Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Column Reinforcing

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE ACI 318-02, Sect. 22.2.2 for the limitations on "Structural Plain Concrete".

You may use plain concrete as a pedistal presuming that you have the correct aspect ratio. ACI 318-02, Sect. 22.8. You could make a case of using the added concrete shell to provide the support for the Structural Plain Concrete core. That way, you would not even have to bond the shell to the core.

Your proposal "Can I just use the area of the new concrete wrap (4? >on a side)?" should not be used. This would not provide proper confinement or proper longitudinal reinforcement.

Harold Sprague

From: "jwknospam" <jwknospam(--nospam--at)>
Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Subject: Column Reinforcing
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 15:47:53 -0600

I?ve got a building where the client wants to add a partial floor below
grade. He?s demolishing the first floor slab, removing the soil (soft clay)
to bedrock, and re-building a structural slab where the first floor used to
be.  The end result will be a below-grade parking level.

The structure is a 4-story concrete building with about 31? bays.  The
reinforced concrete columns (32? octagons) stop at grade and are supported
by 48? sq. unreinforced piers to bedrock.  These piers are confined by the
soft clay soil.  The re-built first floor will be at original grade, so I?m
not worried about the hinge.

One of the uses of this structure in the past 60 years was storage for a
greeting card company.  Anecdotal evidence has every floor covered in huge
pallets of paper stacked from floor to ceiling, i.e., MASSIVE live loads.
The new use for the structure will be residential (condos), so the live load
is reduced to 40 psf in most places.

What I?m worried about is the newly exposed unreinforced pier.  Containment
reinforcing steel must be added, but how much?  Bending isn?t an issue ?
we?re talking about 4 or 5 columns out of about 50, and there are new
reinforced concrete shear walls around the perimeter of the excavated area.
The maximum factored vertical load is 860 kips, and the existing pier
strength is 5500psi (per several tests). We?re in a low to moderate seismic
zone (12% - 6%).  Any axial creep occurred decades ago.

Per ACI 318 10.8.4 and 10.9.1, the minimum reinforcing required is 0.5% of
the gross area.  Adding long bars and wrapping in new concrete raises the
area to 56?x56? which requires As=15.68, or (12) #11 bars. This seems quite
excessive, and the owner almost fainted when I told him.

My question is, how can I reduce the number of longitudinal bars and still
comply with the code?  Can I just use the area of the new concrete wrap (4?
on a side)? This brings the area to (56?x56? ? 48?x48?)*1% = 8.32, or (12)
#8 bars.  This is much more reasonable, but does it technically meet code?

Any other ideas?

The ties will be (2) #4 hooked stirrups (?U? shapes with hooks on the ends)
installed on opposite sides of the column, alternating directions each

Thanks in advance for any ideas,

Jason W. Kilgore

FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!

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