Another deck collapse.... 1

[Pmtottawa]

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...collapses/ar-AAHtPHn?li=AAggNb9&ocid=OEMDHP17

another deck collapse.

Seems to be a trend going on. this is why i am puzzled with building code loading requirements. Our bldg code NBCC states 40 psf for single family deck loading. I disagree and think it should be 100 psf as its an assembly area.

this doesn't deter from the fact that if connections are inadequate no amount of loading will be adequately supported, nor if maintenance is neglected.

P

 

[hokie66]

They almost always fail where they are supported on the house. So rather than worrying about the live load for which they should be designed, a provision requiring that all decks be supported independently of the building they serve (for gravity loads) would make a lot of structural sense. But that provision would be expected to offend the sensibilities of a lot of homeowners and architects.

 

[IRstuff]

This seems apropos, although the OP's deck wasn't DIY, sort of...

https://nationalpost.com/homes/mike-holmes-the-delusion-of-the-diy-deck

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[JAE]

Dang, them good old toenails just don't do well do they.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[miningman]

Must be an international conspiracy!!! Home owner expects original builder to fix the issue. Good luck with that!!!

https://globalnews.ca/news/5916734/calgary-family-deck-collapse

 

[msquared48]

IBC states 1.5 times the occupancy served...

So "residential" occupancy would be 60 psf, but "assembly" occupancy would be 150 psf.

Way too often I have seen these decks were attached through wood siding, or even brick veneer.

Heck, some of the lags either miss the studs beyond or connect to a single rim joist or layer of blocking.

Not to mention the degradation due to water intrusion issues. (I just mentioned it though, didn't I)

Rant over...

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA, HI)

 

[Tomfh]

They almost always fail where they are supported on the house. So rather than worrying about the live load for which they should be designed, a provision requiring that all decks be supported independently of the building they serve (for gravity loads) would make a lot of structural sense. But that provision would be expected to offend the sensibilities of a lot of homeowners and architects.

Our old deck was supported by the house. The deck joists sat upon the perimeter masonry wall of the house, and were bolted to the house joists. It was far more robust than independent deck posts would have been.

 

[Earth314159]

Don't give code writers any bad ideas. The issue is not the loading requirements. 100psf is a massive load. It is very hard to actually get 100psf even with a packed room with people squeezed together. The main problem is that the connections are not design/built properly. It is unforgiving since there is no redundancy.

Simpson Strong Tie actually had an article on this. I believe the article was saying that deck failures are the most common structural failure. Of course they are pointing this out so that you can purchase their anchors. I like Simpson products (lots of products that helps resolve many different issues) and they work well for these kinds of conditions (but I really don't like their web page).

 

[Pmtottawa]

I'm ok with Simpson catalogue but agree with you that their website sucks.

I also like their autocad menu to insert components into the details.

 

[dgallup]

I'm about to replace my deck, I'm not sure exactly how the current one is attached. I'll make sure the new one is properly attached!

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[charliealphabravo]

A few screen shots from the video in OPs link.

 

[LittleInch]

So by the loos of it a solid single piece deck connected to the building by two 4 inch nails every few feet.

Amazing it lasted as long as it has.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[IRstuff]

Those nails look a bit puny; my decking nails for top boards look to be thicker than those. They also look barely long enough to get through the sheathing and certainly not enough for getting a good grip on any studs they might have been nailing to.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[Sym P. le]

Is the builder going to inspect and make good all of the substandard work that they did or will they just force the maimed to sue them? Where is the building dept. holding the builder to account? This is why the construction industry has a bad reputation.

 

[charliealphabravo]

It looks like a single ply header with about 1-inch of nail protruding. I'd say they are 10D 2-1/2" nails. Frightening indeed.

 

[JayMaechtlen]

Should there be recourse against the authorities who allegedly inspected it during construction?
If the actual attachments did not meet code (and it looks like they couldn't have) then criminal prosecution of builder for fraud and/or negligence?


Jay Maechtlen

http://www.laserpubs.com/techcomm

 

[charliealphabravo]

It is hard to convince a judge or jury that someone who spends less than 5 minutes on site has substantial responsibility. Rough framing inspections by the jurisdiction are something of a formality for residential construction and are not exhaustive or continuous or in close proximity to elevated framing members. In some jurisdictions, I wonder if inspections are even based on any expertise in the trade. In Alberta there is hardly anything resembling contractor licensing or qualifications much less inspector licensing.