318 Closure

Document:ACI318:BuildingCodeRequirementsforStructuralConcreteandCommentary
PublicDiscussionPeriod:May1,2014June15,2014
1.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
00
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
2.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
00
3.
MarkGilligan
00
00
No.
4.
Public
Commenter
Name
AliHussein
Provision
#
5.
PeterA.Giessel
00
6.
HelmuthWilden
00
7.
DavidDeValve
00
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
Goingforward,pleaseusethebarforrevisionand
arrowfordeletionusedinACI530.Whyareall
publicationsnotrevisedandannotatedina
consistentfashion?
Istherenotabetterwaytodistinguishbetween
actualyieldstrengthandactualtensilestrength
(i.e.fy,fu?)Ifindtheterminologyopaque.Ifnothing
else,couldthecommentaryshowahypothetical
situationwithallthesevariablesknownandexplain
themthatway?
Thecommentsprovidedherearenotnecessarily
exhaustivebutarerathertheinstancesIfound.Ifin
otherlocationssimilarsituationsoccurtheyshould
betreatedsimilarily.
Drawingsparagraphsinthecurrentcodewiththe
paragraphorbesideorclosetoit,whichallowsthe
usertoeasilycomparethespeechcodeinthe
paragraphwiththedrawing,aswellasinthefollow
uptoreadtheparagraphsthatfollow.
Thedrawingsinthenewcodearethereattheendof
eachchapter,andherethereisdifficultyinthe
comparisonchartwithwordsaswellashinder
continuereadingtheparagraphsthatfollow
IngeneralIlikethereorganizationandappreciatethe
additionalefforttocoordinatethedocumentwith
2015IBC.
Basedonmypreviouscomments[regarding
references],Isuggestthattheentiredocumentbe
copyeditedbyaprofessionalcopyeditor.
Manyreferencestootherchaptercodeprovisions
thenbacktocurrentchap.orotherchapterswasn't
thiscodecyclemeanttoeliminatemuchofthat
jumpingbackandforth?Wouldtheybehypelinked
inthedigitalversion!?(i.e.P.1047.6.4.2)
CommitteeResponse
Duetothereorganization,thewholeCodewouldhaverequired
sidebars.
Theactualyieldstrengthisthemeasuredtensileyieldofthe
reinforcement(asopposedtothespecifiedyieldfy)whilethe
actualtensilestrength(asopposedtothespecifiedtensile
strengthfu) isthemeasuredultimatetensilestrengthofthe
reinforcement.Definitionsofyieldstrengthandtensile
strengthareincludedinACICT13(ACIConcreteTerminology).It
isforthisreasonthatthesetermsarenotredefinedinChapter2.
Thanksforthecomments.
Asinpasteditionsofthecode,figureswillbepublishedin
proximitytotheprovisionsandcommentary.
Thanksforthecomment.
Thereisnoneedtochangetheequationnumberingscheme.
RefertotheresponsetoComment#15.ACIhasprofessional,well
qualifiedcopyeditors.
Thecodeusesatoolboxapproachinordertoavoidduplicationof
materialthatisusedbyanumberofchapters.Thedigitalversion
willbehyperlinked.
No.
8.
Public
Commenter
Name
Reineck,Karl
Heinz
Provision
#
00
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
Thenumberingofchaptersisfrequentlynotcorrect
andnotlogical.Inthefollowingsomeexamplesare
given.ThePublicCommenterReineckcouldnottrace
allmistakesinthewholecode.
Itdoesnotmakesensetonumbersection1.1.1ifno
1.1.2follows.Deletesection#1.1.1.
1.10.2follows.Deletesection1.10.1#.
2.1.2follows.Deletesection2.1.1#.
4.3.2follows.Deletesection#4.3.1
Itdoesnotmakesensetonumbersection4.10.1.1if
no4.10.1.2follows.Deletesection#4.10.1.1
no4.10.2.2follows.Deletesection#4.10.2.1
no4.13.5.2follows.Deletesection#4.12.5.1.
CommitteeResponse
Disagree.TheCommitteehasadoptedthefollowingsection
numberingapproach.Eachheadinghasauniquenumber,and
eachprovisionhasauniquesectionnumber.Inaddition,
subsectionsareusedtoprovideprovisionsonaspecifictopic.The
numberingcorrectlyfollowstheintendednumberingformat.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
Itdoesnotmakesensetonumbersection6.7.2.1.1if
6.7.2.1.2follows.Deletesection#6.7.2.1.1.
Itdoesnotmakesensetonumberasection6.8.1if
bo6.8.2follows.
Delete6.8.1Generalandrenumberthefollowing
sections6.8.1instead6.8.1.1etc.
Belowsection#7.6.4.2abasicstatementisgiven,
andthensect.7.6.4.2.1starts.Ifheadingswouldbe
introducedaftersectionnumbers,thisimportant
statementwouldnotappearinthelistofcontents.
Thisstatementcannotpreciselyreferredtoby
number,butonlybytherulesgivenbelowsection#
CommitteeResponse
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
9.
TrentNagele
00
10.
DavidDeValve
00
Chap.19
25
11.
PeterA.Giessel
00
FAQ
12.
RobertHale
00
13.
Reineck,Karl
00
PublicComment
7.6.4.2andbefore7.6.4.2.1;thisisobviously
curiousandnoteffective.
Introducenewsect.7.6.4.2.1forthestatemetn
directlybelow7.6.4.2,andrenumberthefollowing
sections1up,like7.6.4.2.1to7.6.4.2.2etc.
Itdoesnotmakesensetonumbersection7.7.6.2.1if
no7.7.6.2.2follows.Deletesection#7.7.6.2.1.
Place adetailedchaptertableofcontentsatthe
beginningofeachchapter(similartoAISC).
IthinkChapters1925needtobeplacedearlierin
theCodeasthesechaptersalldiscussdesign
parametersthatareusedinthedesignofconcrete
structures.Mostoftheseprovisionsarealsofoundin
thecontractdocumentsundertheNotesSection
usuallyatthefrontofafinalcontractdrawingset.
Placeasfollows:
Chapters19&24nearChapter4wherethese
parametersarebrieflyintroduced;
Chapters2122beforeChapter7todefinedesign
valuesbeforeputintouseinmembersections;
Chapter25nearChapter20toputreinforcing
constructiondetailsneardesigndetails;
Chapter23placednearorintoChapter6or
elsewhereasdeemedappropriate!?!
OnyourportalpageFAQitsays,Arethere
provisionsinACI31808or11thatareintentionally
missinginACI31814?NoIagreewiththe
omissions,butAppendixBandCareintentionally
missing(astheyshouldbe).Perhapstheportals
overlybroadstatementcouldberevised?
PleaseplacetheFiguresinlinewithprovisionsand
commentary.Reason:makestexteasiertoread
Thenumberingofchaptersisfrequentlynotcorrect
CommitteeResponse
Thanksforthesuggestion.Adetailedtableofcontentswillbe
providedatthefrontofthedocumentasinpasteditions.
Significantdiscussionoccurredwithinthecommitteeregardingthe
organizationofthedocument.Theorganizationpresentedisthe
consensusviewofthecommitteeandfollowsthemajor
organizationasfollows:
Part1General(Chapter14)
Part2Analysis(Chapter56)
Part3MemberDesign(Chapters714)
Part4Joints,Connections,andAnchoringtoConcrete(Chapters
1517)
Part5SeismicDesign(Chapter18)
Part6MaterialsandDurability(Chapters1920)
Part7StrengthandServiceability(Chapters2124)
Part8GeneralReinforcementDetails(Chapter25)
Part9Construction(Chapter26)
Part10ExistingStructuresEvaluation(Chapter27)
Thanksforthecomment.Informationregardingtechnicalchanges
madetotheCodesuchasremovalofAppendixesBandCis
providedintheConcreteInternationalarticlethatintroducedthe
publicdiscussionperiod.ThisarticleappearedintheMay2014
edition(pp1820)andisalsoavailableonthe31814portal
website.
Asinpasteditionsofthecode,figureswillbepublishedin
proximitytotheprovisionsandcommentary.
AsdiscussedforComment#8,theCommitteehasadoptedthe
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
Heinz
14.
HelmuthWilden
00
15.
HelmuthWilden
Wilden
Enterprises,Inc.
2Marshview
Drive
HiltonHead,SC
29928
hwilden@roadru
nner.com
00
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
andnotlogical.Inthefollowingsomeexamplesare
given.ThePublicCommenterReineckcouldnottrace
allmistakesinthewholecode.
followingsectionnumberingapproach.Eachheadinghasaunique
number,andeachprovisionhasauniquesectionnumber.In
addition,subsectionsincludeprovisionsrelatedtoaspecifictopic.
Thenumberingcorrectlyfollowstheintendednumberingformat.
SeeresponsetoComment#15.
Iseethattheequationnumbersseemtofollowthe
sectionnumbers.Ithinkthisisaseriousmistakethat
willcreateconfusionandpotentialerrorsalongthe
way.ForexampleinChapter17whichisalmost
AppendixDofACI31811,Eq.
D2isnowEq.17.4.1.2.Thisisafourdigitnumber
whichmakesthingsverycumbersome.Icanenvision
aseminarwheninthepastthespeakerwouldsimply
sayrefertoequationDdash2.Nowthepresenter
willneedtosayrefertoequationseventeenpoint4
point1point2.Wow.Whydothat?Iseethesame
thinginotherchapters.
GeneralComment:Useofequationnumbersismuch
toocomplex.
ForexampleinChapter17whichisalmostidentical
toAppendixDofACI31811,Eq.D2ofACI31811is
nowEq.17.4.1.2.Thisisafourdigitnumberwhich
makesthingsverycumbersome.Icanenvisiona
seminarwheninthepastthespeakerwouldsimply
sayrefertoequationDdash2.Nowthepresenter
willneedtosayrefertoequationseventeenpoint4
point1point2.Wow.Whydothat?
Asanengineerdoingcalculations,Ioftenreference
anACICodeequation.Usingfourdigitswillnotonly
makethattoughonengineersdoinglikewisebutalso
onthosereviewingthesecalculations.
Iseethesamethinginotherchapters.
Committee318discussedtheformatofequationnumbersand,
whileacknowledgingthatitismoreamatterofpersonal
preference,settledonnumbersthattiedtotheapplicable
provisionnumber.Oneofthedecidingfactorswastheincreased
useoftablesintheCode.Tablesarenumberedtomatchthe
applicableCodeprovision,andmanycontainequationsthatin
previouseditionsoftheCodewouldstandalone.Withthesystem
adopted,equationsintablescanbereferencedbyprovisionand
rownumber,(a),(b),(c)etc.,whichistypicallyincludedina
columnatthefarrightofthetable.Thustheformatofequation
numbersisconsistentwhethertheequationstandsalone,orifitis
includedinatable.
Althoughtheequationnumberingmayseemcumbersome,ithas
theadvantagethatusingthenumbertiedtothesectionwillallow
areviewertoknowwhatsectionfromthecodetheequationcan
befound.Thisisanenhancementfrompreviouscodeswhereas
simpleconsecutiveorderingofequationnumbersdidnot
correspondtoaspecificprovision.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
16.
BrysonAllen
17.
JasonHerrman
18.
RubinMZallen
19.
20.
MarkGilligan
RubinMZallen
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
00
Figures&
Tables
00
31814
01
Chapter
1
1.2.2
All
1.10
All
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
Onemightarguethatitiseasiertofindanequationif
thenumbercoincideswiththesectionitisin.I
wouldcontendthatfindingandequationwithatwo
orthreedigitnumberisjustassimplebyjustscrolling
throughthechapteritisin.Alsowithelectronic
versionsbeingusedmorefrequentlyinthefuture,
thefindfeatureofeitheraMicrosoftWordversion
ofapdffileisprettysimple.
IhaveusedACI318sinceits1963editionandall
subsequentcodeshavesimplyusedthetwo(or
three)digitversion.Whychangenow?
Generalformatting placeallrelevantfiguresand
tableswithinthesectionsreferenced.Havingthem
attheendcontradictstherevisedstructureofthe
318document.
Indentingsubsectionswillhelpreadability.Right
nowitishardtofindheadings.
thereismuchintheCodeinregardtothegeneral
buildingcodethatreallyiscommentaryandshould
bemovedtotheCommentarysideoromitted.
Recommendedcorrectionsto1.2.2,1.2.5,R1.2.5,
1.4.1,and1.4.2areareflectionofthiscomment.
Approvalofspecialsystemsofdesign,construction,
oralternateconstructionmaterialsisnot
appropriatelyaddressedinthisstandard.Thisissue
isaddressedintheIBCinageneralway.Thereisno
needforaspecialtreatmentforconcrete.
ACI318doesnotneedtoaddressalloftheprovision
inthemainbuildingcode.Onemightsuggestthat
ACI318istryingtohijackandrewritethegeneral
provisionsofthemodelcode.
2nd sentence:Ittellsthejurisdictionwhattodo.The
CommitteeResponse
StaffwillformatdocumentaccordingtoACIstyle.Thefinal
versionwillbeformattedlikepreviouseditionsofthecode.
StaffwillformatdocumentaccordingtoACIstyle.
Whilethismaterialmayappearrepetitious,itwasdevelopedin
conjunctionwithlegalstaffbased,inpart,onpastchallengesto
theCode.Thematerialwasthoroughlydebatedbythefull
committee.
ACI318recognizesthatthisCodemaybeadoptedinjurisdictions
wheretheIBCoranothergeneralbuildingcodesisnotinforce.
ThereforesomeoverlapoccurstokeeptheACICodeacomplete
entity.
Thesecondsentencedoesnottellthejurisdictionwhattodo.It
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
sentenceshouldbemovedtothebeginningof
R1.2.2.Also,sentenceshouldstatewhoisdoingthe
adopting.
21.
MarkGilligan
1.2.4
22.
RubinMZallen
1.2.5
23.
RubinMZallen
24.
Mohamed
NasserDarwish
25.
MarkGilligan
Totallyunnecessary Itiswellestablishedinlawthat
onlytheadoptedversiongoverns.
Thelasttwolines inanystructuredesigned......
shouldbeomitted.Weshouldnotaddressanything
otherthantherequirementsofthisCode.
R1.2.5
Omitthissection:repetitiousof1.2.5aftermoving,
andexceedingtheseminimumrequirementsisnota
violationoftheCode.to1.2.5
1.2.5
1.2.7
26.
Mohamed
NasserDarwish
1.3.1
27.
RubinMZallen
1.4.1
..inanystructure...
Reason: Does this include special structures if

coveredbyageneralbuildingcode
proposedaction:Clarificationmaybeneeded
CommitteeResponse
simplypointsouthowthecodesandstandardssystemworks.
Asfarastheadoptingagency,itisleftasjurisdictionsincethe
adoptingagencycannotbedefinedmoreclosely.
ThereareseveralversionsofACI318includingtheSIandSpanish
versions.Thisprovisionisincludedtoidentifytheofficialversion
andestablishgovernance.Omissioncouldimplyotherwise.
ThisprovisionhasbeenintheCodeforseveraleditionsandis
intendedtoprovidethelicenseddesignprofessionalorthe
buildingofficialanindicationofwheretheCodemaybe
applicable.
ThecommentaryrepeatstheintentoftheCodeonlytoclarify
exceedingCoderequirementsispermissible.Asaclarifying
statement,itneednotbepartofthemandatoryCode
requirements.
Anystructureisintendedtocoverspecialstructuresasdefined
inthegeneralbuildingcode.
DeleteorrestateIfnogeneralbuildingcodeis
adoptedthisCodereflectsACIsrecommendations
regardingminimumrequirements..Ifthereisno
adoptedbuildingcodeitcannotprovideminimum
requirements.Moreappropriateinnonmandatory
portionofthestandardsuchasprefaceor
commentary.
...publichealth
Reason:seemsflow,mayneedtobemore
deterministic
proposedaction:Reconsiderationrequired
TherearejurisdictionsthatadoptACI318butnotageneral
buildingcode.Thisstatementmakesitclearthatstructuralsafety
isprovidedbythisCodeshouldtheCodebeadopted
independently.
Thissectionissimilarto1.2.2;itshouldbedeleted
andreplacedwith:
Whilebuildings aretheprimaryobjectiveoftheCode,318feels
thatlimitingtheCodetojustbuildingsratherthanconcrete
structuresmayresultinanunintendedlimitation.
Publichealth isincludedinmanygeneralbuildingcodesandis
associatedwithoverallstructuralsafety.Amoredeterministic
responsewouldtendtolimittheintent.
No.
28.
29.
Public
Commenter
Name
MarkGilligan
RubinMZallen
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
1.4.2
1.4.2
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
30.
MarkGilligan
1.4.6
31.
JamesS.Lai
1.4.6
PublicComment
ThisCodeshallapplytoconcretebuildingsor
structureswithstructuralsystemssimilartothatof
buildings.
Ifthebuildingcodedoesnotgovernatypeof
buildingareferencestandardcannotaccomplish
that.Fromaregulatorypointofviewthisprovisionis
irrelevant.Suggestsections1.2.4,1.2.7,and1.4.2be
addressedinaprefacetotheformalcode.
Replacethegeneralbuildingcode.attheendby
thisCode.
ACI543RandACI336.3RarenotadoptedbytheIBC
thustheIBCprovidesnorequirementsforthedesign
andconstructionoftheseelements.Some
interpretationsofthecodecouldcontendthatthese
deepfoundationselementsarethusnotallowed.
WearedealingwithanACIturfissue.ACI336.3R
essentiallyendorsedtheprovisionsofACI318soit
doesnotmakesensetoexcludetheseelements?
WhileACI543Rdoesmakesomeadditional
recommendationsitshouldbenotedthatdrilled
piersandconcretepilesareofteninstalledinthe
samematerialsusingthesameinstallation
techniquesthusitisunclearwhytheconcrete
requirementsshouldbeanydifferent.Thereiseven
lessreasonwhythecapacitiesoftheseconcrete
sectionsshouldbeevaluatedanydifferently.
IfACI318isapplicabletostructuresassignedtoSDC
D,E,andFwhywouldthiscodenotbeapplicableto
thesamestructureinalesserSDC?
ThusitisrecommendedthatSection1.4.6be
deleted.
Pleaseconsideraddinganotheritemtoeffect
CommitteeResponse
PracticinglicenseddesignprofessionalsoftenuseACI318or
portionsofACI318forstructuresotherthanbuildings.This
sectionistoestablishalegalframeworkforsuchactions.
TheintentofthestatementistoaddresstheapplicabilityofACI
318asstated.
ThisexclusionhasbeenintheCodeforseveraleditions.ACI318is
workingonupdatingthefoundationschaptertoprovidebetter
guidanceforallconditions.CertainlytheprovisionsforSDCD,E,
andFcanbeusedinlessercategories;however,theymaybe
excessive.Aswrittenthelicenseddesignprofessionalisfreeto
makethatjudgment.
TheCommitteeisworkingonupdatingtheFoundationschapter.
Aswrittensection1.4.6aaddressesalllateralloads,including
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
32.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
R1.4.7
33.
RubinMZallen
1.5.3
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
34.
MarkGilligan
1.6.2
35.
JamesS.Lai
1.6.2
36.
JamesS.Lai
R1.6.2
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
applicationtodesignforwindresistanceinhighwind
regions
wind.1.4.6.brefersonlytospecificrequirementsforseismic
designcategories.Thereisnoneedatpresentforaseparatewind
category.
Reviseasnoted:
ThePostTensioningInstitute(2012)providesrecommendations
forsoilinvestigation,geotechnicalandstructuralanalysis,and
designofposttensionedslabongroundfoundationsfor
residentialandlightcommercialbuildingsonexpansivesoils.
Aswritten,thefirstsentenceformallydefineswhatconstitutes
Commentaryanditshouldnotbemoved.
Thiscommentiscorrectandisexactlywhytheprovisionis
includedintheCode.Unfortunatelywhatisperfectlycleartoone
individualisnotsocleartoothers.
Revisereferencetoread:
ThePostTensioningInstitute(2012)provides
standardrequirementsforposttensionedslabon
groundfoundations,soilinvestigation,design,and
analysisofposttensionedresidentialandlight
commercialslabsonexpansivesoils.
Move1st sentencetoCommentarysidetoR1.5.3.
Delete.Itisperfectlyclearthatinterpretationsofa
localjurisdictiondonotimpactotherjurisdictions.It
isalsoclearthatbuildingofficialcannotchangethe
codeasitappliestohisjurisdictionwithoutactionby
theappropriatelegislativebody.
Notethatjustbecauseonewrongheadedindividual
promotedaninterpretationthatisWRONGdoesnot
meanthatoneneedstochangethestandard.You
cannotaddressallofthecrazythingspeoplewilldo.
Suchprovisionsonlyconfusethosewhotrytousethe
standard.
ReplaceBuildingOfficialwithAuthorityHaving
Jurisdictioninordertoaccountforenforcement
agenciesthatdonothaveassignedbuildingofficial.
Seecommentonsection2.2.
Thisstatementlimitstherightofauthorityhaving
jurisdictiontoamendthiscodebasedonlocal
climaticandgeologicalconditions.Aswritten,the
usuallyunenforceablecommentarysentenceis
argumentativeanddoesnotreflectthe
provision1.6.2.Thecommentarysentencetendsto
implynoexceptioncanbetakenonACI318
provision(s)eventhroughstateBuildingStandard
ThedefinitionofBuildingOfficialhasbeenrevisedtoreflectthe
authorityhavingjurisdiction
Section1.6.2statesthatlocalchangestothecoderemainlocal
suchthatachangeinonejurisdictiondoesnotapplyinother
jurisdictions.GlobalchangestotheCodearetheresponsibilityof
ACI,sometimesinresponsetolocalexceptions.Thisprovisionwas
reviewedbyACIlegalcounsel.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
37.
MarkGilligan
1.6.3
38.
MarkGilligan
1.7
PublicComment
Commissionisempoweredtoamendmodelcodes;
andlocaljurisdictionsneedtoenactlocalordinance
toadoptstatecodeswithamendmentswhichare
deemednecessary.Deletethecommentarysentence
intotalwithoutsubstitution.Theprovisionrequires
nocommentary.
Delete.Thisisaddressedinthegeneralprovisionsof
theIBC.Itisnottheroleofareferencestandardto
restateorchangetheprovisionsintheadopted
buildingcode.Evenwhenrequirementsarerestated
theyareinevitablysomewhatdifferentfromthe
provisionsintheadoptedbuildingcodeandthus
createconfusionandconflicts.
HasACIadoptedapolicythatitintendstousurpthe
roleofthebuildingcode.Ifnotthenremovethese
provisions.Ifyesthenbehonestaboutitsothatthe
authorsoftheIBCandotherreferencestandardscan
considertheneedtotakeaction.Ifyespleasesend
meacopyofthepolicy.
Thisstandardshouldnotattempttodefinerolesof
thevariousparties.
Thisstandardhasalreadyestablishedthatitisnot
theintenttodefinemeansandmethodsthuswhy
specifydetailedrequirementsforthedesign
professional.Suggestthattherelevantissuescanbe
addressedbyfocusingontheendresult.See
commentrelatedtosection1.8.1.
WhenthisCodeattemptstodefinetheactionsofthe
designprofessionalitrunstheriskofattemptingto
regulatethepracticeofengineeringorarchitecture.
Inmanyifnotallstatestheregulationofdesign
professionalsareassignedtostateagenciesthatare
CommitteeResponse
entity.HistoricallyACIhasworkedwithIBCtoreduceoreliminate
exceptionstoallowIBCandothergeneralbuildingcodesto
concentrateonotherlifesafetyissues.
ThisCodeiswrittenforthelicenseddesignprofessional.Toavoid
confusion,thelicenseddesignprofessionalmustbeidentified.
No.
39.
Public
Commenter
Name
JonB.Ardahl
Provision
#
1.8
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
40.
MarkGilligan
1.8.1
41.
MarkGilligan
1.8.2
PublicComment
differentfromtheagenciesorlocaljurisdictionsthat
havetheauthoritytoadoptbuildingregulations.
Thusthebuildingcodeanditsreferencedstandards
donothavetheauthoritytoregulatethepracticeof
designprofessionals.
DeletethetermConstructionDocumentsand
replacewiththetermContractDocumentsinthe
entiredocument.ThetermContractDocumentsis
thecommontermusedthroughouttheconstruction
industryconcerningdocumentsthatthecontractor
receivesandmustcomplywithwhenconstructinga
project.Thischangemustalsobemadetoagreewith
ACICT,theTCM,andtheproposedACI314.214.
Thereisnoneedtodefineanewtermwhenthereis
alreadyanacceptableterminusebytheconstruction
industry.
Ratherthatreferringtothelicenseddesign
professionalsuggestaltlanguage:
Theconstructiondocumentsshallcontainthe
informationrequiredinChapter26.
SeelatercommentsregardingChapter26.
Itisnotnecessarytosay;andthatrequiredbythe
jurisdiction.Firstthebuildingofficialcanonly
requirethatisrequiredbythecodeandasaresult
thisstandardcannotgivehimmoreauthority.
Secondthisisthesortofissuethatshouldbe
addressedintheBuildingcodenotinareference
standard.Considerhowconfusingthingswouldbeif
everyreferencestandardattemptedtorestateor
modifythebuildingcode..
Thefirstsentenceisredundant,andshouldbe
CommitteeResponse
Mr.Ardahliscorrectthatcontractdocumentsisinwideuse.
Contractdocumentsalsoincludebidbond,warranties,work
assignments,anditemsthat318doesnotaddress.ACICommittee
318feelsthenewnomenclatureisjustifiedtodefinethescope.
IBCalsomakesthisdistinctionbyusingconstructiondocuments.
The2014versionofACI318wasspecificallywrittentothelicensed
designprofessional.Historicallysomelicenseddesign
professionalsfeltthattheactionsnowinChapter26weretobe
determinedbythecontractor.Thisstatementclarifiesinformation
thatthelicenseddesignprofessionalmustprovidetothe
contractor.Addingthelocaljurisdictionprovidescompleteness.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
42.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R1.8.2
43.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,J.I.
2.2
12
2.2
15
31
44.
PublicComment
deleted,sincethisissueisageneraloneaddressedin
theIBC.
Suggestthattheremainderofthesectionisnot
neededsincethebuildingcodeaddressestheneedto
specifycalculationswithoutbeingspecific.Whyis
thisissueuniquetoconcrete?Whydidthe
committeemembersproposethisasachangetothe
IBCorASCE7?
Arethereferencestomodelanalysissupposedto
beModalanalysis?3x
CommitteeResponse
entityincludingtherequirementforcertaincalculations.
Somestructures,thinshellsforinstance,usemodelstovalidate
thedesignandthemodelsarepartofthedesigndevelopment.
Thestatementdoesnotrefertomodalanalysis.
In2008,c2 isalsousedinChapter21,butisnotnoted c2appearsin18.6.2.1(oldchapter21)andisconsistentwiththe
onthispage.
definitiononline7ofpage12.
ThedefinitionofMpr shouldread:Mpr =probable
Acceptthiscommentasnewbusiness.
flexuralstrengthofmembers,withorwithoutaxial
load,determinedusingthepropertiesofthemember
atjointfacesassumingatensilestressinthe
longitudinalbarsofatleast1.25fy,theprobable
compressivestrengthofconcrete,andastrength
reductionfactor, ,of1.0,in.lb
This clause recommends using an expected yield

strength of 1.25fy for the reinforcement, and tacitly,
thespecifiedconcretestrengthfctocalculateMpr.At
first hand this recommendation makes inconsistent
use of the strengths in a section. Furthermore, and
moreimportantly,isthefactthatinallcompressive
controlled sections and in sections in the transition
region,theuseofthespecifiedconcretestrengthcan
result in flexural strengths that are lower than the
probable flexural strengths. Such difference can
impactthedemandsincapacitydesignedelements.
The discussers suggest reviewing the publication by
No.
45.
Public
Commenter
Name
JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
2.2
24
46.
JianZhao
2.3
23
33
47.
JianZhao
2.3
24
48.
JianZhao
2.3
24
10
49.
JianZhao
2.3
24
11
PublicComment
RestrepoandRodriguez,(2013).There,authorshave
proposed an equation for calculating the probable
flexural strength of RC columns. Although the
inclusion of an equation such as those presented in
thispaperwillnotcoverallpracticalcases,itcangive
an idea on how to compute the probable flexural
strengthofsectionsofcolumnsandalsoinwalls.
Restrepo J.I., Rodriguez, M.E., (2013), On the

Probable Moment Strength of Reinforced Concrete
Columns, JulyAugust 2013, Structural Journal del
AmericanConcreteInstitute,681690.
InlieuofBuildingOfficial,Istronglysuggestthatwe
usethetermAuthorityhavingJurisdictionthe
organization,politicalsubdivision,office,orindividual
chargedwiththeresponsibilityofadministeringand
enforcingtheprovisionsofthiscode.SomeState
agencies,suchasinStateofCaliforniaDivisionof
StateArchitects,donothavebuildingofficial.This
definedterminACI318wouldbeofnomeaningand
superfluous.
Replacethecommabetweenundercutandanchors
withaspace
Pleasespecifythe"loads"heretorepresent
specificallytensileloads.Theshearloadtransferis
throughbearingbetweentheanchorshaftandthe
concrete
"suchthattheprotectedareasoverlap"shouldread
"suchthatthehorizontalprojectedareas(for
tension)and/ortheverticalprojectedareas(for
shear)overlap."
Thisdefinitionisnotnecessary.Otherwisethe
definitionofthestrengthcorrespondingtoother
CommitteeResponse
ThedefinitionofBuildingOfficialhasbeenrevisedasfollows:
buildingofficialTermusedtoidentifytheAuthorityhaving
jurisdictionorindividualchargedwithadministrationand
enforcementofprovisionsofthebuildingcode.Suchtermsas
buildingcommissionerorbuildinginspectorarevariationsofthe
title,andthetermbuildingofficialasusedinthisCode,is
intendedtoincludethosevariations,aswellasothersthatare
usedinthesamesense.
Accept.Anchorinstalledinhardenedconcrete;adhesive,
expansion,andundercutanchorsareexamplesofpostinstalled
anchors.(deleteextracommaafterundercut)
Theshearstrength(e.g.,pryout)isalsodependentonbond
strength.
Fixtypo:suchthattheprotected projected areasoverlap.
The expression pullout(17.4.3),asdistinctfrom bondfailure

(17.4.5),requiresexplanation.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
24
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
35
PublicComment
failuremodessuchasbreakoutandsideface
blowoutisneeded
Definitionofbuildingofficialisunneededand
inappropriatesinceitisdefinedinthemodelcode.
Includingthisdefinitioncanonlyresultinconflicts
andconfusion.Thedefinitioninthemodelcode
wouldgovernandthetermisirrelevantifthereisno
formallyadoptedbuildingcode.
Doeshighearlystrengthconcreteneedtobe
defined?
50.
MarkGilligan
2.3
51.
GregMoody
2.3
25
52.
GregMoody
2.3
25
24
Itappearsthattheequilibriumrequirementisforthe
aggregate.Thewordandismissing.MayIsuggest
Concretecontaininglightweightaggregateand
whichhasan
53.
JuanPablo
Covarrubias
2.3
Terminol
ogy
25
10
11
ItsaysPortlandcementoranyotherhydraulic
cementanditshouldsaycementitiuosmaterialas
definedinpage25lines3to5
54.
JonB.Ardahl
2.3
26
18
55.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
2.3
27
17
56.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
2.3
28
Deletethedefinitionforconstructiondocuments
andreplacewiththedefinitionforContract
DocumentsthatisinACTCTandTCM.[See
comment1]
Fivepercentfractileisnotcorrectlydefined.
Confidenceintervalandprobabilityoffailurearenot
interchangeableterms.
PleaseadddefinitionofHookvs.seismichook.
CommitteeResponse
wheretheIBCoranothergeneralbuildingcodisnotinforce.
entity.
HighearlystrengthconcreteisdefinedinACIsConcrete
TerminologystandardandtheCommitteedetermineditdoesnot
needtoberepeatedinACI318.
Makeaneditorialcorrectionto31811definition
Concrete,lightweightConcretecontaininglightweightaggregate
andhavinganequilibriumdensity,asdeterminedbyASTMC567,
between90and115lb/ft3.
Lines2021EditorialchangetoreplacehydraulicCementwith
cementitiousmaterial.
concreteMixtureofportlandcementoranyotherhydraulic
cementcementitiousmaterial,fineaggregate,coarseaggregate,
andwater,withorwithoutadmixtures.
Mr.Ardahliscorrectthatcontractdocumentsisinwideuse.
Contractdocumentsalsoincludebidbond,warranties,work
assignments,anditemsthat318doesnotaddress.318feelsthe
newnomenclatureisjustifiedtodefinethescope.IBCalsomakes
thisdistinction.
Thedefinitioniscorrectaspresentedandisconsistentwiththe
1997HiltireportANCHORPERFORMANCEANDTHE5%FRACTILEBy
RichardE.Wollmershauser,P.E.
AhookisacommontermdefinedintheACIConcreteTerminology
andnotrepeatedintheCode.Technicaldetailsofhooksand
seismichooksareprovidedin25.3.Theadditionordeletionof
terminologywillbetakenupasnewbusiness.
57.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
2.3
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
28
58.
AttilaBeres
2.3
28
No.
59.
60.
Public
Commenter
Name
JonB.Ardahl
MarkGilligan
Provision
#
2.3
2.3
28
29
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
17
licenseddesignprofessional Anindividualwhois
licensedtopracticecivilorstructuraldesign
engineeringasdefinedbythestatutoryrequirements
oftheprofessionallicensinglawsofthestateor
jurisdictioninwhichtheprojectistobeconstructed,
andwhoisinresponsiblechargeofthestructural
design
2
Aclosedtieshallnotbemadeupofinterlocking
headedreinforcingbars.
Thisexclusionisvoidofcontext.
Furthermore,crosstiesareoftenreplacedby
deformedbarswithheadsatbothends.This
applicationisnotmentioned.
Pleaseprovideguidance,atleastinthecommentary
(preferablywithreferences)thatexplainthe
substantiation/exclusionofsucharrangements,or
articulateanyconcerns.
17
Revisethedefinitionforlicenseddesignprofessional
toagreewiththeACICT.
4
Thisstandardhasadistortedunderstandingof
ManufacturersPrintedInstallationInstructions
(MPII)andinappropriatelyusesthetermwithrespect
tomechanicalanchors.MPIIisadocumentthatis
definedinACI355.4thatasapartoftheprocessof
qualifyinganadhesive,setsforththeinstallation
instructionstobeused.MPIIisnotmentionedinACI
355.2whichappliestomechanicalpostinstalled
anchors.
Thereisadoctrine(nondelegationdoctrine)inlaw
thatsaysthatthelegislaturecannotdelegatethe
writingoflawsorregulationstoprivateentities.For
thispurposetheBuildingStandardsCommissionin
Californiaorlocaljurisdictionsareconsidered
legislativebodies.Thebuildingofficialcannotfillthis
CommitteeResponse
Acceptingthecommentchangestheintentofthecode.Insome
jurisdictionsotherprofessionalsmaypreparethestructuraldesign.
Ifacivilengineerislicensedtopracticestructuraldesign,the
currentwordingiscomplete.
Anidenticalcommentwasreceivedinreferenceto25.7.4(see
CommentbyDr.Bereson25.7.4.2).
Indefinitionofhoop,changereferencefromChapter18to25.7.4.
hoopClosedtieorcontinuouslywoundtie,madeupofoneor
severalreinforcementelements,eachhavingseismichooksat
bothends.Aclosedtieshallnotbemadeupofinterlocking
headeddeformedbars.Chapter18See25.7.4.
SeeresponsetocommentbyMr.BrianJohnsonconcerning
licenseddesignprofessional.
TheCommitteedisagreesthatthisstandardhasa distorted
understandingofManufacturersPrintedInstallationInstructions.
Modifydefinitionin2.3asfollows:Publishedinstructionsforthe
correctinstallationoftheanadhesiveanchorunderallcovered
installationconditionsassuppliedintheproductpackaging.
Modify17.8.1asfollows:Anchorsshallbeinstalledbyqualified
personnelinaccordancewiththeconstruction documentsand,
whereapplicable,manufacturersinstructions.Theconstruction
documentsshallrequireinstallationofpostinstalledadhesive
anchorsinaccordancewiththeManufacturersPrintedInstallation
Instructions(MPII).Installationofadhesiveanchorsshallbe
performedbypersonneltrainedtoinstalladhesiveanchors.
ModifyR17.8.1asfollows:Inspectionisparticularlyimportantfor
postinstalledanchorstomakecertainthatthemanufacturers
recommendedinstallationprocedure,andinthecaseofadhesive
anchors,printedinstallationinstructions(MPII)arefollowed.For
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
role.Thefactthatthemodelcodesarewrittenby
privateentitiesiscuredwhenthelegislativebody
adoptstheregulations.Thelegislativebodyhasto
adoptthespecificlanguageofanyregulationsand
cannotdelegatethedutytoanonlegislativebody
suchasaproductmanufacturer.Thismakesit
impossibleforthegovernmenttoadoptafuture
versionofastandardbeforeithasbeenfinalized.
Theproblemisthatwhenthemanufacturercreates
installationinstructionswhichbecomecode
requirementsbutwhichhavenotbeenapprovedby
theappropriatelegislativebodytheserequirements
areinconflictwiththenondelegationdoctrine.
InthecaseofadhesiveanchorsACI355.4,arguably
getsaroundthisbysuggestingthattheMPIIfollowed
duringthequalificationprocessdocuments
limitationsonthequalificationoftheadhesive
anchors.TheMPIIistiedtothequalificationreport
andcannotbemodifiedwithoutrequalifyingthe
anchors.
Inthecaseofmechanicalanchors(ACI355.2)anMPII
isnotaformalpartofthequalificationprocessand
themanufacturercouldmodifyorcreateanMPIIat
anytimebypassingthemandatorylegislative
oversight..ThismodifiedMPIIcouldcontain
provisionsthatarelessrestrictivethanusedinthe
qualificationprocessyetthespecialinspectorswould
becompelledtofindtheinstalledanchors
acceptable.Thiseffectivelyallowsthemanufacturer
towritebuildingregulationsthatarenotapprovedby
therelevantlegislativebody.
adhesiveanchors,continuousmonitoringofinstallationsby
qualifiedinspectorsisrecommendedtoensurerequiredinstallation
proceduresarefollowed.Postinstalledanchorstrengthand
deformationcapacityareassessedbyacceptancetestingunderACI
355.2orACI355.4.Thesetestsarecarriedoutassuminginstallation
inaccordancewiththemanufacturersrecommendedprocedures
(inthecaseofadhesiveanchors,theMPII).Grossdeviationsfrom
theACI355.2orACI355.4acceptancetestingresultscouldoccurif
anchorcomponentsarealtered,orifanchorinstallationcriteriaor
proceduresvaryfromthosespecifiedintheMPII.
Modify26.7.2a.asfollows:(a)Postinstalledanchorsshallbe
installedinaccordancewithmanufacturersinstructions.Post
installedadhesiveanchorsshallbeinstalledinaccordancewiththe
ManufacturersPrintedInstallationInstructions(MPII).Modify
R26.7.2asfollows:(a)TheManufacturersPrintedInstallation
Instructions(MPII)containsallrelevantinformationfortheproper
installationofpostinstalledadhesiveanchors.Otherinformation
maybeapplicableforspecificcases.Foradhesiveanchors,
applicationdependentrequirementsforqualificationofinstallers
andinspectionrequirementsmayapply.
Referenceismadetomanufacturerrequirements,e.g.,in
R.20.3.2.6.2(fortendonlossnumbers)andR.25.4.8(certification
ofstrandbondcharacteristics).
No.
61.
Public
Commenter
Name
JianZhao
Provision
#
2.3
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
30
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
11
PublicComment
Itisimportanttodifferentiatebetweenwhatmaybe
goodtechnicalpractice,suchascomplyingwith
manufacturersinstallationinstructions,andwhatthe
buildingcodecanlegallyrequire.Buildingcodes
cannotsolveallproblemsassociatedwiththe
constructionprocess.
Asaresulttheprovisionsinthestandardshouldnot
requirecompliancewithanMPIIformechanical
anchorssuchasisdoneinSections17.8.1and
26.7.2(a)
"fulldesignload"inthedefinitionofanchor
reinforcementisvague.Thefulldesignloadcan
correspondtoconcretebreakout.Thedefinitionmay
read"reinforcementdesignedtoensureanchorsto
developtheirfulltensile/shearcapacities."
62.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
2.3
30
12
Revisedefinitiontoread:
reinforcement,bondedprestressedPretensioned
reinforcementorprestressedposttensioned
reinforcementinabondedtendon.
63.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
2.3
30
16
Insertmissingdefinition:
reinforcement,unbondedprestressedPost
tensionedreinforcementinanunbondedtendonor
externaltendon.
64.
MarkW
Cunningham
2.3
31
17
65.
MarkW
2.3
32
19
Re.Refertotie.Thisseemstoimplythatstirrups
andtiesarethesameandperhapseven
interchangeable.In31811itwasSeealsoTie.
thisisbetterinthatitdoesntimplytheyarethe
same.
Thedefinitionoftieisnotclear:(a)Loopof
CommitteeResponse
Revisedefinitionsin2.3asfollows:
reinforcement,anchorReinforcementusedtotransferthefull
designloadfromtheanchorsintothestructuralmember.
reinforcement,supplementaryReinforcementthatactsto
restrainthepotentialconcretebreakout,butisnotdesignedto
transferthefulldesignloadfromtheanchorsintothestructural
member.
ThischangewaspreviouslydiscussedbySubcommitteeGandit
wasdecidedtoleaveprestressedreinforcementasis.Prestressed
reinforcementcanbepretensionedorposttensionedanditis
possiblethatreinforcementcouldbepretensionedinaductand
thenbondedwithgrout.
Theproposeddefinitionisincorrectandunnecessary.Itisnot
uncommonforpretensionedreinforcementtobebondedonlyat
theendsandunbondedfortheremainderofthememberlength.
Thedefinitionofunbondedtendonreasonablydefinesunbonded
prestressedreinforcement.
Revisetextasfollows:Referto Seealsotie.
Alsochangeatotherappropriatesectionsincludingpg.29line23,
etc.:
refertoseealsotwowayconstruction.
Agree,willaddresspartofthiscommentasnewbusiness.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
Cunningham
66.
67.
68.
69.
JianZhao
JianZhao
RubinMZallen
MarkGilligan
2.3
35
16
2.3
3.2.1
36
3.2.2
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
reinforcingbarorwireenclosinglongitudinal
reinforcement;acontinuouslywoundbarorwirein
theformofacircle,rectangle,orotherpolygon
shapewithoutreentrantcornersisacceptable.Each
definitionimpliesasinglebarorwireinaclosed
configuration.However,crosstiesandcapties(318
14,Fig.R9.7.7.1)donotmeetthisdefinition.Also,
thedefinitiondoesntaddressconfigurationsof
closedtiesmadeupofmultipleties.
Also,isacceptableshouldberemovedsincethisis
adefinition,notaspecification.
Re.refertostirruporhoop.Thisseemstoimply
thatstirrups,tiesandhoopsarethesameand
perhapseveninterchangeable.
IsuggestchangingtoSeealsostirrup,hoop.
Theeffectiveembedmentdepthsforavarietyof
anchorsareshowninFig.R2.1.Meanwhile,itis
desiredtospecifytheeffectiveembedmentdepthsin
Fig.R2.3bforsleevetypeconstructiononPage37.
Forthispurpose,ACI318mayneedtolimitthe
applicationtocastinanchorsinthedefinitionof
"stretchlength."
Removethespaceafter"theCode."
ThetableheadingArticledesignationshouldread
Articledesignationofreferencedstandard.Itisnot
clearatfirstglancethatistheintendedmeaning.
DeletereferencetoACI374.1andACIITG5.
ACI374.105isimproperlybeingusedtointroduce
newstructuralsystemsforresistingseismicforces
intothebuildingcode.Theacceptabilityofnew
systemsisarolethatASCE7fills.Itappearsthatthe
LoopofreinforcingbarorwireterminologyhasbeeninACI318
11.Asnewbusiness,ACICommittee318willconsiderrevisionof
thisterminologytoaddressthatitcouldbemadeofmultiplepieces
(e.g.,twooverlappingrectangles).
5ForACI31814,providefollowingeditorialchangestodefinitionof
ForACI31814,providefollowingeditorialchangestodefinitionof
tieasfollows:
tie(a)Loopofreinforcingbarorwireenclosinglongitudinal
reinforcement;acontinuouslywoundtransversebarorwire,inthe
formofacircle,rectangle,orotherpolygonpolygonalshape,
withoutreentrantcornersenclosinglongitudinalreinforcementis
acceptable;refertoseealsostirrup,orhoop.;or(b)tTension
elementinastrutandtiemodel.
Fig.R2.3wastheincorrectreference.Thereferenceshouldhave
beentoFig.R2.1.
effectiveembedmentdepthEffectiveembedmentdepthsfora
varietyofanchortypesareshowninFig.R2.3Fig.R2.1.
ACIstaffwillfixduringlayout.
Section3.2istitledReferencedstandards.TheCommitteedoes
notfeelthatrepetitionofthesectiontitleisneededineach
subsection.Nochange.
ACIITGT1.1,thepredecessortoACI374.1,wasadoptedintoACI
31802.ACIITG5.1wasadoptedintoACI31808sothatforACI
31814therearenotechnicalchangeswithregardtothese
documents.
Aprovisionwithwordingcomparableto18.2.17hasbeenpartof
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
methodologyinACI374.1isatoddswiththe
methodologythathasbeenadoptedbyBSSCand
ASCE7.ACIITG5.107raisesthesameconcernsas
ACI374.1.
ThiscouldbeinterpretedasanattemptbyACIto
takeanendrunaroundASCE7.
70.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
3.2.2
Referencethemostrecentdocument,ACI423.714,
SpecificationforUnbondedSingleStrandTendon
Materials.Thisisespeciallyimportantasthisrevision
ofthespecificationrequiresencapsulatedtendons
forallapplicationsthataregovernedbyACI318.This
isahugestepforwardinensuringdurabilityofthe
CommitteeResponse
theACI318seismicprovisionssincethoseprovisionswerefirst
introducedinACI31871.Section18.2.1.7isneededbecausethe
prescriptiverequirementsforreinforcedconcretestructural
systemsinChapter18maynotcoverallsystemsthatmeetthe
intentofthespecialstructuralsystemsassignedseismicdesign
parametersinTable12.21ofASCE7.
ACI374.1andACIITG5.1definetheminimumexperimental
evidence,additionaltodesignprocedures,thatmustbeprovided
forspecialstructuralmomentframeandspecialstructuralwall
systems,respectively,tosatisfy18.2.1.7andforwhichitis
appropriatetousetheseismicdesignparametersofTable12.21
ofASCE7.
TheexistenceofACI374.1andACIITG5.1isnotatoddswiththe
methodologiesfordefiningthelateralforceresisting
characteristicsofstructuralsystemsasadoptedbyBSSCandASCE
7.ACI374.1wasfirstpublishedasACIITGT1.1in1999andwas
citedasreferencestandardACIITGT1.101fordefiningthe
requiredperformanceofspecialreinforcedconcretestructural
framesystemsinSec.9.1.2,developedbytheBSSC,andpublished
asNEHRP450(2003).ThecontentsofACIITG5.1werepublished
asSec.9.6inNEHRP450anddefinedtherequiredperformance
forspecialstructuralwallsystems.AjointcommitteeoftheBSSC
andoftheSeismicSafetySubcommitteeforASCE705considered
themeritofincludingthoseprovisionsinASCE705.They
concludedthatwithbothdocumentswerebeingreferencedinACI
31805,therewasnoneedtoincludetheminASCE705because
thatdocumentwasadoptingACI31805.
InTable3.2.2,changeACI423.707toACI423.714.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
posttensioningsystemsanditshouldbe
implementedimmediately.
ThetableheadingSectiondesignationshouldread
Sectiondesignationofstandard.
71.
RubinMZallen
3.2.3
72.
RubinMZallen
3.2.4
73.
AttilaBeres
3.2.4
40
mid
page
74.
DavidMcDonald
3.2.4
40
75.
DavidDeValve
3.2.4
76.
RubinMZallen
4.4.1
40,6
89
77.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
4.4.1
44
Astructuralsystemcomprises thesemembers(the
partscomprisethewhole),betteristhata
structuralsystemiscomposedofthesemembers
4.4.3
Deletefortworeasons.Firstaspercommentrelated
tosection1.10thisisnotamatterforthisstandard.
SecondlyifSection1.10isretainedthisisredundant.
78.
MarkGilligan
R4.4.1 Thetermsmemberandstructuralmember
arenotdefinedinChapter2;theyaredefined
somewhatinthelastsentenceofthe1stparagraph
ofR4.4.1.Thedefinitionisambiguous,andsuch
definitionshouldbeontheCodeside.Seecomment
for4.4.1.
ThislistingreferencesanearlierversionofASTM970
(2012)versusthesimilarreferenceonpage689to
the2013version.Thecurrenteditionis2013a.
AllASTMstandardsshouldbebroughtuptodate.
ASTMA775bisnotASTM775b(2014).Changesalso
toA615,706
ShouldthesameyearASTMstand.bereferenced
A106413(689)vs.A106412(40)?
Attheendofthissectionaddthefollowing
paragraph:Thetermmembershallincludea
structuralmember,structuraljoint,orstructural
connection,asthecontextallows.
CommitteeResponse
Section3.2istitledReferencedstandards.TheCommitteedoes
notfeelthatrepetitionofthesectiontitleisneededineach
subsection.Nochange.
DisagreeasdiscussedintheresponsetothecommentonCode
Section4.4.1.
Thereferencein3.2.4willbeupdatedtoASTMA97013atobe
compatiblewiththatunderReferences
Thankyou.ThisisACI318standardprocedure.Thelastupdateof
referencedstandardsisdoneasoftheclosingofthePublic
discussion.
Thereferencein3.2.4willbeupdatedtoASTMA106413tobe
compatiblewiththatunderReferences
AlthoughthisCodeisorganizedintopartsthatdistinguish
members,connections,andjoints,thewritersofthisCodeexpect
thatusersofthisCodewillhavetheexperienceandknowledgeto
understandthecontextinwhichthewordmemberisbeingused.
Incasethereisconfusion,thewritershavestatedinthe
Commentarythatthewordmembermaymeanmember,joint,or
connection.Itseemsunnecessarytoexplicitlydelineatemembers,
connections,andjointsineveryinstanceinthischapter.
AlthoughtheCodeiswrittenconsideringthatastructuralsystem
iscomposedofthesemembersitisgenerallyacceptedthatthe
partscomposethewhole,andthewholecomprisestheparts.
Therefore,thewordingisacceptableasis.
Chapter4hasnotpreviouslybeeninACI318,anditisdeemed
important,oncethestructuralsystemhasbeendefined,tonote
herethatalternativesystemsarepermitted.Thisisnotdeemedto
beredundantwithSection1.10becauseitreferstheuserbackto
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
79.
RubinMZallen
R4.4.5
Substitutethefollowingforthe1stsentenceofthe
2ndparagraph: Ageotechnicalengineershould
makeadeterminationofdifferentialsettlement
whereastructureisunderlainbycompressibleor
expansivesoil.Thesettlementsodeterminedshould
beconsideredinthestructuraldesign.(Aswritten
presently,the1stsentenceisambiguous).
80.
JamesS.Lai
R4.4.5
45
Insertthewordspansothat1st sentencewillread:
Theeffects..inlongspanroofandfloorsystems,..
81.
JamesS.Lai
4.4.6
45
82.
MarkGilligan
4.4.6.2
SuggestchangingsectiontitletoLateralforce
resistingsystemandaddasubsectiononwindforce
whensuchforcecontrolsthemainwindforcesystem
inlowerseismicSDCs.Note:intheglobalmarket,
suchasTaiwan,bothseismicandhighwindmay
controldesignofconcretestructures,andACICodeis
widelyused.
Theideaofanauthority,assumedgovernmental,
havingjurisdictionwithoutalegallyadoptedbuilding
codedoesnotmakesense.Ifthereisnoadopted
buildingcodenobodyhasjurisdiction.
83.
JamesS.Lai
R4.4.6.4
46
2nd sentenceForexample,chapter18doesnot.
isanincorrectstatement.Chapter18doescover
intermediatestructuralwalls.Suggestchanging
CommitteeResponse
Section1.10.
ItisnotthepurposeofthisCodetoprovideinstructionstothe
geotechnicalengineer.However,repetitionoftheconceptof
considerationisnotdesiredgrammatically.Therefore,change
thefirstsentenceofthesecondparagraphofR4.4.5asfollows:
ExplicitconsiderationofdDifferentialsettlementorheaveis
ordinarilyshouldmaybeanimportantconsiderationconsidered
explicitlyindesign.onlywhenspecificcriteriaareprovidedbythe
geotechnicalengineerorwhenexistingsoilconditionsdictatetheir
consideration.
TheCommitteedoesnotconsiderappropriatetoaddtheword
span.Thespansdonothavetobelongtorequirecareful
considerationofvolumechanges.Itisnotlongspan,butlong
geometrywhichisrestrained.
ThiswaspreviouslyconsideredbyACICommittee318,butwasnot
implementedbecausethisCodedoesnothavespecificprovisions
formainwindforceresistingsystems.
IthasbeenandcontinuestobetheintentofACICommittee318
thattheACI318Codebeusablewhetherthereisorisntalegally
adoptedgeneralbuildingcode.Thiscodesectionreferstothe
latterinamannertraditionallydonebyACI318.Wedonotagree
withthelaststatementinthecomment.
ACI318isusedworldwide.Althoughthemainfocusofthecodeis
theUnitedStates,theCommitteeismindfulofitsuseinother
countries,whereanoverarching,nationalbuildingcodemaynot
exist.
Chapter18isnotwrittenprimarilyforSDCD,E,andF.The
commentiscorrect,however,inthatprecastintermediatewalls
arecoveredforSDCC.Therefore,modifythelastsentenceas
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
sentenceto:Chapter18isprimarilywrittenfor
buildingsassignedtoSDCD,EorF;butisapplicable
forperformancebasedesignofbuildingsassignedto
SDCBorC.Requesttodeletesentenceinits
entirety.
84.
KariKlaboe
4.4.6.5
and
R4.4.6.5
Chp.
4
CommitteeResponse
follows:
Forexample,Chapter18doesnotincluderequirementsfor
ordinarycastinplacestructuralwallsinSeismicDesignCategories
BandC,butdoesincludespecialprovisionsforSeismicDesign
CategoriesD,E,andF.
Entire TheCodeandCommentarywordingsareconfusing:
RevisetheCodeandCommentaryasfollows:
code
sectio
Section4.4.6.5appearstoaddressstructural Code
nand
membersthatarenotpartoftheseismic
4.4.6.5Structuralmembersassumednottobepartofthe
com
forceresistingsystem.Areferenceto
seismicforceresistingsystemshallbepermitted,subjecttothe
ment
nonstructuralmembersisincludedinthe
requirementsof4.4.6.5.1and4.4.6.5.2.
ary
lastsentenceofthecodesection;however,
4.4.6.5.1InstructuresassignedtoSeismicDesignCategoryB,
itjustrelatestoaddressingthe
C,D,EorF,theeffectsontheresponseofthesystem,andthe
consequencesofdamagetononstructural
members.Isthiscodesectionalsomeantto consequencesofdamagetothosestructuralmembersthatarenot
adesignatedpartoftheseismicforceresistingsystem,onthe
explicitlyaddressnonstructuralmember
responseofthesystemshallbeconsideredandaccommodatedin
interactionwiththeseismicforceresisting
thestructuraldesign.
system?
Section4.4.6.5(lastsentence),thiscomment 4.4.6.5.2.InstructuresassignedtoSeismicDesignCategoryB,
C,D,E,orF,theconsequencesofdamagetothosestructural
isabitpicky,butthephrasing,
Consequencesofdamagetostructuraland membersnotconsideredpartoftheseismicforceresistingsystem
shallbeconsidered.
nonstructuralmembersthatarenotpartof
4.4.6.5.23InstructuresassignedtoSeismicDesignCategoryD,
theseismicforceresistingsystemshallbe
EorF,structuralmembersnotconsideredpartoftheseismic
considered,seemstoimplythatthereare
forceresistingsystemshallmeettheapplicablerequirementsin
nonstructuralmembersthatarepartofthe
Chapter18.
seismicforceresistingsystem.
4.4.6.6Effectsofnonstructuralmembersshallbeaccountedfor
SectionR4.4.6.5(Commentary)appearsto
asdescribedinSection18.2.2.1andconsequencesofdamageto
addressnotonlythedesignofstructural
membersnotconsideredpartoftheseismic nonstructuralmembersshallbeconsidered.
forceresistingsystem,butalsothe
Commentary(onlyrevisedtoseparateoutthepartssotheygo
interactionofnonstructuralelementswith
theseismicforceresistingsystem.Thelatter withtheassociatedCodesections.Thesentences,reorganized,are
otherwiseunchanged.)
itemisnotaddressedinthecodesection
and,whileimportantforengineersto
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
address,seemstobeoutofplacewith
respecttothecodesectionitisnextto.The
issueofinteractionbetweennonstructural
membersandtheseismicforceresisting
systemappearstobeaddressedclearlyin
Chapter18,Section18.2.2.1.
SectionR4.4.6.5(Commentary)appearsto
alludeto,butnotdirectlyaddress,whether
ornotstructuralmembersnotpartofthe
seismicforceresistingsystemneedtobe
designedperChapter18.Chapter18,
SectionR18.1clearlystatesthattheintentis
foronlytheseismicforceresistingsystemto
bedesignedperChapter18forSDCBandC.
WhenIfirstreadthecommentarysection,I
thoughttherewasatypobecausethefirst
lineonlyreferstoSDCDthroughF,whilethe
codesection(4.4.6.5)referstoSDCB
throughF.
Suggestedchangestoproposedsections:
CodeSection
4.4.6.5Structuralmembersassumednottobepart
oftheseismicforceresistingsystemshallbe
permittedandconsequencesofdamagetothe
structuralmembersshallbeconsidered.
4.4.6.5.1InstructuresassignedtoSeismicDesign
CategoryB,C,D,EorF,theeffectontheseismic
forceresistingsystemofstructuralmembersnot
assumedtobepartoftheseismicforceresisting
systemshallbeconsideredandaccommodatedinthe
structuraldesign.
4.4.6.5.2InstructuresassignedtoSeismicDesign
CategoryD,EorF,structuralmembersnot
CommitteeResponse
R4.4.6.5 InSeismicDesignCategoriesD,EandF,structural
membersnotconsideredpartoftheseismicforceresistingsystem
arerequiredtobedesignedtoaccommodatedriftsandforcesthat
occurasthebuildingrespondstoanearthquake.
R4.4.6.6Althoughthedesignofnonstructuralelementsfor
earthquakeeffectsisnotincludedinthescopeofthisCode,the
potentialnegativeeffectsofnonstructuralelementsonthe
structuralbehaviorneedstobeconsideredinSeismicDesign
CategoriesB,C,D,E,andF.Interactionofnonstructuralelements
withthestructuralsystem,forexample,theshortcolumneffect,
hasledtofailureofstructuralmembersandcollapseofsome
structuresduringearthquakesinthepast.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
85.
RobertHale
4.5.2
86.
KojiSakai
4.9
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
consideredpartoftheseismicforceresistingsystem
shallmeettheapplicablerequirementsinChapter18.
[Ifareferencetointeractionsofnonstructural
membersontheseismicforceresistingsystemneeds
tobeprovided,addanothersubsectionasshown
below]
4.4.6.6Nonstructuralmembersshallbeaccounted
forasdescribedinSection18.2.2.1and
consequencesofdamagetononstructuralmembers
shallbeconsidered.
CommentarySection
R4.4.6.5InSeismicDesignCategoriesD,EandF,
structuralmembersnotconsideredpartofthe
seismicforceresistingsystemarerequiredtobe
designedtoaccommodatedriftsandforcesthat
occurasthebuildingrespondstoanearthquake.
[Ifanadditionalsectionfornonstructuralmembersis
notaddedinChapter4,thenmovethenonstructural
membercommentstoChapter18,Section18.2.2.1]
R4.4.6.6Althoughthedesignofnonstructural
elementsforearthquakeeffectsisnotincludedinthe
scopeofthisCode,thepotentialnegativeeffectsof
nonstructuralelementsonthestructuralbehavior
needstobeconsideredinSeismicDesignCategories
B,C,D,EandF.Interactionofnonstructuralelements
withthestructuralsystem,forexample,theshort
columneffect,hasledtofailureofstructural
membersandcollapseofsomestructuresduring
earthquakesinthepast.
ReplaceThemethodsofanalyseswithThe
methodsofanalysis.Reason:grammatical
Iwouldliketoappreciatetheincorporationof
sustainabilityintotherevisedversionofACI
BuildingCode.Atthesametime,however,Iwould
CommitteeResponse
Agreewiththecommenter.Changeanalysestoanalysis.
Untilsuchtimethatsustainabilityrequirementsarecodified,the
proposedstatementflagstheneedtopayattentionto
sustainability.
No.
87.
Public
Commenter
Name
JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
5.2.1
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
56
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
liketopointoutthatthefundamentalideaon
sustainabilityseemstobeimproper.
(1) First of all, the meaning of sustainability should

be clearly defined as the code. If there is no
proper definition, everybody understands it by
theirownway.
(2) The Code says that the licensed design
professional shall be permitted to specify
sustainability requirements and the strength,
serviceability, and durability requirements shall
take
precedence
over
sustainability
considerations.
(3) In general, it is regarded that sustainability has
three pillars, including economic, social, and
environmental aspects. From this point of view,
the idea the strength, serviceability, and
durabilityrequirementsshalltakeprocedureover
sustainabilityconsiderationisnotappropriate.
(4) Inaddition,socialaspectincludesanissueonthe
safety of a structure, which means that the
redundancy of safety is directly linked to social
sustainability.
(5) According to this logic, the expression does not
work. Fundamentally, we need to consider all
requirements with the balance among them as
the strength, serviceability, durability, and
sustainabilityareinterrelated.
(6) Therefore, my suggestion is to delete 4.9.2. Or
wemayexpressasfollows:
Thestrength,serviceability,durability,and
sustainabilityshallbeconsideredwithareasonable
balance.
Insertthewordwindafterearthquaketobetter
Windisoneoftheappliedloadsandshouldnotbesingledout
reflecttheintentinusingACI318
foradditiontotheprovision.Otherappliedloadsincludelive,
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
88.
JamesS.Lai
R5.2.1
56
89.
RubinMZallen
5.2.2
90.
JamesS.Lai
5.2.2
56
91.
JamesS.Lai
R5.2.2
56
92.
JamesS.Lai
R5.2.2
58
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
snow,rain,fluids,lateralearthpressureandice.Thecommittee
doesnotseemeritinlistingtheseindividuallyinthisgeneral
provisionwhenappliedloadsaddressesthemall.Theseloads
areindividuallyaddressedinsubsequentprovisions.
ConsideraddingWindforcesarebasedonultimate ThisisaddressedinR5.3.5andneednotbeaddedtothisgeneral
windvelocity(speed)inaccordancewithASCE710.
provision.
Substitutethewordtheforthewordanother
Changetoread:
(grammatical).
5.2.2Loadandseismicdesigncategories(SDC)shallbein
accordancewiththegeneralbuildingcode,ordeterminedby
anothertheauthorityhavingjurisdiction.
Revise sentence to read: Loads, wind and seismic Provision5.2.2iscorrectaswritten.Windisoneoftheloadsthat
designcategories.....(balanceunchanged)
shallbeinaccordancewiththegeneralbuildingcode.The
committeebelievesthatitisinappropriatetosingleoutwindfor
additiontothisprovision.
ChangeNFPA2009toNFPA2012
ChangesecondsentenceofR5.2.2toread:
SimilardesignationsareusedbytheInternationalBuildingCode
(IBC2012)andtheNationalFireProtectionAssociation(NFPA
20092012).
ChangeNFPA2009toNFPA2012
Othercorrectionstodocumenttitlesandpublicationdateswere
foundsubsequenttopublicdiscussion.
ReviseR5.2.2toread:
R5.2.2SeismicDesignCategories(SDC)inthisCodeareadopted
directly from ASCE/SEI 7. Similar designations are used by the
International Building Code (IBC 2012), and the National Fire
Protection Association NFPA 5000 (NFPA 2012). The Building
OfficialsandCodeAdministratorsInternational,Inc.BOCANational
BuildingCode(BOCA1999)andTheStandardBuildingCode(SBC
1999)usedseismicperformancecategories.TheUniformBuilding
Code (UBC 1997) relates seismic design requirements to seismic
zones, whereas editions of ACI 318 prior to 2008 related seismic
designrequirementstoseismicrisklevels.TableR5.2.2correlates
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
SDCtoseismicriskterminologyusedinACI318forseveraleditions
beforethe2008edition,andtothevariousmethodsofassigning
design requirements used in the United States under the various
model building codes, the ASCE/SEI 7 standard, and the National
EarthquakeHazardReductionProgram(1994).
Design requirements for earthquakeresistant structures in this
Code are determined by the SDC to which the structure is
assigned. In general, the SDC relates to seismic hazard level, soil
type, occupancy, and building use. Assignment of a building to a
SDC is under the jurisdiction of the general building code rather
thanthisCode.
TABLER5.2.2 Correlationbetweenseismicrelated
terminologyinmodelcodes
Levelofseismicriskor
assignedseismic
Code,standard,or
performanceordesign
resourcedocument
categoriesasdefinedin
andedition
theCode
ACI31808,ACI31811,
ACI31814;
IBC2000,2003,2006,
2009,2012;
SDC
NFPA5000,2003,
SDC[1]
SDCC
A,B
D,E,F
2006,2009;
ASCE798,702,705,
710;
NEHRP1997,2000,
2003,2009
Moderate/
High
Low intermedia
ACI31805and
seismi
seismic
te
previouseditions
c
risk
seismic
risk
risk
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
BOCANationalBuilding
Code1993,1996,
1999;
SPC[2]A,
StandardBuildingCode
B
1994,1997,1999;
ASCE793,795;
NEHRP1991,1994
SPCC
SPC
D,E
Seism
ic
Zone
3,4
[1]
SDC = Seismic design category as defined in code,
standard,orresourcedocument.
[2]
SPC = Seismic performance category as defined in
code,standard,orresourcedocument.
Seismic
UniformBuildingCode
Zone0,
1991,1994,1997
1
Intheabsenceofageneralbuildingcodethatprescribes
earthquakeloadsandseismiczoning,itistheintentof
Committee318thatapplicationofprovisionsforearthquake
resistantdesignbeconsistentwithnationalstandardsor
modelbuildingcodessuchasASCE/SEI7,IBC(2012),
andNFPA5000(2012).Themodelbuildingcodesalsospecify
overstrengthfactors,o,thatarerelatedtotheseismicforce
resistingsystemusedforthestructureanddesignofcertain
elements.
Table5.3.1theloadcombinationduetoTemperature Theproposedloadcombinationsdonotcomply withASCE/SEI7
loadeffectneedtobedefiningasgivenbelow:
10section2.3.5.
1. 1.2DL+1.2T+1.6LL
DL+0.75LL+0.75T
TheloadfactorsandcombinationsofTable5.3.1
TheloadcombinationsareincludedintheCodebecausesome
appeartobefromASCE710.Whyisitrepeated
codeusersoutsideoftheUSmaynothaveaccesstoASCE/SEI7
here?Alsowhatabouttheprimacyofthegeneral
10.Thedeterminationofprimacyisbeyondthemandateof
buildingcodeortheauthorityhavingjurisdictionif
Committee318.
thereisnobuildingcode?
Lastparagraph revisetoread:Modelbuilding
Thesubjectofthecommentaryparagraphiscodesthatuse
93.
Dr.HUSAIN
KHALAF
JARALLAH
5.3
59
94.
RubinMZallen
5.3.1
95.
JamesS.Lai
R5.3.1
59
Seismic
Zone2
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
96.
MarkW
Cunningham
R5.3.1
59
97.
DavidDeValve
Eq.
5.3.1d,e
60,6
2
98.
Dr.HUSAIN
KHALAF
JARALLAH
5.3.5
60
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
codesanddesignloadreferencerefertoearthquake
andwindforcesatthestrengthlevel.....(balance
remain)tobetterreflecttheintentinusingACI318
Inthelastparagraph,whyreferenceBOCA/NBC99,
SBC99,UBC97,whichareratheroutdated?Whynot
justreferenceASCE/SEI710andIBC2012?Isuggest
rewordingfirstsentenceasASCE/SEI710andIBC
2012refertoearthquakeforcesatthestrengthlevel,
andthecorrespondingloadfactoris1.0.
Isn'tequationsd&ealwaysgreaterthanequationsf
&g:given1.2D>0.9D,andtheadditionofHin5.3.8
doesnotchangethis?
strengthlevelearthquakeforces.Addingwindwillconflictwith
theremainingwordingwhichreferencesBOCA/NBC99,SBC99,
andUBC97.Thesecodesdonotusestrengthlevelwindloads.
Theoutdatedreferencesidentifystandardsthatuseearthquake
forcesatstrengthlevelthatareconsistentwithaloadfactorof
1.0.ThisinformationisusefuloutsideoftheUnitedStateswhere
theymaynotbeusingASCE/SEI710andIBC2012.
it is not only the factor of the wind load will be

changeiftheserviceloadlevelusedbutthefactorfor
dead load and live load will be change also. Still
further, if the wind load use according to ASCE the
following load combination will be used for all load
case:
Load Combinations for Strength Design
ASCE705andIBC09
DL=DeadLoad
LL=LiveLoad
T=TemperatureLoad
1.
1.4DL
2.
1.2DL+1.2T+1.6LL
3.
1.2DL+0.8WIND
Eq.5.3.1dandetypicallygovernverticalloadeffectswhileEq.
5.3.1fandgtypicallygovernlateralloadeffectssuchassliding,
overturning,anduplift.Hcanbeapassiveearthpressureoran
activeearthpressuremakingithardtotellwhichequationsgovern
thedesignofanyparticularmember.
TheproposedloadcombinationsarefromASCE/SEI705whileACI
31814isbasedonASCE/SEI710loadcombinations.WhenWis
basedonservicelevelloads,theloadfactorsonloadsotherthan
WdonotchangeinASCE/SEI710.1.6timestheservicelevel
windcorrespondsto1.0timethestrengthlevelwindforuseinEq.
5.3.1dwhichistheloadcombinationwithwindastheprimary
load.0.8timestheservicelevelwindcorrespondsto0.5timesthe
strengthlevelwindforuseincombinationswherewindisa
companionload.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
4.
1.2DL 0.8WIND
5.
1.2DL+1.0LL+1.6WIND
6.
1.2DL+1.0LL1.6WIND
7.
0.9DL+1.6WIND
8.
0.9DL1.6WIND
CommitteeResponse
Load Combinations for Allowable Stress

