Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations SSS148 on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Wood Framed Parapet Wall at Balcony 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

JungleJoe

Structural
Jun 25, 2021
35
Hi everyone, thanks for reading. I am working on a residential project with a southwest-style flat roof with parapets. One area of the roof is going to be usable space with stairs going up to it on the exterior of the home. Below this area is a deck that you can walk out onto from the kitchen. I am working up a detail for the parapet wall at the usable roof space above. The owner does not want to use kickers to support the parapet for obvious reasons. Balloon framing the parapet is also not an option since it is an open deck below. The "floor" that you walk on will be 2x10's that hang into a beam that spans to a 6x6 column at each end. I want to see what your opinions are on this detail I'm working on. I am thinking that with the sheathing applied to both faces of the parapet wall and the SDS screws into the beam that this wall will be quite sturdy. There is no snow load to worry about where this home is being built. One thought I had (labeled on the drawing) for some peace of mind was to add an MST strap on the inside face of every other parapet stud, attaching the stud to the beam. I'd love to hear your thoughts. The total height from the bottom of the beam to the top of the parapet wall is to be 48". I drew a 6' tall person on the drawing for scale. The beam itself is 19.5" tall. Thanks!

Here's the drawing. I have also put a link to the drawing at the bottom of the post.

Parapet_jy14ua.jpg
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Same in Manitoba

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
And Virginia. An ESR doesn't make it code compliant - it just means it's been tested by a lab that happens to be owned by the same corporation that writes the model building code. At the end of the day it's up to the EOR and the AHJ to determine if the test data shows that it will do what code requires and if the data is sufficiently reliable. There was recently a law suit between ICC and another testing lab because the other testing lab starting offering reports for product testing that mirrored the ESR layout for ease of comparison by designers and code officials. I do believe ICC lost because they can't hold a monopoly on testing products.
 
I’m not sure it would be legally defensible to use a product outside of the manufacturer’s stated limits of applicability, which are based on specific testing conditions. Just seems like you’d be taking a liberty by using that clip for this specific application.
 
Could one design the same connection using bent plate? I don't think a problem like this has a solution in a book, so regardless, it the engineer's design. Simpson will eventually test these as these problems are becoming very common for anyone working in the CLT world. I doubt the connection strength will be affected by the difference in the base material, but its stiffness will. I have seen the solutions suggested for this problem, and others have embedded short stubby steel columns within the the wall to deal with the bending forces. We all hate these problems.
 
bones - I agree that using it outside of the manufacturer's specific guidance means the engineer takes all responsibility on him/herself. The only "legally defensible" thing to do would be to run your own calcs on it to prove the anchorage into the beam is equivalent.
 
Agreed. You can always reverse engineer the product and prove out a novel condition with calcs or lperform your own load tests, but you wouldn’t be able to justify pulling any values from the Simpson capacity tables.
 
In trying to think of other ideas not previously presented - a goal which I have not yet accomplished - I found a neat Simpson Strong-Tie pic that references the cross-grain issue so thought I'd at least share that

Capture_gsryd5.png




CWB (W47.1) Div 1 Fabricator
Temporary Works Design
 
...need the straps on the inside, too.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor