ACI 355.

(Reapproved 1997)

Reported by ACI Committee 355
Patrick J. Creegan Chairman Edwin A. Burdette Robert W. Cannon Peter J. Carrato Peter D. Courtois Rolf Eligehausen Raymond R. Funk C. Raymond Hays Paul R. Hollenbach Gerard B. Hassehvander Harry B. Lancelot III* Harry A. Chambers Secretary Douglas D. Lee Alexander Makitka, Jr. Donald F. Meinheit Richard S. Orr Moorman L Scott George A. Senkiw Harry Wiewel Jim L Williams Richard E. Wollmershauser

*Committee Chairman during the formative years of this report.

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.

ACI Committee Reports, Guides, Standard Practices, and Commentaries are intended for guidance in designing, planning, executing, or inspecting construction, and in preparing specifications. Reference to these documents shall not be made in the Project Documents. If items found in these documents are desired to be a part of the Project Documents, they should be phrased in mandatory language
and incorporated into the Project Documents.

ACI 355.1R-91 became effective JuIy 1, 1991. Copyright 0 1991, American Concrete Institute.

All rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any
form or by any means, including the making of copies by any photo process, or by any electronic or mechanical device, printed or written or

oral, or recording for sound or visual reproduction or for use in any
knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless permission in writing is obtained from the copyright proprietors.

355.1 R-l



TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1-Introduction, p 355.1R-2


1.1 Purpose 1.2 Significance of the subject 1.3 Scope
Chapter 2-Types of anchoring devices, p 355.1R-2

1.1-Purpose The purpose of this document is to summarize the current state of the art in anchorage to concrete. 1.2-Significance of the subject To date, anchorage to concrete has received little attention in structural codes. Emphasis has been primarily on the tensile and shear capacities of anchorage devices. As designs became more sophisticated and analyses more exacting, more emphasis was placed on the transfer of loads through single anchors and anchor systems. It was recognized that performance of anchors controlled these load transfers, and that generally, failure modes at ultimate anchor capacities were important. There were no definitive design codes or anchorage performance criteria on which designers and installers could rely. Subsequently, a myriad of approaches were developed. 1.3-Scope This state-of-the-art report summarizes anchor types and provides an overview of anchor performance and failure modes under various loading conditions in both uncracked and cracked concrete. It covers design and construction considerations and summarizes existing requirements in codes and specifications. References are given for further review.

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

Introduction Scope Anchor systems Cast-in-place systems Post-installed systems

Chapter 3-Behavior of anchors, p 355.1R-9

Introduction Behavior of anchors in uncracked concrete Behavior of anchors in cracked concrete Behavior of cast-in-place anchor bolts in uncracked concrete piers 3.5 References
Chapter 4-Design considerations, p 355.1R-53

4.1 Introduction 4.2 Functional requirements 4.3 Materials 4.4 Design basis 4.5 Construction practices 4.6 References
Chapter 5-Construction considerations, p 355.1R-60

5.1 Introduction 5.2 Shop drawings/submittals 5.3 Tolerances 5.4 Installation of anchors 5.5 Inspection 5.6 Grouting 5.7 Field problems
Chapter 6-Requirements in existing codes and specifications, p 355.1R-66

6.1 Introduction 6.2 Existing codes and specifications 6.3 Application and development of codes 6.4 References
Appendix A-Conversion factors, p 355.1R-71 Appendix B-Notations, p 355.1R-71

2.1-Introduction There are many types of devices used for anchoring structures or structural members to concrete. The design of anchorages, involving the selection and positioning of these devices has been based on the Engineer’s experience and judgment, private test data, manufacturers’ data, and existing (sometimes obsolete) code requirements. It is proposed to promote a design of anchorages that more consistently reflects the performance potential of each type of anchor. 2.2-Scope This report relates to the most widely used types of anchor, in sizes ranging from 1/4 in. (6.35 mm) to 2 l/2 in. (63.5 mm) in diameter. Included for consideration are only those devices which can generally be considered bolt and insert-type



anchors. Excluded from consideration are shear lugs, structural shapes, powder actuated fasteners, light plastic or lead inserts, hammer driven concrete nails, screw driven systems, and cables. These are excluded because there is a paucity of test data regarding their performance. The anchors included in this report are either commercially available or may be fabricated. 2.3-Anchor Systems According to present practice, there are two broad groups of anchoring systems: cast-in-place systems (anchors installed before the concrete is cast) and post-installed systems (anchors installed in holes drilled after the concrete has been cast and cured). Table 2.1 identifies these two groups of anchors.
Table 2.1 -Types of anchors in concrete Cast-in-place systems Embedded, nonadjustable Common bolts Hooked "J" & "L" bolts Threaded rod Reinforcing steel Threaded inserts Stud-welded plates Bolted connections Adjustable anchors Fig. 2.1 Fig. 2.2 Fig. 2.3 Fig. 2.4 Fig. 2.5 Fig. 2.6 Fig. 2.7 Fig. 2.8

2.4-Cast-in-place systems 2 . 4 . 1 - Embedded Anchors, Non Adjustable - These anchors may have an end attachment, such as a coil loop, head, nut, or plate, which will enhance anchorage properties and develop full potential strength by means of bond, and/or bearing, or both. Typical examples of these anchors are: Common bolts Hooked "J" or "L" bolts - structural steel bolts placed with the head into the concrete. (Fig. 2.1)

Post-installed systems Bonded anchors Grouted anchors Headed bolts or anchor Chemical anchors With threaded rod With reinforcing steel Expansion anchors Torque-controlled Heavy-duty sleeve anchor Sleeve anchor Shell expansion anchor Wedge anchor Rock/concrete expansion anchor Deformation controlled Drop-in anchor Self-drilling anchor Stud anchor Undercut With predrilled under-cut hole Self undercutting

Fig. 2.9 Fig. 2.10 Fig. 2.11

-bent, smooth or deformed threaded bars. Have been known to straighten out in pull-out tests. (Fig. 2.2) Threaded rod - straight threaded rod, usually with coarse threads. (Fig. 2.3) Reinforcing steel - Stock or trade-name reinforcing bar (Fig. 2.4) - wire form or internally Threaded inserts threaded ferrule inserts, or coils, usually manufactured with internal or external threads, with wire loop struts. Headed anchors made from smooth or reinforcing steel bar also fall into this category. (Fig. 2.5) Stud welded plates - steel plates which have smooth bent hooked bars, deformed bars, or headed stud anchors. (Fig. 2.6) 2.4.2 Bolted connections-These anchors consist of headed bolts, as embedded or throughconnectors. (Fig. 2.7).

Fig. 2.12 Fig. 2.13 Fig. 2.14 Fig. 2.15 Fig. 2.16 Fig. 2.17 Fig. 2.18 Fig. 2.19

L Steel

Fig. 2.20 Fig. 2.20

Fig. 2.7-Bolted connections

1R4 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE D P Washer tack welded .4 -Reinforcing steel Fig.1. b v * Fig. 2. 2.Common bolts Fig.2-J.Threaded rod .355. 2.3 . Note be made : E i t h e r ' J ' o r ' L ' ’ b o I ts c a n from plain or threaded rod Fig.and L-bolts (not recommended) . 2.

welded plates . Fig. 2.6 .Stud.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE a * . 2.5 .Threaded inserts We I d Fig. ‘X . v * B ..

or bulk.v chemical or from capsule Fig. The anchor is installed immediately afterward. 2. or epoxies. The chemicals are available in four forms: glass capsules. or pumped through a mixer and injected into the hole.4.2 Chemical anchors-Chemical anchors are usually threaded rods (Fig.3 Adjustable anchors-Adjustable anchors can be adjusted for lateral position or depth (Fig. inserting the anchor rod into the hole.1.5-Post-installed s y s t e m s These anchors are installed in a hole drilled in the cured concrete.5.10-Chemical anchor with threaded rod n .9) 2. The anchor rod is then inserted into the hole completing the installation. On thin floor slabs.1R-6 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE 2. The plastic cartridges are used with a dispenser and a mixing nozzle which mixes the two parts. The anchor then acts similar to a cast-in-place anchor.1-Bonded anchors 2. and finally. The setting time is dependent on temperature. and then broken by the anchor rod when it is rotated and hammered into place. The tube or “sausage” type contains two components which are mixed by kneading the tube. * in . The bulk systems predominantly use epoxies. P 4 Fig. the anchor can develop full capacity and still be embedded in the concrete. tubes.8).11) which are bonded in place with two-part chemical compounds of polyesters. They are set in predrilled holes with portland cement and sand grout or other commercially available premixed grout. grout is used to fill the void around the anchor. 2. varying from a few minutes at 90o F up to several hours at 30o F.1 Grouted anchors-Grouted anchors are headed or headless bolts or threaded rods.5.355.10) or deformed bars (Fig. 2.1. which are either premixed in a pot and used immediately. After the equipment or machine base is installed and leveled. When the floor slab or foundation is very thick. They are normally used for attaching large machines or equipment bases. (Fig. .5. plastic cartridges. 2.8-Adjustable anchors 2. 2. initiating a chemical reaction while installing the compound into the drilled hole. 2. placing the mixture into the hole. the anchor bolt often goes through the concrete to develop the required anchor capacity. Epoxies can be formulated to set up quickly or slowly (up to 36 hr curing time). thereby mixing two components to cause a chemical reaction. vinylesters. Glass capsules are inserted into the drilled hole. 2. There are two basic groups of post-installed systems: bonded and expansion.

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. an expansion sleeve usually made of sheet metal. Sections 2.5. 2.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. The anchor is set by tightening the bolt head or nut which draws the cone up through the expansion sleeve. sometimes made of plastic.2 Expansion anchors-Expansion anchors are designed to be inserted into predrilled holes and then expanded by either tightening the nut (torque controlled expansion anchor.5.2 Sleeve anchors. hammering the anchor (deformation controlled expansion anchor. torque-controlled sleeve anchor 2. When the nut is tightened. The bottom of the steel stud has a uniformly tapered mandrel which has the same diameter at the end as the expansion sleeve. expanding it against the side of the drilled hole.2.Shell expansion anchor Fig. .5. Above the sleeve is a collapsible mechanism.The sleeve anchor consists of a steel stud.14) is available in two types. 2.13).Heavy-duty.2. nut. The bottom cone is internally threaded to accept a bolt or stud.13 .15) consists of a steel stud bolt with a nut . (Fig. They often are supplied with a bolt. 2. various types of expansion anchors. Tensile capacity depends on the strength of the bolt and its depth of embedment. by Single-acting (shell expanded single wedge nut) Double acting expanded (shel by opposing wedge) Fig.12 . By torquing the fastener into the anchor. the tapered mandrel moves into and expands the sleeve which in turn bears against the wall of the hole.6 to 2. These anchors transfer the tension load from the bolt to the concrete by expansion pressures or forces through friction and/or keying against the side of the drilled hole. Fig.2.5.1 Heavy duty. Sections 2. one at the top end and one at the bottom. The bottom of the expansion sleeve is slit longitudinally to provide for expansion.2.4 Wedge anchors-The wedge anchor. Section 2. The entire length of the bolt below the washer is enclosed in a section or sections of the steel tubing.5. and a nut and washer (Fig. 2.9). 2.5). 2. or expanding into an undercut in the concrete (undercut anchors.2. 2.1 to 2.14 . The spacer sleeve aids in increasing the shear capacity.The shell expansion anchor. One type consists of a two-piece shell held together by steel tabs with a tapered. BEFORE TORQUING AFTER TORQUING 2.5. (Fig. .5. Around the cone is a heavy expansion sleeve.1R-7 2. This anchor is used for medium and light holding requirements.2.5. (Fig. and The following sections describe the washer.12). the steel cones expand the shell to bear against the wall of the hole. The second type consists of a two-piece shell section with two tapered steel cones.Sleeve anchor 2. The anchor develops its tensile capacity by means of a combination of keying into the concrete and high friction between the sleeve and concrete. 2.8).3 Shell expansion anchors . internally threaded end plug.5. which are held together by a steel spring at the center. A spacer sleeve extends to the surface of the drilled hole.

1R-8 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE and washer. Grout hole Threaded rob Nut Air tube Plate Hollow bar Fig.5.5 Rock/concrete expansion anchor-The rock/concrete expansion anchor. The top of the shell is internally threaded to accept a bolt or stud. Grouting is optional down the center of the bolt to fill the annular space between the rod and the drilled hole for corrosion protection. tightened.17-Drop-in anchor 2.15. wedging between the mandrel and the wall of the hole. 2.5. (Fig.6 Drop-in anchors-The drop-in anchor consists of a steel shell and an internal steel expander plug (Fig. The bottom of the shell is expanded by hammer drilling the anchor over the steel plug.2. BEFORE TORQUING AFTER TORQUING 2. I6 .355. 2. The lower portion of the shell is slit longitudinally into equal segments to allow the anchor to expand when the internal plug is hammered with a setting tool. the stud bolt is rotated in a clockwise direction. 2. The bottom of the steel stud has a uniform tapered mandrel around which is positioned an expandable steel clip or separate steel When the nut is wedges with protrusions. the clip or steel wedges ride up on the tapered mandrel. 2.2. To set the expansion anchor. The bottom of the shell has teeth for cutting its own hole in the concrete.2.5. 2.Wedge anchor 2.Rock/concrete expansion anchor (grouted) Fig. BEFORE AFTER Fig.16) consists of a stud bolt that is threaded on the top end for a hex nut. 2.18) consists of a steel shell and a tapered steel end plug. By hammering the plug into the shell. 2. The bottom end consists of a large mechanical expansion anchor.7 Self-drilling anchors-The self-drilling anchor. The plug expands the bottom of the shell which bears against the wall of the drilled hole.17). matching the shape of the steel plug inside the anchor. (Fig. BEFORE AFTER Grout hole Thrust rl Mal leable shell e b 0. the lower portion of the shell expands to bear against the wall of the hole. Fig. The anchor is internally threaded at the top end while the internal end is machined to a uniform taper.18 -Self-drilling anchor .

2. t . The bottom of the expansion sleeve is driven over a cone at the bottom of the hole. and has a drilled hole with longitudinal slits at the bottom end. The top of the threaded section is raised to provide a surface for hammering. By tightening the nut. 3.20).19).Undercut anchor CHAPTER 3-BEHAVIOR 3. BEFORE AFTER bolt and tapered cone are drawn up into the expansion sleeve. the tapered plug expands the bottom end of the bolt causing it to bear against the wall of the hole. I v v - Q .9 Undercut anchors-There are two primary designs of undercut anchors available (Fig. .1R-9 2. . 2. This chapter covers anchor behavior in uncracked concrete and in cracked concrete.355. which accepts a tapered steel plug (Fig. Anchors are primarily loaded through attachments to the embedded anchor. The bottom of the expansion sleeve has a sharp edge which.v Q * A . v.19 .5.8 Stud anchors -The stud anchor consists of a steel stud. . keeping the bottom of the expansion sleeve in the undercut. They may also be subjected to bending depending on the details of shear transfer through the attachment. V . V ’ . cuts its own undercut into the wall of the hole. 2. but generate high tensile-loading capacities.2. The behavior of anchors in tension is of primary importance and will be discussed first. the tapered expander plug expands the bottom of the steel expansion sleeve into the undercut.1). n . 2. 4 . A sleeve is hammered by a rotary hammer drill with a special setting tool.Introduction OF ANCHORS Understanding anchor behavior is necessary in specifying the appropriate anchorage for a given application. They cause little or no expansion force in the concrete. threaded at the top end. the Fig. This includes an understanding of failure modes and strengths as well as loaddisplacement and relaxation characteristics of various anchor types. . The loading can be in tension and shear or combinations of tension and shear (Fig. By hammering the top of the stud. When the nut is tightened. D 4 . A BEFORE AFTER b .Stud anchor 2.b .1 . V’ Fig. on expansion. They all operate by keying and bearing against an undercut in the concrete at the bottom of the drilled hole.5. The first type requires a second drilling operation to create an undercut at the bottom of the first drilled hole. The second type cuts its own undercut at the bottom of the drilled hole. 2.20 . The anchor is installed with the bottom of the expansion sleeve at the undercut.

3(c) gives load displacement curves for adhesive anchors. 3. 3.The five primary failure modes of anchors in tension are (Fig.2): (a) Steel failure (b) Pull-out failure (c) Concrete splitting failure (d) Concrete cone failure (e) Spacing and edge cone failure The various types of anchors have different displacement characteristics depending on preload. The displacements shown represent the displacement (slip) of the embedded anchor and the deformation of the concrete as well as the deformation of the anchor.2-Behavior of anchors in uncracked concrete 3.3(b) presents curves for torque-controlled. load transfer mechanism.Typical failure modes of anchors loaded in tension .3(c) present three load-displacement graphs. and self-drilling expansion anchors.1 -Possible loadings of anchors By far. The preloaded a) steel failure b) pull-out failure c) concrete splitting failure d) concrete cone failure e) spacing and edge cone failure Fig. While cracking occurs in almost all concrete. most anchor testing to date has been performed in uncracked concrete. testing in uncracked concrete provides the basis for understanding anchor behavior. 3.355. 3. 3. 3. Fig.1 Load-displacement behavior and failure modes under tension loading.3(a)-3. 3.2 .1R-10 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE tension loading combined tension and shear loading [ shear loading bending Fig. Fig.3(a) gives the characteristic curves for headed and undercut anchors while Fig.2. When a preload is applied to an anchor. 3. drop-in. Fig. the displacement caused by an externally applied load is affected. and failure mode. typically by tightening the nut to a prescribed moment torque.

3(b) . 3.Typical load-displacement relationships of expansion anchors under tension loading (from Eligehausen and Pusill-Wachtsmuth 1982) d i s p l a c e m e n t [mm] Fig. and Mallee 1988) Fig. Eligehausen. 3.Wachtsmuth 1982) .3(a) .Typical load-displacement behavior of chemical anchors under tension and shear loading (from Eligehausen and Pusill. 3.3(c).1R-11 l o a d F [kN] load F [kN] 0 4 6 8 10 Displacement s [mm] 2 6 8 4 d i s p l a c e m e n t s [mm] bolt diameter anchorage depth mm mm I I I Iine anchor type Fig.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.Typical load-displacement relationships of headed and undercut anchors (from Rehm.

3.3(b)]. 3. the displacements are larger for equal loads.3(c) show that the actual load-displacement behavior of the currently available expansion. Headed anchors that fail due to fracture of the concrete will exhibit a brittle failure (Fig.3(a). therefore.3(c)]. 3. When expanded properly during installation. bonded area in the case of adhesive or grouted anchors). Under sustained loads displacements will increase with time due to creep of concrete in the highly stressed load transfer area (bearing area in the case of headed or undercut anchors. in Fig.3(b). and headed anchors differs somewhat from this plastic behavior. the bond strengths vary considerably depending on the adhesive component mix used and the installation procedure. Line 2). line 2). 3.4 (see Seghezzi and Vollmer. leading to increased displacement. This happens because load transfer is mainly by mechanical interlock which causes high pressure on the concrete and large concrete deformations. but significantly reduces the anchor total displacement. high expansion forces are induced and the load displacement curve may remain almost linear up to failure [Fig. 1982) the displacements of a torquecontrolled expansion anchor loaded with a constant tensile force corresponding to approximately 70 percent of the static ultimate strength. If the external load exceeds the preloading force in the bolt generated by the torquing during installation. Inelastic displacements of headed anchors due to concrete deformations under the head may be expected at relatively low loads unless preloaded. Self-drilling anchors show larger displacements in the total load range than torque-controlled expansion and drop-in anchors [Fig. 3. Under working loads all categories of anchors should behave elastically with little additional displacement after installation. 3. 3. Increasing the bearing area under the head may reduce inelastic displacements but will have little influence on the failure load [compare Lines 1 and 2 in Fig. therefore.1R-12 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE anchor shows little displacement with increasing external loading until the preload in the anchor (and resulting clamping force on the concrete) is overcome. 3. at ultimate load a plastic behavior and in the case of cyclic loading only a limited strength degradation is desired. of torquecontrolled expansion anchors is smaller than that of drop-in anchors and. are plotted as a function of load duration on a double logarithmic scale. the displacement curve is rather steep until it reaches the static envelope which is followed thereafter. 3. However. Adhesive anchors exhibit elastic behavior up to nearly maximum load [Fig. Fig. The displacement behavior of undercut anchors depends primarily on the bearing area (undercut area) and the installation torque.3(a)]. contact area in the case of expansion anchors. Line 3) the ductility depends on the relationship between tensile strength and yield strength of the steel and the anchor length. 10* Duration [Days] 10 10 2 Fig. If the load is increased after a sustained load test. The preload has no effect on the ultimate static tensile capacity of the anchorage.3(a)]. the spreading cone is pulled further into the sleeve. The expansion force. The behavior of drop-in anchors is dependent on the magnitude of the expansion force created in setting the anchor. Therefore relatively large deformations may be expected with some undercut anchors while others exhibit elastic behavior well above service load [Fig. adhesive. the displacements approach a limiting final value. It can be seen that the displacement velocity (tangent to the displacement-time curve) decreases with increasing time and. As an example.3(b).3(a)-3. undercut. In the case of steel failure (Fig. at installation. 3. At failure the deformations are much larger than for comparable drop-in anchors [Fig.355.4 -Increase of displacement during sustained loading . Failure load and displacement at maximum load are not negatively influenced by a previous sustained load smaller than about 70 to 80 percent of the static failure load. The increase in displacements is smaller for lower sustained loads. 3. While the load-displacement curves of adhesive anchors exhibit relatively low coefficients of variation in comparison to torque-controlled expansion and drop-in anchors.3(b)].

and Funk 1987).090 to 0. the final value of the preload is increased (Fig. Perry. It is estimated that the final preload will be about 40 to 60 percent of the initial value. 3. Eriksson.6 -Influence of retorquing on the final value of preload (from Seghezzi and Vollmer 1982) Chemical anchors are usually preloaded by applying a predefined torque. showed displacements still increasing after 5 years.5 5.5. and Mallee 1988). the concrete deformation and the anchorage depth.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. Anneling. locally high concrete stresses are created around the embedded anchor wedges or expansion devices as the anchor is preloaded.2 Relaxation -If headed anchors are preloaded. There is an exponential drop-off of load immediately after the applied tension is released. and Wagner-Grey 1976). 38. Creep of concrete under these high stresses results in a slight movement of the embedded anchor. 3. Perry.)(Elfgren. The shape of the curve is essentially the same for all anchors (including headed anchors). After retorquing the anchors.1R-13 In principle. 0 0 10 I I 20 30 40 50 I 60 70 Time [Days] I Fig.I Torque Controlled Expansion Anchor M12 1 i I I I 0 0 2. 30. Preload is plotted as a function of time. Eligehausen. and in turn. 3. but ranging from 0. This is confirmed by other test data (Seghezzi and Vollmer 1982. 3. 7. 3.5 shows a typical load-relaxation test (Burdette. the preload force in the anchor declines faster and the final value is less than for torque-controlled expansion and headed anchors. Because of the high stresses in the adhesive bond. Fig.056 in.0 7.5 -Reduction of preload as a function of time (after Burdette. both of which are tension) smaller than about 50 percent of the static failure load (provided no fatigue failure of the bolt occurs). Retorquing even a short time after anchor installation can be effective (Wagner-Grey 1976). the same behavior is valid for cyclic loadings with up to 1 x lo6 load repetitions and an upper load (where the cyclic load ranges between an upper and lower value. For higher upper loads the displacements may increase significantly and a fatigue failure of the concrete might occur (Rehm.5 Time [h] I Fig. in a reduction in the load in the bolt. followed by a continued gradual diminishing of the load over an indefinite period. Torque-controlled expansion anchors are usually preloaded by tightening the nut during installation. Long-term relaxation and creep has been Four Ml6 investigated in several studies.5 10 12. diameter polyester anchors tested at loads of 25. and Granlund 1988). and Funk 1987) .6). the initial force induced in the anchor is reduced with time due to creep of the highly stressed concrete under the anchor head. and 40 kN (6.2. In typical cases the value of that final force will approach 40 to 80 percent of the initial preload (40 percent for short anchors. however. Sustained and cyclic loadings in the workingload range have the same influence on displacements and ultimate loads of headed anchors as for expansion and undercut anchors. and 9 kips).140 mm (0.0036 to 0. The final value of the tension force in the anchor depends primarily on the value of bearing stresses under the head. 8. In a typical installation. Creep tests were also performed on 26 Ml6 anchors for 3 years at various loads and . This preload is essential for the proper performance of such anchors. the process of load relaxation starts again. 80 percent for long anchors).

expansion. 3.004 to 0.2 Concrete cone failure -When the embedment of an anchor or group of anchors is insufficient to develop the tensile strength of the anchor steel.2(e)] interferes with the development of the full cone strength of an anchor. Robert W. (mean value 5S”) and tends to decrease with increasing anchorage depth. in the case of expansion anchors the angle varies from about 60’ for short embedments (Id ( 2 in) to 45O for 1.2. Army Corps of Engineers performed creep tests on polyester and epoxy anchors.6 mm) (Best..4 kips). 3.40 mm (0. loads exhibited continually increasing creep. a pullout cone failure of the concrete [see Fig. and Mallee 1988.1R-14 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE environmental conditions. Cement and epoxy grouted specimens exhibited low slippage. its capacity will be reduced.02 mm). 3. 3. while polyester anchors exhibited approximately 30 times as much movement. 2 6 in. Appendix B. . The ultimate strength can be determined from Eq.2(d)] is the principal failure mode. lb where As = tensile stress area. correspondence to ACI 1986.* f ut = ultimate tensile strength of steel. According to Cannon*. 3. correspondence to ACI Committee 355. Cannon.1 Steel failure -The strength of anchor steel controls failure when the embedment of the anchor is sufficient to preclude concrete failure and when the spreading forces are sufficiently high (expansion anchors) or the bearing area is sufficiently large (headed and undercut anchors) to preclude an anchor slip failure. Because the theoretical failure load was calculated with the nominal steel strength.). (0.3. anchors tested outdoors exhibited continually increasing creep.024 in. Those tested indoors at 30. Floyd.3 Ultimate strength in tension 3.009 in. Nov. Fig. in. When the spacing of anchors or location of an edge [Fig.03 to 0.0008 in. The following formulas have been developed to describe behavior of headed studs. Robert W. measured from the axis of the anchor.7-Ratio of actual to predicted tensile capacity according to Eq. Sept.0013 to 0. The U.S.2(a)] is rupture of the anchor steel with ductility dependent on the type of anchor steel and embedment length. (3. In ACI 349.. and undercut anchors.7 shows a comparison of the failure loads of headed anchors measured in tests to the values predicted by Eq. The failure mode [Fig.1) for steel failure (after Klingner and Mendonca 1982) 3.2.008 to 0.016 in. 0. the angle varies between approximately 50° and 60”. anchors tested indoors showed small creep. varies along the failure surface and shows considerable scatter..2 to 0. A 4 month test on epoxy anchors showed creep less than 0.2. psi For given material properties and anchor dimensions this case defines the upper limit for the tensile-load-carrying capacity.1. 3. Eligehausen.355. 3. 0. (3 . *Cannon.3. 0. Committee 355. and McDonald 1989). the ratios of actual to predicted tensile capacity are larger than one. ACI Committee 349.1.1985) the angle of the failure cone of headed and expansion anchors is assumed as 45’.kN (7 and 10 kips). F u = 4 x f. (0.2 mm) (Wiewel 1989). 1988. According to Rehm.1) number of specimens 10 STEEL FAILURE 5- Fig. (0. However..and 45. subjecting the anchors to 60 percent of the anchor steel yield strength for 6 months. This correspondence is filed at ACI headquarters and is available ACI at cost of reproduction and handling at time of request. 3. The angle of the failure cone. At allowable working loads of 15 kN (3.10 to 0.

0 2. to a uniform stress of 4 +d$ (psi) on the stress cone surface of the anchors. (3 3 For 1. Appendix B. and were evaluated by Cannon*. but < 6 in.8). +Cannon. psi If this requirement cannot be satisfied.2) strength reduction factor 0.1-1 5 R ACI 349.3) to provide a better fit to test data. stirrup or tie reinforcement should be provided.3) as a more correct lower bound for the edge distance for headed anchors: m 20 10 F ut = ASTM-specified tensile strength of the anchor bolt.. or areas.: (Y = 45 + 0. Fig. measured from the axis of the anchor. cut off by intersecting edges. Letter to ACI 355. psi f 'c = compressive strength of concrete. kips 1. in. in. 3. private correspondence. Dec.: cy = 62 . **Cannon.9 -Ratio of actual to predicted tensile capacity of headed anchors according to Eq.pred *Cannon.85 for uncracked concrete = 0.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.9 shows the frequency diagram of the ratio of actual to Predicted tensile capacity of headed anchors. The following equation is suggested in the ACI 349 Commentary for determining this minimum value. F = ultimate tensile strength of anchor.test /Fu. Cannon+ found that for embedments less than 6 in. Tested were individual anchors with large and small edge distances and anchor groups. 1984 **) . (3. 1988.5 2.1 (l#. -A Frequency [%] n = 45 tests 5i = 1.14 v = 26 O/o If an anchor is installed too close to an edge. (3. ACI 349 has no requirements for minimum center-to-center spacing of single anchors or anchors belonging to a group. (3. 5) deg With respect to the minimum edge distance he reported the results of tests which indicated a direct relationship between anchor load and side cone failure. 3. Therefore. The tests were described by Klingner and Mendonca (1982a).** He suggested Eq. previously cited (see footnote p 14). c 3 in. (3. the anchor will fail before developing the concrete cone strength.5 Fu. deg For ld 2 3 in. 1986.1. private correspondence. (3 . Fig. 1984.2) (from Cannon.79 (6-ld) . ACI 349 becomes increasingly conservative with decreasing embedment. ACI 349 requires that the minimum edge distance m to the center of the anchor be sufficient to prevent a side cone failure. In all tests a concrete cone failure occurred. Note: Other reductions are made based on member thickness relative to embedment and the area of fabricated anchor heads (see Fig. anchors.. for headed anchors. previously cited (see footnote p 14). (3. He has proposed a modification to Eq. this modification would increase the angle of the failure cone.65 in zone of potential cracking A = the summation of the projected areas (in. m .2).2) of individual stress cones minus the areas of overlap and of any area. Theoretical capacity was calculated according to Eq. Robert W. “Comparison of Testing Edge Conditions and Anchor Spacing with Predictions”.6) instead of Eq. For embedments less than 6 in. (3. 3.. or wup of . limits the tensile capacity of the cone failure of an anchor. (3.3) where D = anchor diameter.

*EFFECTIVE STRESS AREA. *EFFECTIVE STRESS AREA B Ld I41 A t \L DEDUCT AREA OF ANCHOR HEADS P L A N *REDUCE BY THE TOTAL BEARING AREA OF THE ANCHOR STEEL. Pd t Pd t L EFFECTIVE STRESS AREA L J (a+2Ld-2h) . 3.8-ACI 349 method for determining effective stress areas . A) Effective stress area for anchorage pullout EFFECTIVE STRESS AREA . STRESS AREA REDUCTION FOR LIMITED DEPTH (Ar) Ar= (a+2Ld-2h)(b+2Ld-2h) *REDUCE BY THE TOTAL BEARING AREA OF THE ANCHOR STEEL B) Stress area reduction for I imited depth A Fig.

Eq.82 f 'cc (cube).1R-17 The average failure load for a side cone (bursting) failure is given as: where F.11 shows a histogram of the ratio of measured to predicted failure load. (3.. The failure load of a two-point fastening results in: G = xcr x F. N/mm2 & = 1 +a/a. (3..8b) where In the original equation the concrete strength was measured on cubes with a side length of 200 mm (8 in. (3. (3. The tests with expansion. in.8) can only be obtained if the distances between anchors are large enough so that concrete cones do not overlap each other. Eligehausen. N depth (see Fig. from Eq.8a) and (3. For the calculation of the ultimate load of quadruple fastenings the xa factors can be derived separately for both directions and combined in product form as follows.8) = (3. and Mallee 1988). FIA4 = %a1 x Xd x Fur Fig.9) Fu ‘d = embedment f’. single anchor. (3. 3.).10) = distance between center of anchors a crit = critical distance between center of anchors = 31. = 20 to 50 N/mm2 (2900 psi to 7150 psi). 3. where F ul ultimate failure load.9) leads to the x-method for calculating the ultimate capacity of multiple anchor I 2 where a (3. Fig.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.10).kips (3. For expansion and undercut anchors. (3.12) xai = 1 + ai(acd 5 2 a. (3. Eligehausen.) and concrete strengths f’. Eq. (3.8a) where mm (1 9/16 to 20 l/2 in.10 -Illustration of embedment depth as used in Eq.86) Results of an additional 196 tests on headed studs showed a similar relationship (from Rehm. undercut and headed studs included anchorage depths from 40 to 525 (3.8a) and (3. where 1d is the depth of embedment. The average failure loads given in Eq. and Mayer (1987 and 1988).) at time of testing..I = spacing in direction i . = 15m f . mm = average compressive strength of concrete cylinders (6 by 12 in. = average ultimate load.8b) assume f 'c (cylinder) = 0.8a) from 287 test series with single anchors with large edge distances showing concrete cone failure.11) (3.7) 35cCo’ m = actual edge distance. 3. Assuming an angle of the failure cone cy = 55o the critical distance is approximately three times the embedment depth. derived Eq. Fuchs.

(from Rehm.13) (3.crit = = critical distance from free edge 1.8a).13 shows the ratio of actual to predicted tensile capacity of groups of headed studs. In the tests the number of anchors was varied between 4 and 36.5 1. (3.14) where Xa?n = 0. (3. 3.1R-18 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE 40 Frequency [%] n = 196 individual tests si= 1 0 0 v= 1 4 % 30 I 20 10 0. (from Rehm.11) can also be extended for multiple anchorages with any number of anchors in any spacing by setting the value of ai as the distance atot between the outer anchors.5 1.8) .0 1. (3. Eligehausen.11). (3. Eq.pred Fu. 3.541.12 shows the capacity of quadruple fastenings for headed studs. test ’ %.11 (a) -Ratio of acutual to predicted tensile capacity for concrete cone failure of individual expansion and undercut anchors away from edges according to Eq. (3. smaller than critical: Fu* = a& * Fy (3.13) covers the influence of edge distances. and Eligehausen. expansion and undercut anchors as a function of the ratio of anchor spacing to embedment depth as measured in tests and calculated according to Eq.crit S 1 a m. Fuchs.3 + 0.86). a. and Mallee 1988). and Mayer 1987 and 1988) Fig.5 /Fu. 3.9) and (3. The X-method can also be extended to take account of load eccentricities (Riemann 1985).value is limited to xa I n with n = number of anchors in one direction. and Mallee 1988.7 am/a.11(b) -Ratio of actual to predicted tensile capacity for concrete cone failure of individual headed anchors away from edges according to Eq.355. Fig. test 1. Eq. Eligehausen.5 2. The groups were loaded by a concentric tension load which was equally distributed to all anchors. and the x0.5 1d Fu = ‘ actual embedment length = ultimate failure load. and 2. 3.0 $.0 0. (3. and the anchor plate is sufficiently stiff to assure an even distribution of tension forces to all anchors (see Rehm.2&. Eligehausen. the spacing of the outer anchors between 100 and 875 mm and the spacing of the individual anchors between 0. and Mallee 1988) Fig. single anchor to be taken from Eq. This is provided that the spacings between the individual anchors are smaller than acrit = 31.. pred Fig.

3. and Mallee 1988) . ( 3.355.1R-19 5.0 Fig. Eligehausen.0 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.0 0 I I O FE according to eqn.8 ) I 8 0 4.0 1.0 2.


16 . N/mm2 (3. 1d d.15 (where p.16) TU’k lN/mmz I mean value kN 50 75 100 125 150 h [mm] Fig. 3.15) Fig. N where F. 3. If anchors are located in a corner [see Fig. that minimum distances from the free edge are necessary for headed studs in order to allow proper concreting and avoid local spalling of concrete. 3. Roik (1987). 3. mm concrete cylinder strength at time of testing.3/2(1 + d&. Minimum edge distances for expansion and undercut anchors are necessary to avoid splitting of concrete during installation and expansion of the anchors. (3. Eligehausen. however.1R-21 Fig.15 . mm head diameter. = = = = average failure load.16 compares the measured failure loads of headed studs with the values according to Eq.15(b.) 8.14 shows a comparison of test results with the theoretical values according to Eq.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.Typical failure modes of anchors Loaded in shear (from Rehm. Bode and Roik (1987).Measured failure loads compared to Eq. the factors xarn are calculated separately for each direction and then the two x-factors are multiplied.15). = concrete splitting strength) (from Bode and Roik 1987) . F” = 12r. 3.)]. and Mallee 1988) (3. (3. 3. It should be noted.13). N embedment length. evaluated data of 106 tests with headed studs to arrive at Eq. Fig. assume the critical spacing of neighboring headed a cl+ = 41. f’.

50 o Anchor studs.50 1.00 1. 00 / / L .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. and Mallee 1988) . concrete break-out l Headed studs.50 1.. Eligehausen.75 Fig.00 . 3. local concrete failure ( blow -out) I 0 .

(3.355. The line of demarcation between shear cone failure and slip failure was approximately six bolt diameters.20) lies in properly estimating the spreading force. Slip failure may also occur with bonded and adhesive anchors of insufficient embedment to develop the strength of the anchor steel or to cause a concrete cone failure. could be calculated from Eq. (3. (3. However.20) . in some case anchors may fail by pulling the whole anchor (including expansion sleeve) out of the hole.35. The failure load is assumed to be pro ortional to the concrete compressive strength. Jense. All of these factors may vary with anchor type. Deformation-controlled expansion anchors (e. For distances from center of headed stud to the free edge(s) which are smaller than the critical distance according to Eq.19) was deduced by applying the theory of plasticity to headed studs embedded in co rrete. 3.19) Eq. The spreading force and thus the slip load of drop-in anchors decreases significantly with increasing diameter of the drilled hole with respect to the diameter of the anchor. Torque-controlled wedge anchors. = coefficient of friction S = spreading force The coefficient of friction depends mainly on the roughness and cleanliness of the drilled hole and of the surface of the expansion sleeve or wedge as well as on the spreading pressure. Fit = ps where I..ll&f$ N (3. oversize holes) slip failure may occur at a much smaller embedment depth than ld = 6D. and installation. (1 + d.g. since complex mechanics are involved.. (3. which fail by slip. and Bach (1976).18). give the predicted failure load as: FM = 0. raestrup. Nielson.1R-23 With respect to the influence of free edges (see Fig. in much the same ner as shown in Fig. This failure mode may also occur with sleeve anchors. The difficulty in using Eq.2 to 0. Only 10 of 464 tension tests indicated any cracking associated with a cone failure.20).21 x 2. drop-in anchors) have a fixed expansion and may slip to a critical depth and then fail the concrete.Slip failure occurs [Fig. Torque-controlled expansion anchors may also slip to a critical depth and fail the concrete.2. 3. the factor p for torque controlled expansion anchors is in the range of 0. Theoretically the slip failure load F.3 and for drop-in anchors is approximately 0.21.g. 3. manufacturer. nI 3. For this reason (3. Slip failure may also occur in low strength concrete due to deformation of the wall of the hole. The slip failure load is dependent on the coefficient of friction between the sliding surfaces and on the spreading force at failure which is a function of the critical expansion force producing failure and the deformability of the concrete which varies with hole depth and concrete properties. and in the case of two or more free edges: acit. From Wagner-Grey (1976).2 5 21. Under conditions of poor workmanship in the field (e. they fou d that the assumption of a linear decrease of ulti ate failure load in proportion to the ratio of act” distance/critical distance gives a lower al bound of their test results.14. clearly demonstrated that the primary failure mode for individual anchor tests (uninhibited by edge conditions) was either cone failure of the concrete or anchor slip depending on the depth of anchor for a given size. The cause may also be due to an oversize hole. generally fail by slipping the expansion cone past the wedges.2(b)] with expansion anchors when the expansion force is too small to develop either the strength of the anchor steel or a shear cone failure of the concrete. The testing of wedge bolt expansion anchors by Hanks (1973). This is a typical failure mode for wedge anchors at moderate to deep embedments in lower strength concrete where the crushing of the concrete at the wedges allows the bolt to “pull through”.3.3 Pullout (slip) of the anchor.15) they consider the critical distance beyond which there is no significant influence on load as being in the case of one free ati1 IJ 1.17) and (3.

are based on many tests and are given in Table 3. However. which typically fail by slip at specified embedments. If side cover or spacings of anchors are too small. the bond strength is in the order of 1300 psi (9 MPa) with a coefficient of variation of 10 to 15 percent for polyester and vinylester chemical anchors. in important applications it is advisable to test expansion anchors. For headed anchors local failure in front of the head will occur when the pressure on the concrete is larger than about 12f’. This value is for a concrete compressive strength of 3000 psi (21 MPa) and an embedment of about nine anchor diameters. Torque-controlled expansion and deformationcontrolled anchors (e. 1984 (see footnote p 14). The bond strength increases approximately with the square root of the concrete strength. Deformation-controlled expansion anchors generate higher spreading forces and require larger edge distances than torquecontrolled expansion and undercut anchors..0. Eligehausen. With respect to the minimum edge distance Cannon* has proposed the following criteria to preclude a splitting failure occuring at a load lower than the capacity for concrete cone failure or pullout failure: m = D(11.51. Assuming a uniform bond stress distribution along the anchorage length. 1988).92& in. in design strength job concrete to confirm slip characteristics. Furthermore. *Cannon. where : (3. drop-in and self-drill anchors are the type anchor most likely to experience splitting failure due to the high lateral thrust required to resist sliding by friction on the steel wedges. The bond stress is no longer uniform. Private correspondence previously cited Dec. . The pullout capacity of chemical anchors increases with increasing embedment depth: however. using theoretical considerations. (3.g. 3. The validity of this evaluation was checked by relatively few test results. This type of failure is somewhat similar to a pullout failure.1 for the different types of anchors. = embedment depth to the bottom of the ld anchor.751d or 3.3. According to this theory. This is due to the high bonding effect resulting in high load transfer to the concrete at the top of the anchorage.20) gives only an approximate estimate of the pullout load (see Eligehausen. and Mallee (1988). respectively. as recommended by Rehm. the necessary side cover or spacing to preclude a splitting failure before reaching the concrete cone failure load must be about 1. The failure load is usually smaller than for a concrete cone failure. the failure initiates with a concrete failure in the upper portion of the concrete and then the bond fails in the remainder of the embedment. or the expansion forces are too high.21) is valid for anchor spacings s L 2 in. and Mallee. in.21) = minimum edge distance = anchor bolt diameter. The minimum edge distance and the minimum spacing to avoid splitting during installation. 3..2(c)]. the anchors are placed too close to an edge or too close to each other [Fig.355. equations for estimating of the spreading force are given by Wagner-Grey (1976). Eligehausen. The capacity of expansion anchors which fail by splitting of the concrete has been evaluated by Pusill-Wachtsmuth (1982). and if the tensile load is sufficiently high. and Pusill-Wachtsmuth 1982). after about nine anchor diameters the increase is not proportional to embedment. in Eq. It was assumed that splitting occurs when the tensile stresses averaged over a critical area reach the concrete tensile strength.4 Splitting failure of concrete -This failure mode will occur only if the dimensions of the concrete are too small. The size of this area was found by evaluating the results of tests with concentrated loads and of tests with thick concrete rings subjected to a constant inner pressure. the bond between the wall of the drilled hole and the mortar is critical (see Sell 1973). to 15f’. For pullout failures of a chemical anchor.4 .2. This possibility is greater for drop-in anchors and for self-drilling anchors than for torque-controlled expansion anchors because of the higher initial spreading forces. splitting cracks may occur during installation of anchors. For drop-in anchors a side cover m I 31d was recommended.1R-24 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE the profession relies on test data. Because of the large variability of the spreading forces and the coefficient of friction. (Rehm. (3. Eq.

3. 3.Typical load-displacement curve for wedge anchor in shear from Meinheit and Heidbrink 1985) .1R-25 Table 3. the embedment and the steel strength. The frictional resistance depends on surface conditions.4 Load-displacement behavior and failure modes in shear-For anchors with an applied preload. This can be attributed to the bending of the anchor rod and the deformation of the concrete in the direction of loading.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.0 Drop-in anchors I I 3.3(c)]. For cast-inplace anchors. 3. the existing preload (if any) in the anchors and the compressive forces applied through the attachment as a result of direct loads or applied moments.15(a)] or by shearing of the concrete (concrete failure) in the case of anchors loaded near an edge [Fig.0 3. (b3)]. This is especially true if the anchor is not flush with the concrete at the hole opening (e.g.17. ~~~ 0 .17). The baseplate slides and the anchor moves to the side of the hole in the second stage of behavior. (b2). 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.0 Torque-controlled expansion anchors with one cone (recent design) 2. 3.1 -Minimum edge distance and minimum spacing to avoid splitting failure Undercut anchors Mihimum edge distance m / 1d to avoid splitting during installation Minimum center-to-center spacing a / 1d to avoid splitting during installation 1. The connection details concern the treatment of connecting surfaces and the fit and manner of connecting the anchors to the attachment. Shear loading generally produces larger displacements than tension loading [see Fig.5 0 20 Fig. The third stage of loaddisplacement 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.0 1.50 r r -7 10 Deformatlon 1. Onset of bearing crushing in the concrete lip of loading plate into bearing on anchor stud Load transfered by friction to embedment .2.15(b1). the behavior will depend on the type of anchorage used. the initial friction forces between the baseplate and the concrete have to be overcome by the shear load before there is initial anchor movement (Fig.. 3.0 1. when the concrete is spalled during drilling). The distribution of shear from the attachment to anchors of a group depends on the details of the anchors to the attachment connection and on overcoming the frictional resistance of the attachment.

(3. 3. Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988). 3.2 Concrete failure -Concrete failures will exhibit two modes.5 Ultimate strength in shear 3. D < 25mm average concrete compressive strength (cylinders) at time of testing. number of specimens x I ” 0. 3. lower strength steels and large edge distances. Commentary gives a design shear strength of vu = 24$$n2. A. Appendix B. based on the evaluation of some 80 test results with headed and expansion anchors (anchorage depth ld > 4D).: 0.2..2. psi Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988). lb (3. mm . the failure load is influenced by the concrete tensile strength.1)) and f. In the following paragraphs.24) where D = anchor diameter. Another influencing factor is the embedment depth..2. 3. (1) blow out cones due to edge proximity (Fig.22) where the factor N takes account of the steel “shear” strength and has the range 0. lb where = 0. free edge and exhibiting a concrete failure (Fig.Steel failure usually occurs after relatively large displacements and is most common for deep embedments.f.15) and (2) concrete spa11 followed by a possible anchor pullout or steel failure away from an edge. = 1. m shank diameter (mm) of headed studs or drill-hole diameter for anchors.7 [Klingner and Mendonca. Appendix B further recommends a minimum side cover or edge distance m required to preclude edge failures: be calculated by Eq. the average ultimate failure load of the concrete of a single fastener in shear be calculated by: F.2. N (3. (3.65-4 I F8l = N A. 3.85 cb f’. have suggested.1R-26 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE 3. 3. = compressive strength of concrete m = distance from anchor to free edge (see Fig. The failure surface has a conical shape that may radiate from the embedded end of the anchor for shallow embedments or from the upper part of the anchorage for deep embedments.18.s~~. The failure load depends on the steel area and the steel strength and is given by Eq.For all types of anchors loaded in shear toward an adjacent.15) Fig.5.15). 3.5. propose the value N = 0.6 to 0. (3. F t = anchor ultimate tensile load. m= . = concrete compressive strength.6 on the basis of an evaluation of 230 tests.18 -Histogram of actual to predicted capacity ACI 349.25) where D f’.5. is the tensile stress area (as defined in Eq. several formulas for calculating the failure load for an edge failure are reviewed. (3.2.23) RATIO OF ACTUAL TO F’FQICTED CAPACITY Fig.4@$n1. taken from Klingner and Mendonca (1982b) gives the ratio of actual to predicted shear capacities for this approach. in. the edge distance m and the stiffness of the anchor.22).t is the ultimate tensile strength.1 Steel failure . (1982b)]. (3.1 Edge failure. ACI 349. N/mm2 distance from anchor to free edge.355. in.24). lb fr”.

4m where h = member thickness. and (3.15(b2)]. The failure load ratio is plotted against the ratio of spacing to edge distance. Group = x. Mendonca.29) (3. Similar expressions are proposed for calculating the failure load of single fastenings or anchor groups situated in a corner or in narrow members. a common failure cone may occur [see Fig. T he corresponding failure load may also be calculated as described in Section 3. have proposed the calculation of the average failure load of a group of anchors (see Fig. (3.24)]. If an anchor group is loaded in shear toward an edge. The method has been extended to anchor groups with an arbitrary number of anchors. 1988) shows the ratio of the failure load of a group loaded in shear towards the edge to the failure load of an individual anchor calculated according Eq. (3. depend on the distance from the free edge measured in load direction.9). The test results were normalized to a concrete strength f 'c = 20N/mm2 and D = 18 mm.25) Fig. for For anchors with small embedment depth situated away from an edge and loaded in shear. where = 1 + a/a.12)] according to the x-method.90 and the other terms are as given the ACI 349 [Eq.0 a/a. . (3. and Mallee 1988). recommend a critical (minimum) edge spacing of: mkD Fut -.i.27) where m = distance to free edge. 3.. 1985). (3. as: a Wit = 3.25) and test results. The tests were performed in concretes with different strengths and anchors ranging in diameter between 12 and 22 mm.5 4. (3. [-] Fig. (3. Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988). the failure mode may be a tensile cone failure as the anchor bends under load and induces a tensile loading into the concrete. Eligehausen. 3. is from Eq. and Malik (1982).0 ' 3.25) is valid for 1./D = 4 to 6.20-Ratio of actual shear failure load of anchor group to shear failure load of an individual anchor as a function of spacing between anchors (3.20) subjected to shear load by: FI(. ACI 349 does not distinguish between embedment requirements for shear and tension. (3.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.i. in.28) where #C = 0. The critical (minimum) distance between two or more anchors beyond which no intersection of failure cone will happen is given by Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988).F.11). This is very conservative if only shear is considered (see Shaikh and Yi. mm Eq.2 for tension loading [Eq.1R-27 h Xh =-sl 1. 3. The thickness of the test specimens was h 1 1.. & F. 3. The x-values for shear loads.2. 3.5m 0 3. %@ (3. For a I a.3.19 shows a comparison between failure loads according to Eq. Because of ductility requirements and reversible load conditions associated with seismic design.4m.20 (Eligehausen and Fuchs. Fig.25). The influence of load eccentricity on the failure load of an anchor group can also be taken into account by the x-method (Rehm. Klingner. however.


. in.The behavior of anchors under combined tension and shear loading lies in between the behavior under tension or shear loading. According to Meinheit and Heidbrink (1985). TU and Vu as defined for Eq. 3. and for a given depth of embedment.5. 3.2. provided the embedment depth is 1.2 f’. + VJV.9. according to Eq. the above described local concrete failure does not negatively influence the anchor steel capacity (normal strength steel) and will not cause subsequent pullout of the anchor.32). To calculate the failure load under combined tension and shear loadings three approaches are in use. 3. as: (3.2. (3. = elastic modulus of concrete. and American Institute of Steel Construction (1978).2. The primary factors influencing concrete spall due to shear are tensile strength of the concrete. Va. L 4D.5 A./T.31) where = applied tension load = 4 F. stiffness of the anchorage.21). T”. a trilinear function and an elliptical function. is dependent on the angle of the loading (Fig. The first is a shear friction approach used by ACI 349.22).2 where T. embedment depth. Bode and Roik (1987). and deformability of the concrete. respectively Vu = ultimate tensile and shear load.33) is valid also for expansion anchors (see Fig. Load FQ[ kN ] 125 100 75 50 25 I 0 5 I 10 I I 25 15 20 Displacement A. (3.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. s 1.6 Combined tension and shear Loading. and given by Eq. fit..33c) TJT.21.1R-29 3. a straight-line function. according to Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988).32) where applied tensile and shear load.22) cr = coefficient of friction = 0. s 1 (3.0 (3. (3. (3. The corresponding shear capacity is given by Klingner and Mendonca (1982). 3. = 0. Eq. Appendix B.31).2 Concrete spall-Anchors away from an edge will locally spall the concrete in front of the anchor. lb where Ab = nominal gross cross-sectional area of anchor shank. respectively These straight-line methods give a conservative approach to combined loading analyses. psi However. T.85 F.30) F.[mml Fig. = specified compressive strength of concrete..32). (3. There are two types of straight-line functions. psi E. r” = 0.Shear load-displacement behavior of headed studs for different tension loads (from Bode and Hanenkamp 1985) . propose for headed studs a trilinear function: Ta* va = vp.55 to 0. + VJVu s 1. anchor diameter. depending on the location of the anchor plate in relation to the concrete surface Tall = allowable anchor tensile load TL? A second straight-line equation is given by Eq. (3.

Beyond that point. The displacements of anchors located in cracks behave similarly to anchors in uncracked concrete up to a critical load. The theoretical considerations discussed above.1R-30 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE Many investigators have concluded that shear and tension combine in an elliptical function as given by Eq. while the Teledyne Engineering Services report (1979) gives x = y = 5/3 as a good fit for expansion anchors. or from the anchorage itself. temperature. the concrete slab was loaded to its service load.004) (see Eligehausen.0 where exponents x and y are determined from tests and the other terms are as previously defined for the straight-line equations. Fuchs.24). Lotze.22 shows a comparison between test results with expansion anchors and the different approaches as described above.355. Testing showed that the displacement characteristics of these anchors remained essentially unchanged until the slab load was about 40 percent of the slab service load.3. 3.) or 80 mm (3.. and loaded statically to failure. Theoretical considerations also indicate that cracks should propagate through the anchor location.. experience has shown that there is a high probability that the crack will propagate through the anchor location (see Cannon 1981 and Eligehausen.). The anchorage holes were drilled either 40 mm (1. it must be assumed that cracks will occur in the concrete because of the rather low concrete tensile strength. .25). and Reuter 1989).e. The increased displacement characteristics of the anchor in cracked concrete are caused by the crack propagating through the load transfer zone of the anchor (see Cannon 1981). 3. The PCI Design Handbook (1978) uses x = y = 4/3 for precast anchors.) away from the transverse acting wires. Observations during this part of the testing often showed that cracking started at the section with transverse reinforcement but then deviated from that section to the section that contained the anchor hole.26 presents typical loaddisplacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors which were set in uncracked concrete and in cracks. in the fabric]./T.23 and 3. significant increased displacement occurred (Fig. due to tension loading). the drilled hole can also act as a notch or produce a cross section in the concrete member with reduced concrete area. 3. were confirmed by testing Ml2 (12 mm) torquecontrolled expansion anchors and undercut anchors in a slab reinforced with welded wire mesh (AJbd = 0. their load displacement behavior and strength may be significantly influenced.) and in uncracked concrete. If concrete cracks. Fig. The cracks propagating through the anchor hole also were to the depth of the hole (Fig. The concrete tensile strength may be totally or partially consumed by the restraint of induced deformations due to shrinkage.3.1 Introduction -When anchors are installed in the tension zone of reinforced concrete members. When the anchor is loaded. Fuchs. All test anchors were pretensioned or pretensioned and loaded with their allowable load before the slab was subjected to flexural loadings.3-Behavior of anchors in cracked concrete 3. [spacing of 250 mm (10 in. These tensile stresses in the concrete would add to other tensile stresses from locally high bending moments. The test anchors were installed with 1d = 80mm (3. For higher loads the displacements of anchors in cracks are much higher than the values expected in uncracked concrete and anchor capacity is significantly reduced.2 in. (i. or flexure. (3. e. For the case when expansion or undercut anchors are used. This critical load depends on the type of crack and the crack width. flexural stresses and restrained shrinkage stresses). and Reuter 1989). Bending of the slab was in one direction only.34) (T.Y + CV. The crack width can vary over the depth of the member (bending cracks) or can be of constant width (parallel cracks. Lotze. If anchors are situated in or beside these cracks. 3. The load-displacement behavior of headed or undercut anchors may be affected by cracks in concrete but the displacements at maximum load are less influenced by cracks than are expansion anchors (see Fischer 1984). 3.2 in. the anchor creates splitting (tensile) forces at the anchor embedded end. In the worst case the anchor can lie in the intersection of two cracks with constant width over the member depth. After preloading the anchors. (3.g. 3.2 Load-displacement-behavior and failure modes in tension -Fig. Cracks run either in one direction (single cracks) or in two directions (intersecting cracks.34).6 in.lVJ s 1. in the case of slabs spanning two directions).

0 Fig.Tension-shear interaction diagram for expansion anchors (from Meinheit and Heidbrink 1985) .22.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 0 l l 0 0 I. 3.

. Fuchs. l 100 Id 150 1 1 . F I a 150 100 2 kc -I 15 .I 15 L torque-controlled undercut expansion anchors -7 anchors -- z -- z ic i l l anchor loaded 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. and Reuter 1989) .MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE I I______ _.23 .84cm2/mI _ _ _ __ _ 1.:‘.. Lotze.Torque-controlled expansion anchors and undercut anchors in the cracked tensile zone of a concrete slab (from Eligehausen. 3. F / ! I I I _. K 884 (8.

A expansion area Fig.24. Fuchs.Crack pattern in a drilled hole with expansion anchor (from Eligehausen. and Reuter 1989) .1R-33 tension t A I- jr A Section A .ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. 3. Lotze.

Lotze. .2 crack width [mm] displacement [mm] Fig.2 0. 3. 1 0. 4 torque controlled e expansion anchors (H 0 0.26-Influence of cracks on the load-displacement relationship of expansion anchors .schematically (from Rehm and Lehmann 1982) . 8 adm - 1.6 1 r(I 0.3 0.4 .355.2 .1R-34 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE -4-l F . Fuchs.8 0.0 - 0.1 1 0..25-Crack width and anchor displacement as a function of the ratio of applied load to allowable load of the slab (from Eligehausen. and Reuter 1989) Force -v r Uncracked Torque Controlled Expansion Anchor Tension Loading Cracked Concrete r--- Displacement Fig.1 0. 3.

28 shows the influence of cracks in the concrete on the strength of headed and undercut anchors placed in or close to cracks.27-Influence of cyclic loading on the loaddisplacement relationship oftorque-controlled expansion anchors (after Rehm and Lehmann 1982) 3. 3. . sion Anchor FTER CYCLIC LOADING I D CYC LES 5 Displacement [mm] 15 Fig. the cracks were opened by loading the specimen and then the anchors were statically loaded in tension with the cracks open. The anchors were tested in tension specimens with almost constant crack width over the member depth.4 Ultimate strength in tension-Fig. The ratios of the failure loads of single anchors measured in cracked concrete to the value in uncracked concrete are plotted as a function of the crack width. However. The load-displacement curve for higher loads than the upper load during cycling is rather steep up to the static envelope which is followed thereafter. In principle the failure modes described in Sections 3. Anchor capacity and displacement at failure are not influenced significantly by cyclic loading with an upper load as given above. [kN] Torque ConIt rolled Expa c. 3. After installing the anchors in uncracked concrete or concrete with hairline cracks. Provided the upper load during cycling is smaller than about 50 percent of the static failure load. 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).1 are also valid for anchorages in cracked concrete. This possible change of the failure mode is due to the reduction of the spreading force as a result of the cracks (see below). This is also valid for bonded anchors.1 and 3. The amount of this displacement is dependent on the design of the anchor and on the crack width.3.2. 3. 3. However.27 shows the typical load-displacement relationship of torque-controlled expansion anchors set in intersecting cracks and cycled up to 10’ times between different load levels before loading to failure.3. cyclic loading results in an almost linear increase of the anchor displacement as a function of the logarithm of the number of cycles. The relaxation behavior of headed anchors installed in cracks has not yet been studied.2. one may assume that the residual preload is not significantly smaller than for headed anchors in uncracked concrete. Failure occurred by pulling out a concrete cone.Fig.3 Relaxation-Expansion and undercut anchors installed in cracks will show an initial displacement during widening of the crack.3. Usually this initial displacement is large enough to reduce the preload to zero. For comparison the loaddisplacement relationship for statically loaded anchors is also plotted. expansion anchors which produce a concrete cone failure in uncracked concrete may slip and pull out when located in a crack.

under service load. Fuchs.) are tolerated in reinforced concrete structures. 3. In the case of uncracked concrete.OA Fu (crack) / Fu (uncracked c o n c r e t e ) I fi.2 1.) is about 60 percent of the ultimate value in uncracked concrete. cracks with a width no greater than 0. If the anchor is installed in a crack.29(a)].4 mm (l/64 in. the area which can be used for transmitting the load into the concrete is smaller than in uncracked concrete [Fig. tensile stresses cannot be transferred across the crack. An almost similar strength reduction was also observed with anchors installed deeper in the tension zone of beams for various anchor-depthto-beam-height ratios (Rehm. and Mayer 1987 and 1988).1R-36 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE I.) and is almost constant for larger cracks. The reduction of the anchor strength is due to the change of the stress distribution in the concrete caused by cracks (Eligehausen 1984 and Eligehausen. 3. and Mayer 1987. 3. the stresses in the concrete are radially symmetric to the anchor and tensile hoop stresses are caused by the load transfer into the concrete [Fig.28 -Influence of cracks on the ultimate load of undercut and headed anchors (from Eligehausen 1984) The failure load decreases rapidly up to a crack width of about 0. uncracked concrete b) cracked concrete m m Fig.29(b)].8 1. 3. The scatter of the data is relatively large.4 0. Eligehausen. Fuchs. Therefore.Load transfer into concrete schematically for a) uncracked concrete and b) cracked concrete (from Eligehausen. the ultimate load of anchors installed in or beside cracks with a width > 0. It should be noted that. On an average.4 mm (l/64 in.29 . 1988) . The influence of the type of anchor (headed or undercut) on the failure load reduction is negligible.20-55N/mm2 id = 8O mm 0.355.4 mm (l/64 in. and Mallee 1988).6 crack width A w [mm] Fig.

3.30-Influence of cracks on spreading force (from Eligehausen and Pusill. the widening of the crack by the width w leads to a reduction of the effective expansion displacement around the circumference of the anchor by w/2 [Fig. For anchors situated in cracks running in one direction. In addition to the above effect.). 3. it is assumed that the concrete is subjected to purely plastic deformations during expansion. These combined effects cause a strength reduction of approximately 40 percent compared to uncracked concrete. on the other hand.Wachtsmuth 1982) .. This explains the increasing anchor strength for crack widths less than 0. the reduction of the spreading forces by the crack opening must be taken into account for expansion anchors (Fig. 3. 3.30(d)]. If.4 mm (l/64 in. the spreading force will also be reduced by the opening of the crack. In reality the concrete is deformed elastically and plastically. Displ. [Fig. Assuming elastic behavior of the concrete.30(a)].30. Therefore. the actual situation lies between these two extremes.1R-37 Furthermore. However.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. anchor unspread crack opening spread anchor a) FO 6 I -7 . 3. due to the steep gradient of the unloading curve. a part of the concrete cone may be cut off by neighboring cracks. Some tensile stresses can be transmitted over small cracks due to aggregate interlock (Eligehausen and Sawade 1985). it has to be expected that even a relatively slight increase in crack width will lead to a substantial reduction of the spreading force [Fig.30). 3.30(c)]. but the reduction will be less pronounced than in the case shown in Fig. this reduction of the expansion displacement causes a slight reduction of the spreading force from F. - Spreading Force 1 Spread. If the anchor lies in an intersecting crack. c b) Concrete elastic c) Concrete plastic Fig. then theoretically the expansion sleeve will free itself around its circumference from the hole wall and the spreading force will decline to zero [Fig.30(b)]. 3. to F.

28). 3. the reduction of the failure load caused by cracks is much larger than for well-designed torque-controlled expansion anchors (compare Fig. 3.33).4 0.1R-38 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE Properly designed torque-controlled anchors will expand to an upper bound when they are loaded.2 crack width _w [mm] ^ Fig. Due to the reduction of the spreading force caused by cracks (Fig.6 0. Therefore. Because the maximum expansion displacement increases with increasing anchor diameter.4 mm.2 1.8 1.31 with Fig.8 0.30). and Mayer 1987 and 1988) 0. 3. 3.31. 3. 3. these anchors often fail by pulling out without significant damage of the concrete while in uncracked concrete they produce a concrete cone type failure.31).4 0.31 -Influence of cracks on the ultimate load of torque controlled expansion anchors (from Eligehausen 1984) . Fig.6 crack width _ w [mm] ^ 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.355. 3. 3. because the maximum spreading displacement reaches the upper bound and the holding capacity is less than the concrete cone failure load.8 1. 3. This results in an additional decrease of the failure load in comparison to headed or undercut anchors. torque-controlled sleeve anchors is often large enough to cause failure by pulling out a concrete cone. bcrack) / F ubncracked concrete) 1. Fuchs.32-Influence of cracks on the ultimate load of drop-in anchors (from Eligehausen.0 0. For larger cracks the expansion cones are often pulled through the expansion sleeves. the reduction of the failure load is ahnost the same as for headed anchors (compare Fig. If the crack width is smaller than about 0.2 0 0. the influence of cracks on the failure load will be much more pronounced than shown in Fig. If torque-controlled expansion anchors do not properly expand further or when the spreading displacement is too small. This causes an increase of the spreading force until the holding capacity is reached. Therefore. Ku / c r o c k ) / Fu ( u n c r a c k e d concrete) Drop-in anchors cannot expand further after they have been properly installed. the holding capacity of heavy-duty. the reduction of the failure load for constant crack width is larger for smaller anchors than for bigger anchors.32 with Fig.

rU (Anchor in uncracked Concrete) FU (Anchor in Crack) 7 . (uncracked concrete) 0.33 -Relative strength of self-drilling anchors as a function of the ratio of crack width to expansion displacement (from Eligehausen 1987) F.6 crack width w [mm] Fig.r .1 0. (crack) / F. Mallee.5 I 0. the anchor failure load is even more reduced or the anchor may even be pulled out (Cannon 1981). and Mayer 1987 and 1988). In this case some anchors might sit in uncracked concrete while others are located in .6 I 0. Therefore.2 0. This can be explained by the fact that the effects described above will occur in both directions and not in one direction as in the case of single cracks. If the crack widths are changing due to fluctuating loads.4 0.8 0. the failure load of grouted anchors in cracks is significantly smaller than the value measured in uncracked concrete (Fig. Anchors are often installed in groups where the individual anchors a r e c o n n e c t e d b y a n attachment.34). The large scatter of the results is caused by the random distribution of the crack around the anchor hole and along the anchor length. Fuchs. 3.4 I 0. and Rehm 1984) In the case of grouted anchors (grouted by cement-based or chemical-based mortar) cracks may disturb the bond between the grout-concrete interface. 3. Under constant conditions anchors placed in the intersection of two cracks fail at approximately 20 percent lower loads than anchors set in cracks running in one direction only (Eligehausen.M12 1 Single Cracks .34 -Ratio of the failure load of chemical anchors installed in cracks to the failure load in uncracked concrete as a function of crack width (from Eligehausen. 0 * I 0.9 w/a 1.3 0.7 L-7 0.0 1 Fig 3.

tensile stresses in the concrete were mainly induced by the anchors.36). it can be stated that the strength of anchor groups placed in cracked concrete can be taken as n-times (n = number of individual anchors of the group) the value expected for one anchor if the influence of cracks and anchor spacing is taken into account simultaneously. and Mayer 1987 and 1988).1R-40 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE cracks. Fuchs. the failure load of the group may be reduced by more than 40 percent. Therefore. 3. If the anchors show a steadily increasing load displacement relationship in uncracked and cracked concrete (Lines a1 and a2 of Fig. Fig. (This theoretical result is in accordance with Fig.4.36) or may be pulled out at rather low loads (Line c of Fig. However. Plotted are stresses in the concrete due to splicing of the bar and loading of the anchor.36 describes the influence of the loaddisplacement relationship of expansion anchors placed in cracks on the failure load of anchor groups. The tensile stresses along the failure surface of the concrete cone overlap. locally high tensile stresses are already induced in the concrete due to the loading of the structure.355. and therefore. 3.35.36). the anchor plate was connected flexibly (by hinges) to the hydraulic cylinder. It is assumed that three anchors of a quadruple fastening (large spacing) are located in cracks and one anchor is sitting between cracks in uncracked concrete. 3. is up to 25 percent in . Fu [kN] 150 - 125 100 75 50 Number of anchors in cracks Fig. Approximately the same strength reduction was measured for single anchors installed in cracks. 3. 3. Fuchs. such as the tension zone of a concrete member. the anchors were placed in the tension zone with constant stress of the reinforcement. In the test. It is assumed that an anchor is placed in the end region of lapped splices of large reinforcing bars. If only one of the anchors shows a load-displacement behavior according to Lines b or c. If anchors are placed in this region. Anchors which are being used in areas where cracks may occur. 3.35-Strength of fastenings with four anchors as a function of the number of anchors in cracks (from Eligehausen. Based on these results. and Mayer 1987 and 1988). and Mayer 1987 and 1988) Theoretical studies showed that the results described are also valid for larger groups of anchors and for applications when the anchor plate is rigidly attached (Eligehausen.35). the tensile stresses that they induce in the concrete combine with the tensile stresses due to loading of the structure. must be suitable for this application. The average strength of groups situated in cracked concrete was about 30 percent lower than the value applicable for anchor groups set in uncracked concrete (Eligehausen. An example is shown in Fig.3.) Expansion anchors located in cracks may slip in the hole before expanding further and take up more load (Line b of Fig. The strength of the entire anchor group is constant for one or more of the anchors in a concrete crack. Fuchs.1 Influence of tensile stresses generated by structural action on anchor strength -In tests summarized to this point. This is valid for anchors with a steadily increasing load-displacement relationship in both uncracked and cracked concrete. The reduction is almost the same whether one anchor or all are in concrete cracks (Fig. according to tests. 3. Failure of all fastenings was caused by pulling out a concrete cone.37. a reduction of the pullout load compared to anchors placed in otherwise unloaded concrete must be expected which. 3. 3. the failure load of the group is about four times the failure load of one anchor placed in a crack. if the anchors are placed in the shear region of beams and slabs and in the region of anchorages and lap splices of deformed bars.

o 0.1R-41 F anchor in crack FUC load displacement relationship Fu 4 Fuc 0 a. 0b C .37-Anchor in the region of an overlap splice (cross section). 3. Overlapping of stresses caused by the bars and by the anchor (from Eligehausen 1984) . a . \ 1 expansion anchor stresses caused by anchor + c + 1 Fig.50 V vuc - Fig.Influence nf load-displacement relationships of expansion anchors on the ultimate load of an anchor group (from Mayer and Eligehausen 1984) \ stresses caused ~~ by r e i n f o r c e m e n t ds = 28mm-.64 0. 3.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.94 0.36.

increasing the embedment depth of the anchor. or both reduces the influence of these intersecting stresses. In this circumstance. Fig. 3. Reinhardt. and Mayer 1987 and 1988) (Fig. Reinhardt.38). under . Furthermore.2 Influence of load transfer into the tension zone on the behavior of the structural element-The overlapping of concrete tensile stresses caused by loading the structure. The anchor failed when the concrete cover between two adjacent cracks was pulled off (Fig. anchors were used which extended beyond the tension reinforcement. 3.38 . This was confirmed by tests with expansion and undercut anchors placed in the cover of a beam with rather heavy reinforcement (Eligehausen. they are anchored in the concrete cover or between the bars. The shear-span ratio a/h ranged from 3 to 4. the influence of these intersecting stresses on the failure load is smaller than the influence of cracks. After loading the beams to service load (crack width w = 0.5.40 shows the cracking pattern of one specimen at about 95 percent of the failure load of the member. Types of anchors examined were expansion.4 mm) the anchors were loaded to failure. Another critical application is the transfer of forces into the tension zone in the shear region of slabs without shear reinforcement.39). this reinforcement reduces the concrete area available for transmitting tensile forces. Slabs 300 mm thick were tested by Eligehausen and Reuter without shear reinforcement. and Walvaren (1987). 3. In all cases the slabs failed by an inclined shear crack. and Mayer 1987 and 1988) Investigations of this case are described by Eligehausen and Reuter (1986) and Lieberum. In the tests a reduction of the shear carrying capacity of the slabs up to between 15 and 20 percent was found when all the loads were transmitted into the tension zone and not into the compression zone. The anchor loads must be transmitted over the tip of the inclined crack to the supports.355. Transfer of high tensile forces into the concrete in the region of overlap splices and of anchorages of reinforcing bars may be critical especially if the splice reinforcement is not enclosed by stirrups (Rehm and Eligehausen 1986). This causes high tensile stresses at the crack tip. Because of these conditions a significant reduction of the failure load of all types of anchors must be expected. The embedment depth (40 to 130 mm) and the ratio of anchor load to total load (0 to 100 percent) were varied.3 to 0. If short anchors are used. Fuchs. The strength reduction was smaller when only a fraction of the total load was transferred into the tension zone. 3.35. A similar strength reduction was found by Lieberum.Test specimens (from Eligehausen. In summary. Therefore.31. Reducing the size of the reinforcing bars. In the tests summarized in Fig. and headed studs. On an average the ratio of failure load in cracked concrete to the value for uncracked concrete was about 30 percent smaller than shown in Fig. 3. A fraction of the total load was transmitted by anchors into the tension zone and the rest by loading plates into the compression zone. the failure crack (shown as a broken line) will occur at a lower total shear force than loading the slab in the compression zone only.31 to 3. undercut. These stresses intersect the tensile stresses in the concrete induced by the anchor.1R-42 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE the assumed case (Eligehausen 1984).15 Id b 0 180=3ld t c dimensions in mm Fig. and stresses induced locally by the loaded anchor affects the strength of the anchor and may reduce the strength of the member where the anchor is placed (Rehm and Eligehausen 1986). 3.28 and 3.3. high tensile stresses are induced in the concrete cover by the bond action of the reinforcing bars. The strength of the concrete in the cover and in the region of the bars may be lower than in the core of the specimen due to poor compaction. a 0 135 = 2. and Walvaren (1987).4.28 and 3. 3. especially in sections with closely spaced reinforcement. Fuchs.

b.39 . of a slab without shear reinforcement (from Eligehausen and Reuter 1986) . and Mayer 1987 and 1988) 1 a =3d 7 L I Fig.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. b Fig. Fuchs.Crack pattern.. 3.1R-43 _ I .Concrete failure of an anchor group (from Eligehausen. 3.40.

depending on the design of the slab. . They are also used to connect steel columns in industrial structures to structural concrete members. sign supports. The structural behavior of cast-in-place anchor bolts with long embedment lengths installed in supporting members with limited dimensions is distinctly different from that described in the preceding sections. It can be assumed that the strength reduction is almost the same as for tension loading (reduction by about 40 percent).1R-44 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE these test conditions. The anchor bolt installation discussed in this section is one of the most widely used cast-in-place anchorage systems. The strength reduction will be smaller if edge reinforcement is present. 3. the concrete is usually well confined by reinforcement. the shear stress should be limited to about 80 percent of allowable values. If the anchors are placed close to the support the strength reduction will be much more significant. 3.41). 3. drilled shafts. This reduction of the shear capacity may.355. it is recommended that the shear forces transmitted directly into the tension zone should be limited to about 40 percent of the total shear force. The supporting concrete members associated with this installation are usually piers. Such installation should be distinguished from bolts embedded for short lengths in mass concrete with very large edge distances. The ultimate load of anchors with large edge distances (steel failure) is not significantly influenced by cracks. 3.3. and traffic signal poles. The anchor bolts used typically have long embedment lengths and small edge distances. are especially critical. the failure load of anchors with a small edge distance and loaded towards the edge will be smaller in cracked concrete than in uncracked concrete due to the disturbance of the distribution of stresses in the concrete by cracks. The few available test results can be summarized as follows.41 -Shear stress failure of a composite slab without connecting reinforcement between precast and cast in place concrete (after Rehm and Eligehausen 1986) 3. Composite structures (precast concrete elements with bonded cast-in-place concrete) without reinforcement connecting the precast and cast-in-place concrete. or the bolt (large edge distances). This section summarizes some significant results from extensive research conducted for this type of anchor bolt application at the University of Texas at Austin (see Breen 1964.1 Introduction -Anchor bolts are commonly used in highway and bridge structures to connect light standards. Anchors placed in cracked concrete and loaded in shear will fail the concrete (small edge distances). or alternatively. Therefore. or a combination of both.5 Shear loading-Little investigation of the influence of cracks on the behavior of anchors loaded in shear has been conducted. To avoid this problem.4-Behavior of cast-in-place anchor bolts in uncracked concrete piers join f -7 2 a/d 4 6 Fig. Failure of this type of structure will often be caused by a crack in the contact area between the precast and the cast-in-place concrete. Under otherwise constant conditions. significantly change the type of failure from a ductile bending failure to a brittle shear failure (Eligehausen and Reuter 1986). The edge distance required to insure a steel failure of the anchor is about 30 to 40 percent larger in cracked concrete than in uncracked concrete. If the load is transmitted into the precast concrete element. or other foundation elements with limited plan dimensions. however. the shear stress at failure is significantly lower than in the case of loading the specimen in the usual way at the top (Fig.4. high tensile stresses are generated in the contact area.

and Lo 1977. Embedment lengths ranged from 10 bolt diameters to 20 bolt diameters. A typical test specimen geometry is shown in Fig.o”_ I'' ANCHOR 8OLlI J/4” ANCHOR B O L T - SECTION A-A Fig.Typical specimen geometry SECTION B-B . bolt diameter. Pavluvcik. type of anchorage device. a series of exploratory and supplementary studies were made to determine the influence of cyclic loading. bond strength decreases along the length of the bolt and 8'.42 . 3.1R-45 Lee and Breen 1966. shape of piers. Lee and Breen 1970. Under increasing load. embedments: Adhesion or bond between the bolt and concrete is the predominant load carrying mechanism for early stages of loading. embedment length. bearing area. steel yield strength. and (3) a wedging action by the cone of crushed and compacted concrete in front of the anchorage device. Calzadilla. transverse reinforcement. 3. but the exact nature of the transition from one stage to the next is highly indeterminate and can only be discussed in a general manner. and three different 10. In addition. Breen. (2) bearing against the washer of the anchorage device. Fig. Jirsa. Hasselwander. 3. Cichy.42. These three stages are not entirely distinct. the more load the bolt can carry by the bond mechanism. lateral loading. and Breen 1974. 15. 3. The longer the bolt. and method of loading on the bolt behavior. and 20 bolt diameters.2 General behavior under loading-A single anchor bolt transfers tension load to the concrete member in three successive stages: (1) steel-toconcrete bond.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. little increase in tail stress is observed with increasing lead stress. and Jirsa. Steel yield strengths ranged from 33 ksi (A7) to 105 ksi (A139).43 shows tail stress plotted against lead stress for three 1 3/4 in. Jirsa. and Breen 1984). Hasselwander. The test results and design recommendations are valid for anchors in wellconfined concrete. Smart.4. anchor bolts with clear covers of 3 l/2 in. and bolt group configuration. concrete strength. Diameters of anchor bolts ranged from 1 to 3 in. These studies focused on many significant factors affecting anchor bolt behavior including clear cover.

3 Failure modes-The failures observed during testing can be described as: (1) bolt failure. For larger amount of clear cover. ksi Fig. 3.44(b)] which started just in front of the washer on the bolt centerline and extended toward the front and each side of the specimen.Tail stress versus lead stress for different embedment lengths .44(b)]. 3.43 .44(a)]. 3. 3. the failures were characterized by the splitting and spalling of the concrete cover into distinct blocks by the wedging action of a cone of crushed and compacted concrete which formed in front of the anchorage device [Fig. After the bond-to-bearing transition. (2) concrete cover failure by spalling. combinations of these modes were observed in several instances. The distinguishing feature of a wedge-splitting failure was the diagonal cracks [marked B in Fig. 8 10 20 l 30 I 40 I I 50 60 s I 70 Tail Stress. Little damage to the concrete cover over the bolt was observed at bolt failure. The bond-to-bearing transition is dependent on the embedment of the bolt. tail stress increases uniformly with increasing lead stress as the load is carried by bearing or by wedging action. a transverse crack parallel to and near the washer of the anchorage device [A in Fig.4. 3.1R-46 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE tail stress begins to increase. and (3) concrete cover failure by wedge-splitting.355. While these three categories represent distinct failure modes. 3. A relatively sudden spalling of the concrete cover over the anchorage device at low loads characterized the failure of bolts with small amounts of clear cover [Fig. In Fig.44(b)]. the shorter the bolt. the shorter and less well-defined the transition. 3. For a given load increment. the tail stress increases more than the lead stress as the load carried by bond is unloaded into bearing on the anchorage device. Bolt failures occurred in several bolts by necking in the threaded portion of the bolts.43 the bond-to-bearing transition is most clearly seen for the bolt with 200 embedment. These diagonal cracks were frequently accompanied by a longitudinal crack along the bolt axis [C in Fig. The load that was previously carried by a bond mechanism must be transferred to a bearing mechanism.

l/2 in.1 Single bolt strength -Hasselwander.46. The failure of the 10D bolt developed initially as a typical wedge-splitting mode until the cracking propagated to the sides and front face of the specimen. Slip of the anchor bolts was measured relative to the front face of the specimen (lead slip). 3.46 illustrates the effect of embedment length on the stress-slip relationships of three 1 3/4 in. the slopes of the curves are essentially the same until each bolt approaches ultimate capacity. in. with minimum thickness of Dd8 clear cover to the bolt.and plotted against lead slip for four 1 3/4 in.45 and 3. A 15D embedment length can be considered a satisfactory minimum embedment length. with an embedment length not less than 12 (D w .4 Lead-slip relationships (effect of clear cover and embedment length)-Bolt tension versus lead slip curves associated with different clear covers and embedments are shown in Fig. diameter. however. increasing the embedment length beyond this minimum length provides no significant improvement but decreasing the embedment length results in a significant reduction in ultimate strength. 3. The variables were incorporated into an equation for predicting the strength of isolated anchor bolts. and Lo (1977). As seen in Fig.44 . in. 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.4. the ultimate strength of the 1OD bolt. in. The result was the complete loss of a rectangular block of concrete cover extending back to the anchorage device over the full width of the specimen. was d normalized with respect to /-.44(b)] or both. Tension Tension Cover Spalling Failure Wedge-Splitting Failure Fig. 3. diameter of anchorage device (washer). Since the effect f concrete strength varied approximately with P lead stress in Fig. toward the sides of the specimen. bolts each with an embedment of 15 bolt diameters (15D) and an anchorage device consisting of a nut and a 4 in.45. @[O-7 + ln[2C’/(D. Cracking generally started near the anchorage device and extended toward the front. and an anchorage device consisting of a nut and a 4 in. thick washer. 3. (r/4) $$D”).* . 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.45 illustrates the effect of clear cover. Fig. l/2 in. calculated on the d basis of the anchor bolt stress area.5. concluded that clear cover and bearing area are the main variables governing the strength of single anchor bolts.46. A definite trend of increasing ultimate strength with increasing clear cover is indicated. 3. The initial portions of the curves are essentially the same and there is no appreciable difference between the ultimate strengths of the 15D bolt and the 20D bolt. 3. diameter. Fig.5 Ultimate strength-The ultimate strength of a bolt in a group is clearly not the same as that of an isolated bolt with similar geometry. subjected to simple tension and failing in a wedgesplitting mode: Tn = 140A.Concrete cover failures 3. Breen. = C' = . = ultimate wedge-splitting capacity of a single bolt. As illustrated in Fig. 3. lb. or both under increasing load. bolts each with a clear cover of 3 l/2 in. 3. thick washer. as opposed to the usual group of triangular wedges with a common apex over the anchorage device.4. in. 3.45.3. Jirsa. A certain minimum embedment length is required to develop this resistance.4. but not greater than 4D bolt diameter. Ab = D = D.D) net bearing area. is noticeably reduced. -II)]] (3.35) where T.

1R-48 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE :cu d . ’ . d s s d .355.


f A!!L

_,--L~l5 0 1000 A-.._.._& --z750 L = 20 D




C’ = 3.5 In.

1 0.02

I 0.04

. 0.06

. 0.08

I 0.10

I 0.12

. 0.14

. 0.16

. 0.18

. 0.20

. 0.22

. 0.24

Lead Slip, inches

Fig. 3.46-Effect of embedment length



The design tensile strength T, was determined as: T,, si 4 Tn but < A, fy , lb where 4 As fy = a capacity reduction factor of 0.75 = tensile area of the anchor bolt, as defined in Eq. (3.1), in.2 = yield stress of the bolt material, psi (3.36)

ACI Committee 349,1990, “Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures,” (ACI 349-90) Appendix B, American Concrete Institute, Detroit.
American Institute of Steel Construction, 1978, Specifications for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel Buildings, with Commentary, New York, 235 pp. Best, J. FIoyd and McDonald, James E., 1989,: “Evaluation of Polyester Resin, Epoxy, and Cement Grouts for Embedding Reinforcing Steel Bars in Hardened Concrete,” Technical Report REMR-CS-23, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Bode, H. and Roik, K., 1987,: “Headed Studs Embedded in Concrete and Loaded in Tension,” in ACI SP 103 Anchorage to Concrete, G. Hasselwander ed. , Detroit. Bode, H. and Hanenkamp, W., 1985, “Zur Tragfshigkeit von Kopfbolzen bei Zugbeanspruchung,” (For Load Bearing Capacity of Headed Bolts Under Pullout Loads), Bauingenieu pp. 361-367. Braestrup, M.W., Nielson, M.P., Jense, B.C. and Bach, F., 1976, “Axissymetric Punching of Plain and Reinforced Concrete, Copenhagen, Technical University of Denmark, Structural Research Laboratory, Report R 75. Breen, J.E., 1964, “Development Length for Anchor Bolts, Research Report 55-1F, Center for Highway Research, the University of Texas at Austin. Burdette, E.G., Perry, T.C. and Funk, R.R., 1987, “Load Relaxation Tests”, ACI SP-103 Anchorage to Concrete, G. Hasselwander ed.,Detroit, pp. 297-311. Cannon, R.W., 1981,: “Expansion Anchor Performance in Cracked Concrete,” ACI-Journal, November-December, pp. 471-479. Elfgren, L., Anneling, R., Eriksson, A., and Granlund, S., 1988, “Adhesive Anchors, Tests with Cyclic and Long-Time Loads,” Swedish National Testing Institute Report 1987:39, Bor&. Eligehausen, R., 1987, “Anchorage to Concrete by Metallic Expansion Anchors, ACI SP 103 Anchorage to Concrete, G. Hasselwander ed., Detroit, pp.181-201. Eligehausen, R., 1984,: “Wechselbeziehungen zwischen Befestigungstechnik und Stahlbetonbauweise”, (Interactions of Fastenings and Reinforced Concrete Constructions), in “Fortschritte im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau”, Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn. Berlin.

The design equation was developed from a regression analysis on test results of bolts failing in A minimum the wedge-splitting mode only. embedment length of 12(D, - D) was suggested to allow the wedge-splitting mechanism to occur. A restriction which accounted for a reduced bearing efficiency observed for large washers, limited the net bearing area to 4D2. A minimum washer thickness, D$?, was suggested to prevent flexibility of the washer. Fig. 3.47 shows graphically the suggested ultimate strength equation and the test data plotted to illustrate the accuracy of the equation. The equation provides a reasonable estimate of strength, yet is simple to use and reflects the critical parameters observed in the test program. Bolt group strength - Jirsa, et al. (1984), evaluated the bolt group interaction and strength reduction by comparing the average test capacity with the predicted capacity of an isolated bolt with similar geometry. It was observed that as bolt spacing decreased, the reduction in strength significantly increased. From a least squares analysis of the available data, the following modification to Eq. (3.35) was produced for the nominal tensile capacity of an anchor bolt in a bolt group based on failure of the concrete. T,, = 140Ab@ {0.7 + ln[2C’/(D,,,-D)]} (3.37) (0.02S + 0.4), in. where

S = bolt spacing, in.
(0.02S+0.4) 5 1.0 and other factors are the same as in Eq. (3.35). Eq. (3.37) provides an estimate of the strength of closely spaced anchor bolts with edge cover typical of highway- related structures. The design tensile capacity, Tu, can be determined according to Eq. (3.36).





l .


00000 *. .* .. ..



44 4
0 0


. Abbot Hanks Testing Laboratories of San Francisco. for the Failure Modes of Concrete Breakage and Splitting). Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik. and Reuter. 11. in "Fortschritte im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau”. IVBH. Breen. pp. “Shear Capacity of Short Anchor Bolts and Welded Studs. “Tragverhalten von Metallspreizdiibeln unter zentrischer Zugbelastung bei den Versagensarten Betonausbruch und Spalten des Betons. and Mendonca. 1966. D. R. EIigehausen. in German and English. Reinhardt. No. and Heidbrink. “Strength and Behavior of Bolt Installations Anchored in Concrete Piers. File H2189-S1.E. and Breen J. No. 1985.. l/1988. in German and English. 1984.E.. Report No. Hanks. Eligehausen. The University of Texas at Austin. G.. PCI Design Handbook-Precast and Prestressed Concrete. July/August. “A Guide to The Selection of High-Strength Anchor Bolt Materials”. Fischer. 1986.. R. SP29. Jirsa. Berlin. W.. l/17-86/3 of the Institut fiir Werkstoffe im Bauwesen. Smart. Center for Highway Research. 8783. and Mendonca.” (Fastening Technology in Reinforced Concrete Construction). J. “Befestigen mit Hinterschnittankern. 1989. Rehm. N.B. D. 1984.O... pp.E. and Fuchs. 10.. Abbot A. Pusill-Wachtsmuth. February. R. The University of Texas at Austin.” (Bearing Behavior of Metallic Expansion Anchors.P. 1978. 1987. J. K. B. 686-692. 1985. Fuchs. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik. No.O. Fuchs. Lieberum.B.” (bad-bearing Behaviour of Anchor Fastenings Under Shear.o. and Eligehausen. Doctoral Thesis. The University of Texas at Austin.. Werkstoffe und Konstruktion Institut ffir Werkstoffe im Bauwesen der Universitit Stuttgart Badenand Forschungs-und Materialpriifungsanstalt. Loaded in Tension. Eligehausen. M. and L. “Tragverhalten von Dfibelbefestigungen bei Querzug-.. Beton-und Stahlbetonbau 84. and Eligehausen. R. (Load Characteristics of Plates without Shear Reinforcement by Introduction of Loads in the Tensile Zone of Concrete).355. and Malik. No... in German and English. “Verhalten von Beton auf Zug.. J. R.E. Klingner. M. P. D. and Breen.” Center for Highway Research.“Stand der Befestigungstechnik im Stahlbetonbau. 380 pp. 6. The University of Texas at Austin.. 1973. “Factors Affecting Anchor Development.E. 1982b. M. 270-279.W. Sept/Oct.. “Tragverhalten von Platten ohne Schubbewehrung bei Einleitung von Lasten in die Betonzugzone”. Jirsa. “Befestigungen in der Betonzugzone.. “Strength and Behavior of Anchor Bolts Embedded Near Eclges of Concrete Piers. R.W.. 1982. R. K.. G.” (Loadbearing Behavior of Anchor Fastenings in Tension). Klingner. 1988. R. November. ’ Lasteinleitung fiber Diibel in der Schubzone von BetonPlattenstreifen. 1977.O. R.” (Anchor Groups with Anchors in the Concrete Tension Zone).. J..E. G. 62-66. October. Prestressed Concrete Institute.C. “Behavior of Drilled-In Expansion Anchors. R.B..A.” Concrete International.. Research Report 29-1... 10. and Walraven. No..” A literature review.E.” ACI-Journal... Jan/Feb. Chicago. in German and English. M.und Biegebeanspruchung. J... Research Report 29-2F.. 12/1987 und No. August. “Research Report 881F. pp. Combined Tension and Shear or Flexural Loading). and Mayer. J.T. 1982. University of Stuttgart.H. P. Universitgt Stuttgart. Eligehausen. 1987. Report No. 825-829. “Tensile Capacity of Short Anchor Bolts and Welded Studs: A Literature Review. and Breen. G. American Concrete Institute." ACI Journal. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik. Klingner.A. Mendonca. H. “Effect of Reinforcing Details on the Shear Resistance of Anchor Bolts Under Reversed Cyclic Loading. 2 and 3. “Ankergruppen mit Dubeln in der Betonzugzone. 12. J. May.” (Behavior of Concrete in Tension).R.Periodica l/1982. Cichy. 1970.. 167-180.. and Reuter. W. No.. 1988. pp. W. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik. Center for Highway Research. .” (Fastening of Anchors in the Shear Zone of Concrete Slabs).D. J. Pavluvcik.” (Fastening in the Concrete Tensile Zone). D. Mallee. “Tragverhalten v o n D i i b e l b e f e s t i g u n g e n bei Zugbeanspruchung. Center for Highway Research.. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik.” (Effects of Modern Fixing Technology on Structural Design in Reinforcing Concrete Construction). No. 1982. Lee. May/June. 2.W. “Model Study of Anchor Bolt Development Factors. pp. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik.. “Befestigungen mit Verbundankern. IVBH Survey S-19/82.” Research Report 305-IF. Lotze.. and Pusill-Wachtsmuth..” (Fastenings Formed with Chemical Anchors). B. “Auswirkungen der modernen Befestigungstechnik auf die konstruktive Gestaltung im Stahlbetonbau. and Sawade. pp.. W. & Breen.1R-52 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE Jirsa.: Kwik Bolt Testing Program. 1986.E.. April. R. Lee. J. 1982a. Hasselwander. A. ACI Journal. R. No. Mayer. 1984. Eligehausen. Hasselwander. 1974. Meinheit. J. and Rehm. Eligehausen.A. Schrsgzug. F.H. Wiirttemberg (Eigenverlag) October.” (Fastenings with Undercut Anchors).. 5 and 6. No. 1984. CaIzadilla. Models for Concrete Structures. Eligehausen. 781-785. J. R. G. Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn. J.

March/April. W. Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn. R. J une. the capacity of anchors under sustained loading in the tensile stress zone of uncracked concrete is only 60 to 75 percent of static load capacity of anchors in unstressed concrete. “Modern Anchoring Systems for Concrete. when actually bending. 1973. January. the increase in higher capacities. 1982. Sell. As described in Chapter 3.F. Anchorage to Concrete. and the potential for concrete cracking in the vicinity of the anchors. Doctoral Thesis. Harry.. In such cases it may be prudent to design for the failure of the most easily replaced segment of the structure. Rehm. U. Berlin. and redistribution of loads are often involved.1. anchor capacity is significantly influenced by anchor type and width of the crack in the region of the anchorage.2. Stuttgart. Care must be exercised in designing for selected failure modes to maintain the integrity of the primary structural system.2 -Functional requirements CHAPTER 4-DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 4. the designer should use deepseated anchors (anchored in the compression zone of the member). In regions of tensile stress. since the width of flexural cracks is maximum at the concrete surface and decrease with distance away from the surface. or anchors which are designed to perform in cracked concrete. Revision 1.Introduction The purpose of this section is to discuss the various factors which affect the ability of concrete anchorages to perform their intended purpose. may fail completely in cracked concrete under loads of the same magnitude. H. whether it is the anchor bolt or a separate piece of the structure. 1989.and Jbolts for erection anchors. “Festigkeit und Verformung von mit Reaktionsharzmiirtel-Patronen versetzten Ankern. E. pp. The tendency to design anchors based only on their tensile or shear loading is discouraged. August. 12. July.2. 1976.” Techmar Inc. capacity is often not needed for the simple column base plate connection. 1988.: “Experimentelle und Theoretische U n t e r s u c h u n g e n zum Tragverhalten von Spreizdtibeln in Beton”.. Vol. In cracked concrete. H. 355.. and Lehmann. Criteria for the design and selection of concrete anchorages should account for these factors. Riemann. Anchors which perform well. at a given load level in uncracked concrete. 806-815. Eligehausen.” (Fastening Technique)..1. “Befestigungstechnik. There is a high probability of coincidental cracking when anchors are located in the tensile zone of a concrete member. Atlanta. 4. Economics or related issues may dictate designing for a selected mode of failure.1 Column bases . “In-Place Strength of Welded Headed Studs. prying action. Wagner-Grey.” (Strength and Displacement of Anchors Installed with Reaction Resin Mortar Cartridges). in “Betonkalender 1988”. R.. and Mallee.and J-bolts have significantly However. in German. 56-81. These factors should be considered in the design of anchorages. Verbindungstechnik 5. Installations such as bridge railings and highway signs could potentially receive accidental loadings that are not reasonable design loads..” (Investigations with Metallic Expansion Anchors in the Cracked Tension Zone of Reinforced Concrete Members)“. CA. ACI SP-103.. 1979. which do not have sufficient embedment to develop the strength of the anchor steel. H. Seghezzi.Simply connected column bases are normally loaded in compression of sufficient magnitude that column shear is transferred through friction and the anchorage serves only for erection purposes. “Untersuchungen mit Metallspreizdtibeln in der gerissenen Zugzone von Stahlbetonbauteilen. (Experimental and Theoretical Investigations on the Performance of Expansion Anchors in Concrete). 1982. pp.Institut. Technical Report 3501-1.1R-53 4. 1985. G.1 Loading Conditions-Major considerations in determining the requirements for concrete anchorages include the type of loading which the anchorage will experience. Wiewel..” (The Extended X-Method for the Design of Fastening Devices as Exemplified by Headed Stud Anchorages). Teledyne Engineering Services. Research Report of the Otto-Graf. unpublished. It has been common practice for many years to use L. August 30. A. and Yi. Column bases which are designed as moment connections should require a . G. Technical University of Munich.” Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE Rehm. R.: ” Results of Long-Term Tension Tests 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 Installed in Hardrock Concrete. Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik. and Vollmer. “Das erweiterte x-Verfahren fiir Befestigungsmittel: Bemessung an Beispielen von Kopfbolzenverankerungen. 1985. 4. Headed anchors of the same size and length as L. R. long Beach. Shaikh. in German and English. No.D.

structures that provide alternative stress paths) that redistribute loads internally.e. specifications often limit support displacements to low values under conservative combinations of loading. Seismic loading of machine foundation anchorages can be critical and must be considered. 4. In contrast to this. including the connection. and seismic loads.1.1R-54 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE rigid base connection and anchors should be selected which can maintain a sufficient residual preload to develop applied moments. Steel is more ductile than concrete and it is better to proportion an anchorage so that the majority of the ductile displacement occurs in the steel elements of the anchorage or in the attached structural member. The ability of a structure to exhibit high values of ductility (ten or greater) is an extremely desirable feature because this can allow for an overload condition to exist without producing a catastrophic failure.. by experience.1. Failure of structural connections may be catastrophic. Vibration problems normally occur under operating conditions and are corrected by adding or shifting supports to alter the response frequency of the system.2 Anchorage Environment. vibration loads from wind or machinery. Temperature changes and the shrinkage of structural elements should also be carefully considered in determining connection details because of the significant effect which tensile loads have on anchor stress and the manner in which shear is transferred to the concrete. evaluation of the stiffness of each support with respect to the longitudinal stiffness of the total support system between expansion joints or bends should be made to insure that a particular support is not overloaded to failure. When designing the anchorage of a steel structure to concrete. Where steel is under a sustained high stress. 4.3 Structural Tension and Shear Connections-The anchorage of principal structural connections requires careful consideration of all possible loading combinations. the steel anchors. Ductility is defined as the ratio of a structure’s plastic displacement to its maximum elastic (yield) displacement. Pipe supports are generally detailed to provide free expansion and contraction of the piping system under changing temperatures. It can provide for highly redundant structures (i. the baseplate attached to the steel member. usually results in large safety factors. pipe supports are dead-load hangers or support brackets.2 Machine Foundations-Anchor bolts for machinery foundations are generally specified by the machinery manufacturer and have been sized by experience. ductility of the structure. thus setting up a progressive failure mechanism.4 Pipe Supports-In most structures. especially torque-controlled expansion anchors.2. and safety factors. The desired ductile behavior may occur in any one or all of the following components: the structural steel element being connected. Unprotected steel is particularly vulnerable to corrosion when exposed to the atmosphere.355. or the concrete. It is recommended that all structural connections be ductile. They are generally installed to a relatively low stress level and may not have sufficient embedment to develop the anchor steel capacity.2. Most anchorages cannot comply with the imposed displacement limitations without rigid bases and oversized anchors. Their general purpose is to fix the rigid machine housing to concrete in order to withstand machine vibrations. extra care should be taken in selecting anchor types.Consideration of the service environment is essential for service longevity. Corrosion will reduce the ability of anchors to function correctly. 4. Experience has shown these loosely supported systems function very well under seismic conditions without special design considerations. In cases where this is not possible. Design loads for these supports are generally low and sizing of anchors. . vulnerability to corrosion exists in the region of the expansion mechanism where space is available for moisture collection. These conditions are necessary to achieve fixity of the column base.2. particularly when there is no redundancy in the system. the pipe supports for nuclear applications are often designed to prevent piping system frequencies from coinciding with predicted structural frequencies generated by an earthquake of prescribed magnitude. particularly in areas where the anchorage may come in contact with saltwater sprays or deicing salts. For expansion anchors. When a pipe has multiple supports and is loaded along its length. should be considered.2. 4. Structural connections should also be investigated for cyclic loadings.1. As a result. geometry.

or the use of corrosion resistant materials.1R-55 there is a higher potential for stress corrosion failure. Concrete failure may occur before or during slip of the anchor. should be considered in corrosive environments. It is desirable to limit the yield strength of headed anchors to that of ASTM A 325 or lower strength material. In contrast to the controlled ductility of a steel failure mechanism. and the amount of vibration during placement.1 Concrete-When the capacity of the anchorage is controlled by the strength of concrete. The mode of failure is an important design consideration. construction practices. the height of the drop of the concrete. 4. Gaps between a steel base plate and the concrete surface should be sealed if the foundation is exposed to an aggressive environment. Steel with yield strengths in excess of 120. If the foundation is exposed to freezing temperatures. 4. which permit segregation of the aggregate will increase the variability of tensile strength more than the compressive strength.MATERIALS 4. The tensile-compressive strength relationship can be complicated by the influence of grain size.3 Behavior-The behavior of cast-in-place and post-installed anchors is described in Chapter 3. Alternate periods of wetting and drying have been known to produce corrosion even in the absence of chlorides. it is generally the tensile properties of the concrete which control cone failures. because of the brittle nature of higher strength steels.000 psi. Well-designed. Zinc plating causes additional brittleness and reduced fatigue resistance for higher strength steel bolts. Protective coating systems.2. Nonetheless. or other materials which have a high rate of creep at elevated temperatures should not be used in areas of high temperature or possible exposure to fire. cast-in-place anchors perform better than or equally as well as post-installed anchors. For this reason. 4. . Proper detailing will insure that runoff water cannot reach anchors in areas of snow and ice removal. concrete is a brittle material with less well-defined properties. Construction logistics that admit alternative and specifications manufacture of the equipment to be anchored (and therefore alternative anchorage size and location) often make the post-installed anchor more practical. the properties of steel are well defined and steel failure is predictable and controllable. Tensile properties of concrete vary more than compressive properties. Segregation of the aggregate is influenced by the slump of the concrete. and crushing strength that controls slip failures.000 psi have been found to be highly susceptible to stress corrosion in most anchorage environments. For this reason. Intermittent exposure may be a more severe service condition than continuous exposure. the designer should consider use of a cast-in-place anchor whenever the size and location of that anchor is known prior to casting of the concrete. the sleeves should be filled with grout or be otherwise protected against the intrusion of water. type. Tensile properties of the concrete also influence bond and affect those anchor types which depend on bond to develop capacity. and distribution of aggregate particles. Special investigations may also be necessary to determine the possible effects of process chemicals on anchors in industrial plants.3. stress corrosion is less likely to be a problem.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. if for no other reason than that they are normally set deeper into the concrete and at ultimate load feature failure in the bolt rather than failure in the concrete. If the yield strength of the anchor steel is less than 120.2 Steel-The type of steel used in anchors is largely dependent on the method of anchorage but can also be influenced by the method of securing the base plate or attachment to the anchors. precautions must be taken when chlorides are used in the anchorage zone either externally or as a part of the concrete mix.3 . However.3. In a similar fashion. lead caulking. Chemical adhesives. In general. the capacity of anchors may vary depending on their location in walls and in the top or bottom of slabs. or by slip of the anchorage mechanism. The use of thin zinc coatings will not provide permanent protection against corrosion under normal outside exposure conditions. by the strength of the anchorage steel. Failure by slip may be either brittle or ductile depending on the ability of the anchorage mechanism to maintain load during slip. plain sandcement dry-pack pads which are exposed to freezing and thawing should be coated with a sealer to prevent water absorption. Anchor bolts are often set in sleeves to provide for minor adjustment of the bolt to fit the foundation base. Anchor capacity may be limited by the strength of concrete.

1. To preclude a concretecone-break-out failure. s.2. if a group of bars.4. the failure mode “concrete cone break out” is quite typical for shallow anchors (see Chapter 3). subsequent loading anchor head.4.2 Concrete tensile failure -The determination of concrete pullout strength (cone failure) of individual anchors and anchor groups is discussed in Section 3.1R-56 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE 4.4 -Design basis The safety factor for any element in an anchorage system should be consistent with the other elements in the system. Most anchorage situations do not involve minimum values for spacing and cover. All shell type expansion anchors are designed to fail the concrete when the bolt is embedded to shell depth.3 Expansion Anchors-Many patented expansion devices are used to mechanically fasten post-installed anchors to the concrete. the yield strength of an individual reinforcing bar can be developed in 3000 psi uncracked concrete in about 15 bar diameters (straight bar) or 10 bar diameters (hooked bar). The basic development ars with a hook or 90” bend about 50 percent of the of straight bars. The design of concrete anchorages is usually controlled by codes governing both structural steel and concrete. number. The code provisions will be very conservative if individual bars are anchored in uncracked concrete well away from edges. the development length may increase by a factor of up to four to account for the effects of cover. Excluding edge and spacing conditions.2.4. Ductile steels should be specified for this type of anchor if a ductile failure mode is desired. the code provisions may not be conservative. More recently developed expansion anchors feature expansion mechanisms that can fully develop the strength of the anchor steel. Most expansion anchors were originally developed for short embedment depths to provide an anchor which failed in the concrete or by slip. is anchored in uncracked concrete or in the (cracked) tension zone of reinforced concrete members. Headed anchors may also be made by welding a rigid plate to the embedded end of the anchor or by threading a bar and using a standard nut. 4. The quired to fully develop the of deformations). 4.4.355. with or without small edge distance. Establishing an allowable stress or load factor must consider overall behavior of the anchorage. Concrete failure can also occur with wedge bolts having shallow embedment depths. The basic development Building Code are based on d minimum spacing of an rs.1Headed Anchors-Headed anchors may consist of welded studs or bolting material with anchor heads manufactured to established standards. when used as single anchors.1. However. sustained loadi concrete in the Bonded anchor Under typically been manufactured deformed reinforcing bars.1 Types of anchors 4. However. Once the load increases sufficiently to overcome n the shank. Headed efficiently if the shank of the This will minimize bond and oad on the anchor by bearing Anchors-When anchor load inishes with depth. and spacing of bars. The use of r reinforcement was excluded g Code in 1971 (ACI-ASCE considered as twice that of deformed ba insure that the gths given in ACI 318 crete capacity is higher than the When evaluating the concrete e failure modes “splitting of e concrete between ribs” The failure mode “concrete cone break out” was not considered because typically this mode does not occur when developing reinforcing bars. A further increase of the development length by a factor of one and one-half to two is necessary if the anchors are located in the cracked tensile zone of a reinforced concrete member. 4. Concrete cone failure will occur when the capacity of the anchor bolt exceeds the concrete pullout strength. The concrete may also fail by splitting tension when there is inadequate lateral confinement of . there were no restricting strengths applied to the steel in these anchors. Since ductile steel failure had no opportunity to occur in this situation.

This would appear to be a reasonable limit considering all the other concrete and anchor variables.355. have load-displacement characteristics similar to the post-yield behavior of steel. The capacity of welded stud anchors appears to be affected by the thickness of the attachment. load distribution to the attachments is dependent on the stiffness of the attachment and its degree of fixi ty For rigid base connections. service load stresses would approximate 0. most manufacturers of post-installed expansion anchors recommend limiting normal service loads to 25 percent of the average published failure loads.9 of yield for all types of connections. Splitting may also occur at close edge distances when the anchorage mechanism expands with load application. Deformation-controlled expansion anchors (dropin. (2) Using larger number of smaller anchors at closer spacings to avoid spalling when the edge distance is too small. and modifications in anchor design. the determination of anchor stress is complicated by plate stiffness. For these types of anchors. When the edge distance is small. closely spaced spirals of small diameter wire or mesh may be used to resist the bursting forces. and spacing. anchor stress may be determined assuming that plane sections remain plane. Apparently prying action. Assuming an average load factor of 1. Tennessee Valley Authority (1979). Reinforcing steel in the concrete can be used to enhance the strength of cast-in-place anchors. However. other than simple hangers. a minimum safety factor of three for anchor bolts would provide residual service load allowables approximating 85 to 90 percent of the residual preload for bolts initially preloaded close to yield. Considering the increased loss of preload in concrete anchorages (approximately three times that of steel to steel connections). Other solutions may be more effective. without causing the concrete to fail in tension. For the split-shell anchor. and the load-displacement characteristics (including preload) of the anchor steel. AC I Committee 349 (1990) limits maximum stress to 0. and stud) are especially sensitive to edge distance because of the high expansion forces developed during anchor installation. a factor of safety of five on average tested anchor strength is appropriate. For ASTM A 36 steel.1R-57 the anchor. against ultimate. type.55 yield for anchors other than bolts. and with stresses based on the net tensile area for bolted connections. however. most manufacturers of expansion anchors recommend limiting normal service loads to 25 percent of the manufacturer’s average test failure load.4 Tensile strength of steel . design is controlled by the strength of steel. The capacities of anchors are affected by embedment depth. wedge bolts and sleeve anchors with embedment depths greater than seven bolt diameters will fail by slip. For structural attachments. this also closely corresponds to a factor of safety of 3 against tensile strength. prying action. In the United States. for service loads on high yield materials. self-drilling.4. 4. Test results for expansion anchors differ from job to job and with anchor size. AISC imposes a minimum safety factor of two. if the load is transferred from the attachment to the anchors through a flexible plate. more research is required in this area.6.4. However. because the relatively wide variation in the slope of the deflection curves and ultimate loads distribute loads nonuniformly to the anchors. Investigations by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1979) indicated that installation problems associated with split-shell type expansion anchors warranted increased safety factors over those applied to torque-type anchors. They cannot be considered ductile. it was recommended that a minimum factor of safety of five against average test values be used.When the concrete-failure-cone strength exceeds the tensile strength of the anchor steel. Typically. For factored load design. Proof load for concrete anchorages should be approximately 110 percent of the service load. (3) Preloading the anchorage so that shear is transferred by friction at the interface of the base plate and the concrete rather than through shear in the anchor. .3 Anchor Slip -Anchors which fail by slip. due to the flexibility of the plate. They consist of: (1) Providing for deeper embedment to preclude the tensile-cone-failure mode. This occurs with all types of expansion anchors that have small edge distances. edge distance. Assuming a coefficient of variation of 25 percent. 4. and others which cause the concrete to fail.

This is best controlled by limiting the maximum level of design stress. 4. by the compressive reaction of the applied moment. Effective preload should not be assumed without verification requirements in the installation procedure.5. if any. a higher loss should be assumed. The normal force necessary to develop frictional resistance may be caused by direct load. When the installation procedure requires a positive means of determining installation preload. The stiffer elements then transfer their load to the remaining elements. shear is distributed in proportion to the stiffnesses of the shear-resisting elements. shear resistance will be increased by the cohesion between the two surfaces and the coefficient may be taken as 0. must be set at a low enough level to assure that fatigue failure will not occur. Under these conditions service load stress should be set at a level that reflects the residual prestress. the magnitude of the fluctuating stress range must be restricted to prevent eventual fatigue failure (see discussion of behavior under cyclic loads in Chapter 3). testing clearly indicates loss of capacity with increasing plate flexibility. but under no condition should the time period be less than about 1 week. the service load stress.5 Shear. in percent. under fluctuating loads. If the surface of a base plate is in intimate contact with concrete or grout. All forces contributing to frictional resistance should be conservatively determined in designing for either total or partial shear resistance by friction. If the connection is to transfer shear by friction. If the connection is fastened to hardened concrete.4. Note that: (a) Direct loads normal to the shear plane should be the minimum associated with the loading condition. with each element contributing its share. If the element is subject to frequent fluctuations in stress.If shear is to be transferred by friction.355.4.1 Shear transfer by friction . this would be the maximum direct pull-off loading including associated impact factors. no lateral translation (sliding) of the base plate can occur.4. Lost preload may be regained by retorquing.Shear may be transferred from base plate to concrete either by friction or by bearing. or by any combination of the three. should be based on conservative assumptions of preload loss.6 Preload-Concern for fatigue failure is a principal consideration in establishing service stresses. shear lugs.4. The loss. When the installation load is determined by calibrated torque wrench or other less positive means. the loading combination which controls should be that which produces the minimum compressive reaction in conjunction with maximum shear. or retightening anchors. 4. 4. it is generally accepted that fatigue is not likely to occur.1R-58 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE induces very high stress and cracking at the interior edge of the heat-affected zone of the weld under relatively low load applications. . For cyclic loading. Without test verification of the analytical procedure. Failure of the stiffer elements will increase lateral translation. There appears to be little advantage in retorquing more than twice.2 Shear transfer through bearing. Assuring a level of prestress in concrete anchorages is more complicated than steel-to-steel connections.If frictional resistance is not sufficient to resist lateral sliding. For most embedments the major preload loss occurs within a few days of preloading. residual preload should not be assumed greater than 50 percent of the initial preload without prototype testing. the coefficient of friction used to determine shear resistance should not exceed 0. shear must be transferred by the plate bearing on anchors.5. Preload loss occurs due to creep of the concrete in the highly-stressed regions of load transfer from steel to concrete. by residual preload in the anchors. (b) The compression component of the moment reaction is dependent on the location of the center of gravity of the compressive reaction. the location should not be assumed to be farther than pne plate thickness from the compressive edge of the attachment. or the concrete at the end of a fully embedded plate. (c) Residual preload. If the bolting system can be prestressed with sufficient load that the load remaining after losses exceeds the maximum stress load. Sufficient time should be allowed for the majority of loss to occur before retorquing. If a sustaining (residual) prestress cannot be assured. In bearing connections. As a result.6. Shallow depth anchors having the capability of failing the concrete in tension may be expected to experience a total loss of preload. This is particularly true for expansion anchors.7. Conservative assumptions should therefore be used concerning its location. 4.

decreases with increasing preload. which may add directly to the anchor load. If intimate contact is not achieved.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.7. It can also be influenced by the effect of other stressed anchors in the group that cause bending in the plate. The prying force increases the load in the anchor. is often sufficient to locally transfer the entire load for a limited time. 4. by compression of the bearing plate on the surface. For this reason anchor stress will increase with applied load irrespective of preload. rotation of the plate at the anchor will induce a prying force beyond the anchor where the plate bears on the concrete.4. When the base plate is bolted directly to hardened concrete without grout. Loss of preload may approach 100 percent for anchors of lesser embedment depths which are capable of failing the concrete. it will lose from 40 to 50 percent of its applied preload unless retorqued (Burdette. Grout has significantly higher bonding qualities than concrete. the plate may be considered flexible. This will eliminate nonlinear anchor displacement under load and restrict peak stress accumulation to design stress levels. anchor stress due to moment is proportional to its distance from the neutral axis and a conventional summation of forces and moments can be used to determine stress.4. may be significantly in error if the plate is flexible. Prying decreases with increased anchor displacement. the combined stress in the anchor would be increased by the increased bending stress in the bolts in transmitting shear through the added space of the washers. The prestress should not exceed the yield stress of the steel. determined by conventional analysis. care must be taken to exclude any bonding of the anchor to grout or concrete at the embedment surface. then shear must be transferred through the anchors. the loss of preload. however. To achieve an effective residual preload. If the embedment length of the anchor is the minimum required to develop its tensile strength. effective prestress can be accomplished by placing shims or washers between the plate and concrete at the anchor locations. For effective preload. the plate may be considered rigid. in percent. If this occurs. therefore the entire length of bolt above the anchor head should be coated to prevent bond in grouted systems. Loss of preload is a function of the strain relaxation (creep) relative to the total anchor strain. threads must be excluded from bonding to either concrete or grout. In most moment connections. Effective prestress requires intimate contact of the base plate with concrete or grout at all anchor locations.7 Base plate flexibility-The flexibility of the base plate connecting the attachment to the anchorage steel is a controlling factor in determining the magnitude of anchor stress and the distribution of stress to the anchors. Perry. the confinement of the surface concrete or grout. anchor stress is dependent on plate stiffness as well as distance to the neutral axis. can be reduced by increasing the total anchor elongation which increases the strain length of the anchor. The loss may be more pronounced if the anchor is situated in cracked concrete. no prying will occur until the gap between plate and concrete is closed by the . Since the major portion of load relaxation occurs at the zone of load transfer into the concrete. Prying increases with plate flexibility which affects the magnitude of potential downward displacement of the plate edge beyond the anchor. The rate of stress increase. When bond occurs at the surface. If the distance between exterior anchors and attachment is more than two plate thicknesses. otherwise. If the plate is not in contact with the concrete beyond the anchor. shear is transferred to the concrete entirely through friction and bolts transmit tension only. and Funk 1987).1 Prying action-When load is transferred from attachment to anchor through a flexible plate in full contact with the concrete or grout. If the plate is rigid. and on any prying forces caused by plate flexure. Preload reduces the displacement characteristics of the anchor under applied loading and increases the counter rotation of the plate beyond the anchor. This is especially true for anchors located in cracked concrete. When this occurs. stretch of the bolt may be limited to the thickness of the bearing plate or attachment. Anchor loads.1R-59 diminishes each time the anchorage is retorqued such that losses can be minimized by retorquing at about 1 week intervals. If the combined effect of anchor preload and compressive reaction of the applied moment are not sufficient for shear transfer through friction. and shims or washers are used. If the plate is flexible. 4. the danger of high stress accumulations can be prevented by initially torquing to maximum values and then loosening the bolts to a minimum torque value after the concrete has had sufficient time to consolidate in the region of the anchor head.

ACI Journal No. “Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures (AC1 349-90). ACI SP-103 Anchorage to Concrete. No. 1984. 297-311.1R-60 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE downward displacement of the plate edge. and shear required of the connection are typically quite well defined. Cannon.E. Hanks. profession tends to be quite meticulous with respect to tolerance in the fabrication of structural steel. pp. Office of Inspection and Enforcement. the submittal is the shop drawing and any other certifications required by the construction specifications. November-December. Tennessee Valley Authority. American Concrete Institute Special Publication SP-103. CEB Report No. CA ACI Committee 349. Raphael. Anchorage details are at the interface and provide the connecting link between separate structural systems. and reinforced concrete. “Load Relaxation Tests”. 1987.5-Construction practices CHAPTER 5-CONSTRUCTION SIDERATIONS 5. Robert W. pp. 114-122. “Welded Stud Anchors. Orangun. Proceedings V 59.1 Cast-in-place systems-For cast-in-place systems. San Francisco. 8783. with the specified size and material. ACI Journal Proceedings V. Detroit. T. 5. “A Reevaluation of Test Data on Development Length and Splices. If the anchor is not preloaded. Perry. Accordingly. moment. TN. the engineering concrete. No. Eligehausen. it is important that the field engineer understands the intent of the design.6-REFERENCES Abbot A. 1979. tolerances is expensive and. 277333.. Jirsa.. Jerome M. but somewhat less so in masonry.. Effect of Plate Flexibility on Stud Capacity”. or where carelessness can prove more costly. Details should be designed so that the probability of concrete honeycombing at anchor locations is minimized. Abbot A. 158-165. 471-479. Another concept in establishing tolerances is to weigh the consequences of constructing less accurately than specified.. and Breen. 4. C. J. pp. Hanks Testing Laboratories. Vol. The next step is the requirement for submittals and shop drawings for all anchorages. “Tensile Strength of Concrete”. ACI-ASCE Committee 326.R. 2. 1987. J. R. 1979.C.Kwik-Bolt Testing Program”. “Shear and Diagonal Tension”. TVA. Rolf. 78. and must be accommodated because there is usually no alternative path for load transfer. 3. Burdette.2.. The axial load. required tolerances are limited to what is practical and what “can be covered by the other trades” and still yield an acceptable product. March .April. 79-02. Anchorage to Concrete. 1977. American Concrete Institute. With respect to each anchorage . Sometimes corrective measures can be so expensive that they are not taken and the end product falls far short of what the engineer intended. the preload force will add to the anchor stress resisting applied loads.. 79-18. If the anchor is preloaded to close the gap. The joint has a minimum of redundancy to compensate for error in design or construction. “Appendix B”. Knoxville. to assure that the anchorage be constructed as specified. pp. 4. “Anchorage to Concrete by Metallic Expansion Anchors”.1990. ACI Journal. “Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts”.1 Introduction CON- Design of anchor installations must take into account local construction practice and expected field conditions. File No.355. and having it properly installed. 5. 1962. D. 181-201. IE Bulletin No.O.2 Shop drawings/submittals The first step in quality control is that the plans and specifications must indicate clearly what is intended.. E. This relates to having the proper device. See Chapter 5 for more information. 1981. There are few details in a structure where care during installation pays more dividends. Funk. timber Meeting framing. therefore. Experience has shown that the secondary costs of compensating for the structural skeleton being out of square or out of plumb justify taking great care in the initial fabrication. Quality control is the central issue among construction considerations for anchorage to In construction. Detroit.. the displacement of the stressed anchor will add to the gap requiring closure to develop prying. H2189-S1. Feb. pp. Washington. “Summary Report . United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “Expansion Anchor Performance in Cracked Concrete”.” ACI Journal. pp. 74.G.O. This is also true for anchorage to concrete. Placement tolerances may or may not be critical and should be determined by the application. Report No..

metal. if any.1. Table 5. the shop drawings for the anchorage are included in the shop drawings for the reinforcing steel. They should indicate the type of steel. The acceptable variation from the specified positioning is the tolerance.assembly.4. weld plates.Bolts in cans or blockouts . for machinery foundations or in situations where it is not desirable to have anchor bolts protruding from a slab or penetrating through a wall form.1) can be grouped as follows: . the blockout should be wire tied to the reinforcement so that it will not be vibrated out of position during the placement of the concrete. length. Other sources such as the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) and Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) are available. dimensions and details of the member or group of members in the assembly (location. For vertical surfaces.Bolts or groups of bolts. the cans or blockouts can be positioned by wood battens or templates which have a soffit elevation equal to the grade at topof-concrete and are secured to the edge forms. diameter and thickness of washers.4.1 Cast-in-place systems 5. they can be fastened to the wall form in their predetermined positions. with or without sleeves. and their projection and embedment with respect to the finished concrete grade. After concreting. 5. length of threaded portion. etc. The tolerances should be specified by the engineer and be appropriate for the application. size. a can or blockout will be set at the approximate future bolt location.). number of nuts (single. and torquing requirements. For flatwork. Metal or plastic units are typically left in place. Often an anchor assembly includes embedded structural shapes. Mounting or anchoring certain special equipment may require even closer tolerances. Often. diameter. These requirements are rigorous. When the anchorage consists of embedded dowels of reinforcing steel. either as the anchor itself or as a lower template. can provide a shear key perpendicular to the floor or wall. single or double plus leveling.1 gives suggested tolerances for anchor positioning and can be used as a guide in determining acceptability. the location of the bolts (or devices) in a group.3 Tolerances 5. or be battered to provide a dovetail effect.2 Bolts installed in plastic concrete-Often in wood frame construction the bolts connecting the wood sill to the footing or a wood plate to the top of a wall are installed as soon as the concrete placement is completed. the dimensional details of the grout or drypack should be shown. embedment.Bolts. The shop drawing should also indicate the location of the anchorage in the structure. The pocket is blown clean of debris.1 Anchors Embedded. and projection. the submittal should include the shop drawings with information similar to that required for cast-in-place systems.T h i s system can be used in cast-in-place or postinstalled construction.2. type.4. the anchor bolt positioned and the pocket grouted. its coating. can be cylindrical or prismatic. plus manufacturer’s literature which adequately describes the device and its capabilities and provides instructions for its proper installation. 5. Shop drawings for these embedded shapes should indicate type of steel. In both cases. location (bar or groups of bars). 5.Bolts installed in plastic concrete . and length of welds). These blockouts can be made of wood. or plastic.2 Post-Installed Systems-For post-installed systems.4 lnstatllatlon of anchors 5.Embedded structural shapes 5.3 Bolts in Cans or Blockouts. or both . double. size and location of holes. and embedment depth. or they can be wired to the reinforcement or the edge forms. with or without sleeves. details of bending. positioned by top or bottom templates. cross-sectional shape (standard designation).4. wood blockouts are stripped. or inserts attached to the formwork . but meeting them is judged to be more economical than the consequences of not meeting them.1. . embedments. the shop drawing should indicate the material of the anchoring device. This practice is not recommended because a good bond may not be achieved. When the completed anchorage is specified to be either grouted or dry packed. positioned without template . coating. NonAdjustable-Anchorages that fall into this category (see Table 2.Bolts.1.

(r. in.0 N/A N/A 3. Reinforcing steel 3.or Gbolt. Drilled and grouted-all types 2.1 -Suggested tolerances for installation of anchors in concrete Installed Location L and P are Specified Correct Location Plan “A” Suggested tolerances Type of anchorage Projection P. Cast-in-place 1. Troughs for adjustable anchors 6. in.0 . Common bolt. Expansion types + l/4 k 1/8 f 1/4 Flush with concrete Flush with concrete Flush with concrete Per recommendations of Committee 117 1/8 l/8 l/4 l/2 3.0 2. k /14 I 1/16 I 3. continuously threaded rods /3 Per Plans Positioning r. Vertical Alignment. J.0 3. Temporary embedded inserts B.0 1/16 1/16 3.Table 5. Post-installed 1. Weld plates 5. deg. A. Embedded structural shapes 4.

the annular space around sleeved .1.4. They also affect the capacity of an anchorage and for this reason should only be used where detailed or approved by the Engineer. but if proper care is taken it can be successful. or set in accurately located holes in the template. 5. housing a tapped bottom washer plate and having a sleeve extension up to the surface of the concrete. The superstructure can be erected plumb.1.1. channels. or flat bars. usually angles. 5. the bottom template must provide those controls and should be wire tied or welded. The anchor installation is straightforward but care is required through the use of templates and guides to maintain proper location in plan. Then concrete is cast around the structural shape. The machinery can be moved into place on its base and then the bolts set.7 Embedded structural shapes -This system is used mainly for transmission towers. Sometimes top templates are plywood with the holes either laid out precisely as the holes in the base plate. the anchoring elements. 5. 5. according to approved procedures. The bolt is normally grouted in place at the same time that the equipment base plate is grouted. batter. The use of templates is the best technique for guaranteeing that the anchorage is correctly positioned.8 Adjustable anchors -Anchors of this type are patented devices used principally in flatwork. After concreting. bottom washer. When there is no top template. The top template for a single bolt or a group of bolts generally has a soffit elevation at or above the top of the finished concrete. although in “loose base plate” construction (where the superstructure is subsequently welded or otherwise connected to a steel base plate).9 Common bolts pretensioned -Bolt installation is as described in further detail in Section 5. Tolerance criteria should be met and maintained throughout the concrete placement. Low carbon steel bolts can be precisely positioned and welded directly to the steel template. Bottom templates are expensive and usually reserved for larger diameter bolt installations.5 Bolts. top and bottom. The bolt insert or sleeve should be rigidly tied with wire to the reinforcement. Most often they are used for machinery installation and are designed to compensate for normal field tolerances in the positioning of anchor bolts. and at the proper grade. weld plates or inserts attached to the formwork-This work generally relates to soffit and wall forms. The important step is to accurately scribe the inside of the form for proper location of the anchoring unit. are cast in the footings and the tower or superstructure subsequently bolted to them.6 Bolts or groups of bolts. the base plate itself can be used as the template. or both so that neither internal nor external vibration can disturb or move the anchorage unit out of position. 5.1. because material property changes may compromise expected steel capacities.4. The devices are positioned and held in position during concrete placement in a manner similar to that described for sleeves. to cross bars which in turn are wire tied or tack welded to the existing reinforcement. the bolt head.5. A top template is often wood.4. and set to grade in holes augered in the ground.1. The bottom template is a steel assembly of angles. it is the top template that controls both the bolt projection and lateral position of the group of bolts. or actually drilled using the base plate holes as a guide for the drill. leveled. Alternatively. Engineering approval should be obtained before welding to high-strength bolts or reinforcing bar. The shank of the bolt should be coated with bond breaker before placing concrete. Another features deeply embedded pockets. One features a trough set flush with the surface of the concrete and stud anchored to the concrete below. according to approved procedures. although it has been used for other applications. The principal concern is that the insert be maintained level.1.4.1. or insert is tack welded.4. The anchor unit should then be nailed or bolted to the form or wire tied to the reinforcing steel. They offer an added advantage in that there are no bolts projecting above the floor prior to setting the machinery. and tack welded.5. Where only a top template is used. embedments.4. and plane of batter. When used in conjunction with a top template. Sometimes. positioned without templates-This practice is generally not recommended. the sleeve. where the bolts are vertical. to the reinforcement so that it will be maintained in correct position while the concrete is being placed. with or without sleeve positioned by templates -These installations are generally used in flatwork.4 Anchors with or without sleeve. there should be nuts above and below the template to hold the anchor bolt in a plumb position.

or by hammering a spreader into the bottom expanding portion of the anchor. The adhesives are proprietary and installation should follow manufacturer’s instructions. with an adhesive. When concrete and grout (and dry pack under baseplate) has cured the specified number of days.5 Inspection 5. have the proper projection.1 Cast-in-place systems -The inspector has the responsibility to verify that the size and location of anchors or anchorage assemblies are in accordance with the construction plans and specifications. to the forms or the reinforcement and .Bonded (grout and chemical) anchors . then to 90 percent.2.2. ultraviolet light. After 1 week verify that pretension has held. Section 5. Expansion anchors can lose preload under a cyclic loading or from concrete creep due to high local expansion forces unless they are so pretensioned that the bolt is always in tension under all loading conditions.5 Expansion anchors-These systems include a myriad of devices. 5. The final 10 percent of torque should be applied to all bolts in sequence. 5.2 applies as far as positioning and drilling the lead hole. or vinylester taking the place of the grout. The nut is in place on the bolt. 5. or both from shortening the shelf life of the unused product.5. In the case of excessive slip.2 Common bolts. flush with the end. and be rigidly held in place so as not to be disturbed during the placement and finishing of the concrete.Tack welding to the reinforcement. prior to the placement of concrete.2 applies as far as positioning and drilling the hole for the anchor.0 to 2. Storage should follow manufacturer’s recommendations to prevent heat. Anchoring systems using epoxies are not sensitive to these same storage requirements.355. In the case of the split end variety. polyester. Section 5. threaded rod-Section 5. The wedging action between the device and the sides of the hole is actuated by placing tension on the bolt.Expansion anchors 5. rather than the shank of the bolt.2.6.Nailing to the forms (conditions applicable) . working from one bolt to the one diagonally opposite and thus progressing through the group. Section 5. Some systems afford the opportunity of using the base plate or element being connected as a template in drilling the embedment hole. There are many types available.4. It is then adjusted for vertical alignment and grouted per Section 5. and continuously threaded rods .Nailing the top template to the forms .Wire tying individual bolts. 5. Torque should initially be about 50 percent of desired torque. screw on the nut and apply the pretensioning load with a torque wrench.2. or retension to specified torque.1 General anchor types -Anchors in this group include: Common bolts.5. Drilled hole diameters may vary from 1. such as epoxy. if necessary. 5.4. bondbreaker is applied to part of the shank and then the rock bolt is then inserted in the hole with the wedge lightly set in the split tail of the bolt. Generally. reinforcing bars.2 Post-installed systems 5. (High strength bolts should not be welded) Welding should be to the bottom washer or the bottom template of the bolt head.2.0 mm larger than the nominal steel diameter without affecting loading capacity for polyester and vinylester anchoring systems.4.4. or their bottom template. reinforcing bars.5. to develop the pretension load the wedge or expansion device must first be “set” against the side of the hole.5. by turning the bolt.7. Others require a larger hole to accommodate a sleeve that bears against the bottom of the connected base plate. The manufacturer’s instructions for installation of expansion anchors must be followed meticulously.4.6 for grouting. by hammering the bolt onto a spreader (cone or wedge) in the bottom of the hole.Rock bolts occasionally are used for anchoring to concrete. They are self-drilling. or set in predrilled holes. if approved.Rock bolts .3R-64 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE bolts is grouted. the inspector should verify that . This applies particularly to the diameter and depth of hole.4 Rock bolts .2. In the case of bolts that are subsequently to be tensioned. follow the recommendations in Section 5. Anchors must be located properly in plan. Methods of securing the anchorage in place include: . With certain types of anchors there may be an initial slip which should be anticipated and designed for.2 applies for positioning and drilling the hole.4.3 Chemical anchors-These are similar to grouted anchors. The bolt is then rammed down over the wedge until the bolt is well set in the hole.

preloaded. Epoxy grouts also have been used successfully for a number of years.S. 5. such as the grouting of machinery bases. or the hole should be protected by plugging it with a rag or other suitable stuffing until the time of anchor installation. have a bond breaker (grease or other) on the shank that will prevent the bolt from bonding to the concrete or grout. Jackhammering should not be permitted because of the damage it does to the concrete immediately around the hole. Epoxies also have a coefficient of thermal expansion several times that of the concrete or steel. Dry packing with cement.1. Foundations for Equipment and Machinery. early strength and provide excellent bond and protection of steel in corrosive environments. There are. Epoxies can creep under sustained loading of the anchor.Grouting or dry-packing of base plates and machinery bases . that the hole is plumb to the surface (bit guides should be used for critical work). The statements which follow are intended to be a brief summary of grouting as it relates to construction considerations for concrete anchorages.2 Applications .Grouting of anchor bolt holes and sleeves prior to base plate installation .ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. The use of the “jobsite mixed” or packaged products not designed to perform as a precision The most significant grout has limitations. The concrete and steel surfaces to be in contact with epoxy must be cleaned and. 5. or other debris.2 Mixing and placing-Grouts may be mixed in mortar mixers or in smaller vessels.Grouting materials fall into two broad functional categories: nonprecision grouts and precision. CRD-C621.1R-65 unsleeved bolts. 5. When using proprietary products. but cohesive mixture has been used in grouting for many years and is an excellent method. "Nonshrinking" grout-These portland cement based products are proprietary and sophisticated in terms of their cement chemistry and composition.3.6. the anchor should be installed.1 Nonprecision grouts . reference is made to publications of that committee. limitation is the lack of a mechanism for overcoming drying shrinkage which occurs as free moisture leaves the grout.5. and tested (as required) in accordance with Section 5.6. The “pot” life is a very important consideration.1 Preparation .2 Precision. however. Army Corps of Engineers specifications for nonshrink grouts. includes in its work development of information on grouting.6. but it is labor intensive.6. Guidance for inspecting grouted anchors is given in Section 5. dry. 5.6.1 Materials . Bolt holes should preferably have a textured surface.6. sand. This calls for rotary drills (carbide tip or diamond studded bits) or hand hammered star drill bits.Nonprecision grouts include mixtures of cement and water. Accordingly.Anchor bolt holes and sleeves should be clean and free of oil.3 Construction procedures 5. and in many installations is impractical. thoroughly moistened prior to grouting.6. With drilled holes he should verify that the drill bit is of the proper diameter. dirt. 5.1. Once the hole is drilled and blown clean. Accordingly they are excellent materials to use in complex grouting situations. as is appropriate to the work. follow the manufacturer’s instructions for mixing.2 Post-installed systems -Post-installed systems involve setting the anchor in blockouts or drilled holes. with or without the inclusion of sand or admixtures. 5. some limitations in the use of these materials. The inspector should verify that the blockouts or holes are properly located. 5.6.3. They comply with the requirements of the U. These materials offer high. Proper placement of grout is important.6 -Grouting ACI Committee 351. and only enough water to result in a stiff. which should be taken into consideration.Grouting of anchorages to concrete falls into three application categories: . or sleeved bolts that are to be grouted prior to the tensioning. “nonshrinking” grouts. Precision grouts are proportioned to lessen the effects of plastic and drying shrinkage in the plastic and hardened states.Grouting bolt holes after pretensioning of the anchor bolt 5. but with no free moisture in the hole. Whether dry packed or poured at a fluid .5. that the finished hole has the proper diameter and depth. for most epoxies. and some epoxy grouts lose strength when exposed to temperatures over 120 F. and that the appropriate drilling equipment is used. grease.

oversize . the assembly should be reinstalled in the hole and the pretensioning applied such that the slip does not exceed the allowable limit (i. oversize 5. and that the base plate will not fit in place. because the capacity of the welds and the engaged threads are not additive. diameter .355. or until placement of the second grout. diameter . Moment reinforcement should never be welded or cut. hits steel.1 -Introduction Sources of information relating to codes and specifications on anchorage to concrete are presented in this section. the structural adequacy of the installation should be verified by the Engineer-of-Record and. Proprietary grouts should be cured according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. A second problem is excessive slip in pretensioning the bolt.Bolts over 2 in.3. continue the water curing for 7 days. Sometimes.Bolts 1 to 2 in. the Field Engineer. These problems can and should be avoided by proper inspection. In weighing the consequences of each. or use specially designed washers.5/16 in. The single most helpful practice for avoiding the problem of cast-in-place anchor bolts not fitting the base plates is to make holes in column and machinery base plates oversize. With due consideration. Sometimes the entire anchor will have to be replaced. drilling the hole. The specifications should cover these possibilities.7. Where secondary grouting is to follow. perhaps after consulting the Engineerof-Record. or by use of sleeved or adjustable anchors. Bending of protruding bolts is discouraged because the bending stress which results from the eccentricity of the service load. resulting embedment is adequate).Bolts less than 1 in. The location of that reinforcement can be determined magnetically or radiographically.6.e. Normally this is accomplished by placing water-saturated rags over all exposed grout surfaces as soon as possible after grout placement. it is simply discovered when the drill bit.1 Cast-in-Place Systems-The common problem encountered in the preconcreting stage is interference with existing reinforcement. the design should be modified. . 5. In welding to compensate for insufficient thread being engaged by the nut. Sources are referenced in alphabetical order. the material should be placed or poured in a manner which will preclude the entrapment of air which produces voids in the hardened grout. establishes which has priority. after the concrete has hardened. These rags should be maintained wet and in place for at least 24 hr after which the exposed surface of the grout is coated with a curing compound if secondary grouting will not follow.1 in.7. and then grout the annular space after the base plate is in place. can often exceed the yield strength of the bolt. that the anchorage has shifted during the placement of the concrete. diameter . When an anchorage interferes with any inplace reinforcement.3 Curing-Curing is important in achieving satisfactory results in any grout installation. In this case a decision has to be made whether to move the anchorage or move the reinforcement. care should be taken that the weld acting alone will develop the strength of the bolt.l/2 in. the anchorage itself should be shifted to a new location where there is no interference. temperature reinforcement can be cut. or possibly the hole drilled to a larger size and the next larger sized anchor installed. or that there is insufficient thread projecting to fully engage the nut. . Wherever possible.2 Post-installed systems-A common field problem in post-installed systems is interference with the in-place reinforcement. if necessary. When any embedded anchor is not installed within allowable tolerances. the Engineer-of-Record should decide on the remedy.7 -Field problems 5. American and international documents are included in this state-of-the-art review.. Actions taken when field errors are discovered should have the approval of the Engineer-of-Record. and state that it is the contractor’s responsibility to take necessary precautions and corrective measures. Another common problem is to discover. 5.1R-66 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE consistency. This can be indicative of an oversized hole or a faulty anchoring device. when added to the design axial and shear stresses. When excessive slip occurs. oversize . The following schedule of oversize holes is recommended. CHAPTER 6-REQUIREMENTS IN EXISTING CODES AND SPECIFICATIONS 6.

1. but also other and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings” sets allowable bolt stresses in Sections 1. spacing.Volume 04.. The AISC specification gives allowable values in shear for stud shear connectors used for composite design in Table 1. allowable bond values for plain (smooth) bars. which is also an ACI 318 requirement.2. AASHTO requires that anchor bolts subject to tension be designed to engage a mass of concrete which will provide a resistance equal to one and one-half times the calculated uplift.1 Standard Specification for Highway Bridges -For composite bridge decks. The AISC code commentary contains the following warning: “The values of q in Table 1. steel strength.e.1 states “Any mechanical device capable of developing the strength of reinforcement without damage to concrete may be used as anchorage. Design checks are required for horizontal shear under working loads. 6.1 Manual of Steel Construction -The AISC “Specification for the Design. that many of the post-installed systems feature the brittle concretecone failure. “Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Concrete and Masonry Elements.2. The listed values cannot be used for anchor bolts of the same size. 1.1 Annual Book of Standards .2.6.0. Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete . modes of failure. thickness of the concrete member.3. Working loads are compared to allowable loads which include a reduction for fatigue.7. The current edition of ACI 318 does not give allowable bond values for plain or deformed bars. or 1. AASHTO uses the ultimate capacity of stud shear connectors and a reduction factor t$ of 0.2 -Existing codes and specifications 6.2 ACI 349. Fabrication.5.4 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 6.2. required embedment. nature of the anchor load. Concrete strength is critical to assure that the reinforced concrete structure exhibits ductile failure.2. but no values are given which relate to the transfer of these stresses to the surrounding concrete. Note.2.07 contains test standard ASTM E 488.6. and requires that the anchor bolt be swedged or threaded to insure a satisfactory grip on material such as the grout. and size of anchor bolt on the span of the bridge. The commentary of ACI 349. Appendix B.3 American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) 6.” The AISC specification also gives setting tolerances for bolts used to anchor structural members. 6. these tolerances are unsuitable for anchoring machinery. using a factor of safety of 2.3. provides an excellent source of information on types of anchorage devices.1R-67 6.3 of ACI 318 states “Anchor bolts and mechanical connectors shall be designed to reach their design strength prior to anchorage failure or failure of surrounding concrete.2 and 1. This design method considers not only traditional design parameters.2.11-4. and concrete stress in the anchor zone.85 for design. however. concrete strength. Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Structures-Appendix Related Concrete B of ACI 349 gives comprehensive procedures for designing anchorages and steel embedments that are used to transmit loads from attachments to reinforced concrete structures governed by ACI 349.11-4 must not be confused with shear connection values suitable for use when the required number is measured by the parameter VQ/I.11-5. however. The values used in Table 1. Section 12. The failure mechanism is controlled by requiring yielding of the steel anchor prior to brittle failure of the concrete. Such a misuse could result in providing less than half the number required by Formulas 1.2.” 6. where V is the total shear at any given cross-section. and anchor size.2.11-4 are based on equations derived from a testing program and the ultimate strength of the composite member.1 American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 6. edge distance.ACI 318-63 contained variables such as anchor type or form.” This test standard describes procedures for determining the .2 American Concrete Institute (ACI) 6.8.1 ACI 318.11-4.56 bases the number. design requirements. i. AASHTO Section 1. 6.2.2. Many engineers have used these values for determining embedment requirements for cast-inplace anchor bolts. These values apply to certain cast-in-place and grouted anchor bolts and are valid for allowable anchor steel stresses.” Section 15. and testing.4.11-3.3. The basic philosophy of anchorage requirements in ACI 349 is consistent with the ultimate strength design philosophy of reinforced concrete.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.

but simply states that “Anchor bolts shall be designed to provide resistance to all conditions of tension and shear at the bases of columns. expansion.75 for all lightweight concrete embedment. limitations. in. are covered. These include cast-in-place.1R-68 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE static.355.5. allowable loads. combined tension. and fatigue tensile and shear strengths of cast-in-place.8.CIRA Guide 4. psi nominal tensile capacity of anchor as governed by concrete failure Table 26-G sets forth allowable shear and tension loads for cast-in-place bolts of at least ASTM A In anchor bolt design where the concrete does not fail. 26-G. and tests to evaluate allowable loads for design are performed.2. UBC Section 2719. the PCI Connection Details Committee recommends the use of a projected cone model to define the actual bolt tension at which concrete failure will occur. A 307. The table assumes an anchor spacing of 12 anchor diameters. diameter of anchor or stud head. 6. durability. including A 193.. For reasons of simplicity.6 Institut fir Bautechnik (IfBT)(West Germany) 6. A 449. A safety factor of 3 is applied to the determined 5 percent fractile of the failure loads to account for the variations of the concrete tensile strength and of jobsite installation quality.8 hL@ [fi 7~ ld (li + da] (6. Based on a review of past design methods and actual testing and modeling. specified 28-day compressive strength of concrete. and expansion anchors. 6.1) where iz = 1 = = . = f’. Volume 15.2. 6. and practical considerations.2. . one value for the allowable load is given per anchor size which is valid for all loading directions (tension. A 325. does not provide design values for anchor bolts. 26-G of a minimum spacing of 6 anchor diameters. and shear). Tension values listed in the table may be increased 100 percent when “special inspection” is provided. and spacing). a sufficient number of tests have to be performed to calculate a statistically reliable confidence level for the failure loads [5 percent fractile (or 95 percentile) of failure loads]. The PCI cone surface equation is: Pm = 2. in. In the tests the proper functioning of the anchors under extreme conditions are checked.= d. and bonded anchors. A minimum edge distance of 6 anchor diameters is required.08.” The section on steel column anchorage does not refer to Table No.85 for sand lightweight concrete 0. 6.2. 6. Expected displacements of anchors under allowable loads are given which should be taken into account in the design of the fastened element (when appropriate). shear. required edge distance. and A 490. grouted.. = P = IlC 1.6. 307 quality or better. Application of this table to steel column anchorage would greatly affect current design practice because of the requirement in Table No.2.1 Tests to Evaluate the Strength of Metallic Expansion Bolts for Anchorage in Concrete with an SC of 20 MPa (2500 psi) or Greater-Approvals are based on results of tests carried out by licensed universities.5 Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRA) (Great Britain).7. For evaluating allowable conditions of use (e. the anchor bolt fails via a combination of The PCI equation for tension and shear. dynamic. Edge distance may also be reduced up to 50 percent. design considerations.1 Section and Use of Fixings in Concrete and Masonry (Guide 4) .1 PCI Design Handbook-The handbook gives equations for shear and tension load allowables for headed shear stud anchors. Combined loading.g.8 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) 6. The guide also covers behavior of fastener assemblies under load. testing. is a comprehensive guide on the selection and use of anchors installed in concrete.2. as well as required edge distances and anchor spacing for groups of anchors.2.1 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). on anchor bolts for steel column bases. provided that the listed values are reduced in equal proportion. contains various ASTM specifications for the steel used for bolts. Three main categories of anchor types are covered.7 International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) 6.2. The spacing may be reduced down to 6 anchor diameters with a 50 percent reduction in allowable load values. chemical. Fasteners.0 for normal weight concrete 0.

The NRC requires that during anchor bolt design. ACI 349. 6.e. It considers the effects of different types of loading conditions and typically requires a minimum of 277 tests (for six different anchor diameters) to calculate safe working loads as the lower of: a. It also provides information on the acceptability for NRC licensing actions in accordance with Appendix B. c. U. (i. Concrete expansion anchors must have the following minimum factor of safety between the bolt design load and the bolt ultimate capacity determined from static load tests.2.K. anchor performance in masonry walls. Spain.1 mm (0. the effect of pipe support loads on masonry walls. The mean of the loads determined at a displacement of 1. published data from the anchor bolt manufacturer) which simulate the installation conditions. (2) a safety factor of 5:l . Ireland. design. and inspection for steel embedments anchored in concrete. minimum edge distance.1 The Assessment of Torque-Expanded Anchor Bolts When Used in Dense Aggregate Concrete (M.for wedgeand sleeve-type anchor bolts..2.11 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Bulletin 79-02 and 79-14). Nuclear Regulatory Commission provides the criteria for acceptance. It is not intended to describe design procedures for anchorage connections. 1986) is a European code for the assessment and approval of anchor bolts. of ACI 349-80. Only Class I piping (piping used to safely shut down a nuclear power plant) was impacted by Bulletins 79-02 and 79-14. ICBO has also published a limited test standard for expansion anchors only. and 79-14.2.004 in. 6.O. 6. and proper bolt spacing. then divided by three or.for shell-type anchor bolts. 6.. A summary of the USNRC criteria is found in USNRC “Anchor Bolt Study Data Survey and Dynamic Testing” by the Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory.9.9 The Agrbnent Board (Great Britain) YlC 6. nor to identify characteristics which affect performance in conditions other than astested.10 UEAtc (Union European of Agrbment) The UEAtc Directives for the Assessment of Anchor Bolts (December. The mean of the loads determined at a displacement of 0. Portugal. performance of anchors due to cyclic loading.2. b. No. and Belgium. 79-02 ASTM E 488 is the only existing American standard exclusively and specifically concerned with testing to determine the performance of all types of concrete anchors. Netherlands.0 mm (0. qualification.g. type of concrete and its strength properties): (1) a safety factor of 4:1 . France. (i.) under direct tension or..039 in. The document has been adopted by the Common Market Countries of Germany. T.. Denmark.) under direct shear.S.A.1R-99 combined tension and shear strength is: where 4 = strength reduction factor Pu = applied factored tension load P = nominal tension strength of anchor vu = applied factored shear load Kc = nominal shear strength of anchor as governed by steel failure In-depth discussions of these equations may be found in Klingner and Mendonca (1982) and Shaikh and Yi (1985). Italy. The 5 percent exclusion value (or 95th percentile. Austria. installation. The bolt ultimate capacity should account for the effects of shear and tension interaction.3 -Application and development of codes Anchor bolt design methods have been revised based on the United States NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins No. Other American codes limit their consideration to cast- . (e.12 Draft 1 Regulatory Guide MS 129-4 “Anchoring Component and Structural Supports in Concrete” This draft guide from the U.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355. 19:1981) -This document presents the procedures for deriving design information and classifies ten different types of expansion anchors according to the mechanism for achieving expansion. and the maximum support load considered for anchor bolt design. calculated by regression analysis or other statistical techniques). Appendix B.e. 6. the following must be considered: baseplate flexibility. specifies anchorage design and applies ultimate strength design philosophy to all types of anchorages.2. baseplate prying action that increases anchor bolt loading).

American Society for Testing and Materials. 42:1986. A.355.O. European Union of AgrCment.T. Chicago.” PCI Journal.E. Construction Industry Research and Information Association. “UEAtc directives for the Assessment of Anchor Bolts”. (1982a) “Tensile Capacity of Short anchor Bolts and Welded Studs: A Literature Review. West Germany. Prestressed Concrete Institute. IL.A.ACI 318R89. Berlin.07. March.S. 1980. CA. Fasteners. PA.30. No. Third Edition. Twelfth Edition. Whittier. “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-89) and Commentary . MI.. Uniform Building Code. MI.08.A.. Herts. Proceedings. “The Assessment of Torque-Expanded Anchor Bolts when used in Dense Aggregate Concrete”. NUREG/CR-2999. Manual of Steel Construction. 1985. No. supported by ultimate strength data derived by regression analysis of other statistically reliable techniques. Inc. Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory. 1988. .. 2. Volume 04. Detroit. “Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Concrete and Masonry Elements”. M. V.1989.O. “Standard Specification for Highway Bridges”. (ASTM E488-88). r Bn250). 19:1981.References ACI Committee 318. 1988. January. No. 1977. 1988 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. “Selection and Use of Fixings in Concrete and Masonry”. and Mendonca. October. New York. European codes recommend the criterion of displacement (slip) for post-concreting anchors.P. V. Yi. J.. Volume 15. PA.” ACI Journal. March-April. October. 1977. Designers are encouraged to maintain familiarity with ongoing research and other developments and to supplement the provisions of governing codes with such information as it becomes available. ACI Committee 349. R. American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials. W. Philadelphia. USNRC “Anchor Bolt Study Data Survey and Dynamic Testing”. M. Klingner. American Concrete Institute. 1985. New and technically reliable information will inevitably be developed between publication dates of amendments to existing codes. American Society for Testing and Materials. 6. January. 1980. 1981. 1988 Annual Book of Standards. Watford. in-place or grouted anchorages. “In-Place Strength of Welded Headed Studs.. December.. International Conference of Building Officials. Detroit. Agrkment Board. England. December. “Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures (ACI 349-90) and Commentary . Paterson.ACI 349R-90. 1. 79. 1982. London. Institute for Construction (IfBT).T. Shaikh. Codes cannot address all the conditions applicable to a particular design or absolve the designer of the responsibility to check the relevance of code data for a given design. CIRA Guide 4. W. July-August. No. January 1974.A. The Uniform Building Code (UBC) allows for alternative devices as specified in the code. England. NY. Eight Edition.4 . 1990. 1986. Philadelphia. American codes generally base recommended design procedures on ultimate strength data. PCI Design Handbook.1R-70 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE “Prtifungen zur Beurteilung d e r Tragfghigkeit v o n zwangsweise s p r e i z e n d e n Diibeln aus MetaIl nach d e r Verankerung in Normalbeton 1 Bn 250” (Tests to Evaluate the Load Capacity of Metal Expansion Anchors Fastened into Normal Concrete. November. generally applying the same conditions as specified for cast-in-place anchors. American Institute of Steel Construction. American Concrete Institute.

d/I = head diameter of headed stud or bolt D = anchor diameter DUJ = diameter of anchorage device such as embedded washer. lb or N F. = embedment depth of anchor = distance from anchor centerline to free unsupported edge 1?1 0 A . = applied shear load V.6 to 0.048 x 10-l 9.895 x lo3 6. edge distance influence (x. = allowable anchor tensile load T. in.’ Ab A. = applied tension load T.602 x 10 1.. etc.536 x 10-l 4. also anchor spacing T.356 1.048 x 10-l 3.571 x lo2 m2 m3 m/s m/s2 “An lb f lb$ft2 psi psi ft-lbf lb.7 pnc = bolt tension load at which concrete failure will occur P. = ultimate tensile stress of steel. = compressive strength of concrete measured by cylinders psi or N/mm2 fee = compressive slrength of concrete measured by cubes.788 x 101 6. usually 0. psi f. psi or N/mm2 = yield stress of anchor or bolt. = ultimate strength or capacity. = nominal shear strength of anchor as governed by steel failure = shear strength. APPENDIX B-NOTATION = distance between center of anchors = summation of projected areas of individual stress cones. also design tensile load V.. as from expansion sleeves of an expansion anchor. or applied factored Yl shear load W = crack width usually measured at the concrete surface (Y = included angle of concrete spa11 cone measured from the axis of the anchor to the failure cone surface p = coefficient of friction 4 = strength reduction factor x = chi factor which represents a partial influencing factor such as a load capacity reduction based on anchor spacing interaction (x. psi C’ = clear cover to bolt.1R-71 APPENDIX A-CONVERSION FACTORS: INCH-POUND TO SI By Multiply To obtain Length Area Volume Velocity Acceleration Mass Force and Weight Pressure and Stress ft ft2 ft3 ft/s ft/s2 3. = applied factored tension load S = spreading force. in.048 x 10-l 4.290 x 10-2 2.832 x 1O-2 3.2 = net bearing area of head of embedded anchorage. in. = elastic modulus of concrete. psi fY F. E.)./ft3 lbf/ft3 kg N Pa or N/m2 Pa or N/m2 N/mm2 J kg/m3 N/m3 n = number of anchors N = factor which takes into account steel shear strength..448 4. in.895 x 1O-3 1.). ultimate shear load. psi h = member thickness 1.. = tensile stress area. Work and Energy Mass Density Weight Density This report was submitted to letter ballot of the committee was approved according to Institute procedures. = ultimate wedge-splitting capacity of a singlt bolt r. = ultimate tensile load.ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355..