FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   >>  
uired on the subject; it is known that the method used gives good results, and that is sufficient." This is another example of the logic applied to reinforced concrete design--another dogmatic statement. If these stirrups act like the verticals in a Howe truss, why is it not possible by analysis to show that they do? Of course there is no need of special literature on the subject, if it is the intention to perpetuate this senseless method of design. No amount of literature can prove that these stirrups act as the verticals of a Howe truss, for the simple reason that it can be easily proven that they do not. Mr. Thacher's criticism of the sixth point is not clear. "All the shear from the center of the beam up to the bar in question," is what he says each shear member is designed to take in the common method. The shear of a beam usually means the sum of the vertical forces in a vertical section. If he means that the amount of this shear is the load from the center of the beam to the bar in question, and that shear members are designed to take this amount of shear, it would be interesting to know by what interpretation the common method can be made to mean this. The method referred to is that given in several standard works and in the Joint Committee Report. The formula in that report for vertical reinforcement is: _V_ _s_ _P_ = --------- , _j_ _d_ in which _P_ = the stress in a single reinforcing member, _V_ = the proportion of total shear assumed as carried by the reinforcement, _s_ = the horizontal spacing of the reinforcing members, and _j d_ = the effective depth. Suppose the spacing of shear members is one-half or one-third of the effective depth, the stress in each member is one-half or one-third of the "shear assumed to be carried by the reinforcement." Can Mr. Thacher make anything else out of it? If, as he says, vertical stirrups are designed to act like the vertical rods in a Howe truss, why are they not given the stress of the verticals of a Howe truss instead of one-half or one-third or a less proportion of that stress? Without meaning to criticize the tests made by Mr. Thaddeus Hyatt on curved-up rods with nuts and washers, it is true that the results of many early tests on reinforced concrete are uncertain, because of the mealy character of the concrete made in the days when "a minimum amount of water" was the rule. Reinforcement slips in such concrete when it would
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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:
vertical
 

method

 

stress

 
concrete
 

amount

 

designed

 

member

 

reinforcement

 
members
 
stirrups

verticals

 

question

 

assumed

 

proportion

 

center

 

carried

 

effective

 

reinforcing

 

common

 
spacing

subject
 

literature

 
results
 

design

 

Thacher

 

reinforced

 

sufficient

 
horizontal
 
Suppose
 

meaning


character
 

minimum

 

Reinforcement

 

uncertain

 

Thaddeus

 

criticize

 

applied

 

Without

 

curved

 

washers


dogmatic

 

intention

 

perpetuate

 
special
 

senseless

 

criticism

 

proven

 

simple

 

reason

 

easily