Truss Construction Kills- Glued Trusses

[hudson144 150]

A recent e mail about truss construction without gusset plates certainly has raised a concern.This is a major safety issue for all us and certainly should be closely looked at. The use of glue is being used as a substitute for gusset plates and is only a sure sign for failure. Be aware out there!

[E1E2TL3 0]

Hudson,

Can you send a link or other documentation concerning this. It sounds pretty dangerous ontop of the existing danger that truss construction affords us. Thanks

[R1SmokeEater 359]

Edited October 2, 2008 by R1SmokeEater

[mfc2257 464]

I would like to read the same as well.

I'm not convinced that glue isn't a better solution than a tin gusset plate. There are plenty of synthetics out there today that can be manufactured to withstand tremendous temperature loads.

A gusset plate will always warp and begin to separate from the truss, however high temp synthetic glue or an epoxy that is forced into the wood grain during the manufacturing process may indeed be a better solution.

[M' Ave 1,466]

A recent e mail about truss construction without gusset plates certainly has raised a concern.This is a major safety issue for all us and certainly should be closely looked at. The use of glue is being used as a substitute for gusset plates and is only a sure sign for failure. Be aware out there!

As if 1/4" long gang nails weren't bad enough......

Good heads up info, thanks!

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Good post Hudson. Be aware brothers and sisters that these have been around for a few years now. I am trying to remember where I read a very good article about them. I believe it was Fire Engineering if I remember correctly but it was probably about 2 years ago. If I can find the issue number I will post it.

Fire Behavior and Building Construction...knowledge of and experience with that leads to good firefighters and great fire officers.

[antiquefirelt 994]

There's a decent Power Point on this. I have it in my office, when I'm this afternoon I'll try and post the link.

[E1E2TL3 0]

Lets see if this link works. 'trusses with no gussets'

http://www.slideshare.net/guest030d82/trus...btype=slideshow

[abaduck 123]

Slight topic-drift, but a related heads-up... anyone come across SIP at a job? Structural Insulated Panels. OSB sandwiched with foam.

This stuff:

http://www.prowall.com/structural_insulated_panels.htm

This is what you can do with them:

http://www.countryplans.com/raby.html

Note the cathedral ceiling; there isn't even a truss there, let alone dimensional lumber joists or rafters; the whole thing relies on the rigidity of the glued-together SIP to stay up.

Mike

[antiquefirelt 994]

Lets see if this link works. 'trusses with no gussets'

http://www.slideshare.net/guest030d82/trus...btype=slideshow

That's the one I was looking for. The low cost affordable housing market is just great isn't it. We definitely need to invest time into making truss marking or other awareness programs a priority for the safety of us and future firefighters.

As for the sandwiched OSB with foam, I worked residential construction back in the late 80's through the mid-90's and we did a few places with these panel. As I remember they were used frequently in post and beam construction., though they may have been plywood then.

Edited October 2, 2008 by antiquefirelt

[markmets415 524]

I just attended a class last Saturday on lightweight building construction and there were several live burns shown on no gussett trusses and also TJI joist which seem to be more of a danger to us. I have a few videos of test burns at the Dutchess County training center on these as well on our website, click the link in my signature and go to videos at the top of the page.

If you can attend I would recommend taking the class, go to the www.fasny.com and click on the training link and it will show up coming training.

Remember585 reports:

We're hosting this class in November at our Station #3.

Fire Concerns for Lightweight Construction

Date: Saturday, November 08 2008

Croton on Hudson Fire Department

30 Wayne St.

Croton on Hudson, NY

[Bnechis 3,961]

>> The low cost affordable housing market is just great isn't it. We definitely need to invest time into making truss marking or other awareness programs a priority for the safety of us and future firefighters. <<

While awarness and markings are nice, what we really need is for all firefighters to show up and vote for changes to the ICC code. As long as the fire service stays out of the codes process, the truss manufactures and Developers will keep voting to keep allowing them. Failure to fight for this means every firefighter is placed in danger for the next 100+ years as they will keep building more and more of these.

If you can attend I would recommend taking the class, go to the www.fasny.com and click on the training link and it will show up coming training.

Great, FASNY is teaching awarness ...what about lobbying to change the NYSUFP&BC to outlaw these killers or would that mean less lobbying time to fight for blue lights and tax breaks.

[hudson144 150]

ok that was the power point that chief hac sent me,its good to view and of course teach with, ty hac

[markmets415 524]

Great, FASNY is teaching awarness ...what about lobbying to change the NYSUFP&BC to outlaw these killers or would that mean less lobbying time to fight for blue lights and tax breaks.

Sorry about using FASNY in my post, I agree about the changes that need to be made, All I was doing was pointing out an excellent class that is out there to educate us about these dangers, not worrying about who is lobbying and what they are lobbying about..

[gamewell45 258]

Great, FASNY is teaching awarness ...what about lobbying to change the NYSUFP&BC to outlaw these killers or would that mean less lobbying time to fight for blue lights and tax breaks.

I honestly think if you can convince them that this is the way to go, they'd most likely give consideration to lobby to change NYSUFP&BC. It would mean arranging a meeting with them and giving them a presentation stating what your trying to accomplish. I don't think you'd have to be a member of FASNY to meet with them and they'd listen to what you have to say.

As far as lobbying for "Blue Lights" and "tax Breaks", I think the blue light issue is more or less resolved for now; as far as the tax break issue(s), I think thats going to be an ongoing lobbying effort long term. However it doesn't mean that they won't lobby other issues simultaneously if they can be convinced that its the right way to go.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I honestly think if you can convince them that this is the way to go, they'd most likely give consideration to lobby to change NYSUFP&BC. It would mean arranging a meeting with them and giving them a presentation stating what your trying to accomplish. I don't think you'd have to be a member of FASNY to meet with them and they'd listen to what you have to say.

They claim to represent 80-90% of the FF's in NYS and of those 90,000 - 100,000+ members no one has ever brought this up? They know this is an issue that kills firefighters (so they are running awarness classes....which is excellent) and they need me to tell them that there is a problem and we should get rid of this killer? If they dont understand this without the efforts of a non member, then what does that say about FASNY and their membership?

As far as lobbying for "Blue Lights" and "tax Breaks", I think the blue light issue is more or less resolved for now; as far as the tax break issue(s), I think thats going to be an ongoing lobbying effort long term. However it doesn't mean that they won't lobby other issues simultaneously if they can be convinced that its the right way to go.

Then the members of FASNY need to step up to the plate and convince them that life safety has to be the 1st priority of all firefighters and then worry about "whats in it for me"

[ex-commish 490]

Then the members of FASNY need to step up to the plate and convince them that life safety has to be the 1st priority of all firefighters and then worry about "whats in it for me"

Excellent point and good topic. Maybe FASNY should lobby the state to incorporate more building construction type classes into FF1.

[antiquefirelt 994]

While awarness and markings are nice, what we really need is for all firefighters to show up and vote for changes to the ICC code. As long as the fire service stays out of the codes process, the truss manufactures and Developers will keep voting to keep allowing them. Failure to fight for this means every firefighter is placed in danger for the next 100+ years as they will keep building more and more of these.

While I agree, I'm far to much of a realist to believe this will ever become a reality for us. I fear the public would rather we took less risk, and let their houses burn than pay what it would cost to use traditional framing methods. Hell, too many firefighters now would rather we took little to no risk, so we're fighting ourselves. Maybe going forward with safer engineered products and rigorous testing under fire conditions would be a progressive step. The ICC and Fire Service just got sprinklers passed which is monumental! Maybe riding the swell of this and moving forward we can do some good. maybe a trade where is you use lightweight trusses you must sprinkler the space. How about requiring some sort of easily accessible attic vent. But get rid of lightweight construction? Not in our lifetime.

[gamewell45 258]

They claim to represent 80-90% of the FF's in NYS and of those 90,000 - 100,000+ members no one has ever brought this up? They know this is an issue that kills firefighters (so they are running awarness classes....which is excellent) and they need me to tell them that there is a problem and we should get rid of this killer? If they dont understand this without the efforts of a non member, then what does that say about FASNY and their membership?

Then the members of FASNY need to step up to the plate and convince them that life safety has to be the 1st priority of all firefighters and then worry about "whats in it for me"

Weighting in on your response, it would seem to me that no matter whether your a member of FASNY or not, being a member of the fire service, if you believe there is a serious safety issue that, with the change of laws, could save lives, you'd be inclined to bring it to the attention of FASNY for discussion irrespective of what you think of the organization or its members. Or perhaps if you don't feel comfortable doing that, perhaps your union could contact FASNY and request in this instance, they form a working partnership to address the issue as it is a common goal that benefits both career, volunteers and the public at large.

