Is it safe to remove the bottom chords of a series of garage roof trusses?Can I raise a sagging shed roof by...

Efficiently pathfinding many flocking enemies around obstacles

Why does The Ancient One think differently about Doctor Strange in Endgame than the film Doctor Strange?

Why were the crew so desperate to catch Truman and return him to Seahaven?

Who was president?

Why is Boris Johnson visiting only Paris & Berlin if every member of the EU needs to agree on a withdrawal deal?

I have a player who yells

C++20 constexpr std::copy optimizations for run-time

Which household object drew this pattern?

Does a face-down creature with morph retain its damage when it is turned face up?

What is the difference between true neutral and unaligned?

Can realistic planetary invasion have any meaningful strategy?

How do I request a longer than normal leave of absence period for my wedding?

What is wrong about this application of Kirchhoffs Current Law?

Earth rotation discrepancy

What is this symbol: semicircles facing eachother

Is it safe to remove the bottom chords of a series of garage roof trusses?

Did the British navy fail to take into account the ballistics correction due to Coriolis force during WW1 Falkland Islands battle?

Singleton Design Pattern implementation in a not traditional way

Cross-referencing enumerate item

Can pay be witheld for hours cleaning up after closing time?

Avoiding racist tropes in fantasy

Start from ones

Can't stopover at Sapporo when going from Asahikawa to Chitose airport?

Defense against attacks using dictionaries



Is it safe to remove the bottom chords of a series of garage roof trusses?


Can I raise a sagging shed roof by winching the walls back into place?How can I build a temporary support for rafters?How do I determine if a wall is load bearing?Modifying bottom chord of roof truss to accomodate new ACIs this foyer (wall) load bearing, in a condoCan I raise a sagging shed roof by winching the walls back into place?When to repair engineered floor truss damaged by cut?Would drilling a small hole through joist / sole plate cause structural problems?Joists extended by tecosBoard on top of joists in attic. Is it structural?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







26















See attached picture. Looks like an 8x10 cut-out. He wants to lift cars up so he can walk under them.

Is this safe? Doesn't removing the joists affect structural integrity?
enter image description here









share









New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • 15





    With no horizontal members tying across that gap it looks to me as though there would be a risk of the peak collapsing downwards as the walls bow outwards...

    – brhans
    Aug 19 at 22:04








  • 8





    Will you be expecting snow?

    – JACK
    Aug 20 at 0:07






  • 11





    He just created this future situation for himself: diy.stackexchange.com/q/94143/42053

    – MonkeyZeus
    2 days ago








  • 6





    I never wish to be in a car he worked in, given his total disregard for safety.

    – Walker
    yesterday






  • 9





    Too bad there is no "impending-disaster" tag.

    – Eric Hauenstein
    yesterday


















26















See attached picture. Looks like an 8x10 cut-out. He wants to lift cars up so he can walk under them.

Is this safe? Doesn't removing the joists affect structural integrity?
enter image description here









share









New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • 15





    With no horizontal members tying across that gap it looks to me as though there would be a risk of the peak collapsing downwards as the walls bow outwards...

    – brhans
    Aug 19 at 22:04








  • 8





    Will you be expecting snow?

    – JACK
    Aug 20 at 0:07






  • 11





    He just created this future situation for himself: diy.stackexchange.com/q/94143/42053

    – MonkeyZeus
    2 days ago








  • 6





    I never wish to be in a car he worked in, given his total disregard for safety.

    – Walker
    yesterday






  • 9





    Too bad there is no "impending-disaster" tag.

    – Eric Hauenstein
    yesterday














26












26








26


1






See attached picture. Looks like an 8x10 cut-out. He wants to lift cars up so he can walk under them.

Is this safe? Doesn't removing the joists affect structural integrity?
enter image description here









share









New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











See attached picture. Looks like an 8x10 cut-out. He wants to lift cars up so he can walk under them.

Is this safe? Doesn't removing the joists affect structural integrity?
enter image description here







roof joists





share









New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share









New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







share



share








edited 2 days ago









isherwood

57k5 gold badges68 silver badges150 bronze badges




57k5 gold badges68 silver badges150 bronze badges






New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








asked Aug 19 at 21:43









Lynn BakerLynn Baker

1312 silver badges3 bronze badges




1312 silver badges3 bronze badges




New contributor



Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




New contributor




Lynn Baker is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.













  • 15





    With no horizontal members tying across that gap it looks to me as though there would be a risk of the peak collapsing downwards as the walls bow outwards...

    – brhans
    Aug 19 at 22:04








  • 8





    Will you be expecting snow?

    – JACK
    Aug 20 at 0:07






  • 11





    He just created this future situation for himself: diy.stackexchange.com/q/94143/42053

    – MonkeyZeus
    2 days ago








  • 6





    I never wish to be in a car he worked in, given his total disregard for safety.

    – Walker
    yesterday






  • 9





    Too bad there is no "impending-disaster" tag.

    – Eric Hauenstein
    yesterday














  • 15





    With no horizontal members tying across that gap it looks to me as though there would be a risk of the peak collapsing downwards as the walls bow outwards...

    – brhans
    Aug 19 at 22:04








  • 8





    Will you be expecting snow?

    – JACK
    Aug 20 at 0:07






  • 11





    He just created this future situation for himself: diy.stackexchange.com/q/94143/42053

    – MonkeyZeus
    2 days ago








  • 6





    I never wish to be in a car he worked in, given his total disregard for safety.

    – Walker
    yesterday






  • 9





    Too bad there is no "impending-disaster" tag.

    – Eric Hauenstein
    yesterday








15




15





With no horizontal members tying across that gap it looks to me as though there would be a risk of the peak collapsing downwards as the walls bow outwards...

– brhans
Aug 19 at 22:04







With no horizontal members tying across that gap it looks to me as though there would be a risk of the peak collapsing downwards as the walls bow outwards...

– brhans
Aug 19 at 22:04






8




8





Will you be expecting snow?

– JACK
Aug 20 at 0:07





Will you be expecting snow?

– JACK
Aug 20 at 0:07




11




11





He just created this future situation for himself: diy.stackexchange.com/q/94143/42053

– MonkeyZeus
2 days ago







He just created this future situation for himself: diy.stackexchange.com/q/94143/42053

– MonkeyZeus
2 days ago






6




6





I never wish to be in a car he worked in, given his total disregard for safety.

– Walker
yesterday





I never wish to be in a car he worked in, given his total disregard for safety.

– Walker
yesterday




9




9





Too bad there is no "impending-disaster" tag.

– Eric Hauenstein
yesterday





Too bad there is no "impending-disaster" tag.

– Eric Hauenstein
yesterday










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















56















Absolutely not safe.



Those trusses were engineered with a heavy (critical) dependency on the bottom chords, which are in tension. Removal has left them extremely vulnerable to collapse due to spreading, especially under snow loads, but also under just the load of the roof itself. The roof system is basically a hinge now.



To get a good mental image, picture yourself standing on an ice rink and sliding your feet outward. How far do you get before your groin starts to scream at you?



Best case scenario, that ridge slowly sags over the opening and looks ridiculous. It will push walls around with it, cracking drywall and binding windows. Worst case, full collapse. Death. Destruction. Worst of all, humiliation.



Repair will require new lumber installed with a suitably fastening system, such as construction adhesive and through-bolts. It may be necessary to winch the walls back into alignment first if sagging has already begun.






share|improve this answer























  • 3





    I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago






  • 1





    There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago






  • 8





    Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

    – isherwood
    2 days ago








  • 7





    +1 for humiliation

    – Dennis Williamson
    2 days ago






  • 1





    @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

    – Engineer Toast
    7 hours ago



















25















With no bracing above, you might want to check the out side walls - they are probably already spreading. Once they start moving the stabilization and repair can cost many thousands if the roof stays in place, tens of thousands if it comes down.



There are ways to mitigate the damage done, but it needs to be done now before the walls spread, the rafters move and the roof leaks if not collapses. Yes I have seen bonehead DIY hacks like this.



Steel plates in the outside walls with cables to pull the walls back together, repair the damage to the rafters, new bracing with some engineered cables added.



I would suggest getting the bracing and cable system installed now or it will cost much more than the lift and the loss of use if the roof comes down.






share|improve this answer























  • 3





    One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago






  • 2





    It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

    – isherwood
    2 days ago






  • 1





    That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

    – Ed Beal
    2 days ago



















15















The triangle is an extremely stable form of architecture precisely because it has three sides. You remove one side, and you have one of the least stable forms of architecture on account that two members connected at a point can be affected by torque, which is by definition a force multiplier. If you want to play around with it to get a sense, try gluing two Popsicle sticks and three Popsicle sticks like the design in the picture above.



Any force directed downward will because of the elasticity of the wood create force outwards. If the members were steel, there would be substantially less deformation resulting in less outward force, but lumber is relatively flexible.



Now, it should be noted that some of the horizontal members are still in place, as many as half, and those runs will make it unlikely the structure will collapse under normal conditions, however, heavy winds or heavy snowfall, as mentioned in other comments, likely to create outward stresses in the middle section of the structure. The exact details of what will happen will largely be a matter of detail. To some extent, existing construction code generally overengineers a solution to ensure that minor failure will not result in human harm.



It is possible to create both the space needed to elevate the car, and have a structurally sound garage given the picture. For instance, additional chords can be installed low enough to recreate trusses, but high enough to accommodate a raised vehicle. There are a number of truss styles that do not use a horizontal bottom chord, the scissor truss for instance. And using steel as a construction material can help to redirect the tensions through materials more capable of absorbing the load. Lastly, the walls themselves can be modified. It was typical of cathedrals to buttress on the exterior, the wall to handle high-arching ceilings, for instance.



Construction is often a question of engineering as much as it is design, and if safety is a concern, such as it might be in this photo, consulting a structural engineer would be the right thing to do. Structural design is their expertise, which would be my recommendation.






share|improve this answer










New contributor



J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • 1





    My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

    – J D
    2 days ago








  • 5





    @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

    – alephzero
    2 days ago






  • 1





    @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

    – alephzero
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

    – AndyT
    yesterday






  • 1





    Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

    – isherwood
    yesterday



















5















As pictured - very bad idea.



It may work IF the roof is re-engineered to carry a lot more of the stress across the top and bottom of the cutout. That means a much beefier horizontal beam on all four sides of his hole AND a rework of the roof by re-trussing the entire structure.



Some examples:



From https://www.truss.co/blog/when-a-church-redevelops-into-retail-property This one is a Scissor Truss, and also wears the more general name "church truss" or "nave truss" Note some of these have thinner tie rods across the middle exactly where the bottom chord would be - those aren't suitable.



enter image description here

A little ornate for a workshop, but you can see how the load is being brought down to the walls with inner buttressing.



https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2KqZt5vh7-bbx20Dxl-OXgFeEz9MTJHAGv8z2cP8mk6F_p7Rb This one is called a Coffer Truss and as pictured would work perfectly. However the thickness of the rafters (top cords) would have to be increased several-fold to cope with the extra stresses.



https://www.alphasteel.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/parallel-chord-roof-truss.jpg This would work too - depending on how much height there is at the top of the wall.



https://previews.123rf.com/images/geettheerawat/geettheerawat1602/geettheerawat160200082/53446836-steel-truss-roof.jpg Last option is to completely reframe the roof with steel trusses, and do away with the wooden ones. Properly enginerded steel will have more strength than the wooden ones while allowing the open space required.




Any way - whatever creative handyman did this has made a difficult job into an utter nightmare of a job. It would have been less work to remove the roof and then re-truss leaving the bottom chords in place to support the walls until the new roof framing is on.




Frankly, it would probably have been cheaper to build a new garage rather than monster the existing one and now have to repair it.



Also consider any insurance claim will be harder to win, based on the level of care exhibited here. I'd bet any insurance claim for snow damage or storm damage would be rejected out of hand. If this is used for a business, any claim for a customer car damaged by this collapse would be rejected as "failure to use due care"




You need to speak with a structural engineer immediately in person and ideally on-site. I am not a structural engineer.







share|improve this answer




























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "73"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Lynn Baker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdiy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f171624%2fis-it-safe-to-remove-the-bottom-chords-of-a-series-of-garage-roof-trusses%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    56















    Absolutely not safe.



    Those trusses were engineered with a heavy (critical) dependency on the bottom chords, which are in tension. Removal has left them extremely vulnerable to collapse due to spreading, especially under snow loads, but also under just the load of the roof itself. The roof system is basically a hinge now.



    To get a good mental image, picture yourself standing on an ice rink and sliding your feet outward. How far do you get before your groin starts to scream at you?



    Best case scenario, that ridge slowly sags over the opening and looks ridiculous. It will push walls around with it, cracking drywall and binding windows. Worst case, full collapse. Death. Destruction. Worst of all, humiliation.



    Repair will require new lumber installed with a suitably fastening system, such as construction adhesive and through-bolts. It may be necessary to winch the walls back into alignment first if sagging has already begun.






    share|improve this answer























    • 3





      I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 1





      There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 8





      Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

      – isherwood
      2 days ago








    • 7





      +1 for humiliation

      – Dennis Williamson
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

      – Engineer Toast
      7 hours ago
















    56















    Absolutely not safe.



    Those trusses were engineered with a heavy (critical) dependency on the bottom chords, which are in tension. Removal has left them extremely vulnerable to collapse due to spreading, especially under snow loads, but also under just the load of the roof itself. The roof system is basically a hinge now.



    To get a good mental image, picture yourself standing on an ice rink and sliding your feet outward. How far do you get before your groin starts to scream at you?



    Best case scenario, that ridge slowly sags over the opening and looks ridiculous. It will push walls around with it, cracking drywall and binding windows. Worst case, full collapse. Death. Destruction. Worst of all, humiliation.



    Repair will require new lumber installed with a suitably fastening system, such as construction adhesive and through-bolts. It may be necessary to winch the walls back into alignment first if sagging has already begun.






    share|improve this answer























    • 3





      I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 1





      There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 8





      Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

      – isherwood
      2 days ago








    • 7





      +1 for humiliation

      – Dennis Williamson
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

      – Engineer Toast
      7 hours ago














    56














    56










    56









    Absolutely not safe.



    Those trusses were engineered with a heavy (critical) dependency on the bottom chords, which are in tension. Removal has left them extremely vulnerable to collapse due to spreading, especially under snow loads, but also under just the load of the roof itself. The roof system is basically a hinge now.



    To get a good mental image, picture yourself standing on an ice rink and sliding your feet outward. How far do you get before your groin starts to scream at you?



    Best case scenario, that ridge slowly sags over the opening and looks ridiculous. It will push walls around with it, cracking drywall and binding windows. Worst case, full collapse. Death. Destruction. Worst of all, humiliation.



    Repair will require new lumber installed with a suitably fastening system, such as construction adhesive and through-bolts. It may be necessary to winch the walls back into alignment first if sagging has already begun.






    share|improve this answer















    Absolutely not safe.



    Those trusses were engineered with a heavy (critical) dependency on the bottom chords, which are in tension. Removal has left them extremely vulnerable to collapse due to spreading, especially under snow loads, but also under just the load of the roof itself. The roof system is basically a hinge now.



    To get a good mental image, picture yourself standing on an ice rink and sliding your feet outward. How far do you get before your groin starts to scream at you?



    Best case scenario, that ridge slowly sags over the opening and looks ridiculous. It will push walls around with it, cracking drywall and binding windows. Worst case, full collapse. Death. Destruction. Worst of all, humiliation.



    Repair will require new lumber installed with a suitably fastening system, such as construction adhesive and through-bolts. It may be necessary to winch the walls back into alignment first if sagging has already begun.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited yesterday

























    answered 2 days ago









    isherwoodisherwood

    57k5 gold badges68 silver badges150 bronze badges




    57k5 gold badges68 silver badges150 bronze badges











    • 3





      I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 1





      There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 8





      Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

      – isherwood
      2 days ago








    • 7





      +1 for humiliation

      – Dennis Williamson
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

      – Engineer Toast
      7 hours ago














    • 3





      I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 1





      There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 8





      Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

      – isherwood
      2 days ago








    • 7





      +1 for humiliation

      – Dennis Williamson
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

      – Engineer Toast
      7 hours ago








    3




    3





    I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago





    I'm not sure I would describe that mental image as "good"!

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago




    1




    1





    There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago





    There are a number of ways the damage could be repaired without lumber - but repaired it must be.

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago




    8




    8





    Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

    – isherwood
    2 days ago







    Yes, but that probably goes beyond the DIY capabilities of anyone who would do this to their roof system. Also, any replacement for lumber must be laterally stabilized as those bottom chords were by the "rat run".

    – isherwood
    2 days ago






    7




    7





    +1 for humiliation

    – Dennis Williamson
    2 days ago





    +1 for humiliation

    – Dennis Williamson
    2 days ago




    1




    1





    @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

    – Engineer Toast
    7 hours ago





    @DennisWilliamson It's reminiscent of "Or worse, expelled"

    – Engineer Toast
    7 hours ago













    25















    With no bracing above, you might want to check the out side walls - they are probably already spreading. Once they start moving the stabilization and repair can cost many thousands if the roof stays in place, tens of thousands if it comes down.



    There are ways to mitigate the damage done, but it needs to be done now before the walls spread, the rafters move and the roof leaks if not collapses. Yes I have seen bonehead DIY hacks like this.



    Steel plates in the outside walls with cables to pull the walls back together, repair the damage to the rafters, new bracing with some engineered cables added.



    I would suggest getting the bracing and cable system installed now or it will cost much more than the lift and the loss of use if the roof comes down.






    share|improve this answer























    • 3





      One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 2





      It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

      – isherwood
      2 days ago






    • 1





      That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

      – Ed Beal
      2 days ago
















    25















    With no bracing above, you might want to check the out side walls - they are probably already spreading. Once they start moving the stabilization and repair can cost many thousands if the roof stays in place, tens of thousands if it comes down.



    There are ways to mitigate the damage done, but it needs to be done now before the walls spread, the rafters move and the roof leaks if not collapses. Yes I have seen bonehead DIY hacks like this.



    Steel plates in the outside walls with cables to pull the walls back together, repair the damage to the rafters, new bracing with some engineered cables added.



    I would suggest getting the bracing and cable system installed now or it will cost much more than the lift and the loss of use if the roof comes down.






    share|improve this answer























    • 3





      One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 2





      It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

      – isherwood
      2 days ago






    • 1





      That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

      – Ed Beal
      2 days ago














    25














    25










    25









    With no bracing above, you might want to check the out side walls - they are probably already spreading. Once they start moving the stabilization and repair can cost many thousands if the roof stays in place, tens of thousands if it comes down.



    There are ways to mitigate the damage done, but it needs to be done now before the walls spread, the rafters move and the roof leaks if not collapses. Yes I have seen bonehead DIY hacks like this.



    Steel plates in the outside walls with cables to pull the walls back together, repair the damage to the rafters, new bracing with some engineered cables added.



    I would suggest getting the bracing and cable system installed now or it will cost much more than the lift and the loss of use if the roof comes down.






    share|improve this answer















    With no bracing above, you might want to check the out side walls - they are probably already spreading. Once they start moving the stabilization and repair can cost many thousands if the roof stays in place, tens of thousands if it comes down.



    There are ways to mitigate the damage done, but it needs to be done now before the walls spread, the rafters move and the roof leaks if not collapses. Yes I have seen bonehead DIY hacks like this.



    Steel plates in the outside walls with cables to pull the walls back together, repair the damage to the rafters, new bracing with some engineered cables added.



    I would suggest getting the bracing and cable system installed now or it will cost much more than the lift and the loss of use if the roof comes down.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 9 hours ago









    manassehkatz

    16.7k1 gold badge24 silver badges53 bronze badges




    16.7k1 gold badge24 silver badges53 bronze badges










    answered 2 days ago









    Ed BealEd Beal

    38.6k1 gold badge26 silver badges56 bronze badges




    38.6k1 gold badge26 silver badges56 bronze badges











    • 3





      One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 2





      It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

      – isherwood
      2 days ago






    • 1





      That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

      – Ed Beal
      2 days ago














    • 3





      One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

      – Martin Bonner
      2 days ago






    • 2





      It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

      – isherwood
      2 days ago






    • 1





      That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

      – Ed Beal
      2 days ago








    3




    3





    One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago





    One thought, is that it may be possible to replace the joists with much beefier joists higher up. That would allow some of the additional headroom the owner wants, without compromising the structural integrity of the building.

    – Martin Bonner
    2 days ago




    2




    2





    It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

    – isherwood
    2 days ago





    It may, but we have no way of knowing what the loads on those truss members are, and 2x4 top chords probably aren't adequate. You'd need to sister heavier boards on the complete A-frame.

    – isherwood
    2 days ago




    1




    1





    That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

    – Ed Beal
    2 days ago





    That’s the bracing I am talking about but depending on how high the car protrudes into the space will dictate if engineered cable supports are needed. (If the car sticks more than a foot or possibly 2 it will probably require an engineers stamp for whatever is done. Wish I could say I haven’t seen this kind of hack before.

    – Ed Beal
    2 days ago











    15















    The triangle is an extremely stable form of architecture precisely because it has three sides. You remove one side, and you have one of the least stable forms of architecture on account that two members connected at a point can be affected by torque, which is by definition a force multiplier. If you want to play around with it to get a sense, try gluing two Popsicle sticks and three Popsicle sticks like the design in the picture above.



    Any force directed downward will because of the elasticity of the wood create force outwards. If the members were steel, there would be substantially less deformation resulting in less outward force, but lumber is relatively flexible.



    Now, it should be noted that some of the horizontal members are still in place, as many as half, and those runs will make it unlikely the structure will collapse under normal conditions, however, heavy winds or heavy snowfall, as mentioned in other comments, likely to create outward stresses in the middle section of the structure. The exact details of what will happen will largely be a matter of detail. To some extent, existing construction code generally overengineers a solution to ensure that minor failure will not result in human harm.



    It is possible to create both the space needed to elevate the car, and have a structurally sound garage given the picture. For instance, additional chords can be installed low enough to recreate trusses, but high enough to accommodate a raised vehicle. There are a number of truss styles that do not use a horizontal bottom chord, the scissor truss for instance. And using steel as a construction material can help to redirect the tensions through materials more capable of absorbing the load. Lastly, the walls themselves can be modified. It was typical of cathedrals to buttress on the exterior, the wall to handle high-arching ceilings, for instance.



    Construction is often a question of engineering as much as it is design, and if safety is a concern, such as it might be in this photo, consulting a structural engineer would be the right thing to do. Structural design is their expertise, which would be my recommendation.






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor



    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.

















    • 1





      My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

      – J D
      2 days ago








    • 5





      @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

      – AndyT
      yesterday






    • 1





      Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

      – isherwood
      yesterday
















    15















    The triangle is an extremely stable form of architecture precisely because it has three sides. You remove one side, and you have one of the least stable forms of architecture on account that two members connected at a point can be affected by torque, which is by definition a force multiplier. If you want to play around with it to get a sense, try gluing two Popsicle sticks and three Popsicle sticks like the design in the picture above.



    Any force directed downward will because of the elasticity of the wood create force outwards. If the members were steel, there would be substantially less deformation resulting in less outward force, but lumber is relatively flexible.



    Now, it should be noted that some of the horizontal members are still in place, as many as half, and those runs will make it unlikely the structure will collapse under normal conditions, however, heavy winds or heavy snowfall, as mentioned in other comments, likely to create outward stresses in the middle section of the structure. The exact details of what will happen will largely be a matter of detail. To some extent, existing construction code generally overengineers a solution to ensure that minor failure will not result in human harm.



    It is possible to create both the space needed to elevate the car, and have a structurally sound garage given the picture. For instance, additional chords can be installed low enough to recreate trusses, but high enough to accommodate a raised vehicle. There are a number of truss styles that do not use a horizontal bottom chord, the scissor truss for instance. And using steel as a construction material can help to redirect the tensions through materials more capable of absorbing the load. Lastly, the walls themselves can be modified. It was typical of cathedrals to buttress on the exterior, the wall to handle high-arching ceilings, for instance.



    Construction is often a question of engineering as much as it is design, and if safety is a concern, such as it might be in this photo, consulting a structural engineer would be the right thing to do. Structural design is their expertise, which would be my recommendation.






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor



    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.

















    • 1





      My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

      – J D
      2 days ago








    • 5





      @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

      – AndyT
      yesterday






    • 1





      Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

      – isherwood
      yesterday














    15














    15










    15









    The triangle is an extremely stable form of architecture precisely because it has three sides. You remove one side, and you have one of the least stable forms of architecture on account that two members connected at a point can be affected by torque, which is by definition a force multiplier. If you want to play around with it to get a sense, try gluing two Popsicle sticks and three Popsicle sticks like the design in the picture above.



    Any force directed downward will because of the elasticity of the wood create force outwards. If the members were steel, there would be substantially less deformation resulting in less outward force, but lumber is relatively flexible.



    Now, it should be noted that some of the horizontal members are still in place, as many as half, and those runs will make it unlikely the structure will collapse under normal conditions, however, heavy winds or heavy snowfall, as mentioned in other comments, likely to create outward stresses in the middle section of the structure. The exact details of what will happen will largely be a matter of detail. To some extent, existing construction code generally overengineers a solution to ensure that minor failure will not result in human harm.



    It is possible to create both the space needed to elevate the car, and have a structurally sound garage given the picture. For instance, additional chords can be installed low enough to recreate trusses, but high enough to accommodate a raised vehicle. There are a number of truss styles that do not use a horizontal bottom chord, the scissor truss for instance. And using steel as a construction material can help to redirect the tensions through materials more capable of absorbing the load. Lastly, the walls themselves can be modified. It was typical of cathedrals to buttress on the exterior, the wall to handle high-arching ceilings, for instance.



    Construction is often a question of engineering as much as it is design, and if safety is a concern, such as it might be in this photo, consulting a structural engineer would be the right thing to do. Structural design is their expertise, which would be my recommendation.






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor



    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    The triangle is an extremely stable form of architecture precisely because it has three sides. You remove one side, and you have one of the least stable forms of architecture on account that two members connected at a point can be affected by torque, which is by definition a force multiplier. If you want to play around with it to get a sense, try gluing two Popsicle sticks and three Popsicle sticks like the design in the picture above.



    Any force directed downward will because of the elasticity of the wood create force outwards. If the members were steel, there would be substantially less deformation resulting in less outward force, but lumber is relatively flexible.



    Now, it should be noted that some of the horizontal members are still in place, as many as half, and those runs will make it unlikely the structure will collapse under normal conditions, however, heavy winds or heavy snowfall, as mentioned in other comments, likely to create outward stresses in the middle section of the structure. The exact details of what will happen will largely be a matter of detail. To some extent, existing construction code generally overengineers a solution to ensure that minor failure will not result in human harm.



    It is possible to create both the space needed to elevate the car, and have a structurally sound garage given the picture. For instance, additional chords can be installed low enough to recreate trusses, but high enough to accommodate a raised vehicle. There are a number of truss styles that do not use a horizontal bottom chord, the scissor truss for instance. And using steel as a construction material can help to redirect the tensions through materials more capable of absorbing the load. Lastly, the walls themselves can be modified. It was typical of cathedrals to buttress on the exterior, the wall to handle high-arching ceilings, for instance.



    Construction is often a question of engineering as much as it is design, and if safety is a concern, such as it might be in this photo, consulting a structural engineer would be the right thing to do. Structural design is their expertise, which would be my recommendation.







    share|improve this answer










    New contributor



    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.








    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 12 hours ago









    Bob

    1034 bronze badges




    1034 bronze badges






    New contributor



    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.








    answered 2 days ago









    J DJ D

    1692 bronze badges




    1692 bronze badges




    New contributor



    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.




    New contributor




    J D is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.













    • 1





      My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

      – J D
      2 days ago








    • 5





      @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

      – AndyT
      yesterday






    • 1





      Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

      – isherwood
      yesterday














    • 1





      My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

      – J D
      2 days ago








    • 5





      @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

      – alephzero
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

      – AndyT
      yesterday






    • 1





      Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

      – isherwood
      yesterday








    1




    1





    My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

    – J D
    2 days ago







    My intuition (by no means a calculation), would say that in this picture, several strategies would strengthen the roof. Running some sistered members across the cut joists would obviously create rectangles that would reinforce the wall from deforming. Purlins along the rafters would also work, or tying together those inside chords from the front to back parallel to the wall would also help. It's really a question of how sure one wants to be. Horizontal members higher up are a must. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_roof_truss#/media/…

    – J D
    2 days ago






    5




    5





    @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

    – alephzero
    2 days ago





    @supercat If you want a roof with a hole, you design a roof with a hole. You don't first design a roof without a hole, then cut a hole in it, and then try to fix up the resulting mess.

    – alephzero
    2 days ago




    1




    1





    @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

    – alephzero
    2 days ago





    @supercat This is the sort of timber roof design still standing after more than 600 years after it was built: greenoakcarpentry.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Presentations/…

    – alephzero
    2 days ago




    1




    1





    Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

    – AndyT
    yesterday





    Some good information in this answer, and some bad. It is absolutely nothing to do with timber vs steel; it is to do with connections, and also member size.

    – AndyT
    yesterday




    1




    1





    Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

    – isherwood
    yesterday





    Yes, it's foolish to speculate at repairs that meet the intent of the destructor without doing the math on the remaining truss members. No repair can succeed unless the components the repair is applied to are up to the task. Knowing what I do about modern engineered trusses, there's little room for experimentation.

    – isherwood
    yesterday











    5















    As pictured - very bad idea.



    It may work IF the roof is re-engineered to carry a lot more of the stress across the top and bottom of the cutout. That means a much beefier horizontal beam on all four sides of his hole AND a rework of the roof by re-trussing the entire structure.



    Some examples:



    From https://www.truss.co/blog/when-a-church-redevelops-into-retail-property This one is a Scissor Truss, and also wears the more general name "church truss" or "nave truss" Note some of these have thinner tie rods across the middle exactly where the bottom chord would be - those aren't suitable.



    enter image description here

    A little ornate for a workshop, but you can see how the load is being brought down to the walls with inner buttressing.



    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2KqZt5vh7-bbx20Dxl-OXgFeEz9MTJHAGv8z2cP8mk6F_p7Rb This one is called a Coffer Truss and as pictured would work perfectly. However the thickness of the rafters (top cords) would have to be increased several-fold to cope with the extra stresses.



    https://www.alphasteel.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/parallel-chord-roof-truss.jpg This would work too - depending on how much height there is at the top of the wall.



    https://previews.123rf.com/images/geettheerawat/geettheerawat1602/geettheerawat160200082/53446836-steel-truss-roof.jpg Last option is to completely reframe the roof with steel trusses, and do away with the wooden ones. Properly enginerded steel will have more strength than the wooden ones while allowing the open space required.




    Any way - whatever creative handyman did this has made a difficult job into an utter nightmare of a job. It would have been less work to remove the roof and then re-truss leaving the bottom chords in place to support the walls until the new roof framing is on.




    Frankly, it would probably have been cheaper to build a new garage rather than monster the existing one and now have to repair it.



    Also consider any insurance claim will be harder to win, based on the level of care exhibited here. I'd bet any insurance claim for snow damage or storm damage would be rejected out of hand. If this is used for a business, any claim for a customer car damaged by this collapse would be rejected as "failure to use due care"




    You need to speak with a structural engineer immediately in person and ideally on-site. I am not a structural engineer.







    share|improve this answer






























      5















      As pictured - very bad idea.



      It may work IF the roof is re-engineered to carry a lot more of the stress across the top and bottom of the cutout. That means a much beefier horizontal beam on all four sides of his hole AND a rework of the roof by re-trussing the entire structure.



      Some examples:



      From https://www.truss.co/blog/when-a-church-redevelops-into-retail-property This one is a Scissor Truss, and also wears the more general name "church truss" or "nave truss" Note some of these have thinner tie rods across the middle exactly where the bottom chord would be - those aren't suitable.



      enter image description here

      A little ornate for a workshop, but you can see how the load is being brought down to the walls with inner buttressing.



      https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2KqZt5vh7-bbx20Dxl-OXgFeEz9MTJHAGv8z2cP8mk6F_p7Rb This one is called a Coffer Truss and as pictured would work perfectly. However the thickness of the rafters (top cords) would have to be increased several-fold to cope with the extra stresses.



      https://www.alphasteel.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/parallel-chord-roof-truss.jpg This would work too - depending on how much height there is at the top of the wall.



      https://previews.123rf.com/images/geettheerawat/geettheerawat1602/geettheerawat160200082/53446836-steel-truss-roof.jpg Last option is to completely reframe the roof with steel trusses, and do away with the wooden ones. Properly enginerded steel will have more strength than the wooden ones while allowing the open space required.




      Any way - whatever creative handyman did this has made a difficult job into an utter nightmare of a job. It would have been less work to remove the roof and then re-truss leaving the bottom chords in place to support the walls until the new roof framing is on.




      Frankly, it would probably have been cheaper to build a new garage rather than monster the existing one and now have to repair it.



      Also consider any insurance claim will be harder to win, based on the level of care exhibited here. I'd bet any insurance claim for snow damage or storm damage would be rejected out of hand. If this is used for a business, any claim for a customer car damaged by this collapse would be rejected as "failure to use due care"




      You need to speak with a structural engineer immediately in person and ideally on-site. I am not a structural engineer.







      share|improve this answer




























        5














        5










        5









        As pictured - very bad idea.



        It may work IF the roof is re-engineered to carry a lot more of the stress across the top and bottom of the cutout. That means a much beefier horizontal beam on all four sides of his hole AND a rework of the roof by re-trussing the entire structure.



        Some examples:



        From https://www.truss.co/blog/when-a-church-redevelops-into-retail-property This one is a Scissor Truss, and also wears the more general name "church truss" or "nave truss" Note some of these have thinner tie rods across the middle exactly where the bottom chord would be - those aren't suitable.



        enter image description here

        A little ornate for a workshop, but you can see how the load is being brought down to the walls with inner buttressing.



        https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2KqZt5vh7-bbx20Dxl-OXgFeEz9MTJHAGv8z2cP8mk6F_p7Rb This one is called a Coffer Truss and as pictured would work perfectly. However the thickness of the rafters (top cords) would have to be increased several-fold to cope with the extra stresses.



        https://www.alphasteel.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/parallel-chord-roof-truss.jpg This would work too - depending on how much height there is at the top of the wall.



        https://previews.123rf.com/images/geettheerawat/geettheerawat1602/geettheerawat160200082/53446836-steel-truss-roof.jpg Last option is to completely reframe the roof with steel trusses, and do away with the wooden ones. Properly enginerded steel will have more strength than the wooden ones while allowing the open space required.




        Any way - whatever creative handyman did this has made a difficult job into an utter nightmare of a job. It would have been less work to remove the roof and then re-truss leaving the bottom chords in place to support the walls until the new roof framing is on.




        Frankly, it would probably have been cheaper to build a new garage rather than monster the existing one and now have to repair it.



        Also consider any insurance claim will be harder to win, based on the level of care exhibited here. I'd bet any insurance claim for snow damage or storm damage would be rejected out of hand. If this is used for a business, any claim for a customer car damaged by this collapse would be rejected as "failure to use due care"




        You need to speak with a structural engineer immediately in person and ideally on-site. I am not a structural engineer.







        share|improve this answer













        As pictured - very bad idea.



        It may work IF the roof is re-engineered to carry a lot more of the stress across the top and bottom of the cutout. That means a much beefier horizontal beam on all four sides of his hole AND a rework of the roof by re-trussing the entire structure.



        Some examples:



        From https://www.truss.co/blog/when-a-church-redevelops-into-retail-property This one is a Scissor Truss, and also wears the more general name "church truss" or "nave truss" Note some of these have thinner tie rods across the middle exactly where the bottom chord would be - those aren't suitable.



        enter image description here

        A little ornate for a workshop, but you can see how the load is being brought down to the walls with inner buttressing.



        https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2KqZt5vh7-bbx20Dxl-OXgFeEz9MTJHAGv8z2cP8mk6F_p7Rb This one is called a Coffer Truss and as pictured would work perfectly. However the thickness of the rafters (top cords) would have to be increased several-fold to cope with the extra stresses.



        https://www.alphasteel.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/parallel-chord-roof-truss.jpg This would work too - depending on how much height there is at the top of the wall.



        https://previews.123rf.com/images/geettheerawat/geettheerawat1602/geettheerawat160200082/53446836-steel-truss-roof.jpg Last option is to completely reframe the roof with steel trusses, and do away with the wooden ones. Properly enginerded steel will have more strength than the wooden ones while allowing the open space required.




        Any way - whatever creative handyman did this has made a difficult job into an utter nightmare of a job. It would have been less work to remove the roof and then re-truss leaving the bottom chords in place to support the walls until the new roof framing is on.




        Frankly, it would probably have been cheaper to build a new garage rather than monster the existing one and now have to repair it.



        Also consider any insurance claim will be harder to win, based on the level of care exhibited here. I'd bet any insurance claim for snow damage or storm damage would be rejected out of hand. If this is used for a business, any claim for a customer car damaged by this collapse would be rejected as "failure to use due care"




        You need to speak with a structural engineer immediately in person and ideally on-site. I am not a structural engineer.








        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 13 hours ago









        CriggieCriggie

        1,2466 silver badges18 bronze badges




        1,2466 silver badges18 bronze badges

























            Lynn Baker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Lynn Baker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Lynn Baker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Lynn Baker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Home Improvement Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdiy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f171624%2fis-it-safe-to-remove-the-bottom-chords-of-a-series-of-garage-roof-trusses%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Hudson River Historic District Contents Geography History The district today Aesthetics Cultural...

            The number designs the writing. Feandra Aversely Definition: The act of ingrafting a sprig or shoot of one...

            Ayherre Geografie Demografie Externe links Navigatiemenu43° 23′ NB, 1° 15′ WL43° 23′ NB, 1°...