Started garage wobbles

[AG A]

The same.

Take a look at TS's pictures, which are fairly normally constructed. Then imagine removing the top plate. Will the roof maintain its position then? The answer is no. The roof will end up on the ground. Conclusion: the top plate takes vertical loads.

 

[roli]

Ok, then the weight of the snow is about 7.5x1.2= 9kN on 45x45mm. Say the roof weighs 2 tons on the same roof area, then the force becomes 11kN on 45x45mm. That corresponds to the weight of about 5 SUVs or 7 regular cars...

You are forgetting that each rafter has two supports, it rests on two walls. So you have to divide the load by two. Then it is 5.5 kN per support, i.e. 550 kg.

 

[Boan]

When I built the fribbebod, I had cross braces throughout the entire construction in all directions to ensure nothing moves, then I also installed diagonal studs in the corners. However, I only removed the diagonal braces after the asfaboard was placed on the outside and then gradually as it was covered with plastic and plywood was installed on the inside... now nothing moves

 

[useless]

As many have pointed out, the braces also serve a function to ensure that everything stays straight during construction. So even if they are not needed when the inner and outer walls are in place, they can definitely be needed earlier.

 

[Boan]

As many have pointed out, the diagonal braces also serve the function of ensuring everything is straight during construction. So even if they're not needed when the inner and outer walls are in place, they can definitely be

exactly, the first thing done when a wall section is made is to align it so it's straight, even better to cross-measure before lifting and set a plank at 45 degrees and then raise.

 

[Nissens]

You forget that each truss has two supports, it rests on two walls. So you should divide the load by two. Then it is 5.5 kN per support, i.e., 550 kg.

Absolutely right! 🙂

 

[Nissens]

Take a look at TS's pictures, which are fairly normally built. Then consider removing the wall plates. Will the roof then hold its position? The answer is no. The roof will then end up on the ground. Conclusion: the wall plate takes vertical loads.

If you look again, TS has a recessed beam along the entire wall that supports the rafters. The wall plates are on top of the recessed beam.

So, the wall plate bears none of the rafters' weight; that is the correct conclusion...

You can't know much about building if you believe a horizontal wall plate alone can support the rafters…

 

[AG A]

If you look again, TS has a recessed beam along the entire wall that supports the trusses. The hammer beam lies on top of the recessed beam.
So, the hammer beam does not bear any of the weight of the trusses, that's the correct conclusion.

You can't know much about building if you think a horizontal hammer beam alone can support the trusses...

As a structural engineer, I know more than well what holds. But who says a hammer beam is a beam lying on its broad side? What happens if you use a square profile instead, does the building lack a hammer beam then?
In TS, the hammer beam is made up of the vertical and horizontal beam together.
BUT, in many cases, there's only a horizontal beam that serves as the hammer beam. As long as it is at least 45x145, it can withstand quite a lot, as the span is only 60cm.
In an earlier post, you also claimed that only the wall studs took the vertical forces.

 

[Nissens]

As a building engineer, I know all too well what holds up. But who says a top plate is a beam lying on its side? What happens if you use a square profile instead, does the build then lack a top plate? In the original poster's case, the top plate consists of both the standing and lying beams together. HOWEVER, in many cases, there is only a lying beam as the top plate. As long as it's at least 45x145, it can withstand quite a lot, as the span is only 60cm. In an earlier post, you also claimed that it was only the wall studs that took the vertical forces.

First time I see someone call an embedded standing beam a top plate. A top plate in all the constructions I've seen so far has been a beam lying in the same direction as the sill. The top plate primarily catches horizontal movements so the wall doesn't bulge. Yep, of course, it's the standing wall studs that support the roof trusses, do you find that strange?

 

[Stefan_E]

The garage has no interior walls and one gable is completely open, which can make achieving stability tricky. Ideally, one should calculate the lateral stability. I suspect it is quite common for garages and carports to have questionable lateral stability. They are often considered simple structures, and an engineer is likely seldom involved.

A common calculation model is that wind loads and skew forces act along the long side at the level of the wall plate, then the roof functions as a horizontal beam that transfers the load to the gables. In the gables, there are diagonal braces, braces, or panels that transfer the load down to the foundation. This doesn't work here because the open gable cannot take any load. Another calculation model must be used. Also, the deformations on the garage door side must not become too large, as this could cause problems with the garage door. If the stabilizing elements in the walls are short, it can result in lifting forces that require anchoring.

Attached is a thesis on this topic. Träguiden and Gyproc also have information.

 

[roke]

I have (quite often) come across different terms for hammarband such as horizontal or vertical hammarband.
In TS's case, I think one can say that the hammarband consists of a combination of vertical and horizontal timber in, as it appears to be, suitable dimensions.

 

[FredrikR]

The hammer band primarily captures horizontal movements so that the wall does not buckle.

Primarily, wasn't it solely, earlier in the thread?
Hard to keep up with all the twists now. 🧐

 

[Nissens]

In the first place, wasn't it just, earlier in the thread?
Hard to keep up with all the twists now. 🧐

Yes, I understand that it's not easy for you.
Some rigidity does exist vertically, but it hardly supports any roof trusses.

This is basic physics, so it's surprising that you don't understand it.

 

[FredrikR]

Yes, I understand that it is not easy for you.
Some rigidity exists vertically, but it hardly supports any trusses.

This is simple physics, so it's surprising that you don't understand it.

Mostly thought about your previous unshakeable statements.
Funny that you mention physics when you think ts garage roof rests on a 45x45 and that you missed kN by 10x too much weight.

Keep fighting!

 

[Nissens]

As a civil engineer, I know all too well what holds. But who says that a hammarband is a beam lying on its wide side? What happens if you use a square profile instead, does the construction then lack a hammarband?
In TS, the hammarband consists of the vertical and horizontal beam together.
BUT, in many cases, you only have a horizontal beam as a hammarband. As long as it is at least 45x145, it can withstand quite a lot, as the span is only 60 cm.
In a previous post, you also claimed that it was only the wall studs that took the vertical forces.

I looked up the terms since I don't recognize the ones you're using.

The hammarband is what lies on top of the vertical wall studs. The recessed beam that you so creatively call a hammarband is actually called a bärlina.

So, you're hardly a civil engineer.