You are on page 1of 47

I

- ... _.- .. '


..... _. - --.- -,
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
DIVISION OF ENGINEERING DESIGN
THERMAL POWER ENGINEERING
..
Civil Engineering Branch
!Research and Development Staff
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE
,
- _. - -- - - -
, , '
-'- . .----'.-
- ,- -. -. -_._- -- .... ,
-, - 7:.:;."-.:. ____ . :.: ..... . .!-- _ . . - ---- .,. .,." \ . ' .. -. ,. .
.- .- ... -_ ....... -
. -- -.. . - _. __ - , __ F ______ ___ _
'-,
,I
:
j
I
, !
, I
)
..1

0. _or": .
. '::: ,-:;.-:.-: "-.' ; ;".,:,: : ;;;
. . ',' ,"" ": i 5-'32' -.:, ,'-; . __
99
.624153
::C22a
, .2
.-
0
" ,::e,-..--;;-
..... .. .', ....
Principal
Principal Engincer,
VALlEY AUTHORITY
DI VISION OF ENGIlrEERING DF..sIGU
TlIEIU-tAL PO\'lliH ENGINEERnlG
Civil Engineering Branch
and Development Staff
V,le. Ic"r-.J
Al"llCHORJ\GE TO CONCRETE
-.-
Report No. CEB 75-32 ".'
R'.:scnrch aml Development Staf:f:
Chi.ef, Civil Branch:
Isslle Date: _lzjI,b
r
Revision
da'te:
i
t ' i
I I
t
.. r I t
.--: .
~ O - -
-75'- - -
'.
ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE
BY
Robert W. Cannon, Edwin G. Burdette, and Raymond R. Funk
The results of an anchorage research testing program undertaken by the
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is described. Tests were performed to
determine the limiting load capabilities and anchorage requirements for
concrete inserts, anchor bolts, welded studs, and expansion anchors
subject to loads applied in direct tension, direct shear, and under
combined tension and shear. Three sizes of concrete inserts were tested
using various numbers of connecting bolts and different insert patterns.
Three different anchor bolt sizes and three different steels were utilized
in the anchor bolt tests. Anchorages consisted of plates embedded in the
concrete surface, (with and without shear bars) grouted plates, and plates
fastened to hardened concrete. The effect of edge conditions, strength of
concrete, size, strength, number, and spacing of anchors was found to
control anchorage requirements while the method of attachment was a princi-
pal factor controlling shear strength. Shear bars have practically no
influence on the ultimate shear strength of ductile anchorages. Exclusive
of edge effects the strength of anchorages is'unaffected by high bearing
stress at the heads of bolts or under a standard washer at the concrete
surface.
Key Words
Anchor bolts, bearing stress, concrete inserts, concrete tensile strength,
edge effects, embedment, expansion anchors, shear, slip load, stress cones,
tension, combined loading, welded studs.
i.
1
I J
wwm
=me
Biographical Sketches
Robert W. Cannon FACI is Principal Civil Engineer, Research and Development,
Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. Since graduating from
Georgia Tech in 1949 he has 26 years combined experience in structural
design of hydro, fossil, and nuclear power plants and-in research. He is
a registered professional engineer in the state of Tennessee, past chairman
of ACI Committee 207, Mass Concrete and presently a member of Committees
207 and 349, Nuclear Structures.
ACI member, Edwin G. Burdette is a Professor of Civil Engineering at the
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and a consultant to the Tennessee
Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. He received a Ph.D. from the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1969 and, since that time,
has been actively engaged in research at The University of Tennessee. He
served as the Principal Investigator for the portion of the research
- described in this paper which was performed at the University. He is
a registered professional engineer in the state of Tennessee and a member
of ACI Committee 359, Concrete Pressure Components for Nuclear Service.
Raymond R. Funk is Senior Civil Engineer, Research and Development,
Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. Since graduating
from The University of Tennessee in 1954 he has 21 years combined
experience in structural design of industrial buildings, fossil, and
nuclear power plants, and in research. He is a registered professional
engineer in the state of Tennessee, and a member of the ASCE committee on
steel chimney liners.
-- -
- -- ---
ii
.- . _.
.. __ ._-.'-- -
- - '. _ .
:;.-=> .
rPiiiT"S'rr_r

j
f
l
1
,
I
J
I
i
Anchorage to Concrete
Prior to the advent of nuclear power plants the anchorage of structural
steel members to concrete was generally cqnsidered to be a part of the
structural steel design. The design of base plates was essentially
controlled by bearing restrictions on the concrete; shear was transmitted
to the concrete largely through shear lugs or bars attached to the base
plate and the tensile anchorage steel was generally proportioned only for
bending or direct stress. The embedment requirements for anchorage steel
were not clearly defined by any code and were left largely to the discretion
of the design engineer or organization. In the design of nuclear plants
extremely large forces are generated by design basis accidents and seismic
considerations. The application of the above design approach is inefficient,
expensive, and often creates clearance and concrete placement problems
which result in bad construction details.
In December 1973 TVA undertook an anchorage research program to develop a
more efficient design approach and to determine the limiting load capa-
bilities of various anchorage systems. The ultimate goal of such an
approach was to match anchorage requirements with anchorage systems and
reduce to a minimum the number of anchorages requiring final design
information prior to concrete construction.
--
The research program was divided into three parts or phases. The first
part concerned the determination of embedment requirements of various
anchorage systems by means of tensile pullout tests. The second phase
involved the determination of shear strength for the more efficient tensile
.
-- .. ------.. -
-
--
S" 3T'W!iY1f5iSZF'WfZS1"FS3
anchorage systems. The third involved the effect of combined tension
and shear on the various systems.
Description of Tests
The three testing phases involved 186 individual anchorage tests consisting
of varying numbers and types of anchors and a wide variety of anchorage
conditions. The number of tests for the various systems are summarized
-
below. A complete description of the tests is contained in the Appendix.
A continuing program of sampling and testing both concrete and steel
components was carried out for support and analysis of the anchorage
test results. Two other expansion anchor test programs are included in
the discussion, but are not listed in the table below.
The "standard" concrete insert is a l2-gage galvanized channel 1-3/8 inches
deep x 1-5/8 inches wide with punched anchors. The "heavy duty" insert is
a lO-gage galvanized channel 2 inches wide x 2 inches deep with 1/2-inch
stud anchors. The "modified 3/8" insert is a l2-gage painted channel
1-5/8 x 1-5/8 inches with 3/S-inch stud anchors and the "modified 1/2"
insert is the same except 1/2-inch stud anchors.
-.. ....
- .. , .
