www.sefindia.org

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FORUM OF INDIA [SEFI]

 Forum SubscriptionsSubscriptions DigestDigest Preferences   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister FAQSecurity Tips FAQDonate
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to forum 
Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools  before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners
here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.

Detailing of Column Reinforcement

 
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> SEFI General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Abishek_Siingh
Bronze Sponsor
Bronze Sponsor


Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 609
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:14 am    Post subject: Detailing of Column Reinforcement Reply with quote

Dear All,

I recently had a discussion with some engineers in my circle and they advocated on the fact that no matter what the moment on the RECTANGULAR column is and no matter which direction the moment is, we should provide reinforcement equally on all four sides because SP-16 says so?

I disagree on this but nowhere could I find in codes, any clause(s) which distinctly state(s) that the reinforcing steel bars CAN be unequally spaced along column faces depending upon the moment direction.

Can you help me with the answer to this please?

Best,

Abhishek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dr. N. Subramanian
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 5310
Location: Gaithersburg, MD, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:12 am    Post subject: Re: Detailing of Column Reinforcement Reply with quote

Dear Er Abhishek,

Yes, we can provide reinforcement equally on all four sides irrespective of the direction of moment. But it will not be economical.

It will be economical to provide maximum reinforcement in the direction of maximum moment.

Regards,
NS
Kumar_Abhishek_Singh wrote:
Dear All,

I recently had a discussion with some engineers in my circle and they advocated on the fact that no matter what the moment on the RECTANGULAR column is and no matter which direction the moment is, we should provide reinforcement equally on all four sides because SP-16 says so?

I disagree on this but nowhere could I find in codes, any clause(s) which distinctly state(s) that the reinforcing steel bars CAN be unequally spaced along column faces depending upon the moment direction.

Can you help me with the answer to this please?

Best,

Abhishek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kapildingare
...
...


Joined: 15 May 2009
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 6:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes Kumarji you can definitely provide column Reinforcement as per it's value and direction, which may lead to it's uneual distribution on column's faces.
1) I don't think you need any codal reference to do the same.
2) As Respected NS Sir has adviced equal distribution may lead to uneconomical solution.
3) Also direction of moments can always change with respect to considered load case direction, it can't be fixed, except if you are considering load case of DL and LL alone.
4) And most important site execution convenience, from this point also it is advisable to have column reinforcements equal on either two or four sides.


Last edited by kapildingare on Tue Feb 21, 2017 8:26 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sakumar79
...
...


Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 681

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Er Kumar Abhishek Singh,
         Not sure if I have misunderstood you, but does not the code have charts 27 to 38 for reinforcement distributed about 2 sides only? Hence, if moment is basically about one direction only, you should be able to provide the same on 2 sides only and provide nominal reinforcement on the other side to satisfy detailing requirements such as maximum distance between reinforcement.

     If you have biaxial bending and want to do unequal spacing of bars due to one bending being more predominant that the other, you can do the same and work out the P-M interaction diagram from basics and design reinforcement. In fact, you can do the same in ETABS using custom Section Design.

   In case I have misunderstood you, I request you to put up a sketch explaining your query.

Hope this helps,
Arun
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zubairmeer1
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Posts: 88
Location: Hyderabad

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Abhishek Sir,

Having worked with BS codes few years ago, i don't remember it had any charts for equal distribution of steel on 4-sides of a column, even SP-16 has charts defined for equal distribution of steel on 4 sides and equal distribution distribution on two sides. You may ask your colleagues the reason for provision of design aids in SP-16 with reinforcement in columns distributed equally on two sides.

Thanks & Regards

Meer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
knsheth123
Silver Sponsor
Silver Sponsor


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 123

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Er. Abhishek,


Rect. Column Design is carried out using Interaction Diagrams given in SP 16.  Charts directly give Reinf. percentage for Axial Load +  Uniaxial Bending case. It is necessary to iterate assuming percentage of steel and satisfy inequality (IS 456) for Biaxial Bending.

The charts are given for :

case 1 : Equal Reinf. on two opp. faces only
case 2 : Equal Reinf. on all four sides

Case 1 can be used for case of Uniaxial bending only as calculation of capacity in the perpendicular direction can not be obtained from such charts.
Thus for biaxial bending case 2 is the only choice.

It is evident that placing large fraction of reinf. on faces resisting larger bending moment will yield optimal design. This is not possible using SP16 design aids.

However such limitations of SP16 are overcome with formulation from first principle and devloping design aids by way of worksheets or programs. The tools by Shri N. Prabhakar are amongst the leading one. We have also attempted to develop such tools and are in use from several years by Engineers in regular design or checking.

When design internal forces 9Pu, Mux, Muz) due to all load combinations gives inequality ratio <=1, it is acceptable design. Out of all acceptable arrangement, the one with minimum percentage of steel is optimum one.

The links are
http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=7492&highlight=#7492

http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=70713<o:p></o:p>
(First_Col_Dsn_22-10-2015.xls) :


With warm regards


Prof. K. N. Sheth
Dharmsinh Desai University, Nadiad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JVCSNL
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 159

PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear All,

The code gives basic principles of the RC design ( i.e., strain block and stress block parameters) and subsequent to that it is up to engineer to use those principles to design the concrete elements.  

SP 16 provided a set of charts to address the columns that are most likely in most situations.  On 4 side equal reinforcement, it assumes that total number of bars are 20 or so..  But it also does not restrict an engineer to have interaction diagram based actual position of reinforcement and diameter of rebar at that location.  

For economical design, the engineer will certainly size the column for technical reasons and during reinforcement design, engineer will use engineering judgment to place the reinforcement as per design forces.  

In my understanding, there can be different reinforcement on long and short faces (both in numbers and diameter) and will be based on design considerations only.  

What would you do if you have columns like triangular, pentagon or hexagon shape?  The engineer has to develop separate Pu-Mu curves based on the geometry of section and principles of RC design given in code.  

Regards,

Jignesh V Chokshi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> SEFI General Discussion All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


© 2003, 2008 SEFINDIA, Indian Domain Registration
Publishing or acceptance of an advertisement is neither a guarantee nor endorsement of the advertiser's product or service. advertisement policy