I have to point out that the floor trusses in the photo that has the concern about not bearing on the structural wall are blurry but appear that they are top cord bearing and are done ok! Recommend contacting or looking at the structural sheets from the truss manufacturer. Also commenting on the conical roof framing I would have to see the connection at the wall and checking the potential for lateral pressure (out word) movement before I could comment but as far as the cuts and connection points on the variety of joints shown I’m ok with this also (lots of structural members from truss plants have and use this type of cut on (hip components) as standard practice. Even if they were cut with precision the strength of the joint would not increase and with the confined space members would be even harder to connect. Some of the other bearing points do appear to need additional posts transferring the load down and thru to the foundation/girder/header. I’d have to know if the framer is done or if he is still working on the project and hasn’t completed his punch list. If he isn’t I’m forgiving the framer the benefit of the doubt.
Thanks for replying. I have a question, how is it standard practice to cut every rafter short and to have the hip rafters fall in front of the ridge beam instead of resting on it AND to top it off, not even support the ridge beam at all?
I’ve also found some more pictures I’d love for you guys to comment on. I realize I run the risk of being “difficult” so let me just say that these pictures don’t concern me nearly as much as the first post, but doesn’t anyone actually take pride in their work anymore? Perhaps it’s just me but there seems to be some common sense issues that could have easily been fixed, but like they say, “common sense isn’t that common.” Your thoughts on these pictures?
I just realized that those additional photos were somehow added to the original link. Sorry for the duplicate pictures.
http://www.nachi.org/forum/attachments/f23/71376d1390865680t-framing-issues-point-load-issue.jpgPaul, in this picture, assumming it is a Gable end, is not alarming, but is a standard of practice to align the wall studs no matter and maintain the 16" O.C. spacing for modular sizing of exterior, interior sheathing purposes.
It also allows the transfer of any load from above not seen from this photo to be transfered down to the foundation.
Structurally, with the triple top plate installed, it would not be an issue.
I would also have a concern with the wall intersection thermal insulation because of the way it is framed.
http://www.nachi.org/forum/attachments/f23/71377d1390865741t-framing-issues-pool-table-trusses.jpgWith the intent of adding a super imposed loading of the second floor by adding a Pool Table, it would have been more appropriate to have had the floor joist spaced at 12" O.C. in lieu of bunching them together as depicted in the photo.
This would have allowed double studs under each joist and created a wider range of floor capacity to allow placement of the pool table above and have that weight distributed properly.
As is, the wall studs are already bowing under the dead load. Improperly framed.
http://www.nachi.org/forum/attachments/f23/71378d1390865757t-framing-issues-unsupported-top-plate.jpgObviously, this is a defect in itself. Top plates should have proper support for the load above. The top plate should lock in the adjacent wall plate and the exterior corner stud should be insulated.
http://www.nachi.org/forum/attachments/f23/71379d1390865791t-framing-issues-unsupported-lvl.jpgObviously, all trusses to beam girders should have engineered truss hangers.
The beam girder should be supported by a minimum of a 4"x4" PSL post or built up post or whatever the engineered design called for for proper suport of the imposed loading.
I reiterate, STOP WORK ORDER. Engage in a Contractor that is Qualified and Licensed to do this work. Recommend an Architect or Structural Engineer to review.
Thank you Marcel, you are correct about the first photo, I agree that on the gable end we don’t have to deal with the weight of all of the rafters/roof trusses. I was just tying to illustrate how spending an extra $1.95 at Home Depot for an extra stud, and maybe about 7 or 8 minutes cutting and installing them would have been such an easy thing to do. I am however happy that they tripled the top plate, although they probably did this by accident. Thanks for your input and for addressing each photo individually.
Thank you all for your input, it’s been invaluable and I appreciate the support and the advice. I was reading another thread on here about floor trusses and now I think I may have spotted something else wrong. Nearly all of the floor trusses in our home are bottom chord bearing and according to the information posted on here, and other things I’ve read, the bottom web is supposed to face downward, toward the sill or truss hanger it’s resting on like the ones in the first three photos. But the floor trusses he installed have their web pointing upward and appear in the last two photos. Should I be concerned about this as well? Thank you all in advance.
I would say that would be best answered by the manufacturer themselves.
They are manufactured and enginneered both ways for bottom chord bearing.
https://sp2.yimg.com/ib/th?id=H.4824873036547602&pid=15.1
https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=H.4773921831193932&pid=15.1
Thank you Marcel, this is exactly what I want to hear. I can’t possibly think of what would need to be done if they were installed incorrectly.
