Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
(OP)
The general contractor to a 7-level concrete building consisting of 4 levels of residential and 3 levels of parking (all above ground) constructed the perimeter rectangular columns to the parking level using steel formwork, then after stripping the forms, constructed the concrete structural walls that are orthogonal to the long-axis of the column. 36"x12" columns with 8" walls that infill between the columns that are on 25' centers.
The contractor did not provide any horizontal reinforcement between the wall/column interface, nor was there any effort to roughen the off-form finish to the columns prior to constructing the walls.
The walls are part of the main lateral force-resisting system.
I have looked at more 'conventional' repair techniques like 1) drilling and dowelling in rebar and CIP concrete, and 2) horizontal steel through-bolts that pass though the columns 12" width and anchor to adjacent walls, with required fire protection.
I also looked at carbon FRP options to horizontally tie the adjacent walls through the columns, but without any mild steel rebar I am hesitant to rely upon a brittle materials like FRP, even if I downgrade the stress/strain levels.
Has anyone undertaken successful reinstatement of such a situation, and care to share their method/s?
Thank you.
The contractor did not provide any horizontal reinforcement between the wall/column interface, nor was there any effort to roughen the off-form finish to the columns prior to constructing the walls.
The walls are part of the main lateral force-resisting system.
I have looked at more 'conventional' repair techniques like 1) drilling and dowelling in rebar and CIP concrete, and 2) horizontal steel through-bolts that pass though the columns 12" width and anchor to adjacent walls, with required fire protection.
I also looked at carbon FRP options to horizontally tie the adjacent walls through the columns, but without any mild steel rebar I am hesitant to rely upon a brittle materials like FRP, even if I downgrade the stress/strain levels.
Has anyone undertaken successful reinstatement of such a situation, and care to share their method/s?
Thank you.






RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
I should have mentioned that there are 3 horizontal walls for a total wall length of 3x25', with 1 column at each end, and two intermediate columns that 'break-up' the continuous wall into effectively three segments.
The above is applicable over the 2 lower levels.
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
I can't say that I've done a repair on this kind of condition, but I'll offer the following thoughts:
I understand that the walls are part of your design MLFR system. Are there columns at each end of the wall that is intended to help resist forces parallel with the wall? If so, would not the wall perform as a 'strut' between the top of one column and the bottom of the opposing column? Vice versa for forces in the opposite direction.
Did the slab (and/or beams?) over-pour the wall? I would assume that it did, so you do have some connectivity (of sorts) between the tops (and bottoms) of the walls & columns. Perhaps an analysis of the as-built condition is worth examining.
While this is a sometimes common construction method, as one who has been involved it concrete construction for a few decades, I would almost always assume (that nasty word) that the concrete placement is intended to be monolithic, and any other approach requires the EoR's approval.
However, that said, I find that too often that the drawings (in plan) show closed lines around the columns and closed lines representing the wall(s). This can imply separate construction. Sometimes it's to the everyone's advantage to place the column independent of the walls and do the walls as infill between the columns. This can be advantageous with respect to the speed of construction and optimization of the formwork.
I don't ever recall seeing an explicit note or spec statement requiring that all walls touching columns be constructed as a monolithic placement. From my perspective it has always been assumed (!) that if they touch, it must be monolithic. Often with MLFR systems the EoR provides a plan detail showing the reinforcing layout, which then clearly establishes the requirement for a monolithic placement if the wall horizontal bars extend into the columns.
As for a real repair (i.e. tying the wall to the columns over their entire height), this would involve a lot of drilling and a high probability of nicking some of the column ties. You certainly cannot develop the strength of the horizontal bars with epoxied-in dowels alone. Perhaps you could use headed bars by drilling a larger diameter hole perhaps 3-4" (to accommodate the head + cover) into the opposite face of the column, then a smaller hole the rest of the way through and into the wall for the bar diameter. Not sure if this will develop better strength than just a plain straight dowel.
Ralph
Structures Consulting
Northeast USA
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
Do the walls need to be continuous? Separate walls will be more flexible and the shear transfer at the foundations will need to be reviewed, but if the detailing level is low enough... Who knows.
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
I believe that you could get away with just a vertical, bolted angle shear connection between the walls and columns, similar to what might be done in a precast scenario.
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
KootK - Based on the OP's description I do not believe there are gaps between the ends of the walls and the face of the columns. It sounds to me like the contractor simply cast the ends of the walls against the columns.
Ralph
Structures Consulting
Northeast USA
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
We're on the same page there Ralph. I drew the joints as gaps because, structurally and conceptually, that's how I see them. Essentially, joints incapable transferring vertical shear or horizontal forces across the joint.
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
KootK - I agree with you regarding the transfer of vertical shear. However, if the wall were cast directly against the face of the columns, would not the transfer of a horizontal (compressive) force be possible? Granted there would be a vertical component in the case of lateral building load, but the slab/beam above (or below) may be adequate to resist that vertical force component, combined with the vertical wall reinforcing extending from the wall into the beam/slab above & below. I guess this depends on the magnitude of shrinkage of the wall at the top that might open up a very small gap between the end of the wall and the face of the column. Even then, perhaps an epoxy crack repair method can remedy the shrinkage possibility.
I'm of the same mind that if the as-built condition works, is it really necessary to initiate any repair?
Referring to Teguci's comment, the OP did not state that the construction drawings called for reinforcing that would connect the walls to the columns. As I previously stated, I personally would have assumed (!) that the walls & columns would be a monolithic placement. Perhaps the approved rebar drawings correctly showed the EoR's intent, but the contractor ignored them. Again, I have seen many projects where the walls were constructed after completing the columns.
I will step onto the soap box one more time about the clarity of the contract documents. If the drawings imply separate placements and if there is no detail to the contrary, a contractor will approach the job in a manner that he/she feels is most economical and expedient. Wall forming with integral columns in the stated configuration are time consuming and difficult to assemble - the method chosen is certainly more expedient.
Ralph
Structures Consulting
Northeast USA
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
If there wasn't any reinforcing between the walls and columns on the CDs, then it is appropriate to consider these items separately. Shrinkage will place a control joint at these reentrant corners and shear friction = 0 without reinforcement. ACI (14.2.6) codifies this by requiring walls to be anchored to columns (ie the CDs should have shown this rebar continuing through the columns). In hindsight, the detailing of threaded splices would have done well to alleviate this problem.
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
My thoughts on that:
1) In seismic areas in developed countries this is generally considered a no-no. You wind up with undesirable high shear demands at the top and bottoms of your columns. You can design a system to function exactly this way but that's usually something that you'd need to have baked into the cake from the get go.
2) In this case I assume that we'll have vertical rebar passing from one level to the next. As such, that capacity for shear transfer would probably prevent the diagonal strut mechanism from kicking in anyhow.
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
1) Might bite into parking stalls.
2) Might not be able to develop dowels for Fy shear friction. You'd have to cheat it based on prorating or use an alternate shear transfer methodology.
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
I'm waiting to hear from Ingenuity (OP) and see what the feedback might be on the suggestions offered.
Ralph
Structures Consulting
Northeast USA
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
KootK - Just to satisfy my curiosity, where are you located?
Ralph
Structures Consulting
Northeast USA
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
Thank you to RHTPE, Teguci, jayrod12 and KootK for your assistance. Much appreciated.
Some additional background:
1. The EoR intended for the columns and walls to be monolithic with CJ's and dowels passing through the column/wall interface. Pretty much how Ralph described.
2. The GC's rebar shop drawings detail horizontal rebar dowels through the columns, lapping with the wall rebar (#5@10" EF, horiz and vertical).
3. GC superintendent did not want to place holes in his steel forms for horizontal rebar dowels so he deleted them! Not sure how it was missed by the Special Inspector, but that is another issue.
4. EoR came up with 3 options for the GC:
5. The floor system is PT flat plate. There is vertical rebar continuous through the horizontal CJ's at floor levels.
6. The walls are not continuous above L3. The lateral system from L3 to Roof uses other adjacent structural walls (stairs and elevators) that are continuous to the foundations.
7. Seismic DC = C
8. The 'outside' face of the wall is the parking structure access/exit ramp.
I have looked at the 3 segmented walls similar to 'infill masonry' walls, developing diagonal struts as RHTPE first described, and Teguci referenced. I briefly checked STM with ACI-318, but quit when I looked at the strut angle on a floor-to-floor basis where the angle was less than 25°.
I will look further a tKootK "do nothing" options and see where that takes me. Thanks you for the detailed sketches and info.
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
If it's palatable to the design team, I'd definitely pitch the vertical steel angle solution. I'd expect the contractor to lap tha up like honey after being presented with the other, much more labour intensive, solutions.
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
KootK: The walls are supported on 4' deep grade beams that span to 4' deep x 4'x9' pile caps, on 2 drilled piles. The wall/column interface aligns within the pile cap.
Teguci: Thank you for the sketch. The column rebar spacing may be problematic to make the drilling/grouting of dowels a viable option. I will see what the GC says.
I checked the 24' long walls for 1/3rd of the total moment and shear and they have ample capacity as stand-alone segmented walls.
I am going to look at transferring "some" vertical shear across the vertical interface, in an attempt to bring the situation back to the "as-designed" condition.
The GC and EoR are in some disagreement on what was portrayed on the "For Construction" documents. The drawings do not depict the actual column/wall rebar condition, and the GC is therefore trying to justify his position of the "as-built" condition.
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
If anything I'd expect demand to be less than that as you're softening the wall system relative to the other lateral elements in the building.
I'd go all or nothing as most of the remedial measures that have been discussed are likely to have brittle failure modes.
Sounds promising. On the compression side of your new segmented walls, I imagine that you'll be dumping the compression straight into the pile cap which is great. The tension side could be trickier:
1) If your segmented walls have zones at the edges, which seems unlikely, you'd need to make a go of anchorage into the pile cap there.
2) If your walls will be utilizing distributed vertical reinforcement, then your grade beam will collect a bunch of vertical rebar tension as an uplift load on the grade beam which would need to be checked for it's ability to resist that. Of particular importance would be the delivery of shear from the grade beam to the pile cap. If your grade beam continues right through the pile cap, you should be good to go. If not, you may need something akin to hanger steel at the interface. And, obviously, you've only got what you've got at this point.
More questions:
1) Is the top of grade beam at the same elevation as the top of the pile cap? Or does the grade beam run above the cap?
2) Is the pile cap centered on the columns with the 9' dimension parallel to the walls?
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: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
Thanks for your input and comments.
The pile caps (4' thick) and grade beams (3' thick, not 4' as I previously stated) were cast monolithically, and the top of pile cap = top of grade beam. The 9' cap dimension is orthogonal to the wall long axis.
I agree with you wrt "everything" vs "nothing" as a remedial measure, along with brittle failure modes, and that the demand for segmented walls would be less than my assumed 1/3 distribution, but I conservatively assumed 1/3 for this exercise.
I checked the shear flow (VQ/I) assuming the three walls act compositely with columns, and it is less than 1.4 k/in at the internal column/wall interface so steel angles/plates with post-installed anchors are capable to transfer the full design actions. If the EoR accepts the concept, my guess is he shall want angles in the internal corners and plates on the flush 'exterior' wall to reduce any eccentricity of transfer, and if so the contractor may consider through-bolts connecting angles on the interior wall sides to the flat plates on the exterior wall sides (exterior still being enclosed by a parking structure ramp). They may bring up the issue of fire protection to the exposed steel.
I also checked the grade beam assuming the three walls act singularly, applying triangular equivalent loadings and the flexural capacity is okay, and shear is just okay, but interestingly, the conforming design does not meet ACI-318 for stirrup spacing limits of d/2, and only has 2 legs over a 36" wide grade beam. But it is what it is!
RE: Repairs to vertical CJ's between concrete columns and structural walls
Based on the proportions of your wall, I feel that squat shear wall treatment is appropriate. As such, I'd look at it as shown below. Depending on how your went about your VQ/I (cracked, uncracked, etc), the difference may be slight.
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.