peteg240
New Member
Posts:6
 |
| 02 Apr 2009 02:58 PM |
|
All,
Very new to the ICF concept but I'm leaning toward BuildBlock as they are available local and I know someone with first hand o/b experience.
I've posted some images on my project profile for Clerestory Shed.
Please let me describe the project:
The project is a ~230sf shed 20' l x 12'w with long end 8'-10' into a backyard hillside. At 10' into hillside ground level is 8'. So a little less than 45degree slope. Concrete will need to be pumped from street level at 20' below shed grade and no mechanical equipment accessible (e.g. bobcat) so excavation will have to be manual. Instead of hauling forms in I thought ICFs would be easier.
My question is this:
I'd like to minimize pumper trips and although a spread footer with ICF stem wall would likely be most tradiational - that means three separate pumper visits (footer, icf wall, slab). To keep costs down. Could a frost protected mono-slab be used instead (one slab pour and one wall pour)? Any other techniques?
My concern is with soil pressure on the hill side walls and how to protect against the overturning forces that would be present. Could a monoslab with ICF be keyed and rebar'd to keep forces at bay? I would assume a fully boxed building would be the best approach ---- its closest design would be a walk out basement.
Anyone with suggestions?
TIA.
-pg |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron McKinney
New Member
Posts:56
|
| 02 Apr 2009 03:37 PM |
|
Without looking at your land or plans, I can tell you that I have seen people pour a monoslab into a hillside ICF project and everything be fine. As far as the forces against your walls on the hillside, my suggestion is that you make sure your rebar placement, concrete psi, and wall thickness is in accordance with the standards buildblock has for subgrade walls (I am assuming that buildblock does have a PDF for that type of wall, or at least has someone in their company who can give exact technical support)- If you do end up with Buildblock.
I hope that helps. |
|
|
|
|
peteg240
New Member
Posts:6
|
| 02 Apr 2009 05:32 PM |
|
Thanks much. I will look through their literature and post here if I find something usefull for others. -pg |
|
|
|
|
markross
New Member
Posts:38
|
| 02 Apr 2009 06:36 PM |
|
Posted By peteg240 on 04/02/2009 2:58 PM
All,
Very new to the ICF concept but I'm leaning toward BuildBlock as they are available local and I know someone with first hand o/b experience.
I've posted some images on my project profile for Clerestory Shed.
Please let me describe the project:
The project is a ~230sf shed 20' l x 12'w with long end 8'-10' into a backyard hillside. At 10' into hillside ground level is 8'. So a little less than 45degree slope. Concrete will need to be pumped from street level at 20' below shed grade and no mechanical equipment accessible (e.g. bobcat) so excavation will have to be manual. Instead of hauling forms in I thought ICFs would be easier.
My question is this:
I'd like to minimize pumper trips and although a spread footer with ICF stem wall would likely be most tradiational - that means three separate pumper visits (footer, icf wall, slab). To keep costs down. Could a frost protected mono-slab be used instead (one slab pour and one wall pour)? Any other techniques?
My concern is with soil pressure on the hill side walls and how to protect against the overturning forces that would be present. Could a monoslab with ICF be keyed and rebar'd to keep forces at bay? I would assume a fully boxed building would be the best approach ---- its closest design would be a walk out basement.
Anyone with suggestions?
TIA.
-pg As a suggestion: Pour your footings, then simply build the walls with the bracing on the outside, prepare the slab with the ICF walls un poured, and pour the walls in the early morning, with the interior slab being the last to be poured. Done it before, this is the only real way to accomplish what you would like with 2 pours, that I can think of.
|
|
| Mark Ross<br><br>"Le Canuck" |
|
|
peteg240
New Member
Posts:6
|
| 04 Apr 2009 09:53 AM |
|
I've been looking through the various literature including the HUD prescriptive ICF manual.
I think think the closest standard construction would be a walkout basement. It would nice to avoid a step in the footer - is there a prescriptive method for walkout basement with insulated footer design? A design to avoid dropping the footer on the walkout side?
Thanks for the input.
-pg |
|
|
|
|
thagreen
Basic Member
Posts:283
|
| 06 Apr 2009 07:50 AM |
|
Insulating your footer w/eps 4' from wall usually takes care of the step footing issue.
Cheers! |
|
|
|
|
peteg240
New Member
Posts:6
|
| 06 Apr 2009 09:35 AM |
|
Thank you. I also searched around and found this:
http://www.toolbase.org/PDF/DesignGuides/revisedFPSFguide.pdf
I'll take this info to my building official and see what he says. Thanks much.
-pg |
|
|
|
|
thagreen
Basic Member
Posts:283
|
| 07 Apr 2009 12:54 PM |
|
Here's another link of an icf manufacturer's detail http://www.integraspec.com/pdf/engineeringmanual.pdf Look at B-28 B, it's the preffered application. Good luck.
Cheers! |
|
|
|
|
ICFconstruction
Veteran Member
Posts:1324
|
| 07 Apr 2009 04:55 PM |
|
Regarding the Intergraspec; I get the B-28 B, but B-28 does not look good, insulation under the footing? |
|
| Brad Kvanbek - ICFconstruction.net |
|
|
OKBlocker
New Member
Posts:18
|
| 07 Apr 2009 10:36 PM |
|
Your comments concerning the overturning forces is legit and should be addressed seriously.
I've seen projects move "down hill" from these same forces.
Why can't you get equipment into this location?
I think piers should be considered. |
|
|
|
|
thagreen
Basic Member
Posts:283
|
| 08 Apr 2009 08:38 AM |
|
Icf
I'm with you on that one. The preffered method of our engineers is the b-28 b.
By doing so you have foam on foam and one can add a bead of spay foam to adhere both .No frost penetration is the idea.
Cheers.
Peteg, as a side note, your questions about reinforcing steel can in part be answered in that manual. |
|
|
|
|
peteg240
New Member
Posts:6
|
| 08 Apr 2009 01:18 PM |
|
thagreen, thanks for the addiitional details.
OKblocker - No equipment due to no access from back of lot - privately held adjacent prop and no road As well as too steep. Front of 50' wide lot is filled with house and garage leaving only 3.5' between the two. Enough for wheelbarrows.
Either way the structure is smallish (250sqft), the site space is already mostly flat and the hill needs to be dug out 8-10 feet back. The back icf wall will see 8' of fill height behind it - the front will be at grade.
The other issue I recently discovered it that as a potentially unheated building the shallow foundation details change a bit at the footer/slab interface for conventional stem wall .... since the interior space has the potential of being at freezing temperatures. However, for ICF I THINK the details are less important and the footer is essentially self protected as long as the stem wall is ICF, the slab is insulated and the exterior insulation is in place.
|
|
|
|
|
thagreen
Basic Member
Posts:283
|
| 08 Apr 2009 01:38 PM |
|
By insulating the slab w/eps, on top of the footing, butting on the icf wall and the shallow footing detail, no frost will be able to penetrate. |
|
|
|
|
TerryJ
New Member
Posts:40
|
| 08 Apr 2009 02:02 PM |
|
Posted By peteg240 on 04/02/2009 2:58 PM
All,
Very new to the ICF concept but I'm leaning toward BuildBlock as they are available local and I know someone with first hand o/b experience.
I've posted some images on my project profile for Clerestory Shed.
Please let me describe the project:
The project is a ~230sf shed 20' l x 12'w with long end 8'-10' into a backyard hillside. At 10' into hillside ground level is 8'. So a little less than 45degree slope. Concrete will need to be pumped from street level at 20' below shed grade and no mechanical equipment accessible (e.g. bobcat) so excavation will have to be manual. Instead of hauling forms in I thought ICFs would be easier.
My question is this:
I'd like to minimize pumper trips and although a spread footer with ICF stem wall would likely be most tradiational - that means three separate pumper visits (footer, icf wall, slab). To keep costs down. Could a frost protected mono-slab be used instead (one slab pour and one wall pour)? Any other techniques?
My concern is with soil pressure on the hill side walls and how to protect against the overturning forces that would be present. Could a monoslab with ICF be keyed and rebar'd to keep forces at bay? I would assume a fully boxed building would be the best approach ---- its closest design would be a walk out basement.
Anyone with suggestions?
TIA.
-pg The Legalett people do this all the time - monopour the slab and footings and then stack ICF and pour. see: http://www.legalett.ca/Ref_Tech.htm
|
|
|
|
|
peteg240
New Member
Posts:6
|
| 08 Apr 2009 05:51 PM |
|
The legalett approach seems ideal except for one thing - this building must have the option of being unheating and it seems Legalett requires slab heating.
Currently I'm leaning toward a standard frost protected spead footer with ICF stem wall. I like frost protected monoslab but it seems a keyed spread footer with rebar will anchor the uphill side stem wall better especially once the slab is poured. The uphill of a monoslab will have the ICF wall just sitting on top achored by rebar. Seems possible for earth on the uphill side to place the wall in shear w.r.t. the slab underneath ..... in reality perhaps this doesn't make a difference.
Thanks much
-pg |
|
|
|
|
TerryJ
New Member
Posts:40
|
| 08 Apr 2009 05:53 PM |
|
Unheated building, unheated slab:
http://www.legalett.ca/Details_UNHEATED_ON_UNHEATED.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
ICFconstruction
Veteran Member
Posts:1324
|
| 08 Apr 2009 07:01 PM |
|
Frost walls all the way around and pour the floor with the ICFs gets my vote. |
|
| Brad Kvanbek - ICFconstruction.net |
|
|