Finally-- as i'm sure you'll agree-- the IAFF believes that life safety is a 1st priority, but at the same time, the financial welfare of its members (Whats in it for me) is likewise paramount. I know this because i constantly read this in various labor journals, there are constant battles for safety, benefits and living wages for their members. And while i'm sure safety is no.1 on their list, you can bet the other two items are likewise very high on their lists. In my opinion, FASNY is no different in that aspect. While some may think they are not moving fast enough, they are working to promote safety in the fire service and at the same time keeping the welfare of the volunteers right behind safety.

[JetPhoto 626]

All modern day trusses today suck, they are nothing but firefighter killers! Don't trust any floor or ceiling that has been damaged by fire, they will hurt you.

[Bnechis 3,961]

While I agree, I'm far to much of a realist to believe this will ever become a reality for us. I fear the public would rather we took less risk, and let their houses burn than pay what it would cost to use traditional framing methods.

The bigger problem is the public has no idea that their million dollar McMansion will colapse after 4 minutes of direct fire. My 104 year old house can probably stay standing after 30 min of fire. Since I have a central station alarm and the FD response is 3 min. I'm confident that if I have a fire, there is a good chance my home will still be standing.

But get rid of lightweight construction? Not in our lifetime.

I agree its unlikely, but the fire service has already hoisted the white flag. If we educate the public, push as FF's for code changes and convince the insurance industry that the amount of damage that will occur when we encounter these structures because we can not make the same effort on them, maybe the Insurance industry will say, LW = more insurance. That may drive people to homes that while a little more up front, save money forever.

[antiquefirelt 994]

If we educate the public, push as FF's for code changes and convince the insurance industry that the amount of damage that will occur when we encounter these structures because we can not make the same effort on them, maybe the Insurance industry will say, LW = more insurance.

I definitely agree that the insurance companies could be our best ally in many code issues. If they were to see that we are not going to save nearly as much property in newer homes built of LWC materials, they will probably raise rates. Making this a public campaign to educate the masses that their choices will have significant monetary and safety consequences would force the issue. Similarly, how long before the insurance companies want to raise rates for new homes built without sprinklers? A perfect argument for them, is that most codes now agree that sprinklers need to be installed, but states have allowed exceptions for 1 and 2 family dwellings. Why should they insure homes not built to the letter of the nationally recognized codes for the same rate as others? A larger difference in premiums would help sell the systems. Maybe, the costs are where they should be now and new sprinklered homes should have a reduced rate vs. raising the rates for others.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Similarly, how long before the insurance companies want to raise rates for new homes built without sprinklers? A perfect argument for them, is that most codes now agree that sprinklers need to be installed, but states have allowed exceptions for 1 and 2 family dwellings. Why should they insure homes not built to the letter of the nationally recognized codes for the same rate as others? A larger difference in premiums would help sell the systems. Maybe, the costs are where they should be now and new sprinklered homes should have a reduced rate vs. raising the rates for others.

They already give a discount for any structure with a rated (which means tested and maintained) system, so those without already pay more than those with.

The rate per $1,000 is generally based on construction material (brick is better than twigs), sprinklers and FD rating.

[antiquefirelt 994]

They already give a discount for any structure with a rated (which means tested and maintained) system, so those without already pay more than those with.

The rate per $1,000 is generally based on construction material (brick is better than twigs), sprinklers and FD rating.

True enough, in fact most people are under the false impression (purposefully installed there by the real estate and residential const. industry) that insurance might cost more due to water leak potential. Our state recently studied this and found not one company that increased premiums and an overall 15% average reduction. I'd like to see them increase this premium break as they'll certainly save much more and eventually be insuring greater numbers of safer houses. We've discussed a first year tax incentive program to pass an ordinance in our municipality to require 1 and 2 family dwelling systems in compliance with NFPA 101, 2006 and now the new IRC. Maybe further cooperation with/by the insurance industry could yield results on LW material use, as at this point we're losing the battle on that front.

Edited October 5, 2008 by antiquefirelt