×
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

Reduction of development length

Reduction of development length

Reduction of development length

(OP)
Let's say I have a footing that requires only the minimum steel but I am having a problem with developing these bars.  If I make the footing wider, I get more development length, but the moment increases and the required area of steel increases.  
If I only need say 0.25 in^2/ft, but provide 0.5 in^2/ft for the minimum, can I reduce my development length using ACI 318-05 12.5.3(d) using 0.25 in^2/ft for the required As (since that is what is needed for strength) or do I have to use the 0.5 in^2/ft in that calculation?

RE: Reduction of development length

You can reduce development length if you don't need to develop the full 60 ksi--you would only need to develop 30 ksi in your example.

DaveAtkins

RE: Reduction of development length

You only need to develope the reinforcement where the moment diagram requires.  Thus, the maximum moment is at the column face and goes to zero at the edge.  Hooks, either 90 or 180 degree can get development near the end of the bar or cross bar welded to the reinforcement steel gives a mechanical development EVERYWHERE along the length.

RE: Reduction of development length

(OP)
DaveAtkins-

That is the question, though.  Do I really only need to develop 30ksi?  If so than I am not really providing the minimum steel, correct?


civilperson-

I understand about develoopment, but I am trying not to have to hook bars or provide mechanical anchorage in a lightly loaded pavilion footing.


I can't believe I'm the first person to have encountered this.  I have a 2' wide wall footing with a factored bearing pressure of 2.88 ksf (like I said, fairly lightly loaded).  I'm sure plenty of others have used 2' wide footings.  I even tried bumping it to three feet to get additional length, but that bumps the moment up.  I then tried making it 18" deep, then 24" deep, but then the minimum jumps up.   

RE: Reduction of development length

There are two things here.  There is minimum reinforcing for crack control and then the minimum steel you need to resist your loading.
Check the footing as unreinforced for stress and if you do need reinforcing, this will tell you exactly at what distance from the outer edge of the footing you need the first infinitesimal amount of steel.

RE: Reduction of development length

If this is a wall footing, you can rotate the bars a bit to get the required development length.  Rotate them such that you can still maintain your 3" of side clearance.

RE: Reduction of development length

(OP)
I did try it as plain concrete, but it's not even close to working.  The "allowable" (I only use this term because it is really an elastic stress that causes cracking) net tensile stress is 2.75*sqrtf'c to be used against a factored loading.  

Doug-
ACI says that any section that requires reinforcement must have a min of 0.0018bh in it (for footings).  To me that is the min for strength calculations.  

This is for a shearwall footing, so the soil stresses causing this are localized.  I think I am going to try determining where I can get away with plain concrete (and stop hooking the bars in that region), and just specify hooked bars at the ends of the footing where the soil pressures are higher and I need it.  Does that seem reasonable?

RE: Reduction of development length

I can't see how a 2' wide x 2' deep footing can fail as plain concrete.  

RE: Reduction of development length

(OP)
Sorry gentleman,

I just realized an error.  I didn't change my bearing pressures to k/in/ft so my moment was coming up larger than it should be by a factor of 12.  I guess this is a good endorsement for including units in calcs.  Boy, do I feel foolish.   

RE: Reduction of development length

I have always seem to make those size footings work as plain concrete. Double check your calcs.

RE: Reduction of development length

Jike:  He just said it was a calculation error...  Respectfully, as I have done this myself, we should all be more careful to read the whole thread when contributing.

StructuralEIT:  We all have those moments, no matter how good an engineer we are.  And from what I have seen, you are a credit to our Profession.

Regards,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

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