• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

engineered lumber and placement drawings

B

bptp32

Bronze Member
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
34
Location
ny
2010 Residential Code of NYS (2006 IRC with amendments): I have a set of plans for a single family dwelling. the plans are stamped and signed by a licensed architect. The plans denote I-joists for the floors and trusses for the roof framing. I have asked for the truss design certs and the placement drawings for both the I-joist and the trusses. The Contractor (an attorney) has stated that he does not have to provide the placement drawings for the I-joists because the architect has stamped the plans. The placement drawings from the manufacturer will denote blocking locations, beam sizes, hangar sizes and locations, joist model or series number, etc that are not on the plans. Shall i stand firm on this issue or am I ok with the architects stamped drawings? Thanks for the help
 
you can ask for and expect all the information you deem necessary. the devil , as they say, in those details (drawings)
 
We always insist on the truss/beam/joist layout drawings from the engineer who did the work, whois often employed by the supplier.

It's part of the design of the project, and must be provided.

Or we can stop the job and argue it before a judge if you prefer.
 
All beam, floor/ceiling joist layouts, truss specs/layouts required here, regardless of who the designer is. It's all part of the submittal.
 
The engineered stamped truss plans sometimes come later after measurements at the top plates are done but you should have the layout and some truss design documents to issue the permit.

Not all truss plants have engineers employeed and send their designs to a third party for checks and stamps. I sometimes have to contact the lumber yard for the engineered truss plans to verify information before inspections are performed.

pc1
 
Here, we usually get some generics at submittal and the stamped set is SUPPOSED to be submitted before installation, as the truss co. does not want to give them out before they get paid...we usually get them at the rough inspection....CT state statute requires a "live seal" which has been my biggest PITA lately as it seems everyone wants to use a digital type stamp....and once again, we are the bad guys....
 
steveray said:
Here, we usually get some generics at submittal and the stamped set is SUPPOSED to be submitted before installation, as the truss co. does not want to give them out before they get paid...we usually get them at the rough inspection....CT state statute requires a "live seal" which has been my biggest PITA lately as it seems everyone wants to use a digital type stamp....and once again, we are the bad guys....
Click to expand...
My boss does not want us to accept digital stamps, but the state allows them.
 
bptp32 said:
2010 Residential Code of NYS (2006 IRC with amendments): I have a set of plans for a single family dwelling. the plans are stamped and signed by a licensed architect. The plans denote I-joists for the floors and trusses for the roof framing. I have asked for the truss design certs and the placement drawings for both the I-joist and the trusses. The Contractor (an attorney) has stated that he does not have to provide the placement drawings for the I-joists because the architect has stamped the plans. The placement drawings from the manufacturer will denote blocking locations, beam sizes, hangar sizes and locations, joist model or series number, etc that are not on the plans. Shall i stand firm on this issue or am I ok with the architects stamped drawings? Thanks for the help
Click to expand...
What are your concerns regarding the framing which are not currently addressed? Personally, I think requiring placement drawings for I joists is a bit silly, since these are as uniform in their properties as conventional lumber or plywood and the distribution of loads to supporting members is essentially uniform as well.

To put it another way, do you require placement drawings for plywood?

Trusses (both roof and floor) are a different animal because they are each designed individually for the application and concentrated loads are frequently imposed on the supporting members.
 
Hopefully he is not a very good attorney as 504.11.4 of the IRC specifically identifies trusses and the original post indicated wood I-joists for floor framing. I never have and most likely never will require a placement plan for I-joists or dimensional lumber. Just more paper for no good reason.
 
"since these are as uniform in their properties as conventional lumber"

They may be uniform, but the installers are not. I'd just as soon stop a non=compliant installation at plan review, not out in the field. I want to see framing plans with conventional lumber also.
 
fatboy said:
"since these are as uniform in their properties as conventional lumber" They may be uniform, but the installers are not. I'd just as soon stop a non=compliant installation at plan review, not out in the field. I want to see framing plans with conventional lumber also.
Click to expand...
Then you're being consistent. I don't have an issue with framing plans being required for all floor framing.

But singling out i-Joists for a placement plan, when the issues are all in the squash blocks is silly.
 
we require applicants to submit floor truss layouts with their application.

How are you supposed to know how the loads are being transfered to the foundation and that the foundation is designed accordingly if you don't receive these?
 
How are you supposed to know how the loads are being transfered to the foundation and that the foundation is designed accordingly if you don't receive these?

Yeah and how are we supposed to know if they are installed "according to hoyle?"
 
I saw a framing plan recently for an addition.

Then Yesterday I saw what the contractor built. The list of corrections was long.

Sometime today the architect will submit new plans.

I am positive that they will mirror what the contractor f'd up.

Leading to a whole new round of review comments, questions, answers and maybe even a little education.
 
I have'nt seen a conventional floor joist (2x) layout on a set of plans for years, I think the Architect gets another $200 for that piece of paper.

I-beam placement and measurements from the foundation bearing walls are now the norm on the the first sheet, A1.

pc1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top