HeavyCivil
Structural
- Aug 5, 2009
- 184
I got great feedback here yesterday but have additional questions about reinforced SOG's:
1. When using a considerable amount of reinforcing I understand that control joint spacing can be reduced or even eliminated. In applications where cracks are highly undesirable and both code RHO values (.0018-.003) are used in addition to moderate joint spacing (s' ~= d"*2) is it permissible to allow any bar or wire to be continuous across joints? How much?
2. Where it is reasonably certain the slab will not carry significant flexural stresses the best placement of reinforcing for crack control would be in the top third, correct?
3. Where a concrete topping is used to acheive multi-planed slopes, and joint locations are matched, is reinforcing still necessary? The reality of final WWM location is well documented when it is intended at crack control and further more the finishing and grading could be impeded by bar close to the top.
4. Will a construction joint still serve dual purpose as a control joint if reinforcing is continuous across it?
5. In instances of slab haunches, pipe (or sleeve) penetrations and other unintential 'restraints' are isolation joints necessary? Ringo and Anderson allude to isolating all restraint but that only makes sense to me in plain concrete applications so I think that is what they were refering to. What are the implications of placing isolation joints (or control joints for that matter) in a location that may experience high shear stress (relatively high- not approaching capacity though) that would be otherwise distributed across the joint?
6. Where slabs are not rellied on to brace walls or take any other loads besides local compression, the additional restraint from a ridgid connection with foundation walls would do more harm than good - correct?
Your professional input is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
-VT
1. When using a considerable amount of reinforcing I understand that control joint spacing can be reduced or even eliminated. In applications where cracks are highly undesirable and both code RHO values (.0018-.003) are used in addition to moderate joint spacing (s' ~= d"*2) is it permissible to allow any bar or wire to be continuous across joints? How much?
2. Where it is reasonably certain the slab will not carry significant flexural stresses the best placement of reinforcing for crack control would be in the top third, correct?
3. Where a concrete topping is used to acheive multi-planed slopes, and joint locations are matched, is reinforcing still necessary? The reality of final WWM location is well documented when it is intended at crack control and further more the finishing and grading could be impeded by bar close to the top.
4. Will a construction joint still serve dual purpose as a control joint if reinforcing is continuous across it?
5. In instances of slab haunches, pipe (or sleeve) penetrations and other unintential 'restraints' are isolation joints necessary? Ringo and Anderson allude to isolating all restraint but that only makes sense to me in plain concrete applications so I think that is what they were refering to. What are the implications of placing isolation joints (or control joints for that matter) in a location that may experience high shear stress (relatively high- not approaching capacity though) that would be otherwise distributed across the joint?
6. Where slabs are not rellied on to brace walls or take any other loads besides local compression, the additional restraint from a ridgid connection with foundation walls would do more harm than good - correct?
Your professional input is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
-VT