That's unacceptable.

 

It's not uncommon to have 2x4 overhang. Those look to be even deeper.


Mike.
___
[emoji631] [emoji631]

 

Hangers at each rafter to bearing connection, would take care of gaining maximum rafter ability....assuming the rafters are also rated for this span and weather load.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

Should have snapped a pic, there's a fastenmaster timberlok screw at each end to secure. No hangars. Some of the rafters are twisting at this point.

 

With that said, I think it looks like ass though.


Mike.
___
[emoji631] [emoji631]

 

Or just blocking on the beam would go along way and not look too bad.


Mike.
___
[emoji631] [emoji631]

 

 

Composition above?

Mike

 

Yes.

 

With all that material cut out of the Lumber it has no more strength than a 2 x 4, unless you cut a notch for the Joyce hangers they’re not gonna do much help!

 

Without hangers the rafter is only as strong as the minimum dimension above the beam. So essentially a 2x4 rafter. I have seen toe screwed rafters to keep them from twisting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hangers on the bottom will correct all of the issues.
I've had to do the same thing several times when adding a room with a vaulted ceiling to an existing house. Need the the deep cavity for insulation, but also need the top plates to tie through and the roof line to match. That leaves exactly what's in the pic.

 

I wouldn't recommend anyone getting up on that roof. But that's just me.

 

Sounds like everyone is in relative agreement for this one. I also sent pics to an engineering friend who said he'd never put his stamp on it.

I'm not typically in the business of calling out other peoples work, but this seems like its not a hard fix, and that it should be fixed. Anyone disagree with that?

 

2018 IRC

 

What META showed with annotated pix will happen over time as the loads come and go. The rafters will split along their grain. Like everyone else has said....it's the equivalent of a 2x4 roof with all the deflection concentrated at the bird'smouths.

Pretty expensive waste of lumber. And like others have also said, they could notch the bottoms of the rafters at the beams enough to create a flat seat for black powder-coated hangers....but get nice ones so it looks like it was the plan..........

 

Heel height.


Mike.
___
[emoji631] [emoji631]

 

That’s the problem and I have posted in another section about this, we need to speak up when we see things that are unsafe and we know violate code, ethics is important!

We cannot leave it for the next guy, because he might not show up!

 

Put hangers on them and call it a day.

 

Before it snows.

 

Hangers or 2x2 minimum ledgers. Blocking between rafters at beams and in outer rafter bays to prevent roll.

 

Hangers or 2x2 minimum ledgers.

If the customer and builder left off the hangers to make it look clean, i can guarantee they wont like the look of a ledger.

 

The problem is that they weren't put on right away. Tell the customer here is what "has to" happen!

Now they have seen it naked, ohhh I like that look!

Now it's twisted, come fix it! It looks like crap. Why is it split, replace it.

Come on man!

You're the boss.

 

Pressure blocking is probably an option if they don't want hangers

 

Total garbage. Only way to salvage this is with joist hangers. The glu-lam should have been set lower and a proper birds-mouth and rafter tail cut. Done like this you will likely see some splitting in those joists over time. Only saving grace is the roof appears to be small and not that heavy.

 

I've attached a snippet of notch limitations per NDS most recent code. Looking at that photo, those joists don't meet that limitation and I would highly recommend you get a structural engineer licensed where that is to take a look at the joists. There are some other things to note such as blocking, how the joists are fastened to the wall/beam, but it's hard to comment on not knowing how this was built, the foundation, species of wood, etc., to go from that.

 

Notch a level cut approximately 1 1/2" in depth at the bottom of these joists and install a decorative hanger and call it a day...if the joists haven't already split badly at the stress point...

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

Cutting into a joist that's already weakened at its bearing point from an unacceptable notch another 1 1/2" is just going to weaken the joist even further. Not to mention there's already a hole for electrical near the bearing location. And I personally wouldn't put hangers on joists that are already showing signs of cracks or are twisted that can be related to the notch problem. The hangers won't guarantee the cracking & twisting will stop and it probably would interfere with electrical.

Maybe it's just me, but I see more than just some issue that needs to be addressed with fixes. Whoever designed & built this needs to be held accountable for work that is 100% unacceptable.

 

Simpson makes b

Cutting into a joist that's already weakened at its bearing point from an unacceptable notch another 1 1/2" is just going to weaken the joist even further. And I personally wouldn't put hangers on joists that are already showing signs of cracks or are twisted that can be related to the notch problem. The hangers won't guarantee the cracking & twisting will stop.

Maybe it's just me, but I see more than just some issue that needs to be addressed with fixes. Whoever designed & built this needs to be held accountable for work that is 100% unacceptable.

The depth of the seat cut doesn't matter as long as there is sufficient material above the cut to take the roof load. I've done the exact same thing half a dozen times under the direction of a structural engineer. Even if the rafters are over spanned as they sit, a joist hanger will solve the problem. I'd be inclined to put some up pressure on the rafters before installing the hangers, but it will absolutely work. It would also help control any rotational movement in the beam.
The other issues may or may not be valid, it all depends on the construction details.
I don't see any post to beam connections or lateral restraint in the pictures, but it could be that it's just not visible. I wouldn't condemn the structure without inspecting it first.

 

Here's what I think would be an easy solution, agree with the above comments that the whole shebang is looking pretty sketchy............ with the continuous pressure blocking one would nail the pressure block'g to the glu lam and then nail the rafters to the pressure blocking, it should work to keep the rafters from splitting and should also work to carry the roof load to the complete rafter through the nails.

The roof decking should be aligned so the middle of one of the pieces is over the blocking and a boundary nailing schedule adhered to there as that's where the roof diaphragm load is being transferred. What would be good too would be to run another row of continuous blocking where the HGA10 is and shift that over.

 

Yup

Or just blocking on the beam would go along way and not look too bad.


Mike.
___
[emoji631] [emoji631]

Mike.
___
[emoji631] [emoji631]