• 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.

Lateral restraint on load bearing gable walls

Code Neophyte said:
Ajweaver,Another Denver attendee here. It was nice meeting you. I like your response above; I have used the same rationale often. I'm curious, though, as to whether your assessment is based in §R802, or if it comes from your engineering perspective?
Click to expand...
My response comes from an engineering perspective. That is what we do here on our designs.

Just to clarify-I am an inspector, not an engineer. I work for an engineer.

I asumed the perpendicular joist should be part of a diaphram.

If the ceiling/rafters were parallel and on the top plate faced nailed together -

but

the ceiling joists were in a closet and only 2' long,

we could have the same scenerio as finger joists.

Personally, I would approve the finger joist/tie/outlooker scenerio, even without the engineer affiliation.

I could see that it is not 100% prescriptive, and someone might request an engineer to evaluate.

Either way is good for me.
 
ajweaver said:
Personally, I would approve the finger joist/tie/outlooker scenerio, even without the engineer affiliation.

I could see that it is not 100% prescriptive, and someone might request an engineer to evaluate.

Either way is good for me.
Click to expand...
Hence where the problem in our industry, the first sentence:

IF we are enforcing a standard and are only certified at the level of inspector, we have no choice than to follow the prescriptive code or request engineering approval.

It is not what we "like" or think will be OK, but it is what is written and legally adopted. This is especially true with structural issues that can be easily engineered.

These inconsistencies and varying opinions that have a great effect on contractors is what creates complaints and ill feelings from them. The contractor in my town would be PO'd because he was given a choice of doing it over to meet the code prescriptively or get an engineer's approval/repair spec. What I would hear from her/him would be " But I just did the same thing in XYZ town and their inspector approved it!" The bottom line is that they would not learn anything and be making the same mistake again because the code was not properly enforced where they just worked.

That is what we don't need.

I know that ajweaver was simply his/her opinion and it may not be how ajweaver would make an official judgement but I am simply making this an example of one of the biggest problems in our industry. Please take no offense aj.
 
I agree with jar546. The same issues apply to plan checkers.

In addition I suggest that inconsistent and what appears to be arbitrary requirements can have a negative impact on quality of the work because some individuals will say why try and not make an effort.
 
looks like collar ties may be installed. It LOOKS like 2x4 rafters (which is an issue with new growth lumber).

Rafter construction takes some really close scrutiny at plan review.. shouldn't be up to the field inspector.
 
jar546 said:
IF we are enforcing a standard and are only certified at the level of inspector, we have no choice than to follow the prescriptive code or request engineering approval.
Click to expand...
Not quite true. You can approve construction based on "local" construction practices. No reason to require engineering on work where similar engineering has been submitted in the past.
 
GHRoberts

Where in the code does it say you cn use calculations from a previous project to justify something on this project?
 
Mark K said:
GHRobertsWhere in the code does it say you can use calculations from a previous project to justify something on this project?
Click to expand...
Let's say the guy across the road built an identical structure and submitted all the engineering that AHJ asked for. The construction was approved by the AHJ last week. Sounds like I don't need to submit anything.

As ajweaver said: He saw such construction approved before. And he is willing to approve it now.

Prior experience is very important.
 
There are several problems with that logic.

First it is very rare that two structures are exactly the same. They often differ in some aspect that you or the contractor may see as minor but to the engineer it is a big deal.

One thing that can change from one lot to another is the soil under the foundation.

The engineer who prepared the design for the first project was only paid to accept the risk associated with that project. There have been situations where people have reused the design of the engineer without permission and without paying him for the reuse and when there were problems suing him for having contributed to the problem. This puts the engineer at risk without getting paid and without having a chance to help mitigate any problems. This is a real risk for engineers.

If the state engineering registration laws required that certain part of the work be designed by a licensed engineer then you are in violation of the state laws governing the practice of engineering.

The engineer and the architect could sue the owner of the second project for reusing the plans without permission.

You are not enforcing the building code as adopted. If calculations were required for the first project they are required for the next one.

By the way local construction practices are not recognized by the building code unless they have been codified and adopted by the local jurisdiction.

See the posting by jar546
 
Good points on the dangers and fairness of re-using engineered systems, but it does make sense that in an area, if there is an accepted and common building practice that has stood the test of time that should be taken account.

1st thing I'd do is run a row of blocking along the top of the beam where the c.j.'s overlap, then a few rows of continuous blocking between the c.j.'s at some spacing, 32" o.c. or 48" o.c. in the same direction as the blocks on top of the beam along with rafter ties at some spacing. This would be a simple calc. for an engineer or architect who can do engineering.
 
GHRoberts said:
Not quite true. You can approve construction based on "local" construction practices. No reason to require engineering on work where similar engineering has been submitted in the past.
Click to expand...
Engineering doesn't become proper just because it was submitted, and any construction practice can be improperly applied.
 
GHRoberts said:
Let's say the guy across the road built an identical structure and submitted all the engineering that AHJ asked for. The construction was approved by the AHJ last week. Sounds like I don't need to submit anything. As ajweaver said: He saw such construction approved before. And he is willing to approve it now.

Prior experience is very important.
Click to expand...
Just because you got a permit, doesn't mean you met the code.
 
A couple of points, in no particular order...

"That's the way we always do it" isn't quite good enough for me to approve a project, so follow the perscriptive or get some plans prepared by a design professional. I need the info I need for a reason. My files are subject periodic audits and I want them complete.

"Sounds like I don't need to submit anything." Yes you do, kind of like providing plans for each duplicate of the stock houses built in a tract full of houses.

"We don't need to do that in XYZ town". So go back there and build it.

"Just because you got a permit, doesn't mean you met the code." Well, it should mean the proposal meets code, but in actual aplication, well...
 
The most wonderful part of me being an engineer is that I submit just floor plans and a few notes - indicating that I know the code required loadings.

Then I ensure that the construction meets the intent of the plans and notes.

I don't wait for permits or inspections. (I have not had to since a court told the AHJ not to harass me.)
 
Then I ensure that the construction meets the intent of the plans and notes
Click to expand...
Most engineers never see the installation/construction of their designs. Glad to see you are the exception and willing to get out in the field and make sure the contractors are following your design.
 
GHRoberts said:
The most wonderful part of me being an engineer is that I submit just floor plans and a few notes - indicating that I know the code required loadings.Then I ensure that the construction meets the intent of the plans and notes.

I don't wait for permits or inspections. (I have not had to since a court told the AHJ not to harass me.)
Click to expand...
I'm calling B.S. on this one; I don't believe a single word of it. It's a blowhard post if I ever saw one. Requiring you to comply with the law is not "harassing" you. A court isn't going to exempt you from ordinances, even if the AHJ DID harass you. That's not really how the law works, George. And no jurisdiction is going to allow you to "just submit a floor plan and a few notes", unless of course, you're engineering a floor plan...

George, are you a registered professional engineer? If so, in what states are you registered to practice engineering?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Some places you don't even have inspectors but that's the exception. There's no way in most parts of the country that just because you're a civil or structural engineer that you aren't going to have to submit plans and justify your calcs with figures. Also, having worked with a lot of engineers, some are good, some are terrible, and a few are great
 
jar546 said:
Hence where the problem in our industry, the first sentence:IF we are enforcing a standard and are only certified at the level of inspector, we have no choice than to follow the prescriptive code or request engineering approval.

It is not what we "like" or think will be OK, but it is what is written and legally adopted. This is especially true with structural issues that can be easily engineered.

These inconsistencies and varying opinions that have a great effect on contractors is what creates complaints and ill feelings from them. The contractor in my town would be PO'd because he was given a choice of doing it over to meet the code prescriptively or get an engineer's approval/repair spec. What I would hear from her/him would be " But I just did the same thing in XYZ town and their inspector approved it!" The bottom line is that they would not learn anything and be making the same mistake again because the code was not properly enforced where they just worked.

That is what we don't need.

I know that ajweaver was simply his/her opinion and it may not be how ajweaver would make an official judgement but I am simply making this an example of one of the biggest problems in our industry. Please take no offense aj.
Click to expand...
No offense at all.

I do understand your point jar546,

You said:

" IF we are enforcing a standard and are only certified at the level of inspector, we have no choice than to follow the prescriptive code or request engineering approval."

Technically yes,

but there are many instances where construction does not match wording of code,

but I know the intent and do not need engineering to achieve/exceed that.

But I am open to constructive criticism..Is that wrong?

How I was taught is that this particular installation (when intalled correctly) is a "connection of equivalent capacity" and meets intent of the prescriptive code.
 
Oh my gawsh aj....someone with common sense!!! What is wrong with you? :)
 
ajweaver said:
How I was taught is that this particular installation (when installed correctly) is a "connection of equivalent capacity" and meets intent of the prescriptive code.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily disagree, but can some of you engineers please comment on whether this installation is likely to "(when installed correctly) is a "connection of equivalent capacity".

I'd like to know if ajweaver was directed appropriately (from what you can tell). ok?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top