Replies

1. 
   Andy_Engel_ | Nov 26, 2001 08:55pm | #1

   *
   Uhm, then where is the best place for the butt joints to fall? I'm well aware that common practice can be wrong, but I've been in residential construction in one capacity or another since 1979, and I've always seen it done Mike's way. I'd love to hear more.

   Andy

1. 
   Gary_Katz | Nov 27, 2001 03:38am | #2

   *Butt Joints? I have some female friends in this business and from what I hear, they're tired of seeing butt joints--me too, so lets keep our pants up so they won't fall anywhere, huh? And what's up with the one capacity or another since 1979? How old were you then? And how come you couldn't figure out--after more than 20 years--what capacity? Is that why you're an editor? Does Senior have anything to do with your age? And what Mike? I read that article from start to finish and never read anything about a Mike.Nice article, Mr. Guertin. Maybe next time you'll get an editor with hair on his head. You're lucky no one complained about the shims! (:]Gary

1. 
   jim_"crazy_legs"_blodg | Nov 27, 2001 04:34am | #3

   *Californians.

1. 
   Andy_Engel_ | Nov 27, 2001 06:49pm | #4

   *Multiple capacities, Gary, although all of the previous ones frequently entailed lifting heavy things. As to age, well, I escaped high school and took my first legal drink in 1979. Andy

1. 
   Joe_Hennessey | Nov 27, 2001 08:03pm | #5

   *You were 21 when you got out of high school?

2. 
   Andy_Engel_ | Nov 28, 2001 04:19pm | #6

   *Joe, back then, the drinking age was a bit younger than it is today.Andy

3. 
   jim_at_great_white | Nov 29, 2001 08:28am | #7

   *Let's see if you graduated in 79 and I in 82 that would make you three years older than me. So you're 50, right?Oh! that's just a feels like age.jim

4. 
   Andy_Engel_ | Nov 29, 2001 04:24pm | #8

   *Some days I'm 50, maybe 60, fewer days I'm 20, but mostly 40 feels right.

5. 
   jim_at_great_white | Nov 30, 2001 02:41am | #9

   *I know exactily what yer sayin'jim

6. 
   Mike_Guertin | Dec 11, 2001 02:24pm | #10

   *James, you are absolutely correct in all reguards.The beam in question was in fact checked by an engineer.The parragraph was reviewed by an engineer also and it is in keeping with several CABO versions addressing built-up beam lamination joints And I suspect the IRC has similar provisions but I haven't culled through that beast yet.You may recall a Q&A piece last year in FHB with a Q sent in by my brother regarding his suspision that I was blowing smoke that we could (and in many cases would be better off)locating joints between the colunm locations rather than over them. PE David Grandpre answered the question in what I think was a thoughtful and realistic manner. Check it out in issue #136 p 22.I will stand by the our method and sentence until gunned down by a drive by reader...Hey Mr. Katz, what are you doing looking through stuff like this? Don't you have better things to do?Mike

7. 
   Gary_Katz | Dec 13, 2001 05:53pm | #11

   *Actually, Mike I hate to admit it but ever since that shimless prehung article, I've become extremely sensitive to criticism (my daughter is not longer allowed to comment on the changing color of my hair, and my dog has to eat whatever I serve her for dinner), so I started checking this topic as soon as the plunge router article came out. Gary

2. 
   James_Richard_Tyrer | Dec 13, 2001 05:53pm | #12

   *
   "With an engineer's approval, butt joints can fall between columns, but rather than take chances, we locate all butt joints over the columns." Perhaps an engineer should look things like that over before they are published. If this beam in question is considered to be a multiply supported continuous beam. then directly over the columns is not the best place to put the butt joints. JRT