# Pillars sinking in crawlspace



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> I wrote a post last week about jacking up my house. Alot of people on here suggested my pillars were sinking as well. Tonight i did notice one is sinking and going sideways. I dug around it, it is a 12" pillar and has a 20" footer around half of it. My house is currently on jacks about 1" up so far... 1/2 to go.I put a jack on the other side where 2" of concrete is stuck to the pillar and got it straight for now i do have it shimmed currently.....I know this is a problem that has to be fixed... My grandfather told me I should dig around that pillar right now and make another footer vs. replacing or adding a new one....what do you think?


I think I like your grandfather. But I'd still vote for just replacing the whole deal, footer and column... at each pier.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> I think I like your grandfather. But I'd still vote for just replacing the whole deal, footer and column... at each pier.


Thanks Willie... will do that first... how many bags of concrete would you think to get off the top of your head?


----------



## Michael Thomas (Jan 27, 2008)

BTW, a sinking and/or tilting footing can be an indication of water under the slab, for example from a leaking water supply or sewage line, or because of poor grading or drainage conditions which are introducing excessive water under the foundation.

---------

Home Inspection: "A business with illogically high liability, slim profit margins and limited economies of scale. An incredibly diverse, multi-disciplined consulting service, delivered under difficult in-field circumstances, before a hostile audience in an impossibly short time frame, requiring the production of an extraordinarily detailed technical report, almost instantly, without benefit of research facilities or resources." - Alan Carson


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Michael Thomas said:


> BTW, a sinking and/or tilting footing can be an indication of water under the slab, for example from a leaking water supply or sewage line, or because of poor grading or drainage conditions which are introducing excessive water under the foundation.
> 
> ---------
> 
> Home Inspection: "A business with illogically high liability, slim profit margins and limited economies of scale. An incredibly diverse, multi-disciplined consulting service, delivered under difficult in-field circumstances, before a hostile audience in an impossibly short time frame, requiring the production of an extraordinarily detailed technical report, almost instantly, without benefit of research facilities or resources." - Alan Carson


 

It's in a 6' crawl space... dirt floor. I wish i could find out if there is leakage underground. No sewer on septic. There is a pond going down hill about 30-45' from my house which is empty now but full of natural springs. 
I do have poured walls. Would you consider adding one more support pier between the sinking one a and the foundation wall which is 5.5' apart? Maybe a 2x2x1' concrete pad with solid concrete blocks then add one of those basement type adjustable floor jacks? Or is it to close to the wall to worry about? The truss beam is sitting on the foundation wall as well.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Excellent thought, Mike.

I would not attempt to pour an addition to a pad. (Probably an impossible task to do it right, anyway) A true (running length) footer is a different story. These are not footers, but pads. The most effective way is to take each one out, in turn, then dig down another foot or so, properly prepare the base with fill and compacting, use steel in two directions, and this time pour an over-sized pad. Concrete is relatively cheap, and you only have this one shot to make it a BIG one. I'd go as much as 36" x 36". A little overkill, perhaps, but you're in the insurance business right now.

It will take about a quarter of a yard of concrete for each pad. Figure heavier costs because of using bags, about $40 per pad... then the cost of the steel... the cost of blocks... some steel in them.... concrete to fill them. You're looking at what? Maybe a hundred fifty bucks (USA) per replaced column? Just a horse-back guess.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> Excellent thought, Mike.
> 
> I would not attempt to pour an addition to a pad. (Probably an impossible task to do it right, anyway) A true (running length) footer is a different story. These are not footers, but pads. The most effective way is to take each one out, in turn, then dig down another foot or so, properly prepare the base with fill and compacting, use steel in two directions, and this time pour an over-sized pad. Concrete is relatively cheap, and you only have this one shot to make it a BIG one. I'd go as much as 36" x 36". A little overkill, perhaps, but you're in the insurance business right now.
> 
> It will take about a quarter of a yard of concrete for each pad. Figure heavy because of using bags, about $40 per pad... then the cost of the steel... the cost of blocks... some steel in them.... concrete to fill them. You're looking at what? Maybe a hundred fifty bucks (USA) per replaced column? Just a horse-back guess.


So rebuild, would you buy the tubes to fill up? Honestly I do not have that much more money to put in this project. Already about $750 in. Before this problem.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

The tubes are very good... and a lot easier to get the vertical steel into than blocks. (You place it inside the tube before you stand it up, so it will clear the floor of the house.)


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> The tubes are very good... and a lot easier to get the vertical steel into than blocks. (You place it inside the tube before you stand it up, so it will clear the floor of the house.)


Sounds good. Willie would you add one more pad between the wall and that pier with a adjustable floor jack on top of 4-6 solid blocks?. To give extra support in case that pillar gives me problems again.


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

Ineedhelp: *YOU CANNOT AFFORD NOT TO FIX THESE PROBLEMS ASAP*


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

skymaster said:


> Ineedhelp: *YOU CANNOT AFFORD NOT TO FIX THESE PROBLEMS ASAP*


I agree, just trying to save as much as possible. I will do it the right way. Like willie said $150 a piece. Not bad considering one contractor called me will $1100 a piece to replace. I will replace one at a time.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> Excellent thought, Mike.
> 
> I would not attempt to pour an addition to a pad. (Probably an impossible task to do it right, anyway) A true (running length) footer is a different story. These are not footers, but pads. The most effective way is to take each one out, in turn, then dig down another foot or so, properly prepare the base with fill and compacting, use steel in two directions, and this time pour an over-sized pad. Concrete is relatively cheap, and you only have this one shot to make it a BIG one. I'd go as much as 36" x 36". A little overkill, perhaps, but you're in the insurance business right now.
> 
> It will take about a quarter of a yard of concrete for each pad. Figure heavier costs because of using bags, about $40 per pad... then the cost of the steel... the cost of blocks... some steel in them.... concrete to fill them. You're looking at what? Maybe a hundred fifty bucks (USA) per replaced column? Just a horse-back guess.


 
36"x36" and how deep? Would you build it all at once.... pad and pier ----10" or 12" tube


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

Ineed: First question is where are you located? Anywhere up north like myself you MUST run footings 42" MINIMUM. So your location is important:Second: You wont like this but CALL OR go to your local building dept and find the codes for your area. 
As far as footing and pier in one pour, doesnt seem to be the norm. There is however a product I think it is called "bigfoot" which is a flared footing form that you attach your tube to and pour in one shot, again your local codes may or may not allow this. For shure when you do pour put some wire mesh or rebar in there, DO NOT just dig a hole and plop the concrete in it, go a bunch deeper and get a bed of stone,compact it, bring that back to the depth needed,mesh it then pour.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

skymaster said:


> Ineed: First question is where are you located? Anywhere up north like myself you MUST run footings 42" MINIMUM. So your location is important:Second: You wont like this but CALL OR go to your local building dept and find the codes for your area.
> As far as footing and pier in one pour, doesnt seem to be the norm. There is however a product I think it is called "bigfoot" which is a flared footing form that you attach your tube to and pour in one shot, again your local codes may or may not allow this. For shure when you do pour put some wire mesh or rebar in there, DO NOT just dig a hole and plop the concrete in it, go a bunch deeper and get a bed of stone,compact it, bring that back to the depth needed,mesh it then pour.


Central GA. Well the previous owner came by a few months ago he built the house and says concrete guys screwed him big time. I do need to check codes. Will do so today.

Ill bust that column up and use it for rock..... good bad?... how deep should i go with rock and how deep with concrete....... I like wiliie's idea of 3' wide

Do i do rebar into pad and stick up through the pier? Do i pour pad first -let dry then pier.... Does the pier and pad need to be one piece or two pieces. If 2 pieces can i take current one out... build my pad then stick just the tube concrete pier on top????

sorry for all the questions just want to do it right.


----------



## jogr (Jul 24, 2007)

skymaster said:


> Ineed: First question is where are you located? Anywhere up north like myself you MUST run footings 42" MINIMUM. So your location is important:Second: You wont like this but CALL OR go to your local building dept and find the codes for your area.
> As far as footing and pier in one pour, doesnt seem to be the norm. There is however a product I think it is called "bigfoot" which is a flared footing form that you attach your tube to and pour in one shot, again your local codes may or may not allow this. For shure when you do pour put some wire mesh or rebar in there, DO NOT just dig a hole and plop the concrete in it, go a bunch deeper and get a bed of stone,compact it, bring that back to the depth needed,mesh it then pour.


Since this is inside a Georgia crawlspace you don't have to worry about frost. So forget about 42" deep. The top of the footing can be right at grade level. Do not put the footing on a bed of stone. Put it directly on undisturbed earth.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

jogr said:


> Since this is inside a Georgia crawlspace you don't have to worry about frost. So forget about 42" deep. The top of the footing can be right at grade level. Do not put the footing on a bed of stone. Put it directly on undisturbed earth.


Grade Level? Yea 42" scary..


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

jogr said:


> Since this is inside a Georgia crawlspace you don't have to worry about frost. So forget about 42" deep. The top of the footing can be right at grade level. Do not put the footing on a bed of stone. Put it directly on undisturbed earth.


Jogr: Kindly RE READ my post. I DID NOT say to go 42" I used that as an example of CODES.
As far as using footers at Grade Level????????? Then why bother fixing the ones that are there now and falling over? New ones will just join em a little while down the road.
I have done work for my daughter when she lived in Douglas, GA and believe me YOU CANNOT PUT FOOTERS AT GRADE EVEN DOWN THERE.
Ineed; Find your codes, also remember that codes are the Minimum so if ya go a bit beyond them your are helping yourself :}
Oh yeah a crushed stone base for a footer allows better drainage, more solid construction, Gezzzzz now why would you wanna go and do that?:whistling2:


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

skymaster said:


> Jogr: Kindly RE READ my post. I DID NOT say to go 42" I used that as an example of CODES.
> As far as using footers at Grade Level????????? Then why bother fixing the ones that are there now and falling over? New ones will just join em a little while down the road.
> I have done work for my daughter when she lived in Douglas, GA and believe me YOU CANNOT PUT FOOTERS AT GRADE EVEN DOWN THERE.
> Ineed; Find your codes, also remember that codes are the Minimum so if ya go a bit beyond them your are helping yourself :}
> Oh yeah a crushed stone base for a footer allows better drainage, more solid construction, Gezzzzz now why would you wanna go and do that?:whistling2:


I agree I am thinking 20-24" deep 2.5-3' square.. i called county they will not disclose any info. They want to come by and for me to get a permit........where can i find code


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Central GA. Well the previous owner came by a few months ago he built the house and says concrete guys screwed him big time. I do need to check codes. Will do so today.
> 
> Ill bust that column up and use it for rock..... good bad?... how deep should i go with rock and how deep with concrete....... I like wiliie's idea of 3' wide
> 
> ...


 Do not use the broken concrete for a rock base in the footing!!!!!!. Is that what you were suggesting. It will never compact and there will always be voids in there where the soil will trickle in to fill the voids . which will create a poor base for the pad. The soil will always be shifting. you will need at least a 3/4" gravel base. I feel A 3x3 pad will give you no more support then a 2x2 pad. did the 20"x20" pad crack? If not then it was fine. just built on a poor sub base. We install 2x2x1 pads all the time and they support two story additions. and thats on sand and bank run type of soil. BOB.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> Do not use the broken concrete for a rock base in the footing!!!!!!. Is that what you were suggesting. It will never compact and there will always be voids in there where the soil will trickle in to fill the voids . which will create a poor base for the pad. The soil will always be shifting. you will need at least a 3/4" gravel base. I feel A 3x3 pad will give you no more support then a 2x2 pad. did the 20"x20" pad crack? If not then it was fine. just built on a poor sub base. We install 2x2x1 pads all the time and they support two story additions. and thats on sand and bank run type of soil. BOB.


Great, no the pad did not crack it was at an 45 degree angle furthest point 20" then angle in towards center of pier....about 14" in the ground... only on one side.....So can i use my existing pier if i knock of the footer that is attached to it.... or make a new pier as well? 

What would you suggest?


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

A couple of construction pointers for you.


Dig down deeper than you are now to undisturbed soil... and don't gouge into it with the shovel, scoop it off smooth and flat.
Make the bottom as perfectly flat as you can.
Square up perfect 90 degree edges all around the walls of the hole. You want that hole to look like you just took a clean, square, sharp-edged piece of tile out of it. (Trust me, this *IS* important)
You should never use rocks or gravel larger than 3/4".
Any sub base you put in should graduate from large gravel on the bottom, pea gravel for the next layer, DOT Grade crushed material next (the type varies with localities), and finish off with a rock sand called "fines.
Layers should start off about 2" thick... before compacting.
Compact between each layer.
Continue to keep the bottom edges of each layer square and flat.
Suspend your rebar in the center third of a 12" deep concrete pad. They make "rebar chairs" for this.
Run four pieces of rebar one way, and cross them at 90 degrees with four more.
Space them about 5 or 6 inches apart.
Keep the ends and sides of the rebar at least 2" away from the edge of the hole.
Tie them all together with wire so they won't shift during the pour.
Tie four "L" shaped pieces of rebar to the steel so that they will protrude out of the top of the poured concrete about 16". Keep them within about 6" of the center. You will be tying your column steel to these vertical 16" stubs.
Pour 12" of concrete.
You now have a pad. We can talk about the columns later. 
Remember, you are in Georgia. Your clay soil does not support as evenly and solidly as sand does. That is why you need to go the extra mile with the sub base and perfectly squared bottom edges. Anything rounded, or resembling a point will not support anywhere as well as a flat surface. Think about it this way... which goes into your soil easier, a round nose shovel or a flat nosed one? Drop a bowling ball on the ground, and then drop a flat piece of plywood. Which makes a dent? Which could you drive your car over, and still see no serious impression in the soil?


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> A couple of construction pointers for you.
> 
> 
> Dig down deeper than you are now to undisturbed soil... and don't gouge into it with the shovel, scoop it off smooth and flat.
> ...


Perfect will do that and work on column later... thanks again Willie


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

If it twas me; New pier, Then you know what it is made from. Yes I would put some kind of rebar, into footing to really bond the pier to. Silly question, since house is jacked, have you checked to make sure the house is really really level?


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

All this said, make dang sure the center of your pad is directly under the beam... and where it needs support... usually at a joint.


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

Willie: Howdy and thanx for jumpin in on this subject, glad to see I am not alone anymore LOL LOL LOL


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

skymaster said:


> Willie: Howdy and thanx for jumpin in on this subject, glad to see I am not alone anymore LOL LOL LOL


:yes:Over the years, the inspectors have gotten to the point that we often just drink coffee and eat donuts because they know I seldom build to just the code. :thumbup:

It's sometimes almost impossible to get other contractors to believe that doing it to code is often simply not enough to make it really "right."


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

Willie: For better or worse for last 25 plus years hasnt been an inspector ever asked me to cheapen one thing and just meet code LOL. I build like the pyramids :}:}:}:}
dont need no stinkin lawyer sueing me 5oo yrs after I bild something ROFLMAO


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Great, no the pad did not crack it was at an 45 degree angle furthest point 20" then angle in towards center of pier....about 14" in the ground... only on one side.....So can i use my existing pier if i knock of the footer that is attached to it.... or make a new pier as well?
> 
> What would you suggest?


