Talk:Slip forming

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCE articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Geographic clarification needed[edit]

This article could benefit from some clarification on the countries in which the examples are referring to. 206.174.199.186 (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup needed[edit]

The article so laden with convoluted syntax, grammatic errors and punctuation errors that it is a chore to read, despite its brevity. The overall effect is absolutely repulsive. It reads like a candidate for the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest. I'd take a shot at it if I were in a better mood, but not now.—Quicksilver^{T @} 14:02, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The New Wilshire Grand site in Los Angeles[edit]

Longest continuous pour is not slip forming and I originally removed it from the article. The response on my talk has been moved here to have a more detailed conversation with other editors allowed to enter the conversation.XFEM Skier (talk) 06:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you did not read the Los Angles Times article. "Other foundations are commonly poured in sequences and connected with reinforcing steel and ancillary slabs of concrete, but the engineers for the New Wilshire Grand insisted this foundation be created in one piece to provide the tower with greater structural support." This is slip forming.The Stroll (talk) 02:06, 16 February 2014 (UTC)The Stroll[reply]

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-concrete-pour-planned-world-record-20140214,0,3352632.story#ixzz2tRirh0gt

The title of the LA Times articleThe Stroll (talk) 02:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC) had a 20 hour pour and I also had the information concerning a 20 hour pour in the paragraph. That is slip forming.[reply]

The Stroll (talk) 02:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC) (moved here by from my talk page XFEM Skier (talk) 06:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC))[reply]

The article describes continuous pouring which in an of itself is not slip forming. It is just a monolithic pour. A home foundation is a monolithic pour but it not slip forming. The form needs to move along as the concrete is placed and sets. The picture in this article http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/la-crews-aim-for-largest-continuous-concrete-pour/2014/02/15/6749760a-96b2-11e3-ae45-458927ccedb6_story.html you can see that they are just pouring a large mat in one big pour this is not slip forming. The forms are not moving which is critical to it being slip forming. A hope foundation is poured monolithically as well but it is not slip forming either. Lets resolve this before adding it to this article. XFEM Skier (talk) 06:11, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]