Studs for pocket door framing?
BrunoF
| Posted in General Questions on
I have many pocket doors in our house that is under construction and two of them will be within a wall holding a tile backsplash. The framers installed 2x6s turned sideways without a bottom plate as framing for the pocket side of the wall.
My concern is the amount of flex these 2x6s have and the risk of cracked tile as a result. Do most folks use engineered studs in this situation? If, not what should be used? Should a “split” bottom plate have also been used?
Thx!
GBA Detail Library
A collection of one thousand construction details organized by climate and house part
Search and download construction details
Replies
Usually you use a pocket door framing kit which has a steel frame that is thin and stiff.
I've wrapped a wood stud with a same-size steel stud, the result is quite resistant to flexing.
My favorite approach is to use a full 2x4 on each side, oriented normally, but that creates a thick wall and often doesn't work in the design.
Next best is 2x4s on the flat with 1/2" plywood or preferably 3/4" Advantech to tie things together. Worst case, the standard studs are ok, they just have a bit more flex than I prefer.
Sometimes I'll offset the pocket within the wall so there is room for more material on the tile side.
I like DC's solution here. My own experience with the pocket door frame kits is that they are thin and flexible, and don't make a very stiff wall. I would not be surprised if tile on such a wall would crack if someone fell against it.
If possible, see if you can add a bit of thickness to that one wall to allow for beefier framing on the tile side of the door. With a 2x4 wall, there just isn't enough space to do anything to make things stiff -- even using a piece of steel channel isn't enough to make a sufficiently stiff wall (and I've tried that). with a 2x6 wall you have more options.
Bill
Is it too late to install a Cavity Slider kit?
Matt Risinger Youtube video demonstrating them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkGqdpois6g
Those cavity sliders are quite expensive and may not suit everyone's budget. Matt does good work, but lots of what he puts in is sponsored.
AC200,
I design pocket doors out of any house I do, unless there is no other solution. Same with bi-folds.
Is it the usability, constructability, or serviceability that you dislike?
I think in certain circumstances a pocket door both makes sense and, so long as it's built well, functions fine. But harder to address problems down the line.
maine_tyler,
I think my aversion came from the decade I spent building spec houses. You soon learn what will bring call-backs, and what features are the ones that keep you up at night worrying. Some things are just inherently not suited to some occupants, no matter how well they are installed - DC's example of bi-folds is one.
For me pocket doors are right on the edge of that category. They hold up well for most people, but if something does go wrong, the fix is complex and time consuming. I also hate using them.
Malcolm --
Near my house is a public recreation center, it has a gym and a meeting room. The original plan was to have just a hallway between the two rooms, for a nice open feel, but during the design I persuaded them to put pocket doors on the meeting room so that if someone was using the gym it wouldn't disrupt meetings.
I was over there today and all four sets of pocket doors are broken. So I see your point.
DC,
Some people can break just about anything.
The job I probably dislike the most is fixing something under the watchful eye of an aggrieved owner. I'd do almost anything to avoid it.
At least the fashion for barn door hardware appears to have run it's course. They seem to me to the the worst of all worlds.
I've lived in three houses with pocket doors, never had a problem.
Bifolds are the Devil's own work.
I find the type of track and trolley system makes a big difference in the reliability of pocket doors. The traditional system with a "C" shape track and two single rollers riding on it is prone to failure and derailing. The system that uses a track shaped like an upside down "U" and has trolleys with three rollers that ride in the track is vastly superior -- much smoother operation, and much, much less risk of derailing.
The big issues I see aside from the track are people doing the "WHAM!" method of opening and closing the doors, instead of SLIDING them. I also see people (my 6 yo daughter included) pushing on the face of the closed door, stressing the track and pocket in the wall.
Pocket doors just won't be as durable as conventional doors unless they rid in tracks on the top AND bottom, and that's unsightly and rarely done.
Bill
I totally agree Malcolm, I removed a couple from my first draft design. I really don't like them.
Thx folks. For reference, I attached a photo of how it is setup now.
BrunoF,
Is there blocking underneath, or are those studs just toe-nailed into the sub-floor?
They are just toe nailed.
BrunoF,
That's something you will want to alter. There is no framing connection that should rely on toe-nailing into sub-floors.
You could try DC's suggestion of wrapping a steel stud around the wood stud to gain some stiffness. His idea there is a good one, and will give you an extra beefy version of the commercial pocket door frame kits.
Malcolm is on to something with the lower connection too. Some metal angle brackets would make this more solid. If you have a metal brake, you could bend a flat mending plate into a channel shape so that you could attach to the inside of both of the side studs on either side of the pocket, and the floor. Use screws for these connections, not nails. If that frame comes loose at the base, your wall will start to move. The opening and closing action of the pocket door is like beating the frame with a hammer (rememember the "WHAM!" method is commonly used with pocket doors it seems), which will tend to loosen nailed connections over time.
I should probably mention that around half of the doors in my house are pocket doors, so I have a lot more experience dealing with them than I'd like to. The best improvements I can think of are that three-roller trolley and track I mentioned (the orange store carries it), UHMW bumbers on the lower edge of the inside of the pocket frame to help keep the lower painted part of the door from getting scraped up, and use some user friendly hardware for the "handle" on the door -- many of them just aren't easy to use. If you can get away with it, a good size rubber bumper or too at the ends of travel for the door will greatly reduce the impact people using the "WHAM!" method of pocket door operation will exert on the framing.
Bill
You can use a piece of steel stud track to attach the tops and bottoms of the studs. It keeps them nicely aligned too.
Some great ideas. Given that this is for a backsplash I believe it would be plenty rigid if lower cabinets are well screwed to the studs. This would effectively shorten the unsupported span and reduce deflection significantly. As an option: add extra studs for additional stiffness... and/or some Baltic birch plywood if needed.
A piece of 1/4" plywood on the inside along with backer board on the outside would make that very stiff. Glue and screw both sides.
Agreed... basically a torsion box. I would have no concerns for a backsplash. A full length tiled shower wall would require more scrutiny.
Bruno: As a side note: my experience is that pocket doors tend to flop around within the wall. I have previously routed grooves at the bottom of doors and screwed aluminum angle bar to the subfloor to track within the groove. Works great as an alternative to the more expensive pocket door hardware.
> my experience is that pocket doors tend to flop around within the wall. I have previously routed grooves at the bottom of doors and screwed aluminum angle bar to the subfloor to track within the groove. Works great as an alternative to the more expensive pocket door hardware.
Here's one ready to go: https://www.heavydutypocketdoorframes.com/products/t-floor-guide
The single pocket door in my house has that guide in it instead of the flimsy thing that came with the otherwise fine hardware I used.
If you use UHMW strips (or angle, you can get it that way too), there will be less tendency for the framing and support brackets to scrape the paint on the sides of the door. I find that the paint tends to get chewed up because the door is usually not pulled perfectly straight out, so the sides scrape on the frame when the door is slid in and out. UHMW at the lower edge can help with this.
Bill
I would take some Advantech floor sheathing scraps and inlay them as blocking between the 2x6s on the flat. Should create quite a diaphragm behind the tile.
Also, good time to put blocking in for mounting your cabinets as well.
Patrick,
"Also, good time to put blocking in for mounting your cabinets as well."
And to hope the installer remembers to use short screws, so he doesn't go right into the pocket door.
Had that same thought. :-) But...
1. You only make that mistake once!
2. This is a bit thicker than some pocket door assemblies.
For avoidance of doubt, I was referring to also putting blocking in the non-pocket door stud bays; it was the thought of putting it in these particular bays that happened to make me think of it.
PSA for broader audience to reiterate Malcolm's point: Often the split studs in a pocket door mean that the distance from face of the wall to the door is quite small and using the wrong fastener (e.g. for drywall) can have you screwing into the door or screwing into the void where the door needs to go. In fact, if I'm interpreting the picture correctly, this pocket door kit has a bag of hardware taped to the track with drywall screws of the correct length if it had been installed with the provided split studs.
Wow! Lots of great info and suggestions folks! Thank you.
Yeah, there are lots of great tips here. Would make a nice blog article ;-)