Multiple cracks appearing after part of roof beam removed!!

[vinn]

Why? Consult a SE for what? You dont even know the name of the member or its purpose or how many there are or where its coming from and going to? You have no idea what's staring you in the face in the photos.

You claim to have used trusses and tie-beams in 1980, & since 1980 you apparently think that all roofs are framed as your's was back in the day.
Tell me what kind of roof are we looking at?

Where did any poster on this thread say that "there is no problem with cutting that beam"? Please answer with a direct quotation not some nonsense that you've invented?

I said:
"whoever cut the opening ... has not supported the Binder cuts".
"the cuts should be supported"
"you must support the cut members"
"Its good practice to avoid cutting the Binder(s)"

 

[tony1851]

Might I offer my humble opinion on this?

As I see it, there are 2 issues:

1. The binder has had a section cut out of it. Binders usually run from gable-to-gable across the tops of the ceiling joists and are not major structural items. They are usually intended to provide some support to the ceiling joists to prevent them sagging too much. If there are walls below at right angles to the ceiling joists (eg studwork- or even Paramount partitions) they will provide some support to the joists.

2. 2 or 3 of the ceiling joists appear to have been cut. These are of course also acting as ties to the feet of the rafters, so prevent the rafters pushing out on the walls. If all the ceiling joists had been cut like that, the OP would have serious problems, but if only 2/3 are cut, it may not be much of an issue. What does need to be considered is if any compensatory work has been done to try and maintain some degree of restraint, eg by fixing the cut joists in some way to those either side which are not cut.

 

[vinn]

As I see it there's only the one issue of the foolish man posting irresponsible advice about things he knows nothing about.

"fixing the cut joists", or "compensatory work" as you call it, is known as trimming - I've already explained it twice. Its exactly the same process & terminology for cut binders.

With ref. to your considerations regarding the "compensatory work" the OP has already said that he will look into it.

 

[tony1851]

the foolish man posting irresponsible advice about things he knows nothing about.

FWIW I know a bit more about roof structures than you do.

 

[Notabrickie]

Good grief, bernardgreen is likely not right here but there's ways to disagree without going off on one like a playground tyrant vinn. Betablockers.

 

[tony1851]

 

[vinn]

tony1851,
You jumped the gun - the reference to the "foolish man" was not to you.
I've never thought of you/your posts as foolish. I apologise for my badly worded post.

I was however, indeed, snippy with you about your lecturing tone, and as I mentioned, I had already taken the trouble to clearly explain the issues for the benefit of the OP.

As for claiming that you know more about roof structures than I do - Well, I have no idea what you know about roof structures.
I do know what my experience is of cutting and framing cut roofs, and assembling truss roofs - I've never considered it anything special, merely part of the job.

 

[vinn]

Limewash,
Only fools rush in so I'm told, and to smugly leap in with comments when one doesn't know the full story could only label the leaper a fool.
In fact, it puts one in mind of the Monkey up the tree cautionary tale.
I'm also told that unfortunates with excess of mogadon intake are liable to silliness.

 

[John D v2.0]

Well no matter how much you know, it can all be negated by a bad attitude!



...so since I know little that forces me to be nice

Is the op any the wiser or have they run away?

 

[vinn]

John D v2.0
"Well no matter how much you know" - who are you referring to? If its me then where in this thread have I claimed extensive knowledge - please be specific?

Yes, completely agree that a couple of the posters have shocking attitudes - my approach, as you've noticed in the past, is to educate the ignorant, sadly its not always possible. I'm sure that you understand.

Read what the OP last said before you make silly comments - and FWIW, it would be better an OP legged it than acted on some of the downright dangerous "advice" offered by some.

 

[bernardgreen]

Vinn

If you are referering to my advice as dangerous then think again. Is it dangerous to suggest that the OP has the roof structure inspected ? The ceiling has moved, the new cracks indicate that, is that the total movement or will the movement continue ?

 

[vinn]

Nonsense. You have no idea of the building trade or how to deal with even the simplest of everyday bits and pieces that the average jobbing tradesman takes in his stride.

Are you thinking scaffold and perhaps a fire engine on standby? Of course, that would come after the "everybody out" evacuation. Fetch the Cherrypicker.

 

[bernardgreen]

You have no idea of the building trade or how to deal with even the simplest of everyday bits and pieces that the average jobbing tradesman takes in his stride.

If it makes you happy and more secure to believe that then believe it.

 

[John D v2.0]

John D v2.0
"Well no matter how much you know" - who are you referring to? If its me then where in this thread have I claimed extensive knowledge - please be specific?

Yes, completely agree that a couple of the posters have shocking attitudes - my approach, as you've noticed in the past, is to educate the ignorant, sadly its not always possible. I'm sure that you understand.

Read what the OP last said before you make silly comments - and FWIW, it would be better an OP legged it than acted on some of the downright dangerous "advice" offered by some.

No I'm not referring to you, it's just a general observation on life. Life's too short to argue on the internet, although you can always indulge those whose hobby it is! At the end of the day we all just want to learn something and help the others!

 

[tony1851]

tony1851,
You jumped the gun - the reference to the "foolish man" was not to you.
I've never thought of you/your posts as foolish. I apologise for my badly worded post.

Fair enough - no prob.