project update... If only!!!! Long
- Thread starter tile
- Start date
- Views: 11065
I agree 100% with Eddie(as usuall).To try and repair that disaster would be like putting perfume on a skunk.Also,to pay him for that mess would be like admitting to him and everyone else that you are happy with the job.You also have to remember that someday you may want or need to sell the property.If I was in the market for a property of you're type and I walked in and saw something like that I would not even consider buying.Not trying to be rude in my post.I just want you to think what may happen down the road if you settle for this or try to repair it.
Buckeye_Jim
Silver Member
EddieWalker said:
Eddie,
This is about finding peace in all of their chaos. How to move on from this contractor and getting the building completed. It is about terminating the contract now. You're right that it is not about having this guy like them. But if the contract can be terminated by an agreement as to what they get for their money, namely a foundation ready for the building to be erected, then they can put this episode behind them.
Now, my review of the pictures, I see that the flatwork seems to look professional, and that all the ugly areas are under the base plates. If a structual engineer can specify the fixes, and they are performed professionally, then you really wouldn't call it 'Southern Engineering'. The cost of the engineer and the new professional installation should be subtracted from a fair assessment of what the job up to that point would have been worth to arrive at a fair contract dissolution amount.
Again, just my $.02.
Jim
I didn't mean to start any arguments here.
I'm taking a route that is middle of the road. By that I mean I am going about this one step at a time. I've contacted a few of the necessary professionals and I have testing for the concrete scheduled for mid December. I am not rushing to a lawyer however I have not discounted the idea totally. I'd rather go to the lawyer once I have evidence by professionals that he has been negligent and not just my rants. Once I figure out what the total damages are I will decide what action to take next. Last thing I want to do is go off half cocked and I certainly am not going to let this go by without correction. I've got to take little steps or I'll loose all control of what happens and I can't afford to have that happen.
At this point I have no warranty on my building until it is re-engineered by a licensed engineer and it has to be stamped and certified. this is what the building manufacture has told me.
The building is still in the field tied up. I'm going to see if I can get it covered or something until this is settled.
The contractor seems to disappear for days and out of the blue he wants to rush and do mostly nothing. Which in itself is aggravating. I have not seen him or heard from him in maybe a week +/- until yesterday. He called yesterday and I told him the project was on hold and not to come out. He sent a guy out this morning who started to work so I had to go out there and tell him to leave. He tried to argue with me. I explained that I was not going to discuss this with him he just needed to leave. Not 20 minutes later the contractor showed up. I asked him if we could set up a time that we could discuss this matter. I didn't have time this morning as I was late getting out already. He was very upset and told me I was crazy that there were no problems and all this could be fixed easily. He didn't understand why I was being this way. When I explained the warranty issue he said they do this all the time and there are no problems. After I left he gathered up all his wood and took his trailer with him. I will give him a day to calm down and then I'll call him.
I know this is going to be more of a fight than I signed up for but I have to deal with the situation now. I will do what's fair for all involved but right now I don't know how bad it is until I have the tests done and the engineer gets here to tell me what the problems are and what it will take to make it right. Then I can decide what I need to do. I have no intentions of letting this go without an acceptable fix. I do plan to sell at some time and even if I didn't I don't plan to have a subquality building, even if it is a barn.
We may end up leaving that slab in place with some fixes and starting over next to that slab. We've discussed making the existing slab more of a carport of sort of patio with a trellis of sorts. Maybe a place for BBQ's. I'm thinking that if it's not structurally sound for the building that it may be useful in another way. I'd hate to think it was a total loss. The top of the slab is fairly nice and I'm sure with some engineering we can make it work. If it still looks bad then we could do a concrete topping on it. It's expensive and was not in our original budget but we'll just have to see where this takes us.
Back to the concrete mess...
The testing company has given me 2 options. 1 is to core drill it at 500.00++
the other is to do what they call a Swiss Hammer test that runs 250.00
I've heard of core drilling but i've never heard of the Swiss Hammer. The testing company comes highly recommended and they are leaning towards the Swiss Hammer because of the steel in the slab. I haven't spoke to the Arch. Eng. about it yet, just thought I'd get your ideas.
Thanks
Tiles Wife
I'm taking a route that is middle of the road. By that I mean I am going about this one step at a time. I've contacted a few of the necessary professionals and I have testing for the concrete scheduled for mid December. I am not rushing to a lawyer however I have not discounted the idea totally. I'd rather go to the lawyer once I have evidence by professionals that he has been negligent and not just my rants. Once I figure out what the total damages are I will decide what action to take next. Last thing I want to do is go off half cocked and I certainly am not going to let this go by without correction. I've got to take little steps or I'll loose all control of what happens and I can't afford to have that happen.
At this point I have no warranty on my building until it is re-engineered by a licensed engineer and it has to be stamped and certified. this is what the building manufacture has told me.
The building is still in the field tied up. I'm going to see if I can get it covered or something until this is settled.
The contractor seems to disappear for days and out of the blue he wants to rush and do mostly nothing. Which in itself is aggravating. I have not seen him or heard from him in maybe a week +/- until yesterday. He called yesterday and I told him the project was on hold and not to come out. He sent a guy out this morning who started to work so I had to go out there and tell him to leave. He tried to argue with me. I explained that I was not going to discuss this with him he just needed to leave. Not 20 minutes later the contractor showed up. I asked him if we could set up a time that we could discuss this matter. I didn't have time this morning as I was late getting out already. He was very upset and told me I was crazy that there were no problems and all this could be fixed easily. He didn't understand why I was being this way. When I explained the warranty issue he said they do this all the time and there are no problems. After I left he gathered up all his wood and took his trailer with him. I will give him a day to calm down and then I'll call him.
I know this is going to be more of a fight than I signed up for but I have to deal with the situation now. I will do what's fair for all involved but right now I don't know how bad it is until I have the tests done and the engineer gets here to tell me what the problems are and what it will take to make it right. Then I can decide what I need to do. I have no intentions of letting this go without an acceptable fix. I do plan to sell at some time and even if I didn't I don't plan to have a subquality building, even if it is a barn.
We may end up leaving that slab in place with some fixes and starting over next to that slab. We've discussed making the existing slab more of a carport of sort of patio with a trellis of sorts. Maybe a place for BBQ's. I'm thinking that if it's not structurally sound for the building that it may be useful in another way. I'd hate to think it was a total loss. The top of the slab is fairly nice and I'm sure with some engineering we can make it work. If it still looks bad then we could do a concrete topping on it. It's expensive and was not in our original budget but we'll just have to see where this takes us.
Back to the concrete mess...
The testing company has given me 2 options. 1 is to core drill it at 500.00++
the other is to do what they call a Swiss Hammer test that runs 250.00
I've heard of core drilling but i've never heard of the Swiss Hammer. The testing company comes highly recommended and they are leaning towards the Swiss Hammer because of the steel in the slab. I haven't spoke to the Arch. Eng. about it yet, just thought I'd get your ideas.
Thanks
Tiles Wife
EddieWalker
Epic Contributor
Jim,
I agree with you on your opinion of the contractor. I'm not so sure about the slab though. I've copied and attached two of the pictures that Mrs. Tiles posted that caught my eye about the quality of the job. Not the bolts, but the finish and pour itself. First, she mentioned all the extra water that was added. There was no reason for this except to give the crew longer to work the mud. He would have done that if he was short of people. We pour here in hundred degree temps and don't add water, so outside temps are not a good reason to add water, just time. Extra water means less strength.
If he'd done everything right, than it probably wouldn't matter if the concrete was a little weaker than it could have been. From the thicknes of the pad and beams, I doubt it would have cracked.
In the first picture, you can see the exposed rebar. This are doesn't have any strength in it at all. There are two pictures like that in her link, which indicates to me that nobody worked the mud to get rid of the air pockets. If she has two pictures of it, and mabye there's more, than you can gurantee that there's other air pockets inside the pad that nobody can see. The odds are just too overwhelming.
The second picture I've attached is one that shows the pad from the side. The other pictures make it look smooth, but this one makes it look wavy and very un-even. Ignore the bolts in that picture and look to the left at the edge of the pad. To me, this looks very bad and extremly unprofesional.
Mrs. Tiles,
I think you have a good understanding of what you need to do and are handleing this better than most. Better than I would. hahaha
The contractor is gonna be a problem, and from what you just wrote, I think he is already becomeing a problem. You told him not to come over and he sends a guy anyway. Then he shows up himself and argues with you. You are the boss, not him. He does what you say. Unfortuanately he's trying to convince you of something you already know is a lie. Nobody does a pad like he did and stays in business. He did a terrible job and now he's trying to make up some fantasy that it's an easy fix. It isn't. If he'd done it right, there wouldn't need to be a fix in the first place. The simple fact that he says it's an easy fix is proof that he knows it done wrong, but he thinks you don't know any better and he can BS you into accepting it. There's no telling how many times he's done this to others.
The one thing I was hopeing you'd address is what happened when you talked to the inspector. Did he sign off on the pad? Did he tell you why he failed it so many times and why he changed his mind without the contractor changing anything? If you can get the inspector on your side, than your case against the contractor will become very solid.
Good luck,
Eddie
I agree with you on your opinion of the contractor. I'm not so sure about the slab though. I've copied and attached two of the pictures that Mrs. Tiles posted that caught my eye about the quality of the job. Not the bolts, but the finish and pour itself. First, she mentioned all the extra water that was added. There was no reason for this except to give the crew longer to work the mud. He would have done that if he was short of people. We pour here in hundred degree temps and don't add water, so outside temps are not a good reason to add water, just time. Extra water means less strength.
If he'd done everything right, than it probably wouldn't matter if the concrete was a little weaker than it could have been. From the thicknes of the pad and beams, I doubt it would have cracked.
In the first picture, you can see the exposed rebar. This are doesn't have any strength in it at all. There are two pictures like that in her link, which indicates to me that nobody worked the mud to get rid of the air pockets. If she has two pictures of it, and mabye there's more, than you can gurantee that there's other air pockets inside the pad that nobody can see. The odds are just too overwhelming.
The second picture I've attached is one that shows the pad from the side. The other pictures make it look smooth, but this one makes it look wavy and very un-even. Ignore the bolts in that picture and look to the left at the edge of the pad. To me, this looks very bad and extremly unprofesional.
