I would agree with you if the "money saving" is based on long term projections rather than immediate cost.
All of the "production homes" I ever had anything to do with seemed to involve "remesh" (worthless) rather than #3 rebar in the slab.
(btw: I wasn't the "foundation contractor/sub" at the time. I was only a fledgling framer. =)

Rad, all this talk about foundations and construction remind me of not that many years ago when I was **that close** to starting a path to ditch my current profession and go into homebuilding. Love the craft of construction and learning about how to build things better and better. Even had a builder friend who was ready to line me up with some of his subs had I pursued it. Then, the chicken feathers emerged, and the cubicle farm won...alas...

Concrete is guaranteed to do two things:
1) get hard
2) crack.

I would agree with you if the "money saving" is based on long term projections rather than immediate cost.
All of the "production homes" I ever had anything to do with seemed to involve "remesh" (worthless) rather than #3 rebar in the slab.
(btw: I wasn't the "foundation contractor/sub" at the time. I was only a fledgling framer. =)

As I grew up fascinated by the process of construction, and then later to learn and educate myself as a consumer, it was a sobering lesson indeed to watch the construction process on more than a few homes and find that while some of the, shall we say, shadiest (well, maybe it would be better to say "most money saving :) ) construction tactics were employed on some of the most expensive homes around. It wasn't a perfectly inverse relationship, mind you, but it became apparent to me early on in my observations that some builders in some very nice areas also knew they were building for people who knew/cared very little for how the house was constructed, just how it looked when it was done.

I was very fortunate to have enlisted a builder oh-so-many years ago who minded not at all that I was on the construction sites for the two homes he built for me (one in '91, the other in '99) nearly every day. He appreciated that I had at least a somewhat better than average knowledge of home construction practices, and he generally shot very straight with me. He was a crusty, curmudgeonly, but good-natured ex military guy who wasn't a particularly high-profile builder, but hired good subs who did good work with, well, one exception I won't go into here. Sadly, he passed away not long after he finished that second house in '99...

I think post-tensioned slabs are now part of the homebuilding code in some (?) parts of Texas.

Just for info's sake, a conventional/traditional slab is literally that - a simple concrete slab poured within what's called a stemwall. Traditional "monolithic pours" are often reinforced by various techniques such as a mesh material or wired rebar. But even the best traditional slab will almost invariably develop hairline cracks at the corners. That's because as the water evaporates from the concrete during the drying process, the slab shrinks away from the stemwall and, in effect, you have discrete "masses" of concrete trying to "shrink" away from each other - hence the cracking.

A post-tensioned slab is kind of a "next generation" version of a concrete foundation. The slab is strengthened rather drastically by the placement of dozens of steel cables that extend beyond the edges of the stemwall and then mechanically placed under extreme tension, then anchored in place. The concrete is then poured, bonds to the sleeving material of the tension cables, and then the cables themselves are filled with material that bonds the cables to the sleeving. This makes the slab incredibly strong, and resistant to shifts in underlying soil. The caveat is that care must be taken to ensure the cable ends are sealed/waterproofed, as any moisture into the cabling can cause long-term corrosion.

The downside is, as others have noted, that you can't just cut up a PT slab. Think of a garage door coil spring - cut that sucker and you'll see the energy release as that spring EXPLODES with a thunderous BANG. Same idea applies here - huge loads are applied to the cables that then puts the concrete under compression.

It is more expensive, as you might expect, but a lot of builders are moving toward it.

So when putting in a post-tension slab, do they use a stem wall also? In other words, do they dig down along the perimeter (as for a conventional slab), pour in the concrete and make a stem wall, and then run the cables through the slab when they pour that?

I have heard anecdotes of one particular company in the metro who advertises that they use post-tension slab foundations, but don't actually use the cables to strengthen the foundation and don't dig down while making the foundation, in essence just placing the slab of concrete straight onto the dirt. Of course, this is all hearsay, but was wondering if anyone else had heard something similar.

