Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Poured in Place Slab vs. Raised Floor

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

I just reviewed the geo report they called for 10 mil visqueen to be placed under the slab. I hope this is standard.


The soil report also called for drainage behind the walls and the Civil forgot to put the drainage behind the walls until I brought it to his attention.


There is an ICF (Insulated Concrete Form) project almost identical to my project that they did in San Pedro off the coast, and the Engineers did not call for Moisture barrier behind the walls and the city of LA. Made them dig it all up and lay down moisture barrier and drainage behind the walls. This cost them a lot of time and money. Some these things you think are standard are easily forgotten. I don’t know who they blamed that on.


No skimping here… Thanks for the mental reinforcement.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rhkratzse(--nospam--at) [mailto:Rhkratzse(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 4:36 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Poured in Place Slab vs. Raised Floor


In a message dated 6/5/05 4:17:33 PM, gmadden(--nospam--at) writes:

If the soil is not expansive, you shouldn’t have much of a problem (i.e. cracking floor tiles from slab movement).

You definitely want to verify this with your geologist and have them recommend appropriate subgrade preparation, and possibly slab thickness and reinforcement, and vapor barrier, drain rock, etc.  Don't skimp on this or all your efforts will be for naught.  (I say this with a faint recollection that the originator of this thread may have previously shown a predilection for favoring the cheapest engineer, although I may be wrong.)