There was a gap between the TWO members where I could fit my scraper between. The members were NOT glued. If the basement was finished, a structural support wall under the girder would suffice. However, since this was not present, I did call this a defect, “Unsupported girder. Recommend a structural engineer design and a licensed carpenter make corrective repairs to the floor framing to properly support the girder including specifying the correct fasteners.”
Thanks for all the input!
There’s lots of buzz in our state regarding taxes and where the money is spent. After a little investigation, we have 6 people in my city’s building inspection department. 5 Inspectors and 1 clerk. Total 2011 wages was $338,373 plus an additional $170,075 in benefits for a total of $558,448 in tax dollars to support a city of almost 50,000 people. No data on permit fees collected. Frustrating!
Let us know what the SE says please
I probably will never find out, but if I do, I will definitely post an update.
Thanks. I’m not 100 % convinced that this is an issue. I would also recommend an SE since I simply don’t know. I’d like to know what an SE says though.
Thanks for the added info Greg. It sure looks glued from here.
Code doesn’t matter. It’s a matter of best practice and this is poor framing practice. Girder joints should always be supported. As Barry said, SE recommended corrections should be performed by a qualified contractor (but not a “licensed carpenter”, carpenters are never licensed unless they become contractors).
The IRC refers to a beam or girder as built up 2 inch layers, no requirement for 3 or more layers. #28 on the table.
http://publicecodes.cyberregs.com/icod/irc/2009/icod_irc_2009_6_sec002_par005.htm
Under that definition this is not an issue. Also based on the OPs photo there is no bearing of a joist end on a single girder member as the wood I-beams span across this girder. I would not recommend an SE. If the built-up girder is not properly glued a qualified contractor could be referred to. Personally, being able to put a scraper in between one section is not evidence the girder not glued properly. IMHO YMMV
Are you guys freaking, fracking kidding here. A structural Engineer? Are you Kidding?
Joists framing from opposite sides over a bearing support shall be lapped a minimum of 3 inches and shall be nailed together with a minimum of three face 10d face nails.
What did I miss other than suggesting the client engage a structural engineer at $250 for starters.
The standard for a built-up beam using LVL with two members is to use measured lengths so that the joints of the LVL are staggered, but land on different lally columns.
Each joint is supported by different columns. 
That’s not what OP posted. This is a beam/girder not joists overlapping a beam/girder.
Exactly, beam/girder is supporting I-Joists, no overlapping here.
Technically, couldn’t a contractors slap two more sections of lam beam against that with the splice over the post and it would be “code” or best practice?
Add a new post cap to incorporate the splice and call it good.
Won’t go anywhere the way it is anyways. ;)
And I stand corrected with my tail between my legs.
As the codes become less and less prescriptive I.E. refer to ASTM this and ANCE or AFPA that. It becomes less and less a reference.
I was able to finally find the AFPA documents for wood frame construction in reference to beams. Here is the link we should all have this in our library.
http://www.awc.org/pdf/WCD1-300.pdf
When you find a section that you are researching you can click on the details tab at the bottom of the page to view detail
looking at the situation, you have discovered an altered girder, doesnt look like it was manufactured that way. since that is the case an alteration to the girder, would have need to be approved by your local jursdiction engineer/inspector. if no permit was pulled and was not approved, then it is definately a concern for correction and further evaluation.
