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?
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.
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!!!!
ps........... Please stop adding to this thread, cause it is making me
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
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.
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
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.
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.