,
2
I
:1
&
i_t
'DWiwnrmsm
3
Number of Tests
Anchor Phase I Phase II Phase III
System Tensile Shear Combined
Load Angle
30 60
Standard Insert 15
Heavy-duty Insert 13
Modified 3/8" Insert 4 24 6 6
Hodified 1/2" Insert 5
5/8" Welded studs 18 5
3/4" (A307) bolts 28 17 7 4
3/4" (A307) bolts (grouted) 8
5/8" (A307) bolts (grouted) 3
3/4" (A325) bolts 2 1
3/4" (A490) bolts 2 1
1" (A490) bolt 8
3/4" (S.D. ) Exp Anchor 2 2
3/4" (W. T.) Exp Anchor 2 2
GtW'PN" V
Discussion of Test Results
A complete listing of the test results are contained in the Appendix along
with load deflection curves of individual tests which were not selected
for inclusion with this paper.
Embedment Requirements
The peripheral shear area described in Section 11.10.2 of the 318 Building
Code is the same area as the net resisting tensile stress area prescribed
by a 45-degree line radiating from the edge of the loaded area to the
bottom surface of the slab. If we apply the limiting stress of
~ f ' c of section 11.10.3 to this area the minimum embedments required to
develop the minimum tensile strength requirement of A307 bolts (Table 2,
ASTM A307) with 3000 psi concrete would vary from 6.64 bolt diameters
for 1/4-inch bolts to 7.76 bolt diameters for 4-inch bolts. For
direct tensile loading of individual A307 bolts an embedment requirement
of 8 bolt diameters is therefore adequate to fully develop the tensile
strength of these bolts.
If an edge is located closer to a bolt than its embedment depth the tensile
stress area is limited to the projected area within the concrete and a
, deeper embedment is required to compensate for the lost area. In the same
fashion if another loaded bolt is located closer to the bolt than twice
the embedment depth than the overlapping area of the radiating stress
cones also constitutes lost area which must be compensated for by increased
embedment depth to assure full tensile strength development of the bolts.
4
.. ----,a
i
1
I I
i j
, I
! !
I I
I
i'
I
~ - - - - - - -
-';". -
. o . ~ :
5
For embedment depths less than 5 inches the resisting stress cone defined
by 45-degree lines becomes increasingly conservative with decreasing
embedment depth. This was not only demonstrated in the test results of
Phase I, but also by the pullout tests of expansion anchors by a number of
different manufacturers. Our investigations indicate a 4-degree change
in the angle of inclination for each inch of embedment depth less than
5 inches is conservative.
Tensile tests with 2-inch edge distance for the 3/4-inch bolts and 4-l/2-inch
edge distance for the linch A490 bolts clearly indicates that a minimum
side cover dimension is required to fully restrain the side pressure resulting
from full load transfer in bearing at the head of the bolt. A complete side
cone blowout occurred with the 19-inch embedment of the A490 bolts leaving
the bolt embedded in the concrete with one face of the bolt head exposed.
For deep embedments the apparent side thrust is approximately 1/4 of the
bolts' tensile capacity. For bolts of "d" diameter located "m" distance from
the centerline of the bolt to the edge of concrete the design yield strength
should not exceed:
Under combined shear and tensile loads embedment requirements are also
affected by the shift in location of the resultant force at the base of
the anchorage (plane connecting the bolt heads). If there is an edge
condition this shift in location of the center of gravity of the
restraining tensile stress zone results in an increased loss of projected
stress area. This was quite evident in the concrete block failures
which occurred in the 60-degree load angle tests but did not occur at
0, 30, and 90 degrees with the same embedment depth.
The apparent embedment requirements for shear are approximately one-half
of the requirements for tension based on AISC requirements for shear
connectors. Considering the effect of embedment depths less than
5 inches on the inclination of the effective pullout cone, the effective
tensile restraint force for shear connectors ~ y range from 1/4 to 1/2
of the imposed shear. If so the critical angle for anchorage would be
somewhere between 77 degrees and 63 degrees to develop the tensile
component plus 1/4 or 1/2 of the shear component. The corresponding
resultant tensile restraint force in the concrete would be 1.03 and
1.12 times that of a pure tensile anchorage.
Discussion of Phase 1--ln the tensile testing of concrete inserts the
depth of anchorage was not a factor in any of the four different inserts
tested. When the load was transmitted to an insert through a single
l/2-inch connecting bolt, the channel lip failed by pullout. The failure
loads varied from 5.S to 8.8 kips for the standard insert which basically
agrees with the manufactures design recommendations of 2 kips per foot
using a safety factor of 3. For the heavy duty insert the lip failure
load for a single l/2-inch connecting bolt was 9.7 kips; however, the
failure mechanism for all tests on the heavy duty insert was lip tensile
failure. Lip failure did not control in the standard and modified
inserts when the load was transmitted through 3 or more loading bolts.
For multiple loading bolts the failure mechanism for these inserts is
tearout of the anchor or stud from the back of the channel. For
multiple loading bolts a summary of the failure loads on a per foot
basis is given below.
6
Failure Load in Kips per Foot
Insert Minimum Average High
Standard 9.2 12.2 14.9
3/8-inch studs 15 16 .. 3 17.7
Heavy Duty 15.8 17.7 20.1
l/2-inch studs 16.1 18.5 20.4
On a cost per anchorage capacity basis the standard insert is probably
the least expensive and the heavy duty insert the most expensive.
In a total evaluation of anchorage requirements the increased capacity
of the modified insert with 3/8-inch stud anchors was the basis for
selection by TVA. Subsequent testing to establish welding procedures
failed to show any increased pullout capacity from the l2-gage metal for
the l/2-inch studs over the 3/8-inch studs. A broader range of
procedures and more uniformity is achieved with the 3/8-inch studs.
The above test results apply to ungalvanized channel. While the
galvanized coating does not appear to have any significant effect on
weld strength, the difference in hot rolled and cold rolled metal
reduces the pullout capacity of welded studs approximately 30 percent
with galvanized channel.
The tensile testing of anchor bolts and 5/8-inch studs covered a wide
variety of anchorage conditions. The factors concerning embedment
requirements were discussed above. A comparison of the predictability
of failure loads with actual failure loads was made using 4 ~
tensile stress acting on the net projected area for predicting the
failure load, giving due consideration to edge conditions overlapping
stress cones and limiting effects of inadequate side cover. Of the
7
..
" --- .. - ~ - - - .
-
2Y&'
22 tests which were concrete (uninfluenced by tents)
the predicted failure loads were less than the actual failure loads in
19 tests. Of the 3 tests predicting higher failure loads, 2 had
edge conditions and the third had some indication of damage from
previous tests. The average prediction w<!s 89 percent of the actual
and the least conservative prediction was 110 percent. From this it
can be seen that if the normal factor of 85 percent is applied then the
predicted failure load would be less than the actual in all of the tests.
