Duncan House

To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.

EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
Post Reply
DRN
Posts: 4457
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Post by DRN »

It looks as if the top sash is stationary and the bottom sash is operable as an awning unit. I believe the windows are Andersen "Flexivent" windows which, according to Andersen's website, were made from 1952 to 1979. If you Google "andersen flexivent" the first hit will be an Andersen PDF doc called "Flexivent Windows (1952 to 1979)"
that has detailed information on this type of window including sizes, head, jamb, and sill details.

The problem with standardized windows is that what you want or need is isn't always available in the size you want. The operable unit may have been what was wanted and needed, but a stationary unit having the same width may not have been available with the same height.
Top
Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4777
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

I have noticed that many of the current window manufacturers are taking ganging into consideration and making the stationary and operable windows the same size so everything matches up. Skyline Windows does this on there commercial steel windows too.
Former owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond
Top
dtc
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:04 am

Post by dtc »

The top window is stationary and yes only the bottom window is an operable awning.
Oh course the commercially purchased windows do not have the exterior wood stops found on the doors that Wright used for years.
Top
SDR
Posts: 22359
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Hmm. So, it appears that Wright was stuck with the nearest size of operable sash to what would have been half of the total sash height he desired. That's too bad . . .

At least Andersen was able to make the operable and stationary parts of the window appear identical in profile -- a feat in itself. Today, I see (less expensive ?) "double-hung" sash sets in which the operable (i.e., lower) sash has a different profile, and glass size, than the stationary (upper) one. Ugh. Not a "good look" for a traditional house.

According to the chart on page four of the Flexivent PDF, the architect could choose a 20" high vent window with 14" glass, or a 24" window with 18" glass. He appears to have opted for the latter. Perhaps the former would have come closer to aligning with the 16" vertical module ?

Oddly, the same page shows Andersen casement windows. One wonders why Wright (of all people) wouldn't have chosen one of those . . .

SDR
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Click Here for General Discussion Posts”