| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Crawl spaces
|
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote:
What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. |
Crawl spaces
Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 12:08*pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. If your construction union buddies told you that, they are idiots. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with termites. The piers and load bearing walls are concrete. There are several advantages in a warm, moist area. Helps keep moisture levels down, creating a draft under the house helps cool it. Easier to get to plumbing than slab-on-grade and on and on. |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 1:39*pm, HK wrote:
wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:08:56 -0400, HK wrote: Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. These houses usually use 2.5 CCA posts and there isn't much that can eat them. I still have some cutoffs from a house built in 1980 on Pine Island and I use one for a bunk for my jon boat on my dock. It still looks brand new. I have couple more that I keep next to the garage (in the grass) for blocking up my trailer when I am working on the boat. Same thing, still look new. There were a few in Jax where the posts either were rotted out or were eaten. I have no idea how the posts were treated. Most of the raised floor houses I saw there, though, were on short concrete piers.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - House inspector now, huh? Did you learn that at Yale? |
Crawl spaces
"HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 2:36*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. *At least according to code. *Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. *A house on a concrete pad. *Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. *You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. *Bad union work? You even have to have a different coating on screws, nails and anchor bolts that will be in contact with PT lumber because of the newer chemicals they are using. I'm sure Harry's union worker buds that he has protect him (allegedly) have told him this. |
Crawl spaces
wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:39:44 -0400, HK wrote: wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:08:56 -0400, HK wrote: Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. These houses usually use 2.5 CCA posts and there isn't much that can eat them. I still have some cutoffs from a house built in 1980 on Pine Island and I use one for a bunk for my jon boat on my dock. It still looks brand new. I have couple more that I keep next to the garage (in the grass) for blocking up my trailer when I am working on the boat. Same thing, still look new. There were a few in Jax where the posts either were rotted out or were eaten. I have no idea how the posts were treated. Most of the raised floor houses I saw there, though, were on short concrete piers. A lot of construction in Florida was done before they really had an effective building code. People would come down here and do things like they did up north with disastrous results. Just simple things like "where does the vapor barrier go?" can make for bad situations. The whole wind code issue is virtually unknown once you get much north of the Florida line. That is why some little dust devil gets called a tornado up there in Md because it rips off a bunch of shingles and siding. We need engineered, stamped plans to build a shed these days. You do see the difference after a storm though. Old, pre-code houses still get blown up but the newer ones come out unscathed. One of my best demonstrations is the Gilchrist house in Texas. That was built to the same 150 MPH code Florida requires south of Miami. It speaks for itself. http://gfretwell.com/electrical/art....house.irpt.jpg I spent close to a month in south Florida after Andrew preparing a booklet for a client on how various structures handled the storm and its aftermath. Hope I still have a few copies of it somewhere. It was pretty decent, with lots of photos, a few drawings, explanations, all reviewed by the proper sort of engineers. Codes and lack of code enforcement were big issues in south Florida then. That's a great photo, by the way. Never saw it before. |
Crawl spaces
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. |
Crawl spaces
Don White wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. That would be "Bilious Bill's Fly By Night Home Repairs," where every worker is from the HomeDepot shape-up lot. In this country, very, very few workers under a union contract are involved on-site single family house construction. That sort of work typically is done on a piece-work basis, and most of it these days is done by semi-skilled foreign workers, who have displaced the semi-skilled U.S. construction workers. |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 3:14 pm, "Don White" wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message om... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Traditional cracker houses were built up off the ground for cooling breezes and because it gave the dogs and chickens somewhere to go when it rained. My house was built that way but was later air conditioned so the cooling effect is gone. The dogs and cats do go under there during storms. It is on 6" X 6" PT posts about 3' off grade with latticework around it. Building code was non-existent when it was built. When I first bought it in 1988, it got to 8 degrees here in Tallahassee and I had to learn to solder copper pipe on Christmas eve night. There was no insulation on the pipes. Our later addition was built with an amazing amount of steel in the concrete piers for hurricane code with hurricane straps everywhere. The later carport is a fortress compared to the rest of the house. My parents house was also built this way but it was enclosed with block underneath. My neighbors all have houses on pads and have had trouble with termites from under the pad, I have had no termite problems. Some have also had pipes break under the pad, what a pain. I'd rather be off grade. |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 3:14 pm, "Don White" wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message om... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. That pic is why FL natives dont believe in building on the beach, it simply isn't permanent. |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 3:30*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:14 pm, "Don White" wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message om... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. *At least according to code. *Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. *A house on a concrete pad. *Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. *You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. *Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Traditional cracker houses were built up off the ground for cooling breezes and because it gave the dogs and chickens somewhere to go when it rained. My house was built that way but was later air conditioned so the cooling effect is gone. *The dogs and cats do go under there during storms. *It is on 6" X 6" PT posts about 3' off grade with latticework around it. *Building code was non-existent when it was built. *When I first bought it in 1988, it got to 8 degrees here in Tallahassee and I had to learn to solder copper pipe on Christmas eve night. *There was no insulation on the pipes. Our later addition was built with an amazing amount of steel in the concrete piers for hurricane code with hurricane straps everywhere. The later carport is a fortress compared to the rest of the house. My parents house was also built this way but it was enclosed with block underneath. My neighbors all have houses on pads and have had trouble with termites from under the pad, I have had no termite problems. *Some have also had pipes break under the pad, what a pain. *I'd rather be off grade.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Slabs on grade are okay but they put both waste and fresh water plumbing in the slab in a lot of places. Plumbing problem? Get out the jackhammer! |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 3:08*pm, HK wrote:
I spent close to a month in south Florida after Andrew preparing a booklet for a client on how various structures handled the storm and its aftermath. Hope I still have a few copies of it somewhere. Gee, I do too! I'd love to see a copy, liar! It was pretty decent, with lots of photos, a few drawings, explanations, all reviewed by the proper sort of engineers. Codes and lack of code enforcement were big issues in south Florida then. No it wasn't "codes and lack of code enforcement". There were codes in place. They were enforced. But things are learned by such events and the subsequent testing. THEN the codes are revised. I'll be waiting to see your thesis. Please, don't forget to list the engineers that reviewed it. Did they stamp it? How was their review done? |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 2:08*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:39:44 -0400, HK wrote: wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:08:56 -0400, HK wrote: Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. These houses usually use 2.5 CCA posts and there isn't much that can eat them. I still have some cutoffs from a house built in 1980 on Pine Island and I use one for a bunk for my jon boat on my dock. It still looks brand new. I have couple more that I keep next to the garage (in the grass) for blocking up my trailer when I am working on the boat. Same thing, still look new. There were a few in Jax where the posts either were rotted out or were eaten. I have no idea how the posts were treated. Most of the raised floor houses I saw there, though, were on short concrete piers. A lot of construction in Florida was done before they really had an effective building code. People would come down here and do things like they did up north with disastrous results. Just simple things like "where does the vapor barrier go?" can make for bad situations. The whole wind code issue is virtually unknown once you get much north of the Florida line. That is why some little dust devil gets called a tornado up there in Md because *it rips off a bunch of shingles and siding. We need engineered, stamped plans to build a shed these days. You do see the difference after a storm though. Old, pre-code houses still get blown up but the newer ones come out unscathed. One of my best demonstrations is the Gilchrist house in Texas. That was built to the same 150 MPH code *Florida requires south of Miami. It speaks for itself.http://gfretwell.com/electrical/art....ouse.irpt.jpg- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's not just south of Miami. There's lots of coastal areas that are in the 150 range. BUT, an engineer can still interpolate. |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 17, 3:51*pm, wrote:
On Apr 17, 2:08*pm, wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:39:44 -0400, HK wrote: wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:08:56 -0400, HK wrote: Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. These houses usually use 2.5 CCA posts and there isn't much that can eat them. I still have some cutoffs from a house built in 1980 on Pine Island and I use one for a bunk for my jon boat on my dock. It still looks brand new. I have couple more that I keep next to the garage (in the grass) for blocking up my trailer when I am working on the boat. Same thing, still look new. There were a few in Jax where the posts either were rotted out or were eaten. I have no idea how the posts were treated. Most of the raised floor houses I saw there, though, were on short concrete piers. A lot of construction in Florida was done before they really had an effective building code. People would come down here and do things like they did up north with disastrous results. Just simple things like "where does the vapor barrier go?" can make for bad situations. The whole wind code issue is virtually unknown once you get much north of the Florida line. That is why some little dust devil gets called a tornado up there in Md because *it rips off a bunch of shingles and siding. We need engineered, stamped plans to build a shed these days. You do see the difference after a storm though. Old, pre-code houses still get blown up but the newer ones come out unscathed. One of my best demonstrations is the Gilchrist house in Texas. That was built to the same 150 MPH code *Florida requires south of Miami. It speaks for itself.http://gfretwell.com/electrical/art.....irpt.jpg-Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's not just south of Miami. There's lots of coastal areas that are in the 150 range. BUT, an engineer can still interpolate. I heard from people who did re-roofing after Andrew that many of those roofs were done with a nail gun and that there wouild be lines of nails thru plywood where they completely missed the board underneath so nothing was holding it on. |
Crawl spaces
Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:51 pm, wrote: On Apr 17, 2:08 pm, wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:39:44 -0400, HK wrote: wrote: On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:08:56 -0400, HK wrote: Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. These houses usually use 2.5 CCA posts and there isn't much that can eat them. I still have some cutoffs from a house built in 1980 on Pine Island and I use one for a bunk for my jon boat on my dock. It still looks brand new. I have couple more that I keep next to the garage (in the grass) for blocking up my trailer when I am working on the boat. Same thing, still look new. There were a few in Jax where the posts either were rotted out or were eaten. I have no idea how the posts were treated. Most of the raised floor houses I saw there, though, were on short concrete piers. A lot of construction in Florida was done before they really had an effective building code. People would come down here and do things like they did up north with disastrous results. Just simple things like "where does the vapor barrier go?" can make for bad situations. The whole wind code issue is virtually unknown once you get much north of the Florida line. That is why some little dust devil gets called a tornado up there in Md because it rips off a bunch of shingles and siding. We need engineered, stamped plans to build a shed these days. You do see the difference after a storm though. Old, pre-code houses still get blown up but the newer ones come out unscathed. One of my best demonstrations is the Gilchrist house in Texas. That was built to the same 150 MPH code Florida requires south of Miami. It speaks for itself.http://gfretwell.com/electrical/art.....irpt.jpg-Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's not just south of Miami. There's lots of coastal areas that are in the 150 range. BUT, an engineer can still interpolate. I heard from people who did re-roofing after Andrew that many of those roofs were done with a nail gun and that there wouild be lines of nails thru plywood where they completely missed the board underneath so nothing was holding it on. That's correct. And many of the roof lumber was not tied to the top plates, and the bottom plates were not tied to the foundation. Lousy inspectors were a big part of the problem. |
Crawl spaces
"Don White" wrote in message ... "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Oh, you are showing your prejudice now. Most of these homes were built way before Illegals were doing construction. They were Union Built. |
Crawl spaces
Don White wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Sure, dummy. And the building inspectors are getting paid off, too, right? |
Crawl spaces
wrote:
On Apr 17, 2:36 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote: "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? You even have to have a different coating on screws, nails and anchor bolts that will be in contact with PT lumber because of the newer chemicals they are using. I'm sure Harry's union worker buds that he has protect him (allegedly) have told him this. Do you really think WAFA has a clue about ACQ vs CCA lumber? |
Crawl spaces
HK wrote:
That's correct. And many of the roof lumber was not tied to the top plates, and the bottom plates were not tied to the foundation. Lousy inspectors were a big part of the problem. "And many of the roof lumber"? Are you really that dumb? Tell us how they are "tied". I know the answer - do you? Learn what a roof truss is and you won't present your pathetic self like dumb Don. |
Crawl spaces
"Frogwatch" wrote in message ... On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. I'm pretty sure that building houses off the ground "was" pretty common throughout the US until developers got hold of "cookie cutter" plans and threw down cement slabs, 10 or 100 at a time. I know it'll chap your ass but the idea was probably brought to Florida by some damn Yankee. |
Crawl spaces
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:50:35 -0400, D K
wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Sure, dummy. And the building inspectors are getting paid off, too, right? Hey, I thought you were from Chicago. (-: --Vic |
Crawl spaces
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:08:23 -0400, gfretwell wrote:
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/art....house.irpt.jpg Damn, that's a great photo. Quite impressive. |
Crawl spaces
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:55:02 -0400, gfretwell wrote:
I don't want to get in the ****ing match but Harry is somewhat right on this one. A lot of the houses the got blown up in Andrew did not meet the existing code but Dade did have the strongest code in Florida at the time. Andrew also provided a terrific case study, unfortunate, but terrific. Before Andrew, many things had been overlooked. The danger to windows was well known, but doors, both entry and garage, weren't as acknowledged. When the wind gets into a building, it has to get out, mostly with explosive results. Around the same time as Andrew, there was also a well known video from Hawaii, I believe, that showed a complete roof lift up and fly away intact. I still remember it to this day. |
Crawl spaces
"thunder" wrote in message t... On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:55:02 -0400, gfretwell wrote: I don't want to get in the ****ing match but Harry is somewhat right on this one. A lot of the houses the got blown up in Andrew did not meet the existing code but Dade did have the strongest code in Florida at the time. Andrew also provided a terrific case study, unfortunate, but terrific. Before Andrew, many things had been overlooked. The danger to windows was well known, but doors, both entry and garage, weren't as acknowledged. When the wind gets into a building, it has to get out, mostly with explosive results. Around the same time as Andrew, there was also a well known video from Hawaii, I believe, that showed a complete roof lift up and fly away intact. I still remember it to this day. The house we had in Jupiter, Florida (just north of West Palm Beach) was built in 1996 if I recall. It was custom built, designed by the original owner who was an architect. The main, double entry doors originally opened inward. There were also several double doors throughout the house that opened outward. During the first of three hurricanes that hit in one year after we bought the house, the wind blew the main doors open inward and the force of the wind inside blew all the other doors open outward. The result was some significant damage to the inside of the house. It was all repaired, but with no hurricane insurance (a result of Andrew) it wasn't cheap. The main doors were replaced by outward opening types. We also had a pool enclosure installed at that house. By that time the code requirements were for 150 mph winds. It was installed by a reputable and licensed company but "Wilma" still pretty much destroyed it with 120 mph gusts. Eisboch |
Crawl spaces
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, Eisboch wrote:
The main doors were replaced by outward opening types. I guess that's one difference between the north and the south. Up north, those outward opening doors can trap you inside when the snow gets deep. ;-( |
Crawl spaces
"thunder" wrote in message t... On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, Eisboch wrote: The main doors were replaced by outward opening types. I guess that's one difference between the north and the south. Up north, those outward opening doors can trap you inside when the snow gets deep. ;-( When we first bought the house and were in it during a heavy thunderstorm with winds, I noticed that the way the entrance way was designed it "funneled" the wind and put a lot of pressure on the doors. When we returned north after the first winter, I drove our golf cart into the house, closed the doors, and backed the golf cart up against them with a pillow between the golf cart bumper and the doors. Unfortunately the year the first hurricane hit I forgot to do that before we headed north. $50K lesson. Eisboch |
Crawl spaces
