• 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.

Nailing workmanship in code?

A

allis_ch

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
25
Is there anywhere in the IRC that says framers are supposed to hammer the nails all the way in? or even that the wood members are supposed to be touching?

Obviously they are supposed to be, and obviously the table values from NDS are dependant on the required nail penetrations. I attacked the problem from that means, but I could not find a citation in the IRC that says wood members are supposed to touch and that nails have to be driven all the way in to seat the heads.

Thanks for any code citations anyone can provide...
 
Just look at the prints. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the details show framing members securely fastened to each other and means of fastening.
 
Chapter 1 of the IRC dictates that work performed under the code be performed in a workmanlike manner.

Or maybe we can find some manufacturer's instructions for the nails? :D "Place pointed end of nail towards framing member. Hammer. Repeat as necessary until nail head is flush with framing member"
 
If the nails are not driven all the way or the wood isn't tight then the nails are not being used as they were intended and as prescribed by the code. The code doesn't say 16D driven 3/4 of the way, or 16D with a 1/4" space between members. This is where a workman like manor comes in and I would fail them. We have some ability to interpret the code, and this definitely fits within our scope of responsibility, IMHO.
 
At one time, if memory serves me right, the code specifically said that nails whould penetrate at least 1 1/2 X the thickness of the wood.
 
Over time wood shrinks and components move.

It is common for nails to stand proud and for there to be gaps between members.
 
Look at ESR Report 1539. The typical nailing for wood framing starts around page 22.

The 1 1/2 times was printed somewhere... I think it comes from the diameter of the nail and the holding power. So using 16D nails would take less than 12D's. Check out the link below for typical accepted nailing patterns for wood construction.

ESR 1539
 
"Over time wood shrinks and components move.

It is common for nails to stand proud and for there to be gaps between members."

The key part of that is

over time

. I would agree that, after numerous hot/cold cycles, wind and/or snow storms, use, abuse and time will take their toll. Also that modern lumber isn't as stable as older wood - rapid growth has taken its' toll on lumber stock. JMHO
 
Mule,

Isn't that an insulation support??

Can I also get the section that states "workmanlike manner".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Workmanship is a terrible thing to try to enforce. While the picture Mule posted is really ugly.. there's nothing (that I see) that isn't code compliant (the top plate splice is off set.. the framing member (appears to be within 1").. there's a vertical framing member below. I'd hold my nose an approve as meeting the MINIMUM requirements of the code
 
We are on the CBC (modified IBC), maybe there is a note on the structural plans, but the green code rater required OSB rather than plywood so a steel frame was installed in this addition, but the inspectors hated OSB so much that they went behind the carpenters trying to shove their business cards between the studs and the OSB, he was going with them and hand nailing where necessary. OSB is so stiff it's hard to pull it tight with guns, turn them up too high and they break the surface, not high enough and they don't pull the OSB tight. There is something in the APA documentation stating that the nail heads can't break the surface, so I'm sure there is something about nail heads not being pulled tight, how you get from the APA to the IRC is another subject, but inspectors here check all the time for breaking the skin of the plywood, if you do you have to add nails.

CresentStreetPaloAlto
View attachment 132

View attachment 132

/monthly_2010_05/sim_pa..jpg.3a1cff2a4c913f37237cb1a12b94e742.jpg
 
Have to agree with peach: Enforcement is hard especially when you end in court or even in front of the political body. Proof falls totally on the inspector. The judges and Board members eyes glaze over once you start on a path of workmanship. Even with photos and code reference they don't understand. It must be done and takes a great deal of pre - education to get the point across.
 
I am more picky on a bearing wall or roof rafters. Bearing walls need full bearing for each stud and sloppy framing can be dangerous. Interior non bearing walls I give some slack.
 
We are all picky about some things over others; the structural frame should get the most attention (since it's .. well, the structural frame of the building). Some provisions are pretty stupid... like the top plate straps at notched penetrations. Not the strap itself, but the million 16d nails on each side.. which splits the top plate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top