Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 35

Scope and Objectives

Prepared by: Widianto, Jerry Owen, and Chandu Patel


Civil Structural
25 March 2008

Present common and STM approaches for designing anchor


reinforcement
Provide general understanding about behavior of anchors in
structural concrete and design of anchorage to concrete
Present ACI 318-08 Appendix D provisions (Anchoring to Concrete)
Not covered in this presentation:
Shear lugs, Post-installed anchors, headed studs, tensioning,
fatigue & impact loadings, coatings / galvanizing, and
installation

Design of Anchorage to Concrete

Training Module

Outline
I. Introduction

PART I

II. Common / existing approaches for designing anchor


reinforcement

INTRODUCTION

III. Strut-and-Tie Model approach for designing anchor


reinforcement

Pictures of anchor bolts and possible failure modes

IV. Example problem

Available design guidelines for anchor bolts

V. Design philosophy of the ACI 318-08 Appendix D

New provisions in the ACI 318-08

VI. Anchorage to concrete for tension loading

Basic load path for tension and shear

VII. Anchorage to concrete for shear loading

Appendix D of
ACI 318-08

VIII. Combined loading (Tension and shear)


3

IX. Summary and references


Training Module

Training Module

Taken from field

Training Module

Training Module

Directly from the field

Training Module

Training Module

Taken from field

Training Module

10

Training Module

11

Training Module

12

Training Module

Possible failure mode Steel failure

Possible failure mode Concrete crushing

Concrete crushing failure: the concrete surrounding the anchor crushes near the
surface allowing the anchor to displace which creates a bending load ending in a
steel rupture failure. This type of failure is common for anchors manufactured
from brittle steels

Steel failure: the concrete crushes a small amount and the stress in the anchor
results in an action that causes a smooth failure plane in the stud as the steel reaches
its ultimate shear capacity

Wiewel (1991)
13

14

Training Module

Possible failure mode Concrete breakout

Wiewel (1991)
Training Module

Wiewel (1991)

Possible failure mode Concrete breakout

Cone failure: the concrete fails in tension creating a shear cone. The cone starts at the
bottom of the expansion mechanism and travels to the concrete surface at an angle
which varies between 30 to 45 degrees. This type of failure is common when tension
tests are performed on anchors installed at embedments between 4.5D and 6.0D

15

Training Module

Concrete breakout failure: this type of failure generally occurs when anchors are
installed close to an edge or corner

16

Wiewel (1991)
Training Module

Possible failure mode Concrete splitting

Concrete splitting failure: the concrete


slab/beam fails in bending, splitting the
structural member.
This type of failure is common for anchors
installed near an edge of a thin, unreinforced
slab or beam

Wiewel (1991)

Possible failure mode Side-face Blowout

DeVries (1996)
Concrete failure: split structural member.
DeVries (1996)

The concrete slab or beam fails in bending.


This type of failure is common for anchors
installed in thin slabs and beams, or for
anchors installed near a corner of a slab or
beam
Bashandy (1996)

17

Training Module

18

What are the available design guidelines for


anchorage to concrete ?

Training Module

What are the available design guidelines for


anchorage to concrete ?

Appendix D of ACI 318-08

Section 1913 of IBC 2003 refer to the Appendix D of ACI 318-08

19

Training Module

20

Training Module

What is new in the 2008 edition of the ACI 318,


Appendix D ?

What is new in the 2008 edition of the ACI 318,


Appendix D ?

Definition of two types of reinforcement that can be used across the


potential breakout cone:

Section D.4.2.1 of ACI 318-08

1. Supplementary reinforcement

Can be used to improve the deformation capacity for the breakout mode, and thus, enables
the use of a higher -factor.

2. Anchor reinforcement

21

Designed to transfer the full design load from the anchors into the structural member, and
thus precludes consideration of the concrete breakout failure mode.
Training Module

22

Training Module

Basic Load Path

What is new in the 2008 edition of the ACI 318,


Appendix D ?

1. Tension loading (without anchor reinforcement)

Modification factor for lightweight concrete


Mode of failure:

A modification factor for concrete breakout strength is introduced to


correct the current conservative provisions for anchorages loaded
in shear and located in thin concrete members (h,V)

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Yielding / fracture

Bearing strength
of concrete

Anchor pullout

Tensile strength
of concrete

Concrete breakout

If close to an edge:

Side-face blowout
Concrete splitting

PLAIN CONCRETE
23

Training Module

24

Training Module

Foundation

Basic Load Path cont

Basic Load Path cont

Basic load path:

1. Tension loading (summary)


Mode of failure:

1. Tension loading (with anchor reinforcement)


Mode of failure:

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Pullout

25

Bearing strength
of concrete

Pullout

Fracture

Anchor
reinforcement

Rebar yielding

no anchor
Tensile strength of concrete
reinforcement
Rebar pullout

with anchor
reinforcement

Side-face blowout
Concrete splitting

REINFORCED CONCRETE

Yielding / fracture

Yielding / fracture

Bearing strength
of concrete

If close to an edge:

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Foundation

Training Module

Concrete breakout

Rebar yielding
Rebar

If close to an edge:

Foundation
26

Concrete breakout

Rebar pullout

Side-face blowout
Concrete splitting

Concrete splitting
Side-face blowout

Training Module

Basic Load Path cont

Basic Load Path cont

Basic load path:

Basic load path:

2. Shear loading without anchor reinforcement

2. Shear loading with anchor reinforcement


Mode of failure:

Mode of failure:

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Yielding / fracture

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Yielding / fracture

Tensile strength
of concrete

Bearing strength
of concrete

Crushing

Concrete breakout
Concrete pryout

Anchor reinforcement

Foundation

Foundation

PLAIN CONCRETE
27

Training Module

REINFORCED CONCRETE
28

Training Module

Yielding
Pullout

Basic Load Path cont

When both tension and shear are present

2. Shear loading (summary)

1. Design for tension

Mode of failure:
Anchor (i.e. steel)

Yielding / fracture

2. Design for shear


Anchor failure preceded by concrete spall

3. Check interaction
no anchor
Tensile strength of concrete
reinforcement

Concrete breakout

Concrete breakout
Concrete pryout

with anchor
reinforcement

Bearing of concrete

Crushing

Anchor reinforcement

Yielding, pullout

Concrete pryout

Foundation
29

Training Module

30

Training Module

Common anchor bolts


PART II
COMMON / EXISTING APPROACH
PIP,
2006

for
DESIGNING ANCHOR REINFORCEMENT

31

Training Module

32

Training Module

Design Philosophy

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Tension

Concrete contribution is neglected in proportioning the steel


reinforcement.

What is the max. distance from anchor head to the


reinforcement to be considered effective, dmax ?

dmax

Cannon et al. (1981): dmax = hef /3 (clear distance from


anchor head)

When a non-ductile design is permitted, the reinforcement should be


designed to resist the factored design load.

Section RD.5.2.9 of ACI 318-08: dmax = hef /2


(measured from the anchor centerline)

When a ductile design is required, the reinforcement should be


proportioned to develop the strength of the anchor. If the anchor is
sized for more than 2.5 times factored tension design loads, it is
permitted to design the reinforcement to carry 2.5 times the factored
design load, where 2.5 is an overstrength factor.

33

hef

ldh

Training Module

What does the Appendix D of ACI 318-08 recommend ?

Ast

Ase f uta
fy

= 0.75

However, the anchor is sized for more than 2.5 Tu, it is


permitted to design the reinforcement to carry 2.5 Tu to
satisfy IBC 2006 and ASCE 7-05 requirements for SDC C
and above where ductility cannot be achieved.

hef ld

2.5 Tu
Ast
fy
35
Construction joint

35

dmax hef /3

In order to limit the embedment length of anchor, a


larger number of smaller-size reinforcing bars is
preferred over fewer, larger-size reinforcing bars.

u
A st
When a non-ductile failure is permitted:
fy
where: = 0.9
ACI 318-08 use = 0.75

When a ductile failure is required:

Side
cover

db

Reduction in the development length cannot be applied


in the areas of moderate or high seismic risk.

dmax

ldh

Side
cover

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Tension

How to determine the required area of steel, Ast ?

Pier
height

The development length may be reduced when excess


reinforcement is provided per section 12.2.5 of the ACI
318-08 (but cannot be less than 12)
35

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Tension

cover

ld

Construction joint

34

Training Module

What is the required development length, ld ?


Use Section 12.2 of the ACI 318-08

Pier
height

When reinforcement is used to restraint concrete breakout, the overall


anchorage design should ensure that there is sufficient strength
corresponding to other failure modes (pullout failure, side-face
blowout failure, and pryout failure).

cover

db
dmax hef /3

Training Module

Commentary RD.5.2.9:
This recommendation is limited to anchor
reinforcement with maximum diameter similar to
a #5 bar.

where: = 0.9
ACI 318-08 use = 0.75

It is beneficial for the anchor reinforcement to


enclose the surface reinforcement.

Design for anchor ductility requires that the necessary conditions


for elongation over a reasonable gage length are fulfilled (i.e., that
strain localization will not limit the yield strain).

If the available development length is less than the required


length to fully develop the anchor reinforcement, reduce
the bar size or use the stress that can be developed fs (< fy).

In sizing the anchor reinforcement, the use of =


0.75 is recommended as is used for the strut-andtie models.

36

Training Module

As a practical matter, the use of anchor


reinforcement is generally limited to cast-in-place
anchors.

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Shear

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Shear

How many anchors are effective to carry V ?

dtie

How to determine the required area of steel, Atie ?

dtie

If welded washers are used, all anchors will be effective.

Atie

Otherwise, only some anchors will be effective (due to


oversize holes)

Where is the origin of the shear cracks ?


ld or ldh
V

where: = 0.9

ACI 318-08 use = 0.75

If the available development length is less than the


required length to fully develop the anchor
reinforcement, use smaller rebar size or use the stress
that can be developed fs (< fy).

Questionable

ld or ldh

Vu

fy

V
How many legs are available ?

2
3

2
3

Try to carry all shear forces using the first two sets of
shear reinforcement.

ld or ldh

ld or ldh

35

35
37

38

Training Module

Training Module

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Shear

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Shear

What does the Appendix D of ACI 318-08 recommend ?

What does the Appendix D of ACI 318-08 recommend ?

Commentary RD.6.2.9:
The reinforcement could also consist of stirrups and
ties (as well as hairpins) enclosing the edge
reinforcement embedded in the breakout cone and
placed as close to the anchors as practicable
Only reinforcement spaced < the lesser of 0.5 ca1 and
0.3 ca2 from the anchor centerline should be included
as anchor reinforcement.

= 0.75
Commentary RD.6.2.9:

The anchor reinforcement must be developed on both


sides of the breakout surface.

Based on research with max. diameter similar to a #5 bar.

Based on research with the max. size of #6 bar

Enclosing anchor reinforcement should be in contact with


the anchor and placed as close as practicable to the
concrete surface.

In sizing the anchor reinforcement, the use of = 0.75


is recommended as is used for the strut-and-tie models.

In sizing the anchor reinforcement, the use of = 0.75 is


recommended as is used for the strut-and-tie models.

For equilibrium reasons, an edge reinforcement must


be present.

As a practical matter, the use of anchor reinforcement is


generally limited to cast-in-place anchors.
39

Training Module

40

Training Module

As a practical matter, the use of anchor reinforcement


is generally limited to cast-in-place anchors.

Problems with the existing design approach


Variation of breakout cone angle  Some of anchor
reinforcements may not be effective

PART III
STRUT-and-TIE MODEL APPROACH

Anchor reinforcement will only be effective after breakout cone


cracks have been developed. Even though the breakout cone
capacity is commonly smaller than service loads, cracks on
concrete pedestals are rarely seen. Better explanation on load
transfer is needed

for
DESIGNING ANCHOR REINFORCEMENT

For shear - There are many applications where the shape of


concrete breakout cone is not obvious. In a group of anchor, the
location where the shear crack starts is not always obvious
For shear reinforcement - enclosing anchors with hairpin is not
always feasible.
41

Training Module

42

What is the Strut-and-Tie Model (STM) ?

Training Module

STM for tension


ACI 318-08:

A strut-and-tie model (STM) is an ultimate strength design


method based on the formation of a hypothetical truss that
transmits forces from loading points to supports.

25
25

The STM utilizes concrete struts to resist compression and


reinforcing ties to carry tension. Design using STM involves
calculating the required amount of reinforcement to serve as
the tension ties and then checking that the compressive struts
and nodal zone (joints) are sufficiently large enough to
support the forces.

43

Training Module

Mechanism of force transfer between opposing lapped


headed bars (Thompson et al., 2006)

44

Training Module

STM for tension

STM for tension

In order to make it consistent with the CCD method, the angle of


strut is assumed to be 35 from horizontal.

How to determine the tie force ?


If one layer of tie at 35 is insufficient,
place additional tie layers within this
region only

Tie force per side = [ T/4 cos (55) ] cos (35) = T/4 0.47 = 0.12 T
T

25
25

35

T/4
Steel tie

Design tie to carry 0.12 T


Tie

Tie

35

Concrete
strut
Training Module

45

46

Training Module

Assumptions for STM Bearing area

Assumptions for STM - shear Concrete strength

Tie

Concrete strength for struts and bearing  0.85 fc

Note:

T1
Concrete strut

V
Hairpin

T2
T2

V
Anchor

V : Shear force per anchor


T1 : Tension
V force on tie
T2 : Tension force on hairpin
do : Diameter of anchor

Section 7.10.5.6 of the ACI


318-08:
The lateral reinforcement shall
surround at least four vertical
bars, shall be distributed within
5 of the pedestal, and shall
consist of at least two #4 or
three #3 bars.

T1
Grout
2

8do

do
1.5
1

Anchor

Concrete strut
47

Training Module

48

Rebar
Training Module

Section D.6.2.2 of the ACI 318-08:


the maximum load bearing length of the anchor for
shear is 8 do.

Bearing area of anchor = (8 do) do = 8 do2


Bearing area of the rebar is shown on the left

Assumptions for STM Tie reinforcement


V
Layer A

2
3

Layer B

Assumptions for STM Tie reinforcement cont

Only the top most two layers of ties (assume 2-#4 within 5
of top of pedestal per Section 7.10.5.6 of the ACI 318-08)
are effective

At the nodes away from the hook, the tie is assumed to


be fully developed.

Layer A

2
3

Layer B

(For example, under the shear force V, the tie on layer A can
develop fy at the nodes 1 and 6)

Tie reinforcement should consist of tie with seismic hooks.


If internal ties are required, hairpins could be used. As an
alternative, diamond-shaped ties can also be used.
1

dtie

1
6dtie 3

lah

Layer A

6dtie 3
6
49

At the node where the hook is located, the tie cannot


develop fy.

6dtie 3

lah

1 dtie

(For example, under the shear force V, while the tie on layer
A can develop fy at the node 6, the tie on layer B cannot
develop fy because the hook of tie B is located at the node 6)

Layer A

ld

If the available length of hairpin lah < the required straight


development length for a fully developed hairpin ld, the
maximum stress that can be developed in hairpin is f lah
y

1 dtie

dtie

The location of hooks and the direction of hairpins should be


alternated

If lah is shorter than 12 (i.e. the minimum development


length based on Section 12.2.1 of the ACI 318-08), hairpin
should not be used.

Training Module

6dtie 3
6
50

Layer B

Assumptions for STM Tie reinforcement cont

Layer B

Training Module

Assumptions for STM Tie reinforcement cont

Tie

Concrete strut

V contribution from tie Layer B to the tension tie at the node 6?


How to account for

How to account for contribution from tie Layer B to the tension tie at the node 6?

Hairpin

T2
T2

Compare the stiffness of the following two cases:

CASE 1: smooth rebar with 180 hook bearing in


concrete (Fabbrocino et al., 2005) T

Anchor

T1

1 dtie

CASE 2: the conventional single-leg stirrup with


reinforcing bars inside the bends (Leonhardt and
Walther, 1965 as cited in Ghali and Youakim, 2005)

The stress at the hook that was developed at the smooth rebar with 180 hook bearing in
concrete (CASE 1) when it slipped 0.2 mm was about 20 ksi (Fabbrocino et al., 2005)
T

6dtie 3
6

In order to fully-develop fy on the bends of 90, 135, and 180 hooks when engaging
heavier bars lodged inside the bends (CASE 2), there was a slip about 0.2 mm
T
(Leonhardt and Walther, 1965).

Layer B

Therefore, it is assumed that the tie can only develop 20 ksi at the node where the
hook is located.
1 d
3
2
tie

Even though the capacity of CASE 2 may be higher than the capacity of
CASE 1 due to bearing on the heavier rebar, the contact will not always
present because of common imprecise workmanship. When the contact is
51 not present, the CASE 2 is assumed to behave as CASE 1.
Training Module

6dtie 3

52

Training Module

Typical STM for shear loading


Tie

T1

With internal ties :

Concrete strut

V
Hairpin

PART IV

V force per anchor


V : Shear

T2
T2

T1 : Tension force on tie

EXAMPLE PROBLEM

T2 : Tension force on hairpin

Anchor

do : Diameter of anchor

T1
Tie

Without internal ties :

Concrete strut

V
V
V : Shear force per anchor

T : Tension force on tie

V
Anchor

TT
53

54

Training Module

Vua_Y
c1

s1

Pedestal
c1

Reinforcing
bars

Example problem

Vua_X
Anchor

b2

Vua_Y
c1

Design the anchor for the steel


column located at the top of
concrete pedestals. Anchors resist
tension and shear forces.

c2

Training Module

s1

Assumptions:

c1

1. Untorqued, cast-in anchors


2. No sleeve is used
3. Low seismic risk and capacity design is not considered
4. Tension force is distributed equally among all anchors
5. Shear force is assumed to be carried by two anchors
because of oversize holes in the base plate

c2

Vua_X
Anchor

b2

s2

s2

Side cover

c2

b1

Y
Side cover

b1

c2

Note: All code section numbers referred in this example are in


the ACI 318-08
Concrete cover

do

Shear reinforcement

hef

Pier / Pedestal Data:

Pier
height

Grout

Specified compressive strength of concrete:

f'c := 4000psi

(Blocks are input data)

Concrete cover

do
hef

Tension:

db
Training Module

Pier_height := 28in

Concrete_cover := 1.5in

Note: In many cases, the height of the pier is a design constraint.

Maximum total factored loads:

Pier
height

55

db

Height:

Cross-section dimensions:

Nua_total := 80kip

Maximum shear in the X-direction:

Vua_total_X := 20kip

Maximum shear in the Y-direction:

Vua_total_Y := 20kip
56

Training Module

b1 := 24in

b2 := 26in

Edge Distance:

C1 := 8 in

C2 := 8in

Anchor Spacing:

S1 := 8in

S2 := 10in

Side_cover := 2in

1. Determine the size of anchors

Anchors:
Specification: ASTM F1554, A36

fya := 36ksi

futa := 58ksi

ASTM F1554, A36 is a ductile steel (Table 2.1). Therefore: T := 0.75

(tension loads)

(shear loads)

V := 0.65

(D.4.4.a)

Note: Load combinations shall be per Chapter 9 (or ASCE 7-05, Chapter 2)
Reinforcing bars:

Grade 60 steel:

The size of anchors is determined based on the steel strength of anchor in tension and shear. Since the tension force is
assumed to be distributed equally, each anchor carries 80 kip / 4 = 20 kip. There are two anchors in both X and Y directions
(i.e. half of the total number of anchors) are effective in resisting shear, the maximum shear force carried by one anchor is
20 kip / 2 = 10 kip. If there is any shear in the X-direction acting simultaneously, it may be added here.
Try 1.25-in. anchor:

fy_rebar := 60ksi

Vertical (longitudinal rebars): #6

db := 0.75in

Shear reinforcement: #4

dtie := 0.5in

(Threads per inch:

do := 1.25in

nt := 7 )

2
0.9743 in

Ase := do

4
nt

Effective cross-sectional area:


2

As b := 0.44in

Ase = 0.969 in

As tie := 0.2in

The steel strength of one anchor in tension:


The steel strength of one anchor in shear:

Nsa := Ase futa

(D.5.1.2)

V sa := 0.8 0.6Ase futa

T Nsa = 42.156 kip > Nua := 20kip (OK !)

(D.6.1.2.b)

V Vsa = 17.537 kip > Vua := 10kip (OK !)

Note: Shear strength of anchors with grout pads shall be multiplied by 0.8 (D.6.1.3).

Design assumptions:
1. The tension and the shear forces in the anchors are transfered to the longitudinal rebars and shear reinforcement, respectively,
which will be designed as anchor reinforcement. Therefore, the concrete breakout strength in tension and shear (D.5.2 and D.6.2)
is not checked. The concrete pryout strength in shear (D.6.3) is assumed OK by inspection because it is usually critical for short
and stiff anchors.
2. When welded washers are not used, it is not likely that all anchors are effective in resisting shear due to oversize holes in the
base plate. For this case, it is conservative to assume that only the bolts on the critical face are engaged. For this example, only
two anchors are assumed to be effective for resisting shear.

Since N f > 0.2 T Nsa and V f > 0.2 V Vsa , check interaction equation based on D.7.3:
Nua
T Nsa

Vua
V Vsa

= 1.045

< 1.2 , OK !

The minimum effective embedment depth of the non-sleeve 1.25-in anchor:


Note: Since the pier height is 28 inches, try h

ef =24

hef,min =12do=15 in

in. This effective embedment depth will be checked if it is sufficient for

the required development length of vertical reinforcing bars.

57

58

Training Module

2. Check the pullout resistance of anchor in tension (D.5.3.4)

Training Module

3. Check the side-face blowout resistance of anchor in tension (D.5.3.4)

Section D.5.3.4 indicates the load at which the concrete above the anchor head begins to crush. Since the local crushing
above the head will greatly reduce the stiffness of the connection, and generally will be the beginning of a pullout failure. The
pullout resistance of anchor in tension must be ensured to be larger than the factored tension load (Nua ). If the capacity

Consider side-face blowout on face 1 because c1 = c2 and s1 < s2

design (which is not considered herein) is performed, the pullout resistance of anchor in tension should be larger than the
tensile capacity of the anchor ( T Nsa).

Check if the corner effect and close spacing have to be considered:

Use the heavy hex nut (on the anchor head) with the flat-to-flat dimension of 2 inches.
2

Bearing area:

Abrg := 0.866 2

5
4

1.25

Npn = c_P 8 A brg fc'

Assume concrete cracks:

Npn = (1)8(3.68)(4) = 117.8 kip

> Nua

1+

(D.5.3.1 and D.5.3.4)

Strength reduction factor for anchor governed by pullout, assuming condition A (supplementary reinforcement is provided to tie
the failure prism): = 0.75 (D.4.4.(c))
Therefore: Npn = (0.75)(117.8) = 88.4 kip

c2 < 3 c1 --> Consider corner effect

A brg := 1.51in

The pullout resistance in tension of a single headed bolt:


c_P := 1

Corner effect:
2

Nsb := 160 C1 Abrg fc

C2
C1

Nsb := 49.7kip

Close spacing: s1 < 6 c1 --> Consider close spacing

OK !

Nsbg := 1 +

S1

Nsb

Nsbg = 57.983 kip

6 C1

These Nsbg is for the two anchors located on side 1.


Therefore:

59

Training Module

60

Npn = (0.75)(58) = 43.5 kip

Training Module

> 2* Nua

OK !

4. Transfer of Anchor Load to Vertical Rebars

4.2 Development length

4.1 Amount of vertical reinforcing steel


In order to be considered effective for resisting anchor tension, vertical reinforcing steel must be located withinefh/ 3 = 8
inches from the anchor head or edge of washer. The number of pier vertical rebars that are effective for resisting anchor tension
is 3.
Since capacity design is not considered (for a low seismic risk), determine the required number of vertical rebar to resist ua
N :

n_required:=

n_required:=

Nua

20

Development length for straight bars above the failure surface:


The minimum development length, ld (> 12 in), is determined based on the 12.2.2 and 12.2.4 as follows:

For capacity that is governed by yielding of rebars: s := 0.75 (D.5.2.9)

s fy_rebar As b

( 0.75) ( 60) ( 0.44)

The vertical rebar should be developed on either side of the potential failure plane. The part of the rebar above the failure surface
is commonly straight and the part of the rebar that goes into the mat is commonly bent (as shown in Figure 9). Therefore, the
development length for straight bar applies to the part of the rebar above the failure surface and the development length for the
90-degree hooked bar can be applied to the part of the rebar below the failure surface. Since the development length for the
90-degree hooked bar (below the failure surface) is part of the pier/foundation design, it is not considered in this calculation.

< provided effective number of rebar, OK !

n_required:= 1

Bar location factor:

t := 1

(for vertical bar)

Coating factor:

e := 1

(for uncoated bar)

Concrete density factor:

(for normal concrete)

:= 1

For #6 and smaller bars, use:

fy_rebar ( t e )
db
25 f'c

ld :=

ld = 28.5 in

Available development length based on the pier height and the embedment depth of the anchor bolt:
Available_length:= hef Side_cover dmax tan ( 35deg)
From Figure 2, dmax = 5.7 in

Available_length = 24 - 1.5 - 5.7 tan(35deg) = 18.5 in

< ld

However, since the provided number of effective rebar is significantly more than the required number of rebars and for low seismic
risks, l d can be reduced using the excess reinforcement factor per 12.2.5 but cannot be less than 12 in per 12.2.1.
ld_reduced := ld

61

62

Training Module

As_required
A s_provided

ld_reduced := 28.5

Training Module

0.8

= 7.6 in

(12 in. governs in this case)

3
< Available_length

STRUT-AND-TIE APPROACH

5. Design of shear reinforcement

Assumptions:
1. Strut-and-tie modeling (Figure 10) is used to analyze shear transfer to concrete pedestal and to design the required amount
of shear reinforcement.
2. Since the shear forces in both directions are the same and the total number of anchors resisting the total shear forces in
both directions are the same, only the shear in the X-direction is presented in this example problem.

Say L da = 10.7 in
The required straight development length to fully-develop the
ties:
t := 1.3

(for top ties)

fy_rebar ( t e )
dtie
25 f'c

ld :=

The steel stress :

ld := 24.7in

fs := 26ksi

Required area of ties:

Atie :=

20
0.75 26
2

Atie := 1in
Requires 5 legs of #4 tie

63

Training Module

64

Training Module Figure 10

OK !

5.1 Check a geometry of the truss model to see if a direct strut can develop
Since the angles between the axes of all struts and ties entering a single node is larger than 25 degrees, direct struts can
develop (Section A.2.5 of the ACI 318-05).
5.2 Develop a truss model and calculate member forces
The truss model and member forces are shown in Figure 10.
5.3 Check strength of bearing
Assume concrete strength for checking the strength of bearing and compression struts: f

cu

= 0.85 f'c

5.3.a. Bearing of the anchor


Bearing area:

Abrg_anc := 8 do do
2

Abrg_anc = 12.5 in
Strength:

( )

fcu := 0.85 f'c

13.3kip

>

fcu = 3400 psi

OK !

= 1064 psi

Abrg_anc

Figure 11

5.3.b. Bearing of the reinforcing bars


By inspection, bearing on the rebar at the node D (Fig. 11) governs (shorter length and larger force):

5.4. Check strength of struts


The clear distance between the nodes B and D, l

BD

lbd :=

( 5 in) + ( 5.125 in)

do
2

db
2

lbd = 6.16 in

Bearing area:

Since it is assumed that the strength of strut is the same as the bearing strength (f cu = 0.85 fc') and the available area for
struts is typically larger than the available area for bearing, the bearing strength governs over the strength of struts. Therefore,
if the bearing strengths at the anchor and rebar are OK, the strength of struts does not need to be checked.

Abrg_rebar := 8 do + 1.5 lbd Concrete_cover db


Abrg_rebar = 13.305 in

( )

Strength:

fcu := 0.85 f'c

65

fcu = 3400 psi

9.5kip

>

Training Module

Abrg_rebar

= 714.017 psi

OK !

66

Training Module

Ties a and b (see Figure 11):

5.5. Select tie reinforcement

Ties a and b are resisted by exterior ties.

Assumptions:

Assuming that one layer of the exterior tie can develop f

1. Only the top most two layers of ties (within 5" of pedestal as required by Section 7.10.5.6 of the ACI 318-05), shown in
Fig. 12, are effective.
2. Tie reinforcement consists of tie with seismic hooks. Hairpins are used as internal ties.
3. The location of hooks and the direction of hairpins are alternated as shown in Fig. 12.
4. At the nodes away from the hook, the tie is assumed to be fully developed.
5. At the node where the hook is located, the contribution of the hoop to the tension ties T is T1 = As tie *(20 ksi)

Total resistance:

and the other layer can provide T hook :

Rtot_ab := As tie fy_rebar + Thook


> 6.6 kip

Rtot_ab = 16 kip
Tie c (see Figure 11):
Tie c is resisted by a hairpin.

Diameter of hairpin:
Yield stress of hairpin:

T1 := As tie 20ksi

OK !

dhairpin := 0.5in

As hairpin :=

dhairpin

fy_hairpin := 60ksi

Check the stress that can be developed in the hairpin:

T1 = 4 kip

Check available length of the hairpin:

la_hairpin := 26in 2 Side_cover 2 dtie


la_hairpin = 21 in

Thook := T1

Required straight development length for a fully developed hairpin:


Bar location factor:

t := 1.3

Coating factor:

e := 1

Concrete density factor:

(for uncoated bar)


(for normal concrete)

:= 1

For #6 and smaller bars, use:

fy_rebar ( t e )
dhairpin
25 f'c

ld_hairpin :=

ld_hairpin := 25in

cannot be less than 12 in per Section 12.2.1 of the ACI 318-05.

The stress that can be developed in the hairpin:


fs_hairpin :=

la_hairpin
ld_hairpin

fy_hairpin

fs_hairpin = 50.4 ksi

Since the direction of hairpin is alternated, only one layer of hairpin can be accounted as tie reinforcement.
Total resistance:

67

Training Module

Figure 12

68

Rtot_c := 2As hairpin fs_hairpin


kip
Rtot_c = 19.792
Training
Module

> 13.5 kip

(Note: 2 legs per hairpin)


OK !

6. Check the minimum distance requirements to preclude splitting failure

STM for tension

The following minimum distances for anchors shall be satisfied unless reinforcement is provided to control splitting.
I. Center-to-center spacing (D.8.1):

= 5 in

S min_untorqued := 4 do

< min (S 1,S 2 )

OK !

II. Minimum edge distance (D.8.2):


For untorqued cast-in anchors, the minimum edge distances shall be based on minimum cover requirements.
Cmin_untorqued = cover = 1.5 in

< min (C1,C2)

OK !

Use 2 layers of #4 tie @ 4 spacing

25
35

25

Design tie to carry 0.12 T = 0.12 (80) = 9.6 kip


Atie

9.6
= 0.21 in 2
0.75 (60)

Use 2 layers of #4 tie


69

70

Training Module

Training Module

Strength Design
PART V

Nominal strength

DESIGN PHYLOSOPHY

Load factors

of
APPENDIX D ACI 318-08

71

Training Module

72

Factored Design Load

- factors

Chapter 9 (Based on ASCE-7)

Section D.4.4

Appendix C (older)

Section D.4.5

Training Module

- factors

- factors from Section D.4.4 of ACI 318-08

- factors are determined based on :


Tension loads or shear loads ?
Cast-in-place anchor or post-installed anchor ?
Condition A or Condition B ?
Category 1, Category 2 or Category 3 ? (ONLY for post-installed
anchor)

Condition A :
- For concrete breakout or side-face blowout governs, when
supplementary reinforcement is provided

Condition B :
- For concrete breakout or side-face blowout govern, when
supplementary reinforcement is not provided
- For pullout or pryout strength governs
73

74

Training Module

Training Module

ACI Notations
ca1

PART VI
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE

ca2

for
TENSION LOADING

75

Training Module

s2

76

Training Module

For tension: ca1 ca2

s1
For shear:
ca1 is taken in the
direction of the applied
shear

Lightweight Concrete New ACI 318-08 provision

Strength Design for Tension Loading

N n N ua

Section 8.6.1 of the ACI 318-08


To account for the use of lightweight concrete, a modification factor
appears as a multiplier of f c ' in all applicable equations and sections.

N sa = n Ase , N f uta
N cb =
N n = the least of

= 1.0 for normal-weight concrete

ANc
ed , N c, N cp , N N b
ANco
N cbg =

= 0.85 for sand light-weight concrete


= 0.75 for all light-weight concrete

ANc
ec, N ed , N c , N cp , N N b
ANco

If the average splitting tensile strength of light-lightweight concrete, fct,


is specified:

N pn = c , P N p

Abrg

N sb = 160 ca1

fc '

f ct
1.0
6.7 f c '

N sbg = 1 +
N sb
6 c a1
77

78

Training Module

Training Module

Steel strength of anchor in tension

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Section D.5.1 of the ACI 318-08

Section D.5.2 of the ACI 318-08


Modification factors

N sa = n Ase, N f uta
n = number of anchors in group

For a single anchor:

Ase,N = effective cross-sectional area of anchor


futa = specified tensile strength of anchor steel
< the smaller of 1.9 fya and 125,000 psi

For threaded bolts:

Ase, N =

da
4

0.9743

nt

For a group of anchors: N cbg =


2

Training Module

ANc
ed , N c, N cp , N N b
ANco

ANc
ec , N ed , N c , N cp , N N b
ANco
Eccentricity

Modification factors:

da = outside diameter
nt = number of threads per inch

79

N cb =

ed : For edge effects


c : For cracked / uncracked concrete
cp : For splitting of post-installed anchors
80

Training Module

Basic concrete breakout


strength

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Concrete breakout strength in tension


The basic concrete breakout strength

N b = kc

f c ' hef

1.5

kc = coefficient based on test results (has been adjusted for cracked concrete)
= 24 for cast-in anchors
= 17 for post-installed anchors

DeVries, pp. 43

Alternatively, for cast-in headed studs and headed bolts with


11 hef 25, Nb shall not exceed:

N b = 16

81

82

Training Module

5/3

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Modification factor for cracked concrete (D.5.2.6): c ,N

Modification to account for geometry:

This is related to kc as follows:

ANco = maximum projected area for a


single anchor

kc values were then adjusted to provide kc values in cracked concrete.


kc = coefficient based on test results (has been adjusted for cracked concrete)
= 24 for cast-in anchors
= 17 for post-installed anchors

For cracked concrete:

c, N = 1.0

For uncracked concrete:


Cast-in anchors: c , N = 1.25
Post-installed anchors: c , N = 1.4
Training Module

ANc
ANco

ANc = projected concrete failure area for


anchor/group of anchor under consideration

kc represents a coefficient that was determined by testing anchors in


uncracked concrete.

83

f c ' hef

ANco = 9 hef

At service load levels !

(when kc is 17)
84

Training Module

ANc n ANco

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Concrete breakout strength in tension


Modification factor for eccentric loads (D.5.2.4):
(Only for a group of anchor)

(D.5.2.8): Where a plate / washer is added at the head of the anchor,


the failure surface can be projected outward 1.5 hef from the effective
perimeter of the plate / washer.

85

Training Module

ec , N =

1
2 e' N
1 +
3h
ef

How to define eN ?

86

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in tension


Modification factor for edge effects (D.5.2.5):

Only anchors in tension shall be considered when determining eN

Only when:

ed ,N

ca , min < 1.5 hef

ed , N = 0.7 + 0.3
ca1

ca2

87

Training Module

88

Training Module

ca , min
1.5 hef

1.0

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Concrete breakout strength in tension

Modification factor for splitting of post-installed anchors (D.5.2.7): cp,N

When anchor reinforcement is provided and is developed on both


sides of the breakout surface:

Applicable only for post-installed anchors, designed for uncracked


concrete without supplementary reinforcement to control splitting

Section D.5.2.9 of ACI 318-08:

Procedure:

Use design strength of anchor reinforcement instead of the concrete


breakout strength !

Determine the critical distance:

Use = 0.75 in designing anchor reinforcement !

For all other cases, including cast-in anchors: cp , N = 1.0


89

90

Training Module

Side-face blowout

Pullout strength of anchor in tension


Section D.5.3 of the ACI 318-08

Training Module

Special form of the wedge splitting failure where the cover is insufficient.
Basic pullout strength

N pn = c,P N p
Cracked (=1.0) or uncracked (=1.4)

Basic pullout strength:

At service load levels !

Hasselwander (1977): Most failures involved wedge-splitting to some degree.


What is the wedge-splitting ? Splitting of the concrete cover into distinct blocks by the
wedging action of a cone of crushed and compacted concrete which formed in front of
the washer of the anchorage device.

Net bearing area

Single headed stud / bolt:

N p = 8 Abrg f c '

Corresponding to the load at which crushing of the concrete occurs. Local crushing of
the concrete greatly reduces the stiffness of the connection, and generally will be the
beginning of pullout failures.

Single hooked bolt:


where:

91

Training Module

N p = 0.9 f c ' eh d a

Rarely used
in our office !

3 d a eh 4.5 d a

92
Conditions
around
the anchorage after formation of the cone of crushed concrete
Training
Module

Side-face Blowout

Side-face Blowout
Chronological order of side-face blowout:
1. Crushing of concrete
2. Head slips  Cracks
3. If it is close to the side, side-face blowout
If not, it produces splitting cracks

Anchor bolt removed from specimen after


failure, showing cone of crushed concrete

Cone of crushed concrete in front of


anchorage device

Hasselwander (1977)
93

94

Training Module

Training Module

Sequence of Wedge-splitting failure

Wedge Splitting vs. Side-face Blowout

Will occur when the concrete cover is relatively large


The diagonal cracks which just started just in front of the washer
on the bolt centerline and extended toward the front and each side
of the specimen

Also depend on concrete strength


fsm : mean steel stress

High fc : Wedge-splitting
hef = 3 ca
95

Training Module

hef = 3 ca
ca = 2.25 + 0.5 (0.5) = 2.5

Low fc : Side-face blowout

hef = 3 ca

Hasselwander (1977)

96

Training Module

Generally same behavior for


both
Hasselwander (1977)

Wedge Splitting vs. Side-face Blowout

Cracking and Failure Patterns for Side-face


Blowout

Similarity:

Bashandy (1996)

Crushing of concrete in front of the anchorage device  Movement of the head  Cracks

Differences:
Wedge Splitting

Wedge

Side-face blowout

Split the concrete into blocks

Sudden localized spalling of the cover over


the anchorage device

Common for large cover and highstrength concrete

Common for small cover and lowstrength concrete

How to alleviate ?
1. Increase the concrete cover beyond the anchorage device and/or concrete strength
2. Confine the concrete around the anchorage device (spiral reinforcement) to increase the
crushing strength
3. Increase the bearing area to reduce the bearing pressure (caveat: for the same anchor bolt
location, increasing the bearing area reduces the clear cover)
4. Place transverse reinforcement around the anchorage device to resist the lateral force
97

98

Training Module

Effect of transverse reinforcement on Side-face Blowout

Training Module

Effect of transverse reinforcement on Side-face Blowout


fc = 3630 psi
Net bearing area = 10.2 in2
Ttest = 149.4 kips

ACI notation:

At T=149.4 k (max. load without hairpins):

ca1 = 3.5 + 0.5(1.75) = 4.4

N sb = 160 ca1 Abrg

Tlateral = 12 k (8% of the max. load)

f c ' = 135 kips

Tlateral = 48 k (24% of the max. load)

Hasselwander (1977)
99

Training Module

At T=199 k (max. load with hairpins):

Note: 10
TheTraining
capacity
of the anchor is 237.5 k
Module
0

Hasselwander (1977)

Effect of transverse reinforcement on Side-face Blowout

Effect of transverse reinforcement placed


against the anchor head

1. Significantly increase the strength and ductility of anchor with


relatively shallow cover.

It increases the capacity through two mechanisms (Bashandy,


1996):

2. Provide lateral restraint once the cover split away from the
bolt.

1. Provides a lateral restraint against side-face blowout


2. Increasing the overall bearing area, and thus delaying the
formation of the wedge

10
1

Training Module

10
2

Effect of transverse reinforcement placed


against the anchor head cont

Training Module

Effect of transverse reinforcement placed


near the head

Recommendation:
Anchoring behind the transverse reinforcement  capacity
increase by 25%
Only for a positive anchorage (the clear head dimension is half
of the crossing bar diameter)

DeVries (1996)

Transverse reinforcement placed near the head is not as effective as that placed
against the head in increasing the strength
10
3

Training Module

10
4

Training Module

Effect of Corner Placement of the Anchors

Effect of Close Spacing on Side-face Blowout

DeVries (1996) indicated that corner placement reduced the size of


the blowout failure and the anchorage capacity.

Close spacing of anchors


reduced the capacity compared
to a single anchor.

In average: 60% reduction of the capacity


DeVries (1996)
10
5

Training Module

10
6

Effect of Confinement

Training Module

Factors affecting Side-face Blowout


1. Edge distance
2. Concrete strength
3. Bearing area of the head
4. Corner bars
5. Close spacing
Ineffective:
1. Longitudinal bars, unless they are restraint by ties

10
7

Training Module

10
8

Training Module

Concrete side-face blowout strength

Concrete side-face blowout strength cont

Section D.5.4 of ACI 318-08

How to account for the effects of corner bars and close spacing ?
ca1

Furche & Eligehausen (1991) found:

1. If ca2 < 3 ca1

1. The critical ratios of (c/h) at which the failure mode changed from blowout to concrete cone were
between 0.2 and 0.4.

3. The blowout failure depends on the edge distance, the bearing area of the anchor head, and the
concrete strength

where:
Single anchor:
Deep embedment and close to an edge:

N sb = 160 ca1 Abrg

hef > 2.5 ca1

1 .0

3 ca1

3 ca1

Section A-A

2. If s < 6 ca1

3 ca1

10
9

s
N sb
6 c a1

Section A-A

Elevation

11
0

Training Module

Shear reinforcement

3. Concrete strength

c
Spiral reinforcement
to increase bearing
strength

Calculate the side-face blowout capacity:

fc '

Bearing head should have sufficient stiffness !


2. If it is insufficient, design transverse reinforcement to carry
30% of the vertical load  25% increase in capacity if its
bearing based on test result

c : edge distance

6c 8c

Important design consideration: Development length and


stiffness of transverse reinforcement
Training Module

Elevation

Alternatives to increase side-face blowout strength

2. Bearing area

11
1

Section A-A

1. Edge distance

N sb = 160 ca1 Abrg

3 ca1

A
A

6 ca1

Concrete side-face blowout strength cont


1. Given:

6 c a1

6 ca1

Training Module

Elevation

ca1

Multiply Nsb with: 1 +

N sbg = 1 +

6 ca1

ca 2
3 .0
c a1

(Previous edition of ACI: ca1 < 0.4 hef )

ca1

fc '

3 ca1

ca 2
1 +

ca1
4

Multiply Nsb with:

2. The diameter of the lateral concrete cone was 6 to 8 times the edge distance.

ca2

Potential failure
11
2

surface
Training
Module

Effect of Head Thickness / Flexibility

Effect of Head Thickness / Flexibility cont

DeVries (1996)

Based on the tests on bearing capacity of concrete prisms by


applying a load with a punch through flexible plates, Hawkins
(1968) concluded that the flexibility of plates did decrease the
bearing capacity compared to rigid plates.

1. Too thick  waste of materials  Cost


2. Too thin  reduce effective bearing area  smaller capacity

11
3

Training Module

Inelastic deformation of thin heads

11
4

Training Module

Effect of Head Thickness / Flexibility


PART VII

DeVries (1996)
recommended the
use of cantilever
beam / footing model
to determine the
required head
thickness

ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE
for
SHEAR LOADING

Hasselwander et al.
(1977) recommended
the minimum washer
thickness of
1/8(washer diameter)
to prevent excessive
flexibility of the washer
11
5

Training Module

11
6

Training Module

Steel strength of anchor in shear

Strength Design for Shear Loading

Vn Vua

Section D.6.1 of the ACI 318-08


For cast-in headed studs :

Vn = the least of

Vsa = n Ase,V f uta

For cast-in headed studs

Vsa = n 0.6 Ase ,V f uta

For cast-in headed bolts,


hooked bolts

For cast-in headed bolts, hooked bolts :

futa = specified tensile strength of anchor steel


< the smaller of 1.9 fya and 125,000 psi

AVc
ec,V ed ,V c ,V h ,V Vb
AVco

For threaded bolts:

Ase,V = Ase, N =

Vcp = kcp N cb

11
8

Training Module

da
4

0.9743

nt

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Section D.6.2 of the ACI 318-08

Section D.6.2 of the ACI 318-08

For shear force perpendicular to the edge:

For shear force parallel to the edge:

Modification factors

For a single anchor:

Vcb =

For a group of anchors: Vcbg =

AVc
ed ,V c ,V h ,V Vb
AVco

Basic concrete breakout


strength

AVc
ec,V ed ,V c,V h,V Vb
AVco
Eccentricity

Use twice of the Vcb for the shear perpendicular to the edge
(defined on the previous slide)

Modification factors:

11
9

da = outside diameter
nt = number of threads per inch

Vcpg = kcp N cbg


11
7

Vsa = n 0.6 Ase ,V f uta

n = number of anchors in group


Ase,V = effective cross-sectional area of anchor

A
Vcb = Vc ed ,V c,V h,V Vb
AVco
Vcbg =

Vsa = n Ase,V f uta

ed : For edge effects


c : For cracked / uncracked concrete
h : For shallow members
Training Module

Use d,V = 1.0


12
0

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Concrete breakout strength in shear

The basic concrete breakout strength

The basic concrete breakout strength

For a single anchor in cracked concrete:

For cast-in headed studs, headed/hooked bolts that are continuously


welded to steel attachments having a minimum thickness of the
greater of (3/8 and da/2), can use:

l
Vb = 7 e
da

0.2

da

1.5

f c ' (ca1 )

l 0.2

Vb = 8 e
da
da

le = load-bearing length of the anchor for shear (


8 da)
= hef for anchors with constant stiffness over hef
(i.e. headed studs / post-installed anchors with one tubular shell over hef)

1.5

f c ' (ca1 )

Provided:

= 2 da for torque-controlled expansion anchors with a distance sleeve


separated from expansion sleeve
ca1 = edge distance in the direction of shear force

12
1

12
2

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in shear


Modification to account for geometry:

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in shear

AVc
AVco

Some examples for Avc calculations:

AVc = projected concrete failure area for


anchor/group of anchor under consideration
AVco = maximum projected area for a
single anchor

AVc n AVco
ANco = 4.5 ca1

12
3

Training Module

12
4

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Concrete breakout strength in shear


Avc calculations for two rows of anchors in the direction of shear:

When anchors are influenced by three or more edges, what is ca1 ?

Evaluate the both cases 1 and 2 to determine the controlling case !

ca 2
in either direction
1.5

ca1 the max:


12
5

12
6

Training Module

Training Module

ha
1.5
1/3 of max. spacing between anchors within the group

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Modification factor for eccentric loading (D.6.2.5): ec ,V

Modification factor for edge effects (D.6.2.6): ed ,V

(Only for a group of anchor)


ec,V =

ca2

1
2 e'V
1 +

3 ca1

ca1

Consider only anchors that are loaded


in shear in the same direction
V

12
7

Training Module

12
8

Training Module

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Concrete breakout strength in shear

Modification factor for cracked / uncracked concrete (D.6.2.7): c ,V

Modification factor for thin concrete (D.6.2.8):

To account for :
Cracked / uncracked at service loads

h ,V

NEW provision introduced in the ACI 318-08


For ha < 1.5 ca1 :

The amount of supplementary / edge reinforcement

h,V =

1.5 ca1
ha

If uncracked at service loads: c ,V = 1.4


If cracked at service loads and :
with no supplementary / edge reinforcement < #4 bar :

c,V = 1.0

with supplementary reinforcement of #4 bar between the anchor and the edge :

c,V = 1.2

with supplementary reinforcement of #4 bar between the anchor and the edge, and
with the supplementary reinforcement enclosed within stirrups spaced 4 :

12
9

c ,V

= 1.4

13
0

Training Module

Training Module

Combined Loadings (Tension & Shear)


PART VIII
COMBINED LOADING
(Tension and Shear)

McMackin et al. (1973) recommended:

13
1

Training Module

13
2

P

Pu

V
+
Vu

P: applied tension load

Pu: Tensile capacity of the anchor = u As

V: applied shear load

Vu: Shear capacity of the anchor

Training Module

=1

Combined Loadings (Tension & Shear)


p1

General elliptical interaction formula:

P
V
+
Pu
Vu

Combined Loadings (Tension & Shear)

p2

Section D.7 of ACI 318-08

=1

The Task Group on Steel Embedment (1984) and CEB (1991) recommended p1 = p2 = 5/3
Based on the test results on two-anchor connections on a rigid baseplate under eccentric
shear with both anchors on the tension side, Cook (1989) recommended p1 = p2 = 5/3.
Based on the tests results of several types of anchors under oblique loading, Lotze and
Klingner (1997) found that p1 and p2 values between 1.67 and 1.8 could describe the steel
failure load appropriately.

The general elliptical interaction formula can be used for


both steel and concrete failure
Shaikh and Whayong (1985) recommended: p1 = p2 = 2.0

Section D.4.3 of ACI 318-08 indicated that any other interaction expression that
is in substantial agreement with results comprehensive tests can be used.

Cook and Klingner (1992) recommended: p1 = p2 = 5/3


13
3

13
4

Training Module

Training Module

What weve discussed today ?


I. Introduction

PART IX
SUMMARY

II. Common / existing approaches for designing anchor


reinforcement

and

III. Strut-and-Tie Model approach for designing anchor


reinforcement
IV. Example problem

REFERENCES

V. Design philosophy of the ACI 318-08 Appendix D


VI. Anchorage to concrete for tension loading
VII. Anchorage to concrete for shear loading
VIII. Combined loading (Tension and shear)
13
5

Training Module

13
6

IX. Summary and references


Training Module

Appendix D of
ACI 318-08

References
Cannon, R.W., Godfrey, D.A., and Moreadith, F.L. (1981). Guide to the Design of Anchor
Bolts and Other Steel Embedments, Concrete International, July, pp. 28-41.
CEB. (1991). Fastenings to Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures: State-of-Art
Report, Part 1, Euro-International-Concrete Committee (CEB), August, 1991.
Cook, R. A. (1989). Behavior and Design of Ductile Multiple-Anchor Steel-to-Concrete
Connections , Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, May, 1989.
Cook, R.A. and Klingner, R.E. (1992). Ductile Multiple-Anchor Steel-to-Concrete
Connections, Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 118, No. 6, pp. 1645-1665.
Fabbrocino, G., Verderame, G.M., and Manfredi, G. (2005). Experimental behavior of
anchored smooth rebars in old type reinforced concrete buildings, Engineering Structures,
Vol. 27, pp. 1575-1585.

References
Furche, J. and Eligehausen, R. (1991). Lateral Blow-out Failure of Headed Studs Near a
Free Edge, Anchors in ConcreteDesign and Behavior, SP-130, American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 235-252.
Ghali, A. and Youakim, S.A. (2005). Headed Studs in Concrete: State of the Art, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 102, No. 5, pp. 657-667.
Hasselwander, G.B., Jirsa, J.O., Breen, J.E., and Lo, K. (1977). Strength and Behavior of
Anchor Bolts Embedded Near Edges of Concrete Piers, Research Report 29-2F, Center for
Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin.
Leonhardt, F. and Walther, R. (1965). Welded Wire Mesh as Stirrup Reinforcements
Shear Tests on T-Beams and Anchorage Tests, Bautechnik, V. 42, October. (in German)
Lotze, D. and Klingner, R. E. (1997), Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections to
Concrete From the Perspective of Plastic Theory, PMFSEL Report No. 96-4, The University
of Texas at Austin, March.
McMackin, P.J., Slutter, R.G., and Fisher, J.W. (1973). Headed Steel Anchor under
Combined Loading, Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 10, No. 2, April, 1973.

13
7

Training Module

References
Shaikh, A. and Whayong, Y. (1985). In-place Strength of Welded Headed Studs, Journal
of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, pp. 56-81.
Swirsky, R.A., Dusel, J.P., Crozier, W.F., Stoker, J.R., and Nordlin, E.F. (1977). Lateral
Resistance of Anchor Bolts Installed in Concrete, Report FHWA-CA-ST-4167-77-12,
California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, May.
Task Group on Steel Embedment. (1984). State of Art Report on Steel Embedment,
Structural Engineering in Nuclear Facilities, Proceedings, J. J. Ucciferro, Ed., North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1984, pp. 1080-1218.
Thompson, M.K., Ledesma, A, Jirsa, J.O., and Breen, J.E. (2006). Lap Splices Anchored by
Headed Bars. ACI Structural Journal, V. 103, No. 2, pp. 271-279.
Wiewel, H. (1991). Design Guidelines for Anchorage to Concrete, Anchors in Concrete
Design and Behavior, SP-130, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., pp. 118.

13
9

Training Module

13
8

Training Module