Background: 12,500 s/f multi-purpose bldg, continuous ftg passed and in, block wall in to 4 coarses high, verts in and tied off to ftg steel (full length 20’), horizontal bars installed, lapped, (actually additional bar installed all around). Called for inspection day before, talked with inspector - next morning, we were to be 2nd inspection (9:30-10am), set up grout for noon. Inspector called at 10:45am, he was with the fire marshal and then had to go back to the city to cover the counter while guy went to lunch would be at best 1:30pm before at site. Called city and the cbo ended up coming out, not happy when he got here (lunch time). Found one horizontal not lapped properly, we fixed immediately, also wanted all block spalls from drilling for slab dowels removed from cells. 4 men began removing block pcs, by this time we had two trucks of grout sitting. He told the mason it was okay to proceed and have the special inspector verify block pcs removed and steel tied, he then went back to car and issued a do not grout, clean cells and tie steel as his two corrections. Since i had trucks here i had the special inspector verify these two items as he had mentioned previously. I sent the stamped engs letter to the inspector and he has told us the wall failed and must come out. My question: According to the national concrete masonry assoc. The horizontals splices are not required to be tied, is there something else that i can reference? The pieces of block being removed seemed illogical since we can use pieces of block to keep the rebar in place, is the removal per code, if so which? Previous to this incident we have passed all inspections and been told we are doing great work. (i.e. Required to pour 2,000 psi grout and we used 2,500 psi). Any help is appreciated.
-
Welcome to The Building Code Forum
Your premier resource for building code knowledge.
This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.
Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.
Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.
Block wall failed by inspector
- Thread starter Jim R.
- Start date
DAYWALKER
Bronze Member
Hey jim......welcome. Sounds like lack of communication between cbo and his inspector. I certainly would have accepted your special inspector's stamped letter and moved on. Sounds like politics.....at it's worst.
Yikes
SAWHORSE
Jim - is this another So Cal project? Care to mention what city it's in?
JBI
REGISTERED
Sounds like somebody pi$$ed in his wheaties.
I know a really great attorney out your way...
I know a really great attorney out your way...
dhengr
Bronze Member
Jim R:
Look at the IBC, and the ref’ed. masonry codes, and look at low-lift and high-lift grouting, and the need for clean outs in some instances and not others, and the need for clean cores before grouting. Yours was low-lift grouting and probably would not have needed clean outs, but still there will be limits to how much debris can be down in the cores. Chunks of broken block in the cores probably would raise questions, and I’m not real sure who told you you could hold rebar in place with chunks of broken block. We want the grout to flow freely to fill the cores and chunks of block may inhibit this, and a bunch of mortar mush in the bottom of the core screws up bond and compressive strength. Talk with the EoR and the special inspector who wrote the report and see if they can’t go to bat for you. It sounds like you acted reasonably and in good faith and that the BO’s tardiness was part of the problem. Sometimes it’s much easier to clean out or keep the cores of the block clean, than it is to pull the hair out of the butt of a cranky CBO.
Look at the IBC, and the ref’ed. masonry codes, and look at low-lift and high-lift grouting, and the need for clean outs in some instances and not others, and the need for clean cores before grouting. Yours was low-lift grouting and probably would not have needed clean outs, but still there will be limits to how much debris can be down in the cores. Chunks of broken block in the cores probably would raise questions, and I’m not real sure who told you you could hold rebar in place with chunks of broken block. We want the grout to flow freely to fill the cores and chunks of block may inhibit this, and a bunch of mortar mush in the bottom of the core screws up bond and compressive strength. Talk with the EoR and the special inspector who wrote the report and see if they can’t go to bat for you. It sounds like you acted reasonably and in good faith and that the BO’s tardiness was part of the problem. Sometimes it’s much easier to clean out or keep the cores of the block clean, than it is to pull the hair out of the butt of a cranky CBO.
dhengr,
Thanks for the reply, the pieces of block holding the rebar are actually at the top of the cell and only a portion is in the grout, they could now be broken away since no longer needed, probably not a good example. We did clean out all the cells, used a shop vac and all was verified with special inspector. I am going to the city this morning to try to resolve the issue, Will see what happens today????
Thanks for the reply, the pieces of block holding the rebar are actually at the top of the cell and only a portion is in the grout, they could now be broken away since no longer needed, probably not a good example. We did clean out all the cells, used a shop vac and all was verified with special inspector. I am going to the city this morning to try to resolve the issue, Will see what happens today????
Last edited by a moderator:
pwood
REGISTERED
jim,
the cbo sounds a bit unreasonable,napoleonesque? you guys ever use positioners for the steel?
the cbo sounds a bit unreasonable,napoleonesque? you guys ever use positioners for the steel?
Last edited by a moderator:
righter101
Gold Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 604
Frame of discussion
To refresh your memory, Hitler and the Nazi's sent millions of people to their death in horrific and unthinkable ways. They represent a vile ideology which manifested itself thru evil, inhuman acts. To use this is a comparison to a local building official or anyone for that matter is highly inappropriate and serves no purpose in rational debate. A profanity laden tirade would be more appropriate.
JMHO.
Unreasonable CBO is now "hitleresque"??pwood said:
To refresh your memory, Hitler and the Nazi's sent millions of people to their death in horrific and unthinkable ways. They represent a vile ideology which manifested itself thru evil, inhuman acts. To use this is a comparison to a local building official or anyone for that matter is highly inappropriate and serves no purpose in rational debate. A profanity laden tirade would be more appropriate.
JMHO.
High Desert
REGISTERED
ARCO would be a better description.
righter101
Gold Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 604
What is ARCO?High Desert said:
Masonry wall not bonded to footing?
This continues a previous post concerning the first four courses of 12" cmu wall for a multi-purpose bldg. The inspector rejected the wall because the engineer that was providing my special inspections was not certified in the city and etc. He refused his stamped letter. I have contracted with a highly qualified special inspector, I had 4 prisms cut from the wall and taken to an independent lab, 28 day test results produced ultimate compression in excess of requirements. The structural engineer of record has addressed/stamped a letter to the CBO that he has no issues with the bonding of the wall and recommends that the wall be accepted and we proceed with remainder. We have 2, #5 vert bars at 24" o.c. with over 36" of lap to 20' bar. The CBO keeps talking about his issue with bonding but so far has not required anything. The new special inspector, engineer and the other building inspector who have all been to the site disagree with him. If he persists and stops progress, what would my next move be? I've already lost time in waiting for the prism test results... thanks
This continues a previous post concerning the first four courses of 12" cmu wall for a multi-purpose bldg. The inspector rejected the wall because the engineer that was providing my special inspections was not certified in the city and etc. He refused his stamped letter. I have contracted with a highly qualified special inspector, I had 4 prisms cut from the wall and taken to an independent lab, 28 day test results produced ultimate compression in excess of requirements. The structural engineer of record has addressed/stamped a letter to the CBO that he has no issues with the bonding of the wall and recommends that the wall be accepted and we proceed with remainder. We have 2, #5 vert bars at 24" o.c. with over 36" of lap to 20' bar. The CBO keeps talking about his issue with bonding but so far has not required anything. The new special inspector, engineer and the other building inspector who have all been to the site disagree with him. If he persists and stops progress, what would my next move be? I've already lost time in waiting for the prism test results... thanks
The next step is the Board of Appeals.
SECTION 113
BOARD OF APPEALS
113.1 General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders,
decisions or determinations made by the building official relative
to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall
be and is hereby created a board of appeals. The board of
appeals shall be appointed by the applicable governing
authority and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt
rules of procedure for conducting its business.
SECTION 113
BOARD OF APPEALS
113.1 General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders,
decisions or determinations made by the building official relative
to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall
be and is hereby created a board of appeals. The board of
appeals shall be appointed by the applicable governing
authority and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt
rules of procedure for conducting its business.
Alias
REGISTERED
Ditto what Mule said. Make sure your request is in writing.Mule said:
While the city inspector may be a pain the problem was magnified by your scheduling the inspection the same day as the grout pour.
The reinforcing needs to be held firmly in place prior to grouting. I believe the answer will be found in ACI 530 and ACI 530.1. I would suggest that pieces of block acting as shims is not acceptable. If there is a concern about position of rebar you could establish the location using non destructive testing methods or by chipping away the block and grout at a few locations to verify cover.
If the concern is bond to the concrete footing, cores will not address the concern. A core through the grout concrete joint could be informative.
Several factors come into play with regards the special inspector. First you have violated the code by contracting with the special inspector. The code is clear that the Owner must hire the special inspector directly not the contractor. This is typically made clear on the special inspection form issued at the time the premit is issued. This combined with the fact that you did not use a special inspector approved by the building official, as required by the code, probably did not sit well. Could it be that the building official is frustrated by contractors that ignore his requirements and then ask forgiveness.
The reinforcing needs to be held firmly in place prior to grouting. I believe the answer will be found in ACI 530 and ACI 530.1. I would suggest that pieces of block acting as shims is not acceptable. If there is a concern about position of rebar you could establish the location using non destructive testing methods or by chipping away the block and grout at a few locations to verify cover.
If the concern is bond to the concrete footing, cores will not address the concern. A core through the grout concrete joint could be informative.
Several factors come into play with regards the special inspector. First you have violated the code by contracting with the special inspector. The code is clear that the Owner must hire the special inspector directly not the contractor. This is typically made clear on the special inspection form issued at the time the premit is issued. This combined with the fact that you did not use a special inspector approved by the building official, as required by the code, probably did not sit well. Could it be that the building official is frustrated by contractors that ignore his requirements and then ask forgiveness.
Mark, the inspector confirmed with us he would be onsite at a specific time, he did not make it and the cbo had to do the inspection at the last minute and did not complete the total scope of inspection. The shims are not any issue where they are located, at top of cell and grout is below them. The consulting firm was hired for soils testing, compaction and etc and also for structural special inspections (sent s-drawings last sept), they were contracted by the owner and are certified for soils/concrete but not masonry... The cbo is dealing with them regarding that issue.