Construction related questions.
Dec 20th 2011, 3:44 pm
#16
Knee deep and rising
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,007
Re: Construction related questions.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I was wondering if rebar provided a stronger support structure better able to withstand lateral pressure cause the concrete goes through all the voids while I-Beam prevents concrete from 1 side connecting with concrete on the other side of the beam. Unless ofcourse you make holes in the beam but then you would have to strengthen the area around the hole either with additional metal or use flow drilling to make the holes. But then I figured if
I-Beam was inferior, the Americans who are experts in building high rises would not use it.
So is it purely a cost reason why Americans use I Beam and UAE uses rebar?I'm sure everyones seen pics from the early part of the 20th century where NY skyscrapers were being built with I Beam. I can certainly understand the cost issue, as my sis built a 3500 sqft house utilising traditional American wood framing and it cost just over $550,000. Labour (All Union labour) cost was the biggest chunk, which is probably why contractors opt for I-Beam over rebar, for commerical concrete structures.
I was wondering if rebar provided a stronger support structure better able to withstand lateral pressure cause the concrete goes through all the voids while I-Beam prevents concrete from 1 side connecting with concrete on the other side of the beam. Unless ofcourse you make holes in the beam but then you would have to strengthen the area around the hole either with additional metal or use flow drilling to make the holes. But then I figured if
I-Beam was inferior, the Americans who are experts in building high rises would not use it.
So is it purely a cost reason why Americans use I Beam and UAE uses rebar?I'm sure everyones seen pics from the early part of the 20th century where NY skyscrapers were being built with I Beam. I can certainly understand the cost issue, as my sis built a 3500 sqft house utilising traditional American wood framing and it cost just over $550,000. Labour (All Union labour) cost was the biggest chunk, which is probably why contractors opt for I-Beam over rebar, for commerical concrete structures.
Anyhow you are looking at this in a non engineering way, whatever method you chose you design the material to resist the applied forces. the properties of each section (be it I beam or concrete column) are easily calculated and sized to suit the forces.
regarding the skyscrapers in NY, reinforced concrete is a more modern invention that structural steel and I doubt the design knowledge or experience was present to build that high in the 20s or 30s.
brings out the junior builder in everyone
Dec 20th 2011, 3:51 pm
#18
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Disneyland, Dubai
Posts: 15,887
Dec 20th 2011, 3:52 pm
#19
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Disneyland, Dubai
Posts: 15,887
Re: Construction related questions.
Dec 21st 2011, 4:06 am
#20
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Dubai
Posts: 4,017
Re: Construction related questions.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I was wondering if rebar provided a stronger support structure better able to withstand lateral pressure cause the concrete goes through all the voids while I-Beam prevents concrete from 1 side connecting with concrete on the other side of the beam. Unless ofcourse you make holes in the beam but then you would have to strengthen the area around the hole either with additional metal or use flow drilling to make the holes. But then I figured if
I-Beam was inferior, the Americans who are experts in building high rises would not use it.
So is it purely a cost reason why Americans use I Beam and UAE uses rebar?I'm sure everyones seen pics from the early part of the 20th century where NY skyscrapers were being built with I Beam. I can certainly understand the cost issue, as my sis built a 3500 sqft house utilising traditional American wood framing and it cost just over $550,000. Labour (All Union labour) cost was the biggest chunk, which is probably why contractors opt for I-Beam over rebar, for commerical concrete structures.
I was wondering if rebar provided a stronger support structure better able to withstand lateral pressure cause the concrete goes through all the voids while I-Beam prevents concrete from 1 side connecting with concrete on the other side of the beam. Unless ofcourse you make holes in the beam but then you would have to strengthen the area around the hole either with additional metal or use flow drilling to make the holes. But then I figured if
I-Beam was inferior, the Americans who are experts in building high rises would not use it.
So is it purely a cost reason why Americans use I Beam and UAE uses rebar?I'm sure everyones seen pics from the early part of the 20th century where NY skyscrapers were being built with I Beam. I can certainly understand the cost issue, as my sis built a 3500 sqft house utilising traditional American wood framing and it cost just over $550,000. Labour (All Union labour) cost was the biggest chunk, which is probably why contractors opt for I-Beam over rebar, for commerical concrete structures.
As Sandboy pointed out the environmental lobby here is non existent and knocking down mountains is not a problem.
Also factor in the labour costs of a insitu concrete application and also that a lot of very influential families across the G.C.C own Readymix Concrete Companies and Precast concrete and Transport and Quarry companies it's a no brainer why concrete is the most popular choice.
It will be lot of years before concrete is replaced as the number 1 construction method here in the Gulf....
Hopefully after i'm retired
Dec 21st 2011, 8:23 am
#21
Forum Regular
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 37
Re: Construction related questions.
I should declare my hand and confess to being an engineer.
Nonetheless this thread reminds me of the old Yellow Pages entry - "Boring - see Civil Engineers".
Nonetheless this thread reminds me of the old Yellow Pages entry - "Boring - see Civil Engineers".
