avatar

princeplanet

Tin Man

Posts: 11 Member Since: 18/06/2013

Lead

Jun 21 17 11:49 AM

Tags : :

For a RC slab on an upper level to have improved load capacity, it has been necessary in the past to create extra beam support beneath the slab. In the last decade it seems that Carbon Fibre technology is now becoming the go to solution.  Does anyone know of any instances of this technology in studio construction? Must the strips be applied underneath? Or can they go above? How much space is required, and what is the cost per m2 ?For an RC slab on an upper level to have improved load capacity, it has been necessary in the past to create extra beam support beneath the slab. In the last decade it seems that Carbon Fibre technology is now becoming the go to solution.  Does anyone know of any instances of this technology in studio construction? Must the strips be applied underneath? Or can they go above? How much space is required, and what is the cost per m2 ? 
Quote    Reply   
avatar

scullyfan

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,615 Member Since:27/07/2011

#1 [url]

Jun 21 17 7:17 PM

There are doctors who are also lawyers and it wouldn't surprise me at all if someone here could answer your question. However, I think the engineering expertise around here leans more towards electrical engineering and/or recording engineering than structural or civil engineering. As a lay observer of skeletal building structures, even those of newer and greener approaches, I sure haven't seen any carbon fiber being used. The mainstay of commercial buildings is your typical steel I-beam construction, even under pre-stressed concrete slabs. During the "shovel ready" period of the former administration I was involved in the design and installation of low voltage cabling in some buildings that were federally funded. The installation took an interesting turn, especially on the exterior walls, due to the use of Styrofoam forms filled with concrete. Those structures seemed to use a lot of exposed laminated wood beams. It looks nice and gives a building a design flare. Depending on the span length, even those structures used a fair amount of steel structure.

I have some friends who are architects and we seem to share a love of art and good beer. Every once in a while, after a pint or two, I'll ask them something about how they might approach a certain challenge in an old building and they launch into an informative lecture about the pros and cons of doing things certain ways. I always appreciate their informed opinion.

My advice: Befriend a structural engineer who likes to drink beer with you and pick his (or her) brain,
or,
become very wealthy and hire one...

Last Edited By: scullyfan Jun 21 17 7:20 PM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

princeplanet

Tin Man

Posts: 11 Member Since:18/06/2013

#2 [url]

Jun 21 17 10:32 PM

My SE charges me a fortune to "assess" every single idea I put to him, so I was hoping to get some outside info on this one first. So Engineers drink beer? Who woulda thunk it?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

thomas northward

Silverado

Posts: 140 Member Since:10/02/2011

#3 [url]

Jun 26 17 7:57 AM

Princeplanet,

You've been seeking advice for your new studio here, on GS, via private emails to many designers.

As stated before multiple times by multiple people, the space you chose is not suited at all for what you want.

Now you're asking for very specific structural advice on an acoustics forum - because your engineer is charging you for real life work and advising?

I think it's time you stopped this behaviour now.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

princeplanet

Tin Man

Posts: 11 Member Since:18/06/2013

#4 [url]

Jun 26 17 9:03 AM

I learn things on these forums, despite the party poopers ;) So, if you don't mind I'd like to see if there are others who can advise that may even disagree with you. Thomas, as I've written to you, I do appreciate you trying to help, I myself am considered to be a cynical hard ass that likes to tell it like it is, particularly when I know I'm right, and I'm actually helping someone by saving themselves from themselves. I get it, OK, tough love an' all that.

But with all due respect, there are people of equal standing in this industry that simply don't agree with you that my proposed location is a lost cause, so maybe you're the one out of line here? No offence, but I'd appreciate it if you desisted from posting in my threads. dude, get offa my cloud ! ;)

Quote    Reply   
avatar

zmix

Aqua Marine

Posts: 4,288 Member Since:20/01/2011

#5 [url]

Jul 5 17 11:09 PM

princeplanet wrote:
I learn things on these forums, despite the party poopers ;) So, if you don't mind I'd like to see if there are others who can advise that may even disagree with you. Thomas, as I've written to you, I do appreciate you trying to help, I myself am considered to be a cynical hard ass that likes to tell it like it is, particularly when I know I'm right, and I'm actually helping someone by saving themselves from themselves. I get it, OK, tough love an' all that.

