Thread: Framing Questions

1) Do you all comment on the cut ends of rafters being larger than the ridge board, and gaps between the rafter ends and ridge board? (1st and 3rd pictures).

2) For picture 2, would you agree the hip rafters are not bearing properly on the hip board?

Thanks!

b

Yes, this should be reported
Good call

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Yes, this should be reported
Good call

would u recommend a structural engineer or just a framer?

Originally Posted by brianmiller

would u recommend a structural engineer or just a framer?

Unlikely that an engineer is needed.
A framer could be anyone with a hammer
So
A licensed and qualified contractor.

This is why the ridge beam is supposed to be 1 size larger than the rafters. Once the rafters are cut at an angle, and their length thereby increased, you need the larger ridge to provide full support. I write it up every time.
It makes for an especially nice write up when the framer shot too many nails into the rafter too close to the edge and the unsupported end is split.
I've had developers just go ahead and fix it, supposedly because they realized they screwed up. I've had other developers balk and then get screwed when they finally provided the Plans that showed the larger ridge beam

wood butchery at it's best right there. How did that crap pass the AHJ inspections? Rafters are also required to be framed directly opposing each other.

Shouldn't there be rafter hangars attached to those rafters?

Could someone explain the first pic to me? What think I see is not a ridge board or hip, but some kind of continuation of the rafters; it looks like the left and right are on the same plane. Am I correct or merely confused?

Originally Posted by Gunnar Alquist

Could someone explain the first pic to me? What think I see is not a ridge board or hip, but some kind of continuation of the rafters; it looks like the left and right are on the same plane. Am I correct or merely confused?

The center photo looks like a ridge board, however, as you point out, the first and third photos look like the roofing is on the same plane.

A couple of possibilities come to mind:
- a) the roof was restructured when an addition was added
- b) a design change was made during construction and the roof reconfigured
- c) the rafter runs are long and someone thought they could install a mid-span beam for shorter rafters because they could not find lumber long enough

c) could work if that piece was actually constructed as a beam and supported at each end and at intermediate locations as needed for the span of the size of the beam

a) & b) would be a bit more tricky to explain and do properly

Originally Posted by brian schmitt

How did that crap pass the AHJ inspections?

Not sure about other areas but around here city inspectors rarely, if ever, get on ladders. Attic framing is pretty much the wild west of home construction.

Hi Jerry,

Thanks for confirming my thoughts. Pic #3 was weird, but I thought it might be the angle at which it was taken. Now that I look at it again, I see that you are right and it does look like the same plane. When I have seen stuff like this, the roof surface deflected when walked-on because that header (or whatever it is supposed to be) was not properly supported. Imagine that!

Originally Posted by Matt Fellman

Not sure about other areas but around here city inspectors rarely, if ever, get on ladders. Attic framing is pretty much the wild west of home construction.

Framing, whether roof/ceiling, ceiling/floor, or wall framing should all be visible at the time of inspection without a ladder.

The sequence of inspections is (usually): mechanical duct rough (and condensate drain line); plumbing rough (DWV and supply leak test is sometimes done before the rough for the installation); electrical rough; framing rough is last because the other trades have a tendency to cut framing up and out of the way without consideration of what they are actually cutting away.

It is not uncommon to find that plumber contractors and then mechanical contractors tend to cut important big stuff because it is in the way of their stuff.

Mechanical duct work is usually the system with largest components being installed (the duct work) and, if not using flexible duct, those largest components are not very flexible on where they can be routed.

Plumbers piping is no where near as large as the duct work, but it is less flexible on where it can be routed as the DWV piping cannot just be bent and hung over or around structural framing. If a tub, shower, or toilet is supposed to go where there is a floor truss or floor joist ... too bad ... the truss or joist is simply cut away. Plumbers say they have no choice, but they do - just like the mechanical contractor has a choice: before cutting something contact the builder/supt/someone in charge and help work the problem out - do not just cut things out of the way.

The electrical contractors have the most flexibility in routing their stuff, even in locating their stuff. A box for a receptacle or a light needs to go where there is a stud or a truss/joist, typically there is no problem with installing the box right next to the stud or truss/joist.

The plumbing codes state *not to cut* things, as does the mechanical code, and if things need to be altered, cut/notched/drilled, the building code limitations *shall be followed*, i.e., if the plumber cuts it the plumber should pay for the repair - if they cut it without checking with the builder and working out what they can and cannot cut. Same for the mechanical contractors. The same applies to the electrical contractors but they seldom have to cut things, and for the most part the holes they drill are relatively small compared to the lumber sizes.

After all the trades have installed their systems, then the framing inspection can be done. If the framing inspection is done first ... there could very well be surprises which are found later on - and which are much more expensive to correct 'later' then would have been if found earlier in the construction process.