Professional Documents
Culture Documents
State-Of-The-Art Report On Anchorage To Concrete PDF
State-Of-The-Art Report On Anchorage To Concrete PDF
1R-91
(Reapproved 1997)
STATE-OF-THE-ART REPORT ON
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE
For the first time concrete anchoring knowledge based on worldwide test programs is presented in a state-of-the-art document. Performance
of different anchor types, including cast-in-place, grouted, expansion, torque-controlled, chemical (adhesive), and undercut anchors is presented
in both uncracked and cracked concrete. Failure modes in tension and shear, spacing and edge distance, group performance, and load
displacements are offered. The effect of loading conditions for structural supports, column bases, and pipe supports as well as base plate
flexibility, how load is transferred to anchors, and ductility are discussed. Design criteria and existing code requirements, both domestic and
foreign, are presented.
KEYWORDS: Adhesive anchors; anchorages; anchors; anchor groups; base plates; bolts; cast-in-place anchors; chemical anchors; code
requirements; combined loads; compression zone; concrete; cracked concrete; creep; deformation; design criteria; drilling; ductility;
dynamic loads; edge distance; embedment; expansion anchors; failure modes; fatigue loads; fasteners; flexible base plates; grouting; loads;
load transfer; load-displacement; post-installed anchors; preload; pullout; seismic loads; shear loads; slip; spacing; spalling; static loads;
stiffness; studs; structural design; tensile strength; tension loads; tension zone; temperature; torque; torque-controlled anchors; ultimate
strength; undercut anchor, yield strength.
FORWARD
This state-of-the-art report on anchorage to concrete is the first of a two-volume project being undertaken
by ACI Committee 355. The second volume, currently being developed, is a design manual. This first
volume includes no design aids or procedures, per se, but with emphasis on behavior will serve as the guide
for preparation of the second volume.
Committee 355 is working with Committees 349 and 318 toward the objective of including the subject of
anchorage to concrete in ACI 318-95.
355.1 R-l
355.1R-2 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
Deformation controlled
Drop-in anchor Fig. 2.17
Self-drilling anchor Fig. 2.18
Stud anchor Fig. 2.19
L Steel
plate
Undercut
With predrilled under-cut
hole Fig. 2.20
Self undercutting Fig. 2.20 Fig. 2.7-Bolted connections
355.1R4 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
P
Washer tack welded
. -
.
b v * Fig. 2.4 -Reinforcing steel
a *
‘X .
.. v * .
B
We I d
n
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-7
2.5.2 Expansion anchors-Expansion anchors 2.5.2.2 Sleeve anchors- The sleeve anchor
are designed to be inserted into predrilled holes consists of a steel stud, an expansion sleeve usually
and then expanded by either tightening the nut made of sheet metal, and a nut and washer (Fig.
(torque controlled expansion anchor, Sections 2.13). The bottom of the steel stud has a
2.5.2.1 to 2.5.2.5), hammering the anchor uniformly tapered mandrel which has the same
(deformation controlled expansion anchor, diameter at the end as the expansion sleeve. The
Sections 2.5.2.6 to 2.5.2.8), or expanding into an entire length of the bolt below the washer is
undercut in the concrete (undercut anchors, enclosed in a section or sections of the steel
Section 2.5.2.9). These anchors transfer the tubing. The bottom of the expansion sleeve is slit
tension load from the bolt to the concrete by longitudinally to provide for expansion. When the
expansion pressures or forces through friction nut is tightened, the tapered mandrel moves into
and/or keying against the side of the drilled hole. and expands the sleeve which in turn bears against
They often are supplied with a bolt, nut, and the wall of the hole. This anchor is used for
washer. The following sections describe the medium and light holding requirements.
various types of expansion anchors.
2.5.2.1 Heavy duty, torque controlled sleeve
anchor-This type of anchor consists of a bolt or
threaded rod with nut and washer on one end and
a cone on the embedded end, (Fig. 2.12). Around
the cone is a heavy expansion sleeve. Above the
sleeve is a collapsible mechanism, sometimes made .
of plastic. A spacer sleeve extends to the surface .
of the drilled hole. The anchor is set by tight- Fig. 2.13 - Sleeve anchor
ening the bolt head or nut which draws the cone
up through the expansion sleeve, expanding it 2.5.2.3 Shell expansion anchors - The shell
against the side of the drilled hole. The anchor expansion anchor, (Fig. 2.14) is available in two
develops its tensile capacity by means of a combi- types. One type consists of a two-piece shell held
nation of keying into the concrete and high together by steel tabs with a tapered, internally
friction between the sleeve and concrete. The threaded end plug. The second type consists of a
spacer sleeve aids in increasing the shear capacity. two-piece shell section with two tapered steel
Tensile capacity depends on the strength of the cones, one at the top end and one at the bottom,
bolt and its depth of embedment. which are held together by a steel spring at the
center. The bottom cone is internally threaded to
BEFORE TORQUING AFTER TORQUING accept a bolt or stud. By torquing the fastener
into the anchor, the steel cones expand the shell
to bear against the wall of the hole.
and washer. The bottom of the steel stud has a 2.5.2.6 Drop-in anchors-The drop-in anchor
uniform tapered mandrel around which is posi- consists of a steel shell and an internal steel
tioned an expandable steel clip or separate steel expander plug (Fig. 2.17). The anchor is internally
wedges with protrusions. When the nut is threaded at the top end while the internal end is
tightened, the clip or steel wedges ride up on the machined to a uniform taper, matching the shape
tapered mandrel, wedging between the mandrel of the steel plug inside the anchor. The lower
and the wall of the hole. portion of the shell is slit longitudinally into equal
segments to allow the anchor to expand when the
BEFORE AFTER internal plug is hammered with a setting tool. By
TORQUING TORQUING
hammering the plug into the shell, the lower
portion of the shell expands to bear against the
wall of the hole.
BEFORE AFTER
Hollow bar
Grout hole
Thrust rl
b
Mal leable
e shell 0.
2.5.2.8 Stud anchors -The stud anchor con- bolt and tapered cone are drawn up into the
sists of a steel stud, threaded at the top end, and expansion sleeve, keeping the bottom of the
has a drilled hole with longitudinal slits at the expansion sleeve in the undercut.
A
BEFORE AFTER
b
4 v- v -
. . v
. n .
. 4
.
D .
V
Q *
’ .
. .
.
t
A .b
V .v I
.
Q V’
Fig. 2.19 - Stud anchor
combined tension
tension loading and shear loading
By far, most anchor testing to date has been The various types of anchors have different dis-
performed in uncracked concrete. While cracking placement characteristics depending on preload,
occurs in almost all concrete, testing in uncracked load transfer mechanism, and failure mode. Fig.
concrete provides the basis for understanding 3.3(a)-3.3(c) present three load-displacement
anchor behavior. graphs. Fig. 3.3(a) gives the characteristic curves
for headed and undercut anchors while Fig. 3.3(b)
3.2-Behavior of anchors in uncracked presents curves for torque-controlled, drop-in, and
concrete self-drilling expansion anchors. Fig. 3.3(c) gives
3.2.1 Load-displacement behavior and failure load displacement curves for adhesive anchors.
modes under tension loading- The five primary The displacements shown represent the displace-
failure modes of anchors in tension are (Fig. 3.2): ment (slip) of the embedded anchor and the de-
(a) Steel failure formation of the concrete as well as the defor-
(b) Pull-out failure mation of the anchor.
(c) Concrete splitting failure When a preload is applied to an anchor,
(d) Concrete cone failure typically by tightening the nut to a prescribed
(e) Spacing and edge cone failure moment torque, the displacement caused by an
externally applied load is affected. The preloaded
0 2 4 6 8
d i s p l a c e m e n t s [mm]
4 6 8 10
Displacement s [mm]
I I Iine anchor type bolt diameter anchorage depth
mm mm I
Fig. 3.3(a) - Typical load-displacement relationships Fig. 3.3(b) - Typical load-displacement relationships
of headed and undercut anchors (from Rehm, of expansion anchors under tension loading (from
Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988) Eligehausen and Pusill-Wachtsmuth 1982)
d i s p l a c e m e n t [mm]
Fig. 3.3(c)- Typical load-displacement behavior of chemical anchors under tension and shear loading (from
Eligehausen and Pusill- Wachtsmuth 1982)
355.1R-12 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
anchor shows little displacement with increasing comparison to torque-controlled expansion and
external loading until the preload in the anchor drop-in anchors, the bond strengths vary con-
(and resulting clamping force on the concrete) is siderably depending on the adhesive component
overcome. The preload has no effect on the ulti- mix used and the installation procedure.
mate static tensile capacity of the anchorage, but Under working loads all categories of anchors
significantly reduces the anchor total displacement. should behave elastically with little additional
In the case of steel failure (Fig. 3.3(a), Line 3) displacement after installation. However, at
the ductility depends on the relationship between ultimate load a plastic behavior and in the case of
tensile strength and yield strength of the steel and cyclic loading only a limited strength degradation
the anchor length. Inelastic displacements of is desired. Fig. 3.3(a)-3.3(c) show that the actual
headed anchors due to concrete deformations load-displacement behavior of the currently
under the head may be expected at relatively low available expansion, undercut, adhesive, and
loads unless preloaded. Increasing the bearing headed anchors differs somewhat from this plastic
area under the head may reduce inelastic displace- behavior.
ments but will have little influence on the failure Under sustained loads displacements will
load [compare Lines 1 and 2 in Fig. 3.3(a)]. increase with time due to creep of concrete in the
Headed anchors that fail due to fracture of the highly stressed load transfer area (bearing area in
concrete will exhibit a brittle failure (Fig. 3.3(b), the case of headed or undercut anchors, contact
line 2). area in the case of expansion anchors, bonded
The behavior of drop-in anchors is dependent area in the case of adhesive or grouted anchors).
on the magnitude of the expansion force created As an example, in Fig. 3.4 (see Seghezzi and
in setting the anchor. When expanded properly Vollmer, 1982) the displacements of a torque-
during installation, high expansion forces are controlled expansion anchor loaded with a
induced and the load displacement curve may constant tensile force corresponding to approx-
remain almost linear up to failure [Fig. 3.3(b), imately 70 percent of the static ultimate strength,
Line 2). are plotted as a function of load duration on a
The expansion force, at installation, of torque- double logarithmic scale. It can be seen that the
controlled expansion anchors is smaller than that displacement velocity (tangent to the
of drop-in anchors and, therefore, the displace- displacement-time curve) decreases with increasing
ments are larger for equal loads. If the external time and, therefore, the displacements approach a
load exceeds the preloading force in the bolt limiting final value. The increase in displacements
generated by the torquing during installation, the is smaller for lower sustained loads. If the load is
spreading cone is pulled further into the sleeve, increased after a sustained load test, the displace-
leading to increased displacement. At failure the ment curve is rather steep until it reaches the
deformations are much larger than for comparable static envelope which is followed thereafter. Fail-
drop-in anchors [Fig. 3.3(b)]. ure load and displacement at maximum load are
Self-drilling anchors show larger displacements not negatively influenced by a previous sustained
in the total load range than torque-controlled load smaller than about 70 to 80 percent of the
expansion and drop-in anchors [Fig. 3.3(b)]. This static failure load.
happens because load transfer is mainly by
mechanical interlock which causes high pressure
on the concrete and large concrete deformations.
The displacement behavior of undercut anchors
depends primarily on the bearing area (undercut
area) and the installation torque. Therefore
relatively large deformations may be expected with
some undercut anchors while others exhibit elastic
behavior well above service load [Fig. 3.3(a)].
Adhesive anchors exhibit elastic behavior up to
nearly maximum load [Fig. 3.3(c)]. While the
load-displacement curves of adhesive anchors
exhibit relatively low coefficients of variation in 10* 10 10 2
Duration [Days]
Fig. 3.4 -Increase of displacement during sustained
loading
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-13
ACI 349, Appendix B, limits the tensile capacity If an anchor is installed too close to an edge,
of the cone failure of an anchor, or wup. of the anchor will fail before developing the concrete
anchors, to a uniform stress of 4 +d$ (psi) on cone strength. Therefore, for headed anchors,
the stress cone surface of the anchors. ACI 349 requires that the minimum edge distance
m to the center of the anchor be sufficient to
prevent a side cone failure. The following
(3.2) equation is suggested in the ACI 349 Commentary
for determining this minimum value.
strength reduction factor
0.85 for uncracked concrete m , in.
= 0.65 in zone of potential (3.3)
cracking
A = the summation of the projected where
areas (in.2) of individual stress
cones minus the areas of over- D = anchor diameter, in.
lap and of any area, or areas, F = ultimate tensile strength of anchor, psi
cut off by intersecting edges. f 'c = compressive strength of concrete, psi
Note: Other reductions are made based on
member thickness relative to embedment and the If this requirement cannot be satisfied, stirrup
area of fabricated anchor heads (see Fig. 3.8). or tie reinforcement should be provided.
