FINISHED IN 2020! Sharward's Partial Garage Conversion

Discuss studios designed and built by others.

Moderators: Aaronw, John Sayers

sharward
Moderator
Posts: 4281
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Sacramento, Northern California, USA
Contact:

Post by sharward »

mikeklooster wrote:I also just learned lol is lots of laughs not love.
Good grief, Mike -- who's teaching you Internetese, anyway?

LOL = Laughing Out Loud :lol:
So metal plate is good?
Not at over a ton at $1 per pound it ain't! :?
fitZ wrote:sorry Keith.
Geez, Rick -- First you freak me out about cracking slabs, now this? :? I'll consider forgiving you over the weekend.

;-)
Mike wrote:dumb ass mike
Cool -- some variety! It's nice to mix in some "Dumb Ass Mike" with the "Smart Ass Mike" you've been giving us from day one, dude! :lol: :lol: :lol:

IT MUST BE FRIDAY! ;-)
knightfly
Senior Member
Posts: 6976
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 11:11 am
Location: West Coast, USA

Post by knightfly »

Mike, if you find a mis-spelling in my posts let me know; I have this thing about writing exactly what I mean (don't always accomplish it, but would like to)

Here's a helper for your SIASS's

http://members.aol.com/nigthomas/alphabet.html

(Just in case you were wondering, that's NOT one of the standard ones - it stands for Stupid Internet Acronym Study Session ) 8)
sharward
Moderator
Posts: 4281
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Sacramento, Northern California, USA
Contact:

Don't Shoot Me...

Post by sharward »

Please don't shoot me for asking this. :roll:
Back in January, in his first response to this thread, knightfly wrote: . . . the inner will need to be floated on the inner walls, which need to be resting on a floated floor. . . be prepared to put some $$$ into this part - for your requirements, I wouldn't recommend anything less than 3-1/2" of CONCRETE floated on PT 2x6's over EPDM pucks - you need lots of mass, a wide air gap, and high density rockwool fill under the floor if you're to kill things enough to not alienate the neighbors.
After weeks of challenges that all relate to having a floating floor in my design, I'd like to reevaluate this requirement. With thousands of views on this thread already, I'm sure many others wonder the same thing.

Suppose I don't float a floor. Suppose I didn't even attempt to float the walls. Supose everything is permanently affixed to my existing garage floor slab.

Bear in mind that the entire perimeter of my garage floor has a wooden "expansion joint" where it meets the footing of the outside wall or the slab on the inhabitable areas of the house. Perhaps that offers some independence from the rest of the structure and the world...?

Also, the soil in my area is heavy clay, if that is a factor.

I understand that floating 4-6" of concrete is ideal. However, what I need to establish with certainty is whether or not it is necssary to achieve the isolation levels I need.

Regardless, I still plan for my air gap to be 11 3/4" along the walls (deeper between the doors) and at least 10" with 2.5pcf Roxul or Thermafiber (whichever I can get my hands on) between the leaves.

I hope everyone understands that I'm not trying to ignore physics here. I just need to understand with as much detail and practical insights as possible how important the floating floor is in my design.

This thing is in so much flux right now that I'm not sure whether or not I can afford to float the floor. What I would like to establish now is whether or not I can afford not to, and if I don't, whether or not there is anything else I might be able to do to mitigate the effect of going that route.

Perhaps in lieu of a floated floor, I can consider doing what Andrew McMaster did as he described in this thread:
Andrew wrote:My building is all one slab - there is no floor isolation, but my drums are on a riser filled with sand floated off the floor on neoprene pucks.

The sound proofing is close to perfect - you cannot hear anything outside when inside the volume is as loud as you can possibly get it.
...Then I could get some use out of that EPDM I purchased...?

Thanks in advance for settling this nagging dilemma in my mind (and in the minds of family members and friends who are watching me tear my hair out).
knightfly
Senior Member
Posts: 6976
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 11:11 am
Location: West Coast, USA

Post by knightfly »

You wouldn't be "caving" on the "permits for everything" stance, would you? :wink:

First, let me say that I've only a GENERAL idea of what each decision you mention will do to/for you - your original intent was that your neighbors weren't annoyed (or even aware) that you were playing drums at any hour - so I went with the optimum isolation for each case, within your space constraints. Had this been a "from scratch" project, I would have recommended even wider gaps between walls, with everything else being similar to my other recommendations; this is construction I KNOW will work.

When you eliminate decoupling between inner and outer structure, you get flanking; this is such a difficult thing to figure that it's been known to make only a few dB of difference, up to sounding like the offending noise is being generated in the SAME ROOM - only safe way here is to decouple IMO.

As to doing a riser, that will work for impact and coupled sound directly from the kit to the floor; however, if the rest of the room is NOT also similarly floated, the airborne sound will transmit thru the un-floated section of floor and into structure. If you built your riser large enough so at least the bass amp also sits on it, that would help. Guitar amps could be set on MoPads or similar for a few dB improvement in isolation.

Your perimeter expansion joint, being of wood, will likely attenuate sound between slab and stemwalls/frame, but not STOP it; wood is nearly as good as concrete at transmitting sound thru shear waves, just at a different speed - for example

http://www.uk-piano.org/sound.html

Note the speed of sound in wood has Three different values, depending on direction - across the grain is around 4300 fps for Fir, discounting the possibility of travel ALONG the rings.

Concrete - average sound velocity in concrete is around 4,000 meters per second, or around 13,000 feet per second compared to sound in air at around 1130 feet per second;

So, sound traveling thru concrete/fir/concrete would experience two speed changes (and be diffracted twice) - this entire process would attenuate sound somewhat, but I'm not engineer enough to be more specific than that.

Bottom line - not floating your inner walls (I think) would be a mistake - I don't have the capability of specifying the way to do that, independent of being set on a floated floor - maybe Kinetics has standard ways/materials for this, seems like I saw something. Possibly build walls/ceiling floated, then test, then add a floated floor of some kind if/when it's not adequate.

If your walls are done first, you can always build an inner, floated floor later if it's not good enough; it's just not as easy as building from the inside out, things are harder to maneuver when there are already walls in the way... Steve
cadesignr
Senior Member
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 4:25 pm
Location: Oregon USA

Post by cadesignr »

Hello Keith, well, I thought about it and this is what I would do, cause I could do it myself, and do a little at a time. This drawing is NOT exactly right, but it will illustrate the idea. What it doesn't show is the sand. I would sand fill a floating floor on piers. Cut away squares in your slab and pour them yourself. Hell with it. Anyway, just an idea. For me, this would work if I had no other alternative. Well, don't laugh to much, like I said, it wasn't finished as the wife was looking over my shoulder wondering when I was going to get busy on her "honey do's" :lol: Later.
fitZ
alright, breaks over , back on your heads......
sharward
Moderator
Posts: 4281
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Sacramento, Northern California, USA
Contact:

Post by sharward »

knightfly wrote:You wouldn't be "caving" on the "permits for everything" stance, would you? :wink:
Ha! Good one, Steve. :)

No, I'm not "caving" (no pun intended) on that. I really don't have a choice in the matter.
Your perimeter expansion joint, being of wood, will likely attenuate sound between slab and stemwalls/frame, but not STOP it. . .
Yeah, that's pretty much what I expected. :?
. . . Possibly build walls/ceiling floated, then test, then add a floated floor of some kind if/when it's not adequate. . . things are harder to maneuver when there are already walls in the way.
Yeah, this is one of those things that is darned near impossible to retrofit after the fact.
fitZ wrote:. . . I would sand fill a floating floor on piers. Cut away squares in your slab and pour them yourself. . .
Pour "what" myself? The piers?
Very interesting indeed. I see the advantages of that approach -- bypassing the slab entirely. :mrgreen: Clever! :mrgreen: And what's the deal with the bolt? Is that a Kinetics Lift Slab Floating Floor Isolator? If not, could it be?

I must say, though, that the idea of having holes cut in my existing floor like that is more than a little intimidating.
. . . it wasn't finished as the wife was looking over my shoulder. . .
Well, I think it looks awesome and I really appreciate your taking the time to sketch that up for me.

