slim_boy_fat
Member
- Messages
- 29,540
- Location
- Scottish Highlands
Just be careful you don't kill yourself in the 'doing' - there'd be little comfort in a memorial plaque.
Please keep us updated.
- Thread starter frank horton
- Start date
Just be careful you don't kill yourself in the 'doing' - there'd be little comfort in a memorial plaque.
Please keep us updated.
Other Daniel
Member
- Messages
- 853
- Location
- France, Charente
Screwdriver
Member
- Messages
- 10,552
Hang on 150 sqm 7 metres wide, that's 21 metres x 7 metres "workshop".
What are you building, an aircraft hangar?
If you have to lay that by hand, I would suggest 4x3m squares in a sort of checkerboard pattern. Lay all the forms for the "black" squares then, when they are completed, fill in the "white" squares using the existing completed squares as the forms. Don't see the advantage of single long strips.
If you're mixing on site, the smaller the slab the better. They can be tied in with rebar and you'll need control joins anyway. Also, do you really need 8 full inches? Sounds like you couldn't get the machinery that demands such a base up the hill anyway. I would put substantially more effort into the sub base. Really make that a very firm, deep, compacted foundation which would allow you to decrease the thickness of concrete slab.
I think these newfangled fibreglass filled concrete mixes also give you a stronger base for a given thickness (with or without rebar). Work smarter, not harder and try to mitigate the difficulties of access by requiring less bulk product.
What are you building, an aircraft hangar?
If you have to lay that by hand, I would suggest 4x3m squares in a sort of checkerboard pattern. Lay all the forms for the "black" squares then, when they are completed, fill in the "white" squares using the existing completed squares as the forms. Don't see the advantage of single long strips.
If you're mixing on site, the smaller the slab the better. They can be tied in with rebar and you'll need control joins anyway. Also, do you really need 8 full inches? Sounds like you couldn't get the machinery that demands such a base up the hill anyway. I would put substantially more effort into the sub base. Really make that a very firm, deep, compacted foundation which would allow you to decrease the thickness of concrete slab.
I think these newfangled fibreglass filled concrete mixes also give you a stronger base for a given thickness (with or without rebar). Work smarter, not harder and try to mitigate the difficulties of access by requiring less bulk product.
8ob
Member
- Messages
- 14,049
- Location
- Nescient in the vale
My experience of small towns, islands and remote areas is that the few that do actually "want to work" are snowed under and charge the earth. Most of the developers I know will ferry their crew to the end of the earth rather than use local labour.
Bob
gaz1
Member
- Messages
- 19,440
- Location
- westyorkshire
im looking at transporting goods problem however a ski lift uses this method
it allows so many turns just by using wires and also it allows different plains of heights in use
but if you want better control of a cart then a 4 wheel single track bar pulled by the above can be used
id be looking for something more permenant but it can be used on a road with a bridge system over it
Screwdriver
Member
- Messages
- 10,552
gaz1
Member
- Messages
- 19,440
- Location
- westyorkshire
the point im trying to make is if we can transport goods by rope and bucket or weaved basket then goods can be got to the top of the hill
a ski lift reference gives a good idea on design basics
the other alternative would be belt delivery and thats costly
now if he can get all materials up that steep hill cheaply
then all hes dealing with is mixing
if younger id have probably considered a pull system with monorail for years of use
a ski lift reference gives a good idea on design basics
the other alternative would be belt delivery and thats costly
now if he can get all materials up that steep hill cheaply
then all hes dealing with is mixing
if younger id have probably considered a pull system with monorail for years of use
Screwdriver
Member
- Messages
- 10,552
Words fail me.
How young would you have to be to seriously suggest a train or monorail? Five??
frank horton
V twins are great but 4"s rule.........
- Messages
- 4,158
- Location
- Crete, Greece
the cost of transp to get a dumper here would be nearly 3 grand.....
as for more work I just wanna get on with my stuff plus I've had two Indian m/cycles in boxes for 40 years.....plus other projects.....
extra money would be nice but I'm just to old to be bothered, sure i can earn little extras with the machines..turning and milling...
plus dont wanna get invold with commercial vehicles here, just to much red tape....
as for the floor/machines speaking of which I need to move stuff around with my forklift....it weighs around 3.5ton
Bridgeport plus 2 lathes a two poster car lift..etc...even the multi purp wood machine weighs 2 ton.....
so the idea was floor over insulation plus I'm running at max height allowance for this building now....
idea was to be just outta the ground by 75mm'ish.....luckily it's a hot place with rain only for a month or so....
kimB. to avoid the hill at my place they would have to pump conc 1/2 a kilometer.....
thanks all.....
as for more work I just wanna get on with my stuff plus I've had two Indian m/cycles in boxes for 40 years.....plus other projects.....
extra money would be nice but I'm just to old to be bothered, sure i can earn little extras with the machines..turning and milling...
plus dont wanna get invold with commercial vehicles here, just to much red tape....
as for the floor/machines speaking of which I need to move stuff around with my forklift....it weighs around 3.5ton
Bridgeport plus 2 lathes a two poster car lift..etc...even the multi purp wood machine weighs 2 ton.....
so the idea was floor over insulation plus I'm running at max height allowance for this building now....
idea was to be just outta the ground by 75mm'ish.....luckily it's a hot place with rain only for a month or so....
kimB. to avoid the hill at my place they would have to pump conc 1/2 a kilometer.....
thanks all.....
gaz1
Member
- Messages
- 19,440
- Location
- westyorkshire
so what tools do you have
noted the forklift
digger ?
jcb style ?
tractor ?
lawnmower petrol ?
now ive done all the ways delivered concrete
work your butt off, ache afterwards
cement mixer
you feel the shoveling into the cement mixer
only break is in between mixing and wheel barrowing
back ache and leg and arm ache afterwards you dont fancy another say of it
mixing in a wheel barrow
less back breaking but can be done
just 2 people 1 under 50 nephew 20s 2 1/2 ton bags used in one day
noted the forklift
digger ?
jcb style ?
tractor ?
lawnmower petrol ?
now ive done all the ways delivered concrete
work your butt off, ache afterwards
cement mixer
you feel the shoveling into the cement mixer
only break is in between mixing and wheel barrowing
back ache and leg and arm ache afterwards you dont fancy another say of it
mixing in a wheel barrow
less back breaking but can be done
just 2 people 1 under 50 nephew 20s 2 1/2 ton bags used in one day
Step by step guide.
I'm surprised nobody has spotted in the video by now, no guard being used on the 9" grinder ;)
www.mig-welding.co.uk
Doing it like that will make it even more likely to be all over the place
Concrete is very difficult to lay level anyway let alone with nothing matching up
As I said k forms are the best way to do it and just leave them there no waiting for it to set no risk of anything moving and mucking up the next poor it just stays there
Screwdriver
Member
- Messages
- 10,552
There is no reason you couldn't use k forms to create a checkerboard shuttering. The reason you wouldn't use them to create the entire form in one go is because the OP is unable to pump sufficient concrete so it might be better to do multiple smaller slabs.
I don't understand why you suggest this identical technique would mean the surface is "all over the place". To my mind (and I really don't know how valid this is) is that having made half the square patchwork of surfaces all level with each other, you fill in the remaining squares which you strike off the surrounding completed squares.
EM1L4
Member
- Messages
- 392
- Location
- UK Warwickshire
Why use a concrete slab? What about beam and block with additional support under heavy equipment if required. Would be able to transport easier and could do a fair amount with only one or two helpers. then just insulation, underfloor heating and a screed on top.
willie.macleod
Member
- Messages
- 884
- Location
- Western Isles, Scotland
I'd get readymix and offload as close as you can to the site onto a tractor and tipping trailer hired for the day. Might take a few runs but surely some farmer in the locality has a tractor and trailer that can be used - few quid into their pocket, easy work for them. Get someone else as well to help with the finishing, more hands will hopefully be less stressful and if you can get K forms like @Agrismith suggests that will really help you with your levels. Your three bay idea sounds fine.
Concrete doesn't set perfectly to the height of the shuttering even with a roller striker and especially if hand mixing and getting variable slumps the surface tension will differ between poors
By doing a chequer pattern you will increase the amount of joints you have to line up with the next slab.
You will also increase the chances for human error.
You also will have a larger area to clean off every time you poor. Which adds to the work
Then you have problems with having to make bridges or ramps to get to different sections.
By doing a snake pattern you have less sides to line up each time
You have easy access to the poor site and can string line off the previous slab to set the next one far easier and everything will be easier to tie in to each other.
Screwdriver
Member
- Messages
- 10,552
This particular application is whatever "square" fits into a 7x21 grid (2x7 lots of 3.5m squares). Each square therefore will always have unobstructed access with an open side to the boundary.
If you suggest each pour does not set to the height of the shuttering, then don't use the shuttering (which was my original premise - you wanted to use k form shuttering though) I was suggesting you could use the first batch of set concrete (the black squares) as if it were shuttering and just pour up to the finished surface. That also accounts for your slump/surface tension issue because you are using the actual surface and not the shuttering.
Human error is always going to exist wherever you have to compromise on the size of the pour remembering it is access to large volumes of concrete mix which is the fundamental problem here. It is a large surface so it inherently has a larger surface to "clean off" not sure how changing the shape helps if you're concerned about area.
There are no bridges or ramps (as above) and I don't understand what you mean by a snake pattern unless you mean a long straight section (3.5x7m all in one go. Even if you did that, it will still require crack control joints which is extra work compared to alternating slabs.
Incidentally, I am very aware my comments look like I am arguing when actually I am probably not understanding. I am not seeing the pros/cons correctly which is why I am attempting to understand why my initial thoughts are wrong. This is what I saw based on the first post:
The square checkerboard on the left compared to the OP suggesting he was going to do several single 7m lines (snakes??) on the right.
If you suggest each pour does not set to the height of the shuttering, then don't use the shuttering (which was my original premise - you wanted to use k form shuttering though) I was suggesting you could use the first batch of set concrete (the black squares) as if it were shuttering and just pour up to the finished surface. That also accounts for your slump/surface tension issue because you are using the actual surface and not the shuttering.
Human error is always going to exist wherever you have to compromise on the size of the pour remembering it is access to large volumes of concrete mix which is the fundamental problem here. It is a large surface so it inherently has a larger surface to "clean off" not sure how changing the shape helps if you're concerned about area.
There are no bridges or ramps (as above) and I don't understand what you mean by a snake pattern unless you mean a long straight section (3.5x7m all in one go. Even if you did that, it will still require crack control joints which is extra work compared to alternating slabs.
Incidentally, I am very aware my comments look like I am arguing when actually I am probably not understanding. I am not seeing the pros/cons correctly which is why I am attempting to understand why my initial thoughts are wrong. This is what I saw based on the first post:
The square checkerboard on the left compared to the OP suggesting he was going to do several single 7m lines (snakes??) on the right.