Knowing who the Manufacturer was would be the only way to confirm the design.
There is a cutout for the top corner continuous brace. They usually can only go one way. Yours are correct.
I was a framer for 25 years. I agree that there are some issues that should be taken care of and it doesn’t appear to be high quality framing, and some of it appears to be poor or dangerous framing.
This is the reason that jobs have superintendents! If you put a bunch of contractors on a job with no supervision, you shouldn’t be surprised if things don’t go well. Do you put a ship to sea with no one on the bridge? Also, when you pick a contractor, you should have references, know what kind of work to expect and expect to pay a reasonable price. We have no idea what’s been done in that respect. These message boards are not an appropriate place to deal with what has happened on a construction site.
To move ahead, first, someone with some authority and knowledge, preferably someone that the framer agrees to, needs to be paid to go through the site and separate the OK from the bad and the dangerous, determine what needs to be done, and give the contractor a chance to make good on his work. Apparently, the job is not complete, and although you should have posts detailed under a structural load, maybe he just hasn’t put them in yet. You really can’t jump to conclusions and second guess people on the basis of some photos.
Second, if you can’t work something out, then you need to get a new framer in there and the original framer is then a matter for an arbitrator or attorney. That’s not the first choice because that adds to the cost of the project and to stress levels, and it may slow things down if an attorney stops work on the job to document conditions.
When you have a lot of money involved and you have a project to finish it’s better to find a way to compete the project successfully in a professional manner than to to start yelling and screaming and pointing fingers.
All depends on the Owner/Contractor Agreement contract that was agreed upon.
Well said Kenton, and totally agree. A non-biased qualified professional should be mediating this.
Contracts typically state that the home will be built according to plan and most plans are engineered. Most contracts state that work must be completed in a workman-like manner or similar terms that mean according to best practices and of generally acceptable quality. 
Hi Kenton thanks for responding, what wrote makes sense. Just an FYI the builder has already told me, actually he has insisted, that the roofs, sheathing and nearly everything else is framed properly and nothing else needs to be done. When we were discussing these issues, particularly the roof framing, he looked at me like I was crazy and had absolutely no idea why I was so upset. The following day, when I discussed the numerous gaps in the sheathing with the foreman, he actually said, “I really don’t see any issues and don’t know what’s troubling you about this.” After pleading with him, he agreed, even swore, he’d fix the sheathing in the rear of the home. A few days later, my neighbor stopped by and noticed, not only did he not fix it, but he put additional house wrap on to hide it (although you can see the “ghost” lines of all the gaps underneath it). But I appreciate your post and I am thankful for your advice.
Well Paul, there are ignorant contractors, those with poor ethics and those who do things they wouldn’t normally do when they get into financial trouble. I hope you can get this worked out to your satisfaction. Some guys will work with you if you can make them understand, and some it’s just impossible to get through to. Sometimes a neutral third party can be a big help. Anyway, best of luck in getting this settled with the least amount of cost and stress.
Thank you Kenton
Hello again everyone. So the saga continues. I will be coming down there next week to get my deposit back. My neighbor has sent me additional photos and I could use some input on this latest issue. The builder has built the second floor out of square, meaning it “overhangs” the first floor along the perimeter of the house, as illustrated in the picture.
As a result, when he went to install the [FONT="]PRECUT[/FONT]**[FONT="] engineered floor trusses on the third floor, **well, lets just say they were short by about two inches. As a result the framer decided to gap one side of the floor truss (which is top chord bearing) by about an inch and [/FONT]gap the other side of the floor trusses by at least an inch and a half.
[FONT="]Notice that he DOUBLED the top horizontal 2 x 4 ribbon to fill the space at the top. Doesn’t this mean the floor trusses are short and not fully resting on the top plate as intended? My engineer agrees (I took everyone’s advice and hired one) and I wanted your opinion on this as well.
Based on the width of the 2 x 4 we know the top plate now has a space between the sheathing and the bottom part of the truss that is at least 1 1/2" wide. In other words the walls were built too far “outward” and now the trusses aren’t long enough for this span.
Instead of the floor trusses resting the full 3 1/2" on the top plate, best case scenario, only 2" of each truss rests on the entire exterior wall. [/FONT][FONT="][FONT="]The same condition applies for ALL of the 16 floor trusses in this area. Please let me know what you guys think and thanks for all of your input as always:
Paul [/FONT]
[/FONT]
Post #19