×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Minimum Pier Reinforcing
4

Minimum Pier Reinforcing

Minimum Pier Reinforcing

(OP)
All,

Where in ACI 318 does it state that for compressive members that are oversized for architectural purposes or maybe for geotechnical reasons can we defer from the 0.01 Ag to some lesser value?

TIA

RE: Minimum Pier Reinforcing

I remember checking this a while ago.  If I remember correctly it was allowed in the old code (I think 94' UBC) to put the minimum amount of reinforcement in a compression member based on the required size of the member.  However in the new code, IBC and ACI 318-02 that provision does not exist.  I believe that the designer needs to use the actual area of the compression member, not what is required, to calculate minimum area of reinforcement.

RE: Minimum Pier Reinforcing

2
Actualy it is in the code:  ACI-02 Section 10.8.4 allowd you to base minimum erinforcement on a reduced effective area not less than one-half of the total area.  So essentially you can go down to 0.5%Ag for min. reinforcing if the strength ok when checking with the reduced section.  Also see thread507-123265  

RE: Minimum Pier Reinforcing

Thats right, now I remember why I thought it didn't exist.  It  doesn't apply to me because of being in a region of high seismic risk.

RE: Minimum Pier Reinforcing

2
Don't forget that ACI 318 does NOT directly apply to drilled piers (see 1.1.5).  For drilled piers, ACI 336 applies yet it then cross references back to the following 318 sections:

7.10
10.2
10.3
10.8.4  (the one dealing with this post)
10.9
10.15

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources