FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29  
30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   >>   >|  
g from the front wall to the horizontal slab, and anchored into each in such a manner as would be adopted were these slabs suspended on the rods, is the only rational and the only efficient design possible. This design is illustrated at _b_ in Fig. 2. [Illustration: FIG. 2.] The fourth point concerns shear in steel rods embedded in concrete. For decades, specifications for steel bridges have gravely given a unit shear to be allowed on bridge pins, and every bridge engineer knows or ought to know that, if a bridge pin is properly proportioned for bending and bearing, there is no possibility of its being weak from shear. The centers of bearings cannot be brought close enough together to reduce the size of the pin to where its shear need be considered, because of the width required for bearing on the parts. Concrete is about one-thirtieth as strong as steel in bearing. There is, therefore, somewhat less than one-thirtieth of a reason for specifying any shear on steel rods embedded in concrete. The gravity of the situation is not so much the serious manner in which this unit of shear in steel is written in specifications and building codes for reinforced concrete work (it does not mean anything in specifications for steelwork, because it is ignored), but it is apparent when designers soberly use these absurd units, and proportion shear rods accordingly. Many designers actually proportion shear rods for shear, shear in the steel at units of 10,000 or 12,000 lb. per sq. in.; and the blame for this dangerous practice can be laid directly to the literature on reinforced concrete. Shear rods are given as standard features in the design of reinforced concrete beams. In the Joint Report of the Committee of the various engineering societies, a method for proportioning shear members is given. The stress, or shear per shear member, is the longitudinal shear which would occur in the space from member to member. No hint is given as to whether these bars are in shear or tension; in fact, either would be absurd and impossible without greatly overstressing some other part. This is just a sample of the state of the literature on this important subject. Shear bars will be taken up more fully in subsequent paragraphs. The fifth point concerns vertical stirrups in a beam. These stirrups are conspicuous features in the designs of reinforcing concrete beams. Explanations of how they act are conspicuous in the literature on reinforce
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29  
30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

concrete

 

bridge

 

literature

 

design

 

reinforced

 

bearing

 
member
 

specifications

 

embedded

 
thirtieth

manner

 

features

 

designers

 

stirrups

 
proportion
 

absurd

 
conspicuous
 

concerns

 

standard

 

engineering


Committee
 

apparent

 

Report

 

societies

 

dangerous

 
practice
 

soberly

 

directly

 

impossible

 

subsequent


paragraphs

 

important

 

subject

 

vertical

 

reinforce

 
Explanations
 

reinforcing

 
designs
 

sample

 

longitudinal


proportioning

 
members
 

stress

 

tension

 

overstressing

 

greatly

 
method
 

gravely

 
allowed
 
bridges