Started by PEG688, April 10, 2006, 10:08:42 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
QuoteAre the walls framed 24"OC? I was told on this forum that it would cause wavy walls inside and out. Jared
QuoteI like the technique by which you notched, Thanks but I'm not sure why you are notching the studs in the first place. [highlight] For a loft area , 2x12 joist , 4x6 fir post / and 4x6 LSL post 24" oc. as per architectural drawing , BTW the owner/ person who designed the place is a Professor of Architecture , as is his wife ,at a major west coast Univ. . The plans have been approved/ stamped/ added to etc. by a PE Registered in the State of Wa. to spec.s of - IBC '03' and IRC '00' -Exposurer B - 85 mph winds -Seismic Design Cat. D1 The plans have pasted code check for the city they where submitted to. Const. has followed the plans" to the letter" with no major changes to the drawing/ approved plans detail. 17 [size=18]PAGES[/size] of engineering [/highlight] Is it to bear a 'let-in' floor joist? No, a 2x6 SPF ledger is let in. The joist run 90° to the ledger. Joists run N/S , ledgers runs E/W If so, it appears to be a code violation under the International Residential Code 2003 (Washington State's Code) on a number of counts.The Code limits how deep walls studs can be notched.For bearing walls, the maximum depth of the notch is only 7/8" for a 2x4 and 1 3/8" for a 2x6. (Section R606.2 Drilling and Notching Studs). That may be why the post are 4x6 LSL and 4x6 D. Fir This creates a problem because floor joists need to be borne on a minimum of 1 1/2" of lumber. This means according to Code, you cannot do what you just did because A) it weakens the bearing wall joists too much to allow them to carry the weight of the floor and roof system from above from overnotching and B) it does not allow for a deep enough notch at 1 3/8" for the joist to be properly borne. Bearing joists need to be carried on at least 1 1/2" of wood. (Section R502.6) Be interested to have this explained in further detail because it appears that what you may have done is a serious code violation and may have seriously compromised the structural integrity of the building.Perhaps I misunderstand.Could you explain in better detail what you are trying to do and why? I'm following the approved plans
Quote Nice cuts is right PEG - I never get mine that close when cutting with a chain saw. I find I can make them look better by taking the picture off to the side so the the sunlight doesn't show through the cracks. :-/
QuoteGood to have someone around here who knows the code issues. [size=12] Yup [/size] For most owner/builder/designers the mere mass of regulation-style text overwhelms potential understanding - that and the fact that it can seem to be always changing and subject to interpretation. [size=12] Yes it is a PITA [/size]It is very helpful when someone like Mr. NY here explains it in a way that makes perfect sense. [size=12] Now on this specfic issue, 1 3/8 " max depth as apposed to 1 1/2" depth I can't say that "MAKE SENSE", seems nit picky , bean counter , anal retentive to me That 1/8"x5 1/2 " taken out is infinitesimal , there is still a 4" net of material left undisturbed . And of course that is not manhatten's fault PEG [/size]
Quote Are y'all having to put diagonal bracing to keep the whole building from tilting? Or is that just belt-and-suspenders? [size=12] Amanda the old diagonal bracing thing around here is long gone It was also a PITA, IMO. These days we have Brace Wall Panels , BWP , and Alternate BWP ABWP, Interior BWP IBWP , etc All these different panels have to be [highlight]at least[/highlight] 1/2 CDX or 7/16 OSB . Some times we sheet both sides . The nailing is generally 4 "OC on the edges and 6" in the field althought I have seen 2" OC all edges and 4" OC in the field . You'd think all those nails would degrade the lumber / split the crap out of it , and you'd be right , BUT the book/ engineers want the nails , generally 6d gun nails . Unless they go into the new ACQ lumber then the nails have to be Galv. Not much for a old carpenter to remember these days All sorts of different "Hold downs " from Simpson . They must have a boat load of lobbyist we use more metal straps , hold downs , clips , than ya can shake a stick at. '' These straps are generally nailed about ever 2 to 3 inches with 16d nails Each strap generally have the nail size and ya fill all the holes with the "right " nail size. All that hardware drives up the cost, they contend these places will hold up in a quake , some day we'll see or some one will I hope not me A break down of what Katrina did to newer homes would be nice[highlight] , IF they build down south like we do here in PNW[/highlight] . I doubt they do as quakes are not suppost to happen down there , but high winds / hurricane / tornados do about the same thing I would think . [/size] [highlight] Another thing eng. don't figure in is how the sheathing is applied , as in,, does the crew break the sheets so they over lap the box sill so the" hinge point " is supported by the sheathing , or is it just put on willy nilly , cut up,,, not lapped so window headers , plates , changes in levels are thought about. As they can't control that they slap a strap , or a clip , or a threaded rod from a bolt inbeded in the concrete to a coupling to a rod thru the floor , up the wall cavity thru the top plates toa big washer and nut to pull hold the whole works together [/highlight] this last lot of pictures told me exactly what was going on. Getting pictures that do that really is an art form. Good work. [highlight]Ya a picture is worth a thousands words So I'm a artist jee I wonder if I can charge more Thanks PEG[/highlight]
Quote Would it be acceptable to use a vertical 2x nailer ("jack-post", "crutch", ?? ... I don't know the correct term) attached to the inside face of the stud to support the joists? [size=12] I'd call that a trimmer like under a header, it would have to go to the plate full bearing . It would work , but in this case the look is for the two joist pairs to be exposed , finished natural . so you'd need one on each side of the 4x6 post. It might work , but again these plans don't call for it that way. Good question though [/size] is would eliminate the ledger and the letting-in. If acceptable, would such an element have to extend all the way down to the sill ... or would the shear loading on "x" number of nails or screws be sufficient? [size=12]See above [/size]BTW, great looking framing PEG! [size=12] Thanks [/size]