FHB Logo Facebook LinkedIn Email Pinterest Twitter X Instagram Tiktok YouTube Plus Icon Close Icon Navigation Search Icon Navigation Search Icon Arrow Down Icon Video Guide Icon Article Guide Icon Modal Close Icon Guide Search Icon Skip to content
Subscribe
Log In
  • How-To
  • Design
  • Tools & Materials
  • Restoration
  • Videos
  • Blogs
  • Forum
  • Magazine
  • Members
  • FHB House
  • Podcast
Log In

Discussion Forum

Discussion Forum

Beam Size

Saw | Posted in Construction Techniques on June 14, 2005 06:33am

I have a project that I’m going to remove an old gable end wall and replace it with a 24′ header in the attic, this will also carry an intersecting 24′ header at 1/3 distance. My aim is to remove the interior walls on this project. The first header will be replacing an old exterior wall that a 24′ x 24′ room addition was added onto years ago. This is a single story structure with a 5/12 pitch roof. I am in contact with Weyerhauser via their web site for sizing but would appreciate any been there done that information that some of you may have.

RU

Reply
  • X
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • pinterest
  • email
  • add to favorites Log in or Sign up to save your favorite articles

Replies

  1. Piffin | Jun 14, 2005 07:04am | #1

    Your engineer will need to know about three times as much info as you have provided here, like how the roof is framed and what your local required snow load is. Then he will need to know what loads are on the intersecting beam

     

     

    Welcome to the
    Taunton University of
    Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
     where ...
    Excellence is its own reward!

  2. User avater
    BossHog | Jun 14, 2005 06:01pm | #2

    Piffin is right - There's no way we can tell from the info you've provided.

    I don't size beams for remodelling situations unless I look the place over myself.

    One thing to keep in mind - It will ahve to be a heck of a big beam to be able to span 24'. If you start with the rule of thumb that you need one inch of depth for every foot of span, you're looking at roughly a 24" deep beam.

    So using steel or not having such a wide clear opening might start to look more attractive.

    Why does your OB-GYN leave the room when you get undressed if they are going to look up there anyway?

    1. Saw | Jun 14, 2005 08:19pm | #4

      Piffin, Boss Hog

      I was considering bolting several LVL's together, I failed to mention this. The roof is stick built out of 2" x 6" rafters. One layer of shingles. Location would be approximate to Peoria, IL. If needed I will have the local welding shop make a bracket for the intersecting beam. I'm sure this is doable and I'd like to error on the side of overkill rather than what would be minimal needed to do the job.

      RU

      1. User avater
        BossHog | Jun 14, 2005 08:35pm | #5

        You sketches help clarify things a bit, but... Bolting several LVLs together is a given. It's not like you were going to get by with one ply anyway. Simpson has all kinds of beam hangers that will handle loads of this magnitude easily. And they're probably a lot cheaper than paying a welding shop to fabricate something. (Assuming you get a solution using LVLs)I still won't give out specific advice without actually seeing the structure myself.
        If Wile E. Coyote had enough money to buy all that Acme crap, why didn't he just buy dinner?

      2. JohnSprung | Jun 14, 2005 09:39pm | #6

        This is such a big modification that it would be a good idea for the owners to look at the cost of the job and the resale value of the remodeled house, and compare that with what they could buy for the cost of the job plus what they could get for the house as-is.  Sometimes the smart way to get more house is to sell what you have and buy something closer to what you want.

         

        -- J.S.

         

        1. frenchy | Jun 14, 2005 10:00pm | #8

          John,

            That formula forgets something.. that is the cost of selling plus the cost of buying..  for example If you were to sell a $300,000 house the brokers fees on that would be around $21,000  plus say another $5,000 in costs.  I don't know moving cost but let's say that you spend another $3500 on those and heck let's assume that the carpets all match and the drapes are great and you like all the colors so the new house won't need to be painted.. 

            Let's pretend for a moment that the house you buy doesn't have leaky plumbing or bad wiring that got missed in an inspection.. Further let's assume that your new house has a whole bunch of great neighbors to replace all those friends you've spent decades getting to know..   That the new house has a great school and the church of your choice etc..

            Assume that the distance and traffic is no  worse at the new place than the old place and the tax rate doesn't get a dramatic bump up with the sale of the new house.  In California and many other locations the tax rate is based on what a house originally sells for not  it's inflated value..

               Finally the little things that mean so much to people.  The school crssing guard who knows you and always gives a friendly wave.. the drycleaners who starches your shirts just right and never starches your pants.. The chineese resturant that  makes your favorite and the guys in the little league who always come around bring you a great christmas tree!

                 Just in pure money alone by not moving you save nearly $30,000 let alone all the other stuff. 

          1. Saw | Jun 16, 2005 06:05am | #9

            The early solution is 4 ply 2" x 14" LVL making it 8" X 14". The primary beam and the intersecting beam are to be of the same size at this point but the lumber yard rep. canceled his appointment this afternoon due to being just to busy to get away today. We did unload 103 sheets of 4' x 12' drywall after 5:00 pm because things are pretty busy around here. The rep. wants to come out and check things out before we proceed, which is fine with me. I would assume that the primary beam would need to be larger than the intersecting beam but I'm not an engineer. We will need to build a short wall on one end because we will need to cut the roof pitch in on one end but the other end can ride full height as there is an adjoining roof plus it was double walled, don't ask me why but I'll take advantage of it.

            As for the sell vs. buy elsewhere. This house has four structures on it, the house, a 24' x 36' woodworking shop to die for, a 30' x 54' garage / rec room and a 12' x 12' lawn mower shed. It's a pretty good setup so this is money well spent.

            I put the batteries in the charger for the digital camera, I'll take some pics of the beam once we get to that point.

            Take care,

            RU

          2. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 16, 2005 01:42pm | #10

            No way would a 14" deep beam spanning 24' be even CLOSE to adequate. It would barely carry its own weight...
            In America you can go on the air and kid the politicians, and the politicians can go on the air and kid the people.

