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!

*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.

Jobs

ACI 318 12.5.3(d) For Hooked Rebar For Anchors

ACI 318 12.5.3(d) For Hooked Rebar For Anchors

(OP)
I don't want to derail the recent thread about the Section 12.5.3 modification factors for footing dowels, so pardon the semi-parallel subject.

The specific case that has me a bit confused is when a hooked bar (hairpin) is used to provide the needed Appendix D reinforcement for anchors in tension.  The elevation view of Figure RD.5.2.9 in 318-11 illustrates this case perfectly.

The question that I have is as follows:  Can the "excess reinforcement" provision of Section 12.5.3(d) be applied to this hooked anchor reinforcement in order to reduce the standard hook development length ldh?

I'm thinking that it CANNOT be used, since 12.5.3(d) states that this knockdown factor can only be used when "development for fy is not specifically required", and the Appendix D provisions, I believe, would require the anchor reinforcement to be designed based on yield.

Would appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks.

RE: ACI 318 12.5.3(d) For Hooked Rebar For Anchors

I think this is an area that requires judgement. I'd say that I tend to agree with you, that it isn't wise to reduce the development length of reinforcement that is there to preclude the failure of a concrete breakout mechanism.  However, in my opinion it may be acceptable by the code given some conditions.

A ductile failure of the anchor in Appendix D is not required, but it's encouraged.  Per Section D3.3.6 you are allowed to take the design strength as 0.4 times the design strength as determined in D3.3.3 if the anchor is governed by a concrete failure mode.  I would think that if you were to design for a reduced development length this failure mechanism would now be considered a "concrete failure mode" as the failure will be bar slip in the concrete.  Therefore, in my opinion if you take 0.4 x design strength and calculated your development length based on this reduction it satisfies the intent of the code.

The language in D.5.2.9 states only that the anchor is developed in accordance with Chapter 12, therefore, in my opinion, the reduced development lengths are technically allowed.

However, I doubt you'd be reducing your development length much with this reduction in place, and I don't think except in some odd situation that I would ever pursue it.

RE: ACI 318 12.5.3(d) For Hooked Rebar For Anchors

(OP)
Thanks, jdgengineer.  I agree, even if permitted by ACI there isn't much bang for the buck to be realized.

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


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close