Talk:Porch collapse

Untitled
I am dubious about this article as there are no references or even sources citied and so I am putting this up for deletion. 16:23, 23 January 2007

What is this article even about? Whoever wrote this is a real tube.


 * Please observe WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA and avoid namecalling. Edison 22:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Deck as well
Now that the article has survived the AFD, per comments in the AFD, it should be expanded to include "deck collapse." Porches and decks are wooden structures outside a home or other building, but usually residential structure, which collapse from time to time. Factors noted in this article about porches also apply to most wooden decks. Exposure to water over time rots the structure (even if the deckboards are treated; I'm not familiar with whether porches use treated lumber. Wooden porches I have seen were often floored with tongue and groove lumber which was painted. I believe the multistory Chicago-style porches may use treated lumber. A concrete and steel porch or balcony is probably built by specialists, and is likely to have had specific plans submitted to a building and zoning department, while anyone with a few tools can, for better or worse, build, repair, or replace a wooden deck or porch. It may well have never had a structural review to determine the pounds per square foot it can support. An article from Indiana mentioned 40 pounds per square foot as the requirement. Articles from Chicago referred to 100 pounds per square foor. But I would exclude steel fire escapes as well as concrete or brick and concrete balconies or porches, since the inspection and permit procedure, failure modes and construction methods are so different. Edison 20:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, deck collapse was an alternate heading before the AFD, but there wasn't any text separately supporting it. The engineering and cause-effect phenomena are so closely related it should be here. Porches and decks are essentially similar in construction; and yes, standard building codes require treated lumber for both. (The main difference is how much lumber is in close contact with the ground, requiring higher grade of treatment.) Both are susceptible to failures of maintenance such as staining/painting. If you ask me, though, the main "cause" is simply that they were built under a less rigorous code regime. There are much stricter requirements for header boards and anchors today.
 * The other examples (fire escapes, concrete/brick porches) simply don't fail often enough to really be a notable phenomenon. I have heard of entire fire escapes falling off the side of a building due to rusted anchors. But these don't usually fall because there are people on them, like the wooden porches and decks. --Dhartung | Talk 10:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)