DesignaccordingASCE705andIBC09
DL=DeadLoad
LL=LiveLoad
T=TemperatureLoad
99.
MarkW
Cunningham
5.3.7(c)
62
1.
DL
2.
DL+LL+T
3.
DL+0.75LL+0.75T
4.
5.
DL+WIND
DLWIND
6.
DL+0.75LL+0.75WIND
7.
8.
9.
DL+0.75LL0.75WIND
0.6DL+WIND
0.6DLWIND
Theproposed5.3.7isatechnicalchangefromACI
ThetreatmentoffluidsloadFin31814isconsistentwithASCE/SEI
31811.Thecrossreferencekeysprovidedforthis
710.SeeASCE/SEI710commentarysectionC2.3.2forfurther
PublicDiscussionPerioddonotindicateanytechnical information.
changeforthissection.Furthermore,thearticleThe
PublicDiscussionPeriodforACI31814inMay,2014
ConcreteInternationalindicatesthattheprovisions
inproposedChapter5remainthesameasthosein
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
31811.
ASCE710doesnotconsiderthatFmaybe
permanent,thatiswhyASCE710doesnotuseFto
counteractWinsection2.3.2,Eq.6ofthatstandard
(ACI31814Eq.(5.3.1f)).ThecommentaryforASCE7
states:However[F]isnotpermanent;emptyingand
fillingcausesfluctuatingforcesinthestructure,
andFisnotincludedincombination6becausethe
windloadcanbepresentwhetherthetankisfullor
empty,sothegoverningloadcaseincombination6is
whenFiszero.
ACI31814proposestodeviatefromthephilosophy
ofASCE7,byintroducingtheconceptofpermanent
F.IfFispermanent,thenitshouldalsobeapplicable
inloadcase(5.3.1f),withaloadfactorof0.9.Hence,
5.3.7(c)wouldneedtobechangedto:Iftheeffect
ofFispermanentandcounteractstheprimaryload,
itshallbeincludedwithaloadfactorof0.9inEq.
(5.3.1f)and(5.3.1g).
However,anotherproblemisthatFcertainlyneednt
bepermanenttobeincludedinloadcombinationEq.
(5.3.1.g).ThepresenceofFaddstotheseismicload,
E,so0.9Fisusedtocounteracttheprimaryload,E.
TheASCE7commentarystates:Themassofthe
fluidisincludedintheinertialeffectduetoE,and
Tomakeitclearthatfluidweightinatankcanbe
usedtoresistuplift,Fwasaddedtoloadcombination
7,whereitwillbetreatedasdeadloadonlywhenF
counteractsE.
So,IsuggestrevertingbacktothewordingofACI
31811,9.2.4(andnotmakeanytechnicalchangesin
CommitteeResponse
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
100. WilliamSherman
101.
MarkW
Cunningham
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
5.3.8
62
5.3.8(b)
62
PublicComment
31814):WhereF ispresent,itshallbeincludedwith
thesameloadfactorasDinEq.[(5.3.1a)through
(5.3.1e)and(5.3.1g)].
LoadfactorsforearthloadsrefertoIftheeffectofH
ispermanent.Whatisthedefinitionof
permanent?Whiletheintentmaybeforearth
loadstoremaininplace,earthloadsmayberemoved
duetoexcavationforadjacentconstructionor,in
floodareas,erosionfromfloodwaters.Also,anote
shouldberequiredontheengineeringdrawingsif
earthpressureisassumedtobepermanent.
Theproposed5.3.8isatechnicalchangefromACI
31811.Thecrossreferencekeysprovidedforthis
PublicDiscussionPerioddonotindicateanytechnical
changeforthissection.Furthermore,thearticleThe
PublicDiscussionPeriodforACI31814inMay,2014
ConcreteInternationalindicatesthattheprovisions
inproposedChapter5remainthesameasthosein
31811.
Theprovisionreads:IftheeffectofHispermanent
andcounteractstheprimaryload,itshallbeincluded
withaloadfactorof0.9inEq.(5.3.1f)and(5.3.1g).
ThisissayingthatpermanentHmayonlybeusedto
resistWandEinequations5.3.1fand5.3.1g.This
wouldbeamajorchangefrom31811,whichstates:
wheretheeffectofHispermanentandcounteracts
theeffectsofotherloads,itshallbeincludedwitha
loadfactorof0.9inallloadcombinations.Itwould
alsobeamajordeviationfromASCE/SEI710forthe
samereason.ASCE/SEI7isreferencedinR5.3.8ACI
318shouldbeconsistentwithit.
Additionally,HmayresistFalthoughFisntidentified
asaprimaryload.
CommitteeResponse
ACI31814isconsistentwithASCE/SEI710.Thequestionshould
beaddressedtoASCE/SEI710.
Inadditiontomodifying5.3.8(b),thecommenttriggeredchangesto
(a)and(c).Revise5.3.8toread:
5.3.8IflateralearthpressureHispresent,itshallbeincludedin
theloadcombinationequationsof5.3.1inaccordancewith(a),(b),
or(c):
(a)IfHactsaloneoraddstotheprimaryloadeffect,itshallbe
includedwithaloadfactorof1.6.inEq.(5.3.1a)through(5.3.1e).
(b)IftheeffectofHispermanentandcounteractstheprimaryload
effect,itshallbeincludedwithaloadfactorof0.9.inEq.(5.3.1f)
through5.3.2g).
(c)IftheeffectofHisnotpermanentbut,whenpresent
counteractstheprimaryloadeffect,Hshallnotbeincluded.inEq.
(5.3.1a)through(5.3.1g).
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
102.
DavidDeValve
R5.3.12
634
103.
JeremyListerud
6.0
Chap
ter6
104.
JianZhao
R6.2.3
65
R6.2.5
66
105. JamesS.Lai
106. Reineck,Karl
Heinz
6.2.5
66
Sect.
6.2.5
PublicComment
Therefore,changeto:IftheeffectofHispermanent
andcounteractstheprimaryloadorF,itshallbe
includedwithaloadfactorof0.9inEq.(5.3.1a)
through(5.3.1g).
Reasoningseamsconfusingbetween:design
load...specifiedyield...nominaltensilestrength...'?
Inchapter6Inoticedthatthemomentcapacityof
concretewithrebarismissing.Thatisafundamental
requirement.Itwasmissinginthelastversion2011
editionaswell.Thereasonwhypeoplecantdothe
structuralengineeringtodayandwearegoingto
start
beingheldresponsibleforlivesisthatyouneglectto
putthefundamentalsin.Pleaseaddinthediscussion
ofbeammomentcapacityandthedevelopmentof
thea.
ShouldweusePandPwithahyphen?
2nd paragraph Thehighhandruleconventionisnot
acommontermintheglobalmarket.Suggestthe
Commentarytoincludeadiagramforsign
conventionofM1andM2toavoidconfusion.
CommitteeResponse
Thereasoningandwordinginthecommentaryaresound.They
areconsistentwiththemaximumtensilestressesinthe
prestressedreinforcementprescribedinTable20.3.2.5.1which
areusedtoestablishthemaximumjackingforce.
Momentcapacityofconcretewithrebardoesnotbelongin
Chapter6.Withthecodereorganization,Chapter6dealswith
structuralanalysiswhichdeterminesthestructuraldemandsona
member.Otherchaptersaddressthestructuralcapacityofa
member.
Thisisthenotationthathasbeenusedinpreviouseditionsofthe
Code.
ReviseR6.2.5toread:
ThesignconventionforM1/M2hasbeenupdatedsothatM1/M2is
negativeifbentinsinglecurvatureandpositiveifbentindouble
curvature.Thisreflectsasignconventionchangefromthe2011
code.
Belowsection#6.2.5quitesometextfollows,and
TheCodeprovisionscanbereferencedexplicitly.Itisbelieved
thensect.6.2.5.1starts.TheuserofACI318
thatthecommentrelatestocommentary.R6.2.5whichhasfive
wonderswhatthistextinthebeginningisabout.If
paragraphs.GiventhatdesigncalculationsreferenceCode
headingswouldbeintroducedaftersectionnumbers, provisionsratherthancommentary,changesarenotwarranted
andwouldrendertheCodelessreadable.
thissectionwouldnotappearinthelistofcontents.
Thistextcannotpreciselyreferredtobynumber,but
onlybytherulesgivenbelowsection#6.2.5and
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
107. AliHussein
6.3.2.1
108.
6.3.2.1
Chp.
6
KariKlaboe
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
before6.2.5.2;thisisobviouslycuriousandnot
effective.
Introducenewsect.6.2.5.1directlybelow6.2.5,and
renumberthefollowingsection1up,like6.2.5.1to
6.2.5.2etc.
Paragraphinthecurrentcodenumbered8.12.2
Whiletheproposedchangesmayhavemeritintextbooksand
Inthenewcodenumbered6.3.2.1
lecturenotes,itistheCommitteesopinionthattheinformationas
Thisparagraphinthenewcodearenotentirelyclear presentedissufficienttoconveytheCoderequirements.
orcontainsomethingofamysteryintranslationin
eithercodeThewaythecurrentarrangementismore
pronouncedthanthenewcode.
Proposalifitweretobethebestformofausercode
(Sourcedrawinglectures,Dr.AliNaji)
Table6.3.2.1.ForTbeamswithoverhangingflanges
onbothsidesofthebeamweb,theproposedcode
hasincreasedtheallowableflangeoverhangbased
onspanlength.Inpreviouscodesthetotalwidthof
slabeffectiveasaTbeamflangewaslimitedto1/4
ofthespanlength.Theproposedcodeallowsforthe
Addthefollowingcommentary
R6.3.2.1InACI31811,thewidthofslabeffectiveasaTbeam
flangewaslimitedtoofthespan.TheCodenowallows1/8of
thespanoneachsideofthebeamweb.Thiswasdonetosimplify
Table6.3.2.1andhasnegligibleimpactondesigns.
No.
109.
Public
Commenter
Name
DavidDeValve
110. AliHussein
111. RubinMZallen
Provision
#
6.4.2
6.4.2a)
6.5.2
6.6.2.3
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
72
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
flangewidthtonowbe1/4thespanlengthplusthe
widthofthebeam(Table6.3.2.1allowsfor1/8the
spanlengthoneachsideofthebeamweb).
IfTable6.3.2.1isgoingtochangetheeffectiveflange
widthforTbeams,thenIthinkitshouldbenotedin
theCommentarythatachangefrompreviouscode
versionswasmade.
Alternateiscorrectandshouldnotbechanged.
Subject/tenseagreement:"...onalternatingspans."
or"...onanalternatespan."
Paragraphinthecurrentcodenumbered8.3.3
Inthenewcodenumbered6.5.2
Orderthisparagraphisatableinthenewcodeisbetterthanthecurrentcode,butiftheyincludeIllustrationbemuch
better.
((Sourcedrawinglectures,Dr.AliNaji))
COMMITTEERESPONSE:
Whiletheproposedchangesmayhavemeritintextbooksandlecturenotes,itistheCommitteesopinionthatthe
informationaspresentedissufficienttoconveytheCoderequirements
Inparagraph(b),substituteforforor.(typo).
Thisisnotatypo.Theprovisionisalsointendedtoapplyto
continuousconstructionthatmaynotbeaframe.Acontinuous
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
112. RubinMZallen
R6.6.3.1
113. Reineck,Karl
Heinz
6.6.3.1
75
R6.6.3.1.
1
76
114.
DariuszReczek,
PE
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
onewayslabonmonolithicbeamsisnotaframeandwouldbe
excludedbytheproposedchange.
LastsentenceofparagraphonTbeamsis
Thesentencestartsonpage75andendsonpage76.The
incomplete.
remainderofthesentenceisatthetopofpage76.
Sect. Belowsection#6.6.3.1quitesometextfollows,and TheCodeprovisionscanbereferencedexplicitly.Itisbelieved
thatthecommentrelatestocommentary.R6.6.3.1.1whichhas
6.6.3. thensect.6.6.3.1.1starts.TheuserofACI318
fourparagraphs.GiventhatdesigncalculationsreferenceCode
1
wonderswhatthistextinthebeginningisabout.If
headingswouldbeintroducedaftersectionnumbers, provisionsratherthancommentary,changesarenotwarranted
andwouldrendertheCodelessreadable.
thissectionwouldnotappearinthelistofcontents.
Thistextcannotpreciselyreferredtobynumber,but
onlybytherulesgivenbelowsection#6.6.6.3.1
andbefore6.6.3.1.1;thisisobviouslycuriousand
noteffective.
Introducenewsect.6.6.3.1.1directlybelow6.6.3.1,
andrenumberthefollowingsection1up,like
6.6.3.1.1to6.6.3.1.2etc.until6.6.3.1.3to6.6.3.1.4
2to7 Requirementtomodifythemomentofinertiaofa
NewBusiness.
crackedconcretewall(shearwall)from0.7Igto0.35Ig
isambiguousandneedsclarificationregardingthe
Thequestionofwhatistheappropriatestiffnesstouseinthe
extentofsuchadjustment.
structuralanalysisisanongoingchallengethatwillcontinuewith
Amongstengineersinvolvedindesignofhighrise
thenextcodecycle.Thecommentswillbetakeninto
residentialconstruction,thisseemstovary:
consideration.
(i)Iwall=0.35Igbetweenfloorslabsonlyalong
crackedwallfiniteelements(evenwith4%of
reinforcementwithinthewalland5,000psiconcrete,
theequivalentelasticityofsteel(concrete
contributionignored)iswellbelowthe0.35Ig)
(ii)Iwall=0.35Igbetweenfloorslabsalongtheentire
planesectionofwallwhichportionscracked(suchas
theentireflangeofaCshapedshearwall)
(iii)Iwall=0.35Igbetweenfloorslabsalongtheentire
wall(suchasbothflangesandwebofaCshaped
shearwall)
Assumingnotalloftheabovealternativesare
correct,shouldnttheCodebetterdefinethisissue
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
115.
Dr.HUSAIN
KHALAF
JARALLAH
6.6.3.2.2
78
116.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
6.6.4.5.2
117.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
6.6.4.5.3
PublicComment
forthedesigncommunity?
It was concluded from my PhD research study
(Jarallah,H.K.,2005,"InelasticSeismicResponseofR.
C.FramedBuildingswithaSoftStorey",Ph.D.Thesis,
Department of Civil Engineering, I.I.T RoorkeeIndia.
The thesis was evaluated by Prof. Christian Meyer,
Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering
Mechanics, Columbia University, New York, U.S.A.)
That:
Theeffectmomentofinertiareducesfrom1.0to
0.08timesthegrossmomentofinertiaincaseofhigh
nonlinearityinthememberespeciallyiftheframe
buildingissubjectedtorepeatedseismicload.
Ibelievethevaluegivenformomentofinertiato
calculatethelateraldeflectionneedstoberevised.
Whydoesnttheformula(6.6.4.5.2stateKversus
the0.75.?
AddwhereM1isthesmallerofthetwomomentsin
absoluteterms.
CommitteeResponse
NewBusiness.
Thequestionofwhatistheappropriatestiffnesstouseinthe
structuralanalysisisanongoingchallengethatwillcontinuewith
thenextcodecycle.Thecommentswillbetakeninto
consideration.
Eq6.6.4.5.2uses0.75ratherthanKforsimplicity.Thiseliminates
theneedtodefineK,andgivesthecodeuseronelessvariableto
remember.
Theproposalhasmerit,butcreatesarunonsentence.
Revise6.6.4.5.3(a)toread:
whereM1/M2isnegativeifthecolumnisbentinsinglecurvature,
andpositiveifbentindoublecurvature.M1correspondstotheend
momentwiththelesserabsolutevalue.
118.
DavidDeValve
6.6.5.3
90
Isanycommentaryneededtoexplainthedifference
between"...notexceedthelesserof1000Et%&
20%."oristhereferencedfigenough?
119.
AliHussein
7.0
Chapter
7
Inthenewcodehasbeenaddedtochartsummarizes
theimpactontheslimdesignofthecolumnin
ChapterVI.
Iftheproposalistoaddatablecollectsand
summarizesthelawsforthedesignshear
Thesourceofthistable(PCANOTE)
Thereisnoneedtoaddafigure.FigureR6.6.5isinthe
commentary,somesevenpageslateronpage97.Inthefinal
printedversionoftheCodeandCommentary,FigureR6.6.5willbe
locatednear6.6.5.
TheACIBuildingCodeisnotintendedtobeadesignaid.Atable
thatsummarizesdesignforonewayshearbelongsintextbooksor
designguides.Therequirementsforshear,however,areprovided
intabularformin9.6.3.3and9.7.6.2.2.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
120.
JeremyListerud
7.0
Chap
ter7
121.
DavidMcDonald
7.6.1.1
102
122.
JasonHerrman
8.0
Ch.8
+
All
Ireviewedchapterseven.Itdoesn'thavethe
momentcapacityequationinit.Pleaseaddin
themomentcapacityequation.Chapter22also
doesn'thaveit.Youarefailedatunderstanding
engineering.Themomentcapacityistheprimary
concretecapacityweneed.Yougothroughthe
momentloaddevelopmentwhichbyengineeringcan
varyonmethods
butyoudonotrequirethestandardmoment
capacityMnequations.
Thetwoequationsinthetablearediscontinuousat
60,000psi.Thisshouldbereviewedinfuture
editions.
Whenscrollingthrough,Inoticedtheheader
changeslocation,font,andsize.
Theequationforcalculationofmomentcapacityisconsidered
textbookmaterial,andforthisreason,itisnotincludedinthe
Code.However,Section22.2providesdesignassumptionsthat
canbeusedforcalculationofflexuralstrength.
Thenextcodecyclewillaimtoremoveothertextbookmaterial
thatisnotcentraltothecodepresentation.
Theminimumareasofreinforcementareempiricalandwerenot
intendedtoprovideacontinuousfunctionforyieldstrengthsless
than60,000psi.Itismorelikelythatinfutureeditions,yield
strengthslessthan60,000psiwillbedroppedfromthetableas
thedemandforsuchreinforcementdiminishes.
TheseitemswillbefixedbythePublishingServicesDepartment.
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
113
4
Betterdefine f herebeforeusingit??
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
123.
DavidDeValve
31814
8.3.1.2
124.
DavidDeValve
08.4.1.4
116
Couldafig.illustratethisbetterandbeplacedinthe
commentary!?
125.
AminGhali
R.8.4.2.3.
2
117
126.
RamezGayed
8.4.2.3.4
&
R8.4.2.3.
4
117
A commentary is proposed for Section 8.4.2.3.2 in

thefollowingmeaning:
R.8.4.2.3.2Based on finiteelement research, ACI

421.1R08 validates Eqn. (8.4.2.3.2) to shear critical
sectionwhoseperimeterisaclosedrectanglehaving
side lengths = b1 and b2. For other shapes, the
referenceprovidesadjustedequations.
Wherejustified,theuseoftheadjustedequations
givesareducedvalueforthefractionofMsctobe
transferredbyshear.
An objective of the version of 2014 is removal of
outdated provisions. Removal of 8.4.2.3.4 and
R8.4.2.3.4 from ACI 31814 is needed, because they
areoutdated(notneededinmoderndesignandthey
jeopardizesafety).Theprovisionanditscommentary
permit an optional analysis of the shear stress
induced by Msc. By assuming a reduced value of v,
the calculated shear stress due to Msc is diminished
orcompletelyignored.Theresultingdesignincreases
flexuralreinforcementandreducesoreliminatesthe
needforshearreinforcementandthecalculationsfor
Provision
#
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
FootnotesinbothTables8.3.1.1and8.3.1.2directtheuserto
8.10.2.7forthedefinitionoff.Reorderfootnote[4]ofTable
8.3.1.1asfollows:[4]Slabswithbeamsbetweencolumnsalong
exterioredges.Exteriorpanelsshallbeconsideredtobewithout
edgebeamsiffislessthan0.8.Thevalueofffortheedgebeam
shallbecalculatedinaccordancewith8.10.2.7.Exteriorpanels
shallbeconsideredtobewithoutedgebeamsiffislessthan
0.8.
SuchafigurewasnotincludedinACI31811 andthereforewas
notincorporatedintoACI31814.Anewfigurewillbeconsidered
fornewbusiness.
Theadditionoftheproposedcommentarydoesnotappeartobe
related,since8.4.2.3.2addressesthefractionoffactoredslab
momenttransferredbyflexure,whiletheproposedcommentary
addressesthefractiontransferredbyshear.Additionofthis
commentarymaterialinthepropercontextwillbeconsideredfor
newbusiness.
Thecommitteedoesnotconsider8.4.2.3.4andR8.4.2.3.4tobe
outdated.Theremovalofthesesameprovisionswasproposedby
thesamepubliccommenterintheCodecyclewhenACI31808
wasadopted.Thecommitteeresponsetotheproposalatthat
timewas:
TheCommitteedoesnotagreewiththecommenterinterpretation
oftherequirement.Atedgeandcornercolumnsmomentis
transferredbetweenslabandcolumnbybendingandshearatthe
columnfacetransversetothedirectionofmomenttransfer,and
byshearandtorsiononthesidefacesparalleltothedirectionof
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
its design. Providing or installing the required extra

flexural reinforcement is easier than shear
reinforcement. When the optional analysis is
adopted, enhancement of safety against ductile
flexural failure and intensification of risk of brittle
punching failure are inevitable. Enhancing safety
againstflexuralfailureisdesirable;but,riskingbrittle
punchingshearfailuremustbeavoided.
The motives to adopt 8.4.2.3.4 no longer exist.

Modern punching shear design is invariably done by
computer programs satisfying the requirement of
Chapter 8 without that option. Eliminating or
simplifying computations is no more an issue.
Providingorinstallingmodernshearreinforcementis
notahindrance.
Experiments give the values of V and Msc at failure,

butcannotgivethevalueof v.Thiscanbedoneonly
by analytical research that can predict the results of
the tests. There is no test or analysis that supports
any of the modified values of f in Table 8.4.2.3.4.
Relativelyrecentresearch(MegallyandGhali(2000);
GayedandGhali(2008))indicatethatnoreductionof
vcanbesafelypermitted;thefollowingissummary
ofresults:
Nonlinear finiteelement (FE) analyses for

interior, edge and corner connections
satisfying the requirements of 8.4.2.3.4
showedlittlevariationof voccursasthelevelof
shearing force and unbalanced moments are
gradually increased up to failure (Megally and
Ghali(2000);GayedandGhali(2008));thiswork
confirmed that the empirical equations of v in
momenttransfer.Inteststheamountofmomenttransferredby
shearversusthattransferredbyflexureissensitivetothedetailing
oftheflexuralreinforcementasitisanchoredattheedgeofthe
slabadjacenttothesidefacesofthecolumnandwhetherthesub
assemblagebeingtestedcanallowformomentredistributionas
theslabedgecracksintorsionornot.In11.5.2[ofACI31805at
thetime,ACI31811now]twoconditionsarerecognized,onein
whichtherecannotbearedistributionofinternalforceswhen
thereiscracking(equilibriumtorsion)andoneinwhichtherecan
besuchredistribution(compatibilitytorsion).Thesituationfor
momenttransferatedgeandcornercolumnconnectionsexhibits
manycharacteristicssimilartotheequilibrium/compatibility
torsioncharacteristicsforedgebeams.Testsonaslabcolumnsub
assemblagethatconsistsofasingleedgeorcornercolumn
connectedtoaslabcanidentifythestrengththattheconnection
candevelopforthebidirectionalrotationsimposedonitbythe
giventestsetup.Thatisthesituationforallthetestresultsshown
inthecommentersFig.2(b)[Fig1intheACI31814comment].
However,averydifferentresultoccurswherethesubassemblage
testedisaframe.Thereisamarkedredistributionofmoment
fromthenegativemomentsatthesupportstothepositive
momentsinthespanandbetweenthelessstiffexteriorcolumn
connectionsandthemorestiffinteriorcolumnconnectionsas
torsionalcrackingdevelopsattheedgeoftheslabandthebi
directionalrotationsbeingimposedontheexteriorconnections
change.ResultsforframetestsarereportedinPanandMoehle,
ACIStructuralJournal,May/June1989,AkiyamaandHawkins,
ReportSM841,DepartmentofCivilEngineering,Universityof
Washington,1984,andIngvarsson,H.,Concreteslabssupported
oncornercolumnsReportsNo.122and129,DivisionofBuilding
StaticsandStructuralEngineering,RoyalInstituteofTechnology,
Stockholm,1977.The13.5.3.3provisionsrecognizetheframe
behaviorresponse.Therefore,nochangeismade.
Thisresponsecontinuestoreflecttheopinionofthecommittee.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
ACI 421.1R08 (based on linear FE analyses by

Elgabry and Ghali (1996)) are adequate for
ultimatestrengthdesign.
The value of v does not substantially change
withtheincreaseofMscuptofailure.
For edge and corner columnslab connections,
the analyses give v well above the zerovalue
permittedby8.4.2.3.4.
For interior columnslab connections, the
reductionin vpermittedby8.4.2.3.4cannotbe
justifiedbytheFEresults.
Interaction between shearing force, Vu and
moment,MscisevidentinFig.1,whichplotsthe
testvalues(Vu,Msc)compiledinMoehle(1988).
Any point below line IJ represents Msc not
reachingitspotentialvalue(Mn)V=0.Thepotential
value(representedbylineIJ)isthevalueofMsc
producing punching with Vu = 0:
M n V 0 v n v J c x
This equation is derived from R8.4.4.2.3 for a
shear critical section subjected to Vu = 0,
combined with unbalanced moment about
centroidal principal yaxis. Without shear
reinforcement, vn = vc (Section 22.6.5.2); with
shear reinforcement, vn is specified by Eq.
(22.6.1.3).
TheinteractiondiagramofFig.1usestheresults
of the tests compiled in Moehle (1988) to show
that the provisions of ACI 31814, without
8.4.2.3.4areadequateforsafetyandnotoverly
conservative.
CommitteeResponse
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
2.0
1.5
1.0
CommitteeResponse
Stamenkovic & Chapma

Kane, 1978
Zaghlool, 1971
Regan, 1981
Scavuzzo, 1978
Hawkins et al., 1978
Hanson & Hanson, 1968
2.5
Msc / (Mn)V=0
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
0.5
ACI 318-14
interaction line
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Vu / (Vc) with = 1.0
K
1.2
Fig.1Interactionofshearingforce,Vuwithslab
momentthatisresistedbycolumn,Msc.Edge
columnslabconnectionsdataadoptedbyMoehle
(1988).(Figureadoptedfrom:GayedandGhali
(2008))
References:
Elgabry,A.A.andGhali,A.(1996),Momenttransfer
by shear in slabcolumn connections, ACIStructural
Journal,Vol.93,No.2,pp.187196.
Megally, S. and Ghali, A. (2000), Punching of
Concrete Slabs Due to Column Moment Transfer,
Journal ofStructualEngineering, ASCE, Vol. 126,No.
2,pp.180189.
Gayed, R.B. and Ghali, A. (2008), Unbalanced
MomentResistanceinSlabColumnJoints:Analytical
Assessment,JournalofStructuralEngineering,ASCE,
Vol.134,No.5,May,pp.859864.
JointACIASCECommittee421,GuidetoShear
ReinforcementforSlabs,ACI421.1R08,American
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
127.
RamezGayed
8.4.4.2.3
&
R8.4.4.2.
3
120
128.
AminGhali
R8.4.4.2.
3
120
Com
men
tary
Provision
#
PublicComment
ConcreteInstitute,FarmingtonHills,MI.,23pp.
The following proposal of rewording Section
8.4.4.2.3aimsatmakingitclearer:
8.4.4.2.3Thefactoredshearstressresultingfromv
Mscshallhaveplanardistributionovertheperimeter
ofthecriticalsectioninaccordancewith8.4.4.1.
Justification:
Theshearcriticalsectionisaspatialsurface.Linear
variation over a surface is not indicative of what is
intended. Furthermore, the variation is about a
centroidalprincipalaxis,notaboutacentroid.
The present commentary section R8.4.4.2.3 treats a
special case in which Msc is about a symmetry axis.
The commentary section would be more instructive
withMscbeingamomentaboutageneralcentroidal
axis(seeACI421.1R08).
Reference:
JointACIASCECommittee421,GuidetoShear
ReinforcementforSlabs,ACI421.1R08,American
ConcreteInstitute,FarmingtonHills,MI.,23pp.
R8.4.4.2.3presentsintheversionof2014ananalysis
whichcannotsatisfyequilibriuminallcases.Section
4.5.1 states: Analytical procedures shall satisfy
andequilibrium.Itcanbeverifiedthatequilibrium
issatisfiedandtheshearstressdistributionspecified
in 8.4.4.2.3 is achieved only when the analysis in
R8.4.4.2.3calculatesJcas:
Jc = d multiplied by the moment of inertia of the

perimeter of the shear critical section about a
centroidalprincipalaxis.
CommitteeResponse
Thecurrentwordinghasbeeninexistenceforatleast40years,
andthecommitteedoesnotfeelthattheproposedrevisionadds
clarity.
Revisionsasproposedwillbeconsideredfornewbusiness.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
For a critical section of general shape, subjected to

Msc about yaxis (such as line CC in Fig. R8.4.4.2.3),
ACI421.1R08gives:
Jc d 3 lij x i2 x i x j x 2j
129.
JoshPlummer
8.6.1.1
The perimeter of the critical section is considered

composed of straight segments; xi and xj =
coordinates of segment ends i and j; lij = segments
length.
Withthisequation,therewillbenoneedtousethe
terms:analogoustopolarmomentofinertiaand
similarequation(whichcanbeincorrectly
interpreted).Deficientdesignresultingfrominvalid
calculationofJcwillbeavoided.
Thepurposeofthisprovisionistopreventbrittle
failuresameas9.6.1.1forbeams.Therefore,there
shouldbeaprovisionsimilarto9.6.1.3whichallows
4/3*As_requiredtobeused.Unlessforsome
reason,slabsaremorepronetobrittlefailurethan
beams.EitherthatorChapter14couldallowthis4/3
liberalization,sincethisismorelikelytobeanissue
forthickerslabsseenforfoundations.
Imespeciallyconcernedwiththickfootingsand
structuralmatfoundationswheretheprovisionsas
writtenwillpreventengineersfromsplittingtheT/S
reinforcementintotopandbottomlayersunlessthe
clientwantstoabsorbthecostofdoublingthe
amountofreinforcementinthefoundation.
Whenthereisverylightdemandinthetopofthe
footing,thiswillbedesignedtoStructuralPlain
ConcreteProvisions(Chapter22intheoldercodes).
Section10.5.4ofACI31811requiresminimumflexural
reinforcementinslabsandfootingstobethesameasrequiredfor
temperatureandshrinkage(T/S).Thisoverridesthe4/3As
exceptionprovidedby10.5.3.ThesamerequirementsapplyinACI
31814,however,minimumflexuralreinforcementequaltothe
T/Samountisonlyrequiredinregionsofflexuraltension.R
13.3.4.4ofACI31814pointsoutthatprovidingcontinuous
reinforcementonbothfacesofmatfoundationslabsshouldbe
considered,butanyamountcanbeprovidedonthecompression
face.
TheCommitteeacknowledgesinR13.1thatWhilerequirements
applicabletofoundationsareprovidedinthischapter,the
majorityofrequirementsusedforfoundationdesignarefoundin
otherchaptersoftheCode.Theseotherchaptersarereferencedin
Chapter13.However,theapplicabilityofthespecificprovisions
withintheseotherchaptersmaynotbeexplicitlydefinedfor
foundations.Engineeringjudgmentshouldbeexercisedwhen
applyingtheprovisionsofotherchapterstothickfoundation
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
130.
DavidMcDonald
8.6.1.1
123
131.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
8.6.2.2
8.7.5.6.1
132.
RamezGayed
R8.7.6.3
andFig.
R8.7.6(d)
132
and
152
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Thatisntdoneoftennowbecauseyoucanjustputa
reasonablelayerinboththetopandbottom
providedtheybothmeet4/3*Asreqdandsumupto
0.0018*Ag
Thetwoequationsinthetablearediscontinuousat
60,000psi.Thisshouldbereviewedinfuture
editions.
slabs.TheCommitteeintendstoaddressthickfoundationslabsas
newbusinessinthenextCodecycle.
Theminimumareasofreinforcementareempiricalandwerenot
intendedtoprovideacontinuousfunctionforyieldstrengthsless
than60,000psi.Itismorelikelythatinfutureeditions,yield
strengthslessthan60,000psiwillbedroppedfromthetableas
thedemandforsuchreinforcementdiminishes.
TwoowayslabswithbondedPThavearecordof
Structuralintegrityreinforcementisrequiredinalltwowayslabs
adequateperformanceinmanycountriesandinthe
irrespectiveofwhethertheslabsarenonprestressedor
US.ThemaindeficiencyofthepreviousCodewasthe prestressed,orwhethertendonsarebondedorunbonded.If
absenceofarequirementforthebondedtendonsto tendonsmeetingtherequirementsof8.7.5.6.1arenotprovided,
deformedreinforcementsatisfying8.7.5.6.3isrequired.
passthroughornearthecolumn,leavingessentially
thecriticalsectionoverthecolumnunreinforced.
ThisCodeeliminatesthisproblemwithrequiringthe
samebondedreinforcementasforslabswith
unbondedtendonsbutstilldoesnotrequirebonded
PTtendonpassingthroughthecolumn;thisshould
becorrected.PTIJournalarticle(December2012),
TwoWayPostTensionedSlabswithBonded
Tendons,KenBondy,addressestheseissuesand
shouldbereferencedinthisCode.
Revisionsasproposedwillbeconsideredfornewbusiness.
Itisproposedtoaddthefollowingcommentary
sectionR8.7.6.3:
R8.7.6.3FigureR8.7.6(d)showstypical
arrangementofstirrupsataninteriorcolumn.Atthe
innercriticalsection,theshearstressishighest
adjacenttothecolumncorners;thus,atacolumn
faceastirruplegisplacedclosesttothecolumns
corners.Thespacinglimitbetweenthestirruplegs
paralleltocolumnfaceis2d.Atacolumnsidewider
than2d,morethantwostirruplegsareneeded.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
Forbetterpresentationofthe2d requirement(for
thespacingbetweenstirruplegsparalleltothe
columnperiphery),itisproposedtoreplaceFig.
R8.7.6(d)withtheoneprovidedbelow.
Justification:
ThecurrentFig.R8.7.6(d)isnotdrawntoscale;the
widthofthestirrupsistoosmallcomparedtothe
widthofthecolumn.Misinterpretationofthe2d
requirementcanresult.Thewriteroffersanew
figuredrawntoscaleforapracticalcase(copyrightis
hereofferedtoACI).
CommitteeResponse
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Critical section
through slab shear
reinforcement (first
line of stirrup legs)
d/2
d/2
d/2
Plan
2d
Slab
thickness
Section A-A
Column
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
133.
GuilhermeSA
Melo
(Member#:
995184)
Insupportofa
commentmade
beforeby
Professor
AminGhali
R8.7.7.1.
2
134.
AminGhali
R8.7.7.1.
2
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
133
133
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
App.
A)
Com Toavoidmisinterpretationof8.7.7.1.2,anadditionis Revisionsasproposedwillbeconsideredfornewbusiness.
men proposed at end of R8.7.7.1.2 having the following
tary meaning:
On the peripheral line of studs nearest to column

face,Fig.R8.7.7showsastudadjacenttothecorners
of the column, where the shear stress is highest.
Whenthespacingbetweenthecornerstudsexceeds
2d, intermediate studs are necessary to limit the
spacingbetweenadjacentshearstudsnearesttothe
columnto2d.For,theinteriorsquarecolumninFig.
R8.7.7, two stud rails can suffice at each side of the
columnonlywhenitswidthislimitedto2d.
The addition of the above paragraph will avoid

providingtwocloselyspacedstudrailsatasideofa
wide column requiring three rails or more. Figure
R8.7.7isbasedontestsinwhichastudisprovidedat
thecornersofthecolumn.
Toavoidmisinterpretationof8.7.7.1.2,anadditionis Revisionsasproposedwillbeconsideredfornewbusiness.
proposed at end of R8.7.7.1.2 having the following
meaning:
On the peripheral line of studs nearest to column

face,Fig.R8.7.7showsastudadjacenttothecorners
of the column, where the shear stress is highest.
Whenthespacingbetweenthecornerstudsexceeds
2d, intermediate studs are necessary to limit the
spacingbetweenadjacentshearstudsnearesttothe
columnto2d.For,theinteriorsquarecolumninFig.
R8.7.7, two stud rails can suffice at each side of the
columnonlywhenitswidthislimitedto2d.
Theadditionoftheaboveparagraphwillavoid
providingtwocloselyspacedstudrailsatasideofa
No.
135.
136.
Public
Commenter
Name
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
DavidDeValve
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
R8.11.2
143
8.11.4.1,
2
145
137.
Reineck,Karl
Heinz
9.3.1
159
138.
DavidMcDonald
R9.3.2.2
160
139. JamesS.Lai
9.3.4.1
160
140.
HelmuthWilden
R9.5.4.6
165
141.
HelmuthWilden
9.5.4.7
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
widecolumnrequiringthreerailsormore.Figure
R8.7.7isbasedontestsinwhichastudisprovidedat
thecornersofthecolumn.
Theequivalentframeiscomposedof threeparts.
CommitteeResponse
ModifytoreadTheequivalentframe comprises consistsof three

parts:
8.11.4.1,4.2 appear to contradict each other only 8.11.4.1addressesthestiffnessofthecolumnwithinthedepthof

8.11.4.3isneededwiththeaccompanyingfig.!?
thejoint,while8.11.4.2addressesthestiffnessofthecolumn
elsewhere.8.11.4.3permitstheuseofgrosssectionproperties
ratherthancrackedtransformedsectionproperties.
9.3.1 Textafter9.3.1andthen9.3.1.1follows.
Thanksforthesuggestion.Asdiscussedinthegeneralcomments,
Introducenewsect.9.3.1.1directlybelow9.3.1,and theCommitteehasadoptedthefollowingsectionnumbering
renumberthefollowingsections1up,like6.3.1.1to approach.Eachheadinghasauniquenumber,andeachprovision
hasauniquesectionnumber.
6.3.1.2etc.
ThestatementAdditionaldeflectionsdueto
Agreedthatthewordingprecastisnotneeded.
excessivecreepandshrinkagecausedbypremature
loadingofprecastbeamsshouldbeconsidered
RevisesecondparagraphofR9.3.2.2asfollows:
specificallypointstoprematureloadingofprecast.
Similarproblemswouldoccurwithnonprestressed
Additionaldeflectionsduetoexcessivecreepandshrinkage
members.Suggestdeletionofwordprecastas
causedbyprematureloadingofprecastbeamsshouldbe
considered.Thisisespeciallyimportantatearlyageswhenthe
follows:
moisturecontentishighandthestrengthislow.
Additionaldeflectionsduetoexcessivecreepand
shrinkagecausedbyprematureloadingofprecast
beamsshouldbeconsidered
ThenotationsU,TorCarenotinsec.2.2.Suggestto Theclassificationsareidentifiedanddefinedin24.5.2towhichthis
addoncommentarycolumnsimpleexplanationto
provisionrefers.Itisnotfeltnecessarytodefinetheclasseshere.
signifyU,TandCstandsforuncracked,transition
andcracked,
ReferencetotheseventheditionofthePCIDesign
Commentarychangedasfollows:
HandbookshouldbeMNL12010not1204
TheseventheditionofthePCIDesignHandbook(MNL120410)
describestheprocedureofZiaandHsu(2004).
Thissectionisnewastheresearchitisbasedonwas The31814ismorethanjustareorganizationoftechnical
notdonepriortoACI31811.Iwasunderthe
information.Anumberoftechnicalchangesweremade.The
impressionfromeverythingIhavebeentoldthatACI majorchangeswereidentifiedanddiscussedinaConcrete
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
142.
GrantMartin
9.6.3
143.
DavidDeValve
9.6.3.3
144.
MarkW
Cunningham
9.7.3.8
174
PublicComment
31814wassimplyareorganizationoftheCodeand
nownewtechnicalinformationwouldbeincluded.
Howistheadditionofthissectionjustifiablebased
onthis?Isuggestthataverycleardocumentbe
preparedthatidentifiesNEWtechnicalmaterial.
Whydontwehavebeamstirrupspacingguidelines
forverywide(>24)beamsperrecentarticlesinACI
StructuralJournal(MarchApril2009)andConcrete
Internationalmagazine(Jan2004)?
CommitteeResponse
Internationalarticlewhichintroducedthepublicdiscussionperiod.
ThearticleappearedintheMay2014edition(pp.1820)andis
alsoavailableonthe31814portalwebsite.
Asindicatedby1.3.1,thecurrent318provisionsforstirrups
spacingareminimumrequirements.Reducingthetransverse
spacingofverywidebeamsisdiscussedinR22.5.10.5.
Willconsiderasnewbusiness.
Table9.6.3.3.Giventheequationsvalues,whatdo
Asnotedinthetitleofthecolumn,theequationsareforAv,min/s.
theendunitsagreewith[Av,min'(in2)'orAv,min/s
Thereforetheunitsarein.
'(in)']!?
Addaprovisionunder9.7.3.8(renumberas
ThegeneralformatofSection9.7firstpresentsthelongitudinal
necessary)thatstates:Itisalsorequiredtomeetthe reinforcementfollowedbythetransversereinforcement.
Structuralintegrityreinforcementdirectlyfollowsastheintegrity
provisionsof9.7.7forstructuralintegrity
reinforcement.Atsimplesupportsofnonprestressed reinforcementaddressesbothlongitudinalandtransverse
castinplacebeams,theprovisionsof9.7.3.8areonly reinforcement.Itisforthisreasonthatstructuralintegrityis
presentedfollowingthedetailingprovisionsforlongitudinaland
applicablewheretherequirementsforstructural
integrityreinforcementaresatisfiedby9.7.7.2(b).
transversereinforcement.
AddcommentarythatstatesAtsimplesupportsof
Allcodeprovisionsmustbesatisfied,andthemorestringent
nonprestressedcastinplacebeams,ifthe
provisionscontrol.Therefore,itisnotconsideredneededto
provideapointerfollowing9.7.3.8.Furthermore,thestructural
requirementsforstructuralintegrityreinforcement
integrityprovisionsof9.7.7onlyapplyforcastinplacebeams
aresatisfiedby9.7.7.2(a),thentheprovisionsof
whereastheprovisionsofsection9.7.3applytoallconstruction.
9.7.7.4apply,whicharemorestringentthanthe
provisionsof9.7.3.8.
Section9.7.7isintendedforcastinplaceconstruction.For
Reason:Itisimportanttomakereferenceto9.7.7in precastconstructionwheresimplysupportedmembersare
9.7.3.8becauseotherwisethestructuralintegrity
common,theserequirementsarenotapplicable.The
requirementsof9.7.7thatwillcommonlybemore
requirementsof9.7.3.8.1controlforthesesimplysupported
stringentthanthosein9.7.3.8,maybeoverlookedby members.
theCodeuser.
9.7.3.8.1indicatesatsimplesupportsaminimumof
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
145.
DavidDeValve
R9.7.3.8.
3
146.
DavidDeValve
9.7.6.2.2
147.
MarkW
Cunningham
9.7.7.1
180
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
1/3ofthemaximumM+ bottomreinforcementshall
extendatleast6inchesintothesupport.Notethat
R9.7.3.8.1evenindicatesthisenhancesstructural
integrity.And9.7.3.8.3limitsdbatsimplesupports
sothatldislessthan(1.3Mn/Vu+la)or(Mn/Vu+la),
withthebarsthendevelopedwithinadistanceof
1.3Mn/VuorMn/Vu,respectively,fromthecenterline
ofthesupport(unlessthereinforcementis
terminatedbeyondthecenterlineofthesupportwith
astandardhookorequivalentmechanical
anchorage).
However,section9.7.7oftheCoderequires
structuralintegrityreinforcementforcastinplace
beams,and9.7.7.4indicateslongitudinalstructural
integrityreinforcementatnoncontinuoussupports
shallbeanchoredtodevelopfyatthefaceofthe
support.So,forsimplesupportsofcastinplace
beams,9.7.3.8.1and9.7.3.8.3canonlyapplywhere
9.7.7.2(b)applies(becauseif9.7.7.2(a)applies,then
9.7.7.4applies,and9.7.7.4ismorestringentthan
9.7.3.8.1and9.7.3.8.3).
Fig.R9.7.3.8.3.Duplicate(a),(b),(c)titles:onein
Thanksfornoticingtheduplications.Thesewillbecorrectedinthe
bold,oneinitalics
finalpublication.
InFigureR9.7.3.8.3,deleteduplicatecaptionsfor(a),(b),and(c).
Duplicatetable9.7.6.2.2&10.7.6.5.2,whynotone
Tofacilitateuseoftheprovision,theCommitteedecidedto
referenceorhyperlinktheother!?
duplicatethistable.
Thisprovisiondoesntaddressnoncontinuousbeams Continuousreinforcementisrequiredinallcastinplaceperimeter
beams.Continuityisachievedatthenoncontinuoussupportas
sinceitrequirescontinuousreinforcementwithout
requiredby9.7.7.4.
exception.Itsnotpossibletousecontinuous
reinforcementifthebeamisnotcontinuousata
support.Therearenormallynoncontinuousbeamsat AddcommentaryattheendofthefirstparagraphofR9.7.7.1:
theperimeterofastructure,e.g.,twobeamsframing
intoacornercolumnthebeamsarentcontinuous. R9.7.7.1.fromtheadjacentspan.Atnoncontinuoussupports,
No.
148.
Public
Commenter
Name
MarkW
Cunningham
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
9.7.7.2
181
PublicComment
Aswritten,9.7.7.2(a)clearlyappliesonlyto
continuousbeams,althoughitsnotstatedinthe
provision.(Canthavecontinuousreinforcementina
noncontinuousbeam.)Thisimpliesthatfor
noncontinuousbeams9.7.7.2(b)mustbemet.
However,accordingtotheprovisionsofACI31811
7.13.2.5,theamountoflongitudinalintegrity
reinforcementper9.7.7.2(a)shouldalsoapplyto
noncontinuousbeamswherethebarsare
terminatedper9.7.7.4.
Furthermore,9.7.7.4doesntindicatehowmuch
longitudinalstructuralintegrityreinforcementat
noncontinuoussupportsshallbeanchoredto
developfyatthefaceofthesupport.Thisisnt
indicatedanywherein9.7.7.
Therefore,Isuggestmerging9.7.7.4into9.7.7.2as
follows(anddeleting9.7.7.4):
9.7.7.2Forotherthanperimeterbeams,structural
integrity
reinforcementshallbeinaccordancewith(a)for
continuousbeams,(b)fornoncontinuousbeams,or
(c):
(a)Atleastonequarterthemaximumpositive
momentreinforcement,butnotlessthantwobarsor
strands,shallbecontinuous.
(b)Atleastonequarterthemaximumpositive
momentreinforcement,butnotlessthantwobarsor
strands,shallbeanchoredtodevelopfyatthefaceof
thesupport.
CommitteeResponse
thelongitudinal reinforcementisanchoredasrequiredby9.7.7.4.
Provision9.7.7.2(a)alsoappliestotheendspanofbeamsthatare
notontheperimeterofthestructuresifoption(b)isnotused.
Continuityisachievedatthenoncontinuoussupportasrequired
by9.7.7.4.
AddcommentarytoR9.7.7.2:
R9.7.7.2Atnoncontinuoussupports,thelongitudinal
reinforcementisanchoredasrequiredby9.7.7.4.
R9.7.7.1providesanexampleofatwopiece
stirrupthatsatisfies9.7.7.2(b).
Theamountofreinforcementtobeanchoredtodevelopfyis
prescribedin9.7.7.1(a)and(b)forperimeterbeams,andin
9.7.7.2(a)fornonperimeterbeams.Notethat9.7.7.2(a)applies
onlyiftheclosedstirrupsof9.7.7.2(b)arenotprovided.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
149.
MarkW
Cunningham
9.7.7.3
181
150.
JamesS.Lai
10.3.1.1
191
11.2.4.1
11.3.1.2
203
11.5.4.2
11.6.1
209
151.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
152. JamesS.Lai
153.
154.
DavidDeValve
HelmuthWilden
PublicComment
(c)Longitudinalreinforcementshallbeenclosedby
closedstirrupsinaccordancewith25.8.1.6orhoops
alongtheclearspanofthebeam.Longitudinal
reinforcementinnonprestressedbeamsshallbe
terminatedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsof
9.7.3.8.Longitudinalreinforcementinprestressed
beamsshallbeterminatedinaccordancewiththe
provisionsof9.7.4.3.
Theprovisionreads:Longitudinalstructuralintegrity
reinforcementshallpassthroughtheregionbounded
bythelongitudinalreinforcementofthecolumn.
Whatifthesupportisawallratherthanacolumn?
CommitteeResponse
TheCodespecificallyaddressesthecommoncaseofbeamand
columnframing.Toprovideguidanceonwalls,addcommentary
asfollows:
R9.7.7.3Inthecaseofwallsprovidingverticalsupport,the
longitudinalreinforcementshouldpassthroughorbeanchoredin
thewall.
Thecommitteewillconsiderasnewbusinesstheadditionofwalls
andothersupportconditionstotheCode.
Thissectionsaysthereversecompared tosection
Section8.10.1.3isspecificallyforthedirectdesignmethod,and
8.10.1.3ofthisCode.Thiswillpresentan
thisassumptionisforthedesignofthetwowayslab,notthe
enforcementissue.Manualcalculationofnominal
column.Thisprovisioniscurrentlyin31811as13.6.2.5.
momentstrengthofacircularsectioncanbe
Section10.3.1.1isapplicableforthedesignofthecolumn.
challengingandhasbeenavoidedbymostengineers. ThisprovisionhasbeenincludedintheCodeformanyyearsandis
10.8.3in31811.Thelanguageisprovidedonthecodesideasitis
Additionallythissectionisapermissiblelanguage.
Suggestthatthesectionbemovedtothe
permissibletoprovidethisassumptionifdesiredbytheengineer
commentary.
fordesignofthecolumn.
Replacesemicolonswithcommas.
TheuseofpunctuationiscorrectfortheintendedpurposeofACI
Committee318.
(Weassumethisrefersto11.3.1.1.)Thecommentdoesnot
Table11.3.1.2.The1/25and1/30ratiosshownin
provideareasonforreviewingthevaluesof1/25and1/30.No
thistableneedtobereviewedandmodifiedtoklu/r
action.
D=0.xlwmissingdigitbeforelw?
Agreed.Change0.lwto0.8lw
ReferencetoMNL1204shouldbeMNL12010
ChangePCIMNL1204toPCIMNL12010.
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
214
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
155.
JamesS.Lai
156.
SKH
12.0
Chapter
12
157.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
12.1.1
158.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
12.1.1
159.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R12.3.1
160.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R12.4.2.3
222
R12.4.2.4
.thatareentirelycastinplace,orarecastinplace
toppingsonprecastelements(thetoppingisnot
strictlyaslab,isit?
TimSalmons
12.5.1.4
225
Itisreasonabletopermitadesignertoutilize
161.
162.
Provision
#
R11.6.1
R11.8.4.1
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Thereferencecited(Athey1982)shouldbe(SEAOSC
1982).Theentiretestprogramwasconductedby
membersofStructuralEngineersAssociationof
SouthernCaliforniainconjunctionwithSouthern
CaliforniaChapterACI.Mostofthemembersheld
membershipinbothorganizations.Mr.Atheywasa
nontechnicaleditorwhospentverylittletimeonthe
program.SeeACI551.2R13.
Minimumdiaphragmreinforcingrefersto
temperatureandshrinkagerequirements.The
amountofreinforcingrequiredseemsreasonable,
butthereshouldbeanadditionalnotationthatthis
reinforcingsteelshouldbeinadditiontotheamount
requiredforgravityloads.Ifshearreinforcinginthe
diaphragmisrequiredbyanalysis,thisshouldbe
obviousandneednotbestatedintheCode,butifno
reinforcingisrequiredbyanalysis,theminimum
shouldbeinadditiontothatrequiredforgravity.
Diaphragmsthatarecomposedofacastinplace
WhileACICommittee318recognizestheimportantcontributions
ofthetaskgroupmembersandthesponsoringorganizations,this
isafairlyconventionalandappropriatemethodforcitingthis
work.
ItistheopinionofACICommittee318thattheminimum
reinforcementisnotadditionaltoreinforcementrequiredfor
otherpurposes.Nochangewillbemadeinresponsetothis
comment.
Itisgenerallyacceptedthatthepartscomposethewhole,andthe
wholecomprisestheparts.Therefore,thewordingisacceptableas
is.
Diaphragmsthatarecomposedof precastelements Itisgenerallyacceptedthatthe partscomposethewhole,andthe
is.
Orare toppingslabs.(deletecomprise)
Itisgenerallyacceptedthatthepartscomposethewhole,andthe
is.
Deletecomprisefromthesentenceasunnecessary. Thewordingiscorrectascurrentlyused.
Thewordingtodeletecomprisemakesitlessclearwhetherthe
diaphragmisthetoppingonlyoristhecombinationofthetopping
andtheprecastelement.Itisboth.Also,thewordslabis
intentional.
ItistheopinionofACICommittee318thatprecompressionina
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
163.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,
J.I..
12.5.3.6
228
164.
TimSalmons
12.5.4.1
229
165.
TimSalmons
12.6.3
230
166. Mohamed
NasserDarwish
13.3.4.1
mat
foundati
ons
242
PublicComment
precompressiontoresistdiaphragmforceshowever
thisprovisiondirectlyimpliesthat100%of
precompressioncanbeutilizedwithoutanyfurther
design.TherearestillASDlevelcheckswith
associatedloadcombinationsthatarerequired.If
theintentistonolongerhavetoaddress
serviceabilityofprestressedcomponentswhen
designingdiaphragmforces,itshouldbeclearly
indicatedotherwisemorecontentisneededto
preventviolationsofserviceabilityprovisions.It
seemsprudenttodeletethisprovisionandtonot
allowuseofprecompressionintheresistanceof
diaphragmforces.
CommentR12.5.3.6readsThisCodedoesnot
containprovisionsfor
untoppeddiaphragmsinbuildingsassignedto
SeismicDesign
CategoriesD,E,andF.Thediscussersbelievethat
thiscommentshouldbeaprovisioninChapter18
Permittingacollectortobediscontinuedwithout
extendingthefulldimensionofthediaphragmwill
openadoorfornumerousinterpretations.Asa
minimumcollectorsshouldberequiredtoextendto
theperpendicularchordreinforcementinadditionto
therequirementsalreadyincludedinthisprovision.
Thisprovisionseemstoconflictwiththeideaof
utilizingprecompressionasindicatedin12.5.1.4
CommitteeResponse
diaphragmcanbeusedtoresistdiaphragmforces,asstatedinthe
provision.Wefeelitisobviousthat,ifthatprecompressionisused
forotherpurposes,itcannotbecountedtwice.Thecommentary
explainstheconditionsunderwhichprecompressioncanbeused.
ACICommittee318appreciatesthiscomment,butisnotprepared
tointroduceaprovisioninChapter18toprohibituseofthis
systematthistime.Chapter12isanentirelynewchapterinthe
2014Code,whichwasintroducedwithoutmakingmajorrevisions
tothediaphragmprovisionsofChapter18.ItistheintentofACI
Committee318toworkoncoordinationandperhaps
consolidationofthediaphragmprovisionsofthesetwochapters
asnewbusiness.
Therearemanydifferentopinionsonthisparticularaspectof
design.Thelanguageofthisprovisionwasselectedtoreflecta
rangeofproceduresthatengineersareusingincurrentpractices.
Thistopicwillbeconsideredfurtherasnewbusinessinthenext
codecycle.
Itisnotinconflict.Iftheprecompressionisusedtoresistoneload
effect,thenitcannotbedoublecounted.Ifforanyload
combinationtheprecompressionisnotfullyused,thenthe
balancecanbeusedfordiaphragmstrength.
design&detailing..accordingtoapplicableprovisions TheEquivalentFrameMethodhasbeenandcontinuestobe
ofChapter8.
permittedfortheanalysisoffoundations.Aswithallotheranalysis
methodsengineeringjudgmentmustbeusedintheapplication.
Reason:thisimpliesthattheequivalentframe
methodof8.11isallowedfordesign&detailingof
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
167.
GrantMartin
13.4.2
168. Mohamed
NasserDarwish
14.1.1
169.
HelmuthWilden
R16.2.4.1
262
170.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
HelmuthWilden
16.2.4.3
(b)
16.2.5
171.
PublicComment
matfoundations.Isthisintendedso?
Onehastonotethatthereishighshearinmat
foundations,anditisratherathickmorethanathin
plateasinelevatedfloorslabs.Inadditiondetailing
maygreatlydiffer.
Note:accordingto(13.3.4.2.)thedirectdesign
methodof8.10shallnotbeused
Actionproposed:Clarificationand/ormodification
needed
WhydoesntACIrecognizeandincorporatethedeep
membershearequationsthathavebeenincludedin
theCRSIManualpilecapchapter(13)forover30
years?Theseequationsseemtogivemorerealistic
designsthanthatwhenusingACIonewayshear
equations.
tobuilding&nonbuilding structures
Thereisreferencetobuilding&nonbuilding
structures.Shouldhavepreviouslyappearedearlier
tooinnotation,andin1.2.5anystructureetc.
CommitteeResponse
Committee318 incorporatesprovisionsintotheCodethatare
proposedandvettedthroughstandardconsensusprocedures.The
referencedCRSIprovisionswillbeconsideredfornewbusiness
throughthisprocess.
Asstatedin1.2.5,ThisCodeprovidesminimumrequirements
inanystructuredesignedandconstructedundertherequirements
ofthegeneralbuildingcode.Anystructureisintendedtocover
specialstructuresincludingbuildingandnonbuildingstructuresas
definedinthegeneralbuildingcode.
Referencingthe1986PCIBuildingCodeCommittee
Theintegritytiereinforcementisdiscussedinsection16.2.5and
couldbemademorecurrent.Thisoccursatother
thereforedoesnotneedtobediscussedherealso.Remove
locationsaswell
sentencewithreference.
RemovesentencefromR16.2.4.1:PCIBuildingCodeCommittee
(1986)providesrecommendationsforminimumintegritytiesfor
precastconcretebearingwallbuildings.
NewBusiness:InR16.2.1.8andR16.2.5willevaluateifthe
referencecanbeupdated.
Isthisprovisionfromwallpaneltowallpanelwhen
Provisionappliestostackedwallpanels,commentaryissufficiently
theyarestacked?Orwalltoroof?
clear.
TheisometricofaloadbearingstructurethatisFig.
FigureR16.5.2fromACI31811isincludedinACI31814(Fig.
R16.5.2ofACI31811doesnotappearinSection
R16.2.5).Figuresareattheendofthechapterforthepublic
16.2.5ofACI31814.Isuggestitbeincludedtomake reviewcopyonly.Fortheformalrelease,figureswillbeintegrated
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
Fig
R16.2.5
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
Fig
R16.2.6
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R16.2.6
24
R16.4.1.1
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
172.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
173.
174.
No.
175.
176.
JaredE.Brewe
16.4.1.1
267
177.
JaredE.Brewe
R16.4.1.1
267
178.
JaredE.Brewe
16.4.3.1
268
PublicComment
itclearwhichtieforceisbeingreferredto.
Isthelowerwallpanelsupposedtobeatwostory
wallpanel?Thedrawing(unchangedfrom2008)has
neverbeenverygood.
Whataretheeffectsofchamferontheunarmored
edgedoesthatchangeanything?
PleaseadddefinitionforArmorededgehere(Ch.
16).
Replaceshouldwithshalltomatchcodetext.
CurrentlystatesInacompositeconcreteflexural
member,horizontalshearforcesshallbeprovidedat
contactsurfacesofinterconnectedelements.As
worded,itrequiresthattheforcesbeprovided.
Appearsthatfulltransferofshouldbestated
beforehorizontalshearforcestomatch
commentary.
Commentarystatesprovidedbyhorizontalshear
strengthatcontactsurfaces,properlyanchoredties,
orboth.Suggestclarifyasprovidedbyhorizontal
shearstrengthatcontactsurfacesthroughinterface
shear,properlyanchoredties,orboth.
Previouscodesectionsreferredtotheinterfaceas
contactsurfaces,thissectionreferstothesameas
horizontalinterface.Suggestcoordinate
terminology.
CommitteeResponse
intothedocument.
Figureisappropriateforitsintendedpurpose.
ModifyFigureR16.2.6:InFigurechange1/2in.minimumto1/2
in.minimumandnotlessthanthesizeofthechamfer
Armorededgeisusedonlyinthecommentaryandcommentary
sectionR16.2.6providesanadequatedescription.
Changeshouldtocantoshowthattheitemslistedcansatisfy
theCode.
R16.4.1.1Fulltransferofhorizontalshearforcesbetween
segmentsofcompositemembersshouldcanbeprovidedby
horizontalshearstrengthatthecontactsurfaces,properly
anchoredties,orboth.
Reword16.4.1.1toreadInacompositeconcreteflexural
member,fulltransferofhorizontalshearforcesshallbeprovided
atcontactsurfacesofinterconnectedelements.
ChangeR16.4.1.1to
Fulltransferofhorizontalshearforcesbetweensegmentsof
compositemembersshouldbeprovidedbyhorizontalshear
strengthatthecontactsurfacesthroughinterfaceshear,properly
anchoredties,orboth.
ContactsurfaceisusedextensivelyintheCode.Rewordsection
16.4.3.1toread:
DesignstrengthforthehorizontalsheartransfershallsatisfyEq.
(16.4.3.1)atalllocationsalongthehorizontalinterfacecontact
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
surface inathe compositeconcreteflexuralmember
AlsoChange16.4.5.1toreadshallbesatisfiedatalllocations
alongthehorizontalinterfacecontactsurface:
Chapter2:Vuh=factoredshearforcealonghorizontalinterface
contactsurfaceincompositeconcreteflexuralmember,lb
179.
JaredE.Brewe
16.4.4.2
Referencetotherequirementforthesurfacetobe
cleanandfreeoflaitancewouldbehelpfulto
remindtheLDPofthatrequirement.
WilladdafootnotetoTable16.4.4.2.
Contactsurfacepreparation[1]
[1]
Concretecontactsurfaceshallbecleanandfreeoflaitance
Splitexisting(d)into(d)and(e)in26.5.6.2
Firstpartin(d)is(e)andsecondpartis(d).
26.5.6Construction,contraction,andisolationjoints
26.5.6.2ComplianceRequirement:
(d)Otherwise,cConstructionjointsshallbecleanedandlaitance
removedbeforenewconcreteisplaced.
(e)Surfaceofconcreteconstructionjointsshallbeintentionally
roughenedifspecified.Otherwise,constructionjointsshallbe
cleanedandlaitanceremovedbeforenewconcreteisplaced.
(e)(f)Immediatelybeforenewconcreteisplaced,construction
jointsshallbeprewettedandstandingwaterremoved.
ChangeinR16.4.1.3Chapter26to26.5.6
16.4.1.3Surfacepreparationassumedfordesignshallbe
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
specifiedintheconstructiondocuments.
R16.4.1.3Chapter26Section26.5.6requiresthelicenseddesign
professionaltospecifythesurfacepreparationintheconstruction
documents.
InTable22.9.4.2,makethefollowingchanges:
(b)Concreteplacedagainsthardenedconcretethatisclean,free
oflaitance,andintentionallyroughenedtoafullamplitudeof
approximatelyin.
(c)Concreteplacedagainsthardenedconcretethatisclean,freeof
laitance,andnotintentionallyroughened
180.
JaredE.Brewe
16.5.1.1
Reference(withinthecommentaryatleast)tothe
StrutandTieprovisionsasanalternativedesign
methodologywouldbehelpful.
181.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
JianZhao
R16.5.2.3
(d)Concreteplacedagainstasrolledstructuralsteelthatisclean,
freeofpaint,preparedinaccordancewith26.4.7(i)andwithshear
transferredacrossinterfacethecontactsurfacebyheadedstuds
orbyweldeddeformedbarsorwires.
Recommendaddingthefollowingcommentary
AddcommentaryR16.5.1.1:Designofbracketsandcorbelsin
accordancewithChapter23ispermitted,regardlessofshear
span.
Shouldisappropriateforthecommentary.
R16.5.5.1
Shouldisappropriateforthecommentary.
R17.2.1
278
Thissectionshouldprovideguidanceforload
distributioninanchorconnectionssubjectedto
tension,shear,moment,andtorsion.Preferablythis
sectionshouldalsodiscussthebiaxialbendingand
twodirectionalshear.
InACI31814,ACI31811AppendixDwasmovedintothemain
bodyoftheCodeasChapter17.Becauseofextensiverevisionsto
AppendixDinthepreviouscodecycle(i.e.,ACI31811)withthe
additionofadhesiveanchorprovisionsandmodificationstothe
seismicprovisionsforanchors,theACI318Committeemade
182.
183.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
minimalchangestotheAnchoringtoConcreteprovisionsduringthe
ACI31814codecycle.
184.
JianZhao
17.2.2
279
185.
KevinHeffern
17.2.3.4.
3
17.2.3.4.
3(b)
17.2.3.4.
3(b)
186. NathanNewman
shouldbeplacedbeforethecurrent17.2.1because
17.2.2definesthedesignloadforanchor
connections,whichconsistsoftwoormoreanchors
oranchorgroups.Thecurrent17.2.1specifieshow
theloadontheconnectionsisdistributedamongthe
anchorsoranchorgroups.
Thelanguageofthissectionissimilartothelanguage
from31811D.3.3.4.3(b)anddoesnotlisttensionas
oneofthepermissiblemethodsofductileyieldingin
theattachment.Ifthereisnospecificreasonto
excludetension,itshouldbeincludedtoallowdesign
engineerstheopportunitytoemploythisbehavior.
(b)Theanchororgroupofanchorsshallbedesigned
forthemaximumtensionthatcanbetransmittedto
theanchororgroupofanchorsbasedonthe
developmentofaductileyieldmechanisminthe
attachmentintension,flexure,shear,orbearing,ora
combinationofthoseconditions,andconsidering
bothmaterialoverstrengthandstrainhardening
effectsfortheattachment.Theanchordesigntensile
strengthshallbecalculatedfrom17.3.1.1.
Pleaseaddtensionasanacceptableductileyield
mechanismintheattachment.Tensionisthepurest
andmostpredictableformofductilefailure.Itonly
makessensetoincludeitinthisparagraph.Ihave
runintothesituationwhereIwouldprefertouse
tensionastheductilefailuremodeintheattachment
before.Suggesttochangethereadingofthissection
Withregardtothisspecificcomment,loadsduetomomentand
torsioncanberesistedbytension/compressioncoupleandshear
coupleintheconnections.Asaconsequence,loadsdistributed
intotheconnectorscanberesolvedintotensionandshear.
Willconsiderreorganizingasnewbusiness.
Changeto:(b)Theanchororgroup.intheattachmentin
tension,flexure,shear,orbearing.
Changeto:(b)Theanchororgroup.intheattachmentin
tension,flexure,shear,orbearing.
No.
187.
Public
Commenter
Name
JianZhao
Provision
#
R17.2.3.5
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
285
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
tothefollowing(changeunderlined):
(b)Theanchororgroupofanchorsshallbedesigned
forthemaximumtensionthatcanbetransmittedto
theanchororgroupofanchorsbasedonthe
developmentofaductileyieldmechanisminthe
attachmentintension,flexure,shear,orbearing,ora
combinationofthoseconditions,andconsidering
bothmaterialoverstrengthandstrainhardening
effectsfortheattachment.Theanchordesigntensile
strengthshallbecalculatedfrom17.3.1.1.
"thecrosssectionofthesteelelementoftheanchor ACICommittee318willconsiderthisasnewbusiness
cannotbeconfiguredsothatsteelfailureinshear
providesanymeaningfuldegreeofductility."This
sentenceisquestionable.Sheartestsofanchors
(controlledbysteelfailure)havedemonstrated
substantialdisplacementbeforefailure.Two
situationscanbesummarized:
1)anchorsinplainconcrete:concretemaycrushnext
totheupperpartoftheanchorshaft.Thiscauses
bendingintheanchorshaft.Asaresult,theanchors
maydeveloplargedisplacementsbeforefailure.
2)anchorswithanchorreinforcement:Thecover
concrete(relativelydeepercomparedwiththatin
Case1)nexttotheanchorshaftmayspall,leaving1.5
in.(sameastheconcretecoverdepth)ofanchor
shaftunsupportedinthesheardirection.Thusthe
anchorsmayexperiencelargedisplacementat
ultimate.
Hencethefactisthatanchorsinsheardodevelop
ductilebehavior;however,ourdesignequation
basedonsteelfracturemaynotbeappropriateto
usethisductility.Moreimportantly,undercyclic
loading,deeperconcretecrushesduetolowcycle
fatigue,resultinginlargerbendingmomentinthe
No.
188.
Public
Commenter
Name
JianZhao
Provision
#
Fig.
R17.3.2
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
325
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
anchorssuchthattheanchorcapacitycanbefurther
reduced.Aseismicreductionfactorforanchorsin
shearisnecessary.
Theshapeofbreakoutconesarerelatedtothe
locationoftestanchorsandthetestsetup,especially
thelocationofreactions,asillustratedinthe
followingtestpicture.Hencetheassumedbreakout
conesinthisfigureshouldbedrawninstraight
dashedlines,indicatingthattheseareassumptions.
Nevertheless,thesametestsindicatedthatthe
concretebreakoutcapacityisnotaffectedbythe
actualbreakoutcones,andthecodeequationscan
reasonablypredicttheanchorcapacity.
WillchangetheinclinedlinestostraightdashedlinesinFig.
R17.3.2.
6 in.
16 in.
35
hef = 6 in.
Idealized breakout cone

6 in.
Top surface
ca1: 4 in.
35
6 in.
Idealized breakout cone
Front surface
189.
JianZhao
R17.3.3
293
Actualbreakoutconesandthedesignmodels
thelastparagraph,anchorreinforcementshownin
Theincreasedphifactorassociatedwithsupplementary
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
reinforcementanticipatestheprovisionofreinforcementinthe
anchorageregionthatwillimprovestrengthassociatedwith
concretebreakout.Theincreasedphifactordoesnotapplyto
pulloutandpryoutstrengths.Itdoesapplytothecaseofconcrete
breakoutandsidefaceblowouttoencouragetheuseof
supplementaryreinforcementinthesesituations.
Agree.InEq.17.4.2.4,thetermsec,Nshouldbesubscriptsof
psi.InR17.4.2.4,eNshouldbeeNthatis,theprimeshould
followthee.
MandatorylanguageisusedintheCode,notinthecommentary.
190.
JianZhao
R17.3.3
293
191.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
JianZhao
R17.4.1.2
Figs.R17.4.2.9andR17.5.2.9providesonly
reinforcingschemesforanchorscontrolledby
concretebreakoutfailure.Theanchorscontrolledby
sidefaceblowoutandpryoutfailurearenot
protectedbythesupplementaryreinforcementas
suggestedbythetwofigures.HenceTheincreased
factorisnotjustified.
Inthelastparagraph,thesupplementary
reinforcementisdefinedhereintheCode.Forcastin
anchors,anchorreinforcementcanbespecifically
designed;henceprovidingspecialreinforcementwith
insufficientdevelopmentlengthmaynotbe
meaningful.Inthemeantime,manypostinstalled
anchorsareinstalledinreinforcedconcrete
elements.Engineersneedtoknowiftheexisting
reinforcementinthememberscanhelprestrainthe
brittleconcretebreakoutorpryoutfailure,and
whethertheymaytakeadvantageoftheincreased
factors.
17.4.2.4
298
Subscriptsin17.4.2.4arenotintherightlocations
R17.4.2.6
194.
195.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
JianZhao
JianZhao
17.4.2.6
17.4.2.6
298
299
Subscriptsin17.4.2.6arenotintherightlocations
Optionc)isnotshown.
Agree.c,Nshouldbesubscriptsofin17.4.2.6a)andb).
Theletterc)shouldbedeleted:
c)
196.
JianZhao
17.4.2.9
300
Steelreinforcementspecificallydesignedforanchors
andanchorgroupsisusedforcastinanchorsandJ
orLbolts.Forsuchapplications,engineersmaywant
toandmaybeencouragedtoplacesufficientamount
ofreinforcementsuchthatsteelfracturecontrolsthe
anchorbehavior.Anchorreinforcementisdifferent
ACICommittee318willconsiderthisasnewbusiness.Change
referencefrom25.4toChapter25in17.4.2.9and17.5.2.9
becauseanchorageoftransversereinforcementisntcoveredin
25.4;ACI31811providedgeneralreferencetoChapter12:
192.
193.
Althoughtheuseofsupplementaryreinforcementdoesnot
precludeconcretebreakout,theincreasedphifactorassociated
withsupplementaryreinforcementisintendedtoencouragethe
engineertoprovidereinforcementintheanchorageregionthat
willenhanceanchorperformanceeventhoughitmaynotbe
specificallydesignedforthispurpose.Eveninthecaseofpost
installedanchorswherethefinalpositionoftheanchorsisless
certain,itmaybedesirabletodetailtheanchorageregionwith
supplementaryreinforcement.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
197.
DavidHosking
17.4.2.9
300
13
198.
DavidHosking
17.4.2.9
300
13
199.
JianZhao
17.4.2.9
andFig.
R17.4.2.9
300
and
328
PublicComment
fromsupplementaryreinforcementinthatwhether
thereinforcementcanbefullydevelopedatboth
sidesoftheprojectedbreakoutcracks.Testsby
PetersenatUWMilwaukeeshowedthatthe35
degreeprojectedcracksdonothappenwhen
reinforcingbarsareplacedassuggestedbytheCode.
Inaddition,stirrupsandtiesareallowedbythis
provision;however,25.4doesnotspecifythe
developmentrequirementsforstirrupsandties.
Instead,theuseofstirrupsandtiesinflexural
membersindicatesthatthedevelopment
requirementsforthestirrupsandtiesaresatisfied
throughtheinteractionbetweenstirrupsandcorner
bars.PullouttestsbyPetersenindicatesthat4db
(wheredbisthediameterofthestirrups)isneeded
forsuchanchorageofstirrupsthroughcornerbars.
ClarifyinthissectionifAnchorReinforcementusedin
Seismicapplicationsneedstobefullydevelopedfor
fyorcanyouuseSect25.4.10toreducethelengthof
developmentduetoexcessreinforcement.
ClarifyiftheuseofStrutandTiemodelcanbeused
asanchorreinforcement.
CommitteeResponse
17.4.2.9 Whereanchorreinforcementisdevelopedin
accordancewith25.4Chapter25onbothsides
17.5.2.9Whereanchorreinforcementiseitherdevelopedin
accordancewith25.4Chapter25onbothsides
See25.4.10.2forthosecaseswheretheexcessreinforcement
factorcannotbeused.Forseismicapplications,specificallysee(e).
TheStrutandTiemodelisamethodofdesign.Itisnot
reinforcement.Thereinforcementistobeanchoredinaccordance
withChapter25,whichrecognizestheuseofstrutandtiemodels
forspecificcases.See,e.g.,R25.4.4.2.
Thecurrentprovisionforanchortensionreinforcementislimitedtoanchors/groupanchorsinmassconcrete,whichdoes
notdevelopsplittingcrackswhentheanchorsareloadedintension.SomeofthetestsinReferenceD.28inACI31811
showsuchapplications.Whentheanchors/groupanchorsarenotinstalledinthemiddleofmessconcrete,crackscan
developandpassthroughtheanchorhead.Inthiscase,anchorreinforcementdesignedaccordingtothisprovisionmaynot
ensuresatisfyingbehavior,asdemonstratedbythetestsatUWMilwaukee.Similarbehaviorhasalsobeenobservedinthe
testsofheadedbarsinbeamcolumnjoints,inwhichsplittingcracksandthelossofconcretecovergreatlyreducethe
capacityoftheheadedbars.Thefollowingprovisionsareproposedtosupplementtheexistingprovision.
17.4.2.9 Anchortensionreinforcement
R17.4.2.9 Anchortensionreinforcement
17.4.2.9.1Anchortensionreinforcementshall
R17.4.2.9.1Twodesignapproachesfor
bedesignedeitherby17.4.2.9.2foranchorsand proportioninganchorreinforcementareincluded
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
anchorgroups inmassconcrete,or17.4.2.9.3for
anchorsandanchorgroupsclosetoconcrete
edges.
17.4.2.9.2Whereanchorreinforcementis
developedinaccordancewith25.4onbothsides
ofthebreakoutsurface,thedesignstrengthof
theanchorreinforcementshallbepermittedto
beusedinsteadoftheconcretebreakout
strengthindeterminingNn.Astrength
reductionfactorof0.75shallbeusedinthe
designoftheanchorreinforcement.
17.4.2.9.3anchortensionreinforcementshall
include1)loadcarryingreinforcementinthe
directionoftheanchors;2)crackcontrolling
reinforcementinalldirectionsthathasalimited
edgedistance;and3)localconfining
reinforcementneartheanchorheadifsideface
blowoutmaycontrolthefailure.Theareaof
loadcarryingreinforcementshallbedetermined
by
,
.
(17.4.2.9.3)
wherethelimitationof1.9fyaonfutashallnotbe
applied.Thevalueoffytshallsatisfy20.2.2.4.
in17.4.2.9.1.Theprovisionsof17.4.2.9.2are
similartothoseofthe2011Code.Section
17.4.2.9.3allowsanalternativedesign,inwhich
closedstirrupsandcrackcontrollingbarsconfine
concretearoundtheanchors.Theconfined
concretealongwiththereinforcementtransfers
thetensileloadtothestructure.
R17.4.2.9.2Sameastheexistingwording.
R17.4.2.9.3Withagoaltoconfineconcretein
frontofanchorsandtopreventconcrete
breakout,theanchorreinforcementconsistsof
closelyspacedstirrups,cornerbars,andcrack
controllingbarsdistributedalongallconcrete
facesasillustratedinFig.R17.5.2.9.3.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Fig.R17.4.2.9.3anchorreinforcementfor
tension.
Theloadcarryingreinforcementshouldbe
proportionedtocarryaforceequaltothedesign
tensilecapacityoftheanchors,andimplemented
usingsmalldiameterclosedstirrups.Theclosely
spacedstirrupswithacenteroncenterspacing
of2to3in.canextendupto1.0heffromthe
anchorbolt.
Thedesignofthecrackcontrolling
Crackcontrollingreinforcementarenecessary
reinforcementcanusetwostrutandtiemodels: crossingallpossiblecracks.Allcrackcontrolling
onedescribingtheloadtransferfromtheanchor reinforcementshouldbeproportionedusinga
headtotheloadcarryingreinforcement,andthe steelstressof0.6fy,andimplementedusing
otherdescribingtheloadtransferfromtheload smalldiameterbarsevenlydistributedwitha
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
carryingreinforcementtotherestofthe
structure.
200.
JianZhao
17.4.3.4
301
CommitteeResponse
smallandpracticalspacingintwoorthogonal
directions.Inaddition,theanchorsandtheload
carryingreinforcementclosetotheanchorcan
beencasedbythreeorfourclosedhoopsinthe
transversedirectionneartheanchorheadifthe
anchorsareclosetoafreesidesurface.Withthe
anchortensionreinforcement,anchorshaft
fractureisexpectedifotherfailuremodesin17.4
donotcontroltheanchorbehavior.
Thequasistaticcyclictestsofthereinforced
anchorsintension,conductedattheUniversity
ofWisconsin,Milwaukeeshowedinsignificant
capacityreduction.Thereforenocapacity
reductionisneededforreinforcedanchors
subjectedtocyclictensileloading
COMMITTEERESPONSE:ACICommittee318willconsiderthisasnewbusiness
ThepulloutstrengthofheadedanchorsinEq.
ACICommittee318willconsiderthisasnewbusiness
17.4.3.4(alsotheclausenumber)assumesthe
concretebearingstrengthof8fc'.Thisisavalid
assumptiononlywhenconcreteneartheanchor
headdoesnotdevelopcracks.Whensplittingcracks
passthroughtheanchorhead,theconcretebearing
strengthcanbegreatlyreducedasobservedinthe
testsofheadedbarsintheliterature,andthetestsat
UWMilwaukee.
Test of headed bars
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Test of headed anchor
201.
JianZhao
17.4.4
302
Thisclauseisforcastinheadedanchors.Theimpact
ofsidefaceblowoutcanbereducedbyusing
reinforcementperpendiculartotheanchorshafts,
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
202.
DavidHosking
17.5.1
308
10
203.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
JianZhao
R17.5.1.2
17.5.2.9
andFig.
R17.5.2.9
314
and
335
204.
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
similartothetransversereinforcementinthedesign
ofheadedbars.
Boltbendingshouldbeaddressed.Someprograms
aremakingassumptionsorusingETAGasaguideline.
Thisresultsinveryinconsistentresultsfordesigns.
CalculationsfromETAGsuggestthatboltbendingis
significantwhileAISCDesignGuide1suggeststhere
isnobendingoftheanchorrodwithinthegrout.
AISCDesignGuide1onlycalculatesboltbendingif
theboltshaveweldedwashers.
Thecurrentprovisionforanchorshearreinforcementassumesthatabreakoutconeforms,andtheselldeveloped
reinforcementbridgingthebreakoutcracksprovidestheshearcapacityfortheanchors.Thismaybeapplicableforanchor
withlightreinforcement.Forcastinanchors,itispossibletoprovidecloselyspacedreinforcementintermsofstirrups,in
whichcase,theexistingdesignassumptionmaynotapplyasdemonstratedbythetestsatUWMilwaukee.Thefollowing
provisionsareproposedtosupplementtheexistingprovision,asshownintheattacheddocument.Inaddition,concrete
covermaycrushwhenthereinforcedanchorsareloadedinshear.Thecrushedcovercauseslargebendingmomentsinthe
anchors,thusreducingtheirshearcapacity.Thefollowingprovisionsareproposedtosupplementtheexistingprovision.
17.5.2.9 Anchorshearreinforcement
R17.5.2.9 Anchorshearreinforcement
17.5.2.9.1Anchorreinforcementshallbe
R17.5.2.9.1Twodesignapproachesfor
designedeitherby17.5.2.9.2,whichassumes
proportioninganchorreinforcementareincluded
welldevelopedanchorreinforcementprovides
in17.5.2.9.1.Theprovisionsof17.5.2.9.2are
shearresistanceofanchors,or17.5.2.9.3,which similartothoseofthe2011Code.The
assumptionmustbesatisfiedthatconcrete
assumeswellconfinedconcretetransfersshear
breakoutcracksformattheultimateload.
loadtothestructuralelement.
Section17.5.2.9.3allowsanalternativedesign,in
whichclosedstirrupsandcrackcontrollingbars
confineconcretearoundtheanchors.The
confinedconcretealongwiththereinforcement
transferstheshearloadtothestructure.
17.5.2.9.2Whereanchorreinforcementis
R17.5.2.9.2Sameastheexistingwording.
eitherdevelopedinaccordancewith25.4on
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
bothsidesofthebreakoutsurface,orencloses
theanchorandisdevelopedbeyondthe
breakoutsurface,thedesignstrengthofthe
anchorreinforcementshallbepermittedtobe
usedinsteadoftheconcretebreakoutstrength
indeterminingVn.Astrengthreductionfactor
of0.75shallbeusedinthedesignoftheanchor
reinforcement.
17.5.2.9.3Theanchorreinforcementshall
consistofclosedstirrupsencasingcornerbars
andcrackcontrollingbarsdistributedalongall
concretesurfaces.Theareaofanchor
reinforcementshallbedeterminedby
.
,
.
(17.5.2.9.3)
wherethelimitationof1.9fyaonfutashallnotbe
applied.Thevalueoffytshallsatisfy20.2.2.4.
R17.5.2.9.3Withagoaltoconfineconcretein
frontofanchorsandtopreventconcrete
breakout,theanchorreinforcementconsistsof
closelyspacedstirrups,cornerbars,andcrack
controllingbarsdistributedalongallconcrete
facesasillustratedinFig.R17.5.2.9.3.
8db
8db
8db
min ca1, ca 2
ca1
8db
Therequiredanchorreinforcementshallbe
providedintermsofclosedstirrupsparallelto
Fig.R17.5.2.9.3anchorreinforcementforshear.
Crackcontrollingbarsshallbedeterminedbased
onstrutandtiemodelsforthestructural
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
anchorsevenlydistributedatbothsidesof
anchorswithamaximumspacingof3in.Crack
controllingbarscanbedesignedusingstrutand
tiemodel,andshallbeatleast0.5 ,evenly
distributedalongthetopandfrontsurfaces.
Thenominalstrengthsof17.5.2.9.3shallbe
multipliedbya0.75factorforreinforcedanchors
inshear.
205.
DavidHosking
17.5.2.9
317
18
206.
DavidHosking
17.5.2.9
317
18
CommitteeResponse
element.Diagonalstrutsfromtheanchorshaft
totheoutmoststirrupsindicatethatthesplitting
forcecanbe50percentofthedesignshearforce
fortheanchor.
Withtheanchorshearreinforcement,concrete
breakoutcanbepreventedandanchorshaft
fractureisexpectedatultimate.Coverconcrete
infrontoftheanchorboltscrushes,causingthe
lossofconcretesupporttothetopportionofthe
anchorshaft.Thefullanchorsteelcapacityin
shearcannotbeachievedbecausetheexposed
anchorboltsweresubjectedtoacombinationof
shear,bending,andtensionatfailure.A
strengthreductionfactorof0.75(slightlylower
thanthatofACI31811onanchorswithagrout
pad)canbeusedtodeterminetheshear
capacityofreinforcedanchors.
Quasistaticcyclictestsofthereinforcedanchors
inshearshowedinsignificantcapacityreduction.
Thereforenocapacityreductionisneededfor
reinforcedanchorssubjectedtocyclicshear
loading.
COMMITTEERESPONSE:ACICommittee318
willconsiderthisasnewbusiness
ClarifyinthissectionifAnchorReinforcementusedin
Seismicapplicationsneedstobefullydevelopedfor
fyorcanyouuseSect25.4.10toreducethelengthof
developmentduetoexcessreinforcement.
ClarifyiftheuseofStrutandTiemodelcanbeused
asanchorreinforcement.Ifso,pleasealsoclarityif
See25.4.10.2forthosecaseswheretheexcessreinforcement
factorcannotbeused.Forseismicapplications,specificallysee(e).
Thelanguageregardingthereinforcementwhichcanbeconsidered
ascontributoryisadvisoryinnature.Thecoderequirementisthat
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
207.
JianZhao
Fig.
R17.5.2.9
(b)
336
208.
DavidHosking
17.5.3.1
315
24
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
thelimitationsofreinforcementspacedlessthan
thelesserof0.5*ca1and0.3*ca2fromtheanchor
centerlinesnotedinR17.5.2.9beignored.Thisin
importantincalculationinpierswherethetiescan
beusedasanchorreinforcement.Howevertheties
inpiersalmostnevermeetthespacingrequirements
inD.17.5.2.9.
thereinforcementbedevelopedoneithersideofthebreakout
surface.Theuseofstrutandtiemodelstodesignreinforcementfor
anchorsisnotprecluded.Commentarysentencemodifiedas
follows:
R17.5.2.9
[Changelastpartofsecondparagraph]
OnlyGenerallyreinforcementspacedlessthanthelesserof
0.5ca1and0.3ca2from theanchorcenterlineshouldbeincluded
asanchorreinforcement.Inthiscase,theanchorreinforcement
mustbedevelopedonbothsidesofthebreakoutsurface.For
equilibriumreasons,anedgereinforcementmustbepresent.The
researchonwhichtheseprovisions are based was limited to
anchor reinforcementwithmaximumdiametersimilartoaNo.6
bar.Strutandtiemodelsmayalsobeusedtodesignanchor
reinforcement.
ACICommittee318willconsiderthisasnewbusiness.
Theplaneviewoftheanchorshearreinforcementin
termsofsurfacereinforcementhasamistake:the
breakoutcracktowardsthelimitededge(ca2side)
doesnotusuallyfollowtheassumed35degreeangle.
Thishasbeenobservedintestsanddemonstratedin
Fig.R17.3.1Category(b),Caseiii.Hence,thelimited
usefulrangeforanchorreinforcement,thatis0.3ca2
inR17.5.2.9,shouldbereleased.Barsawayfromthis
limitwillstillbridgingthepotentialbreakoutcrack
andhavesimilardevelopmentconditions.
WhatvalueofNcbshouldbeusedinpryout
calculationswhenanchorreinforcementisusedto
resistconcretebreakoutintension?Inpierswhere
Ncbisverysmallandanchorreinforcementisused
pryoutcanbecomeaverysmallvalue.Ifeelthere
shouldbesomelimitationstothepryoutcalculations
whenlonganchorsareusedandanchor
reinforcementisused.
209. JamesS.Lai
R18.1
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
338
210. JamesS.Lai
18.1
338
211.
R18.2
341
18.2.1.5
343
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
212. JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
2nd paragraph changeICC(ICCIBC12)toIBC12

(ICC2012)
ConsiderpossiblechangingthischaptertoLateral
ForceResistantStructureandinclusionofMain
WindForceResistingSysteminthischapter.Thiswill
enableuseoftheBuildingCodeforglobalmarketand
particularlyforthelowerSeismicDesignCategories
Replacecomprisedwithiscomposedof
213.
JianZhao
18.2.3
345
214.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
18.2.4.1
CommitteeResponse
Modifyasrecommendedhereandthroughout.
ACI318doesnothavespecificprovisionsformainwindforce
resistingsystems.
Thewordingisacceptableasis.
Whydoweexcludesections18.9and18.10fromSDC Thiscommentisinterpretedasarequesttorevise18.2.1.5to
D,EandF?
clarifywhy18.9and18.10arenotrequiredinSDCD,E,andF.
Actually,thesearenotexcludedfromSDCD,E,andF,butarenot
requiredaspartofSection18.2.1.5.TohelpclarifytheCode
intent,introduceCommentaryasfollows:
R18.2.1Sections18.2.1.3through18.2.1.5identifythoseparts
ofChapter18thatapplytothebuildingbasedonitsassignedSDC,
regardlessoftheverticalelementsoftheseismicforceresisting
system.ASCE7definesthepermissibleverticalelementsofthe
seismicforceresistingsystemandapplieswhereadopted.Section
R18.2summarizestheintentofACI318regardingwhichvertical
elementsshouldbepermissibleinabuildingconsideringitsSDC.
Section18.2.1.6definestherequirementsfortheverticalelements
oftheseismicforceresistingsystem.Whereadopted,thegeneral
buildingcode,notACI318,definesthepermissiblevertical
elementsoftheseismicforceresistingsystem.
TheseismicdesignpartinChapter17should be
movedtothisclause.Seismicdesignofsteelto
concreteconnectionswithanchorsandheadedbars
shouldbedefinedherewhenresearchisavailablein
thefuture.
Itisunclearifallthestructuralsystemshereare
Furthermore,thisprovisionisredundantwith21.2.4,whichis
intendedtobemodifiedforSDCD,E,orF,orifonly
moreclearlyworded.Replace18.2.4.1withlanguagethatrefersto
theintermediateprecaststructuralwallsinSDCD,E, Chapter21.Alsoaddcommentarytoimproveawarenessthat
Fgetmodified,andALLspecialmomentframesand
21.2.4presentsadditionalrequirementsforseismicsystems
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
ALLspecialstructuralwallsgetthesemodifications,
regardlessofSDC.
215.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
18.2.4.1
346
216.
RobertStewart
18.2.7.1
348
CommitteeResponse
Replace18.2.4.1withthefollowingandaddR18.2.4.1:
18.2.4.1Strengthreductionfactorsshallbeinaccordancewith
Chapter21.
R18.2.4.1Chapter21containsstrengthreductionfactorsforall
members,joints,andconnectionsofearthquakeresistant
structures,includingspecificprovisionsin21.2.4forbuildingsthat
usespecialmomentframes,specialstructuralwalls,and
intermediateprecastwalls.
Coulditemb)heregivetheshearphi factorlike(a)
Thevalueofphiinitem(b)dependsonthevalueofphiusedfor
and(b),i.e.0.75,toreducecrossreferencingforthe theverticalcomponents.Therefore,itisnotnecessarily0.75.For
example,forashearwall,itispermittedtousephi=0.6.
users?
Section18.2.7.1 Mechanicalsplicesclassifiedas(b)
ThisrequirementhasbeeninACI318sincethe1999edition.Itis
readsasfollows:(b)Type2Mechanicalsplice
basedonstudiesconductedbymembersofACI318duringthat
conformingto25.5.7andcapableofdevelopingthe
Codecycle.Thelanguageinthecommentaryisnewlyproposedto
specifiedtensilestrengthofthesplicedbars.AType helpclarifytheintentoftheprovision.
2Mechanicalsplicerequirementisbasedona
ACICommittee318hasnotreviewedtheotherreferenced
specifiedloadbearingstrength.Thecommentary
readsasfollows:Rl8.2.7.1Theadditional
documentandhasnotdevelopedanopiniononitsapplicability.
requirementforaType2mechanicalspliceis
Themagnitude,number,andnatureoftheinelasticcyclesthata
intendedtoresultinamechanicalsplicecapableof
mechanicalsplicemustresistwillvarywiththeearthquake
sustaininginelasticstrainsthroughmultiplecycles. shaking,thebuilding,andthespecificlocationwithinthebuilding.
ACICommittee318declinestodefinethespecificrequirements
WhatstudyorpaperwaspresentedtoACI31814
foraspliceusingthetermsrequestedbythecomment.
thatjustifiessuchachangeinphilosophy?
IfaType2mechanicalspliceisintendedtoresultin
amechanicalsplicecapableofsustaininginelastic
strainsthroughmultiplecycles.,doesthecurrent
InternationalCodeCounselESAC133(Acceptance
CriteriaforMechanicalConnectorSystemsforSteel
ReinforcingBarsApprovedDecember2012)
provisionsmeettheintentofthiscommentary?
Ifnot,thentheACI31814codeneedstodefine;
1) Theinelasticstrainsthatarerequired.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
2) Howmanycyclesarerequired.
3) Whatconstitutesacycle.
217.
BrysonAllen
18.2.7.1
348
218.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,
J.I..
18.2.7.2
349
219. JamesS.Lai
18.3.1
350
220. JamesS.Lai
18.4
350
Inreferencetothecommentary:Rl8.2.7.1 The
additionalrequirementforaType2mechanicalsplice
isintendedtoresultinamechanicalsplicecapableof
sustaininginelasticstrainsthroughmultiplecycles.
Istheintentofthiscommentarytofullydefinethe
inelasticperformancerequirements?Wouldthetest
regimeofAC133fulfilltheintendedrequirements?If
not,thereshouldbeclarificationtothistoavoidmis
interpretation.
Section 18.2.7.2 reads: Type 1 mechanical splices
shallnotbelocatedwithinadistanceequaltotwice
thememberdepthfromthecolumnorbeamfacefor
special moment frames or from critical sections
whereyieldingofthereinforcementislikelytooccur
asaresultoflateraldisplacementsbeyondthelinear
rangeofbehavior.Type2mechanicalsplicesshallbe
permitted at any location, except as noted in
18.9.2.1(c).
In the discussers opinion there is a wide range of

typesofmechanicalsplicesandabetterclassification
ofthesesplicesisneeded.Type2mechanicalsplices
should be able to develop the actual, and not the
specified, tensile strength of a bar. In addition, the
ACI 318 committee should discuss an appropriate
metrictolimitthebarslipattheconnector,toensure
suitableserviceloadperformanceofelements.
ThissectionshouldalsoapplytoMainWindForce
ResistingSystem
ThissystemshouldalsoapplytoMainWindForce
Itisnottheintentofthiscommentarytofullydefinetheinelastic
performancerequirements.Thiscommentaryonlydescribesthe
intentofthecoderequirement.
Newbusiness.ACICommittee318hasconsideredalternativecode
languagetoincorporatetheconceptsnotedbythecomment,but
hasbeenunabletodevelopsuitablecodelanguage.Itisour
understandingthatmostType2mechanicalsplices,eventhough
onlyrequiredtodevelopspecifiedstrength,actuallyarecapableof
developingactualstrength.
ACI318doesnothavespecificprovisionsformainwindforce
resistingsystems,andhasnotconsideredwhetherthereferenced
provisionsaresuitableforsuchsystems.
ACI318doesnothave specificprovisionsformainwindforce
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
ResistingSystem
221.
BrysonAllen
R18.5
P.35
6
46
222.
JulianAlbrigo
ERICO
R18.5
Page
356
223.
MichaelKolta
18.5
Page
356
(ch.
18
R18.
5)
224.
TimSalmons
18.5.2.2
356
Remove1.5xSpecifiedyieldforrebar.A706rebar
cannotpracticallyachievethisscenario.
Currentlyreads:WhenType2mechanicalsplices
areusedtodirectlyconnectprimaryreinforcement,
theprobablestrengthofthespliceshouldbeatleast
1.5timesthespecifiedyieldstrengthofthe
reinforcementThe1.5timesspecifiedyieldonly
appliestoASTMA615,Grade60rebardesignation.
ThestatementdoesnotaccountforA706,Grade75
orGrade80.Shouldread:Type2connections
developthespecifiedminimumtensilestrength,as
definedinSection18.2.7.1(b)ofthe2014Code.
IwouldsuggestitShouldbesaidjusttype2
Mechanicalspliceconfirmingto18.2.7.1(whichisto
achievethespecifiedtensilestrengthofthebar)
withoutthe1.5timesthespecifiedyieldstrength.or
tobesaid1.5timesthespecifiedyieldstrengthfor
type2splicesonlyforASTM615Grade60asitisnot
correctforgrade75orgrade80andalsonotcorrect
forSteelASTM706,Grade60,75orGrade80
BecausetheratioofFu/Fyislessthan1.5forthese
grades,sothemechanicalcouplernotgoingto
achievethe1.5timesthespecifiedyieldifthesteel
itselfdidnt.
Forexample:ASTM706Grade60steel:Fy=60Ksi
Fu=80KsiFy/Fu=1.33<1.5
AverageFuforASTM706Grade60=85ksiratiostill
willbelessthan1.5
developinthisrequirementisambiguous.
Recommendmodifyingthissectiontoread:
Elementsoftheconnectionthatarenotdesignedto
CommitteeResponse
resistingsystems,andhasnotconsideredwhetherthereferenced
provisionsaresuitableforsuchsystems.
ThisisalongstandingCodesectionthatisnotbeingchangedas
partoftheACI31814Code.Thiswillbeconsideredasnew
business.
ThisisalongstandingCodesectionthatisnotbeingchangedas
partoftheACI31814Code.Thiswillbeconsideredasnew
business.
Inadditiontomechanicalsplices,the1.5factorappliestoother
kindsofelementsintheforcepath.Therefore,itwouldbe
incompletetorefertoonlythemechanicalspliceprovisions.
Agreethatdevelopisunclear.Reviseasfollows:
18.5.2.2Elementsoftheconnectionthatarenotdesignedto
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
yieldshallhaveanominalstrengthofatleast1.5Sy.
225.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
226. JamesS.Lai
227. JamesS.Lai
R18.6.1
R18.6.1
357
R18.6.3.1
358
Assumptionthatspecialmomentframesare
composedofhorizontalbeams.
Somehorizontalmembersareusedasstrutsandare
subjecttohighaxialforces,particularlyattransfer
level.Thestrutmembermayormaynotbeintegral
withadiaphragm.Insuchinstance,dimensional
limitsandconfinementshouldconformtothosein
section18.7.Pleaseaddcommentarylanguageto
thiseffect.
Convertthereinforcement ratioof0.025to
equivalentstrainashasbeendoneelsewhereinthe
Code
228.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R18.6.4
Replaceshouldwithshalltomatchcodetext.x2
229.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
18.7.5.2
366
230.
TrentNagele
18.7.5.3
.Shallbecomposedofeithersingleoroverlapping
spirals,circularhoops,orrectilinearhoopswithour
withoutcrossties.
ClarifythatthelastsentenceofthissectionThe
valueofSoshallnotexceed6in.andneednotbe
CommitteeResponse
yieldshalldevelopatleast1.5Sy.Forelementsoftheconnection
thatarenotdesignedtoyield,therequiredstrengthshallbebased
on1.5Syoftheyieldingportionoftheconnection.
Thewordingiscorrectascurrentlyused.
Thisconditionisalreadycoveredbycommentaryinthemiddleof
thesecondparagraph.Section18.6.4.7coversthedetailing
requirementsforbeamswithhighaxialforce.
Thisisalongstandingprovisionthathasservedwell.The
conditionsusedtocalculatestrainelsewhereintheCodedonot
strictlyapplyforamembersubjectedtoinelasticcurvature
reversals.
ItisagreedthatuseofshouldappearstoconflictwiththeCode.To
avoidthisproblem,modifythelastparagraphofR18.6.4as
follows:
Inthecaseofmemberswithvaryingstrengthalongthespanor
membersforwhichthepermanentloadrepresentsalarge
proportionofthetotaldesignload,concentrationsofinelastic
rotationmayoccurwithinthespan.Ifsuchaconditionis
anticipated,transversereinforcementisalsoshouldbeprovided
requiredinregionswhereyieldingisexpected.
Becausespallingoftheconcreteshellmightoccur,
especiallyatandnearregionsofflexuralyielding,allweb
reinforcementshouldisrequiredtobeprovidedintheformof
closedhoops.
Thewordingiscorrectascurrentlyshown.
Thelimitsonspacing(4to6inches)appliesonlytothevalue
calculatedinthecitedequation.If(a)or(b)requiresomething
No.
231.
Public
Commenter
Name
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,J.I.
Provision
#
18.7.5.3
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
367
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
takenlessthan4.appliestoallthreeconditions(a,
bandc),notjustthelastcondition(c)whichisthe
onlyonethatusestheSonomenclature.
Recommendchangingthebeginningsentenceofthe
sectiontoincludetheSonomenclatureasfollows:
Spacingoftransversereinforcement,So,alongthe
length
The Code does not offer an explanation of the
background of provision 18.7.5.3(c) regarding
transverse reinforcement in columns of special
moment frames. The discussers doubt that such
provisiondeservesanexpressionlike18.7.5.3,which
givesafalseimpressionofaccuracy.Unlessarational
explanation is given in the Code, the discussers
suggestthefollowingnewCodeprovision.
18.7.5.3Spacingoftransversereinforcementshall
notexceedthe
smallestof(a)through(c):
(a)Onequarteroftheminimumcolumndimension
(b)Sixtimesthediameterofthesmallestlongitudinal
bar
(c)soequalto5in.,ascalculatedby
14 hx
so 4
3
232.
Rodriguez,M.E., R18.7.6.1 370

andRestrepo,J.I.
371
CommitteeResponse
smaller,thenthesmallervaluegoverns.
ACICommittee318doesnottakeissuewiththecommentthat
Equation18.7.5.3mightgiveafalseimpressionofaccuracy.The
intent,however,toencouragesmallerhorizontalspacing(hx)to
achievegreaterverticalspacing(so)isconsideredappropriate.The
commenttomakethis5in.andtochangehxto11in.isanoption,
butotheroptionsalsoexist.Thecurrentexpression,oraverbal
expressionofitsintent,remainsthepreferenceofACICommittee
318.
(18.7.5.3)
ThevalueofsofromEq.(18.7.5.3)shallnotexceed6
in.andneednot
betakenlessthan4in.hxshallnotexceed11in.
SectionR18.7.6.1.1reads: Distributionofthe
combinedmomentstrengthofthebeamstothe
columnsaboveandbelowthejointshouldbebased
onanalysis.
Thedistributionofcolumnresistingmomentsin
ACICommittee318hashadataskgrouplookingatthisissue.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
proportionwiththecolumnflexuralrigiditycanbe
unconservative(Moehleetal.,2008).Section
R18.7.6.1.1needstoberevised.
Moehle,J.P.,Hooper,J.D.;andLubke,C.D.,2008,
"Seismicdesignofreinforcedconcretespecial
momentframes:aguideforpracticingengineers,"
NEHRPSeismicDesignTechnicalBriefNo.1,National
InstituteofStandardsandTechnology,Gaithersburg,
MD.,NISTGCR89171
Section18.7.6.1.1shouldread:Thedesignshear
force,Ve,shallbecalculatedfromconsideringthe
maximumforcesthatcanbegeneratedatthefaces
ofthejointsateachendofthecolumn.Thesejoint
forcesshallbecalculatedusingthemaximum
probableflexuralstrengths,Mpr,ateachendofthe
columnassociatedwiththerangeoffactoredaxial
forces,Pu,actingonthecolumn.
Thereasonisthatthereisonlyonedefinitionofthe
probableflexuralstrength,Mpr.
233.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,J.I.
18.7.6.1
370
234.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R18.8.3.3
235.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
18.9.2.1
378
CommitteeResponse
ThevalueofMprvarieswiththevalueoftheaxialforce.The
requirementistousethemaximumvalueofMprassociatedwith
therangeofaxialforces.
Itis,however,agreedthatuseofshouldappearstoconflictwith
theCode.Toavoidthisapparentconflict,modifythefirst
paragraphofR18.8.3.3asfollows:
R18.8.3.3Therequiredtransversereinforcement,ortransverse
beamifpresent,isintendedtoconfinethebeamlongitudinal
reinforcementandimproveforcetransfertothebeamcolumn
joint.Wherethewidthofthebeamexceedsthecorresponding
columndimension,beamreinforcementnotconfinedbythe
columnreinforcementshouldbeprovidedlateralsupporteitherby
abeamframingintothesamejointorbytransverse
reinforcement.
Section 18.9.2.1(c) reads: Mechanical splices of ACICommittee318agreeswiththecommentthatonlyYoshioka
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
andRestrepo,J.I.
(c)
236. WilliamSherman
237.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,J.I.
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
Fig.
R18.9.2.2
418
18.10.4
381
PublicComment
beamreinforcementshallbelocatednotcloserthan
h/2fromthejointfaceandshallsatisfy18.2.7.
SectionR18.9readsReinforcementinductile
connectionscanbemadecontinuousbyusingType2
mechanicalsplicesoranyothertechniquethat
providesdevelopmentintensionorcompressionof
atleastthespecifiedtensilestrengthofbars
(YoshiokaandSekine1991;Kuroseetal.1991;
Restrepoetal.1995a,b).
Yoshioka and Sekine 1991 is the only reference that

provides test evidences of mechanical connectors at
thebeamcriticalsection.Allotherreferencesdonot
providesuchevidenceascited.
Providedetailsfortypicaljointdetailingforabeam
framingtothetopofanexteriorcolumn.Simple
hooksarenotsufficientshowrequiredsplicesfor
thissituation.
Regardingshearstrengthofstructuralwalls,they
shouldbecapacitydesigned,parallelingthedesign
philosophyforRCspecialmomentframesandfor
manysteelstructuralsystems.
Thereissubstantialexperimentalandanalytical
evidencethatshearforcesinwallsaremuchlarger
thanthosecomputedcurrently.(Panagiotouand
Restrepo,2009;Panagiotouetal.,2011).Additional
flexuraloverstrengthhasbeenobservedinstructural
wallsystemsduetokinematicsystemoverstrength
(Panagiotouetal.,2011).Thesearereasonsthat
explainwhyobservedshearforcedemandswere
higherthanthedesignshearforcesinwalls.
Furthermore,maximummeasuredsystembaseshear
forcehasbeenfoundaboutfourtimesthedesign
CommitteeResponse
andSekine1991providetestevidenceofmechanicalconnectors
atthebeamcriticalsection.However,thecommentarysentence
inquestiondoesnotmakethisclaim.
ItisnottheroleofACI318toprovidedetailingrequirementsfor
everyconfiguration.Inthiscase,thecommentermightwishto
refertothenewprovisionsforroofjointswithheadedbeam
reinforcement.
ACICommittee318isawareoftheconcernsraisedbythis
comment.ACICommittee318invitedandheardapresentationon
thissubjectbyDr.Panagiotou.Membersofthecommitteearealso
awareofthisconcernbasedontheirowndirectexperienceand
basedondiscussionofthissubjectintheliterature.Theresolution
ofthisrequiresconsiderationbyboththeACI318committeeand
theASCE7committee,anddiscussionsbetweenmembersofthe
twocommitteeshavetakenplace.Thissubjectalsohasbeen
recommendedforstudyaspartoftheNISTroadmapfortechnical
studies.
Additionally,ACI318,SubcommitteeHhadachangeproposal
assignmentforcapacitydesignofshearwalls.However,itwasnot
feasibletocompleteitduringthisCodecycle.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
baseshearofthewallsinabuilding(Panagiotouet
al.,2011).
Panagiotou,M.,andRestrepo,J.I.(2009),"Dual
plastichingedesignconceptforreducinghigher
modeeffectsonhighrisecantileverwallbuildings.",
EarthquakeEngineering&StructuralDynamics,Vol
38,13591380.
Panagiotou,M.,Restrepo,J.I.,andConte,
J.P.(2011),ShakeTableTestofaFull
Scale7StoryBuildingSlice.PhaseI:
RectangularWall,JournalofStructural
EngineeringASCE,V137,No6,691704
Anewprovisionneedstobegiveninsection18.12.
Suchnewsectionmightread:Untoppeddiaphragms
inbuildingsarenotpermittedinSeismicDesign
CategoriesD,EandF.
238.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,J.I.
18.12
395
239.
TimSalmons
18.12.7.5
399
240.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R18.13.2.
4
Shouldthelimitincreasesofthelastparagraphalso
applywhendesignforcesareperFp,max?Itseems
theyshouldsincecollectorforcesarelimitedbythe
Fp,maxforces.
241.
BrianJohnson,
18.13.4.5
Pleaseprovidecommentaryastowhytheseitems
CommitteeResponse
ACICommittee 318appreciatesthiscomment,butisnotprepared
tointroduceaprovisioninChapter18toprohibituseofthis
systematthistime.ItistheintentofACICommittee318towork
oncoordinationandperhapsconsolidationofthediaphragm
provisionsofChapters12and18.ACICommittee318willconsider
thiscommentaspartofthisnewbusiness.
Theincreasesto0.5fcand0.4fcapplyonlywhendesigningfor
omegasub0amplifiedforces.
However,itisagreedthatuseofshouldappearstoconflictwith
theCode.Toavoidthisapparentconflict,revisecommentaryas
follows:
R18.13.2.4Thepurposeofthissectionistoemphasizethattop
reinforcementmayberequired,inadditiontoshouldbeprovided
aswellasotherrequiredreinforcement.
ACICommittee318doesnotbelievethatCommentarytothis
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
P.E.
242.
AminGhaliand
RamezGayed
PublicComment
areexemptfromtransverserequirements lackof
weight?Nodamagehistory?Why?
18.14.5.1 409
Section18.14.5.1employsarelationshipbetweenthe
design story drift ratio and the normalized value
[vug/( vc)] without requiring calculation of the
inducedshearforceormomenttransferredbetween
the slab and the column. Figures 1 and 2 show that
thisdesignmaynotsatisfythestrengthrequirements
ofChapter8(GayedandGhali(2012)).ACI421.2R10
recommends design providing the strength required
in Chapter 8; then, for ductility, it verifies using the
criterion in Fig. R18.14.5.1, that a minimum amount
of shear reinforcement is provided. This design
procedure, proposed here for Section 18.14.5.1,
would improve safety and might require less shear
reinforcement. The proposed design procedure may
bewordedinthefollowingmeaning:
18.14.5.1Calculatetheshearingforceandmoment
transferredbetweenslabandcolumninducedbythe
designstorydriftratiocombinedwithotherfactored
loads. Satisfy the requirements of Chapter 8; when
shearreinforcementisrequired,considervn =vs +vc,
with vc = half the value specified in Table 22.6.6.1;
ensure that the amount and extension of the shear
reinforcement exceeds a specified minimum. When
[(vu/( vc)>0.4]orthedesignstorydriftratio>[0.035
(vu/(20 vc)], ensure that at least the specified
minimum shear reinforcement is provided. The
minimumshearreinforcementshallprovidenominal
CommitteeResponse
longstandingCodeprovisionisneeded. Oneandtwostory
bearingwallconstructiondoesnothaveahistoryofsafetyrelated
failurescausedbyfailureoftheseelementsduetolackof
transversereinforcement.Theexpenseofrequiringsuch
reinforcement,therefore,isnotjustifiedbycommensurate
benefits.
ACI Committee318isawareofconcernsbythecommenters.Itis
theintentofACI318toreconsiderthebroadersubjectofshear
andmomenttransferofslabcolumnconnectionsinstructures
designedtoresistearthquakeeffectsasnewbusinessinthenext
codecycle.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
strength vs 3 fc and extend from the column

periphery a distance 3.5d; the spacing between
peripheral lines of stirrups or headed stud shear
reinforcementd/2or3d/4,respectively.
Theproposeddesignimprovessafetybecause:
(1) The design criterion in Fig.R18.14.5.1 is used in
the proposed design for ductility only. The
criterion considers only vug while ignoring other
parametersthataffectthedriftratioatultimate.
Thus, the criterion cannot ensure strength in all
cases; it can permit absence of shear
reinforcementwhenitisnecessarytosatisfythe
requirementsofChapter8(Figs.1and2).InFig.
1, the shaded zones represent cases in which
Chapter 8 requires shear reinforcement while
18.14.5.1 permits its absence. The data and the
derivationofFigs.1and2aregiveninGhaliand
Gayed (2012); lines ef and eg in Fig. 2 are for
squareandrectangularcolumns,respectively.
(2) All slabcolumn connections, including members
that are not part of seismic force resisting
system, must undergo the design story drift
withoutpunchingfailure(requirementexpressed
in alternative words in 4.4.6.5). The proposed
designensuresthatthisrequirementissatisfied;
itaccountsforthedegradationofconcreteshear
strengthcausedbyreversalsofdrift.Supporting
researchisreferredtoinACI421.2R10.
(3) The proposed design considers the shearing
stress due to transfer of a shearing force Vu,
including the force induced by the design story
drift(i.e.factoredloadsspecifiedinEqn.(5.3.1e)
or(5.3.1g)).
(4) The proposed design procedure calculates the
CommitteeResponse
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
valueMsc inducedbythedesignstorydrift.Thus,
the flexural reinforcement necessary to resist f
Msc can be calculated and provided. This
requirement is possible only with the revised
design procedure, outlined in the current
proposalfor18.14.5.1.
(5) The values of Vu and Msc due to factored loads,
includingtheeffectofthedesignstorydrift,may
require increasing the slab thickness for the
strength required by the code. This is possible
only when the values of the shearing force and
momentinducedbythedriftarecalculated.
The proposed design can require smaller amount of

shearreinforcementbecause:
Section 18.14.5.1 in the present draft code extends
theshearreinforcedzoneadistance=4h(5d)from
column perimeter; the spacing between peripheral
lines of shear reinforcement elements is not
specified.Inmostcases,Chapter8limitsvuto(6or8)
f c and 2 f c , respectively, at the shear critical
sectionsatd/2fromthesupportandatd/2fromthe
outermostperipherallineofshearreinforcement.To
satisfythetworequirements,itissufficienttoextend
theshearreinforcedzonefromthecolumnperiphery
a distance 3.5d. This is the extent of minimum
shear reinforcement in the proposed design. The
saving in shear reinforcement with the proposed
design is shown by an example case in Ghali and
Gayed(2012).
With the proposed design procedure, R18.14.5.1
needs a minor change removal of the statement:
Nocalculationofinducedmomentisrequired.
CommitteeResponse
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
0.030
CommitteeResponse
0.025
Design drift ratio, DRu
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
18.14.5 of ACI 318-14

(Line abc)
0.020
g
0.015
0.010
Chapter 8 of
ACI 318-14
b
0.005
c
e
0.000
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Vu / ( Vc)
0.8
1.0
Fig.1Illustrationofthecriterionforrequiringshear
reinforcementaccordingto18.14.5ofACI31814.In
theshadedzone,Chapter8requiresshear
reinforcement,while18.14.5permitsitsabsence
(GhaliandGayed(2012)).
0.030
Design drift ratio, DRu
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
0.025
0.020
Interior column
cx cy = 300 mm300 mm
(11.8 in.11.8 in.)
0.015
0.010
0.005
Msc
Interior column
cx cy = 500 mm250 mm
(19.7 in.9.8 in.)
x
Msc
0.000
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Vu / (Vc)
0.8
1.0
Fig.2Requirementsofshearreinforcement
accordingtoChapter8ofACI31814,appliedtoflat
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
platerectangularandsquarecolumnconnections
(GhaliandGayed(2012)).
243.
JonB.Ardahl
Chapter
19
244.
RobertHale
19.1.1.a
245.
DavidMcDonald
19.2.1.1
426
246.
RobertHale
19.2.2.1
247.
DavidMcDonald
19.2.2.1
427
References:
Ghali, A. and Gayed, R.B. (2012), Requirements for
SeismicResistantFlatPlates:StrengthandDuctility,
AmericanConcreteInstitute,ACISP287,May,pp.1
20.
JointACIASCECommittee421,GuidetoSeismic
DesignofPunchingShearreinforcementinFlat
Plates,ACI421.2R10,AmericanConcreteInstitute,
FarmingtonHills,MI.,30pp.
Theredoesnotappeartobeanyrequirements
concerningASRandACRinthiscode.Thischapter
coversexposurecategorieswhereconcretewillbe
exposedtowatersoASRshouldbeaddressed.There
areseveralpublishedstandardpracticedocuments
thataresupportedbyresearchthataddressASRand
ACR.Thecodeshouldaddressthisexposure
condition.
Replace Properties to be used for design with

DesignPropertiesReason:stylisticfirstlanguage
isawkward.
Thetablesuggestsnolimitsinconcretestrength.
Doesthismeanthat20,000psiconcretecanbeused
indesign?
ASRandACRarenotexposureconditions.Thesearematerial
relatedconditions.AdditionoflanguagetotheCodetoaddress
ASRandACRwillbeconsideredinthenextcycleasnewbusiness.
Thislanguagewasselectedbythecommitteetomaintaina
consistentScopestatementforallchapters.
ACI318hasnothadageneralupperlimiton concretestrength.
Thecommenterhasnotprovidedareasontoestablishsucha
limit.However,specificCodeprovisionseffectivelylimitthe
compressivestrengththatmaybeusedindesignforsomecases.
Section22.5.3containsprovisionsforlimitingmaterialstrength.
Fix square root operator in equations 19.2.2.1.a & Staff editorialfix.
19.2.2.1.b
Theequation57,000fcisnotapplicabletohigh
ThecommitteewillconsiderrecommendationsfromACI363and
strengthconcretes(>8000ksi).ResearchbyGardiner otherresearchasnewbusiness.
etal.andothershaveconsistentlydemonstratedthis.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
19.3
248.
Reineck,Karl
Heinz
19.3
249.
RobertHale
19.3.1
429
and
follo
wing
250.
Kevin
MacDonald
19.3.1
251.
MarkW
Cunningham
R19.3.1
430
PublicComment
ConsiderchangesinnextCodecycle.
This section mainlyconsistsof lengthy Commentary,
which makes it hard for the user to follow up the
mainprinciplesofthecodeitself.Furtherconfusion
istriggeredbywrongnumbering,seebelow
Change Exposure category W back to Exposure
category P. Reason: permeability is the reason for
the provision not water contact. W connotes the
provisionshouldbeusedwhenincontactwithwater
andPconnotesthepermeabilitybeingthegoverning
factor
CommitteeResponse
TheCommitteebelievesthissectionofCoderequiresasignificant
discussion.TheintentistoassisttheLDPwhenassigningexposure
classes.
Permeabilityisnotanexposurecondition itisaconcrete
property.
Thetablesusingexposurecategoriesandclassesfirstappearedin
ACI31808.InACI31805theexposuretowaterwascoveredby
Table4.2.2RequirementsforSpecialExposureConditions.That
tableincludedanexposurecondition:Concreteintendedtohave
lowpermeabilitywhenexposedtowater.Duringthetransition
to31808,theexposuretowaterwasinadvertentlylost.The318
14documentreturnstotheoriginalintent.
Anadditionalexposureclass,whereonlychlorideion CategoryCaddressescorrosionprotectionofreinforcement.
contentlimitsarerequired,shouldbedevelopedfor Chloridelimitsarerelatedtothisconcernandareappropriately
concretewithnosignificantenvironmentalexposure. coveredasrequirementsunderthisexposurecategory.
Mostconcretespecifiedtothiscodewillbeinthis
category
ExposureCategoryFappliestoexteriorconcrete
TheCodeprimarilyaddressesexposureconditionsinservice.In
thatisexposedtomoistureandcyclesoffreezingand Chapter26,itexplicitlystates:
thawingRemovethewordexterior.Theresno
reasontoincludeexteriorthekeyisexposedto R26.4.3.1(a)TheCodedoesnotincludeprovisionsforespecially
moistureandcyclesoffreezingandthawing
severeexposures,suchaschemicalcontact,hightemperatures,
temporaryfreezingandthawingconditionsduringconstruction,
regardlessofiftheconcreteisexteriororinterior.
abrasiveconditions,alkaliaggregatereactions,orotherunique
Also,whatiftheconcretewillbeinteriorinservice,
durabilityconsiderationspertinenttothestructure.
butduringconstructionitisexterior?
However,useofexteriormaynotbenecessaryorappropriatein
theprovisioncitedbythecommenter.
Becausethisissueinvolveschangestomultipleprovisionsinthe
CodeandCommentary,itwillbeaddressedasnewbusiness.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
431
252.
MarkW
Cunningham
R19.3.1
253.
MarkW
Cunningham
Table
R19.3.1
433
254.
MarkW
Cunningham
R19.3.1
434
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
ExposureCategoryCappliestononprestressedand
prestressedconcreteexposedtoconditionsthat
requireadditionalprotectionagainstcorrosionof
reinforcement.Removethewordsnonprestressed
andprestressedastheyareunnecessary.Inclusion
ofthewordreinforcementattheendofthe
sentence,bydefinition,includesbothnonprestressed
andprestressedreinforcement.Notethattheother
exposurecategoriesalsoallapplytoboth
nonprestressedandprestressedreinforcement,but
thosewordscorrectlyarentincludedinthe
descriptionsofthosecategories.
Wheredoesconcreteexposedtofreezethawcycles
andmoistureduringconstruction,butnotinservice,
fall?Suchconcretemayalsobesaturated.Itseems
thatthiscaseshouldbeaddedtothetable.
ForExposureCategoryW1,retain:Membersare
assignedtoExposureClassW1ifthereisaneedfor
concretewithlowpermeabilitytowaterandthe
penetrationofwaterintoconcretemightreduce
durability.Delete:oraffecttheintendedfunction
ofthemember.Anexampleisaninteriorwatertank
orafoundationwallbelowthewatertable.The
portionsuggestedfordeletionotherwiseimpliesthat
meetingtherequirementsforW1exposurewill
somehowreducethepotentialforleakage.Thisisnot
trueatall.
Permeabilityintoaconcretematrixor
microstructure,andleakagethroughaconcrete
memberareverydifferentphenomena.Table
19.3.1.1indicatesConcreteincontactwithwater
andlowpermeabilityisrequired.Thereiscorrectly
nomentionofleakage.(Also,theengineershouldbe
usingACI350todesignsuchstructures.)And31814,
CommitteeResponse
Becausetherequirementsforchloridelimitsofprestressedand
nonprestressedconcretearedistinctlydifferentandhaveserious
implications,theCommitteebelievesitisimportanttoretainthese
wordstoprovideemphasisintheCommentaryandCode.
SeeresponsetoCunninghamonsametopicaboveforR19.3.1.
Delete:oraffecttheintendedfunctionofthemember.An
exampleisaninteriorwatertankorafoundationwallbelowthe
watertable.
Retaintheexampleoffoundationwallbutdeletewatertank.
R19.3.1(page434)
b)MembersareassignedtoExposureClassW1if
thereisneedforconcretewithlowpermeabilityto
waterandthepenetrationofwaterintoconcrete
mightreducethedurabilityoraffecttheintended
functionofthemember.Anexampleisaninterior
watertankorafoundationwallbelowthewater
table.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
255.
MarkW
Cunningham
R19.3.1
435
256.
DavidMcDonald
R19.3.2
440
PublicComment
R19.3includes,TheCodeplacesemphasisonw/cm
forachievinglowpermeabilitytomeetdurability
requirements.Leakage,ontheotherhand,doesnot
correlatewithw/cm.Aconcretemixturewithlower
w/cmmayexperiencemorecrackingdueto
shrinkagerestraint,withresultingleakage,whilethe
concretematrixormicrostructuremaintainsavery
lowpermeability.
UnderExposureClassesC1andC2,deletereference
tononprestressedandprestressedasitisnot
necessary.
CRSIhasadoptedthefollowingdefinitionfor
Corrosionresistantreinforcement:Relativeto
uncoatedcarbonsteel(black)bar,reinforcingbars
havingasignificantlyincreasedchloridethreshold
beforeinitiationofcorrosioninconcreteand/ora
significantlyreducedrateofcorrosion,as
demonstratedbyASTMtestingmethodor
documented,longtermperformance.
Thecommentaryseparatescoatedreinforcingfrom
corrosionresistantreinforcingandthisis
inappropriate.
Suggestreplacementtext:
Coatedreinforcement,corrosionresistantsteel
reinforcementandcovergreaterthantheminimum
requiredin20.6canprovideadditionalprotection
undersuchconditions
Corrosionresistantsteelreinforcement(including
epoxycoated,galvanizedandstainlesssteel)and
covergreaterthantheminimumrequiredin20.6can
provideadditionalprotectionundersuchconditions
CommitteeResponse
Itisusefultoretainbecausetherequirementsonchloridelimits
aredifferentforeachtypeofreinforcement.
SeeresponsetoCunninghamonsametopicaboveforR19.3.1.
Itisusefultomaintaintheseparationwithdistincttermsforclarity
totheuseroftheCodeeventhoughthemechanismmightbe
similar.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
257. WilliamSherman
Provision
#
R19.3.2
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
440
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Thediscussionofchloridelimitsallowsaninitial
evaluationofthechloridecontentoftheconcrete
mixturebytestingindividualconcreteingredients.It
isstatedthatifthetotalchlorideioncontent
calculatedexceedsthepermissiblevalueitmaybe
necessarytotestsamplesofthehardenedconcrete
forwatersolublechlorideioncontent.Whilethis
seemstobereasonable,thiswordingviolates
acceptablelanguageforcommentarytotheCode,
sinceiteffectivelyallowsadifferentprocedurethan
thatstipulatedintheCode.Footnote7toTable
19.3.2.1statesthatthewatersolublechlorideion
contentshallbedeterminedontheconcrete
mixturebyASTMC1218atagebetween28and42
days.TheproceduredescribedintheCommentary
wouldnotsatisfythisCoderequirement.
Irecommendthatthealternateprocedureasnoted
intheCommentarybeincludedontheCodeside.
Followingisdraftlanguageforconsiderationasa
startingpoint:
1.Submitthefollowinginformationfortheconcrete
mixingredients:
a. Testdataforchloridecontentoffineand
coarseaggregates,ofcementitious
materials,andofmixingwater.Ifthe
mixingwaterispotablewater,the
maximumchloridecontentpermittedby
thewaterprovidermaybeassumedin
lieuoftestingthewater.
b. Submittestdatadocumentingchloride
contentoftheadmixture(s).Alternately,
Thiscommentiscorrect thereisnotaCodeprovisiontosupport
thealternativediscussedintheCommentary.Thesubject
wordinghasbeenintheCommentaryatleastdatingtothe1989
edition.
ThediscussionintheCommentaryisintendedtoprovidea
practicalmethodforaddressingtherequirementofFootnote7.If
thetotalchlorideionscontributedfromeachconstituentmaterial
arecombinedandfoundtobelessthanthelimitsinTable
19.3.2.1,thenthewatersolublelimitwillbemet.
TheproposedadditiontotheCodeseemstobefartoodetailedfor
adoption.
Toallowfortestingindividualingredients,anadditiontotheCode
andachangetothewordinginfootnote7toTable19.3.2.1may
berequired.
Thischangewillbelookedatasnewbusiness.
Whilereviewingthiscomment,onecommitteememberfoundan
editorialissueinthecommentary.Makethefollowingchange:
R19.3.2,page440.
Additionalinformationontheeffectsofchloridesonthe
corrosionofsteelreinforcingreinforcementisgiveninACI201.2R,
whichprovidesguidanceonconcretedurability,andACI222R,
whichprovidesguidanceonfactorsthatimpact
corrosionofmetalsinconcrete.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
submitaLetterofcertificationthatthe
chloridecontentoftheadmixturedoes
notexceedtraceamountsanddoesnot
containintentionallyaddedchlorides.
258.
MarkW
Cunningham
Table
19.3.2.1
441
2.Calculatethechloridecontentoftheconcretemix
asfollows:
a. Determinethechlorideioncontentof
eachingredientasapercentbymass(or
weight)oftheingredient.Multiplyby
themass(orweight)oftheingredient
includedintheconcretemixture.For
admixtureswhichonlyreporttrace
amountsofchlorides,assumethe
chloridecontentisequalto0.5percent
bymass(orweight)ofadmixture.
b. Addupthechlorideioncontent
contributedbyeachoftheingredients
toobtainthetotalchlorideioncontent
contributed.
c. Dividebythetotalmass(orweight)of
cementintheconcretemixture.
d. Multiplyby100.Theresultisthetotal
chlorideioncontentasapercentby
mass(orweight)ofcement.
3.Ifthetotalchlorideioncontentdoesnotexceed
theapplicablechloridelimitrequiredbytheCode,
theconcretemixtureneednotbefurthertestedfor
chlorides.
WhyisthecolumnforCalciumchlorideadmixture
onlyincludedforexposureScategory?Itimpliesthat
calciumchlorideispermittedinotherexposure
categories,i.e.,F,W,C.Thisdoesnotappeartobe
CommitteeResponse
Therestrictiontotheuseofcalciumchlorideadmixtureisbased
onresearchperformedbytheUSBRdocumentingthatthese
admixtureshadanadverseeffectonsulfateresistance.ACI31805
section4.3.2specificallystatedthistherewasnocommentaryto
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
discussedinthecommentary.
259. WilliamSherman
Table
19.3.2.1
441
CommitteeResponse
this andthisisnowincorporatedintheTable.
ForCategoryFandWthereisnoreasonforthisrestriction.For
membersassignedtoCategoryC,chloridelimitswouldapplythat
willtypicallyprecludetheuseofcalciumchlorideadmixturesfor
C1andC2.
AsIhavecommentedinthepast,Ibelievethatthe
Thissamecommenthasbeenmadeduringthelasttwoorthree
minimumcompressivestrengthsassociatedwith
codecycles.Duringthattime,nocomplaintshavebeenreceived
maximumw/cmratiosaresettoohigh.Pleasenote
bytheCommitteefromLDPsorconcreteproducers.Anychange
thefollowing:Itisagreedthatanapproximateactual toreducethecompressivestrengthlimitsassociatedwiththe
listedw/cmwillpotentiallyresultinareductionindurability.
concretecompressivestrengthof4500psiis
associatedwitha0.45w/cmratio.(RefPCADesign
andControlofConcreteMixturesorFigure1in
WaterinConcretebyKimBasham,Concrete
Contractor,April23,2014.)However,ifthecode
requirestheengineertospecifyfc=4500psiwhere
a0.45w/cmratioisrequiredfordurability,theactual
mixdesignwillneedtobedesignedforaneven
higherstrength.ThisisduetotheRequiredAverage
StrengthprovisionsofACI318(e.g.Section5.3.2in
ACI31811).ItiscommonfortheRequiredAverage
Strengthtobeontheorderof300500psihigher
thanfc.Soaconcretemixwithanactual
compressivestrengthontheorderof4800to5000
psiwouldberequiredforsuchastructureinorderto
satisfythecoderequirements.
Ibelievethatitmakesmoresensetoprovidea
concretemixwithanactualconcretecompressive
strengthontheorderof4300to4500psiwhena
maximumw/cmratioif0.45isspecified.Thenthe
minimumspecifiedcompressivestrengthshouldbe
setat4000psi,sothatthecodesRequiredAverage
Strengthwouldbeontheorderof4300to4500psi
whenstandarddeviationisaccountedfor.
260. WilliamSherman
Table
19.3.2.1
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
441
442
261.
MarkW
Cunningham
20.2.1.3
446
262.
DavidMcDonald
R20.2.1.3
446
No.
263.
Public
Commenter
Name
AttilaBeres
Provision
#
20.2.1.6
447
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
Forcementtypestobeusedforsulfateresistance:In
lieuofonlypermittingmixeswithTypeVcementfor
ExposuresS2andS3,alsoallowTypeIIcement
combinedwithpozzolanswhenthemixhasbeen
testedtomeetrequiredcriteriaperstandardsulfate
testsforconcretemixtures.Insomeregions,TypeV
cementmaybehardtofind,butTypeIIcementand
pozzolansmaybemorereadilyavailable.
Changeto:Deformedbarsshallconformto(a),(b),
(c),(d),or(e)inaccordancewithTable20.2.2.4a
because20.2.1.3isnottruewithoutthe
requirementsofTable20.2.2.4a.Forexample
20.2.1.3(e)indicatesdeformedbarsconformingto
ASTMA1035areacceptable,howeverTable
20.2.2.4aonlypermitsthemasindicatedinthetable.
Similarly,perthetable,deformedstirrups,ties,
hoopswithmaximumvalueoffytpermittedfor
designcalculationsmorethan60,000arenot
permitted.
Thetextforstainlesssteelisincorrect.Thetext
suggeststhattheyarerequiredinareasofhigh
corrosion.ThesecondsentenceisincorrectasASTM
A615hasdifferentstrengthandelongation
requirementsthanA955.
Stainlesssteeldeformedbarsaremaybeusedin
applicationswherehighcorrosionresistanceor
controlledmagneticpermeabilityarerequired.The
physicalandmechanicalpropertyrequirementsfor
stainlesssteelbarsunderASTMA955arethesameas
thoseforcarbonsteelbarsunderASTMA615.
Thissectionshouldreferencethealternativedevices
andinstallationparametersof25.4.5.1
CommitteeResponse
Theoptionofusingalternativecementitiouscombinations,likea
TypeIIwithSCM,tothetypesstatedintheTableintheCodeis
permittedby19.3.4whentestedbyASTMC1012.
Section20.2.1.3identifiesingeneraltypesofdeformed
reinforcementrecognizedbythecode.Table20.2.2.4athen
separatelyidentifieslimitationsonuseandondesignproperties
forrecognizedreinforcement.
Preferareusedtomaybeused;areuseddoesnotimplythat
theyarealwaysused.Changewithmodificationasfollows:
R20.2.1.3
[makechangein3rdparagraph]
Stainlesssteeldeformedbarsareusedinapplicationswherehigh
corrosionresistanceorcontrolledmagneticpermeabilityare
required.Thephysicalandmechanicalpropertyrequirementsfor
stainlesssteelbarsunderASTMA955arethesameasthosefor
carbonsteelbarsunderASTMA615.
Theheadeddeformedbarprovisionsin25.4.4.2arespecificto
thosedesignatedin20.2.1.6.
No.
264.
265.
Public
Commenter
Name
MarkW
Cunningham
DavidDeValve
266. JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
20.2.1.7.
2
20.2.1.7.
3
R20.2.2.4
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
447
Line#
(Ch.2
&
PublicComment
App.
A)
Editorial sectionisshownnumberedas20.2.7.1.2.
450
CommitteeResponse
Fixsectionnumber.
Whyisthererestrictionsontransversewirespacing
Theserequirementshaveappearedinmanyprioreditionsofthe
here?rational?determination?couldsomeother
code.
limitsbeplacedandreasonsaddedtothe
commentary!?
Amountoftransversereinforcementdesignedunderprovisionof18.7.5.4forcolumnsofspecialmomentframesnormally
resultinmaximumspacingof6inchesandnotlessthan4incheso.c..Basedontheselimitations,theconfinement
reinforcementwillnotbestressedtofy.ResearchbyTanaka,ParkandMcNamee,1985,AnchorageofTransverse
ReinforcementinRectangularReinforcedConcreteColumnsinSeismicDesign,BulletinoftheNewZealandNational
SocietyforEarthquakeEngineering.Vol.18,No.2,pp.165190,showedstrainoftransversehoopreinforcementdidnot
exceed60%yieldstrainandmuchlessincrosstieat6%displacement.[SeeFigureattheendofthiscomment.]The
requirementforanchorageofhoopsandcrosstiestodevelop1.25fyor1.25fytortensilestrengthofbarsandwireis
inconsistentwithtestresults.
Testoftransversereinforcementhastraditionallybeenpartoftestassemblyofconcretestubbeamcolumn,and
furthermoretestingofindividualhoopsorcrosstiestoachievethestatedstrengthcannotbeaccomplishedwithoutan
acceptanceteststandardonhowthetestshouldbeaccomplished.ThestatementintheCommentarycannotbeenforced.
Inconsiderationofpriortestsontransversereinforcementandlackofacceptancecriteriaintestingindividualhoopand
crosstie,Isuggesttheportionofsentencefollowingspecialseismicsystemsbereplacedwith:....,specifically,test
assemblyofbeamcolumnwithtransversereinforcementorconfinementreinforcementbetestedtoexhibiteda
displacementdriftrationotlessthan0.03.[SeecommentaryR18.7.5.4]
No.
267.
Public
Commenter
Name
AlAnvari
Provision
#
20.2.2.4a
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
451
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
COMMITTEERESPONSE:
ACICommittee318agreeswiththecommentthat,insometests,themeasuredstrainsontransversereinforcementare
lessthanyieldstrains.Inothertests,however,strainsexceedingtheyieldstrainhavebeenrecorded.
Thesuggestiontoreplaceexistingtextwithtestassemblyofbeamcolumnwithtransversereinforcementorconfinement
reinforcementbetestedtoexhibitedadisplacementdriftrationotlessthan0.03isnotacceptablebecauseapplications
ofthesematerialsarenotnecessarilyrestrictedtobeamcolumnframes.Furthermore,applicationsinbeamcolumn
framescommonlyinvolvemorecomplicatedconfigurationsandabroaderrangeoftransversereinforcementdemands
thanareconsideredintypicallaboratorytests.Aconnection/anchoragethatiscapableofsomeyieldingorotherinelastic
responsewithoutfractureisdesirabletopromoteconcreteconstructionthatisbetterabletoaccommodatethecomplex
rangeofdemandsexperiencedinpractice.
Table 20.2.2.4a.Footnote2isambiguousandmust
ACICommittee318disagreeswiththestatementthatFootnote2
becorrected.Aspresented,itwillcause
ofTable20.2.2.4aisambiguous.Materialsthatonlyconformto
ASTMA1022andA1064andthatrequiretheweldtoresiststress
misinterpretationofWeldedWireReinforcement,
arenotpermittedinspecialseismicsystems(thatis,special
commonlyknownasWWR,withBauGridWelded
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
268. JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
20.2.2.4a
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
451
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
ReinforcementGrid(WRG)products.Thereisa
significantdifferencebetweenthesetwotypesof
premanufacturedproducts.WWRisacommodity
product,manufacturedbyvariousmanufacturersin
accordancewiththerequirementsofACI.BauGrid
WeldedReinforcementGrid(WRG)isaproprietary
product,protectedbyU.S.andInternationalPatents,
ICCESAcceptanceCriteriaandICCESESRevaluation
report.
WWR can be wrapped around the longitudinal bars

as confinement reinforcement but they cannot be
placed perpendicular to longitudinal bars. However,
BauGrid Welded Reinforcement Grid (WRG) is
used as lateral or transverse reinforcement to
confine longitudinal or primary reinforcing bars in
concretestructures(seeICCESESR2352).
AlthoughWWRandBauGridWRGutilizethesame
ASTMspecificationASTMA1064(formerlyknownas
ASTM A 82, A 185, A 496 and A 497), there are
distinct differences in their production and
application.
Table20.2.2.4a.Footnote2isambiguous.Wiresare
intendedtobeanchoredbycrosswiresthrough
resistantweldingateachintersectionwhetherthe
weldedwiresareusedperpendicularpositionor
wraparoundthelongitudinalbarsbasedonmember
dimensions,concretestrengthandalsosizeof
longitudinalreinforcement.Ifthisfootnoteisof
significantimportance,itmustberewrittenasa
provisionandnotintheformofafootnote.
PriortestsbySaatciogluandGrira,1999
ConfinementofReinforcedConcreteColumnwith
CommitteeResponse
structuralwallsandspecialmomentframes).
ACICommittee318disagreeswiththestatementthatFootnote2of
Table20.2.2.4aisambiguous.MaterialsthatonlyconformtoASTM
A1022andA1064andthatrequiretheweldtoresiststressarenot
permittedinspecialseismicsystems(thatis,specialstructuralwalls
andspecialmomentframes).
ACICommittee318isfamiliarwiththecitedtests,andagreesthat
thesetestshaveshowngoodbehavior.However,thetest
specimenconfigurationsandthestressdemandsonthematerials
inthosetestsdonotrepresenttherangeofconfigurationsand
stressdemandstowhichmaterialscanbesubjectedinspecial
momentframesandspecialstructuralwalls.ACICommittee318is
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
269.
PeterA.Giessel
20.2.2.4b
270.
DavidDeValve
20.2.2.5
271.
RobertHale
20.4.1.2
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
WeldedReinforcedGrids,ACIJournal96S04and
Miranda,ThompsonandBertero,1990,Cyclic
BehaviorofShearWallBoundaryElements
incorporatingPrefabricatedWeldedWireHoops,
EERCReport,haveshowngoodbehaviorofwelded
grids.Unlessthereisobservedevidenceoffailures
duetorecentearthquakes,theCodeshouldnot
includenegativeconnotationtobarfurther
developmentofnewtechnology.
Thisfootnoteprecludesfuturedevelopmentof
productswhichofferslesscongestioncomparedto
thetraditionalreinforcementhoopsandcrossties
andimprovesqualityconcreteconstruction.The
footnote2shouldbeomittedsubjecttomorein
depthcomparativestudy.
Table20.2.2.4b.Itappearsthattheductility
requirementofSection20.2.2.5isrelaxedtoonlybe
specifictoFlexure,axialforce,andshrinkageand
temperature.Itseemsoddthattheductilitywould
berequiredfortemperaturesteelbutnotShearin
SpecialSeismicSystemsorConcreteconfinement.
concernedthatlocalforce/stressconcentrationswillresultinlocal
fractureinwelds,andthatthiscouldleadtounzippingofthe
transversereinforcement.Reinforcementmaterialsthatprovide
greatercapabilitytoredistributelocaloverstresswithoutfracture
aredesirableinspecialstructuralsystems.
In(b)(i)shoulditnotread'...exceedspecified Fy
bymorethan...'??
Add(d)ASTM1085 coldformed,welded,
seamlessReason:newHSSspecification
Thespecialductilityrequirement(aka,A706equivalence)does
notapplytotransversereinforcementbecausetheanticipated
straindemandsinsuchreinforcementarelessthanstrains
achievableinotherpermittedreinforcementspecifications.The
exceptionisdiagonallyorientedreinforcementindiagonally
reinforcedcouplingbeams,forwhichA706equivalentductilityis
requiredeventhoughthatreinforcementresistsshear.
fybydefinitionisspecifiedyieldstrength.SeeChapter2.
1.ReviseSection3.2.4byadding:
A108513StandardSpecificationforColdFormed
WeldedCarbonSteelHollowStructuralSections(HSS)
2.ReviseSection20.4.1.2:
20.4.1.2Steelpipeortubingusedincomposite
columnstoencaseaconcretecoreshallconformto(a),(b),or
(c),or(d):
(a)ASTMA53GradeBblacksteel,hotdipped,
zinccoated
(b)ASTMA500coldformed,welded,seamless
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
(c)ASTMA501hotformed,welded,seamless
272.
DavidDeValve
20.6.1.1
273. JamesS.Lai
20.6.1.3.
1
462
274.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
20.6.3.1
275.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
20.6.3.2
276.
DavidDeValve
20.7.1
Shoulditnotread'...covershallbeinaccordance
with20.6.1.2,20.6.1.3,&20.6.1.4.'tobemore
specific??
Table20.6.1.3.1.Groupingofprimary
reinforcement,stirrups,ties,spiralsandhoopswith
specifiedcoverof1.5inchcausesconfusion.Suggest
stateseparatelystirrups,ties,spiralsandhoops..
1.5inchesandprimaryreinforcement2.0
inches
Removethissectionas20.6.3.3issufficient
(renumberto20.6.3.1).Thecorrosionprotectionis
specifiedinACI423.7andpartialrepeatingofthose
provisionsintheCodeshouldbeavoided.
Removethissectionas20.6.3.3issufficient
(renumberto20.6.3.1).Thecorrosionprotectionis
specifiedinACI423.7andpartialrepeatingofthose
provisionsintheCodeshouldbeavoided.
Shoulditnotbe'...strengthofconstruction
concrete...'??
(d)ASTMA1085coldformed,welded
Referencing20.6.1isclear.
Existinglanguageisappropriatefortheinfrequentsituationwhere
primaryreinforcementisusedwithoutthepresenceofstirrups,
ties,spiralsorhoops.ItiswordedsimilarlytoACI31811.
Section20.6.3.3coversonlysinglestrandtendons.General
requirementof20.6.3.1appliestomultistrandtendonsaswell.
ThisprovisionprovidesbasicCoderequirementsforcorrosion
protectionandACI423.7supplementsthesebasicrequirements.
ThisprovisionprovidesbasicCoderequirementsforcorrosion
protectionandACI423.7supplementsthesebasicrequirements.
Seecommentaryitdoesnotjustapplytotheconcrete:The
embedmentsshouldnotbeharmfultotheconcreteandthe
reinforcement.
Toclarify,changeconstructiontothestructureasfollows:
277.
Rodriguez,M.E.,
andRestrepo,J.I.
21.2.4
474
20.7.1Embedmentsshallnotsignificantlyimpairthestrengthof
constructionthestructureandshallnotreducefireprotection.
The discussers see no differences between sections Duplicationisnotneeded. DeleteR18.2.4and18.2.4.1. Replace
21.2.4 and 18.2.4.1, whichmight be misleading. The with:
discusserssuggestdeletingoneofthesesections.
18.2.4.1Strengthreductionfactorsshallbeinaccordancewith
Chapter21.
R18.2.4.1Chapter21containsstrengthreductionfactorsforall
members,joints,andconnectionsofearthquakeresistant
structures,includingspecificprovisionsin21.2.4forbuildingsthat
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
278.
AbbasMokhtar
zadeh
22.5.7.1
&
22.5.6.1
279.
ShihHo(Simon)
Chao
22.5.9.3
and
22.5.9.5
490
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
usespecialmomentframes,specialstructuralwalls,and
intermediateprecastwalls.
Alsorevise12.5.3.2forconsistency:
12.5.3.2shallbe0.75,unlessalesservalueisrequiredby
18.2.4.121.2.4.
Thesignconventionfortensionandcompressionisclearlystated
intheappropriatesections.Itisuptothesoftwaredevelopers
andtheLDPtointerpretandimplementtheCodeprovisions.
Needclarificationinthepracticeforthedesignation
oftheAxialCompressionandAxialTension.
Currentlymanyofstructuralanalysismethods
incorporatedynamicanalysislikeResponse
Spectrumwhichinthosethesignoftheinternal
forceswaslost(eitheritbecomewholesection
positivetensionorwholesectionnegative
compressionbyconsideringnegativesignforwhole
section).Thereshouldbeguidelinesinthissection(or
ingeneralinthesimilarsectionsofthecodewhich
identifyprovisionbasisontensionorcompression)to
useinthistypicalscenarios.Theapplicabilityofthese
twoprovisionsinthesedynamicanalysismethods
artificiallymayleadnonominalshearstrength.
Vc=0forNu>=500Agwhichisnotsamecompareto
equivalentstaticanalysismethods.
Theseprovisionsandalsosimilarprovisionsareonly
applicableforthestructuralanalysisresultantsthat
capturevariationsofthesigninactions(fiber
stresses),whetheraspositiveornegativesign,within
atypicalsectionfordesign.
Thereshouldbedifferenttechniques,approaches
anddesignprovisionstobeprovidedfortypical
dynamicstructuralanalysis(ResponseSpectrum)
lateron.
Inthesetwosectionsthereducedprestressforceis
Byrequiringthatthereducedeffectiveprestressforcebeusedto
consideredtocalculatetheVc.However,whileSect. calculateVcwonly,22.5.9.3(b)acknowledgesthattheflexureshear
22.5.9.5requeststhatthereducedeffectiveprestress strengthVcidoesnotgovernwithinthetransferlengthoffully
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
forceshallbeusedtocomputeVc,Sect.22.5.9.3only
requestthatthereducedeffectiveprestressforcebe
usedtocomputeVcwwhichseemsnomaking
sensebecausethereducedprestressforce(within
thetransferlength)willalsoaffecttheVciby
reducingthecrackingmomentstrengthMcre.
bondedpretensionedstrand. Whenstrandsaredebondeditis
possiblethatMcrecanbeaffectedbythereducedprestressat
sectionswhereVcimaygovern.Hence22.5.9.5(b)requiresthe
reducedeffectiveprestressforcetobeconsideredwhen
calculatingbothVcwandVci(thelesserofwhichbecomesVc)where
strandsarenotfullybondedtotheendsofthemember.
Parenthesesarenotnecessarywhenequationisconvertedto
stress,andtheycanberemoved.
280.
DavidDeValve
22.6.5.5
281.
DavidDeValve
22.6.8.3
282.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
DavidDeValve
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R22.6.9.1
500
R22.6.9.8
R22.7.6.1
510
Figureisunclear,fuzzy!?
285.
HelmuthWilden
R22.8.3.2
513
ReferencetoPCIMNL1204shouldbeeitherMNL
12004ormorecurrentMNL12010
286.
HelmuthWilden
22.9.5.1
517
287.
288.
RobertHale
DavidDeValve
23.1.2
23.7.1
289.
HelmuthWilden
R24.2.3.9
550
290.
DavidDeValve
24.3.2
LineSpacingisnotconsistentwithrestofdocument
'Prestressedtiereinforcement'?,couldthisbe
definedbetter!?
Simplifythesecondtermsfors,maxbondedand
283.
284.
Equ.22.6.5.5aparenthesisinequ.notneededas
equationisthesumofthreevalues,unlessa
multiplierofthesevaluesismissing!?
Ifequationissubstitutedintoequ.22.6.8.2resultsis
Vs>=2(Fc')1/2,sowhynotstatethat!?
Thefocusisondeterminingtheminimumamountofheadedshear
studreinforcement(Av/s)thatisrequiredifthereinforcementis
provided,whereas22.6.8.2isfocusedondeterminingtheshear
strength(vs)providedbythequantityofheadedshearstud
reinforcementprovided,whichmayexceedtheminimumamount
requiredby22.6.8.3.
Nonmandatorylanguage,should,isappropriateforthe
commentary,whileshallisneededfortheCode.
Figurewillbefixed.
ChangeshouldbeprovidedtoisrequiredinR22.7.6.1
LongitudinalreinforcementwithastrengthAfyshouldbe
providedisrequiredtoresistthesumoftheNiforces,Ni,acting
inallofthewallsofthetube.
ChangereferencePCIMNL1204toMNL12010.
ChangereferencePCIMNL1204toMNL12010.
Staffwillfix.
Thetermprestressedreinforcementisdefined.Textissufficient.
ReferencehasbeenmodifiedtoMNL12010throughoutthecode.
Theequationsaspresenteddemonstrate thecodeprescribed
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
291.
HelmuthWilden
R24.4.2
558
292.
HelmuthWilden
Wilden
Enterprises,Inc.
2Marshview
Drive
HiltonHead,SC
29928
hwilden@roadru
nner.com
24.5.2.1
Ch.
24:
Page
562
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
combinedto8*(40,000/deltaFs)and10
*(40,000/deltaFs)respectively!!
TableR24.5.2.1 Serviceabilitydesignrequirements
ColumnsforClassUandClassT;RowforTensile
stressatserviceloads24.5.2.1
relativeeffectivebondofdeformedversusprestressed
reinforcement.
ReferencehasbeenmodifiedtoMNL12010throughoutthecode.
While 7.5
rupturefornormalweightconcrete,inactualitycrackingcanoccur
atstressesrangingapproximatelybetween 4
f c and 10 f c .
Sinceallowablestressesaresomewhatarbitraryandaddress
serviceability,notstrength,andinlightofthelargevariabilityin
themodulusofrupture,thecommitteefelttherewasno
compellingreasontoincludeintheallowabletensionprovisions.
Itwasaconsciousdecisionbythecommittee,notanoversight,
nottoincludeforlightweightconcreteintheallowablestress
provisions.Therefore,nochangeismade.
Ibelievethattheterm shouldbeincludedinthe
stresslimitsidentifiedforClassUandClassT.
Reason:
ItismyunderstandingthatClassUcomponentsare
thosethatareUncracked,yetthetensilestressat
serviceloads,ftnotedintheTableisasshownandis
withouttheinclusionof
ftistheactualcalculated
stressofacomponentbasedonuncrackedsection
properties.
Ifthecomponentisuncracked,itseemstomethat
thecalculatedstressneedstobelessthanthe
modulusofrupturewhichisdefinedas:
AndSection19.4.2.1states:
f c hasgenerallybeenrecognizedasthemodulusof
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
293. JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
25.3.1
567
294.
AttilaBeres
25.4.4.1
579
Condi
tion
(g)
295.
AttilaBeres
25.4.5.1
582
PublicComment
Table25.3.1.Becausetheminimuminsidebend
diametertabulatedonthisTable(6dbforNo.3and
No.4ties),clarifythatlongitudinalbarsareallowed
tobeoffsetduetothestandardbendradiusofties
sothatrequirementof25.7.2.3willnotbe
interpretedandenforcedliterally.
Theminimumspacinglimitispunitivelyrestrictivefor
headedbarsversusstandardhooks.Thisisanissue
thatveryoftencomesupinpractice.
Theextensivereviewofresearchpaperspublishedin
theACIStructuralJournalbyKangetal.(2009),
supportstherevisionofthecurrent4dbminimum
clearspacinglimitto2db.
Arethereanyexampleswhereheadedbars
performedworsethanstandardhooks?The
commentaryindicatesthatthedevelopmentlength
formulationinthissectionisbasedonthelimited
testsconductedatU.Texasthatfocusedonshallow
embedmentconfigurations.
Asaninterimmeasure,howaboutallowingheaded
barstobeinstalledwiththesamecriteriaasstandard
hooks?(e.g.,samedevelopmentlengthasfor
standardhooketc.,butwithoutminimum4db
spacinglimit)
Considerprovidingspecificreferencetoheaded
CommitteeResponse
25.7.2.3requiresthelongitudinalbarstobelaterallysupportedby
theties.TheCodedoesnotnecessarilyrequirecontactbetween
thebendofthetieandthelongitudinalbarbecauseof
constructabilityissues.TheCodestatestheintent.
Thecurrentprovisionsforheadedbarsarebasedonthelimited
databasethatexistedatthetimetheprovisionswereformulated.
Experimentaldataarestilllimited,withtheexceptionofhighly
confinedbeamcolumnjointsofthetypedescribedbyKangetal.
(2009).TheworkbyKangetal.isthebasisforchangesinthe
provisionsthatallowareductionintheclearspacingto3dbin
beamcolumnsjointsinspecialmomentframes(see18.8.5.2).
Researchisnowunderwaythatshouldenableamorerational
approachtodesignwithheadedbarsinfutureBuildingCodes.
Newbusiness.Suchheadedreinforcementisnotprecludedunder
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
296.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R25.4.10
297.
MarkW
Cunningham
25.4.10.2
589
298.
MarkW
Cunningham
25.4.10.2
589
PublicComment
deformedbarswithlargenetbearingareathat
providefullforcetransferatthehead,withoutthe
needoftransferviabond.Prioreditions,intandem
withASTM,recognizedsuchdevicesthatareusedin
practiceextensively.
WhymusteverythingbeasquirrelchaseintheACI
code?ThissectionreferstoSIXdifferentlocationsin
thecode.Youretryingtosimplifythecode,butyou
dontcondenseanything.EPICFAIL.Atleastchange
thecommentarytoindicatethatexcess
reinforcementisnotpermittedtoreduce
developmentlengthinSDCD,E,andF.Dotheusers
somehelp.Thereorganizationcreatesasteep
learningcurvefordesignprofessionals,refusingto
condensethecodeandplaceallrequirementson
onetopicinONEchapterviolateseventhestated
goalsoftheACI318reorganization.
Change(a)from:Atthefaceofanoncontinuous
supportto:Atnoncontinuoussupportsbecause
althoughatthefaceappliestolongitudinal
structuralintegrityreinforcementprovidedunder
9.7.7.4,atthefacedoesnotapplyto9.7.3.8,where
25.4.10.1shouldalsonotbepermitted.Thatis,the
reinforcementprovidedunder9.7.3.8isnot
developedforfyatthefaceofthesupport,sothe
originalwordingfor(a)isnottrue.Includingatthe
faceisnotnecessary,andatbestaddsunnecessary
confusion.
In(b),removethewordothersoitreads,At
locationswhereanchorageordevelopmentoffyis
required.Includingthewordotherisunnecessary,
andimpliesthatunder(a)thereinforcementmust
alsoalwaysbedevelopedforfy.Thereinforcement
providedunder9.7.3.8isnotdevelopedforfyatthe
faceofthesupport.Includingotherisnot
CommitteeResponse
25.4.5.1.
Allexcessreinforcementprovisionshavebeenconsolidatedinone
section.
25.4.10.2indicateswherereductionindevelopmentlengthdueto
excessreinforcementisnotpermitted.Seeitem(e).
Changeto:
25.4.10.2
(a)Atthefaceofanoncontinuoussupports
Changeto:
25.4.10.2
(b)Atotherlocationswhereanchorageordevelopmentforfyis
required
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
necessary,andatbestaddsunnecessaryconfusion.
Change(c)toInthedeterminationofsplicelength.
Itwouldseemthattherewouldbenoreasontobe
concernedwithdevelopmentlengthwherebarsare
requiredtobecontinuousexceptfordetermination
ofsplicelengths(asalsocoveredin25.5.1.4).
Ibelievereferenceto9.7.6shouldbe9.7.7.
299.
MarkW
Cunningham
25.4.10.2
589
300.
MarkW
Cunningham
R25.4.10.
2
589
301.
HelmuthWilden
R25.4.8.3
586
302.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R25.5.4.1
592
assurehereisincorrect.Ensureisappropriate.
303.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
R25.6.2.1
597
304.
DavidDeValve
25.7.1.4
Whyis bend(min.)=8dbandnot4dbor2dbbased
onwiresizeandroughtness(W/D)?Ref.p.569
25.3.3?
CommitteeResponse
Barsmayberequiredtobecontinuousoverasupportforintegrity
reasons.Thesuggestedchangeto(c)isalreadycoveredin
25.5.1.4,andtheCommitteedoesnotwanttorepeatthe
provision.
ModifylastsentenceinCommentarysection:
R25.4.10.2fordevelopmentofreinforcementprovided
accordingto9.7.69.7.7and8.7.4.2.
ChangetoPCIMNL1204 MNL12010
IfallreferencestoPCIMNL1204arechanged,deletethe
referenceinthereferencelist(pg.692):
MNL1204PCIDesignHandbook:PrecastandPrestressed
Concrete
SeeH.Wilden26.6.2.1;R26.6.2.1
Rewordasfollows:
R25.5.4.1The2in.additionallaprequiredistoassure
overlappingofthecrosswiresprovideadequateoverlapofthe
crosswiresandtoprovidespaceforsatisfactoryconsolidation
TheCodemustbemandatory,andonlytheprovisionsoftheCode
arerequired.IftheCommentaryrepeatsordescribeswhatthe
Coderequires,itmaypreferabletorepeatthemandatory
languagethantoswitchtononmandatorylanguageandraisethe
questionofwhethersomethingisrequiredornot.Inthiscase,
however,theCommentaryismakingasomewhatbroader
statementthantheCode,andnonmandatorylanguage(i.e.,
should)isappropriate.
ThisisexistingCodeinACI31811.
Seelatterpartof25.3.3
Bendswithinsidediameteroflessthan8dbshallnotbelessthan
4dbfromnearestweldedintersection.
Thisisconsistentwith25.7.1.4
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
305.
DavidDeValve
R25.7.1.5
306.
MarkW
Cunningham
25.7.1.6.
1
600
307.
MarkW
Cunningham
25.7.2.1
600
308. JamesS.Lai
25.7.2.2
600
309.
25.7.2.2.
1
Fig.
R25.7.2.3
623
DavidDeValve
310. JamesS.Lai
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
Onelongitudinalwirelocatednotmorethand/4fromthe
compressionfaceandasecondwireclosertothecompression
faceandspacednotlessthan2in.fromthefirstwire.Thesecond
wireshallbepermittedtobelocatedonthestirruplegbeyonda
bend,oronabendwithaninsidediameterofbendofatleast
8db.
Fig.R25.7.1.5.Edittitleto'...weldedwire
Changewithmodification:
reinforcementshearreinforcement.'
Fig.R25.7.1.5Anchorageofsinglelegweldedwire
reinforcementforshearreinforcement.
accordingto25.7.1.6(a) referenceisunclear,
Referenceistoclause(a)of25.7.1.6.Thatis,if thestirrupsare
shouldthisbeFig.R25.7.1.6(a)"?
fabricatedintwopieces,theUshapedstirrup,ofthetwopiece
system,shallbeanchoredwith135degbendsaroundthe
longitudinalbars.
Tiesshallconsistofaclosedloopofdeformedbar CommentarySectionR25.7.2.3andFig.25.7.2.3(a)showthat
impliesasinglebaranddoesnotaddressuseof
multipleclosedtiescanbeusedinthecaseofrectilinearties.
multiplebarstoprovideaclosedconfiguration.The
wordingofthisprovisionshouldbecoordinatedwith
thedefinitionoftie.Seemypreviouscommenton
definitionoftie.
For#11andlargerbars,clarifyincommentaryif#4
Notnecessary.Commentaryalreadystatesthat:
tiesmatchingcrosstiesareintended
R25.7.2.2Theseprovisionsapplytocrosstiesaswellasties.
Whatshallbepermittedasanalternativeisnot
Confusionhasarisenbecausedeformedwirewasdirectly
stated?!?
includedasanoptionin25.7.2.1and25.7.2.2.Revertbackto
wordinginACI31811.Deletedeformedwirefrom25.7.2.1&.2.
Itshouldthenbeclearin25.7.2.2.1thatthealternativeto
deformedbarsisdeformedwireorWWRofequivalentarea:
25.7.2.1Tiesshallconsistofaclosedloopofdeformedbaror
deformedwirewith
25.7.2.2Diameteroftiebarorwireshallbeatleast(a)or(b):
25.7.2.2.1Asanalternativetodeformedbars,deformedwireor
weldedwirereinforcementofequivalentareatothat
Illustrationsdonotreflecttheactualbendradiiof
Theillustrationisarenderingofthecrosssection.Showingthe
tiesatthecornerbars,wherelongitudinalbarsare
detailthatthecornerbarsdonotlineupwiththebarsalongthe
displacedatthe90degreeandthe135degreebends. facesofthecolumnbecauseofthebendradiiisnotthepurposeof
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
311.
PeterA.Giessel
312.
DavidDeValve
313.
314.
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
25.7.2.3.
1
25.7.3.6
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
25.7.4.2
604
AttilaBeres
25.7.4.2
604
605
PublicComment
Thisprovisionisawelcomeadditionandlong
overdue.
Table25.7.3.6.Ibelievethatdeformedbar/wireand
plainbar/wirecouldeasilybecombinedinthe
table!?
Compriseismisusedhere,itisnotasynonymfor
are.Suggest:Anchorageoftheendsofhoop
elementsshallbeprovidedbyseismichooksthat
conform..
Aclosedtieshallnotbemadeupofinterlocking
headedreinforcingbars.
Thisexclusionisvoidofcontext.
Furthermore,crosstiesareoftenreplacedby
deformedbarswithheadsatbothends.This
applicationisnotmentioned.
Pleaseprovideguidance,atleastinthecommentary
(preferablywithreferences)thatexplainthe
substantiation/exclusionofsucharrangements,or
articulateanyconcerns.
CommitteeResponse
therendering.
Thankyou.
Forclarity,becauseofthedifferenttypesofcoating,keep
separate.
Agreebutwithmodification.Changeshowninresponseto
CommentbyAttilaBeresonthesamesection.
Section25.7.4isabouthoops.Section25.7.2isaboutties.All
tiesandhoopsareclosed.
25.7.4.2AnchorageoftTheendsofthereinforcementelements
thatcompriseinhoopsshallbeprovidedbyanchoredusingseismic
hooksthatconformto25.3.4andengagealongitudinalbar.A
closedtiehoopshallnotbemadeupofinterlockingheaded
deformedbars.
Alsochange25.7.2.3.1:
25.7.2.3.1Anchorageofrectilineartiesshallbeprovidedby
standardhooksthatconformto25.3.2andengagealongitudinal
bar.Atieshallnotbemadeupofinterlockingheadeddeformed
bars.
Closedtiesaregenerallymadeupofoneorfewcontinuouspieces
ofdeformedreinforcementthatenclosethelongitudinal
reinforcement.Incontrast,hoopsmadeupofinterlockingheaded
reinforcingbarsrelyontheforcetransferprovidedbyinterlocking
theheadedbarstogether.Thereareconcernsthataneffectively
interlockedconditionwillnotalwaysbeachievableunderfield
conditions.Furthermore,ACICommittee318isnotawareof
laboratorytestsofreinforcedconcretemembersusinghoops
madeupofinterlockingheadedreinforcingbarswith
demonstratedgoodperformanceunderrepresentativeseismic
loadingconditions.ACICommittee318hassimilarconcerns
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
315.
GrantMartin
Provision
#
Figure
R25.9.4.4
.2
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
627
PublicComment
TwodifferentequationsforTburstareshownonthe
leftsketchwhichcanbeconfusing.
CommitteeResponse
regardingtheuseofheadstoanchorcrossties.
TheTburst approximatelyequally0.5Ppu shouldbemovedunderb)
insteadofunder(a).Alsob)shouldbe(b).
Figuresshouldberedrawnasshownbelow.Theverticalline
betweenthearrowsnearTburstshouldbethinnerthantheadjacent
arrows.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
316.
DavidDeValve
Chap.26
317.
JonB.Ardahl
Chapter
26
318. MarkGilligan
319. SylvanaRicciarini
onbehalfof
A2LA
26.1
Chapter
26
26.1
page
631
Botto
mof
the
com
ment
ary
PublicComment
Consistentheadingsforalldesign/compliance
requirementswithboldlettersfollowbyacolon:!
ChangetitleofChapter26toCONTRACT
DOCUMENTSANDINSPECTION.Alsochangethe
termConstructionDocumentstoContract
Documentsintheentiredocument.[Seecomment
1.]
Suggestthatthebuildingcodeshouldfocusonthe
qualitiesofthecompletedconstructionandnoton
howtheOwnerandhisconsultantsmakethis
happen.
Chapter26,26.1
A2LAappreciatesACIeffortsinupdatingtheACI318
versionandbelievesthenewdocumentsstructure
facilitatesreading,interpretationand
comprehension.
Theoveralldocumenthasavarietyofreferencesto
conformityassessmentworksuchastesting,
inspectionandcertification.Giventhepurposeof
thiscodeandimpactinpubichealthandsafety,itis
proposedtospecifyinthissectionandotherrelevant
chapters/sections/provisionsthatalltheconformity
assessmentbodiesperformingoperationssuchas
inspection,testingandproductcertificationshallbe
accreditedbyinternationallyrecognized
accreditationbodiessuchasaccreditationbodies
whicharefullmembersignatoriestothe
InternationalLaboratoryAccreditationCooperation
(ILAC)/MutualRecognitionArrangement(MRA)[for
CommitteeResponse
Stafftoaddressduringfinallayout.
Constructiondocumentsareasubsetofthecontractdocuments.
TheLDPmaynotberesponsibleforpreparationoftheentireset
ofcontractdocuments.Thetermconstructiondocumentsis
definedinChapter2.
TheCommitteebelievesthattheinformationpresentedinCh26is
appropriatetoensurethattherequirementsoftheCodeare
followedduringconstruction.TheintentofChapter26istohelp
ensurethatappropriateprovisionsofthestructuraldesignare
passedontothecontractor.
ACICommittee318understandsthatconformityassessmentis
importanttoqualityofconstruction.ItisforthisreasonthatACI
318includesprovisionsfortestingagenciestoconformtoASTM
C1077asthisstandardisdirectlyapplicabletoagenciestesting
concreteandaggregates.TheannexofASTMC1077definesthe
requirementsforbodiesthatinspectandaccredittestingagencies.
TheserequirementsareconsistentwithISO17011andarespecific
toconcreteandaggregatetesting.ASTMC1077alsoestablishes
requirementsfortechnicians.Thus,ACI318hasclearcriteriathat
canbeusedtoselectspecificinspectionandaccreditation
programs.Thesecriteriacanbeimplementedthroughexplicit
provisionsinconstructiondocumentsforspecificprojects.Insome
cases,thegoverninggeneralbuildingcodemayprovideadditional
requirements.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
320. JamesS.Lai
Provision
#
R26.1
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
629
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
testingandinspectionwork]andtheInternational
AccreditationForum(IAF)/MultilateralRecognition
Arrangement(MLA)[forproductcertification.]
AccreditationbodymembersofILACandIAFare
admittedtotherespectiveArrangementsonlyafter
stringentevaluationoftheiroperationsbyapeer
evaluationteam.Itistheresponsibilityofthisteam
toevaluatethattheapplicantmembercompliesfully
withboththeinternationalstandardsandILAC/IAF
policiesandrequirements.Theseinternationally
recognizedaccreditationbodiesoperatein
accordancewithISO/IEC17011,General
requirementsforaccreditationbodiesaccrediting
conformityassessmentbodies(theAmericanNational
Standardforaccreditationbodiesusedbyseveral
federalgovernmentagenciesandendorsedbythe
WhiteHouseOfficeofManagementandBudget.)
Forfurtherinformationonourcommentsincluding
backgroundonILAC(www.ilac.org)andIAF
(www.iaf.nu),pleasecontactA2LAsCEOPeterUnger
atpunger@a2la.organd/ormeat
sricciarini@A2LA.org.
2nd paragraph restatetheparagraphasfollows:
Thischaptergivesguidanceforlicenseddesign
professionalresponsibletoincorporateproject
requirementsintheformofdetailsandspecification
intotheconstructiondocuments.Theconstruction
documentsshouldcontainallnecessarydetailsand
requirementsforconstruction.ACIcannotlegally
directlicenseddesignprofessionnorcanACI
precludeContractortohaveapracticalunderstandof
thisCodeparticularlyindesignbuiltprojects.The
worddesignisunnecessaryverbiagesince
constructiondocumentnormallyreflectstheresultof
Similarmandatorystatements,legallyrequiringLDP'stoincludeall
applicableCoderequirementsinconstructiondocuments,have
appearedineverymodelbuildingcodefordecades.InIBCit
currentlyresidesin
106.1.1:
"Constructiondocumentsshallbeofsufficientclaritytoindicate
thelocation,natureandextentoftheworkproposedandshowin
detailthatitwillconformtotheprovisionsofthiscodeand
relevantlaws,ordinances,rulesandregulations,asdeterminedby
thebuildingofficial."
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
designprofessionalsendproductintheformof
generalandspecificdetails.
321. MarkGilligan
26.2.1(b)
Delete.ThisduplicatesIBCSection1603.1.
322. MarkGilligan
26.2.1(c)
323.
26.3.1
and
26.9.1
R26.4.1.2
.1(b)
633
Delete.Thereisaneedtodifferentiatebetweenthe
workthatneedstobedoneandhowitisdone.The
delegationoftheworkisacontractualmatter.The
buildingcodeandhencethisstandardshouldnot
dealwithcontractualmatters.Itneedstobe
appreciatedthatnoteverythingcanorshouldbe
regulated.
Buildingregulationsregulatethepropertiesor
characteristicsofthecompletedbuilding.Itifthe
Ownersresponsibilitytocomplywiththeregulations
sohehiresprofessionalengineersandarchitectsto
helphimdothat.Thereisnoneedforthebuilding
coderegulatehowthedesignprofessionalsandthe
ownersortthatout.
Similarto9.5.4.7above,ITG709isnotinACI31811
sowhatisthejustificationforincludingitinACI318
14ifnonewtechnicalinformationistobeincluded?
ThisstatementdoesnotbelongtotheCommentary
particularlywithrespecttononconforming
materials.Theacceptanceofnonconforming
materials,ifany,isbytheAuthorityhaving
Jurisdictiononaprojecttoprojectbasis.Sucha
HelmuthWilden
324. JamesS.Lai
CommitteeResponse
ThecommitteebelievesthatthesuggestedmodificationofR26.1
wouldcreateanunnecessaryconflictbetweenACI318andthe
InternationalBuildingCode.
Inaddition,ACI318recognizessomeprojectcontractsare
structuredgivingdesignresponsibilitytosomeoneotherthanan
LDPsuchasaspecialtycontractororadesignbuildcontractor.
26.1commentaryparagraph5addressesthisshiftinresponsibility.
ThisprovisionhasbeenintheCodeforseveralcycles andthe
committeebelievesitisappropriate.
Also,noteveryjurisdictionusesIBC.
ThisprovisionsimplyrequirestheLDPtoidentifydesignworkto
bedonebythecontractor.Itdoesnotinvolveitselfwiththe
contractualrelationshipbetweentheownerandthecontractor.
InclusionofITG709wasapprovedbythecommittee.
Thisstatementexplainsthecodeprovisionandexplains the
circumstancesunderwhichnonconformingmaterialsmaybe
acceptable.
EssentiallysimilarwordinghasexistedintheCodesincethefirst
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
325.
MarkW
Cunningham
26.4.1.3.
1
633
326.
MarkW
Cunningham
26.4.1.4.
1
634
327.
MarkW
Cunningham
26.4.2.1
635
328.
MarkW
Cunningham
26.4.2.1
635
PublicComment
statementbelongstospecificrecommendedpractice
suchasACI211.1orACI211.2documents.
(b)impliesthatmixingwaterfornonprestressed
concretethatdoesntcontainaluminum
embedmentsandthatisnotcastagainststayin
placegalvanizedsteelformsisallowedtocontain
deleteriousamountsofchlorideionorthathigh
amountsofchloridesinallotherexposuresarent
potentiallydeleterious.Shouldntthemixingwater
notcontaindeleteriousamountsofchlorideions
foranyconcretewheretheresapotentialfor
corrosionofreinforcement?
Also,isntitahighchloridecontentofthewhole
concretemixturethatisofconcern,ratherthanjust
ofthemixingwater?26.4.1.3.1impliesthataslong
asthemixingwaterdoesntcontaindeleterious
amountsofchlorides,thattheconcretewillbe
acceptablefortheexposuresdescribedin26.4.1.3.1.
(NotethatT19.3.2.1defineslimitsofchloridesin
concrete,notmixingwater,forexposurecategoryC.)
Ialsosuggestreferencebemadein26.4.1.3.1to
T19.3.2.1forlimitsonchlorideionsinreinforced
concreteespeciallysinceitsinadifferentchapter.
(c)Seemycommentabovepertainingtothesame
wordingin26.4.1.3.1(b)
CommitteeResponse
Commentarywaspublishedin1963.
Thisisanexistingcodeprovision.TheCommitteedisagreesthat
thereisanimplicationthatthechloridelimitsin19.3.2.1arenot
applicable.Thechloridelimitsbasedonassignedexposureclass
fromexposurecategoryCwouldapplyfortheconcrete.Footnote
7inTable19.3.2.1explicitlyreferencesmixwaterasa
contributortotheconcretechloridesalongwithotherconcrete
ingredients.
However,theCommitteeagreesthat26.4.1.3.1(b)willbe
reviewedasnewbusinesstoensurethattheintentisclear.
Seeresponsetocommenterscomment#325on26.4.1.3.1.
TheCommitteeagreesthat26.4.1.3.1(b)willbereviewedasnew
businesstoensurethattheintentisclear.
Similarto(6),itseemsthattheparticularcasesand
Reviewofthelistin26.4.2.1willbeconsideredasanewbusiness
limitsdescribedin26.4.1.3.1(b)shouldalsobe
iteminthenextcodecycle.Seealsotheresponsetocommentsby
Mr.CunninghamonSections26.4.1.3.1and26.4.1.4.1.
includedhere.
(8):Thisimpliesthatcalciumchlorideadmixtures
Theuseofcalciumchlorideadmixturesmaybeprecludedbythe
needntbeprohibitedinotherthanS2orS3
chloridelimitsforExposureCategoryCwhenassignedto
exposures.ItimpliestheyreneverprohibitedinF,W, members.Theprohibitionforsulfateresistanceisbasedon
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
26.4.2.1(
b)
330. JamesS.Lai
R26.4.2.1
(c)
637
331. MarkGilligan
26.4.2.2(
a)
No.
329.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Kevin
MacDonald
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
orCexposures.
Theidentificationofexposureclassshouldnotbe
optional.Byidentifyingtheclassinthedocuments
thecontractorcanorderconcreteandtheproducer
manufactureittoasetofACIrequirements,and
thereforebeabletodevelopstandardmixtures
basedontheserequirements.Thiswouldimprove
constructionefficiencyandreducetheriskof
improperconcretebeingincorporatedintothework.
Makeeditorialcorrection:...,theserequirements
shouldbestatedexplicitly....
researchandmaynotberelatedtochlorides.
TheCommitteedebatedthismatteratlengthanddecidedthatitis
notreadyatthistimetoturnoverresponsibilityforselectionof
keyconcreteparameterstothecontractor.TheLDPretainsthe
responsibilityforspecifyingkeyconcreteparametersratherthan
simplyspecifyingexposureclasses.
TheLDPretainstheoptiontospecifyexposureclassesalongwith
thekeyconcreteparameters.
Acceptaseditorialchange.
R26.4.2.1(c)Ifdesignorconstructionrequirementsdictatethat
inplacestrengthofconcretebeachievedatspecificagesorstages
ofconstruction,theserequirementsshouldtobestatedexplicitly
intheconstructiondocuments.
Thetermlicenseddesignprofessionalasusedherereferstothe
engineerofrecord.Theprovisionstatesthatstrength
requirementsspecifiedbyotherlicensedprofessionalsaretobe
submittedforreview.
Thisprovisiondoesnotregulatethepracticeofengineering.
Delete.Thisstandardshouldconcernitselfwiththe
characteristicsofthebuildingandnotwhomadethe
decisions.
Whiletherearesomestructuresthatuseconcrete
thatcanbedesignedbyunlicensedindividualsitis
hardtoimaginetheneedtotrackthestrengthof
concreteatdifferentstagesforthosebuildings.
Thepracticeofengineeringisregulatedbystate
agenciesotherthantheagencyadoptingthebuilding
codeandhencetheagencyadoptingthebuilding
codehasnoauthoritytoregulatethepracticeof
engineeringorthoseoperatinglegallywithinthe
boundsofexemptionstothelicensinglaws.
Itisnotclearwhatisthebasisofthereviewofthe
informationsubmitted.Whatisthebasisfor
acceptanceorrejection?Reviewsbythebuilding
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
26.4.3
26.4.3.1
640
334. MarkGilligan
26.4.3.1(
b)
335.
26.4.3.1.
b
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
332. MarkGilligan
333.
MarkW
Cunningham
JonB.Ardahl
PublicComment
departmentcannotbeopenended.
Removingthestatisticalrequirementsforacceptance
ofconcretemixeswillresultinalotofpushback
Thestatementinthecommentarythatthe
informationisincludedinotherdocumentsignores
thefactthatbuildingregulationsmustbespecific.
Ifonewerecynicalitmightbesuggestedthatthis
informationwasbeingdeletedtoforcedesignersto
buyadditionalACIpublications.
(b)ReferenceismadeveryspecificallytoACI301,
Art.4.2.3,whichrequiresstrengthtestrecordsnot
morethan12monthsold.Soitdoesntseemtomake
sensefor318tomakeachangetothisprovisionto
24months.TheCodeandtheSpecificationshouldbe
consistent.
Revisefirsttwosentencestoread:
Concretemixtureproportionsshallbeestablishedin
accordancewithArticle4.2.3ofACI301oran
alternativemethodthatmeetsorexceedsthe
probabilityassociatedwiththemethodinArticle
4.2.3ofACI301.
ThereferencetoACI301inthecodeisnot
acceptable.RemoveallreferencestoACI301from
thecodetext.ACI301isaconstructionspecification
thatifreferencedwillbepartoftheContract
Documents.ACI301iswritteninspecification
languagenotcodelanguage.Thecodeshould
providealltherequirementsthatmustbemetto
complywiththecodewithnoreferencetoACI301.
ACI301shouldbewrittentomeetorexceedthe
coderequirements.Ifthecodedoesnotwantto
providecertainrequirements,thatisuptothem,but
CommitteeResponse
Thedetailedstatisticalprocedurefordevelopingaconcrete
mixturebelongsindocumentsotherthanthebuildingcode.Itis
nottheresponsibilityoftheLDPtodesigntheconcretemixture.
TheLDPestablishestherequiredpropertiesoftheconcrete,and
theCodeprovidesrequirementsforacceptance.
SeealsotheresponsetoArdahlcomment342onthissectionas
well.
TheCommitteeexplicitlydecidedtopermittheageofatest
recordtobe24monthsinACI318.ThecurrentACI301provision
ismorerestrictive,whichispermitted.However,arevisionhas
beenapprovedbyACI301tochangeto24months.Thiswillbe
includedinthenextrevisionofACI301atwhichpointtheCode
andspecificationwillbeconsistentonthisissue.
Thisprovisionrequiresthatanalternativemethodfor
proportioningbeacceptabletotheLDP.
ThereferenceinACI318isonlytotheonearticleinACI301on
mixtureproportioningandwasnecessarytoachieveconsensusto
removeproportioningprovisionsfromtheCode.Therationalefor
thisremovalisthattheLDPisnotresponsibleformixture
proportioningbutneedstoensurethatthereisadefinedprocess
forasubmittalthisisaddressedinmandatorylanguageinACI
301.ThisreferencedoesnotincorporateallofACI301intothe
Code.
ThisprovisionwillbereviewedtochangetheCodeportiontoa
performancerequirementandincludethereferencetoACI301or
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
336. MarkGilligan
26.4.4.1
337.
HelmuthWilden
641
338.
WardMalisch
26.4.4.1
(b)
R26.5.2.1
(f)
339.
WardMalisch
R26.5.3.2
(a)
26.5.4.1(
340. MarkGilligan
PublicComment
Ibelievetheyshouldprovidetheminimumcode
requirementsforeverything.Thecodeshouldnot
makepartsof301apartofthecode.ACI301will
alwaysbebasedonapreviousversionof318since
noonebut318membersknowswhatwillbein318
untilitispublished.ForexampleACI30110isbeing
referencedinthisproposedACI31814code.
Thebuildingcodeandthisstandardshouldnot
regulatethesubmittalreviewprocess.
Stateobjectiverequirementsandbesilentonwhat
thedesignprofessionaldoes.
5,000isusedattwoplacesandshouldbe5000
withoutthecomma
Itisessentialtoavoidsegregationofthecoarse
aggregatefromthemortarorofwaterfromthe
otheringredients.Suggestdeletingthissentence.It
addsnothingtotheunderstandingoftheCode
requirement,andimpliesthatbleeding(segregation
ofwaterfromothermaterials)canbeavoidedforall
structuralconcretemixtures.Bleedingoftencannot
beavoided.Ifthesentenceisntdeleted,replacethe
wordavoidwiththewordlimit.
TherequirementthatConcreteshallbe
maintainedinamoistconditionhasbeen
interpretedbysomeinspectorsandengineersto
meanthatwatercuringisrequired.Watercuringis
impractical,especiallyforsoffitsofslabsorbeams.
Suggestrewritingthesectionasfollows:Maintain
concreteatatemperatureofatleast50Fandlimit
waterlossforatleastthefirst7daysafter
placementThismoreclearlyallowsthecontractor
tousecuringcompoundsormoistureretention
methodsratherthanwatercuring.
Thereisnocodespecifiedcriteriafordeterminingif
CommitteeResponse
equivalentintheCommentary.Thischangewillbeaddressedas
newbusiness.
ReviewofmixturesubmittalsbytheLDPisstandardpracticeinthe
concreteindustry.ItwasimplicitinACI31811andearlierCodes.
SubmittalofproposedmixtureproportionsishowtheLDPensures
thatanappropriatemixturehasbeendeveloped.
Stafftoaddressduringfinallayout.
Modify:R26.5.2.1(f),secondparagraph,lastsentence
Itisessentialtoavoidimportanttominimizesegregationofthe
coarseaggregatefromthemortarorofwaterfromtheother
ingredients.
Theproposedwordinglimitwaterlossisvagueand
unenforceable.TheCommitteewilllookatthiscommentasnew
businesstodetermineifrevisedwordingorifaddingcommentary
languageisappropriate.
TheprovisionislistedtoremindtheLDPtoidentifythe
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
a)
PublicComment
thetemperaturelimitsareappropriate.The
documentsmentionedinthecommentaryarenot
mandatory.
341. MarkGilligan
26.5.4.2(
a)
Whatmusttheequipmentbeadequatetodo?
Simplydefinethetemperaturesthatmustbe
maintained.
342. MarkGilligan
26.5.5.1(
a)
Thereisnocodespecifiedcriteriafordeterminingif
thetemperaturelimitsareappropriate.The
documentsmentionedinthecommentaryarenot
mandatory.
343. MarkGilligan
26.5.6.1(
a)&(b)
344. MarkGilligan
26.5.6.1(
b)
345.
DavidDeValve
26.5.6.1(
e)
Neitherofthesearenecessarytocodify.Atwhat
leveldoyouneedtomicromanagethedesign
process.
Istheresoliddatathatshowsthatthetypicallyused
shearkeysareeffectiveintransferringmoderateto
largeforces?Iamconcernedthatthegeometryof
shearkeyswillmakeitdifficulttoinsurethatthe
concreteadequatelyfillsallvoids.
Shouldread'...roughingofcompositetopping...'not
if!?
346.
JaredE.Brewe
26.5.6.2
(d)
Suggestcreatinganew(e)provisionafterthefirst
sentenceanddeletingotherwisetohaveaspecific
compliancerequirementthatconstructionjointsbe
cleaned.
CommitteeResponse
temperaturelimitintheconstructiondocumentsbyreferringtoan
ACISpecification,forexample,orbylistingaspecificvalue.
ThedocumentsreferencedintheCommentaryprovideguidance
tohelptheLDPselecttheappropriatetemperaturefortheproject
conditions.
Thisisagoodcomment.TheprovisionislistedtoremindtheLDP
toidentifytheequipmentrequirementsintheconstruction
documentstoprovideprotectionoftheconcreteduringcold
weatherplacement.
Thecommitteewillreviewrewritingthisprovisionasnew
business.
TheprovisionislistedtoremindtheLDPtoidentifythe
temperaturelimitintheconstructiondocumentsbyreferringtoan
ACISpecification,forexample,orbylistingaspecificvalue.
ThedocumentsreferencedintheCommentaryprovideguidance
tohelptheLDPselecttheappropriatetemperaturefortheproject
conditions.
TheprovisionisintendedtoremindtheLDPtoidentifyonthe
constructiondocumentssheartransferdetails,ifrequired.They
arenotintendedtodictatethemethod.
Thereisnocommentherethatcanbeaddressed.
TheprovisionisintendedtoremindtheLDPtoidentifyonthe
constructiondocumentssheartransferdetails,ifrequired.Itdoes
notdictatethemethod.
Ifisthecorrectwordhere.Thecompositetoppingslabisnot
roughenedtheunderlyingslabisroughened.Thedecisionto
roughenislefttotheLDP.
Changethecodeprovisionsasshown:
(d)Otherwise,cConstructionjointsshallbecleanedandlaitance
shallberemovedbeforenewconcreteisplaced.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
347.
HelmuthWilden
R26.6.2.1
651
IbelievethereferenceshouldbePCIMNL13500not
PCIMNL1204
348.
HelmuthWilden
R26.6.2.1
651
349.
WardMalisch
26.6.2.1(
a)
Table26.6.2.1(a).Suggestdeletingthefootnote
requiringanabsolutetoleranceof1/4in.onclear
coverforformedsoffits.Areinforcementplacing
toleranceof1/4in.impliesthatbarscanbesettoa
precisionof1/8in.Thatisnotgenerallyachievable.
Dataforinplaceconcrete(MirzaandMacGregor
1979)showthat,onaverage,bottombarsinslabs
were0.31in.belowthespecifiedlocation.This
indicatesthatin1979,morethan50%ofthebottom
barsinslabswouldnothavebeenwithinthe1/4in.
tolerancetothesoffit.Morganetal(1982)measured
barlocationinslabsduringtheinspectionof14
buildings.Onlytwobuildingshadbottombar
concretecoverthatmetthe1/4in.tolerance.For
thosetwobuildings,theplustoleranceof3/8in.was
exceededsothebottomconcretecoverwaswithin
the1/4in.tolerance.Theslabsontheother12
buildingsdidnotmeetthe1/4in.
tolerance,andafewwerenotwithina1/2in.
tolerance.
CommitteeResponse
(e)Surfaceofconstructionjointsshallbeintentionallyroughened
ifspecified.
Renumberprovision(e)to(f).
ChangetoPCIMNL1204 ACIITG709.Also:
Adash()shouldbeaddedbetweenITGand7inR26.9.1(a)
andthereferencelist(page687)tomakethedesignation
consistentwithothers.PCIMNL13500shouldbedeletedfrom
thereferencelist(page692)asitisnolongerused.
ChangetoPCIMNL1204 MNL12010
IfallreferencestoPCIMNL1204arechanged,deletethe
referenceinthereferencelist(pg.692)
NochangeinACI31814codecycle.Theprovisioniscorrectly
worded.Ifa1in.coverisspecified,forinstance,itisdesiredto
havenothinglessthanin.cover.Thetoleranceisonlyaminus
becauseotherthanassuringstructuraldepththeLDPdoesnot
careifthecoverismore.Inaddition,theprovisionsmatchthosein
ACI11710.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
Specifiersmayrecognizetheinabilityofmany
contractorstomeetthiscoverrequirementby
specifyingaconcretecoverof1in.sotheonethird
ruleallowsatoleranceof1/2in.
However,asmentionedearlier,thetoleranceas
statedinACI31814isanabsolutevalue,regardless
ofthespecifiedcover.Andifcontractorsincreasethe
heightofthe
chairsorbolstersto,forexample,1/2in.,theyrisk
beingout
oftoleranceontheplussideford.
ConstructiontolerancesareunderthepurviewofACI
Committee117,andshouldbesetbythatcommittee
basedonconsiderationsofstructuralsafetyand
achievability.
Allowinganabsolutetoleranceof1/4in.onclear
distancetoformedsoffits,regardlessofthespecified
cover,wasfirstrequiredinSection7.3.2.1ofthe
1974supplementtoACI31871.Onerationalefor
thisrequirementwasthatclearcoverwasimportant
forfireresistance(Section7.5.2oftheCommentary
forACI31883).NootherACIstandardordocument
coveredfireresistancein1974.
ThatchangedwiththepublicationofACI216.107,
CodeRequirementsforDeterminingFireResistance
ofConcreteandMasonryConstructionAssemblies.
Section1.1ofthatdocument
addressesthescopeofthedocumentandincludes
thefollowingstatements:
Theprimaryintendeduseofthisdocumentisfor
determiningthedesignrequirementsforconcrete
andmasonryelementstoresistfireandprovidefire
CommitteeResponse
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
350. MarkGilligan
Provision
#
26.6.2.2(
c)
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
protection.Tolerancecompliancetotheprovisions
forconcreteshallbebasedoninformation
providedinACI117.
Thisplacestheresponsibilityfortoleranceswhereit
belongs.TheForewordforACI216.107,however,
stillrequiresthatwheredifferencesoccurinspecific
designrequirements,themore
stringentoftherequirementsshallapply.Soinorder
forACI117tosetachievabletolerances,theabsolute
minusin.requirementneedstobedeletedfrom
ACI318.
References
Mirza,S.A.,andMacGregor,J.G.,1979,Variations
in
DimensionsofReinforcedConcreteMembers,
Journalof
theStructuralDivision,ASCE,Apr.,pp.5459.
Morgan,P.R.;Ng,T.E.;Smith,H.M.;andBase,G.D.,
HowAccuratelyCanReinforcingSteelbePlaced?
Field
ToleranceMeasurementComparedtoCodes,1982,
ConcreteInternational,V.4,No.10,Oct.,pp.5465.
Givingthe designprofessionalpermissionto
designatesplicelocationsnotshownonthe
constructiondocumentscreatesconflictswiththe
IBCwhichwouldnotallowthis.Theworkmust
complywiththeapprovedpermitdocuments.If
workcannotordoesnotcomplywiththeapproved
permitdocumentsitmustberepairedortheOwner
mustsubmitreviseddocumentstothebuilding
officialforreviewandapproval.Sincethedesign
CommitteeResponse
TheintentofChapter26istoremindtheLDPofdetailsand
provisionstobeincludedontheconstructiondocuments.The
provisiondoesnotgivetheLDPpermissiontomakechanges
withoutfollowingthepermitprocess.Thisisthesameas31811
(12.14.1).
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
professionalwillneedtoprepareandstampthe
reviseddocumentshehaseffectivelyapprovedthe
changes.
Similarprovisionsoccurinothersectionssuchas
26.6.3.1(b)
Replacewordingcoldbentwithbentatambient
temperature
351.
DavidMcDonald
R26.6.3.1
(b)
654
352.
DavidMcDonald
26.6.3.1a
654
Thewordcoldsuggestsbelowambient
temperatures
Reinforcementshallbebentcoldatambient
temperaturespriortoplacement.
353. MarkGilligan
26.8.1(a)
354. MarkGilligan
26.9.2(a)
355. MarkGilligan
26.9.2(b)
DeletedesignedbylicenseddesignprofessionalIt
makesnodifference.Thisisinformationthatwould
beneededinanycaseevenifinstalledbyanon
licensedindividual.
Thereisnoneedforthepermitdrawingstoindicate
dateofmanufactureoftheprecastunits.This
informationisnotavailablewhenthe
construction/permitdrawingsareprepared.Even
whenthereisadeferredapproval,suchaswhen
contractordesignsmember,thedrawingsneedtobe
preparedpriortocastingofprecastmember.
Eliminateanyreferencetoerectiondrawingssince
theyrelatetocontractorsmeansandmethodsof
construction.
356. MarkGilligan
26.9.2(d)
Eliminatethisprovision.Constructionsafetyand
hencetemporarybracingispreemptedbyOSHA
legislationandhencebuildingcodesdonothave
CommitteeResponse
Theterm"coldbent"isincommonuseandisunderstoodtobe
withouttheadditionofheat.Thistermhasbeenusedinprevious
editionsoftheCode(e.g.,ACI318117.3.1).
Theterm"coldbent"isincommonuseandisunderstoodtobe
withouttheadditionofheat.
ThistermhasbeenusedinpreviouseditionsoftheCode(e.g.,ACI
318117.3.1)
SeeresponsetoMcDonaldR26.6.3.1(b)
Thisprovidesadistinctionbetweenembedmentsselectedbythe
licenseddesignprofessionalandthosein26.8.2(a)whichare
selectedbyothers.
Thisisarequirementthatthelicenseddesignprofessional
specifiesthecontractortoperformthatwheneachprecast
memberismanufactured,itismarkedtoindicatelocationand
orientationinthestructureandthedateofcasting.
Erectiondrawingscanindicatemuchmorethanmeansand
methods,includingafulldesignperformedbythecontractorasa
deferredsubmittal.Bythisprovision,thelicenseddesign
professionalisrequiringthatthemarksonprecastmembers(part
(a))correspondwiththemarksontheerectiondrawingssothat
thestructuregoestogetherasplanned.
Bythisprovision thelicenseddesignprofessionalisassuringthat
anerectionplanisinplace.Itdoesnotregulateconstruction
safetyordictatethedetailsofthebracingplan.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
357. MarkGilligan
26.10.1(c
)
358. MarkGilligan
26.10.2(a
)
359. MarkGilligan
26.10.2(c
)
360. MarkGilligan
26.10.2(f
)
361. MarkGilligan
26.11.1.1
(a)
362. MarkGilligan
26.11.2.1
(b)
PublicComment
authoritytoregulate.InCaliforniastatestatutes
wouldfurtherprohibitthisrequirement.
Deleteforsystemsselectedbythelicenseddesign
professional.Thisaddsnothing.Anythingonthe
permitdrawingswasselectedbythedesign
professional.
Deletesinceinstallationofposttensioningsystems
notshownonthepermitdocumentsarenotallowed.
Thiswouldrequiretheconstructiondocumentsbe
revisedandapprovedbythebuildingdepartment.
Thedesignprofessionalwouldpreparethese
documents.
Noneedtomentiondesignprofessionalsincethe
issueofcouplerlocationswouldneedtobe
addressedontheconstructiondocuments.
Deleteunlessotherwiseapprovedbythelicensed
designprofessional.Inpreviouseditionsifthe
problemcouldnotbecorrectedwithoutchangingthe
constructiondocumentsthefix(reviseddrawings)
wouldhavetobesubmittedtothebuilding
departmentforreviewandapproval.Thislanguage
attemptstobypassthebuildingofficial.
Delete.Thisisacontractualissue.Thecodeshould
focusonformworkrelatedtechnicalissuesthat
impactperformanceofcompletedstructure.In
generalregulationofformworkdesignisanissuefor
OSHAtoregulatenotforthebuildingcode
Exceptinunusualcircumstancesthedesign
professionaldoesnotwanttoseethecontractors
calculationsrelatedtoformworkdesign,shoring,and
reshoring.Ifthedesignprofessionalwastoreview
thesecalculationshecouldfindhimselfresponsible
foranyproblemswhereifthesecalculationswere
notreviewedtheContractorwouldberesponsible.
CommitteeResponse
Thisprovidesadistinctionbetweensystemsselectedbythe
licenseddesignprofessionalandthosein26.10.2(a)whichare
selectedbyothers.
Itiscommonforthecontractortoselectanddetailaproprietary
posttensioningsystemmeetingtherequirementsspecifiedbythe
licenseddesignprofessional,andtoprovideadeferredsubmittal
thatsupplementstheconstructiondocuments.
Thelocationofthecouplersmustbeapprovedbythelicensed
designprofessional.
Alldesignshavesomedegreeoflatitudeandthelicenseddesign
professionalisinthebestpositiontoevaluateandapprove
deviationsfromCodeprescribedlimits.
ThisprovisionistellingtheLDPtoinformcontractorastowhois
responsiblefortheformwork.
OSHAcertainlyisaparticipantinensuringtheformworkmeets
workersafety.ButtheLDPhasaninterestinmakingsurethe
formworkwillproducetheintendedresults.
Revise26.11.2.1(b)asfollows:
(b)Structuralanalysisandconcretestrength
requirementsusedinplanningandimplementingtheformwork
removalandreshoreinstallationshallbefurnishedbythe
contractortothelicenseddesignprofessionaland,when
requested,tothebuildingofficial,whenrequested.
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
Inadditionthisprovisioncreatesadirectrelationship
betweenthecontractorandthedesignprofessional
whichcouldimpactthelegalbasisforthecontractor
tosuethedesignprofessionaldirectly.
Whyistherearequirementmandatedfor3x(4x8)
cylinders.Proposed:Testnotlessthantwo
compressionspecimensofeither(4X8)or(6x12)
sizeat28daysasmayberequiredtosatisfythe
acceptableWithinTestPrecisionofASTMC39.
CommitteeResponse
363.
William
Ciggelakis
364. MarkGilligan
26.12.1.1
26.12.4.1
(c)
Deletethelastsentence.Itisunnecessary.
Sometimesitmaybethebuildingofficialwho
dictatessomeorallofthetests.
Is'residualstrength'definedasaratio,aspecific
value,orapercentaboveFrneedtoclarify?!?
ASTMC1609doesnotcallfordeterminingthe
deflectionat1/300thofthespan.
365.
DavidDeValve
26.12.5
366.
GregMoody
26.12.5.1
671
367. MarkGilligan
26.13.1.1
368. MarkGilligan
26.13.1.2
Thiswasbasedontheobservedhigherwithintestvariabilityof
measuredstrengthsof4x8inchcylinders.
TheCommitteeiscollectingdatatosupportachangetothis
requirementandwillconsiderthisasnewbusinessinthenext
cycle.
Change26.12.4.1(c),lastsentence
ThespecifieroftestsreferencedinASTMC42shallbethelicensed
designprofessionalorthebuildingofficial.
Residualstrengthis definedinASTMC1609,whichisreferenced
inthisprovision.
TheCodemodifieswhatiscalledforinASTMC1609becausethis
additionalrequirementisnecessaryfortheperformance
characteristicsofSFRCforthisstructuralapplication.
Yes,thecommitteehasreadtheprovisions.
Havethecommitteemembersreadthetestingand
inspectionprovisionsinthe2012IBCrelatedto
concreteconstruction.
Ifthereisnoadoptedbuildingcodethereisno
TheCommitteebelievesthattheprovisioniscorrectaswritten.
reasontousethewordshallindiscussingthe
inspectionprogram.Ifthestandardisreferenced
fromthebuildingcodeshallisimpliedanddoesnot
needtobestated.
Whilethedesignprofessionalwhodesignedthework
hascertainskillstheydonotoftenincludeexpertise
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
inhowtomanageaninspectionprogram.
Implementingthetestingandinspectionprogramis
oftenbetterdelegatedtoatestingandinspection
agency.Thedesignprofessionalsroleconsistsof
structuralobservationsandreviewoftestreports.
Proposedaddition:qualifiedinspectorsin
accordancewithASTME329andwiththeprovisions
ofthissection.Comment:TheTestingAgencyis
requiredtocomplywithASTMC1077.Accordingly,
thereshouldbearequiredlevelofcompetenceof
theInspectionAgency.ASTME329definesthe
expectationsofcompetenceofafirmperforming
inspectionsandalsosetsforthrequirementswhen
theBuildingOfficialdoesnotsetforththe
requirementsofthespecialinspector.
369.
William
Ciggelakis
26.13.1.2
370.
BrianJohnson,
P.E.
William
Ciggelakis
R26.13.1.
2
26.13.1.4
673
Miroslav
Vejvoda
Referenc
es
Proposedchange:orunderthesupervisionofa
licensedprofessionalengineerorregisteredarchitect
withthedemonstratedcapabilitytosupervise
inspection.Comment:LicensedProfessional
MaterialsEngineersemployedbyaConstruction
MaterialsEngineeringLaboratorymaynotbe
consideredadesignprofessionalbutwillhavethe
knowledgeoftherequirementsforspecial
inspections.
PostTensioningInstitute:Revisedesignationsas
follows:
PTI/ASBIM50.312
PTIM55.112
371.
372.
CommitteeResponse
Asnotedbythereviewer,theCodeprovidescriteriafortestingby
referencetoASTMC1077.Conformityassessmentrequirements
arecommonlyimplementedthroughtheapplicablegeneral
buildingcodeorthroughcontractdocumentsfortheproject.In
theabsenceofgeneralbuildingcoderequirements,ACI318
includesapplicableprovisionsinSections26.13.1.2through
26.13.1.4.Commentarytothesesectionsprovidesguidanceon
qualificationsofinspectorsandreferencesACI311.4RGuideto
ConcreteInspection,whichinturnreferencesASTME329along
withotherprovisions.TheCommitteebelievesthisprovidesa
soundandflexibleapproachtoprovidingappropriateconformity
assessment.
TheuseofshallisnotappropriatefortheCommentary.
Thetermlicenseddesignprofessionalisintendedtocoverall
professionals.Thiscommentwillbereviewedasnewbusiness
whentheCommitteereviewsuseofthetermLDP.
Thecommitteewillupdatethesereferences.
Page692:Revisereferences:
PTI/ASBIMB50.312
PTI/ASBIMB55.112
Also,citationsinchaptersneedtobecorrected:
No.
Public
Commenter
Name
Provision
#
Pg#
(Ch.
2&
App.
A)
Line#
(Ch.2
&
App.
A)
PublicComment
CommitteeResponse
R26.10.1(f)PTI/ ASBIM50.3andPTIM55.1
R26.10.1(g)PTI/ASBIM55.1
ReplacePostTensioningInstitute(PTI),2008,Design ReplacethePTI2008referencetothefollowing:
ofPostTensionedSlabsonGround(PTIDC10.108),
thirdeditionwith2008Supplement,PostTensioning PostTensioningInstitute(PTI),2012,StandardRequirementsfor
Institute,FarmingtonHills,MI,106pp.withan
DesignandAnalysisofShallowPostTensionedConcrete
updateddocument:
FoundationsonExpansiveSoils(PTIDC10.512),PostTensioning
Institute,FarmingtonHills,MI,43pp.
PostTensioningInstitute(PTI),2012,Standard
RequirementsforDesignandAnalysisofShallow
PostTensionedConcreteFoundationsonExpansive
Inaddition,thischangecoordinateswithComment42.The
Soils(PTIDC10.512),PostTensioningInstitute,
commentary(R1.4.7)thatcitesthisreferenceneedstobeupdated
FarmingtonHills,MI,43pp.
forconsistencywiththereferenceassuggestedinComment#32
bycommenteronR1.4.7.
Shouldthesameyearstandardbereferenced
AllcitationsareappropriateforAISC36010.Deletereferenceto
bewteenAISC(36010)&ANSI/AISC(36005)??
AISC36005.
ANSI/AISC36005SpecificationforStructuralSteelBuildings
DeleteC1.02006StandardforCompositeSteel
Changeasnoted:
FloorDeck.ThishasbeenupdatedtoSDIC2011
AmericanNationalStandardsInstitute/SteelDeckInstitute
StandardforCompositeSteelFloorDeckSlabs
C1.02006StandardforCompositeSteelFloorDeck
whichisshownwiththeotherSDIStandardonPage
692.
Nochangetothecitedstandardonpage692.
373.
Miroslav
Vejvoda
Referenc
es
374.
DavidDeValve
Referenc
es
687
8
375.
Referenc
es
688
376.
ThomasSputo,
Ph.D.,P.E.,S.E.
Technical
Director
SteelDeck
Institute
sputoeng@mind
spring.com
HelmuthWilden
Referenc
es
692
IbelieveMNL1204shouldbeMNL12004andrefer
tothe6thEdition
377.
HelmuthWilden
Referenc
es
692
IbelieveMNL12010shouldreadPCIDesign
HandbookPrecastandPrestressedConcreteand
refertothe7thEdition
ThereferencestoMNL12004shouldbeupdatedtoMNL12010.
Changeasfollows:
Deletethefollowingreference:MNL12004PCIDesign
Handbook:PrecastandPrestressedConcrete,6thEdition
ChangecitationsinR11.6.1,R22.8.3,R22.9.1.1,R22.9.5.1,
R25.4.8.3,andR26.6.2.1toMNL12010.
Changereferenceto:
MNL12010PCIDesignHandbook:PrecastandPrestressed
Concrete,7thEdition
Document:ACI318.2:CodeRequirementsforThinShellsandCommentary
PublicCommenter
No.
Provision#
PublicComment
Name
378.
DavidDeValve
00
Shouldthisbeaseparatechapterin31814oraseparateguide
document??
379.
DanielJ.McCarthy
R3.1.8
Thecommentarycurrentlyreads:Recommendationsforbuckling
designofdomesaregiveninACI373ThisshouldbeACI372.ACI
Committee373wasdisbandedseveralyearsagoandtheirreport
documentACI373R97hasbeenremovedfromtheMCP.Thelatest
informationcoveringbucklingdesignandconstructionofdomes
withPrestressededgeringsisfoundin:372R13GuidetoDesign
andConstructionofCircularWireandStrandWrapped
Prestressed.
380.
BrianJohnson,P.E.
R3.1.7
381.
BrianJohnson,P.E.
R6.1.3
382.
MarkGilligan
7.1
Reformulatewithoutreferringtothedesignprofessional
CommitteeResponse
Itwillbeaseparatedocument.
ChangethereferencesinACI318.2fromACI 373toACI
372asnotedbelow.
R1.1.1Discussionoftheapplicationofthinshellsin
structuressuchascoolingtowersandcircularprestressed
concretetanksmaybefoundinACI334.1R,ACI334.2R,
ACI373RACI372R,andtheIASSWorkingGroupNo.5
report(1979).
R3.1.8lastparagraph
Aprocedurefordeterminingcriticalbucklingloadsof
shellsisgivenintheIASSrecommendations(IASS1979).
Somerecommendationsforbucklingdesignofdomes
usedinindustrialapplicationsaregiveninACI373372R
andACISP67.
References
373R97DesignandConstructionofCircularPrestressed
ConcreteStructureswithCircumferentialTendons
372R13GuidetoDesignandConstructionofCircular
WireandStrandWrappedPrestressedConcrete
Structures
ThereferencetoACI373shouldbedeletedfromtheACI
31814Codereferencesalso.(page686)
WhileCodeiswritteninmandatorylanguage,the
Commentaryusesnonmandatorylanguage.Therefore
CommentarycanuseshouldwhileCodeusesshall.
WhileCodeiswritteninmandatorylanguage,the
Commentaryusesnonmandatorylanguage.Therefore
CommentarycanuseshouldwhileCodeusesshall.
Asaseparatedocument,the specifyingtheactionsin
Section7.1aretheresponsibilityofthelicenseddesign
professional.Reformulatingthissectiontobeparallelto
ACI318willbeconsideredasnewbusiness.

318 Closure

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

318 Closure

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Document:ACI318:BuildingCodeRequirementsforStructuralConcreteandCommentary

Reason: Does this include special structures if

This clause recommends using an expected yield

The discussers suggest reviewing the publication by

Restrepo J.I., Rodriguez, M.E., (2013), On the

Fixtypo:suchthattheprotected projected areasoverlap.

The expression pullout(17.4.3),asdistinctfrom bondfailure

(1) First of all, the meaning of sustainability should

it is not only the factor of the wind load will be

Load Combinations for Allowable Stress

A commentary is proposed for Section 8.4.2.3.2 in

R.8.4.2.3.2Based on finiteelement research, ACI

its design. Providing or installing the required extra

The motives to adopt 8.4.2.3.4 no longer exist.

Experiments give the values of V and Msc at failure,

Nonlinear finiteelement (FE) analyses for

ACI 421.1R08 (based on linear FE analyses by

Stamenkovic & Chapma

Jc = d multiplied by the moment of inertia of the

For a critical section of general shape, subjected to

The perimeter of the critical section is considered

On the peripheral line of studs nearest to column

The addition of the above paragraph will avoid

On the peripheral line of studs nearest to column

ModifytoreadTheequivalentframe comprises consistsof three

8.11.4.1,4.2 appear to contradict each other only 8.11.4.1addressesthestiffnessofthecolumnwithinthedepthof

surface inathe compositeconcreteflexuralmember

Idealized breakout cone

Test of headed bars

Test of headed anchor

2nd paragraph changeICC(ICCIBC12)toIBC12

In the discussers opinion there is a wide range of

Rodriguez,M.E., R18.7.6.1 370

Yoshioka and Sekine 1991 is the only reference that

strength vs 3 fc and extend from the column

The proposed design can require smaller amount of

Design drift ratio, DRu

18.14.5 of ACI 318-14

Design drift ratio, DRu

Replace Properties to be used for design with

WWR can be wrapped around the longitudinal bars

Вам также может понравиться