SE's, does this 'sidepinning' solution check out?

[Deluks]

Backstory: It seems that the excavation prior to the pad foundation for the steels being poured, were not inspected by BC.
So they refused to sign off based on this.
Trial pits were then dug to expose the ground beneath the pads, the ground assessed to be inadequate.
Engineer came up with this solution to side pin the pads, by pouring another pad next to it.

So now if the ground beneath the pads were to shift, the original pads would be held up by a couple of bits of M16 rebar drilled sideways into the pad adjacent.
Does that actually make sense?

 

[blup]

Do you mean using rebar as support for the load? It would be simpler but more expense/time consuming to dig out the existing pad and assess the ground exposed.

 

[stevie888]

( get the feeling that maybe BC felt they had to ask for something in the circumstances, but I don't see that arrangement doing a great deal.

12 mm bars set at an angle aren't going to do much in shear.

No attempt to prep the existing concrete to get a bit unity between old and new.

Decent looking concrete but I hope it was properly vibrated.

I'd have liked to see more efffort to reinstate the DPM

 

[Notch7]

Backstory: It seems that the excavation prior to the pad foundation for the steels being poured, were not inspected by BC.
So they refused to sign off based on this.
Trial pits were then dug to expose the ground beneath the pads, the ground assessed to be inadequate.
Engineer came up with this solution to side pin the pads, by pouring another pad next to it.

So now if the ground beneath the pads were to shift, the original pads would be held up by a couple of bits of M16 rebar drilled sideways into the pad adjacent.
Does that actually make sense?

I sub to Izzy the brickie, enjoy his content.