Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
I've always taken a serendipity view of screw gauge when doing rough
stuff as in "hey, I'd better use a bigger screw for this." I need to cobble together some two bys for a frame for a basement storage rack. I've got a box of number 9 2 1/2 inchers that ought to do the trick. Question: Is there a formula for determining the minimum gauge for a screw if you know the load? |
#2
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/6/2012 11:05 AM, Gramp's shop wrote:
I've always taken a serendipity view of screw gauge when doing rough stuff as in "hey, I'd better use a bigger screw for this." I need to cobble together some two bys for a frame for a basement storage rack. I've got a box of number 9 2 1/2 inchers that ought to do the trick. Question: Is there a formula for determining the minimum gauge for a screw if you know the load? My favorite screw for that application is a "Spax": http://www.mcfeelys.com/spax-screws I prefer them for attaching cabinets to walls these days because of the superior shear strength. That said, most engineers will tell you that for many construction/structural projects nails will provide more shear strength than screws, so it really depends upon the application. -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
#3
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
"Gramp's shop" wrote in message ... I've always taken a serendipity view of screw gauge when doing rough stuff as in "hey, I'd better use a bigger screw for this." I need to cobble together some two bys for a frame for a basement storage rack. I've got a box of number 9 2 1/2 inchers that ought to do the trick. Question: Is there a formula for determining the minimum gauge for a screw if you know the load? I never thought about it. Just that so many screws today are absolute crap. If you shear off a screw while driving it into the wood, it is a bad sign. And it depends where you buy them too. I have had terrible luck with deck screws and lag screws from the local home depot. But the local ace hardware store gave me screws that were higher in quality, stronger and a few cents cheaper too. If I got any kind of basic repair outside or in the garage these days, I just use their deck screws. It ain't art or furniture. But it is strong. They don't shear off and they don't rust outside. The old standby rule about strength for fasteners is to estimate how many will do the job. Then put twice as many in there. I have always been accused of using too many screws anyway. |
#4
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/6/2012 11:05 AM, Gramp's shop wrote:
I've always taken a serendipity view of screw gauge when doing rough stuff as in "hey, I'd better use a bigger screw for this." I need to cobble together some two bys for a frame for a basement storage rack. I've got a box of number 9 2 1/2 inchers that ought to do the trick. Question: Is there a formula for determining the minimum gauge for a screw if you know the load? What you also need to ask is if there is a way to determine the quality of the screw you are using. I know of #6 screws that are stronger than #10's. All things be in equal, McFeeleys.com has the specifically information that you are asking and IIRC their catalog has a chart of this also. |
#5
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Friday, April 6, 2012 12:05:36 PM UTC-4, Gramp's shop wrote:
I've always taken a serendipity view of screw gauge when doing rough stuff as in "hey, I'd better use a bigger screw for this." I need to cobble together some two bys for a frame for a basement storage rack. I've got a box of number 9 2 1/2 inchers that ought to do the trick. Question: Is there a formula for determining the minimum gauge for a screw if you know the load? Those will do. If you are concerned, smear a little construction adhesive in there too. Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. RP |
#6
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote:
Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? I learned the hard way that any carpentry (as opposed to ww) work I do, someday I, or someone who comes after, will have to take it apart again. I use screws for all that now. -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#7
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. I learned the hard way that any carpentry (as opposed to ww) work I do, someday I, or someone who comes after, will have to take it apart again. I use screws for all that now. -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
#8
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed...
Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. On 4/11/2012 7:37 PM, Swingman wrote: On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. I learned the hard way that any carpentry (as opposed to ww) work I do, someday I, or someone who comes after, will have to take it apart again. I use screws for all that now. |
#9
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote:
Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. |
#10
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:37:51 -0500, Swingman wrote:
On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. Using the right number and pattern of screws will achieve the same thing. You need a larger screw to give the same strength, generally speaking, because the root diameter if the screw is significantly less than the nominal diameter, and the strength of the screw (yield) is lowered by the stress rizers formed by the malformation of the metal at the thread root. Screws COULD be made that were almost as strong as the equivalent sized nail, but they would be way to expensive to be practical. An "old school" wood screw is stronger than today's "construction screw" or "deck screw" or, particularly, the "drywall screw". The holding ability of a screw excedes that of a nail in most cases - but with a "deck screw" or "drywall screw" it also often excedes the yield strength of the screw itself. An "ardox" nail is a compromize - it's holding ability approaches that of a screw - with the overall strength of a nail, but without the removeability of a screw. A guy who used to work in construction with my dad used to drive screws with a hammer - he said the funny head and other features of the screw were just to make them easier to remove. I learned the hard way that any carpentry (as opposed to ww) work I do, someday I, or someone who comes after, will have to take it apart again. I use screws for all that now. |
#11
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
Swingman writes:
On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. Particularly in earthquake country where shear walls are commonly required by the building codes. The nailing patterns are very specific. scott |
#12
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:05:15 -0400, tiredofspam nospam.nospam.com
wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. On 4/11/2012 7:37 PM, Swingman wrote: On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. I learned the hard way that any carpentry (as opposed to ww) work I do, someday I, or someone who comes after, will have to take it apart again. I use screws for all that now. A straight nail driven into end grain has about the same holding power (in tension) as yesterday's chewing gum. |
#13
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:15:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. If you google "strength of wood screws" you will find http://www.awc.org/pdf/.../Part11Woo...pp133to139.pdf. Download the PDF and read it. You will find out all you ever wanted to know about wood screws, their strength and application. (and likely even MORE than you wanted to know). A good read. |
#14
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:15:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...69aEy4gb6jrsjw gives more information on screw strength and calculations. It is a LONG URL and may not work for you, but you can find it by googling as well. Google "wood mechanical fasteners". |
#15
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:15:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf2001/ramme01c.pdf will give you the PDF on wood: mechanical fasteners. www.awc.org/pdf/ndscom97.pdf will find you my first reference to "Part XI: Wood Screws" in secion XI. All you ever wanted to know about wood screws (particularly in construction) from the American Forest and Paper Association. |
#16
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
|
#17
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:15:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. Look up "fasten master" structural screws. They are approved for a LOT of general construction use - and their "timberlok" screw can be used in place of hurricane straps to fasten trusses to double top sills - as an example - replacing the tiedown strap and 12 nails with ONE fastener. |
#18
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
|
#19
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
And put on earth quake straps on the foundation and sil board.
That will work in other cases of strong wind. A force trying to flatten a house. Another thing we did in earth quake country was to put in shear walls. Often the outer boards are 1x tongue and grove but they silip and slide in wind. On the inside put sheet ply It doesn't have to be all walls, but some of the side on all sides. Keep that side from laying over. Martin On 4/11/2012 7:15 PM, Leon wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. |
#20
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/11/2012 8:33 PM, wrote:
TimberLok screws can be used in place of hurricane straps to connect trusses to sills. Fully code compliant, and you won't mistake them for a common screw or lag bolt - and you don't need to remove them or X-Ray to know how long the timberlok is (they are clearly marked on their black hex heads) You simply cannot make a blanket statement like the above without checking your local building code, as well as the Engineering specifications for the particular structure. Without question, you will most assuredly find that your options in that regard are severely limited when it comes to structural members. -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
#21
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Swingman writes: On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. Particularly in earthquake country where shear walls are commonly required by the building codes. The nailing patterns are very specific. We have a separate shear wall inspection in the locale where I generally build, and you are correct, the nailing pattern for that inspection, as well as full height structural sheathing on single story, and required overlap of structural sheathing between floors, is very specific. -- www.ewoodshop.com |
#22
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/11/2012 9:00 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/11/2012 8:33 PM, wrote: TimberLok screws can be used in place of hurricane straps to connect trusses to sills. Fully code compliant, and you won't mistake them for a common screw or lag bolt - and you don't need to remove them or X-Ray to know how long the timberlok is (they are clearly marked on their black hex heads) You simply cannot make a blanket statement like the above without checking your local building code, as well as the Engineering specifications for the particular structure. Without question, you will most assuredly find that your options in that regard are severely limited when it comes to structural members. I don't think he was addressing "approval by political elect", but structural reliability. |
#24
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:57:15 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:15:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. If you google "strength of wood screws" you will find http://www.awc.org/pdf/.../Part11Woo...pp133to139.pdf. Um, remove the ... and give us the actual URL, please. Parsing error! Silly wabbit. -- Happiness is not a station you arrive at, but a manner of traveling. -- Margaret Lee Runbeck |
#25
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/11/2012 10:20 PM, Swingman wrote:
wrote: On 4/11/2012 9:00 PM, Swingman wrote: On 4/11/2012 8:33 PM, wrote: TimberLok screws can be used in place of hurricane straps to connect trusses to sills. Fully code compliant, and you won't mistake them for a common screw or lag bolt - and you don't need to remove them or X-Ray to know how long the timberlok is (they are clearly marked on their black hex heads) You simply cannot make a blanket statement like the above without checking your local building code, as well as the Engineering specifications for the particular structure. Without question, you will most assuredly find that your options in that regard are severely limited when it comes to structural members. I don't think he was addressing "approval by political elect", but structural reliability. WTF does "approval by political elect" have to do with building codes and structural requirements set forth by an engineer? Clare's a pretty decent engineer. |
#26
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
In article ,
says... On 12 Apr 2012 01:17:25 GMT, (Scott Lurndal) wrote: writes: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:05:15 -0400, tiredofspam nospam.nospam.com wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. On 4/11/2012 7:37 PM, Swingman wrote: On 4/11/2012 6:33 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:26:06 -0700, RP wrote: Up here in the Northeast, if we are framing a house, we cannot use screws. Must use nails or you will not pass the framing inspection. That seems a little strange - what's the rational given, if any? Nails generally have a greater shear strength than screws, thus the requirement in some areas are very specific as to the nails used, their size, makeup, and nailing patterns. I learned the hard way that any carpentry (as opposed to ww) work I do, someday I, or someone who comes after, will have to take it apart again. I use screws for all that now. A straight nail driven into end grain has about the same holding power (in tension) as yesterday's chewing gum. When it is nailed from the top plate or sill into stud endgrain, it suffices since the roof holds them together - the nail is to keep the stud aligned, any forces will be perpendicular to the nail. Untill you get wind lift. Or siesmic activity. Which is why toe-nailing USED to be pretty well a requirement in the days of plain nails. Ardox nails help. TimberLok screws can be used in place of hurricane straps to connect trusses to sills. Fully code compliant, For certain values of "code". Building codes in the US are not standardized. There is a model code but no requirement that it be used by any given locality. and you won't mistake them for a common screw or lag bolt - and you don't need to remove them or X-Ray to know how long the timberlok is (they are clearly marked on their black hex heads) |
#27
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/2012 12:54 AM, Richard wrote:
On 4/11/2012 10:20 PM, Swingman wrote: wrote: On 4/11/2012 9:00 PM, Swingman wrote: On 4/11/2012 8:33 PM, wrote: TimberLok screws can be used in place of hurricane straps to connect trusses to sills. Fully code compliant, and you won't mistake them for a common screw or lag bolt - and you don't need to remove them or X-Ray to know how long the timberlok is (they are clearly marked on their black hex heads) You simply cannot make a blanket statement like the above without checking your local building code, as well as the Engineering specifications for the particular structure. Without question, you will most assuredly find that your options in that regard are severely limited when it comes to structural members. I don't think he was addressing "approval by political elect", but structural reliability. WTF does "approval by political elect" have to do with building codes and structural requirements set forth by an engineer? Clare's a pretty decent engineer. Then he should know better than to make a blanket statement indicating that a fastener/method claiming to be "fully code compliant" with a model building code is not necessarily accepted by any jurisdiction using that model building code as a basis for building standards. Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. When an engineer calls for a specific fastener, joist hanger, strapping method, etc, in an approved structural/framing plan, he does so in compliance with the specifics of the local code in the jurisdiction in which the structure is built. Any deviation from the engineer's specific fastener, joist hanger, strapping method by someone implementing the plan risks obtaining both engineering approval of the "as built" structure, and failure of any inspection under that jurisdition's code. In short, just because something is claiming to be "fully code compliant", does not mean that it can be used. Once again, check your local building code, and your engineer approved structural plan, BEFORE using any fastener in structural members. -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
#28
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, Swingman wrote:
Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. Has there been noticeable resistance to it? To me anyway, it looks like the ultimate plumbing product. At least for the current state of the art. Have you heard about this Karl? http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/...-no-resistance |
#29
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/2012 8:20 AM, Dave wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, wrote: Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. Has there been noticeable resistance to it? To me anyway, it looks like the ultimate plumbing product. At least for the current state of the art. Absolutely in some areas, to the point that it can not be used. Although as soon as some of these old farts on jurisdiction's zoning and building standards boards retire, that should be subject to change. Have you heard about this Karl? http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/...-no-resistance Pretty cool ... heretofore most of that stuff is/was done at temperatures not found outside a laboratory, but I expect it won't be long before it becomes a reality in the real world. -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
#30
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/2012 8:20 AM, Dave wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, wrote: Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. Has there been noticeable resistance to it?... Yeah, I think Chicago still requires flex conduit instead. -- |
#31
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/12 9:35 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/12/2012 8:20 AM, Dave wrote: On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, wrote: Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. Has there been noticeable resistance to it? To me anyway, it looks like the ultimate plumbing product. At least for the current state of the art. Absolutely in some areas, to the point that it can not be used. Although as soon as some of these old farts on jurisdiction's zoning and building standards boards retire, that should be subject to change. Tru dat. Most resistance to new, better technology comes from old school technophobes often entrenched in a corrupt system protecting their fellow old schoolers and the technology they profit the most from. If you can sit on a house for 3 days, sweating copper and charging like it's rocket surgery, why would you switch to Pex and only get a 1/2 day's labor, then have to go find another client? -- -MIKE- "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life" --Elvin Jones (1927-2004) -- http://mikedrums.com ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply |
#32
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/2012 9:44 AM, -MIKE- wrote:
On 4/12/12 9:35 AM, Swingman wrote: On 4/12/2012 8:20 AM, Dave wrote: On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, wrote: Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. Has there been noticeable resistance to it? To me anyway, it looks like the ultimate plumbing product. At least for the current state of the art. Absolutely in some areas, to the point that it can not be used. Although as soon as some of these old farts on jurisdiction's zoning and building standards boards retire, that should be subject to change. Tru dat. Most resistance to new, better technology comes from old school technophobes often entrenched in a corrupt system protecting their fellow old schoolers and the technology they profit the most from. If you can sit on a house for 3 days, sweating copper and charging like it's rocket surgery, why would you switch to Pex and only get a 1/2 day's labor, then have to go find another client? +1 -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
#33
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:44:11 -0500, -MIKE-
Tru dat. Most resistance to new, better technology comes from old school technophobes often entrenched in a corrupt system protecting their fellow old schoolers and the technology they profit the most from. If you can sit on a house for 3 days, sweating copper and charging like it's rocket surgery, why would you switch to Pex and only get a 1/2 day's labor, then have to go find another client? I'm thinking there might be less labour for plumbers on the home owner side of the issue. I'd expect home owners doing a pex install for themselves where they might run to a plumber to have a copper water pipe soldered. I mean, how difficult is it to install pex? Don't bend it too much and crimp a collar onto a line. Can't get too much simpler than that. |
#34
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:36:27 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:57:15 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:15:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: On 4/11/2012 7:05 PM, tiredofspam wrote: Used to be that framing had to be toe nailed... Now I see nails used from top and bottom sil to studs. Not as strong. The toe nailing really locks it in from both sides. straight nailing will not withstand storm forces as much. But then again, most roofs will easily lift before the framing gives. Typically hurricane straps add tremendous strength if you are building for wind storm resistance. If you google "strength of wood screws" you will find http://www.awc.org/pdf/.../Part11Woo...pp133to139.pdf. Um, remove the ... and give us the actual URL, please. Parsing error! Silly wabbit. That's why I said google it and the hacked up URL was just to identify the post, Dumb bunny |
