# Ceiling framing



## jar546 (Sep 20, 2010)

Anyone finding any issues with this?

Limited viewing, comment on what you can see.  This is a drill........


----------



## TJacobs (Sep 20, 2010)

Is the scaffolding staying???  LOL


----------



## jar546 (Sep 20, 2010)

And as an FYI, those rafters go to a ridge board, not a ridge beam


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 20, 2010)

Add some purlins would it then be "Braced Rafter Construction"? It has to be putting a load on that wall.


----------



## Code Neophyte (Sep 20, 2010)

Does it say anywhere in the rafter tie provision of the IRC that the rafter ties have to be parallel to the floor?  One end connected at the plate (of a center partition) and one in the center third of the rafter span?


----------



## Yankee (Sep 20, 2010)

I have never found that "bottom third" that has been referenced several times for rafter ties. There is a chart to use if the tie is above the plate. Where does the "bottom third" come from?

I would say that as a rafter tie, this doesn't cut it. Generally this type of set-up would accept some of the roof loads (rafter bending), but not in the anti-spreading direction.


----------



## TimNY (Sep 21, 2010)

In addition, the gable end may need bracing, methinks.


----------



## Mule (Sep 21, 2010)

You know...I really don't see a problem with this but I can see where you could say that since there are no rafter ties that a beam would be required where the rafters meet to keep the wall from spreading. Maybe I haven't really read that deep into the code....

Yankee... we get the bottom ...actually 2/3 as being rafter ties beacuse of the definition of collar ties are in the upper third of the attic space.

Collar ties or ridge straps to resist wind uplift shall be

connected in the upper third of the attic space in accordance

with Table R602.3(1).


----------



## Rio (Sep 21, 2010)

It looks like those are rafter braces which brings up the question of how well supported from lateral movement is the wall they are bracing to. It looks like the bracing might be at a larger than 45 degree angle. I would see how far the rafters are spanning to see if the braces weren't there if the rafters will be overspanned.

 Looking at it again it appears that they are planning on making this area into a smaller room inside the larger area.  If that's the case a whole other can of worms is opened.  As pointed out there's a hinge at the gable end framing and rafter tie issues and questions.


----------



## Yankee (Sep 21, 2010)

Mule said:
			
		

> You know...I really don't see a problem with this but I can see where you could say that since there are no rafter ties that a beam would be required where the rafters meet to keep the wall from spreading. Maybe I haven't really read that deep into the code....Yankee... we get the bottom ...actually 2/3 as being rafter ties beacuse of the definition of collar ties are in the upper third of the attic space.
> 
> Collar ties or ridge straps to resist wind uplift shall be
> 
> ...


Right, but I often hear someone say or see a post that says "the rafter tie can be in the bottom third (now you are saying 2/3rds) of the attic space and I see nowhere in the  prescriptive code that allows such. The placement of the rafter tie, if anywhere but on the plate, is determined by the tables in the IRC. Just putting them anywhere in the bottom third without running the numbers and adjusting the required connection does not meet code.

I'm I misunderstanding this section?


----------



## mueller (Sep 21, 2010)

> Yankee I have never found that "bottom third" that has been referenced several times for rafter ties. There is a chart to use if the tie is above the plate. Where does the "bottom third" come from?I would say that as a rafter tie, this doesn't cut it. Generally this type of set-up would accept some of the roof loads (rafter bending), but not in the anti-spreading direction.


The only place I ever found that bottom 1/3 is in footnote A of the rafter span tables.

If the

a. The tabulated rafter spans assume that ceiling joists are located at the bottom of the attic space or that some other method of resisting the outward push of the rafters

on the bearing walls, such as rafter ties, is provided at that location. When ceiling joists or rafter ties are located higher in the attic space, the rafter spans shall be

multiplied by the factors given below:

HC/HR Rafter Span Adjustment Factor

1/3        0.67

1/4        0.76

1/5        0.83

1/6        0.90

1/7.5      or less 1.00

where:

HC = Height of ceiling joists or rafter ties measured vertically above the top of the rafter support walls.

HR = Height of roof ridge measured vertically above the top of the rafter support walls.

If the rafter tie is any higher than 1/3 I don't see any prescriptive way to adjust the rafter span.


----------



## Mac (Sep 21, 2010)

The 'birds mouth' cuts at the ceiling joist tails (left side) look pretty deep. I'd call them 'notches not in compliance with R802.7.1' because they are more than one sixth of the depth (is it a rafter or a ceiling joist?). Those cuts in those locations are prone to starting a split that can run upwards and cause problems. Hard to see, but I think a split can already be seen starting at the second one in from hte end wall.


----------



## fatboy (Sep 21, 2010)

In addition to the replies so far, I have a problem with the method of attachment at the new "ridge". There is not anything that really represents an opposing rafter, other than the short horizontal member and the shear of the nails.


----------



## Mule (Sep 21, 2010)

fatboy said:
			
		

> In addition to the replies so far, I have a problem with the method of attachment at the new "ridge". There is not anything that really represents an opposing rafter, other than the short horizontal member and the shear of the nails.


Fatboy, the opposing (opposite) rafter is no longer in the code........


----------



## fatboy (Sep 21, 2010)

"*R802.3 Framing details. *Rafters shall be framed to ridge board

or to each other with a gusset plate as a tie."

There is neither.


----------



## Yankee (Sep 21, 2010)

fatboy said:
			
		

> "*R802.3 Framing details. *Rafters shall be framed to ridge boardor to each other with a gusset plate as a tie."
> 
> There is neither.


Those aren't rafters, they are somthing to attach the finished ceiling to. I don't believe they are intended to be assiociated with any roof loading at all. The apparent lack of rafter ties is a seperate issue.


----------



## fatboy (Sep 21, 2010)

OK, fine, they don't comply with R803.1. My point was the connection, not the nomenclature, sorry I wasn't specific.


----------



## Mule (Sep 21, 2010)

Can the connection of the two rafters/ceiling not satisfy the intent of a gusset plate?

What is a gusset plate?

Isn't it an apparatus to connect two pieces of material together? Would the rafter/ceiling/joist lapping by the rafter contitute a gusset?


----------



## Yankee (Sep 21, 2010)

A *gusset* is a triangular or square piece of fabric inserted into a seam to add breadth or reduce stress from tight-fitting clothing. Gussets were used at the shoulders, underarms, and hems of traditional shirts and chemises made of rectangular lengths of linen to shape the garments to the body.[1][2]

Gussets are used in manufacturing of modern tights or pantyhose to add breadth at the crotch seam; these gussets are often made of breathable fabrics for hygiene when wearing pantyhose without panties.

The term "don't bust a gusset" comes from this sewing term; a gusset in this context was usually a piece of fabric sewn between two others to increase mobility or increase the size of the pant waist, the latter being more common in the early 1900s.

Gusset is also an alternate spelling of gousset, a component of late Medieval armor which functions similarly.


----------



## Mule (Sep 21, 2010)

Okay...so there you have it..install a pair of panty hose on it and it complies!


----------



## Mule (Sep 21, 2010)

Seriously now.... in my opinion I would rather see two 2X6's lapped by that way and nailed together than seeing one of them cut to fit underneath with a piece of plywood nailed over the joint with roofing nails.


----------



## fatboy (Sep 21, 2010)

I believe the intent of the section is that the rafters would be opposed to each other, with a gusset plate acting as the tie to keep them opposed, and self-supporting. However, this section has been so watered down it doesn't say that anymore. I, once again, sure miss the 97 UBC..........sigh.


----------



## Mule (Sep 21, 2010)

fatboy....me too! About the time I learned where everything was in the UBC they done went and screwed everthing up by merging everything together.................dang hillbilly looking fools!!!!


----------



## TJacobs (Sep 21, 2010)

I'd call them ceiling joists, but they still don't tie the outside walls together.



			
				Yankee said:
			
		

> Those aren't rafters, they are somthing to attach the finished ceiling to. I don't believe they are intended to be assiociated with any roof loading at all. The apparent lack of rafter ties is a seperate issue.


----------



## fiddler (Sep 21, 2010)

I'd say yankee's got it right. What your showing in the picture is framing for a cathedral ceiling. The picture does'nt show enough to tell wether the rafters are in compliance or not. To me the ceiling joists to the left of the picture are quesstionable due to the birdsmouth cut. It looks like they are now maybe a 2x4.


----------



## 88twin (Sep 21, 2010)

"Ceiling framing

Anyone finding any issues with this?

Limited viewing, comment on what you can see. This is a drill........"

all I "see" is a simple vaulted ceiling. the rest is conjecture.

I can't see the connections at the ridge, top plate, wall braceing (or lack of), engineer stamp, USDA approval etc.

obviously they wanted the vault to break over the center of the window.

probably not the way i would have framed it  and yes the cuts at the end of the ceiling joist' look a little deep

(what.. no one has a hand saw anymore?).

nobody mentioned the blocking required for the ceiling fan


----------



## technomaze (Jan 27, 2011)

Looking at it again it appears that they are planning on making this area into a smaller room inside the larger area. If that's the case a whole other can of worms is opened. As pointed out there's a hinge at the gable end framing and rafter tie issues and questions.

But it looks nice peice if you look at it as whole.


----------



## GHRoberts (Jan 27, 2011)

The lumber appears to be properly grade stamped.

The construction does not appear to be prescriptive. I expect the proper engineering has been done.


----------



## steveray (Jan 27, 2011)

Thrust may be an issue...not seen...fireblocking wall to attic at ceiling plane, cut at "birdsmouth"...something about "bearing" at ends of joists...not just nails...


----------



## Jobsaver (Jan 27, 2011)

If the span of the rafters is great enough that the ceiling joists are functioning as required rafter bracing (in place of purlins), I would require that each ceiling joist butt the rafter, instead of being nailed to the side of the rafter. Also, the portion of the cathedral ceiling formed by the rafters does not appear deep enough to achieve more than a R19 insulation value (assuming 2x6 rafters).

http://www.inspectpa.com/phpbb/showthread.php?3180-Cathedral-Ceiling-Framing-and-R-values


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Jan 27, 2011)

The $64,000.00 question is will it have an attic stairway?

pc1


----------



## Daddy-0- (Jan 29, 2011)

Welcome to all of the new contributers. It is nice to have new opinions in here.

If we have a ridge beam as stated and the rafters are large enough by the charts then I don't see a huge issue. Like Fatboy said I don't like the gusset area connection either. The collar ties are not doing anything because they don't lap over on both sides. Collar ties must lap over both rafters and be face nailed with a specific number of nails. The butt joint with toe nails doesn't work. Now, if it is just a vaulted ceiling not structural (only carrying the weight of the drywall) it looks fine.


----------



## RJJ (Jan 31, 2011)

This thread started a while back and I didn't have time to comment. I agree with a good deal of what was stated above. Here are a few comments on what I see.

1. Header nailing / window: Doesn't seem to have proper nailing from what I see!

2. Top of plate left side: Light is coming in! What is going on? Is something missing?

3. Cathedral ceiling: These are ceiling joists! Appears to be 12/12 pitch. Sole cut is a little deep, but nailing is suspect?

4.If the ceiling joist are attached properly from right side rafter / to division wall/ and to the horizontal ceiling joist running to adjacent wall then no problem! Given that the rafter and ridge construction meet code. If the 12/12 ceiling joist are being used to stiffen the rafters then I need a design and seal.

5.Attachment of small ceiling joists right side! The nailing and design of attachment will cause drywall cracking. Poor at best install. I would suggest a stronger way to make the intersecting connection.

6.Energy: If batts are used no problem. Would not approve blow in insulation.

7. Roof plywood does not seem to have any clips of space? May be a problem.

8. Gable end wall: I believe needs bracing? Hard to tell! The seems to be very tall!

9. The window seems large enough to need some special treatment of nailing or straps to meet the wind section of the code?


----------

