Strength of an Screw Eyebolt???

Page 2 of 2  


Why not cut a hole in the ceiling just enough to get Johns strongback idea up on top of the truss chords (ceiling joist). Patch and paint it back to the way it was. The way I'm reading it, you was just going to put your 2 by 6 across 3 joists on the outside-underside of the sheetrock ceiling?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim.... Just when I think I am not going to do it...... You and John come up with these good ideas...... :~) -thanks but I no longer have a good feeling about this idea.

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

LOL!!! Follow your gut feeling brother!!! It usually turns out to be right. I know I sure wish I'd have listened to mine more than a thousand times!!! In other words, DAMN I wish I hadn't done that!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
-thanks pardner! Roger That!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then, after I've learned my lesson, it changes to "If I did that this way... perhaps it would work." (Curse of the engineer?)
Puckdropper
--
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.

To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
LOL ....... sounds like an ME talking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Buck,
I wouldn't let the comments (mine or anybody else's) give you that 'bad' feeling. I feel pretty confident that a solution is there - but I would add this one caveat...
If you were thinking of attaching this 2x6 from the *underside* (i.e. on the ceiling - visible from below), I would caution against doing that. If you lay your 2x6 ON TOP of the bottom chords of the trusses (i.e. from the attic space), then those members are transferring their loads to the bottom chords through simple 'bearing' -- any anchorage you use (nails, lag bolts, etc) are simply holding the 2x6 in place so that it wouldn't shift depending on the loading from the eye-bolts.
If, on the other hand, you *were* thinking of anchoring this from below, then you are relying on the lag bolts to carry ALL the load into the truss bottom chords. This might actually could be workable -- the AITC (Amer. Inst. of Timber Construction) "Timber Construction Handbook" has loading values for lag bolts in exactly this kind of loading case -- so there are *real numbers* that can be determined as to how much load they would carry. BUT, if you're talking about hanging some bicycles or other 'hardware' from these eye-bolts, that's one thing. Placing a 'human load' on them (in this arrangement) is something else - and I wouldn't do that if I had to rely on lag bolts only to do it. There's just better ways when you are putting someone's health and safety on the line.
If I were detailing such an arrangement for a client, I would -- as noted -- place the 'structure' ABOVE the bottom chords (i.e. in the attic) to get that 'bearing' type of load transfer. That will, obviously, complicate the situation for 'already built' conditions -- tearing a hole in the ceiling and patching back.
But, the bottom line is that this *could* be done - and I wouldn't let any comments dissuade you if you really want to pull this off. Just do it the right way and you won't have any problems. Invariably, folks tend to 'rewrite the laws of physics' (without thinking things through) and that's when they get burned.
-- john.
buck wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ARGGGGG! ...... Darn it John! Now you got me thinking again. What you say makes sense too, putting the 2x6 above the bottom chords. I guess it is very similar to John and Tim's ideas......... As far as 'rewriting the laws of physics' ...... I have a tendancy to always think there is a better way - And I'm usually right about 15 percent of the time.... LOL! Thanks John for your good info and I will certainly accept your expertise as well ................ As far as other opinions go, I know that they all are wanting to error on the side of safety and I appreciate that for sure. See Puckdropper, I am like a rudder-less ship!!!! -buck
ps........... Please stop adding to this thread, cause it is making me crazy..... :~)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
buck wrote:

There's always this...
http://www.amishoutdoorfurniture.com/store/Other/OtherImages/A-Frame.gif
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"jcatora"

Finally, an accurate, well thought out response.
Thanks
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I missed the 2X4 part when I made my first reply. I was thinking you meant a 2X6 or 2X8 or larger joist. Anyway, since you are talking about a truss made of 2X4s, I'd say it's not a good idea. Trusses are usually engineered to support a roof and little else, they have a definite limit on safe loading of the lower horizontal and will not take additional loading to the same extent that stick-built framing joists will.
With your idea of laying a 2X6 across 3 trusses and spreading out the load, you might be OK depending... If you know who manufactured the trusses you could checki with them for allowable loading, or look at similarly sized and constructed trusses if the manufacturer is unknown. If this will just be a "dead" load, not swinging or subject to shock or impulse loads, you could just do a test; Lay the 2X6 up there, then s l o w l y do a pull up on it. If your comfortable with the degree of flexing (or lack thereof) let your conscience be your guide.
--

Larry Wasserman Baltimore, Maryland
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry...... Thanks for the come back. Me thinks I will not take a chance on a questionable idea. Probably will save me some grief down the road. Appreciate your advice. -buck
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am guessing you mean a joist and not a rafter? And you are talking about an "eyebolt" that has a thread like a lag bolt, correct? If so, I have always called these "screw eyes" and use the term "eyebolt" for a bolt with machine threads that goes in a through-hole, with a nut on the end. Maybe someone here can verify what the correct nomenclature is.
At any rate, if the wood is sound and the pilot hole sized properly to the eyebolt/screw eye, it should able to support 200lbs dead load without pulling the threads out of the wood.
Some thoughts and concerns: You mention that you will be "hanging" from the eyebolts. That's probably OK but if you are "swinging" from them, maybe not, especially in soft wood. No way for instance, that I'd hang a kids swing from a screw eye.
--

Larry Wasserman Baltimore, Maryland
  Click to see the full signature.
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.