Thread: Proper Roof Support?

This just doesn't look properly supported to me. The horizontal beam that supports both the rafters of the main roof and those of a lower, sloped roof section has a span of about 10 feet. It is nailed into the end rafters. That's it for support.

Wouldn't you think this should have some vertical supports running under that horizontal span?

Similar Threads:

• Proper Wine Storage
• Front Porch Roof Support
• Code reference for b-vent support
• Is this proper
• Joist support

Originally Posted by Brent Crouse

Wouldn't you think this should have some vertical supports running under that horizontal span?

Absolutely YES!

Which is probably why it looks like it is sagging toward its center.

However, keep in mind that the support would need to go to a bearing wall, not to the ceiling joists.

Thanks Jerry,

It just didn't look right to me. Also, there was about a half inch gap between this horizontal beam (sorry, I don't know the correct name of this beam) and the rafter it is attached to. You can see about 4 or 5 nails in the gap.

I showed this to the buyer, and recommended additional vertical support in my report.

I guess this roof has just been lucky we're in GA where we don't have to worry about snow accumulating on the roof.

Brent

There is an alternative, but it would not be any easier than supporting it.

They may have to double, maybe even triple, that header, and then they would need to double, maybe even triple, the rafters the doubled or tripled header ends are attached to, or maybe provide support to a bearing wall at the ends of the header.

Regardless, that needs work and, for your clients protection, it needs a structural engineer to "design appropriate repairs, inspect the repairs, then issue an engineer's letter stating that the repairs were complete in accordance with the design".

This house is 14 years old. The current owner is not the original owner.

How did this pass original builder inspection, and subsequent inspections? Did the original house plans reflect this design, or did the framers screw up?

Makes you wonder who dropped the ball.

Brent, get used to it. You will have days that you just have to stand back and wonder "what were they thinking?"
Or for some here "WTF?"

Brent: The cut in to the rafter system shows a single header supporting the shed roof back in the shadows, This is definitly an example of poor construction and was either done by an owner builder who never got a permit or a developer that paid off a lazy inspector. To alliviate your concerns; what you would like to see here is a double or triple rafter on the left and right side of the opening and then a double or triple header supporting the shed roof rafters. This would be similar to building a dormer in a rafter roof system. Secondly in the 10 foot opening a vertical support down to a bearing portion of the house frame would be additional insurance that this assemby would not sag in the event of a heavy wet snow.
Doug

Thanks guys!!! Appreciate your input on this.

Originally Posted by Douglas Dewitz

This is definitly an example of poor construction and was either done by an owner builder who never got a permit or a developer that paid off a lazy inspector.

Douglas,

"This is definitly an example of ... or a developer that paid off a lazy inspector"

That is a big and bold statement with no supporting documentation.

Those types of comments show an unprofessional attitude toward municipal inspectors - one which is not deserved. That would be like a roofer/contractor/electrician/HVAC/etc. person saying 'This is definitly an example of ... a seller that paid off a lazy home inspector".

I echo EC Jerry’s opinion regarding jurisdictional inspectors, which has come from years of providing training seminars plus teaching building code classes to both novices and long time inspectors. If I’ve learned one thing its this; the vast majority are well meaning folks who really want to provide the best possible service they can and being that most jurisdictions keep them on a short leash (one year probationary hire) from the date they are hired they have every reason to perform well. The major cause for missing significant construction defects is lack of knowledge followed by lack of TOT. (time over target) When the construction market is hot many are handed 25 to 30 inspections when they show up for work in the morning and they cannot afford the luxury of checking what went on before they appeared on the job or examine any items not on their inspection call list. They just don’t have the time to look at stuff they have not been sent out to inspect, which I call it the “blinders syndrome” and almost every jurisdiction I’ve been associated with has suffered from that malady to some extent. Yes, there are bad jurisdictional inspectors just like there are bad home inspectors, plumbers, HVAC people and any trade of profession folks you can name.
Please don’t look at every construction defect you discover as a “blown call” by the local city or county building inspector as there’s a good chance they never had the opportunity to see it.

Thanks to Jerry & Jerry for taking up for us little guys! As a municipal electrical inspector, I mainly concentrate on just electrical. However, (plus I'm working towards my combination certification) if I do notice anything "squirrely" I do try to make note of it and refer to a building inspector. We're a small department and try to look out for one another as best we can, and no one here has the "Big Head Syndrome", we try to work with everyone from owner builders to general contractors as well as subs. I do understand though how a few "bad apples" can give all inspectors a bad name, whether it's deserved or not. It's hard to break the stigma as bad guy, I just wish that people could hear about the times the inspectors made a good call, not just the bad ones.


Oh by the way, what the heck am I doing over here looking at proper roof support anyway? Gathering information to better myself as an inspector thats what. Early bird catches the worm, know what I mean?

The horizontaL menber would be call a ridge beam. Typically a beam of this type would be at least one or two sizes larger than the rafter sizer. This beam may have to be double if the area below does not offer a correct bearing point below for the span of this beam. Proper joist hanger should have been installed at each end. Happy attic crawling.

Originally Posted by Brad Peterson

The horizontaL menber would be call a ridge beam.

Brad,

First, welcome to THE inspectors board.

Second ... why would you call that a "ridge beam" when it is not serving as a ridge beam, and the loads imposed upon it are not the same as the loads imposed on a ridge beam?

Curious to understand why you would call it a ridge beam.

Originally Posted by Jerry McCarthy

Please don’t look at every construction defect you discover as a “blown call” by the local city or county building inspector as there’s a good chance they never had the opportunity to see it.

Ditto. On large homes I work with a second inspector whom I consider to be top drawer. On virtually every one of those jobs, one of us will see something that the other missed. I'm convinced that it's a fact of H.I. life.

We each know how much we hate hearing about someone saying "your home inspector should have caught that." I think that a professional approach would give the benefit of doubt to the other party - I'd certainly appreciate it if I was on the receiving end. Slamming and condemning someone without knowing all the details can diminish the image others have of you and may make the other guy undeservingly look foolish.

I know, sometimes your instinct doesn't want to take the high road and you'd get much more pleasure in going for the jugular.