Cut out floor joist/rafter for steel beam?

[Sliparn]

I am extending the house, it will be a 6-meter extension, the width is 7.5 m and completely open plan on both floors, like a small hallway on the ground floor and a walk-in closet on the upper floor, this means that a steel beam is needed to support the upper floor. A construction company has been hired to erect the extension. When the roof trusses arrived, it turned out that the builder had measured incorrectly, the ceiling/floor height was too low, but they solved this by nailing a plank to the side of the truss and cutting off the bottom of the truss's joist (first picture). Furthermore, they have cut the joist 10 cm to fit in the beam (picture 2 and 3). I asked if they shouldn't weld shoes onto the beam to support the joists from underneath, but they didn't think it was necessary.

I would need some reflections on this construction. Is this sufficient? Will the construction hold for a bathroom with tiles and a jacuzzi if one wanted to have it on the upper floor?



http://www.geting.se/viewimage.php?image=237395-P1000584.JPG



http://www.geting.se/viewimage.php?image=237396-P1000588.JPG



http://www.geting.se/viewimage.php?image=237397-P1000590.JPG

 

[injonil]

What are the dimensions of the beam?

 

[sjalvdrag]

think it looks strange with the notches in the rafters for the steel beam, a weakening of the entire truss ???

 

[Blecktrumman]

I would definitely weld some bärskor under the beam. That can hardly be considered correct.

 

[sjalvdrag]

weld on bearing shoes was what I was thinking about too hehe maybe because I'm a welder

 

[Sliparn]

I might be welding something this weekend, found a whole stack of 50x100x3mm pipes in the storage
that I can cut and weld on, it can't hurt, even though the builder says
that the construction is approved and that they will reinforce it in another way.
The beam is approximately 25-30 cm wide.

 

[Ingenjören]

Regarding image 2 and 3

Request the construction calculations for this design and complete drawings of the "reinforcements" they plan to make. As the joint currently looks, it won't hold!!!

What type of truss is it? Normally, there are significant tensile forces in a bottom chord, and in this case with a furnished attic, also moments and shear forces from that load. If the joint is supplemented with welded supports so the beam doesn't split from the load above, and if the tensile forces can be absorbed through the steel beam, it might work, but I don't understand why you are supposed to weld this? If THEY made a mistake, shouldn't THEY be the ones to build it correctly???

/The Engineer

 

[hakaner]

Well written Engineer!
Stand your ground & demand construction drawings!
You are the one who will live in the house, you are the builder & it is your responsibility in the end...

 

[ih624]

there should be life deflections on the entire beam on both sides where the trusses meet the beam

 

[Sliparn]

Regarding image 2 and 3

Ask to get the construction calculations for this execution and complete drawings of the "reinforcements" they are going to make. As the joint currently looks, it won't hold!!!

What type of truss is it? Normally, large tensile forces occur in a lower frame, and in this case, with a finished upper floor, also moment and shear force from that load. If the joint is supplemented with welded supports so that the beam is not split by the load from above, and if you also make sure that the tensile forces can be absorbed through the steel beam, it might work, but I don't understand why you should weld this? If THEY messed up, shouldn't THEY build it right???

/The Engineer

The truss construction can be seen quite well in image 1, further up there's also a beam crosswise,
In image 1, you can also see that the lower edge of the truss is cut 10cm in length
and is completely cut where the beam is meant to be, on the side a new plank is nailed to compensate for this.
In image 2, it's the original truss beam visible, and in image 3, the plank nailed on the side.

It's the plank nailed on the side of the truss that is notched for the beam,
not the original truss beam, it is completely cut and halved in length.
Personally, I'm more skeptical of this repair than the actual notching for the beam.

As reinforcement, they have now nailed on a one-meter long 45x100 stud on the beam over the beam.

I will call an acquaintance who has a larger construction company and see if he wants to take a look at it over the weekend.
If you get the municipality's building advisor involved, they will probably listen more to the construction company than to me.

 

[Sliparn]

Here is a picture of the loonies, uh.. sorry, the roof trusses.


http://www.geting.se/viewimage.php?image=237525-takstolarna.jpg

And here is a picture of the reinforcement above the beam they nailed on to compensate for the notch for the beam


http://www.geting.se/viewimage.php?image=237527-P1000594_2.JPG

 

[Sliparn]

I have now consulted another construction master, according to him, this was not a good solution to attach a plank on one side of the truss to compensate for the sawed-off lower frame of the truss, it causes uneven load on the entire structure, but if you attach one on the other side, you get an even load again. It also doubles the strength at the notch for the beam. Additionally, he considered that attempts should be made to fix it so that the cutout part for the beam gets support on the I-beam's foot in some way. The builder is also doing this now.



http://www.geting.se/viewimage.php?image=237596-tva_plankor.JPG

Thanks for your opinions, by the way! I'm not so familiar with construction, but when I see something that I think looks odd, I want to check if the concern is justified.

I will probably start a construction thread later so you can see how the construction progresses.