Does anyone know where I can find the booklet guide from 2006? Only 2010 and 2018 show up on google. It's for litigation purposes so the booklet used at the time it was built is important. The only reason I know 2006 exists is it's reference in ESR 1553. Thanks
Eng-Tips is the largest forum for Engineering Professionals on the Internet.
Members share and learn making Eng-Tips Forums the best source of engineering information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations dmapguru on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Superior Wall Builder's Guideline Booklet 2006
- Thread starter Jerehmy
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #3
A 2-story wood framed building sits on a precast foundation. Foundation is 28x54. The house is 28x38 (8’ short on each side). So the first floor diaphragm has to tranfer the shear to the end walls in combination with the bond beam likely helping distribute. There’s no interior foundation walls, just the perimeter. Theres 5.5’ of soil fill on the one 54’ side. Other 3 sides have no soil pressure on them. The one 28’ foundation wall has 2 large garage door openings. This wall racked and had 4”+ in plane deflection (has 2” now. surprised the whole building didnt fall over). The opposite 54’ wall has a 1’ knee wall between fdn and the first floor framing so nice little hinge there. This same wall settled several inches. Some company installed soil nails in the 54’ wall with the soil load and pulled it back in which blows my mind since its only 1.5” of concrete where they installed the nails and is causing bending in the opposite direction of how it was designed. Plus the settled wall was jacked back up at 14 diff locations and rests on these steel plates im assuming sits on a pile. Nobody has any plans or approvals for anything! Luckily found a copy of that guide. Hasnt changed much.
Jerehmy:
Those kinds of precast bsmt. wall systems are a ‘not-so-good’ substitute for a good, well designed poured conc. or a conc. blk. wall with a cont. conc. ftg. which can tolerate a little unbalanced loading and a little differential settlement. They require considerable attention to detail to make them work reasonably well. They seem to do a real selling job on those systems, and they make them $100 cheaper than the site-built wall, and then leave it to an inexperienced guy with a pick-up and hammer to install them and know what to do to make them work. They do depend on the wood fl. diaphragm for lateral support at the top, so the knee wall is certainly a problem. I don’t remember exactly what the interconnection detail is btwn. the wall units, but if that isn’t done right they may not even be good for much lateral loading in plane. They will just tip, on their ftg. edges, as individual rigid units, causing a saw-toothed surface at their top sill pl. Then, they eliminated half the wall units, for O.H. doors at one end. It sounds like it is sufficiently messed up to make for a good lawsuit. The question will be that the contractors may not have much more than their used pick-up and hammer in terms of assets to collect against the damages.
Those kinds of precast bsmt. wall systems are a ‘not-so-good’ substitute for a good, well designed poured conc. or a conc. blk. wall with a cont. conc. ftg. which can tolerate a little unbalanced loading and a little differential settlement. They require considerable attention to detail to make them work reasonably well. They seem to do a real selling job on those systems, and they make them $100 cheaper than the site-built wall, and then leave it to an inexperienced guy with a pick-up and hammer to install them and know what to do to make them work. They do depend on the wood fl. diaphragm for lateral support at the top, so the knee wall is certainly a problem. I don’t remember exactly what the interconnection detail is btwn. the wall units, but if that isn’t done right they may not even be good for much lateral loading in plane. They will just tip, on their ftg. edges, as individual rigid units, causing a saw-toothed surface at their top sill pl. Then, they eliminated half the wall units, for O.H. doors at one end. It sounds like it is sufficiently messed up to make for a good lawsuit. The question will be that the contractors may not have much more than their used pick-up and hammer in terms of assets to collect against the damages.
Should be an interesting case as it will blur the lines between the EOR's responsibility (if one existed) and Superior walls.
Is it SW's responsibility to ensure interior shearwalls exist? The same racking issue would likely have occurred with CMU construction.
I see basements with side loading garages rack on a regular basis.
The settlement would likely be an issue with the grading contractor as in my experience, SW does not do the grading or gravel.
Is it SW's responsibility to ensure interior shearwalls exist? The same racking issue would likely have occurred with CMU construction.
I see basements with side loading garages rack on a regular basis.
The settlement would likely be an issue with the grading contractor as in my experience, SW does not do the grading or gravel.
- Thread starter
- #7
There are many parties involved which has convoluted everything. As with most errors, lack of communication seems to be a primary factor. Homeowner acting as GC, excavator hired the precast company who then subbed the installation out to another company. The township approved and stamped drawings that don't even have member sizes on it. It's going to be a fun report to write.
Jerehmy:
It sounds like the GC shot a bull, and now gets to live with his/her construction cost savings or fix the problems he caused/allowed to happen. If structural engineering and construction were so darn easy as the homeowner thought, in the first place, more people would (and could) be doing it well and successfully. As it is today, more and more people are doing these jobs less and less well, and screwing homeowners and the general public in the process, and too often getting away with it. It is always interesting to see the screwer also be the screwee. At least the right person took it on the chin this time, and is going to pay for some of the damages, by having to go after all the low bidders he hired. The GC should have some self-interest in making the stupid homeowner whole again. An expensive education, I’d say.
It sounds like the GC shot a bull, and now gets to live with his/her construction cost savings or fix the problems he caused/allowed to happen. If structural engineering and construction were so darn easy as the homeowner thought, in the first place, more people would (and could) be doing it well and successfully. As it is today, more and more people are doing these jobs less and less well, and screwing homeowners and the general public in the process, and too often getting away with it. It is always interesting to see the screwer also be the screwee. At least the right person took it on the chin this time, and is going to pay for some of the damages, by having to go after all the low bidders he hired. The GC should have some self-interest in making the stupid homeowner whole again. An expensive education, I’d say.
I think they run a few bolts between the panels. I have had mixed experiences with pre-cast residential wall systems. If the overall system is designed and installed properly they seem to function well and are economical given that they are insulated and ready for sheetrock.dhengr said:
- Status
Similar threads
- Question