concrete padstone - will a concrete dense block suffice.

Joined
17 Aug 2008
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
Location
Sheffield
Country
United Kingdom
Hello,

Have had some calcs done for removal of load bearing wall with RSJ resting on padstone. The padstone is to be 100(w) * 150(d) *300(l). Will a dense concrete block, the type that can be bought in all common diy stores suffice for this?

Not doing myself but am interested.

Thanks
 
Sponsored Links
Hi,
While a dense concrete block would no doubt "do" The BCO wouldn't accept it.

The usual way is to use a 150x100 concrete lintel cut to the desired length.
900 one cut in half would suffice :)
 
Many thanks for that. I did look for concrete lintels at Wickes as someone had told me a lintel is the usual method, but they only seemed to have 65 depth ones, no doubt the local building suppliers will have one though.

Thanks Again!
 
Sponsored Links
Sorry to hi-jack a thread but I've been doing some searching of the forum and this was very similar to my question.

Woody you said chop the lintel in half and lay it one on top of the other...is this with a mortor mix in between?

Are building control likely to be okay with this?

Many thanks.
 
...is this with a mortor mix in between?

.

No. If you put mortar in between, you will be creating a weak point as the mortar will not have the compressive strength of the p/c lintels.
Not worth skimping; get a proper pad or deeper lintel
 
Hello,

Will a dense concrete block, the type that can be bought in all common diy stores suffice for this?

It might work in practice depending on the actual load from the beam, but I wouldn't risk it. The typical concrete padstone has a stength of around 40 - 50 N/mm2; the concrete blocks you mentioned are typically just 7 N/mm2.
 
3:1 mortar will be fine

I don't think you can say that unless you Know;

1. the length the padstone has to be;
2. the flange width of the beam;
3. the reaction from the beam.

None of these we know.
 
If it's a domestic property, it will be fine. If it's the new Ho-Ming skyscraper, then perhaps not
 
If it's a domestic property, it will be fine. If it's the new Ho-Ming skyscraper, then perhaps not

Oh, right then. Henceforth it's official!; we don't need SE's to calculate domestic steel beam bearings any more. Just chop a couple of 65 lintels in half, slap some mortar on, and we're done. :rolleyes:
 
Lol .. and now for the serious bit

The most significant aspect of the bearing design is not the load spreading, but the concentrated load directly under the beam.

The bearing needs to be able to deal with this more than anything else, or there is the potential for local failure in the form of spalling or shear cracking of the top corner of the bearing

So a mortar joint is no problem 65mm down from the beam if the lintel piece above takes the shear load preventing spalling - and the load is also spread sideways as a bonus

This is why solid blue bricks (which are also 65mm) work well, as do bearing plates .... which can be even thinner and also bedded in mortar
 
Lol .. and now for the serious bit

The most significant aspect of the bearing design is not the load spreading, but the concentrated load directly under the beam.

Does this sentence not have two conflicting ideas? :confused:

One part says that the significant aspect is not the load spreading, and yet the next part says it is the concentrated load under the beam.

Surely the two are intimately related if the stress on the brickwork is to be reduced to acceptable levels?
 
No. There is an immediate point load directly at the bearing which needs to be dealt with, before the load can even begin to spread
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top