Roof truss problem- new construction

[longez]

After finishing up our new home I'm finally back to building my 40x60 shop. I'm traveling on business this week, but today the builder set the roof trusses.He sent me these pictures, but something didn't look right - the pitch looked too low. When I called him he acknowledged they too were wondering about that and had just checked and found they were built at 4/12 instead of my 5/12 spec. Argggh! The 12' wide "wing" on the right side and over the entry was to be 3/12 and they indeed are correct. The truss company acknowledged they made a mistake, but have a plan to scab on additional material to make-up the 22-1/2" height deficiency.

Does this seem prudent, or should I tell them to forget it and build new trusses at 5/12? I'm so torqued off I can hardly see straight, but I'm sure it will get fixed one way or another.

 

[ItsNemo]

Never settle...get them redone in 5/12.

 

[The Cobbler]

don't think I would accept the scab on , even if they supply you with engineer specs & drawing.
is the height that important? could you negotiate a cost reduction by keeping what they installed?

 

[southalabama]

I see your in Montana.

With snow loads.

No way I'd settle for some jack leg scab on.

So much for the term "engineered truss".

 

[p_mori7]

don't think I would accept the scab on , even if they supply you with engineer specs & drawing.
is the height that important? could you negotiate a cost reduction by keeping what they installed?

THIS.

Use the cost savings on something else you want.

 

[jd_1138]

I wouldn't trust a band-aid fix. They f'ed up. They need to give you the correct trusses. Only way I'd keep those if they just tore up their bill for them, but then again you'd still be stuck with the wrong slope.

 

[Zippercat]

Why didn't the builder check the trusses before installing them?

 

[readhead]

Be careful. Once you accept them the truss company doesn't have to do anything. The trusses should be replaced. But there is another problem. The GC didn't check the trusses and installed them. Is he going to remove them and install the new ones at no charge? Did anyone check the shop drawings? Were they right or wrong? Looks like several things went wrong here.

 

[Bib Overalls]

Couple of thoughts come to mind.

You have labor in the trusses you have because they have been set. If you insist on new trusses make them eat the tear off and reset.

If you paid the quoted price and you decide to keep the trusses make sure the cost difference between what you spected and what you got is computed. A taller, steeper truss will have more material in it than a lower, flatter truss of the same width.

If you decide to do the sister act make sure the truss company pays for all labor and equipment rental needed to do the job.

Your contractor put them up without confirming the pitch. The truss company may argue that constitutes "acceptance." They may say you or the contractor acting as your agent, had a duty to inspect the trusses for conformance to specs and if defective, seek a remedy before they were installed.

I don't think the additional material the truss company proposes as a fix will compromise the strength of the roof. If anything, it will make the roof stronger.

If you take this issue ugly no one will win and your project will be frustrated for a while.

 

[longez]

I'm uncertain where the disconnect came from. The truss company is a subsidiary of the major building materials company in Western Montana, with 10+ retail yards plus the truss plant. I have a good relation with the manager of our local store, but this was the GC's dealings. My drawings clearly call out the 5/12 pitch, and they acknowledge that fact. It isn't clear if the truss designer/engineer picked up the wrong pitch from my plans, or the truss plant built the wrong trusses. I don't think the building will look the way I want with 4/12 and 3/12 wing roofs - that's not an option. I don't know if the engineering was done for 5/12 and they built 4/12, or if the engineering was done for 4/12.

Either way, it needs to 5/12 to make me happy. Is it possible the top plates would be damaged in tearing off the 4/12 trusses if I make them do so?

I'm inclined to tell them to start building new trusses tomorrow morning, but wanted to hear what the experts here advise.

Sheesh - the house had 17 different trusses (many with pitch breaks) and was done perfectly; yet this simple square box has a problem.

 

[readhead]

Keep in mind that the building reactions are based on the engineered plans. If you accept the lower pitch you will have changed the design loads. Are you willing to do that? If there is a failure in the future you can bet this change will come to light. This might not be a big deal but the pitch break amplifys the problem.

Replace them.

 

[matt_i]

If you go the route of additional framing, I would make sure that there is an engineered-stamped drawing of the *assembly* and how the two parts are to be attached (likely a nailing schedule and 2x lumber or strapping that connects the two parts).

While your GC owns the responsibility to comply with the framing inspection, I would want those documents in my pocket to a) verify correct work of the GC, and b) have in my files long-term in case of any questions down the road.

 

[bczygan]

Don't see much of an energy heel for Montana...

 

[readhead]

Outbuilding that probably doesn't fall into energy code requirements in that jurisdiction.

 

[bczygan]

Outbuilding that probably doesn't fall into energy code requirements in that jurisdiction.

Who cares about code.

You would want it for your own benefit...

Bill

 

[ms fowler]

Couple of thoughts come to mind.

You have labor in the trusses you have because they have been set. If you insist on new trusses make them eat the tear off and reset.

If you paid the quoted price and you decide to keep the trusses make sure the cost difference between what you spected and what you got is computed. A taller, steeper truss will have more material in it than a lower, flatter truss of the same width.

If you decide to do the sister act make sure the truss company pays for all labor and equipment rental needed to do the job.

Your contractor put them up without confirming the pitch. The truss company may argue that constitutes "acceptance." They may say you or the contractor acting as your agent, had a duty to inspect the trusses for conformance to specs and if defective, seek a remedy before they were installed.

I don't think the additional material the truss company proposes as a fix will compromise the strength of the roof. If anything, it will make the roof stronger.

If you take this issue ugly no one will win and your project will be frustrated for a while.

A well-reasoned and rational response. Any solution the truss company has to stand behind any solution they offer--they can't simply throw some extra lumber at it; it must be engineered--and it will be. I have inspected wood frame construction for many years. It is not uncommon to see buildings where trusses sit on top of other trusses. Saying they are going to "scab on" a repair implies something shady. It need not be.
Listen to what the truss company offers, demand signed and sealed prints of the repair, ask for some compensation for the impact on your building schedule.

 

[KnurledNut]

Is the gable end truss intentionally shorter?
Perhaps for lookouts to catch the fly?

What are the short gable trusses on the ground for?

I would advise against a repair however engineered.
Replace if possible.
There will be some damage to the top plate but i wouldnt worry too much about that if they are gonna hurricane strap it.

 

[readhead]

Bill, I agree with you about the heel stand. I'm just saying that it was probably designed to the minimum requirement for its use.

Andy

 

[lakeroadster]

....something didn't look right - the pitch looked too low. When I called him he acknowledged they too were wondering about that and had just checked and found they were built at 4/12 instead of my 5/12 spec. Argggh! The 12' wide "wing" on the right side and over the entry was to be 3/12 and they indeed are correct. The truss company acknowledged they made a mistake, but have a plan to scab on additional material to make-up the 22-1/2" height deficiency.

Does this seem prudent, or should I tell them to forget it and build new trusses at 5/12? I'm so torqued off I can hardly see straight, but I'm sure it will get fixed one way or another.

Modifying seems prudent to me. I'd specify that they:

• A) Submit their P.E. stamped retrofit drawing of the proposed changes for your review, pending your permit jurisdictional approval, and,
• B) Specify they have their P.E., the one that stamped the truss drawings, on-site during the retrofit to approve and sign off on the installation of the components.

Any "plan" is only as good as the finally installation. Adding the components to the erected trusses on-site is quite different than on the factory floor. Implementation is critical.

If they are unwilling to meet your specifications then they, the folks that screwed up, should pay for removal and replacement of the non-spec. trusses.

Yeah.. this stuff *****. Mistakes happen and can be worked through, but they sure do impact timeline schedules and frustration levels.

Stick to your guns.... IMHO the 5-12 pitch will look so much better than the 4-12. And you'll think about that every time you look at the building if you don't have them change it.

Good luck with this... your building is going to be awesome!

 

[NUTTSGT]

Is the gable end truss intentionally shorter?
Perhaps for lookouts to catch the fly?
The shorter end trusses allow for a 2x4/2x6 to make contact with the second truss and sit on the end truss to form the overhang/soffit...kinda like a cantilever.

What are the short gable trusses on the ground for?

I'd guess those are for the 12' right wing the OP mentions inthe first post.

I would advise against a repair however engineered.
Replace if possible.
There will be some damage to the top plate but i wouldnt worry too much about that if they are gonna hurricane strap it.

Not the OP but my answers in red.

 

[longez]

Here is what the small gable trusses are for. This building was built at 5/12 and although it is 50x50, is what my shop was patterned after. I have a telecon with the GC this morning now that I've cooled off a little bit.

Thanks so much for everyone's input. I'm inclined to tear them off and start over, but I'm on a tight schedule and therefore will at least listen to what the proposed field repair is. I was a PE (Mechanical) many years ago when we lived in SoCal, so I'm familiar with the PE sign-off process.

In this part of rural Montana there isn't a framing inspection; just electrical and plumbing. Even the house was the same way, and no formal CO is ever issued. So, between the GC and I... we have to monitor the work. The GC is the framer and siding/roofer on my shop.

 

[hh76]

I'd be comfortable with the "fix", assuming that they run it through engineering. Being a major building supplier, I'd expect that they wouldn't attempt anything without engineering, but can't hurt to make sure.

My main concern would be with cost, specifically, who's covering the extras.

 

[longez]

The scissors truss below is what they are proposing to mount on the side (not top) of the existing 4/12 trusses. If I give them the go ahead, they will develop the sistering specification using structural screws... and I suppose some kind of plywood plate where the two scissors **** up. I want to see a dwg of the assembly; not just the scissor truss.

