Are you a subscriber but don’t have an online account?

Register for full online access.

 
 
 
 
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 31
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    5,576

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    I have this, I don't recall seeing an adopted code;

    http://www.awc.org/publications/DCA/DCA6/DCA6-09.pdf

    I recall something from the University of Virgina also, ill have to see if I can find that.

    Tom
    http://chicagocraftsmen.org/2011/06/261.html

    Check with the AHJ, what we say doesn't matter.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    1,377

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Hmm, must be a Maine thing. Or, it was an LSD glitch in my synapse from the college days and I'm seeing things.
    Portland Renovations, Inc.
    www.portlandrenovations.com

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Grafton, MA, but sometimes on another planet
    Posts
    568

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    DG,
    IIRC you are in Michigan. I'm thinking you are in an area that has a deep frost line and have to set the footings pretty deep like maybe 4 feet or more. Is that right?

    Do you follow the IRC in your area? If so, check out the various sections in chapter 3 and requirements for distributing "ALL" loads to the ground. Also check out Chapter 4 TABLE R401.4.1.

    The above sections will dictate how big the footings need to be and IF you can use piers at all, how close they need to be spaced. Your soil conditions may dictate you need a frost wall or some other type footing/foundation support. IMHO, it isn't about what the post gizmo can do so much as how heavy is what it is supporting relative to these design constraints. For example, if you are putting these things on soil with 1500 pound strength per sqft then that is all you can support IF the footing has bearing of 1 sqft. These posts do not even have that much bearing!

    Hopefully this is clear...

    Don
    I started out with nothing. I still have most of it left.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bergen County, NJ
    Posts
    4,410

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Quote Originally Posted by DonMirabito View Post
    The above sections will dictate how big the footings need to be and IF you can use piers at all, how close they need to be spaced. Your soil conditions may dictate you need a frost wall or some other type footing/foundation support. IMHO, it isn't about what the post gizmo can do so much as how heavy is what it is supporting relative to these design constraints. For example, if you are putting these things on soil with 1500 pound strength per sqft then that is all you can support IF the footing has bearing of 1 sqft. These posts do not even have that much bearing!
    Don is on track. Any footing/pier/whatever is only as good as the soil, so unless you have a soil test at the job site, you have no idea what the soil is capable of holding.

    This is what appeals to me about helical piers and why I got involved with Techno Metal Post. Our installations are each verified to handle a specific load based on the quality of soil. If the soil is weak, we keep going until the soil is strong. At the end of the install, I can tell you exactly what the helical pile will hold--no guesswork--it's the most scientific way to install a foundation system you can hope to get. Numbers don't lie.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    trenton, nj
    Posts
    1,032

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Brad

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,582

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Quote Originally Posted by tjbnwi View Post
    I have this, I don't recall seeing an adopted code;

    http://www.awc.org/publications/DCA/DCA6/DCA6-09.pdf

    I recall something from the University of Virgina also, ill have to see if I can find that.

    Tom
    Tom, I haven't seen that document before, but it looks suspicious. On bottom of page 7, it says ALL deck posts must be 6x6 or larger. That precludes the Redi posts. Right after that, it says deck to post must be bolted and shows the double 2x beams sitting sistered on a single side shoulder cut (haunch).(Fig. 8.)

    The pictures you posted in #3 violate all these. I'll have to read the code, but I'm a bit skeptical of this document.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,582

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Quote Originally Posted by DonMirabito View Post
    The above sections will dictate how big the footings need to be and IF you can use piers at all, how close they need to be spaced.
    Don
    Yes Don, all that means is that on poor soil we'll need more posts. Not an issue, and our soils are generally good. I'm trying to establish whether the Redi posts have general merit and whether it makes sense to try them out.

    You are indeed correct in that they have a fixed, and small, footprint. You can't just make it bigger diameter with the next size up sonotube :)

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    midwestish
    Posts
    7,347

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Will your AHJ accept them? Have run some $ numbers on your typ job vrs your usual methods and say the techno posts? Bearing in mind that any ability to get right to work on them may well be mitigated by, well, not being able to get right to work on them due to numbers to be set or status of the rest of the job.
    “I find the curiosity of our men with respect to this animal is pretty much satisfied.”
    ~ Meriwether Lewis

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    5,576

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Quote Originally Posted by dgbldr View Post
    Tom, I haven't seen that document before, but it looks suspicious. On bottom of page 7, it says ALL deck posts must be 6x6 or larger. That precludes the Redi posts. Right after that, it says deck to post must be bolted and shows the double 2x beams sitting sistered on a single side shoulder cut (haunch).(Fig. 8.)

    The pictures you posted in #3 violate all these. I'll have to read the code, but I'm a bit skeptical of this document.
    As I stated I have never seen an adopted code. I believe, what I linked was a proposed code document.

    It is not a proposed code document, but a combination of code and what they feel is best practice.

    I went and looked at the document again. It states any code citation is bracketed. The 6x6 post and the notch is the AWC recommendation, not a code requirement. The code sited in the post section is R402.1.2, that only deals with the treatment of a cut end.

    I much prefer the way I shoulder the post, far less chance of a split going straight down from the notch. The support tongue is still 2-1/2" by the depth of the beam ply.

    Tom
    Last edited by tjbnwi; 03-07-2012 at 04:19 PM.
    http://chicagocraftsmen.org/2011/06/261.html

    Check with the AHJ, what we say doesn't matter.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,582

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Tom, we always put our beams on top of posts, with saddles, no shoulder cuts. So I was a bit curious about the shoulder cuts and asked my engineer.

    He told me that the reason they show the single-sided shoulder is that it's a beam. They also show a fastening schedule. The way you do yours is not a beam (at least in our neck of the woods it isn't). To call it a beam, the 2 plies have to be in contact the whole length and be fastened together over the entire length. Otherwise you have to engineer it as 2 half-thick single-ply beams.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    5,576

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Thanks dg, I'll look into it.

    Tom
    http://chicagocraftsmen.org/2011/06/261.html

    Check with the AHJ, what we say doesn't matter.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    5,576

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Dg,

    I have discussed this with an engineer and a building inspector.

    I do bolt the plies with spacer, every 32". The building inspector said he would pass the install. The engineer said it could be treated as a repetitive member. He will check into it and get back to me.

    More to come.

    Tom
    http://chicagocraftsmen.org/2011/06/261.html

    Check with the AHJ, what we say doesn't matter.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,582

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    Right. I'm not saying your spaced 2x beam is inadequate. I'm saying my engineer and my inspectors do not consider it as equivalent where a span table calls for a 2-ply 2x beam. It would have to have engineering calcs, including fastening schedule.

    Perhaps one of the structural engineers here would care to comment.

    I did a bit more reading on the Redi posts and I'll PM you my findings.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    I know the last post to this thread is a year ago, but wonder if anyone has more redi-footing experience to add. Also, the redi-footing web site is down (it worked yesterday) and it seems their phone numbers no longer work -- does anyone know if they went under (no pun intended)?

    Thanks...Keith

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    5,576

    Default Re: Redi-Footing deck posts

    I've done 2 more decks with them. Still like them better than concrete.

    I have no answers to your questions.

    Tom
    http://chicagocraftsmen.org/2011/06/261.html

    Check with the AHJ, what we say doesn't matter.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts