We have a fairly large balcony, 8-9 square meters, where the previous owners had laid paving stones! Not very nice, I thought, and quite heavy too. When I removed a stone - maybe 50x50 and thick - I discovered to my horror that there was sand underneath. A thick layer, 4-5 cm, of WET sand. Water and snow have run down between the stones and probably never dried out. We have now taken down some of the stones and carried down the sand in large bags. It seems like it never ends! All of this must have weighed quite a lot; my guess is more than 2 tons. There were also some balcony furniture, a large wooden table, and small pots that also weigh something. If you're allowed 100 kg/sqm, we would need a twice as large balcony to handle the load. The balcony rests on three brick pillars and is anchored to the facade in some way as well. What could the heavy load (over decades) have done to the balcony? Is it safe to be there at all? What kind of expert should we consult? And last but not least, who should pay? Perhaps we should have inspected under the stones before buying, but who does that? Even the stones themselves were, of course, a big load, but the wet sand certainly doesn't help. Could the former owner have violated any regulations with their construction? Can we then demand that they do something about it?
Sorry if I seem stupid, but two tons isn't much, is it? If the balcony is made of concrete and 10 cm thick, the balcony itself weighs at least 240 kg/m2. Brick withstands a lot of pressure. Then of course, the question is how it is anchored to the house.
Instead of carrying the sand, maybe one of those chutes typically used during apartment renovations is an option. Just pour it down. Any coarse pipe should work, right?
Instead of carrying the sand, maybe one of those chutes typically used during apartment renovations is an option. Just pour it down. Any coarse pipe should work, right?
It is stated in some building code, issued by the state? that balconies may be loaded with a maximum of 100kg/sqm, including balcony furniture, pots, and people. On 10 sqm, that's one ton, and then we have double the load than what is allowed. This may be excessive caution with that standard, but better that than having the balcony collapse one fine day. It's not just a question of what the brick pillars can bear, but the entire structure with anchoring in the facade and everything; there must be some limit to how much the balcony can bear.
What kind of house is it? Is there a possibility that the balcony is designed for the stone paving?
i.e., did they build the house themselves?
But if there are no visible damages to the bricks, it's probably not a problem. What might happen (besides it giving way immediately, which it hasn't) is that the balcony slab and other load-bearing elements may deform over time. In other words, creep. If this had happened, the brick facade (?) would likely have cracked, which would be clearly visible.
i.e., did they build the house themselves?
But if there are no visible damages to the bricks, it's probably not a problem. What might happen (besides it giving way immediately, which it hasn't) is that the balcony slab and other load-bearing elements may deform over time. In other words, creep. If this had happened, the brick facade (?) would likely have cracked, which would be clearly visible.
Member
· Västerbottens län
· 18 047 posts
If the balcony was NOT originally made for paving stones + sand, then the "floor height" should be 15 cm higher than what would be practical for a balcony.
If the current height (with stone and sand) is correct in relation to the indoor floor, then one must hope that the structural calculation has taken into account the extra weight of stone and sand.
If you now remove the stone and sand, you will "fill" it with something else (wood perhaps).
Protte
If the current height (with stone and sand) is correct in relation to the indoor floor, then one must hope that the structural calculation has taken into account the extra weight of stone and sand.
If you now remove the stone and sand, you will "fill" it with something else (wood perhaps).
Protte
It is a stone house with a plaster facade from 1952. The cobblestones and the sand underneath are a later construction, perhaps from the 1970s. I don't think any structural calculations were made; it's a DIY project. The owners probably thought the cobblestones looked nice, tastes vary, and the sand was laid underneath to get the right slope so that rainwater would run off. However, it hasn't done that, instead seeping in between the stones and staying there. We've removed the stones now, and it's still damp underneath, despite the warm and dry weather. The balcony doesn't have a roof, so all the rain and snow come right in. The stones themselves probably weigh about 1 ton, 96 x 15-20 kilos, and the wet sand likely weighs as much? The balcony was originally built to support its own weight, plus some furniture and flowers, not 2 tons of stones and sand. It seems like quite a significant extra load that has been there for 30 years, possibly deforming the supporting structure? However, there are no visible cracks, either on the facade or the brick pillars under the balcony. We plan to replace the stones with some kind of wooden floor; it doesn't even weigh half as much and is also more comfortable to walk on.
But it's not a cantilevered balcony you have. It's resting on columns. With the right reinforcement, you can certainly put 20 tons on it without it breaking. It's a big difference from a balcony that extends from a wall and is cantilevered, which probably is the norm you've read about.