FLOOD03130 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Figure 4,-6000 Beam Placement were designed with one square inch of free opening per one square foot of enclosed floor space. The design used on 88 percent of the structures elevated on masonry wall founda- tions was a 2 x 2-foot square galvanized sheet metal louver, providing 50 percent free opening with alternating louvers for both filling and drainage of the enclosure with no human inter- vention required (see figure 6). Louvers were placed within 8 inches of the interior grade and at least two louvers were used in each enclosure regardless of the enclosed square footage (see figure 7), Owners were allowed to press-fit I-inch thickness styrofoam panels into the louvered opening from the inte- rior to reduce cold air penetration into the en- closed area beneath the first raised floor (see figure 8). In the event of flooding, these panels would dislodge at low water pressures and per- mit hydraulic equalization to occur, In the case of the other foundation designs (wood post! beam and masonry pier) the area beneath the first floorwas not entirely enclosed or enclosed with wood lattice, allow- ing free passage of flood water both into and out of the space without louvers. grade basement, the existing basement wall was removed, 2 feet below grade and a new footing was constructed on top of the existing wall before laying the new foundation block. The existing basement floor was fractured and the basement area was filled with compacted free-draining material to the elevation of the exterior grade. Interiorsupport- ing masonry or steel pipe col- umns, when required, were founded on unfractured por- tions of the existing basement floor or on new footings and extended to the required design height (see figure 5). ~~ , \. ~'~" -::---;::---~ W::O~G.te~~ , --~~~~-=-=-- Flood Louvers An integral part of the solid waIl foundation design was the equalization of hydrostatic wa- ter pressures between the inte- rior enclosure and the exterior flood heights. With the excep- tion of using a veneer wall to "dry" flood proof a church, the entire Tug Fork Valley flood proofing program was based upon elevation with flooding below the first floor. In the case of the solid ma- sonry wall foundation system, openings to allow filling and drainage of the enclosed area Figure 5,-lntenor Column \...A{;, ~oL-r~ 2}' 10 ~NOA~ WE1Grl1f ~t::.t.: COl-UMN (r\-\A ~ ~e/ ~ XS' A~~ ~L:f~ s. '2- #4 i3A'?6 et>a-I WA'-? 7