Wrap or nothing?

What do you all think based only on what you can see.
This was from an old inspection.

The definition of a wrap is now.

**C. Single Wraps **
Metal connectors consisting of a single strap that wraps over the top of the truss/rafter and is secured with a minimum of 2 nails on the front side and a minimum of 1 nail on the opposing side.

What if the nails are reversed as they are in this photo. 1 on the front 2 on the back. Does anyone know for sure if it is a wrap or not? I think we can all agree it should be accepted but is it.

For arguments sake even if you do not agree that the photo represents that situation what do you do if you see the situation I am describing?

A picture would be nice!

I would guess if it has three nails, two on one side and one on the other, then the side with two nails would be the front.
Maybe the builder was left handed.

woops stand by :slight_smile:

It is now there. I assume where it exits the cement is the front?
I would not think it matters but I apparently do not know much because I think a wrap with 2 nails is better than toenail.

That is a good question.
What is the “front”?
Is it the front of the house, or as you stated, where the strap goes into the concrete?

It won’t matter much as they won’t get credit for re-nailing the deck as most of the nails missed the truss.:frowning:

Another thing brought up in last nights class was. How do you know that the roofer did not see he missed and go right back and nail it properly.

If he did not HAVE to remove the missed nails he would likely just put them in where they go. It did after all pass the inspection and that is how we determine if something meets the code.

I am not worried about getting sued but I imagine somewhere there is going to be a client that paid a lot for the new roof and will not get a discount because of this.

Look out roofers.

Whoever installed the nails didn’t know they missed the trusses because they used an air gun to install them… If they didn’t know that they missed the trusses, what on earth would make anyone believe that they went back and renailed them?
Here are a bunch more New Roof=Fail

And, as is evidenced on this report Tamarac roof, the code requirement is to remove all nails that did not make contact with the truss.

I am still trying to find out about the nails and front issue.

I would think lift wise, 2 nails on the side that wrapped over would be higher than 2 nails on the side coming from the wall. But I’m no engineer.

I’m still waiting to make an order with John on those magnetic nail heads he mentioned. :twisted:

Are inspectors not required to actually check when a roof is re-nailed before marking sheathing as passed?

If not what a joke.

No, they are not. An affidavit from the roofer suffices in most instances. The only times an inspector will come out is if he is called to inspect a specific issue. It is what had to be done on the failed roofs on my roof page. Once the city inspector came out and red tagged the job, things got done.

It is now the first thing I tell my clients to do before they close on the home when I run into this. I have been writing it up on my reports for years.
Just another way I piss everyone off.

Now, with the wording in the course with regards to this matter, a lot of sales are going to fall through because of it.

The problem is ONLY home inspectors need the training so only Home Inspectors will know this and only home inspectors who take the newest course.

Once most folks are qualified to do something that is where they stop.

Very few actually try to stay on top of things like those we see daily here discussing the issues.

As far as I am concerned if it does not ask it on the form the information is not required.

I do not believe the insurance companies have the right to add whatever they wish to the way things are done. If it does not state something on the form I do not believe it should be taken into consideration.

That does not mean I believe it is the correct way or not to do something but I do believe if it is a must then it MUST say so on the form.

You want my opinion on the matter I believe everyone doing them should have to take new training whenever there is a new form. I personally would hate it but at least most would be on the same page.

I also have problems with that because the classes are nothing but opinions. Nothing that is not on the form should be taught as fact.

The guy from last night teaches things as fact when he admits that he adds things based on what inspectors tell him insurance companies require and he speaks as if the OIR and Citizens are one.

I believe that crap is wrong. I believe opinions should not matter and only the facts to the questions on the form whatever the form may be should matter.

I agree with you on that. Unfortunately, Citizens, the OIR and all the other “big fish” control things. The form is there. Plans are in the works to have everyone who has anything to do with the form is required to pass a course. John is working on a handbook. I think everything should have been done first before the form was released, but at least things are being done.

As for your instructor from the course, after he made this statement: How do you know that the roofer did not see he missed and go right back and nail it properly., I would have walked out.

He did not say that. He taught it as you say. A inspector said that.
He himself is a York student. I about walked out anyhow but I did not wish to be rude. He was a nice guy and his course is approved but I just feel the whole system is flawed.

Sorry then.
It is a statement I have heard Realtors ask. I really have to bite my tongue when responding to them.:mrgreen:

I asked John S. about this issue a couple weeks back and he gave a very good detailed answer as it pertains to codes and insurance coverage.

From a reliable source, the area where the strap enters the bond beam is considered the front.

Unless that rusty nail on the bottom is actually a nail, they are going to have to add one more to get the credit.
Again, we need to show both sides of the truss end.

Does anyone know what the exact uplift data is that the form is based on. By exact uplift data I mean what is the minimum Pounds per square foot (PSF) of uplift required.

I think this was recently discussed between Simpson the ARA and the OIR in the changing from 3 on front side to 2 on front side with one on back side …thank you in advance

This was part of it.

Eric thanks-----Item says : Testing conducted by Simpson showed that 2+1 configuration is sufficient to produce resistance levels assumed in 2002 study.

Here is the study: http://www.rms.com/publications/RMS_Study_of_Floridas_Windstorm_Mitigation_Credits.pdf

I looked through it very quickly but don’t see an exact calculation (PSF) does anyone know what that is ?

By the way everyone should take a look at that study !

If you go back to the MSFH manual it would appear (pg83) the single wrap is rated at approximately 1000 lbs of uplift force. That comes from Simpson. The manual was developed using ARA studies.