"Better" Pier and Beam foundation system

[North Sask]

A lot of owner-builders seem to end up selecting a wooden pier and beam foundation for their project (it's cheap and simple, right?). The drawbacks of that system (poor lateral load resistance, possible bearing capacity issues and/or differential settlement, etc) have been pointed out many times by some of the experienced members on this forum.

I came across an interesting take on the pier and beam foundation that may benefit some owner builders.



I found it on the website of a structural engineering firm, and the true source is the APA Homeowners' Guide for Earthquake Safeguards (1992). It seems to me that this would be a step in the right direction if someone was planning to build a pier and beam foundation.

[Don_P]

It is not good construction and there are specific prohibitions against it. This is from a retrofit article to address known failures and is being used to advocate a poor form of work in new construction, how bright is that? That drawing simply connects the hinges together in the poorest forms of work but doesn't provide any bracing.

From the article;

Lateral support can be achieved by installing 2x4s as diagonal bracing from one post to the next.

As we've seen, most people incorrectly assume that either they don't need to brace them or that a few nails can brace a building against lateral loads. This is an engineer required method of construction for good reason, one must be able to calculate the gravity and lateral loads and then provide safe resistance to those loads.

This type of thing is harmful because it lacks ANY quantified design values. I've asked repeatedly for someone to provide that type of design.

[akwoodchuck]

Treated post foundations are proven design and can perform, but I wouldn't recommend anyone build anything as directed by that pic....what's the pier block do, sit on the ground? Awful....