# Increasing height of Steel Bulkhead Concrete Foundation



## ulrichfolkers (Mar 22, 2012)

With repect to getting a good bond, would I be better off using Masonry Cement vs Quikrete 5000? The gravel in Quikrete 5000 may not produce as optimal a bond as Masonry Cement would.

Thanks


----------



## Canarywood1 (May 5, 2012)

ulrichfolkers said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> Wanted to get some input before I tackle a job. Recently purchased a home built in the 70s. One of the first things I noticed that was going to need attention was the concrete foundation that the steel bulkhead rests on. The grade of the land is such that there's a slight pitch back toward the bulkhead foundation, so, in a heavy rain, water will collect back toward this low area. The obvious issue is I get water at the bottom of the concrete steps leading into the basement. My plan is to remove the steel bulkhead, build some concrete forms to increase the height of the concrete foundation, re-install the bulkhead, and regrade the soil so it pitches water away from the foundation. The 2 sides of the bulkhead foundation are 6' long, and the front is 5 wide'. The existing concrete foundation is 5" thick. My plan is to increase the existing height 7 or 8 inches. So, the concrete pour will be 5" wide by 7" high around the entire perimeter of the foundation. I was planning on using Quikrete 5000 concrete mix. I'm obviously going to use a bonding agent, but my question is: Does anyone think it's necessary to use rebar or wire mesh for this job?
> 
> Thanks for any advice


 







I'm not following this at all,can you post a pic?


----------



## ulrichfolkers (Mar 22, 2012)

Unfortunately, I won't be able to post a pic this weekend. It's a cape style home in New England with a full basement. Picture it this way, there's a full basement with poured concrete walls, you access the basement via a steel bulkhead from outside (the back of the house), the bulkhead has its own poured concete foundation (apron) 5" thick, you step down concrete steps into the basement. The bulkhead foundation is really a vault you step down into. To say it another way, the concrete foundation for the bulkhead isn't high enough ( It is below grade). I can't simply build up the ground level with soil going against the steel bullkhead, so, the only real option is to increase the high of the cement foundation the bulkhead rests on (5" thick foundation), then regrade the soil so it pitches away from the foundation. The steel bulkhead I'm referring to is made my Bilco. Fairly common around here. I hope this helps explain the issue. I know a picture would be a 1000x better.

I wanted to know if it was necessary to drill holes into the existing concrete foundation, use rebar, then do the concrete pour, or would this be over kill since there's really no load to speak of on the concrete ( just the weight of the steel bulkhead). Would the bonding agent alone be enough in this case?

Thanks again


----------



## Canarywood1 (May 5, 2012)

ulrichfolkers said:


> Unfortunately, I won't be able to post a pic this weekend. It's a cape style home in New England with a full basement. Picture it this way, there's a full basement with poured concrete walls, you access the basement via a steel bulkhead from outside (the back of the house), the bulkhead has its own poured concete foundation (apron) 5" thick, you step down concrete steps into the basement. The bulkhead foundation is really a vault you step down into. To say it another way, the concrete foundation for the bulkhead isn't high enough ( It is below grade). I can't simply build up the ground level with soil going against the steel bullkhead, so, the only real option is to increase the high of the cement foundation the bulkhead rests on (5" thick foundation), then regrade the soil so it pitches away from the foundation. The steel bulkhead I'm referring to is made my Bilco. Fairly common around here. I hope this helps explain the issue. I know a picture would be a 1000x better.
> 
> I wanted to know if it was necessary to drill holes into the existing concrete foundation, use rebar, then do the concrete pour, or would this be over kill since there's really no load to speak of on the concrete ( just the weight of the steel bulkhead). Would the bonding agent alone be enough in this case?
> 
> Thanks again


 


Okay this explaination makes it easier to picture, and if you pour concrete on top of the wall that's there now,i'd say yes to using rebar epoxied into the old wall,the reason being there's a good chance the new wall will not bond with the old even using a bonding agent,any chance you could use cement block instead of concrete seeing as there's no load to speak of?,might make life a little easier.


----------



## ulrichfolkers (Mar 22, 2012)

Thanks Canarywood1.

I elected to do exactly what you suggested, namely, rebarred into the existing concrete using epoxy, then used a bonding agent before the pour. I was working on this project along with some others all week long, so, I didn't have an opportunity to post back until today. I suppose I could have used block, but I like doing things the hard way! Just kidding. Here's a picture after the pour. The picture doesn't really show that the existing concrete apron was below grade. But once the new cement cures, I'll regrade this area to pitch away from the foundation.

There was a new septic system put in last fall (before I bought the house). I assume when the back yard soil was graded (after the septic install), the bulkhead foundation wound up being a bit below grade.

I do have peace of mind that using rebar was the way to go here.

Thanks again


----------

