Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations SDETERS on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

How to fix this? 1

XR250

Structural
Jan 30, 2013
5,841
W8x67 flush beam w/ 2x10 joists on each side. This is how I showed the beam being packed out....
1743724770543.png
This is what I got.. Basically, they did not put the OSB in and just cranked the (2)2x8 into the kern of the beam so it is sitting about 3/8" inside the edge of the flange...

1743724854082.png
Now the hangers are not plumb and are bent. Not sure how to put a number to this. I realize the lower nails are missing but I am not even close to the hanger capacity. I'd like GC to take it down and do the padding correctly if not adding a bit thicker so it sits 1/4" proud of the beam as this will give them the opportunity to clean up the joist cuts. He will be upset to say the least. The entire installation is not great. I mean it is only an 1800 lb beam x 25 ft. long.
 
Last edited:
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

One thing that concerns me is that the existing (2)2x8 furring has about 1/2" gap between it and the beam web. Not sure how that will play out long-term. What happens if it wedges itself deeper into the kern radius?

Do the load test at 150% ASD and leave it in place for a couple of days. If that generates no problems, I feel that your risk of future problems is pretty low.

For an added measure of comfort, run an SDS screw thought the assembly and up to the beam web low on the packing to discourage the packing moving inwards. One each side of each hanger.
 
Do the load test at 150% ASD and leave it in place for a couple of days. If that generates no problems, I feel that your risk of future problems is pretty low.

For an added measure of comfort, run an SDS screw thought the assembly and up to the beam web low on the packing to discourage the packing moving inwards. One each side of each hanger.
You read my mind (on the screw at least).
 
You read my mind (on the screw at least).

That's by design. I do all my residential WWXRD. I'm not cut out for it natively.

This is kind of amusing really. I'm encouraging you to be a res-cowboy by parroting my favorite res-cowboy who is... you.
 
Last edited:
In all seriousness though...

A 55 gallon rainwater barrel from Rona weighs about 500 lbs full. Spec three of them at the end of a pair of joists and you're off to the races. You can put them on 2x rails if you want to avoid unwanted load sharing. Fill slow (not that there will be much choice) and have somebody monitor for problems developing.

c01.JPG
 
do they make a much larger hanger that you could put over the existing hangers?

otherwise I vote for take it apart and do it right as designed. if I was the homeowner I would be pissed to see this.
 
I'd probably go with something like this:
1743735825102.png

So, sister a new 2x piece to the side of each 2x10. If this doesn't work for the required load, then go with the same detail for each side. There will be a little interference between the new pieces and the LUS210. If that matters, you can provide a small notch in the 2x. I can't immediately think of any downsides of this solution, and it seems like a quick fix.
 
There is one potential problem with this detail which has not been mentioned. Wood joists will shrink with time; if the top of steel beam is flush or nearly flush with the top of joists, there will be a noticeable bump in the deck above the beam. That will likely be an issue with the client. There should be a gap between the steel beam and the underside of deck sufficient to accommodate joist shrinkage.
 
That first picture is one I would expect to see in the Simpson "what not to do" section of their in person seminars. The bottom hole of the hanger also doesn't have a nail, it looks like they just tossed a third one through the steel midway up. Not sure Simpson would honor any reactions with a miss-install.
 
Why is it poor judgement? There is no more scientifically valid way to assess capacity.
I don't disagree. But load testing will turn into a science experiment, as any good load test should - as that is quite literally what it is. See IBC 1708 - which would set the precedent for the requirements of the test. Deformation must be accounted for, as well as load duration, and temporary shoring installed in the event of failure.

The cost/benefit just isn't there for the client. I'm not at all disparaging load testing, but this is the wrong application. I'd spend one hour to develop a detail, the contractor eats a day to resolve the issue and they're back making forward progress before the load test has even started.
 
There is one potential problem with this detail which has not been mentioned. Wood joists will shrink with time; if the top of steel beam is flush or nearly flush with the top of joists, there will be a noticeable bump in the deck above the beam. That will likely be an issue with the client. There should be a gap between the steel beam and the underside of deck sufficient to accommodate joist shrinkage.
The joists have been in place for 30 years so that should not be an issue. If this was new construction, none of this would have occurred.
 
Do the load test at 150% ASD and leave it in place for a couple of days. If that generates no problems, I feel that your risk of future problems is pretty low.

For an added measure of comfort, run an SDS screw thought the assembly and up to the beam web low on the packing to discourage the packing moving inwards. One each side of each hanger.

What if I expand on this idea and loosen the bolts and try to use the screws to force the padding back out to the face of the beam? I doubt I will get it all the way there but maybe halfway. Actually, the diagonal hanger nails will likely prevent any movement so scratch that. My full ASD load is 391 lbs so in reality it may see 2/3 of that max. I have no doubt the hangers will hold that. I am more worried about some weird thing happening that I cannot foresee. Like the nails working themselves loose due to the prying action. That is why I am considering adding screws to the hanger.
 
It looks like there might be a gap between the joist and the flooring too? You can end up with that annoying squeaky soft spot.
So i looked at this more closely and I think you are right. The contractor put a shim on top of the beam - looks to be about 1/2" thick. But the joists are also hanging down about 1/2" below the bottom of the beam. The beam is 9" tall and the joists are 9 1/4" so how is that possible? I asked the homeowner to check to see if there is a big hump in the floor above from overjacking.
 
Are you going to load test each and every case? Looks to me like the fastening could be different everywhere with the quality of the work. 150% also seems light to me, you're going to eat almost the entire 50% in the load duration factor.
 

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor