Any carpenters/handypeople: Porch column question

[Mears]

I have an enclosed 19' wide and 4' deep porch that I'm renovating. Currently it has 3 porch columns: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/aKQfBIkTnbDIRmWf83kwYJNI4D1ZCVBHGdmCgqGXr6s?feat=directlink

What you can see is 1x4 and 1x6 boards boxing in the column and then the "V" at the top are 4x4 posts. I thought that the 1x4 and 1x6 boards were simply wrapping a 4x4 post for decorative purposes, but when I pried one of them back, the post is hollow.

I originally planned on removing the 1x boards and then wrapping the posts (which don't exist) with Azek or Fypon column wrap. Now I am at a complete loss at what do do and have more questions than answers.

1. Is the current setup safe? I've never seen 1" boards used for structural support? This stuff isn't even pressure treated. That being said, it's been standing for 20 years.
2. In the current setup, are those "V" 4x4 members at the top of the columns structural? I originally thought they were decorative, but now I'm not sure.
3. What's my best course of action: Removing the original posts altogether an replace with 4x4 posts which I'll wrap or leave these posts as-is and wrap them.

 

[BoomerD]

Those posts are NOT 4x4's?

I'm surprise that meets code.

Personally, I'd replace them with redwood (or pressure treated) 4x4's...but if you do, be sure to carefully brace the header on both sides before you remove the existing ones.

Have you checked with the local lumber supply houses to see if they have pre-built columns available? You MIGHT be able to get some decorative columns to replace those.

 

[Mears]

Those posts are NOT 4x4's?

I'm surprise that meets code.

Nope, not 4x4s: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/KHYOPBxImY_0tb53tjaVfZNI4D1ZCVBHGdmCgqGXr6s?feat=directlink

 

[Anubis]

id remove and replace wih 4x4s, that should no be that hard, and then col wrap however you want

 

[Imp]

Dad? Is that you?

My dad had too much time a few years back and did some "probing" (cutting out half the usable cross-sectional area) of one of the front porch posts. The post may have only been holding up part of the second and third floor... Turns out there was a space gap between the top of the post and the second floor beam - maybe it settled over the 80 years since it'd been built. Also, like in OP's case, the post was just a four 1" or 2" boards nailed together. The idiot, sorry I mean dad, decided to remove the post and replace it with a hollow square steel post (I'm not calling it a square HSS section).

It may look useless and not load bearing, but who knows what the carpenter/engineer had in mind. The diagonal posts would be for lateral stability, and 1"x4" boards (ignoring overlap) add up to ~16 sq.in. or ~100 cm2 of usable support area. Being only 1 floor high, that may be adequate for the load above at that spacing in compression.

Long story short, don't screw with it if you're not sure. Talk to a professional. I just have an undergrad and graduate degree in civil engineering.

 

[vi edit]

Uhhh yeah thats crazy that there is no 4x4 posts under there. Definitely need to reinforce that. How far does the porch overhang?

 

[Sluggo]

Possibly the end posts are actual 4x4s and the middle is simply decoration.

Another thought is that the second floor joists cantilever out to form the porch roof, not requiring a whole lot of support.

 

[Mears]

Dad? Is that you?

It may look useless and not load bearing, but who knows what the carpenter/engineer had in mind. The diagonal posts would be for lateral stability, and 1"x4" boards (ignoring overlap) add up to ~16 sq.in. or ~100 cm2 of usable support area. Being only 1 floor high, that may be adequate for the load above at that spacing in compression.

Long story short, don't screw with it if you're not sure. Talk to a professional. I just have an undergrad and graduate degree in civil engineering.

So one issue is that the column planks aren't anchored to the slab. So if the diagonal posts are for lateral stability, then they're probably required unless I address that. I was trying for a more modern look and the current columns just seem far too country for me. If I did replace with 4x4, I'd probably go with a post base like :http://www.strongtie.com/products/connectors/CPS-PBV_APG.asp, drop the diagonal members, and wrap with something like: http://images.architecturaldepot.com/images/id/zoom/203710.jpg.

This is what the first finished side of my house looks like: https://picasaweb.google.com/110573...key=Gv1sRgCIyCwY_IjdLe7wE#5694667122907532562

Vi, the overhang is about 5'.

 

[Greenman]

I would expect at least one of the center posts to be load bearing. Though it's entirely possible that the second floor is cantilevered off of the front wall of the house. If that's the case, the posts and beam above them are decorative.
Drill a hole in the beam and see if it's solid, or just a skin, and check out the other posts.

The post bases you linked aren't structural, don't use them if the posts are load bearing.

Btw, I've been a contractor for 24 years.

Edit: My bad, those are structural. I thought the were the composite standoffs.

 

[Humpy]

I'd bet that the corner post is structural. A 4' cantilever with a roof load is unlikely with wood construction.

It doesn't really matter though. Spend the extra hundred bucks and make the new posts capable of bearing a load so you don't have to worry about it. Make them look like you want. The diagonal bracing is unnecessary.

 

[Greenman]

I'd bet that the corner post is structural. A 4' cantilever with a roof load is unlikely with wood construction.

It doesn't really matter though. Spend the extra hundred bucks and make the new posts capable of bearing a load so you don't have to worry about it. Make them look like you want. The diagonal bracing is unnecessary.

A 4' cantilever with roof load is nothing. On that porch the entire load at the front would be just over six thousand pounds at maximum roof and floor loading. The only possible issue is seismic load, and if he's worried about that he can tie the second floor diaphragm to the front wall and sheer it.

I do this stuff every day, it ain't rocket science.

 

[Squisher]

A 4' cantilever with roof load is nothing. On that porch the entire load at the front would be just over six thousand pounds at maximum roof and floor loading. The only possible issue is seismic load, and if he's worried about that he can tie the second floor diaphragm to the front wall and sheer it.

I do this stuff every day, it ain't rocket science.

I love it when you talk like that.

 

[Humpy]

A 4' cantilever with roof load is nothing. On that porch the entire load at the front would be just over six thousand pounds at maximum roof and floor loading. The only possible issue is seismic load, and if he's worried about that he can tie the second floor diaphragm to the front wall and sheer it.

I do this stuff every day, it ain't rocket science.

I'm sure you are a great contractor, being that you have done it for 24 years and all.

I agree it's not rocket science but common sense should play a part, no?

Tell us, why would you go through the expense of constructing a cantilever greater than outlined in prescribed building code (http://publicecodes.citation.com/icod/irc/2012/icod_irc_2012_5_sec002_par013.htm) and then place posts under it for aesthetic reasons?

 

[Greenman]

I'm sure you are a great contractor, being that you have done it for 24 years and all.

I agree it's not rocket science but common sense should play a part, no?

Tell us, why would you go through the expense of constructing a cantilever greater than outlined in prescribed building code (http://publicecodes.citation.com/icod/irc/2012/icod_irc_2012_5_sec002_par013.htm) and then place fake posts under it for aesthetic reasons?

You're completely correct.
I couldn't build it beyond the limits of building code, unless an engineer approved it, or the building department in whatever city he's in would accept my design. But that doesn't mean it isn't done. It's common to find things like this in older homes, there were few codes, and less enforcement, back in the day.

In the OP's case, I'd bet the beam at the front is bearing, and one of the mid span posts is a structural member (though it doesn't have to be). That would be the simple way of building it. But we don't have all the information, so there is no way of knowing. It's possible the front porch was built as a single story structure, and someone added the second floor at a later date. It's just as likely that the guy who framed it didn't know or care if it was strong enough.

Btw, a lot of places haven't adopted the IBC yet. Most still use the UBC.

 

[Humpy]

You're completely correct.
I couldn't build it beyond the limits of building code, unless an engineer approved it, or the building department in whatever city he's in would accept my design. But that doesn't mean it isn't done. It's common to find things like this in older homes, there were few codes, and less enforcement, back in the day.

In the OP's case, I'd bet the beam at the front is bearing, and one of the mid span posts is a structural member (though it doesn't have to be). That would be the simple way of building it. But we don't have all the information, so there is no way of knowing. It's possible the front porch was built as a single story structure, and someone added the second floor at a later date. It's just as likely that the guy who framed it didn't know or care if it was strong enough.

The neighbors have similar, two story houses as the OP's and they are relatively new. It's very unlikely that the porch was framed as a cantilever. Big cantilevers are, of course, possible but more than 24" is almost never done in mass produced residential construction due to the expense. I am interested to hear if the corner post is solid or if the builder figured that hollow box columns were sufficient. They probably are.

Btw, a lot of places haven't adopted the IBC yet. Most still use the UBC.

Who still uses the UBC?
http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/building-codes/

 

[alkemyst]

Get I-beams cut to length, recover.

profit.