|
| Author |
Message |
socceronly
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Apr 2024 05:21pm - Edited by: socceronly
Reply
I am curious as to why this is so borderline contentious.
Obviously no one wants to do it wrong, but I am wondering why there are such wildly different takes on how to do it.
Soil, environment, wood type, wrap it, dip it, burn it, postsavers, quality of PT ect.... I guess one method can work in one place and not the next?
I guess it is hard to gather real data over long time frames, and most stories are anecdotal.
|
|
Brettny
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Apr 2024 06:32pm
Reply
All those you listed are trying no to mix concrete and put it in the ground to above the ground.
|
|
socceronly
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Apr 2024 07:33pm - Edited by: socceronly
Reply
But lots of people argue over concrete rots posts, concrete doesn't rot posts....
It still seems like an endless debate.
If a post sits on a concrete pier instead of a bracket with a standoff, you see rot... so how does embedding it concrete not rot the post...
|
|
ICC
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Apr 2024 08:11pm
Reply
Quoting: socceronly If a post sits on a concrete pier instead of a bracket with a standoff, you see rot... so how does embedding it concrete not rot the post...
Bingo! I have seen rot in both methods. No real difference. I have never liked concrete around posts. We would ram the dirt back into the hole around the post. Vastly superior to concrete encasement, IMO. Ditto for any other method that tries to seal out moisture. Everything eventually leaks.
|
|
spencerin
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Apr 2024 09:20pm
Reply
Are you wanting to put posts in the ground but just aren't sure the best way to go about doing it?
|
|
socceronly
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Apr 2024 05:31pm - Edited by: socceronly
Reply
Quoting: spencerin Are you wanting to put posts in the ground but just aren't sure the best way to go about doing it?
Part of it. I mean looking at different building methods, and I see examples of PT posts rotting a few years in sitting on concrete piers, then I see pole barns wholly resting on posts in the ground embedded in concrete.
Curious why it works in some cases and not others. Climate... design... magic...
I will likely use skids, or just weld myself some metal posts to attach beams too.
I am buildings something really small, 10x16.
I am just interested in why something that is so common, doesn't have more (no pun intended) concrete information. The debate is practically religious, where you would think at this stage there would be some real data.
|
|
Brettny
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Apr 2024 08:27pm
Reply
Real data will prob show that it's cheaper to build with no wood in the ground but people tend to build with there pocketbook not data.
The PT that will last a lifetime underground is very expensive and hard to find. With that being said ii built a pole firewood shed useing no concrete but it's only need 3yrs..however it's still square.
For a 10x16 just build it on blocks.
|
|
socceronly
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Apr 2024 09:05pm
Reply
Quoting: Brettny For a 10x16 just build it on blocks.
... but it's ten stories tall....lol 
|
|
|
spencerin
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Apr 2024 08:25am
Reply
I can tell you that the performance varies in part due to the treatment method used. Most of the PT wood bought at big box stores isn't treated for foundation uses. It says it's for ground contact, yes, but it's really for fence posts and decks, nothing major. So, it can rot faster than you'd like, especially without any sort of additional barrier or protection from moisture.
You can still buy foundation grade PT wood. That's what's used in pole barns, for example. It's treated with more of a better preservative, and will last many, many years longer than big box wood. Add an additional barrier to it, and it'll outlast you by decades, in my opinion.....
If I personally were to build an in-ground wood foundation, I'd use foundation grade PT wood (CCA 0.60) wrapped in Post Protectors.
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Apr 2024 09:49am
Reply
My only real experience with a pole barn... burial rated treated posts and the engineered blue prints called for 3/4 minus compacted gravel fill. 30+ years ago and they still look fine.
|
|
travellerw
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Apr 2024 10:48am
Reply
I don't have any hard data. Only 2 fences I built. One in 2004 and one in 2013. Both used 4X6 PT from a farm supply store. Set in concrete. Both fences have about 40 posts each.
Both fences still stand today and show no signs of rotting on any of the posts. Of course you can't look below, but everything is still super solid.
Our soil is hard clay after 6" of black dirt and around here, everyone uses concrete. However, a few years back the big box stores were selling an expanding foam for post setting. Mix 2 chemicals, pour it in the hole, cut off any expansion out the hole. Looked like it worked great, but I think the costs are what killed it.
|
|
gcrank1
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Apr 2024 11:01am
Reply
For our deck posts at home I used BigBox pt and coated the in ground with roofing repair Blackjack.
We have been here 35+ years, decks built early on and later; all seem good yet.
|
|
Brettny
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Apr 2024 06:48pm
Reply
Quoting: Nobadays engineered blue prints called for 3/4 minus compacted gravel fill
Depending on soil type you may be putting that post in a underground pool. I know I couldn't do that with my clay soil. For clay you prob want to just compact back in native soil.
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Apr 2024 10:18am
Reply
Quoting: Brettny Depending on soil type you may be putting that post in a underground pool.
Well drained, no clay.... engineered/passed building inspection. I think the idea was to have any ground water drain away and not pool around the posts.
|
|
Brettny
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Apr 2024 05:59pm
Reply
If water around the post can drain into the soil around it do you really need stone to begin with?
|
|
ICC
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Apr 2024 09:05pm
Reply
I have never understood the recommendation of using gravel fill around wood posts. As Brettny alluded water can flow into a space like that just as readily as water may flow out. In fact, I believe it is more likely that such gravel around a post will most likely become a reservoir for water to flow into rather than to cause water to drain away from the post. I strongly believe that refilling the hole with the same soil that was dug out is the best solution once the post has been inserted. Packing the soil in tightly with the mushroom head of a digging bar a few inches at a time makes for a very solid pole/post. Using proper foundation grade PT wood.
|
|
spencerin
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Apr 2024 11:05pm
Reply
These were filled with compacted gravel all the way from the bottom of the hole to grade? I initially read it as just a gravel base/footer for the pole.
|
|
ICC
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Apr 2024 08:51am - Edited by: ICC
Reply
I initially read it as just a gravel base/footer for the pole
Even at that I fail to see the point of placing gravel in the bottom of the hole. A pole or post should have a concrete footer to spread the load of & on the post over more soil area. Gravel does not do that. Gravel in the bottom of a hole can be considered to be a well, a space with some voids between the stone that can fill with water or soil. Water can run into the gravel as readily as it could run out. Depending on the type of surrounding soil it may even be more likely and easier for water yo run into the gravel space.
|
|
Nobadays
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Apr 2024 10:13am
Reply
Filled to within a foot of the top, 4' burial, soil on top. Heck I don't know if was right or wrong but it was spec'ed by the engineer and they are still there.
I agree with filling back with the same, compacted soil.... but in the mentioned case I followed engineered drawings to pass my inspection. 
|
|
ICC
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Apr 2024 12:53pm
Reply
Quoting: Nobadays followed engineered drawings to pass my inspection
And perhaps the engineer had some soil tech info. I do believe in following engineers' advice.
|
|
|
