How can a steel lintel support "100 mm + 50 mm stone facing" in Table 9.20.5.2.A.

[sunyaer]

This are two tables from Ontario building code part 9:

Table 9.20.5.2.A. & Table 9.20.5.2.B.pdf

Shared with Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

In column 3, there is the following text:

"For Stone
100 mm + 50 mm stone facing"

My question: Does "100 mm + 50 mm stone facing" mean 100 mm thick stone is cemented with 50 mm stone facing? How does a steel lintel support it?

 

[Msradell]

My question: Does "100 mm + 50 mm stone facing" mean 100 mm thick stone is cemented with 50 mm stone facing? How does a steel lintel support it?

Steel lintels are used all the time to support the facing of walls above doorways. The steel goes across the opening and rests on the facing outside of the doorway. Different codes and jurisdictions vary how far outside of the doorway the steel lintels have to go, somewhere around 8"-12"is pretty normal. Lintels are normally angle iron with sufficient thickness for the weight of the material above them.

 

[sunyaer]

Steel lintels are used all the time to support the facing of walls above doorways. The steel goes across the opening and rests on the facing outside of the doorway. Different codes and jurisdictions vary how far outside of the doorway the steel lintels have to go, somewhere around 8"-12"is pretty normal. Lintels are normally angle iron with sufficient thickness for the weight of the material above them.

What does "100 mm + 50 mm stone facing" mean?

 

[north star]

% ~ % ~ %

The Link is one example of 100mm stone facing.

https://www.lantoom.co.uk/granite-walling-stone-100mm-sawn

% ~ % ~ %

 

[sunyaer]

I still don't know what "100 mm + 50 mm stone facing" means, and am looking for help to understand it.

 

[Paul Sweet]

I wonder if it means 4" (100 mm) brick or concrete block with 2" (50 mm) veneer stone applied to it.

 

[sunyaer]

I wonder if it means 4" (100 mm) brick or concrete block with 2" (50 mm) veneer stone applied to it.

if that's the case, would the L-127 × 89 × 7.9 (1st row) be long leg horizontal, otherwise 89 mm would not be enough to support 150 mm ?

 

[tmurray]

In the photo that North Star posted, you will see some concrete style material behind with some more stone appearance on the the front. This is what they are describing.

Where the code is silent on the orientation of the angle, it would be unregulated. It would be up to the installer on which way they choose to install it. In these situations, a lot of people have plenty of opinions on how it should be done. As building officials, we're more concerned with how it must be done.

 

[sunyaer]

In the photo that North Star posted, you will see some concrete style material behind with some more stone appearance on the the front. This is what they are describing.

Where the code is silent on the orientation of the angle, it would be unregulated. It would be up to the installer on which way they choose to install it. In these situations, a lot of people have plenty of opinions on how it should be done. As building officials, we're more concerned with how it must be done.

There are two things here: 1. the capacity of the angle L-127 × 89 × 7.9 is dependent on the orientation of the angle;
2. would 89 mm angle leg supporting 150 mm stone ("100 mm + 50 mm stone facing" =150 mm) be a bit small?

 

[tmurray]

1. True, but your assumption is that in one orientation that the load-bearing capacity would be exceeded. We do not know if this is true or not.
2. Not necessarily. Even bottom plates in a wall can overhang their supports a surprising amount according to the code.

Just because the code says you can do something, does not make it a good idea.