Pls help me identify if load bearing.

Alright guys I am struggling to figure out if an interior wall is load bearing. My though ( Pretty sure I am right, but I am not about to just start swinging a sledge) is that it is not due to the configuration of the house

House Specs
-Single Level Ranch 22'ish feet wide
-Built in 1956
-Fink Truss roof construction 24'ish solid 2x4 bottom chord, wood gussets.
-Truss's are about 24" on center ( didn't have a tape measure up there used my arm)
-single large beam in crawl space EXACTLY in the middle of the floor, 11' from both walls of the foundation.

Images

Wall in Question runs perpendicular to truss's


"Header" The bottom chords of the truss rest on the header, nailed in place with 1 nail per, nothing other than the truss above the double 2x4.


Floor beam



Truss's ( more images next post)



My concerns

I know that truss's typically displace on exterior walls, however truss's were not really popular in the 50's so I am unsure if my "truss" are engineered to displace weight to outerwalls.

Side note,
Neighboors house has the wall in question removed from the getgo. We have the same basic house design ( VERY similar house floor plan), but his truss's use bolts and nails, and not plywood gussets


So can I grab the Sledge, grunt like Tim Allen, and start swinging or do I need to get a beam put up?


Thanks for the insight

Nick

More images of the truss's

Your double top late is typical. No clue there. Your passage framing looks typical too with a king stud, header, probably a jack stud and a trimmer above. (see picture blow up) My question is, do you plan on completely removing the wall, including the double top plate or do you intend to head it off? Whenever you have doubts about bearing, a header is the safe way to go.

hadn't made that plan yet. It really depends. The entire house has double 2x4 headers. The doorway header is a simple 2x4 also so again that leads itself to none load correct? Figure for a 3 foot doorway they would use a 2x6 if it was load bearing.

I wouldn't mind the look of a exposed wood header, but I figure that it would be easier to patch it all, but I could go either way. Suppose it would be easy to cut strips of drywall for the section and just attach it to the truss's like they did with the rest of the house.

upon some more reading I went back into the attic and checked for gaps between the truss bottom chords and the header in question. About %50 of them have a clear gap and the others I could get a putty knife between ( some tighter than others) assuming this is just due to the house settling.

I would assuming this means that the wall is in fact not load bearing, correct?

I am the type to remove all doubt before taking it down.

me78569 said:

The entire house has double 2x4 headers. The doorway header is a simple 2x4 also so again that leads itself to none load correct? Figure for a 3 foot doorway they would use a 2x6 if it was load bearing.

Click to expand...

By "headers", you mean over the doorways? using a doubled 2x4 is not typical construction ... even with cripples. However, it tells us there is no load bearing on those walls because even in that time a bearing wall would have required a beefy header.

As to the "insurance beam", it can be drywalled. No need to make it "woodsey." You did not seem to indicate the width of the opening ... that would determine the size of the beam.

The opening created will be about 12' in total.

unless you feel that there is a true need for a beam up there I think I am gonna skip it.

After walking around in multiple neighboors houses with the same basic floor plan, and the same truss's, and floor support beam there should be no issue with not using a beam. 3 of the houses directly around me have the wall missing or the wall configured differently with no extra support anywhere.


Thanks for the insight.

The door way was framed down with blocks, that wall is not load bearing. The double plate on top of the wall is normal on all walls bearing or not. If you had 2x6s or better on edge over the door, that would make you think twice about it. Evan if it does sag over time , a beam could be added later.