Aci 318-14 Pdf Free Download

The American Concrete Institute (ACI) published the Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary (ACI 318R-14) in the Fall of 2014. ACI 318-14 has been adopted by reference into the 2015 International Building Code (IBC). There are very significant organizational as well as technical changes between ACI 318-11 and ACI 318-14. This is the second of a two-part article on these changes: Part 1 (STRUCTURE, April 2016) described the organizational changes, and this Part is devoted to the technical changes.

In view of the effort involved in the complete reorganization of ACI 318-14, the initial expectation was that the number of technical changes in ACI 318-14 would be minimal. However, it did not end up that way. ACI 318-14 contains a number of significant technical changes, with some of the most significant ones discussed below.

Download 🔥 https://blltly.com/2y7O5c 🔥

This new chapter contains sections on: Materials, Design Loads, Structural System and Load paths, Structural Analysis, Strength, Serviceability, Durability, Sustainability, Structural Integrity, Fire Resistance, Requirements for Specific Types of Construction, Construction and Inspection, and Strength Evaluation of Existing Structures. Most of these sections refer to other chapters in ACI 318-14. The section on Construction and Inspection, for instance, refers to Chapter 26. ACI 318-14 does not have specific requirements concerning sustainability and fire resistance. The section on Sustainability permits the licensed design professional to specify sustainability requirements in the construction documents. The strength, serviceability, and durability requirements of ACI 318-14 are required to take precedence over sustainability considerations. In the section on Fire Resistance, ACI 318 refers to the fire protection requirements of the general building code, which is the legal code used by the authority having jurisdiction over the structure.

ACI 318-11 Section 18.9.1 required a minimum area of bonded reinforcement to be provided in all flexural members with unbonded tendons. ACI 318-14 Section 8.6.2.3 requires the same minimum bonded reinforcement in slabs with unbonded or bonded tendons, except that the area of bonded tendons is considered effective in controlling cracking.

The structural integrity requirements in ACI 318-11 Section 18.12.6 applied to two-way post-tensioned slab systems with unbonded tendons only. The structural integrity requirements in ACI 318-14 Section 8.7.5.6 apply to two-way post-tensioned slab systems with unbonded as well as bonded tendons.

ACI 318 has, for many editions, contained design and detailing requirements, found in ACI 318-14 Section 18.12, for diaphragms in structures assigned to Seismic Design Category (SDC) D, E, or F, defined in ACE 7-10. ACI 318-14 has, for the first time, added design provisions in the new Chapter 12 for diaphragms in buildings assigned to SDC C and lower. The new chapter applies to the design of nonprestressed and prestressed diaphragms. The diaphragms may be cast-in-place as well as precast with or without topping. The topping may be composite or non-composite with the precast units.

4) In these earthquakes and laboratory tests, concrete spalling and vertical reinforcement buckling were at times observed at wall boundaries. Wall damage was often concentrated over a wall height of two or three times the wall thicknesses, much less than the commonly assumed plastic-hinge height of one-half the wall length. Out-of-plane buckling failures over partial story heights were also observed; this failure mode had previously been observed only in a few, moderate-scale laboratory tests. Design requirements for special shear walls have changed in significant ways in ACI 318-14 in view of the above observations.

The stress in prestressing steel at the stage of strength, fps, can be calculated based on strain compatibility, or is permitted to be calculated in accordance with Eq. (20.3.2.3.1) for members with bonded prestressed reinforcement if the effective prestress is no smaller than one-half the tensile strength of the prestressing reinforcement. ACI 318-14 now requires that all prestressing reinforcement be located in the tension zone for Eq. (20.3.2.3.1) to be applicable.

ACI 318-14 has also added Section 22.4.3.1, which requires that the nominal axial tensile strength of a nonprestressed, composite, or prestressed member, Pnt, be taken greater than Pnt,max, calculated by the new Eq. (22.4.3.1).

In ACI 318-14, the two-way shear provisions are all expressed in terms of stress (vn, vc, vs, used in ACI 318-11 for slab-column connections subject to axial load and moment), never force (Vn, Vc, Vs, used in ACI 318-11 for slab-column connections subject to concentric axial load only).

Two changes are made in ACI 318-14 Table 25.3.2 to eliminate the difference between the required tail extension of a 90-deg or 135-deg standard hook (6db in ACI 318-11) and that of a seismic hook (6db, subject to a minimum of 3 inches). The 3-inch minimum requirement now applies to standard hooks as well.

The new ACI 318-14 code has been implemented into RISA-3D V14, RISAFloor V10, and RISAFoundation V8. One of the big changes between the ACI 318-11 and the ACI 318-14 was to minimum flexural reinforcement for one-way and two-way slabs, as well as foundation elements.

The American Concrete Institute (ACI) published the Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary (ACI 318R-14) in the Fall of 2014. ACI 318-14 has been adopted by reference into the 2015 International Building Code (IBC). Adoption of the 2015 IBC by cities, counties, and states has been rather slow. However, major adoptions are scheduled to follow. The 2016 California Building Code (CBC), based on the 2015 IBC, will be effective in California on January 1, 2017. As of that date, ACI 318-14 will be law within the State of California.

There are very significant organizational as well as technical changes between ACI 318-11 and ACI 318-14. This is the first of a two-part article on these changes. This part is devoted to the organizational changes. Part 2 will describe the technical changes.

Chapter 19, Shells and Folded Plates, is no longer part of the reorganized document. ACI Committee 318, in collaboration with ACI-ASCE Committee 334, Concrete Shell Design and Construction, has developed ACI 318.2-14, the contents of which match those of ACI 318-11 Chapter 19. The reader may wonder why this document was designated ACI 318.2, rather than ACI 318.1. This is because it was initially planned that ACI 318-11 Chapter 22 on plain concrete would become a separate standard: ACI 318.1. The number was reserved for that purpose. It was later decided to place the contents of ACI 318-11 Chapter 22 in ACI 318-14 Chapter 14.

Does anyone else think that when a company says they have incorporated a new design code into their software, they should probably update their code references at that time? Seem reasonable to anyone else? Instead, Bentley still references the 2005 seismic specs when either 2010 or 2016 specs are selected. And baselate anchorage calcs have yet to offer ACI 318-14 as an option even. It is almost 2019....

Don't hold your breath... This is the same company that still has to have a workaround for checking roof live load and snow load on the same building in RSS, still can't handle wind uplift in RSS, and still only has an option for 2005 NDS for wood design in Elements. ACI 318-19 is already out, so they're an entire development cycle behind now, but my state updates every other code cycle, so we're just now moving up to IBC 2018 and will still need to use ACI 318-14 until we adopt the 2024 code in 2025 probably. So it would be nice if the references were at least up-to-date for when we do have to submit calcs on projects.

The final verification includes determining whether the cross-section dimensions are sufficient based off Sec. 22.5.1.2. [1]. To do this, ultimate shear strength is compared to Eqn. 22.5.1.2 from ACI 318-14 [1]:

Formula 15

An alternative for concrete reinforcement design is to utilize the add-on module RF-/CONCRETE Members and perform the design as per ACI 318-14 [1]. The module will determine the required reinforcement to resist the applied loads on the beam. Furthermore, the program will also design the provided reinforcement based on the specified bar sizes set by the user while taking into consideration spacing requirements from the standard. The user has the opportunity to make small adjustments to the provided reinforcement layout in the results table.

This technical background discusses the requirements for the design of a reinforced concrete corbel in both metric version ACI 318M-14 and the US customary unit version ACI 318-14 of the code. Formulas and terms are primarily expressed in metric units with the equivalent US unit enclosed in square brackets [ ]. The online calculator allows the engineer to select the desired unit.

The corbel reinforcement should be detailed in accordance to Section 16.5.6. It must be ensured that the reinforcement are properly anchored both in front and at back of the corbel. Refer to some details extracted from ACI 318-14.

Bars larger than No. 6 in size are not very practical for use as transverse reinforcement. Also, the ensemble of one hoop and crossties in two orthogonal directions has a thickness of 2-1/4 in. for No. 6 bar size, which translates into a 1-3/4-in. clear spacing for a 4-in. center-to-center spacing. Thus, the above table shows the limitations on sustainable axial load as the specified compressive strength goes beyond 6 ksi. The limitations have become significantly more severe under ACI 318-14. It should be noted that ACI 318 does not allow Pu to exceed 0.8 (accidental eccentricity factor) x 0.65 ( for columns with discrete transverse reinforcement) x Po = 0.525 Po, where

The database was limited to push-off specimens subjected to monotonic loading and without external normal forces. The data were categorized in terms of concrete type, interface condition, compressive strength of concrete, clamping stress, and area of shear interface to help identify gaps in the literature. Analysis of the database showed that PCI Eq. (5-32b) is more accurate and has a lower standard deviation than both PCI Eq. (5-32a) and ACI 318-14 Eq. (22.9.4.2) for normalweight, sand-lightweight, and all-lightweight concrete with monolithic uncracked, monolithic precracked, and cold-joint roughened interface conditions. For the cold-joint smooth interface condition, the authors recommend removing the modification factor in the coefficient of friction to provide more accurate and economical designs. 006ab0faaa