Using a vibrator when pouring piers / piles 2

[getitrightconcrete]

We are concerned about the work a concrete company has done. We learned halfway through the project that they should have been using a vibrator during the pours. We made them use one for the retaining walls, but they had already poured all the piers. The piers are 16' deep, 16" diameter. The cages are 4 vertical bars arranged in an 8.5" square with stirrups every 6". They did shake the top of the cages as the concrete neared the top, but I don't think it was doing too much. Should I be concerned or would the concrete been likely to flow well enough to prevent large voids?

 

[BigH]

You shouldn't double post - you will find that most engineers in this forum are in the other that you posted in.

 

[miclaex]

Is the vibrator hammer better to drive square concrete Plies

 

[Roadbridge]

Gretitrightconcrete.

Sound like you got a whole lot of problems with your concrete contractor.
If I were you I’d insist on the work being pulled down and redone at his expense.

 

[Zambo]

A very similar question was posted recently. It isn't necessary that bored piles are vibrated, it depends on the workability of the concrete.

miclaex, as far as driving piles goes that is a totally different subject. Here the discussion is cast in situ bored piles.

Zambo

 

[DRC1]

There are non desructive means to evaluate the integrity of the piers. I would suggest contacting a firm such as Wiss Jancey and Elstner to review this. However I can't imagine a contractor not pouring with out at least 2 vibrators. Shaking the cage after it was placed really blows my mind, not to mention ACI code. I woul;d have some one take a serious look at the concrete. If it was not self consolidating concrete, it would have needed to be vibrated. If it didn't, it was probabably way too wet.

As far as drivinng square prestress piles, I have only driven them with impacts. I would be afraid the vibratory hammer would damage the pile.