Before I finish a 1200 sq. ft. basement for multi purpose use in a 4 year old home, I would like to remove 1 row of support columns (4) to open up the views for an eventual home theater area. There are a total of three rows, 2 of which contain 4 (7 feet apart) columns each holding up a wood laminated beam spanning 35 feet. There is a third row with 2 columns supporting a 15ft beam. My concern is only 1 of the 4 column rows. What is the feasibility of doing this and what would be entailed? Could a steel I-beam be used in lieu of the columns? Any other suggestions? Thanks.

Your asking a question that can only be answered correctly by a architect. I suggest you contact one before you do anything. Bearing walls are nothing to fool with.

Thanks for your imput. I agree with you and that's why I have given up on the idea.

I have removed beams that fall in doorways but in its place I added about 4 studs in the doorway to replace the post. I took an exact measurement after finishing and wrote it down in an unfinished area for future reference. After 10 years nothing had moved. You might encase the posts in decorative wood or something. I would never completely remove a post. Your house will start cracking up. Hope this helped.

Thanks for your help. I actually posted this question in 2 categories (see foundation) and was told by everyone that even if it was technically possible, it would be financially impractical. I am aware that these posts can be beautified by using wood or sheetrock etc. but my issue was the views that these posts will block in my future home theater. Covering them, which I now WILL do, is only going to make it worse. But you can't always have everything. Thanks again.

To keep your finished poles skinny, try boxing them in with 1x4s so they form boxes that hug the pole. Use construction adhesive to fasten the box to both the sides of the pole and the floor so it's secure and can't rotate. Add moldings as you wish. Then you can stain or paint them to finish them. At least they won't be big fat obstacles.

Hi,
I realize this post is old, but an HGTV website is the last place you should be looking for STRUCTURAL advice. The first post (from woodchuck) even tells you to contact the wrong professional for your consideration.
An architect CAN NOT tell you the feasibility of removing posts in your basement. Only a qualified structural engineer can do that.
I am a structural engineer, and unless you have an unusually large basement or an unusually framed basement, I am struggling to visualize why you would have 3 lines of posts. I am assuming these lines of posts are approximately 12' or so apart with joists spanning between the girders that the posts support?
Either way, if all you want to do is remove 1 post, I do not see any issue with that at all.
It would likely require the floor to be shored from below and a steel plate (or channel) added to one or both sides of the existing beam - this is called a "flitch plate beam".
You should contact a local structural engineer. It's an easy calculation.

Once again, baloney substitutes for good sense. Why can an architect not advise on the feasibilty of removing posts in a basement? As you say, it's an easy calculation, and we all have to demonstrate that we can indeed perform such calculations, and many a great deal more complicated, before we become licensed. Maybe some allow those skills to decay, but others surely keep them honed and well sharpened, especially those who have tried having a structural engineer design their houses and gave it up for the sake of their clients' budgets. An architect who cannot competently offer such advice as this person has sought should be de-registered. I don't know how many can or cannot, but I do know one who can, and that's all I need.

I can assure you that I work with some of the most prestigious architects in the country on very important projects (that often win awards and are written about in architectural journal and magazines). Architects are NOT engineers.
Please, Richard Hetzel, do tell me some of the finer points of flitch plate beam design.
It is an easy calc for a STRUCTURAL ENGINEER who knows what he/she is doing, it is not for an architect. Did you take any structural design/analysis courses in your architecture program? If so, you would be the first that I've heard of.
Architects know how to make things look pretty, engineers make sure it can stand up.

Engineering without art is calculating, but art without engineering is DREAMING.

No quick reply to that one, huh? I guess you haven't done as many flitch plate beams as you thought, huh?
Please do tell me what other hardcore engineering calcs you've done.
Please don't bore me with beam capacities or column or stud wall capacities.
Talk to me about diaphragm capacities or shearwall capacities. Or maybe some stability calculations. Don't limit yourself to wood. I'd love to hear how you determine the adequacy of stability bracing for steel columns or bottom chord bracing in trusses.

I do residential work, and I am competent to do all the calculations necessary for such work. And I have 50 years of successful projects which support that assertion. Of course, on major commercial work, what little I do of it, I use a good structural engineer. I do hope the architects you work with do not read what you have said about their (and my) profession, because you could lose a couple of clients. I know that I would never retain an engineer with an attitude like yours for a second project.

And I'm not going to use a structural engineer for my residential work, ever. Been there, done that. It just didn't work.

Alright, let's get one thing clear. I did not register on this board to start fights with you, Richard hetzel. I registered on this board to give some advice to homeowners that they would typically have to pay a competent engineer for. Advice that gives people things to consider besides the obvious. Things like considering the vibrational consequences of removing a post in the basement.
I didn't say anything bad about architects in general, just stated clearly what their role in the construction process is. Most architects know they are not equipped to do REAL engineering. There is a reason that single family homes don't require engineering and that is the reason an architect can do the calcs. I know some states allow architects to stamp other structures, but the states are few and even fewer architects are willing to do it.
Engineering is not just about making sure something won't fall down when it is built, but that it can actually withstand all of the forces that it is expected to be subjected to over its useful life.
Engineers follow the loads throughout the structure and make sure it is taken safely back to ground.
I answered a few questions on here because I saw some advice that is best left to structural engineers and could seriously cause life-safety concerns being given by people who are clearly not qualified (not you, necessarily). They believe they are qualified - maybe because they've done the grunt work in the field, maybe because they've done some of it on their own and it's still standing. Whatever reason they feel they are qualified is irrelevant, the fact of the matter is that states license engineers for a reason. You can't slap something together and say, "See, look I don't need an engineer...... it's still standing". There are so many more things that go into that laypersons don't think about or even understand. Sometime you want to allow a structure or joint to move, sometimes you don't.... there are a ton of detailing items and considerations that may not cause collapse of a member/structure, but can cause it to not be serviceable and perform the way it was intended.
I can tell from many of your posts and many of the responses to your posts that:
1.) You seem pretty knowledgeable - for an architect (lol, I had to throw that in there)
2.) You like to cause friction where there doesn't need to be any.

You would be very surprised if I told you some of the projects I've worked on - I'm sure you've heard of many of them.
The point of this long post is that laypersons who don't understand true engineering shouldn't write engineers off as "masters of overkill", and that architects should recognize their role in the construction process (I certainly recognize mine as a structural engineer - I would never tell an architect he is wrong about the aesthetics of a structure), and also recognize the limitation of his/her knowledge when it comes to the true structural behavior of members and how it relates to and impacts the behavior of the structure as a whole.

I think you would be very surprised if I told you some of the projects I have worked on, not as an architect, but as an assistant to a structural engineer, one of the finest in the world.

When LWP, or concretemasonry, or Maintenance6, or Home Care Club, or Jay in Minnesota, or TileGuyBob, or many of the other respected contributors to this forum, including myself, first posted here, we did so by simply attempting to help people who asked for help, without attacking others, and without speaking of ourselves in self-laudatory terms. Perhaps if you came back under another name and started out that way, instead of the way you did, you might find that same respect, also.

This is exactly why engineering will never achieve the respect/stature in society that it deserves.
There are far too many people who think they understand engineering principles and simply do not.
Again, there is a reason that the state licenses engineers.
Just for the record, there is no way you are going to bully me in coming in here under a new name. I neither want nor need your respect. I have the respect of the architects I work for and my colleagues. Your admiration for my knowledge base and understanding of structural behavior and issues matters zero to me.
Keep doing your homes and have fun. I'll take my kids to the museums I do.

WOW! I never thought that a question I asked 2 1/2 years ago would cause so much ruckus 2 1/2 years later! I respect both of your professions which is why when I finally get around to begining this basement project I will be using an architect for design (Richard-you've already been to my house to see the job) and a structural engineer to tell me if I can remove either some or all of the columns. Structuraleng-what can I expect to pay for such a consultation in today's world and how do I find the most qualified person in my area for the job? Thanks for your help in advance and for the free entertainment all day.

Kaybjay-
I would estimate that it would take 4-6 hours (likely including driving time) for an engineer to come out to your place and survey the existing framing in the basement as well as the floors above (sometimes framing flips directions on the floors above).
I would estimate a day to do the calcs. I know at first glance it seems simple (and it really is not difficult), but in addition to determining what will need to be done for strength and deflection considerations a good engineer will also make sure the vibrational characteristics of the new system are satisfactory (and that can take a little more time). It would really suck to open up the basement, but have your first floor feel a little bouncy, right?
Additionally, because you are removing supports for this beam, all of the load will be going to the existing walls. The walls and their foundations need to be checked for this additional load as well.
For a total of 12-16 hours, this could be on the order of $1k to $2k depending on the engineer. If you want drawings (which you probably will) it will cost a little more. It will be money well spent, though, as I can assure you that no contractor will be able to do a vibrations check (you're lucky if you get an accurate strength and deflection check out of them), and it will ensure satisfactory performance of your new space and existing space.
Engineers will virtually never get into specifying construction practices or sequences. The reason for this is that practices and sequences is a "means and methods" issue that falls on the contractor. Engineers have been villified in the past for dictating the "means and methods" that a contractor had to follow and blaming the engineer for the high cost of construction. Contractors typically like to know what the end product needs to be and they take it upon themselves to make it happen.
There are exceptions to this, of course, but typically an engineer will not specify these things, just what the end product needs to be. I only mention this so you don't expect to be able to tell the contractor exactly how to proceed and think the engineer didn't do his job is he doesn't provide it.
Good Luck!

Oh yeah, as for the most qualified person............ I would call around to different firms. I would definitely make sure they know that you want them to perform a vibration analysis (because many engineers won't get into that). Ask about their familiarity with such projects and ask their fee. A more experienced engineer will probably charge more, but will likely do a better (read more thorough) job and take less time doing it (saving you money in the end).
When calling around, ask if they have a structural department. Many civil engineering firms don't get into structures. I know that conventional thinking is that this is "civil engineering", but structural engineering is really its own animal.