Hilti HIT-Rebar Injection

Rebar Fastening Technology Manual
Bonded-in Reinforcement B 2.11

Europe
Hilti HIT-Rebar Injection System

for Bonded-in Reinforcement
Supplement A
Based on the safety concept of
Eurocode 2 (ENV 1992-1-1 : 1992)

Part 1. General rules and rules for buildings
and Hilti Fastening Technology
Content:
A01 Drafting details
A02 Injection filling
A03 Basics on the design of anchorage and lapped bars
A04 Summery of the relevant design provisions of Eurocode 2 (ENV 1992-1-1 : 1992)
A05 Basics on bond behaviour of ribbed bars in concrete
A06 Interaction of splitting and bond
A07 Hilti HIT-Rebar deign and ACI 318-99 approach
A08 Serviceability limit state
A09 Corrosion behaviour of Hilti HIT-Rebar connections
A10 Fire resistance design
A11 Fatigue of Hilti HIT-Rebar connections
A12 Guide specifications for bonded-in connections
A13 List of approvals
Issue 09/2003
Fastening Technology Manual
Europe
A01: Drafting details
1. Symbols
The definition and terminology used in this section are in accordance with European Standard EC (ENV 1992-1-
1 : 1992) where ever applicable.
The relevant clauses from EC 2 are in {brackets} for easier reference.
Supplementary symbols for bonded-in bars are in bold letters.
Anchorage:
cs,2 ≥ 2.5∅ 1)
If c s,3 < 0.5 s or c s,4 < 0.5 s:
l b,ef ≥ 10∅ adequate links (stirrups) to prevent
cs,3 ≥ 2.5∅
1)
s ∅ splitting at edge should be provided.
≥ 0.5s s ≥ 5∅
s
c1 s
l inst Note that minimum anchorage is
cs,1 ≥ 2.5∅ D0 10∅ according to the standard.
cs,41) ≥ 2.5∅
≥ 0.5s
Lapped splice:
edge of member
ls cf
l inst
edge of member
s ≥ 5∅ ∅
≥ 30mm D 0
ls cf
l inst
linst
The following symbols apply:

∅ [mm] effective bar size (nominal diameter of bar)
D0 [mm] hole diameter
lb [mm] nominal anchorage length
ls [mm] lapped splice length
l inst [mm] installed anchorage length of bar
lm [mm] marking distance for injection (length in hole that is not filled with adhesive)
lmin [mm] minimum anchorage length
s [mm] spacing of bar centre lines
c [mm] clear concrete cover of bar
cmin [mm] minimum clear concrete cover of bar
cs [mm] distance of centre line of bar to concrete edge (specify on drawings!)
cf [mm] clear concrete cover of face of bar to construction joint surface
Note: With cast-in bars, for practical reasons (spacers) normally clear cover is specified.
For bonded-in bars the distance of the centre line of bar to the concrete edge should be specified.
in the drawings since this measurement is relevant for the drilling.
Symbol cs,i is used: cs,1 / c s,2: near / far edge parallel to row of bars;
c s,3 / c s,4: edge at perpendicular to row of bars.
Other symbols are defined in the text where they occur.
Issue 09/2003
1/1
Europe
A02 Approximate filling volume of adhesive and marking distance
1. Approximate filling volume
The necessary injection volume Vm to fill the gap between bar and hole perimeter is shown in table 1.
Sufficient allowance should be provided for deeper drilling, cavities in the base material, overflow and others.
Rule of the thumb: fill 2/3 of the hole.
Calculated volume Vm [ml], with allowance in the formula of 20% compared to the nominal volume using linst in
[cm] and D0, and ∅ in [mm]: Vm = 0,0094 x lb, inst x (D02 - ∅ 2)
Adjust according to site conditions, e.g. pneumatic drilling needs more material.
Recommendation: add 15% for cost estimation.
Table 1: Approximate filling volume of adhesive
∅ 10 12 16 20 25 28 32 36 40
Drill bit size 12 14 16 18 20 22 25 28 30 32 35 37 39 42 42 46 48 52
l inst lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm lm
[cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm] [cm]
10 5 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12 5 11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
14 6 13 15 24 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
16 7 15 17 28 22 35 - - - -- - - - - - - - -
20 9 19 22 34 28 43 43 73 - - - - - - - - - -
22 10 20 24 38 30 48 47 80 57 83 - - - - - - - -
25 11 23 27 43 34 54 53 91 65 94 104 138 - - - - - -
28 12 26 30 48 38 61 60 102 73 106 117 154 131 195 - - - -
30 13 28 32 51 41 65 64 109 78 113 125 165 141 209 - - - -
32 14 29 34 55 44 69 68 116 83 121 133 176 150 223 141 247 - -
34 15 31 36 58 47 73 72 123 88 128 141 187 159 237 150 263 - -
36 15 33 38 61 49 78 77 130 94 136 150 198 169 251 159 278 - -
38 16 35 41 65 52 82 81 138 99 143 158 209 178 265 168 293 - -
40 17 37 43 68 55 86 85 145 104 151 166 220 187 279 176 309 265 416
45 19 41 48 77 61 97 96 163 117 169 187 248 211 314 198 347 298 467
50 21 46 53 85 68 108 106 181 130 188 208 275 234 348 220 386 331 519
55 23 50 58 94 75 118 117 199 143 207 228 303 257 383 242 424 364 571
60 25 55 64 102 82 129 127 217 156 226 249 330 281 418 264 463 398 623
65 27 59 69 110 88 140 138 235 169 244 270 358 304 453 286 502 431 675
70 29 64 74 119 95 151 149 253 181 263 291 385 328 487 308 540 464 727
75 32 68 79 127 102 161 159 271 194 282 311 413 351 522 330 579 497 779
80 34 73 85 136 109 172 170 289 207 301 332 440 374 557 352 617 530 831
85 36 77 90 144 116 183 180 307 220 319 353 468 398 592 374 656 563 883
90 38 82 95 153 122 193 191 325 233 338 374 495 421 627 396 694 596 934
100 42 91 106 170 136 215 212 361 259 376 415 550 468 696 440 771 662 1'038
110 - - 116 187 149 236 233 398 285 413 456 605 514 766 484 848 728 1'142
120 - - 127 204 163 258 254 434 311 451 498 660 561 835 528 925 795 1'246
130 - - 137 220 176 279 275 470 337 488 539 715 608 905 572 1'003 861 1'350
140 - - - - 190 301 297 506 362 526 581 770 655 974 616 1'080 927 1'453
150 - - - - 204 322 318 542 388 563 622 825 701 1'044 660 1'157 993 1'557
160 - - - - - - 339 578 414 601 664 880 748 1'113 704 1'234 1'059 1'661
180 - - - - - - 381 650 466 676 747 990 841 1'253 792 1'388 1'192 1'868
200 - - - - - - 423 722 517 751 830 1'100 935 1'392 880 1'542 1'324 2'076
Issue 09/2003
1/2
Europe
2. Marking distance l m
The mark with distance lm from tip of injection extension is used to
achieve exact filling volume during the injection of the adhesive (see
setting instruction for deep holes). linst
lm = linst x (∅ 2 / D02 – 0.2) where 20% allowance is included
Note: - lm represents the length of the hole that is not filled during injection.
- suitable build-up plugs are available.
Table 2: Marking distance l m
∅ 10 12 16 20 25 28 32 36 40
Drill bit size 12 14 16 18 20 22 25 28 30 12 14 16 18 20 22 25 28 30
l inst Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm Vm
[cm] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml] [ml]
10 4 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12 5 3 4 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
14 6 4 5 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
16 7 4 5 3 7 5 - - - -- - - - - - - - -
20 9 6 7 4 8 6 8 6 - - - - - - - - - -
22 10 6 7 5 9 7 9 6 - - - - - - - - - -
25 12 7 9 6 11 8 11 7 12 10 - - - - - - - -
28 13 8 10 6 12 9 12 8 13 11 12 10 - - - - - -
30 14 9 10 7 13 9 13 9 14 12 13 11 - - - - - -
32 15 9 11 7 14 10 14 9 15 13 14 11 15 12 - - - -
34 16 10 12 8 14 11 14 10 16 13 14 12 16 12 - - - -
36 17 11 13 8 15 11 15 11 17 14 15 13 17 13 19 14 - -
38 18 11 13 9 16 12 16 11 18 15 16 14 17 14 20 15 - -
40 19 12 14 9 17 13 17 12 19 16 17 14 18 15 21 16 19 15
45 22 13 16 11 19 14 19 13 22 18 19 16 21 17 24 18 22 17
50 24 15 18 12 22 16 22 15 24 20 22 18 23 19 26 20 24 19
55 27 17 19 13 24 18 24 17 27 22 24 20 26 20 29 22 27 21
60 29 18 21 14 26 19 26 18 29 24 26 22 28 22 32 24 29 23
65 32 20 23 15 28 21 28 20 32 26 28 24 30 24 34 26 32 25
70 34 21 25 17 30 23 30 21 34 28 30 26 33 26 37 28 34 27
75 37 23 27 18 33 24 33 23 37 30 33 27 35 28 40 30 37 29
80 39 24 29 19 35 26 35 24 39 32 35 29 37 30 42 32 39 31
85 42 26 30 20 37 27 37 26 42 34 37 31 40 32 45 35 42 33
90 44 27 32 22 39 29 39 27 44 36 39 33 42 34 48 37 44 35
100 49 31 36 24 44 32 44 31 49 41 44 37 47 38 53 41 49 39
110 - - 39 26 48 36 48 34 54 45 48 40 52 41 58 45 54 43
120 - - 43 29 52 39 52 37 59 49 52 44 56 45 64 49 59 47
130 - - 47 31 57 42 57 40 64 53 57 48 61 49 69 53 64 50
140 - - - - 61 46 61 43 69 57 61 52 66 53 74 57 69 54
150 - - - - 66 49 66 46 74 61 66 55 70 57 80 61 74 58
160 - - - - - - 70 49 79 65 70 59 75 60 85 65 79 62
180 - - - - - - 79 55 89 73 79 67 85 68 96 74 89 70
200 - - - - - - 88 62 98 82 88 74 94 76 106 82 98 78
Issue 09/2003
2/2
Europe
A03 Basics on design for anchorage and lapped bars
1. Design model for reinforced concrete

The design method presented in this section is based on EC 2.
Consequently, the design method only applies to reinforced concrete and is subjected to the modelling and the
basic assumptions of this code.
For post installed anchorage and lap splices of the reinforcement only straight bars can be used.
Where such anchorages and splices are not in accordance with the codes requirements or good detailing
practice, additional considerations are necessary.
1.2 Strut-and-tie model:

Crack limitation Compression cord and strut
A strut-and-tie model is used to
(concrete)
calculate the load path in
reinforced concrete members. The
tensile bearing capacity of Joint to be
concrete is very low compared to roughene
its compressive strength. For this d
reason tensile forces are attributed
to the steel reinforcement of the
concrete member. Tension cord Tension ties
Figure.1a: Strut-and-tie-model
1.3 Joint to be roughened

The model of inclined compressive struts is used to transfer the shear
forces through the construction joint. Therefore a rough interface is required
to provide sufficient cohesion in the construction joint.
Figure 1b: Roughen Joint
1.4 Shear friction model or saw tooth model for shear transfer
The shear friction model is also based on the assumption of a rough interface.
Due to the parallel displacement induced by the shear force, the interfaces are
forced to separate. As a result the bars are subjected to a tensile force and
simultaneously to a bending moment depending on the roughness of the
interface surfaces. Tests show that due to the combined load only 50% of the
yield tensile force of the bar can be activated for friction (see actual Hilti FTM,
Appendix 2)
Additional interlocking effects and cohesion can take up part of the shear force
at the rough interface.
Figure 1c
Issue 9/2003
1/2
Europe
2. Anchorage of reinforcement
At places where the reinforcement it is no longer needed, it has to be anchored. These situations may occur:
• when load path of the tensile force has ended (e.g. support, figure 2a)
• at curtailment of reinforcement (see figure 2b)
• compression bar anchorage (fig. 2c).
Figure 2b Figure 2c
Figure 2a: Tensile force has ended Compression bars
Support, truss model
3. Lapped splice of reinforcement:
Lapped splices are used to achieve continuity in the tensile tie of the truss
model at construction joints. The load from one bar to the other bar is
transferred by means of compressive struts in the concrete. A 45°-truss model
is assumed.
The resulting splitting forces are controlled by sufficient concrete cover,
spacing of bar and by the transverse reinforcement
4. Design model for anchors in concrete:

Figure 3: Lapped splice
In the case of non-reinforced concrete, or if the reinforcement is not known, or
if requirements of the code for the load transfer can not be fulfilled, the anchor
design model is used.
The anchor design model assumes that the tensile force in the bar is
transferred by means of tensile stresses into the concrete, or by means of a
tensile load path in the non-reinforced (part of) concrete (figure 4). It is evident,
that a special approach for this application is necessary. The anchor design
method is shown in the actual Hilti FTM.
Note, that normally for this application, only tensile forces are attributed to the
steel reinforcement and the shear force is transferred through the rough
interface.
Figure 4: Anchor model

5. Doweling
Shear transfer by means of bending of the reinforcement (bending of bar,
doweling, figure 5) at smooth surfaces are only used when large transverse
displacement are acceptable (e.g. for dilatation joints). For this case, anchor
modelling applies (see actual Hilti FTM).
Figure 5: Doweling
Issue 09/2003
2/2
Europe
A04 Summery of the relevant design provisions of to EC 2 (ENV 1992-1-1 : 1992)
Design Requirements {2.3}
Ultimate Limit States

Sd ≤ Rd
{2.6(b)}
Sd is the design value of an internal force or moment and
Rd is the corresponding design resistance
Combination of actions:
Design situation Permanent actions Variable actions Accidental
Gd Qk actions Ak
One with its Other with their
characteristic value combination value
Persistent and Transient γG Gk γQ Qk ψ0 γQ Qk -
Accidental * γGA Gk ψ1 Qk ψ2 Qk γA Ak**
* If not specified differently elsewhere
** if Ad is not specified directly
combination expression: Σ γG,j Gk,j + γQ,1 Qk,1 + Σ γQ,i ψQ,i Qk,I {2.7(a)}
i>1
accidental design situation: Σ γGA,j Gk,j + Ad + ψ1,1 Qk,1 + Σ ψ2,i Qk,I {2.7(b)}
i>1
where
Gk,j [kN] characteristic values of permanent actions (e.g. dead load, i.e. the weight of structure
complete with finishes, fixtures and partitions)
Qk,1 [kN] characteristic value of one of the variable actions
Qk,1 [kN] characteristic value of the other variable actions
Ad [kN] design value (specified value) of thr accidental action
γG,j partial safety factor for permanent action j
γGA.j as γG,j but for accidental design situation
γQ,i partial safety factor for variable action i
ψ0, ψ1, ψ2 coefficients defined in {2.2.2.3}
Partial Safety Factors for Ultimate Limit States {Cl. 2.3.3}
Partial safety factors for actions in building structures {Cl. 2.3.3.1}

For Ultimate Limit State (ULS) design of the whole or any part of a structure, each of the combinations of the
loading given in Table 2.2 in EC 2 should be considered and the design of cross sections based on the most
severe stresses produced. Table 2.2 from EC 2 is reproduced below:
Permanent actions (γG) Variable actions (γ0) Prestressing
(γp) ***
One with its Others with their
characteristic value combination value
Favourable effect 1.0 * 0 ** 0 ** 0.9 or 1.0
Unfavourable effect 1.35 * 1.5 1.5 1.2 or 1.0
* Where according to {2.2.2.3 P(3), favourable and unfavourable parts of a permanent action need to be
considered as individual actions, the favourable part should be associated with γG,inf = 0,9 and the
unfavourable part with γG,sup = 1,1.
** See EC 1; in normal cases for building structures γQ,inf = 0.
*** See relevant clauses EC 2.
Issue 09/2003
1/9
Europe
Partial safety factors for actions in building structures {Cl. 2.3.3.2}
Table 2.3 from EC 2 is reproduced below:
Combination Concrete γc Steel reinforcement γs
Fundamental 1,5 1,15
Accidental (except earthquakes) 1,3 1,0
Characteristic strengths of materials

Normal Weight Concrete: {Cl 3.1.2}
Normal weight concrete is a concrete having an oven dry (105°C) density greater than 2000 kg/m3, but not
exceeding 2800 kg/m3. The concrete is described in ENV 206.
EC 2 is based on the characteristic compressive cylinder strength, fck, defined as that value of strength (28
days) below which 5% of all possible strength test results for the specified concrete may be expected to fall.
Concrete strength classes, characteristic compressive strengths fck (cylinder height 30 cm, diameter 15 cm)
mean tensile strength fctm, and characteristic tensile strength fctk of the concrete (in N/mm2).
The classification eg, C20/25 refers to cylinder (diameter 15 cm, height 30 cm) / cube (150mm side) strength
as defined in Section 7.3.1.1 of ENV 206). {Table 3.1}
Strength class C12/15 C16/20 C20/25 C25/30 C30/37 C35/45 C40/50 C45/55 C50/60
of concrete
fck 12 16 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
fctm 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.1
fctk 0.05 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.7 2.9
fctk 0.95 2.0 2.5 2.9 3.3 3.8 4.2 4.6 4.9 5.3
fctk characteristic cylinder compressive strength of the concrete
fctm ( = 0.30 fck 2/3) mean value of the tensile strength
fctk 0.05 ( = 0.7 fctm) lower characteristic tensile strength (5%-fractile)
fctk 0.95 ( = 1.3 fctm) upper characteristic tensile strength (95%-fractile)
The coefficient of thermal expansion may be taken as 10 x 10-6 /°C {Cl 3.1.2.5.4}
For modulus of elasticity Ecm see {Table 3.2, EC 2} (for normal cases assume 30 kN/mm2)
For creep coefficient φ see {Table 3.3, EC 2}.
For shrinkage strains ε see {Table 3.4, EC 2}. (for normal cases assume: inside –60 %0; outside –30 %0)
Density: ρ = 2400 kg/m3 for plain (unreinforced) concrete {Cl 4.2.1.2}
ρ = 2500 kg/m3 for reinforced or prestressed concrete of normal percentage of reinforcement
Reinforcing steel {Cl 3.2}

The methods of production, the specified characteristics, the methods of testing and the methods of attestation
of conformity are defined in EN 10080.
Classification and geometry {Cl 3.2.2}
fyk N/mm2 Grade, denoting the value of the specified characteristic yield stress
(normally fyk = 500 N/mm2 for bars and fyk = 550 N/mm2 for welded fabric (mesh)).
Class indicating the ductility characteristics
high (H) εuk > 5%; value of (ft/fy)k > 1.08; normal (N) εuk > 2.5%; value of (ft/fy)k > 1.05. εuk
denotes the characteristic value of elongation at maximum load at the tests.
∅ mm Size of bar (nominal)
fRk Surface characteristic, characteristic projected rib factor
high bond bars (ribbed bars): fRk is not less than that specified in EN 10080
plain, smooth bars: other bars with fRk resulting in low bond action
Weldability see {Cl 3.2.5.2}
Modulus of elasticity: a mean value of 200 kN/mm2 may be assumed {Cl 3.2.4.3}
Coefficient of thermal expansion: 10 x 10-6 /°C {Cl 3.2.3}
Density: 7850 kg/m3 {Cl
3.2.3}
Issue 09/2003
2/9
Europe
2. Detailing Provisions
2.1 Bond {5.2.2.1 - 4}
Bond Conditions
For cast in bars bond conditions are considered good or poor depending on the situation of the bar when
concrete is cast. The Definition of bond condition is specified in {figure 5.1, EC 2}
Direction of concreting
a) 45° ≤ a ≤ 90° for all h values c) : h > 250 mm

Direction of concreting
b) h ≤ 250 mm d) : h > 600 mm

a) and b) Good bond condition for all bars c) and d) Bars in hatched zone: good bond conditions
bars not in hatched zone: poor bond conditions
For post installed bars good bond conditions are applied in all cases but for splices the cast in bar may
be ruling for the assessment of the splice length.
2.1.1 Ultimate bond stress {5.2.2.2}

The ultimate bond stress shall be such that no significant relative displacement between the steel and concrete
occurs under service loads, and that there is an adequate safety margin against bond failure.
Design values fbd (N/mm2) for good bond conditions and high bond bars where ∅ ≤ 32 mm {Table 5.3}
These values incorporate a partial material safety factor γc equal to 1.5
For poor bond conditions the values in the table should be multiplied by a coefficient 0.7.
Strength C12/15 C16/20 C20/25 C25/30 C30/37 C35/45 C40/50 C45/55 C50/60
class of
concrete
fck 12 16 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
fbd 1.6 2.0 2.3 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.0 4.3
Basic anchorage length {5.2.2.3}

The basic anchorage length is the straight length required for anchoring the force As * fyd in a bar, assuming
constant bond stress equal to fbd.
lb = (∅ / 4) * (fyd / fbd) {eq. 5.3}
Issue 09/2003
3/9
Europe
Anchorage {5.2.3}
The reinforcing bars shall be anchored in a way that the forces are fully transmitted to the concrete but that
longitudinal cracking or spalling of concrete is avoided. If necessary, transverse reinforcement shall be provided.
Anchorage methods {5.2.3.2}
For post installed bars only straight bars are used. ⇒ αa = 1.0
Transverse reinforcement parallel to the concrete surface {5.2.3.3}
In beams transverse reinforcement should be provided:
• for anchorages in tension, if there is no transverse compression due to the support reaction
(as is the case for indirect supports, for example).
• for all anchorages in compression
a) slab b) beam
The minimum total area of the transverse reinforcement (legs parallel
to the layer of the longitudinal reinforcement) is 25 % of the area of
one anchored bar (figure 5.3).
The transverse reinforcement should be evenly distributed along the

anchorage length. At least one bar should be placed in the region of
the hook, bend or loop of curved bar anchorage.
For bars in compression, the transverse reinforcement should Σ Ast ≥ As / 4
surround the bars, being concentrated at the end of the anchorage, Fig. 5.3 Transverse reinforcement in
and extend beyond it to a distance of at least 4 times the diameter of the region of anchored bars
the anchored bar (fig. 5.5b).
Required anchorage length {5.2.3.3}

The required anchorage length lb,net may be calculated from:
A s,req
l b,net = α a ⋅ l b ⋅ ≥ l b,min ; where
A s,prov
lb is the basic anchorage length
As,req is the area of reinforcement required
As,prov is the area of reinforcement actually provided
lb,min denotes the minimum anchorage length
lb,min = 0.3 lb ≥ 10 ∅ or ≥ 100 mm for anchorages in tension:
lb,min = 0.6 lb ≥ 10 ∅ or ≥ 100 mm for anchorages in compression:
αa = 1 for straight bars
Splices {5.2.4}
The detailing of splices between bars shall be such that:
• the transmission of the forces from one bar to the next is assured;
• spalling of the concrete in the neighbourhood of the joints does not occur;
• the width of cracks at the end of the splice does not significantly exceed the values given
in {section 4.4.2.1, EC 2}
Lapped splices for bars
Arrangement of lapped joints:
As far as possible:
• laps between bars should be staggered and
should not be located in areas of high stress,
{see also Section 2.5.3, EC 2, Analysis}
• laps at any one section should be arranged
symmetrically and parallel to the outer face of
the member
Clauses {5.2.3.2 (1) to (4)} are also applicable to * otherwise the lap length shall be increased by the amount
by which the clear space exceeds 4 ∅.
lap splices.
Transverse reinforcement Fig. 5.4: Adjacent laps
{5.2.4.1.2}
If the diameter ∅ of the lapped bars is less than 16 mm, or if the percentage of lapped bars in any section is
Issue 09/2003
4/9
Europe
less than 20%, then the minimum transverse reinforcement provided for other reasons (e.g. shear
reinforcement, distribution bars) is considered as sufficient.
If ∅ ≥ 16 mm, then the transverse reinforcement should:
• have a total area (sum of all legs parallel to the layer of the spliced reinforcement, see figure 5.5) of not less
than the area As of one spliced bar (ΣAst ≥ As).
• be formed as links if a ≤ 10 ∅ (see figure 5.6) and be straight in other cases.
• The transverse reinforcement should be placed between the longitudinal reinforcement and the concrete
surface.
For the distribution of the transverse reinforcement {5.2.3.3} applies (see anchorage).
Lap Length {5.2.4.1.3}

The necessary lap length is:
ls = lb,net α1 ≥ ls,min {eq. 5.7}
with:
lb,net according to equation (5.4)
l s,min ≥ 0.3 αa α1 l s
≥ 15 φ
Fig. 5.5 Transverse reinforcement
≥ 200 mm
for lapped splices
the coefficient α1 takes the following values:
% of spliced bars < 30 % All > 30%
Bar spacing a > 10 ∅ other < 10 ∅
Edge distance b >5∅ cases <5∅
α1 = 1.0 1.4 2.0
Ls,min = 0.3l b 0.42l b 0.6lb
  
MAX 15Φ MAX 15Φ MAX 15Φ
200 mm 200 mm 200 mm
  
The table is valid for splices in tension and in compression Figure 5.6 Evaluation of α1
Additional rules for high bond bars exceeding 32 mm in diameter {5.2.6}

Construction details
Bars of ∅ > 32 mm shall be used only in elements whose minimum depth is not less than 15∅.
When large bars are used, adequate crack control shall be ensured either by using surface reinforcement or by
calculation.
Bond:
For bar diameter ∅ > 32 mm the values of fbd in table 5.3 should be multiplied by the coefficient
(132 - ∅) / 100 (∅ in mm).
Anchorages and joints:
Large diameter bars shall be anchored as straight bars. They shall not be anchored in tension zones.
Lapped bars shall not be used either for tension or compression bars.
For additional reinforcement see details in {5.2.6.3, EC 2}
Issue 09/2003
5/9
Europe
Structural Members {5.4}
Columns {5.4.1}
The minimum amount of total longitudinal reinforcement As,min should be derived from the following condition:
0 .15 ⋅ NSd
A s,min = ≥ 0 .003 ⋅ A c
f yd
fyd is the design yield strength of the reinforcement
NSd is the design axial compression force
Ac is the cross-section of the concrete
Even at laps, the area of reinforcement should not exceed the upper limit of 0.008 Ac.
The longitudinal bars should be distributed around the periphery of the section. For columns having a polygonal
cross-section, at least one bar shall be placed at each corner. For columns of circular cross-section the
minimum number of bars is 6.
Beams {5.4.2}
Minimum and maximum reinforcement
The effective cross-sectional area of the longitudinal
tensile reinforcement should be not less than that
required to control cracking, see: {4.4.2, EC 2} (see also
Limit States of Cracking).
Nor less than:
b ⋅d
A s,min = 0 .6 ⋅ t ≥ 0.0015 ⋅ b t ⋅ d
f yk
where:
bt denotes the mean width of the tension zone (for a
T-beam with flanges in compression use web)
The cross sectional area of the reinforcement should not

be greater than 0.04 Ac other than at laps.
In monolithic construction, even when simple supports

have been assumed in design, the section should be Fig. 5.11 Envelope line for the design of flexural
designed for bending moment arising from partial fixity of members, anchorage lengths
at least 25% of the maximum bending moment in the span.
Length of longitudinal reinforcement

The envelop line of the tensile force is obtained by the shift method. For details see {5.4.2.1.3, EC 2}
For standard cases:

a1 = z / 2,
where z can be taken as 0.9 d (d = effective depth of beam)
Cut-of bars should be anchored with

lb,net ≥ d
from the point where they are no longer needed.
Issue 09/2003
6/9
Europe
Anchorage of bottom reinforcement at end support {5.4.2.1.4}
Over supports with little or no end fixity, it is necessary to retain not less than ¼ of the steel section present in
the span.
The anchorage of the reinforcement should be capable of resisting a tensile force of:
Fs = VSd a1 / d + NSd
{eq. 5.15} a) direct support b) indirect support
where :
VSd is the shear force and NSd the design axial tensile force
The anchorage length is measured from the line of contact

between the beam and its support; it should be taken as:
- for direct support: 2/3 l b,net
- for indirect support: l b,net
see figure 5.12:

Fig. 5.12: Anchorage of bottom reinforcement
at end supports
Anchorage of bottom reinforcement at intermediate supports {5.4.2.1.5}

Amount of reinforcement: same as end support
Anchorage not less than 10 ∅
It is recommended, that the reinforcement should be continuous and able to resist accidental positive moments
(settlements of support, explosions , earthquake, etc.).
Cast in situ solid slabs {5.4.3}

This section applies to two-ways solid slabs and one-way solid slabs where b and leff ≥ 4h.
Flexural reinforcement {5.4.3.2}

For the detailing of the main reinforcement, {5.4.2.1, see beams} applies with
a 1 = d in {5.4.2.1.3}.
Secondary transverse reinforcement should be at least 20% of the main reinforcement

Minimum and maximum steel percentage in the main direction according to {5.4.2.1.1} (see beams).
Maximum spacing of the bars:
for the principal reinforcement: 1.5 h ≤ 350 mm
For the secondary reinforcement: 2.5 h ≤ 400 mm
Rules {5.4.2.1.3 (1) –(3)}, {5.4.2.1.4 (1) –(3)} and {5.4.2.1.5 (1) –(2)} apply (see beams).
Reinforcement in slabs near supports {5.4.3.2.2}

In slabs,
50% of the calculated span reinforcement should continue up to the support and anchored therein.
Where partial fixity occurs along one side of slab, but is not taken into account in the analysis, the top
reinforcement should be capable of resisting
not less than ¼ of the maximum moment in the adjacent span; this should be provided along a length of
not less than 0,2 times the adjacent span measured from the inner face of the support.
For anchorage of tension reinforcement (2.5 d from the support) when taking into account increased shear
strength close to direct supports, refer to {4.3.2.2 (11) EC 2}.
Issue 09/2003
7/9
Europe
Corbels {5.4.4}
For details see {5.4.4, EC 2}
Reinforced concrete walls {5.4.7}

For walls in which reinforcement is taken into account in the strength analysis see {5.4.7, EC 2}
Limit States of Cracking {4.4.2}

Cracking shall be limited to a level that will not impair the proper functioning of the structure or cause its
appearance to be unacceptable.
Note: Normally, serviceability requirements are specified by the owner.

For details of design see {4.4, EC 2, Serviceability Limit States}.
At construction joints, special care should be drawn to the limit state of cracking induced primarily by restraint
forces due to shrinkage and thermal effects of curing of concrete.
Minimum reinforcement areas {4.4.2.2}

In assessing the minimum area of reinforcement required to ensure controlled cracking in a member or part of a
member which may be subject to tensile stress due to the restraint of imposed deformations, the required
minimum areas of reinforcement may be calculated from the relation below:
As = k c * k * fct,eff * A ct / σs {eq. 4.78}
Where:
As = area of minimum reinforcement within tensile zone.
Act = area of concrete within tensile zone (calculated just before formation of the first crack).
σs = the maximum stress permitted in the reinforcement immediately after formation of the crack:
for normal cases σs = fyk,
unless otherwise specified by the design engineer to satisfy other crack width limits.
fct,eff = the tensile strength of the concrete effective at the time when the cracks may first expected to occur:
for normal cases assume fct,eff = 3 N/mm2,
unless otherwise specified by the design engineer to satisfy for special conditions.
kc = a coefficient which takes into account of the nature of the stress distribution within the section prior
to cracking (loading and restrained imposed deformations).
= 1.0 for pure tension
= 0.4 for bending without normal compressive force
(for sections subjected to normal force or prestress, see {4.4.2.2 (7), EC 2}
k = a coefficient which allows for the effect of non-uniform self-equilibrating stresses
= 0.8 generally for tensile stresses due to restraint of intrinsic deformations
= 0.8 for rectangular sections h ≤ 30 cm
= 0.5 for rectangular sections h ≥ 80 cm
= 1.0 for tensile stresses due to restraint of extrinsic deformations
Issue 09/2003
8/9
Europe
Summery of reinforcement detailing provisions

as an example, for concrete C20/25, for bars ≤ 32 mm
Basic anchorage length :
Design ultimate bond stress fbd fbd = 2.3 N/mm2 tension and compression bar, {table 5.3, EC 2}
multiply by 0.7 for poor bond conditions
Basic anchorage length lb = (∅/4) x (fyd/fbd) {equation 5.3, EC 2}
Anchorage length l inst : A s,req {equation 5.4, EC 2}

l b,net = α a ⋅ l b ⋅ ≥ l b,min
A s,prov αa = 1.0 for straight bars
Minimum anchorage length lb,min = 0.3 lb ≥ 10 φ or 100 mm in tension {equation 5.5, EC 2}

lb,min = 0.6 lb ≥ 10 φ or 100 mm in compression {equation 5.6, EC 2}
Transverse reinforcement see {5.2.3.3, EC 2}
Simply supported end of member 2/3 l b,net for direct support {5.4.2.1.4, EC 2}
consider the greater of: l b,net for indirect support
Fs = VSd * a1 / d + NSd {eq. 5.15, EC 2}
Curtailment of reinforcement the greater of: l b,net or d {5.4.2.1.3 (2), EC 2}
Lap splice l s: l s = l b,,net ⋅ α 1 ≥ l s,min {equation 5.7, EC 2}
% of spliced bars < 30 % All > 30%

Bar spacing a > 10 ∅ other < 10 ∅ {5.2.4.1.3 , EC 2}
Edge distance b >5∅ cases <5∅
α1 = 1.0 1.4 2.0
l s,min = 0.3l b 0.42l b 0.6lb

  
MAX 15Φ MAX 15Φ MAX 15Φ {eq. 5.8, EC 2}
200 mm 200 mm 200 mm
  
Transverse reinforcement {5.2.4.1.2, EC 2}
Detailing provisions:
Spacing of cast-in bars s ≥ dg dg is the maximum size of coarse aggregate
s ≥ 1 ∅ or 20 mm {5.2.1.1 EC 2}
Spacing of post installed bars s≥ 5 φ care for deviation due to drilling process
Cover of cast-in bars c ≥1∅ {4.1.3.3 (5ff) EC 2} bond
corrosion protection: {table 4.2, EC 2}
fire protection: {part X, EC 2}
Cover of post installed bars c ≥ 2 ∅ or 30 mm care for deviation due to drilling process
corrosion protection: {table 4.2, EC 2}
fire resistance:
consult your Hilti advisory service
Max. distance between bars in Crack control: {4.4.2, EC 2}
tension minimum specifications in {5.4, EC 2}, Structural Members
applies for cast-in and post installed bars.
Issue 09/2003
9/9
Europe
A05 Basics on bond behaviour of ribbed bars in concrete
1. Cast-in ribbed bars
Generally, for load transfer in reinforced concrete only tensile or compressive forces in the bar are considered.
For ribbed bars, the load transfer in concrete is governed (approx. 90%) by the bearing of the ribs against the
concrete (figure 1). The force reaction in the concrete is assumed to form a compressive strut in the direction of
45°.
For higher bond stress values, the concentrated bearing forces in front of the ribs cause the formation of cone-
shaped cracks starting at the crest of the ribs. The resulting concrete keys between the ribs transfer the
bearing forces into the surrounding concrete, but the wedging action of the ribs remains limited. In this stage
the displacement of the bar with respect to the concrete (slip) consists of bending of the keys and crushing of
the concrete in front of the ribs.
The bearing forces, which are inclined with respect to the bar axis, can be decomposed into directions parallel
and perpendicular to the bar axis. The sum of the parallel components equals the bond force, whereas the
radial components induce circumferential tensile stresses in the surrounding concrete, which may result in
longitudinal radial (splitting) cracks.
Figure 1 Figure 2
Load transfer from ribbed bars into concrete [Goto]
Failure of bond may occur due to pull-out (crushing of the concrete between the ribs, (fig.1) or, if the
encasement of the surrounding concrete is not sufficient, due to splitting of the concrete (fig.3). Splitting is
controlled by the concrete cover, the transverse reinforcement, the spacing of the bar, size of the bar and the
force in the bar (normally yield).
Two failure modes can be considered:

a) Bond failure (fig. 2):
If the confinement (concrete cover, transverse reinforcement) is sufficient to prevent splitting of the concrete
cover, bond failure is caused by pull-out of the bar. In that case the concrete keys are sheared off and a sliding
plane around the bar is created. Thus, the force transfer mechanism changes from rib bearing to friction. The
shear resistance of the keys can be considered as a criterion for this transition. It is attended by a considerable
reduction of the bond stress. Under continued loading the sliding surface is smoothed due to wear and
compaction, which will result in a further decrease of the bond stress, similar to the case of plain bars.
b) Splitting failure (fig. 3):

If the radial cracks propagate through the entire cover, bond splitting failure is
decisive. In that case the maximum bond stress follows from the maximum
concrete confinement, which is reached when the radial cracks have penetrated
the cover for about 70%. Further crack propagation results in a decrease of the
confining stresses. At reaching the outer surface these stresses are strongly
reduced, which results in a sudden drop of the bond stress.
Figure 3
Issue 10/2002
1/2
Europe
2. Lapped bar splices
2.1 Model for load transfer at lapped bar splices

The load transfer between bars is performed by
means of compressive struts in the concrete (fig.
2). A 45° truss model is assumed. The resulting
perpendicular forces act in a similar way as the
splitting forces. The splitting forces normally are
taken up by the transverse reinforcement. Small
splitting forces are attributed to the tensile
capacity of the concrete. The amount of the
transverse or tie reinforcement necessary is Figure 2a: Load transfer at lap splices
specified in the design codes.
2.2 Influence of spacing and cover on splitting and spaling of concrete

In most cases the reinforcement bars are placed
close to the surface of the concrete member to
achive good crack distribution and economical
Figure 2c: Spalling bending capacity.
Figure 2b: Splitting
For splices at wide spacing (normally in slabs,
fig. 2b), the bearing capacity of the concrete is only dependent on the thickness of the concrete cover. At
narrow spacing (normally in beams, fig. 2c) the bearing capacity is dependent on the spacing and on the
thickness of the cover. In the design codes the reduction of bearing capacity of the cover is taken into account
by means of multiplying factors for the splice length.
3. Bond behaviour of post installed ribbed bars

The load transfer for post installed bars is similar to cast in bars if the stiffness of the overall load transfer
mechanism is similar to the cast-in system. The efficiency depends on the strength of the adhesive mortar
against the concentrated load near the ribs and on the capacity of load transfer at the interface of the drilled
hole.
In many cases the bond values of post installed bars are higher compared to cast in bars due to better
performance of the adhesive mortar. But for small edge distance and/or narrow spacing splitting or spalling
forces become decisive due to the low tensile capacity of the concrete.
Issue 10/2002
2/2
Europe
A06 Interaction of splitting and bond
1. General notes
Anchorage and splice lengths of cast-in reinforcement bars are defined by the applicable structural concrete
design codes. In many cases these anchorage lengths are multiples of the bar diameter. The multiplying factor
usually depends on the state of stress around the anchorage and also on the concrete cover and bar spacing
dimensions. Splitting and pullout failures, as well as displacement conditions, are covered by the prescribed
anchorage lengths.
For post-installed bars, the same failure and serviceability criteria must be met. Splitting is the failure of the
concrete surrounding the anchorage because of excessive radial stresses. While standard design procedures
for post-installed anchors prevent splitting failure by specifying minimum edge distances and spacing, this limit
should be omitted for post-installed reinforcement bars, because their structural efficiency generally depends on
their being placed close to the concrete cover. Since splitting is a pure concrete failure, the design of post-
installed bars should respect the same splitting criteria as cast-in bars. The American Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-02) gives an explicit formula for the anchorage length of cast-in
bars taking into account the concrete quality and the geometry of the anchorage.
The other failure criterion for reinforcement bars is bond failure (pullout). If spacing and edge distances have no
influence, the bond strengths of cast-in and post-installed bars may differ considerably. With cast-in bar, the
bond strength is mainly a function of the rib geometry while post-installed bars take their pullout resistance from
the characteristics of the bonding agent. These characteristics vary from one product to another.
2. Splice tests to check bond stiffness suitability

Load transfer at lapped splices in reinforced concrete functions due to the micro cracking at the ribs with the
result of uniformly distributed bond stress also for long splices. It was to be proven that the stiffness of the post
installed adhesive system performs in a similar way and that that the same concrete splitting capacity can be
taken into account.
Splice tests were performed with cast-in splices and with splices where one bar was cast-in while the other was
set with either Hilti HIT HY-150 or Hilti HIT-RE 500. A drawing of the tension test specimens is shown in fig.2.
Splice length and clear spacing were kept constant. For the splices with post-installed bars, 28 days after
casting holes were drilled into the elements and the inner bars were installed. The displacements at the
unloaded and loaded ends of the bars in reference to the concrete surface as well as the opening of the splitting
cracks were measured.
cast -in cast-in

300
300
600
600
40 40 60 40 40 40 40 120 40 40
220 280
post -installed post-installed

or cast -in or cast -in
Specimen size: 222x300mm Specimen size: 280x300mm

Figure 2: Splice test specimens
Failure Loads
The failure load of all three combinations (both bars cast-in / one bar cast-in, one Hilti HIT-HY150 / one bar
cast-in, one Hilti HIT-RE 500) were comparable, within a scatter of 10%.
Failure Loads specimen
220x300 280x300
both bars cast-in 209.5kN 259.4kN
one side with HIT HY 150 234.0kN 271.9kN
one side with HIT RE 500 234.1kN 267.3kN
Table 2: Failure loads of splice tests (mean value of 3 tests each)
Issue 09/2003
1/3
Europe
Spieth [11], [12] has demonstrated that a uniform distribution of the load transfer along the embedment land a
stiffness comparable to that of the cast-in bar are important to obtain a good splice behavior and high ultimate
loads. Table 2 shows, that the ultimate loads with post-installed splices with the Hilti HIT-Rebar system have
even higher failure loads than the specimens with cast-in splices.
Therefore it has been shown that post installed lapped splices with the adhesive Hilti HIT-HY 150 and
Hilti HIT-RE 500 have equal performance compared to cast-in splices.
Spieth [12] also made comparative splice tests with other adhesives. The dimensions of the specimens were
similar to the 220x300mm specimen as shown in figure 3, but they additionally had transverse reinforcement.
Figures 3a shows the maximum steel stresses at failure load for, from left to right, cast-in splices, then splices
with a hybrid mortar, with a cement system, with a stiff epoxy mortar and with a soft polyester mortar.
In these tests, cast-in, hybrid system and cement system achieved similar failure loads. The failure load with
the stiff epoxy system was 5-10% lower and that with the soft polyester mortar even approximately 25% lower.
Steel stress along the lapped length

Figures 3 show the steel stresses along the splice for a) two cast-in bars, b) one bar cast-in and one set with
Hilti HIT-HY 150 and c)one bar cast-in and one with Hilti HIT-RE 500. In figure 3c only the steel stresses in the
bar set with Hilti HIT-RE 500 are shown. These stresses have been measured during tests with specimen
220x300mm according to figure 3.
Figure 3a) Steel stresses in cast-in splice (from [11]) Figure 3b) Steel stresses in splice with cast-in
(left) Hilti HIT-HY 150 (right) bar (from [11])
cast-in-place Hilti HIT-RE 500
450
400
350
steel stress [Mpa]
300
F=20kN
250
F=40kN
200 F=60kN
150 F=100kN
100 Fmax=116kN
50
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
embedment depth [mm]
Figure 3c) steel stress in splice, bar set with Hilti HIT-RE 500
Figure 3a shows that the stresses in both cast-in bars are symmetrical; in the splice with Hilti HIT-HY 150 (fig.
3b) there is a slight eccentricity of the stresses, but, as demonstrated by the ultimate loads, this non
symmetry is not critical, since loads of the same range are obtained. Figure 3c shows that the stresses in the
bar set with Hilti HIT-RE 500 are almost identical to those in cast-in bars or bars set with Hilti HIT-HY 150.
Thus, it can be affirmed that the load introduction from bars set with Hilti HIT RE-500 or with Hilti HIT HY-150
into concrete is equal to that from cast-in bars into concrete.
Issue 09/2003
2/3
Europe
Other tests performed by Spieth [12] demonstrated that mortars not providing similar overall stiffness as cast-in
bars, such as soft polyester or stiff epoxy resins based mortars, are unsuitable for such applications. The load
transfer was clearly unsymmetrical and it resulted in premature splitting failure (fig. 3d,e).
d) soft polyester resin e) stiff epoxy resin

Figure 3d,e: Steel stresses in splice (from [12])
Bibliography
[2] Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary 318R-02 American
Concrete Institute, Michigan. ISSN 0065-7875.
[3] Darwin, D., Idun, E.K. et al.: Reliability-Based Strength Reduction Factor for Bond. ACI Structural
Journal, V. 95, No. 4, July-August 1998
[4] Darwin, D., Zuo M.L., et al.: Development Length Criteria for Conventional and High Relative Rib Area
Reinforcing Bars. ACI Structural Journal, V. 93, No. 3, May-June 1996.
[5] Pullout and Direct Shear Tests of Deformed Reinforcement Using Product A. Final Test Report for Hilti.
Prof. D.-U. Choi, Hankyong National University, Korea. December 1999.
[6] Pullout Tests with Product B. Hilti internal test report. Not published.
[8] Chinn, Ferguson, Thompson, Neils, 1955. Lapped Splices in Reinforced Concrete Beams. ACI Journal,
Proceedings V. 54, No. 8, Feb., pp. 689-698
[9] Spieth, Eligehausen, Fuchs: Eingemörtelte Bewehrungsstäbe (Verbundmörtel HIT-HY 150), Auszugs-
versuche an Einzelstäben mit großer und kleiner Betondeckung. Bericht FH1/1 – 97/1 vom 18.8.1997
[10] Kuster: Zur Verankerung von Bewehrungsstäben. Diplomarbeit ETH Zürich, 2001.
[11] Tragverhalten von Übergreifungsstössen eingemörtelter Bewehrungsstäbe. Diplomarbeit von A. Quasem,
Universität Stuttgart, März 1999
[12] Spieth, Ozbolt, Eligehausen, Appl: Numerical and Experimental Analysis of Post-Installed Rebars
Spliced with Cast-in-Place Rebars. International Symposium on Connections between Steel and
Concrete. RILEM, Stuttgart, Sept. 2000.
Issue 09/2003
3/3
Europe
A07 Hilti HIT-Rebar design and ACI 318-99 approach
1. ACI 319-99 approach
The American Standard ACI 318-02 gives an explicit formula for the design of anchorages and splices that
considers splitting as a function of concrete cover and bar spacing. This function is adapted and extended for
post-installed bars for the Hilti HIT-Rebar design concept. The embedment length of an anchorage or splice is
defined as a function of steel yield, concrete strength, the bar diameter, the minimum edge distance or spacing
and a coefficient taking into account the transverse reinforcement.
Figure 1 shows the bond stress as a function of the parameter c/∅ or s/2∅. The splitting bond stress is defined
by an inclined line and it augments with larger values of c/∅ or s/2∅. The increase in splitting bond stress is
limited by the maximum pull-out bond stress, which is a value given by the standards for cast-in bars and by
the product supplier for post-installed bars. For example, in ACI 318-02 and a concrete C30 the bond stress is
limited to 3.9 N/mm2.
20
18 8
Effective bond stress fb,ef [N/mm2]
16
14
7
12 1
10
8 2
6 6
3
4 5
4
2
Minimum edge distance to centre line of bar
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Relative edge distance c/φ or spacing s/2 ∅
Cast-in [8] and [9] Hilti HIT-RE 500, single bar [6,10]
Hilti HIT-RE 500 two bars [6,10] Hilti-HIT-HY 150 single bar tests [9]
1 Concrete splitting: mean ultimate 5 ACI 318-99, cast-in: design bond f b,d = 3.9 N/mm2
2 Concrete splitting: characteristic 6 Hilti HIT-RE 500: design bond f b,d = 6.0 N/mm2
3 Concrete splitting: design 7 Hilti HIT-RE 500: characteristic bond f b,k = 13.0 N/mm2
4 EC 2, cast-in: bond design f b,d = 2.7 N/mm2 8 Hilti HIT-RE 500 mean ultimate bond: f b,u = 17.3 N/mm2
Fig. 1 Splitting and bond interaction for concrete C30 (fcu = 30 N/mm2)
The limit of bond stress

As seen above, ACI 318-02 prevents pullout failure by limiting the design bond stress to 3.9 N/mm2 for concrete
class C25/30 under the condition that splitting is not critical. In cases of small edge distance or narrow spacing
the design bond stress is reduced according to formulae. Other standards, like EC 2 simplify this rule and limit
the bond stress to a value at which splitting cannot occur at the minimum spacing and concrete cover defined.
EC 2 gives the design bond strength for a concrete C25/30 as 2.7 N/mm2. Fig. 1 shows the various bond
stresses as specified for cast-in and post installed. Therefore, the bond strength given in EC 2 is strictly
speaking not a bond condition, but rather a splitting condition.
For post-installed reinforcement bars, the maximum bond stress is a function of the bonding agent and not
necessarily equal to that of cast-in bars. Thus, the limitation for bond failure in the code has been replaced by
the specific design bond stress of the bonding agent and the splitting function has been adapted according to
the tests in a bilinear way.
2. Interaction of concrete cover and transverse reinforcement (splitting reinforcement)
Issue 09/2003
1/3
Europe
Tests show that transverse reinforcement improves the splitting capacity. Transverse reinforcement can be
taken into account by adding a substitute augmentation of the cover when reading the design tables for splitting
capacity.
The ACI 318-02 code explicitly takes into account the influence of transverse reinforcement able to prevent
splitting by means of the “transverse reinforcement index” Ktr .
Design splitting bond stress evaluated from design formula in ACI 318-02:
c + K tr A tr ⋅ f yt c + K tr
f bd = f cu ⋅ ; K tr = ; ≤ 2 .5 for cast - in bars (SI-units)
4⋅φ⋅ξ 10 .34 ⋅ s ⋅ n φ
with: Atr total cross-sectional area of all transverse reinforcement that is within the spacing s and that
crosses the potential plane of splitting through the reinforcement being developed [mm2]
fyt yield strength of transverse reinforcement [N/mm2]
s maximum spacing of transverse reinforcement within lb, center to center [mm]
n number of bars being developed along the plane of splitting [-]
ξ substitute for various adjustment factors
A s,t, f yt
A s,t , f yt
str
s tr
lb
lb
a) splitting to surface b) spalling of cover

Figure 2: Transverse reinforcement (splitting reinforcement):
Figure 2 shows the influence of transverse reinforcement for two typical cases. With small concrete cover (fig.
2a) splitting is towards the concrete cover. The transverse reinforcement only once crosses the splitting plane;
therefore the total area of transverse reinforcement crossing the splitting plane is Atr = As,t and the number of
bars developed along the splitting plane is n = 1. With small spacing, spalling of the entire concrete cover
becomes critical as shown in fig. 2b. In this case, the stirrup crosses the splitting plane twice. Therefore we
have Atr = 2 As,t and n = 4. In a slab with horizontal transverse reinforcement instead of the stirrups shown in fig.
2b, values for figure 2a remain unchanged (A tr = As,t, n = 1), but for the case of spalling, there is no contribution
of the transverse reinforcement (A tr = 0).
For example, a transverse reinforcement of bar size 10 mm with spacing of 200 mm and a specified yield
strength of 460 N/mm2 results in a factor of Ktr = 17 mm in the case of fig. 2a and Ktr = 8.7mm in the case of
figure 2b. In a slab with horizontal transverse reinforcement, Ktr is 0 in the case of spalling.
The transverse reinforcement index Ktr is used as “additional” concrete cover with the value of Ktr.
A s,t, f yt Figure 2c shows a supported slab. Vertical spalling is
prevented by the support reaction and the shear strut.
The edge bar is critical for horizontal splitting at the side
face of the slab. Normally ties are provided at the face of
the slab and they can improve splitting conditions if
str taken into account in the design.
ld Figure 2c: Splitting at edge of support
Issue 09/2003
2/3
Europe
3. Final design formulas for design by means of Hilti Excel Spread Sheets
c + K tr
for ≤ 2 .5 (bonded-in bars and cast-in bars):
φ
f ck c + K tr lb fy γ
f bd = ⋅ ; or : = ⋅
4⋅γ φ φ c + K tr
f ck
φ
c + K tr
for > 2 .5 (bonded-in bars only):
φ
f ck   c + K tr  l fy γ
f bd = ⋅ 2 .5 + 0.83 ⋅  − 2 .5 ; or : b = ⋅
4⋅γ   φ  φ 4⋅ f  c + K tr 
ck 2.5 + 0 .83 ⋅  − 2.5 
 φ 
where:
fbd design bond strength
lb bond length
φ nominal bar size
fck characteristic concrete cylinder strength
c min{c min; 0.5 s)

c min minimum edge distance (to axis of bar)
s spacing of bars
A tr ⋅ f yt c + K tr
Ktr K tr = ; ≤ 2.5 for cast - in bars
10 .34 ⋅ s t ⋅ n φ
Atr total cross-sectional area of all transverse reinforcement that is within the spacing s and that
crosses the potential plane of splitting through the reinforcement being developed [mm2]
fyt yield strength of transverse reinforcement [N/mm2]
st maximum spacing of transverse reinforcement within lb, center to center [mm]
n number of bars being developed along the plane of splitting [-]
γ bar size factor: γ = 0.8 for bar size 19 mm and smaller

γ = 1.0 for bar size 22 mm and greater (bar size 20mm?)
Note: the following factors used in ACI 318 are set to be 1.0
β = 1.0 for uncoated reinforcement
λ = 1.0 for normal weight concrete
For more detailed Information see: Kunz, J.; Münger, F.: “Splitting- and bond failure of post-installed rebar
splices and anchoring.”; Bond in Concrete – from research to standards, Proceedings of the 3rd International
Symposium held at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary, 20 to 22
November 2002, p.447 -454.
(Copy available from Hilti Technical Service)
Issue 09/2003
3/3
Europe
A08 Serviceability Limit State (SLS)
1. General
In general the Hilti HIT-Rebar system is designed to provide similar stiffness as cast in situ connections.
Therefore the provisions of the Standard apply in terms of detailing regarding serviceability limit state.
The limit state of cracking for high bond adhesive like Hilti HIT-RE 500 should be checked for
elevated service temperatures.
For elevated service temperatures and stringent requirements see table 1.
Table 1
Hilti HIT-RE 500: bond stress limitation fbt,s for quasi -permanent loads and elevated temperatures
Bar size 10 13 16 20 25 28 32 40 wm
∅ [mm]
[mm]
Temperature T
50°C / 122°F 5.3 4.8 4.2 3.7 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.3
0.3
60°C / 140°F 4.3 3.9 3.3 2.9 2.5 2.2 2.1 1.7
T [°C / °F] servi ce temperature in substrate at the position of the bonded bar
fb,s [N/mm2] bond stress under permanent loads
(load factor γf = 1.0 for dead load and permanent part of variable actions)
wm [mm] Mean value of expected crack width for permanent loads
Not deceive for normal cases
Notes:
• Ultimate limit state (ULS) design is mandatory in all cases.
• Be aware that the loads in SLS are 50% to 60% of ULS loads for normal cases.
• The table is valid for concrete compressive strength fc ≥ 25 N/mm2
• Scatter of crack width is considerable and larger cracks may occur.
Issue 09/2003
1/1
Europe
A09 Corrosion behavior of bonded-in reinforcement
The Swiss Association for protection against corrosion (SGK) was given the assignment of evaluating the
corrosion behavior of fastenings post-installed in concrete using the Hilti HIT-HY 150 and Hilti HIT-RE 500
injection systems.
Corrosion tests were carried out. The behavior of the two systems had to be evaluated in regard to their use in
field practice and compared with the behavior of cast-in reinforcement. The SGK can look back on extensive
experience in this field, especially on expertise in the field of repair and maintenance work.
The result can be summarized as follows:
Hilti HIT-HY 150

• The Hilti HIT-HY 150 system in combination with reinforcing bars can be considered resistant to corrosion
when it is used in sound, alkaline concrete. The alkalinity of the adhesive mortar safeguards the initial
passivation of the steel. Owing to the porosity of the adhesive mortar, an exchange takes place with the
alkaline pore solution of the concrete.
• If rebars are bonded in chloride-free concrete using this system, in the event of later chloride exposure, the
rates of corrosion are about half those of rebars that are cast-in.
• In concrete containing chlorides, the corrosion behavior of the system corresponds to that of cast-in
rebars. Consequently, the use of unprotected steel in concrete exposed to chlorides in the past or
possibly in the future is not recommended because corrosion must be expected after only short exposure
times.
Hilti HIT-RE 500

• If the Hilti HIT-RE 500 system is used in corrosive surroundings, a sufficiently thick coat of adhesive
significantly increases the time before corrosion starts to attack the bonded-in steel.
• The HIT-RE 500 system may be described as resistant to corrosion, even in concrete that is carbonated
and contains chlorides, if a coat thickness of at least 1 mm can be ensured. In this case, the unprotected
steel in a concrete joint and in the new concrete is critical.
• If the coat thickness is not ensured, the HIT-RE 500 system may be used only in sound concrete. A rebar
may then also lie against the wall of the drilled hole. At these points, the steel behaves as though it has a
thin coating of epoxy resin.
• In none of the cases investigated did previously rusted steel (without chlorides) show signs of an attack by
corrosion, even in concrete containing chlorides.
• Neither during this study was an acceleration of corrosion found at defective points in the adhesive mortar
bond nor was there any reference to this in literature. Even if a macro-element forms, the high resistance
to it spreading inhibits a locally increased rate of corrosion.
• Information in reference data corresponds with the results of this study.
For a summery of the test report ask the Hilti Technical Servi ce for the test report
Report No 02015a, dated September 25, 2002: „Corrosion behaviour of fastenings made with Hilti HIT-HY 150
and Hilti HIT-RE 500 injection systems“.
Issue 09/2003
1/1
Europe
1)
A10 Fire resistance design
If passive fire prevention requirements have to be met,
the suitability of rebar connections should be verified
additionally to ULS cold design.
Large-area building components (walls and floors) can

be verified according to tables 1 and 2. The design
tables are derived from tests at the University of
Brunswick following the Standard ISO 834
temperature/time curve (fig. 1). Design for fire Time [minutes]
resistance may be carried out in line with BS 8110 Figure 1.:
Standard temperature/time curve (ISO 834)
:1997.The Warrington Report 1) confirmed test results
in accordance with the principles of British Standards 476 : Part 20.
linst
Note: for the Tables 1 and 2: Fs,T = force in bar when exposed to fire
Intermediate values may be interpolated linearly. Extrapolating is not permitted.
Table 1 Bar perpendicular to slab or wall surface exposed to fire

Hilti HIT-HY 150 Bar Max. Hilti HIT-RE 500
Fire resistance of bar in [kN] l inst size ∅ Fs,T
l inst Fire resistance of bar in [kN]
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240 [cm] [mm] [kN] [cm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240
8.83 3.57 1.88 1.10 0.22 0 10 10 25.3 10 5.68 2.45 1.31 0.85 0.24 0
13.2 6.24 3.46 2.42 0.82 0.28 12 12 10.7 4.44 2.48 1.68 0.68 0.31
17.6 10.5 5.62 4.12 1.92 0.88 14 14 17.6 7.76 4.38 2.99 1.33 0.73
25.3 18.2 13.2 9.61 4.52 2.83 17.5 16.5 25.3 15.1 8.50 5.79 2.58 1.50
25.3 20.9 17.3 7.57 5.62 21 19.5 25.3 17.6 12.2 5.12 2.93
25.3 23.8 10.9 8.89 23.5 22 25.3 20.7 8.69 4.78
25.3 14.2 12.0 25 23.5 25.3 11.8 6.30
25.3 24.1 30.5 28 25.3 13.9
25.3 31.5 32 25.3
15.9 7.48 4.15 2.90 0.98 0.34 12 12 36.4 12 12.8 5.33 2.97 2.01 0.82 0.37
23.8 15.2 9.20 6.07 3.13 1.58 15 14.5 23.2 10.7 6.02 4.12 1.84 1.03
36.4 28.4 22.4 18.1 7.99 5.69 20 18 36.4 24.3 15.0 10.1 4.41 2.55
36.4 31.6 27.4 13.1 10.7 23.5 21 36.4 27.4 20.6 8.47 4.74
36.4 32.6 18.3 15.8 25.5 23.5 36.4 31.0 14.2 7.56
36.4 22.3 19.7 27 25 36.4 19.1 9.89
36.4 34.2 32.5 29.5 36.4 21.4
36.4 33.5 33.5 36.4
24.7 14.7 7.87 5.76 2.68 1.23 14 14 49.6 14 24.6 10.9 6.13 4.19 1.86 1.03
43.1 33.1 26.1 21.2 9.32 6.64 20 17 39.1 23.5 13.5 9.20 4.07 2.37
49.6 40.8 33.8 28.8 12.9 10.2 22.5 19.5 49.6 35.6 24.7 17.0 7.17 4.10
49.6 43.1 38.1 21.4 18.4 25.5 22.5 49.6 39.2 31.3 13.5 7.34
49.6 45.8 29.1 26.1 28 25 49.6 43.4 22.3 11.5
49.6 33.7 30.7 29.5 26.5 49.6 29.5 15.0
49.6 47.6 35 31 49.6 32.0
49.6 36 35 49.6
Table continues next page
1)
for test reports contact your Hilti Technical Service: (Warrington Report WFRC No. C1211086)
- Test report for rebar connections suitable for fire rating using Hilti HIT-HY 150, IBMB, July 16, 1999
- Test report for rebar connections suitable for fire rating using Hilti HIT-RE 500, IBMB, Aug. 25, 2000
Issue 09/2003
1/3
Europe
linst
Table 1 (continue) Bar perpendicular to slab or wall surface exposed to fire

Hilti HIT-HY 150 Bar Max. Hilti HIT-RE 500
Fire resistance of bar in [kN] l inst size ∅ Fs,T l inst Fire resistance of bar in [kN]
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240 [cm] [mm] [kN] [cm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240
35.2 23.8 15.8 10.3 5.33 2.97 16 16 64.8 16 39.2 21.3 11.9 8.15 3.65 2.11
64.8 53.7 45.7 40.0 20.9 17.5 24.5 19 55.8 37.9 25.4 17.2 7.35 4.22
64.8 58.0 52.3 33.2 29.8 28 21 64.8 49.0 36.5 27.5 11.3 6.32
64.8 59.4 40.3 36.8 30 24 64.8 53.1 44.1 20.9 11.0
64.8 47.3 43.9 32 26.5 64.8 57.9 33.7 17.1
64.8 61.5 37 28 64.8 42.0 22.2
64.8 38 32.5 64.8 44.8
36.5 64.8
61.6 47.3 37.3 30.2 13.3 9.49 20 20 101.2 20 76.6 54.3 38.7 27.5 11.4 6.48
101.2 86.9 76.9 69.8 45.9 41.7 29 24 101.2 82.0 66.4 55.1 26.1 13.8
101.2 92.3 85.2 61.3 57.0 32.5 27 101.2 87.1 75.9 45.6 23.4
101.2 96.2 72.3 68.0 35 29.5 101.2 93.2 62.9 35.7
101.2 78.9 74.6 36.5 31 101.2 73.2 45.7
101.2 98.8 42 35.5 101.2 76.8
101.2 43 39.5 101.2
104.5 86.6 74.1 65.3 35.4 30.1 25 25 158.1 25 139.0 111.1 91.6 77.6 39.9 20.6
132.0 114.2 101.6 92.8 62.9 57.6 30 27.5 158.1 132.7 113.2 99.2 61.3 31.8
158.1 141.6 129.1 120.2 90.4 85.1 35 30.5 158.1 139.1 125.1 87.2 52.8
158.1 145.6 136.7 106.9 101.5 38 33 158.1 146.7 108.8 74.4
158.1 150.5 120.6 115.3 40.5 34.5 158.1 121.8 87.3
158.1 128.9 123.5 42 39 158.1 126.2
158.1 153.8 47.5 43 158.1
158.1 48.5
28 198.3 28 184.7 153.4 131.6 115.9 73.5 38.7
π 2 0.500 29.5 198.3 168.0 146.1 130.4 88.0 49.9
Max.Fs,T = ⋅ φe ⋅
4 1,15 ⋅ 1,35 33 198.3 184.8 164.3 121.9 83.3
35 198.3 183.6 141.2 102.4
37 198.3 160.6 121.8
41 198.3 160.5
45 198.3
32 259.0 32 255.3 219.6 194.7 176.7 128.2 84.2
32.5 259.0 225.1 200.2 182.2 133.7 89.7
36 259.0 238.9 220.9 172.5 128.4
38 259.0 243.0 194.6 150.5
39.5 259.0 211.2 167.1
44 259.0 216.9
48 259.0
36 327.8 36 327.8 296.8 268.8 248.5 194.0 144.1
385 327.8 299.9 279.6 225.1 175.2
410 327.8 310.7 256.2 206.3
425 327.8 274.9 225.0
470 327.8 281.0
510 327.8
40 404.7 40 404.7 385.1 353.9 331.5 270.9 215.8
41.5 404.7 374.6 352.2 291.6 236.5
44 404.7 386.7 326.2 271.1
45.5 404.7 346.9 291.8
50 404.7 354.0
54 404.7
Issue 09/2003
2/3
Europe
Table 2. Bar connection parallel to slab or wall surface exposed to fire
Max. bond stress, τT , depending on actual clear concrete cover for classifying the fire resistance.
It must be verified that the actual force in the bar during a fire, Fs,T , can be taken up by the bar connection of
the selected length, linst. Note: Cold design for ULS is mandatory. linst cf
Fs, T ≤ (linst – c f)⋅ ∅ ⋅ π ⋅ τT where: (linst - c 1) ≥ ls;
ls = length of overlap joint
φe = nominal diameter of bar
linst – c f) = selected overlap joint length; this must be at least ls, c
but may not be assumed to be more than 80 ∅
τT = bond stress when exposed to fire
Clear Fire resistance for Hilti HIT-RE 500

Fire resistance for Hilti HIT-HY 150
Max. bond stress, τ T
concrete Max. bond stress, τ T
cover [N/mm²]
[N/mm²] c
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240 [cm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240
1,4 0,2 0 0 0 0 3 0.7 0 0 0 0 0
1,9 0,7 0 0 0 0 4 0.9 0.5 0 0 0 0
2.4 1,2 0,4 0 0 0 5 1.2 0.6 0 0 0 0
2.8 1,7 0,7 0,3 0 0 6 1.6 0.8 0.5 0 0 0
4.9 2,2 1,2 0,7 0 0 7 2.2 1.0 0.7 0.5 0 0
2.5 1,7 1,0 0,2 0 8 3.0 1.4 0.8 0.6 0 0
2.8 2,0 1,5 0,5 0 9 4.0 1.7 1.1 0.8 0.5 0
4.0 2.3 1,9 0,7 0.3 10 5.4 2.3 1.4 1.0 0.6 0
2.7 2.3 1,2 0.6 11 2.9 1.7 1.2 0.7 0.5
2.9 2.6 1,6 0.8 12 3.8 2.2 1.6 0.8 0.6
4.0 2.8 1,9 1.1 13 4.9 2.8 2.0 1.0 0.65
3.0 2,2 1.4 14 3.6 2.5 1.2 0.7
4.5 2.3 1.7 15 4.6 3.1 1.4 0.9
2.5 2.0 16 3.9 1.7 1.0
2.6 2.2 17 5.0 2.1 1.2
2.7 2.4 18 2.5 1.4
2.8 2.6 19 3.1 1.7
2.9 2.8 20 3.7 2.0
3.0 3.0 21 4.5 2.3
4.5 4.4 22 2.7
23 3.2
25 4.5
Issue 09/2003
3/3
Europe
A11 Fatigue of bonded-in reinforcement
for joints where imposed loading is predominantly cyclical
1. General Notes
For loadbearing elements which are subjected to considerable cyclic stress the bonded-in connections should
be designed for fatigue. In that case evidence for fatigue of reinforcing steel bars, concrete and bond should be
provided separately.
For simple cases it is reasonable to use simplified methods on the safe side.
The partial safety factors for loads are specified in the code for reinforced concrete.
The partial safety factors for material are specified in Table 1.
Table 1: Partial safety factors for materials subjected to cyclic loading

Evidence for concrete bond reinforcing bars (steel)
Partial safety factor 1.5 1.8 1.15
2. Fatigue of reinforcing bars (steel)

The resistance for fatigue of reinforcing bars (steel) is specified in the actual code for reinforced concrete. The
behaviour of the steel of reinforcing bars bonded-in by means of Hilti HIT-HY 150 or Hilti HIT-RE 500 is at least
as good as cast-in place reinforcement.
3. Fatigue of bond and concrete (simplified approach)

As a simplified approach on the safe side evidence for fatigue is shown if equation 1 is valid:
FSd,fat ≤ NRd . ffat eq. 1
where:
FSd,fat Design value of the anchorage force for the ruling loading model for fatigue.
NRd Design resistance for static load of the anchorage (bond and concrete).
ffat Reduction factor for fatigue for bond and concrete: ffat = 0.5 eq. 2
If max/min of cycles is known, reduction factors are shown in fig. 1.
Figure 1
Diagram for a simplified approach
1 with 106 cycles
0.9 (Weyrauch diagram)
0.8
FSd,fat max
0.7 FSd,fat
/ N Rd FSd,fat max
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
FSd,fat min
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
F Sd,fat min / NRd 0 time
If the simplified method is not satisfying, additional information using the

“Woehler” lines can be used.
Ask your Hilti Technical Service for the Hilti Guideline:
TWU-TPF 06a/02 Hilti HIT-Rebar: Fatigue.
Issue 09/2003
1/1
Europe
A12 Guide Specifications for bonded-in reinforcement
Specifier Note - General:
This specification is intended to address the use of bonded-in reinforcing bars for safety-related applications,
such as structural connections in reinforced concrete. It has been prepared to assist design professionals in
the preparation of project or office master specifications. Only minor editing should be necessary with most
master specification systems.
Edit carefully to suit project requirements. Modify as necessary and delete/add items as applicable.
This is an open proprietary specification allowing users the option of approving other manufacturers that comply
with the criteria specified herein.
PART 1 - GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. Section Includes: Bonded-in reinforcement for concrete.
1.02 SUBMITTALS
Specifier Note: Insert appropriate section for the project as referred to below for shop drawings or submittals.
A. For bonded-in reinforcement as specified in Section 2.01.B submit in accordance with
Conditions of the Contract and Submittal Procedures Section.
1. Design values and physical characteristics for bonded-in reinforcement, including:
(Proposed to include the standards that is internationally recognised to that subject)
a. considerations for long-time and creep behaviour in elevated temperatures (Include
testing standard.),
b. considerations for installation sensitivity in terms of site conditions (hole cleaning
water saturated concrete,
c. evidence for adequate bond distribution over splice length for splices with cast-in place
bars (splice/splitting test),
d. approved design values for fire resistance where the ISO 834 Standard temperature/
time curve shall be applied (BS 476 : Parts 20 to 23),
e. design values for dynamic loading.
2. Product specifications including:
a. Injection material shelf life and storage conditions,
b. Material Safety Data Sheet,
c. Waste disposal considerations,
d. Overview of chemical resistance for hardened material.
Specifier Note: For normal application of bonded-in reinforcement it is assumed that concrete is not carbonised
and never salt infested at the position of the bars. Minimum concrete cover to bonded-in reinforcement should
be at least according to standard for the relevant environmental conditions.
3. Corrosion behaviour
Provide evidence for adequate corrosion protection of the injection bonding material for the
bonded-in reinforcement for internal [and external] use in normal not-carbonised and not salt
infested concrete
4. Quality Assurance Submittals:
Test Reports: Certified test reports showing compliance with specified performance
characteristics and physical properties.
5. Manufacturer’s installation instructions.
Sample demonstration for suitable installation procedure for holes deeper than 30 cm.
6. Installer Qualifications & Procedures: Submit a letter of procedure stating method of drilling,
the product proposed for use, the complete installation procedure, manufacturer training
date, and a list of the personnel to be trained on bonded-in reinforcing bar installation
B. Closeout Submittals:
Submit the following Record Documents:
1. Project record documents for installed materials in accordance with Closeout Submittals
Section.
2. Test records for field test according to Section 3.03.
1.03 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Installer Training: Conduct a thorough training with the manufacturer or the manufacturer’s
representative for the [contractor] [installer] on the project.
Issue 09/2003
1/4
Europe
1. Training to consist of a review of the complete installation process for bonded-in
reinforcement bars, to include but not limited to:
a. hole drilling procedure,
b. hole preparation & cleaning technique,
c. adhesive injection technique & dispenser training / maintenance,
d. reinforcing bar preparation and installation,
e. proof loading.
Specifier Note: Complete paragraph below to suit project and local jurisdiction requirements. Co-ordinate with
section 1.02.A above.
B. Certifications: Unless otherwise authorised by the Engineer, injection system shall have one of
the following certifications:
1.
2.
1.04 DELIVERY, STORAGE AND HANDLING
A. General: Comply with Section−Product Storage and Handling Requirements.

Store foil packs/cartridges in accordance with manufacturer recommendations.
PART 2 – PRODUCTS
2.01 MATERIALS
A. Bonded-in Reinforcing Bars:
Specifier Note: Revise paragraph below to suit project requirements. Co-ordinate terminology with designations
used on the Drawings for other types of reinforcement, coated reinforcement, stainless steel, etc. Special
precautions shall be taken where pitting corrosion is a concern.
1. Prepared Reinforcing Bars: Grade 500, high bond, deformed type 2 as per EC 2. Size as
indicated on Drawings.
B. Injection Adhesive System:
1.Dual foil/cartridge packing injection system having fast curing hybrid adhesive, styrene free and
odour-less of 3:1 mixing ratio for anchorage to concrete, or approved equivalent.
2.Dual foil/cartridge packing injection system of high performance slows curing, odour-less
Epoxy adhesive having 3:1 mixing ratio for anchorage to concrete, or approved equivalent.
3.The Manufacturing and Expiry date must be clearly indicated on the packing for tracking
purposes and mixing of the chemical should be done using a static mixer during injection.
4.Where bonding injection system manufacturer is not indicated, subject to compliance with
requirements and acceptance by the Architect / Engineer, provide the following:
a. Approved substitute in accordance with Section - Product Substitution Procedures must
be comply with and all relevant test reports to be supported.
PART 3 – EXECUTION
3.01 INSTALLATION
A. Bonded-In Reinforcing Bars:

Specifier Note: Verify if restrictions exist on the type of drilling equipment to be used for the project.
1. Drill holes with electro-pneumatic drills using carbide-tipped bits [and, if applicable, core
drills using diamond core bits]. Drill bits shall be of diameters as specified by the injection
system manufacturer. All holes shall be drilled perpendicular to the concrete surface unless
otherwise shown on the Drawings.
a. Cored Holes: Where reinforcing bars are to be installed in cored holes, use adequate
injection (slow curing Epoxy) adhesive as approved by the engineer and use core bits
with matched tolerances as specified by the manufacturer.
b. Embedded Items: Identify position of reinforcing steel and other embedded items prior
to drilling holes for bars. Exercise care in coring or drilling to avoid damaging existing
reinforcing or embedded items. Notify the Engineer / Supervisor if reinforcing steel or
other embedded items is encountered during drilling. Take precautions as necessary
to avoid damaging Prestressing tendons, electrical, water and telecommunications
conduit, and gas lines.
c. Base Material Strength: Unless otherwise specified, do not drill holes in concrete until
concrete has achieved [70%] ______ design strength.
Issue 09/2003
2/4
Europe
d. Perform bar installation in accordance with manufacturer instructions.
2. Dual foil/cartridge packing injection adhesive bar installation:
a. Clean all holes per manufacturer instructions to remove loose material and drilling dust
prior to installation of adhesive.
b. Remove water from drilled holes in such a manner as to achieve a surface dry
condition.
c. Ensure proper mixing of adhesive components with the static mixer provided by
manufacturer.
d. Inject adhesive into holes proceeding from the bottom of the hole and progressing
toward the surface in such a manner as to avoid introduction of air pockets in the
adhesive. For holes deeper than 30 cm use build-up plug or similar device to ensure
controlled injection.
e. Sufficient adhesive shall be injected in the hole to ensure that the annular gap is filled
to the surface.
f. Mark embedment depth on bar. Insert bar swiftly with a twisting motion.
g. Shim bars with wedge or other suitable device to adjust the bar in the hole for the
planned direction. Use nails to wedge the bars for over head applications.
h. Do not disturb or load bars before manufacturers specified cure time has elapsed.
3. Observe manufacturer recommendations with respect to installation temperatures for dual
foil / cartridge packing injection adhesive systems.
3.02 REPAIR OF DEFECTIVE WORK
A. Remove and replace miss-placed or malfunctioning bars, unless otherwise instructed by the
Engineer. Fill empty holes with the injection adhesive. Bonded-in bars that fail to meet proof
load requirements shall be regarded as malfunctioning.
3.03 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL (PROOF LOADING)
Specifier Note: Job site testing is a common method of assuring correct installation of anchor systems. In
order to achieve the appropriate level of quality control, testing should be performed by the manufacturer
representative or the owner’s inspector in consultation with the manufacturer representative. Adjust testing
requirements to suit job and local jurisdiction conditions. Select percentage of anchors to be tested. Smaller
or more critical installations may warrant a higher percentage of anchors to be tested and a greater penalty for
malfunctioning anchors. Verify that anchor embedment and proof loads are shown on the Drawings.
A sequential acceptance test program shall be adopted for all installations.
The number of tests required for each batch sizes shall be as detailed in table 1.
The maximum batch size shall be 500 and shall consist of only one type and size of bar per field of application
or site location.
The test load shall be as prescribed by the responsible engineer and in accordance with the values published in
this document.
Table 1
Batch Size Nos. of tests
>99 10 %
100 - 500 As per table 2
Issue 09/2003
3/4
Europe
Table 2
Sequential % of tests Permissible No of Action upon batch Upon completion of Three
test stage. per batch. Failure per batch failure successful batch test.
1 10% 0 ( Nil) Seek the advise of the Revert to stage 2 testing
responsible engineer
2 5% 0 ( Nil) Revert to stage 1 Revert to stage 2 testing
3 2% 0 ( Nil) Revert to stage 1 Continue stage 3 testing
A. Testing: [2%] [10%] [25%] ______ of each type and size of drilled-in bars shall be proof loaded
by [the manufacturer representative] [the independent testing laboratory]. If [any] [more than
10%] ______ of the tested bars fail to achieve the specified proof load within the limits as defined
on the Drawings, all bars of the same diameter and type as the failed bar shall be tested, unless
otherwise instructed by the Engineer.
1. Proof loads shall be applied with a calibrated hydraulic ram. Displacement of adhesive bars
at proof load shall not exceed ∅ /10, where ∅ is the nominal bar diameter.
B. Minimum bar embedment, proof loads shall be as shown on the Drawings.
3.0.4. Values for Proof loading
Specifier Note: Proof loading of bonded-in bars is intended to catch significant installation problems, such as
partial or complete failure to cure. It is not intended to check the design capacity of the anchorage. Other limits
on displacement may be appropriate, depending on the magnitude of the proof load and the requirements of the
application.
B. Field quality control
1. Proof loads shall be applied with a calibrated hydraulic ram. Displacement of adhesive bars
at proof load shall not exceed ∅ /10, where ∅ is the nominal bar diameter.
2. Unless otherwise shown on the Drawings, minimum anchor embedment and proof load
shall be as follows:
Specifier Note: The proof loads provided in the following tables are based on the lesser of 50% of the minimum
ultimate bond strength in C20/25 concrete or 75% of the bar yield (Grade 500 reinforcing bar). The data shown
are appropriate for fast curing hybrid and slow curing Epoxy adhesive injection systems. Tension development
length values are based on Manufacturer’s Fastening Technology Manual for Post-installed Reinforcing Bars B
2.11, loaded with narrow support and edge distance ≥ 4 ∅ , bar spacing ≥ 8 ∅ (concrete splitting condition),.
Proof loads for shorter embedment but not less then minimum embedment may be calculated proportionally.
REINFORCING BAR GRADE 500, ribbed bars
INJECTION ADHESIVE SYSTEM: Fast Curing Hybrid and Slow Curing Epoxy Adhesive
BAR BAR EMBEDMENT LENGTH IN NORMAL WT. CONCRETE (C20/25)
SIZE
MINIMUM Fast curing Hybrid Adhesive Slow Curing Epoxy Adhesive
EMBEDMENT TENSION TENSION
∅ LENGTH PROOF PROOF
DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT
10 ∅ LOAD LOAD
LENGTH linst LENGTH linst
mm mm mm kN mm kN
10 100 180 27 170 27
12 120 260 46 220 46
16 190 360 69 270 69
20 240 500 108 340 108
22 265 580 131 370 131
25 300 700 169 420 169
28 335 - - 540 212
32 385 - - 670 277
40 480 - - 980 434
Issue 09/2003
4/4
Postinstalled Reinforcement Bars B 2.11
Europe
A13 Approvals and Test Reports
1. List of approvals for Hilti HIT-HY 150
Country: USA Country: Germany

Approval body: International Conference of Building Approval body: Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt)
Officials (ICBO) Approval No.: Z-12.8-1648
Approval No.: Evaluation Report # 5193 Title: Bewehrungsanschluß mit Hilti-
Title: Hilti HIT HY -150 Adhesive Anchor System Injektionsmörtel HIT-HY 150
Remark: Covers threaded rod and reinforcing bar (Rebar conections with Hilti injection
applications in concrete mortar HIT-HY 150)
Remark: Post installed rebar anchoring for
Country: USA BSt 500 rebars Ø8 – Ø25,
Approval body: City of Los Angeles (COLA) design according to DIN 1045 / EC 2
Approval No.: Research Report 25257
Country: France
Country: USA Approval body: SOCOTEC
Approval body: Southern Bulding Code Congress Approval No.: BX 1032
International (SBCCI) Title: HY 150 fers à béton
Approval No.: Report No. 9930 Remark: REBAR
2. List of approvals for Hilti HIT-RE 500

Country: France
Country: USA Approval body: SOCOTEC
Approval body: International Conference of Building Approval No.: KX 0893
Officials (ICBO) Title: HIT-RE500 pour l’ancrage d’armatures
Approval No.: Evaluation Report # 6010; August 1, 2002 pour béton armé
Title: Hilti HIT RE 500 Adhesive Anchor System Remark: REBAR
Remark: Covers threaded rod and reinforcing bar
applications in concrete
3. Test Reports
Hilti Corporation
FL-9494 Schaan
Principality of Liechtenstein Hilti Fastening Technology Manual FTM B 2.11
Europe
www.hilti.com
Issue09/2003
1/1

Hilti HIT-Rebar Injection

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hilti HIT-Rebar Injection

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rebar Fastening Technology Manual

Bonded-in Reinforcement B 2.11

Hilti HIT-Rebar Injection System

Based on the safety concept of

Eurocode 2 (ENV 1992-1-1 : 1992)

and Hilti Fastening Technology

The following symbols apply:

1. Design model for reinforced concrete

1.2 Strut-and-tie model:

1.3 Joint to be roughened

Figure 1b: Roughen Joint

4. Design model for anchors in concrete:

Figure 4: Anchor model

Ultimate Limit States

Partial Safety Factors for Ultimate Limit States {Cl. 2.3.3}

Partial safety factors for actions in building structures {Cl. 2.3.3.1}

Characteristic strengths of materials

Reinforcing steel {Cl 3.2}

a) 45° ≤ a ≤ 90° for all h values c) : h > 250 mm

b) h ≤ 250 mm d) : h > 600 mm

2.1.1 Ultimate bond stress {5.2.2.2}

Basic anchorage length {5.2.2.3}

The transverse reinforcement should be evenly distributed along the

Required anchorage length {5.2.3.3}

αa = 1 for straight bars

Lap Length {5.2.4.1.3}

ls = lb,net α1 ≥ ls,min {eq. 5.7}

Additional rules for high bond bars exceeding 32 mm in diameter {5.2.6}

The cross sectional area of the reinforcement should not

In monolithic construction, even when simple supports

at least 25% of the maximum bending moment in the span.

Length of longitudinal reinforcement

For standard cases:

Cut-of bars should be anchored with

The anchorage length is measured from the line of contact

see figure 5.12:

Anchorage of bottom reinforcement at intermediate supports {5.4.2.1.5}

Cast in situ solid slabs {5.4.3}

Flexural reinforcement {5.4.3.2}

Secondary transverse reinforcement should be at least 20% of the main reinforcement

Reinforcement in slabs near supports {5.4.3.2.2}

Reinforced concrete walls {5.4.7}

Limit States of Cracking {4.4.2}

Note: Normally, serviceability requirements are specified by the owner.

Minimum reinforcement areas {4.4.2.2}

As = k c * k * fct,eff * A ct / σs {eq. 4.78}

Summery of reinforcement detailing provisions

Anchorage length l inst : A s,req {equation 5.4, EC 2}

Minimum anchorage length lb,min = 0.3 lb ≥ 10 φ or 100 mm in tension {equation 5.5, EC 2}

Fs = VSd * a1 / d + NSd {eq. 5.15, EC 2}

Curtailment of reinforcement the greater of: l b,net or d {5.4.2.1.3 (2), EC 2}

Lap splice l s: l s = l b,,net ⋅ α 1 ≥ l s,min {equation 5.7, EC 2}

% of spliced bars < 30 % All > 30%

l s,min = 0.3l b 0.42l b 0.6lb

Two failure modes can be considered:

b) Splitting failure (fig. 3):

2.1 Model for load transfer at lapped bar splices

2.2 Influence of spacing and cover on splitting and spaling of concrete

3. Bond behaviour of post installed ribbed bars

2. Splice tests to check bond stiffness suitability

cast -in cast-in

post -installed post-installed

Specimen size: 222x300mm Specimen size: 280x300mm

Table 2: Failure loads of splice tests (mean value of 3 tests each)