×
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

ACI Section 11.5.4.3

ACI Section 11.5.4.3

ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
Greetings,
I have a question pertaining to Section 11.5.4.3 of ACI 318-02. It states that when Vs exceeds 2 Vc, then maximum spacing limit shall be d/4. In case an engineer decides to put more shear steel than necessary, does ACI force section 11.5.4.3 into effect? Because the way Vs is defined, it is not the required shear steel but provided shear steel. It almost seems that the code is penalizing you for being conservative, or am I missing something?

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

If Vs is that high in the first place, and you add MORE stirrups, do you really ever have a condition where d/4 would even control?  Might be a rare circumstance.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
I actually had a situation close to that. I had to redesign a plaza slab for a contractor who wanted to drive his concrete trucks over (300 psf LL). To add to my woes, I had headroom issues, making my beam only 16" deep. I had a 48" to 54" wide beam x 16" deep. That's where my problem came from. It is rare, but happened to me now.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
Vu = 250 kips
I have a 48" wide x 16" deep beam
Phi Vc = 74 kips (d=14.5")
Av using a spacing of 4" o.c. = 0.809 in2
If I use 4 #4 ties, Av = 1.2 in2. That gives me Vs = 261 kips > 2Vc, and hence I am forced to use a spacing of 3" o.c.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
Correction Using 3 # 4 ties, Av = 1.2 in2.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

Actually, referring to your original post - doesn't 11.5.4.3 say 4 x sqrt(f'c)?

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
Right, 4*sqrt(fc')bd = 2(2*sqrt(fc')bd) = 2Vc

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

I would look for some information about shear reinforcing for wide shallow beams.  You may have some modifications you should consider.  I seem to remember some research suggesting the ACI typical method is unconservative for this case.  It's late and I'm at home so I can't say for sure.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

You are misinterpretting the ACI Clause, by calculation you required a spacing of 5.18" and max spacing by ACI restrict in these situations where you have excessive shear stresses vs, shear strenghts. As Vs which is (Vu- phi Vc) /phi exceed 4 sq. rt fc'b.d, then spacing as per ACI should be half not that which you calculated, but the maximum spacing which is d/2 or Av. fy/(50 bw)which is 3.4". And i think you have to check for deflection also which might increase your longitudinal steel also to control your creep deflection.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

creep deflection is only helped by COMPRESSION steel, not additional tension steel.  
Also, you are not required to check deflections unless the depth of your section is less than that given in table 9.5(a) of ACI 318-05.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
Again, what i do not understand is that if you decide to provide more shear steel than necessary, why would you further decrease the spacing. What is the research that this is based on. And yes, I have checked my deflections and have enough top steel for long term deflections. I will try to do some more research for wide shallow beams. Thanks UcFSE.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

I guess my view is that the Vs described in this section was simply anticipating that it is the required Vs based on Vs = (Vu - φVc) / φ and not the Vs actually provided.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
I am interpreting it the same way as well.....thanks

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

I have always interpreted the Vs in this case to be the "Required" Vs, not what you provide.  If the required shear strength due to stirrups exceeds twice the concrete shear capacity alone, then the maximum stirrup spacing is cut in half.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

Article 11.5.4 of PCA Notes on 318-02 interprets Vs to be the required steel, not the provided steel.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

(OP)
I have also sent an email to ACI to see if they will fix the definition of Vs, as it does not make sense intuitively. Vs is something that you choose to provide, and not something you get inherently.

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

When discussing this with ACI you should note that this clause has been renumber 11.5.5.3 in ACI 318-05.

I suppose a more accurate expression for this limit would be,

"Where (Vu/phi - Vc) exceeds 4 sqrt(f'c) bwd ..."

Also, Vc isn't necessarily 2 sqrt(f'c) bwd so the limit doesn't always boil down to 2Vc.  You're right though that the general idea is that if the required strength is more than twice the concrete component (originally assuming 2 sqrt(f'c) bwd) then the spacing should be halved since the stirrup strength dominates.

If they did want to assume that Vc = 2 sqrt(f'c) bwd for the sake of this limit then it could be simplified to,

"Where Vu exceeds 6 phi sqrt(f'c) bwd ..." (Vu > 3 phi Vc)

RE: ACI Section 11.5.4.3

or maybe Vs,req'd

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