I'm about to remodel my kitchen and I am looking for suggestions on places to get good appliances, countertops, and (tile) flooring at good prices in OKC. I've been to Home Depot and Lowe's but I'd like to check out other options. Thanks

I'm about to remodel my kitchen and I am looking for suggestions on places to get good appliances, countertops, and (tile) flooring at good prices in OKC. I've been to Home Depot and Lowe's but I'd like to check out other options. Thanks

Try Metro Appliances & More on W Reno for appliances

I'm about to remodel my kitchen and I am looking for suggestions on places to get good appliances, countertops, and (tile) flooring at good prices in OKC. I've been to Home Depot and Lowe's but I'd like to check out other options. Thanks


x2 for Metro , visit floor trader for your flooring needs. Depending on the type of counter tops you're looking for there are several good places, what kind are you wanting?

So when putting in a post-tension slab, do they use a stem wall also? In other words, do they dig down along the perimeter (as for a conventional slab), pour in the concrete and make a stem wall, and then run the cables through the slab when they pour that?

I have heard anecdotes of one particular company in the metro who advertises that they use post-tension slab foundations, but don't actually use the cables to strengthen the foundation and don't dig down while making the foundation, in essence just placing the slab of concrete straight onto the dirt. Of course, this is all hearsay, but was wondering if anyone else had heard something similar.


Foundations « AA Designs (http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjo8bydTcDwArI4PxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTBybnV2cXQ wBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1395122108/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.aadesigns.net%2ffix-it-now%2ffoundations%2f/RK=0/RS=2NJAL6CLJUi2aNWVQ7vlfIUfbj8-)

So when putting in a post-tension slab, do they use a stem wall also? In other words, do they dig down along the perimeter (as for a conventional slab), pour in the concrete and make a stem wall, and then run the cables through the slab when they pour that?

I have heard anecdotes of one particular company in the metro who advertises that they use post-tension slab foundations, but don't actually use the cables to strengthen the foundation and don't dig down while making the foundation, in essence just placing the slab of concrete straight onto the dirt. Of course, this is all hearsay, but was wondering if anyone else had heard something similar.

Building code requires foundations to extend below frost depth, so I doubt anybody is doing just a slab.

So when putting in a post-tension slab, do they use a stem wall also? In other words, do they dig down along the perimeter (as for a conventional slab), pour in the concrete and make a stem wall, and then run the cables through the slab when they pour that?

I have heard anecdotes of one particular company in the metro who advertises that they use post-tension slab foundations, but don't actually use the cables to strengthen the foundation and don't dig down while making the foundation, in essence just placing the slab of concrete straight onto the dirt. Of course, this is all hearsay, but was wondering if anyone else had heard something similar.

A concrete slab typically involves (in a perfect world, at least) a barrier layer, perhaps a layer of gravel/sand, then rebar or other reinforcement.

Keep in mind there two ways to do stemwalls - one that is poured atop a dug or excavated footing, reinforced with rebar, and then filled with concrete; the other, and is where the stemwall forms are simply framed and poured on a graded lot, essentially a single concrete beam. ("Pier and grade-beam" was how builders always described it to me). The latter is cheaper and quicker, but the former IMHO is the superior choice of the two. I guess a "third" way is really just to trench the permeter of the site and pour a slightly thicker "wedge" of concrete at the perimeter to serve the purpose of a stemwall, without it actually being a separate, containing wall structure.

While I could see that you could use a stemwall with a post-tensioned slab, drilling holes for the cabling in the stemwall before the pour, a PT slab from what I've seen/understand generally doesn't have one - you frame up the forms, lay out the rebar, put down the cables, pour, start the cure, then tension.

The only thing I can say about PT slabs is that the type I've read about use the cables. If there's another variety or technology, I'm not familiar with it.

Keep in mind there two ways to do stemwalls - one that is poured atop a dug or excavated footing, reinforced with rebar, and then filled with concrete; the other, and is where the stemwall forms are simply framed and poured on a graded lot, essentially a single concrete beam. ("Pier and grade-beam" was how builders always described it to me). The latter is cheaper and quicker, but the former IMHO is the superior choice of the two. I guess a "third" way is really just to trench the permeter of the site and pour a slightly thicker "wedge" of concrete at the perimeter to serve the purpose of a stemwall, without it actually being a separate, containing wall structure.

While I could see that you could use a stemwall with a post-tensioned slab, drilling holes for the cabling in the stemwall before the pour, a PT slab from what I've seen/understand generally doesn't have one - you frame up the forms, lay out the rebar, put down the cables, pour, start the cure, then tension.

