Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

embed plates

Status
Not open for further replies.

simplebm

Structural
Apr 28, 2013
24
Does anybody use the Nelson Stud method for designing embeds, i.e., number, size and spacing of studs? The plate thickness is designed
by standard engineering mechanics.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

slickdeals beat me to the question.
 
I’m not sure what you are asking…..your title talks about embedded plates but the content of your post discusses embedded studs…..which one are you using to resist pullout?

For studs (at this point) I use Appendix D of ACI 318. (There was a time when I would use the methods in the PCI handbook, but they appear to be unconservative compared to Appendix D in the calculations I have done.)

For embedded plates, as far as the concrete pullout strength goes, I just use the normal two-way/one-way failure planes that ACI 318 gives the strength for.
 
I have a publication by TRW Nelson Stud Division that gives data and formulas for embedded stud design. I don't know if it is still available.
I assume everyone knows what a Nelson shear stud is.
 
I am using the publication I referred to, to design the attachment of an embedded plate connected to concrete to resist all loads applied to the surface of the plate. The steel studs are welded to the back of the plate and the whole assembly is placed in formwork and concrete is cast around it. When the forms are removed just the steel plate is exposed to receive an attachment(which applies the loads).
My typical situation is a flush mounted plate.
 
Are you referring to the Nelson Manual circa 1977? Depending on your contract requirements, ACI Appendix D is generally followed in this situation.
 
The publication I have is copyrighted 1985 and 1985. I just wondered whether this method is conservative or not.
 

The publication I have is copyrighted 1985 and 1985. I just wondered whether this method is conservative or not.

I don’t think it is. I don’t think they did the extensive testing that was performed to develop Appendix D. You look at the various failure modes that Appendix D considers and then consider the fact that some of those older methods don’t even touch them……and you then realize which one you should be using. The bottom line is: You can defend using Appendix D in a court room…..so getting away from that is risky.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor