Hi all,
This house had a new roof installed. My question is, do you think that this separation in the sheathing where it “meets” is OK? There is not a ridge vent (has Gable and soffit vents). Your input is appreciated!
Hi Greg,
Personally I am rarther more concerned about the big hole in the last picture as the shingles in this area are not adequately supported. The ridge looks fine to me
Regards
Gerry
Gerry,
Those were roof vents that were added with new roof. I thought they were OK. Am I mistaken?
I’d be more concerned about the aghmm…Trusses? that don’t meet at the peak.
Please tell me they are homemade.
Hi Cheremie,
Didn’t notice that until you ponted it out. I think they may be done when the house was re roofed? I did think it was odd they used 2x3 instead of 2x4’s for the supports
Sorry Greg the hole just looked like… well,… a hole, you didn’t mention roof vents only gable and soffitt, anyway the trusses appear to have a manufacturers stamp, so I would assume them to be properly engineered for the application
Regards
Gerry
Gerry,
My fault not mentioning the roof vents…they were added when the new roof was put on.
Now that I see the whole truss I do see the stamp.
In terms of the sheathing not meeting, in my opinion it is not a problem. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the structure. It is a non-issue.
Greg,
In addition, the following picture, 100_4190 (Small).JPG, I have not seen any lateral bridging/blocking or permanent bracing added in the top & bottom cords or in the web plane. The roof sheathing and ceiling finishes may provide a part of the bracing, but web plane bracing should be added at the vertical & diagonal webs.
If you have already called this out, please disregard post.
I have installed this style truss before but only on garages with no intention of installing ceilings. They are cheaper that house trusses.
Sheathing not a problem at all. When a ridge vent is installed you’ll see sheathing cut back up to three inches, so a half-inch gap is fine. Trusses are fine too.
Sometimes truss companies will do strange-looking things, but as long as you see pressure-rolled gangnails and nothing has been field-altered, it should be fine.
You are right Aurelio.
There is no evidence of lateral bracing on the web members nor is there evidence of temporary lateral members that are usually left in place after erection of the trusses.
Another thing that caught my eye in the pictures was that not having seen trusses before with a square cut at the ridge, the crimp pressure plates appear to have been nailed or screwed.
Anyone seen this before?
Marcel 
</IMG></IMG>
Catwalk is visible on the bottom chord way off to the right. I’ve never seen top chords braced, since theiy’re held by sheathing. Diagonal and lateral bracing are called out by the engineer. I wouldn’t call them out as missing just because I didn’t see them. Not without a set of plans. These look like just more trusses to me, not other than house trusses. Looks OK to me.
Sorry Kenton; ha. ha.
This might help understand.
www.woodscience.vt.edu/researchpapers/bracing.pdf
http://www.gov.mb.ca/labour/safety/roofguide.html
pahi.org/…/sitebuilderfiles/roof-truss-erection-guidelines.pdf
http://www.trussec.com/handling.html
Up here, I was brought up to have lateral bracing whether they were stick built or later roof trusses.
Not so many on homes, but most Commercial Roof Trusses come with tags on the truss chords that require permanent lateral bracing.
This is one item that the AHJ will look for upon CO request.
If a structural Engineer is involved, that is the first thing he will look for.
For the little home, I guess they just blow in the wind and fall apart. ha. ha.
Marcel
Good catch on the nailed gangails, I don’t remember seeing that before. They also look rolled though.
I must admit Marcel, I don’t know what a BCSI-B3 Summary Sheet - Web member Permanent Bracing/Web Reinforcement is. I installed a lot of trusses over the years, and I think most of them called out for some kind of lateral and diagonal bracing, but then it seems like some didn’t call out much.
Those other links say that the architect or engineer is responsible for spec’ing permanent bracing. I always saw it on the truss plans that came with the trusses, so I thought it was spec’ed by the truss company’s engineer.
What it all says is that permanent bracing must be designed, and since bracing spec’s vary with each project, how can inspector call what he sees a defective condition if he hasn’t seen the engineering specs?
I’d like to get an SE’s opinion on truss bracing in general.
Your right Kenton;
Lateral bracing is usually specified by the Truss Manufacturer.
They are usually indicated on the truss by red tags by the Manufacturer, where permanent lateral bracing are required.
I see more so then not because I do a lot more Commercial Building than Residential.
Check out this link, it is very good.
http://www.alpeng.com/wood_truss_info.html
Click on Builders Guide to Trusses
Go to pages 28-33.
Enjoy.
Marcel:)
Marcel … those are links that primarily talk about temporary bracing, which is different from permanent bracing. We are talking about an installed truss and therefore permanent bracing. From the first link you gave …
[FONT=Verdana]Permanent bracing is a function of the truss design. More heavily loaded compression webs may require permanent bracing, while less heavily loaded webs of the same length may not require permanent bracing.[/FONT]
I agree … BUT (there is always a “but” ) … longer compression webs often have permanent bracing specified, in lieu of stepping up the member sizes. So for longer webs without any permanent bracing it might be a good idea to flag it as a concern.
JMO & 2-nickels … 
P.S. The following is a link to a pretty good article on inspection of wood trusses … http://www.alpeng.com/Wood_Truss_Inspection.html
Thanks, Robert!