RSJ Splice Connections

[JohnMarsden]

Hi there,

We are currently having guys install the steels for our loft conversion.

On the couple of floor beams that have gone in so far, I have seen these splices (there are three beams, with two splices in each - i.e. each beam is in three sections).

Structural engineer had specified no more than one splice per beam, and a top/bottom plate to be bolted at each join. Builder has not done this and seems to have used end plates on RSJs so top and bottom plates could not be added to be flush even if desired now.
 

Builder is saying it’s fine we do it all the time and their “internal” structural engineer will be fine and BCO will sign it off. Our structural engineer is not happy and says he will not stand behind it.

 

Any thoughts/comments/advice? Is there even a chance that these connections are sufficient? The purlins are already being supported (temporarily) off these steels and subfloor that’s already partially down so redoing the 3 that have gone in so far is going to be a lot of work and backtracking but if that’s what needs to happen it needs to happen.

[markc]

Hi, I have seen plenty of ridge beams jointed this way with multiple joints presumably to reduce weight and facilitate fitting without a crane etc. as for floor beams then I would be more suspicious, the joint looks well done but beam deflection/joint flex will be more than a single piece or splice done with flange plates. Can you post a pic of the beam in place?

Edited August 11 by markc

[JohnMarsden]

Thanks for your response Mark - my thoughts. I previously did this on the ridge beam only but never a floor.

 

These photos are the best I have at the moment - they show the three beams and most of the splices. There are additional beams at the back that have the same splice connections too but they are in two sections rather than three. The same problem with them too though - not as to spec by the structural.

 

 

[Redbeard]

Assuming your SE's spec and dwgs were submitted to BC at application stage then what was drawn and spec'd is what BCO will expect to see, not a not-as-specified alternative enacted by the builder. Is the builder in possession of the SE spec and dwgs? If not what went wrong and (come to think of it) if yes, what went wrong?

 

Unless you can get your SE to say it's OK.

 

(Which, given that...

 

"Our structural engineer is not happy and says he will not stand behind it." does not seem likely) you arguably have to call a halt to all works forthwith until the builder has either re-done as per SE spec or come up with a proposal which, though different from SE's spec, will satisfy that SE and *get you BC sign-off*. (Arguably contractor should be liable for extra SE costs if incurred, too). All of this is a hell of a lot easier to say than to get done, and can be very much depend om personalities, so I wish you very good luck.