YATFR: The science of wood

It's actually to keep people from doing whatever they want without any oversight or regulation, so ultimately it keeps people from ignoring all the rules if don't like what the rules say.
this doesn't help prove your case at all. It actually shows my point even stronger that they do it to control everything and everyone.
There's a state law that says what you can and can't do with a 2x6.
Of course there is haha
Basic science of wood: (BS of metals spinoff) Chapter 4, section 3; if you take some thin plywood and double or triple it's thickness with plenty of overlap, it becomes plenty strong enough within a reasonable measure, to hold up to anything I or anyone else could ever throw at it.
Lol lollol Tha good homie
 
doesn't help prove your case at all. It actually shows my point even stronger that they do it to control everything and everyone.

It's to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Last week, you were shocked when your super awesome carport fell down in a little bit of snow, now you're all "building codes are a waste of time, fuck engineering".
 
It's to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Last week, you were shocked when your super awesome carport fell down in a little bit of snow, now you're all "building codes are a waste of time, fuck engineering".
So what do they base these laws on?
 
Engineering and failure modes.

So when you take a piece of 2x6 dimensional lumber with known nominal physical properties, and turn it into a truss assembly for a specific application with specific structural requirements, nothing bad happens.
So..... Calculations using stress vs load were used?

Someone should have said that posts ago:D
 
I heard mention of a 2x6, and a 2x6 is clearly not a truss. ;)
But if I glue it to the top of a D35 does it become a truss? It has technically made the axle stronger by some fraction!
 
But if I glue it to the top of a D35 does it become a truss? It has technically made the axle stronger by some fraction!

What kind of glue did you use? Did you preheat the center section before gluing? post heat?
 
But if I glue it to the top of a D35 does it become a truss? It has technically made the axle stronger by some fraction!

There is almost another, unintended Fuller joke within that statement.

My answer is: Black paint hides everything.


Also, I see you using a piece of hardwood on the D35, with proper grain orientation and moisture content, acclimated to the local trail conditions. A 2x6 doesn't align with your personal tastes, if my hunch is correct.
 
Last edited:
metal stamp trusses are indeed 'flimsy' until supported by sheathing. the load vector is 'only' from above. after they are completed, it really doesnt matter. they are designed for snow load, wind shear and go on. houses were never designed to stop trees from falling....
 
engineered trusses are also simply used so that when your shit falls down the insurance man knows what hes gonna pay for and what hes not. stronger or not, hes gonna get super nervous about homebuilt ones.
 
So what do they base these laws on?
Typically... cases where things failed. Unfortunate events cause people to go back and say, hm maybe that wasn't a good idea"...

Which makes me wonder, has John not seen enough failure yet to understand this notion?
 
YATFR

Yet Another Thread Fuller Ruined

@shawn what do I win?
Second place

Screenshot_20181223-220613_Chrome.jpg
 
What does Engineering prove? Back in the late 70 s, I ended up at a new multi-story apartment complex. It was under construction, & I delivered concrete. First time I saw the "Engineered" Joist! Scared the crap out of me! "I-beams" built with plywood centers & slotted into something like 2x2 s. Then I got to watch a "This Old House" show, where they went to the Factory. Toured, & observed all the structural test. Other than the aspect of Fire, I was impressed! More Impressed with the structural / load test of Laminated Beams! Wow!
 
Which makes me wonder, has John not seen enough failure yet to understand this notion?
I sure would hope not hahaha (would be some unhappy log home owners:lol::D)
But don't really know what your referring to
 
I sure would hope not hahaha (would be some unhappy log home owners:lol::D)
But don't really know what your referring to
It's pretty simple.
Many codes are on the books today because of something bad that happened, where something failed, and some engineers went back and figured out what the failure was, and what would prevent it from happening next time. That then becomes a requirement in future building to prevent that same bad thing.
This is literally learning from mistakes and making the world better, safer, as a result of that learning.

It seems that you are not understanding the need for these rules, and to improve things based on past failure.
It makes me wonder if you were to see things fail more, first hand, based on poor engineering and NOT following code, then perhaps you would understand why the codes are there.

Dealing with building code and permits sucks and is a pain in the butt. However there is a reason why the level of structure/design-related deaths in this country is so low compared to most others.
 
What does Engineering prove? Back in the late 70 s, I ended up at a new multi-story apartment complex. It was under construction, & I delivered concrete. First time I saw the "Engineered" Joist! Scared the crap out of me! "I-beams" built with plywood centers & slotted into something like 2x2 s. Then I got to watch a "This Old House" show, where they went to the Factory. Toured, & observed all the structural test. Other than the aspect of Fire, I was impressed! More Impressed with the structural / load test of Laminated Beams! Wow!

LVL beams rate right up there with gusset plate trusses in the fire community. All bad juju. Our community is BOOMING right now so thankfully we get the opportunity to walk through these houses as they're being built and have a fair idea of what we're up against.

Duane
 
Back
Top