Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
(OP)
Hi people.
Plase look at the sketch attached.
Short description:
Virgin ground under the future raft slab is removed (aboth 20cm).
Beam trenches are dig out.
Beams are poured first and serve later as the "side formwork" for good hardcore compaction.
Virgin ground (slab part) is compacted and then filled with harcore compacted filling (fractions raging from 1-32mm).
An "mud slab" is poured (above the harcore fill) wich then serves as the leveling plane for the proper reinforecement placement.
Beams are poured first and later serev as the "side formwork" for good hardcore compaction.
Hidroisolation is placed on the raft surface as the first layer of the residential floor.
note: virgin ground level (left in green) and the down side of the RC raft slab are at the same elevation.
Im interested in your negative comments for this design.
Thank you.
Plase look at the sketch attached.
Short description:
Virgin ground under the future raft slab is removed (aboth 20cm).
Beam trenches are dig out.
Beams are poured first and serve later as the "side formwork" for good hardcore compaction.
Virgin ground (slab part) is compacted and then filled with harcore compacted filling (fractions raging from 1-32mm).
An "mud slab" is poured (above the harcore fill) wich then serves as the leveling plane for the proper reinforecement placement.
Beams are poured first and later serev as the "side formwork" for good hardcore compaction.
Hidroisolation is placed on the raft surface as the first layer of the residential floor.
note: virgin ground level (left in green) and the down side of the RC raft slab are at the same elevation.
Im interested in your negative comments for this design.
Thank you.





RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Just form the slab and pour the beams and slab at the same time.
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
I blue dotet line you can see the pouring break. (attached raft2)
I agree with you that the monolitic cast would probably result in a stiffer construction but I think that could be neglected due to provided reinforcement and links in the beams wich connect the two pour stages.
Advantage of beams beeing poured first that they can serve later as the "side formwork" for good hardcore compaction. You basicly made an "ground pool" with fixed edges wich wont allow any side movement of the fill during the compaction process.
If using one pour I could do it with forming an "skewd" compacted hardcore face (attached raft3)wich will also in return create an thicker "slab-beam" connection but I question the compaction at that face.
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
You called this a "raft foundation". By that, I assume you mean that there are a series of internal beams in both directions.
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Removing the virgn soil, compacting its exposed surface then filling the "hole" with granular material compacting it and then, excavating for ground beams would defineltly couse disturbance around the excavation trenchs and could couse corners sides caving in (depending on the soil properties).
Youve done projects like this?
"I assume you mean that there are a series of internal beams in both directions"
Theres the "all around" perimeter beam.
Internals only provided if the "bay ratio" is more then lx/ly > 2.
I want to have the feel of two way slab behaviour when using downstand beams with a thiner slab.
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
2. Your terminology is strange to me. What you have is a slab on grade with perimeter footings (or beams). A raft foundation consists of a grid of beams or slab thickenings, and is typically used where there is a degree of volume change sensitivity to moisture.
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
2.) Why do you call this an slab on grade?
Raft foundation can be a solid plate element without any thickenings, or with them, can have downstand beams...there are various solutions. Typicaly used where the ground conditions are such that differential settlements are to be expected wich can couse structural damage to the superstructure. Like you said, swelling clays are also a bit concern.
What are you thought on the hydroinsulation position?
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
To answer your questions.
Please look at the picture attached wich shows the arangement of the residential floor layers.
This is something thats been bothering me for a while.
As said, this is a system that been used for over 30 years as the standard in insulating residential groundfloors resting on soil.
Material used for the water insulation is bitumenius paper wich is placed and fixed directly ON the RC slab.
Like you said water and moisture will come under the slab.
Placing the water insulation ON the slab will not prevent the slab of beeing exposed to water coming from the ground.
The PE folie (vapor barrier) is placed on the warmer side of the floor layer wich will prevent the moisture of condenstaing in the thermoinsulation.
But this is also contradicting the capillary action coming from under the slab becasue if the ground moisture penetrates the slab it wont have any problem wetting the thermoinsulation.
Maybe casting the RC slab directly on the vapor barrier...
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
So, how did you see it?
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Im still interested to hear your thoughts
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
I read aboth these stuff a lot.
The placement of the vapor barrier seems to be crucial.
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Ive been reading more and more on USA recommendations for floors on ground insulating solutions.
Ive found one article here that goes in-depth on explaining how the capilary action + water vapor under the slab are two main concerns.
The articel is located here:
http://www.jdtechnical.com/VaporBarriersNus_Nec_PA...
I agree on most part mentioned on capilary action that can occur under the slab and its effect on the concrete slab, BUT, I cannot agree on the part thats written on the water vapor coming from ground into residental space.
Water vapor always travels from higher pressure to lower pressure!
If we assume that, in winter,
- inside heated residential spaces have temperature of 70F and relative humidity of 50-60%.
I cannot agree on values below 30% of relaitve humidity couse youll probably have serious sympthoms of "dry throat"
- temperature of soil below the slab dependes on many factors, air temperture, type of soil, depth at wich its measured...but lets say that outside temperature is around 40F and for simplicity let assume that thats also the temperature of the soil.
If we assume the worst case scenario that the soil under the slab has 100% relative humidity the water vapor pressure would be around 150psi
So internal water vapor pressure 180psi > soil water vapor pressure 150psi
Vapor would travel from the inside towards the ouside (soil).
Your thoughts...
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Where do you place thermo-inslulation?
Whats usual practice in USA?
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
Ive found an article that explains this very good but Ive always thought geotextiles where used when you wanted to direct waterflow?
Anyone has any experience?
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
It's my experience that raft foundations are generally used with poorer soils and that the consolidation of the granular fill may be an improvement (if required). As long as the soil is essentially undisturbed, I can take no exceptions to your detail. I'd have used hooked dowels in the top all around and then spliced straight bars for the top reinforcing.
Dik
RE: Negative comments for approved practice design of a raft foundation
I mean, when to choose wich model.
For non-woven there are 4oz 6oz 8oz 10oz...
Can any of these model be whitstand the pressure that will a slab on grade produce?