! the first wofati - allerton abbey- version 0.7

I believe it is possible to use actual topo data in sketchup.

I would like Jesse to focus on "standard wofati on a normal-ish slope". Once that is excellent and shiny we can talk about possibly modifying it to fit this particular circumstance. For the retaining wall at the downhill slope I think it won't make much difference because that will all be dirt that we have moved into position.

Tim S., I'll work on the changes. I have a concern with having the 4 purlins you mentioned sharing the same post. My concern is that the joint could get too complicated and thus become complicated to construct. It looks to me like the uphill/downhill purlins all go onto the posts first, then the beams are set in place. In this scenario, the joint where the shed meets the gable will have purlins coming together at 2 different angles, an then a beam will be secured over top of them. I don't have much framing experience, but wouldn't that mean 2 fasteners into the supporting post, and how then would the beam above be safely fastened to this compound joint? Maybe there is a simple way of fastening this all together, but it's outside of my knowledge set, thus my attempts to do something different.

Paul, I'm happy to keep working on this as I can. It's fun and I want to wrap my mind around it. Unfortunately, the going will be a little slow for me right now. Two things I could use clarification on... what do you mean by:

I would also like the retaining logs to be far back from the roof wood.

Are you talking about the retaining logs on the "winglike" bits, or the uphill patio?

also:

I am thinking that the slope to the ground would be shorter, the retaining wall would be smaller, and the wood in the retaining wall would be less/smaller - thus easier.

is

Does this mean that the overall structure is sitting more above ground thus meaning less of a need to retain earth?

I'm sitting here thinking that it makes sense to do what Mike describes in his book. That is, decide where your downhill retaining walls are going on the given site and backfill against them as you excavate uphill. I'm a little confused why there will need to be fill brought in. Is it because there's very little slope and 0.7 is sitting a little more "proudly"?

It IS possible to bring a rough topo in from google earth, but in my experience it's not that accurate on a micro scale such as a 400 sq.ft. structure, and it makes the model a bit more complicated thus slowing things down.

Jesse Biggs wrote:

I would also like the retaining logs to be far back from the roof wood.

Are you talking about the retaining logs on the "winglike" bits, or the uphill patio?

I am focusing, for the moment, on the wing-like bit on the downhill side. Once we have that perfected, then we can rubber stamp it to the other side. I want the roof-ish stuff on the gable roof to come down to the ground, but a bit more downhill than the gable roof line. Then the retaining wall stuff sits well within that shelter, thus keeping those woody-bits dry.

also:

I am thinking that the slope to the ground would be shorter, the retaining wall would be smaller, and the wood in the retaining wall would be less/smaller - thus easier.

is

Does this mean that the overall structure is sitting more above ground thus meaning less of a need to retain earth?

A wofati house is always above ground. Therefore, for the slope that you have defined in your drawing, the dirt will come from on site. In the case of this actual build, the slope is pretty shallow, so we will be importing dirt to keep the structure above ground.

For the one little retaining wall segment, I would like to get that drawn up with your existing slope. I think the way I am proposing is what Tim S. and I discussed a few weeks ago and will be excellent. Once it is drawn, then I can talk to tim about how he might want it to be different and why.

Jesse Biggs wrote:I'm sitting here thinking that it makes sense to do what Mike describes in his book. That is, decide where your downhill retaining walls are going on the given site and backfill against them as you excavate uphill. I'm a little confused why there will need to be fill brought in. Is it because there's very little slope and 0.7 is sitting a little more "proudly"?

It IS possible to bring a rough topo in from google earth, but in my experience it's not that accurate on a micro scale such as a 400 sq.ft. structure, and it makes the model a bit more complicated thus slowing things down.

Yes. The idea is to have this more above ground than an oehler structure.

Maybe a future wofati site will have more slope and we won't need to bring in more dirt. In the case of the current wofati, we will probably bring the dirt in from 50 feet away. Not a big deal.

I think the need to be above ground is bigger than the need to use dirt that was at ground zero.

Hello,
If I could make a few suggestions. The design (in Sketchup) could be saved and copied and then readjusted to accomodate various sloped land(s).
For example, Design 1 could be for 0-2% slope, Design 2 could be for 2-4% slope, etc.
The idea being to have a balanced design in the sense of earthmoving, meaning that you try to make the net cut/fill as close to zero as possible.
This way, when you are at a site, all you need to determine is what the existing slope of the area is and then you can select the design that matches the exisitng slope.
Some local topographic information is always the best thing to start with, but that may not be so easy to obtain.
If you would like some demonstration of this, I can try to help.

Hope this helps,
-Kevin

Kevin Murphy wrote:Hello,
Some local topographic information is always the best thing to start with, but that may not be so easy to obtain.

Hey Kevin,
Thanks. Yes, your idea of having patterns of cut/fill requirements for a WOFATI is a great idea. There would need to be some extrapolations made since every WOFATI will most likely be different.

I measured the slope at the WOFATI 0.7 site which is 1" in 12" - very shallow, which means a significant amount of fill compared to the cut.

Hi Tim,
1" on 12" is about 8.3% slope. 8% over 50 feet would be 4 foot change in elevation.
I think you may want to try measuring a longer distance to check the slope calculation.
Of course I live in the coastal plain of NJ where 8% is steep. Where you are working, 8% might seem flat.

I do understand that each structure will be different, but with some basic assumption the earthwork can be balance so that minimal earth moving is required.
I might also suggest that we look at the soil type and include some data on how the soil load will effect the structure as well.

Hope this is helpful
-Kevin

Kevin, I attached the model I've been working with above. It'd be great to have lots of people fiddling with it. The files could even be shared to google's 3d warehouse where we might infect more brains.