Remember me
▼ Content

Septic tanks and water pollution



Page 8 of 11<<<678910>>>
24-11-2020 23:43
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Xadoman wrote:
Kind of doubt permafrost will have much affect on sand. It's just not good at retaining moisture.


It is there to protect the bottom of the slab which sits on the clay. I hope that with insulation and backfilling the cold does not reach there.

With roofs, if people work with them all of the time, then it's not that difficult. But considering everything else that you've been doing, can't expect you to know everything can we?


I could do it but I do not like when things are not easy. With gable roof all the walls are the same height . Very simple to install top plate on the studs. With shed roof making the top plate is not so easy anymore. You would have to cut at an angle etc etc to get it to seat properly. This is why I ditched the idea of the shed roof.



I do wood working as a hobby. A miter saw cuts angles quite nicely. Some people cut a notch in the upper chord, the board that the plywood would be nailed to. This is so it will nest on the top plate. Speed squares are marked for the pitch of the roof for this reason. Even with a gabled roof, notching the upper chord to fit the top plate is common. If you notice in his video, the upper chord is notched so it sits flush on the top plate.
https://youtu.be/kR6kGufeKIU

An easy online calculator to use. Since you know the distance from one side to the other, divide by 2 and you have B. How high you want your center brace to be is A (to the bottom of the upper chord is what's needed to know C). C will be where your notch would start on your upper chord.
http://www.carbidedepot.com/formulas-trigright.asp

I could draw an example on SketchUp for you if you want. It might make things a lot easier for you. I would need some information. The distance from the front (?) top plate to the back top plate (outside measurements). Then from 1/2 way between, the height to the top of your truss. And the last piece of info would be the height (ie., 1 x 6 or?) of your upper chord. And if you want to have your roof to have an over hang, the linear distance from the outside of your frame.
25-11-2020 17:29
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
James , I am going to use 45 degree rafter angle and therefore I can use the Phytagoras theorem for calculating rafters. I do not remember much from highschool math but Phytaghoras is one of those that I never forget.
I checked the links you posted and those are helpful to get the things right. I noticed that in the video he used ridge board to support rafters. I am doing a little bit differently. I do not use ridgeboard, instead I make the triangles out of rafters and rafter ties ready on on the ground and then I simply pull them up and lift into place. I generally like the idea of having a ridgeboard because it eliminates the horizontal rafter thrust but for a small building like this the rafter thrust is not significant and could be solved with rafter ties that keep the rafters from spreading. I know you are good in math , if I have a problem that I can not solve then I will turn to you for the help. So far I think I can do it. Using pythagoras simplifies things alot for me.
Edited on 25-11-2020 17:37
25-11-2020 22:13
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
James , I am going to use 45 degree rafter angle and therefore I can use the Phytagoras theorem for calculating rafters. I do not remember much from highschool math but Phytaghoras is one of those that I never forget.

Apparently you forgot it. The Pythagorean theorem works for any roof angle. If you have a rafter's square, you will often see tables of rafter unit lengths embossed on it somewhere. Those are a bit rougher, but they work for that kind of carpentry.
Xadoman wrote:
I checked the links you posted and those are helpful to get the things right. I noticed that in the video he used ridge board to support rafters. I am doing a little bit differently. I do not use ridgeboard, instead I make the triangles out of rafters and rafter ties ready on on the ground and then I simply pull them up and lift into place. I generally like the idea of having a ridgeboard because it eliminates the horizontal rafter thrust but for a small building like this the rafter thrust is not significant and could be solved with rafter ties that keep the rafters from spreading. I know you are good in math , if I have a problem that I can not solve then I will turn to you for the help. So far I think I can do it. Using pythagoras simplifies things alot for me.

Ridge boards may or may not take the side thrust away from the walls, depending on how they are supported. There are three types: one supported by intercostals (essentially studs cut to fit the end gables and transfer the load down to the end walls) and 'flying' ridges, which are supported by the rafters themselves and ceiling joists to keep the rafters from opening up. Both of the first two methods transfer the load pretty much straight down onto the walls, and then, of course, the floor and foundation.
A third method, used for smaller sheds, is to simply leave out the ceiling joists. This will work, but it transfers the load to spreading the walls, rather than straight down. With smaller sheds, these walls are short enough that they are held in check by their end walls. It still is a weaker structure, however.

Roofs of 4-12 pitch are most common. Shingles, whether asphalt or cedar shingles, do not work at a roof pitch below 4. Most people feel uncomfortable walking on any roof pitch above 6. A 12 pitch roof is okay, but you will want to get some climbing brackets (available at the hardware store) for working on it. These screw or nail directly into the roof, and act like a kind of stepladder for tools and you while you work on such a steep roof. They are easily removed later when you are done. They are handy to keep around though (they don't require much storage) for when you want to get up there again for roof maintenance.

Oh, you use a few 2x4s for the platform. They screw in place so they don't slide around while your up there!

Most builders use truss roofs these days. it's like stick built roofs is becoming a lost art.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 25-11-2020 22:15
25-11-2020 23:02
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
Apparently you forgot it. The Pythagorean theorem works for any roof angle. If you have a rafter's square, you will often see tables of rafter unit lengths embossed on it somewhere. Those are a bit rougher, but they work for that kind of carpentry.


My mistake, of course Pythagoras works for all angles. My emphasis was actually on 45 degrees of angle that makes things very simple.

A third method, used for smaller sheds, is to simply leave out the ceiling joists. This will work, but it transfers the load to spreading the walls, rather than straight down. With smaller sheds, these walls are short enough that they are held in check by their end walls. It still is a weaker structure, however.


You would be suprised how much I have seen in forums quite large gable roofs which were supposedly built by professional builders that have no load bearing ridgeboard and no ceiling joists. Eventually there will be problems because of the rafter thrust. Sagging roofs etc. I just can not understand how people , even professionals, make such mistakes. Usually the rafter is connected to the top plate with some kind of metal bracket and the have called a day. When I say that this kind of connection will start to push the top plate outward with the wall under it , they usually do not believe me and start to talk about collar ties which supposedly should resist the spreading action. They do not realise that the collar tie, that is located in the upper section of the rafters, can not resist this kind of thrust. The collar tie should be under push not pull when there is a heavy load of snow on the roof.
Edited on 25-11-2020 23:04
26-11-2020 00:29
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Xadoman wrote:
James , I am going to use 45 degree rafter angle and therefore I can use the Phytagoras theorem for calculating rafters. I do not remember much from highschool math but Phytaghoras is one of those that I never forget.
I checked the links you posted and those are helpful to get the things right. I noticed that in the video he used ridge board to support rafters. I am doing a little bit differently. I do not use ridgeboard, instead I make the triangles out of rafters and rafter ties ready on on the ground and then I simply pull them up and lift into place. I generally like the idea of having a ridgeboard because it eliminates the horizontal rafter thrust but for a small building like this the rafter thrust is not significant and could be solved with rafter ties that keep the rafters from spreading. I know you are good in math , if I have a problem that I can not solve then I will turn to you for the help. So far I think I can do it. Using pythagoras simplifies things alot for me.



I was actually worried about pissing you off. You might not have wanted unsolicited help. Still, I did a quick drawing and think 2 x 4 construction with the angled braces maybe 1 x 3. They could go on a flat surface, ie., lay down the truss frame and then attach them. Using a 2 x 4 would have an extra angle to account for but wouldn't be a problem. If it's angled at 30º, that's an easy angle to account for. That would require 2 - 30º angled cuts.
The angles are 45º. The center line of the upper chords are 48 inches from one side to the other and 24 inches tall. So it's scaled. The notches might look weird but they are for mounting at a 45º angle to the top plate and allowing for an eave.
I know on interior framing that 16 inch spacing from center to center is the norm, not sure about trusses. And the trig calculator.
http://www.carbidedepot.com/formulas-trigright.asp

This is just to give you an idea. If you notch the upper chords, then the height at center will be less than the dimension to the notch. Basically, if the notch is as deep as a 2x4, subtract the width/depth of the notch from the top plate from A. p.s., with cross brace, it's could be even with the outside of the upper chords or cut to fit between the 2 opposing sides. You know what weather you're dealing with.
Attached image:


Edited on 26-11-2020 00:31
26-11-2020 01:44
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
I added the center lines. With the notch, the top plate and frame can offer the eave some support. There's probably a metal bracket that can be used as well.
Since 2x4s are 3 1/2 inches, going from inside to outside, about 1 1/2 inches of board will be left. That'd be about 1 inch of the 3 1/2 inch dimension of the board.
If 2x6s were to be used, you'd have a sturdy roof.
Attached image:

26-11-2020 04:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
Apparently you forgot it. The Pythagorean theorem works for any roof angle. If you have a rafter's square, you will often see tables of rafter unit lengths embossed on it somewhere. Those are a bit rougher, but they work for that kind of carpentry.


My mistake, of course Pythagoras works for all angles. My emphasis was actually on 45 degrees of angle that makes things very simple.

A third method, used for smaller sheds, is to simply leave out the ceiling joists. This will work, but it transfers the load to spreading the walls, rather than straight down. With smaller sheds, these walls are short enough that they are held in check by their end walls. It still is a weaker structure, however.


You would be suprised how much I have seen in forums quite large gable roofs which were supposedly built by professional builders that have no load bearing ridgeboard and no ceiling joists. Eventually there will be problems because of the rafter thrust. Sagging roofs etc. I just can not understand how people , even professionals, make such mistakes. Usually the rafter is connected to the top plate with some kind of metal bracket and the have called a day. When I say that this kind of connection will start to push the top plate outward with the wall under it , they usually do not believe me and start to talk about collar ties which supposedly should resist the spreading action. They do not realise that the collar tie, that is located in the upper section of the rafters, can not resist this kind of thrust. The collar tie should be under push not pull when there is a heavy load of snow on the roof.

Well, a 12 pitch roof (a 45 angle roof) is simple in that the rise is the same as the run, but still need to calculate the length of the rafter in the same way.
That will be 1.141421 times the length of either the run or the rise, since they are the same.

Remember to subtract 1/2 the thickness of the ridgeboard when you do this.

Once you get your ridgeboard in place, the intercostals installed, the rafters mounted to it, and the first sheet of sheathing on it, you can remove the ridgeboard scaffolding. For this size shed, one post on either end should work just fine. Make sure they are well braced and plumb. Screws work well here, as they are easily removable. A power screwdriver is really useful here as well. Some models are about $70 dollars right now (black friday prices!) and include the charger and two battery packs.

To set the ridgeboard yourself, you can clamp a speed square on each post (they're cheap). That will hold the ridgeboard in place while you screw or nail it into position (I use screws). Once screwed in, you can remove your speed squares. Those things make great little braces!

You should probably think about what kind of eave you are going to want and how large. Yes, that includes the gable walls. It may be easier to build a drop gable and cantilever the eave supports from the 2nd rafter and across the end rafter, or for a shed this size, a simple barge rafter would do, so long as it doesn't extend out past 1 foot beyond the wall.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 26-11-2020 04:57
26-11-2020 16:57
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Since you want simple, 2x4 and 2x6 (upper chords only) construction. Considering a 45º angle and permafrost, you'll be expecting some snow maybe? And if you want more cover over the door, that could probably go from the wall and be supported by the eave. As drawn, there is an 11 1/2 inch over hang.
It is definitely to scale, 1 inch equals 1 inch just as 1 cm equals 1 cm. And this drawing is 48 inches center line to center line. With the middle center line, it is 24 inches. Both angled braces have a 30º angle at the bottom and a 15º angle on top.
About 1 5/8 inches of the upper chord will sit on the top plate. For the full 3 1/2 inch if the top plate is a 2x4, then the 24 inch dimension becomes 22 1/8 inch. Would probably be recommended. But then this is to give you an idea of what you're looking at.

Anyway, it's something for you to consider.
Attached image:


Edited on 26-11-2020 17:15
26-11-2020 17:16
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Best match I could find for pine and end grain.

Attached image:

26-11-2020 18:59
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
This is what I have in plan, the simplest truss possible, a triangle:



I think your design is good for bigger roofs but for me it is unnecessarily complicated. I use 2x6 inch timber for the rafters and ceiling joist. With those I have a sufficient overlapping area to comfortably nail all the pieces together( rules for nailing , distances from the edge, between the nails etc). The birdsmouth cut also takes quite a lot of meat away from the rafter , therefore I think going 2x6 over 2x4 makes a lot of sense. 2x4 would probably be sufficient for such a small roof but I like to keep things as simple and comfortable as possible.
Edited on 26-11-2020 19:00
26-11-2020 20:25
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
If it snows a lot where you live, then I'd probably bolt the cross braces to the upper chords. Nails can pull out if a load is placed on the roof. What I showed you is pretty basic and would last.

p.s., if you really want simple, why didn't you just buy a shed to put over it? Easy enough to put in a dividing wall and 2 doors inside.
Attached image:


Edited on 26-11-2020 21:13
26-11-2020 21:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
James___ wrote:
If it snows a lot where you live, then I'd probably bolt the cross braces to the upper chords. Nails can pull out if a load is placed on the roof. What I showed you is pretty basic and would last.

p.s., if you really want simple, why didn't you just buy a shed to put over it? Easy enough to put in a dividing wall and 2 doors inside.


Bolts weaken the wood. They are not allowed when building trusses.

Trusses are plate mended together or glued together or both. You can make your own for a shed using gussets.

The roof he is describing is a stick built roof, since he is wanting to use a ridge board.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
26-11-2020 21:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
This is what I have in plan, the simplest truss possible, a triangle:



I think your design is good for bigger roofs but for me it is unnecessarily complicated. I use 2x6 inch timber for the rafters and ceiling joist. With those I have a sufficient overlapping area to comfortably nail all the pieces together( rules for nailing , distances from the edge, between the nails etc). The birdsmouth cut also takes quite a lot of meat away from the rafter , therefore I think going 2x6 over 2x4 makes a lot of sense. 2x4 would probably be sufficient for such a small roof but I like to keep things as simple and comfortable as possible.


Should be sufficient for your shed. Yes, 2x6's make it easier with the birds-mouth cut for such a steep roof pitch.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
26-11-2020 21:59
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
If it snows a lot where you live, then I'd probably bolt the cross braces to the upper chords. Nails can pull out if a load is placed on the roof. What I showed you is pretty basic and would last.

p.s., if you really want simple, why didn't you just buy a shed to put over it? Easy enough to put in a dividing wall and 2 doors inside.


Bolts weaken the wood. They are not allowed when building trusses.

Trusses are plate mended together or glued together or both. You can make your own for a shed using gussets.

The roof he is describing is a stick built roof, since he is wanting to use a ridge board.



It's not really any of my business what he does. I have my own projects to keep me busy. And since today is Thanksgiving, I am thankful that he made me aware of that.
26-11-2020 22:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
James___ wrote:
If it snows a lot where you live, then I'd probably bolt the cross braces to the upper chords. Nails can pull out if a load is placed on the roof. What I showed you is pretty basic and would last.

p.s., if you really want simple, why didn't you just buy a shed to put over it? Easy enough to put in a dividing wall and 2 doors inside.


Why? Such shed kits are usually built out of plastic or crap lumber.

I build my sheds. That way the quality of lumber is selected by me, and the design is exactly the way I want it. Cheaper than the kits, too.

If I want a metal shed, I can build that myself. If I want a framed shed, I can build that myself. If I want a ribbed shed, I can build that myself. All for cheaper than the equivalent shed kits.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
26-11-2020 22:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
If it snows a lot where you live, then I'd probably bolt the cross braces to the upper chords. Nails can pull out if a load is placed on the roof. What I showed you is pretty basic and would last.

p.s., if you really want simple, why didn't you just buy a shed to put over it? Easy enough to put in a dividing wall and 2 doors inside.


Bolts weaken the wood. They are not allowed when building trusses.

Trusses are plate mended together or glued together or both. You can make your own for a shed using gussets.

The roof he is describing is a stick built roof, since he is wanting to use a ridge board.



It's not really any of my business what he does. I have my own projects to keep me busy. And since today is Thanksgiving, I am thankful that he made me aware of that.

Enjoy your thanksgiving!


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
26-11-2020 22:30
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
The roof he is describing is a stick built roof, since he is wanting to use a ridge board.


Just to be clear - I do not want to use ridgeboard. There is simply two rafters supporting themselves face to face at the top and a ceiling joist tying them together at the heel forming the simplest truss known to man - a triangle.
Edited on 26-11-2020 22:36
26-11-2020 22:44
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAgUQ7lMKOs


And where it says with the Good Lord;

Matthew 6:19
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.

Kind of begs the question, why do or have anything? It simply isn't what Jesus taught.
Edited on 26-11-2020 22:53
26-11-2020 23:02
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
Bolts weaken the wood. They are not allowed when building trusses.


Not so long ago it was a norm in building DIY trusses in our country. I even have a book where some of the connections with nails or bolts where specified for certain span trusses. It still amazes me how come they managed to smash in the amount of nails or bolts without destroying the 2x4 lumber that was specified for the truss members. I specially remember some kind of heel connection that needed four 20 mm( or 3/4 inch) bolts to withstand 40000N of force. The lumber was 2x6 but it still did not sound right to me.
26-11-2020 23:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
The roof he is describing is a stick built roof, since he is wanting to use a ridge board.


Just to be clear - I do not want to use ridgeboard. There is simply two rafters supporting themselves face to face at the top and a ceiling joist tying them together at the heel forming the simplest truss known to man - a triangle.


Okay. You mentioned using a ridge board before. I assumed you had settled on that. It appears you haven't.

If you choose to use trusses instead, you can build them yourself for something like this. Use glued gussets. Mending plates can work if properly installed, but they are trickier to get right. Any compromise here will severely weaken the roof.

Truss joints have to be very accurately cut. No gaps. Handle the trusses carefully. They are very weak except for vertical loads. The wood used MUST be good quality. No knots or pitch pockets are allowed within a certain distance to any joint.

You can go to your lumberyard and order trusses made for you, delivered. They are made to these specifications using mending plates for their attachment points.

Trusses are heavy. For something of this size, you can probably handle them yourself, but getting the last few trusses installed can be a real pain. Builders that use them have cranes or extension forklifts and multiple person crews to handle these things without damaging them.

If you are building by yourself, seriously consider a stick built roof.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
26-11-2020 23:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
James___ wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAgUQ7lMKOs


And where it says with the Good Lord;

Matthew 6:19
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.

Kind of begs the question, why do or have anything? It simply isn't what Jesus taught.


Jesus Christ never taught to entirely give up supplying your material needs. We all need food. We all need water. We all need shelter. Yes, they are all subject to rot, decay, and pests. Jesus never taught that we should give up all material things simply because they are subject to these things. We all have material needs. Even our own bodies are subject to death, rot, decay, and physical pain.

What Jesus is teaching here is to not place any of these things as a replacement for the treasures you can find in the gospel. Worship God, not your own wealth.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
26-11-2020 23:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
Bolts weaken the wood. They are not allowed when building trusses.

Not so long ago it was a norm in building DIY trusses in our country.

People still do. It is fine for sheds. Most places do not allow to build your own trusses for living spaces like homes. Building a truss is not just bolting or nailing the wood in the shape of a truss. These things are like building the wing on an airplane. You have to know what you are doing to avoid catastrophe.
Xadoman wrote:
I even have a book where some of the connections with nails or bolts where specified for certain span trusses.

A lot of the roofs using these techniques have fallen in, too. No, such nails or bolts are a BAD idea. They weaken the wood.
Xadoman wrote:
It still amazes me how come they managed to smash in the amount of nails or bolts without destroying the 2x4 lumber that was specified for the truss members. I specially remember some kind of heel connection that needed four 20 mm( or 3/4 inch) bolts to withstand 40000N of force. The lumber was 2x6 but it still did not sound right to me.

It isn't. Those bolts act like a dull knife, cutting through the wood fibers. Over time, the joint fails.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
27-11-2020 00:19
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAgUQ7lMKOs


And where it says with the Good Lord;

Matthew 6:19
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.

Kind of begs the question, why do or have anything? It simply isn't what Jesus taught.


Jesus Christ never taught to entirely give up supplying your material needs. We all need food. We all need water. We all need shelter. Yes, they are all subject to rot, decay, and pests. Jesus never taught that we should give up all material things simply because they are subject to these things. We all have material needs. Even our own bodies are subject to death, rot, decay, and physical pain.

What Jesus is teaching here is to not place any of these things as a replacement for the treasures you can find in the gospel. Worship God, not your own wealth.



Nope, he says have nothing that matters to you. And like Xado said, keep things simple. Christians even say take the Bible literally. That keeps things simple. I think Christians would like him.
What I might do to please Christians and live a scriptural life is that if my projects work out, I'll live alone in a cheap mobile home or trailer and live off of McDonald's value menu. And at home I will drink alcohol and smoke marijuana.
And by doing so, I will have no treasures in my life. Then my life will be scripturally correct. Christians wish for me to live a scriptural life that they can witness.
And what is that old saying? Be careful what you wish for because you just might get it? Christians would be getting what they want from me.


p.s., I was having a good day despite dealing with serious complications from surgery until Xado posted that I unnecessarily complicated things. Anyone who knows how to use a speed square would say what I posted was as basic as you can get. What he wants to do might not account for stress very well but that's his problem.

And ITN, the last sentence is a freebie to him. At the same time he won't understand what I posted.

Edited on 27-11-2020 00:26
27-11-2020 03:14
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
@ITN, I didn't care for someone suggesting that I'm a moron for trying to be nice on a Day of Thanks. Then again he uses clay to repair bearings. And maybe silica with it. Why did he make it so complicated for?
Just like any American and many Christians, they need to make someone look bad. It's funny though. If my science experiment works out, he'll read about it and then he'll know that I could've mentioned it. Actually, that would have to do with wood working and trying to recreate a machine from 300 years ago while keeping it authentic. Something his clay probably could've been used for but I wouldn't want to complicate things with wood working. Alchemy provides a solution that is not used today while a variation is used. His loss.
27-11-2020 03:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
James___ wrote:
@ITN, I didn't care for someone suggesting that I'm a moron for trying to be nice on a Day of Thanks.

I didn't. I will now, though. I don't care what day it is.
James___ wrote:
Then again he uses clay to repair bearings. And maybe silica with it. Why did he make it so complicated for?

Never saw him suggest any such thing either, moron.
James___ wrote:
Just like any American and many Christians, they need to make someone look bad.

No, you make yourself look bad.
James___ wrote:
It's funny though. If my science experiment works out, he'll read about it and then he'll know that I could've mentioned it. Actually, that would have to do with wood working and trying to recreate a machine from 300 years ago while keeping it authentic. Something his clay probably could've been used for but I wouldn't want to complicate things with wood working. Alchemy provides a solution that is not used today while a variation is used. His loss.


You haven't brought your magick 'experiment' for awhile now. Never did it, eh?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
27-11-2020 09:28
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
p.s., I was having a good day despite dealing with serious complications from surgery until Xado posted that I unnecessarily complicated things. Anyone who knows how to use a speed square would say what I posted was as basic as you can get. What he wants to do might not account for stress very well but that's his problem.


I do not understand why do you take it so bad. I said your design is good for big roofs. Mine is quite small( the width from top plate to top plate is 2.10m=6feet10 inches). A simple triangle formed of rafters and ceiling joint is sufficient and rigid enough to whithstand the load. This is in fact the simplest truss known to man.

@ITN, I didn't care for someone suggesting that I'm a moron for trying to be nice on a Day of Thanks. Then again he uses clay to repair bearings. And maybe silica with it. Why did he make it so complicated for?
Just like any American and many Christians, they need to make someone look bad.


I have never suggested that you are a moron. Anyone who is good in math is not a moron. I am the moron here because I suck at math big time. I also never wanted to make you look bad. Do not take it so bad. I only modified a little and made your design as simple as possible.
27-11-2020 10:15
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
Okay. You mentioned using a ridge board before. I assumed you had settled on that. It appears you haven't.


I only mentioned it because James posted a video where a guy builded a small roof and he used a ridge board on that video. I said back then:
I am doing a little bit differently. I do not use ridgeboard, instead I make the triangles out of rafters and rafter ties ready on on the ground and then I simply pull them up and lift into place.


As seen I have made pretty clear from the beginning that I do not want to use ridgeboard. I know it is a popular way to construct in many places but for me it adds complications. I need to set it up, I need to connect rafters somehow to the ridgeboard etc etc. I am all for it with big buildings and large roofs because it eliminates the horizontal rafter thrust ( if the ridgeboard is supported, unsupported ridgeboard does nothing to eliminate it) but with small roofs the ridgeboard is not necessary and rafter thrust could be eliminated with the ceiling joist that are connected to the rafters at the heel through nailing, bolting or both.

If you choose to use trusses instead, you can build them yourself for something like this. Use glued gussets. Mending plates can work if properly installed, but they are trickier to get right. Any compromise here will severely weaken the roof.


I use nails. The overlapping area of the ceiling joist and the rafter is big enough to get the nails in without violating nailing rules( edge distance etc etc).
27-11-2020 10:50
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
People still do. It is fine for sheds. Most places do not allow to build your own trusses for living spaces like homes. Building a truss is not just bolting or nailing the wood in the shape of a truss. These things are like building the wing on an airplane. You have to know what you are doing to avoid catastrophe.


I agree with you. If I were to build my own house I would avoid DIY trusses like plaque. Personally I would also avoid factory trusses. For some reason I just can not trust them. I know that firefighters during the fire also do not go into the homes that have truss roofs because if the truss fails at some place then the whole thing collapses like a house of cards.

A lot of the roofs using these techniques have fallen in, too. No, such nails or bolts are a BAD idea. They weaken the wood.


I am sure factory trusses have also fallen in. I would be concerned about the glue , gussets etc that are used to make connections. Moisture in the air, temperatur changes etc etc .

It isn't. Those bolts act like a dull knife, cutting through the wood fibers. Over time, the joint fails.


The bolts also remove some meat from the wood in the first place because you need to drill a hole for them. Nails do not but they tend to split the wood .

I am going to calculate the horizontal thrust from the roof and then I can decide if I should add a supporting ridgeboard or not.
27-11-2020 10:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
p.s., I was having a good day despite dealing with serious complications from surgery until Xado posted that I unnecessarily complicated things. Anyone who knows how to use a speed square would say what I posted was as basic as you can get. What he wants to do might not account for stress very well but that's his problem.


I do not understand why do you take it so bad. I said your design is good for big roofs. Mine is quite small( the width from top plate to top plate is 2.10m=6feet10 inches). A simple triangle formed of rafters and ceiling joint is sufficient and rigid enough to whithstand the load. This is in fact the simplest truss known to man.

@ITN, I didn't care for someone suggesting that I'm a moron for trying to be nice on a Day of Thanks. Then again he uses clay to repair bearings. And maybe silica with it. Why did he make it so complicated for?
Just like any American and many Christians, they need to make someone look bad.