          3. Saw | Jun 16, 2005 07:56pm | #12

            This is the early projection and it will four of them bolted together rather than a single beam. We do have an engineer but he will most likely just get the info from the yard rep. I will ask the rep. if he gurantees this without the engineer showing up on site.

            RU

          4. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 17, 2005 01:33am | #14

            "This is the early projection and it will four of them bolted together rather than a single beam."

            I don't care how early it is in the process - A 14" beam is totally inadequate to span 24'. Doesn't matter how little it's carrying.

            Adding plies to a beam with a poor length/depth ratio does very little to help it out. You could put 12 plies up there and it would still have too much deflection.

            I wouldn't settle for anything less than someone coming out and looking over the situation.
            Rap is to music what Etch-a-Sketch is to art.

          5. frenchy | Jun 17, 2005 02:26am | #17

            Boss Hog,

              you and I are in agreement here. just adding a few extra 2x's doesn't add much strength.. solid timber gets better numbers but then factors such as knots etc can degrade it

             There is no way a 14 inch beam will carry a 24 foot long load!..

             I used a 12x12 white oak beam and sistered a 6x12 blackwalnut beam to carry a 16 foot garage header..

          6. Piffin | Jun 17, 2005 02:49am | #18

            I think just walking it would throw me 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          7. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 17, 2005 02:57am | #19

            "I think just walking it would throw me"

            Not having a clue what you mean is throwing me...
            Pi R not square Pie R round, cornbread R square.

          8. Piffin | Jun 17, 2005 03:54am | #20

            I mean that the weight of a single man walking it would cause so much vibration and deflection that it would bounce and throw him off. Similar to your own statement that it could barely hold it's own weight.Your approach comes from the design and l;oad values familiarity. mine comes as the guy installing it. Same conclusion. 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          9. Saw | Jun 17, 2005 04:02am | #21

            The yard rep showed up this afternoon, we measured actual spans so he could call them in to his supplier.

            Here is what we got. 2" x 18" - 26' tripled for the primary beam, 2" x 18" - 24' (I can't recall if this was doubled or tripled) for the intersecting beam. Brackets to join the beams and nice bill.

            I did ask the yard rep in front of the home owner if this would be sufficient because I don't want to get a call in six months with complaints of cracked drywall, he assured us that it would stay put.

            RU

          10. Saw | Jun 17, 2005 04:04am | #22

            I forgot to add that they will be delivered on Wednesday next week, we were figuring that it would take a few weeks anyway.

            RU

          11. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 17, 2005 04:30am | #23

            An 18" beam is at least getting closer to working O.K.But I would still be concerned about deflection. Get a copy of the reports he has on each beam, and look at the deflection values. If one beam supports the other one, and they both have an inch of design deflection, that means they could deflect between 1.5" and 2" total. The beam designer has to know what he's doing beyond the capabilities of the software. This guy may or may not.
            Take my advice - I don't use it anyway.

          12. Saw | Jun 17, 2005 05:24am | #24

            Boss,

            The yard rep called this in to the truss company, they should know their business. It will certainly be an improvement over the other additions to this house. We have found numerous building errors. In a 16' x 25' addition, five of the 2" x 10" floor joists were cut a foot short and then sistered a three foot 2" x 10" piece onto it to use as a board stretcher, deflection was 1 1/2" belly in that room. Following this kind of work just makes mine look all the better IMO.

            I better go work out so I'll be able to lift those beams next Wednesday!

            RU

          13. Bowz | Jun 17, 2005 06:13am | #25

            I better go work out so I'll be able to lift those beams next Wednesday!

            Yes you better.  Each of those 18" x 26' LVL's will be around 250lbs each. 

            I put in a set up very similar to what it sounds like you are doing a few years ago. (3 18" x26'LVL) the point load was from a structural ridge beam. 

            Bowz 

             

          14. Saw | Jun 17, 2005 06:31am | #26

            Bowz,

            I recall doing something similar to yours on a lake house a few years back. It was for a cathedral ceiling about 14' up, luckily I only have to go 8' this time and will be able to set one end and then the other. I dread driving the joist hanger nails as much as placing them, these things are hard.

            RU

          15. frenchy | Jun 18, 2005 12:56am | #39

            RY41,

                  I can do it with one finger! That is lift a 250 pound beam in place and hold it there while guys attach it.. It doesn't bother me at all if they even have to sit on it..

             

             

            Oh, did I mention I sell rough terrain telescopic forklifts?   yes you can rent them for a day but I warn you once you start to build with them you won't want to give it back..  (PS they pay for them selves and if you rent from a dealer instead of a rental yard he''ll even apply the rent towards the purchase..

          16. Framer | Jun 17, 2005 06:33am | #27

            Here is what we got. 2" x 18" - 26' tripled for the primary beam, 2" x 18" - 24' (I can't recall if this was doubled or tripled) for the intersecting beam. Brackets to join the beams and nice bill.

            I did ask the yard rep in front of the home owner if this would be sufficient because I don't want to get a call in six months with complaints of cracked drywall, he assured us that it would stay put.

            So your a contractor doing this job for a homeowner with no set of plans and trusting the Yard Rep with sizing a beam this big. Is this all in writing? I guess you don't get inspections either.

            Six months from now, if there's any cracks in the drywall and the homeowner calls you up, try telling them to call the yard rep because he assured you the beams were sufficient.

            A lot of people have done jobs a lot smaller than what your doing without architectual plans but in your case with those spans especially I wouldn't touch it without approved plans from an Architect or Engineer because six months from now if there's any cracks in the drywall, you can bet your A$$ Mr Homeowner is coming after you not the yard rep........

             

             Joe Carola

          17. Saw | Jun 17, 2005 06:52am | #28

            Framer,

            I guess my trump card here is that the homeowner contacted the yard, set up the meeting, wrote the check today for the beam. My 2 cents was describing to him what we intended to do and what do we need to do it, I'm out 2 cents.

            If i had intended to be stupid about this then I would have thrown a splice on the ceiling joist, nailed in an upright to the rafter and said there you go.

            RU

          18. Framer | Jun 17, 2005 07:07am | #29

             We will need to build a short wall on one end because we will need to cut the roof pitch in on one end but the other end can ride full height as there is an adjoining roof plus it was double walled, don't ask me why but I'll take advantage of it.

             

            Your talking about cutting an angle off the top of the beam that follows the pitch of the existing roof so that it doesn't stick past the top of the rafters right?

             

            If that's what your talking about, did your yard rep engineer that cut also, because you can't just cut whatever you want off that beam because you compromised the structural integrety of the beam.

             

             Joe Carola

          19. Saw | Jun 17, 2005 07:19am | #30

            Framer

            And we will block in from the mud sill to the sub floor, we have a foundation wall below where we intend to place the short wall. This wall was once the exterior wall before a room addition was added years ago.

            We will place blocking at the three points that the beam will sit on the walls along with filling the wall with studs to transfer the weight to the foundation.

            RU

          20. GeoffsHands | Jun 17, 2005 07:59am | #31

            I have to agree with the pessimists.   Hire an engineer.  Change a roof ridge to a beam, and you get a lawsuit if you don't know the difference.  You've got this thing ordered.  Have  the owner sign a hand written disclaimer>  Joe the installer here did not design the beam, he is just going to install it.  He has not represented that he is an engineer. 

            24' is a long F!@#$ way. The moment is a product of the square of the span.  A 2 foot span is cool.  An 4' span requires 4 times the strength.   If a 2' span resists 100 pounds, the same load for a 24' span is 6.683 TIMES 10 TO THE 23RD POWER!.

            Good luck.

             

             

          21. DaneB | Jun 17, 2005 03:16pm | #35

            I am by no means an engineer and as Boss Hog can confirm I know very little about such things.  I failed his truss brain teasers but learned from them as well.

            My biggest concern is the intersection of the two beams.  It seems to me that the stress at that location would be so great that some kind of support would be needed to keep it from sagging.  I read the entire thread first to see if this was brought up.  By the information that I have read here that point will be nonsupported.  Even in a Timber Frame you will not see two beams of that length coming together like that without support of some kind.

            Some times in my wanting to learn I ask questions that make the more educated ones stop and think about what they are doing and how they do it.  The one answer that I do not except is "That is the way it has been done for all eternity.''  There has to be a reason why it is done the way it is being done.  Some times the Student makes the Teacher teach thy self.

            DaneI will always be a beginner as I am always learning.

          22. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 17, 2005 04:21pm | #36

            "My biggest concern is the intersection of the two beams. It seems to me that the stress at that location would be so great that some kind of support would be needed to keep it from sagging. "

            A point load isn't a problem, as long as the beam is designed for it.

            The deflection limits are for the place where the maximum deflection is. So the beam design programs take that into account.
            My next house will have no kitchen - just vending machines.

          23. frenchy | Jun 18, 2005 01:01am | #40

            Boss Hog, 

                The point load will all be taken by the beam it's attached to.   Sure the beam may be nailed to a second beam (and even a third)  but that's a long way from a shared load situation..

               

          24. Saw | Jun 18, 2005 05:29am | #41

            Man, this is a tough crowd.

            I present a design plan here and look for some suggestions on the sizing of the LVL Beam and next thing I know is that my project is not really happening and I should jump into a name game with those that oppose. I present a rough sketch and its considered coffee shop napkin work, whatever. I enjoy reading this forum too much to play that game.

            I'm sure that if an engineer was brought in that most of the house would have to be redone. Maybe I would need to remove the rafter system on the house and replace it with trusses.

            Sometimes we have to work with what we have, sure I'd like to build new construction everyday, it's easy, remodeling is where the challenges are.

            RU

             

          25. Bowz | Jun 18, 2005 06:00am | #42

            RU

            Maybe I would need to remove the rafter system on the house and replace it with trusses.

            Possibly.  If I am understanding what you are trying to do.

            Your primary beam is carrying one end of your secondary beam, correct?

            Your secondary beam is going to be running perpendicular to the ceiling joists in the 24x24 addition, supporting only the ceiling weight. The ceiling joists are being held up by the wall (dashed line in the second drawing) that you are removing, correct?

            If the above is correct, you have another curveball to think of.

            The ceiling joists are also acting as collar ties, holding the outside walls together. I don't think you can cut them and slip a beam in there.  You may have to install your secondary beam above the ceiling joists, and strap the joists up to the beam.  Which will lead to an interesting connection at the primary beam.  Somebody want to comment on whether joist hangers are engineered to be put in tention?

            So what would it take time and cost wise to remove the existing roof system vs doing what you are proposing?

            Rummaging through my files, the engineering for the 18" 3-ply 26' I put in has an allowable deflection of 1.29".  (I think Boss asked about that)

            Bowz

             

          26. Saw | Jun 18, 2005 07:33am | #43

            Bowz,

            Yes that is the plan. The addition now has 12' of header already in the attic and shows no sign of separation.

            Removing the roof and installing trusses would be cost prohibitive IMO.

            Demolition

            Disposal

            Trusses

            Sheeting

            Shingles

            Fascia

            Soffit

            Siding

            Insulation

            Wiring

            Labor

            If money was no object, maybe.

            I may put in some collar ties once things are in if I feel they are needed.

            RU

          27. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 18, 2005 03:48pm | #45

            You asked for advice, and you got it. If you only wanted us to tell you what you wanted to hear you should have told us that in your first post.If you look back to the first few posts, we told you there was no way a 14" LVL would do what you had suggested. And we were right. The 18" LVL is closer, but most seem to feel that it's still shallow, and are concerned about deflection. Not one person has come in here and told you that you were 100% right, so go for it. Since you got free, correct, and virtually unanimous advice I don't see why you're coming back at us with attitude. Having spoent a fair amount of time replying to you, I sure don't appreciate it.
            If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten. [George Carlin]

          28. Piffin | Jun 19, 2005 02:01pm | #49

            What I hear you saying so far:"My customer wants me to do something nearly impossible
            ( the impossible is doable, but costs more you know)
            My customer does not want to pay a couple bills for an engineer
            I am afraid that if we bring in an engineer,
            his specs will drive costs thru the roof.
            So I want to manipulate the information given to the Weyerhauser team to come up with the answer I am looking for instead of the right answer.So I came here for free advice too and I am disappointed that nobody told me what I want to hear."This thing you are trying reminds me of a caricature I once saw, A guy got his horse stuck in deep mud, he still sitting in the saddle. In order to hoist himself and horse out of the situation, he simple reached up over his head, grabbed a handfull of his own hair, and lifted himself and the horse under him up and out of the mireif you won't hire an engineer, at least get a skyhook 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          29. DaneB | Jun 18, 2005 06:27pm | #46

            A point load isn't a problem, as long as the beam is designed for it.

            And there lies RU41's problem.  No one certified, on site, has looked at this to make sure that it is designed for it.

            RU41's job has all the appearance of someone trying to circumvent the Building Permit process.  Had that process been done there would be certified drawings and what have ya.  Also RU41 would not have felt the need to come here and have his true gut feelings justified.  That being the possibility of structural failure with his name on it.

            Please don't feel that your time on this thread has been wasted.  Even if RU41 doesn't follow the advice that has been given here, others like myself have learned something from it.  Between you and others like CAPTMAC there is a lot of information here to be gleaned.

            I hope that you and all of the others will continue to teach your part of the trades.

            DaneI will always be a beginner as I am always learning.

          30. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 19, 2005 02:31am | #48

            When I said the point load wasn't a problem, I meant that point loads in general aren't a problem. We design for those all the time. I agree that someone who's familiar with beam sdesign should have visited the jobsite - I said that myself a time or two. I'm glad you learned something from the thread, and hope other have too. God knows I've learned plenty from the guys who are kind enough to help others here. I'm glad I can contribute something useful.
            I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury.

          31. User avater
            CapnMac | Jun 17, 2005 06:39pm | #38

            My biggest concern is the intersection of the two beams

            Mine, too.

            Two reasons, first the load of the intersecting beam has a dramatic effect on the practical moment of the beam.  Second, the attachment of the intersecting beam is very critical to the new beam's stability.

            In the attachment, moment.dwg, the top two diagrams are a simple representation of the moment on a 24' beam (it's only aproximately to any scale). 

            Keeping the bendin moment "inside" the mass ofthe beam is where the "one inch of depth per run in feet" rule of thumb comes about.

            Now, the bottom two diagrams show what happens when we add a point load, like the intersecting beam, to the existing one.  I'm not sure that moment curve is actually right, either; experience wantes to tell me that a cantilevered load like that has a geometric function, which would be larger than shown.  be that as it may, the depth of the moment arc has still tripled.

            Now, all I'm sketching here is the bending moment, the width of the beam has little to the bending moment.  The width of a beam has more to do with its internal strength.  So, steel can have a smaller depth than wood as the shear strength of the steel crystals is greated than that of wood fibers for a given dimensional volume.

            Now, the second image, beam-joint.dwg shows my concern about the "hanger" for the intersecting beam.  This is one where width is important.  Any surface-mounted hanger is on a moment arm cantilevered out from the center of the made-up beam.  The farther away the hanger is, the greater is the torque it is applying to the beam.  That means the beam either wants to roll (or "upset" to use a term-of-art), or delaminate.  Neither is a very good thing.

            Now, what that suggests is some sort of bolted-through bracket.  Something that makes the connection "bind" to the center of the long beam.  That would want some engineering; beut then, so does this entire structural "answer."

            Just because the supplier said "ok," and the HO nodded their heads, all of that matters not.  In effect, somebody on this job is acting as a structural designer. 

            The current jurisprudence seems to indicate that unlicensed designers have a liability to their designs for the life of the structure.  That's not the designer's life, the HO's life, or the truss mill's life, that's the life of the building.  So, maybe it holds.  Maybe it holds for 40 years.  Maybe in year 41 is all falls down.  Then the process server comes and serves your estate and heirs for the liability.  That's the wager being made against the cost of some engineering time.

            Me, with this very marginal connection, I'd sweat bullets every time there was a severe thunderstorm.  A little racking of the house from a 40 or 50 mph downburst, and the fasteners fail in the hanger, a cracked ceiling could be the least of the worries.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)

          32. Piffin | Jun 17, 2005 07:59am | #32

            Your trump card is a wild card 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          33. gdavis62 | Jun 17, 2005 01:02pm | #33

            Triple 18s.  One bearing to another with a hanger.  24 and 28 foot spans.  Probably need a crane to rig everything when it is ready.

            Guy poses his situation to Breaktime with about three sentences, maybe one tenth of the info needed.  Comes back a few posts later with a sketch on a napkin done down at the coffee shop.

            And no engineer in sight.

            But of course the homeowner is on board with it all, so that makes it right.  Making it even more right, he's buying the materials.

            Sounds so wacky I think it is made up.

            Gene Davis, Davis Housewrights, Inc., Lake Placid, NY

             

             

            Edited 6/17/2005 7:26 am ET by Ima Wannabe

          34. User avater
            EricPaulson | Jun 17, 2005 03:08pm | #34

            Sounds so wacky I think it is made up.

            That's funny you should say that.

            I just read through the entire thread and was thinking someone is pulling our collective legs.

            Plus he has not once yet lashed out in a fit of rage at the nay sayers.

            eh......buildings go up; and sometimes they come down. Time will tell.

            EricI Love A Hand That Meets My Own,

            With A Hold That Causes Some Sensation.