So, Steve (and everyone else) -- what do you think of this? Should we have fitZ committed, or is he onto something, or both?
cadesignr
Senior Member
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 4:25 pm
Location: Oregon USA

Post by cadesignr »

Pour "what" myself? The piers?
Hell yes :lol: Well, its all I could think of. At times like this, I just say to my self...what are the options...possible failure or absolute success. Keith, I know cutting the slab seems like...well pretty scary. But believe me, its not. I used a diamond saw to cut a sidewalk to do the same exact thing one time. In fact, thats what made me remember this. The key here is precision layouts of the holes. However, this all has to do with the point loads, you compression calcs, and load on the piers, which I think we can work out.
When I did this, I had built some precision forms that indexed to the first one via bolts and a jig. IF and when you decide what your going to do, I'm here to help you lay it out. But this still all has to do with PRO opinion, BID, YOU, etc, and theres still lots of details to work out.
The main point of this design is building this so you can level it prior to pouring in sand, and even then, still being able to adjust it from above, should you need to. Like I said, the detail shown is NOT correct, it was just to get the idea down quick, before I had to go do the honey do's :lol:

I'll work on it tomorrow some more. Actually, the bolt thing is really not correct. I had it drawn and just inserted it into this drawing. And no, its not the kinetics thing. Actually, its still just Rubber pucks and compression.
Maybe some research is in order for the fiberglass type, since they are already calculated for you. More brainfarts. Tell you the truth, I think the kinetic thing would be WAY to expensive. Hell, you can get stuff like this over at BLUE COLLAR SUPPLY cheap!! Ever been there? Out on Florin Perkins road I believe. Pretty cool place. Anyway, once we get this down, it will be fairly cheap. I bet you could do this way under what the slab etc would cost. At least in my mind. However, the priority is NO CRACKED SLAB...so, what do you do....PLAN B!!

Actually, I envision a much more robust assembly, using maybe welded brackets and 3/4" bolts. You'll see, or maybe Steve and others will have some pointers or suggestions. Anyway, it was an idea, so I thought I'd run it up the flagpole and see if anyone saluted :wink: I'll post a few more pics in a day or so. One more thing. The beauty of this is...you can do it yourself slowly but surely. Its actually better that way. At least you have control over most everything. EXCEPT BID.

Later Keith

fitZ
alright, breaks over , back on your heads......
cadesignr
Senior Member
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 4:25 pm
Location: Oregon USA

Post by cadesignr »

Hello Keith, I just looked at those kinetic isolators. Same idea kinda. In fact, I don't know what your budget is, and I actually haven't kept up completely with your thread. Not much time. But, I know you were considering a slab. In this instance, the pier thing would work for that too. But the piers may have to be engineered for point load/psi. I don't really know about that cause...well, I'm no engineer. Anyway, its a thought.
fitZ
alright, breaks over , back on your heads......
sharward
Moderator
Posts: 4281
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Sacramento, Northern California, USA
Contact:

Wooden Floated Floor with Wider Gap?

Post by sharward »

In Mike's thread, knightfly wrote:. . . around 10 dB . . . a rough approximation of the difference you'll hear between wood over RIM's and concrete over RIM's, near as I can tell from their specs. . .
This is really helpful info. So, it appears that floating wood vs. floating concrete using the Kinetics system costs about 10db (and I'm not taking that lightly -- I know that's a lot).

Now, I'm wondering if I would be able to chip away at that 10db deficit by increasing the air gap between the inner floor and the original concrete floor, perhaps to about 20" (i.e., three steps up instead of two). Obviously that would cut into available headroom, but maybe a 7' 3" ceiling is an acceptable price to pay to save thousands of dollars and not worry about cracking my slab.

Please don't anyone think I'm just being stubborn -- I'm really not trying to cheat physics. I just need to establish what all of my options are.

Several months ago I had the pleasure of speaking with the renowned high end home theater designer Keith Yates -- he told me (paraphrasing) that my challenge will achieving 80% of my isolation at 20% of the cost, then determining how much of the additional 20% of isolation to pursue. Man, he was so right about that! :roll:

By the way, I played drums yesterday for the first time in a year at the Skip's Music Weekend Warriors Open Jam, and it was a :D blast :D -- someone even wanted me to join an established band! (I declined, citing this project of mine!) Hopefully things will work out and I'll be in the program this month for a few weeks. It was a nice diversion and a great reminder about the point of this whole thing -- something I sometimes lose sight of amidst all the drawings and studying and such.
knightfly
Senior Member
Posts: 6976
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 11:11 am
Location: West Coast, USA

Post by knightfly »

Stop screwing around, go buy a 5/8" long shank masonry bit, put it in your drill, and drill a freakin' hole through your slab almost anywhere; then take a piece of coat hanger, bend a 1/4" long "L" on one end, stick it through the hole and "hook" the underside of the slab; mark the coathanger at the surface of the slab, measure the depth of the slab, and report back...

