When did builders start using OSB for floor joists?

[SMS]

We looked at some houses today and since some in the development are not
complete I walked in and looked at the construction quality.

I thought that floor joists were normally 2x6es or 2 x 8s, and was
amazed to see that they were using a piece of OSB sandwiched between
what looked like two 2x3s.

<http://i46.tinypic.com/14uhopl.jpg>. You can see that this "joist" is
inserted into Simpson joist hangers and it looks rather absurd to me.

You can't see it in that picture, but the sub-floor above the joists is
screwed down to the 2x3s, but about 3/4 of the screws missed the 2x3 and
went into nothing. It looked like they used liquid nails as well.

BTW, they are asking around $700K for these houses, which are right next
to a noisy freeway.

[Oren]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:28:06 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

I believe those are called "I-Joists". Very strong actually. The
construction method gives them strength while being easier to handle
and install.... liquid nails reduces squeaks in the floor above.
Screws or nails need to be placed, spaced correctly.

Think I-beam. I see nothing wrong in the construction.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:28:06 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

Been around about 40 years.

Aside from missed screws, it is good construction. Straighter,
stronger and cheaper than solid wood.

The use of liquid nails for the sub-floor helps prevent squeaks in a
few years. Adhesives are rather strong.

http://www.homeadditionplus.com/framing-info/Engineered-Wood-I-Beams-vs-Sawn-Lumber.htm
Engineered wood I-beams were first introduced in the late 1960's and
were used mainly for high-end home construction. However, today up to
half the homes built in the United States now use engineered wood
I-beams. Engineered wood I-beams are considered an excellent
alternative to sawn lumber for floor joists due to their strength and
overall lower installation costs.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:28:06 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

The "engineered Joists" work pretty well - and reduce the
requirement for old growth timber - but missing the joists with the
screws??? I'd run the other way. Sounds like a cheapskate shoddy
builder passing off substandard workmanship at a high quality price.

[DD_BobK]

TJ-I's "Wooden I-beams" from Truss Joist.

Visit their website and take a look at all the "engineered" wood
products.
LVL, LSL, etc

In many (if not most) cases, engineered wood products are stronger,
stiffer, straighter and drier than sawn lumber.
Plus engineered wood conserves timber resources & allows the use of a
wider range of species.
(Driving factors in the development & use of OSB)

For rectangular sections (and members in general), member strength &
stiffness are roughly proportional to wood density.
Engineered wood products typically have more wood per cubic inch than
natural wood.

I recently purchased an engineered 4 x 10 x 8 (actually 3-1/2 x 9-1/2
x 8') ... only $36 including tax
It was WAY stiffer, stronger & drier than a similarly sized piece of
sawn lumber.
Plus I didn't have to deal with the nearly 3/8" of cross grain
shrinkage that a green sawn 4 x 10 would have experienced.

Any extra cost was easily offset by performance improvements

Don't let the poor assembly workmanship taint your opinion of the
materials.

cheers
Bob

[harry]

Been common in Europe for years. Called engineered timber over here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_Lumber

Lots of different components are made.

[Tim Watts]

<Deja-vu/>Didn't we do this a couple of months back


--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

[George]

On 2/17/2013 12:28 AM, SMS wrote:
> We looked at some houses today and since some in the development are not
> complete I walked in and looked at the construction quality.
>
> I thought that floor joists were normally 2x6es or 2 x 8s, and was
> amazed to see that they were using a piece of OSB sandwiched between
> what looked like two 2x3s.
>
> <http://i46.tinypic.com/14uhopl.jpg>. You can see that this "joist" is
> inserted into Simpson joist hangers and it looks rather absurd to me.

Do you also thing say a typical truss bridge as used for a road or
railway is absurd?

[k...@attt.bizz]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:28:06 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

If you didn't live in such a hell hole, you wouldn't need to spend
$700K for a piece of shit.

[recycl...@gmail.com]

I seriously doubt that they would stand-up well
to getting wet as they are bound to do
sooner or later if there is a leak somewhere some day,
and labor to repair them isn’t relatively cheap
here in the U.S. like it is in Europe.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 10:05:06 -0800 (PST), recycl...@gmail.com
wrote:

>
>I seriously doubt that they would stand-up well
>to getting wet as they are bound to do
>sooner or later if there is a leak somewhere some day,
>and labor to repair them isn’t relatively cheap
>here in the U.S. like it is in Europe.

There is risk and reward with every decision and every choice we make.
Personally, I cannot think of a single instance in my life where they
would have been wet enough to be damaged. I'm sure somewhere at some
time they were. But it is not enough to make me think not to use
them.

[Jim Elbrecht]

recycl...@gmail.com wrote:

-snip-

>I seriously doubt that they would stand-up well
>to getting wet as they are bound to do
>sooner or later if there is a leak somewhere some day,
>and labor to repair them isn’t relatively cheap
>here in the U.S. like it is in Europe.

Since those beams have been around [in the US] for 40 years, I think
they've proven they hold up 'well enough'.

As for OSB-- I had a 3/4" pice covering a sump hole in my basement for
5-6 years. Now backing, framing, or protection from moisture. An
18" square hole covered with a 30" square chunk of OSB. I stepped in
the middle of it regularly. When I finally got around to covering
the floor and making a proper cover, that piece kicked around in the
garage for years as I whittled it down for various small pieces.

OSB does a lot better than it looks like it ought to do.

Jim

[George]

On 2/17/2013 12:53 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:28:06 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We looked at some houses today and since some in the development are not
>> complete I walked in and looked at the construction quality.
>>
>> I thought that floor joists were normally 2x6es or 2 x 8s, and was
>> amazed to see that they were using a piece of OSB sandwiched between
>> what looked like two 2x3s.
>>
>> <http://i46.tinypic.com/14uhopl.jpg>. You can see that this "joist" is
>> inserted into Simpson joist hangers and it looks rather absurd to me.
>>
>> You can't see it in that picture, but the sub-floor above the joists is
>> screwed down to the 2x3s, but about 3/4 of the screws missed the 2x3 and
>> went into nothing. It looked like they used liquid nails as well.
>>
>> BTW, they are asking around $700K for these houses, which are right next
>> to a noisy freeway.
>
> Been around about 40 years.
>
> Aside from missed screws, it is good construction. Straighter,
> stronger and cheaper than solid wood.
>
> The use of liquid nails for the sub-floor helps prevent squeaks in a
> few years. Adhesives are rather strong.

I imagine that if the was ever on an commercial aircraft they would be
rather upset to learn that a great deal of modern aircraft structures
are bonded together with adhesives.

[k...@attt.bizz]

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 18:50:27 -0500, Jim Elbrecht <elbr...@email.com>
wrote:

As long as it doesn't get soggy it's fine. For decking I'd spend the
extra for plywood. There's too much chance of water on floors. OSB
doesn't hold nails well, either, so it's iffy for sheathing. There
doesn't seem to be much downside to the beams. They seem to be coated
with a waterproofing that should repel water that may come in contact
with them (leaks, and such).

[DD_BobK]

Years ago... nearly 20, I did some work for a grumpy old structural
engineer.

He hated OSB, he thought OSB was junk.
He paid me to build and test some cripple walls.

We used full dimension old timber for framing and a number of
sheathing materials.
We used plywood on some specimens & OSB on others.
We "over drove" the sheathing nails, we left the specimens outside &
"watered them" everyday for weeks.

Much to his dismay... the OSB sheathed cripple walls (watered or
unwatered, over driven or flush driven nails) all performed just fine.

We came away with a new respect to OSB.

TImber structures are designed & built to keep the materials dry, they
do get wet at times but even sawn lumber has its limits.

OSB is good product, you can use it without concern.

I built a "temporary" shed out of OSB. I never painted it.
It weathered about 8 years in SoCal...not a huge amount of rain (~15
inches pre year on average but a couple years with 20"+)

The surface of the OSB suffered a bit & generated some roughness but
no delimitation & no loss of strength.

cheers
Bob

[DD_BobK]

On Feb 17, 4:03 pm, k...@attt.bizz wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 18:50:27 -0500, Jim Elbrecht <elbre...@email.com>
> wrote:

Urban legend ... I've done the testing.

http://netinfo.ladbs.org/ladbsec.nsf/d3450fd072c7344c882564e5005d0db4/180e63b3b0caa3e588256b200081a4f3/$FILE/CoLA_Rpt.pdf

If anyone is interested, I could probably find an electronic copy of
the report & attendant data.

It's fine for sheathing. Visit APA website for information about OSB.

cheers
Bob

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 22:48:49 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK <rkaz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

What is sold as OSB today IS significantly better than the old
"Aspenite" "Chipboard" crap. There is more resin in it - and a better
grade as far as water resistance is concerned.