But with all due respect, there are people of equal standing in this industry that simply don't agree with you that my proposed location is a lost cause, so maybe you're the one out of line here? No offence, but I'd appreciate it if you desisted from posting in my threads. dude, get offa my cloud ! ;)

Thomas is the moderator of this forum, Mr. Planet.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

podgorny

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 2,352 Member Since:27/01/2011

#6 [url]

Jul 6 17 1:20 AM

princeplanet wrote:

But with all due respect, there are people of equal standing in this industry that simply don't agree with you that my proposed location is a lost cause, so maybe you're the one out of line here? 

 

As a person who is not entirely in the dark regarding studio design/construction (and the snake-oil world of acoustics), I can say with a large degree of certainy that there is no one of equal standing to Thomas in this industry.
 

Kyle Mann :: www.kylemann.com

Quote    Reply   
avatar

John Eppstein

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,321 Member Since:31/05/2015

#8 [url]

Jul 8 17 2:15 AM

princeplanet wrote:
I learn things on these forums, despite the party poopers ;) So, if you don't mind I'd like to see if there are others who can advise that may even disagree with you. Thomas, as I've written to you, I do appreciate you trying to help, I myself am considered to be a cynical hard ass that likes to tell it like it is, particularly when I know I'm right, and I'm actually helping someone by saving themselves from themselves. I get it, OK, tough love an' all that.

But with all due respect, there are people of equal standing in this industry that simply don't agree with you that my proposed location is a lost cause, so maybe you're the one out of line here? No offence, but I'd appreciate it if you desisted from posting in my threads. dude, get offa my cloud ! ;)

Typical internet attitude problem. Pose question, get lots of solid answers explaining why the wishful thinking won't work, SO - instead of actually learning from experience and moving on, the poster persists, "secure" in the knowledge that sooner or later somebody's going to come along with an an opposite "opinion" to all the good advice already offered.

There's only one, rather major, problem with that approach, which is that those posters with the "alternative" viewpoint (which convenietly fits the first poster's original idea) is almost without exception dead wrong, often to such a degree that they're supplying "confirmation" for an idea that is, in reality, quite physically dangerous, if not outright illegal - as is the example here.

When a whole bunch of experienced people who really know what they're talking about tell you not to do something, DON'T DO IT! You could be responsible for getting somebody killed. You could even wind up in prison for negligent homicide. I'm pretty certain that if you actually bothered to consult your local building codes (which I wopuld bet money you have not done) you'd find that the sort of thing you're trying to get away with is definitely not allowed, at least in any way remotely resembling the way you're going about it. Yes, there have been recording studios built on upper floors and some have used heavy concrete floor slabs in their construction However I've read accounts of how this was accomplished (lots and lots of welded steel) and it's way, way beyond anything remotely resembling what you're talking, not merely in the degree of expense involved, but also in the extreme difficulty of doing it safely and and the incredible amount of problems you'd have getting it past your local planning commission and finally pulling the permits. And don't even think about trying to do something like this without permits.Not to mention the cost of insurance if you did somehow come with a legally acceptable design and somehow managed to find financing, which is highly unlikely in and of itself.

And you're not going to find any brand new "high tech" solutions because it takes a LONG TIME for such new techniques to gain legal approval.

Give it up. Remember Mick Jagger's immortal words  "You can't always get what you want."

Quote    Reply   
avatar

princeplanet

Tin Man

Posts: 11 Member Since:18/06/2013

#9 [url]

Jul 11 17 2:09 PM

Well, I gotta say that I actually do feel appreciative of all your concerns, but I think you're all being too cautious. My SE says I have a live load of 500kpa beyond the ADL of 150kpa. If my additional dead load goes beyond 150 - which it will with, say, a 200-250 kpa floated floor - then it will borrow from the allocated 500 LL. Given my walls and ceilings are totally supported by structural beams, any LL on the float slab will be no where near 250 kpa, I doubt there will be more than 2 or 3 tonnes including people in either of my rooms. With channels over the isolators for load distribution, point loads will be spread out so I don't think my console or my piano are likely to crack my floor.

So there will be no issue with safety. The worst that can happen is that if it's decided that we go for only a 200 kpa light float floor, someone below might still hear kick and snare. Fine, not a total write off, I'll do loud drums after 5,50 pm- I work late anyway. I can still do guitars and vocals, piano, strings, percussion etc, and I'm sure the 200kpa float floor will come in handy for that! I should add that yesterday I had my monitors blaring at 90 db SPL and it was inaudible downstairs. That's without any building or treatment. Makes me think I could get away with a much lighter shell for the CR. I will probably see if I can have a heavier drum booth shell than the rest of the LR, and I would have liked some opinions about that from the experienced folks on this forum. But it seems everyone has made up their mind that it's a lost cause. Or at least the moderator has, and no one wants to disagree with him... ;)

Seriously, no hard feelings, and I'll keep you all posted (in case anyone's interested...). Cheers. pp

Last Edited By: princeplanet Jul 11 17 2:12 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

John Eppstein

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,321 Member Since:31/05/2015

#10 [url]

Jul 12 17 2:08 PM

princeplanet wrote:
Well, I gotta say that I actually do feel appreciative of all your concerns, but I think you're all being too cautious. My SE says I have a live load of 500kpa beyond the ADL of 150kpa. If my additional dead load goes beyond 150 - which it will with, say, a 200-250 kpa floated floor - then it will borrow from the allocated 500 LL. Given my walls and ceilings are totally supported by structural beams, any LL on the float slab will be no where near 250 kpa, I doubt there will be more than 2 or 3 tonnes including people in either of my rooms. With channels over the isolators for load distribution, point loads will be spread out so I don't think my console or my piano are likely to crack my floor.

So there will be no issue with safety. The worst that can happen is that if it's decided that we go for only a 200 kpa light float floor, someone below might still hear kick and snare. Fine, not a total write off, I'll do loud drums after 5,50 pm- I work late anyway. I can still do guitars and vocals, piano, strings, percussion etc, and I'm sure the 200kpa float floor will come in handy for that! I should add that yesterday I had my monitors blaring at 90 db SPL and it was inaudible downstairs. That's without any building or treatment. Makes me think I could get away with a much lighter shell for the CR. I will probably see if I can have a heavier drum booth shell than the rest of the LR, and I would have liked some opinions about that from the experienced folks on this forum. But it seems everyone has made up their mind that it's a lost cause. Or at least the moderator has, and no one wants to disagree with him... ;)

Seriously, no hard feelings, and I'll keep you all posted (in case anyone's interested...). Cheers. pp

I'm not understanding something here - you started the thread by asking if we thought that it would be OK to suspend this concrete slab using the new, relatively untested technique of using carbon fiber on top of the slab to support it. Now you're saying that there will be no issues with safety  because your walls and ceilings are supported, blah, bhlah, blah, and that the SE says this or that - so why are you asking us?

It doesn't seem to me that anything you've said in this last post actually pertains to the question of using cartbon fiber supports on top of the load. Sure, the wall can support it - that's not the question. The question is whether using support on top of the slab is safe, which has to do with (A) the load bearing capacity of the carbon fiber support (which would involved design considerations that we have not been given) and (B) whether supporting the slab from above instead of below is safe. This last part is what bothers me - I've never heard of anyone attempting to support such a load from above (even with conventional steel) and frankly it does not sound safe to be. I has nothing to do with the load bearing capacity of the existing building and everything to do with whether supporting such a load from above would be safe. I'm not an SE, nor do I play one on TV, but based on experience with composite materials and observation of techniques used for such projects in the past I'm highly skeptical concerning the safety of suspending the load from above in this manner. There is a big difference between strength under compression (as in supporting the load from below) and supporting the load under tension, as in supporting from above.

