Roof framing Q
Client’s too cheap to buy the plans for this, but wants to see what it might come to. I’m trying to envision the structure, see if there is something funky going on. If I can get close, I’ll do a takeoff and a price-up. Looky here.
The pics above show a front and rear elevation. Note the dormer on the L side.
The floor plans, shown above, make me thing there cannot be a structural ridge. Except for going end to end with a biggie spanning 28′ and picking up one monster of a roof load (66 psf ground snow), there is nowhere to get an intermediate post that will do any good. I am thinging it is a collar tied roof. See below.
Those are 2x12s spanning 18 feet, at a length of 24 feet. The collar ties are down far enough, I think.
Look OK? How about the gable framing? I just patched in the headers, and the ridge and valleys. Is it done this way?
Not a direct response to your question, but a word of caution to you & your client.
I had a client once have a builder put up a house from a picture in one of those "Plans" mags. Sure enough, the company who was selling the plans spotted it and sued the builder and the HO for around 10X what the plans would have cost. The client asked me what to do. I told 'em they could go ahead and contest the case, lose and pay the plan owner big $$$ or they could work out a deal. Fortunately, the plan owner was reasonable and the HO got off light, paying the owner the cost of the plans and some legal fees (as well as my legal fees). Also, if the HO is too cheap to buy plans, maybe he'll be too cheap to pay the builder? (Wouldn't surprise me at all.) Maybe if he contacts the plan owner, they would be willing to give him a reduced set, for take-off purposes only, for not much $$$. Save YOU a bunch of unpaid time too. Worth a shot.
Thanks, Mike. If the job is a go, the plans will certainly get bought.
Copies of that very house have been built around the mountains here, and I'll bet not all used a set that were originals.
You're absolutely right. There is an issue of copyright law here. You can't believe how much discussion there is now regarding this in continueing education courses. At times some of the specifics of what you can and can't do without infringing on an architect's copyright of his/her work seem fricking ridiculous. But regarding bought house plans like these, I'm surprised there aren't more lawsuits out there. Beware, there are a lot of attorneys out there that need there tanning vacations to be paid for.
"Beware, there are a lot of attorneys out there that need there tanning vacations to be paid for."
LOL - Yep, and I'm one of 'em!
But seriously, I do some work for design professionals and it amazes me how many excuses folks can come up with for not paying them.
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
So how's you're tan holding up?
After solving for how the ridge load can post down, I sketched in the inside walls, the beam above the upstairs ceiling that picks up the post load and transfers it to bearing walls below, and highlighted the load paths in red.
I thought it might be instructive. For you that frame regularly, though, it's just a yawn.
Man, I've never seen anyone spend as much time fiddling around with a "might wanna build it" project as you do. Are you just really bored and like playing with Sketchup or what? lol
Client backed out of this project, but we're taking the plan, buying some lots, and planning to cookie-cutter this one, and one other plan, with early spring starts. Small vacation home specs.
I am using SU to do all the plans, which is saving us a few thou, and am presently designing the hot water radiator heating systems.
I'm retired, and enjoy a little building from time to time, and this week, being the holiday week, my non-holiday ski pass is blacked out.
Hmm. Isn't this the house from plans the client "was too cheap to buy?" If so, and if you do as you suggest you are considering, maybe you won't save a few thou after you get sued by the folks who designed the building in the first place.
Buy the plans! Or don't, and hire me to defend you. ;-)
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
It is, Mike, and we are building it in an area where three copies have already been built, two without original plans. This, in a building jurisdiction where things are so unsophisticated that a hand sketch on a legal pad sheet is all that is required, along with your check for $15, for a permit.
When I was in business, with the big huge corp retaining counsel for these kinds of issues, my understanding of copyright law was that it could be applied if an exact replicate were done, but that it only took modest changes to skirt the issue.
If you are in the 'Burgh, maybe you know my little bro, who is a principal with Bridges and Company, a commercial GC.
"When I was in business, with the big huge corp retaining counsel for these kinds of issues, my understanding of copyright law was that it could be applied if an exact replicate were done, but that it only took modest changes to skirt the issue."Try printing up some t-shirts with Mickey Mouse on them, except put a 3 ear on it or some other "modest change".Then start selling them on the internet.I am starting a pool.10 milk bones that you will be contacted the Disney's lawyers within 96 hours..
Hey every group has to have one. And I have been elected to be the one. I should make that my tagline.
"my understanding of copyright law was that it could be applied if an exact replicate were done, but that it only took modest changes to skirt the issue."
Nope. If true, you could rip off a best seller by changing the names of the characters and we all know THAT won't work. Just think of all the huge verdicts you have heard/read about where some songwriter successfully claimed infringement based on the most remote, "kinda/sorta" similarities between his nowhere tune and a No. 1 hit by a successful performer. Same thing with plans.
You may be able to get away with this, since the chances are pretty good that the owner of the copyright will never find out. But if he does, there will be a great weeping and gnashing of teeth fer sure, accompanied by a rapid and substantial emptying of wallets. And, not only are YOU at risk, but the new owners of these homes will be stuckees as well, and they will also sue -- you guessed it -- You! Sou you get pain X 4. Heck, your legal fees alone will exceed the national budget for a small country! So just don't tick off anybody who might squeal on 'ya! My (admittedly unsolicited) advice is, as previously stated, "buy the plans." The owner may even give you a discount for building multiple units from the same plan. Heck, I won't even charge for the legal advice, so you just saved a few bucks! ;-)
Don't think I know your brother, but I do know of the company. Good outfit.
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
Right down the road from me, a builder is doing a spec and asking $1.1 million. He is using a set of plans copied from one already built elsewhere, and my understanding is, no architect fees were paid.
Around the corner from that one, a spec sits unsold, little lower asking price, built from a "study set" of Donald Gardner plans, stamped clearly with the "illegal set of plans if this stamp is not red" warning.
It's going on everywhere here, and the plans police could have a field day. Guy I know has a good friend, a GC out in the Tahoe area of CA, says it is rampant out there. Big ticket ski homes all over the mountansides, copyright infringement galore.
My biz in which I got the free legal advice was entry doors, the company ThermaTru, a well known biggie. In cooking up new designs for the fiberglass models, we worked from huge files of catalogs and photos, ripping off features and details, then "borrowing" features we liked to make up new models. In many cases, only very minor details were changed from competitor's copyrighted designs, to come up with our own designs, which we then copyrighted. Maybe we should have hired you.
Can you say "copyright law" violation?
Can you say "copyright law" violation?
Of course I can. You've convinced me of my risk. I'll dispense with my argument toward the legalities, here. The budget can certainly stand the $545 fee we'll pay to plans'r'us.com or whomever we go to (the same plans are available from over a dozen web sellers). Our subs and suppliers like to work from full sized plans, so our little Sketchup pages don't work for them.
But ripping off stock plans from books and websites, plus doing it from photos and a site walkaround, is so commonplace, that I can hardly imagine anyone taking an infringement hit.
I knew Amish builders out in the midwest, and non-Amish design build GCs as well, who built most all their stuff based on plans clients showed them in a plans book, or copied from a website. No fees were ever incurred for purchased plans, and the builders drew up enough pages of plans and elevations, themselves, to get things permitted and built.
We're talking about 95% of the residential new construction in places like northeastern Ohio and the entire northern half of Indiana, plus southern Michigan. Go into a lumberyard out there, trudge into the back office, and you'll see folks doing takeoffs from hand-drawn plansets, most all of them done by builders or the draftsman they pay to crank out the lines. And the title blocks will just say, "Jones Home," or whatever the owner is called.
OK,...but one of these days...when you least expect it,...some one will come up to you and say.....Smile....I'm here to serve with some papers!
I've read this wih much interest regarding copy infringement. As I recall it is a 125.00 filing fee for federal court. The defense for a federal court lawyer starrts at 8000.00 Wasn't me that had problems with this but a friend of mine dealt with this until he closed the doors. Even if you are innocent, you lose. I remeber him saying,,,,everybody does this!!
From my continueing education courses, the restrictions seem very unreasonable, but they are there. All it takes is once.
I'm not so worried about the legality of my home, but I wonder about the line.SWMBO searched the net, and books for years to find a plan.We finally found a basic concept we liked, then she started from scratch in 3DHAD, and I finished up in Turbocad.The floorplan is different, and so is the footprint, but the essence is the same as the plan we looked at.Where is the line?
How different is the floor plan? How different is the footprint? How different are the exterior elevations?
Keep in mind I'm no attorney but as an architect I recommend my clients look at and show me various things they've seen built or cut out of magazines that they like and dislike. Not all clients are capable of expressing this in words. And even with a "show and tell" I have to guide them through with specifics to pin down exactly what they mean and tailor the design to reflect the result of our discussions.
I'm sure you can look at many a house design and argue that it's similar enough to say it's been copied from another. In the event a situation comes up I imagine one needs to prove the process of design, document the meeting discussions, document the evolution of design to final outcome. Everything we see out there is a vehicle used to discuss, learn, and expand.
The fee will help Mike work on his tan.
"The fee will help Mike work on his tan."
LOL! Not me -- I'm a pale, blue-eyed Irishman who sizzles in the sun. But I could use the $$$ to head to the beach, stand in the shade and oogle da babes!
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
The dotted lines in the second floor plan are..........the demarcation of pitch to flat ceiling?
Someplace around that closet at the top of the steps looks like it might stack over that funky caddy closet on the first floor for a post.
It's Never Too Late To Become What You Might Have Been
Yes, Eric, that dotted line is where pitched goes to flat.
Compare the main floor plan to the second. On the main floor, you'll see the dotted line depicting the ceiling vault's flat/pitched line. The ridge c/l is actually running parallel to that, to the R, and is centered over the mullion of the glass door to the R of the fireplace.
I can probably bury a post in the main floor, about midway in the 2x4 wall of the MBR closet, the wall between hall and closet. Above that on the second, the post-up can continue just a little L of the 45 bend in the closet wall, also adjacent the hall. This would shorten the 28' span of a structural ridge by maybe 6 feet, making my span 22 something.
A rough calc on my loading, tells me I need a ridge capable of handling a total load of about 1350 plf, which means something like a three-pack LVL 20. What a monster.
But what I am wondering, is with all those collar ties, whether I need a serious ridge at all? Maybe I play it safe and do, say, a twin-pac of LVL 18, AND the collar ties (hey, they double as ceiling joists), and then I am home free.
The closet in the second floor bedroom at the bottom of the drawing looks like it is almost directly stacked above that caddy corner closet on the first floor and is also roughly midspan.
If it is not, than plans could make it so.
Piffin or some of the others are better suited to answer your biggest question though.
It's Never Too Late To Become What You Might Have Been
Don't know if this might help but I will give it a shot.
It looks to me as if a post could be located to stand atop the latch side of the M. bedroom door and the load carried down to the entry side wall of what I assume to be the entry closet below.
This would split your ridge at close to the 1/2 way point.
The posts supporting a ridge are allowed to be out of plumb , but I cannot remember what the formula (rise/run) is off the top of my head. Several yrs. back I framed quite a few of the "French Chateau" style houses and often had to install posts like this.
The location , size etc. were spelled out in the plans. I do remember that they were always a "T" configuration if out of 2x stock but often were 4x stock.
Thanks for jogging my thoughts. I see it now.
On the main floor, the stairwall halfwall rises up to ceiling height when it dives under the gallery walk corner. On the second floor, stacked above it, a little 2/0 wide wall goes floor to ceiling. It is the one with the plant parked next to it on the second floor plan. That is one post run that will get me from basement to under the roof.
Directly across from that, to the R in the mainfloor plan, find the point in the skewed backwall of the closet, and there's your other post. It continues up in the closet wall that stacks above it.
Up above the topfloor ceiling, those two posts are capped with a short deep beam, and atop that beam, right under the ridge, goes the almost-midpoint post.
I think I can get away with a two ply LVL 18 for a structural ridge, given how the ceiling joists provide a lot of collar tie effect, and the kneewalls here and there on the second are bringing some of the roof loading into the upper floor deck, which can spread some reaction around below.
Nuffa this! Time to count up some stuff and stick it all in the Excel blender, to see what comes out the other end.
Happy to have been of some help.
is nowhere to get an intermediate post that will do any good.
