Padstone Q for engineers or anyone else really

[^woody^]

Why is a padstone required for steel beams, but if a lintel is used then no padstone is required?

 

[Shytalkz]

They aren't if the brickwork is adequate to take the load. It's an urban myth; same as lintels having to have 150 bearing.

 

[^woody^]

Yes that's what I thought. A BCO is querying use of brick (blues) citing the joints as a possible weakness and that the bearing should be one material.

Hes a bit new and keen, and will "check" and get back to us.

I asked what about the lintels, and he said those are different. Made me smile

 

[Shytalkz]

It's preferable not to have a joint under the beam bearing (coming in at right angles to the wall), in which case I would say stick a eng brick padstone in (and then only to make sure that the bearing surface is constant and level across the width of the beam), but, other than that and calcs show that the wall is ok for direct bearing, there is no need.

As for using dissimilar materials...I sometimes wonder exactly what purpose BCOs serve (especially when you consider Murphy v Brentwood in issues of liability) and it grips me when they ask for things, purely because they don't know the answer. The comment about lintels says it all, really.

I have to admit to considering it ironic that I have to have a BCO come out and tell me if my footing excavations on the barn are ok!