# Over-cut / bored studs in interior bearing wall, DWV



## o_m_r

I'm a new home owner who's recently become interested in DIY and homebuilding best practices,  and wondering the best way to resolve some apparent code violations after multiple contractors have done work on a structural wall during our still in progress bathroom remodel. 

The wall involved is a 2nd floor interior bearing wall consisting of 2x4 studs, 16 O.C., with 3/8" OSB sheathing.

photos:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/e3k8gf31e93tfng/7w%B6h4uTeuJezYExK%XKQ_thumb_a52c.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/g54r1flq7t630gt/UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_a554.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/icti6394dstwwbj/GNywSBlKRByrdUrYEqjkKw_thumb_a45f.jpg?dl=0

My area has not adopted Ch. 11 on of the 2012 IRC and so the 2012 UPC covers the plumbing.

Without getting into how the cuts and holes got there, although I will if asked , as shown in the photos, I’ve got 3 "successive" studs cut and/or bored beyond 2012 IRC limits. 

I plan to add 1 full height stud to the stud cut through at the far left for electrical (switch bank), toe nailing to top and bottom plates, face nailing to the original stud, gluing the narrow side to the sheathing and adding Simpson’ A35’s to reinforce the new stud to the sheathing. 

That leaves me with 2 successive studs ( 1 single and a pair of doubled studs at the edges of 2 panels meeting).

The horizontal vent line ( 1-1/2” ) is fine in the sense that I can easily install stud shoes for each penetration, as explained in the exception for 2012 IRC, Ch. 6, R602.6. 
 However, with the lower penetrations for the drainage line ( 2” ) I can’t install stud shoes on theses studs because on the single stud, the hub of the combination wye fitting will conflict with the rim of the Simpson’ HSS shoe, and the doubled studs have so much material removed that I can’t fasten all the screws. 
Beyond that, both the single and doubled studs have conditions where it might be necessary to install additional shoes or some other repair, i.e. for the empty bored hole in the single stud, and the hole being too large for a stud shoe in the doubled studs. 

  I could add a new separate stud to take the place of the single damaged stud, and have room for stud shoes for each notch of the DWV piping, and it would be 16” O.C. from the new stud I’m adding next to that first cut stud from the electrical work. However, I’m thinking I’d need to remove the drywall from other side of the wall and properly nail the sheathing to this new stud, which for obvious reasons I’d rather avoid. Unless using A35’s would be sufficient to secure the sheathing to the stud?
 For the doubled studs, I’m at a loss for what would be a sufficient repair other than completely replacing them, which would for sure require me to nail the sheathing to the new studs from the other side of the wall since these are supporting the edges of the panels. 
Adding a stud to either side of the doubled studs still leaves me with one side where the stud shoe can't be fully fastened, and no one makes a stud shoe for (4) 2x members if I tried to add studs to both sides.

I'll put nail plates over the PEX supply lines in the doubled studs, or wherever else the IRC and UPC require.

Is remove and replace the studs my only option? My best option? 

  Any advice and opinions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Francis Vineyard

I suggest checking with the official if this is a permitted project or an architect/engineer on making the repairs with heavy duty  (16 gauge) stud shoes from Simpson Strong Tie or USP in accordance with the exception to section R602.6 in the (2012) IRC.

Hope this answer will be satisfactory as I did not read beyond the 1st picture in your post.

Welcome to the BCF and maybe other members be of further assistance.


----------



## cda

welcome


----------



## mark handler

Get with a licensed design professional, Architect or Engineer
One option is to furr-out the entire wall with with bearing wood or metal studs, maybe bearing flat studs,
transfering the load into the new wall.


----------



## ICE

Second floor 3/8" OSB doesn't sound like much of a braced wall to me.  Strap the face of the studs with CS16 a foot past the damage. Use short nails.  Get some more studs where they will slip in.  Toe nail the studs.  
Conventional light framing relies on repetitive members.  If a few get knocked out, the building isn't likely to fall down around you.


----------



## o_m_r

ICE said:


> Second floor 3/8" OSB doesn't sound like much of a braced wall to me.  Strap the face of the studs with CS16 a foot past the damage. Use short nails.  Get some more studs where they will slip in.  Toe nail the studs.
> Conventional light framing relies on repetitive members.  If a few get knocked out, the building isn't likely to fall down around you.