[recycl...@gmail.com]

When I see and smell genuine lumber
I KNOW that what’s in it is pure Mother Nature.
With OSB you can’t tell if and or how much of what is in it.

[HerHusband]

> As long as it doesn't get soggy it's fine. For decking I'd spend the
> extra for plywood. There's too much chance of water on floors.

I used 1-1/4" T&G OSB flooring for our house (Don't recall the brand now).
It's strong and doesn't have voids like plywood does. They also put some
kind of coating on the sheets (wax?) that repels water nicely. Ours was
exposed to rain for 3-4 months during construction. The water would bead up
on top and we would just sweep it off each morning.

I'm sure long term water exposure would cause rot, but you would get that
with regular plywood also.

> OSB doesn't hold nails well, either, so it's iffy for sheathing.

I used CDX plywood for our roof sheathing because it's slightly stronger
than OSB, and because it's lighter and was easier to carry up to the roof.

I also used CDX plywood for our wall sheathing, because I wanted a rough
sawn face for simulated board and batten (even though we decided not to
install the battens). I didn't care for the look of the textured OSB
plywood.

Otherwise, I usually use OSB and CDX interchangeably. OSB is usually
cheaper, so I tend to use it where appearance isn't an issue.

Anthony Watson
Mountain Software
www.mountain-software.com/about.htm

[k...@attt.bizz]

On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 22:48:49 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK <rkaz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

So have I. In my own houses. It sucks.

>http://netinfo.ladbs.org/ladbsec.nsf/d3450fd072c7344c882564e5005d0db4/180e63b3b0caa3e588256b200081a4f3/$FILE/CoLA_Rpt.pdf
>
>If anyone is interested, I could probably find an electronic copy of
>the report & attendant data.
>
>It's fine for sheathing. Visit APA website for information about OSB.

If you get the nails into the framing, it's fine. Otherwise it sucks.

[k...@attt.bizz]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:46:39 +0000 (UTC), HerHusband
<unk...@unknown.com> wrote:

>> As long as it doesn't get soggy it's fine. For decking I'd spend the
>> extra for plywood. There's too much chance of water on floors.
>
>I used 1-1/4" T&G OSB flooring for our house (Don't recall the brand now).
>It's strong and doesn't have voids like plywood does. They also put some
>kind of coating on the sheets (wax?) that repels water nicely. Ours was
>exposed to rain for 3-4 months during construction. The water would bead up
>on top and we would just sweep it off each morning.

OSB or particle board? I've seen some nice T&G engineered subflooring
(decided to use 3/4" ply, though). It's a *long* way from the crap
they use for sheathing.

>I'm sure long term water exposure would cause rot, but you would get that
>with regular plywood also.

Sure, I just worry about the bathroom. I've had ply disintegrate due
to a very slow unseen leak. Termite barf will be worse.

[DD_BobK]

On Feb 18, 2:35 pm, k...@attt.bizz wrote:

>So have I. In my own houses. It sucks. <<

You've built structures, instrumented them and tested them to
destruction?

SNIP

> If you get the nails into the framing, it's fine.  Otherwise it sucks. <<<

And where are sheathing nails supposed to go?

OSB is a decent product, especially when you consider its price and
utilization of a wide range of wood specimen.

[cl...@snyder.on.ca]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:06:22 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK <rkaz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

And where do roofing nails go? When using OSB roof sheathing.

[DD_BobK]

On Feb 18, 7:48 pm, cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:06:22 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK <rkaza...@gmail.com>

Good point about roof sheathing..my bad.
I was thinking floor diaphragms & shear walls.

but I stand by my comment...

OSB is a decent product, especially when you consider its price and
utilization of a wide range of wood specimen.

check out
http://www.gp.com/build/pageviewer.aspx?repository=bp&elementid=6132
http://bct.eco.umass.edu/publications/by-title/choosing-between-oriented-strandboard-and-plywood/

[tra...@optonline.net]

> check outhttp://www.gp.com/build/pageviewer.aspx?repository=bp&elementid=6132http://bct.eco.umass.edu/publications/by-title/choosing-between-orien...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


From what I've seen in some looking at plywood vs OSB
for roof sheathing, I tend to agree. Most info indicated that
they had similar and certainly acceptable nail holding ability.
Another data point would be the shingle manufacturers.
You would think that if OSB were not acceptable and
plywood was preferred, they would have something to say
on the subject. I have not seen one that says you can't
use OSB.

[HerHusband]

>> I used 1-1/4" T&G OSB flooring for our house

> OSB or particle board? I've seen some nice T&G engineered subflooring
> (decided to use 3/4" ply, though).

I guess my memory is failing me. After looking through our building photos
(from 2003) it appears we used 3/4" Structurwood Gold OSB T&G subflooring.

In any case, when nailed to the joists with construction adhesive it made a
rock solid floor. We didn't notice any edge swelling or other issues
despite being exposed to the weather for a few months during construction.

> It's a *long* way from the crap they use for sheathing.

Many years ago my father-in-law closed in his carport with "waferwood".
Kind of a really cheap version of OSB. Surprisingly, other than looking
terrible, it held up fairly well to nearly 30 years of weather exposure.

[nestork]

"OSB is a decent product, especially when you consider its price and
utilization of a wide range of wood specimen."

I don't want to be a stickler for details, but I think you meant to
say:

"OSB is a decent product, especially when you consider its price and

utilization of a wide range of wood species."

Here in Canada, we've had huge areas planted with only one kind of tree
laid to waste by the Formosan Pine Beetle. Having multiple species of
pine, spruce, fir and other fast growing coniferious trees not only
slows the spread of such parasites, but it helps the forest recover
better after after an attack.

Ditto for agriculture. Mixed farming is the most sustainable form of
agriculture. It's not great for maximizing profits, but it prevents any
one parasite from destroying the farmer's whole crop, and that's good
for sustainability.




--
nestork

[k...@attt.bizz]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 16:06:22 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK <rkaz...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Feb 18, 2:35�pm, k...@attt.bizz wrote:
>
>>So have I. In my own houses. It sucks. <<
>
>You've built structures, instrumented them and tested them to
>destruction?

I've pulled siding nails out with my bare fingers. That's enough
"instrumentation" for me.

>SNIP
>
>> If you get the nails into the framing, it's fine. �Otherwise it sucks. <<<
>
>And where are sheathing nails supposed to go?

Where are the siding nails supposed to go, moron?

>OSB is a decent product, especially when you consider its price and
>utilization of a wide range of wood specimen.

It's crap, you're right, it's cheap crap.

[Rondog]

replying to SMS, Rondog wrote:
I first saw it built into our then new 100k sq ft.building back in 1990 here
in calif. We thought it was sketchy but the building is still there. However
when we walked on the roof, there was a noticeable bounce to our steps.

--
posted from
http://www.homeownershub.com/maintenance/when-did-builders-start-using-osb-for-floor-joists-736968-.htm

[Harry K]

On Saturday, February 16, 2013 at 9:49:25 PM UTC-8, Oren wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:28:06 -0800, SMS <scharf...@geemail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >We looked at some houses today and since some in the development are not
> >complete I walked in and looked at the construction quality.
> >
> >I thought that floor joists were normally 2x6es or 2 x 8s, and was
> >amazed to see that they were using a piece of OSB sandwiched between
> >what looked like two 2x3s.
> >
> ><http://i46.tinypic.com/14uhopl.jpg>. You can see that this "joist" is
> >inserted into Simpson joist hangers and it looks rather absurd to me.
> >
> >You can't see it in that picture, but the sub-floor above the joists is
> >screwed down to the 2x3s, but about 3/4 of the screws missed the 2x3 and
> >went into nothing. It looked like they used liquid nails as well.
> >
> >BTW, they are asking around $700K for these houses, which are right next
> >to a noisy freeway.
>

> I believe those are called "I-Joists". Very strong actually. The
> construction method gives them strength while being easier to handle
> and install.... liquid nails reduces squeaks in the floor above.
> Screws or nails need to be placed, spaced correctly.
>
> Think I-beam. I see nothing wrong in the construction.

It is actually stronger and better than 2x6, 8, or 10 as they are all identical and stronger.

Those type joists have been in use since at least the 1960s.

[Harry K]

But then it is not meant to have driving "into" it, only through it.

Same as gyp rock.

[Harry K]

And they hold just fine in that use.

[trader_4]

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 3:35:51 PM UTC-4, Harry K wrote:
sucks.
>
> But then it is not meant to have driving "into" it, only through it.
>
> Same as gyp rock.

I bet if you look hard enough, you can find some more 13 year old
posts to reply to.

[hrho...@att.net]

I don't know how you count, but using the common counting mode in use here it is only 3 years.