Meme

BigGreenWeenie · 2024-12-03T08:46:49-0600

BigGreenWeenie · 2024-12-03T08:51:05-0600

BigGreenWeenie · 2024-12-03T08:52:18-0600

BigGreenWeenie · 2024-12-03T08:52:50-0600

WaterH · 2024-12-03T09:05:17-0600

Norm said:

View attachment IMG_1966.webp

clodhopper said:
Sure they do. However, that picture isnt driven pile. Drilled shafts or auger cast maybe. There are no concrete driven pile that small of diameter, wouldnt work. That aside, as your graphic presents, the intent of driven pile, or other deep foundations, is to tranfer structure loads to a competent support layer at depth. A fully buried space, like the bunker, is a compensated structure. The weight of the volume of soil that was replaced by the bunker is greater, so the actual load the bunker applies to the base slab is lower than the soil originally there. And at any significant depth, the overburden soil pressures will restrain any potential bearing capacity failure, allowing significantly higher bearing pressures to be utilized for structure support. But since it is compensated, the applied bearing pressure would effectively be a negative. Any reinforced slab would be more than sufficient for that structure, the deep foundations are stupid. The only possible reason I can think of that would necessitate deep foundations would be if the bunker was in the groundwater and the piles anchored the bunker to resist bouyant forces. You sure wouldnt want your illegally constructed bunker to pop to the surface like the coffins in Poltergeist after a rainstorm. That would suck.

This is what I was going to say. Well actually, no, but I was thinking it.

elkraider · 2024-12-03T09:31:10-0600

clodhopper said:
Sure they do. However, that picture isnt driven pile. Drilled shafts or auger cast maybe. There are no concrete driven pile that small of diameter, wouldnt work. That aside, as your graphic presents, the intent of driven pile, or other deep foundations, is to tranfer structure loads to a competent support layer at depth. A fully buried space, like the bunker, is a compensated structure. The weight of the volume of soil that was replaced by the bunker is greater, so the actual load the bunker applies to the base slab is lower than the soil originally there. And at any significant depth, the overburden soil pressures will restrain any potential bearing capacity failure, allowing significantly higher bearing pressures to be utilized for structure support. But since it is compensated, the applied bearing pressure would effectively be a negative. Any reinforced slab would be more than sufficient for that structure, the deep foundations are stupid. The only possible reason I can think of that would necessitate deep foundations would be if the bunker was in the groundwater and the piles anchored the bunker to resist bouyant forces. You sure wouldnt want your illegally constructed bunker to pop to the surface like the coffins in Poltergeist after a rainstorm. That would suck.

The primary stupid is some graphics person adding unnecessary things cause they cant be bothered to ask a question of someone who would know better. And when called out on it, the answer often given is "well it is just for conceptual presentation". But if the bunker is the concept you are trying to pesent, why the unnecessary complexity of adding the weird foundation?

Too much information? Remember, I left it at just an observation the foundation was stupid. Buzzbomb dragged all this boring blather outta me. Blame him