Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it at
HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be special
ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

"Eric and Megan Swope" wrote in message
news:LcCMe.2811$zb.1712@trndny02...
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it
at
HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be
special
ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

good luck. best bet would be to find someone who is tearing down a barn or
similiar old building or a speciality lumberyard. does it have to be a 4x12?
just nail two 2x12's together with some 1/2 ply sandwiched in the middle.

"Eric and Megan Swope" wrote in message
news:LcCMe.2811$zb.1712@trndny02...
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it
at HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be
special ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

Maybe at a sawmill. Or a place that supplies pole barns and the like. Look
into making your own composite beam to achieve what you need.

Thanks guys. I had considered that, and that is probably what I will do is
use 2 x 12s with the plywood in between, just didn't know if 4 x 12s were
commonly available.


"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
m...

"Eric and Megan Swope" wrote in message
news:LcCMe.2811$zb.1712@trndny02...
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it
at HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be
special ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

Maybe at a sawmill. Or a place that supplies pole barns and the like.
Look into making your own composite beam to achieve what you need.

Eric and Megan Swope wrote:
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it at
HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be special
ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric



Depends on the wood I would guess. I couldn't find 4x12' Ceder at any
of the home depot's or lowe's in the Metro Detroit area. I had to use 2
2x12, and I don't like them as much at all.

--
Respectfully,


CL Gilbert

Eric and Megan Swope wrote:
Thanks guys. I had considered that, and that is probably what I will do is
use 2 x 12s with the plywood in between, just didn't know if 4 x 12s were
commonly available.


"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
m...

"Eric and Megan Swope" wrote in message
news:LcCMe.2811$zb.1712@trndny02...
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it
at HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be
special ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

Maybe at a sawmill. Or a place that supplies pole barns and the like.
Look into making your own composite beam to achieve what you need.

No, 4x12 is not common. Making up your own as suggested will make a
far stronger and straighter header. When making it, try to pick fairly
straight stock and if it is a faily long header, lay it out so the
curves are opposite, i.e., if the top one curves left, the bottom one
curves right. Start nailing from one end and keep pulling the other
end together. That makes for a nice straight beam. You might
(probably will) need clamps to draw the ends together when you get
near. I have done that often with stock up to 2x10, haven't tried with
2x12.

Harry K

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:04:59 GMT, "Eric and Megan Swope"
scribbled this interesting note:

Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it at
HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be special
ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric


4X12 is a common size, but you won't find it at any Home Depot or
Lowes I've ever frequented. To find sizes like this you have to find a
real lumber yard, not the silly, poorly stocked and over priced "Home
Centers."

I was recently in an 84 Lumber just up the street, which is a real
lumber yard, and they had 4X12 rough cedar beams, as well as other
sizes.

For a header, that isn't exposed so it doesn't matter what it looks
like, I would laminate one up for myself. I would probably build it in
place because it would be a bit heavy once assembled. Use 1/2" CDX
plywood glued between two 2X12 boards and you will have a 4X12. And it
will be stronger than a solid piece of lumber would be. Gang nail or
bolt it together, or both. If I wanted this exposed, I would probably
still build it like this and then dress it up on the outside with
whatever grade wood I wanted.


--
John Willis

(Remove the Primes before e-mailing me)

John Willis wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:04:59 GMT, "Eric and Megan Swope"
scribbled this interesting note:


Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x 12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to find it at
HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to be special
ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric



4X12 is a common size, but you won't find it at any Home Depot or
Lowes I've ever frequented. To find sizes like this you have to find a
real lumber yard, not the silly, poorly stocked and over priced "Home
Centers."

I was recently in an 84 Lumber just up the street, which is a real
lumber yard, and they had 4X12 rough cedar beams, as well as other
sizes.

For a header, that isn't exposed so it doesn't matter what it looks
like, I would laminate one up for myself. I would probably build it in
place because it would be a bit heavy once assembled. Use 1/2" CDX
plywood glued between two 2X12 boards and you will have a 4X12. And it
will be stronger than a solid piece of lumber would be. Gang nail or
bolt it together, or both. If I wanted this exposed, I would probably
still build it like this and then dress it up on the outside with
whatever grade wood I wanted.


--
John Willis

(Remove the Primes before e-mailing me)

I went to several 'real' lumber yards myself, and they still didnt have
this size in Cedar.

--
Respectfully,


CL Gilbert

wrote:

....

I agree that nailing two 2X12's together is stronger than a single
beam.

Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.

"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message

Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.

Putting to different pieces together acts the same way, sort of like a
torsion box. Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message

Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.


Putting to different pieces together acts the same way, sort of like a
torsion box. Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.



Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.

--
Respectfully,


CL Gilbert

"CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert" wrote in message

Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.


I didn't write the laws of physics, I just use them like everyone else. Why
are airplane wings not solid?

crowns are ALWAYS up.

"Harry K" wrote in message
ups.com...

Eric and Megan Swope wrote:
Thanks guys. I had considered that, and that is probably what I will do
is
use 2 x 12s with the plywood in between, just didn't know if 4 x 12s
were
commonly available.


"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
m...

"Eric and Megan Swope" wrote in message
news:LcCMe.2811$zb.1712@trndny02...
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x
12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to
find it
at HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to
be
special ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

Maybe at a sawmill. Or a place that supplies pole barns and the like.
Look into making your own composite beam to achieve what you need.

No, 4x12 is not common. Making up your own as suggested will make a
far stronger and straighter header. When making it, try to pick fairly
straight stock and if it is a faily long header, lay it out so the
curves are opposite, i.e., if the top one curves left, the bottom one
curves right. Start nailing from one end and keep pulling the other
end together. That makes for a nice straight beam. You might
(probably will) need clamps to draw the ends together when you get
near. I have done that often with stock up to 2x10, haven't tried with
2x12.

Harry K

Edwin Pawlowski writes:

Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.

No, not absolutely stiffer.

You may be thinking of it being stiffer per unit weight, which it is.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:34:52 -0400, "CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert"
wrote Re 4 x 12:

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message

Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.


Putting to different pieces together acts the same way, sort of like a
torsion box. Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.



Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.

No, the tube is *stiffer* than the solid rod of the same material.
Our Strength of Materials teacher in 3nd year engineering went through
the math/physics for the proof and I remember being stunned by it. But
it was clearly correct as I recall.
--
To email me directly, remove CLUTTER.

Vic Dura wrote:

..the tube is *stiffer* than the solid rod of the same material.

Wrong.

Nick

I have always been told that by structural & civil engineers.

Stretch

I R Baboon wrote:

"Harry K" wrote in message
ups.com...

Eric and Megan Swope wrote:
Thanks guys. I had considered that, and that is probably what I will do
is
use 2 x 12s with the plywood in between, just didn't know if 4 x 12s
were
commonly available.


"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
m...

"Eric and Megan Swope" wrote in message
news:LcCMe.2811$zb.1712@trndny02...
Hi. Is it common or uncommon for Home Depot and Lowe's to stock 4 x
12
lumber? I wanted to use a 4 x 12 for a header, but was unable to
find it
at HD, and didn't know if it was this particular store, if it has to
be
special ordered, etc. Thanks.

Eric

Maybe at a sawmill. Or a place that supplies pole barns and the like.
Look into making your own composite beam to achieve what you need.

No, 4x12 is not common. Making up your own as suggested will make a
far stronger and straighter header. When making it, try to pick fairly
straight stock and if it is a faily long header, lay it out so the
curves are opposite, i.e., if the top one curves left, the bottom one
curves right. Start nailing from one end and keep pulling the other
end together. That makes for a nice straight beam. You might
(probably will) need clamps to draw the ends together when you get
near. I have done that often with stock up to 2x10, haven't tried with
2x12.

Harry K




crowns are ALWAYS up.


Except when building headers. Check out some construction manuals if
you don't believe it.

Top posting corrected

Harry K

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert" wrote in message

Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.



I didn't write the laws of physics, I just use them like everyone else. Why
are airplane wings not solid?



Why are bird bones hollow?

--
Respectfully,


CL Gilbert

"Richard J Kinch" wrote in message
. ..
Edwin Pawlowski writes:

Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.

No, not absolutely stiffer.

You may be thinking of it being stiffer per unit weight, which it is.

A composite beam may be stronger because the defects and local weakness will
not likely coincide.
There is another factor, the tendency to twist and buckle under load may be
improved by the fact that the pieces have different twist in the fibers.

We are talking about wood, here. Not aluminum beams like in an airplane
wing.

MG

Vic Dura wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:34:52 -0400, "CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert"
wrote Re 4 x 12:


Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message


Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.


Putting to different pieces together acts the same way, sort of like a
torsion box. Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.



Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.


No, the tube is *stiffer* than the solid rod of the same material.
Our Strength of Materials teacher in 3nd year engineering went through
the math/physics for the proof and I remember being stunned by it. But
it was clearly correct as I recall.

Sounds like an urban legend to me. Kinda like hot water freezes faster
than cold water.

The wikipedia says stiffness is a measure of resistance to deformation.
Solid rod resists deformation more than a hollow rod. It makes no
sense that boring out a steel rod would make it stronger. How thin
should I make it? The thinner the stronger? And the opposite is true
too? The more I fill it, the less stiff it becomes?


--
Respectfully,


CL Gilbert

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert" wrote in message

Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.


I didn't write the laws of physics, I just use them like everyone else. Why
are airplane wings not solid?

Weight, mostly...

I'm not sure what laws you're thinking of...let's see--if we consider a
simple beam w/ uniform load w/ simple support at both ends the maximum
deflection at the center is 5/384 (W*l^3)/(EI) where

E = modulus of elasticity (material property only)
I = moment of inertia (dependent on geometry)
W = applied load
l = length

Now for a rod Irod = MR^2

where M = mass of beam and R = radius

and for a hollow tube it is Itube = M(R1^2 + R2^2) where

R1,R2 are inner/outer radii, respectively.

This superficially makes it look like ItubeIrod for R2 = R, but that
doesn't include the mass which will be less for a hollow tube than for a
solid rod.

Since we're after comparing two geometries of the same material, we can
consider the density of the two to be the same as well as the length.
On that basis, for the rod the weight/unit length is

mRrod = density*pi*R^2/4

and similarly,

mTube = density*pi*(R2^2-R1^2)

Substituting into the formulae for I the geometrical terms for each M we
get that for each the moment of inertia is proportional to

iRod ~ R^4

and

iTube ~ (R2^2 - R1^2)*(R1^2 + R2^2) = R2^4 - R1^4

Thus, it can be seen that the moment of inertia for the tube section is
always slightly smaller than that of the solid rod and since I is in the
denominator of the deflection, the larger deflection will occur for the
tube, not the rod for R2==R (the outer diameters equal).

If you figure on an equivalent weight basis, the tube will be stronger
as the same amount material will be located at a farther distance from
the neutral axis.

Stretch wrote:

I have always been told that by structural & civil engineers.

Stretch

For equivalent weights, yes. See my note back to Edwin.

Vic Dura wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:34:52 -0400, "CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert"
wrote Re 4 x 12:

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message

Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.


Putting to different pieces together acts the same way, sort of like a
torsion box. Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.



Say what? I disagree. Further a 1/2" tube should not be stiffer than a
1/2" rod.

No, the tube is *stiffer* than the solid rod of the same material.
Our Strength of Materials teacher in 3nd year engineering went through
the math/physics for the proof and I remember being stunned by it. But
it was clearly correct as I recall.

I think what he demonstrated must have been different than what you
recall or mine is all awash...see my note to Edwin.

As a practical thought experiment, if it were as you say, you could
continue to reduce the wall thickness of the tube until it was paper
thin and the result wouldn't be different--that obviously wouldn't be
true in reality.

MG wrote:

"Richard J Kinch" wrote in message
. ..
Edwin Pawlowski writes:

Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.

No, not absolutely stiffer.

You may be thinking of it being stiffer per unit weight, which it is.

A composite beam may be stronger because the defects and local weakness will
not likely coincide.
There is another factor, the tendency to twist and buckle under load may be
improved by the fact that the pieces have different twist in the fibers.

We are talking about wood, here. Not aluminum beams like in an airplane
wing.


Those are some hypothetical maybes that sometimes might, sometimes might
not actually help...

I still don't believe an engineering load test of two nailed 2x12's
would beat a 3x12 in load on average of several trials of same species
and grade material...

Tomorrow if I have time I'll see if I can find anything on the US
Forestry site specific to the questin...

"MG" wrote in message

A composite beam may be stronger because the defects and local weakness
will not likely coincide.
There is another factor, the tendency to twist and buckle under load may
be improved by the fact that the pieces have different twist in the
fibers.

We are talking about wood, here. Not aluminum beams like in an airplane
wing.

There are counteracting forces. Take a thin strip of wood and bend it. Now
take two thin pieces of wood, bend them, glue them together, clamp, dry, and
they remain bent. Why do you think that is? Laminations for curved
materials are often made that way.

Nick was quick to chime in with a one word answer, perhaps he will take the
time to talk about the molecular flow of this so everyone can easily
understand what happens with laminations when you are pushing one while
pulling the other. .

wrote in message
...
Vic Dura wrote:

..the tube is *stiffer* than the solid rod of the same material.

Wrong.

Nick


No formula?

"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message
...
MG wrote:

"Richard J Kinch" wrote in message
. ..
Edwin Pawlowski writes:

Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.

No, not absolutely stiffer.

You may be thinking of it being stiffer per unit weight, which it is.

A composite beam may be stronger because the defects and local weakness
will
not likely coincide.
There is another factor, the tendency to twist and buckle under load may
be
improved by the fact that the pieces have different twist in the fibers.

We are talking about wood, here. Not aluminum beams like in an airplane
wing.


Those are some hypothetical maybes that sometimes might, sometimes might
not actually help...

I still don't believe an engineering load test of two nailed 2x12's
would beat a 3x12 in load on average of several trials of same species
and grade material...

Tomorrow if I have time I'll see if I can find anything on the US
Forestry site specific to the questin...

You say same species and grade, and add averaging over several specimens.
This imply uniformity. The more we assign importance to uniformity the more
we make wood an homogeneous material, which is not.

Clearly there is no reason why a composite should be stronger that a single
piece of equal crossection IF the material are homogeneous. Wood is less
dependable than a steel beam
in the sense that a higher safety margin must be applied for wood.

In construction you consider the lowest of all possible breaking loads and
stay below that.
With wood the ratio between lowest breaking load and typical is a smaller
fraction than with steel.

To make a silly extreme case a knot hole at one third of the span in a
single beam is worst than two knots symmetrically placed on a composite
beam.

In other words the issue is about homogeneity or lack thereof. If you
select 2 perfectly grained flawless board and compare it to the same perfect
single piece there is no difference.


MG

"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message

iTube ~ (R2^2 - R1^2)*(R1^2 + R2^2) = R2^4 - R1^4

Well that explains a lot.


If you figure on an equivalent weight basis, the tube will be stronger
as the same amount material will be located at a farther distance from
the neutral axis.

And that even more.

Stretch wrote:

I have always been told that by structural & civil engineers.

You've always been told what???

Nick

wrote:

Sounds like an urban legend to me. Kinda like hot water freezes faster
than cold water.


Not a legend. Hot water DOES freeze faster. It's because it dont
have as much oxygen. Dont ask me why it has less oxygen, but it does.
and thus it freezes faster.



/me shakes head...

--
Respectfully,


CL Gilbert

Duane Bozarth wrote:

...if we consider a simple beam w/ uniform load w/ simple support at both
ends the maximum deflection at the center is 5/384 (W*l^3)/(EI) where

E = modulus of elasticity (material property only)

Say E = 1.1 million psi for Eastern hemlock...

I = moment of inertia (dependent [only] on geometry)

I = bd^3/12 in^4, for a b" wide x d" deep beam.
I = 2x6^3/12 = 36 in^4 for a rough-sawn (real) 2x6.

W = applied load

....the total load. Say W = 400 lb.

l = length

....in inches. So a 10' rough-sawn 2x6 beam would have
a D = 5W(10x12)^3/(384EI) = 0.23" max deflection.

Now for a rod Irod = MR^2

where M = mass of beam and R = radius

You may be confusing something like the polar moment of inertia (including
mass, for dynamics) with the geometric moment of inertia about the neutral
axis, eg the horizontal diameter x-axis. That's the sum of the products of
each tiny area and the square of the perpendicular distance from that area
to the axis. Ix = Pir^4/4 for a disk of radius r, eg Pi2^4/4 = 12.57 in^4
for a 2" radius rod, IMO.

and for a hollow tube...

....with the same axis, consider the rod to be a composite area and subtract
I = Pi1^4/4 = 0.79 in^4 for the 1" radius bore from 12.57 to get 11.78 in^4
for a 2" radius rod with a 1" radius bore.

So a 10'x2" radius Eastern hemlock rod with a 400 pound total load would
have D = 5x400(10x12)^3/(384x1.1x10^6x12.57) = 0.650" max, and the hollow
version would have D = 5x400(10x12)^3/(384x1.1x10^6x11.78) = 0.695" max.

If the hemlock weighs 30 lb/ft^3 and the solid rod weighs 26.2 pounds,
a 26.2 pound 4" radius rod with a 3.46" radius bore with I = 201.1-113.1
= 88 in^4 would have D = 5x400(10x12)^3/(384x1.1x10^6x88) = 0.093" max.

And a 26.2 pound 4"x8" hemlock "I beam" with 2 4"x1.6" boards bolted onto
a 4"x4.9" foamboard sandwich and I = 4x8^3/12-4x4.9^3/12 = 133 in^4 might
have D = 5x400(10x12)^3/(384x1.1x10^6x133) = 0.062" max, if nothing slips.

Nick

"CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert" wrote:

wrote:

Sounds like an urban legend to me. Kinda like hot water freezes faster
than cold water.


Not a legend. Hot water DOES freeze faster. It's because it dont
have as much oxygen. Dont ask me why it has less oxygen, but it does.
and thus it freezes faster.



/me shakes head...


Well, it's true that water w/ less entrained air will freeze faster than
that w/ more entrained air--and, heating water will drive out some of
the entrained air so there's a kernel of truth in the saw...

MG wrote:
....

In other words the issue is about homogeneity or lack thereof. If you
select 2 perfectly grained flawless board and compare it to the same perfect
single piece there is no difference.

That's exactly my point--that on average (which is all one can deal
with w/ timber since, as you say, it's an inconsistent material),
there's no difference between a composite built of 2-tubaX's and a solid
beam of the same actual dimensions.

I don't believe there's any code based on the difference between the
combination outlined above based on the assumption of defects cancelling
on the composite beam.

Engineered and laminated material is something else entirely...

In article X6MMe.2911$yb.62@trndny01, Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message

Why would that be? There's no more (and maybe less) material
(neglecting the effect of an additional 1/2" (say) ply which would add
some additional resistance.

Putting to different pieces together acts the same way, sort of like a
torsion box. Same as a 1/2" dia. tube is stiffer than a 1/2" rod.


That's just not true. A (larger diameter) tube made from the same
amout of steel as a solid rod would have more resistance to bending
force, but a solid tube of the same diameter as a hollow tube will be
stronger. If you don't believe that, try bending a lenght of 1/2" EMT
over your knee, then try with a solid 1/2" steel bar.




--

Larry Wasserman Baltimore, Maryland

"CL (dnoyeB) Gilbert" wrote:

wrote:

Sounds like an urban legend to me. Kinda like hot water freezes faster
than cold water.


Not a legend. Hot water DOES freeze faster. It's because it dont
have as much oxygen. Dont ask me why it has less oxygen, but it does.
and thus it freezes faster.



/me shakes head...


Might look at...

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...hot_water.html