Re: Precast vs Poured[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: gtg740p(--nospam--at)hotmail.com, seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Re: Precast vs Poured
- From: Rhkratzse(--nospam--at)aol.com
- Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 14:18:48 EDT
Ralph Hueston Kratz, S.E.
Richmond CA USA
In a message dated 6/5/05 11:16:19 AM, gtg740p(--nospam--at)hotmail.com writes:
An architect asked me the other day whether I would prefer to use precast or poured in place concrete for a new courthouse he is looking at. I am trying to get a list of advantages and disadvantages of each system .
He is looking at the building being made of precast floors and facade, poured floors with precast facade, or poured floors with brick facade. Of course money is the most important factor for this project. It will be about 50,000 sq ft, involving 2 to 3 stories.
From what I know, the precast will be cheaper and it will go up a lot faster. But there will be less flexibility for penetrations. I would rather do the poured concrete (whether reinforced or post tensioned) because of the design involved. But of course I can't recommend it based on just that. I was hoping one of you had recently done a similar size and function building and could give some advice either way, (not just which system will be the cheapest even though that is the most important aspect).
- Prev by Subject: Precast vs Poured
- Next by Subject: Re: Precast vs Poured
- Previous by thread: RE: Precast vs Poured
- Next by thread: Re: Precast vs Poured