Guide to the Design of Anchor Bolts
and Other Steel EI11bedments
by R. W. Cannon. D. A. Godfrey. and F. L. Moreadith
Preface
There has been little published on the design of steel
embedments. Many designers looking for guidance have
found the work of ACI Committee 349, Concrete Nuclear
Structures, extremely helpful. Because there may be de-
signers who are not aware of this information, which is an
appendix to the Code prepared by Committee 349, a mod-
ified version is offered here which can be applied outside
the design of nuclear structures.
Appendix B, "Steel Embedments" of "Code Require-
ments for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures (ACI
349-76)" was adopted by the American Concrete Institute
in August 1979. The authors of this article were principal
authors of Appendix B. The appendix was ballotted and
revised extensively several times before being accepted by
ACI Committee 349. Additionally, the document was ex-
tensively reviewed by the ACI Technical Activities Com-
mittee (TAC). Following revision and ballotting by ACI 349
and further review by TAC, the document was accepted for
ballotting by the general membership of the Institute and
published in the August 1978 ACI JOURNAL Proceedings of
the American Concrete Institute. It was adopted as part of
the Code in June 1979.
Appendix B is, for the most part, directly applicable to
concrete structures in general, not only to nuclear safety
related structures. The parts of this article presented in
italic-type represents modifications which the authors feel
transform Appendix B into a general guide for designing
steel embedments. For the most part, the changes fall into
one of three categories:
1. 1980 proposed revisions to Appendix B.
2. Deleting references to ACI 349-76 and inserting ref-
erences to ACI 318-77.
3. Technical changes which the authors feel constitute an
improvement in the content of Appendix B.
It is important to emphasize that the regular-type por-
tions of this article have been subjected to a rigorous eval-
uation by ACI Committee 349, TAC, and the general mem-
bership of the Institute.
This guide defines minimum requirements for design of
steel embedments used to transmit loads from attachments
into reinforced concrete structures. Loads may be trans-
mitted into structures by means of tension, bearing, shear,
friction, or any combination thereof. The design limits have
been established using both analytical and test methods.
The commentary provides background information on the
provisions.
Keyword8: anchorage (structural); anchor bolts, anchors (fas-
teners); building codes; composite construction (concrete and steel);
embedment; grouting; inserts; loads (forces); reinforced concrete;
shear properties; structural design; studs.
1.0 - Notation
a dimension out to out of bearing edges (see Fig.
5-2), in.
reduction in projected area, sq in.
28
AI loaded area, sq in.
Az maximum area of the portion of the supporting
surface that is geometrically similar to and
concentric with loaded area, sq in.
b dimension, out to out of bearing edges (see
Fig. 5-2), in.
D major thread diameter of threaded anchor or
nominal diameter of anchor, in.
f; specified compressive strength of concrete, psi
f ut minimum specified tensile strength of anchol
steel, psi
!y mInlmUm specified yield strength of embed-
ment steel, psi
h overall thickness of member, in.
Ld embedment depth for tensile anchorage mea-
sured from anchorage bearing surface to con-
crete surface, in.
m minimum side cover distance from the center
of an anchor to the edge of the concrete (see
Fig. 5-1), in.
n number of threads per in.
Pd design pullout strength of concrete in tension,
lb
U required strength to resist factored loads or
related internal moments and forces
~ strength reduction factor, dimensionless
2.0 - Scope
2.1 - This guide provides minimum requirements
for design and anchorage of steel embedments used
to transmit loads from attachments into reinforced
concrete structures by means of tension, bearing,
shear, friction, or any combination permitted by this
guide.
Typical embedment details and concepts as refer-
enced in this guide are shown in Fig. 2-1 and 2-2.
In addition to meeting these requirements consid-
eration shall be given to the effect of the forces ap-
plied to the embedment on the behavior of the overall
structure.
2.2 - The requirements for the attachment to the
embedment shall be in accordance with applicable
codes and are beyond the scope of this guide.
2.3 - Design limits less conservative than those
specified in this guide may be used by the engineer
if substantiated by experimental or detailed analyti-
cal investigation.
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
 BOUNDARY Of
STE:(L EMBEDMENT
SHEAR EMBEDMENTS
EMSEDMENTS
~(OMPR[5SI0N
.- \1EMB[R
-p
BOUNDARY CK
Sn:EL EMBEDMENT
Fig. 2-1 - Bearing embedments - Typical embed-
ment details.
3.0 - Definitions
Anchor head - A nut, washer, plate, stud, or bolt
head or other steel component used to transmit an-
chor loads to the concrete by bearing.
Attachment - The attachment is that structure
external to the surfaces of the embedment which
transmits loads to the embedment.
Embedment - The embedment is that steel com-
ponent in contact with the concrete or grout used to
transmit applied loads to the concrete structures. The
embedment may be fabricated of plates, shapes,
bolts, reinforcing bars, shear connectors, expansion
anchors, inserts, or any combination thereof.
Expansion anchor - A component installed in
hardened concrete for the transfer of loads into struc-
tural components by direct bearing and/or friction.
Grouted embedment - An embedment located in
a formed or drilled hole in hardened concrete utilizing
a grout to provide load transfer from the embedment
to the concrete.
Inserts - Commercially available, predesigned,
and prefabricated embedments installed prior to con-
crete placement which are specifically designed for
attachment of bolted connections.
4.0 - General requirements and loading
combinations
4.1 - The embedment and surrounding concrete
or grout shall be designed for transmitting to the con-
crete structure all loads used in the design of the at-
tachment.
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
'>'NC.HC>R~ c
HEAOc ccc~' f---~--I f-==...,.....--'-~~
. •,~. fJ'" ~ .~.
_ _ _B=-O:..::U.:::.;N=-DA",R=Y:..:O.::.F:.:=.:........_ _
..- STEEc. EMBD'.:[i iT
TYPE B
Fig. 2-2 - Tension embedments - Typical embed-
ment details.
4.2 - Reactions on the embedment due to individ-
ual loads such as dead, live (including vibratory
loads), thermal and seismic, loads shall be considered.
The loading combinations for embedment design shall
be in accordance with Section 9.2 of ACI 318-77.
4.3 - Material and testing requirements for
embedment steel shall be specified by the engineer
to ensure that the intended function of the embed-
ment and the attachment is compatible.
4.4 - The strength of embedments as affected by
the size and grade of steel, spacing, and depth of
embedment and any concrete dimensions which limit
or restrict the transfer of loads from steel to concrete
shall be considered as defined in Sections 5.0, 6.0, and
7.0.
4.5 - Shear lugs that meet the requirements of
Sections 5.5 and 6.1.2(b) shall be considered effective
only when located in a concrete compression zone
developed between the embedment and the concrete
and transverse to the direction of the shear force for
a given load combination unless adequate reinforce-
ment is provided.
4.6 - A combination of bearing and shear friction
mechanisms shall not be used to develop the required
29

".REJUCE BY THE TOTAL
Fig. 5-1 Effective stress area for anchorage pull-
out.
Fig. 5-2 - Stress area reduction for limited depth A,.
shear strength defined in accordance with Section 9.2
of ACI 318-77.
5.0 - Design requirements for concrete
5.1 - The design provisions of this guide are based
on the strength design method. The assumptions,
principles, and requirements of ACI 318-77 are ap-
plicable for all load combinations except as modified
herein.
80
5.2 - Tension - The design pullout strength of
concrete P d for any anchorage shall be based on a
uniform tensile stress of 4~ VI: acting on an effective
stress area which is defined'!:ly the projected area of
stress cones radiating toward the attachment from
the bearing edge of the anchotfi'; The effective area
is limited by overlapping stress cones, by the inter-
section of the cones with concrete surfaces, by the
bearing area of anchor heads, and by the overall
thickness of the concrete (see Fig. 5-1 and 5-2). The
inclination angle for calculating projected areas shall
be 45 deg. The ~ factor shall be taken as 0.65 for an
embedded anchor head unless the anchor head is be-
yond the far face reinforcement. In such cases a ~
factor of 0.85 may be used.
5.3 - Shear - The design shear strength of an-
chors subject to shear shall satisfy the requirements
of Sections 6.1.2 and 7.2.2.
5.4 - Reinforcement - If the requirements of Sec-
tion 6.1 are not satisfied, reinforcement shall be pro-
vided to develop the required strength. Reinforce·
ment requirements shall be in accordance with
applicable sections of ACI 318-77 and placed to pre-
vent failure of the concrete in tension.
5.5 - Bearing
5.5.1 - The bearing requirements of Sections 10.16
or 18.13 of ACI 318-77 shall apply to the maximum
bearing stress at a shear lug or anchor head except
as permitted by Section 5.5.2.
5.5.2 - The bearing requirements of Section 5.5.1
do not have to be met if the anchor head at the base
of the tensile stress component satisfies the following
conditions:
(a) The bearing area of the anchor head (excluding the
area of the tensile stress component) is at least 1.5
times the area of the tensile stress component.
(b) The thickness of the anchor head is at least 1.0
times the greatest dimension from the outer most
bearing edge of the anchor head to the face of the
tensile stress component.
(c) The bearing area of the anchor head is approxi-
mately evenly distributed around the perimeter of
the tensile stress component.
6.0 - Anchorage requirements
6.1 - Anchorage design shall be controlled by the
strength of embedment steel unless otherwise spec-
ified in this guide.
6.1.1 - Tension. Steel strength controls when the
design pullout strength of the concrete Pd as deter-
mined in Section 5.2 exceeds the minimum specified
tensile strength of the tensile stress component of the
embedment steel and full load transfer is accom-
plished from steel to concrete within the depth of the
anchorage by one of the following methods:
(a) A mechanical anchor at the base of the tensile
stress components which satisfies the requirements
of Section 5.5.2. To prevent failure due to lateral
bursting forces at an anchor head, the side cover dis-
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
tance m shall be determined such that the lateral con-
crete design strength (based on a uniform tensile
stress of 4~ VI: acting on an effective area defined
by projecting 45 deg planes from the anchor head to
the free surface) exceeds the lateral bursting force
unless the requirements of Section 5.4 are met. The
~ factor shall be taken as 0.85.
(b) Reinforcing bars with development lengths in
accordance with the requirements of Chapter 12 of
ACI318-77, for anchor steel composed of reinforce-
ment.
6.1.2 - Shear. For steel strength to control the
design shear strength: (a) For anchor bolts, studs, or
bars the side cover distance m for shear loading to-
ward a free edge shall be such that the concrete de-
sign strength (based on a uniform tensile stress of
4~ VI: acting on an effective area defined by project-
ing 45 deg planes to the free surface from the cen-
terline of the anchor at the shearing plane) exceeds
the ultimate shear strength of the bolts, studs, or
bars (based on fu ,) unless the requirements of Section
5.4 are met. The ~ factor shall be taken as 0.85.
(b) For shear lugs bearing in the direction of a free
edge, the concrete design shear strength shall be de-
termined based on a uniform tensile stress of 4~ VI:
_acting on an effective stress area defined by pro-
jecting 45 deg planes from the bearing edges of the
shear lug to the free surface and shall exceed the
ultimate shear strength of the steel (based on fu,) un-
less the requirements of Section 5.4 are met. Bearing
area of the shear lug shall be excluded from the pro-
jected area. The ~ factor shall be taken as 0.85.
6.1.3 - For combined tension and shear, the depth
of embedment shall be in accordance with Section
6.1.1 and the minimum edge distance in accordance
with Section 6.1.2(a).
6.1.4 - Where reinforcement is provided in ac-
cordance with Section 5.4, the side cover distance
shall not be less than 1fa that required by Section
6.1.2. Under no conditions should the edge distance
be less than the concrete cover requirements for re-
inforcement in Section 7.7 of ACI 318-77.
1.11 - Design requirements for embedment steel
7.1 - Embedment material shall be defined by the
Engineer in contract documents.
7.2 - The design strength for embedments shall
be based on a maximum steel stress of ~ fy or ~ (0.8
i u ,), whichever is less. The design yield strength iy
shall not exceed 120,000 psi. The following values for
~ shall be used:
7.2.1 - Tension, compression, and bending. ~ = 0.9.
7.2.2 - Shear
7.2.2.1 - Structural shapes and fabricated steel
sections and shear lugs. ~ = 0.55.
7.2.2.2 - The shear-friction provisions of Section
_ 11.7 of ACI 318-77 (as herein modified) shall be ap-
plied to bolts, studs, and bars using a ~ of 0.85. The
coefficient of friction J.I shall be:
CONCRETE INTERNATION~/JULY 1981
(a) 0.9 for concrete or grout against as-rolled steel
with the contact plane a full plate thickness below the
concrete surface.
(b) 0.7 for concrete or grout against as-rolled steel
with contact plane coincidental with the concrete sur-
face.
(c) 0.55 for grouted conditions with the contact
plane between grout and as-rolled steel exterior to
the concrete surface.
7.3 - Combined tension and shear
7.3.1 - For structural shapes and fabricated steel
sections, the web shall be designed for the shear and
the flanges designed for the tension, compression,
and bending.
7.3.2 - For bolts, studs, and bars the area of steel
required for tension by Section 7.2.1 and for shear by
Section 7.2.2.2 shall be additive.
7.4 - The tensile stress area of a threaded anchor
shall be taken as:
2
[ 0.9743
0.7854 D - -n- ]
where D is the, major thread diameter and n is the
number of threads per in.
7.5 - The tensile stress area of Section 7.4 shall
be applied to all threaded anchors subject to direct
tensile and shear stress.
B.O - Expansion anchors
This section provides minimum requirements for
the design of typical expansion anchors used in con-
crete structures and does not restrict the use of other
expansion anchors provided the expansion anchors
are designed and tested in accordance with the re-
quirements of this section.
8.1 - Design requirements - Expansion anchors
shall be designed to assure that the design strength
of concrete for a given expansion anchor or group of
expansion anchors is greater than the strength of the
anchor steel except as permitted in Section 8.2. This
requirement shall be met by satisfying the require-
ments of Sections 8.1.1 or 8.1.2.
B.1.1 - Design by analysis
(a) Tension: The design pullout strength of concrete
P d shall be as defined in Section 5.2 except that the
effective stress area shall be defined by the projected
area of the stress cones radiating toward the concrete
surface from the innermost expansion contact surface
between the expansion anchor and the drilled hole.
Refer to Fig. 8-1 for typical details. The design pull-
out strength of concrete shall be equal to or greater
than the minimum specified tensile strength or av-
erage tensile strength if a minimum is not defined for
the expansion anchor. The minimum edge distance
requirement of Section 6.1.1(a) shall be satisfied.
(b) Shear: Expansion anchors subject to shear shall
meet the requirements of Section 6.1.2(a).
31

Fig. 8-1 - Typical details of expansion anchors.
(c) For combined tension and shear, the depth of
embedment shall be in accordance with Section
8.1.1(a) and the minimum edge distance in accordance
with Section 8.1.1(b).
(d) The design requirements for embedment steel
shall be in accordance with Section 7.0.
8.1.2 Design by testing. Tests shall be conducted
to verify that the concrete will develop the steel
strength of the expansion anchors. Design by test
results shall be restricted to tests that are represen-
tative of the anchor spacing and load application.
8.1.S Strength reduction factors. The requirements
+
of Section 7.1 shall apply except that the factors for
expansion anchors shall be 0.9 times the values spec-
ified in Section 7.2.
8.2 - Alternative design requirements - For ex-
pansion anchors that do not meet the requirement of
Section 8.1, the design strength shall be 0.35 times
the average test failure load. This factor applies to
tension and shear test failure loads. The average test
failure load shall be equal to the average of the test
loads carried by test anchors at failure (maximum
load) or at a magnitude of displacement of test an-
chors as specified by the engineer. A linear interac-
tion shall be used for combined tension and shear.
8.3 - A single expansion anchor used to anchor an
attachment shall be designed for 1/2 of the design
strength defined herein.
8.4 - Testing
8.4.1 - Expansion anchors designed in accordance
with the guide shall be tested to verify anchorage or
82
to determine the average test failure load. Tests shall
be conducted by a testing agency other than the an-
chor manufacturer and shall be certified by a profes-
sional engineer with full description and details of the
testing program, procedures, results, and conclu-
sions.
8.4.2 - The expansion mechanism of the anchor
shall be tested for the installed condition by one of
the following methods:
(a) The mechanism shall be actuated and tested
during installation by preloading the expansion an-
chor to a minimum value as specified by the engineer.
(b) A random selection of the installed anchors shall
be load tested to a minimum of 100 percent of the
required strength. The testing program shall be es-
tablished by the engineer.
8.5 - Expansion anchor selection - The engineer
shall review the expansion anchor design features,
failure modes, test results, and installation proce-
dures prior to selecting a specific expansion anchor
for an application. Expansion anchors shall not be
used to resist vibratory loads in tension zones of con-
crete members unless tests are conducted to verify
the adequacy of the specific anchor and application.
9.0 - Inserts
Concrete inserts shall be specified in accordance
with Section 7.1 and tested in accordance with Sec-
tion 8.4.1.
9.1 - Design requirements - When inserts cannot
be designed to meet the requirements of Sections 5.0,
6.0 and, 7.0, the design strength shall be based on
actual test data of tests performed on inserts embed-
ded in concrete. The tests shall cover the full range
of possible loading conditions.
9.2 - Strength reduction factor - When inserts
cannot be designed to meet the requirements of Sec-
+
tions 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0, a factor of 0.5 shall be applied
to the average test failure loads in determining the
design strength.
10.0 - 6routed embedmenD
10.1 - Grouted embedments shall meet the appli-
cable requirements of Sections 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0.
10.2 - For general grouting purposes the material
requirements for cement grout shall be in accordance
with Chapter 3 of ACI 318-77. Special grouts used to
achieve certain properties such as high strength, low
shrinkage, or expansion shall be the responsibility of
the engineer and specified in contract documents.
10.3 - Grouted embedments shall be tested to ver-
ify anchorage strength. Grouted embedments in-
stalled in tension zones of concrete members shall be
capable of sustaining design strength in cracked con-
crete. Tests shall be conducted by an independent
testing agency and shall be certified by a professional
engineer with full description and details of the test-
ing programs, procedures, results, and conclusions.
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
 10.4 - Grouted embedments shall be tested for the
installed condition by testing randomly selected
grouted embedments to a minimum of 100 percent of
the required strength. The testing program shall be
established by the engineer.
10.5 - The tests required by Sections 10.3 and 10.4
may be waived by the engineer if tests and installa-
tion data are available to ensure that the grouted
embedment will function as designed or if the load
Commentary on Guide to the Design of Anchor
Bolts and Other Steel Embedments
I.O-Notation
In addition to the notation provided in Section 1.0,
the notation used in this guide is the same as in ACI
318-77.
2.9-Seope
This guide provides minimum requirements for the
design of steel embedments used to transmit loads
from attachments into the reinforced concrete struc-
tures governed by ACI 318-77.
Design limits have been established using both an-
alytical and test methods. Analytically, limits on ca-
pacity for both concrete and steel have been estab-
lished which are consistent with accepted ACI and
AISC practice. Where design limits have been estab-
lished through test programs, test results have been
published or are available from the original source. l -3
Tests have been performed on steel embedments to
determine the limiting ioad capabilities and anchor-
age requirements for fabricated anchorages, concrete
inserts, anchor bolts, welded studs, and expansion
anchors subject to loads applied in direct tension and
shear. The effect of edge conditions, strength of con-
crete, size, strength, number, and spacing of anchors
was investigated. Typical arrangements and geome-
try of steel embedments are as reflected in the fig-
u~es of the guide, commentary, and references.
Although typical embedment details and concepts
are referenced in Section 2.1, this does not preclude
the use of other details of concepts to which the pro-
visions of this guide and ACI 318-77 are applicable.
Various methods of joining the attachment to the
embedment may be used, a few of which are shown
in figures which are a part of the guide. Section 2.2
specifies that the design of attachments is not a part
of the guide; however, proper consideration should be
given to their design to ensure compatibility with
assumptions made in the design of the embedment.
3.9-Definitions
In addition to the definitions provided in Section
3.0, the definition of other terms used in the guide
are the same as those in ACI 318-77.
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
transfer through the grout is by direct bearing or
compression.
11.0 - Fabrieatlon and instaDation
Welding of attachments to embedments shall be in
accordance with good practice to avoid excessive ex·
pansion of the embedment which could result in det-
rimental spalling or cracking of the concrete or ex-
cessive stress in the embedment anchors.
4.O-General requirements and loading
eombinations
The requirements of this section reference other
sections of the guide and ACI 318-77. The engineer,
using the applicable requirements of the referenced
section, is responsible for the design of an embed-
ment which is compatible with the material, design
loads, and function of the attachment and the sup-
porting structure.
Sections 4.1 and 4.2 require that the engineer co-
ordinate the design of the attachment with the design
of the embedment and surrounding concrete and that
the embedment be designed for the load combinations
of Section 9.2 of ACI 318-77 as a minimum. It is sug-
gested that special consideration be given to embed-
ments designed for vibratory loads (e.g., increased
load factor).
The variation in type of loading coupled with the
various loading combinations result in a wide range
of design problems for the embedment designer.
Also, a wide range of material for embedments is
available which restricts Section 4.3 from being more
explicit. From a practical point of view as well as
from an economic standpoint, it must be the respon-
sibility of the engineer to select appropriate materials
for embedments and specify testing, if necessary, for
each class of embedments (as implied by Section 4.3)
which will ensure that the intended function of the
attachment is not impaired.
Section 4.5 places limitations on shear lugs which
do not satisfy the requirements of Section 6.0, i.e.,
that the embedment exhibit ductile behavior if sub-
jected to overload. The engineer is cautioned that
shear lugs, even though located in the specified
compression zone, may not be fully effective if edge
distance between the lug bearing surface and free
surface of the concrete is limited. The requirements
of Section 5.4 must be satisfied when those of Section
6.1.2(b) are not.
Although specific requirements are not given in the
guide, the engineer must ensure that the stiffness
characteristics of the shear lugs are compatible with
the assumed bearing stress distribution between the
lugs and the concrete.
ss

Fig. 1 - Load transfer behavior of deformed rein-
forcement.
Section 4.6 prohibits the engineer from combining
the design shear strength of bearing (e.g., shear lugs)
and shear friction (e.g., shear studs) mechanisms.
This exclusion is justified in that it is difficult to pre-
dict the distribution of shear resistance as a result of
the differential stiffness of the two mechanisms.
5.O-Design requirements for eonerete
The basic requirements for the development of
embedments in reinforced concrete are provided by
Sections 5.0 and 6.0. The transfer of tensile stress
from steel to concrete using deformed reinforcement
or headed anchors is accomplished by mechanical
means if the location of the load transfer mechanism
(either bar deformations or anchor heads) is in close
proximity to one or more concrete surfaces, tensile
cracking of the concrete will occur at the load trans-
fer mechanism. The extent of cracking is dependent
on the tensile strength of concrete and location of the
load transfer mechanism with respect to embedment
depth and side cover distance.
Development length requirements for deformed re-
inforcement are dependent on the relationship of the
height and spacing of deformations with respect to
bar size and the influence of adjacent stressed rein-
forcement. The basic development length require-
ments of Section 12.2 of ACI 318-77 are based on
clear side cover distances equal to or less than 3 in.
(76.2 mm) and maximum bar spacing of 6 in.
(152.4 mm). Reinforcement in concrete members is
generally located near the surface and, therefore, the
development length requirements of Section 12.2 of
ACI 318-77 are reasonably conservative to ensure a
ductile failure without tensile splitting of the con-
crete.
If a reinforcing bar is used as a tensile stress com-
ponent embedded into the interior of a concrete mass,
the development length requirements of Section 12.2
are excessive. For uniformly sized and spaced bar
deformations, the tensile stress in the steel varies
from a maximum at the surface of the concrete to
zero at the end of the bar as illustrated in Fig. 1. For
embedment lengths equal to the ld of Section 12.2, the
failure mode would be rupture of the steel at its ul-
timate tensile strength. Typically, complete failure is
preceded by developing a shallow surface cone (see
Fig. 1) when the bar reaches yield. This preliminary
distress occurs typically because the bar deforma-
tions along the embedded portion of the reinforce-
ment are trying to participate equally in the load
transfer from the bar to the concrete. Using the ld
values of Section 12.2 is conservative. However,
these requirements are specified in Section 6.1.1(b)
of the guide due to the lack of available data neces-
sary to reduce the embedment requirements.
A single mechanical anchor (e.g., head of an anchor
bolt or stud) at the end of a smooth bar or rod be-
haves differently than deformed reinforcement. As
tensile load is increased, bond failure will occur such
that the entire tensile load is transferred into the
concrete by the anchor head. If the depth of embed-
ment is less than that required to develop the ulti-
mate tensile strength of the bar or rod concrete ten-
sile failure will occur with initial cracking beginning
around the perimeter of the anchor head. A "pullout
cone failure" results as the cracking propagates to
the surface.
5.1-The combined requirements of Sections 5.0
and 6.0 are intended to result in an embedment de-
sign which will exhibit ductile behavior in the case
of unanticipated overload. This philosophy is consis-
tent with the code in that sudden brittle failure is an
undesirable failure mode.
Section 5.1 requires the designer to be cognizant
of satisfying applicable general requirements of the
code.
5.2-Tension-This section defines the method of
calculating design pullout strength of concrete, i.e.,
direct tensile capacity, for an embedment.
The tensile strength of concrete is generally ac-
cepted as ranging from 6 to 7 times the square root
of the compressive strength of concrete (in psi). The
distribution of principal tensile stress in the concrete
along the potential pullout failure plane defined by
Section 5.2 is assumed to vary (based on References
1,2, and 3) from a maximum at the mechanical anchor
on the end of the steel embedment to zero at the sur-
face of the concrete. This constitutes an average re-
sistance provided by the concrete of approximately
4 VI: acting on the projected tensile stress area.
Failure is initiated at the outside periphery of the
mechanical anchor (anchor head) and, therefore, the
area of the anchor head does not contribute to the
pullout strength of the concrete and should be sub-
tracted from the projected tensile stress area in com-
puting pullout strength. Thus, it is desirable to keep
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
the effective size of anchor head as small as possible
to reduce embedment requirements. Tests!,2 have
shown that the head of a standard anchor bolt or
stud, without a plate or washer, is sufficient bearing
area to fully develop the tensile strength of bolts
without damage to the concrete when the head of the
bolt has sufficient side cover for development of the
necessary confining pressure. This is the basis of the
requirement specified in Section 5.5.2 which defines
anchor head dimensions that are similar to the head
of standard anchor bolts.
When the individual tensile stress components
(e.g., bolts or studs or an embedment configuration
are located sufficiently close together (i.e., center-to-
center spacing) for overlapping of the potential pull-
out failure planes of the individual anchors, then the
loss of the effective tensile stress area can be com-
pensated for by increased depth of embedment. The
projected tensile stress area of the group must be
capable of developing the combined strengths of the
tensile stress components as required by Section
6.1.1. Otherwise, the reinforcement provisions of Sec-
tion 5.4 must apply.
For fully developed embedments, the concrete di-
mension parallel to the development length must be
of sufficient thickness to meet the nominal shear
stress requirements of Section 11.11 for two-way ac-
tion. When the anchorage is made up of a number of
bolts or individual anchors, spaced over a relatively
wide surface area of the structure, the effective
stress area must be reduced to comply with Section
11.11 of ACI 318-77 as illustrated in Fig. 5-2 of the
guide.
The nominal inclination of the failure plane for pull-
out of the concrete is 45 deg; due to principal stress
orientation; if the concrete is stress-free transverse
to the pullout force. As the crack propagates toward
the surface the uncracked portion flexes as a shallow
disc putting the outer surface in compression around
the perimeter and causing a change in the failure
plane inclination. For shallow embedments, generally
less than 5 in. (127 mm), the flexural strength due to
the disc action is greater than the cone pullout
strength such that an increase in load is required to
propagate the crack. For this reason, the normal 90
deg failure cone (total angle) will approach 120 deg
with decreasing anchor depth in correlating failure
loads! to calculated values using 4 VI: as a uniform
stress. The actual concrete spall for shallow depth
anchors will produce an even wider area of failure.
However, caution should be observed in the utiliza-
tion of inclination angles greater than 45 deg because
of the possibility of surface cracking which might re-
strict flexural action. For this reason the use of in-
clination angles greater than 45 deg for shallow depth
anchors is not recommended.
The inclination of the failure angle will also vary
as a function of state of stress in the plane of the
concrete structure (e.g.; wall or slab) into which the
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
embedment is being anchored. For example, several
cases are as follows:
1. Biaxial compression in the plane of the structure
will result in the total angle approaching zero as the
magnitude of in-plane biaxial compression stresses
becomes very large. The mode of failure of the con-
crete approached direct shear.
2. Biaxial tension in the plane of the structure
would tend to result in a total angle limit of 180 deg
with increasing magnitude of in-plane tension. How-
ever, as a real limit, the reinforced concrete would
crack with the crack width being controlled by main
reinforcement designed in accordance with appropri-
ate provisions of ACI 318-77. In such cases of crack-
ing due to biaxial tension (or flexural cracking of the
face containing the embedment), the authors feel that
the total angle can still be taken as 90 deg in con-
junction with 4+ fie to calculate pullout strength.
+
The two factors specified in this section, i.e., 0.65
and 0.85, represent a simplification of a very complex
problem. When the anchor head is between the far
face reinforcement and the near face concrete, the
pullout strength of the concrete is dependent pri-
marily on the tensile strength of the concrete and the
+ factor, 0.65, has been specified to correspond with
Section 9.3.2(f) of ACI 318-77 for bending stress in
plain concrete which also relies on concrete tensile
strength. When the anchor heads are beyond the far
face reinforcement, the entire depth of structure is
involved in the failure in a manner consistent with
the shear provisions of Section 11.11. In this case,
+
using a factor of 0.85, the provisions of Section 5.2
are equivalent to those of Section 11.11.
+
Ideally, the factor could be varied over a consid-
erable range dependent upon such factors as depth
of embedment, amount of main reinforcement in the
near face, and state of stress in the plane of the struc-
ture. However, there is not sufficient data; nor is it
practical for design purposes to be more precise than
0.85 or 0.65 in the current version of the guide.
5.3-Shear-The strength of anchors subject to
shear are not significantly affected by concrete
strength unless the anchors are located near an edge
or in the case of anchors (e.g., "shell-type" expansion
anchors) which exhibit nonlinear load deflection be-
havior. For bolts (also studs or bars) shear is trans-
mitted from the bolt to the concrete through bearing
of the bolt at the surface, forming a concrete wedge
approximately 1/4 of the bolt diameter in depth.
Translation of the wedge under the shearing force
cannot occur without vertical movement or an up-
ward thrust of the wedge on the restraining plate as
illustrated in Fig. 2. This thrust induces tensile elon-
gation in the anchor and thus the clamping force on
the wedge increases in direct proportion with the
shear as long as the anchor steel remains elastic.
When the bolt is near an edge, the total shearing
force must be developed by tensile stress on a po-
tential failure plane radiating at 45 deg toward the
S6

SHEAR
.' FORCE
Fig. 2 - Concrete wedge due to shear.
/ configuration should be changed.
//
/ " " - POTENTIAL"
" FAILURE ' tion 6.1.2(a), premature concrete failure occurred for
/ PLANE
FREE
EDGE
Fig. 3 - Potential shear failure near a free edge.
free edge from the anchor steel at the surface of the
concrete as illustrated in Fig. 3. If several bolts are
parallel to a free edge, the effect of overlapping fail-
ure planes (i.e., center-to-center spacing less than 6.6
ft (2 m) on the concrete design strength must be con-
sidered.
When the steel is not fully anchored (i.e., minimum
side cover distance is not provided) or the anchorage
behavior is nonlinear in the normally elastic stress
range, there is a radical reduction in the clamping
force of the plate restraining the movement of the
wedge. The depth of the wedge is then controlled by
bending and is reduced in direct proportion to an in-
creased depth of the wedge.
The location of the shear plane with respect to the
concrete surface affects the development of shear
friction resistance and is discussed under Section
7.2.2.2.
6.4-Reinforeement- Concrete tensile failure may
occur either directly or indirectly as a result of in-
sufficient embedment depth or side cover distance.
When embedment depths or side cover distances are
not sufficient to fully develop the strength of anchor
steel, reinforcement must be located to intercept po-
tential cracking planes: The reinforcement must be
sized and oriented to restrict propagation of cracking
should it occur. To accomplish this, reinforcement
must be fully developed on both sides of a postulated
crack. It is recommended that the reinforcement pat-
terns be concentric with the tensile stress field.
For direct tensile load transfer, Fig. 4 illustrates,
how the tensile capacity of studs might be assured
by reinforcing the potential concrete failure cone. For
hairpin reinforcement to effectively intercept the po-
tential failure planes, each leg should be located with
Ld/3 froIQ the edge of an anchor head. The portion
of the hairpin anchored in the potential failure cone
should extend a minimum of eight (8) bar diameters
of the reinforcement configurations into the potential
failure cone, the anchorage requirements of Chapter
12 should be satisfied. In any case the limiting di-
mensions of eight (8) bar diameters and Ld/3 should
be complied with.
If anchorage of the reinforcement cannot be accom-
plished in the available dimensions, the anchorage
Limited testing'l has shown that when the edge dis-
tance is less than 2fs of the minimum provision of Sec-
the reinforcement pattern provided. For edge dis-
tance from 113 to 2fs of the minimum, reinforcement
did restrain 45 deg tensile cracking; however, con-
crete shear failure occurred on a plane parallel to the
shear plane at the uppermost surface of the reinforc-
ing steel. While the anchorage remained ductile the
shear strength was reduced by the increased bending
of the bolt about the concrete failure plane; therefore,
reinforcement and confinement similar to that illus-
trated in Fig. 5 should be considered to preclude pre-
mature failure. When the edge distance was less than
!f3 of the Section 6.1.2(a) requirement, there was in-
sufficient anchorage of the reinforcement on the
wedge side of the crack and failure was controlled
entirely by the tensile strength of the concrete.
Therefore, in no case should anchors with less than
113 the side cover required by Section 6.1.2(a) be con-
sidered active for shear capacity. The engineer
should be extremely cautious with edge distances less
than those required by Section 6.1.2(a). If reinforce-
ment cannot be provided to develop the required ca-
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
 SHEAR FOR,CE

8 X THE DIAMETER
OF THE HAIRPIN
:..f--+ REI NFORCEMENT

~-+_.!:l!. MAXIMUM DISTANCE FROM

3 ANCHOR HEAD FOR
REINFORCEMENT TO BE
CONSIDERED EFFECT'IVE

'!f MINIMUM

LOCATE LEGS OF HAIRPIN

ReiNFORCEMENT IN THIS
REGION
Fig. 5 - Example of reinforcement for shear near an
edge.
Fig. 4 - Example of reinforcement for direct tension.
TENSION.

t
FORCE
pacity, the shear capacity of all such anchors should
be completely discounted or the embedment config-
uration changed.
When the side cover distances for direct tension
are less than the Section 6.1.1(a) requirement, rein-
forcement must be provided to arrest tensile failure ·"~4·.
0.'· '4-
of the concrete due to lateral bursting forces at an- , I I \

SPIRAL
chor heads near the free surface. Tests have not been REINFORCEMENT
performed to date on the effectiveness of reinforce-
ment to prevent tensile failure due to lateral bursting
forces at an anchor head when the side cover dis-
tances are less than required by Section 6.2.2(a).
Therefore, the engineer should rely on accepted prac- POTENTIAL
FA1\.URE
tices for prestressing anchorages and spiral reinforce- PLANE

ment as illustrated in Fig. 6 is recommended. For

conventional anchor heads the lateral force may be
conservatively taken as 1/4 of the tensile capacity of
the anchor steel (based on the Poisson, effect in the
lateral direction). For expansion anchors this force
should not be taken as less than the pullout capacity
of the anchor because of the significant lateral force
required to restrain an expansion anchor.
Any embedment configuration requiring reinforce-
ment must also permit development of the reinforce-
ment. If sufficient space is not available for appro-
priate development, the engineer should consider
alternative configurations.
6.5-Bearing- The bearing requirements of Sec-
tion 5.5.1 reference the bearing requirements of Sec-
tion 10.16 of ACI 318-77 deal with bearing stresses
on concrete supports which are not laterally rein-
forced to resist splitting stresses. 4 When reinforce-
ment is provided to prevent splitting and develop the
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
Fig. 6 - Example of reinforcement to prevent lateral
bursting.
bursting force of the anchorage, anchorages shall
comply with the requirements of Section 18.13 of ACI
318-77. The force required to pull out a cone of con-
crete for an individual headed anchor (anchored in
accordance with Section 6.1.1) is less than the force
required to split the concrete and, therefore, splitting
parallel to the tensile force does not occur irrespec-
tive of the bearing stress at the anchor head. Split-
ting transverse to the tensile force can occur between
87

"J'
, .' I
, 1'0 1 "
a''. 4,' ,',' .
::,: .;~.' 'I/",~ ~
Fig. 7 - Splitting transverse to tension load.
anchor heads in multiple stress component anchor-
ages, particularly when the center-to-center spacing
between the anchor heads is less than the anchor
embedment depth (see Fig. 7). However, the splitting
plane is at 90 deg to the plane of concern for bearing
restrictions and may be controlled with proper depth
of embedment. If the concrete has been previously
cracked in the normal splitting plane, then the force
required to propagate the crack is approximately 112
of the force required to initiate splitting. Under these
conditions splitting may control the failure mode.
However, the failure load is approximately the same
as the force required for pullout cone failure in un-
cracked concrete.
In compression anchorages, bearing stress is trans-
mitted to the concrete at the concrete surface; there-
fore, splitting is likely to occur only in compression
anchorages of limiting supporting surface area. For
such anchorages, the normal bearing restrictions
should apply.
Section 5.5.2 describes anchor heads that do not
have to satisfy the requirements of Section 5.5.1 (see
Commentary for Section 5.2).
6.0-Anehorage requirements
The basic philosophy of anchorage requirements is
consistent with the ultimate strength design philos-
ophy of reinforced concrete. The failure mechanism
is controlled by requiring yielding of the steel an-
chorage prior to brittle failure. While ductility is not
possible in all types of anchorages, it is required in
TABLE 6.1.1 - SaDlple side eone blowont test data
Bolt ASTM Side cover
size material distance
D, in. specification m, in.
3/, A 307 2 5500 +
1 A 490 4'12
88
those types which can be made ductile (custom de-
sign). Most commercially available expansion anchors
are not ductile and are penalized by requiring a
higher safety factor against failure (see Section 8.2
of the guide).
Fig. 8 is a typical load deflection curve for ductile
anchorages. Fig. 9 is typical of nonductile anchorages.
6.1.1-Tension. The requirement of this section
that the calculated pullout strength of concrete ex-
ceeds the minimum specified tensile strength of the
steel is to assure ductile behavior of the embedment
in the event of overload. Typical embedment steels
exhibit significant variation in actual yield strength
above specified minimums and have a wide ratio of
yield to tensile strength. Therefore, fut, rather than
a factor times fy, is used to ensure ductile behavior.
A minimum side cover distance is required at the
anchor head to confine the lateral thrust generated
by the full load transfer from steel to concrete. Be-
cause of the significant difference in restraint stiff-
ness around the periphery of the anchor head, lateral
strains are not uniform and tend to concentrate in the
region of minimum cover. The lateral bursting force
is, therefore, of a magnitude relative to the longitu-
dinal load similar to that of the lateral strain' to the
longitudinal strain. Sample side cone blowouts are
represented by the test data given in Table 6.1.1.
Equating the lateral bursting force to the concrete
capacity for a single anchor bolt, stud, or bar results
in
fJP 4'v'C
(lateral (concrete (projected
force) tensile area)
strength)
Applying a • factor of 0.85 to concrete strength, a
conservative fJ or 0.25 and a tensile stress area of 0.75
of the gross area of bolt, stud, or bar
0.75nD2 ]
fJP = fJ [ 4 x f ut = 4+ VI: nm 2
,n:;-
m=Dv7Wf
If several bolts are paraIJel to a free edge, the effect
of overlapping failure planes on the lateral concrete
design strength must be considered.
Similar relationships can be developed for other
embedment shapes that are embedded close to a
Concrete Lateral force
strength Failure load coefficient
f:' psi P,lb f3
22100 0.17
4245 94000 0.18
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
 ,,' . " .
30-r--~~-r--__~~-------r------~-------' 12.5

