Thread: Modified Trusses?

I saw a few items on some trusses in an attic yesterday. Nail plates that looked too small, some truss members not properly connected and twisted apart from nail plate, and a missing nail plate. But the vertical sections of some of the trusses had what I can only describe as remnants of cut truss members. When I lined up the angles of the remnants to the areas they point, there was nothing on any of the other truss sections to indicate these remnants were connected to anything else at any point in time. No nail plate marks and no other cut areas.

Thoughts?

Similar Threads:

• Cut trusses
• medieval trusses
• ranch trusses
• Metal to modified bitumen roof.
• Trusses

These are probably truss parts that the truss company screwed up and decided to cut them up and use on another set of trusses. It's easier to cut off the 2X than tear the pressed metal plates off.

Another thing I learned this past week while attending a conference was that the larger plates on trusses are for load bearing and the smaller ones are just connectors from 2X to 2X.

You might see this more on floor joist trusses than roof trusses.

Originally Posted by Wayne Carlisle

These are probably truss parts that the truss company screwed up and decided to cut them up and use on another set of trusses. It's easier to cut off the 2X than tear the pressed metal plates off.

I would have never come up with this, but it makes a lot of sense. Those pieces look to be at about the right angle for this center post to have originally been a bottom chord.

If this is the case, I would have never accepted these trusses, wouldn't want to have to explain it every time someone went in the attic.

Also I'm just curious, how old was this house, mid 80's?

I was leaning towards what you said Wayne. There just wasn't anything else present on the other attic trusses to indicate these left-overs served any role in the attic structure of this house.

Chris, the house is 7-8 years old.

I'm thinking the trusses originally were designed with a scissors type cathedral ceiling on one side and were modified for a flat ceiling all the way across. That would also account for not other visible point of attachment as those would have gone out to the wall bearing points.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Chris, the house is 7-8 years old.

Thanks Nick, plywood sheathing faded away in the mid 80's around here, I just didn't know about other areas.

Wow, be sure to flag this finding. It looks like the roof was raised on-site, which required bebuilding of the truss. One thing that I noted is that the new rafters appears to be 2 X 4s while the former ones were 2 X 6s. Granted, a steeper roof pitch might allow smaller lumber; but it might also not, particularly if it is a long span. Rebuilding of the truss could also void warranties or affect insurability. Given the state of some of the joints, I also have to wonder about the craftsmanship of the builder.

Originally Posted by Matthew Klein

One thing that I noted is that the new rafters appears to be 2 X 4s while the former ones were 2 X 6s.

Matthew,

Those 2X4s you are referring to should be called 'top chords' rather than rafters (because they are part of a truss).