Patio roof hung off of eave

[Chris Bernhardt]

We have previously discussed patio roof covers supported on the roof. What I would like to have comment on is patio covers that are supported off of the eave.

What I see day in and day out are rafters attached to fascias on the truss tails of the eave overhang.

I know its not right but nobody ever complains its done here all of the time. I actually see more problems where someone has attached the patio cover rafters to the side of the house. But in that case its because they have only fastened into the siding and not any structure.

Should it always be written up for correction? Or just explained its not right, but everybody does it? Like I say I have seen hundreds and hundreds of these and rarely is there a problem with rafter connections to the eave.

Download Attachment: jse_IMG_6863.jpg

50.88 KB

Sorry the photo's a little dark, I couldn't find my lightener dily

Chris, Oregon

[randynavarro]

I don't really see it as a problem, but I'm willing to be educated otherwise.

There isn't any weight up there (unless you live in heavy snow country, I guess) and if somebody is silly enough to walk up there, its not the joist-eave connection that's gonna fail!!

Now about how ugly those things are . . .

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt

. . . What I see day in and day out are rafters attached to fascias on the truss tails of the eave overhang.

I know its not right but nobody ever complains its done here all of the time. I actually see more problems where someone has attached the patio cover rafters to the side of the house. But in that case its because they have only fastened into the siding and not any structure.

Should it always be written up for correction? Or just explained its not right, but everybody does it? Like I say I have seen hundreds and hundreds of these and rarely is there a problem with rafter connections to the eave.

I think it depends on how well (or poorly) it's done. I've made recommendations that range from "tear it down" to "It's fine. Leave it be."

In your picture, I'd be concerned with the connection between the rafter tails and the fascia. My recommendation would probably be to have a framing contractor improve the connection between the rafter tails and the fascia board. (An A34 at each tail would be fine.)

Sorry the photo's a little dark, I couldn't find my lightener dily

Chris, Oregon

Here's a lightened version.

Download Attachment: 2007510172910_jse_IMG_6863.jpg

131.2 KB

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Steven Hockstein]

What about uplift during a storm? The roof is a big sail.

[Chris Bernhardt]

We have had a number of high wind events and while I have seen only a few blow off its amazing that so many stay on happy as a clam.

Chris, Oregon

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Steven Hockstein

What about uplift during a storm? The roof is a big sail.

If the framing is even moderately well-installed, the roof panels on these things tend to fly off while the framing stays put.

Chris & I are in a fairly protected valley where the really nasty wind storms are rare.

On Columbus Day of 1962, we saw gusts of 167mph, but haven't seen anything that bad since.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[sbrooten]

Okay, how about this... The 167 mph wind blows through the area and cheesy fiberglass/plastic panels blow off. Mr. Do-It-Yourselfer gets pissed, goes down to Home Depot and buys plywood and shingles so the d----- thing won't blow off again. Now I see a big problem, as the load isn't transferred to the wall. I won't count on things staying as they are now. I will point it out and let the chips fall where they may.

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by sbrooten

Okay, how about this... The 167 mph wind blows through the area and cheesy fiberglass/plastic panels blow off. Mr. Do-It-Yourselfer gets pissed, goes down to Home Depot and buys plywood and shingles so the d----- thing won't blow off again. Now I see a big problem, as the load isn't transferred to the wall. I won't count on things staying as they are now. I will point it out and let the chips fall where they may.

So you'd recommend altering the construction of the patio cover based on your guess about what a homeowner might do in reaction to a rare windstorm that might happen?

Frankly, that's too many contingencies for me. I'd just tell them to secure the framing well.

If we get another once-in-a-hundred-year storm, we'll have bigger problems than improper subsequent repairs to patio covers.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[chicago]

I would think SOP might not include actually inspecting something like that,since it could be looked at as not part of the structure.

[randynavarro]

True, but if its built so poorly that it could fall and hurt someone, then it's worthy of comments.

[chicago]

Good point.

[Chris Bernhardt]

Thats an interesting point that the attached patio cover might not be covered under certain SOP's. Back in the FHA days there was sort of this unwritten rule that anything attached to the house that served the house was to be included in the pest & dryrot report. Under that definition fences didn't count.

It was sort of a strange rule because I had talked to a number of appraisers and underwriters that assumed that anything being given value on the property was inspected including fences. All day long the inspectors would do P&D's where it was clearly stated on the reports that only the house or maybe the infrequent detached garage was inspected. Never had anyone complain.

Chris, Oregon

[ctgo4it]

I would put in the report that the support is adequate for the current covering, but would need to be upgraded if changed.

But I'm also willing to be educated