Thread: Connecting veranadah beam to posts etc.

I'm no expert but a 6.1m span seems like a long span for 240x90. What sort of timber are you using? Have you checked any span charts for that type and grade of timber? I ask because I am currently helping my brother in law with his deck and the spec there is 250x50 rough sawn Oregon for a 4m span.

Rafters can be connected directly to the house by fastening a barge board (? not sure of terminology) to the house and having brackets attached where the rafters butt in.

I'll let those more knowledgable comment on anything else.

Thanks Rookie, All timber in the project is Seasoned Hardwood - F17... and according to the "Tasmanian Timber Framing Manual" 6.1 is OK span for this size. I had thought of steel for this beam but not sure how to fix it all together and the builder doesn't like working with steel.

The connection detail for veranadah beam to posts is my main query.

Originally Posted by Rookie

................Rafters can be connected directly to the house by fastening a barge board (? not sure of terminology) to the house and having brackets attached where the rafters butt in....................

I call it a "pole plate", may be known by different terms in different areas though. Barge boards are the raked pieces that you would call fascias if they weren't raked.

Beams are usually fixed to the posts with 2 x 12mm cuphead bolts. Top of the post is checked out 20mm or so. Where beams join (on a post obviously) they are cogged and one bolt goes through each piece. These details should really be on the plans.

Mick

Usually posts are 90-100mm square & beams are about 45-50mm wide, this means you check out the posts about half their thickness x the beam depth. You're left with about 50mm of timber on the back of the post to fix through into the beam, & when the two come together you have the beam flush with the front of the post...a nice neat finish. Your same width post & beams can't be done this way, or if it is, the outside face of the beam will not be flush with the outside face of the post because you need to leave a piece on the back of the post to attach it to the beam. If this look is OK to you, just remember to set the bottom of the posts back from the outside edge of the deck so the outside face of the beam will end up flush with the outer edge of the deck. Phew...are you still with me? If you want the beam to sit directly on top of the beam, in my area it is acceptable to attach the two by means of a heavy dowel through the beam down into the post, glued with a waterproof glue. For christs sake, don't start using those bloody awfull joist hangers & other various metal attachment plates. Sure they do the job but I only use them where they won't be seen because they're plain ugly. Do you really want to be looking at those things that say "this job was done this way because its all we could afford, we didn't have the skills & we have no taste"? While I'm having a winge, don't use ugly bolts, use a 70mm batten screw nicely countersunk into the timber, or you could let the batten screw in & plug it for a really trick look. The beam should pass through the wall & sit on a stud or two. The rafters should indeed locate to a pitching plate fixed to the house wall, but once again for a clean look cut stopped scarfs in the pitching plate (grooves the same width of the rafter at the rafter spacing positions not cut all the way from top to bottom, but stopped short so a shoulder is left for the rafter to sit on) & you won't need brackets. I have to stop now because I've got steam coming out of my ears from trying to verbalise this stuff. Good luck.

Carpenter,
unfortunately where I am "ugly bolts" are the only way to go (and 12mm is minimum) due to cyclonic wind uplift factors. Definitely wouldn't get away with glued dowels! :eek: Also the rafters need to be fixed with either framing anchors or bolts (or sometimes both if you live near the beach). I agree it's ugly (but not nearly as ugly as a deroofed house ) and adds hours to the job.

Mick

Fair enough Mick. You'd think someone would have invented an attractive alternative to Pryda brackets by now eh?

Thanks Guys for your advice, some good points there.

I attached the detail post to beam that I will submit. It gets a bit windy around here so brackets and bolts are a must. Everything will be painted so shouldn't look too bad. I'll let you know how I go. I'm sick of playing with the plans. Sometimes think I should have just paid an architech/engineer or whoever normally does this side of the job. Anyway...

Can't wait to start digging those footings!

Cheers

Just a word of caution re: the large beam, assuming your beam is correct for the span it doesn't mean it won't deflect, deflection is calculated into span tables it might sag 10-20 mm but is still considered structually sound, it just looks crap! what about no post in the middle but one at either side of the 3m door opening to 'frame' the door, might look better than a saggy beam, and it will sag.
Cheers,
John

That's interesting about deflection. I've used AS1684 to determine that 190x45 F7 dry treated pine / 240x50 F7 oregon will span 5.8m as single span rafters / fascia respectively (900mm spacing). This is rafter not beam, so only carrying its own weight plus roof sheets (10kg/m2 or less) and no cyclonic concerns in the ACT - but perhaps I need to be more conservative?

We have found that most timbers spanning long distances will sag,they will sag in their own weight, the span tables won't gaurantee a straight result but will give you a structural answer. Go the next size up or ask the engineer you want a beam to stay straight he will probably use steel!
When doing glass balustrade we will only use steel beams or make sure their is plenty of posts to support the beam as the glass balustrade can't handle any movement.
cheers,
John

I agree with jaws 6 metres is a long span and I think an extra post looks better than a sagging or twisting beam