FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   >>  
discussion of the first point, seems to object solely to the angle of the bent-up portion of the rod. This angle could have been much less, without affecting the essence of the writer's remarks. Of course, the resultant, _b_, would have been less, but this would not create a queen-post at the sharp bend of the bar. Major Sewell says that he "does not remember ever to have seen just the type of construction shown in Fig. 1, either used or recommended." This type of beam might be called a standard. It is almost the insignia of a reinforced concrete expert. A little farther on Major Sewell says that four beams tested at the University of Illinois were about as nearly like Fig. 1 as anything he has ever seen in actual practice. He is the only one who has yet accused the writer of inventing this beam. If Major Sewell's statement that he has never seen the second point exemplified simply means that he has never seen an example of the bar bent up at the identical angle given in the paper, his criticism has not much weight. Major Sewell's comment on the retaining wall begs the question. Specific references to examples have been given in which the rods of a counterfort are not anchored into the slabs that they hold by tension, save by a few inches of embedment; an analysis has also been cited in which the counterfort is considered as a beam, and ties in the great weight of the slab with a few "shear rods," ignoring the anchorage of either horizontal, vertical, or diagonal rods. It is not enough that books state that rods in tension need anchorage. They should not show examples of rods that are in pure tension and state that they are merely thrown in for shear. Transverse rods from the stem to the flange of a T-beam, tie the whole together; they prevent cracking, and thereby allow the shearing strength of the concrete to act. It is not necessary to count the rods in shear. Major Sewell's comparison of a stirrup system and a riveted truss is not logical. The verticals and diagonals of a riveted truss have gusset plates which connect symmetrically with the top chord. One line of rivets or a pin in the center line of the top chord could be used as a connection, and this connection would be complete. To distribute rivets above and below the center line of the top chord does not alter the essential fact that the connection of the web members is complete at the center of the top chord. The case of stirrups is quite different. Abov
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   >>  



Top keywords:

Sewell

 

tension

 
connection
 

center

 

riveted

 

complete

 

concrete

 

rivets

 

anchorage

 

weight


examples

 
counterfort
 
writer
 

flange

 
Transverse
 
cracking
 

prevent

 

thrown

 

diagonal

 

vertical


horizontal

 

shearing

 

ignoring

 

comparison

 

distribute

 

discussion

 

essential

 

stirrups

 

members

 
object

system

 

portion

 
stirrup
 

considered

 

logical

 
verticals
 

symmetrically

 
solely
 

connect

 
plates

diagonals

 

gusset

 

strength

 
embedment
 

Illinois

 

actual

 
practice
 

accused

 

inventing

 
University