But what I think isn't important - what's important is whether your local planning commission is willing to sign off on the design and allow you to pull permits - because if they don't you can't proceed. And I doubt that they will. You need to have blueprints drawn up and submitted to the proper authorities - onjly they can give you permission. And having been part of building projects before I can tell you that it's an exacting, time consuming, and expensive process to get even a conventional building design cleared - my guess is that they'll be all over this one like flies on stink, at least if the officials in your area are anything like the officials around here.

You admit you've never heard of anyone putting the support on top in a similar situation. Neither have I. And when nobody does something in a particular way there's usually a reason for it.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

John Eppstein

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,321 Member Since:31/05/2015

#11 [url]

Jul 12 17 2:20 PM

princeplanet wrote:
I learn things on these forums, despite the party poopers ;) So, if you don't mind I'd like to see if there are others who can advise that may even disagree with you. Thomas, as I've written to you, I do appreciate you trying to help, I myself am considered to be a cynical hard ass that likes to tell it like it is, particularly when I know I'm right, and I'm actually helping someone by saving themselves from themselves. I get it, OK, tough love an' all that.

But with all due respect, there are people of equal standing in this industry that simply don't agree with you that my proposed location is a lost cause, so maybe you're the one out of line here? No offence, but I'd appreciate it if you desisted from posting in my threads. dude, get offa my cloud ! ;)

"Party poopers"?

No. The term is "voices of experience".

It seems to me that you've probably been getting uniformly negative responses and you're searching for somebody to validate you idea. Well, when the overwhelming response is negative it generally means something. Yes, on the internet you'l probably evntually be able to find some bozo who will agree with you, but that doesn't really mean anything. There are people on the internet who will agree if you say the earth is flat and that nobody ever landed on the moon. But when there's a consensus among many people across multiple sites it probably means something you should heed.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

princeplanet

Tin Man

Posts: 11 Member Since:18/06/2013

#12 [url]

Jul 18 17 9:09 AM

@JE, thanks for your thoughts. The carbon fibre idea has been discarded, mainly on advice given outside of this forum which made perfect sense. I do respond to advice that is grounded in reality, and this is why I'm fine to proceed with building a flawed studio. I have updated the saga since my first posts in other threads, so I can see how some are confused. The goalposts have moved, as they will, but I am in a comfortable place now where the SE has given me 650Kpa to play with b/n the ADL and the LL- which is plenty for a fairly heavy floor, without carbon fibre or extra steel support. As I've been saying, I fully expect that drums and loud bass will still be audible during business hours, and that's OK as I will track loud things at night.

As for the "consensus" of nay sayers, I understood it at first when the information I had was inaccurate and insubstantial, but since the picture has changed (as has been divulged), I must say I'm quite baffled by it, as I am by the veiled insults... But hey, if I'm wrong, I promise to come back here to say "You told me so!". OK? :)

Quote    Reply   
avatar

John Eppstein

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,321 Member Since:31/05/2015

#13 [url]

princeplanet wrote:

As for the "consensus" of nay sayers, I understood it at first when the information I had was inaccurate and insubstantial, but since the picture has changed (as has been divulged), I must say I'm quite baffled by it, as I am by the veiled insults... But hey, if I'm wrong, I promise to come back here to say "You told me so!". OK? :)



 

Well, I don't know if that was directed at me of not but I assure you there was nothing personal intended. However I do at times tend to be somewhat acerbic and I'll admit to a lack of patience with those who persist in maintaining a wrongheaderd approach when confronted with knowledgeable correction - especially when that wrongheaded approach entails things that very well could result in injury or death.

I dunno - somehow the idea of unsuspecting musicians, hell, even unsuspecting mooks or even lawyers accountants being squished like bugs under a giant slab of concrete kinda bothers me for some reason....

Edit: To be perfectly clear, it isn't the carbon fiber I object to per se, it's the idea of suspending from above. My feelings about that are that to adequately and safely suspend from above  would probably be much, much more difficult that supporting from below, regardless of the materials involved.

All that being said, I'm glad to hear that you've abandoned this idea and have moved on to a (hopefully) safer, more practical location and build.

Last Edited By: John Eppstein . Edited 4 times.

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help