Installing joist header

Hi

I installed a joist header that spans 2 joists bays. The tail joist was previously sistered, as was one of the trimmer joists. Because of this, I used doubled headers. However, the other trimmer joist was only a single, and I didn't think to double it up.

Both headers are within 3' of the joist support, and the header is less then 6' long, so I could've used a single header/trimmer.

So my question is - I used joist hangers for every connection (tail-header, header-trimmer), along with 16d nails. They stick out past the single trimmer. Is this ok? I could see it either way...the situation only called for singles everywhere, so I should be fine even though I made the header stronger than necessary, OR since I used a doubled header, I should've used a doubled trimmer.

Thanks

You lost me with joist headers, tail joists, trimmer joists and single header/trimmer.

Are you making up new words?

AZ Contractor said:

You lost me with joist headers, tail joists, trimmer joists and single header/trimmer.

Are you making up new words?

Click to expand...

Look at UBC 2320.8.4, IRC R502.10, or IBC 2308.8.3. All have similar language. The IRC seems the most conservative by specifically saying a single header. See R502.10 on this link http://www.cbs.state.or.us/bcd/boards/rsb/boardpack/07/100307/public_hearing/ch_05.pdf

Single trimmer joists may be used to carry a single header joist that is located within 3 feet (914 mm) of the trimmer joist bearing. When the header joist span exceeds 4 feet (1219 mm), the trimmer joists and the header joist shall be doubled and of sufficient cross section to support the floor joists framing into the header.

Click to expand...

Hi Phil, thanks for posting the links.

I was off on the length of the header before a doubled-up one is necessary, but mine is only about 30" long, so a single still would've been fine.

Any thoughts on my situation, whether to just leave as is?

Thanks again

Some joist hangers require their own nails -- regular nails will not meet their standards for warranty, code compliance, etc.

Phil H2 said:

Look at UBC 2320.8.4, IRC R502.10, or IBC 2308.8.3. All have similar language. The IRC seems the most conservative by specifically saying a single header. See R502.10 on this link http://www.cbs.state.or.us/bcd/boards/rsb/boardpack/07/100307/public_hearing/ch_05.pdf

Click to expand...

Is that from behind some pay-to-download barrier, or is there some website I should know about?