cannon anchorage to concrete

8/3/2019 Cannon Anchorage to Concrete

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cannon-anchorage-to-concrete 1/47

I

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING DESIGN

THERMAL POWER ENGINEERING..

Civil Engineering Branch!Research and Development Staff

ANCHORAGE TO CONCRETE,

'-,,I

:jI

,

,)..1



~ ' E N N E S S E E VALlEY AUTHORITY

DI VISION OF ENGIlrEERING DF..sIGU

TlIEIU-tAL PO\'lliH ENGINEERnlG

Civi l Engineering Branch

R e s e ~ c h and Development StaffV,le. Ic"r- .J

Al"llCHORJ\GE TO CONCRETE--

Report No. CEB 75-32 ".'



O § - - -75'- - -

ANCHORAGE TOCONCRETE

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



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, fossi l , 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 Il l inois 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 th e research

- described in this paper which was performed at the University. He is



rPiiiT"S'rr_r

1 ~ '

j

f

l

1

Anchorage to Concrete

Prior to the advent of nuclear power plants th e 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 restrict ions 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 lef t 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 .



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 fo r the various systems are summarized

-elow. A complete description of the tests is contained in the Appendix.

A continuing program of sampling and testing both concrete and s teel

components was carried ou t for support and analysis of the anchorage

test results. Two other expansion anchor test programs are included in

the discussion, but are not l is ted 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 i s

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

-.......,,2



_

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



Discussion of Test Results

A complete l is t ing of the tes t resul ts are contained in the Appendix along

with load deflection curves of individual tests which were not selected

fo r inclusion with this paper.

Embedment Requirements

The peripheral shear area described in Section 11.10.2 of the 318 Building

Code is th e 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. I f we apply the limiting stress of

~ f ' c of section 11.10.3 to this area th e minimum embedments required to

develop th e minimum tensile strength requirement of A307 bolts (Table 2,

ASTM A307) with 3000 psi concrete would vary from 6.64 bolt diameters

fo r 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

4

.. - - - - ,a

- - - - - - -



5

For embedment depths less than 5 inches the resisting stress cone defined

by 45-degree l ines 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 th e 3/4-inch bolts and 4-l/2-inch

edge distance for the l inch A490 bolts clearly indicates that a minimum

side cover dimension is required to fullyrestrain

theside

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 th e A490 bolts leaving

the bolt embedded in the concrete with one face of th e bolt head exposed.

For deep embedments th e apparent side thrust is approximately 1/4 of the

bolts' tensile capacity. For bolts of "d" diameter located "m" distance from



The apparent embedment requirements for shear are approximately one-half

of the requirements fo r 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 range from 1/4 to 1/2

of the imposed shear. If so th e cri t ical angle for anchorage would be

somewhere between 77 degrees and 63 degrees to develop the tensile

component plus 1/4 or 1/2 of th e 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

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.

7-

2Y&'



22 tests which were concrete f a i l u r C ! ~ , (uninfluenced by p r t ~ v i o u s tents)

the predicted fai lure loads were less than the actual fai lure loads in

19 tests . Of the 3 tests predicting higher fai lure 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 i t

can be seen that i f the normal factor of 85 percent is applied then the

predicted failure load would be less than the actual in a l l of the tests .

For the 37 tests involving fai lure of the bolt or anchor s teel the

predicted concrete fai lure loads did exceed the actual s teel fai lure loads

in 95 percent of the cases.

~ l e n the bolts or studs are spaced close enough for an intersection of

the 90 degree pullout cones, the concrete fai lure plane is always a

straight l ine between the bolt heads. The tensile strength of th e

concrete between bolts in mUltiple b o l ~ connectors is a major factor

in determining anchorage requirements. If a s teel plate is used a t

B



9

30 studs in multiple stud anchorages. Material specification require

a minimum strength of 16.9 kips for a 55,0000 psi stress l imit .

We have no explanation why none of the individual stud tests met

requirements and a ll 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 tes t block spl i t down th e middle instead of the typical concrete

cone pullout which normally occurs. We have analyzed this as a bending

failure of th e unreinforced test block. The location of the neutral

axis and distr ibution 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 s teel rat io

of 0.001 is recommended.

Splitt ing faHure did not occur when 3/4-inch A-490 bolts were torqued



. .

concrete. Most manufacturers report data on average failure loads for

individual anchors with guidance given, by some, on the application of th e

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 th e calculated concrete pullout failure load as discussed

under "embedment requirements" should be questioned.

Discussion of Phase II--The failure mechanism for shear on th e concrete

insert is shear failure of th e 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 str ic t ly a function of the 50 foot

pounds of preload torque. The range of washer l i f t -of f 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 sl ip load was

10



11

Shear testing of th e individual 3/4-inch bolts was directed principally

toward establishing th e restr ic t ions 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 fai lures 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 th e bolt to the concrete within

1/2 bolt diameter of the surface shear plane. Applying 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 ta n 0) .V

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

aMI"



at the ends of th e 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 a t concrete

failure was undoubtedly a contributing factor to the fai lure 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 st i ffness of the shear bar

connection prior to concrete failure does not appear to be signif icant .

The average shear strength of th e bolts with the grouted plates was

only 53 percent of th e 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,

12



percent of the individual shear tests . This strength loss is

attributed to nonuniform distribution of load due to the tensi le sl ip

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 th e shear strength of the self-dri l l ing

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 th e 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 sl ip is substantially greater

under combined loading than for shear alone in the test ing of concrete

13



J

deflection characteristics in figure 4. When the rat io 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:

Pu

=T

osin + (T Iv

)cos

o 0

Under combined loading the minimum load producing failure for bolted

connections occurs a t some angle between 25 degrees and 45 degrees

depending on To/Vo. There is also an apparent decrease in s t i ffness

of these connections underc o m b i n e d ~ l o B d s .

In these bolts the failure

stress is a combination of direct tension, bending, and the cutting

or shearing action of th e loading plate on the back side of the bolt .

Under combined loading the tensile component not only adds direct st ress ,

but l i f t s the plate off the concrete surface and thereby increases th e

bending radius and bending stress as well.

14



II

(7)

(8)

The ultimate shear strength of embedded plates is dependent

entirely on th e strength of th e anchorage steel and is

relatively unaffected by th e 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 a t which concrete fails on th e

frontside of th e plate. Under combined tensile and shear loads

shear bars add nothing to the st iffness characteris t ics 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 in i t ia l snug

t ight f i t . Such connections have a shear capacity of slightly

more than 80 percent of the tensile capacity of th e bolts and

provide stiffness characteristics similar to embedded plates.

16



1

(12) High bearing stress at the heads of bolts is of no consequence

as long as the side cover a t 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 a t 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 a l l 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

no t recommended since they perform no useful function and only

17

e &B - - . ~



18

(18) For expansion anchors with embedment depths of 4 bolt diameters

or less, shear strength appears to be influenced by th e 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 l imit deflections to those commensurable to bolted

connections.

II,



i'ii: ,, ', ;

U )

0..

!IoC

t-...J

0CD

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-...

0m

0:::UJ

0..

2Q

<I:0

o

0.0 0.2 0.3 o.q. 0.5

DEFLECTION (INCHES)

FIGURE 2:.

nrn· ' · 'CC



-n.0....

:.::-;,

Q. .

c0«

0.....I

UJa::: : t

.....I

oC(

-1 t>' ..... ..........

15

--

l>

. ( ~ ... ,'-

10

---

.~

."

" " , " "

-""'"- - - - - , ~ - - - ' -

•........ -- --.-- ~ - - - .... -

· iiiiII IiiiiiItiI ... ... ... ... a l l al i ; ...

i'I·

..

j



- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ," ."

; :·1

! ' !I ,i

COMBINED LOADING

30SB SHEAR BAR

EP E t ~ B E O D E D PLATE

GP GROUTED PLATE

KB EXP. ANCHOR(Gil DEEP)

20RH EXP. ANCHOR

CI) ( 3 ~ n DEEP)0-

PY PRELOADED BOLTI--' FT FINGER-TIGHT BOLTal

0: :

UJPY @ 30°..

05/8 @ 67°.::c

0...J

10

o

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 O . ~ 0.5

DEFLECTION INCHES

FIGURE 4

6ieWlilliifii'wnn_....I I i ~ i i i : O o i i 7 R 5 I i 1 1 i : i : O = ..~ - .. .a;;w:; . . . . .... . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - . - ~ - - - - - - - - - - -



I

I

I

I

I

I,II

I

I

Anchorage to Concrete

APPENDIX

Phase I (Tensile Tests)--The f i r s t series of tes ts 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 stee l 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 util izing 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

19

C'@¥7WVC7S".UWWW =



I-20

1 The 3/4-inch A307 bolts were embedded to depths varying from 4 inches to

18 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 resul t , 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, th e remaining eight tests were run with 2-inch and

3-inch edge distances. Only one test out of this group was apparently

iinfluenced by concrete failure of prior tests.

J

The in i t ia l 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 r ig, were welded to the

t3/8-inch plates prior to embedment and some af ter embedment to check

the effects of welding on the anchorage. In some instances th e welding



I

i

Ii

f

I

,

J

t

l

J

roughen th e slick surface of the holes in th e limestone aggregate concrete

resulted in bond failure with both epoxy and portland cement grouts in the

ini t ia l 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 th e bolts.

Additional pull tests were performed using I-inch diameter high strength

(ASTM A490) bolts to determine what effect , i f any, the higher bearing

stress a t 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

21



I

device is a Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT). The

test apparatus thus has th e abil i ty 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 st i ffness of the beams through which th e 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 util ize as many faces of each block as possible. The shear

load in the test block was transmitted back to the test r ig through bearing

on the forward face of the test block. The moment induced in the block

22



I

l

ii

i

f

t

I

1

I

run with 4- and 8-bolt connections for shear applied a t IS, 30 , and 45

degrees to th e 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 l ine

pattern on 4-inch centers. The other two tes ts 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 f i r s t series of shear tests with the 3/4-inch bolts only th e 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 t ight" conditions

and half were preloaded by the AISC "turn-of-the-nut" method. Additional



IIIIIIIII

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 f i rs t 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 sel f -dr i l l ing

type anchor uses i t s own shell as a dri l l bit and accomplishes i ts anchorage

by driving the shell down over a wedge which expands th e 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 dri l l b it to control hole size

and achieves i ts anchorage by wedges on each side of th e 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.

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

hardened concrete. Only four tests were performed with 3/4-inch bolts a t

a 60-degree load angle because of unexpected block fai lures and because

of expiration of ~ h ~ contract completion date. Three additional tests

were performed at the 60-degree loading on 5/S-inch bolts fastened to

hardened concrete. These bolts were set by drill ing into existing

blocks and set with an expansive grout. They were set a t 3-1/2-inch,

7-inch, and S-inch depths. (Tests were also planned a t 5-inch and

6-inch depths but could not be performed because the bolt alignment

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 .)

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-dri l l ing

.,......

- -- J-'!J P'iiiif till..

Table I



-- - - - -Tension Tests

Concrete Failure

Number Size Embed Edge Spacing f 'c Failure LoadInches Depth Distance Inches psi Actual Estimate Es t Remarks

Inches Inches 1000 lb . 1000 lb . Act.

1 3/4 3 15 3500 16 11. 7 0.73 A3074 2 4870 9.9* 14.3 Embedded4 2 4315 16.6 13.5 .81 Bolts

4 3 4870 13.3* 16.4

4 3 4315 18.3 15.4 .844 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 .895 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 Grouted4 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 WeldedI I 15 3 4000 63 53.9 .86 Studs14 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 .9414.7 4-1/2 4300 82 76.8 .9412.6 4-1/2 4300 76 76.8 1.01

,.1 ••

. * Concrete damaged from previous tests:, :

. III' • til •

. , . .• •

..• •

..



Number

1111222

22222222

24

SizeInches

5/ 8

EmbedDepthInches

6-3/8

EdgeDistance

Inches

+7

Table 2(a)

Tension Tests

Steel Failure

SpacingInches

222

334455668

84

f 'epsi

4635505048704635431543154315350035004635463550505050487048704635

46355050

Failure LoadActual Concrete Unit Remarks1000 lb. (Estimate) 1000

1000 lb. lb/bolt

16 34.8 16 Welded15.5 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 1738.1 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 17.574 69.8 18.5

---, -

...

_ _...............



Uumber

1

1

1I" .

Size

Inches

3/4

3/4

1I

Embed

DepthInches

56666

77788

56678

8

12.6

14.7

16.8

Table 2

Tension Tests

Steel Failure

EdgeDistanceInches

53456

24524

3-3/42-1/2

32-3/4

2-3/4

2-3/4

181818

SpacingInches

f 'c

psi

46355050505050505050

40005050505035003500

5500+5500+5500+5500+5500+

5500+43004245

4200

Failure Load

Actual Concrete Unit Remarks1000 lb . (Estimate) 1000

1000 lb . lb/bo1t

21 21.4 21 A(307)26 25.9 26 Embedded

26.1 28.6 26.1 Bolts26.1 30.9 26.126.2 32.1 26.2

25.4 26.5 25.426.3 36.9 26.329.6 39.9 , 29.623.2 31.3 23.224.4 46 24.4

29.9 21. 7 29.9 A(307)25.4 25.4 25.4 Grouted26 27 26 Bolts30.4 34 30.429.3 42.6 29.3

27.742.6

27.7116 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 TypeBolts of Anchors Lift-off Total Per Foot of

No. Spacing Channel Yes No FailureInches Inches kips/bolt 1000 Ib 1000 lb

1-5/8 x 1-3/8 Standard Insert

1 48 x 3.3 5.5 LP48 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 LP2 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 AT4 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 LT3 6 12 x 16.6 16.6 LT

3 6 24 x 24.7 16.5 LT3 3 24 x 30.1 20.1 LT3 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 LT6 3 18 x 23.8 15.8 ST6 3 20 x 26 17.3 LT6 3 20 x 29 19.3 LT

*Edge Load



Description of Failure

LP - Pullout of LipLT Tear of Lip

ST - Stud tear from channel web

AT - Anchor tear from channel web



----



Number Size

1 3/4

1 3/41 3/41 3/4

1 3/4

1 3/4

1 3/4

1 3/41 3/4

1 3/41 3/41 3/4

4 3/4

4 3/4

4 3/4

4 3/4

4 3/4

4 3/44 3/4

2 5/83 5/84 5/ 8

'.,: : 4 5/8

. 14 5/8

!

..

---- ._-- '., - ..

EmbedDepth

6666666

66666

66666

(A325)(A490)

StudsStudsStudsStudsStuds

EdgeDistance

36363-1/84-3/16

56-3/167-3/8

8-3/169-5/16

10-3/4

'Table 4 '

Shear Tests

Spacing

(A307 Bolts)

88888

44444

f lc

5600570056005800382538255080

37004100410045504600

46004500535051004450

24002400

60004500500045003900

Concrete

1000 1bs

11

1117

91820

407076

6060

Failure LoadSteel Per Anchor Remarks1000 1bs kips/bolt

04 HPA

22 22 06 HPA

22 22 fl6 HPA

20 20 fl4 HPA

fJ6 HPA18 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

444

Size

3/43/4

3/4

HPA Hairpin anchorGP Grouted plateSB - Shear BarEP - Embedded plate

EmbedDepth

3-1/43-1/46

SM - Surface Mounted Plate

Table 4 (Continued)

EdgeDistance

(Exp.)

(Exp.)(Exp. )

Shear Tests

Spacing

(A307 Bolts)

8

88

f lc

555056004550

Concrete

1000 lbs

Failure LoadSteel Per Anchor

1000 lb s kips/bolt

44.4

49.6100

11.112.425

Remarks

SM

SM

8M

-

Table 5



Number

of

ConnectingBolts

22334

455

22334

455

4448

12

Direction

of

Load

Perpendicular

toslot

Longitudinal

to

slot

Cross

Connections

Concrete Inserts

Shear Tests

Anglewith

PrincipalAxis

Degrees

0

0

0

of Loadwith

Face ofBlock

Degrees

0

Average

0

Average

0

Average

Maximum LoadTotal Per Bolt

Kips Kips

14 716 821 726 8.729 7.3

26 6.536 7.2

39 7.8

7.4

5 2.511 5. 5

6 26 2

12 314 3.516 3.2

26 5.2

3.36

18 4.522 5.5

26 6.540 565 5.4

5.38

{



Number

ofConnectingBolts

8484

84234

234

2

34

234

DirectionofLoad

Cross

Connections

Longitudinalto

slot

Table 6

Concrete Insert

Shear and Combined Load

Angle of Loadwith with

Principal Face ofAxis Block

Degrees Degrees

45 045

30

30

1515

0 30

0 30

0 60

0 60

Haximum LoadTotal Per Bolt

Kips Kips

50 6.2524 6.052 6.528 7

51 6.3720 5

11.5 5.7511.5 3.83

17.5 4.38

9 4.516 5.33

15.5 3.88

13.8 6. 9

15.6 5.217.75 4.37

13.5 6.73

13.6 4.5319.6 4.9



A307

30S8 SHEAR BAR

EP EMBEQDED PLATE.GP GROutED PLATE

20(I)

Q.

!lie

!30

=Q:

IJJQ.

Qoct0

10'

Ii·o

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 O.q. 0.5

\DEFLECTION INCHES

FIGURE 5

i:,;

.



.-

,; .

J.)'

CI )

4.

lie:

...J0m

0::

UJ

4.

Q

-<0...J

-.'

50

qO

SO

20

10

o

0. 0 0.1

DEFLEctiON INCHES

A325, Aq90, EXP ANCHORS

KB EXP. ANCHORf::J0 (6" DEEP)

~ \ l c ~ O : .......

RH EX', ANCHOR......'" (a. DIE'),

K8 @ S O O ~ -----_ .... -.. ..-.,

0.'"

F,IGURE 6

"I

-',- .',

--

--



8

6

2

oiiI

\

\1I i;> .,

0.0

DEFLECTION INCHES

O. I

.. .-.. ' ~ ~ '

..

INSERT CROSS CONNECTIONS

0.3

FIGURE 7

.'1,' ".'

", '.

cannon anchorage to concrete

Documents