Footing Designed with Vs (Shear) Considered?

[X-Wing]

What happens to a footing designed with Vs Considered (on either or both Beam or Punching Shear)?
If the Vs provided from steel shear when added up to Vc satisfies the require shear?

Very Truly Yours,

- andru18

 

[KootK]

Then I'd say that you're good to go for shear. Your remaining challenge will be to convince your contractor that this is a wise strategy as it may be more costly to build than a conventional footing. What has lead you to consider this solution?

The greatest trick that bond stress ever pulled was convincing the world it didn't exist.

 

[JAE]

If this is a footing on the ground (vs. a pile cap) then usually adding thickness and/or increasing your concrete compressive strength is a much more economical option.



Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[Signious]

@JAE

If you are specing higher than typical concrete strength I would make sure a test is done - I'm not sure about your area but concrete suppliers sending out understrengthed batches is always a concern where I am

 

[X-Wing]

Thanks for the replies!

Actually because of lack of funds, and proportioning of the sizes to satisfy stability and concrete shear capacity.

Can I follow ACI 11.2.2.2?

Very Truly Yours,

- andru18

 

[KootK]

No, your axial compression is in the wrong direction here.

The greatest trick that bond stress ever pulled was convincing the world it didn't exist.

 

[JAE]

11.2.2.2 doesn't apply to punching shear or one-way shear through footings. The axial load Nu (per KootK) in a footing is downward (adding to or really, causing the shear) and doesn't compress the footing perpendicular to the shear failure plane.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[X-Wing]

^^ My Bad, sorry it should be 11.2.2.1, for members subject to shear and flexure.

Very Truly Yours,

- andru18

 

[KootK]

In that case, sure, have at 'er.

The greatest trick that bond stress ever pulled was convincing the world it didn't exist.