I guess the IRC has an exception that allows metal straps to substitute for diagonal bracing. Metal straps do not look nearly as effective as a let-in diagonal brace. What do you think?
Originally Posted By: mpetner This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
metal straps are good as long as it’s an approved equal.
I don't know about that one strap, though. Looks like it's installed at too much of an angle from the horizontal. Should probably be less than or equal to 60 degrees from the horizontal. I guess that window got in the way.
Originally Posted By: rking This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
John,
In the first picture it looks to me like the metal has been put in place to prevent those darn drywaller from screwing the drywall into the plumbing pipes, and/or electrical wire runs!
In the second picture those braces will do absolutely squat! I would definitely suggest to my client on something like that, that the builder either correct it or sign something effectively rendering him/her liable for any movement within five - ten years.
-- Muskoka Home Inspections
"Wisdom is the Anticipation of the Consequences"
Steering Committee Member At Large
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
The plumbing top plate cut-outs are pretty typical, and allowed by the IRC as long as the metal reinforcement plate is installed for cuts greater than 50% of the plate. If you have a copy of the IRC look at R602.6.1 and Figure R602.6.1 … and it’s to provide a continuation of the top plate as a tie, and not really to protect the pipes.
Those straps are not lateral bracing (not permitted under IRC) ... looks like just fit-up straps or something. The lateral bldg bracing should be structural sheathing (e.g. 1/2 plywood) or let-in braces on the outside of the walls. Hope thats there ... 
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
Originally Posted By: Scotty Lee This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
roconnor wrote:
The plumbing top plate cut-outs are pretty typical, and allowed by the IRC as long as the metal reinforcement plate is installed for cuts greater than 50% of the plate. If you have a copy of the IRC look at R602.6.1 and Figure R602.6.1 ... and it's to provide a continuation of the top plate as a tie, and not really to protect the pipes.
Those plates are nail guards and are not designed for structural support.
Originally Posted By: mpetner This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I thought the IRC permitted metal strap bracing? R602.10.3 - “Nominal 1x4 continuaous diagonal braces let in to the top and bottom plates and the intervening studs or approved metal straps devices installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s specs…”
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Scotty wrote:
Those plates are nail guards and are not designed for structural support.
Scotty ... even though the metal plates over the pipe cut-out may look like just protection plates, they are also required tension ties per IRC R602.6.1 [I am talking about the ones at the white pipe] ? also check IRC Figure R602.3(2) which labels these on the diagram as "Cut Plate TIED with 25 Gage Steel Angle or Equivalent", and look at the length and number of nails. If only protection plates are installed it would be a code/structural issue.
Mike ... that IRC code section is addressing ICC-ES "approved" metal strap "devices" which are in the shape of a tee or angle (e.g. SAF-T Angle/Tee Brace) or heavier gage/width straps in an ?X? pattern (e.g. KC Superspeed) ? not those light gage coil straps as a substitute for 1x4 let in braces ? think about it. I am not aware of any ICC-ES approvals for that ... as I think it should be ... therefore it's not allowed.
Originally Posted By: jonofrey This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
roconnor wrote:
The plumbing top plate cut-outs are pretty typical, and allowed by the IRC as long as the metal reinforcement plate is installed for cuts greater than 50% of the plate.
Robert, I was referring more to the missing section of diagonal brace. Thanks for the info on the straps.
Originally Posted By: dvalley This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
John,
That diagonal brace is not missing a section. It's running behind the rigid board. They installed that one piece of rigid between the plumbing and the 1x5 brace. Look up in the left corner for the continuance of the brace.
Originally Posted By: jonofrey This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Robert,
I was not kidding. I went back to the structure today to double check. The straps are it. Guess what? The client and the Super were there when I went by. I started asking questions about the structural support at the corners. Man, I never saw a guy get so nervous all of sudden. He gave me the number to his Engineering firm that says the straps are ok. Thought I would call the manufacturer first.
It just so happens that the manufacturer is a local company a few miles away from me and I was at their factory for a seminar a couple of weeks ago (the owner is a Iwo Jima Marine, Ooh Rah!). Tamlyn & Son's.
Tamlyn won't recommend the use of those straps as a replacement for let-in braces or structural sheathing at the corners. They spent a good deal of time discussing the matter with me. Those Tamlyn guys are alright.
They do recommend a "T" wall brace as a replacement which is let-in diagonally to the walls in a saw kerf.
I will be notifying the client that the manufacturer does not recommend the 1 1/4 16 gauge straps as an alternative to 1 X 4 diagonal let-in bracing or structural corner sheathing.
Originally Posted By: pdacey This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
John,
Even when homes are built outside of a municipality, the contract between the builder and the buyer usually states that the builder will construct the house according to an accepted code..ie...the IRC. Ask your client if their contract has such a clause. If it does then they have a way to make the builder correct the problem.
Originally Posted By: roconnor This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Actually the building code does not need to be referenced in the contract for the owner to have a valid position. If a state adopts a building code then it is the law of the land for construction (statutory laws), regardless of any enforcement or agreements.
If you really want to get some strange looks you could ask the contractor for a copy of your states approval or the manufacturers ICC-ES approval of the "braces" he used as a substitute for the 1x4 let-in braces, as required by the IRC.
No local building officials ...  ... you poor soul.
-- Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee
I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong
