VER Design of Anchorage To Concrete Handout

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 ?

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

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:
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
Anchor (i.e. steel)
Foundation
Training Module
Concrete breakout
Rebar yielding
Rebar
Foundation
26
Concrete breakout
Rebar pullout
Side-face blowout
Concrete splitting
Concrete splitting
Side-face blowout
Training Module
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Layer B
Training Module
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

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

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
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

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
Training Module

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
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

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

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 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

against the anchor head cont
Training Module

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

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
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
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

Modification to account for geometry:
Training Module
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

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
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
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

p1
General elliptical interaction formula:
P
V
+
Pu
Vu
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

VER Design of Anchorage To Concrete Handout

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VER Design of Anchorage To Concrete Handout

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scope and Objectives

Prepared by: Widianto, Jerry Owen, and Chandu Patel

Present common and STM approaches for designing anchor

Design of Anchorage to Concrete

II. Common / existing approaches for designing anchor

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

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

VIII. Combined loading (Tension and shear)

IX. Summary and references

Taken from field

Directly from the field

Taken from field

Possible failure mode Steel failure

Possible failure mode Concrete crushing

Possible failure mode Concrete breakout

Possible failure mode Concrete breakout

Possible failure mode Concrete splitting

Concrete splitting failure: the concrete

Possible failure mode Side-face Blowout

The concrete slab or beam fails in bending.

What are the available design guidelines for

What are the available design guidelines for

Appendix D of ACI 318-08

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

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

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

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

Section D.4.2.1 of ACI 318-08

Basic Load Path

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

1. Tension loading (without anchor reinforcement)

Modification factor for lightweight concrete

A modification factor for concrete breakout strength is introduced to

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Basic Load Path cont

Basic Load Path cont

Basic load path:

1. Tension loading (summary)

1. Tension loading (with anchor reinforcement)

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Anchor (i.e. steel)

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

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Anchor (i.e. steel)

Basic Load Path cont

When both tension and shear are present

2. Shear loading (summary)

1. Design for tension

2. Design for shear

Common anchor bolts

Designing Anchor Reinforcement for Tension