Deck Posts

[Kenton H. Shepard, CMI]

Wail boys, personally, I portray my comments as correct, because if I didn't think they were... I wouldn't post 'em! And (don't correct my punctuation here) what people post is their opinions, because that's often what's asked for by the original poster.

How well a poster's opinions are accepted often depends (as it should) on their credentials. You can research a poster's credentials by looking at their website or researching thier past posts.

In one of Richards's early posts on the NACHI boards, I disagreed with him strongly until I realized that he had an engineering background while I had a trade background and after realizing our different training, I understood that we were both saying the same thing, just using different terms.

Engineers are a real help on these boards. Appreciate them. Don't be too quick to rag on them because we need them. Richard is just being honest about what he thinks about this deck and you can accept his take or reject it, but he's taking the time to post as a professional, trained engineer.

[rwand1]

Ken

I am not researching any bodies background or past posts to see their credentials if they are to lazy to provide it themselves in their profile. Quite frankly an engineer making posts on a public forum should be providing his credentials because he appears to be offering a professional opinion.

Respect gets respect and the links prove that he is not entirely correct given that he is an engineer or architect or so he says.

[Richard A. Hetzel]

Correction, Mr. Shepard, I'm a professional trained architect, as is stated in my profile. I don't know what else I need to post to satisfy those who seem to think I am trespassing here. I repeat, my motive for posting here is to help when I think I can...topics that are outside my area of expertise, I do not enter. If I post something that's wrong, I will be quick to apologize and learn something. By the same token, if someone else posts something that's wrong, I will try to explain why it is wrong, in a spirit of perhaps helping someone to be a better, more informed inspector.

In the case of the pictured deck, when someone posts that there are no cantilevers, that is simply wrong. There is at least one, and maybe two, but we don't know how it was designed, and the pictures provide insufficient information to be able to know. We do know, however, that there is more than zero, and we do know that the deck is managing to stand so far. We might also suspect that such a design did not come from a carpenter throwing up wood, but probably from a design professional who carefully calculated loads and member sizes.

Are there some legitimate concerns? Sure there are. Can we make determinations about them? No, we cannot, Can we maintain that the deck is a disaster waiting to happen? I think not, without specific structural information to back up such a statement.

The object here is to help each other. All of you can help me to be a better architect, and most have. I hope I occasionally help some of you to be better inspectors.

[rwand1]

Thanks Richard.

I see what you are talking about the cantilevers. The links to the documents indicate that this deck is not as safe as you allude to. I know in my area it would not be acceptable. The 4x4 posts would have to be 6x6, and the links I think allude to that insofar as bracing and post connections.

The original poster did not indicate what state he resides in so it would be up to the local AHJ as to what would be acceptable.

As to your qualifications I do not understand why you would be hesitant to provide a profile that speaks to your qualifications.

[Richard A. Hetzel]

My profile clearly states that I am an Architect registered in the State of New York. That is easily verified. What more do you want?

[relliott]

I see no problem with your original post Richard.
Please continue to help.

[rwand1]

Thanks Richard.

[Frank P. Newman]

I agree with Richard as well. There is no way to adequately evaluate a design from one photograph, even if you are a professor of structural engineering. However, the prevailing opinion among posters is that it looks to be questionable. While we all can state opinions, the most we probably should do is to recommend further evaluation of this deck. IMHO, the last thing we need to do as H.I.s is to start recommending off-the-cuff modifications, sizes of members, etc. Defer it and let it go.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Sorry but when I look at the picture I can see there is NO handrail on the inside of the stairs to me this is wrong and needs to be written up as Immediate repair.
I also feel there are other concerns ..
... Cookie

[relliott]

Good point on the handrail.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by rcooke

Sorry but when I look at the picture I can see there is NO handrail on the inside of the stairs to me this is wrong and needs to be written up as Immediate repair.
I also feel there are other concerns ..
... Cookie

The rail that is on stair is non-graspable.
Did anyone else notice the the right hand most 4x4 is not bearing on the top of the lower deck but is only attached along side by some unknown means.

[rwand1]

Yes Michael,

The whole deck is questionable.

Cheers,