For the 37 tests involving failure of the bolt or anchor steel the
predicted concrete failure loads did exceed the actual steel failure loads
in 95 percent of the cases.
the bolts or studs are spaced close enough for an intersection of
the 90 degree pullout cones, the concrete failure plane is always a
straight line between the bolt heads. The tensile strength of the
concrete between bolts in mUltiple connectors is a major factor
in determining anchorage requirements. If a steel plate is used at
this location inside the concrete, the tensile strength of concrete
between bolt heads does not apply and a deeper anchorage must be applied
to make up for this loss of effective concrete tensile strength. Since
interior plates only serve to weaken an anchorage they should not be
used.
The average tensile strength of the embedded 3/4-inch bolts was 25.4
kips with no bolt failures less than specification requirements. All
but 3 of the 16 bolts tested failed in the shank of the bolts.
The average tensile strength of the S/8-inch studs was 16.1 kips in
4 tests with individual studs and 18.5 kips per stud in 14 tests involving
B
"
!
I:
9
30 studs in multiple stud anchorages. Material specification require
a minimum strength of 16.9 kips for a 55,0000 psi stress limit.
We have no explanation why none of the individual stud tests met
requirements and all of the multiple stud tests exceeded requirements.
The average tensile strength of the I inch A490 bolts was 117 kips.
All 3 tests failed in the threads. The minimum embedment depth of
these 3 was 12.6 inches. At a minimum depth of 10.5 inches the
concrete test block split down the middle instead of the typical concrete
cone pullout which normally occurs. We have analyzed this as a bending
failure of the unreinforced test block. The location of the neutral
axis and distribution limits of the maximum tensile bending stress in
the top surface is obviously influenced by the location of the head
of the bolt. In future tests involving minimum embedment depths of
large diameter, high strength bolts, a minimum reinforcing steel ratio
of 0.001 is recommended.
Splitting faHure did not occur when 3/4-inch A-490 bolts were torqued
to failure in a 27-inch block with both edge distance and embedment
depth of 9.5 inches and concrete strength of 2,900 psi. There was also
no surface distress despite the use of only a standard washer to transmit
bearing.
Tensile testing of some types of expansion anchors were done prior to
these investigations and are only discussed here briefly to coordinate
the total anchorage picture. The basic failure mechanism for expansion
anchors in tension is anchor slip. The embedment requirement for most
expansion anchors has been set so the average slip failure load will
closely correspond to a concrete tensile cone failure with 3,500 psi
- - ~ - . - -
------- - - . ~ . - - - .
."P'I; .n
concrete. Most manufacturers report data on average failure loads for
individual anchors with guidance given, by some, on the application of the
data to spacing limitations. Our tests clearly show that unless slip
failure occurs at a lower load the maximum failure load for multiple
expansion anchors is a function of anchor spacing as described in the
embedment discussion. For expansion anchors any manufactures' claims
which exceed the calculated concrete pullout failure load as discussed
under "embedment requirements" should be questioned.
Discussion of Phase II--The failure mechanism for shear on the concrete
insert is shear failure of the 1/2-inch connecting bolts for shear
perpendicular to the channel slot and continuous slip for shear along
the slot. The average shear strength of the l/2-inch bolts was 7.4
kips per bolt. The slip load is strictly a function of the 50 foot-
pounds of preload torque. The range of washer lift-off loads in the
tensile tests (2.2 kips to S . ~ kips) is almost identical to the range
of measured slip loads in the shear tests. The average slip load was
3.'4 kips per bolt. In the cross connections each element contributes
its full shear capabilities as indicated by an average failure load
of 5.4 kips per bolt. When the loads were applied at any angle other
than the principal axis of the cross the failure load per bolt is
higher.
The average shear strength of the SIS-inch welded studs was 17.3 kips
per stud or 94 percent of the average tensile strength of the stud
groups. Typically failure occurred in the shank of the stud at a point
just below the weld I
10
11
Shear testing of the individual 3/4-inch bolts was directed principally
toward establishing the restrictions needed for edge loaded bolts. The
tests were not fully successful because the hairpin anchors which were
installed to prevent (if possible) concrete wedge failures turned out
to be plain bars instead of deformed bars ~ n d bond failures occurred.
The tests did confirm the need to restrict edge shear to prevent concrete
failure. Examination of the failed wedges indicated that the entire
shearing force was transferred from the bolt to the concrete within
1/2 bolt diameter of the surface shear plane. Applying 4 ~ allowable
stress to the effective tensile stress area the estimated shear wedge
failure load for an individual bolt would be:
v = 2'71(m + d/2_'2 /f'
u tan 0) .V r ~
o = (m + d/2) 4 + 25 ~ 45
Shear testing of the various 4 bolt groups established the effect of
the method of attachment on the shear strength of bolts. The average
shear strength of bolts fastened to hardened concrete (without grout)
was 21.5 kips per bolt or approximately 83 percent of the tensile
strength of representative bolts. There was no difference in the
ultimate strength between preloading bolts or tightening nuts finger
tight however under service load conditions the preloaded bolt
connections were much stiffer.
The average shear strength of the embeded plate connections was
approximately 91 percent of the tensile strength of representative
samples. There was no discernible difference in ultimate strength of
plates with and without shear bars. Prior to concrete bearing failure
aMI"
at the ends of the plate and shear bar, the load deflection curves
(figure 1) indicate most of the load is being carried by the shear
bar. The sudden transfer of load from concrete to steel at concrete
failure was undoubtedly a contributing factor to the failure of the
test rig in these tests. On the other hand most of the load is
carried by the bolts prior to concrete failure for the plate without
shear bars and concrete failure apparently does not occur prior to
yielding of the bolts. The added stiffness of the shear bar
connection prior to concrete failure does not appear to be significant.
The average shear strength of the bolts with the grouted plates was
only 53 percent of the tensile strength of representative samples.
Grout failure occurs on the front side transferring almost the
entire shear load to the back bolts. An improved bonding condition
between grout and concrete could conceivably increase the strength
of this type of connection; however, the grout pad does create an
,
edge loaded condition of sorts. Unless the grout is recessed,
reduced load allowables should be used.
The A325 and A490 high strength bolt connections were" made by
fastening the plates to hardened concrete with preloaded bolts. The
average shear strength of these connections was 86 percent and 77
percent respectively of representative tensile strength samples.
The average shear strength of 3/8-, 1/2-, and 3/4-inch self-drilling
expansion anchors was 75, 67, and 91 percent of the average tensile
slip lond for these respective anchors in individual anchor tests.
