DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum

DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum (http://www.diychatroom.com/)
-   Building & Construction (http://www.diychatroom.com/f19/)
-   -   How to use Simpson Hold downs for gaurd rails (http://www.diychatroom.com/f19/how-use-simpson-hold-downs-gaurd-rails-52606/)

rocketdoctor 09-09-2009 02:07 AM

How to use Simpson Hold downs for gaurd rails
 
1 Attachment(s)
I am trying to follow specifications by Simpsons and AWC. Where I am attaching the Rail post to the end of a joist do I use the Simpson Hold down in place of a Joist hanger, or will I be able to install this as well as the joist hanger?

I have included a screenshot that shows my question in detail taken from http://www.strongtie.com/ftp/bulleti...GRDRL06_EX.pdf its confusing since it doesn't show a joist hanger where hold down is but also doesn't discuss omitting one.

Termite 09-09-2009 09:04 AM

Omission of the joist hanger would not be a good idea. Personally, I would not approve the hold-down in lieu of the hanger. :no: It would probably never be an issue but as an inspector I wouldn't hang my name on it without some engineering support.

I'm not very impressed with the idea of securing a guardrail with hold-downs. Seems like Simpson just finding another way to sell products, and I don't see this method being all that effective at all. Solid wood blocking would be much, much more effective at reducing or eliminating movement of the newell posts.

Willie T 09-09-2009 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thekctermite (Post 325614)
Omission of the joist hanger would not be a good idea. Personally, I would not approve the hold-down in lieu of the hanger. :no: It would probably never be an issue but as an inspector I wouldn't hang my name on it without some engineering support.

I'm not very impressed with the idea of securing a guardrail with hold-downs. Seems like Simpson just finding another way to sell products, and I don't see this method being all that effective at all. Solid wood blocking would be much, much more effective at reducing or eliminating movement of the newell posts.

:whistling2: I was biting my tongue, trying NOT to post that thought.

Scuba_Dave 09-09-2009 09:49 AM

Is this required for any sort of Earthquake "code" in your area?
The one on the left is just a piece of blocking
Based on the view of the item I'd say the hanger can also be installed

rocketdoctor 09-09-2009 10:22 AM

No specific codes Im trying to follow. Im just trying to find out how to attach 4X4s to the Rim Joist and Beam. There was an AWC and Simpsons document recommened to me that I was following. Is there any suggestions for attaching posts. Ideally I would like them sitting on top of the beam and rim Joist so I can put the decking around

Willie T 09-09-2009 10:26 AM

First question.......... How far along are you at this point?


BTW, Simpson says: "Tested within the limits prescribed by ICC’s Acceptance
Criteria for Handrails and Guards (AC273) and for Joist
Hangers and Similar Devices (AC13)."

rocketdoctor 09-09-2009 10:47 AM

I have my deck planned and most of my materials ordered, was planning on installing metal gaurd rails but starting to realize I can't afford that (after ordering all the wood) so I decided to use wood posts and 2X2s.

metlc 09-09-2009 10:54 AM

Simpson is somewhat ambiguous on this.

I'm using the HDA2s now at the ledger for lateral retention as recommended by Simpson's "pending new code" pitch, but with those two little stamped ribs on the bottom they seem to want some plywood shims (at the ledger and on the joist) to seat properly over the joist hanger nails.

If you look at Simpson's Deck pdf bulletin page 9 (here) a few pages before the one you're quoting, it shows an installation with their DKT22 hold-down installed along with joist hangers. The DKT22 is installed in an offset manner to give clearance to the hangers. The same would presumably apply to the HDA2 hold-downs.

I also recall seeing somewhere in the Simpson catalogs that the HDA2 (and other) bolted hold-downs could/should be installed in an offset (raised) manner on 2x studs/joists to increase their hold-down force rating. With that in mind, and not wanting that extra wood/ledger joint to just rot out, I'm going back and remove the plywood shims and just leave the hold-downs sitting 3/4" off the ledger. The same applies to the deck rim joist connections.

Willie T 09-09-2009 11:08 AM

Bring all your railing support posts right on up from way down on the foundation as solid, full length posts, and you will eliminate the need for any additional lateral support.

Ever wonder what Simpson's costs are in lobbying and "other incentives" that may have been paid out to various construction agency employees over the years?

metlc 09-09-2009 11:34 AM

I don't see anything wrong with adding in another $15 worth of bolted connectors to connect the edge of the deck with the house framing. More than that in labor, I guess.

And you can't expect that running ground-level support posts up through the decking will provide for all of the guardrail posts you may need.

I can also see the wisdom in anchoring the deck-level railing posts to the deck joists, which are better oriented to resist the leverage of the guardrail posts than the rim joist is. The deck joist is in tension/compression. The rimjoist's resistance is in torsion, however transient that load is. Either of those methods, though, seem stronger than any of the post surface-mount systems I've seen that seem to be all the rage now. I guess it's all a tradeoff for joint exposure/rot versus strength.

Willie T 09-09-2009 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metlc (Post 325657)
I don't see anything wrong with adding in another $15 worth of bolted connectors to connect the edge of the deck with the house framing. More than that in labor, I guess.

And you can't expect that running ground-level support posts up through the decking will provide for all of the guardrail posts you may need.

I can also see the wisdom in anchoring the deck-level railing posts to the deck joists, which are better oriented to resist the leverage of the guardrail posts than the rim joist is. The deck joist is in tension/compression. The rimjoist's resistance is in torsion, however transient that load is. Either of those methods, though, seem stronger than any of the post surface-mount systems I've seen that seem to be all the rage now. I guess it's all a tradeoff for joint exposure/rot versus strength.

Perhaps not "all", merely 100%.

metlc 09-09-2009 11:53 AM

I've got a 13-foot span between the main support posts. I guess I could have put another support post halfway between. Downstairs below, though, it wouldn't look as good, gazing out through (and having to walk around) that extra post.

rocketdoctor 09-09-2009 01:06 PM

metl2c thanks for pointing out the illustration on the other simpson document, I think I'll go with the dtt2z. Im not crazy about running posts to ground I would have to pour a bunch more foundations. I just found out that I can't even get IPE 4X4's so this is a temporary solution until I can afford Metal railings to replace.

Termite 09-09-2009 02:11 PM

Do yourself a favor and forget about using metal products to secure your railings. Nothing will be more rigid than blocking between your posts and rim joists with 2x dimension lumber the depth of the joists. Draw everything tight with bolted connections. Rock solid...No fuss.

Trying this with metal brackets that aren't intended for the purpose is a futile waste of time. That's coming from somebody that has built hundreds of decks and inspected thousands of them.

Full height posts are great when they can be used but solid blocking will make the railing newels nice and solid.

drtbk4ever 09-09-2009 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rocketdoctor (Post 325699)
I just found out that I can't even get IPE 4X4's so this is a temporary solution until I can afford Metal railings to replace.

What do you mean you can't get 4X4 Ipe posts?

This place seems to have 4X4 and 6X6 posts.

http://www.ipedepot.com/picelist01.htm

So they are available. Affordability may be another issue altogether.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:55 PM.