Thank you.
To make sure I'm understanding you right, apply a length of CS16 strapping vertically along the narrow face of each damaged stud, approx. 1' beyond  each end of the damage? 

It appears to me the CS16 strapping only offers tension loads. But adding some additional studs as you suggested could compensate for compression loads I assume.
I also saw this tie that offers both compression and tension loads CTS218 Compression and Tension Strap 
and Simpson' mentions stud repair in the description but doesn't list any recognized application on studs in terms of testing/listing/codes.
I wasn't considering it because the IRC seems to only recognize shoes as a repair (other than having an engineered and approved solution), and I was worried the flange on the strap would make installing drywall an issue.


----------



## o_m_r

mark handler said:


> Get with a licensed design professional, Architect or Engineer
> One option is to furr-out the entire wall with with bearing wood or metal studs, maybe bearing flat studs,
> transfering the load into the new wall.



Thanks for the suggestion, but I'd rather consider other options than changing the depth of the wall and having to redesign the room considering what's already been installed. In that case I think I'd rather completely replace the damaged studs, i.e. rebuild that section of the wall.

I did have a licensed framing contractor assess the wall and he suggested trying stud shoes and screws in the split area to help reinforce, but suggested that in reality that he believed those were ultimately for my psychological benefit and that the wall was stable as-is barring an 8.0 type seismic event, which he suggested at that point the wall wasn't a factor considering the entire structure's resistance.

I might have a structural engineer come in as you suggest if I can't find a reasonably certain solution presented without one.

Thanks again.


----------



## o_m_r

Simpson Strong-Tie seems to interpret the IRC to limit the number of successive notched/cut/bored studs to 2, regardless if they are single or doubled: 
https://embed.widencdn.net/pdf/plus/ssttoolbox/mtsncnavbn/F-REPRPROTECT09.pdf?u=cjmyin

The IRC _could_ be interpreted to be saying the limit applies to 2 successive _doubled_ studs and that the exception pertaining to stud shoes, if approved, is an exception to to the 2 successive stud limit as well:

"*R602.6 Drilling and notching of studs.*
Drilling and notching of studs shall be in accordance with the following:
1. Notching. Any stud in an exterior wall or bearing partition shall be permitted to be cut or notched to a depth not
exceeding 25 percent of its width. Studs in nonbearing partitions shall be permitted to be notched to a depth not
to exceed 40 percent of a single stud width.
2. Drilling. Any stud shall be permitted to be bored or drilled, provided that the diameter of the resulting hole is
not more than 60 percent of the stud width, the edge of the hole is not more than 5/8 inch (16 mm) to the edge of
the stud, and the hole is not located in the same section as a cut or notch. Studs located in exterior walls or
bearing partitions drilled over 40 percent and up to 60 percent shall be doubled with not more than two
successive doubled studs bored. See Figures R602.6(1) and R602.6(2).
Exception: Use of approved stud shoes is permitted where they are installed in accordance with the
manufacturer's recommendations."
http://codes.iccsafe.org/app/book/content/2015-I-Codes/2015 IRC HTML/Chapter 6.html

I've seen multiple installations/repairs where way more than 2 studs in a row had shoes, and suggested it was approved locally.


----------



## o_m_r

I haven't been able to find any official statement, i.e.  from the ICC or AWC, etc., but I see where studs notched beyond code limits are "built up" with multiple members in numerous real world examples of conventional framing. 

Is it an understood practice that building up studs in this way effectively compensates? If so, is there any guideline or formula to determine how many studs would be needed?
I wondered if I added enough studs to the damaged studs, face nailed to each other, etc. if in reality I could effectively reinforce the structure, meeting the spirit of the prescriptions even if it didn't strictly meet the literal prescriptions?

Thanks again all,


----------



## north star

*@ = @ = @*


o_m_r,

IMO, ...I too like the idea of creating another "furred out" wall
in front of that Wood Butchery, and transfer "some \ most"
of the loads on to it........You may even consider using 4" x 4"
atypical beams, ripped down to 3.5"  x  3.5",  in place of
traditional studs, for more load bearing capacity.


*@ = @ = @*


----------



## mark handler

You have four optionsas I see it:
Get a licensed  design professional
Furr out the wall
Put plywood on the entire wall
Reframe and replumb


----------



## Francis Vineyard

After taking the time this morning to thoroughly read the OP; would it be possible to put a header above these damaged studs to remove the load and add bracing across the damage studs in place for the plumbing and sheathing support?

