• KCI Concrete Journal
• /
• 제11권3호
• /
• pp.45-52
• /
• 1999

A Computer-based iterative method is provided for the calculation of minimum thickness values for one-way slabs to satisfy the maximum permissible limits given in the ACI Building Code. An algorithm includes the effects of cracking and time-dependent effects due to creep and shrinkage. Comparison of the calculated minimum thickness values with the current ACI limits is conducted to investigate limitations of the current tabulated minimum thickness. which are constant to a range of design conditions.

• 콘크리트학회논문집
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.365-376
• /
• 2011

현행 콘크리트구조설계기준(2007)은 콘크리트 구조물의 설계에 적용하는 콘크리트의 압축응력 분포로 ACI 318의 등가 직사각형 응력 분포를 규정하고 있다. 단면의 휨강도 해석에는 등가 직사각형 응력 분포가 충분하겠지만, 성능 중심 설계의 한계 상태 검증에는 실제와 가까운 압축응력-변형률 관계가 필요하다. 또 등가 직사각형 응력 분포는 고강도 콘크리트 기둥의 휨강도 해석에 비안전측의 결과를 준다는 것이 알려져 있으므로, 이를 대신하는 새로운 응력 분포 모델이 필요하다. 이 연구에서는 Eurocode와 일본 토목학회의 설계기준에서 채택하고 있는 포물선-직선 형상의 새로운 모델을 제안하였다. 이 응력 분포 모델은 이 연구에서 수행된 압축응력 분포 실험과 타 연구자들의 실험 결과를 분석하여 도출된 것으로서, 보통 강도뿐만 아니라 고강도 콘크리트를 포함한 것이다. 제안 모델의 특성은 미국 ACI 318, 캐나다 CSA, 유럽의 Eurocode, 일본 토목학회 설계기준의 응력 분포 모델과 함께 실험 결과와 비교하여 정리하였다.

• 한국콘크리트학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국콘크리트학회 2005년도 추계 학술발표회 제17권2호
• /
• pp.255-258
• /
• 2005

The current ACI design code does not take into account the contribution of concrete for the torsional moment of reinforced concrete(RC) beams subjected to pure torsion. This code is not capable of evaluating the inter-effects between concrete and torsional reinforcement on the torsional resistance of the RC beams. In this study, 9 RC beams subjected to pure torsion were tested. The main parameter of the beams was the amount of torsional reinforcement and the angle of twist. Test results indicated that the current ACI code over-estimated the torsional strength of RC beams that had larger amount of torsional reinforcement.

• 콘크리트학회지
• /
• 제15권6호
• /
• pp.64-69
• /
• 2003

• 콘크리트학회지
• /
• 제7권3호
• /
• pp.164-174
• /
• 1995

ACI규준에 의하여 설계된 철근콘크리트 보의 휨보강의 신뢰성을 분석하였다. 분석된 결과를 기존의 연구와 비교하였다. 인장철근비가 변함에 따라 일관된 신뢰성이 보장되지 못하고 부적합하게 변하는 것으로 분석되었다. 규준의 최대철근비 조항에 적합하게 설계된 보라도 취성파괴가 매우 높은 것으로 분석되었다. 특히 국내의 철근콘트리트구조물에서는 이러한 현상이 두드러지는 것으로 분석되었다. 이와 같은 현상의 원인을 규명하였고 그 대책을 제시하였다.

• 한국건축시공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건축시공학회 2017년도 춘계 학술논문 발표대회
• /
• pp.200-201
• /
• 2017

Generally, a lot of reinforcements are used in nuclear power plant concrete structures, and it may cause several potential problems when concrete is poured. Because of the congestion caused by hooked bars, embedded materials, and other reinforcements, it is too difficult to pour concrete into structural member joint area. The purpose of this study is to change ACI 349 Code for using the large-size(57mm) and high-strength(Gr.80) headed deformed bars instead of standard hooked bars in nuclear power plant concrete structures in order to solve the congestion problems.

• 한국건축시공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건축시공학회 2019년도 추계 학술논문 발표대회
• /
• pp.110-111
• /
• 2019

In ACI 318-19 published recently, the conditions and development length equation to use the headed deformed bars were changed considerably. Although the use of the larger-diameter(No.14 and 18) headed deformed bars isn't yet permitted, the use of the high strength(80,000psi) headed deformed bars is permitted and the effect of bar-diameter($d_b$) on the development length is increased considerably. Therefore, structures using larger-diameter headed deformed bars will be expected to be affected by this code change. We will study the effect of the code change on the development design and find out the design optimization method to minimize the effect of the changed conditions and development length equation.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• 제32권6호
• /
• pp.705-724
• /
• 2009

The two major widely used building design code documents of reinforced concrete structures are the ACI 318-05 and Eurocode for the Design of Concrete Structures EC2. Therefore, a thorough comparative analysis of the provisions of these codes is required to confirm their validity and identify discrepancies in either code. In this context, provisions of flexural computations would be particularly attractive for detailed comparison. The provisions of safety concepts, design assumptions, cross-sectional moment capacity, ductility, minimum and maximum reinforcement ratios, and load safety factors of both the ACI 318-05 and EC2 is conducted with parametric analysis. In order to conduct the comparison successfully, the parameters and procedures of EC2 were reformatted and defined in terms of those of ACI 318-05. This paper concluded that although the adopted rationale and methodology of computing the design strength is significantly different between the two codes, the overall EC2 flexural provisions are slightly more conservative with a little of practical difference than those of ACI 318-05. In addition, for the limit of maximum reinforcement ratio, EC2 assures higher sectional ductility than ACI 318-05. Overall, EC2 provisions provide a higher safety factor than those of ACI 318-05 for low values of Live/Dead load ratios. As the ratio increases the difference between the two codes decreases and becomes almost negligible for ratios higher than 4.

• 한국건축시공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건축시공학회 2017년도 추계 학술논문 발표대회
• /
• pp.137-138
• /
• 2017

Generally, a lot of reinforcements are used in nuclear power plant concrete structures in order to improve the structural safety, but it may cause several potential problems due to the overcrowded reinforcement, such as the degradation of concrete quality, the construction delay and the increase of construction cost. In order to resolve these problems, structural test researches and code change studies on using high-strength reinforcement (Gr.80) in unclear power plant structures are under way, and there is good progress in code change of ASM BPVC.III.2 and ACI 349. This purpose of this study is to review the code change status ASM BPVC.III.2, ACI 349 under way to use the high-strength reinforcement in nuclear power plant structures. Also I will introduce the design optimization of NPP structures with high-strength reinforcements in order to maximize the effect and minimize the problem when using the high-strength reinforcements in NPP structures.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• 제48권4호
• /
• pp.467-477
• /
• 2013

Municipalities in the United Arab Emirates approve reinforced concrete design of building structures to follow either the ACI 318 or the BS 8110 code. Since the requirements of these codes are different from each, there is a need to compare the structural demand in the two codes. The main objective of this study is to compare the design requirements of the ACI 318 code with the BS 8110 code for the flexural, shear and axial compression limit states. The load factors and load combinations in the two codes are also compared. To do so, a large number of cross-sections with different geometries, material properties, and reinforcement ratios are analyzed following the procedures in the two codes. The relevant factored load combinations in the two codes are also investigated for a wide range of live-to-dead load ratios and for various wind-to-dead load ratios. The study showed that the differences between the design capacities in the ACI 318 and BS 8110 codes are minor for flexure, moderate for axial compression, and major for shear. Furthermore, the factored load combinations for dead load, live load and wind in the two codes yield minor-to-moderate differences, depending on the live-to-dead load ratio and intensity of wind.