I have never suggested that you are a moron. Anyone who is good in math is not a moron. I am the moron here because I suck at math big time. I also never wanted to make you look bad. Do not take it so bad. I only modified a little and made your design as simple as possible.

Sucking at math does not make one a moron.

Build your roof. With such a small shed, you will have little problem with practically any design you come up with, so long as the rigidity of the triangle is maintained. A 12 pitch roof will certainly be effective at keeping off the snow load.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
27-11-2020 11:35
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
People still do. It is fine for sheds. Most places do not allow to build your own trusses for living spaces like homes. Building a truss is not just bolting or nailing the wood in the shape of a truss. These things are like building the wing on an airplane. You have to know what you are doing to avoid catastrophe.


I agree with you. If I were to build my own house I would avoid DIY trusses like plaque.

You would have to. Most counties will not allow DIY trusses in houses. It will never pass inspection. The point is rather moot for a shed, though; particularly one as small as the one you are building.
Xadoman wrote:
Personally I would also avoid factory trusses. For some reason I just can not trust them.

They're actually very good. I am currently living in a house built with trusses. It was built in 1975 and has shown no sign of weakness in the roof. They are well fitted and fastened with mending plates.

I don't like building with trusses. They are awkward to handle without damaging them unless you have some pretty expensive equipment handy, and can get it to the building site. They go up faster, which is why builders tend to use them, but I prefer a stick built roof.

You can do a ridge board, or go without a ridge board essentially building a kind of truss in place for a shed the size you are talking about. Make sure the joists have a good solid fastening to the wall plate to keep them from spreading from the rafter loads, and you should have no problems.

Fitting the intercostals into the end gables is kind of fussy, since you are cutting an angled dado joint, but it's not as difficult as it sounds. Careful measurement will go a long ways here. The intercostals are the studs from the rafters to the top plates on the ends of the gables. You'll want 'em for attaching the siding there. If you use a ridge board, place a stud directly under the ridge board to the top plate, transferring load from the ridge board to the wall. That's a nice straight cut on both ends. You can either toenail it in or use brackets.
Xadoman wrote:
I know that firefighters during the fire also do not go into the homes that have truss roofs because if the truss fails at some place then the whole thing collapses like a house of cards.

They go into such buildings no problem, unless the fire got up into the rafters. No wood roof structure is safe after that! Once fire gets up into the rafters, it runs the whole building. There's no more fire stop anywhere. The building is totaled at that point.

Code requires a fire stop to slow fire spreading into the rafter area. This can take the form of the top plates themselves (keeping the fire in the wall), or by the use of gypsum board (like ceiling gypsum). Sheds have no fire protection requirements and need not be inspected by the framing inspector or the fire department.
Xadoman wrote:
A lot of the roofs using these techniques have fallen in, too. No, such nails or bolts are a BAD idea. They weaken the wood.


I am sure factory trusses have also fallen in.

They hold up pretty good, IF they are properly handled when they are installed. The trusses in my house have held up just fine for 55 years. There is no sign of weakening in any of them.
Xadoman wrote:
I would be concerned about the glue , gussets etc that are used to make connections.

Use FPL-16a or West epoxy. Both of these glues will take wood before the glue and are waterproof and impervious to humidity and temperature changes. Another type of glue is called Resorcinol (a two part glue made by Elmer's Glue company...it's the original Elmer's Glue!) is also waterproof, humidity proof, and impervious to temperature changes. It also takes wood before glue.
Some aircraft built in 1916 are still flying today and are built with this glue. It's harder to work with, but it's a good glue. Modern wooden aircraft today are built with FPL-16a, a glue developed by the Forest Products industry. This is also a two part glue.

West epoxy (you can get it at boat and marine suppliers) also works well as a glue when mixed with cotton or chopped glass fibers (flox).

Laying up a single wrapping of fiberglass tape around the joint will do a lot to increase it's strength as well. You use pure epoxy for that (again I recommend West epoxy).

West epoxy is handy because you can get simply dispensers that measure out the correct ratio of glue to hardener (approx 15:1). These dispensers are sold in the same area as the epoxy is in the store. You can also usually find a brochure describing the strengths and limitations of this material.

Resorcinol is not at all forgiving of sloppy joints. FPL-16a is a lot better, but filling anything beyond 1/8 inch gap is not recommended. West epoxy as flox can be quite forgiving, easily handling 1/8 inch gaps.

Xadoman wrote:
Moisture in the air, temperatur changes etc etc .

Why you don't use the usual white or yellow glues, or any adiabatic glue like Gorilla glue. These glues are not designed to withstand humidity and temperature changes over time. There is an 'outdoor' version of yellow glue that is designed for outdoor use (after a fashion), but it doesn't age well for long periods of time. It will eventually fail. It is also particularly susceptible to breakdown from UV exposure. If the joint outdoors is well protected from UV exposure, it can be a good glue for joints lasting a few years. Of course, you want your roof to last longer than that!
Xadoman wrote:
It isn't. Those bolts act like a dull knife, cutting through the wood fibers. Over time, the joint fails.


The bolts also remove some meat from the wood in the first place because you need to drill a hole for them. Nails do not but they tend to split the wood.

Nails drill holes too. Just kind of do it the hard way using a hammer. They are smaller holes, though. As long as you are careful with spacing, you should be okay with the size shed and roof pitch you are considering here.
Xadoman wrote:
I am going to calculate the horizontal thrust from the roof and then I can decide if I should add a supporting ridgeboard or not.

Go for it. You might find you are well within your limits for your design.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
27-11-2020 15:12
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
Xadoman wrote:
p.s., I was having a good day despite dealing with serious complications from surgery until Xado posted that I unnecessarily complicated things. Anyone who knows how to use a speed square would say what I posted was as basic as you can get. What he wants to do might not account for stress very well but that's his problem.


I do not understand why do you take it so bad. I said your design is good for big roofs. Mine is quite small( the width from top plate to top plate is 2.10m=6feet10 inches). A simple triangle formed of rafters and ceiling joint is sufficient and rigid enough to whithstand the load. This is in fact the simplest truss known to man.

@ITN, I didn't care for someone suggesting that I'm a moron for trying to be nice on a Day of Thanks. Then again he uses clay to repair bearings. And maybe silica with it. Why did he make it so complicated for?
Just like any American and many Christians, they need to make someone look bad.


I have never suggested that you are a moron. Anyone who is good in math is not a moron. I am the moron here because I suck at math big time. I also never wanted to make you look bad. Do not take it so bad. I only modified a little and made your design as simple as possible.



I can see why women don't like you. Don't know how to use a speed square? Then attack someone. And with the stupid video, did I say "and the ridge board"? You ignored how a speed square is used and how upper chords sit on the top plate. You simply ignored what you don't know.
I have better things to do than to get caught up in bullshїt mind games. And I am thankful that on a Day of Thanks, you made me very aware that there are more productive ways for me to spend my time.

p.s., the projects that I'm working on/pursuing need to be done the right way. I don't need to learn any bad habits.

Edited on 27-11-2020 15:55
27-11-2020 18:28
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
I can see why women don't like you. Don't know how to use a speed square? Then attack someone. And with the stupid video, did I say "and the ridge board"? You ignored how a speed square is used and how upper chords sit on the top plate. You simply ignored what you don't know.
I have better things to do than to get caught up in bullshїt mind games. And I am thankful that on a Day of Thanks, you made me very aware that there are more productive ways for me to spend my time.

p.s., the projects that I'm working on/pursuing need to be done the right way. I don't need to learn any bad habits.


James, you got it wrong, I never meant to attack you. I simply used your design to show what I had in mind initially. Yours is better and stronger but I think mine will be sufficient. I now realise that my wording was not very good when I said that you " unnecessarily complitated " things . You did not have all measurements. You did not know that the roof is going to be tiny. Also my english is not as good as I would like and sometimes I could say something very rude to someone without even realising it. That is what happened in this case. Sorry about that.
I am going to calculate the horizontal thrust and then I have a clear answer if I can go with my initial desing or not. I like the idea of simple triangle because it is rigid. After all it is the simplest truss possible. Bigger trusses are also formed from smaller triangles. If it turns out that the horizontal thrust is too big to make safe connections , then I will ditch my initial idea and I will bring in the load bearing ridgeboard.
Edited on 27-11-2020 18:46
27-11-2020 18:54
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
I took pictures from the framework today. Some things are still missing but basic framework is done.




27-11-2020 19:58
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
Questions to those who are good in physics. I am going to calculate the horizontal rafter thrust of the roof. I am going to use clay tiles. This will add quite a lot of mass on the roof besides snow load. I know the snow load is about 100 kg/m2( for 45 degree angle) and the self load of the roof could also be around 100 kg/m2. How much to take for wind load? When I took for wind load also 100 kg/m2 , then I got the overall load on the roof ( which is about16 m2) 300x16= 4800 kg=4.8 tons. For 45 degree angled roof the rafter thrust should be half of the overall load, so I got 2400 kg=2,4 tons. I initially planned 5 pairs of rafters , so I get 2400/5=450 kg=1000 pounds for the rafter and ceiling joint connection to withstand. It seems a little bit high to me. 16d nail is suppsedly good for about 140 pounds, that means I need about 8 of those nails. Is it good or too much to nail properly ? The lumber is going to be 2x6 both for rafters and ceiling joists.
Also, I tought a little bit about the rafters overhang and it seem to me that the overhang should counter some of the horizontal thrust. I could get then a little bit of load out of the calculation and the number would be lower for the connection to whithstand. The trouble is that I do not know how much I can substract from the rafter length. I marked the places I would like to substract from the rafter length but I do not know which one of those( if any) is right.
Here is the picture:
27-11-2020 20:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
Questions to those who are good in physics. I am going to calculate the horizontal rafter thrust of the roof. I am going to use clay tiles. This will add quite a lot of mass on the roof besides snow load. I know the snow load is about 100 kg/m2( for 45 degree angle) and the self load of the roof could also be around 100 kg/m2. How much to take for wind load? When I took for wind load also 100 kg/m2 , then I got the overall load on the roof ( which is about16 m2) 300x16= 4800 kg=4.8 tons. For 45 degree angled roof the rafter thrust should be half of the overall load, so I got 2400 kg=2,4 tons. I initially planned 5 pairs of rafters , so I get 2400/5=450 kg=1000 pounds for the rafter and ceiling joint connection to withstand. It seems a little bit high to me. 16d nail is suppsedly good for about 140 pounds, that means I need about 8 of those nails. Is it good or too much to nail properly ? The lumber is going to be 2x6 both for rafters and ceiling joists.
Also, I tought a little bit about the rafters overhang and it seem to me that the overhang should counter some of the horizontal thrust. I could get then a little bit of load out of the calculation and the number would be lower for the connection to whithstand. The trouble is that I do not know how much I can substract from the rafter length. I marked the places I would like to substract from the rafter length but I do not know which one of those( if any) is right.
Here is the picture:

Use more rafters. One rafter set every yard is pretty thin. You should probably double that number. Remember that sheathing adds a lot of strength to the roof. It is part of the structural integrity of the roof.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
27-11-2020 21:07
James___
★★★★★
(4435)
@All,
Because of my hobbies which include both wood working and atmospheric chemistry, I am working on spreadsheets. They are a lot of work. Not only with being math intensive but also with mechanics.
An example of this is that the Moon's gravitational effect on the Earth. If you consider the image, this would be if the Moon had a constant orbit around the Earth's equator and that orbit was circular. Since it is not, it's elliptical orbit that goes both above and below the Earth's equator can easily be calculated.
Then this information would show a change in sea levels relative to the Moon's physical orbit around the Earth. Yet the same understanding can be applied to the Earth's atmosphere. My being handicapped gives me the time to pursue such things. This limits how much I can do because I also owe it to myself to take it easy. My personal life is just that, private.

p.s., @D, with Perth, if the winds are blowing from the Southern Ocean, this will influence sea level as well. And if stronger winds are blowing some other place, then the sea level could drop. When your talking large volumes of water, winds over a period of time would need to be considered. And with the hole in the ozone layer there, that has changed the winds as well.
The eastern side of Antarctica is the colder side and the jet stream circulates that air moving towards Perth from the west. At the same time, from the warmer western side, the jet stream is disrupted.

Publicly released: Tue 8 Oct 2019 at 0200 AEDT | 0400 NZDT

Extremely hot and dry summers in Australia could be down to more than just El Nino, with Aussie scientists showing that an Antarctic jet stream, known as the Antarctic polar vortex, is driving these conditions across eastern Australia from spring to early summer. The researchers found that when the vortex was weakening, spring and summer temperatures were up to 2°C higher in Queensland, New South Wales and northeastern South Australia, and rainfall was also reduced.

And the ozone hole is caused by ODSs. Basically speaking, your weather might have more to do with the hole in the ozone layer than anything else.
https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/extremely-hot-and-dry-aussie-summers-driven-by-weak-antarctic-jet-stream
Attached image:

27-11-2020 22:37
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
Use more rafters. One rafter set every yard is pretty thin. You should probably double that number. Remember that sheathing adds a lot of strength to the roof. It is part of the structural integrity of the roof.


Ok, I will double the amount. It brings down the load to 500 pounds which sounds a lot better. The spacing will be quite tight but better safe than sorry. Do you happen to know which tile surface type to go - engobed or glazed? I guess glazed is better but I do not know much about those surface technologies.
Edited on 27-11-2020 22:44
28-11-2020 03:39
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15459)
Xadoman wrote:
Use more rafters. One rafter set every yard is pretty thin. You should probably double that number. Remember that sheathing adds a lot of strength to the roof. It is part of the structural integrity of the roof.


Ok, I will double the amount. It brings down the load to 500 pounds which sounds a lot better. The spacing will be quite tight but better safe than sorry. Do you happen to know which tile surface type to go - engobed or glazed? I guess glazed is better but I do not know much about those surface technologies.


There is no one better tile. It is simply two different ways of putting a decorative finish on pottery (what your roof tiles are). Be aware the clay tiles are slicker than snot after any rain when you're up there, and a loose tile can act just like standing a steep roof made of marbles. It is also tough to put up safety gear that is necessary when working on such a steep pitch. They also don't take kindly to walking on them. Cracking a tile sucks.

Like any shingle, you lay them in from the bottom up, which means you'll be climbing around on those things.

Be careful...is all I'm sayin'.

Wood shingles can be pretty slick things as well, and a loose shingle can send you flying. They can at least tolerate walking on them a lot better.

Asphalt shingles are...well...asphalt, with grit in them. They form a natural walking and climbing surface, and last quite well. Broken shingles are pretty easy to replace. They are easier to mount your safety equipment to when climbing around in a 12 pitch roof.

I realize you have probably already decided for your own reasons on clay tiles, but have you considered the alternatives fully?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 28-11-2020 03:46
28-11-2020 04:41
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3352)
Have you considered keeping the 'look', consistent with the house, and the other out-buildings? Notice a couple of sheds (?), in the background of some of your photos, which seemed to look a lot like similar construction/materials as the house.

Really should consider a roof, that can take a few solar panels, unless you plan on running a line out from the house. Lights, a fan, maybe some heat, would all be reasonable comforts, using 'green' energy though.
28-11-2020 09:59
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(424)
I realize you have probably already decided for your own reasons on clay tiles, but have you considered the alternatives fully?


I thought that it would be a good way to learn to install clay tiles but it seems a lot of trouble.

The other option and a lot easier is to install :

https://www.eterniitkatus24.ee/tootekategooria/eternit-gotika-585x920mm-varvivalik/

I am not fully decided yet. The roof is tiny but special tiles for vent pipes , edges and ridge could make the overall price too high for me and then I will go with the cheaper option. I will get a quote for the tiles and if it is silly high then I will ditch the idea and go for the previously linked material.
Page 8 of 11<<<678910>>>





Join the debate Septic tanks and water pollution:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
water supply1521-01-2021 11:33
Desalination and evaporation of sea water at both poles1019-11-2020 23:57
water water water1231-01-2020 22:44
There is no evidence water vapor makes things hotter018-09-2019 21:34
CO2 saturated water409-08-2019 06:43
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact