As most have said, you can't do that. But I don't think anyone mentioned that perpendicular compression (axial force in column) should reduce the development length. I think hook + compression = 0,5 length. If you add to that Arequired/Aprovided I don't see how you could have a problem. But I think I read somewhere that code values for development length are determined for seismic areas so if you're not in a seismic area you should be good with a bit shorter development length, but I wouldn't do that myself.
If the Strut and Tie Method is used to justify the connection, there is a September 2008 article, Curved-Bar Nodes, in Concrete International. The article describes a procedure for analyzing this type of connection.
It looks like, in addition to present parameters, ACI318-14 allows reducing Ldh by confining reinforcement, as well as excessive reinforcement. See link below.
It was next to the last slide, on the link I provided. It looks like they decided to drop it for hooked bars due to insufficient works done on seismic provisions. Maybe they changed it again later, I don't think ACI shall dangling around topic like this.
Yea, you're right, my bad. They did remove the reinforcement clause for hooks for ACI 318-19. Interestingly enough, though, that clause still exists on the 2017 AASHTO LRFD specification.
ACI are playing fires, bad news - good for 2014-2018, then dismiss the clause on 2019, things built in between were no good? If something goes wrong (sure not likely), who is the responsible party?!!! Thanks for checking out and bother to clarify though.
The first company I worked for had a standard detail showing Ld measured around the bend of a bar. Even had a fancy curved dimension line. But if I recall correctly, there was a limit on the bend angle... maybe 45 degrees or something like that. They had used it on several nuclear plants around the world, so I assume it had been vetted.
