FINISHED IN 2020! Sharward's Partial Garage Conversion

i'm not sure what you're using, but i recommend a "speed changer" type set for the drill ... it's pretty awesome. i only just discovered it in the last couple months. i'll put pix on my thread later if you are interested. also, speaking of cheap ryobi gear, did you see the electric caulk gun they have for $40 ... i bet your same battery will fit that ... aw hell i may have to get one myself, nobody else seems to care ...

I'm familiar with the quick changer type devices -- I have one and I do use it at times. 8) I did see a power caulk gun there, but I recalled the price was much higher. You know, each store has different stuff. I'm very interested in it though -- for $40? Bleh, what's that in the grand scheme of things? :roll: (It's precisely that type of thinking that gets me into trouble though! :lol:) --Keith :mrgreen:

Holy crap -- I just passed 2,500 posts! :shock:

LoL.... At first I thought you were driving in your car, and just passed a fence -- with 2500 posts... Anyway, did someone say they saw a power caulking gun for 40 USD? Ryobi? does it look of decent quality? K

sharward wrote:

Holy crap -- I just passed 2,500 posts! :shock:

yes, i saw one at HD pro in Colma (san francsico area) a few months ago for $40 ... but no idea on the quality. i was spending enough $$ on the hammer drill and bits so i didn't bite ... :) .. but in general i like Ryobi stuff, i've had good luck so far. the hammer drill has already been abused with dull bits :oops: but survived

Dan Fitzpatrick wrote:

yes, i saw one at HD pro in Colma (san francsico area)

Home Depot has separate PRO stores now??? Somehow it rings of something like McDonald's 'Bistro'... We don't have any of those stores around here, do we?.... K

Framing starts today! Unless you count the soleplates that I cut and positioned last weekend... But I like to think of the upward work as being the official start of framing! :lol: I called the city building department yesterday to ask a question: "Does code allow me to use screws instead of nails for my framing?" It appears the answer is "No." All the documentation I have found, including the packet stapled to my building permit, all call for nails, and of course there are specific nail patterns to follow, depending on what you're joining and how. Unfortunately, screws appear not to be an option. :( This is rather disappointing, because although screwing tends to take longer than nailing, it's a nice copout for someone like me who lacks experience, and frankly, confidence, with things like this. The nice thing about screws is that they can be undone pretty easily, whereas nails are a lot less friendly about being removed. I'm also disappointed with Home Depot and their crappy nail selection... :evil: ...yesterday I went to buy nails and they did not have any "common" galvanized nails. :x All they had in galvanized were "box" nails. (Dan discussed the advantages of the thicker "common" nails in his thread last month.) Apparently one must use galvanized nails with pressure treated wood so that the chemicals in the PT lumber won't corrode the nails. :shock: (Fortuately I did find some common non-galvanized nails for the framing that does not include the pressure treated stuff.) I also found Home Depot's selection of masonry nails to be most disappointing... :x ...I wanted to get my hands on some 2 1/2" long ones so that I can attach a small section of soleplate to the floor where the outer leaf door will go (hinge side), since there are no J-bolts in that corner. (Oops... :oops:) The longest they had was 2". I read in one of my books that you don't want to drive a masonry nail more than 1" into the concrete, else you risk damaging the concrete -- but I doubt 1/2" is enough. (The soleplates are 1 1/2" thick -- so I was hoping to drive a few into the soleplates and then into the outer leaf foundation an inch further, hence the need for 2 1/2" nails.) When the weather heats up today, I may venture out to a real building center to see what they've got. So, the plan for today is removing some ceiling drywall in the garage to expose the bottom chords of the roof trusses so that I can attach my top plates for the new outer leaf walls. That laser level is going to work out really well for this. 8) Depending on how long that takes, I may be able to get some studs in place too. That would be great -- it will really start looking like I'm actually accomplishing something if I get some studs up! ;-) Wish me luck and look forward to some pictures later today. --Keith :mrgreen:

oh my god, this code your following seems like a real pain in the butt. No screws? huh that's just :shock: unbeleivable. Maybe if you screw them first with just one or two screws and than bang them together with nails and then remove the screws, just to make sure you get right at the first place? You should, if you could, get something like the metal stud-spacer, that'd give you exact distances between studs. good luck! a :P

The prohibition of screws actually has merit.

Nails are the preferred fasteners for several reasons. They cost less to install than screws and are easier to install . . . Engineers prefer nails because they are generally more ductile than screws. Better ductility mean better absorption of seismic energy. (Source)

Remember -- I'm in earthquake country. (Kind of -- actually, my part of the state is pretty stable.) I do intend to cut a spacer 14 1/2" spacer block to make stud placement easier, and I have read about techniques to minimize shifting while toenailing the studs. :) I have a coworker who experienced the 1994 Northridge earthquake -- the most damaging quake in our country since the famous San Francisco earthquake of 1906. His house was nearly destroyed and much of his famiy was home when the quake struck. He had no earthquake insurance, so they took out a massive loan to do the repairs. His story is the scariest I have ever heard first hand. Moments before the quake struck, their newborn was in his crib. Fortunately, his wife was holding the baby when the quake hit, and the ceiling collapsed onto and into the crib! :shock: The FEMA inspector told him that his house was the most badly damaged he had ever seen that was somehowstill on its foundation. The Northridge quake was one of many pivitol points in the evolution of building codes in our state. "Post-quake investigations revealed that some structural specifications did not perform as well as expected. Because of this building codes were revised" (Source). I guess the point I'm making is that our codes are in place for a reason, and we shouldn't pretend to be smarter than they are. ;-) Yes, it can be frustrating at times, and when I get frustrated, I'll whine a little. :lol: --Keith :mrgreen:

Keith: I'm finding all this code stuff about screws versus nails very interesting.... also wondering if there weren't other factors in the code's choices.... I'm led to understand how many people use drywall screws in many framing scenarios, over using nails, thinking that they are 'better' (btw, do we see Sonic Clang using drywall screws on framing in those videos?)... Wonder if the code is precluding ANY screws, including deck screws, partly because of this? But I guess it's all in allowing some movements in the structure that screws might not be able to allow as easily, unless the design takes into consideration the need for (and makes the appropriate member changes and adjustments) specific deflections, expansions, contractions, tensions, or whatever the seismic forces require... It would seem to me that it's because construction might be more easy using nails to get the sympathetic movements during an earthquake, than using screws and making the adjustments to framing (perhaps such as slotting screw holes, adding deflection plates, etc.)... If that were right, then it might just be that a 'variance' for using screws could be had -- if the structure's plans were engineered for them? What I think they may be after is avoidance 'brash' failures with the structure that could more likely cause injury to the occupants, and NOT necessarily to protect the structure itself (unless any protection to the structure also protects the occupants). Abrupt failures might be the worst kind of failures, since they don't give warning to people; this is despite the fact that an abrupt failure might come after a much greater degree of 'trauma' (?)... So, maybe in a earthquake, a structure that doesn't move might give a 'false' sense of security, and that may be part of the code's philosophy? Not forgetting that have something have 'a little give' is a good thing -- just look at the treess during wind storms; if they didn't sway like they do they would come down (and they still sometimes do come down because they can only allow so much give and still be strong enough to stand up when there is no storm); maybe there is a balance between give and stiffness that is ideal?? K

sharward wrote:

The prohibition of screws actually has merit.

Nails are the preferred fasteners for several reasons. They cost less to install than screws and are easier to install . . . Engineers prefer nails because they are generally more ductile than screws. Better ductility mean better absorption of seismic energy. (Source)

Remember -- I'm in earthquake country. (Kind of -- actually, my part of the state is pretty stable.) ... I do intend to cut a spacer 14 1/2" spacer block to make stud placement easier, and I have read about techniques to minimize shifting while toenailing the studs. :) .... I guess the point I'm making is that our codes are in place for a reason, and we shouldn't pretend to be smarter than they are. ;-) Yes, it can be frustrating at times, and when I get frustrated, I'll whine a little. :lol: --Keith :mrgreen:

From what I have been reading, nails are superior to screws for wood framing. Bear in mind that there are four properties to a nail and screw: shear strength, tensile strength, yield strength, and resistance to pullout. While screws may typically win over nails in regards to pullout, think about the others. So, my first day of framing was kind of boring -- because I didn't do any framing! :lol: All I really had the time for today was exposure of the trusses. That was actually more work than I had anticipated (what else is new! ;-)). My fancy cutter drill bit didn't work too well in the drywall. :roll: I considered using a jigsaw, but doing that overhead on a 10 foot ceiling just didn't seem safe... And considering that I encountered two locations with electrical wires, I'm glad I didn't go that route. Instead I used a little manual drywall saw, so we're talking about cutting overhead -- awkward and uncomfortable, especially for this weakling. :evil: Here are the pics... Not too exciting, but hey, it's progress! 8) This light fixture was in the way, so I had to move it. The "hole size to effort ratio" is, unfortunately, quite low... :( The hardest part is over -- cutting a 22.5" wide hole while taking care not to damage the steel strips... Eye protection and a dust mask are necessary when doing this kind of demolition. What a mess! That's quite possibly the ugliest photo ever taken of me. ;-) Behold -- this dirty part of the project appears to be complete! 8) Tomorrow I'll actually cut some lumber! :twisted: I've become a little worried about the steel furring strips. Until now I've referred to it has "hat channel," but now that I can actually see it, I don't know. It looks really wimpy to me. :roll: I'm not sure I want to put another layer of 5/8" drywall on it! :shock: Here are a couple of close-ups of the channel... Important to note is that it only has a single leg. I assume it's attached to teach truss, which is 24" o.c. There are a few nails in the drywall that go up into the trusses, but mostly at the perimeter of the garage. Assuming I proceed with adding the 2nd layer, I think I'll drive screws through the first layer along the trusses, and then add the 2nd layer and drive screws through the channel and the trusses. My instincts tell me that I should get this thing identified and spec'd so that I know for a fact what kind of weight it is designed to hold. I will need to remove 4" pieces of it to provide clearance for the top plates I'll be installing tomorrow, so that should make ID'ing it a lot easier. --Keith :mrgreen:

sharward wrote:

From what I have been reading, nails are superior to screws for wood framing. Bear in mind that there are four properties to a nail and screw: shear strength, tensile strength, yield strength, and resistance to pullout. While screws may typically win over nails in regards to pullout, think about the others. manual drywall saw, so we're talking about cutting overhead -- awkward and uncomfortable, especially for this weakling. :evil:

Code is code... Although, according to this article, shear strength (of equivalent sized fasteners) seems to be at least the same.... http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgt ... gtr113.htm (also, an interesting discussion here, with the engineer at the end making a claim)? http://www.contractortalk.com/showthread.php?t=2645 I think, for me, the jury is still a bit out on which is better; it would almost certainly have to depend some extent to the quality of the screw/nail..... no? After all, for shear, they are both largely just 'pins'?... I'm still somehow thinking that the relative ease of withdrawal of the nails contributes to it's ability to give... and so that this contributes alot to their ductility... (I've seen plenty of bent screws before... although probably more bent nails -- yet this could be just because they are more frequently pounded than are screws?)... K

I think it all comes down to shear strength. Failures are probably not llikely to be withdrawal because that's probably not where the stresses are. --Keith :mrgreen:

as Knightfly mentioned in my thread, the actual solid part of a deck or drywall screw is pretty thin compared to a fat common nail. also, i've seen screws snap, but not nails. also, nailing is a million times faster and easier than screwing. ok maybe slight exaggeration. :) when framing i recommend generous use of sharpie marking on the plates, showing both edges of where the stud is to go along with an "x" in the middle, to avoid mistakes. measure out your markings on one plate, then match top and bottom plates together and simply copy those markings over to the other plate using a square. if you are worried about making mistakes, leave 3/8 of an inch or so of the nail out until you have re-inspected and feel like you are doing it right. that's what i did the first couple of frames ... then i quit because i got more confident. and, get a framing (waffle head) hammer at least 19 oz, that's what i have, it makes a big difference ... don't try to use an ordinary household hammer. now that i've used my 19oz for a while i'm almost ready to go heavier. i too wanted to use screws before i had started in on this job, now that i've used both, i prefer the nails, it's just much faster. on anything, large or small. not to mention cheaper. i'm on my third 5 pound box of framing nails already. they go fast.

Without looking for a lot of links, etc, this partly depends on the type of screw; a standard wood screw may have a long enough full-diameter section near the head so that its cross-section is at least as thick as a nail would be; but some of the "bugle head" types for sheet rock, etc, are threaded all the way to the head so the effective cross-section is smaller. Unless some wonder-metal is used for that type screw, it would have lower shear strength than a nail. Next thing is purpose; if you're hanging things from the ceiling, like hat channel, RC, etc, then screw win because pull-out is important. But for framing, shear strength is more important if the framing isn't done wrong. As a general rule, a properly done frame should stand on its own with NO NAILS in it (assuming no wind, good balance, etc) - IOW, each frame member should have something below it to keep gravity from doing its thing - the nails are mostly there to keep things from shifting. Otherwise, the ENTIRE weight of whatever you're building will be supported by these 2 or 3 little metal thingies - dunno 'bout you, but I'm not interested in betting my life on that :cry: Keith, in your search for "the perfect nail", at least for framing, ask about galvanized "sinkers" - that's what they used to be called, anyway. They are, in addition to zinc, coated with this stuff that is heat-activated so when you drive 'em they make their own glue. They can be an absolute bitch to pull out, but that's the idea. Common nails in my experience are a pain in the ass for framing; their extra thickness makes the nail itself stronger, but odds are they'll split the ends of a large percentage of boards so the extra strength isn't realized. I use a Senco framing nailer for framing, with galvanized COATED "full 16d" nails instead of the new "short 16d", which is 1/4" shorter than what USED to be called a 16d nail - 3-1/4" instead of 3-1/2". The extra 1/4" length means you sometimes need to angle nails more in order to keep them from sticking out the other side, but it also means a little bit more holding power. The Senco framing nailers now have an adjustable drive depth so you can set it to NOT drive flush, then finish driving with a hammer; this pulls the two pieces together tighter than just power nailing, because the nailer is so fast that the boards don't get a chance to pull together. By finishing the drive with a hammer, you get the benefit of a tighter joint in most cases, although it's a lot slower. For non-acoustic projects, I'll set the depth control for a full depth drive and make sure the boards are held tight against each other before firing the nails. I've not tried any of the butane-powered nailers to compare to the air nailers, but maybe if you weren't doing multiple houses this might be economically feasible; I would think that the cost of "fuel" would eventually overtake the cost of a portable "rooftop" type air compressor, but again this has no basis in experience :? so I don't know where the cost balance would be in # of fasteners driven... Steve

Hi Steve, I remember your warning about wood splitting ... however, I've been lucky and haven't had any problems for the most part. I've used them (common nails) on both regular green studs and KD Stimson brand studs (very dry) without any major splitting problems. A few times, yes, but not enough to be an issue. The only time where splitting has been a problem is where i'm trying to nail a very short piece of wood, say under a foot or less. In that case i've had to drill pilot holes to avoid splits ... or sometimes i've tried to get away with using the coated box nails. Of course 1 split in the wrong place can be a major pain in the ass ... but as opposed to frequent nail bending ... i don't know, i sure love not having to worry about that, especially nailing into 30 year old (hard) wood ... YMMV as always :)

Yeah, green wood will "stretch" more often than splitting; and "old" wood can be a pain for sure. I've actually had better luck with the nailer on old wood, even common nails have a hard time with that. I guess drilling pilot holes of about half diameter would be OK (but slooooow) if you're hand nailing. I've occasionally used the ol' BLUNT nail trick with the air nailer, but it's kinda time consuming too; you have to take an entire "stick" of nails and partially flatten each point with a bench grinder :roll: Steve

Time for a lunch break. OMG, this is such a pain!! (And I mean that literally -- my right arm hurts!) This may not seem like a lot of work, but it is, at least for me. I started out with a plan to hold one end of the top plate up with a screw, driven at an angle, with some wire wrapped around the bottom chord of the truss: It took some trial and error to get the screw in the right place that would allow me enough slack at the other end to fasten it. Behold, my first framing nails driven! (Ugh!) Moving along -- two 16d (3 1/2") common nails into each truss. Note that there's one spot where there's an "extra truss," so I nailed that one too. And, there you have it -- my first top plate! I will need to use a handsaw to trim it off a bit. Yeah, I know I could have measured it first, blah blah, but this way I can be sure it's the correct length. ;-) Dan, I do have a framing hammer, a nice hand-me-down from my father-in-law. I'm not sure how heavy it is, but it does have a waffle head and it's much longer and heavier than my household hammers. 8) I must now admit to bending beyond recognition three nails that necessitated pulling them and doing them over. (Out of 12! :x) I extracted them with a Vice Grip. I'm also now drilling 1/8" pilot holes about 2" deep -- not too wide (it still takes a lot of effort to hammer the nails in) and not too deep (i.e., I still bent a couple of nails, even after drilling first :roll:). It's so damned awkward to hammer upwards, especially at 10 feet. :x I'm now considering framing the 2nd top plate and the studs on the ground (the "normal way") and then tipping it into place. But I'll still toenail the studs to the soleplate. How can I do that, you might ask? By temporarily using a 2x4 fastened to the face of the studs a foot or two near the bottom. Why not frame the whole wall on the ground and tip it into place? Because I wouldn't be able to lift the wall over the J-bolts (not enough vertical clearance). They're forecasting a high of 101°F (38°C) today, so I doubt I'll get that much done today. And next weekend is our 12 year wedding anniversary, so I'll probably take that weekend off this project altogether. --Keith :mrgreen:

yeah that "frame-in-place" vs "tip up" question screwed me up too. i definitely don't recommend doing it the way i did it, it's super lame (tip up, leave a gap, shims in gap). i'm embarassed about how lame this is. not enough to re-do it however. your temporary 2x4 brace (or permanent) sounds good ... i saw someone else around here do that (after my lame job) ... another idea that might help is using Simpson angle brackets (about 33 cents a piece) to hold each firmly stud in place (using 1 inch nails), then you can do toenails from the other side using the long nails. i'd love to hear any other tricks to "frame in place" ... for future use, even though i'm not doing any more of this on my project.

sharward wrote:

....I'm now considering framing the 2nd top plate and the studs on the ground (the "normal way") and then tipping it into place. But I'll still toenail the studs to the soleplate. How can I do that, you might ask? By temporarily using a 2x4 fastened to the face of the studs a foot or two near the bottom. Why not frame the whole wall on the ground and tip it into place? Because I wouldn't be able to lift the wall over the J-bolts (not enough vertical clearance). ... --Keith

