TheSwamp
CAD Forums => CAD General => Topic started by: Rob... on October 15, 2007, 04:47:38 PM
-
Be careful to designate your revision clouds. :lmao:
-
I still think that's a photoshopping.
-
Also see this -> http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=140.msg194612#msg194612
-
Photoshop....shadows are way off. :| :roll:
-
I don't think it's a photoshop job, myself. I think what you're looking at is water seepage. It also looks like the white stuff is lime or some kind of residue from the cement... I dunno...
-
looks like they were trying to find reinforcing
-
Yeah, who knows... Maybe they needed a hole that big and drilling a bunch of holes was the best way to do it. I've done something similar with ceramic tile. Still, it's funny to think that someone was that absent minded to do that from a rev cloud.
-
looks like they were trying to find reinforcing
That's another reason I think it's a photoshop. I am new to structural concrete design... but typically, I don't think you would have concrete spanning much of -any- distance without at least the minimum steel required per area of slab, let alone a floor or whatever that may be.
On top of that.. who cuts that shape, really? It could happen... but come on.
Also I agree that the shadows conflict with each other.
But I agree it is a good photoshop job, very detailed, and otherwise hilarious.
... What M-Dub says about drilling 8 holes, or however would be the smartest way to make that shape... but man... why would you :-D
-
... What M-Dub says about drilling 8 holes, or however would be the smartest way to make that shape... but man... why would you :-D
I mean, this picture was taken right after the drilling and before they cut off all the little 'triangular' pieces, assuming that they wanted a square hole for some reason or another. You're right about the rebar, though.
-
looks like they were trying to find reinforcing
That's another reason I think it's a photoshop. I am new to structural concrete design... but typically, I don't think you would have concrete spanning much of -any- distance without at least the minimum steel required per area of slab, let alone a floor or whatever that may be.
If you know it's there, there is no need to look. But if someone may have poured a floor without it, you need to make sure.
Also I agree that the shadows conflict with each other.
Having taken quite a few flash photos, I see nothing incongruent in the shadows.
... What M-Dub says about drilling 8 holes, or however would be the smartest way to make that shape... but man... why would you :-D
if all you have is a four inch hole saw....
-
Also I agree that the shadows conflict with each other.
Having taken quite a few flash photos, I see nothing incongruent in the shadows.
Nor do I...
Seepage. (That's a cool word... unless you're explaining why your pants are wet)
-
... What M-Dub says about drilling 8 holes, or however would be the smartest way to make that shape... but man... why would you :-D
I mean, this picture was taken right after the drilling and before they cut off all the little 'triangular' pieces, assuming that they wanted a square hole for some reason or another. You're right about the rebar, though.
I don't know enough about concrete forming and such, but I also wonder why they wouldn't have formed that cutout initially... I guess it could be a revision, or mistake by the contractor... but I dunno.
As the 'benefit of the doubt' of the accuracy of the photo, it could be someone actively looking for reinforcement, of the suspicion that the contractor did not put any, and is coring over and over to find some... but I don't think you would make a square pattern of drills... you would really only need makes holes in one direction, then if none found, drill in the perpendicular direction... but no need to complete the square.
I hate over analyzing stuff like this... why can't I just laugh and move on.. :roll:
-
... What M-Dub says about drilling 8 holes, or however would be the smartest way to make that shape... but man... why would you :-D
I mean, this picture was taken right after the drilling and before they cut off all the little 'triangular' pieces, assuming that they wanted a square hole for some reason or another. You're right about the rebar, though.
I don't know enough about concrete forming and such, but I also wonder why they wouldn't have formed that cutout initially... I guess it could be a revision, or mistake by the contractor... but I dunno.
Or retro-fitting an existing structure.
As the 'benefit of the doubt' of the accuracy of the photo, it could be someone actively looking for reinforcement, of the suspicion that the contractor did not put any, and is coring over and over to find some... but I don't think you would make a square pattern of drills... you would really only need makes holes in one direction, then if none found, drill in the perpendicular direction... but no need to complete the square.
Seemed like the thing to do at the time, or they needed to make the hole big enough to take a picture.
-
Also I agree that the shadows conflict with each other.
Having taken quite a few flash photos, I see nothing incongruent in the shadows.