            [email protected]

          35. pickings | Jun 17, 2005 04:31pm | #37

            "But of course the homeowner is on board with it all, so that makes it right.  Making it even more right, he's buying the materials"

            Plus.........Do not forget that all the previous shabby construction on the house will make this new work "look that much better".

            I guess something rotten can not stink providing it is placed next to a pile of sh!t.

            The phrase "CONSULT AN ENGINEER" appears numerous times in this thread, but is never responded to directly. Just wondering, if an engineer was contacted, what would his fee (in comparison to the cost of the entire job) be?

          36. BungalowJeff | Jun 18, 2005 08:45am | #44

            I don't do this kind of work myself, so I wouldn't know what to charge. I have done forensic work and I know that gets many (many, many) times more money. I'm not just talking about catastrophic failures, but functional failures too. Like a sagging header that opens the adjacent drywall joints and causes the garage door to wrack and get stuck....that's not a mistake, it's rustic

          37. woodguy99 | Jun 17, 2005 01:36am | #15

            RU,

            Which part of "consult an engineer" scares you?

             

            Mike

          38. Framer | Jun 17, 2005 01:52am | #16

            RU,

            Which part of "consult an engineer" scares you?

             

            Mike

             

            $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

             

            Joe Carola

             

             

             

            Edited 6/16/2005 6:54 pm ET by Framer

          39. Piffin | Jun 17, 2005 12:34am | #13

            That was my thinking - this looks like acase where somebody doesn't have all the info and that's why a site visit is needed 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          40. pickings | Jun 16, 2005 04:38pm | #11

            " The primary beam and the intersecting beam are to be of the same size at this point "

            If the secondary beam needs to be this size, then the primary beam is severely undersized. If the primary beam needs to be this size, then the secondary beam is needlessly oversized which I might add, adds $$$ to the cost, and loads of un-necessary extra weight to the primary beam. No way in heck should they be the same size. This, IMHO, illustrates guesswork.

            Still lots of info missing. No mention of floor joist direction/loading above. Knee walls bringing loads from roof? Lots to consider here. You asked for advise. Piff and everyone else already gave it to you-CONSULT AN ENGINEER!! This is a large and expensive beam. Plowing ahead w/ guesswork will not save you any time or money.

          41. DanThomas | Jun 18, 2005 07:57pm | #47

            RU,

            Several years ago I sized a similar beam for a friends party room in his barn.  We were spanning twenty feet with 40PSF loading (local code).  We ended up with at 12" wide flange steel beam.  I don't remember the weight per foot of the beam but it was fairly light.  In long spans stress does not govern good design, deflection does.  If we sized the beam on l/360 deflection, there would be over 3/4" sag in the floor. I am currently re-framing the floors in my house to remove the soft feel when you walk on them, the new floors are rated at 100PSF and they feel proper to my feet.  The posters here are wise.  You will need to supply all the associated framing details so the beam can be correctly sized and supported.  Be cautious of salesmen with computer programs, garbage in=garbage out, but they make their commission.  If Weyerhaeuser got all the associated framing info, I would trust them.  As you are finding out the devil is in the details and it takes a lot of time to correctly sort them out.  Since you are researching and asking the questions, you have a good chance at making the correct decision.  A good engineer should be able to set you up in a couple of hours if you bring him all the associated framing details. 

            Good Luck,

            Dan Thomas

  3. User avater
    CapnMac | Jun 14, 2005 07:19pm | #3

    Yeah, what Boss said--you may need steel, just to stay "inside" your renovation.

    The real kicker is the intersecting beam, that puts a big "belly" in the moment curve along the beam.  The larger the moment, the deeper a beem you need.  So, a nominal 24" deep beam might need another 12-15" to "carry" the end of the intersecting beam.

    So, I'm thinking you need a real, on-site, engineer to give you answers.

    Like would a LVL beam work, or what sort of hanger/connection the existing header wants/needs, etc.

    Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
  4. frenchy | Jun 14, 2005 09:45pm | #7

    RU41,

         When you finally get an answer that will work and somebody will sign their name to it.  (I darn sure wouldn't use this site as a final source for that info)   is to seriously consider sizing up!

         Everybody always talks about using the smallest size beam that passes code..  well what isn't spoken about in the code or just about anyplace else is durability..

        If you go to Europe where homes last for hundreds of centuries rather than the 56 years that they do here in America  you'll find one thing that those old home builders did was to oversize everything!  In fact homes that are here in America and worthy of historical note have oversized beams as their signature.. Whereas the homes built to a price right after WW2 are often in the dumpster by now.  Either they have been so extensively remodeled that they wound up in the dumpster bit by bit or just torn down and replaced..

      That's  real pity.  homes built with trees that took thousands of years to grow wind up in the landfill within 56 years!..

        Look at alternatives besides lumberyards.  Go find a sawmill where they may saw you a timber that will more than meet your needs and it could be dramatically cheaper than a TGI or glue lam..

       Remember depth is only part of the solution.   Width adds load carring capacity as well..  Perhaps not as much as depth but getting a  6x 24 inch beam is going to cost you about the same as a 12 x24 inch beam..   You can then make the size of the beam a design element...

     

  5. Framer | Jun 19, 2005 04:56pm | #50
    Piffin,
     
    Here's some of his posts.
     
    This is a single story structure with a 5/12 pitch roof. I am in contact with Weyerhauser via their web site for sizing but would appreciate any been there done that information that some of you may have
     
    I was considering bolting several LVL's together, I failed to mention this. The roof is stick built out of 2" x 6" rafters. One layer of shingles. Location would be approximate to Peoria, IL.  If needed I will have the local welding shop make a bracket for the intersecting beam. I'm sure this is doable and I'd like to error on the side of overkill rather than what would be minimal needed to do the job.
     
