What Are Your Thoughts On This Foundation Block?

rino1494

Seems like a good system, what do you guys think ??

http://www.peiworldwide.com/block/product.html

__________________
Life is hard. It is harder when you are stupid

Uncle Sam wants YOU....to speak ENGLISH

stacker

seen those before,years ago.you can use a hand saw and cut them to length

__________________
life is short,do your masonry naked!!
http://ok.local.yahoo.biz/knabemasonry/index.html

TimNJ

you might want to look into another product www.rastra.com Of course Rastra doesn't have a young lady in fishnet top to carry the block around like the one in your link rino

concretemasonry

Nothing new and these things have been around for quite some time and have not gotten real acceptance. They are not really accepable as a foundation block because of waterproofing and reliability problems. Above grade is a different situation

Is is not a simple as it looks.

The block do not really stack vertically.

The walls must be braced very well before pumping the concrete.

Not practical for anything but a square box.

It is not as cheap as it looks/sounds.

That level of insulation is not needed below ground. Better for above grade.

You dont have to drill holes since you can since you can poke holes with rebars and mice can eat through them.

Ordinary reinforced concrete and block are must stronger.

There are better systems than both of these that represent recent improvements and they still are not taking off. I did my first marketing study for similar systems in 1988.

Dick

sound building

Your absolutely right Concretemasonary. Foundations are a very sensible member of the buildings system and most cracks and deformations on buildings can be redirected to problems on the foundation.

I would not even recommend Aerated Concrete for basments, left alone
use it for foundations.

There are some cruicial parts of a building you always better off staing in the
" traditional " concrete/ concret block performance.


Still we wait and will continue to do so on the medicine curing all problems at once.



Nice catch btw.

concretemasonry

I was not confusing these products wirh AAC (Autoclaved Aerated Concrete). I have been in more than 20 aerated concrete plants in Europe and have seen hundreds of construction products. I was in my first "gas concrete" or AAC plant in the U.S. in 1968 and have followed the performance of the buildings and industry since then.

I would not recommend the previously mentioned "styrofoam concrete" blocks and forming systems for basements unless I found a solution to the waterproofing problems that have plagued them. Even aerated concrete might be better (but not acceptable) for basements. Above grade building are totally different application.

It is good to see the many attempts to improve concrete and construction in general. The potential market gains for concrete products are very evident as evidenced by the massive investment by international companies in the U.S. This dwarfs the domestic stick construction suppliers.

I do not appreciate the simplistic advertising attempts to recycle old ideas without any attempt to make the systems buildable AND durable.

One of the first things I do when evaluating a "new" system is to look at the location of the company and try to determine how much real experience (people and projects) is behind the product. After that, I look at the stardards they proclaim to meet and sort out the real applications from the usual practice of using creditable associations/organizations (such as ASTM, ACI, ANSI, etc.) to create credibility. The next step is to see if any current tests are available. After that, it is fun to see what what was built and how well it works.

Usually, it seems that the claims made for the new systems do not provide any equal to the good applications of existing products by intellegent contracts that recognize what the customer needs (even if the customer is not aware of it). My favorite example is the standard construction method of using 6" loadbearing block walls (no steel or concrete columns) for high quality 20 story buildings. All it takes is a good, smart contractor and not a magic system!!

I do keep looking for the magic system, but it has been a long search.

Dick

tkle

Seen them maybe ten years ago.California was giving tax credits for alternative energy efficient building at the time.The contractor built only one then went back to traditional framing.Concretemasonry names a few reasons why in his thread.One other time they were brought in for the outside walls of a dog kennel we did for the blind.Didn't see them go up but saw there were quite a few broken pieces in the load.All the inside walls were traditional block.Must have been too much of a hassle to catch on.

TimNJ

I used the ICF's on my foundation here in NJ. It doesn't matter if you use ICF's, block, or poured, you WILL have water problems if you don't take the proper precautions. As far as strength, I would take a foundation properly done with ICF's over block any day. These things are being used to make "safe" rooms in tornado and hurricane areas. My foundation has been in the ground now for 14years and no problems EXCEPT in the early fall the *^%$$% crickets love to try hide up along the top of the foundation. If I had it to do over and there was a Rastra dealer nearby, I would go with Rastra over foam. These sytems are slow to catch on due to initial costs, and also I believe a slow acceptance to anything new. Block will always have its place, poured walls will have their place, and these products will too especially in areas that build slab.

747

Thats definately the way to go. Its big down in hurricane country where teetor lives. That will stand up to some serious winds.

stacker

im sorry,but that line didnt go together

__________________
life is short,do your masonry naked!!
http://ok.local.yahoo.biz/knabemasonry/index.html

tkle

good catch

concretemasonry

There is a difference in suitability below grade and above grade. Read very closely -

I like ICFs for above grade if you get the finishes you want and the quality you expect.

Below grade, there is a significant problem inherent with ICF systems. I should not mention this because the bad jobs may be a significant source of revenue for me.

First, the forms are placed and braced. Next, concrete is poured (actually, hopefully it is placed.). This is compounded by the need to place the concrete around the structure and to slowly and uniformly bring it up to avoid form shifting and the typical "out of square" poured basement" that framers hate. Below grade applications are somewhat easier to brace and pump concrete to. Then construction goes on. - A couple of critical situations exist:

1. One problem is you have no opportunity to make sure you have a suitable concrete wall because it is out of sight and out of mind for a few years. Few builders and no concrete contractors will go to the extent necessary to show, insure or prove there is sound concrete in the wall. One solution is to remove the interior foam to observe the wall. Unfortunately, this is not practical.

It makes little difference ABOVE GRADE because even the worst concrete is far better and stronger than any wood or "wrinkled tin" structure. In my opinion, residential ICF walls above grade should be 6" thick, but 8" is OK. BELOW GRADE is a different situation where it is critical that you have absolutely proper concrete placement and density. Honeycombed concrete and cold joints are not seen and can permit moisture penetration. Even with proper placement methods, the condition can and does exist. Corners and cold joints are typical problem areas. Concrete contractors recognize this and would prefer to use their own traditional forms AND bracing methods, strip them and quickly rub a sand/cement mixture into any problem area the day of stripping.

Additionally, shrinkage cracks can be common in poured basement walls - near the center of the wall or starting at a window. These occur a month or two after pouring. These are also out of sight and out of mind until the problem shows up later when repairs are difficult.

2. One of the classic basement leakage points is the joint between the wall and slab. It is a fact of life and physics/chemistry that the concrete slab WILL shrink and there WILL be a potential leakage point at the lowest point in a basement. Unless you remove the foam form before pouring (placing?) the slab, you have no opportunity to seal/close this point after curing and shrinkage has occurred. - Out of sight, out of mind! If you have a leak after a year or two and have finished the basement, repair becomes a horror scene.

To my knowledge there is no permanent way of properly sealing the joint between the ICF on the inside of the basement and the concrete slab.

It is infortunate that exterior drain tile does not always remove enough water to prevent the build up inside the perimeter of the footings, especially in heavy soils. The usual practice of a contractor digging a swimming pool and building a house in it continues.

The ICF system is great and it is unfortunate that more people do not use it for homes above grade. I don't believe a ICF wall section has been tested for projectile pentration meeting the FEMA standards, but I would imagine the results would be as good as they were for reinforced block and reinforced concrete walls already proven/tested. The use of the system for "safe rooms" in the interior and basements seems too expensive and impractical since no insulation is needed. They should be either block or conventional poured concrete depending on the size, openings, accessibility and construction sequence.

I inspected hundreds of homes after hurricane Katrina. The lack of projectile damage was surprisingly low in the actuall hurricane area - mostly flooding, storm surge, roof damage and mold if you were lucky. In the inland areas, there was projectile damage from the tornados that were spawned. We all know what that can be like on a wood frame structure. Virtually everthing was slab on grade or piers. The concrete block homes fared very well and were much easier and faster to repair, consequently mold was not a factor on these.

I am in an area where ICFs have had some success, but no where near their potential use for a climate such as Minnesota. This is probably due to the system being sold as a building product by concrete contractors and concrete salesmen and not as a system by people involved in the initial and long term life of a home and its systems. Maybe, it is because they fall into the simplistic R-value trap and do not sell the real or actual value of the structure from an energy standpoint.

A couple of ICF manufacturers have outstanding web sites and technical information (Reward is one). Some others just sell "buzz words" and fluff without a good product, substative content or real application information. Unfortunately, many others fall far short and should get their act in together or return to making foam trays for the local meat department at a mega-mart. - I did a market study for one of these outfits in the early 1990's.

The styrofoam and concrete concrete form units are probably less likely to have rodent and insect problems. Unfortunately, they generally have a concrete/foam pathway through to the interior. The first critter may not get through, but the later ones can. One good thing is that you can drive a rebar through the wall at a web and gain access. A wood/concrete form would be worse for critters and insects. There is always the problem of concrete shrinkage and the void created between the form and the concrete no matter what kind of form system you use.

The "sandwich" type systems (parallel exterior faces and ties) eliminate the susceptible or possible foam paths, maximize the insulation, but still have the same placement and concrete wall performance issues. Shipping and storage is much better than foam blocks.

An ICF system is great above grade, but needs serious changes for below grade applications if it is to become a standard construction method.

There are many excellant homes built using the ICF systems, but improvements are needed to make it a real viable standard system that is "bullet-proof" or predictable like the established systems or at least has identifyable points to address and correct.

Dick

747

I'm assuming when they pump the concrete into the forms there sticking a vibrator in there to get a uniform pore. Your right i have never seen any houses built with icf's up north here in Illinois. Finally those house are a completely different ballgame for a sparky. Year ago i seen one on a home improvement show being built. The sparky had a special tool which had a heat wire on it which would go through the stryfoam like butter. Then he would run his wire and put the styrofoam back in.

concretemasonry

747 -

Your are right - You should definitely do something to consolidate the concrete if you want a good wall. The old fashioned way of beating on the wood or metal forms just makes the surface look good, but does not do too much to consolidate the concrete.

A small vibrator is the best way to consolidate the concrete. Unfortunately, the big foam blocks with webs tying the sides together limit what you can use and how you pour the concrete. Sometimes a long rod has to be used, but it does work. Over-vibration can blow out the forms.

There are many cost-saving inovative ways to make installation of systems easier that are developed with experience. Hot wires are one of those. This is one of the reasons it is difficult for a DIYer.

If anyone ever is in a ICF home for a while, he would never be satisfied with a stick home. They are not necessarily costly if you consider the value down the road. The huge energy savings are a bonus.

My personal ideal would be a block foundation with 8" concrete plank first floor (non columns in the basement) and an ICF home above grade.

Dick

TimNJ

concrete, how are you guys doing your basement slabs, monolithic with the footing?? If so, you'll never do anyhting to stop water seepage where the wall sits on the floor. Here we do everything 1) footing 2) walls 3) slab. Just about everybody sets their slab grade with foam. Once the slab cures, rip out the foam and you have a troughway leading to your sump pit. You'll never have a wet basement floor unless the house goes under water.
The problems you bring up about voids, etc are just basic knowledge of the product. There are quite a few brands of ICF's. The ones I use are open all the way through, each half of the form joined by a "steel stud" that is fully open to allow the mix to flow completely through the form. There is no invisible area that you can't see. If your not setting your forms with the vertical columns directly in line with each other and with the rebar set in the footing and coming all the way to the top, plus setting your horizontal rebar on each course, then it is being done incorrectly. With a 3/8 pea gravel pump mix, and filling the forms bit by bit around the walls there aren't going to be any areas that nothing flowed into.
A lot has to with good communication between you and the pumper.