Does a RSJ always require a padstone?

[Jason1971]

Hope you're still watching!
BCO was attending Wednesday!
Builder has blown him off for another day, unsure when, maybe Thursday!
Hmmmm!

 

[Jason1971]

It's wednesday night..
I went around to my mates house to look at the work so far.
The builder plasterboarded up to the RSJ covering up all block/brick. The #1 RSJ is resting on 6" of block one side and 5" the other. #2 RSJ is resting on 10" one side and 5.5" the other. It is quite difficult to measure but can be done, I wonder if the BCO would be bothered to measure! I have taken off the thickness of the plasterboard for the measurements as I didn't think plasterboard would be loadbearing.
I read somewhere the minimum required is 6"(150mm), but 9"(220mm) is recommended, is that correct?
There is also a visible crack above the RSJ that follows/zig-zags the mortar lines for 2.5 blocks(not bricks).
Is this normal or acceptable for settling?
I believe the BCO is now coming Friday.
Any comments welcomed.

 

[noseall]

Just to butt in and have my ha'penny worth...

You have not mentioned span as this is a huge determining factor.

152mm x 89mm beams are often used in smaller loads/spans. We have used them to carry say a wall plate over a 2.4m opening. I can't help feeling it sounds a bit lean to me.

Virtually all steel steel beams we have installed have been designed with pad's.

All pairs of beams we have fitted have been bolted together.

A large amount of steel beams are designed with 100mm - 150mm bearings. Anything greater is unusual.

The BCO will want to view the masonry directly below the beam.

Seeing mortar cracks in blockwork is not only acceptable but commonplace and can occur anytime even without influence from steel beam installation.

 

[Jason1971]

Hi Noseall,
To try and answer your questions..
The span is approximately 2.8m, the beams are bolted together, as for the load the RSJ is supporting the side of the house second floor plus the gable end of the roof. Do the dimensions of the beam sound right?
You mention your beams are designed with 100-150mm bearing, but is this with a 'padstone' to help dissipate the load. Without a padstone should the bearing be greater?
As for the cracks being visible, surely if a bigger RSJ and better packing of the RSJ was done there shouldn't be any sagging. What do you think?
Is there a definitive minimum bearing size?

 

[noseall]

better packing of the RSJ was done there shouldn't be any sagging?

You mentioned cracking, not actual sagging!

How much sagging?

Beams will deflect but only a small amount.

There is no definitive bearing amount, but i bet if an S.E. had to, he would be able to show that 100mm bearing would satisfy aboot 95% of all domestic loading.

 

[Jason1971]

Sagging, cracking all the same to a mere novice like me! The crack wasn't there before.
On the previous post I mentioned the crack length, but the start of the crack is about 1mm fading to nothing.
What do you think about the loads I have mentioned, I know it's a description and hard to visualise but there is a massive amount of brick/blockwork above the RSJ.
The CBO is booked to arrive tomorrow.

Another minor issue.. I noticed 2x15mm compression equal T's in the ceiling space which he fitted. I told my mate he shouldn't have them as there is no access if they leak. My mate told the builder, his response was "It'll be alright, I've done it that way for years."

 

[noseall]

Another minor issue.. I noticed 2x15mm compression equal T's in the ceiling space which he fitted. I told my mate he shouldn't have them as there is no access if they leak. My mate told the builder, his response was "It'll be alright, I've done it that way for years."

You can not possibly accommodate every single concealed joint in a building, it would mean having hatches everywhere.

......there is a massive amount of brick/blockwork above the RSJ.
The CBO is booked to arrive tomorrow.

You be sure to tell the....er...CBO all your concerns.

 

[Jason1971]

Thats why he should solder the elbow while he has access, so there is no possible chance of leakage in the years to come. I have had to remove a few leaking service valves that have been installed on the flow/return systems after they were fitted 4 years before.

He has arranged to call the BCO tomorrow morning before his site visit.

 

[chapeau]

Thats why he should solder the elbow while he has access, so there is no possible chance of leakage in the years to come.

Soldered joints can leak, or you can get pinhole leaks in the pipe, years later if poor workmanship left flux on the copper. Though I tend to agree that compression joints should not be concealed as if you disturb the pipe years later (eg fitting new radiator) they can come apart. I believe you are not allowed to have concealed compression joints on gas pipes so obviously there is some risk.

 

[Jason1971]

You're right soldered can leak but there is more chance of the compression going first. In exactly the circumstances you said. And yes it is against regulation to use compression fittings on concealed joints on gas pipes. It's just bad practice to use them on water pipes.

Bring us back to the original post, the BCO came around today(Friday). And refused to pass the RSJ on the lack of padstone. The original SE had used the wrong figure for the x masonary below the RSJ, SE used a figure of 7ish it should have been 2ish.
For calculating the bearing area he used 152x150 area, relating to a 6" wide beam onto 6" bearing. When in fact he had specified 89mm(3.5") wide beam.
There are other issues the LA engineer is going to check on monday.

Does anybody know what this means....

Beam length=2.54 + 1/2 beam bearing at each end= 2.7m

Cheers

 

[noseall]

Does anybody know what this means....

...Yeah, FAIL!

 

[^woody^]

Does anybody know what this means....

...Yeah, FAIL!

EPIC fail more like .... SE and builder

Get the dust sheets out, things are going to get messy - unless the SE can recalculate and prove the situation is satisfactory

 

[noseall]

Fitting a padstone, or indeed replacing masonry below the beam will be relatively straightforward, prop the beams and chop away.

However, if the beams need replacing......

 

[Jason1971]

The builder didn't take the news too well! He said "I'm going to fit padstones right away". We told him "You shouldn't because firstly the calcs are wrong so the bearing, and the RSJ could also be wrong". He ignored us and refitted the pads very,very quickly. We even said "you might have to do it again if the calcs come back from the LA with changes". He said "I'm the builder, I know what I'm doing......" Obviously the conversation was heading to the builder getting back on his horse and leaving!!!!
I believe it's going to get worse. Even if the Bearing is 6", one of the beams is 1" too short.
The LA have now got the calcs and design, they are checking the sums on monday. Will the LA give us the new calcs based on what the BCO seen or will they just say 'completely wrong, back of the class, do it again!'

 

[r_c]

you might have to do it again

What happened??