Null set. Not possible without a warp in the time space continuum.

What makes you think that the beam isn't already there?

I suspect there is a beam lurking behind the drywall. Something has to be holding the roof up over that room.

The house plans show the beam stopping at the window. Above the window is a box header holding up the roof.

How can you extend a beam without replacing it?

I don't know of any way to stretch a beam no matter how hard you pull it.

The $700 is for the cost of the structural engineer. One simple approach is to sister another beam to the existing one. I have done a local search without much success. They are either too busy, way to expensive >3k$ or they insist that the beam needs to be replaced.

You can sister another beam to it (bolt one to the other).

Or you can use C-Channel steel attached to the end of the existing beam.

Cheaper to replace the beam.

To replace the beam would cost several $1000s in labor/material. You have to:

- Remove all the drywall around the beam which is 20ft off the floor.

- Support the roof which will require a temporary support structure

- Cutaway away the new beam and install the new beam.

- Repairing all the ceiling drywall.

- Doing all this without damaging the ceiling, questionable.

To sister a beam:

- place the new beam next to the old beam and lag bolt them together

- The cost of a sister beam is $300-400.

- Labor cost, reasonable, two people and a lift.

C-Channel steel:

- Attach the steel to side of the beam

- Material Cost?

- labor Cost, cheap, requires one person

Sorry, but I worked for a structural engineering firm. I would expect a minimum of $3000 for a project like this for the engineering report and plans. $700 simply isn’t sufficient budget for this.

$3000 or less is the cost of an Architect. I know this because I have 4 bids.

The reason I don't want to go with an Architect is that the ones I selected are booked out several months. Within their bids is the cost of the structural engineer which averages around $600. This is a very simple engineering task for a one story home. I've already completed the architectural drawings and determined the roof loading, I just need a structural engineer to run the calculations and to come up with the best and cheapest method for extending the beam.

I 'm neither an architect nor a structural engineer, and I don't speak for them, but I suspect that you're running into the same problem that some folks with highly technical hobbies have.

Here's an example of the latter. It's made up, but not much different from what really happens.

You're building your own electric car from the ground up (I actually know people who have done this). There's a company in California that makes the perfect motor for it, exactly what you need. They sell motors to Ford and GM for $600 each. Score!

You call the company. They won't sell you a motor, not at $600, not at any price. They sell only to manufacturers, and only in quantity. They just aren't set up to sell to individuals; that's not their business. They might sell to you if you sign an NDA and a contract to buy 1000 of their motors over the next 6 months. Maybe.

They tell you to go to your local Ford dealer's parts department. Sure, Smith Ford will order a spare-parts Focus EV motor for you! That'll be $6,000 cash, 50% deposit required.

Again, I'm not an insider, but I suspect it's the same with business-to-business services. That $600 is sort of a wholesale price. The structural engineers have long established relationships with those architects. They charge the architects a lower price for a relatively limited, well-defined task. They also know that they won't have to deal directly with the homeowner, the architect will handle that.

You don't have that kind of relationship with the SE, so your price isn't going to be $600 or even $700.

Now, maybe you can find an SE who will work with you for $700. Is he willing to because he's a nice guy, or because he isn't good enough to get work with the architects? How will you know?

As I say, I'm not an expert, just musing about what might be in play here.

Site visit, plan review, autocad plans. No engineer worth their salt would give you plans without a site visit and review of floor plans. Our engineers were billed at $300/hour. Then there’s the expense of covering liability insurance, overhead office expenses, administrative staff to review and send out reports and do billing. You can do the math. There’s a reason the bids come in where they do.

It's possible. The $700 was just a starting price. My biggest problem is finding

a structural engineer who can think outside the box. A couple of engineers recommend replacing the beam. Sure that is the simplest and quickest engineering solution for their $$$. But for the homeowner that is the most expensive solution.

Totally disagree on the site visit.

The site visit is done by the Architect.

Structural Engineers work off the Architect's plans.

It's the Architects job to produce the AutoCad Drawings.

$300/hr is probably for Commercial Structural Engineers (i.e. bridges, skyscrapers etc)

I've not gotten a quote anywhere near $300/hr.

Besides I would pay the $300/hr if he/she could do the work in a couple of hours.

I just need the analysis and information which can be handwritten/hand drawn.

Engineers don't pull solutions from midair. Structural problems don't demand creative solutions. They demand proven solutions. Engineers do an analysis that tells them what they need, and then they look at existing options which will meet the requirement. This isn't a case of just hiring a new person who will give you what you want. If want them to invent unorthadox solutions, it's going to cost you a lot of money. And as an engineer, I can tell you that if engineers are telling you to replace the beam there's probably a very good reason.

I know you think it's "simple" to sister a beam or use a C bracket, but those designs are inherintly weaker than a full beam. I'm not a civil engineer and obviously don't have any data to look at, but any engineer worth their salt has probably considered those options and ruled them out based on the loads the beam is carrying. Those solutions are civil 101. It's not their failure to think outside the box, it's your failure to accept reality.

But you aren’t working with an architect, so how does that argument even apply?

Engineers pull solutions from experience and being creative/inventive increases your ability to solve problems. As example using steel or aluminium, using laminated wood etc. you get the idea. Remember a proven solution first started out as a new idea that someone was daring enough to try. Like Frank Lloyd Wright. I'm not looking for an unorthodox solution. The solutions I mentioned before steel and sistering are proven common methods in the housing industry.

Sistering the beam would span the full length.

The argument applies because I can supply all the information that an Architect can supply to the Structural Engineer. I'm very familiar with AutoCad. I've created permit drawings in the past for my home remodeling projects. For this project the drawings are very simple.

That ain’t Taliesin and you ain’t a multi millionaire, so comparing your project to something done by a name with a giant budget is a straw argument.

Youre gonna have to pay the money and wait out the wait list. Only to get told what everyone else has said. Replace the beam.

Or get a better remodeling plan.

Yeah, like I said no engineer worth their salt is going to do plans based off of the homeowner’s self-drawn house plans. They have a massive liability and have to protect themselves. Do you have AIA after your name? If not, you’re no architect. To your point about sistering the beam, over that long of a span it still wouldn’t be considered as strong as one continuous. They might be able to do it but you likely would have to have a pole carrying the load down where the joint is. Leave the engineering to the engineers.

Not sure why all the hostility?

My statement is that people try different solutions to a problem based on new technology or whatever to solve a problem that may or may not become a proven solutions. Frank Wright is the best example of someone who pushed the world of architectural design and who was ridiculed for some of his ideas that now everyone uses.

Again, I have used the sistering beam technique in the past and it worked fine. And it was all done by an Architect and his structural engineer and approved by the city.

Again, I was told by structural engineers and Architects that sistering a beam, using steel or replacing the beam will work.

So, if they are all proven solutions then I prefer to go with the solution that is the least expensive to implement.

I'm not an Architect but I am a highly qualified Mechanical Engineer. Getting the Structural Engineer to work off my plans is not an issue. All the ones I've talked to will do it, not a problem. And your wrong about sisterming the beam. It all depends on the size of the sistered beam. If It was 2ft x 2ft it would have no problem supporting the weight, as an example.

Proving yet again that the industry standard stereotype is 100% based on fact.

Never take a job working for an engineer. If you live through it to regret that, you won’t do it again.

Youre getting told that your money isn’t green enough with the attitude that comes with it. Tone it down, or you’ll be waiting a LONG time.

[https://www.houzz.com/discussions/10-tests-for-you-and-your-contractors-first-meeting-dsvw-vd~5332686?n=90[(https://www.houzz.com/discussions/10-tests-for-you-and-your-contractors-first-meeting-dsvw-vd~5332686?n=90)

This has got nothing to do with me being an engineer. Maybe I'm just one of the few people out there that likes to do my research so I don't get taken advantage of.

How many times have you had your car serviced realizing later on that you were ripped off. Or buying a car a house etc.

I don't like blindly depending on others to solve my problems, only a fool does that.

Like the saying " A fool and his money are soon parted". And I've worked to hard to part with mine so easily.

You have several engineers (real civil engineers who pay liability insurance and have professional licences, not "highly qualified mechanical engineers"), as well as the vast majority of (dubiously qualified but hey you asked) people on this thread telling you you're wrong. You still insist you know best. In this instance, your only path forward is to spend months looking for a dubiously ethical, cheap (inexperienced) engineer to tell you what you want instead of what you need to hear. I feel sorry for the homeowners who put their trust in you.

WOW! As I stated before I'll pay for good Architect but not $2 to $3,000.

The only reason I mentioned being a Mechanical Engineer is because I took the same classes as a Structural Engineer did, so I know what I'm talking about.

The people on the thread are not Structural Engineers, if so speak up.

As I said again and again, the methods to solving my problem were from qualified and certified Structural Engineers and Architects. They are not my solutions but I know they will work.