ML17277B056

Forwards Addendum to 831031 Response to Violations Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-397/83-38 Re Evaluation of Concrete & Reinforcing Steel,In Response to 831108 Telcon W/Nrc

ML17277B056
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	11/15/1983
From:	Sorensen G WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
GO2-83-1057, NUDOCS 8311220173
Download: ML17277B056 (70)

See also: IR 05000397/1983038

Text

REGULATORY

IN RMATION DISTRIBUTION

SYSTEM (RIDS)t ACCESSION NBR:8311220173

DuC.DATE: 83/11/15 NOTARIZED:

No DOCKET FACIL:50-397

NPPSS Nuclear Projects Unit 2~1'tashington

Public Powe 05000397 AUTH, NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION

S6RENSENgG,G

~Washington

Public Power Supply System REC IP~NAME AEC IP IENT AFF ILI ATION SCHNENCERgA

~, Licensing Branch 2'SUBJECT: Forwards addendum to 831031 response to violations, noted in IE Insp Rept 50~397/83 38 re evaluation

of concrete 8 reinforcing

steeliin response to 831108 telcon w/NRC~DISTRIBUTION

CODE: IEOIS COPIES RECEIVED:LTR

j ENCL l SIZE: gg TITLE: General (50 Dkt)-Insp Rept/Notice

of Violation Response NOTES: REC IP IENT ID CODE/NAME NRA LB2 BC INTERNALS AEOD IE ENF STAFF IE/DQAS IP/ORPB NRR/DSI/RAB

EXTERNAL: ACRS t<RC PDR NT/S COPIES LTTR ENCL 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 I 1 1 1 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME AULUCKeRD'LD/HDS2

IE F ILE IE/ES FILE LPDR NSIC COPIES LTTR ENCL'1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1)k TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED~LTTR M ENCL

0~~Il Eli>>~'>>'J I" N ,'*tr II')C"'v'E ,i~e I H>r~~fr>>ff)a<<cur)<<<<>>r I)JE))')<<lr))r)P))r)~<<>>l<<fI'>>,)>>)')l'1 4 if),f"~>>l q'>>>0 ,TP~).r>>e',EI>>">>I f)l~, E), c E e ,f)E>>E I~P)ltd.'ktttl

I)P"'<<T I~IEE~~&Eh<<>>10 l>>P')<<')P)

f~F>>l)r 4)0>>g r$O II it iTI J T ffl'g)I ll q 9 I IE jiPfi]I Pf~>>f>>E'f I fI<censing comtn>Tmen~s,)

k 1, f I I

SUMMARY OF STRUCTURAL

MEMBERS EVALUATED Design Margin(See

Footnote)Observed Discrepancies

SK.E SK-8 Member GB9 Maximum+jve Moment+M 4.8 Maximum-ive Moment-M 4.2 Shear 2.1 Rebar Spacing Yes Rebar/Dowel Honey-Hissing/combing His/aced.None Hone Remarks Concrete consolidation

is excellent.

Conclusions

Meets the intent of the code.SK-9 Pilaster Hot Calcu-lated Not Calcu-lated Hot Calcu-lated None Hone Hone None.I Meets the Code..requirement.

~SK-1 West Exterio Wall 1 Not Calcu-lated Not Calcu-lated Hot Calcu-lated None Hone Hone None Meets the code requirement.

SK-11 Dryer Separa-tor Pool Not Calcu-lated Not Calcu-lated Hot Calcu-lated-None None'one None Meets the code requirement.

SK-1 Fuel Pool Wall(N,)El.Hot Appli-cable 5.6 Not Appl i-cable Yes None Hone Construction

aid rebars at El.588'-2>><<were not placed per drawings.Meets the code requirement

fo~operating con~ons 6K-1 Mat at El.422'-0<<Not Calcu-lated Hot Calcu-lated'ot Calcu-lated Yes None Hone Trim additional

rebar deviate spacing requirements.

Concrete consolidation

excellent.

Meets the code requirements, K-1 Mat.at El, 422 IP<<Hot Calcu-lated Not Calcu-lated Hot Calcu-lated None None'None None Meets the code requirements.

Footnote t bl o Ta 4 fM I~+i inal desi'rne t e: Design margin as used herein in the capacity provided above that, of the or g gn requlr n s.(A design margin of l.p signifies compliance

with ACI 318 code requirements

and lscens>ng commitments

)

0 ly t r LI

age" SUHHARY OF STRUCTURAL

HEHBERS EYALUATED Design Margin(See

Footnote)Observed Discrepancies

Hember Haximum Haximum+ive-ive Moment Moment 4H-H Shear Rebar Spacing Rebar/Dowel.Honey-Missing/combing Hisplaced.RemarRs Conclusions

Mat at El.422'-0"\Slab at El.471'ot Cal cu-lated Not Calcu-lated Hot Calcu-lated Hot'Calcu-lated Not Calcu-.lated Hot Calcu-lated Yes None None Hone None Additional

rebars.deviate spacing requirements.

Concrete consolidation

excellent.

I Meets the code requirements.

Meets the code requirements~

K-1 East Ext.Wall Not Calcu-lated Not Calcu-lated 2.2 Hone None Hone Meets the code requirements.

it rovided above that'of the ori inal desi n re uirement'ei i e:ootnote to Table: Design Margin as used her n n the capac y p g g q s.(A design margin of 1.0 signifies compliance

with ACI 318 code requirements

and licensing commitments.)

HIIIEN ANO,KUCHENREUTHER,ON

SUROE FORCES When the solutions to Eq.44 are extended over those presented in Table 3 and the results plotted, curves of the type given in Fig.11 are obtained which show strikingly

the tendency of.the ship movement and restoring for e t b-e infinite whenthe naturalperlodof

vibration(when

Ao=0)is approached.

Of course, no such thing can occur due to the"fuze'n the system in the form of the mooring lines which tend to break and thereby ruin what elegance there is in this problem.Fig.11 shows the relationship

between period and amplitude of a moored ship (and standing wave)oscillation

in su'rge with standing wave amplitude as a parameter.

Note that both negative as well as positive dlsplacements

are plotted where this rather unconventional

presentation

Is made to emphasize those situations

where the oscillation (x)Is 180'ut of phase with th it-0 on(o).Usually this phase'relation

Is conslderedof

slight interest In com-parison with the amplitudes.

However, at the precise point of phase switching many ships couldreceive

a jolt at a level high enough to rouse even the slee-ie t 8 seaman and, even worse, to break the ropes.Therefore, the negative signs n eseep-are usuallydisregarded

so a presentation

is made entirely inthefirstquadrant.

The writers have obtained a record of such a shift correlated

with changes n mooring fbrces, bjj a landing ship tank (LST),as spread moored in the open Gulf of Mexico.This.ship shifted the phase of its pitching motion by 180'-as theperlodof

the lncldentwave

changedln a very short tlmefrom 4 to I 1/2 sec where the point of shift is computed as about 6 sec.The system, depending on its period of excitation

will be subject to stable-bran mottuns, fro example, branch 1, 3, 4, and 5 In Fig.11 and unstable-motions

7 J ranch 3 and.4-b.Some damping, however slight, must be present in order to permit the ship to cross from In-phase oscillation, periods greater than free period, to out-of-phase

oscillation

across the, zone of transition.(from 4-a to 2 In Fig.11, for example).".lt would appear that the free'period

of oscillation, line designated

A=0 In Fig.11, of the ship-line system Is one of the dominantdesignparameters

where care should be exerctsed toward avoiding period coincidence

between this pe-riod and that of the excitation.

A likely operational

period of oscillation

which ls less than rather than greater than the free period would seem desirable.

A number of investigators, including Abramson and Wilson,33 havediscuss-

ed surge oscillation

of a ship moored at the node of a standing wave, although none appear to have stretched the mechanical

analogy as far as the writers herein.Other modes are not at all well covered.Another examination

of the problem was made by Wilson.34 The writers hope that this closure has provided In some measure answers to and amplification

of the questions raised by Mr.Wilson In his much appre-ciated discussion

of their paper.AMERICAN'OCIETY

OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded Novcmbei 5, 1852 TRANSXCTIDNS

-/g (D Paper No 3047 CONCRETE BEAMS AND COLUMNS WITH BUNDLED REINFORCEMENT

By Norman W.Hanson,1 M.ASCE and Hans Relffenstuhl2

Witli Discussion

by hiessr Homer ht Hadley I'VNOPSIS This paper reports on tests of pairs of large beams with conventionally

spaced and with bundled longitudinal

reinforcement.

The bundles of reinforcement

used comprised groups of four No.6, four No.8, or three No.9 touching bars.Pairs of beams were compared with respect to width of flexural cracks, steel stress distribution, deflection, andultiinate

strength;No significant

difference

.in behavior or ultimate strength was found for bundled as compared to spaced reinforcement.

Tied columns were tested by concentric

loading to compare spaced and bundled longitudinal

reinforcement

consisting

of twelve No.6 or twelve No.8 bars.Comparison

with respect to ultimate strength indicated that bundling is a safe detailing procedure when adequate ties are provided.This true even for 6.6%longitudinal

reinforcement.

Splicing of bundled reinforcement

incolumns was explored and found to be feasible.INTRODUCTION

334 F A urther Analysis of tho LoagttudtnalRosponso

ofh'Ioorod

Vessels to Sea Osctl-laflon,~by H.N.Abramson, and B, W.WHson, Proceedings, Joint hiid-West Conf., Solid and Fluid Mechanics;

Purdue UnivSeptember, 1955.34"The Energy Problem in tho hioortng of Ships Exposed to Waves," by B.W.Wilson, Proc.of Princeton Conference

on Borthing and Cargo Handflng in Exposed Locations Octobor, 1958, pp.1-87.Bundled reinforcement

in structuralconcrete

refers to reinforcement

placed In groups of touching bars.As compared to the mlnlmum bar spacings com-monly used in beams, for instance those given by the 1965 American Concrete Note.-Published, essentially

as printed hero, in October, 1958, in the Journal of the Structural

Division, as Proceedings

Paper 1818.Positions and titles given are thoso In effect when the paper or discussion

was approved for pubflcation

In Transactions.

I Assoc.Development

Engr., Roses'rch and Dovolopmont

Div., Portland Cement Assn., Chicago, Ill.9 Visiting Engr., Research and Development

Div., Portland Cement Assn., Chicago, Hl.889

a t I I l)r f

890 BUNDLING Sl Section 505(a))1 bundling yern)its'the

necessary+rs,to be phced.in much,nar-rower sections.As a'result, bundling permits construction

of lighter, inore graceful and more economtcpl-,beams.

of,box,-.channel

or T-B6, section.In beams of normal width, the clear distance between bundles will beconslderably

greater than the distance',betw4efi

individual

evenly spaced bars.Bundling greatly facilitates

concrete placement and insertion of spud vibrators, par-ticularly" wlien heavy negate'moment

reTnfbrcement

must be ehibedded ihthe top of beams.In columns, bundled reinforcement

permits a reduced concrete cross section, which maybe an important advantage in the lower storiesof tall buildings.

Bundling also permits interior ties to be omitted, so that concrete placement is facilitated.

Finally, bundled bars ln beams and columns may be a satisfactory.

alternate.to!large

sizes of specially rolled~reinforcing

bars that are occasionally

used in very large, structures.

Practical use of ibundledirelnforcement

in beams has been pioneered, and several structures

with bundled reinforcement

have been builtP>>i4Ãi6

for which good service records have been reported.Laboratory

tests that have been reported>>concern principally

bundles of four j-tn.square bars in beams,and there maybe somequestion

regardingthe

performanceof

bundlesof larger bar sizes.No tests of bundled reinforcement

in columns have been reported.An experimental

investigation

was therefore carried out 1n the Research and Development

Laboratories

of the Portland Cement Association

during 1955-57 to inyestigate

the performanceof

largede-formed bars placed in bundles as longHudfnai

beam andcolumn reinforcement.

Nolaffon.-The

letter symbols adapted for use in this paper are defined where the)first afloat', lri the text'or in'the illustrations, and are arranged alphabetically, for chnvehte'nce

of reference, in the Appendix.I y~~g Jf I~gl TEST BEAM ARRANGEMENT

~..~))v-$A,f, t~~a gg v r As compared to spaced bars, bundling may be questioned

primarily with respect to the bond integrity'of

beams: The most serious conditions

may then be expected for bars plac'ed ast negative reinforcement

near the top of deep and short beams.'Previous tests>have clearly indicated that, due to adverse ef-fects of settlement,'the bond resistance

of top bars is less than that of bottom bars.They have also indicated that'a short beam span leads to high bond stress 2'Unusual Concrete Roof of Hollow Girdera and Precast Slabs, by H.hL Hadloy, Journah A,C.I., Proceedings

Vol, 37, February, 1941, pp.453-460.Braall'a Wonder Hotel.and Casino,'y A, J.Boaae, Engineering

News-Record, Vol.136, January, 1946, pp.112-116, 4~Bundle Reinforcing

Savea hiatoriala," Engineering

Nowa-Record, Vol.140, AprQ, 1948, pp, 609-610.5~Bridge with'Bundled'otnforoement,~

by H.M.Hadley<Weatern Construction,.

l~26, Juno1951, pp, 69;90,: 'Bundled'Reinforcement,",by

H~hL Hadloy, Journal, A.C.IProceedings

Vol..49, October, 1952, pp.$57-159.Precast Box Beams for High Strength,~

by H.hi, Hadiey, Engineering

News-Record, Vol.125, Doo1940, pp, 383-839>~~8'Tests of Beams Retnforoed

wHh'Bundle

Bars',~by H.hi, Hadley, Civil Engtneer-Ing, VoL 11, February, 1941;pp: 90-93.9'An InvestlgaHon

of Bond, Anchorage and Related Factors in Reinforced

Concrete Beams,'y C.A.htenzol and W.M.Woods, BuHeHn 42, Research Dept., Portland Ce-ment Assn., November~1952, p.114;~BUNDLING 891 before the flexural ultimate strength ls developed.

Therefore, the test speci-mens for this investigation

were short, deep beams, with the tension steel at the top as cast..In the beam, designations

to follow, the first number shows the number of: bars and the second number their size;.the letter S indicates spaced bars and B indicates bundled bars;H indicates high-strength

steel.The test beams 8-SSy 8 SSHp 8 SSH and 6-9S, with spaced reinforcement, shown in Fig.I, were designed by first determining

the minimum beam width for a chosen group of bars.By the ACI code previously

mentioned, this width is governed by a minimum protective

cover of 1-f in.and, for 1-f in.maxi-mum size aggregate, a clear distance of 2 ln.between parallel bars.The beam depth was chosen so that the ratio of reinforcement

was 1.5%.Finally, the distance from the face of a centrally located column stub to the beam support was chosen as twice the effective beam depth.Thus, the test span L is 85 in.for the beams with No.6 bars,-134.5

in.for the beams with No.8 bars, and 151.8 in.for those with No.9 bars.The beams and all bars were extended 6 in.beyond the supports.The gross concrete dimensions

of beams 8-6S, S-SS and 6-9S, excluding the column stubs, wex'e 13 in.by 21 in.by 97 in., 14.5 in by 33.5 in.by 146.5 fn., and 11.5 in.by 38.8 in.by 163.8 in., respectively.

The beams with bundled reinforcement, beams 8-6B, 8-SB and 6-9B we identical.to

the corresponding

beams with spaced bars except fo'r the bar rangeme'n7.

The effect of decreasing

the beam width for bundled reinforcement

was investigated

through beams 8-SBH and 8-8 BH.For these two beams,and their companions

with spaced reinforcement, high-strength

reinforcement

was used to delay flexural faQure and develop very high bond stress.The column stubs of all beams were reinforced

with four bars of the same size as the'longitudinal

beam reinforcement, and these bars vlere extended through the beam, Vertical stirrup reinforcement

was provided to prevent di-agonal tension and shear failures, The stirrups also served the function of preventing

horizontal

splitting that might otherwise have been caused by high bond stress.Beams 8-6SH and 8-SBH had two No.6 bars placed as compress sion reinforcement

toprevent flexuralcompresston

failure.Beams 8-SSH and 8-8BH had two No.8 bars placed as compression

reinforcement.

ProPerffes

of Bundfes.~e

external perimeter for a bundle of four bars as shown for be'am 8-6B and 8-SB in Fig.1 is 38D, that is, 25%less than for the same bars spaced in the usual manner.On the other hand, a single large bar with the same cross-section

area as a bundle of four bars with diameter D would have a diameter of 2D and a perimeter of 2nD.Accordingly, the bundle of four bars has anexposed perimeter 50%greater

than that of thesingle large bar.The bundle of three bars used for beam 6-9B similarly.has

an expos perimeter'16.'I%

less than that for the same spac'ed bars, and 55%greater t that of a larger bar of the same area.These geometric properties

indicate that bundling leads to only a moderate increase ln bond stress as compared to spaced bars.Replacing a single large bar by a bundle with the same area, leads to a reduced bond stress.It should be noted, however, thht the deformation

of lug height, as defined by ASTM A-305-53T, would be greater for a single large bar than for a bundle of bars, a d bo nd r'esistance

for top b rs 18 k own9 to 1 crease with tncreasi g lug height.Materials.-A

laboratory

blendof Type I cements was used.Sand and gravel aggregates

were combined to gradations

within-the limits given by ASTM C-33-.55T for 1-j in.maximum: size.The concretes were mixed in 6 cu ft

1

ceo e>>CCt ce m 0O~~0&gal ce mo'g g~e3 m e E 8 8 ce~~Cl e~e r cer 4 Q Ce e$04 s""'4d r ce m cl 0 yc e m'0>>m ce m ce I e KOb0 rm"0~O bore e 99~-m m Q e'ce m e el I O 5~CD g QCI m>>ci 4 4~>>P p cl Q ca" g Rom.BF Ir C~ce g e I 3~~0 P Cl 0 ro CI r IC1 Cl ICC)O ce o r r e be Cl>>el CI 4 e~g bb m>>4 e ce~Sl w 0 g be 0 oe'e ce r e e O r~e e a CI e QI 4J mre roe m m eer Ce r 0 0 0 4 i>>0 I e~e00 g'0 ce el~Ce r r>>CO 0 8 Ri m e~O>>>>$e m C 6 m ce ce e el 4 8C'6 Cl'm Qi m cD~O 0 C4 m o RR ce N53$~g r g g g I g>>i Cl dl c O~g CCI QCI g ea Cl clclr&P 4-8'r%r" r~r 00 Cl 04 MIDih0000~0 ID CI>>0 00 iD 04 CI Cl 00,04 04 ID O C4 CI>>I 0 O>>C CII O CD>>C~0 CD>>C>>li O CD>>4>>4 CI CI CI 04 ID A c-c oooo CI Cl CD CD>>Ci'CIC A>>00404 C4 ID CD CD 00>>ci ID>>C>>I C4 Dl>>4>>4 ID O CD O O O CICDC>>CCDO

A O CI 04%CD C4 00'CC W,'00M Oooooo O io O O O O 0 0 CI Cl CD 0)c c m00 ID co cn 4 03 cQ cn lC CP<<0 CD Dl Dl iD CD ED CO CD CD O CC C 04>>4 CI O IA ID CI CI 04 QDI CI CD CD M C4 C4>>li+O IA O CD>>4 Q ID O O ID O O CD O C>>>>li O 00 00 00>>C CI W CI OOOO OOOO 04 04 0 O.XI9 O Cl o r 4J>>J'g C O e Qi e'"0'0 r-.'8 8 el cl CI Q e ce Q, 4 o O e~CD b0 g r~C I cee ce CQ be 0 r m a~u 4'0~04 c I e m g e o oD"0 e co., bb~0 r~~g<e 4 Clg>>0 4C>>>>>>0%0 e>>0 Cerl">>e'0 0 m ce I e ce'ts 0'8 rc e~r 0'~g e'IS w C~ee e~emcermvt

m>>ID'ce m Q,r r~~8 m~ce~" 4e ce m 0~~e r~e 4 Q e r g m o o me m'ce g o o ce e r e eg~e O~~m 0 0 g~~ID Ce Io mo4 oe I a'X Cl C0 E9 00 00 CO.cl i0 Q>>.5 d X'It d Z'lt d x CD al~0 00 C I X I I I I

0 t t I t It t

(r p I rr~>r'r(,I'(g." r.~((i (r~r~yr<<4k>Pt C(rC Q.@+r r 4'rr(r" r: j rf t ,I rg h FIG.2.-TESTING

ARRANGEhIENT

FOR BEAhIS wires were attached, and the slot was filled to the bar surface with wax water-proofing.Tension tests indicated that gages so placed yielded measurements

in close accord with mechanical

strain measurements

over the same reduced section.The stress at any bar load was 5%to 9%higher in"the sloffed section than in the full bar section.Eight strain gages for each beam were located as shown ln Fig.1(a).Two gageswer'e

placed on eachof four barS symm'etrlcally

about mid-span.The measured strainwlthout

correctionwas

ass'umed to'ep-reseq)the average strain'n all bars at the location of the gage'.Therefore, measured strain is reported heryin a's stress obtains'd by multiplying~

'the'aver-

age strain in the two half sparis by the modulus of elasticity

for the full section of the various bar sixes as obtained in te'nsion tests.'r'5~r(,'('-'J (J"rl'(r'.(r~.~((TEST RESULTS~'r (rrr.~..I r., r I.('ll beamswith,intermedtaty-grade(steel, beams 8;,L'I,through

6-9p 1nTable 1, fa1led by yielding of the longitudinal

reinforcement, followed by large de-BUNDLING stub through a 2-in.steel plate.The total duration of each beam test was ap-proximately

two hours.Deflection

dial.gages were mounted directly below the two faces.of the column stub and mid-way between these points and the supports.The widths of all cracks were measured by a graduated microscope

at the level of thy centroid of the longitudinal

reinforcement.

To minimize the amount of bar surface area isolated from bond by the waterproofing

of the electric strain gages, SR-4 Type A-12 gages were placed in the intermediate

grade bars in milled slots.3/32

in.,wide,r

3/8 in.de.p, and approximately

6 in.long.The high-strength

bars could not be milled.Thus, the location of the strain gages in Fig.1(a)does not refer to tha,beamsuslng

high-strength

steel rods.A gage was cemented ta the sideof each slot, lead P~~>3 QUNDJ2gG$95 flections and final crushing of the concrete compression

zone at the column face.As shown in Fig.2;both flexural and diagonal'cracks tended to extend upward toward the corner at the column stub so that lt-was hardly possible to differentiate

behveen flexural and diagonal~cktt'-po indication.

of bond fail-ure was found 1n any of these beams, and noijisual difference

in behavior was noted for beams with bundled as compared t'o'spaced

bars.Three beams with high strength reinforcement

failed ln bond as indicated by large amounts of bar slip at the beam ends.For bream 8-6SH the tension steel yielded following bar sflp at the beam ends.Steel Stress and Deflection.-Measured

steelstressanddeflectionatvarlous

load levels for the three beam pairs with intermediate

grade steel are shown in Figs.3(a),(b)and(c).

Both steel stress and deflection

are given as an aver-age of two measurements

symmetrical

about mldspan for each beam.Distribution, of measured steel stress along a longitudinal

reinforcing

bar, in a beam specimen, may be expected to reflect bong distress.Preceding a final destruction

of bond, an abnormal rise of steel stress should take p~toward the beam ends.Fig.3 shows that.the distribution

of steel stress~very similar for the two members of each pair of test beams even at high steel-stress..lt

may be noted, on the other hand, that the steel-stress

for all beams was practically

uniform at high loads in the middle third of the span.This was certainly caused by a stress redistribution

resulting from the deep--beam type of crack pattern seen in Fig.2.'It is also seen that the overhangs contributed

to the bonding action because the steel-stress'of

all beams is not zero over the supports at high loads.It is felt that this behavior ls related to local stress disturbances

in the support region where heavy reaction forces entered the abnormally

short beams.The deflection

curves are also similar for all beam pairs.Accordingly, both steel stress and deflection

measurements

indicate that there was no sig-nificant difference

in behavior between bundled and spaced reinforcement.

Crach IVidth.-Crack

patterns were closely similar within pairs for all tests.Bond distress maybe expected toopenup a few wide cracks near the beam ends rather than to increase the widthof all cracks.Crackwidths

are therefore given in Fig.4, as the average width of the three widest cracks in the beam.Steel stress is given in the figure asvalues computed fromapplied

moment at the column face section, taking'the

internal moment arm as 7/8 times the ef-fective depth.It is seen that there ls no systematic

difference

between~crack widths for bundled and for spaced reinforcement, Furthermore, noes~opened suddenly before yielding of the reinforcement

was ln progress.This indicates that'even the high local bond stress<<whioh

acts near cracks, resulted only in the normal minor bond slip for bundled as well as for spaced reinforce-

ment.For the four beams with high strength reinforcement, a similar lack of systematic

difference

was observed between'crack widths for bundled and spaced reinforcement.

However, for beams 8;,6BH, 8-8SH, and 8-8BH, as the ultimate load was reached,a few cracks near the beam ends became very wide shortly before final bond failure took place.Flexural Strength, Beams uVth Intermedtate

Grqde Steel.-Itis

seen In Table 1 that some of the beams with intqrmediate

grade steel carolled loads consider-ably above their.yield-loads.

These yield loads'are'listed

as detected by strain~r 0 I I~u t r((038~l l~-<<rr(4(lrr(<<4(Z

.~~I'I

r V (I'I 1 4)~I II k PI fI k I

896 P Fsosh silos h Mcsos BUNDLING P IO 8 20 cn cn hc o 3 x 25Kl ps ro~50~/r I I I I I I r r r I I r I 4 IOO~or r//~/P ISO Kiss 42,000psl ss C O.IO ss o OIS 2 0.20 2SKIPs r SO~r I/FS~///IOO~P r r<<Spocs4 Soss ispn Kl,-~a'4II4 ben-4 (0)BEAMS 8 BS ond 8 88 00 IO 40 SO 40 BUNDLING 49$and crack width measurements.

Considering

the external moment at the face of the column the computed flexural ultimate loads, Pcalcs were abtained by the equation for ultimate internal moment'I Mu=b d2 fc q(1-0 P q)~~~~~~(1)in which fc is the concrete cylinder strength, and q is the factor pfy/fc in I which p equals As (the effective cross-sectional

area of reinforcement)

divided by bd, and fy is the yield point of reinforcement.

This'equation is given in ACI*s'18-56, A605(b).The ratio of measured tocomputed

ultimate load exceeds one (1)for all beams.The average ratio for the three beams with spaced bars is 1.13, and the average ratio for the beams with bundled bars is also 1.13.This indicates that there was no systematic

difference

in ultimate flexural strength developed by spaced and by bundled bars except that the beams with bundled bars were slightly stronger by virtue of the slight increase in effective b~depth.sf s P Fcshi ISIISPOh Ihollo~50 g 40 f-47000 pcl I-48300 ps>I If<<46800 ps)6.9S IO vs 8 20 cn sI OI 7 I vs 8 cn~I In so~s X 40~h c OI o COKlp~/////I I I I I I I IZ0~I I I.ISO~I I/40-r 4 802 s'u cs ss 0.~s I~s cs I 20 r r r r ISO'Spo44i SCAptroo th-cs-scdlidlsohI

~SOO Klps 240+fp~4SWpsl (h)BEAMS Pi240 Kins 8 BS opd 8-88 I'O Kiss//I/I r//P//I ,/p r r c40 P 240 Klps/o I I~44,000 psl o I20 8 g OI 8~0.2~s<<0 aS COKlps I r/r/I/I20 rr//~4////rSO 220 rr I r f40~Spocso Sos~w Oohoiso nosh (c)BEAMS B-SS ond 6-88 FIG.S.-h(EASURED

STEEL STRESS AND DEFLECTIONS

R E 8 30 9 20 8 8.68 8-6S B.SS 8.88 6.98 10 0 0.004 0.008 OA)12, 0 OI004 OA)08 0412 0 OA)04 OA)08 JO12 Clock widths, ln (nchos'IG.4.-CRACK 1VIDTH htEASUREhiENTS

The average ratio of 1.13 also confirms previous findings that the equa~for ultimate moment, which was developed essentially

by tests of small bea~is also applicable

to the large beams of this investigation.

It is believed that the excess of measuredultimate

loads over the computed load resulted princi-pally from strain hardening of the reinforcement.'

biaxial state of stress at the column stub appeared to delay crushing of the compression

zone so that large steel strains were developed locally at the ma)or flexural cracks.Bond stresses are given in Table 1 as computed at ultimate load, by dividing the shearing force by the external perimeter of the bars times 7d/8.These bond stresses, for the beams with intermediate'rade

steel, were sustained without any indication

of bond failure." They are'in no way to'e regarded as ultimate bond stresses.To develop higher bond stresses with intermediate-

grade steel it would have been necessary to make'special

test beams with part of thetension

zone removed, or to make the beams so short that theywould act as walls rather than beams.Both of these cases were thought not to represent practical conditions

under which bundled bars may be used." High-strength

steel was therefore used to study ultimate load stress;=s s.illll~~I'I I~ssl~~~I I

I I jl f t f If f I

898 BUNDLING BUNDLING 899 Bond Strength, Beams with Hfgh-Strength

Steel.-Table

1 shows that the beams with high-strength

reinforcement

failed at ultimate loads close to the flexural strengths computed by ACI 318-56, A606(a), Mu" (As-As)fy d~1-'+As fy (d-d'),...(2)I 0.59 (p-p')f)c ln which As ls the area of tensile reinforcement, As ls'he area of compres-sive reinforcement, d etluals the distance from the extreme compressive

fiber to the centroid of tensile reinforcement, whereas d's the distance from this fiber to the centroid of compressive

reinforcement

and p ls the factor As/bd.Beam 8-6SH failed ln flexure after bond slip had been observed at the beam ends.The remaining three beams failed at loads below the computed ultimate flexural strength.Failure was ln bond, as indicated by large amounts of bar slip observed by dial gages as a relative movement between bar ends and the concrete surface at the beam ends.Bar slip ls plotted as a function of computed bond stress ln Fig.5.Bond stresses at ultimate strength, calculated

by dividing shearing force by external-bar-perimeter

times 7d/8, are also shown.It ls seen that bond slip was ln progresswhen

beam8-6SH failed ln flexureatabond

stressof 520psl(Table1).

By comparlsonwlth

the slip records for beams 8-8SH and 8-8BH ln Fig.5,both of which failed ln bond, lt must be expected that beam 8-6SH would have failed ln bond at a stress only slightly greater than 520 psl lf flexural failure had been prevented bya higher yield point for the steel.Hence,theultlmate

bond stress for spaced No.6 bars must be expected to exceed only slightly the value of 513 psl observed for bundled bars.For No.8 bars, the ultimate bond stress for spaced bars was 337 psl, which ls slightly less than the stress of 391 psl ob-served for bundled bars.However, lt should be noted from Fig.5 that bond stress fora given slip value was always lower for bundled than for spaced bars.It can be concluded that, when only external bar perimeter was used to cal-culate bond stress, there was no systematic

difference

ln ultimate bond stress developed between spaced and bundled bars.Thus, the beam tests indicated that bundling of tension reinforcement

ls a satisfactory

detailing procedure.

TEST COLUMN ARRANGEMENT

8-6SH 400 n X 4 n 300 Fr':m r3 l00 0~Il I/IS l'l:~I 8-68H l F!~F 8.8SH OA$4 0.008 OA)12 OAI I 6'Average bar srlp et beam ends, tn Inches FIG, 6.-BAR SLIP MEASUREMENTS

lr~F I I FnIF 0.020 A series of ten tied columns was designed to study bundled compression

re-inforcement.

Concentric

loading was chosen..An

outline of, the test program ls shown ln Fig.6.Allcolumnswere12-1n.-by-12-ln.

W>th a height Alf 6 ft.Two amounts of longitudinal

reinforcement

were used.These were 6.58%and 3.67%, made up of 12 po.8 and 12 No.p bars, respectively.

The 1/4-ln, tie-diameter

used ls tile minimum permitted by ACI 318-58, 1104(c).The corresponding

maximum tie spacing of forty-eight

tie diameters ln 12 ln., whtgh ls also the maximum spacing as governed by the 12,-+.colure size and by sixteen times the diameter of the No.6 bars.Five columtts with 12 No.8 bars were tested.Column 12-8S contained bars spaced ln'the nOrmal manner and surrounded

by a squarp tie.The interior barswere hefd firmly by two interior rectangular

ties.All ties of this column were spaced at 12 ln.Column 12-8B-1 contained bars bundle)at the corners, Interior ties were omitted, and the exterior tie spacing its maiqtained

at 12 ln.For column 12-8B-2, the exterior tie spacing was decreased to 6 fn, A splice was provided at mid-height

of column 12-8B-3 as shown ln Fig.6.The spliced bars were cut by a saw, and each bar was touching its longltut(tnal

ex-tension.The tie spacing In both columns 12-8 B3 and 12-8 B4 was 6 lns.The IF'~'I~trcoromn'S column ,I ,.I" I VI F la~O FF I,F 4 V I F FIG, S,-TEST COLUMNS"~

t~"e!

900 BUNDLINg BUNDLING 901 bars of column 12-8B-4 were cut at the splice with a hydraulic bar cutter so that the bar-ends were wedge-shaped.

A clear spacing of 1/4 in.was provided between the two parts of each longitudinal

bar.It should be noted that the splice lap is only ten bar-diameters

as compared to the minimum amount of twenty diameters given by ACI 318-56, 1103(c).A similar group of five col-umns with 12 No.6 bars was tested.Materials.-A

laboratoryblend

of Type I cements wasused.Sand and gravel aggregates

were combined to gradations

within the ASTM C-33-55T limits for 3/4-in.maximum size.The mix ratio of cement to sand to gravel was 1 to 3.58 to 2.38 by weight, and the water-cement

ratio was from 0.64 to 0.68 by weight.Two concrete batches were used for each column.In previous column tests it has been found10 that failure generally takes place near the top of vertically

cast columns.To explore this phenomenon, the bottom batch of some columns was made with a slightly higher water-cement

ratio than the top batch.Com-pressive strengths, representing

averages of three to four 6-in.-by-12-in.

cylinders for each batch, made and cured with the corresponding

columns, are given in Table 2.All reinforcement

was intermediate-grade

steel and was tied into cages without welding.The ties were 1/4-in.plain bars.The longitudinal

reinforce-

ment conformed to ASTM A-305-53T for deformations

and had the yield points reported in Table 2.All reinforcing

bars were cut by a saw to a length toler-ance of 1/32-in.Bearing plates, 3/4-in.thick, were placed touching the bars at the top and bottom of the columns.The lower plate was placed in the form before casting, the upper plate was set 1n a thin layer of high-strength

plaster after the concrete was cured.The heavy t1e reinforcement

shown in Fig.6 prevented failure at the column ends by possible local non-uniform

stress conditions.

Casting.All columns were cast in a vertical position, fn plywood forms protected by an epoxy resin paint.Concrete was placed in columns and com-panion cylinders with the aid of spud vibrators.

It was noted that the absence of interior ties in the columns with bundled reinforcement

eased the concrete placing operation substantially.

By fnspectfon

after testing the columns, ft was found that mortar had filled the cavity between the bars of all bundles.The test columns and their companion cylinders were cured four to five days under wet burlap.They were then stored in the laboratory

until they were tested at the ages given in Table 2.Test Method.-Alf

columns were tested under concentric

loading as shown in Fig.7, with both ends fixed against rotation.Spherical bearings permitted rotation at both column ends until a load of 20 k was applied, after which the hearings were blocked by steel wedges.Electric strain gages applied at mid-height of all four column faces were monitored by a continuous

strain recorder.Even at ultimate strength, the spread between the four gage readings was less than 15%, which indicates that a closely concentric

loading was obtained for all columns.In addition to electric strain measurements, the total shortening

over the entire column-hefghtwas

measured by a dial gage.A continuous

load-ing speed of 160 k per min was maintained

for all columns.COLUMN TEST RESULTS the ACI column investigations

in the 193Ps.The equation used is'>P~=0.85 fc (Ag-AST)+AST fy,..........

~.(3)fn which Ag is the gross area of the section an'd AST fs the total area of longi-tudinal reinforce ment.This equation has been confirmed by several recent fnvestfgations10

and is used in Section A608(b)of ACI 318;56.A comparison

of measured and calcu-lated ultimate loads is given in Table 2 together with concrete and steel prop-erties.A>>y 1~j, TABLE 2,-COLUMN STRENGTH J Column Desig-nation hfain Steel, (>>p i per square inch Cylinder Strength, fg, In pounds per square inch Top Bottom Avera Test ge>In ays hfeasured Uftimat'e Load,'>test>)in kips Calcu-lated tfinate Load in Yips Ptest Pcafc Location>all~I 12-8S 12-8B-1 12-8B-2 12-8B>>3 12-8B-4 12-6S 12-6B-1 12-6B-12-6B-3 12-6B-49,610 49,500 49,800 50,000 48>470 48,510 49,300 48,800 50,200 48,230 3220 3290 3930 3550 3280 3970 3840 4200 3270 2960 3290 3150 3680 3150 3360 3470 3310 3820 2540 2860 3250 3220 3800 3350 3320 3720 3570 4010 2900 2910 5 915 8-'83 6 i9.09 6>>,889 7"'.789 726.7b2-~758'02'626 842 836 906 856 839 695 681 730 607 597 1,09 0.94 1.00 1.04 0.04 1.04 1.03 1,04 1.16 1.05 Top Top TOp Top hiiddle Top Top Top Bottom Middle The test data were also studied ln terms of the relationship

between applied load and total column shortening

expressed as strain..The load-shortening

durves for the columns with 12 No.8 bars are given in Fig.8.Type of Failure.-Aff

columns failed.through the crushing of the con~e followed by the buckling of the longitudinal

reinforcement.

Except for~columns, failure took place in the upper half of th'e columns.Tffe typical nature of such a failure 1s shown in Ffg.7(a)./he Iftrength of the concrete placed fn the lower half of some columns was reduced to explore the phenomenon

of top failure, which had been observed10

fn numerous prevfous4ests.

Though the cylinder strength of the bottom batch for columns 12-8B-1, 12-8B-2, 12-8B-3, 12-6S, 12-6B-1 and 12-6B-2, was from 4%to 14%less than that of the top batch, failure took placein theupper halfof the columns.For column 12-6B-3,cylin-

der strength of the bottom batch was 22%below that of the top batch, and in this case failure took place in the lower half of the column as shown fn Fig.9(c).Even so, the measured ultimate load exceeded by 24%the value calculated

on the basis of the cylinder strength for the bottom batch.The column test results were evaluated essentially

in terms of the equation for ultimate strength of concentrically

loaded tied columns established

during"A Study of Combined Bonding and Axial Mad in Reinforced

Concrete hiembors,'y

E.Hognestad, Bulletin No.399, Engrg, Experiment

Sta., Univ.of Illinois, 1951.

I I 0 I t V I I 1i ljl I c~1 I 1 I II I 1 W

902 BUNDLING BUNDLING 903",;>@0.IT$u>y4'>flj A>>'Qtrt>>,.Yr~Q>jg)s 1 J'bg ,>>4u,g.!~>(((g+"~4>>-+u I I>'J r ((~4'tu>>+8>)f-()(Ik&b)41, i jjpptt'jt'-'-})>>)rrr,'4~;eQ$f.'I 6 I'i a.'Jgg i.: ',y J~i (r>>,>>8>*>>r>r>>>41 s+J YP is'./@+I".'r$8'j',:, (>>J(fi'gQ>'-

&No.)2-8B-I (o)NO.l>)-BB-4 (b)..No.l2-6B-3 (c,), FIG.7,-TYPICAL COLUMN FAILURES-These findings confirm the previously

reported observatio'n

that the column strengthof

the concrete placed in the lower half of columns is Increased;proba~

bly by the'improved

compaction

afforded when the upper half is cast.Similar-ly, the'column

strength of the concrete placed in the upper half may decrease somewhat by water gairi from below.To evaluate effects of bundling, there-fore, measuredultlmate

loads were compared to calculated

values based on the average cylinder strength for the top and bottom batches for each column.The two spliced columns 12-8B-4 and 12-6B-4 which had I/4'n.clear be-tween bars at the splice, failed in the-splice

region at mid-height

as shown in Fig.'r(b).~~Effect of Bundling.-

The ratios between measured and calculated

ultimate load given in TabIe 2 exceed one (1)for all except two columns.'ll'hits confirms previous findings that led to the ACI column investigation

equation.j

t i')'lJ">8 r+>'.r.~>'t.~~i Yield point or steel~.r~>>>>>l'lr r>6~.I>>>j 9~~4 J"J~J'~600 JC 8 2 400 J+)2.88-2 (t>(ts at 6 in 12-8 (ties at 8.1 12 ln.)\)2-88-3'spliced bep t()ucrjnd)

)2-88.4~(spdced bars$ln.clear),>200 12-8S (spaced bars)12-8S 0.001 J~J~~J J 0 Total column shor>ann>d.

ih incttespei~

FIG.8.-LOAD-SHORTENING

CURVES FOR COLUMNS\'"~, J The load ratios of columns 12-6B-1 and 12-8Bn2 jr(ere 1.03 and 1.04 r ypectively

as cpmpared to a value of 1.04 for column 12-68 that had convention-

ally spaced Iprs.Fpr 3.6'l%longitudinal

reinforpen)*ents,.

therefore, no detri-mental j)feet of btmdling was found regardless

oftie spacing..,-.For the columns with 6.58%reinforcement, which(eltpceds,the

maximum value of 4%given by ACI 318-56, 1104(a), the 12-in.tie spacing of column 12-8B-1 led to a load ratio of 0.94 as compared to 1.09 for column 12-88 with spaced bars.By reducing the tie'spa'cing

to 6 ln:"for column 12-8B-2, the load ratio increased to 1.00.Furthermore, column 12-8B-3, which had a 6-in.tie-spacing andufailed

above the splice, had a load ratio of'1:04.'-Therefore;

even for 6.68%reinforcement, no detrimental>

effect of bundlingl))as found when the tie spacing for'bundle'd

bars was reduced" tb 6(in."which

is>>eslual'to

24'tie-'iameters, or-one"-half

of'the least dimension-of

the'column.

>"-'undling:did

not" significantly

affect'-the'relatk4sliipr

between applied load and'column'(ihorte)iing.-

Thlhris"shuwrilforthe'dollimtis'4th'No."8&Ps"fii(Fig.8:

J r I I'l t II~

BUNDLING The results for the columns with No.6 bars indicated a similar lack of effect of bundling.Sp/fang.-Bundled

reinforcement

placed in the corners of a column section maybe spliced in the~me manner as single corner bars.The bars from be-low may be offset to a position inside the bars above the splice, and a proper amount of lap may then be provided.The bars may also be-butted and welded'n these testy, a splice particularly

suitable for bundled bars yes explored.As shown in Fig.6 the splices of the three bundled corner bars were staggered a distance of five bar-diameters, and a fourth splice-bar, 35 bar-diameters

long, was added at each corner.For columns 12-8B-3 the bars were cut by a saw, and each bar was touching its longitudinal

extension.

The contact was not perfect and after testing, a mortar layer 1/32 in.to 1/16 fn.thick was found between the bars.Both of these columns failed outside the splice, and the measuredultimate

loads exceeded the computed values by 4%and 16@, respec-tively.To simulate less accurate manufacture

of reinforcement, the bars of col-umns 12-8B-4 and 12-6B-4 were cut at the splice by a hydraulic bar cutter with 60 cutting edges.The bar ends were wedge-shaped

by the cutting to an angle of 90, and a clear distance of 1/4 in.was provided between the bars when the reinforcing

cages were tied.Both columns failed at mid-height

in the splice.However, in spite of the unfavorable

conditions

for a direct stress transfer be-tween bars in the longitudinal

direction, the No.6 bar column developed an ultimate strength 5%over the computed value.The ultimate strength of the No.8 bar column was only 6%below the computed value.As shown for the No.8 bar columns in Fig.8, the splicedid not significantly

change the relation-ship between load and column shortening.

It was planned in subsequent

tests to strengthen

the splice by longitudinal

welds between the four bars at each splice.Even without welds, however, three out of four spliced columns developed an ultimate strength in excess of the computed values.It is obvious that the strength of splices with longitudinal

welds would exceed that of the three bars outside the weld.Therefore, no columns with welded splices were made.It is believed that the short lap used in the splices did not suffice to trans-fer stress by bond.The mortar between meeting bar ends was probably sub-jected to a triaxial stateof stress so that acompressive

strength far inexcess of the cylinder strength could be developed.

To assure that the longitudinal

bars do not buckle in the splice, the reduced tie-spacing

used in the tests, twenty-four

tie-diameters

or one-half the column dimension, may be neces-sary.If a splice of the type studied is used in eccentrically

loaded columns so that tensile stress may be developed in the longitudinal

bars,'the mortar be-tween bars cannot be expected to transfer stress and welds, or a longer lap, are obviously necessary.'>

HADLEY ON BUNDLING 905 for spaced bars, 3.Each bar in a bundle is a deformed bar and is individually

well anchored, and 4.Stirrup reinforcement

ls provided"in

regions of high bond stress.Bundling of compression

reinforcement

in tfed columns can also be used even for high ratios of longitudinal

reinforcement, if the'provisions

of ACI 318-56 regarding other details are strictly complied wfth.For large amounts of longitudinal

bundled reinforcement, it is advisable to reduce the maximum tie-spacing

to about one half of that given by the ACI Building Code.Because bundling of refnforcementwas

found to be saf'e in tests involving the extreme cases of bending alone and compression

alone, bundling should also be satisfactory

for members subject to combined bending and axfal load.APPENDIX.-NOTATION

The following symbols, adapted for use in the'paper and for the guidance of discussers, conform essentially

with"American Standard Letter Symbols for StructuralAnalysis" (ASA A10.8-1949), prepared bya committeeof

theAmeri-can Stanthrds Associatfon

with Society representation, and'approved

by the Association

in 1949: Ag=Gross area of section;As=Area of tensile reinforcement;

As=Area of compressive

reinforcement;

AST=Total area of longitudinal

reinforcement;

d=Distance from extreme compressive

fiber,.to centroid of tensile rein-forcement;

d'Distance

from extreme compressive

fiber to centrqfd of compressive

reinforcement;

4 fy=Yield point of reinforcement

not to exceed 60,000 psl;I fc=Concrete cylinder strength of test specimen;As/bd p'At/bd;and

k q (pfy)/fc.CONCLUDING

REMARKS The test results reported confirm the previous findings that the use ofbun-dled reinforcement

is a sound detailing procedure.

It can be expected that bundling of tension reinforcement

in beams will not lead to,detrimental

conse-quences as compared to spaced bars, for the following conditions:

1.Thery are not more than four touching bars in each bundle, 2, Bong stress computed on the basis of external bar perfmeter fs limited tp the vafuqs now permitted DISCUSSION

HOMER JN.HADLEY, F.ASCE.-The writer'was

pleased to read this 11 paper on the'testing

of bundled reinforcement

fn both beams a'nd columns." On>>Cons.Engr., Seattle, Wash.

\I'I>~F r jj l t

906 HADLEY ON BUNDLING HADLEY ON BUNDLING numerous occasions, he has found bundling highly advantageous

in beams par-ticularly in precast channel-shaped

concrete sections for short-span

bridge decks, for which A, C.L or AASHO bar spacing is peculiarly

ill-adapted.

There are probably several hundredof such short spans-16-ft-to-30-ft

long and ten or fewer years old-installed and in service in various parts of the state of Washington.

These have been made,wifh four bundled bars in each leg of the channel.The bar size depends on the span.length, with single-be stirrups looped around the bundle at the bottom.The stems of the channel webs are usually given a 6-in.bottom thickness, with a 7-in.top thickness at the under-side of the slab.These over-all web thicknesses, except inthe case of theouter curb units, are initially reduced to approximately

4 in.by notcldng with a 2-in.plankon their outer faces.Thenotchstarts

approximately

6 in.above the bottom of the stem.When the units are placed aide by side, these notched spaces, and any additional

spaces are filled with concrete and thereafter

there is full cover of the bundle everywhere.

There have been a few such small bridges on Federal Aid projects.After quite a number of small county bridges had been successfully

installed, per-mission was granted on a project having twenty-eight

ft trestly spans to use the precast units with four bar bundled reinforcement

in, each web.This pro-ject was likewise successfully

installed and 4 the best of the writer's know-ledge has proven entirely satisfactjry.

Unfortunately', an engin'eer from Wash-ington, D.C.visited the project during construction

and voiced some misgivings

about bundling.This brought ona local reactionof

rejectionto'thepractice'a'nd

permission

to bundle reinforcement

was withdrawn for several years, lt is the writer's understanding

that currently three bars may be bundled on local Fed-eral Aid projects but not four bars.He is unable to explain the rationale of this ruling.The California

Highway Department

has bundled four bars'on Federal Aid prospects since 1949 and continues to do so;.Not mentioned by theauthors

among thenuqed advantages

of bundlingis

the fact that it affords opportunity

for having the quantity of beam reinforcement

conform roughly with the moment diagram, by stopping unneeded steel areas somewhere near the points at which they become unneeded.In these days of high-priced

reinforcement, such savings can total a considerable

sum.The original use of 1/2 in.square bars fn contrast with 1-in.square bars was in demonstration

of this fact.In the beam with the single 1-in',-'square

bar, that bar had to run through from end to end of-the.beam;.whereas with.the bundled four 1/2-in.square bars only two of them carried through from end to end, and slightly offset longitudinally

in the beam, provided as much eHective bond area as the 1-in.-square

bar offered.li The authors state in their conclusion

that'bundling of tension reinforce-

ment in beams will not lead to deterimental

consequences

as compared to spaced bars for the following conditions:

1.There must not be more than four, touch-ing bars in each bundle;2.Bond stress computed on the basis of external bar perimeter must be limited to the values,now

permitted for spaced bars..." Strictly limited to their test findings these statements

are correct.However, attention should be drawn to the fact that they did not test five or six bars in a bundle and that there is nothing to be found in these tests to indicate or imply that a larger number of bars should not be bundled if that is desirable.

The writer has used stx No.10 bars in a bundle, stacked 1-2-3 from top down in one bridge in beamy of 9 in.width, and 2-2-2 from top doggy qyeqond bridge in beams of the same 9 in.width., No,ill;effect

haye pen,;qbspzyed, In the latter case the twovertical

tiers were not incontact with oneanother

but there was considerably

less than orthodox spacing between the tiers.In the writer's mind it has been the long-held and continued concept that if the bars in a large bundle are successively

well anchored in the concrete at their ends, so that they can develop their designed stress at these ends, it then matters little how much or how little bond they have between these terminal zones.It is at these endzones thatanchorage

is indeed vital.The intermediate

concrete is simply fireproofing

or weatherproofing.

With a dozen bars in a bundle, withgood plastic concrete and with vibration, the fines of the mortar will penetrate and fill the interstitial

spaces of the bundle and afford all needed protection.

But the dozen bars must be well anchored at their several ends.About that necessity there must be no misunderstanding.

The writer is particularly

pleased to see bundling applied to columns, where it will unquestionably

effect marked improvement

in economy and quality.The-contrasting

column cross-sections

in Fig.6 convincingly

show this, The authors and whoever elseparticipated

in this development

are to be congratulated

u n its excellence.

j 4 l I l ll d I I ab@1 II'I

e e e V/.0.No.Drawing N.Sy Title PO-0 3 Q BURNS AND ROE.lNO.o..l'"~s..sH.J'ale.No.C~d 4 Approved d2'-r Pr'Page No.Sheet~et nzet/Pr zfri'~AAzX~+Sriar

Ps////Eric/prZ/c'sr

/g/CrCWCX,+/+r

jPZJC~/QCpyrr///SuN S~Er//ere'4

~45-Jr~CJre JAeeJ-84 Y~(g Pre jp JggfcA/~T Jgocsz///cg~tct wag j~z//dgpJ, (gee J"/te-7/P)

orle'cd';/7'oxggggl~yt

~~gdrJ gf 7/h~rrc-'~~ra>~/o/Vs.-J'eP rn~/,/jc P/wc<E~j gj'/C/erOt/"/PAL/dr l><r~u/o a-'C Worl/Co//inc rl/,+e Cr/OCCn~P: 47r'-'o~d/-'O"~e A'r Wider'r"~porc'~Z/"C///PWZP~g er~d<J CZ/r/~or Zn guP/ig+get@'rc/ssg

tf-74" 7 roooA'u 8roJ//c~AcuDri i'77O jOV'/Z'O//~4~/r

Cfcf P O Ce/Wi/Plr//j/rd'/yncg~rl/<~i~j

/~u/c~c g~,/did~gJ~g~/%4 e/tr//e/C j>f Jg//~>>~c/VCgux~~~e>ddo'V

r j~glluorig+

d/u/jci/v ltd/I.nor/Yiu/-'"'k c)/'~~/i n.~ggcoi f/4/o/felrrerifJ

par OgcP 4'VCR Ct+//c'ndiekar

Ji'Iles'O/

/d')pc'P/o/rcu(R/

74 vr/P44g IJ'Ji le)d/ra.wo/co//fru//ri/r

g+67+cojgclrl

/D~lWg f'cA ht//Cce&//O/PI cd/t/fag"J/+JJ 4n/O, t/~j QrH//cv A/I biz-.7i)r c'" 7, z;.//n rc/o~g Q/~zc,ny-.4'c/vc/y

/p//ere 4~rp/gxl+g~ctctpp~//e

M vcJJ'n e 8</" rJ c/jrcr4gK/id'$ye o.s dg z4u I peoi t.o/y~lj k/"zgurrclrrc

z.'ses..Z,, Z/rrc/ppeor c s'/j/cc rp e/8c/rz 4/"c/o.z rcc//wigi$c/f~/rrvc r//enny<, p//earl~//riled

~rcypuuyr~gi

or Cur/gp/li p//Ay)seee sssees.'ATTACHMENT

3

~I I I V/.0.No.Drawing N.By Title dO~03 BURNS AND ROE,,INC.Date/+Book No.J~4 Gale.No.J7 Ch ed App oved c'age No.Sheets~of/v~//~/~-'crrui'g//c/'k~J/l~~

/4 t~gJ~/qc ada'c wg/I z/-c c"/~//-8'plica-pp=/zJa3 oner///un:

Jyyr'c c/pz///,///n/<caT//-cJ4c'p c+4/J/c jib.c~c-W~/4~Ferrite~///f/t t uA PiJ+gal~+HAJJ~/~~=/13 g)'Ws/~i//g~jlc<//dCcc/kb'/~

uc H~/-+CJXII 7-/~cud'c~/c~/i~~i'.c.

r,~4 M>,z z'.age 7iIu~r~g~r/cu/.P/~x

X~X>J<<ii~4

Ae~mrzrwccm pu~Qufcg rwlu~gtncig

/Z/~Xi'>a Form BR 8002-2

, l~~il~N.O.'etio.Graviing By Title Apltro ed BURNS AND ROE, INC./'ate/I~~Book No.Gale.No.Ch kd Sheet~of~'I SHIPp.g Dreretntt No.tty'8tte~~~BVRNS AND ROE, INC.ceceeccc, le J,~l4cerewt, cc, 7,~ere Angel~ccclt.0, Attrroored

'l t~,l pegeHo.I4 Sh t~rot-~/g,~gyes Ce Checked 7)cia.~H)PP~@NG 17 a I l i': Jl!Zj/EX/pg/7~+/~I~~~Cgg.j 4/A>C 6HZ C//A'/7dAZ I~'C~cr~)nerf@

'mcr I/&1 cI~I/u p~~c7 V'ee)'Ii('g)

A rtos'/S-7/

-//.<fico'/c/~Ie-'.V>>~h6S~Afr)/4+

rl Jew'eL I~8 (Q'W CC/NAOS,C E Mki/7/i/kac'C,C U>>'-C4>fan'" t/d r 2ig r/Zc'C~~/OP('crSa p~r tlCI'~%/gal)

u'/C.>./ac/~!g-N)//./d4 li/D'OR/ZOrI

r4L Sf'R EgZ~~CpgMW/Cttn

'r Ar>eCO~+uZSC)

g.V..Ay (CP-ac)gS;P'//C))e72 XgPW Zk)Hr-cP<CX 4A'pSS'gecr.Ccr~c'Ace.>>w/g'aox5 VaerrC~~S ffa~~4~rW~Vr p'I r+g~)afar)1)PK OKSSC thee).~HCC'e:rI oPAS+Ct'5 g6'///C.4.x (/'crba J c (A et tr~~~1 I~~l t I~~~~~I:, l.'.J~l'

~I I~~I ,.i~I\: j6&cdcC'..~K-.:&g>>~/cP 7./"...dcujiun

//4',6 l.: I.i}~~~~~~I fi n..//=.-.:-'.",::..'P~=.:>~vZc.~7.u 0~a 0 1E~BURNS AND ROE, INC.h WO.No.+~+~Daaa d~<<r~Booh Na.O+~Pago No.Drevking lo.N ghaat0 Mof gy'~Ch k r ved Title r~~i~'n~~a/~~ar//p WAlzvr~v-/+~i I:: Pg jcreyPziu'~

/~f<NiPr>>P"/YcfJ/~4g~PQ//a~L)~0,~.~a~~0 1'~1 k~gfiw~..//2Z a 0 L~O I 1~~g o tv'.,7 Spy (/Q~Pm F z,i A ZA'I~~~~~~~~~~~r~.~'~.1~~1 4 o~gPr~'~+/.-W aC'I~~~~'~~~~~~Form BR 8002.2~4~~~~00 0~~0 0~~~0~0~~~0~~~0~0~0 00

't~~~~Q Vf.Q.No.+Drmving By Itic o.~.~Gale.Nn.C ec Appr ed r I'UR S AND ROE, tNC.Boak No.27 Page No, Sheet~et..jill/CJfi shan A Jf~Zg~riuc 4/ilier, ccnrrnqfrj'-

vr'l'ororg~lc

f4.'~d"i~iJ'

OA e/-o cr orno ro"'r.oorcr;.~W/o.or 4'77->a~/i 23Oy,lSC/f~~~e~~~e~w~A..~/CclCC',-'g7C Won-O'P>7'//Zor<)

occofrin'.'ec g 4Pjrlgo Zgr/7/'gc Z...,.../"/>J34',/', lt",d'dd,,'Pl

rl.-7/:/>'7 O>l dt p~e: AGRIC.....

X.:.:/1~54-//JKr/

g+7?-rrt7/:.:'Qg

(, d gP.:: '.,perry':

Cr.>>:::"/op(f',.'7g~r<Jrp<Gal'lrj i oS d'+p~pizj~)..y~)/f~gi'..<.::::.:,/clr./Ig-/.7768'c

WzZ-,g7/...,..., 7 Z~'k lf't: Nl jS'Z;/c//Ir/<

So/-f.7/7/7clo.(z0qQ c Jo)r t~~~~J~~~~~~~~~t~~~~j., Crlotrilnfirlc..SJZcrrr".~~C.<o?/u=Z/da'Z~., l~~~e))>>w 4 j.'..0/c,"..',/~~Ac'4<@8'd@rAX~!ye".~d/<kJcXg4'".

o P~ggrcrol/r

Sg~i o.>/r.~gaerrm..

//-ZZ H-oggcrzy'~7

cocr:.CgJZ.Z~.~.J/c'V,Z.p~qe

'.4Z...4ekrg

cor V4r>c./.rrrtrcitrorl

j':cg z boa&.J....='voo+PJ

P.-r'oc"d.odor

ocJ'c o>>-..7.'..ob Ac.g'cnr rr/rorL rlZ 8>zYzocrr~tdl<g.l<c/Pr

cor.o.o rcrc>~inc', ug jfci'.,ltr/c

govt.rn Z4 gq/crnrrr'eo/co

ore Acr<erne rkrrim.>...:or.mc.,vt.ri.Marco/rocl

//-gg err,C'O/rZ

ocro~rl/8r coo"-.m+'A"...con/erg+~~/rorioni4p

d~/wccrr.moorcC.r.use>ader.

v/c.r e-pr/o/rrrrrrt

-5@87co>>..l/-Zz..or.J/rcodg, roti)/fr'crrrlui

/I-3Z..gOVcNrlr, Pjc~'lcCg-'

~For~OR 8002 2~~e~W

II~II IV 1

BURNS AND ROE, 1NC.tjtj.o.No.39 O O Data V at D Book No.Dr'awing'.

IC.Nrt.By"<ch cd Title'-ggi jPxj~~.u Ngrr".':, j4 j~l jjUUjjjv PZUjt Q/J/.M~lic J jag Fjr~lg Jg~r Pgj Pago No, Shoat iaa ot---r j"/C Wlf t.'t e at~I Ij~~~~a~~a ar/NJ jg ahAZ r t~a~a~~:: g~.ji..i.(S~~Z~y8W33

'.'~a: Scrv~cs A (Conscruc/7i

UO j.'j'j/cv~I\'C/: VZ/a--3 3 ja 32~UjcOato,~2C'g+S'C.~~,~a~,~r o a lg4wc OpCjsCCrg jf Ir5': (Cdj/isMvgfijc

fjrjcc SS+fj j a~I~t~I'.t a~J a r: '-j@s-5~-: 3F 4/zan/73-.O'Z+z$0 Z~d r.a/tor j jjjait (wc/~su~)ttjjeta ot Jjrjt'ij jta L~r~" r~t I~I~I j iQ:~~~~~.izing-79'~~r a~~~a~gj j cr 4Cg!!i~Z>" gk.'~ai~/vor//~-Pcs 0~~~~~~~e~~~>>~~~~~0~o 0~~Form GA 8002.2 4~e~0~~~~~~~~\~~0~~

.j gp)~~$.0.No.~POD 0 Drawing Noi By~Tile Date Calo.No hec ed Ap roved BURNS AND ROE)INC.Book No.CÃrlrz I e Page No.Sheet~>>f/pe///.-~C>cr chuck~c>>F Ezyccccr~~n

&zP~ezwv z//7o)~J g/g gt~~v cp W/~7/s=8 Z, 77/g/Prc~cc.: Ci/cap ZP-'roe ICa/egg lY-zov/P~/yah.4 lF-ill g Rulc/Jcc//a/xgy

J/ceo g~/i/err 7o c'z/crzur Pre//Z=ag5 P 4 cretic~: Cz c 8>>Z4'Z7gp~c zs-)Cg 7'/h>Ar.P~J

7o c~Pri.-~Zji~o a+x'bP<Z7,774 XZ, 9yz, jAc'~r g~jjuciQ tu P~z7W~//=gp&'z-I'l,SC Z/dc jarA Qo+fd&n/J<("=I 7o~~z-fcg-

cd/>Jo~" pc~>IS ,gg'ward zA+(kE~~~~cc, Pu/egg gP'XTp~pc wZ)zap'cc (d'~c Jg+)(z07)Y~-y xl>>Z+Wc-Soy)<Zo x>p/yq>>gg~110O" 4 all xf~~f+~oucdca/

=+jcufz=g x',g6=>zz i-;57<cSX J~o'clare darS I PZ-O.pg (O,X+7 Z>I Z FOtm BR 8002.2

0~J lj

~e C.BURNS AND ROE, tNC.., Q!'g.C', i'to'.4 Cgte~+agate No.+~~Page Ma.Growing o Cole.Na.gtteet~at~ra ,.By r h k~prov.'itle r..-'r/z~pr i r o r~<~a~floor."/~~/rr~~~rrC%7-re

I:\a\~~a~~~\.,~.j%rc.ni'iform 2Nj J"-7 Z tfcifin JZd dS~aS j+c,..8 vizonfi/~4cC r devi ur":j~g8.@Pc Aciv//!~g//rrr d4/>>Ž8/gttg HA'c/icdd/

P4//gd'+C//WrO....,:..::

<a'c<ac~f r~J.conPi<j pcs/P~><>j'i ns>rcP<c erst>:~'oiri7 aP...e cc(~ion rrz-'rc"c Wg ecPrsiZr inc.elr~g'P~Sd//<4'crt

re//d dgng MP at v/dp 3certt~c/col/a.:.:-.goZ-'Z>~'!

Agchc~P~c(gers j~rcro p 4c'vwcr7/~~>'no

,:.pgvrjpg A~oc rcr(c//4 6d'd f dd c1ogF oov7<u wo//cmz.vryno'err,jn~

gp gc Spore psucr%j,::-:ab~@.C<i5

C S'g~W 8/e/~7itt rg>d4g.rtrr+/nfl~.rubric'~

rp~S~neccrq..rr!rr C urer'rri7::..-::;</eeg n.~W Z-Z~-'Zg<"~+~

io c~rczc77p<

~dec~~~r/iuvt~orr7rs./

Hive)roo/4g/l gegz rfcjv;iir:-(~-

p9cc2:-'-':.+ri@VS+I'&rC-Mge(rOOJWg(//gggrSfr

irO/7>~'poS~r.r/rg cs'cto pgPrpdzgArv

/<jr gg jgu/qlccn retd eig~g./ic p ized et ji (-/"c/Aorcrrr-

jrr.-':-, ay//rw~sci~rP rr~.~ivrr Wee-'4 ri WZ~~e/='pi

c+i.rppcv ylzcj~rrp pc~/A'd<g He~evi.>.-~J

a6O<<...79iJ+jul@flu./ah>S/'nI 75 Werc/~C.VW

~c'l'4r u"Q'crt/rr Wc~r'Ccrgryl

wee sv'd'd~>~/oc<Z ore gov ops'(rcc/rhea rrrupprgcl

hd'f'gp rcpt i7/cg~S vcricr.rrr

o r c')ccz c~rc<g7 rro..-'-Crrfc

uov'&-, j4 nx 8 ue Drs>rrrc'71~>

JccfAo ZZo>dig 7 rb7crrcg/e

Igi AY@-/~r~icm..%is wo/I dcev resn Pcsgy J"$<rsrn err gee'........

A eh~Xicclj/~)rr'(d

cwWJrv~gi,~~1~e~Ae oa a form SA 800M P~~~a~g~~~~~~a~~1

0 Oh VM~hp Oy~oo C~~I>>TO 0 4 04~~4bh+ICI 1 LAYClte'I CA>>LAYCR ov 00 tll 4Y OCC LICC4.Oil>>4~IA>>CQ LTD.)~II 8 9'~0~I.v~at 000~0 00>>0~q>.0>>0~Q~Q J~0>>r.l et I'.~<<e+>>~~I'VOL 41JORL4L&tl t COO,Ct 4'IO t tLTCot O'b llCtOItO.aCC CT>>Cr>>0>>$Žoo~0 D<l,bt>>c erat)/r gn~tg Tt AYCRS I5'7 II CS.LI Y" IL nh LAYCIts~Ilsgv t CA, I A'YCIL~2 II~i t CLA>cps$H IICX.LA'tCC

Clttito~p(p~'I I!0~00 0~00~n gn a'A 0 C 0 J$fl~v 0 p4>>+II 4 LAYCILS 4 Ch.LXYCC$II'K~1 Ttl toll C l 4)olg~~~~~~~~~'o~:,4 I4~I>>~~Cplbo 14~v oo~oooo>>~oooo>>oooo>>

J~]"$I~COI Ll MJ.I~M lttIN!~LIOT etOOtNH'SCC D+4'o 01CT eCCT~T Doe:iri4)jercr.bio ye(<t 0000~~00 O FOAL eTDILA4$I'OOL RCII4K OYIOI~AbTJ l Q.N>>~~IICY IC A l I I.I I ho~~POOL~~~~I"I I~~~~J~a<<~~~~~2 LAVERS~llf$lh LAVEC,~IIQ 0.~~I poo LAYCILS 0 a..sea-A'I I 4 LIlICIC 4V I LVTr.)I.~.~J.~~Ioe 5'.~.~~~.0~,~0~~~FOR.REINlt IN 5Lh&P.KYOH~C't

Ct.'CL>OH I,"i~<$1Q&ECTIOkl 030-SSO~e~0~~0~s.l (~3-'~'t I~00>>otoo~00~~~~~~~~~~0~~~~~~~~~~>>00~O~0>>~000~O~~~J>>o o~>>C Qi 4ST J r~oo PQ CCIOII+o l4OT Ot>>OWN OCC OW4>>MTl etCT>>404 S04 i f~O~CL.COO'IOC

.~~..~T IIC4+OtnT Ar'Cg>>I plr>>Yo Ir)(OO r~~--xCV I'R nb~!(TYlo)LI l4.>>CONST JT y',I I CL.Slhlh"Ot

~Q:-.J~~Q I~g~i g r 0 Q p QT Q4 Z 0 m 0 R C/I tO g~0 P 0 0 I~~op~I 5/Z-A~J o~o I

0~~

~0~~+~~~~~\~j/I%85 R g~~

I f,, I

~.//J~~~'a.//ARRPÃRW~SI r 1~/.~~~g I H i I I~PI~~~

0

o)o r r~CF~~~%mr~~/J r p/I/jr r/~~

0~~

,W.O, No.;-:tPrIIWillg

." Sy Thf~~oole/d/g)d~took Me, Ic.No.~/Cg~e Approved a Page No, Sheol~el O~r W~~40~~~la~~~I I I~J'.~I I.l~t 0I 0~~I~~0~.'l~0~~..I l"L~I.~~~~0~~0~I~~~0~t~~4 ,~~~0~~;~et~~0~~0 I~~a Ie~a~~~14 ar C,I..CO>Ios.~I~jul-SC///ended

dr C~~/ifdd//o>>

., e.Z PO Cu~>g i.','.+dan j dncrgXc'Pnsm'.

..:/Od<<j,+de';jqr gcziy>>~~V'~~~I~~<~~~r'I, e, see-8 I..~~~~'gg.'z74'oy.

~'~~~~t~~~'0.J~~~~a.~~t S CO fid6.fy<<et C I d~SCe-'Ia rt 0 0 I~~~I't t t~~~~~~e e~~~ra J,~~J 4 WzclPyo)A'))'-/rdnP~udp'~n

Se'/<z~c-".~I:: f.'l I aa~aa~0~1 t~~I~~0.I.~0~~0 I 0~~~~~~'rt~eaa~~r~I r t ara}<<t)~~~d~~r 004~L I~I~~~~~~~~~I re 0~~~~~I>..L.~~0~I~~-at~~0.+/der/4',.+<.,e)d'7 n t dEcj P'td./.IlI.I.d'4 r, rt I~C a 000 p~~/'I/Porn~Z~~/rr/7<Žg prrrrrr~~~, wisp.'s-,pz-z6,...!>>/hatt

/fi P/me//rdna/

/t!Jc'r/~.~d//Zuni, p~<<S2.~,//.8, y,p/~Py,~1~cyA~~I'.,I l",.e~~r~0\~I'I'~r~~l..I~~~~0~~~~~~~~~I I 0~0 I l 0 I~~~~~0 j I I S.~,t~~I~.t~I~I~~~~~~~~~~~J'~drtfrrj

l8+~c'I/>>'r cd/7c'r~~c

Pd///rr4dr<~cdr~gI g g'd//d~/j//r'd+g/n/!

/c ji'>>//>>re r/r.I::.c2ndt/:, d rccv~rptr",r/nor'/

//lc'rm 7hcl.'.careen.'::~r/r'.csnp urer//r ri'Zu/r/>>I

drt:.o/$d~.';7I/., e6/ld:lg/4~3'.gdlt Q, r/7.r/<f2/S',-.Ji//ja5w<~/./..u'%e id'/l."r't

r'..l//.c'dorctyp

.;...J'g>>ted P~" e//dr/Par/fg

.: dr'd'I/.yC'/>/Cygne>'vi'nt c n.'//7/r dt.d d'.C'a>00 ea~~~e~ee~~~~~~~~~~0 r~0~

0 E a.~I 1'l 1 l t'r,

'W.O.No.~4 4 Drawing~g By fl lr Title~<'BURNS AND ROE, INC.Date/'o~Book N Gale.No.S/X Ch ked A Z.-ws r roved r r Page No.Sheet~of/Ac//Jfp~j//c//

IJ cc c"4'/Q4'/@

@joel g~gc 44//r g)f/~S~k)Zaire~l~S ZZZ-'C'aZ Z-S~'l&c'dP&~/sc'df

//~+oJh J'o c+P"I~<wc 7 Co/rc<oIcgo/r/

do Jere r<c/ou'<cog Z.$&pep gc>Z-to~P5c/A a)S'/W~j-'/u,'WZS Pk~/-aogrr/lo~l=O.t//Arly.S/"-FJHI~S/r Jg-/Z)=4 ff/z,]J~/34))7J-IC/90 WAS ZZ=asizfhf~jg 83'p sgz-jc J/~Z-u=,~SF/dcl~S-=

/)7J Ci s~jo//~J Pgj=,rrxldZ<S=-

/g,ZJ zc zi f&gJ=/F/)////

~SC.Z/<2/-cfog Jgf Z lZ FEr//Jc=Fi>8=<S=

'a,z/xz7//Z u/'=/,r/Pc/i=/8/c(+>>./~~ac)g r<<--I-,u 4'c z(gJ wJaq-31J$7Z'f~--O'h274 S'$598 H/3-Rc3-7n/-/god zg z3g PJ/rh-~=/ii'I gq Pg'=Z<~iXE8 W~gz l2Jdud lz yd p Odr fc'fNlo~/Cooo S s=4+$<rgb.Form BR 8002-2

V~

ee,r rr i oo'~o os~o\f BUR SAND ROE, INC.!WO Ne+fru+Dele~fr/.7 BeekNe S rd~L PegeNe.Dra win Gale.No.SheetMf ef By Cel A proved.r.~Title r r r.>r/r/Wr'r/ji'giurf

+fr~rWrc'c/Heiefr/P+Wf

.'e'rfcnrcZ/q rj ilg7ifrr cd if'/rcr/7 ifr g gc/r rl B rc's.merry.

rp rrrrcnpcur

8r trpb/r crrdn i idion I'o~pVrrlfr/rcir

.Xi f/dr'/<c/~a~/m~r/r'.rn..We...VrC/err~rj".....4.

r rr-ii-:',,:: "'-::.-:: '.:::g~..3rrP r ccrPPcn7.gr er&rrree P cc'/rrrrÃBBr zz W/0:=ZZM c 7=Z7r/P 4,':;:"-'::;::;".'::...-'"::

'.:."-".: 'f:.':":-',.'::::

".:.".'~y'Cg jl-&rj7 g/PZ/CurrCid

%~~r~',-.~e e.r~<':, e.~~~~~~~~r~e.Q/d Z~gr guru neer/7::~i)::-:,:.:-:~@AC~e"W4/I: '-:.::.':as%">(4g'lee 7=.>'77.rrr rt rcrirlrlr~/'..

ggcl..:.:.':,...:: gfrg<gg rr'Pire/Ccrnrfr'qcFzs~

co>JiliB>>:hg:=d~7.-Af r.'./i crV~ruP~+/Q'.-::-::.".':.:-:..W4/t"Cghl r C",fi.~~~~~0'e::;".ji>~J/lcsI K.>Z,fdJ rrJ-rcpt/rrrr: rrrC/rrr~P

~r WZZ-Z:.:.f'/rrr.'<4Z I g>>4'i/zJlc),8/2 squirrel m~l ge/rrn.:.::.'....:

--: "/n c>i>I~i ZL J'Zg-Z.j.grrrrA~iver..~~'ef~i o<<o'oO'o J~~e~~e~~~i~~C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~e~'o~~~<<~~eo~~<<ooe o oe r~~I'~~~~'~~0~v os 0~~oo 0~~~~~~e ee>>o>>~~oo~o~~~o~p~.~e~~~~o~o~o~~~>>~~o~.~S o~~~e~N~~~~~~~o~~~o~~~~~ee~'I~~~o o eForm BR 80024 e~~~o~oo<<~~~~~A%~o

'L