This session will address the experience with ACI 318 as the structural concrete building code in Latin American countries. The advantages, concerns and potential barriers to adopting or adapting ACI 318 to local design and construction practice will be presented and discussed. Many Latin American countries have adopted, adapted, or use the ACI 318 Building Code as the de facto national building code for structural concrete. Other countries in the region, however, use it only on an ad hoc basis but are considering ACI 318 as a model code for the development of their own national code. Invited session speakers will discuss the experience in adopting or adapting ACI 318 to their local design and construction practice, and the role of the ACI 318-25 Building Code in the development of design codes for structural concrete in Latin American countries.
Learning Objectives:
(1) Undestand the advantages and barries to adopting, or adapting, ACI 318 to other building codes;
(2) Understand the differences and similitudes of the code adoption process in different countries;
(3) Learn about the nuances and potential concerns in adopting ACI 318 to the local design and construction practice, methods of construction, inspection methods, and classification and testing of materials;
(4) Learn about the main changes included in the 2025 edition of ACI 318.
ACI 318 and the Development of Structural Concrete Building Codes in Latin America-An Overview
Presented By: Jose Pincheira
Affiliation: University of Wisconsin-Madison
Description: The Building Code for Structural Concrete (ACI 318) has had a profound influence on the development of building codes across Latin America. The great majority of Latin American countries use ACI 318 as a reference and have either adopted or adapted ACI 318 to develop and update their own building codes. This presentation will serve to introduce session speakers and to provide a roadmap and a brief description of the influence on the development of local standards and design codes in Latin America.
Argentina Reinforced Concrete Code Evolution: From Argentine, European and New Zealand Code to AC
Presented By: Raul Bertero
Affiliation: University of Buenos Aires
Description: This presentation summarizes the evolution of RC concrete codes in Argentina from XX century to now. Why and how the decision of adopting ACI based Code was done and what and why are the main differences between ACI 318 and the present Argentine Code.
ACI 318 and the Development of the Structural Concrete Building Code in Peru
Presented By: Mario E Rodriguez
Affiliation:
Description: The proposed Structural Concrete Building Code in Peru, Standard E060, is under review and is expected to be approved in 2026. This standard does not follow the format changes in ACI 318-14, and its seismic design differs from that in Chapter 18 of ACI 318-19 and ACI 318-25. These differences result in less stringent design requirements for Standard E060 compared to both versions of ACI 318. Another significant difference is that Standard E060 for seismic design only permits Grade 60 (ksi) reinforcing steel and allows the use of ASTM A615 steel.
Adoption and Changes to the ACI 318 for Seismic Design of Shear Wall Buildings in the Chilean Design Code
Presented By: Leonardo Massone
Affiliation: University of Chile
Description: This presentation summarizes a series of changes considered to modify the Chilean design code (NCh430), based on the ACI 318-19 code. A displacement-based approach is maintained for detailing wall boundary elements and also for establishing damage limits, including a maximum compressive strain (0.8%), and a maximum tensile strain (3%). The elastic component can be considered for strain calculations, allowing the exclusion of wall segments that do not require special detailing, but in this case, the plastic hinge length is reduced to 0.3lw since inelastic incursion in Chilean buildings is expected to be moderate. Finally, capacity design for walls, recently incorporated into ACI 318, is a necessity that recognizes that linear models are unable to anticipate the increase in shear forces. Although incorporated, the expected flexural overstrength in walls will depend on the level of inelastic inclusion to avoid overdesign in low-rise buildings or buildings founded in hard soil. On the other hand, dynamic shear amplification can be disregarded, since, for moderate inelastic incursion in a shear wall building with low-coupling action given by slabs, the amplification is small. These changes aim to continue improving design while maintaining the best practices that have led to successful performance in the past.
The Colombian Experience in Adopting ACI 318 through Revision and Harmonization
Presented By: Juan Correal Daza
Affiliation: Universidad de Los Andes
Description: This presentation describes The Colombian Experience in Adopting ACI 318 through Revision and Harmonization. Over four decades, Colombia has progressively aligned its national structural code (NSR) with ACI 318 while adapting it to local seismic, material, and construction conditions. The process, led by the Colombian Association of Seismic Engineering (AIS), integrated global standards with national practices through a revision-based approach. Key outcomes include provisions for intermediate seismic zones, reinforced concrete wall systems, and local inspection and material standards. The experience highlights the benefits of unifying regulations under a single, coherent framework, as well as the challenges of maintaining expert collaboration, institutional continuity, and periodic updates to remain consistent with ACI 318’s evolution.
The Mexican Experience on the use of ACI 318 Building Codes
Presented By: Sergio Alcocer
Affiliation:
Description: Mexico has a long tradition of using the ACI 318 Building Code Requirements as a basis for its concrete design standards—either as a direct reference in Mexico City and central and southern regions, or as the primary design code in the northern part of the country. Specific exceptions to ACI 318 have been incorporated into Mexico City’s standards to reflect distinct target performance levels, material availability, quality of workmanship, construction practices, and cost considerations. The main differences between ACI 318 and the Mexican concrete design standards will be discussed.