0 views

Uploaded by Rajeev Dua

Earthquake Engineering

Earthquake Engineering

© All Rights Reserved

- ME2303
- 859063351 00 PROV CalculationReportBifurcazioneFinal
- ASME_Ch9_p001-024
- The Effect of Easy-Going Steel on KBF's Seismic Behavior
- Nonlinear Behavior of Steel Coupling Beams
- Report_VTT-R-08651-12
- Rotational Stiffness of Continuous Composite Beams With Sinusoidal Web Profiles for Lateral Torsional Bucklinguckling 2012 Journal of Constructional Steel Re
- Elementos Finitos Nolineal
- Theories of Failure2.pdf
- MMA Electrode Classification
- DME Question Bank
- Structural Modeling and Seismic Performance Analysis of Mehmet Aga Mosque in Istanbul
- m. Youssef & a. Ghobarah
- 2_CasingDesign.ppt
- 10.1617_s11527-014-0405-5
- 3_309
- ssss
- j.aej.2010.12.003
- 20 Nonlinear Materials
- Asme Case 2188-4

You are on page 1of 5

and detailing of beam-column joints

in seismic regions

Mr. Indrajit Barua writes exceed 0.87fy , granted that in laboratory be good to check the beam-column joints

This has reference to the paper titled conditions the ultimate strength of on the lines proposed by the author.

Proposed codal provisions for design HYSD bars may have been found to be

1.27fy . Moreover, when the stress in the Mr. Indrajit Barua

and detailing of beam-column joints in Designers' Guild

seismic regions by Sudhir K. Jain, R.K. steel is around 1.25fy , the corresponding

stress in the concrete could be very much Milonpur Road,

Ingle and Goutam Mondal published in Guwahati

the August 2006 issue of your journal. higher than fck and the concrete itself

may fail much before the steel does and Assam 781 021

The above paper is timely and pertinent.

I have done some calculations with the this mode of failure is not desirable.

data given in the authors' examples. Why, then use a factor of 1.25 ? We may Mr. D.S. Joshi writes

perhaps therefore take a factor of 1.0 This has a reference to the above paper.

However, for computing the exural instead of 1.25 or is the factor of 1.25 The seismic region should mean the

strength ratio, I feel that taking Pu = 0 for taken to cover the fact that the codal areas where the expected intensity

2

computing Mu/(fckbD ) for the column is provisions for computing seismic forces of earthquake ground acceleration is

overly conservative. We may perhaps are low and we need to provide for forces 2

much greater than 0.1g cm/s and not

use the minimum Pu for the purpose, higher than those anticipated by our articially upgraded zones merely due

which could be the least Pu, without codes ? In that case, something has to be to panic or other reasons (that is, Zone

any LL, resulting from frame analysis, done about preventing premature failure IV and V). For other areas less stringent

factored by 0.8 for further safety. of concrete before the steel yields. provisions can be made.

Secondly, I feel that the computation In almost all multistoreyed buildings It is true, that design and detailing

for tensile force in the rebars is also rather designed by my firm, shear walls or provisions in beam-column joints in

conservative. Recall that the area of steel diagonal bracings are provided, and the IS 13920 : 1993 do not adequately

required/provided is computed on the demand on the MR frames, as well as address prevention of anchorage and

principle that the maximum stress in the the steel in the beams and columns, are shear failure during severe earthquake

rebars at limit state of collapse cannot vastly reduced thereby. Even so, it will shaking.

Clause 1 force resisting system. If columns are not to indeterminable eccentricities, they

It is not understood as to after giving stronger than beams framing into a joint, are also exposed to transverse tensile

a few important reasons out of many, there is likelihood of inelastic action. In strains. In this biaxial state of stress,

for increasing the sizes of the columns the worst case of weak columns exural a considerable reduction of strength

and importance of joint design and yielding can occur at both ends of all occurs. Cyclic loading in cross-cracked

also their provisions in ACI and New columns, in a given story, resulting in a concrete causes a repeated opening

Zealand codes. Why is it proposed that column failure sway mechanism of the and closure of cracks. Because of the

the minimum dimension of column structure. dominance of the shearing action across

to be not less than 15 times the largest the joint, movements parallel to open

beam bar diameter of the longitudinal We design our structures for only cracks also occur in the joint core.

reinforcement in the beam passing a fraction of the actual seismic force to

which they are really expected to be The joint reinforcement does not

through or anchoring into the column

subjected to, as we take in to account the play a major role in such situation.

joint, on non conservative side without

benets of over-strength, redundancies It is therefore necessary to limit the

giving any valid technical reasons,

and ductility while determining the magnitude of horizontal joint shear

when it is clear that the values given in

design forces. stress to protect the joint against diagonal

ACI code are the critical values as the

crushing.

development length of the longitudinal

bars in compression govern the size of The proposal of bigger dimension

of the column requires lesser steel for When the cracks become large, the

the column along the length of the bar.

resisting same combination of forces. transverse reinforcement yields and

Research has shown that, straight beam

the process of grinding and progressive

bars may slip within the beam column

This provision of 20 percent higher splitting due to uneven concrete bearing

joint during a series of large moment

moments is a good provision from the begins. The transverse reinforcement can

reversals. The bond stresses on these

point of strong column weak beam resist shears only at this stage.

straight bars may be very large. To

substantially reduce slip during the design concept to achieve formation

of hinges at the joints in the beam However, the hysteretic response of

formation of adjacent beam hinging, it the joint core shows severe pinching. A

would be necessary to have a ratio of portion only, which is not suggested in

IS 13920 : 1993. complete disintegration of the concrete

column dimension to bar diameter of within the body of the joint can result.

approximately 32, which would result This is associated with drastic volumetric

in very large joints. On reviewing the This clause helps in increasing the

stiffness of the frame which ultimately increase of the core unless connement

available test data, the limit of 20 was is provided. This is how the connement

chosen by ACI by accepting inevitable helps in reducing the drift.

reinforcement is required to be provided

slip. in joint portion also.

Clause 1.3.1

When the frame has deep and strong

Clause 1.1 It is apparent that, diagonal tension columns, the joint shear stresses become

The sum of the moments of resistance and compression stresses are induced small and as a result the problem of

of the columns are proposed to be at in the panel zone of the joint. The diagonal cracking in the joint core

least 1.1 times the sum of the moment diagonal tension may be high, when is completely eliminated. Thus, the

of resistance of the beams along each the ultimate capacity of the adjoining physical size or volume of the joint

principal plane of the joint as against 1.2 members is developed, and this can becomes the most important parameter

proposed by ACI. lead to, extensive diagonal cracking. because, it not only directly controls the

The severity of diagonal tension is level of stress in compressed diagonal

It is well known that, because of inuenced by exural steel content and concrete but also dictates how much

the disproportionate distribution of the magnitude of the axial compression transverse steel in each direction can be

the moments around column beam load on the column. provided.

joint during the higher modes of

response of a multi storeyed frame, the The strength of the diagonal strut Further, the stiffness of the joint,

bending moments at the critical sections, controls the joint strength, when the which determines the contribution of

considerably larger than those derived joint shear forces are large and diagonal the joint deformation to overall frame

from static analysis could result. cracking occurs in the joint core. deformation, is also proportional to the

volume of the joint.

The intent of this clause is to reduce There are in fact several struts,

the likelihood of yielding in columns separated from one another by diagonal The nominal shear strength of the

that are considered as part of the lateral cracks. Not only are they subjected joint as proposed by ACI, is not be

Table 3: Mechanical properties of high strength deformed bars and wires+

No. Property Fe 415 Fe 415 D Fe 500 Fe 500D Fe 550 Fe 550 D Fe 600

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

0.2 percent proof stress /

i) 415.0 415.0 500.0 500.0 550.0 550.0 600.0

yield stress, Min N/mm2

Elongation, percent, Min,

on guage length 5.65A

ii) where A is the cross- 14.5 14.5 12 14.5 8 14.5 11

sectional area of the test

piece

10 percent more 12 percent more 8 percent more 10 percent more 6 percent more 8 percent more 8 percent more

than the actual than the actual than the actual than the actual than the actual than the actual than the actual

0.2 percent 0.2 percent proof 0.2 percent 0.2 percent proof 0.2 percent proof 0.2 percent 0.2 percent

iii) Tensile strength, Min

proof stress but stress but not proof stress but stress but not stress but not proof stress but proof stress but

not less than less than 485.0 not less than less than 565.0 less than 585.0 not less than not less than

485.0 N/mm2 N/mm2 545.0 N/mm2 N/mm2 N/mm2 600.0 N/mm2 660.0 N/mm2

Uniform elongation,

percent, Min, on guage

iv) length 5.65 A where A is - 5.0 percent - 5.0 percent - 5.0 percent -

the cross-sectional area of

the test piece*

+

Table from revised IS 1786

*Uniform elongation, for the enhanced ductility category, must be measured and reported in the test certicate but shall not be a criterion for rejection

greater than 1.5 Aj for joints conned purpose of calculating the effective shear 3. Minimum total percentage

on all faces, 1.125 A j for joints area of the joint is not understood. elongation - 18 percent and

conned on three faces or two opposite minimum uniform elongation

faces and 0.9 Aj for others, where Clause 1.3.4 percentage - 10 percent.

A j is effective area of the joint for Shear force in the joint shall be calculated 4. Fe 550 and Fe 600 Grade Steel

resisting shear and fck is the characteristic assuming that the stress in flexural need not be used.

compressive strength of concrete cube tensile reinforcement is 1.25fy where fy

in MPa at 28 days, whereas the authors One of the reasons for collapse of

= yield stress of the steel.

have proposed, 1.5 Aj , 1.2 Aj buildings during Gujarat earthquake

and 1 Aj respectively. In earthquake resistant reinforced 2001 was the use of substandard steel

concrete structure, it is important to use in construction of reinforced concrete

It is not understood as to why the

good quality concrete and steel for their structures.

authors have proposed higher stresses

proper performance.

on non conservative side than those

permitted by ACI. Solved example

Draft Code Doc: CED 54(7303),

March 2005 published by Bureau Of Looking to Figure 5, only the columns

Clause 1.3.2 Indian Standards Draft Specication for marked C3 on grid B-2 and grid B-5, are

The effective width of the joint, as High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and subjected to uniaxial moments, where

proposed by ACI, is smaller of , Wires for concrete Reinforcement, fourth as all other columns will be subjected

revision of IS 1786 in its Table 3 (shown to biaxial moments, irrespective of the

Min [b c ; b b + h c ] if b c > b b for above) shows mechanical properties direction of the action of earthquake

concentric and coaxial arrangement of high strength deformed bars and force. It was therefore necessary as a

of configuration for beam and wires. general case, to solve the columns for

column, and Min [bc ; bb + 2x ] if biaxial bending considering minimum

In the interest of safety of earthquake eccentricity and slenderness as required

bc > bb where x is the smaller distance

resistant reinforced concrete structures by IS 456 : 2000 and also considering the

from the edge of the column in case

this needs to be corrected as follows. effect of factored axial force including

of non concentric arrangement of

conguration for beam. thrust and 20 percent increased moments

1. Upper limit on variation in yield (the exural strength of beams framing

stress Max 20 percent. into the joint in the direction considered)

Aj is given by product of effective

joint width bc and joint depth hc Fe 415 498 MPa as the lowest exural strength of the

columns meeting at a joint should be 20

Fe 500 600 MPa percent higher than the exural strength

The signicant reason, as to why the

dimension hc is replaced by 0.5 hc for the 2. Ratio of ultimate stress to yield of the beams framing in the joint in

stress should be at least 1.25. the respective direction of earthquake

considered. It is known that the presence and gives a step by step procedure to before compressive stress in concrete

of moment in one direction tends to design earthquake resistant dual system reaches the compressive strength value

reduce the flexural strength of the frame which includes the calculations (f ck). Hence, the tensile stress in the

column in the other direction. The axial for columns subjected to biaxial bending reinforcement is conservatively taken

force can become negative in certain and design of internal and external as 1.25fy for computation of joint shear

circumstances. joints. to account for (a) the actual yield

strength of the steel normally being

This discussion is made to understand greater than the specied yield strength

Figure 7

the views of the authors of the article on fy, and (b) the effect of strain hardening

Column dimension is 500 mm x 400 the subject. at high strain. When the tensile stress of

mm. The provision of links is correct as HYSD bar reaches 1.25fy, corresponding

per ACI 318, but will require to provide Mr. D.S. Joshi compressive stress in concrete should be

at least one central link as it narrowly Chairman smaller than the compressive strength

escapes provision of three vertical links ISSE Committee for Standards and Codes of concrete (f ck). Hence, section size

as per IS 456 : 2000 clause 26.5.3.2.(b) and C/o S. G. Dharmadhikari and concrete grade should be such

Fig 8. Also, as per more lenient IRC 21 24, Pandit Niwas, S.K. Bole Marg, that the maximum stress in concrete

: 2000, clause 306.3.1, one vertical link Dadar (W), Mumbai 400 028 corresponding to ultimate strength of

will be required to tie central bar leaving steel (1.25 fy) is less than fck.

adjacent bars free. It is not understood

as to which code we should follow here We indeed appreciate Mr Barua

in India. The author replies: very much for providing shear walls

We would like to thank Mr. Barua and or diagonal bracings in his projects in

Conning Links Mr. Joshi for their interest on design north-east India for long years. What

and detailing of beam-column joint he has done in Guwahati needs to be

The spacing of links for the conning

provisions proposed in this paper. emulated in other cities. It is not easy to

zone shall not be less than 75 mm nor

provide ductility to a moment resisting

more than 100 mm (clause 7.4.6 of

Reply to Mr. Baruas queries: frame and enormous effort in design and

IS 13920 : 1993). In the calculations

We agree with Mr. Baruas comment that construction is required for the same. It

of connement reinforcement for the

for calculating the exural strength ratio, is much easier to make a safe building

arrangement of reinforcement of Fig.

it is conservative to calculate the moment using shear walls. We hope many more

10, using rectangular hoops of 8 mm

capacity of column corresponding engineers will go by the example of his

diameter, the spacing of hoops is worked

to zero axial load (P u= 0). We have professional practice.

out as 65 mm, which is less than 75

in fact mentioned in the paper, In

mm.

actual practice, it is desirable to take

Response to Mr. Joshis queries:

Here, 8 mm diameter confining minimum corresponding to Seismic provisions on beam-column

links at 75 mm centres in the joint is joints tend to vary widely from code to

proposed to be provided. Possibly, this actual obtained from different code. An overview of beam-column joint

is not the meaning of above clause. This provisions in some codes of different

reinforcement either could have been 10 load combinations. Since, we have not countries is available elsewhere .

1

mm diameter at 75 mm centres or 10 mm calculated different load combinations Considering the large variation in codal

diameters at 100 mm centres to account for the example problem in this article, provisions in different seismic countries,

for the area to be provided as required we have conservatively taken the value we need not follow the ACI exactly. In

by the calculations. fact, the proposed effective width of joint

of corresponding to = 0.0 (clause 1.3.2) is in line with New Zealand

'Design of reinforced concrete seismic code (NZS 3101: 1995) rather

structures for earthquake resistance' for the purpose of this example. than with ACI provisions.

2

by Indian Society of Structural Engineers, In earthquake resistant design of We agree with the concern of Mr.

Mumbai (2001), contains complete structures ductile failure of member Joshi on high strength deformed steel

explanation of all the clauses of IS 13920 is desirable rather than brittle failure. bars and therefore, we have proposed

: 1993 discussed above and also suggests Failure of steel is ductile and that of some changes in IS :13920 (clause 5.3) .

3

the required changes to be made in IS concrete is brittle. Brittle failure of beam- Moreover, these issues have also been

provisions taking into consideration column joint is not desirable. Therefore, discussed thoroughly in an e-conference

the provisions in various international during severe earthquake shaking, stress on 'Steel Reinforcement' by the Structural

codes available throughout the world in steel should reach tensile strength Engineering Forum of India (http://

www.sendia.org/)4. Since these issues deals with concrete road bridges and is Reference

are beyond the scope of the present yet to evolve its own ductile provisions 1. UMA, S. R., and JAIN, S.K., Seismic design of beam-

paper, we are not discussing them for RC bridges and hence IS 13920 may column joints in RC moment resisting frames

Review of codes, Structural Engineering and

here. be used until IRC develops its own Mechanics, July 30 2006, Vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 579-

provisions. 597, .

The example problem is meant to

Column section in Fig 7 was a 2. ______Concrete structures standard, (part 1

explain the proposed clauses on beam- and 2), code and commentary on the design of

column joint. Hence, a simple beam- trial section and its size did not meet concrete structures, NZS 3101 : 1995, New Zealand

column joint C-3 in Fig 5 in the example the shear requirement. Therefore, we Standard, New Zealand.

building has been chosen to illustrate the have not detailed the conning links 3. JAIN, S.K. and MURTY C.V.R., Proposed draft

same. One could have chosen another of this trial section and revise the provisions and commentary on ductile detailing

section size to that of Fig 10. In the of RC structures subjected to seismic forces,

joint. Document No. IITK-GSDMA-EQ11-V4.0 and

revised section Fig 10, the confining IITK-GSDMA-EQ16-V3.0, http://www.iitk.

There is a variation in the provisions links are designed and detailed as per ac.in/nicee/IITK-GSDMA/EQ11.pdf.

4. _ _ _ _ _ _ S t e e l r e i n f o r c e m e n t , T a t a S t e e l

different codes, for example, IS 456 e-conference, June-July 2005, http://www.

: 2000, IS 13920 : 1993 and IRC 21 : We agree with Mr. Joshi that we sendia.org/

5.6,7

1987 . These need to be reconciled by should use 10 mm diameter hoops 5. ______Code of practice for plain and reinforced

the different code committees. It may be with 100 mm centre to centre to meet concrete, IS 456 : 2000, Fourth Revision, Bureau

the requirement of clause 7.4.6 of of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

noted that clause 5.1 of IS 13920 : 1993

states The design and construction IS 13920 : 1993. 6. ______Code of practice for ductile detailing of

Dr. Sudhir Jain reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic

of reinforced concrete buildings shall forces, IS 13920 : 1993, Bureau of Indian

be governed by the provisions of IS Dr. R.K. Ingle Standards, New Delhi, 2002.

456 : 1978, except as modied by the Mr. Gautam Mondal

7. ______Standard specications and code of practice

provisions of this code. Hence, the ties Department of Civil Engineering,

for road bridges, Section-III, Cement concrete (plain

in columns for RC buildings should be Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur and reinforced), IRC 21 : 1987, Second Revision,

governed by IS 13920 rather than by IS Kanpur 208 016 Indian Road Congress, 1997.

Be an I CJ Author

We at ICJ offer an opportunity to our readers to contribute articles and be a part of

a big family of ICJ authors.

In particular, we will appreciate receiving contributions on

the following:

Articles bearing on innovative design and construction

Articles dealing with challenging construction problems and

how they were solved.

Just a Point of view covering your opinion on any facet of concrete, construction

and civil engineering

contribution to about 2000 words only.

Contact:

The Editor, The Indian Concrete Journal, ACC Limited, CRS Complex, L.B.S. Marg,

Thane 400 604. Tel: +91 (022) 25825333 (D) 2582 3631-3, ext. 653

Fax: +91 (022) 2582 0962; E-mail: editor@icjonline.com

- ME2303Uploaded byGalih Pramudita
- 859063351 00 PROV CalculationReportBifurcazioneFinalUploaded byJosé Hernández Barrientos
- ASME_Ch9_p001-024Uploaded byjjirwin
- The Effect of Easy-Going Steel on KBF's Seismic BehaviorUploaded bytaosye
- Nonlinear Behavior of Steel Coupling BeamsUploaded byAndreea Pop
- Report_VTT-R-08651-12Uploaded byOtso Cronvall
- Rotational Stiffness of Continuous Composite Beams With Sinusoidal Web Profiles for Lateral Torsional Bucklinguckling 2012 Journal of Constructional Steel ReUploaded byMarco Figueiredo
- Elementos Finitos NolinealUploaded bychavico113
- Theories of Failure2.pdfUploaded byDeepak Ashokan
- MMA Electrode ClassificationUploaded byRathnakraja
- DME Question BankUploaded byILAYAPERUMAL K
- Structural Modeling and Seismic Performance Analysis of Mehmet Aga Mosque in IstanbulUploaded byMuhammadFaysal
- m. Youssef & a. GhobarahUploaded byJhuma Debnath
- 2_CasingDesign.pptUploaded bySleim Bguiga
- 10.1617_s11527-014-0405-5Uploaded bydraqbhatti
- 3_309Uploaded byw1000000
- ssssUploaded byVignesh Venkatasubramanian
- j.aej.2010.12.003Uploaded byAndriBenz
- 20 Nonlinear MaterialsUploaded byAnonymous oTrMza
- Asme Case 2188-4Uploaded byDinh Nguyen Gia
- 2Uploaded byDaniel Laurence Salazar Itable
- design conceptsUploaded byMahendra rajak
- Strength of Csg and tbgUploaded byTiffany Dacino
- Standard Comparison SKK 490 to Q345DUploaded byFred Han
- Composite BeamsUploaded bypresentasi mankon
- 2395ch02Uploaded bySheikh Mizanur Rahman
- Fema p440a Part2Uploaded byPourang Ezzatfar
- Basic Beam Static 2 1Uploaded bymahfuzul_haque
- Concrete-T-Beam-Design.pdfUploaded byRhegie Samonte

- 316 316L Data SheetUploaded byPrem_me
- M15- HILTI Anchor Design Report With HST3 M10 Anchors_AD_2017_2Uploaded byRajeev Dua
- Technical_data_sheet_for_the_HST3_metal_expansion_anchor_Technical_information_ASSET_DOC_5412122.pdfUploaded byBijaya Raula
- Deflection of Reinforced ConcreteUploaded bycklcon
- Page 8.pdfUploaded byBrandon Levine
- Handbook Cpwd NoPWUploaded byAijaz Zende
- h 1449013814Uploaded byRajeev Dua
- Ho Wei RongUploaded byAfia S Hameed
- Cylinder Strength Versus Cube StrengthUploaded byfsirfan
- Iit Norsar Bmt Brochure Dec2015Uploaded byRajeev Dua
- ACI 358.1R-92 - Analysys and Design of Reinforced Concrete Guideway StructuresUploaded byJocker_Boy
- DMR-7-CC04-C-GEN-GEO-S-001-B01Uploaded byRajeev Dua
- DMR-7-CC04-C-GEN-GEO-S-003-B01Uploaded byRajeev Dua
- brochure-yst310.pdfUploaded bysunil
- RCDesignandDetailing.pdfUploaded byAnonymous 1HFV185Sl4
- R.C.C. Column DesignUploaded bygufran khan
- fly ashUploaded bySanjay Murthy
- example2.pdfUploaded bydane05
- PCI_Jan02_Seis_design_provi_in_US.pdfUploaded byRajeev Dua
- journal_S--Pramod 30jul15esr.pdfUploaded byRajeev Dua
- Calculation_of_Long-Term_Deflection_by_Ian_Gilbert.pdfUploaded byMohammed Satti
- Design CalculationsUploaded byTharmalingam Vijay
- WorkshopIS1893PartI_Draft2016Uploaded byRajeev Dua
- Dr D K Paul Former Professor IIT RoorkeeUploaded byjacs127
- Design Manual for Structural Stainless Steel - CommentaryUploaded byRajeev Dua

- S29AL016J----bootSectorFlashUploaded byqwertyu
- Study of Cavitation in Hydro Turbines - A Review184Uploaded byAlberto Aliaga
- CCNASv11_CH10_LabFUploaded byFreddy Adolfo Acosta Aguilar
- Final Exam Solutions 2011 6 FallUploaded bySum Khor
- Lta Dc m&w Wen DazhiUploaded byjohnkoh99
- Bayer ERP Dev Factory_Delivery Process Improvement Options_V01.pptxUploaded byAbhinay J Badhan
- WA Readme-3.6.31.0 BetaUploaded byAnes Hrnjić
- A.J. Ayer - The Concept of a Person 1963Uploaded byJYDeGroot
- Auto RecloserUploaded bySenthilkumaran Venkatasamy
- Bernard 2002Uploaded byJose Colin
- Dynamic Analysis of Open Crack2Uploaded byAbdul Khader Shahadaf
- Storytelling and Grammar Learning: A Study among Young - Elementary EFL Learners in ColombiaUploaded byFabián Vergel García
- Pme 200 ManualUploaded byJonathan Kailas
- Bagaimana Cara Crack Program RegistrasiUploaded bysepulut79
- Corporate Taxation - CPA's Mind BlogUploaded byblaire
- ciip09_1564_1571.2683Uploaded bymuse
- f-whaUploaded byAlsayed Rabiea Miesalam
- Check Point CLI Cheat SheetUploaded byJay Patel
- P2 September 2014 PaperUploaded byAshraf Valappil
- Ord 5774 Norsok, Iso, And APIUploaded byRoo Fa
- Examination+of+AISC+LRFD+Shear+Lag+Design+ProvisionsUploaded bySergioAlcantara
- PI ConfigExample OnOffboarding30SP05Uploaded byabraxas_dragon
- Water Softening 1Uploaded byzpraj09
- DMA MUploaded byDoctorr Camacho
- Hot Mix Asphalt Railway Trackbeds; Trackbed Materials, Performance Evaluations and Significant Implications - RoseUploaded bymkon79
- Communication Protocol for Co Operative Collision Warning Students3KUploaded bySariaKhan
- Paramount Building, 39-storey building, San Francisco (Englerkirk, 2002, photos courtesy of Pankow Builders, E. Miranda, Len McSaveney)Uploaded byBesar Hoti
- Digital Signal Processing with ApplicationsUploaded bysahar
- SATA-IO_Rev3.0&UTD1.4_Overview-Final[1]Uploaded byWendeh Wang
- multivariate basics for students_MewaSingh.pdfUploaded byAmal Fernando