Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Anchor Bolts in CMU

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I have sat in presentations by the masonry people in code development in the past. There have been many tests much more recent than the 1997 Design of Masonry Structures. The tests which led up to the NEHRP, IBC, ACI 530-02 were predicated on anchor bolts in concrete. As a minimum, the prism strengths should be correlated to compressive cylinder strengths. But this area needs a lot of work.

Harold Sprague

From: "Catherine Pagni" <CPagni(--nospam--at)>
Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Subject: RE: Anchor Bolts in CMU
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 13:01:15 -0700

Pullout and shear test results of both bent and headed anchor bolts are
presented in Chapter 5 of the 1997 Design of Reinforced Masonry
Structures published by the Concrete Masonry Association of California
and Nevada.

Brief discussion of the UBC requirements is also included.

I wonder if an ICBO Evaluation Report would provide a criterion for
spacing of pantented A.B.s? In so, might this criterion be applied to
threaded rods?

Catherine Pagni, MSCE
PACE Civil, Inc.
Redding, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 12:35 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: RE: Anchor Bolts in CMU

I have always been troubled by the way the masonry people do what the do
the code development process.  Their methodology is no different than
concrete.  Spacing and all.  The problem is when you assume f'm is the
as f'c.  I wish they would do some anchor research in this area.  I
use the same reductions as the ACI 318.

Harold Sprague

>From: "Joe Grill" <jgrill(--nospam--at)>
>Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
>To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
>Subject: Anchor Bolts in CMU
>Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:09:44 -0700
>I am looking at the anchor bolt requirements in ACI 530/02 and in
>the shear requirements.  There are requirements for reduction of shear
>to edge distance, but nothing is said about reduction for spacing.  The
>had requirements for reductions for spacing less that 8 bolt diameters.

>commentary on the ACI document talks about a reduction for edge
>less that 12 bolt diameters due to developing a full cone.  I would
>that this would also apply to spacing even though the commentary only
>mentions edge distance.  Am I right?
>Joseph R. Grill, PE

Check out the latest news, polls and tools in the MSN 2004 Election Guide!

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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: ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********