CurlyDave
Elite Member
I have to confess, I didn't design the deck myself. The general contractor who built it just made it that strong, possibly because he had worked with me for a few months before he built the deck.
The deck certainly seems stable, but I know that doesn't really mean very much.
I think its stability comes from the fact that there is an OSB diaphram under the concrete and tile. It acts just like a shear wall, lying on its side instead of standing upright. This stiffens the deck in the horizontal plane, preventing the outboard edge from moving in a direction parallel to the inboard edge. Cross bracing the posts would certainly be another way to get stiffness in this plane, but I think the OSB is sufficient.
There is a very substantial retaining wall/foundation along the south side of the house, which can be seen in the picture which includes the garage doors. Even though the wall is very tall, it was engineered and then I asked the subcontractor who built it to double the amount of re-bar in it. He balked at that, because it would involve a huge number of pieces, so we compromised. Everywhere the engineer called for #4 bar we used #5, and where he wanted #5, we used #6.
The floor inside the house is at he same level as the deck and again acts as a diaphram stiffening the structure of the house at exactly the attachment plane of the deck.
One of the pictures shows the attachment detail of the header to the retaining wall. There is a heavy steel seat for the beam, secured to the retaining wall by eight 3/4" bolts. I think the weakest part is that the beam itself is only secured to the bracket with two 3/4" bolts through the bracket.
The place where the grout is deteriorating the worst is very near where the beam is attached to the retaining wall, which is the spot I would expect the least movement in the deck.
If anyone can educate me as to why I am wrong, I would love to hear it, because it would solve the problem.
The deck certainly seems stable, but I know that doesn't really mean very much.
I think its stability comes from the fact that there is an OSB diaphram under the concrete and tile. It acts just like a shear wall, lying on its side instead of standing upright. This stiffens the deck in the horizontal plane, preventing the outboard edge from moving in a direction parallel to the inboard edge. Cross bracing the posts would certainly be another way to get stiffness in this plane, but I think the OSB is sufficient.
There is a very substantial retaining wall/foundation along the south side of the house, which can be seen in the picture which includes the garage doors. Even though the wall is very tall, it was engineered and then I asked the subcontractor who built it to double the amount of re-bar in it. He balked at that, because it would involve a huge number of pieces, so we compromised. Everywhere the engineer called for #4 bar we used #5, and where he wanted #5, we used #6.
The floor inside the house is at he same level as the deck and again acts as a diaphram stiffening the structure of the house at exactly the attachment plane of the deck.
One of the pictures shows the attachment detail of the header to the retaining wall. There is a heavy steel seat for the beam, secured to the retaining wall by eight 3/4" bolts. I think the weakest part is that the beam itself is only secured to the bracket with two 3/4" bolts through the bracket.
The place where the grout is deteriorating the worst is very near where the beam is attached to the retaining wall, which is the spot I would expect the least movement in the deck.
If anyone can educate me as to why I am wrong, I would love to hear it, because it would solve the problem.