• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Community Reputation

18 Good

1 Follower

About dik

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 06/13/47

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
  • Occupation
    Structural Engineer
  • Expert in
    Actions on Structures
  • CV
    Dik has in excess of 45 years of practical engineering experience, functioning as a structural analyst/designer, project engineer, project manager, and consultant. Dik has gained an extensive knowledge in the field of parking structures encompassing planning, design and restoration, has become familiar with a wide variety of materials of construction and the related building sciences involved, including seismic analysis, and has become well versed in the preparation, interpretation and application of specifications including a working knowledge of construction contracts.

    Experience encompasses the design of concrete, steel and wood structures, electrical sub-station structures, pre-stressed concrete structures, storage tanks, tunnels, lifting devices, crane runways, retaining walls, and fall protection systems. Design experience includes both the use and programming of Finite Element Analysis (FEA) methods.

    Dik has a good working knowledge of other engineering discipline design requirements and design documents including: general arrangement drawings, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) schematics and project specifications.

    Dik has also provided numerous forensic reports to engineers, lawyers and insurance companies and has testified as an expert witness on numerous occasions.

Recent Profile Visitors

683 profile views
  1. Just a caution... I have one of these and use MasterFormat (a North American standard specification format) as an overall guide with sub-directories in each of the sections. Over the years, I've filed thousands of articles ( and at times it is difficult to find something I'm looking for. About 30 years of accumulation and also currently at 36,172 Files, 2,693 Folders and takes up 43.4 GB (46,680,927,418 bytes)). Another problem is that some of the information is 'dated' and that there are more current articles on various websites. Dik
  2. Reinis: I didn't respond to his picture because I didn't know what the numbers represented... and I don't have Eurocode data... a discussion is all I could offer. Dik
  3. I generally use the 'U' bar as a stirrup/tie... and the smaller bending radius should be adequate... generally for 10M, 15M, and 20M bars... and, not had any difficulties... If bar is welded, then usually spec 400W reinforcing which is weldable and is capable of being bent to a tighter radius, but not smaller than a stirrup or tie radius. If the cross bar is welded, then all reinf has to be weldable; this carries a bit of a premium cost. Failure of hooked bars is not normally a 'crushing' failure of the concrete, but is caused by the rebar 'straightening' out. I'm not sure about the overall effect of the welded cross bar... it doesn't hurt. Dik
  4. The first radius for the dowel to the wall would be a larger inside bend diameter and would be for a standard hook. The bending radius for the 'U' bar would be considered as a tie and would be the smaller bend diameter. This inside bend diameter varies with the reinforcing bar diameter. Unfortunately, I've used all my space for uploading pictures, else, I would send you a table for the various inside diameters (applicable in North America). Bar diameters, steel yield strength, and bar sizes may vary between North America and Europe and the Eurocode may have different prescribed inside bend diameters. Dik
  5. In North America, stirrups and main steel hooks have different bending radii, independent of force. Dik
  6. and the corbel can be designed using a strut and tie approach...
  7. should add that the benefit of using T-beam design is more appropriate for beams with greater flexural reinforcement ratios. For small amounts of reinforcing, the depth of the flexural compression zone does not reduce very much for T-beams and the amount of reinforcing steel required does not diminish by much. The use of a T-beam also has an impact on short and long term deflections. Dik
  8. Not familiar with this... do you have a source or authority? Dik
  9. Soloman and dlnunes: Thanks for the 'like'; are you aware of other reasons? I'll check at the office and see if there are other reasons. Dik
  10. A couple of reasons... thicker material cools more slowly and the steel normalises a little and also thinner material has a greater distortion in rolling and is 'cold worked' a little more. There may be other reasons, and someone with a metallurgical background can fill in the blanks. Dik
  11. Agree about the tensile stresses... some of my first work as an engineer was related to failure of amalgams secured to teeth with steel pins. I met a dentist in the student union building at the University and after a little chat asked what he was studying. He was investigating the failure of amalgam fillings. I asked him what the material was like and he said it had a high compressive strength and a low tensile strength, very much like concrete. I asked him if it could be a tensile fatigue failure generated by the tensile stresses at the bearing of the amalgam and the steel pin. Did some FEM models using a 3D FEM program I had written and then we did additional studies using plastic and polarised light. Was fun... Reinforcing is another issue for bearing. The ACI and CSA codes allow the increase in bearing stress just due to the confining nature of the loaded concrete with a small area loading a large area of concrete. Dik
  12. Unless you really need the compression steel for either flexural capacity or for limiting long/short term deflection it is not common to include its contribution (with the exception of forensic work, where it may be an issue). There are numerous engineering texts that provide an analysis of a doubly reinforced section. Dik
  13. I'm way past the limit and don't know how I got there; I cannot remove uploads to free up some space. Dik
  14. Can you find more recent publications? Unless these papers are exemplary, they are in excess of 30 years old. Dik
  15. Reinis: ACI and CSA codes allow for an increase in bearing capacity based on the overall concrete area and the area loaded; this is independent of the steel reinforcing. Dik