How to fix this framing?

[Martin Wasner]

I'm building a raised center isle pole barn (see last pic below). The beam holding the loft floor is bolted to the center posts. Normally, I would prefer to "let in" this beam but didn't want to weaken the post because it has to carry shear forces for the roof. Further, due to an error, the IJI's for the loft were slightly shorter than needed and don't extend all the way to the outside beam "A" in the diagram below. So, beam "B" is carrying the loft load, and is only bolted and nailed to the posts. This isn't sufficient in my view. How should I improve beam B's load bearing capacity? I could nail another board to the post under the beam, or attach some type of bracket, to direct more of the load to the post. Hope's this makes sense. Any suggestions?

Framing issue:


Barn

You need a engineer, not a woodworking forum.

[andy bessette]

A block of wood screwed to the post, and expected to support the beam, is laughable.

...it's appears some type of scab/support will work. Currently, I have a 2 x 6 temporarily scabbed to the bottom of one of the double 2 x 12's, as shown below...

[Thomas Marr]

A block of wood screwed to the post, and expected to support the beam, is laughable.

Thank you for the comment. However, I didn't expect that small scab to be permanent. Once we established a line around all posts using a transit level, we nailed on a scab so we could sit the 2 x 12 on something for initial nailing.

Despite "just being a woodworking forum," there's a lot of expertise here. Wisdom of crowds. We've already had an architect way in. Plus, I learned about split rings to assist in load bearing (although they look to be a little difficult to install in the field). The suggestion that a fabricated metal bracket might not be stronger than wood because it would reduce the weight bearing area on the bolt (with regard to its resistance to shearing off) was something I hadn't considered but makes perfect sense.

I've about decided on a permanent fix but will get the advice of an engineer because I'm now very curious about the positives and negatives of various options.

[Bob Faris]

Simpson APDJT.

http://www.dhcsupplies.com/Shared/Im...n_apdjt2-4.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8b/6a...a1b724d7b8.jpg

https://www.strongtie.com/missioncol...jt_tie/p/apdjt

[Al Launier]

The post should be let in, bad practice to rely on the bolts for a column beam connection. There are no shear loads on the post and if there were they would be resisted by the beam. Neither the shed roof or the main roof impose shear forces on the post.

I totally agree with David's comment. Lose the bolts & inlet the post. If you are concerned about letting in the post, get a larger post, pressure treated if available.
By the way, what is the span?

[Lee Schierer]

This isn't sufficient in my view. How should I improve beam B's load bearing capacity? I could nail another board to the post under the beam, or attach some type of bracket, to direct more of the load to the post. Hope's this makes sense. Any suggestions?

I concur. I believe that building codes now call for the post to be notched so that the shoulder bears the weight and not the fasteners. You can do the same by adding jack boards under each side of post to support beam "B".

[Bill Dufour]

I can not imagine California ever giving out plans to build anything. This is because someone will hurt themselves building it or it will fall down in 100 years and hurt someone then the law suits will start.
Bill
Modesto, CA

[Thomas Marr]

Guys,

Letting in the beam to the post has some issues. Each i-joist is toe nailed (with a nail gun) to the beam in several place. The process of removing these nails from the joist may do more damage than good at this critical location.

With regard to a jack stud, to be clear, your talking about adding another stud to the bottom of the beam extending all the way to the floor. Correct? However, the post is sitting on a pad 24" under the floor. Therefore, the post and stud would be sitting on different structures as the stud would sit on the floating pad. Further, I'd need to add two studs (2 2x6's) as the beam is double.

What about adding a 6x6 support under the beam, let in to the post, as an alternative? Wouldn't this accomplish the same effect as letting in the beam?

[andy bessette]

...Wouldn't this accomplish the same effect as letting in the beam?...

No, it wouldn't, as the short grain could easily shear. But a fabricated metal substitute would not have that same deficiency.

[Todd Mason-Darnell]

"With regard to a jack stud, to be clear, your talking about adding another stud to the bottom of the beam extending all the way to the floor. Correct? However, the post is sitting on a pad 24" under the floor. Therefore, the post and stud would be sitting on different structures as the stud would sit on the floating pad. Further, I'd need to add two studs (2 2x6's) as the beam is double."

Given that you cannot transfer the load of the beam to footing by added a jack stud, your best bet would be to look at the Simpson Strong-tie brackets. They are engineered and certified to carry the load.

If you are not aware, Simpson is very proud of their product.