January 2010

Reprinted from Concrete International with permission of American Concrete Institute

Layering
Reinforcing Bars

M any walls and slabs are reinforced with a single

curtain of reinforcing bars comprising two
orthogonal layers. An example of a two-layer curtain is
while maintaining the two-layer arrangement. In heavy
industrial and nuclear construction, however, it may be
impractical to increase the bar size. So, three- or four-
Curtain A in Fig. 1. Thicker walls or slabs are usually layer curtains (Curtains B and C in Fig. 1, respectively)
reinforced with a two-layer curtain at each face. may be needed.
From the perspectives of detailing and installation,
a two-layer curtain is the most desirable. In many Issues and concerns
structures, if structural requirements call for increased General
reinforcement area, the bar size can be increased When designing multiple-layer curtains such as Cur-
tains B and C in Fig. 1, there are several issues to consider:
 Clear spacing for parallel reinforcement must meet the
requirements of Section 7.6.1 of ACI 318-08 (clear
spacing ≥ db or 1 in.). Normally, when using multiple-
layer curtains (three or more layers), the bar would
likely be at least a No. 8 bar and, thus, the 1 in.
(25 mm) dimension would not control;
 The nominal maximum size of coarse aggregate must
comply with the limitations in Section 3.3.2 of ACI
DETAILING CORNER 318-08;
Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B,
 The same bar size should be used in each direction to
Details of Concrete Reinforcement—
avoid installation errors;
Constructibility, has developed forums
 Bars should be placed at a consistent spacing or using
dealing with constructibility issues
multiples of a given spacing to simplify reinforcement
for reinforced concrete. Staff at the
placing; and
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
 Staggering the bar spacing between parallel layers
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a
should be avoided as this can effectively halve the
regular series of articles.
clear spacing between bars (see Fig. 2(a)).
It should also be noted that using curtains with more
than the normal two layers will cause spatial issues
that can affect concrete cover and constructibility at wall
corners, staggered lap splices, and slab top steel over
intersecting beams.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 Wall corners
When multiple-layer curtains of
reinforcing bars are required, a
common problem area is the corner
region of two intersecting walls. In
walls with typical two-layer cur-
tains, there is usually space avail-
able to maneuver the bars to make
them fit. With three- or four-layer
curtains, however, bar placement
becomes much more difficult. If the
wall curtains are preassembled, it
becomes very challenging to get the
inner horizontal or diagonal corner
bars in place. When the wall
curtains are site-built (“stick” built
Fig. 1: Multi-layer reinforcing bar curtains: (a) two-layer; (b) three-layer; and (c) four- in place), the placer can encounter
layer sequencing difficulties when
installing the reinforcing bars. As
illustrated in Fig. 3, the heavily
reinforced thick walls (for example,
4 to 6 ft [1.2 to 1.8 m] thick) present
difficulties in placing the corner
bars, and sequencing the bar
placement is critical.
To assist in placing the curtains of
reinforcement in the corner shown in
Fig. 2: Bars in parallel layers: (a) staggered; and (b) not staggered Fig. 3, note that the horizontal bars
(shown in black) in all the layers are
straight. To provide continuity in the
outer layers of reinforcement, corner
bars (shown in red) are lap spliced to
the horizontal bars. For the inner
layers, the horizontal bars are lap
spliced to L-shaped bars (shown in
blue). Finally, diagonal bars (shown
in green) are used in the corner to
provide enhanced moment capacity
at the joint.
Assuming the preassembled
reinforcement curtains shown in
Fig. 3 would be erected “from the
outside inward,” the sequence of
placement could be as follows:
1. The outside layers would be
erected first, either as stand-alone
cages and set in place or erected
in place;
2. The corner bars (red) would be
placed and lap spliced to the ends
of the horizontal bars in the
Fig. 3: Wall intersection with four- and six-layer curtains outside layers;

2 Concrete International | January 2010

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
3. The inside layers would be placed
next, using methods similar to
those used for placement of the
outside layers;
4. Next, the L-shaped bars (blue)
would be lap spliced to the
horizontal bars in the inside
layers; and
5. Lastly, the diagonal bars (green)
would be placed and tied to the
horizontal bars in the outside
layers.

Staggered lap splices

Staggering lap splices in members Fig. 4: Staggered lap splices of multiple layers at a construction joint (CJ) (1 in. = 25.4 mm,
containing layered reinforcing bars 1 ft = 305 mm, No. 11 bar = No. 36M)
can cause problems. A common
situation occurs when footing or mat
slab reinforcement passes through a
construction joint. To have access to
the lowest steel layer for lap splicing,
the lowest layer must project past
the layer immediately above. For
large bar sizes, this distance can be
significant. If a contractor is unaware
of this condition and is excavating
just ahead of concrete work for a
footing (sometimes necessary during
winter construction of large mat
foundations), the excavation may not
be cut back far enough to properly
place the bars. In the specific
example illustrated in Fig. 4, the Fig. 5: Four-layer curtains in wall: (a) continuous; and (b) lap spliced
excavation would have to extend at
least 23 ft (7 m) past the construction
joint (CJ). This could cause project
delays, as the excavation would
require widening prior to bar
placement.
Preassembly of wall curtains
with staggered horizontal lap splices
also requires special attention. This
situation is illustrated in Fig. 5, where
Fig. 5(a) shows the layers as continu-
ous curtains and Fig. 5(b) shows the
layers being lap spliced. As indicated
in Fig. 5(b), vertical bars must be left
off the curtains at the extended
portion of the stagger location during
erection. This is required to prevent
doubling-up of the vertical bars in Fig. 6: Layering of beam and slab reinforcing bars can create sequencing issues. Structural
drawings should designate layer locations and concrete covers (1 in. = 25.4 mm; No. 8 and
the curtain. No. 4 bars = No. 25M and No. 13M bars)
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation Detailing Corner 3
Slab top steel over Design Considerations
intersecting beams Considering the overall reinforcing bar diameter per Table 1
Layering of slab top steel at beam intersections can and planning the bar layering sequence will help avoid many
create constructibility challenges for the detailer and spatial problems associated with multiple-layer curtains.
placer. The sequencing and layering of beam and slab Designers should consider using larger bar sizes, higher
top steel creates serious congestion issues and makes strength steel, closer bar spacing, or some combination of
maintaining concrete cover difficult, as illustrated in these to avoid reinforcing bar curtains with more than two
Fig. 6. The structural designer should consider this layers of bars.
situation and perhaps note the layer sequencing on the
structural drawings. Moreover, the structural drawings Table 1:
should clearly designate which beam top steel layer is Diameter of reinforcing bars outside deformations
uppermost, and indicate the
concrete cover for the various top bar layers. Approximate diameter outside
Although various sequences are possible for placing Bar size, deformations,
the reinforcement shown in Fig. 6, one possibility is: No. (SI No.) in. (mm)
1. Erect the steel reinforcement for the primary beams 3 (10) 7/16 (11)
(bottom bars, stirrups, top bars) as stand-alone cages 4 (13) 9/16 (14)
and set in place;
2. Place the stirrups (bottom 5 (16) 11/16 (17)
pieces of two-piece stirrups) 6 (19) 7/8 (22)
and the bottom bars for the secondary beams; 7 (22) 1 (25)
3. Place the bottom bars for the slab (not depicted in the
8 (25) 1-1/8 (29)
view shown in Fig. 6 for clarity);
4. Place the top bars and top pieces of the two-piece 9 (29) 1-1/4 (32)
(cap) stirrups for the secondary beams; and 10 (32) 1-7/16 (37)
5. Finally, place the top bars for
11 (36) 1-5/8 (41)
the slab.
If the beams in Fig. 6 are perimeter beams, note that the 14 (43) 1-7/8 (48)
structural integrity reinforcement requirements of ACI 18 (57) 2-1/2 (64)
318-08, Section 7.13, must also be followed.

Thanks to Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315 member Richard H. Birley

for providing the information in this article.

Selected for reader interest by the editors.

Reprinted from Concrete International, Volume 32, Issue 1, January, 2010, pp 53–56. ©2010 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute American Concrete Institute

933 North Plum Grove Road 38800 Country Club Dr.
Schaumburg, IL 60173 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
847-517-1200 • www.crsi.org 248-848-3700 • www.concrete.org

4 Concrete International | January 2010

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 March 2010

Reprinted from Concrete International with permission of American Concrete Institute

Wide Beam Stirrup

Configurations

A s beam-slab floor systems become shallower, wide

reinforced concrete beams are being used to directly
carry applied loads or serve as transfer girders in the
A wide beam will likely have a number of longitudinal
tension reinforcing bars distributed across the cross section.
Wide beams can also have high shear demands, necessitating
framing scheme. Making beams wider than the column the use of stirrups to contribute to the shear capacity.
width is also a key constructibility concept to avoid Proper stirrup detailing in these members is imperative to
interference between longitudinal beam corner bars and ensure that the distributed longitudinal flexure reinforcement
column corner bars. In this discussion, a wide reinforced and stirrups are fully effective and behave efficiently.
concrete beam has a width bw that exceeds its effective Wide beam shear behavior has been investigated by
depth d. Leonhardt and Walther;1 Anderson and Ramirez;2 and
Lubell, Bentz, and Collins.3 These studies have shown that
locating the stirrups solely around the perimeter of the beam
core is not efficient in beams under high shear demand.
When viewed as a truss, the internal diagonal compressive
struts need to be equilibrated at the internal truss joints.
This requires a vertical stirrup leg in close proximity to
an internal longitudinal bar used to resist flexure.
Based on previous and current test results, Lubell, Bentz,
and Collins summarized some simple design guidelines for
DETAILING CORNER transverse spacing of vertical stirrup legs in a wide beam:
Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B,  Transverse stirrup leg spacing sw should be the lesser
Details of Concrete Reinforcement— of d or 24 in. (600 mm); but
Constructibility, has developed forums  The governing sw should be halved when the nominal
dealing with constructibility issues shear strength Vn exceeds lb
for reinforced concrete. Staff at the ( N), where fc′ is the specified concrete
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute strength in psi (MPa).
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a Figure 1, which is a reproduction of Fig. 10 from
regular series of articles. Reference 3, illustrates how large transverse stirrup leg
spacing can significantly reduce the full shear capacity of
a wide beam. When the stirrup legs are concentrated
around the perimeter of the wide beam, the shear
capacity is reduced, as the shear forces in the beam
interior must propagate to the beam exterior to be
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation equilibrated by the vertical stirrup legs.
 Fig. 1: Influence of transverse stirrup leg
spacing on the shear capacity.3 Beams with
perimeter stirrups only (as shown in the
lower right portion of the plot) have
capacities that are well below the strengths
calculated using ACI 318-08, while beams
with well-distributed stirrup legs (as shown
in the upper left portion of the plot) have
shear capacities exceeding values calcu-
lated using ACI 318-08

Design to Fabrication Alternate Configurations

Nesting vertical stirrup legs in a wide beam interior Figures 3 and 4 show two examples of suitable
is clearly good detailing practice to ensure this shear alternate designs that will ease reinforcing bar place-
behavior, but detailing of the separate stirrup compo- ment for either preassembly or in-place installation. In
nents can be a fabrication nightmare if done improperly— both cases, a large, open stirrup is detailed to the
the stirrup detail must be buildable. When designing full net width within the beam, and a stirrup cap—
stirrups in beams of various widths and depths, the a top horizontal bar with a 135-degree stirrup hook at
configuration of the stirrups can either simplify or hinder one end and a 90-degree stirrup hook at the other—
the placement of the reinforcing steel. With the growing will close the detail. The full-width stirrup will help
trend of using preassembled beam reinforcement, compli- maintain the correct concrete cover and ease
ance with required concrete cover and ease of placement installation after preassembly. Moreover, this full-
needs to be addressed at the design level. Figure 2 shows width, closed stirrup configuration is important if the
a commonly used stirrup configuration for a wide beam. wide beam is subjected to significant torsional forces;
While it’s simple for the designer to specify three closed the perimeter stirrup detail confines the beam core,
stirrups with evenly spaced legs in the beam stirrup set, but more importantly, it confines the corner bars.
such a configuration presents two problems: ACI 318-08,4 Section 11.5.4, gives additional information
 No stirrup is the full net width of the beam (gross beam on torsional reinforcement detailing.
width minus concrete cover on each side). This forces To facilitate the interior stirrup leg placement,
the reinforcing bar placer to measure the overall width two configurations can be contemplated. Both
of the stirrup set and make sure the stirrups are configurations will allow the aforementioned
securely assembled to maintain the necessary width. recommended transverse stirrup leg spacing to be
Preassembly of the beam cage and hoisting with a maintained. Figure 3 shows a U-stirrup pair with
crane may cause the net width to change slightly, identical dimensions and 135-degree hooks. This
increasing the risk of inadequate side concrete cover; configuration simplifies the detail by limiting the
and stirrup piece types required on the job site. Figure 4
 If wide beam reinforcement is “stick-built” in place, shows a smaller-width hooked U-stirrup nested in a
the closed, one-piece stirrups make it difficult to place larger-width hooked U-stirrup in the beam interior.
all of the reinforcing steel into the beam. Long, large With the open-top design of the stirrups, the placer
size longitudinal bars are especially difficult to can load all of the longitudinal reinforcing bars from
maneuver into the stirrups, so productivity is signifi- the top and avoid tedious maneuvering of the bars.
cantly reduced. After the longitudinal bars have been installed, the
stirrup cap can be installed to create closed stirrup
configurations.

2 Concrete International | March 2010

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Review of Code Requirements
For the benefit of the designer, the following is a list of
important ACI 318 requirements concerning beam stirrup
configurations:
 Transverse reinforcement for perimeter beams and
beams with torsion must be closed, one-piece or
closed, two-piece stirrups (Sections 7.13.2.3 and 11.5.4.1);
 Transverse reinforcement must be as close to the
compression and tension surfaces of the beam as Fig. 2: Beam stirrup configuration with three closed stirrups
distributed across the beam width
concrete cover requirements and proximity of other
reinforcement permits (Section 12.13.1);
 Ends of stirrup caps and U-shaped stirrups must be
anchored with a standard hook around a longitudinal
bar (Section 12.13.2.1). No. 6, 7, and 8 (No. 19, 22, and
25) stirrups with yield strengths exceeding 40 ksi
(280 MPa) must also have a minimum embedment
between the midheight of the beam and the outside end
of the hook (Section 12.13.2.2 defines the embedment);
 Between anchored ends of a stirrup, each bend in the
stirrup must enclose a longitudinal bar (Section 12.13.3);
Fig. 3: An alternate configuration consisting of a single U-stirrup
 Pairs of U-stirrups or ties (in either case, with no end (with 135-degree hooks) across the net width of the beam, two
hooks) can be placed to form a closed unit, but they identical U-stirrups (each with 135-degree hooks) distributed
must have minimum laps of 130% of the bar development across the beam interior, and a stirrup cap
length, or the bars must meet certain size and strength
restrictions and the splices must extend over the full
available depth of the member (Section 12.13.5);
 When hoops are required for confinement, every
corner and alternate longitudinal bar on the perimeter
of the section must have lateral support provided
by a corner of a stirrup or tie. Additional restrictions
are placed on the tie configuration and spacing (Sec-
tions 7.10.5.3 and 21.5.3.3); and
 A seismic hoop can comprise a U-stirrup with seismic Fig. 4: A second alternate configuration consisting of a single
U-stirrup across the net width of the beam, two smaller-width
hooks closed by a top crosstie (in effect, a stirrup U-stirrups nested in the beam interior, and a stirrup cap
cap with a minimum 3 in. [76 mm] extension on the
135-degree hook). Consecutive crossties must have their
90-degree hooks at opposite sides of the beam. If there is
a slab on only one side of the beam, then the 90-degree
hooks must be placed on that side (Section 21.5.3.6).
References
Summary 1. Leonhardt, F., and Walther, R., “The Stuttgart Shear Tests
Wherever possible, the designer should use beam 1961,” Translation No. 111, Cement and Concrete Association
stirrup configurations with a large outer stirrup. The large (CCA), London, UK, 1964, 134 pp.
outer stirrup will allow the side concrete cover to be 2. Anderson, N.S., and Ramirez, J.A., “Detailing of Stirrup Rein-
maintained, and the open, two-piece configuration will forcement,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 86, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1989,
allow accurate and efficient installation of the longitudinal pp. 507-515.
reinforcing bars. A separate stirrup cap can be used 3. Lubell, A.S.; Bentz, E.C.; and Collins, M.P., “Shear Reinforcement
where needed for torsion or confinement. Spacing in Wide Members,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 106, No. 2,
Thanks to Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315 member Greg Birley and Mar.-Apr. 2009, pp. 205-214.
Neal Anderson of CRSI for providing the information in this article. 4. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary,” American Concrete
Selected for reader interest by the editors. Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 473 pp.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation Detailing Corner 3
 Reprinted from Concrete International, Volume 32, Issue 3, March 2010, pp 62–64. ©2010 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute American Concrete Institute

933 North Plum Grove Road 38800 Country Club Dr.
Schaumburg, IL 60173 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
847-517-1200 • www.crsi.org 248-848-3700 • www.concrete.org

4 Concrete International | March 2010

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 june 2010

Reprinted from Concrete International with permission of American Concrete Institute

Concrete Cover
at Rustications,
Drip Grooves,
and Formliners
C oncrete cover is defined as the distance between the
outermost surface of embedded reinforcement and
the closest outer surface of the concrete. Section 7.7 of
and providing a specified fire rating; these requirements
are contained in Section 721 of the International Building
Code.2 Concrete cover has been shown to provide
ACI 318-081 provides minimum concrete cover dimen- various structural benefits, including development
sions for reinforcement protection against weather length, but this issue is beyond the present discussion.
effects, primarily due to moisture. Minimum concrete For flat or single-plane formwork, providing the
cover dimensions are also necessary for fire protection proper cover is fairly straightforward considering
the appropriate tolerances. The issue becomes more
complex when considering architectural rustication,
reveals, or drip grooves on the concrete surface.
Architectural formliners further complicate the issue
because of the multiple amplitudes likely present on the
form surface. In all cases, the concrete cover to the
embedded reinforcing steel must be properly considered
on the concrete surface. This article examines these
concrete cover issues as they affect some basic structural
DETAILING CORNER elements.
Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B,
Details of Concrete Reinforcement—
Walls
Constructibility, has developed forums
If reveals or rustications run along the entire length or
dealing with constructibility issues
height of the wall, there should not be a problem with the
for reinforced concrete. Staff at the
concrete cover over the reinforcing steel. It is assumed
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
that the wall thickness does not include the rustication
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a
depth. A constant concrete cover is thus measured from
regular series of articles.
the inside of the reveal, as shown in Fig. 1(a).
When the rustication influences only a specific region
of the wall, there can be potential problems with the
specified minimum concrete cover, as illustrated in Fig. 1(b).
The designer should indicate or note on the design
drawings the proper reinforcing steel details in the
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 rustication area with information on the minimum
acceptable concrete cover. Two options typically exist
for this situation:
 Run the bars straight through the rustication area,
accepting the fact that less than the specified concrete
cover will be provided in this area (Fig. 1(b)); or
 Offset the reinforcing bars in the localized area to
maintain the specified concrete cover (Fig. 1(c)).
If the rustication area involves multiple small
square or rectangular sections, the configuration of
the reinforcing steel becomes more complex. If the
reinforcement must be offset to provide the proper
cover at each of these sections, then both the vertical
and horizontal steel must be offset. This presents
a significant detailing and placing challenge. If a
rustication area is located near an opening, the
issue becomes further complicated by the fact that
the trim steel (additional bars) around the opening
will have to be offset as well.
When a high percentage of the wall area has small
rustication areas, a third option becomes more viable for
the designer: treat the area as an opening and place an
inner layer of reinforcing steel at the rustication with the
proper clear cover. The inner reinforcing bar layer then
extends a lap length beyond the area in all directions
(Fig. 1(d)).
Fig. 1: Horizontal sections through walls with rustication: (a)
rustication considered; (b) rustication not considered; (c) Slabs
rustication considered using offset bars; and (d) rustication While not as significant as the cover at wall rustica-
considered using inner layer of bars
tions, the concrete cover at drip grooves or drip edges
along the edge of a slab soffit should also be consid-
ered. These grooves are generally formed with a piece

Fig. 3: Beam sections showing drip groove at bottom soffit: (a)

inadequate cover at drip; (b) shifting reinforcing cage to maintain
adequate cover at drip will cause top cover problems; and (c) to
Fig. 2: Slab with drip groove at edge of soffit: (a) offset bars used maintain adequate cover at all locations, stirrup sizes may need
to maintain cover at drip; and (b) relocated bars used to maintain to be changed. The designer must consider the effects of shifting
cover at drip or changing the stirrups on beam capacity

2 Concrete International | June 2010

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
of form chamfer strip or nominal 1 in. (25 mm) dimen- bottom to achieve the proper cover will decrease the
sion lumber strip nailed to the formwork deck near the concrete cover at the top (Fig. 3(b)). The only practical
slab edge. Usually, the required concrete cover can be solution is to measure the concrete cover from the drip
achieved by offsetting the bars crossing the groove (Fig. groove and detail the stirrups accordingly (Fig. 3(c)). This
2(a)). Alternatively, the transverse and longitudinal layers may impact the overall depth of the beam and should be
can perhaps be reversed and the affected reinforcing bar accounted for in design.
(open circle) can be moved away from the groove to
achieve the proper concrete cover (Fig. 2(b)). Formliners
Architectural formliners provide an inexpensive
Beams means of enhancing the visual characteristics of a
A drip groove or edge in a beam soffit oftentimes concrete surface. When formliners are used, the speci-
presents a concrete cover problem (Fig. 3(a)). Increasing fied concrete cover is generally measured from an
the concrete cover in the beam soffit when the beam steel interior working line, which represents the maximum
is placed isn’t feasible. Raising the stirrups from the protrusion of the formliner into the form. The project

RFI on wall corner joints for low levels of moment capacity in the wall and further
RFI 10-1: In the November 2009 Detailing Corner, I have detailing adjustments would be necessary for moderate or
concerns with two of the figures, Fig. 09-3.1(a) and (b) on high levels of moment capacity.
p. 56. Unlike Fig. 09-3.1(c), (a) and (b) will provide inad- To demonstrate the effect the reinforcement details
equate anchorage for the compressive strut that will form have on the moment capacity of a corner, Fig. 10-1.1
across the diagonal in the corner under a large opening presents various reinforcement details and their moment
moment. My concern is the lack of support for the capacity ratings, which were calculated as the actual
outward force component from the strut. The hooks need moment failure load divided by the calculated moment
to be turned into the joint, not turned into the adjacent capacity.1 As noted in the query, turning the hooks into
wall. The newly added diagonal bar helps, but not to the joint as well as adding the diagonal bar (Fig. 10-1.1(g))
anchor the strut. results in a moment capacity that exceeds the corner’s
calculated capacity.
Response: Point taken. The details shown in Fig. 09-3.1,
in which a diagonal bar was added in the corner, were Reference
meant as improved details of those that originally ap- 1. Nilsson, I.H.E., and Losberg, A., “Reinforced Concrete Corners
peared in Fig. 2 of the September 2009 Detailing Corner. and Joints Subjected to Bending Moment,” Journal of the
As was noted in RFI 09-3, the details shown were intended Structural Division, ASCE, V. 102, No. ST6, 1976, pp. 1229-1254.

Fig. 10-1.1: Efficiency ratings (quotient of measured capacity and calculated capacity)for different reinforcement details
(based on Reference 1)

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation Detailing Corner 3
 Form liner

Peak
Side cover
Fig. 4: Concrete wall cast using a formliner designed to simulate Fig. 5: View of formwork, formliner, and reinforcing showing side
a masonry wall (photo courtesy of Gewalt Hamilton Associates) cover measured to the peak of the formliner

drawings should be specific in the proper illustration

of the concrete clear cover with respect to the form- Design Considerations
liner. The concrete used to create the textured surface is It’s important for the design engineer to clearly show
considered “extra” and may need to be accounted rustications, reveals, and drip grooves on the design
for in dead load computations, depending on the drawings. Details must show that members have sufficient
relief depth. thickness or depth to give the reinforcing steel the proper
concrete cover but without compromising the design
Figure 4 shows an example of a wall cast using a requirements of the member.
formliner that provides a random ashlar masonry Thanks to Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315 member Greg Birley and
pattern. The “masonry joints” are formed by ribs in the Neal Anderson of CRSI for providing the information in this article.
formliner. Because they have the largest amplitude of
the features on the formliner, they set the interior Selected for reader interest by the editors.
working line of the wall. Figure 5 shows the reinforcing
steel placement in the wall. For simplicity, straight
lengths of vertical and horizontal wall bars were used. References
The wall thickness is based on the width from the 1. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
near side to back side interior working lines, and the Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary,” American Concrete
concrete cover is measured to the interior side of the Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2008, 473 pp.
working line. 2. “International Building Code,” International Code Council,
Washington, DC, 2006, 664 pp.

Reprinted from Concrete International, Volume 32, Issue 6, June 2010, pp 35–38. ©2010 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute American Concrete Institute

933 North Plum Grove Road 38800 Country Club Dr.
Schaumburg, IL 60173 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
847-517-1200 • www.crsi.org 248-848-3700 • www.concrete.org

4 Concrete International | June 2010

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 august 2010

Reprinted from Concrete International with permission of American Concrete Institute

Using Standees

A s structural engineers, we routinely design reinforced

concrete members to resist the required loads, and
we generate construction documents showing concrete
with the ACI Detailing Manual 1 or the CRSI Manual of
Standard Practice.2 Rarely, however, will we place any
explicit requirements on how reinforcing bars or bar
sections with the reinforcing bars in their final configurations. mats are to be supported, as these concerns are within
That is, we graphically depict the reinforcing bars as the domain of the contractor—means and methods.
embedded in the hardened concrete, with no formwork While polymer, wire, or precast concrete bar supports
or bar supports indicated. are commercially available for use in members up to
Although we don’t show bar supports on our details, 10 in. (250 mm) thick, reinforcing bar assemblies, known
our instructions in the general notes may require the as “standees,” are normally required for the support of
contractor to “Provide adequate bolsters, hi-chairs, or top mats of reinforcing bars in thick concrete members,
support bars to maintain specified clearances for the such as footings and slabs. Standees are readily available
entire length of all reinforcing bars.” Also, our specification as a standardized product up to 18 in. (457 mm) in height,
for concrete reinforcing (Division 3 of the project manual) but various sizes and configurations of standees have
will probably require that bars are supported in compliance also been used in thick mat footings as deep as 12 ft (3.7 m).

Standee Types
Figure 1 illustrates four common types of standees.
Bend Types 25 and 26 are found in Fig. 10, Typical Bar
Bends, in the ACI Detailing Manual.1 Bend Type 26
standees are the most commonly used. Shape 27 is a
modified Bend Type 26 used by some fabricators, especially
near slab edges. Note that all three of these standee types
are multiple-plane bent bars (that is, they do not lie flat)
DETAILING CORNER and thus are termed “special fabrication” in the industry.
Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B,
Shape S6 is used in some areas of the country and is a
Details of Concrete Reinforcement—
modified version of Bend Type S6 found in Fig. 10 of the
Constructibility, has developed forums
ACI Detailing Manual.1 The dimensions “A” and “G” on
dealing with constructibility issues
Shape S6 are specified by the detailer and are usually
for reinforced concrete. Staff at the
not the standard hook extension dimensions. This is a
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
single-plane bent bar, which can be bent on a standard
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a
tie bender. Legs A and G are then pulled apart in the
regular series of articles.
field, in a direction perpendicular to the original plane
of the legs, to create the desired height of the standee
similar to Bend Type 25. It’s important to note that the
detailer must properly dimension the “B” and “D” sides
so the standee height is correct once the legs are pulled
apart or splayed.
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 Support Issues
Table 1: Safety is a primary concern when
Suggested standee widths* (refer to Fig. 2) supporting top reinforcing steel—es-
pecially if the member depth is great
Finished bend enough to allow workers to move
Bar size diameter, D † Flat dimension, F Width, W within the space created between the
No. 3 (No. 10) 1.5 in. (40 mm) 2 in. (50 mm) 4 in. (100 mm) top and bottom layers. The design
of the support system for the top
No. 4 (No. 13) 2 in. (50 mm) 2 in. (50 mm) 5 in. (125 mm) steel must provide for a large margin
No. 5 (No. 16) 2.5 in. (65 mm) 2 in. (50 mm) 6 in. (150 mm) of safety, and many jurisdictions
require that systems with heights
No. 6 (No. 19) 4.5 in. (115 mm) 2 in. (50 mm) 8 in. (200 mm) exceeding 4 ft (1.2 m) be designed
No. 7 (No. 22) 5.25 in. (135 mm) 3 in. (75 mm) 10 in. (250 mm) and sealed by an engineer.
In addition to the weights of the
No. 8 (No. 25) 6 in. (155 mm) 4 in. (100 mm) 12 in. (305 mm) top mat, the concrete placing crew,
No. 9 (No. 29) 9.5 in. (240 mm) 4 in. (100 mm) 16 in. (410 mm) and the placing equipment, impact
effects of the concrete itself must be
No. 10 (No. 32) 10.75 in. (275 mm) 4 in. (100 mm) 18 in. (460 mm) considered in the design of supports.
No. 11 (No. 36) 12 in. (300 mm) 6 in. (150 mm) 21 in. (530 mm) Multiple layers of top bars require
close attention to the total load
*
Based approximately on the following formula: W = 2db + D + F
placed on each standee. The lateral
†
Finished bend diameters based on minimum diameters for ties, plus springback
stability of the top reinforcing steel
mat(s) is also a design consideration.
Some bar layouts will include a series
C of temporary horizontal strut bars
D D
D braced against the concrete formwork
C (assumed to be well braced itself).
D
H
C E These temporary bars are then
C E E
B
B removed or pushed inboard during
B B F
F
A concrete placement, thus maintain-
Shape S6
F Bend Type 26 Shape 27
G
ing concrete cover. Diagonal braces
Bend Type 25 Open (truss bars) are also tied between the
(All Shapes - Isometric Views)
top and bottom reinforcing mats to
Fig. 1: Common types of standees provide stability to the top mat
during placement.
While standees can be used to any
depth—provided they are properly
braced against lateral and twisting
movement—many engineers require
some other kind of support when the
support height exceeds about 6 ft
(1.8 m). Used scaffolding is commonly
used, as are special frames or trusses
made of welded reinforcing bars or
structural steel angles.

Manufacturing
Standees
There are no specified rules for
determining the reinforcing bar size
to be used in manufacturing a
Fig. 2: Flat length on a standee

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2 Concrete International | August 2010
 Scrap bar bracing, top layer
against formwork (as required) Top steel mat

Diagonal brace
around perimeter
Standee

Tie-bar, each way

midheight, tied
to standees

Bottom steel mat

Precast concrete bar supports

Fig. 3: Top steel mat support for generic raft foundation (elevation view)

standee. Many detailers select bar sizes based on their

past experience. A common industry rule-of-thumb is the Example Placement
standee bar size is about one size smaller than the bars to Figure 3 shows an example of a bar support system for a
be supported. This can be modified, of course, depending simple raft footing with two mats comprising orthogonal
on the spacing of the supported steel, the number of top layers of reinforcing bars. The bottom steel mat is
layers, and standee height. If an engineering design is supported on precast concrete blocks (dobies) spaced
performed, a column stability analysis on a standee leg about 2 to 3 ft (0.6 to 0.9 m) each way. The top layer is
would be appropriate. Regardless of the determination, supported on standees spaced about 3 to 5 ft (0.9 to 1.5 m)
it’s prudent to coordinate with the bar placer to be install- each way, depending on the self-weight of the top reinforcing
ing the reinforcement and bar support systems. steel mat. Because the standees are taller than 3 ft (0.9 m),
horizontal tie-bars are tied securely at the midheight of
The standee width should be sufficient to create a the standees in each direction; tie-bars are typically No. 5
suitable flat length along the top so the supported bar will (No. 16) bars, but can be larger if required. These bars
not have a tendency to roll off (Fig. 2). Table 1 provides a provide midheight stability for the vertical standee legs.
listing of suggested standee widths for reinforcing bar In this example, No. 5 (No. 16) diagonal braces are placed
sizes up to No. 11 (No. 36). around the foundation perimeter and are spaced to match
The length of each foot at the base of a standee, repre- the standees. Additional lateral support is shown at the
sented by dimensions “B” or “F” of Bend Types 25 and 26, top left of Fig. 3; short lengths of horizontal bars are
or Shape 27 in Fig. 1, depends on where the standee will be placed so they brace to the formwork.
positioned. If the standee will be supported on a concrete
blinding layer or a formed surface, the feet should be Summary
about the same length as the width dimension (dimension While Bend Type 26 is the most stable standee due to
D). Taller standees should have proportionately longer feet the load being vertical on the legs, its height is not
to ensure sufficient stability. adjustable; the same holds true for Shape 27. Because
If the standee will be supported on a bottom layer of both feet point in the same direction in Shape 27, it tends
reinforcing bars, each foot should be about 1.5 times to tip—the legs may need to be tied down. The tendency
the spacing of the supporting bars. This length allows to tip can be mitigated by alternating the direction of the
each foot to cross two support bars, thus providing legs from one standee to the next, if possible.
better stability. Because the added weight of the top Bend Type 25 and Shape S6 share the significant advan-
reinforcing steel will force the use of additional sup- tage of having an adjustable height, simply by spreading
ports for the bottom reinforcing bars, placing heavily or moving the legs closer together. Tall standees have a
loaded standees on the bottom reinforcing steel mat tendency to twist under heavy loading, however, so
should be avoided. lateral bracing should be used.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation Detailing Corner 3
 Bend Types 25 and 26, and Shape 27 are two-plane bent
bars and require special fabrication. Shape S6 is initially a
single-plane shape and can be bent on a standard tie bender.
Safety is of paramount importance when designing a
bar support system for heavy top mats of reinforcing
bars. Standees offer the most economical solution, but
care must be taken to consider all forces acting on them.
Standee spacing must be carefully determined to support
the dead loads, and bracing must be adequate to handle
all lateral forces.
Thanks to Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315 member Dick Birley for
providing the information in this article.

References
1. ACI Committee 315, ACI Detailing Manual, SP-66(04), American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2004, 165 pp.
2. CRSI Manual of Standard Practice, twenty-eighth edition,
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute, Schaumburg, IL, 2009, 144 pp.