 Yes listen to willyT's post #21 its the correct way that we have doing for years BOB


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

skymaster said:


> If it twas me; New pier, Then you know what it is made from. Yes I would put some kind of rebar, into footing to really bond the pier to. Silly question, since house is jacked, have you checked to make sure the house is really really level?


 
So hard to tell.... i have all wood floors.... they all have buckeled a little. Have 12' board laying the level on top ... it's getting there....

I tried marbles like willieT suggested but hardwoods not even they just go down that one board....


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Thank you, Bob. Yes, many footers and pads are poured every day without following the guidelines that have been long proven be sound construction principles. And often there have been few problems encountered in doing so. Some people would say "See?" "You don't need all that rigmarole and excess." "Just dig a hole, and throw in some concrete... even the rebar is overkill."

Well, I see the absence of serious problems in many cases to be simply a tribute to the architect’s overall good design. And sometimes just plain dumb luck. It's kind of like the guy who proudly boasts of never having changed the oil in his car in 70,000 miles of driving. Yeah, he got away with it, but.... the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.

Here in Florida, we have it pretty good with sand most everywhere. (Sand, by the way, is just about the best compacting and most solid base you can build on.) But we are not immune to the hassle of occasional patches of Georgia-like clay. And when we run across those, the better builders just bite the bullet, and figure in $5,000 or so to properly prepare the ground for building. (This consists of plowing into the soil, yards and yards of rice husks or hay and straw for a depth of up to two feet to stabilize the clay.) The rest just build their same old way, like they were on good sand, and hope for the best. The predictable results are invariably slab cracking, uneven settlement, and ugly diagonal cracks down the exteriors of the houses done in the latter method. 

The surprising thing about this is that the same builders who take these shortcuts today seem to admire the old ways and the resulting pristine examples of almost perfectly preserved houses... many a hundred years old or more. You can hear them say, “They sure don’t build ‘em like they used to...”

No, “they” sure don’t.


----------



## jogr (Jul 24, 2007)

I respectfully disagree with recommendations to put the new footers on rock. This is a DIYer and the risk of insufficient compaction of the rock is greater than any benefits. Compaction is a nonissue with concrete directly on undisturbed soil. This is in a 6' deep crawlspace, it won't be raining in there and drainage is not an issue. The key is to place the correct size footer on undisturbed soil. The current footer is sinking because it is the incorrect size and located offcenter. The top of the new footer can be at grade level in the crawlspace if desired as long as the thickness reaches undisturbed soil and is adequate for the load. This is the norm for basements and this 6' deep crawl is essentially a basement.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

jogr said:


> I respectfully disagree with recommendations to put the new footers on rock. This is a DIYer and the risk of insufficient compaction of the rock is greater than any benefits. Compaction is a nonissue with concrete directly on undisturbed soil. This is in a 6' deep crawlspace, it won't be raining in there and drainage is not an issue. The key is to place the correct size footer on undisturbed soil. The current footer is sinking because it is the incorrect size and located offcenter. The top of the new footer can be at grade level in the crawlspace if desired as long as the thickness reaches undisturbed soil and is adequate for the load. This is the norm for basements and this 6' deep crawl is essentially a basement.


Well, I am not sure why he did not make a basement. He custom built the whole house. I would have. I do not even have a garage. 

Honestly I think i messed this whole pier of by placing jack on the footer... mistake. once the truss was lifter of that pier the weight from the house tilted it from the jack sitting on the main part of the footer.......... i learnned my lesson. I uncovered it all last night, but i do not have the dept yet...... The info i have given so far is not to accurate. I did not include the pier in the footer when i gave previous measurements. It measures 22"by32" but the pier is not center at all. It is 2-3" from one side but in the center of the 22" width it is a 12" pier.........does this make sense. Basically they made the pad correctly but did not put pier in center.....

Sorry for all the confusion and thanks for all the advice given far....


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

the reason the builder didn't make a full basement could be because at the time the house was built the water table could of been higher. you stated earlier that there is a pond in the back of the house about 30-40 Feet away that is empty now but gets filled by natural springs. well whats to say there is not one running under the house now just below the footing. the water table drops the soil drys and the footings drop. the water table rises and the footing raise. does this seem to make sense with the pond being full. just a possibility. BOB


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> the reason the builder didn't make a full basement could be because at the time the house was built the water table could of been higher. you stated earlier that there is a pond in the back of the house about 30-40 Feet away that is empty now but gets filled by natural springs. well whats to say there is not one running under the house now just below the footing. the water table drops the soil drys and the footings drop. the water table rises and the footing raise. does this seem to make sense with the pond being full. just a possibility. BOB


The pond was there since i was a kid... i grew up next door. This guy built the house in 01 and was a farmer with alot of heavy equipment. He had a driveway going over the dam. It started leaking (made of dirt)... he drained is End-beg of 08---to prevent rushing out people down the road.......... it's always had a constant stream.....The deepest point is around 30' which is now just a stream from springs... and around a half acre empty pond. Now my house is on a hill....


