I am having a house built in South Carolina by a large home
builder and have seen some issues with a couple of things and have
been told several reasons by the builder but haven't gotten a straight
answer. I would like some help here.
First - there are studs that have a saw cut halfway through them
on a downward 45 degree angle, there were nails put in upward just
below the cut and a 2 foot board nailed along side of the stud. I have
been told that those were the board that were being replace. I was
also told that they do that to remove any bending or twisting in the
studs, this seemed more logical but for the fact that I see several
studs that had obvious bends or twists that this was not done to. Also
on one wall where the studs looked to be in pretty good shape, they
did it to every stud in the wall. Can anyone give me a reason for
doing this and is it a standard building practice.
Second - When they built the 10x10 deck on the back of the house
they nailed a 2" x 2" on to the bottom edge of the ledger board and
the deck joists sit on that board and were toenailed to the ledger. I
thought everyone used joist hangers when building decks. My wife was
told that this method made the deck stronger then when hangers were
used. I said then why did they use hangers when the put our floor
joist in the house? I am not familiar with SC building codes but
question this practice and would like the correct answer.
Seen this done with studs with excessive crowns/bowing. Does nothing for
twisting. If studs have excessive bowing, and/or twisting, they should have
be replaced with suitable studs at time of original framing of the wall.
Its a patchwork fix for someone in a hurry.
Usually, if such is done on a given wall, its because it has a long run
where bowing would be obvious. Closets and other small spaces, not so
obvious, may be left alone. Again, someone in a hurry. Can't do it right
the first time.
Normally, the framers eyeball the studs, and throw the unsuitables in a pile
to exchange for suitables from the lumber supplier. Again, someone in a
Standard practice before joist hangers came along. The joist should have a
cutout for the 2X2 on its bottom. The top of the joists should be even
across. The bottom may have some unevenness due to dimensional lumber not
always perfect in size from board to board. If the framer did not account
for this, the top of the joists may be slightly uneven. Forgivable as joist
hangers do the same thing. Have seen a form of bridging at the ledger board
between the joists in some cases.
Unaware of any building code for S.C.
Last I looked in TX, its specified IRC 2001 minimum, with the local
municipalities (10,000 or more population) making their own building code
based on that.
Sorry Dave, I don't understand your point. He said he was having a home
built in South Carolina. South Caroilna uses the 2003 IRC statewide with
very few amendments. I can't see what requirements Texas has, that could
possibly impact home construction in South Carolina.
(I'm licensed in Texas and do work in both states.)
Is SC imposing IRC 2003 on municipalities, municipalities unable to make
such more strict locally? IE - not a minimum standard, it is the standard.
Or, is the municipality in SC allowed to legislate locally stricter
standards? If so, IRC 2003 may not be the rule here in this specific case.
That is my point.
Certainly not "standard practice".
The correction of some bow or twist is (barely) plausible; it would be
far more likely a framing crew would throw it out and use other stock
rather than take the time to cut and add the cripple since (unless
they're an hourly crew of the builder) they get paid on a piecework basis.
The room that has them all that way would make me question both stories.
My guess would be they had a stack of framing lumber that somebody
used as a sawhorse and cut through them while trimming for an angle cut
on some other stock. Then, they had a bunch of studs w/ a kerf across
them they needed to use up.
Whether it's is significant will depend in part on whether you're close
enough to coast to be in a hurricane zone and whether they're exterior
or interior walls.
That's BS and cheap, tract-housing construction and needs correcting. A
deck of that construction in the KC area failed just a couple of months
ago during the opening weekend open house and killed at least two, iirc,
with several other serious injuries.
I certainly don't know what Code, if any, is in force in SC, but you
should immediately contact whoever issued the building permit and find
out what is Code and follow up imo.
The studs were cut to remove a bow in the wall. The 2' piece is called a
"scab." A few of these here and there are not atypical. However, that wall
where every stud was cut should be looked at carefully. If it is a load
bearing interior wall, some straight studs can be installed next to the cut
studs. If it is an exterior wall, replacement would be better as doubled
studs affects your insulation.
The deck was built with joists that are resting on "bond timber." Dave
talks about a 2x2 cut out on the bottom of the joist. Since this is a deck,
you probably won't have that cut out. Most likely, the "band" of the deck
is one size larger than the joists. So, on a 10x10 from a large home
builder, you probably have 2x10 band and 2x8 joists resting on 2x2 bond
timber. The only problem I see with your description is the 2x2. The code
requires a minimum 2" bond timber. A 2x2 that is used for "balusters" or
"pickets" is not actually 2". This is a common code violation around here,
and I've learned to watch out for it. Also, there should be 3 nails in the
bond timber below each joist.
You should ignore the response by dpb. Calling this method "cheap,
tract-house construction" absolutely incorrect.
ASP Home Building, Inc.
I've not ever heard it called a bond timber. I do know and use
the term ledger strip. It is a very normal and time honored
method of carrying joists long before joist hangers.
I agree, there is absolutely nothing shoddy or 2nd rate about the
method. Joist hangers could be argued to be faster, cheaper, and
easier except for the ones on the ends of the rim joist.
Keep the whole world singing . . . .
Go with the flow, I'll top post this time.
Many decades ago when I was framing, a 2X2 birdmouth at the bottom was
common on joists. They road on 2X2s. Actual 1.5"X1.5". The ledger board
was that measurement as well. Was done both internally and on external
decks. The carrying beam was either doubled with 1/2" plywood inbetween
minimum/tripled/ or doubled with 1/2" steel between. The width of the beam
timber depended on the joist width (IE - largest number in 2X?). The joist
width depended on it run. The joists were same lumber (2X?) as the beams.
Those homes still stand today.
I find some discrepancy in 2X8 resting on an actual 2" piece of lumber
attached to a 2X10 beam vs. the height of the beam and the height of the
joist at the top.
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.