While you're buying the masonry bit, pick up a box of Concrete FixAll (gray box, not the green one) and when you're done measuring, mix a batch and cram it down the hole; fill to the top, plus a bit more, then strike it off flush with a putty knife and let it cure.

Once you know what you REALLY have, we can continue the debate -

Also, I would NOT cut your slab and pour piers; all that will give you is a chance to support your entire floor/room weight on even SMALLER surface area, more likely to sink... STeve
cadesignr
Senior Member
Posts: 566
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 4:25 pm
Location: Oregon USA

Post by cadesignr »

Also, I would NOT cut your slab and pour piers; all that will give you is a chance to support your entire floor/room weight on even SMALLER surface area, more likely to sink... STeve

Whats the difference whether its a point load on a 4" slab, or a point load on a 12" deep pier, with a 16" base?


But thats why I said..."PRO approval".
well, I guess you got it Keith :lol: Of course, on the other hand.. if the slab isn't thick enough I guess you take your chances with that. At least piers can be engineered. But Steve knows best. I only tried to offer an alternative.

fitZ
:)
alright, breaks over , back on your heads......
Dan Fitzpatrick
Senior Member
Posts: 601
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:07 am
Location: Bay Area, California
Contact:

Post by Dan Fitzpatrick »

keith, how can you go from floating 6-inch concrete to not floating the floor at all? this is clearly despair, not logic talking. :P you can't give up man, you're my hero!

i suggest you talk to an engineer at this point, i bet it will give you that warm-all-over feeling you've been missing! 8) of course i say this having no idea what that costs ... :?

and oh man, i think i'd rather do the whole slab than a bunch of little holes ... sorry fitZ!! :lol:
sharward
Moderator
Posts: 4281
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Sacramento, Northern California, USA
Contact:

Post by sharward »

I'm not giving up on anything yet, folks. I'm just trying to fully understand the ramifications of all my options. There are pros and cons to each of them -- in some cases, the significance of the cons may cause the options to disqualify themselves. Then I'll choose the option that will give me the most bang for my buck and the least amount of aggrivation from the bureaucrats.

Steve, you're right about needing the critical fact of how thick my slab truly is. That's something I will be looking into further, quite possibly using the method you proposed.

fitZ, I do appreciate your ideas and will keep them on the table, perhaps entertaining modifications to address the concerns already raised.

Dan, your encouragement means a lot and I'm sure you speak for many others who have been following the saga.

A coworker of mine has a friend who's getting his Masters degree in structural engineering -- I'll be contacting him to see if this project interests him at all.

I'll probably also make a couple of calls to ballpark the costs of following Rod's suggestion -- removing that area of the garage floor altogether and pouring a new, reinforced slab that is definitely able to withstand the load. I suspect that it will break the bank, but I need to establish that dollar amount anyway to determine how high the sky really is.
sharward
Moderator
Posts: 4281
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Sacramento, Northern California, USA
Contact:

<5000!

Post by sharward »

Woo-hoo! 8) Over 5000 views now! Even more than The Almighty "Reference Area" Thread!

I know, I know -- this one has many views because of the number of pages -- but hey, I'll take it any way I can get. ;-)

Seriously though -- if you haven't already read the Reference Area thread, read this and watch your brain expand!
rod gervais
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:48 am
Location: Central Village CT
Contact:

Re: Don't Shoot Me...

Post by rod gervais »

sharward wrote: Also, the soil in my area is heavy clay, if that is a factor.
Awww.......... ya had ta go and do it...........

It's even more important now that you contact a local structural engineer.

Heavy clay can cause some real problems........ it's what's known as "expansive soil", and dpending on ground water can (under the RIGHT conditions) cause as much as 2 or 3 inches of vertical movement in a structural slab.

Some buildings have to be constructed on piles (or cassions) when that soil is prevelant (this is to get the structural bearing below the clay) and then none of the structure is allowed to carry on building slabs.

I am not saying this is the case necessarily in your area - it does depend on ground water travel - but trust me you don't want to make any final descisions before you speak with someone who knows exactly what is going on in your neck of the woods.

Sincerely,

Rod
Ignore the man behind the curtain........
Post Reply