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

WATER WILL ALWAYS LEVEL OUT. You say he drained-it and at its deepest point is 30' well when the pond was full was it 30" higher. and if so would that bring it in line with the crawl space floor or where abouts? its hard to envision where the top of the pond would be with the crawl space floor so help me out. I'm trying to find out why the pads where sinking other then poorly constructed. do you see where I'm going?. by him draining the pond he lowered the water table. and by lowering it the soil dried there for making the piers to sink. this could be a possiblity?.BOB


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> WATER WILL ALWAYS LEVEL OUT. You say he drained-it and at its deepest point is 30' well when the pond was full was it 30" higher. and if so would that bring it in line with the crawl space floor or where abouts? its hard to envision where the top of the pond would be with the crawl space floor so help me out. I'm trying to find out why the pads where sinking other then poorly constructed. do you see where I'm going?. by him draining the pond he lowered the water table. and by lowering it the soil dried there for making the piers to sink. this could be a possiblity?.BOB


HOnestly i think i tilted it by placing the jack on the footer while jacking up my house.


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> HOnestly i think i tilted it by placing the jack on the footer while jacking up my house.


 I under stand that . But why did you have to jack up the house, Because the footing was sinking, Correct? I new if you put the jack on the edge of the footing and the weight came off the Pier the footing pad would sink down where the jack was. What I'm trying to find out is why did the piers sink before you got involved with the jacking. other then they might of been constructed poorly. I hope you are following me here., BOB.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> I under stand that . But why did you have to jack up the house, Because the footing was sinking, Correct? I new if you put the jack on the edge of the footing and the weight came off the Pier the footing pad would sink down where the jack was. What I'm trying to find out is why did the piers sink before you got involved with the jacking. other then they might of been constructed poorly. I hope you are following me here., BOB.


Well..... It was constructed poorly. They shimmed with 2x4s not PT and cut ends of a 2x10's to make the .5-1.5" difference so all the weight was on a 1" pad...they have crushed--- my truss is made of 3---2x12s nailed together... there is a 2x4 running along the top of the truss beam but only covering 2 of the 2x12's those two have sunken down where the ends where not held by anything except the front 2x12 that it's nailed to...... (where the end of each board ran there was nothing under it) The truss was not done in layers.. 2 of the boards were nailed at the same lenght.. why i have not clue..... i am redoing the shims 4x16 block running with it and 1/4" metal plat as shims.. I will be covering at least 8" along truss vs. the 1" 

am I explaining good?


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Well..... It was constructed poorly. They shimmed with 2x4s not PT and cut ends of a 2x10's to make the .5-1.5" difference so all the weight was on a 1" pad...they have crushed--- my truss is made of 3---2x12s nailed together... there is a 2x4 running along the top of the truss beam but only covering 2 of the 2x12's those two have sunken down where the ends where not held by anything except the front 2x12 that it's nailed to...... (where the end of each board ran there was nothing under it) The truss was not done in layers.. 2 of the boards were nailed at the same lenght.. why i have not clue..... i am redoing the shims 4x16 block running with it and 1/4" metal plat as shims.. I will be covering at least 8" along truss vs. the 1"
> 
> am I explaining good?


 Yes Understood Thinking back from your first post as i was following i remember that they did a shi? job on the shims. Even pt would be no good they will crush also. what you have described would be the proper way to tackle this. yes steel plates are what I use. I must of miss understood something a few post back. I was under the impression that the piers them self were sinking. Understand now YOU made the pad sink by putting the weight on the edge, sorry for the misunderstanding BOB,


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> Yes Understood Thinking back from your first post as i was following i remember that they did a shi? job on the shims. Even pt would be no good they will crush also. what you have described would be the proper way to tackle this. yes steel plates are what I use. I must of miss understood something a few post back. I was under the impression that the piers them self were sinking. Understand now YOU made the pad sink by putting the weight on the edge, sorry for the misunderstanding BOB,












There we go.... see the driveway over the pond..... that was broken down...


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> Yes Understood Thinking back from your first post as i was following i remember that they did a shi? job on the shims. Even pt would be no good they will crush also. what you have described would be the proper way to tackle this. yes steel plates are what I use. I must of miss understood something a few post back. I was under the impression that the piers them self were sinking. Understand now YOU made the pad sink by putting the weight on the edge, sorry for the misunderstanding BOB,


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> Yes Understood Thinking back from your first post as i was following i remember that they did a shi? job on the shims. Even pt would be no good they will crush also. what you have described would be the proper way to tackle this. yes steel plates are what I use. I must of miss understood something a few post back. I was under the impression that the piers them self were sinking. Understand now YOU made the pad sink by putting the weight on the edge, sorry for the misunderstanding BOB,


 
Correct, I checked a few more.. ... None of the piers are center of the pads.....i cannot comprehend... the two things done crappy on my house were these and the roof vents...(leaks)


----------



## buletbob (May 9, 2008)

Sorry again for the miss understanding, seams as tho your on the right approach, Good luck :thumbup:. BOB


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

buletbob said:


> Sorry again for the miss understanding, seams as tho your on the right approach, Good luck :thumbup:. BOB


+1 not a problem thanks for commenting any advice is helpful
my luck has been bad on ever project so far


----------



## cocobolo (Dec 16, 2008)

Ineedhelp, you have found the reason for the pier problem all by yourself. The piers should have been centered on the footings. WillieT has given you the best advice....now if we can just get him to say footings instead of footers...
You definitely need to get down to undisturbed soil, and as Willie said, when you dig the hole, get the bottom dead flat and as level as possible. If you're on undisturbed soil, I think in your case I would not worry about the rock and sand.
What is the load on top of your beam?


