I had to match what was there!

[Yankee]

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!

I think it all depends on the stresses that are creating the split as to when it is and where it goes from there

 

[north star]

* * * *

Anybody have any pictures / hand drawings / sketches that they

can paste on here, with a recommended "compliant" fix?....How

would "you" fix it?

steveray,

Would you accept a letter from a structural engineer saying that

it is o.k. as installed? Ya know, ...kinda like "have seal, ...will sell

for cookies?" :lol:

* * * *

 

[steveray]

NS...We kinda have to accept it from an engineer.....on structural anyway (not blindly, but that is another discussion).... As I said previously, they are going to pick up the new rafters at an LVL put in the old exterior wall used to carry the existing ceiling joists, cutting that span to about 6' from like 20' Therein also reducing the load on the sketchy header and jacks on the right as well...Still no ideas on insulation, and many other structural issues...I have tried to arrange a meeting on site with their designer....and have been unsuccessful as of yet....

 

[Yankee]

I would go with the engineers stamped assessment unless they can come up with some other framing documents from a referenced standard. Personally if the rafters were bearing on what looks like a beam, I would be pretty comfortable with it structurally (as far as I can see in the one picture).

 

[NH09]

I understand everyones point on the notching, by I alway thought that meant the notching of the minimum required rafter size, which in this case appears to be 2 x 6. It just looks worse because he's notching and over sized rafter. I think the tough part is getting in the required insulation without decreasing the headroom too much.

 

[brudgers]

At the point where the biggest concern is insulation over a few square feet, any violation is trifling when it comes to this sort of renovation.

 

[NH09]

True brudgers, but if this renovation is in a northern climate then inadequate insulation/ventialtion is going to result in one heck of an ice dam, and many complaints to the building department down the road.

 

[Yankee]

I understand everyones point on the notching, by I alway thought that meant the notching of the minimum required rafter size, which in this case appears to be 2 x 6. It just looks worse because he's notching and over sized rafter. I think the tough part is getting in the required insulation without decreasing the headroom too much.

I wouldn't sweat the R factor at all. that's just me talkin'.

 

[Darren Emery]

I will take my usual stance. What is shown appears to be allowed.If you don't know the code, don't get a job inspecting.

I'm curious - why is that your usual stance? Seems to me accepting framing that may indeed be incorrect, inadequate, and in violation of the code is an unusual stance to take.

 

[brudgers]

True brudgers, but if this renovation is in a northern climate then inadequate insulation/ventialtion is going to result in one heck of an ice dam, and many complaints to the building department down the road.

Put on your big boy undies.

 

[steveray]

Put on your big boy undies.

My big boy undies went with me on about 80 roof calls in 2 days a couple weeks ago when the 60" of snow we had in January started melting.....if I can do anything to mitigate those before they become a problem, I will do it.....even if it means holding the contractors to the lowest standard allowed by law!

If the insulation was not coupled with at least 10 other violations...it would not be such a big deal, if they had know proper framing techniques or proper insulation vaues, all of the issues may have solved themselves. In the northern climates here, the insulation values usually drive the rafter sizing...we need a minimum of R-30 over the top plate, or R-38 to the edge of the wall...

 

[pwood]

use rigid to get your r values in the suspect areas and compact batts in the other areas! next?

 

[ajweaver]

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?

I have a question -bear with me I am a person still learning the codes and intent:

If the span chart says a 2x6 is required, and someone installs a 2x12 Why could they not notch or even rip the 2x12 to a 2x6 depth?

I would prefer on a uniformly loaded member like the one in the picture for the cut to be in compression vs tension- but still

My confusion lies in why would a 2x12 be loaded up any more than a 2x6 in the same scenario ?

I understand the code says not more than one-fourth the depth and not in the middle third, but reading and thinking (dangerous for me) makes me start to wonder if the intent was for lumber not oversized...

1-Does cutting/notching/ripping the wood cut on tension side add stress because it is no longer milled and grains/fibers are exposed?

2-Would you have a problem if the notch was on the compression side (top) of a uniformly loaded member notched from a 2x12 to a 2x6 with a 2x6 being an acceptable span.

Future lessons..thanks.

 

[SBerg]

This illustrates resawn lumber.

And the use or resawn lumber is not allowed. The ANSI/AF & PA NDS-2005 section 4.1.7 (which is a referenced standard in the IBC and IRC) prohibits the use of tapered or ripped lumber after grading. NDS Section 4.4.3 limits the end notch to not exceed 1/4 the depth of the graded material.

Essentially the lumber needs to regraded and then a engineer can determine loading of those members.

Fail.

 

[NH09]

Put on your big boy undies.

Nice reply brudgers - way to keep this forum professional. I realize that in the south ice and snow are not an issue, but in the northeast ice damming is a common problem that can cause significant damage to a structure. If I can prevent a problem down the road by taking action now, and it is within the scope of the code I will do it. Like steveray I've been on a lot of roofs this winter and in a lot of cases a little extra work by the contractor could have prevented the problem.

 

[ajweaver]

This illustrates resawn lumber.And the use or resawn lumber is not allowed. The ANSI/AF & PA NDS-2005 section 4.1.7 (which is a referenced standard in the IBC and IRC) prohibits the use of tapered or ripped lumber after grading. NDS Section 4.4.3 limits the end notch to not exceed 1/4 the depth of the graded material.

Essentially the lumber needs to regraded and then a engineer can determine loading of those members.

Fail.

I can understand the resawn..but tapered?

Rafters and ceiling joists are tapered with the roof pitch decking in a lot of houses.

I looked at the section you referenced.

It says resawn or remanufactured...I could not find the word tapered.

Resawn..making a 2x4 a 1x4..Remanufactured...making a 2x4 a 2x2. not allowed.

I learned something new..thanks.

I have allowed ripped (remanufactured) lumber in the past..anyone else?

 

[brudgers]

Nice reply brudgers - way to keep this forum professional. I realize that in the south ice and snow are not an issue, but in the northeast ice damming is a common problem that can cause significant damage to a structure. If I can prevent a problem down the road by taking action now, and it is within the scope of the code I will do it. Like steveray I've been on a lot of roofs this winter and in a lot of cases a little extra work by the contractor could have prevented the problem.

Don't worry, we got plenty of bureaucrats down here who are just as skilled as you in denying permits to keep their workload down. They are able to do so with similar rationalizations and the same smug self-satisfaction, too.

A code official playing "Gotcha" with permits and counting down the days until retirement is hardly unique.

 

[JBI]

Two (basic) ways to adhere to Milton's Rule... 1) Plans (and work) comply with the prescriptive provisions of the Code or

2) Engineered design based on sound engineering principles.

I do agree with George on at least one point in this thread, the header over the interior door is simply incomplete. The jack studs are there, the header is yet to be installed.

What I do find troublesome however, is the cavalier attitude regarding what is obviously poor workmanship (and bad planning). Since the as-built roof does not comply with the prescriptive provisions of the Code (remember #1 above?), a Design Professional will be required to provide justification using sound engineering principles (#2 above)...

instead of playing "Gotcha" with the Code Official or counting down the days until retirement... :-(

 

[Yankee]

Two (basic) ways to adhere to Milton's Rule... 1) Plans (and work) comply with the prescriptive provisions of the Code or2) Engineered design based on sound engineering principles.

I do agree with George on at least one point in this thread, the header over the interior door is simply incomplete. The jack studs are there, the header is yet to be installed.

What I do find troublesome however, is the cavalier attitude regarding what is obviously poor workmanship (and bad planning). Since the as-built roof does not comply with the prescriptive provisions of the Code (remember #1 above?), a Design Professional will be required to provide justification using sound engineering principles (#2 above)...

instead of playing "Gotcha" with the Code Official or counting down the days until retirement... :-(

Your #2 above does NOT SPECIFY that a design profession be used, simply that sound engineering principles be used.

 

[SBerg]

Yes, tapered rafters are resawn lumber. They must be regraded to comply with the loading characteristics of the material.

You can cut to achieve the correct length, and notch to no more than 1/4 the depth at bearing points.

The issue is if a member ripped (or tapered) a knot or check could reduce the effective strength of that member. Hence, needs regrading.

 

[Mule]

With the tapered on the top say the way you cut off joists so it won't get in the way of the decking, there isn't enough loading on that type of cut that will cause failure.

On a cut off (tapered) the bottom there is load from the top which could cause the taper to fail...split at a wood grain.

I know not a taper but......

 

[GHRoberts]

I'm curious - why is that your usual stance? Seems to me accepting framing that may indeed be incorrect, inadequate, and in violation of the code is an unusual stance to take.

It is my usual stance here: due to the fact that those who post pictures here tend to lack engineering judgment.

I don't expect AHJs or inspectors to have engineering judgment. It is not a job requirement. They should simply follow the prescriptions or submitted engineering.

Lacking enough details to be definitive I can accept that the construction is prescriptive code compliant.

---

Real quick engineering analysis: If I recall: comments were made that from the left support to the right support is 20' and that the rafter is sufficient for that span. And the right most span is 6'. The 14' span is certainly ok. That gives me an approval for a 7' (1/2 of the 14') unsupported cantilever. And that makes the remaining 6' ok. I am done.

Snow and ice dams may be a problem but there is not enough information to make any rational decision.

 

[GHRoberts]

Your #2 above does NOT SPECIFY that a design profession be used, simply that sound engineering principles be used.

The code only requires engineering. There is no obligation for a builder to employ an engineer. He can simply do the engineering himself. (He cannot do engineering for a third party unless he is licensed, but he can do it for himself.)

 

[brudgers]

Snow and ice dams may be a problem but there is not enough information to make any rational decision.

But ironically it is enough for people to deny a permit.