Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Back to ACI App D and Punching Shear

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Now, I am a little more confused, but using what I have come up with
as a solution.  Now I am writing to get some kind of assurance.  I
still have my doubts.

So, the whole scenario, is that I have to put a tie-rod protruding
from a concrete beam, to take 144 kips ultimate value, the concrete
beam spanning 4'-0" between soldier beams.  I am assuming a 2'-0"
square concrete beam, spanning in between W24 soldier beams.

So, if I look at this whole thing with punching shear calc, then it
far exceeds the capacity.  If I look at it using Appendix D, it
doesn't work at all.  Why are these two methods giving me such
different answers?  I think the old UBC method is more intune with the
punching shear calculation than the new calculation.

Does the reduction in capacity have anything to do with tension on the
side of the concrete breakout cone?  Or do engineers agree that using
the punching shear instead of the Appendix D is a proper calculation
in such a case?  The tension rod has a 6"x9" plate at the thrusting
end.

Best Regards,
Refugio

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