# Might need some let-in bracing or blocking? Maybe a few more jack studs?



## Fortner (May 14, 2010)

Load wall with two floors on it. I would have used 2 X 6's, but you know, that's just me. I don't know how this passed rough. I have no idea. The only straight ones are "braced" by the panel.

View attachment 1344


View attachment 1345


View attachment 1346


View attachment 1344


View attachment 1345


View attachment 1346


/monthly_2010_05/framing1.jpg.cb1b616685c63bdd215459d7f0139216.jpg

/monthly_2010_05/framing2.jpg.5df41c14a544f803d771bc5eabce7898.jpg

/monthly_2010_05/framing3.jpg.92c220c641cf4c563ec814a0854045cb.jpg


----------



## Glennman CBO (May 14, 2010)

It almost looks like the studs were too long, lol.


----------



## Mule (May 14, 2010)

Fortner said:
			
		

> I don't know how this passed rough. I have no idea.


The thing about it....what section of the code would you cite?

Hump in slab....?? Studs too long...???


----------



## rshuey (May 14, 2010)

Fortner said:
			
		

> *Load wall *with two floors on it. I would have used 2 X 6's, but you know, that's just me. I don't know how this passed rough. I have no idea. The only straight ones are "braced" by the panel.


Load wall? Doesn't look like it.


----------



## Fortner (May 14, 2010)

Mule said:
			
		

> The thing about it....what section of the code would you cite?Hump in slab....?? Studs too long...???


Table R602.3(5)?

Table R502.5(2)?


----------



## smeismer (May 14, 2010)

You could cite R602.4 (2006 code) which refers to exterior walls cited in R602.3, which in turn cites the AF&PA NDS.  Now the AF&PA NDS section 3.7.1(2001 ed) sets a max L/D at 50.  50x1.5=75" , so, at least after construction, these walls need to be faced, or laterally braced.  There is also a formula for load which is obviously being exceeded.  The contractor could argue that during construction max L/D is 75 which would allow an unbraced 2x to be 9'4.5", but I think that once this wall is under load, it is hard to argue that it is under construction.


----------



## Mule (May 14, 2010)

Load wall with two floors. No roof!!!

Table R602.3(5) The only thing I see in 602.3 (5) is ..... What is the wall actually supporting? Is the wall supporting two floors and a roof? If there is not a wall directly on top of the wall shown then the wall is only supporting a floor.

Table R502.5(2) I don't know how this can be used. Again, what is the wall actually supporting?


----------



## Fortner (May 14, 2010)

This wall supports, the floor shown, the wall directly above which has a center bearing floor on it, and a second floor wall that has ceiling joists and ridge supports resting on it. (2 story house)

Table 602.3(5) has a --- for 2X4's supporting 2 floors and a ceiling (2006)

Table 502.5(2) states that a building that is 28' wide with double 2X10 headers supporting 2 floors must have 2 jacks on each end.  2006

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough before.


----------



## Mule (May 14, 2010)

Good enough for me! Looks like you've got it covered!


----------



## mtlogcabin (May 14, 2010)

So what are you going to accept for a fix for the stud spacing?


----------



## GHRoberts (May 14, 2010)

The top plates appear to be straight. That indicates that the studs are too long. Without dimensions and load numbers I have to assume that the design is prescriptive.

What is the complaint?


----------



## north star (May 14, 2010)

** **

*What about the overdrilled I-joists? Section R502.8.2 in the `06 IRC.*

** **


----------



## mtlogcabin (May 14, 2010)

What I-joist I see floor trusses


----------



## GHRoberts (May 14, 2010)

north star said:
			
		

> ** ***What about the overdrilled I-joists? Section R502.8.2 in the `06 IRC.*
> 
> ** **


I joists can be drilled out to the flange and still support the rated load.


----------

