Unconventional roof support

Jon mackay · 03-18-2011, 06:18 AM

Is there anything that would state the requirements for this type of installation?

I don't know how to report on it other than to have a structural engineer go in and take a look..

Has anyone run into this before?

Similar Threads:

**John Kogel** · 03-18-2011, 06:37 AM

Its kind of ugly, but there's no sign of failure.
If you need to CYA, do that, call for a structural engineer, or ask the seller to produce a permit for it.
I'd tell them to keep it painted, or replace it with a nice post on a pier block.

**Billy Stephens** · 03-18-2011, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by John Kogel

.
Its kind of ugly, but there's no sign of failure.
.

.
Except in The Roof Covering.

( as shown in Photo #4)
.

**Randy Mayo** · 03-18-2011, 08:57 AM

Jon

The devil is in the details when checking the design of something like this you have to check every component and determine the weakest link:

1.) pull-out capacity of the porch roof connection
2.) tension capacity of the turn buckle
3.) tension capacity of the rod
4.) pull-out capacity of the connection the attic

Plus this configuration will introduce a new force that is pushing into the front wall of the house where the porch is attached.

**Markus Keller** · 03-18-2011, 10:59 AM

No sign of failure? Pic 2 seems to show the original sign of failure. That may be why they put the steel in.
Beyond that I agree with Randy. Load transfers the walls, soffits and roof have been changed outside of original construction design.
CYA, Arch or SE referral

Jon mackay · 03-18-2011, 11:05 AM

My thought was that the only way to verify the installation would be to have the original plans and specifications in hand since it is not a common installation.

I was going to recommend review by an engineer just so they can check all the components involved.

**Rolland Pruner** · 03-18-2011, 05:58 PM

Hope you report leaking also!

chris mcintyre · 03-18-2011, 06:06 PM

Even if it was designed by an engineer and installed according to specs there is water penetrating around the eye bolt which is causing damage to the rafters/blocking, which is a problem. I'm guessing no SE is going to say everything is ok even if you had the original plans and specs.

**John Kogel** · 03-18-2011, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
Except in The Roof Covering.

( as shown in Photo #4)
.

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

No sign of failure? Pic 2 seems to show the original sign of failure. That may be why they put the steel in.

I knew that comment would draw flak.

The failure of the roof in pic 4 is up on the main roof. Not the porch.
The sinking post is on the left side, not the right. So yeah, maybe it needs 2 hangers, but it would still be ugly.

Originally Posted by chris mcintyre

Even if it was designed by an engineer and installed according to specs there is water penetrating around the eye bolt which is causing damage to the rafters/blocking, which is a problem. I'm guessing no SE is going to say everything is ok even if you had the original plans and specs.

The failure of the roof is up on the main roof. Not the porch.
There's no access to the attic of the porch roof, so we don't know if it's leaking. I'd note that in the report.

**H.G. Watson, Sr.** · 03-19-2011, 08:48 AM

Makes for a nice lightening attractor.

Not a proper method. DIY tree-surgeon type approach employed - No Good, whether supposed to support overhang or an attempt to straighten/plumb gable wall lean/failure. Suspect there is more (or rather less) going on behind the stacked matter. Definately defer to an engineer for evaluation of the wall, integrity of the chimney & its founation, review of roof superstructure/attic not just the porch/overhang projection.