#35
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/12 11:23 AM, Dave wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:44:11 -0500, Tru dat. Most resistance to new, better technology comes from old school technophobes often entrenched in a corrupt system protecting their fellow old schoolers and the technology they profit the most from. If you can sit on a house for 3 days, sweating copper and charging like it's rocket surgery, why would you switch to Pex and only get a 1/2 day's labor, then have to go find another client? I'm thinking there might be less labour for plumbers on the home owner side of the issue. I'd expect home owners doing a pex install for themselves where they might run to a plumber to have a copper water pipe soldered. I mean, how difficult is it to install pex? Don't bend it too much and crimp a collar onto a line. Can't get too much simpler than that. I recently installed a bunch for my bathroom remodel and I'm still scratching my head thinking, "It can't be this easy, there has to be more to it than this." -- -MIKE- "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life" --Elvin Jones (1927-2004) -- http://mikedrums.com ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply |
#36
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, Swingman wrote:
On 4/12/2012 12:54 AM, Richard wrote: On 4/11/2012 10:20 PM, Swingman wrote: wrote: On 4/11/2012 9:00 PM, Swingman wrote: On 4/11/2012 8:33 PM, wrote: TimberLok screws can be used in place of hurricane straps to connect trusses to sills. Fully code compliant, and you won't mistake them for a common screw or lag bolt - and you don't need to remove them or X-Ray to know how long the timberlok is (they are clearly marked on their black hex heads) You simply cannot make a blanket statement like the above without checking your local building code, as well as the Engineering specifications for the particular structure. Without question, you will most assuredly find that your options in that regard are severely limited when it comes to structural members. I don't think he was addressing "approval by political elect", but structural reliability. WTF does "approval by political elect" have to do with building codes and structural requirements set forth by an engineer? Clare's a pretty decent engineer. Then he should know better than to make a blanket statement indicating that a fastener/method claiming to be "fully code compliant" with a model building code is not necessarily accepted by any jurisdiction using that model building code as a basis for building standards. Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. When an engineer calls for a specific fastener, joist hanger, strapping method, etc, in an approved structural/framing plan, he does so in compliance with the specifics of the local code in the jurisdiction in which the structure is built. Any deviation from the engineer's specific fastener, joist hanger, strapping method by someone implementing the plan risks obtaining both engineering approval of the "as built" structure, and failure of any inspection under that jurisdition's code. In short, just because something is claiming to be "fully code compliant", does not mean that it can be used. No, but it means it can be SPEC'd. If the engineer signs off on the design using a "code compliant" Timberlok in place of say, aStrongTie and 12 nails, it is going to be pretty difficult for an inspector to fail the structure on the basis of their correctly applied use. And it IS acceptable for an engineer to spec "or equivalent" in the design, particularly if he provides the specification the device must meet -such as pull-out strength and shear strength. Once again, check your local building code, and your engineer approved structural plan, BEFORE using any fastener in structural members. |
#37
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:50:37 -0500, Swingman wrote:
On 4/12/2012 9:44 AM, -MIKE- wrote: On 4/12/12 9:35 AM, Swingman wrote: On 4/12/2012 8:20 AM, Dave wrote: On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 08:05:03 -0500, wrote: Pex is "fully code compliant", just try using it in building a house many in jurisdictions across the US. Has there been noticeable resistance to it? To me anyway, it looks like the ultimate plumbing product. At least for the current state of the art. Absolutely in some areas, to the point that it can not be used. Although as soon as some of these old farts on jurisdiction's zoning and building standards boards retire, that should be subject to change. Tru dat. Most resistance to new, better technology comes from old school technophobes often entrenched in a corrupt system protecting their fellow old schoolers and the technology they profit the most from. If you can sit on a house for 3 days, sweating copper and charging like it's rocket surgery, why would you switch to Pex and only get a 1/2 day's labor, then have to go find another client? +1 Makes a lot of sense when you quote the job on a contract basis instead of time and materials. Contractor is used to, say, $3500 to plumb the house in copper, so he's REAL happy to pay $2500 to have it done in PEX - while $1400 would still be making the plumber money. But in MY opinion, a house plumbed with copper just looks so much NEATER, and more professional than the "spiderwebs" of PEX that I see in a lot of new houses. Nothing requires PEX to be run in straight lines with neat 90 degree bends - so the "cheap" plumber just runs the crap in the shortest, easiest route, looks be damned. |
#38