Mrs. Tiles,
I think you have a good understanding of what you need to do and are handleing this better than most. Better than I would. hahaha
The contractor is gonna be a problem, and from what you just wrote, I think he is already becomeing a problem. You told him not to come over and he sends a guy anyway. Then he shows up himself and argues with you. You are the boss, not him. He does what you say. Unfortuanately he's trying to convince you of something you already know is a lie. Nobody does a pad like he did and stays in business. He did a terrible job and now he's trying to make up some fantasy that it's an easy fix. It isn't. If he'd done it right, there wouldn't need to be a fix in the first place. The simple fact that he says it's an easy fix is proof that he knows it done wrong, but he thinks you don't know any better and he can BS you into accepting it. There's no telling how many times he's done this to others.
The one thing I was hopeing you'd address is what happened when you talked to the inspector. Did he sign off on the pad? Did he tell you why he failed it so many times and why he changed his mind without the contractor changing anything? If you can get the inspector on your side, than your case against the contractor will become very solid.
Good luck,
Eddie
EddieWalker
Epic Contributor
Jim,
I agree with you on your opinion of the contractor. I'm not so sure about the slab though. I've copied and attached two of the pictures that Mrs. Tiles posted that caught my eye about the quality of the job. Not the bolts, but the finish and pour itself. First, she mentioned all the extra water that was added. There was no reason for this except to give the crew longer to work the mud. He would have done that if he was short of people. We pour here in hundred degree temps and don't add water, so outside temps are not a good reason to add water, just time. Extra water means less strength.
If he'd done everything right, than it probably wouldn't matter if the concrete was a little weaker than it could have been. From the thicknes of the pad and beams, I doubt it would have cracked.
In the first picture, you can see the exposed rebar. This are doesn't have any strength in it at all. There are two pictures like that in her link, which indicates to me that nobody worked the mud to get rid of the air pockets. If she has two pictures of it, and mabye there's more, than you can gurantee that there's other air pockets inside the pad that nobody can see. The odds are just too overwhelming.
The second picture I've attached is one that shows the pad from the side. The other pictures make it look smooth, but this one makes it look wavy and very un-even. Ignore the bolts in that picture and look to the left at the edge of the pad. To me, this looks very bad and extremly unprofesional.
Mrs. Tiles,
I think you have a good understanding of what you need to do and are handleing this better than most. Better than I would. hahaha
The contractor is gonna be a problem, and from what you just wrote, I think he is already becomeing a problem. You told him not to come over and he sends a guy anyway. Then he shows up himself and argues with you. You are the boss, not him. He does what you say. Unfortuanately he's trying to convince you of something you already know is a lie. Nobody does a pad like he did and stays in business. He did a terrible job and now he's trying to make up some fantasy that it's an easy fix. It isn't. If he'd done it right, there wouldn't need to be a fix in the first place. The simple fact that he says it's an easy fix is proof that he knows it done wrong, but he thinks you don't know any better and he can BS you into accepting it. There's no telling how many times he's done this to others.
The one thing I was hopeing you'd address is what happened when you talked to the inspector. Did he sign off on the pad? Did he tell you why he failed it so many times and why he changed his mind without the contractor changing anything? If you can get the inspector on your side, than your case against the contractor will become very solid.
Good luck,
Eddie
I agree with you on your opinion of the contractor. I'm not so sure about the slab though. I've copied and attached two of the pictures that Mrs. Tiles posted that caught my eye about the quality of the job. Not the bolts, but the finish and pour itself. First, she mentioned all the extra water that was added. There was no reason for this except to give the crew longer to work the mud. He would have done that if he was short of people. We pour here in hundred degree temps and don't add water, so outside temps are not a good reason to add water, just time. Extra water means less strength.
If he'd done everything right, than it probably wouldn't matter if the concrete was a little weaker than it could have been. From the thicknes of the pad and beams, I doubt it would have cracked.
In the first picture, you can see the exposed rebar. This are doesn't have any strength in it at all. There are two pictures like that in her link, which indicates to me that nobody worked the mud to get rid of the air pockets. If she has two pictures of it, and mabye there's more, than you can gurantee that there's other air pockets inside the pad that nobody can see. The odds are just too overwhelming.
The second picture I've attached is one that shows the pad from the side. The other pictures make it look smooth, but this one makes it look wavy and very un-even. Ignore the bolts in that picture and look to the left at the edge of the pad. To me, this looks very bad and extremly unprofesional.
Mrs. Tiles,
I think you have a good understanding of what you need to do and are handleing this better than most. Better than I would. hahaha
The contractor is gonna be a problem, and from what you just wrote, I think he is already becomeing a problem. You told him not to come over and he sends a guy anyway. Then he shows up himself and argues with you. You are the boss, not him. He does what you say. Unfortuanately he's trying to convince you of something you already know is a lie. Nobody does a pad like he did and stays in business. He did a terrible job and now he's trying to make up some fantasy that it's an easy fix. It isn't. If he'd done it right, there wouldn't need to be a fix in the first place. The simple fact that he says it's an easy fix is proof that he knows it done wrong, but he thinks you don't know any better and he can BS you into accepting it. There's no telling how many times he's done this to others.
The one thing I was hopeing you'd address is what happened when you talked to the inspector. Did he sign off on the pad? Did he tell you why he failed it so many times and why he changed his mind without the contractor changing anything? If you can get the inspector on your side, than your case against the contractor will become very solid.
Good luck,
Eddie
Attachments
rlk
Gold Member
Ms Tile, in your first picture, is that grass I see? If it is, that tells me the contractor did not remove organic material. I don't know where you are located, but in North Carolina, you need to remove all organic material prior to pouring concrete. Top soil should also be removed. Not removing will cause the concrete to settle / crack.
Bob
Bob
Buckeye_Jim
Silver Member
Eddie,
I agree that 2nd picture looks pretty bad. But it is also distorted by the big zoom up. The step up to the steel troweled area is only 1.5 inches, so the big creast in the picture on that line is probably only a 1/2 inch or so. I can't figure out why the area for the base plates are so much wider than the base plates themselves. Maybe the plans call for them to grout in the extra space.
One of my complaints in looking at the pictures is the use of 2x4 for stake material. A big waste of material (maybe) leading to not using enough stakes. Especially along the 2x2 use to form that 1.5" edge on the slab. A usual procedure should have been to fill the footings first with much dryer concrete (1 to 2 inch slump) tamping and vibrating as you go to make sure the forms were filled. Then do the slab with wetter concrete where strength is not a big issue.
I have attached some of pictures of my building (30' x 50'). I was too cheap to buy the base plates, so we formed a trough for arches to drop into. They are later grouted. My building was engineered for 70 lbs per sq ft snow load, but we were only reguired to install 2 1/2" bars in the footings. She must have a "floating slab" design to resist frost upheaval. While we can have heavy wet snow (sierra cement) we do not have to take frost into account.
Mrs. Tiles you seem to be calmer in your last post. That's good. You have to live with this, so no need to make any apologies about demanding a quality result.
Jim
I agree that 2nd picture looks pretty bad. But it is also distorted by the big zoom up. The step up to the steel troweled area is only 1.5 inches, so the big creast in the picture on that line is probably only a 1/2 inch or so. I can't figure out why the area for the base plates are so much wider than the base plates themselves. Maybe the plans call for them to grout in the extra space.
One of my complaints in looking at the pictures is the use of 2x4 for stake material. A big waste of material (maybe) leading to not using enough stakes. Especially along the 2x2 use to form that 1.5" edge on the slab. A usual procedure should have been to fill the footings first with much dryer concrete (1 to 2 inch slump) tamping and vibrating as you go to make sure the forms were filled. Then do the slab with wetter concrete where strength is not a big issue.
I have attached some of pictures of my building (30' x 50'). I was too cheap to buy the base plates, so we formed a trough for arches to drop into. They are later grouted. My building was engineered for 70 lbs per sq ft snow load, but we were only reguired to install 2 1/2" bars in the footings. She must have a "floating slab" design to resist frost upheaval. While we can have heavy wet snow (sierra cement) we do not have to take frost into account.
Mrs. Tiles you seem to be calmer in your last post. That's good. You have to live with this, so no need to make any apologies about demanding a quality result.
Jim
Attachments
capt jack
Silver Member
Eddie Walker is right on (as usual) adding water weakens concrete . On jobs
I've done or had done for me, I puckered about 10-20 gal. of water being added per truck. But 105 gal. should have made the concrete thin enough to fill up the forms and seek it's own level UNASSISTED. You said the "contractor" arrived for the pour alone and then some helpers showed up, I wonder if he got them and trained them on the donut shop parking lot that morning. I'll bet the results of the concrete stress test (not the stress test this guy is putting you thru, the one the engineering firm does) will help you make up your mind. This is not a minor fix. However compared to what others face in life, bad concrete is a minor problem.
I've done or had done for me, I puckered about 10-20 gal. of water being added per truck. But 105 gal. should have made the concrete thin enough to fill up the forms and seek it's own level UNASSISTED. You said the "contractor" arrived for the pour alone and then some helpers showed up, I wonder if he got them and trained them on the donut shop parking lot that morning. I'll bet the results of the concrete stress test (not the stress test this guy is putting you thru, the one the engineering firm does) will help you make up your mind. This is not a minor fix. However compared to what others face in life, bad concrete is a minor problem.
CurlyDave
Elite Member
In the first picture, you can see the exposed rebar. This are doesn't have any strength in it at all. There are two pictures like that in her link, which indicates to me that nobody worked the mud to get rid of the air pockets. If she has two pictures of it, and mabye there's more, than you can gurantee that there's other air pockets inside the pad that nobody can see. The odds are just too overwhelming.
Eddie:
I hate to disagree with you, but in every reinforced concrete structure I have ever seen engineering plans for, the strength is derived from the bar, not from the concrete.
The reason bar is placed a certain distance from the edge of a pour is usually to prevent rusting. While I agree that the job is sloppy to the point of being inexcusable, I think that this area could be salvaged by being grouted, especially if a consciencious contractor took care to assure bonding between the grout and the existing pour.
I completely agree with the idea that there are probably major voids in other areas.
This is never going to be a fine slab, but with some additional expense it might be salvaged.
The part that gives me some concern is from the original post:
While I waited for the building documents and the permitting to go thru I had my neighbor dig up the area for the slab pad and I brought in several trucks of dirt. No real requirements but I wanted to elevate the barn about 2'. This dirt pad sat for some time til the contractor got the permit and we could finally get started.
