Chris Bernhardt Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Is anyone writing up lag bolted and bolted thru guardrails lacking the simpson tiedown in light of the tests done a Virginia tech a couple of years ago? My take on the testing was that an HI can't judge just by stressing the guard rail as the failure is non-linear. Given the testing results aren't we liable for not pointing out that lag bolted and even bolted thru connections are likely to fail? Chris, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian G Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Speaking only for myself, I can't go anything like that far yet. If I did I would have to automatically write up every deck I see. Frankly I think it's an exaggeration to say that most other connections are likely to fail, test results or no. Most never fail, if only because most are never really tried under extreme stresses. I see some crummy railings and I write them up without mercy, but I also see some damn stout ones that I'm perfectly comfortable blessing (or sitting on, or leaning against). For now I'm sticking with that approach. I did just get a nice new publication from Simpson, and I love their stuff. Brian G. Bart Makes Great Hardware [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt Is anyone writing up lag bolted and bolted thru guardrails lacking the simpson tiedown in light of the tests done a Virginia tech a couple of years ago? No. The pocket protector crowd doesn't particularly impress me on this topic. My take on the testing was that an HI can't judge just by stressing the guard rail as the failure is non-linear. I don't see or hear about enough railing failures to justify the concern. I find ledger flashings and connections to be a much more pressing concern. Given the testing results aren't we liable for not pointing out that lag bolted and even bolted thru connections are likely to fail? I doubt it. When lag screws and through bolts cease to be standard methods that the AJH's bless and even show in their documents, then I might change my mind. - Jim Katen, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottpat Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt Is anyone writing up lag bolted and bolted thru guardrails lacking the simpson tiedown in light of the tests done a Virginia tech a couple of years ago? My take on the testing was that an HI can't judge just by stressing the guard rail as the failure is non-linear. Given the testing results aren't we liable for not pointing out that lag bolted and even bolted thru connections are likely to fail? Chris, Oregon Never heard a word about this. Now was this study paid for by Simpson or was it paid for by the VA Tech? Lag screws and bolts seem to work fine and just about every single one will out last the wood. I'm with Jim on the flashing. It is a fight every time I bring it up and that is about 90% of the time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Originally posted by Scottpat Never heard a word about this. Now was this study paid for by Simpson or was it paid for by the VA Tech? Tsk, Scott, Scott, Scott, what am I going to do with you, Bro? [:-banghea It's all right here on TIJ the most jim-dandiest place to be for all home inspectors, don't you know! [:-party] ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Originally posted by hausdok It's all right here on TIJ the most jim-dandiest place to be for all home inspectors, don't you know! [:-party] ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Having re-read the article, I'm even more hesitant to criticize bolted rail connections. Their rails failed when they applied a 200# load PLUS a 2.5 safety factor. This safety factor isn't mentioned in the IRC. Heck, sure they failed at 500 pounds. - Jim Katen, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottpat Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Man what a great place! Thank you, I have had trouble sleeping for the past week I will try this tonight! [:-bigeyes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bernhardt Posted June 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 If you found a guard rail that you felt was overly deflecting to the stress you gave it, would you recommend the Simpson Tie down method or just say Have a carpenter repair the faulty unsafe guard rail? Chris, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bernhardt Posted June 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 I have wondered if 200# is even enough. I have envisioned some of my larger clients horsing around with their equally large beer drinking buddies pushing a 200# rated railing right over. For the under 6 foot and 200# crowd a 200# railing is probably sufficient. Chris, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randynavarro Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Regarding lag-screws, they will always loosen. Thru-bolting is far superior and the bolt can be re-tightened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Originally posted by Chris Bernhardt I have wondered if 200# is even enough. I have envisioned some of my larger clients horsing around with their equally large beer drinking buddies pushing a 200# rated railing right over. One word: Darwin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian G Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 I was thinking about this today. I can't ever recall seeing thru-bolts fail in railings in the real world. The most common safety issue I find with guard rails is not being tall enough, followed openings that are too big to hold little people. Brian G. Rails At Mid-Thigh High....No Good [xx(] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 Originally posted by Brian G. I was thinking about this today. I can't ever recall seeing thru-bolts fail in railings in the real world. The most common safety issue I find with guard rails is not being tall enough, followed openings that are too big to hold little people. Brian G. Rails At Mid-Thigh High....No Good [xx(] It isn't the bolts that are the problem, it's the fact that the rails are usually connected to poorly braced rim joists. When the geeks from VA Tech applied a 500# load to them, either the rim twisted apart of the bolts pulled through. - Jim Katen, Oregon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian G Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 Originally posted by Jim Katen It isn't the bolts that are the problem, it's the fact that the rails are usually connected to poorly braced rim joists. When the geeks from VA Tech applied a 500# load to them, either the rim twisted apart of the bolts pulled through. I've never seen that happen in the real world either. All of the shaky/scary rails I see are due to poor fastening, idiotic design, or totally inappropriate materials being used. About half are just nailed on. I'm sure the mileage varies elsewhere. Brian G. 500 Pound People Shouldn't Be on a Deck to Start With...Try an Exercise Bike [:-bigeyes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.