On Apr 18, 1:55*am, wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:50:05 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 17, 3:08*pm, HK wrote: I spent close to a month in south Florida after Andrew preparing a booklet for a client on how various structures handled the storm and its aftermath. Hope I still have a few copies of it somewhere. Gee, I do too! I'd love to see a copy, liar! It was pretty decent, with lots of photos, a few drawings, explanations, all reviewed by the proper sort of engineers. Codes and lack of code enforcement were big issues in south Florida then. No it wasn't "codes and lack of code enforcement". There were codes in place. They were enforced. But things are learned by such events and the subsequent testing. THEN the codes are revised. I'll be waiting to see your thesis. Please, don't forget to list the engineers that reviewed it. Did they stamp it? How was their review done? I don't want to get in the ****ing match but Harry is somewhat right on this one. A lot of the houses the got blown up in Andrew did not meet the existing code but Dade did have the strongest code in Florida at the time. They found things like roof sheathing with about 10-15% of the required nailing schedule and such. The inspectors were not really inspecting. That is the type of thing that did get addressed. Florida has always had a fairy strict code, when it was enforced. My 1963 house has a poured bond beam with 2 #5s in it and embedded straps over the trusses. In my addition we did get to bust into some of that for a look. The slab also has the two #5 perimeter steel and the dowelled cells in the walls. That is basically what the current code is and happened almost a half century ago. It was all in who built your house.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Codes evolve. What was in place during a particular house's construction may not be the same as one that was built even a year later. If a house isn't built to code, first they start looking at the engineer and architect. If there construction documents were in compliance with the code at the time of construction, then they go to the builder. As for a bond beam at the top of a c.m.u. wall, that's standard, it stiffens the wall. As for the embedments, they are just as much for the wall as for the trusses. The diaphram action of the trusses help keep the wall from pushing over. Poured and reinforced cells in the wall (simply put) keep the wall from breaking off at at some height. Horizontal joint reinforcing stiffens the wall in a side to side direction. |
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
On Apr 18, 12:38*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:44:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: We also had a pool enclosure installed at that house. *By that time the code requirements were for 150 mph winds. It was installed by a reputable and licensed company but "Wilma" still pretty much destroyed it with 120 mph gusts. I was involved in some post mortem inspections of failed screen cages after Charley. It appears the first thing to fail is the cable stay system, then the screen cage just shakes itself apart. I really believe these should be designed more like a bi-plane than a bridge with more cable stays. The forces are more similar. One of the mitigation in the subsequent code was more diagonal bracing in the roof to give them better dimensional stability. I don't know if this is true or not, but it was suggested to me that in hurricanes, it is best to remove or open any doors on the pool enclosures. The screen sections are installed in a manner that is supposed to allow them to "blow out", reducing the surface that the wind can capture and thus reduces the loads on the aluminum frame and braces. *Leaving the doors open allows the wind "pressure" *to equalize within the structure. Eisboch We picked apart 5 failed cages of various vintages and none of them seemed to "blow out" the screen before the structure failed. The only real commonality was in every case there was an apparent failure of the cables in the section that failed first. Once one part fails, the rest comes down fairly fast if the wind keeps blowing. The "flat spline" patio material will hold screen until the screen itself fails. Round spline will pull out but that is not used here except in door and window frames. It is ironic that the old method of through bolting an eye bolt for the cable stay seems more robust than the new style angle corner bracket with 8-10 screws in it. The bracket itself fails. (all of the new cage failures) After this, I did add some additional cable stays to my cage and used the eye bolt method. Wilma didn't hurt it. After Charley we found a 40' mango tree on our cage, the oldest part. I was amazed it didn't come crashing down but everything was in compression and that is not the force that pulls them apart. I ended up having a crane remove it (handy to have a wife in the construction biz, his number was in her NexTel)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Usually, the greatest pressures in a wind event are the negative pressures at the corners. Let's say the wind is blowing on the front of a house. The back corners act like a wing and accelerate the wind. Those leeward corners are where the negative pressure is the greatest. I don't know how many times I've seen mobile homes on the highway where the siding was being blown off, and always on the rear edges. |
Crawl spaces
wrote in message ... On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:11:14 -0700, "Calif Bill" wrote: More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Oh, you are showing your prejudice now. Most of these homes were built way before Illegals were doing construction. They were Union Built. Union? In South Florida? Huh? This is a "right to work" state. I won't say these guys weren't in a union before they moved here but they weren't in a union here. The reference was originally NOLA. |
Crawl spaces
Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:50:35 -0400, D K wrote: Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message m... Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 17, 11:25 am, "mmc" wrote: What a novel idea:http://www.raisedfloorliving.com/ Like this is something new? No, this is traditional "Cracker house" construction. My house is built this way. Not unusual in areas with high water tables...and gives the termites something beefy - the posts - on which to chew. The posts do not contact the ground. At least according to code. Seeing the damage after Katrina, lots of the lost houses were because of construction practices. A house on a concrete pad. Not bad, but they did not bolt the house to the pad. You would see a house pad, and no nails, no bolts sticking up from the pad. Bad union work? More likely some shifty 'contractor' hiring illegals at the cheapest possible wage and taking every shortcut imaginable. Sure, dummy. And the building inspectors are getting paid off, too, right? Hey, I thought you were from Chicago. (-: --Vic The 'burbs. |
Crawl spaces
wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:51:32 -0700 (PDT), wrote: You do see the difference after a storm though. Old, pre-code houses still get blown up but the newer ones come out unscathed. One of my best demonstrations is the Gilchrist house in Texas. That was built to the same 150 MPH code Florida requires south of Miami. It speaks for itself.http://gfretwell.com/electrical/art....ouse.irpt.jpg- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's not just south of Miami. There's lots of coastal areas that are in the 150 range. BUT, an engineer can still interpolate. This is the current Fla wind code map. http://gfretwell.com/electrical/windcodemap.jpg Hurricane Andrew was upgraded to a Cat 5 in the past few years. |
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
On Apr 18, 3:08*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:53:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 12:38*pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:44:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: We also had a pool enclosure installed at that house. *By that time the code requirements were for 150 mph winds. It was installed by a reputable and licensed company but "Wilma" still pretty much destroyed it with 120 mph gusts. I was involved in some post mortem inspections of failed screen cages after Charley. It appears the first thing to fail is the cable stay system, then the screen cage just shakes itself apart. I really believe these should be designed more like a bi-plane than a bridge with more cable stays. The forces are more similar. One of the mitigation in the subsequent code was more diagonal bracing in the roof to give them better dimensional stability. I don't know if this is true or not, but it was suggested to me that in hurricanes, it is best to remove or open any doors on the pool enclosures. The screen sections are installed in a manner that is supposed to allow them to "blow out", reducing the surface that the wind can capture and thus reduces the loads on the aluminum frame and braces. *Leaving the doors open allows the wind "pressure" *to equalize within the structure. Eisboch We picked apart 5 failed cages of various vintages and none of them seemed to "blow out" the screen before the structure failed. The only real commonality was in every case there was an apparent failure of the cables in the section that failed first. Once one part fails, the rest comes down fairly fast if the wind keeps blowing. The "flat spline" patio material will hold screen until the screen itself fails. Round spline will pull out but that is not used here except in door and window frames. It is ironic that the old method of through bolting an eye bolt for the cable stay seems more robust than the new style angle corner bracket with 8-10 screws in it. The bracket itself fails. (all of the new cage failures) After this, I did add some additional cable stays to my cage and used the eye bolt method. Wilma didn't hurt it. After Charley we found a 40' mango tree on our cage, the oldest part. I was amazed it didn't come crashing down but everything was in compression and that is not the force that pulls them apart. I ended up having a crane remove it (handy to have a wife in the construction biz, his number was in her NexTel)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Usually, the greatest pressures in a wind event are the negative pressures at the corners. Let's say the wind is blowing on the front of a house. The back corners act like a wing and accelerate the wind. Those leeward corners are where the negative pressure is the greatest. I don't know how many times I've seen mobile homes on the highway where the siding was being blown off, and always on the rear edges. I agree, that is why I think they should be using aircraft engineering, more than bridge engineering. These things become a huge air foil. The same is somewhat true in all of the wind code engineering. We have specs for positive and negative pressure ratings on everything. I usually hear that you do not want to compromise the envelope by opening windows and doors because that might end up adding a positive force to an inside surface that is already having a negative force being applied from the outside. Roof loads are usually where this comes up. I know when I was building in Maryland they never gave uplift a second thought. Everything was assuming the load was down. They usually didn't even put nuts on the embedded plate bolts. The opinion was they were just there for horizontal placement.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I deal in a lot of mono sloped flat roofs for industrial buildings. Uplift is always considered. Pre-engineered buildings are another story. They build them so light that most of the time, the mitigating factor on the size of column footings isn't the axial load on the ground, but they have to be heavy enough to counteract uplift. Especially if it's a long narrow building, it tries to tip over! |
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
|
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
|
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
On Apr 19, 9:25*am, Richard Casady
wrote: On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 05:36:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 3:08*pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:53:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 12:38*pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:44:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: We also had a pool enclosure installed at that house. *By that time the code requirements were for 150 mph winds. It was installed by a reputable and licensed company but "Wilma" still pretty much destroyed it with 120 mph gusts. I was involved in some post mortem inspections of failed screen cages after Charley. It appears the first thing to fail is the cable stay system, then the screen cage just shakes itself apart. I really believe these should be designed more like a bi-plane than a bridge with more cable stays. The forces are more similar. One of the mitigation in the subsequent code was more diagonal bracing in the roof to give them better dimensional stability. I don't know if this is true or not, but it was suggested to me that in hurricanes, it is best to remove or open any doors on the pool enclosures. The screen sections are installed in a manner that is supposed to allow them to "blow out", reducing the surface that the wind can capture and thus reduces the loads on the aluminum frame and braces. *Leaving the doors open allows the wind "pressure" *to equalize within the structure. Eisboch We picked apart 5 failed cages of various vintages and none of them seemed to "blow out" the screen before the structure failed. The only real commonality was in every case there was an apparent failure of the cables in the section that failed first. Once one part fails, the rest comes down fairly fast if the wind keeps blowing. The "flat spline" patio material will hold screen until the screen itself fails. Round spline will pull out but that is not used here except in door and window frames. It is ironic that the old method of through bolting an eye bolt for the cable stay seems more robust than the new style angle corner bracket with 8-10 screws in it. The bracket itself fails. (all of the new cage failures) After this, I did add some additional cable stays to my cage and used the eye bolt method. Wilma didn't hurt it. After Charley we found a 40' mango tree on our cage, the oldest part. |
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
On Apr 19, 9:25*am, Richard Casady
wrote: On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 05:36:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 3:08*pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:53:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 12:38*pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:44:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: We also had a pool enclosure installed at that house. *By that time the code requirements were for 150 mph winds. It was installed by a reputable and licensed company but "Wilma" still pretty much destroyed it with 120 mph gusts. I was involved in some post mortem inspections of failed screen cages after Charley. It appears the first thing to fail is the cable stay system, then the screen cage just shakes itself apart. I really believe these should be designed more like a bi-plane than a bridge with more cable stays. The forces are more similar. One of the mitigation in the subsequent code was more diagonal bracing in the roof to give them better dimensional stability. I don't know if this is true or not, but it was suggested to me that in hurricanes, it is best to remove or open any doors on the pool enclosures. The screen sections are installed in a manner that is supposed to allow them to "blow out", reducing the surface that the wind can capture and thus reduces the loads on the aluminum frame and braces. *Leaving the doors open allows the wind "pressure" *to equalize within the structure. Eisboch We picked apart 5 failed cages of various vintages and none of them seemed to "blow out" the screen before the structure failed. The only real commonality was in every case there was an apparent failure of the cables in the section that failed first. Once one part fails, the rest comes down fairly fast if the wind keeps blowing. The "flat spline" patio material will hold screen until the screen itself fails. Round spline will pull out but that is not used here except in door and window frames. It is ironic that the old method of through bolting an eye bolt for the cable stay seems more robust than the new style angle corner bracket with 8-10 screws in it. The bracket itself fails. (all of the new cage failures) After this, I did add some additional cable stays to my cage and used the eye bolt method. Wilma didn't hurt it. After Charley we found a 40' mango tree on our cage, the oldest part. |
OT Screen cages, was Crawl spaces
wrote in message ... On Apr 19, 9:25 am, Richard Casady wrote: On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 05:36:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 3:08 pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:53:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Apr 18, 12:38 pm, wrote: On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:44:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:02:46 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: We also had a pool enclosure installed at that house. By that time the code requirements were for 150 mph winds. It was installed by a reputable and licensed company but "Wilma" still pretty much destroyed it with 120 mph gusts. I was involved in some post mortem inspections of failed screen cages after Charley. It appears the first thing to fail is the cable stay system, then the screen cage just shakes itself apart. I really believe these should be designed more like a bi-plane than a bridge with more cable stays. The forces are more similar. One of the mitigation in the subsequent code was more diagonal bracing in the roof to give them better dimensional stability. I don't know if this is true or not, but it was suggested to me that in hurricanes, it is best to remove or open any doors on the pool enclosures. The screen sections are installed in a manner that is supposed to allow them to "blow out", reducing the surface that the wind can capture and thus reduces the loads on the aluminum frame and braces. Leaving the doors open allows the wind "pressure" to equalize within the structure. Eisboch We picked apart 5 failed cages of various vintages and none of them seemed to "blow out" the screen before the structure failed. The only real commonality was in every case there was an apparent failure of the cables in the section that failed first. Once one part fails, the rest comes down fairly fast if the wind keeps blowing. The "flat spline" patio material will hold screen until the screen itself fails. Round spline will pull out but that is not used here except in door and window frames. It is ironic that the old method of through bolting an eye bolt for the cable stay seems more robust than the new style angle corner bracket with 8-10 screws in it. The bracket itself fails. (all of the new cage failures) After this, I did add some additional cable stays to my cage and used the eye bolt method. Wilma didn't hurt it. After Charley we found a 40' mango tree on our cage, the oldest part. I was amazed it didn't come crashing down but everything was in compression and that is not the force that pulls them apart. I ended up having a crane remove it (handy to have a wife in the construction biz, his number was in her NexTel)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Usually, the greatest pressures in a wind event are the negative pressures at the corners. Let's say the wind is blowing on the front of a house. The back corners act like a wing and accelerate the wind. Those leeward corners are where the negative pressure is the greatest. I don't know how many times I've seen mobile homes on the highway where the siding was being blown off, and always on the rear edges. I agree, that is why I think they should be using aircraft engineering, more than bridge engineering. These things become a huge air foil. The same is somewhat true in all of the wind code engineering. We have specs for positive and negative pressure ratings on everything. I usually hear that you do not want to compromise the envelope by opening windows and doors because that might end up adding a positive force to an inside surface that is already having a negative force being applied from the outside. Roof loads are usually where this comes up. I know when I was building in Maryland they never gave uplift a second thought. Everything was assuming the load was down. They usually didn't even put nuts on the embedded plate bolts. The opinion was they were just there for horizontal placement.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I deal in a lot of mono sloped flat roofs for industrial buildings. Uplift is always considered. Pre-engineered buildings are another story. They build them so light that most of the time, the mitigating factor on the size of column footings isn't the axial load on the ground, but they have to be heavy enough to counteract uplift. Especially if it's a long narrow building, it tries to tip over! There is a building in Calif that is twenty foot wide and two miles long. It has never blown over. They muct have bolted it down. Casady- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I was talking to an engineer once who designed a 29 story building in Bristol used to test elvators. He sid it went down 29 stories too. I noted "that's to hold it up", he said, "no, it's to hold it down"... Engineer thing, but I never forgot it... ************************************************** ***** Did it have 58 flights of stairs? That must have been a nightmare for you. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com