I disagree. A post can be inserted in the stairwell wall between the stairs and the tub. I think it would do a lot of good. It would serve as the bearing post for a beam that would carry some of the the ceiling load, as well as a substantial portion of the roof load.
Keep in mind that a midpoint support for the ridge isn't limited to a single load path dropping directly down. It can drop down to a big header in the floor, with the load path continuing down two posts.
A load bearing ridge beam can also be two beams located to the sides of center. See the latest FBH page 99. A friend has a house with three ridge beams.
It would be a shame to not have a cathedral ceiling in that house. It would be seen as odd in these parts if it didn't.
Beer was created so carpenters wouldn't rule the world.
See this, Don. http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=82815.8
As for the cathedral ceiling, as you can sort of tell from the floor plans, the ceiling vaults up to the bottomside of the rafters over the great room, but then turns and goes flat at the line where the upstairs ceiling joists meet the rafters. But then you knew that, right?
The small 11/6 w x 4/0 bumpout at the front elevation, on the R, has a ceiling vault, but I am not sure how it will look and feel, seing as how it vaults only there. Once inside, the ceiling drops down flat in the family-style eat in kitchen.
This morning I looked again at the drawings you posted and have a couple of questions/comments.
What is the support for the floor under the M. Bed.? I just can't seem to picture anything other than an exposed beam running from the right of the front door to the corner of the kitchen to what I assume is a pantry.
Cantilevered joists over the top of the beam to support the balcony?
""Compare the main floor plan to the second. On the main floor, you'll see the dotted line depicting the ceiling vault's flat/pitched line. The ridge c/l is actually running parallel to that, to the R, and is centered over the mullion of the glass door to the R of the fireplace.""
Align the dotted line on the left of the drawings on the main floor that you say represents the break from vault to flat with the dotted line on the second floor drawing that represents the same thing. Either the draftsperson was really bad or someone moved the fireplace and furniture between drawings. I am not convinced they are meant to represent the same place in space if you know what I mean.
It looks to me as if the 1st. floor drawing dotted line represents the balcony/2nd. floor edge, not the change in ceiling . I suppose that it would be possible to have a beam run from the fire place to the stair wall for 2nd. floor support.
Also in answer to your question about the gable framing , looks fine to me(as if what I know counts for much ) assuming that the rafters alongside the opening are doubled as is header. but I know you know that ..
Sorry, I see I misspoke about the dotted lines, mainfloor plan and second.
The dotted line on the first floor plan is the line of the gallery floor edge above. I have imagined a floor structure done with 9.5" I-joists, that, running over the kitchen and out to the gallery edge, bear first on a beam mounted under, that as you observe, runs from its bearing adjacent the patio door at the front of the house, to its bearing adjacent the pantry closet. Its gallery-edge bearing would be a flush beam. The dropped beam would break the flat ceiling and nicely define the space between the family kitchen and the great room.
The dotted line shown on the second floor plan is defining the ceiling change above. Everything to its R is a nominal 8/0 h flat ceiling, and everything to its L is pitching downward under the 10-pitch rafters. In the way I sketched the dormer, the peak of its vaulted ceiling comes into the 10-pitch ceiling just a little downslope from the ceiling change line.
The greatroom ceiling thus is vaulting up to a height above floor of about 17 feet, and the space above the staircase access is dressed up with the vaulted dormer, creating some more drama.
Entering the shared bath on the second floor, the guest sees a ceiling line above, and an under-roof slope ceiling going down to a kneewall that is about 6/4 high. The corner sink, and the round window around the corner, in the toilet space, adds some more interest.
Back down on the main floor, even though there are no dotted lines to say so, I am envisioning a little vaulted ceiling space just in the bumpout, as you enter fromt the deck through the glass door to the family kitchen, and that small vault is lit by the circular window higher up in the wall, centered over the door.
A compact and interesting plan, huh? No place designated for a laundry, but the owner can put that in the basement. It is a vacation house, and there probably won't be much laundry to do, making the trip to the basement not that much an inconvenience.
Sounds great .
Between jobs here so I have way too much time on my hands..keeping what is left of my mind sharp by meddling here at breaktime, Keeps me from actually dealing with my own problems. ;-)