AC232-1011-R1 #9

Institut für Werkstoffe im

Bauwesen
Abt. Befestigungstechnik

Universität Stuttgart Ansprechpartner

Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen 70550 Stuttgart Eligehausen
Telefon
+49 711 / 685-62795
Mrs. Andra Hoermann-Gast Telefax
Staff Engineer +49 711 / 685-62285
e-mail
ICC Evaluation Service, LLC
eligehausen@gmx.de
5360 Workman Mill Road Aktenzeichen
Whittier, CA 90601 Eli
USA Datum
September 23, 2011

RE: Proposed Revisions to the Acceptance Criteria for

Anchor Channels in Concrete Elements, Subject AC232-1011-R1

Dear Mrs. Hoermann-Gast,

In your cover letter dated August 30, 2011 to the proposed revision of AC232 you asked for
further explanations to some topics. In the following these explanations are given.

The influence of the member depth on the concrete edge breakout resistance is calculated
according to Equation (D-29a) with an exponent β1. In general, the exponent β1 is deduced
from the results of tests (Test No. 11 according to Table 4.1).
1
 h 
h,V   
 (D-29-a)
h
 cr,V 
Tests with current anchor channels with U-shaped channels have shown that for these
channels the exponent is β1= 2/3 (see Fig. 1). Therefore this exponent is given as default
value. If β1= 2/3 is accepted test No.11 may be omitted.

akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00
 2

1,8
1,6
1,4

1,2
/Vucalc
/Vu,calc [-]

1,0
Vutest

0,8
Vu,test

0,6
0,4
0,2

0,0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
h h[mm]

Fig. 1: Ratios Vu,test to Vu,calculated as a function of member depth. Tests with anchor channels
with U-shaped channels in members with h<hcr,V, Vu,calculated determined with β1 = 2/3.

According to D.7.4.3 (alternate approach) an interaction shall be satisfied for the channel bolt
(Eqn. (D-32.d)), for steel failure modes of the anchor channel (anchor or connection between
anchor and channel according to Equation (D-32-e) and channel lips according to (D-32-f))
and for conrete failure modes according to Equation (D-32.g). In Equation (D-32.e) and (D-
32.f) the exponent is α =2 (quadratic interaction) for anchor channels with a design steel
shear strength of the channel not larger than the channel design steel tension strength. For
anchor channels with a channel design steel shear strength larger than the channel design
steel tension strength the exponent α is deduced from the results of tests (Test No. 9
according to Table 4.1). These tests can be omitted if the exponent is assumed as α =1
(linear interaction). In Equation (D-32.g) (concrete failure modes) the exponent is α =1.5 for
anchor channels without anchor reinforcement or with anchor reinforcement to take up
tension and shear loads; it is α =1 (linear interaction) for anchor channels with anchor
reinforcement to take up tension or shear loads. The alternate approach is considered as the
most correct representation of the real behavior.

The simplified approach according to D.7.4.1 and D.7.4.2 does not distinguish between the
different failure modes (steel failure of channel bolt, steel failure of channel (anchor,
akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00
 3

connection between anchor or channel or channel lips) and concrete failure modes) but uses
as Nn and Vn the lowest value of all failure modes. The simplified approach should not result
in a design strength larger than the value according to the more accurate alternate approach.
Therefore Section D.7.4.1 (tri-linear interaction equation or Eqn. (D-32.b) with α =5/3) is valid
only for anchor channels with Vns ≤ Nns and where no anchor reinforcement or anchor
reinforcement to take up tension and shear loads is provided. The linear interaction equation
(D-32.c) given in Section D.7.4.2 must be used for anchor channels with Vns ≤ Nns and for
anchor channels with anchor reinforcement to take up tension or shear loads (independent
of the ratio Vns/Nns).

Section 3.2 provides guidance when converting strength design values to values suitable for
use with allowable stress design load combinations. For combined tension and shear loading
only the design strength calculated according to the simplified approach (Sections D.7.4.1
and D.7.4.2) is converted to a value suitable for use with allowable stress design values. This
is conservative.

The results of the tests under combined tension and shear loading (Test No. 9 according to
Table 4.1 and Section 7.9) are intended to evaluate the exponent α in the interaction
equation (D- 32.e) and (D-32.f) for steel failure of anchor channels with a design shear
strength larger than the design tension strength. The angle α between the resultant load and
tension component should be chosen such that the difference F between the quadratic and
linear interaction (see Fig. 2) is large. This difference is plotted in Fig. 3 as a function of the
angle α. Parameter is the ratio channel steel strength under shear load to channel steel
strength under tension load (Vu,s/Nu,s). The figure shows that for channels with Vu,s/Nu,s ≥ 1.5
the difference F between the quadratic and linear interaction equation is large for α = 450
to 750. The angles used in the tests should be ≥ 300 apart. Therefore α = 450 and 750 are
recommended. Because the critical angle depends on the ratio Vu,s/Nu,s it is also permitted to
evaluate the two angles to be tested for the anchor channel in question.

akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00
 4

Nu,s
35

quadratic interaction equation

30
linear interaction equation

25 a=30°
a=45°
20

a=60°
15

F
10
a=75°
5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Vu,s

Fig. 2: Quadratic and linear interaction for an anchor channel with Vus/Nus = 1.5 (Vus = steel
channel strength under shear loading, Nus = steel channel strength under tension
loading). Blue lines valid for α = 30°, 45°, 60° and 75°.

F [kN]
10

9 Vus/Nus=1,0
Vus/Nus=1,3
8 Vus/Nus=1,5
Vus/Nus=2,0
7

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

a []

Fig. 3: Differenz F between the quadratic and linear interaction equation as a function of
the angle α (α = angle between the resultant force and the tension component).

After reviewing the version August 2011 I have the following comments. Most of them are
editorial.

a) Change in 1.3.19 ASTM E 488-96 to ASTM E 488-10

Reason: Update of published version.

akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00
 5

b) Add the following sentence to 6.6.2.1.1:

Test No. 10 can be omitted if the default value according to D.6.2.10.2 is accepted for
all channel sizes.

Reason: Harmonization with footnote 8 of Table 4.1 in annex A

c) Add Section D. 3.3.4.1 in annex A

D.3.3.4.1 - In general, anchor channels shall be designed according to D.3.3.5 or

D.3.3.6.

Reason: Current anchor channel do not meet the requirement of ACI 318-08, D.3.3.4 in
combination with D.3.3.3 (tenion loading: 0.75    N n    N sa ) or the requirement in
ACI 318, D.3.3.4 (free stretch length of 8d with d= diameter of anchor). Furthermore, no
seismic tests near ultimate load are available.

d) Change the default values for αch,V in annex A, D.6.2.10.2; footnote 8 of Table 4.1 and
Section 7.10.2.1 as follows:

αch,V =5.97 6.67 (αch,V = 2.5 2.8 for SI) (normal weight concrete) or αch,V = 3.82 4.29
(αch,V = 2.6 1.8 for SI) (sand-lightweight concrete).

Reason: In CEN/TS 1992-4:2009 a default value αch,V = 2.5 (SI units) is given for normal
weight concrete. This standard is based on the concrete cube strength. However, ACI
318, Appendix D is based on the concrete cylinder strength which is 0.8 times the cube
strength. Therefore the default value given in AC232 should be 2.5 (1/0.8)0.5 =2.8. The
other default values are calculated accordingly.

e) Change annex A, 5.6.2 as follows

5.6.2 In tests Nos. 4, and 8, and 9 of Table 4.1 …

Reason: Concrete failure should be avoided in tests Nos. 4, 8, and 9 of Table 4.1,
because in these tests the channel steel strength under tension or combined tension and
shear loads is investigated.

f) Change annex A, 5.6.3 as follows

5.6.3 In tests Nos. 6 and 7, and 9 of Table 4.1…

Reason: In tests Nos. 6 and 7 splitting failure is investigated. Therefore steel failure
should be avoided. In test No. 9 the channel steel strength under combined tension and
shear load is tested (compare 5.6.2).

g) Change annex A, 5.6.4 as follows:

5.6.4 The tension tests in accordance with Table 4.1 of this annex, Test Nos. 7 and 10

12 shall be ….

Reason: Test No. 10 is a shear test and not a tension test.

akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00
 6

h) Change annex A, 5.6.5 as follows:

5.6.5 In Test Nos. 9 10 and 11 (Table 4.1 of this annex), the clear distance between
… not smaller than 2ca1. In test No.11 13 (Table 4.1 of this annex) the distance…

Reason: Test Nos. 10 and 11 are shear tests at the edge of the concrete member, test
No. 13 is the simulated seismic shear test.

i) Add the following text to annex A, 5.6.5:

The shear force should be applied at the center of the fixture (distance between applied
shear force and concrete surface 0.5  t fix ) (see ASTM E 488-10, Fig. 4). The thickness
of the fixture in the immediate vicinity of the tested anchor channel shall be equal to or
greater than nominal diameter of the used channel bolt (tfix ≥ ds).

Reason: In practice, the shear load is acting at the center of the fixture. The excentricity
between the shear load and the concrete surface is neglegted in design. Therefore the
influence of this excentricity on the concrete and steel shear capacity of the channel
should be included in the test set-up. To ensure this a corresponding sentence should be
added.

j) Change annex A, 7.9.1 as folllows:

7.9.1 Purpose: These tests are used to determine the exponent σ α in Eqs. (D-32.e)
and (D-32.f) for …

Reason: The exponent is termed α. It is used in Eqs. (D-32.e) and D.32.f).

k) In annex A, Sections 8.13.1, 8.13.2 and 8.13.3 change the exponent σ to α and add
Eq. (D-23.f)

Reason: See j) above

l) Change Eq. (8.13) as follows

 Vk  ≤ 10.72 (normal weight concrete)

a ch,V  0.7   ,lbf0.5/in0.5 Eq. (8.13a)
 c a,1   fc   s,V  ≤ 6.90 (sand-light weight concrete)
1.5 '

akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00
 7

 Vk  ≤ 4.5 (normal weight concrete)

a ch,V  0.7  ,(N0.5/mm0.5) Eq. (8.13b)
 c a,1   fc   s,V 
1.5 ' ≤ 2.90 (sand-light weight concrete)

Vk = characteristic failure load … normalized according to Eq. (8.3) (8.1), lbf (N)
ca,1 = edge distance, inch (mm)
fc,test = concrete compressive strength, psi (MPa)
f’c = see Eq. (8.1), psi (MPa)
s,V = factor according to Eq. (D-24.b)

Reason: The normalization to a certain concrete strength is done according to Eq. (8.1).
In Eq. (8.1) the measured failure loads are normalized to f’c. Therefore f’c must be
inserted in Eq. (8.13). Because the anchor spacing might be smaller than the critical
spacing scr,V the factor ψs,V is included in Eq. (8.13). In addition, the maximum values for
the factor αch,V , valid for concrete cylinder strength of normal weight and lightweight
concrete are given.

m) Change Eq. (8.14) as follows

 0.7  Vk   h 
 0  log  log 
 Eq. (8.14)
 c a,1 1.5  fc'   s,V  a ch,V   h cr,V 

Vk = characteristic failure load …

ach,V = profile factor …
ca,1 = edge distance, inch (mm)
fc,test = concrete compressive strength, psi (MPa)
f’c = see Eq. (8.1), psi (MPa)
h = thickness of test member, inch (mm)
hcr,V = critical member thickness according to Eq. (D-29.b), inch (mm)
s,V = factor according to Eq. (D-24.b)

Reason: See l) above. Furthermore, Equation (8.14) contained a printing error.

n) Change annex A, 9.5.5.2 such that provisions are identical with 6.6.2.1

Reason: The provisions in 6.6.2.1 and annex A, 9.5.5.2 must be identical.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards

Rolf Eligehausen

akkreditiert durch / accredited by

DAP-PL-3297.00