ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
(OP)
I've been doing a lot more work with concrete recently and just realized that my ACI 318-11 is no longer on the cutting edge. I've done some reading on the ACI website about the new improved organization of the 318-14 but I am wondering what others experience has been. Is it worth the $250 to update or am I just as well off with my trusty 318-11. I guess my real question is whether the improvements are enough to justify the cost?
A confused student is a good student.





RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
What I've heard is that the code has been reorganized to a design by element, as opposed to design by load condition. Instead of a chapter on shear and bending, the chapters address beams and columns. I'm sure it's the same recipes, just in different order.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
The ACI seminar I was at they said that because of the huge format change they didn't want to also have a huge content change on this one but would wait until the next spec (318-17?)
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
Garth Dreger PE - AZ Phoenix area
As EOR's we should take the responsibility to design our structures to support the components we allow in our design per that industry standards.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
I really don't want to shell out $250 unless it is going to significantly improve my productivity or give me additional information that I might be currently missing.
With the ASCE 7-10 there were enough significant changes in my opinion that necessitated the upgrade.
A confused student is a good student.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
My guess is that, long term, the format change will make it significantly easier to use and learn. But, it will take me a while to get used to where all the new sections are.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
They're taking the seminar on the road, coast to coast. There's likely to be one near you. See ACI SeLinkminar.
Depending on whether or not you're an ACI member, the cost is either $550 or $697. And you get the code.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
but no Hawaii...I guess it must be tough to get volunteer speakers to make the trip. Sigh!
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
And I did say coast to coast.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
A confused student is a good student.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson, PE
www.medeek.com
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
The committee did not accept new business except for a very few items (such as the methods for determining yield strength of reinforcement), BUT they did find problems with the old code where things were missing or misplaced or outdated. As they worked through the reorg, they found provisions which had to be changed to either keep the intent or to assure safe design - not so much a change in requirements as a clarification of what was always required. Only a handful of true content changes were made.
318-14 is now organized according to what member is being designed rather than by flexure, shear, etc. This allows one to open the Beam chapter and design a beam. It also allows the use of "beam specific" shear and flexure provisions which might differ from those of slabs, walls, or columns. It may allow better, easier design as the code evolves. Many of us hope it will eventually simplify things rather than complicate them even more.
RE: ACI 318-14 vs. 318-11
Further, the instructor said that we should start using ACI 318-14 immediately. He said that as it is "state of the art" there's no problem using it whether adopted or not. I'm not sure I agree with that, but that's what he said.