• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

2009 IRC Rebar in Footings

D

Durant

Bronze Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
86
Location
Oklahoma
Most cities in Oklahoma the inspectors are requiring four #4 horizontal rebars in the footing, or two #5 stacked. I find that no rebar is required in the 2009 IRC except that foundation with stemwall one 12 inches from top of stemwall and one within 3 or 4 inches of bottom of footing (R403.1.3.1).

No siesmic requirements here. According to 2009 IRC I don't find where any rebar is required in the footing accept where a stemwall is added.

Is rebar required in footings and am I missing something?
 
No expansive soil, just looking for code requirements. Thought I might be missing something in the code book. To me the only requirement in my case is with stem wall you must have one #4 in stemwall and only one #4 in footing assuming normal conditions and no extinuating circumstanses.
 
Could be a local amendment.

We require 2-#5 top and bottom of foundation walls as a local amendment.

Ask the inspector for a Code section.

mj
 
MJ,

Is that two at the top and two at the bottom for a total of four?
 
Ok, getting off track here. 2009 IRC, I see no, nada, none requirements for rebar in the footing. Am I missing something? Without any extraordinary conditions and no local amendments, do you know of any IRC requirements for rebar in the footing? Please
 
ps. I am the inspector and I don't make up my own codes, so I need the actual requirements that I might be missing. Just a little rusty and in new environment.
 
R403.1.3.1 Foundations with stemwalls.

Foundations with stem walls shall have installed a minimum of one No. 4 bar within 12 inches (305 mm)of the top of the

wall and one No. 4 bar located 3 inches (76 mm) to 4 inches (102 mm) from the bottom of the footing.

R403.1.3.2 Slabs-on-ground with turned-down footings.

Slabs on ground with turned down footings shall have a minimum of one No. 4 bar at the top and the bottom of the footing.

Exception: For slabs-on-ground cast monolithically with the footing, locating one No. 5 bar or two No. 4

bars in the middle third of the footing depth shall be permitted as an alternative to placement at the footing top and bottom.
 
ICE said:
MJ,Is that two at the top and two at the bottom for a total of four?
Click to expand...
Yep. We have some very expansive local soil with many foundation failures. The foundation repair companies keep plenty busy with our older housing stock.
 
ICE,

Then where the footing is poured first and the stemwall is added on next pour the only requirement in the footing is for one #4 rebar in the footing. That's what I read.

Thanks
 
Durant said:
ICE,Then where the footing is poured first and the stemwall is added on next pour the only requirement in the footing is for one #4 rebar in the footing. That's what I read.

Thanks
Click to expand...
That depends on the engineered design.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We have terrible soil here. We require an engineered design for new house footings in most areas of the county depending on the soil report results. We have a county minimum of (2) #4's in footings.
 
Just as I thought; without amendments there is no requirement for rebar reinforcement in the footing accept with stemwall one #4 near the bottom; or if monolithic or turndown foot.

Thanks
 
ICE said:
R403.1.3.1 Foundations with stemwalls. Foundations with stem walls shall have installed a minimum of one No. 4 bar within 12 inches (305 mm)of the top of the

wall and one No. 4 bar located 3 inches (76 mm) to 4 inches (102 mm) from the bottom of the footing.

R403.1.3.2 Slabs-on-ground with turned-down footings.

Slabs on ground with turned down footings shall have a minimum of one No. 4 bar at the top and the bottom of the footing.

Exception: For slabs-on-ground cast monolithically with the footing, locating one No. 5 bar or two No. 4

bars in the middle third of the footing depth shall be permitted as an alternative to placement at the footing top and bottom.
Click to expand...
To be clear , your quote is for seismic D's , not other areas.
 
Durant said:
Just as I thought; without amendments there is no requirement for rebar reinforcement in the footing accept with stemwall one #4 near the bottom; or if monolithic or turndown foot.Thanks
Click to expand...
that's really for the vertical dowels to have something to hook to in the footing. Expansive soil is a totally different animal.
 
Durant said:
Just as I thought; without amendments there is no requirement for rebar reinforcement in the footing accept with stemwall one #4 near the bottom; or if monolithic or turndown foot.Thanks
Click to expand...
I don't think I am going to make a public announcement about that. Even though we are mostly siesmic B around here, I will continue to require some rebar in the footing. Besides it makes for a pretty boring footing inspection without it. :D Just my two cents
 
Mr. Inspector

By requiring something that is not required by the adopted regulations you are acting illegally. Your job is to enforce the adopted regulations not to impose your personal preferences.
 
Mr.Inspector said:
I don't think I am going to make a public announcement about that. Even though we are mostly siesmic B around here, I will continue to require some rebar in the footing. Besides it makes for a pretty boring footing inspection without it. :D Just my two cents
Click to expand...
Mark K said:
Mr. InspectorBy requiring something that is not required by the adopted regulations you are acting illegally. Your job is to enforce the adopted regulations not to impose your personal preferences.
Click to expand...
Let me rephrase. I will continue to allow reinforcement in footings
 
Stick to your guns there in Gunnison. Whatever segment of this country managed to get plain concrete foundations into the code deserves a good nose twisting. And then there's that code that only geniuses understand about 2 #4 in the middle.
 
Mark K said:
Mr. InspectorBy requiring something that is not required by the adopted regulations you are acting illegally. Your job is to enforce the adopted regulations not to impose your personal preferences.
Click to expand...
You know Mark, you have said that quite a few times. What do you have against innovation?
 
Ice

What do you not understand about complying with the law? How would you feel if a police officer gave you a ticket for speeding because he did not like the color of your car?

One of the few instances where a building official or inspector can be held personally liable is when he knowingly requires something that is not required by the adopted regulations.

I hear the complaints about government controlling our lives but when regulations are adopted procedures are followed that give us an option to object. I think it is much worse when individuals such as building inspectors put themselves in a position of imposing their own personal beliefs.

If you believe the building codes are inadequate work to have them changed legally, but until that happens your job is to enforce the adopted regulations.
 
Even the IBC will allow plain concrete without longitudinal bars for one and two family dwellings three stories or less even in seismic zones C,D,E or F

1908.1.8 ACI 318, Section 22.10.

Delete ACI 318, Section 22.10, and replace with the following:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top