Time for a do over.

[ICE]

I wonder how much lumber was wasted before he said "Screw it, this is the best I can do". Or is it possible that someone thought that this was good enough?

It is rare that I catch these prior to sheathing but it's not a rare catch.

Nope, not rare but usually well done to burnt. They are waiting with the H/O to celebrate a milestone 'cause the roof is going on and I tell them to start over. I chose this picture because it happened today but gosh I see some strange cut roofs.

 

[brudgers]

That's why I spec simpson angles for those connections.

 

[Rio]

Looks like they might be able to slip another plate adjacent to the one that is 'supporting' the rafters and pick up the load. Of course, with that part being so sloppy who knows how bad the rest of it is.....

 

[texasbo]

Disregarding the poor saw work, I wonder what made them think they could have the rafters bear on top of roof sheathing? Do you guys not require framing plans?

 

[MtnArch]

It looks like fill framing to me - something that's done all of the time here. The nailer looks a tad too small, though - should have used a 2x12!

 

[texasbo]

It looks like fill framing to me - something that's done all of the time here. The nailer looks a tad too small, though - should have used a 2x12!

What is this "fill framing" of which you speak, and how does it reconcile with R802.3, 2006 IRC?

 

[pwood]

that is a california infill framing. done all the time here. the level cut on the jacks require full bearing on the plate and the level cut is showing some air. nothing a little structural caulk can't cure!

 

[texasbo]

Sweet...

I think I'd prefer calcs to caulk.

And code compliance would be even better.

 

[Darren Emery]

Disregarding the poor saw work, I wonder what made them think they could have the rafters bear on top of roof sheathing? Do you guys not require framing plans?

Framing plans? You actually get framing plans on a project this size? We're doing good to get an accurate site plan, and a basic floor plan...

 

[KZQuixote]

Around here it's called a California. Probably a better term is "over framing". I've framed many similarly except that mine had full bearing. Good you caught it before they roofed it with those concrete tiles.

TBO: I don't see any problems with R 802.3.

Bill

 

[rktect 1]

Just an overlay. I've done it a few times. Seen it several times on plan reviews.

Of course it needs to be done correctly.

 

[fatboy]

I agree with KXQ, it overframing here, we see it all the time. I would require an additional plate under the heel cut for full bearing, and some shimming to support the crappy cut.

 

[JMORRISON]

Overframing; should be vertically braced to existing rafters/trusses below so load path is not modified. Typical plan would be 4' oc vertical.

 

[TJacobs]

What KQX and fatboy said.

 

[Daddy-0-]

The plate distributes the load throughout the roof diaphragm which gets it to the rafters below. As long as it is angled across the rafters below as in a typical roof overlay it is structurally sound framing. The problem is that the heel cut on the rafters is not fully bearing and the plate is too small. I would add a 2x4 or 2x6 plate to support the heals. I would then pull the rafters out and cut them a little better (get the compound mitre angles corrected) and just move them up the roof a 1/2". A little adjustment in the first course of plywood and voila...all is well. Of course they could just shim it but that is sloppy at best.