Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Hey Curtis,
Well I actually expected to see listed plates for this application rather than the 1/8 inch straps but the approved plans (stamped by an engineer) called for exactly that.
Most of the perimeter cracks were simply patched with a 2500 lb. thin-set (according to the specs.). Cracks of 1/4 inch or more required these straps in addition.
The retrofit had appropriate permits so who am I to say anything more. It appeared that the all of the plan specifications were followed.
-- Jeff Pope
JPI Home Inspection Service
"At JPI, we'll help you look better"
(661) 212-0738
Originally Posted By: mkober This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Jeff,
I'm not familiar with the original foundation problem requiring a retrofit, but the photos sure would get my attention as to how effective the retrofit was (is). I'm guessing your client or the seller paid an engineer to work up the retrofit details and monitor the work, so hopefully your liability isn't at issue. The steel strap bridging a patched or repaired area doesn't appear substantial enough to be effective, and the anchor bolts attaching it are spaced closer together than what is normal practice to develop full strength of the anchors. The (temporary?) stub vertical spacer block should also warrant a question or two regarding the thoroughness of the retrofit. I assume the yellow job card indicates the local building inspection unit was involved, which by itself never instills much confidence, at least here in western Colorado. Concrete footings with rebar laying in the dirt are routinely approved here, and a few months ago I came across a steel beam supporting floor joists that had been spliced at midspan--I could easily put my index finger through the bottom flange weld splice joining two sticks of salvage steel!! I've given up trying to inform the building department of these mistakes ("that's not our problem--we're too overworked to be able to deal with construction problems" ). I guess the bottom line is job security for us home inspectors down the road when these places start falling apart.
Originally Posted By: ccoombs This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Mike
The spacing of the bolts wasn't an issue because the inside bolts were too close to the repair to do any good....
I assumed the strap was in lieu of rebar...and to be honest I would have suggested saving the cost of material and labor.
Jeff
"so who am I to say anything more." You have a lot of say. Obviously your client trusts you. If you have a concern you should bring it to their attention. When dealing with someone with a stamp, how it is brought up is important.
Originally Posted By: jpope This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
ccoombs wrote:
When dealing with someone with a stamp, how it is brought up is important.
Please expand on this statement.
Regardless of the trust factor, I do not have the credentials to question the design drafted by a Registered Structural Engineer. Wouldn't you agree Curtis?
Apparently the SE did not feel that the vertical cracks in the foundation were "severe" enough to warrant through and through bolting with listed plates on two sides.
Did you look at the "before" pictures? How would you call this as an SE yourself?
-- Jeff Pope
JPI Home Inspection Service
"At JPI, we'll help you look better"
(661) 212-0738
Originally Posted By: ccoombs This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Jeff
Just because you don?t have ?the credentials? doesn?t mean you can?t question a fix. And just because an SE or CE is involved doesn?t mean they are right.
I have found that when questioning an engineer?s design, telling them you think they are wrong at the start isn?t going anywhere. Asking specific questions of how and/or why is a better way to start and move toward the direction of why you think it is wrong. Even asking why another option wasn?t used is okay. The other concern is not to provide any detailing, sketches or calculations. This can be considered engineering without a license. Sketches of the condition or of past fixes are okay as long as they are presented that way.
As for the bolted fix, the concern is the location of the bolts. They appear to be too close to each other at each end of the strap and not enough ?end distance? to the crack/repair. Although through bolts would address any eccentric loading, there would be other issues to address. The spacing and ?end distance? on the bolts would still be an issue. Plus you would have to deal with long term issues of water and metal, assuming the other side of the footing is on the exterior of the building.
I am assuming the vertical cracks are due to tension. One source of this tension would be the raise of soil due to water or the shrinkage of soil due to the removal of water. So a strap with bolts isn?t such a bad idea. However, it should be located at the top of the footing and/or the bottom of the footing. At its current location it is only resisting movement due to seismic or sliding. And it is installed at an angle. I would also provide a good distance between the original crack and/or repair and the first bolt. I would also space the bolts per the manufacture?s specs.