I appreciate everyone's responses and interest in the subject!
bones206, thank you for the reference document. Very informative. Also noting that earlier version of this requirement extended the 'zone of hanger reinforcement' by as much as d/4 into the supported beam for beams of equal...
Hi BAretired,
I also thought about the bent bars in the supporting beam as you propose. The reason I went for the other approach, is that due to the beams being the same depth, the area crossed by the 45 degree concrete breakout line is too small to to fit those bars. If I am correct in my...
Hi hardbutmild,
This is how I interpret it...
There is an end moment in the supported beam that puts top portion of the beam in tension. I am thinking this is the reason that the compression strut is shown to go through the bottom 1/4 of the supported beam, since concrete in tension cannot...
Hi cliff234 and bones206,
Canadian guide considers stirrups crossing a line drawn at 45 degrees starting from the bottom 1/4 of supported beam. You can see this visually shown on the left image in my 2nd post. When the beams are the same depth, only closest stirrup legs are effective. Adding...
Hi hokie66,
No, not possible. The loadbearing wall is not all the way across and is of steel stud (CFS) construction.
It is also not possible to make the supporting beam deeper due to clearance constraints.
Thank you BAretired!
This is for a transfer floor of a mid-rise. The floor plan gives no favours to structural layout. The supported beam is carrying a loadbearing wall and the supporting beam is carrying this load to the columns.
The intent is specifically to address the 'additional transverse...
HI all,
Long time reader, first time poster here. [glasses]
I have a beam-to-beam connection with large shear forces. This is in Canada to A23.3. Hanging stirrups in the girder are too closely spaced to fit in the 'hanging zone' because only 2 legs out of 6 would be effective.
My proposal is to...
