Beam Attachment to Column - InspectionNews

Joseph P. Hagarty · #1 (**permalink**) 07-14-2008, 12:38 PM

Steel I-Beam as the Main Beam... Steel Column under the Main Beam.

Column cap is secured by folding the tabs around the underside of the I-Beam. No bolts or other means of fastening.

Is this Ok???

Looking for a Code reference either way....

Thanks,

Nick Ostrowski · #2 (**permalink**) 07-14-2008, 12:44 PM

Joe, any welding on those tabs or were they just folded?

Joseph P. Hagarty · #3 (**permalink**) 07-14-2008, 01:57 PM

Hammered and bent. No weld...

Jerry Peck · #4 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 08:49 AM

Joe,

I would say that would fall under "engineering" and would need to be addressed by a structural engineer.

My guess is that they will require either drilling and bolting or welding, and, at this point (having been bent and folded over (most likely cold, not heated) that metal may have metal fatigue started, so cutting those off and welding from the bottom, or bolting, or both, may be the outcome.

Brandon Chew can address it best.

Joseph P. Hagarty · #5 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 11:12 AM

Jerry,

Thanks for the reply. We are working with an Architect Consultant (Retired) currently on Staff.
He confirmed that the install is improper as the lack of attachment does not prevent lateral movement. Bending / Hammering the tabs over is acceptable for Temporarily holding the beam but a final attachment (welding or bolting) is necessary. Unfortunately, he has recently moved into his new home and has been unable to unpack all of his books to cite a specific code reference.

The end result may be that the Local Building Inspector / AHJ has (reportedly) approved the current installation.

The deficiency was noted in the course of the Phase Inspections and was still present at time of Final Inspection.

Thanks for assistance....

Jerry Peck · #6 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 11:36 AM

I don't know that the code specifically addresses that attachment (as to how), that's an engineering issue.

Joseph P. Hagarty · #7 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I don't know that the code specifically addresses that attachment (as to how), that's an engineering issue.

That seems to be the answer that I am getting from various sources. If approved by the AHJ, the attachment is deemed acceptable...

Jerry Peck · #8 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph P. Hagarty

If approved by the AHJ, the attachment is deemed acceptable...

Joe,

Not really.

"If approved by the AHJ ... "

You mean if they *specifically* "approved" that in writing? Yeah, then it would be deemed acceptable, whether it was or not.

You mean because they sign the permit card inspection off? Does not mean diddly squat.

Well, okay, it does mean one thing, but one thing *only*: All that means is 'what I looked at, I did not see much wrong with it' - which is a lot different than saying 'I looked at everything and it was all correct', and certainly not the same as saying 'I looked at that column/beam connection and it looked hunky-dory to me'.

Darren Miller · #9 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 06:22 AM

In NJ:

R502.9 Fastening. Floor framing shall be nailed in accordance with table R602.3(1). Where posts and beam or girder construction is used to support floor framing, positive connections shall be provided to ensure against uplift & lateral displacement.

Tabs bent over do not provide against lateral displacement.

Jerry Peck · #10 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darren Miller

In NJ:

R502.9 Fastening.

Darren,

I found that too, but it does not apply.

SECTION R502
- WOOD FLOOR FRAMING
- - R502.1 Identification.

That is for "wood".

Nonetheless, any reasonable person would say 'But ... but ... there has to be some attachment to resist lateral forces.", yeah, they are right too, but where in the code does it address that?

Gets back to "engineering".

Darren Miller · #11 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 07:01 AM

Jerry,

In my opinion your mis-reading the section. It says nothing about wood beams or wood columns; it's referring to wood floors.

"Where posts and beam or girder construction is used to support floor framing,"

Anything that supports the wood floor needs positive connections.

Jim Luttrall · #12 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 07:17 AM

Kind of loose, but R301.1 Design criteria could be used in a general argument, but you would have to demonstrate that the connection did not meet the requirement (which I don't think you could do).
Buildings and structures, and all parts thereof, shall be constructed to safely support all loads, including dead loads, live loads, roof loads, flood loads, snow loads, wind loads and seismic loads as prescribed by this code. The construction of buildings and structures shall result in a system that provides a complete load path capable of transferring all loads from their point of origin through the load-resisting elements to the foundation.

Jim Luttrall · #13 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 07:28 AM

Darren, got to agree with Jerry on this one, section 502 is Wood Floor Framing, so everything in the section following will reference wood. Section 505 is for steel floor framing.

How about? R505.3.5 Cutting and notching. Flanges and lips of load bearing steel floor framing members shall not be cut or notched.

From the description of the attachment in question, it sounds like the I beam flange was cut in order to wrap it around the other beam which would be prohibited.

Jerry Peck · #14 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 10:02 AM

Jim,

I'm envisioning it as the beam was not cut or notched, only that the flange (bearing plate) on top of the column was large enough to be bent up and over the bottom flange of the beam.

Maybe Joe will clear that up for us?

Joseph P. Hagarty · #15 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Jim,

I'm envisioning it as the beam was not cut or notched, only that the flange (bearing plate) on top of the column was large enough to be bent up and over the bottom flange of the beam.

Maybe Joe will clear that up for us?

Jerry,

As you described. The beam was not cut / notched. Tabs were of a length long enough to be hammered / peened over and around.

No bolting or welding in place.

Brandon Chew · #16 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 02:19 PM

I'm envisioning a column that looks something like this one.

The bottom plate gets set upon a footing and, after installation, the adjustment screw gets embedded in the concrete slab.

These columns usually come with different cap plates, depending upon whether you want to use the column to support a steel or wood girder and what kind of connection is required. Connections to steel beams could be clipped, welded, or bolted. Connections to wood beams could be made with nails or lag bolts. Here's a link to some diagrams of typical cap plates.

Quality Manufacturing INC., manufacturer of the ADJUSTA-COLUMN. Telescopic basement posts, lolly columns, jack posts, and basement columns.

I suspect the column that Joseph is dealing with has an H cap. The ears are hammered and bent around the bottom flange of the I beam. If the ears are bent to tightly grip the flange, they COULD provide sufficient restraint against lateral displacement without additional bolts or welding, but it depends upon what the expected lateral design loads are for the specific installation.

The connection of the column to the girder is the responsibility of the registered design professional. The column manufacturers installation instructions and ICC-ES reports defer to the designer and what will be accepted by the building official. The designer could say that clips are sufficient or specify welding or bolts.

The code is not as clear as it could be on this subject.

IRC R407.3 requires restraint at the bottom ends of columns. There is an exception for certain columns less than 48 inches high provided other conditions are met. It doesn't say anything about restraint at the top end.

Jerry's point about the section is noted but I think R502.9 provides the clearest reference to the situation at hand. There is no similar reference to the connection between columns and girders in the steel floor framing section. Jim's point about R301.1 is a good one and it does apply, but one would probably need to be a registered design professional to make a convincing argument that the H-clip alone is either ok or not ok in a given situation.

Regarding the applicability of 502.9 in the "wood floor framing" section to columns and girders made of wood or steel, this would not be the first time that the code crossed over into other sections. For example, the nailing schedules for floor framing and roof framing are in the section on wall framing.

Bottom line, the physics does not care if the column and girder supporting the floor framing are made out of wood or steel. The top end needs a positive connection to the girder. How strong and what type of connection falls on the shoulders of the building designer, and the building official has the final say on the CO.