Shims are steel, so it’s fine in compression, and it’s tied into the floor joists, so laterally it’s probably stable, but I couldn’t see any pins protruding through the top flange, so the plates resting on the top flange may only be glued to the steel beam. Expanding foam is a nice touch.
Not in a seismic zone, so I don’t really see how it could fail, so I’m not even mentioning it in the report unless anyone can come up with a reason to.
Looks like the concrete contractor did not bring the elevation of the foundation high enough.
If this is new construction I would question weather this is what’s shown in the prints or altered after the fact, if it was altered was there a amendment to the plan?
The framer probably shot them in with a Hilti.
Just curious, how far does that beam span to a lally?
The thing that jumps out at me is why did they not increase the size of the short lally column, thus increasing the elevation or the steel beam.
If they had it would have reached the floor joists without the pads on top of the steel column.
This is at the point where the floor joists shake hands over the beam.
If they had it would have reached the floor joists without the pads on top of the steel column.
This is at the point where the floor joists shake hands over the beam. images/2006/buttons/quote.gif
Pete
I think you’re refering to the double plate on top of the beam. They need that to toe nail the joists in place. It would nearly imposible to do it without a plate. But most guys only use a single plate. I’m still trying to figure why the mini lally is there in the first place? If you look at how far that beam protrudes the beam pocket, then add the double plate; what do they have for sill plates and rim joists?
Am I missing something? It is getting late.
I hate when computers DON’T do what you tell them.
Sorry, those first 2 lines where to quote prussell’s last 2 lines of reply #5 and I have no idea where “images/2006…” came from?
Stupid computers!!!
I would love to see a calculation of the load in pounds per square inch on the base plate of that stub column. That’s quite a span bearing on that little guy. How many stories of house is carried on the steel beam? I also wonder why they didn’t shim the base plate of the column and pack the space between it and the concrete with non-shrink grout, and then set the beam directly on the top plate, where it could be bolted or welded.
the small lally should be fastened to the concrete with anchor bolts. no engineer or architect is ever going to tell you that it’s ok to eliminate anchor bolts.
typically the beam is anchored to the beam pocket with anchor bolts and the space below it (the space between the bottom flange of the beam and the top of the concrete) is grouted in with a dry pack. there’s a space so that the contractor can level the beam up or down with the anchor bolt nuts that are under the steal. just like anchoring a steel column.
in this case there was a planning error and the contractor did the best he knew how.
the beam and whatever is tied to it, above or sideways, can shift in any direction with enough force (the planet is a seismic zone - volcanoes, tornadoes, hurricanes, mudslides, earthquakes, tsunami’s etc etc and we should be building with mother nature’s moods in mind 
)
it was the general contractor’s responsibility to coordinate the steel beam with the size of the beam pocket and the correct fastening.
i’ve always seen plates on top of a steel beam. the plate should be bolted to the beam &, in commercial construction, it will be specified how often and with what size bolts. in residential i witness them fastening the plate to the beam by “shooting” them in with “pins” (powder activated gun that shoots hardened nails, or pins, aka pk nails, hilti’s, whatever)
“the steel beam is not properly anchored to the foundation”
and the beam needs to be fastend to the column.
the more i look at the end condition, the more i dislike it. & there’s alot of work that went into fabricating the small columns/plates so apparently it wasn’t that the contractor was trying to take a short cut, but that he or she just didn’t know how to make the connection correctly. too bad.
Also consider that beams many times provide horizontal support for the top of concrete end walls, particularly where there is a significant difference between the exterior and interior grade/slab, since there are no joists running across the house and anchored to sill plates in these areas.
If the beam is not adequately attached to the wall, and there are significant horizontal loads, you can get bowing/cracking of the wall over time, and sometimes the beam end punching through the wall. This is less of a concern with shallow crawl space foundations (which it appears to be), but still may be a concern depending on the actual construction.
Attached are two of the older NACHI TOD diagrams that help explain this.
JMO
This whole set up does not look right to me at all, but cannot see the whole picture.
I agree with Robert and some others on the previous post.
My other concern would be this exposed sprayfoam in the crawl space, because we do not know what kind of product was used.
Most spray foam that is left exposed has to meet a Flame Spread of 25 or less and smoke developed of less than 450.
Not knowing what was used, I would think that should be noted in a report also.
Not all spray foam Products meet the above criteria and could be considered flammable as compared to a kraftfaced fiberglass insulation.
Just a thought.
Marcel 
</IMG>
marcel: i assume that’s a code issue. can you tell me where i can find the code on that? is it for all habitable spaces or anywhere in the building - do you know? thanks.
Hi. Andrew;
It is actually a requirement of the IRC.
It would be listed under R316.1, and this criteria also applies on Commercial Jobs.
Most Manufactures Products under their Technical Bulletins will give you the rated index of the specified product to compare with this specification.
Hope this helps.
Marcel
</IMG>
thanks, marcel
Good info. by everyone, thanks, since I seldom work with steel this has been an education, I still think the problem was with the concrete elevation.
What do you guys think?
we don’t know if the elevation was wrong. maybe the form contractor put that beam pocket exactly where he was told.
but given the beam pocket elevation and the steel, the condition wasn’t handled correctly.
say that was a renovation and you were given an existing foundation. the challenge is to work with what you have to make it structurally sound and built with craftsmanship according to a given set of building codes.
No hilti pins visible, no glue visible for plate attachments to steel beam. Non-shrink woulde have been a more professional approach. I think they just used what was lying around.
No blockouts for beams anywhere in the foundation, they were all cut in afterwards with a concrete saw, so either they lacked information at the time or they forgot or something.
Exterior of this area is above grade, so not much lateral pressure on the foundation walls here, just compression.
In my experience as a carpenter, quality construction calls for glue and pins holding 1 plate on top of the beam, providing backing for toenailing joists.
Expanding foam was used at many areas around the home on the interior of the rim joist to cut down on air leakage. I hadn’t thought of the fire/smoke issue. It’s a safety inspection , not a code inspection, I guess that qualifies. One more narrative to add to the library.