This whole thread kinda makes my a$$ tired. I generally agree with the comments made by Woodman, Rowing, Ron, and JAE. We should not be doing someone’s design for them on this forum, nor should people be coming here expecting that. Those who do should be run out of the forum on a rail, and quickly, because these forums do not offer free design or engineering services. We should be, or might be, giving them ideas to help solve their problem, as Teguci did, without giving them the exact design or answer; and telling them where to dig a little deeper when we think they are going astray, in our opinion. And, good sound opinions, in that vein, generally illicit seconds and thirds, with a little more detail. I’m not a union man, and I don’t think the P.E. behind my name is there primarily to protect my turf. But, I do object strongly to the misapplication and misuse of the terms Professional and Engineer. When you ain’t one, de-puff your chest a little, and tell us who you really are, and you’ll probably get more and better help, assuming you come here with an intelligent, well thought out question. If your question is put together in such a way as to show that you know very little about the subject, but then you get all uppity when called on that, you will probably be given the bums-rush in short order. If on the other hand, the hair dresser down the street wants to know how a beam (that thingie carrying her garage roof over the OH door) works, most of the regulars here will give a very good explanation for that level of understanding. There are way too many people coming here pretending to be something they are not, and I’ve always wondered what that (Struct., Mech. or whatever) behind our handles really means to people. Are they really an engineer of that stripe, or do they just think their question fits that category, but they’re not quite sure? I always thought these were forums for engineers and/or well qualified technical people, doing this work for a living, not as a hobby or a handyman. If you are a designer, drafter, or tech. person, etc. say so; and if you come here with a meaningful question, well thought out, and with enough of the pertinent info. needed for a meaningful discussion, to show that you have some basic understanding of your own problem... you more than likely will generate some good sound discussion and advice for your initial effort.
TPWGM... You did give some info. on your background, so no fault there, but go back and read your OP. The problem info. you give and the details you suggested were left so wanting as to amplify your statement that you were not a Structural Engineer, and it did this in a fairly negative light, and this was not the reader’s fault. You didn’t give it enough engineering thought in the first place, and in retrospect I’ll bet you know that. Without your showing some deeper thought for loading; if it’s 4' wide they will drive a riding mower or a four-wheeler over it; code compliance, hand rails to meet wooden deck criteria, public safety, his yard or not the whole neighborhood will be out their to watch the fireworks over the pond; splices at max. moment point on the beams, etc. etc., what were you thinking, you left yourself wide open. And, as an engineer you should care about your friend’s liability exposure when working on something like this. You did say you had done some structural design, earlier in your career. Many of us would ask, is this guy really an engineer, has he forgotten everything he learned in school, can I even begin to trust that he would apply what I told him in a correct engineering manor, and yet Woodman gave you a perfectly practical answer, and correctly implied that your friend needed an engineer involved in this project. My first reaction to your OP was not to participate in this thread, because the original idea was so ill thought out. Someone needed a 34' beam, but beyond that had little grasp of his problem, and no foundation for it. Stick around, this isn’t intentionally an unfriendly place, but do give your questions some better engineering thought before you post the next time. And, reread some of the threads that stuck in your craw, and see if some of what I’m ranting about above wasn’t the reason for the rough treatment.
As for anonymity on this sight, I’m with Woodman again, and I’ve expressed that several times before. While we assume some anonymity here, what you say here could easily come back to haunt you, so you better be able to defend it. I’ve had stuff read back to me in court, which I said in a depo. or at trial ten years ago, and then had to explain why that didn’t apply here, in this case. While it may be pretty shallow lawyering to assume that any advice given here could be relied upon for a final design. If push came to shove I suspect that lawyer would have Teguci’s name, address, e-mail, etc. in short order and then you could spend your time and money defending your advice and proving that that lawyer’s reasoning was shallower than the pond in question here.
