Surprises in the roof framing

[Kenton H. Shepard, CMI]

Home built in '64.
Didn't care much for the quality of the roof framing in the garage, usually there's some kind of post under the point at which the hips meet the ridge and common rafters. Rafter ties were a little high, too. Walls were all straight. described verbally as poor quality framing, not a defect, and it won't get a mention in the narratives, since there was no visible failure after many years.

The last place I looked before leaving was in the attic. I'd noticed the garage door king stud (at right side of photo #3 by the CMU chimney, it's in that crack in #4)and the next stud back in the wall were charred, although the top plate and ext. wall sheathing were clean as a whistle.

I wondered how enough heat got through a CMU chimney wall near the base of the wall to start a fire that worked its way into the attic. Even the garage wall bottom plate had a little charring. Mostly smoke damage in the attic with very little actual char and no smell at all, no char debris on the insulation. Never been inside one that didn't smell strongly unless it was a real old fire.

Half the home roof (the half furthest from the garage) was trusses. Roof framing in the half closest to the garage and in the garage was conventional. Usually around here, at least above the living space, it's one or the other.

Roof sheathing in the garage was plywood, in the house was board.

[lfoster]

There should be a paper trail with the insurance companies. Their computer memory is really long.
or - with the local tax accessor records.
or - local fire department

[Richard A. Hetzel]

usually there's some kind of post under the point at which the hips meet the ridge and common rafters.

If so, it's only there for the convenience of the framers...there is no structural need for a post there.

The collar ties can be anywhere no higher than the upper third of the dimension between top plate and ridge. Those pictured are within that area.

The framing appears perfectly fine to me.

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by Richard A. Hetzel

If so, it's only there for the convenience of the framers...there is no structural need for a post there.

The collar ties can be anywhere no higher than the upper third of the dimension between top plate and ridge. Those pictured are within that area.

The framing appears perfectly fine to me.

I didn't see any problems with the roof framing either (I've framed many like that) but I would have looked closely at the collar tie rafter connection.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

I agree with Richard and Larry, nothing wrong here that I can see. Framed many like this many times.

Marcel

[Kenton H. Shepard, CMI]

Aaaaah... you guys are Eastern framers. This is the Wild West.
Well, OK. You're right. But I do like to see the rafter tie right down on top of the top plate tying the bottoms of opposing rafters together because it stresses the connection less than a tie placed higher such as shown in the picture. But I don't always get what I want. At least not in this case.

[Barry Adair]

Kent,

Here is some real after burn crap.

They cut the 2x4 over spanned rafters and added 1x4 extensions at the tails. Numerous were split, cracked, unapproved sistered, purlins, and the best of all not a collar one on this 1904 project. Just put a new roof on last week with zero step flashing at the dormers. SE will be designing repairs Friday, price will be adjusted or they are walking.

[Larry D. Kage]

Check out this nasty homeowner job I inspected a couple of years ago: