Aci 355 1R PDF

ACI 355.
1R-91
(Reapproved 1997)
STATE-OF-THE-ART REPORT ON
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE
Reported by ACI Committee 355

Patrick J. Creegan Harry A. Chambers
Chairman Secretary
Edwin A. Burdette Raymond R. Funk Douglas D. Lee George A. Senkiw

Robert W. Cannon C. Raymond Hays Alexander Makitka, Jr. Harry Wiewel
Peter J. Carrato Paul R. Hollenbach Donald F. Meinheit Jim L Williams
Peter D. Courtois Gerard B. Hassehvander Richard S. Orr Richard E. Wollmershauser
Rolf Eligehausen Harry B. Lancelot III* Moorman L Scott
*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, ACI 355.1R-91 became effective JuIy 1, 1991.
planning, executing, or inspecting construction, and in Copyright 0 1991, American Concrete Institute.
preparing specifications. Reference to these documents shall All rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any
not be made in the Project Documents. If items found in form or by any means, including the making of copies by any photo
these documents are desired to be a part of the Project process, or by any electronic or mechanical device, printed or written or
Documents, they should be phrased in mandatory language
oral, or recording for sound or visual reproduction or for use in any
knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless permission in writing is
and incorporated into the Project Documents. obtained from the copyright proprietors.
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Copyright American Concrete Institute

355.1 R-l
Provided by IHS under license with ACI Licensee=Jacobs Engineering ( new WAN ) /3219500102, User=Schoolmeyer, Scott
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 02/05/2007 07:29:17 MSTs/org1
355.1R-2 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 -INTRODUCTION

1.1-Purpose
Chapter 1-Introduction, p 355.1R-2 The purpose of this document is to summarize
1.1 Purpose the current state of the art in anchorage to
1.2 Significance of the subject concrete.
1.3 Scope
1.2-Significance of the subject
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Chapter 2-Types of anchoring devices, To date, anchorage to concrete has received

p 355.1R-2 little attention in structural codes. Emphasis has
2.1 Introduction been primarily on the tensile and shear capacities
2.2 Scope of anchorage devices. As designs became more
2.3 Anchor systems sophisticated and analyses more exacting, more
2.4 Cast-in-place systems emphasis was placed on the transfer of loads
2.5 Post-installed systems through single anchors and anchor systems. It was
recognized that performance of anchors controlled
Chapter 3-Behavior of anchors, p 355.1R-9 these load transfers, and that generally, failure
3.1 Introduction modes at ultimate anchor capacities were
3.2 Behavior of anchors in uncracked concrete important. There were no definitive design codes
3.3 Behavior of anchors in cracked concrete or anchorage performance criteria on which
3.4Behavior of cast-in-place anchor bolts in designers and installers could rely. Subsequently,
uncracked concrete piers a myriad of approaches were developed.
3.5 References
1.3-Scope
Chapter 4-Design considerations, This state-of-the-art report summarizes anchor
p 355.1R-53 types and provides an overview of anchor per-
4.1 Introduction formance and failure modes under various loading
4.2 Functional requirements conditions in both uncracked and cracked con-
4.3 Materials crete. It covers design and construction
4.4 Design basis considerations and summarizes existing require-
4.5 Construction practices ments in codes and specifications. References are
4.6 References given for further review.
Chapter 5-Construction considerations, CHAPTER 2 -TYPES OF ANCHORING

p 355.1R-60 DEVICES
5.1 Introduction 2.1-Introduction
5.2 Shop drawings/submittals There are many types of devices used for
5.3 Tolerances anchoring structures or structural members to
5.4 Installation of anchors concrete. The design of anchorages, involving the
5.5 Inspection selection and positioning of these devices has been
5.6 Grouting based on the Engineer’s experience and judgment,
5.7 Field problems private test data, manufacturers’ data, and existing
(sometimes obsolete) code requirements. It is
Chapter 6-Requirements in existing codes proposed to promote a design of anchorages that
and specifications, p 355.1R-66 more consistently reflects the performance
6.1 Introduction potential of each type of anchor.
6.2 Existing codes and specifications
6.3 Application and development of codes 2.2-Scope
6.4 References This report relates to the most widely used
types of anchor, in sizes ranging from 1/4 in. (6.35
Appendix A-Conversion factors, p 355.1R-71 mm) to 2 l/2 in. (63.5 mm) in diameter. Included
for consideration are only those devices which can
Appendix B-Notations, p 355.1R-71 generally be considered bolt and insert-type

ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1R-3
anchors. Excluded from consideration are shear 2.4-Cast-in-place systems

lugs, structural shapes, powder actuated fasteners, 2 . 4 . 1 - Embedded Anchors, Non -
light plastic or lead inserts, hammer driven Adjustable - These anchors may have an end
concrete nails, screw driven systems, and cables. attachment, such as a coil loop, head, nut, or
These are excluded because there is a paucity of plate, which will enhance anchorage properties
test data regarding their performance. The and develop full potential strength by means of
anchors included in this report are either bond, and/or bearing, or both. Typical examples
commercially available or may be fabricated. of these anchors are:
2.3-Anchor Systems Common bolts - structural steel bolts

According to present practice, there are two placed with the head into
broad groups of anchoring systems: cast-in-place the concrete. (Fig. 2.1)
systems (anchors installed before the concrete is Hooked
cast) and post-installed systems (anchors installed "J" or "L" bolts -bent, smooth or deformed
in holes drilled after the concrete has been cast threaded bars. Have been
and cured). Table 2.1 identifies these two groups known to straighten out in
of anchors. pull-out tests. (Fig. 2.2)
Threaded rod - straight threaded rod,
Table 2.1 -Types of anchors in concrete usually with coarse
threads. (Fig. 2.3)
Cast-in-place systems Reinforcing steel - Stock or trade-name rein-
Embedded, nonadjustable
forcing bar (Fig. 2.4)
Threaded inserts - wire form or internally
Common bolts Fig. 2.1 threaded ferrule inserts,
Hooked "J" & "L" bolts Fig. 2.2 or coils, usually manu-
Threaded rod Fig. 2.3 factured with internal or
Reinforcing steel Fig. 2.4
Threaded inserts Fig. 2.5
external threads, with wire
Stud-welded plates Fig. 2.6 loop struts. Headed
Bolted connections Fig. 2.7 anchors made from
Adjustable anchors Fig. 2.8 smooth or reinforcing
steel bar also fall into this
Post-installed systems
category. (Fig. 2.5)
Bonded anchors Stud welded plates - steel plates which have
Grouted anchors smooth bent hooked bars,
Headed bolts or anchor Fig. 2.9 deformed bars, or headed
stud anchors. (Fig. 2.6)
Chemical anchors
With threaded rod Fig. 2.10
With reinforcing steel Fig. 2.11 2.4.2 Bolted connections-These anchors consist
of headed bolts, as embedded or through-
Expansion anchors connectors. (Fig. 2.7).
Torque-controlled
Heavy-duty sleeve anchor Fig. 2.12
Sleeve anchor Fig. 2.13 Plastic
Shell expansion anchor Fig. 2.14
Wedge anchor Fig. 2.15
Rock/concrete expansion
anchor Fig. 2.16
Deformation controlled
Drop-in anchor Fig. 2.17
Self-drilling anchor Fig. 2.18
Stud anchor Fig. 2.19
L Steel
plate
Undercut
With predrilled under-cut
hole Fig. 2.20
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Self undercutting Fig. 2.20 Fig. 2.7-Bolted connections

355.1R4 MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
P
Washer tack welded
. -
Note : E i t h e r ' J ' o r ' L ' ’ b o I ts c a n be made

Fig. 2.1- Common bolts from plain or threaded rod
Fig. 2.2-J- and L-bolts (not recommended)
.
b v * Fig. 2.4 -Reinforcing steel
Fig. 2.3 - Threaded rod

--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
a *
‘X .
.. v * .
B
Fig. 2.5 - Threaded inserts
We I d
Fig. 2.6 - Stud- welded plates

2.4.3 Adjustable anchors-Adjustable anchors 2.5.1.2 Chemical anchors-Chemical anchors

can be adjusted for lateral position or depth (Fig. are usually threaded rods (Fig. 2.10) or deformed
2.8). They are normally used for attaching large bars (Fig. 2.11) which are bonded in place with
machines or equipment bases. On thin floor slabs, two-part chemical compounds of polyesters,
the anchor bolt often goes through the concrete to vinylesters, or epoxies. The chemicals are
develop the required anchor capacity. When the available in four forms: glass capsules, plastic
floor slab or foundation is very thick, the anchor cartridges, tubes, or bulk.
can develop full capacity and still be embedded in Glass capsules are inserted into the drilled hole,
the concrete. After the equipment or machine and then broken by the anchor rod when it is ro-
base is installed and leveled, grout is used to fill tated and hammered into place, thereby mixing
the void around the anchor. The anchor then acts two components to cause a chemical reaction.
similar to a cast-in-place anchor. The plastic cartridges are used with a dispenser
and a mixing nozzle which mixes the two parts,
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
initiating a chemical reaction while installing the

compound into the drilled hole. The anchor rod
is then inserted into the hole completing the
installation. The setting time is dependent on
temperature, varying from a few minutes at 90o F
up to several hours at 30o F.
The tube or “sausage” type contains two
components which are mixed by kneading the
tube, placing the mixture into the hole, and finally,
inserting the anchor rod into the hole.
The bulk systems predominantly use epoxies,
. which are either premixed in a pot and used
4
immediately, or pumped through a mixer and
P -
injected into the hole. The anchor is installed
Fig. 2.8-Adjustable anchors immediately afterward. Epoxies can be form-
ulated to set up quickly or slowly (up to 36 hr
2.5-Post-installed s y s t e m s curing time).
These anchors are installed in a hole drilled in
the cured concrete. There are two basic groups of
post-installed systems: bonded and expansion.
2.5.1-Bonded anchors
2.5.1.1 Grouted anchors-Grouted anchors are
headed or headless bolts or threaded rods. They
are set in predrilled holes with portland cement
and sand grout or other commercially available in or
premixed grout. (Fig. 2.9) * .v chemical from capsule
Fig. 2.10-Chemical anchor with threaded rod

2.5.2 Expansion anchors-Expansion anchors 2.5.2.2 Sleeve anchors- The sleeve anchor
are designed to be inserted into predrilled holes consists of a steel stud, an expansion sleeve usually
and then expanded by either tightening the nut made of sheet metal, and a nut and washer (Fig.
(torque controlled expansion anchor, Sections 2.13). The bottom of the steel stud has a
2.5.2.1 to 2.5.2.5), hammering the anchor uniformly tapered mandrel which has the same
(deformation controlled expansion anchor, diameter at the end as the expansion sleeve. The
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Sections 2.5.2.6 to 2.5.2.8), or expanding into an entire length of the bolt below the washer is
undercut in the concrete (undercut anchors, enclosed in a section or sections of the steel
Section 2.5.2.9). These anchors transfer the tubing. The bottom of the expansion sleeve is slit
tension load from the bolt to the concrete by longitudinally to provide for expansion. When the
expansion pressures or forces through friction nut is tightened, the tapered mandrel moves into
and/or keying against the side of the drilled hole. and expands the sleeve which in turn bears against
They often are supplied with a bolt, nut, and the wall of the hole. This anchor is used for
washer. The following sections describe the medium and light holding requirements.
various types of expansion anchors.
2.5.2.1 Heavy duty, torque controlled sleeve
anchor-This type of anchor consists of a bolt or
threaded rod with nut and washer on one end and
a cone on the embedded end, (Fig. 2.12). Around
the cone is a heavy expansion sleeve. Above the
sleeve is a collapsible mechanism, sometimes made .
of plastic. A spacer sleeve extends to the surface .
of the drilled hole. The anchor is set by tight- Fig. 2.13 - Sleeve anchor
ening the bolt head or nut which draws the cone
up through the expansion sleeve, expanding it 2.5.2.3 Shell expansion anchors - The shell
against the side of the drilled hole. The anchor expansion anchor, (Fig. 2.14) is available in two
develops its tensile capacity by means of a combi- types. One type consists of a two-piece shell held
nation of keying into the concrete and high together by steel tabs with a tapered, internally
friction between the sleeve and concrete. The threaded end plug. The second type consists of a
spacer sleeve aids in increasing the shear capacity. two-piece shell section with two tapered steel
Tensile capacity depends on the strength of the cones, one at the top end and one at the bottom,
bolt and its depth of embedment. which are held together by a steel spring at the
center. The bottom cone is internally threaded to
BEFORE TORQUING AFTER TORQUING accept a bolt or stud. By torquing the fastener
into the anchor, the steel cones expand the shell
to bear against the wall of the hole.
Single-acting Double acting

(shell expanded (shel expanded
by single wedge nut) by opposing wedge)
Fig. 2.14 - Shell expansion anchor
2.5.2.4 Wedge anchors-The wedge anchor,

(Fig. 2.15) consists of a steel stud bolt with a nut
Fig. 2.12 - Heavy-duty, torque-controlled sleeve
anchor
and washer. The bottom of the steel stud has a 2.5.2.6 Drop-in anchors-The drop-in anchor
uniform tapered mandrel around which is posi- consists of a steel shell and an internal steel
tioned an expandable steel clip or separate steel expander plug (Fig. 2.17). The anchor is internally
wedges with protrusions. When the nut is threaded at the top end while the internal end is
tightened, the clip or steel wedges ride up on the machined to a uniform taper, matching the shape
tapered mandrel, wedging between the mandrel of the steel plug inside the anchor. The lower
and the wall of the hole. portion of the shell is slit longitudinally into equal
segments to allow the anchor to expand when the
BEFORE AFTER internal plug is hammered with a setting tool. By
TORQUING TORQUING
hammering the plug into the shell, the lower
portion of the shell expands to bear against the
wall of the hole.
BEFORE AFTER
Fig. 2.15- Wedge anchor

2.5.2.5 Rock/concrete expansion anchor-The
rock/concrete expansion anchor, (Fig. 2.16) con-
sists of a stud bolt that is threaded on the top end
for a hex nut. The bottom end consists of a large Fig. 2.17-Drop-in anchor
mechanical expansion anchor. To set the expan-
sion anchor, the stud bolt is rotated in a clockwise 2.5.2.7 Self-drilling anchors-The self-drilling
direction. Grouting is optional down the center of anchor, (Fig. 2.18) consists of a steel shell and a
the bolt to fill the annular space between the rod tapered steel end plug. The bottom of the shell
and the drilled hole for corrosion protection. has teeth for cutting its own hole in the concrete.
The top of the shell is internally threaded to
Grout hole accept a bolt or stud. The bottom of the shell is
Threaded rob expanded by hammer drilling the anchor over the
steel plug. The plug expands the bottom of the
Nut
shell which bears against the wall of the drilled
Air tube hole.
Plate BEFORE AFTER
Hollow bar
Grout hole
Thrust rl
b
Mal leable
e shell 0.
Fig. 2. I6 - Rock/concrete expansion anchor

(grouted) Fig. 2.18 -Self-drilling anchor
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

355.1R-9
2.5.2.8 Stud anchors -The stud anchor con- bolt and tapered cone are drawn up into the
sists of a steel stud, threaded at the top end, and expansion sleeve, keeping the bottom of the
has a drilled hole with longitudinal slits at the expansion sleeve in the undercut.
A
bottom end, which accepts a tapered steel plug

(Fig. 2.19). The top of the threaded section is AFTER
BEFORE
raised to provide a surface for hammering. By
hammering the top of the stud, the tapered plug
expands the bottom end of the bolt causing it to
bear against the wall of the hole.
BEFORE AFTER
b
4 v- v -
. . v
. n .
. 4
.
D .
V
Q *
’ .
. .
.
t
A .b
V .v I
.
Q V’
Fig. 2.19 - Stud anchor
2.5.2.9 Undercut anchors-There are two

primary designs of undercut anchors available Fig. 2.20 - Undercut anchor
(Fig. 2.20). They all operate by keying and
bearing against an undercut in the concrete at the CHAPTER 3-BEHAVIOR OF ANCHORS
bottom of the drilled hole. They cause little or no 3.1 - Introduction
expansion force in the concrete, but generate high Understanding anchor behavior is necessary in
tensile-loading capacities. specifying the appropriate anchorage for a given
The first type requires a second drilling application. This includes an understanding of
operation to create an undercut at the bottom of failure modes and strengths as well as load-
the first drilled hole. The anchor is installed with displacement and relaxation characteristics of
the bottom of the expansion sleeve at the under- various anchor types. This chapter covers anchor
cut. When the nut is tightened, the tapered behavior in uncracked concrete and in cracked
expander plug expands the bottom of the steel concrete.
expansion sleeve into the undercut. Anchors are primarily loaded through
The second type cuts its own undercut at the attachments to the embedded anchor. The
bottom of the drilled hole. A sleeve is hammered loading can be in tension and shear or
by a rotary hammer drill with a special setting combinations of tension and shear (Fig. 3.1).
tool. The bottom of the expansion sleeve is driven They may also be subjected to bending depending
over a cone at the bottom of the hole. The on the details of shear transfer through the
bottom of the expansion sleeve has a sharp edge attachment. The behavior of anchors in tension is
which, on expansion, cuts its own undercut into of primary importance and will be discussed first.
the wall of the hole. By tightening the nut, the
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

combined tension
tension loading and shear loading
[ shear loading bending
Fig. 3.1 -Possible loadings of anchors
By far, most anchor testing to date has been The various types of anchors have different dis-
performed in uncracked concrete. While cracking placement characteristics depending on preload,
occurs in almost all concrete, testing in uncracked load transfer mechanism, and failure mode. Fig.
concrete provides the basis for understanding 3.3(a)-3.3(c) present three load-displacement
anchor behavior. graphs. Fig. 3.3(a) gives the characteristic curves
for headed and undercut anchors while Fig. 3.3(b)
3.2-Behavior of anchors in uncracked presents curves for torque-controlled, drop-in, and
concrete self-drilling expansion anchors. Fig. 3.3(c) gives
3.2.1 Load-displacement behavior and failure load displacement curves for adhesive anchors.
modes under tension loading- The five primary The displacements shown represent the displace-
failure modes of anchors in tension are (Fig. 3.2): ment (slip) of the embedded anchor and the de-
(a) Steel failure formation of the concrete as well as the defor-
(b) Pull-out failure mation of the anchor.
(c) Concrete splitting failure When a preload is applied to an anchor,
(d) Concrete cone failure typically by tightening the nut to a prescribed
(e) Spacing and edge cone failure moment torque, the displacement caused by an
externally applied load is affected. The preloaded
a) steel failure b) pull-out failure c) concrete splitting failure
d) concrete cone failure e) spacing and edge cone failure
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Copyright American Concrete Institute Fig. 3.2 - Typical failure modes of anchors loaded in tension
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
l o a d F [kN] load F [kN]
0 2 4 6 8
d i s p l a c e m e n t s [mm]
4 6 8 10
Displacement s [mm]
I I Iine anchor type bolt diameter anchorage depth
mm mm I
Fig. 3.3(a) - Typical load-displacement relationships Fig. 3.3(b) - Typical load-displacement relationships
of headed and undercut anchors (from Rehm, of expansion anchors under tension loading (from
Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988) Eligehausen and Pusill-Wachtsmuth 1982)
d i s p l a c e m e n t [mm]
Fig. 3.3(c)- Typical load-displacement behavior of chemical anchors under tension and shear loading (from
Eligehausen and Pusill- Wachtsmuth 1982)
anchor shows little displacement with increasing comparison to torque-controlled expansion and
external loading until the preload in the anchor drop-in anchors, the bond strengths vary con-
(and resulting clamping force on the concrete) is siderably depending on the adhesive component
overcome. The preload has no effect on the ulti- mix used and the installation procedure.
mate static tensile capacity of the anchorage, but Under working loads all categories of anchors
significantly reduces the anchor total displacement. should behave elastically with little additional
In the case of steel failure (Fig. 3.3(a), Line 3) displacement after installation. However, at
the ductility depends on the relationship between ultimate load a plastic behavior and in the case of
tensile strength and yield strength of the steel and cyclic loading only a limited strength degradation
the anchor length. Inelastic displacements of is desired. Fig. 3.3(a)-3.3(c) show that the actual
headed anchors due to concrete deformations load-displacement behavior of the currently
under the head may be expected at relatively low available expansion, undercut, adhesive, and
loads unless preloaded. Increasing the bearing headed anchors differs somewhat from this plastic
area under the head may reduce inelastic displace- behavior.
ments but will have little influence on the failure Under sustained loads displacements will
load [compare Lines 1 and 2 in Fig. 3.3(a)]. increase with time due to creep of concrete in the
Headed anchors that fail due to fracture of the highly stressed load transfer area (bearing area in
concrete will exhibit a brittle failure (Fig. 3.3(b), the case of headed or undercut anchors, contact
line 2). area in the case of expansion anchors, bonded
The behavior of drop-in anchors is dependent area in the case of adhesive or grouted anchors).
on the magnitude of the expansion force created As an example, in Fig. 3.4 (see Seghezzi and
in setting the anchor. When expanded properly Vollmer, 1982) the displacements of a torque-
during installation, high expansion forces are controlled expansion anchor loaded with a
induced and the load displacement curve may constant tensile force corresponding to approx-
remain almost linear up to failure [Fig. 3.3(b), imately 70 percent of the static ultimate strength,
Line 2). are plotted as a function of load duration on a
The expansion force, at installation, of torque- double logarithmic scale. It can be seen that the
controlled expansion anchors is smaller than that displacement velocity (tangent to the
of drop-in anchors and, therefore, the displace- displacement-time curve) decreases with increasing
ments are larger for equal loads. If the external time and, therefore, the displacements approach a
load exceeds the preloading force in the bolt limiting final value. The increase in displacements
generated by the torquing during installation, the is smaller for lower sustained loads. If the load is
spreading cone is pulled further into the sleeve, increased after a sustained load test, the displace-
leading to increased displacement. At failure the ment curve is rather steep until it reaches the
deformations are much larger than for comparable static envelope which is followed thereafter. Fail-
ure load and displacement at maximum load are
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
drop-in anchors [Fig. 3.3(b)].

Self-drilling anchors show larger displacements not negatively influenced by a previous sustained
in the total load range than torque-controlled load smaller than about 70 to 80 percent of the
expansion and drop-in anchors [Fig. 3.3(b)]. This static failure load.
happens because load transfer is mainly by
mechanical interlock which causes high pressure
on the concrete and large concrete deformations.
The displacement behavior of undercut anchors
depends primarily on the bearing area (undercut
area) and the installation torque. Therefore
relatively large deformations may be expected with
some undercut anchors while others exhibit elastic
behavior well above service load [Fig. 3.3(a)].
Adhesive anchors exhibit elastic behavior up to
nearly maximum load [Fig. 3.3(c)]. While the
load-displacement curves of adhesive anchors
exhibit relatively low coefficients of variation in 10* 10 10 2
Duration [Days]
Fig. 3.4 -Increase of displacement during sustained
loading
In principle, 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, both of which
are tension) smaller than about 50 percent of the
static failure load (provided no fatigue failure of
the bolt occurs). For higher upper loads the dis-
placements may increase significantly and a fatigue
failure of the concrete might occur (Rehm,
Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988).
Sustained and cyclic loadings in the working-
load range have the same influence on dis-
placements and ultimate loads of headed anchors
as for expansion and undercut anchors.
3.2.2 Relaxation -If headed anchors are pre-
loaded, the initial force induced in the anchor is
0
0
I
10 20 30
I
40 50
I
60 70
I
reduced with time due to creep of the highly Time [Days]
stressed concrete under the anchor head. The Fig. 3.5 -Reduction of preload as a function of time
final value of the tension force in the anchor (after Burdette, Perry, and Funk 1987)
depends primarily on the value of bearing stresses
under the head, the concrete deformation and the
anchorage depth. In typical cases the value of
that final force will approach 40 to 80 percent of
the initial preload (40 percent for short anchors,
80 percent for long anchors).
Torque-controlled expansion anchors are
usually preloaded by tightening the nut during
installation. This preload is essential for the
proper performance of such anchors. In a typical
installation, locally high concrete stresses are
created around the embedded anchor wedges or
1 i.I
Torque Controlled Expansion Anchor M12
I
I I
expansion devices as the anchor is preloaded.
Creep of concrete under these high stresses results
0
0 2,5 5,0 7,5 10
I
12,5
in a slight movement of the embedded anchor, Time [h]
and in turn, in a reduction in the load in the bolt. Fig. 3.6 -Influence of retorquing on the final value
Fig. 3.5 shows a typical load-relaxation test of preload (from Seghezzi and Vollmer 1982)
(Burdette, Perry, and Funk 1987). Preload is
plotted as a function of time. The shape of the Chemical anchors are usually preloaded by
curve is essentially the same for all anchors applying a predefined torque. Because of the high
(including headed anchors). There is an stresses in the adhesive bond, the preload force in
exponential drop-off of load immediately after the the anchor declines faster and the final value is
applied tension is released, followed by a less than for torque-controlled expansion and
continued gradual diminishing of the load over an headed anchors.
indefinite period. It is estimated that the final Long-term relaxation and creep has been
preload will be about 40 to 60 percent of the investigated in several studies. Four Ml6
initial value. This is confirmed by other test data diameter polyester anchors tested at loads of 25,
(Seghezzi and Vollmer 1982, and Wagner-Grey 30, 38, and 40 kN (6, 7, 8.5, and 9 kips), showed
1976). After retorquing the anchors, the process displacements still increasing after 5 years, but
of load relaxation starts again, however, the final ranging from 0.090 to 0.140 mm (0.0036 to 0.056
value of the preload is increased (Fig. 3.6). in.)(Elfgren, Anneling, Eriksson, and Granlund
Retorquing even a short time after anchor in- 1988). Creep tests were also performed on 26
stallation can be effective (Wagner-Grey 1976). Ml6 anchors for 3 years at various loads and
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

environmental conditions. At allowable working

loads of 15 kN (3.4 kips), anchors tested indoors
showed small creep, 0.10 to 0.40 mm (0.004 to
0.016 in.). However, anchors tested outdoors number
exhibited continually increasing creep. Those of specimens
tested indoors at 30- and 45- kN (7 and 10 kips),
loads exhibited continually increasing creep. A 4 10 -
month test on epoxy anchors showed creep less

than 0.009 in. (0.2 mm) (Wiewel 1989). STEEL FAILURE
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers performed 5-
creep tests on polyester and epoxy anchors,

subjecting the anchors to 60 percent of the anchor
steel yield strength for 6 months. Cement and
epoxy grouted specimens exhibited low slippage,
0.0013 to 0.0008 in. (0.03 to 0.02 mm), while
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Fig. 3.7-Ratio of actual to predicted tensile capacity
polyester anchors exhibited approximately 30 times
according to Eq. (3.1) for steel failure (after Klingner
as much movement, 0.008 to 0.024 in. (0.2 to 0.6
and Mendonca 1982)
mm) (Best, Floyd, and McDonald 1989).
3.2.3 Ultimate strength in tension
3.2.3.1 Steel failure -The strength of anchor
steel controls failure when the embedment of the 3.2.3.2 Concrete cone failure -When the
anchor is sufficient to preclude concrete failure embedment of an anchor or group of anchors is
and when the spreading forces are sufficiently high insufficient to develop the tensile strength of the
(expansion anchors) or the bearing area is suffi- anchor steel, a pullout cone failure of the concrete
ciently large (headed and undercut anchors) to [see Fig. 3.2(d)] is the principal failure mode.
preclude an anchor slip failure. The failure mode When the spacing of anchors or location of an
[Fig. 3.2(a)] is rupture of the anchor steel with edge [Fig. 3.2(e)] interferes with the development
ductility dependent on the type of anchor steel of the full cone strength of an anchor, its capacity
and embedment length. The ultimate strength can will be reduced.
be determined from Eq. 3.1. The angle of the failure cone, measured from
the axis of the anchor, varies along the failure
F u = 4 x f,,, lb (3 .1) surface and shows considerable scatter. In ACI
349, Appendix B, ACI Committee 349,1985) the
where angle of the failure cone of headed and expansion
As = tensile stress area, in.* anchors is assumed as 45’. According to Cannon*,
f ut = ultimate tensile strength of steel, psi in the case of expansion anchors the angle varies
from about 60’ for short embedments (Id ( 2 in)
For given material properties and anchor to 45O for 1, 2 6 in. According to Rehm,
dimensions this case defines the upper limit for Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988, the angle varies
the tensile-load-carrying capacity. between approximately 50° and 60”, (mean value
Fig. 3.7 shows a comparison of the failure loads 5S”) and tends to decrease with increasing
of headed anchors measured in tests to the values anchorage depth.
predicted by Eq. 3.1. Because the theoretical The following formulas have been developed to
failure load was calculated with the nominal steel describe behavior of headed studs, expansion, and
strength, the ratios of actual to predicted tensile undercut anchors.
capacity are larger than one.
*Cannon, Robert W., correspondence to ACI Committee 355, Nov.

1986.
Cannon, Robert W., correspondence to ACI Committee 355, Sept.
1988.
This correspondence is filed at ACI
ACI headquarters and is available
at cost of reproduction and handling at time of request.

ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE 355.1
R-1 5
ACI 349, Appendix B, limits the tensile capacity If an anchor is installed too close to an edge,
of the cone failure of an anchor, or wup. of the anchor will fail before developing the concrete
anchors, to a uniform stress of 4 +d$ (psi) on cone strength. Therefore, for headed anchors,
the stress cone surface of the anchors. ACI 349 requires that the minimum edge distance
m to the center of the anchor be sufficient to
prevent a side cone failure. The following
(3.2) equation is suggested in the ACI 349 Commentary
for determining this minimum value.
strength reduction factor
0.85 for uncracked concrete m , in.
= 0.65 in zone of potential (3.3)
cracking
A = the summation of the projected where
areas (in.2) of individual stress
cones minus the areas of over- D = anchor diameter, in.
lap and of any area, or areas, F = ultimate tensile strength of anchor, psi
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
cut off by intersecting edges. f 'c = compressive strength of concrete, psi

Note: Other reductions are made based on
member thickness relative to embedment and the If this requirement cannot be satisfied, stirrup
area of fabricated anchor heads (see Fig. 3.8). or tie reinforcement should be provided.
ACI 349 has no requirements for minimum Cannon+ found that for embedments less than
center-to-center spacing of single anchors or 6 in., ACI 349 becomes increasingly conservative
anchors belonging to a group. with decreasing embedment. He has proposed a
Fig. 3.9 shows the frequency diagram of the modification to Eq. (3.3) to provide a better fit to
ratio of actual to Predicted tensile capacity of test data. For embedments less than 6 in., this
headed anchors. Theoretical capacity was modification would increase the angle of the
calculated according to Eq. (3.2). The tests were failure cone, measured from the axis of the
described by Klingner and Mendonca (1982a), and anchor.
were evaluated by Cannon*. Tested were
individual anchors with large and small edge For 1, c 3 in.: cy = 62 - 1.1 (l#, deg (3 3
distances and anchor groups. In all tests a For ld 2 3 in. but < 6 in.: (Y = 45 + 0.79 (6-ld) ,
concrete cone failure occurred. deg (3 . 5)
With respect to the minimum edge distance he

-A Frequency [%]
reported the results of tests which indicated a
n = 45 tests direct relationship between anchor load and side
5i = 1,14 cone failure.** He suggested Eq. (3.6) instead of
v = 26 O/o Eq. (3.3) as a more correct lower bound for the
20 edge distance for headed anchors:
m
10
F ut = ASTM-specified tensile strength of the

anchor bolt, kips
1,5 2,0 2,5
Fu,test /Fu,pred *Cannon, private correspondence, 1988, previously cited (see
footnote p 14).
Fig. 3.9 -Ratio of actual to predicted tensile capacity +Cannon, private correspondence, 1986, previously cited (see
footnote p 14).
of headed anchors according to Eq. (3.2) (from
**Cannon, Robert W., Letter to ACI 355, “Comparison of Testing
Cannon, 1984 **) Edge Conditions and Anchor Spacing with Predictions”, Dec. 1984.

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

Fig. 3.8-ACI 349 method for determining effective stress areas
The average failure load for a side cone mm (1 9/16 to 20 l/2 in.) and concrete strengths
(bursting) failure is given as: f’, = 20 to 50 N/mm2 (2900 psi to 7150 psi). Fig.
3.11 shows a histogram of the ratio of measured to
f predicted failure load.
- kips (3.7)
F, = 15m
35cCo’
The average failure loads given in Eq. (3.8) can
where only be obtained if the distances between anchors
are large enough so that concrete cones do not
m = actual edge distance, in. overlap each other. Assuming an angle of the
failure cone cy = 55o the critical distance is
For expansion and undercut anchors, approximately three times the embedment depth.
Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer (1987 and 1988), The failure load of a two-point fastening results
derived Eq. (3.8a) from 287 test series with single in:
anchors with large edge distances showing
concrete cone failure. G = xcr x F,, (3.9)
where
(3.8a)
F ul = ultimate failure load, single
where anchor, from Eq. (3.8)
Fu = average ultimate load, N

‘d = embedment depth (see Fig. 3.10), mm & = 1 +a/a,,it I 2 (3.10)
f’, = average compressive strength of con-
crete cylinders (6 by 12 in.) at time of
testing, N/mm2 where
a = distance between center of

anchors
a crit = critical distance between center
of anchors
= 31,, where 1d is the depth of
embedment.
Eq. (3.9) leads to the x-method for calculating

the ultimate capacity of multiple anchor fasten-
ings. For the calculation of the ultimate load of
quadruple fastenings the xa factors can be derived
Fig. 3.10 -Illustration of embedment depth as used separately for both directions and combined in
in Eq. (3.8a) and (3.86) product form as follows.
Results of an additional 196 tests on headed FIA4 = %a1 x Xd x Fur (3.11)

studs showed a similar relationship (from Rehm,
Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988).
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
xai
= 1 + ai(acd 5 2 (3.12)
(3.8b)
where
In the original equation the concrete strength
was measured on cubes with a side length of 200 a.I = spacing in direction i
mm (8 in.). Eq. (3.8a) and (3.8b) assume f 'c
(cylinder) = 0.82 f 'cc (cube).
The tests with expansion, undercut and headed
studs included anchorage depths from 40 to 525

Frequency [%]
40
n = 196 individual tests
si= 1 0 0
v= 1 4 %
30
I
20
10
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

$, test ’ %,pred Fu, test /Fu, pred
Fig. 3.11 (a) -Ratio of acutual to predicted tensile Fig. 3.11(b) -Ratio of actual to predicted tensile
capacity for concrete cone failure of individual capacity for concrete cone failure of individual
expansion and undercut anchors away from edges headed anchors away from edges according to Eq.
according to Eq. (3.8a). (from Rehm, Eligehausen, (3.86). (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988)
and Mallee 1988, and Eligehausen, Fuchs, and
Mayer 1987 and 1988)
Fig. 3.12 shows the capacity of quadruple and 36, the spacing of the outer anchors between
fastenings for headed studs, expansion and 100 and 875 mm and the spacing of the individual
undercut anchors as a function of the ratio of anchors between 0.541, and 2.2&. The groups
anchor spacing to embedment depth as measured were loaded by a concentric tension load which
in tests and calculated according to Eq. (3.11). was equally distributed to all anchors.
Eq. (3.9) and (3.11) can also be extended for Eq. (3.13) covers the influence of edge dis-
multiple anchorages with any number of anchors tances, a,, smaller than critical:
in any spacing by setting the value of ai as the
distance atot between the outer anchors, and the
x0- value is limited to xa I n with n = number of Fu* = a& * Fy (3.13)
anchors in one direction. This is provided that the where
spacings between the individual anchors are
Xa?n = 0.3 + 0.7 am/a,crit S 1 (3.14)
smaller than acrit = 31, and the anchor plate is
sufficiently stiff to assure an even distribution of
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
tension forces to all anchors (see Rehm, a m,crit = critical distance from free edge
Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988). The X-method = 1.5 1d
can also be extended to take account of load
‘ actual embedment length
eccentricities (Riemann 1985). =
Fig. 3.13 shows the ratio of actual to predicted Fu = ultimate failure load, single anchor
tensile capacity of groups of headed studs. In the to be taken from Eq. (3.8)
tests the number of anchors was varied between 4
355.1R-19
0
5.0 I I
O
FE according to eqn. ( 3.8 ) 8
I 0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Fig. 3.12-Ratio of actual failure load of a group of anchors to the predicted value for an individual anchor as
a function of the ratio of anchor spacing to embedment depth (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988)
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

MANUAL OF CONCRETE PRACTICE
_.-
I L
l-
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Fig. 3.14 shows a comparison of test results with Bode and Roik (1987), evaluated data of 106
the theoretical values according to Eq. (3.13). It tests with headed studs to arrive at Eq. (3.15).
should be noted, however, that minimum distances
from the free edge are necessary for headed studs (3.15)
F” = 12r,3/2(1 + d&,) 8, N
in order to allow proper concreting and avoid
local spalling of concrete. Minimum edge where
distances for expansion and undercut anchors are
necessary to avoid splitting of concrete during F, = average failure load, N
installation and expansion of the anchors. 1d = embedment length, mm
If anchors are located in a corner [see Fig. d, = head diameter, mm
3.15(b,)], the factors xarn are calculated separately f’, = concrete cylinder strength
for each direction and then the two x-factors are at time of testing, N/mm2
multiplied.
Fig. 3.16 compares the measured failure loads
of headed studs with the values according to Eq.
Roik (1987), assume the critical

spacing of neighboring headed
a cl+ = 41, (3.16)
Fig. 3.15 - Typical failure modes of anchors Loaded

in shear (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee
1988)
kN
TU’k lN/mmz I
mean value
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
50 75 100 125 150

h [mm]
Fig. 3.16 - Measured failure loads compared to Eq. 3.15 (where p, = concrete splitting strength) (from Bode and
Roik 1987)
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
.50
o Anchor
studs,
concrete break-out
/ l Headed studs,
/ local concrete failure
0 ( blow -out)
.00 L I
. 00 .50 1.00 1.50 1.75
Fig. 3.14-Ratio of actual failure load of an individual anchor close to the edge to the predicted value for an
Provided by IHS under license with ACI
anchor with large edge distance (from Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee 1988)
Licensee=Jacobs Engineering ( new WAN ) /3219500102, User=Schoolmeyer, Scott
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
355.1R-23
With respect to the influence of free edges (see failure was approximately six bolt diameters.
Fig, 3.15) they consider the critical distance Under conditions of poor workmanship in the
beyond which there is no significant influence on field (e.g., oversize holes) slip failure may occur at
load as being in the case of one free a much smaller embedment depth than ld = 6D.
Slip failure may also occur with bonded and
adhesive anchors of insufficient embedment to
ati1 IJ 1.21, develop the strength of the anchor steel or to
cause a concrete cone failure.
and in the case of two or more free edges: Torque-controlled wedge anchors, which fail by
slip, generally fail by slipping the expansion cone
acit.2 5 21, past the wedges. This failure mode may also
occur with sleeve anchors. However, in some case
anchors may fail by pulling the whole anchor
For distances from center of headed stud to the (including expansion sleeve) out of the hole.
free edge(s) which are smaller than the critical Torque-controlled expansion anchors may also slip
distance according to Eq. (3.17) and (3.18), they to a critical depth and fail the concrete.
fou d that the assumption of a linear decrease of Deformation-controlled expansion anchors (e.g.,
ulti ate failure load in proportion to the ratio of drop-in anchors) have a fixed expansion and may
act”al distance/critical distance gives a lower slip to a critical depth and then fail the concrete.
bound of their test results, in much the same The slip failure load is dependent on the
ner as shown in Fig. 3.14. coefficient of friction between the sliding surfaces
raestrup, Nielson, Jense, and Bach (1976), give and on the spreading force at failure which is a
the predicted failure load as: function of the critical expansion force producing
failure and the deformability of the concrete which
FM = 0.21 x 2; (1 + d,ll&f$ N (3.19) varies with hole depth and concrete properties.
All of these factors may vary with anchor type,
manufacturer, and installation. The spreading
Eq. (3.19) was deduced by applying the theory force and thus the slip load of drop-in anchors
of plasticity to headed studs embedded in decreases significantly with increasing diameter of
co rrete. The failure load is assumed to be the drilled hole with respect to the diameter of the
pronI ortional to the concrete compressive strength. anchor.
3.2.3.3 Pullout (slip) of the anchor- Slip Theoretically the slip failure load F, could be
failure occurs [Fig. 3.2(b)] with expansion anchors calculated from Eq. (3.20).
when the expansion force is too small to develop
Fit = ps (3.20)
either the strength of the anchor steel or a shear
cone failure of the concrete. This is a typical
failure mode for wedge anchors at moderate to where
deep embedments in lower strength concrete
where the crushing of the concrete at the wedges I, = coefficient of friction
allows the bolt to “pull through”. The cause may S = spreading force
also be due to an oversize hole. Slip failure may
also occur in low strength concrete due to
deformation of the wall of the hole. The coefficient of friction depends mainly on
The testing of wedge bolt expansion anchors by the roughness and cleanliness of the drilled hole
Hanks (1973), clearly demonstrated that the and of the surface of the expansion sleeve or
primary failure mode for individual anchor tests wedge as well as on the spreading pressure. From
(uninhibited by edge conditions) was either cone Wagner-Grey (1976), the factor p for torque
failure of the concrete or anchor slip depending controlled expansion anchors is in the range of 0.2
on the depth of anchor for a given size. Only 10 to 0.3 and for drop-in anchors is approximately
of 464 tension tests indicated any cracking 0.35. The difficulty in using Eq. (3.20) lies in
associated with a cone failure. The line of properly estimating the spreading force, since
demarcation between shear cone failure and slip complex mechanics are involved. For this reason

the profession relies on test data. However, steel wedges. Deformation-controlled expansion
equations for estimating of the spreading force are anchors generate higher spreading forces and
given by Wagner-Grey (1976). require larger edge distances than torque-
Because of the large variability of the spreading controlled expansion and undercut anchors.
forces and the coefficient of friction, Eq. (3.20) The capacity of expansion anchors which fail by
gives only an approximate estimate of the pullout splitting of the concrete has been evaluated by
load (see Eligehausen, and Pusill-Wachtsmuth Pusill-Wachtsmuth (1982), using theoretical
1982). Furthermore, in important applications it considerations. It was assumed that splitting
is advisable to test expansion anchors, which occurs when the tensile stresses averaged over a
typically fail by slip at specified embedments, in critical area reach the concrete tensile strength.
design strength job concrete to confirm slip The size of this area was found by evaluating the
characteristics. results of tests with concentrated loads and of
For pullout failures of a chemical anchor, the tests with thick concrete rings subjected to a
bond between the wall of the drilled hole and the constant inner pressure. According to this theory,
mortar is critical (see Sell 1973). Assuming a the necessary side cover or spacing to preclude a
uniform bond stress distribution along the splitting failure before reaching the concrete cone
anchorage length, the bond strength is in the order failure load must be about 1.751d or 3.51,, respec-
of 1300 psi (9 MPa) with a coefficient of variation tively. For drop-in anchors a side cover m I 31d
of 10 to 15 percent for polyester and vinylester was recommended. The validity of this evaluation
chemical anchors. This value is for a concrete was checked by relatively few test results.
compressive strength of 3000 psi (21 MPa) and an With respect to the minimum edge distance
embedment of about nine anchor diameters. The Cannon* has proposed the following criteria to
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
bond strength increases approximately with the preclude a splitting failure occuring at a load
square root of the concrete strength. lower than the capacity for concrete cone failure
The pullout capacity of chemical anchors or pullout failure:
increases with increasing embedment depth:
however, after about nine anchor diameters the m = D(11.4 - 0.92& in. (3.21)
increase is not proportional to embedment. This where
is due to the high bonding effect resulting in high = minimum edge distance
load transfer to the concrete at the top of the : = anchor bolt diameter, in.
anchorage. The bond stress is no longer uniform, ld = embedment depth to the bottom of the
and if the tensile load is sufficiently high, the anchor, in
failure initiates with a concrete failure in the Eq. (3.21) is valid for anchor spacings s L 2 in.
upper portion of the concrete and then the bond
fails in the remainder of the embedment. If side cover or spacings of anchors are too
For headed anchors local failure in front of the small, splitting cracks may occur during installation
head will occur when the pressure on the concrete of anchors. This possibility is greater for drop-in
is larger than about 12f’, to 15f’, (Rehm, Elige- anchors and for self-drilling anchors than for
hausen, and Mallee, 1988). This type of failure is torque-controlled expansion anchors because of
somewhat similar to a pullout failure. the higher initial spreading forces. The minimum
3.2.3.4 Splitting failure of concrete -This edge distance and the minimum spacing to avoid
failure mode will occur only if the dimensions of splitting during installation, as recommended by
the concrete are too small, the anchors are placed Rehm, Eligehausen, and Mallee (1988), are based
too close to an edge or too close to each other on many tests and are given in Table 3.1 for the
[Fig. 3.2(c)], or the expansion forces are too high. different types of anchors.
The failure load is usually smaller than for a
concrete cone failure.
Torque-controlled expansion and deformation-
controlled anchors (e.g., drop-in and self-drill *Cannon, Private correspondence previously cited Dec. 1984
anchors are the type anchor most likely to (see footnote p 14).
experience splitting failure due to the high lateral
thrust required to resist sliding by friction on the

Table 3.1 -Minimum edge distance and minimum spacing to avoid splitting failure
Undercut anchors Torque-controlled expansion anchors Drop-in anchors
with one cone (recent design) I
Mihimum edge distance m / 1d to avoid 1.0 2.0 3.0
splitting during installation I
Minimum center-to-center spacing a / 1d 1.0 1.0

to avoid splitting during installation
3.2.4 Load-displacement behavior and failure through the attachment as a result of direct loads
modes in shear-For anchors with an applied or applied moments. The connection details
preload, the initial friction forces between the concern the treatment of connecting surfaces and
baseplate and the concrete have to be overcome the fit and manner of connecting the anchors to
by the shear load before there is initial anchor the attachment.
movement (Fig. 3.17). The baseplate slides and
the anchor moves to the side of the hole in the
second stage of behavior. The third stage of load-
displacement behavior is a pressure loading
against the top surface of the concrete and a
surface spa1l of the concrete at the edge of the
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
hole. Depending on edge distance and anchor
embedment, the failure may be by shearing of the
anchor (for deep embedments) with or without a
concrete spa11 preceding the steel failure [Fig.
3.15(a)] or by shearing of the concrete (concrete
failure) in the case of anchors loaded near an
edge [Fig. 3.15(b1), (b2), (b3)]. Onset of bearing
Shear loading generally produces larger crushing in the concrete
displacements than tension loading [see Fig.
3.3(c)]. This can be attributed to the bending of
the anchor rod and the deformation of the lip of loading plate into
bearing on anchor stud
concrete in the direction of loading. This is
especially true if the anchor is not flush with the
concrete at the hole opening (e.g., when the
concrete is spalled during drilling). For cast-in-
Load transfered by
place anchors, the behavior will depend on the friction to embedment
type of anchorage used, the embedment and the . ~~~ r r -7
steel strength. 0 .50 10 1.5 0 20

The distribution of shear from the attachment
Deformatlon
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. The frictional resistance depends on Fig. 3.17- Typical load-displacement curve for
surface conditions, the existing preload (if any) in wedge anchor in shear from Meinheit and
the anchors and the compressive forces applied Heidbrink 1985)

3.2.5 Ultimate strength in shear

3.2.5.1 Steel failure - Steel failure usually occurs
after relatively large displacements and is most
number
common for deep embedments, lower strength of specimens
steels and large edge distances. The failure load
depends on the steel area and the steel strength x
I
and is given by Eq. (3.22). ” 0,: 0.65-4
I
F8l = N A,f,, lb (3.22)
where the factor N takes account of the steel

“shear” strength and has the range 0.6 to 0.7
RATIO OF ACTUAL TO
[Klingner and Mendonca, (1982b)], A, is the ten- F’FQICTED CAPACITY
sile stress area (as defined in Eq. (3.1)) and f,t is
the ultimate tensile strength. Fig. 3.18 -Histogram of actual to predicted capacity
Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988), propose the
value N = 0.6 on the basis of an evaluation of ACI 349, Appendix B further recommends a
230 tests. minimum side cover or edge distance m required
3.2.5.2 Concrete failure -Concrete failures will to preclude edge failures: be calculated by Eq.
exhibit two modes; (1) blow out cones due to edge (3.24).
proximity (Fig. 3.15) and (2) concrete spa11
followed by a possible anchor pullout or steel
m= , in. (3.24)
failure away from an edge.
3.2.5.2.1 Edge failure- For all types of
anchors loaded in shear toward an adjacent, free
edge and exhibiting a concrete failure (Fig. 3.15), where
the failure load is influenced by the concrete D = anchor diameter, in.
tensile strength, the edge distance m and the F t = anchor ultimate tensile load, lb
stiffness of the anchor. Another influencing factor fr”, = concrete compressive strength, psi
is the embedment depth. The failure surface has
a conical shape that may radiate from the em- Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988), have suggested,
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
bedded end of the anchor for shallow embedments based on the evaluation of some 80 test results
or from the upper part of the anchorage for deep with headed and expansion anchors (anchorage
embedments. depth ld > 4D), the average ultimate failure load
In the following paragraphs, several formulas of the concrete of a single fastener in shear be
for calculating the failure load for an edge failure calculated by:
are reviewed.
ACI 349, Appendix B, Commentary gives a F,, = 1.4@$n1.s~~, N (3.25)
design shear strength of
where
vu = 24$$n2, lb (3.23) D shank diameter (mm) of headed
studs or drill-hole diameter for
where anchors, D < 25mm
cb = 0.85 f’, average concrete compressive
f’, = compressive strength of concrete strength (cylinders) at time of testing,
m = distance from anchor to free edge N/mm2
(see Fig. 3.15) m distance from anchor to free edge,
mm
Fig. 3.18, taken from Klingner and Mendonca
(1982b) gives the ratio of actual to predicted shear
capacities for this approach.
h
Xh =-sl
1.4m
where
h = member thickness, mm
Eq. (3.25) is valid for 1,/D = 4 to 6.
Fig. 3.19 shows a comparison between failure

loads according to Eq. (3.25) and test results. The
thickness of the test specimens was h 1 1.4m.
The tests were performed in concretes with
different strengths and anchors ranging in
diameter between 12 and 22 mm. The test results 0 3.0 ' 3.5 4.0
were normalized to a concrete strength f 'c = a/a, [-]
20N/mm2 and D = 18 mm.
If an anchor group is loaded in shear toward an Fig. 3.20-Ratio of actual shear failure load of
edge, a common failure cone may occur [see Fig. anchor group to shear failure load of an individual
3.15(b2)]. T he corresponding failure load may anchor as a function of spacing between anchors
also be calculated as described in Section 3.2.3.2
for tension loading [Eq. (3.9), (3.11), and (3.12)] Similar expressions are proposed for calculating
according to the x-method. The x-values for the failure load of single fastenings or anchor
shear loads, however, depend on the distance from groups situated in a corner or in narrow members.
the free edge measured in load direction. The influence of load eccentricity on the failure
The critical (minimum) distance between two or load of an anchor group can also be taken into
more anchors beyond which no intersection of account by the x-method (Rehm, Eligehausen,
failure cone will happen is given by Eligehausen and Mallee 1988). The method has been extended
and Fuchs (1988), as: to anchor groups with an arbitrary number of
anchors.
a Wit = 3.5m (3.27) Klingner, Mendonca, and Malik (1982),
where recommend a critical (minimum) edge spacing of:
m = distance to free edge.
mkD Fut in.
-, (3.29)
For a I a,,i, Eligehausen and Fuchs (1988),
have proposed the calculation of the average %@
failure load of a group of anchors (see Fig. 3.20)
subjected to shear load by: where
(3.28) #C = 0.90 and the other terms are as given
FI(, Group = x,F, for the ACI 349 [Eq. (3.24)].
where For anchors with small embedment depth

& = 1 + a/a,,i, situated away from an edge and loaded in shear,
F, is from Eq. (3.25) the failure mode may be a tensile cone failure as
the anchor bends under load and induces a tensile
Fig. 3.20 (Eligehausen and Fuchs, 1988) shows loading into the concrete. Because of ductility
the ratio of the failure load of a group loaded in requirements and reversible load conditions
shear towards the edge to the failure load of an associated with seismic design, ACI 349 does not
individual anchor calculated according Eq. (3.25). distinguish between embedment requirements for
The failure load ratio is plotted against the ratio shear and tension. This is very conservative if only
of spacing to edge distance. shear is considered (see Shaikh and Yi, 1985).
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
8 8
cv
3.2.5.2.2 Concrete spall-Anchors away from A second straight-line equation is given by Eq.
an edge will locally spall the concrete in front of (3.32).
the anchor. The primary factors influencing
concrete spall due to shear are tensile strength of T,/T, + VJVu s 1.0 (3.32)
the concrete, stiffness of the anchorage, anchor where
diameter, embedment depth, and deformability of
the concrete. The corresponding shear capacity is Ta* vaapplied tensile and shear load,
=
given by Klingner and Mendonca (1982), and respectively
American Institute of Steel Construction (1978), T”, uV = ultimate tensile and shear load,
as: respectively
F, = 0.5 A, fit, lb (3.30) These straight-line methods give a conservative
where approach to combined loading analyses.
Ab = nominal gross cross-sectional area of Bode and Roik (1987), propose for headed
anchor shank, in.2 studs a trilinear function:
f’, = specified compressive strength of
concrete, psi
E, = elastic modulus of concrete, psi
vp, s 1
However, according to Eligehausen and Fuchs
(1988), the above described local concrete failure TJT,, + VJV,, s 1.2 (3.33c)
does not negatively influence the anchor steel where
capacity (normal strength steel) and will not cause T,, Va, TU and Vu as defined for Eq. (3.32).
subsequent pullout of the anchor, provided the According to Meinheit and Heidbrink (1985),
embedment depth is 1, L 4D. Eq. (3.33) is valid also for expansion anchors (see
3.2.6 Combined tension and shear Loading- The Fig. 3.22).
behavior of anchors under combined tension and
shear loading lies in between the behavior under Load FQ[ kN ]
tension or shear loading, and for a given depth of 125
embedment, is dependent on the angle of the
loading (Fig. 3.21).
To calculate the failure load under combined
tension and shear loadings three approaches are in 100
use; a straight-line function, a trilinear function
and an elliptical function.
There are two types of straight-line functions.
The first is a shear friction approach used by ACI 75
349, Appendix B, and given by Eq. (3.31).
(3.31)
where
50
TL? = applied tension load
= 4 F,
r” = 0.85
F, according to Eq. (3.22)
25
cr = coefficient of friction
= 0.55 to 0.9, depending on the
location of the anchor plate in
relation to the concrete surface I I I I
Tall = allowable anchor tensile load 0 5 10 15 20 25

Displacement A,[mml
Fig. 3.21- Shear load-displacement behavior of

headed studs for different tension loads (from Bode
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`--- and Hanenkamp 1985)
Many investigators have concluded that shear drilled either 40 mm (1.6 in.) or 80 mm (3.2 in.)
and tension combine in an elliptical function as away from the transverse acting wires, [spacing of
given by Eq. (3.34). 250 mm (10 in.), in the fabric]. Bending of the
slab was in one direction only. All test anchors
(T,/T,,Y + CV,lVJ s 1.0 (3.34) were pretensioned or pretensioned and loaded
where exponents x and y are determined from with their allowable load before the slab was
tests and the other terms are as previously defined subjected to flexural loadings.
for the straight-line equations. After preloading the anchors, the concrete slab
The PCI Design Handbook (1978) uses x = y = was loaded to its service load. Observations
4/3 for precast anchors, while the Teledyne during this part of the testing often showed that
Engineering Services report (1979) gives x = y = cracking started at the section with transverse
5/3 as a good fit for expansion anchors. reinforcement but then deviated from that section
Fig. 3.22 shows a comparison between test to the section that contained the anchor hole.
results with expansion anchors and the different The cracks propagating through the anchor hole
approaches as described above. also were to the depth of the hole (Fig. 3.23 and
3.24). Testing showed that the displacement
3.3-Behavior of anchors in cracked concrete characteristics of these anchors remained
3.3.1 Introduction -When anchors are installed essentially unchanged until the slab load was about
in the tension zone of reinforced concrete mem- 40 percent of the slab service load. Beyond that
bers, it must be assumed that cracks will occur in point, significant increased displacement occurred
the concrete because of the rather low concrete (Fig. 3.25). The increased displacement charac-
tensile strength. The concrete tensile strength may teristics of the anchor in cracked concrete are
be totally or partially consumed by the restraint of caused by the crack propagating through the load
induced deformations due to shrinkage, tempera- transfer zone of the anchor (see Cannon 1981).
ture, or flexure, or from the anchorage itself. The crack width can vary over the depth of the
Cracks run either in one direction (single cracks) member (bending cracks) or can be of constant
or in two directions (intersecting cracks, in the width (parallel cracks, e.g. due to tension loading).
case of slabs spanning two directions). In the worst case the anchor can lie in the inter-
If concrete cracks, experience has shown that section of two cracks with constant width over the
there is a high probability that the crack will member depth. If anchors are situated in or beside
propagate through the anchor location (see these cracks, their load displacement behavior and
Cannon 1981 and Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and strength may be significantly influenced.
Reuter 1989). Theoretical considerations also 3.3.2 Load-displacement-behavior and failure
indicate that cracks should propagate through the modes in tension -Fig. 3.26 presents typical load-
anchor location. When the anchor is loaded, the displacement curves of torque-controlled expan-
anchor creates splitting (tensile) forces at the sion anchors which were set in uncracked concrete
anchor embedded end. These tensile stresses in and in cracks, and loaded statically to failure. The
the concrete would add to other tensile stresses displacements of anchors located in cracks behave
from locally high bending moments. (i.e., flexural similarly to anchors in uncracked concrete up to a
stresses and restrained shrinkage stresses). For critical load. This critical load depends on the
the case when expansion or undercut anchors are type of crack and the crack width. For higher
used, the drilled hole can also act as a notch or loads the displacements of anchors in cracks are
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
produce a cross section in the concrete member much higher than the values expected in
with reduced concrete area. uncracked concrete and anchor capacity is sig-
The theoretical considerations discussed above, nificantly reduced.
were confirmed by testing Ml2 (12 mm) torque- The load-displacement behavior of headed or
controlled expansion anchors and undercut undercut anchors may be affected by cracks in
anchors in a slab reinforced with welded wire concrete but the displacements at maximum load
mesh (AJbd = 0.004) (see Eligehausen, Fuchs, are less influenced by cracks than are expansion
Lotze, and Reuter 1989). The test anchors were anchors (see Fischer 1984).
installed with 1d = 80mm (3.2 in.) and in
uncracked concrete. The anchorage holes were

0
l
l 0 0
I.0
Fig. 3.22- Tension-shear interaction diagram for expansion anchors (from Meinheit and Heidbrink 1985)
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

I
!
I______ _;
F
_,,,:‘, I -(8,84cm2/mI
K 884
_ _ _ __ _ 1. F
2
kc
I -I
a
I
15 , 100 150 1 150 100 15
/ l Id ,I I L
1
torque-controlled undercut
expansion anchors -7 anchors
--
z
--
ic
-i
l anchor loaded
l a n c h o r p r e s t r e s s e d but n o t l o a d e d
o drill hole
Fig. 3.23 - Torque-controlled expansion anchors and undercut anchors in the cracked tensile zone of a concrete
slab (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and Reuter 1989)
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

tension
t
I-
A
jr A
expansion
area
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Section A - A
Fig. 3.24- Crack pattern in a drilled hole with expansion anchor (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and Reuter
1989)
-4-l
F .
8 adm
- 1.0
- 0.8
0.6
1
r(I
0.4
,
1 (H 0
0.2
,, , 4 torquee controlled
expansion anchors
1
0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2
crack width [mm] displacement [mm]
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Fig. 3.25-Crack width and anchor displacement as a function of the ratio of applied load to allowable load of
the slab (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, Lotze, and Reuter 1989)
Force -v
Torque Controlled Expansion Anchor

r Tension Loading
Uncracked
Cracked Concrete
r---
Displacement
Fig. 3.26-Influence of cracks on the load-displacement relationship of expansion anchors - schematically (from
Rehm and Lehmann 1982)

Fig. 3.27 shows the typical load-displacement
relationship of torque-controlled expansion [kN]
anchors set in intersecting cracks and cycled up to
10’ times between different load levels before Torque ConIt rolled Expa c, sion Anchor
loading to failure. For comparison the load-
displacement relationship for statically loaded
anchors is also plotted. Provided the upper load
during cycling is smaller than about 50 percent of
the static failure load, cyclic loading results in an
almost linear increase of the anchor displacement
as a function of the logarithm of the number of
cycles. The load-displacement curve for higher FTER CYCLIC LOADING
loads than the upper load during cycling is rather
I
steep up to the static envelope which is followed
thereafter. Anchor capacity and displacement at
failure are not influenced significantly by cyclic
loading with an upper load as given above.
Opening and closing of cracks by cycling the
reinforced concrete while subjecting the anchor to
a constant load has more influence on the anchor
behavior than cycling the anchor with the cracks
kept open (Rehm and Lehmann 1982).
In principle the failure modes described in D CYC LES
Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.3.1 are also valid for
anchorages in cracked concrete. However,
expansion anchors which produce a concrete cone 5 15
failure in uncracked concrete may slip and pull out
when located in a crack. This possible change of
Displacement [mm]
the failure mode is due to the reduction of the Fig. 3.27-Influence of cyclic loading on the load-
spreading force as a result of the cracks (see displacement relationship oftorque-controlled expan-
below).
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
sion anchors (after Rehm and Lehmann 1982)

3.3.3 Relaxation-Expansion and undercut
anchors installed in cracks will show an initial 3.3.4 Ultimate strength in tension-Fig. 3.28
displacement during widening of the crack. The shows the influence of cracks in the concrete on
amount of this displacement is dependent on the the strength of headed and undercut anchors
design of the anchor and on the crack width. placed in or close to cracks. The ratios of the
Usually this initial displacement is large enough to failure loads of single anchors measured in
reduce the preload to zero. This is also valid for cracked concrete to the value in uncracked
bonded anchors. concrete are plotted as a function of the crack
The relaxation behavior of headed anchors width. The anchors were tested in tension
installed in cracks has not yet been studied. specimens with almost constant crack width over
However, one may assume that the residual the member depth. After installing the anchors in
preload is not significantly smaller than for headed uncracked concrete or concrete with hairline
anchors in uncracked concrete. cracks, the cracks were opened by loading the
specimen and then the anchors were statically
loaded in tension with the cracks open. Failure
occurred by pulling out a concrete cone.

The failure load decreases rapidly up to a crack

Fu (crack) / Fu (uncracked c o n c r e t e )
I,OA I width of about 0.4 mm (l/64 in.) and is almost
fi- 20-55N/mm2 constant for larger cracks. The scatter of the data
is relatively large. On an average, the ultimate
id = 8O mm load of anchors installed in or beside cracks with
a width > 0.4 mm (l/64 in.) is about 60 percent of
the ultimate value in uncracked concrete. It
should be noted that, under service load, cracks
with a width no greater than 0.4 mm (l/64 in.) are
tolerated in reinforced concrete structures. The
influence of the type of anchor (headed or under-
cut) on the failure load reduction is negligible.
An almost similar strength reduction was also
observed with anchors installed deeper in the
tension zone of beams for various anchor-depth-
to-beam-height ratios (Rehm, Eligehausen, and
Mallee 1988).
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
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, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987 and 1988).
In the case of uncracked concrete, the stresses in
the concrete are radially symmetric to the anchor
and tensile hoop stresses are caused by the load
0,4 0,8 1,2 1,6 transfer into the concrete [Fig. 3.29(a)]. If the
crack width A w [mm] anchor is installed in a crack, tensile stresses
cannot be transferred across the crack. Therefore,
Fig. 3.28 -Influence of cracks on the ultimate load the area which can be used for transmitting the
of undercut and headed anchors (from Eligehausen load into the concrete is smaller than in uncracked
1984) concrete [Fig. 3.29(b)].
uncracked concrete b) cracked concrete
m
m Fig. 3.29 - Load transfer into concrete schematically for a) uncracked concrete and b) cracked concrete (from
Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987, 1988)

Furthermore, a part of the concrete cone may spreading force from F,, to F, [Fig. 3.30(b)]. If,
be cut off by neighboring cracks. These combined on the other hand, it is assumed that the concrete
effects cause a strength reduction of approximately is subjected to purely plastic deformations during
40 percent compared to uncracked concrete. expansion, then theoretically the expansion sleeve
Some tensile stresses can be transmitted over will free itself around its circumference from the
small cracks due to aggregate interlock hole wall and the spreading force will decline to
(Eligehausen and Sawade 1985). This explains the zero [Fig. 3.30(c)]. In reality the concrete is
increasing anchor strength for crack widths less deformed elastically and plastically. Therefore,
than 0.4 mm (l/64 in.). the actual situation lies between these two
In addition to the above effect, the reduction of extremes. However, due to the steep gradient of
the spreading forces by the crack opening must be the unloading curve, it has to be expected that
taken into account for expansion anchors (Fig. even a relatively slight increase in crack width will
3.30). If the anchor lies in an intersecting crack, lead to a substantial reduction of the spreading
the widening of the crack by the width w leads to force [Fig. 3.30(d)]. For anchors situated in cracks
a reduction of the effective expansion displace- running in one direction, the spreading force will
ment around the circumference of the anchor by also be reduced by the opening of the crack, but
w/2 [Fig. 3.30(a)]. Assuming elastic behavior of the reduction will be less pronounced than in the
the concrete, this reduction of the expansion case shown in Fig. 3.30.
displacement causes a slight reduction of the
anchor unspread
crack opening
spread anchor
a)
Spreading Force
FO
6
I -7 .-
1 Spread. Displ.
c
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
b) Concrete elastic c) Concrete plastic
Fig. 3.30-Influence of cracks on spreading force (from Eligehausen and Pusill- Wachtsmuth 1982)

Properly designed torque-controlled anchors Drop-in anchors cannot expand further after
will expand to an upper bound when they are they have been properly installed. Due to the
loaded. This causes an increase of the spreading reduction of the spreading force caused by cracks
force until the holding capacity is reached. If the (Fig. 3.30), these anchors often fail by pulling out
crack width is smaller than about 0.4 mm, the without significant damage of the concrete while
holding capacity of heavy-duty, torque-controlled in uncracked concrete they produce a concrete
sleeve anchors is often large enough to cause cone type failure. Therefore, the reduction of the
failure by pulling out a concrete cone. Therefore, failure load caused by cracks is much larger than
the reduction of the failure load is ahnost the for well-designed torque-controlled expansion
same as for headed anchors (compare Fig. 3.31 anchors (compare Fig. 3.32 with Fig. 3.31).
with Fig. 3.28). For larger cracks the expansion
cones are often pulled through the expansion bcrack) / F ubncracked concrete)
sleeves, because the maximum spreading 1,0
displacement reaches the upper bound and the
holding capacity is less than the concrete cone
failure load. This results in an additional decrease
of the failure load in comparison to headed or 0,8
undercut anchors.
If torque-controlled expansion anchors do not
properly expand further or when the spreading
displacement is too small, the influence of cracks
0,6
on the failure load will be much more pronounced
than shown in Fig. 3.31.
Ku / c r o c k ) / Fu ( u n c r a c k e d concrete)
0,4
0,2
0
0,4 0,8 1,2
crack width _w [mm]
^
Fig. 3.32-Influence of cracks on the ultimate load
of drop-in anchors (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, and
Mayer 1987 and 1988)
For self-drilling anchors the ratio of failure load
in cracked concrete to failure load in uncracked
concrete seems to be independent of the anchor
diameter for constant crack width to maximum
expansion displacement ratio (Fig. 3.33). Because
the maximum expansion displacement increases
with increasing anchor diameter, the reduction of
0,8 1,2 1,6
crack width _ w [mm] the failure load for constant crack width is larger
^ for smaller anchors than for bigger anchors.
Fig. 3.31 -Influence of cracks on the ultimate load
of torque controlled expansion anchors (from --`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Eligehausen 1984)
FU (Anchor in Crack)
r
.rU (Anchor in uncracked Concrete)
7
,M12
1 Single Cracks ,
* I I I I L-7 1
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
w/a
Fig 3.33 -Relative strength of self-drilling anchors as a function of the ratio of crack width to expansion
displacement (from Eligehausen 1987)
F, (crack) / F, (uncracked concrete)
In the case of grouted anchors (grouted by

cement-based or chemical-based mortar) cracks
may disturb the bond between the grout-concrete
interface. Therefore, the failure load of grouted
anchors in cracks is significantly smaller than the
value measured in uncracked concrete (Fig. 3.34).
The large scatter of the results is caused by the
random distribution of the crack around the
anchor hole and along the anchor length. If the
crack widths are changing due to fluctuating loads,
the anchor failure load is even more reduced or
the anchor may even be pulled out (Cannon
1981).
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, Fuchs,
and Mayer 1987 and 1988). 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.
Anchors are often installed in groups where the
0,4 0,6
crack width w [mm]
individual anchors a r e c o n n e c t e d b y a n
attachment. In this case some anchors might sit in
Fig. 3.34 -Ratio of the failure load of chemical uncracked concrete while others are located in
anchors installed in cracks to the failure load in
uncracked concrete as a function of crack width
(from Eligehausen, Mallee, and Rehm 1984)
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
cracks. The average strength of groups situated in and anchor spacing is taken into account
cracked concrete was about 30 percent lower than simultaneously. This is valid for anchors with a
the value applicable for anchor groups set in steadily increasing load-displacement relationship
uncracked concrete (Eligehausen, Fuchs, and in both uncracked and cracked concrete.
Mayer 1987 and 1988). Approximately the same Fig. 3.36 describes the influence of the load-
strength reduction was measured for single displacement relationship of expansion anchors
anchors installed in cracks. Failure of all placed in cracks on the failure load of anchor
fastenings was caused by pulling out a concrete groups. It is assumed that three anchors of a
cone. quadruple fastening (large spacing) are located in
The strength of the entire anchor group is cracks and one anchor is sitting between cracks in
constant for one or more of the anchors in a uncracked concrete. If the anchors show a
concrete crack. The reduction is almost the same steadily increasing load displacement relationship
whether one anchor or all are in concrete cracks in uncracked and cracked concrete (Lines a1 and
(Fig. 3.35). In the test, the anchor plate was a2 of Fig. 3.36), the failure load of the group is
connected flexibly (by hinges) to the hydraulic about four times the failure load of one anchor
cylinder. placed in a crack. (This theoretical result is in
Fu [kN] accordance with Fig. 3.35.) Expansion anchors
150 - located in cracks may slip in the hole before
expanding further and take up more load (Line b
of Fig. 3.36) or may be pulled out at rather low
loads (Line c of Fig. 3.36). If only one of the
125
anchors shows a load-displacement behavior
according to Lines b or c, the failure load of the
group may be reduced by more than 40 percent.
100 Anchors which are being used in areas where
cracks may occur, such as the tension zone of a
concrete member, must be suitable for this
application.
75 3.3.4.1 Influence of tensile stresses generated by
structural action on anchor strength -In tests
summarized to this point, the anchors were placed
in the tension zone with constant stress of the
50 reinforcement, and therefore, tensile stresses in
the concrete were mainly induced by the anchors.
However, if the anchors are placed in the shear
region of beams and slabs and in the region of
Number of anchors in cracks
anchorages and lap splices of deformed bars,
Fig. 3.35-Strength of fastenings with four anchors locally high tensile stresses are already induced in
as a function of the number of anchors in cracks the concrete due to the loading of the structure.
(from Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987 and If anchors are placed in this region, the tensile
1988) stresses that they induce in the concrete combine
with the tensile stresses due to loading of the
Theoretical studies showed that the results structure. An example is shown in Fig. 3.37. It is
described are also valid for larger groups of assumed that an anchor is placed in the end
anchors and for applications when the anchor region of lapped splices of large reinforcing bars.
plate is rigidly attached (Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Plotted are stresses in the concrete due to
Mayer 1987 and 1988). splicing of the bar and loading of the anchor. The
Based on these results, it can be stated that the tensile stresses along the failure surface of the
strength of anchor groups placed in cracked concrete cone overlap. Therefore, a reduction of
concrete can be taken as n-times (n = number of the pullout load compared to anchors placed in
individual anchors of the group) the value otherwise unloaded concrete must be expected
expected for one anchor if the influence of cracks which, according to tests, is up to 25 percent in
anchor in crack
FUC
Fu
load
displacement
4 Fuc
relationship
0 a, 0,94
0b 0,64
C
.o 0,50
vuc V
Fig. 3.36- Influence nf load-displacement relationships of expansion anchors on the ultimate load of an anchor - -
group (from Mayer and Eligehausen 1984)

\
ds = 28mm-,
stresses caused
by r e i n f o r c e m e n t
~~ a \.
expansion anchor
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
stresses caused 1
by anchor
+c +1
Fig. 3.37-Anchor in the region of an overlap splice (cross section). Overlapping of stresses caused by the bars
and by the anchor (from Eligehausen 1984)
the assumed case (Eligehausen 1984). Reducing

the size of the reinforcing bars, increasing the
embedment depth of the anchor, or both reduces
the influence of these intersecting stresses. In
summary, the influence of these intersecting
stresses on the failure load is smaller than the
influence of cracks. a
0
In the tests summarized in Fig. 3.28 and 3.31 to
3.35, anchors were used which extended beyond
the tension reinforcement. If short anchors are
used, they are anchored in the concrete cover or
between the bars. In this circumstance, high
tensile stresses are induced in the concrete cover
by the bond action of the reinforcing bars. These
135 = 2.15 Id 180=3ld
stresses intersect the tensile stresses in the
b
0 t
concrete induced by the anchor. The strength of c
the concrete in the cover and in the region of the
dimensions in mm
bars may be lower than in the core of the
specimen due to poor compaction, especially in Fig. 3.38 - Test specimens (from Eligehausen, Fuchs,
sections with closely spaced reinforcement. and Mayer 1987 and 1988)
Furthermore, this reinforcement reduces the
concrete area available for transmitting tensile Investigations of this case are described by
forces. Because of these conditions a significant Eligehausen and Reuter (1986) and Lieberum,
reduction of the failure load of all types of Reinhardt, and Walvaren (1987).
anchors must be expected. This was confirmed by Slabs 300 mm thick were tested by Eligehausen
tests with expansion and undercut anchors placed and Reuter without shear reinforcement. The
in the cover of a beam with rather heavy shear-span ratio a/h ranged from 3 to 4.5. A
reinforcement (Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer fraction of the total load was transmitted by
1987 and 1988) (Fig. 3.38). After loading the anchors into the tension zone and the rest by
beams to service load (crack width w = 0.3 to 0.4 loading plates into the compression zone. Types
mm) the anchors were loaded to failure. The of anchors examined were expansion, undercut,
anchor failed when the concrete cover between and headed studs. The embedment depth (40 to
two adjacent cracks was pulled off (Fig. 3.39). On 130 mm) and the ratio of anchor load to total load
an average the ratio of failure load in cracked (0 to 100 percent) were varied. In all cases the
concrete to the value for uncracked concrete was slabs failed by an inclined shear crack.
about 30 percent smaller than shown in Fig. 3.28 Fig. 3.40 shows the cracking pattern of one
and 3.31. specimen at about 95 percent of the failure load
3.3.4.2 Influence of load transfer into the tension of the member. The anchor loads must be
zone on the behavior of the structural element-The transmitted over the tip of the inclined crack to
overlapping of concrete tensile stresses caused by the supports. This causes high tensile stresses at
loading the structure, and stresses induced locally the crack tip. Therefore, the failure crack (shown
by the loaded anchor affects the strength of the as a broken line) will occur at a lower total shear
anchor and may reduce the strength of the force than loading the slab in the compression
member where the anchor is placed (Rehm and zone only. In the tests a reduction of the shear
Eligehausen 1986). Transfer of high tensile forces carrying capacity of the slabs up to between 15
into the concrete in the region of overlap splices and 20 percent was found when all the loads were
and of anchorages of reinforcing bars may be transmitted into the tension zone and not into the
critical especially if the splice reinforcement is not compression zone. The strength reduction was
enclosed by stirrups (Rehm and Eligehausen smaller when only a fraction of the total load was
1986). Another critical application is the transfer transferred into the tension zone. A similar
of forces into the tension zone in the shear region strength reduction was found by Lieberum,
of slabs without shear reinforcement. Reinhardt, and Walvaren (1987), under
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

I
_
.b.. b
Fig. 3.39 - Concrete failure of an anchor group (from Eligehausen, Fuchs, and Mayer 1987 and 1988)
1 a =3d L
7 I
Fig. 3.40- Crack pattern. of a slab without shear reinforcement (from Eligehausen and Reuter 1986)
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

these test conditions. If the anchors are placed 3.3.5 Shear loading-Little investigation of the
close to the support the strength reduction will be influence of cracks on the behavior of anchors
much more significant. loaded in shear has been conducted. The few
This reduction of the shear capacity may, available test results can be summarized as
depending on the design of the slab, significantly follows.
change the type of failure from a ductile bending Anchors placed in cracked concrete and loaded
failure to a brittle shear failure (Eligehausen and in shear will fail the concrete (small edge
Reuter 1986). To avoid this problem, it is distances), or the bolt (large edge distances), or a
recommended that the shear forces transmitted combination of both. Under otherwise constant
directly into the tension zone should be limited to conditions, the failure load of anchors with a small
about 40 percent of the total shear force, or edge distance and loaded towards the edge will be
alternatively, the shear stress should be limited to smaller in cracked concrete than in uncracked
about 80 percent of allowable values. concrete due to the disturbance of the distribution
Composite structures (precast concrete of stresses in the concrete by cracks. It can be
elements with bonded cast-in-place concrete) assumed that the strength reduction is almost the
without reinforcement connecting the precast and same as for tension loading (reduction by about 40
cast-in-place concrete, are especially critical. percent). The strength reduction will be smaller
Failure of this type of structure will often be if edge reinforcement is present. The ultimate
caused by a crack in the contact area between the load of anchors with large edge distances (steel
precast and the cast-in-place concrete. If the load failure) is not significantly influenced by cracks.
is transmitted into the precast concrete element, The edge distance required to insure a steel
high tensile stresses are generated in the contact failure of the anchor is about 30 to 40 percent
area. Therefore, the shear stress at failure is larger in cracked concrete than in uncracked
significantly lower than in the case of loading the concrete.
specimen in the usual way at the top (Fig. 3.41).
3.4-Behavior of cast-in-place anchor bolts in
uncracked concrete piers
3.4.1 Introduction -Anchor bolts are commonly
used in highway and bridge structures to connect
light standards, sign supports, and traffic signal
poles. They are also used to connect steel
columns in industrial structures to structural
concrete members. The anchor bolt installation
discussed in this section is one of the most widely
used cast-in-place anchorage systems. The anchor
bolts used typically have long embedment lengths
and small edge distances. Such installation should
be distinguished from bolts embedded for short
join f lengths in mass concrete with very large edge
distances. The supporting concrete members
associated with this installation are usually piers,
drilled shafts, or other foundation elements with
limited plan dimensions; however, the concrete is
usually well confined by reinforcement.
-7 The structural behavior of cast-in-place anchor
2 4 6 bolts with long embedment lengths installed in
a/d supporting members with limited dimensions is
distinctly different from that described in the
Fig. 3.41 -Shear stress failure of a composite slab
preceding sections. This section summarizes some
without connecting reinforcement between precast
significant results from extensive research con-
and cast in place concrete (after Rehm and ducted for this type of anchor bolt application at
Eligehausen 1986) --`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
the University of Texas at Austin (see Breen 1964;

Lee and Breen 1966; Lee and Breen 1970; 3.4.2 General behavior under loading-A single
Hasselwander, Jirsa, and Breen 1974; anchor bolt transfers tension load to the concrete
Hasselwander, Jirsa, Breen, and Lo 1977; and member in three successive stages: (1) steel-to-
Jirsa, Cichy, Calzadilla, Smart, Pavluvcik, and concrete bond, (2) bearing against the washer of
Breen 1984). The test results and design the anchorage device, and (3) a wedging action by
recommendations are valid for anchors in well- the cone of crushed and compacted concrete in
confined concrete. front of the anchorage device. These three stages
These studies focused on many significant are not entirely distinct, but the exact nature of
factors affecting anchor bolt behavior including the transition from one stage to the next is highly
clear cover, embedment length, bolt diameter, indeterminate and can only be discussed in a
bearing area, type of anchorage device, concrete general manner.
strength, steel yield strength, shape of piers, and Fig. 3.43 shows tail stress plotted against lead
bolt group configuration. In addition, a series of stress for three 1 3/4 in. anchor bolts with clear
exploratory and supplementary studies were made covers of 3 l/2 in. and three different
to determine the influence of cyclic loading, lateral embedments: 10, 15, and 20 bolt diameters.
loading, transverse reinforcement, and method of Adhesion or bond between the bolt and concrete
loading on the bolt behavior. Diameters of anchor is the predominant load carrying mechanism for
bolts ranged from 1 to 3 in. Steel yield strengths early stages of loading; little increase in tail stress
ranged from 33 ksi (A7) to 105 ksi (A139). is observed with increasing lead stress. The longer
Embedment lengths ranged from 10 bolt diameters the bolt, the more load the bolt can carry by the
to 20 bolt diameters. A typical test specimen bond mechanism. Under increasing load, bond
geometry is shown in Fig. 3.42. strength decreases along the length of the bolt and
8'- o”_
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
I'' ANCHOR 8OLl-
I J/4” ANCHOR B O L T -
SECTION A-A SECTION B-B

Fig. 3.42 - Typical specimen geometry
tail stress begins to increase. The load that was Bolt failures occurred in several bolts by
previously carried by a bond mechanism must be necking in the threaded portion of the bolts.
transferred to a bearing mechanism. In Fig. 3.43 Little damage to the concrete cover over the bolt
the bond-to-bearing transition is most clearly seen was observed at bolt failure. A relatively sudden
for the bolt with 200 embedment. For a given spalling of the concrete cover over the anchorage
load increment, the tail stress increases more than device at low loads characterized the failure of
the lead stress as the load carried by bond is bolts with small amounts of clear cover [Fig.
unloaded into bearing on the anchorage device. 3.44(a)]. For larger amount of clear cover, the
The bond-to-bearing transition is dependent on failures were characterized by the splitting and
the embedment of the bolt; the shorter the bolt, spalling of the concrete cover into distinct blocks
the shorter and less well-defined the transition. by the wedging action of a cone of crushed and
After the bond-to-bearing transition, tail stress compacted concrete which formed in front of the
increases uniformly with increasing lead stress as anchorage device [Fig. 3.44(b)].
the load is carried by bearing or by wedging The distinguishing feature of a wedge-splitting
action. failure was the diagonal cracks [marked B in Fig.
3.4.3 Failure modes-The failures observed 3.44(b)] which started just in front of the washer
during testing can be described as: (1) bolt failure, on the bolt centerline and extended toward the
(2) concrete cover failure by spalling, and (3) front and each side of the specimen. These
concrete cover failure by wedge-splitting. While diagonal cracks were frequently accompanied by a
these three categories represent distinct failure longitudinal crack along the bolt axis [C in Fig.
modes, combinations of these modes were 3.44(b)], a transverse crack parallel to and near
observed in several instances. the washer of the anchorage device [A in Fig.
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
8 l I I I s I
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Tail Stress, ksi
Fig. 3.43 - Tail stress versus lead stress for different embedment lengths
3.44(b)] or both. Cracking generally started near cracking propagated to the sides and front face of
the anchorage device and extended toward the the specimen. The result was the complete loss of
front, toward the sides of the specimen, or both a rectangular block of concrete cover extending
under increasing load. back to the anchorage device over the full width
of the specimen, as opposed to the usual group of
Tension Tension
triangular wedges with a common apex over the
anchorage device. Such a failure indicates that
the wedge-splitting mechanism did not fully
develop and therefore the ultimate strength of the
anchor bolt installation was reduced.
The major effect of embedment length on the
ultimate strength of an anchor bolt installation is
related to the ability of the concrete cover to resist
the wedge-splitting action of the cone of crushed
and compacted concrete in front of the anchorage
device. A certain minimum embedment length is
required to develop this resistance. As illustrated
Cover Spalling
in Fig. 3.46, increasing the embedment length
Wedge-Splitting
Failure Failure beyond this minimum length provides no
significant improvement but decreasing the
Fig. 3.44 - Concrete cover failures
embedment length results in a significant
3.4.4 Lead-slip relationships (effect of clear cover reduction in ultimate strength. A 15D embedment
and embedment length)-Bolt tension versus lead length can be considered a satisfactory minimum
slip curves associated with different clear covers embedment length.
3.4.5 Ultimate strength-The ultimate strength of
and embedments are shown in Fig. 3.45 and 3.46.
a bolt in a group is clearly not the same as that of
Slip of the anchor bolts was measured relative to
an isolated bolt with similar geometry.
the front face of the specimen (lead slip). Fig.
3.4.5.1 Single bolt strength -Hasselwander,
3.45 illustrates the effect of clear cover. Since the Jirsa, Breen, and Lo (1977), concluded that clear
effect f concrete strength varied approximately cover and bearing area are the main variables
with P d lead stress in Fig. 3.45, calculated on the governing the strength of single anchor bolts. The
basis of the anchor bolt stress area, was variables were incorporated into an equation for
normalized with respect to /-- d and plotted against predicting the strength of isolated anchor bolts,
lead slip for four 1 3/4 in. bolts each with an subjected to simple tension and failing in a wedge-
embedment of 15 bolt diameters (15D) and an
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
splitting mode:
anchorage device consisting of a nut and a 4 in.
diameter, l/2 in. thick washer. As seen in Fig. Tn = 140A, @[O-7 + ln[2C’/(D, -II)]] (3.35)
3.45, the slopes of the curves are essentially the
same until each bolt approaches ultimate capacity.
A definite trend of increasing ultimate strength
with increasing clear cover is indicated. where
Fig. 3.46 illustrates the effect of embedment T, = ultimate wedge-splitting capacity of
length on the stress-slip relationships of three 1 a single bolt, lb, with an
3/4 in. bolts each with a clear cover of 3 l/2 in. embedment length not less than 12
and an anchorage device consisting of a nut and a
4 in. diameter, l/2 in. thick washer. The initial (D w - D)
Ab = net bearing area, in.* , (r/4) $$-
portions of the curves are essentially the same and D”), but not greater than 4D
there is no appreciable difference between the D = bolt diameter, in.
ultimate strengths of the 15D bolt and the 20D D, = diameter of anchorage device
bolt; the ultimate strength of the 1OD bolt, (washer), in. with minimum
however, is noticeably reduced. thickness of Dd8
The failure of the 10D bolt developed initially C' = clear cover to the bolt, in.
as a typical wedge-splitting mode until the

:cu
d
s
d
s ’
d
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

I500
1250
f _,--L~l5 0
A!!L
Jr-: L = 20 D .
1000
A-.._.._& --z-
LL=l0D
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
750
C’ = 3.5 In.
1 I . . I I . . . . . .
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24
Lead Slip, inches
Fig. 3.46-Effect of embedment length

The design tensile strength T, was determined 3.5-REFERENCES

as:
ACI Committee 349,1990, “Code Requirements for Nuclear
T,, si 4 Tn but < A, fy , lb (3.36) Safety Related Concrete Structures,” (ACI 349-90) Appendix
B, American Concrete Institute, Detroit.
where
4 = a capacity reduction factor of 0.75 American Institute of Steel Construction, 1978,
As = tensile area of the anchor bolt, as Specifications for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of Struc-
defined in Eq. (3.1), in.2 tural Steel Buildings, with Commentary, New York, 235 pp.
fy = yield stress of the bolt material, psi

Best, J. FIoyd and McDonald, James E., 1989,: “Evaluation
of Polyester Resin, Epoxy, and Cement Grouts for Embedding
The design equation was developed from a Reinforcing Steel Bars in Hardened Concrete,” Technical
regression analysis on test results of bolts failing in Report REMR-CS-23, US Army Engineer Waterways Experi-
the wedge-splitting mode only. A minimum ment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
embedment length of 12(D, - D) was suggested to
Bode, H. and Roik, K., 1987,: “Headed Studs Embedded in
allow the wedge-splitting mechanism to occur. A Concrete and Loaded in Tension,” in ACI SP 103 Anchorage to
restriction which accounted for a reduced bearing Concrete, G. Hasselwander ed. , Detroit.
efficiency observed for large washers, limited the
net bearing area to 4D2. A minimum washer Bode, H. and Hanenkamp, W., 1985, “Zur Tragfshigkeit von
Kopfbolzen bei Zugbeanspruchung,” (For Load Bearing
thickness, D$?, was suggested to prevent flexibility
Capacity of Headed Bolts Under Pullout Loads), Bauingenieu
of the washer. pp. 361-367.
Fig. 3.47 shows graphically the suggested
ultimate strength equation and the test data Braestrup, M.W., Nielson, M.P., Jense, B.C. and Bach, F.,
plotted to illustrate the accuracy of the equation. 1976, “Axissymetric Punching of Plain and Reinforced
Concrete, Copenhagen, Technical University of Denmark,
The equation provides a reasonable estimate of
Structural Research Laboratory, Report R 75.
strength, yet is simple to use and reflects the
critical parameters observed in the test program. Breen, J.E., 1964, “Development Length for Anchor Bolts,
3.4.5.2 Bolt group strength - Jirsa, et al. (1984), Research Report 55-1F, Center for Highway Research, the
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
evaluated the bolt group interaction and strength University of Texas at Austin.
reduction by comparing the average test capacity
Burdette, E.G., Perry, T.C. and Funk, R.R., 1987, “Load
with the predicted capacity of an isolated bolt with Relaxation Tests”, ACI SP-103 Anchorage to Concrete, G.
similar geometry. It was observed that as bolt Hasselwander ed.,Detroit, pp. 297-311.
spacing decreased, the reduction in strength
significantly increased. From a least squares Cannon, R.W., 1981,: “Expansion Anchor Performance in
Cracked Concrete,” ACI-Journal, November-December, pp.
analysis of the available data, the following 471-479.
modification to Eq. (3.35) was produced for the
nominal tensile capacity of an anchor bolt in a Elfgren, L., Anneling, R., Eriksson, A., and Granlund, S.,
bolt group based on failure of the concrete. 1988, “Adhesive Anchors, Tests with Cyclic and Long-Time
Loads,” Swedish National Testing Institute Report 1987:39,
Bor&.
T,, = 140Ab@ {0.7 + ln[2C’/(D,,,-D)]}
(0.02S + 0.4), in. (3.37) Eligehausen, R., 1987, “Anchorage to Concrete by Metallic
Expansion Anchors, ACI SP 103 Anchorage to Concrete, G.
where Hasselwander ed., Detroit, pp.181-201.
S = bolt spacing, in.
Eligehausen, R., 1984,: “Wechselbeziehungen zwischen
(0.02S+0.4) 5 1.0 Befestigungstechnik und Stahlbetonbauweise”, (Interactions of
Fastenings and Reinforced Concrete Constructions), in
and other factors are the same as in Eq. (3.35). “Fortschritte im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau”, Verlag Wilhelm
Eq. (3.37) provides an estimate of the strength Ernst & Sohn. Berlin.
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).

--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
4
Q
(I w a I
00000
.. .. *. .* l .
a ma40
44 4
l
0 0

Eligehausen, R. and Fuchs, W., 1988, “Tragverhalten von Jirsa, J.O., Cichy, N.T., CaIzadilla, M.R., Smart, W.H.,
Dfibelbefestigungen bei Querzug-, Schrsgzug- und Biegebean- Pavluvcik, M.P., & Breen, J.E., 1984, “Strength and Behavior
spruchung,” (bad-bearing Behaviour of Anchor Fastenings of Bolt Installations Anchored in Concrete Piers,” Research
Under Shear, Combined Tension and Shear or Flexural Report 305-IF, Center for Highway Research, The University
Loading), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 2, in German of Texas at Austin, November.
and English.
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Klingner, R.E. and Mendonca, J.A., 1982a, “Tensile

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

Rehm, G., Eligehausen, R. and Mallee, R., 1988, “Befest- 4.2 -Functional requirements
igungstechnik,” (Fastening Technique), in “Betonkalender 4.2.1 Loading Conditions-Major considerations
1988”, Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn, Berlin.
in determining the requirements for concrete
Rehm, G. and Lehmann, R., 1982, “Untersuchungen mit anchorages include the type of loading which the
Metallspreizdtibeln in der gerissenen Zugzone von Stahlbeton- anchorage will experience, and the potential for
bauteilen,” (Investigations with Metallic Expansion Anchors in concrete cracking in the vicinity of the anchors.
the Cracked Tension Zone of Reinforced Concrete Members)“, There is a high probability of coincidental cracking
Research Report of the Otto-Graf- Institut, Stuttgart, July,
unpublished.
when anchors are located in the tensile zone of a
concrete member. As described in Chapter 3, the
Riemann, H., 1985, “Das erweiterte x-Verfahren fiir capacity of anchors under sustained loading in the
Befestigungsmittel: Bemessung an Beispielen von Kopfbolzen- tensile stress zone of uncracked concrete is only 60
verankerungen,” (The Extended X-Method for the Design of to 75 percent of static load capacity of anchors in
Fastening Devices as Exemplified by Headed Stud Anchor-
ages), Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, No. 12, pp. 806-815, in
unstressed concrete. In cracked concrete, anchor
German and English. capacity is significantly influenced by anchor type
and width of the crack in the region of the
Seghezzi, H.D. and Vollmer, H., 1982, “Modern Anchoring anchorage. In regions of tensile stress, since the
Systems for Concrete, ACI SP-103, Anchorage to Concrete,
width of flexural cracks is maximum at the
Atlanta, January.
concrete surface and decrease with distance away
Sell, R., 1973, “Festigkeit und Verformung von mit from the surface, the designer should use deep-
Reaktionsharzmiirtel-Patronen versetzten Ankern,” (Strength seated anchors (anchored in the compression zone
and Displacement of Anchors Installed with Reaction Resin of the member), or anchors which are designed to
Mortar Cartridges), Verbindungstechnik 5, Vol. E, August, in perform in cracked concrete. Anchors which
German.
perform well, at a given load level in uncracked
Shaikh, A.F. and Yi, W., 1985, “In-Place Strength of Welded concrete, may fail completely in cracked concrete
Headed Studs,” Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, under loads of the same magnitude. Criteria for
March/April, pp. 56-81. the design and selection of concrete anchorages
should account for these factors.
Teledyne Engineering Services, 1979, Technical Report
3501-1, Revision 1, August 30. Economics or related issues may dictate
designing for a selected mode of failure.
Wagner-Grey, U., 1976,: “Experimentelle und Theoretische Installations such as bridge railings and highway
U n t e r s u c h u n g e n zum Tragverhalten von Spreizdtibeln in signs could potentially receive accidental loadings
Beton”, (Experimental and Theoretical Investigations on the
that are not reasonable design loads. In such
Performance of Expansion Anchors in Concrete), Doctoral
Thesis, Technical University of Munich. cases it may be prudent to design for the failure of
the most easily replaced segment of the structure,
Wiewel, Harry, 1989,: ” Results of Long-Term Tension Tests whether it is the anchor bolt or a separate piece of
on ITW Ramset/Red H e a d E P C O N S y s t e m @ A n c h o r s the structure. Care must be exercised in designing
Installed in Hardrock Concrete,” Techmar Inc, long Beach,
for selected failure modes to maintain the integrity
CA. J une.
of the primary structural system.
4.2.1.1 Column bases - Simply connected
column bases are normally loaded in compression
of sufficient magnitude that column shear is
CHAPTER 4-DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS transferred through friction and the anchorage
4.1- Introduction serves only for erection purposes. It has been
The purpose of this section is to discuss the common practice for many years to use L- and J-
various factors which affect the ability of concrete bolts for erection anchors, which do not have
anchorages to perform their intended purpose. sufficient embedment to develop the strength of
These factors should be considered in the design the anchor steel. Headed anchors of the same
of anchorages. The tendency to design anchors size and length as L- and J-bolts have significantly
based only on their tensile or shear loading is higher capacities. However, the increase in
discouraged, when actually bending, prying action, capacity is often not needed for the simple column
and redistribution of loads are often involved. base plate connection. Column bases which are
designed as moment connections should require a
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

rigid base connection and anchors should be because of the significant effect which tensile
selected which can maintain a sufficient residual loads have on anchor stress and the manner in
preload to develop applied moments. These which shear is transferred to the concrete.
conditions are necessary to achieve fixity of the Structural connections should also be investigated
column base. for cyclic loadings, vibration loads from wind or
4.2.1.2 Machine Foundations-Anchor bolts machinery, and seismic loads.
for machinery foundations are generally specified 4.2.1.4 Pipe Supports-In most structures, pipe
by the machinery manufacturer and have been supports are dead-load hangers or support
sized by experience. Their general purpose is to brackets. Pipe supports are generally detailed to
fix the rigid machine housing to concrete in order provide free expansion and contraction of the
to withstand machine vibrations. They are piping system under changing temperatures.
generally installed to a relatively low stress level Experience has shown these loosely supported
and may not have sufficient embedment to systems function very well under seismic
develop the anchor steel capacity. Seismic loading conditions without special design considerations.
of machine foundation anchorages can be critical Vibration problems normally occur under
and must be considered. operating conditions and are corrected by adding
4.2.1.3 Structural Tension and Shear or shifting supports to alter the response
Connections-The anchorage of principal frequency of the system. Design loads for these
structural connections requires careful supports are generally low and sizing of anchors,
consideration of all possible loading combinations. by experience, usually results in large safety
Failure of structural connections may be factors.
catastrophic, particularly when there is no In contrast to this, the pipe supports for nuclear
redundancy in the system. It is recommended that applications are often designed to prevent piping
all structural connections be ductile. system frequencies from coinciding with predicted
Ductility is defined as the ratio of a structure’s structural frequencies generated by an earthquake
plastic displacement to its maximum elastic (yield) of prescribed magnitude. As a result,
displacement. The ability of a structure to exhibit specifications often limit support displacements to
high values of ductility (ten or greater) is an low values under conservative combinations of
extremely desirable feature because this can allow loading. Most anchorages cannot comply with the
for an overload condition to exist without imposed displacement limitations without rigid
producing a catastrophic failure. It can provide bases and oversized anchors.
for highly redundant structures (i.e., structures When a pipe has multiple supports and is
that provide alternative stress paths) that loaded along its length, evaluation of the stiffness
redistribute loads internally. of each support with respect to the longitudinal
When designing the anchorage of a steel stiffness of the total support system between
structure to concrete, ductility of the structure, expansion joints or bends should be made to
including the connection, should be considered. insure that a particular support is not overloaded
The desired ductile behavior may occur in any one to failure, thus setting up a progressive failure
or all of the following components: the structural mechanism.
steel element being connected, the baseplate 4.2.2 Anchorage Environment- Consideration of
attached to the steel member, the steel anchors, or the service environment is essential for service
the concrete. Steel is more ductile than concrete longevity, particularly in areas where the
and it is better to proportion an anchorage so that anchorage may come in contact with saltwater
the majority of the ductile displacement occurs in sprays or deicing salts. Unprotected steel is
the steel elements of the anchorage or in the particularly vulnerable to corrosion when exposed
attached structural member. In cases where this to the atmosphere. For expansion anchors,
is not possible, extra care should be taken in vulnerability to corrosion exists in the region of
selecting anchor types, geometry, and safety the expansion mechanism where space is available
factors. for moisture collection. Corrosion will reduce the
Temperature changes and the shrinkage of ability of anchors to function correctly, especially
structural elements should also be carefully torque-controlled expansion anchors.
considered in determining connection details Where steel is under a sustained high stress,
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
there is a higher potential for stress corrosion to casting of the concrete.

