Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Shear friction methods in masonry

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Dmitri,
You can bet big money that your note not allowing double 8" blocks will be used in the future and in very large font. Generally the block can be turned 90 degrees to obtain the 16" thickness and the amount of block is no different than two wythes of 8" block.

The original design did contain 12" concrete at the lower 5 ft. or so of the wall with 12" CMU above. But, of course that wasn't acceptable so the wall was re-designed for block full height. The vast majority of foundation wall work here is CMU.

It was interesting that as I was fighting through this I got a call from an engineer in one of our other offices and he was having pretty much the same problem except that his wall had called for 12" CMU and they had installed 8" CMU. The contractor wanted to just add another row of 8" block. It seems he had done this before and had even seen the detail on some "architectural" drawings. Hence the problem around here. I'm guessing it has been approved around here many times by non-engineers.
J. Grill



----- Original Message ----- From: "Dmitri Wright" <dmitri(--nospam--at)pciengineers.com>
To: "Seaint" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:29 PM
Subject: RE: Shear friction methods in masonry


Joe,

I have designed some CMU walls in your part of the world that required a 16" thickness. I was worried that 16" blocks were not available, and that the contractor would build a multi wythe wall exactly as you described. So I made the bottom few feet of the wall 12" concrete, and put 12" block on top of it. I don't care for it, and I doubt the contractor did either, but I expect it will be built correctly. Are 16" blocks readily available in Northern AZ? If so, I won't worry about specifying 16" CMU walls, with a very large note that says double 8" blocks may not be substituted for 16" blocks.

TIA.

Dmitri Wright, PE
Portland, OR



From: "Joe Grill" <jgrill(--nospam--at)swiaz.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: Shear friction methods in masonry

Thanks Nels,
I do understand what you are saying and agree.  What I am dealing with =
here
is a CMU retaining wall that required a 16" thick section at the base. =
The
16" thick section is required to be 5'-4" above the footing and then it
turns into 12" thick for the remainder of the height.  The contractor
(without asking) stacked an 8" CMU section with the intent of stacking
another 8" section next to it to make the 16" thickness.  Of course this =
is
not the same as a full 16" block.  Rather than telling them to take out =
the
first "wythe" of CMU we are looking at making a composite section.  The
first wythe has not been grouted, so there are some things we can do.  =
What
we are looking at is having him sawcut the face shells, vertically, at =
24"
o.c. or maybe 32" o.c. from the first wythe and also from the second =
lift.
This will provide a "header" section between the wythes as the grout is
placed, or as is easier for me to visualize a web section for an "H" =
shaped
section where the flanges are the two wythes of the wall.  Even though =
it
seems that the shear through the Web is within the guidelines for =
section
2.1.5.2.2 of ACI 530, we are also going to ask that dowels (really shear
stirrups) be placed within the "web" between the wythes.  This should
provide the shear reinforcing necessary.  I had been thinking of "shear
friction" as a means to develop the shear necessary for the composite
section.  My thoughts have changed somewhat to a more traditional method =
of
providing the shear strength in using hooked stirrups within the web =
between
the wythes.

Sound reasonable?

J. Grill

Joseph R. Grill, P.E. (Structural)
Shephard - Wesnitzer, Inc.
Civil Engineering and Surveying
1146 W. Hwy 89A Suite B
Sedona, AZ  86340
PHONE (928) 282-1061
FAX (928) 282-2058
jgrill(--nospam--at)swiaz.com
=20




******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********