Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
(OP)
AASHTO uses a different equation for development length than ACI. Does anyone have any insights into why this is?
Also, AASHTO LRFD code uses different units than ACI. Is there any reason why this change was made?
Also, AASHTO LRFD code uses different units than ACI. Is there any reason why this change was made?






RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
The question mark in your response indicates uncertainty. That's no good. I'm hoping to get definitive responses to my post from an expert that knows for sure.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
But in all honesty do the two equations result in drastically different development lengths? I would always go with ACI, they are called the concrete institute for a reason.
As for the unit change, maybe they've decided to finally join the rest of the world and use the metric system.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Not sure if that is the case anymore.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Whatever meets specifications is the design code I use.
Current AASHTO LRFD is not in metric, but they chose to use a very odd system focused on ksi and kips, throwing out 100+ years of the customary notation, very odd indeed.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Waxwing - lighten up, besides it's Friday.
On a somewhat serious note, there are some aspects of the AASHTO LRFD concrete specs that have been influenced by ACI.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
I don't work with AASHTO but but this is a trend that seems to apply almost across the board to building codes, material standards, etc. In my opinion it's something that should be addressed, or at least brought to the table as a topic of discussion. Some people are comfortable with it and some of us find it frustrating and even alarming.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Presently, I'm part of a team for a design build tender. Bad enough the piers they came up with are ugly; there's no easy way to detail the bars because of all their crazy shapes.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
Some of us are actively working to remove unneeded complexity in ACI 318, and I hope that some current research, funded in part by CRSI, will help with this mission.
(I tried to avoid the obvious answer: Rebar in concrete develops differently in buildings than it does in bridges.)
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
At least the wind requirements in LRFD are not as complex as ASCE 7, but give AASHTO time and they'll catch up.
RE: Rebar development length AASHTO vs ACI
TXStructural,
Good for you for being involved in that endeavor. I don't miss very many opportunities to grip about this topic but it is with the hope that eventually it will be heard by people who are in positions that can address the issue. It sounds like I may have just found one of you. So, from one of the peons, I appreciate your willingness to push back a little on our behalf.