old wire mesh denominations

[structdtl]

Looking at an existing drawing from 1946 of a 6-inch slab-on-grade calling out #42 mesh for reinforcement. Does anybody know its characteristics or equivalency to today's product?
Thank you,

 

[Ingenuity]

Possibly "#42" is 42 lb/100sf:

More info is available from WRI's document: "TF 101-R-14: Historical Data on Wire, Triangular Wire Fabric/ Mesh and Welded Wire Concrete Reinforcement": Link

 

[structdtl]

Thank you!

 

[Compositepro]

It appears the per 100 sqft column is switched with the 100 sqyrd column in the posted table.

 

[Ingenuity]

It appears the per 100 sqft column is switched with the 100 sqyrd column in the posted table.

I think it is that the 100 sq yd unit should be sq yd, as 42 lb/100 sq ft = 3.78 lb/sq yd.

 

[fel3]

Ingenuity...

I get 42 lb/(100 sf) = 4.67 lb/(100 sy), not 3.78 lb/(100 sy)

It should be a 9:1 ratio, but the table uses an 11.11:1 ratio, or 1/0.09.

============
"Is it the only lesson of history that mankind is unteachable?"
--Winston S. Churchill

 

[Ingenuity]

It should be a 9:1 ratio, but the table uses an 11.11:1 ratio, or 1/0.09.

fel3:

Note that I said the units of the 3[sup]rd[/sup] column - to make the numerical values correspond to the 2[sup]nd[/sup] column - should be #/yd[sup]2[/sup] NOT #/100 yd[sup]2[/sup]

And, how could a 100 sf area of mesh with a mass 42 lb only have a mass of 4.76 # for a 100 yd[sup]2[/sup] (i.e. 900 sf) of 9 times the area?

So I still stand by my above number even though I did the above at lunchtime on a project site with my HP-41CX emulator on my old iPhone5 with fat fingers

For a given wire mesh: 42 lb for a 10'x10' (i.e 100 sf) section of mesh.

So if only a 3'x3' (i.e 1 square yard) section of mesh would have a mass of: 42*9/100 = 3.78 lb/yd[sup]2[/sup] - NOTE: NOT #/100 yd[sup]2[/sup]​

 

[robyengIT]

IMHO (used to metric size) :

1 ft = 0.333 y
1 ft^2 = 0.33^2 y^2 = 0.11 y^2
42 lbs/(100 ft^2) = 42 lbs/(100 * 0.11 y^2) = 381 lbs/(100 y^2) that is 3.81 lbs/y^2 (apart the difference 3.78 and 3.81 probably due to number of wires per ft or similar)

Conclusion : Ingenuity is correct

 

[fel3]

Ingenuity...

I mis-typed my response and wrote them backwards. What I meant was 42 lb/100 sy = 4.67 lb/100 sf, not 3.78 lb/100 sf. The ratio between lb/sy and lb/sf or between lb/100sy and lb/100sf should be 9:1.

Per Mathcad Prime 5.0:

My HP-48G+ gives the same answer.

============
"Is it the only lesson of history that mankind is unteachable?"
--Winston S. Churchill

 

[JedClampett]

I perceive this hasn't been beaten to death, so see attached.