# TJI and blocking



## jar546 (Feb 1, 2011)

Is the blocking correct if there is a load bearing wall above?


----------



## MarkRandall (Feb 1, 2011)

Looks correct to me.

See: http://www.ilevel.com/literature/TJ-4000.pdf


----------



## Mac (Feb 1, 2011)

Ummm....  yes, looks OK to me.

And the clinched nail method of attaching the 2X to the steel girder.


----------



## Code Neophyte (Feb 1, 2011)

Mac said:
			
		

> And the clinched nail method of attaching the 2X to the steel girder.


That's every bit as good as the jack posts the beam is probably sitting on without _any_ mechanical attachment (They're going to come back and do that, though - just haven't gotten around to it yet!!!!)


----------



## jar546 (Feb 1, 2011)

Would your answers be the same if that was also a flush splice point for the joists that were butt ended together under that bearing wall?


----------



## Code Neophyte (Feb 1, 2011)

It would not.  Joists would then require lateral restraint at the _ends_


----------



## Uncle Bob (Feb 1, 2011)

Where I worked; blocking was from (between) TJI to TJI; not 2 bys nailed to the floor and top plate. Since it is engineered wood, a TJI layout should be furnished and the blocking indicated on the layout; per manufacturer's specifications and installation instructions.

Your opinion and/or the contractor's opinion is not an amendment to the codes.

Without the manufacturer's layout and specifications the installation automatically fails.

However, the way things are going; I see a future; where remodeling contractors; using engineered wood; will weaken the the code requirements; because they are buying the products and using them "at their own discretion"; and, the majority of inspectors have no training in inspecting these products.

And, AHJs will bend to the will of the contractors, ( " I'm just using one LVL and two TJIs and you want a manufacturer's layout and spec sheet"). Now, you've got the idea Mr. Holmes.  

Uncle Bob


----------



## mn joe (Feb 1, 2011)

Both TJI and BCI (Boise Cascade) show this application in their respective application manuals.  The squash blocks must be 1/16th inch longer than the I-joist, with the excess length at the top.  The wall above must be centered over the wall below.

Joe


----------



## Uncle Bob (Feb 1, 2011)

Oh, squash blocking, ok;  I've been away from this stuff too long.

Uncle Bob


----------



## jar546 (Feb 1, 2011)

http://www.gp.com/build/DocumentViewer.aspx?repository=BP&elementid=4815

Figure F9 for butt end joints GP


----------



## Mark K (Feb 1, 2011)

The joist need lateral support at all bearing supports not just at the end.

If there is a bearing wall above and the studs and posts do not rest on top of the squash blocking does the plywood support the loads?


----------



## GHRoberts (Feb 2, 2011)

Some people might think the load bearing wall above will provide lateral restraint.

Others might think the sheathing is sufficient.

While I block the ends of my joists, it is more of a construction aid than an engineered requirement.


----------



## Mark K (Feb 2, 2011)

The default position in the code is that blocking provides the lateral restraint.  Whether the diaphragm is capable of providing the necessary restraint is situational and should typically require engineering involvement.

The load bearing wall above could actually increase the need for lateral restraint.  The ability of the load beaing wall to provide restraint would be dependent on the configuration and other elements of the construction.  Again the IRC is a "simple" code that does not deal with this situation.


----------



## mn joe (Feb 2, 2011)

Since we are dealing with an engineered product, shouldn't we defer to the manufacturer's installation instructions?  I think that the entire floor system is engineered when installed as the I joist manufacturer specifies.

Joe


----------

