|
From a structural engineering perspective, one of the whole points of pole construction is that poles embedded in the ground provide a moment resisting force along with the ability to carry a gravity load. The posts resist forces from the side, as well as forces trying to push them down into the ground. This allows you to build a structure without worrying about bracing the walls against shear loads, and to use plain metal siding instead of plywood. The trusses are typically just set in place atop the poles, with no moment transfer from wall to roof. (Contrast with metal truss buildings like "Miracle truss"). There is little or no cross bracing employed in typical pole structures. If you try to "jack up" a pole structure, you will dis-embed the poles from the ground and destroy the ability of the walls to resist the forces of wind blowing perpendicular to them. The whole building will fall down like a house of cards in the first strong wind. If you've ever build a stud wall for regular frame construction, and stood it up on the deck by itself, you have seen how flimsy a plain wall is to perpendicular forces, without provisions for cross bracing. Compare it to the guardrail on the side of the highway, in which the embedded posts are very effective at resisting forces perpendicular to the row of posts. If you were to put a new post next to each existing post, you would have to find a way to dig down as deep as the base of the existing post, and embed the new post just as effectively as before. Setting the posts in concrete is one way, but this has its own set of problems, especially in a wet area. Next, you would have to find a way to tie the new posts to the existing structure so that they can carry the gravity and shear loads over from the old posts. This will take more than a few bolts or spikes. I suspect this is more effort than the building is worth. You would be better off figuring out how to drain the water away.
| 
