Pole barn questions

[ejb]

I read thru lots of the posts on pole barns but couldn't find an answer to these questions:

I want to build a pole barn...the bigger the better (up to around 30x60 anyway), but budget will dictate how big I can actually go...

Anyway, code will probably dictate what I ultimately end up doing, but just in case code will leave some lee-way, what are the pros and cons of the various options for setting the posts. Here are the choices as I see it from some of the other threads:

(PS: I am in Mass so I have a 4ft frost line)

1. Dig down 4+ feet and tamp the posts in w/out any cement at all.
2. Dig down 4+ feet put a footer in, sit the post on that footer and backfill/tamp to grade.
3. Dig down 4+feet, poot in a footer, set post, and the fill the hole with concrete.
4. Dog down 4+feet, pout footer, wait till it dries, pour cement pier upto grade, insert a "J-hook" and then attach the PT post to the j-hook with a deck bracket...

If I had designed this w/out reading some of the other posts here on TBN, my instinct would have been to use #4. That is precisely how I have always built decks and porches, but it seems no one here on TBN anyway uses that method for a pole barn....

Anyone know the pros and cons of each? and happen to know what the code is in massachusetts?

Last question: I'd like to cover the building with a metal roof, but use 1x8 rough pine/hemlock board and batten system for the outside walls to give it a more rustic look. Any reason I can't do this? Most pole barns seem to be covered with metal walls, but not sure if that is because that is all the frame will support or because of other considerations...does a pole barm need different/bigger/stronger construction to use wood on the outside?

I will go see the building inspector, but I'd like to mostly go with a workable plan in hand, not a bunch of questions if I can help it. Its a part-time official around these parts, and probably will loose a week or more between each visit so the more prepared I am the better....

 

[cowboydoc]

I would say a modification of #3 is fine. Put a round concrete 14" disc in the hole. Put the post on top of that. Dump in a couple bags of concrete and tamp on top of this good and solid. It took a big excavator quite a bit of work to pull these out two years after we put them in. The concrete had set up just like you had mixed it.

As far as the metal roof and wood sides that is done all the time, even with houses, especially out west. You won't have any problem at all building it this way. You will have to spend quite a bit more as you will need to change your framing from standard pole barn framing to have enough board to nail to. You will need to put girts up every 24" instead of the normal pole barn spacing. As far as strength your girts and supports at the corners are where most of the strength is. Putting the girts every 24" and putting that much wood up will actually give you a stronger building than will the steel.

 

[jmc]

Morton Buildings has done two for me so far and I have a lot of faith in their ability. In Indiana, they use your option #2.

I priced an option of using tongue and groove siding on one barn and it was expensive. One reason is that they would still side the whole barn with plywood or particle board before siding with the T&G. They felt that the boards by themselves would not provide the support against "racking"- the posts being blown into a parallelogram. They use a thick enough metal siding to provide this support.

John

 

[cowboydoc]

Yes you're right about plywood John. I just kind of assumed that was a given.

 

[SPIKER]

the # 2 method is what is used around here> the #4 method while works if you have 0 wind load there is the possability of snapping the post bottom @ the J hook where the post is attached. the dirt around posts gives some in a light impact and it has the hole post surrounded. the #3 is not good but as JMC said some bags in the bottom AFTER the pole is set and the sides squared and spacing is all done is probably OK.

markm

 

[ejb]

Thanks everyone for the replies...sounds like #2 and/or #3 are the way to go...

Interestlingly, I talked to the building inspector yesterday to find out what my options are, and he said there is no requirement, any of the options would be fine...its a matter of choice....imagine that, something in Massachusetts thats not regulated....

Anyway, his opinion was that #4 was the "best" way, and the way he would build it if it was his building...

The reply above that this way tend to break in high winds make sense to me, so I am leaning against it so far. He (Inspector) also said the benefit is that the posts, even though they are pressure-treated, would last longer if they were not in direct contact with the soil...make sense to me. Opinions on that? I'd like the building to last 40+ years, or more anyway...

Lastly, as far as posts, I wonder what the relative pros and cons are of using 3 PT 2x6's nailed/glued/bolted together versus using a single 6x6 post? It seems the morton buildings use this method (at least some of them, and they play up this "feature" in the literature). It makes sense that the relative rot protection would be better with a built up since the CCA penetration would be more complete on a built up post over a single post. Having cut into 4x4's and 6x6's its clear the chemicals don't make it anywhere near the center...

Thats it for now...thanks for the suggestions.

 

[shvl73]

I would think it would depend on the soil as to how well the posts would do in a direct burial application. I've been thinking about it as well, in another thread about posthole diggers. Judging from the responses I think I will use a backhoe to dig the footings, pouring them to just above grade, put my 8x8 sill on top backfill up to the sill & build on that. The .60 ACQ posts are easy to get & cheaper than a higher retention level of treatment. If I use a 12" tube with a "bigfoot" type base I'm sure it will work.