Hello,
about two weeks ago, the footing slab for our house was poured. Overall, the work seemed very clean and solid, as far as I can tell. This week, the masonry work on the ground floor started. During this, it was discovered that the formwork for the footing slab was not properly squared. As a result, on one gable side, the footing slab slightly protruded below the masonry. The overhang increased along the width of the house from 0 to about 6cm (2.4 inches).
Now the general contractor has chiseled away the overhang along the house width. The reason given was that otherwise the insulation would not fit. The background is that we are also having brick cladding. The bricks will rest on a frost guard approximately 80cm (31.5 inches) deep.
Where the footing slab was chiselled away, the reinforcement is partially exposed. How should this be assessed? Is it sufficient to coat it with bitumen waterproofing?
about two weeks ago, the footing slab for our house was poured. Overall, the work seemed very clean and solid, as far as I can tell. This week, the masonry work on the ground floor started. During this, it was discovered that the formwork for the footing slab was not properly squared. As a result, on one gable side, the footing slab slightly protruded below the masonry. The overhang increased along the width of the house from 0 to about 6cm (2.4 inches).
Now the general contractor has chiseled away the overhang along the house width. The reason given was that otherwise the insulation would not fit. The background is that we are also having brick cladding. The bricks will rest on a frost guard approximately 80cm (31.5 inches) deep.
Where the footing slab was chiselled away, the reinforcement is partially exposed. How should this be assessed? Is it sufficient to coat it with bitumen waterproofing?
Knallkörper schrieb:
The general contractor agreed today to clean the damaged area, apply corrosion protection, and then repair it using PCC concrete replacement.
And you, as a layperson, want to assess what consequences this might have in the future?
By the way, the expert should have already noticed during the acceptance of the foundation slab that the measurements were incorrect.
But apparently, you also felt confident enough to handle that yourself.
K
Knallkörper8 Aug 2016 10:40Musketier schrieb:
And you, as a layperson, now want to judge what consequences this will have for the future?
By the way, the expert should have already noticed during the inspection of the foundation slab that the dimensions were incorrect. But apparently, you felt confident enough to assess that yourself.The products are suitable for this purpose, have the necessary building approval, and the general contractor installed everything according to the manufacturer's instructions. So theoretically, this is acceptable. For the rest of the process, I trust the people involved.
I did not come up with the described approach myself; I got it from someone knowledgeable.
As a mechanical engineer myself, I can understand his approach, and the construction expert gets horrified because they really like engineers as clients (difficult customers).
A building surveyor is always considered great, but they are usually a specialist focused on just one specific area. In that case, you would need a master bricklayer or someone similar to take a look. The part cited from the DIN standard about removing 2–5 cm (1–2 inches) down to the reinforcement is actually being done. Cleaning beforehand is also included. In my opinion as a layperson—without having seen the site—they are doing exactly what the DIN standard requires.
However, as you also noticed, the construction company is cutting corners if you’re not careful. Consequently, an expert assessor might actually be the right choice.
A building surveyor is always considered great, but they are usually a specialist focused on just one specific area. In that case, you would need a master bricklayer or someone similar to take a look. The part cited from the DIN standard about removing 2–5 cm (1–2 inches) down to the reinforcement is actually being done. Cleaning beforehand is also included. In my opinion as a layperson—without having seen the site—they are doing exactly what the DIN standard requires.
However, as you also noticed, the construction company is cutting corners if you’re not careful. Consequently, an expert assessor might actually be the right choice.
K
Knallkörper13 Aug 2016 12:45Payday schrieb:
but what you also noticed: the construction company cuts corners if you don’t watch closely. logically, a building inspector might still be the right choice.Hello Payday.
You are right. The company generally works very neatly, but when it comes to some details, the foreman and site manager get a bit uncertain when I ask for precise information. This happened with the detailed execution of the waterproofing at the base of the wall (damp proof course). I have since read a lot about this, and that’s a good thing. I pay very close attention to these trades. If mistakes happen later with the screed or drywall, these can usually be detected and corrected more easily. The ground floor is now finished, and overall, I am optimistic. Today we chose the facing bricks.
In general, a layperson cannot become an expert in the entire construction process, at least not within the building period. But for some aspects, it is possible to inform yourself thoroughly enough to form a sound opinion. This is completely normal in a professional context, where I or my employer are still responsible for my judgments.
Knallkörper schrieb:
. But some topics can be researched thoroughly enough to form a well-founded opinion. This is perfectly normal in professional settings, where I—or my employer—am responsible for my judgment.ppst Don’t upset the all-knowing building inspectors; other technically skilled individuals can also read and understand a DIN standard. A good engineer, however, knows when they’ve reached the limits of their expertise.
Similar topics