Structural Engineering

Thursday, February 9, 2012

WA Licensed P.E.

Hi, folks.

Anyone out there with a license in the State of Washington who'd be interested in a small job? Let me know.

William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Sent from my iPad 2

List Server

Is the SEAINT list server still operating?? I haven't seen any messages posted in probably a month or so.

Larry Hauer, S.E.

Friday, January 6, 2012

RE: Sheet Pile Coatings - Preferred Methods

For what it is worth, the US Army Corps of Engineers New Orleans District has studied the issue and uses the coal tar epoxy on the upper 20 feet of pile. After talking to some of our people, the fusion epoxy coating is not worth dropping the coal-tar which is what is tried and true.

Regards, Harold Sprague

I had a little tete-a-tete with a Contractor not long ago, who insisted that the the old tried-and-true painted-on coal-tar epoxy method was the best and cheapest way to go, over "newfangled" methods such as "fusion" epoxy coating (c.f. ASTM A950), which as I understand it, is a "baked-on" powder coating technology.

Being a bit easily impressed as I am with "the newest thing," I had assumed that the powder-coating would be superior, not least in its durability.

He claims that "everyone knows" that the ASTM A950 method was "a failure". He specifically said "if you 'jeep' it, it goes of like a geiger counter," meaning I presume, that there is a problem with lots and lots and lots of "Holidays" with the ASTM A950 method.

Obviously this is not something I can speak to from experience, but I'm sure someone here certainly can. What if anything do you know of the various methods for coating sheet piles, pipe piles, etc.? Is this guy's information correct, that one should NEVER specify ASTM A950?
------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Sheet Pile Coatings - Preferred Methods

Bill,

It might depend on what you are using the sheet piles for. I am use to sheet piles being used temporarily during construction where after they pour the concrete and backfill the hole the sheet piles are removed. In this case the sheet piles have no coating. In cases where we let the contractor leave the sheet piles in the ground (i.e. use the sheet pile as formwork to actually pour concrete against) again we do not specify any coating. If your sheet piles are going to be used as a permanent exposed wall then you may need a coating but I would think any coating would get scratched and dinged during the pounding/vibration of installation. With this in mind I would probably use hot dip galvanizing. Of course all will depend on the soil conditions for chlorides, electrical resistivity, pH, water table, etc.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor

From: "bill@polhemus.cc" <bill@polhemus.cc>
To: "<seaint@seaint.org>" <seaint@seaint.org>
Date: 01/05/2012 07:47 AM
Subject: Sheet Pile Coatings - Preferred Methods

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Sheet Pile Coatings - Preferred Methods

Being a bit easily impressed as I am with "the newest thing," I had assumed that the powder-coating would be superior, not least in its durability.

He claims that "everyone knows" that the ASTM A950 method was "a failure". He specifically said "if you 'jeep' it, it goes of like a geiger counter," meaning I presume, that there is a problem with lots and lots and lots of "Holidays" with the ASTM A950 method.

Obviously this is not something I can speak to from experience, but I'm sure someone here certainly can. What if anything do you know of the various methods for coating sheet piles, pipe piles, etc.? Is this guy's information correct, that one should NEVER specify ASTM A950?

Monday, January 2, 2012

RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Carbon fiber is used mostly for tension reinforcement. I have not used it for low concrete strength. Contact the engineers at Fyfe for the most optimal solution.
http://www.fyfeco.com/

I am not aware of any type of injection that you could use for strengthening the concrete.

Regards, Harold Sprague

Subject: RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 21:40:52 +0200
From: dcohen@barviv.co.il
To: seaint@seaint.org

Hi Harold, Did you mean a kind of carbon membrane like for the seismic upgrade of beams in buildings?

It could be a great idea. but I never used it before , it could be installed like a seal(isolation) membranes?

From: David Cohen (Baran Raviv) [mailto:dcohen@barviv.co.il]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 9:27 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

What do you mean by adding caron fiber, the concretee floor is already done, is there any kind of injection, or reinforcement solution you know without additional weigth (or a light-weight solution) for reinforcing the flexibility of the floor?

From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 9:07 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Wow!! The contractor needs to go back to contractor school.

If you are close, you may be able wait and use the 90 day breaks to achieve the strength. Normal concrete mixes using cement will continue to gain a lot of strength beyond the 28 days we normally specify. The other approach may be to add carbon fiber strengthening. Fyfe is a good source.

Whatever course of action, I would put the contractor on the hook for paying for all of this. Work the deal through your client. The other approach is for the contractor to tear it all out and do it again per the specifications.

Regards, Harold Sprague

Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 20:51:55 +0200
Subject: Re: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012
From: dcohen@barviv.co.il
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes I've already added a beam to correct the deviations.

The surveyor was there during the drilling execution but it didn't help.

Now there is a new problem :

the concrete grade I've received from the compression test laboratories of the concrete floor is under the codes request.

This is a floor of a pool and the beams were done under the floor level.

Adding thickness will increase the self-weight and the piles weren't with great spare in design.

Do you have some idea what to do with the fact that the concrete quality grade you've received is not matching with your design??

David Cohen

Kembcon <engineers@kembcon.com> wrote:

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.

**********************************************************************

********************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by Baran
Mail-System for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses
*********************************************************************************************

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.

**********************************************************************

********************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by Baran
Mail-System for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses
*********************************************************************************************

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.

**********************************************************************

RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Hi Harold, Did you mean a kind of carbon membrane like for the seismic upgrade of beams in buildings?

It could be a great idea. but I never used it before , it could be installed like a seal(isolation) membranes?

From: David Cohen (Baran Raviv) [mailto:dcohen@barviv.co.il]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 9:27 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 9:07 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 20:51:55 +0200
Subject: Re: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012
From: dcohen@barviv.co.il
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes I've already added a beam to correct the deviations.

The surveyor was there during the drilling execution but it didn't help.

Now there is a new problem :

the concrete grade I've received from the compression test laboratories of the concrete floor is under the codes request.

This is a floor of a pool and the beams were done under the floor level.

Adding thickness will increase the self-weight and the piles weren't with great spare in design.

Do you have some idea what to do with the fact that the concrete quality grade you've received is not matching with your design??

David Cohen

RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 9:07 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 20:51:55 +0200
Subject: Re: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012
From: dcohen@barviv.co.il
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes I've already added a beam to correct the deviations.

The surveyor was there during the drilling execution but it didn't help.

Now there is a new problem :

the concrete grade I've received from the compression test laboratories of the concrete floor is under the codes request.

This is a floor of a pool and the beams were done under the floor level.

Adding thickness will increase the self-weight and the piles weren't with great spare in design.

Do you have some idea what to do with the fact that the concrete quality grade you've received is not matching with your design??

David Cohen

RE: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 20:51:55 +0200
Subject: Re: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012
From: dcohen@barviv.co.il
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes I've already added a beam to correct the deviations.

The surveyor was there during the drilling execution but it didn't help.

Now there is a new problem :

the concrete grade I've received from the compression test laboratories of the concrete floor is under the codes request.

This is a floor of a pool and the beams were done under the floor level.

Adding thickness will increase the self-weight and the piles weren't with great spare in design.

Do you have some idea what to do with the fact that the concrete quality grade you've received is not matching with your design??

David Cohen

RE: Foundation piles deviations

The ACI 117 is too liberal for many applications. As an example, I use the AISC tolerances for anchor rod tolerances. Auger cast piles are a different lot than other foundations, and ACI 117 just does not cover it well. i.e. There is no other foundation of which I am aware that the reinforcing steel is placed after the grout is in place. There is a likelihood to have bulbs close to the surface due to the pressure (thus ACI 117, Section 3.5.2 is impossible to maintain). The grout is measured for fluidity and workability with a funnel and the rate of flow is measured. The reason that I pointed to the DFI is because it covers more aspects of auger cast piles than the ACI 117.

There is a lot of good free stuff, if you know where to find it:

There is another good document that should be referenced, but it does not have that much on tolerance. It is by the FHWA. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/pubs/gec8/gec8.pdf The best approach is to use the FHWA document for the QC plan with the DFI or the UFGS (below) for the specifics on tolerance to develop a QC plan. An additional document that has specifics on auger cast piles (including tolerances) is the US Army Corps of Engineers guide specifications. http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/DOD/UFGS/UFGS%2031%2063%2016.pdf

This is another good free document on deep foundations: http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/DOD/UFC/ufc_3_220_01a.pdf

Anyway, it is up to the engineer to put the specs together for acceptance criteria. If field inspection is a problem, the engineer should have approval authority of the inspectors and call them to task if there is a continued problem. Most importantly, the variations should be reported immediately so that remedial actions can be taken. Remedial actions now should be developed collaboratively. And the engineer should be paid for any additional work.

I had a similar situation in LA on a project in the early 1990's. The general contractor selected an auger cast pile contractor that was not qualified. After 6 months, the original auger cast pile contractor was fired. The GC had to pay for all of my time in the meetings and for the remedial work. Then the GC hired a qualified contractor and the work was completed in 90 days. And the subsequent work was all done within specifications. The GC lost a lot of money by selecting the low bidder that did not have the qualifications. I did not have approval authority until after the project went badly. The client then gave me all the approval authority (for a fee). The rest of the project went smoothly.

Regards, Harold Sprague

Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 10:47:03 -0600
From: bill@polhemus.cc
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Foundation piles deviations

On 1/2/2012 10:44 AM, Bill Polhemus wrote:

On 1/1/2012 7:47 AM, David Cohen (Baran Raviv) wrote:

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Harold mentioned DFI. I didn't see anyone mention ACI 117, which contains Tolerances for concrete work including bored pile foundations. I think it's pretty complete.

As far as rectifying the problem, here in the states, "the contractor proposes and the engineer (as representative for the owner) disposes." In other words it's not for you to come up with remedial methods, it's for the contractor to propose them and you are responsible for acceptance.

The contractor SHOULD have enough money in the bank to hire his own engineer if he needs help with that, FWIW.

Oh, and to provide emphasis:

This habit of contractors to screw up and then expecting the OWNER'S engineer to fix his mess is absurd - and rather childish if I do say so myself.

Putting you on the spot, and shifting some of his liability for his mistake onto you, is more than absurd, it's insane. Don't fall for it.

Re: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

Yes I've already added a beam to correct the deviations.

The surveyor was there during the drilling execution but it didn't help.

Now there is a new problem :

the concrete grade I've received from the compression test laboratories of the concrete floor is under the codes request.

This is a floor of a pool and the beams were done under the floor level.

Adding thickness will increase the self-weight and the piles weren't with great spare in design.

Do you have some idea what to do with the fact that the concrete quality grade you've received is not matching with your design??

David Cohen

Re: seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012

The 2009 IBC generally requires deep foundations, such as drilled piers
and driven piles, to be laterally restrained at the tops by grade beams
or, sometimes, by structural slabs. If you already have a grade beam
grid, it should be possible to add short grade beams diagonally across
the "corners" of the grid to accommodate the mislocated piles. This is
a lot cheaper than adding piles.

You probably want to have a surveyor do an "as-built" pile survey, then
look at the differing conditions, sorting them by severity and then
sprcifying a "fix", with added concrete and rebar as required.

This is a notorious problem with pile jobs, unless you have proper
quality control in the field, which you apparently did not. You can
tell the contractor the old engineer's motto: "Pay me now or pay me
later". When will they ever learn? When will they eeeevvfeeerrrr
learn? (Hat Tip to Peter, Paul and Mary, who young folks probably don't
remember.)

