Some Guy ( snipped-for-privacy@Guy.com) said... [talking about truss manufacturers]
This really has no idea what he is talking about.
While truss manufacturers will do some business "churning out the same stuff" for subdivision builders, they also do a substantial amount of work for custom built homes that are one-off projects.
As one who had to source out a truss manufacturer for our custom built home with some rather unique roof components, they most certainly do have this sort of capability.
Now, whether they would bother with looking into an alteration issue as the original poster has, is a whole different question.
Oh, come on, it's easy. The proper way to modify a truss for load bearing is to run posts up between the existing trusses, put beams across just over the top, and build a deck on the new beams. No problem. You can ADD anything you want, you just can't take anything out, and nothing that you add is allowed to touch the existing system.
Huh? Virtually any truss manufacturer will design and supply attic trusses for "bonus space". It's not exactly a complicated or new problem. The problem is that if the truss *WASN'T* designed for that, then it's almost certainly because the system can't be easily modified to do it, else they WOULD have, when it went in.
And in someone else's post:
Work that through again... If the truss has, say 500# of excess temporary support ability, because you need that for workers, and you use that extra 500# for storage, what happens when the workers show up?
you people are complete idiots for even trying to tell this person ways on how to attempt this on his own. ive done framing for 15 years. just framing. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER cut or modify a truss in ANY way without the approval of a engineer or the truss co. ive fallen thro trusses because the gangnails have given out (cheap pine) and i'm only 190 pounds. yea, lets pile a bunch of junk up there
Why don't you just go in there with a sawzall and cut everything out of your way. That way, when the roof falls in, you can have it rebuilt with rafters and then you will have lots of room. And that will only cost about $20,000.00.
I just saw this exact same thing on 'House Detective' on TLC. Someone removed the center posts on a trusts an used 2x4 lag bolted in to the remaining top and cross members.(yeah, I'm hooked those shows, but they occasionally have really good info)
The result. The roof was fine but the floor was sagging. There was about a 4" sag from the floor was originally(in the center)
Eitherway, knowing that a house is usually someones largest asset, do you really want to compromise its value by cutting corners. Either find an engineer or find a different space to store clutter.
Thanks for all the helpful replies to my query. I absolutely had no idea that using the attic to store things could pose a problem! But based on what you people have told me here -plus the the regrettable realization from my own observations that my house was built as cheaply and shoddily as its builders could legally get away with- I now realize my attic CANNOT be used for storage in any case.
Rant: For a home that sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars, you'd think the builder could've been a little more liberal budgetwise and built the house to higher spec.
This is the main reason I would NEVER build a house with trusses. The older homes I have lived in all my life had stick framed roofs. Normally 2x8's across the floor (above your ceiling) and they go from the outer walls to the center support wall. Then the roof is 2X6's from the outer walls, and come together at the peak. Built that way, you can make a real attic, build rooms up there and whatever. Trusses save the expense of the larger dimension lumber, but are all wasted space. They are fine for a barn or something where you would not need an attic, but for a house they are just a big waste of space. Considering the high cost of trusses, I tend to wonder if they are really worth the savings, because I tend to think the savings is minimal. You can call me old fashioned, but I was taught to never have boards end midstream between supports on horizontal runs (between walls), but I have alot of disputes with modern construction. Don't even get me started about those particle board floor joists, and if you use them be sure your toilet never overflows or you might end up sitting on your basement floor on top of a pile of wood chips.
As for your situation, I can only say this. You cant just sister the roof joists, because the floor could drop (along with your ceiling below) However, if you were to sister 2x8s across the floor, AND
2x6's on the roof, being sure both the 2x8's and 2x6s are resting on the outer walls, and on the center support wall of the home, you could probably get away with it. Look at the way an older home roof was built, and duplicate that. But, if your trusses are 2x4s, you may not be able to get your new wood onto the outer walls, unless you can cut the angle and still have enough wood on the walls. I am not suggesting you do this without having a professional engineer or builder look at it, but it could possibly work. Your other option would be to remove the entire roof and rebuild it using stick construction, but I dont think you want to go that extreme.
As someone else said, trusses are not made to hold heavy loads, as a floor. Those 2x4's are likely spliced right in the middle of your rooms below, so even if you leave the trusses intact, I would still add some at least 2x6's from outer walls to center walls and floor on top of them.
Of course you could move too.... Remember, many of the older stick built houses have lasted a hundred years or more. These new houses built out of crap have a life expectancy of about 30 years. So you might save a few bucks today, but you will pay and pay and pay later.
There is such a thing as an "attic truss". But, it must be specified at the time of design and manufacture. Typically, the truss is designed with an aisle way down the middle and the bottom chord is designed to carny the weight of stuff stored in a typical attic.
The engineer or architect can specify a heavier than normal load on the bottom chord. Obviously, the truss manufacturer will do what's typical unless told to do otherwise. the spec building could specify an attic truss, but that costs more. Most spec builders on not going to spend the a few hundred extra dollars if they don't have to.
Most of the older homes that I've seen don't have such beefy floors. Most of them have 2x6 ceiling joists or even 2x4s.
Sure, if the home is built the way you say.
Trusses can be, and are, designed for all sorts of conditions and loads. I frequently have to beef up or replace existing stick frame structures when remodeling. If it wasn't designed for it, it has to be modified. The only difference is that trusses are more complicated to analyze and therefore modify.
Every tract home builder in the country disagrees with you. There are many advantages - much longer spans possible eliminating the need for interior support and concomitant foundation costs, faster roof framing, weight savings, etc.
If he's just looking to add storage capabilities (floor load), why does he have to touch the roof? He could ignore the trusses and install floor joists next to them, but if he doesn't have a center support wall, he probably can't do that.
Probably not.
You are advising that substantial loads be placed on walls that may not be bearing walls...?
Not sure where you got your life expectancy number from, but it's _extremely_ pessimistic.
Look what the orig "Currently I'm busy fastening 3/4" plyboard over the ceiling rafters (so objects to be stored won't crash thru the drywall ceiling)."
So we can assume that the rafters are strong enough to support someone wiggling around putting plywood down?
3/4 plywood to tie the rafters together will certainly give some additional strength to the load-bearing capacity.
HomeOwnersHub website 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.