.
~RE
10.0
. /'

~ ~-r------~~~---r~~~-r-------+-------;
,/
V """
"...~
:
T"N510N TEST,
7.5

/ TENSION TEST,
ffi
a.

~
A307 BOL TS

5.0 L P~ANSIONANCHOR

JO +-j~--+-------+"";"";---+--"";---+--"';";"'----i

2.5 / ..
'J

/
' ,,'

') ··1'
0.0

• 0.2 0.3 0,4 0.5 0.00 0.02 0.04 0;06 ' o.oa b.IO· ' 0.12 0.14
DEFLECTION, INCHES'
>DEfLECTION, INCHES

Fig. 8 - Ductile load deflection behavior. Fig. 9 - Nonductile load deflection behavior.
"free" edge of the concrete. For expansion anchors
it is recommended that the lateral bursting force, (JP,
be assumed equal to the average tension test failure
load of the anchor being used.
When the anchor steel is composed of reinforce-
ment without mechanical end anchorage the devel- ~ 20 -r---J-.,....-;:>""f:......--"'::>""'90~;;.....,---,.,f~,.......,--+-----;
a.
opment requirements of Chapter 12 are more than
adequate for development of the tensile strength of
"~
...:

the reinforcement. '"

l::'
~
o
6.1.2- Shear. A minimum edge distance is required ~ 10-H~~+--+--~~~....; __~~____~-+-----~
for full development of the shear strength of anchor
steel. The projected tensile stress area of a single
bolt, stud, or bar for shear toward an edge is exactly
half of the normal stress area for tensile loading of
an anchor without an edge effect. For a design shear
capacity of V and an edge distance of m 0.0 0,1 0.2 0.3..
DEFl,EeTIOH, INCHES:
0.5

Fig. 10 Effect of shear plane location on load de-

V= 4~v7.
2
For a friction coefficient of 0.7 for steel against con-
crete, the ultimate shear strength of a bolt equals:
nD 2
V= 0.7 -4-fu.
The minimum edge distance for a single bolt, stud,
or bar is obtained by equating the two expressions
for V:
\rt:-
m=DV107i:
Similar relationships can be developed for other
embedment shapes that are embedded close to a
"free" edge of the concrete.
It should be noted that plates embedded near an
edge will behave essentially as shear lugs and should
be treated as such.
The utilization of reinforcement to reduce edge re-
quirements for shear was discussed in Section 5.4.
6.1.3-Combined loading. The resultant load capac-
ity of anchors subject to combined tension and shear
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
flection behavior.
is always less than the tensile capacity alone. The
development requirements for tensile loading are
therefore also good for combined loads.
6.1.4. - Side cover distances less than m/3 may re-
sult in side blowout cone failures and loss of anchor-
age (see Section 6.4 of the Commentary).
T.O-Design reqnirements for embedment steel
7.1- Embedments can be designed using a variety
of materials and attachments under varying loading
conditions and construction situations. The engineer
must therefore consider all this in his selection and
specification of materials, structural shapes, or types
of anchors best suited to fit each situation.
7.2.1-The ~ factor of 0.9 for tension compression,
and bending for the embedment steel is consistent
with Section 9.3.2(a) of ACI 318-77.
7.2.2.1- The +
factor of 0.5 for shear stress in
structural shapes, shear lugs, and fabricated sections
is consistent with the AISC shear yield stress for
plastic design which corresponds to the required
strength methods of ACI 318-77.
S9
 7.2.2.2 - The mechanism of shear transfer for
bolts and bars is commonly termed shear-friction.
The location of the plane of stress transfer from bolt
to concrete directly affects the shear strength of the
anchorage. The effect of shear plane location on an-
chorage behavior is illustrated by the load deflection
curves of Fig. 10. If the plate contacting the concrete
is embedded in the concrete with its outer surface
flush with the exterior surface of concrete then, for
a given horizontal movement, the component of
clamping force perpendicular to the plate is greater
than when the contact plane is flush with the exterior
concrete surface. This increased clamping force di-
rectly increases the frictional shear strength of the
anchorage as reflected in the 0.9 coefficient as com-
pared with the commonly accepted coefficient of 0.7
for a flush mounted plate.
When the contact plate is mounted on a group pad
exterior to the concrete surface the forward bolts in
the direction of shear have only the width of grout
from the bolt to the edge of the plate for an assured
edge distance to develop the shear strength of the
bolts. (Even if the grout pad is extended away from
the plate the extended portion cannot be relied upon
to remain bonded and uncracked from drying shrink-
age.) This nominal edge distance is not sufficient to
develop the shear strength in the forward bolts;
therefore, a much larger portion of the shear must
be carried by the back bolts. Plate rotation follows
grout failure, reducing the clamping force and sub-
sequent shear strength of the back bolts and thus the
coefficient of friction is reduced for these anchorages.
7.3 - Combined tension and shear
7.3.1 - Normally accepted practice for structural
shapes.
7.3.2 - The effect of direct tension on an anchor-
age is a direct reduction of the clamping force which
provides shear transfer resistance. While this effect
can be offset somewhat in the elastic stress range by
preloading bolts there is no difference in effect once
the tensile load component exceeds the preload. The
reduced shear strength corresponding to the loss il1
clamping force affects the combined load capacity
such that no more than a straight addition of com-
ponent strengths is allowed.
7.4 - This section is consistent with the AISC
"Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Erec-
tion of Structural Steel for Buildings."
7.5 - The shear failure plane can be excluded from
the threads by care in detailing the connection. Un-
der these conditions the gross area may be utilized
for shear.
B.O - Expansion anchors
Section B.O was developed to provide guidance in
the design and use of concrete expansion anchors.
8.1 - Design requirements - The preferred de-
sign for concrete expansion anchors is for the con-
crete to have a capacity greater than the anchor steel
and, therefore, provide indication of an impending
40
failure if an overload condition should occur. In lieu
of design strength calculations as defined in Section
8.1.1, design strengths can be established by tests as
defined in Section. 8.1.2.
Due to variations in installation conditions, expan-
sion mechanisms, and repeatability of test results,
the permissible design capacity for the expansion an-
chor steel is reduced to 90 percent of the values spec-
ified in Section 7.2.
8.2 - Alternative design requirements - Expan-
sion anchors that do not meet the ductility require-
ments of Section 8.1 are penalized by this section.
The permissible design strength is limited to approx-
imately 113 of the average test failure load. An overall
factor of safety of 4.0 is achieved by combining the
0.85 factor with a load factor of 1.4 (i.e., only dead
load). This limitation is applied to both tension and
shear test loads since shear capacity generated by
shear friction resistance is a function of tensile an-
chorage capacity.
8.3 - The use of one expansion anchor results in
a connection with no capability to redistribute load;
therefore, additional conservatism is required.
8.4 - Testing - Testing of expansion anchors to
verify anchor strength as used in Sections 8.1 or 8.2
is required by Section 8.4.1. Anchor strength shall be
established by tests and shall include testing of the
anchor expansion mechanism and its ability to trans-
mit the load to adjacent concrete. Concrete capacity
shall be determined in accordance with Sections 8.1.1
or 8.1.2. Tests performed to meet the requirements
of Section 8.1.2 may be incorporated in the tests spec-
ified in Section 8.4.1. It is not practical to specify in
the guide a detailed testing program for expansion
anchors due to the variety of applications and de-
signs. The testing requirements defined in ANSI!
ASTM E 488-76 are acceptable as a guide for estab-
lishing a testing program. However, the engineer is
responsible for assuring that the testing program
used qualified the particular anchor for the intended
application.
Testing of expansion anchors in the installed con-
ditions specified in Section 8.4.2 is to verify actuation
of the expansion mechanism. Test method (a) is in-
tended primarily for wedge type expansion anchors
that are typically installed and tested via torquing,
and method (b) is intended primarily for shell type
anchors which should be tested by direct load appli-
cation.
8.5 - Expansion anchor selection - The engineer
is cautioned to select an expansion anchor that is de-
signed, manufactured, and tested to be compatible
with the load application, environment, and installa-
tion conditions. Oracking of concrete in tension zones
subsequent to anchor installation can result in a re-
duction of anchor capacity and complete loss of pre-
load if the cracking is coincident with the anchor lo-
cation. In this kind of application the engineer should
have results from tests conducted in cracked concrete
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
specimens. As an alternative, an appreciably higher
factor of safety than would otherwise be required
should be used to define design strength.
When such anchors are subject to vibratory loads
(i.e., nonseismic continuous or intermittent cyclic
loads), a complete loss of function can occur. Anchor
type and application must be qualified by testing or
such use is prohibited.
9.0 - Inserts
Inserts are not subject to the same variables as
expansion anchors and, therefore, the safety factors
are adjusted accordingly. Testing to verify capacity
is a requirement.
10.0 - Grouted elllbedllleDts
10.1 - Since grouted embedments are required to
transfer loads the same as cast-in-place embedments,
the appropriate design and anchorage requirements
defined in Sections 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 are applicable.
10.2 - Grouts are used frequently for their special
characteristics. Special grouts shall be tested to ver-
ify their required properties. Epoxy grouts are not
covered by this guide.
10.3 - Grouted embedments designed to transfer
load between steel and grout or grout and concrete
by tension, shear or bond shall be tested to verify
load transfer capabilities. The testing program shall
be established by the engineer.
Special considerations are required for grouted
embedments that are designed to transfer tension
loads where cracking may be parallel to and coinci-
dent with the axis of the embedment. The testing
program must address this situation if applicable.
Testing has demonstrated that the bond between
grout and concrete can be lost due to cracking. In lieu
of relying on bond, a belled hole in the region of the
anchor head is suggested.
10.5 - Grouted embedments designed to transfer
load by bearing or compression should only require
testing to verify compressive strength of grout and
do not require in place verification testing.
11.0 - Fabrication and installation
The engineer must consider and make provisions
for fabrication and installation conditions that could
influence the load capacity. Thermal expansion due
to welding after the embedment has been set in con-
crete is considered to be a frequent problem.
References
1. "Anchorage to Concrete," Research and Development
Report No. CEB 75-32. Civil Engineering Branch, Tennes-
see Valley Authority, Knoxville, Dec. 1976, 25 pp.
2. McMackin, P. J.; Slutter, R. G.; and Fisher, J. W.,
"Headed Steel Anchors Under Combined Loading," AISC
Engineering Journal, 2nd Quarter, 1973, pp. 43-52.
3. Bailey, John W., and Burdette, Edwin G., "Edge Ef-
fects on Anchorage to Concrete," Civil Engineering Re-
search Series No. 31, University of Tennessee, Knoxville,
Aug. 1977, 21 pp.
CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981
4. ACI Committee 318, "Commentary on Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-77),"
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1977, 132 pp.
5. "Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in
Concrete and Masonry Elements," (ANSI-ASTM E 488-76),
1976 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 18, American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 843-
851.
6. ACI Committee 349, "Proposed Addition to: Code Re-
quirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures
(ACI 349-76)," ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 75, No.8, Aug.
1978, pp. 329-347.
7. PCI Design Handbook, Prestressed Concrete Institute,
Chicago, 1971, 380 pp.
Received June 1980 and reviewed under Institute pUblication policies.
Robert W. Cannon, FAC/, is a Con-
sulting Engineer in Maryville, Tennes-
see. He recently retired from TVA
after 25 years of Design and Research
in Reinforced Concrete and Structural
Applications. A major portion of re-
search during the last eight years has
been in steel embedments. He is a
member and past chairman of ACI
Committee 207, Mass Concrete, and 8
member of ACI Committee 849, Nu-
clear Structures.
A CI member Dwaine A. Godfrey is
president and founder of Nuclear
Structures, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia. He
is involved in the analysis and design
of steel and concrete structures for
nuclear generating plants. He is a
member of ACI Committee 849, Con-
crete Nuclear Structures (currently
the chairman of the Working Group on
Steel Embedments).
ACI member F. L. MoreaditlJ is
manager, Structural Department and
Chief Structural Engineer; Power Di-
vision-Reading; Gilbert/Common-
wealth; Reading, Pa. He received his
Ph.D. from North Carolina State Uni-
versity in 1964 and was engaged in
teaching and consulting in reinforced
and prestressed concrete at Old Do-
minion University before joining Gil-
bert/Commonwealth in 1972. He is a
member of ACI Committee 859, Con-
crete Components for Nuclear Reac-
tors (Sub-group on Containment De-
sign) and ACI Committee 849,
Concrete Nuclear Structures (cur-
rently chairman of the Working Group
on Design with previous activity on
the Working Groups for Steel Embed-
ments and Impactive and Impulsive
Loads).