Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: UBC Section 1633.2.8

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
We have been asked to clarify this same requirement on several occasions,
especially since it would be difficult(!) to hook around the reinforcing steel
in a retrofit situation.  That particular code section makes no mention of
anchors or bolts, only to straps leading me to believe that they are talking
about PA type connections (anyone still doing that?).  Susan Dowty at ICBO
thought, if I remember correctly, that they may want to have the potential
pullout cone overlap with some wall reinforcement to transfer the load into
the steel.  This type of confinement does help the anchor strength.

Howard Silverman
Covert Operations, Inc.
(800) 827-7229

In a message dated 10/12/98 9:22:24 AM, you wrote:

<<Greetings All,

I just attended a seminar put on by SEAO here in Portland that talked about
many of the seismic provisions in the 1997 UBC.  One of the provisions that
prompted much discussion and disagreement was Section 1633.2.8, which states
in part that for masonry and concrete walls "...in Seismic Zones 3 and 4,
diaphragm to wall anchorage using embedded straps shall have the straps
attached to or hooked around the reinforcing steel or otherwise terminated to
effectively transfer forces to the reinforcing steel.".  It was the "or
otherwise terminated" part that caused the disagreement.  Some felt that the
strap had to be hooked around or physically attached to the reinforcing steel.
Others said that it was necessary only to have the reinforcing steel cross the
strap's shear cone.  I would like to hear other opinions.

Kipp Martin, P. E.  
>>