See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/333828313

ANCHORAGES WITH SUPPLEMENTARY REINFORCEMENT UNDER TENSION,

SHEAR AND INTERACTION LOADS - EXPERIMENTAL DATABASE

Conference Paper · May 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 80

4 authors:

Jan Bujnak Akanshu Sharma

University of Žilina Universität Stuttgart
59 PUBLICATIONS   87 CITATIONS    145 PUBLICATIONS   656 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Rolf Eligehausen Jörg Asmus

Universität Stuttgart International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement
341 PUBLICATIONS   2,165 CITATIONS    45 PUBLICATIONS   30 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Structural Engineering View project

Impact behavior of concrete structures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Akanshu Sharma on 17 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ANCHORAGES WITH SUPPLEMENTARY REINFORCEMENT
UNDER TENSION, SHEAR AND INTERACTION LOADS -
EXPERIMENTAL DATABASE

Akanshu Sharma1, Rolf Eligehausen1,2, Jörg Asmus2, and Jan Bujnak3

1
Institute for construction materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany
2
IEA GmbH & Co. KG, Engineering office Eligehausen-Asmus-Hofmann, Stuttgart, Germany
3
Peikko Group Corporation, Lahti, Finland
Corresponding author email: akanshu.sharma@iwb.uni-stuttgart.de

Abstract
Anchorages in concrete may be subjected to tension forces, shear forces or combined tension and
shear forces (interaction). The performance of anchorages can be enhanced by providing
supplementary reinforcement against tension or shear forces in the form of stirrups enclosing surface
or edge reinforcement, respectively. Previously, the authors carried out detailed experimental
investigations on anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces subjected to
tension loads and anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces close to an
edge loaded in shear perpendicular and towards the edge. In this work, comprehensive experimental
investigations are carried out on quadruple anchor groups (2x2 configuration) made using Welda®
anchor plates provided with supplementary reinforcement to take up only tension or shear forces and
subjected to tension, shear and combined tension and shear loads. Concrete based failure modes were
targeted in the test program. This paper gives the details of the experimental program.

Keywords: Headed studs, supplementary reinforcement, tension, shear, interaction

1. Introduction
The presence of supplementary reinforcement in the form of surface (or edge) reinforcement and
stirrups can significantly enhance the load-displacement behaviour of an anchorage with headed studs.
The previous test programs carried out by the authors on the behaviour of Welda® anchor plates with
supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces under tension loads and with supplementary
reinforcement to take up shear forces under shear loads (Sharma et al., 2017) showed a significant
increase in the load carrying capacity of the anchorages due to supplementary reinforcement.
The load resisting mechanism of an anchorage with supplementary reinforcement can be
understood with the help of a strut-and-tie model (Eligehausen et al., 2006; EN1992-4, 2018). For
tension loads, the supplementary reinforcement consists of surface reinforcement and stirrups
enclosing the surface reinforcement (Figure 1a), while for shear loads, the edge reinforcement and
stirrups enclosing the edge reinforcement constitute the supplementary reinforcement (Figure 1b). The
load-bearing capacity of an anchorage with supplementary reinforcement results from the anchorage in
the concrete breakout body achieved by means of bond and bearing of a hook or bend. Under the
influence of an external load, the anchor transfers the load inside concrete, which initially takes up
almost entire load by itself while the stirrups remain basically unstressed. On gradually increasing the
loads, however, the concrete and the stirrups lying within the breakout body get activated and start
taking up the forces. On the other hand, due to fracture of concrete, after cracking, the concrete
gradually drops the load carried by it.
a) b)

Stirrups
V
Idealized
breakout body
c1 Edge
reinforcement

1,5c1 1,5c1

Figure 1. Strut-and-tie model for anchorage with supplementary reinforcement (a) Tension (b) Shear.

For a given configuration of the anchorage, in general, increasing the amount of stirrups leads to
increased resistance of the anchorage. However, beyond a certain amount of reinforcement, concrete
failure due to compression can precede yielding of the stirrups. This phenomenon of “strut failure”
forms the upper limit beyond which the resistance of the anchorage cannot be increased by adding
further supplementary reinforcement.
In practice, often the supplementary reinforcement for the anchorage is provided to take up either
only shear forces or only tension forces, while the anchorage itself is subjected to inclined loads. In the
absence of the test data, the existing codes (e.g. EN1992-4, 2018; fib Bulletin 58, 2011) use a very
conservative approach for such cases. The current approach given in these codes considers the
interaction between tension and shear forces acting on the anchorages with supplementary
reinforcement through Eq. (1):
𝑁 𝛼 𝑉 𝛼
( ) + ( ) ≤ 1.0 (1)
𝑁𝑢 𝑉𝑢
Where,
N is the tension force component applied on the anchorage
Nu is the ultimate tension resistance of the anchorage
V is the shear force component applied on the anchorage
Vu is the mean ultimate shear resistance of the anchorage
For the anchorages provided with supplementary reinforcement to take up both tension and shear
forces, in Eq. (1), the exponent α is taken as α = 1,5. However, if the reinforcement is provided to take
up either tension or shear loads only, then the exponent α must be taken as 0,67. This value of the
exponent seems rather conservative and is included in the codes due to the lack of test data for
anchorages with supplementary reinforcement under interaction loads.
This paper reports the details and the results of a comprehensive experimental program carried out
on quadruple anchor groups (2x2 configuration) made using Welda® anchor plates provided with
supplementary reinforcement to take up only tension or shear forces and subjected to tension, shear
and combined tension and shear loads. Using the information obtained from the tests and carefully
planned strain gauges, a new model has been developed to calculate the failure loads for anchorages
with supplementary reinforcement under interaction. The analytical model and the open questions will
be described in another paper.

2. Details of the experiments

2.1. Test program
The tests were carried out on Welda® anchor groups of 2x2 configuration fabricated with headed stud
anchors of diameter, ds = 22mm at a spacing of 150mm in both the directions. The anchors were
welded on a 25mm thick base plate, which was cast flush with the concrete surface. The effective
embedment depth of the anchors, measured from the top of the plate to the top of the anchor head was
kept as hef = 155mm. The anchor plates were identical as the ones used in the previous test programs
by the authors (Sharma et al., 2017). The tests were conducted in concrete without supplementary
reinforcement, with supplementary reinforcement to take up only tension forces and with
supplementary reinforcement to take up only shear forces. The tests were performed at four different
loading angles with the vertical, θ, namely, θ = 0° (Centric tension), θ = 30°, θ = 60° and θ = 90° (pure
shear). For each anchor group configuration tested, three tests were performed. The edge distance for
the front anchor row was kept as c11 = 120 mm for all the cases, while the distance to the other edges
was kept large.
The supplementary reinforcement provided to take up tension forces consisted of four stirrups
(eight stirrup legs) of diameter 10mm reinforcement marked by red dashed lines in Figure 2a
enclosing the hanger (surface) reinforcement of same diameter reinforcing bars marked by blue dashed
lines in Figure 2a. The supplementary reinforcement provided to take up shear forces consisted of
12mm diameter rebar as edge reinforcement and stirrups placed at a regular spacing of 200mm (Figure
2b). In order to segregate the contribution of the supplementary reinforcement and the concrete against
the applied loads, the strains in the reinforcing bars were measured at specified locations, where the
theoretical concrete crack was expected to intercept the stirrups.

a) b)

Figure 2. Supplementary reinforcement provided to take up (a) Tension forces (b) Shear forces.

2.2. Test setup

The typical test setup for tension tests consisted in a hydraulic cylinder placed on a circular steel frame
of support ring diameter of 800mm placed on the concrete slab concentrically with the anchor group
(see Figure 3a). A threaded rod made from high strength steel was used to connect a loading plate with
the hydraulic cylinder. The tension load transfer between the loading plate and the anchor plate was
facilitated through four M24 bolts threaded into internally threaded holes, pre-drilled in the base plate.
The applied tension load was measured using a calibrated load cell and the displacement of the anchor
plate was measured relative to the concrete surface using LVDTs.
For tests under shear loads (loading angle, θ = 90°), the shear load was applied to the anchor plate
through a 80mm thick shear loading plate (see Figure 3b), which was connected to a shear loading
fork. The shear loading fork was connected to the hydraulic cylinder, supported on the reaction
bracket, through a 42mm thick high strength threaded rod. The applied load was measured using a
calibrated load cell. The design resulted in an eccentricity of 40mm between the line of load
application and the surface of the anchor plate/concrete surface. In order to minimize friction, 2mm
thick Teflon sheets were placed below the shear loading fork. The shear loading plate did not touch the
concrete surface. The clear support distance in every test was kept 1000mm to allow the formation of
full concrete edge breakout body. The horizontal displacement of the anchor plate in the direction of
the applied load was measured using LVDT placed on the rear side of the loading plate. An array of
LVDT was used to measure the crack widths at anticipated crack locations. The location of crack
measuring LVDTs was selected on the basis of the assumption of the theoretical crack appearing from
any anchor row.
Figure 3c shows the test setup used for the tests at a loading angle of 30° with the vertical. The test
setup consists of a specially designed rigid loading frame that can be set at 30°, 45° and 60° angle,
while maintaining the unconfined test setup requirements. The loading frame is designed to carry
forces up to 400 kN. The displacements were measured parallel to the loading direction, in the
horizontal direction and in the vertical direction. Additionally, the crack widths were measured at the
locations similar to those used for the tests under shear loads.
a) Hydraulic b)
cylinder

Circular steel
frame

Threaded rod
connecting loading plate
and hydraulic cylinder

LVDT
LVDT

Bolts connecting anchor Loading plate

plate and loading plate

c)

Figure 3. Photograph of the setup used for the tests on (a) Tension (b) Shear and (c) Inclined loads.

3. Results of the experiments

The mean experimental failure loads obtained for each test series are summarized in Table 1. The
coefficient of variation (CoV) within a particular test series was always less than 10%.

Table 1. Summary of the mean failure loads obtained from experiments.

Test Series Diameter of stirrups Nature of stirrups Loading angle Mean failure load
[-] [mm] [-] θ [Degrees] Pu [kN]
S1 0 NA 0 222.6
S1 0 NA 30 180.2
S1 0 NA 60 161.1
S1 0 NA 90 167.5
S2.1 10 Tension 0 371.7
S2.1 10 Tension 30 266.1
S2.1 10 Tension 60 224.2
S2.1 10 Tension 90 243.3
S3.1 12 Shear 0 205.6
S3.1 12 Shear 30 189.0
S3.1 12 Shear 60 201.8
S3.1 12 Shear 90 284.8

The ultimate failure loads, Pu, obtained from the experiments were resolved in corresponding tension
loads, Nu, and shear loads, Vu, considering the loading angle with the vertical, θ, using Eq. (2).
𝑁𝑢 = 𝑃𝑢 Cos𝜃; 𝑉𝑢 = 𝑃𝑢 Sin𝜃 (2)
 The experimental interaction curves were obtained by plotting the individual and mean values of Nu
and Vu on the graph.

3.1. Anchorages without supplementary reinforcement

The ultimate tension and shear failure loads thus obtained were plotted against each other to
generate the experimental interaction curves as displayed in Figure 4a. For comparison, the interaction
curves that would be obtained following Eq. (1) using the experimental mean values for Vu and Pu
with different exponents, α, namely α = 1.0; α = 1.2 and α = 1.5. It can be seen that the interaction
curve obtained using α = 1.5 matches the experimental interaction curve very well. This shows that the
current approach given in the codes using α = 1.5 in Eq. (1) is suitable for anchorages without
supplementary reinforcement.

a) b) c)

d) e)

Figure 4. Results of tests on groups without supplementary reinforcement (a) Interaction curve, (b) Failure mode
tension (0°), (c) Failure mode 30°, (d) Failure mode 60°, (e) Failure mode shear (90°).

Figure 4b through 4e display the typical failure modes obtained in the tests displaying the change in
failure mode from truncated concrete cone breakout under tension loads to concrete edge breakout
from the back anchor row under shear forces. For other loading angles, a mixed concrete cone and
concrete edge breakout was observed.

3.2. Anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces

The ultimate tension and shear failure loads obtained from the tests using Eq. (2) were plotted
against each other to generate the experimental interaction curves as displayed in Figure 5a. For
comparison, the interaction curves that would be obtained following Eq. (1) using the experimental
mean values for Vu and Pu with different exponents, α, namely α = 1.0; α = 1.2 and α = 1.5. The
experimental interaction curve clearly displays a convex outward shape and the interaction curve
obtained using α = 1.2 matches the experimental interaction curve the best. Thus, the current approach
given in the codes using α = 0.67 in Eq. (1), which leads to a concave outward shape is too
conservative for anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces only.
Figure 5b through 5e display the typical failure modes obtained in the tests on anchorages with
supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces only. Similar to the case of anchorages without
supplementary reinforcement, in this case also the failure mode gradually changed from truncated
concrete cone breakout under tension loads to concrete edge breakout from the back anchor row under
shear forces.
In two out of three tests on anchorages with supplementary reinforcement loaded at an angle of 30°
or 60° with the vertical, strain gauges were provided at specified locations, where the theoretical
concrete crack was expected to intercept the stirrups. The readings from the strain gauges were
evaluated in order to estimate the amount and extent of forces carried by reinforcing bars. The strains
recorded by the strain gauges were converted into stress in the reinforcing bar considering an elastic-
perfectly plastic stress-strain curve with a yield stress of 540 MPa. The stress in the reinforcing bar
was multiplied by the cross-sectional area to obtain the tensile force carried by the rebar. The tensile
forces carried by all reinforcing bars intercepted by the crack were added up to obtain the total tension
force carried by the activated stirrups. The tensile forces carried by the reinforcing bars were
converted to the inclined force component taken up by the stirrups considering the loading angle. The
total inclined force carried by stirrups was subtracted from the applied forces to obtain the contribution
of the concrete to carry the applied inclined force.

a) b) c)

d) e)

Figure 5. Results of the tests on anchor groups with supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces only
(a) Interaction curve, (b) Failure mode tension (0°), (c) Failure mode 30°, (d) Failure mode 60°, (e) Failure mode
shear (90°).

Figure 6 displays the total applied force and the force component carried by the stirrups and
concrete in the direction of the applied load as a function of the horizontal displacement for (a) test
performed at a loading angle of 30° and (b) test performed at a loading angle of 60°. It can be
observed that in both the tests, initially the plot of total force is identical with the plot of total force
carried by concrete. Once the contribution of concrete reaches a value, which approximately
corresponds to the capacity of the group in unreinforced concrete, the reinforcement contribution
becomes significant. After cracking, the concrete contribution gradually drops down while the stirrups
take up more loads. This behaviour is similar to that observed in the tests on anchor groups with
supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces and loaded under tension (Sharma et al., 2017).
As expected, due to a close to vertical loading, the contribution of the tension stirrups is larger in case
of loading angle = 30° compared to that obtained for the loading angle = 60°.

a) 300 b) 250

250
200

200
Load [kN]

150
Load [kN]

150

Total applied force 100

100
Total applied force
Inclined force component
of stirrups 50 Inclined force component
50 Inclined force component of stirrups
taken by concrete Inclined force component
taken by concrete
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Displacement - Horizontal [mm] Displacement - Horizontal [mm]

Figure 6. Segregated contributions of concrete and stirrups in carrying the total force in case of anchorages
with supplementary reinforcement to take up tension forces loaded at an angle of (a) 30°, (b) 60°.

3.3. Anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces

The ultimate tension and shear failure loads obtained from the tests performed on anchorages with
supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces only using Eq. (2) were plotted against each other
to generate the experimental interaction curves as displayed in Figure 7a. For comparison, the
interaction curves that would be obtained following Eq. (1) using the experimental mean values for Vu
and Pu with different exponents, α, namely α = 1.0; α = 1.2 and α = 1.5. Again, the interaction curve
obtained using α = 1.2 matches the experimental interaction curve the best. Thus, the current approach
given in the codes using α = 0.67 in Eq. (1), which leads to a concave outward shape is too
conservative for anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces only.

a) b) c)

d) e)

Figure 7. Results of the tests on anchor groups with supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces only (a)
Interaction curve, (b) Failure mode tension (0°), (c) Failure mode 30°, (d) Failure mode 60°, (e) Failure mode
shear (90°).

Figure 7b through 7e display the typical failure modes obtained in the tests on anchorages with
supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces only. Similar to the other cases, in this case also
the failure mode gradually changed from truncated concrete cone breakout under tension loads to
concrete edge breakout from the back anchor row under shear forces.
Figure 8 displays the total applied force and the force component carried by the stirrups and
concrete in the direction of the applied load as a function of the horizontal displacement for tests on
anchorages with supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces subjected to loads at an angle of
(a) 30° and (b) 60°. For the case of loading angle = 30°, due to almost vertical loading angle, the
contribution of stirrups in taking up the applied force is relatively low. For the case of loading angle =
60°, once the contribution of concrete reaches approximately the capacity of group in unreinforced
concrete, the reinforcement contribution becomes significant. Since in this case, the loading angle is
close to horizontal, the contribution of stirrups in taking up the applied force is relatively high.

a) 200
Total applied force
b) 250
Total applied force
180
Inclined force component
Inclined force component of stirrups
160 of stirrups 200
Inclined force component
140 Inclined force component taken by concrete
taken by concrete
Load [kN]

Load [kN]

120 150

100

80 100

60

40 50

20

0 0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Displacement [mm] Displacement [mm]

Figure 8. Segregated contributions of concrete and stirrups in carrying the total force in case of anchorages
with supplementary reinforcement to take up shear forces loaded at an angle of (a) 30°, (b) 60°.

4. Conclusions
In this work, experiments were performed on anchorages without and with supplementary
reinforcement to take up tension or shear loads placed close to an edge and loaded in tension, shear
towards the edge and combined tension and shear loads. The investigated groups were of 2 x 2
configuration (quadruple anchor groups). The test results clearly show that supplementary (anchorage)
reinforcement to take up tension or shear forces significantly increases the capacity of anchorages
loaded in combined tension and shear towards the edge. The shape of the experimental interaction
 curve was found to be convex outward instead of concave outward as used in the current model of
EN1992-4 (2018). The test results are evaluated from the point of view of contribution of stirrups and
concrete. It was found that both concrete and supplementary reinforcement contribute significantly
towards the capacity of the anchorage. The evaluation of the failure loads showed that for anchorages
with supplementary reinforcement to take up either tension or shear forces only, tested in this test
program, an interaction exponent of α = 1,2 is appropriate. Once the applied load reaches the load
corresponding to concrete edge failure, the concrete drops the load gradually. As soon as the concrete
cracks, the reinforcement gets effective and begins to carry loads. The stirrups intercepted by the crack
are activated and participate in carrying part of the applied load. Based on these detailed evaluations, a
new analytical model is proposed, which will be presented in another paper.

References
EN 1992-4: Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures — Part 4: Design of fastenings for use in concrete, July
2018, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium.
fib Bulletin 58 (2011), Design of anchorages in concrete - Guide to good practice, fib Special Activity Group 4.
Fédération Internationale du Béton (fib), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Eligehausen, R., Mallée, R. & Silva, J.F (2006), Anchorage in Concrete Construction. Ernst & Sohn.
Sharma A, Eligehausen R, Asmus J. Comprehensive experimental investigations on anchorages with
supplementary reinforcement., Proceedings 3rd International Symposium on Connections between Steel
and Concrete (ConSC 2017), September 27-29, 2017, Stuttgart.

View publication stats