     The early solution is 4 ply 2" x 14" LVL making it 8" X 14". The primary beam and the intersecting beam are to be of the same size at this point but the lumber yard rep. canceled his appointment this afternoon due to being just to busy to get away today
     
     This is the early projection and it will four of them bolted together rather than a single beam. We do have an engineer but he will most likely just get the info from the yard rep. I will ask the rep. if he gurantees this without the engineer showing up on site.
     
     

    The yard rep showed up this afternoon, we measured actual spans so he could call them in to his supplier.

    Here is what we got. 2" x 18" - 26' tripled for the primary beam, 2" x 18" - 24' (I can't recall if this was doubled or tripled) for the intersecting beam. Brackets to join the beams and nice bill.

    I did ask the yard rep in front of the home owner if this would be sufficient because I don't want to get a call in six months with complaints of cracked drywall, he assured us that it would stay put.

     

     The yard rep called this in to the truss company, they should know their business. It will certainly be an improvement over the other additions to this house. We have found numerous building errors. In a 16' x 25' addition, five of the 2" x 10" floor joists were cut a foot short and then sistered a three foot 2" x 10" piece onto it to use as a board stretcher, deflection was 1 1/2" belly in that room. Following this kind of work just makes mine look all the better IMO

    I guess my trump card here is that the homeowner contacted the yard, set up the meeting, wrote the check today for the beam. My 2 cents was describing to him what we intended to do and what do we need to do it, I'm out 2 cents.

    If i had intended to be stupid about this then I would have thrown a splice on the ceiling joist, nailed in an upright to the rafter and said there you go.

     

    Man, this is a tough crowd.

    I present a design plan here and look for some suggestions on the sizing of the LVL Beam and next thing I know is that my project is not really happening and I should jump into a name game with those that oppose. I present a rough sketch and its considered coffee shop napkin work, whatever. I enjoy reading this forum too much to play that game.

    I'm sure that if an engineer was brought in that most of the house would have to be redone. Maybe I would need to remove the rafter system on the house and replace it with trusses.

    Sometimes we have to work with what we have, sure I'd like to build new construction everyday, it's easy, remodeling is where the challenges are.

    Everything you said about him is correct. This guy is a waste of time and doing the job with no plans, no Architect or Engineer, or permits with something so big. He acts like it's a 6' opening. This winter I had a 22' opening and an engineer specked out a rectagle piece of steel 20" wide x 8" in height with no perpendicular beam going into it.

    He's also designing the hanger for the perpendicular beam himself which is something that should also be done by an Architect of Engineer. As we all no this is not just a small opening he's dealing with and he's just looking for free advice and still not listening so in my eyes talking to him is like talking to a wall and he's a waste of time.

    Happy Fathers Day, Piffin.

     

     

     

     
    Joe Carola



    Edited 6/19/2005 9:56 am ET by Framer

    1. Piffin | Jun 19, 2005 05:51pm | #51

      The biggest points of concern for me are not just the beam sizing lack of connection to reality ( from my experiences) but that he begins with saying he will have an engineer on hand, and then argues against using an engineer in the face of all the advice to retian an engineer. This is one of the more complicated beam situations I have encountered and still have only half the info I would need for a gedneralization, but all the warmning signs are there that an engineer is definitely needed.That connectiuon piece is another defintie concern. An assumption could be made as to size and number of holes. Too many would weakenb the main beam and too few would reduce effective carrying capacity and safety of intersecting. 

       

      Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

      1. Saw | Jun 19, 2005 09:29pm | #52

        I don't know where the point was lost, I believe that I stated that the yard rep called into the truss / beam company for sizing on this. I believe (I didn't ask nor did I sit in on the call) that it was designed by an engineer or engineer designed software. I also stated that the brackets were being shipped along with the beam. The beam also will have an opposing 6' header attached to it that will sit on a wall that will eliminate the roll theory. Everything that we will be doing to the beam was described to the yard rep prior to design and purchase.

        As for not passing along more info, I was a little punch drunk from all the naysayers.

        Piffin,

         I admire your posts here and read them quite often, you even helped me out on a staircase redo a couple years back. The builder of the staircase lost his leg due to an accident and the homeowner wanted me to correct them. With your help, they were corrected.

        Framer, 

        Opinions are like _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ everyone has one.

        Take care,

        RU

        1. Piffin | Jun 20, 2005 12:08am | #54

          I'll try to explain where the point was lost.You have given maybe a third of the info - no more than half - that is needed to accurately size and design these beams unless as in the previous post here, several assumptions are mdde. Assumptions in this kind of work hurts people. Any unique situation always calls for a site visit by the engineer. the weyerhauser people can opnly go based on the info you provide and if they submit paperwork to you, it will contain disclaimers stating that the ifo is based solely on theoretical info provided by you and it will dislaim any and all liabilit5y for conditions not clear to them. If you have been as unclear to them as you have been in answering questions posed by people here trying to help you, then I can gaurantee that they do not understand the full scope of the job. That can account for a failure of the design and you as installer become the one who stands liable for damages.That is the point that you seem to have lost.It is frustrating that you ask a Q and then refrain from providing further information needed to discern the scope of work. Things like exactly what is the laod carried by the wall being replaced by the main beam? What is the exact load being carrying by the intersecting beam. What foundations provisions are being made for the end post supports which will now carry the entier load that is currently spread across thirty some feet? When it becomes point loads instead of distributed loading, the foundation has to be able to carry it.
          There are many other potential problems that can only be identified on site by someone who has a clue. It has not become clear that you do.What is going on here is not an attempt to castigate you p[ersonallyu. It is what we call integrity. There are lives and property atr risk if this is not done correctly. i'm sorry if you do not find the answer you seek here, but there are more important issues than free advice or easy answers. 

           

          Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

      2. Bowz | Jun 19, 2005 09:57pm | #53

        First off, peace to all and Happy Fathers Day.

        That being said, I am on RU's side, if I am understanding what he is doing.

        Has anybody else tried to figure out what he is doing?

