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
5,838
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

I kinda feel as though this is okay as is. Maybe load test one hanger to 150% of its specified end reaction? See if your contractor is a betting man.
 
Looks pretty rough, but also pretty typical.

First thought to minimize rework would be to add an additional ply to the outside face of the web packout, treating it like a ledger with fasteners back to the flange bearing plies. This would also give them a chance to snap a line across the joist ends and try again.
 
Can you pack out the beam more by adding layers to the outside of what is there already, would have to cut around the bolts though. An maybe spec longer nails in the hanger to get back to the meat of the 2x material?

Or maybe have them switch out hangers for one that has a wider vertical leg that laps farther onto the face of the 2x joists to get more bite in the nails to the joist?
 
I kinda feel as though this is okay as is. Maybe load test one hanger to 150% of its specified end reaction? See if your contractor is a betting man.
Was thinking of having them drill the flange of the hanger and adding screws. There is some prying action on the nails in its current state.
I think packing it out in-situ would be challenging.
 
I agree with kootk. Check that it's good for it, and go from there.
 
3/4" x 8" x 8" piece of plywood at each joist, screwed/nailed as needed. Fasten hanger properly thru that to packout.
 
How would you load test this? At some point, it is cheaper for the contractor to remove it and do it right than pay me to set up a load test.
3/4" x 8" x 8" piece of plywood at each joist, screwed/nailed as needed. Fasten hanger properly thru that to packout.
They would have to remove the hangers, cut the joists back and then the hangers would be in the same holes as previously except for the 3/4" of plywood. Don't know if that is any better.
 
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.
 
Damn, some cowboys up in here. I get it’s residential, but c’mon this is pretty shit. And suggesting load testing is ridiculous.

I’ve added a ledger like this before, not easy - but it can be done. Do it in sections and bring a good mallet.
 
How would you load test this? At some point, it is cheaper for the contractor to remove it and do it right than pay me to set up a load test.

They would have to remove the hangers, cut the joists back and then the hangers would be in the same holes as previously except for the 3/4" of plywood. Don't know if that is any better.
They couldnt slide the piece of plywood in the gap?
Then make them use longer screws/nails, or a hanger that has different nail pattern.
 
How would you load test this? At some point, it is cheaper for the contractor to remove it and do it right than pay me to set up a load test.

It won't be you setting up the load test. Have the contractor do it. You just say how you want it done. And the cost of it is a wonderful thing. It then becomes the contractor's decision as to whether they would prefer to absorb the cost of the load test or the cost of rebuilding.

What is the maximum ASD reaction going into any one hanger? How big that number is will dictate how onerous the test will be.

Filling large containers with water over the end of the joist is one popular method.

Maybe you just drive you motor bike up there and park it on top of a joist end.
 
How would you load test this? At some point, it is cheaper for the contractor to remove it and do it right than pay me to set up a load test.
I think the idea is that you're not setting it up. Recommending load testing is a "nudge." It's like talking to a toddler — do you want to prove to me that it works with a load test, or do you want to rip it out and redo it?
 
And suggesting load testing is ridiculous.

What's ridiculous about it? As far as I'm concerned, load testing is the gold standard for whether or not something has the capacity it's supposed to. Research lite. It's commonly done to evaluate existing concrete structures.
 
Damn, some cowboys up in here. I get it’s residential, but c’mon this is pretty shit. And suggesting load testing is ridiculous.
Totally disagree. Load testing is so much more powerful than ambiguous, factor-ridden calculations that neither the homeowner nor the contractor understand. Residential is an exercise in compromise and good judgment.
 
Not sure I trust this contractor to do anything at this point. 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? Will things loosen up and cause more hanger distress? Probably not but still. My suspicion is that it will pass a load test in its current state. Do y'all see an issue drilling the hanger flange for say. 2 or 3 #9 Simpson screws each side?
 
I also have this concern for any solution that would add a thin bit of packing to the existing setup. For me, this is the difference between a realistic assessment of likely performance and just checking "capacity" as if no deformation were to be expected.

c01.JPG
 

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor