Guide to the Design of Anchor Bolts and Other Steel Embedments by R. W. Cannon, D. A. Godfrey, and F. L. Moreadith Preface There has been little published on the design of steel fembedments. Many designers looking for guidanee have found the work of ACI Committee 849, Conerete Nuclear Structures, extremely helpful. Because there may be de- signers who are not aware of this information, which is an appendix to the Code prepared by Committee 849, a mod: ified version is offered here which can be applied outside the design of nuclear structures. Appendix B, “Steel Embedments” of “Code Require- ‘ments for Nuclear Safety Related Conerete Structures (ACT 949.76)" was adopted by the Ameriean Concrete Institute lin August 1979. The authors of this article were principal authors of Appendix B. The appendix was ballotted and ‘revised extensively several times before being accepted by ACT Committee 349. Additionally, the document was ex. tensively reviewed by the ACI Technical Activities Com- mittee (TAC. Following revision and ballotting by ACI 349 and further review by TAC, the document was accepted for ballotting by the general membership of the Institute and published in the August 1978 ACI JOURNAL Proceedings of the American Concrete Institute. It was adopted as part of the Code in June 1970, ‘Appendix B is, for the most part, directly applicable to conerete structures in general, not only to nuclear safety related structures. The parts of this article presented in italicstype represents modifications which the authors feel transform Appendix B into a general guide for designing steel embedments. For the mast part, the changes fall into ‘one of three categories: 1. 1980 proposed revisions to Appendix B. 2. Deleting references to ACT 349-76 and inserting ref- erences to ACI 318-77. 3. Technical changes which the authors feel constitute an improvement in the content of Appendix B. it is important to emphasize that the regular-type por- tons of this artile have been subjected to a rigorous eval uation by ACI Committee 849, TAC, and the general mem- bership of the Institute. This guide defines minimum requirements for design of steel embedments used to transmit loads from attachments into reinforced conerete structures. Loads may be trans ‘mitted into structures by means of tension, bearing, shear, {rietio, or any combination thereot. The design limits have been established using both analytical and test methods. The commentary provides background information on the provisions. Keywords: anchorage (structural); anchor bolts, anchors (fas- ‘twneral: building codes; composite construction concrete and steeD: fembedment; grouting inert; loads (oreesls reinforced concrete: ‘Shear properties; structural design: studs. 1.0 — Notatio imension out to out of bearing edges (see Fig. 52), in A, = reduction in projected area, sq in. A, = loaded area, sq in. ‘A, = maximum area of the portion of the supporting surface that is geometrically similar to and concentric with loaded area, s9 in. b= dimension, out to out of bearing edges (see Fig. 52), in. D_ = major thread diameter of threaded anchor or nominal diameter of anchor, in. specified compressive strength of conerete, psi minimum specified tensile strength of ancho steel, psi f, = minimum specified yield strength of embed- ment steel, psi h_ = overall thickness of member, in. embedment depth for tensile anchorage mea- sured from anchorage bearing surface to con crete surface, in. m = minimum side cover distance from the center of an anchor to the edge of the concrete (see Fig. 541), in. number of threads per in. design pullout strength of concrete in tension, tb U_ = required strength to resist factored loads or related internal moments and forces 4 = strength reduction factor, dimensionless 2.0 Seope 21 — This guide provides minimum requirements for design and anchorage of steel embedments used to transmit loads from attachments into reinforced concrete structures by means of tension, bearing, shear, friction, or any combination permitted by this guide. ‘Typical embedment details and concepts as refer- ‘eneed in this guide are shown in Fig. 21 and 22. In addition to meeting these requirements consid- ‘eration shall be given to the effect of the forces ap- plied to the embedment on the behavior of the overall, structure. 22 — The requirements for the attachment to the embedment shall be in accordance with applicable codes and are beyond the scope of this guide. 23 — Design limits less conservative than those specified in this guide may be used by the engineer if substantiated by experimental or detailed analyt cal investigation. (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981i TERS S| rire ane BRB oie es Fig. 21 — Bearing embedments — Typical embed- ‘ment details. 3.0— Definitions Anchor head — A nut, washer, plate, stud, or bolt head or other steel component used to transmit an- chor loads to the conerete by bearing. Attachment — The attachment is that structure external to the surfaces of the embedment which transmits loads to the embedment, Embedment — The embedment is that steel com- ponent in contact with the conerete or grout used to transmit applied loads to the concrete structures. The embedment may be fabricated of plates, shapes, bolts, reinforcing bars, shear connectors, expansion anchors, inserts, or any combination thereof. Expansion anchor — A component installed in hardened conerete for the transfer of loads into strue- tural components by direct bearing and/or friction. Grouted embedment — An embedment located in 4 formed or drilled hole in hardened conerete utilizing 4 grout to provide load transfer from the embedment to the concrete. Inserts — Commercially available, predesigned, and prefabricated embedments installed prior to con: rete placement which are specifically designed for attachment of bolted connections. 4.0 General requirements and ‘combinations 4.1 — The embedment and surrounding concrete or grout shall be designed for transmitting to the con- crete structure all loads used in the design of the at- tachment. (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1961 LL Seon Fig. 22 — Tension embedments — Typical embed- ment details. 4.2 — Reactions on the embedment due to individ: ual loads such as dead, live (including vibratory loads), thermal and seismic, loads shall be considered, ‘The loading combinations for embedment design shall be in accordance with Section 9.2 of ACI 318-77, 4.3 — Material and testing requirements for ‘embedment steel shall be specified by the engineer to ensure that the intended function of the embed- ‘ment and the attachment is compatible 4.4 — The strength of embedments as affected by the size and grade of steel, spacing, and depth of embedment and any concrete dimensions which limit or restrict the transfer of loads from steel to concrete shall be considered as defined in Sections 6.0, 6.0, and 7.0. 4.5 — Shear lugs that meet the requirements of Sections 5.5 and 6.1.2(b) shall be considered effective only when located in a concrete compression zone developed between the embedment and the concrete and transverse to the direction of the shear force for a given load combination unless adequate reinforce- ‘ment is provided. 4.6 — A combination of bearing and shear friction mechanisms shall not be used to develop the requiredNovus. sis com Fig. 5-1 — Etfective stress area for anchorage pull- out. Fig. 52 — Stress area reduetion for limited depth A,. shear strength defined in accordance with Section 9.2 of ACT 318-77. 5.0 — Design requirements for concrete 5.1 — The design provisions of this guide are based fon the strength design method. ‘The assumptions, principles, and requirements of ACI 318-77 are ap- plicable for all load combinations exeept as modified herein. 52 — Tension — The design pullout strength of conerete P, for any anchorage shall be based on a uniform tensile stress of 44 V & acting on an effective stress area which is defined by the projected area of stress cones radiating toward the attachment from the bearing edge of the anchors. The effective area is limited by overlapping stress cones, by the inter- section of the cones with concrete surfaces, by the bearing area of anchor heads, and by the overall thickness of the eonerete (see Fig. 51 and 52), The inclination angle for calculating projected areas shall be 45 deg. The $ factor shall be taken as 0.65 for an embedded anchor head unless the anchor head is be- yond the far face reinforcement. In such eases a ¢ factor of 0.85 may be used. 53 — Shear — The design shear strength of an- chors subject to shear shall satisfy the requirements of Sections 6.1.2 and 7. 54 — Reinforcement — Ifthe requirements of Sec- tion 6.1 are not satisfied, reinforcement shall be pro- vided to develop the required strength. Reinforce ment requirements shall be in accordance with applicable sections of ACI 818-77 and placed to pre- vent failure of the concrete in tension 5.5 — Bearing 55.1 — The bearing requirements of Sections 10.16 or 18.18 of ACI 318-77 shall apply to the maximum bearing stress at a shear lug or anchor head except as permitted by Section 5.5.2. 55.2 — The bearing requirements of Section 5.5.1 do not have to be met if the anchor head at the base of the tensile stress component satisfies the following conditions: (a) The bearing area of the anchor head (excluding the area of the tensile stress component) is at least 1.5 times the area of the tensile stress component. (b) The thickness of the anchor head is at least 1.0 times the greatest dimension from the outer most bearing edge of the anchor head to the face of the tensile stress component. (c) The bearing area of the anchor head is approxi mately evenly distributed around the perimeter of the tensile stress component. 6.0 — Anchorage requirements 6.1 — Anchorage design shall be controlled by the strength of embedment steel unless otherwise spec ified in this guide. 6.1.1 — Tension. Steel strength controls when the design pullout strength of the concrete P, as deter mined in Section 52 exceeds the minimum specified tensile strength of the tensile stress component of the embedment steel and full load transfer is accom- plished from steel to conerete within the depth of the anchorage by one of the following methods: (a) A mechanical anchor at the base of the tensile stress components which satisfies the requirements of Section 5.5.2. To prevent failure due to lateral bursting forces at an anchor head, the side cover dis- CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981tance m shall be determined such that the lateral con- crete design strength (based on a uniform tensile stress of 46 VT, acting on an effective area defined by projecting 45 deg rlanes from the anchor head to the free surface) exceeds the lateral bursting force unless the requirements of Section 5.4 are met. The ¢ factor shall be taken as 0.85. (b) Reinforcing bars with development lengths in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 12 of ACT 318-77, for anchor steel composed of reinforce- ment, 61,2 — Shear. For steel strength to control the design shear strength: (a) For anchor bolts, studs, or bars the side cover distance m for shear loading to- ward a free edge shall be such that the concrete de- sign strength (based on a uniform tensile stress of 4 VT. acting on an effective area defined by project- jing 45 deg planes to the free surface from the cen- terline of the anchor at the shearing plane) exceeds the ultimate shear strength of the bolts, studs, or bars (based on f,) unless the requirements of Section 5.4 are met. The ¢ factor shall be taken as 0.86. {b) For shear lugs bearing in the direction of a free edge, the conerete design shear strength shall be de- termined based on a uniform tensile stress of 44 VE acting on an effective stress area defined by pro- jecting 45 deg planes from the bearing edges of the ‘shear lug to the free surface and shall exceed the ultimate shear strength of the steel (based on f,) un: Jess the requirements of Section 5.4 are met. Bearing area of the shear lug shall be excluded from the pro- jected area. The ¢ factor shall be taken as 0.85. 6.1.3 — For combined tension and shear, the depth ‘of embedment shall be in accordance with Section 6.1.1 and the minimum edge distance in accordance with Section 6.1.2). 61.4 — Where reinforcement is provided in ac- cordance with Section 5.4, the side cover distance shall not be less than ‘4 that required by Section 6.1.2, Under no conditions should the edge distance be less than the concrete cover requirements for re- inforcement in Section 7.7 of ACI 318-77. 7.0 — Design requirements 7.1 — Embedment material shall be defined by the Engineer in contract documents. 7.2 — The design strength for embedments shall be based on a maximum steel stress of ¢ f, or $ (0.8 £,), whichever is less. The design yield strength f, shall not exceed 120,000 psi. The following values for 4 shall be used: 7.2.1 — Tension, compression, and bending. $ = 0.9. 72.2 — Shear 72.21 — Structural shapes and fabricated steel sections and shear lugs. ¢ = 0.58. 72.2.2 — The shear-friction provisions of Section 11.7 of ACI 318-77 (as herein modified) shall be ap- plied to bolts, studs, and bars using a ¢ of 0.85. The coefficient of friction w shall be: ‘embedment steel CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1961 (a} 0.9 for concrete or grout against as-rolled steel with the contact plane a full plate thickness below the conerete surface. (b) 0.7 for conerete or grout against as-rolled steel with contact plane coincidental with the conerete sur- face. (c} 0.55 for grouted conditions with the contact plane between grout and as-rolled steel exterior to the conerete surface. 73 — Combined tension and shear 73.1 — For structural shapes and fabricated steel sections, the web shall be designed for the shear and the flanges designed for the tension, compression, and bending. 7.3.2 — For bolts, studs, and bars the area of steel required for tension by Section 7.2.1 and for shear by Section 7.2.2.2 shall be additive. 74 — The tensile stress area of a threaded anchor cnet [o-224] where D is the major thread diameter and n is the number of threads per in. 7.5 — The tensile stress area of Section 7.4 shall be applied to all threaded anchors subject to direct tensile and shear stress. 8.0 — Expansion This section provides minimum requirements for the design of typical expansion anchors used in con- crete structures and does not restriet the use of other expansion anchors provided the expansion anchors are designed and tested in accordance with the re- quirements of this section. 81 — Design requirements — Expansion anchors shall be designed to assure that the design strength of conerete for a given expansion anchor or group of expansion anchors is greater than the strength of the anchor steel except as permitted in Section 82. This requirement shall be met by satisfying the require- ments of Sections 8.1.1 of 81.2. 81.1 — Design by analysis (a) Tension: The design pullout strength of concrete P, shall be as defined in Section 52 except that the effective stress area shall he defined by the projected area of the stress cones radiating toward the concrete surface from the innermost expansion contact surface between the expansion anchor and the drilled hole. Refer to Fig. &1 for typical details. The design pull- out strength of concrete shall be equal to or greater than the minimum specified tensile strength or av- erage tensile strength if a minimum is not defined for the expansion anchor. The minimum edge distance requirement of Section 6.1.1(a) shall be satisfied. (b) Shear: Expansion anchors subject to shear shall meet the requirements of Section 6.1.2a). anFig. 8:1 — Typical details of expansion anchors. (c) For combined tension and shear, the depth of embedment shall be in accordance with Section 8.1.1(a) and the minimum edge distance in accordance with Section 8.1.1(b). (d) The design requirements for embedment steel shall be in accordance with Section 7.0. 8.1.2 Design by testing. Tests shall be conducted to verify that the conerete will develop the steel strength of the expansion anchors. Design by test. results shall be restricted to tests that are represen- tative of the anchor spacing and load application. 81.8 Strength reduction factors. The requirements of Section 7.1 shall apply except that the } factors for expansion anchors shall be 0.9 times the values spec- ified in Seetion 72. 82 — Alternative design requirements — For ex- pansion anchors that do not meet the requirement of Section 8.1, the design strength shall be 0.35 times the average test failure load. This factor applies to tension and shear test failure loads. The average test failure load shall be equal to the average of the test loads carried by test anchors at failure (maximum Joad) or at a magnitude of displacement of test an- cchors as specified by the engineer. A linear interac: tion shall be used for combined tension and shear. 83 — A single expansion anchor used to anchor an attachment shall be designed for ‘2 of the design strength defined herein. 84 — Testing 84.1 — Expansion anchors designed in accordance with the guide shall be tested to verify anchorage or to determine the average test failure load. Tests shall bbe conducted by a testing agency other than the an- chor manufacturer and shall be certified by a profes sional engineer with full description and details of the testing program, procedures, results, and conclu 84.2 — The expansion mechanism of the anchor shall be tested for the installed condition by one of the following methods: (a) The mechanism shall be actuated and tested during installation by preloading the expansion an- chor to a minimum value as specified by the engineer. (b) A random selection of the installed anchors shall be load tested to a minimum of 100 percent of the required strength. The testing program shall be es- tablished by the engineer. 85 — Expansion anchor selection — The engineer shall review the expansion anchor design features, failure modes, test results, and installation proce- dures prior to selecting a specific expansion anchor for an application. Expansion anchors shall not be used to resist vibratory loads in tension zones of con- crete members unless tests are conducted to verify the adequacy of the specifie anchor and application. 9.0 — Inserts Concrete inserts shall be specified in accordance with Section 7.1 and tested in accordance with Sec- tion 8.4.1 9.1 — Design requirements — When inserts cannot be designed to meet the requirements of Seetions 5.0, 6.0 and, 7.0, the design strength shall be based on actual test data of tests performed on inserts embed- ded in concrete. The tests shall cover the full range of possible loading conditions. 92 — Strength reduction factor — When inserts cannot be designed to meet the requirements of Sec- tions 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0, a $ factor of 0.5 shall be applied to the average test failure loads in determining the design strength. 10.0 — Grouted embedments 10.1 ~ Grouted embedments shall meet the appli- cable requirements of Sections 5.0, 6.0, and 7. 10.2 — For general grouting purposes the material requirements for cement grout shall be in accordance with Chapter 3 of ACI 318-77. Special grouts used to achieve certain properties such as high strength, low shrinkage, or expansion shall be the responsibility of the engineer and specified in contract documents. 10.3 — Grouted embedments shall be tested to ver- ity anchorage strength. Grouted embedments.in- stalled in tension zones of concrete members shall be capable of sustaining design strength in cracked con- rete. Tests shall be conducted by an independent testing agency and shall be certified by a professional engineer with full description and details of the test- ing programs, procedures, results, and conclusions. (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 196110.4 ~ Grouted embedments shall be tested for the installed condition by testing randomly selected grouted embedments to a minimum of 100 percent of the required strength. The testing program shall be established by the engineer. 10.5 ~ The tests required by Sections 10.3 and 10.4 may be waived by the engineer if tests and installa- tion data are available to ensure that the grouted embedment will function as designed or if the load transfer through the grout is by direct bearing or compression. Welding of attachments to embedments shall be in accordance with good practice to avoid excessive ex- pansion of the embedment which could result in det- rimental spalling or cracking of the concrete or ex- cessive stress in the embedment anchors. Commentary on Guide to the Design of Anchor Bolts and Other Steel Embedments 1.0-Notation In addition to the notation provided in Section 1.0, ‘the notation used in this guide is the same as in ACT 318.77, 2.0-Seope This guide provides minimum requirements for the design of steel embedments used to transmit loads from attachments into the reinforced concrete strue- tures governed by ACT 318-77. Design limits have been established using both an- lytical and test methods. Analytically, limits on ea acity for both concrete and steel have been estab- lished which are consistent with accepted ACI and AISC practice. Where design limits have been estab- lished through test programs, test results have been published or are available from the original souree.”* Tests have been performed on steel embedments to determine the limiting load capabilities and anchor- age requirements for fabricated anchorages, concrete inserts, anchor bolts, welded studs, and expansion anchors subject to loads applied in direct tension and shear. The effect of edge conditions, strength of con- crete, size, strength, number, and spacing of anchors was investigated. Typical arrangements and geome- try of steel embedments are as reflected in the fig- ures of the guide, commentary, and references. Although typical embedment details and concepts are referenced in Section 2.1, this does not preclude the use of other details of concepts to which the pro- visions of this guide and ACI 318-77 are applicable. Various methods of joining the attachment to the embedment may be used, a few of which are shown in figures which are a part of the guide. Section 22 specifies that the design of attachments is not a part, of the guide; however, proper consideration should be given to their design to ensure compatibility with assumptions made in the design of the embedment. 3.6-Definitions In addition to the definitions provided in Section 3.0, the definition of other terms used in the guide are the same as those in ACI 818-77. ‘CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1961 4.0—General requirements and loading combinations The requirements of this section reference other sections of the guide and ACI 318-77. The engineer, using the applicable requirements of the referenced section, is responsible for the design of an embed- ment which is compatible with the material, design loads, and funetion of the attachment and the sup- porting structure. Sections 4.1 and 42 require that the engineer co- ordinate the design of the attachment with the design of the embedment and surrounding conerete and that the embedment be designed for the load combinations of Section 9.2 of ACI 318-77 as a minimum. It is sug- gested that special consideration be given to embed- ments designed for vibratory loads (e.g, increased load factor). The variation in type of loading coupled with the various loading combinations result in a wide range of design problems for the embedment designer. Also, a wide range of material for embedments is available which restricts Section 43 from being more explicit. From a practical point of view as well as from an economic standpoint, it must be the respon- sibility of the engineer to select appropriate materials for embedments and specify testing, if necessary, for each class of embedments (as implied by Section 4:3) which will ensure that the intended function of the attachment is not impaired. Section 4.5 places limitations on shear lugs which do not satisfy the requirements of Section 6.0, i., that the embedment exhibit ductile behavior if sub- jected to overload. The engineer is cautioned that Shear lugs, even though located in the specified compression zone, may not be fully effective if edge distance between the lug bearing surface and free surface of the concrete is limited. The requirements of Section 5.4 must be satisfied when those of Section 6.1.2(b) are not. Although specitie requirements are not given in the guide, the engineer must ensure that the stiffness characteristies of the shear lugs are compatible with the assumed bearing stress distribution between the Jugs and the concrete.Fig. 1 — Load transfer behavior of deformed rein- forcement. Section 4.6 prohibits the engineer from combining the design shear strength of bearing (e.g., shear lugs) and shear frietion (e.g., shear studs) mechanisms. This exclusion is justified in that it is difficult to pre- diet the distribution of shear resistance as a result of the differential stifiness of the two mechanisms. 5.0-Design res ‘The basie requirements for the development of ‘embedments in reinforced conerete are provided by Sections 5.0 and 6.0. The transfer of tensile stress from steel to conerete using deformed reinforcement ‘or headed anchors is accomplished by mechanical ‘means if the location of the load transfer mechanism (either bar deformations or anchor heads) is in close proximity to one or more conerete surfaces, tensile cracking of the concrete will occur at the load trans- fer mechanism. The extent of cracking is dependent ‘on the tensile strength of concrete and location of the load transfer mechanism with respect to embedment depth and side cover distance. Development length requirements for deformed re- inforcement are dependent on the relationship of the height and spacing of deformations with respect to bar size and the influence of adjacent stressed rein- forcement. The basie development length require- ments of Section 12.2 of ACI 818-77 are based on clear side cover distances equal to or less than 3 in, (76.2 mm) and maximum bar spacing of 6 in. (152.4 mm). Reinforcement in concrete members is generally located near the surface and, therefore, the development length requirements of Section 12.2 of ACT 318-77 are reasonably conservative to ensure a ductile failure without tensile splitting of the con- crete. If a reinforcing bar is used as a tensile stress com- ponent embedded into the interior of a conerete mass, the development length requirements of Section 12.2 jirements for conerete are excessive. For uniformly sized and spaced bar deformations, the tensile stress in the steel varies from a maximum at the surface of the concrete to zero at the end of the bar as illustrated in Fig. 1. For embedment lengths equal to the /, of Section 12.2, the failure mode would be rupture of the steel at its ul- timate tensile strength. Typically, complete failure is preceded by developing a shallow surface cone (see 1) when the bar reaches yield. This preliminary distress occurs typically because the bar deforma- tions along the embedded portion of the reinforce- ment are trying to participate equally in the load transfer from the bar to the concrete. Using the 1, values of Section 12.2 is conservative. However, these requirements are specified in Section 6.1.1(b) of the guide due to the lack of available data neces- sary to reduce the embedment requirements, A single mechanical anchor (e.g., head of an anchor bolt or stud) at the end of a smooth bar or rod be- haves differently than deformed reinforcement. As tensile load is inereased, bond failure will occur such that the entire tensile load is transferred into the concrete by the anchor head. If the depth of embed- ‘ment is less than that required to develop the ulti- mate tensile strength of the bar or rod conerete ten- sile failure will occur with initial eracking beginning around the perimeter of the anchor head. A “pullout ‘cone failure” results as the cracking propagates to the surface. 5.1—The combined requirements of Sections 5.0 and 6.0 are intended to result in an embedment de- sign which will exhibit ductile behavior in the ease of unanticipated overload. This philosophy tent with the code in that sudden brittle failure is an undesirable failure mode. Section 5.1 requires the designer to be cognizant of satisfying applicable general requirements of the code. 52—Tension—This section defines the method of calculating design pullout strength of concrete, i.e., direct tensile capacity, for an embedment. ‘The tensile strength of conerete is generally ac- cepted as ranging from 6 to 7 times the square root, of the compressive strength of concrete (in psi). The distribution of principal tensile stress in the concrete along the potential pullout failure plane defined by Section 52 is assumed to vary (based on References 1,2, and 8) from a maximum at the mechanical anchor ‘on the end of the steel embedment to zero at the sur face of the concrete. This constitutes an average re- sistance provided by the concrete of approximately 4VT acting on the projected tensile stress area. Failure is initiated at the outside periphery of the mechanical anchor (anchor head) and, therefore, the ‘area of the anchor head does not contribute to the pullout strength of the conerete and should be sub- tracted from the projected tensile stress area in com- puting pullout strength. Thus, it is desirable to keep CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981the effective size of anchor head as small as possible to reduce embedment requirements. Tests have shown that the head of a standard anchor bolt or stud, without a plate or washer, is sufficient bearing area to fully develop the tensile strength of bolts without damage to the concrete when the head of the bolt has sufficient side cover for development of the necessary confining pressure. This is the basis of the requirement specified in Section 5.5.2 which defines anchor head dimensions that are similar to the head of standard anchor bolts. When the individual tensile stress components (e.g., bolts or studs or an embedment configuration are located sufficiently close together (i.e., center-to- center spacing) for overlapping of the potential pull- out failure planes of the individual anchors, then the loss of the effective tensile stress area can be com- pensated for by increased depth of embedment. The projected tensile stress area of the group must be ‘capable of developing the combined strengths of the tensile stress components as required by Section 6.1.1. Otherwise, the reinforcement provisions of Sec- tion 5.4 must apply. For fully developed embedments, the conerete di- mension parallel to the development length must be of sufficient thickness to meet the nominal shear stress requirements of Section 11.11 for two-way ac- tion, When the anchorage is made up of a number of bolts or individual anchors, spaced over a relatively wide surface area of the structure, the effective stress area must be reduced to comply with Section 11.11 of ACI 318-77 as illustrated in Fig. 52 of the ‘guide ‘The nominal inclination of the failure plane for pull- out of the concrete is 45 deg: due to principal stress orientation; if the concrete is stress-free transverse to the pullout force. As the crack propagates toward the surface the uncracked portion flexes as a shallow dise putting the outer surface in compression around the perimeter and causing a change in the failure plane inclination. For shallow embedments, generally less than 5 in, (127 mm), the flexural strength due to the dise action is greater than the cone pullout strength such that an increase in load is required to propagate the crack. For this reason, the normal 90 deg failure cone (total angle) will approach 120 deg with decreasing anchor depth in correlating failure Joads' to calculated values using 4Vf as a uniform stress. The actual concrete spall for shallow depth anchors will produce an even wider area of failure. However, caution should be observed in the utiliza tion of inclination angles greater than 45 deg because of the possibilty of surface cracking which might re- striet flexural action. For this reason the use of in- clination angles greater than 45 deg for shallow depth anchors is not recommended, The inclination of the failure angle will also vary as a function of state of stress in the plane of the concrete structure (e.g.; wall or slab) into which the CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1961 embedment is being anchored. For example, several cases are as follow: 1. Biaxial compression in the plane of the structure will result in the total angle approaching zero as the magnitude of in-plane biaxial compression stresses becomes very large. The mode of failure of the con- crete approached direct shear. 2. Biaxial tension in the plane of the structure would tend to result in a total angle limit of 180 deg with increasing magnitude of in-plane tension. How- ever, as a real limit, the reinforced concrete would crack with the crack’ width being controlled by main reinforcement designed in accordance with approp: ate provisions of ACI 318-77. In such cases of crack- ing due to biaxial tension (or flexural eracking of the face containing the embedment), the authors fel that the total angle can still be taken as 90 deg in con- junetion with 44 V7 to ealeulate pullout strength. ‘The two ¢ factors specified in this section, ie., 0.65 and 0.85, represent a simplification of a very complex problem. When the anchor head is between the far face reinforcement and the near face concrete, the pullout strength of the concrete is dependent. pri- marily on the tensile strength of the conerete and the 4 factor, 0.65, has been specified to correspond with Section 9.3.2(f) of ACI 318-77 for bending stress in plain concrete which also relies on conerete tensile strength. When the anchor heads are beyond the far face reinforcement, the entire depth of structure is involved in the failure in a manner consistent wit the shear provisions of Section 11.11. In this case, using a factor of 0.85, the provisions of Section 5.2 are equivalent to those of Section 11.11. Ideally, the ¢ factor could be varied over a consid- rable range dependent upon such factors as depth ‘of embedment, amount of main reinforcement in the near face, and state of stress in the plane of the struc- ture. However, there is not sufficient data; nor is it practical for design purposes to be more precise than 0.85 or 0.65 in the current version of the guide. 53—Shear—The strength of anchors subject to shear are not significantly affected by concrete strength unless the anchors are located near an edge or in the case of anchors (e.g., “shell-type” expansion anchors) which exhibit nonlinear load deflection be- havior. For bolts (also studs or bars) shear is trans- mitted from the bolt to the concrete through bearing of the bolt at the surface, forming a concrete wedge approximately % of the bolt diameter in depth. ‘Translation of the wedge under the shearing force cannot occur without vertical movement or an up- ward thrust of the wedge on the restraining plate as lustrated in Fig. 2, This thrust induces tensile elon- gation in the anchor and thus the clamping foree on the wedge increases in direct proportion with the shear as long as the anchor steel remains elast When the bolt is near an edge, the total shearing force must be developed by tensile stress on a po- tential failure plane radiating at 45 deg toward the 6Fig. 2 — Conerete wedge due to shear. \. 7 A sore. Fig. 3 — Potential shear failure near a free edge. free edge from the anchor steel at the surface of the concrete as illustrated in Fig. 3. If several bolts are parallel to a free edge, the effect of overlapping fail- ure planes (ie., center-to-center spacing less than 6.6 {ft (2 m) on the conerete design strength must be con- sidered. ‘When the steel is not fully anchored (.e., minimum side cover distance is not provided) or the anchorage behavior is nonlinear in the normally elastic stress range, there is a radical reduction in the clamping force of the plate restraining the movement of the wedge. The depth of the wedge is then controlled by bending and is reduced in direct proportion to an in- creased depth of the wedge. ‘The location of the shear plane with respect to the concrete surface affects the development of shear friction resistance and is discussed under Section 72.2.2. 54—Reinforcement—Concrete tensile failure may occur either directly or indirectly as a result of sufficient embedment depth or side cover distance. When embedment depths or side cover distances are not sufficient to fully develop the strength of anchor steel, reinforcement must be located to intercept po- tential cracking planes.” The reinforcement must be sized and oriented to restriet. propagation of cracking should it occur. To accomplish this, reinforcement must be fully developed on both sides of a postulated crack. It is recommended that the reinforcement pat- terns be concentric with the tensile stress field. For direct tensile load transfer, Fig. 4 illustrates how the tensile capacity of studs might be assured by reinforcing the potential conerete failure cone. For hairpin reinforcement to effectively intercept the po- tential failure planes, each leg should be located with L,/3 from the edge of an anchor head. The portion of the hairpin anchored in the potential failure cone should extend a minimum of eight (8) bar diameters of the reinforcement configurations into the potential failure cone, the anchorage requirements of Chapter 12 should be satisfied. In any case the limiting di- mensions of eight (8) bar diameters and L,/3 should be complied with. If anchorage of the reinforcement cannot be accom- plished in the available dimensions, the anchorage configuration should be changed. Limited testing’ has shown that when the edge dis- tance is less than ‘%/ of the minimum provision of Sec tion 6.1.2la), premature conerete failure occurred for the reinforcement pattern provided. For edge dis- tanee from % to % of the minimum, reinforcement did restrain 45 deg tensile cracking; however, con- crete shear failure occurred on a plane parallel to the shear plane at the uppermost surface of the r ing steel. While the anchorage remained ductile the shear strength was reduced by the increased bending of the bolt about the conerete failure plane; therefore, reinforcement and confinement similar to that illus- trated in Fig. 5 should be considered to preclude pre- mature failure. When the edge distance was less than ¥% of the Section 6.1.2(a) requirement, there was in- sufficient anchorage of the reinforcement on the wedge side of the crack and failure was controlled entirely by the tensile strength of the concrete Therefore, in no case should anchors with less than % the side cover required by Section 6.1.21a) be con- sidered active for shear capacity. The engineer should be extremely cautious with edge distances less than those required by Section 6.1.2a). If reinforce- ‘ment cannot be provided to develop the required ca- CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981¥ Y i 5, wexaay isan FRO + Fig. 4 — Example of reinforcement for direct tension. pacity, the shear capacity of all such anchors should be completely discounted or the embedment config uration changed. When the side cover distances for direct tension are less than the Section 6.1-1(a) requirement, forcement must be provided to arrest tensile failure of the concrete due to lateral bursting forces at an chor heads near the free surface. Tests have not been performed to date on the effectiveness of reinforce- ment to prevent tensile failure due to lateral bursting, forces at an anchor head when the side cover dis tances are less than required by Section 62: Therefore, the engineer should rely on accepted prac- tices for prestressing anchorages and spiral reinforee- ‘ment as illustrated in Fig. 6 is recommended. For conventional anchor heads the lateral force may be conservatively taken as % of the tensile capacity of the anchor steel (based on the Poisson, effect in the lateral direction). For expansion anchors this force should not be taken as less than the pullout capacity of the anchor because of the significant lateral force required to restrain an expansion anchor. Any embedment configuration requiring reinforee- ment must also permit development of the reinforee- ment. If sufficient space is not available for appro: priate development, the engineer should consider alternative configurations. 55—Besring— The bearing requirements of Sec- tion 5.6.1 reference the bearing requirements of Sec tion 10.16 of ACI 818.77 deal with bearing stresses on concrete supports which are not laterally rein: forced to resist splitting stresses. When reinforco- ment is provided to prevent splitting and develop the (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1961 Fig. 5 ~ Example of reinforcement for shear near an edge. Fig. 6 — Example of reinforcement to prevent lateral bursting. bursting force of the anchorage, anchorages shall comply with the requirements of Section 18.13 of ACI 818-77. The force required to pull out a cone of con- crete for an individual headed anchor (anchored in accordance with Section 6.1.1) is less than the force required to split the concrete and, therefore, splitting parallel to the tensile force does not oceur irresp tive of the bearing stress at the anchor head. Split- ting transverse to the tensile force can occur between aFig. 7 — Splitting transverse to tension load. anchor heads in multiple stress component anchor- ages, particularly when the center-to-center spacing between the anchor heads is less than the anchor embedment depth (see Fig. 7). However, the splitting plane is at 90 deg to the plane of concern for bearing restrictions and may be controlled with proper depth of embedment. If the concrete has been previously cracked in the normal splitting plane, then the force required to propagate the crack is approximately of the force required to initiate splitting. Under these conditions splitting may control the failure mode. However, the failure load is approximately the same as the force required for pullout cone failure in un- cracked concrete. In compression anchorages, bearing stress is trans- mitted to the conerete at the concrete surface; there- fore, splitting is likely to occur only in compression anchorages of limiting supporting surface area. For such anchorages, the normal bearing restrictions should apply. Section 5.5.2 describes anchor heads that do not shave to satisfy the requirements of Section 5.5.1 (see Commentary for Section 5.2). 6.0-Anchorage requirements ‘The basic philosophy of anchorage requirements is consistent with the ultimate strength design philos- ophy of reinforced conerete. The failure mechanism is controlled by requiring yielding of the steel an- chorage prior to brittle failure. While ductility is not possible in all types of anchorages, it is required in TABLE 6.1.1 — Sample side cone blowout test data those types which can be made duetile (custom de- sign). Most commercially available expansion anchors are not ductile and are penalized by requiring a higher safety factor against failure (see Section 82 of the guide) ig. 8 is a typical load deflection curve for ductile anchorages. Fig. 9 is typical of nonductile anchorages. 