International Concrete Abstracts Portal

International Concrete Abstracts Portal

Showing 1-5 of 712 Abstracts search results

Document: 

24-283

Date: 

May 15, 2025

Author(s):

Guido Valentini, Rémy D. Lequesne, Andrés Lepage, and David Darwin

Publication:

Structural Journal

Abstract:

Compression development and lap splice length provisions in ACI 318-19 §25.4.9 and §25.5.5 are reexamined after an example is used to show that existing provisions can produce unexpected results in some design conditions, such as compression lap splices longer than tension lap splices. A historical review of ACI Building Codes shows existing compression bond length provisions are largely based on provisions adopted before test data were available. The provisions in ACI 318-19 are compared with a database of 89 test results, and are shown to poorly fit the data. Several compression and tension bond equations are also examined that fit the data better. It is shown that compression development and lap splice lengths can be based on a number of expressions available in the literature for tension development length, with minor modification, including the ACI 318-19 equation for tension development length. Using this approach would simplify design by eliminating the use of different expressions to calculate tension and compression development lengths, prevent calculated lengths from being longer in compression than in tension, and provide a better fit to available data.

DOI:

10.14359/51746821


Document: 

24-306

Date: 

May 15, 2025

Author(s):

Utsav Neupane, Rémy D. Lequesne, Andrés Lepage, and David Darwin

Publication:

Structural Journal

Abstract:

Three large-scale reinforced concrete rectangular slender structural walls were subjected to cyclic displacement demands to establish whether, and under what conditions, mechanical splices can be used with Grade 100 (690) bars where yielding is expected. These tests were conducted because ACI 318-19 prohibits both lap splices and mechanical splices for high-strength longitudinal reinforcement (Grade 80 (550) and higher) in special structural walls where yielding is expected. Three mechanical splices were used that differed in connection type (one type per wall) and overall splice length. The mechanical splices were all placed starting 2 in. (50 mm) from the wall base. Mechanical splices satisfying the specified minimum tensile strength criterion of ACI 318-19 Type 2 mechanical splices resulted in better wall behavior than reported for lap splices, but satisfying Type 2 requirements alone did not prevent bar fractures at the mechanical splice. Thus, Type 2 mechanical splice requirements are not recommended as the sole qualification criteria where yielding is expected. Test results also showed that mechanical splices with a strength not less than the actual bar tensile strength, such that bars systematically fail in direct tension tests away from the splice and therefore develop their actual uniform elongation, perform well, and are recommended for use where yielding is expected in special structural walls.

DOI:

10.14359/51746822


Document: 

24-161

Date: 

May 1, 2025

Author(s):

Ali Banaeipour, David Darwin, Matthew O’Reilly, and Andres Lepage

Publication:

Structural Journal

Volume:

122

Issue:

3

Abstract:

The ACI 318-19 Building Code does not allow the use of headed bars larger than No. 11 (No. 36) due to insufficient experimental data. Thirty large-scale simulated beam-column joint specimens containing high-strength No. 11 (No. 36), No. 14 (No. 43), or No. 18 (No. 57) headed bars were tested to investigate the effects on anchorage strength of key factors, including bar stress at failure, bar size, bar spacing, embedment length, transverse reinforcement, concrete compressive strength, and loading condition. Specimens exhibited concrete breakout, side splitting, or a combination, with four exhibiting a shear-like failure. Anchorage of larger bars is noticeably influenced by joint shear demand and loading condition. Descriptive equations developed based on 164 tests accurately characterize anchorage strength for headed bars up to No. 18 (No. 57). They indicate that anchorage strength is proportional to concrete compressive strength to a power close to 0.2 and that the contribution of parallel ties for large headed bars is lower than that observed for smaller headed bars.

DOI:

10.14359/51744381


Document: 

22-207

Date: 

May 1, 2025

Author(s):

Laura N. Lowes, Ray Yu, Dawn E. Lehman, and Scott Campbell

Publication:

Structural Journal

Volume:

122

Issue:

3

Abstract:

Reinforced concrete walls are commonly used in low- and mid-rise construction because they provide high strength, stiffness, and durability. In regions of low and moderate seismicity, ACI 318 Code requirements for minimum reinforcement ratio and maximum reinforcement spacing typically control over strength-based requirements. However, these requirements are not well-supported by research. The current study investigates requirements for the amount and spacing of reinforcement using experimentally validated nonlinear finite element modeling. For lightly reinforced concrete walls subjected to out-of-plane loading: 1) peak strength is controlled by concrete cracking; and 2) residual strength depends on the number of curtains of steel. Walls with very low steel-fiber dosages were also studied. Results show that fiber, rather than discrete bars, provides the most benefit to wall strength, with fiber-reinforced concrete walls achieving peak strengths more than twice that of identically reinforced concrete walls.

DOI:

10.14359/51745465


Document: 

24-131

Date: 

May 1, 2025

Author(s):

Hung-Jen Lee, Fu-Chi Yu, and Ker-Chun Lin

Publication:

Structural Journal

Volume:

122

Issue:

3

Abstract:

This paper investigates the seismic performance of exterior beamcolumn joints in special moment frames (SMFs) with varying axial load ratios. Cyclic testing of four additional specimens with an axial load ratio of 0.45 is compared with four companion specimens at 0.10. Each specimen was designed and constructed with Grades 60, 80, or 100 (No. 420, 550, or 690) reinforcement in accordance with ACI 318-19 provisions for special moment frame joints, except for the provisions of joint shear and confinement. While ACI 318-19 tightens confinement requirements for SMF columns and joints, especially under high axial loads, this study reveals that increasing the axial load ratio benefits joint behavior. The study also demonstrates the feasibility of using high-strength reinforcement in exterior beam-column joints of SMFs, provided that appropriate modifications are made. The findings in this study have influenced modifications from ACI 318-19 to the Building Code Requirements for Concrete Structures in Taiwan.

DOI:

10.14359/51745667


12345...>>

Results Per Page 





ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL CONCRETE ABSTRACTS PORTAL

  • The International Concrete Abstracts Portal is an ACI led collaboration with leading technical organizations from within the international concrete industry and offers the most comprehensive collection of published concrete abstracts.

Edit Module Settings to define Page Content Reviewer