The only thing I can say about PT slabs is that the type I've read about use the cables. If there's another variety or technology, I'm not familiar with it.

Partially correct, a pier and grade system will have pier holes dug down at the corners and various load bearing spots then a stem wall poured on grade bridging the pier holes.

A traditional slab will be poured in a three step process, the footings will be dug and poured first usually 18"-24" below ground, then a stemwall, then the floor after plumbing is roughed in.

The post tension slabs are poured monolithically...ie the footing, stem, and slab are all poured at once after the plumbing and tension cables are installed. They then come back and tension the cables afterwards.

Building code requires foundations to extend below frost depth, so I doubt anybody is doing just a slab.

This is correct.

The only thing I can say about PT slabs is that the type I've read about use the cables. If there's another variety or technology, I'm not familiar with it.

Seeing more and more use of an "engineered" slab. This basically uses the same process and technique as the post-tension, except without the cables. A monolithic footing and floor are poured together. But instead of using the PT cables, rebar and wire mesh are used for reinforcing.

Concrete is guaranteed to do two things:
1) get hard
2) crack.

You sound like a man who not only knows what he is talking about, but also a man who understands reality.
Real reality . . . Not virtual reality.
(maybe an app can be invented to keep concrete from cracking =)

Back when I was personally involved in The Business of Construction I used to have a (free) subscription to a magazine called "Concrete Construction". There were ads in there for admixtures to the mix that were nearly mind-boggling. One of the simpler ones was that "adding fibers to the [mix] so you didn't even have to use up any precious (worthless) remesh" spiel. I ordered some concrete once--with this additive--to help the slab beyond the capabilities of the remesh that I used anyway--actually, not me, but the top-notch concrete pouring and finishing crew I hired. The customer freaked out a little about the "little hairs coming up out of the slab" . . . Plus, before that, I got to listen to the finishing crew bitch about how hard it was to get a nice finish on the surface. (and in English, not that other language . . . =)

It should be noted that the Post-tension slab assembly that has become so popular lately has some negatives as well as positives.

The negatives would be:
* Typically a 2 x 10 is used for the outside form board setting on top of the ground. Henceforth, your slab is only 9.5" off of the ground requiring special considerations for exterior grading. And, this requires a relatively flat building pad.
* The brick ledge is set to within 1.5" of top of the slab, so it is possible to have concrete edges showing. Although, dirt is usually brought up to cover this.
*As previously mentioned, no saw cutting or drilling should be done to slab once cables have been tightened. If you intend to install a storm shelter in the garage, make sure cables are not in place. Also, make sure the plumber hits his walls the first time.
*Typically, costs are $2000 higher, although some money is saved by the builder on brick and footer concrete costs. So it could be a wash, price wise.
*More times than not, the exterior wall footers are not as large as you would have on a typical footing and stem wall situation. Also, this footer is inside the exterior wall line. This usually is not a problem on a single story home, but could pose a problem for a taller, more intense load placed upon this exterior wall.

Positives:
*The post-tension concrete slab system is an outstanding system for holding the slab in place. Concrete does not react well with moving situations, aka tensile strength. The cables will actually allow the concrete to bend but not break. Considering our clay soils, and with the recent implementation of earthquakes into the equation, the cables do an outstanding job of holding the structure together.
*Some companies are offering a 10 yr warranty on the slabs, of course if they're still in business.
*Works well for the "production" builders as often times they build the same plan over and over, therefore reducing costs. But, still allows them the advertising potential of the post-tension slabs.

In summary, the post-tension slab is another technique of achieving a quality foundation and slab, although it is not the perfect fit for all situations. There are many factors involved in achieving a quality foundation and slab for the structure being built. Not one technique will fit all situations. Research and consult.

Your last paragraph, above, nails it, Klop.
(at least in my opinion)

Here's one of my favorite old sayings (from back in the day):
"If you are going to 'cut corners' in order to save money, don't do it on the foundation. Every other expensive part of the structure relies on it. Choose less expensive countertops, or whatever, later. But don't skimp on the foundation."

(Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of The Concrete/Masonry Cabal or Union . . . =)

Partially correct, a pier and grade system will have pier holes dug down at the corners and various load bearing spots then a stem wall poured on grade bridging the pier holes.[/qupte]

Completely omitted the corner piering. Thanks for pointing that out.

[quote=BlakmoreRulz;]
A traditional slab will be poured in a three step process, the footings will be dug and poured first usually 18"-24" below ground, then a stemwall, then the floor after plumbing is roughed in.

The post tension slabs are poured monolithically...ie the footing, stem, and slab are all poured at once after the plumbing and tension cables are installed. They then come back and tension the cables afterwards.

Yeah, when I saw pier-and-beam with what seemed to be no footing compared to the "excavated" footing, I had to think the only advantage was cost - little to no excavation, rebar, additional pour, etc. Had one builder tell me he'd "never" build that way - excavated, reinforced footing all the way for him. There really was no PT in the discussion back then.

Your last paragraph, above, nails it, Klop.
(at least in my opinion)

Here's one of my favorite old sayings (from back in the day):
"If you are going to 'cut corners' in order to save money, don't do it on the foundation. Every other expensive part of the structure relies on it. Choose less expensive countertops, or whatever, later. But don't skimp on the foundation."

(Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of The Concrete/Masonry Cabal or Union . . . =)

+1,000,000.

Precisely the kind of thing that led me to my other comment - that some of the cheapest, dirtiest construction "tricks" were used in the nicest areas. But man, those houses looked great. That's why I looked at the guts of a bunch of houses to see how builders built them before I signed a contract with anyone. There was one fairly well-known builder (whom I shall not name) who framed the interiors on 24" centers rather than 16". I didn't know this for a fact until I looked at one or two of his houses and thought, wait, something doesn't look right, but I wasn't sure what - until I noticed the stud spacing. Brought out a tape measure, and bingo. I'm assuming 16" centers either wasn't code back then, or if it were, the code was liberally ignored. Not sure. And this same neighborhood was replete with sagging covered patios and lots of rumors in the area about lots of structural issues the builder presumably would not fix...Mind you, this is not an indictment of all builders by any means, but just my observations of the practices of a select few builders several years ago. The point is that one cannot assume that because the house is finished well that it was constructed well.

Ya just gotta be very, very careful. With that kind of expense, and the info that's out there these days, I'm amazed more average consumers aren't still better educated. Heck, even for all the study I did, I was painfully ignorant of HVAC systems and have subsequently found ours to be....lets say..less than optimal.

SoonerDave: just fyi, hopefully without even a trace of "rumormongering" . . . Some of the worst inattention to foundational/other construction details involving concrete that I've personally encountered include those in a well-known development that starts with "G" and is on the far NW side. This is not to say that the houses don't LOOK beyond beautiful because they do. I'm just curious how they will look in another 20 years. Expansive clay soils, combined with drainage planning ignorance, are a bitch. This probably has something to do with the lack of enthusiasm, on the part of Civic Planners, to put in a bunch of sidewalks. (People who aren't watching where they are walking are liable to trip and file lawsuits and whatever. Even with the convenience of sidewalks.) It sort of goes back to a revelation that I had at one point regarding Construction Values (back in the '80's): "What we are building here seem to be "instant slums" for the future" . . . (a lot of that had to do with using "Masonite" siding (of later lawsuit fame) improperly installed). And, in my entire career in the business, I only saw ONE slab poured (by others) that was actually square and level.

p.s.: if one isn't going for a basement/crawlspace (with all the benefits, and higher initial cost), a pier and grade beam is probably the best option here in Central Oklahoma. Just be sure to do that soil survey before spending a dime on the concrete.

I should probably note here that the "Master Carpenter" from whom I learned "The Way It is Supposed to Be" (in terms of framing and cornice work) was a "Mason" ("Masonic Lodge") member too. Not that I ever had any desire whatsoever to be part of that "fraternity." I'm more of the Norm Abrams/Tommy Silva/Roy Underhill/Mike Holmes School. =)

Illustration of Principle: I once had a "customer/client" complain/express a concern that the 2 x 12's (purchased at their Lumberyard of Choice) that we were assembling to create a "field-laminated" porch beam (including a pre-drilled steel plate, bolted in) varied by 1/8" from the one (the 2 x 12) adjacent to it. I looked at him and said: "Do I look like a f***kin' sawmill to you?"

This is one reason I have Cooking as a hobby rather than Carpentry. =)

btw: The Master Mason/Carpenter that I learned from--in reality--once said (in regard to properly fitting gable studs): "Just nail it . . . We ain't buildin' a f****in' piano here." He pronounced it, "pie-anne" yet his meaning was clear. =)

I have a family member is SW OK in need of a house built on a small piece of land. Question is which is cheaper per sq ft: 1) traditional stick construction; 2) prefab or modular home; or 3) manufactured house (double-wide trailer house delivered on site)?

I am assuming a simple, basic house of say 1750sqf.

Does any one have a ballpark on the cost per sq ft for each construction type, assuming it includes foundation, delivery, septic, and everything but the cost of the land?

I have a family member is SW OK in need of a house built on a small piece of land. Question is which is cheaper per sq ft: 1) traditional stick construction; 2) prefab or modular home; or 3) manufactured house (double-wide trailer house delivered on site)?

I am assuming a simple, basic house of say 1750sqf.
Does any one have a ballpark on the cost per sq ft for each construction type, assuming it includes foundation, delivery, septic, and everything but the cost of the land?

That is sort of a trick question to answer on account of it is difficult to balance "cheaper" with "more valuer" and whether it is a DIY Project or not. I would venture to say that #3 might be the answer, except for tornadoes. Earthquakes probably wouldn't effect the structure as severely, so it's a balanced trade-off. in a way . . . First thing is to have a geological survey done to determine the soil characteristics then proceed accordingly.

It is sandy soil, and I see lots of homes being built and lots of manufactured homes being sited in that area. That part of OK doesn't have earthquakes as seen of late in N. and central OK. They need basic construction, i.e., Formica over granite countertops; laminate floors over wood, etc. I would assume they might be able to be their own contractor for building (but do not labor in the actual construction), but would of course rely on a prefab or manufacturer for those two types of construction.

It is sandy soil, and I see lots of homes being built and lots of manufactured homes being sited in that area. That part of OK doesn't have earthquakes as seen of late in N. and central OK. They need basic construction, i.e., Formica over granite countertops; laminate floors over wood, etc. I would assume they might be able to be their own contractor for building (but do not labor in the actual construction), but would of course rely on a prefab or manufacturer for those two types of construction.

Sorry, Motley. Canna' provide a reasonable answer. Spent most of the day with California House Flippers in the background on TV an' a semi well-done Pork Roast in th' oven while doin' the dishes t' boot . . . fer cryin' out loud fer crysakes. . . . =)

Tip o' de Day:
Be sure that if you buy a house
with an Irish Wife you are prepared to be patted on the back and kicked in the pants when necessary.

If you are in a hurry and don't mind throwing away money, get a double wide. Otherwise, build. Most of the time modulars are glorified trailers. I would avoid those also.

Thanks all.
I agree building is preferable, but they are on a tight budget. I advised them to check out steel buildings to see if that could be a little less expensive. I am also curious about using cement block construction to help with strong winds and is maybe more energy efficient in the long run.

Maybe talk to the folks building OKSea about a container home?

Others have expressed the best longterm financial solution - built, not bought.

That said, I have some friends that bought their 'ideal property' in a rural area some time ago but didn't have enough money to build their 'dream home' yet.

They went with a repossessed doublewide and had it put on the property - but not where their home would be built. They had to do some remodeling of the doublewide but nothing serious or too costly. (you've gotta spend some time looking to find one's in really good shape, but they are out there and priced right)

They lived in it for 8 years before they started building their home.

Their new home is done and they live in it and two elderly relatives live in the doublewide and pay rent.

It worked out very well for them and their financial reality at the time. They also added an underground storm shelter.


I also have a relative we see often that has a prefab home outside of OKC. Nice house, but obviously has a manufactured 'look'. That said, it has so far held up great for at least 18 years and when they bought it they had no intention of moving afterwards and the price was low enough they could pay cash. They also added an underground storm shelter. So, again, was a good fit for their needs.


Third option. Another set of relatives bought their ideal property and built a large metal barn on it. They converted a large portion into a very nice loft style apartment and lived in it while they themselves built their dream home a couple of years later and on their own budget and schedule. Once the house was built they had a barn they already needed and it had a guest apartment.

To me, that last option (live in barn) would work best for me had I been in that situation.