6.1.1—Tension. The requirement of this section that the calculated pullout strength of concrete ex- ceeds the minimum specified tensile strength of the steel is to assure ductile behavior of the embedment in the event of overload. Typical embedment steels exhibit significant variation in actual yield strength above specified minimums and have a wide ratio of yield to tensile strength. Therefore, f. rather than ‘a factor times f,, is used to ensure ductile behavior. ‘A minimum side cover distance is required at the anchor head to confine the lateral thrust generated by the full load transfer from steel to concrete, Be- ‘cause of the significant difference in restraint stiff- ness around the periphery of the anchor head, lateral strains are not uniform and tend to concentrate in the region of minimum cover. The lateral bursting force is, therefore, of a magnitude relative to the longitu- inal load similar to that of the lateral strain’to the longitudinal strain. Sample side cone blowouts are represented by the test data given in Table 6.1.1. Equating the lateral bursting force to the concrete ‘capacity for a single anchor bolt, stud, or bar results BP = 4bVE Xone (lateral (conerete (projected force} tensile area) strength) Applying a > factor of 0.85 to conerete strength, a conservative f or 0.25 and a tensile stress area of 0.75, of the gross area of bolt, stud, or bar 0. [ m= D\/, If several bolts are parallel to a free edge, the effect. of overlapping failure planes on the lateral concrete design strength must be considered. Similar relationships can be developed for other embedment shapes that are embedded close to a xt] ev to Bolt STAN ‘Side cover Concrete Tater force se material distance strength allure load “ffcent Duin. speaeation| i. pst Pb % ‘AseT 2 5500 + 22100 out 1 Ao we 205 4000 016 CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981| x a, Ea “of nak: pad oaks Ceara abd Fig. 8 — Ductile load deflection behavior. Fig. 9 — Nonductile load deflection behavior. “tree” edge of the concrete. For expansion anchors it is recommended that the lateral bursting force, BP, be assumed equal to the average tension test failure oad of the anchor being used. When the anchor steel is composed of reinforce- ment without mechanieal end anchorage the devel- ‘opment requirements of Chapter 12 are more than adequate for development of the tensile strength of the reinforcement. 6.1.2—Shear. A minimum edge distance is required {for full development of the shear strength of anchor steel. The projected tensile stress area of a single bolt, stud, or bar for shear toward an edge is exactly half of the normal stress area for tensile loading of an anchor without an edge effect. For a design shear capacity of V and an edge distance of m V=4vE For a friction coefficient of 0.7 for steel against con- crete, the ultimate shear strength of a bolt equals: xD! va oT ba ‘The minimum edge distance for a single bolt, stud, or bar is obtained by equating the two expressions for V: m Me Similar relationships can be developed for other embedment shapes that are embedded close to a “free” edge of the conerete. It should be noted that plates embedded near an edge will behave essentially as shear lugs and should be treated as such ‘The utilization of reinforcement to reduce edge re- quirements for shear was discussed in Section 5.4. 6.1.3—Combined loading. The resultant load capac- ity of anchors subject to combined tension and shear (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1961 Fig. 10 — Effect of shear plane location on load de- flection behavior. is always less than the tensile capacity al development requirements for tensile loi therefore also good for combined loads. 6.1.4, Side cover distances less than m/3 may re- sult in side blowout cone failures and loss of anchor- ‘age (see Section 6.4 of the Commentary). 7.0—Design requirements for embedment steel 7.1—Embedments can be designed using a variety of materials and attachments under varying loading conditions and construction situations. The engineer ‘must therefore consider all this in his selection and specification of materials, structural shapes, or types of anchors best suited to fit each situation. 72.1—The 4 factor of 0.9 for tension compression, and bending for the embedment steel is consistent with Section 9.3.2/a) of ACI 318-77. 72.2.1—The factor of 0.5 for shear stress in structural shapes, shear lugs, and fabricated sections is consistent with the AISC shear yield stress for plastie design which corresponds to the required strength methods of ACI 318-77.72.2.2 — The mechanism of shear transfer for bolts and bars is commonly termed shear-frietion. ‘The location of the plane of stress transfer from bolt to conerete directly affects the shear strength of the anchorage. The effect of shear plane location on an- chorage behavior is illustrated by the load deflection curves of Fig. 10. If the plate contacting the concrete is embedded in the conerete with its outer surface flush with the exterior surface of concrete then, for given horizontal movement, the component of clamping force perpendicular to the plate is greater than when the contact plane is flush with the exterior conerete surface. This increased clamping force rectly increases the frictional shear strength of the anchorage as reflected in the 0.9 coefficient as com- pared with the commonly accepted coefficient of 0.7 for a flush mounted plate. When the contact plate is mounted on a group pad exterior to the concrete surface the forward bolts in the direction of shear have only the width of grout from the bolt to the edge of the plate for an assured ‘edge distance to develop the shear strength of the bolts. (Even if the grout pad is extended away from the plate the extended portion cannot be relied upon to remain bonded and uncracked from drying shrink- age.) This nominal edge distance is not sufficient to develop the shear strength in the forward bolts; therefore, a much larger portion of the shear must be carried by the back bolts. Plate rotation follows grout failure, reducing the clamping force and sub- sequent shear strength of the back bolts and thus the coefficient of friction is reduced for these anchorages. 78 — Combined tension and shear 78.1 — Normally accepted practice for structural shapes. 7.3.2 — The effect of direct tension on an anch age is a direct reduction of the clamping force which provides shear transfer resistance. While this effect can be offset somewhat in the elastic stress range by preloading bolts there is no difference in effect once the tensile load component exceeds the preload. The reduced shear strength corresponding to the loss clamping force affects the combined load capacity such that no more than a straight addition of com- ponent strengths is allowed. 74 — This section is consistent with the AISC “Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Br tion of Structural Steel for Buildings.’ 7.5 — The shear failure plane can be excluded from the threads by care in detailing the connection. Un- der these conditions the gross area may be utilized for shear. 8.0 — Expansion anchors Section 8.0 was developed to provide guidance ii the design and use of concrete expansion anchors. 81 — Design requirements — The preferred de- sign for concrete expansion anchors is for the con- crete to have a capacity greater than the anchor steel and, therefore, provide indication of an impending failure if an overload condition should occur. In liew of design strength calculations as defined in Section 8.1.1, design strengths can be established by tests as, defined in Section. 8.1.2. Due to variations in installation conditions, expan- sion mechanisms, and repeatability of test results, the permissible design capacity for the expansion an: chor steel is reduced to 90 percent of the values spec- ified in Seetion 72. ments of Section 81 are penalized by this section. The permissible design strength is limited to approx- imately % of the average test failure losd. An overall factor of safety of 4.0 is achieved by combining the 0.35 factor with a load factor of 1.4 (ie., only dead load). This limitation is applied to both tension and shear test loads since shear capacity generated by shear friction resistance is a function of tensile an- chorage capacity. 83 — The use of one expansion anchor results in 4 connection with no capability to redistribute loa therefore, additional conservatism is required. 84 — Testing — Testing of expansion anchors to verify anchor strength as used in Sections 8&1 or 82 is required by Section 84.1. Anchor strength shall be established by tests and shall include testing of the anchor expansion mechanism and its ability to trans- mit the load to adjacent concrete. Concrete capacity shall be determined in accordance with Sections 8.1.1 or 8.1.2. Tests performed to meet the requirements of Section 8.1.2 may be incorporated in the tests spee- ified in Section 84.1. It is not practical to specify the guide a detailed testing program for expansion anchors due to the variety of applications and de- signs. The testing requirements defined in ANSI/ ASTM E 488-76 are acceptable as a guide for estab lishing a testing program. However, the engineer is responsible for assuring that the testing program used qualified the particular anchor for the intended application. Testing of expansion anchors in the installed con- ditions specified in Section 84.2 is to verify actuation ‘of the expansion mechanism. Test method (a) is tended primarily for wedge type expansion anchors that are typically installed and tested via torquing, and method (b) is intended primarily for shell type anchors which should be tested by direct load appli- cation. 85 — Expansion anchor selection — The engineer is cautioned to select an expansion anchor that is signed, manufactured, and tested to be compatible with the load application, environment, and installa- tion conditions. Cracking of conerete in tension zones subsequent to anchor installation can result in a re- duction of anchor capacity and complete loss of pre- load if the cracking is coincident with the anchor lo- cation. In this kind of application the engineer should have results from tests conducted in cracked concrete (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981specimens. As an alternative, an appreciably higher factor of safety than would otherwise be required should be used to define design strength. When such anchors are subject to vibratory loads (ie., nonseismic continuous or intermittent cyclic Toads), a complete loss of function can occur. Anchor type and application must be qualified by testing or such use is prohibited. 9.0 Inserts are not subject to the same variables as expansion anchors and, therefore, the safety factors are adjusted accordingly. Testing to verify capacity is a requirement. seris 10.0 ~ Grouted embedments 10.1 ~ Since grouted embedments are required to transfer loads the same as cast-in-place embedments, the appropriate design and anchorage requirements defined in Sections 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 are applicable. 10.2 ~ Grouts are used frequently for their special characteristics. Special grouts shall be tested to ver- ify their required properties. Epoxy grouts are not covered by this guide. 10.3 — Grouted embedments designed to transfer load between steel and grout or grout and concrete hy tonsion, shear or bond shall be tested to verify load transfer capabilities. The testing program shall be established by the engineer. ‘Special considerations are required for grouted ‘embedments that are designed to transfer tension loads where eracking may be parallel to and coinci- dent with the axis of the embedment. The testing program must address this situation if applicable. Testing has demonstrated that the bond between rout and concrete can be lost due to cracking. In liew of relying on bond, a belled hole in the region of the anchor head is suggested. 10.5 — Grouted embedments designed to transfer load by bearing or compression should only require testing to verify compressive strength of grout and dio not require in place verification testing. 1.0 ¥s 9d instal ‘The engineer must consider and make provisions for fabrication and installation conditions that could influence the load capacity. Thermal expansion due to welding after the embedment has been set in con- crete is considered to be a frequent problem. rleati References 1, “Anchorage to Concrete,” Research and Development Report No. CEB 75-82, Civil Engineering Branch, Tennes- see Valley Authority, Knoxville, Dee. 1976, 25 pp. 2, MeMackin, P. J; Slutter, R. G.: and Fisher, J. W., “Headed Stoel Anchors Under Combined Loading.” AISC Engineering Journal, 2nd Quarter, 1978, pp. 43-52. 3. Bailey, John W., and Burdette, Edwin G., "Edge Bt fects on Anchorage to Conerete,” Civil Engineering Re- search Series No. 31, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Aug. 1977, 21 pp. (CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL/JULY 1981 4. ACI Committee 318, “Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Conerie (ACI 918-70," sn Conerete Institute, Detroit, 1977, 132 pp. 5, "Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Conerete and Masonry Elements,” (ANSI-ASTM E 486-6), 1976 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 18, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 843- 851. 6. ACI Committee 349, “Proposed Addition to: Code Re- ‘quirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures (AGI 849-76),” ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 75, No. 8, Aug. 1978, pp. 329347. 1. PCI Design Handbook, Prestressed Conerete Institute, Chieago, 1971, 980 pp. Received June 1980 and reviewed under Inatittepobeton polis, Robert W. Cannon, FACI, is a Con- sulting Engineer in Maryville, Tennes- see. He recently retired from TVA after 25 years of Design and Research in Reinforced Concrete and Structural Applications. A major portion of re- ‘search during the last eight years has been in steel embedments. He is a member and past chairman of ACI Committee 207, Mass Conerete, and a member of ACI Committee 349, Nu- lear Structures. ACI member Dwaine A. Godtrey is president and founder of Nuclear Structures, Ine, Adanta, Georgia. He °% af is involved in the analysis and design ‘of steel and conerete structures for huclear generating plants. He is a member of ACI Committee 349, Com rete ‘Nuclear Structures (currently the chairman of the Working Group on Steel Embedments). ACI member F. I. Moresdith is ‘manager, Structural Department and Chief Structural Engineer; Power Di- vision-Reading: Gilbert/Common- wealth; Reading. Pa. He received his Ph.D. from North Carolina State Uni versity In 1964 and was engaged in teaching and consulting in reinforced and prestressed concrete at Old Do- ‘inion University before joining Gil- bert/Commonwealth in 1972, He is 2 member of ACI Committee 359, Con- erete Components for Nuclear Reac- tors (Sub-group on Containment De- sign] and ACI Committee 349, Concrete Nuclear Structures (eur- rently ehairman of the Working Group on Design with previous activity on the Working Groups for Stee! Embed- ‘ments and Impactive and Impulsive Loads). a