![]() ![]() Please!! I need clarifications if this statements of the ACI code must be interpreted literally. Do we really need to interpret this Literally?I mean do we really need to splice it exactly over the support when needed? technically this produces a lot of waste if we should strictly follow this. ![]() The ACI code clearly states that at non-perimeter at least two bars or at least 1/4 of Area of rebars must be continuous or splice(class B tension lap splice) over the support. I wonder what section of the aci code allows this? but I do not know in what section of the code allows it. If I made 2 bottom bars continuous and I had to splice near the column,do I need to stagger the lap splicing? I have seen a link that it is allowed not to stagger it. Additionally, development and lap splice length tables for welded wire reinforcement, expanded information on headed bars, and supporting formulas for all. A provision in ACI 318-05 that allows a 20 reduction in development and lap splice length for bars smaller than 19 mm appears to be unsafe and should be removed or modified. ![]() My question is : if I have 3 top bars and the two top bars ( at the sides ) are made continuous, do we need to stagger the splices? if so, what provision in the ACI code allows this? and do we really need to splice (class B tension lap splice) =it exactly at mid-span? The relative safety of the latter four design procedures improves for lap splices. Under gravity loads or in most cases the top bars at mid span and the bottom bars near the supports (in a doubly reinforced beams ) receives compressive stresses. The ACI code gave a provision on structural integrity to perimeter beams is to splice continuous top bars at mid span and splice continuous bottom bars at or near supports. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |