plans accepted, but details not

[frazoo]

Got excited today when the building inspectors officed called to say I could pick up my permit, the plans were accepted.  But the notations on the plans were anything but.

Trim I know.  Framing not so much.  My exterior walls will be 2x6 ten ft. high with a loft.  Loft joists 2x10's 16"o.c. .  2x4 collar ties listed, inspector inked in "top 1/3".  I understand that.  Then he inked in and drew in 2x8's 16" o.c. going across my top plates, front to back and has this listed as "lower 1/3".  Is he talking about throughout the whole house or just over non-loft area where I wanted a cathedral ceiliing.  I had thought you could get by with 2x8's every four feet for this, is this not so?  2x8's every 16 inches will look like crap, I think.

Also, on my 2x12  12/12 pitch roof, I had used a 2x12 ridge board.  He inked in "ceiling joist required or use engineered lvl's and point loads".  Can anyone explain this to me, what is a ceiling joist?

On my piers, I drew 12x12 c-blocks filled with concrete with girder anchors into concrete to hold made up girder of 3 2x12's with sandwiched ply.  He wants 2 2x10's and a treated wood nailer on top of the concrete pier. How will this work with the girder anchors?
He does NOT answer questions, just tells you you need an engineer, architect or general contractor.  

HELP!!

frazoo

[ScottA]

I'd suggest you scan his notes and post a pic. Some of his comments don't make any scense. If you put in a LVL ridge beam with point loads you don't need collar ties at all. The 2x8's front to back must be the cieling joists he's talking about. Are you doing a balloon frame or is this a full 2 story? Need more info to give good answers.

Don't panic. Come up with the solution then present it to him.

[Don_P]

I had to look out the window to see if you were in the back yard  .

He cannot by law design your structure, if it fails you will say "he told me how to do it". That is a far cry from he would or would not allow something... so do cut him some slack in that regard, frustrating, but I've seen the other side of that and know where it comes from.

These designs are non code and an inspector doing his job can require an engineer's blessing anywhere that enforces the IRC. Here's the VA IRC; https://www2.iccsafe.org/states/Virginia/Residential/Res-Frameset.html

R802.3.1
The collar tie in the upper third is required at 4' max intervals. The rafter tie in the lower third is not specified but is inferred by the referenced table to be on every rafter pair. Correct call, you can provide engineering demonstrating that every 4' is sufficient but this is the cookbook default position otherwise it needs to be on a ridgebeam.

He drew in the ceiling joists as required OR he allowed that you could use a ridgebeam. A ceiling joist may be raised as much as 1/3 of the roof height from plate to ridge... if you think about it when the kneewall gets to about 5' and you raise the ties/cj's 1/3 of the way up, you have headroom and meet code.

It appears he is not recognizing the upper floor joists as rafter ties... that would be correct, again an engineer can show otherwise but the kneewall is non cookbook.

He just designed your girder, let him have it. The cookbook calls for a continuous perimeter footing and a full crawlspace. Pier and beam is non code, it can be engineered. If you want to make this inspector happy you'll either need to build prescriptively, by the book, or get an engineer or archidork.

[psammy]

Sounds as though he's telling you that you need a live ridge (LVL's with point loads) in the loft area (or ceiling joists within lower third of rafter rise - doesn't work if you intend to use that space).  In the open ceiling area again you need a live ridge or joists tying the rafters together (bottom third).  A good solution if you don't want joists every 16" is to double every third rafter and put a joist on both sides, through-bolted.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/1140800/collar-ties-vs-rafter-ties-roof-structure-components-

I think also his unwillingness to answer questions and to refer you to an architect, engineer, or GC is if you seemed unfamiliar with these basic structural concepts.  He cannot bear the responsibility for the structural design of your cabin but has given you clues in his markup.  Show your plans to someone local that can guide you on putting your cabin up sturdy and safe.  

Good luck,
psammy

[frazoo]

Thanks for the input, some if it is starting to make sense.  I understand the liability aspects from his perspective.  Will try to post the drawings soon.

I guess I'm looking for an engineer  !

frazoo

[frazoo]

https://i940.photobucket.com/albums/ad247/fishndan/Building%20the%20small%20cottage/IMGP0793.jpg?t=1269127728

https://i940.photobucket.com/albums/ad247/fishndan/Building%20the%20small%20cottage/IMGP0794.jpg?t=1269128290

This is a 16'x28' with ten ft. walls with loft.  I think you are right, he is saying either/or on the ceiling joists.  I had called them collar ties.  He does not seem to be accepting the loft joists as drawn, wants the liability on the owner.

I don't understand the treated plate (he's calling it a nailer?) on the pier, but I can easily run a treated 2x10 16' long on top of the piers, but don't know how I will get the girder bracket on.  Any thoughts?

thnaks, frazoo

[Beavers]

I'm pretty sure that any wood in contact with concrete has to be treated.  Were you planning on using treated wood for the beam?  Maybe he would be OK with that instead of using a separate "nailer"?  The treated beam might cost a little more, but it could solve your bracket problem.

It's pretty cool that this guy sounds like he is "by the book" and that's all he could gig you on.
Make sense to me that he wants either a ridge beam or ceiling joist's.  The way Don_P explained it to me a while ago, was that if you push down on the roof, then the rafters want to spread, you need either a ridge beam to keep the roof from pushing down, or ceiling joist's to keep them from spreading.  

OK...he spelled it out a lot better than that but hopefully you get the idea.  

BTW- not sure what your pier layout is, but if you go with a ridge beam you need a pier directly under each end of the beam to transfer the load to the ground instead of just to your floor joist's.  I learned that the hard way.  

[psammy]

I would print out a cut sheet on that Simpson base to show him that there would be no wood contact with the CMU pier.  It's possible he's not familiar with that specific base connector??  I'd prefer to use the ABU66 base....seems a bit less fussy with some adjustability plus higher load rating.

psammy

[Don_P]

Is the word "pier" used by you anywhere on the plans? I'm a little lost on his calls, I'm not seeing his note calling for 2-2x10's but that doesn't work with your pier spacing. That combined with the call for a mudsill (the nailer) makes me wonder if he thinks its a continuous crawlspace wall with 12x12 pilasters  If you look in the foundation chapter under pier and curtain wall I can make a case for possible confusion although your pier sketch is clear to me, dunno. You could either drill through the sill or notch it I guess.

He is not allowing the upper floor joists to be called the tie.  If you can handle a post in the middle of the house a ridgebeam would be an easy solution. The supplier will typically provide engineering on that for free

[frazoo]

DonP, I submitted two foundation plans, an either/or because I wasn't sure what he would require.  one is for a crawlspace, his only notation on that one was for drainage pipe and gravel around the perimeter (which I forgot to include on the drawing).  The other foundation plan was for a pier construction. I noted 3 2x12's with ply sandwich, he noted 2 2x10's (I didn't post that pic to p'bucket, but will later).  I thought that a bit light?

From talking to other people in the community, this guy is all about roof framing.  My excavator built a building on his property last year and he had to engineer an additional $2500 worth of roof framing to satisfy the permit.  Don't know if he was telling it right, but he said he had to have his roof engineered to 130 mph winds.  Maybe thats typical, I don't know, just seems like a lot to my inexperienced mind.  BUT, I appreciate safety.

Beavers, I did not note P.T. for my girder and I should have, I'll ask about that.  I still like the 3 2x12's better than 2 2x10's. 

Anyone have any idea what an engineer might cost for something like this little roof system?  Don't mind paying an honest price, but don't wanna be gouged. either


thanks, frazoo

[frazoo]

bottom right of photo showes his red marking, and left side shows "footings and piers". 

After I talk to an engineer, I think I need to talk to my inspector.

frazoo

[frazoo]

My pics were there, then they were gone.

frazoo




P.S. I tried to separate the pics, it would not let me and deleted them.

[Don_P]

No mistaking that.
Let's check the girder;
Looks like a 7' spacing x half of the building width 8'= 56 square feet
Downstairs use 50 psf total x 56= 2800 lbs
upstairs use 40 psf total x 56 sf=2240 lbs
Assume 1' overhang for 9' width x 7 x 35 psf=2205 lbs
Total design load on the girder=7245, assume a 6' span
I'm coming out ok with a triple 2x10 or a double 2x12 in #2 SPF or better.

Sounds like you are in the special wind region too, enforcement of that is apparently varied. I had to remove and replace some windows when it first happened. From what I've heard later they were fine, that happened to how many homes?...  I'm working in another county this spring, he's already reminded me of the SWR but by saying he would be looking for hurricane ties, uhh sure wedodat. I helped design a hybrid TF/stick frame/truss roof in league with a young designer, confident that the inspector would bust us and require engineering and all would be right with the world. I had warned the homeowners to expect this. He glossed right over 2 areas I really wanted to be caught on. I've just had an exchange and gotten a cheerful email back to bring in the engineer.

One way I've looked at similar situations, for something simple, if I can modify to some form of prescriptive or vendor engineered method I'll try for that. The engineer will cost something on the way to the cost of a ridgebeam, so there's one option to think about. I would think a few hundred should clear it up though. One way to look at the engineer's fee is you are buying insurance. If something really goes south you get to say "he told me to do it that way", he's the one with appropriate and adequate insurance for that contingency, that also partially explains their cost.

Tell us about the boat 

[frazoo]

That was my cabin fever project when we had the two big snow storms here.  Couldn't get out to do anything, so I built a canoe in the living room.  It was evicted as soon as the snow melted enough to walk down to the workshop, and I almost was .

frazoo