failure. If the yield strength of the anchor steel is Anchor capacity may be limited by the strength
less than 120,000 psi, stress corrosion is less likely of concrete, by the strength of the anchorage steel,
to be a problem. However, precautions must be or by slip of the anchorage mechanism. The mode
taken when chlorides are used in the anchorage of failure is an important design consideration.
zone either externally or as a part of the concrete Concrete failure may occur before or during
mix. Protective coating systems, or the use of slip of the anchor. In general, the properties of
corrosion resistant materials, should be considered steel are well defined and steel failure is
in corrosive environments. The use of thin zinc predictable and controllable. In contrast to the
coatings will not provide permanent protection controlled ductility of a steel failure mechanism,
against corrosion under normal outside exposure concrete is a brittle material with less well-defined
conditions. Proper detailing will insure that runoff properties. Failure by slip may be either brittle or
water cannot reach anchors in areas of snow and ductile depending on the ability of the anchorage
ice removal. Alternate periods of wetting and mechanism to maintain load during slip.
drying have been known to produce corrosion
even in the absence of chlorides. 4.3 - MATERIALS
Anchor bolts are often set in sleeves to provide 4.3.1 Concrete-When the capacity of the
for minor adjustment of the bolt to fit the anchorage is controlled by the strength of
foundation base. If the foundation is exposed to concrete, it is generally the tensile properties of
freezing temperatures, the sleeves should be filled the concrete which control cone failures, and
with grout or be otherwise protected against the crushing strength that controls slip failures.
intrusion of water. Gaps between a steel base Tensile properties of concrete vary more than
plate and the concrete surface should be sealed if compressive properties. Tensile properties of the
the foundation is exposed to an aggressive concrete also influence bond and affect those
environment. In a similar fashion, plain sand- anchor types which depend on bond to develop
cement dry-pack pads which are exposed to capacity.
freezing and thawing should be coated with a The tensile-compressive strength relationship
sealer to prevent water absorption. can be complicated by the influence of grain size,
Chemical adhesives, lead caulking, or other type, and distribution of aggregate particles. For
materials which have a high rate of creep at this reason, construction practices, which permit
elevated temperatures should not be used in areas segregation of the aggregate will increase the
of high temperature or possible exposure to fire. variability of tensile strength more than the
Special investigations may also be necessary to compressive strength. Segregation of the
determine the possible effects of process chemicals aggregate is influenced by the slump of the
on anchors in industrial plants. Intermittent concrete, the height of the drop of the concrete,
exposure may be a more severe service condition and the amount of vibration during placement.
than continuous exposure. For this reason, the capacity of anchors may vary
4.2.3 Behavior-The behavior of cast-in-place depending on their location in walls and in the top
and post-installed anchors is described in Chapter or bottom of slabs.
3. Well-designed, cast-in-place anchors perform 4.3.2 Steel-The type of steel used in anchors is
better than or equally as well as post-installed largely dependent on the method of anchorage but
anchors, if for no other reason than that they are can also be influenced by the method of securing
normally set deeper into the concrete and at the base plate or attachment to the anchors. It is
ultimate load feature failure in the bolt rather desirable to limit the yield strength of headed
than failure in the concrete. Construction logistics anchors to that of ASTM A 325 or lower strength
and specifications that admit alternative material, because of the brittle nature of higher
manufacture of the equipment to be anchored strength steels. Zinc plating causes additional
(and therefore alternative anchorage size and brittleness and reduced fatigue resistance for
location) often make the post-installed anchor higher strength steel bolts. Steel with yield
more practical. Nonetheless, the designer should strengths in excess of 120,000 psi have been found
consider use of a cast-in-place anchor whenever to be highly susceptible to stress corrosion in most
the size and location of that anchor is known prior anchorage environments.

--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
4.4 -Design basis “concrete cone break out” was not considered
The safety factor for any element in an because typically this mode does not occur when
anchorage system should be consistent with the developing reinforcing bars. However, the failure
other elements in the system. Establishing an mode “concrete cone break out” is quite typical for
allowable stress or load factor must consider shallow anchors (see Chapter 3).
overall behavior of the anchorage. The design of Excluding edge and spacing conditions, the
concrete anchorages is usually controlled by codes yield strength of an individual reinforcing bar can
governing both structural steel and concrete. be developed in 3000 psi uncracked concrete in
4.4.1 Types of anchors about 15 bar diameters (straight bar) or 10 bar
4.4.1.1Headed Anchors-Headed anchors may diameters (hooked bar). To preclude a concrete-
consist of welded studs or bolting material with cone-break-out failure, the development length
anchor heads manufactured to established may increase by a factor of up to four to account
standards. Headed anchors may also be made by for the effects of cover, number, and spacing of
welding a rigid plate to the embedded end of the bars. A further increase of the development
anchor or by threading a bar and using a standard length by a factor of one and one-half to two is
nut. Once the load increases sufficiently to necessary if the anchors are located in the cracked
overcome n the shank, subsequent loading tensile zone of a reinforced concrete member.
anchor head. Headed Most anchorage situations do not involve
efficiently if the shank of the minimum values for spacing and cover. The code
This will minimize bond and provisions will be very conservative if individual
oad on the anchor by bearing bars are anchored in uncracked concrete well away
from edges. However, the code provisions may
Anchors-When anchor load not be conservative, if a group of bars, with or
without small edge distance, is anchored in
uncracked concrete or in the (cracked) tension
inishes with depth. The zone of reinforced concrete members.
quired to fully develop the 4.4.1.3 Expansion Anchors-Many patented
expansion devices are used to mechanically fasten
post-installed anchors to the concrete. Most
of deformations). Under expansion anchors were originally developed for
sustained loadi short embedment depths to provide an anchor
concrete in the which failed in the concrete or by slip. Since
Bonded anchor typically been manufactured ductile steel failure had no opportunity to occur in
deformed reinforcing bars, this situation, there were no restricting strengths
s. The basic development applied to the steel in these anchors. More
Building Code are based on recently developed expansion anchors feature
d minimum spacing of an expansion mechanisms that can fully develop the
rs. The basic development strength of the anchor steel, when used as single
ars with a hook or 90” bend anchors. Ductile steels should be specified for this
about 50 percent of the type of anchor if a ductile failure mode is desired.
of straight bars. The use of 4.4.2 Concrete tensile failure -The determination
r reinforcement was excluded of concrete pullout strength (cone failure) of
g Code in 1971 (ACI-ASCE individual anchors and anchor groups is discussed
in Section 3.2.2. Concrete cone failure will occur
considered as twice that when the capacity of the anchor bolt exceeds the
of deformed ba concrete pullout strength. All shell type expansion
gths given in ACI 318 anchors are designed to fail the concrete when the
insure that the crete capacity is higher than the bolt is embedded to shell depth. Concrete failure
When evaluating the concrete can also occur with wedge bolts having shallow
e failure modes “splitting of embedment depths.
e concrete between ribs” The concrete may also fail by splitting tension
The failure mode when there is inadequate lateral confinement of

355.1R-57
the anchor. This occurs with all types of bolts and sleeve anchors with embedment depths
expansion anchors that have small edge distances. greater than seven bolt diameters will fail by slip.
Deformation-controlled expansion anchors (drop- They cannot be considered ductile, however,
in, self-drilling, and stud) are especially sensitive because the relatively wide variation in the slope
to edge distance because of the high expansion of the deflection curves and ultimate loads
forces developed during anchor installation. distribute loads nonuniformly to the anchors. For
Splitting may also occur at close edge distances these types of anchors, most manufacturers of
when the anchorage mechanism expands with load post-installed expansion anchors recommend
application. limiting normal service loads to 25 percent of the
In the United States, most manufacturers of average published failure loads.
expansion anchors recommend limiting normal 4.4.4 Tensile strength of steel - When the
service loads to 25 percent of the manufacturer’s concrete-failure-cone strength exceeds the tensile
average test failure load. Investigations by the strength of the anchor steel, design is controlled
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the strength of steel. For structural
(1979) indicated that installation problems attachments, other than simple hangers, load
associated with split-shell type expansion anchors distribution to the attachments is dependent on
warranted increased safety factors over those the stiffness of the attachment and its degree of
applied to torque-type anchors. For the split-shell fixi ty For rigid base connections, anchor stress
anchor, and others which cause the concrete to may be determined assuming that plane sections
fail, it was recommended that a minimum factor remain plane. However, if the load is transferred
of safety of five against average test values be from the attachment to the anchors through a
used. flexible plate, the determination of anchor stress
Test results for expansion anchors differ from is complicated by plate stiffness, prying action, and
job to job and with anchor size, type, and the load-displacement characteristics (including
modifications in anchor design. Assuming a preload) of the anchor steel.
coefficient of variation of 25 percent, a factor of AISC imposes a minimum safety factor of two,
safety of five on average tested anchor strength is against ultimate, for service loads on high yield
appropriate. materials. Considering the increased loss of
The capacities of anchors are affected by preload in concrete anchorages (approximately
embedment depth, edge distance, and spacing. three times that of steel to steel connections), a
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Reinforcing steel in the concrete can be used to minimum safety factor of three for anchor bolts
enhance the strength of cast-in-place anchors. would provide residual service load allowables
When the edge distance is small, closely spaced approximating 85 to 90 percent of the residual
spirals of small diameter wire or mesh may be preload for bolts initially preloaded close to yield.
used to resist the bursting forces. However, more This would appear to be a reasonable limit
research is required in this area. Other solutions considering all the other concrete and anchor
may be more effective. They consist of: variables. Proof load for concrete anchorages
should be approximately 110 percent of the service
(1) Providing for deeper embedment to load.
preclude the tensile-cone-failure mode. For factored load design, AC I Committee 349
(2) Using larger number of smaller anchors at (1990) limits maximum stress to 0.9 of yield for all
closer spacings to avoid spalling when the edge types of connections, and with stresses based on
distance is too small. the net tensile area for bolted connections.
(3) Preloading the anchorage so that shear is Assuming an average load factor of 1.6, service
transferred by friction at the interface of the base load stresses would approximate 0.55 yield for
plate and the concrete rather than through shear anchors other than bolts. For ASTM A 36 steel,
in the anchor. this also closely corresponds to a factor of safety
of 3 against tensile strength.
4.4.3 Anchor Slip -Anchors which fail by slip, The capacity of welded stud anchors appears to
without causing the concrete to fail in tension, be affected by the thickness of the attachment,
have load-displacement characteristics similar to Tennessee Valley Authority (1979). Apparently
the post-yield behavior of steel. Typically, wedge prying action, due to the flexibility of the plate,

induces very high stress and cracking at the should not be assumed greater than 50 percent of
interior edge of the heat-affected zone of the weld the initial preload without prototype testing.
under relatively low load applications. As a result, When the installation load is determined by
testing clearly indicates loss of capacity with calibrated torque wrench or other less positive
increasing plate flexibility. means, a higher loss should be assumed. Lost
4.4.5 Shear- Shear may be transferred from preload may be regained by retorquing, or
base plate to concrete either by friction or by retightening anchors. There appears to be little
bearing. advantage in retorquing more than twice.
4.4.5.1 Shear transfer by friction - If shear is to Sufficient time should be allowed for the majority
be transferred by friction, no lateral translation of loss to occur before retorquing, but under no
(sliding) of the base plate can occur. The normal condition should the time period be less than
force necessary to develop frictional resistance about 1 week. Effective preload should not be
may be caused by direct load, by the compressive assumed without verification requirements in the
reaction of the applied moment, by residual installation procedure.
preload in the anchors, or by any combination of 4.4.5.2 Shear transfer through bearing- If
the three. If the connection is to transfer shear by frictional resistance is not sufficient to resist
friction, the loading combination which controls lateral sliding, shear must be transferred by the
should be that which produces the minimum plate bearing on anchors, shear lugs, or the
compressive reaction in conjunction with concrete at the end of a fully embedded plate. In
maximum shear. bearing connections, shear is distributed in
If the connection is fastened to hardened proportion to the stiffnesses of the shear-resisting
concrete, the coefficient of friction used to elements, with each element contributing its share.
determine shear resistance should not exceed 0.6. Failure of the stiffer elements will increase lateral
If the surface of a base plate is in intimate contact translation. The stiffer elements then transfer
with concrete or grout, shear resistance will be their load to the remaining elements.
increased by the cohesion between the two 4.4.6 Preload-Concern for fatigue failure is a
surfaces and the coefficient may be taken as 0.7. principal consideration in establishing service
All forces contributing to frictional resistance stresses. This is particularly true for expansion
should be conservatively determined in designing anchors. If the element is subject to frequent
for either total or partial shear resistance by fluctuations in stress, the magnitude of the
friction. Note that: fluctuating stress range must be restricted to
(a) Direct loads normal to the shear plane prevent eventual fatigue failure (see discussion of
should be the minimum associated with the load- behavior under cyclic loads in Chapter 3). This is
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ing condition. For cyclic loading, this would be best controlled by limiting the maximum level of
the maximum direct pull-off loading including design stress. If the bolting system can be
associated impact factors. prestressed with sufficient load that the load
(b) The compression component of the remaining after losses exceeds the maximum stress
moment reaction is dependent on the location of load, it is generally accepted that fatigue is not
the center of gravity of the compressive reaction. likely to occur. Under these conditions service
Conservative assumptions should therefore be load stress should be set at a level that reflects the
used concerning its location. Without test veri- residual prestress. If a sustaining (residual)
fication of the analytical procedure, the location prestress cannot be assured, the service load stress,
should not be assumed to be farther than pne under fluctuating loads, must be set at a low
plate thickness from the compressive edge of the enough level to assure that fatigue failure will not
attachment. occur.
(c) Residual preload, if any, should be based Assuring a level of prestress in concrete
on conservative assumptions of preload loss. anchorages is more complicated than steel-to-steel
Shallow depth anchors having the capability of connections. Preload loss occurs due to creep of
failing the concrete in tension may be expected to the concrete in the highly-stressed regions of load
experience a total loss of preload. When the transfer from steel to concrete. For most
installation procedure requires a positive means of embedments the major preload loss occurs within
determining installation preload, residual preload a few days of preloading. The loss, in percent,
diminishes each time the anchorage is retorqued bolts in transmitting shear through the added
such that losses can be minimized by retorquing at space of the washers. If intimate contact is not
about 1 week intervals. The prestress should not achieved, the danger of high stress accumulations
exceed the yield stress of the steel. Loss of can be prevented by initially torquing to maximum
preload is a function of the strain relaxation values and then loosening the bolts to a minimum
(creep) relative to the total anchor strain. Since torque value after the concrete has had sufficient
the major portion of load relaxation occurs at the time to consolidate in the region of the anchor
zone of load transfer into the concrete, the loss of head. This will eliminate nonlinear anchor
preload, in percent, can be reduced by increasing displacement under load and restrict peak stress
the total anchor elongation which increases the accumulation to design stress levels.
strain length of the anchor. If the embedment 4.4.7 Base plate flexibility-The flexibility of the
length of the anchor is the minimum required to base plate connecting the attachment to the
develop its tensile strength, it will lose from 40 to anchorage steel is a controlling factor in
50 percent of its applied preload unless retorqued determining the magnitude of anchor stress and
(Burdette, Perry, and Funk 1987). The loss may the distribution of stress to the anchors. If the
be more pronounced if the anchor is situated in distance between exterior anchors and attachment
cracked concrete. Loss of preload may approach is more than two plate thicknesses, the plate may
100 percent for anchors of lesser embedment be considered flexible, otherwise, the plate may be
depths which are capable of failing the concrete. considered rigid. If the plate is rigid, anchor stress
This is especially true for anchors located in due to moment is proportional to its distance from
cracked concrete. To achieve an effective residual the neutral axis and a conventional summation of
preload, care must be taken to exclude any forces and moments can be used to determine
bonding of the anchor to grout or concrete at the stress. If the plate is flexible, anchor stress is
embedment surface. When bond occurs at the dependent on plate stiffness as well as distance to
surface, the confinement of the surface concrete the neutral axis. It can also be influenced by the
or grout, by compression of the bearing plate on effect of other stressed anchors in the group that
the surface, is often sufficient to locally transfer cause bending in the plate, and on any prying
the entire load for a limited time. When this forces caused by plate flexure, which may add
occurs, stretch of the bolt may be limited to the directly to the anchor load. Anchor loads,
thickness of the bearing plate or attachment. For determined by conventional analysis, may be
effective preload, threads must be excluded from significantly in error if the plate is flexible.
bonding to either concrete or grout. Grout has 4.4.7.1 Prying action-When load is trans-
significantly higher bonding qualities than ferred from attachment to anchor through a
concrete, therefore the entire length of bolt above flexible plate in full contact with the concrete or
the anchor head should be coated to prevent bond grout, rotation of the plate at the anchor will
in grouted systems. induce a prying force beyond the anchor where
Effective prestress requires intimate contact of the plate bears on the concrete. The prying force
the base plate with concrete or grout at all anchor increases the load in the anchor. Prying increases
locations. When the base plate is bolted directly with plate flexibility which affects the magnitude
to hardened concrete without grout, effective of potential downward displacement of the plate
prestress can be accomplished by placing shims or edge beyond the anchor. Prying decreases with
washers between the plate and concrete at the increased anchor displacement. Preload reduces
anchor locations. In most moment connections, the displacement characteristics of the anchor
shear is transferred to the concrete entirely under applied loading and increases the counter
through friction and bolts transmit tension only. rotation of the plate beyond the anchor. For this
If the combined effect of anchor preload and reason anchor stress will increase with applied
compressive reaction of the applied moment are load irrespective of preload. The rate of stress
not sufficient for shear transfer through friction, increase, however, decreases with increasing
then shear must be transferred through the preload.
anchors. If this occurs, and shims or washers are If the plate is not in contact with the concrete
used, the combined stress in the anchor would be beyond the anchor, no prying will occur until the
increased by the increased bending stress in the gap between plate and concrete is closed by the
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
downward displacement of the plate edge. If the CHAPTER 5-CONSTRUCTION CON-

anchor is not preloaded, the displacement of the SIDERATIONS
stressed anchor will add to the gap requiring 5.1 Introduction
closure to develop prying. If the anchor is Quality control is the central issue among
preloaded to close the gap, the preload force will construction considerations for anchorage to
add to the anchor stress resisting applied loads. concrete. In construction, the engineering
profession tends to be quite meticulous with
4.5-Construction practices respect to tolerance in the fabrication of structural
Design of anchor installations must take into steel, but somewhat less so in masonry, timber
account local construction practice and expected framing, and reinforced concrete. Meeting
field conditions. Details should be designed so tolerances is expensive and, therefore, required
that the probability of concrete honeycombing at tolerances are limited to what is practical and
anchor locations is minimized. Placement what “can be covered by the other trades” and still
tolerances may or may not be critical and should yield an acceptable product.
be determined by the application. See Chapter 5 Another concept in establishing tolerances is to
for more information. weigh the consequences of constructing less
accurately than specified. Experience has shown
4.6-REFERENCES that the secondary costs of compensating for the
structural skeleton being out of square or out of
Abbot A. Hanks, “Summary Report - Kwik-Bolt Testing plumb justify taking great care in the initial
Program”, File No. H2189-S1, Report No. 8783, Abbot A. fabrication. This is also true for anchorage to
Hanks Testing Laboratories, San Francisco, CA
concrete. There are few details in a structure
ACI Committee 349,1990, “Code Requirements for Nuclear where care during installation pays more
Safety Related Concrete Structures (AC1 349-90), “Appendix dividends, or where carelessness can prove more
B”, American Concrete Institute, Detroit. costly. Sometimes corrective measures can be so
expensive that they are not taken and the end
ACI-ASCE Committee 326, 1962, “Shear and Diagonal
Tension”, ACI Journal, Proceedings V 59, No. 2, Feb., pp. 277- product falls far short of what the engineer
333. intended.
Anchorage details are at the interface and
Burdette, E.G., Perry, T., Funk, R.R., 1987, “Load provide the connecting link between separate
Relaxation Tests”, ACI SP-103 Anchorage to Concrete, Detroit, structural systems. The axial load, moment, and
pp. 297-311.
shear required of the connection are typically
Cannon, Robert W., 1981, “Expansion Anchor Performance quite well defined, and must be accommodated
in Cracked Concrete”, ACI Journal Proceedings V. 78, because there is usually no alternative path for
November-December, pp. 471-479. load transfer. The joint has a minimum of
redundancy to compensate for error in design or
Eligehausen, Rolf, 1987, “Anchorage to Concrete by
Metallic Expansion Anchors”, Anchorage to Concrete, American construction. Accordingly, it is important that the
Concrete Institute Special Publication SP-103, pp. 181-201. field engineer understands the intent of the
design, to assure that the anchorage be
Orangun, C.O., Jirsa, J.O., and Breen, J.E., 1977, “A Re- constructed as specified. This relates to having
evaluation of Test Data on Development Length and Splices,” the proper device, with the specified size and
ACI Journal, Vol. 74, No. 3, pp. 114-122.
material, and having it properly installed.
Raphael, Jerome M., 1984, “Tensile Strength of Concrete”,
ACI Journal No. March - April, pp. 158-165. 5.2 Shop drawings/submittals
The first step in quality control is that the plans
Tennessee Valley Authority, 1979, “Welded Stud Anchors, and specifications must indicate clearly what is
Effect of Plate Flexibility on Stud Capacity”, CEB Report No.
79-18, TVA, Knoxville, TN. intended. The next step is the requirement for
submittals and shop drawings for all anchorages.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979, “Pipe 5.2.1 Cast-in-place systems-For cast-in-place
Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor systems, the submittal is the shop drawing and any
Bolts”, IE Bulletin No. 79-02, Office of Inspection and other certifications required by the construction
Enforcement, Washington, D.C.
specifications. With respect to each anchorage

assembly, the shop drawing should indicate the 5.4 lnstatllatlon of anchors
material of the anchoring device, its coating, 5.4.1 Cast-in-place systems
length, diameter, length of threaded portion, 5.4.1.1 Anchors Embedded, Non-
diameter and thickness of washers, number of nuts Adjustable-Anchorages that fall into this category
(single, double, single or double plus leveling, (see Table 2.1) can be grouped as follows:
etc.), and torquing requirements, if any. - Bolts installed in plastic concrete - Bolts in
The shop drawing should also indicate the cans or blockouts
location of the anchorage in the structure, the - Bolts, with or without sleeves, positioned
location of the bolts (or devices) in a group, and without template
their projection and embedment with respect to - Bolts, embedments, weld plates, or inserts
the finished concrete grade. When the completed attached to the formwork
anchorage is specified to be either grouted or dry - Bolts or groups of bolts, with or without
packed, the dimensional details of the grout or sleeves, positioned by top or bottom templates, or
drypack should be shown. both
When the anchorage consists of embedded - Embedded structural shapes
dowels of reinforcing steel, the shop drawings for
the anchorage are included in the shop drawings 5.4.1.2 Bolts installed in plastic
for the reinforcing steel. They should indicate the concrete-Often in wood frame construction the
type of steel, details of bending, location (bar or bolts connecting the wood sill to the footing or a
groups of bars), embedment, and projection. wood plate to the top of a wall are installed as
Often an anchor assembly includes embedded soon as the concrete placement is completed.
structural shapes, either as the anchor itself or as This practice is not recommended because a good
a lower template. Shop drawings for these bond may not be achieved.
embedded shapes should indicate type of steel; 5.4.1.3 Bolts in Cans or Blockouts- T h i s
coating; cross-sectional shape (standard desig- system can be used in cast-in-place or post-
nation); dimensions and details of the member or installed construction. Often, for machinery
group of members in the assembly (location, type, foundations or in situations where it is not
size, and length of welds); size and location of desirable to have anchor bolts protruding from a
holes; and embedment depth. slab or penetrating through a wall form, a can or
5.2.2 Post-Installed Systems-For post-installed blockout will be set at the approximate future bolt
systems, the submittal should include the shop location. These blockouts can be made of wood,
drawings with information similar to that required metal, or plastic; can be cylindrical or prismatic;
for cast-in-place systems, plus manufacturer’s can provide a shear key perpendicular to the floor
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
literature which adequately describes the device or wall; or be battered to provide a dovetail effect.
and its capabilities and provides instructions for its For flatwork, the cans or blockouts can be
proper installation. positioned by wood battens or templates which
have a soffit elevation equal to the grade at top-
5.3 Tolerances of-concrete and are secured to the edge forms; or
The acceptable variation from the specified they can be wired to the reinforcement or the
positioning is the tolerance. The tolerances edge forms. For vertical surfaces, they can be
should be specified by the engineer and be fastened to the wall form in their predetermined
appropriate for the application. Table 5.1 gives positions. In both cases, the blockout should be
suggested tolerances for anchor positioning and wire tied to the reinforcement so that it will not
can be used as a guide in determining be vibrated out of position during the placement
acceptability. Other sources such as the American of the concrete.
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) and After concreting, wood blockouts are stripped.
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) are Metal or plastic units are typically left in place.
available. These requirements are rigorous, but The pocket is blown clean of debris, the anchor
meeting them is judged to be more economical bolt positioned and the pocket grouted.
than the consequences of not meeting them.
Mounting or anchoring certain special equipment
may require even closer tolerances.

Table 5.1 -Suggested tolerances for installation of anchors in concrete
Installed
Location
L and P are Specified
Correct
Location
/3 Per Plans Plan “A”
Suggested tolerances
Type of anchorage Vertical
Projection Positioning Alignment,
P, in. r, in. (r, deg.
A. Cast-in-place
1. Common bolt, J- or Gbolt, continuously threaded rods k /14 I 1/16 I 3.0
2. Reinforcing steel Per recommendations of Committee 117

3. Embedded structural shapes f 1/4 1/8 3.0
4. Weld plates Flush with concrete l/8 N/A
5. Troughs for adjustable anchors Flush with concrete l/4 N/A
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
6. Temporary embedded inserts Flush with concrete l/2 3.0
B. Post-installed
1. Drilled and grouted-all types + l/4 1/16 3.0

2. Expansion types k 1/8 1/16 3.0

5.4.1.4 Anchors with or without sleeve, be wire tied or welded, according to approved
positioned without templates-This practice is procedures, to the reinforcement so that it will be
generally not recommended, but if proper care is maintained in correct position while the concrete
taken it can be successful. Tolerance criteria is being placed. Engineering approval should be
should be met and maintained throughout the obtained before welding to high-strength bolts or
concrete placement. The bolt insert or sleeve reinforcing bar, because material property changes
should be rigidly tied with wire to the rein- may compromise expected steel capacities.
forcement, top and bottom. Sometimes, the Bottom templates are expensive and usually
sleeve, the bolt head, bottom washer, or insert is reserved for larger diameter bolt installations.
tack welded, according to approved procedures, to They also affect the capacity of an anchorage and
cross bars which in turn are wire tied or tack for this reason should only be used where detailed
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
welded to the existing reinforcement. or approved by the Engineer.

5.4.1.5 Bolts, embedments, weld plates or inserts 5.4.1.7 Embedded structural shapes -This
attached to the formwork-This work generally system is used mainly for transmission towers,
relates to soffit and wall forms. The important although it has been used for other applications.
step is to accurately scribe the inside of the form The superstructure can be erected plumb, leveled,
for proper location of the anchoring unit. The and set to grade in holes augered in the ground.
anchor unit should then be nailed or bolted to the Then concrete is cast around the structural shape.
form or wire tied to the reinforcing steel, or both Alternatively, the anchoring elements, usually
so that neither internal nor external vibration can angles, are cast in the footings and the tower or
disturb or move the anchorage unit out of superstructure subsequently bolted to them. The
position. anchor installation is straightforward but care is
5.4.1.6 Bolts or groups of bolts, with or without required through the use of templates and guides
sleeve positioned by templates -These installations to maintain proper location in plan, and at the
are generally used in flatwork, where the bolts are proper grade, batter, and plane of batter.
vertical. The use of templates is the best 5.4.1.8 Adjustable anchors -Anchors of this
technique for guaranteeing that the anchorage is type are patented devices used principally in
correctly positioned. flatwork. Most often they are used for machinery
A top template is often wood, although in installation and are designed to compensate for
“loose base plate” construction (where the normal field tolerances in the positioning of
superstructure is subsequently welded or otherwise anchor bolts. They offer an added advantage in
connected to a steel base plate), the base plate that there are no bolts projecting above the floor
itself can be used as the template. The top prior to setting the machinery. The machinery can
template for a single bolt or a group of bolts be moved into place on its base and then the bolts
generally has a soffit elevation at or above the top set. One features a trough set flush with the
of the finished concrete. Sometimes top templates surface of the concrete and stud anchored to the
are plywood with the holes either laid out concrete below. Another features deeply
precisely as the holes in the base plate, or actually embedded pockets, housing a tapped bottom
drilled using the base plate holes as a guide for washer plate and having a sleeve extension up to
the drill. Where only a top template is used, there the surface of the concrete. The devices are
should be nuts above and below the template to positioned and held in position during concrete
hold the anchor bolt in a plumb position. placement in a manner similar to that described
The bottom template is a steel assembly of for sleeves. The principal concern is that the
angles, channels, or flat bars. Low carbon steel insert be maintained level. The bolt is normally
bolts can be precisely positioned and welded grouted in place at the same time that the
directly to the steel template, or set in accurately equipment base plate is grouted.
located holes in the template, and tack welded. 5.4.1.9 Common bolts pretensioned -Bolt
When used in conjunction with a top template, it installation is as described in further detail in
is the top template that controls both the bolt Section 5.5.1. The shank of the bolt should be
projection and lateral position of the group of coated with bond breaker before placing concrete.
bolts. When there is no top template, the bottom After concreting, the annular space around sleeved
template must provide those controls and should
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
bolts is grouted. When concrete and grout (and or set in predrilled holes. The wedging action
dry pack under baseplate) has cured the specified between the device and the sides of the hole is
number of days, screw on the nut and apply the actuated by placing tension on the bolt, by turning
pretensioning load with a torque wrench. Torque the bolt, by hammering the bolt onto a spreader
should initially be about 50 percent of desired (cone or wedge) in the bottom of the hole, or by
torque, then to 90 percent, working from one bolt hammering a spreader into the bottom expanding
to the one diagonally opposite and thus portion of the anchor. The manufacturer’s
progressing through the group. The final 10 instructions for installation of expansion anchors
percent of torque should be applied to all bolts in must be followed meticulously. This applies
sequence. After 1 week verify that pretension has particularly to the diameter and depth of hole.
held, or retension to specified torque, if necessary. Some systems afford the opportunity of using the
5.4.2 Post-installed systems base plate or element being connected as a
5.4.2.1 General anchor types -Anchors in this template in drilling the embedment hole. Others
group include: require a larger hole to accommodate a sleeve
Common bolts, reinforcing bars, and that bears against the bottom of the connected
continuously threaded rods base plate.
- Bonded (grout and chemical) anchors Expansion anchors can lose preload under a
- Rock bolts cyclic loading or from concrete creep due to high
- Expansion anchors local expansion forces unless they are so
5.4.2.2 Common bolts, reinforcing bars, pretensioned that the bolt is always in tension
threaded rod-Section 5.5.2 applies for positioning under all loading conditions. Generally, to
and drilling the hole; Section 5.6 for grouting. develop the pretension load the wedge or
5.4.2.3 Chemical anchors-These are similar expansion device must first be “set” against the
to grouted anchors, with an adhesive, such as side of the hole. With certain types of anchors
epoxy, polyester, or vinylester taking the place of there may be an initial slip which should be
the grout. Section 5.5.2 applies as far as anticipated and designed for. In the case of
positioning and drilling the hole for the anchor. excessive slip, follow the recommendations in
The adhesives are proprietary and installation Section 5.7.2.
should follow manufacturer’s instructions.
Drilled hole diameters may vary from 1.0 to 5.5 Inspection
2.0 mm larger than the nominal steel diameter 5.5.1 Cast-in-place systems -The inspector has
without affecting loading capacity for polyester the responsibility to verify that the size and
and vinylester anchoring systems. Storage should location of anchors or anchorage assemblies are in
follow manufacturer’s recommendations to prevent accordance with the construction plans and
heat, ultraviolet light, or both from shortening the specifications, prior to the placement of concrete.
shelf life of the unused product. Anchoring Anchors must be located properly in plan, have
systems using epoxies are not sensitive to these the proper projection, and be rigidly held in place
same storage requirements. so as not to be disturbed during the placement
5.4.2.4 Rock bolts - Rock bolts occasionally and finishing of the concrete. Methods of
are used for anchoring to concrete. There are securing the anchorage in place include:
many types available. Section 5.5.2 applies as far - Nailing to the forms (conditions applicable)
as positioning and drilling the lead hole. In the - Nailing the top template to the forms
case of the split end variety, bondbreaker is - Wire tying individual bolts, or their bottom
applied to part of the shank and then the rock template, to the forms or the reinforcement and
bolt is then inserted in the hole with the wedge - Tack welding to the reinforcement, if
lightly set in the split tail of the bolt. The nut is approved. (High strength bolts should not be
in place on the bolt, flush with the end. The bolt welded)
is then rammed down over the wedge until the Welding should be to the bottom washer or the
bolt is well set in the hole. It is then adjusted for bottom template of the bolt head, rather than the
vertical alignment and grouted per Section 5.6. shank of the bolt.
5.4.2.5 Expansion anchors-These systems In the case of bolts that are subsequently to be
include a myriad of devices. They are self-drilling, tensioned, the inspector should verify that

unsleeved bolts, or sleeved bolts that are to be and is an excellent method, but it is labor
grouted prior to the tensioning, have a bond intensive, and in many installations is impractical.
breaker (grease or other) on the shank that will Epoxy grouts also have been used successfully
prevent the bolt from bonding to the concrete or for a number of years. These materials offer high,
grout. early strength and provide excellent bond and
5.5.2 Post-installed systems -Post-installed protection of steel in corrosive environments.
systems involve setting the anchor in blockouts or There are, however, some limitations in the use of
drilled holes. The inspector should verify that the these materials. The concrete and steel surfaces
blockouts or holes are properly located. With to be in contact with epoxy must be cleaned and,
drilled holes he should verify that the drill bit is of for most epoxies, dry. Epoxies also have a
the proper diameter, that the hole is plumb to the coefficient of thermal expansion several times that
surface (bit guides should be used for critical of the concrete or steel, which should be taken
work), that the finished hole has the proper into consideration. Epoxies can creep under
diameter and depth, and that the appropriate sustained loading of the anchor, and some epoxy
drilling equipment is used. This calls for rotary grouts lose strength when exposed to temperatures
drills (carbide tip or diamond studded bits) or over 120 F.
hand hammered star drill bits. Jackhammering 5.6.1.2 Precision, "Nonshrinking" grout-These
should not be permitted because of the damage it portland cement based products are proprietary
does to the concrete immediately around the hole. and sophisticated in terms of their cement
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Once the hole is drilled and blown clean, the chemistry and composition. They comply with the
anchor should be installed, preloaded, and tested requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engin-
(as required) in accordance with Section 5.5; or eers specifications for nonshrink grouts, CRD-C-
the hole should be protected by plugging it with a 621.
rag or other suitable stuffing until the time of Precision grouts are proportioned to lessen the
anchor installation. effects of plastic and drying shrinkage in the
Guidance for inspecting grouted anchors is plastic and hardened states. Accordingly they are
given in Section 5.6. excellent materials to use in complex grouting
situations, such as the grouting of machinery
5.6 -Grouting bases.
ACI Committee 351, Foundations for Equip- 5.6.2 Applications - Grouting of anchorages to
ment and Machinery, includes in its work concrete falls into three application categories:
development of information on grouting. Accord- - Grouting of anchor bolt holes and sleeves
ingly, reference is made to publications of that prior to base plate installation
committee. The statements which follow are in- - Grouting or dry-packing of base plates and
tended to be a brief summary of grouting as it machinery bases
relates to construction considerations for concrete - Grouting bolt holes after pretensioning of the
anchorages. anchor bolt
5.6.1 Materials - Grouting materials fall into two 5.6.3 Construction procedures
broad functional categories: nonprecision grouts 5.6.3.1 Preparation - Anchor bolt holes and
and precision, “nonshrinking” grouts. sleeves should be clean and free of oil, grease,
5.6.1.1 Nonprecision grouts - Nonprecision dirt, or other debris. Bolt holes should preferably
grouts include mixtures of cement and water, with have a textured surface, thoroughly moistened
or without the inclusion of sand or admixtures. prior to grouting, but with no free moisture in the
The use of the “jobsite mixed” or packaged hole.
products not designed to perform as a precision 5.6.3.2 Mixing and placing-Grouts may be
grout has limitations. The most significant mixed in mortar mixers or in smaller vessels, as is
limitation is the lack of a mechanism for appropriate to the work. When using proprietary
overcoming drying shrinkage which occurs as free products, follow the manufacturer’s instructions
moisture leaves the grout. for mixing. The “pot” life is a very important
Dry packing with cement, sand, and only consideration.
enough water to result in a stiff, but cohesive Proper placement of grout is important.
mixture has been used in grouting for many years Whether dry packed or poured at a fluid

consistency, the material should be placed or be verified by the Engineer-of-Record and, if

poured in a manner which will preclude the necessary, the design should be modified.
entrapment of air which produces voids in the The single most helpful practice for avoiding
hardened grout. the problem of cast-in-place anchor bolts not
5.6.3.3 Curing-Curing is important in fitting the base plates is to make holes in column
achieving satisfactory results in any grout and machinery base plates oversize, and then
installation. Normally this is accomplished by grout the annular space after the base plate is in
placing water-saturated rags over all exposed grout place, or use specially designed washers. The
surfaces as soon as possible after grout placement. following schedule of oversize holes is
These rags should be maintained wet and in place recommended.
for at least 24 hr after which the exposed surface - Bolts less than 1 in. diameter - 5/16 in.
of the grout is coated with a curing compound if oversize
secondary grouting will not follow. Where - Bolts 1 to 2 in. diameter - l/2 in. oversize
secondary grouting is to follow, continue the water - Bolts over 2 in. diameter - 1 in. oversize
curing for 7 days, or until placement of the second 5.7.2 Post-installed systems-A common field
grout. Proprietary grouts should be cured problem in post-installed systems is interference
according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. with the in-place reinforcement. The location of
that reinforcement can be determined magnetically
5.7 -Field problems or radiographically. Sometimes, it is simply
5.7.1 Cast-in-Place Systems-The common discovered when the drill bit, drilling the hole, hits
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
problem encountered in the preconcreting stage is steel. When an anchorage interferes with any in-
interference with existing reinforcement. In this place reinforcement, the Engineer-of-Record
case a decision has to be made whether to move should decide on the remedy. Wherever possible,
the anchorage or move the reinforcement. In the anchorage itself should be shifted to a new
weighing the consequences of each, the Field location where there is no interference. Moment
Engineer, perhaps after consulting the Engineer- reinforcement should never be welded or cut.
of-Record, establishes which has priority. With due consideration, temperature
Another common problem is to discover, after reinforcement can be cut.
the concrete has hardened, that the anchorage has A second problem is excessive slip in
shifted during the placement of the concrete, and pretensioning the bolt. This can be indicative of
that the base plate will not fit in place, or that an oversized hole or a faulty anchoring device.
there is insufficient thread projecting to fully When excessive slip occurs, the assembly should
engage the nut. These problems can and should be reinstalled in the hole and the pretensioning
be avoided by proper inspection, or by use of applied such that the slip does not exceed the
sleeved or adjustable anchors. The specifications allowable limit (i.e., resulting embedment is
should cover these possibilities, and state that it is adequate). Sometimes the entire anchor will have
the contractor’s responsibility to take necessary to be replaced, or possibly the hole drilled to a
precautions and corrective measures. Actions larger size and the next larger sized anchor
taken when field errors are discovered should have installed.
the approval of the Engineer-of-Record.
Bending of protruding bolts is discouraged
because the bending stress which results from the CHAPTER 6-REQUIREMENTS IN EXISTING
eccentricity of the service load, when added to the CODES AND SPECIFICATIONS
design axial and shear stresses, can often exceed 6.1 -Introduction
the yield strength of the bolt. In welding to Sources of information relating to codes and
compensate for insufficient thread being engaged specifications on anchorage to concrete are
by the nut, care should be taken that the weld presented in this section. Sources are referenced
acting alone will develop the strength of the bolt, in alphabetical order. American and international
because the capacity of the welds and the engaged documents are included in this state-of-the-art
threads are not additive. When any embedded review.
anchor is not installed within allowable tolerances,
the structural adequacy of the installation should

6.2 -Existing codes and specifications variables such as anchor type or form, spacing,
6.2.1 American Association of State Highway edge distance, nature of the anchor load, thickness
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) of the concrete member, and concrete stress in the
6.2.1.1 Standard Specification for Highway anchor zone. Concrete strength is critical to
Bridges -For composite bridge decks, AASHTO assure that the reinforced concrete structure
uses the ultimate capacity of stud shear connectors exhibits ductile failure, which is also an ACI 318
and a reduction factor t$ of 0.85 for design. requirement. Note, however, that many of the
Design checks are required for horizontal shear post-installed systems feature the brittle concrete-
under working loads. Working loads are cone failure.
compared to allowable loads which include a The commentary of ACI 349, Appendix B,
reduction for fatigue. provides an excellent source of information on
AASHTO Section 1.7.56 bases the number, types of anchorage devices, design requirements,
required embedment, and size of anchor bolt on modes of failure, and testing.
the span of the bridge, and requires that the 6.2.3 American Institute of Steel Construction
anchor bolt be swedged or threaded to insure a (AISC)
satisfactory grip on material such as the grout. 6.2.3.1 Manual of Steel Construction -The
AASHTO requires that anchor bolts subject to AISC “Specification for the Design, Fabrication,
tension be designed to engage a mass of concrete and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings” sets
which will provide a resistance equal to one and allowable bolt stresses in Sections 1.5.2 and 1.6.3.
one-half times the calculated uplift. These values apply to certain cast-in-place and
6.2.2 American Concrete Institute (ACI) grouted anchor bolts and are valid for allowable
6.2.2.1 ACI 318, Building Code Requirements anchor steel stresses, but no values are given
for Reinforced Concrete - ACI 318-63 contained which relate to the transfer of these stresses to the
allowable bond values for plain (smooth) bars. surrounding concrete.
Many engineers have used these values for The AISC specification gives allowable values in
determining embedment requirements for cast-in- shear for stud shear connectors used for composite
place anchor bolts. The current edition of ACI design in Table 1.11-4. The listed values cannot
318 does not give allowable bond values for plain be used for anchor bolts of the same size. The
or deformed bars. Section 12.6.1 states “Any values used in Table 1.11-4 are based on equations
mechanical device capable of developing the derived from a testing program and the ultimate
strength of reinforcement without damage to strength of the composite member, using a factor
concrete may be used as anchorage.” Section of safety of 2.0.
15.8.3.3 of ACI 318 states “Anchor bolts and The AISC code commentary contains the
mechanical connectors shall be designed to reach following warning:
their design strength prior to anchorage failure or “The values of q in Table 1.11-4 must not be
failure of surrounding concrete.” confused with shear connection values suitable for
6.2.2.2 ACI 349, Code Requirements for use when the required number is measured by the
Nuclear Safety Related Concrete parameter VQ/I, where V is the total shear at any
Structures-Appendix B of ACI 349 gives given cross-section. Such a misuse could result in
comprehensive procedures for designing providing less than half the number required by
anchorages and steel embedments that are used to Formulas 1.11-3, 1.11-4, or 1.11-5.”
transmit loads from attachments to reinforced The AISC specification also gives setting
concrete structures governed by ACI 349. The tolerances for bolts used to anchor structural
basic philosophy of anchorage requirements in members; however, these tolerances are unsuitable
ACI 349 is consistent with the ultimate strength for anchoring machinery.
design philosophy of reinforced concrete. The 6.2.4 American Society for Testing and Materials
failure mechanism is controlled by requiring (ASTM)
yielding of the steel anchor prior to brittle failure 6.2.4.1 Annual Book of Standards - Volume
of the concrete. 04.07 contains test standard ASTM E 488,
This design method considers not only “Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors
traditional design parameters, i.e., steel strength, in Concrete and Masonry Elements.” This test
concrete strength, and anchor size, but also other standard describes procedures for determining the
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

static, dynamic, and fatigue tensile and shear 307 quality or better.
strengths of cast-in-place, chemical, grouted, and The table assumes an anchor spacing of 12
expansion anchors. anchor diameters. The spacing may be reduced
Volume 15.08, Fasteners, contains various down to 6 anchor diameters with a 50 percent
ASTM specifications for the steel used for bolts, reduction in allowable load values. A minimum
including A 193, A 307, A 325, A 449, and A 490. edge distance of 6 anchor diameters is required.
6.2.5 Construction Industry Research and Edge distance may also be reduced up to 50
Information Association (CIRA) (Great Britain). percent, provided that the listed values are
6.2.5.1 Section and Use of Fixings in Concrete reduced in equal proportion. Tension values listed
and Masonry (Guide 4) - CIRA Guide 4, is a in the table may be increased 100 percent when
comprehensive guide on the selection and use of “special inspection” is provided. UBC Section
anchors installed in concrete. Three main 2719, on anchor bolts for steel column bases, does
categories of anchor types are covered. These not provide design values for anchor bolts, but
include cast-in-place, expansion, and bonded simply states that “Anchor bolts shall be designed
anchors. The guide also covers behavior of to provide resistance to all conditions of tension
fastener assemblies under load, design and shear at the bases of columns.” The section
considerations, limitations, durability, testing, and on steel column anchorage does not refer to Table
practical considerations. No. 26-G. Application of this table to steel
6.2.6 Institut fir Bautechnik (IfBT)(West column anchorage would greatly affect current
Germany) design practice because of the requirement in
6.2.6.1 Tests to Evaluate the Strength of Table No. 26-G of a minimum spacing of 6 anchor
Metallic Expansion Bolts for Anchorage in Concrete diameters.
with an SC of 20 MPa (2500 psi) or 6.2.8 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI)
Greater-Approvals are based on results of tests 6.2.8.1 PCI Design Handbook-The handbook
carried out by licensed universities. gives equations for shear and tension load
In the tests the proper functioning of the allowables for headed shear stud anchors.
anchors under extreme conditions are checked, Combined loading, as well as required edge
and tests to evaluate allowable loads for design distances and anchor spacing for groups of
are performed. anchors, are covered.
For evaluating allowable conditions of use (e.g., Based on a review of past design methods and
allowable loads, required edge distance, and actual testing and modeling, the PCI Connection
spacing), a sufficient number of tests have to be Details Committee recommends the use of a
performed to calculate a statistically reliable projected cone model to define the actual bolt
confidence level for the failure loads [5 percent tension at which concrete failure will occur. The
fractile (or 95 percentile) of failure loads]. A PCI cone surface equation is:
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
safety factor of 3 is applied to the determined 5 Pm = 2.8 hL@ [fi 7~ ld (li + da] (6.1)
percent fractile of the failure loads to account for
the variations of the concrete tensile strength and where
of jobsite installation quality. For reasons of iz = 1.0 for normal weight concrete
simplicity, one value for the allowable load is 1 = 0.85 for sand lightweight concrete
given per anchor size which is valid for all loading = 0.75 for all lightweight concrete
directions (tension, shear, combined tension, and ;= embedment, in.
shear). Expected displacements of anchors under d,, = diameter of anchor or stud head,
allowable loads are given which should be taken in.
into account in the design of the fastened element f’, = specified 28-day compressive
(when appropriate). strength of concrete, psi
6.2.7 International Conference of Building P =
IlC
nominal tensile capacity of anchor
Officials (ICBO) as governed by concrete failure
6.2.7.1 U n i f o r m B u i l d i n g C o d e ( 1 9 8 5
Edition) -The Uniform Building Code (UBC), In anchor bolt design where the concrete does
Table 26-G sets forth allowable shear and tension not fail, the anchor bolt fails via a combination of
loads for cast-in-place bolts of at least ASTM A tension and shear. The PCI equation for

combined tension and shear strength is: and 79-14. Only Class I piping (piping used to
safely shut down a nuclear power plant) was
impacted by Bulletins 79-02 and 79-14. The NRC
requires that during anchor bolt design, the
following must be considered: baseplate flexibility,
(i.e., baseplate prying action that increases anchor
where bolt loading), performance of anchors due to
4 = strength reduction factor cyclic loading, anchor performance in masonry
Pu = applied factored tension load walls, the effect of pipe support loads on masonry
P = nominal tension strength of YlC walls, and the maximum support load considered
anchor for anchor bolt design. Concrete expansion
vu = applied factored shear load anchors must have the following minimum factor
Kc = nominal shear strength of anchor of safety between the bolt design load and the bolt
as governed by steel failure ultimate capacity determined from static load
In-depth discussions of these equations may be tests, (e.g., published data from the anchor bolt
found in Klingner and Mendonca (1982) and manufacturer) which simulate the installation
Shaikh and Yi (1985). conditions, (i.e., type of concrete and its strength
6.2.9 The Agrbnent Board (Great Britain) properties): (1) a safety factor of 4:1 - for wedge-
6.2.9.1 The Assessment of Torque-Expanded and sleeve-type anchor bolts, (2) a safety factor of
Anchor Bolts When Used in Dense Aggregate 5:l - for shell-type anchor bolts.
Concrete (M.O.A. T. No. 19:1981) -This document The bolt ultimate capacity should account for
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
presents the procedures for deriving design the effects of shear and tension interaction,
information and classifies ten different types of minimum edge distance, and proper bolt spacing.
expansion anchors according to the mechanism for A summary of the USNRC criteria is found in
achieving expansion. It considers the effects of USNRC “Anchor Bolt Study Data Survey and
different types of loading conditions and typically Dynamic Testing” by the Hanford Engineering
requires a minimum of 277 tests (for six different Development Laboratory.
anchor diameters) to calculate safe working loads 6.2.12 Draft 1 Regulatory Guide MS 129-4
as the lower of: “Anchoring Component and Structural Supports in
a. The 5 percent exclusion value (or 95th Concrete”
percentile, calculated by regression analysis or This draft guide from the U.S. Nuclear
other statistical techniques), then divided by three Regulatory Commission provides the criteria for
or, acceptance, qualification, design, installation, and
b. The mean of the loads determined at a inspection for steel embedments anchored in
displacement of 0.1 mm (0.004 in.) under direct concrete. It also provides information on the
tension or, acceptability for NRC licensing actions in
c. The mean of the loads determined at a accordance with Appendix B, of ACI 349-80.
displacement of 1.0 mm (0.039 in.) under direct
shear. 6.3 -Application and development of codes
6.2.10 UEAtc (Union European of Agrbment) ASTM E 488 is the only existing American
The UEAtc Directives for the Assessment of standard exclusively and specifically concerned
Anchor Bolts (December, 1986) is a European with testing to determine the performance of all
code for the assessment and approval of anchor types of concrete anchors. It is not intended to
bolts. The document has been adopted by the describe design procedures for anchorage
Common Market Countries of Germany, U.K., connections, nor to identify characteristics which
France, Austria, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Netherlands, affect performance in conditions other than as-
Portugal, Denmark, and Belgium. tested. ICBO has also published a limited test
6.2.11 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) standard for expansion anchors only.
Bulletin 79-02 and 79-14). ACI 349, Appendix B, specifies anchorage
Anchor bolt design methods have been revised design and applies ultimate strength design
based on the United States NRC Office of philosophy to all types of anchorages. Other
Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins No. 79-02 American codes limit their consideration to cast-

in-place or grouted anchorages. The Uniform “Prtifungen zur Beurteilung d e r Tragfghigkeit v o n

Building Code (UBC) allows for alternative 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
devices as specified in the code, generally applying Load Capacity of Metal Expansion Anchors Fastened into
the same conditions as specified for cast-in-place Normal Concrete, r Bn250), Institute for Construction (IfBT),
anchors. Berlin, West Germany, January 1974.
American codes generally base recommended
design procedures on ultimate strength data. Shaikh, A.P., Yi, W., “In-Place Strength of Welded Headed
Studs,” PCI Journal, V.30, No. 2, March-April, 1985.
European codes recommend the criterion of
displacement (slip) for post-concreting anchors, “Standard Specification for Highway Bridges”, Twelfth
supported by ultimate strength data derived by Edition, American Association of State Highway
regression analysis of other statistically reliable Transportation Officials, 1977.
techniques.
“Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in
Codes cannot address all the conditions Concrete and Masonry Elements”, (ASTM E488-88), 1988
applicable to a particular design or absolve the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Volume 04.07, American
designer of the responsibility to check the Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, October,
relevance of code data for a given design. New 1988.
and technically reliable information will inevitably
“The Assessment of Torque-Expanded Anchor Bolts when
be developed between publication dates of used in Dense Aggregate Concrete”, M.O.A.T. No. 19:1981,
amendments to existing codes. Designers are Agrkment Board, Watford, Herts., England, January, 1981.
encouraged to maintain familiarity with ongoing
research and other developments and to “UEAtc directives for the Assessment of Anchor Bolts”,
M.O.A.T. No. 42:1986, European Union of AgrCment;
supplement the provisions of governing codes with December, 1986.
such information as it becomes available.
Uniform Building Code, International Conference of
Building Officials, Whittier, CA. 1985.
6.4 - References
ACI Committee 318,1989, “Building Code Requirements for USNRC “Anchor Bolt Study Data Survey and Dynamic
Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-89) and Commentary - ACI 318R- Testing”, Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory,
89, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, MI, November. NUREG/CR-2999, December, 1982.
ACI Committee 349, 1990, “Code Requirements for Nuclear

Safety Related Concrete Structures (ACI 349-90) and
Commentary - ACI 349R-90, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, MI, March.
Fasteners. 1988 Annual Book of Standards, Volume 15.08,

American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA,
January, 1988.
Klingner, R.E. and Mendonca, J.A., (1982a) “Tensile

Capacity of Short anchor Bolts and Welded Studs: A Literature
Review,” ACI Journal, Proceedings, V. 79, No. 1, July-August.
Manual of Steel Construction. Eight Edition, American

Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., New York, NY, 1980.
Paterson, W.S., “Selection and Use of Fixings in Concrete

and Masonry”, CIRA Guide 4, Construction Industry Research
and Information Association, London, England, October, 1977.
PCI Design Handbook, Third Edition, Prestressed Concrete

Institute, Chicago, IL, 1980.
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

APPENDIX A-CONVERSION FACTORS: n = number of anchors

INCH-POUND TO SI N = factor which takes into account steel shear strength, usu-
ally 0.6 to 0.7
pnc = bolt tension load at which concrete failure will occur
P, = applied factored tension load
Multiply By To obtain S = spreading force, as from expansion sleeves of an expan-
sion anchor, also anchor spacing
T, = applied tension load
Length ft 3.048 x 10-l
T,,, = allowable anchor tensile load
T,, = ultimate wedge-splitting capacity of a singlt bolt
Area ft2 9.290 x 10-2 m2
r, = ultimate tensile load, also design tensile load
V, = applied shear load
Volume ft3 2.832 x 1O-2 m3 V, = nominal shear strength of anchor as governed by steel
failure
Velocity ft/s 3.048 x 10-l m/s Yl = shear strength, ultimate shear load, or applied factored
shear load
Acceleration ft/s2 3.048 x 10-l m/s2 W = crack width usually measured at the concrete surface
(Y = included angle of concrete spa11 cone measured from the

Mass “An 4.536 x 10-l kg axis of the anchor to the failure cone surface
p = coefficient of friction
Force and Weight lb f 4.448 N 4 = strength reduction factor
x = chi factor which represents a partial influencing factor
Pressure and Stress lb$ft2 4.788 x 101 Pa or N/m2 such as a load capacity reduction based on anchor
psi 6.895 x lo3 Pa or N/m2 spacing interaction (x,), edge distance influence (x,),
psi 6.895 x 1O-3 N/mm2 etc.
Work and Energy ft-lbf 1.356 J
Mass Density lb,/ft3 1,602 x 10 kg/m3
Weight Density lbf/ft3 1.571 x lo2 N/m3 This report was submitted to letter ballot of the committee
was approved according to Institute procedures.
--`,``,````,,,`,``,``,,,,,```,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
APPENDIX B-NOTATION
0 = distance between center of anchors

A = summation of projected areas of individual stress
cones, in.2
Ab = net bearing area of head of embedded anchorage, in.’
A, = tensile stress area, psi
C’ = clear cover to bolt, in.
d/I = head diameter of headed stud or bolt
D = anchor diameter
DUJ = diameter of anchorage device such as embedded washer,
in.
E, = elastic modulus of concrete, psi
f, = compressive strength of concrete measured by cylinders
psi or N/mm2
fee = compressive slrength of concrete measured by cubes, psi
or N/mm2
= yield stress of anchor or bolt, psi
fY
F,, = ultimate strength or capacity, lb or N
F,, = ultimate tensile stress of steel, psi
h = member thickness
1, = embedment depth of anchor
1?1 = distance from anchor centerline to free unsupported edge


Aci 355 1R PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aci 355 1R PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ACI 355.

Reported by ACI Committee 355

Edwin A. Burdette Raymond R. Funk Douglas D. Lee George A. Senkiw

*Committee Chairman during the formative years of this report.

ACI Committee Reports, Guides, Standard Practices, and

Copyright American Concrete Institute

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 -INTRODUCTION

Chapter 2-Types of anchoring devices, To date, anchorage to concrete has received

Chapter 5-Construction considerations, CHAPTER 2 -TYPES OF ANCHORING

Copyright American Concrete Institute

anchors. Excluded from consideration are shear 2.4-Cast-in-place systems

2.3-Anchor Systems Common bolts - structural steel bolts

Self undercutting Fig. 2.20 Fig. 2.7-Bolted connections

Note : E i t h e r ' J ' o r ' L ' ’ b o I ts c a n be made

Fig. 2.2-J- and L-bolts (not recommended)

Fig. 2.3 - Threaded rod

Copyright American Concrete Institute

Fig. 2.5 - Threaded inserts

Fig. 2.6 - Stud- welded plates

Copyright American Concrete Institute

2.4.3 Adjustable anchors-Adjustable anchors 2.5.1.2 Chemical anchors-Chemical anchors

initiating a chemical reaction while installing the

Fig. 2.10-Chemical anchor with threaded rod

Copyright American Concrete Institute

Single-acting Double acting

Fig. 2.14 - Shell expansion anchor

2.5.2.4 Wedge anchors-The wedge anchor,

Fig. 2.15- Wedge anchor

Fig. 2. I6 - Rock/concrete expansion anchor

Copyright American Concrete Institute

bottom end, which accepts a tapered steel plug

2.5.2.9 Undercut anchors-There are two

Copyright American Concrete Institute

[ shear loading bending

Fig. 3.1 -Possible loadings of anchors

a) steel failure b) pull-out failure c) concrete splitting failure

d) concrete cone failure e) spacing and edge cone failure

drop-in anchors [Fig. 3.3(b)].

In principle, the same behavior is valid for

Copyright American Concrete Institute

environmental conditions. At allowable working

month test on epoxy anchors showed creep less

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers performed 5-

creep tests on polyester and epoxy anchors,

*Cannon, Robert W., correspondence to ACI Committee 355, Nov.

Copyright American Concrete Institute

cut off by intersecting edges. f 'c = compressive strength of concrete, psi

With respect to the minimum edge distance he

F ut = ASTM-specified tensile strength of the

Copyright American Concrete Institute

*REDUCE BY THE TOTAL BEARING AREA OF THE ANCHOR STEEL

B) Stress area reduction for I imited depth A

Copyright American Concrete Institute

Fu = average ultimate load, N

a = distance between center of

Eq. (3.9) leads to the x-method for calculating

Results of an additional 196 tests on headed FIA4 = %a1 x Xd x Fur (3.11)

Copyright American Concrete Institute

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

Copyright American Concrete Institute

Copyright American Concrete Institute

Roik (1987), assume the critical

a cl+ = 41, (3.16)