New deck - Area currently concrete tiles over sand base on top of concrete slab.

[Dr - 307]

Hi guys,

Need your advice.
I'm currently quoting a job for a deck that will be 60m2. The area at the moment has got concrete pavers on a sand base sitting on top of a 100mm concrete base. If the area was reasonably flat no problem. BUT the area slopes from the upper/furthest left side to the right as well as forward meaning slope on two planes. I worked out with the owner that the fall is between 200 to 250mm going from top left to bottom right.

This is what I am proposing -
Lift the pavers and get rid of the sand. Then use a demo. tool to cut my holes into the concrete and fthen fill with concrete and stirrup / stump away. This way I 'd be working on my terms and the deck would last forever. This job could potentially get me even more work so I want it to last and look smashing.

Have a think and let me know. I'm online at work so I'll see your posts tomorrow.

Cheers brothers,
Dr - 307.

[brynk]

gday dr-307

the timber framing code makes provision for the posts to rest on a sole-plate, as opposed to being tied into a footing below the surface. depending on the height above ground, wind forces, construction, this may be a suitable and economical solution to your needs. the paving is there and it falls therefore substructure drainage is not an issue. if the whole area is paved & the overall height above ground is less than 1m then this may well be an option.

with the substructure you need to decide if you want to span further distances with less but more substantial footings, or vice-versa. something to remember - every stirrup you put in will cost you around $20 once you factor in time and materials - maybe a little more because you need to get through a bed of concrete 100 thick that presumably has been sitting there for some time - personally i would be trying to tie into this to take advantage of it. having said that, you need to verify that it is indeed 100thk and suitably strong - it may have been a wet mix because it was only ever intended as a layer under the pavers; but then, maybe the pavers were laid over the top of an existing slab to change the appearance? 100 thk does seem a little excessive for a paving bed...

speculation aside - to answer such a question, you must name names...
what are the dimensions? where is it being built? what type of timber are you using? at what spans? will there be a roof and will it be integral to the substructure or mounted afterwards? what about handrails? how (if at all) will you attach to the existing residence? what parts of the deck do you want to achieve yourself as opposed to how much will you sub out? can you weld? and finally, what is your budget?

here is some food for thought... all these posts have used discussed differing methods for bearing the load...

tall deck next to a pool
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=58407

low-clearance, stirrups
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=55825
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=57608

low-clearance, many stirrups
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=58502

footings into sandstone
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=55187

telegraph poles
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=47807

stumps on/in to concrete
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=56136

stumps direct-buried
https://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=58109


r's brynk

[rod1949]

WHAT! You're quoting for a job and you don't know how to construct it... amazing.

[Dr - 307]

Hi Brynk,
Thanks for your feedback.
Please explain soleplate and your method of stirrups into concrete. I normally use stirrups (round leg with square end plate). Had no problems. First deck finished six years ago. 18 holes same method, no problems.
With this new project I have no issues. I am most comfortable with going into the ground. The slope on this project is about 300mm on two planes over 7m forward and 9m left. The pavers in some areas are loose so they are definetely coming out. Don't know the strength of the concrete base so I'm by-passing that also. Work on definites not on maybes.

Cheers,
Dr - 307.

P.S. rod1949 - Don't be sore 'cause we kicked you out of the finals and your captain came home to the home of football.

[Dr - 307]

Hi brynk,

Went and had a look at the site again yesterday. The client is telling me different things now. One thing is for certain. The concrete is 100mm tuff no probs. I'm starting to move away from digging though because he can't tell me for sure where his pipes run and it seems that there is alot of them because of various extensions. The site actually slopes forward about 300 (I stringlined it last night) but left to right is quite level. Might need a little packing but not much.

Now thinking of going over the pavers and bolting through into the concrete base.

Anyones thoughts?

Cheers,
Akilas.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[brynk]

gday bloke

i think bolting into the conc is the go. can you weld good? if you can weld then you can bolt the base-plates straight onto the conc & cut & weld the posts to the suitable angle.

another option - setting threaded rods plumb into the conc with chemical anchors then bolting the concrete base-plates onto the threaded rod. this method will require larger and thicker base-plates on the columns because you will need slotted holes on the base plates so you can get the angle right as it is extremely difficult to get every threaded rod spot on without using the base-plate as a guide. then you'll need to pack under the columns with steel plate then bolt the base-plates down tight. next step is to grout in around the base to protect the threaded rod & packers from rusting out.

not sure if this will be entirely suitable with the above method but, check out the uni-pier system from lysaght steel; here is a website with some pricing -

http://buybuildingsupplies.com.au/ly...1199_1201.html

r's brynk

[Dr - 307]

gday bloke

i think bolting into the conc is the go. can you weld good? if you can weld then you can bolt the base-plates straight onto the conc & cut & weld the posts to the suitable angle.

Hi Brynk,
Thanks for you're reply. The problem is the fall of land on two planes. Can I bolt the post housing ( the shallow ones with the single hole under the cap) to the concrete and then cut the post / stump to length and angle? I just worried about nature and the fact that the deck will want to pull down the incline.

[Dr - 307]

Hey rod,

Got any clue. You were critical of me for not knowing how to do the job. No offence brother. We all get on to learn.

Can you help?

But seriously, don't be upset your captin left......just jokin dude...HELP!!!!!!!!!

[Gaza]

core drill a hole through the slab but in a post support of gal SHS and fill with engineres grout.

you could even smash in shs that would act like a stump. then just fill upto paver level with concrete mix.

