Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: SEISMIC ANCHORAGE

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
2-cents worth. If I remember correctly, the testing was initiated to review overhead applications where the primary load is tension. It seems that the chemical anchors could be used for anchoring equipment and such to foundations.
 
Bill


From: S. Gordin [mailto:mailbox(--nospam--at)sgeconsulting.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 8:45 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: SEISMIC ANCHORAGE

This is exactly the case. 
 
Couple months ago, I posted a similar question in regard to the cast-in anchors, practically all of which - designed per previous ACI 318 were rendered inadequate by ACI 318-05 (Appendix D).  This seemed even more serious than the situation with epoxy anchors, as the distribution of stresses in the cast-in anchors was apparently proven to be much more unfavorable than thought before. 
 
This means that the physics (not some formalities of the code) should force the engineers to rethink the design of the anchors. Amazingly, at the time, my post generated no responses.
 
V. Steve Gordin, SE
Irvine CA
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 09:32
Subject: RE: SEISMIC ANCHORAGE

The testing criteria changed with the ACI318-02. The new standard, ACI
355.2, requires that post installed anchors be tested in cracked
concrete. That is why the use of these anchors for seismic applications
is excluded in jurisdictions that enforce 2003 or a later version of
IBC.

Ben Yousefi, SE
Santa Monica, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Randig [mailto:RRandig(--nospam--at)specservices.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:25 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: SEISMIC ANCHORAGE

Good morning Steve,
Could you be a little more specific.
What code changed, what eliminated the ability to use epoxy for
anchorage of all thread rods?
Is this an IBC thing or UBC or other?


Robert Randig, P.E.
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: S. Gordin [mailto:mailbox(--nospam--at)sgeconsulting.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:11 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: SEISMIC ANCHORAGE

Good morning.
 
Starting January 1, 2007, all HILTI epoxy anchors are effectively
excluded from usage in the areas of high seismicity (UBC Zones 3 and 4,
or IBC equivalents).  Apparently, this situation affects all (not only
HILTI) epoxy anchors, and the timing to resolve that situation is
currently unknown.
 
This means that no ICC reports are currently available to support the
engineers decision to use chemical anchors in the areas of high
seismicity.
 
Does anybody have the experience of dealing with such situation during
the plancheck?
 
Thank you,
 
V. Steve Gordin, SE
Irvine CA   
 
 

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