Stud wall with brick veneer out of plumb

Need a photo or a sketch to give you any worthwhile responses.

Please see the comment below this one. The top portion is leaning outwards. Brick veneer is my concern. These cripples are supporting a roof (short span). You see the spirit level's photo shows excessive inclination (not the best photo, I know). A small wall portion but leaning quite a bit. I appreciate your feedback

I would rip it down and rebuild it. What you sketched there looks unstable. Assuming you developed sufficient torsional restraint between the post and the bottom flange (which is doubtful if the bottom flange is sloped as you sketched), the beam is still essentially torsionally free at the support. There is nothing restraining the web. So, with no bracing to prevent it and a grossly eccentric loading (brick = 40psf, studs and sheathing = 6psf) on what is likely a tiny beam (W16x26, maybe? The web is really thin). So...the beam is probably trying to roll over. Maybe bending in the web, but that's probably not likely given the light loading.

Thank you for your feedback. The beam is W200x27 (it's an overkill for only a roof above it - I know). The wood plate above it is unrestrained (it's actually a 2x4). The photo below shows the real inclination. I probably exaggerated it in my sketch. The photo I posted above shows the inclination of the cripples above the beam, which I think it's over the tolerance, but I would need your confirmation. I'm worried precisely about the brick veneer on the exterior side of the building.

Take the entire wall down, exam and determine the reason that the beam has tilted. Correct the beam, then build wall back on top. There is no short cut to this situation.

Agree the lack of restraint is a problem and needs rectification. The wall being out of plumb is secondary.

Your deleted post shows that the beam is the header for a garage door. The photo looks like you're sealing the garage door opening, but leaving the header in place.

Was the header already out of plumb before the contractor put up the stud wall?

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

Ah - metric. Even smaller than I thought. Web thickness 5.8mm? less than a 1/4 inch (sorry - I think in imperial). The flange is a little over 5". Certainly weak in torsion, though. And based on the alignment of the studs with the edge of flange, I'd guess there's something holding up the brick - a plate welded to the bottom flange, perhaps? Even if it's an angle bolted back to the studs, the eccentricity is pretty bad.

Whether you exaggerated it or not, the beam flange is inclined which suggests deflections due to torsion.

But, if the bottom of the flange is deflected, then it's not the web at fault, but either the connection to the steel post or the post is deflected as well.

Not sure why the OP deleted this photo; it seems to give context:



TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

I'd say it's not just the web's fault. It's a small section with limited torsional resistance. Also limited lateral torsional buckling resistance. I'd say you're probably dealing with one or both of those. Looking at the condition of that garage door, I'm leaning toward torsion as the dominant factor, though. Eccentric gravity loading combined with eccentric wind loading strong enough to cause a catastrophic failure of the door is probably enough to twist that beam.

Pointing out the web thickness was more a matter of pointing to the next failure mode to consider/prevent once the torsion issue is solved. Some sort of web stiffeners are likely required to make the connection stable.

Thank you all for your answers and valuable information. I have a few answers and replies to your comments. It's worth noting that this was installed 20 years ago, so we are facing resistant when we suggest repairs!

RE: IRstuff: yes the header was like this before the opening was temporarily sealed. There is an angle between the header beam and the posts. The posts themselves are leaning as well, one base under one post is cracked and as you know now, the cripples above the beam are significantly inclined.

RE: phamENG: I recall each flange is something like 5.5" and there is a plate welded under the flange to support the bricks on the exterior side. Gravity load-wise, we believe this is an overkill (the beam is supporting 10' of roof span only). But your point on the torsion is definitely worth an analysis. The thing is that builders usually use a 2x6 wall to support such bricks. I bet they think this beam is more than what they need for the job. I noted no twist in the beam's components themselves, but the beam itself is rotated along its longitudinal axis and its flange made an angle with the post top plates. So, I believe the whole beam is rotating due to insufficient restraint! Please advise here.

RE: IRstuff: Not easy to check if the flange had twisted but we believe the whole beam had rotated as one piece.

Thank you everyone for your answers and kindness.

If they didn't build it that way, then something unexpected loaded the structure, which needs to be accounted for in your retrofit.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

If there is no proper spec to tell the contractor what to do and the contractor doesn't know exactly what he's doing, then this can happen.

It looks like a tear it apart and make it right type of situation. Who pays for it depends on the contract structure.

Alan CA said:

So, I believe the whole beam is rotating due to insufficient restraint! Please advise here.

Click to expand...

I don't think lack of beam end restraint is the problem. Rather, the column/pilaster supporting the beam has tilted outward, and taking the beam with it. Check the plumb of the end columns, and looking for cracks.

If it is caused by web bending at the post, you could try to straighten it and add a full-height channel welded to it to act as a king post to react the torsion.

Looks like there is a hinge in the "middle" of the wall.
I suspect that the support of the steel beam is the issue in that it is not well situated to handle the incidental horizontal load on the wall and to transfer that up to the top of the wall, where it presumably would be resisted by the roof framing.

That photo the OP posted is what I imagine happens when you use a precast or steel lintel in a masonry wall. I like CIP masonry lintels because of the two-way action you get.