# Opening up a wall



## Greenturd88 (Dec 30, 2015)

Hello everyone new hear and have a question(obviously). So I recently bought this house. It's just over 900sqft ranch and I wanted to take a wall down further from the living room to the kitchen. Right now there is about a 7ish ft opening and I wanted to take it back another about 5ft. My roof ridge Isnt very high I was wondering if I need a big header or if I can use 2x2x4s vertically from the roof rafters down to the ceiling joists. The attic height isn't very large and currently there is the same type of support for the current opening. The outside wall of the current opening is the exterior wall of the house.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

Welcome to the site.
The big question is which way the ceiling joists go?
Is there now some support for the roof landing on this wall?


----------



## CallMeVilla (Dec 30, 2015)

This is one of the most frequent topics we see here.  the basics can give you clues .... If the wall is parallel to the ceiling rafters the opening is probably a partition wall, not a bearing wall.  If the rafters are perpendicular to the wall you better check closer.  If the rafters sit on your wall, you might have a bearing situation.  Bearing requires you to carry the roof load down to the foundation .... and using a header transfers the load to the sides safely.

Are you trying to create a clear span open look?  A partition wall allows this without a header.  A bearing wall absolutely requires a header engineered for the span width and loads.

Here is a video you might find helpful:  https://search.yahoo.com/search;_yl...r=yfp-t-693-s&fr2=p:fp,m:sa&type=fpbucket_693


----------



## beachguy005 (Dec 30, 2015)

If it's a typical ranch, the wall running between the kitchen and LR, and down the length of the house is probably a load bearing wall.  If your roof framing is trusses, the weight would be on the outside walls.  Given that you said the existing opening is basically hung from the rafters, it's more likely stick built roof and a load bearing wall.
A 13 foot opening is going to need something more than a couple of 2x4s.  First you need to find out if it is a load bearing wall before you open it up further.


----------



## Greenturd88 (Dec 30, 2015)

It's load bearing for sure.  Looking at the wall and the ceiling joists  run north and south the wall I would like to open more runs east to west


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

That will need some type of beam with support on each end that extends down to the foundation. An engineer to figure out what the load is and how to deal with it would be the way to go.


----------



## Greenturd88 (Dec 30, 2015)

Ok so then my next question would be since one side of the existing opening is the exterior wall this means the roof line is close to the ceiling. What do you do then? Cut the beam on an angle to fit?


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

Usually the beam would be below the ceiling, it can be lifted up like you are thinking but no one should cut a beam on the angle with out an engineers approval.
Depending on load the beam could be anywhere from 9 to 14" high, cutting that angle on a 14" beam would not work.


----------



## beachguy005 (Dec 30, 2015)

As nealtw points out the beam is usually below the ceiling.  That being said, do you have enough ceiling height to put a beam in.  I know a lot of those older houses didn't have 8' ceilings.


----------



## Greenturd88 (Dec 30, 2015)

After some discussion about time and cost with my old lady we might just do something like this. Any suggestions then for a header? Maybe 2 2x8s? http://www.simplicityinthesouth.com/2013/08/knocking-down-a-wall-and-opening-up-the-kitchen.html


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

So the post would be where the end of the wall is now? 
Is there a bulkhead in the area that is open now, how high is that now?
In new construction 2  2x10s are usually the min.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

Greenturd88 said:


> Hello everyone new hear and have a question(obviously). So I recently bought this house. It's just over 900sqft ranch and I wanted to take a wall down further from the living room to the kitchen. Right now there is about a 7ish ft opening and I wanted to take it back another about 5ft. My roof ridge Isnt very high I was wondering if I need a big header or if I can use 2x2x4s vertically from the roof rafters down to the ceiling joists. The attic height isn't very large and currently there is the same type of support for the current opening. The outside wall of the current opening is the exterior wall of the house.



Here is a general rule of thumb for determining load bearing;

If you have a basement with a center support beam and this wall occurs above above that beam, either parallel or perpendicular with the floor joists, it could be*load*bearing.

If your house is single story, in the attic, if the ceiling joists continue over it, end over it, are spliced over it, or you have roof bracing landing on it, It's a*bearing*wall. If the ceiling joist are parallel with the wall and you have roof bracing landing on it, It's a*bearing*wall.

If there is a 2nd floor above the wall, you have two options. You can remove a section of ceiling on both sides of the wall to determine if the 2nd floor, floor joists, cross it or end over it. If so, Its*load*bearing. Or you can use a stud finder to determine the location and direction of the joists.

Here is a link that should be of assistance;
http://www.awc.org/pdf/WCD1-300.pdf*


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

Greenturd88 said:


> It's load bearing for sure.  Looking at the wall and the ceiling joists  run north and south the wall I would like to open more runs east to west



There generally 3 options available to you, given that one end of the existing opening is the exterior wall.

No matter what you elect to attempt to accomplish, support the ceiling on both side of the area to be removed.

The first, and it may already be 2/3rds accomplished, if your existing header is a dropped header, is to remove the existing header and replace it with a like dimensioned, full length, product, with a box post or or a 6x6 decorative turned post supporting the load under the original end of the existing header.

The second is to install a full length flush header which would rest one end on the exterior wall, a intermediate support as described above, and over the wall describing the width of the opening.

The third is to install full length header, without an intermediate post.

The general rule for determining the size of a dimensional lumber header is 1" of height for 1' of length it will span.

Regarding sloping the end of a header to fit the roof slop. The first 12" of a dimensional lumber header, is allowed to be cut for the slop of the roof, because the 1st 12" are discounted in the loading calculation, due to inherent splitting that occurs in the lumber drying process.


----------



## slownsteady (Dec 30, 2015)

> Regarding sloping the end of a header to fit the roof slop. The first 12" of a dimensional lumber header, is allowed to be cut for the slop of the roof, because the 1st 12" are discounted in the loading calculation, due to inherent splitting that occurs in the lumber drying process.



I have a question about this: I can imagine that if the tapered end was tucked in the eave, that would be no problem. But what if the tapered end is over (or close to) the vertical support?


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

slownsteady said:


> I have a question about this: I can imagine that if the tapered end was tucked in the eave, that would be no problem. But what if the tapered end is over (or close to) the vertical support?



Me too. A 2x4 rafter with a 1' birdsmouth will have 2 1/2 inches on the outside of the wall for the beam and the angle cut on a 14"would be 16" long on a 6/12 pitch and longer with a lower pitch roof. I havn't found anything to do with this on the net.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

slownsteady said:


> I have a question about this: I can imagine that if the tapered end was tucked in the eave, that would be no problem. But what if the tapered end is over (or close to) the vertical support?



Because I would address this from a framers perspective, It's a little hard to detail, unless you know the roof pitch, rafter size, rafter tail as well as the CJ size and spacing.

Also one end of the existing opening is the exterior wall, the existing header and any new header would be, "over the vertical support", or am I not understanding the question.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

nealtw said:


> Me too. A 2x4 rafter with a 1' birdsmouth will have 2 1/2 inches on the outside of the wall for the beam and the angle cut on a 14"would be 16" long on a 6/12 pitch and longer with a lower pitch roof. I havn't found anything to do with this on the net.



I think you are mixing points of inquiry.

I'm having difficulty visualizing a 1' long birdsmouth cut into a 2x4 rafter with a 6/12 pitch.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

Snoonyb said:


> I think you are mixing points of inquiry.
> 
> I'm having difficulty visualizing a 1' long birdsmouth cut into a 2x4 rafter with a 6/12 pitch.



how about 1" high


----------



## slownsteady (Dec 30, 2015)

When I read the post, I wondered if you were saying that the "sloping end of the header" was allowed as part of the load bearing portion of the beam (as opposed to just an end sticking out). I get it, if it is just sticking out into the eave and needs to be sloped to fit.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

nealtw said:


> how about 1" high



There are also additional grades as well as 6x headers.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

slownsteady said:


> When I read the post, I wondered if you were saying that the "sloping end of the header" was allowed as part of the load bearing portion of the beam (as opposed to just an end sticking out). I get it, if it is just sticking out into the eave and needs to be sloped to fit.



Now I understand, and you were correct in your first assumption, in that the small end of the slop ends even with the outside of the double top plate.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

Snoonyb said:


> There are also additional grades as well as 6x headers.



I found this write up on beams @
http://myconco.com/ComEngProb.html
And this is what he said

*Think twice before cutting beams


It's easy to pull out a saw and cut off the top corner of a beam that must be kept beneath a roofline. But if too much cross section is removed, shear forces can cause the beam to split and eventually to fail. For solid-sawn beams, you should leave at least half the width of the beam above the supporting wall and confine the length of the tapered cut to no more than three times the original width of the beam. If you don't have room to leave this much cross section, your best bet is to lower the beam (set it in a pocket) or have a tapered beam engineered. *

Using this and asuming a house this old will have 2x4 rafters with that birdmouth, figure out the largest beam that could be installed and tell us it would be big enough to carry the unknown load.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 30, 2015)

nealtw said:


> I found this write up on beams @
> http://myconco.com/ComEngProb.html
> And this is what he said
> 
> ...


----------



## nealtw (Dec 30, 2015)

We don't know where this house ius or what the snow load might be and you are ready to suggest a beam, great.
I don't know this guy either and can not argue that he is right, but he is a home inspector, so if he sees something like this, his suggestion will be to get an engineers report.
If the OP is getting a permit, which he should do as thius is an important change to the house. the city will just say get and an engineer to sign off on it.
If an engineer puts his 30 yr garrentee stamp on it there is nothing more to talk about. But you can not take that to the next job. The next job needs an engieers report of it's own.
Experience around engineering does not help in this case unless you are prepared to put your stamp on the drawings.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 31, 2015)

nealtw said:


> We don't know where this house ius or what the snow load might be and you are ready to suggest a beam, great.



Absolutely, years of experience, a low slope roof ranch style const.

What do think the snow load, if any, would be.



nealtw said:


> I don't know this guy either and can not argue that he is right, but he is a home inspector, so if he sees something like this, his suggestion will be to get an engineers report.



Sure it's a natural response to relieve liability, because a housing inspector is a specialty license for a specific function.



nealtw said:


> If the OP is getting a permit, which he should do as thius is an important change to the house. the city will just say get and an engineer to sign off on it.



The requirement to have an engineers stamped plan is jurisdictional, some do, some do not.

When the municipality is confident in the competency of their inspectors, within certain perameters, they do not.

Another consideration that can influence that decision is the time it delays the project and the increased cost.

Some municipalities are obstructionist and some are advocates.



nealtw said:


> If an engineer puts his 30 yr garrentee stamp on it there is nothing more to talk about. But you can not take that to the next job. The next job needs an engieers report of it's own.



He may have opened his business yesterday, and the requirement is jurisdictional.



nealtw said:


> Experience around engineering does not help in this case.



It has and will continue to serve me well.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 31, 2015)

Snoonyb said:


> Absolutely, years of experience, a low slope roof ranch style const.
> .


But yoiu are ready to suggest the right beam and it modify it to fit without knowing the dead load of the roof or snow load for the location, no questions about point loads landing on interior point of foundation.
That's not cute, it's nuts.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 31, 2015)

nealtw said:


> But yoiu are ready to suggest the right beam and it modify it to fit without knowing the dead load of the roof or snow load for the location,



So, was the addition of the snow loads, to these that I've answered;"Me too. A 2x4 rafter with a 1' birdsmouth will have 2 1/2 inches on the outside of the wall for the beam and the angle cut on a 14"would be 16" long on a 6/12 pitch and longer with a lower pitch roof. I havn't found anything to do with this on the net.

Using this and asuming a house this old will have 2x4 rafters with that birdmouth, figure out the largest beam that could be installed and tell us it would be big enough to carry the unknown load", if there are any, generally instructional, or simply pointing out that those forces would have already been factored into the existing structure.



nealtw said:


> no questions about point loads landing on interior point of foundation.



Why would I question the existing which would come into play in either scenario.



nealtw said:


> That's not cute, it's nuts.



You are free to use the internet as your base for experience.

I'll use my hands on as my basis.

You may not have realized that much of what we have been discussing is only relevant when the roof structure is a hip, not a gable.

Just another unknown.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 31, 2015)

Snoonyb said:


> So, was the addition of the snow loads, to these that I've answered;"Me too. A 2x4 rafter with a 1' birdsmouth will have 2 1/2 inches on the outside of the wall for the beam and the angle cut on a 14"would be 16" long on a 6/12 pitch and longer with a lower pitch roof. I havn't found anything to do with this on the net.
> 
> Using this and asuming a house this old will have 2x4 rafters with that birdmouth, figure out the largest beam that could be installed and tell us it would be big enough to carry the unknown load", if there are any, generally instructional, or simply pointing out that those forces would have already been factored into the existing structure.
> 
> ...



I wonder why sometimes they call for extra big footings under pointloads.
Maybe you could explain their reasoning.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 31, 2015)

nealtw said:


> I wonder why sometimes they call for extra big footings under pointloads.
> Maybe you could explain their reasoning.



Or, you could.

I'd prefer that the OP absorb and assemble a plan from the alternatives presented, decide a plan of attack, prepare a rudimentary drawing and proceed to the local building dept.

And then return with a refined question.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 31, 2015)

Snoonyb said:


> Or, you could.
> 
> I'd prefer that the OP absorb and assemble a plan from the alternatives presented, decide a plan of attack, prepare a rudimentary drawing and proceed to the local building dept.
> 
> And then return with a refined question.



perhaps that should have been your first suggestion when it was determined that it was a bearing wall.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 31, 2015)

nealtw said:


> perhaps that should have been your first suggestion when it was determined that it was a bearing wall.



And deprive them of the alternatives presented, the cruxt of the reason they visit.


----------



## nealtw (Dec 31, 2015)

Snoonyb said:


> And deprive them of the alternatives presented, the cruxt of the reason they visit.



That would be great if the discussion actually covered all the things the engineer or permit department will want to question before making a suggestion on what they think should be done.


----------



## Snoonyb (Dec 31, 2015)

nealtw said:


> That would be great if the discussion actually covered all the things the engineer or permit department will want to question before making a suggestion on what they think should be done.



If they do, and only time will tell.


----------

