Ep 42 Awesome Framers Pt. 1

Episode Overview

• This episode features a live Q&A with structural engineers Max and Zach, aimed at bridging the communication gap between engineering design and practical field application for builders and framers.
• The hosts address the common builder complaint of "over-engineering," explaining that stricter specifications are typically driven by evolving building codes based on new data from seismic events and testing.
• The conversation delves into a variety of technical topics, comparing materials like OSB and plywood, explaining the strength of different anchors, and contrasting the fire performance of steel versus heavy timber.
• A central theme is the importance of collaboration, with the engineers encouraging builders to ask questions and propose alternative solutions to find efficient, structurally sound methods.

Key Concepts

• Engineering vs. Field Practice: The session explores the disconnect between engineering plans and on-site construction realities, highlighting the need for better communication to resolve common points of friction.
• Building Code Evolution: Stricter engineering requirements are not arbitrary but are a direct result of updated building codes, which improve based on data from real-world events like earthquakes and advanced lab testing.
• Material Properties and Performance: The discussion contrasts manufactured materials like OSB, valued for consistency, with natural products like plywood. It also compares the fire-resistance of heavy timber (which chars and insulates) to steel (which quickly loses strength at high temperatures).
• Engineered Connections: A core principle is that engineered connections—such as finger joints in studs, epoxy, or welds—are designed to be stronger than the base materials they join.
• Anchor Strength and Failure: Cast-in-place anchors are generally stronger than post-installed epoxy anchors because they engage a much larger "breakout cone" of concrete, distributing force more effectively.
• Designing for Realistic Loads: Buildings are typically engineered for a 50-year life cycle against probable wind and seismic loads, not for extreme, unpredictable events like a direct tornado strike, which would require impractical and cost-prohibitive construction.

Quotes

• At 1:16 - "'I know you guys like me have a ton of questions about engineering, or just we don't understand a lot of this stuff.'" - Tim Uhler setting the premise for the Q&A, explaining why he invited the engineers to speak directly to his audience of builders.
• At 5:10 - "'How do you guys get so good at over-engineering?'" - Tim Uhler sharing a humorous but common question from builders, which kicks off a discussion on the perception that engineers unnecessarily complicate designs.
• At 6:22 - "'It's just the code's changing... and after every earthquake that we have in the United States... the better our code gets 'cause we have better data and more testing.'" - Zach explaining that stricter engineering requirements are not arbitrary but are driven by learning from structural failures and improving safety standards.
• At 13:15 - "'When you go to the craftsmen in the field... they're the ones building it, they know the best efficiencies for their crew.'" - Zach acknowledging the practical expertise of builders and emphasizing the value of collaboration to find the most effective building solutions.
• At 22:23 - "The breakout cone of a cast-in-place anchor is way bigger than an epoxy... it breaks out of concrete is much more vertical. It is a failure right outside of the epoxy zone." - Detailing why cast-in-place anchors are stronger because they engage a much larger volume of concrete than post-installed anchors.
• At 27:38 - "With a glulam, wood does this really cool thing where it chars and it insulates itself, as long as the fire is not... you have to burn out whatever is burning." - Contrasting the failure of steel in a fire with the self-insulating properties of heavy timber, which allows it to maintain structural capacity longer.
• At 44:10 - "If you wanted a house to withstand a tornado, it would be the ugliest house you have ever seen." - Emphasizing the extreme and impractical structural measures needed to resist tornado-force winds in a conventional home.

Takeaways

• Proactively communicate with the design engineer if a specified detail seems inefficient; they are often open to collaborating on alternative solutions that meet structural requirements.
• View changes in building codes and engineering standards not as arbitrary complications, but as safety improvements based on new data and a better understanding of structural performance.
• Respect the specificity of engineered connections and material callouts, as they are based on technical principles of force distribution that may not be intuitive.
• Understand that conventional buildings are designed to meet code for a standard life cycle and predictable stresses, not to withstand the catastrophic forces of extreme events like tornados.