Hey guys
Does anyone have a good narrative for a column like this? On the left it looks like the core and web of a removed CMU replaced by the solid blocks on the right or something. I don’t really know but its not even wide enough for the built up girder.
We have different standards here in CA, and that “support” would certainly make it into my report as needing correction due to its vulnerability to seismic activity.
Start with something like;
The support has been modified or otherwise compromised as does not appear to have the capacity to adequately support the beam as it was originally designed or intended. The support should be repaired or replaced by a qualified contractor in an effort to restore its structural integrity.
Thanks Jeff. I got a couple private messages about it. Basically the same thing you are saying and reminding me to just report what I see and move on. I keep over complicating things.
Yes that would be the same here. Accept I would not say Qualified Contractor.
That’s because you’re not qualified to give an appropriate opinion…
Juan did you take a side shot of this lovely support?
Since it is not earth quake country in my area I would only be concerned with the lack of PTL support for the beam.
