Removing load bearing wall?

SpartanEpoxies
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
House Repair Talk

Help Support House Repair Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Encalado83 said:
Kitchen is 13x12
Living room 16.5x12
Drywall 1/2 thick
King studs will land on top of piers
Click to expand...

We would like the jack studs to land on the pier. I don't think this a problem but if you were worried about that you could just stand a treated post in front of the pier down to the footing below the pier..
 
I agree i dont see no reason why the cinder block piers couldnt handle the load. I think doing it that will prolly be easier than trying ti have the 2 middle posts try to help support the ceiling.
 
Encalado83 said:
I agree i dont see no reason why the cinder block piers couldnt handle the load. I think doing it that will prolly be easier than trying ti have the 2 middle posts try to help support the ceiling.
Click to expand...

I just think that you are going to all that work and the next guy will likely want to remove your two center posts so for a little extra effort, call it done.

earlier I described putting the beam above the ceiling but you could put it below the ceiling with a lot less work.
 
Well the reason i want the 2 center post is because between the 2 i am putting a bar to sit at to eat
 
Your foundation is a typical post and beam system.

What should be of concern is the loading of the pier between the 6' and 12' post, where by action you are concentrating the load of those two members there. While the diaphragm of the wall spreads the load proportionately over the length of the girder, the placement of those posts has the potential of that pier to settle disproportionately.

A larger structural header in the ceiling allows for the placement of any space defining elements, anywhere along the line, as well as eliminates all the blocking of the floor joists.
 
Snoonyb said:
well as eliminates all the blocking of the floor joists.
Click to expand...

As there is 14 1/2" between floor joist, there may or may not be one below the installed post so code says solid blocking from the beam to the sub floor and block size should relate to the size of the beam and the post so as the beam is 4 1/2" and the posts discussed will be 6x6 the blocking can be pieces of 2x4 totaling 4 1/2 x 6 x the height of the joist and can include a floor joist if one is there.
 
However, increasing the header in the ceiling carries the load end too end, thereby eliminating any significant weight, other than the weight of the post itself, and also eliminating the need for any joist blocking.
 
Snoonyb said:
However, increasing the header in the ceiling carries the load end too end, thereby eliminating any significant weight, other than the weight of the post itself, and also eliminating the need for any joist blocking.
Click to expand...

So in a good build we try to get the studs in the wall to land directly over the joist below so any weight transfer goes to the beam with out stressing the plywood of the sub floor.

So you think you can remove the wall and all the studs and replace that with a beam and you only have to be concerned about the weight of the post.

Good luck with that.:down:

Squash_Blocks.gif
 
Last edited:
I will make sure i block off under each post for safety measure. Extra work and being extra safe does not bother me.
 
nealtw said:
So in a good build we try to get the studs in the wall to land directly over the joist below so any weight transfer goes to the beam with out stressing the plywood of the sub floor.

So you think you can remove the wall and all the studs and replace that with a beam and you only have to be concerned about the weight of the post.

Good luck with that.:down:
Click to expand...

I've been doing it that way for 45yrs., and remember I warranty my work for as long as that homeowner lives there, and I don't do "ANY" warranty repairs, because I do it right the first time.

Another reason the larger header makes sense, is that the "posts" can be hollow, placed any where, further reducing the weight, and allowing for elec. and/or other service drop downs.

Budgeting for convenience, as well as architectural.
 
Snoonyb said:
I've been doing it that way for 45yrs., and remember I warranty my work for as long as that homeowner lives there, and I don't do "ANY" warranty repairs, because I do it right the first time.

Another reason the larger header makes sense, is that the "posts" can be hollow, placed any where, further reducing the weight, and allowing for elec. and/or other service drop downs.

Budgeting for convenience, as well as architectural.
Click to expand...

Well the first time I missed the blocking below the engineer and the city inspector had something to say about it.

I guess that only happens if you get inspections.
 
There's another reason for building with the full span header.

The OP or the next owner doesn't have to go through the whole process again, were they to decide to remove the bar and posts in favor of an open space layout.

Double, Double Toil, Trouble, Trouble Broil, and Caldron Bubble.
 
Snoonyb said:
There's another reason for building with the full span header.

The OP or the next owner doesn't have to go through the whole process again, were they to decide to remove the bar and posts in favor of an open space layout.

Double, Double Toil, Trouble, Trouble Broil, and Caldron Bubble.
Click to expand...

That's all fine but we were talking about the blocking under the floor.

You should hide you corn flakes.
 
nealtw said:
That's all fine but we were talking about the blocking under the floor.

You should hide you corn flakes.
Click to expand...

Your talking about the necessity for blocking between the floor joist because you are advocating a short span header requiring intermediate supports, which is the hard way, doesn't allow the versatility or the foresight of eventuality.

While I'm advocating a far simpler process, eliminating unnecessary labor and costly material, allows design versatility while budgeting for contingencies.
 
Snoonyb said:
Your talking about the necessity for blocking between the floor joist because you are advocating a short span header requiring intermediate supports, which is the hard way, doesn't allow the versatility or the foresight of eventuality.

While I'm advocating a far simpler process, eliminating unnecessary labor and costly material, allows design versatility while budgeting for contingencies.
Click to expand...

If you actually read all the posts you would understand that I said to install the 16 ft beam with point loads at each end with blocking below those. and what he does in the middle is only for show.:nono:
 
nealtw said:
If you actually read all the posts you would understand that I said to install the 16 ft beam with point loads at each end with blocking below those. and what he does in the middle is only for show.:nono:
Click to expand...

Actually, you're all over the place;
#2The posts you put in will be point loads so they need support all the way to the foundation. So if you have a crawlspace, there will be some work to do down there. Not much.

If I was doing this much work I would go the extra and put the full length LVLs flush so I had a clean open ceiling.

#8Depending on the style of girder, I doubt it was designed to take a point load in the center.

#10And the new posts will land at X inches from one pier and X inches from another pier and so on.

#12Slide hangers onto the ends of every ceiling joist then nail the 2x12s together with 4 nails every 16" and slide that up into place,

#192x12s would be over kill, LVLs would be a waist of money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top