# post footing off center



## darcar (Nov 17, 2011)

What code violations do you see here?Section?

View attachment 1621


View attachment 1621


/monthly_2011_11/downsized_1117111017.jpg.4a833a26dfff248e400df0a7bdebad0b.jpg


----------



## globe trekker (Nov 17, 2011)

How is the PT column going to be anchored to that ( R802.11.1,  2006 IRC )?

.


----------



## High Desert (Nov 17, 2011)

They forgot to throw the lumber scaps in the hole. And they better back fill it before the pier tips over.

It doesn't look like PT to me.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Nov 17, 2011)

darcar,

That happens more than you think, I had two projects that they did something like that. I told them it had to be centered on the pier and they corrected the issues. I based my authority on the plans submitted show it in the center not hanging on the side as was in my case.

pc1


----------



## righter101 (Nov 17, 2011)

Design standards for concrete presume a central loading.  If you indeed want to load something, as shown, eccentricaly (sp?), the calculations are different and likely not done in ordinary circumstances.

I would have to dig deeper to find a code section, but you are supported by the code.


----------



## Mark K (Nov 18, 2011)

Not per the approved construction documents.  If it cannot be built as permitted they would need to submit a revision to the construction documents.  Suggest that they will need to have an engineer and possibly a geotechnical engineer signoff on the revised drawings.

I would expect the solution to include grade beams connected to the existing drilled pier to deal with the eccentric loads.


----------



## darcar (Nov 18, 2011)

If you look close enough there is a saddle bracket that the 6x6 sits on and YES it is pressure treated however it is light... Menards probably.


----------



## ICE (Nov 18, 2011)

What is the post supporting?  What post base has been installed?  Is there reinforcing steel in the pier with the obligatory 3 spirals in the top 6"?  How deep is the pier into undisturbed soil?  Is this an engineered design?


----------



## globe trekker (Nov 18, 2011)

darcar,

I'm sure that after they cut that PT post, that they applied an approved type

of preservative to the ends ( refer to Section R319.1.1, 2006 IRC ).

ICE,

Do you have some " attorney " in you?   :lol:

.


----------



## ICE (Nov 18, 2011)

globe trekker said:
			
		

> ICE,
> 
> Do you have some " attorney " in you?   :lol:
> 
> .


Not since 5:30 this morning.

Tiger


----------



## gbhammer (Nov 18, 2011)

Whoa not good, not a good picture for the brain, not at all.


----------



## pwood (Nov 18, 2011)

i feel dirty. i need a shower after reading this


----------



## globe trekker (Nov 18, 2011)

Too much visual information ICE!         This thread sure has taken a crappy turn!   

I wonder if darcar obtained the relevant, OP information that he was seeking...

.


----------



## gbhammer (Nov 18, 2011)

"Ow my pancreas?" Dude


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Nov 18, 2011)

My spleen hurts now, I need an attorney!

pc1


----------



## gbhammer (Nov 18, 2011)

We may be able to make a class action out of it. Especially if we use Tiger's attorney on the class ... Um action suit that is.


----------



## peach (Nov 22, 2011)

the footing (whatever that may be) needs to be balanced to prevent tipping; that's the reason IRC R403.1.1 is specific about the projections (on either side of the load bearing member)


----------



## pwood (Nov 22, 2011)

peach said:
			
		

> about the projections (on either side of the load bearing member)


 peach,

  keep posting words like these and ICE may get excited again:agree


----------



## gbhammer (Nov 22, 2011)

pwood

Your killing me just :censored killing me.


----------



## Daddy-0- (Dec 18, 2011)

Also agree with Peach as usual.


----------



## mn joe (Dec 20, 2011)

Ok, you all have missed the obvious quick fix here.  The hole is already big enough.  Bend back the tabs of the bottom bracket, jack the deck up 1 inch, and get in there with a big bar and a sledge hammer. Come on, you know Red Green would get it done and then patch the chips in the column with duct tape!

Joe


----------



## Sifu (Jul 25, 2013)

I found this old thread and after the shock of the turn it took wore off I am able to pick it up again.  I have a crawlspace full of 1/2 height piers with steel columns holding up a building.  Most are sitting right out on the edge of the pier.  I thought there was a specific code that required bearing in the middle third but I can't find it.  Anybody have any code references, I'll need them for this particular site.


----------



## Glenn (Jul 25, 2013)

I didn't read the second page until after I posted.


----------



## Builder Bob (Jul 25, 2013)

SiFu...... may be a violation, may not be a violation. depends upon the design ..... and if using the minimum standards, i believe I only have to have follow-R502.6 Bearing.

The ends of each joist, beam or girder shall have not less than 1.5 inches (38 mm) of bearing on wood or metal and not less than 3 inches (76 mm) on masonry or concrete except where supported on a 1-inch by 4-inch (25.4 mm by 102 mm) ribbon strip and nailed to the adjacent stud or by the use of approved joist hangers. The bearing on masonry or concrete shall be direct, or a sill plate of 2-inch-minimum (51 mm) nominal thickness shall be provided under the joist, beam or girder. The sill plate shall provide a minimum nominal bearing area of 48 square inches (30 865 square mm).


----------