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/12 12:40 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:50:37 -0500, wrote: On 4/12/2012 9:44 AM, -MIKE- wrote: Absolutely in some areas, to the point that it can not be used. Although as soon as some of these old farts on jurisdiction's zoning and building standards boards retire, that should be subject to change. Tru dat. Most resistance to new, better technology comes from old school technophobes often entrenched in a corrupt system protecting their fellow old schoolers and the technology they profit the most from. If you can sit on a house for 3 days, sweating copper and charging like it's rocket surgery, why would you switch to Pex and only get a 1/2 day's labor, then have to go find another client? +1 Makes a lot of sense when you quote the job on a contract basis instead of time and materials. Contractor is used to, say, $3500 to plumb the house in copper, so he's REAL happy to pay $2500 to have it done in PEX - while $1400 would still be making the plumber money. Except that a good General Contractor isn't an idiot and keeps track of the prevailing labor rates and costs of materials and know what a job should cost. Free market would drive that other plumber out of business real quick when the $1400 guy starts getting all the work. Hence, his other old school buddy down on the local code board. But in MY opinion, a house plumbed with copper just looks so much NEATER, and more professional than the "spiderwebs" of PEX that I see in a lot of new houses. Nothing requires PEX to be run in straight lines with neat 90 degree bends - so the "cheap" plumber just runs the crap in the shortest, easiest route, looks be damned. Boooo! Bad answer, you sound like an old guy. :-) There are lazy, sloppy plumbers who do shoddy work with whatever material they are working with. I've seen some ugly ass copper piping with big balls of solder stuck all over the joints and all kinds of extraneous elbows and crap with bad decisions in where to run the lines where the lines are in the way of everything that comes later, pipes too close to the outside of studs and plates. And I've seen great copper jobs.... the kind that belongs in instruction books. In my experience, the guys who care about their work, care about it when they did copper and they care about it after moving to Pex. Why run Pex in straight run with 90 degree bends if you don't have to? If it's not in the way and it makes sense, why do it it based on the same physical restrictions as copper? If it's neater to do it that way and works out better, then do it. But don't do it just because "that's the way we did copper." I've seen some beautiful Pex runs from manifolds and nothing was messy and you could trace every line. It's the plumber, not the plumbing. -- -MIKE- "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life" --Elvin Jones (1927-2004) -- http://mikedrums.com ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply |
#39
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
wrote:
But in MY opinion, a house plumbed with copper just looks so much NEATER, and more professional than the "spiderwebs" of PEX that I see in a lot of new houses. Nothing requires PEX to be run in straight lines with neat 90 degree bends - so the "cheap" plumber just runs the crap in the shortest, easiest route, looks be damned. That's my biggest complaint with PEX - which admitedly, has nothing to do with the product, but has everything to do with the installation. Installed professionaly, it can look and perform as well as copper or CPVC, but it seems the stuff is just plopped in place and it looks like hell. -- -Mike- |
#40
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Shear strength of screws
On 4/12/2012 12:32 PM, wrote:
No, but it means it can be SPEC'd. If the engineer signs off on the design using a "code compliant" Timberlok in place of say, aStrongTie and 12 nails, it is going to be pretty difficult for an inspector to fail the structure on the basis of their correctly applied use. And it IS acceptable for an engineer to spec "or equivalent" in the design, particularly if he provides the specification the device must meet -such as pull-out strength and shear strength. Absolutely no argument that anything can be spec'ed ... (and this has gotten off the intended beaten path and onto a rabbit trail). However, and in MY experience, an engineer or architect will rarely attempt to specify (as with the aforementioned use of PEX) something that is specifically disallowed in the jurisdiction's building code (even if by default, as when specifically stating where they (screws in this case) _can_ be used ... as with ledger boards, decks, etc) if a solution that is unquestionably, and specifically in compliance, is indeed available. And for good reason ... it _always_ costs (me, mostly) time, money and, most importantly, GOOD WILL, for any of the parties involved being forced to take issue with an inspector ... and any architect or engineer who puts me in that position without good reason stands a good chance of not being on the next job. That said, back to the main issue: No disrespect intended at all, I was simply taking exception to what appears to be an qualified statement that since a screw type fastener is deemed to be "fully code compliant", to infer that it may be used, without regard, as an optional replacement, is both arguably incorrect, and misleading to the intended audience. I maintain, once again, that the ONLY reasonable action is to check both your local building code, and engineer approved structural plan, BEFORE using _any_ fastener in structural members just about anywhere in North America. -- www.eWoodShop.com Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious) http://gplus.to/eWoodShop |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why does my snow blower not shear the shear bolts? | Home Repair | |||
Tenon Strength / Rail strength- Max? | Woodworking | |||
Sheetmetal screws, chassis screws, fastening idears | Metalworking | |||
Ultimate shear strength | Metalworking | |||
FS: Roper Whitney Kick Punch, Circle Shear, Libert Shear | Metalworking |