another pole barn question

[mechanic]

I have been talking to different builders of pole barns and using this information to pick my pole barn builder. This other company that build pole barns uses the 2x6 on 24 inch centers instead of the 2x4 on 24 inches centers on the walls . Reason being he says makes the walls stronger against wind and this makes the roof able to hold up under load. I also like the the pier system they use. They drill the holes for the poles and pour concrete in the hole and then pour the slab over the piers and place the poles over the pier locations on 10' center. The building also comes with a 10 year warranty. I could go back to the 2x4 walls and pay $14000 instead $22000. This is for the 30x30. I don't think the 2x4 walls will give way to a load but my pocket book will give way to the $22000. How many of you have the 2x4 walls? Both buildings have the 2x4 purlins on 24 inch centers. Also the $14000 building they put the poles in the ground, 6x6 treated posts. Does the pier building add more value to your property than the posts in the ground?

 

[davedj1]

In my local, if I (I am a builder) build a pole barn I have to follow code , drill hole, pour concrete base, get inspected, set posts (6x6 pt) on concrete cookie, backfill holes, add girts and trusses, get inspected again, then a final inspection . The trusses are engineered per zip code, I can have them 24" centers or 48" centers or whatever I have them engineered for. I usually put a 2x6 pt bottom grade board with 2x4 girts the rest of the way up the wall on 24" centers. I've never seen the girts 2x6, I suppose there is no harm but I don't see any reason to do it either.
If you are a farm (Agriculture use) you don't have to follow any codes, no concrete in the bottom of the holes. I guess they don't care if farm buildings sag and lean and fall down after a few years.

 

[Wolfy]

I used to build, and I would steer you away from pouring concrete around the poles. The problem is the water can not drain and rot will take over. Also, if your ceilings are higher than 12', then for sure use 2x6s. You will end up will straighter and sturdier walls. And upgrade to 2x6 purlins.

 

[davedj1]

If you're going to have a slab anyway why not just pour an Alaskan slab and build on top of the concrete. They have fasteners for 6x6 poles, or you could just frame it conventionally. It would be easier to insulate it.

 

[ovrszd]

You guys that don't show where you are from make it hard on us "slow" guys. Hard to understand your points?

There's a gazillion pole buildings here in the Midwest with the post set in the ground and no concrete pad under them. I've not saw a single one that is leaning or sagging.

Pouring concrete around the post is fine if outside water is prevented from entering the building. And,,, if you aren't preventing water from entering the building what's the point in pouring concrete?

To the OP, if you pour a concrete floor I can't imagine there being any "value" added by either method of setting the posts. If you are insulating and finishing the inside of the building it might be a bit cheaper to "stick build" the whole thing. Treated sill plate on the concrete and then studs. Hard to find a "pole barn" outfit that wants to do that though. Probably need a small construction guy and crew for that method.

 

[KennyG]

Just a guess, but I think the option that does not have the poles in the ground needs greater cross bracing in the walls, hence the use of 2 x 6. I like the idea of not having the poles in the ground but I think it requires more structure for rigidity.

 

[LD1]

Never heard of pouring piers then a slab over that. But have heard of monolithic slab, where the slab, footer, and frost wall are all one pour. But takes more concrete.

I think in the end you are comparing two different building styles and that's the reason for the price difference. If pouring a slab and building on top of it, hands down forget the posts and stick frame on top of the slab with a ledger board attached to the concrete. And I suspect that's what the $22k guy is quoting when he says the 2x6's make a stronger wall more resistant to wind.

Post frame style with wall gotta running flat and horizontal, not much difference in 2x6 vs 2x4.

The quote for $14k with posts in the ground, 2x4 wall gotta, and 2x4 purlins laid flat.....That describes probably 95% of pole barns made today. Nothing at all wrong with that approach either. Are their better ways... Sure. But you pay for it.

If I was doing anything other than post frame like your $14k quote, it would either be a footer/foundation, 6 row of block, and stick built on top....Or a monolithic slab. Hiring the work done probably isn't a whole lot of difference in cost between the two. Because the extra spend in concrete for a monolithic pour is offset by the labor of laying block

 

[davedj1]

You guys that don't show where you are from make it hard on us "slow" guys. Hard to understand your points?

There's a gazillion pole buildings here in the Midwest with the post set in the ground and no concrete pad under them. I've not saw a single one that is leaning or sagging.

Pouring concrete around the post is fine if outside water is prevented from entering the building. And,,, if you aren't preventing water from entering the building what's the point in pouring concrete?

To the OP, if you pour a concrete floor I can't imagine there being any "value" added by either method of setting the posts. If you are insulating and finishing the inside of the building it might be a bit cheaper to "stick build" the whole thing. Treated sill plate on the concrete and then studs. Hard to find a "pole barn" outfit that wants to do that though. Probably need a small construction guy and crew for that method.

Sorry ovrszd, I thought I had that info, I just put it in for you. We have clay soil, heavy snow loads to contend with as well as 4 seasons, 5 if you count mud season