FrankWoeste Posted September 16, 2010 Report Posted September 16, 2010 Re the balcony collapse last weekend, this post raises some design questions. Referring to this document: http://www.wwpinstitute.org/mainpages/d ... un1807.pdf do you think that cantilevered balconies fall into the UC3A category or the UC4B use category (or higher)? UC3A ââ¬â Wood and wood based materials used in exterior construction that are coated and not in contact with the ground. Such products may be exposed to the full effects of weather, but are in vertical exterior walls or other types of construction that allows water to quickly drain from the surface. UC4B ââ¬â Wood and wood based materials used in contact with the ground either in severe environments, such as horticultural sites, in climates with a high potential for deterioration, in critically important components. Referring to the first table in the wwpinstitute.org document, UC4B calls for about three times (3x) the chemical retention that is required for a UC3A use. Questions for discussion. Should cantilevered balconies be permitted to use ââ¬ÅAbove Groundââ¬
Chad Fabry Posted September 16, 2010 Report Posted September 16, 2010 Hi Frank, I met you at the Finger Lakes Building Official conference- the topic was truss creep as I recall. Anyway, I was the 37th guy to shake your hand following the presentation. You and Joe made the other twenty hours of drudgery almost bearable. Thanks for the provocative post and hope to see more input from you in the future.
FrankWoeste Posted September 16, 2010 Author Report Posted September 16, 2010 Hi Frank, Thanks for the provocative post and hope to see more input from you in the future. Chad: Thank you for the kind remarks about the post. More deck problems today after a funeral (link below). Frank Woeste, Professor Emeritus, Virginia Tech http://www.necn.com/09/16/10/6-injured- ... eedID=4206
Jim Katen Posted September 17, 2010 Report Posted September 17, 2010 Re the balcony collapse last weekend, this post raises some design questions. Referring to this document: http://www.wwpinstitute.org/mainpages/d ... un1807.pdf do you think that cantilevered balconies fall into the UC3A category or the UC4B use category (or higher)? Neither. They'd fall into category UC3B. Category 4 is for materials in contact with the ground. UC3A ââ¬â Wood and wood based materials used in exterior construction that are coated and not in contact with the ground. Such products may be exposed to the full effects of weather, but are in vertical exterior walls or other types of construction that allows water to quickly drain from the surface. UC4B ââ¬â Wood and wood based materials used in contact with the ground either in severe environments, such as horticultural sites, in climates with a high potential for deterioration, in critically important components. Referring to the first table in the wwpinstitute.org document, UC4B calls for about three times (3x) the chemical retention that is required for a UC3A use. Where do you see that? Under copper nap, I see a range from .04 to .06 Under creosote, I see a range from 8 to 10 Under Penta, I see a range from .3 to .6 None of those is even close to a 3x increase. BTW, on line 9, under Copper Nap, I believe there's a printing error. I should be .06, but it's printed as .60. That's way out of line with everything else in the chart. Questions for discussion. Should cantilevered balconies be permitted to use ââ¬ÅAbove Groundââ¬
Jack Ahern Posted September 17, 2010 Report Posted September 17, 2010 Deck in Burlington,Ma. fell off of a house. Rotted wood-six people hurt. Gathered after a funeral. No other HI information available.[:-banghea
Jim Katen Posted September 17, 2010 Report Posted September 17, 2010 Deck in Burlington,Ma. fell off of a house. Rotted wood-six people hurt. Gathered after a funeral. No other HI information available.[:-banghea Yes, Frank mentioned that one. What would be useful is to find out whether or not the wood was treated and, if so, what category of treatment it was. - Jim Katen, Oregon
Bill Kibbel Posted September 17, 2010 Report Posted September 17, 2010 http://necn.platformicstaging.com/09/16 ... kID=312293
hausdok Posted September 17, 2010 Report Posted September 17, 2010 Hi, Well the ledger and hangers are still visible in the video; so it wasn't the ledger that separated it was the joists that either sheared (doubtful) or pulled out of the hangers (more likely). Now I have to wonder whether the inner ends of the joists were rotten or whether they'd failed to use a nail in every hole in those hangers. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now