Chains in attic...

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by ldapkus1

I think your restraint to react (patience) is what is leading to you overeating which leads to your obesity. Have you sought professional help?

I see my therapist(s) (Mr.Beef, Suzie's, Vito & Nick's, and others) every time I visit Chicago!

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by rcooke

Not the best way to go through life always going to get even .
Where does this end .
I get upset and the next day its gone and I try to move on.
... Roy

So, you have no sibling's Roy?

I know a few "only child's", and they're some of the most "out of touch with reality" people I know!

Gotta remember though... it's 'usually' all in fun.

The "jury is still out" on Linas though!

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by jhagarty

Sooooo.....
based on this opinion,
you would report the framing as satisfactory?
or deficient?

I will answer your question with a phrase that is posted on this MB often... (which I might add, I disagree with)... and for the sake of your question assuming this framing did not have the visible damage and poor repairs but was all in good condition...

"It has stood the test of time"

(that is not to say I wouldn't have anything to say about it).

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jjonas

So, you have no sibling's Roy?

I know a few "only child's", and they're some of the most "out of touch with reality" people I know!

Gotta remember though... it's 'usually' all in fun.

The "jury is still out" on Linas though!

Had 2 brothers they too where electricians
4 Children.
11 grandchildren.
I great grandchild
Still Married to same woman for 56 years .

[Robert J. OConnor]

Originally Posted by jjonas

"It has stood the test of time"

(which I might add, I disagree with)

You would be correct.

The funny thing about structures is that the visual appearance and how long something has been standing has absolutely nothing to do with it's future safety, performance, or capacity (unless it looks really bad).

A structure or element can be on verge of failure (sagging, cracking, collapse, etc) under typical loading without showing any signs of a problem, and then later fail under full loading or adverse conditions the structure should be able to handle if correctly designed and installed. It happens all the time, and I have seen it first hand (heavy snow storm, rain/snow/ice combinations, connections that gradually loosen or deteriorate over time, etc)

Performance based inspections of structural elements only tells part of the story, and is one of the reasons that it's the top liability area for home inspectors (e.g. FREA and SPREI studies)

And structures do not get stronger over time, they get weaker.

JMO & 2-Nickels ...

[Randy L. Mayo, PE]

Jeffery

My guess is a support wall was removed, by mistake or ignorance, when that kitchen was remodeled and the ceiling sagged over time. Then someone decided to attempt a repair by lifting the joist with the chains. Lucky for them with the steep pitch rafters and fairly short joist span along with a light ceiling load it just might work. Typically I would not recommend this approach because you would be transferring the ceiling loads to the rafters at mid-span causing them to bend. It would have been better to attach the chains to the rafters at the peak by adding a steel gusset plate. Then the loads would be transferred parallel to the rafters which would make the system act more like an engineered truss.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by rmayo

Jeffery

My guess is a support wall was removed, by mistake or ignorance, when that kitchen was remodeled and the ceiling sagged over time. Then someone decided to attempt a repair by lifting the joist with the chains. Lucky for them with the steep pitch rafters and fairly short joist span along with a light ceiling load it just might work. Typically I would not recommend this approach because you would be transferring the ceiling loads to the rafters at mid-span causing them to bend. It would have been better to attach the chains to the rafters at the peak by adding a steel gusset plate. Then the loads would be transferred parallel to the rafters which would make the system act more like an engineered truss.

Agreed! Wish I had said it.

[mstankiewicz]

Alright! Robert and Randy! Written just like one might expect form PE'S. Excellent!

Jonas, I agree with not going further into attic space. How many more bells and whistles would an inspector need with the pictures you provided, to not proceed further.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Exactly how I see it Robert. Thanks.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by rmayo

Jeffery

My guess is a support wall was removed, by mistake or ignorance, when that kitchen was remodeled and the ceiling sagged over time. Then someone decided to attempt a repair by lifting the joist with the chains. Lucky for them with the steep pitch rafters and fairly short joist span along with a light ceiling load it just might work. Typically I would not recommend this approach because you would be transferring the ceiling loads to the rafters at mid-span causing them to bend. It would have been better to attach the chains to the rafters at the peak by adding a steel gusset plate. Then the loads would be transferred parallel to the rafters which would make the system act more like an engineered truss.

Thanks for your experienced info Randy!

I don't believe a wall was removed, at least not a load bearing wall, based on the room dimensions and basement evidence, and locations of original doors and windows. At a width of 14ft, and an enclosed porch (original) off the kitchen exterior entry door, I really see no practical reason or use for a loadbearing wall in the kitchen area.

That section of the home was approx 14ft in width (load bearing exterior wall to wall) and about 30ft long, split about 60% kitchen and 40% bedroom, seperated by a non-load bearing wall containing an abandoned chimney. The chains were above the kitchen counter areas only, and thought it may be related to the cabinets being installed, but could see no correlation between the two.

Here are a few more misc. pics...

Note: basement pic is best overall view I have, due to being long and narrow. Wall on left is the wall behind the stove/refer... wall on right is an abandoned cistern that is approx. 5ft in height. Ceiling height is approx 6-1/2 ft in height. Approx 5ft X 8ft in dimension. Did I mention the floor is mostly dirt, with no indication of removed or modified walls?

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Pic of exterior (single story) area with enclosed porch attached...

The only other thought I had for a reason, was snow load or minor puddling on the flat porch roof, but could not see any means of construction of the porch roof... totally sealed inside porch with beadboard ceiling and nothing visible in attic.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

Originally Posted by mstankiewicz

Alright! Robert and Randy! Written just like one might expect form PE'S. Excellent!

Jonas, I agree with not going further into attic space. How many more bells and whistles would an inspector need with the pictures you provided, to not proceed further.

Marc... true... with what I could already visually see, I saw enough damage, and there no justification to enter any further and risk harm to myself or further damage to the home. Let the contractor deal with investigating further.

Jeff

[mstankiewicz]

Agreed Jonas.

Seriously. The insulation has an unknown weight per square foot. Or could be 5 lbs per sq ft without storage. The drywall ceiling may or may not be thick enough to hold the weight of the added insulation. Some manufacturer's of drywall will not allow 1/2" drywall in this situation as your pic shows. (Could be plaster and lathe) Drywall thickness unknown. Then add the roof load calculation of 30-40 psi for Minnesota.
Anyone could be the feather that broke the camel's back.