Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Concrete anchorage (ACI 318-99 appendix D)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Forrest:

This is one case where I say where are the bodies? There should be an
exception for wood shear walls.  I do not care what anyone can calculate the
wood post with an HD20 is going to go before the 1.25" rod embedded 36
inches in a foundation wall.

There needs to be an exception in the code for wood frame construction.  I
do not have a 2003 IBC and would like to see if an exception was added to
IBC 1913.3.3.2.  If there is we could do a policy until it adopted in
Anchorage.

Respectfully,

Scott Haan

-----Original Message-----
From: Forrest Braun [mailto:fbraun(--nospam--at)bbfm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 1:09 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Concrete anchorage (ACI 318-99 appendix D)


Jake

I was hoping that there would have been some response on this issue
following your earlier post.  The IBC section 1913.3.3 (ACI D3.3.4 and
5) is indicating for seismic categories C, D, E, and F, that the anchors
are to be designed for the strength of a ductile element.  It appears
that based on these provisions, hold downs in wood shear walls will be
impossible to use since the embedment, and edge distances will not allow
capacities great enough to yield the anchor.

> Jake Watson wrote:
> 
> How many people have though about the new CCD approach and its
> integration into the IBC?  Reading between the lines I have drawn the
> conclusion that the new CCD approach & the IBC wants us to begin to
> think of concrete connections the same way we think of concrete
> beams.  Connections should be designed to fail in a ductile manner.
> We are not necessarily making a better building by over-sizing
> anchors.  But instead, we should design the steel to yield before the
> concrete fails similar to a concrete beam.
> 
> Am I on the right track?  How many people still just use standard
> "over-sized" connections that are strong enough, but don't fail in a
> ductile manner?  Or is this another code provision that will be
> repealed in a few code cycles?  Any thoughts?
> 
> Jake Watson, P.E.
> Salt Lake City, UT

-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Forrest T. Braun, P.E.
BBFM Engineers, Inc.
Ph (907)274-2236
Fx (907)274-2520
Anchorage, Alaska
http://www.bbfm.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. 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: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. 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: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********