Good Gawd! A stud holding up a second floor by itself... time to have that domicile condemned and the inhabitants moved out asap!
Accidentally Load Bearing
71–80 of 204 posts
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
In software, I would strongly disagree with this: > you ought to understand what something is doing before fiddling with it I think understanding before fiddling is one option. But I think a better option is often fiddling and seeing what happens. The trick is to make it so that fiddling is safe. E.g., on a project where I have good test coverage and find mystery code, I can just delete it and see what fails. Or I se…
> But I think a better option is often fiddling and seeing what happens. The trick is to make it so that fiddling is safe. E.g., on a project where I have good test coverage and find mystery code, I can just delete it and see what fails. Or I set up a big smoke test that runs a bunch of input and compares outputs to see what changes. There was a good discussion of this in the comments, starting at https://www.jefftk.…
The problem “fiddle and see if Rome burns” is that you may have broken something that only runs once a year/decade and you won’t know if that process isn’t in the list of tests.
And by the time it breaks, will anyone remember the probable cause?
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#73Huh. Finally a name for it. I do a lot of support work for Control Systems. It isn't unheard to find a chunk of PLC code that treats some sort of physical equipment in a unique way that unintentionally creates problems. I like to parrot a line I heard elsewhere: "Every time Software is used to fix a [Electrical/Mechanical] problem, a Gremlin is born". But often enough when I find a root cause of a bug, or some sort o…
The most haunting comment line I've ever seen was buried deep in an Allen Bradley PLC: > I don't know why this rung is needed but delete it and see what happens for yourself Did not fuck around; did not find out.
Context for those who haven't worked in the field: A PLC is a programmable logic controller. They are typically programmed with ladder logic which grew out of discrete relay based control systems.
Generally they're controlling industrial equipment of some sort, and making changes without a thorough understanding of what's happening now and how your change will affect the equipment and process is frowned upon.
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#74Huh. Finally a name for it. I do a lot of support work for Control Systems. It isn't unheard to find a chunk of PLC code that treats some sort of physical equipment in a unique way that unintentionally creates problems. I like to parrot a line I heard elsewhere: "Every time Software is used to fix a [Electrical/Mechanical] problem, a Gremlin is born". But often enough when I find a root cause of a bug, or some sort o…
Sometimes you have to remove the chunk and see what breaks because the person that put it in is long gone and documentation is missing
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#75I used to work with a physics postdoc who would sometime leave a sign on an equipment setup that read, "Do not touch. There are hidden dangers."
The lab was full of smart people who were used to looking at things and making their own well-reasoned conclusions about whether it was OK to change something. This was a warning not to be too hasty about doing that!
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#76I had something similar. A couple of years ago I bought on old house. The previous owners did most of the work themselves from the 1960s on. The zinc gutter had leaked for probably decades and it destroyed part of the roof structure. The roof was held up by the wooden paneling the used to cover it on the inside (70s). So the wooden paneling was actually load bearing Actually I've found way more stuff in this house. F…
If you go back to the early 1900s, the cladding was installed on a diagonal, which helped greatly in preventing the building from racking. Now we rely on sheet rock and plywood to provide that protection in earthquakes and wind storms.
If you ever see a house stripped down to the sticks for a rebuild, you will hopefully notice a few braces added. Not to keep the walls from falling down, but to keep them square and true until the walls are rebuilt.
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#77I had something similar. A couple of years ago I bought on old house. The previous owners did most of the work themselves from the 1960s on. The zinc gutter had leaked for probably decades and it destroyed part of the roof structure. The roof was held up by the wooden paneling the used to cover it on the inside (70s). So the wooden paneling was actually load bearing Actually I've found way more stuff in this house. F…
Yep, sounds like my garage. At first look it seem like someone backed into the garage door and mangled the hell out of it but on more careful inspection the roof is being barely held up by the tracks that the door runs in and is pretty near to giving up the ghost. Was just going to splice the ends of the rafters (like someone did on the other side who knows how many years ago...if it works, it works) and replace the…
The thing I learned when we fixed our old house up for sale, is that in some municipalities you need a building permit to replace a floor that already exists with a new one. In our case water damage was from a claw foot tub drain, which I had fixed but years after the problem started, so it was in the middle of the floor. The contractor ripped it down to the joists and doubled them, which does not it turns out require a permit.
Sounds like your guy had a similar experience.
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#78I had something similar. A couple of years ago I bought on old house. The previous owners did most of the work themselves from the 1960s on. The zinc gutter had leaked for probably decades and it destroyed part of the roof structure. The roof was held up by the wooden paneling the used to cover it on the inside (70s). So the wooden paneling was actually load bearing Actually I've found way more stuff in this house. F…
Yep, sounds like my garage. At first look it seem like someone backed into the garage door and mangled the hell out of it but on more careful inspection the roof is being barely held up by the tracks that the door runs in and is pretty near to giving up the ghost. Was just going to splice the ends of the rafters (like someone did on the other side who knows how many years ago...if it works, it works) and replace the…
I had to do a garage roof a few years ago. The previous owner thought it would be a good idea to put a hole in the main crossbeam to attach the garage door opener. As soon as I bought the house I removed the garage door opener and put metal plates on both side of the hole bolted together.
My "fix" held for about 11 years, but apparently it very slowly weakened, creating a small divot on the roof. Which got bigger and bigger with each rain, but since I never go on the garage roof, I didn't notice.
Until during one heavy rain I got a surprise skylight!
So yeah, you probably want to fix that before you get a total collapse like I did.
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#79Good Gawd! A stud holding up a second floor by itself... time to have that domicile condemned and the inhabitants moved out asap!
The only option is to do a complete rebuild. The load bearing stud indicates that the foundation design was inadequate for current needs.
Re: Accidentally Load Bearing
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
"This is an even more conservative position than the default Chesterton's Fence reading, which is itself dismissed by a lot of people as pedantically restrictive." In a normal, real-life context, I can see why someone would feel that way. In a software engineering context I think it's just a further emphasis that you ought to understand what something is doing before fiddling with it, and both the original intent and…
In software, I would strongly disagree with this: > you ought to understand what something is doing before fiddling with it I think understanding before fiddling is one option. But I think a better option is often fiddling and seeing what happens. The trick is to make it so that fiddling is safe. E.g., on a project where I have good test coverage and find mystery code, I can just delete it and see what fails. Or I se…
> But I think a better option is often fiddling and seeing what happens.
Yeah, as always, IMMV.
But I do agree that online discourse puts too much emphasis on statically analyzing systems, and too little on adding instrumentation or just breaking it and seeing what happens.
At the same time, my experience is that on practice people put too much emphasis on instrumentation or just breaking it and seeing what happens, and way too little on statically analyzing the system.