Browse Forums General Discussion Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 901Jul 31, 2017 2:16 pm This is so disappointing. I have seen comments on this forum before where people with slab and cracking problems have been advised to sell the house. Obviously in this case the previous owners felt no moral imperative to disclose the state of the house and the poor new buyers, who did the right thing by engaging an inspector, have ended up shouldering the problem. Wrong, wrong, wrong. We also fell into the trap of thinking an inspector had to be qualified to do their job to be licensed to operate in Victoria. Sadly not true. Another victim of the Victorian housing industry. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 902Jul 31, 2017 2:50 pm previous owners offloading their burden rather than face it themselves. should be some form of recourse for the new owners. sucks that almost anyone can claim to be an inspector. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 903Jul 31, 2017 5:52 pm Entilzha my thought is if stormwater is being done after handover then there is nothign for temporary downpipes to be connected to anyway Apart from fitting temporary downpipes, the land must slope away from the foundations...water is not allowed to pool next to the slab. For builders to allow this on reactive soil is the epitome of arrogance towards their clients and incompetence on their part. The regs are covered in Volume 2 of the National Construction Code (NCC) and AS2870. The 3 Part NCC can be downloaded free of charge but you have to buy the Australian Standards...and they are expensive. Always take as many photos as you can of everything during the build and never mind if you don't know what you are taking photos of. Also put all queries and requests in writing...verbals are worthless if there is a later dispute. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 904Jul 31, 2017 6:15 pm If no temp downpipes are put in, won't you have months of pooled water against your slab, they really need to go in yesterday, wouldn't you just make sure they were long enough so water comes out 3 metres or so from slab, where natural grading will place water well away from your slab. I would also worry that builder would say in a slab heave situation that you have taken on this responsibility, a possible get out of jail card for him. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 905Jul 31, 2017 6:31 pm Joker I would also worry that builder would say in a slab heave situation that you have taken on this responsibility, a possible get out of jail card for him. I will be paying very close attention to the grading and expressing my concern re any water from rainfall pooling near the slab in written emails. Wish i had taken photos of those houses under construction 3 weeks ago now. Will ensure i have emails that wont allow that to be a get out of jail card if there was issues down the track from my CFR "It has been assumed that aspects of site drainage, paving and landscaping which are described in the report have been, or will be, implemented. Where any or all of these aspects do not form part of the building contract, it is a mandatory requirement that they be carried out within a period of 4 months from date of completion of the building provided always that adequate temporary stormwater drainage is installed." so i would assume they should provide adequate temporary stormwater drainage during construction and will be querying that in writing Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 906Jul 31, 2017 7:00 pm Builders can't escape their responsibilities. There are required not to allow abnormal moisture conditions to develop during the build and to leave the site properly drained after completion. Proper drainage being, grading the soil away from the foundations and not allowing water to pond against the foundations. This has been confirmed in VCAT decisions against the builders.So the best thing you can do is gather evidence that shows the builder is not for filling their duties :photos emails, original soil test and engineers design documents,etc and to ask your inspector why the have complied with the situation. The one big thing in your favour is the soil moisture conditions now are not very dry in fact slightly on the wet side so the chances of you actually getting slab heave have been greatly reduced as normally very dry clay will dramatically increase your chances of slab heave. If you are still worried about the situation then get a geotechnical engineer to take floor levels after completion and soil moisture test around your perimeter of your house for your own records and as a bench mark to compare in future if needed. Consider constructing a protective concrete paving around your house that drains(done by a licensed plumber not the concreter) all it's rain catchment into the stormwater system. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 908May 20, 2018 11:47 pm I cannot post documents on here not sure how to do it,. Yes There is the BTF 18 to the Home Owners guide to footings maintanance. But theres also the CSIRO BTF 19 is part 1 AND CSIRO BTF 22 is part 2 its the Builders guide to preventing damage to Dwelling these 2 documents have been hiden so well no one whats to talk about these 2 documents and you will find some very intresting reading which puts the builder at fault in many cases. Please let me know when you read these documents love to know your thoughts on this. Thank you. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 909May 21, 2018 1:11 am This us the BTF 19 CSIRO PART 1 THE PROBLEMS History Many homes in Australia suffer from one or more of the several maladies that result from conditions that could have been prevented had the engineer and/or builder undertaken thorough site investigation and subsequent site preparation. This work is just as important as employing sound practice in construc- tion – in fact, at law it is increasingly seen as part of sound building practice. The result is that a reasonably competent builder is now expected to know more about building movement caused by foundation soils than was the case before the landmark legal battles of the middle 1990s. The growth of consumerism has led to the notion that a consumer can rely on the builder to be competent in all matters related to construction. We know that the builder relies on the competence of specialists and professionals, but in the end it is the builder’s duty to the customer to ensure that the building is not adversely affected by defective foundations. There are many builders who are sufficiently competent in soils to carry out the level of elementary investigation required for most small sites. For them, this document may serve as a checklist for their initial inspection and a reminder that if they discover any soil problems, they should engage a suitably qualified engineer. For those builders who are not familiar with site investigation, this document is designed to give the rudiments of soils as they affect housing in most parts of Australia, and to help the practitioner on the road toward an understanding of the issues. Such builders, while in the process of learning, would be wise to engage an expert engineer for site investigation prior to finalisation of the engineering design drawings. The predominant practice in residential construction is for the builder to ignore the soil except for the provision of bearing surfaces for footings. In fact, Clause 3.2 of AS 1684 requires the site to be clear of tree roots etc. and to be well drained. AS 2870 requires soil classification and gives a brief description of the allowable methods. AS 3798 details a number of issues that should be covered in a site investigation. All of these standards have been incorporated into the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Because the BCA has been adopted by every relevant jurisdiction in the nation, the law requires the builder to abide by the provisions in the standards or have an engineered solution accepted that will meet the performance requirements of the BCA. Results of soil problems The upshot of all the above is that no longer are defects such as falls in floor levels, cracking in floor tiles, cracking in concrete slabs, cracking in walls and ceilings (especially cornices), squeaky flooring, binding doors and windows, deflecting roof slopes, and cracked mortar bedding to ridge and hip caps believed to be caused by a natural phenomenon beyond the responsibility of the builder. The builder should therefore carry out proper site investigation and prepare the site accordingly. Water problems The principal enemy is water – either flowing, ponding, seeping by gravitational force, migrating by capillary action or in the air as vapour. Any masonry product that can absorb water can be damaged by it or by the chemicals carried with water; any permeable mortar is also susceptible; timber will decay in contact with water or vapour; gypsum plasterboard decomposes; steel is obviously also vulnerable. Aside from direct damage to building elements, water very commonly causes damage to buildings indirectly by working on the foundation soil – erosion, subsidence, swelling and shrinkage of soil by absorption and shedding of moisture. Buildings with subfloor voids, such as found when timber or steel frame floors are constructed, also suffer from high humidity in the subfloor when water flows or ponding exist. This can encourage decay of the timber, cup the floorboards and raise the humidity level in the living space. This introduces another dimension of the problems created by water – that of living organisms. The presence of water attracts insects including termites. In turn, predators such as spiders are also attracted. Perhaps the most insidious and serious hazard is introduced by dust mites and some types of fungus, that have been shown to greatly increase the incidence of respiratory ailment symptoms in susceptible occupants. Slab-on-ground construction is also subject to water incursion problems. The added problem this method has is the ease with which water can gain access to the cavity via weepholes. Once in the cavity, it creates a damp environment which is very slow to dry, transferring moisture to the inner leaf walls and timber finishes and creating high humidity in the living space. Vegetation problems The other source of instability to structures that this BTF deals with is vegetation and organic