BF’s Basement Studio Build Journal

sharward wrote:

BF, not all basement windows qualify as emergency egress. Do a search for "egress" to find the Portland build where authorities required one. It was quite an involved modification. Rod, I know that emergency egress is required for sleeping quarters, but what about habitable space in basements? I was under the impression that some jurisdictions may require them in habitable (but not sleeping) rooms... :roll: ...Reference aforementioned project in Portland, Oregon. --Keith :mrgreen:

Keith - typically it would only be a 2nd means of egress from the floor - and gererally you would have a bilco and a stair to the upstairs....... BTW - you actually misquote the code - what is required from sleeping quarters is 2 means of egress (and then not in all cases as I will explain a in a moment) Egress windows are not specifically required............ you can do a door - which could enter another corridor, another room or directly to the outside - then - as long as that room had a 2nd means of egress you would meet the code - It is only WHEN you decide to use windows - that the code provides requirements for the size of the window openings to make certain they provide egress............ But yes - some areas do make some weird requirements - and then you have to deal with them............. In the case of this house - IF the people who finished the basement originally got a permit - then we would know that it wasn't an issue because the windows in place are not egress - and the rework shouldn't create the requirement in and of itself........... Rod

rod gervais wrote:

NoI don't see that (making more cuts into that brace) as being an answer to your problem - one cut like I see in your pic is one thing - multiple cuts are another - that brace is required to ensure that the trusses act properly and don't collapse - it a part of their design - you can't just go around slicing it up.

Ok, because it looks as though the floor above is doing the same job as this brace, if not a better job of keeping them immobile and in place.

rod gervais wrote:

The thing with the electrical panel - if the treatment you put in front of it was hinged - with magnetic catches (for example) and you could open it with out the need for any tools

This is exactly the plan. I was even going to go as far as placing a sign on the outside of the room as well as on the door of the panel alerting to its location.

rod gervais wrote:

It is only WHEN you decide to use windows - that the code provides requirements for the size of the window openings to make certain they provide egress............

Yes, there will be no bedrooms in the basement. I really doubt that these windows are large enough for an adult to exit either way. At the top of the basement stairs there are three unobstructed doors to the outside within a few steps.

BF wrote:

rod gervais wrote:

NoI don't see that (making more cuts into that brace) as being an answer to your problem - one cut like I see in your pic is one thing - multiple cuts are another - that brace is required to ensure that the trusses act properly and don't collapse - it a part of their design - you can't just go around slicing it up.

Ok, because it looks as though the floor above is doing the same job as this brace, if not a better job of keeping them immobile and in place.

BF, that is only because you don't now what you're looking at - the plywood handles the top real well - but not the bottom - and that's what these are for - they stop them from rolling over and also help them to distribute weight from each joist to the ones flanking it............. Rod

BF, since you have Rod's book, I suggest you study this thread, which includes discussion of a section of Rod's book relating to cross-bracing of basement ceiling joists. Obviously you have trusses, which is different, but you'll see the relevance. --Keith :mrgreen:

BF wrote:

sharward wrote:

And we haven't even talked about fresh air ventilation yet.

New point, please explain.

There is a lot of very useful information on the forum regarding fresh air ventilation in air-tight spaces without operable windows and doors to the outside world. Here's a very informative (although painful ;-)) thread:

ventilation and code

It's (unfortunately) argumentative and unpleasant at times, but there are a lot of valuable building code quotations on the requirements of mechanical fresh air ventilation in spaces that have no windows or doors opening directly to the outside. You might be able to utilize that window opening somehow, but I'm thinking you'll need a mechanical system. Do a search here for "HRV" and you're bound to find a lot of posts from me about Heat Recovery Ventilators. You know, we haven't really even talked about your cooling and heating... I see ducts, but no further information. I guess you're tying in to the main system in the house, eh? If so, how have you engineered it to give you what you need? I'm also concerned about your equipment room -- you said you're going to put your heat-generating equipment in there. What's going to keep them from getting overheated in that confined space? :roll: I have a friend who just built a beautiful custom home and has an equipment closet for all his audio, video, and security gear. That room gets extremely hot, in spite of having two A/C ducts feeding it. He's going to be following up with his HVAC contractor to resolve the problem. --Keith :mrgreen:

Thanks, Ill check into those links. I appreciate you keeping up on this thread.

sharward wrote:

I see ducts, but no further information. I guess you're tying in to the main system in the house, eh? If so, how have you engineered it to give you what you need?

Keith, I had a few HVAC companies (I think detailed or perhaps more dramatized in the fourth post on this thread) come in and observe the space and go over the requirements first hand. One of the gents, (the one who ended up getting the job) has done work for a local studio in the past and knew exactly what I was trying to accomplish (granted my project is on a significantly smaller scale). The other has done jobs for a server room and a rendering farm. They both came up with very similar designs based on the requirements, although the second I felt was missing some of the isolation concerns. Yes, we have tied into the existing system. The studio is now pulling before any other branches on this arm. Both checked the specifications on the current system and thought it should handle the load without issue. Heat generating equipment in the machine room is a light load and consist of power conditioning, desk supply, amplifier, and two computers (one a cloned build backup that will not be running unless the other goes down). Pretty much the gear that doesn't have a hands on element. From how it was explained to me the return is the major factor in keeping an acceptable temp in a room such as this. Does you friend have two AC ducts feeding the closet with no return? This may be a significant factor contributing to his issue. Flushing his closet with fresh air will only go so far without a return to remove the heat. Also this is a 10 1/2 ft x 11 1/2ft machine room (slightly larger than a closet) with a return pulling pretty much off of the back of the rack. While I'm not 100% that this will be the end all be all solution, I am feeling confident in the company that did the work and their dedication to see it right. If you have questions about particular elements I will do my best to supply the information for you.

rod gervais wrote:

that is only because you don't now what you're looking at - the plywood handles the top real well - but not the bottom - and that's what these are for - they stop them from rolling over and also help them to distribute weight from each joist to the ones flanking it.............

Fair enough Rod. Is there a way to put something in place that will provide the support needed to the bottom of the trusses while allowing greater headroom? Thanks

Ah, yes, I do recall reading that in your thread now. Sorry -- lots going on with me these days... ;-) As far as my friend's equipment closet is concerned, it's complicated..... The room is being fed from two separate systems (his house has four independent A/C systems -- no joke -- the house is 6,800 s.f.) -- one of them has a return, and the other (which was added ad-hoc during construction on his order) does not. There is an exhaust fan that runs pretty much 24x7. Because it gets so hot in there, the door is left open all the time too -- which defeats the purpose of it being in its own room. The whole thing is kind of screwy if you asked me, which is why I suggested he get his HVAC guy back there to evaluate the situation. At 80+ degrees, I think he's harming his equipment over the long haul. Anywayyyyyy... This isn't his thread -- it's yours. :-) Personally, I'm the big proponent of mini split systems (I just installed one) because they allow you to have total control of the temperature in your space because it has its own thermostat, multiple fan speeds, etc., and doesn't tie into the existing system. It doesn't do squat for fresh air, but that can be addressed with a separate system. I just have my doubts that you can get the precise amount of cooling you want when you want it without adversely affecting the rest of the house. Maybe you can with dampers and such -- this is not my area of expertise, but Rod is a genius when it comes to it ;-) -- so I won't get in the way of you guys too much... ;-) ...But I'll just say, if you haven't read about the mini split systems on here, then I think you owe it to yourself to study up on it and at least consider it before you commit to tapping into the main system. --Keith :mrgreen:

BF wrote:

rod gervais wrote:

that is only because you don't now what you're looking at - the plywood handles the top real well - but not the bottom - and that's what these are for - they stop them from rolling over and also help them to distribute weight from each joist to the ones flanking it.............

Fair enough Rod. Is there a way to put something in place that will provide the support needed to the bottom of the trusses while allowing greater headroom? Thanks

Unfortunately he answer is "no"........... you require bracing at the bottom chord of the truss - and that means you only have 1 1/2" from it to the truss bottom itself - and that (as they say) is life............. Rod

Thanks Rod. The trusses are braced at the bottom at either end of their 17 foot run (sown in red below). I was thinking perhaps some type of X bracing running from the bottom of each truss to the top of the adjacent truss might offer the support needed. But no matter what I look at I'm ending up with a room height a 2x6 below 7'6"?

Yes, this is exactly what I was referring to on the X bracing (lower portion on the pic below). Rod, if a design like this would / could stabilize roll on the trusses could the cross member for the 10ft width of the room be cut or removed? I hate to beat this poor horse, but...

BF wrote:

Yes, this is exactly what I was referring to on the X bracing (lower portion on the pic below). Rod, if a design like this would / could stabilize roll on the trusses could the cross member for the 10ft width of the room be cut or removed? I hate to beat this poor horse, but...

External image, not preserved — original: http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/files/inner_ceiling_design_130.jpg

BF, I don't imagine the horse appreaciates it either - No- i have zero confidence in that approach - I don't see anyway that a piece of 3/4" tube (or even 3/4" solid rod) would withstand the forces involved here........... your bet bet is to check with a structural engineer in your area who can actually visit the site and make a determination as to what can be done - a luxury I do not have............ Sincerely, Rod

Thanks Rod. The idea was more like the picture below with 2x4 supports running from the top of one truss to the bottom of next creating right triangles. But I agree, getting someone to take a look at the situation is probably best. I know that I don't have trusses drawn, but the floor tool in sketchup only seems to do joists and I-joists.

I still think you ought to visit your local building department to determine what model codes they have adopted, and thus, what your minimum floor-to-height clearance must be. With local ordinance amendments, the requirements vary significantly from place to place. It is common for basement finishing projects to be governed by that finished rooms must have at least 7' 0" clearance over X% of the floor space... And if that's the case, then may have a challenging time complying with that. Figure you're already at the bare minimum of 7' 6" without any flooring and not counting that 2x member spanning across the bottom chords of the trusses. Yes, you may be able to use the cross-bracing method to eliminate the 2x across the bottom, local structural engineer recommendations willing... But still, that 6" margin gets chipped away pretty quickly when you figure the thickness of some flooring materials (you haven't mentioned what kind of finished floor you'd like to have -- engineered hardwood perhaps? If so, how thick is the hardwood, the subfloor, the moisture barrier...?) and the two(+?) layers of drywall overhead. Also, any clouds you plan to hang permanently in the room (I believe) count in the overall clearance measurement, so depending on how much of the ceiling you plan to cover with clouds, you might run into that "X%" limitation. This, combined with other reasons, is why I always advocate starting a design process at the permit counter of the local building department to determine what, if any (and there usually are) limitations one has before even drawing up a plan. If you were to discover, for example, that even a non-sleeping room in a basement in your area built after such-and-such year must have a secondary means of direct egress (which I agree would be quite restrictive, and perhaps unreasonably so, but oh well), then you'd know what you'd have to do in order to be legit and can come up with a concept that is sure to pass their plan check process. I understand that you didn't have the benefit of this advice before starting your build, so I am really hoping that you don't have too much (ideally, any) "undoing" ahead of you. :-) --Keith :mrgreen:

BF, actually - I think that cross bracing in this case might be a problem - once again you have to verify this with a local engineer - but I can see where the cross bracing (by it's very nature) will cause a downward load on the bottom chord of that truss........... and that load might well be more than the truss is designed for at that particular location.................... Rod

Good point Rod. I have an old friend who is a structural engineer that has become very interested in the project. He is going to be passing through town and wanted to check it out without prompting. :D He did amazing work on his house and might have some great ideas to contribute.

sharward wrote:

you haven't mentioned what kind of finished floor you'd like to have

Keith, we were planning on simply using the concrete floor and maybe applying a concrete stain. An engineered hardwood would be nice on the eyes, but I am not aware of any acoustical advantage of swapping one reflective floor for another so it just seems a luxury with additional cost. I'm going to say that aside from the occasional friend who might stop in to collaborate on a project, I'm going to be the only one spending any time in here and I think the cons that would go along with adding a constructed floor outweigh the cons of simply using the slab. However, judging by the last few pages of the thread I seem to be racking up mistakes by the dozen. :) Is there an issue with using the concrete as flooring?

BF on the reflective floor question - none what-so-ever. Rod

That's exactly what I plan to do -- an etched concrete stain. They look awesome, and they're very economical, durable, and easy to maintain.

guys, not leaning one way or the other, however, I did notice a slight acoustical "softening" when I installed my floating floor in the tracking room. Making no other changes, going from concrete to an engineered floor did seem to make a bit of a difference... though, I'd hardly recommend it as acoustical treatments... and the cost alone can definitely be prohibitive. I plan on leaving my control room concrete, so i'll have both surfaces. just wanted to post my 2cents! kevin

Week 2: On the road again. Got the go ahead from the engineer. The memorable phrase being, “Short of a heard of horny hermaphroditic hippos humping in the room above this will not be an issue. Don’t let hippos in the house!” complete with meaningful finger point to punctuate the statement. Week two had more focus on work after that point than detailing progress step by step, but the highlights are below. 2x6 rafters were installed on Simpson Strong Ties straddling the trusses with an average of 12 in. on center. Pink fluffy insulation was packed above and on either side of the existing duct that will run above the room, and a layer of 703 below. 703 was also positioned to sit above the ceiling once installed, And the second layer of 703 for the inner walls was staged. Preparation was made for our sealed switch and outlet boxes. Little cuz came and satisfied all of our electrical requirements. We had to take a break at this point as it was way too hot to drive 8 feet of rod without a breather. The last foot is the worst. We grumbled over why I couldn't live in the city anymore where we could find a crack head to drive the last foot for a few bucks, but decided he might run with the rod thinking he had hit a copper mine. We took a few days off and got our progress checked and with all good on that front the next day started early with a 30 min drive west and the rental of a drywall lift. Holy crap, the may who invented this thing needs to stop by for a round, or two, or five. Such a simple tool, but it allowed us to throw up the (granted small) ceiling at a good rate without feeling busted afterwards. Layer one begins to go up. Backer rod goes in smooth. If only my calk skills would follow suit. Prep done for layer one of inner wall done. Calk applied to front side of our outlet boxes before the first layer goes up. Left inner wall layer one up, and right. A strip of 7/16th ply was used to keep a space at the bottom for the insertion of backer rod. The second layer goes up and lighting is installed, albeit temporary... but we will need the light inside once the final inner wall is finished. Other notes: Rory was very proud of his puncture tool. Week three started this morning feeling a bit that progress was slowing, but by the end of the day I was feeling better about things. We began to add the face to seal the top of the outer wall where it will meet the truss. Spoke with the Mason Industries rep. Huzza! We have a solution for floating the monitor stands. Put the order in and the pucks may arrive late this week. We set about getting the framing for the soffits up, while leaving some room to get in there and work once we are ready to pour the stands. On a separate note, I'm beginning to question a design issue and thought I would ask for input before we got that far. Currently the forward side walls are designed as a two part splay per side at around 12°. Most of the designs I see on the site have single side splay. I could have done this but the angle would have suffered by around 6° and I understand that 6° is the minimum recommended to combat flutter. I opted for two shorter angles walls at the recommended 12°. All was well until I began to worry about reflections off of the forward face of the rear splay (part at 90° to the side wall). Is this problematic? Should I think about placing a layer of 703 on this face to absorb this reflection, or am I making mole mountains? Appreciate thoughts on this. Thanks BF

looks like mole mountains to me.......

Thanks Rod. You the man!

Is this legal? Having insulated ground wires running loosely, not in conduit, and not a part of an NM-B (i.e. "Romex") PVC jacket? :roll: --Keith :mrgreen: