Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Structural Stud/Joist Designations

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Bill

Looks like the designation that Unimast uses for their studs.  Unimast uses the
first group of numbers to indicate size (3 5/8" deep), the second set is "style" and
the last is steel gauge thickness.  What the CSJ exactly stands for I do not know.
But a CSJ stud by Unimast has a 1 5/8" wide flange with a 1/2" "lip".  They use
their different style designations to reference the different flange widths of the
studs:

CSW has a 2" flange
CSE has a 2 1/2" flange.
Lip size varies from 1/2" to 5/8"

Unimast's tech support is:

800-654-7833 North
800-969-4110 South and their website is www.unimast.com

Hope this helps (a little at least)

Mike

Bill Polhemus wrote:

> Could someone set me straight on something?
>
> I am not well-versed in steel stud terminology.
>
> I have an architect's drawings showing the designation 362CSJ18, which I assume
> is some sort of "Channel-shaped Stud-Joist" shape. Of course the architect
> hasn't a clue what the designation means; he's just copying it drawings that got
> it from other drawings, etc., down three or four generations. I did find one
> reference to this shape, at http://www.edgemontdrywall.com/newsteel.htm, but
> there is no information beyond the fact that it is one of many types of
> "Structural" as opposed to "Drywall" framing.
>
> I see that a relatively new organization, the Steel Stud Manufacturers
> Association (SSMA; just what we need, another acronym to remember!), has now
> published specification tables, which can be found in .PDF format at
> http://www.ssma.com/ssmatechcatalog.pdf and in which I can find no reference to
> anything like 362CSJ18. Either that designation is proprietary or the SSMA has
> REVISED the "official" designations (don't you love it when they do that? Like
> TS ->> HSS?)
>
> Can anyone point me in the direction of where I want to be? And if this section
> turns out to be not sufficient (big surprise there, where my experience with
> this architect is concerned), should I use the SSMA specification?
>
> Thanks.
>