ACI 349 has no requirements for minimum Cannon+ found that for embedments less than
center-to-center spacing of single anchors or 6 in., ACI 349 becomes increasingly conservative
anchors belonging to a group. with decreasing embedment. He has proposed a
Fig. 3.9 shows the frequency diagram of the modification to Eq. (3.3) to provide a better fit to
ratio of actual to Predicted tensile capacity of test data. For embedments less than 6 in., this
headed anchors. Theoretical capacity was modification would increase the angle of the
calculated according to Eq. (3.2). The tests were failure cone, measured from the axis of the
described by Klingner and Mendonca (1982a), and anchor.
were evaluated by Cannon*. Tested were
individual anchors with large and small edge For 1, c 3 in.: cy = 62 - 1.1 (l#, deg (3 3
distances and anchor groups. In all tests a For ld 2 3 in. but < 6 in.: (Y = 45 + 0.79 (6-ld) ,
concrete cone failure occurred. deg (3 . 5)
m
10
A t
\L DEDUCT AREA
L EFFECTIVE STRESS
AREA
OF ANCHOR HEADS
P L A N
*REDUCE BY THE TOTAL BEARING AREA OF THE ANCHOR STEEL.
Pd
Pd
t
t
L J
(a+2Ld-2h)
EFFECTIVE
STRESS
AREA . STRESS AREA REDUCTION FOR LIMITED DEPTH (Ar)
. A) Effective stress area for anchorage pullout
Ar= (a+2Ld-2h)(b+2Ld-2h)
The average failure load for a side cone mm (1 9/16 to 20 l/2 in.) and concrete strengths
(bursting) failure is given as: f’, = 20 to 50 N/mm2 (2900 psi to 7150 psi). Fig.
3.11 shows a histogram of the ratio of measured to
f predicted failure load.
- kips (3.7)
F, = 15m
35cCo’
The average failure loads given in Eq. (3.8) can
where only be obtained if the distances between anchors
are large enough so that concrete cones do not
m = actual edge distance, in. overlap each other. Assuming an angle of the
failure cone cy = 55o the critical distance is
For expansion and undercut anchors, approximately three times the embedment depth.
Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer (1987 and 1988), The failure load of a two-point fastening results
derived Eq. (3.8a) from 287 test series with single in:
anchors with large edge distances showing
concrete cone failure. G = xcr x F,, (3.9)
where
(3.8a)
F ul = ultimate failure load, single
where anchor, from Eq. (3.8)
Frequency [%]
40
n = 196 individual tests
si= 1 0 0
v= 1 4 %
30
I
20
10
Fig. 3.11 (a) -Ratio of acutual to predicted tensile Fig. 3.11(b) -Ratio of actual to predicted tensile
capacity for concrete cone failure of individual capacity for concrete cone failure of individual
expansion and undercut anchors away from edges headed anchors away from edges according to Eq.
according to Eq. (3.8a). (from Rehm, Eligehausen, (3.86). (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988)
and Mallee 1988, and Eligehausen, Fuchs, and
Mayer 1987 and 1988)
Fig. 3.12 shows the capacity of quadruple and 36, the spacing of the outer anchors between
fastenings for headed studs, expansion and 100 and 875 mm and the spacing of the individual
undercut anchors as a function of the ratio of anchors between 0.541, and 2.2&. The groups
anchor spacing to embedment depth as measured were loaded by a concentric tension load which
in tests and calculated according to Eq. (3.11). was equally distributed to all anchors.
Eq. (3.9) and (3.11) can also be extended for Eq. (3.13) covers the influence of edge dis-
multiple anchorages with any number of anchors tances, a,, smaller than critical:
in any spacing by setting the value of ai as the
distance atot between the outer anchors, and the
x0- value is limited to xa I n with n = number of Fu* = a& * Fy (3.13)
anchors in one direction. This is provided that the where
spacings between the individual anchors are
Xa?n = 0.3 + 0.7 am/a,crit S 1 (3.14)
smaller than acrit = 31, and the anchor plate is
sufficiently stiff to assure an even distribution of
tension forces to all anchors (see Rehm, a m,crit = critical distance from free edge
Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988). The X-method = 1.5 1d
can also be extended to take account of load
‘ actual embedment length
eccentricities (Riemann 1985). =
Fig. 3.13 shows the ratio of actual to predicted Fu = ultimate failure load, single anchor
tensile capacity of groups of headed studs. In the to be taken from Eq. (3.8)
tests the number of anchors was varied between 4
355.1R-19
0
5.0 I I
O
FE according to eqn. ( 3.8 ) 8
I 0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Fig. 3.12-Ratio of actual failure load of a group of anchors to the predicted value for an individual anchor as
a function of the ratio of anchor spacing to embedment depth (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988)
MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
_.-
I L
l-
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-21
Fig. 3.14 shows a comparison of test results with Bode and Roik (1987), evaluated data of 106
the theoretical values according to Eq. (3.13). It tests with headed studs to arrive at Eq. (3.15).
should be noted, however, that minimum distances
from the free edge are necessary for headed studs (3.15)
F” = 12r,3/2(1 + d&,) 8, N
in order to allow proper concreting and avoid
local spalling of concrete. Minimum edge where
distances for expansion and undercut anchors are
necessary to avoid splitting of concrete during F, = average failure load, N
installation and expansion of the anchors. 1d = embedment length, mm
If anchors are located in a corner [see Fig. d, = head diameter, mm
3.15(b,)], the factors xarn are calculated separately f’, = concrete cylinder strength
for each direction and then the two x-factors are at time of testing, N/mm2
multiplied.
Fig. 3.16 compares the measured failure loads
of headed studs with the values according to Eq.
mean value
o Anchor
studs,
concrete break-out
/ l Headed studs,
/ local concrete failure
0 ( blow -out)
.00 L I
. 00 .50 1.00 1.50 1.75
Fig. 3.14-Ratio of actual failure load of an individual anchor close to the edge to the predicted value for an
anchor with large edge distance (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988)
355.1R-23
With respect to the influence of free edges (see failure was approximately six bolt diameters.
Fig, 3.15) they consider the critical distance Under conditions of poor workmanship in the
beyond which there is no significant influence on field (e.g., oversize holes) slip failure may occur at
load as being in the case of one free a much smaller embedment depth than ld = 6D.
Slip failure may also occur with bonded and
adhesive anchors of insufficient embedment to
ati1 IJ 1.21, develop the strength of the anchor steel or to
cause a concrete cone failure.
and in the case of two or more free edges: Torque-controlled wedge anchors, which fail by
slip, generally fail by slipping the expansion cone
acit.2 5 21, past the wedges. This failure mode may also
occur with sleeve anchors. However, in some case
anchors may fail by pulling the whole anchor
For distances from center of headed stud to the (including expansion sleeve) out of the hole.
free edge(s) which are smaller than the critical Torque-controlled expansion anchors may also slip
distance according to Eq. (3.17) and (3.18), they to a critical depth and fail the concrete.
fou d that the assumption of a linear decrease of Deformation-controlled expansion anchors (e.g.,
ulti ate failure load in proportion to the ratio of drop-in anchors) have a fixed expansion and may
act”al distance/critical distance gives a lower slip to a critical depth and then fail the concrete.
bound of their test results, in much the same The slip failure load is dependent on the
ner as shown in Fig. 3.14. coefficient of friction between the sliding surfaces
raestrup, Nielson, Jense, and Bach (1976), give and on the spreading force at failure which is a
the predicted failure load as: function of the critical expansion force producing
failure and the deformability of the concrete which
FM = 0.21 x 2; (1 + d,ll&f$ N (3.19) varies with hole depth and concrete properties.
All of these factors may vary with anchor type,
manufacturer, and installation. The spreading
Eq. (3.19) was deduced by applying the theory force and thus the slip load of drop-in anchors
of plasticity to headed studs embedded in decreases significantly with increasing diameter of
co rrete. The failure load is assumed to be the drilled hole with respect to the diameter of the
pronI ortional to the concrete compressive strength. anchor.
3.2.3.3 Pullout (slip) of the anchor- Slip Theoretically the slip failure load F, could be
failure occurs [Fig. 3.2(b)] with expansion anchors calculated from Eq. (3.20).
when the expansion force is too small to develop
Fit = ps (3.20)
either the strength of the anchor steel or a shear
cone failure of the concrete. This is a typical
failure mode for wedge anchors at moderate to where
deep embedments in lower strength concrete
where the crushing of the concrete at the wedges I, = coefficient of friction
allows the bolt to “pull through”. The cause may S = spreading force
also be due to an oversize hole. Slip failure may
also occur in low strength concrete due to
deformation of the wall of the hole. The coefficient of friction depends mainly on
The testing of wedge bolt expansion anchors by the roughness and cleanliness of the drilled hole
Hanks (1973), clearly demonstrated that the and of the surface of the expansion sleeve or
primary failure mode for individual anchor tests wedge as well as on the spreading pressure. From
(uninhibited by edge conditions) was either cone Wagner-Grey (1976), the factor p for torque
failure of the concrete or anchor slip depending controlled expansion anchors is in the range of 0.2
on the depth of anchor for a given size. Only 10 to 0.3 and for drop-in anchors is approximately
of 464 tension tests indicated any cracking 0.35. The difficulty in using Eq. (3.20) lies in
associated with a cone failure. The line of properly estimating the spreading force, since
demarcation between shear cone failure and slip complex mechanics are involved. For this reason
355.1R-24 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
the profession relies on test data. However, steel wedges. Deformation-controlled expansion
equations for estimating of the spreading force are anchors generate higher spreading forces and
given by Wagner-Grey (1976). require larger edge distances than torque-
Because of the large variability of the spreading controlled expansion and undercut anchors.
forces and the coefficient of friction, Eq. (3.20) The capacity of expansion anchors which fail by
gives only an approximate estimate of the pullout splitting of the concrete has been evaluated by
load (see Eligehausen, and Pusill-Wachtsmuth Pusill-Wachtsmuth (1982), using theoretical
1982). Furthermore, in important applications it considerations. It was assumed that splitting
is advisable to test expansion anchors, which occurs when the tensile stresses averaged over a
typically fail by slip at specified embedments, in critical area reach the concrete tensile strength.
design strength job concrete to confirm slip The size of this area was found by evaluating the
characteristics. results of tests with concentrated loads and of
For pullout failures of a chemical anchor, the tests with thick concrete rings subjected to a
bond between the wall of the drilled hole and the constant inner pressure. According to this theory,
mortar is critical (see Sell 1973). Assuming a the necessary side cover or spacing to preclude a
uniform bond stress distribution along the splitting failure before reaching the concrete cone
anchorage length, the bond strength is in the order failure load must be about 1.751d or 3.51,, respec-
of 1300 psi (9 MPa) with a coefficient of variation tively. For drop-in anchors a side cover m I 31d
of 10 to 15 percent for polyester and vinylester was recommended. The validity of this evaluation
chemical anchors. This value is for a concrete was checked by relatively few test results.
compressive strength of 3000 psi (21 MPa) and an With respect to the minimum edge distance
embedment of about nine anchor diameters. The Cannon* has proposed the following criteria to
bond strength increases approximately with the preclude a splitting failure occuring at a load
square root of the concrete strength. lower than the capacity for concrete cone failure
The pullout capacity of chemical anchors or pullout failure:
increases with increasing embedment depth:
however, after about nine anchor diameters the m = D(11.4 - 0.92& in. (3.21)
increase is not proportional to embedment. This where
is due to the high bonding effect resulting in high = minimum edge distance
load transfer to the concrete at the top of the : = anchor bolt diameter, in.
anchorage. The bond stress is no longer uniform, ld = embedment depth to the bottom of the
and if the tensile load is sufficiently high, the anchor, in
failure initiates with a concrete failure in the Eq. (3.21) is valid for anchor spacings s L 2 in.
upper portion of the concrete and then the bond
fails in the remainder of the embedment. If side cover or spacings of anchors are too
For headed anchors local failure in front of the small, splitting cracks may occur during installation
head will occur when the pressure on the concrete of anchors. This possibility is greater for drop-in
is larger than about 12f’, to 15f’, (Rehm, Elige- anchors and for self-drilling anchors than for
hausen, and Mallee, 1988). This type of failure is torque-controlled expansion anchors because of
somewhat similar to a pullout failure. the higher initial spreading forces. The minimum
3.2.3.4 Splitting failure of concrete -This edge distance and the minimum spacing to avoid
failure mode will occur only if the dimensions of splitting during installation, as recommended by
the concrete are too small, the anchors are placed Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee (1988), are based
too close to an edge or too close to each other on many tests and are given in Table 3.1 for the
[Fig. 3.2(c)], or the expansion forces are too high. different types of anchors.
The failure load is usually smaller than for a
concrete cone failure.
Torque-controlled expansion and deformation-
controlled anchors (e.g., drop-in and self-drill *Cannon, Private correspondence previously cited Dec. 1984
anchors are the type anchor most likely to (see footnote p 14).
experience splitting failure due to the high lateral
thrust required to resist sliding by friction on the
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-25
Table 3.1 -Minimum edge distance and minimum spacing to avoid splitting failure
Undercut anchors Torque-controlled expansion anchors Drop-in anchors
with one cone (recent design) I
Mihimum edge distance m / 1d to avoid 1.0 2.0 3.0
splitting during installation I
3.2.4 Load-displacement behavior and failure through the attachment as a result of direct loads
modes in shear-For anchors with an applied or applied moments. The connection details
preload, the initial friction forces between the concern the treatment of connecting surfaces and
baseplate and the concrete have to be overcome the fit and manner of connecting the anchors to
by the shear load before there is initial anchor the attachment.
movement (Fig. 3.17). The baseplate slides and
the anchor moves to the side of the hole in the
second stage of behavior. The third stage of load-
displacement behavior is a pressure loading
against the top surface of the concrete and a
surface spa1l of the concrete at the edge of the
hole. Depending on edge distance and anchor
embedment, the failure may be by shearing of the
anchor (for deep embedments) with or without a
concrete spa11 preceding the steel failure [Fig.
3.15(a)] or by shearing of the concrete (concrete
failure) in the case of anchors loaded near an
edge [Fig. 3.15(b1), (b2), (b3)]. Onset of bearing
Shear loading generally produces larger crushing in the concrete
displacements than tension loading [see Fig.
3.3(c)]. This can be attributed to the bending of
the anchor rod and the deformation of the lip of loading plate into
bearing on anchor stud
concrete in the direction of loading. This is
especially true if the anchor is not flush with the
concrete at the hole opening (e.g., when the
concrete is spalled during drilling). For cast-in-
Load transfered by
place anchors, the behavior will depend on the friction to embedment
type of anchorage used, the embedment and the . ~~~ r r -7
h
Xh =-sl
1.4m
where
h = member thickness, mm
8 8
cv
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-29
3.2.5.2.2 Concrete spall-Anchors away from A second straight-line equation is given by Eq.
an edge will locally spall the concrete in front of (3.32).
the anchor. The primary factors influencing
concrete spall due to shear are tensile strength of T,/T, + VJVu s 1.0 (3.32)
the concrete, stiffness of the anchorage, anchor where
diameter, embedment depth, and deformability of
the concrete. The corresponding shear capacity is Ta* va applied tensile and shear load,
=
given by Klingner and Mendonca (1982), and respectively
American Institute of Steel Construction (1978), T”, uV = ultimate tensile and shear load,
as: respectively
F, = 0.5 A, fit, lb (3.30) These straight-line methods give a conservative
where approach to combined loading analyses.
Ab = nominal gross cross-sectional area of Bode and Roik (1987), propose for headed
anchor shank, in.2 studs a trilinear function:
f’, = specified compressive strength of
concrete, psi
E, = elastic modulus of concrete, psi
vp, s 1
However, according to Eligehausen and Fuchs
(1988), the above described local concrete failure TJT,, + VJV,, s 1.2 (3.33c)
does not negatively influence the anchor steel where
capacity (normal strength steel) and will not cause T,, Va, TU and Vu as defined for Eq. (3.32).
subsequent pullout of the anchor, provided the According to Meinheit and Heidbrink (1985),
embedment depth is 1, L 4D. Eq. (3.33) is valid also for expansion anchors (see
3.2.6 Combined tension and shear Loading- The Fig. 3.22).
behavior of anchors under combined tension and
shear loading lies in between the behavior under Load FQ[ kN ]
tension or shear loading, and for a given depth of 125
embedment, is dependent on the angle of the
loading (Fig. 3.21).
To calculate the failure load under combined
tension and shear loadings three approaches are in 100
use; a straight-line function, a trilinear function
and an elliptical function.
There are two types of straight-line functions.
The first is a shear friction approach used by ACI 75
349, Appendix B, and given by Eq. (3.31).
(3.31)
where
50
TL? = applied tension load
= 4 F,
r” = 0.85
F, according to Eq. (3.22)
25
cr = coefficient of friction
= 0.55 to 0.9, depending on the
location of the anchor plate in
relation to the concrete surface I I I I
Many investigators have concluded that shear drilled either 40 mm (1.6 in.) or 80 mm (3.2 in.)
and tension combine in an elliptical function as away from the transverse acting wires, [spacing of
given by Eq. (3.34). 250 mm (10 in.), in the fabric]. Bending of the
slab was in one direction only. All test anchors
(T,/T,,Y + CV,lVJ s 1.0 (3.34) were pretensioned or pretensioned and loaded
where exponents x and y are determined from with their allowable load before the slab was
tests and the other terms are as previously defined subjected to flexural loadings.
for the straight-line equations. After preloading the anchors, the concrete slab
The PCI Design Handbook (1978) uses x = y = was loaded to its service load. Observations
4/3 for precast anchors, while the Teledyne during this part of the testing often showed that
Engineering Services report (1979) gives x = y = cracking started at the section with transverse
5/3 as a good fit for expansion anchors. reinforcement but then deviated from that section
Fig. 3.22 shows a comparison between test to the section that contained the anchor hole.
results with expansion anchors and the different The cracks propagating through the anchor hole
approaches as described above. also were to the depth of the hole (Fig. 3.23 and
3.24). Testing showed that the displacement
3.3-Behavior of anchors in cracked concrete characteristics of these anchors remained
3.3.1 Introduction -When anchors are installed essentially unchanged until the slab load was about
in the tension zone of reinforced concrete mem- 40 percent of the slab service load. Beyond that
bers, it must be assumed that cracks will occur in point, significant increased displacement occurred
the concrete because of the rather low concrete (Fig. 3.25). The increased displacement charac-
tensile strength. The concrete tensile strength may teristics of the anchor in cracked concrete are
be totally or partially consumed by the restraint of caused by the crack propagating through the load
induced deformations due to shrinkage, tempera- transfer zone of the anchor (see Cannon 1981).
ture, or flexure, or from the anchorage itself. The crack width can vary over the depth of the
Cracks run either in one direction (single cracks) member (bending cracks) or can be of constant
or in two directions (intersecting cracks, in the width (parallel cracks, e.g. due to tension loading).
case of slabs spanning two directions). In the worst case the anchor can lie in the inter-
If concrete cracks, experience has shown that section of two cracks with constant width over the
there is a high probability that the crack will member depth. If anchors are situated in or beside
propagate through the anchor location (see these cracks, their load displacement behavior and
Cannon 1981 and Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and strength may be significantly influenced.
Reuter 1989). Theoretical considerations also 3.3.2 Load-displacement-behavior and failure
indicate that cracks should propagate through the modes in tension -Fig. 3.26 presents typical load-
anchor location. When the anchor is loaded, the displacement curves of torque-controlled expan-
anchor creates splitting (tensile) forces at the sion anchors which were set in uncracked concrete
anchor embedded end. These tensile stresses in and in cracks, and loaded statically to failure. The
the concrete would add to other tensile stresses displacements of anchors located in cracks behave
from locally high bending moments. (i.e., flexural similarly to anchors in uncracked concrete up to a
stresses and restrained shrinkage stresses). For critical load. This critical load depends on the
the case when expansion or undercut anchors are type of crack and the crack width. For higher
used, the drilled hole can also act as a notch or loads the displacements of anchors in cracks are
produce a cross section in the concrete member much higher than the values expected in
with reduced concrete area. uncracked concrete and anchor capacity is sig-
The theoretical considerations discussed above, nificantly reduced.
were confirmed by testing Ml2 (12 mm) torque- The load-displacement behavior of headed or
controlled expansion anchors and undercut undercut anchors may be affected by cracks in
anchors in a slab reinforced with welded wire concrete but the displacements at maximum load
mesh (AJbd = 0.004) (see Eligehausen, Fuchs, are less influenced by cracks than are expansion
Lotze, and Reuter 1989). The test anchors were anchors (see Fischer 1984).
installed with 1d = 80mm (3.2 in.) and in
uncracked concrete. The anchorage holes were
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE
0
l
l 0 0
I.0
Fig. 3.22- Tension-shear interaction diagram for expansion anchors (from Meinheit and Heidbrink 1985)
MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
I
!
I______ _;
F
I
_,,,:‘, -(8,84cm2/mI
K 884
_ _ _ __ _ 1. F
2
kc
I -I
a
I
15 , 100 150 1 150 100 15
/ l Id ,I I L
1
torque-controlled undercut
expansion anchors -7 anchors
--
z
--
ic
-i
l anchor loaded
l a n c h o r p r e s t r e s s e d but n o t l o a d e d
o drill hole
Fig. 3.23 - Torque-controlled expansion anchors and undercut anchors in the cracked tensile zone of a concrete
slab (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and Reuter 1989)
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-33
tension
t
I-
A
jr A
expansion
area
Section A - A
Fig. 3.24- Crack pattern in a drilled hole with expansion anchor (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and Reuter
1989)
355.1R-34 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
-4-l
F .
8adm
- 1.0
- 0.8
0.6
1
r(I
0.4
,
1 (H 0
0.2
,, , 4 torquee controlled
expansion anchors
1
0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2
crack width [mm] displacement [mm]
Fig. 3.25-Crack width and anchor displacement as a function of the ratio of applied load to allowable load of
the slab (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and Reuter 1989)
Force -v
Cracked Concrete
r---
Displacement
Fig. 3.26-Influence of cracks on the load-displacement relationship of expansion anchors - schematically (from
Rehm and Lehmann 1982)
Fig. 3.27 shows the typical load-displacement
relationship of torque-controlled expansion [kN]
anchors set in intersecting cracks and cycled up to
10’ times between different load levels before Torque ConIt rolled Expa c, sion Anchor
loading to failure. For comparison the load-
displacement relationship for statically loaded
anchors is also plotted. Provided the upper load
during cycling is smaller than about 50 percent of
the static failure load, cyclic loading results in an
almost linear increase of the anchor displacement
as a function of the logarithm of the number of
cycles. The load-displacement curve for higher FTER CYCLIC LOADING
loads than the upper load during cycling is rather
I
steep up to the static envelope which is followed
thereafter. Anchor capacity and displacement at
failure are not influenced significantly by cyclic
loading with an upper load as given above.
Opening and closing of cracks by cycling the
reinforced concrete while subjecting the anchor to
a constant load has more influence on the anchor
behavior than cycling the anchor with the cracks
kept open (Rehm and Lehmann 1982).
In principle the failure modes described in D CYC LES
Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.3.1 are also valid for
anchorages in cracked concrete. However,
expansion anchors which produce a concrete cone 5 15
failure in uncracked concrete may slip and pull out
when located in a crack. This possible change of
Displacement [mm]
the failure mode is due to the reduction of the Fig. 3.27-Influence of cyclic loading on the load-
spreading force as a result of the cracks (see displacement relationship oftorque-controlled expan-
below). sion anchors (after Rehm and Lehmann 1982)
3.3.3 Relaxation-Expansion and undercut
anchors installed in cracks will show an initial 3.3.4 Ultimate strength in tension-Fig. 3.28
displacement during widening of the crack. The shows the influence of cracks in the concrete on
amount of this displacement is dependent on the the strength of headed and undercut anchors
design of the anchor and on the crack width. placed in or close to cracks. The ratios of the
Usually this initial displacement is large enough to failure loads of single anchors measured in
reduce the preload to zero. This is also valid for cracked concrete to the value in uncracked
bonded anchors. concrete are plotted as a function of the crack
The relaxation behavior of headed anchors width. The anchors were tested in tension
installed in cracks has not yet been studied. specimens with almost constant crack width over
However, one may assume that the residual the member depth. After installing the anchors in
preload is not significantly smaller than for headed uncracked concrete or concrete with hairline
anchors in uncracked concrete. cracks, the cracks were opened by loading the
specimen and then the anchors were statically
loaded in tension with the cracks open. Failure
occurred by pulling out a concrete cone.
355.1R-36 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
m
m Fig. 3.29 - Load transfer into concrete schematically for a) uncracked concrete and b) cracked concrete (from
Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987, 1988)
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-37
Furthermore, a part of the concrete cone may spreading force from F,, to F, [Fig. 3.30(b)]. If,
be cut off by neighboring cracks. These combined on the other hand, it is assumed that the concrete
effects cause a strength reduction of approximately is subjected to purely plastic deformations during
40 percent compared to uncracked concrete. expansion, then theoretically the expansion sleeve
Some tensile stresses can be transmitted over will free itself around its circumference from the
small cracks due to aggregate interlock hole wall and the spreading force will decline to
(Eligehausen and Sawade 1985). This explains the zero [Fig. 3.30(c)]. In reality the concrete is
increasing anchor strength for crack widths less deformed elastically and plastically. Therefore,
than 0.4 mm (l/64 in.). the actual situation lies between these two
In addition to the above effect, the reduction of extremes. However, due to the steep gradient of
the spreading forces by the crack opening must be the unloading curve, it has to be expected that
taken into account for expansion anchors (Fig. even a relatively slight increase in crack width will
3.30). If the anchor lies in an intersecting crack, lead to a substantial reduction of the spreading
the widening of the crack by the width w leads to force [Fig. 3.30(d)]. For anchors situated in cracks
a reduction of the effective expansion displace- running in one direction, the spreading force will
ment around the circumference of the anchor by also be reduced by the opening of the crack, but
w/2 [Fig. 3.30(a)]. Assuming elastic behavior of the reduction will be less pronounced than in the
the concrete, this reduction of the expansion case shown in Fig. 3.30.
displacement causes a slight reduction of the
anchor unspread
crack opening
spread anchor
a)
Spreading Force
FO
6
I -7 .
-
1 Spread. Displ.
c
Fig. 3.30-Influence of cracks on spreading force (from Eligehausen and Pusill- Wachtsmuth 1982)
355.1R-38 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
Properly designed torque-controlled anchors Drop-in anchors cannot expand further after
will expand to an upper bound when they are they have been properly installed. Due to the
loaded. This causes an increase of the spreading reduction of the spreading force caused by cracks
force until the holding capacity is reached. If the (Fig. 3.30), these anchors often fail by pulling out
crack width is smaller than about 0.4 mm, the without significant damage of the concrete while
holding capacity of heavy-duty, torque-controlled in uncracked concrete they produce a concrete
sleeve anchors is often large enough to cause cone type failure. Therefore, the reduction of the
failure by pulling out a concrete cone. Therefore, failure load caused by cracks is much larger than
the reduction of the failure load is ahnost the for well-designed torque-controlled expansion
same as for headed anchors (compare Fig. 3.31 anchors (compare Fig. 3.32 with Fig. 3.31).
with Fig. 3.28). For larger cracks the expansion
cones are often pulled through the expansion bcrack) / F ubncracked concrete)
sleeves, because the maximum spreading 1,0
displacement reaches the upper bound and the
holding capacity is less than the concrete cone
failure load. This results in an additional decrease
of the failure load in comparison to headed or 0,8
undercut anchors.
If torque-controlled expansion anchors do not
properly expand further or when the spreading
displacement is too small, the influence of cracks
0,6
on the failure load will be much more pronounced
than shown in Fig. 3.31.
Ku / c r o c k ) / Fu ( u n c r a c k e d concrete)
0,4
0,2
0
0,4 0,8 1,2
crack width _w [mm]
^
Fig. 3.32-Influence of cracks on the ultimate load
of drop-in anchors (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, and
Mayer 1987 and 1988)
For self-drilling anchors the ratio of failure load
in cracked concrete to failure load in uncracked
concrete seems to be independent of the anchor
diameter for constant crack width to maximum
expansion displacement ratio (Fig. 3.33). Because
the maximum expansion displacement increases
with increasing anchor diameter, the reduction of
0,8 1,2 1,6
crack width _ w [mm] the failure load for constant crack width is larger
^ for smaller anchors than for bigger anchors.
Fig. 3.31 -Influence of cracks on the ultimate load
of torque controlled expansion anchors (from
Eligehausen 1984)
FU (Anchor in Crack)
r
.rU (Anchor in uncracked Concrete)
7
,M12
1 Single Cracks ,
* I I I I L-7 1
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
w/a
Fig 3.33 -Relative strength of self-drilling anchors as a function of the ratio of crack width to expansion
displacement (from Eligehausen 1987)
cracks. The average strength of groups situated in and anchor spacing is taken into account
cracked concrete was about 30 percent lower than simultaneously. This is valid for anchors with a
the value applicable for anchor groups set in steadily increasing load-displacement relationship
uncracked concrete (Eligehausen, Fuchs, and in both uncracked and cracked concrete.
Mayer 1987 and 1988). Approximately the same Fig. 3.36 describes the influence of the load-
strength reduction was measured for single displacement relationship of expansion anchors
anchors installed in cracks. Failure of all placed in cracks on the failure load of anchor
fastenings was caused by pulling out a concrete groups. It is assumed that three anchors of a
cone. quadruple fastening (large spacing) are located in
The strength of the entire anchor group is cracks and one anchor is sitting between cracks in
constant for one or more of the anchors in a uncracked concrete. If the anchors show a
concrete crack. The reduction is almost the same steadily increasing load displacement relationship
whether one anchor or all are in concrete cracks in uncracked and cracked concrete (Lines a1 and
(Fig. 3.35). In the test, the anchor plate was a2 of Fig. 3.36), the failure load of the group is
connected flexibly (by hinges) to the hydraulic about four times the failure load of one anchor
cylinder. placed in a crack. (This theoretical result is in
Fu [kN] accordance with Fig. 3.35.) Expansion anchors
150 - located in cracks may slip in the hole before
expanding further and take up more load (Line b
of Fig. 3.36) or may be pulled out at rather low
loads (Line c of Fig. 3.36). If only one of the
125
anchors shows a load-displacement behavior
according to Lines b or c, the failure load of the
group may be reduced by more than 40 percent.
100 Anchors which are being used in areas where
cracks may occur, such as the tension zone of a
concrete member, must be suitable for this
application.
75 3.3.4.1 Influence of tensile stresses generated by
structural action on anchor strength -In tests
summarized to this point, the anchors were placed
in the tension zone with constant stress of the
50 reinforcement, and therefore, tensile stresses in
the concrete were mainly induced by the anchors.
However, if the anchors are placed in the shear
region of beams and slabs and in the region of
Number of anchors in cracks
anchorages and lap splices of deformed bars,
Fig. 3.35-Strength of fastenings with four anchors locally high tensile stresses are already induced in
as a function of the number of anchors in cracks the concrete due to the loading of the structure.
(from Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987 and If anchors are placed in this region, the tensile
1988) stresses that they induce in the concrete combine
with the tensile stresses due to loading of the
Theoretical studies showed that the results structure. An example is shown in Fig. 3.37. It is
described are also valid for larger groups of assumed that an anchor is placed in the end
anchors and for applications when the anchor region of lapped splices of large reinforcing bars.
plate is rigidly attached (Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Plotted are stresses in the concrete due to
Mayer 1987 and 1988). splicing of the bar and loading of the anchor. The
Based on these results, it can be stated that the tensile stresses along the failure surface of the
strength of anchor groups placed in cracked concrete cone overlap. Therefore, a reduction of
concrete can be taken as n-times (n = number of the pullout load compared to anchors placed in
individual anchors of the group) the value otherwise unloaded concrete must be expected
expected for one anchor if the influence of cracks which, according to tests, is up to 25 percent in
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-41
anchor in crack
FUC
Fu
load
displacement
4 Fuc
relationship
0 a, 0,94
0b 0,64
C
.o 0,50
vuc V
Fig. 3.36- Influence nf load-displacement relationships of expansion anchors on the ultimate load of an anchor
- -
ds = 28mm-,
stresses caused
by r e i n f o r c e m e n t
~~ a \.
expansion anchor
stresses caused 1
by anchor
+c +1
Fig. 3.37-Anchor in the region of an overlap splice (cross section). Overlapping of stresses caused by the bars
and by the anchor (from Eligehausen 1984)
355.1R-42 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
I
_
.b..b
Fig. 3.39 - Concrete failure of an anchor group (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987 and 1988)
1 a =3d L
7 I
Fig. 3.40- Crack pattern. of a slab without shear reinforcement (from Eligehausen and Reuter 1986)
355.1R-44 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
these test conditions. If the anchors are placed 3.3.5 Shear loading-Little investigation of the
close to the support the strength reduction will be influence of cracks on the behavior of anchors
much more significant. loaded in shear has been conducted. The few
This reduction of the shear capacity may, available test results can be summarized as
depending on the design of the slab, significantly follows.
change the type of failure from a ductile bending Anchors placed in cracked concrete and loaded
failure to a brittle shear failure (Eligehausen and in shear will fail the concrete (small edge
Reuter 1986). To avoid this problem, it is distances), or the bolt (large edge distances), or a
recommended that the shear forces transmitted combination of both. Under otherwise constant
directly into the tension zone should be limited to conditions, the failure load of anchors with a small
about 40 percent of the total shear force, or edge distance and loaded towards the edge will be
alternatively, the shear stress should be limited to smaller in cracked concrete than in uncracked
about 80 percent of allowable values. concrete due to the disturbance of the distribution
Composite structures (precast concrete of stresses in the concrete by cracks. It can be
elements with bonded cast-in-place concrete) assumed that the strength reduction is almost the
without reinforcement connecting the precast and same as for tension loading (reduction by about 40
cast-in-place concrete, are especially critical. percent). The strength reduction will be smaller
Failure of this type of structure will often be if edge reinforcement is present. The ultimate
caused by a crack in the contact area between the load of anchors with large edge distances (steel
precast and the cast-in-place concrete. If the load failure) is not significantly influenced by cracks.
is transmitted into the precast concrete element, The edge distance required to insure a steel
high tensile stresses are generated in the contact failure of the anchor is about 30 to 40 percent
area. Therefore, the shear stress at failure is larger in cracked concrete than in uncracked
significantly lower than in the case of loading the concrete.
specimen in the usual way at the top (Fig. 3.41).
3.4-Behavior of cast-in-place anchor bolts in
uncracked concrete piers
3.4.1 Introduction -Anchor bolts are commonly
used in highway and bridge structures to connect
light standards, sign supports, and traffic signal
poles. They are also used to connect steel
columns in industrial structures to structural
concrete members. The anchor bolt installation
discussed in this section is one of the most widely
used cast-in-place anchorage systems. The anchor
bolts used typically have long embedment lengths
and small edge distances. Such installation should
be distinguished from bolts embedded for short
join f lengths in mass concrete with very large edge
distances. The supporting concrete members
associated with this installation are usually piers,
drilled shafts, or other foundation elements with
limited plan dimensions; however, the concrete is
usually well confined by reinforcement.
-7 The structural behavior of cast-in-place anchor
2 4 6 bolts with long embedment lengths installed in
a/d supporting members with limited dimensions is
distinctly different from that described in the
Fig. 3.41 -Shear stress failure of a composite slab
preceding sections. This section summarizes some
without connecting reinforcement between precast
significant results from extensive research con-
and cast in place concrete (after Rehm and ducted for this type of anchor bolt application at
Eligehausen 1986) the University of Texas at Austin (see Breen 1964;
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-45
Lee and Breen 1966; Lee and Breen 1970; 3.4.2 General behavior under loading-A single
Hasselwander, Jirsa, and Breen 1974; anchor bolt transfers tension load to the concrete
Hasselwander, Jirsa, Breen, and Lo 1977; and member in three successive stages: (1) steel-to-
Jirsa, Cichy, Calzadilla, Smart, Pavluvcik, and concrete bond, (2) bearing against the washer of
Breen 1984). The test results and design the anchorage device, and (3) a wedging action by
recommendations are valid for anchors in well- the cone of crushed and compacted concrete in
confined concrete. front of the anchorage device. These three stages
These studies focused on many significant are not entirely distinct, but the exact nature of
factors affecting anchor bolt behavior including the transition from one stage to the next is highly
clear cover, embedment length, bolt diameter, indeterminate and can only be discussed in a
bearing area, type of anchorage device, concrete general manner.
strength, steel yield strength, shape of piers, and Fig. 3.43 shows tail stress plotted against lead
bolt group configuration. In addition, a series of stress for three 1 3/4 in. anchor bolts with clear
exploratory and supplementary studies were made covers of 3 l/2 in. and three different
to determine the influence of cyclic loading, lateral embedments: 10, 15, and 20 bolt diameters.
loading, transverse reinforcement, and method of Adhesion or bond between the bolt and concrete
loading on the bolt behavior. Diameters of anchor is the predominant load carrying mechanism for
bolts ranged from 1 to 3 in. Steel yield strengths early stages of loading; little increase in tail stress
ranged from 33 ksi (A7) to 105 ksi (A139). is observed with increasing lead stress. The longer
Embedment lengths ranged from 10 bolt diameters the bolt, the more load the bolt can carry by the
to 20 bolt diameters. A typical test specimen bond mechanism. Under increasing load, bond
geometry is shown in Fig. 3.42. strength decreases along the length of the bolt and
8'- o”_
I J/4” ANCHOR B O L T -
tail stress begins to increase. The load that was Bolt failures occurred in several bolts by
previously carried by a bond mechanism must be necking in the threaded portion of the bolts.
transferred to a bearing mechanism. In Fig. 3.43 Little damage to the concrete cover over the bolt
the bond-to-bearing transition is most clearly seen was observed at bolt failure. A relatively sudden
for the bolt with 200 embedment. For a given spalling of the concrete cover over the anchorage
load increment, the tail stress increases more than device at low loads characterized the failure of
the lead stress as the load carried by bond is bolts with small amounts of clear cover [Fig.
unloaded into bearing on the anchorage device. 3.44(a)]. For larger amount of clear cover, the
The bond-to-bearing transition is dependent on failures were characterized by the splitting and
the embedment of the bolt; the shorter the bolt, spalling of the concrete cover into distinct blocks
the shorter and less well-defined the transition. by the wedging action of a cone of crushed and
After the bond-to-bearing transition, tail stress compacted concrete which formed in front of the
increases uniformly with increasing lead stress as anchorage device [Fig. 3.44(b)].
the load is carried by bearing or by wedging The distinguishing feature of a wedge-splitting
action. failure was the diagonal cracks [marked B in Fig.
3.4.3 Failure modes-The failures observed 3.44(b)] which started just in front of the washer
during testing can be described as: (1) bolt failure, on the bolt centerline and extended toward the
(2) concrete cover failure by spalling, and (3) front and each side of the specimen. These
concrete cover failure by wedge-splitting. While diagonal cracks were frequently accompanied by a
these three categories represent distinct failure longitudinal crack along the bolt axis [C in Fig.
modes, combinations of these modes were 3.44(b)], a transverse crack parallel to and near
observed in several instances. the washer of the anchorage device [A in Fig.
8 l I I I s I
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Tail Stress, ksi
Fig. 3.43 - Tail stress versus lead stress for different embedment lengths
3.44(b)] or both. Cracking generally started near cracking propagated to the sides and front face of
the anchorage device and extended toward the the specimen. The result was the complete loss of
front, toward the sides of the specimen, or both a rectangular block of concrete cover extending
under increasing load. back to the anchorage device over the full width
of the specimen, as opposed to the usual group of
Tension Tension
triangular wedges with a common apex over the
anchorage device. Such a failure indicates that
the wedge-splitting mechanism did not fully
develop and therefore the ultimate strength of the
anchor bolt installation was reduced.
The major effect of embedment length on the
ultimate strength of an anchor bolt installation is
related to the ability of the concrete cover to resist
the wedge-splitting action of the cone of crushed
and compacted concrete in front of the anchorage
device. A certain minimum embedment length is
required to develop this resistance. As illustrated
Cover Spalling
in Fig. 3.46, increasing the embedment length
Wedge-Splitting
Failure Failure beyond this minimum length provides no
significant improvement but decreasing the
Fig. 3.44 - Concrete cover failures
embedment length results in a significant
3.4.4 Lead-slip relationships (effect of clear cover reduction in ultimate strength. A 15D embedment
and embedment length)-Bolt tension versus lead length can be considered a satisfactory minimum
slip curves associated with different clear covers embedment length.
3.4.5 Ultimate strength-The ultimate strength of
and embedments are shown in Fig. 3.45 and 3.46.
a bolt in a group is clearly not the same as that of
Slip of the anchor bolts was measured relative to
an isolated bolt with similar geometry.
the front face of the specimen (lead slip). Fig.
3.4.5.1 Single bolt strength -Hasselwander,
3.45 illustrates the effect of clear cover. Since the Jirsa, Breen, and Lo (1977), concluded that clear
effect f concrete strength varied approximately cover and bearing area are the main variables
with P d lead stress in Fig. 3.45, calculated on the governing the strength of single anchor bolts. The
basis of the anchor bolt stress area, was variables were incorporated into an equation for
normalized with respect to /-- d and plotted against predicting the strength of isolated anchor bolts,
lead slip for four 1 3/4 in. bolts each with an subjected to simple tension and failing in a wedge-
embedment of 15 bolt diameters (15D) and an splitting mode:
anchorage device consisting of a nut and a 4 in.
diameter, l/2 in. thick washer. As seen in Fig. Tn = 140A, @[O-7 + ln[2C’/(D, -II)]] (3.35)
3.45, the slopes of the curves are essentially the
same until each bolt approaches ultimate capacity.
A definite trend of increasing ultimate strength
with increasing clear cover is indicated. where
Fig. 3.46 illustrates the effect of embedment T, = ultimate wedge-splitting capacity of
length on the stress-slip relationships of three 1 a single bolt, lb, with an
3/4 in. bolts each with a clear cover of 3 l/2 in. embedment length not less than 12
and an anchorage device consisting of a nut and a
4 in. diameter, l/2 in. thick washer. The initial (D w - D)
Ab = net bearing area, in.* , (r/4) $$-
portions of the curves are essentially the same and D”), but not greater than 4D
there is no appreciable difference between the D = bolt diameter, in.
ultimate strengths of the 15D bolt and the 20D D, = diameter of anchorage device
bolt; the ultimate strength of the 1OD bolt, (washer), in. with minimum
however, is noticeably reduced. thickness of Dd8
The failure of the 10D bolt developed initially C' = clear cover to the bolt, in.
as a typical wedge-splitting mode until the
355.1R-48 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
:cu
d
s
d
s ’
d
.
I500
1250
f _,--L~l5 0
A!!L
Jr-: L = 20 D .
1000
A-.._.._& --z-
LL=l0D
750
C’ = 3.5 In.
1 I . . I I . . . . . .
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24
Lead Slip, inches
4
Q
(I w a I
00000
.. .. *. .* l .
a ma40
44 4
l
0 0
0
355.1R-52 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
Eligehausen, R. and Fuchs, W., 1988, “Tragverhalten von Jirsa, J.O., Cichy, N.T., CaIzadilla, M.R., Smart, W.H.,
Dfibelbefestigungen bei Querzug-, Schrsgzug- und Biegebean- Pavluvcik, M.P., & Breen, J.E., 1984, “Strength and Behavior
spruchung,” (bad-bearing Behaviour of Anchor Fastenings of Bolt Installations Anchored in Concrete Piers,” Research
Under Shear, Combined Tension and Shear or Flexural Report 305-IF, Center for Highway Research, The University
Loading), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 2, in German of Texas at Austin, November.
and English.
Klingner, R.E. and Mendonca, J.A., 1982a, “Tensile
EIigehausen, R., Fuchs, W., Lotze, D. and Reuter, M., 1989, Capacity of Short Anchor Bolts and Welded Studs: A
“Befestigungen in der Betonzugzone,” (Fastening in the Literature Review,” ACI-Journal, July/August, pp. 270-279.
Concrete Tensile Zone), Beton-und Stahlbetonbau 84, No. 2
and 3. Klingner, R.E. and Mendonca, J.A., 1982b, “Shear Capacity
of Short Anchor Bolts and Welded Studs,” A literature review,
Eligehausen, R., Fuchs, W. and Mayer, B., 1987, 1988, ACI Journal, Sept/Oct.
“Tragverhalten v o n D i i b e l b e f e s t i g u n g e n bei Zugbean-
spruchung,” (Loadbearing Behavior of Anchor Fastenings in Klingner, R.E., Mendonca, J.A. and Malik, J.B., 1982,
Tension), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 12/1987 und “Effect of Reinforcing Details on the Shear Resistance of
No. l/1988, in German and English. Anchor Bolts Under Reversed Cyclic Loading,," ACI Journal,
Jan/Feb.
Eligehausen, R., Mallee, R. and Rehm, G., 1984, “Befest-
igungen mit Verbundankern,” (Fastenings Formed with Lee, D.W. and Breen, J.E., 1966, “Factors Affecting Anchor
Chemical Anchors), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 10, Development, “Research Report 881F,” Center for Highway
pp. 686-692, No. 11, pp. 781-785, No. 12, pp. 825-829. Research, The University of Texas at Austin, August.
Eligehausen, R. and Pusill-Wachtsmuth, P., 1982,“Stand der Lee, D.W., and Breen J.E., 1970, “Model Study of Anchor
Befestigungstechnik im Stahlbetonbau,” (Fastening Technology Bolt Development Factors, Models for Concrete Structures, SP-
in Reinforced Concrete Construction), IVBH Survey S-19/82, 29, American Concrete Institute.
IVBH- Periodica l/1982, February.
Lieberum, K.H., Reinhardt, H.W. and Walraven, J.C., 1987,
Eligehausen, R. and Reuter, M., 1986, “Tragverhalten von ’ Lasteinleitung fiber Diibel in der Schubzone von Beton-
Platten ohne Schubbewehrung bei Einleitung von Lasten in die Plattenstreifen,” (Fastening of Anchors in the Shear Zone of
Betonzugzone”, (Load Characteristics of Plates without Shear Concrete Slabs), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 10, in
Reinforcement by Introduction of Loads in the Tensile Zone German and English.
of Concrete), Report No. l/17-86/3 of the Institut fiir
Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universitgt Stuttgart. Mayer, B., and Eligehausen, R., 1984, “Ankergruppen mit
Dubeln in der Betonzugzone,” (Anchor Groups with Anchors
Eligehausen, R. and Sawade, G., 1985, “Verhalten von in the Concrete Tension Zone), Werkstoffe und Konstruktion
Beton auf Zug,” (Behavior of Concrete in Tension), Betonwerk Institut ffir Werkstoffe im Bauwesen der Universitit Stuttgart
+ Fertigteil-Technik, No. 5 and 6, May/June. and Forschungs-und Materialpriifungsanstalt, Baden-
Wiirttemberg (Eigenverlag) October, pp. 167-180.
Fischer, A., 1984, “Befestigen mit Hinterschnittankern,”
(Fastenings with Undercut Anchors), in "Fortschritte im Kon- Meinheit, D. and Heidbrink, F.D., 1985, “Behavior of
struktiven Ingenieurbau”, Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn, Drilled-In Expansion Anchors,” Concrete International, April,
Berlin. pp. 62-66.
Hanks, Abbot A., 1973,: Kwik Bolt Testing Program, Abbot PCI Design Handbook-Precast and Prestressed Concrete, 1978,
Hanks Testing Laboratories of San Francisco, File H2189-S1, Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, 380 pp.
Report No. 8783.
Pusill-Wachtsmuth, P., 1982, “Tragverhalten von
Hasselwander, G.B., Jirsa, J.O., Breen, J.E., and L.o, K., Metallspreizdiibeln unter zentrischer Zugbelastung bei den
1977, “Strength and Behavior of Anchor Bolts Embedded Near Versagensarten Betonausbruch und Spalten des Betons,”
Eclges of Concrete Piers, Research Report 29-2F, Center for (Bearing Behavior of Metallic Expansion Anchors, Loaded in
Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, May. Tension, for the Failure Modes of Concrete Breakage and
Splitting), Doctoral Thesis, University of Stuttgart.
Hasselwander, G.B., Jirsa, J.O., and Breen, J.E., 1974, “A
Guide to The Selection of High-Strength Anchor Bolt Rehm, G. and Eligehausen, R., 1986, “Auswirkungen der
Materials”, Research Report 29-1, Center for Highway Research, modernen Befestigungstechnik auf die konstruktive Gestaltung
The University of Texas at Austin, October. im Stahlbetonbau,” (Effects of Modern Fixing Technology on
Structural Design in Reinforcing Concrete Construction),
Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 6, in German and
English.
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-53
Rehm, G., Eligehausen, R. and Mallee, R., 1988, “Befest- 4.2 -Functional requirements
igungstechnik,” (Fastening Technique), in “Betonkalender 4.2.1 Loading Conditions-Major considerations
1988”, Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn, Berlin.
in determining the requirements for concrete
Rehm, G. and Lehmann, R., 1982, “Untersuchungen mit anchorages include the type of loading which the
Metallspreizdtibeln in der gerissenen Zugzone von Stahlbeton- anchorage will experience, and the potential for
bauteilen,” (Investigations with Metallic Expansion Anchors in concrete cracking in the vicinity of the anchors.
the Cracked Tension Zone of Reinforced Concrete Members)“, There is a high probability of coincidental cracking
Research Report of the Otto-Graf- Institut, Stuttgart, July,
unpublished.
when anchors are located in the tensile zone of a
concrete member. As described in Chapter 3, the
Riemann, H., 1985, “Das erweiterte x-Verfahren fiir capacity of anchors under sustained loading in the
Befestigungsmittel: Bemessung an Beispielen von Kopfbolzen- tensile stress zone of uncracked concrete is only 60
verankerungen,” (The Extended X-Method for the Design of to 75 percent of static load capacity of anchors in
Fastening Devices as Exemplified by Headed Stud Anchor-
ages), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 12, pp. 806-815, in
unstressed concrete. In cracked concrete, anchor
German and English. capacity is significantly influenced by anchor type
and width of the crack in the region of the
Seghezzi, H.D. and Vollmer, H., 1982, “Modern Anchoring anchorage. In regions of tensile stress, since the
Systems for Concrete, ACI SP-103, Anchorage to Concrete,
width of flexural cracks is maximum at the
Atlanta, January.
concrete surface and decrease with distance away
Sell, R., 1973, “Festigkeit und Verformung von mit from the surface, the designer should use deep-
Reaktionsharzmiirtel-Patronen versetzten Ankern,” (Strength seated anchors (anchored in the compression zone
and Displacement of Anchors Installed with Reaction Resin of the member), or anchors which are designed to
Mortar Cartridges), Verbindungstechnik 5, Vol. E, August, in perform in cracked concrete. Anchors which
German.
perform well, at a given load level in uncracked
Shaikh, A.F. and Yi, W., 1985, “In-Place Strength of Welded concrete, may fail completely in cracked concrete
Headed Studs,” Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, under loads of the same magnitude. Criteria for
March/April, pp. 56-81. the design and selection of concrete anchorages
should account for these factors.
