Home Page link

Cutting load bearing members - standard practices

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Building Construction - Building Construction Industry Discussions. 

Page 2 of 3       < 1 2 3 > last >> Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Cutting load bearing members - standard practices mike 09-27-2006
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by RicodJour on September 27, 2006, 4:33 pm
Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> > Matt Barrow wrote:
> >>
> >> > mike wrote:
> >> >> I am putting a window in my garage along one of the external walls. We
> >> >> have
> >> >> already cleared the brick and sheetrock only to reveal a double wall
> >> >> stud
> >
> > "Only to reveal" suggests that you laid out the wall from the outside
> > without verifying framing prior to cutting, or that you didn't strip
> > the drywall before knocking out the brick.
>
> Tell that to Mike, not to me. I only left that in for context.

I thought I just did. ;) I commented on something the OP wrote in the
midst of a reply to you. Maybe your newsreader works differently - my
stuff didn't show up as a reply to something the OP wrote in your
reader?

> >> >> near the center of the new window opening. In the attic, this doubled
> >> >> stud
> >> >> supports a doubled rafter which would appear to be a load bearing
> >> >> member.
> >> >
> >> > All rafters are load bearing members. A doubled rafter indicates a
> >> > larger load. Consider it a red flag.
> >>
> >> Why a "red flag" item?
> >
> > I'll answer your question with three other questions.
> > Why did they double up the rafter in the first place?
>
> You better ask Mike...I only asked the last question.

Indeed. That was understood thanks to the marvels of the > and >>
technology.

> > Was the existing garage built correctly?
> > Do you feel from the information provided that the OP should forge
> > ahead on his own with information garnered from a newsgroup (where the
> > best intentioned advice is based on many assumptions), or should he get
> > some pro eyeballs on it?
> >
> You're losing track of the questions.

You asked why a red flag, and in my own tangental way I answered. It's
a red flag for the simple reason that beefed up construction points to
greater loads and possibly previous modifications or repairs. Did I
misunderstand the meaning of your question?

R


PexSupply Save 50 468x60
Posted by Matt Barrow on September 28, 2006, 8:50 am
>
> You asked why a red flag, and in my own tangental way I answered.

Well, take your tangent and stick it where...! :~)

>It's
> a red flag for the simple reason that beefed up construction points to
> greater loads and possibly previous modifications or repairs. Did I
> misunderstand the meaning of your question?

I assume so. I saw nothing in the original (albeit a quick read) to indicate
these were after the original construction. (?)

Why would modifications to beef up a structure be a negative (red flag)? I
would take such to be "improvements".






Posted by RicodJour on September 29, 2006, 12:24 am
Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> >It's
> > a red flag for the simple reason that beefed up construction points to
> > greater loads and possibly previous modifications or repairs. Did I
> > misunderstand the meaning of your question?
>
> I assume so. I saw nothing in the original (albeit a quick read) to indicate
> these were after the original construction. (?)

That's why I wrote possibly.

> Why would modifications to beef up a structure be a negative (red flag)? I
> would take such to be "improvements".

Structural modifications are rarely done on a whim, and unless the
members and loads could be verified it would be an assumption that the
modification was an improvement. An improvement doesn't equate to
simpler or standard inDoubled members are perfect indicators that there
are greater loads in the area. Either way, original framing or
modified, it has little difference on the approach to the problem.
Verify conditions then design a solution.

R


Posted by Jonny on September 27, 2006, 10:03 am
>I am putting a window in my garage along one of the external walls. We have
>already cleared the brick and sheetrock only to reveal a double wall stud
>near the center of the new window opening. In the attic, this doubled stud
>supports a doubled rafter which would appear to be a load bearing member.
>
> I need to cut that double wall stud and build the header to frame in the
> new window opening. I have read that standard practice is to make the
> header size twice the size of the member being cut. Would the appropriate
> header for a double stud member then be qty 4, 2x4's? Seems a bit much but
> there is room to do it. Also, would the two adjacent wall studs need to be
> doubled as well?
>
> Please comment
> Mike in DFW
>

Can't speak for your garage, can't see it. Opposite walls on my garage have
doubled studs with another 3rd stud attached 90 degrees orientation to the
two. The doubled studs run 90 degrees orientation as opposed to the rest of
the wall studs. Their purpose is help support a doubled up 2X12 beam w/1/2"
plywood that spans the garage. This beam holds the ceiling joists. There
also 2x4s on top of that beam that go to the bottom of the ridge board.
Span is only 20'.

While it may have been possible for me to put a window in the middle of such
a wall, I chose to offset the window placement toward the rear of the
garage. Something has to support the beam temporarily while building a
header and blocking to support the top plate. I chose not to mess with
this.

The header dimensional lumber used depends on the king studs and cripples
separation distance, and how much weight is being supported. Would probably
be best to double up the studs that actually support such a header. Don't
forget about the 2x4 blocking above the header, if not running the header to
the bottom of the top plate to support whatever's immediately above.
Suggest, if you have some method of accessing the attic, to see what's being
supported.
--
Jonny



Posted by dpb on September 27, 2006, 1:12 pm

mike wrote:
> I am putting a window in my garage along one of the external walls. We have
> already cleared the brick and sheetrock only to reveal a double wall stud
> near the center of the new window opening. In the attic, this doubled stud
> supports a doubled rafter which would appear to be a load bearing member.
>
...

> Please comment

Make the opening to one side or the other or get somebody who has a
clue to make the header design modifications necessary. Can't imagine
having the opening a couple feet one way or the other in a garage could
possibly be a major problem...

That's my comment... :)


Page 2 of 3       < 1 2 3 > last >>
Similar ThreadsPosted
Is it a load-bearing wall? April 9, 2007, 11:40 am
Removing a 9' load bearing wall October 5, 2008, 4:39 am
Gas pipe through load bearing wall November 5, 2008, 3:29 pm
Multiple holes in load bearing studs September 24, 2006, 1:00 pm
Removing Basement wall, load bearing? January 28, 2008, 5:59 pm
Load Bearing Partition- wood frame residential March 15, 2007, 9:31 am
Standby Load, Plug Load February 5, 2008, 9:36 pm
Non-standard bend in schedule 40 DWV? April 19, 2007, 10:48 pm
Using foam boards instead of standard vent chutes on rafters September 26, 2007, 12:44 pm
Domestic Extension - Parapet Wall vs Standard Flat Roof September 19, 2007, 4:35 pm

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap