Search results for query: *

My comments are based on AISC, not CSA, so take them as you will. 1. 300 is a recommendation, not a hard limit. It is advisable to comply with the recommendation because experience has shown that it helps to avoid problems. But you may exceed it if you have fully considered the ramifications...

For your example of two-way slab splice locations in ACI 318-11, see 13.3.8.5 and Figure 13.3.8 for some limitations on where splices are permitted.

Is it a nonstructural slab-on-ground as implied by the post title or is it a structural mat foundation as stated in the first sentence of the post? If it is a mat foundation, then ACI 318 13.3.4.4 would require reinforcement located close to each tension face (presumably both top and bottom...

k=2 because sidesway is not inhibited

hokie66, assuming the new slab is 12" thick max and the load spreads out at a 45 degree angle, then the effective concrete area at the bottom of the floor slab is (22"+2*12")*(12")=552in^2. The compressive stress is 450k/552in^2=0.815ksi which would be 0.2f'c if 4ksi concrete was used for the...

450 kips is a substantial concentrated load. Even if you spread it out at 45 degrees through the floor slab thickness, it will still be in the range of 0.1f'c to 0.2f'c depending upon the concrete strength used for the wall. I would tend to agree with the building official and would want...

Although it is not technically applicable to site-cast concrete, you might consider the PCI Quality Control Manual (PCI MNL-116) 3.1.4 criteria that maximum size of coarse aggregate shall not exceed three-fourths of the minimum clear cover.

The AISC minimum weld size used to be based on the THICKER part joined. In 2005, it was changed to the THINNER part joined. The commentary said the change was due to the prevalence of low-hydrogen filler metal.

NCMA TEK 10-03 Control Joints for Concrete Masonry Walls - Alternative Engineered Method.

No. Your building does not meet the criteria for partially enclosed, so the 0.55 coefficient is not applicable. If you are using ASCE 7-10 (or earlier), you may want to look at a newer edition. They added a partially open classification for buildings that do not meet the criteria for any of...

When considering uniformly distributed loads on slabs-on-grade, you must account for aisles between loaded areas. This pattern loading causes tension at the top of the slab in the aisle areas. The WRI and PCA slab design methods have charts and tables to account for this.

More modes.

I have always increased the concrete dead load by about 10% to account for the extra concrete (both for the gravity design of the floor and also the seismic weight to the lateral system).

I didn't gather from the OP that the question only regards dealing with a non-compliant field condition (maybe because I'm unfamiliar with the term "Weaver"). Even so, I think I would try to adjust the design of the pile cap to maintain the required pile embedment.

Depends on what code you are using. IBC 1810.3.11 requires 3" minimum embedment.

I'd be more inclined to use an expansion bolt such as Lindapter Hollo-bolt instead.

What is the roof slope? 12 psf is applicable to steep roofs regardless of tributary area.

Buyer beware for the digital version. Ever since TMS took over from MJSC, they won't sell you a regular pdf. It's only available in a LockLizard version that can only be viewed on one computer with their viewer and has limited printing capability with watermarks. I think I will be switching back...

Philosophically, it makes sense to me to not require special seismic detailing for SDC A. The purpose of special detailing is to provide sufficient ductility so that the required seismic energy dissipation can occur without brittle failure occurring. But this may not be an issue for some SDC A...

You seem to be using the 2011 edition? Is that still the legally adopted code in your jurisdiction? If not, I wouldn't recommend citing an outdated code to the attorneys. In the 2011 edition, look at 3.2.1.3.