Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: CMU wall reinforcing

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I thought running bond was better than stacked bond since there is no interlock of the block and that is why you need reinforcement more often.

Joe Venuti,  P.E.
Joven Engineering
La Quinta,  CA
-----Original Message-----
From: byainc(--nospam--at) [mailto:byainc(--nospam--at)] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 3:33 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: CMU wall reinforcing

Are you using running bond? If that's the case, yes. If you use stack bond, it's min 24". Running bonds are not as reliable.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Drew Morris <dmorris(--nospam--at)>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:25:27 
To: SEAINT<seaint(--nospam--at)>
Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Subject: CMU wall reinforcing

I have a pair of short special reinforced CMU walls that are being 
designed under SDC D.  Based on the masonry code (TMS 402-08), the 
vertical and horizontal spacing has to be less than the wall length/3 
(  For a wall 2'-8" long, I come up with a spacing of 10.7" 
oc, i.e. every cell.  Am I interpreting this correctly.  There is 
minimal shear and for out of plane loading, the verts can be at 24" oc.

*Drew Morris, PE*| /Project Engineer/
BBFM Engineers, Inc. <>
510 L Street, Suite 200 | Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Ph: (907)274-2236 | Fax: (907)274-2520 | Web: 


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