FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109  
110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   >>  
------+--------------------------------- University of| 2,033 | 2,438 |_Proceedings_, Wisconsin. | | |Am. Soc. for Testing Materials, | | |Vol. IX, 1909, p. 477. --------------+--------+--------------+--------------------------------- In referring, in the next paragraph, to Mr. Withey's tests at the University of Wisconsin, Mr. Godfrey selects for his comparison two groups of concrete which are not comparable. Mr. Withey, in the paper describing the tests, refers to two groups of plain concrete columns, _A1_ to _A4_, and _W1_ to _W3_. He speaks of the uniformity in the tests of the former group, the maximum variation in the four specimens being only 2%, but states, with reference to columns, _W1_ to _W3_, that: "As these 3 columns were made of a concrete much superior to that in any of the other columns made from 1:2:4 or 1:2:3-1/2 mix, they cannot satisfactorily be compared with them. Failures of all plain columns were sudden and without any warning." Now, Mr. Godfrey, instead of taking columns _A1_ to _A3_, selects for his comparison _W1_ to _W3_, made, as Mr. Withey distinctly states, with an especially superior concrete. Taking columns, _A1_ to _A3_, for comparison with the reinforced columns, _E1_ to _E3_, the result shows an average of 2,033 for the plain columns and 2,438 for the reinforced columns. Again, taking the third series of tests referred to by Mr. Godfrey, those at Minneapolis, Minn., it is to be noticed that he selects for his criticism a column which has this note as to the manner of failure: "Bending at center (bad batch of concrete at this point)." Furthermore, the column is only 9 by 9 in., and square, and the stress referred to is calculated on the full section of the column instead of on the strength within the hooping, although the latter method is the general practice in a hooped column. The inaccuracy of this is shown by the fact that, with this small size of square column, more than half the area is outside the hooping and never taken into account in theoretical computations. A fair comparison, as far as longitudinal reinforcement is concerned, is always between the two plain columns and the six columns, _E_, _D_, and _F_. The results are so instructive that a letter[Q] by the writer is quoted in full as follows: "SIR:-- "In view of the fact that the column tests at Minneapolis, as
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109  
110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   >>  



Top keywords:

columns

 
column
 

concrete

 

comparison

 

Godfrey

 

selects

 

Withey

 

Wisconsin

 

taking

 

states


University

 

groups

 

hooping

 

superior

 

square

 

referred

 

Minneapolis

 

reinforced

 

method

 

general


Bending

 

center

 

failure

 

manner

 

section

 

strength

 

calculated

 

stress

 

practice

 

Furthermore


reinforcement

 

concerned

 
results
 
quoted
 

writer

 

instructive

 

letter

 

longitudinal

 

inaccuracy

 

criticism


computations

 

theoretical

 

account

 

hooped

 

speaks

 

uniformity

 

describing

 

refers

 

maximum

 
reference