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

Re: Foundation Min. reinforcement

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

You are absolutely right. In fact it was I who was refering to an old code
requirement, which has survived in my office practice.  The exception has been
permitted in special moment frames since 1995.  Thanks again for correcting me.

BTW, is there any other DOG on the list who agrees with me on keeping the old
requirement for this one and doing away with the exception?

 S A Masroor
 Consulting Structural Engineer
 Karachi, Pakistan

Scott Maxwell wrote:

> Actually, I don't believe that is true.  Section 10.5.3 (the 1/3 higher by
> analysis) still is an exception even for flexural members in special
> moment least according to ACI 318-99.  Section
> states:
> "At any section of a flexural member, except as provided in 10.5.3, for
> top as well as for bottom reinforcment, the amount of reinforcement shall
> not be less than that given by Eq. (10-3) but not less than 200bw*d/fy,
> and the reinforcement ratio (rho) shall not exceed 0.025.  At least two
> bars shall be provided continuously both top and bottom"
> This section is basically repeating the requirements of section 10.5.1 and
> the exception permitted by section 10.5.3.
> Now, all of this may have changed in 318-02...I haven't taken a close look
> at it to see if anything in this area has changed.
> HTH,
> Scott
> Ypsilanti, MI

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at:
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********