• 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

R502.7 lateral restraint

Based on the code language that says "supported laterally at the ends by full depth blocking.........or by attachment to a full-depth header, band or rim joist..." I would say it complies.
 
R502.7: Lateral Restraint at supports. Yes, blocking required.

What's up with the light fixtures that don't appear to be for outdoor use.
 
They look like 2 X 12s to me and the full code section reads:

R502.7 Lateral restraint at supports. Joists shall be supported laterally at the ends by full-depth solid blocking not less than 2 inches (51 mm) nominal in thickness; or by attachment to a header, band, or rim joist, or to an adjoining stud; or shall be otherwise provided with lateral support to prevent rotation.

Exception: In Seismic Design Categories D1 and D2, lateral

restraint shall also be provided at each intermediate

support.

R502.7.1 Bridging. Joists exceeding a nominal 2 inches by 12 inches (51 mm by 305 mm) shall be supported laterally by solid blocking, diagonal bridging (wood or metal), or a continuous 1-inch-by-3-inch (25.4 mm by 76 mm) strip nailed across the bottom of joists perpendicular to joists at intervals not exceeding 8 feet (2438 mm).

Also I don’t see the other ends being supported so I would said I need at least some mid span blocking.
 
More info:

Deck is attached to the building by a ledger with hangers and 5/8” CDX plywood glued and screwed down to the joist and with the light fixture the state is the responsibility party (Labor and Industries).
 
This is a note from the bottom of the cantilever table. Looks like both are required.

g. A full-depth rim joist shall be provided at the cantilevered end of the joists. Solid blocking shall be provided at the cantilever support.
 
steveray said:
This is a note from the bottom of the cantilever table. Looks like both are required.g. A full-depth rim joist shall be provided at the cantilevered end of the joists. Solid blocking shall be provided at the cantilever support.
Click to expand...
Steveray,

NICE FIND!!!

Just what I was looking for.

Thank you,

Rick
 
IMHO- Footnote G from table 502.3.3(1) would only apply if the cantilevered joists were supporting an exterior wall and roof.
 
steveray said:
This is a note from the bottom of the cantilever table. Looks like both are required.g. A full-depth rim joist shall be provided at the cantilevered end of the joists. Solid blocking shall be provided at the cantilever support.
Click to expand...
. . . cripes . . . they gonna lov me now
 
mueller said:
IMHO- Footnote G from table 502.3.3(1) would only apply if the cantilevered joists were supporting an exterior wall and roof.
Click to expand...
OK Mueller:

What now?
 
From the picture in the OP I would say the cantilever span does not exceed the nominal depth of of the wood floor joists and additional blocking is not requirered pursuant to section R 502.3.3
 
mueller said:
From the picture in the OP I would say the cantilever span does not exceed the nominal depth of of the wood floor joists and additional blocking is not requirered pursuant to section R 502.3.3
Click to expand...
Thank you Mueller,

I'll go with that.
 
mueller said:
From the picture in the OP I would say the cantilever span does not exceed the nominal depth of of the wood floor joists and additional blocking is not requirered pursuant to section R 502.3.3
Click to expand...
I contend that this section only dictates the span and further shows requirements as per several tables. Both table 502.3.3(2) footnote e AND section 502.7 indicate the requirement for blocking. The beam is the point of support(502.7) and it's cantilevered as per 502.3.3.(2)
 
bgingras said:
I contend that this section only dictates the span and further shows requirements as per several tables. Both table 502.3.3(2) footnote e AND section 502.7 indicate the requirement for blocking. The beam is the point of support(502.7) and it's cantilevered as per 502.3.3.(2)
Click to expand...
I must respectivly disagree, 502.7 requires joists to be laterally supported by blocking or attachment to a rim joist.

R502.7 Lateral restraint at supports.

Joists shall be supported laterally at the ends by full-depth solid blocking not less than 2 inches (51 mm) nominal in thickness; or by attachment to a full-depth header, band or rim joist, or to an adjoining stud or shall be otherwise provided with lateral support to prevent rotation.

Table 502.3.3(2) is not applicable as it is for exterior balconies and the picture in the OP is a deck.

DECK. An exterior floor system supported on at least two opposing sides by an adjoining structure and/or posts, piers, or other independent supports.

BALCONY, EXTERIOR. An exterior floor projecting from and supported by a structure without additional independent supports.
 
I stand corrected deck vs balcony. BUT, 502.7 is restraint at support. The rim joist isn't at the support, thus I still say blocking required. This has been discussed during trainings and the answer has always been that it's required. Anyone have a commentary showing this?
 
Don't have the book handy, but I believe 2009 that deck and balcony are now treated the same in most if not all respects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top