Happy New Year, All. / eric

On 1/2/2012 12:00 AM, admin wrote:
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
> seaint Digest for 1 Jan 2012
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1: Foundation piles deviations
> by "David Cohen (Baran Raviv)"<dcohen@barviv.co.il>
> 2: Foundation piles deviations
> by David Cohen (Baran Raviv)<dcohen@barviv.co.il>
> 3: Re: Foundation piles deviations
> by "h.d.richardson"<h.d.richardson@telus.net>
> 4: Re: Foundation piles deviations
> by "David Cohen (Baran Raviv)"<dcohen@barviv.co.il>
> 5: Foundation piles deviations<BR>Date: Sun=2C 1 Jan 2012 15:47:38 +0=
> by dcohen@barviv.co.il
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 1 Message:0001 1
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: Foundation piles deviations
> From: "David Cohen (Baran Raviv)"<dcohen@barviv.co.il>
> To:<seaint@seaint.org>
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCC88B.EBF52F98
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Engineers
>
> I have a building in construction phase, as the designer, the contractor
> and the client are sending the as-made location of the foundation piles.
>
> The piles were done by CFA Method, 70cm diameter, 15m depth.
>
> Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design
> location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%
>
> Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation
> errors, or just to execute some other ones?
>
> Executing other ones will be very complicated; I'm looking for other
> smarter solutions.
>
> Thanks.
>
> =20
>
> David Cohen
>
> Mobile-054-5515105
>
> Office-03-9775278
>
> Fax-03-9775232
>
> www.barangroup.com
>
>
> **********************************************************************
>
> Confidentiality Message
>
> This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.
>
>
> **********************************************************************
>
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: Foundation piles deviations

On 1/2/2012 10:44 AM, Bill Polhemus wrote:

On 1/1/2012 7:47 AM, David Cohen (Baran Raviv) wrote:

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Harold mentioned DFI. I didn't see anyone mention ACI 117, which contains Tolerances for concrete work including bored pile foundations. I think it's pretty complete.

As far as rectifying the problem, here in the states, "the contractor proposes and the engineer (as representative for the owner) disposes." In other words it's not for you to come up with remedial methods, it's for the contractor to propose them and you are responsible for acceptance.

The contractor SHOULD have enough money in the bank to hire his own engineer if he needs help with that, FWIW.

Re: Foundation piles deviations

On 1/1/2012 7:47 AM, David Cohen (Baran Raviv) wrote:

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Harold mentioned DFI. I didn't see anyone mention ACI 117, which contains Tolerances for concrete work including bored pile foundations. I think it's pretty complete.

As far as rectifying the problem, here in the states, "the contractor proposes and the engineer (as representative for the owner) disposes." In other words it's not for you to come up with remedial methods, it's for the contractor to propose them and you are responsible for acceptance.

The contractor SHOULD have enough money in the bank to hire his own engineer if he needs help with that, FWIW.

Sunday, January 1, 2012

RE: Foundation piles deviations

David,
The Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) http://www.dfi.org/ publishes the Augered Cast-in-Place Piles Manual which should be a reference in your specifications as it contains acceptable industry tolerances. The Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) method is used for the Augered Cast-in-Place (ACP) pile. The method was developed by Intrusion Prepakt when they were based in Cleveland back in the 1950's. Charlie Berkel was a developer, worked for Intrusion, and then set up Berkel and Company in 1959 in Kansas and has been drilling them all over the place. The other name for these piles is Auger Pressure Grouted (APG) piling. They are all pretty much the same thing.

What you did not state is whether or not you have a pile cap. You also did not state the nature of the deviation. I presume that it is a plan deviation. If you have a plan deviation then the remedy is to adjust or add a pile cap or grade beam to serve as a bridge. The nice thing about these type of piles is that you can just chip the top off and add a grade beam easily.

ACP piles are very versitile and good and economical foundations. But you need good inspection services and good special inspections. The DFI has many good publications that can be referenced and purchased regarding inspections and industry practices. I would suggest that you get some of these documents and require their use to facilitate proper construction within appropriate tolerances. The logs of the inspector should be kept and should let you know what happened. If not, you need a good inspector.

Regards, Harold Sprague

Subject: Foundation piles deviations
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 15:47:38 +0200
From: dcohen@barviv.co.il
To: seaint@seaint.org

Engineers

I have a building in construction phase, as the designer, the contractor and the client are sending the as-made location of the foundation piles.

The piles were done by CFA Method, 70cm diameter, 15m depth.

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Executing other ones will be very complicated; I'm looking for other smarter solutions.

Thanks.

David Cohen

Mobile-054-5515105

Office-03-9775278

Fax-03-9775232

www.barangroup.com

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.

**********************************************************************

Re: Foundation piles deviations

Thanks a lot

Happy new year everyone

David Cohen

"h.d.richardson" <h.d.richardson@telus.net> wrote:

Davie,

        Sounds to me like you should just execute the contractor.

        A more practical solution, however, may well be to follow Irv Fruchtman's suggestion to design some grade beams to transfer the loads as needed. The downside is that the weight of the grade beams may be substantial. You may want to have the geotechnical consultant review the pile design or even conduct load tests to confirm that the new design is satisfactory.

        I would strongly recommend that you do NOT release any payment to the contractor (or sub contractor) until this issue is resolved. The cost of correcting this will probably be substantial and the contractor could just take the money and run.

Regards, and Happy New Year,

H. Daryl Richardson
----- Original Message -----
From: David Cohen (Baran Raviv)
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2012 6:47 AM
Subject: Foundation piles deviations

Engineers

I have a building in construction phase, as the designer, the contractor and the client are sending the as-made location of the foundation piles.

The piles were done by CFA Method, 70cm diameter, 15m depth.

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Executing other ones will be very complicated; I'm looking for other smarter solutions.

Thanks.



David Cohen

Mobile-054-5515105

Office-03-9775278

Fax-03-9775232

www.barangroup.com

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employ

Re: Foundation piles deviations

Davie,

Sounds to me like you should just execute the contractor.

A more practical solution, however, may well be to follow Irv Fruchtman's suggestion to design some grade beams to transfer the loads as needed. The downside is that the weight of the grade beams may be substantial. You may want to have the geotechnical consultant review the pile design or even conduct load tests to confirm that the new design is satisfactory.

I would strongly recommend that you do NOT release any payment to the contractor (or sub contractor) until this issue is resolved. The cost of correcting this will probably be substantial and the contractor could just take the money and run.

Regards, and Happy New Year,

H. Daryl Richardson

----- Original Message -----

From: David Cohen (Baran Raviv)

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2012 6:47 AM

Subject: Foundation piles deviations

Engineers

I have a building in construction phase, as the designer, the contractor and the client are sending the as-made location of the foundation piles.

The piles were done by CFA Method, 70cm diameter, 15m depth.

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Executing other ones will be very complicated; I'm looking for other smarter solutions.

Thanks.

David Cohen

Mobile-054-5515105

Office-03-9775278

Fax-03-9775232

www.barangroup.com

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.

**********************************************************************

Re: Foundation piles deviations

David,
Perhaps you can design a reinforced concrete grade beam arrangement supported by the existing piles and adding helical piles only where necessary.
Happy New Year
Irv

--- On Sun, 1/1/12, David Cohen (Baran Raviv) <dcohen@barviv.co.il> wrote:

From: David Cohen (Baran Raviv) <dcohen@barviv.co.il>
Subject: Foundation piles deviations
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Sunday, January 1, 2012, 8:47 AM

Engineers

I have a building in construction phase, as the designer, the contractor and the client are sending the as-made location of the foundation piles.

The piles were done by CFA Method, 70cm diameter, 15m depth.

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Executing other ones will be very complicated; I'm looking for other smarter solutions.

Thanks.

David Cohen

Mobile-054-5515105

Office-03-9775278

Fax-03-9775232

www.barangroup.com

**********************************************************************

Confidentiality Message

This email message, including its attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the render of this notice is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete it from your system forthwith and notify us immediately. Thank you.

**********************************************************************

Foundation piles deviations

Engineers

I have a building in construction phase, as the designer, the contractor and the client are sending the as-made location of the foundation piles.

The piles were done by CFA Method, 70cm diameter, 15m depth.

Almost each of the pile was done in deviation from the original design location I'd designed, about 2% to 20%

Do you know a kind of rectification for this kind of installation errors, or just to execute some other ones?

Executing other ones will be very complicated; I'm looking for other smarter solutions.

Thanks.

David Cohen

Mobile-054-5515105

Office-03-9775278

Fax-03-9775232

www.barangroup.com

Thursday, December 29, 2011

2012 SE Reveiew Seminars in LA - Last chance to save $400

Register by January 1, 2012 and save $400.

BYA Publications is pleased to announce the 12^th consecutive year of the most comprehensive Structural Engineering Review seminars in California. The expanded 12 session program is comprised of a detailed interactive presentation of a selection of problems and topics intended for the 2012 NCEES Structural exam. Also included are discussions of the most recent developments in structural and seismic engineering. These seminars also provide the best in-depth review of the 2009 IBC code provisions even for those not taking the exam.

For complete program and registration information please see our website

http://structuralsolutions.com/seminars.html

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Re: airport sound barriers

Sometimes???

David Topete

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 28, 2011, at 5:15 AM, "Gary L. Hodgson and Assoc." <design@hodgsoneng.ca> wrote:

Thanks for your replies. I was able to convince several parties that the design wind would govern over the lesser jet wash. It also helped that the wall is parallel to the runway or taxi way. Makes you wonder about people sometimes.
Gary

On 12/21/2011 4:39 PM, David Topete wrote:
AK-
You beat me to the punch. I was just about to comment that flights would likely be grounded if a significant storm was passing through...

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Andrew Kester <akester74@gmail.com> wrote:

Gary,
I am not sure if ASCE or similar Canadian codes have a specific
opinion or load combination for this. But I would think that the
probability of planes taking off during a significant wind would be
quite low if not impossible. I think in absence of other requirements
I would check it 2 different ways:
Full wind pressure
Full plane pressure + wind pressure at max wind speed allowed for
plane takeoffs/landings (maybe available from FAA or the Canadian
equivalent)

However, a quick google search seemed to indicate large commercial
planes can be landed in 50-60+ knots... And they said there is no
established speed, like everything else, it depends...

Regards,
Andrew Kester, PE
Florida

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

--
David Topete, SE

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to: * * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp * * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web * site at: http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: airport sound barriers

Thanks for your replies. I was able to convince several parties that the design wind would govern over the lesser jet wash. It also helped that the wall is parallel to the runway or taxi way. Makes you wonder about people sometimes.
Gary

On 12/21/2011 4:39 PM, David Topete wrote:

AK-
You beat me to the punch. I was just about to comment that flights would likely be grounded if a significant storm was passing through...

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Andrew Kester <akester74@gmail.com> wrote:

Gary,
I am not sure if ASCE or similar Canadian codes have a specific
opinion or load combination for this. But I would think that the
probability of planes taking off during a significant wind would be
quite low if not impossible. I think in absence of other requirements
I would check it 2 different ways:
Full wind pressure
Full plane pressure + wind pressure at max wind speed allowed for
plane takeoffs/landings (maybe available from FAA or the Canadian
equivalent)

However, a quick google search seemed to indicate large commercial
planes can be landed in 50-60+ knots... And they said there is no
established speed, like everything else, it depends...

Regards,
Andrew Kester, PE
Florida

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

--
David Topete, SE