Some Mooted Questions in Reinforced Concrete Design - American Society of Civil Engineers, Transactions, Paper - No. 1169, Volume LXX, Dec. 1910 by Edward Godfrey
page 11 of 176 (06%)
page 11 of 176 (06%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
saddle, and the rod will be like the cable of a suspension span. The
concrete could be in separate blocks with vertical joints, and still the load would be carried safely. By end anchorage is not meant an inch or two of embedment in concrete, for an iron vise would not hold a rod for its full value by such means. Neither does it mean a hook on the end of the rod. A threaded end with a bearing washer, and a nut and a lock-nut to hold the washer in place, is about the only effective means, and it is simple and cheap. Nothing is as good for this purpose as plain round rods, for no other shape affords the same simple and effective means of end connection. In a line of beams, end to end, the rods may be extended into the next beam, and there act to take the top-flange tension, while at the same time finding anchorage for the principal beam stress. The simplicity of this design is shown still further by the absence of a large number of little pieces in a beam box, as these must be held in their proper places, and as they interfere with the pouring of the concrete. It is surprising that this simple and unpatented method of design has not met with more favor and has scarcely been used, even in tests. Some time ago the writer was asked, by the head of an engineering department of a college, for some ideas for the students to work up for theses, and suggested that they test beams of this sort. He was met by the astounding and fatuous reply that such would not be reinforced concrete beams. They would certainly be concrete beams, and just as certainly be reinforced. Bulletin 29 of the University of Illinois Experiment Station contains a |
|