RC Structure Strength

It is a silly idea.

In many cases, too much reinforcing is more dangerous than too little because any failure would be by the sudden failure of the concrete, not the slow failure of the steel.

You say you are a structural engineer but from your question it appears that you do not understand the basic principles of reinforced concrete design.

Would you care to rephrase your question so that we can give you a meaningful answer.

I think what he meant is that in theory the steel content in RC Beams should not exceed 10% and steel content in RC column should not exceed 6%, particular in Rigid Frame Structure.

And all Building plans he encountered arrived at the same conclusion, despite many months of intensive calculation and re-calculation. That means after all the Merry-go-Rounds and Beating around the Bushes, the Structural Design arrived at the same spot.

Why not just simply use the 6% and 10% steel content formula in the first place and save all the time wasted in optional calculation, when you know the end-result is still the same.

I hope he knows where to place the Steel bars to cater for moments, torsion, bending, axial and eccentric loadings.

- Dr. LSD

He appear to be too engrossed in Value-engineering by trying to re-invent the Working Stress and Ultimate Load Method into the " all Roads lead to Rome Method " Another Idiot savant ?

Many engineering "rule of thumb" are calculated form complex formula with a certain safety factor. Everyone then use the simplified results to speed up design. Engineer designing in CAD won't recalculate, they'll just follow the "rule of thumb".

For example strength of nuts and bolts. You can spend time calculating strength from material, size and pitch. Or just look it up in a table.

Engineer may recalculate everything if they need/want a tighter safety factor. Usually not a good thing.