Is this beam OK?

[dbucknavich]

I'm obviously not familiar with Japanese carpentry, but it does not look like they are done framing the wall yet. Whether or not it is supported depends on what is above and beneath the beam or bearing point. Nothing is a substitute for being there.

[japanguy]

Here is a link to some of the floor plans.
http://homepage.mac.com/mori****aste...toAlbum71.html
Remember to reach the site just copy and paste and replace the **** with s h i t without the spaces. The forum doesn't like the bad word I guess.
Does it look OK?

Japanguy(Steve)
Thanks

[rwand1]

It wouldn't cost much to stiffen the load carrying supports. Just ensure the beams carrying the weight of the studs mid span are also adequate. It may be necessary to add another column under the mid span of the beam. Inexpensive for piece of mind. Good luck.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by rwand1

It wouldn't cost much to stiffen the load carrying supports.

But if this designed for an area of seismic activity, stiffening can actually reduce its ability to withstand the effects of an earthquake.

[Barry Adair]

japanguy,

Some of the guys over on http://www.inspectorsjournal.com/ may be more familiar with the building standards over there and the Canadian manufacture.

Photo inspecting will be inconclusive at best and worth the price paid.

NOW, in this phase of your project is a good time to spend a little x-tra money and hire a local inspector, a good one can save the price of your investment, in the long run.

Best of luck to you and yours,

[japanguy]

Thanks for the advice. I understand that a live inspectors is better. And I found out that I have access to an inspector through the warranty I purchased(my japanese is poor so I didn't know the details, the wife is Japanese though) So I will be having them address the issue. Thanks again all.
Japanguy(steve)

[Robert J. OConnor]

I think you are headed in the right direction getting your own local inspector familiar with local construction. You may want to also check with whoever designed the house and prepared the plans, as it seems like you also have questions about how the framing is detailed on the construction drawings.

[ccoombs]

Japan Guy

Overall the framing looks good. I agree with you that you should have additional bearing at the stud wall location. You should have "full bearing" at each end of a large beam. Typically "full bearing" would be minimum of a 4x4 post or double studs. This size would be increased to match the width of the beam.

It is not normal practice to put a large beam over a stud wall. One of the concerns is the deflection of the beam. If the beam deflects then it will push down on the studs and the floor etc. This can lead to dry wall cracks or other concerns. Interior non-bearing wall will be installed with a 1.25" gap below the floor joist, roof trusses, or beam and attached using a Simpson DTC clip. This allows the members to deflect without putting weight on the wall below.


I worked on some houses in Japan about 10 years ago. They used the UBC but required all the calculations to be converted to metric values.

Japan Guy - feel free to e-mail me directly if you have any other questions. They only thing I could suggest on the pictures is to add an arrow to the specific area in question.

Good luck!

[Kenton H. Shepard, CMI]

Curtis, seems like I remember reading on one of Japan Guy's posts (maybe on another board) that there is a load path directly to the foundation beneath that beam.