[Dr - 307]

Went and had a look at the site again yesterday. The client is telling me different things now. One thing is for certain. The concrete is 100mm tuff no probs. I'm starting to move away from digging though because he can't tell me for sure where his pipes run and it seems that there is alot of them because of various extensions.

No digging as I posted. Don't shoot too quickly. I was going to dig initially. Owner says no go. Too many pipes underneath.

Try again.....please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dr - 307]

Sorry guys,

Gotta bail. Have a 90min drive home. Please try and suggest something. 'Underused' suggested a wall plate / ledger against the house wall. No probs, good idea but any supporting members underneath - post / stumps would need to sit plumb. If I bolt a post support to the concrete it will be sitting at an angle on two planes, that is two planes. One plane is no problem but two planes, different story. I worried about post supports sitting at an angle and thus making the deck want to move forward.

Guys?????????????????

Here's hoping.

[brynk]

Hi Brynk,
Thanks for you're reply. The problem is the fall of land on two planes. Can I bolt the post housing ( the shallow ones with the single hole under the cap) to the concrete and then cut the post / stump to length and angle? I just worried about nature and the fact that the deck will want to pull down the incline.

nah the post stirrups wont work. at the check out pryda's website http://www.pryda.com.au/catalog.php?...ors&conn=PS160 -

this connector only has two bolts so it will not be as strong; if you can find one with 4 bolt-holes (ie, 90 degrees apart on the base-plate) then this will be better one.

the slope is not a concern if you use the second method i described becase you drill the threaded rod into the conc so it is plumb, then slide the base-plate onto the threaded rod. gaps between underside of the base-plate & the ground level may be different at each threaded-rod (because the slope of the land below) but there will be packers underneath; another way i have seen it done is to use 2 nuts - one on each side of the base-plate.

chemical anchors would be better than expansion anchors especially into conc.

r's brynk

[brynk]

maybe a pic would help... after the post is packed & bolted, the remaining gap under the base-plate (sole-plate) is grouted in with a non-compressilble grout. if you went for an m16 rod then the resistance to shear would be more than sufficient - if this is done properly the pull-out strength will exceed 2 ton per fixing -

suitable chemical anchors - ramset chemset or powers are two that i have used successfully - any of the 2-pack 'injection' systems. when you drill the hole try not to go clear through the slab itself. leave some cover. it's not critical but it will be a better join because you won't lose any of the chem out the bottom of the hole.

this is the only process that i have encountered that works successfully - any deviation from this has generally (for me, anyway!) resulted in failure... once you start with the chemical anchor it is best to keep going otherwise the chems will set in the end of the nozzle & you will lose a good 10% when you have to replace it.

drill all your holes first, then clean them out thoroughly with a pipe-cleaner & an air-gun (close your eyes!) or a vacuum cleaner. set all your bolts down next to each hole.

fill each hole to the manufacturer's recc but it will be about 25-30% deep; in any case when you push the threaded rod in it will fill up out & around - you should see a little bit at the top of the rod-hole when you push it right the way in; any more and it is wasted.

if somehow you can build the frame without securing it to the slab this will make your life a little easier because you can build the frame, square it all up then drill your holes and set the bolts. if you do it this way put the nut & washer on before you push the rod into the hole. do one or two then recheck the rest of your posts to make sure they are still plumb.

whenever you set a rod be sure you have enough above the hole to fit a second nut on. this is a contingency incase one of the little buggers doesn't go in right. if it wobbles or moves up and down after it is set (even one minute later) then it is not set & it will need to come out - wind a second nut down onto the rod to lock the lower nut, then use a spanner to wind it out of the hole.

the chemical anchor technology is well proven and will give you what you need; your substructure will be locked into the slab itself & i have seen it proven time and again in industrial and commercial application.

r's brynk

[Loki429]

If your concern with using the bolt down post stirrups is with the sloping concrete then how about grinding the concrete to get a flat and level area and then bolting the stirrup in?

Or how about Brynk's second suggestion of using the threaded rod and a stirrup with a base plate with four holes. With nuts above and below the baseplate by adjusting the nuts you will be able to get the stirrup perfectly level. Sort of like the rag and bolt assembly used for mounting light posts. If you can't find any stirrups with a larger base plate with four holes then you could quite easily get a plate welded to some of the Pryda ones.

Just reading back over your post it doesn't sound like there is much slope at all. 300mm over 5m? or 10M? (you don't provide dimensions, only 60m2) is very little.
How high off the ground will it be?
How many posts and at what spacing?

I think you may be over-analysing about this one...

[Dr - 307]

this connector only has two bolts so it will not be as strong; if you can find one with 4 bolt-holes

Brynk,
Your chemical anchor theory looks good.
I had a think last night. The post support I'm talking about is the McIntyre Brand. Bolts flat to the ground. Provision for three dynabolts. One M12 Dynabolt centrally located and two M10's diagonally opposed. Then use my mitre saw to cut the bases of my posts to correct angle on two planes. Bolt them in right through with hex head bolts and washers. Then brace them against each other - top of higher stump to base of lower stump in front. Then work as normal. House out, bolt bearers and attach joists and so forth.
What do you think? I think this is actually extremely viable. If you can brace posts 3 and 4 metres high then bracing stumps is a non issue.


The ones I use have two bolt holes to hold the timber.

Your thoughts.......

I'll still look into the chemical anchor method. One of those things where if it's not familiar you tend to bypass it and stick to what you know.