Thank you all for the inputs. It is not an easy connection at all. I don't like deck additions. Nothing works. From the posts supporting the decks(if no diagonal braces),to the railing posts. And clients always think a deck addition is a simple project.I have convinced my client to drop the beam...
Here is a suggested detail with calculations.http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=7859e955-5fb1-4290-94f6-b21e56a2a3f0&file=newel_post_connection_on_flush_beam..pdf
Thinking about further about the Simpson bracket, it actually can resist the load on both directions. The post can push the bracket and it will work the same.
Well, building departments here in California accept the Simpson bracket, no questions. And I believe in applying some common sense to code requirements.
CelinOttawa: I am collecting suggestions and saw one which is less "crappy looking". I will post once I have it drawn and verified.
Jittles: I believe the concept is that since the posts are at edges of decks, the 200# load will not occur in both directions unless something comes flying from...
I use this Simpson bracket when possible. I wish they would come up with a manufactured connector for the post on top of the beam. I figure the only way will be to have a custom made connector with a plate knifed into the post welded to a base plate with screws or bolts to the beam. Unless...
Hello,
Anyone has a detail for connecting guardrail posts to a flush beam at the edge of the deck framing with the post on top of the beam? The connection must be able to resist the 200# load at the top
I realized that after thinking over. I was only thinking of the tension. And I also realized that the reason he finds the wood failing is because he is using 200lbs concentrated load instead of the 50plf I used. When the load is distributed uniformly, the wood is ok below the plate.
Thanks!
page with calcs and plan checker's commentshttp://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=0654018f-3eb4-4f7f-bb67-971092bed311&file=20130905_124630.jpg
here is the detail I have on my plans. next post will have the page where I noted my calcs and the plan checker added his comments.http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=2b563252-3b8d-4d9a-8274-ad2e055999ba&file=detail.pdf
Spoke to plan checker. He says that my calculation for T and C is not correct if I just use the moment at the base divided by the moment arm (??). I must use the formula 2M/jkd2b. And on top of that he says that the wood beam below the glass rail needs to be designed using a factor of 4x the...
Ron, a plan checker threw these calcs for checking the bearing perpendicular to the wood and bending of the steel plate. he uses formulas that look like masonry calcs with j and k factors. It didn't make any sense to me at all. I just found his contact info this morning and will be calling him...
I have to design the connection for a glass rail shoe to a wood beam. I used a steel plate on top of the wood beam and the glass rail shoe has screws to this plate. The shoe connection to the steel plate comes from the glass rail manufacturer specs. I basically designed the connection of the...
