Sistering to trusses?

[Sean Fogarty]

Rear porch construction was conventianal framing. Low sloped roof rafters sistered to the trusses as seen in the photo. Cape cod style home.

Obviously the county let it pass, home built in 95.

No signs of issues but what would be any concerns?

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

I wouldn't call that "sistering."

Often, roof framing will include a combination of engineered trusses and conventional framing. Without more of a view, it's difficult to see if there are any obvious deficiencies.

[Sean Fogarty]

Originally Posted by jpope

I wouldn't call that "sistering."


Often, roof framing will include a combination of engineered trusses and conventional framing. Without more of a view, it's difficult to see if there are any obvious deficiencies.

I didn't seen any obvious deficencies but still unusual. This was not standard.

what would you call it??

[Randy L. Mayo, PE]

Sean

I would say part of the front porch roof framework is attached to the main truss. Technically you would have to get the engineer from the original truss manufacturer to sign off on attaching anything to the truss. I don't know the geometry of the roof system or the loads but this additional load to the truss could cause the roof or ceiling to sag in that area.

[KEVIN WOOD]

Jeffrey is right this should not be called Sistering.
Don't forget that there is very little weight on that porch. This is not an engineer problem unless the weight was bearing on the roof joist attached which it is not according to the picture.

[Larry D. Kage]

It looks like additional truss members were added in the field, between the upper and lower truss cords, below the attached rafter.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

Improper framing at it's best.
Note the vertical chords that were added to the truss and with the side attachment of the stick built rafters, it is all transferring the weight load to the bottom chord and top chord of the truss. Hope there is never a big snow load.
The lower slope addition should have been overlayed on top of the sheathing of the original roof to distribute the weight more evenly upon the truss diaphragm. That would be similar to a dormer somewhat.
In either case, it is clear to me that this construction was never part of the original truss design as Randy mentioned.
Although this makeshift framing may last for years, it is not the standard framing practice and would is unorthodox in methods that could impair the original design capacities of the trusses of the original build at one point in the future.
Recommend a SE or Architect to evaluate.

[Sean Fogarty]

Originally Posted by rmayo

Sean

I would say part of the front porch roof framework is attached to the main truss. Technically you would have to get the engineer from the original truss manufacturer to sign off on attaching anything to the truss. I don't know the geometry of the roof system or the loads but this additional load to the truss could cause the roof or ceiling to sag in that area.

It may have been an add later perhaps.
The front porch was built into the trusses. The back part was not. They just added the framework to the existing truss structure. Fortunately there was little load due to the fact it was only a basic covering.

I passed the ball over to someone else. Let them decide. Thanks for the answer..

[Sean Fogarty]

Originally Posted by mcyr

Attachment 45748

Improper framing at it's best.
Note the vertical chords that were added to the truss and with the side attachment of the stick built rafters, it is all transferring the weight load to the bottom chord and top chord of the truss. Hope there is never a big snow load.
The lower slope addition should have been overlayed on top of the sheathing of the original roof to distribute the weight more evenly upon the truss diaphragm. That would be similar to a dormer somewhat.
In either case, it is clear to me that this construction was never part of the original truss design as Randy mentioned.
Although this makeshift framing may last for years, it is not the standard framing practice and would is unorthodox in methods that could impair the original design capacities of the trusses of the original build at one point in the future.
Recommend a SE or Architect to evaluate.

Good catch Marcel,
oddly enough the one beside it did not have any additional bracing except for the one sad little brace the rest had. . The buyers agent was also a general contractor. She (yes a woman) should have some people that can look at it to provide further info.

[KEVIN WOOD]

Funny how one picture can tell you a million things more than general comment.
I stand corrected after looking at the second picture.

[Sean Fogarty]

Originally Posted by kwood

Funny how one picture can tell you a million things more than general comment.
I stand corrected after looking at the second picture.