The pad apparently was poured on 2' of "dirt" (topsoil, clay, whatever is not specified) and there is no mention of placing this in lifts or compacting it.
If anyone is concerned about settlement, look no further. This is almost guaranteed to settle over time.
I see a potential mess here with tile's wife (and tile) having a very valid complaint about an incredibly sloppy job, but the contractor having a counterclaim that the preparation was improper. Now why the contractor would agree to pour concrete on such a poor surface is a mystery to me, and he may be liable for it, but you would need someone familiar with construction case law in the local juristiction to sort that out.
I would certainly think that any competent contractor would recognize a 2' base the exact size & shape of the pad as a recent fill-in and would question how it was placed.
The other issue which is of some concern is that while I see vapor barrier, I see no drain rock under it, and I see no sand over it. This is just plain not the right prep work out here on the left coast, and I think the laws of nature are the same wherever you are. No sand over the vapor barrier will lead to cracks.
And, speaking of cracks, there is no indication of any bar or mesh in the slab itself, just in the grade beams under it.
The real bottom line is that I would not pay the contractor anything until I had the engineering report, and then I would subtract the cost of fixing the problems from the contractor's bill.
Lastly, when I Google "Swiss Hammer concrete" I find that it is actually a Schmidt Hammer, or a rebound hammer.
The Portland Cement Association Concrete Technology | Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): Rebound Hammers | Portland Cement Association (PCA) does not feel that this is a reliable technique, unless a corelation is established with cylinder crush tests from the same batch of concrete.
The Swiss Hammer will tell you if the concrete is of the same quality all over, which I doubt, since different amounts of water were added to each truck, and it will pinpoint the worst places, but I would have a core drilled sample taken & tested at the worst place. Essentially you don't have material all from the same batch. It might have been when it left the plant, but adding different amounts of water means you have a different batch for each truckload.
Eddie:
I hate to disagree with you, but in every reinforced concrete structure I have ever seen engineering plans for, the strength is derived from the bar, not from the concrete.
The reason bar is placed a certain distance from the edge of a pour is usually to prevent rusting. While I agree that the job is sloppy to the point of being inexcusable, I think that this area could be salvaged by being grouted, especially if a consciencious contractor took care to assure bonding between the grout and the existing pour.
I completely agree with the idea that there are probably major voids in other areas.
This is never going to be a fine slab, but with some additional expense it might be salvaged.
The part that gives me some concern is from the original post:
While I waited for the building documents and the permitting to go thru I had my neighbor dig up the area for the slab pad and I brought in several trucks of dirt. No real requirements but I wanted to elevate the barn about 2'. This dirt pad sat for some time til the contractor got the permit and we could finally get started.
The pad apparently was poured on 2' of "dirt" (topsoil, clay, whatever is not specified) and there is no mention of placing this in lifts or compacting it.
If anyone is concerned about settlement, look no further. This is almost guaranteed to settle over time.
I see a potential mess here with tile's wife (and tile) having a very valid complaint about an incredibly sloppy job, but the contractor having a counterclaim that the preparation was improper. Now why the contractor would agree to pour concrete on such a poor surface is a mystery to me, and he may be liable for it, but you would need someone familiar with construction case law in the local juristiction to sort that out.
I would certainly think that any competent contractor would recognize a 2' base the exact size & shape of the pad as a recent fill-in and would question how it was placed.
The other issue which is of some concern is that while I see vapor barrier, I see no drain rock under it, and I see no sand over it. This is just plain not the right prep work out here on the left coast, and I think the laws of nature are the same wherever you are. No sand over the vapor barrier will lead to cracks.
And, speaking of cracks, there is no indication of any bar or mesh in the slab itself, just in the grade beams under it.
The real bottom line is that I would not pay the contractor anything until I had the engineering report, and then I would subtract the cost of fixing the problems from the contractor's bill.
Lastly, when I Google "Swiss Hammer concrete" I find that it is actually a Schmidt Hammer, or a rebound hammer.
The Portland Cement Association Concrete Technology | Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): Rebound Hammers | Portland Cement Association (PCA) does not feel that this is a reliable technique, unless a corelation is established with cylinder crush tests from the same batch of concrete.
The Swiss Hammer will tell you if the concrete is of the same quality all over, which I doubt, since different amounts of water were added to each truck, and it will pinpoint the worst places, but I would have a core drilled sample taken & tested at the worst place. Essentially you don't have material all from the same batch. It might have been when it left the plant, but adding different amounts of water means you have a different batch for each truckload.
EddieWalker
Epic Contributor
CurlyDave said:
Hey Dave,
I've always been led to believe that concrete has a certain level of strength based on it's mix and the materials used. Adding rebar to that mix increases the strenghth of the concrete by spreading out the surface area and allowing the concrete something to bond to. Haveing exposed rebar doesn't accomplish anything from my understanding. If it's just that one area, than a patch over it will keep it from rusting and make things pretty, but that will always be a week spot.
I fully admit to not being qualified to make these statments and I cannot defend or support them in any way. It's just what I've always been told and thought I understood.
