Cranked beam overhangs padstone

[gaj2002]

Hi, I have a building project ongoing and the SE has specified three 203 x 203 UC 86 cranked beams which are obviously pretty massive.

The steel fabricators complained about a lack of detail about how to actually get this massive beam on to a 100mm width padstone. They have ended up actually doing this with the 100mm bearing on the padstone, which leaves about 130mm of flange (is that the right word?) not resting on the wall. It looks a bit strange but I suppose in the way that is the point of a beam, to span over thin air...

Is that right and if not does anyone have any ideas to rectify it?

 

[John D v2.0]

The structural engineer needs to specify something that's possible and safe to build, so they should have an idea how it will all fix together.
Photos might help here, but it sounds like the SE has an idea on their head!
Although i do wonder if they just fed things into a formula until they got something that passed...

 

[gaj2002]

Thanks for quick reply, here is a picture, any thoughts on that? Cheers

 

[John D v2.0]

I'm sure it's fine structurally but it's certainly one to check with the calculations and structural engineer, but now I'm wondering thermally what's going on, is the steel going on the cold side of the insulation or the warm side? It looks like a severe cold bridge so far. That would be one for the architect.

 

[tony1851]

The metal in that section is fairly thick, so it won't be a problem sitting it (effectively) on a 100mm wide plate - the overhanging bit you see is redundant and could just as well be cut away with no ill-effect.

My query would be the load going on to a 100mm thick wall. If those beams are 8 x 8 x 86, they must be carrying considerable weight?

 

[catlad]

Is that resting on a piece of timber?