matter. Tree roots can cause upheaval when growing and subsidence when decomposed, as well as creating uneven moisture content by taking in water. Organic material generally in the subsoil is not stable and does not properly compact, therefore making a poor foundation for a structure. SOIL TYPES The types of soils usually present under the topsoil in land zoned for residential buildings can be split into two approximate groups – granular and cohesive. Quite often foundation soil is a mixture of both types. The general problems associated with soils having granular content are usually caused by erosion. Cohesive soils are either clay or silt. Clay soils are by far the more common and are subject to saturation and swell/shrink problems. As most buildings suffering continuing movement problems are founded on clay soils, there is an emphasis on classification of soils according to the amount of swell and shrinkage they experience with variations of water content. The following table is reproduced from AS 2870. B UILDING TECHNOLOGYfile Number Nineteen February 2003 Part 1 – Site investigation and preparation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • the void. The excavator should be instructed to remove any organic material while cutting or skimming. In addition, particularly where a sandy foundation exists, it is good practice to probe the subsoil in the immediate area around where a stump has been removed. A good tool to use is a 1 m length of 6–10 mm round reinforcement bar. Driven with a hammer, this will discover not only tree roots, but floaters and voids or poorly compacted areas. In some cases, poorly compacted areas are composed of leaves and other decayed vegetable matter. This material must not be left under or adjacent to the location of any footings as it will reduce in volume and cause a void. Service trenches It is not unusual to find that trenches that are dug to house services are not well backfilled or compacted. Often the trench is used as a repository for trade spoil. Where a subsoil water flow picks up such a trench, a watercourse is provided where water may be delivered alongside or even under footings. Typically, sewer and stormwater pipes run adjacent to and/or under footings. Where building additions are being constructed it is important to check around existing service trenches that may carry water to the proposed construction. Of course, it is also imperative to ensure that trenches dug for the new project are properly located, backfilled and compacted, but this topic is dealt with in BTF 20. During the site investigation, other than any pre-existing domestic service trenches, the following are some of the possible problems: • Trenches under the footpath or roadway for telephone cables, gas, electricity, stormwater or sewer all have risers to the surface. Often, water can gain access to the trench from around the riser or manhole, then flow along or pond in the trench until finding a way to flow out, through the proposed domestic feed, or just by permeating the soil in the area. • Street stormwater gullies can also be vulnerable, particularly older ones with brickwork in their structure. • The possibility of leaking water, stormwater or sewer piping should not be ignored. Where the new structure is downhill from these water sources, moisture can surface under the building or at the external footing where the soil has been cut. Builders sometimes believe that running agricultural pipe around the external side of the footing excavation solves the problem. This is not always the case, because some systems in common use may collect only a moderate percentage of the water, particularly when not expertly installed. In fact, this practice often delivers water directly to the footing area. Water run-off Surface water must not be allowed to flow to the building. A thorough inspection of the topography is necessary in order to properly allow for finished ground falls and water run-off collection. Particularly on a sloping site, the finished falls can be critical to the maintenance of good drainage. REMEDIAL MEASURES Other than the exception of water flow through rock faults, which is very difficult to stop, almost all of the problems above can be addressed by correct drainage of the soil or, in the case of poor existing trenches, removal of poor ballast material then refilling and compacting. Correct drainage is an engineering matter and, unless very straightforward, should be the province of a suitably qualified person, however in essence the job is to prevent water from coming into contact with the building or entering the soil within the footprint and its environs. The object of good ground drainage should be to exclude all possible water from the building, the foundation and its area of influence. There is a notion that reactive clays should be kept at a constant moisture content in order to provide equilibrium. Irrigation systems have been developed to try to provide constant moisture content to subfloor areas, but these can fail because there are other factors involved, i.e.: • A building creates its own environment and predominant weather conditions will either create moisture flow toward the centre of the subfloor or away from it. This influence is never evenly distributed but varies with several factors. • Solar influence dries some areas more rapidly than others. • Ground slope or other factors can result in uneven water content at various parts of the perimeter. These and other naturally occurring factors mean that the irrigation system would have to be very sophisticated indeed in order to keep all the foundation soil and immediately adjacent soil at the same stage of volumetric expansion. In practice, the best solution in all but extreme cases is to drain the ground and surface water away from the building and keep the foundations dry. In reactive clay this is likely to result in cracking due to some shrinkage, and this needs to be redressed, but once this has been remedied and providing the drainage system is kept in working order, the building will remain stable. This document has covered the bulk of the issues that a builder should deal with in regard to discovery of pre-existing conditions that can affect the stability of the foundation soil. There are also several construction do’s and don’ts that the builder must know about and put into practice in order to make sure that the building itself does not contribute to instability of the soil and resultant movement in the structure. These matters are dealt with in BTF 18. FURTHER READING AS 1684, Residential Timber-Framed Construction, Standards Australia, Sydney, 1999. AS 2870, Residential Slabs and Footings – Construction, Standards Australia, Sydney, Amdt 2, 2003. AS 3798, Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and Residential Developments, Standards Australia, Sydney, 1996. BTF 22, A Builder’s Guide to Preventing Damage to Dwellings: Part 2 – Sound Construction Methods, CSIRO, Highett, Victoria, 2003. This BTF was prepared by John Lewer Partner, Construction Diagnosis john@constructiondiagnosis.com.au A builder’s guide to preventing damage to dwellings The information in this and other issues in the series was derived from various sources and was believed to be correct when published. The information is advisory. It is provided in good faith and not claimed to be an exhaustive treatment of the relevant subject. Further professional advice needs to be obtained before taking any action based on the information provided. Building Technology File © CSIRO MIT 2003 Compiled and published by the CSIRO Manufacturing & Infrastructure Technology, Building Information Resource Centre PO Box 56, Highett, Vic. 3190, Australia, Tel (03) 9252 6378, Fax (03) 9252 6243, www.cmit.csiro.au Unauthorised copying of this Building Technology File is prohibited Distributed by CSIRO Publishing Tel (03) 9662 7500, Fax (03) 9662 7555 www.publish.csiro.au Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 910May 21, 2018 1:13 am THIS IS BTF 22 CSIRO PART 2 BELOW IS EVERYTHING THE PROBLEMS Site water problem identification It is essential to investigate the site and prepare it in such a way that ground and surface water are prevented from entering the building footprint, whether the building has suspended floors or is footed on a ground slab. Site investigation methods are dealt with in BTF 19, which should be read prior to reading this BTF. It is also recommended that BTF 18 be read as additional information on this subject. Legal considerations Good site drainage always addresses both surface and ground water flows. Lack of attention to potential building movement caused by moisture migration can be a costly oversight for the builder, who may be found liable for damage long after any statutory warranty has expired. The Building Code of Australia (BCA) has not made site drainage mandatory, although it does set out acceptable construction practice in Volume 2, Clause 3.1.2, to be used where a local drainage authority deems it necessary. This makes for uncertainty in the minds of builders as to their responsibilities, but the courts tend to view the builder as the expert and, where some foreseeable damage occurs, it is usually found that the builder should have used methods that would have prevented the damage. Where site investigation has revealed that there is existing or potential erosion problem, or where reactive clay subsoil is present, the builder is wise to give written advice to the owner and strongly recommend that ground drainage be installed. Where the owner declines in writing, some jurisdictions are known to have accepted that it is within the contractor’s rights to continue the project. However, ground drainage is an area where contractors ignore or try to side-step at their own peril. As to water entering a building, the BCA is quite clear. It is the task of the builder to prevent rainwater from entering a building, even when the rainwater is propelled by a storm of a magnitude that would only be expected to occur, on average, once in a hundred years. What is not so obvious to many is that water should not be allowed to enter the cavity, which is there not as a drain or repository for water that enters through openings, but as a break between the outer and inner leaves of exterior walls to prevent water from permeating through as it used to do when buildings were constructed of 230 mm solid brick- work. When water enters the cavity in volume, a wet, dark and enclosed environment is set up that can result in serious consequences for the health and amenity of the occupants. Water problems in buildings are usually cumulative, resulting from several oversights rather than from a single source. This BTF is designed as a general checklist of commonly occurring flaws in construction methods, to help the builder deliver a product that will be durable, weatherproof and provide a healthy environment. SURFACE AND GROUND WATER PREVENTION It is no longer acceptable for a builder to claim that building movement is outside his or her power to prevent. The subsoil of land that is available for building development normally has an allowable bearing capacity well in excess of the loads imposed by class 1a buildings. The movement problems that are experienced by buildings are very often brought about by the failure of the builder and designers to deal with site water. Surface and ground water that is allowed within the footprint of the building causes erosion and foundation soil movement, which in turn causes an exacerbation of cracking in slabs; cracking and failure in masonry and finishes; doming and dishing of floors; cupping and lifting of timber flooring; decay to timber members; degradation of metals and mortar; doming and dishing of roofs, leading to breakage of tiles and degradation of mortar beds. Surface drainage methods The basis of good surface water drainage is to: • Have the finished exterior ground level at the building perimeter a minimum of 150 mm below finished floor level, ground floor cavity flashing weepholes or subfloor vents, whichever are the lowest. However, where a slab is used as part of a termite management system, 75 mm at the top of the slab edge must be visible or able to be made visible. • In the finished ground, provide a 1:20 fall away from the building for at least the first metre. Nothing that needs to be watered, including lawn, should be within this graded area and it should preferably be a hard surface. The above requirements mean that thought may need to be given to finished floor level etc. before the plans go to council. Where there is natural topography that leads to surface water being encouraged toward the building, a dish or other surface drain should be installed and connected to the stormwater system through a pit. Ground water drainage methods If it is desired to keep the soil dry in areas other than the building footprint, it should be realised that this other drainage may not be sufficient to prevent water entering the footprint, and additional drainage for the building may be necessary. It should be understood that ground drainage is a complex subject, often requiring the expertise of an engineer who is suitably com- petent in hydrology and geotechnics. For anything other than straightforward problems, even drainers or builders experienced in installing ground drainage should engage a consultant to assist in the design. This section is therefore intended to give reminders to already competent people, and to assist others toward a rudimentary understanding to help them discuss the issues with a consultant. In addition, it is essential for a builder or drainer to comply with the minimum requirements of BCA Volume 2, Clause 3.1.2, and AS 3500.3.2, Sections 6–8, unless installing a system certified by an engineer. The first step is to investigate the depth and volume of the subsoil flow of water. Test pits, particularly on the uphill perimeter of the footprint should be dug as outlined in BTF 19. It is, how- ever, important to remember that ground drainage problems are not restricted to sloping sites. Some of the most susceptible sites are on flat land, particularly where the area is ringed by B UILDING TECHNOLOGYfile Number Twenty-Two August 2003 Part 2 – Sound construction methods • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Weepholes AS 3700, Clause 12.7.2.3, requires that weepholes are formed immediately above the cavity flashing and that mortar is removed from the joint so that the opening is clean and the flashing is exposed. This is to ensure the free flow of water from the cavity. It is not uncommon to find blocked weepholes, recessed DPCs and fouled cavity flashings all on the same job. Window and door openings The popularity of unevenly faced bricks has led to a problem at openings. The problem arises where brickwork reveals do not present a straight line against windows, and is exacerbated by the fact that these bricks are generally not suited to flush mortar bedding. Consequently, it is common to see gaps at window/reveal interfaces caused by brick unevenness and raked joints. Such gaps mean that the building envelope is not weatherproof within the requirements of the BCA. It should be realised that the cavity is not envisaged as a part of a water removal system, but is there to prevent moisture permeation from the outer skin to the inner skin. It may also act as a last line of defence in the event of an extraordinary event, however the idea that a builder should leave gaps in the build- ing envelope through which water can penetrate into the cavity is in direct conflict with the objectives and requirements of the BCA. An external wall that routinely allows