The maintenance line from Skip's class

[ChainsawGrandpa]

In class, I remember Skip saying; "The way we build, a log home
could last 200 - 500 years, and here's why...."

My first thought wasn't; "Big deal. I won't live that long", but I had
immediately graphed two charts in my pre-meningitis mind. One was
a thirty year chart and the other a 300 year chart.

Both charts had the life span (new homes about thirty years now,
and the house I'm currently in is living (dying) proof of that) run left
to right. The condition of the home was vertical. New, was upper left,
and, "bulldoze" was lower right. The line drawn on the chart was the "maintenance line".

In other words, A short life span will have a steeper line and all things
being the same (they aren't) a higher maintenance cost in labor and
materials. The total cost of the structure (cost to build or purchase,
plus maintenance costs) is then divided by the life span in years.

The obvious summary from the charts was "Wow, I can have a lot of
extra money for myself, family, friends, those in need, and I can't begin
to afford a cheap 2x6 and OSB built house."

In short, a house designed to have a short lifespan will be made of
materials meant to last a short time. Go beyond the projected useful
life and the maintenance costs will skyrocket. The charts made sense
to me and this certainly has been true with my present house. Many
times I 've said, "This house is alive and it's fighting me!! I fix one thing
and two more things break!!! The house is 41 years old, and I've been
fighting it for 15 years.

Does this make sense to anyone else, or are my charts just the product
of an overly active imagination?

-Rick

[StressMan79]

Rick,


Airplanes are designed to last 20 years of average service with 5% of components needing repair/replacement during that time (with 95% confidence). There are lots of older planes out there but the maintenence schedule goes up. say you are trying to run a 40 yr old 747, you are going to need to do A LOT more maintenence just to keep it in the air. We call this "metal fatigue" but it happens to all structures. Usually metal fatigue is plotted (nearly linear) on log-log paper. That is the logarithm of load (stress) on the y and logarithm of cycles (time) on the x. Metal tends to have a slope of 2: that is, if you increase the stress by 20%, you generally half the life.

therefore, if you shift the plot to the right by a factor of 10 (300/30), you can expect the allowable stress to also increase by 10 fold.

That is the general "what happens if" that I usually get. However, you ask a distinctly different question.

You ask about the scatter of that fatigue data. It turns out that the scatter is described very accurately by a "Weibull" distribution. The accuracy is not compromised much if you approximate this with the symmetric "normal" or "gaussian" distribution.

Remember that we have a tail area of roughly 5% at 20 years. That means that at 20 years, we expect that 5% of components will fail. we can draw an analog to a home. with a bell shaped curve, and general metals, 95% will fail in 4 lives.

that means that in 1 life, 5% fail, but in 4, 95% fail (this is why we test to 4 lives!). If you look at a cumulative distribution graph, you can see that the maximum slope (rate of increase) in the failure rate occurs at 2 lives (half the 95% life).

Long story short, I don't know what the 95% life for a new home is, but I susppect it is roughly 15 years, which means that at 30 years, you are well on the upslope of the failure curve by the time you get to 30 years. If your 95% life is 150 years, your have a much shallower curve, that is, you have to fix stuff much less frequently. I'll give you a better answer at the member's meeting, and will likely post something soon.

Anyway, the problem with this way of thinking is: we are basically changing the exterior method. the shower, toilets, eshaust fans, etc (the things that generally break) will (often) be used by members. If you use these, you will be doomed to fix/replace them as often as in a stickframe house. In short, the systems are my issue, not the structure.

-Peter

[rreidnauer]

I'm with you Rick. I'm less concerned with internal systems, and more so with the envelope. Roofs, siding, and windows are the real killers when it comes time to deal with them. Granted, if a kitchen or bath needs a full retro, it's going to hurt, but mainly those are done generally to bring things aesthetically up to date, not because they failed.

LOW maintenance, LONG life is my goal. When I took the class, I really went only half excited, as I suspected there would be significant maintenance required. After all, all I've ever known was kit log homes and the maintenance that went with them. In any case, I took the class because it promised a way to get your home much more affordably. What a thrill it was to find the bonus of extremely low maintenance using the LHBA method. It truly was a case of getting far more than I expected from the class.

I want my place to be the last place I HAVE to build, (unless I WANT to build another) and once built, be done with it. There's no siding, so I need not worry about that. Great care will go into my chinking and the logs will not be stained nor sealed. I hoping the borate treatments are more or less a necessity of fresh logs, and the need will subside with seasoning/aging. The roof will almost certainly be metal if at all within reach of my budget. I'd LOVE to have slate since it is the real maintenance free roof, but the likelihood of that happening is slim. (but not impossible!) Yes, a metal roof will occasionally need paint. I wish there was a permanent coating that could eliminate that maintenance, but so be it. I can't believe people use 25 yr asphalt shingles (which go at about 15-20 yrs) Then when they do reroof, they shingle over the old ones in an attempt to "save money" but instead reduce the lifespan of the new roof even more. (maybe to 10-15 yrs) In 25-35 years, they're having the third roof go on? (and have to pay to remove twice the amount of shingles on the third go!) Windows are what they are. It all depends on what you spend on them. I would like wood windows, but I don't want the painting and glazing maintenance. I'll probably use a high quality vinyl in a pleasing color. (GAWD, anything but white!!!!) The LHBA method does provide longer life to windows, by better protecting them from weather, just as it does the logs. You may also note in my model pics, that I don't plan on an extravagant number or size of windows. It keeps my costs down, both initially and for heating/cooling, but also, I'm an outdoorsy type that doesn't need to feel like I'm outside while inside, staring through a wall of glass. If I want to experience nature, I'll go outside! I'm still hashing out what I want to do for smaller things like plumbing fixtures. I can tell you it won't be cheapy cartridge faucets/valves. Dang, those things just stink to no end. Anything that's fitted with O-rings or rubber seats is off my list. Quality brass seat faucets and valves are worth the extra expense, both with labor savings and not having to replace it two (or three?) time over.

I wonder about the structures of spec homes built with OSB. It's been about 20 years? now since it really took off using wood-chips and glue to make sheathing, flooring, joists, columns, and girders. I wonder how long that stuff will stay together before one's home literally starts to come apart at the seams.

[pinecone pam]

I sit here reading these comments. I remember Skip telling us about the lifetime of these homes. Rod, I don't even think that my roof has faded over these 10 years. The systems will need attention eventually, but as I look around, it's like brand new. This house WILL be here long after I am not. It will probably be here long after my son is gone. And my grand daughter Natalie? She will probably paint it pink!

[Ellsworth]

16 year check in.

Member's I'm curious, please describe your experience with maintenance while living in your butt and pass log home.

Thanks!

[BoFuller]

I finished building in early 2015. I have a couple logs that are deteriorating. They sound hollow when I hit them with a hammer. I’m trying to figure out how to replace part of a log that is in the 3rd course, from the end to about 10 feet in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Ellsworth]

Thanks for the reply and I'm sorry to hear that.

If I saw that in the Pacific Northwest, I'd first look for a source of water.
At that high of a log course, it's usually a water splashing off bushes or garbage cans, then hitting the house.

I have done a ton of research on arborist / logging forums, and eventually came away with this concept.
Occasionally there's a situation where water had an entry point (typically a knot/branch area) and it attained deep penetration.
This is while the tree is upright, on the stump and living.

When cut down and it'll feel fine on the outside when. 100% fine. The entry point is not visible to the eye.
It creates long lines / ribbons of rot deep within the log that can remain hard to detect until they get closer to the log's surface.
I have seen this type of situation before, confirmed it with cross-profession research.

A TPI inspection would likely miss this.
I have found no reliable means to solve this problem, in part because when green the log has zero outward signs of rot (so why 'extra' check it).
Some electrical based probes, some sort of means to scan density, there's surely some expensive methods for testing that might work.

Log rot phenomenon, not the same as heart rot or windshake / ring shake (oh idk pick your fav term).
It's a small chance that sometimes one of the logs you use has hidden rot.

Have you figured out what caused the rot issue?

[BoFuller]

Im sure it was leaky downspout. Then the wind blowing the water over the log. Downspout has been replaced, but probably too late.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[loghousenut]

Those darned gutters and their downspouts. Probably metric.

You know about the epoxy option. If you can open up the rotted hollow part by cutting out a door in the solid outer part of the log, the rotted part can be cleaned out, soaked with epoxy to solidify anything that is spongy, and then solid wood and epoxy\sawdust filled. The log can be stabilized and the "door" can be glued (epoxied) back in place.

Maybe not the cheapest solution, but a solid and permanent solution. Whatever the epoxy touches will be permanent and, if done right, close to invisible.

It worked for my "Dirty Rotten Ridgepole".

I got the idea from the Smith's Rot Doctor website. Depending on your schedule, I might be able to stop in for a week to help.

PS... It's not invisible, but it's easy to make it hard to see. I know it is "possible" to replace part of a log, but I know it is not fun.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[BoFuller]

That’s probably a better idea than mine. I was thinking of cutting a 3-4 foot section and trying to take it out, and replace with another good section that size. Then do it again, right next to it. And a 3rd time if necessary.

I’m just worried about the end section on the corner collapsing when that section is removed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[BoFuller]

When you hammer on the log inside the house, it sounds solid. And when you hammer on the top of the outside it sounds solid. It’s just the bottom outside quarter that sounds bad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[loghousenut]

I'd think those logs above that are all pinned together would support that cantilever... But I'm as good an engineer as my Yamaha is a dump truck.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[Ellsworth]

Respectful suggestion, cut a quarter round out of that log (if that will get all the rot).
Fab up a quarter round replacement (which will be timberLOK-ed into place).
If you need weight support, hide some short metal posts (with plates top and bottom for lag screws) behind the replacement cantilever.

You'll probably find more rot than you anticipate, any pre-plan will likely require re-consideration, and it'll work out fine.

I contemplate, how would this be in video versus text?
But then, I'm a bit archaic.

BTW, zero judgement from me. I've seen a lot of log rot progress unnoticed, and also progress noticed.
Just tossing in some cobra rots and annual spraying with borate can really help slow the rot with absolutely minimal cost/expense.
They are like the aspirin + bandaid fix, for an injury that eventually leads to real care.

[BoFuller]

1/4 round - Excellent idea.

I do spray with borate every other year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Ellsworth]

1/4 round - Excellent idea.

I do spray with borate every other year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Questions:

Was the glycol you sprayed water or glycol based?
Is your home stained?
If yes, do you think that interfered with the borate soaking in?
If yes, did you ever (or would you please) talk to the stain manufacturer's scientific type division/support asking about spraying borate over their stain?

Musing: On log ends that might need extra attention perhaps something like:
Drill some 1/2" holes down the length of the log, angled down from the top, drill in about 1/4 to 1/3 toward the center of the log.
Space the holes 14.75" on center.
Take an empty bottle of hot sauce and cut the bottom out, insert the nozzle end into the hole (so that it will stay in place).
Then fill the container with glycol borate and let is slowly soak in. Refill the container a few times.
Maybe plumber's putty or clay to seal the hose in the hole.
Lastly, plug the hole with a cobra rod.
Repeat every year, or two, or 5?

It's an idea in case the stain interferes with absorption, or if you want really be sure you attained deep penetration with the glycol.

The same approach might work from underneath an overdangle if you used a liquid delivery hose that sealed fairly well and had just a bit of pressure to it (edited to add: gravity feed!).
Why from underneath? Looks better. Water is less likely to wick into the hole compared to a hole on top (careful of snow in some areas).

[BoFuller]

Borate is a powder I mix with water. I never stained but I did do a coat of semi-gloss varathane at year 1 and year 4.

Currently I’m experimenting with a diesel/motor oil mix - I did two logs on the back of the house. The used motor oil turns it darker than I like, but if it keeps the moisture out, I’m good.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Ellsworth]

Borate is a powder I mix with water. I never stained but I did do a coat of semi-gloss varathane at year 1 and year 4.

Currently I’m experimenting with a diesel/motor oil mix - I did two logs on the back of the house. The used motor oil turns it darker than I like, but if it keeps the moisture out, I’m good.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Glycol base soaks in deep, generally speaking, and water based is a surface treatment (that washes away with rain/moisture).

YMMV:
"Shake and shingle oil" is likely lighter, and usually sounds better. And serves as a reminder for the shingles vaccines.
By sounds better, I mean if you sell the house. Because at least it's a product designed for homes.

[BoFuller]

Those darned gutters and their downspouts. Probably metric.

You know about the epoxy option. If you can open up the rotted hollow part by cutting out a door in the solid outer part of the log, the rotted part can be cleaned out, soaked with epoxy to solidify anything that is spongy, and then solid wood and epoxy\sawdust filled. The log can be stabilized and the "door" can be glued (epoxied) back in place.

Maybe not the cheapest solution, but a solid and permanent solution. Whatever the epoxy touches will be permanent and, if done right, close to invisible.

It worked for my "Dirty Rotten Ridgepole".

I got the idea from the Smith's Rot Doctor website. Depending on your schedule, I might be able to stop in for a week to help.

PS... It's not invisible, but it's easy to make it hard to see. I know it is "possible" to replace part of a log, but I know it is not fun.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

With your experience with epoxy, how much will I need to replace a quarter round section about 8 ft long?

I ordered the gallon package from the Rot Doctor. Will that be enough?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[loghousenut]

Bo, you know better than to pretend that you think I'll have a clean answer to this. If you are sawing out a quarter of the log and God blessed you with no rot to follow, then the epoxy would mostly be glue and a gallon is a lot of glue.

I suspect there's a chance that it won't be so cut and dried and the investigation will begin at that point. You may end up scraping out a garbage can full of dusty spongewood and then filling an oddly shaped cavity with hand shaped solid wood and sawdust mixed with epoxy.

In either case I think you will want their CPES. It is thin enough to shoot through a garden sprayer and any nearly solid wood gets saturated until it does not soak in. That makes it all solid and forever rotproofs it all. It also acts as a primer so any epoxy then sticks to it.

This epoxy is pretty nasty stuff and you don't want to breath it. It's nastier than Agent Orange. I always had a fan on it and wore a chemical facemask.

As an interesting aside, the epoxy we used for our countertops was completely odorless with no hazard warnings. I love the stuff but suspect it is not suitable for the task at hand.

Good luck. Wish I was there. Like most disagreeable tasks, I semi-enjoyed my foray into rotland and learned a lot. I guess I forgot a lot too.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk