Hi! I’m new to this forum and hope that I can get some good advice on dealing with a problem here. It’s 3:12 Am, so as you might notice- I’m just a bit stressed out about it.
I’m writing to find a cure for a bouncy deck.
I have a six year old home with a one story deck (70′ x 12′) hanging off the back of my house (deck is about 10′ off ground). The decking is 5/4 PT pine that is in good shape. The deck has sistered 2×10 joists running perpendicular to house and single 2×8’s connecting them. The 2×8’s are on 16″ centers and span 10′ in most sections, but also span 14′ in two sections. Deck is supported by seven 6x6PT posts that are on either 10′ or 14′ centers. Access to the bottom of the deck is excellent.
I am considering the following:
1. Sister a 2×10 onto some or all of the 2×8’s. Question is whether is will help stiffen things or hurt things by adding weight?
2. Add blocking or bracing between the 2×8’s.
3. Angle brace the 2×10’s to the 6×6 posts- both parallel to house and perpendicular to house.
4. Rip it off and start over.
Hope someone has some experience dealing with this. I am particularly drawn to the sistering approach as I think it would be most unobtrusive.
Replies
The deck has sistered 2x10 joists running perpendicular to house and single 2x8's connecting them. The 2x8's are on 16" centers and span 10' in most sections, but also span 14' in two sections
can you help get my head around what you said here???
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming
WOW!!! What a Ride!
Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
Sorry about my confusing words. I am trying to attach a picture to help explain. The sistered 2x10's run perpendicular to the house and span the 12' depth of the deck. The are connected to the ledger board on the house with double joist hangers and to the 2x10 rim joist at the outer edge of the deck. These 2x10's joists have 2x8 joists connecting them- they are on 16" centers and span 10' in some sections, 14' in two other sections.
if I get this right..
the deck's frame is all sistered 2x10's excluding the rim and ledger....
now for this part......These 2x10's joists have 2x8 joists connecting them...
where exactly are these 2x8's installed in what location...
are the 2x8's a subframe assembly???
perhaps you are saying one thing and meanining something else...
as a note.... at 2MB I and a slew of others here won't be able to open those pics...
try http://www.irfanview.com for a resizing program most here use...
go for 100 to 150KB in size and yur adiance parameters will radically inprove...
free, painless, simple and a the cat's meow...
be patient I'll hang with ya...
BTW.... it's still early yet...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
Thanks for parameters on sizing pics- I'll try again.Regarding my words- I'm not an engineer or a carpenter- so you'll have to help me describe the situation- hope you can be patient.
can you bump that up about 5 or 6 times in size please....
about a 600/800x400/600 sized pic is comfy... or in the nieghborhood some place..
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
now I undestand what yur talking about...
are the 6x6's at the ends of the sistered 2x10's???
what does their connection look like???
my inclination is to say the sistered 2x10's are inadaquite...
look into adding another set of sistered 2x10's perpendicular to the 2x8's at their centers in a tressled beam configuration...
and add screws.. pull the loose nials that you can get to...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
IMERC said: look into adding another set of sistered 2x10's perpendicular to the 2x8's at their centers in a tressled beam configuration...IMERC, cam you describe a "tressled beam configuration" to me?The sistered 2x10's are sitting on top of the 6x6 posts. This is actually another concern- the 6x6's have twisted so badly they are really worrying me-clear to me that the posts have to be replaced. Suggestions on something that won't twist.To answer your question- I think the rim joist is nailed into end of sistered 2x10's and that whole system is toenailed into the ends of 6x6's. Doesn't sound very secure does it?Trying to show pic of posts-what am I doing wrong- the picture uploads, but isn't opened- I just see the little ".jpg" icon.Edited 8/13/2008 8:32 am ET by bobframeEdited 8/13/2008 8:52 am ET by bobframe
Edited 8/13/2008 8:52 am ET by bobframe
now that I've seen the details....
!. What Piffin says...
2. start over...
there's too many items to "fix"....
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
hey rez...
can ya look into this???
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
OK Bob - Personally I would start over and here's why:Code design should be to 40 PSF live load - that puts a total load of say 600 PLF on your (2) 2 x 10s which exceeds their capacity by a factor of about 2.5.
14' is too long a span for 2 x 8s under these conditions.
Ledgers are no way to attach the 2 x 8s to the (2) 2 x 10s - should have joist hangers. If the obvious bow in the ledgers correctly follows the line of the bottoms of the (2) 2 x 10s (not the outboard member) then you have obvious deflection under no load conditions.
I don't see any evidence below the deck of proper railing post attachment - please advise.
IMO the outboard member should be a double, not a single - despite the fact that the main joists load the (2) 2 x 10s this member is essential to prevent racking.
Decking should have screws.
At 9' off the ground to bottom of structure I would consider angle bracing to the columns.
eta - I was going to add that the only thing really going for you was the 6 x 6s, but then I saw your photo below:
View Image
Desparately in need of a top post connector ...
Don't know if it's just me, but if those are 5 1/2" wide boards they look more like 1x (3/4" thick) than 5/4 (1 1/16 - 1 1/8" thick). Are you sure they're 5/4?Sorry for the bad news, but I see this construction as significantly substandard in a number of ways, including by code (generalizing - you don't give a location).
Jeff
Edited 8/15/2008 10:03 pm ET by Jeff_Clarke
Jeff said: then you have obvious deflection under no load conditions.If this is correct then wouldn't adding sister joints just make it worse?I thought they were 5/4 deck boards. Didn't know you could buy 3/4 or 1" decking. I'm sure they have shrunk in 6 years. The boards you see get pretty strong afternoon sun in north GA- so maybe they are 3/4 by now??I appreciate your candor- I wonder if this deck is substandard, can it be brought up to some kind of "standard" condition? If I sell this house at some point, I worry that a home inspection will get ugly and interfere with a closing.
Edited 8/13/2008 9:01 am ET by bobframe
Measure the thickness at the outside edge. They don't look 5/4 to me.
And, no, I'm quite serious when I say you should start over.
Jeff
Where in N. GA?
Forrest
I'm in Toccoa, GA
Jeff, are you saying the design loads for decks shpuld be 60 psf. or are in your area?
He is in northern GA. I doubt that his ground snow loads are more than 15 psf, and normal design loads for a house range from 30 to 40 psf.
I don't have my IRC handy, so those numbers are just from my failing memory.
Has something change in the latest version of the the IRC ?
10-15# for dead load and 40# for live load means a minimum of 50# design load, IMO. That is for dealing with deflection and system failure, but does not adress all potential vibration issues which can come via overkill on design loads generally.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Sorry it's 40 # live load for decks - 60# is exterior balconies. So at 50 PSF total load it's 600 PLF by code (assuming 2006 IRC) and (2) 2 x 10s on 12' should probably be limited to no more than 250 PLF at Fb = 1300 psi which is generous.
Checking 2 x 12s = 3 (triple) as Piffin notes.
Jeff
Thought I'd copy a suggestion my brother (a very experienced builder) had for me. Here it is:What about this? Rather than remove the 2x10 why not beef it up where it matters. Think about adding double 2x8s or even 2x10s directly under the existing beam. Glue the surface between the existing 2x10 and what is added with suitable p.t. adhesive like PL 500 (I think that's for pt lumber). Make good connections at the house and posts. Remove the 2x3 ledger strip. Install joist hangers, and also tie the two beams together with a metal strap as I drew. Locate one of these between each joist. So instead of a 2x10 you would essentially have a 2x18 or 2x20!
I think this would work well and not cost a fortune to do. By the way; I wasn't sure if MicroLam makes or has a product suitable for exterior use---something I thought could be researched.
I at first thought you could just beef it up as others have suggested, but after reading Piffens post, I think he is right, you may have unsuitable fastners for your type of PT.
Haveng said that, I would tear down and rebuild, using proper fastners and joist hangers. I think you would be happier.
How are you going to fasten the end of the added 2x10 beam?Judging from your pic, the existing DBL 2x10 beam is fastened to the existing rim joist, if you go below this you will likely not have any meat other than an occasional stud to fasten to.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
I am no framer, but because of the twist of the 6x6 support posts- I have totally bought into replacing them. SO, if I have to replace them, it would be fairly straightforward to size those to accommodate the newly created "2x18's". My guess is we'd have to tear off some siding to be able to securely attach the 2x18's to the house side.EDit: Jon I read your post more carefully and see that your big question is how to secure them to the house side--don't have an answer for that one. Guess using the 2x4 studs is the wrong answer?Gawd this is getting depressing. How much is a new deck?
Edited 8/13/2008 2:10 pm ET by bobframe
Attaching to a properly secured stud would be fine, but it's only going to go so far.A double joist hanger is typically 5-6" wide, so one 1-1/2" stud will not come even close to full nailing. If your basement is unfinished you could sister some studs as needed.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Entire basement is finished- sheet rock walls and ceilings.
To All: I really appreciate all the attention and careful thought you guys have given me. I am really concerned about this situation and your attention has been comforting to me. Thanks guys!!If I have neglected replying to anyone, let me know and I'll go back and try to answer.Thanks,Bob
"Entire basement is finished- sheet rock walls and ceilings."No problem - we can change that!;)
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Instead of that knee kicker i mentioned, I had first thought about addding to the beam similar to what your drawing shows. The attachment to the house is my primary concern tho and why I did not mention it. If you drop into the siding you are likely down below your rim joist in the house where you would only be tying into osb sheathing which will hold nothing heavier than a toothpick.{for that matter. it is not uncommon for some 'builders' to have attached ledgers only to sheathing and to cause failures like your minor vibrations all the way up to total collapse and deaths}Simply thickening the beam as he shows would stuffen it some, but that connection to the hosue still worries me without knowing just how well it is done.Also the steel strapping used to gusset the added depth to the beam crosses where you now have 2x2 ledgers. You would have to remove them, do the beam, then add metal joist hangers, not a bad idea on it's own, as others have pointed out.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
One more thing.
You may want to confirm the bearing capacity of the existing DBL 2x10 hangers. My guess, from looking at the picture, is that they're the equivalent of a Simpson LUS26-2. If I'm right, that means you have a connection that can fail at 1/3 of a #50/PSF design load. Definitely something to consider.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
I think from the first post that the 'sistered' 2x10s are the beams running perpendicular to the house, and 2x8s land on them so the deceking can run perp to the house and drain away.Most of the bounce would be in those beams if they are only doubled. Should be 2x12 tripled.The 2x8 are fine for the 10' spans but overspanned at 14'I'm going to read the rest of this and get caught up before mouthing off any more now;)
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
one other thing...
do the deck boars flex by them selves???
or do the joist equally as well???
what are the 5/4's fatened to the joist with???
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming
WOW!!! What a Ride!
Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
I don't know if the deck boards are flexing- but I think not. The reason I say this is that I have a 5/4 deck on the front of my house that is quite stiff. I believe the difference is that is it framed entirely with 2x10 joists- same decking, same centers. Maybe a 2' or 4'shorter span. I suspect the culprit on back deck is 2x8 joists trying to span 10' or 14'.The deck boards were nailed with a nail gun.
Edited 8/13/2008 3:49 am ET by bobframe
WTB you pull all those nails and change to 3" ACQ rated deck screws you will see a radical difference right off the bat...
don't use the home desperate deck screws...
they're not worth the pain and misery...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
REALLY?? Wow. I'm shocked. Now, would I have to "pull" all the nails? Builder used a nail gun and many/most are sunk below surface- I think pulling them would be a really difficult task. Would leaving nails but adding screws help?
bTW Bob....
welcome to BT....
the day shift will be in shortly and comence with yur hazing...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming
WOW!!! What a Ride!
Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
Hey - welcome here.
View Image
If it was me, I would probably just stiffen the 2x8s first.
Get a jack, and a post, and a bunch of treated 2x4s, and some "non-creeping" (like resorcinol) glue.
View Image
Then - every day, mix a bit of glue, slather a stripe down the center of a 2x4. Hold it against the bottom of the first 2x8 (upside-down-T fashion), put the post in the center, jack a slight crown into the assembly (maybe 1/4-3/8"), and screw the 2x4 up to the 2x8 6-8" OC with 3" deck screws.
Let sit overnight (make sure the jack doesn't leak down; maybe use a screw jack). Take down the jack and post; repeat 'til done.
No joke, this is stiffer than sistering with a 2x10, and a lot cheaper!
If you want, you could do the same thing to the double 2x10s with 2x6s - it will be slightly narrower than the 4-layer 2-by build up; just center it
Forrest - want strong, like bull
Edited 8/13/2008 5:41 am ET by McDesign
Your saying make the bottom of the each 2x8 into a sort a half I beam by glueing and screwing on the 2x4 ?
Sounds like an excellent idea. The deck boards on top act as a diaphram to complete the new i joist configuration, right?
Well, sort of. Mainly, the deck boards act to maintain the orientation of the "T" and prevent down-rating the assembly for buckling failure of the 2x8 (now) web.
JLC has a good Q&A about upside-down-T beams this issue; I read it last night.
Forrest
Beef up your beams- add a couple of 2x10's to each of the interior ones and one to the outboard beams. Screw them together with ledger locks.
Install solid bridging between the joists on 2' centersNo Tag
Just to clarify -- what do you mean by "bouncy". The framing should be strong enough as it is to be pretty stiff vertically -- not much load on a deck -- but I see absolutely no bracing or anything to keep the deck from moving in the horizontal plane. If horizontal movement is what you mean by "bouncy", a diagonal fastened to the underside of each section should cure it.
Mike Hennessy
Pittsburgh, PA
Edited 8/13/2008 7:46 am ET by MikeHennessy
Mike, When I say "bouncy" I mean that when I (6'3" 230#) walk across the deck I feel a bit of "springyness" in the entire deck. The things on a free standing shelving system that sits against the wall of the house rattle and make noises. It feels like it is up and down bounce, not side to side wiggle.
Question: Is the deck really just bouncy, or is at least part of the problem that it "wiggles" side to side? Some diagonal bracing across the bottom of the deck (say a 1x4 run diagonally across the bottom of the joists) will eliminate most of the wiggle.
DAn,My sense is that it is up and down bounce.
OK, I have had time to see the photos and thought about this.
My firs t comment is a general one. That in way too many places decks are not subject to inspection and that leads to the fact that there are too many failures making fro a black eye on this industry, tho a lot of those failures are due to homeowners doing an addon after the fact. I see that you had a builder do this so shame on him.
I see three things wrong, but given that he was poor in what I see, there could also be other problems contributing to this.
First, when a deck is framed this direction ( I do it that way myself so the deck boards can lead water away from the house when given sufficient pitch) there is no need whatsoever for a ledger. The beams can be coupled to the house with fewer connections and less chance of water penetraing the envelope. Ledger connections are responsible for a LOT of rot problems in the house frame proper. But when a beam is hung to the house with a single hanger and a self healing membrane behind it, odds of water problems are far reduced.
By using ledger first, then attaching a beam to that ( in what manner I don't know) there is an added structrual step. The more connnections, the greater the odds of failure from human error / poor workmanship or from hardware failure froma number of causes.
One of those causes that is commonplace now days is corrosion from ACQ lumber. If six years old, your deck was built about the time that we were all changing over to ACQ PT from the older better CCA PT.One problem caused by this change is that the newer has a form of copper that reacts in presence of water with standard fastening hangers and nails or screws, sometimes causing them to rust out in a s little as six months. We have mostly changed to SS fasteners, but some still have not got the word or don't care.
So - that connection of beam to house copuld be part of the trouble.
second, The beams running perpendicular to the house are undersized. They should have been tripled 2x12 IMO. Since everything else hangs suspended from them, every thing would shake and bounce.
Thirdly, the 2x8s are OK at 10' spans but undersized at 14' spans. They need to be doubled with 2x8 sisters or strengthened by the method Forrest described. To my knowledge, 14' is still a bit of a stretch for that method. I have seen it specified by engineers before, but think that it was only up to about 13'4".
If I were the one doing this, I would want to start from scratch to be sure that there is no damage from water behind that ledger and that everything else is completely right.
But for a shorter term stop gap measure, you could do the following...
Inspect at ledger first that it is soundly attached and then the connection of beam to ledger/house.
Then stiffen the beams by running a 4x4 diagonal knee from the post at about 6'6" high, back at 45° towards the center of the beam. This will shorten the span the beam carries, and transfer more load directly to the posts. That height will keep you from bumping your nogin. If you can get by with starting it lower, you get to t he center of beam better.
Then stiffen the joists as mentioned above. You might find that mush of the bounce is gone before getting to that step.
But if you plan to be there for a long time, better off rebuilding to last your liftime.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
CCA was not phased out for residential production until 12-21-2003. If this deck was built 6 years ago, I think it's unlikely that it has ACQ or other "new" PT formulations.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
You may be right, but I was definitely using ACQ five years ago. It was being phased IN before the CCA was totally phased OUT
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I didn't see ACQ until about February of 2004. I don't know if it was the treaters or lumber suppliers, but I got the impression that they were working up to the deadline as much as possible.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Maine is somewhat similar to Calif on enviro things like paints to latex etc sooner than rest of country so that could be why I was forced to it ahead of some others. The first ACQ I am sure of was summer of other '02 or '03 - thinking '03. It was right after building that deck that I learned that it corrodes the galvie hangers and nails so i weent back to refasten the next week. Owner was impressed about that and the no charge for it on his bill.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
Edited 8/14/2008 10:15 am ET by Piffin
Ditto.
It looks pretty suspect, but you could do a whole lot of bracing and re-inforcing and not spend 25% of the cost of a new deck. I'm guessing, ( spitballin really, cause I haven't done a deck that was completely out of pt in a while) 8-10k in material.
I'd fix what's there. As to Paul's concerns as to the attachment....See what's there! I'm not a big fan of the running the joists parallel to the structure method. Don't see how, regardless of attachment method, that it can be as strong as a correctly attached and flashed ledger, with joists 16" o.c. attached correctly to it. It's only going to be attached at the beam ends, and by the decking material, (which still needs to be nailed to something at the wall, so I don't really see what you save in flashing, etc........Anyhow, I digress....
I think I'd do your brothers method, and if you don't have a good way to attach a bearing point at the wall, put a pier at the wall and put a column an inch or two off the wall....So stuff doesn't collect behind the siding. For that matter, add a post at the middle of the "beam" if it won't clutter up the works underneath. Also, if you can, with the "post agin' the wall" method, break the span on the 14' segments of 2x8 ( way overtaxed @ 14") Put a beam at 7' or frame something decorative that you can put some lattice on, and it'll look like ya did it on purpose.
Def. check the connections at the house, tho'.... that's key.Connectors/and/or replace posts that are kaka, blocking mid-span on 10' sections of 2x8, some diagonal 2x4's nailed to bottom of joists will stiffen from swaying too....
There's all kinds of methods to repair what's there, before you bury a5 tons of lumber in a landfill and write a big check.
My.02
Bing
"Don't see how, regardless of attachment method, that it can be as strong as a correctly attached and flashed ledger, with joists 16" o.c. attached correctly to it. It's only going to be attached at the beam ends, and by the decking material, (which still needs to be nailed to something at the wall, so I don't really see what you save in flashing,"You really do NOT need a ledger attached when doing it my way. Only the beam ends need attachement and I just use hardware designed for the load. That minimizes wall penetration and is easier to flash. The siding can run right up behind the nearest joist which can be placed 2" off it a nd leave the decking boards 1/4" off.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Ok, that makes sense. Haven't seen one done that way here. I would have an issue with the decking 1/4 inch away from the wall. Unfortunately, there are lots of homeowners that would let crud collect there, ( although not bad w/ 2" behind joist) and ultimately the leaves, dirt and crud hold moisture contributing to rot at that point.
If you were building this deck, I'm assuming ( I know, not a good idea) that you'd be figuring 3 2x12's for beams, with 2x8 0r 2x10 spanning 10-12'? So with a 70' deck, it would be connected (albeit with the "correct" hardware) at 7 or 8 points to the house? I suppose that's fine on a new build, where you have access to the back to thru bolt some beefy hangers, but not so much on a retro.....
Everyone has their own methods so it's all cool... My point in the first place is pretty much what Jeff is saying... I don't see anything there that can't be confirmed to be safe ,visually or with a little investigation, that's all. If it's not sufficiently bolted, bolt it. If it's acq and the hangers are wrong, replace em. etc.etc.etc. Still a lot more sensible in my mind to correct a few issues than starting over, in my opinion.
Bing
even tho Jeff is pretty excited about this issue, I think we all three agree. It can be fixed, depending...;)
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
That deck looks very similar to one I repaired a few years ago. It had single 2x10's and some 14 or 16 span 2x8 joists. I jacked and doubled the "beam" ones (it did not have the spans he had. I jacked and added ones midspan and added joist hangers. They had been end and toenailed.
Did a lot of other things too. Owner's brother had been the county inspector. I went over all with him and he thought it was great.For those who have fought for it Freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.
anybody seen the original poster?
i'm worried he maybe was swinging on a tire swing that wasn't properly chained and swivelled together and flew out -hitting his head on the corner of the pingpong table (which by the way should have been safely folded up and stowed in the overhead compartment when he wasn't playing with it) and he staggered into one of those whopperjawed 6x6's which promptly and inevitably tore the deck ledger off and knocked the whole house down around his ears and now he is maimed and lonesome with his insides spread all over the northern Georgia countryside.
on the upside the deck don't bounce no more and the china is as silent as a church mouseNo Tag
I was hoping he was out there with a nailing gun, coupla tubes of PL and random lenghts of lumber making all that bounce go away.
either way ... problem solved!
Jeff Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
That's just plain mean.
summer of '02 was when the ACQ was just starting to show up.. there was a lot ofit in '03 mixed in with CCA... by '04 CCA was difficult to find....
had my fill with the ACQ on a deck in '03... had to redo the deck and that put a real sizable dent in the margin.... what happened to the fasteners in no time was scary....
have been avoiding it with a passion since...
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming<!----><!----><!---->
WOW!!! What a Ride!Forget the primal scream, just ROAR!!!
That's interesting. I probably installed between 10k and 15k board feet of PT in 2003- all of it was CCA. Maybe the ACQ showed up in the move environmentally "conscious" areas before the Mid-Atlantic?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Jeff,
What do you think of my brother's suggestion (add double 2x8's or 2x10's underneath the existing 2x10's thereby converting them to 2/18's or 2/20's)??
If the problem is the 2x10's, why doesn't this fix it? Only 7 of them to deal with, so it would be relatively inexpensive (compared with demo'ing the whole deal and starting over) and I don't think it would look terribly odd. Do you?
The connection detail at the beams may be a part of the problem. The 2x_ attached to the side of the beams is likely nailed only. It appears to me that this is a simple seated connection and many appear deformed. I would check this as any movement of this piece will allow joist movement. I dont like this connection, because the norm is to nail this board on without ever considering where a joist lands and in many cases 2x2 stock is used. All the 2x2 stock I have seen is normally fraught with knots and other poor wood qualities. The nailing of this 2x_ ledger is important since if the nails are located midway between joists, the 2x_ piece is in bending and is not always adequate for this.
As to the flex in the structure I would ask what your goal is? Improve this a bit or make it rock stable for gatherings? If the later, re-building may the easier solution rather than the trial and error methods. Especially true if you need to replace the railings.
After you have checked the beam and ledger connection details, jump up and down at the center of the beam and then do the same at the middle of a joist. Now I know this is not very technical, but it helps to determine which part of the assembly is the bigger offender. Obviously, stiffening the beams is easier as there are fewer of them. Many solutions have been suggested, just make sure to consider the adhesives carefully and adding depth (2x_stock or ...) is the more effecient solution. Many subfloor adhesives will not work as well as a structural adhesive since they are designed to be flexible. Flex at the glue joint is not what you want in this case. Another point to consider would be the pressure the glue needs to develop a proper bond. Some require great pressure which you cannot develop in this case.
Another option if your joists are the problem would be to add beams between the posts. Using this beam, along with hanger type brackets at the wall ledger you can install new beams at the midspan (under the joists) of the existing joists. This will reduce the number of pieces you need to reinforce, and will stiffen the posts which are in dire need of a connection. Yes, it will not look as clean below, so it may not be an option.
Brad
"How to Stiffen Deck"
Don't you have email ?
I get several spam emails every day, offering to help me stiffen my deck.
Click here for access to the Woodshed Tavern
I really hope that my "stiff deck" lasts for more than four hours.
jesus!
tear down an existing deck with complete access from below with full working headroom ... because there's a coupla issues?
WTF?
might as well tear down the house ... bet there's a hairline crack in there somewhere ...
it's a freaking deck. Just attach more wood to the bouncy parts ... and get on with life.
Hub had a good idea ... the inverted T was a good idea ... the brother had a good idea. It's freaking lumber people .... just build it ... over built it ... and move on.
if that one post is twisted ... replace it.
tear down ... might be the wrong fastners ... no simpson hardware ...
my god ...
better call the structural steel people out to erect the framing for the new one!
Jeff
Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
Now you're talking,
build a steel deck under that wobbly wooden trampolineNo Tag
"jesus! [BuckRant snipped]"
Jeff's back!
I take it you'd rather still be on vacation? ;-)
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
I was trying to do my best Big,Scary,Crazy Bob impersonation.
he'da had it rigid-ified by now!
Jeff Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
"I was trying to do my best Big,Scary,Crazy Bob impersonation.he'da had it rigid-ified by now!"
LOL!
Yep. With about 4 yard of 'crete, and some steel angles thrown in for good measure. Wouldn't ever move after BSC Bob was done with it -- too scared!
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
I agree that is all possibleBut in your magnificence, you have not addressed the deck to house connection
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
"you have not addressed the deck to house connection"
connect it.
Jeff
Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
So just how do you propose the deck be connected?I don't think the existing should be torched, but there seem to be some areas that require attention.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
and why's it gonna be easier to connect the new deck than re-connect the existing?
Jeff Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
remember I gave some suggestions how to fix what is there? for me iot all comes down to "What IS there?"I have no idea how this is connected and flashed or how much rot it has already caused.
So I would need to be on the scene to answer your question.You would too.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
You would too.
exactly.
but it's a freaking deck ... not a suspension bridge.
the underside is completely exposed ... and looks to be plenty of nice clean well lit working room.
I'm sure most any decent carp could stand there with moring cup O coffee in hand and come up with a suitable plan. A plan that most likely won't be "tear it down".
as to thate exact plan ... don't know ... don't care.
I'm not gonna be fixing it, so I'm not gonna be giving it too much thought.
I will say that the idea of a simple deck being beyond repair is just dumb.
How do ya rebuild a deck anyway? Remove wood then add wood?
OK ... that's the plan.
just do less removing and adding than a whole tear down and rebuild would take.
it's a freaking deck ...
Jeff Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
I'm a DIY, not a pro, but saw a couple things I've not seen mentioned. Others can speak better to whether they are significant.
1. In the initial picture, the bottom of the far post appears to be about a foot farther from the house than the top of the post. Is this just an illusion?
2. There is a downspout on the middle post. Is this just a deck, or is there also a screened in room with a roof above the deck? May make a difference on the repair/replace equation.
To others: On fastening a beam on the house side, could posts be added to support the beam, possibly with angle braces, or is too difficult to ensure a tight fit over time? It doesn't appear the posts would interfere with the door.
-Nate
Your point is well taken, but...we hear all the time of decks failing and people being hurt--sure, it's only a deck, but what happens when you get thirty people out there dancing on it? I guess it can be fixed, but what else has been done wrong that isn't apparent? Maybe just nailed to the ledger insted of through bolted?
"I guess it can be fixed, but what else has been done wrong that isn't apparent?"I gave solutions for fixing what is there if the obvious is all that is wrong, but what you said is my concern if I were putting my professional name on this as a repair.what I've learned is that nine times out of ten surface sloppiness like this is an indication that there is other hidden sloppiness in the man's work.I still give the benefit of the doubt until I know.For instance - those 2x2 ledgers - I have to ask myself why he used those. It it because he is an old timer and that is how he has always built deck framing? Is it because he had heard that the ACQ was rusting joist hangers out and wanted to try and avoid that scenario with what he regarded as an upgrade?Or was he just trying top save a couple hundred bucks by deleting that hardware?if I had the answer to that, I could know better how he attached to the wall and how well it is flashed.or vice verse.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Question: How do you get 30 drunk Canadians to stop dancing on your deck?
Answer: Ask them to please leave the deck.
I was going to say to add blocking between the 2 x 8's but then I saw the pic of the post connection (or lack thereof) and the way the rim joists are sagging desperately each way, indicating in my mind improper connection and overloading.
The 2 x 8's are not correct for the span either and the box-frame way that it was constructed is flimsy as well. There is no firm connection from front to back or back to side.
Are you a carpenter or a homeowner part-timer?
Are you a carpenter or a homeowner part-timer?Neither. I am a retired telcom guy-I was one of the suits.
It's obviously time to outlaw decks. They're just too dangerous.
thanks, I have a file folder of collapsed decks that I added those to.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
I was just at one about 1-1/2 months ago.2nd due Engine.Go on Projo.com, Warwick, RI deck collapse.5 people seriously injured.Obviously built incorrectly by the standards in place in 1988 when it was built, never mind today. But that's just my point....After we had the victims extricated and could take a look at the attachments, A 12 ft long deck had 3 bolts total, and 12d nails, 2 every 2' or so, holding a ledger of a deck OVER another deck, through the masonite siding, no flashing. But these are all things that could have been seen, and corrected, had the right person looked at it before it fell.... It does happen all too frequently, but the fact of the matter is, no one is saying,"It'll be fine, don't worry about it" We're saying "check it out, make the necessary repairs, and move on"
Believe me, I probably take it as seriously as anyone here.......
Bing
have anything on plane crashes ...
seems about as relevant.
Jeff
Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
again ... relevant how?
If you can't do a site check and spec out a simple deck repair then get outta the business.
Jeff
Buck Construction
Artistry In Carpentry
Pittsburgh Pa
Hey,I've been traveling for the past few days and haven't had internet access. I really appreciate all of the interest and creative suggestions from you all. There have been a few issues raised that I would like to respond to and to do it I am going to suggest that anyone interested visit the website I built just for the purpose of showing my deck issues.Go here: http://web.me.com/robertframe/My_Rear_Deck/Welcome.html
nevermind - joke. I'll delete it.
Meanwhile I am starting to peruse your website.
The photo showing at ledger attachment where the gas line enters shows bad stuff to me.
They used some flashing and then ran out and no more. ( I see that this missing flashing is where the porch roof covers the deck, but requires assuming that no water will blow in, not a valid assumption in my area) There are half as many bolts holding it as what I am used to seeing, tho I work in snow country where heavier loads can be expected.
BTW, There is no need to remove the nails holding the boards to the framing. If that joint seems loose, just add screws.
Properly done footings would not be easily apparent - you would need to dig to see them.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
Sorry about not getting your joke- someday you can explain it to me.Regarding missing flashing....it is clear to me that we MUST remove deck boards and install flashing. The real snotty issue that comes with this is that the support posts for the roof rest on top of the deck boards (there are about 60 that will have to come up) as does the screening. Looks like a serious amount of work to fix this issue and I don't see any clever workarounds for this.Take a close look at how the rim joist is attached to house and how 2x10 joists "pass through" the rim joist. I can't understand what's going on here. Where do the ends of the 2x10's go and what are they attached to?? Mystery to me.
Edited 8/16/2008 4:32 pm ET by bobframe
Regarding replacing the 6x6 posts. If I was going to replace the twisting 6x6's, how would I do that? Cut them off at the concrete and put a replacement post on top? Or, yank the whole post out of the ground and pour a "proper footing", then attach the new post to that footing?
to my mind, the posts and footings are the least of the problem. Lots of ways to deal with that.But
http://web.me.com/robertframe/My_Rear_Deck/Joist_Span_Problems.html#3
This is another thing I just now see. I CANNOT FIND ANY toenails attaching the joists to t he 'beam'!!!!
The other picture on other side of beam seems to show two nails only per joist, so maybe on the other side of these...But that is only a third to a half as many as needed. You can deal with that by taking off the 2x2s and adding LUSX28 hangers.But the more I see of this, the more I would be prone to a rebuild.Again, it CAN be improved, but if you will be there all your life and not flipping this, you want it right.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
re: the toe nails, I think they nailed through from the opposite side, what seems to be the other side of that beam has toenails. Set 1 piece of the beam, nail the joists and then set the other piece of the beam then toen nail the joists. Kind of working their way down the length of the house.
My vote would be rebuild.
That would be end nailed then, not toe nailed.End nailing does not count except as a temporary way of stitching things together. toenails have far greater pullout resistance. That is why so many jurisdictions require them in floors and decksIf this is only end nailed, that is a major reason for the vibration and why that gap is showing open at the rim over the post. I see a lot of guys get by with just end nailing, then when it is loosening up 4-5 years later, adding toenails helps, but it would help more to do it right ion the first place.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
yep, I wasn't saying it was right. another thing that I don't get is when they put that worthless 2x2 under the joists they don't even place a nail or 2 close to the joist in a feeble attept to take any load.
yup- seems like the 2x2 was a really bad idea, but a situation that is fixable, no? So, if I could summarize what I've heard:1. The flashing is a problem, but fixable. The siding is Hardiplank, but we could remove a couple of courses of siding and remove the deck boards to install flashing. Would take some work and all new deck boards, but doable. Not hideously expensive.2. The 6x6 posts are toast and need to be replaced. Doable. Not hideously expensive by itself.3. The way the 2x8's are attached to the 2x10's is a problem but fixable with joist hangers. Trash the 2x2's. Not too expensive, agian by itself, but the total bill is starting to mount.4. The 2x8's 14' spans is a problem, but difficult to fix in place. Never really heard if sistering with added 2x8's or even 2x10's fixes the issue. I could rebuild the two end sections of the deck (the uncovered sections) and fix this problem. Two decks demo'd and rebuild- not cheap. Bill is getting bigger.5. The double 2x10's are undersized and not so easily fixed. My brother's solution's biggest problem is how to attach it to house, plus it looks "non standard" and could queer an effort to sell home. This issue is where I start to say given all the fixes above, it's time to quit patching and rebuild.If I am going to rebuild and my guess is I'm looking at $30,000 to do it, the big question is whether the original builder should foot some or all of the bill. Whats the best way to do this?
Ho. Le. Shiiite. Never got wind of the roof load on all of that too.
Did you ever measure the thickness of the deck boards? Part of my original point recommending rebuild was that even the decking (if 3/4" not 5/4) didn't come up to standard practice.
So the comments re: it's only a freakin' deck - no, it's roofed as well.
Even if that whole area is screened (can't tell from photo) that railing doesn't cut it either.
Jeff
Edited 8/16/2008 9:33 pm ET by Jeff_Clarke
He mentions that decking detail in his website - that it is 5/4
I did think it looked to be so. That is why I never commented on that.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
"The 2x8's 14' spans is a problem, but difficult to fix in place. Never really heard if sistering with added 2x8's or even 2x10's fixes the issue"You missed it. I and at least one other guy said that doubling those longer 2x8s would handle that bounce where they are overspanned at 14' I think I saw it as so simple and easy I did not stress the mention of it.As far as the underbeam re-inforcment, I don't think of that as atypical really.There are two ways of doing beams. One is flush set which you have now, the other is to cross over the beams with the joists and is actually more common in many places. That is what your structure would look like once you finish it.
If the attachment to house end look goofy with an extra piece of hardware there to reach up to the ledger, you could trim out the beams and the posts with painted one bye material to look more refined.For that matter, you could upgrade to IPE if you are removing the surface material. Then it would look more like this
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
You said: There are two ways of doing beams. One is flush set which you have now, the other is to cross over the beams with the joists and is actually more common in many places. That is what your structure would look like once you finish it.
If the attachment to house end look goofy with an extra piece of hardware there to reach up to the ledger, you could trim out the beams and the posts with painted one bye material to look more refined.Sorry- I don't understand this comment. Can you explain??BTW, that Ipe deck is FREAKING gorgeous. Come down here to Georgia and build me one right now!!!!Regarding decking thickness: I mic'd the decking at between .99" and 1.08". I thought this was referred to as 5/4 (kind of like calling our 1.5"x3.5" lumber "2x4's")
5/4 material doers measure out to be what yours is. the Q brought up earlier was whether it was that or not. it is, and that is thick enough. 3/4 would not have been thick enough except in IPE` which is much stronger and can span more than 16" OCwhat you did not under stand is that I was talking about trimming out your posts and the beams you add in under. Let's see if I have a picture of that sort of thing....This porch shown has a finished cieling above it, but you can get the gist of this- what finished trimmed posts and beams would look like in under the other framing. Most of these shots let you see the depth of the beamThe one titled west porch is before we started, and winter view is after finished
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
What am I seeing near the corner of the deck in this pic:View ImageIt looks like some type of metal column. Am I seeing things?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Foundation supports. This was immediately above ledge so we drilled for 1" allthread and epoxied it in, then the deck supports on a double-nut and heavy washer. The black is a PVC or ABS sleeve there to cover it for looks and to let the few inches of soil be sure to not freeze directly to it and damage the system.
The plan was to have the landscapers do shrubbery along in front of that gap and build up soils there, but that has not happened yet. I also left an option in my trim over frame there so I can slip lattice in under that with little trouble if they want to pursue that one.It is a fairly common thing here on open porches. Matter of fact, I went to look at a repair from one done about '72 the other day. The steel rod was still good, but the porch framing ( pre-PT days) had rotted around it and slipped down.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Interesting.Did this have to be engineered?What is the highest you have ever gone with one of these supports? I don't know if I've ever handled 1" all thread- I wonder at what height things would get squirelly?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
That one you see at the corner was probably the longest I have ever used, but I have seen a lot that were set four feet in the ground with soil around up to about a foot or 18" from bottom of framing.I don't do it that way when there is another story above - as you can see in the other photos I had up previously.The one I just posted showing them being installed was at the end around the corner of this house, where none of them were more than maybe 16" long free of the ledge. After building that deck, I had a thirty foot tower of pipe staging on it for the masons to rebuild a chimney top.Never had it all engineered, but it is so common here that I take from past experiences seeing where it was used. If I felt I was pushing the parameters I would get engineering.But for wobble, the load is straight down. The framing is well attached to the house. So for it to wobble, there would have ot be some lateral movement in the frame. I see potential for deflection/displacement if it were long enough so that is where an engineer would come in.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
>If I am going to rebuild and my guess is I'm looking at $30,000 to do it, the big question is whether the original builder should foot some or all of the bill. Whats the best way to do this?<
If it was me, I'd rebuild it myself and not mess with repairing it, but have you talked to the builder 1 to 1 yet? Might help to know hwat your legal standing is before you talk to him.
Have not talked to builder yet. My plan is to get some opinions first (this group's, my builder brother who's 1,000 miles away, and maybe a structural engineer's) about whether this is fixable or not. Once I am armed with that information I will contact builder. But I need to know if the fix is to repair it or rebuild it (and to really understand why that is the answer). In fact, if the answer is to repair it, I might do so without even contacting the builder- just depends on the price tag- for a couple grand I'd probably bite the bullet and do it wthout trying to hassle him.I would also like to know what my legal options are in case the answer is total rebuild and the builder is uncooperative.
The effort you put into repairs will probably come pretty close to the same effort as replacing (maybe even exceed). Material cost is what will tip your scale. Rebuilding gives you an opportunity to redesign with a blank sheet.
My personal belief is that you're somewhere near 1/2 way way through the life on your deck boards for here in GA anyway. If you don't replace the 5/4 now you'll be doing it in a few years. So the decking is 100% replacement on this job. Start throwing all the bandaids on the structure and somewhere 1/2 through that phase you'll be asking yourself why you just didn't do a whole rebuild.
You're going to have a long row to hoe talking to the builder in my cynical POV.
How long do you plan on staying in the house?
Really good points. I suspect getting the builder in the boat will not happen- not unless I can make a clear case of malfeasance/code violation (I don't think I can make this case) or if he used a different standard of construction on my deck than on other decks he built where codes required a higher standard (might be able to make this case).The deck boards do show some wear- weather related where they get full sun everyday. I suspect they'll need to be replaced in a few years.Anybody have a walking around number for new deck construction prices on a per square foot basis. Last I heard, and it was probobaly five years ago was about $20/s.f.- for PT deck.What's the scoop on synthetic materials- recommend or not?What would Ipe deck cost?Edit: We don't have a definite time frame on staying in the house, but we are discussing selling at some point-probably within five years??Edited 8/17/2008 10:25 am ET by bobframe
Edited 8/17/2008 10:26 am ET by bobframe
The only place to get a legal opinion on this is from an attorney.My own opine is that you would need a darn good trial lawyer just to keep a straight face and not be laughing. It is not something that a judge or jury would be likely to see as a failure due to negligence, just more of a inconvenience and the most damaging to your case would be the amt of time elapsed since this was built. Now - that he built something that leaks water into your basement was negligent IMO. That he failed to properly size and attach the joists was negligent also.But it gets pretty hard to educate the court and gain satisfaction.He is likely to - at the most - offer to add some toenails and kickers and a couple of added sisters to longer joists and caulk at the siding. This is still below standards, but might help it out a lot and weaken any court case you would have. and if you reject a minor fix from him, in favour of wanting the whole enchilada, he can then tell the court he tried to help you but you got cantankerous with him and rejected his fix.Fact is, a court case is a lot of ugly and aggravation for this. His biggest motivation should be to preserve his reputation.For myself, I do my callbacks with pleasure. None are ever as extensive as this is, but they always lead to other work or references to friends and neighbors while I am there. A two hour call back is a marketing opportunity for me.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
"He is likely to - at the most - offer to add some toenails and kickers and a couple of added sisters to longer joists"
I'd want to know how fat his sisters are before I'd allow them on that deck ...
Jeff
"finally, I see you mention the builder's name on your site." I didn't think I mentioned his name- I specifically did NOT intend to do so- for the reason you mentioned. I did mention his association with a homebuilders assoc- and have taken that down. Where did you see his name- I'll take it down immediately.
I do not see it now. Maybe I misinterpreted what I was reading re the builder's association
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I am curious about those PVC white elbows venting out thru the siding under this deck
http://web.me.com/robertframe/My_Rear_Deck/Flashing_Problems.html#1
You definitely have flashing problems if it is leaking when exposed to water as mentioned in text. The fix for that is not terribly hard with vinyl siding. There are zipper tools to open a joint so you can remove to repair or replace. You would need custom prebent flashing to seat in caulk if you try to do this above the deck boards without replacing them. There is also no Z-flashing at bottom of the ledger to kick water out over the siding.
I've already given my thoughts on stiffening the whole thing overall, but with a gap in knowledge about the attachment.
You could help that by adding lag screws from outside staggering them up and down within 2" of top and bottom edge of the ledger and placing them 16" OC.
That beam to ledger joint is the weirdest I have ever seen, i think.
http://web.me.com/robertframe/My_Rear_Deck/House_Attchment.html#0
That hanger is for a doubled 2x6 and as you note, at least one of the doubled 2x10s goes to the house wall, with poorly attached ledger abutting to the beam assembly.
A way to improve this joint would be to use a much larger ( taller or top-hanging) joist hanger to suspend the added underbeam your brother suggested. I might also replace that existing hanger with one made for double 2x10, and use 16d nails instead of the 1-1/2" TECO nails - or use 4" structural screws also.
One more item - looking from under at framing.
http://web.me.com/robertframe/My_Rear_Deck/Joist_Span_Problems.html#1
Where the post from railing above is bolted to the rim joist - put blocking in there back to the next joist. That post MUST be flexing that rim and the joint there when leaned against!
finally, I see you mention the builder's name on your site. Have you contacted him first about these concerns? If I have a customer who later questions my work, I appreciate every opportunity to communicate and to make things right. But I would be angered by a customer who posts complaints such as this without first giving me opportunity to show how well I can take care of things.
'course, you would never have had this problem from me at the get-go.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!