I'd stop construction and sort the engineering before going any further. I'm predicting bigger (& even more expensive) cock up's if you keep going!

Engineering should be finalised before construction is even started!! At least then adjustments made during construction are minimised.

Now, see engineer and ask if the columns can be done how designer has drawn them. They are now quite 'straight' but do look more achievable from an engineering view point..... The designer should've run his vision past an engineer before even council DA..... again 'cart before the horse...'

Engineers do 'over engineer' so there could be some scope to adjust back to the designers way or perhaps have the structure above connecting to the columns, have each end cantilevered so the engineers columns are unchanged but utilise the existing footing which is what you suggested in 2.?

Well 24hrs later, great meeting with our architect, an a good bit of laterial thinking and we think we have a solution. But it all depends on the engineer who took it on herself to change this away from anatomy's design .

So thoughts are seeing that we have 2 plates in a huge concrete pad in the ground with the big very deep piers . Why not get another bigger piece of steel plate that goes from one plate to the other. Make it slightly smaller to enable at full perimeter weld , plus chemi weld between plate and to stop any thrust movement we drill thru both plate and insert at least 36mm rio and butt weld a series of them. than we can move columns back to original position or as near as possible dependent on load forces.

On the question of who was to blame engineer took it upon herself to change it without notifying anyone because it made it easier to get figures to work. was the excuse given. How it got this far thru so many set of eye of council and private certification and not noticed until i called for cad file amazed me.

So lesson learnt.

To any professionals that would like to add to this if they think any better solution please do as i have only a week before we push ahead.

Thank you in advance.

The main problem seems to be one of communication in the design team.

I am an architect, not an engineer, but I can well see why the engineer changed the angle of the supports. The design as intended is inherently unstable and would put immense bending moments at the interface of the columns and the foundation. Lowering the point of confluence of the columns even just a little would reduce these stresses greatly.

I am curious as to why this structure is balancing on a single point - an inverted pyramid is bound to fall one day!

Our inspiration came from this house in japan

Hear what your saying, but engineer change it without notify the design team. As for it moving i doubt it with the amount of steel and concrete in the ground. Piers under columns go down 8m and 800mm wide. The pad is 4m*2m*2m

We had 50 degrees and she made 30 ruining concept look.

OK, so 2 pads side by side, that makes a lot of difference to the stability! One option would have been to make a saddle plate over the pier top for the columns, but the columns would still need to be extended down the sides of the pier to reach it. Communication was the problem but it sounds like you've got it sorted. It will still have that same dramatic cantilever and I'm sure you will still be pleased with the end result in the long run.

Hi Doug,

Another thought would be to ask engineer about adding gusset plates (either or top and bottom) as seen on the original but perhaps larger, many elegant solutions use gussets to strengthen the junction connection - tend to look like 'fins'. If engineer cannot provide an alternatives then up to you to provide options.

Hi Anatoly, barry had meeting with her friday and she has been given till next friday to fix all faults. I will advise him of this idea too. Thanks again for chat.

the house in Japan has the stilts towards the centre of the build, not on the outside..would make a difference to the forces..