Padstone Inquiry

[shill]

Hi, I am in the early stages of planning an extension to my existing loft conversion on a 1959 bungalow. I have plans that show a 4.8mtr 152 x 152 x 37 UC laying across from the outside wall across a 3mtr width room and laying along 1.8mtrs of the internal wall. My questions are can I lay the 1,8mtr section on just a bed of mortar or does it have to be pad stones. And on the outside wall can the beam lay on the existing wooden wall plate or dos it need to be removed.
Any advice would be appreciated. Drawings can be provided if required.

Thanks Steve

 

[RonnyRaygun]

No, don't put your beam on a bed of mortar.

Depending on the loads you might not necessarily require a pad stone, or you might get way with just an engineering brick, but it's impossible to say without knowing the loads at the support.

Not sure what you mean about laying the beam on the wall plate - no, shouldn't be done, but drawings would help.

 

[^woody^]

And if the beam sits near the eaves, check that the top of it does not stick out the roof. Many crap plan drawers forget that small detail.

 

[shill]

Thanks for the feedback. I have attached the drawing for reference. On closer inspection of the drawing the SE had specified padstones of 200 x 100 x 150 deep under the note for the beam B4 and a 200 x 200 x 10mm plate for the beams B3. If the wall with the beams B3 are carrying the load on an internal wall i would have thought i could use the same principle on the outer walls. What do you think?

 

[tony1851]

Hey guys, if you think you can't chamfer a beam at the bearing, see this
It's a 203x203x47, supporting a 9" rear wall (to the left of the camera) onto a new side wall of a wrap-round, and with no pier.
I detailed it to be chamfered a little so that it would clear the rafters, but the builder clearly had different ideas!
It may not be by the book, but it works!!!!!!

 

[^woody^]

Lol.

I'll be watching the local news.

 

[RonnyRaygun]

It may not be by the book, but it works!!!!!!

I take it you've checked the moment capacity against bending moment and shear capacity against shear at points along the chamfered section?

 

[RonnyRaygun]

Thanks for the feedback. I have attached the drawing for reference. On closer inspection of the drawing the SE had specified padstones of 200 x 100 x 150 deep under the note for the beam B4 and a 200 x 200 x 10mm plate for the beams B3. If the wall with the beams B3 are carrying the load on an internal wall i would have thought i could use the same principle on the outer walls. What do you think?

Yes, you could use a steel plate in place of the specified pad stones. You could (as stated earlier) also simply use engineering bricks as they are more than 200mm long and will do the same job.

It looks like you're bearing onto a 100mm wide wall where the ends of the B3s meet. If so for one I can't work out why a 200x200mm plate has been specified, and for two, make sure you bolt the beams together at the ends.

 

[tony1851]

It may not be by the book, but it works!!!!!!

I take it you've checked the moment capacity against bending moment and shear capacity against shear at points along the chamfered section?

Yes, and as a matter of fact, it works.
But to be on the safe side, I got them to weld plates each side.
They also welded the flange back on top, though not sure that would do much for shear?
(Don't know why they bolted it down either - doubt that would serve any useful purpose).