The building supply/truss plant is accepting responsibility and would bear all material and labor costs if I accept a fix. They'd also provide stamped drawings; not sure if the PE would come to the job site as the truss plant is >100 miles from me.

What say you experts??

 

[longez]

Re: Roof truss problem- new construction - update pg 2

My GC and truss company have concluded the best solution is to build new 5/12 trusses. Apparently the cost to build and install 60+ scissor trusses is greater than the cost to make/install new 5/12's. Hopefully the top plates won't be damaged when the 4/12's are torn off.

The GC will build out the "L" shaped 3/12 wing roof while waiting for the new 5/12 trusses.

This gives me a little more time to work out my air and electrical - both need to be in the walls before we spray the insulation.

 

[DPG]

Any reason to remove the wrong trusses when they can put the correct ones next to them? That would save someone lots of labor and crane time. That should ease your mind on the top plates also.
If not, your question on damaging the top plates - Most likely, they would drive a wedge between the truss and top plate just enough to get a sawzall blade in there. No big deal.

 

[matt_i]

My guess is that the structural screw and/or sistering lumber got to be cost prohibitive over building new. They can probably sell those at a discount and recoup some funds. Not sure if you spec'd uplift protection in the trusses, I've seen two systems, one is a long framing screw driven up thru the double-top-plate, the other is the Simpson metal-tie system, which come apart reasonably well with a prybar (I had to remove a couple). The biggest beating gets taken by the Simpson connector in all of this, if its nailed. Presumably if its the H1Z style (diamond shape with notched top) it could stay there to receive a new truss. However I would want them all replaced due to above damage, if that's they way you have gone on this. If the GC attached the Simpson connector with Simpson structural screws sent with an impact driver, then they should be easily removed and no damage. Several pathways here.

 

[Mustang1167]

Any reason to remove the wrong trusses when they can put the correct ones next to them? That would save someone lots of labor and crane time. That should ease your mind on the top plates also.
If not, your question on damaging the top plates - Most likely, they would drive a wedge between the truss and top plate just enough to get a sawzall blade in there. No big deal.

I'd imagine that is a lot of weight that isn't necessary if the 4 12's are left up. You also would lose any storage space if there were plans for that.

 

[lakeroadster]

Re: Roof truss problem- new construction - update pg 2

...Hopefully the top plates won't be damaged when the 4/12's are torn off....

Any reason they couldn't attach additional top plates, rather than making the existing ones swiss cheese?

If they used ring shank nails.... that will be a ***** getting them out. They may just cut them.

Ugh... I bet somebody gets canned over this screw up.

 

[jd_1138]

Any reason to remove the wrong trusses when they can put the correct ones next to them? That would save someone lots of labor and crane time. That should ease your mind on the top plates also.
If not, your question on damaging the top plates - Most likely, they would drive a wedge between the truss and top plate just enough to get a sawzall blade in there. No big deal.

That's a lot of additional weight. It would need some additional beams/posts to carry that weight. It'd strengthen the roof structure, sure, but would cost extra.

The GC should've checked the pitch of the trusses before installing them. He failed. It would've been instinct for me to check them and I am not even a PE, carpenter, or a general contractor.

 

[longez]

The GC acknowledges he owns some of this. He spent the last 18 months building us a beautiful 5,700 sf new home that was a flawless process - he gets a pass from me on this. I **know** he'll make it right; the truss company and GC will need to work out bites of the rotten apple. The truss company operates their own flatbed trucks with 80' stinger cranes, so at least there isn't a 3rd party involved.

In a way, I'm sort of glad I'm away on business this week - I might not have been helpful in resolving this

 

[bczygan]

Seems like it is working out perfectly.

See if you can get a taller heel while you're at it.

It's the solution I would have asked for.

I doubt they will take the old trusses back for resale. Probably trash them. They've been in too much weather. Let us know what happens.

And careful removal will keep from damaging your top plate.

I've had truss screw ups on jobs. It happens. Worst thing is it hampers the schedule.

Bill

 

[egdede]

Modifying seems prudent to me. I'd specify that they:

• A) Submit their P.E. stamped retrofit drawing of the proposed changes for your review, pending your permit jurisdictional approval, and,
• B) Specify they have their P.E., the one that stamped the truss drawings, on-site during the retrofit to approve and sign off on the installation of the components.

Any "plan" is only as good as the finally installation. Adding the components to the erected trusses on-site is quite different than on the factory floor. Implementation is critical.

If they are unwilling to meet your specifications then they, the folks that screwed up, should pay for removal and replacement of the non-spec. trusses...

This seems like excellent advice if you allow modification.

And, if the house went flawless, then the GC can probably afford to fix the trusses. Specifically, that such a large house was done flawlessly suggests he knows how to run his business and a GC will have padded the bid for just such problems.