Crap Beam a/k/a Trac Beam

CrapBeam.info

Crap Beam a/k/a Trac Beam™

This site is a public repository of information on the Trac Beam™.

Please email anything that you may have pertaining to the product.

Trac Beam™ is marketed through the Pool Enclosure Collective, LLC

Do Yeon Kim, P.E., a/k/a Do Kim, (lic. no. 49497) is the sole corporate officer.

Allegations

The Pool Enclosure Collective (PEC) is making numerous misrepresentations concerning the Trac Beam™, including but not limited to: it is the only beam "produced with the newer 6005T5 alloy which is 140% stronger than the older 6063T6 alloy that is standard for the aluminum patio industry in Florida." According to the Aluminum Association's Aluminum Standards and Data, which is the definitive reference for aluminum alloy properties and the source for the Aluminum Design Manual, 6005T5 has an ultimate minimum tensile strength of 38ksi verses 30ksi for 6063T6. So the actual difference in strength is 27%, not the 140% that PEC professes. Further, conventional beams and other proprietary beams are readily available in 6005T5.

The additional strength comes with a cost: 6005T5 tends to fail catastrophically when subjected to impact or overloading. Alcoa specifically admonishes that the alloy should not be use in applications where the structure may be susceptible to these conditions, e.g. screen enclosures. 6005T5 is not widely used because of its detrimental attributes. Consequently, it hasn't even been tested for corrosion resistance.

The subterfuge is more serious that just exaggerating the strength of beams. A warranty has been fabricated that is supposed to cover the repair and replacement of Trac Beams™ enclosures. PEC's brochure and a phony web site were created to promote it. The web site listed Fidelity National Financial, Inc. d/b/a Dominion Home Warranty as the insurer. Fidelity National Financial doesn't do business in Florida and has specifically disavowed any connection to the sham warranty. It was buried under another company's domain. The owner claimed his web designer concealed the pages without his knowledge and it was removed after he was apprised of the situation. PEC paid the designer to create the pages. A copy of the site is posted here. The application page for the fraudulent warranty is also present on PEC's web site.

Another phony web site was established under the name of Dominion Home Warranty Company. The original web page was removed on November 11th, 2007. A copy is posted here. The domain is registered by a fictitious entity with fake information. The Trac Beam™ logo is prominently displayed. It links to and references Liberty Home Protection, which also disavows any connection to the sham warranty and web site. It appears that the creator of the Dominion site plagiarized Liberty's site to make it appear legitimate. A PEC contractor has advertised the warranty.

No entity has registered with the State of Florida to sell any form of insurance or extended warranties under any derivation of the "Dominion", "Trac", or "Pool" monikers. So it is just a matter of time until prosecutions ensue.

On July 24th, 2008, the Florida Board of Professional Engineers (FBPE) issued a ruling stating that "there is sufficient evidence to believe that [Do Yeon Kim] violated Section 471.033(1)(g) & Rule 61G15-19.001(4)". Which is defined by statute as "[e]ngaging in fraud or deceit, negligence, incompetence, or misconduct, in the practice of engineering". The ruling was in response to a complaint concerning a screen enclosure constructed with Trac Beams™. The evaluating engineer "opined that [Do Kim] did not utilize due care in performing in an engineering capacity and failed to have due regard for acceptable standards of engineering principles" (Closing Order, p.2). As a consequence, a Letter of Guidance was issued. A copy of the case is posted here.

The FBPE's expert engineer also issued an opinion regarding the Florida product approvals for the Trac Beam™ as follows (FBPE case no. 2008008617, Joseph M. Berryman's report, p. 7):

This additional opinion is in reference to statements made in the product approval documents reviewed and does not apply to Mr. Kim.
On page 2 of 9 in document 2A above under Section 4.0 Specimen Installation, I encountered the following statements.
"Each end of the assembled beam specimen was affixed to a post just as would be done in the field for actual erection of a structure. The posts were anchored to the concrete floor of the lab as would be done in the field for actual assembly. This arrangement facilitates testing with the end fixity of the beam (to column?) as it would be in actual installations in the field. See drawing L-3931 for details on the connection". Drawing L-3931 depicts a moment transferring beam to column connection with fastener arrangement similar to mansard beam knee and gable ridge beam splice connections.
I have reviewed hundreds if not thousands of sets of plans for screen enclosures and screen enclosure specifications and "Master Files", and I have yet to see a beam to column connection detailed or constructed in the manner indicated in drawing L-3931. Typical beam to column connections are detailed with a cluster of fasteners located in a relatively small area which provides negligible moment capacity through the joint. You may refer to the "Main Post/Column to Roof Beam Connection Detail" on page 4 of 6 of Mr. Kim's drawings or to page 1-12 of the "AAF Guide to Aluminum Construction in High Wind Areas", "Typical Schematic Section @ Bearing Wall Column", for an industry typical beam to column connection detail. In my opinion, the tested connection is not "as it would be in actual installations in the field."
I also observed in the photograph of the "Mansard Connections" that the column section of the test assembly is only a few inches in height at best. In a normal beam to column frame assembly, the joint at the beam column connection would translate laterally in plane proportionally to the parameters of the system. (Framing member length and stiffness, restraint, loading, etc.) In my opinion the arrangement shown will allow almost no lateral movement at the beam to column connection and therefore negates a normal effect of the column on the framing system. Again, the tested specimen is not "as it would be in actual installations in the field."
In my opinion, the test specimen depicted in the referenced photograph is modeled as a single span beam, fixed at both supports against translation and rotation. I opine further that the unrealistic fixity at the supports of the test specimen has returned unrealistic, un-conservative test results. It may be appropriate for FDCA, Product Approval to review this application further.

PEC's web site states that:

Two suppliers are license to sell Trac Beams™: Town & Country Industries and Florida Extruders International, Inc.

Seven contractors are certified to install it: Aluminum Contractors, Inc., Florida Pool Enclosures, Inc., Pioneer Development Enterprises, Inc., Screen Professionals, Inc., Treasure Coast Exteriors, LLC, Absolute Aluminum, Inc., and Trademark Aluminum, Inc.

	Trac Beam™ is a trademark registered to Engineered Innovations, LLC. Do Kim is listed as the registered agent and A.B.E. Investment Enterprises, Inc. is listed as the manager of the corporation. Do Kim is also the registered agent and president of A.B.E. Investment Enterprises, Inc. This website is published as a public service courtesy of: Vernon M. Leslie, Jr. P.O. Box 804 Palm Beach, FL 33480 Please contact me if you have any concerns regarding the veracity of the information contained herein or want to submit additional information. Email submissions or comments to: info@CrapBeam.info Return to top of page

	Revised: 07/05/16