Reprinted from Concrete International, Volume 32, Issue 8, August 2010, pp 52–54. ©2010 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute American Concrete Institute

933 North Plum Grove Road 38800 Country Club Dr.
Schaumburg, IL 60173 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
847-517-1200 • www.crsi.org 248-848-3700 • www.concrete.org

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
4 Concrete International | August 2010
 october 2010

Reprinted from Concrete International with permission of American Concrete Institute

Avoiding Ambiguous
Reinforcing
Bar Callouts
C onstruction drawing clarity is one of the most important
factors that contribute to a successful construction
project. A missing key piece of information, an unclear note,
design drawings or details shall contain: “Size and location
of all structural elements, reinforcement, and anchors.” The
licensed design professional must ensure that design
or a misunderstood detail could potentially add weeks to a requirements are clearly expressed in the structural
project and lead to thousands of dollars in extra costs. drawings so the contractor will be able to accurately
One vital class of information is the reinforcing bar interpret them for the structure being built. Unfortunately,
callout on the drawings. Callouts typically list the reinforc- some commonly used callouts for reinforcing bars can be
ing bar size along with the number of bars or the bar ambiguous.
spacing. ACI 318-08,1 Section 1.2.1 lists important informa-
tion that must be included in the design drawings, details, Concerns
and specifications. Sub-item (e) specifically requires that While a reinforcing bar callout on a structural drawing
may seem perfectly clear to the design engineer, it could
very well be interpreted in a completely different fashion
by another person. The contractor may be confused about
the intent of the callout, which will require clarification from
the designer and result in lost time in the field.

Example 1—Alternating bar lengths

Calling out the spacing for a series of bars with alternating
lengths seems to be a common source of confusion. For
DETAILING CORNER example, in Fig. 1(a), the designer has called for a series of top
Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B,
slab bars over a beam for negative moment reinforcement.
Details of Concrete Reinforcement—
Does the designer want No. 6 x 16 ft 0 in. at 12 in. and No. 6 x
Constructibility, has developed forums
14 ft 0 in. at 12 in. for a net spacing of 6 in. as shown in Fig.
dealing with constructibility issues
1(b)? Or, does the designer want a net spacing of 12 in. as
for reinforced concrete. Staff at the
shown in Fig. 1(c)? (Note: SI units are also shown on the details
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
and will not be repeated in the text.) Depending on the
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a
interpretations of the bar callout, the amount of placed steel
regular series of articles.
could be half or twice the amount intended by the designer.
For this case, if the callout had been No. 6 x 16 ft 0 in. +
No. 6 x 14 ft 0 in. ALT @ 12 in., it would be clear that the
design called for a net spacing of 12 in. However, if the
designer wanted to make the detail absolutely clear, the
callout should be as shown in Fig. 2; this figure shows
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 1: Callouts for alternate bar lengths: (a) the original detail; (b) one interpretation results in bars at 6 in. spacing; and (c) a second
interpretation results in bars at 12 in. spacing

(a)

Fig. 2: Suggested callout for alternate bar lengths (b)

Fig. 3: Callout for horizontal bars in wall: (a) the original detail;
and (b) one interpretation results in bars at an aggregate spacing
of 6 in.

The intent would seem to be that the horizontal bars

additional information, with the bar spacing between should be spaced at 12 in. on each face, for an aggregate
adjacent bars also depicted. spacing of 6 in., as shown in Fig. 3(b). In the actual
project, the designer intended for the bars to have an
Example 2—Staggered horizontal bars in aggregate spacing of 12 in., not 6 in. Figure 4 shows what
a wall the designer had actually meant for the design.
It’s common for horizontal bars in a wall to have the
same spacing on each face but with the bars on one face A less ambiguous callout would have been No. 4 Hor
offset by half a bar space. How this is called out can be EF @ 24 in. Stag. This would clearly indicate the spacing
ambiguous. In Fig. 3(a), taken from an actual project, the on each face to be 24 in., with an aggregate spacing of 12 in.
horizontal bars are called out as No. 4 Hor @ 12 in. EF An even clearer approach would be to augment the detail by
Stag (Hor is horizontal, EF is each face, Stag is staggered). showing the bar spacing similar to that shown in Fig. 4.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2 Concrete International | October 2010
Example 3—Column ties For greater clarity, the bottom and top callouts should
Typical callouts for the spacing of column ties can be have been 8 ties @ 6 in. or 8 spaces @ 6 in., depending on
ambiguous as well. Figure 5(a) is taken from an actual the intent of the designer. In this case, simply including the
column schedule. The schedule indicated No. 4 ties would word “ties” or “spaces” would have clarified the intent of
be used with the column. The callout at the bottom and the callout completely.
top of the column was 8 @ 6 in., as shown in Fig. 5(a). It’s
not clear if this means eight ties and seven spaces (Fig. Example 4—Skewed bars
5(b)) or nine ties and eight spaces (Fig. 5(c)). Another situation that occasionally causes some
confusion is the manner in which the limit lines of skewed
bars are called out, as shown in Fig. 6(a). Normally, a limit line
is drawn at a right angle to the indicated bars. As shown in
Fig. 6(a), however, the designer may instead draw the limit
line parallel to the skew. This detail could be interpreted to
mean that the bar spacing of 9 in. should be measured along
the extent line, as shown in Fig. 6(b). This interpretation
would result in having the No. 5 bars more closely spaced
than if the spacing was measured along a horizontal extent
line. As a standard industry practice, limit lines should never
be drawn parallel to the skew but should always be shown at
right angles to the bars, as shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 4: Suggested callout for horizontal bars in wall

Tie (typ.)

8 Spaces @ 6 in.
[9 Ties]

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 5: Callout for column ties at the top and bottom: (a) the original detail; (b) one interpretation results in eight ties; and (c) a second
interpretation results in nine ties

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation Detailing Corner 3
(a) (b)
Fig. 6: Callouts for skewed bars: (a) original detail; and (b) one interpretation leads to bar spacing < 9 in.

Fig. 7: Suggested callout for skewed bars

Summary Thanks to Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315 member Dick Birley for
Four examples of ambiguous reinforcing bar callouts were providing the information in this article.
illustrated in this article. All of the examples
demonstrate how easily a seemingly simple piece of Selected for reader interest by the editors.
reinforcing bar callout information could be misinterpreted,
with far-reaching results. The designer must always look
at the reinforcing bar callouts on the design drawings Reference
with a critical eye to determine if they might lead to 1. A
 CI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
erroneous interpretations. In most cases, adding a Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary,” American Concrete
little more text or a simple detail with specific spacing Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2008, 473 pp.
information is all that’s needed to help clarify the intent
of a bar callout.

Reprinted from Concrete International, Volume 32, Issue 10, October 2010, pp 54–57. ©2010 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute American Concrete Institute

933 North Plum Grove Road 38800 Country Club Dr.
Schaumburg, IL 60173 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
847-517-1200 • www.crsi.org 248-848-3700 • www.concrete.org

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
4 Concrete International | October 2010
 decemeber 2010

Reprinted from Concrete International with permission of American Concrete Institute

Bar Detailing at
Wall Openings

I t’s a necessary fact that any building is going to

have openings in walls or structural slabs. Round or
rectangular, openings are required for conduit, piping,
In a typical wall with no openings, reinforcing bars will
probably consist of layers of bars (curtains) with uniform
spacing. The bars will typically be continuous over the full
ductwork, doors, or windows. Their locations are often the height or width of the wall, but an opening can interrupt
responsibility of the architect, and they can change by the bars. Also, the re-entrant corners created by rectangu-
minor or major amounts throughout the design process lar openings cause stress risers that will likely lead to
(and even during construction). This Detailing Corner diagonal cracking.
focuses on openings in walls, but some of the discussion So, reinforcing bars are typically added in the perimeter
could be equally applicable for openings in slabs. zone of an opening. These added bars are commonly
known as trim bars, opening bars, or corner bars. Trim
bars (called trimmer or trimming bars in some regions of
North America), are the added bars placed near openings
to replace the reinforcement interrupted by the opening.
These bars are usually considered structural and are
placed so as to provide a reinforced load path around the
opening. Opening bars are minimum reinforcement added
around windows, doors, and similar-sized openings. Per
Section 14.3.7 of ACI 318-08,1 each layer of reinforcement in
DETAILING CORNER the wall requires at least one No. 5 (No. 16) bar around the
Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315-B, perimeter of an opening. Opening bars must be developed
Details of Concrete Reinforcement— at the corners, so they extend a development length
Constructibility, has developed forums beyond the opening. Corner bars are opening bars placed
dealing with constructibility issues on a diagonal at each corner. Although they aren’t explic-
for reinforced concrete. Staff at the itly required, it’s good practice to use them—they provide
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute more efficient restraint of the likely cracks at the re-en-
(CRSI) are presenting these topics in a trant corners.
regular series of articles.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 Design Considerations the standard requires that trim bars on each side of the
On the structural drawings, wall openings are often opening have a total area of at least one-half the area of
detailed in a “typical” fashion with a number of generic the bars interrupted by the opening (in effect, the trim
notes pointing to specific vertical, horizontal, or diagonal bars must replace the interrupted bars at an opening). For
bars on the drawing. Figure 1 provides an example of a openings located in zones of pressure, the area of the
typical drawing detail. General structural notes for the horizontal trim bars must be 20% greater than this mini-
reinforcement at openings are equally generic. Frequently, mum. Vertical trim bars on each side of the opening must
the designer’s notes specifying trim bars around openings also be designed as column reinforcement for a narrow
do not clearly express the designer’s intent, potentially strip on each side of the wall. The column width is limited
leaving the detailer or bar placer uncertain about what to 4h, where h is the wall thickness, and the unsupported
reinforcement is specifically required. length of the column is equal to the full height of the
The most common general note for trim bars requires opening. The trim bars must be developed at the corners,
that one-half the number of cut or interrupted bars be but they must extend no less than 24 in. (600 mm) or
placed on each side of the opening. If an odd number of one-half the opening dimension beyond the opening.
bars are cut, then the number is rounded up to an even Section 14.3.7 and the associated commentary of
number and one-half of the bars are placed on each side. ACI 350-063 require that trim bars replace the interrupted
This practice is generally based on Section 13.4.2 of ACI bars at an opening. The trim bars must be developed (or
318-08, which is specifically required for slabs; however, extend at least 24 in. [600 mm]) beyond the corners of an
it is normally followed for walls as well. In the case of angular opening or the intersection with other trim bars of
nominal-sized openings, this practice usually doesn’t circular openings. The commentary points out that this is
create a problem. minimum reinforcement—walls with lateral loads should
Guidance for design and reinforcing bar detailing be designed to maintain the strength of the wall and
around openings exists in other ACI documents. ACI transfer load around the opening.
313-97,2 for example, provides design and construction
requirements for concrete silos. In lieu of a detailed
analysis of the effects of the stress risers at an opening,

Fig. 1: A typical detail showing reinforcement at wall openings

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
2 Concrete International | December 2010
 (a) (b) (c)

Fig. 2: Designers use different reference points for trim bar extensions: (a) measuring from the opening corner is the most precise; (b)
using a trim bar as a reference point can create problems if the trim bar location must shift; and (c) measuring from the outermost trim
bar may lead to excessive embedment lengths

(a) (b)

Fig. 3: Examples of column reinforcement details incorporated into a wall: (a) column-like wall; and (b) corner column-like wall (based on
Reference 4)

As both ACI 313-97 and ACI 350-06 emphasize, it’s an opening may not be available at the time the footing
important to develop the bars beyond the opening. But as concrete is placed. Conversely, if the small opening is
simple as the design and detailing might appear, there are moved or the dimensions changed after the footing is cast,
recurring issues and concerns, as addressed in the the dowels would no longer be properly located. It’s
following. recommended that the designer avoid this requirement
wherever possible.
Trim Bars
Issue 1—Full height trim bars Issue 2—Trim bar embedment
Some designers require vertical trim bars located on There can be a wide variance in how designers call out
each side of the opening to run the full height of the wall, the embedment or development of trim bars. Figure 2(a)
lapped with dowels anchored in the footing and oftentimes shows the embedment of the trim bars measured from the
embedded in the floor or roof above (Fig. 1). The require- corner of the opening. This is the preferred method, as it
ment is applied to all openings, regardless of the opening gives the detailer and placer a precise location for the trim
size or its location relative to the bottom or top of the wall. bar based on the bar embedment length per the structural
For large openings, structural design may dictate drawings. At placement time, the opening location should
full-height wall bars. This practice is usually unnecessary, be marked in the field or formwork should be in place,
however, for small openings near the bottom or top of the thus providing a “hard” geometric control point for the
wall. Trim bars are only required to have full embedment placer.
(that is, tension development length) past the edge of the The detail in Fig. 2(b) is also frequently used, whereby
opening. Detailing and placing full-height bars can be a the embedment length is referenced to a reinforcing bar.
problem because the precise dimensions and location of Designers who use this detail may believe that the opening

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Detailing Corner 3
 location will not be precisely set and that the bar is a
better control point. In this example, the horizontal
trim bar embedment is then conditional on the first
trim bar location in the perpendicular or vertical
direction. The detailer can easily determine the trim
bar embedment, assuming that the first perpendicular
trim bar will be located at the proper concrete cover
distance from the opening. Embedments or other
conditions, however, may force the perpendicular trim
bar to be placed further away from the opening,
resulting in the horizontal trim bar embedment length
being too short beyond the vertical bar in this case.
This can be corrected in the design phase by provid-
ing a set horizontal dimension that includes the
development length plus a nominal width dimension
to account for tolerances, a placement range for the
vertical trim bar(s), and concrete cover. From a
structural perspective, providing a development
length slightly greater than the ACI 318 Code minimum
is not harmful and could be helpful; the added cost of
the extra length on the bars will be minimal.
The detail in Fig. 2(c) is used occasionally in heavily
reinforced walls or opening locations. This detail
presents the same potential problems as the detail in
Fig. 2(b). Moreover, Fig. 2(c) illustrates that if there
are a large number of vertical trim bars adjacent to
the opening, the horizontal trim bar length could
become excessively long; this excessive length may
not be structurally necessary. For these reasons, this
detail is not desirable and the designer should strive
to use the detail shown in Fig. 2(a).

Issue 3—Opening too wide or high?

When is an opening too wide or too tall to apply the
general practice of replacing the interrupted reinforce- Fig. 4: Trim bars may be located too far from the opening if cut
ment? Oftentimes, the general notes do not indicate bars are replaced one-for-one: (a) for a large opening,
matching the cut bar size can result in a wide band of trim
the maximum dimension beyond which this practice is bars; and (b) using larger replacement bars (in this case,
no longer valid. At some point, the size of an opening using a trim bar with about twice the area of the cut bar) can
could become a structural concern necessitating allow trim bars to be concentrated close to the opening
beam and column design around the opening. Clearly,
this is dependent on the opening size, wall thickness,
and loading condition at the opening. If the horizontal umns.” ACI 315-994 illustrates an example of how a
dimension (span) of the opening is too great, beam- column cross section would be incorporated within
type reinforcement may be required above or below the confines of the wall thickness (Fig. 3).
the opening. Likewise, the vertical wall on each side The designer should always show the maximum
of the opening may necessitate a dedicated reinforced dimensions for which the general practice can be
column section with specific longitudinal and tie applied. All larger openings should be individually
reinforcement. investigated by the designer and the proper reinforce-
Section 4.3.8.4 of ACI 313-97 provides some practi- ment details should be shown on the structural
cal guidance for the engineer, stating that “unless drawings.
determined otherwise by analysis, walls 8h in width
or less between openings shall be designed as col-

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
4 Concrete International | December 2010
Fig. 5: A typical detail for opening and corner bars used for
crack control (based on Reference 5)

Fig. 6: Likely diagonal bar location in multi-layered wall

Issue 4—Spacing of trim bars
What is the spacing of the trim bars? This is usually
not indicated in the general notes; in such cases, the Section 13.4.2 of ACI 318-08 requires that “an
detailer will usually not indicate a dimension either. amount of reinforcement equivalent to that interrupt-
Section 4.3.9 of ACI 313-972 requires that horizontal ed by an opening” be added to the sides of the open-
bar clear spacing to be at least 2 in. (50 mm) and ing. It doesn’t require that the same bar size be used
center-to-center spacing to be at least five bar diam- for the trim bars, only that half the area be placed on
eters. The section also requires that the spacing of each side. Using the same bar size is simpler and
horizontal bars in slipformed walls to be large enough avoids confusion in the field, but this is not always
to allow bars to be placed and tied during form practical from a potential congestion standpoint.
movement. A solution to this problem would be to use fewer
Absent any spacing information on the structural or but larger bars (Fig. 4(b)). For example, say 20 No. 5
reinforcing bar placing drawings, the bar placer will (No. 16) bars are interrupted by an opening. Rather
determine the spacing. The placer will arbitrarily than placing 10 No. 5 (No. 16) bars on each side (As =
space the bars to a personal preference or experience, 3.10 in.2 [2000 mm2]), seven No. 6 (No. 19) bars (As =
usually about 3 in. (75 mm). If for any reason the 3.08 in.2 [1987 mm2]) or six No. 7 (No. 22) bars (As =
spacing is critical, the designer should indicate the 3.60 in.2 [2323 mm2]) can be used. The designer should
trim bar spacing on the structural drawings. consider this possibility and account for this option in
the general note. Alternatively, specific trim bar
Issue 5—Effectiveness of trim bars details could be indicated on the structural drawings
How far from the opening can the trim bars be for each affected opening.
placed before they lose their effectiveness? As was
addressed in the section regarding Issue 3, there are Diagonal Bars
times when the maximum opening width is not given The minimum opening bars required per ACI 318-08,
in the general notes. By default, the detailer must Section 14.3.7, are illustrated in Fig. 5 for a typical
assume that all of the openings are to be trimmed with opening. These bars are intended to restrain cracking,
one-half of the interrupted bars on each side. If a large but trim bars will also help keep any cracks tight. Diag-
amount of bars are cut, however, there will potentially onal bars have the primary purpose of arresting
be a large quantity of additional trim bars on each side cracks at re-entrant corners of wall openings, and they
of the opening (Fig. 4(a)). As they are evenly spaced deserve two more comments.
out from the opening, some of these bars may be too
far away from the opening to be considered fully
effective.

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
Detailing Corner 5
 address the conditions
Designers should be cautious of generic notes for trim
bars around openings. Trim bars should be carefully
considered on a project-by-project basis to determine if
special conditions exist that may require nonstandard
details. These special conditions should be addressed in
the general notes or special details should be included in
the structural drawings. The designer needs to make his
or her intent clear for all aspects of the trim bars around
openings.
Thanks to Greg Birley of Condor Rebar Consultants and a member of
Fig. 7: Development of diagonal bars in close proximity to another Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315, Details of Concrete Reinforcement, and
opening will require bends or hooks Neal Anderson and Anthony Felder of CRSI for providing the information
in this article.

Issue 6—Diagonal bar location in Selected for reader interest by the editors.
wall thickness References
Are diagonal bars effective on multi-layer wall curtains? 1. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
Due to cover requirements and the thickness of the Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary,” American Concrete
reinforcing bar curtains, the diagonal bars will likely be Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2008, 473 pp.
placed closer to the center of the wall rather than near the 2. ACI Committee 313, “Standard Practice for Design and Construc-
concrete faces. Figure 6 shows a section of a wall with tion of Concrete Silos and Stacking Tubes for Storing Granular
multiple layers of reinforcement and diagonal bars. The Materials (ACI 313-97) and Commentary,” American Concrete
diagonal bars are less effective in controlling cracks Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1997, 39 pp.
radiating from the opening corners because the bars are 3. ACI Committee 350, “Code Requirements for Environmental
so far from the concrete faces. The vertical and horizontal Engineering Concrete Structures (ACI 350-06) and Commentary,”
trim bars should provide the requisite reinforcement near American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2006, 488 pp.
the surface to keep the cracks tight. Because the corner 4. Joint ACI-CRSI Committee 315, “Details and Detailing of Concrete
crack will likely propagate through the wall thickness, the Reinforcement (ACI 315-99),” American Concrete Institute,
diagonal bars will provide supplemental restraint near the Farmington Hills, MI, 1999, 44 pp.
midsection of the wall. 5. ACI Committee 315, ACI Detailing Manual, SP-66 (04), American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2004, 212 pp.
Issue 7—Diagonal bar development
For openings close to the top of a wall or near a slab,
the normal straight diagonal bar detail may not be pos-
sible. In such cases, the diagonal bar detail needs to be
modified in one of two ways (Fig. 7). The bars can extend
past the opening with a standard hook at the end, or the
diagonal bar can be bent to avoid the obstruction.

Reprinted from Concrete International, Volume 32, Issue 12, December 2010, pp 52–56. ©2010 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute American Concrete Institute

933 North Plum Grove Road 38800 Country Club Dr.
Schaumburg, IL 60173 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
847-517-1200 • www.crsi.org 248-848-3700 • www.concrete.org

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
6 Concrete International | December 2010