Retrofitted strap

Client had a roofer fix some clips and sent me this pic. I have rejected them twice prior. What say yall?

I would really appreciate opinions. I dont like it btw

That would be a “NO GO” from me. They didn’t use the correct connector.

And by the way, for everybody else…Roofers are not licensed to install these retrofit RTW connectors.

I would say, the original strap fails because it is roughly 3 inches away from where it goes into the bond beam, which leaves us with the “retro-fit”.

Which appears to be some sort of L bracket which uses four small screws into the truss.

In the real world, I don’t think this mess is going anywhere. In the insurance world, possibly other with a request for an engineering letter, but more than likely, a waste of time and money…and no credit.

The proper retrofit for this application, and the only one that my company (WindStorm Retrofit, LLC) uses is a Simpson Strong Tie HGMA10 ---- Four tapcons into tie beam and 1/4" screws into truss… These are a pain to install, and you need enough heel height on the trusss to allow drilling into the beam.

The L bracket in the OP is a no go. The truss can easily move the 1 1/2" distance to the first tap con. They should have at least placed that first tapcon right next to the truss.

Thanks. Its pretty clear thats unacceptable, just wanted to get other opinions on record. Thank you guys

I pretty much agree with Eric.

BUT

In the real world I bet it would do the job :slight_smile:

Disagree, in the real world this clip is useless, there is nothing stopping it from moving upwards in a good wind, if this strap were to be tested as installed, the truss would lift off of the tiebeam, and after a few gusts would most probably shear along the line of the first tapcon.

I wouldn’t accept this clip, and like you say the original wouldn’t be acceptable either.

Dennis,
does this count as a clip or a single wrap now???

the original strap was counted, ( by me as a toenail) the added clip is currently under review, ( by me) and does not appear to meet the minimum requirement for clip on the 1802, ( 1/2" rule) Correct?

“Clip” — good for 850 Lbs Uplift

There is also have one for wood frame construction HGA10

Toenail by the form but much better in reality.

I think he was asking me DQ, right? I don’t want to confuse anyone who may be directed to this thread for clarification.

im only using the form as the standard. so the form is “reality” in this circumstance.

I would say “No” Does not meet the minimum of 500lbs uplift resistance. Why couldn’t they pop a nail into the original strap :-k. I have seen some retro-fitters use a palm nailer and nail into the original strap. Let me know if that is not correct. Always nice to learn.

The original strap is going to be a toenail(ii) no matter how many nails are in it…more than 1/2" gap.

@Dennis B, since the angle bracket is not code approved for this use, my selection would be “Other”. Technically it would fall under the 1/2" rule due to design and installation, but underwriters may see that differently.

yeppers

Oops, You are correct. Thanks for the clarification…