In group tests the shear strength of 3/4-inch anchors was only 80
12
percent of the individual shear tests. This strength loss is
attributed to nonuniform distribution of load due to the tensile slip
characteristics of the anchors. In the individual tests the bolts
failed in shear. In the group tests failure occurred in the shank of
the anchor shell. A comparison of the relptive shear strength and
load deflection characteristics of the various bolted systems is
shown in figure 1. This shows the shear strength of the self-drilling
type anchor to be approximately 40 percent of the shear strength of the
same size of embedded A307 bolts. The shear strength of the deeper-bedded
wedge-type anchor is approximately 91 percent of the embedded A307
bolts in this comparison; however, these bolts are 21 percent higher
in tensile strength than the 307 bolts. Thus the probable shear
strength of these anchors is 75 percent of the shear strength of
embedded bolts of the same size and materials.
Discussion of Phase III--The load producing slip is substantially greater
under combined loading than for shear alone in the testing of concrete
inserts as shown '1n figure 2. The preload torque of the connecting bolts
apparently controls the depth of bite of the special saw teeth into
the lip of the channel. When the tensile component of the load is less
than the preload then slippage does not occur until the shear component
exceeds the preload. When the tensile component exceeds the preload
the additional bearing load of the bolt head on the lip is spread over
a wider contact area and the friction coefficient is reduced.
The effect of combined loading on bolted anchorage systems is shown in
figures 3 and 4. The basic trends of the effect of angle of
applied load on resultant load are shown in figure 3 and load
13
J
i
l
1
J
------------------
deflection characteristics in figure 4. When the ratio of tensile
strength to shear strength (To/Vo) for a given anchorage system is
known the resultant failure load Pu is a function of the anchorage
tensile capacity "To" and the angle of applied load "9" as follows:
P
u
=
T
o
sin + (T Iv ) cos
o 0
Under combined loading the minimum load producing failure for bolted
connections occurs at some angle between 25 degrees and 45 degrees
depending on To/Vo. There is also an apparent decrease in stiffness
of these connections under In these bolts the failure
stress is a combination of direct tension, bending, and the cutting
or shearing action of the loading plate on the back side of the bolt.
Under combined loading the tensile component not only adds direct stress,
but lifts the plate off the concrete surface and thereby increases the
bending radius and bending stress as well.
The load deflection characteristics of the various types of
anchorages should be considered in establishing safety factors for
design, particularly where expansion anchors are used. Smaller safety
factors should be utilized in those anchorages which can tolerate
relatively large deflections.
Conclusions
(1) Embedment is the key to anchorage design. When the requirements
for embedment are met the mode of failure is restricted to the
material strength of the anchor. (Expansion anchors which fail
in slip at lesser loads than required to fail the concrete are
an exception.) When embedment requirements are not met the mode
14
1
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
___________ _4
------
of failure is tensile failure of the concrete. Embedment
requirements are dependent on the tensile strength of concrete;
the size, strength, number and spacing of anchors; and the
proximity of any' edge conditions within the tensile stress zone
of the concrete.
(2) Embedment can be assured by equating the pullout cone strength
of the concrete to the tensile strength of the anchors using a
uniform concrete tensile stress of 4 0 / f ~ acting on a projected
area confined within the limits of intersecting cones radiating
from the heads of bolts at the base of the anchorage.
(3) The strength capabilities of concrete inserts can be improved
by utilization of 3lB-inch welded studs on standard 12-gage
channel sections I-SIB-inches deep. Utilizing optimized welding
procedures stud pullout strength in excess of S kips per stud
can be acheived and working stress design loads of S kips per
foot of channel can be utilized with multiple bolt connections.
(4) The shear strength of channel inserts depends on the direction of
the applied load, the strength of connecting bolts, and the
preload torque on the searated edges of the connecting nuts
and bolts.
(5) The shear strength of bolted connections depends on the
strength of bolts and the method of attachment.
(6)
For plates embeded with the top surface flush with the concrete
surface, the shear strength of connections fastened with
bolts or welded studs is slightly more than 90 percent of the
tensile strength of the bolts or studs.
--------.---
1.5
It
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
l
1
~
~
~
~ .
(7)
(8)
(9)
The ultimate shear strength of embedded plates is dependent
entirely on the strength of the anchorage steel and is
relatively unaffected by the use of shear bars when there is
sufficient anchorage steel to provide a ductile failure.
Under these conditions shear bars appear only to have a small
influence on the load at which concrete fails on the
frontside of the plate. Under combined tensile and shear loads
shear bars add nothing to the stiffness characteristics of the
anchorage and should not be used since they create problems
in concrete placement.
Plates may be fastened to hardened concrete by preloading embedded
bolts to yield by a 2/3 turn of the nut beyond an initial snug
tight fit. Such connections have a shear capacity of slightly
more than 80 percent of the tensile capacity of the bolts and
provide stiffness characteristics similar to embedded plates.
Bolts grouted into drilled holes (with roughened sides) have the
same anchorage strength and embedment requirements as cast-in-
place bolts assuming equal strengths of concrete and grout.
(10) The shear strength of grouted plates with the surface of the
grout exterior to the concrete surface should not be taken as
more than 50 percent of the tensile capacity of the connecting
bolts.
(11) The shear strength of bolts or anchors must be reduced for edge
loaded bolts located closer than 1.25 times the required embedment
for the bolt.
16
i.
-
i
t
1
1
-
1
1
1
1
t
I
(12) High bearing stress at the heads of bolts is of no consequence
as long as the side cover at the bolt head is equal to or
(13)
greater than one half of the embedment depth. For smaller cover
distances a reduction in design yield strength may be required
(see discussion).
High bearing stresses at the surface of the concrete also appears
to be of no consequence with bolts. As long as the distance to
the side of the block is equal to or greater than the
embedment depth of the bolt, a standard washer is all that is
required for bearing. (Lesser edge distances were not tested.)
(14) The use of bearing plates in the interior of the concrete to
reduce stress at the heads of bolts will require a deeper anchorage
because of the loss of the tensile strength contribution of the
concrete between bolt heads in resisting pullout. They are
not recommended since they perform no useful function and only
create a bad construction condition.
(15) The general mode of failure for tensile loading of expansion
anchors tested by TVA was anchor slip.
(16) Preloading of expansion anchors to any degree of certainity does
not appear to be practical because of the slip characteristics of
these anchorages.
(17) The general mode of failure in shear for a group of self-drilling
anchors appears to be shell failure at the bottom of the connecting
bolt.
17
e &B - - . ~
18
(18) For expansion anchors with embedment depths of 4 bolt diameters
or less, shear strength appears to be influenced by the pullout
strength of the concrete even though failure in single bolt tests
occurs in the bolt.
(19) Larger safety factors must be utilized with expansion anchors
to limit deflections to those commensurable to bolted
connections.
/II
I"
:t,.
"
I
I,
i'
i
i
: ,
, ',;
U)
0..
!IoC
t-
...J
0
CD
a:::
UJ
0..
0
<
0
...J
50
IJO
30
20
10
o
SHEAR
SB SHEAR BAR
EP EMBEDDED PLATE
GP GROUTED PLATE
I<B EXP. ANCHOR
(6" DEEP)
RH EXP. ANCHOR
(3&" DEEP)
,
0.0 0.1 0.3 O.Q. 0.5 0.6
DEFLECTION INCHES
FIGURE 1
CONCRETE INSERT
5
-
(f)
0..
:.::
3
-
....
~
0
m
0:::
UJ
0..
2
Q
<I:
0
~
o
0.0 0.2 0.3 o.q.
0.5
DEFLECTION (INCHES)
FIGURE 2
:.
nrn
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-
<n.
0....
:.::
-
:;,
Q..
c
0
0
.....I
UJ
a::
::t
.....I
oC(

Ii . -C.C-._
IJ "- ----.
-
1 t>' .....
..........
15
-
-

l>
.... ,
'-
10
-
-
-
-
.5

.

10
''CC
."
"",""
-""'"
-
.20

........ -- --.-- .... -
30 lW 50 60
e IN DEGREES
SYMBOLS
o = EMBEDDED PLATE
$ = EMB PL + SHEAR BAR
X = PLATE ON HARDENED
CONCRETE
o = GROUTED PLATE
<> = I LL I NG
EXPANSION ANCHOR
FIGURE 3
j"
70 80
\
I
. ..
__ ___ ._
, .. ---.;.......:---;--
t
iiiiII
-
IiiiiiItiI .. ... .. .. .. ... .. ... ... .. ..
all ali; .. ...
,-
i'
I
..
j
" f .
"
; :
1
! '
!
I ,
i
COMBINED LOADING
30
SB SHEAR BAR
EP PLATE
GP GROUTED PLATE
KB EXP. ANCHOR
(Gil DEEP)
20
RH EXP. ANCHOR
CI) DEEP)
0-

PY PRELOADED BOLT
I-
-'
FT FINGER-TIGHT BOLT 0
al
0::
UJ
PY @ 30 a..
0
5/8 @ 67 ..::c
0
...J
10
o
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5
DEFLECTION INCHES
FIGURE 4
6ieWlilliifii'wnn_ ..... ... ... sa;;w:; ..... .... - .....
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
t
tJ
11
Anchorage to Concrete
APPENDIX
Phase I (Tensile Tests)--The first series of tests were performed on two
commercially available concrete inserts, on 3/4-inch A307 anchor bolts, and
on SIS-inch welded studs.
The bolts were tested at varying depths and edge distances and the studs
were tested for the effects of number, spacing, and anchorage pattern. The
heavy duty insert was a 2-inch by 2-inch la-gage steel channel and the
standard insert was a l-3/S-inch by 1-S/S-inch 12-gage steel channel.
The various anchorages were embedded in 30-inch square by 4-foot long
test blocks utilizing as many faces as possible to reduce the number of
test blocks required and to reduce the variable effect of concrete
strength. The testing apparatus consisted of a 50-ton calibrated
hydraulic jack with a loading beam to spread the reaction loads to a
point on the concrete block beyond the expected failure cone.
The two concrete inserts were tested in 1-, 2_, and 4-foot lengths
using a loading bar between the jack and the inserts to spread the
load uniformly to the special l/2-inch connecting bolts. The loading
bar was clamped to the insert 50 foot-pounds of torque preload
applied to the l/2-inch bolts. A total of 13 tests were performed on the
heavy duty insert and 15 on the regular insert.
As a result of these tests a second series was run using a modified insert
consisting of I-SIS-inch by I-SIS-inch 12-gage channel with welded studs
on 4-inch centers for anchors. A total of five tests were performed using
l/2-inch studs and four tests using 3/B-inch studs in this series.
19
C'@7WVC7S".UWWW =
I-
20
1
The 3/4-inch A307 bolts were embedded to depths varying from 4 inches to
1
8 inches with edge distances varying from 2 inches to 6 inches, but
not more than the embedded depth. All 18 bolts were embedded in a single
,
test block. As a result, some of the concrete failures influenced the
test results of others and a second series of 10 bolts were tested. With
I
the exception of one test each in the center of the block for 3-inch and
I
4-inch embedment depths, the remaining eight tests were run with 2-inch and
3-inch edge distances. Only one test out of this group was apparently
i
influenced by concrete failure of prior tests.
J
The initial testing of the S/8-inch welded studs consisted of four single-
stud pull tests, eight double-stud pull tes'ts at 4-inch through 8-inch
t
spacing, and one test with four studs at a 4-inch spacing in a square
pattern. All studs were welded to 3/8-inch thick plates. Some of the
t pull bars, required for attaching the test rig, were welded to the
t
3/8-inch plates prior to embedment and some after embedment to check
the effects of welding on the anchorage. In some instances the welding
t
heat caused sufficient expansion of the plate to spall the concrete at
the edges. It did not, however, effect the ultimate strength since edge
t
spalling also occurred at very low tensile stress with the prewelded
I
pull bars.
t
Five additional tests were performed on studs at 2-, 3-, and 4-inch
spacing. Two tests were performed with groups of two, and three tests
I
with groups of four. All five tests in this series resulted in concrete
failure in comparison to all steel failure in the initial series.
I
Tests were also performed on 3/4-inch grouted bolts set in holes drilled
I
in hardened concrete with a l-l/2-inch diameter core drill. Failure'to
I ~
- - - ,.
I
i
I
i
f
I
,
J
t
l
J
1
f
t
t
J
1
f
-
roughen the slick surface of the holes in the limestone aggregate concrete
resulted in bond failure with both epoxy and portland cement grouts in the
initial tests. Tests were repeated with a minimum of surface roughening
and no bond failures occurred. Each series consisted of 8 tests for
embedment depths of 4, 5, and 6 inches w i ~ h edge distances of 2 and 3
inches to the center of the bolts.
Additional pull tests were performed using I-inch diameter high strength
(ASTM A490) bolts to determine what effect, if any, the higher bearing
stress at the head of these bolts had on embedment requirements. These
bolts were tested in 3-foot by 3-foot by 3-foot concrete blocks. One
block was cast with six bolts of varying depths with one bolt in the
center of each face. In the other block four bolts were cast one in each
face with 4-1/2-inch edge distances. An increase in the size of
test rig was required for these tests.
Phase II (Shear Tests)--The tests for both Phase II and Phase III were
performed at The University of Tennessee utilizing a testing facility
which was designed specifically for linear anchorage tests for
TVA's Bellefonte Nuclear Plant.
21
This test facility is a self-contained system with a 400-kip loading capacity.
A Gilmore hydraulic pump and control console supply hydraulic fluid to the
loading rams which are controlled by a servo valve through this control
console. The console compares a preset voltage to the voltage from either
a load or a deflection control device and sends an electrical signal
to the servo valve to adjust the loading rams until the two voltages are
equal. The load control devices consist of load cells which were
calibrated in the compression testing machine. The deflection control





I
~
I
I
-
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
I
device is a Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT). The
test apparatus thus has the ability to imput either load or deflection
and to measure both.
Special connecting devices were designed for the various types of anchorages
to be tested. The devices were pin connected to the loading rig such
that the center of the loading pin and the desired plane of shear could be
aligned. The stiffness of the beams through which the load was transmitted
from loading pin to test block was such that essentially no rotation
occurred for the normal loading conditions achieving very close to pure
shear conditions.
The fixed height of the testing apparatus established a maximum test block
dimension of 27 inches. The test block was therefore cast as a 27-inch
cube in order to utilize as many faces of each block as possible. The shear
load in the test block was transmitted back to the test rig through bearing
on the forward face of the test block. The moment induced in the block
through the resulting eccentricity was removed by clamping the back side
of the test block to the laboratory slab.
As a result of the evaluation of the tensile tests on concrete inserts,
shear tests were only performed on the modified insert with 3/8-inch studs.
A total of 12 tests were performed on 2-foot-Iong sections embedded
in the faces of the 27-inch cubical test blocks. Tests were performed
both in the direction of and perpendicular to the channel slot utilizing
from two to five connecting bolts. These inserts were also cast into blocks
in the configuration of a cross and tested for shear along the principal
axis of the cross for 4-, 8-, and l2-bolt connections. Later tests were
22
I
l
i
i
~
i
f
t
I
1
I
I
J
I
I
m
ru
I
1,,-- --
-. - - ~
run with 4- and 8-bolt connections for shear applied at IS, 30, and 45
degrees to the principal axis of the cross.
23
A total of five shear tests were performed on groups of S/8-inch studs welded
to 3/B-inch plates and embedded in the 27-inch cubical blocks. Three of
these tests were on groups of two, three" and four studs spaced in a single line
pattern on 4-inch centers. The other two tests were on groups of four in a
square pattern with one group spaced on 4-inch centers and the other on
6-inch centers.
In the first series of shear tests with the 3/4-inch bolts only the bolts
were embedded in the concrete. Four single bolts were tested for edge
effects on shear, two with 3-inch edge distance and two with 6-inch edge
distance. In addition, two groups of four bolts in a square pattern on
8-inch centers were tested. All bolts were embedded 6 inches deep and
the loading plates were fastened to the hardened concrete without
grout. Half of the plates were fastened under "finger tight" conditions
and half were preloaded by the AISC "turn-of-the-nut" method. Additional
turns of the nut could easily have been made without breaking the bolts.
A second series of 3/4-inch bolts were tested. This series involved
eight single bolt tests and three mUltiple bolt tests utilizing four bolts
in square patterns. The single bolt tests followed the pattern of the
first series except that all bolts were preloaded to yield. The edge'
distances varied from 3-1/8 inches to 10-3/4 inches. One of the plates
in the multiple bolt connections was grouted to the block surface and
fastened with "finger tight" nuts. The other two plates were embedded with
their top surfaces flush with the concrete surface. One of these plates
had a I-inch deep shear bar and the other did not. In both cases the nuts
were fastened to a "finger tight" fit.
... " ____ c __ - __ ____ --.. ---.----------.....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
ru
W
~
I
A third series of four-bolt configurations was tested using ASTM A325 and
A490 bolts with the plates fastened to hardened concrete and the bolts
preloaded to yield as in the first series.
Two types of 3/4-inch expansion anchors were tested in shear using the
same grouping pattern as the bolts. Similar anchors are manufactured by
a number of different concerns and are commonly used. The self-drilling
type anchor uses its own shell as a drill bit and accomplishes its anchorage
by driving the shell down over a wedge which expands the shell base. These
anchors have a I-inch outside shell diameter and 3-1/4-inch embedment.
Connections to these anchors was made with 3/4-inch A307 bolts. The
other type of anchor requires a special drill bit to control hole size
and achieves its anchorage by wedges on each side of the bolt which
expand when the bolt is tightened. These bolts are made of high strength
steel and can be purchased in different lengths. The bolts tested in
this series were set 6 inches deep.
Phase III (Combined Loading)--In these tests the test apparatus and 27-inch
cubical blocks were arranged to transmit the load to the anchorage at angles
of 30 and 60 degrees to the face of the connecting plate. The connecting
plates were also designed to control the location of the intersection of
the line of force and the bottom surface of the connecting plate. In
some instances a small eccentricity was used to detect, if possible, the
clamping effect of bending.
A total of 12 tests were performed on the modified insert with varying
numbers of connecting bolts at both 30- and 60-degree angles. In all of
these tests the loads were aligned with the weak shear plane longitudinal
to the channel slot.
24
25
A total of seven tests were performed at a 30-degree load angle on the
,
basic four-bolt configuration using 3/4-inch A307 bolts with embedded plates
(with and without shear bars), grouted plates, and plates fastened to
I
hardened concrete. Only four tests were performed with 3/4-inch bolts at
a 60-degree load angle because of unexpected block failures and because
of expiration of ~ h ~ contract completion date. Three additional tests
I
were performed at the 60-degree loading on 5/S-inch bolts fastened to
hardened concrete. These bolts were set by drilling into existing
I
blocks and set with an expansive grout. They were set at 3-1/2-inch,
I
7-inch, and S-inch depths. (Tests were also planned at 5-inch and
6-inch depths but could not be performed because the bolt alignment
I
did not match the holes in the connecting plate. The end of the
school year and expiration of the contract did not allow time for
I
retest.)
I
A total of five tests were performed with expansion anchors at a load
angle of 30 degrees. Two of these were performed on the self-drilling
type anchor, two on a super-bolt with two expanding wedges per bolt
and set 9 inches deep, and one test on the standard expanding wedge bolt
set 6 inches deep.
Supporting Tests
I
A continuing program of sampling and testing concrete and steel was carried
out for correlation with the above anchorage tests.
- -- ~ . .... ~ , .. -
- - - - ~ .. - ~ . - . - ., - .--,. .. --' .
.,......
-
--
~ ~ ~ J-'!J P'iiiif ~
-- - - -
till ..
-
,.

Table I
Tension Tests
Concrete Failure
Number Size Embed Edge Spacing f'c Failure Load
Inches Depth Distance Inches psi Actual Estimate Est Remarks
Inches Inches 1000 lb. 1000 lb. Act.
1 3/4 3 15 3500 16 11. 7 0.73 A307
4 2 4870 9.9* 14.3 Embedded
4 2 4315 16.6 13.5 .81 Bolts
4 3 4870 13.3* 16.4
4 3 4315 18.3 15.4 .84
4 4 4870 19.9* 18.1 .91
4 15 4315 25.4 17.5 .69
5 2 4635 14.5 16.0 1.10
5 2 3500 14.9 13.9 .93
5 3 4635 20.5 18.3 .89
5 4 4635 22 20.3 .92
6 2 4635 22.7 2h2 .93
6 2 3500 17.7* 19.0
6 3 4315 28.2 23.9 .85
7 2 5050 23.8* 29.7
1 3/4 5 2-3/4 5500+ 23.2 19.4 .84 A307
7 1-1/4 5500+ 22.1 19 .86 Grouted
4 2-1/4 5500+ 14.4 15.75 1.10 Bolts
4 2-1/4 5500+ 16.6 15.75 .95
4 5/8 6-3/8 16 2 4000 59.7 46.2 0.77 Welded
I I
15 3 4000 63 53.9 .86 Studs
14 4 4400 63.4* 65.5 1.03
1 1 10.5 18 4300 98 90.8 .93 A490
18.9 4-1/2 4245 94 76.3 .82 Bolts
16.8 4-1/2 4300 82 76.8 .94
14.7 4-1/2 4300 82 76.8 .94
12.6 4-1/2 4300 76 76.8 1.01
,.1
. *
Concrete damaged from previous tests
i:, ~ ! :
II ~ MM. ~ II III' til ., .. .. ..
Number
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
~
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
Size
Inches
5/8
Embed
Depth
Inches
6-3/8
Edge
Distance
Inches
+7
Table 2(a)
Tension Tests
Steel Failure
Spacing
Inches
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
8
8
4
f'e
psi
4635
5050
4870
4635
4315
4315
4315
3500
3500
4635
4635
5050
5050
4870
4870
4635
4635
5050
Failure Load
Actual Concrete Unit Remarks
1000 lb. (Estimate) 1000
1000 lb. lb/bolt
16 34.8 16 Welded
15.5 36.3 15.5 Studs
16.4 35.6 16.4
16.5 34.8 16.5
40.9 40.2 20.5
39.2 40.2 19.6
35.4 40.2 17.7
34 43.6 17
38.1 43.6 19.1
36.5 48.7 18.3
36.5 48.7 18.3
34.8 54.4 17.4
38.1 54.4 19.1
39.3 57 19.7
36.5 57 18.3
37 62.5 18.5
35 62.5 17.5
74 69.8 18.5
~ , ---
Uumber
1
1
1
I
" .
Size
Inches
3/4
3/4
1
I
,-
Embed
Depth
Inches
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
5
6
6
7
8
8
12.6
14.7
16.8
Table 2
Tension Tests
Steel Failure
Edge
Distance
Inches
5
3
4
5
6
2
4
5
2
4
3-3/4
2-1/2
3
2-3/4
2-3/4
2-3/4
18
18
18
Spacing
Inches
... _--_ ............... -
f'c
psi
4635
5050
5050
5050
5050
4000
5050
5050
3500
3500
5500+
5500+
5500+
5500+
5500+
5500+
4300
4245
4200
Failure Load
Actual Concrete Unit Remarks
1000 lb. (Estimate) 1000
1000 lb. lb/bo1t
21 21.4 21 A(307)
26 25.9 26 Embedded
26.1 28.6 26.1 Bolts
26.1 30.9 26.1
26.2 32.1 26.2
25.4 26.5 25.4
26.3 36.9 26.3
29.6 39.9 , 29.6
23.2 31.3 23.2
24.4 46 24.4
29.9 21. 7 29.9 A(307)
25.4 25.4 25.4 Grouted
26 27 26 Bolts
30.4 34 30.4
29.3 42.6 29.3
27.7 42.6 27.7
116 130.8 116 A(490)
118 176.8 118 Bolts
118 229.7 118
JUiJ .L . : . . . ~ ~
- ~
~ ~
- -'
J!!'!I!! ~ ~ .... .... .- ~ ~
@!!Ii. @!!I!IIJ 1iIh,
.. ,
Table 3
Tension Test
Concrete Inserts
Connecting Length End Washer Failure Load Type
Bolts of Anchors Lift-off Total Per Foot of
No. Spacing Channel Yes No Failure
Inches Inches kips/bolt 1000 Ib 1000 lb
1-5/8 x 1-3/8 Standard Insert
1 48 x 3.3 5.5 LP
48 x 3.9 8.3 LP
48 x 2.2 8.8 LP
* 48 x 4.4 5.3
* 48 x 5.5 8.4 LP
* 48 x 5.5 8.1 LP
2 3 12 x 4.2 10.7 AT
3 6 24 x 4.4 17.3 11.5 AT ,
4 3 14 x 3.2 16 16 AT
4 3 12 x NM 14.9 14.9 AT
4 3 12 x 2.6 11.6 11.6 AT
6 3 24 x NM 14.9 9.9 AT
6 3. 24 x NM 13.8 9.2 AT
2 x 2 Heavy Duty Insert
1 3 24+ x NM 9.7 LT
2 3 18 x 15.5 LT
3 3 12 x 17 .2 17.2 LT
3 6 12 x 16.6 16.6 LT
3 6 24 x 24.7 16.5 LT
3 3 24 x 30.1 20.1 LT
3 3 12 x 18.3 18.3 LT
4 3 12 x 16.6 16.6 LT
.4 3 16 x 18.8 18.8 LT
6 3 18 x 23.8 15.8 ST
6 3 20 x 26 17.3 LT
6 3 20 x 29 19.3 LT
*Edge Load
Description of Failure
LP - Pullout of Lip
LT Tear of Lip
ST - Stud tear from channel web
AT - Anchor tear from channel web
Connecting
Bolts
No. Spacing
Inches
3 3
4 3
6 3
6 3
2 3
3 3
3 6
4 3
4 3
Description of Failure
LP - Pullout of Lip
LT - Tear of Lip
, ., ; ~ . (
Table 3
Tension Test
Concrete Inserts
Length I End Washer
of Anchors Lift-off
Channel Yes No
Inches kips/bolt
1-5/8 x 1-5/8 Modified with 3/8
12 x NM
12 x
18 x
20 x
1-5/8 x 1-5/8 Modified with 1/2
18 x NM
12 x
24 x
12 x
16 x
ST Stud tear from channel web
AT Anchor tear from channel web
Failure Load Type
Total Per Foot of
Failure
1000 1b 1000 1b
Studs
17.7 17.7 LP
16.6 16.6 ST
18.8 15 ST
23 15.9 ST
Studs
16.1 ST
19.9 19.9 ST
21.6 16.1 ST
17.7 17.7 ST
20.4 20.4 ST
.<
- ..
