Removing upright roof supports

[maxtwo]

My wife bought us a plot of land a few years ago, because it has a large lake on it for me to fish when I retire.But then she made a start of a bungalow.Which I stopped when I found out it will look smart from outside when completed.But to make any sense inside is hard to layout.It has to many upright supports in the way.I need to remove at least two international ones.they don't appear to be taking much weight.And it has had plenty of time to settle.Now do I just put in more steel to help the original or cut that out and put in all new girders.Or leave well alone and live with compromise?

[lopburi3]

Don't believe without more information/photos many can be of much help - but remember if this is two story home the second floor and walls probably are supported by these support pillars. Remember walls are normally just filled in non-weight supporting - support is from those pillars

[maxtwo]

No only single story.But clay roof tiles so bit of Wight.

[krisb]

If you don't know what you're doing, maybe better to leave them.

You can take them out but you need to run beams to take the load. Those concrete posts are there for a reason.

[maxtwo]

[Soutpeel]

If you don't know what you're doing, maybe better to leave them.

You can take them out but you need to run beams to take the load. Those concrete posts are there for a reason.

Going with Kris on this one, if you don't know what your doing, leave well alone

[Soutpeel]

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1422425234.261011.jpg

If that's what you want to take out, I wouldn't, that mid span and your horizontal on your truss doesn't look big enough to take the full span

[maxtwo]

I won't take out without adding something.But just what to add.When you get up close the cross beam is welded to the rebar in the concrete no touching the concrete.You can slide a piece of cardboard between concrete post and beam.

[krisb]

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1422425234.261011.jpg

That doesn't look like enough steel framing for the roof tiles.

I can see the 1 metre spacing (vertical) but where's the horizontal steel? Is it just hard to see in the pic?

[lopburi3]

Those support pillars will normally be in or at the end of walls when you fill in rooms so will not been seen once construction finished. If your plans are not done in that manner perhaps they can be changed?

But even when open you can decorate - look in any local Wat. They normally are full of supports and will finish them so not objectionable.

[Morakot]

I won't take out without adding something.But just what to add.When you get up close the cross beam is welded to the rebar in the concrete no touching the concrete.You can slide a piece of cardboard between concrete post and beam.

There might not be much of a load on it at the mo, but it might change when tropical cloudbursts and monsoon winds suddenly delight your roof structure.

Without exact measurements and frame specifications everything is guesswork.

If you want wide open plan spaces without pillars in the room, you are essentially looking at a different roof construction... trusses and considerably stronger outer pillars.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Morakot

[Rimmer]

Moved to DIY forum

[IMHO]

I won't take out without adding something.But just what to add.When you get up close the cross beam is welded to the rebar in the concrete no touching the concrete.You can slide a piece of cardboard between concrete post and beam.

There might not be much of a load on it at the mo, but it might change when tropical cloudbursts and monsoon winds suddenly delight your roof structure.

Without exact measurements and frame specifications everything is guesswork.

If you want wide open plan spaces without pillars in the room, you are essentially looking at a different roof construction... trusses and considerably stronger outer pillars.

+1

@OP: yes, it's very feasible to have a post-less design with truss beams, but, the posts and footings that support the truss beams will need to be able to handle all of the extra load that will be placed upon them.

Bear in mind that tile roof's and their steel trusses quickly add up to several tons of weight.

You should consult an engineer on this one - internet advice won't get you by, safely.

[maxtwo]

As Iam at early stage I need professional help doing the rest so I'll have them look at what's done and consider fresh start.What I hadn't considered was the other posts having to be stronger.

[splitlid]

do you have a floor plan you can post up

[Morakot]

What I hadn't considered was the other posts having to be stronger.

and their foundations.

[maxtwo]

This is the first time in 18 months that we have been to this property.And just trying to work out what to do with it.wife started build on a picture she was shown.When I found out I stopped the work straight away.And all plans must have gone with contractors.I can put enough steel up to hold a battle ship but if other posts and foundations will no hold it its a wast of more money.ill try find someone to look at it then decide.But it is no good the way it is.I'am about £4000 in so with what I will need to spend to finish mite be best to cut my losses and start again.

[cooked]

There are work arounds for inadequate foundations (underpinning), it gets done all the time. Maybe not cheap but do not despond!

[bankruatsteve]

A "pole grid" is the only thing most upcountry builders understand. Suggest you just design around it. I did, and I'm sure lot's others have so there's your challenge. Be sure to stay on top of the infrastructure as well; like the plumbing, electric, sewer, etc. Your time will be best spent there vs. imagining something that just won't happen since it wasn't the plan in the first place.

[sipi]

It looks perfectly OK to me. Why " cut your losses". I would let the wife go ahead with it. Next the dwarf walls go in between the posts, then the floor and walls etc. Our house looked the same at this stage, but the finished product turned out great. All houses look cramped until the walls go up, even brick veneer. I am guessing the spacing between the posts is about 2.4 metres, normal. In the meantime swing a hammock between them and trust the wife.

[sdanielmcev]

From what I can see, and without measurements, I gotta say no. This is hurricane country, so minimum strength should be for 55 mph winds. (70kph?) They also look to be interdependent. A floor plan would be good. A tile roof is not particularly heavy, only comparatively so.

[wayned]

Looking at post number 5 if the pole that you want to remove is that one, the answer is NO!. It is one of the main supports of the roof. The truss could be made stronger by adding additional steel and supports, but that would only transfer the load to the outer poles and footings which are not designed to carry the additional load. IMHO any upgrade to remove that pole in situ would be a real problem and should not be attempted without a structural evaluation and redesign by a qualified engineer. Otherwise your roof might sag -all the way to the floor!

