FINISHED IN 2020! Sharward's Partial Garage Conversion

[sharward]

OK, thanks for clarifying "fire rated" vs. "fire code." I think I got it.

Now, to rephrase my question with hopefully the correct terminology...

It appears to me that all 5/8" gypsum wallboard is "fire code." Examples: SHEETROCK® Brand HUMITEK™ Gypsum Panels | Gold Bond® BRAND Gypsum board. Perhaps I misunderstood a post from you (Steve) that I can now not find. Please confirm that I just need to use "normal" 5/8" gypsum, which will be "fire code."

Fitz suggested I look into Kinetics KIP isolators as a possible alternative to the EPDM pucks. Steve, the only mention of this product on this board is this post in which you didn't really state an opinion. What are your thoughts on this? It would seem that one advantage would be that I wouldn't have to do all the fancy EPDM testing I was planning, and there seems to be less risk of overloading.

FYI, I recetly priced PT lumber at my local Home Depot... 1 1/2" x 3 1/2" x 8' is $5... And yes, the stuff is supposedly acceptable for indoor use.

Also, In other news, I am meeting with two HVAC guys next week for proposals. Wish me luck!

[knightfly]

Your walls, as designed, are so far beyond "fire rated" it's funny. Just build 'em and fuhgeddaboutit... :=))

Seriously, no prob - and, fire CODE is a TYPE of wallboard with a different formulation, so that THIN stuff can meet fire RATING, which has NOTHING to do with formulation. Fire RATING means, this frame, this insulation, that wallboard in this thickness, is RATED to withstand a fire for 1 hour, 2 hours, etc - I'm not even sure they HAVE a fire rating for THREE layers of 5/8 gypsum, no matter WHOSE brand/type it is. You may obsess about something ELSE now...

Kinetics Kips; haven't used 'em, but WSDG has (and doesn't hide the fact) - since they are compressed fiberglass, I'm not sure what all would react differently. Life should be good, I've no idea about compression range vs. lifespan. Kinetics, similar to Auralex' UBOATS, just says "put 'em in and do your floor", no calcs, no nuttin' - I tried to get Jeff at Auralex to say why they did that, and got stone-walled haven't talked to the Kinetics guys about it.

AFAIK, you would still need to stay within a range that wouldn't allow the pads to either LEAVE compression or BOTTOM OUT under any circumstances, but beyond that as I said I don't know yet whether the fiberglass pads have the same limitation as EPDM, etc, as far as staying toward the LIGHT side of loading for longevity... Steve

[sharward]

Cool. I understand. Thanks for clarifying.

For the record, I was most concerned about buying the wrong stuff, as I'm really not worried about 3 layers of rock not meeting building code for fire containment. (The word "overkill" comes to mind! )

I'm faced with buying 40+ panels of the stuff and getting it delivered, and I'd hate to post a photo of it and then see comments from you and everyone else that say, "WTF is that??"

Otay! This weekend I'll be working out electrical details in preparation for hopefully paying my friendly neighborhood building department a visit for what I hope will be the necessary permits, or as a runner-up prize, a clear understanding of what (more) I'll need to do in order to get them (and, of course, pass the inspections). This week's record-breaking 15-degrees-above-normal high pressure ridge has really got me motivated to get some of this construction completed (ahem... started...) before the infamous triple-digit summer heatwaves come unapologetically to make for a very uncomfortable building environment!

And next week I'll call the Kinetics folks to hopefully get pricing and more details about their KIP product... Naturally, I'll post what I learn.

[knightfly]

One other possibility - if you have any commercial drywall suppliers close, ask if they have any NON-tapered-edge drywall - if so, this will give slightly better results for all but the TOP layer, which will look better using tapered edges where the mud/tape goes - less voids in the wall when using non-tapered boards may improve TL near joints by a SMALL amount.

If you can't find it, not to worry; this is just a new twist I've been discussing with a REALLY smart guy on another forum... Steve

[sharward]

Otay! This weekend I'll be working out electrical details in preparation for hopefully paying my friendly neighborhood building department a visit for what I hope will be the necessary permits, or as a runner-up prize, a clear understanding of what (more) I'll need to do in order to get them (and, of course, pass the inspections).

SIGH. Last night I spent some time on my municipality's Web site, where they must have done quite a revamp since the last time I was in their building department section. It's been completely transformed and includes a lot more information now.

Unfortunately, much of that information is scary. Their requirements for plan reviews are pretty strict. I may also have to cough up much more $ in fees than I had anticipated. Plus, there may be plan review delays.

It's a little discouraging, but not enough to take me off my track.

(BTW, please don't try to talk me into not doing this by the book. The risks are far too great.)

Also, I've met with three HVAC contractors the last three mornings in a row. The first bid came in much higher than I expected. Hopefully the other two will be better.

Oh well... I knew this wouldn't be easy!

Stay tuned...

[sharward]

OK, I'm done (I think, I hope) with the electrical plans. I welcome your feedback, everyone (especially you, Steve, of course!)

Bear in mind that this space is not going to be used for recording, so there is no special grounding or anything like that, nor does there need to be.

All the lights will be incandescent (no fluorescents) and on dimmers wired in 3-way circuits. I'm not planning to use any low-voltage lighting, mostly because I haven't worked with it myself... However, I'm open to changing my plans to incorporate 12v lights and learn about them if there's a compelling reason to do so.

By the way, I'm meeting with the machine/fabrication shop tomorrow morning -- hopefully I'll be able to get my EPDM tested this week! Wish me luck...

Thanks!

[sharward]

Well, the machine shop now has my EPDM, plus a stick of PT 2x4 and some Liquid Nails so that they can make a little "leg" just like I'll be using. They quoted me a "not to exceed" price of 5 hours @ $60/hour for the testing. That doesn't count final cutting into dozens of 1 1/2" x 3 1/2" pucks; they'll be able to give me a better idea of the effort involved in that once they work with it a little.

I'm confident that these guys know what I need and know how to get it for me.

[sharward]

It's official! This thread has been viewed more times than the "VITAL Update- Everyone Please Read AGAIN***" announcement! Hee hee

(Now, don't everyone go read that thread and make a liar out of me! )

[knightfly]

Printed out your pdf, haven't had time to go over it yet... Steve

[sharward]

I got my EPDM puck compression test results today from S and S Machine in Roseville, and I'm very pleased! Total cost: $180 (3 hours of labor @ $60/hour).

I have taken the data that the shop gave me and plotted it on a graph. They did four tests, all using the same 3½" x 1½" x ½" EPDM Durometer 60 puck, which was glued to a 2" high piece of pressure-treated lumber (1½" x 3½") using standard Liquid Nails adhesive. They were careful to ensure that the puck had nothing in its way to prevent the rubber from spreading out sideways.

The first two tests were atop aluminum blocks. The last two tests were also atop aluminum blocks, except they put some teflon between the rubber and the aluminum to allow it to spread more easily and uniformly. That second condition was a great call on their part -- the difference between the two conditions is significant!

The results seem to indicate that this puck can take a LOT of weight without "bottoming out" -- at least, this is true under temporary load in a lab -- I don't have 25 years to spare to see what the characteristics of the stuff is over time. There also seems to be some kind of "memory effect," since the 2nd test of each condition shows results of greater compression at the same weights.

Anyway, much to my surprise, it seems that each puck can take on between 350 and 800 pounds in order to achieve the recommended 10% compression. 25% compression occurs at 1,100 to 1,800 pounds. Also interesting is that first test of the puck showed 40 pounds compressing 1% and 100 pounds compresing 1.6%. All of this tells me that aiming for the 10% figure gives me lots of margin of error with minimal risk of underloading or overloading! They cranked the last test up to 4,000 pounds, just to see what would happen -- but it still didn't "bottom out"! What planet is this stuff from anyway?!

I should point out that they said the Liquid Nails gave way at the high end, around 2,000 pounds I think. So, there is some risk of the puck separating from the leg if loaded too much.

Have a look for yourself...

[Dan Fitzpatrick]

That is so cool. I've been following your plans with great interest, but now i'm truly "geeking out" as Syndrome (The Incredibles) would say.

I'm researching/planning a drum room myself, and I'm not too far from you geographically, so I've been paying close attention to where you get your materials. Keep the details coming!

[sharward]

Thanks for the encouragement, Dan! I know people are following this thread, as evidenced by the 3,000+ views it's had since its inception.

I've been in touch with two other guys in the region (one in Sacramento, one in Stockton), and we're discussing getting together to go over each others' plans. I'm thinking that a regional meet might be in order!

Hey, maybe we can have Steve (nightfly) by speakerphone as a guest keynote speaker!

[sharward]

I now humbly present my plans for EPDM placement!

I chose the placements based on the spreadsheet I compiled estimating the weight of all the construction materials, and figuring about 300 pounds per puck (which is, I believe, a little less than 10% compression per puck). The spreadsheet figures about 7,000 pounds for the floor, 6,000 pounds for the walls, and 2,000 pounds for the ceiling (which is supported by the long walls on the left and right sides of the room).

The puck spacing on the left and right sides are 24" O.C. in order to maintain even spacing. I would have liked to have done 16" O.C. to match the spacing of the floor joists, but I think that would have been too many pucks and not enough compression per puck.

Obviously, the success of the puck spacing is wholly dependent on the accuracy of my weight estimates, which I haven't received any feedback on yet.

This is a huge milestone and, based on what I have learned here, the "make or break" point of the plan. It's one of the things that will be nearly impossible to fix after the fact, so I've got to get it right the first time!

This is a top view of the floor framing, so it is an optical illusion that the pucks are visible -- they'll actually be underneath, sitting below a block of pressure-treated 2x4 that is cut to size. These "stubby legs" will double as leveling blocks, as the concrete floor of the garage is sloped slightly towards the 16x7 front door. It will be held steady and fastened to the joists with pressure-treated 2x4 on each side.

[knightfly]

Why not change the surface area of your pucks downward by 1/3, so you CAN put them on 16" centers? Your frame will be stronger if those pucks support the main joists AT the attachment points of cross-joists, instead of a few inches away.

Also, what page is your weight estimate on so I can review it?

Did you estimate the extra weight your inner ceiling will add to the walls/perimeter floor joists by using half the total ceiling weight distributed over each long wall, or something different?

And, are you basing your calc's on the longer term compression or the short-term?

And, would you like fries with that?

[sharward]

Why not change the surface area of your pucks downward by 1/3, so you CAN put them on 16" centers? Your frame will be stronger if those pucks support the main joists AT the attachment points of cross-joists, instead of a few inches away.

I suppose I could do that... I was just sticking with a consistent puck size, primarily because that's the size I tested. Should I chisel point the bottom of my PT blocks, like this \___/ and put cut the puck down to 1 1/2" x 2 1/2"?

Also, what page is your weight estimate on so I can review it?

My weight estimates are in my spreadsheet from hell.

Did you estimate the extra weight your inner ceiling will add to the walls/perimeter floor joists by using half the total ceiling weight distributed over each long wall, or something different?

Indeed I did.

And, are you basing your calc's on the longer term compression or the short-term?

I'm not sure. I'm figuring about 300 pounds per puck (which is, I believe, a little less than 10% compression per puck). I guess that's "short term," given the limited amount of time the pucks were tested at the shop.

And, would you like fries with that?

Always!

Thanks again, Steve.