×
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!
  • Students Click Here

*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.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Existing RC Beam Shear & The IEBC

Existing RC Beam Shear & The IEBC

Existing RC Beam Shear & The IEBC

(OP)
IEBC requires strengthening/replacement for a structural element whose gravity demand is greater than 5-percent (using current codes). Easy enough.

However, I am checking an existing RC beam for shear (new addition loads) and find that Vu is over 75% of phiVc. With (1/2)*phiVc limit in mind, is my beam "overstressed"? Would the IEBC 5% allowance permit the shear check to be (0.05*50+50)*phiVc (i.e. 53% of phiVc)?

If it helps, I have put my eyes on these beams and they seem to be in tip-top shape.

"It is imperative Cunth doesn't get his hands on those codes."

RE: Existing RC Beam Shear & The IEBC

(OP)
bump

"It is imperative Cunth doesn't get his hands on those codes."

RE: Existing RC Beam Shear & The IEBC

Are you suggesting that the beams have Vs = 0 (i.e. no stirrups)?

If so, then I've usually treated the ΦVc/2 limit (which requires minimum stirrups) with a little looseness.

If you do have some stirrups, but they are less than the minimum, I still treat ΦVc/2 as a "strong suggestion" but, as it is an existing building, don't apply a 5% rule to the minimum stirrup limit.

There is also things like:
1. Verifying the actual f'c with cores.
2. Looking very closely at all the loads, live load reductions, analysis assumptions in an attempt to minimize Vu to the most accurate point possible.
3. Verifying actual beam sizes (bw and d) and also possibly including a bit wider bw if the beam is a pan-formed shape with tapered sizes.

Older structures many times were designed by engineers who didn't have a lot of code or prescriptive guidance on shear design so it isn't rare to find older beams working great in flexure but with questionable shear capacities. That always poses a dilemma since shear failures tend to be quick and sudden and taking liberties with things like a ΦVc/2 limit are perhaps OK but not to be too much abused.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

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