Calculators for Contractors, Builders, Remodelers, Carpenters, Woodworkers
blocklayer.com
blocklayer.com
My goto build device is the speed square https://www.popularmechanics.com/home/how-to/a3999/4306646/
And for fractions, thank you Mr Shimel for teaching how to do fraction math.
But I do have a construction calculator that will figure sq feet, cu feet for concrete. It's a standalone device for about $30, but there are a ton of builder apps out there.
I'd like to see the US switch as well, so that we can switch to 5x dimensional lumber
Like OP said, anyone in construction in Canada is using Imperial Measurements on the job site (even the guys from Europe). Just makes more sense somehow.
I grew up with both systems (Canada switched when I was a teenager) and to this day strangely still prefer Imperial for measurement, temperature, speed, and weight.
The big jump between units (mm and m) is really useful as even the most preoccupied of coworkers will notice if the scale is out by a thousand. If the units were closer -- say 10x -- then there would be more ordering errors. That explains the absence of centimetres (10mm) from construction sites even though centimetres is a popular household unit.
Millimetres dominates construction as being close to the width of a cut it is the perfect-size unit. It's simple to work with because you simply count: in imperial a tad more than 1⅜" is 1½"; in metric a tad more than 35 is 36.
Even though we retain the same size of timber as in the imperial past, those sizes are now expressed in metric -- common sizes are 90x35, 120x45. So you can measure up an old house for a repair and order in timber of the same size. There are not pre- and post-metric timbers.
For what it’s worth, 1/16” is also about a saw kerf. But in my experience, that doesn’t really matter because, as I was taught, you don’t take the line, but keep the blade completely on the waste side.
And until they can get time into base 10 (60 seconds to the minute, 12 months in a year, 24 hours in day??) it all fails on consistency anyway.
I'm a DIY homeowner renovating my basement and adding an office.
There were a lot of rules regarding where/how to use floating corners, what screw lengths/diameters to use, where to place the screws, etc. It was really hard to keep them straight, and in some areas I used way more screws than is ideal.
The issue was further complicated by inconsistent advice from the Gypsum Association (the main trade group, AFAICT) and various contractors who post advice on Youtube, diy.stackexchange.com, etc.
I really wished for a website that let me enter the shape and framing details of my room, and have it show me an optimal plan for the shape / placement of drywall pieces, and the attachment method.
Many sheetrockers join sheets on studs or joists, but that puts the edge onto the structure, and increases the likelihood that the joint will fail, particularly in the ceiling. It's actually better to join the sheets between structural members with a plywood or osb spline that floats with the wall. This moves the joint off of the structural member and also makes for a flatter (if not flat) joint.
Really high end sheetrockers will put up 2 sheets of drywall. The first is glued and screwed onto the structure. The 2nd is glued and screwed to the first layer. The screws are then removed from the outer layer when the glue sets. This makes getting a pop impossible, and makes the soundproofing a lot better.
That is the way I used to do it years ago back when I was hanging sheetrock as a summer job while I was at university. My boss at the time used to tell me that it's what should be done in high-end construction; the reason they don't elsewhere is to cut corners on the budget.
When I was doing my research before starting to hang drywall, I had difficulty determining a few things about the various techniques being advocated:
- Is the technique required for what I'd consider "normal" quality results? I.e., when I walk into most houses I just don't notice anything about the drywalling. I was shooting for that level of quality.
- How well would the technique stand up over time, given the particulars about my climate, house age, framing style, etc.? I saw lots of confident statements about how the longevity / reliability of various techniques, but not much evidence that people had actually verified these statements empirically. (I.e., I saw few statements of the form "I've used technique X in over 200 houses in Georgia, and after 10 years I've only been made aware of problems with 3 of the jobs."
I think I'm too dumb to switch it to metric or I miss something.
At one point I thought I was clicking on a button to do something and it turns out that it was an ad and I was redirected to another site.
Resorting to dark patterns like this for ad clicks is scummy IMO.