• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

I had to match what was there!

So, if those rafter things can bear OK at just a 2X4 depth or whatever there is left there....

If so, why not cut off some more to just make a sloped ceiling?
 
They are pretty far from ok...as far as I am concerned. Beyond structure....which may or may not be able to be remedied, we need R-30 minimum....apparently the contractor should stick to kitchen remodels that do not involve structural work.
 
The Tapered members might be ok.

The overall depth of the member is based on what occurs in the middle of the span. At the bearing the big concerns are crushing and shear and the section may well be adequate to handle those.

Of course, rational analysis should be used to determine that.
 
I agree that if the roof rafter only needs to be a 2x4 they may be ok, the additional rafter width would not alarm me which would allow for R-30 insulation. But I have a concern with the triple Anderson window framing, should have a double cripple at the ends below the header I would think. Is the header already sagging?

pc1
 
Good spot PC! Called them on that also....they are picking up the rafters back about 6' w/ an LVL, therein reducing the loading on the header, jacks, and rafters....several issues there that are yet unresolved...even more on the rest of the framing...
 
BG....they are going to get to that,,,funny little remodel...difficult to work around......but no excuse for...." what do you mean both ends of the rafters have to have bearing" I can just sister and extend them...right....Jeez. Hopefully I will get more pics soon.
 
I will take my usual stance. What is shown appears to be allowed.

The rafters seem to be proper for the span.

The insulation seems to be proper given that windows do not need R-30.

The header above the door is not yet finished.

---

If you don't know the code, don't get a job inspecting.
 
GHRoberts said:
The insulation seems to be proper given that windows do not need R-30.

---

If you don't know the code, don't get a job inspecting.
Click to expand...
The Window may not require R30, but I'm certain the roof/ceiling aseembly may need/require R30, and unless it's High density, closed cell Polyurethane foam I don't think they will get an R30 up there.
 
I wouldn't allow what is there. The code only allows 1/4 of the depth of the rafter to be notched. The code does not say that if a joist or rafter is larger than required that you can notch the member to within the specidfications of the minimum required member. Sorry.. I don't buy it!

So you install a 14 foot 2X12 joist but all that the code requires is a 2X6.....you can go in and notch the middle of the joist out to 5 1/2 inches deep and 8' wide???? Do you think that would be within the code?
 
Rafters that are whacked in that fasion tend to develop a split in the grain at the base of the bearing. Depending on the grain, it can split upwards or down. Either way it's poor practice and as Mule mentions, way overcut.
 
That's why I gave the scenario of.....

So you install a 14 foot 2X12 joist but all that the code requires is a 2X6.....you can go in and notch the middle of the joist out to 5 1/2 inches deep and 8' wide???? Do you think that would be within the code?

As others stated it would be the same as.....Nope!!! The scenario I gave would do exactly as Mac stated. The weight would cause the 2X's to split...then where would the split go? Who knows???
 
Mac said:
Rafters that are whacked in that fasion tend to develop a split in the grain at the base of the bearing. Depending on the grain, it can split upwards or down. Either way it's poor practice and as Mule mentions, way overcut.
Click to expand...
If the split you mention is shaped like an eyebrow, it would be a textbook failure in "shear", which would indicate that the stresses were NOT accounted for in the rafter at the location.
 
It appears the NDS for Wood Construction has formulas for tapered beams. (at least I expect it or similar references do.)

But if you are going to object to the taper, I would suggest you also need to object to to the bearing seats on most any rafter with an overhang.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The bearing seats on rafters are within the code. Unless you over notch them! Rafters fall within the 1/4 rule. A 2X8 rafter can be notched 2 inches and meet code. Anything over that and you're not in compliance with the notching regulations.
 
These were 2x10's cut down to about 4"....there were also some "extended" rafters that were half lapped to the old rafters nailed together and extended to new ridge....hopefully I will get some pics of those also...
 
Mule said:
then where would the split go? Who knows???
Click to expand...
Rational analysis can determine if a portion of the member is inadequate for the applied loads.

It's not mysterious.
 
What is mysterious is when the wood splits as to where the split will travel. It all depends on the grain of the wood and where the split begins. I don't think anyone could determine that!
 
It is difficult to tell from the photo, but it appears this is a bumpout in between two sections of the building (rafters in the foreground and distance seem to be perpendicular to rafters in question). With such a shallow pitch are there any concerns about unbalanced snow loads? We have that problem up here when snow collects in valleys and between dormers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top