'.
Number Size
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
1 3/4
4 3/4
4 3/4
4 3/4
4 3/4
4 3/4
4 3/4
4 3/4
2 5/8
3 5/8
4 5/8
'.,
: i:
4 5/8
. 1
4 5/8
!
..
----._-- - ~ '., - ..
Embed
Depth
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
(A325)
(A490)
Studs
Studs
Studs
Studs
Studs
Edge
Distance
3
6
3
6
3-1/8
4-3/16
5
6-3/16
7-3/8
8-3/16
9-5/16
10-3/4
'Table 4'
Shear Tests
Spacing
(A307 Bolts)
8
8
8
8
8
4
4
4
4
4
---
flc
5600
5700
5600
5800
3825
3825
5080
3700
4100
4100
4550
4600
4600
4500
5350
5100
4450
2400
2400
6000
4500
5000
4500
3900
-
Concrete
1000 1bs
11
11
17
9
18
20
40
70
76
60
60
Failure Load
Steel Per Anchor Remarks
1000 1bs kips/bolt
04 HPA
22 22 06 HPA
22 22 fl6 HPA
20 20 fl4 HPA
fJ6 HPA
18 18 fJ6 HPA
20 20 06 HPA
18 18 #6 HPA
24 24 #6 HPA
19
. 19
fl6 HPA
18 18 fl6 HPA
25 25 fl6 HPA
85 21.3 SM
87 21.8 SM
6 16 GP
110 27.5 EP
112 28 EP & SB
182 45.5 SM
183 45.8 SM
36 18 EP
51 17 EP
67 16.8 EP
73 18.3 EP
65 16.3 EP
' ~ : : : ; ; ~ ; . J ~ . ' : ~
",.";; ..
~ .. '
1 ~ .
' ..
. : . ,>"
'!'. '
Number
4
4
4
Size
3/4
3/4
3/4
HPA Hairpin anchor
GP Grouted plate
SB - Shear Bar
EP - Embedded plate
Embed
Depth
3-1/4
3-1/4
6
SM - Surface Mounted Plate
Table 4 (Continued)
Edge
Distance
(Exp.)
(Exp.)
(Exp. )
Shear Tests
Spacing
(A307 Bolts)
8
8
8
flc
5550
5600
4550
Concrete
1000 lbs
Failure Load
Steel Per Anchor
1000 lbs kips/bolt
44.4
49.6
100
11.1
12.4
25
Remarks
SM
SM
8M
Number
of
Connecting
Bolts
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
4
4
4
8
12
Direction
of
Load
Perpendicular
to
slot
Longitudinal
to
slot
Cross
Connections
-
Table 5
Concrete Inserts
Shear Tests
Angle
with
Principal
Axis
Degrees
0
0
0
of Load
with
Face of
Block
Degrees
0
Average
0
Average
0
Average
Maximum Load
Total Per Bolt
Kips Kips
14 7
16 8
21 7
26 8.7
29 7.3
26 6.5
36 7.2
39 7.8
7.4
5 2.5
11 5.5
6 2
6 2
12 3
14 3.5
16 3.2
26 5.2
3.36
18 4.5
22 5.5
26 6.5
40 5
65 5.4
5.38
{
,. -
Number
of
Connecting
Bolts
8
4
8
4
8
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
Direction
of
Load
Cross
Connections
Longitudinal
to
slot
Table 6
Concrete Insert
Shear and Combined Load
Angle of Load
with with
Principal Face of
Axis Block
Degrees Degrees
45 0
45
30
30
15
15
0 30
0 30
0 60
0 60
Haximum Load
Total Per Bolt
Kips Kips
50 6.25
24 6.0
52 6.5
28 7
51 6.37
20 5
11.5 5.75
11.5 3.83
17.5 4.38
9 4.5
16 5.33
15.5 3.88
13.8 6.9
15.6 5.2
17.75 4.37
13.5 6.73
13.6 4.53
19.6 4.9
Number
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
SM
-
CP
-
EP
-
SB
-
GB
-
Size
Inches
3/4 -
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
5/8
5/8
5'!8
ASTM
AJ07
AJ07
AJ07
A307
A307
AJ07
AJ07
AJ07
AJ07
AJ25
A490
Exp
Exp
Exp
Exp
Exp
AJ07
AJ07
AJ07
Surface Mounted Plate
Grouted Plate
Embed Plate
Shear Bar
Grouted Bolt
Embed
Depth
Inches
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
8-1/2
9-1/2
3-1/4
3-1/4
6-
9
9
3-1/2
7
8
j
Combined Loads
Connection
SM
SM
SM
SM
GP
GP
GP
EP
SB
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
8M
CB
GB
GB
f'c
psi
5200
4550
4750
5100
3700
4650
4200
3750
4000
5450
5400
4650
4600
4500
4500
4500
5400
5300
5300
Angle
of Load
Degrees
60
30
30
60
30
30
30
30
30
60
60
30
30
30
30
30
60
60
60
Failure Load
Total Per Bolt
1000 1bs 1000 1bs
73 18.3
75 18.8
68 16.9
81 20.3
50.5 12.6
58 14.5
61 15.3
94 23.5
108 27
83 20.8
104 26.1
41.8 10.5
33.2 8.3
63 15.8
776 19.1
76.7 19.2
47.7 11.9
47.6 11.9
44.2 11.0
A307
30
S8 SHEAR BAR
EP EMBEQDED PLATE
.
GP GROutED PLATE
20
(I)
Q.
!lie
!3
0
=
Q:
IJJ
Q.
Q
oct
0
10
-'
I
i
o
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 O.q. 0.5
\
DEFLECTION INCHES
FIGURE 5
i:
,
; ~
.'-
,; .
J.
)'
CI)
4.
lie:
~
...J
0
m
0::
UJ
4.
Q
-<
0
...J
-.
",t'
50
qO
SO
20
10
o
0.0 0.1
DEFLEctiON INCHES
--.
A325, Aq90, EXP ANCHORS
KB EXP. ANCHOR
f::J0 (6" DEEP)
~ \ l c ~ O : .......
RH
EX', ANCHOR
......
'"
(a. DIE') ,
,
K8 @ S O O ~
-----_ .....
-.. - ~ .. -.. ,
,
0.'"
F,IGURE 6
"
I
i'
-'
,-
.',
8
6
2
o
i
i
I
I
\
\
1
I i;
> .,
-
0.0
DEFLECTION INCHES
O. I
.. .-
.. ' ~ ~ '
..
- --
INSERT CROSS CONNECTIONS
0.3
FIGURE 7
.
'1,' ".'
", '.

You might also like