water to enter the cavity, turns that cavity into a hazard to the building elements, and to the health and amenity of the occupants. It is the job of the builder to make the envelope weatherproof. The construct- ion system must prevent significant volumes of water entering the cavity. In the case of window and door reveals, the bricklayer, while being mindful of the danger of ceramic growth, should not rake or iron the joint past the leading edge of the frame. In some cases where gaps must be left because long walls make ceramic growth a hazard, or where the brick profile is badly uneven, storm moulds should be installed, and bedding should be left flush with the leading edge of the storm mould. It is also common to see cases where an overwide cavity creates insufficient overlap between the window and the brickwork reveal. Where this occurs, storm moulds are also called for. Window gaskets When fitted to brick veneer construction, windows need to be clear of the brickwork sill so as to allow for timber shrinkage in the frame. The usual allowance is 5–10 mm clearance to ground floor windows and a minimum of 15 mm on the second storey. For this purpose, aluminium window assemblies are fitted with neoprene gaskets to bridge the gap between the window frame and the brickwork sill. As with reveals, the brickwork sill should have joints left flush from the leading edge of the gasket to the rear edge of the sill. Commonly, little attention is paid to seat- ing the gasket to provide a waterproof surface. Mortar is left on top of sill bricks which, when timber shrinkage reduces or closes the gap, pushes the gasket up and away from the brick and allows water to enter the cavity. Mortar should be cleaned off the top of bricks while laying. In addition, bricklayers commonly turn the ends of gaskets down into the perpends at the sill/ reveal joints. This is poor practice, as it leaves a gap above the gasket where water can gain entry to the cavity and which also encourages water into the mortar where the gasket turns down. These gaskets should be cleanly cut off flush with the reveal and the mortar should be flush with the sill brickwork. If the reveal bed aligns with the gasket there is no reason that the gasket cannot be bedded into it. Sills and thresholds Where brickwork sills are significantly sloped, it is common to find that the bricks are cut to have a minimal overlap with the gasket. These gaskets need a minimum 15 mm overlap with the sill bricks where the sill is at 30° to the horizontal. For lesser angles the necessary overlap increases. Brickwork patio and other door thresholds are often laid without any fall away from the building. This will always result in water entering the cavity. Some bricklayers fill the cavity in at the doorway to prevent water incursion, but this does not work and only inhibits the operation of the flashing. The builder must provide the bricklayer with sufficient height to allow for weepholes to be continued across the doorway as necessary, and for either a soldier course sill with sufficient fall or room to lay a sloped tiling threshold. Subfloor vents In dwellings having suspended ground floors, particularly where timber floor framing is used, adequate cross-flow ventilation must be installed to counteract condensation. BCA Volume 2, Section 3.4.1, gives minimum ventilation standards that are deemed to satisfy the performance requirements. The required ventilation area is based on the perimeter length of the building and differs depending on: • The zone in which the dwelling is located. • The moisture content of the foundation soil. It is also important to realise that where the floor is lower to the ground, there is less volume of air to dissipate the moisture that is transferred to it from the ground. Landscaping Two important aspects of landscaping that relate to water entry were introduced in the surface drainage section above, viz.: • The finished exterior ground level at the building perimeter should be a minimum of 150 mm below finished floor level, ground floor cavity flashing weepholes or subfloor vents, whichever are the lowest. However, if paving is to be used around the building perimeter, the clearance may be 50 mm. Where a slab is used as part of a termite management system, 75 mm at the top of the slab edge must be visible or able to be made visible. • The finished ground should have a 1:20 fall away from the building for at least the first metre. Nothing that needs to be watered, including lawn, should be within this graded area and it should preferably be a hard surface. In addition, the landscaper should only install automatic watering systems where the beds that they service are lower than the base of the footings or where they are separated from the building by a properly engineered surface and ground water drainage system. FURTHER READING/REFERENCED DOCUMENTS AS 2050, Installation of Roof Tiles, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2002. AS 3500.3.2, Stormwater Drainage – Acceptable Solutions, Standards Australia, Sydney, 1998. AS 3700, Masonry Structures, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2001. BTF 18, Foundation Maintenance and Footing Performance – A Homeowner’s Guide, CSIRO, Highett, Victoria, 2001. BTF 19, A Builder’s Guide to Preventing Damage to Dwellings: Part 1 – Site Investigation and Preparation, CSIRO, Highett, Victoria, 2003. Building Code of Australia (BCA) Volume 2, Australian Building Codes Board, Canberra, 1996. This BTF was prepared by John Lewer Partner, Construction Diagnosis. john@constructiondiagnosis.com.au A builder’s guide to preventing damage to dwellings The information in this and other issues in the series was derived from various sources and was believed to be correct when published. The information is advisory. It is provided in good faith and not claimed to be an exhaustive treatment of the relevant subject. Further professional advice needs to be obtained before taking any action based on the information provided. Building Technology File © CSIRO MIT 2003 Compiled and published by the CSIRO Manufacturing & Infrastructure Technology, Building Information Resource Centre PO Box 56, Highett, Vic. 3190, Australia, Tel (03) 9252 6378, Fax (03) 9252 6243, www.cmit.csiro.au Unauthorised copying of this Building Technology File is prohibited Distributed by CSIRO Publishing Tel (03) 9662 7500, Fax (03) 9662 7555 www.publish.csiro.au Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 912Jan 16, 2019 12:29 pm baronx A little off-topic, but any recommendations for building inspector/engineer to access a single story dwelling for slab-heave in Tarneit (VIC) Do you mean for a report ? Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 913Jan 16, 2019 12:38 pm insider baronx A little off-topic, but any recommendations for building inspector/engineer to access a single story dwelling for slab-heave in Tarneit (VIC) Do you mean for a report ? Yes, a building inspection report for a house built a few years ago. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 915Jan 16, 2019 1:24 pm insider If you’re after the cause of slab heave then you will need a geotechnical report Thanks.. Actually we don't even know if there is a slab heave. So, I'm after recommendations for a building inspection or building + geotechnical report to check the state of the house. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 916Jan 17, 2019 8:25 pm baronx insider If you’re after the cause of slab heave then you will need a geotechnical report Thanks.. Actually we don't even know if there is a slab heave. So, I'm after recommendations for a building inspection or building + geotechnical report to check the state of the house. If there is slab heave, you should be able to see it with naked eye as well as confirm with levels. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 917Jan 17, 2019 8:54 pm baronx insider If you’re after the cause of slab heave then you will need a geotechnical report Thanks.. Actually we don't even know if there is a slab heave. So, I'm after recommendations for a building inspection or building + geotechnical report to check the state of the house. Is there any damage? Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 918Jan 17, 2019 9:05 pm insider Is there any damage? We've had some consistent cracking around wall voids which the builder has fixed time after time. A few years ago the builder also fixed underground piping that was broken due to house movement. We've had some new cracking now in the middle of the house and one of the expansion joins in the bricks has compressed to the maximum. Hence why I wanted a professional opinion before the warranty expires. Re: Has anyone rectified slab heave successfully 919Jan 17, 2019 10:39 pm You need to find a engineer to check your floor levels at every corner of the house, this will tell you if the slab has moved from its original levels. That's important to have the TBM taken from an external fixed point like a electricity pit or something like it has to be anchored deep into ground so a pit has no chance of moving. I've had a total 12 floor levels done and even after 9 years this October the Waffle pod slab still moving so as insider said and other very good people on this site no cure for waffle slab heave. If it was not for the information these good people gave me early last year I would not have known about of a lot of things also I'd like to thank everyone for the help and their own experience in the field I'd like to also thank the structual engineer from Perth if it was not for him and the answers he gave me I would have not been able to kick the builder in the arse and also our own solicitor because he was not using our evidance we had since talking with all these good people on this forum it opened my eyes to the truth of things so yes. There is a lot of good people on this forum and I thank you so much for the wealth of information passed on to me. With all my heart your God sent at the right time. Hi All, we are starting to think of building with Masterpiece Builders in Victoria, has anyone had any feedback or experience with them 0 13602 Hi we are looking to talk to people who have built with them recently. We have signed mid range built contract but identified that a lot of things are not included.… 0 740 I work with owner, he/she is my man on the ground and I instruct them when to visit the site and take photos and I have other tools in the bag. 4 15284 |