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

cocobolo said:


> Ineedhelp, you have found the reason for the pier problem all by yourself. The piers should have been centered on the footings. WillieT has given you the best advice....now if we can just get him to say footings instead of footers...
> You definitely need to get down to undisturbed soil, and as Willie said, when you dig the hole, get the bottom dead flat and as level as possible. If you're on undisturbed soil, I think in your case I would not worry about the rock and sand.
> What is the load on top of your beam?


Willie has helped alot....Load?


----------



## cocobolo (Dec 16, 2008)

By "load", we mean what is it that you have sitting above.
For example, is there a wall, or perhaps more than one wall. Is it an open floor with almost no load? Is it a kitchen, which would weigh quite a bit more? That sort of thing.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

I'm still concerned that you stay very aware of the unique and esoteric conditions that exist in your area, and not too many other places in this nation... especially with the contributing factor of those springs.

Clay soils can be subject to dramatic changes in volume as their moisture content varies. Clay soils contain very fine mineral particles, silt and sand. The ratio of each of these determines how the clay will shrink and expand. It is usual to excavate foundations to a depth where the moisture content of the clay remains stable.

Some sources recommend a minimum depth of about 42" for foundations, but if the clay is very soft you may need a special foundation specified by an engineer.

Any foundation excavated in a clay soil should be concreted as soon as possible after it is dug. Even left overnight it can dry out or get wet, in which case it will need to be deepened a further 3" to 4". Foundations built over a dried-out trench bottom may suffer heave when the clay takes up moisture and swells; if built over a wet trench bottom, the clay may swell which will cause settlement later when it compresses under load.

Please, please talk with several experienced builders in your area about these things.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

cocobolo said:


> By "load", we mean what is it that you have sitting above.
> For example, is there a wall, or perhaps more than one wall. Is it an open floor with almost no load? Is it a kitchen, which would weigh quite a bit more? That sort of thing.


Both beams are under the load bearing walls... foyer/living room center of house the beams are on the either side of the LR/FOYER walls......... both are wide open(flloor-ceiling).... kitchen and master on either end both bedrooms upstairs are on either end as well... over kitchen and over master..


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> I'm still concerned that you stay very aware of the unique and esoteric conditions that exist in your area, and not too many other places in this nation... especially with the contributing factor of those springs.
> 
> Clay soils can be subject to dramatic changes in volume as their moisture content varies. Clay soils contain very fine mineral particles, silt and sand. The ratio of each of these determines how the clay will shrink and expand. It is usual to excavate foundations to a depth where the moisture content of the clay remains stable.
> 
> ...


Thanks again... never considered any of this.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

cocobolo said:


> Ineedhelp, you have found the reason for the pier problem all by yourself. The piers should have been centered on the footings. WillieT has given you the best advice....*now if we can just get him to say footings instead of footers...*
> You definitely need to get down to undisturbed soil, and as Willie said, when you dig the hole, get the bottom dead flat and as level as possible. If you're on undisturbed soil, I think in your case I would not worry about the rock and sand.
> What is the load on top of your beam?


 Ok, Ok....  Yeah, it's technically correct to call dem footers "footings". But I's jus a dum Southern kuntry boy. Hell, I still say "Mile an hour". And the "hour" is pronounced "are". (My wife cringes when I use some of my quaint, but charmingly rustic, colocialisms.)

So, here goes. Treasure the moment, because it may not come again soon. They are FOOTINGS. :thumbup:


----------



## cocobolo (Dec 16, 2008)

Willie, you are definitely one of the good guys!!!!
I very much appreciate the fact that you are giving our man such excellent advice about this clay.
In your experience, how deep would you say this sort of thing generally goes?
There are one or two clay areas on the local islands here, but they are quite small in comparison to what it sounds like you experience there.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

cocobolo said:


> Willie, you are definitely one of the good guys!!!!
> I very much appreciate the fact that you are giving our man such excellent advice about this clay.
> *In your experience, how deep would you say this sort of thing generally goes?*
> There are one or two clay areas on the local islands here, but they are quite small in comparison to what it sounds like you experience there.


The clay usually goes pretty deep. I'm talking many, many meters. You never really dig through it in most parts of Georgia. But the trick is to get down to where ground water doesn't effect it very much. This takes electronic testing equipment.

Odd as this sounds, clay, because it absorbs water at varying rates for differing levels of stratus doesn't just get soaked then dry out like sand or dirt does. At a certain level, when the water absorbed by the upper crust meets a resistant strato-layer (is that a word?), it begins to migrate laterally. And it can actually cause the upper layer to float across a deeper, more dense and solidified layer. Texas and some of our western states also have a lot of this kind of trouble.

Clay type soils are very strange acting at times. We just go ahead and try to stabilize it whenever we encounter it, as I described in an earlier post.


----------



## cocobolo (Dec 16, 2008)

Thanks Willie. This reminds me somewhat of when the government was constructing a bridge over one of our highways in Richmond. What they did was to get a whole lot of 24" steel pipe and drive it into the ground. I believe they used 60' lengths. They would get one length almost into the ground, then sit the next one on top and weld it on. Then that would be driven into the ground, and so on until they were at 220'. I can't recall how many of these pipes they drove in, but it was many truckloads of steel. Not only does that prevent any lateral movement, but friction on the pipe also is supposed to prevent movement.
It's all still good after twenty some years, so I guess the engineers knew what they were doing.


----------



## skymaster (Jun 6, 2007)

Coco" dem thar pilins sho do work gooooooooooooder :}:}

Willie: Clay is wierd just lik Kolorado "expansive" soil LOL Uh Yup:laughing:


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Today i removed the pier/footing. With my four wheeler ~ no problem. There was a grade level footing there.... no wonder it moved. Will dig and concrete tommorrow. Plan to do a 3'x2'x12" should take 10-80lb bags..... <---- is that a sufficient footing?

Willie- THe pad/footing/footer... not sure which we want to call it - was not connected to the pier, my pier is still perfect. Can i lay a completley level pad and lay my pier back up? Do you see a problem with that considering it was like that and most likely the other 9 are like that? Should I do the L shaped #4 rebar sticking up 16" like you said when making all new? Then drill into the existing pier?

Which way should i go.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Today i removed the pier/footing. With my four wheeler ~ no problem. There was a grade level footing there.... no wonder it moved. Will dig and concrete tommorrow. Plan to do a 3'x2'x12" should take 10-80lb bags..... <---- is that a sufficient footing?
> 
> Willie- THe pad/footing/footer... not sure which we want to call it - was not connected to the pier, my pier is still perfect. Can i lay a completley level pad and lay my pier back up? Do you see a problem with that considering it was like that and most likely the other 9 are like that? Should I do the L shaped #4 rebar sticking up 16" like you said when making all new? Then drill into the existing pier?
> 
> Which way should i go.


I can't believe I'm saying this. :wink: But I'd say you probably *can* get away with it. Actually, you have no real mechanical nor chemical bond, pad to column, when you fill a tube on top of a pre-poured pad anyway. The integrity comes from the tie through the rebar.

Just be sure to EPOXY the dowels into the column, and it wouldn't hurt to put some EPOXY all over the column base to glue it to the pad. But I will warn you, you're in for a hell of a drilling time to get all four to line up just right. Might want to only do two since there's probably no steel in the column anyway.

And doing it that way, I would probably shorten the length of the dowels to about 6 or 8 inches sticking out of the pad.

This is not the ideal setup of doing a column full of rebar, but I honestly do think the most important thing here is going to be the pads.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> I can't believe I'm saying this. :wink: But I'd say you probably *can* get away with it. Actually, you have no real mechanical nor chemical bond, pad to column, when you fill a tube on top of a pre-poured pad anyway. The integrity comes from the tie through the rebar.
> 
> Just be sure to EPOXY the dowels into the column, and it wouldn't hurt to put some EPOXY all over the column base to glue it to the pad. But I will warn you, you're in for a hell of a drilling time to get all four to line up just right. Might want to only do two since there's probably no steel in the column anyway.
> 
> ...


Sounds good. 
Is a week good enough to let the concrete dry? 

There was no gravel base under this pad. Is the gravel for shifting or for water? 
off subject
today it rained alot i have one area 2'x2' that gets wet. Not flooded but the rocks are dark... sometimes more sometimes less... Assuming the water is coming through the foundation wall somewhere it's on a slope alot of rain runs that direction towards the house........ It's about 5' away from the row of piers- opposite the pier discussing above... should i find a solution? or not enough to worry about....


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Sounds good.
> Is a week good enough to let the concrete dry?
> 
> There was no gravel base under this pad. Is the gravel for shifting or for water?
> ...


Since you have no floor down there, you aren't likely to keep all rain water from infiltrating. If it's not causing a problem at the pad locations, I wouldn't get overly concerned about it.

The gravel will actually act somewhat like a self-adjusting bed or foundation for the pad. You know how you hear talk about the initial "settling" of a house? Well, it does happen. And it is usually only in fractions of inches all over the house.... no joints are perfect, nothing is always perfectly aligned with what it is supposed to align with, no footings (see! I can say it right :thumbup are exactly 100% level and equally compacted... and this is where the gravel base comes in. It shuffles and shifts and interlocks and seeks a level much like water does, keeping a fairly level and stable base situated evenly beneath the pad. (One of the reasons to be especially concerned about getting a good compaction job.) All this movement is almost imperceptible, of course, and rarely could even be noticed without sophisticated monitoring equipment.

And, yes, water that could possibly cause the pad to slide like tires hydroplane, or the shifting of the tectonic plates of the Earth, tends to simply seep harmlessly on through the gravel... in one side and out the other without taking any foundation material with it, as it might if there were nothing but sand or dirt down there. These can be washed away far easier than gravel.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

A week is good enough on the curing time. And the size you mentioned will probably be OK. Definitely stay with the 12" thickness.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> A week is good enough on the curing time. And the size you mentioned will probably be OK. Definitely stay with the 12" thickness.


Since I did push that one side down, the deepest point of the hole is 8" shallow is 6"....

Thanks for all your help.... we need to set you up on "pay per response" 

Very good advice.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Since I did push that one side down, the deepest point of the hole is 8" shallow is 6"....
> 
> Thanks for all your help.... we need to set you up on "pay per response"
> 
> Very good advice.


Hey, I'm an old retired fart now, and all I do is small jobs for friends and just putter around the house. It is I who should offer remuneration for the opportunity to pass on what little I've picked up over the years. You make me feel useful.:yes:


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> Hey, I'm an old retired fart now, and all I do is small jobs for friends and just putter around the house. It is I who should offer remuneration for the opportunity to pass on what little I've picked up over the years. You make me feel useful.:yes:


HAHA.

YOu know i was looking at the blue prints to the house...... the footings are supposed to be 10x16x42" vs. 22x32x5or6" and the piers 8x8x16" assuming stacked blocks........... he went haywire.....the sill is to be 2x6--- it's 2x4...not sure why ...... laminated beams are to be in 4 spots under kitchen 2 in master and one in LR... i have 2 under stairs in foyer....only

Then again a builders worst nightmare.. the owner made changes all over the place on the prints/drawings

now i know why the bank talked me into signing contract Monday and closing 3 days later.......and saying " no need to get it inspected we are not lowering the price" They purchased my old house from me (not much negotiation room)


----------



## cocobolo (Dec 16, 2008)

Willie, GO STRAIGHT TO THE HEAD OF THE CLASS!!!!


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

A 42" thick footing? And so wide! Actually overhanging the blocks by a whole inch in that one direction. Good planning. Almost guarantees a problem before long... extra weight and an undersized, unbalanced footprint.

Or maybe he just got his dimensions confused, and then added some typos for flavor.

You sometimes get to wondering how some people figure out how to get their pants on in the morning, let alone find their way to work. :huh:


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> A 42" thick footing? And so wide! Actually overhanging the blocks by a whole inch in that one direction. Good planning. Almost guarantees a problem before long... extra weight and an undersized, unbalanced footprint.
> 
> Or maybe he just got his dimensions confused, and then added some typos for flavor.
> 
> You sometimes get to wondering how some people figure out how to get their pants on in the morning, let alone find their way to work. :huh:


who knows about to go start my day digging and mixing concrete


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> who knows about to go start my day digging and mixing concrete


 
not to bad 12, 80lb bags it's a big ol pad..... thanks willie will set pier next week.....


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

For people doing a little lighter work in the future, I thought I'd show a comparison between doing individual pads, and doing a running footing.

It's 6 of one and a half dozen of the other as far as the amount of concrete is concerned. But the work for a running footing tends to be a little easier.


----------



## cocobolo (Dec 16, 2008)

Willie: I couldn't agree more. The single footing adds considerably more stability overall as well. Good point.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> For people doing a little lighter work in the future, I thought I'd show a comparison between doing individual pads, and doing a running footing.
> 
> It's 6 of one and a half dozen of the other as far as the amount of concrete is concerned. But the work for a running footing tends to be a little easier.


Thanks again for your assitance willie.

I did not put any rebar sticking straight up.... kinda forgot... so concerned about hitting my head really hard on crawl door and mixing up concrete......

plan to get some half in channel and making L brackets to keep it in place......it's place.... hopefully the weight of the house will not allow it to tip.


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Ineedhelp2009 said:


> Thanks again for your assitance willie.
> 
> I did not put any rebar sticking straight up.... kinda forgot... so concerned about hitting my head really hard on crawl door and mixing up concrete......
> 
> plan to get some half in channel and making L brackets to keep it in place......it's place.... hopefully the weight of the house will not allow it to tip.


It's alway something... now my bottle jacks are loosing pressure overnight :furious:


----------



## Ineedhelp2009 (Feb 18, 2009)

Willie T said:


> A 42" thick footing? And so wide! Actually overhanging the blocks by a whole inch in that one direction. Good planning. Almost guarantees a problem before long... extra weight and an undersized, unbalanced footprint.
> 
> Or maybe he just got his dimensions confused, and then added some typos for flavor.
> 
> You sometimes get to wondering how some people figure out how to get their pants on in the morning, let alone find their way to work. :huh:


thansk again willie... just finishsed one side.. doing other next week. 

The 35' truss is pretty even.. 2 sections of it are a 1/8" to a 1/4" lower but only a 2' section in between piers.... ... not really much i can do unless i move/disconnect all of the a/c ducts and place a perm jack there.... the other one is where the pier sank......... it's down 1/8 right there.. i did use alot of truss screws......starting to think this wood is just warped from sitting so lope sided for so many yrs... 

i put a laser on the other truss....... the poured wall sides need to go up 1/4" (shim crushed) but towards centers it's down about 1.5-2" gradual... shims are not that crushed, thinking those grade level footings have sunk a little....


----------

