Hi!
I have a 1970’s house that I believe will qualify for the Clip discount on a wind mitigation. Just haven’t seen a clip that looks like this yet and is very basic. However, it seems to check all the boxes on the form.
Thanks for any input!
Mike
Don’t read this as hostile, this is a genuine question.
How would this pass for a clip? It’s not anchored to anything. It’s a corner bracket. If it is some form of a clip, it doesn’t have enough nails. If we’re attaching the side to the end, there needs to be 3 nails in each piece and that’s not what clips are anyway.
Maybe I’m not understanding what I’m looking at.
Oh and is that a taped off NM of some sort just hanging out in space? lol. I had one of those in my 1949 home where the tape has fallen off and dummy me found it in the crawlspace as it raked my arm.
2 Likes
First, I am not doing inspections in hurricane zones, but I’ve seen a few things. That is some kind of DIY bracket which may be performing its intended purpose, but it is not an approved hurricane clip anywhere that there might be a hurricane or even get windy.
3 Likes
It looks like assembly bracing when they were building the structure. Just holding it together while the rest of the structure gets filled in.
I would not call it a clip. There are companies that do retro hurricane bracing on older homes. It’s expensive and it looks nothing like that either.
1 Like
Thanks for the feedback!
Does it meet this requirement?
Secured to truss/rafter with a minimum of three (3) nails, and
Attached to the wall top plate of the wall framing, or embedded in the bond beam, with less than a ½" gap from the blocking or truss/rafter and blocked no more than 1.5” of the truss/rafter, and free of visible severe
corrosion.
1 Like
There’s definitely 3+ nails to the truss, and also appeared to have one nail in the top plate of the wall.
As a FYI: UBC specifies three 8d nails (not 16d), toenailed, to secure a rafter to the top plate. Toenailing does provide shear, but probably not enough for wind mitigation.
There are truss screws as an alternative to hurricane clips, but again, I don’t know if they meet wind mitigation standards for Florida. They might have obtained certification. Timberlok and Simpson Strong Tie are two manufacturers I’m aware of who manufacture truss screws. In lieu of hurricane clips, I’ve used both during my construction time.
Your top plate nail(s) are the weakness for the condition you pictured.
Interesting that it doesnt specify how to attach to the top plate… According to that description, it is…
Although, one nail is not going to hold up to hurricane force uplift.
What is not included from the Wind Mitigation Forms verbiage in this post is: “Minimal conditions to qualify for categories B, C, or D. All visible metal connectors are:” Metal connectors is the requirement, and clearly the connectors ARE metal.
So, is it a “hurricane clip”, certainly not! Would I trust it in a Cat 3 hurricane to keep my roof in place? Hard to tell, anything can happen in a hurricane, clips or toenails! I have seen 100+ year old homes here (NW coast of Florida) with 2 toenail holding the rafter to the top plate just fine. These homes have been through many, many, many storms and the same 100+ year old rafter and toenails still in place and standing strong! I have also seen “hurricane clips” and the nails securing them to the framing ripped right out and the roof gone after a major storm. I am sure an engineer can tell you why one is better than the other!
And the last question, does it qualify for the discount as per the Mitigation Form? Per the verbiage on the Mitigation Report “Metal Connectors secured to the truss with a minimum of 3 nails”…Absolutely!
1 Like
Not to side-track the conversation, but I must, since you brought it up first…
In your scenario above, the ‘connectors’ likely had very little to do with your claims…
I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that the following was a much more direct cause to the observed results…
Without a doubt Jeffrey! The old wood in these old homes has held up through thick and thin… Much better that the lumber in the “future slums of America” (as I affectionately refer to much of what is being constructed today).
1 Like
My home was built in 1901. I think the original framing is old growth oak lumber. Trying to pound a modern nail into it is treacherous, lol. Really gives a person respect for the old timers that worked with it, typically with very basic hand tools.
2 Likes
When I was a kid, we lived in a farmhouse that was one of the original homes in the area of northeast Ohio. It was built in 1865 and the property was complete with an old red barn.
The barn was in various stages of disrepair, the windward siding was beat up, falling off in places, etc.
Eventually, one section fell in and left this nice 16"x16" 20’ long beam laying there.
I grabbed the tractor, dragged the beam out to this 450 year ash tree that was about 10 foot diameter at the base. I used the old blocks and tackle from the barn to hoist that beam into the tree and proceeded to make one of the greatest tree forts of all time because the beam could span this huge gap.
We had a logger come thru a few years later and wouldn’t you know it, I come back to my tree fort and the SOBs stole that beam!!! Now, I hadn’t been up there in years, but them sonsofbeeches took my beam!
Your post made me think of it as I remember what a nightmare it was trying to pound nails into that thing.
2 Likes