• 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.

What is the code for footers/posts for a outdoor pavilion at my house?

Elvis said:
I am trying to sue the contractor. I am looking for some sort of code for foundations that would apply so that I could highlight and give to my attorney. Also, I was told that the washer used was too small for the bracket to prevent the dislodgement. Also, why was there no other stabilization for north/south vs east/west.
Click to expand...
This goes far beyond the size of a washer and an engineer as an expert witness is in order here.
 
Fix the fence and move on. Letting a lawyer in the door is fraught with peril. As he's leaving be sure to check his pockets.
 
Last edited:
Those post stand-off brackets come with an oversized hole drilled in the center and a thick, square washer that goes under the nut (or under the bolt head if you use wedge bolts). Looks to me like your guy put his anchor bolts in the wrong place, so he elongated the holes in the brackets so he could keep the posts square with each other. If he'd put his anchor bolts in the right place, used the right washers, and added some short little knee braces, that thing would still be standing.
 
Hire a code consultant from your area that is familiar or a lawyer that will hire a code consultant that is familiar with the requirements for your area, who can testify in court, not someone who writes a report for your lawyer to present.
 
Even if "properly" installed the post base would have failed. The post base was never intended to resist the resulting moment forces.
 
You may want to hire a licensed engineer to perform an investigation inspection on the structure, and provide a written report on his/her findings. The drawings used by the contractor would need to be provided. The engineer would identify the fasteners, anchors, clips, etc., used, and specify if the materials were used as listed by the manufacturer(s), whether or not they were specified on the drawings. Without the benefit of a permit, the best course of action may be to provide as many factual pieces of evidence that indicates the incorrect use of materials by the contractor.
 
From what I can see, perhaps one option is to determine the manufacturers requirements for each of the piece of hardware and show that the manufacturers requirements were not followed. and or they were not the proper hardware for the situation
 
The particular pieces of hardware are not the problem. The problem is that the Contractor did not have an understanding of a need to resist certain forces and thus chose a structural system that was incapable of resisting those forces. This is arguably an example of the dunning kruger effect.

This was compounded by either a lack of a permit or of a plan checker who had no engineering education.
 
Elvis has left the building ....code forum
 
Last edited:
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability.
It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from people's inability to recognize their lack of ability.

Many are guilty of this, He who has the gold, often seeks to control the game.

As they say, "buyer beware"

Thank you MH
 
I'm an architect not an engineer, but it seems to me that the bolts and the hold downs are only a secondary reason the structure fell. It looks like the lack of bracing and bracing connections is the primary reason for structural failure. I would expect to see two bracing members at a 45 degree angle from column to roof for each one of the 4 corner posts. Based on where the structure fell, it most likely got pushed over because of inadequare column to roof connections and no bracing to provide shear resistance and after those elements failed then, the column to footing connections failed as a result also. Robert, above, alludes to some of this in his comments, I will let him speak for himself though. If those elements were installed, it would probably still be standing. The good news is that it looks like it can be hoisted back into place and fixed. I'd try a settlement or deal and move on though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top