There are complete set of RC drawings and plans for 3-story building.
The house is designed with respect on PBAB-87 ( code for RC structures) and PIOVS-81 ( code for seismic design ).
The numbers in code's name means the year they are employed in use.
The codes are very old and I will be thankful If you share your opinion
My country has seismic hazard 0.3g
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
http://forum.civilea.com/thread-27464.html
***************************************
Moderator Notes:
- PDF files format
- Useful, instead of non English text (Russian)
I make them in *pdf files because the drawings are made in ArmCad which is compatible with AutoCad and If you don't have ArmCad installed on your pc you are not able to view the drawings.
I am sorry for the language (Macedonian), but I don't see difficult to read the adopted rebar.
It is not sufficiently clear what is your request? Do you need code design check?
You have not attached any calculations sheets.
This is "set of drawings", as mentioned in the title of the thread. Nobody expects calculation's report to be there in the drawings set.
I have a question: what means 'R', and 'RU' before the diameter?
Also what means "Д.Г.И." after the names of the design team? Diplomated Gradjevski Injener?
As a recommendation: it looks strange to use slash "/" for the arrow af the leaders pointing to the rebars. Why just don't use standard arrow like "->" ? Also the 'arrows' of the dimensions, which are circles - Is this a standard in Macedonia/Serbia, or they just 'look cool' to the draftsman? ;)
Also you used one symbol for locating the cross section (in "kofrajen plan" it is just a L-line with a title) and another for the sections of the reinforcement plan - a triangle.
Anyway, everything seems clear, my recommendations are for the stile. Like the use of several different fonts. Just follow the standard - 1 technical font (ISO), 3 sizes - that's all. Also try to print it black&white, and check the thickness properly. The dimension lines should be thinner than the concrete line. The rebars should be thicker than the concrete line. As you are using 3 densities of stirrups in the beam, also put the length of the three density zones, not only the number of the rebars and the space between them.
Also put a dimension of the overlapping length (the longitudinal bars of the beams). for example, how anybody can put on the right place rebar position 6 on "ramka Ry1, rigla na platforma 100" on drawing 13.pdf? My recommendation is also to "expand" (open) the stirrup in such way, that the double hooks to be clearly seen.
If it is just style check of the drawings why does he writes the codes and seismic acceleration???
To excuse himself from critics about the excessive reinforcement, probably ;)
By the way I am sure that your codes are much better than those of 80% of the other world countries.
Dear ynopum, Thank you very much for your objections for the style. You are completely in right for the recommendations and I will try to apply them in future.
Medo_sk, as I can notice you are from Macedonia too. I put the acceleration only for sense about the value of seismic force, and If you are engineer with good experience, with that data (acceleration, plans and sections ) you will be able to give your opinion about the adopted reinforcement and adopted dimensions for beams, columns...etc.
I cannot understand your complains.