[jules4]

Yes, a lot of the vertical support is regained with good, snug-fitting, cross-members. But when the inertial moments are stressed, as they would be from side loading wind factors, at least one direction proves to be weaker than the un-notched piece would have been.

I happen to love Timber Framing, and I think (although extra work) mortising in the heads of angle braces and cross-members would be sharp.

Okay, all the big notches are gone and I was able to use the wall blocking as deadmen for the siding girts.

I've put Simpson LUC26Z concealed flange hangers in for outer 2x8 joists and beams (it seems to be the only concealed flange hanger they make for 2x), but I don't know if these will be strong enough to use on the front and rear beams - I might have to attach actual slabs of lumber to act as deadmen there (blech).

 

[jules4]

I'm glad others are answering.

When you contacted your B.D., did they tell you to double the snow loads on the overhangs? Might look into that....

Plywood in headers: http://www.finehomebuilding.com/how-to/qa/using-plywood-to-build-up-beams.aspx

Be safe, Gary

They told me not to use post-frame construction, and that I'd need a 48" deep poured foundation . . . I didn't pursue matters any further with them.

I'll investigate this double-snow-load-on-overhangs - I hope that's not structurally required (it doesn't matter if it's code required, it won't be inspected since no one cares about outbuildings where I'm building).

Hmmm - I'm not sure how to relate "bending resistance factor" to design bending value.

 

[jules4]

I've seen charts that specify a 7% increase in Fb numbers when using plywood flitch plates with Douglas Fir and Larch.

Now, I don't know if those are repetitive increases (I wouldn't expect so), and I imagine the type of wood and number of plies would change those factors some....+/-.

Drat - 7% isn't enough, I need a 33% increase.

 

[Willie T]

:001_unsure: :blush: I keep stabbing at your drawings with my mouse, thinking they are SKP files. And they just won't orbit! :no: :laughing:

You do know this forum allows you to attach small SKP files? You'd probably have to remove the colors to get it small enough, but it's doable.

 

[jules4]

:001_unsure: :blush: I keep stabbing at your drawings with my mouse, thinking they are SKP files. And they just won't orbit! :no: :laughing:

You do know this forum allows you to attach small SKP files? You'd probably have to remove the colors to get it small enough, but it's doable.

Actually, I keep doing that too :laughing:

I noticed that, but the SKP file I'm working with is 10MB (it contains everything, in lots of layers), and it's easier to just export 2d jpg's of the current view than to create a new (smaller) SKP file each time I want to post something.

 

[Willie T]

Know watcha mean. They do get big in a hurry. I recently did a dozen, or so, concept drawings of a very economical house for some missionaries in Ghana. It got to be a minor headache just emailing the files back and forth.

 

[jules4]

Well, I gave it a shot - I saved a copy of the file and deleted all but two layers and the colours and got the file down to 9.5MB. Since the max you can attach appears to be 1MB I'm thinking not doable in this case.

 

[Gary in WA]

Don't forget to take the front let-in braces out of the built beams for full continuous strength.

Be safe, Gary

 

[Willie T]

Oh well. Good try. Usually when the half dozen of us that really get into SU want some detailed input on a particular drawing, we just go the email route. If you ever find yourself wanting that level of scrutiney of a model, there are several guys here willing to take a look for you...... and most of them are way better than I am. :wink:

 

[jules4]

Know watcha mean. They do get big in a hurry. I recently did a dozen, or so, concept drawings of a very economical house for some missionaries in Ghana. It got to be a minor headache just emailing the files back and forth.

Huge files are to be expected when designing a house though (unless by "economical" you mean shack lol), I'm pretty sure 10MB is overkill when designing a screen room (e.g., I probably didn't need to precisely replicate all the Simpson fasteners I'll use, or the screen door I plan to install...).

 

[jules4]

Don't forget to take the front let-in braces out of the built beams for full continuous strength.

Be safe, Gary

It doesn't appear that the built up beam idea will work after all (7% isn't nearly enough), so I'll have to work out something else anyway. (After all the effort I've invested in trying to avoid this, I might even be forced to go with your original suggestion of using a 4x10 lol.)

 

[jules4]

Oh well. Good try. Usually when the half dozen of us that really get into SU want some detailed input on a particular drawing, we just go the email route. If you ever find yourself wanting that level of scrutiney of a model, there are several guys here willing to take a look for you...... and most of them are way better than I am. :wink:

I'd be more than happy to have that level of scrutiny - if you'd be willing to take a look at just pm me your address and I'll send it out.

 

[Willie T]

OK, glad to. BTW, if you should decide to go with the sandwiched beams, here's a neat way to use the plywood, itself, as a corner brace...... although you might have to add some edge wood to dress the braces up... stiffen them up some, too.

This is an exploded view of a beam. One end of the ply is shown trimmed out, and the other is just solid... no cutout. It would go into a narrow groove on the post.

 

[jules4]

OK, glad to. BTW, if you should decide to go with the sandwiched beams, here's a neat way to use the plywood, itself, as a corner brace...... although you might have to add some edge wood to dress the braces up... stiffen them up some, too.

This is an exploded view of a beam. One end of the ply is shown trimmed out, and the other is just solid... no cutout. It would go into a narrow groove on the post.

Now that is slick - very cool idea.

 

[Willie T]

Now that is slick - very cool idea.

Of course you'd have to work out the various lengths of the end sections of ply where they differ from the actual lumber of the beam... and if using hangers, you'd have to ease some notches in for the Simpsons to clear, etc.... but the drawing gives you a starting point to think about.

Well, it's starting toward midnight here, so I'm off to go walk the dog. Later.

 

[jules4]

I clued in to a very stupid mistake the other day - I’ve been doing my beam-load calculations using the total span instead of the unsupported span. The unsupported span is only 7', and at F'b = 1500 a triple 2x6 can safely support 3240lbs - so I don’t even need any filtch plates!

And thanks to Willie T, who suggested a host of improvements to the railing and trim, I now have framing plan #4:

I’m heading down to the parent’s cottage on Sunday for a week to finish up some plastering I’ve been doing and plan to (at the least) get the screenhouse posts set.

I figure that getting the posts raised plumb and square will be the most challenging part of construction for me, considering it took me almost two days to get the batter boards set up (three dimensions is too many).

 

[jules4]

If anyone wants to see how this project is turning out, I’ll be chronicling the construction process here: Screenhouse in the woods.