Started garage wobbles

[Mikael Karlsson4999]

Now I think we should collectively sing
"we shall overcome"

As I said, once again, amateur hour, some never change 😀.

 

[din granne]

Bracing with iron bands rarely works well. They slacken in the summer when it's warm.

What is missing are:
-Sheathing boards on the walls. Wind barrier fabric is rubbish that is only good for wrapping the manufacturer in when you have killed him and need to dispose of the body.
-Bracing on the walls, especially the back wall
-Bracing in the intermediate ceiling
-Braces to prevent the trusses from toppling.

No construction drawings are needed. It is a matter of common sense.

The problem is that common sense varies greatly from person to person.

 

[useless]

Bracing with iron bands rarely turns out well. They slacken in the summer when it's warm.

For a 3-meter-long steel band, the length difference is 1.8 mm between -25 and +25 degrees. Additionally, wood also expands when it gets warm. The coefficient of linear expansion is about half as large as for steel, so the band's effective expansion becomes a max of 1 mm. Hardly something that makes them "slacken".

 

[twoody]

Bracing with iron bands rarely works well. They slacken in the summer when it's warm.

What is missing is:
-Wind protection boards on the walls. Wind fabric is a nuisance that's only good for wrapping up the manufacturer when you've killed him and need to dispose of the body.
-Bracing on the walls, especially the back wall
-Bracing in the intermediate ceiling
-Bracing that prevents the roof trusses from toppling.

No construction drawings are needed for that. It's a matter of common sense.

You talk about common sense and then say that wind fabric is a nuisance?
Well, you don't know much about building houses.

 

[Workingclasshero]

We can imagine a small garage build here.
Solid foundation, maybe a poured slab.
1 layer of Leca to lift the timber from the moisture, lay it upside down so the top is smooth.
Sill paper or equivalent.
Sill=lying 45x145.
Wall studs 45x145 alternatively 45x95 with lying 45x45 cc 60, it all depends on
Lying recessed beam 45x145, if the truss is placed directly on this, the bearing surface becomes 45x45 truss/beam, and the beam is in turn on a surface of 45x45 in the wall stud, hence nice with a wall plate on top.
Wall plate=45x145 that lies on top of the wall studs and the possible beam.
Diagonal braces=45x145 that go from the top corner diagonally down to the next wall stud to stabilize the building during construction and the entire garage's lifespan, 2 braces per corner.

Does anyone agree with these terms and opinions?
But I'm a mechanic, so what do I know ;-)

/Workingclasshero

 

[AG A]

What nonsense. No one would believe that the top plate sits on top of the rafters. Incomprehensible how you came to that conclusion.

But even all amateurs know that a beam is stiffer in the direction it is widest. The top plates are stiffest in the horizontal direction because they lie flat. That’s why TS has a recessed support beam in their construction. Without it, the flat top plates would bend significantly. When I build frames, I prefer to put the vertical wall studs under the rafters, so I don’t need to recess any support beams except to bridge above doors and windows.

The top plates help stiffen the exterior wall so it doesn't bow between the rafters and, of course, they hold the wall studs in place.

We probably won't get any further with this discussion. I’m familiar with this construction, but you seem to have your own perspective.

Have a great weekend! 😊

I wonder what supports the person load and other loads on a veranda. It can't be the decking boards, as they only take side loads. This is obvious since the decking board is much stronger in its width. It is only 28mm thick, but a whole 120mm wide.

Then you try to explain how to build, when you don't even know the function of beams.

 

[Nissens]

Wonder what supports the personnel load and other loads on a veranda. It can't be the decking boards, because they only take lateral loads. You can see that since the decking board is much stronger in width. It's only 28mm thick but a whole 120mm wide.

Then you try to tell people how to build, when you don't even know the function of joists.

So you think the load on decking boards is comparable to the load from a roof truss. It's impossible to take you seriously.

A guess in an earlier message in the thread was that one side of the roof truss is loaded with about 5.5 kN with full snow load.

Do you think the load on the decking boards is anywhere near that load?

What do you think happens to the decking boards if you load them with 5.5 kN?

Exactly, Mr. Structural Engineer. I would definitely never hire you to calculate loads on a structure. Ordinary amateurs understand more about this than you do.

 

[useless]

Wondering what supports the live load and other loads on a veranda.

The beams under the decking. Check next time which direction they are placed...

 

[AG A]

So you think the load on decking boards is comparable to the load from a truss.
It's hard to take you seriously.

A guess in an earlier message in the thread was that one side of the truss is loaded with about 5.5 kN with full snow load.

Do you think the load on the decking boards is anywhere near that load?

What do you think happens to the decking boards if you load them with 5.5kN?

Exactly, Mr. Structural Engineer. I would definitely never hire you to calculate loads on a construction. Ordinary amateurs understand more than you do about this.

It's about the principle. You are dumber than one could have imagined. The load is completely irrelevant to the principle question.
But instead calculate how much a 45x145mm joist on the flat, with support at cc60cm can hold.
However, I am now tired of explaining things to someone who lacks the ability to understand simple physics.

 

[AG A]

The joists under the decking. Check next time which direction they're in...

And..
What in the world do the supports have to do with it. So you didn't understand my irony, and you seriously believe that decking boards do not have a load-bearing function...
It makes you terrified, over how incredibly low the intelligence is among some people.

 

[Nissens]

It’s about the principle. You are dumber than one could imagine. The load is completely irrelevant to the principle of the question.
But instead, calculate how much a 45x145mm beam on edge, with support on cc60cm, can hold.
Now, however, I'm tired of explaining things to someone who lacks the ability to understand simple physics.

Your personal attacks say more about you than you realize.

The load is what's most important. The original poster's construction has an embedded main beam (standing top plate) because the lying top plates can't carry the trusses. I would have preferred to place the standing wall studs under the trusses and the lying top plates instead.

Then you keep arguing about the lying top plates and think they can carry the trusses, which is extremely ignorant of someone who calls themselves a structural engineer.

 

[DrDengrot]

Having a horizontal wall plate has the advantage that the contact pressure between the truss and the wall plate is lower. For as large a span as this garage has, I think it's necessary.
Having a vertical wall plate has the advantage that it better supports the trusses that do not have an upright wall stud directly underneath them if they are offset towards the trusses (why one would build so foolishly) and is better if you directly during construction or later want to have doors or windows where there *should* be an upright stud.
In other words: if you're not quite sure how you want to modify your garage later, the wise one includes *both* a vertical and horizontal wall plate. At a very reasonable extra cost.
End message.

 

[useless]

Having a lying wall plate has the advantage that the contact pressure between the truss and the wall plate is lower. For as large a span as this garage has, I think it's necessary.
Having a standing wall plate has the advantage that it better supports the trusses that do not have a standing wall stud directly under them if they are offset towards the trusses (why one would build so foolishly) and is better if one wants to have doors or windows where there *should* be a standing stud either at the time of construction or later.
In other words: if one is not quite sure how they want to modify their garage later, a wise person installs *both* a standing and a lying wall plate. For a very reasonable extra cost.
End of message.

There is no such thing as a "standing wall plate." The purpose of the wall plate is, as has been said several times, to stabilize the wall. Therefore, it should be installed lying down.
The rule on edge is a supporting beam that holds up the trusses, not a wall plate.

 

[din granne]

There is no such thing as a "standing hammarband". The purpose of the hammarband is, as mentioned several times before, to stabilize the wall. Therefore, it should be installed lying down.
The rule on edge is a beam that supports the roof trusses, not a hammarband.

Should and should, of course, depends on the cross-section. If the cross-section is rectangular, it should be placed to increase the torsional stiffness of the wall section.

 

[Ingvar 58]

Strange discussion about the hammarband, I must say. Sometimes I wonder if there are people here who actually build anything or just make things up.

In 'regular' house constructions, you have horizontal hammarband and vertical studs on c/c 60. The roof trusses then land on every other stud at c/c 120.

In a simpler construction where the wall studs are placed further apart, it is advantageous to place a vertical stud recessed under the hammarband, which creates an incredibly strong combination.

Of course, this can also be done when the wall studs are on c/c 60, but that's going above and beyond.

Personally, I always add a vertical 145-stud OUTSIDE the wall studs and use a hammarband that is 2 inches wider to cover that stud. The vertical stud then serves as a support for the paneling.