几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


 
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-15, 05:00 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 reduction of development length ok

reduction of development length ok?
i have got a question about concrete development length, and whether i can reduce the development length if the tension in my steel is less than the maximum tension that my steel reinforcement can take. reference is aci 318-05
section 15.6.2 - "calculated tension or compression in reinforcement at each section shall be developed on each
side of that section by embedment length, hook (tnesion only) or mechanical device, or a combination thereof.
say the tension in my steel bar is only 37% of the full tensile capacity of the bar. is it right to say that my
development length for that particular bar can only be 37%, esp. if i have no space to develop my length further?
thanks.
it's actually based on the ratio of req'd steel to provided steel (see 12.2.5). we don't determine stresses in steel bars (typically), we simply analyze the section to determine if it has adequate capacity.
if your analysis shows that you have twice as much steel as is necessary for your ultimate loads, then you can cut the development length in half, with certain limitations.
the limitations structuraleit is talking about are those cases where the full yield strength of the bar needs to be developed. examples would be tension ties (actually need 125% of yield), shear friction reinforcement, and shrinkage & temperature reinforcement. for a footing you would probably only have to worry about t&s steel if it governed. if this is a problem, use smaller diameter bars to get shorter lengths.
you can use hooks or nuts to achieve development if you're really up against a wall.
aci 318-05 section 12.5.3 does provide for a reduction of the development length when 90 degree hooks are used. structuraleit, how do we know that the ratio refers to required steel versus provided steel, and not actual tensile capacity of steel, versus allowable tensile capacity of steel?
6 on one hand, half a dozen on the other.
the ratio is the same thing - unless the required area of steel is governed by something other than strength.
with concrete you are dealing with factored loads, not allowable loads. so technically you don't have an "allowable" capacity of the steel.
great point by pob. adding/subtracting as is non-linear, so if you double your as you don't double your capacity.
here's an example, using a spread sheet i have, i found that for a demand of 50 k-ft (with abritary dims)...
i need 1.4in^2 of steel. so if i provided 2.8 in^2 i could reduce my ld by 1/2 (according to aci 12.2.5).
however, if i calculate the capacity with 2.8 in^2 it is 87.5 kip-ft...so if you ratioed capacities by eit's method you could only reduce ld by by 43%.
thanks for the support, ns4u and for the practical example you provided. even though a reduction of 50% (ns4u's example with area of steel) and a reduction of 43% (ns4u's example with steel capacities) are reasonably close, they are not exactly the same, and the variance may be even more if the dimensions are different.
so, it still comes back to the question of do we take the ratio to the required steel versus provided steel, or actual tensile capacity of steel versus factor capacity of steel? or do we do both, and just go with the one that is more conservative.
thanks for all the feedback and discussion topics, everyone.
both 12.2.5 and 12.5.3 use the ratio:
as(required) / as(provided) as the reduction coefficient.
this is based upon, historically, the stress in the bars as the older codes used to use circumferential contact area on the bar surface as the measure of development.
ns4u, your example appears to be relating bending moment in a beam. this is not the way to look at it. the ratio of bending moments is based on moment capacity which is based on depth, beam configuration, concrete compressive stress, etc.
aci does not recognize reductions in development length based on moment. only based on area of steel (thus the as ratio).

jae, i agree, i was merely pointing out that it is not as simple as ratioing the capacities.
sorry i meant to say... it is not as simple as ratioing the capacity to the demand.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
 


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
masonry development length huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 12:36 PM
development length of reinforcement in shear huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 06:30 PM
concrete development length for hook huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 12:01 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 10:30 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多