removed

Great to see Fastfoot being using for the footings. Very professional looking site.

I had to go and buy the material myself. My contractor wasn't interested in using it, but I insisted. The strange thing is that they are very specific about something's and other things aren't important. They are very concerned about blowouts, being level, and being plumb, and so they are using tons of osb and plywood and other wood to keep things aligned.

Well it isn't too unusual to use wood cleats and strapping, what is the ICF system you are using, they should be using them somewhat for windows and doors depending on the buck system you used and they should be using them for any common seams or a stacked bond line.

I am using amvic and amdeck. They are using lvl for three sides of the buck, and they are using pressure treated wood for the bottom. The person who decided that has left the project.

LVL wow! thats a little expensive i would think. you will still need some type of membrane barrier on the lvl so it doesn't come in contact with the concrete, we usually use 2x12 and rip it to fit depending on the size of the icf block, but the pt on the bottom is good should be (2) 2x4 so you can pour concrete in the middle see the projects file in this link www.gnphouse.com

They used building paper. Not sure what kind. They used 3 2x4's. Two were in place, and the third one in the middle is held by wire, and after the concrete is poured, they will release it, and fill the concrete pour location.

All of our walls have now been poured.  They used tons of bracing to insure that there weren't any blowouts.  It looks like 40% of the foam was protected with OSB.  We had one wall which goes from 17 ft to 10 ft, and they formed the top plate as they went up.

We are hoping to get roof trusses started in about one week.  They will measure on Monday, and it supposedly takes about 4 days to have them made and delivered.  I think the plan is to compact the lot, putting base rock wherever there is hardscape, and then grade the rest of the lot.

The crawl space is super dry.  All of the amdeck bracing has been removed.  All of the sewer pipes have been tied off.

We can really see the house now.

removed

Very clean footings. Usually they are very messy but they did a good job, very detailed.

How wide were those footings? What did the foundation cost you?

So if I understand the process correctly. You ran ICF from the footings up the stem wall to your floor slab which is LiteDeck. You  placed a vapor barrier down on raw soil and created a crawl space.

For the slab on grade did you run the vapor barrier underneath, and then the gravel and rebar? Was that #4 bar at 18" oc?

Picture #147 - How much spacing between the top of that large window and the ICF top? Is it 12"?

Picture #174 - What is the pitch on that roof angle?

Pictures #191 & 192 - Are those foam thermal breaks in the slab?

Picture #100 - Are you placing a treated bottom sill plate down and then untreated 2x4 lumber on top? If so, why not just use a foam protector and place untreated lumber down on the slab?

Posted By Lbear on 18 Jan 2014 11:51 PM
Very clean footings. Usually they are very messy but they did a good job, very detailed.

How wide were those footings? What did the foundation cost you?

So if I understand the process correctly. You ran ICF from the footings up the stem wall to your floor slab which is LiteDeck. You  placed a vapor barrier down on raw soil and created a crawl space.

For the slab on grade did you run the vapor barrier underneath, and then the gravel and rebar? Was that #4 bar at 18" oc?

Picture #147 - How much spacing between the top of that large window and the ICF top? Is it 12"?

Picture #174 - What is the pitch on that roof angle?

Pictures #191 & 192 - Are those foam thermal breaks in the slab?

Picture #100 - Are you placing a treated bottom sill plate down and then untreated 2x4 lumber on top? If so, why not just use a foam protector and place untreated lumber down on the slab?

The widest footings were 6' and 26" deep.  I don't know.  I have a whole house bid, and individual items were not priced.
Yes, ICF from footings to roof trusses.  I used Amdeck which might be the same as LiteDeck, but my GC bought it from an Amvic distributor.  I am not sure of the specifications of the vapor barrier, but it is super thick.  My crawl space is a minimum of 18" tall.
There isn't a vapor barrier underneath the slab on grade for the garage. I was not here when they did it, so I didn't get a chance to specify it, and it wasn't in the plans.  I am not too worried about it, because it has ICF all around it, and the footings were done with fastfoot.  I have waterproofing on the outside of the ICF, and they used gravel underneath.  I would've preferred it, but too late now.  I am not sure about the rebar specifications.
147 - that isn't the top of the ICF.  You need to look at 159
174 - 3.75/12
191&192 - I am not sure.  The main slab has the ICF around it.  They are doing some kind of special things at all of the windows, so I am not sure if some of that is just blockout for now.  The window and door installer has been working with the GC to specify how things should be at all of the doors and windows.  They will install doors and windows in the next 2-3 weeks, and I will know what it is then.
I assume you meant 199 - I didn't know what the framer was doing.  I am not an owner/builder, so I have been letting the GC do things either as specified in the building documents, or as they see fit.  The framers came in and did all of the interior framing in two days.  I asked them about the pressure treated lumber, but they said that they don't place untreated lumber next to concrete even though mine was suspended with totally surround ICF, fast foot forms, waterproofed exteriors, and a vapor barrier in the crawl space.  They said that concrete absorbs water from wherever it can, and then that water will most likely go into the wood, so they didn't want to take any chances.  I didn't know what was happening until I arrived, and I didn't have any ideas to do things differently, so it will be as is.

Why did you use a suspended concrete slab over a crawl space vs. a conventional concrete slab over compacted granular fill? It doesn't appear that you have very much grade to deal with. Just looking at the amount of rebar stirrups in that floor foam, I'm sure that suspended slab cost significantly more than a slab over fill. Last time I checked, that floor deck foam alone costs about $4/sq ft.

Posted By arkie6 on 19 Jan 2014 11:43 AM
Why did you use a suspended concrete slab over a crawl space vs. a conventional concrete slab over compacted granular fill? It doesn't appear that you have very much grade to deal with. Just looking at the amount of rebar stirrups in that floor foam, I'm sure that suspended slab cost significantly more than a slab over fill. Last time I checked, that floor deck foam alone costs about $4/sq ft.

I would say it is mostly just desire.  My lot is almost perfectly flat.  I liked the idea of a crawl space,  having easier access to my pipes, however, the only pipesin the crawl space that I will have are sewage.  Some simple storage if I want it.  At least easy to hide christmas presents.  I have nearly a foot of insulation, so hopefully, my radiant won't work hard.  Also, I didn't have to do anything special for my perimeter insulation because it is ICF from footing to roof truss.  Also, I have some beams underneath to keep the spans under 20 ft, and they are also ICF.`

Here is california, people are scared of ICF, so I have had numerous structural engineers tell me that I needed to have a 16" or more thick mat slab with two layers of rebar.  I also wanted to use radiant heat.  The mat slab would be quite expensive, plus with the slab being so thick, I would probably need to place some insulation down, and then place another layer of gypcrete or concrete for my radiant slab.  I got a number of quotes, and maybe they overcharged for the mat slab or undercharged the amdeck, but it was always less than $10k, so I decided to go for it.

Posted By Lbear on 18 Jan 2014 11:51 PM
Picture #100 - Are you placing a treated bottom sill plate down and then untreated 2x4 lumber on top? If so, why not just use a foam protector and place untreated lumber down on the slab?

A senior carpenter has laid out the wall. What you see is the bottom and TOP plates. Soon the crew will separate them and nail the studs in between.
If your question is wither the treated plate is necessary, then no, but some form of separation is good. Some use simple poly others use the steel track for steel stud walls. I see no reason that foam would not work as long as it doesn't absorb or pass moisture.

Posted By ba_icf on 19 Jan 2014 03:25 PM

Here is california, people are scared of ICF, so I have had numerous structural engineers tell me that I needed to have a 16" or more thick mat slab with two layers of rebar.  I also wanted to use radiant heat.  The mat slab would be quite expensive, plus with the slab being so thick, I would probably need to place some insulation down, and then place another layer of gypcrete or concrete for my radiant slab.  I got a number of quotes, and maybe they overcharged for the mat slab or undercharged the amdeck, but it was always less than $10k, so I decided to go for it.

What do you mean by that most people are scared of ICF in California?

Isn't AmDeck a form of a "mat slab?" The same concept of I-Beams being formed with concrete with EPS foam underneath.

Posted By FBBP on 20 Jan 2014 10:55 AM

A senior carpenter has laid out the wall. What you see is the bottom and TOP plates. Soon the crew will separate them and nail the studs in between.
If your question is wither the treated plate is necessary, then no, but some form of separation is good. Some use simple poly others use the steel track for steel stud walls. I see no reason that foam would not work as long as it doesn't absorb or pass moisture.

I see. The carpenter just laid out the top plate on top of the bottom plate so that it would be ready for assembly.

The untreated dimensional lumber tends to twist less than treated lumber. A good quality foam sill plate protector would work. Being an interior wall, it didn't seem necessary to install treated lumber. On an exterior facing wall, I could see it being used. Either way, as long as the wood is protected from the concrete by either foam or treatment, all is good.

Posted By Lbear on 20 Jan 2014 01:19 PM

Posted By ba_icf on 19 Jan 2014 03:25 PM

Here is california, people are scared of ICF, so I have had numerous structural engineers tell me that I needed to have a 16" or more thick mat slab with two layers of rebar.  I also wanted to use radiant heat.  The mat slab would be quite expensive, plus with the slab being so thick, I would probably need to place some insulation down, and then place another layer of gypcrete or concrete for my radiant slab.  I got a number of quotes, and maybe they overcharged for the mat slab or undercharged the amdeck, but it was always less than $10k, so I decided to go for it.

What do you mean by that most people are scared of ICF in California?

Isn't AmDeck a form of a "mat slab?" The same concept of I-Beams being formed with concrete with EPS foam underneath.

I say scared, because I look at other footings online that are using ICF, and their footings are very small compared to mine.  Also, many of the ICF's are essentially two stories tall with basement and first floor, and I just have a single story, but I guess mine is virtually two story with the stem walls and the high wall heights.  However, I don't see anyone having footings that are 6' wide and 26" deep.  So, I believe they are scared so they are way over designed.

My definition of a mat slab, and what I see in the literature is a mat slab is a combination of the footings and the slab.  The mat slab would be responsible for holding up the weight of the whole house.  In the case of Amdeck, the suspended slab is only responsible for holding up itself, and a few interior walls.  I believe the weight bearing interior wall is above a footing.  The footings are holding up the walls, the house, the suspended slab, etc.  So, a mat slab would more similar to a whole house footing.

Posted By ba_icf on 20 Jan 2014 02:19 PM
I say scared, because I look at other footings online that are using ICF, and their footings are very small compared to mine.  Also, many of the ICF's are essentially two stories tall with basement and first floor, and I just have a single story, but I guess mine is virtually two story with the stem walls and the high wall heights.  However, I don't see anyone having footings that are 6' wide and 26" deep.  So, I believe they are scared so they are way over designed.

When I saw the footing size I just assumed it's because you're in CA where you have strict earthquake design requirements, right? I believe those are the strictest in the country. When you look at just soil bearing capacity and what the area needs to be to support a wall it's surprisingly small, even with only  the usual minimum of 1500 psf bearing allowance for the soil.

That footing width was pretty insane. A 72" wide footing for a home is the largest I've seen. I assume you are in a Seismic Design Category "D" area?

It would be interesting to know the breakdown of what the foundation/footings cost.

That form fabric for the footings, what is it's main purpose? Is it a vapor barrier for the footing to protect the concrete from the soil so that the soil doesn't rob all the moisture out of the curing concrete or does it serve some other purpose?

Posted By dmaceld on 20 Jan 2014 03:12 PM

Posted By ba_icf on 20 Jan 2014 02:19 PM
I say scared, because I look at other footings online that are using ICF, and their footings are very small compared to mine.  Also, many of the ICF's are essentially two stories tall with basement and first floor, and I just have a single story, but I guess mine is virtually two story with the stem walls and the high wall heights.  However, I don't see anyone having footings that are 6' wide and 26" deep.  So, I believe they are scared so they are way over designed.

When I saw the footing size I just assumed it's because you're in CA where you have strict earthquake design requirements, right? I believe those are the strictest in the country. When you look at just soil bearing capacity and what the area needs to be to support a wall it's surprisingly small, even with only  the usual minimum of 1500 psf bearing allowance for the soil.

When I did my own back of the napkin calculation, it wasn't that big, so they are adding quite a bit for seismic and margin.

I know that I am in a seismic zone, but I am not sure of the zone.  I am in Santa Clara county.

My soils guy would only commit to the minimum 1500 psf.  We were originally planning to build a basement, and some of the soil at some depths wasn't that great.

I don't know the exact reasoning behind the size of the footing.  The structural engineer that I used said it needed to be this big.  Where it is the largest, I have an 18' wall.  My walls range from 10' to 18' plus the stem wall which is about 3'.  Also, I think the specified the slab as thicker because I wanted to have zero threshold showers, utility room, and mechanical room, so they blocked out more than 1" for the drain slope.  So, everywhere else has to be thicker

I talked to a couple of structural engineers when I was getting quotes, and they all mentioned massive footings.  My builder said that his guy that I didn't use recommended a mat slab on their other project.  So, I guess if you want to have the structural strength of a mat slab, but prefer perimeter foundations, then they will be massive.