# Notching jack studs?



## MikeC (May 24, 2012)

Okay, a brief history here - a large garage that is being converted into an upper and lower apartment with a large garage space in the front.

So, here is what happened - the upper apartment is almost complete and the owner decides he wants another apartment.  This is approved by zoning, so it is a go ahead for me to look at the plans.  After a few minor changes, construction was started.

Here is what I noticed the other day while performing a follow up in the upper apartment:

The jack studs for the window openings in the first floor apartment were notched for pre existing TV cable.  These notches are about 3/8 inches thick, but my concern is the depth.  They go through each 2x8 jack stud about 5 inches.  I will stop by and get some pictures later today.  I have never seen anything like this before, but I am thinking that is needs to be treated as a notch in any other load bearing wall stud would be treated.  Am I wrong?


----------



## Mac (May 24, 2012)

A notch that deep is beyond the generally accepted 25% limits.


----------



## north star (May 24, 2012)

*+ + +*

MikeC,

Welcome to The Building Codes Forum!    

*+ + +*


----------



## MikeC (May 24, 2012)

I agree, but I was just completely thrown off base by this.  The builder has a good history of quality work and I have never had anything like this come up before.  These two things combined got me to start questioning myself.  I'm gonna take a swing by the place later today for a framing inspection.  I will verify what I think I saw and take some pictures.


----------



## codeworks (May 24, 2012)

have 'em throw a stud shoe on it


----------



## MikeC (May 25, 2012)

I just realized that I put this in the non-structural section.  If somebody wants to move it to the Framing section, feel free.Anyway, here is a photo of what I was asking about.  I try to stick to the rule "If it doesn't look right, it probably isn't".
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 1354

	

		
			
		

		
	
Thanks for the confirmation

View attachment 584


View attachment 584


/monthly_2012_05/572953c4168d2_JSnotch.jpg.c5669bbb822d1c0a631e16e358e7a80c.jpg


----------



## Pcinspector1 (May 25, 2012)

Looks like the sub left his drill and bits in his girl friends car last night!

Stud overhangs the wall plane, and appears to be load bearing as Mac has noted over 25%, could put a shoe on it as codeworks has suggested!

pc1


----------



## fatboy (May 25, 2012)

A repair is in order.......


----------



## pwood (May 25, 2012)

a lobotomy for the offender is in order.


----------



## ICE (May 25, 2012)

codeworks said:
			
		

> have 'em throw a stud shoe on it


Not even....


----------



## Pcinspector1 (May 25, 2012)

ICE,

You brought it to our attention the a stud shoe is not used to fix a notch that is non-compliant. After reading a little Simpson instalation info, a SS 1.5 shoe is for reinforcing studs that are allowed to be bored not repairing Juniors screw-ups!

Thanks,

Pc1


----------



## rogerpa (May 25, 2012)

Time to think outside the box.

It would have been nice if the photo showed more of the opening framing. That said;


The king stud appears to be un-notched.

The jack stud is most likely nailed appropriately to the king stud.

A 2x4 stud would carry the load.

If this were a 2x4 stud it could be notched 7/8”, leaving 2-5/8” bearing. Would you have thought twice about it then?

The notching, if only in the jack and cripple stud, does not create a hinge effect.

What’s the problem?

Add a couple of more nails in the cripple stud (to the jack stud) above the notch if this gives you heartburn.


----------



## MikeC (May 25, 2012)

Okay, the original wall is 2x6 studs.  An additonal 2 was added to allow for the lower concrete portion.  All of the window openings are framed with 2x8's to allow wall surfaces to be uniform.  FWIW, this wire is a ground.  The builder wasn't there when I showed up, but the electrician was.  He had a good laugh and said the new kid must have done that work.  He said that he would let the builder know about it and gladly re-run the ground once the work was done properly.  The framing is a 36" opening which supports a roof, ceiling, and center bearing floor.


----------



## MikeC (May 25, 2012)

rogerpa said:
			
		

> Time to think outside the box.  It would have been nice if the photo showed more of the opening framing. That said;
> 
> 
> The king stud appears to be un-notched.
> ...


Good point.  As ugly as this is and the fact that it violates the 25% rule doesn't reflect the fact that the opening was overbuilt to start with.  The header could have been pulled off with 2-2x4, but is 2-2x8 instead.  IRC says that 2-2x8 needs 2 jack studs, but the smaller adeqaute headers for this application only need one.  I didn't make a big deal out of this because the header was overbuilt.  If I look at this the same way, he may be able to pull this off.  A 2x4 jack stud with a bunch of extra wood on the front of it.  He could have at least reversed the jack stud holding the sillplate so the notch was from the exterior side.

Even if it will perform the intended function, it is ugly as heck.

If you haven't figured it out yet, I have only been at this job for about 6 months now and I live in a depressed area where people aren't building new houses every day.


----------



## dhengr (May 25, 2012)

MikeC:

I completely agree with Rogerpa’s thinking on this detail, and he has laid the thought process out very nicely.  Except I wouldn’t say “think outside the box,” rather I would say he’s applying a little common sense, being practical, seeing what he can do to make it work, however dumb it looks.  You might mention to the builder, in passing, that he was luck this time, but that if you see this again, he will likely be pulling new wire and removing and replacing those studs.  Your photo shows that the notch only goes into the 2x8 about half way, so it would seem that approx. a 2x4 is left as stud material.  The cripple below the window sill is mostly a framer’s convenience, it doesn’t carry much load in most cases, but in this case it adds stud bearing area on the sill pl. and is nailed to the other studs.  A 2x4 jack stud is usually adequate for a 3' wide opening without knowing any exact specifics of the header loads.  There are probably also rim boards above which act to distribute loads over the opening.  The 2x8's were used primarily to fur the wall out, not because they were needed structurally, and any stud hanging over the sill pl. is not very effective as relates to the critical stresses on this detail.  The controlling condition on this joint would most likely be compression perpendicular to the grain on the sill pl.


----------



## ICE (May 25, 2012)

dhengr said:
			
		

> MikeC:  You might mention to the builder, in passing, that he was lucky this time, but that if you see this again, he will likely be pulling new wire and removing and replacing those studs.


If it won't be good enough next time, what makes it good enough this time?


----------