[eyecatcher]

Wayned; appreciate your comment and two likes no less but i have to say (with my background) that i think you are being over cautious.

The post can be eliminated with no detriment on the rest of the structure but yes strengthening is necessary.

Its a bungalow so no major dead and live loads from an upper floor.

Dead load on the roof will never include snow and the hurricanes well to be honest if ever you get one the roof disappearing is a given.

A lesser storm and winds will create uplift so the only thing to worry about is whether the structure is adequately tied down.

That column has more than likely been set there simply to be a mid span support for the roof enabling them to make best use of the cheapest 4x2 c section steel. It is there to reduce deflection of that tie beam as you dont want sagging ceilings.

The steel support on top of the column is doing the same, picking up the end of the steel or supporting mid spans.

Simply another length of c section back to back with the existing will reduce the deflection andcarry those ridge posts.

I called this a flitch plate whrn you cleat on another beam to beef up an existing.

With regard to additional load on the existing columns actually it will be negligable. The foundations here are not often lesss that 400mm deep ring beams even bungalows. In Europe 150mm to 225mm is the norm for two and three storeys and only reinforced if the ground is particularly soft.

That aside if the foundation were ever engineer designed they would for sure have a factor of safety (f.o.s.) loading of 1.5 to 2. in other words pretty much every bungalow foundation has already been designed to carry a second floor and a two storey could carry a third storey.

Pretty much all of those central columns can be elimimated at the cost of 1000bt for a heavier guage/deeper section steel.

And always remrmber; as soon as you start taking up all your internal walls whilst they are not loadbearing per se they are giving some extra support to those roof steels.

To the OP i will concur with others to be cautious if you have a lack of knowledge but its not really as issue or an expensive issue to achieve what you want.

[wayned]

"IMHO any upgrade to remove that pole in situ would be a real problem and should not be attempted without a structural evaluation and redesign by a qualified engineer."

Wow, you must be him, did an entire structural evaluation by looking at a picture. Did these people follow your advice?

[IMHO]

Wayned; appreciate your comment and two likes no less but i have to say (with my background) that i think you are being over cautious.

The post can be eliminated with no detriment on the rest of the structure but yes strengthening is necessary.

Its a bungalow so no major dead and live loads from an upper floor.

Dead load on the roof will never include snow and the hurricanes well to be honest if ever you get one the roof disappearing is a given.

A lesser storm and winds will create uplift so the only thing to worry about is whether the structure is adequately tied down.

That column has more than likely been set there simply to be a mid span support for the roof enabling them to make best use of the cheapest 4x2 c section steel. It is there to reduce deflection of that tie beam as you dont want sagging ceilings.

The steel support on top of the column is doing the same, picking up the end of the steel or supporting mid spans.

Simply another length of c section back to back with the existing will reduce the deflection andcarry those ridge posts.

I called this a flitch plate whrn you cleat on another beam to beef up an existing.

With regard to additional load on the existing columns actually it will be negligable. The foundations here are not often lesss that 400mm deep ring beams even bungalows. In Europe 150mm to 225mm is the norm for two and three storeys and only reinforced if the ground is particularly soft.

That aside if the foundation were ever engineer designed they would for sure have a factor of safety (f.o.s.) loading of 1.5 to 2. in other words pretty much every bungalow foundation has already been designed to carry a second floor and a two storey could carry a third storey.

Pretty much all of those central columns can be elimimated at the cost of 1000bt for a heavier guage/deeper section steel.

And always remrmber; as soon as you start taking up all your internal walls whilst they are not loadbearing per se they are giving some extra support to those roof steels.

To the OP i will concur with others to be cautious if you have a lack of knowledge but its not really as issue or an expensive issue to achieve what you want.

We normally see eye-to-eye (see what I did there? ) but in this case, I'm afraid I have to say no way. The load at the middle of a tile roof is immense and there's no way adding and extra length of 220 Baht C-section steel is going to compensate for a post that was likely (admittedly, over) engineered to support 20 tons.

We routinely do 7M/9M wide post-less spans for carports (2/3cars), and our engineer always designs larger footings (1.5m x.1.5m in cases where no piles are needed), larger posts (25cmx25cm) with larger rebar (16mm vs 12mm), more rebars (8 vertical vs 4), and then a 75/100cm (7M/9M) high truss beam.

Sure, maybe he's over-engineering them a little, but OTOH, we've never ever had one sag even a mm, let alone worse.

Edited January 29, 2015 by IMHO

[eyecatcher]

Ok guys seems like I didnt study the photo long enough.

I will retract my comments suggesting the solution is easier that it may be.

I wasnt suggesting though to spend only 220bt for a new steel.

That truss does seem to be on its own and i accept now its carrying more load.

However a solution can still be obtained with a heavier ceiling tie and more consideration about the bearing and of course the quality of the other columns.

I still maintain that construction loadings here are probably only a third of western builds.

And you are right its impossible to carry out a structural analysis from part of a photo.

Good discussion anyway.

[maxtwo]

Their are two like the one in the picture carrying the ridge the ones on each end seem to take most of the weight.If I take it out I would put in a I section beam a lot bigger than is in place now.But I will get someone in to look first.What I didn't want was to get someone that says yes we can take it out then run when it fell.I don't mind cost as long as it is what I want .And as it stands I'll salvage tiles and some steel and start again.

[Jupiterjim]

This Is Thailand.

You have to build it, tear it down at least 2 or 3 times to get it 80% right.

Look around. You will see every construction site has a crew with jackhammers tearing out yesterdays work.

[wayned]

Or you could just take it out and wait until it falls down. You never know, it might just lean and sag and will become a historic landmark like this one: http://www.house-crazy.com/the-crooked-house-of-windsor/