The situation involves a house with an extended upper floor. In conjunction with this, a longitudinal beam has been placed in the middle of the house under the rafters. This beam rests on the gables of the house and two steel posts in between. The posts are not enclosed; one is even visible in a corner of a room.

I've noted the same thing in another extended house and am now wondering if there is a regulation that these supporting posts must be inspectable.

In the current house (recently purchased by my son), the plan is to remove a non-load-bearing partition wall, which would position the post that was in the corner of the room instead in the middle (by a wall). The obvious aesthetic solution is to enclose the post in a niche. However, this would naturally result in losing the ability for inspection.

The backup plan is to make the niche easily openable—perhaps with snap or magnetic fasteners on a panel.
 
I see no reason at all that a steel post would need to be inspected.
After all, you usually can't do that with the house's other structural elements,
such as roof trusses, floor joists, or wall studs.
 
Just build in.
 

Best answer

It's almost the opposite, steel SHOULD be built in for fire safety reasons. Steel only needs to get warm to bend, a wooden post has to burn through. Cover your posts with plasterboard.

Protte
 
  • Like
tergo
  • Laddar…
Most villas are in fire class BR3 if they are under 200 sqm, and in that case, BBR does not require fire protection of the structure.
 
Ok, it will have to be built in then.

@Daniel 109: Aha, then it's an inverted niche I'm thinking of. It's too much work to move the entire wall to create a recess. ;)

But what do you call a "negative" niche - an extension?
 
Box...
 
  • Haha
Pen
  • Laddar…
"Very short wall"? ;)
 
  • Haha
Pen
  • Laddar…
An old man :)
 
  • Like
Anna_H
  • Laddar…
Click here to reply
Vi vill skicka notiser för ämnen du bevakar och händelser som berör dig.