Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
(OP)
Don't know if this has already been covered, but it appears our long national nightmare is over. ACI 318-14 has finally put to rest the debate hashed out here, here, and here.
In ACI 318-14, Chapter 13 now covers foundations. For one-way shallow foundations, section 13.3.2.1 states that design shall be per the applicable provisions of Chapter 7. Section 7.6.1.1 references Table 7.6.1.1 which has the familiar .0018 x Ag amount for As min. Commentary section R7.6.1.1 now states, "The required area of deformed or welded wire reinforcement used as minimum flexural reinforcement is the same as provided for shrinkage and temperature in 24.4.3.2. However, whereas shrinkage and temperature reinforcement is permitted to be distributed between the two faces of the slab as deemed appropriate for specific conditions, minimum flexural reinforcement should be placed as close as practicable to the face of the concrete in tension due to applied loads".
For two-way and mat foundations, section 13.3.3.1 references Chapter 8 and 13.3.4.4 specifically references 8.6.1.1 for mat foundations. Section 8.6.1.1 references Table 8.6.1.1 which has the same .0018 x Ag for As min. Commentary R8.6.1.1 has the same explanation as given in section R7.6.1.1 above.
Ambiguity has finally been removed - congrats to those who felt it necessary to have .0018 x Ag on the tensile face, you are the winners.
In ACI 318-14, Chapter 13 now covers foundations. For one-way shallow foundations, section 13.3.2.1 states that design shall be per the applicable provisions of Chapter 7. Section 7.6.1.1 references Table 7.6.1.1 which has the familiar .0018 x Ag amount for As min. Commentary section R7.6.1.1 now states, "The required area of deformed or welded wire reinforcement used as minimum flexural reinforcement is the same as provided for shrinkage and temperature in 24.4.3.2. However, whereas shrinkage and temperature reinforcement is permitted to be distributed between the two faces of the slab as deemed appropriate for specific conditions, minimum flexural reinforcement should be placed as close as practicable to the face of the concrete in tension due to applied loads".
For two-way and mat foundations, section 13.3.3.1 references Chapter 8 and 13.3.4.4 specifically references 8.6.1.1 for mat foundations. Section 8.6.1.1 references Table 8.6.1.1 which has the same .0018 x Ag for As min. Commentary R8.6.1.1 has the same explanation as given in section R7.6.1.1 above.
Ambiguity has finally been removed - congrats to those who felt it necessary to have .0018 x Ag on the tensile face, you are the winners.






RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
Though I imaging the next code cycle will change it again, to allow the other interpretation for foundation slabs greater than a certain thickness.
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
But, then another provision to ensure that overall reinforcement doesn't violate the T/S minimums.
Right now they have "corrected" the problem by forcing foundation slabs to obey the stricter requirements which thin elevated slabs are required to obey.
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
Please qualify that statement. What is heavily restraining the foundation slab? Because that seems somewhat off base for the industrial foundations that I've worked on.
I don't want to re-hash any arguments here. Just want to understand what you mean by that statement.
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
Though I still don't know that I would really view them as "heavily restrained" except for the cases where you have basement walls on all sides. If the argument is that the soil provides the restraint, then by that logic, the top surface of the slab certainly could be considered completely unrestrained.
Not trying to be argumentative here. Just trying to get my understanding to align with what you're talking about. I'm only part way there. Still doesn't feel like it applies to the types of industrial structures that I've mostly worked on. But, at least I'm understanding your logic more. Maybe I should add in KootK's signature:
I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
For spread footings of limited dimension, I see no need for "T&S" reinforcement, but they always need flexural reinforcement unless designed as unreinforced.
RE: Minimum Flexural Reinforcement in Footings and Mat Foundations ACI 318-14
Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies