ᐅ Crack in the roof cross beam – should the beam be replaced?

Hello everyone,

Last Monday, a TÜV inspector visited our construction site for the first time.
Overall, he was quite satisfied with the work, pointed out a few minor issues (which have already been fixed), and found one point that concerns me.

One of our roof cross beams (the beam closest to the gable) shows a longer longitudinal crack. No one noticed it during the roof framework installation, nor at the topping-out ceremony, and our site manager was quite upset that he hadn’t spotted the crack earlier.
The crack likely formed due to the drying of the wood.

When the inspector arrived, the roof was already covered.
According to the inspector, the beam should be replaced. However, the beam can also be repaired by gluing and reinforcing it with a splice plate. This method will be applied in our case, according to the site manager.

Still, I am a bit worried whether a repaired and glued beam will have the same long-term properties as an original beam or if it might be more prone to potential damage over time. Perhaps one of the experts here could share some insights. Does this type of crack occur frequently?

The inspector considers the method used an acceptable solution. However, I remain somewhat uncertain.

Hello, f-pNo,

f-pNo schrieb:

I still have some concerns about whether a reinforced and glued beam will have the same long-term properties as an "original beam" or if it might be more susceptible to potential damage over time. Maybe one of the experts here can provide some insight. Are such cracks common?

The expert considers the method used an acceptable solution. However, I am a bit uncertain.

Then trust the site manager and the expert; wood always moves. Cracks should and can be protected from additional water and dirt ingress through constructive measures, such as clamping, boarding, and covering, etc.; it is not necessary to seal every crack.

To assess the load-bearing capacity of cracks in wood, several criteria have been established:

• The effect of shrinkage cracks must be differentiated based on the main load on the component
• The position of the cracks in the wood cross-section relative to the load direction must be considered
• The largest crack depths are possible either as a single crack or as the sum of crack depths on opposite sides

There are so-called harmlessness criteria for wood. The procedure approved by the site manager and the expert is a standard practice. If it were a longitudinal crack that would cause structural issues, the expert would have already strongly recommended replacing the beam.

PS: With your question, you’ve also reminded me to review my documents again.

Regards, Bauexperte

Bauexperte schrieb:


Then trust the builder and the expert; wood always moves. Cracks are to be expected and can be protected against additional water and dirt penetration through constructive measures, for example by clamping, adding battens, and covering, etc.; it is not necessary to seal every crack.

There are so-called harmlessness criteria for wood. The procedure approved by the site manager and the expert is a very common process. If it were a longitudinal crack that could cause structural problems, the expert would have already put significant pressure on replacing the beam.

Thank you very much – that reassures me. At first, I thought this method was chosen because the roof was already covered and replacement would be too complicated. On the other hand, I also thought the expert wouldn’t agree to something like this if it wasn’t compliant with the regulations.

Bauexperte schrieb:

PS: You’re also making me review my documents again with this question.

Gladly anytime – let’s see if I can find more questions that have the same effect.