ACI releases 318-14 Draft for Public Discussion 1

[JAE]

ACI 318-14 Draft copy (for public discussion) can be found on this page: ACI 318-14 DRAFT

This is a new formatted code - completely revamped from the previous decades of versions.

 

[JAE]

Apparently you need a license key to open it.
ACI indicates it is: [blue]public31814[/blue]

 

[JedClampett]

I don't usually do this, but I'm going to wait for the movie.

 

[TXStructural]

VERY IMPORTANT: This is your last chance to tell ACI what you think before this eventually becomes law. If you don't bother to look it over and comment, you will just have to take it when it comes. All public comments get addressed by one committee or another, and if you have a valid point to make and you make the issue clear and suggest a resolution, there is a good chance they will listen. It is part of my job to do these things, but we need more engineers, with wide experience, to vet this document. It is a complete reorganization but not a rewrite of the provisions - they have simply been moved around and few minor changes were made where there were errors found. If you read through it and think "that's not how it used to be", you need to point that out.

Also, ACI has taken a little different tact recently. If the code is not self-explanatory it is inadequate, so some commentary has become code and some code will become commentary. Also, PCA is no longer maintain the PCA Notes for 318 and ACI will be undertaking a revised version of that next. It is important that they get this right, which is more likely with your help. They do need more practicing engineers involved in these things, or the academics pick up the slack. And working on code committees has made me a much better engineer by helping me see exactly why things area as they are and being exposed to provisions and applications that just never came up in practice.

 

[RobertHale]

I have a couple of comments/questions about this draft.

1) How would you suggest "evaluating" the draft? Ideally I would love to take a project and design it again with this new code, but I don't have that kind of time on my hands (especially considering that I need to read all the provisions, construct a "design tree", then go and do the design). Previous revisions were exactly that, changes that were well documented who's impact could be evaluated fairly directly.

2) For those that are at least reading the draft, what are your impressions so far? After reading (with a deal of skimming) about half the text, I am a little disappointed about the usability of the text as compared with the grand language used by ACI in the lead up to release. It seems to me the committee has just changed the jumping back and forth between chapter you needed to do to design with different jumping back and forth between chapters for design.
For example, in 318-05 to design a beam you would need to start out with chapter 8 and 9 for analysis including deflection, go to Chapter 10 for flexure, then to Chapter 11 for shear, Check minimum reinforcing with Chapter 7, then calculate bar laps with Chapter 12, finally add in Chapter 21 if you are in SDC C or greater.
Now with 318-14, start out with Chapter 5 and 6 for analysis, then go to chapter 9 for beams. Chapter 9 in turn points you Chapter 21 to get phi, Chapter 22 to get the particulars of the stress block and the shear strength of the concrete, and the shear strength of reinforcing. The minimum reinforcing is covered back in Chapter 9. You need to look at Chapter 24 for serviceability (with in turns uses equations from Chapter 19). Bar laps and details are covered in Chapter 25, and if you have a seismic structure you end up at Chapter 18. I am sorry if I missed something for this little thought experiment, but see my comments from item 1.

What I heard during the development and roll-out of this code revision was ACI was pushing concrete toward a design basis document like AISC's steel specification, where the code calculations for one type of member could be accomplished using fewer chapters (or fewer changes in chapters) where you wouldn't need to go to multiple chapters to check one type of material behavior. In steel, if you want to check flexure, you go to chapter F and all the equations are there (with the exception of the limiting lambda values). I will be the first to admit that I read into the hype a little more than was stated on the face of it. As a practicing engineer, I understand the desire to avoid listing the same design equations multiple times, but I figured that was the price to pay for the ease of use ACI was striving for.

 

[mtu1972]

Robert - I had the same expectations and was somewhat disappointed that it is still so convoluted, except in a different way.

In reviewing it I am making notes so as to report to other engineers. It will definitely take some getting used to.

gjc

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Has anyone here actually been able to review this document. It seems to me that there is so much security on the document that it can't be opened on any of my systems.

Am I wrong in this, or does the security seem crazy tight on this document?

 

[msquared48]

The concrete code has always been hard to crack, Josh.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[JAE]

You have to use Adobe products only to open it. Also see the password above.

Here is what ACI emailed me when I had problems:

[blue]Please ensure you are using either Adobe Acrobat or Adobe Reader. No other PDF viewer will correctly unlock our Protected PDFs.

Once you ensure you are using an Adobe product, please go into Edit --> Preferences --> Javascript and ensure that Enable Global Object Security Policy is NOT checked. If it was checked, that could be the reason your document has problems staying unlocked.

The following is your offline unlock code:
[/blue]

They also gave me an offline unlock code to use after I downloaded the pdf itself.

 

[RobertHale]

I had a similar experience to JAE. They gave me an unlock code too and that worked well. I finally got the document to open on my home laptop with the public31814 code but the little JavaScript that runs took quite a while to complete.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Mike - that's the best pun I've read in a while.

JAE - Thanks, I will give it a try. First issue was that I wasn't using adobe. Then, perhaps it wasn't the LATEST version of Adobe. Now I'm 100% up to date on the latest, most expensive version of Adobe imaginable. But, the download always stalls at 23% complete every time.... ugh!! I will try the Javascript stuff. See if that fixes it.

Honestly, probably not worth the amount of energy I've put into it so far. At some point, it feels like the "public" review period is a joke. Just something they have to "officially" do, but which they only do begrudgingly. . . .

 

[TXStructural]

Josh, it is a grudging task, but since it is required, you do get a say. I have heard a few on the inside who do not feel that they had a fair chance for input and plan to raise issue during public comment. The process works, which is why it is required.

 

[Archie264]

Sorry to resurrect and old thread, though the review period is still open for those who may have missed this. That said, I was unable to get past the security measures, even using the password: public31814

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Archie -

I never got past the security stuff either.... Eventually, I just gave up.

One of my colleagues was successfully able to view it (though he tried unsuccessfully many times as well). I had him e-mail me a screen shot of a couple of sections I was particularly interested in. So, I accomplished what I needed to despite all the security roadblocks ACI threw up along the way.

 

[Rainbowtrout]

I was able to open the document. However, the fact I cannot print it really bothers me. I like to print things out and mark and read at leisure. I mean, what's wrong with people being able to print it. It is NOT the code yet.

 

[hokie66]

Strange. Here in Australia, I had no problems opening it. But with 739 pages, I don't know how much review I will do.

 

[MGMtulsa]

The web page first noted shows the closing date as 6/15/2014. It looks like I missed an opportunity to download the draft.
I am wondering if there are any changes to ACI 318-11, Section 10.3 - "General Principles and Requirements? If so, could someone reply and provide an attachment to show Section 10.3, including commentary. Thanks.