Shear strength of screws

Page 4 of 4  
On 4/14/2012 3:56 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

LOL, no hotel.
I have 4 in the kitchen, 2-Sink, 1-DW, 1- Frig 3 for exterior hose bibs 10, 5 for each of the 2 guest baths 2 for the laundry 9 for the master bath
Then there is the additional ball valve at the end of each or those runs except for the tub, shower, and outside hose bibs.
My water softener filters all water or not except for 1 extra hose bib before the softener which I never use.

Wow shall we say hard water? :~) I will admit that my valves took 3~5 years before the build up eroded and freed them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/13/2012 1:20 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Frost proof hose bibs are code requirements in most jurisdiction these days, even on the Gulf Coast, and for a good reason.
Contrary to what you may think, a standard hose bib is more likely to be the cause of frozen pipes in this area (Gulf Coast) and in relative moderate freezing temperatures (+/- 20 to 32 C), than a pipe in an attic (which rarely freeze here except when the temperatures stay in the low to mid teens (C) for more than 24 hours), and the house is unheated or unoccupied.
With most attic pipes between joists, and below the required R-30 insulation , the ambient temperature from the rooms below will generally protect attic pipes for most of our coldest winters
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/13/12 2:20 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I have never had problems with pipes freezing in our house, apparently my neighbour has, although I have seen her walking around *in* her house with her winter coat on for hours. Same idiot never takes the cover off her A/C either, so I have no idea how often if ever she lets the furnace run.
*shakes head*
--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/13/2012 2:18 PM, FrozenNorth wrote:

Hummmm ... does your wife know you're watching, and "for hours"? <g,d,&r>
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/13/12 5:26 PM, Swingman wrote:

Just a casual walk through the kitchen, neighbour is a teacher, she marks papers in her kitchen, under a 25W light bulb (or there about, really dim light), my wife is much better looking. :-)
--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
But in MY opinion, a house plumbed with copper just looks so much NEATER, and more professional than the "spiderwebs" of PEX that I see in a lot of new houses. Nothing requires PEX to be run in straight lines with neat 90 degree bends - so the "cheap" plumber just runs the crap in the shortest, easiest route, looks be damned. ****************************************************** I agree to a point. When pex is run in the most direct line, the shortest distance from the water heater to the fixture, it gets the hot water there faster. It may not look as good, but I'll take that 25% faster hot water over looks, any day.
-- Jim in NC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm thinking there might be less labour for plumbers on the home owner side of the issue. I'd expect home owners doing a pex install for themselves where they might run to a plumber to have a copper water pipe soldered.
I mean, how difficult is it to install pex? Don't bend it too much and crimp a collar onto a line. Can't get too much simpler than that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/12/12 11:23 AM, Dave wrote:

I recently installed a bunch for my bathroom remodel and I'm still scratching my head thinking, "It can't be this easy, there has to be more to it than this."
--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/12/2012 8:20 AM, Dave wrote:

Yeah, I think Chicago still requires flex conduit instead. :)
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, but it means it can be SPEC'd. If the engineer signs off on the design using a "code compliant" Timberlok in place of say, aStrongTie and 12 nails, it is going to be pretty difficult for an inspector to fail the structure on the basis of their correctly applied use. And it IS acceptable for an engineer to spec "or equivalent" in the design, particularly if he provides the specification the device must meet -such as pull-out strength and shear strength.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/12/2012 12:32 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Absolutely no argument that anything can be spec'ed ... (and this has gotten off the intended beaten path and onto a rabbit trail).
However, and in MY experience, an engineer or architect will rarely attempt to specify (as with the aforementioned use of PEX) something that is specifically disallowed in the jurisdiction's building code (even if by default, as when specifically stating where they (screws in this case) _can_ be used ... as with ledger boards, decks, etc) if a solution that is unquestionably, and specifically in compliance, is indeed available.
And for good reason ... it _always_ costs (me, mostly) time, money and, most importantly, GOOD WILL, for any of the parties involved being forced to take issue with an inspector ... and any architect or engineer who puts me in that position without good reason stands a good chance of not being on the next job. :)
That said, back to the main issue:
No disrespect intended at all, I was simply taking exception to what appears to be an qualified statement that since a screw type fastener is deemed to be "fully code compliant", to infer that it may be used, without regard, as an optional replacement, is both arguably incorrect, and misleading to the intended audience.
I maintain, once again, that the ONLY reasonable action is to check both your local building code, and engineer approved structural plan, BEFORE using _any_ fastener in structural members just about anywhere in North America.
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Correct - you give the spec sheet of the product you would like to use to the inspector and tell him you want to use these - does he have any problems allowing them. It's a nobrainer to use ONE device that installs in a minute or two and costs a buck instead of a complex strap arrangement that takes 5 minutes or more to install, in 13 pieces, and costs two bucks, if you can get the inspector's permission. The inspector may want to see a sample of an installation that he can whack at with a crow-bar or hammer to satisfy HIMSELF that it is an acceptable solution.
Had a friend designed a very thermally efficient house, using modular insulated panels, built on-site, instead of a traditional studded wall. The inspector said "prove to me this panel is as strong as or stronger than the traditional wall and I'll allow it".
When he drove his 3/4 ton 4X4 up a ramp consisting of a wall panel, the inspector was duly impressed and gave him the go-ahead.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca says...

For certain values of "code". Building codes in the US are not standardized. There is a model code but no requirement that it be used by any given locality.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Using the right number and pattern of screws will achieve the same thing. You need a larger screw to give the same strength, generally speaking, because the root diameter if the screw is significantly less than the nominal diameter, and the strength of the screw (yield) is lowered by the stress rizers formed by the malformation of the metal at the thread root. Screws COULD be made that were almost as strong as the equivalent sized nail, but they would be way to expensive to be practical. An "old school" wood screw is stronger than today's "construction screw" or "deck screw" or, particularly, the "drywall screw".
The holding ability of a screw excedes that of a nail in most cases - but with a "deck screw" or "drywall screw" it also often excedes the yield strength of the screw itself. An "ardox" nail is a compromize - it's holding ability approaches that of a screw - with the overall strength of a nail, but without the removeability of a screw. A guy who used to work in construction with my dad used to drive screws with a hammer - he said the funny head and other features of the screw were just to make them easier to remove;).

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Particularly in earthquake country where shear walls are commonly required by the building codes. The nailing patterns are very specific.
scott
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We have a separate shear wall inspection in the locale where I generally build, and you are correct, the nailing pattern for that inspection, as well as full height structural sheathing on single story, and required overlap of structural sheathing between floors, is very specific.
--
www.ewoodshop.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

When in doubt, put in another screw for redundancy. If they're going to fail, in all likelihood, they're going to fail one screw at a time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:49:20 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell

Unless even 2 is not strong enough, where both can, and often do, fail virtually at the same time. Ore one will fail, without being noticed, and a significant time later the second fails catastrophically.
Better to use overkill on one than use 2 too small fasteners.
Better yet, overkill on more than one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.