Since it’s become common practice to use galvanized bolts that come into contact with p.t. lumber I now use only galvanized bolts in foundations where p.t. mudsills are to be installed. However, I have a load of regular bolts sitting in the garage and can’t think of where to use them. Since they are still being sold I assume that there is a use for them but can’t think where. Before I toss them I’d like to know where people are using them these days.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
Learn how the pros keep their hand tools sharp without breaking the bank.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Fine Homebuilding Magazine
Fine Home Building
Follow
-
Fine Homebuilding
Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.
Start Free Trial Now -
GBA Prime
Get instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.
Start Free Trial Now
Replies
Why do you use PT plates. Cant you use reg common lumber and a gasket?
I would only be using PT where I expect moisture.
Rik
My understanding is that, in this area (Bay Area) any lumber that comes into contact with concrete must be p.t. even the plans state that unless I've been missing something.
PT required here for contact with any /all masonry foundation.
You can put in all the gaskets or sealers you want, still must be PT.
JimNever underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
Wow, here on the wet coast of Canada I have only ever had to use PT for outdoor use.For interior use if it's gonna get wet I won't use wood. (saunas excluded)Rik
Not positive of the reasoning here. Have heard dampness in CMU and others. Just know the only way to get a plan permitted is to spec PT sills.....
Might be subterranian termite concerns - we got plenty of them!
But truthfully, those little blighters will build a mud tube right past a PT sill up to the tasty untreated wood joists or rim boards.
JimNever underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
PT required here for contact with any /all masonry foundation.
Oh gawd, here we go again....
http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=125054.10 et seq.;
and specifically:
http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=125054.57
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I checked out the (1st) thread and then read a few of the comments after yours. I tend to agree with them that if the B.I. insists on using it and the plans also call specifically for them then it is easier than fighting it, especially if it gives someone something to throw back at you at a later date (i.e. if there are ANY problems with the project). If the chemicals in p.t. lumber necessitate using HDG or stainless steel hardware then fair enough, I won't use a regular d.f. sill just so I can empty my Garage of old hardware. As I said before, I could scrap them and buy some beer, that won't be sitting in Garage for very long at all.
I checked out the (1st) thread and then read a few of the comments after yours.
A little further along in that discussion you will find comments on the other side of the argument, as well as a post from a member in the US who quoted the IBC to the effect that no, PT is not required for all concrete contact--the code requires either treated lumber of naturally rot-resistant species. Which is one of the main points I've been trying to make.
I understand and have a certain amount of sympathy with the argument that getting into a pissing contest with a BI who doesn't know his own code well enough can be a PITA. But I maintain that if a builder/designer does his paperwork properly, this argument can be avoided by getting the code-approved alternate material passed at the permit-pulling stage so there will be no on-site delays or hassles over it later.
The other big point I'm making is that over the last 20-30 years or so, the PT manufacturing industry has so successfully bamboozled the entire construction industry--designers, builders, lumberyards, inspectors, and everybody else--that by now, the false beliefs about PT being required by code have become 'everybody knows that' urban-legend factoids that most people no longer think about or question. By now, we are facing a situation where the false beliefs help to propagate and perpetuate themselves, so that things aren't going to improve unless and until enough people holler loud enough for long enough.
It's one of those vicious circles, wherein the situation creates an attitude which in turn 'validates' the situation which in turn 'justifies' the attitude, and so on around and around, ad infinitum, ad nauseum....
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
>>it has been propagated by ignorant designers and code writers wishing to cover their butts.<<
And there you have the best case for me saying PT is required here (DE).
Agreed, other woods are acceptable under IRC, and if I wanted to pay dearly for and order WRC, heart redwood, or cypress, in a sill grade, I could probably get a plan approved and permitted. Might be a different situation in the PNW for WRC, California for heart redwood, or deep south for cypress.
Then I would most likely have to go through another hassle with a BI who probably won't be able to identify any of the above mentioned woods - but they can all read the PT tags and / or identify PT SYP by sight.
Therefore, I will rephrase my original statement:
Here, if you want your project to sail through the permitting process and inspections with a minimum of hassle and wasted time - PT sills are required.
Here, galvanized foundation bolts are readily available and are the standard installed by all of the foundation companies.
Here, I will not get a discount from a foundation company for specing non-galvanized bolts - might well pay a premium since they no longer keep them in stock because...........everybody uses PT sills.
Here, I will pay at least a 200% premium for WRC, heart redwood, or cypress sill stock as compared to PT SYP. And yes, I can afford to use SS nails for fastening joists and rims to the PT sills and still be far ahead from a $$ standpoint.
I am in the business to produce a quality product and make money with a minimum of hassle from the local authorities. For me, this makes PT the only way to go (here).
Jim
Never underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
Edited 10/11/2009 2:38 pm ET by JTC1
What you say about "code writers I can't comment. Being in both the construction business and the design business I would however like to comment about "ignorant designers". If you call being ignorant, specifying on ones designs and drawings what the code requires, I confess to being ignorant and yes for sure covering my butt.
Just like you are when you go out of your way, even at additions expense, to use material and processes that you know that your BI wants in order cover yours.
JTG1, please do not take offense to the above statement. I hear what you are saying. I've felt the same way and made similar statements about others. You know. Those blasted Architects, Engineers, Lawyers, etc.
From:
oops <!----><!---->
Oct-11 3:26 pm
To:
JTC1 <!----><!---->
What you say about "code writers I can't comment. Being in both the construction business and the design business I would however like to comment about "ignorant designers".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim was quoting me in that post, so I ought to be the one to answer your comment.
If you call being ignorant, specifying on ones designs and drawings what the code requires, I confess to being ignorant and yes for sure covering my butt.
It looks like I didn't make myself clear enough, so let me try again.
The truth is that the codes do not require PT; the problem is that most people don't understand that, and believe the urban legend instead.
In fact, the code requires only that some sort of rot-resistant material be used for structural members in contact with concrete. Yes, PT is accepted...but so are some of the cedars and redwoods and a number of other naturally resistant species.
There is a distressingly large number of people who are ignorant of this fact--designers, builders, and building inspectors among them. From one perspective, it is difficult to blame them for this ignorance because, as I pointed out in my previous post, the false beliefs about PT being required have achieved the status of 'common knowledge' factoids, and when you hear the same incorrect statement being uttered by pretty much everyone you know, it's easier to just believe it than it is to go dig out the books and find out the real truth for yourself.
What I'm trying to do is address that misconception and raise the consciousness of builders, designers, and others involved in the homebuilding process about it. In doing that, I try to be precise in my choice of words ('ignorant' is not an insult; it is simply an adjective which describes a person lacking certain knowledge) and non-judgemental about people who've been unwittingly led down the garden path by the PT industry's highly effective and long-running marketing ploys.
So, no, you're not 'ignorant' if you specify what the code really requires, but I urge you to read the code for yourself and not take the word of others (including BI's) who are.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I didn't take offense at "ignorant", I just know the "ignorance quotient" of most of our BI's, and the availability and pricing of different lumber species in my area.
About the only naturally, rot-resistant, 2x wood always available in my area is cypress. That comes from a small yard about 15 miles away which supplies the nearby mushroom house industry. They build their "growing boxes" from cypress - 8/4, 5/4 and 4/4.
The cypress 2x which they stock is rough sawn and green. This is what the mushroom business wants - cheapest available, and green makes no difference since it will be damp constantly once in service.
These, already more expensive, cypress sills would require a separate delivery or pick up for this material, which drives the cost even higher.
I can always get WRC, 2x stock from a supplier who is ~90 miles away - premium price and a big delivery charge.
I can get heart redwood as a special order from my local pro yard - premium price plus the wait.
OTOH, I can always get PT SYP from a HD about 3/4 of a mile away, or from any other yard in town, delivered right along with the framing lumber. And the masons have already installed galvanized foundation bolts because "everybody uses PT sills". Probably, for the same reasons I do.....
My point was really - why would I pay a premium for sill stock which no one but the BI, myself and other subs will even see, and put up with the potential hassle of using it at the permitting and inspection stages when I can make all of those expenses / fights go away by using PT SYP and buying a few SS nails (always available from my normal supplier to fit my Hitachi gun).
I understand the use of other species is code compliant, but just does not make financial (or headache) sense in my area, and, with appropriate fasteners, I do not believe the quality of the structure suffers by it's use.
Perhaps in a different geographical area, the use of other species would make perfect sense.
JimNever underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
Damn, I had a reply all typed and ready to post and this here 'puter froze on me. So here we go again....
I live in a rural area, too, so I'm quite used to dealing with a severely limited choice of materials. The nearest HD is over an hour away, but we have a local franchise from each of two province-wide chains of not-quite-Big-Box stores; one in town, the other 20 klicks away.
But whenever I ask for anything even slightly out of the very ordinary, the usual answer from the mental giant behind the counter is something along the lines of 'There ain't no such thing,' or 'Never heard of it,' or 'Nobody stocks that,' or 'Duh, whut??'
EPDM? 'We don't carry that brand of shingles."
CVG cedar? 'I don't know what it is, so we don't have it.'
'Quarter inch flexible gyprock? 'Ain't no such thang; gyprock only comes in half inch or five eights.'
Retailers' stocking choices are supposed to be driven by demand, but since the Big Boxes have eaten up all the indy yards, the cart has starting driving the horse. They control supply, and by restricting the choices also effectively control the demand. Which suits them just fine...but isn't so good for the rest of us.
In theory, if sufficient demand is present, a yard will stock whatever the customers want. But because the Big Boxes are so Big, that demand has to be both loud and insistant. Which means guys like you and me have to be willing to walk out of the Big Box, taking our money with us, and go see a supplier who will supply what we want, even if that means an extra half hour in the truck.
Yeah, I know: it's a PITA. But if we don't do it, things are just gonna get worse.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I'm confused. I checked the first post in the first link, and here's what you said:
"I'm gonna say it again: Concrete does not degrade wood in direct contact with it"...
and later:
"There are literally millions and millions of houses with plain, garden variety spf framing lumber sitting directly on slabs and foundation walls."
But now, it seems that you're saying concrete *does* degrade wood that it's in contact with, but doesn't degrade heart redwood, or cedar, or cypress, (or pt). Or are you still saying that spf directly on concrete will pass inspection, unless the ahj is ignorant?I think artacoma (SP?) had the best point when he said that if you use a sill sealer to separate the plate from the crete, then you can use whatever you want.
k
The confusion is somewhat understandable, as there are several different issues being discussed without a clear break between the discssions. Which tends to happen here, LOL....
Issue #1: Does concrete degrade wood in contact with it?
No, not unless the house has been poorly built or designed and there are water-control issues in the foundation, roof, etc. Using PT as a 'panacea' to compensate for lack of good design and workmanship is ill advised for both ecological reasons; and because while yes, a PT plate may resist rot, all the non-PT studs and sheathing nailed to it won't. So unless you're ready to start building the entire house--framing, trim, sheathing and all--out of PT, it'll be a lot better for everyone to build it right.
Issue # 2: Is the use of PT in contact with concrete required by Code?
No. The IBC only requires the use of rot resistant material; it does not specify 'PT' as the only acceptable material to be used in contact with concrete.
In reference to Issue #1, it is important to understand that this code requirement assumes that builders and designers won't build the house properly, and that plates in contact with concrete will rot because good water control in foundations and roofs will not be present. Otherwise, there is no logical reason for the requirement except to cover the a$$e$ of the code writers.
There is also the sub-issue of whether the local BI fully understands the code he is supposed to enforce.
The answer is usually no; many of them think the same way many builders do, believing erroneously that the code requires PT and nothing but PT. Builders and designers must therefore know the code better than the BI, and ensure that use of code-approved non-PT materials is specified in the original plans and stamped at the time the permit is pulled.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not broughtlow by this? For thine evil pales before that whichfoolish men call Justice....
I'm in the bay area too and I'm also wondering why they stock that item.
Just a guess, but maybe to bolt above grade ledgers onto CMU and concrete walls, and for plates on top of the same type of walls at the parapet.
timc,
Don't toss them, MCQ and borate plates can use them.
KK
If I can't find a use I'd rather get their scrap value and buy a case of beer.
Put 'em on Craigslist for a buck apiece.
Somebody will need them.
Maybe start at $2, leave yourself some negotiating room.......
Joe H
I used borate plates on my last walls."There are three kinds of men: The one that learns by reading, the few who learn by observation and the rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."Will Rogers
I now use only galvanized bolts in foundations where p.t. mudsills are to be installed.
If you insist on using PT mudsills, I'd suggest you be careful about galvy fasteners. Double-dipped HDG fasteners are about the only ones you can depend on; there's too much quality-control variation in what is labelled HDG for you to be certain that there are no surface voids in the galvanising. Many manufacturers label hot-drum galvanised hardware as 'hot galvanised' (or worse, 'HDG') which too many people think means the same thing as 'hot-dipped'. It doesn't.
However, I have a load of regular bolts sitting in the garage and can't think of where to use them.
Use them to hold down non-poison-treated mudsills and plates. You do not have to use PT; there are perfectly legal alternatives you may use. 2006 IBC states "...or naturally durable woods..." which include cedar and many others.
Dinosaur
How now, Mighty Sauron, that thou art not brought
low by this? For thine evil pales before that which
foolish men call Justice....
You can isolate the steel from the pt by drilling a slightly larger hole and wrapping the bolt with ice and water shield.
But you may not want to go through the hassle.
Will Rogers
the code in illinois states that any conectoe smaller then 3/8" must be hdg or stainless (last i checked at least). 3/8" or 1/2" black j bolts fly here.
I believe thickness of the metal is considered here. J bolts and stab anchors being 1/2" or 5/8" thick in my case were not required to be galv on the last two remodels I did despite holding down PT plates.
The bearing plates--now req'd in place of reg. round washers--did come galv, although I don't know if they were req'd to be either.
I placed a PT plate first, then built the wall with a second std plate and rolled it up on to the PT. Inspector did check to see that I'd used HDG or SS fasteners to make that connection tho.
That's the way it is here in OR.
Same thing here as far as any steel 1/2" or larger in contact with PT not required to be HD galvanized. Not that I totally agree, but OTOH, I believe that the PT lumber & metal corrosion issue is much less when there isn't much moisture present, like in the case of mud sills- especially if you use foam sill sealer.
Some guy here was doing a test - but I don't think he ever got back to us.... Anyone remember that?
>>Some guy here was doing a test - but I don't think he ever got back to us.... Anyone remember that?<<
I do. That guy is me.
Original thread title was "ACQ vs nail."
Still have my two samples going - one outdoors, one indoors in my basement to simulate a sill application. Testing involves, KD (control), ACQ and MCQ woods; aluminum flashing; and multiple fasteners including bright, CC bright, HD galvanized and SS nails; various coated, SS, and GRK screws.
Approaching the 2 year mark, about time to start pulling fasteners.
I have not forgotten to post results - just don't have them yet.......
JimNever underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
prior to pulling fasteners, what is it looking like? I'm on the edge of my seat...
some people are easily entertained.....
Exposed area report - fasteners not pulled:
Brights are looking bad, cc brights also bad - outdoors - expected.
Outdoor GRK's are discolored.
Some rust on coated screws outdoors
Simpson and Tecot nails discolored - no rust visible
HD galvanized look slightly discolored / weathered - indoor look new
SS look like new
Aluminum flashing has some corrosion, but not as bad as I expected.
Will attempt to post photos when the time comes, if my daughter will teach me how......
Jim
Never underestimate the value of a sharp pencil or good light.
When you actually post the results start a new thread. It's a pretty important topic to me anyway.