I was wondering about this myself.... Is it possible to have double base plates? The bottom one can be bolted to the J bolts.... Then the whole frame, with the lower top plate and upper base plate can be constructed on the floor... After lifting the frame off the floor and onto the lower baseplate, you could slide in the upper top plate... As long as there is clearance above the top of the J bolts (and nuts, washers, etc.), you should be able to raise the frame over the lower base plate... You could notch holes through the upper base plate where the J bolts and square plates are (would give you access to the nuts too)? I don't think anything is wrong with having 2 base plates is there? ... and it certainly would be even more sturdy for the framing since you would have overlapped gaps in the 2 base plates? Is this okay to do, or do you have to do it exactly according to a plan submitted to the BA? K

Are you ready for this? :twisted: After lunch I was really worn out, arm still aching, and I think the heat was getting to me... :? ...I was "this close" to taking a two week break from the project and doing couch potato activities. But I guilt-tripped myself into doing "just one more little thing" before calling a quits. That little thing was cutting my second top plate. But before that I needed to secure my nifty miter saw. I decided the leftover concrete form sitting on my fold-up ladder would be a good setup, so I used some lag bolts. On with the eye protection, and then I cut my first piece of lumber on it! 8) Finger check: 8 Thumb check: 2 Woo-hoo! This thing is nice! And it's so easy! 8) Well, I might as well trim my studs to size, so I measured (twice ;-)) and chopped off about an inch from 8 of my 10 foot 2x4s: I then decided to attach the 2nd top plate to the studs. I predrilled with my 1/8" drill bit and pounded 2 8d (3 1/2") common nails through the top plate so that they barely protruded through the opposite side. Then I lined the studs up and hammered the nails into their ends. (Thanks for the "brightened up" photo, Ro! 8)) I was pretty motivated at this point to put the damned thing up, so I hoisted it up and leaned it against the laundry room wall. Geez, that thing was awkward as hell! :evil: (I didn't do the temporary 2x4 brace because I needed the wall to "rack" a bit (lean and get a little shorter) so I could squeeze it into place. Here it is close to its final position (about a foot or so off). A lot of nipping here and tucking there, all the while fearing that I'd lose control of it and it would slam against the stack of lumber on that poor dining room table :shock: (although it never even got close :)), I managed to get it perfectly aligned, using a hammer and a block of wood to knock it perfectly into position. 8) I did more predrilling and hammering of common nails, plus toenailing the studs to the sole plate with (at least) four 8p (2 1/2") galvanized box :x nails, and this is the result! 8) As per code, I used four nails at each end of the double top plate... ...and one nail every 16" in between. Also, where the first stud meets the laundry room corner, I nailed it every 24". Not bad, especially considering the working environment today! The thermometer on the bottom shows outdoor temperature (101°F / 38°C) and the top one shows the temperature in the garage (91°F / 33°C). At least it's a dry heat (15% relative humidity)... :roll: I've got to tell you that if I hadn't researched code or bought any framing books, I would definitely have used fewer nails (and that's would not have been good). So, do yourself a favor and research the nailing requirements thoroughly before you begin any framing job, especially if you have a permit and will be getting inspections (and, of course you have a permit -- right? ;-)). This is a major milestone for me. :D I was rather nervous about framing to start with (as is so often the case on this project :lol:), but the research boosted my confidence enough to get over the fear and just do it. Plus, it's great to post here, because I do get a sense that I'm not alone in this. :twisted: --Keith :mrgreen:

here's a slightly brighter version of the non-flash photo, keith :) [edit: photo moved up ] :roll:

Ro wrote:

here's a slightly brighter version of the non-flash photo, keith :)

I'm wondering if Keith should add a dozen stringers between each vertical stud.... lol :lol:

...with screws! ;-) Thanks for fixing up that photo, Ro. :) I edited my post to use it. --Keith :mrgreen:

Congrats, Keith! I've been reading your audiogeek-heaven thread for a while now, and as I've seen you write elsewhere, there's something about framing that gives such a tangible sense of "progress." After the incredible amount of research and work you've done over the past many moons, and with (I'm sure) less visible progress than you would have preferred, this HAS to feel good! Very cool!