        My take on it is that he is removing a marginally structural wall. The only thing this wall is holding is the weight of the ceiling.  With a 5/12 pitch there will be no room for storage  above.  My code books says the design load for this ceiling will be 5 psf.

        24x24 area yeilds a total weight of 2880 lbs. Let's round up to 3000 lbs.

        Half of that weight is on the outside walls, so his secondary beam is carrying 1500lbs.

        2 laminations of 18" LVL 24' long will weigh 414 lbs. (I cut a 12"x12" square out of LVL and weighed it, 5.75 lbs per sqr ft)

        So we are dealing with 1500lbs plus 414lbs. = 1914 lbs.  Let's round that up to 2000lbs.

        RU's primary beam will be holding 1/2 of that weight (1000lbs) on a point load.

        A Triple 18" LVL won't hold this? The triple 26' 18" LVL that I put in has a  heck of a lot more point load on it than this, and it must be working, because I've been back to do more work at that house.

        RU said the person who came out also speced the hanger. My assumption is that this is some sort of Sipson produced hanger, and they would have engineered it to work in this situation.

        I would only be concerned about RU's ability to place these beams, and cutting the collar ties. His main beam calcs to weigh about 675 lbs.

        Again, peace to all.

        Bowz

        1. Piffin | Jun 20, 2005 12:22am | #55

          see aboveyes I tried to understand the situation.
          You have to make assumptions to come up with the scenario that you did.Then, I'll admit that I am not strong on codes, but I have never seen a table showing five pounds of cileing load. I imagine that five pounds would be about what the dead load is for a typical residence with rock and insulation, but live loads of fifteen pounds are more common. The only time I have seen a five pound olive load mentioned is for interior partition walls, incase somebody stumbles into, sneezes on, or hangs a picture from one, or even if the window is left open and a breeze pushes on it. So if you have only calculated dead loads and if the live laod requirement is fifteen, you need to multiply by four to know what your required loading is.i think you have volunteered a good example of why not to do engineering sight unseen and via internet with unknown persons. Thanks for the object lesson. 

           

          Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          1. Bowz | Jun 20, 2005 07:21am | #56

            Piffin,

            i think you have volunteered a good example of why not to do engineering sight unseen and via internet with unknown persons. Thanks for the object lesson.

            Yes that is part of it. The answer I expected was "how do you know what codes apply to him, since you are in a different state." I'm somewhat disappointed that you were the only one to question 5 psf, because it is wrong.

            Yes  there are a lot of assumptions.  someone is assuming that he is changing a ridge board to a beam, someone is assuming it equates to framing a floor at 100psf, someone is assuming that it equates with a beam in a party barn. In other posts his dimentions have grown to 28' and 30'.

            Oh well, time for bed. tommorrow starts a very busy week.

            Bowz

          2. Saw | Jun 23, 2005 07:36am | #57

            Bowz, Piffin, Boss Hog

            Here is the site for the company that did the beam sizing http://www.robertsdybdahl.com/ 

            It was purchased through Carter Lumber which has some 200 locations for what it's worth.

            Now that the beams are here I have done some measuring on the short wall that will support the cut end of the beam, it will be 33" in length leaving a span of 21' 3" for the primary beam. This wall has a foundation below it and will have blocking between the mud sill and sub floor.

            The brackets were delivered with the beams, along with general application installation instructions and the legal liability that Piffin spoke of.

            The roof load will consist of insulation, 1/2" drywall (I know, I recommended 5/8" but 1/2" will lighten the load, 3/4" board sheeting and plywood, 1 layer of shingles.

            Is this where I ring the bell for round 2!

            Thanks and take care,

            RU

             

          3. gdavis62 | Jun 23, 2005 11:54am | #58

            No snow load?  Where I live the ground snow load is over 70 psf.Gene Davis, Davis Housewrights, Inc., Lake Placid, NY

             

             

          4. TLE | Jun 23, 2005 01:23pm | #59

            Totally stepping away from the structural issues here.

            The roof load will consist of insulation, 1/2" drywall (I know, I recommended 5/8" but 1/2" will lighten the load

            You are going to have more deflection in this ceiling system than desirable. I would recommend strapping the ceiling framing with RC channel, 16" oc.  The metal will help isolate much of the stresses and minimize drywall cracks.

            Terry

          5. Piffin | Jun 24, 2005 05:40am | #61

            I hope he at least follows that advice.21' is much better than the originally stated 24', but he is still in for a lot of deflection, so isolating the movement by a step like this is wise. 

             

            Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!

          6. User avater
            BossHog | Jun 23, 2005 04:57pm | #60

            I'm familiar with Roberts + Dybdahl. They sell a lot of beams and I-joists. Two things stil concern me about your situation, though. First - As I understand it - The guy who actually visited your site wasn't from Roberts + Dybdahl - They were just from a lumberyard. So they may or may not have had any experience with load development. No way I could know that without knowing them. I don't deal with any of the Carter Lumber yards that far north in Illinois.Second - The length of the beam and the allowable deflections concern me. The person who designed the beams may or may not have a lot of practical experience. They may say anything is O.K. that they can get to run in the computer. Or they may have checked it all, and they don't think it's a problem. Obviously, I can't possibly know that without reviewing the situation myself. So where does that leave you? Sounds like you've already made up your mind to go ahead with this. So it doesn't matter a whole lot what any of us think. I'm not trying to bust your chops - Just telling you what I honestly think.Hope it works out for ya.
            Can a hearse carrying a corpse drive in the carpool lane?

Log in or create an account to post a comment.

Sign up Log in

Become a member and get full access to FineHomebuilding.com

Video Shorts

Categories

  • Business
  • Code Questions
  • Construction Techniques
  • Energy, Heating & Insulation
  • General Discussion
  • Help/Work Wanted
  • Photo Gallery
  • Reader Classified
  • Tools for Home Building

Discussion Forum

Recent Posts and Replies

  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
View More Create Post

Up Next

Video Shorts

Featured Story

FHB Summit 2025 — Design, Build, Business

Join some of the most experienced and recognized building professionals for two days of presentations, panel discussions, networking, and more.

Featured Video

Builder’s Advocate: An Interview With Viewrail

Learn more about affordable, modern floating stairs, from design to manufacturing to installation.

Related Stories

  • Guest Suite With a Garden House
  • Podcast Episode 688: Obstructed Ridge Vent, Buying Fixer-Uppers, and Flashing Ledgers
  • FHB Podcast Segment: Finding the Right Fixer-Upper
  • Keeping It Cottage-Sized

Highlights

Fine Homebuilding All Access
Fine Homebuilding Podcast
Tool Tech
Plus, get an extra 20% off with code GIFT20

"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.

Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters
See all newsletters

Fine Homebuilding Magazine

  • Issue 332 - July 2025
    • Custom Built-ins With Job-Site Tools
    • Fight House Fires Through Design
    • Making the Move to Multifamily
  • Issue 331 - June 2025
    • A More Resilient Roof
    • Tool Test: You Need a Drywall Sander
    • Ducted vs. Ductless Heat Pumps
  • Issue 330 - April/May 2025
    • Deck Details for Durability
    • FAQs on HPWHs
    • 10 Tips for a Long-Lasting Paint Job
  • Issue 329 - Feb/Mar 2025
    • Smart Foundation for a Small Addition
    • A Kominka Comes West
    • Making Small Kitchens Work
  • Issue 328 - Dec/Jan 2024
    • How a Pro Replaces Columns
    • Passive House 3.0
    • Tool Test: Compact Line Lasers

Fine Home Building

Newsletter Sign-up

  • Fine Homebuilding

    Home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox.

  • Green Building Advisor

    Building science and energy efficiency advice, plus special offers, in your inbox.

  • Old House Journal

    Repair, renovation, and restoration tips, plus special offers, in your inbox.

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters

Follow

  • Fine Homebuilding

    Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
    • LinkedIn
  • GBA Prime

    Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
  • Old House Journal

    Learn how to restore, repair, update, and decorate your home.

    Subscribe Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
  • Fine Homebuilding

    Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X
    • LinkedIn
  • GBA Prime

    Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.

    Start Free Trial Now
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
  • Old House Journal

    Learn how to restore, repair, update, and decorate your home.

    Subscribe Now
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X

Membership & Magazine

  • Online Archive
  • Start Free Trial
  • Magazine Subscription
  • Magazine Renewal
  • Gift a Subscription
  • Customer Support
  • Privacy Preferences
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • Terms of Use
  • Site Map
  • Do not sell or share my information
  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility
  • California Privacy Rights

© 2025 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.

Fine Homebuilding receives a commission for items purchased through links on this site, including Amazon Associates and other affiliate advertising programs.

  • Home Group
  • Antique Trader
  • Arts & Crafts Homes
  • Bank Note Reporter
  • Cabin Life
  • Cuisine at Home
  • Fine Gardening
  • Fine Woodworking
  • Green Building Advisor
  • Garden Gate
  • Horticulture
  • Keep Craft Alive
  • Log Home Living
  • Military Trader/Vehicles
  • Numismatic News
  • Numismaster
  • Old Cars Weekly
  • Old House Journal
  • Period Homes
  • Popular Woodworking
  • Script
  • ShopNotes
  • Sports Collectors Digest
  • Threads
  • Timber Home Living
  • Traditional Building
  • Woodsmith
  • World Coin News
  • Writer's Digest
Active Interest Media logo
X
X
This is a dialog window which overlays the main content of the page. The modal window is a 'site map' of the most critical areas of the site. Pressing the Escape (ESC) button will close the modal and bring you back to where you were on the page.

Main Menu

  • How-To
  • Design
  • Tools & Materials
  • Video
  • Blogs
  • Forum
  • Project Guides
  • Reader Projects
  • Magazine
  • Members
  • FHB House

Podcasts

  • FHB Podcast
  • ProTalk

Webinars

  • Upcoming and On-Demand

Podcasts

  • FHB Podcast
  • ProTalk

Webinars

  • Upcoming and On-Demand

Popular Topics

  • Kitchens
  • Business
  • Bedrooms
  • Roofs
  • Architecture and Design
  • Green Building
  • Decks
  • Framing
  • Safety
  • Remodeling
  • Bathrooms
  • Windows
  • Tilework
  • Ceilings
  • HVAC

Magazine

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Magazine Index
  • Subscribe
  • Online Archive
  • Author Guidelines

All Access

  • Member Home
  • Start Free Trial
  • Gift Membership

Online Learning

  • Courses
  • Project Guides
  • Reader Projects
  • Podcast

More

  • FHB Ambassadors
  • FHB House
  • Customer Support

Account

  • Log In
  • Join

Newsletter

Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
See all newsletters
See all newsletters

Follow

  • X
  • YouTube
  • instagram
  • facebook
  • pinterest
  • Tiktok

Join All Access

Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.

Start Your Free Trial

Subscribe

FHB Magazine

Start your subscription today and save up to 70%

Subscribe

Enjoy unlimited access to Fine Homebuilding. Join Now

Already a member? Log in

We hope you’ve enjoyed your free articles. To keep reading, become a member today.

Get complete site access to expert advice, how-to videos, Code Check, and more, plus the print magazine.

Start your FREE trial

Already a member? Log in

Privacy Policy Update

We use cookies, pixels, script and other tracking technologies to analyze and improve our service, to improve and personalize content, and for advertising to you. We also share information about your use of our site with third-party social media, advertising and analytics partners. You can view our Privacy Policy here and our Terms of Use here.

Cookies

Analytics

These cookies help us track site metrics to improve our sites and provide a better user experience.

Advertising/Social Media

These cookies are used to serve advertisements aligned with your interests.

Essential

These cookies are required to provide basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website.

Delete My Data

Delete all cookies and associated data