Teledyne Engineering Services, 1979, Technical Report
3501-1, Revision 1, August 30. Economics or related issues may dictate
designing for a selected mode of failure.
Wagner-Grey, U., 1976,: “Experimentelle und Theoretische Installations such as bridge railings and highway
U n t e r s u c h u n g e n zum Tragverhalten von Spreizdtibeln in signs could potentially receive accidental loadings
Beton”, (Experimental and Theoretical Investigations on the
that are not reasonable design loads. In such
Performance of Expansion Anchors in Concrete), Doctoral
Thesis, Technical University of Munich. cases it may be prudent to design for the failure of
the most easily replaced segment of the structure,
Wiewel, Harry, 1989,: ” Results of Long-Term Tension Tests whether it is the anchor bolt or a separate piece of
on ITW Ramset/Red H e a d E P C O N S y s t e m @ A n c h o r s the structure. Care must be exercised in designing
Installed in Hardrock Concrete,” Techmar Inc, long Beach,
for selected failure modes to maintain the integrity
CA. J une.
of the primary structural system.
4.2.1.1 Column bases - Simply connected
column bases are normally loaded in compression
of sufficient magnitude that column shear is
CHAPTER 4-DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS transferred through friction and the anchorage
4.1- Introduction serves only for erection purposes. It has been
The purpose of this section is to discuss the common practice for many years to use L- and J-
various factors which affect the ability of concrete bolts for erection anchors, which do not have
anchorages to perform their intended purpose. sufficient embedment to develop the strength of
These factors should be considered in the design the anchor steel. Headed anchors of the same
of anchorages. The tendency to design anchors size and length as L- and J-bolts have significantly
based only on their tensile or shear loading is higher capacities. However, the increase in
discouraged, when actually bending, prying action, capacity is often not needed for the simple column
and redistribution of loads are often involved. base plate connection. Column bases which are
designed as moment connections should require a
355.1R-54 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
rigid base connection and anchors should be because of the significant effect which tensile
selected which can maintain a sufficient residual loads have on anchor stress and the manner in
preload to develop applied moments. These which shear is transferred to the concrete.
conditions are necessary to achieve fixity of the Structural connections should also be investigated
column base. for cyclic loadings, vibration loads from wind or
4.2.1.2 Machine Foundations-Anchor bolts machinery, and seismic loads.
for machinery foundations are generally specified 4.2.1.4 Pipe Supports-In most structures, pipe
by the machinery manufacturer and have been supports are dead-load hangers or support
sized by experience. Their general purpose is to brackets. Pipe supports are generally detailed to
fix the rigid machine housing to concrete in order provide free expansion and contraction of the
to withstand machine vibrations. They are piping system under changing temperatures.
generally installed to a relatively low stress level Experience has shown these loosely supported
and may not have sufficient embedment to systems function very well under seismic
develop the anchor steel capacity. Seismic loading conditions without special design considerations.
of machine foundation anchorages can be critical Vibration problems normally occur under
and must be considered. operating conditions and are corrected by adding
4.2.1.3 Structural Tension and Shear or shifting supports to alter the response
Connections-The anchorage of principal frequency of the system. Design loads for these
structural connections requires careful supports are generally low and sizing of anchors,
consideration of all possible loading combinations. by experience, usually results in large safety
Failure of structural connections may be factors.
catastrophic, particularly when there is no In contrast to this, the pipe supports for nuclear
redundancy in the system. It is recommended that applications are often designed to prevent piping
all structural connections be ductile. system frequencies from coinciding with predicted
Ductility is defined as the ratio of a structure’s structural frequencies generated by an earthquake
plastic displacement to its maximum elastic (yield) of prescribed magnitude. As a result,
displacement. The ability of a structure to exhibit specifications often limit support displacements to
high values of ductility (ten or greater) is an low values under conservative combinations of
extremely desirable feature because this can allow loading. Most anchorages cannot comply with the
for an overload condition to exist without imposed displacement limitations without rigid
producing a catastrophic failure. It can provide bases and oversized anchors.
for highly redundant structures (i.e., structures When a pipe has multiple supports and is
that provide alternative stress paths) that loaded along its length, evaluation of the stiffness
redistribute loads internally. of each support with respect to the longitudinal
When designing the anchorage of a steel stiffness of the total support system between
structure to concrete, ductility of the structure, expansion joints or bends should be made to
including the connection, should be considered. insure that a particular support is not overloaded
The desired ductile behavior may occur in any one to failure, thus setting up a progressive failure
or all of the following components: the structural mechanism.
steel element being connected, the baseplate 4.2.2 Anchorage Environment- Consideration of
attached to the steel member, the steel anchors, or the service environment is essential for service
the concrete. Steel is more ductile than concrete longevity, particularly in areas where the
and it is better to proportion an anchorage so that anchorage may come in contact with saltwater
the majority of the ductile displacement occurs in sprays or deicing salts. Unprotected steel is
the steel elements of the anchorage or in the particularly vulnerable to corrosion when exposed
attached structural member. In cases where this to the atmosphere. For expansion anchors,
is not possible, extra care should be taken in vulnerability to corrosion exists in the region of
selecting anchor types, geometry, and safety the expansion mechanism where space is available
factors. for moisture collection. Corrosion will reduce the
Temperature changes and the shrinkage of ability of anchors to function correctly, especially
structural elements should also be carefully torque-controlled expansion anchors.
considered in determining connection details Where steel is under a sustained high stress,
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-55
4.4 -Design basis “concrete cone break out” was not considered
The safety factor for any element in an because typically this mode does not occur when
anchorage system should be consistent with the developing reinforcing bars. However, the failure
other elements in the system. Establishing an mode “concrete cone break out” is quite typical for
allowable stress or load factor must consider shallow anchors (see Chapter 3).
overall behavior of the anchorage. The design of Excluding edge and spacing conditions, the
concrete anchorages is usually controlled by codes yield strength of an individual reinforcing bar can
governing both structural steel and concrete. be developed in 3000 psi uncracked concrete in
4.4.1 Types of anchors about 15 bar diameters (straight bar) or 10 bar
4.4.1.1Headed Anchors-Headed anchors may diameters (hooked bar). To preclude a concrete-
consist of welded studs or bolting material with cone-break-out failure, the development length
anchor heads manufactured to established may increase by a factor of up to four to account
standards. Headed anchors may also be made by for the effects of cover, number, and spacing of
welding a rigid plate to the embedded end of the bars. A further increase of the development
anchor or by threading a bar and using a standard length by a factor of one and one-half to two is
nut. Once the load increases sufficiently to necessary if the anchors are located in the cracked
overcome n the shank, subsequent loading tensile zone of a reinforced concrete member.
anchor head. Headed Most anchorage situations do not involve
efficiently if the shank of the minimum values for spacing and cover. The code
This will minimize bond and provisions will be very conservative if individual
oad on the anchor by bearing bars are anchored in uncracked concrete well away
from edges. However, the code provisions may
Anchors-When anchor load not be conservative, if a group of bars, with or
without small edge distance, is anchored in
uncracked concrete or in the (cracked) tension
inishes with depth. The zone of reinforced concrete members.
quired to fully develop the 4.4.1.3 Expansion Anchors-Many patented
expansion devices are used to mechanically fasten
post-installed anchors to the concrete. Most
of deformations). Under expansion anchors were originally developed for
sustained loadi short embedment depths to provide an anchor
concrete in the which failed in the concrete or by slip. Since
Bonded anchor typically been manufactured ductile steel failure had no opportunity to occur in
deformed reinforcing bars, this situation, there were no restricting strengths
s. The basic development applied to the steel in these anchors. More
Building Code are based on recently developed expansion anchors feature
d minimum spacing of an expansion mechanisms that can fully develop the
rs. The basic development strength of the anchor steel, when used as single
ars with a hook or 90” bend anchors. Ductile steels should be specified for this
about 50 percent of the type of anchor if a ductile failure mode is desired.
of straight bars. The use of 4.4.2 Concrete tensile failure -The determination
r reinforcement was excluded of concrete pullout strength (cone failure) of
g Code in 1971 (ACI-ASCE individual anchors and anchor groups is discussed
in Section 3.2.2. Concrete cone failure will occur
considered as twice that when the capacity of the anchor bolt exceeds the
of deformed ba concrete pullout strength. All shell type expansion
gths given in ACI 318 anchors are designed to fail the concrete when the
insure that the crete capacity is higher than the bolt is embedded to shell depth. Concrete failure
When evaluating the concrete can also occur with wedge bolts having shallow
e failure modes “splitting of embedment depths.
e concrete between ribs” The concrete may also fail by splitting tension
The failure mode when there is inadequate lateral confinement of
355.1R-57
the anchor. This occurs with all types of bolts and sleeve anchors with embedment depths
expansion anchors that have small edge distances. greater than seven bolt diameters will fail by slip.
Deformation-controlled expansion anchors (drop- They cannot be considered ductile, however,
in, self-drilling, and stud) are especially sensitive because the relatively wide variation in the slope
to edge distance because of the high expansion of the deflection curves and ultimate loads
forces developed during anchor installation. distribute loads nonuniformly to the anchors. For
Splitting may also occur at close edge distances these types of anchors, most manufacturers of
when the anchorage mechanism expands with load post-installed expansion anchors recommend
application. limiting normal service loads to 25 percent of the
In the United States, most manufacturers of average published failure loads.
expansion anchors recommend limiting normal 4.4.4 Tensile strength of steel - When the
service loads to 25 percent of the manufacturer’s concrete-failure-cone strength exceeds the tensile
average test failure load. Investigations by the strength of the anchor steel, design is controlled
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the strength of steel. For structural
(1979) indicated that installation problems attachments, other than simple hangers, load
associated with split-shell type expansion anchors distribution to the attachments is dependent on
warranted increased safety factors over those the stiffness of the attachment and its degree of
applied to torque-type anchors. For the split-shell fixi ty For rigid base connections, anchor stress
anchor, and others which cause the concrete to may be determined assuming that plane sections
fail, it was recommended that a minimum factor remain plane. However, if the load is transferred
of safety of five against average test values be from the attachment to the anchors through a
used. flexible plate, the determination of anchor stress
Test results for expansion anchors differ from is complicated by plate stiffness, prying action, and
job to job and with anchor size, type, and the load-displacement characteristics (including
modifications in anchor design. Assuming a preload) of the anchor steel.
coefficient of variation of 25 percent, a factor of AISC imposes a minimum safety factor of two,
safety of five on average tested anchor strength is against ultimate, for service loads on high yield
appropriate. materials. Considering the increased loss of
The capacities of anchors are affected by preload in concrete anchorages (approximately
embedment depth, edge distance, and spacing. three times that of steel to steel connections), a
Reinforcing steel in the concrete can be used to minimum safety factor of three for anchor bolts
enhance the strength of cast-in-place anchors. would provide residual service load allowables
When the edge distance is small, closely spaced approximating 85 to 90 percent of the residual
spirals of small diameter wire or mesh may be preload for bolts initially preloaded close to yield.
used to resist the bursting forces. However, more This would appear to be a reasonable limit
research is required in this area. Other solutions considering all the other concrete and anchor
may be more effective. They consist of: variables. Proof load for concrete anchorages
should be approximately 110 percent of the service
(1) Providing for deeper embedment to load.
preclude the tensile-cone-failure mode. For factored load design, AC I Committee 349
(2) Using larger number of smaller anchors at (1990) limits maximum stress to 0.9 of yield for all
closer spacings to avoid spalling when the edge types of connections, and with stresses based on
distance is too small. the net tensile area for bolted connections.
(3) Preloading the anchorage so that shear is Assuming an average load factor of 1.6, service
transferred by friction at the interface of the base load stresses would approximate 0.55 yield for
plate and the concrete rather than through shear anchors other than bolts. For ASTM A 36 steel,
in the anchor. this also closely corresponds to a factor of safety
of 3 against tensile strength.
4.4.3 Anchor Slip -Anchors which fail by slip, The capacity of welded stud anchors appears to
without causing the concrete to fail in tension, be affected by the thickness of the attachment,
have load-displacement characteristics similar to Tennessee Valley Authority (1979). Apparently
the post-yield behavior of steel. Typically, wedge prying action, due to the flexibility of the plate,
355.1R-58 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
induces very high stress and cracking at the should not be assumed greater than 50 percent of
interior edge of the heat-affected zone of the weld the initial preload without prototype testing.
under relatively low load applications. As a result, When the installation load is determined by
testing clearly indicates loss of capacity with calibrated torque wrench or other less positive
increasing plate flexibility. means, a higher loss should be assumed. Lost
4.4.5 Shear- Shear may be transferred from preload may be regained by retorquing, or
base plate to concrete either by friction or by retightening anchors. There appears to be little
bearing. advantage in retorquing more than twice.
4.4.5.1 Shear transfer by friction - If shear is to Sufficient time should be allowed for the majority
be transferred by friction, no lateral translation of loss to occur before retorquing, but under no
(sliding) of the base plate can occur. The normal condition should the time period be less than
force necessary to develop frictional resistance about 1 week. Effective preload should not be
may be caused by direct load, by the compressive assumed without verification requirements in the
reaction of the applied moment, by residual installation procedure.
preload in the anchors, or by any combination of 4.4.5.2 Shear transfer through bearing- If
the three. If the connection is to transfer shear by frictional resistance is not sufficient to resist
friction, the loading combination which controls lateral sliding, shear must be transferred by the
should be that which produces the minimum plate bearing on anchors, shear lugs, or the
compressive reaction in conjunction with concrete at the end of a fully embedded plate. In
maximum shear. bearing connections, shear is distributed in
If the connection is fastened to hardened proportion to the stiffnesses of the shear-resisting
concrete, the coefficient of friction used to elements, with each element contributing its share.
determine shear resistance should not exceed 0.6. Failure of the stiffer elements will increase lateral
If the surface of a base plate is in intimate contact translation. The stiffer elements then transfer
with concrete or grout, shear resistance will be their load to the remaining elements.
increased by the cohesion between the two 4.4.6 Preload-Concern for fatigue failure is a
surfaces and the coefficient may be taken as 0.7. principal consideration in establishing service
All forces contributing to frictional resistance stresses. This is particularly true for expansion
should be conservatively determined in designing anchors. If the element is subject to frequent
for either total or partial shear resistance by fluctuations in stress, the magnitude of the
friction. Note that: fluctuating stress range must be restricted to
(a) Direct loads normal to the shear plane prevent eventual fatigue failure (see discussion of
should be the minimum associated with the load- behavior under cyclic loads in Chapter 3). This is
ing condition. For cyclic loading, this would be best controlled by limiting the maximum level of
the maximum direct pull-off loading including design stress. If the bolting system can be
associated impact factors. prestressed with sufficient load that the load
(b) The compression component of the remaining after losses exceeds the maximum stress
moment reaction is dependent on the location of load, it is generally accepted that fatigue is not
the center of gravity of the compressive reaction. likely to occur. Under these conditions service
Conservative assumptions should therefore be load stress should be set at a level that reflects the
used concerning its location. Without test veri- residual prestress. If a sustaining (residual)
fication of the analytical procedure, the location prestress cannot be assured, the service load stress,
should not be assumed to be farther than pne under fluctuating loads, must be set at a low
plate thickness from the compressive edge of the enough level to assure that fatigue failure will not
attachment. occur.
(c) Residual preload, if any, should be based Assuring a level of prestress in concrete
on conservative assumptions of preload loss. anchorages is more complicated than steel-to-steel
Shallow depth anchors having the capability of connections. Preload loss occurs due to creep of
failing the concrete in tension may be expected to the concrete in the highly-stressed regions of load
experience a total loss of preload. When the transfer from steel to concrete. For most
installation procedure requires a positive means of embedments the major preload loss occurs within
determining installation preload, residual preload a few days of preloading. The loss, in percent,
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-59
diminishes each time the anchorage is retorqued bolts in transmitting shear through the added
such that losses can be minimized by retorquing at space of the washers. If intimate contact is not
about 1 week intervals. The prestress should not achieved, the danger of high stress accumulations
exceed the yield stress of the steel. Loss of can be prevented by initially torquing to maximum
preload is a function of the strain relaxation values and then loosening the bolts to a minimum
(creep) relative to the total anchor strain. Since torque value after the concrete has had sufficient
the major portion of load relaxation occurs at the time to consolidate in the region of the anchor
zone of load transfer into the concrete, the loss of head. This will eliminate nonlinear anchor
preload, in percent, can be reduced by increasing displacement under load and restrict peak stress
the total anchor elongation which increases the accumulation to design stress levels.
strain length of the anchor. If the embedment 4.4.7 Base plate flexibility-The flexibility of the
length of the anchor is the minimum required to base plate connecting the attachment to the
develop its tensile strength, it will lose from 40 to anchorage steel is a controlling factor in
50 percent of its applied preload unless retorqued determining the magnitude of anchor stress and
(Burdette, Perry, and Funk 1987). The loss may the distribution of stress to the anchors. If the
be more pronounced if the anchor is situated in distance between exterior anchors and attachment
cracked concrete. Loss of preload may approach is more than two plate thicknesses, the plate may
100 percent for anchors of lesser embedment be considered flexible, otherwise, the plate may be
depths which are capable of failing the concrete. considered rigid. If the plate is rigid, anchor stress
This is especially true for anchors located in due to moment is proportional to its distance from
cracked concrete. To achieve an effective residual the neutral axis and a conventional summation of
preload, care must be taken to exclude any forces and moments can be used to determine
bonding of the anchor to grout or concrete at the stress. If the plate is flexible, anchor stress is
embedment surface. When bond occurs at the dependent on plate stiffness as well as distance to
surface, the confinement of the surface concrete the neutral axis. It can also be influenced by the
or grout, by compression of the bearing plate on effect of other stressed anchors in the group that
the surface, is often sufficient to locally transfer cause bending in the plate, and on any prying
the entire load for a limited time. When this forces caused by plate flexure, which may add
occurs, stretch of the bolt may be limited to the directly to the anchor load. Anchor loads,
thickness of the bearing plate or attachment. For determined by conventional analysis, may be
effective preload, threads must be excluded from significantly in error if the plate is flexible.
bonding to either concrete or grout. Grout has 4.4.7.1 Prying action-When load is trans-
significantly higher bonding qualities than ferred from attachment to anchor through a
concrete, therefore the entire length of bolt above flexible plate in full contact with the concrete or
the anchor head should be coated to prevent bond grout, rotation of the plate at the anchor will
in grouted systems. induce a prying force beyond the anchor where
Effective prestress requires intimate contact of the plate bears on the concrete. The prying force
the base plate with concrete or grout at all anchor increases the load in the anchor. Prying increases
locations. When the base plate is bolted directly with plate flexibility which affects the magnitude
to hardened concrete without grout, effective of potential downward displacement of the plate
prestress can be accomplished by placing shims or edge beyond the anchor. Prying decreases with
washers between the plate and concrete at the increased anchor displacement. Preload reduces
anchor locations. In most moment connections, the displacement characteristics of the anchor
shear is transferred to the concrete entirely under applied loading and increases the counter
through friction and bolts transmit tension only. rotation of the plate beyond the anchor. For this
If the combined effect of anchor preload and reason anchor stress will increase with applied
compressive reaction of the applied moment are load irrespective of preload. The rate of stress
not sufficient for shear transfer through friction, increase, however, decreases with increasing
then shear must be transferred through the preload.
anchors. If this occurs, and shims or washers are If the plate is not in contact with the concrete
used, the combined stress in the anchor would be beyond the anchor, no prying will occur until the
increased by the increased bending stress in the gap between plate and concrete is closed by the
355.1R-60 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
Installed
Location
L and P are Specified
Correct
Location
Suggested tolerances
Type of anchorage Vertical
Projection Positioning Alignment,
P, in. r, in. (r, deg.
A. Cast-in-place
1. Common bolt, J- or Gbolt, continuously threaded rods k /14 I 1/16 I 3.0
B. Post-installed
bolts is grouted. When concrete and grout (and or set in predrilled holes. The wedging action
dry pack under baseplate) has cured the specified between the device and the sides of the hole is
number of days, screw on the nut and apply the actuated by placing tension on the bolt, by turning
pretensioning load with a torque wrench. Torque the bolt, by hammering the bolt onto a spreader
should initially be about 50 percent of desired (cone or wedge) in the bottom of the hole, or by
torque, then to 90 percent, working from one bolt hammering a spreader into the bottom expanding
to the one diagonally opposite and thus portion of the anchor. The manufacturer’s
progressing through the group. The final 10 instructions for installation of expansion anchors
percent of torque should be applied to all bolts in must be followed meticulously. This applies
sequence. After 1 week verify that pretension has particularly to the diameter and depth of hole.
held, or retension to specified torque, if necessary. Some systems afford the opportunity of using the
5.4.2 Post-installed systems base plate or element being connected as a
5.4.2.1 General anchor types -Anchors in this template in drilling the embedment hole. Others
group include: require a larger hole to accommodate a sleeve
Common bolts, reinforcing bars, and that bears against the bottom of the connected
continuously threaded rods base plate.
- Bonded (grout and chemical) anchors Expansion anchors can lose preload under a
- Rock bolts cyclic loading or from concrete creep due to high
- Expansion anchors local expansion forces unless they are so
5.4.2.2 Common bolts, reinforcing bars, pretensioned that the bolt is always in tension
threaded rod-Section 5.5.2 applies for positioning under all loading conditions. Generally, to
and drilling the hole; Section 5.6 for grouting. develop the pretension load the wedge or
5.4.2.3 Chemical anchors-These are similar expansion device must first be “set” against the
to grouted anchors, with an adhesive, such as side of the hole. With certain types of anchors
epoxy, polyester, or vinylester taking the place of there may be an initial slip which should be
the grout. Section 5.5.2 applies as far as anticipated and designed for. In the case of
positioning and drilling the hole for the anchor. excessive slip, follow the recommendations in
The adhesives are proprietary and installation Section 5.7.2.
should follow manufacturer’s instructions.
Drilled hole diameters may vary from 1.0 to 5.5 Inspection
2.0 mm larger than the nominal steel diameter 5.5.1 Cast-in-place systems -The inspector has
without affecting loading capacity for polyester the responsibility to verify that the size and
and vinylester anchoring systems. Storage should location of anchors or anchorage assemblies are in
follow manufacturer’s recommendations to prevent accordance with the construction plans and
heat, ultraviolet light, or both from shortening the specifications, prior to the placement of concrete.
shelf life of the unused product. Anchoring Anchors must be located properly in plan, have
systems using epoxies are not sensitive to these the proper projection, and be rigidly held in place
same storage requirements. so as not to be disturbed during the placement
5.4.2.4 Rock bolts - Rock bolts occasionally and finishing of the concrete. Methods of
are used for anchoring to concrete. There are securing the anchorage in place include:
many types available. Section 5.5.2 applies as far - Nailing to the forms (conditions applicable)
as positioning and drilling the lead hole. In the - Nailing the top template to the forms
case of the split end variety, bondbreaker is - Wire tying individual bolts, or their bottom
applied to part of the shank and then the rock template, to the forms or the reinforcement and
bolt is then inserted in the hole with the wedge - Tack welding to the reinforcement, if
lightly set in the split tail of the bolt. The nut is approved. (High strength bolts should not be
in place on the bolt, flush with the end. The bolt welded)
is then rammed down over the wedge until the Welding should be to the bottom washer or the
bolt is well set in the hole. It is then adjusted for bottom template of the bolt head, rather than the
vertical alignment and grouted per Section 5.6. shank of the bolt.
5.4.2.5 Expansion anchors-These systems In the case of bolts that are subsequently to be
include a myriad of devices. They are self-drilling, tensioned, the inspector should verify that
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-65
unsleeved bolts, or sleeved bolts that are to be and is an excellent method, but it is labor
grouted prior to the tensioning, have a bond intensive, and in many installations is impractical.
breaker (grease or other) on the shank that will Epoxy grouts also have been used successfully
prevent the bolt from bonding to the concrete or for a number of years. These materials offer high,
grout. early strength and provide excellent bond and
5.5.2 Post-installed systems -Post-installed protection of steel in corrosive environments.
systems involve setting the anchor in blockouts or There are, however, some limitations in the use of
drilled holes. The inspector should verify that the these materials. The concrete and steel surfaces
blockouts or holes are properly located. With to be in contact with epoxy must be cleaned and,
drilled holes he should verify that the drill bit is of for most epoxies, dry. Epoxies also have a
the proper diameter, that the hole is plumb to the coefficient of thermal expansion several times that
surface (bit guides should be used for critical of the concrete or steel, which should be taken
work), that the finished hole has the proper into consideration. Epoxies can creep under
diameter and depth, and that the appropriate sustained loading of the anchor, and some epoxy
drilling equipment is used. This calls for rotary grouts lose strength when exposed to temperatures
drills (carbide tip or diamond studded bits) or over 120 F.
hand hammered star drill bits. Jackhammering 5.6.1.2 Precision, "Nonshrinking" grout-These
should not be permitted because of the damage it portland cement based products are proprietary
does to the concrete immediately around the hole. and sophisticated in terms of their cement
Once the hole is drilled and blown clean, the chemistry and composition. They comply with the
anchor should be installed, preloaded, and tested requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engin-
(as required) in accordance with Section 5.5; or eers specifications for nonshrink grouts, CRD-C-
the hole should be protected by plugging it with a 621.
rag or other suitable stuffing until the time of Precision grouts are proportioned to lessen the
anchor installation. effects of plastic and drying shrinkage in the
Guidance for inspecting grouted anchors is plastic and hardened states. Accordingly they are
given in Section 5.6. excellent materials to use in complex grouting
situations, such as the grouting of machinery
5.6 -Grouting bases.
ACI Committee 351, Foundations for Equip- 5.6.2 Applications - Grouting of anchorages to
ment and Machinery, includes in its work concrete falls into three application categories:
development of information on grouting. Accord- - Grouting of anchor bolt holes and sleeves
ingly, reference is made to publications of that prior to base plate installation
committee. The statements which follow are in- - Grouting or dry-packing of base plates and
tended to be a brief summary of grouting as it machinery bases
relates to construction considerations for concrete - Grouting bolt holes after pretensioning of the
anchorages. anchor bolt
5.6.1 Materials - Grouting materials fall into two 5.6.3 Construction procedures
broad functional categories: nonprecision grouts 5.6.3.1 Preparation - Anchor bolt holes and
and precision, “nonshrinking” grouts. sleeves should be clean and free of oil, grease,
5.6.1.1 Nonprecision grouts - Nonprecision dirt, or other debris. Bolt holes should preferably
grouts include mixtures of cement and water, with have a textured surface, thoroughly moistened
or without the inclusion of sand or admixtures. prior to grouting, but with no free moisture in the
The use of the “jobsite mixed” or packaged hole.
products not designed to perform as a precision 5.6.3.2 Mixing and placing-Grouts may be
grout has limitations. The most significant mixed in mortar mixers or in smaller vessels, as is
limitation is the lack of a mechanism for appropriate to the work. When using proprietary
overcoming drying shrinkage which occurs as free products, follow the manufacturer’s instructions
moisture leaves the grout. for mixing. The “pot” life is a very important
Dry packing with cement, sand, and only consideration.
enough water to result in a stiff, but cohesive Proper placement of grout is important.
mixture has been used in grouting for many years Whether dry packed or poured at a fluid
355.1R-66 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
6.2 -Existing codes and specifications variables such as anchor type or form, spacing,
6.2.1 American Association of State Highway edge distance, nature of the anchor load, thickness
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) of the concrete member, and concrete stress in the
6.2.1.1 Standard Specification for Highway anchor zone. Concrete strength is critical to
Bridges -For composite bridge decks, AASHTO assure that the reinforced concrete structure
uses the ultimate capacity of stud shear connectors exhibits ductile failure, which is also an ACI 318
and a reduction factor t$ of 0.85 for design. requirement. Note, however, that many of the
Design checks are required for horizontal shear post-installed systems feature the brittle concrete-
under working loads. Working loads are cone failure.
compared to allowable loads which include a The commentary of ACI 349, Appendix B,
reduction for fatigue. provides an excellent source of information on
AASHTO Section 1.7.56 bases the number, types of anchorage devices, design requirements,
required embedment, and size of anchor bolt on modes of failure, and testing.
the span of the bridge, and requires that the 6.2.3 American Institute of Steel Construction
anchor bolt be swedged or threaded to insure a (AISC)
satisfactory grip on material such as the grout. 6.2.3.1 Manual of Steel Construction -The
AASHTO requires that anchor bolts subject to AISC “Specification for the Design, Fabrication,
tension be designed to engage a mass of concrete and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings” sets
which will provide a resistance equal to one and allowable bolt stresses in Sections 1.5.2 and 1.6.3.
one-half times the calculated uplift. These values apply to certain cast-in-place and
6.2.2 American Concrete Institute (ACI) grouted anchor bolts and are valid for allowable
6.2.2.1 ACI 318, Building Code Requirements anchor steel stresses, but no values are given
for Reinforced Concrete - ACI 318-63 contained which relate to the transfer of these stresses to the
allowable bond values for plain (smooth) bars. surrounding concrete.
Many engineers have used these values for The AISC specification gives allowable values in
determining embedment requirements for cast-in- shear for stud shear connectors used for composite
place anchor bolts. The current edition of ACI design in Table 1.11-4. The listed values cannot
318 does not give allowable bond values for plain be used for anchor bolts of the same size. The
or deformed bars. Section 12.6.1 states “Any values used in Table 1.11-4 are based on equations
mechanical device capable of developing the derived from a testing program and the ultimate
strength of reinforcement without damage to strength of the composite member, using a factor
concrete may be used as anchorage.” Section of safety of 2.0.
15.8.3.3 of ACI 318 states “Anchor bolts and The AISC code commentary contains the
mechanical connectors shall be designed to reach following warning:
their design strength prior to anchorage failure or “The values of q in Table 1.11-4 must not be
failure of surrounding concrete.” confused with shear connection values suitable for
6.2.2.2 ACI 349, Code Requirements for use when the required number is measured by the
Nuclear Safety Related Concrete parameter VQ/I, where V is the total shear at any
Structures-Appendix B of ACI 349 gives given cross-section. Such a misuse could result in
comprehensive procedures for designing providing less than half the number required by
anchorages and steel embedments that are used to Formulas 1.11-3, 1.11-4, or 1.11-5.”
transmit loads from attachments to reinforced The AISC specification also gives setting
concrete structures governed by ACI 349. The tolerances for bolts used to anchor structural
basic philosophy of anchorage requirements in members; however, these tolerances are unsuitable
ACI 349 is consistent with the ultimate strength for anchoring machinery.
design philosophy of reinforced concrete. The 6.2.4 American Society for Testing and Materials
failure mechanism is controlled by requiring (ASTM)
yielding of the steel anchor prior to brittle failure 6.2.4.1 Annual Book of Standards - Volume
of the concrete. 04.07 contains test standard ASTM E 488,
This design method considers not only “Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors
traditional design parameters, i.e., steel strength, in Concrete and Masonry Elements.” This test
concrete strength, and anchor size, but also other standard describes procedures for determining the
355.1R-68 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
static, dynamic, and fatigue tensile and shear 307 quality or better.
strengths of cast-in-place, chemical, grouted, and The table assumes an anchor spacing of 12
expansion anchors. anchor diameters. The spacing may be reduced
Volume 15.08, Fasteners, contains various down to 6 anchor diameters with a 50 percent
ASTM specifications for the steel used for bolts, reduction in allowable load values. A minimum
including A 193, A 307, A 325, A 449, and A 490. edge distance of 6 anchor diameters is required.
6.2.5 Construction Industry Research and Edge distance may also be reduced up to 50
Information Association (CIRA) (Great Britain). percent, provided that the listed values are
6.2.5.1 Section and Use of Fixings in Concrete reduced in equal proportion. Tension values listed
and Masonry (Guide 4) - CIRA Guide 4, is a in the table may be increased 100 percent when
comprehensive guide on the selection and use of “special inspection” is provided. UBC Section
anchors installed in concrete. Three main 2719, on anchor bolts for steel column bases, does
categories of anchor types are covered. These not provide design values for anchor bolts, but
include cast-in-place, expansion, and bonded simply states that “Anchor bolts shall be designed
anchors. The guide also covers behavior of to provide resistance to all conditions of tension
fastener assemblies under load, design and shear at the bases of columns.” The section
considerations, limitations, durability, testing, and on steel column anchorage does not refer to Table
practical considerations. No. 26-G. Application of this table to steel
6.2.6 Institut fir Bautechnik (IfBT)(West column anchorage would greatly affect current
Germany) design practice because of the requirement in
6.2.6.1 Tests to Evaluate the Strength of Table No. 26-G of a minimum spacing of 6 anchor
Metallic Expansion Bolts for Anchorage in Concrete diameters.
with an SC of 20 MPa (2500 psi) or 6.2.8 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI)
Greater-Approvals are based on results of tests 6.2.8.1 PCI Design Handbook-The handbook
carried out by licensed universities. gives equations for shear and tension load
In the tests the proper functioning of the allowables for headed shear stud anchors.
anchors under extreme conditions are checked, Combined loading, as well as required edge
and tests to evaluate allowable loads for design distances and anchor spacing for groups of
are performed. anchors, are covered.
For evaluating allowable conditions of use (e.g., Based on a review of past design methods and
allowable loads, required edge distance, and actual testing and modeling, the PCI Connection
spacing), a sufficient number of tests have to be Details Committee recommends the use of a
performed to calculate a statistically reliable projected cone model to define the actual bolt
confidence level for the failure loads [5 percent tension at which concrete failure will occur. The
fractile (or 95 percentile) of failure loads]. A PCI cone surface equation is:
safety factor of 3 is applied to the determined 5 Pm = 2.8 hL@ [fi 7~ ld (li + da] (6.1)
percent fractile of the failure loads to account for
the variations of the concrete tensile strength and where
of jobsite installation quality. For reasons of iz = 1.0 for normal weight concrete
simplicity, one value for the allowable load is 1 = 0.85 for sand lightweight concrete
given per anchor size which is valid for all loading = 0.75 for all lightweight concrete
directions (tension, shear, combined tension, and ;= embedment, in.
shear). Expected displacements of anchors under d,, = diameter of anchor or stud head,
allowable loads are given which should be taken in.
into account in the design of the fastened element f’, = specified 28-day compressive
(when appropriate). strength of concrete, psi
6.2.7 International Conference of Building P =
IlC
nominal tensile capacity of anchor
Officials (ICBO) as governed by concrete failure
6.2.7.1 U n i f o r m B u i l d i n g C o d e ( 1 9 8 5
Edition) -The Uniform Building Code (UBC), In anchor bolt design where the concrete does
Table 26-G sets forth allowable shear and tension not fail, the anchor bolt fails via a combination of
loads for cast-in-place bolts of at least ASTM A tension and shear. The PCI equation for
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-99
combined tension and shear strength is: and 79-14. Only Class I piping (piping used to
safely shut down a nuclear power plant) was
impacted by Bulletins 79-02 and 79-14. The NRC
requires that during anchor bolt design, the
following must be considered: baseplate flexibility,
(i.e., baseplate prying action that increases anchor
where bolt loading), performance of anchors due to
4 = strength reduction factor cyclic loading, anchor performance in masonry
Pu = applied factored tension load walls, the effect of pipe support loads on masonry
P = nominal tension strength of
YlC walls, and the maximum support load considered
anchor for anchor bolt design. Concrete expansion
vu = applied factored shear load anchors must have the following minimum factor
Kc = nominal shear strength of anchor of safety between the bolt design load and the bolt
as governed by steel failure ultimate capacity determined from static load
In-depth discussions of these equations may be tests, (e.g., published data from the anchor bolt
found in Klingner and Mendonca (1982) and manufacturer) which simulate the installation
Shaikh and Yi (1985). conditions, (i.e., type of concrete and its strength
6.2.9 The Agrbnent Board (Great Britain) properties): (1) a safety factor of 4:1 - for wedge-
6.2.9.1 The Assessment of Torque-Expanded and sleeve-type anchor bolts, (2) a safety factor of
Anchor Bolts When Used in Dense Aggregate 5:l - for shell-type anchor bolts.
Concrete (M.O.A. T. No. 19:1981) -This document The bolt ultimate capacity should account for
presents the procedures for deriving design the effects of shear and tension interaction,
information and classifies ten different types of minimum edge distance, and proper bolt spacing.
expansion anchors according to the mechanism for A summary of the USNRC criteria is found in
achieving expansion. It considers the effects of USNRC “Anchor Bolt Study Data Survey and
different types of loading conditions and typically Dynamic Testing” by the Hanford Engineering
requires a minimum of 277 tests (for six different Development Laboratory.
anchor diameters) to calculate safe working loads 6.2.12 Draft 1 Regulatory Guide MS 129-4
as the lower of: “Anchoring Component and Structural Supports in
a. The 5 percent exclusion value (or 95th Concrete”
percentile, calculated by regression analysis or This draft guide from the U.S. Nuclear
other statistical techniques), then divided by three Regulatory Commission provides the criteria for
or, acceptance, qualification, design, installation, and
b. The mean of the loads determined at a inspection for steel embedments anchored in
displacement of 0.1 mm (0.004 in.) under direct concrete. It also provides information on the
tension or, acceptability for NRC licensing actions in
c. The mean of the loads determined at a accordance with Appendix B, of ACI 349-80.
displacement of 1.0 mm (0.039 in.) under direct
shear. 6.3 -Application and development of codes
6.2.10 UEAtc (Union European of Agrbment) ASTM E 488 is the only existing American
The UEAtc Directives for the Assessment of standard exclusively and specifically concerned
Anchor Bolts (December, 1986) is a European with testing to determine the performance of all
code for the assessment and approval of anchor types of concrete anchors. It is not intended to
bolts. The document has been adopted by the describe design procedures for anchorage
Common Market Countries of Germany, U.K., connections, nor to identify characteristics which
France, Austria, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Netherlands, affect performance in conditions other than as-
Portugal, Denmark, and Belgium. tested. ICBO has also published a limited test
6.2.11 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) standard for expansion anchors only.
Bulletin 79-02 and 79-14). ACI 349, Appendix B, specifies anchorage
Anchor bolt design methods have been revised design and applies ultimate strength design
based on the United States NRC Office of philosophy to all types of anchorages. Other
Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins No. 79-02 American codes limit their consideration to cast-
355.1R-70 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
Weight Density lbf/ft3 1.571 x lo2 N/m3 This report was submitted to letter ballot of the committee
was approved according to Institute procedures.
APPENDIX B-NOTATION