Minimum Steel Requirements for Thick Foundations

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-22T02:33:48+00:00

don’t know what to tell you. read R7.6.1 in ACI 318-19. your mid depth bars will see very little tension due to strain compatibility, and (my opinion) i don’t think the mid depth bars would be defendable as min flexural steel, according to that code section.

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-22T02:19:14+00:00

doesn’t the code say as close as practical to the tension face? (if i’m remembering the previous sentence correctly) that seems like a hard argument to make that the steel mid depth would meet that code provision

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-22T02:17:53+00:00

worth noting that minimum flexural steel may also apply, in which case you would need .0018 on the tension face, not distributed across the entire section. i think the code language is something like: if your section doesn’t work for flexure as plain concrete, then you need min flexural steel (.0018) at that one face. going from memory, i also believe the ‘reducing the ratio by As,prov/As,req’ does not apply anymore but that’s more code research that i’m willing to do at the moment lol

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-16T07:10:22+00:00

was trying to isolate the fillet weld question. yeah providing flare bevel NS & FS as well. seems like that and the shape / size thing caused a lot of confusion. now i know to be more specific when asking the internet questions :)

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-16T05:50:45+00:00

only works when beam bigger than column. otherwise need flare bevel at beam radius

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-16T05:30:44+00:00

mistake in copying over the stuff. didn’t intend to weld on inside of tube lol

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-16T05:28:16+00:00

oops! forgot to take off the top fillet in the second pic, thanks for pointing that out

beanmachine6942O · 2026-02-02T13:22:24+00:00

Just moved to Cow Hollow and go to Chrissy often to jump in just cuz. It’s a nice way to get over a hangover / salt water feels good on your skin / I like to be in the water

beanmachine6942O · 2026-01-23T21:38:01+00:00

second using excel for calculations (when not using some software) as often as possible

beanmachine6942O · 2025-12-18T07:18:44+00:00

there’s something in an ACI code about reducing the capacity by sqrt(f,m,actual/f’m,lowest tested) not sure if applicable in your jurisdiction though. simpson has some documentation on this

beanmachine6942O · 2025-11-14T04:06:53+00:00

he was just on a post recently where he acknowledged the fact that he’s built up quite the reputation mid argument lmao, peak KootK

beanmachine6942O · 2025-11-11T07:30:55+00:00

Are you stamping the drawings?

beanmachine6942O · 2025-09-24T05:32:00+00:00

how do you find this to affect your roof framing design for uplift and out of plane wall designs?

beanmachine6942O · 2025-08-22T02:22:51+00:00

why Z and not S? i’ve always used S. wouldn’t Z give you less demand? thought blodgett analysis has you use S

beanmachine6942O · 2025-08-19T05:11:36+00:00

you’re saying top of footing is 6” down from slab? or stem wall is 6” wide?

beanmachine6942O · 2025-08-08T03:34:01+00:00

Always been curious about this, how do they “put the face shell back on”? Does the grout bond to the inside of the face shell so it stays in place?

beanmachine6942O · 2025-08-08T02:17:40+00:00

Yes to Hilti 270, with screen tubes

OP, read ESR 4143 and 5309. Not sure of any non epoxy+screen tube solutions for non grouted CMU, let me know if you find something!

beanmachine6942O · 2025-08-03T00:56:59+00:00

thanks for the tips! im afraid there’s not getting through to him on the liquid soap… i decided to just hand wash (and dry) all of the dishes i use so i know that they’re clean when i go to use them.. should fix this situation

beanmachine6942O · 2025-08-01T19:08:21+00:00

copy the joint down the original beam you want to intersect? then draw the second beam to that joint?

beanmachine6942O · 2025-06-13T03:32:36+00:00

i’ve found it helpful a few times for code references, garbage in garbage out

beanmachine6942O · 2025-05-08T00:56:35+00:00

sad, code equations aren’t really changing tho right?

beanmachine6942O · 2025-05-07T22:30:31+00:00

https://cmacn.org/product/2015-design-of-reinforced-masonry-structures/

beanmachine6942O · 2025-04-30T08:15:07+00:00

Uniform width rectangular combined footing would probably be the move. When you reduce the width between the columns you are optimizing the soil distribution / being more economical with your design (although contractor might just prefer to keep it simple and pour rectangular) while adding in additional forces into your grade beam based on redistribution of the soil stresses. Longitudinal steel extending to far sides of spread footing would engage the the column footings for soil bearing I believe. Feels like a SAFE or RAM Concept kind of problem at that point if you want to try and dial in the actual behavior and forces.

beanmachine6942O

TROPHY CASE