You make an excellent point on the dirt used to build up the pad. I missed that because I just assumed it would have been compacted to pass the building inspection. One of the first jobs I had after the Marines was runnning a water truck, which dealt with building up pads in California for residential and commercial jobs. Every inspection involved testing for the level of compaction. Nothing else was done until that test passed.
If it's like you say, and I believe you're right, that pad will be moving for the next 30 years. I predict it will crack and split between the beams. They are huge and will tend to stay put, but the week spot will be those thin areas.
Again, I wonder what the inspector was inspecting? The fact that it was inspected on numerous times led me to believe that some sort of code was met. Obviously there's more wrong here than we can ever imagine.
Jim,
You have a nice building there in a nice setting. How close to Pine Grove or Jackson are you?
Eddie
CurlyDave
Elite Member
I've always been led to believe that concrete has a certain level of strength based on it's mix and the materials used. Adding rebar to that mix increases the strenghth of the concrete by spreading out the surface area and allowing the concrete something to bond to. Haveing exposed rebar doesn't accomplish anything from my understanding. If it's just that one area, than a patch over it will keep it from rusting and make things pretty, but that will always be a week spot.
Concrete has strength in compression. It has almost no strength in tension.
While steel has strength in both tension and compression, the long, thin pieces of rebar would easily buckle if subjected to any significant compressive forces.
Reinforced concrete is a composite material which uses the strengths of both components to achieve its properties.
The way an engineer designs a reinforced concrete structure is to examine the tensile forces developed under the anticipated loads, apply a safey factor, and then specify enough bar to withstand the tensile forces. For most instances, unless you have a completely rediculous amount of bar (ever see a bank vault being constructed?), the area of the concrete times its compressive strength is so much greater than that of the steel that no calculation is ever done for compressive strength. The common term for this is "designing for the bar" or "designing for the steel".
Clearly, the structure is stronger if the bar is completely surrounded by properly compacted concrete, but I expect that the right grout would fill in the exposed voids in this pour. If I owned it, I would mix epoxy with sand, and force that into the exposed voids. Expensive and probably labor-intensive, but the epoxy-sand mixture would adhere well, and make a decent repair. Another possibility would be mixing up a grout with the concrete-adhering emulsions I have seen.
No it wouldn't be as good as doing the job right in the first place, but it could be "good enough".
If it's like you say, and I believe you're right, that pad will be moving for the next 30 years.
Probably longer. The house I live in had areas of uncompacted fill under concrete slabs. It was originally built in 1928. In 1988-89 I completely remodeled and rebuilt it. I had noticed some of the concrete slabs settling before I tore them out, and when I did, the dirt under them was still not fully compacted, 60 years later.
Concrete has strength in compression. It has almost no strength in tension.
While steel has strength in both tension and compression, the long, thin pieces of rebar would easily buckle if subjected to any significant compressive forces.
Reinforced concrete is a composite material which uses the strengths of both components to achieve its properties.
The way an engineer designs a reinforced concrete structure is to examine the tensile forces developed under the anticipated loads, apply a safey factor, and then specify enough bar to withstand the tensile forces. For most instances, unless you have a completely rediculous amount of bar (ever see a bank vault being constructed?), the area of the concrete times its compressive strength is so much greater than that of the steel that no calculation is ever done for compressive strength. The common term for this is "designing for the bar" or "designing for the steel".
Clearly, the structure is stronger if the bar is completely surrounded by properly compacted concrete, but I expect that the right grout would fill in the exposed voids in this pour. If I owned it, I would mix epoxy with sand, and force that into the exposed voids. Expensive and probably labor-intensive, but the epoxy-sand mixture would adhere well, and make a decent repair. Another possibility would be mixing up a grout with the concrete-adhering emulsions I have seen.
No it wouldn't be as good as doing the job right in the first place, but it could be "good enough".
If it's like you say, and I believe you're right, that pad will be moving for the next 30 years.
Probably longer. The house I live in had areas of uncompacted fill under concrete slabs. It was originally built in 1928. In 1988-89 I completely remodeled and rebuilt it. I had noticed some of the concrete slabs settling before I tore them out, and when I did, the dirt under them was still not fully compacted, 60 years later.
Egon
Epic Contributor
My reply is kinda late but:
For any type of action the pad will have to be inspected by a Licensed Engineer and then go from there.
For this job the three man crew needs an additional 4 or more competent men. That's why the water was added. They may also not have had a vibrator or known how to use it properly.
There are voids and the bolts had to be added into partially set concrete. Chances are they may pull out under the right circumstances.
The fellow on the chute was not very experienced and I'm betting there was a lot hand work moving concrete around. Means segregation and real problems on the final finish bull floating and power floating.
I'd also suggest the consistency of the pour will vary all over the place with a lot of future spalling and a slab unable to withstand freeze thaw cycles.
Looking at the bolt placement suggests the form work was not done properly
to ensure they were in the right place and placed vertically. They were placed almost as an after though in partially set concrete.
It's not a nice thing to say but for properly built structure a new start may be in order.
The fixes may cost more in the final tally than starting over.
For any type of action the pad will have to be inspected by a Licensed Engineer and then go from there.
For this job the three man crew needs an additional 4 or more competent men. That's why the water was added. They may also not have had a vibrator or known how to use it properly.
There are voids and the bolts had to be added into partially set concrete. Chances are they may pull out under the right circumstances.
The fellow on the chute was not very experienced and I'm betting there was a lot hand work moving concrete around. Means segregation and real problems on the final finish bull floating and power floating.
I'd also suggest the consistency of the pour will vary all over the place with a lot of future spalling and a slab unable to withstand freeze thaw cycles.
Looking at the bolt placement suggests the form work was not done properly
to ensure they were in the right place and placed vertically. They were placed almost as an after though in partially set concrete.
It's not a nice thing to say but for properly built structure a new start may be in order.
The fixes may cost more in the final tally than starting over.
Buckeye_Jim
Silver Member
Eddie,
My property is 11 acres 15 miles east of Grass Valley which is 55 miles NE of Sacramento and 82 miles North of Jackson. Whole area is often referred to as the mother load, for all the gold mining which across the region. Grass Valley is about the same elevation (2500’) as Pine Grove, while my property is about 3700’ elevation. It’s a kind of a vacation place where we have a 5th wheel trailer to stay in and we are way beyond the grid, so it’s solar power and propane appliances, and a generator.
BTW I have a good friend named Chuck Thomas who moved up to Tyler from Houston in 2000. I think he’s a volunteer firefighter in the area. I was stationed in Sheveport in the Air Force back in the late 60’s.
Take care,
Jim
My property is 11 acres 15 miles east of Grass Valley which is 55 miles NE of Sacramento and 82 miles North of Jackson. Whole area is often referred to as the mother load, for all the gold mining which across the region. Grass Valley is about the same elevation (2500’) as Pine Grove, while my property is about 3700’ elevation. It’s a kind of a vacation place where we have a 5th wheel trailer to stay in and we are way beyond the grid, so it’s solar power and propane appliances, and a generator.
BTW I have a good friend named Chuck Thomas who moved up to Tyler from Houston in 2000. I think he’s a volunteer firefighter in the area. I was stationed in Sheveport in the Air Force back in the late 60’s.
Take care,
Jim
EddieWalker
Epic Contributor
Hey Jim,
My parents live in Pine Grove and I grew up in the Bay Area is the reason I asked. I've camped and skied over allot of the Sierra's, but can't say I know Grass Valley very well.
Dave,
Thanks for the explination. You have the gift of making these things make sense for me. I always enjoy your posts and learning from you. Thanks.
Eddie
My parents live in Pine Grove and I grew up in the Bay Area is the reason I asked. I've camped and skied over allot of the Sierra's, but can't say I know Grass Valley very well.
Dave,
Thanks for the explination. You have the gift of making these things make sense for me. I always enjoy your posts and learning from you. Thanks.
Eddie
Sorry for not replying sooner, I've been busy.
I've spoke to a couple professional concrete guys who don't really know what to think of this guy and say that I got a really crappy deal.
I've spoke to 2 engineers, who are fully capable and I trust without a doubt.
I also spoke with a completely capable contractor again who I trust without a doubt. They have seen the slab first hand and are giving me very similar answers. One thing they told me is that it does not look as bad in person as it does on the pictures that I have. However it is not perfect and still has it's obvious problems. This will be a fix in progress for a little while as we are going to allow it to cure a while longer before finalizing our plans.
I do know that most of the guys here will be disappointed in the route I am taking however my goal is to get this barn up and this mess behind me. The contractor who did this is not worth suing as I'll never get anything out of him. He is NOT going to pay for any of the fixes and the most I could get is the labor I WAS going to pay him anyways. That would only be because I wouldn't pay him not that that was all he was liable for. So we are not going to be calling a lawyer. Next is the inspector who is well not going to make life easy for me. There is a good chance the project will be shut down indefinately and that is not going to help me. The inspectors here can be very difficult usually when it's not neccesary. With the help of an engineer/architect and a real GC we have devised a new plan of attack for the project and will be fixing the missing concrete and the areas where the base plates sit. We will be repermitting the project as he is no longer part of the project and has been terminated. For liability issues the manufacture will be reengineering a fix for the base plates that have been drilled. The slab will never be good but it will be enough. I will be calling the licensing board to report him and I will be calling the concrete manufacture if nothing else but to make them understand they are not doing themselves a service by allowing this to happen.
Where this all goes I do not know only time will tell. Hopefully not too much time.
BTW the finished slab top is fairly flat considering. I have seen worse as far as flatness goes. We do tile and epoxy and deal with floors day in and day out. There are no slab cracks as of yet but I've seen 18 yr old slabs crack. There are expansion joints at the north and south end of the building and there are 4 saw cut joints, 2 in either direction. The concrete is still soft but the feeling is that with the extra engineering that is really not required here in Florida and the added fibre along with the rebar we should be ok. There is a discussion of doing a topping but we need to work out a few details as to what materials we will be using.
At this point nothing is set in stone ( not even my slab) and are subject to change at anytime. I'll keep you posted about the progress of the building or non progress.
Thanks
I've spoke to a couple professional concrete guys who don't really know what to think of this guy and say that I got a really crappy deal.
I've spoke to 2 engineers, who are fully capable and I trust without a doubt.
I also spoke with a completely capable contractor again who I trust without a doubt. They have seen the slab first hand and are giving me very similar answers. One thing they told me is that it does not look as bad in person as it does on the pictures that I have. However it is not perfect and still has it's obvious problems. This will be a fix in progress for a little while as we are going to allow it to cure a while longer before finalizing our plans.
I do know that most of the guys here will be disappointed in the route I am taking however my goal is to get this barn up and this mess behind me. The contractor who did this is not worth suing as I'll never get anything out of him. He is NOT going to pay for any of the fixes and the most I could get is the labor I WAS going to pay him anyways. That would only be because I wouldn't pay him not that that was all he was liable for. So we are not going to be calling a lawyer. Next is the inspector who is well not going to make life easy for me. There is a good chance the project will be shut down indefinately and that is not going to help me. The inspectors here can be very difficult usually when it's not neccesary. With the help of an engineer/architect and a real GC we have devised a new plan of attack for the project and will be fixing the missing concrete and the areas where the base plates sit. We will be repermitting the project as he is no longer part of the project and has been terminated. For liability issues the manufacture will be reengineering a fix for the base plates that have been drilled. The slab will never be good but it will be enough. I will be calling the licensing board to report him and I will be calling the concrete manufacture if nothing else but to make them understand they are not doing themselves a service by allowing this to happen.
Where this all goes I do not know only time will tell. Hopefully not too much time.
BTW the finished slab top is fairly flat considering. I have seen worse as far as flatness goes. We do tile and epoxy and deal with floors day in and day out. There are no slab cracks as of yet but I've seen 18 yr old slabs crack. There are expansion joints at the north and south end of the building and there are 4 saw cut joints, 2 in either direction. The concrete is still soft but the feeling is that with the extra engineering that is really not required here in Florida and the added fibre along with the rebar we should be ok. There is a discussion of doing a topping but we need to work out a few details as to what materials we will be using.
At this point nothing is set in stone ( not even my slab) and are subject to change at anytime.
I'll keep you posted about the progress of the building or non progress.Thanks
Egon
Epic Contributor
Thanks for the update.
I am glad you have good advice on hand locally.
I am glad you have good advice on hand locally.
EddieWalker
Epic Contributor
Thank you for keeping us updated. If anything, you'll find that we're a concerned group that only wants the best for you guys.
Your solutions are better than we've come up with and in the end, you'll have a buildng to be proud of. It's never the problems that come up that matter, but how you overcome them. Tiles shouls be very proud of his wife.
Thanks,
Eddie
Your solutions are better than we've come up with and in the end, you'll have a buildng to be proud of. It's never the problems that come up that matter, but how you overcome them. Tiles shouls be very proud of his wife.
Thanks,
Eddie
Hi all
Since it's been a while I just wanted to say,
Hope everyone had a great Holiday and New Year.
For an update on the progress here. After some discussions and a few arguements we finally have gotten somewhere with this situation. Even though I had wanted to just fire the builder and deal with fixing the slab it hasn't happened that way. I took it one step further and had the slab tested. The tests came back very low, 1780, 1770,1440 & 1290. Keep in mind this was a 2500 psi mix which is the lowest psi any concrete plant in this area makes. You could get lower if you ordered it but really why would you. After seeing the results and kicking around our options we really didn't want to live with the slab as it was. One of the superintendents that we work with also knows the contractor and he interveined on our behalf and spoke with the builder. He did some sqwaking and has been some what slow at coming around but the ultimate decision has been to allow the contractor to fix his mistake. SO........
It is gone!
The contractor is going to replace the slab at no additional cost to me. He has removed it and has schedule to form it up and repoured it. I am having the testing company stay onsite while the new slab is placed to avoid any future problems. We have also decided to NOT place the bolts during the pour but have them epoxied in later. Using the J-Bolts seems better to me but since it didn't work the first time we have opted to do it the fool proof way.
Since it's been a while I just wanted to say,
Hope everyone had a great Holiday and New Year.
For an update on the progress here. After some discussions and a few arguements we finally have gotten somewhere with this situation. Even though I had wanted to just fire the builder and deal with fixing the slab it hasn't happened that way. I took it one step further and had the slab tested. The tests came back very low, 1780, 1770,1440 & 1290. Keep in mind this was a 2500 psi mix which is the lowest psi any concrete plant in this area makes. You could get lower if you ordered it but really why would you. After seeing the results and kicking around our options we really didn't want to live with the slab as it was. One of the superintendents that we work with also knows the contractor and he interveined on our behalf and spoke with the builder. He did some sqwaking and has been some what slow at coming around but the ultimate decision has been to allow the contractor to fix his mistake. SO........
It is gone!
The contractor is going to replace the slab at no additional cost to me. He has removed it and has schedule to form it up and repoured it. I am having the testing company stay onsite while the new slab is placed to avoid any future problems. We have also decided to NOT place the bolts during the pour but have them epoxied in later. Using the J-Bolts seems better to me but since it didn't work the first time we have opted to do it the fool proof way.
Attachments
BayouMan
Silver Member
Tile,
I have been following your post and I have to say, that is the worst job for a slab I have ever seen. I am truely amazed at your perseverence to stay the course and come to a great resolution. May God continue to Bless you.
I have been following your post and I have to say, that is the worst job for a slab I have ever seen. I am truely amazed at your perseverence to stay the course and come to a great resolution. May God continue to Bless you.
