Can I span 17' 4" with 2x6's, 16 oc, ceiling w/drywall, insulation, no attic storage?

[John D]

Can I span 17' 4" with 2x6's, 16 oc, ceiling w/drywall, insulation, no attic storage? I wanna remove a wall that is within this span. It looks like 2 or

3 joists(?) already span this distance in line with the doorway. ____________ | |j | | |o | |_____|i__ _| | |s | | |t | |_____|s__ _|

[Carpenter Ant]

-------------------------------------------------- yes as long as you nail (not screws) 2x4's from the ceiling joist to the rafters creating a truss.

otherwise that would require 2x10 ceiling joists for a 17' 4" span 16" on center.

--------------------------------------------------

[EJ]

Why nail? Just curious.

EJ

[Chuck]

Nails are much stronger with regards to shear strength. Screws resist pulling out, but are much more brittle and easy to snap.

[Renata]

Creative answer! But, I wonder if that's legal, especially since, if not done right, the ceiling will fall.

Renata

--snip--

['nuther Bob]

Crack maybe, not fall as long as it meets code. As long as the drywall is properly attached, nothing can fall unless the beams drop.

But, FWIW, don't do it even if it meets code. You have to do all the 2x "truss" work to make it stable enough to not crack. That takes a lot of time. It also makes the "attic" space nearly unusable and inaccessible, even for running HVAC and wiring. Spend a couple of bucks more and at least put 2x8's in.

Also, ask the building inspector. If he doesn't like it, it doesn't matter what anyone here thinks.

Bob

[John D]

According to a span calculation program some grades of some species can do it. I'm not sure if the 10# live 5# dead loads they used is enough for the

[John D]

gonna be any new ducts or storage. If I do it myself the inspector ain't gonna see it, but I must be comfortable that it's structuraly sound. John

[Renata]

Ceiling Joist (Drywall - No future rooms & limited attic storage) : 20 PSF Live, 10PSF Dead #2 & Btr L/240 2X6 2X8

2X10 2X12 12" o.c. 16" o.c. 12" o.c. 16" o.c. 12" o.c. 16" o.c. 12" o.c. 16" o.c. SPF 13-8 12-5 18-0 16-4 22-11 20-10 -- -- Hem-Fir 14-5 13-1 19-0 17-3 24-3 21-11 29-4 25-5

from

(one of many span table sites)

Renata

['nuther Bob]

I don't disagree with you Renata that the current code would not allow a 2x6. The question was about his *existing* structure which apparently does use a 2x6.

I'll still stand by my advice that whether it met the code or not, whether that wall was considered supporting or not, removing the wall would not be the best idea.

Bob

[Renata]

I wasn't going to reply, but some clarification is in order.

Building code is a _minimum_ standard. But, Building Code ISN'T the issue here.

Those tables aren't suggestions - if they "state" that a 2x6 CAN"T span 17' it means that it will fail in some fashion if you try to span

17' with a 2x6. While the failure may not be a collapse, the ceiling sure ain't gonna be looking good.

This seems to indicate that the wall in the middle is indeed load bearing. (Yo - OP - do those joists overlap each other over that wall or not)

On 6/25 @ 7:07pm, you (Bob) stated "There's a good chance that wall is not "formally" load bearing and that your house met the code way back when. Still, it is no doubt stabilizing the rafters and keeping your ceiling from cracking under stress. "

My point is that code is actually irrelevant here, as far as it goes. If you don't shore up those 2x6 joists (by sistering 2x8s, for example) and do remove the center wall, you're going to have problems.

On 6/28 you stated "If the 2x6's are "ties", then they are stressed horizontally and not set up to handle a top load, just the weight of the drywall below. It probably is not a good idea, probably does not meet code today, probably did when it was built. "

The span table I posted was for ceiling joists, no load in attic space above.

Probably never met code (unless they were true "2" x "6" maybe), probably never works, forget it.

Perhaps you should take a few structures and building classes before making such definitive statements.

I apologize for not being the most diplomatic, but folks who haven't a clue about what they're talking, and haven't a clue that they really haven't a clue, and insistandinsist that they're right, well, at that point, I tend to lose patience.

Renata