Originally Posted By: mcyr This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I guess the best advice you could have received for this object was like Larry E. wrote on adding what you would call knee bracing or sway braces.
They would have to be at a 45 degree angle and through bolted to the columns and would help to eliminate the sway of this umbrella on stilts.
This would not cure the uplift code requirements for this area.
This parachute will not sustain a Category 1 Hurricane and I doubt if they even used h2.5 clips from rafter to support beam would hold it down.
Embedment of the columns in the concrete will only maximize the overload of the wood colomns bending values and with enough stress caused by the weight above them, would fail.
Would strongly reccommend a structural evaluation on this one. Concealment of the connections at the roof line would have to be revealed and exact detail of the column base be verified in order to make a proper assessment.
Originally Posted By: psisler This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Steven,
I see that this structure was not built by your normal handyman. There are several questions I have, as a contractor, that has built quite a few of them.
1. I see about a 5/12 roof/truss covering. Is this area above used for storage? May be top heavy.
2. In the brick/concrete foundation, were the posts just set in a hanger? In this situation I would use an HD5A or HD2A hanger to secure it to the concerete pad
3. I agree on the knee bracing as a last resort. It is critical for movement to secure the lateral movement from occuring.
4. Was there a permit for this construction.
With the double post construction there should be no lateral movement unless the posts were just set on top of the pad or in an insufficient hanger.
I would have the owner contact the constructor of this unit for details first before moving on. Just my opinion.
Originally Posted By: pdickerson This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
The house will prevent it from moving longitudinally (if designed correctly), and to a small degree will restict it from moving laterally. An additional means of resisting lateral loads may be required, though it may not be. If the 12 6x6 posts are sufficiently sunk into the ground and embedded in concrete, there may be enough lateral support to preclude the need for knee braces.
I designed a carport recently with knee braces. The engineer who ran the calcs for me determined that the knee braces were not required because the posts were stiff enought to resist the wind and seizmic loads.
IMO there is not enough information here to determine if there is or is not a problem. It would not surprise me if the owner produced an engineered drawing detailing sufficient construction methods. It also would not surprise me if the thing blew over in the next stiff wind. I need more to go on.
Curtis Coombs, if you read this one, I would be curious to hear your opinion.
Originally Posted By: ccoombs This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I like Brian’s response: “Don’t push on the columns”
If pushing on the columns can move this structure that is a major issue in my opinion. I would consider it a "life safety issue."
Although small structures can be designed using wood posts and moment connections, this is no small structure. These small of structures typically have bolted connections at the top and bottom (or the posts are embedded in a conc. pad). From the picture, it looks like the posts are in a nailed post base that is sitting on top of the brick curb/wall. This would allow movement without cracking the bricks. This also would not provide the moment connection needed to hold this roof up.
If properly designed and detailed this type of carport can be designed to rotate the forces back into the house. However, there is only a small roof section between the carport and the house. This will not do any good.
I just completed the design of a trellis structure that was much smaller than this carport. I designed the block columns to carry the lateral loads. My calculations resulted in a 7' square footing! This structure would be much heavier and require a much stronger lateral resisting element.
If I was asked to provided a fix for this structure, it would be ugly. I would expect that two Hardy Panels would need to be added to each side of the structure. These would need to sit on new footings. I would expect 12"x18" footings with 2 #5 bars top and bottom around the perimeter.
Originally Posted By: bking This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I’m familiar with Hardy Planks (siding)
What are Hardy Panels? and how do they connect to the new footers propsoed?
Also prev post said this looked like a 5/12 roof, its more like 8 or 10 /12
5/12 is fairly shallow amd easy to walk on, this one is not.
I agree it is top heavy.
Originally Posted By: ccoombs This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hardy panels are a pre-manufactured and ICC approved shear wall. They come in 12", 18" and 24’ widths and carry a lot of load but they require large footings to transfer/resist the loading.
They would change the architecture of the structure. However, if you put two panels at each corner, at 90* to each other, you could then wrap them with light framing or a brick column or a combination of both. That way they still look good but they also hold up the house.