It seems to me that if it were a flash photo, there would be no shadow on the upper half of the back of the hole... unless that IS water saturation... but I can't put my finger on it exactly, but it seems too much like shadow. The lines it makes... the darkness... I am not sure, what it is.
The dropped shadow from the top (nearest) edge of the hole seems most inconsistent... what is it reflecting on? The ceiling in the background? If so, that shadow is far too sharp. It would most likely be much more blurred, I am thinking.
-
Here's what I think...
The shadow comes from the flash of the camera because the flash is ABOVE the lens. I bet if the camera was upside down, you wouldn't see the shadow... (Don't quote me on that though)
-
Looks like some anal-retentive laborer (I know, it's an oxymoron) with a hammerdrill, and a core bit.
Nice consistent work though.
-
I thought I had some other slab cut photo's from another job, but I can't find them at the moment.
I must have deleted them :-o
The white powder is from the cutting process when they are using the water for heat/lubrication.
The picture is at least a day later after everything has dried out. This process is very messy
and water is all over the place. I don't think they used as much water as with the process
in the photo's I've taken.
As far as reinforcing, I believe there is some in there. If you look in the far cuts. there are symmetrical dots
about every hole (right-side). Would most likely be wire mesh. Also, in looking at the wall, it's composition
is that of brick so this building is most likely pretty darn old. We don't There could be a wall right behind the
camera.
Working out in the field, if you have to cut a slab opening and only have a core drill, you are going to use it.
Time is money and to wait a day to get a wetsaw can cause delays.
I agree that M-dubs shadows are possible given that my beam has that same shadow.
The one that throws it off is where the green line points. Either the camera position is very high,
or something from above is casting another shadow. The other thought, it maybe this originally was
just 4 holes and someone expanded it to make it rectangular.
Either way, it is still funny. Real or edited
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2158/1591200544_d2b0718a38.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2366/1590316559_a4b2cb73b1.jpg)
-
The dropped shadow from the top (nearest) edge of the hole seems most inconsistent... what is it reflecting on? The ceiling in the background?
the wall just beyond the hole directly above the masonry.
-
nope, it's a revcloud alright.
-
nope, it's a revcloud alright.
:-D
-
Nice explanation, Pieter. :)
The one that throws it off is where the green line points. Either the camera position is very high,
or something from above is casting another shadow. The other thought, it maybe this originally was
just 4 holes and someone expanded it to make it rectangular.
I'm thinking that the part that the green line is pointing to is water, not a shadow. When you get cement wet, it gets darker. Does no one else see this? Maybe I'm wrong, but... ?
nope, it's a revcloud alright.
:-D
-
M-dub , understand your point, but have to disagree,
concrete density IMO would not allow that sort of moisture penetration,
If it were water I would expect to see a feathering out of the seepage not a distinct line.
The coring process is usually with a water cooled blade (as pieter said) that wash effect to the u/s slab and it has already dried
so the exposed sides would/should be dry as well....
photoshop/real still pretty funny..
-
M-dub , understand your point, but have to disagree,
concrete density IMO would not allow that sort of moisture penetration,
If it were water I would expect to see a feathering out of the seepage not a distinct line.
The coring process is usually with a water cooled blade (as pieter said) that wash effect to the u/s slab and it has already dried
so the exposed sides would/should be dry as well....
two side cut, the slab is too thick for a hole saw to cut all the way through, cut one side then the other.
-
two side cut, the slab is too thick for a hole saw to cut all the way through, cut one side then the other.
Thats one piddly little saw :-D
-
two side cut, the slab is too thick for a hole saw to cut all the way through, cut one side then the other.
Thats one piddly little saw :-D
as the hole gets deeper more surface area of the blade is in contact with the sides of the hole causing considerably more load on the tool. Not to mention the max depth for most hole saws of that diameter is a little over three inches.
-
After looking at the picture using software designed to test for variations in the pictures that would indicate the photo was edited, I feel that it is indeed edited.
The most compelling evidence is the obvious cut lines when the pixels are masked. Note the dark lines following the contour of the cuts. Further review also indicates that the background as seen through the "hole" is also not part of the original picture.
-
it does however have some stuff hanging from the holes (right around 9 o'clock of the hole)
-
Here we go
Not to mention the max depth for most hole saws of that diameter
what would your estimate of the diameter be ?
max depth for most hole saws of that diameter is a little over three inches.
care to back that up..
I need one of those pokey stick smileys
-
it does however have some stuff hanging from the holes (right around 9 o'clock of the hole)
And the hangy stuff casts a shadow as well.
Ok, how 'bout this theory.
On Thursday, Frank, under the order of Randy, cuts half way through the floor from below. He finishes his work and goes home for the day. On Friday, he arrives to finish the job. Again, using water (or other coolant), he finishes the holes and his job is complete. Since he made the cuts from below the day before, the lower half of each hole is dry. The upper half is still wet from the fresh cuts. Since Randy had given Frank crap for not completing work in the past, he takes a picture of it as proof. This is why Randy will now tell us the real story because he has known all along!
Amateurs! :-D
Ok, so it's a little far fetched. I still say it's not a fake and that the dark half of the hole is a liquid of some sort, but not necessarily seeing through the concrete.
I can't believe how many times I've posted some degree of an argument to this thread! :roll: :)
-
I need one of those pokey stick smileys
(http://www.theswamp.org/screens/index.php?dir=&file=pokeit.gif)
http://www.theswamp.org/screens/index.php?dir=&file=pokeit.gif
-
I need one of those pokey stick smileys
(http://www.theswamp.org/screens/index.php?dir=&file=pokeit.gif)
http://www.theswamp.org/screens/index.php?dir=&file=pokeit.gif
Aww, C'mon Kerry! You can't just come in here and poke someone with a stick and not say anything! ( I know... you just did ) But what do you think???
-
........................
Aww, C'mon Kerry! You can't just come in here and poke someone with a stick and not say anything! ( I know... you just did ) But what do you think???
I thought the ambiguity of who was poking whom was slightly mirthful. :-P
-
I can't believe how many times I've posted some degree of an argument to this thread! :roll: :)
I agree, I do think **part of it is real** and part of it is fake
And no, it was not cut halfway from the top down then bottom up.
A hole like this would **normally** be drilled with a core drill which would
have more then 3" of travel which can have bits that are 12"+ in depth.
It's also an interesting thing to watch. I was on a job site where they were
cutting 8" slab about the size of an elevator shaft. As they cut the slabs in about
2' widths, it would drop down onto the next floor! :-o :?
After the first few floors, the general contractor asked the slab cutting company
to support the slab while cutting and not to drop it to the next floor...
pieter
-
The only thing I have to add....
If they were looking to locate / find out if rebar exists, why wouldn't they just use a metal detector?
Even the cheapest of them could find rebar.
craigr
-
The only thing I have to add....
If they were looking to locate / find out if rebar exists, why wouldn't they just use a metal detector?
Even the cheapest of them could find rebar.
craigr
That doesn't tell you where it is though. Whether or not the steel is in the top or bottom of the slab is important to a slab's design, so often that's something important for an engineer to check on. I know of a couple contractors who do not use welded wire fabric in their slabs... they request that we design them with rebar, because they do not feel that WWF is good enough. I'm told the process for placing WWF is that they lay it down on the compacted soil or sand, before the pour... basically pour the concrete down on top of the WWF... then shove a broomstick with a hook on the end down into the freshly poured concrete and pull the WWF up to the approx. level. This creates varying elevations of reinforcement and is not good.
Since steel is strong in tension, you want it to be where the slab will be in tension, to reinforce the concrete which is weak in tension. So the backside of the "bend" off the concrete will be steel-reinforced. Thus you would want the steel on the bottom of a slab that is used to span a long length, I would assume (that's coming from a glorified CAD Tech, not an engineer, so take that for whatever it's worth)
-
We core drill through precast planks 1' thick.
Now if it really was a revision cloud I ask this...who makes their revision clouds with the exact same radius "cloud puffs"?
I think it's a ductwork cut through.
-
We core drill through precast planks 1' thick.
Now if it really was a revision cloud I ask this...who makes their revision clouds with the exact same radius "cloud puffs"?
I think it's a ductwork cut through.
If you use a predrawn polyline to create the revcloud from, it makes uniform "puffs" but I think if they weren't uniform, the contractor would take a little liberty in the creation, and use a single hole-saw or core drill.. rather than taking to time to finely craft such an artsy fartsy hole. That would be what I expect anyways... unless I provided a detailed drawing dimensioning the radius of each curve, the inner bounding box, and outer or whatever "convenient" (I use that term loosely) measurements would aide in creation of that feature.
-
Now if it really was a revision cloud I ask this...who makes their revision clouds with the exact same radius "cloud puffs"?
We do...
Just happens to be a nice lisp routine that we use. No extra clicking. Pick your arc length and go.
-
We core drill through precast planks 1' thick.
Our plumbers core drill through 8-10" poured walls when they have to.
-
We core drill through precast planks 1' thick.
Our plumbers core drill through 8-10" poured walls when they have to.
Really? I just punch walls that thin.
-
We core drill through precast planks 1' thick.
Our plumbers core drill through 8-10" poured walls when they have to.
Really? I just punch walls that thin.
doesn't that hurt your knuckles?
-
We core drill through precast planks 1' thick.
Our plumbers core drill through 8-10" poured walls when they have to.
Really? I just punch walls that thin.
doesn't that hurt your knuckles?
A real man does what it takes to get the job done.
-
Your identity is no longer a secret, Mr. Josh Norris! :-D
-
Your identity is no longer a secret, Mr. Josh Norris! :-D
Ever since I grew a beard... I just feel more powerful!
-
Did your voice change too?
-
Ever since I grew a beard... I just feel more powerful!
This would just be too easy. :-)
-
Maybe I should have specified... 'let my beard grow out' :-D
-
Maybe I should have specified... 'let my beard grow out' :-D
That Oreo desert commercial for Domino's comes to mind....
-
Maybe I should have specified... 'let my beard grow out' :-D
That Oreo desert commercial for Domino's comes to mind....
:-D :-D
That one made me laugh.
-
Now if it really was a revision cloud I ask this...who makes their revision clouds with the exact same radius "cloud puffs"?
We do...
Just happens to be a nice lisp routine that we use. No extra clicking. Pick your arc length and go.
You mean, like the built-in REVCLOUD command? :wink:
-
Is the built-in RevCloud command an LT thing only?
craigr
-
Is the built-in RevCloud command an LT thing only?
craigr
nah, it's in the full version too. It uses varying Revcloud arcs... (hence the min-max settings) but I've found that picking an object gives you uniform 'curves' too
-
Is the built-in RevCloud command an LT thing only?
craigr
nah, it's in the full version too. It uses varying Revcloud arcs... (hence the min-max settings) but I've found that picking an object gives you uniform 'curves' too
Or you set min/max to the same value, then you get uniform arcs no matter the method of creation.
-
Now if it really was a revision cloud I ask this...who makes their revision clouds with the exact same radius "cloud puffs"?
We do...
Just happens to be a nice lisp routine that we use. No extra clicking. Pick your arc length and go.
You mean, like the built-in REVCLOUD command? :wink:
That would be the one! :)
So, my guess is that LOTS of people should... or could say "We do"
-
Is the built-in RevCloud command an LT thing only?
craigr
nah, it's in the full version too. It uses varying Revcloud arcs... (hence the min-max settings) but I've found that picking an object gives you uniform 'curves' too
Or you set min/max to the same value, then you get uniform arcs no matter the method of creation.
crikey, that does work... I could have swore that I tried that long ago and it returned an error o.0... oh well... thanks for the tip!
-
The only thing I have to add....
If they were looking to locate / find out if rebar exists, why wouldn't they just use a metal detector?
Even the cheapest of them could find rebar.
craigr
That doesn't tell you where it is though. ...
Actually there are detectors that will locate a bar to within an inch of it true location... unless the concrete employs additional metal fiber reinforcement.
-
We have a local geotech company that has a portable device that can locate and size rebars and WWM to a depth of 12" without degrading the concrete. The testing is expensive (about $700 for a few spot checks) but we have had to utilize their services to verify pours when the contractor did not have the pour inspected prior to the placement of the concrete. The contractor gets to acting really stupid when they get the bill, but it is the only recourse other than digging it all up and starting over.