Online software makes it simple to create, share, and price projects. Efficiency - Pre-stamped engineering letters available in most states.UL 2703 system eliminates separate module grounding components. Safety - All components evaluated for superior structural performance.Place it anywhere along the span (except the outside cantilever). The BOSS eliminates restrictions around splice locations. The built-in bonding spring has teeth that bite into rail, creating a connection that meets all UL standards. No assembly, tools, or hardware required. The BOSS (Bonded Structural Splice) provides a strong, bonded connection for XR Rails. For Free.IronRidge, BOSS (Bonded Structural Splice) XR1000, Tool-Less Bonding Splice, Mill, Qty. Therefore wastage occurred due to lapping is (3.05m/12m)*100% = 25.42% Length of steel bar per floor is : 3.2m + 1.275m = 4.475mįor a 12metres steel bar, two nos of 4.475metres length bar could be prepared.īalance: 12metres –4.475metres –4.475metres = 3.05metresīy adopting a 6m bar for coupler joint. of laps: x 100% = 48%Īssuming floor height of 3.2m and lap length of 1.275m Apart from that, there are many other savings which can be anticipated such as Ħ meters length will be most ideal for joining and this would result in reduction of no. But is the perception that mechanical splices cost more than lap splices a reality? By using couplers, contractors can be more cost efficient, able to achieve from 20-50% of cost savings compared to lap splicing. Mechanical splices will significantly reduce this congestion.Īlthough the advantages of mechanical splices are well recognized, a major concern has been their high cost for applications where the codes permit the use of lap splices. Laps effectively double the steel to concrete ratio, and the resulting congestion can restrict the flow and distribution of larger aggregate particles and limit the effectiveness of vibration. This cost savings can be particularly significant for jobs requiring expensive epoxy- coated or galvanized bars, since building codes require up to 50% longer splice laps for these bars than for standard rebars.Ī common complaint of concrete placing crews is that they can’t get the concrete through the rebar cages. Mechanical splicing does away with the tedious calculations needed to determine proper lap lengths and the potential calculation errors.īecause mechanical splices do not overlap, less rebar is used, reducing some of the material costs. Mechanical splices do not rely on the concrete for load transfer and therefore maintain the structural integrity.ģ) Elimination of lap splice calculations Since lap splices transfer load through the surrounding concrete, when the concrete is gone, the lap splice in effect has failed. In coastal regions, rebar corrosion can produce concrete delamination and spalling. In seismic applications, mechanical splices maintain structural integrity when bars are stressed beyond yield, allowing the predictable formation of plastic hinges.Ģ) No reliance on concrete for load transfer Therefore the performance of the system is assured throughout the strain-hardening region where plastic deformations occur. To use splices in tensile regions, they must be able to develop the full strength of the rebar and not create a weak point. Mechanical splices maintain load path continuity of the reinforcement, independent of the condition or existence of the concrete. Mechanical splices offer builders the following benefits: Today, a range of mechanical splices are available to ensure that a precise, reliable connection can be made quicker and easier. They are more reliable than lap splices because they do not depend on concrete for load transfer. Mechanical splices join rebar end-to-end, providing many of the advantages of a continuous piece of rebar. Mechanical splices are mechanical connections between two pieces of rebar that enable the bars to behave in a manner similar to continuous lengths of rebar. Continuing research, more demanding designs in concrete, new materials and the development of composite materials have forced designers to consider alternatives to lap splicing, which is mechanical splices. However, there has been a shift in recent years. Lap splicing, which requires the overlapping of two parallel bars, has long been accepted as an effective, economical splicing method. In either case, rebar installers end up with two or more pieces of steel that must be spliced together. The required length of a bar may be longer than the stock length of steel, or the bar may be too long to be delivered conveniently. In almost all reinforced-concrete structures, rebars must be spliced. Lapping of rebars has long been considered an effective, economical splicing method, but today’s more demanding concrete designs are forcing builders to consider alternatives.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |