Crack in the roof crossbeam - replace the beam?

Hello everyone,

last Monday, the TÜV inspector was on the property for the first time.
He was generally very satisfied with the work, had a few minor issues to criticize (which have already been fixed), and found one point that I am concerned about.

One of our roof cross beams (the beam closest to the gable) has a longer longitudinal crack. No one noticed it when constructing the roof framework, not even at the topping-out ceremony, and our site manager was very annoyed that he hadn't seen this crack earlier.
The crack apparently occurred due to the drying of the wood.

When the expert came, the roof was already covered.
According to the expert, the beam needs to be replaced. However, the roof beam can also be glued and reinforced with a splice plate. According to the site manager, this method is being applied in our case.

Nevertheless, I am somewhat concerned whether a reinforced and glued beam will have the same long-term properties as an "original beam" or whether it might be more prone to potential damage in the long run. Maybe one of the experts here can tell me something about this. Does such a crack occur frequently?

The expert considers the applied method to be an acceptable solution. However, I am a bit unsure.

Hello, f-pNo,

Now I still have some concerns whether a reinforced and glued beam has the same long-term properties as an "original beam" or whether it might be more susceptible to potential damage in the long run. Perhaps one of the experts here can say something about this. Does such a crack occur more frequently?

The expert considers the applied method to be an acceptable solution. However, I am a bit unsure.

Then trust BL & the expert; wood always works. Cracks should and can be secured from additional water and dirt ingress by constructive measures, e.g.: clamping, battening, and covering etc.; it is not necessarily required to close every crack.

To assess the load-bearing capacity of cracks in wood, some definitions have been made:

[*]The influence of shrinkage cracks must be differentiated according to the main load of the component
[*]The position of the cracks in the wood cross-section in relation to the load direction must be taken into account
[*]The largest crack depths are possible as a single crack or as the sum of the crack depths of opposing cracks

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 would cause structural problems, the expert would have already exerted considerable pressure to replace the beam.

PS: You inadvertently made me reread my documents with this question.

Rhenish regards

Then trust BL & experts; wood always works. Cracks should and can be secured against additional water and dirt ingress through constructive measures, e.g.: by clamping, battening, and covering, etc.; it is not necessarily required to close every crack.

There are so-called harmlessness criteria for wood. The procedure approved by the site manager and the expert is a completely usual process. If it were a longitudinal crack that would cause structural problems, the expert would have already exerted considerable pressure to replace the beam

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

PS: By the way, your question made me reread my documents.

Always gladly – let’s see if I can find other questions that have the same effect .