In all likelihood if this is in a planned development built by one or two contractors it could have this condition throughout the structure and the neighborhood with no problems until the threshold is exceeded that is below the expected minimum.


----------



## cda

Sounds like this is after the house was accepted

And owner is already having remodel work done, by someone with a big saw


----------



## tmurray

Francis Vineyard said:


> After taking the time this morning to thoroughly read the OP; would it be possible to put a header above these damaged studs to remove the load and add bracing across the damage studs in place for the plumbing and sheathing support?
> 
> In all likelihood if this is in a planned development built by one or two contractors it could have this condition throughout the structure and the neighborhood with no problems until the threshold is exceeded that is below the expected minimum.


My thoughts as well, but I don't know if the venting would allow it.


----------



## steveray

tmurray said:


> My thoughts as well, but I don't know if the venting would allow it.



Mechanical vent?

What % are the studs bored currently? I do like FV's idea of the header above and that would get you to 60% nonbearing boring......Still might require shoes though...


----------



## mark handler

steveray said:


> Mechanical venting


No Plumbing venting


----------



## steveray

mark handler said:


> No Plumbing venting



Sorry....I meant AAV or mechanical plumbing vent....


----------



## mark handler

steveray said:


> Sorry....I meant AAV or mechanical plumbing vent....


AAV  are not legal in many areas


----------



## o_m_r

Francis Vineyard said:


> After taking the time this morning to thoroughly read the OP; would it be possible to put a header above these damaged studs to remove the load and add bracing across the damage studs in place for the plumbing and sheathing support?
> 
> In all likelihood if this is in a planned development built by one or two contractors it could have this condition throughout the structure and the neighborhood with no problems until the threshold is exceeded that is below the expected minimum.




Thank you all for your input and suggestions. 

This work is not part of the original construction. Obviously the first contractor should've roughed-in the sink drainage into the floor to tie into the existing drainage and vent straight up into the roof, both as done for the original. 

I thought about a header as well. I didn’t consider it further because I’m not familiar with significance of the variables pertaining to the vent penetrating the header and the fact that the header would run through the doubled studs that are each supporting edges of a sheathing panel.   

If considering the header:

If I’m understanding the IRC correctly, the width of the house is short side? If so, the width of the *house is 29’ 4” W.* The span of the damaged studs, from the nearest full height stud to the other, not including the far left stud (cut for electrical) which will have a new full height stud essentially sistered to it and this new stud would act as a king stud, the *span is 4’ 4” maximum*.

According to *2012 IRC, Ch. 6, Table R602.7.1 Spans for minimum No. 2 grade single header, (p. 161):*
With a wall supporting a roof and ceiling, 36’ building width, and a span of 4’4”… I do not know the pitch of the roof, so I would be safe and use the 30 psf snow loading category, that then allows for *a single 2x10 Hem fir or better *(I’d use Douglas fir) *header with a 2x4 flat on the top and bottom* of the 2x10, with 1 jack stud on each end. 

The IRC allows for approved “framing anchors” to be used in lieu of jack studs to attach the single member header to each king stud, which might be preferable considering the space in the stud bays with the plumbing.
 The IRC also allows for the wall’s top plates to be used as the top flat 2x4 of the header. So, I believe the existing vent bored through the top plates could clear the 2x10, requiring only a 2” deep notch in the header bottom plate. I could install reinforcement strap/plates to both the top plates and the header bottom plate. 

1. Is it worth the trouble of building the header considering the 2” deep notch and reinforcement strap/plate at the vent penetration?
 
2. What’s the significance, if any, of the fact that the 2 sheathing panels meet at the doubled stud, which would then be underneath this header? 

3. Would I still need to expose the back of the wall (remove drywall) to nail the sheathing to the header? Which if so, would seem to negate the benefit of building the header, and it seems like I should just replace all the damaged studs, and rebuild the sections of the plumbing that conflict with installing stud shoes?


Also, just to add some more info. The wall is on a second floor of a two story house, and supports trusses that run/span the length of the house. Beyond this wall is an attached garage and a living space above, where the webbed floor joists/trusses and the roof trusses both run perpendicular to the rest of the house. Those trusses do not directly rest on this wall.

Thanks again everyone.


----------



## ICE

o_m_r said:


> Thank you all for your input and suggestions.
> 
> This work is not part of the original construction. Obviously the first contractor should've roughed-in the sink drainage into the floor to tie into the existing drainage and vent straight up into the roof, both as done for the original.
> 
> I thought about a header as well. I didn’t consider it further because I’m not familiar with significance of the variables pertaining to the vent penetrating the header and the fact that the header would run through the doubled studs that are each supporting edges of a sheathing panel.
> 
> If considering the header:
> 
> If I’m understanding the IRC correctly, the width of the house is short side? If so, the width of the *house is 29’ 4” W.* The span of the damaged studs, from the nearest full height stud to the other, not including the far left stud (cut for electrical) which will have a new full height stud essentially sistered to it and this new stud would act as a king stud, the *span is 4’ 4” maximum*.
> 
> According to *2012 IRC, Ch. 6, Table R602.7.1 Spans for minimum No. 2 grade single header, (p. 161):*
> With a wall supporting a roof and ceiling, 36’ building width, and a span of 4’4”… I do not know the pitch of the roof, so I would be safe and use the 30 psf snow loading category, that then allows for *a single 2x10 Hem fir or better *(I’d use Douglas fir) *header with a 2x4 flat on the top and bottom* of the 2x10, with 1 jack stud on each end.
> 
> The IRC allows for approved “framing anchors” to be used in lieu of jack studs to attach the single member header to each king stud, which might be preferable considering the space in the stud bays with the plumbing.
> The IRC also allows for the wall’s top plates to be used as the top flat 2x4 of the header. So, I believe the existing vent bored through the top plates could clear the 2x10, requiring only a 2” deep notch in the header bottom plate. I could install reinforcement strap/plates to both the top plates and the header bottom plate.
> 
> 1. Is it worth the trouble of building the header considering the 2” deep notch and reinforcement strap/plate at the vent penetration?
> 
> 2. What’s the significance, if any, of the fact that the 2 sheathing panels meet at the doubled stud, which would then be underneath this header?
> 
> 3. Would I still need to expose the back of the wall (remove drywall) to nail the sheathing to the header? Which if so, would seem to negate the benefit of building the header, and it seems like I should just replace all the damaged studs, and rebuild the sections of the plumbing that conflict with installing stud shoes?
> 
> 
> Also, just to add some more info. The wall is on a second floor of a two story house, and supports trusses that run/span the length of the house. Beyond this wall is an attached garage and a living space above, where the webbed floor joists/trusses and the roof trusses both run perpendicular to the rest of the house. *Those trusses do not directly rest on this wall.*
> 
> Thanks again everyone.



No harm, no foul


----------



## o_m_r

mark handler said:


> You have four optionsas I see it:
> Get a licensed  design professional
> Furr out the wall
> Put plywood on the entire wall
> Reframe and replumb



Thanks Mark.
I hadn't considered adding sheathing to the exposed side of the wall. That's interesting and possibly acceptable in terms of the design compared to furring out the wall. Hmm...

Unless there are clear advantages or even clearly no loss of structural integrity by building the header, I think rebuilding and re-plumbing where necessary might be my best option.


----------



## Pcinspector1

Mark's suggestion of applying sheeting if nailed properly would be a good fix IMO, be careful with the fasteners and added stud guards if you can.


----------



## cda

o_m_r said:


> Thanks Mark.
> I hadn't considered adding sheathing to the exposed side of the wall. That's interesting and possibly acceptable in terms of the design compared to furring out the wall. Hmm...
> 
> Unless there are clear advantages or even clearly no loss of structural integrity by building the header, I think rebuilding and re-plumbing where necessary might be my best option.




think rebuilding and re-plumbing where necessary might be my best option.

Not a plumber or carpenter

Can you cut just the black pipe.

Ad one or two 2x4 on one side or both

Replumb  black pipe


----------



## Keystone

Here's what I do not understand, do plumbers in your area get paid by the lineal foot and fitting. The drain height is offset from the 1st Tee, why not stack another Tee immediately atop of the 1st Tee and come off with just an arm then eliminate the additional overhead vent arm. Not trying to add confusion to the situation buttttttttt.


----------



## o_m_r

Keystone said:


> Here's what I do not understand, do plumbers in your area get paid by the lineal foot and fitting. The drain height is offset from the 1st Tee, why not stack another Tee immediately atop of the 1st Tee and come off with just an arm then eliminate the additional overhead vent arm. Not trying to add confusion to the situation buttttttttt.



It's my understanding the venting is proper. 
I could be mistaken, but I thought the licensed plumber that did the rebuild of the DWV said you couldn't stack sanitary tees, but I can't find that in the 2012 UPC. I believe that's why they used a combination wye, but I might not be understanding the code correctly. A tee there would've allowed me to fit a stud shoe at that single stud penetration, but ultimately with the leftover bored hole from the first plumbing attempt, that stud still needs either multiple shoes or another solution.
The drainage section of the added sink was actually rebuilt a 3rd time due to a lack of, or negative pitch in that section of the horizontal drainage line. That was a quick fix job and why it resulted in the trap arm being placed quite a bit higher than the other. My sinks are shallow so they won't conflict.

Here's a photo of the first attempt. As I understand it, it was not code because of improper venting, the use of 1-1/2" tubing vs 2" for the drainage line, and the use of "stacking" the tees...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7bf43abm3wdep5g/IMG_1196.jpg?dl=0


----------



## o_m_r

cda said:


> think rebuilding and re-plumbing where necessary might be my best option.
> 
> Not a plumber or carpenter
> 
> Can you cut just the black pipe.
> 
> Ad one or two 2x4 on one side or both
> 
> Replumb  black pipe




Yes and no. Can definitely replace the ABS sections if needed. But simply putting in 2x4's that will also be penetrated wouldn't really solve anything. Studs notched/bored to that extent, even doubled. still require shoes according to IRC unless an actually engineered solution. 
I'm assuming without an engineer or similar giving the okay, sistering more studs doesn't necessarily fix the issue. 

Technically, and to meet code as it's worded, I should be able to add notched studs to the existing penetrated ones, and then put heavy duty (meaning compression and tension load rated) stud shoes over the penetrations, but as far as I understand the plumbing requirements, I can't change the combination wye fitting so that I could fit a shoe over that stud (hub/collar of fitting conflicts with shoe opening), and the doubled studs need a new stud on each side to give me enough material to screw into, and no one makes a (4) 2x stud shoe.

I should be able to add a single or even doubled notched stud/s to the right of the single penetrated one and add the shoes fairly easily, and in a way that makes the single penetrated stud necessary (16 O.C. to a new sistered stud to the far left stud cut for electrical, and unattached to the single penetrated stud), but the doubled studs are where I'm sc###ed.


----------



## Keystone

The drain and vent as installed is code compliant, it is a more thorough method and likely required by your jurisdiction.  Frankly, it's been some time since I've seen work like this, anytime I have its from plumbers who are not from this area.


----------



## Keystone

Yes, the first plumbing attempt is a failed inspection. Vent below trap weir. Ironically enough, I failed the same attempt on a commercial job today..


----------



## Keystone

So are you guesstimating on your own or speaking with the local inspector about your proposed repair? A call to them may take the guesstimating out of the equation...

We may be able to make judgement calls in this scenario however there are factors at play, how far from a corner or interior braced wall, window, total length of wall area, why the double stud is there, wind zone, seismic zone, etc.... Code complaint repair may be better left to your local official.


----------



## o_m_r

Keystone said:


> So are you guesstimating on your own or speaking with the local inspector about your proposed repair? A call to them may take the guesstimating out of the equation...
> 
> We may be able to make judgement calls in this scenario however there are factors at play, how far from a corner or interior braced wall, window, total length of wall area, why the double stud is there, wind zone, seismic zone, etc.... Code complaint repair may be better left to your local official.



Thanks for the replies. 
Long story, but this part has not been discussed with the building dept. A few licensed either general or framing contractors have looked at it but I still had questions.
A lot of those parameters are detailed elsewhere in the thread, but of course I agree factoring the complete context of the structure is the best practice ideally. So I'm just trying to see how I can get it as close to the original structure as possible.


----------



## ICE

I’ve not seen a guest post before now.  Did I just not notice or is this something new? There is no content and the spam button is not there.


----------



## classicT

ICE said:


> I’ve not seen a guest post before now.  Did I just not notice or is this something new? There is no content and the spam button is not there.


Yup, that's new.


----------



## jar546

ICE said:


> I’ve not seen a guest post before now.  Did I just not notice or is this something new? There is no content and the spam button is not there.


I deleted that person a day ago or so to the spam but they may have been in the middle of posting when I sent them off.  I deleted the post.


----------

