Está en la página 1de 1365

RILEM_Connections_between_Steel_COncrete_Stutgart_2001

0_Preface by R. Eligehausen
1_Where structural steel and concrete meet by J.W.B. Stark, D.A. Hordijk
10_Study on standard test methods for post-installed anchors by Y. Hosokawa, K. Nakano, Y. Oohaga, S. Usami, K. Imai
100_Experimental investigations on the bahaviour of strip shear connectors with powder actuated fasteners by M. Fontana, H. Beck, R. Bärtschi
101_Design concept of nailed shear connections in composite tube columns by G. Hanswille, H. Beck, T. Neubauer
102_An experimental study on shear characteristics of perfobond strip and its rational strength equations by U. Yoshitaka, H. Tetsuya, M. Kaoru
103_Behavior of lying shear studs in reinforced concrete slabs by U. Kuhlmann, K. Kürschner
104_Composite bridge with compression joint connection concrete end slab to steel girder finite element method by M.V. Lammens
105_Perfo-bond connection and tests by S. Poot
106_Development and application of saw-tooth connections for composite structures by J. Schlaich
107_Geometry, behaviour and design of high capacity saw-tooth connections by V. Schmid
108_Composite bridge with compression joint - Connection concrete end slab to steel girder - Dowels divided in groups by D. Tuinstra
109_TH~1
11_Static behavior of anchors under combinations of tension and shear loading by D. Lotze, R.E. Klingner, H.L. Graves, III
110_Influence of fatigue loads in tension on short cast-in-place anchors in concrete by E. Cadoni
111_A test proposal for fatigue experimental studies on stud shear connectors by G. Natalino, E. Giuriani
112_Innovative interface systems for steel-girders-concrete-deck connection by M.K. Tadros S.S. Badie, A.M. Girgis
113_Non-linear analyssis of steel-concrete composite beams a finite element model by C. Faella E. Martinelli E. Nigro
114_Connections between prestressed concrete bridge decks and composite bridge decks - Hybrid construction by D. Jankowski, O. Fischer, M. Matthes
115_Anchorage behavior of 90-degree hooked beam bars in reinforced concrete wall-beam intersections by O. Joh, Y. Goto, A. Kitano
116_Embedded steel bearings instead of concrete NIBS by M.R. Kintscher
117_Anchorage zone in a steel-concrete composite slab with unbonded tendons by H. Koukkari
118_Connections for continuous framing in precast concrete structures by G. Krummel
119_Standoff screws as shear connectors for composite trusses push-out test results and analysis by J.R.U. Mujagic W.S. Easterling T.M. Murray
12_Improved structural model for channel bars with more than 2 anchors by J. Kraus, J. Ozbolt, R. Eligehausen
120_EX~1
122_Design and construction of a concrete-filled steel tube joint by S.P. Schneider, D.R. Kramer, D.L. Sarkkinen
123_Friction slipping behavior between concrete and steel - Aiming the development of bolted friction-slipping joint by T. Yoshioka, M. Ohkubo
124_AN~1
125_Low-cycle fatigue behaviour of pull-push specimens with headed stud shear connectors by S. Erlicher, O.S. Bursi, R. Zandonini
126_Static tests on various types of shear connectors for composite structures by H.C. Galjaard, J.C. Walraven
127_Structural monitoring of hybrid specimens at early age using fibre optic sensors by B. Glisic, D. Inaudi
128_Development of innovative composite system- Between steel and concrete members by K. Kitagawa, H. Watanabe, Y. Tachibana, H. Hiragi, A.
Kurita
129_An experimental study on the bond-slip relationship between the concrete and steel with stud by K. Konno, A. Farghaly, T. Ueda
13_Anchors in low and high strength concrete by J. Kunz, Y. Yamamoto, M. Berra
130_The behavior of beam-to-box column connection of CFT with air cavity by M.-J. Lee, M.-S. Choi, J.-H. Kim, S.-W. Jun
131_Sheet reinforcement by O. Matthaei, H.-P. Andrä, N.V. Tue
132_Composite girders of reduced height by U. Khulmann, J. Fries, A. Rieg
133_Innovative development of light steel composites in buildings by R.M. Lawson, S.O. Popo-Ola, D.N. Varley
134_Intentional and unintentional shear connections in shallow floor composite structures by M.V. Leskelä
14_Development of common uniform regulations in Europe for the assessment of metal anchors by K. Laternser
15_Behavior of multiple-anchor fastenings subjected to combined tension_shear loads and bending moment by L. Li, R. Eligehausen
16_Load bearing capacity of torque-controlled expansion anchors by L. Li
17_Behaviour and design of anchors close to an edge under torsion by R. Mallée
18_Fixing new anchors concerning relevant base plate thickness by R. Mallée, F. Burkhardt
19_Installation verification of mechanical and adhesive anchors by L. Mattis
2_Fastening technique - Current status and future trends by R. Eligehausen, I. Hofacker, S. Lettow
20_Steel capacity of headed studs loaded in shear by N.S. Anderson, D.F. Meinheit
21_The analysis of fastener strength using the limit state approach by J.J. Melcher, M. Karmazínová
22_Behavior of shear anchors in concrete stastical analysis and design recommendations by H. Muratli, R.E. Klingner, H.L. Graves, III
23_Study on shear transfer of joint steel bar and concrete shear key in concrete connections by K. Nakano, Y. Matsuzaki
24_Performance of undercut anchors in comparison to cast-in-place headed studs by P. Pusill-Wachtsmuth
25_Shear anchoring in concrete close to edge by N. Randl, M. John
26_Behavior of tensile anchors in concrete statistical analysis and design recommendations by M. Shirvani, R.E. Klingner, H.L. Graves, III
27_Performance of single anchors near an edge under varying angles of loading by R.E. Wollmershauser, U. Nestler, V. Smith
28_The prequalification of anchors in the united states of america past, present and future by R.E. Wollmershauser
29_On the ratio of plate thickness to stud diameters for steel concrete stud shear connectors by H.D. Wright, A. Elbadawy, R. Cairns
3_Anchoring to concrete_the new ACI approach by J.E. Breen, E.-M. Eichinger, W. Fuchs
30_INC~1
31_Corrosion behavior of materials in fixing applications by N. Arnold
32_Behaviour of post-installed anchors in case of fire by K. Bergmeister, A. Rieder
33_Durability of galvanized, post-installed fasteners to concrete by K. Menzel, B. Hagmayer
34_Durability of stainless steel connections with respect to corrosion by U. Nürnberger
35_Fibre resistance of steel anchors in concrete by M. Reick
36_Anchoring with bonded fasteners by R.A. Cook, R.C. Konz
37_Experimental study on performance of bonded anchors in the low strength reinforced concrete by T. Akiyama, Y. Yamamoto, S. Ichihashi, T. Katagiri
38_Behavior of grouted anchors by R.A. Cook, N.A. Zamora, R.C. Konz
39_Long time load-carrying capacity of bonded anchors by L. Elfgren, G. Danielsson, I. Holm, G. Söderlind
4_Evolution of fastening design methods in Europe by W. Fuchs
40_Transmission of shear loads with post-installed rebars by J. Kunz
41_Design of anchorages with bonded anchors tension load by B. Lehr, R. Eligehausen
42_Load bearing bahavior and design of single adhesive anchors by J. Meszaros, R. Eligehausen
43_Rebar anchorage in concrete with injections adhesive by M. Reuter, T. Greppmeir, F. Münger
44_Investigations on bonding behaviour of the reinforcements in historic masonry by M. Raupach, J. Brockmann, A. Domink, M. Schürholz
45_Actual trends in chemical fixings from capsule to injection systems by J. Schätzle
46_PER~1
47_Study on the performance evaluation of the new capsule typed bonded anchor by M. Yonetani, A. Fukuoka, Y. Matsuzaki
48_Seismic behavior of connections between steel and concrete by J.O. Jirsa
49_Test on connectors for seismic retrofitting of concrete and masonry structures in Mexico by S.M. Alcocer, L. Flores
5_Probabilistic calibration of design methods by W. Fuchs
50_Design and construction of heavy industrial anchorage for power-plants by P.J. Carrato, W.F. Brittle
51_Dynamic behavior of single and double near-edge anchors loaded in shear by J.H. Gross, R.E. Klingner, H.L. Graves, III
52_Post-installed rebar connections under seismic loading by I. Hofacker, R. Eligehausen
53_An evaluation of tensile capacity of anchor system in NPPS by actual model tests by J. Jung-Bum, W. Sang-Kyun, S. Yong-Pyo, L. Jong-Rim
54_Structural behavior of SRC column - RC beam joint under monotonic and cyclic load by S.-H. Lee, Y.-K. Ju, S.-C. Chun, D.-Y. Kim
55_Dynamic behavior of tensile anchors to concrete by M. Rodriguez, D. Lotze, J. Hallowell Gross, Y.-G. Zhang, R.E. Klingner, H.L. Graves, III
56_Test methods for seismic qualification of post-installed anchors by J.F. Silva
57_Safety concept for fastenings in nuclear power plants by T.M. Sippel, J. Asmus, R. Eligehausen
58_Experimental study on seismic performance of beam members connected with post-installed anchors by R. Tanaka, K. Oba
59_Shallow shear anchor bolts for structural seismic strengthening of columns with wing wall by Y. Yamamoto, Y. Hattori, T. Koh, M. Kato
6_Current status of post-installed anchor application in Japan by R. Tanaka
60_Seismic response of multiple-anchor connections to concrete by Z. Yong-gang, R.E. Klingner, H.L. Graves, III
61_Smeared fracture Finite Element (FE) - Analysis of reinforced concrete structures - Theory and examples by J. Ozblot_
62_Numerical and experimental investigations of the splitting failure mode of fastenings by J. Asmus, J. Ozbolt
63_Three dimensional modeling of an anchorage to concrete using metal anchor bolts by H. Boussa, G. Mounajed, B. Mesureur, J.-V. Heck
64_Influence of bending compressive stresses on the concrete cone capacity by M. Bruckner, R. Eligehausen, J. Ozbolt
65_ATENA - An advanced tool for engineering analysis of connections by V. Cervenka, J. Cervenka, R. Pukl
66_A computational model for double-head studs by A. Haufe, E. Ramm
67_Behavior and design of fastenings with headed anchors at the edge under arbitrary loading direction by J. Hoffmann, J. Ozbolt, R. Eligehausen
68_Evaluation of a bridge deck strengthening with shear connectors finite element analysis and experimental results by A.J. Leite
69_Numerical analysis of group effect in bonded anchors with different bond strengths by Y.-J. Li, R. Eligehausen
7_Design method for splitting failure mode of fastenings by J. Asmus, R. Eligehausen
70_Simulation of fastening systems utilizing chemical and mechanical anchors by J. Nienstedt, R. Mattner, U. Nestler, C. Song
71_Headed stud anchor - Cyclic loading and creep-cracking interaction of concrete by J. Ozbolt, J. Hofmann, R. Eligehausen
72_Numerical investigations of headed studs with inclined shoulder by P. Pivonka, R. Lackner, H.A. Mang
73_Simulating investigations of headed studs with inclined shoulder by R. Pukl, J. Cervenka, V. Cervenka
74_Non-supported crash barriers - Proof of the concrete resistances according to the concrete-capacity-method by J. Buhler
75_Reconstruction of multi-layer-walls by E. Dereser, J. Buhler
76_Load carrying capacity of fasteners in concrete railay sleepers by H. Thun, S. Utsi, L. Elfgren, P. Nilsson, B. Paulsson
77_Anchorage with headed bars with exterior beam-column joints by J. Hegger, W. Roeser
78_Halfen HDB-S bars as shear reinforcement in slabs and beams by J. Hegger, K. Fröhlich, R. Beutel, W. Roeser
79_Behaviour of fasteners in concrete with coarse recycled concrete and masonry aggregates by D.A. Hordijk, R. van der pluijm
8_Behaviour and design of fastenings of shear lugs in concrete by H. Michler, M. Curbach
80_Regarding strength of anchor bolts used for PCa Curtain wall fasteners by H. Kawamura, T. Otobe, S. Oka
81_New method of reconstruction - Strengthening of old buildings by M. Marjanishvili, T. Zuzadze, D. Ramishvili, A. Lebanidze
82_Fastening in masonry by A. Meyer, T. Pregartner
83_Study on design method of joint panels for hybrid railway rigid-frame bridges by H. Nishida, K. Murata, T. Takayama
84_Tension stiffening model based on bond by M.A. Polak, K. Blackwell
85_OVE~1
86_Redundant structures fixed with concrete fasteners by M. Rößle, R. Eligehausen
87_Numerical and experimental analysis of post-installed rebars spliced with cast-in-place rebars by H.A. Spieth, J. Ozbolt, R. Eligehausen, J. Appl
88_Dowel action of titanium bars connecting marble elements by E. Vintzileou, K. Papadopoulos
89_Case study - Application of high strength post-tensioned rods for anchoring aerial tram structures to rock by G.P. Wheatley
9_Safety relevant aspects for torque controlled expansion anchors by H. Gassner, E. Wisser
90_Behaviour and design of fastenings with concrete screws by J.H.R. Küenzlen, T.M. Sippel
91_Behaviour and design of anchors for lifting and handling in precast concrete elements by D. Lotze
92_Behaviour of plastic anchors in cracked and uncracked concrete by T. Pregartner, R. Eligehausen
93_TES~1
94_A new step forward for composite bridges - The Bras de la Plaine Bridge by E. Barlet, G. Causse, J.-P. Viallon
95_Anchorage of the steel elements to the concrete piers at the specific pipe bridges over a Danube-bay in Budapest by B. Csiki
96_BEH~1
97_Recent developments and chances of composite structures by U. Kuhlmann
98_Design of lying studs with longitudinal shear force by U. Breuninger
99_STU~1
Preface

Anchorage by fasteners and composite structures of steel and concrete have seen
dramatic progress in research, technology and application over the past decade. The
understanding of the fundamental principles underlying both disciplines has
significantly improved. Concurrently, there has been rapid growth in the
development of sophisticated new products and the establishment of international
directives and codes to ensure their safe and economical use in a wide range of
engineered structures.

Although they deal with very similar problems, the two disciplines have developed
independently from each other. To optimize the use of composite structures and
fastenings to concrete, however, it is necessary to have knowledge of both: the local
behavior of the fastening system and the global behavior of the structure. It became
apparent that a forum offering the opportunity to expand and to exchange experience
in the field of connecting steel and concrete would benefit all involved. Furthermore
this forum would aid in the rapid dissemination of new ideas, technologies and
solutions as well as explore new areas of research.

To meet these objectives the first symposium on 'Connections between Steel and
Concrete' was conducted in Stuttgart, Germany from September 9 to 12, 2001
organized under the auspices of RILEM, the International Union of Testing and
Research Laboratories for Materials and Structures and the University of Stuttgart.
The event was cosponsored by the American Concrete Institute (ACI), the
International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib) and the International
Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE). Experts from all facets
of the research, design, construction and anchor manufacturing community from
around the world were invited to present papers covering the topics of testing,
behavior and design, durability, exceptional applications, strengthening and
structures as well as related topics such as anchorage to masonry.
Regrettably, due to the limitation on the number of papers, dictated by the time frame
of the symposium, not all worthy papers proposed for presentation could be
accepted. 134 authors were invited by the scientific committee to address the topic of
connections between steel and concrete at the symposium. Their papers are gathered
in this volume. I hope this volume will significantly contribute to knowledge in the
field of connecting steel and concrete, related design methods, code specifications
and new applications.

I wish to thank the authors for their excellent contributions and the scientific
committee for the useful technical advice. I would like to express particular thanks to
Mr. Stefan Fichtner and Werner Fuchs for their essential assistance in the local
organization of the symposium and the preparation of the present volume.

Rolf Eligehausen
Stuttgart, September 2001
WHERE STRUCTURAL STEEL AND CONCRETE MEET
J.W.B. Stark*, D.A. Hordijk**
*Delft University of Technology CiTG, The Netherlands
**Adviesbureau ir. J.G. Hageman B.V., The Netherlands

Abstract
Traditionally "steel structures" and "concrete structures" formed more or less two
different worlds in structural engineering. However, fortunately this situation is changing
rapidly. It is now recognised that each of the two materials have advantages and
disadvantages and that often an optimal solution is found by combining both materials in
for example a "Composite steel-concrete construction" or a "Mixed construction".
It is important that the design rules for the two materials are consistent, especially for
those components connecting both materials. However, in the past the design standards
and recommendations for concrete and steel have been developed separately. So
evidently at this moment there are still considerable differences in design assumptions
and treatment of various aspects.
During drafting of the Eurocodes and the conversion of the ENV's into EN's these
inconsistencies became apparent. As the Eurocodes, additional to level national
differences, also aim at harmonisation over the materials, it is now urgent to trace
inconsistencies and find solutions for improvement.
In this paper situations in modern buildings are described where steel and concrete meet.
On the basis of an overview of the historic situation in education and practice,
differences in approaches for concrete and steel design can be explained. Then for some
aspects of steel-concrete-connections the present approaches will be discussed and
compared with emphasis on inconsistencies, gaps and possibilities for harmonisation of
design rules.

1. Introduction

In the past for the design of a building the choice was normally between a concrete
structure or a steel structure. Looking at recent practice in Europe there is an evident
tendency that designers also consider the combined use of concrete and steel in the form
of composite or mixed structures as a serious alternative. Use of composite elements in

1
the form of beams, columns and composite slabs is already common practice in many
countries (see Figure 1).
Composite slab

Composite beam

Composite column

Fig. 1: Composite elements

Applications are supported by accepted National Standards or Recommendations,


including rules for the design and verification of the connection between the concrete
and steel parts. These National Standards will be replaced by a Harmonised European
Standard: EN 1994 - Eurocode 4 [1], now being in a final stage of completion.
However, this supporting material is not available for mixed constructions where
(reinforced or prestressed) concrete elements and structural steel elements are used in
combination. The elements itself are covered by the respective design standards for
concrete and steel. But in many cases the joints where the elements meet form a black
spot as far as Design Standards and information is concerned. So the designer has to
develop design models based on a creative interpretation of methods and rules in use for
concrete and steel. It is of course a complication when these design methods for the
different materials are not consistent. In the past the Design Standards and
Recommendations for concrete and steel have been developed separately. So evidently at
this moment there are still considerable differences in design assumptions and treatment
of various aspects. Some examples of these differences will be illustrated in this paper.
That this situation exists is understandable from the historic perspective where
separation existed for education and design practice between concrete and steel. At
Universities students were (are) separately educated by professors specialised in concrete
or steel. Each had (have) separate academic chairs and departments.
Also in practice often difference is made between concrete designers and steel designers
rather than structural engineers. This is also caused by the fact that for concrete most
often the complete design is made by the design consultant while for steel the task of the
design consultant is limited to the overall structural design. Detailing for steel structures,
inclusive connection design, is often carried out by the fabricator or a specialised design
office. Also professional organisations act separately. In Germany, for example,
“Betonverein” and “DAST” and on an international level CEB and FIP (now merged to
fib) and ECCS act respectively for the concrete and the steel society. Incidentally there
are examples of co-operation between these organisations as for example in the “Joint

2
Committee on Structural Safety” and the “Joint Committee for Composite Structures”. It
would be useful to form a similar Joint Co-operation for connections between concrete
and steel (and possibly other materials).

2. Typology

Many different details exist depending on the type of members to be connected, the
actions to be transferred and the performance requirements. An exhaustive treatment of
all possible details is not possible in the context of this paper. Just to give an idea an
arbitrary selection is made.

2.1 Column bases


This is one of the most commonly used details. The steel column is connected to a base
plate, which is attached to the concrete foundation by some form of so-called “holding
down” assembly. A typical detail is shown in Figure 2. The system of column, base
plate and holding down assembly is known as a column base. The holding down
assembly comprises two, but more commonly four (or more) holding down bolts
(anchors). These may be cast-in-place, or post-installed to the completed foundation.
Cast-in-place bolts sometimes have some form of tubular or conical sleeve, so that the
top of the bolts are free to move laterally, to allow the base plate to be accurately
located.

base plate

anchor
Fig. 2: Typical detail of a column base grout

Base plates for cast-in assemblies are usually provided with oversized holes and thick
washer plates to permit translation of the column base. Anchor plates or similar
embedded arrangements can be attached to the embedded end of the anchor assembly to
resist pull-out. Post-installed anchors may be used, being positioned accurately in the
hardened concrete. Post-installed assemblies include, for instance, torque-controlled
expansion anchors, under-cut anchors and bonded anchors (see also [2]).

3
2.2 Connections of steel beams to concrete walls or columns
A stiff concrete core often provides the stability of a multi-storey steel frame. The steel
beams of the floors are connected to the wall of the concrete core (see Figure 3a). To
provide sufficient fire resistance sometimes (prefabricated) concrete columns are used
instead of steel columns with fire protection. In Figure 3b a connection is shown as used
in a refurbishment project where new steel floor beams are connected to existing
concrete columns by means of an extended end plate connection.

concrete core

anchor

a b
Fig. 3 Connection composite beam-concrete core (a) ; steel beam-concrete column (b).

A great number of different forms of connection details are possible for these types of
connection. The choice of the most appropriate solution is dependent of the following
aspects of consideration:
• Sequence of construction
• Method of fabrication of the core or column.
• Tolerances of both concrete and steel
• Type of action effects (shear, tension or compression, moment)
• Static or variable loading
• Reversal of loading
• Support conditions (degrees of freedom)
• Required static properties (resistance, stiffness and deformation capacity)
• Behaviour under elevated temperature caused by fire

2.3 Outrigger in a high rise building


In some structures taylor-made solutions have to be invented by the designer. As an
example in Figure 4 an outrigger structure in a high rise building is shown. The steel
outrigger had to be connected to a concrete core and to a composite column.

4
Outrigger

Composite column Concrete core

Fig. 4: Outrigger in a high rise building

3 Standards and Recommendations


The European Standards Organisation (CEN) has planned to develop a complete set
of Harmonized European Building Standards. This set includes Standards for concrete,
steel and composite steel-concrete buildings and bridges. The Eurocodes, being the
Design Standards, form part of this total system of European Standards, together with
Standards for fabrication and erection and Product Standards. After a period of
experimental use of the ENV(European Pre Standard)-versions of the Eurocodes, a start
has been made with the conversion to EN’s (European Standards). At the time of the
conference, draft prEN versions of the relevant parts covering – "General Rules and
Rules for Buildings" will have been completed [1,3,4].
The Eurocode-programme is aiming at a two dimensional harmonization:
1) Harmonization across the borders of the European Countries;
2) Harmonization between different construction materials, construction methods, types
of building and civil engineering works to achieve full consistency and compatibility
of the various Codes with each other and to obtain comparable safety levels.
Especially the 2nd item is relevant for the topic of this paper. The designer of a “mixed
structure” is concerned with the Eurocodes listed in Table 1. A check of the present
drafts shows that he will find not many detailed rules specific for the design of joints
between concrete and steel elements.

Table 1: Eurocodes relevant to “mixed” structures


Material Standard Subject
General EN 1990 Basis of Design
“ EN 1991-1 Actions on structures
Concrete EN 1992-1-1 Concrete - General & Buildings
Steel EN 1993-1-1 Steel - Common rules
“ EN 1993-1-8 Steel – Design of joints
“ EN 1993-3 Steel – Buildings
Composite EN 1994-1-1 Composite steel & concrete – General & buildings

5
• prEN 1992-1-1 (Eurocode 2 – 2nd Draft Jan. 2001) [3]
In Eurocode 2 no specific section for the design of connections is included. This
situation will change since recently within CEN/TC250/SC2 a new Working Group
‘Design of fastenings’ started their activities.
• prEN 1993-1-8 (Eurocode 3 – 2nd Draft Dec. 2000) [4]
Eurocode 3 has a separate part for the design of steel joints. The present draft
contains design rules for fasteners (bolts, rivets and welds) but also principles and
application rules for the design of joints. The principles are so general that they
apply globally to ”mixed” joints as well. For example clause 2.5 states:
“2.5 Design assumptions
(1)P Joints shall be designed by distributing the internal forces and moments to
fulfill the following criteria:
(a) the assumed internal forces and moments are in equilibrium with the
applied forces and moments;
(b) each element in the joint is capable of resisting the forces or stresses
assumed in the analysis;
(c) the deformations implied by this distribution are within the deformation
capacity of the fasteners or welds and of the connected parts, and
(d) the deformations assumed in any design model based on yield lines are
based on rigid body rotations (and in-plane deformations) which are
physically possible.
(2)P In addition, the assumed distribution of internal forces shall be realistic with
regard to relative stiffnesses within the joint.”
The design method for joints in EN1993-1-8 is based on the so-called “component
method”. The advantage being that the rules for “all steel” joints can easily be
extended to ”mixed” joints. Detailed rules are given for the application of the
component method for typical steel joints but also for column bases.
• prEN 1994-1-1 (Eurocode 4 – 3rd Draft April 2001) [1]
Composite joints in frames for buildings are covered in Section 8 (and Annex A) of
prEN1994-1-1. This Section is consistent with prEN 1993-1-8. A great advantage is
that the design method in EN1993-1-8 is based on the component method so only
rules for properties of specific composite components had to be given in EN1994-
1-1. The proposed EN provisions therefore deal only with what is peculiar to
composite joints. It is assumed that the user of EN1994 will be familiar with EN
1993-1-8. Design moment resistance and rotational stiffness are each to be
“determined in a manner analogous to that for steel joints”. No attempt is made to
present detailed modifications to the provisions of the Steel Code.

So far Design Standards as covered by the Eurocodes. Other groups also produce design
guidance.
A CEB Task Group (since the merging of CEB and FIP in 1998 now a fib Group)
prepared a Design Guide for fastenings in concrete [5]. It only covers the load transfer
into the concrete. For the design of the fixture (f.e. a base plate) the designer is referred

6
to “the appropriate code of practice”. In [5] so far only rules for cast-in-place headed
anchors and post-installed expansion and undercut anchors are given. Work is in
progress for other types of anchor, like bonded anchors and channel bars.
Many types of anchor are special products. The determination of the characteristic
properties is not covered in the Eurocodes. They either refer to Harmonized Product
Standards or ETA‘s (European Technical Approvals). For ETA‘s, guidelines (ETAG’s)
are being produced by the European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA). In
the ETAG for “Metal anchors for use in concrete” [6] a Design Guide is given in an
Annex. The motivation for including design rules was the fact that there is a relation
between the anchor properties and the design and that a Design Guide was not yet
provided by CEN. With the new Working Group of CEN/TC250/SC2, as mentioned
before, this situation will change. The elastic design approach in the ETAG Design
Guide [6] is similar to the CEB guideline [5]. However the CEB document is more
comprehensive than the ETAG design guideline, since also a plastic design approach is
included, while cast-in-place anchors are also covered.
As a result of a joint project of ECCS/TWG10.2 “Semi-rigid connections” and
COST/C1/WG2 a publication [7] was issued. This publication gives details of a design
method for column bases. It covers the calculation of characteristic values for the
resistance and rotational stiffness. An evaluation of the CEB Design Guide model is
included.

3. Comparison of some fastener aspects in different Codes

3.1 General
As mentioned before, in Eurocode 2 connections are not treated. Therefore, for some
aspects the rules in Eurocode 3 are compared with the CEB/EOTA Design Guidelines. In
Section 3.2 rules for the resistance of the steel part of a single anchor fastening are
compared. In Section 3.3 some aspects related to a base plate connection are discussed.

3.2 Anchor strength


In table 2 resistances for the steel part of a single anchor according EC3 and EOTA/CEB
are compared. Values are given for the design tension resistance Ft.Rd (NRd.s) and the
design shear resistance Fv.Rd (VRd.s). For some cases there are significant differences. The
design shear strength according to EC 3 is always greater than that according to CEB
and EOTA. It should be noted that in case of shear there is a difference between a bolt
connecting two steel parts and an anchor connecting a steel component to concrete.
The design resistance to combined tension and shear load is according CEB [5] and
EOTA [6] to be determined with the following interaction equation:
N Sd VSd N VSd
+ ≤ 1,2 but Sd ≤ 1 and ≤1 (1)
N Rd VRd N Rd VRd
It is noted that this yields conservative results for steel failure and that when NRd and VRd
are governed by steel failure more accurate results are obtained by:

7
2 2
 N Sd   VSd 
  +   ≤ 1 (2)
 N Rd   VRd 
For bolts subjected to combined tension and shear Eurocode 3 [4] gives the following
interaction equation :
Fv.Sd Ft .Sd Ft .Sd
+ ≤ 1,0 but ≤1 (3)
Fv.Rd 1,4 ⋅ Ft .Rd Ft .Rd
The resistance functions in Eurocode 3 have been developed by statistical evaluation of a
international collection of test results evaluated in accordance with the procedure given
in Annex D of prEN1990 : “Basis of Design”

Table 2 Comparison of the design resistance of the steel part of a single anchor
according to Eurocode 3 [4] and the CEB/EOTA [4,5] Design Guidelines.
tension
‘Code’ ‘original equation’ 4.6 5.8 8.8 10.9
EC 3 Ft.Rd = 0,9⋅fub⋅As / γMb = 0,72⋅As⋅fuk 288⋅As 360⋅As 576⋅As 720⋅As
CEB/EOTA NRd,s= As⋅fyk / γMs = 0,83⋅As⋅fyk 200⋅As 333⋅As 533⋅As 750⋅As
Note:
fyk = characteristic steel yield strength (nominal value)
fuk = characteristic steel ultimate tensile strength (nominal value)
The ‘original equation’ differs between CEB and EOTA, but the result is, except for
10.9 anchors, equal; CEB result is shown.
shear
‘Code’ ‘original equation’ 4.6 5.8 8.8 10.9
EC 3 Fv.Rd= 0,6⋅fub⋅As / γMb = 0,48⋅As⋅fuk 192⋅As 384⋅As
Fv.Rd= 0,5⋅fub⋅As / γMb = 0,40⋅As⋅fuk 200⋅As 400⋅As
CEB/EOTA VRd,s= 0,6⋅As⋅fyk / γMs = 0,5⋅As⋅fyk 120⋅As 150⋅As 320⋅As 360⋅As
Note:
CEB/EOTA: for 10.9 anchors γMs=1,5 instead of 1,2 for lower classes.

In the CEB and EOTA Design Guidelines steel failure under a shear load with a lever
arm (causing combined shear and bending stresses in the anchor) is treated separately.
This is not covered by Eurocode 3.

3.4 Base plate connection


Probably the most common connection between concrete and steel is the base plate
connection of a column (see Figure 2). Quite a lot of steel research into the structural
behaviour was carried out in the past. These research activities mainly focussed on the
strength and stiffness of the steel base plate, while for the behaviour of concrete under
concentrated loads use was made of knowledge provided by the‘concrete-colleagues’.
For tensile loading “holding down bolts” have to be used, as they are named in the

8
normative Annex L of Eurocode 3 [4]. For the anchorage of these bolts reference is
made to Eurocode 2. This means that the anchorage should be such that steel yielding
governs anchorage failure. One could speak of an anchorage according to the reinforced
concrete technique. With the fastener technique relative shorter anchorages with other
governing failures modes (break out of concrete cone, pull-out and concrete splitting),
are introduced. The length of short anchors is normally about 10 times their diameter,
while for anchorages of reinforcing steel according to the concrete codes lengths of 20d
to 30d, depending on cover and concrete strength, are required.

Now two items from the CEB Design Guide will be discussed more in detail. These
items were selected because the authors expect that a combined effort of experts from
the steel and fastener groups shall lead to improvement of the design rules
.
Base plate stiffness and load distribution over the anchors.
In the CEB Design Guide [4] distinction is made between an elastic design approach and
a plastic design approach. The plastic approach is only acceptable when the anchor has
sufficient deformation capacity. For short anchors with a high steel strength this is often
not the case. Furthermore, in many situations the resistance of the concrete is reduced by
edge effects of the concrete element. This may also cause that the requirement for the
plastic approach is not fulfilled.
For an elastic approach it is required that the fixture does not deform under the design
actions. It may be assumed that this is valid when the base plate is rigid and in full
contact with the concrete or with a layer of mortar. Furthermore, the base plate may be
assumed to be rigid when the maximum steel stress under the design actions does not
exceed fyk/γMs with γMs = 1,1. It is expected that in practice this requirement will
sometimes not be fulfilled and/or even not checked in many cases. The guidance in [5]
on this aspect is rather limited, which can be understood since the document mainly
deals with the load transfer into the concrete.
According the CEB Design Guide the use of flexible end plates is permitted, provided
that the non-linear load distribution over the anchors and the associated prying forces are
taken into account.

Shear strength and contribution of friction


According the CEB Design Guide for base plates with a grout layer thicker than 3 mm
plastic design is not allowed, friction forces underneath the base plate should be
neglected and the shear capacity has to be calculated for the mechanism ‘shear load with
lever arm’. For column bases usually a grout layer with a thickness greater than 3 mm is
used. Though it is realised that there may be uncertainties about the strength and quality
of the grout layer, the CEB method will be very conservative in many practical cases.
This was confirmed by COST/WG2 [7] that compared design values with test results for
column bases loaded in shear and with a varying thickness of the grout layer [8].
In particular in case of low strength bolts and a thick grout layer (60 mm) the
experimentally obtained maximum shear load was many times (between 10 and 25 !!)
greater than the calculated characteristic shear strength of the connection.

9
5. Concluding remarks

In daily practice the two main structural materials concrete and steel are often used in
combination. When steel is fully incorporated in the concrete, as is the case with
reinforcement the interaction between these two materials is treated properly. This also
applies to composite elements. However, when concrete and steel elements are used in
combination in a mixed structure the designer is not supported with sufficient design
guidance. Significant improvement can still be achieved as far as Codes, engineering
practice and education is concerned. Though things are changing rapidly in a positive
direction, to some extent there are still two separate “worlds”. As far as the joint is
concerned, both “worlds” tackle the aspects related to their one material in detail and
look a little bit over the border to the other world. Since at the joint the interaction
between the two worlds play an essential role, it is of prime importance that the
treatment on both sides of the border is consistent. This is not the case yet.
As a result of the “two-world-situation” inconsistencies in Codes still exist and
properties of connections may not be fully utilised. Some examples have been given.
The authors of this paper, one with a steel and the other with a concrete background, are
of the opinion that with joint co-operation for several aspects of steel-concrete
connections improvement can be achieved. In that respect, this symposium is a perfect
initiative and may be a bases for new combined activities.

6. References

1. prEN 1994-1-1, ‘Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures –


Part 1: General rules and rules for buildings’, CEN, 3rd Draft, April 2001.
2. CEB ’Fastenings to concrete and masonry structures – State-of-the-art’ CEB-
bulletin no. 216, Thomas Telford, July 1994.
3. prEN 1992-1, ‘Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures – Part 1: General rules and
rules for buildings’, CEN, 2nd draft, January 2001.
4. ENV 1993-1-1: 1992, ‘Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: General
rules and rules for buildings’, CEN, April 1992.
5. CEB, ‘Design of Fastenings in Concrete. CEB Guide - Part 1 to 3’ CEB-bulletin no.
233, Thomas Telford, January 1997.
6. Guideline for European Technical Approval of Anchors (metal anchors) for use in
concrete. Part 1, 2 en 3 and Annexes A, B en C (Final Draft). EOTA, Brussels,
February 1997.
7. COST C1, ‘Column bases in steel building frames’, ECCS Technical Working
Group 10.2 ‘Semi-rigid connections’ and COST C1 WG 2, February 1999.
8. Bouwman, L.P., Gresnigt, A.M. and Romeijn, A., Research into the connection of
steel base plates to concrete foundations, Stevin report 25.6.89.05/c6, 1989 (in
Dutch).

10
FASTENING TECHNIQUE – CURRENT STATUS AND
FUTURE TRENDS
Rolf Eligehausen, Isabelle Hofacker and Steffen Lettow
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In the paper the current status and future trends of modern fastening technique are de-
scribed. Fastening technique is used in a wide range of the construction industry. By co-
operation between industry and research more economical and safe fastening systems
have been and will be developed, which work well in cracked and uncracked concrete.
Engineers use special software for the selection of fastening systems and the design of
fastenings according to the CC-method. For the installation of anchors technicians are
more and more supported by manufacturers with descriptive technical manuals and in
some cases with training courses. This will lead to an expanding field of application of
modern fastening technique.

1. Introduction

Modern fastening systems are becoming more important in civil engineering construc-
tions. In Figure 1 on basis of a simple graph an overview of the wide area of applications
of fastenings is given. Fastenings are used in all types of constructions. Because the
failure of a fastening may lead to an endangerment of human life or major economic
consequences, reliable fastenings are necessary.

To ensure reliable fastenings a good co-operation of producer, engineer and user is


needed (Figure 2). The producer has to supply efficient and well functioning fastening
systems, the engineer must choose the optimal fastening system for the application in
question and proof the adequate safety of the fastening by accurate design methods and
the user has to ensure a correct installation of the fasteners.

11
Figure 1. Examples of the field of application of fastenings Figure 2. Requirements to ensure
reliable fastenings

2. Fastening Systems

The fastening systems currently in use in concrete structures may be classified in cast-in-
place installations and post-installed installations for applications (Figure 3). Cast-in-
place systems are typically positioned in the formwork before the concrete is cast and
thus may also be used in members with dense reinforcement. Post-installed systems may
either be installed into drilled holes (drill installation) or be driven into the base material
with impact energy (direct installation). They are very flexible in application. For ten-
sion loading the load-transfer mechanisms employed by the fasteners may be identified
by three different types: friction, mechanical interlock and bond (Figure 4).

Figure 3. Fastening methods in concrete Figure 4. Load transfer mechanisms

12
Cast-in-place systems like headed anchors (Figure 5a) and channel bars (Figure 5b)
transfer tension load mainly by mechanical interlock to the concrete. Typical post-
installed fasteners based on the above mentioned load-transfer mechanisms are shown in
Figure 6. In case of expansion anchors (Figure 6a), the load is transferred to the concrete
mainly by friction. The frictional resistance depends on the expansion force generated by
the expansion of the anchor. Undercut anchors (Figure 6b) transfer tension load to the
concrete principally through mechanical interlock between a local undercut and the ex-
pansion element which results in locally high bearing stresses. The load transfer of
bonded anchors (Figure 6c) is ensured by bond stresses between threaded rod and mortar
and mortar and concrete along the embedment length. Often fastenings systems employ
a combination of load transfer mechanisms, e.g. bonded expansion anchors for use in
cracked concrete. During the last decade many innovative and well functioning fastening
systems have been developed by the industry often in close contact with research insti-
tutes which cover almost all applications encountered in practice (e.g. fastenings in non-
cracked and cracked concrete as well as fastenings in different types of masonry under
static and cyclic loading).

(a) (b)
Figure 5. Typical cast-in-place anchors

(a) (b) (c)


Figure 6. Typical types of post-installed anchors

13
A survey at about 50
German engineering
offices revealed that
engineers consider the
availability of de-
tailed technical data
(e.g. Technical Ap-
proval) on anchors as
the most important
criteria for anchor
selection (Figure 7).
Furthermore they ask
for fastening systems
that can be used in a
large variety of appli- Figure 7. Selection criteria of fastenings
cations. In contrast to
the general believe the low price of a fastening system seems not to be an important
selection criteria.

3. Testing of Fasteners

Fasteners must function properly in the application in question. To ensure this pre-
qualification testing is necessary. During the last years test programs to check the suita-
bility of anchors and to evaluate allowable conditions of use have been worked out by
EOTA (1997) and ACI (1985). They will be explained in detail during the conference.

In the suitability tests the behavior of fasteners under unfavorable conditions that may
occur during installation or the service life of the fastening (e.g. behavior in a wide crack
with w=0.5 mm) is checked. In Europe anchors that have passed the approval tests
which are mainly performed by an independent testing institute receive an European
Technical Approval (ETA) which is required for the use of anchors in safety related
applications.

4. Design of Fastenings

Fastenings may be loaded by tension-, shear-, or combined tension and shear loads and
bending moments. The loads may be static or dynamic. Fastenings may fail in several
different modes.

14
Under tension loading mechani-
cal fasteners may be pulled out
of the hole (Figure 9e), whereby
the concrete at the surface may
be damaged. This failure mode
will occur only if with expan-
sion anchors the expansion force
and with headed and undercut
anchors the bearing area is too
small. The most common failure
mode is the pulling of a concrete
cone (Figure 9b + d). For anchor
groups the individual cones may
overlap (Figure 9b) and for
fastenings at the edge the cone is
truncated by the edge (Figure
9d). With fastenings close to an
edge or in a thin concrete mem-
Figure 8. Load directions and failure modes ber splitting of the concrete
might occur (Figure 9a) and
headed anchors very close to an edge may generate a local blow-out failure (Figure 9f).
The maximum capacity of the fastening is governed by steel failure (Figure 9c).

Fastenings with a sufficiently large edge distance and embedment depth loaded in shear
will fail by a local concrete spall in front of the anchor followed by steel rupture (Figure
10a). If the embedment depth is not large enough, the concrete behind the anchor will
fail (pry-out failure, Figure 10b). Fastenings close to an edge often fail by a brittle edge
failure (Figure 10c, d + e).

Figure 9. Failure modes under tension loading Figure 10. Failure modes under shear loading

15
While in reinforced concrete constructions in general tensile forces are taken up by rein-
forcement this is often not possible with fastenings. Therefore fastenings without special
reinforcement utilize the concrete tensile capacity which – in case of concrete failure -
governs the failure load. This must be taken into account in the safety considerations.

In the design it must be shown that in the serviceability limit state the displacements of
the fasteners are smaller than allowable values and that in the ultimate limit state the
load acting on the fastening can be safely transmitted into the concrete. Furthermore the
fasteners must be durable during the expected service life.

The design of fastenings – as the design of structures – is based on the concept of partial
safety factors. It must be demonstrated that the design actions Sd are not larger than the
design resistance Rd (Equ. (4.1)). Formelabschnitt 4

S d ≤ Rd (4.1)

The design actions are distinguished between permanent or variable actions and actions
induced by restraint of imposed deformations (e.g. by temperature variations). In the
simplest case with one variable load Qk acting in the same direction as the permanent
load Gk we get

S d = γ G ⋅ Gk + γ Q ⋅ Qk (4.2)

The partial safety factors γG for permanent loads and γQ for variable loads are indepen-
dent of the material or failure mode. They may be different in different countries. In
Europe γG = 1.35 and γQ= 1.50 are used.

The design resistance is equal to the characteristic resistance (5%-quantile) divided by


the material safety factor γM (Equ. (4.3))

Rd ≤ Rk γ M (4.3)

The partial safety factor γM depends on the accepted probability of failure. It is influ-
enced by the failure mode (ductile steel failure or brittle concrete failure). In case of
concrete failure the value of γMc should reflect the utilization of the concrete tensile ca-
pacity. Furthermore it should take into account the sensitivity of a fastening system to
installation inaccuracies often observed in practice and to unfavorable conditions (e.g.
hole drilled with drill but with a diameter of the cutting edge at the upper tolerance lim-
it). In Europe values γMc = 1.80 (fastener with high installation safety) to γMc = 2.50
(fastener with low installation safety) are used.

16
To calculate characteristic resistances for different load directions and failure modes
sound engineering models should be available that are sufficient accurate and generally
accepted.

A comprehensive design method has been published by ACI 349 (1985). It is based on
the 45° cone model and assumes a constant tensile stress ( k1 ⋅ f c0.5 ) over the failure
surface ( k2 ⋅ hef ) (Equ. (4.4)).
2

N u ,c = k1 ⋅ f c0.5 ⋅ k2 ⋅ hef2 (4.4)

Intensive research has shown that in case of concrete structures failing in tension the
failure load should not be based on the theory of plasticity. But on fracture mechanics to
account for the size effect (Bažant (1984)). According to the size effect the failure load
of geometrical similar specimens will increase less than proportional with increasing
member size. Because of the very high strain gradient in the region of the load transfer
area the size effect is very pronounced in fastening technique (Eligehausen/Sawade
(1989), Eligehausen/Ožbolt (1990)). It can be taken into account by multiplying
0.5
Equ. (4.4) with the factor ( k5 / hef ) (Equ. (4.5)).

N u ,c = k3 ⋅ f c0.5 ⋅ k4 ⋅ hef2 ⋅ k5 / hef0.5


= k ⋅ f c0.5 ⋅ hef1.5 (4.5)

with: k1 - k5 = constants
fc = concrete compressive strength
hef = embedment depth

Figure 11 shows the concrete cone failure loads measured in tests can be predicted with
sufficient accuracy by Equ. (4.5). In contrast to that the failure loads are underestimated
by Equ. (4.4) for small embedment depths and are overestimated for large embedment
depths.

Furthermore the angle between the failure cone and the concrete surface is not 45° but
approximately 35° (Figure 12). Therefore assuming α = 45° the failure load of anchor
groups or fastenings at the edge may be overestimated.

17
3.0
Eligehausen et al. (1992/1) and (1992/2)
2.5 CC-method
Failure load [MN]

ACI-349 (1985)
2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Embedment depth [m]
Figure 11. Concrete cone failure loads of headed Figure 12. Angle of the failure cone as a
anchors under tensile load as a function of the function of the embedment depth (Fuchs,
embedment depth (fcc=33 MPa), (Eligehausen et al. Eligehausen, Breen (1995/2)
(1992/1), (1992/2))

The above described and other research results have been incorporated into the κ-method
for the design of fastenings which is described in the CEB State-of-the-Art-Report
(1994). In this method the influence of different parameters on the failure load (as edge
distance, spacing, eccentricity of the resultant force, surface reinforcement, cracked
concrete) is taken into account by κ−factors. Fuchs/Eligehausen/Breen (1995/1) devel-
oped the CC-method, which is based on the same mechanical models as the κ-method.
The CC-method visualizes the κ-factors of the κ−method. Furthermore, more recent
research results (e.g. Fuchs (1990), Eligehausen/Furche (1991), Lehmann (1993), Zhao
(1993), Furche (1994), Asmus (1999)) have been taken into account to cover all failure
modes. The CC-method is very user friendly and in most cases gives sufficiently accu-
rate results.

The CC-method has been incorporated in several design guides in Europe ((DIBt (1993),
EOTA (1997), CUR (2000) and SIA (1998)) and the USA ((IBC (2000) and ACI 318
(2001)) and is currently discussed in China. It is described in several papers of this con-
ference and open problems are discussed.

Recent research results (e.g. Cook et al. (1998), Meszaros (2001) and Lehr (2001))
demonstrate that for fastenings with bonded anchors a modification of the CC-method is
needed to cover their load transfer mechanism. These modifications will also be
discussed during this conference.

5. Cracked Concrete

In concrete structures often cracks will occur due to a variety of reasons (Beeby (1991)).
The most important are tensile stresses due to loads and due to restraint of imposed

18
deformations (e.g. caused by shrinkage, creep, temperature variations or support settle-
ments). Therefore according to codes for structural concrete in the serviceability limit
state the width of cracks must be limited to acceptable values by reinforcement. Exten-
sive measurements in practice demonstrate that under quasi-permanent load the characte-
ristic crack width is wk ≈ 0.3 mm (Bergmeister (1988), Eligehausen/Bozenhardt (1989)),
which agrees with the value generally accepted by codes.

Figure 13. Crack pattern at service load. The anchors were installed in uncracked concrete,
after Lotze (1987)

There is a high probability that fasteners installed in uncracked concrete will be located
in a crack if the concrete cracks (Figure 13), because high tensile stresses are caused in
the region of the fastening by prestressing and loading of anchors and the notch effect.
The influence of concrete cracking on anchor behavior depends on the type of anchor.

The failure load of anchors transferring tensile loads by mechanical interlock (e.g.
headed and undercut anchors) and failing by breaking a concrete cone is reduced by
about 25 % by a crack with a width w ≈ 0.3 mm (Figure 14) due to the disturbance of the
distribution of the tensile stresses around the anchor by the crack. A slightly larger re-
duction must be expected for torque controlled expansion anchors that function well in
cracked concrete (Figure 15).

19
Figure 14. Load-displacement curves of headed Figure 15. Load-displacement curves of
anchors in cracked and uncracked concrete torque controlled expansion anchors de-
(Furche, Dieterle (1986)) signed for use in cracked concrete in cracked
and uncracked concrete (Dieterle, Bozen-
hardt, Hirth, Opitz (1990))

Figure 16. Load-displacement curves of torque Figure 17. Load-displacement curves of


controlled expansion anchors designed for use in fully expanded displacement controlled
non-cracked concrete in cracked and uncracked expansion anchors in cracked and un-
concrete (Dieterle, Bozenhardt, Hirth, Opitz cracked concrete (Dieterle, Opitz (1988))
(1990))

20
However torque controlled expansion anchors that are designed for use in uncracked
concrete may not function at all if anchored in a crack (Figure 16). With deformation
controlled expansion anchors the failure load in cracked concrete (w = 0.3 mm) is on
average only 50 % of the value valid for non-cracked concrete (Figure 17). The
reduction of the failure load is even more pronounced if – as often in practice – the
anchors are partly expanded only.

Figure 18. Interference of bond between mortar Figure 19. Influence of cracks on the
and concrete caused by a crack failure load of capsule-type bonded anc-
hors under tension loading (Meszaros
(2001))

With bonded anchors the bond between mortar and concrete is partly destroyed by a
crack (Figure 18) which results in rather low failure loads and a large scatter (Figure 19).
With bonded expansion anchors expansion forces are generated by pulling the cone into
the mortar after crack opening (Figure 20). Therefore the failure load is only reduced by
about 30 % compared to non-cracked concrete (Figure 21).

If fastenings must be installed in reinforced concrete that may crack only fasteners with a
predictable behavior in cracked concrete (demonstrated in pre-qualification tests) should
be used and the influence of cracks on the failure load should be taken into account in
the design. Whether in a certain application the concrete may be considered as cracked
or non-cracked over the expected service life of the fastening should be decided by the
designer based on the rules for reinforced concrete.

21
Figure 20. Interference of bond between Figure 21. Load-displacement curves of bonded
mortar and concrete caused by a crack and expansion anchors in cracked and uncracked
load transfer mechanism of a bonded expan- concrete (schematically)
sion anchor

6. Installation of Fasteners

Fasteners must be installed correctly according to the design specifications and the in-
stallation instructions of the manufacturer. To reach this goal the installation instructions
- preferably in form of pictograms - should be detailed and clear and the installer should
be well trained.

The mistakes may not always


be as severe as shown in Figure
22. However, even smaller
mistakes (e.g. use of improper
drill bit, no or too little cleaning
of the hole, too small installati-
on torque, improper compaction
of the concrete in the region of
a cast-in-place fastening) may
influence the anchor behavior
significantly.

During the last decade


Figure 22. Fastening of column. According to the designespecially manufacturers have
the fastening should be installed directly on the concrete
done a lot to improve the situa-
surface, after Steiner (2000)
tion by distributing adequate
installation instructions. However the biggest problem is that many fasteners are
installed by untrained workers. According to a recent survey in Germany, 45% of the

22
polled engineers believe that fastenings are installed by inexperienced personal resulting
in an incorrect installation in about 50% of all applications (Schade (2001)). In other
countries the situation is probably not much better.

According to the authors opinion the situation will only improve significantly if only
workers with proper training are allowed to install safety related fastenings. And if this
is checked by supervision the proper training should be demonstrated by a certificate that
is issued after passing a corresponding test. Very good experiences have been made in
Germany with this approach for the post-installation of rebars.

7. Open Problems and Future Trends

With the CC-method fastenings under arbitrary loading can be designed. However, in
some applications (e.g. fastenings close to an edge and loaded in shear parallel to or
away from the edge) the design models are rather conservative and should be improved.
Furthermore the influence of special reinforcement on the strength and ductility of
fastenings should be taken into account by improved design models.

Until now most of the research has been done for monotonic loading including sustained
and fatigue loading. However, much less research has been performed to study the
behavior of fastenings under seismic excitations. The results until about 1990 are
summarized in the CEB State-of-the-Art Report (1994) and the results of a recently
finished extensive study are given in Klingner et al. (1998). It should be clarified if the
test procedures and evaluation criteria for post-installed anchors and the design models
valid for monotonic loading are adequate in case of seismic loadings, especially if
fastenings are installed in regions where very wide cracks must be expected in the struc-
ture.

Fastenings may be subjected to fire. While some results have been published (e.g. Reick
(2001)), more research is needed in this area.

In many regions of the world a large number of existing structures must be strengthened
to resist future earthquakes. Modern fastening technique will play an important role in
this work. However, more research is needed to develop new strengthening techniques
and rational design models for the actions on and the resistance of fastenings.

During the last two decades many new types of anchors have been developed (e.g.
undercut anchors, bonded expansion anchors, concrete screws) to cope with new
requirements (e.g. cracked concrete, fatigue and seismic loading). In the future more
systems will be developed by combining different working principals to reach more
economical solutions, better performance or both satisfy new demands by the user.

23
According to a recent survey
in Germany about 70% of the
polled engineers design
fastenings according to the
CC-method by using software
provided by manufacturers
and in only 20% of applicati-
ons a hand calculation is done
according to a simplified
design method (Figure 23). In
the future the design of
fastenings with the help of a
Figure 23. Procedures used in praxis for the design of fas- computer will be common all
tenings, after Schade (2001) over the world.

Several committees all around the world work on test procedures and evaluation criteria
for fasteners and on design methods for fastenings. The authors hope that because of
modern information technologies, communication between the acting persons and – last
but not least – conferences like this one the provisions will be harmonized world wide.

The knowledge on fastening technique has increased significantly over the last two
decades which is demonstrated by an increasing number of papers, reports, text books
and conferences. However, the subject is often not taught in engineering schools. The
authors believe that this will change in the future when more design guides are published
by code committees.

8. Summary

Modern fastening technique is increasingly used in the building industry. New and inno-
vative fastening systems have been developed by the industry and reliable design
methods have been incorporated in design guides. This will go on in the future.
However, the training of designers and installers should be improved.

Currently fastenings to concrete structures with cast-in-place or post-installed fastening


systems are often not used in practice with the same confidence as other connections
(e.g. welding or screwing in steel structures). It is hoped that this will change in the futu-
re, thereby expanding the field of application of modern fastening technique.

24
9. References

1. American Concrete Institute, ACI Committee 318: Proposed Canges to Building


Code Reqiurements for Structural Concrete. Appendix D – Anchoring to Concrete,
scheduled to be published in edition of Concrete International, June 2001.
2. American Concrete Institute, ACI Standard 349-85: Code Requirements for Nuclear
Safety Related Concrete Structures, Appendix B – Steel Embedments, 1985
3. Asmus, J.: Verhalten von Befestigungen bei der Versagensart Spalten des Betons.
Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1999.
4. Bažant, Z.P.: Size Effect in Blunt Fracture: Concrete, Rock, Metal. Journal of Engi-
neering Mechanics, ASCE, 110, No. 4, S. 518-535, April 1984.
5. Bergmeister, K.: Stochastik in der Befestigungstechnik mit realistischen Ein-
flußgrößen. Dissertation, Universität Innsbruck, 1988.
6. Civieltechnisch Centrum Uitvoering Research en Regelgeving (CUR): Aanbeveking
25, Korte Ankers in Beton; berekening en uitvoering. Redactionale Bijlage bij Ce-
ment 4/2000.
7. Comité Euro-International du Béton (CEB): Design of Fastenings in Concrete. Bul-
letin D’Information No. 226, Lausanne. Thomas Telford, London 1995.
8. Comité Euro-International du Béton (CEB): Fastenings to Concrete and Masonry
Structures. State-of-the-Art-Report, Bulletin D’Information No. 216, Lausanne.
Thomas Telford, London 1994.
9. Cook, R.A.; Bishop, M.C.; Hagedoorn, H.S.; Sikes, D.; Richardson, D.S.; Adams,
T.L.; De Zee, C.T.: Adhesive Bonded Anchors: Bond Properties and Effects of In-
Service and Installation Conditions. Bericht Nr. 94-2A, University of Florida, De-
partment of Civil Engineering, Collage of Engineering, Gainsville 1994.
10. Cook, R.A.; Kunz, J.; Fuchs, W.; Konz, R.C.: Behavior and Design of Single Adhe-
sive Anchors under Tensile Load in Uncracked Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, V.
95, No. 1, 1998, S. 9-26.
11. Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt): Bemessungsverfahren für Dübel zur Ve-
rankerung in Beton (Anhang zum Zulassungsbescheid). Berlin, Ausgabe Juni 1993.
12. Dieterle, H.; Bozenhardt, A.; Hirth, W.; Opitz, V.: Tragverhalten von Dübeln in
Parallelrissen unter Schrägzugbeanspruchung. Bericht Nr. 1/45-89/19 (nicht
veröffentlicht). Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen. Universität Stuttgart, 1990.
13. Dieterle, H.; Opitz, V.: Tragverhalten von nicht generell zugzonentauglichen
Dübeln, Teil 1: Verhalten in Parallelrissen. Bericht Nr. 1/34-88/21 (nicht veröffen-
tlicht). Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1988.
14. Eligehausen, R.; Bouska, P.; Cervenka, V.; Pukl, R.: Size Effect of the Concrete
Cone Failure Load of Anchor Bolts. In Bažant, Z.P. (Herausgeber), Fracture Me-
chanics of Concrete Structures. S. 517-525, Elsevier Applied Science, London, New
York, 1992/2.
15. Eligehausen, R.; Bozenhardt, A.: Crack Widths as Measured in Actual Structures
and Conclusions for the Testing of Fastening Elements. Bericht Nr. 1/42-89/9, Insti-
tut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1989.

25
16. Eligehausen, R.; Fuchs, W.; Ick, U.; Mallée, R.; Reuter, M.; Schimmelpfennig, K.;
Schmal, B.: Tragverhalten von Kopfbolzenverankerungen bei zentrischer Zugbean-
spruchung. Bauingenieur 67, S. 183-196, 1992/1.
17. Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R.: Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und Mauerwerkbau.
Bauingenieur-Praxis. Ernst & Sohn, Berlin 2000.
18. Eligehausen, R.; Ožbolt, J.: Size Effect in Anchorage Behavior. Proceedings, ECF8,
Fracture Behavior and Design of Materials and Structures, Turin, 1990.
19. Eligehausen, R.; Sawade, G.: A Fracture Mechanics based Description of the Pull-
Out Behavior of Headed Studs embedded in Concrete. Fracture Mechanics of Con-
crete Structures, From Theory to Application. S. 281-299. Herausgeber: Elfgren, L.
Chapmann and Hall, London, New York, 1989.
20. European Organization for Technical Approvals (EOTA): Guideline for European
Technical Approval of Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete. Part 1, 2, 3 & 4, Brüssel,
1997.
21. Fuchs, W.: Tragverhalten von Befestigungen unter Querlast im ungerissenen Beton.
Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1990.
22. Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen, R.; Breen, J.E.: Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) Ap-
proach for Fastening to Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 1, S. 73-94,
1995/1.
23. Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen, R.; Breen, J.E.: Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) Ap-
proach for Fastening to Concrete, Authors’ Closure to Discussion. ACI Structural
Journal, Vol. 92, No. 6, S. 794-802, 1995/2.
24. Furche, J.: Zum Trag- und Verschiebungsverhalten von Kopfbolzen bei zentrischem
Zug. Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1994.
25. Furche, J.; Dieterle, H.: Ausziehversuche an Kopfbolzen mit unterschiedlichen
Kopfformen bei Verankerungen in ungerissenem Beton und Parallelrissen. Bericht
Nr. 9/1-86/9 (nicht veröffentlicht), Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen. Universität
Stuttgart, 1986.
26. Furche, J.; Eligehausen, R.: Lateral Blow-out Failure of Headed Studs Near the Free
Edge. In: Senkiw, G.A.; Lancelot, H.B. (Herausgeber), SP-130, Anchors in Con-
crete, Design and Behavior. American Concrete Institute, S. 235-252, Detroit, 1991.
27. International Building Code (IBC): International Code Council. Fall Church, Virgin-
ia, March 2000.
28. Klingner, R.E.; Hallowell, J.M.; Lotze, D.; Park, H.-G.; Rodriguez, M.; Zhang, Y.-
G.: Anchor Bolt Behavior and Strength During Earthquakes. Report No. NU-
REC/CR-5434. The University of Texas at Austin, 1998.
29. Lehmann, R.: Tragverhalten von Metallspreizdübeln in ungerissenem und gerisse-
nem Beton bei der Versagensart Herausziehen. Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe
im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1993.
30. Lehr, B.: Bemessung von Befestigungen mit Verbunddübeln. Dissertation, Institut
für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 2001.
31. Lehr, B.; Eligehausen, R.: Vorschlag eines Bemessungskonzeptes für Verbundanker.
Bericht Nr. 20/25-98/6, (nicht veröffentlicht). Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen,
Universität Stuttgart, 1998.

26
32. Lotze, D.: Untersuchungen zur Frage der Wahrscheinlichkeit, mit der Dübel in Ris-
sen liegen – Einfluß der Querbewehrung. Bericht Nr. 1/24-87/6 (nicht veröf-
fentlicht), Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1987.
33. Meszaros, J.: Tragverhalten von Einzelverbunddübeln unter zentrischer Kurzzeitbe-
lastung. Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart,
2001.
34. Ministry of Construction of People’s Repuplic of China: Anchors for Use in Con-
crete (Draft). China, 2000.
35. Rehm, G.; Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R.: Befestigungstechnik. Betonkalender 1988,
Teil II, Verlag Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn, Berlin 1988, S. 569-663.
36. Rehm, G.; Lehmann, R.: Untersuchungen mit Metallspreizdübeln in der gerissenen
Zugzone von Stahlbetonteilen. Forschungsbericht, Forschungs- und Material-
prüfungsanstalt Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart 1982.
37. Reick, M.: Brandverhalten von Befestigungen in Beton bei zentrischer Zugbean-
spruchung. Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart,
2001.
38. Schade, P.: Stand der Befestigungstechnik in der Praxis. Diplomarbeit am Institut
für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 2001.
39. Schweizerischer Ingenieur- und Architekten-Verein (SIA): SIA 179, Befestigungen
in Beton- und Mauerwerk. Zürich, 1998.
40. Steiner, J.: Vermeidbare Qualitätseinbuße – Erfahrungen mit der Planung und der
Ausführung von Verankerungen mit Dübeln. IBK-Bau-Fachtagung, Dübel- und Be-
festigungstechnik, Darmstadt 2000.
41. Studiengemeinschaft für Fertigbau e.V.: Verankerungen am Bau. Technisches
Merkblatt der Arbeitskreise “Dübel” und “Verankerungen am Bau”. Wiesbaden
2000.
42. Zhao, G.: Tragverhalten von randfernen Kopfbolzenverankerungen bei Betonbruch.
Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1993.

27
ANCHORING TO CONCRETE: THE NEW ACI APPROACH
John E. Breen*, Eva-Maria Eichinger** and Werner Fuchs***
*Ferguson Structural Engineering Laboratory, The University of Texas at Austin, USA
**Institute for Structural Concrete, Technical University of Vienna, Austria
***Institute for Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
This paper outlines the general approach of a new appendix for design of anchoring to
concrete in the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Building Code. It covers cast-in-situ
anchors and mechanical post-installed anchors. ACI 318 and the ACI Technical
Activities Committee have approved this proposal, and it is being published for public
comment as part of the ACI 318-2001 revision. The proposed design procedures are in
general harmony with provisions being developed by fib.

1. Foreword

It is a great privilege to participate in this Symposium. It is fitting that it is being held at


the University of Stuttgart where Professors Gallus Rehm, Rolf Eligehausen and their
coworkers, established the extensive scientific basis for modern approaches to
Anchoring to Concrete.

While ACI has long had recommendations for the design of anchors when used in
nuclear related structures (ACI 349) the ACI 318 Building Code has been silent on this
subject. In 1970, ACI Committee 355, Anchorage to Concrete, was established to report
on performance and recommend design and construction practices for anchorage to
concrete. Because of trade conflicts, no design related code recommendations ever came
to ACI 318. In 1989 ACI 318 Sub B formed a task force to develop anchoring to
concrete design provisions. Anchor qualification provisions were left to ACI 355 and
ASTM. The design approach adopted by ACI 318 stems directly from the interaction
with Dr. Fuchs as a DFG post-doctoral fellow at The University of Texas in 1990-1991.
His visit resulted in major integration of the European and North American test data on
cast-in-place and post-installed anchors reported in comparison studies of Reference 1.
Detailed discussions led to adaptation of the previously proposed Stuttgart κ method to

31
make it more “designer friendly,” a most important factor in subsequent adoption by
ACI 318.

Now, twelve years later that challenge is virtually done, at least in its first phase. This
paper describes where ACI 318 is and its general approach. But, in structural concrete,
doors never truly close. While the new recommendations cover much and represent a
great improvement, they are still only first steps. The search is just beginning for similar
design provisions for adhesive and grouted anchors.

2. Introduction

In 1995 when setting the goals for the 2001 ACI 318 Building Code, the membership
voted overwhelmingly to add specific design provisions for anchoring to concrete. This
reflects the increased demand for such design guidance by code users, the considerable
research and design development stimulated by ACI Committees 349 and 355, and the
increased cooperation with CEB (now fib).

Main decisions in the ACI 318 approach were based on the unanimous technical advice
from Committee 355. The approach had to be compatible with the load and resistance
factor format of the present code. The nominal resistance expressions should be
consistent with the observed accuracy of the design formulae or values from
comprehensive tests. A design approach should be found that accommodates brittle
failure as well as ductile failure modes. The design provisions that envision brittle
failure should use load and resistance factors appropriate for brittle failure modes. The
nominal resistance design formulae should account for the effects of the type of anchor,
anchor material, anchor diameter, edge distance, spacing, concrete strength, embedment
depth and for the effects of cracking. An alternate approach using site specific testing to
determine design values should be included. The basic approach of the ACI 318
Building Code provisions is to express all possible modes of failure for the anchors, to
require the use of conservative design provisions based on the 5 percent fractile, and to
provide some limited spacings, edge distance minimums and minimum thicknesses for
the concrete member. Then, while the user is allowed to choose any design models or
design by test values that meet these general requirements, for practical use a “deemed to
satisfy” procedure is included. This latter procedure for steel failures is based on the
method of AISC LRFD [2] while for concrete failures, it is based on the Concrete
Capacity Design (CCD) procedure [1,3] that is accurate, designer friendly and in good
agreement with tests. Special provisions for seismic applications and enhanced ductility
through use of supplementary reinforcement are included.

The ACI 318 Building Code provisions are applicable in scope to cast-in-place headed
studs and headed or hooked bolts as well as a variety of post-installed anchors such as
expansion anchors and undercut anchors [See Fig. 1]. Committee 318 plans to include
provisions for adhesive anchors in a future code revision. A key element in the design
philosophy is that the post-installed anchors must be prequalified by acceptance testing

32
using performance standards developed by ASTM or ACI 355 (ACI 355.2-00) [4]. This
testing differentiates between post-installed anchors according to their installation
sensitivity, behavior in oversize holes, low and high strength concrete, or with partial
torque or expansion in cracked or uncracked concrete. These standards are similar to
European EOTA (ETAG) requirements but adapted to American certification
procedures. The anchors are placed in one of three categories according to their
performance in tests. The ACI Code gives reduced resistance factors (φ) for the poorer
performing categories. Designers may specify allowable categories to be used according
to their safety requirements. The ACI 318 Appendix passed all voting procedures of
Committee 318 and was approved by the ACI Technical Activities Committee pending
final approval of the reference testing standard. A version for cast-in-place anchors that
does not require such acceptance testing was adopted and included in the International
Building Code 2000 [9]. An almost identical version has been adopted by ACI 349B for
cast-in and post-installed anchors for nuclear-related structures. Since the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission prescribes test procedures for fastening acceptance, the ACI
349B-1999 version did not have to wait for completion of the reference acceptance
testing standard. Thus, ACI has now replaced the traditional 45º cone approach of ACI
349B with the new CCD procedures. The overall approach has also been adopted by the
Fastening to Concrete committee of NEHRP (National Earthquake Hazard Reduction
Program) for inclusion in NEHRP 2000 [10].

hef
hef

(a) post-installed anchors (b) cast-in-place anchors


Figure 1 – Types of anchors

The proposed Appendix provides design requirements for structural anchors used to
transmit structural loads from attachments into concrete members by means of tension,
shear, or a combination of tension and shear. Several failure types of fasteners can be
differentiated [See Figs. 2 and 3]. Strength design of structural anchors is based on the
computation or test evaluation of the steel tensile and shear strengths of the anchor and
the attachment, the concrete breakout tensile and shear strengths, the tensile pullout
strength of the anchor, the side-face blowout strength, the concrete pryout strength and
required edge distances, spacing and member thickness to preclude splitting failure. The
minimum of these strengths is taken as the nominal strength of the anchor for each load
condition. Regardless of the mode which governs for a given anchor at a given
embedment depth, the suitability of post-installed anchors for use in concrete must be
demonstrated by the prequalification tests of ACI 355.2 [4].

33
Many possible design approaches exist and the user is always permitted to “design by
test” as long as sufficient data are available to verify the model. If test results are used
these must be evaluated on an equivalent statistical basis to that used to select the values
for the concrete breakout method in the “deemed to satisfy” provisions. The basic
capacity shall not be taken greater than the 5 percent fractile.

When the failure of an anchor group is due to breakage of the concrete, the behavior is
brittle and there is limited redistribution of the forces between the highly stressed and
less stressed anchors. In such a case the theory of elasticity must be used for
determining the force on the anchor, assuming the attachment that distributes loads to the
anchors is sufficiently stiff. The forces in the anchors are considered to be proportional
to the external load and its distance from the neutral axis of the anchor group.

Nn Nn

(a) Steel Failure


Nn (b) Pullout Nn

(c) Concrete Breakout


Nn

Nn Nn
Nn Nn

(e) Concrete Splitting

(d) Side-Face Blowout

Figure 2 — Failure modes for fasteners under tensile loading

34
Vn Vn

(a) Steel Failure Preceded (b) Concrete Pryout for Fasteners


by Concrete Spall Far From a Free Edge

Vn
Vn

Vn

Vn Vn Vn Vn

(c) Concrete Breakout

Figure 3 — Failure modes for fasteners under shear loading

If an anchor failure is governed by ductile failure of the anchor steel, significant


redistribution of anchor forces may occur. In such a case, analysis assuming the theory
of elasticity will be conservative. A non-linear analysis, using theory of plasticity, is
allowed for the determination of the ultimate loading conditions of ductile anchor
groups.

The levels of safety defined by the combinations of load factors and resistance factors
(φ) are appropriate for structural applications. The designer may use lower levels of
safety in design for non-structural applications and may wish to use more demanding
safety levels for particularly sensitive structural connections. The safety levels are not
intended for handling and construction conditions. The φ factors proposed for use with
the current load factors given in the 1995 ACI Code Section 9.2 are given in Table 1.

Condition A applies where the potential concrete failure surfaces are crossed by
supplementary reinforcement proportioned to tie the potential concrete failure prism into
the structural member. Condition B applies where such supplementary reinforcement is
not provided or where pullout or pryout strength governs.

Higher φ factors are given for anchors that have supplementary reinforcement in the
direction of the load to increase overall ductility, i.e. Condition A [See Fig. 4].

35
Table 1: φ factors
a) Anchor governed by tensile or shear strength of a ductile steel element .................... 0.90
b) Anchor governed by tensile or shear strength of a brittle steel element...................... 0.75
c) Anchor governed by concrete breakout, blowout, pullout or pryout strength
Condition A Condition B
i) Shear Loads ...................................................................... 0.85 0.75
ii) Tension Loads
Cast-in headed studs, headed bolts, or hooked bolts ........ 0.85 0.75
Post-installed anchors with category as determined from
ACI 355.2
Category 1 (Low sensitivity to installation and high
reliability) ...................................................................... 0.85 0.75
Category 2 (Medium sensitivity to installation and
medium reliability) ........................................................ 0.75 0.65
Category 3 (High sensitivity to installation and lower
reliability) ...................................................................... 0.65 0.55

Figure 4 – Influence of reinforcement on the load-displacement behavior of


headed anchors loaded in shear (from Ref.5)

36
For a post-installed anchor to be acceptable in seismic loading situations, the system
must be proven to have adequate ductility. The anchor must demonstrate the capacity to
undergo large displacements through several cycles as specified in the seismic
simulation of the ACI 355.2 prequalification tests. If the anchor cannot meet these
requirements or if substantially reduced design loads are being applied which assume
substantial ductility in the structure, then the attachment must yield at a load well below
the anchor capacity.

3. Steel Based Resistance

For the calculation of steel failure, an approach based on the AISC LRFD [1] approach
was “deemed to satisfy” (See Reference 6). In case of steel failure the shear and tensile
strength of an anchor are evaluated based on the properties of the anchor material and
the dimensions of the anchor. Values based on the 5 percent fractile of test results may
also be used.

4. Concrete Based Resistance

The basic design concrete capacities for any anchor or group of anchors must be based
on design models which result in predictions of strength in substantial agreement with
results of comprehensive tests and which account for the size effect. They are to be
based on the 5 percent fractile of the basic individual anchor capacity, with
modifications made for the number of anchors, the effects of close spacing of anchors,
proximity to edges, depth of the concrete member, eccentric loading of anchor groups,
and presence or absence of cracking. Limits on edge distances and anchor spacing in the
design models shall be consistent with the tests that have verified the model.

The “deemed to satisfy” design method used for the calculation of the concrete breakout
capacities under tensile or shear loading was developed from the Concrete Capacity
Design (CCD) Method [1,3], which was an adaptation of the κ method [7,8] and is
considered to be accurate, relatively easy to apply, and can be extended to irregular
layouts. For single anchors, it assumes a breakout prism angle of about 35 degrees
[Figs. 5, 6]. Both the CCD and the κ methods include fracture mechanics theory, which
indicates that in the case of brittle concrete failure the failure load increases at a rate less
than the increase in the available surface and that the nominal stress at failure (peak load
divided by failure area) decreases with increasing member size. The method predicts the
load-bearing capacity of an anchor or group of anchors by using one basic equation for a
single anchor in cracked concrete, and multiplying by factors which account for the
number of anchors, edge distance, spacing, eccentricity and absence of cracking [1,6].

A very important attribute of the CCD approach is that it is reasonably “transparent” and
hence designer friendly. Rather than working with the complex intersection of 45º cones
as previously required by the ACI 349B approach, the CCD method when applied to
groups uses values of AN/ANo or AV/AVo that are based on projected areas of

37
quadrilaterals. These areas are illustrated in Figure 7 for tension loads and in Figure 8
for shear loads.

The critical edge distance for headed


studs, headed bolts, expansion fasteners,
and undercut fasteners is 1.5hef .
1.5hef
1.5 hef 1.5 hef

≈ 35° h 1.5hef
ef

1.5hef 1.5hef
Section through failure cone
Plan view

A No = 2 * 1.5 h ef × 2 * 1.5 h ef
= 3 h ef × 3 h ef
= 9 h ef2

Figure 5 – CCD concrete cone breakout model for tensile loading


c1

≈35o
1.5c1

The critical edge distance for


headed studs, headed bolts,
Vn
expansion fasteners, and undercut
fasteners is 1.5c1 Center of fastener
1.5c1

where it crosses
the free surface
1.5c1 1.5c1 Edge of concrete
Plan view
Vn

hef
1.5c1

Side section
A Vo = 2 ∗ 1.5c 1 × 1.5c 1
= 3c1 × 1.5c 1 = 4.5c 12
Front view

Figure 6 – CCD concrete cone breakout model for shear loading

38
c1 1.5 hef
AN

1.5 hef 1.5 hef


AN = (c1 + 1.5hef) (2 x 1.5hef)
if c1 < 1.5hef

c1 s1 1.5 hef
1.5 hef 1.5 hef

AN
AN = (c1 + s1 + 1.5hef) (2 x 1.5hef)
if c1 < 1.5hef and s1 < 3hef

c1 s1 1.5 hef
s2 1.5 hef

AN
AN = (c1 + s1 + 1.5hef) (c2 + s2 + 1.5hef)
if c1 and c2 < 1.5hef
and s1 and s2 < 3hef
c2

Figure 7 – Projected areas for single anchors and groups of anchors for tension loads

5. Other Design Concepts

A comparison with the extensive test database indicated that the CCD method gave good
results over the full range of applications [Figs. 9, 10]. While the ACI 349-85 procedure
had very much the equivalent accuracy in some ranges, it was very unconservative in
other ranges, particularly with group effects, and the geometry of intersecting circles was
much more complex in group applications [Fig. 11].

However, recognizing that widely accepted procedures such as the earlier ACI 349-85
model as well as the PCI model can give satisfactory results in certain ranges, the
proposed ACI 318 Appendix allows any “design models which result in substantial
agreement with results of comprehensive tests” to be used. This generalized wording

39
allows previous procedures like the ACI 349 or PCI techniques to be used in applicable
ranges if desired.

if h < 1.5c1 if h < 1.5c1


Vn/2
Vn
Vn/2
Av c1 Av
c1
h
h
1.5c1 1.5c1
1.5c1 1.5c1
AV = 2 x 1.5c1 x h AV = 2 x 1.5c1 x h
Note:One
Note: One assumption
assumption of the
of the
if c2 < 1.5c1 distribution
distribution of of forces
forces indicates
indicates that that
half
Vn half
the thewould
shear shear bewould be on
critical critical
front on
front anchor
fastener and its and its projected
projected area. area.
Av
c1

1.5c1 if h < 1.5c1

Vn
c2 1.5c1

AV = 1.5c1 (1.5c1 + c2) Av c1


h

if h < 1.5c1 and s1 < 3c1 1.5c1 1.5c1

Vn Av = 2 x 1.5c1 x h

Av Note:Another
Note: Another assumption
assumption of the
of the
c1 distribution
distribution of of forces
forces thatthat applies
applies onlyonly
h where
where anchorsare
fasteners arerigidly
rigidly connected
connected to to
theattachment
the attachment indicates
indicates thatthat the total
the total
1.5c1 s1 1.5c1 shear
shear would
would be be critical
critical on the
on the rearrear anchor
and itsand
fastener projected area. area.
its projected
AV = (2 x 1.5c1 + s1) x h

Figure 8 – Projected areas for single anchors and groups of anchors for shear loads

Typical cast-in-place headed studs, headed anchor bolts and hooked anchors have been
tested and have proven to behave predictably, so calculated pullout values are
acceptable.

40
Post-installed anchors do not have predictable pullout failure loads, therefore they must
be tested. The pullout strength of headed studs or headed anchor bolts can be increased
by provision of confining reinforcement such as closely spaced spirals throughout the
head region. This increase can be demonstrated by tests.

The tensile and shear capacity can be increased by provision of supplementary


reinforcement with resisting components in the direction of the applied force [See Fig. 4]
[5].

a) Equation vs Tension Test Results b) Equation vs Tension Test Results for


for Post-Installed Anchors Headed Studs and Anchor Bolts
in uncracked concrete, and not in uncracked concrete, and not
affected by edges or spacing affected by edges or spacing

300 Mean CCD Equation for Mean CCD equation for


tension on post-installed tension on headed studs
1000 and anchor bolts in
anchors in uncracked
concrete uncracked concrete
Failure Load, kN
Failure Load, kN

200

500

100 Design equation


Design equation for anchors in
for anchors in uncracked
uncracked concrete
concrete
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 125 250 375 500 625

Effective Embedment Depth, hef, mm Effective Embedment Depth, hef, mm

Figure 9 – Mean and design CCD equations for anchors in uncracked concrete
compared to test data for a) post-installed anchors and b) headed anchors

41
Equation vs. Shear Test Results
for single anchors in deep uncracked members
(European Tests)

150 Mean CCD equation for


shear in uncracked concrete
Failure Load, kN

100

50
Design equation
for shear in
uncracked
concrete

0
0 75 150 225 300
Edge Distance in Direction of Shear, c1, mm

Figure 10 – Mean and design CCD shear equations for


uncracked concrete compared to test data

N [kN]
3000
n Symbol
1 +
4
16 85 fcc′ = 25 N/mm2
49-
2000 Si 36 I3 hef = 185 mm
AC n = 1-36 headed studs
St

+ Mean value of a series


hod
1000 Met
CCD

200 400 600 800 1000 Si [mm]

Figure 11 – Comparison of ACI 349-85 and CCD design equations for anchor groups

42
Interaction of tensile and shear loads is considered in the design using an interaction
expression which results in predictions of strength in substantial agreement with results
of comprehensive tests [See Ref. 6 and Fig. 12].

The values used for the tension part of the interaction equation shall be the smallest of
the anchor steel strength, concrete breakout strength, sideface blowout strength, or
pullout strength. For the shear part, the smaller of the steel strength, the concrete pryout
strength or the concrete breakout strength shall be used.

Nu
5 5
 Nu  3   3
φ Nn   +  Vu  =1
φ Nn φ Vn

Trilinear
Interaction
Approach

0.2 φ Nn

Vu
0.2φ Vn φ Vn

Figure 12 – Shear and tensile load interaction equation

6. Status

In North America, a task force of ACI 318 Subcommittee B developed and refined the
current proposals that have been approved by ACI Committee 318. ACI 355 recently
completed the post-installed anchor acceptance test standard [4], but it has been subject
to procedural and legal challenges by one anchor manufacturer. Assuming resolution of
this challenge, comprehensive design provisions will be in ACI 318-2001. Even if the
challenge provides further delay in adoption of the provisions for post-installed
fasteners, the new ACI 349B expressions will be widely used and cast-in anchors will be
governed by the recently adopted IBC 2000 provisions. These are identical to the ACI
318 provisions given herein but are limited to cast-in applications.

The proposed new Appendix to the ACI 318 Building Code is a very important step in
harmonizing several existing design procedures. The user is allowed to choose any
design models or design by test values that meet the general requirements. A design
procedure based on the CCD design method is “deemed to satisfy.” The harmonization
with the CEB task force leads to the hope that future fib recommendations and
Eurocodes will be in close agreement with the new ACI approach.

43
7. References

1. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., and Breen, J., Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, 92(1), Jan.-Feb., 1995,
pp. 73-93.
2. American Institute of Steel Construction (1986). Manual of Steel Construction –
Load and Resistance Factor Design.
3. Eligehausen, R., and Balogh, T., Behavior of Fasteners Loaded in Tension in
Cracked Reinforced Concrete, ACI Structural Journal, 92(3), May-June 1995, pp.
365-379.
4. ACI Committee 355, ACI Provisional Standard 355.2-00, Evaluating the
Performance of Post-Installed Mechanical Anchors in Concrete, American Concrete
Institute, Detroit, MI.
5. Comité Euro-International du Béton (1994). Fastenings to Concrete and Masonry
Structures – State of the Art Report. Thomas Telford Services Ltd., London.
6. ACI Committee 318, Proposed Changes to Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete, scheduled to be published in June 2001 edition of Concrete
International.
7. Eligehausen, R., Fuchs, W., and Mayer, B., Load Bearing Behavior of Anchor
Fastenings in Tension. Betonwerk + Fertigteiltechnik, 12(87), pp. 826-832, and
1/88, pp. 29-35.
8. Eligehausen, R., and Fuchs, W., Load Bearing Behavior of Anchor Fastenings under
Shear, Combined Tension and Shear or Flexural Loadings. Betonwerk +
Fertigteiltechnik, 2(88), pp. 48-56.
9. International Code Council, International Building Code 2000, Falls Church,
Virginia, March 2000.
10. Proposed year 2000 revisions to the 1997 edition of the NEHRP (National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Provisions for Seismic
Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Federal Emergency
Management Agency 302, Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington, DC, 1997.

44
EVOLUTION OF FASTENING DESIGN METHODS
IN EUROPE
Werner Fuchs
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Since antiquity there has been a demand for more flexibility in the planning, design and
strengthening of concrete structures in Europe. Although a wide variety of fastening
systems have been invented over the years to help achieve this goal, our understanding
of the behavior of these systems and the corresponding development of design
provisions has only in the past three decades made significant advances. This paper
gives a brief overview of the evolution of fastener design. Emphasis is placed on the
importance of understanding the physics behind these problems and the need for a
unified design approach throughout Europe.

1. Foreword

Stability, durability and aesthetics have always been primary concerns for buildings.
These requirements have been equally important for fastening technology. In the 1st
century B.C., Vitruvius described in his 10 books on architecture practical solutions for
fastening applications. It can be assumed that fasteners played an important role in the
construction of the Colosseum in Rome as evidenced by the ruins (Fig. 1). At many
other excavation sites in Europe traces similar fastening devices have been found.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the common thinking of the master builder with
regard to fastening technology was: "leave well-enough alone". That is to say, use what
has been proven to work. Consequently, fastening technology was restricted for many
centuries to grouting or cast-in situ installation of steel parts. This dogma was thrown
into turmoil as new construction methods were developed such as mixed constructions
from concrete and steel or concrete and wood which placed higher demands on fastening
technology. For the fulfillment of these tasks, new solutions in the fastening technology
such as post-installed fasteners were provided.

45
Figure 1: Colosseum, Rome

The diversity of products increased with the number of possible applications of fastening
devices. For the user in the practice, it became difficult to find the correct fastening
solution and to design safe connections. It became apparent that guidelines to aid in the
design of structures using fastening systems was necessary.

2. Introduction

The push over the last two decades to reduce construction duration has brought about
increased use of fasteners for the transfer of concentrated loads in concrete structures.
Various types of fastenings, such as cast-in-place headed anchors, as well as post-
installed mechanical and chemical fastening systems, are available to meet a wide range
of strength and application requirements. Furthermore, installation techniques have been
developed for certain fastening systems, which have features that can be tailored to fit
special construction situations and offer added constructability and productivity
advantages. These advances have been brought about through extensive scientific work
and today myriad prequalified, quality controlled products with demonstrated repeatable
performance characteristics meet the ever increasing demand for safe and secure
fastening products in a wide field of applications.

This paper surveys fastener design techniques from past to present. It illustrates how
fastenings were historically used to meet project demands and the progress of products
for new applications. Some developments in building design codes are also highlighted.
The review focuses primarily on developments in Europe, however, similar trends can be
observed in other parts of the world.

46
3. Basic principles

Plutarch (45-125 A.D.) reported that the building contractors who promise quality
construction and fast execution, with the lowest costs, will receive the contract for the
erection of a building. The trade-offs between quality, costs and deadlines have
apparently existed for millenniums and are still valid today for the discipline of
structural fastening technology.

As the use of fasteners has increased in recent years, so has the need to ensure their
correct use on site. Faced with a bewildering multitude of fastening systems, the first
question one must ask one's self is: 'Which kind of fastening type is most appropriate for
my application?'. The second question is: 'How do I use it to achieve its maximum
effect?'. This work is the domain of the engineer.

The best design method and the most careful design by engineer, however, are of no use
if the fastening device specified by the designer does not function reliably or is not
installed properly. The factors influencing the successful design of connections are
illustrated in Figure 2.

reliable
fastening
systems

satisfying designer installer


design provisions (accurate design) (proper installation)

safe, economical,
aesthetically
pleasing connection

Figure 2: Success factors for connections

It goes without saying that connections for safety relevant applications where fastening
devices are used, should be planned and designed by experienced personnel.
Reproducible calculations and drawings must be done. The fastening installation has to
be carried out by properly trained workers. Reliable connections based on reliable
fasteners and appropriate design procedures may be ensured only by cooperation of both:
the designer and the installer. One should never lose sight of the fact that proper
connection design and application are vital for the overall performance of a structure.

47
4. Evolution of fastening systems

As the development of new and innovative products in fastening technology has gained
pace, design provisions have become considerably more accurate, more transparent and
unfortunately, more time consuming.

In Figure 3 the load-bearing principles of three commonly used fasteners are shown.
Load transfer through mechanical interlock by anchor heads (Fig. 3a)) and grouting or
glueing of steel parts to the base material (Fig. 3c)) are very old techniques. In the past
the design of such fastening elements was based mainly on trial and error. Failure was
to be avoided at all costs and it was for this reason that the fasteners were overdesigned
in most applications. This poor engineering was due to a lack of understanding of the
behavior of fasteners.

N N N
N

a) b) c)

Fig. 3: Load-bearing principles of fastening elements


a) mechanical interlock (direct)
b) expansion (friction)
c) grouting, glueing (bond, shear)

In 1920 a new era in fastening technique began, when John Rawlings applied a time
tested scientific principle as a means of making fasteners. Namely, he used the principle
of expansion (Fig. 3b)) to develop the first expansion anchors (Fig. 4).

When a screw was turned into a threaded plug, the product expanded and tightly griped
the side of the hole that had been made for it. The result was that the plug and screw
become securely fixed.
This invention immediately gained public favor for small fastener dimensions. It was
not until the 1960's, however, that the real break-through for post-installed fasteners
occurred: This was when the first electric compact hammer-drill tools were launched to
the construction market. It became possible to drill large holes into concrete in a
reasonable period of time. At about the same time the first post-installed glass-capsule

48
type adhesive anchors became available to the construction market and increased the
range of applications for post-installed fastening systems.

The use of post-installed anchors for structural applications began to soar, and today a
big variety of fastening systems classified in cast-in situ fasteners and post-installed
fasteners with different load-bearing principles are known and used in virtually every
country of the world. The need for reliable design provisions taking into account the
load-bearing principles is evident.

Fig. 4: One of the first expansion anchors

5. Development of design concepts

Fastener design provisions must account for several influencing factors. For example
they must consider the type of fastener, its load-bearing mechanism, fastener material,
fastener diameter, edge distance, anchor spacing, concrete strength, embedment depth, as
well as for the conditions of the base material (cracked or non-cracked concrete), the
type of loading and the loading direction.

Early on there was little known about the parameters mentioned above. The designer,
liable for his work with his fortune and perhaps even his life, had to design according to
experience and gut feeling. Therefore, he may have used lower levels of safety in design
for non-structural applications and more demanding safety levels for particularly
sensitive structural connections.

With the development of post-installed fasteners this situation changed. It was necessary
to promote new products and to convince the engineering community of their
performance. The design of early post-installed fasteners was primarily based on test
results. Tensile loading was thought to be the most critical application. Therefore,
values obtained from static, short-duration tests with single fastenings under tensile
loading were published as technical data in most manufacturers' product information
brochures. The producers recommended to apply a global safety factor 4 ≤ γ ≤ 5 to the
mean ultimate load of the tests to account for variations e.g. in concrete, steel and
fastening reliability. For non-standard applications the designer had to refer to his own
experience and limited common knowledge.

Until about 1970, no guidelines or standards for fastener testing and evaluation were
available. Testing was conducted based on an individual laboratories' experience or

49
according to the manufacturers' recommendations. It became apparent that depending
on the testing laboratory, the same product could end up with different load-bearing
behavior, ultimate capacity and consequently, a different recommended allowable load.
The need for harmonization of testing and evaluation procedures became obvious.

In response to several, in part severe accidents mainly due to improper use and
installation of post-installed fasteners, an expert committee 'Channel bars and dowels'
was set up in Berlin, Germany in 1972 to refine the application of fasteners to allow for
greater safety and durability. Thus began the first true research work in fastening
technology with the goal of understanding the influence of the test methods on the
fastening systems. The focus was on the most common case of predominantly static
loading. The investigations yielded testing guidelines. The experimental program
included tensile tests and shear tests far away from edges. Furthermore, the experience
from a large number of fastener tests showed that the load-bearing capacity of the
fasteners approximates a normal Gaussian probability density function. This allowed for
the use of statistical evaluation techniques, which could relate the allowable load to the
reliability of the connection. Thus, design could be defined based on the 5%-fractile
with a global safety factor γ = 3 for concrete failure and γ =1.75 for steel failure. The
minimum strength after evaluation was taken as the allowable load for each load
condition: tension, shear and combined tension and shear loading.

Acceptable quality levels were defined and the era of approved fastening systems began.
The design was founded on experimental results, corresponding evaluation method and
allowable loads for certain applications. In addition it became necessary to the
manufacturer to shown by internal (plant) and external quality control (testing agency),
that the product samples used in the approval tests are conform with of the products
marketed. Only fastening systems which were approved were permitted for use in safety
relevant applications.

In 1975 the first approvals for post-installed expansion and bonded anchors as single
fastenings with large edge distances and anchor spacings for applications in non-cracked
concrete were released. Both the admissible loads and the fields of application were
limited, however, and not in accordance with practical requirements. This is illustrated
by the technical data of a sleeve type expansion anchor M 12 with an embedment depth
hef = 80 mm: The allowable load in non-cracked concrete C20/25 was 5.7 kN at a
minimum edge distance c1 = 130 mm, a minimum distance to the corner
c1 = c2 = 180 mm and the minimum anchor spacing s = 450 mm.

As our knowledge of the behavior of structural fasteners increased the range of


applications regulated by German approvals was extended. Approvals were granted for
double fastenings with post-installed anchors in non-cracked concrete (1978) and for
single fasteners with expansion anchors in cracked concrete (1979). Then, the
allowable load for an expansion anchor M 12 situated in cracked concrete was just
1.5 kN.

50
In the mid 1970's, the headed stud industry in the United States intensified testing and
supported the development of the first design methods for applications in non-cracked
concrete only [9]. The nominal tensile capacity of an anchor governed by concrete
failure was assumed to be computed by the maximum concrete tensile strength acting
equally distributed on the surface of an idealized truncated conical failure surface
(Fig. 5). The inclination of the concrete break.-out surface was assumed to 45 degrees.
The design of fastenings under shear loads was based on similar assumptions of the
failure mechanism. Because this design approach was conceptually simple and in
satisfactory agreement with the limited test results available at this time, it was adopted
by ACI 349 [10]. Due to the lack of design aids for cast-in parts, the ACI 349 design
method was often used by designers in Europe.

Fig. 5: Concrete tensile capacity of a headed stud [10]

In the beginning of the '80s, comprehensive research in fastening technology started in


Germany. The first physical models explaining the behavior and failure of different
fastening systems were developed [4]. These models lead to the so-called κ-method for
the design of fastenings (Fig. 6). The main research focus was on the load-bearing
principles of mechanical interlock and the mechanics of anchor expansion (Fig. 3a, b).
In 1983, the first approval incorporating the κ-method was published for cast-in-place
headed studs in non-cracked and cracked concrete. In 1985 followed approvals, also
based on the κ-method, for mechanical post-installed anchorage systems for use as
fastenings in the tensile and compressive zones of slab-type and beam-type concrete and
reinforced concrete structural members. Fasteners were placed in load classes according
to their anchorage depth (Fig. 7). Fastening in the tensile zone (i.e. cracked concrete)

51
was regarded as the normal case. The permissible load in the compression zone (non-
cracked concrete) was about 1.33 times the value in the tension zone. The higher
allowable loads in the compression zone could be used for design, if in each individual
case it was shown, that the anchors were installed in a concrete member, which is under
compression over the full embedment depth of the fastener. Then, for the example of an
expansion anchor M12, installed to concrete C20/25, the admissible load in cracked
concrete might be 6 kN (compare to 1.5 kN in 1979), in non-cracked concrete 9 kN
(compare to 5.7 kN in 1975), the minimum edge distance c1 = 120 mm, a minimum
distance to the corner c1 = c2 = 120 mm and the minimum anchor spacing s = 80 mm.

Fig. 6: κ-method for fastenings according to German approvals [6]

The κ-method represented a significant advance in the design methods given in approval
documents up until this point, which – with a few exceptions – were applicable only to
single anchors in the compressive zone with large anchor spacing and edge distances.
The κ-method permitted to determine the admissible load of a single anchor and of an
anchor in a double or quadruple fastening far from and close to an edge. The admissible
load for a fixture is calculated from the admissible load of an individual anchor located
at considerable distance from other anchors and from an edge of a structural member by
multiplication with coefficients κ (Fig. 6). The values for the admissible load of the
individual anchor, the critical anchor spacings and edge distances, that prevent adjacent
anchors from interacting with each other as well as the minimum spacings and distances
were stated in the approval documents. However the κ-method of the German approvals
still had the disadvantage, that the minimum of the capacities under shear and tensile

52
loading evaluated from test results regardless of the mode of failure was taken as the
admissible load of the fastener for each load direction, i.e. the admissible load
represented the most unfavorable case.

Fig. 7: Load classes for mechanical anchors in cracked concrete [6]

In the mid '80s, approvals for mechanical expansion anchors were released by
SOCOTEC in France, which allowed higher loads and a wider range of applications than
given in the German approvals. The basematerial used to establish these approvals,
however, was non-cracked concrete. The admissible loads for each product were
derived directly from experimental results. Since the French system did not use load
classes, allowable anchor loads were dependent on scatter of concrete strength and on
the testing methods of the testing institute, where proof testing was performed.

In other countries where no approval system existed the designer had to rely on
information provided by the manufacturers. Most of these published data were based on
fastener testing. The manufacturers believed that determining the ultimate or allowable
loads for fasteners from 'theoretical (i.e. calculation) methods' e.g. the κ-method would
not give satisfactory results because of the interrelationships of the many variables
involved e.g. material strength, friction coefficients, etc.. Hilti developed a design
concept very similar to the κ-method also taking into account product specific
characteristics. In some cases even different sizes of a single product had different
tuning factors. Furthermore, the Hilti design method distinguished between load

53
directions and in this respect was superior to the κ-method of the German approvals at
this time.

The various efforts to develop new design provisions reflected the increased need and
demand to design reliable connections with cast-in-place and post-installed anchors at
reasonable costs. Further improvements were necessary.

The German design concept of one admissible load for all directions could be presented
in a very simple form, however, it resulted in many cases in a considerable under-
estimation of the load-carrying capacity of the fastening. For reasons of economy, it was
desired to optimally utilize the capacity of anchor-type fastenings in most applications.
Thus it was necessary to develop a more application oriented approach. The first steps
in this direction are documented in [6, 7 and 8]. In these documents expanded κ-
methods for the computation of concrete break-out failure of post-installed mechanical
expansion and undercut anchors as well as cast-in-place headed studs under tension,
shear and combined tension and shear loading fracture mechanics theory are explained in
detail. Fracture mechanics indicated that the failure load increases less than the available
concrete break-out failure surface. That means the nominal stress at failure (peak load
divided by failure area) decreases. Furthermore, corresponding to widespread
observations in tests, the κ-method is based on 35 degrees concrete break-out cones.
Note, these are major differences to the ACI 349 design approach.

It was determined that an improved design method should distinguish between different
directions of loading, modes of failure and condition of the base material (cracked or
non-cracked). In addition, modern design recommendations should consider all
available test data and differences among already existing recommendations should be
analyzed and reconciled. This task was performed at the University of Stuttgart and
during the visit of the author to the Structural Engineering Laboratory at the University
of Texas, Austin in 1990-1991. During his visit the European and North American test
data for cast-in-place and post-installed mechanical fasteners were assembled and
integrated into a database to facilitate comparison studies with different design
approaches. Furthermore, the κ-method to predict concrete capacity was adapted to
make the design process more transparent and user friendly by implementing a
rectangular prism model (Fig. 8). The combination of the accuracy of the κ-method and
the transparency analogous to the ACI 349 cone model yielded the Concrete Capacity-
method (CC-method). The CC-method not only improved computation for design with
fasteners, it also helped to increase the accuracy of the computed fastener capacity in
comparison to design provisions using test results. Detailed results of the
comprehensive studies leading to the development of the CC-method are given in [11].
A summary is published in [1].

54
The critical edge distance for headed
studs, headed bolts, expansion anchors,
and undercut anchors is 1.5hef .
1.5hef
1.5 hef 1.5 hef

1.5hef
≈ 35° h
ef

1.5hef 1.5hef
Section through failure cone
Plan view

A No = 2 * 1.5 h ef × 2 * 1.5 h ef
= 3 h ef × 3 h ef
= 9 h ef2

Fig. 8: Concrete cone surface idealized by a 35° prism, according to CC-method [11]

To predict the capacity of other failure modes, such as steel failure, additional design
models may be used. The pull-out capacity for typical cast-in-place headed studs has
proven to be predictabe by calculation. Post-installed anchors on the other hand do not
have predictable pullout failure loads and therefore they must be tested. Tests are also
necessary to determine the minimum concrete member dimensions, minimum spacing
and edge distances of fasteners to avoid a splitting failure. These values are
characteristic of a product and are given in approvals or technical data sheets of the
manufacturers.

In 1987, in order to improve the design methods, the general knowledge and the
awareness of the engineering profession in this area, the formation of Task Group III/5
(TG III/5) with members from academia, practice and producers from Asia, Europe and
North America was authorized by the Comité Euro-International du Béton (CEB, now
fib). One of the TG III/5's first major tasks was providing test data to support the author
in the construction of a data base of European fastener tests at the University of Stuttgart.
Until 1991, the group produced a state-of-the-art report on fastenings to concrete and
masonry, first published as CEB Bulletins 206 and 207. A revised hardcover edition was
published in 1994 [5]. Therein the revised safety concept for the design of fastenings
based on partial safety factors was introduced to Europe.

55
In the new safety concept it has to be shown that the value of the design actions Sd does
not exceed the value of the design resistance Rd.

Sd < Rd (1)

Sd = value of design action


Rd = value of design resistance

The partial safety factors for the actions depend on the type of loading and shall be
calculated according to Eurocode 2 or Eurocode 3. The partial safety factors for the
resistances cover steel failure, concrete cone failure, splitting failure and pull-out failure.
Furthermore, the partial safety factor γ2, which indicates the sensitivity of a fastening
system to installation inaccuracy, was introduced. It is determined as part of the proof
testing in so-called suitability tests and may not be changed because it describes a
characteristic of the fastening system. The partial safety factors can be found in the
relevant approvals.

In 1993, stimulated by these results, DIBt (Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik) replaced
the traditional κ-method with the new CC-method and the new safety concept for post-
installed mechanical fasteners [12]. Cracked concrete still was assumed the normal state
of the base material. In 1995 in Germany the first approvals based on this new design
concept were released for headed studs and mechanical post-installed fasteners suitable
for applications in cracked concrete. Compared to 1985, with regard to tensile loading
nothing has changed. However, now the admissible shear load in cracked concrete
C20/25 is 14,9 kN (compare to 6 kN in 1985).

At the same time throughout Europe harmonized test regimes were developed to create
data necessary to fit the new design concept and to prequalify the products for safety
relevant applications. In 1995, the CEB TG III/5 published a comprehensive design
method for cast-in-place headed anchors and mechanical post-installed fasteners in
concrete based on the CC-method in CEB Bulletin No. 226, released as a revised
hardcover edition in 1997 [13]. This approach to the design of mechanical anchors
forms the basis for current design codes in Europe and the United States. It was adopted
by EOTA in ETAG 001, Appendix C [14] in 1997.

According to ETAG the design resistance is based on the performance of a specific


product demonstrated in prequalification tests following the ETAG directive [14].
Corresponding to the type and number of tests, three different design methods are
proposed. The relation between the design methods and the required tests is given in
Table 1. The design method to be applied is given in the relevant European Technical
Approval (ETA) of the product concerned.

In design method A the characteristic resistance is calculated for all load directions and
failure modes. It must be shown that Equation (1) is satisfied for all loading directions

56
(tension, shear, combined tension and shear), as well as all failure modes (steel failure,
pull-out failure and concrete failure). To design the anchorage the loads acting on each
anchor shall be calculated, taking into account partial safety factors.

Table 1: Design methods and required tests according to ETAG [14]


Design cracked and non- non-cracked characteristic resistance for tests according
method cracked concrete concrete ETAG Annex B,
C 20/25 only C 20/25
only Option
to C 50/60
x x 1
A x x 2
x x 7
x x 8
x x 3
B x x 4
x x 9
x x 10
x x 5
C x x 6
x x 11
x x 12

Design method B is based on a simplified approach in which the design value of the
characteristic resistance is considered to be independent of the loading direction and the
mode of failure. In the case of anchor groups, the design is performed for the most
highly stressed anchor.

Design method C is based on a simplified approach in which only one value for the
design resistance FRd is given, independent of loading direction and mode of failure. The
actual spacing and edge distance must be equal to or larger than the characteristic values
given in the relevant ETA specifications.

With this combination of testing guidelines and design models EOTA was able to
publish approvals for mechanical fasteners that are valid in the whole European
community. This means that for a product with an ETA there are uniform technical data
for Europe. This is a significant improvement from the old situation, where different
national approvals and manufacturers' recommendations showed different technical data
and fields of application for the same product. Furthermore, it is now easier to compare
similar products. Trade barriers have been removed and since establishment of the first
ETA in 1998, engineers can now design with fastenings almost without problems
Europe wide. Today about 30 ETAs for different types of mechanical post-installed
fasteners exist.

57
In accordance with European agreement after a transition period of 33 months after the
publication of an ETAG , national approvals in the areas covered by an ETAG, are not
allowed. For the first ETAGs the transition period takes longer i.e. for the ETAGs P.1 to
P. 4 the deadline is June 2002.

Since the establishment of the new design recommendations for mechanical anchors, in
the mid 1990's the efforts of the CEB TG III/5 have been directed to channel bars and
adhesive anchors. Channel bar and adhesive anchor design is still based mainly on
knowledge from the 1980's. It is performed according to national regulations and
recommendations of the manufacturers. It is hoped that design methods compatible with
the CC-method can be formulated for these systems as well in the future. Work in this
direction have already begun. It is under discussion in the now fib Task Group and is
expected to be finalized within the next year.

In 2000, the new Working Group of CEN/TC250/SC2 'Design of Fastenings' was given
the task of coming up with a new Eurocode covering 'Design of Fastenings for Use in
Concrete'. The Working Group plans to include the existing design provisions for
mechanical anchors and the soon to be completed design provisions for adhesive anchors
and channel bars under static and fatigue loading [15]. Earthquake loading will not be
covered in this document due to lack of published research. A key element in the design
philosophy will be that fasteners and fastening systems must be prequalified using
performance criteria described in ETAG, stated by a European Technical Approval
(ETA) or relevant Eurocode (EN).

6. Conclusion

The first documentation of the use of fastenings to concrete was provided by Vitruvius
over 2000 years ago. Up until the mid 20th Century, engineers were still designing
fastening systems according to experience and gut feeling – often with huge safety
factors thrown in for good measure. This situation changed dramatically with the
development of hammer-drill tools and innovative post-installed fastening systems. The
urgent need for the detailed understanding of the working principles of fasteners
increased.

In the last two decades very comprehensive research programs were undertaken to
consolidate existing knowledge and significantly extend the general knowledge in the
field of fastening technology. The efforts allowed the design of fastenings to be based
on physical understanding. This allowed for the development of universal design
models and their international application.

Optimal utilization of anchor capacity in all applications under static loading using cast-
in headed studs and mechanical metal anchors is possible by the existing CC-method.
More recently, research efforts have been directed towards the design of grouted and

58
bonded (adhesive) anchors. A design method compatible with the CC-method can be
formulated for these systems and is under consideration in Europe. Additionally, the
design of cast-in-place channel bars following the principles of the CC-method, has been
undertaken and is nearly finalized. The design of anchors for earthquake loading
continues to be a focus of research and will hopefully be addressed in future codes. It is
known that the load-bearing behavior of fasteners can be enhanced by properly detailed
local reinforcement. Such enhancement can be included in future design provisions a s
well as the resistance of fasteners under seismic load.

To conclude, today fastening systems are reliable, economical and satisfy many needs in
construction practice. However, it is important to keep in mind that even the most
expensive fastenings form a nearly negligible part of the total cost of a building, and a
failure can damage property and endanger lives. Connections - their accurate design and
correct application - are vital to the performance of the building!

7. Acknowledgements

The author wishes to express special thanks to Dr. Schätzle (fischerwerke), Dr. Arndt
and Dr. Pusill-Wachtsmuth (Hilti), Mr. Tschositsch (Unibautechnik) as well as
Mr. Frischmann and Mr. Zimmermann (UPAT) who provided brochures, technical data
and product information that were needed to give a historical background. Special
thanks are also accorded to Matthew Hoehler who spent many hours in reviewing the
paper.

8. References

1. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., and Breen, J.E., Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, 92(1), Jan.-Feb.,
1995, pp. 73-93.
2. Marsh, P., Fixings, Fasteners and Adhesives, Site Practice Series, Construction
Press, London, New York, 1984.
3. Maass, G., Bauwerksdübel, Werner-Verlag, Düsseldorf, 1987.
4. Eligehausen, R., Pusill-Wachtsmuth, P., Stand der Befestigungstechnik im
Stahlbetonbau. IVBH Bericht S-19/82, IVBH-Periodica 1/1982, Februar 1982.
5. Comité Euro-International du Béton. Fastenings to Concrete and Masonry
Structures – State of the Art Report. Thomas Telford Services Ltd., London, 1994.
6. Eligehausen, R., Design of Fastenings with Steel Anchors – Future Concept.
Betonwerk + Fertigteiltechnik, 5(88), pp. 88-100.
7. Eligehausen, R., Fuchs, W., and Mayer, B., Load Bearing Behavior of Anchor
Fastenings in Tension. Betonwerk + Fertigteiltechnik, 12(87), pp. 826-832, and
1/88, pp. 29-35.

59
8. Eligehausen, R., and Fuchs, W., Load Bearing Behavior of Anchor Fastenings
under Shear, Combined Tension and Shear or Flexural Loadings. Betonwerk +
Fertigteiltechnik, 2(88), pp. 48-56.
9. Cannon, R.W., Burdette, E.G., Funk, R.R., Anchorage to Concrete, Tennessee
Valley Authority, Knoxville, Dec. 1975.
10. ACI 349-76, Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1976.
11. Fuchs, W., Entwicklung eines Vorschlags für die Bemessung von Befestigungen
(Development of a Proposal for the Design of Fastenings to Concrete), Report to
the DFG, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bonn, February 1991.
12. Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt), Bemessungsverfahren für Dübel zur
Verankerung in Beton, DIBt, Berlin, 1993.
13. Comité Euro-International du Béton. Design of Fastenings to Concrete. Thomas
Telford Services Ltd., London, 1997.
14. European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA), ETAG, Guideline for
European Technical Approval of Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete, P. 1: Anchors
in General, P. 2: Torque-controlled Expansion Anchors, P. 3: Undercut Anchors,
P. 4: Deformation-controlled Expansion Anchors, P. 5: Bonded Anchors, Annex A:
Details of Tests, Annex B: Tests for Admissible Service Conditions – Detailed
Information, Annex C: Design Methods for Anchorages, European Organisation
for Technical Approvals, Brussels, 1997-2001.
15. CEN/TC 250/SC/WG 2 'Design of Fastenings', Design of Fastenings for Use in
Concrete, 1st Draft, Brussels, 2001.

60
PROBABILISTIC CALIBRATION OF DESIGN METHODS
Richard E. Klingner
Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, USA

Abstract
In this paper, basic steps in the probabilistic calibration of design methods are identified.
These include identification and evaluation of test data; comparison of design models
with test data; evaluation of safety in the context of an overall design approach; and final
development of code language. Challenges to the success of each step are described, and
means of overcoming those challenges are suggested. Finally, calibration is shown to be
an ongoing process, one of whose benefits is to suggest areas in which additional
research would be particularly cost-effective.

1. Introduction

This Symposium, had it been held a decade earlier, would have been quite different. At
that time, many of the world’s researchers on anchor behavior were divided into two
camps, which, if not opposing, certainly had different perspectives on how to design
anchorage to concrete. Those different perspectives had been developed by technical
committees of the Comité Euro-International du Beton in Europe, and the American
Concrete Institute in the USA.

In Europe, a broad-based and reasonably coordinated technical community, tied on many


levels to the University of Stuttgart, was convinced of the reality of cracked concrete,
and of the need to address concrete cracking in anchorage design. They were equally
convinced of the potential weaknesses of traditional design methods for anchors, and of
the need to develop and adopt new design methods.

In the USA, an equally broad-based but much less coordinated technical community was
beginning to examine these same issues. Instead of a single Eurocode, though, we had a
bewildering array of manufacturers’ recommendations, consensus resource documents,

61
and model codes, which agreed with each other only on the broadest issues, and were
sometimes in direct conflict.

The past 10 years have witnessed a remarkable convergence of technical understanding


among Europe, the USA, and other countries around the world with respect to design of
anchorage to concrete. Most modern design provisions for anchors admit the possibility
of cracked concrete, and require that anchor designs have reasonably consistent levels of
safety. In a most important sense, this convergence is the result of tremendous work by
individuals who believed that a connection to concrete should behave in the same
manner whether it is designed and built (for example) in Austin, Texas, or in Stuttgart,
Germany. Several key steps in that convergence depended on the successful
probabilistic calibration of design methods. That is the subject of this paper.

1. Basic Steps in the Probabilistic Calibration of Design Methods

The probabilistic calibration of design methods can be discussed in terms of the


following steps:

o identification and evaluation of test data;


o comparison of design models with test data;
o evaluation of safety in the context of an overall design approach; and
o final development of code language.

In the remainder of this paper, each step is described, and is illustrated by specific
examples from technical committee work in the anchorage area over the past decade.
Challenges to the success of each step are described, and means of overcoming those
challenges are suggested, again with reference to one specific example: tensile breakout
capacity.

2. Background for Specific Examples

Design codes are not intended to predict behavior. Rather, they are intended to enable
practicing engineers to produce designs that are sufficiently safe. Nevertheless, if design
codes are to be more than empirical expressions of what has worked before, their design
equations must be linked to engineering mechanics and physical reality. The first
linkage occurs through rational design models; the second, through comparison with test
data. Let us first discuss design models, using the specific example of tensile breakout
capacity.

A decade ago, one particular area of controversy existed with respect to predicting the
tensile breakout capacity of anchors in concrete. Many designers in the USA and
elsewhere used the 45-Degree Cone Method, a traditional way of computing that
capacity. A growing number of designers in Europe used what has now evolved into the
CC Method.

62
The 45-Degree Cone Method assumes that a constant tensile stress of 4 f c′ acts on the
projected area of a 45-degree cone radiating towards the free surface from the bearing
edge of the anchor (Figure 1).
T
2hef+dh

45º

dh

Figure 1 Tensile breakout cone as idealized by 45-degree Cone Method

For a single tensile anchor far from edges, the mean cone breakout capacity is
determined by:

(
To = 0.96 f c′ π hef2 1 + d h hef ) N (1)
where:
To = tensile breakout capacity (kN);
f c′ = specified concrete compressive cylinder strength (MPa);
dh = diameter of anchor head (mm); and
hef = effective embedment (mm).

Breakout capacity is reduced by edges or adjacent anchors as a function of the reduction


in area of the projection of the breakout cone on the free surface.

The CC Method [1] computes the mean concrete breakout capacity of a single tensile
anchor far from edges as:

To = k fc′ hef1.5 (3)


where:
To = tensile breakout capacity (kN);
k = constant; equal to 13.48 for expansion and sleeve anchors, 15 for undercut
and headed anchors, in SI units;
f′c = specified concrete compressive strength (6 in. × 12 in. cylinder) (MPa);

63
hef = effective embedment depth (mm).

In the CC Method, the breakout body is in effect idealized as a pyramid with an


inclination of about 35 degrees between the failure surface and the concrete member
surface (Figure 2). Breakout capacity is reduced by edges or adjacent anchors as a
function of the reduction in area of the projection of the breakout pyramid on the free
surface. Other modification factors are used as well.

3hef
3hef

h ef

35º

Figure 2 Tensile breakout body as idealized by CC Method

3. Identification and Evaluation of Test Data

A decade ago, technical discussion of the relative merits of the 45-Degree Cone Method
and the CC Method for predicting tensile breakout was complicated by the fact that there
was no consensus database of test results that could be used as a standard. Proponents of
each method referred to separate sets of test data.

To cut through that Gordian knot, Dr. Werner Fuchs, during a stay as a Visiting
Researcher at The University of Texas at Austin, began to assemble such a database. He
identified original test reports from all over the world; he placed each tensile test in a
common framework of units (both US customary and SI); and most important, he began
the process of evaluating each test result to distinguish those tests governed by steel
failure, from those governed by pullout, and from those governed by concrete breakout.
His original work was done in DOS. Since then, the database that he began has been
converted into Excel, has been expanded to include many more tests, and has been even
more extensively studied [2, 3, 4]. It is in the public domain, and is maintained by ACI
Committee 349 (Subcommittee 3) and ACI Committee 355.

The database for tensile breakout behavior in uncracked concrete under static load now
numbers almost 1600 tests, partitioned into shallow and deep embedment, absence or
presence of edge effects, and absence or presence of adjacent anchors. For cracked

64
concrete, dynamic loading, or combinations of these, statistically significant number of
tests (for example, 50 to 200) are available in several categories.

4. Comparison of Design Models with Test Data

The next step is to evaluate each design model with respect to the consensus database of
tensile breakout results. In the case of models for predicting tensile breakout capacity,
the required steps are as follows:

1) For each failure mode, ratios of tested capacity to that predicted by the design
provisions are computed. The ratios are plotted as a function of embedment
depth.

2) The resulting plots are evaluated, using the criteria that an ideal design method
should have:
a) no systematic error (that is, no variation in ratios with changes in
embedment depth);
b) high precision (that is, little scatter of data); and
c) appropriate conservatism, achieved by a combination of normalizing
criteria for the design equation (mean versus lower fractile), load factors,
and φ-factors.

Examples of those plots are given in Figure 3 and Figure 4, for single tensile anchors
with shallower embedments, for the CC Method and the 45-Degree Cone method
respectively. Both methods have been normalized so that they predict approximately the
mean capacity from test results. The implications of this normalization are discussed in
more detail later in this paper. Comparison of those figures shows that the CC Method
has little systematic error (that is, almost zero slope), high precision (that is, relatively
low dispersion), and appropriate conservatism (mean values close to unity for this
normalization). In contrast, the 45-Degree Cone Method, while at least as conservative,
has high systematic error and lower precision.

65
RATIOS OF OBSERVED TO PREDICTED CAPACITIES, CC METHOD,
SHALLOWER EMBEDMENTS
3.5
y = 0.0009x + 0.9097
3 Mean = 0.981
COV = 0.197
2.5
(Nobs/Npre)

1.5

0.5

0
0 50 100 150 200
Effective Embedment, mm

Figure 3 Ratios of observed to predicted tensile breakout capacities, CC Method,


single anchors with shallow embedment

RATIOS OF OBSERVED TO PREDICTED CAPACITIES, 45-DEGREE


CONE METHOD, SHALLOWER EMBEDMENTS, NO EDGE EFFECTS
3.5

3 Mean = 1.356
COV = 0.266
2.5
(Nobs/Npre)

1.5

0.5
y = -0.0059x + 1.8074
0
0 50 100 150 200
Effective Embedment, mm

Figure 4 Ratios of observed to predicted concrete tensile breakout capacities, 45-


Degree Cone Method, single anchors with shallow embedment

66
Plots such as these immediately indicate how to improve a given design method.
Downward-trending systematic error, as in the case of the 45-Degree Cone Method,
indicates that as embedments increase, the ratios of observed to predicted capacity tend
to decrease. This means that as embedments increase, predicted capacities are too high,
and it implies that the exponent of the embedment (equal to 2.0 in the case of the 45-
Degree Cone Method) should be reduced to a value between 1.5 and 1.6.

5. Evaluation of Safety in the Context of an Overall Design Approach

The next step is to compare the safety that will result from the use of different design
models, in the context of a particular overall design approach. For example, as in the
work of Farrow et al. [2, 3] and Shirvani [4], using each tensile breakout method, and a
probabilistic analysis based on the design framework of ACI 349-90 Appendix B [5], the
probabilities of failure under known loads, and the probabilities of brittle failure
independent of load, are evaluated for each method.

Any probabilistic evaluation of safety faces several daunting challenges:

o many design professionals are suspicious of probabilities; and


o many design professionals are unfamiliar with probabilistic tools.

For example, referring to Figure 3 and Figure 4, many design professionals, while
recognizing that the 45-Degree Cone Method has greater dispersion than the CC Method
for shallow embedments, would intuitively think that this greater dispersion would be
compensated for by the former’s higher ratios of observed to predicted capacity, leading
to approximately equivalent levels of safety for each method. This in fact is not the case.
In spite of the higher conservatism of the 45-Degree Cone Method, its greater dispersion
makes it less safe than the CC Method.

Experience has demonstrated that while very few technical committee members
(including this author) have the formal mathematical background to compute
probabilities of failure in closed form, most feel reasonably comfortable with
approximating probabilities of failure by Monte Carlo analysis, for which tools such as
Schneider [6] are readily available and reasonably user-friendly. Monte Carlo analysis
has the additional advantage of being practical when a design method involves complex
logic with many possible branches.

Using an assumed statistical distribution of loads, and known distributions of the ratios
between observed and predicted strengths as governed by steel yield and fracture, and by
tensile breakout, it is possible within the context of a given overall design approach, such
as that of ACI 349-90 [5], to predict the probabilities of failure under given loads, or the
probabilities of brittle failure independent of loads. Results of typical statistical analyses
for known loads are summarized in Table 1. Higher values of β indicate lower
probabilities of failure. The table shows that in most anchor categories, anchors

67
designed using the 45-Degree Cone Method to predict concrete breakout capacity, have
a much higher probability of failure than if the CC Method were used. This is
particularly evident for anchors with edge and group effects.

Table 2 shows corresponding probabilities of brittle failure independent of load. These


probabilities are essentially the probability of brittle failure if the load increases beyond
the value used in design. For design against earthquakes or loads that are similarly
difficult to predict, it is important to reduce the probability of brittle failure (“capacity
design”). The 45-Degree Cone Method has much higher probabilities of brittle failure,
than the CC Method.

Table 1 Probability of failure under known loads for different categories of tensile
anchors, ductile design approach, static loading, uncracked concrete
CC METHOD 45-DEG CONE
ANCHOR CATEGORY METHOD
Probability Probability
β β
of Failure of Failure
single anchors, shallower embedments 5.46E-05 3.87 8.56E-04 3.14
single anchors, deeper embedments 1.39E-05 4.19 1.99E-03 2.88
single anchors, shallower embedments,
1.92E-03 2.89 1.00E-03 3.09
edge effects
single anchors, deeper embedments,
1.70E-06 4.65 9.87E-04 3.09
edge effects
2- and 4-anchor groups, shallower
2.23E-05 4.08 1.79E-03 2.91
anchors, no edge effects
4-anchor groups, deeper embedments,
5.23E-04 3.28 5.08E-04 3.29
no edge effects

68
Table 2 Probabilities of brittle failure independent of load for different categories
of tensile anchors, ductile design approach, static loading, uncracked
concrete
CC METHOD 45-DEG CONE
ANCHOR CATEGORY METHOD
Probability β Probability β
of Brittle of Brittle
Failure Failure
single anchors, shallower embedments 0.178 0.922 0.066 1.51
single anchors, deeper embedments 0.088 1.36 0.369 0.335
single anchors, shallower embedments, 0.206 0.821 0.198 0.848
edge effects
single anchors, deeper embedments, 0.0405 1.75 0.717 0.573
edge effects
2- and 4-anchor groups, shallower 0.107 1.24 0.125 1.15
anchors, no edge effects
4-anchor groups, deeper embedments, 0.0621 1.54 0.273 0.603
no edge effects

6. Final Development of Code Language

Once a design method has been agreed upon, it is necessary to decide how that method
should be expressed in code language. The following questions are relevant:

o How should the design method be normalized?


o How should appropriate load factors and understrength factors be derived?

Design methods can be normalized so that they predict either mean values, or some
lower fractile (such as 5%). Provided that ratios of observed to predicted capacities are
reasonably consistent from case to case, either normalization technique can produce
equivalent levels of safety. Nevertheless, because the scatter of observed to predicted
capacities varies from case to case, it is probably preferable to normalize design methods
to a lower fractile of the expected capacity.

It is simple to convert design models normalized on mean values, to models normalized


on lower fractiles. For example, if a 5% fractile value is about 75% of the mean for the
tensile breakout database, then design methods normalized to mean values can simply be
multiplied by 0.75 to give the corresponding design methods normalized to 5% fractiles.
For example, the leading coefficient k in the CC Method (normalized to mean values) for
tensile breakout is 15 for cast-in-place and undercut anchors. If it is desired to normalize
to the 5% fractile of test results, then the leading coefficient k would be 15 multiplied by
that same factor of 0.75, or 11.25.

69
Probabilities of failure such as those presented in Table 1 depend on the load and
understrength factors used in the overall design framework. To keep the probability of
failure the same, if the load factor is increased by 10%, the understrength factor should
be decreased by 10%, without any need to run additional probabilistic studies.

In most cases, load factors are prescribed uniformly for all materials, and are beyond the
control of those developing anchor design provisions. In such cases, it is necessary to
arrive at suitable understrength factors by trial and error. In some cases, understrength
factors will be constrained by practical limitations, such as being less than unity, or less
than that corresponding so some other failure mode. If both load factors and
understrength factors are constrained, the only possible adjustments may be in the
fractile against which the design method is normalized.

Finally, it is necessary to modify design methods to account for effects such as dynamic
loading and cracked concrete. Modification factors for such cases are most
appropriately arrived at by comparing the results of tests in which everything is held
constant, except for the loading rate, or the presence of cracks.

7. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

In this paper, essential steps in the probabilistic calibration of design methods have been
identified, and examples of how challenges to those steps were successfully overcome,
with reference to the particular issue of methods for predicting tensile breakout capacity.
Those steps, and the methodology behind them, need to be checked against new data and
new design criteria. Finally, while more research is not always needed, the methodology
outlined here can be used to indicate areas in which additional research information
would be particularly cost-effective.

8. References

1. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen and R. and Breen, J. E., “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 1,
January-February, 1995, pp. 73-94.
2. Farrow, C. Ben and Klingner, R. E., “Tensile Capacity of Anchors with Partial or
Overlapping Failure Surfaces: Evaluation of Existing Formulas on an LRFD
Basis,” ACI Structures Journal, Vol. 92, No. 6, November-December 1995, pp. 698-
710.
3. Farrow, C. Ben, Frigui, Imed and Klingner, R. E., “Tensile Capacity of Single
Anchors in Concrete: Evaluation of Existing Formulas on an LRFD Basis,” ACI
Structures Journal, Vol. 93, No. 1, January-February 1996.

70
4. Shirvani, Mansour, “Behavior of Tensile Anchors in Concrete: Statistical Analysis
and Design Recommendations,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin,
May 1998.
5. ACI Committee 349, “Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete
Structures,” American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1990.
6. Schneider, Jörg, “VaP version 1.6,” Institute of Structural Engineering, Zurich,
Switzerland.

71
CURRENT STATUS OF POST-INSTALLED ANCHOR
APPLICATION IN JAPAN

Reiji Tanaka, Faculty of Eng., Tohoku Institute of Technology, Japan

Abstract
Currently about 450 million pcs. of post-installed anchors are being used annually in
Japan. This report introduces the outline where and how these post-installed anchors are
utilized.
Japan Construction Anchor Association (JCAA) is now producing an approval system
and design guide of post-installed anchors. This outline is also presented.
This report aims for the comprehensive study on current status and overall picture in the
near future concerning post-installed anchor application in Japan.

1. Post-installed Anchor Products Approval Project by Japan


Construction Anchor Association

Japan Construction Anchor Association (JCAA) is preparing for the approval of


post-installed anchors. Target products are confined to ones manufactured or sold
exclusively by JCAA members. Foreign products sold by JCAA members are qualified
to get approval. The initial application was accepted in January, 2001.

1.1 Product approval procedure


Product approval procedure is shown in the flow chart of Table 1.

1.2 Approval Committee


Approval Committee members are composed of more than 10 experts. Present chairman
is Prof. Reiji Tanaka, Tohoku Institute of Technology.

72
1.3 Overall plan of product approval
Followings are the outline of product approval project.

Applicants
Application

Application receipt

Receipt judgement

Notification of acceptance

Approval

Approval committee

Decision Yes/No

Notification of Yes/No

To sign the agreement

Issue of certificate

Renewal

Table 1 Procedure of product approval

73
a) Target products
All products which applicants wish to apply. But the secretariat will check in advance
whether these products are qualified for JCAA approval.
z Post-installed anchors consist of metal anchors, bonded anchors and other anchor
group.
z Applicants can freely select which category their products belong to.
z Basically every product can be acceptable by establishing the category of other
anchor group and also their criteria can be specified by self-declaration.
z But at least they should have shape and form of post-installed anchors.

b) Approved products
1) Approved products consist of standard type and special type. Special type is
composed of Type 1 and Type 2.
Standard type
Approved products Type 1
Special type
Type 2
The structure of approved products is shown below for metal anchor, bonded anchor
and other anchor group respectively.

z Metal anchors
Standard type
Approved products Type 1
Special type
Type 2
z Bonded anchors
Standard type
Approved products Type 1
Special type
Type 2
z Other anchor group
Type 1
Approved products Special type
Type 2

74
2) Standard type
Similar to JIS standard, acceptance criteria is already available and only those that pass
this criteria can be approved. Standard type has the self-regulatory feature, and has an
advantage of clear quality contents for the public such as JIS standard. Also users
receive the merit of exchangeability of products. This type is very important in order to
show the consensus of JCAA to the public society.
Some standard testing methods are available to confirm the performance in the
acceptance criteria.
Approval shall be given to depending on the experimental results of those testing
methods.

3) Special type
It is also necessary to cope with the technical development and originality of each
manufacturer. The acceptance criteria of those products are self-declared by applicants.
After the reliability of the self declared contents has been confirmed, approval will be
granted. Though the contents of evaluation items are self-declared, the evaluation
process is the same as standard type, and therefore the approval level is never damaged.
Plenty of products are considered in special type, and they are classified into type 1 and
type 2. It is up to the applicant to which category he wish to apply.
The evaluation items should include specific ones in addition to the standard type items.
These specific items are also self-declared. Type 1 is supposed to those anchors
designed by the JCAA Design Guide.
On the other hand, type 2 is supposed to be designed in very simple form or used
without any engineering approach. Its evaluation items and evaluation methods are
self-declared. For example, evaluation items can be several ones like shape, material
quality, strength, etc. But the minimum information for anchor performance is necessary.
Though the quantity of evaluation items may be small. their contents are carefully
investigated like standard type and therefore the approval level is never damaged.

As for specific evaluation items for special type, some standard testing methods will
become necessary. At this time nobody knows which specific items will appear in the
future, and we can not prepare all standard testing methods. But for the time being we
estimate following ones: cyclic loading test (tension and shear), crack test(tension and
shear), thermal effect test for bonded anchors.
The name of above mentioned “standard testing method” is tentative.
When some new specific items appear, we will have to consider additional standard
testing methods to cope with them.
For both metal anchors and bonded anchors, the next table is applied for standard type
as well as specific type. For other anchor group, the rule of special type is applied.

75
Standard type Special type
Type 1 Type 2
Evaluation approval Evaluation approval Evaluation approval
item standard item standard item standard
1 1 **
2 2 ** Self-
3 3 ** declaration
4 4 **
5 5
6 Approval 6 Self-
7 standard is 7 declaration
8 available 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
Specific
items Self-
declaration

z Quality level of standard type and special type (Type 1 , Type 2) is as follows.
Special type 1 > Standard type > Special type 2
z Specific items are declared by applicants.
Foe example, we consider strength effect, rigidity effect, cyclic loading effect,
crack effect, and thermal effect as specific items for the time being.
z Evaluation items 1 through 15 of special type 1 are same as standard type.
But the approval standard of special type is self-declared.
z The evaluation items of special type 2 shall be selected from the counterparts of
standard type 1 through 15 and self-declared. Approval standard is also
self-declared.
z Those anchors designed by JCAA Design Guide should belong to the category of
at least standard type
4) Evaluation items and acceptance criteria
Product approval is evaluated by next items. Evaluation items for metal anchors and
bonded anchors are shown in Fig.2 and Fig.3 respectively.

76
Table 2 Approval items of metal anchors
Approval items
1 Subjects concerning quality 1) Shape, size and tolerance of anchor parts.
and performance of anchor
parts. 2) Material of parts.
3) Strength of parts
4) Hardness and ductility of parts
5) Thread class, appearance and surface finish
2 Subjects concerning quality 6) Shape, size and tolerance before and after “set” condition.
and performance of anchor
products. 7) Drill bit diameter, drilling depth and tolerance
8) Product strength
9) Hardness and ductility of products
10)Base material type
11)Scope of base material design strength
12)Tensile resistance
13)Tensile rigidity
14)Shear resistance
15)Shear rigidity
Table 3 Approval items of bonded anchors
Approval items
1 Subjects concerning quality 1) Shape, size and tolerance of capsule
and performance of anchor
parts. 2) Material and strength of adhesive
3) Property of adhesive
4) Type, shape and appearance of anchor bolts
5) Material and surface finish of anchor bolts
6) Strength and thread class of anchor bolts
2 Subjects concerning quality 7) Drill bit size and tolerance
and performance of anchor
products. 8) Drilling depth and tolerance
9) Base material type
10)Scope of design strength of base material
11)Environmental conditions
12)Tensile resistance
13)Tensile rigidity
14)Shear resistance
15)Shear rigidity

For the evaluation of approval items in Table2 and Table3, the acceptance criteria
on quality/performance are given in Table4 and Table5.

77
Table 4 Quality/performance criteria of metal anchors
Criteria 1 Shape, size and tolerance of anchor parts.
Criteria 2 Material of parts.
Criteria 3 Nominal yield strength and tensile strength of parts
Criteria 4 Hardness and ductility of parts
Criteria 5 Thread class, appearance and surface finish
Criteria 6 Shape, size and tolerance before and after “set” condition
Criteria 7 Drill bit diameter and drilling depth
Criteria 8 Product material: nominal yield strength, tensile strength
Criteria 9 Product material: Hardness, ductility
Criteria 10 Base material type
Criteria 11 Scope of design strength of base material
Criteria 12 Tensile resistance
Criteria 13 Tensile rigidity
Criteria 14 Shear strength
Criteria 15 Shear rigidity

Table 5 Quality/performance criteria of bonded anchors


Criteria 1 Shape, size and tolerance of capsule.
Criteria 2 Material and strength of adhesive.
Criteria 3 Mechanical property of adhesive
Criteria 4 Type, shape and appearance of anchor bolts
Criteria 5 Material and surface finish of anchor bolt
Criteria 6 Strength and thread class of anchor bolts
Criteria 7 Drill bit diameter and drilling depth
Criteria 8 Drilling depth and tolerance
Criteria 9 Base material type
Criteria 10 Scope of design strength of base material
Criteria 11 Environmental condition
Criteria 12 Tensile resistance
Criteria 13 Tensile rigidity
Criteria 14 Shear strength
Criteria 15 Shear rigidity

2.JCAA “Post-installed Anchor Design Guide”


JCAA is now working on their original “Post-installed Anchor Design Guide (draft)”.
Its working activities are nearly finished. Design Committee consists of eight members
with chairman Prof. Reiji Tanaka, Tohoku Institute of Technology.
I will give just the content of this guide below.

78
Post-installed Anchor Design Guide and its Commentary (Draft)

Contents
1. General rules
1.1 Scope of application
1.2 Post-installed anchors
1.3 Base material
1.4 Operation of post-installed anchors
1.5 Terminology

2. Design of post-installed anchors


2.1 Security of structural performance
2.2 Safety factor
2.3 Characteristic values of materials
2.4 Design load and design deformation
2.5 Design resistance and design deformation limit
2.6 Serviceability limit state design
2.7 Ultimate limit state design

3. Resistance and rigidity formula


3.1 Resistance and rigidity formula of metal anchors
3.2 Resistance and rigidity formula of bonded anchors

4. Structural specification

Design example 1 Equipments fixed on floors (Underground)


Design example 2 Equipments fixed on floors (High importance case)
Design example 3 Equipments fixed on floors (Rooftop)
Design example 4 Suspension
Design example 5 Sign board (fixed on wall)
Design example 6 Metal handrail
Design example 6 Seismic reinforcing (added shear wall)
Design example 7 Deformation design

79
DESIGN METHOD FOR SPLITTING FAILURE MODE OF
FASTENINGS
Jörg Asmus*, Rolf Eligehausen**
*Ingenieurbüro Eligehausen und Sippel, Stuttgart, Germany
**Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
The failure of a fastening is often caused by a rupture of steel, anchor pullout or by a
concrete-cone failure. In the past these failure modes have been intensively investigated
and the associated failure loads can be calculated with sufficient accuracy [1]. For the
failure mode splitting there exists no general equation to calculate the failure load.
Therefore, theoretical and experimental investigations have been performed [2]. Splitting
of a concrete member can be expected if the member dimensions are relatively small or
in large concrete specimens if the fasteners are installed near to an edge or corner. The
splitting failure load depends on dimensions and on material properties of the concrete
member. Moreover, the design and load-bearing area of the fastener influence the failure
load as well.

In the present paper the results of experimental and numerical investigations in case of
splitting are discussed and a design method to calculate the splitting failure load is
proposed. Details of the design method are given to illustrate how installation parameters
(dimension of concrete member and material properties) and the type of the fastener
(headed anchor and undercut anchor) influence the splitting resistance.
1. Introduction
For fastenings loaded under tension concrete-cone failure, bursting failure, steel failure
or pull-out failure are the most common failure modes (Fig. 1a-d). For these failure
modes design methods are available [1]. However, fastenings in concrete can also fail by
splitting (Fig. 1e). The corresponding failure load may be smaller than the concrete cone
failure load. Therefore, the failure mode splitting has to be considered in the design of
fastenings.
The mechanism of splitting failure is not well understood and the ultimate load
associated with it is not easily predictable. Currently splitting is prevented in Technical
Approvals by prescribing minimum edge distances and spacing. These parameters have

80
to be determined in tests. However, to design safer and more economical fastenings for
any geometry a realistic design method which accounts for splitting failure is needed.

a) concrete-cone failure b) bursting failure c) steel failure d) pull-out failure

e) splitting failure
Fig. 1 Failure modes of fastening systems

Splitting is especially relevant for anchor systems which transfer loads by high local
stresses into the base material. These stresses are present for systems with mechanical
interlock as well as for expansion systems. Therefore, a design method for the failure
mode splitting valid for headed anchors, undercut anchors and torque controlled
expansion anchors has been proposed [2]. In this paper the design model for headed
anchors and undercut anchors is presented (Fig. 2).

A1

αΗead

Drilling pin
a) Mechanical interlock b) Headed anchor c) Undercut anchor
Fig. 2 Fastening systems with load-transfer mechanism mechanical interlock

81
2. Splitting failure mechanism

2.1. Numerical investigations


To study the splitting failure mechanism numerical non-linear calculations using a
realistic material model for concrete have been performed. In a three-dimensional (3D)
finite element analysis the splitting of a concrete block caused by a concentrated internal
pressure has been investigated. The results show that the ultimate pressure at splitting
failure depends mainly on the size and geometry of the specimen as well as on the size
of the load-bearing area. When the structure geometry and the load-bearing area are
scaled proportionally, the ultimate load increases approximately proportionally as well,
i.e. no significant size effect on the splitting failure load is observed. However, if the
structure size is scaled proportionally but the size of the load-bearing area is kept
constant, there is a strong size effect on the ultimate load. The reason is the localisation
of damage and consequently a decrease of the peak resistance by an increase of the size.

The numerical results are in good agreement with the experimental observations [2] as
well as with theoretical and experimental studies for concrete members loaded by locally
applied compressive forces [2]. The numerical investigations are explained in detail in
[12].

2.2. Model
When modeling the splitting failure mode it must be taken into account that anchors
transfer high loads on a relatively small area compared to the size of the concrete
member. The concentrated load causes highly concentrated stresses which are several
times higher than the uniaxial compressive strength. In literature several cases have been
studied in which small areas are loaded by concentrated compression forces [4], [5], [6].

On the basis of theoretical and experimental investigations the pressure σu under the
loaded area A1 is assumed to be proportional to the square root of the ratio between
loaded area Ao and load transfer area A1 σu ∼ (Ao/A1)0,5. The investigations in [10] show
that the square root relationship is valid for a range of Ao/A1 ≤ 950 which covers the
range valid for fasteners. Assuming the tensile capacity of concrete as proportional to
fcc0,5 the following equation for splitting resistance is recommended in [10]:

Nu,sp = 4,65 ⋅ A10,5 ⋅ Ao0,5 ⋅ fcc0,5 (1)


When loading a small concrete area on the surface of a concrete member by a rigid disk
the typical failure mechanism shown in Fig. 3a) is observed. First, a local failure on the
concrete surface occurs, which is associated with radial cracking and spalling around the
disk. If the ratio A1/Ao is high below the disk a sheared compressed cone with an angle
between 25° to 40° is observed. Fig. 3a) shows a typical schematic cross section of a
concrete specimen loaded by a stiff disk. With increasing load splitting failure may occur
due to the wedging action.

82
In case of headed or undercut anchors the concrete around the load bearing area is
confined. Therefore no spalling is possible. As shown in numerical investigations [12]
the loading zone is high compressed in all directions. Under the compressed volume
zone high tensile strains localize in the radial as well as in the splitting direction and
failure is caused by splitting. The failure mechanism is very similar to the failure
mechanism shown in Fig. 3a). Therefore in principle, Equation (1) is also valid for
headed anchors. However, certain modifications must be taken into account. While the
loaded area Ao can easily be calculated the definition of the area A1 needs some
considerations (see section 3.1).

Fastening by
Loading plate mechanical
interlock
member surface Concrete
h LE h LE
αB αB
member
sheared
compressed Sheared
concrete compressed
concrete

a) Partial loading on a concrete surface b) Loading by a headed anchor in a concrete


member
Fig. 3 Load-transfer mechanism

Based on the Mohr-Coulomb-law and a


friction angle of concrete φ of about 36°
[11] an angle of the compressed cone
αB = 27° is determined [2]. This angle,
α
deduced by theoretical considerations,
φ
α N agrees well with angles observed in
RES tension pull-out tests with headed anchors
F
z
[8]. In tension tests with headed anchors a
R shearing of the concrete in front of the
(α+φ) anchor head with an angle of about 25° is
SPF observed. Because the sheared compressed
Fig. 4 Forces in the load bearing area of cone in front of a headed anchor has angle
a headed anchor αB = 27°, a similar behavior for headed
anchors with a head angle (see Fig. 2b)
between αHead= 27° to 90° is to be expected. For a head angle αB < 27° the splitting and
bursting forces increase significantly. Therefore, the higher splitting forces of fasteners
with mechanical interlock with a head angle αB < 27° have to be taken into account
when calculating the splitting failure load. From the mechanical model shown in Fig. 4 a
factor kα is introduced in Equation (2) to consider a head angle αB < 27°.

83
3. Calculation of the Average Failure Load for Splitting

3.1. General
In [2] it is shown that a substitution of the loaded area Ao by the fracture area Acrack is
needed. The fracture area depends on member size and edge distance. The fracture area
for anchors installed in the middle of a narrow concrete member is defined by the
member width b and the member height h. Numerical and experimental investigations
with anchors installed in a large specimen near the corner or edge the typical splitting
failure mode as shown in Fig. 5b is observed. The splitting crack appears at a specific
angle β to the edge. In Fig. 6 the angles as observed in tests are plotted as a function of
the edge distance. Besides the results of tension pull-out tests also results of tests with a
shear load to the edge [7] are evaluated in Fig. 6. The test results can be approximated by
Equation (6), which is represented by the line in Fig. 6. A similar result have been found
for fasteners at the corner Equation (7). Equation (6) and (7) are valid for an edge
distance c ≥ 40 mm. Furthermore, the splitting area must be restricted to a member
height h ≤ 2hef (hef = embedment depth) because the concrete at a distance larger than hef
is not stressed significantly [2]. Therefore, the member height in the calculation is
limited by h ≤ 2hef (compare Equations (4) and (5)).

Equations (2) to (7) give the average splitting failure load of a single fastener with
mechanical interlock. In [2] equations for calculating the failure load of double and
quadruple fastenings are given. Furthermore, an equation valid for torque controlled
expansion anchor is proposed as well.
Nu,sp = 4,65 ⋅ kα ⋅ A10,5 ⋅ Acrack0,5 ⋅ fcc0,5 (2)
kα = 0,51⋅tan (αB + 36°) for αHead < 27° (3)
= 1 for αHead ≥ 27°
fastening
member

h fracture area
Acrack h

fracture area
c3 Acrack
bb c1

c1 c2
a) Fastener installed in the middle of b) Fastener installed at the edge or
a narrow concrete member corner
ACrack = b ⋅ h h ≤ 2 hef (4) ACrack = rCrack ⋅ h h ≤ 2 hef (5)
Fig. 5 Failure area in a concrete member loaded by a fastener

84
60

Angle of crack ß [°]


50

40

30

20
ß ß
rcrack/2 c1
10

0
0 50 100 150 200 250

Edge distance [mm]


h = 120 mm h = 160 mm
h = 240 mm tension, Blow-out
Shear load to edge (scatter range) sin (21 + 0,15c)

Fig. 6 Splitting of a single fastener located at the edge; angle of crack as a function of
the edge distance

2 ⋅ c1 (c1 ≤ 40 mm: r = 4,4c; c1 ≥ 160 mm: r = 2,8c)


rcrack,edge = (6)
sin (21 + 0,15 ⋅ c1 )

2 ⋅ c1 (c1 ≤ 40 mm: r = 2,4c; c1 ≥ 160 mm: r = 2,8c)


rcrack,corner =
sin (61 − 0,1 ⋅ c1 )
(7)

3.2. Undercut Anchors


Headed anchors are cast-in-place systems, while undercut anchors are systems installed
in hardened concrete (post-installed systems). Undercut anchors transfer tension loads to
the concrete primarily through mechanical interlock. Nevertheless, there are some
differences between headed anchors and undercut anchors. Fig. 7 shows details of the
load-bearing area of an undercut anchor.

The annular gap between the anchor sleeve and the wall of the drilled hole and gaps
between the elements of the expansion sleeve reduce the load-bearing area. Furthermore,
with some types of undercut anchors with increasing tension load the cone is drawn
further into the expansion sleeves. Due to this follow-up expansion the expansion forces
are increased. Furthermore, the concrete surrounding an undercut anchor is affected by
the drilling process. The aggregate granules may split when drilling the hole or when
generating the undercut.

85
To consider these differences to headed
anchors for the calculation of the splitting
failure load of undercut anchors a factor kp
is introduced in Equation (2):

Nu,sp,undercutanchor = kP ⋅ Nu,sp (8)


hLE

Drilling pin

kP ≤ 1 product factor
Undercut elements

Sleeve
The factor kp is product dependent. For
Space
Threaded rod
headed anchors it is kp = 1.0. For undercut
anchor it must be evaluated by tests. For
Load bearing area
typical undercut anchors values kp = 0.8 to
b
1.0 have been found.
d1

d2

Fig. 7 Expansion zone of an undercut


anchor

4. Comparison with experimental data


To evaluate the proposed design method, numerous tests with undercut anchors (see Fig.
2c) were carried out. In these tests several influencing factors were investigated.
According to Equation (2) the splitting failure load of systems with mechanical interlock
depends on the member width or edge distance, member height and other parameters of
the fastening system (embedment depth hef, load-bearing area A1). Fig. 8 a) to d) shows
the ratio of the measured and calculated splitting failure load in narrow concrete member
(compare Fig. 5a) plotted as a function of edge distance (c = b/2), member height,
embedment depth and load-bearing area. The splitting failure load is calculated with a
factor kp = 1, i.e. for a headed anchor. The head angle of the undercut anchor is 18°. An
optimal agreement between measured and calculated splitting failure loads corresponds
to Fu,test/Fu,calc = 1. The comparison shows a good agreement between the proposed
formula and the experimental data. Furthermore, a histogram for the ratio of measured to
calculated splitting failure loads is shown in Fig. 9. The diagram is based on the results
of 164 tests with single fasteners in narrow concrete members. The coefficient of
variation is approximately 20%. The scatter is not significantly larger than that of the
measured concrete tensile strength. The design formula visualises the effect of
influencing parameters and it predicts the splitting failure load obtained in the
experiments with sufficient accuracy.

86
2,00
1,80

Nu,s p,tes t/Nu,s p,calculation


1,60
1,40
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0 100 200 300 400 500
Edge dis tance [cm]

2,00
1,80
1,60
Nu,s p,tes t/Nu,s p,calculation

1,40
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0 100 200 300 400 500
M ember height h [cm]

2,00
1,80
1,60
Nu,s p,tes t/Nu,s p,calculation

1,40
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0 50 100 150 200
Embedment depth h ef [mm]

2,00
1,80
1,60
Nu,s p,tes t/Nu,s p,calculation

1,40
1,20
1,00
0,80
0,60
0,40
0,20
0,00
0 100 200 300 400
Load-bearing area A 1 [mm²]

Fig. 8 Single fastenings with undercut anchors in narrow members; Ratio of the
measured to the calculated splitting failure load as a function of (1 = optimal
agreement):
a) edge distance with c = b/2
b) member height
c) embedment depth
c) load-bearing area

87
50
n = 164
45 x = 1,08
v = 21,6 %
40

35

30

Number
25

20

15

10

0
0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0

Splitting failure load


Test/Calculation
Fig. 9 Comparison of measured to calculated splitting failure loads; Single fastenings
(undercut anchors) in narrow concrete members

In [2] more details are given related to the influence of the bending and the spacing of
multiple fastenings on the splitting failure load. Furthermore, a design method for
calculating the splitting failure load of torque controlled expansion anchors is proposed
as well.
5. Summary
Splitting of concrete occurs when the dimensions of the structural member are too small
or the anchors are located too close to the edge or are spaced too closely. The failure
load is normally less than in the case of concrete cone failure. Therefore, the failure
mode splitting has to be considered in the design of fastenings.

In the present paper the results of experimental and numerical investigations are
discussed and a design method to calculate the splitting failure load is proposed. Details
of the design method are discussed to illustrate how installation parameters (dimension
of concrete member; material properties) and type of fastener (headed anchors or
undercut anchors) influence the splitting failure load. To demonstrate the validity of the
proposed design method, numerous tests with undercut anchors were performed. The
calculated and experimentally obtained failure loads agree with sufficient accuracy.

88
6. References

[1] European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA) (1994): Guideline for
European Technical Approval of Anchors (Metal Anchors) for Use in Concrete,
Final Draft, Sept. 1994.
[2] Asmus, J., „Bemessung von zugbeanspruchten Befestigungen bei der
Versagensart Spalten des Betons”, Dissertation, Universität Stuttgart, 1999.
[3] Eligehausen, R.; Mallee, R.: Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und
Mauerwerksbau, Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische
Wissenschaften GmbH, Berlin, 2000.
[4] Lächler, W.: „Beitrag zum Problem der Teilflächenpressung bei Beton am
Beispiel der Pfahlkopfanschlüsse.“, Dissertation, Institut für für Grundbau und
Bodenmechanik der Universität Stuttgart, 1977.
[5] Spieth, H.P: Das Verhalten von Beton unter hoher örtlicher Pressung und
Teilbelastung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von
Spannbetonverankerungen. Dissertation TH Stuttgart, 1959.
[6] Niyogi, S. K.: The Bearing Strength of Concrete-Geometric Variations; ASCE,
Journal of the Structural Division No. 99, July 1973.
[7] Fuchs, W.: Tragverhalten von Befestigungen unter Querlast in ungerissenem
Beton, Deutscher Ausschuß für Stahlbeton, Heft 424, Beuth-Verlag, 1992.
[8] Furche, J.: Zum Trag- und Verschiebungsverhalten von Kopfbolzen bei
zentrischem Zug, Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen der
Universität Stuttgart, 1994.
[9] Furche, J.; Eligehausen, R.: „Lateral Blow-Out Failure of Headed Studs Near a
Free Edge“, In: Senkiw, G. A.; Lancelot, H. B. (Herausgeber), SP-130, Anchors
in Concrete, Design and Behaviour. American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1991,
S. 235 - 252.
[10] Lieberum, K.-H.: Das Tragverhalten von Beton bei extremer
Teilflächenbelastung. Dissertation an der Technischen Hochschule Darmstadt,
1978.
[11] Szabo, G.: Über die Berechnung der Bruchlast örtlich belasteter
Stahlbetonkörper, Betonstein-Zeitung, Heft 2/1963.
[12] Asmus, J.; Ozbolt, J.: Numerical and experimental investigations of the failure
mode splitting of fastenings, Symposium on connections between steel and
concrete, University Stuttgart 2001
[13] Furche, J.: „Spalten des Ankergrundes Beton infolge zentrisch belasteter
formschlüssiger Befestigungsmittel“; Nachtrag zur Diplomarbeit Bohner
(1988), Bericht Nr. 9/7 - 88/20, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen der
Universität Stuttgart, 1988.

89
BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF FASTENINGS OF SHEAR
LUGS IN CONCRETE
Harald Michler, Manfred Curbach
Dresden University of Technology, Germany

Abstract
Research on special structures with shear lugs to transmit high values of shear load to
fixed ground has been carried out. An additional loading with normal force and bending
moment is possible, but the shear load will be the main loading. In this case the base will
be concrete and the fitting will be made of steel. The fixing is built into the green con-
crete. The advantage of the fittings with shear lug is reasonable in the splitting of the
load transfer. The special components of the load especially the shear load is transmitted
by highly specialized structural parts. The behaviour and capacity of these structures will
be shown.

1. Introduction

An experimental and theoretical analysis of the bearing behaviour of complex shear


loaded fixtures with shear lugs has been carried out at Dresden University of Technol-
ogy, which was supported by the DFG. As part of the working group ”Design of Fas-
tenings in Concrete (Design Guide of fib)”, fastenings are examined for the transfer of
great surface parallel shear loads into the concrete structure [1] [2] [3]. The experiments
discussed later are an extension of work done at the Bechtel Power Corporation in Ann
Arbor, Michigan and at the former Institute of Reinforced Concrete in Dresden. The
earlier experiments in Dresden are the basis for this examination [4] [5].
The analysed units are different from systems based on friction or prestressed units. And
they do not need any normal pressure, which is a usual feature of a steel pillar feet. The
analysis has turned the attention to a major shear force load combined with small normal
forces either in tension or compression and also a bending moment or not. The basic idea
of the new components is the construction from highly sophisticated and specialised
modules.

90
The fixings mentioned can be used F
for any kind of concentrated load fixture
transmission or assembly joints fitting M
between structural concrete (steel)
components, steel/wooden structures
V
or other concrete elements loaded
parallel to the surface. Possible fields base plate
of application of the new components abutting padding
will be all cases that match to the face
principle of corbel load introduction. shear lug tie bar
The strengthening of existing =
concrete structures using additional round bolt
headed
steel structures, fixing facade Ø14
anchor bolt
elements on the main construction
Figure 1 Schema of fixing, main parts
part or supporting girders using a
corbel may be some examples for
future applications.
As shown in Figure 1, the component always consists of three main parts: the base plate,
the shear lug and the tie bar. The base plate parallel to the surface is the interconnection
between the load and the actual anchoring components, the shear lug and the tie bar. The
design of the shear lug is supposed to deliver an optimal transmission of the shear force
into the concrete component and the tie bar is designed only for the transfer of tension
forces. Because the shear lug has a rectangular cross section with flat surfaces, the load
transmission is more effective than the load transmission of the tie bar. Even it is
stress distribution at fixing systems possible to easily built a
much greater cross section
• bending stiff • rigid joint than the circular cross
anchor bolt of shear lug section of a traditional
round anchor bolt. So the tie
h e bar has only been
a b
considered as transmission
V V
l/2

of tension forces either from


R2 h e external load or resulting
from the eccentricity of the
shear force V (see Figure 2).
Normal compression forces
l/2

R1 are transmitted directly


R1 using the base plate. For this
loading no further special
cross section cross section elements are needed. So the
of anchor bolt: of shear lug: specified construction is
most ideal for great shear
Figure 2 Comparison of stress distribution, anchor
forces in combination with
bolt and lug

91
lower normal forces or bending moments. F
A design concept for this shear anchorage M
will be presented here. The concept is V
based on numerous tests, and a numerical eS eV
description will be discussed. The resis- RS eD
tance will be explained in dependence on
different stiffness conditions, especially RA eA/2 eA/2
the geometry and material of the lug, vari- FA
ous depths of embedment of the lug and RD
the tie bar, different strength of the con-
crete ground and, of course, different load shear lug
combinations. In addition to the failure
modes and the capacity, the ductility of
the construction will be described.
Figure 3 Forces at the fixture
2. Testing

The tests have been carried out at the OTTO MOHR LABORATORY at the INSTITUTE OF
STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS IN DRESDEN. The fittings are designed in the style of ex-
periments carried out before. But, the double symmetric design of these former experi-
ments is given up for the benefit of a directional layout. In this manner the individual
elements can be specialized more consequently. In Figure 1, a schematic profile view is
presented. It is easy to see that the shear force V is only suitable in one direction, ac-
cording to the design. Consequently there is only one headed anchor bolt placed behind
the shear lug, the tie bar. Its task is to take the tension part from the equilibrium moment
and introduce it into the anchor ground. In front of the lug a weaker pressure-anchor is
placed. Between these elements the shear lug itself is placed. It serves to transfer the
shear load to the concrete base. The shear lug is supported by the base plate. The front
end face of this base plate also transfers a part of the shear load to the ground.
The experiments are designed to make the concrete failure in front of the lug decisive. A
possible breaking of the tie bar bolt due to shear load is prevented by padding the bolt
shaft directly below the base plate. By this coating, the concrete in this area is not con-
nected to the tie bar shaft and no shear load can be transmitted. This will be the theory
until there is a moving of approximately 2 mm. Therefore, the tie bar is only loaded by a
tensile normal force, according to plan. There are three mechanisms which may lead to a
breakdown of these fittings. These are:
1) concrete failure; shear failure of the concrete part in front of the lug and/or the base
plate, or rather crushing
2) steel failure of the shear lug, shear failure or plastification and rotation
3) breaking down of the tie bar
a) concrete cone failure or pull-out failure
b) steel failure

92
The concrete failure aspect should
be examined mainly. A failure ac-
cording to 2) and 3) is not planned,
however, it represents important
limiting conditions for failures ac-
cording to 1).
This mutual susceptibility can be
shown if we look at the reaction
forces RD, see Figure 3. The quantity
of RD represents the main part of the
shear force. But the eccentricity, say
eD, of it sets the loading of the shear
Figure 4 Fixings with rigid block lugs lug by the bending moment and of
course the load of the tie bar FA
according to the equilibrium moment. But this eccentricity itself is influenced by the
vertical movement of the tie bar – theory of 2nd order. RD is based on the multiaxial
compressive stress in front of the shear lug, and this stress itself is dependent on the tie
bar extension.
The whole tests are divided into three parts, to investigate the essential experimental
parameters. The mean parameters are: concrete strength, lug stiffness, anchoring depth
of the lug and the tie bar, and of course the load carrying capacity of the tie bar. Its influ-
ence on the shear load capacity of the shear lug will also be of interest. Figure 4 shows
the fittings of a series of experiments of the 1st group. We see the stiff box lugs, com-
posed from two channel sections, with stepping of 0 cm, 4 cm and 8 cm anchoring depth.
By the first group the influence of the concrete strength is investigated, also the lug stiff-
ness and the anchoring depth of the lug are varied. The lug stiffness is achieved by two
different lug designs. On the one hand, flat lugs made from steel plates - 2 cm thickness.
They will be called soft lugs. On the other hand, inflexible box lugs composed from two
welded channel sections, which are the stiff ones. The cell composed from them is filled
by concrete, too. All these lugs are tested with anchoring depths of 4 cm and 8 cm. So
the building relevant sizes are covered. In each series fittings also are tested without lugs
at all, so the anchoring depth will be 0 cm. In this case only the base plate will transmit
the shear load to the ground. The tie bars are varying at 20 and 30 cm. Hereby the swap-
ping stress state in front of the shear lug is tested. It is influenced by the volume belong-
ing to the pull-out failure of the tie bar, and the stress in front of the shear lug itself.
In the second group, the concrete strength is then held unchangeable and the load com-
bination is varied. Only the soft flat-sheet lugs are applied with 4 and 8 cm anchoring
depth. Besides an additional eccentricity of the shear force V, an unchangeable tensile or
compression normal force F is applied. The tie bar anchoring depth itself is unchange-
ably 30 cm.
In the third group, the experimental body is changed, first the location of the base plate is
bonded in the concrete and, second on top of the concrete. Only soft 4 cm and 8 cm lugs
are used. The solid experimental body, measuring 120·120·90 cm, of the first two groups
is changed in the last group. Here a narrow rectangular reinforced column measuring

93
45·45 cm is used. The effect of a placing of the fittings close to the edge should be ex-
amined hereby, and of course the influence of reinforcement.
All experiments are designed to expect a failure of the concrete in front of the load
transmitting faces. Only if higher strength classes of concrete and the stiff box lug are
used, pull-out-failure or steel failure of the tie bar is to be expected.

3. Crushing mechanics and behaviours v5


V v4
F
The failure case ”exhaustion of lug load-carrying v 1 v2 v3 v6 v7
capacity” is used for the assessment of lug ef- w4
fects and ability. This failure is characterized by
shearing a wedge-shaped concrete volume in w6
front of the base plate, in general (Vks failure).
With beginning loss of the pressure transmitting
in front of the base plate the shear force itself is
increasingly relocated to the shear lug and fi- V 3
nally onto the bolt of the tie bar itself. This will
1 2 4 6 7
happen if the bolt will crush onto the concrete
face after the padded path around the tie bar is
used. The ability of the tie bar to pick up these
5
additional loads and to transmit them to the con-
crete decides whether it comes to an immediate Figure 5 Measuring points with
breaking of fixing or a stable balance can still
shift direction
appear in the deformed state in spite of damage.
The exact description and explanation of the
damage process is of decisive importance. From the first crack to the crack propagation
and the final crushing down, the whole procedure of damage is to be observed to do a
valid description of the cause to fracture and the evaluation of a calculation model. Spe-
cial attention must be given to the special cause that will release the final breaking down.
The failure of the concrete can be traced back to four basic cases. These can occur both
in a pure form and in combination:
a) Loss of the stress transmission in front of the base plate by shearing a wedge
sized concrete volume in front of the base plate face or damage of concrete in
this area. The shear force is shifted onto the shear lug and possibly the anchor
bolt of the tie bar.
b) Shearing of an wedge sized concrete volume according to a) with immediately
following breaking down of the tie bar near the base plate due to combined ten-
sile shear load.
c) Tie bar outbreak due to the load attacking at the tie bar head, with an outbreak
of a cone behind the base plate. (pull-out failure)
d) Complete destruction of the experimental concrete body. Cracking starting at
the shear lug will reach up to the component edges.
A more detailed description of these basic cases is done in [8] [9] and [10].

94
4. Structural behaviour and load-bearing capacity

Figure 6 presents a first view of all achieved ultimate loads. All experiments are plotted
on one graph and the load is shown over the concrete compressive strength. It should be
noted that all tested parameters are shown. Therefore the achieved loads need some
comments, because different load applications, different forms of fittings and, of course,
reasons of crushing are presented. Obviously the three classes of concrete compressive
strength can be recognized clearly.
Please note the fittings have two different shear transfer faces with quite a varying bear-
ing behaviour. The base plate, embedded in the concrete, which will transmit important
parts of the shear loading into the concrete at its front face. But only 2 cm are embedded
in the concrete, and the result is an edge compression. The free surface does not allow
the concrete to establish a multiaxial compressive state of stress, in the sense of partial
load pressure. And the shear lug itself that transmits decisive parts of the shear load V.
The concrete body in front of this shear lug is enclosed in concrete and steel. On the top
it is protected by the lateral cantilever of the base plate and all the rest is enclosed in
concrete, too. So the differ-
B15 B25 B45 -> concrete strength ent conditions make it clear
0 cm 4 cm flat 4 cm box -> lug anchoring
8 cm flat 8 cm box
that the failure mechanism
depth and sort
D, e = 0 cm Z, e = 0 cm -> additional load . for the final crushing can-
D, e = 10 cm Z, e = 10 cm e = 10 cm tension/compression not automatically be the
F V eccentricity same for the experiments
bewehrt, bewehrt
mit Stirn ohne Stirn e without lugs and for the
experiments with lugs pre-
sent.
1200
Consequently, the consid-
eration of a summary lug
total failure load V [kN]

1000 face AC [8], cannot allow a


general estimation of ulti-
mate load. Also it is not
800 possible to transfer the
results to a more general
600 layout of fittings. So the
failure of the base plate end
face (Vks) is to view sepa-
400 rately from the total failure
(Vges). Here Vks designates
the shear load step that
200 brings the breaking out of
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 the concrete in front of the
f c [N/mm²] base plate front side. Vges
whereas is the maximum
shear load achieved in the
Figure 6 Total failure load of all tests
experiment.

95
4.1. Concrete failure in
F V front of the base
e plate, Vks
1000 The dependence of concrete
increase of load Vks to Vges [kN]

failure on the existing uni-


800 axil or multiaxial stress
state is confirmed by the
experiments. In certain
600 experiments, the concrete
in front of the base plate is
400 without dowel crushed and is shifted out
4 cm rigid dowel without a total failure oc-
4 cm soft dowel
8 cm rigid dowel curring. Even this case of
200 8 cm soft dowel events often is difficult to
e = 10 cm
compressiv F discover in the load-dis-
tensile F
0 placement diagrams be-
cause there is no sudden
100 300 500 700 900 relocation of the load
failure load V ks [kN] transmitted in the base plate
contact surface to the lug
Figure 7 Possible increasing of load Vks to Vges surface. This failure load
Vks due to concrete failure
in front of the base plate only indicates that the complete shear load V is now transferred
by the shear lug itself. It is still possible to increase the load after the concrete destruc-
tion on the end face of the base plate. This is shown by Figure 7. For the experiments
without special shear lugs (black points), the load must be relocated to the tie bar if the
Vks-failure occurs. The bolt of the tie bar will now act as a dowel and will be shear
loaded, like the lug.
It looks similar in the experiments with flat sheet lugs (triangles). The load increasing
ability is smaller in the case of the experiments with 4 cm lugs and greater in the case of
the experiments with 8 cm lugs. For the experiments with the stiff block lugs the load is
not increased after the Vks-failure has occurred. In this case the load due to the Vks-failure
is greater than or equal to the load of final breaking, but this will happen on a quite
higher load step. The same also occurs in all experiments with enlarged eccentric load
attack eV, and in experiments with additional tensile normal force. Merely in the case of
the experiments with pressing normal force an appreciable load increase can be found in
turn.

4.2. Concrete failure in front of the lug – final failure Vges


The concrete failure in front of the base plate brings a clear announcement of the break-
ing, but it will not automatically introduce it. Regardless of whether it is a question of
block or flat lugs, in the fracture state the experiments show a concrete stress of 4.5 to
6.0 times fc for all the 4 cm lugs. The adequate values of the 8 cm lugs then range be-
tween 2.5 and 4.0 times fc, where the values of the block lugs fall out down. However,

96
for these block lugs no
800 F-compression concrete failure is the final
700 reason for breaking down.
600 If the theoretical
load V [kN]

500 anchoring depth of all flat


400 8 cm lugs is reduced to
300 6 cm in general, the values
200 F=0 will join the values of the
100 4 cm lugs, too. By a pure
F-tension shear load all the 4 cm
0
lugs alone (flat and block)
-0,2
0,2 0,6 1,0 1,4 1,8 give a concrete ultimate
displacement v 4 [mm] stress of 5.2·fc. An
additional pressure load
800 increases this value to
700 F-compression 7.1·fc, an additional tensile
600 normal force will reduce
load V [kN]

500 the value to 4.1·fc. A


similar behaviour is to be
400
observed for an additional
300 eccentric load
200 F=0 introduction. A look at the
100 F-tension displacement values v4 and
0 w4 at the fracture state will
-0,2 0,2 0,6 1,0 1,4 1,8 show that an additional
displacement w 4 [mm] normal force increases the
displacement considerably
F v4 during failure. An
Figure 8 Behaviour with tension w4 additional eccentric load
and compression introduction with normal
V force or without normal
hD = 4/8 force then leads to lower
values of the displacement value of w4 in the fracture state. Looking at the load
displacements in Figure 8, the displacements v4 und w4 show the behaviour as it is
described above. Figure 8 shows the displacements for 4 cm and 8 cm flat lugs without
additional eccentric load introduction. The grouping of the lines is to be seen clearly. For
an additional compressive normal load we get a very stiff behaviour, and the 8 cm lugs
do not behave differently to the 4 cm lugs. The behaviour of both is much stiffer than in
the case of pure shear load or shear load with additional tensile normal force. These
experiments also react far more brittle than those with additional eccentricity of the load
introduction. Arriving the maximal load the deformation will increase. Of course the
load will go down hereby due to decreasing oil pressure, and the fitting in general is cut
by shear force at the tie bar bolt.

97
This is the reaction to fact that the concrete also has broken down in front of the lug.
And the steel fitting glides up, on a wedgeshaped body of concrete that was formed in
the corner between the base plate and the lug front face. Finally tests with additional
tensile normal force show a much more brittle behaviour with a more sudden breaking
down. Again, in principle it is not important whether 4 cm- or 8 cm flat lugs are used.
Only the ultimate load is higher in the case of the latter. However, the principle of failure
is not changed at all. It can be seen that the additional pressing normal force constitutes a
kind of initial preloading on the tie bar. The preloading will help the tie bar and is to be
directly subtracted from the rest of the tie bar load. The additional tensile normal load
then is a preloading with additional load. Especially noteworthy is that the load dis-
placement lines for v4 are identical for all of the experiments with compressive normal
force without additional eccentric load. Here all the lugs with 4 cm and 8 cm act quite
identically at any rate up to Vks-failure. However, the fact must be considered that the
experiments with compressing and compressing eccentric load show a considerably
more good-natured post-break behaviour than the experiments with tension and tension-
eccentric load. This will effect the dimensioning of this fittings, by the possible choice of
permissible stresses in front of the shear lugs. There will be a necessary differentiation
according to load combinations, especially load combinations with tension.

4.3. Other failure modes


Steel failure in the lug can occur in two variants. On the one hand, the lug can be cut by
shear load in the place of the maximal stress. Both will happen as reaction to the situa-
tion of the concrete stresses in front of the lug. The type of distribution of these concrete
stresses over the lug height is to be assumed here. These cannot be measured in the ex-
periments and is examined by means of an FEM-model.
The tie bar works like a normal force loaded headed anchor bolt, and will crash like that.
(steel failure, concrete cone failure or pull-out failure.

5. Model of design

Finally, a simple model of dimensioning for these fittings should be presented. This must
consider the three basic failure mechanisms separately (See Testing)
Even if the different failure mechanism must not be considered completely independent,
it is helpful for the checking process to do this. Within the framework of a simple and
presumably rough dimensioning it is precise enough to isolate the failure mechanisms
and to estimate deformations not at all. The key to the numerical dimensioning of the
fittings is the concrete failure in front of the lug and/or the load transmitting face of the
base plate. The knowledge of the resulting forces RS and RD will develop the loading of
the tie bar, and all forces that will be transmitted in the fitting are known (see Figure 3).
To know the location of the forces always a constant stress is assumed in front of the
load transmitting surfaces. As shown, a concrete failure in front of the base plate can be
distinguished clearly from a total failure. Furthermore, the dimensioning equations will
be given for both, a permissible stress σm,AC and a permissible stress σm,AD. The stress of
σm,AC will be combined with the available summary lug face AC, and no concrete out-

98
break in front of the base plate is to be expected. On the other hand, the pure lug face AD
may be applied to the stress of σm,AD. This is the part of lug face in front of which a mul-
tiaxial stress state may develop. The load step of VAC may be considered by a concrete
breakout in front of the base plate, but it will not matter. This will occur if the value VAD
is greater than the value VAC.
The consideration of these two values will also offer the possibility to dimension fittings
without a base plate embedded in the concrete, too.

5.1. General verification equation


With consideration of all available experiments, the equations (1) can be developed.
Hereby hD is replaced, so it is more easy to handle the equation. The value hD is to be
calculated directly from the total shear load and the permissible stress σm, because the
stress σm does not depend on hD furthermore. Also reprocessing of e'V (e'V is the value
from the test protocols) to eV is done.

σm, AC F
= 2,475 − 0,570 ∗ − 0,005 ∗ eV − 0,002 ∗ fC a)
fC FA
(1)
σm, AD F
= 9,175 − 2,270 ∗ − 0,0150 ∗ eV − 0,100 ∗ fC b)
fC FA
Units [N] and [mm]; eV ≥ 25 mm

FA = FuE = 15,5 ∗ hr1,5 ∗ β w [N] (2)

A post processing of the experiments based on these relationships gives a good agree-
ment with the experimental values. Naturally, for the experiments without lug only Vks-
failure can be calculated. Here the final failure is characterized by a bolt shear fracture of
the tie bar, and the yielding mechanisms can be found in the literature due to headed tie
bars [6], [7]. For each of AC and AD, the possible value of shear load is calculated, and of
course the depended value of FA, the normal force at the tie bar. The greater value indi-
cates the permissible shear load Vges and indicates simultaneously whether a concrete
outbreak is possible in front of the base plate or not. Of course, the tie bar has to be able
to serve the dependent value of FA. Otherwise the permissible shear load is to be re-
duced. It should be noted that the tie bar can break down with a steel failure or a pull-out
failure. In practice, the tie bar will be a headed bolt, and so the load carrying capacity is
known (see equation (2)). In this equation the value of hr gives the anchoring depth of
the tie bar. The tie bar diameter has no effect on the concrete-pull-out loading.

5.2. Model
For dimensioning the fittings, the following model can be used. This model is used to get
the test results by calculation and therefore it works with mean values. It is valid to all
fittings which strongly separate shear load transmission from normal force transmission.
Even the normal force component of the balance moment is served by the separate tie

99
bar. Using equation (1) to get the absorbable mean concrete compressive stress, the ex-
perimental total failure loads are reached sufficiently precise. Only the 8 cm lugs show a
greater deviation in the results. This behaviour can be traced back to the approximation
of the model itself. Naturally the effects on deformation will not allow a rectangular
stress distribution in front of the lug over the hole anchoring depth. The effects of this
state of affairs are more closely described in [11]and would go beyond the scope of this
simple model.
In detail, the procedure has to be carried out as shown in Figure 9: On the basis of the
input variables, the absorbable mean concrete compressive stresses in front of the lug are
determined. From these stresses the absorbable shear load is to be calculated. This total
load is based, on the one hand, on the summary lug face area AC, and, on the other hand,
on the pure lug face area AD. Notice that area AD will be only that contact surface which
can develop a multiaxial stress status in front of itself. The bigger value of these two
approaches indicates the absorbable shear load level - henceforth called V. If the shear
load VAC is less than the shear load VAD, it is to be expected that the concrete will break
out in front of the linked base plate, but still there will be a reserve available up to the
total shear failure load
searched: given:
that will be V = VAD. The
shear load V eccentricity planned use and the secu-
eQ [mm] rity concept will decide
normal force N [N]
tie bar load capacity F [N] whether V AC as working
concrete strength
A load may be exceeded or
fc [N/mm²] not. The form and stiff-
ness of the lugs are still
permissible stress / load unimportant in this step.
Furthermore, the failure
σm,AC -> tolerable VAC = σm,AC × AC of the single components
σm,AD -> tolerable VAD = σm,AD × AD is tested and they will be
dimensioned or the ab-
sorbable shear load V is
load carrying fitness for use to be reduced to the
capacity weakest part. In this step
VAC ≥ VAD sudden crash
ultimate load it will be practically cho-
VAC < VAD concrete breaks out in sen by which component
tol VAC front of the linked base the final failure will be
max =V
tol VAD plate, but still load in- introduced. It is advis-
crease to VAD possible able, to prove the tie bar
first. Its load will be
clearly given by the ex-
dimensioning / verification
ternal loading and the
at the fixture (local) rectangular stress distri-
bution in front of the base
plate and the shear lug.
Figure 9 Schema of verification The tie bar is to be veri-

100
fied with respect to steel failure as well as to concrete outbreak. At last the lug itself
should be proved. The proofing is to be done in a separate manner for a shear failure,
and bending failure that will result in plastic flow with rotation. The last one is not to be
allowed, because no deformations are expected in this model.
In this form the proving has the advantage that not a reduced anchoring depth of the
shear lug has to be used. As a result, the shear load component in the lug is reduced by
static system alternations and the applied concrete compressive stress state will remain
unchangeable. Using this lug dimensioning model will result in great deformations of the
fitting, and therefore the concrete will break in front of the base plate. In the case of very
big values of lug anchoring depth combined with a very small value of the lug bending
stiffness this dimensioning model should not be used because it does not consider the
real deformations in the fitting.
So the local load introduction is done. Of course, a secure load transmission to the sup-
ports is to be ensured, too. The investigation of a possible punching of the fitting is also
to be made. This case is not so erroneous at mass components with low reinforcement.
The test with stiff lugs and high values of concrete strength does show this.

Bibliographic references
[1] Fastenings to Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures, State-of-the-Art Re-
port, Part I and Part II, CEB-Bulletin d’Information Nr. 206/7, Lausanne 1991
[2] Fastenings to Concrete and Masonry Structures, State-of-the-Art Report, CEB-
Bulletin d’Information Nr. 216, Lausanne 1994
[3] Design of Fastenings in Concrete, Draft CEB Guide Part 1 to 3; Fastenings to Seis-
mic Retrofitting, State-of-the-Art Report on Design and Application, CEB-Bulletin
d’Information Nr. 226, Lausanne 1995
[4] Rotz, J.V.; Reifschneider, M: Combined Axial and Shear Load Capacity of Steel
Embedments in Concrete, Report Bechtel Power Corporation, 1991
[5] Körner, C; Schweigel, P: Nachweis der Betontragfähigkeit im Verankerungs-
bereich von Stahleinbauteilen, Betontechnik H. 1, 1986
[6] Rehm, G.; Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R.: Befestigungstechnik, published in
Betonkalender 1988, (Teil II-D, 609-753; 1997) and other following
[7] Eligehausen, R. and other; Tragverhalten von Kopfbolzenverankerungen bei zen-
trischer Zugbeanspruchungen, Bauingenieur 67 (1992) pp.183-196
[8] Körner, C.: Verankerung schwerer Lasten mit Schubdübeln, 34. Forschungskollo-
quium des DAfStb am 9./10. Oktober 1997 an der TU Dresden
[9] Curbach, M.; Körner, C.; Michler, H.: Tragfähigkeit von Befestigungen mit Schub-
dübeln im Betonbau zur Übertragung großer Schubkräfte. Abschlussberichtzum
Forschungsvorhaben DFG Cu-37/3-1, TU Dresden, Institut für Tragwerke und
Baustoffe, Lehrstuhl für Massivbau, Dresden 2001
[10] Michler, H: Load Capacity of shear loaded anchorages. International PHD Sympo-
sium in Civil Engineering, Wien 2000
[11] Michler, H: Dissertation, Lehrstuhl für Massivbau, TU Dresden (in progress)

101
SAFETY RELEVANT ASPECTS FOR TORQUE
CONTROLLED EXPANSION ANCHORS
Helmut Gassner, Erich Wisser
Hilti AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein

Abstract
For an assessment of expansion anchors, it is necessary to know, which parameters have
to be considered. To investigate safety relevant aspects for Torque Controlled Expansion
Anchors fife different types of anchors have been tested. The products were examined
onto appearance, behaviour at setting and under static loading in tension and shear
direction.

The tests have been shown, that a lot of parameters have to be considered to compare the
behaviour of different anchors, especially under difficult conditions on construction site.
In addition to the ultimate pull-out and shear load, the setting procedure and the
tightening torque moment are very important parameters.

1. Introduction

To investigate safety relevant aspects for Torque Controlled Expansion Anchors fife
different types of anchors have been tested.
The dimensions and embedment depth are nearly identical.
The products were examined onto appearance, behaviour at setting and under static
loading in tension and shear direction. Basic data for concrete capacity C25/30 and drill
hole were evaluated. All anchors of same size were set with same embedment depth
obeying the setting instructions of the respective manual.

2. Test Setup

Static pull-out test


All pull-out tests were carried out with a testing system of 250 kN maximum load and a

102
chosen displacement speed of 6 mm/min. The tests were performed with and without
tightening torque moments to check the reliability at wrong application.

Static shear tests


The shear tests were carried out with a servohydraulic test cylinder of an nominal
capacity of 250 kN. The displacement speed of the piston was 16 mm/min.

Clamping of gaps between concrete and attaching part


Often only after installing the torque moment there is realized that the attaching part
shows a gap to the substrate. So in the test a steel padding of 6 mm was placed between
concrete surface and loading plate. The full torque moment was installed, then released
and the padding removed.
If after installing the torque moment again the loading plate could be clamped onto
concrete surface, the clamping test was assessed positive.
With the Anchor Type E one test was performed only with a low torque moment. Then
the pads were taken out and the full torque moment applied for simulating a flexible
footing.

3. Behavior under Tensile and Shear


70
Load F [kN]

A; M12 with Md
A; M12 without Md
B; M12 with Md
B; M12 without Md
60 C; M12 with Md
C; M12 without Md
D; 5/8" with Md *
D; 5/8" without Md *
50 E; M12 with Md
E; M12 without Md

40

30

20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Displacement s [mm]

Fig. 1 Load Displacement behaviour - Pull-Out Tests

103
In Figure 1 the results at static pull-out tests for all anchor types are shown, black curves
with tightening torque moment, red curves without.

All tested samples of Anchor Type A were conform to the anticipated behaviour. The
follow-up expansion worked well. At pull-out test the very small scattering in the load
displacement behaviour up to ultimate load is significant. But the clamping force of the
attaching part is comparatively low with 15 kN.
Also in shear the system works as requested. With high ductility the ultimate shear load
is achieved at a displacement of about 28 mm.
The claming function is ensured up to a gap of 8 mm.

The results at static pull-out test of Anchor Type B shows, that at in minimum two of
five anchors the expansion sleeve cracked radially and moved onto the upper cone. This
causes a high number of turnings for the torque moment. So the conversion of torque to
pre-load is undefined and within a wide variation of deviation. At prescribed torque
moment pre-stressing forces twice of Anchor Type A were achieved.
At the static pullout tests the system acted brittle and without any follow-up expansion
effect. At four of five anchors the cones were pulled through. The concrete failed but no
concrete cone broke out. The average ultimate load was only at 63% of the Anchor Type
A value.
In shear the system works - due to the failure mode bending-tension of bolt - ductile but
the maximum loads were achieved after already 5-12 mm displacement (Anchor Type A
only after 28 mm).

For the Anchor Type C, the transmission of the torque moment varied in a wide range as
with Anchor Type B. To the customer this generates a dubious feeling. However pre-
stressing forces of 120 to 200 % of the Anchor Type A values are realised. The load-
displacement behaviour, the ultimate loads and the failure mode were equal to that of the
Anchor Type A.
Nevertheless at the pullout test without a torque moment the tested anchors failed
without increasing of load.
Also in shear loading the ductility of the tested Anchor Type C is about 30% below the
ductility of the Anchor Type A. The average of the ultimate shear capacity is 18% less
however with small standard deviation - below the Anchor Type A value.

The results at static pull-out of Anchor Type D are described as follow. A high number
of strokes was needed for setting the anchor. At two of five anchors the plastic ring
broke so that the expansion sleeve did not touch the cone. At the attempt to install the
torque moment the screw got stuck at the front of the slotted and compressed cone and
the cone was not pulled into the expansion sleeve. In the drill hole the cone turned
through. One of these two anchors was pulled out with only 4 kN ultimate load. The
average ultimate load of the other anchors for pull-out amounted only 69% of the
Anchor Type A value. Without torque moment both tested anchors were pulled out
without load.

104
The tested Anchor Type D System works very unsafe concerning the setting and pull-out
behaviour.
In shear the ductility of this anchor is comparable to Anchor Type A. The ultimate force
is 17% below the Anchor Type A value because of the thin rolled sheet sleeve.

The expansion cone of Anchor Type E differs from all other tested anchors in the two-
fold expansion angle. First an angle of 7º and 6 mm long followed by an angle of 15º and
7 mm long. At Anchor Type A the angle is 8º with a length of 12 mm. This may cause
the high pre-stressing force, more than twice that of Anchor Type A. Sleeve and washer
are equal to Type A parts. The torque moment was reached only after 4 1/2 to 6 turnings
because 5 mm displacement are necessary that the front of the sleeve contacts the cone.
Ultimate tensile load and its variation are equal to Anchor A. The follow-up expansion
works well also the plastic deformation of the expansion sleeve to a tulip shape. Also
without a torque moment the safety of this anchor at tensile loads is given.
The shear capacity of Anchor Type E makes 73% of Type A value. But the threaded rod
version of Type E has 27% reduced stress area. The ductility is much lower as with
anchor A. The dimensions of the sleeve are equal to Anchor A.

4. Rest Results at Cclamping of Gaps

At Anchor Type E the functions of the plastic collapsible section are integrated into the
expansion sleeve made of sheet metal. These consist of 3 folded expansion parts of 1.2
mm thickness. The rips as crumble zone should prevent internal pretension when a gap
between concrete surface and attaching part has to be closed. The thickness of the sleeve
is 20% less than that of Anchor Type A.
To assess the function of gap clamping two tests were performed. At the first one the
total torque moment was installed using steel pads between concrete surface and
attaching part, then released and the pads were removed. Now no clamping of attaching
parts to concrete surface could be achieved with torque moment.
At the second test after a small torque moment the pads were removed and the torque
moment was increased to the prescribed value now producing a clamping force.
The drilled out anchors show the insufficient function of the crumble zone.
To get more information for the functioning at “gap clamping” a more detailed
examination is proposed.

5. Setting Behavior

In Table 1 is shown a synopsis of test results to setting behaviour.


Most of anchors needs 1 to 2 hammer strokes for setting into the drill hole, but Anchor
Type D significantly more.
The mounting overhead can be made without falling out of the anchors and the anti-
rotation device works at all anchors, too.

105
The clamping test with a gap of 6mm worked more or less at all anchors. At Anchor
Type B broke the expansion sleeve and was pushed over the conic part. At Anchor Type
C the plastic section collapsed as defined, at Anchor D as undefined. Anchor Type E
managed the clamping test only at facilitated conditions.
The tightening with torque moment occurred at Anchor Type A with only 1 1/2 to 1 3/4
turns. The others partially needed much more turns as you see in the table.
All anchors could be removed flush to the concrete surface.

type of number of mounting anti- clamping test needed removable


anchor strokes at rotation (6 mm gap) turns for flush to the
with 500g overhead device tightening concrete
hammer with torque surface
moment
A 1 o.k. o.k. o.k. 1 ½ -1 3/4 o.k.
B 2 o.k. o.k. o.k., o.k.
expansion 4 ½ -10
sleeve broken
C 1 o.k. o.k. o.k., defined 1¾-4 o.k.
collapse of
plastic section
D 12-17 o.k. o.k. o.k., 2-2½ o.k.
undefined
collapse of
plastic section
E 2-3 o.k. o.k. o.k., only at 4½-6 o.k.
facilitated
conditions
Table 1 setting behaviour

6. Behavior at Loading

In the synopsis of test results to the behaviour at loading it is recognisable that the pre-
stressing force of Anchor B, C and E is distinctly higher than at Anchor Type A. The
pre-stressing force of Anchor Type D varies between 0 and 14 kN.
The ultimate load at static pull-out of Type C is the highest one with the smallest
standard deviation, followed by Anchor A.
The follow-up expansion did not work at all anchors of Anchor Type B, 3 of 5 anchors
of Anchor Type D.

106
type of pre-stressing ultimate pull- follow-up ultimate pull-out ultimate shear
anchor force out load, expansion load without load, standard
standard tightening torque deviation, n=4
deviation, n=5 moment, n=2
A ~ 15 kN Fu,m = 61,9 kN o.k. Fu,m = 55,2 kN Vu,m = 100,6 kN
v = 9,1 % Fu,m = 57,3 kN with v = 8,8 %
follow-up expansion
B ~ 32 - 40 kN Fu,m = 39,4 kN no follow- Fu,m = 37,0 kN Vu,m = 87,2 kN
v = 11,6 % up Fu,m = 38,0 kN with v = 1,4 %
expansion follow-up expansion
C ~ 20 - 30 kN Fu,m = 63,9 kN o.k. Fu,m = 0,8 kN Vu,m = 82,3 kN
v = 4,2 % Fu,m = 1,1 kN pull v = 3,2 %
out by hand
D ~ 0 - 14 kN Fu,m = 42,6 kN 3 of 5 Fu,m = 2,0 kN Vu,m = 83,2 kN
v = 16,6 % without Fu,m = 2,0 kN no v = 4,6 %
follow-up follow-up expansion
expansion
E ~ 35 - 40 kN Fu,m = 60,3 kN o.k. Fu,m = 45,4 kN Vu,m = 73,7 kN
v = 9,3 % Fu,m = 59,6 kN with v = 1,3 %
follow-up expansion
Table 2 load behaviour

The pull-out test without tightening torque moment simulates, that because of confined
place a tightening with full torque moment is not or only partially possible. Here Anchor
Type A, B and E demonstrated follow-up expansion and high pull-out forces. Anchor
Type C and D exhibited no follow-up expansion and therefore low loads.
The ultimate static shear load of Anchor A was the highest, this time followed by Type
B.

7. Conclusion

The tests of different expansion anchors demonstrates, that the Anchor Type A
impresses with the clear and save function of the plastic collapsible section. The system
is well calculable because of the small standard deviation of the results. All components
are optimally adjusted to the setting procedure, pull-out and shear load.

It has been shown, that a lot of parameters have to be considered to compare the
behaviour of different anchors, especially under difficult conditions on construction site.

107
STUDY ON STANDARD TEST METHODS FOR POST-
INSTALLED ANCHORS
Yoji Hosokawa*, Katuhiko Nakano**, Yoshiki Oohaga***,
Shigeru Usami****, Kiyoshi Imai*****

* Technical Development Group, Maeda Corporation, Japan


** Institute for Structural Concrete, Science University of Tokyo, Japan
*** Institute for Structural Concrete, Tohoku Institute of Technology, Japan
**** Institute for Structural Engineering, Kajima Corporation, Japan
***** Institute for Post-Installed Anchor, KFC Corporation, Japan

Abstract
The present paper reports the test methods and test results of Bonded anchors and Metal
Anchors. So far, in Japan, Post-installed Anchors cannot be used for a newly-built
building, but can be used to reinforce an existing building for earthquake resistance
strengthening. There for, standards test methods are important to meet the requirement of
appraisal system.

1. Introduction

About 4 hundred millions of Post-installed Anchors are used for fitting up machineries
and reinforcing earthquake resistant structures. In common, the performances of
Post-installed Anchors are determined by the makers, and there is not a unified standard to
evaluate the performances of such anchors. In order to guarantee the quality and
performances of Post-installed Anchors, Japan Construction Anchor Association makes
an Approval System for the technical appraisals.

The present paper reports the standard mechanical test methods, by which the necessary
data of strength and stiffness are determined for the Approval of Post-installed Anchors.
So far, three test methods were developed, which are the Set test, Tensile strength test and
Shear test.

The Set test is a performance test for a constructed anchor, in which strength test for the
base material and adhesive strength is necessary for metal anchors and bonded anchors
respectively.

While, the Tensile test and Shear test are carried out by measuring the strengths and
displacements due to tension and shear forces act on test anchors, which was supposed
that the test anchors were constructed anchors fixed in concrete.

108
2. Set Test Method

2.1 Set test for metal


anchors
2.1.1 Introduction
In common, Metal anchors
are cold formed, and the
properties of its material are
changed during the products
process. Stress concentra-
tion always happens at the
expansion head of an anchor,
due to the beating and
pressing during construction.

So, it is very important for


the quality control to confirm
the performance and its
quality by the Set test before
the products leave the
factory.

2.1.2 Method of the Set test


The Testing equipment is Fig. 2.1
shown in Fig. 2.1. The
equipment is composed by Reaction plate, Oil jack and Deflection Transducer. The test
anchors are Nail-in, Internal cone, Out Cone, the diameter of the test anchor is
M10—M20.
150
The test anchor is set bet- No1M10
ween a tension rod and a jig No2M10
125 No3M12
fixed onto the equipment, and M20
No4M12
Tensile Load (KN)

No5M20
then the jack applies the 100
No6M20
No7M20
tension force on to the set.
Just like the real construction, M12
75
the jig is filled with non- P
shrink mortar (compressive M10
strength: 30N/mm2). The jig 50
δ1
l δ2
is made by steel, and its inner
shape is a cone. 25 l=50mm
δ = (δ 1 +δ 2 ) / 2
2.1.3 Test results 0
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15
Fig. 2.2 shows the load- Displacement (mm)
displacement curve of the Fig.
Fig.2.2 Relationship of Tensile Load and Displacement
tests. The displacement (Outer Cone Type Anchor)

109
measuring points are 50mm and 100mm below the concrete surface for Out Cone and
Nail-in type respectively.

The broken locations are at the thread part for the cone anchor and Internal cone,
minimum section or thread part for Nail-in type.

2.2 Set test for Bonded Anchor


2.2.1 Introduction
By the Set test for bonded anchor, we measured the limited value of the bond strength of
the anchors, and make a standard value for quality control of bonded anchors. Hence, the
bonding surface of the anchor should be very homogenous. Steel jig and mortar filled
steel jig are discussed, and then mortar filled steel jig are selected as a part of the testing
equipment.

Event for the test using old resin, we have not found the influence of aggregate in the steel
jig.

2.2.2 The test method


Fig. 2.3 shows the testing equip-
ment and the jig. The jig is a steel
pipe (89.1mm in diameter and
80mm in length) filled with
non-shrink mortar. The test
anchor is a bolt of M16 hammered
into a bored hole in the jig.

In such a bonding strength test, the


object anchor was set on the
tension rod, and tensile force was
applied with a speed of 20N/mm2
per second by the oil jack till the
anchor was pulled out of the jig.

3. The Tension test method

3.1 Introduction
For this test, there is not a
specification for the shape of the
loading equipment. But, we set
the inner dimension of the reaction
plate food as shown in Table 3.1,
considering the support position of
the reaction plates have influence
on the measures results of tension
Fig. 2.3
performance of the anchor.

110
Table 3.1 Minimum Inner dimension of the reaction plate
Broken Type of the anchors Metal anchors Bonded Anchors
Cone broken type 3.5 h 2.0 h
Not cone broken type 2.0 h 1.5 h

Fig. 3.1

3.2 Testing equipment


Fig.3.1 shows the testing equipment and its Deflection Transducer. There is not a
specification for the dimension of the concrete object. We used common concrete, and its
minimum thickness is double of the insert depth of the anchor in the concrete body, or the
biggest value of the double of the insert depth and the depth plus 10cm (same as the Shear
test).

The tolerance of the load cell is less than 1.5%, and the maximum tension load acted on
the load cell is 1/20 (5%) of its capability. The tolerance of the Deflection Transducer is
less than 0.02mm. As showing in Fig. 3.1, three Deflection Transducers were set around
the test anchor, which are 15mm from the concrete surface. The reference fix points are in
a distance from the anchor, double of the insert depth of the anchor in the concrete body,
and are set at the top and lateral surfaces where the influence due to the bending
displacement of concrete can be considered as small enough.

111
3.3 The Test method
For this test, a pre-load acted on the test anchor was introduced. The value of the pre-load
is 5% of the maximum of a presumed load and smaller than 2.0KN. The load was acted at
a loading speed smaller than 20N/mm2 per second. The measuring of load and
displacements were continued till the anchor was broken.

3.4 Confirm the Test method


In the present paper, the influence of pre-load and loading speed were discussed based on
the tests for checking the validity of the test methods. Table 3.2 shows the types of the
anchors and the out line of the test anchors.

Table 3.2
    Outline of Test Anchors
Effective Effective
Bolt Minimum Embedded Horizontal Calculated
Anchor Type Embedded
Nominal Diameter Section Length Length Project Aria Strength
Diameter de (mm) (mm2)   h (mm)   Le(mm) Ac (cm) Tc(kN)
Nail-in M 16 16.0 119 60 44.0 82.9 130
Metal
Internal Cone M 16 20.0 127 60 40.0 75.4 119
Anchor
Outer Cone M 16 21.4 157 63 41.6 82.3 129
Type
Hard Sleeve M 16 21.7 157 60 38.3 72.2 114
Bonded Vinyl
M 16 16.0 157 125 109.0 427.8 506
Anchor Urethane
Calculated Strength with Shear Cone Failure・ Tc=√ óB・ Ac( Metal Type)
                    ・ Tc=0.75√ ó B・ Ac( Bonded Type)
Here, óB: Concrete Strength at Test( 26N/mm2)
Ac: Effective Horizontal Project Aria( c㎡)
    Le: Effective Embedded Length( cm) =h-de

The pre-load was applied with 3 load levels, which were a determined load level, 0% and
200% of the determined load level. And then, 3 loading speeds were used, which were a
determined speed, 50% and 150% of the determined speed.

The tests were carried out with an anchor hammered into concrete block (110cm 180cm
30cm, Fc = 21N/mm2) and set onto the testing equipment .

3.4.1 Influence of pre-load


Fig. 3.2 shows the relationship between the pre-load and the capability. In this diagram,
the average value of 3 test pieces with different levels is shown as folded line. The
influence of pre-load is obvious for anchors of Hard Sleeve, and there is not obvious
influence for other types of anchors.

112
3.4.2 Influence of loading speed
80
Fig 3.3 shows that the capability increased Hard Sleeve Type
proportionally to the loading speed for a 60
bonded anchor. But, a little influence of
loading speed was measured for Nail-in
40
anchors, and almost no influence was 80 Outer Cone Type
measured for other types of anchors.

Maxuium Load (KN)


60
4. Shear test
40
4.1 Introduction 60 Internal Cone Type
For this test, we set the test anchor at a
certain distance from the concrete edge, so 40
that the edge part the concrete would not
break. 20
60 Nail-in Type
4.2 The testing equipment
Fig. 4.1 shows the loading equipment. 40
The loading equipment is composed with
a setting-plate for supplying shear forces 20 0 1.96 3.92
onto the anchor, a tension rod, an oil jack (0%) (Stndard) (200%)
and a load cell. Pre-force
Pre-load of Bolt
of Bolt (KN)(KN)
Fig.
Fig. 3.2 Relationship
relationship ofofPre-load
Pre-force
4.3 Tests for confirming the equipment and Maximum Strength
And Maximum strength
The tests were carried out by the
equipment shown in Fig. 4.1, with 120
different lengths of setting-plate and
shearing surface, different levels of
100
pre-load and different types of anchors.
The concrete strength used for the tests is
Maxuium Load (KN)

80 Bonded Anchor Type


Fc = 32.7KN/mm2, and the diameter of 80
the anchor is 16mm.
60
Tests were carried out for different types
of anchors, with different lengths of
Hard Sleeve Type
setting-plate, and different material of 40
shearing surfaces. The anchor types used 60
for the tests are Internal cone, Hard
Sleeve, Out Cone, Nail-in and bonded 40
anchors. Lengths of setting-plate are 7.5
and 15.0 times of the diameter of the Nail-in Type
20 9.8 19.6 29.4
anchor. The Pre-load are shown in Table (50%) (Upper Limit of Stndard) (150%)
4.1. The shearing surface is thin steel Loading Speed N/mm
( N/mm2/sec
2
/sec ) )
sheet, and Teflon sheet. Fig. 3.3 Relationship of Loading Speed
and Maximum Strength

113
Reaction Frame
H-200x200

Teflon sheet
Reaction Frame Swivel
Tension Rod Load Cell
Setting Plate Jack

S p ec ime n

M1 6 A n ch o r Anchor
Plate

Reaction Pedestal Spring


Fastening Anchor Bolt

Fig.4.1 Equipment of Shear Laoding Test

Table 4.1 indicates the types of anchors and other items for the test. In the test procedure,
the concrete close to the anchor was broke first by its bearing stress, and then the anchor
broke lately, which is the common phenomenon of the tests.

Table4.1 List of Shear Tsets


Table
Se tting P late To r que B o undary C o nditio n
Spe cim e n Le ngth
Anc ho r Type
N am e 120 240 ・ ・ N o n SS
mm mm 0 kN N o te 1 N o te 2 SS T +T
M A1 ~ 4 ○ ○ M A1 M A2 M A3 M A4
M A5 ~ 8 ○ ○ M A5 M A6 M A7 M A8
Metal Anchor

H ar d Sle e ve
M A9 ~ 1 2 ○ ○ M A9 M A1 0 M A1 1 M A1 2
M A1 3 ~ 1 6 ○ ○ M A1 3 M A1 4 M A1 5 M A1 6
M B1~ 2 O ute r Co ne ○ M B1 M B2 ○
M C1 Inte rnal C o ne ○ ○ ○
M D1 N ail-in ○ ○ ○
B A1 ~ 3 B o nde d Anc ho r ○ B A1 B A2 ,3 ○
N o te 1 : To rque= M in. [ 6 0 % o f Yie ld Stre ngth, 4 0 % o f Shear-C o rn failure Stre ngth,
4 0 % o f B o nd Stre ngth ] , The To rque is c o ntro lle d by the 0 .2 to rque c o e f fic ie nt.
H ar d Slee ve : To r que Value 2 3 5 N ・ m m (Axis fo rc e 7 .3 5 K N )
O ute r Co ne : To rque Value 2 2 5 N ・ m m (Axis fo rc e 7 .0 5 K N )
Bo nde d Anco r: To rque Value 2 2 5 N ・ m m (Axle Fo rc e 7 .0 5 K N )   BA2
          : To rque Value 6 5 6 N ・ m m (Axle Fo rc e 2 0 .4 8 K N ) B A3
N o te 2 : Bo undary C o nditio n: N o n-she e t
SS is Ste el She e t. T is Te flo n She e t.

114
60
MA1-1(Non-Sheet) MA2-2(Steel Sheet)
Shear Load Q (KN) 50

40

30

20
MA4-2(Steel
10 + Teflon Sheet)
MA3-2(Teflon Sheet)
0
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Shear Deflectionδ (mm)
Fig.
Fig.4.2 Relationship Example of Shear Load and Displacement
(Boundary Condition)

[1] Influence of concrete surface situation and setting-plate:


The test anchor is Hard Sleeve, and take setting-plate (120mm in length) and 4 types of
concrete surface situation as the items of the test. The test result are shown in Fig.4.2.

The concrete surface situation


(1) Bare concrete surface
(2) Concrete surface covered by steel sheet
(3) Concrete surface covered by Teflon sheet of 2mm in thickness
(4) The composing of (2) and (3)

Fig. 4.2 shows the difference of stiffness and capability depend on the situation of the
concrete surface. Fig. 4.3 shows the result with different lengths of setting-plate, and that
the capability and stiffness are increased with the increasing of the setting-plate lengths.

[2] The influence of the pre-load

Fig 4.4 shows the displacement-strength cure of Hard Sleeve due to torques of “0” and
235N・mm respectively. By this diagram, we found that there was not influence of the
torque.

115
60
MA9-3(240mm) MA1-1(120mm)
Shear Load Q (KN) 50

40

30

20
MA1-1(240mm)
10
MA3-2(120mm)

0
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Shear Deflectionδ (mm)
Fig.
Fig.4.3 Relationship Example of Shear Load and Displacement
(Setting Plate Length)

60

50
M A 7-2 (3 .5K N )
Shear Load Q (KN)

40

30

20
M A 3-2(A xis For c e 0K N )
10

0
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Sh ear D e flection δ (m m )
Fig.
F ig.4.4 R elations hip E xa m ple of S hear Loa d a nd D is pla cem e nt
(A xis Fo rc e)
Fig. 4.5 shows the test results of bonded anchor, which is a comparison between three
torques, “0”, 225N・mm and 656N・mm. The maximum of stiffness increased with the
increasing of the pre-load.

116
60
BA2-1(3.5KN)
50
Shear Load Q (KN)

40
BA1-1(0 KN)
30

20
BA3-1(10.3KN)
10

0
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Shear Deflectionδ (mm)
Fig. 4.5 Relationship Example of Shear Load and Displacement
Fig.
(Axis Force)

5. Conclusion

1. We demonstrated that it is possible to confirm the performances of metal anchors


and bonded anchors by set test method before the products leave the factories.
2. For the tension tests, the influence of pre-load is very small besides the test for
Hard Sleeve anchors.
3. Besides the Nail-in anchors, almost no influence of loading speed on the capability
was found.
4. Henceforth, we will study the in situ test methods for the anchors.

Acknowledgement

I am grateful to Dr. R. Tanaka (Tohoku Institute of Technology), Dr. Y. Matsuzaki (Science


University of Tokyo) and JCAA for their good cooperation throughout the research. And
then, I would like to thank Dr. Pei Shan Chen (Meada Co.) for his help with composing
this paper.

117
STATIC BEHAVIOR OF ANCHORS UNDER
COMBINATIONS OF TENSION AND SHEAR LOADING
Dieter Lotze*, Richard E. Klingner** and Herman L. Graves, III***
*Director of Research, Halfen GmbH & Co., Wiernsheim, Germany. Former, The
University of Texas at Austin.
**Phil M. Ferguson, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas, USA
***Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC, USA.

Abstract
Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program
was carried out on the dynamic behavior of anchors (fasteners) to concrete. This paper
deals with the static behavior of single and multiple undercut and sleeve anchors, placed
in uncracked concrete and loaded by combinations of tension and shear. The results are
used to draw conclusions regarding force and displacement interaction diagrams for
single anchors, and regarding the applicability of elastic and plastic theory to the design
of multiple-anchor connections to concrete.

1. Introduction

Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program


has recently been completed, whose objective was to obtain technical information to
determine how the seismic behavior and strength of anchors (cast-in-place, expansion,
and undercut) and their supporting concrete differ from the static behavior. The research
program comprised four tasks:

1) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Single Tensile Anchors (250 tests);


2) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Multiple Tensile Anchors (179 tests);
3) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Near-Edge Anchors (150 tests); and
4) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections (16 tests).

This paper deals with part of Task 2, concerning the static behavior of single and
multiple undercut and sleeve anchors, placed in uncracked concrete and loaded by
combinations of tension and shear. The results are used to draw conclusions regarding
force and displacement interaction diagrams for single anchors, and regarding the
applicability of elastic and plastic theory to the design of multiple-anchor connections to
concrete.

118
2. Background

The behavior of anchors (fasteners) to concrete is discussed at length in Reference 1.


The work of Fuchs [2] provides some useful information regarding shear behavior. As
discussed in Reference 3, mean concrete breakout capacity in tension or shear is well
predicted by the CC Method. Tensile capacity as governed by steel failure is given by
the product of the ultimate tensile strength and the cross-sectional area of the anchor
shank. For a uniform cross-section, the ratio of shear to tensile capacity is about 0.6 [4].
If the anchor sleeve goes through the baseplate, steel capacity in shear is increased, by an
amount that depends on the degree of interaction between the anchor shank and sleeve,
and the material of each component. Figure 1 shows different models for the interaction
of tension and shear capacities.
1.2

Elliptical (5/3)
0.8
N/No

0.6 Tri-linear

0.4 Linear

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
V/Vo

Figure 1 Tension – shear force interaction for anchors

For failure by steel fracture, an elliptical interaction is used:


p p
 N  V 
  +   = 1 (1)
 0   V0 
N

The exponent p varies between 5/3 [5] and 2.0 [6]. For failure by concrete breakout,
Johnson and Lew [7] propose a linear interaction as a lower bound (Figure 1). Bode and
Roik [8] propose a tri-linear interaction (Equations 2a through 2c):

 N 
  = 1 (2a)
 N0 

119
V 
  = 1 (2b)
 V0 
 N  V 
  +   = 1 (2c)
 N 0   V0 

The elliptical interaction of Equation 2 has been proposed for concrete failure as well,
using an exponent p equal to 4/3 [9], 5/3 [4], or 2.0 [6].

Displacement interaction has not been widely investigated [10], and is in theory not
required for the elastic design procedure, in which no redistribution of anchor forces is
assumed. If redistribution of anchor forces is assumed, as in the plastic design approach,
then knowledge of displacement interaction is necessary.

3. Anchors, Test Setups and Procedures

Based on surveys of existing anchors in nuclear applications, tests described here


involved one undercut anchor (“UC1”) and a heavy-duty, sleeve-type, single-cone
expansion anchor (“Sleeve Anchor”). Based on current use in nuclear applications, it
was decided to test anchors ranging in diameter from 3/8 to 1 in. (9.2 to 25.4 mm), with
emphasis on the 3/4 in. (19.1 mm) diameter.

The Sleeve Anchor tested throughout this study is a single-cone, sleeve-type expansion
anchor with follow-up expansion capability, shown in Figure 2.

spacer sleeve plastic crushable leg expansion sleeve


structurally funished surface
cone
D1
D2
D

lc
lef

Figure 2 Key dimensions of Sleeve Anchor

The Undercut Anchor 1 (UC1) opens conventionally, and is shown in Figure 3.

120
threaded shank extension sleeve expansion sleeve
cone

D1

D2
D
lef lc

Figure 3 Key dimensions of Undercut Anchor 1

Embedment depths in Task 2 were varied according to whether steel failure or concrete
breakout failure was desired. The embedments used are described when each set of test
results is discussed.

The target concrete compressive strength for this testing program was 4700 lb/in.2 (32.4
MPa), with a permissible tolerance of ±500 lb/in.2 (±3.45 MPa) at the time of testing.
For these tests, a porous limestone aggregate was used.

The typical test specimen was a concrete block 39.5 in. (1 m) wide, 24 in. (0.6 m) deep,
and 87.5 in. (2.2 m) long. Seven #6 (32 mm) longitudinal reinforcing bars were placed
in the middle of each block to provide safety when the block was moved. This
reinforcement was placed at the mid-height of the block to permit testing anchors on
both the top and bottom surfaces, while precluding interference with anchor behavior.
Four lifting loops were located at the mid-height of the blocks, permitting transport by
overhead crane.

For loading anchors under combinations of tension and shear, the test setup consisted of
a structural steel framework holding a center-hole actuator at a variable angle (Figure 4).
Load was applied through a special loading shoe, shown in Figure 5.

For eccentric shear tests on two-anchor attachments, the loading fixture consisted of a
special baseplate with two high-strength steel inserts, two tension rods, and two
compression bars (Figure 6). The inside thickness of these inserts was counter-bored to
3/4 in. (19 mm), the same as the diameter of the anchor bolts. The diameter of the
baseplate holes was 13/16 in. (20.6 mm). The overall test setup is shown in Figure 7.

121
actuator
angle varies
steel frame

anchor

Figure 4 Test setup for anchors loaded at different orientations

hole for mounting pin

60 deg
30 deg

welded
side plate

baseplate

screwed-in insert made


of high-strength steel
Figure 5 Special loading shoe for tests at different orientations

122
External Load

Strain Gages
Compression
Bars Tension
Rods
Inserts

Strain Gages
5 deg
Plan view of base plate

Elevation
Figure 6 Loading fixture for eccentric shear tests on two-anchor attachments
Load DCDT Hydraulic
Cell Actuator
Loading
Attachment

Clamping Beams

Concrete Restraint Tubes


Specimen

Rollers

Reaction Frame

Tie-Down Rods
Additional --- Lab Floor --- On Floor
W12 Beams

Figure 7 Setup for eccentric shear tests on two-anchor attachments

The axial force and bending moment in the baseplate were calculated from strain
measurements from two sets of three strain gauges each, evenly spaced on the top and
bottom of the center section of the baseplate. Based on the geometry of the loading
apparatus, the force in the tension rods is 1.2 times the external shear load, and the
tension force on the back anchor can be calculated by equilibrium of moments about the
center of the baseplate. The shear force on the back anchor equals the measured tension
force in the baseplate. External load on the connection was measured with a load cell,
using a spherical bearing to eliminate error due to angular deviation. The tension forces

123
on each anchor were measured with force washers placed between the normal washers
and the baseplate.

Baseplate slip was measured with a potentiometer placed against the back of the
baseplate. The horizontal displacement of the loaded point 12 in. (305 mm) from the
surface was also measured. The vertical displacement of the baseplate, δv, was measured
at the centerline of the baseplate. Rotation of the attachment was calculated from the
difference between the transverse displacements measured at the level of the baseplate
and at 12 in. (305 mm) above the concrete surface.

4. Test Results

Results for Single Anchors Loaded at Different Orientations (Series 2.3 and 2.4)
Figure 8 shows the mean force interaction diagrams for Sleeve and Expansion anchors in
Series 2.3 [11]. In that series, anchor failure was intended to be governed by yield and
fracture of anchor steel, so deep embedments were used.
Interaction of Load, Series 23

140 Series 23H64, Exp. = 1.8


Series 23M53 / 54, Exp. = 1.8
120
Series 23M74 / 23H74, Exp. = 1.8
Vertical Load Component [ kN ]

Series 23M34, Exp. = 1.67


100

80

60

40

20

0
0 50 100 150 200
Horizontal Load Component [ kN ]

Figure 8 Interaction curves for actions (Test Series 2.3, [11])

Mean displacement interaction curves for all sub-series in Series 2.3 and 2.4 are
compared in Figure 9. That figure shows large displacements in Series 23M53 under
tension, approaching the values achieved in higher strength concrete with increased load
angle or increased shear. It also shows good agreement between the values for UC1 and
the Sleeve Anchor. Differences are evident, however, due to installation method
(through-sleeve versus flush-sleeve). Under pure tension, displacements are identical.
Under oblique loading, anchors installed with flush sleeves generated smaller shell-

124
shaped concrete spalling in the loading direction in front of anchors, than did otherwise
identical anchors with through sleeves. For this reason, they failed under shear and
oblique tension by shear fracture of the anchor shank at a comparatively small shearing
deformation. With lower concrete strength, larger displacements were achieved at
maximum load under tension. These approach the displacements in higher-strength
concrete with increasing shear. Tests with 3/8 in. anchors showed smaller
displacements, and no concrete spalling in front of the anchors under shear and oblique
tension.
45
23H64, EAII, M16, flush-sleeve installation
23H74, EAII, M16, through-sleeve installation
Vertical Displacement at Maximum Load (mm)

40
23M54, UC1, 5/8 in., flush-sleeve installation
23M74, UC1, 5/8 in., through-sleeve installation
35 23M53, UC1, 5/8 in., flush-sleeve installation
23M34, UC1, 3/8 in., flush-sleeve installation

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Horizontal Displacement at Maximum Load (mm)

Figure 9 Interaction curves for displacements (Series 2.3 and 2.4, [11])

Discussion of Results for Eccentric Shear Loading on Two-Anchor Attachments


Despite the differences in gaps between anchors and baseplates among specimens,
failure loads showed only slight scatter. In contrast, considerable scatter was observed
in displacements, without any obvious correlation with the measured gaps. The gaps,
however, did significantly affect the failure mode. In tests with an eccentricity of 18 in.
(457 mm), failure always occurred by fracture at the outermost tension anchor. In tests
with an eccentricity of 12 in. (305 mm) the shear anchors also fractured. The tension
anchor fractured only with maximum gaps of the shear anchors.

Normal force and bending moment in the baseplate were calculated from the results of
the strain measurement. Strains are approximately constant over the width of the
baseplate, due to its configuration. The bending moments and axial forces in the
baseplate can be calculated from those strains. Axial force in the baseplate (equal to the

125
shear in the tension anchor) increases with the applied load. After the gap at the shear
anchor is overcome, this increase slows, and the axial force even decreases near ultimate.
When the shear anchor fractures, the axial normal force increases abruptly, because the
applied shear must then be resisted entirely by the tension anchor.

The hogging bending moment in the baseplate (tensile stresses on top) decreases with
increasing external load, changing finally to a reversed moment caused by a combination
of the diagonal compression (at the height of the axis of the shear anchor) and the
support reaction from the concrete (at the compression edge of the baseplate). The
fracture of the shear anchors causes an additional negative moment from the additional
normal force of the tension anchor, applied eccentrically to the bottom edge of the
baseplate.
Observed versus Predicted Capacities for Two-Anchor Attachments with Eccentric
Shear Loading
The loading eccentricity used for these attachments was such that the tension anchors
were required to resist combined shear and tension. Under these conditions, their load
capacity could be limited either by load, or by deformation. Ratios of observed
capacities to those predicted by elastic theory ranged from 0.954 to 1.154. Ratios of
observed capacities to those predicted by plastic theory [4] ranged from 0.892 to 1.05.

5. Conclusions

Tests on Single Anchors Loaded at Different Orientations


1) Force interaction is well described by an elliptical interaction relationship (Equation
1), with an exponent of 1.67 to 1.80 for steel failure and 1.6 for concrete breakout.
2) The displacement interaction diagram for steel fracture is bulb-shaped; that is, the
shearing displacement at failure under oblique tension is larger than under pure
shear. This is due to larger spalling under oblique tension in the direction of the
shear, in front of the anchor.
3) Failure by steel fracture and ductile behavior of the steel of anchor shank do not by
themselves guarantee ductile connection behavior. Brittle fracture of the anchor
shank can still occur. Low steel strength, small anchor diameters, flush-sleeve
installation, and high-strength concrete lead to small deformation capacity,
particularly if shear dominates.
4) Ductile fractures will be achieved, in principle, if the maximum possible steel
strength of the anchor is reached. Therefore, connections with large edge distance,
high-strength yet ductile steels, and through-sleeve installation (sleeve extending to
the top surface of baseplate) are recommended.

Eccentric Shear Tests on Two-Anchor Connections


1) For large eccentricity in shear (capacity governed by fracture of the tension anchor),
plastic theory accurately predicts connection behavior and capacity.

126
2) At lower eccentricities of applied shear, the bulb-shaped interaction curve for
displacements causes a failure transition from the tension anchor to the shear
anchor. At this point both shear anchors and tension anchors are fully utilized, and
the assumptions of plastic theory agree with the actual behavior of the connection.
3) At still lower eccentricities of applied shear, the transverse displacement of the
tension anchor cannot exceed the transverse displacement of the shear anchor. For
that reason, the tension anchors of a multiple-anchor connection cannot reach the
fracture states in the “belly” of the displacement interaction curve. Contrary to the
assumptions of plastic theory, this causes the strength of the tension anchor to be
under-utilized at small loading eccentricities. Depending on how pronounced the
“belly” of the interaction curve is, the calculated capacity of the group can be
considerably overestimated by plastic theory, or even by elastic theory. Lotze [11]
proposes that this problem be corrected by assuming an even distribution of shear to
all anchors.

6. Acknowledgment and Disclaimer

This paper presents partial results of a research program supported by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) (NUREG/CR-5434, “Anchor Bolt Behavior and
Strength during Earthquakes”). The technical contact is Herman L Graves, III, whose
support is gratefully acknowledged. The conclusions in this paper are those of the
authors only, and are not NRC policy or recommendations.

7. References

1. CEB, “Fastenings to Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures: State-of-the-Art


Report, Part 1,” Euro-International Concrete Committee (CEB), August 1991.
2. Fuchs, W., “Tragverhalten von Befestigungen unter Querlast in ungerissenem
Beton,” Dissertation, Universität Stuttgart, 1990.
3. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen and R. and Breen, J. E., “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 1,
January-February, 1995, pp. 73-94.
4. Cook, R. A. and Klingner, R. E. “Ductile Multiple-Anchor Steel-to-Concrete
Connections,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 118, No. 6, June 1992, pp.
1645-1665.
5. McMackin, P. J., Slutter, R. G. and Fishere, J. W., “Headed Steel Anchor under
Combined Loading,” Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 10, No. 2, April, 1973.
6. Shaikh, A. and Whayong, Y., “In-place Strength of Welded Headed Studs,” Journal
of the Prestressed Concrete Institute, 1985 pp. 56-81.

127
7. Johnson, M. and Lew, H., “Experimental Study of Post-Installed Anchors under
Combined Shear and Tension Loading,” Anchorage to Concrete, SP-103, American
Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1987.
8. Bode, H. and Roik, K., “Headed Studs Embedded in Concrete and Loaded in
Tension,” Anchorage to Concrete, SP-103, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
Michigan, 1987, pp. 61-88.
9. PCI Design Handbook - Precast and Prestressed Concrete, 3rd Edition, Prestressed
Concrete Institute, Chicago, 1985.
10. Dieterle, H., Bozenhardt, A., Hirth, W. and Opitz V., “ Tragverhalten von nicht
generell zugzonentauglichen Dübeln, Teil 4: Verhalten im unbewegten Parallelriß
unter Schrägzugbelastung,” Bericht Nr. 1/45 - 89/19, Institut für Werkstoffe im
Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 1989.
11. Lotze, D. and Klingner, R. E., “Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections to
Concrete From the Perspective of Plastic Theory,” PMFSEL Report No. 96-4, The
University of Texas at Austin, March 1997.

128
IMPROVED STRUCTURAL MODEL FOR CHANNEL BARS
WITH MORE THAN 2 ANCHORS
Josef Kraus, Joško Ožbolt, Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
At present, no model is available to describe concrete failure of channel bars with sev-
eral anchor distances and for the general position of tensile loads. To examine this prob-
lem, an Finite Element-analysis of channel bars (profil 50/30) with several anchor dis-
tances has been carried out with various load positionings. Based on the results of the
numerical study, a new design model for channel bars with more than two anchors, is
proposed.

1. Introduction

In current engineering practice, no design code for fastening elements exists. Conse-
quently, the conditions for the use of channel bars are controlled by general building
authority approvals. In these approvals, the limit values of the edge distances in concrete
elements, the application of loads and the minimal member sizes are recommended. The
regulations do not offer a possibility for a general design of channel bars. They reflect a
structural framework of demands, which limit the variability of possible applications and
often leads to not very efficient and economical solutions. Therefore, there is an obvious
need for design rules, which should account for the specific geometrical and loading
conditions. These rules have to assure safer and more economical fastenings.

With channel bars there are principal two different kinds of failure modes: (1) concrete
failure and (2) steel failure. The steel failure is to a large extent clarified. However, to
better understand the concrete failure mechanism of channel bars with 3 or more an-
chors, additional investigations are needed. Therefore, a new model should be devel-
oped, in which the critical anchor is obtained on a system of a single-span beams. So,
the influence on the single anchors can be determined and compared with the character-
istical resistance of the considered anchor. The resistance of the anchor is calculated

129
based on the concept of the influencing area. Depending on the system, loads can be
transferred from the considered anchor, due to the stiffness and degree of constraint of
the channel, to the neighbour anchor with respecting their loading condition.

For better understanding the failure of channel bars, Finite Element studies have been
carried out. The analysis is useful to predict the structural behaviour of channel bars
with any loading conditions (e.g. load distribution on the anchors, influenced area of
each anchor). Based on the results of the parametric study, a new design model for
channel bars with more than two anchors is proposed.

2. Channel Bars

In engineering practice channel bars are used for fastening of facing masonry, at the
mounting of claddings, for fastening of pipe systems, for the ground fastening engines
and other applications.

Figure 2.1: Channel bar with bolt anchors

Channel bars are made in cold-rolled or hot-rolled U-shaped steel. They are filled up
with foaming agent, fixed in the formwork and casted into concrete. After removing the
formwork and the foaming agent the construction members can be fixed with special
hammer- or by hook bolts.

Figure 2.2: Hook bolt with channel bar

The advantage of this method for fixing is, that the point of loading in direction of the
channel bar, must not been known before. Consequently the system is very flexible. The

130
disadvantage of the system is, that the insertion of the channel bar has to be planned
exactly.
The screw can freely be moved along the channel bar and the load can be so transmitted
to the channel bar. At the lower side of the channel bar headed studs are welded and
they are responsible for the transmission of the load into the concrete. Several versions are
available:
- welded I-shaped anchors
- clench anchors
- swaged headed studs

The single bolts are connected by the U-shaped profile. The anchor rail itself cannot
transfer loads into the concrete. The load can only be transferred to concrete by the an-
chors. A general topic to be discussed is, how the geometrical parameters and position of
load influence the structural behaviour. The main parameters are the spacing of the an-
chors, the edge distance, the position of the load, the angle of load, the embedment depth
and the size of the channel bar.

3. Concrete failure

3.1 Design method (CCD-method)


When the steel strength is high enough, most fasteners lead under axial tension load to a
concrete cone failure of a specimen. The inclination of the cone surface is between 30°
and 40° measured to the direction of load. With increasing embedment depth the inclina-
tion of angle increases up to approximately 45°.

The tensile resistance under the load is distributed differentially over the concrete cone.
At the point of origin of the concrete cone, directly at the head of the anchor, the tensile
strains are maximal and they decrease by reaching the surface of concrete. Based on a
number of tests, the failure load of headed studs with large edge distances and large
spacing of the anchors, can be calculated as:
N 0u ,c = 15,5 ⋅ h 1ef,5 ⋅ β w (1)
with:
hef = embedment depth [mm]
βw = concrete compressive strength [N/mm2]

The resistance calculated by equation (1) can only be achieved, if there is a sufficient
concrete surface for each fastener. If the fastener is put close to the edge of the structural
member or if a neighbour fastener is too close, the cones are overlapping. The character-
istic spacing for an anchor group is s = 3 ⋅ hef. To transfere the maximum load of a fas-
tener, the minimum edge distance must be at least 1,5 ⋅ hef. To estimate the concrete
capacity of anchor groups and fastenings close to the edge of the building component,
the mentioned influences are considered in the CCD-Method (Concrete Capacity De-

131
sign). In this method, the concrete cone is idealized as a rectangular projection of the
concrete cone, on the concrete surface. By groups of anchors within the CCD-Method it
is assumed that the anchor plate is sufficient stiff, to distribute the loads uniformly on all
anchors. The group effect is taken into account by the formula.
A c,N
N u ,c = 0
⋅ ψ s, N ⋅ N u0 , c (2)
A c,N
with:
Ac,n0 projected area of each single fastener with large edge distance and
spacing. The concrete cone is idealized as a pyramide with the height
hef and a length of the basis scr,n = 3 ⋅ hef .

Ac,n actual projected area of the concrete cone on the concrete surface. The
limits of the area are the overlapping of the single cones of the next
fasteners and the edges.

ψs,n = 0,7 + 0,3 ⋅ c/ccr,N

edge distances c of a fastener; ccr,N edge distances required, to guaran-


tee that a complete concrete cone can be developed, and so the tension
of equation (1) with ccr,N = 1,5 ⋅ hef can be transmitted.

Nu,c0 resistance of a single anchor (1)

The ratio Ac,n/A0c,n considers the geometrical influence of the edge and further fasteners
next to the calculated fastening group. An additional reduction of the concrete capacity
is given by the factor ψs,n. It considers the disturbance of the radial-symmetric stress
distribution. For fastenings without edge influence (c ≥ 1,5 hef) the factor is ψs,n = 1,0.
This means that there is no disturbing influence of the radial-symmetric stress distribu-
tion.

3.2 Application of the CCD-method for channel bars


By the calculation of the capacity of the anchor ground with a channel bar it is assumed,
that by designing of each single anchor the design rules of headed studs can be used [1].
According to the method, the capacity of the anchor ground of channel bars with more
than 2 anchors with any positions of single loads, is designed as follows. Each span of
the channel bar can be considered as a single span beam (Figure 3.1).

132
s s s s

Figure 3.1: Channel bar as a system of single span beams


The model should be used for spacings s of the anchors. The resistance is for each an-
chor calculated with respect of the actual influencing area i.e. according to (2).

Ac,N

3 hef

s/2 + 1,5 hef s s s s/2 + 1,5 hef

Figure 3.2: Determination of the characteristical anchor resistances with respect of the
influencing area.

The above model is for channel bar only realisable, if the bar is stiff or the spacing of
anchors relatively small. Therefore the model need to be improved.

4. Modelling of a specimen with channel bar

4.1 General
To better understand the failure of channel bars a FE-analysis with the program MASA
has been carried out. The FE-program MASA has been developed at the Institute of
Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart and is aimed to be used for three dimen-
sional linear and non-linear analysis structures of quasi-brittle materials, especially of
concrete. The concrete is discretisized with 8-node solid elements. The channel bar is
also discretisized by volume elements with steel material parameters. To discretisize the
contact between channel bar and concrete, special contact elements are used which
transfer only compressive forces. The load is applied incrementally by displacement
control.
For the graphical analysis mesh generation and analysis of the results, the pre- and post-
processor FEMAP® is used.
Former investigations showed, that the symmetric part of the specimen can be used
(Figure 4.1) to reduce the number of elements, what leads to a shorter calculation time.

133
modelled area

Figure 4.1: Channel bar with 5 anchors and the modelled area

4.2 Modelling
The concrete and steel are modelled separately. The mesh of the concrete and the steel
elements has to be similar, to be able to connect both. Figure 4.2 shows a concrete mem-
ber with the size length 1800 mm, edge distance c = 75 mm and spacing of the anchors
of s = 300 mm with using the double symmetrie of the system. In the concrete member
an acavity for the channel bar of the profile 50/30 with 5 anchors can be seen. The steel
is although modelled with 5 anchors, the elementation is similar to the concrete.

position of load

Z
Y

Figure 4.2: Specimen for 5 anchors Figure 4.3: FE-model of a channel bar profile
(¼ of the specimen) 50/30 with 5 anchors (¼ of the bar)

The load is applicated in direction of the z-axis and it’s position is at the top of the
channel. The load, which is applied as a displacement onto the channel bar, is first trans-
ferred to the anchors. From the anchors the tensile force is transferred into the concrete.
The transmission occurs at the head of the anchor, where the elements of steel and con-
crete are connected to each other.

load transfer nodes (channel bar - concrete)


Z

Figure 4.4: Back view of a channel bar with bolt and the load transfer nodes

134
The rest of the nodes of the bolt are not connected to the concrete. They have a distance
of 0,1 mm to the concrete nodes. To avoid load transfer, the vertical nodes of the chan-
nel bar, are also at the distance of 0,1 mm measured from the surface of the concrete
member.
Under load the channel lifts from the concrete surface. At some positions between chan-
nel bar and concrete, pressure caused by bending of the channel, can be transferred. To
model the real contact between channel bar and concrete, special contact elements are
used. The mesh of these elements is similar to the concrete and channel elements. The
tensile stress which can be transferred from steel to concrete is very low (tensile strength
of interface elements is close to zero). The thickness of the contact elements is 2 mm.

Figure 4.5: Contact between steel and concrete

concrete

channel bar

Y contact elements
X

Figure 4.6: FE-model of a specimen anchor

5. Numerical investigations of channel bars with 5 anchors

5.1 General
The aim of the calculations is, to investigate the concrete failure of a channel bar for
different loading positions. Totally predict 22 Finite-Element-Calculations with spacings
of the anchors of s = 100 mm and s = 300 mm are carried out. The profile 50/30 (width,
height of the channel) with an embedment depth of hef = 85 mm was analysed. The di-
ameter of the bolt was d1 = 16 mm, the diameter of the head of the bolt was d2 = 24 mm.
The protrusion of the channel in direction of the channel length was u = 300 mm. With
the chosen protrusion of the channel, the corner influence should be avoided. At the
calculations with a spacing of the anchors of s = 300 mm ≥ 3 ⋅ hef = 255 mm, there is no
interaction between the anchors to be expected.
At a spacing of s = 100 mm = 1,18 ⋅ hef there is a strong influence between the anchors,

135
with respect to the transmission of load. In all calculations the edge distance on both
sides was choosed c2 = c3 = 75 mm. The concrete properties are summarised in table 1.

Concrete Concrete Concrete tensile Fracture energy E-Modulus


compressive compressive strength GF
strength strength ft
Fc,cylinder Fc,cube200 [N/mm²] [N/mm] [N/mm²]
[N/mm²] [N/mm²]
25,0 29,4 2,0 0,08 28000
Table 1: Concrete parameters

The material model of the steel of the channel bar is supposed as linear elastic with an
E-modulus of 210000 N/mm². I.e. in all cases concrete failure causes the system failure.

The load on the channel bar is always symmetric to the middle anchor with 2 single
loads (Figure 5.1). The distance of the single load to the middle anchor is signed with x.
The position of load was varied between x = 0 mm (over the middle anchor A) and
x = 100 mm respectively x = 300 mm (over the anchor B).
x x

C (le.) B (le.) A B (ri.) C (ri.)

s s s s
Figure 5.1: Designation of the anchors

The supports in z-direction were placed at the concrete surface. The displacement was
applied incrementally on the channel bar. The increment size was 0,05 mm.

5.2 Results of the calculations for spacing s = 300 mm


Different load positions are investigated for a spacing of the anchors of s = 300 mm, and
the maximum loads of the anchors are compared with each other. The anchor load B is
shown only once, but it actually acts 2 times in the system, caused by the symmetry. The
difference between the sum of the anchor loads and the system load, is a result of the
minimum tensile capacity of the contact elements.

Figures 5.2a and b show crack development at the maximum load of the first broken
anchor. The failure is caused by a horizontal crack to the edge of the concrete member.
As can be seen from the crack development for load position x = 0 mm, only the middle
anchor A is activated. For load position x = 200 mm both anchors (A and B) are acti-
vated.

136
0.01

0.00833

0.00667

0.005

0.00333

0.00167

0.
Z Z
Y Y

X X
Output Set: MASA3 A1096 Output Set: MASA3 A10073
Contour: Avrg.Ez stra. Contour: Avrg.Ez stra.

Figure 5.2a: Cracks pattern, x = 0 mm Figure 5.2b: Cracks pattern, x = 200 mm

In the Figures 5.3a and b the load distribution on the single anchors is shown. At load
position x = 0 mm only anchor A is activated, then at about 75 % of the maximal anchor
load, the anchors B are also activated. The load of the anchors B can nearly be ne-
glected. The system failure is caused by failure of anchor A. In comparison with load
position x = 200 mm from the beginning, the middle anchor A and the anchors B are
activated. At maximum load of the system the anchors A and B take up almost the same
load. The failure of the system is caused by concrete failure of the anchors A and B (ri./
le.).
40 40

35 35
Anchor load A, B [kN]

30 30
Anchor load A, B [kN]

25 25

20 20

anchor load A
15 anchor load B 15
anchor load A
anchor load B
10 10

5 5

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Systemload [kN] Systemload [kN]

Figure 5.3a: Anchor loads, x = 0 mm Figure 5.3b: Anchor loads, x = 200 mm

Figure 5.4 shows, that by loading above position x = 0 mm the ultimate load of the sys-
tem is nearly the same, as the ultimate load of a single anchor. Load position x = 200
mm shows, that the systemload is 3-times the load of the anchor acting at x = 0 mm. At
the load positions from x = 0 mm to x = 50 mm the middle anchor carries about 97 % of
the total load. The neighbour anchors get only 3 % of the total load. Beginning at posi-
tion x = 150 mm the load in the system is better distributed. The anchors B take up at
load position x = 150 mm 63,5 % of the maximum load and the middle anchor only 36,5
%. This tendency maintains up to load position x = 200 mm. At position x = 200 mm the
anchors A and B are activated at the same size. From load position x = 200 mm on,
activation of anchor A is decreasing. As a result between x = 200 mm and 300 mm the

137
systemload becomes lower.
140

120

100
Systemload [kN]

80

systemload
60 anchor load A
anchor load B

40

20

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Distance of loading point from middle anchor [mm]

Figure 5.4: Anchor loads and maximum load for different load positions
At position x = 300 mm the systemload is 2 times higher than the load from position
x = 0 mm. The results show, that for s = 300 mm when load is applied directly over an
anchor, only that anchor can be activated. Generally can be seen, that the maximum
anchor load of a single anchor is reached at 32 kN. This gives a maximal (optional)
resistance if all anchors are directly loaded. This shows a good agreement between the
calculated loads and the CCD-method. The analysis shows, that for s = 300 mm there is
no interaction between the anchors. The results are in good agreement with the CCD-
method (34 kN), only if the load is applied directly over the anchor.

5.3 Results of the calculations for spacing s = 100 mm


The representation of the results of the calculations with different load positions and
spacing of the anchors of s = 100 mm is corresponding to section 5.2.
The Figures 5.5a and b show crack development at the maximum. The maximum load is
controlled by a horizontal crack in direction to the edge of the concrete member and a
connecting crack between the heads of the anchors. From the crack development it can
be seen, that at load position x = 0 mm the anchors A and B are activated and for the
load position x = 75 mm the anchor C is activated as well. After peek load the anchors
will break by concrete cone failure.

138
0.01

0.00833

0.00667

0.005

0.00333

0.00167

0.
Z Z
Y Y
X X
Output Set: MASA3 C1053 Output Set: MASA3 C7055
Contour: Avrg.Ez stra. Contour: Avrg.Ez stra.

Figure 5.5a: Crack pattern, x = 0 mm Figure 5.5b: Crack pattern, x = 75 mm

In the Figures 5.6a and b the load distribution of the individual anchors is shown. At
load position x = 0 mm anchor A carries the highest part of the acting load. In compari-
son with the channel bar with large spacing of the anchors the anchors B and C are acti-
vated as well (see Figure 5.3). Up to 50 % of the maximum load the activation of anchor
B and C is nearly the same. From 50 % of the maximum load anchor B is activated more
strongly. The system failure is caused by concrete failure of the anchors A and B. Com-
pared with the load position x = 75 mm, both anchors A and B are activated from begin-
ning of loading. At maximum load the loads are nearly the same. The anchor C is acti-
vated from beginning of loading as well. Extremely strong is the activation close by the
maximum of the system load. The failure is caused by concrete failure of all 5 anchors.
40 40
Anchor load A, B, C [kN]
Anchor load A, B, C [kN]

anchor load A
30 anchor load B 30
anchor load C

anchor load A
anchor load B
20 20 anchor load C

10 10

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Systemload [kN] Systemload [kN]

Figure 5.6a: Anchor loads, x = 0 mm Figure 5.6b: Anchor loads, x = 75 mm

Figure 5.7 shows, that for s = 100 mm the influence of the position of the load on the
maximum load of the system is not so strong as for s = 300 mm. Nevertheless, the
maximum load is growing up in dependence on the load position from x = 0 mm to
x = 100 mm. At the load position x = 62,5 mm the ratio of activation of the anchors A
and B is the same. From load position x = 62,5 mm to x = 100 mm anchor C is better
activated.
In the CCD-method mutual influence of the anchors by spacing of s = 100 mm with an
embedment depth of hef = 85 mm is taken to account on the failure of a single anchor. In

139
the FE-analyses the same influence can be seen. Especially it is shown in the activation
of the single anchors at different load positions. Up to position x = 50 mm 3 anchors will
break out, over x = 50 mm 5 anchors will break out. Generally it is shown, that the high-
est loaded single anchor has a failure load of about 20 kN. At load position x = 0 mm the
failure load of anchor A is about 25 kN. This could be restored, because activated area
of anchor A is low influenced by the anchors B and C. An indication therefore is the
lower anchor load of the anchors B and C, compared with all other load positions at
maximum load.
120

100
Systemload [KN]

80

60
systemload
anchor load A
40 anchor load B
anchor load C

20

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Distance of loading point from middle anchor [mm]
Figure 5.7: Anchor loads and maximum load for different load positions
By designing anchor groups using the CCD-Method it is assumed, that the anchor plate,
which connects the anchors is sufficiently stiff. Figure 5.7 shows, that the anchors close
to the loading point (anchor B and A) are both activated almost the same. However the
ratio of activation of anchor C is lower than for the anchors A and B. Obviously by
small spacing of the anchors, the CCD-method can be used only conditional, since the
load distribution on all anchors is not the same.

6. Conclusions

Presently no model is available to describe concrete failure of channel bars with more
than two anchors and for different positions of loads. To investigate this problem a FE-
analysis of channel bars (profil 50/30) with several anchor distances and for different
load positions has been carried out. The results of the calculations are compared with the
CCD-method for fasteners.

By designing anchor groups with the CCD-method it is assumed, that the anchor plate
which connects the anchors, is sufficiently stiff. Consequently, according to the model
the load is uniformly distributed over all anchors.
The numerical analyse shows, that for small spacing of the anchors, the channel bar can
be viewed approximately as a stiff. Therefore the CCD-method can be used. However,

140
the results show, that for large spacing of the anchors, it is reasonable to assume the
channel bar as a system of single span beams.

Therefore, in the new model for design of channel bars the critical anchor is obtained on
a system of single span beams. The resistance of each anchor is calculated based on a
concept of the influencing area.

The cases studied in the present numerical investigations are two extreme cases. To
formulate a more general design model, which should account for the transition from the
approach with the stiff channel bar (CCD-method) to the system of a single span beams,
further numerical and experimental work is needed.

7. Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the following companies: Halfen and Deutsche
Kahneisen. The support is very much appreciated.

8. References

[1] Wohlfahrt, R.: Tragverhalten von Ankerschienen ohne Rückhängebewehrung, Stutt-


gart: Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Mitteilung 1996(4).

[2] Ozbolt, J.: „MASA- Macoscopic Space Analysis“, Stuttgart: Institut für Werkstoffe
im Bauwesen, Internal report 1999.

[3] Halfen GmbH & Co. KG: Zulassungsbescheid Halfen-Ankerschiene HTA (Z-21.4-
34), Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (1998).

141
ANCHORS IN LOW AND HIGH STRENGTH CONCRETE
Jakob Kunz*, Yasutoshi Yamamoto**, Mario Berra***, Pietro Bianchi*
*Hilti AG, Corporate Research, Liechtenstein
**Shibaura Institute, Tokyo, Japan
***Enel.Hydro, Milan, Italy

Abstract
Standard anchor design rules apply to normal strength concrete in a range of about 20 to
50 MPa compressive strength. However, we often encounter low strength concrete when
retrofitting old buildings. On the other hand, the evolution in concrete technology leads
to always higher compressive strengths in new concrete construction.

A research commissioned by Hilti Corporate Research and carried out under the
direction of Professor Yamamoto at Shibaura Institute of Technology in Japan
investigated the transfer capability of anchors by conducting a systematic series of more
than 500 shear and tension tests in low strength concrete.

The behavior of anchors in high strength concrete has been investigated in the European
project ANCHR. This paper puts together comparable results from both research
programs and draws conclusions for the design of anchorage in low and high strength
concrete. This leads to the conclusion that standard design rules can be applied for shear
transmission, but that for tension load, the concrete strength has to be taken into account
as proposed by structural concrete codes when designing anchorage for concrete
capacity in low or high strength concrete.

1. Introduction

Standard anchor design rules apply to normal strength concrete in a range of about 20 to
50 MPa compressive strength. The failure of the concrete capacity is usually associated
with the concrete strength to the power of 0.5. Thus the concrete capacity design method
(CCD, [1], [2]) gives the concrete cone failure caused by an anchor as:

N u ,m = k ⋅ hef1.5 ⋅ f c

142
(1)
with: Nu,m mean ultimate concrete cone pullout load [N]
k constant, =13.5 for metal anchors; =15.5 for headed studs and some
undercut anchors [-]
hef effective embedment depth [mm]
fc concrete compressive strength [MPa]

and for shear loads:


0.2
 hef 
Vc ,u ,m = 0.9 ⋅ d ⋅   ⋅ c1.5 ⋅ f c ≤ Vs ,u ,m (2)
 d 
with: Vc,u,m ultimate load for concrete cone failure in shear [N]
d anchor diameter [mm]
c distance from axis of anchor to concrete edge [mm]
Vs,u,m maximum shear load for steel failure [N]

The value of the concrete compressive strength to the power of 0.5 is to represent the
concrete tensile strength. This results in a good representation of the cone pullout
strength for concrete strengths from 20 to 50 MPa. However, Neville [3] suggests, that
probably the best fit to represent tensile strength of concrete ft is

f t ≅ 0.3 ⋅ f c2 / 3 (3)

In fact, Eurocode 2 [4] also uses this formula. In this study, tests for concrete failure with
compressive strengths below and above the range of 20 to 50 MPa have been compared
to both representations of the concrete tensile strength. The tests in low strength concrete
have been taken from a research program carried out at the Shibaura institute of
Technology, Tokyo under the direction of Professor Y. Yamamoto and the tests in high
strength concrete are taken from the Brite-Euram Project ANCHR which investigated
the anchor behavior in normal and high strength concrete under static load and under
high strain rates. Another set of tests with undercut anchors in normal strength concrete
from the Hilti testing laboratory is considered as well.

2. Tensile Load Capacity of Undercut Systems

The tensile load capacity was evaluated with headed studs and undercut anchors. A total
of 97 tests representing concrete compressive strengths from 5 to 120 MPa has been
analyzed. The embedment depths range from 36mm to 135mm. The measured failure
loads Fu,test have been “normalized” to an embedment depth of 100mm. Since the
ultimate load depends on the embedment depth hef to the power of 1.5 (1), the
normalized ultimate load Fu,norm is obtained as:

143
1.5
 100 
Fu ,norm = Fu ,test ⋅   (4)
h 
 ef 
Figure 1 shows the normalized measured ultimate loads with two calculated curves. The
first curve represents formula (1), where the factor k for the considered sample was 17.2.
Thus, curve (1) represents the dependence of the ultimate load on the square root of the
concrete compressive. The second curve represents formula (5), i.e. the dependence of
the ultimate load on the concrete strength to the power of 2/3.

N u ,m = 10.3 ⋅ hef1.5 ⋅ β w2 / 3 (5)

350
conrete cone failure load [kN]

300

250 formula (1)


200 formula (5)
tests Shibaura
150 tests ENEL
100 tests Hilti

50 failure loads normalized


for hef = 100mm
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
concrete strength [N/mm2]

Figure 1: Tests with undercutting systems

Figure 1 clearly shows that both formulae yield the same results with compressive
strengths in the range of 20 to 50 MPa, but that for lower and especially for higher
compressive strengths the differences are considerable. For low strength concrete, the
test results are lower than the results of both formulae, but formula (5) is somewhat
closer than formula (1). For a compressive strength of 120 MPa, formula (1) clearly
underestimates the test results, while formula (5) gives a good prediction of the average
test result.

A thorough analysis of the test data has shown, that the quality of a predictive formula
can be further increased by taking into account the undercutting area A.

N u ,m = 8.1 ⋅ (hef + 0.9 ⋅ A0.5 ) ⋅ f c2 / 3


1.5
(6)

144
with: A undercutting area projected to a plane perpendicular to the axis of the anchor

The ratio of measured to predicted ultimate load has been evaluated for all 97 tests with
formulae (1), (5) and (6). The coefficient of variation obtained with the prediction
formula (1) is 17.7% which corresponds to the values given in [1]. Considering formula
(5), the coefficient of variation is reduced to 13.1% and with formula (6) even to 11.6%.

3. Tensile Load Capacity of Adhesive Bonded Systems

a) Bond Strength
As shown earlier[5], [6], the pullout resistance of bonded anchorage systems is mainly
dependent on the product specific bond strength τb and the anchor surface. The influence
of the compressive strength of the concrete depends on the product. In the considered
tests, the dependence varied from none to proportional to the square root of the concrete
compressive strength.

n
 f 
N u ,m ,b = τ b ⋅ φ ⋅ π ⋅ hef ⋅  c  (7)
f 
 c ,ref 
with: Nu,m,b mean ultimate maximum load for pullout failure [N]
τb product specific bond strength [MPa]
φ diameter of anchor [mm]
fc,ref reference concrete strength, corresponds to tb [MPa]
n product dependent exponent, 0.0 < n < 0.5

This statement has been confirmed by both presented test series in low and in high
strength concrete.

b) Splitting Bond Failure


If the anchor is set near the edge and therefore the concrete cover is small, the bond
strength τb may not be reached before splitting of the concrete cover. Splitting failure has
been tested in normal and high strength concrete. Cylindrical concrete specimens with a
diameter of 100mm. High strength reinforcement bars with a diameter of 20mm were
pulled out of the concrete cylinders. Thus the concrete cover around the reinforcement
bars was 40mm or 2 times the bar diameter. From the measured maximum loads, the
splitting bond stress τu,sp was evaluated by dividing the maximum load by the anchor
surface, i.e:

145
Fu ,m
τ u ,sp = (8)
φ ⋅ π ⋅ hef
Figure 2 shows the splitting bond stresses evaluated from tests with cast-in and with
post-installed bars against the concrete strength. Two curves show the best fit equations
for predictions supposing that the splitting bond stress is proportional to the concrete
strength to the power of 0.5, or to the power of 2/3, respectively.

curve1 : τ u ,sp = 1.69 ⋅ f c0.5 ; curve 2 : τ u ,sp = 0.81 ⋅ f c2 / 3 (9)


splitting bond stress [MPa]

40.0
curve 1
35.0
30.0
curve 2
25.0
20.0
tests post-
15.0
installed
10.0
tests cast in
5.0
place
0.0
0 100 200 300
concrete strength [MPa]

Figure 2: splitting bond tests with bonded systems

The comparison of tests and prediction (figure 2) shows that the assumption that the
splitting failure is proportional to the concrete strength to the power of 2/3 (curve 2)
gives better results for very high and very low concrete strengths. When comparing the
ratios of measured to predicted values, curve 1 yields a coefficient of variation of 38%
while curve 2 yields a coefficient of variation of 29% for the considered sample of 30
tests. Nevertheless these results must be considered as preliminary, since the coefficient
of variation is rather high in both cases.

4. Shear Load Capacity without Edge Influence in Low Strength Concrete

In the test program at Shibaura Institute of Technology the shear capacity of single
anchors and of groups of 3 anchors has been measured in low strength concrete
specimens. The concrete base material was cast as 1.2m long concrete blocks with
compressive strengths of 5 to 15 MPa. Monotonic shear loading tests on post-installed
reinforcement bars were conducted in order to measure strength, displacement and
failure modes that are basic characteristics of post-installed anchors.

146
The number of cracks in the base material (existing member) decreased, as the concrete
strength increased, since the mode of failure shifted from concrete bearing pressure to
steel shear failure.

Structural concrete design codes show how to calculate the strength of shear bolts.
Eurocode 4 proposes the following formulae for the characteristic resistance PRk (sect.
6.3.2.1 [7]):
π ⋅d 2
steel shear failure: PRk = 0.8 f u (10)
4
concrete bearing pressure: PRk = 0.29d f ck ⋅ Ecm
2
(11)

E cm = 9500( f ck + 8)
1/ 3
(E cm , f ck [kN / mm 2 ], EC2, sect. 3.1.2.5.2 )
with: fu ultimate strength of steel
fck characteristic compressive strength of concrete
Ecm Young’s modulus of concrete

0.35 d16, single


normalized shear strength

0.3 d19, single


Fu/(n*d ) [kN/mm ]
2

0.25
d22, single
0.2
2

0.15 d19, group


0.1
d22, group
0.05
0 calculated steel
0 5 10 15 20 failure
calculated
concrete strength [N/mm2]
concrete failure

Figure 3: Shear tests

Figure 3 shows the test results and the expected failure loads according to Eurocode 4,
where the normalized shear strength is the shear strength divided by the diameter
squared of the anchor rods, d2, and the number of anchors in a group, n. The diagram
shows, that single anchors with small diameters perform in a clear concrete bearing
failure, while anchors with bigger diameters in groups tend more to steel failure. In any
case it seems advisable to design shear connections in low strength concrete for concrete
bearing pressure.

147
5. Conclusions

All tests presented in this paper show the concrete capacity limit. For anchor pullout
tests with concrete cone failure, the results have been compared to the concrete capacity
design method and it has been confirmed that this method gives a good prediction for the
ultimate resistance in normal strength concrete, but that in low and high strength
concrete, the resistance should rather be estimated as proportional to the concrete
strength to the power of 2/3.

Bonded anchor systems with small concrete cover tend to reach their ultimate load when
splitting of the concrete cover occurs. This is again reached with the concrete tensile
capacity. For this case the considered tests also suggest to predict the failure load as
proportional to the concrete compressive strength to the power of 2/3 if a wide range of
concrete strengths is considered. Additional prediction accuracy can be obtained if the
undercutting area of the anchorage system is taken into account.

The last section has shown that the shear capacity of anchors without influence of
concrete edges can be estimated with the formulae from Eurocode 4 with good precision.

Thus, the investigations summarized in this paper suggest that the concrete capacity
method is a good predictions of the failure loads in normal strength concrete, but that a
more realistic model for the concrete tensile strength should be taken into account if a
wide range of concrete strengths is considered.

6. Open Questions

The investigations shown here compare fiber reinforced high strength concrete to normal
and low strength concrete without fiber reinforcement. This has been done under the
assumption that fibers are generally contained in high strength concrete in order to
achieve a minimum ductility. Thus, simply saying “concrete” may mean fiber reinforced
for high strengths and not reinforced with fibers for medium and low strengths.

Nevertheless, it should be stated that by definition fiber reinforced concrete is a material


different from normal concrete. The relations found in this research apply to the two
different materials as they are generally used. In order to establish clear relationships for
the two different materials (fiber reinforced concrete and concrete not reinforced with
fibers) further research is required.

Acknowledgement

The project ANCHR was sponsored by the BRITE-EURAM research framework 7. The
authors would like to thank for the support.

148
References

1. Eligehausen, Mallée, Rehm: Befestigungstechnik. Sonderdruck aus dem


Betonkalender 1997. Ernst & Sohn, Verlag für Architektur und technische
Wissenschaften, Berlin 1997.
2. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., Breen, J. E.: Concrete Capacity Design Approach for
Fastening to Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, January-February 1995.
3. Neville, A.M.: Properties of Concrete. Pearson Education Limited. Essex, England,
1995.
4. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures.
5. Cook, R. A., Kunz J., Fuchs W., Konz C.: Behavior and Design of Single Adhesive
Anchors under Tensile Load in Uncracked Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, V. 95,
No. 1, January-February 1998.
6. Kunz, J., Cook R. A., Fuchs W., Spieth H.: Tragverhalten und Bemessung von
chemischen Befestigungen. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 93 (1998), Hefte 1 und 2.
Ernst und Sohn, Berlin.
7. Eurocode 4: Design of Mixed Structures in Steel and Concrete.

149
DEVELOPMENT OF COMMON UNIFORM REGULATIONS
IN EUROPE FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF METAL
ANCHORS
Klaus Laternser
Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik, Germany

Abstract
The different national regulations in force in Europe in the field of metal anchors lead to
the development of a first European UEAtc Directive for the assessment of anchors in
1986 by means of which common principles of testing and a mutual recognition of test
results were achieved.

On the basis of this Directive the EOTA (European Organisation for Technical
Approval) has elaborated comprehensive compulsory "Guidelines for European
Technical Approval of Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete". These Guidelines endorsed
in 1997 by the European Commission resulted in the issue of a great number of European
Technical Approvals (ETAs) for metal anchors.

1. Introduction

During the past 30 years the use of metal anchors for anchorage in drilled holes of
concrete elements has tremendously fast increased worldwide. This required regulations
for the determination and evaluation of the properties and efficiency of anchors as well as
for the installation of anchors. Differing national regulations in various European
countries by agréments, technical approvals or standards led, at the beginning of the 80s,
to a first European harmonization for the testing of metal anchors. Upon completion of
uniform and binding regulations in Europe through guidelines for the European
Technical Approval for metal anchors for use in concrete circa 30 European Technical
Approvals could be granted up to now for metal anchors.

150
2. National regulations in Europe

The first national approvals for metal anchors in Germany were granted in 1975. The
anchors concerned were torque-controlled expansion anchors (sleeve type) and
deformation-controlled expansion anchors (drop-in anchors). Four years later approvals
were granted for expansion anchors for use in cracked concrete and bonded anchors. At
present there are a great number of German technical approvals in force for different
systems of metal anchors.
In other European countries such as France, United Kingdom, Sweden and The
Netherlands also agréments were granted and/or standards for testing of anchors were
elaborated as well.
As agreed with the European Commission national regulations shall be withdrawn and
replaced, after a transitional period, by European Technical Approvals as soon as EOTA
Guidelines for European Technical Approvals are available. For expansion anchors and
undercut anchors this transitional period will end in mid-2002.

3. UEAtc regulations

3.1 General
The UEAtc – Union Européenne pour l'Agrément technique dans la Construction -
European Union of Agrément - joins national institutes, centres and organisations of
Europe, which deal with the establishment of common guides and the elaboration of
technical agréments in building, with the objective to reduce costs and time required for
the different approval procedures in the European area and to simplify the mutual
recognition of agréments.

3.2 UEAtc Directives


In December 1986 a first European regulation, the "UEAtc Technical Directive for the
Assessment of Anchors Bolts" [1] was published. This Directive contained, in addition to
terminology and general requirements, details on the determination of characteristics,
advice for the evaluation of the test results, information on the quality control and
conditions for the use of the anchors. It applied only to anchorages realised in the
compressive zone of the concrete and not to anchorages in or in the vicinity of cracks.
However, a uniform evaluation of the test results and a common safety concept could then
not yet be established in a binding way. For anchorages realised in the compressive zone
of concrete, however, the main first objectives, i.e. common principles for testing in all
UEAtc countries and mutual recognition of test results, had been achieved.

3.3 UEAtc Technical Guides


As an extension of the UEAtc Directive, the Institut für Bautechnik proposed in 1987 to
set up a "Test programme for suitability tests and approval tests for anchors to be used in
the tension zone of concrete".

151
For the design of reinforced concrete structures the tensile zone of concrete is assumed
to be cracked, since concrete has a low tensile strength which may already be utilised by
inherent stresses and restraint of imposed deformations not taken into account.
Additionally, there are locally increased tensile stresses in the anchorage zone due to
splitting forces resulting from the installation and loading of the anchor. After agreement
on the question of whether cracked and non-cracked concrete can be distinguished in
practice, the scope of the new document was defined as applying to anchors
- for use in cracked and non-cracked concrete,
and
- for use in non-cracked concrete only.
The UEAtc Technical Guide [2] completed in 1992 includes the testing of torque-
controlled expansion metal anchors, the design of anchorages in concrete and details on
the anchor installation. Of central importance are the good functioning tests. They are
intended to establish the fitness of the anchor system for the intended use and to detect
any poor performance, e.g. installation safety under normal site conditions, performance
in different concrete strengths or under repeated and sustained loading.

4. EOTA

The European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA) [3] consists at present of
29 Member Bodies from 17 European countries, which were nominated and authorised
to issue European Technical Approvals (ETAs). EOTA was created in the framework of
the implementation of the Construction Products Directive [4] for the harmonization of
construction products in the European Union. EOTA has the task to monitor the
elaboration of Guidelines for European Technical Approval and to coordinate all
activities in connection with the granting of ETAs. ETA-Guidelines (ETAGs) are
elaborated for a certain product area within working groups and project teams. The
elaboration is based on a mandate issued by the European Commission and on an
approved work programme.
In the field of anchors there is a total of four mandates issued by the European
Commission for the elaboration of Guidelines for European Technical Approval:
− Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete
− Metal Anchors for Lightweight Systems
− Plastic Anchors for Use in Concrete and Masonry
− Injection Anchors for Use in Masonry.
For all four anchor sectors EOTA has placed the elaboration under the chairmanship of
the writer, thus ensuring a uniform assessment concept for the different anchor types.
The convenorship and the secretariat for the four working groups are held by the
Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik [5]. The European manufacturers of anchors,
represented by their association CEO (Comité Européen de l'Outillage - European Tool
Committee), are essentially involved in the elaboration of the Guidelines.

152
5. ETAG 001

5.1 General
The Guideline for European Technical Approval of Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete
[6] was adopted in 1997 as the very first ETAG: ETAG 001.
It consists of a general part for all types of metal anchors and of five further parts
applying to
- torque-controlled expansion anchors
- undercut anchors
- deformation-controlled expansion anchors
- bonded anchors, and
- anchors for lightweight systems.
Part 1 includes the requirements and assessment methods for all metal anchors, whereas
the subsequent parts contain additional and/or deviating requirements and assessment
methods; they shall be used only in connection with Part 1.
The Guideline includes three Annexes:
- Details of tests
- Tests for admissible service conditions – Detailed information
- Design methods for anchorages.
Parts 1 to 3 and Annexes A, B and C were published in 1997, Part 4 for deformation-
controlled expansion anchors was published in 1999. Part 5 for bonded anchors has been
completed and will probably be published after its adoption in this year. Part 6 for
anchors for use in redundant systems is presently in preparation and is envisaged to be
completed next year.

5.2 Scope
The Guideline applies to metal anchors placed into drilled holes in concrete and
anchored by expansion, undercutting or bonding. The Guideline covers the assessment
of metal anchors when their use shall fulfil the Essential Requirements 1 and 4 of the
CPD and when failure of anchorages made with these products would compromise the
stability of the works, cause risk to human life and/or lead to considerable economic
consequences.
The anchor has to be made of carbon steel, stainless steel or malleable cast iron. In the
case of bonded anchors the mortar may be made of resin, cement or a combination of
both. The minimum thread size of the anchor is 6 mm, the anchorage depth shall be not
less than 40 mm. Anchors for use in lightweight systems shall have a diameter of at least
5 mm and an anchorage depth of 30 mm.
The concrete member in which anchors are installed shall be made of normal weight
concrete between strength classes C 20/25 and C 50/60. Part 6 covers also other strength
classes and other types of concrete, e.g. lightweight aggregate concrete and aerated
concrete.

153

Paper115
The Guideline applies to anchors subject to static or quasi-static actions in tension, shear
or combined tension and shear or bending, and only applications are covered, where the
concrete members in which the anchors are embedded are also subject to static or quasi
static actions.
The use categories are defined for use in cracked and non-cracked concrete or non-
cracked concrete only. The durability categories for use in structures subject to dry,
internal conditions and/or in structures subject to other environmental conditions; e.g.
external atmospheric exposure or exposure in permanently damp internal conditions.

5.3 Verification methods


The assessment of anchors is based on the following tests:
- tests for confirming their suitability
- tests for evaluating the admissible service conditions
- tests for checking durability.
The tests for suitability are of decisive importance for the assessment of the anchors and
are required for the following reasons:
- The anchors must not be too sensitive to deviations from the installation instructions
of the manufacturer, which might occur during installation.
These may include
• cleaning of the drilled hole
• application of a torque moment higher or smaller than required
• degree of expansion in the case of undercut anchors and deformation-controlled
expansion anchors
• mixing of mortar in the case of bonded anchors
• striking of reinforcement during drilling.
- The anchors must not be too sensitive to deviations from the concrete characteristics
(e.g. concrete strength, cracks, opening and closing of cracks).
- Due to drilled hole tolerances and wear of the drilling machine the load resistance of
the anchor can be adversely affected.
- The anchors must properly function even under sustained loads and repeated loads of
varying size.
However, gross errors are not covered by the ETAG 001 and should be avoided by
proper training of installers and supervision on site.
For these suitability tests it is accepted that there is a limited reduction of the load
resistance of the anchor compared to the test results for the determination of the
admissible service conditions. The different behaviour is assessed by using reduction
factors and an installation safety factor of the anchor system as a function of the test
results.
The extent of the tests for determining the admissible service conditions depends of the
field of use chosen by the manufacturer for the anchors. For this purpose the options
given in Table 1 are included in the Guideline, which cover the use of anchors in

154
cracked and non-cracked concrete and in non-cracked concrete only, the characteristic
load resistance FRk as a function of the concrete strength class and load direction and the
characteristic load resistance respectively as a uniform value for all concrete strength
classes ≥ C 20/25 and/or for all load directions. There are further options for the
characteristic spacing of the anchors scr and the characteristic distance between anchor
and member edge ccr and for the minimum distances smin and cmin respectively.
Characteristic distances are values at which the characteristic (i.e. the full) load
resistance of the anchor in the event of concrete failure is achieved. The minimum
distances are the minimum admissible values. Where when using the anchors spacing
and edge distance respectively are smaller than the determined characteristic values –
e.g. in the case of anchor groups and/or anchors near the edge – the characteristic load
resistance of the anchors shall be reduced by applying one of the design methods given
in Annex C.
The tests for checking durability concern mainly the resistance to corrosion, the
durability of coatings and the problem of jamming in the case of stainless steel.

Table 1: Options
Option Cracked Non- C20/25 C20/25 FRk FRk ccr scr cmin smin Design
No and cracked only to one function method
non- concrete C50/60 value of according
cracked only direction to
concrete Annex C
1 x x x x x x x
A
2 x x x x x x x
3 x x x x x x x
B
4 x x x x x x x
5 x x x x x
C
6 x x x x x
7 x x x x x x x
A
8 x x x x x x x
9 x x x x x x x
B
10 x x x x x x x
11 x x x x x
C
12 x x x x x

5.4 Assessment of the anchors


The characteristic load resistance of the anchor is determined on the basis of statistical
methods as 5% fractile of the ultimate loads measured in a test series for a confidence
level of 90%. The load/displacement curves shall show a steady increase. A reduction in
load and/or a horizontal or near-horizontal part in the curve caused by uncontrolled slip

155
of the anchor is not acceptable up to a defined load. Furthermore, the scatter of the
ultimate loads and of the load/displacement curves is limited.

5.5 Annexes
Annex A includes details of tests, such as test samples, test members, anchor
installation, test and measurement equipment, test procedure and test report.
Annex B contains detailed information on the type and number of tests for admissible
service conditions. The number of tests is dependent on the option chosen by the
manufacturer and on the current experience available on the loadbearing behaviour of
the anchors. The equations given for ultimate loads for single anchors are based on
current test experience. If the behaviour of the anchors falls within the current range of
test experience, a reduced test programme may be carried out. Where test results are
available from the manufacturer, these results - with the exception of the suitability
tests - can be taken into account thus reducing the number of the tests.
Annex C describes the three design methods for anchors for use in concrete. The design
of the anchorages (e.g. anchor groups, influence of concrete member edges or corners) is
based on the characteristic value of the load resistance given in the relevant ETA for the
anchor concerned.

6. ETAs

Based on the ETAG 001 the first two European Technical Approvals were granted by
Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik in February 1998. By that the first European technical
specifications were available being automatically valid in all European countries; they
were actually the first construction products bearing the CE marking at all. The anchors
concerned are torque-controlled expansion anchors of sizes M8 to M24 made of
galvanized steel and stainless steel. They were tested and evaluated under Option 1, the
most extensive scope of application for use in cracked and non-cracked concrete fixed in
the ETAG 001.
They were followed by ETAs for undercut anchors of sizes M6 to M16, made of
galvanized steel and stainless steel for use in cracked and non-cracked concrete under
Option 1. Until the beginning of 2001 altogether circa 30 ETAs for metal anchors were
granted by 5 different European approval bodies for 12 manufacturers in all. They were
mainly expansion anchors made of galvanized steel or stainless steel which were
evaluated and approved for different fields of application (cracked and non-cracked
concrete or non-cracked concrete only).

156

Paper115
7. Prospects

The adoption of ETAG 001 for Metal anchors for use in concrete has opened the
possibility to grant European Technical Approvals which are automatically in force in
all European countries and which are thus the basis for placing the first CE-marked
construction products on the European market.
The fact that so far a large number of European Technical Approvals have been granted
by different European approval bodies is evidence for the broad acceptance of the
Guideline.

References

[1] UEAtc Directive for Assessment of Anchor Bolts, UEAtc - European Union of
Agrément / Union Européenne pour l'Agrément Technique dans la Construction,
M.O.A.T. N° 42:1986, December 1986

[2] UEAtc Technical Guide on anchors for use in cracked and non-cracked concrete,
UEAtc - European Union of Agrément / Union Européenne pour l'Agrément
Technique dans la Construction, M.O.A.T. N° 49:1992, June 1992

[3] European Organisation for Technical Approvals - EOTA: www.eota.be

[4] Council Directive of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of laws, regulations


and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to construction
products (CPD), Official Journal of the European Communities N° L 40/12 of
11 February 1989

[5] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik: www.dibt.de

[6] Guideline for European Technical Approval of Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete
- ETAG 001, EOTA

157
BEHAVIOR OF MULTIPLE-ANCHOR FASTENINGS
SUBJECTED TO COMBINED TENSION/SHEAR LOADS
AND BENDING MOMENT
Longfei Li*, Rolf Eligehausen**
*MKT Metall-Kunststoff-Technik GmbH & Co. KG, Germany
** Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Multiple-anchor fastenings are commonly used to connect steel superstructures with
concrete foundations both in highway and building constructions. A plastic design method
may be used for multiple-anchor fastenings, if full redistribution of forces between anchors
is possible.
An analytical model was set up for exploring the behavior of multiple-anchor fastenings
under combined tension/shear loads and bending moment. The correctness of the model was
examined by comparisons between calculated and test results.
A number of parametric studies was carried out with the analytical model. Based on the
results of this study it will be discussed whether a plastic design method can be applied for
typical post-installed metal anchors.

1. Introduction

In building and bridge constructions the loads acting on the superstructures are frequently
transferred by multiple-anchor fastenings through the steel columns to concrete foundations.
The ultimate loading capacity of the multiple-anchor fastenings can be increased by using
ductile anchors if the anchors are decisive for the load capacity of the multiple-anchor
fastenings.

The behavior of ductile multiple-anchor steel to concrete connections was investigated in


several tests /1/. A systematic parametric study was carried out for ductile multiple-anchor
fastenings subjected to bending moment /2/. However, the results of this studies may not be
valid for typical post-installed metal-anchors.
Therefor an analytical model was set up in order to simulate realistically the load-bearing
and deformation behavior of multiple-anchor fastenings under combined tension/shear loads

158
and bending moment /3/. The ultimate load capacity of multiple-anchor fastenings may be
predicted with the analytical model which was verified by comparison with experimental
results.

A number of parametric studies was carried out with the analytical model. Based on the
results of this study it will be discussed whether a plastic design method can be applied for
typical post-installed metal anchors.

2. Description of the analytical model

2.1 Basic assumptions


The following assumptions were made for a numerical simulation of the behavior of a
multiple-anchor fastening shown in Fig. 2.1:

1) Monotonically increasing load P with a constant angle α between oblique tension


load P and vertical axis and a constant load eccentricity e.
2) Rigid baseplate (The minor deformations of the baseplate are neglected).
3) Constant coefficient of friction between baseplate and concrete.
4) The load-displacement curves of individual anchors subjected to oblique tension
(combined tension and shear loads) are known (e.g. determined by tests).

Fig. 2.1 Multiple-anchor fastening subjected to combined tension and shear load and
bending moment ( N=P⋅cos α, V=P⋅sin α and M=P⋅e⋅sin α)

2.2 Material laws


The load-displacement behavior of individual anchors subjected to combined tension and
shear loads can be simulated by two families of curves with different load angles β based on
the oblique loading tests /3,4/ (Fig. 2.2). For a mathematical description of the load-
displacement relationships the curves are divided into four parts (Fig. 2.3), a plateau with
zero stress representing the slip of the beseplate due to a gap between anchor and fixture, a
non-linear ascending part approximated by the function σ=σ1⋅(δ/δ1)γ, a linear ascending part
which simulates steel yielding or anchor pullout and a descending line which simulates steel

159
or concrete failure of the fastening. The tension and shear stresses are plotted against anchor
tension and shear displacements respectively (Figs 2.2 and 2.3).

160
a) Normal stress-displacement b) Shear stress-displacement
Fig. 2.2 Normal and shear component of the stress-displacement relationships

Fig. 2.3 Idealization of the load-displacement curve by mathematical functions

For the load-displacement behavior of the concrete under local high compressive
stresses which occur at the compressed side of the fixture a linear and dimensionless
stress-displacement relationship was assumed in the analytical model based on
theoretical /3/ and test results /5/ (Fig. 2.4). The coefficient B may be determined by
tests. The diameter d was calculated back from the compressed area A.
σ s
= B⋅ (2.1)
fc d

161
4⋅ A
d= ≈ 1.13 ⋅ A (2.2)
π
Stress σ
d
d
d
d
d

for model

fc= 39 N/mm2

Relative penetration s/d [/]

Fig. 2.4 Load-displacement behavior of concrete under local high compressive stress in
accordance with /5/

2.3 Constitutive equations and their numerical solution


For the multiple-anchor fastening shown in Fig. 2.5a we have the equilibrium and
compatibility conditions shown in Fig. 2.5b,c with three degrees of freedom.

Fig. 2.5 Multiple-anchor fastening with equilibrium and compatibility conditions

162
If the normal displacement on the baseplate is entered as x1, the shear displacement as x2
and the anchor plate rotation as x3, the following three equations of equilibrium are
obtained:
∑N =0 N( x1 , x 2 , x 3 ) = 0
∑V = 0 V( x1 , x 2 , x 3 ) = 0 (2.3)
∑M = 0 N( x1 , x 2 , x 3 ) = 0
The modified Newtonian method of iteration was used to solve the nonlinear equation
system /6/.
x
(k +1)
= x(k) - ω ⋅ [F ′(x )(k) ] -1 ⋅ F(x )(k) k = 0,1,2, ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ (2.4)
wherein:
 x1   N( x1 , x 2 , x3 ) 
   
x = x 2  F(x) = V( x1 , x 2 , x3 )  (2.5)
x   M( x , x , x )
 3  1 2 3 

 ∂N ∂N ∂N 
∂
 x1 ∂ x2 ∂ x3 
ω1
 ∂V ∂V ∂V   
F ′(x) =  ω = ω 2  (2.6)
∂ ∂ x2 ∂ x3 ω 
 x1   3
 ∂M ∂M ∂M 
∂
 x1 ∂ x2 ∂ x3 
with, for example:
∂N N( x1 + ∆ x1 , x 2 , x3 ) - N( x1 , x 2 , x3 )
= (2.7)
∂ x1 ∆ x1

By an appropriate selection of the iteration constant ωk and ∆xi, the conditions of equilibrium
with permissible tolerances ξN ≤ 1 N, ξV ≤ 1 N and ξM ≤ 10 Nmm, for one load step can be
obtained after 5 to 10 iteration steps with a computer program /10/. In the computer program
the anchor forces under combined tension and shear forces are determined by linear
interpolation with the two families of the stress-displacement curves /3/. The calculation can
be controlled by either the load, the normal displacement, the shear displacement or the
rotation of the baseplate of the multiple-anchor fastening /3,10/.

163
The calculated results can be visualized by a plot program so that the correctness of the
calculated results can be quickly checked graphically /10/.

3. Verification of the analytical model by tests

The M1 series of tests conducted in /1/ was calculated with the analytical model. Fig. 3.1
shows the dimensions of the multiple-anchor fastenings used for the tests. Failure was
caused by steel rupture.

Fig. 3.1 Dimensions of the multiple-anchor steel to concrete connections using under-
cut anchors, Tests /1/ (1 inch = 25.4 mm)

The load displacement-relationship of the anchor subjected to a centric tensile load was
taken from the tests /7/, whereas the families of load-displacement curves of the anchor
subjected to oblique tension were taken from the tests conducted in /4/. The tension/shear
interaction of the anchor was calculated with the equation /9/:
k k
N V
( ) +( ) =1 (3.1)
Nu Vu
with k = 2.0 and Vu = 0.6⋅Nu. The coefficient B (see equation 2.1) and the coefficient of
friction µ were entered into the calculation with values of 0.00015 and 0.4.

164
Figs. 3.2 to 3.4 show comparisons between the calculated peak loads and the measured
values as a function of the eccentricity e. In Fig. 3.5 the calculated maximum anchor
displacements are compared with the test results. In Fig. 3.5 the diagonal line corresponds to
a complete agreement between tests and calculation. The calculated peak loads correspond
well with the measured values. Some of the calculated normal and shear displacements are
too high and some too small. This is probably caused by the inaccuracy of the assumed load-
displacement curves.

Fig. 3.2 Comparison between calculated Fig. 3.3 Comparison between calculated and
and measured peak loads for measured peak loads for test series
test series 2M1 4M1

Fig. 3.4 Comparison between calculated Fig. 3.5 Comparison between calculated
and measured peak loads for and measured maximum anchor
test series 6M1 displacements

More calculations were carried out with the computer program to simulate the behavior of
multiple steel-to-concrete connections tested in /11/. The calculated results agreed well with
the experimental values.

165
4. Parametric Studies

4.1 General
In case of combined tension and shear forces on an anchor the tensile loading capacity
depends on the shear component of the load on the anchor (Equ. 3.1). If multiple-anchor
fastening is subjected to combined tension and shear loads and bending moment, each row
of anchors is loaded differently, depending on its geometrical and displacement conditions.
In the following sections, the different stresses of the anchor rows are explained in detail by
means of simulations for multiple-anchor fastenings.

Fig. 4.1 shows the dimensions of the multiple-anchor fastening which was used for the
simulation. The stress-displacement relationships of the anchor subjected to an oblique
tension force were evaluated according to /4/ and /8/. The interaction was calculated
according to Equ. (3.1) with k = 2.0 /9/.

Fig. 4.1 Dimensions of the multiple-anchor fastening for the parametric study

4.2 Influence of load eccentricity and load angle


Fig. 4.2 shows the ultimate tension component of the ultimate load as a function of the shear
component of the investigated multiple-anchor fastenings at different load eccentricities e. It
can be seen that at e=0 the ultimate load of the fastening is exactly determined by the load
interaction diagram of the individual anchors. At e≥76 mm (3 in), the ultimate tension and
shear loads on the fastening have an approximately linear load interaction.
Figs. 4.3 and 4.4 show the stress paths and the load-stress curves of different anchor rows at
e=76 mm and α=75°. It is clearly visible that the anchors in different rows are stressed
differently in normal and shear direction.

166
Fig. 4.2 Tension and shear load interaction diagram at ultimate loads of the fastenings,
under centric tension failure is caused by concrete breakout

Fig. 4.3 Stress paths of the anchors at α=75° (e=76 mm or 3 in)

167
Fig. 4.4 Anchor stresses as a function of the load at α=75° (e=76 mm)

4.3 Influence of anchor ductility


With the theory of elasticity, it is assumed that all anchors behave elastically and have a
constant stiffness both in normal and shear direction. The ultimate load capacity of a
multiple-anchor fastening is achieved when one anchor row has reached its oblique tension
strength.

With the theory of plasticity, it is assumed that the anchors are sufficiently ductile, so that
full anchors in the tension zone of a multiple-anchor fastening can fully activate their
oblique tension strength /3/. The conditions of the compatibility are neglected.

Fig. 4.5 shows the ultimate loads on the fastening as a function of load eccentricity e. It was
assumed that under tension and shear loads failure occurs by steel rupture. The calculation
was done for different theories. It can be seen that the ultimate loads calculated on the basis
of the actual material behavior correspond well with the values determined according to the
theory of plasticity. This can be attributed to the ductile load-displacement curves used
which allow a full redistribution of forces between anchors in the tension zone.

The ultimate loads calculated according to the theory of elasticity are conservative,
especially if the friction between baseplate and concrete is neglected. The contribution of
friction on the ultimate load decreases with increasing eccentricity, because the shear load is
reduced with increasing load eccentricity.

168
Fig. 4.5 Comparison of ultimate loads on the fastening according to different theories
(ductile anchor behavior)

5. Conclusions

The behavior of multiple-anchor fastenings is determined by the load-deformation behavior


of the individual fastening elements of the group. The load-displacement behavior is
determined by the type of anchor and the failure model under tension and shear load.

To determine the behavior of multiple anchor fastenings under arbitrary loading an


analytical model is proposed. This model can be used to determine under which conditions a
plastic analysis of a fastening is justified. The model shows that a plastic analysis is
sufficient accurate if the anchors show a ductile steel failure.

6. Bibliography
/1/ Cook, R.A.; Klingner, R.E.: Behavior and design of ductile multiple-anchor steel-
to-concrete connections. Research Report 11263, Center for Transportation
Research, University of Texas at Austin, March 1989

/2/ Balogh, T.; Eligehausen, R.; Klingner, R.E.: Parametric studies on the ductility of
anchor groups. Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, University of Stuttgart,
December 1992

169
/3/ Li, L.; Eligehausen, R.: Loadbearing Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Fastenings
Subjected to Combined Tension/Shear and Bending Moment. Institut für
Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, University of Stuttgart, 1994

/4/ Bozenhardt, A.; Hirth, W.; Opitz, V,: Dieterle, H.: Tragverhalten von nicht generell
zugzonentauglichen Dübeln. Teil 4: Verhalten im unbewegten Parallelriß (∆w=0.4
mm) unter Schrägzugbelastung. Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, University
of Stuttgart, February 1990.

/5/ Lieberum, K.-H.: Lokal hohe Pressungen - Einfluß der Betonzusammensetzung


und der Belastungsgeometrie auf das Last-Verformungsverhalten. Darmstädter
Massivbau-Seminar, Vol. 5, Verankerungen in Beton. TH Darmstadt, 1990

/6/ Tönig, W.: Numerische Mathematik für Ingenieure und Physiker. Band I:
Numerische Methode der Algebra. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New
York, 1979

/7/ Collins, D.M.; Cook, R.A.; Klingner, R.E.: Load-Deflection Behavior of Cast-in-
Place and Retrofit Anchors Subjected to Static, Fatigue, and Impact Tensile Loads.
Research Report 1126-1, Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas
at Austin, February 1989

/8/ Furche, J.: Zum Trag- und Verschiebungsverhalten von formschlüssigen


Befestigungsmitteln bei zentrischem Zug. Dissertation, University of Stuttgart,
May 1992

/9/ Rehm, G.; Eligehausen, R.; Mallee, R.: Befestigungstechnik. Betonkalender 1992,
Berlin 1992

/10/ Li, L.: BDA: Programm zur Berechnung des Trag- und Verformungsverhaltens von
Gruppenbefestigungen unter kombinierter Schrägzug- und
Momentenbeanspruchung. -Programmbeschreibung-. Institut für Werkstoffe im
Bauwesen der Universität Stuttgart, 1994

/11/ Lotze, D.: Bemessung von Gruppenbefestigungen nach der Plastizitätstheorie.


Forschungsvorhaben Nr. Lo 561/1-1 der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft
(DFG), 1996

170
LOAD BEARING CAPACITY OF TORQUE-CONTROLLED
EXPANSION ANCHORS

Longfei Li
MKT Metall-Kunststoff-Technik GmbH & Co. KG, Germany

Abstract
The load bearing capacity of the torque-controlled expansion anchors depends on the
internal and the external friction of the anchor. Especially for the re-expandable torque-
controlled expansion anchors which are suitable for use in cracked and non-cracked
concrete, the coefficient of the internal friction must lie within a certain range, so that the
anchors re-expand reliably and then resist the external loads efficiently.
Unfortunately the coefficient of the internal friction can vary significantly depending on the
materials as well as the speed of movement of friction surfaces. A test method to determine
the internal and external frictional coefficient was introduced. The load bearing capacity of
the torque-controlled expansion anchors was analyzed with the different values of the
internal frictional coefficient.

1. Introduction

Torque-controlled expansion anchors are widely used as post-installed systems to fix


structural elements. Because of its simplicity of manufacture and easy installation they are
often selected for anchoring of facades and banisters /1/.

Torque-controlled expansion anchors are anchored in drilled holes by forced expansion


which is achieved by a torque acting on the screw or thread. A tensile force applied to the
anchor is transferred to the concrete by friction and some keying between expanded sleeve
and the concrete. With increasing tensile load the anchor must expand reliably, so that it
transfers the load to concrete safely.
The safety of functioning as well as the load bearing capacity of the anchor depends on the
internal (expansion sleeve/cone) and external (expansion sleeve/concrete) frictions. Higher
external friction may be achieved by manufacture or by more tightening of the anchor

170
during installation. The internal friction is the main problem which must be solved during
the development of new expansion anchors, especially for expansion anchors made of
stainless steel.

In this paper it was investigated to enlighten the bond friction between expansion sleeve
and cone. The load bearing capacity of expansion anchors was estimated using the value of
internal frictional coefficient with which the anchor expand reliably.

2. General basis

2.1 Conditions for reliable functioning of expansion anchor


The torque-controlled expansion anchors installed in drilled holes can only resist the
tension load efficiently, if the expand-condition (2.1) is fulfilled /2/.
δ c>α +δ i (2.1)
Where δc is the external frictional angle, α is the expansion angle of cone and δi is the
internal frictional angle (fig. 2.1).

Fig. 2.1 gives the details about the relationships between the expansion pressure fexp,
expansion force Fexp and the splitting force Fspl.

Expansion force : F exp = ∫ f exp dϕ


Splitti ng force : F spl = ∫ f exp sin ϕ dϕ

Fig. 2.1 Internal forces of expansion anchor

171
2.2 Ultimate load of re-expandable expansion anchors
The load bearing capacity of expansion anchors with the failure type concrete-cone failure
and steel failure are given in /3/. The concrete break-out load for an individual anchor in
cracked concrete is reduced by approximately 40% in relation to the failure load in
uncracked concrete. However, expansion anchors which are suitable for use in cracked and
uncracked concrete have often the failure type pull-through because of the relative low
internal frictional coefficient. The failure load can only be estimated by actual internal
friction behavior of the anchor. According to the mathematical relations from fig. 2.1 and
/3,4/ the failure load with the failure type pull-through can be calculated by equation (2.2)
(fig. 2.2).

F u,m = F exp ,1 tan ( α + δ i ) + F exp ,2 tan δ i (2.2)

Fig. 2.2 Expansion forces of the anchor

2.3 Test method to determine the internal and external frictional


coefficient
The internal and external frictional coefficient of expansion anchors can be measured by
means of FEP II – tests /2/(FEP II: replaced function test). For example, from the test
results in fig. 2.3 an internal frictional angle of 7.1° is calculated by actual construction of
MKT BZ M8 A4 at the tensile force of 5 kN.

172
Fig. 2.4 shows a test result for measuring the internal and external frictional coefficient.
From these test results, the following important information can be determined about the
anchor:
1. The value at point a determines the internal frictional coefficient at point a’ of the
anchor.
2. The value at point b determines the external frictional coefficient of the anchor.
3. The distance between point a and b reflects the safety of the functioning.

Fig. 2.3 Example of test results from FEP II test /7/

Fig. 2.4 Example of test results to determine the internal and external frictional coeficient

173
/7/
2.4 Scatter of internal frictions
The coefficient of steel-to-steel frictions scatter very differently depending on the contact
surfaces. For example, the roughness and hardness of the steel have a large effect on
friction. Generally there is always an internal bond friction which makes re-expansion of
the anchor less reliable. Fig. 2.5 shows a test result of a steel expansion anchor in which the
coefficient of friction increases 18% after 10 minutes of installation.

Fig. 2.5 Bond friction between expansion sleeve and cone /7/

However, there was no internal bond friction observed with the MKT BZ A4 expansion
anchor in which a special synthetic hose is installed between the expansion sleeve and the
cone (fig. 2.6).

174
Fig. 2.6 Behavior of internal friction of MKT BZ M12 A4 /7/

2.5 Verification of the calculation assumptions for ultimate load


The ultimate loads with the failure type pull-through are calculated according to equation
(2.2) by a numeric program /5/. A parabolic relative stress-displacement relationship of
concrete is assumed on the basis of test results from /6/.
Fig. 2.7 shows the 18 calculated ultimate loads compared with the values of average
ultimate loads of five tests each /7,8/ in which the internal frictional angle was determined
by FEP II tests /7/. The diagonal line shows the absolut agreement between calculation and
test. The calculated ultimate loads agree well with the mean value of failure loads from
tests.

Fig. 2.7 Comparisons of calculated ultimate loads with those from test /7,8/

3. Load bearing capacity of re-expandable expansion anchors

The ultimate loads of torque-controlled expansion anchors which are suitable for use in
cracked and uncracked concrete were calculated by the numerical program /5/ according to
equation (2.2). The following assumptions were made in the calculation:

1. The 5%-fractile of external frictional coefficient is equal to 0.45.

µc,5%=0.45, i.e. δc,5%=24.3°

2. The internal frictional coefficient scatters 20% with the normal distribution at n=∞.

i.e. δi,m = 0.75 δi,95%

175
According to equation (2.1) results in following re-expand condition:

δi,m < 0.75 (24.3°-α)

Fig. 2.8 shows the calculated ultimate loads with different expansion angles of cone in
uncracked concrete. The loading capacity decreases with increasing expansion angle,
because the expansion force Fexp, 1 (fig.2.1) decreases propotionatly. Fig. 2.9 shows the
estimated load bearing capacity of expansion bolt anchors of sizes from M8 to M16 with
α=11°.

Fig. 2.8 Mean value of failure loads depending on the expansion angle of cone

Fig. 2.9 Load bearing capacity of bolt anchors (α=11°, δi,m=10°)

176
4. Conclusions

The reliability of functioning as well as the load bearing capacity of torque-controlled


expansion anchors depends on the internal and external frictions of the anchor. The
coefficient of the internal and external frictions of the anchor can be measured exactly by
FEP II tests.
The loading capacity of expansion anchors in uncracked concrete was analyzed by a
numerical program which was verified by tests. In accordance with the analysis the newly
developed MKT stainless steel bolt anchors BZ A4 /1/ have achieved the optimum load
bearing capacity.

5. References

1. European Technical Approval ETA-99/0010, MKT Bolzenanker A4, Torque-


controlled expansion anchor made of stainless steel of sizes M8, M10, M12 and
M16 for use in concrete. Berlin, September 1999

2. Mayer, B.: Funktionsersatzprüfungen für die Beurteilung der Eignung von


kraftkontrolliert spreizenden Dübel. Dissertation of University Stuttgart, 1990

3. Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R.: Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und Mauerwerkbau.


Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2000

4. Lehmann, R.: Tragverhalten von Metallspreizdübeln im ungerissenen und


gerissenen Beton bei der Versagensart Herausziehen. Dissertation of University
Stuttgart, 1994

5. Li. L.: Programm zur Berechnung der Durchzuglast von kraftkontrolliert


Metallspreizdübeln.- Programmbeschreibung -. MKT Metall-Kunststoff-Technik
GmbH & Co. KG, Weilerbach 2001, in preparation

6. Lieberum, K.-H.: Das Tragverhalten von Beton bei extremer


Teilflächenbelastung. Dissertation of TH Darmstadt, 1987

7. MKT test documents: FEP II – test with BZ A4 M8 to M12; Pull-out test with
MKT Bolzenanker B M20. MKT report-No. BAB 01/2000, Weilerbach 2000.

8. Eligehausen, R.; Asmus, J.: Evaluation report for the assessment of the torque
controlled bolt anchor MKT Z A4 M8 to M16 for anchoring in concrete in
accordance with the ”Gudeline for European Technical Approval”, Option 1,
Stuttgart, July 1999

177
BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF ANCHORS CLOSE TO AN
EDGE UNDER TORSION
R. Mallée
Fischerwerke, Germany

Abstract
In order to investigate the behaviour of anchor groups close to an edge under torsion
tests with pairs of injection anchors M12 parallel to a free structural component edge
were carried out. The tests indicate that the anchor with the lowest loadbearing capacity
is decisive for the capacity of the group. Based on these results a design method for
anchor groups close to an edge under torsion is proposed.

1. Introduction

Anchors close to an edge under shear load fail due to concrete edge failure. Their
loadbearing capacity can be calculated in accordance with the Concrete-Capacity-
Method (CC-Method) /1,2/ taking into account all influencing parameters such as
concrete strength, stiffness of the anchor, axial and edge spacings, dimensions of the
structural component, angle between load and free edge and eccentricity of the load. The
influence of the eccentricity is considered by a reduction factor ψec,V, which depends
upon the distance eV between the shear load and the centre of gravity of the anchors.

With groups of anchors parallel to the free edge the factor ψec,V may only be used, if all
anchors of the group are loaded in the same direction (eV ≤ st/2, with st = spacing
between the outermost anchors of the group). No assumption is available if the load
direction within the group changes, e.g. with a group of two anchors under torsion, when
one anchor is loaded perpendicular towards and the other away from the free edge.

Based upon experimental research this paper outlines a proposal for the design of anchor
groups close to an edge under torsion.

178
2. Behaviour of anchors close to an edge under shear load

Anchors close to an edge of a structural component may fail in consequence of concrete


edge failure before the anchor’s steel capacity is exhausted. The angle between the
failure crack and the edge is approximately 35° and the depth of the failure body on the
side face of the structural component is about 1.5 times the edge distance of the anchor
(Figure 1a) /1/. If a pair of anchors with an axial spacing s ≤ 3 ⋅ c1 (with c1 = edge
distance) is installed close to an edge the concrete break-out bodies of the anchors can
not develop completely, i.e. the bodies of adjacent anchors overlap each other (Figure
1b). This leads to a reduction of the surface of the break-out body and consequently to a
reduction of the failure load.

a) b)

Figure 1: Concrete edge failure


a) Break-out body of a single anchor close to a free edge
b) Break-out body of a pair of anchors close to a free edge

If an eccentric load acts on a group the anchors are loaded to a different extent. An
example is given in Figure 2a. It may be assumed that failure occurs when the most
stressed anchor of the group fails. The effect of the eccentricity may be taken into
account in analogy with /3/ by means of a reduction factor ψec,V.

1
ψ ec ,V = (1)
1 + 2 ⋅ eV /( 3 ⋅ c1 )

Equation (1) is only valid if all anchors of the group are loaded either towards the edge
or away from the edge. With acting torsion moments the load direction alters within a
group. Figure 2b shows an example. Provided that the anchor loaded away from the edge
has no effect on the behaviour of the anchor which is loaded perpendicular towards the
free edge, it may again be assumed that the most stressed anchor is decisive for the
loadbearing capacity of the group. Four test series with both, single anchors as well as
pairs of anchors were carried out in order to investigate whether the two anchors of the
groups influence each other. The test results are described in the following chapter.

179
V
MT

a) b)

Figure 2: Pair of anchors close to a free edge


a) Anchors loaded by shear forces with the same direction
b) Anchors loaded by shear forces with different directions

3. Test results

Figure 3 shows the test set-up. A concrete block was introduced into a steel frame and
fixed at the corners on four supports (steel plates or wedges). Two injection anchors
M12 were installed with a specific edge
V
distance. The spacings between the anchors
and the supports were sufficient to allow an
Hydraulic press Concrete block
unrestricted concrete edge failure. Shear
forces were applied to the anchors by means
of hydraulic presses in such a way that both
anchors were loaded to the same extent, one
perpendicular towards the edge and the other
away from the edge. Thus a torsion moment
was simulated. The loads were applied
displacement controlled (5 mm / minute).
V

Steel frame Support

V Figure 3: Test set-up

180
The concrete had a compressive strength of fcc = 36.1 N/mm2 (measured on cubes 200 x
200 x 200 mm3). To reduce a possible influence of stresses due to shrinkage of the
concrete, relatively old (564 days) concrete blocks were used. In order to allow small
edge distances injection anchors were used which do not create expansion forces during
installation.

A shear load perpendicular to the axis of an anchor creates compressive stresses in the
concrete in the area of the mouth of the drilled hole. The resultant of these stresses
(compare Figure 4, force A1 for anchor No. 1 and A2 for anchor No. 2) and the shear
force due to the torsion moment have the same direction. For conditions of equilibrium
compressive stresses occur close to the end of the anchor on the opposing side of the
shear load. The resultants of these stresses are shown in Figure 4 (force B1 for anchor
No. 1 and B2 for anchor No. 2). It may be assumed that the probability that the forces A1
and B2 or A2 and B1 respectively affect each other increases with decreasing axial
spacing and embedment depth of the anchors.

Anchor No.1

Anchor No.2
Mt

A1
A2

B1

Figure 4: Pair of anchors under tor-


B2 sion: reaction forces in the
concrete

To investigate whether this has an influence, tests were carried out with two different
embedment depths (hef = 50 mm and hef = 100 mm). This corresponds to a ratio of
embedment depth and anchor diameter of 3.6 and 7.2 respectively. The axial spacings
were varied between s = 50 mm and s = 200 mm. The edge distance was kept constant
(c1 = 60 mm). For comparison two series of single anchors loaded perpendicularly
towards the free edge were tested (series A and C).

The test parameters and results are given in Table 1.

181
Table 1: Test parameters and results
Test Type Embedment Test Axial Ultimate Mean
series of fixing depth hef No. spacing s load Vu ultimate load
[mm] [mm] [kN] [kN]
A Single 50 1 0 14.9 14.8
2 14.7 (v = 0.8%)
3 14.9
B Pair 50 4 50 12.0 13.7
5 15.6 (v = 13.3%)
6 13.4
7 150 12.7 12.9
8 13.4 (v = 3.7%)
9 12.5
C Single 100 10 0 15.1 17.8
11 16.9 (v = 14.4%)
12 18.1
13 21.2
D Pair 100 14 50 19.3 18.7
15 19.3 (v = 5.2%)
16 17.6
17 100 14.7 17.7
18 18.3 (v = 15.3%)
19 20.0
20 150 21.0 18.6
21 16.6 (v = 12.0%)
22 18.1
23 200 16.1 18.8
24 19.3 (v = 13.2%)
25 21.0

The tests were stopped as soon as the anchor loaded perpendicularly towards the free
edge failed in consequence of concrete edge failure. In the tests with small axial spacings
(s = 50 mm) a failure crack was observed running from the anchor loaded towards the
edge to the opposing side of the load of the second anchor (Figure 5a). With increasing
axial spacing an independent break-out body developed (Figure 5b).

a) b)

Figure 5: Failure cracks, hef = 100mm, a) spacing s = 50mm, b) spacing s = 100mm

182
4. Evaluation of the test results

In /4/ the following equation for the mean concrete edge failure load of single anchors
loaded perpendicularly towards a free edge is given:

(
Vu = d nom ⋅ f cc ⋅ hef / d nom )
0.2
⋅ c11.5 / 1000 [kN] (2)

with: dnom: anchor diameter [mm]


fcc: concrete cube compressive strength [N/mm2]
hef: embedment depth [mm]
c1: distance to the free edge [mm]

Equation (2) gives calculated failure loads for the tested single anchors of Vu = 13.5 kN
(hef = 50 mm) and Vu = 15.5 kN (hef = 100 mm) which are approximately 9% and 13%
lower than the mean measured values (test series A and C). A reason for this may be
assumed in the relatively high age of the concrete blocks. The older the concrete, the
lower the stresses due to shrinkage which normally affect the loadbearing capacity at
concrete edge failure.

Figures 6 and 7 show the measured ultimate loads as a function of the axial spacing s.
Figure 6 is valid for anchors with an embedment depth of hef = 50 mm and Figure 7 for
hef = 100 mm. The results of the tests with single anchors are plotted at a spacing s = 0.

Figure 6: Ultimate shear load Vu of pairs of anchors as a function of the axial spacing s,
embedment depth hef = 50 mm

183
Figure 7: Ultimate shear load Vu of pairs of anchors as a function of the axial spacing s,
embedment depth hef = 100 mm

The failure loads of the anchors loaded perpendicularly towards the free edge and the
ultimate loads of the single anchors are in the same range of scatter. It is obvious that the
anchors of the group do not affected each other. A statistical analysis of all test gives the
following results:

hef = 50 mm: number of tests n: 9


mean ultimate load Vu: 13.8 kN
standard deviation: s: 1.27 kN
coefficient of variation v: 9.2 %

hef = 100 mm: number of tests n: 16


mean ultimate load Vu: 18.3 kN
standard deviation: s: 2.04 kN
coefficient of variation v: 11.1 %

5. Conclusion

The test results indicate that with a pair of anchors parallel to a free edge under torsion
the anchor with the lowest loadbearing capacity is decisive for the capacity of the group.
The following proofs are required for the design:

V Sd( 1 ) ≤ V Rk( 1,)c / γ Mc (3a)


V (2)
Sd ≤V (2)
Rk ,c / γ Mc (3b)
with:
V Sd( 1 ) : design action of the shear load of anchor No. 1
V Sd( 2 ) : design action of the shear load of anchor No. 2

184
V Rk( 1,)c : design resistance at concrete edge failure for anchor No. 1
V Rk( 2,c) : design resistance at concrete edge failure for anchor No. 2
γ Mc : partial safety factor for concrete edge failure

The corresponding characteristic resistance at concrete edge failure may be calculated


using the following equation /5/ :

Ac ,V
V Rk( 1,,c2 ) = V Rko ,c ⋅ ⋅ψ s ,V ⋅ψ h ,V ⋅ψ α ,V ⋅ψ ucr ,V (4)
Aco,V

For details regarding the parameters of equation (4) compare /5/. The anchor with the
lowest ratio of design action and design resistance is decisive.

This proposal is valid for anchors with a ratio of embedment depth and anchor diameter
hef / dnom ≥ 4 and for axial spacings s ≥ 50 mm. For lower ratios and spacings further
research is necessary.

6. References

1. Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen, R. (1995): Das CC-Verfahren für die Berechnung der
Betonausbruchlast von Verankerungen. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, 1995, Heft
1, S. 6-9, Heft 2, S. 38-44, Heft 3, S. 73-76.

2. Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen, R.; Breen, J.E. (1995): Concrete Capacity Design
(CCD) Approach for Fastenings to Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92
(1995), No. 1, p. 73-94.

3. Riemann, H. (1985): Das „erweiterte κ-Verfahren“ für Befestigungsmittel,


Bemessung an Beispielen von Kopfbolzenverankerungen. Betonwerk +
Fertigteil-Technik, 1985, Heft 12, S. 808-815.

4. Comité Euro-International du Béton (CEB) (1994): Fastenings to Concrete and


Masonry Structures. Bulletin d’Information No. 216, Lausanne, published by
Thomas Telford, London, 1994.

5. European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA) (1994): Guideline for


European Technical Approval of Anchors (Metal Anchors) for Use in Concrete.
Final Draft, Sept. 1994.

185
FIXINGS WITH ANCHORS:
CONCERNING RELEVANT BASE PLATE THICKNESS

R. Mallée, F. Burkhardt
Fischerwerke, Germany

Abstract
Based upon international guidelines, with groups of anchors the anchor forces are
calculated in accordance with the theory of elasticity under the assumption that the steel
plate of the attachment has a sufficient stiffness. No detailed information is given in the
guidelines how to determine this stiffness. Based on tests and on non-linear Finite
Element calculations taking into account realistic assumptions for the load displacement
behaviour of anchors it is investigated which stiffness is needed to meet the requirements
of the theory of elasticity.

1. Introduction

Anchors to be used in the countries of the European Community will need an European
Technical Approval. The necessary tests to gain an approval are laid down in guidelines
/1/. Special attention is drawn on the proper functioning of the anchors in cracked and
non-cracked concrete taking into account the influence of parameters which are
unavoidable on site, such as tolerances of the drill hole diameter, the intensity of
cleaning of the holes as well as tolerances of the applied torque with torque controlled
expansion anchors or the amount of expansion energy with displacement controlled
expansion anchors. These relatively high requirements are responsible for the
development of high quality post-installed anchors which allow to apply high loads to
reinforced concrete structures. It is obvious that high loads require a proper design of the
fixings in accordance with good engineering judgement. Design concepts are available
which consider all influencing parameters such as direction of the load (tension, shear,
combined tension and shear), axial spacings to adjacent anchors, the anchor’s edge
spacings and the condition of the base material (cracked or non-cracked) /1,2/.

186
If bending moments act on a group of anchors special consideration must be given to the
determination of the anchor forces. In accordance with the design guidelines the anchor
forces of a group shall be calculated under the assumptions of the theory of elasticity.
One of these assumptions is that the anchor plate does not deform under the design
loads. I.e. a sufficient stiffness of the steel plate is required but no detailed information is
given in the guidelines how to determine this stiffness. This paper outlines an
appropriate proposal which is based upon theoretical and experimental research.

2. Anchor forces

2.1 Theory of elasticity


According to the theory of elasticity the following assumptions are made:

- The anchor plate does not deform under the design actions.
- The stiffness of all anchors of a group is equal and corresponds to the modulus
of elasticity of the steel.
- In the zone of compression under the steel plate the anchors do not contribute to
the transmission of the normal forces.

The assumption that the steel plate does not deform under the design actions corresponds
to the Bernoulli hypothesis of reinforced concrete. The anchor forces are calculated like
the forces in the reinforcement. This is strictly speaking applicable only for rebars in
concrete. Post-installed anchors show an elastic deformation between the area of
undercut or expansion and the surface of the attachment. Additional displacement is
caused by the elastic / plastic deformation of the highly stressed concrete. The
displacement gives rise to a rotation of the steel plate and thus to a reduction of the
compression zone under the plate and to an increase of the effective internal lever arm
between the anchor forces and the compression force in the concrete. Thus assuming a
stiff steel plate and neglecting the anchor’s displacement leads to more conservative
results.

According to the theory of elasticity the stresses in the state of serviceability are
proportional to the strains. The anchor forces depend on the ratio of the modulus of
elasticity of steel and concrete and can be calculated from the equilibrium of the forces
and moments.

2.2 Finite element analysis


The assumptions of the theory of elasticity allow an easy calculation of the anchor
forces. Nevertheless it must be pointed out that some simplifications are made. It is
assumed that the concrete stresses below the plate increase linearly from the neutral axis
to the compressed edge of the plate. In reality even small deformations of the plate cause
a redistribution of the stresses which leads to a reduction of the stresses below the
corners of the plate. The forces and the bending moments are transferred to the steel
plate by a profile which is normally not considered when calculating the anchor forces.

187
Finite Element analysis show peaks of bending stresses in the steel plate close to the
corners of the profile which may lead to a limited plastic deformation of the plate and
again may cause a redistribution of the concrete stresses. And last but not least the
displacement of the anchors has a positive influence on the internal lever arm between
the anchor forces and the concrete compressive force.

To consider the influence of the parameters mentioned above non-linear Finite Element
calculations were performed using the program Ansys. The base material was
idealized by three dimensional elements where the concrete was supported on two lower
edges. For the steel plate and for the profile welded to the plate three dimensional shell
elements were used. Contact elements were placed between concrete and steel which
allow to transmit compression but no tensile forces. Thus the steel plate is in contact
with the concrete only where compressive stresses occur. The tensioned anchors were
idealized using non-linear spring elements. The behaviour of these elements corresponds
to the load displacement behaviour of the anchors. Anchors in the zone of compression
below the steel plate are not considered.

Using this Finite Element approach groups with four anchors loaded by a tensile force
and both, uni-axial as well as bi-axial bending moments were investigated. For
confirmation test were performed. The validity of the theoretical approach may be
assumed if the calculated anchor forces correspond to the measured values. The results
of this comparison will be discussed in Section 4.

3. Steel plate thickness

In actual computer programs for the design of anchors (e.g. /3/), the thickness of the steel
plate is determined based on results of linear Finite Element calculations. On the one
hand Finite Element analysis allows to determine the bending moments in the steel plate
considering all influencing parameters such as size and thickness of the plate, size and
position of the profile, type of loading (compression or tension load, uni-axial or bi-axial
bending moments) as well as size and load displacement behaviour of the anchors. On
the other hand a time-consuming non-linear approach is required if the entire system
including the concrete and the contact between steel plate and base material is idealized.
To simplify matters it is therefore proposed to support the steel plate on the welded
profile and to apply the anchor and concrete forces as external loads. The advantage of
using this is a reduced time for calculation for this linear approach instead of a more
complex non-linear method. This however does not consider the influence of anchor
displacement.

The Finite Element analysis shows peaks of bending moments occurring in the corners
of the welded profile (compare Fig. 1a), the size of which depends upon the size of the
finite elements.

188
In the case of the design of the steel plate these moment peaks are not decisive, as in the
relative small area of the peaks a plastic deformation of the steel without any large
deformation of the plate itself can occur. For this reason it is proposed to use a mean
value of the moment, calculated over the length 2 times the steel plate thickness t plus
the profile’s wall thickness s (compare Fig. 1b) rather than the moment peak. The
thickness of the plate may then be calculated from a bending proof using the mean
bending moment and the characteristic steel strength.

2 t+s

s
s

a) b)
Figure 1: Calculation of the mean bending moment in the steel plate
a) Distribution of the bending moment
b) Mean bending moment

4. Test results

In order to assess the results of the non-linear Finite Element analysis (Section 2.2) and
the proposal for the calculation of the anchor plate thickness (Section 3) 7 tests were
performed (compare table 1). Square and rectangular shaped steel plates were tested, the
dimensions of which are given in Figures 2a and 2b.
440 240
200
400
400

440

560
500

a)
Figure 2: Dimensions of the tested steel plates
a) Square shaped steel plates
b) Rectangular shaped steel plates b)

189
The load was applied by a straight (uni-axial bending) or L-shaped steel beam (bi-axial
bending) (Fig. 3). The test set-up allowed tension loads, compression loads could not be
applied. The steel plate thickness of the square and the rectangular plate were 20 mm and
25 mm respectively and thus smaller than
the theoretical values in accordance with
Section 3 (27 mm and 26 mm respectively).
The concrete had a cube strength of fcc,200 =
32.4 to 40.0 N/mm2.

In 6 of the 7 tests a thin layer of levelling


mortar was placed between plate and
concrete to ensure a close contact to the
concrete over the entire area of the steel
plate. In one test the plate was placed
directly on the concrete.

a)
The anchors (Zykon undercut anchors FZA
14 x 60 M10) were set and prestressed with
the required torque. The torque was
reduced to null after 10 minutes and
subsequently the anchors were tightened
again by hand without any tool. In one test,
the torque was not reduced to determine the
influence of the higher anchor stiffness.
The anchor forces were measured using a
load cell with an accuracy of ± 0.5 %.

b)
Figure 3: Test setup
a) Uni-axial bending
b) Bi-axial bending

Table 1: Test parameters


Test No. Figure No. Bending Levelling mortar Thickness
of steel plate
[mm]
1 2a uni-axial y 20
2 n
3 y
4 2b y 25
5 y
6 2a bi-axial y 20
7 y

190
Anchor force F [kN]
45
40 test No. 3
35 FEM (test No. 3)
30 test No. 1+2
25
FEM (test No. 1)
20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Tension load [kN]

Figure 4: Measured anchor force as a function of the applied tensin load (square shaped
plate, uni-axial bending)

Figure 4 shows the measured anchor forces as a function of the applied tension load for
the tests with square steel plates (test no. 1 to 3) in comparison with the values found in
the Finite Element analysis. The tests with non-prestressed anchors show a linear
relationship between tension load and anchor force. It is obvious that the stiffness of the
anchor plate was sufficient. The plate deformations are small and the influence of a non-
linearity may be neglected. The difference between the measured anchor forces and the
Finite Element values are negligible.

A prestressing force due to the applied tightening torque changes the behavior of an
anchor. With no external load applied the anchor forces correspond to the prestressing
force. Relatively low loads cause only a small increase in anchor force because the
stiffness of the base material is significantly higher than the one of the anchors. With
further increasing loads the anchor forces increase proportional to the tensile load and in
the ultimate limit state correspond to the forces found in tests without prestressing.
Again a good correspondence between measured and Finite Element values was found.

Figure 5 shows the results found in tests with rectangular steel plates (test no. 4 and 5).
The anchor forces are proportional to the external load and slightly lower than the values
found in the Finite Element analysis. It may be assumed that the plate thickness is
sufficient, no significant deformation of the plate occurred.

191
Anchor force F [kN]
40
35
30 test No. 4
test No. 5
25
FEM
20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Tension load [kN]

Figure 5: Measured anchor force as a function of the applied tensin load (rectangular
shaped plate, uni-axial bending)

Test no. 6 and 7 were performed under bi-axial bending. Figure 6 shows the test results.
The measured forces in the most stressed anchor are slightly lower than the Finite
Element values.

Anchor force F [kN]


40
35
test
30
FEM
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 2,5 5 7,5 10 12,5 15 17,5 20 22,5 25
Tension load [kN]

Figure 6: Measured anchor force as a function of the applied tensin load (square shaped
plate, bi-axial bending)

192
Based upon the test results and upon the comparison of measured and calculated values
it may be assumed that the Finite Element model is suitable to describe the real
behaviour of anchor groups under tension load and uni-axial or bi-axial bending with
sufficient accuracy.

5. Parameter studies

Parameter studies were performed using the Finite Element model described in Section
2.2. The studies cover both, square as well as rectangular steel plates. The plates were
fixed to the concrete by 4 Zykon undercut anchors FZA 18 x 80 M12 with axial spacings
of sx = sy = 200 mm (square plates) and sx = 200 mm, sy = 500 mm (rectangular plates).
Compression or tensile forces and uni-axial or bi-axial bending moments were applied
using hollow profiles. The sizes of the profiles were varied. The ratio of the profile
height or width and the corresponding axial spacing was chosen to k = 0.4 and k = 0.8.
Additionally the ratio of the bending moments My / Mx and the eccentricity of the
external load (e = Mx / N) were varied. The parameters are given in Table 2.

Table 2: Parameters of the Finite Element analysis


Series No. sx / s y sx sy k My / Mx

[-] [mm] [mm] [-] [-]


1 1.0 200 200 0.4 0.0
2 0.8 0.0
3 0.4 1.0
4 0.8 1.0
5 0.4 200 500 0.4 0.0
6 0.8 0.0
7 0.4 0.4
8 0.8 0.4

In order to reduce the number of calculations only the combination of normal force and
bending moment giving the maximum permissible load in accordance with the European
Technical Approval was investigated (Fperm = 12.3 kN). Non-cracked concrete was
chosen because the permissible load and thus the load on the steel plate is higher than in
cracked concrete. The corresponding displacement of the anchor was found from tests to
∆ = 0.3 mm. The thickness of the steel plate was calculated in accordance with Section 3.

Figures 7 and 8 show the results found with square steel plates (series no. 1 to 4). Figure
7 is valid for uni-axial and figure 8 for bi-axial bending. The figures show the ratio of the
anchor force according to the Finite Element analysis and the force according to the
theory of elasticity as a function of the eccentricity of the external load. The results
according to the theory of elasticity are slightly conservative.

193
Figure 7: Ratio of anchor forces according Figure 8: Ratio of anchor forces according
to Finite Element analysis and to Finite Element analysis and
to theory of elasticity as a to theory of elasticity as a
function of the eccentricty function of the eccentricty
(square shaped plate, uni-axial (square shaped plate, bi-axial
bending) bending)

Figures 9 and 10 show the results found with rectangular steel plates. The ratio of the
anchor force according to the Finite Element analysis and the force according to the
theory of elasticity is equal or slightly larger than 1. The difference between the anchor
forces according to the Finite Element analysis and those found under the assumptions of
the theory of elasticity is rather small (< 5 %) and may be neglected.

Figure 9: Ratio of anchor forces according Figure 10: Ratio of anchor forces according
to Finite Element analysis and to Finite Element analysis and
to theory of elasticity as a to theory of elasticity as a
function of the eccentricty function of the eccentricty
(rectangular shaped plate, uni- (rectangular shaped plate, bi-
axial bending) axial bending)

194
In a further series the influence of the anchor displacement was investigated. A
rectangular steel plate was chosen loaded by an uni-axial bending moment. The
displacement varied between ∆ = 0 mm and ∆ = 0.6 mm. Figure 11 shows the results. A
slight influence of the displacement was observed. The calculated anchor force decreases
with increasing displacement because the displacement gives rise to a rotation of the
steel plate and thus to a reduction of the compression zone under the plate and to an
increase of the effective internal lever arm between the anchor forces and the
compression force in the concrete.

Figure 11: Anchor force according to Finite


Element analysis as a function of
the anchor displacement

6. Conclusion

In actual computer programs for the design of anchors, the thickness of the steel plate is
determined based on results of linear Finite Element calculations. A comparison with
test results and with the results of non-linear Finite Element analysis taking into account
realistic assumptions for the load displacement behaviour of the anchors shows that this
thickness is sufficient to meet the requirements of the theory of elasicity. This is valid for
plates under tension load and uni-axial or bi-axial bending. Further reaearch is necessary
for plates under compression load.

7. References

1. European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA) (1994): Guideline for


European Technical Approval of Anchors (Metal Anchors) for Use in Concrete.
Final Draft, Sept. 1994.

2. Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt), Berlin (1993): Bemessungsverfahren für


Dübel zur Verankerung im Beton (Design Concept for Anchors in Concrete). June
1993 (in German).

3. fischer Fixing Systems: COMPUFIX, Program for the Design of Anchorages,


Version 5.1, April 2001.

195
INSTALLATION VERIFICATION OF MECHANICAL AND
ADHESIVE ANCHORS
Lee Mattis
CEL Consulting, Oakland, USA

Abstract
In the United States building codes allow increased design loads for expansion anchors
whose installation has been verified to be in accordance with the engineer's design and
the manufacturer's recommendations. The verification process is called special
inspection. Adhesive anchors require special inspection for all installations with no
increase in design loads. This paper describes the background of the building code
provisions and typical procedures used to verify proper installation of expansion and
adhesive anchors in concrete.

1. Introduction

Independent inspection of certain construction activities where unique expertise or


additional assurance of quality is deemed necessary is mandated in the US building
codes. This inspection is called "special inspection".

Special inspection is continuous observation of these construction activities. Concrete


placement, masonry construction, structural welding and high strength bolting are
common special inspections. These inspections are in addition to the normal progress
inspections performed by municipal building inspectors.

Special inspection of expansion and adhesive anchors is specified by ICBO Evaluation


Service, Inc. (ICBO ES) in evaluation reports for proprietary post-installed anchors. The
basis for this is the building code requirement for special inspection of "Bolts installed in
concrete" which permits higher design loads for cast-in-place anchor bolts when special
inspection prior to and during the placement of concrete around the bolts is provided.
The evaluation reports permit use of proprietary products such as post-installed concrete

196
anchors as alternatives to the generic items such as cast-in-place anchors in the building
code.

2. Qualification of Special Inspectors

A special inspector is a specially qualified person with both inspection and practical
experience in the construction operation requiring special inspection. The individual
must submit his qualifications to the municipal building official for approval. Approval
is sometimes done on a case by case, individual basis or is granted to local independent
testing agencies who employ inspectors with the expertise. In many cases the approval is
informal, based on previous experience with firms and individuals. Engineers may be
qualified as special inspectors, however an engineering degree or license does not
automatically qualify a person as a special inspector.

3. Employment of Special Inspectors

The owner of the construction project or the engineer or architect of record acting as the
owner’s agent must employ the special inspector. Although not explicitly stated in the
building code, the wording is such that the contractor cannot employ the special
inspector. This would be a conflict of interest and not in accordance with the intent of
special inspection as an independent evaluation.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of Special Inspectors

The special inspector observes the work for conformance with the approved design
drawings, specifications and workmanship provisions of the building code, brings
discrepancies to the immediate attention of the contractor and to the design authority and
municipal building official if not corrected and submits periodic and final inspection
reports to the municipal building official and project engineer or architect.

The special inspector is considered an extension of the municipal building official's


authority by virtue of the code requirements for progress inspections by the building
official and special inspection. The City of Los Angeles formalizes the relationship with
special inspectors in this regard, and they are called “deputy inspectors”.

5. Recognized Special Inspection Procedures

5.1. Expansion anchors


When the design engineer specifies anchors installed with special inspection, ICBO ES
evaluation reports permit use of twice the allowable tension loads than anchors installed
without special inspection. To meet the requirements of continuous inspection, the
special inspector must verify that the installation is in accordance with the requirements

197
of the approved plans, evaluation report and manufacturer’s installation instructions.
This means that the special inspector must be present during all anchor installation,
verifying the location of the anchor including any edge distance and spacing
requirements, drill bit type and size, hole depth, hole cleaning technique (if applicable),
anchor type, size, embedment and installation procedure.

Proof loading of anchors is frequently specified, however this alone is not recognized as
meeting special inspection requirements. Periodic (non-continuous) special inspection
may be performed if specified on the project plans and approved by the municipal
building official as provided for in the building codes.

A program of post-installation visual inspection for location, size and embedment


combined with torque or tension proof load testing is used in California hospital
construction and could be considered as acceptable periodic inspection in other
construction. A detailed written procedure was developed by the author working with the
State of California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), the
state agency responsible for approving plans and observing construction, and has been in
use for over ten years. The document is named Interpretation of Regulations IR 26-6.
The procedure includes visual observation and proof loading or torque testing of the
installed anchors and covers typical Wedge, Sleeve and Drop-In anchors. Torque testing
is applicable for Wedge and Sleeve type anchors only. Torque test values found to be
typical of installation torque recommendations for a majority of these anchors are
specified. The torque test value must be achieved within one-half turn of the nut to
account for torque relaxation. Torque testing is not applicable for Drop-In type anchors.
Proof loading of a small percentage combined with verification of proper plug setting of
a larger percentage is used for Drop-In anchors. Proof loading is applicable to all these
anchor types. Proof load levels are high enough to detect improper installation but low
enough to prevent any movement of a properly installed anchor. The acceptance
criterion is that anchors must show no visible signs of movement during or after the
proof loading. Test frequency is 50% for both torque and proof load testing.

The basic philosophy of this procedure is to verify proper installation (setting) of the
anchors which can be done after installation for these types of anchors. If the anchor is
properly installed, it should perform in accordance with the manufacturer's load ratings.
Design parameters such as size, quantity, location and embedment can be visually
determined after installation. The ICBO ES requirement for a length identification
symbol on the exposed ends of anchors recognized for multiple embedments makes it
possible for the special inspector to determine the embedment of these anchors after
installation.

198
5.2. Adhesive anchors
ICBO ES evaluation reports require special inspection for all installations. The special
inspector must verify that the installation is in accordance with the requirements of the
project plans, evaluation report and manufacturer’s instructions. This means verifying
the location of the anchor, any edge distance and spacing requirements, drill bit type and
size, hole depth, hole cleaning technique (very important), anchor type, size, embedment
and installation procedure including adhesive expiration date and proper dispensing.

Proof loading alone is not recognized as meeting special inspection requirements. While
proof loading may be specified as a supplement, visual inspection of the anchor
installation must still be provided since it is not possible to verify embedment and
important installation procedures such as hole cleaning, mixing and adhesive dispensing
after the anchors have been installed.

Periodic special inspection is possible, however there are no established procedures like
the OSHPD procedures for expansion anchors. A reasonable approach to periodic
inspection for adhesive anchors is:

• Initial inspection of installation of the first anchors


• Proof loading to the lesser of 50% of expected adhesive ultimate bond strength or
80% of steel yield strength. Proof loading should be done after a minimum curing
period specified by the manufacturer. Anchors should have no visible indications of
movement during or after the application of the proof load.
• For highly redundant applications such as rebar doweling for shotcrete or slab
doweling, proof load a minimum random sampling of 5% of the anchors. The
engineer or architect should consider higher sampling rates for installations with less
redundancy or that are considered more critical.
• Subsequent inspection of installation when there is an change of personnel
performing the installation or use of a different product.

The following is an example of a periodic inspection procedure used on an actual


project:

• Initial inspection is required for each different subcontractor. The inspector will
verify location and configuration of the anchors based on the project plans including
any edge distance and spacing requirements, drill bit type and size used, hole depth,
hole cleaning technique, anchor type, size, embedment and installation procedure
including adhesive expiration date and proper dispensing.

• Subsequent inspection of installation will be required only when there is a change of


personnel doing the installation. The general contractor shall call for such inspection

199
in the event of such a change, defined as any one or more persons drilling, preparing
holes or installing anchors.

• Initial inspection and proof load testing are required for the following. Anchor type
and location, (drawing detail reference), test frequency and tension proof loads for
each condition are:

#4 Rebar Dowels at shotcrete walls (7/S1.2) - 5%/9000 lbs

#4 Rebar Dowels at lower level ramps (5/S1.1) - No testing

#5 Rebar Dowels at roof infill (2/S1.3) - 10%/14,000 lbs

3/4" Epoxy Rods at steel moment frames (1-7/S5.1) - 5%/20,000 lbs

1" Epoxy Rods at steel moment frames (9/S5.1) - 5%/28,000 lbs

1-1/4" Epoxy Rods at steel moment frames (8/S5.1) - 1 at each frame/50,000 lbs

• Test loads are based on either 80% of steel yield or 50% of expected ultimate
adhesive bond tension capacity, whichever is less, to avoid permanent distress.
Anchors shall have no visible indications of movement during or after the application
of the proof load.

6. Equipment and Calibration

6.1. Hydraulic Systems


Hollow core rams with pressure gages are used when proof loading is part of the special
inspection procedures. Each combination of ram and gage must be calibrated together as
a system in a testing machine or other device that is traceable to the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST). It is not acceptable to calibrate the gage alone and
calculate the load by multiplying gage pressure time the ram area.

When testing anchor to ultimate failure, the load reactions from the bridging system
should be at least two times the anchor embedment away from the anchor when testing
anchors to ultimate failure. However when using the OSHPD procedure, it is permissible
to have the reactions close to the anchor as long as the fixtures do not restrict the anchor
from pulling out. The reason for this is that only the anchor installation is being verified
using a relatively low proof load.

200
6.2. Torque Wrenches
Torque wrenches are used when torque testing is part of the special inspection
procedures. They must be calibrated by a standard traceable to NIST.

6.3. Other
Torque bridges, levers and other custom devices must be carefully conceived and
calibrated to insure that the required proof load is applied to the anchors. Torque bridges
are particularly problematic since the calibration procedures in testing machines using
rigid connections may not be valid for anchors that move when loaded (are less rigid
than the calibration set up).

7. Conclusion

Good workmanship is important to any construction activity and in particular to the


installation of post-installed concrete anchors. Special inspection and related testing
procedures are mandated in the United States to provide assurance that anchor
installations are done properly and to promote good workmanship for proprietary
concrete anchor systems.

201
STEEL CAPACITY OF HEADED STUDS LOADED IN
SHEAR
Neal S. Anderson, Donald F. Meinheit
Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., Northbrook, Illinois USA

Abstract
The Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) sponsored a comprehensive research
program to assess the shear capacity of headed stud group anchorages. This program
was initiated in response to new provisions introduced into the ACI 318 Building Code.
These new provisions are based on an extensive experimental database consisting mostly
of post-installed anchor tests. Tests of headed stud anchorage groups loaded in shear, as
used in precast construction, are not extensively reported in the literature.

The test program, conducted by Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. (WJE), examined
headed stud connections loaded toward a free edge (de3), loaded toward a free edge
(de3) near a corner, loaded parallel to one free edge (de1), loaded parallel to two free
edges (de1 and de2), loaded away from a free edge (de4), and in-the-field of a member,
such that edge distance was not a factor. The information reported herein addresses one
aspect of the overall test program, the steel capacity failure mode.

1. Introduction

Headed stud anchorages are used throughout the concrete industry in both cast-in-place
and precast construction. Welding studs to steel plates provides an economical structural
connection by allowing larger variability in construction dimensions and tolerances.
Commonly, studs in precast members are 75 to 200 mm long and found almost always in
multi-stud group connections. The load capacities of these connection types are affected
by stud spacings, edge distances, and member depth or thickness. This research work1
focused on anchorages and geometric conditions typically used in precast / prestressed
members. The research concentrated on diameter, embedment depth, and number of
welded headed studs on connection plate configurations commonly used in precast
applications; the study excluded post-installed anchors.

202
Figure 1: PCI notation for anchorage geometry.1

In the United States, headed stud anchorage design usually followed procedures set forth
in the PCI Handbook 2 or the nuclear structures code of ACI Committee 349.3 The
Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) approach for anchorage to concrete has recently been
approved as Chapter 23 of the upcoming 2002 version of the ACI 318 Building Code.4, 5

The work reported herein summarizes stud anchorage behavior when the connection is
loaded in shear away from a free edge and in-the-field. These two conditions cause the
ultimate capacity to be dictated by the stud steel. Referring to Figure 1, the overall
research program tested anchorages toward, parallel, and away from a free edge. Several
test series were repeated in both 152 and 406-mm thick specimens to evaluate member
thickness effects. This paper is limited to defining the stud steel capacity in shear.

203
2. Literature Review

2.1 Push-off testing


The welded, headed stud received research attention in the late 1950s and through the
1960s in concrete slab-steel beam composite construction.6-13 Testing to evaluate
composite beam behavior utilized a push-off specimen, consisting of a wide flange beam
section sandwiched between two concrete slabs. Headed studs were welded to both
flanges of the beam in some prescribed spacing pattern and embedded into a thin
concrete slab, representing the composite deck slab.

Early push-off test results provide the design basis for headed stud groups loaded in pure
shear. Push-off test failures were sometimes due to stud steel shear. The push-off
specimen having one transverse stud row (one y-row) is viewed to be analogous to a
headed stud anchorage located in-the-field of a member, away from all edge influences,
and is relevant to this paper. When stud groups with multiple longitudinal rows were
tested using the push-off specimen, the test results become more difficult to interpret
because large y-spacings reduce anchor group efficiency due to shear lag effects; these
tests were thus excluded from our analysis. Significant findings are summarized below.

2.2 Embedment depth and steel capacity


The reviewed data indicates 1.0AsFut (see Eq. (1) notation) is a good predictor for a steel
failure when the effective embedment depth / stud diameter (hef/d) exceeds about 4.5.
This is slightly greater than the value of 4.2 identified by Driscoll and Slutter.12 A value
reduced for tensile yield (Fy = 0.9 Fut), where Fy is the offset tensile yield stress, is not as
good, although more conservative. Likewise, AsFut is a much better capacity predictor
than using shear yield (Fvy = Fut 3 ), where Fvy is the shear yield stress per the Huber-
von Mises-Hencky yield criteria.

Work performed by Ollgaard, Slutter, and Fisher13 at Lehigh University produced a


longstanding prediction equation, independent of failure mode, basing individual stud
strength on stud area, concrete compressive strength, and elastic modulus of the
concrete. Studs with an hef/d of 3.26 and different types of lightweight and normal-
weight concrete were used. Failures were noted in both stud steel shear or by a concrete
mechanism. Their final prediction equation used in composite beam design was:

Q u = 0.5A s f 'c E c ≤ A s Fut (1)


where:
Qu = Nominal shear stud connector strength embedded in a solid concrete slab (N)
As = Effective cross-sectional area of a stud anchor (mm2)
f’c = Cylinder compressive strength of concrete (MPa) [ = 0.8 x cube strength (fcc) ]
Ec = Modulus of elasticity of concrete (MPa)
Fut = Ultimate tensile strength of the stud steel (MPa)

204
When headed studs have hef/d < 4.5, a concrete pryout failure mechanism can occur.
Pryout failure is a concrete breakout failure mode not associated with edge distance but a
function of the headed stud “stiffness.” Eq. (1) predicts this failure mode well.

2.3 Lightweight aggregate concrete


Our analysis of reported steel shear failures for headed studs embedded in lightweight
concrete indicates test strengths less than a 1.0AsFut prediction. Lightweight aggregate
concrete apparently provides an embedment environment whereby the stud induces
greater concrete crushing, producing more stud bending deformation resulting in larger
overall relative slip between the stud and concrete. The increased concrete deformation
produces more bending in the stud and attachment weld, thereby making the failure
mode appear to be one of combined shear and tension stress on the stud at the tension
stressed region of the weld. In our analysis, this higher bending deformation combined
with shear deformation reduces the headed stud capacity to a value lower than 1.0AsFut.

2.4 Connection plate thickness


Minimum plate thickness research is limited to work by Goble at Case Western Reserve
University, 10 where he focused on the minimum flange thickness required in light-gage
steel in order to fully develop a welded stud connection. Goble determined the
minimum flange thickness required must be greater than 0.37d to develop the stud weld.

2.5 Minimum slab thickness


Steel stud failures in the push-off specimens were achieved in some relatively “thin”
slabs ranging in thickness from 102 to 178 mm. We have concluded that slab thickness
is not a variable influencing a stud steel shear failure.

3. Experimental Program

3.1 Background
The literature search and analysis of existing headed stud and cast-in-place anchor bolt
data was used to formulate an experimental program, conducted in the WJE structural
laboratory. The program tested 312 plate configurations in shear and 16 push-off type
specimens. The tests were typically conducted in slabs measuring 1.2 x 3.0 m, or 1.5 x
1.5 m with either a 152 or 406-mm thickness. Push-off specimen tests simulated shear
loading conditions when an embedded anchor group is adjacent to two side edges.

A total of 14 different combinations of plate size, stud spacing, stud embedment depth,
and stud diameter were evaluated. Plate thickness and concrete compressive strength
were not testing variables in the program. Headed stud diameters of 12.7 and 15.9 mm
were tested in this program. Both tension and double shear guillotine tests were
performed on the studs, “in-air,” in support of this work.

Test specimen concrete was a commercially available 34.5 MPa, normal-weight concrete
containing 19-mm limestone coarse aggregate. All slabs were cast with the anchorages

205
on the bottom of the form to ensure good concrete consolidation around the studs.
Reinforcement, used only in the 152-mm thick slabs for handling purposes, was placed
as not to interfere with the stud anchorage plates or provide anchorage confinement.

All slabs were tested flat (horizontal) on the laboratory test floor. A specially fabricated
channel pulling test rig had a welded shoe plate, which reacted on the back edge of the
stud anchorage plate. This loading scheme was used to practically eliminate the
eccentricity from the shear tests, which theoretically was one-half the plate thickness or
6.4 mm. All slab shear tests were instrumented with a load cell and two linear variable
displacement transformers (LVDTs).

3.2 Individual stud tests


For design, it is convenient to base the headed stud capacity on the tensile yield or
strength values and relate the steel shear capacity to a fraction of either value. Steels
used for manufacturing headed studs do not generally exhibit well defined yield point
values. The headed stud steel shear strength was thus correlated to the measured stud
tensile strength properties.

WJE independently measured the geometry and tested the physical characteristics for the
various steel heats in the project stock. Four different stud length and diameter
configurations were received, manufactured from six different steel wire heats. Headed
studs were tested for their tensile and shear strength properties, “in air.” The test fixture
was similar to that suggested in the American Welding Society (AWS) D1.1-2000
structural welding code.14 Double shear, guillotine tests were conducted on the middle
third of the shank to determine the steel shear strength.

A universal testing machine was adapted to tension test headed studs welded to a square
plate. Tension test results for the various steel heats showed ultimate strengths of 536 to
563 MPa for the 12.7 mm diameter and 538 MPa for the 15.9 mm diameter studs. Each
stud exhibited a roundhouse load-deformation curve, requiring the 0.2% offset
determination of yield strength. The measured stud yield strength was approximately
80% of the tensile strength; the strength of each steel heat exceeded the AWS D1.1-2000
requirements shown below in Table 1. AWS Type B studs are headed, bent, or of other
configuration. They are an essential component in composite beam design and
construction, and constitute those most used in precast concrete construction.

Table 1 – Minimum mechanical property requirements for headed studs


(from AWS D1.1-200014)
Property Type A Type B
Tensile Strength ( min. ) 420 MPa 450 MPa
Yield strength ( 0.2% offset ) 340 MPa 350 MPa
Elongation ( min. % in 2 in. ) 17% 20%
Reduction of area ( min. ) 50% 50%

206
The double shear, guillotine tests were conducted with a three plate fixture. Double
shear tests showed ultimate strengths of 328 to 381 MPa for the 12.7-mm diameter and
352 MPa for the 15.9-mm diameter studs. These tests imply the shear strength would be
about 65% of the tensile strength. Earlier reported push-off test results exhibited a shear
strength that is better than what these “in-air” material test results imply.

3.2 Tests loading away from a free edge (de4)


Shear load on anchorages directed away from a free edge is not commonly encountered
in precast construction. However, special framing conditions may dictate use of this
type of connection. In this study, 23 tests were conducted with the shear force directed
away from the back free edge (refer to Figure 1). Two series had single studs and the
third series had two headed studs oriented in one y-row. The two single stud anchorage
series examined both 12.7 and 15.9 mm diameter studs. The two stud anchorage groups
used 12.7-mm diameter studs, spaced 4.5d apart. All three series were tested in 406-mm
thick specimens; hef/d for these tests were 5.34 and 5.93.

For the 12.7-mm diameter single stud connection, five de4 distances (4d to 12d) were
evaluated with two tests performed per edge distance. Eight tests failed due to steel stud
failure, and two failed at the stud weld. After failure, only minor concrete damage was
observed. Concrete crushing at the stud front was accompanied by hairline, transverse
cracks (normal to the shear load) propagating 50 to 100 mm each side of the stud center.

Seven tests were conducted with 15.9-mm diameter studs. Edge distances evaluated
were 4d, 8d, and 12d, with three tests conducted at 4d. All tests failed in a steel shear
mode, with no weld failures in this series. The two-stud anchorage tests used 12.7-mm
diameter studs at nominal 4d, 8d, and 12d edge distances with six total tests. Two tests
exhibited weld failures in one or both studs, while the other four tests failed by stud
shearing through both stud shanks. From these tests, it was concluded that the de4 edge
distance variable is not a factor causing concrete breakout of stud anchorages in shear.

3.3 Tests in-the-field


Some anchorages used in precast concrete members are located at such large edge
distances that all concrete breakout capacities exceed the capacity developed by the
individual studs failing in steel shearing; these test series are classified as in-the-field
tests. Six series were conducted to test two and four anchor connections, with an
emphasis on evaluating x- and y-row spacing and embedment depth effects on capacity.

These test series had 24 total tests in 406-mm thick test slab specimens using 12.7-mm
diameter studs. The first two tests in a series used studs with an effective embedment
depth (hef) of 67.7 mm; longer studs with hef = 124 mm were used for the second two
tests. Based on the push-off testing review, steel stud failure can be achieved in
relatively thin slabs. As such, we conclude slab thickness influence on the anchorage’s
ability to develop steel failure was viewed to have little effect, especially with the
12.7-mm diameter studs used in this study.

207
For the 24 tests conducted in the six in-the-field test series, the test-to-predicted steel
stud shear capacities ranged from 0.90 to 1.05, using AsFut as the calculation basis.
When the short and long stud results are compared for all series, there is no discernable
difference in the ultimate steel shear capacity due to stud length. For the x- or y-
spacings investigated, 4.5d and 7.0d in different combinations and loading orientations,
stud spacing did not have a significant effect on the ultimate shear strength.

4. Steel Failure Analysis

4.1 Data review and proposed design equation


Testing has shown that the steel stud failure mode typically occurred for back edge (de4)
and in-the-field tests performed in 406-mm thick slabs. In all cases, steel failures were
marked by two failure modes: a ductile, shear yielding-type stud failure, accompanied by
appreciable lateral deformation, or a stud weld failure at the plate interface. When the
corresponding failure area on the concrete slab specimen was observed, the still
embedded studs had elliptical-shaped fracture surfaces with the major axis parallel to the
load direction. The concrete in front of the stud was locally crushed, due to stud shank
bearing; this concrete crushing also created a void (pocket) behind the stud.

The second steel failure type experienced was the weld of the stud to the plate. Varying
degrees of weld region porosity, confined within the shank diameter, marked the weld
fracture surface. Weld porosity often ranged from 25 to 75% of the shank area. In this
test program, the stud failures due to welding were a random occurrence, attributed to
weld machine malfunctions and operator error.

The steel shear failure database from this program is based on the de4 and in-the-field
testing, and other tests (de1 and de3 testing), where the distance to a free edge was large
enough to transition from a concrete to steel stud failure. Anchorage capacity governed
by steel stud shank failure can be predicted by the number of studs in the group (n) times
the stud area (As) multiplied by the ultimate stud tensile strength (Fut). Stud weld
failures, however occurred at steel shear stresses less than the ultimate tensile strength.

When the weld failure data are omitted from the population, the WJE database represents
stud steel shear failures only; the number of tests is 80 with an average test-to-predicted
ratio of 1.00. The sample standard deviation is 0.07, thus indicating the relative
tightness of the data. A frequency distribution is plotted to the left in Figure 2. Given
that the steel stud shank shear failures can be used as a database, the characteristic
strength equation from a 5% fractile analysis (κ factor = 1.957) when the actual ultimate
tensile strength is known, becomes:
Vsteel = 0.86 nAsFut (using actual Fut) (2)
However, actual tensile strength is generally not used in design. An analysis using the
minimum design ultimate strength of 450 MPa from Table 1, shows the average test-to-

208
25
Prediction with
Design Tensile Strength (450 MPa)
Frequency (or Number of Occurances)

20 Actual Tensile Strength


Mean = 1.00

15
Mean = 1.21

10
Shear Prediction Equation:
Vs = nAsFut
5

0
0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60
Test-to-Predicted Capacity

Figure 2: Frequency distribution plot of steel stud failures.


predicted ratio is 1.21 with a standard deviation of 0.10; the coefficient of variation is
7.8%. The 5% fractile characteristic prediction equation thus becomes:
Vsteel = 1.0 nAsFut (using design minimum Fut) (3)
From a probability standpoint, this indicates with 90% confidence that over 95% of the
failure loads occur at a value represented by Eq. (3) above. Using the minimum design
strength of 450 MPa and WJE data, no tests had test-to-predicted ratios less than 1.0.

4.2 Steel failure behavior


The reason there is an apparent steel shear strength increase when the stud is embedded
in normal-weight concrete, versus “in air” results, is related to stud weld metallurgy. In
the stud welding process, the shielded arc weld melts the stud end creating a shallow
weld pool beneath the stud. The stud gun then plunges the stud into the molten weld
pool, holding the stud in position while the liquid metal solidifies. Although this process
occurs very quickly, a heat-affected zone (HAZ) is created in the weldment.

AWS defines the HAZ as that portion of the welded metal where the mechanical
properties or microstructure have been influenced by the welding heat. The heat
developed tends to heat-treat or temper the steel such that locally the steel’s strength and
hardness will increase. This transformation hardening process is dependent on the initial
material temperature after arcing, the cooling rate, and the final (ambient) temperature.15

Figure 3 shows a stud weld cross section submitted for metallurgical work, which had
failed in a concrete breakout mode. The numbers represent locations where Rockwell B

209
Hardness tests were performed; the locations are shown in scale. The Rockwell B
Hardness values were then converted to ultimate steel tensile strength.16 Table 2 shows
the approximate tensile strength is greater in the HAZ than the nominal stud shank
strength. The stud typically sheared off above the weld flash region in the parent stud
material, corresponding to hardness locations 2, 9, and 14 in Figure 3. Tensile testing of
this stud heat revealed an average ultimate tensile strength (Fut) of 538 MPa; on a
relative basis, the indicated strength in the weld area is between 40 to 130 MPa higher.

Table 2 - Rockwell B Hardness readings.


Test Rockwell B Converted
Points Hardness Fut (MPa)
1 90.1 606.8
2 / 14 93.7 667.4
3 91.8 634.3
4 95.1 703.3
5 101.5 841.2
6 / 16 99.5 795.0
7 89.9 603.3
8 85.0 544.7
9 / 17 87.7 588.1
10 / 15 102.3 856.7
11 106.5 986.0
12 92.3 630.2
13 / 18 82.1 515.1
Figure 3: Stud weld cross-section.1
5. Summary

ƒ Well-embedded studs are recommended to have a minimum effective embedment-


to-diameter ratio (hef/d) of 4.5 to achieve steel stud failure. The minimum stud hef/d
used in this study was 5.30, but the literature review justified a smaller hef/d.
ƒ For steel failure in headed stud anchorage groups, this study shows the shear failure
load is best predicted using the ultimate stud tensile strength. In normal weight
concrete, Eq. (3) is recommended as the steel prediction equation (Vs) for headed
studs with hef/d > 4.5. For lightweight concrete, see Reference 1 for background.
ƒ Headed studs with an hef/d less than 4.5 will likely cause a pry out failure mode.
The design ultimate capacity will be less than that predicted by 1.0AsFut. Again,
Reference 1 provides a proposed characteristic equation for short, “stocky” studs.

6. References

1. Anderson, N. S. and Meinheit, D. F., “Design Criteria for Headed Stud Groups in
Shear: Part 1 – Steel Capacity and Back Edge Effects,” PCI Journal, V. 45, No. 5,
September/October 2000, pp. 46-75.

210
2. PCI Design Handbook, Fifth Edition (PCI MNL 120-99), Precast/Prestressed
Concrete Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 1999.
3. ACI Committee 349, "Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete
Structures (ACI 349-97)," ACI Manual of Concrete Practice, Part 4, American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2000.
4. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
318-99) and Commentary (ACI 318R-99), American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, MI, 1999.
5. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., and Breen, J. E., "Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete," ACI Structural Journal, V. 92, No. 1,
January-February 1995, pp. 73-94.
6. Viest, I. M., “Investigation of Stud Shear Connectors for Composite Concrete and
Steel T-Beams,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute, V. 27, No. 8, April
1956, pp. 875-891.
7. Baldwin, Jr., J. W., “Composite Bridge Stringers – Final Report,” Report 69-4,
Missouri Cooperative Highway Research Program, Missouri State Highway
Department and University of Missouri-Columbia, May 1970, 62 p.
8. Buttry, K. E., “Behavior of Stud Shear Connectors in Lightweight and Normal-
Weight Concrete,” Report 68-6, Missouri Cooperative Highway Research Program,
Missouri State Highway Department and University of Missouri-Columbia, August
1965, 45 p.
9. Dallam, L. N., “Push-Out Tests of Stud and Channel Shear Connectors in Normal-
Weight and Lightweight Concrete Slabs,” Bulletin Series No. 66, Engineering
Experiment Station, University of Missouri-Columbia, April 1968, 76 p.
10. Goble, G. G., “Shear Strength of Thin Flange Composite Specimens,” Engineering
Journal, AISC, V. 5, No. 2, April 1968, pp. 62-65.
11. Chinn, J., “Pushout Tests on Lightweight Composite Slabs,” AISC Engineering
Journal, V. 2 No. 4, October 1965, pp. 129-134.
12. Driscoll, G. C. and Slutter, R. G., “Research on Composite Design at Lehigh
University,” Proceedings, AISC National Engineering Conference (May 11-12,
1961), Minneapolis, MN, 1961, pp. 18-24.
13. Ollgaard, J. G., Slutter, R. G., and Fisher, J. W., “Shear Strength of Stud Connectors
in Lightweight and Normal-Weight Concrete,” AISC Engineering Journal, V. 8, No.
2, April 1971, pp. 55-64.
14. AWS, Structural Welding Code – Steel, AWS D1.1:2000, 17th Edition, American
Welding Society, Miami, FL, 2000.
15. Linnert, G. E., Welding Metallurgy – Carbon and Alloy Steels, Volume I –
Fundamentals, Fourth Edition, American Welding Society, Miami, FL, 1994.
16. ASTM, Standard Hardness Conversion Tables for Metals (Relationship Among
Brinell Hardness, Vickers Hardness, Rockwell Hardness, Rockwell Superficial
Hardness, Knoop Hardness, and Scleroscope Hardness) (ASTM E140-97e2), V.
3.01, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999.

211
THE ANALYSIS OF FASTENER STRENGTH
USING THE LIMIT STATE APPROACH
Jindrich J. Melcher, Marcela Karmazínová
Inst. of Metal and Timber Structures, Brno University of Technology, Czech Republic

Abstract
In this paper a brief information about the results and statistical analysis of experimental
research program directed to investigation of actual behaviour of the torque-controlled
expansion POLYMAT anchors will be presented. Especially the problems of failure
mechanism, ultimate and design strength, the influence of edge distance and anchor
diameter will be discussed. Based on the test results and theoretical approaches the
design formulas have been verified.

1. Introduction

The effectiveness and accurate placement together with the new easy techniques and
technology are the most important advantages of the post-installed anchor systems
increasingly used for the connection of other structural or constructional parts to
hardened concrete and masonry supporting structures.

In the new construction as well as in repair and strengthening works the anchor
behaviour can be rather complicated considering the influence of concentrated loads,
their different direction and especially the type of the failure mode depending on the way
of the load transfer from anchor body into the concrete or masonry base. Thus the
experimental verification together with statistical analysis of appropriate results should
be an authority for the theoretical modeling and practical design procedures of the
fastening systems.

Recently a wide range of post-installed anchor systems have been developed. Well-
known producers in this area are HILTI, FISCHER, UPAT and SPIT, for example. The
application of fastening systems to reinforced concrete and masonry, in general, is based
on experimental and theoretical investigations and continuous work of international
technical groups and committees - see [ 1 ], for example.

212
In this paper a brief information about analysis of results of the experimental research
program directed to problems of actual behaviour of torque-controlled expansion
anchors produced in our country will be presented.

2. Basic information on experimental research program

During 1998 - 2000 in the testing laboratory of the Institute of Metal and Timber
Structures of the Civil Engineering Faculty at Brno University of Technology
the experimental research program [ 2 ], [ 3 ] directed to the analysis of actual behaviour
and design strength of expansion anchors to hardened concrete under tension loading
has been conducted. The goal of this investigation was concentrated to the domestic
torque-controlled fastenings of POLYMAT type and its comparison with results derived
for other similar types of expansion anchors.

Together 169 specimens under static action and 13 specimens under dynamic action
have been tested. For the anchor bolts - see Fig. 1 - the steel grade of 5.6 and 8.8
(with nominal values of the bolt
ultimate tensile strength fub = 500
MPa and fub = 800 MPa, respectively)
and diameters of d = 8 mm, 12 mm
and 16 mm have been used. The
external diameter of anchor sleeve
was D = 12 mm, 18 mm and 24 mm.
The cube concrete strength of the
specimen bodies was in the range of
fcc = 22 MPa to fcc = 76 MPa. The
effective anchor depth hef was in the
range of 30 mm to 85 mm .
Fig. 1 Expansion Anchor Scheme
3. Analysis of expansion anchor strength parameters
In this paper the test results of specimens under static tension action will be discussed.
During the test process the failure mechanism and ultimate tensile strength of the tested
specimens have been verified. Depending on basic parameters of fastening arrangement
different types of failure mode can be established. Especially the anchor depth and
concrete strength together with the bolt dimension and its strength are for the anchor
behaviour decisive. Also the size of the edge distance influences significantly the
fastening strength. Mainly the concrete-cone failure occurred, in some cases also the
anchor extraction has been found. For the anchors placed closely to the edge of the test
body the edge break out failure was typical mode appropriate to ultimate strength.
In the frame of the information presented here the results covering the set of concrete-
cone failures and edge break out failures are presented (altogether 76 and 31 test,

213
respectively). In Fig. 2 some typical examples of corresponding failure modes are
shown. Additionally in 31 cases the bolt extraction and also in 31 cases the simple bolt
rupture occurred.

Fig. 2 Examples of concrete-cone failure mode

For the elaboration of the test results the calculation models based on large sets of test
results according to published results - see Ref. [ 1 ], for example - will be used. For
subsequent analysis directed to characteristic and design values of fastener strength the
procedure based on the specified European document [ 4 ], [ 5 ] for design assisted by
testing can be used.

Concrete-cone failure mode

According to the so called ψ-method [ 1 ] the mean value of the fastener strength for
concrete-cone failure mode can be expressed by the format of

Nu,m = k1 . hef1,5 . fcc0,5 , (1)

where fcc is the cube concrete strength, hef is the effective anchor depth and k1 = 13,5
is a coefficient derived from tests.

In [ 6 ], [ 2 ] the corresponding general expression is presented in the form of

Nu,m = k2 . hef2 . fcc0,5 . (2)

Based on the format of Eq. (1) and using the regression analysis of our test results the
mean value of expansion anchor strength is given by

Nu,m = 17 . hef1,5 . fcc0,5 (3)


and the appropriate value of characteristic strength is

214
Nu,k = 10 . hef1,5 . fcc0,5 . (4)

Similarly for the format of Eq. (2) the corresponding mean and characteristic anchor
strengths are
Nu,m = 2,2 . hef2 . fcc0,5 , (5)

Nu,k = 1,3 . hef2 . fcc0,5 . (6)

150 150

Nu,test [kN]
Nu,test [kN]

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

Nu,m [k N] Nu,m [k N]

Fig. 3 Relationship according to Eq. (3) Fig. 4 Relationship according to Eq. (5)

20 20
Frequency [%]

15
Frequency [%]

15

10
10

5
5

0
2
0,2

0,5

0,8

1,1

1,4

1,7

0
2
0,2

0,5

0,8

1,1

1,4

1,7

Nu,test / Nu,m
Nu,test / Nu,m

Fig. 5 Distribution based on Eq. (3) Fig. 6 Distribution based on Eq. (5)
In Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 the test results and regression relationship between experimental
(Nu,test) and theoretical (Nu,m ) strength values according to Eq. (3) and Eq. (5) are

215
presented. The corresponding distributions for the ratio of Nu,test / Nu,m are shown in
Fig. 5 and Fig. 6.

Using the procedure for design assisted by testing [ 4 ] the corresponding formulas for
design strength are

NRd = 6,50 . hef1,5 . fcc0,5 (7)

and NRd = 0,79 . hef2 . fcc0,5 , respectively. (8)

100 100

80 80

60 60
Nu [kN]
Nu [kN]

40 40

20 20

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100

h ef [m m ] h ef [m m ]

TESTS TES TS
MEA N V A LUE ac . to ( 3) MEA N V A L UE a c . to ( 5 )
CHA R. V A LUE ac . to ( 4) CHA R. V A L UE a c . to ( 6 )
DESIGN V A LUE ac . to ( 7) DES IG N V A L UE a c . to ( 8 )

Fig. 7 Fig. 8

The test results compared to the course of the mean, characteristic and design strengths
are plotted as a function of effective anchor depth hef in Fig. 7 (for the relationships
going out of the Eq. 3) and Fig. 8 (for the relationships going out of the Eq. 5).
The values elaborated here are standardized for the concrete cube strength taken
as fcc = 25 MPa.

The influence of edge distance - edge break out failure mode

216
According to [ 1 ] for the anchor edge distance e ≥ 2 hef the concrete-cone failure
mode is for the fastening strength decisive. Thus analyzing the influence of the edge
distance the mean values of anchor strength according to Eq. (3) to the test results in the
range of e ≤ 2 hef have been compared. The corresponding mean value of the strength
of the anchor placed in the edge distance of "e" can be expressed by
Nue,m = 0,5 (e / hef ) Nu,m . (9)

Using the Eq. (5) the appropriate results are practically identical.

1,5

1
Nu,test / Nu,m

0,5

0
0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5

e / hef

TESTS THEORY - MEAN VALUE ac.to (9)

Fig. 9 The influence of the anchor edge distance

The corresponding characteristic values based on test results and Eq. (9) are given by
Nue,k = 0,6 Nue,m . (10)

The influence of anchor diameter


The effective anchor depth is the decisive parameter for the value of fastening strength.
Based on the analysis of test results also the influence of external sleeve diameter "D"
can be verified.

217
2

1,5
Nu,test / N u,m

0,5

0
0,15 0,2 0,25 0,3 0,35 0,4 0,45

D / h ef

TE S TS THE ORY - M E A N V A LUE ac .to (11)

Fig. 10 Test elaboration based on Eq. (3)

1,5
Nu,test / N u,m

0,5

0
0,15 0,2 0,25 0,3 0,35 0,4 0,45

D / h ef

TE S TS THE ORY - M E A N V A LUE ac .to (12)

Fig. 11 Test elaboration based on Eq. (5)

218
Analyzing the relationship between the fastening strength and ratio of D / hef the main
value of expansion anchor strength can be expressed by

NuD,m = (0,80 + 0,62 D / hef ) . Nu,m (11)

for Nu,m according to Eq. (3) and by

NuD,m = (0,28 + 2,56 D / hef ) . Nu,m (12)

for Nu,m according to Eq. (5) . The corresponding results plotted against the test strenth
values are plotted in Fig. 10 and in Fig. 11.

4. Conclusions
For the POLYMAT type of torque-controlled expansion anchors the analysis of basic
strength parameters has been presented in consideration of experimental research
program and corresponding theoretical models. The statistical elaboration of test results
is based on limit state design approach and on procedures derived for design assisted by
testing. Especially the anchor strength, the influence of edge distance and anchor sleeve
diameter have been analyzed.

Acknowledgements : This paper has been elaborated under gratefully acknowledged


support of projects MSM 261100007 and GAČR reg. No. 103/00/0758.

References

1. Eligehausen, R. (Editorial Chairman), 'Fastenings to Reinfoced Concrete and


Masonry Structures', Bulletin d'information No. 206, CEB, Lausanne, 1991.
2. Karmazínová, M., 'Some Problems of Design of Expansion Anchors', Ph.D. Theses,
Brno University of Technology, 1999.
3. Karmazínová,M.,'Loading Tests of Expansion Anchors', In: Proceedings of Seminar
"Steel and Timber Structures - Brno '99", VUT - FAST, Brno, 1999, pp. 93 - 96.
4. ENV 1993-1-1:1992/A2:1998, Annex Z, 'Determination of Design Resistance from
Tests', CEN, Brussels, 1998.
5. Karmazínová,M. - Melcher,J., 'To the Problem of Design Assisted by Testing',
Proceedings of 19th Czech and Slovak Conference "Steel Structures and Bridges":
held in Štrbské Pleso, C-PRESS Publisher, Košice, 2000, pp. 39 - 42.
6. VN 73 2615:1994, 'Directions for anchoring of steel structures', Firm Specification,
VÍTKOVICE, 1994.
7. Karmazínová,M., 'To the Problem of Load-carrying Capacity of Expansion
Anchors', In: Proceedings of the XI. International Conference of the Brno
University of Technology, Part No. 7, VUT - FAST, Brno, 1999, pp. 91 - 94.

219
BEHAVIOR OF SHEAR ANCHORS IN CONCRETE:
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
RECOMMENDATIONS
Hakki Muratli*, Richard E. Klingner**, and Herman L. Graves, III***
* Dallas, Texas, USA; former, The University of Texas at Austin, TX, USA.
** Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, TX, USA.
*** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., USA.

Abstract
The overall objective of this paper is to evaluate three different procedures for predicting
the concrete breakout capacity of shear anchors under static and dynamic loading, and in
uncracked and cracked concrete. A data base for shear anchors was developed,
evaluated, and placed in the public domain. Observed capacities of shear anchors
failing by concrete breakout were compared with the predictions of three methods: the
45-Degree Cone Method; the CC Method, and a variation of the CC Method, obtained
by regression analysis. Each predictive method was then evaluated using Monte Carlo
analyses to predict the probability of failure by concrete breakout, using the design
framework of ACI 349-90 [1].

1. Introduction

The objective of this research was to provide the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) with a comprehensive document that could be used to establish regulatory
positions regarding fastening to concrete. Shear behavior of anchors under static and
dynamic loading in uncracked and cracked concrete, and for cast-in-place, undercut,
sleeve and expansion anchors, is evaluated using the design framework of ACI 349-90
[1], and three possible predictive equations for concrete breakout:

1) the CC Method;
2) the 45-Degree Cone Method; and
3) a variation on the CC Method, obtained by regression analysis.

Available test data are evaluated and organized by failure mode, using descriptions and
photographs presented by the original researchers. Each set of design provisions is
evaluated [2] based on the criteria that:

220
1) An ideal design method should give ratios of observed to predicted capacity
showing no systematic error (that is, no variation in ratios with changes in
embedment depth), high precision (that is, little scatter of data).

2) An ideal design method should have acceptably low probabilities of failure in the
overall design framework in which it is to be used.

2. Background

General information on anchor types and behavior is given in CEB [3]. The most widely
known procedures for predicting shear breakout capacity are the CC Method and the
45-Degree Cone Method, described here. A variation on the CC Method, obtained by
regression analysis, is described later.

Shear Breakout Capacity by Concrete Capacity Method (CC Method)


The CC Method [4] computes mean shear breakout capacity as:
0.2
Vno = 13 (d o f c )  l  c1.5
0.5
lb (1a)
 do 
1

0.2
Vno = 1.0 (d o f cc )  l  c1.5
0.5
N (1b)
 do 
1

where:
do = outside diameter of anchor (in. in US units, mm in SI units);
l = activated load-bearing length of anchors, ≤ 8do;
= hef for anchors with a constant overall stiffness;
= 2do for torque-controlled expansion anchors with spacing sleeve separated
from the expansion sleeve;
fc = specified compressive strength of concrete; and
c1 = edge distance in the direction of load.

The above formula is for the mean rather than 5% fractile concrete breakout capacity in
uncracked concrete, and is valid for a member with a thickness of at least 1.4 hef. For
anchors in a thin structural member, or a narrow member, or affected by adjacent
anchors, breakout capacity must be reduced based on the idealized model of a half-
pyramid measuring 1.5c1 by 3c1 (Figure 1).

221
35 º 35 º
c1

1.5c1

3c1 3c1

FromTest Results Simplified Model

Figure 1 Idealized breakout model for a single shear anchor, CC Method


In such cases,
Av
Vn = ψ 4ψ 5ψ 6 Vno (2)
A vo
where:
Av = actual projected area at the side of concrete member;
Avo = projected area of one fastener in thick member without influence of spacing
and member width, idealizing the shape of the projected fracture cone as a
half-pyramid with side length of 1.5c1 and 3c1;
ψ4 = modification factor for shear strength to account for fastener groups that are
loaded eccentrically;
ψ5 = modification factor to consider the disturbance of symmetric stress
distribution
caused by a corner;
= 1, if c2 ≥ 1.5 c1
c2
= 0.7 + 0.3 , if c2 ≤ 1.5 c1;
1.5c1
where:
c1 = edge distance in loading direction;
= greater of (c2,max/1.5, h/1.5) for anchors in a thin and narrow member
with c2,max < 1.5c1 and h < 1.5c1;

where:
h = thickness of concrete member;
c2 = edge distance perpendicular to loading direction.
ψ6 = modification factor for shear strength to account for absence or control of
cracking.

222
Shear Breakout Capacity by 45-Degree Cone Method
By the 45-Degree Cone Method, a tensile stress of 4 f c′ is assumed to act on the
surface of a half-cone with an inclination of 45 degrees to the concrete surface (Figure
2).

45 º

Figure 2 Breakout body assumed by 45-Degree Cone Method


Equilibrium in the direction of the applied shear leads to:

Vno = 2π f c′ c12 lb (3a)

Vno = 0.48 f c′ c12 N (3b)

where c1 is the edge distance in loading direction.

If the depth of the concrete member is smaller than the edge distance, or the spacing of
anchors is smaller than 2c1, or the width of the concrete member is smaller than 2c1, the
shear breakout capacity is modified as follows:
Av
Vn = Vno (4)
A vo
where:
Av = actual projected area of semi-cone on the side of concrete member;
Avo = projected area of one fastener in thick member without influence of spacing,
and member width, idealizing the shape of projected fracture cone as a half-
cone with a diameter of c1, so that AVo = (π/2) c12 (Figure 3).

223
 πθ c
2
AV =  π − + sin θ  1
45 º  180  2
 h
h θ = 2 cos −1  
 c1 

Figure 3 Projected areas for shear anchors, 45-Degree Cone Method

Effects of Dynamic Shear Loading and Cracks on Shear Breakout Capacity


In this research, predicted shear breakout capacities under static loading are proposed to
be multiplied by a dynamic factor equal to 1.20 [5]. Predicted shear breakout capacities
in uncracked concrete are proposed to be multiplied by a crack factor equal to 0.714 for
cases involving cracked concrete.

3. Test data for shear anchors in concrete

An extensive search was conducted for data on single and multiple shear anchors, with
and without edge effects, group effects, or cracks, and including dynamic as well as
static loading:

a) Only tests with concrete breakout failure were included.

b) Only tests on cast-in-place, expansion and undercut anchors were included.

c) Tests are from the US and Europe. Some static shear tests in uncracked concrete
from Germany are not included, because the mean ratios of observed to predicted
capacities were about 0.859, about 20% lower than the rest of the data in this
category (1.075), and the coefficient of variation was about 0.4, much higher than
for the rest of the data. This difference could be explained by unreported
information on the thickness of the concrete specimens for those tests.

d) Tests were sorted according to type of loading (static or dynamic) and condition of
concrete before the test (cracked or uncracked). Only limited tests were available
with dynamic loading.

e) Most tests on multiple-anchor connections were excluded, because their resistance


mechanisms and failure sequence are complex. Because it is normally not possible
to measure the tensile and shear failure loads taken by each anchor, nor the friction
between baseplate and concrete, it is difficult to decide how anchors share axial and
shear load. As a consequence, it is difficult or impossible to distinguish those tests
showing concrete breakout failure.

224
f) The confining effect of baseplate and presence of reinforcement affect the type of
failure and concrete breakout capacity. The compression on concrete from the
baseplate around some anchors usually increases the concrete breakout capacity. In
addition, reinforcement may also confine the concrete after cracking. Since these
effects are not fully understood, tests with reinforcement in concrete were not
included.

g) Out-of-plane eccentric loading is another factor that affects load-carrying


mechanism and type of failure. The eccentricity changes the type and magnitude of
the load taken by each anchor, and the friction between baseplate and concrete.
Because these points are still under investigation, tests with out-of-plane eccentricity
were not included.

Shear Breakout Data for Single and Double Anchors in Uncracked Concrete under
Static Loading
Data in this category come from Klingner [6] (85 tests), Drillco [7] (5 tests), Hallowell
[5] (5 tests), and Hilti1 (154 tests). Twenty-seven of these tests are in lightweight
concrete, and the rest, in normal-weight concrete. The Klingner [6] and Hallowell [5]
tests are on cast-in-place anchors; the Drillco [7] and Hilti1 tests are on undercut and
expansion anchors respectively.

Figure 4 shows the variation of ratio of observed to predicted capacity as a function of


edge distance c1, based on the CC Method [4]. A linear regression is fitted to the data.
In general, the ratio of observed to predicted capacity decreases with increasing edge
distance. This systematic error suggests that the exponent applied to the edge distance c1
in the current equation is slightly high. The negative slope is also influenced by the low
ratios for a few tests with edge distances greater than 250 mm.

225
Static Shear Loading - Single and Double Anchors
Uncracked Concrete - CC Method
2.50
Mean= 1.075
2.00 COV = 0.215

y=-0.0006x+1.1606
Vobs/Vpred

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Edge Distance (mm)

Figure 4 Ratios of observed to predicted concrete shear breakout


capacities, uncracked concrete, CC Method
Figure 5 shows the same ratios for the 45-Degree Cone Method. Mean values in the two
figures are almost the same, but the coefficient of variation is higher for the 45-Degree
Cone Method. The negative slope of the best-fit line for the 45-Degree Cone Method is
quite high, indicating significant systematic error. The outliers with mean values higher
than 1.50 correspond to tests from Drillco [7], in which the tensile strength of concrete
was higher than the value implied in the equations of the CC Method and the 45-Degree
Cone Method.

Similar information is presented in Reference 2 for dynamic loading, cracked concrete,


and post-installed versus cast-in-place anchors.

226
Static Shear Loading - Single and Double Anchors
Uncracked Concrete - 45-Degree Cone Method
3.00

2.50 Mean= 1.073


COV = 0.339
2.00
Vobs/Vpred

y=-0.003x+1.5111

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Edge Distance (mm)

Figure 5 Ratios of observed to predicted concrete shear breakout


capacities, uncracked concrete, 45-Degree Cone Method

Development of an Alternative Method based on Regression Analysis

Because significant systematic error was observed in the preceding graphs of the ratios
of observed to predicted shear breakout capacities as a function of edge distance,
multivariate regression analysis was used with the data for single anchors in uncracked
concrete, static loading, to attempt to improve the CC Method in this regard.
Considering all data categories and slightly modifying the mathematically optimum
values for design convenience, the following values were obtained for the parameters: α
= 2.7; m1 = 0.1; m2 = 0.3; m3 = 0.5; and m4 = 1.4:
Vno = 2.7 ⋅ l 0.1 ⋅ d o ⋅ fcc ⋅ c1
0 .3 0.5 1.4
(5)
There is little difference between the alternative method as optimized using regression
analysis, and the CC Method, except with respect to the exponent of the edge distance,
c1. The regression formula has significantly lower systematic error than the CC Method,
suggesting that the CC Method’s exponent of 1.5 should be reduced to 1.4. Similar
results are obtained for the other conditions discussed above.

4. Probabilities of failure associated with each breakout formula

To evaluate the accuracy and suitability of the CC Method, the 45-Degree Cone Method
and the alternative method as design approaches, the probabilities of concrete breakout
failure under known loads and independent of load were computed. The probabilistic

227
evaluation is carried out assuming the ductile design framework and current load and
understrength factors of ACI 349-90, Appendix B [1] (load factor = 1.7; φ = 0.85 for
steel; φ = 0.65 for concrete). Assuming the exact forms of load and capacity
distributions, the probabilities of failure are computed using FORM (First Order
Reliability) analysis. These calculations are based on a normal distribution for all
variables. The basic procedure is similar to that reported in Farrow [8, 9].

The results of these probabilistic analysis are presented in Table 1 and Table 2.
Probabilities of failure are consistent with observations made earlier based on evaluation
of ratios of observed to predicted shear breakout capacities. The CC Method, with
acceptable mean ratios and low systematic error, has lower probabilities of failure under
known loads, and lower probabilities of brittle failure independent of load, than the 45-
Degree Cone Method, when both are used in the ductile design framework of ACI 349-
90, Appendix B [1].

Table 1 Probabilities of failure under known loads for different categories of shear
anchors, ductile design approach
45-Degree CONE REGRESSION
CC METHOD METHOD METHOD
ANCHOR CATEGORY
Probability Probability Probability
β β β
of Failure of Failure of Failure
single and double anchors,
uncracked concrete, static 2.665E-04 3.55 1.138E-02 2.28 1.56E-04 3.77
shear loading
single anchors, cracked
concrete, static shear 3.275E-04 3.48 3.885E-04 3.42 -- --
loading
single anchors, uncracked
concrete, dynamic shear 7.567E-05 5.10 7.554E-05 5.39 -- --
loading
single anchors, cracked
concrete, dynamic shear 8.620E-05 4.25 9.130E-05 4.16 -- --
loading

228
Table 2 Probabilities of brittle failure independent of load for different categories
of shear anchors, ductile design approach

45-Degree CONE REGRESSION


CC METHOD
METHOD METHOD
ANCHOR CATEGORY Probability Probability Probability
of Brittle β of Brittle β of Brittle β
Failure Failure Failure
single and double anchors,
uncracked concrete, static 0.189 0.88 0.270 0.61 0.271 0.61
shear loading
single anchors, cracked
concrete, static shear 0.290 0.55 0.402 0.25 -- --
loading
single anchors, uncracked
concrete, dynamic shear 0.034 1.83 0.003 2.70 -- --
loading
single anchors, cracked
concrete, dynamic shear 0.011 2.29 0.023 2.00 -- --
loading

5. Conclusions

1) The ductile design approach in the draft proposal for ACI 349 [1] (including the CC
Method) is safe and efficient for shear fasteners in concrete.

2) The CC Method is more reliable than the 45-Degree Cone Method as a design tool
for shear breakout. It can be safely used for design of cast-in-place and post-
installed anchors for edge distances up to 250 mm.

3) The systematic error of the CC Method for shear breakout could be decreased by
changing the exponent of edge distance from 1.5 to 1.4.

4) For dynamic loading, the capacity of cast-in-place anchors increases by 20%


compared to static loading.

6) The concrete breakout capacity of post-installed anchors is 10% lower than that of
cast-in-place anchors. Therefore, predicted breakout capacity should be based on
anchor type. This can be done by adjusting the mean normalization constant k to
0.97 for the basic uncracked concrete case for post-installed anchors.

229
6. Acknowledgement and disclaimer

This paper presents partial results of a research program supported by U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) under Contract No. NRC-04-96-059. The technical
contact is Herman L. Graves, III. Any conclusions expressed in this paper are those of
the authors, and are not to be considered NRC policy or recommendations.

7. References

1) ACI 349 1990, ”Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete
Structures,” American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1990.
2) Muratli, Hakki, “Behavior of Shear Anchors in Concrete: Statistical Analysis and
Design Recommendations,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, May
1998.
3) Comite’ Euro-International du Beton, Fastening to Reinforced Concrete and
Masonry Structures: State-of-the-Art-Report, bulletin D’Information Nos.206 and
207, August 1991.
4) Fuchs, Werner, Eligehausen, Rolf, and Breen, John E., “Concrete Capacity Design
(CCD) Approach for Fastening to Concrete,” Journal of the American Concrete
Institute, Vol. 92, No. 1, January-February 1995, pp. 73-94.
5) Hallowell, Jennifer, “Tensile and Shear Behavior of Anchors in Uncracked and
Cracked Concrete Under Static and Dynamic Loading,” M.S. Thesis, The
University of Texas at Austin, December 1996.
6) Klingner, R. E. and Mendonca, J. A., “Shear Capacity of Short Anchor Bolts and
Welded Studs: A Literature Review,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute,
Proceedings Vol. 79, No. 5, September-October 1982, pp. 339-349.
7) Arkansas Nuclear One Maxibolt Anchor Bolt Test Program, Entergy Operations,
Inc. Arkansas Nuclear One Steam Electric Station, MCS Design, May 14, 1992.
8) Farrow, C. Ben and Klingner, R. E., “Tensile Capacity of Anchors with Partial or
Overlapping Failure Surfaces: Evaluation of Existing Formulas on an LRFD
Basis,” ACI Structures Journal, Vol. 92, No. 6, November-December 1995, pp. 698-
710.
9) Farrow, C. Ben, Frigui, Imed and Klingner, R. E., “Tensile Capacity of Single
Anchors in Concrete: Evaluation of Existing Formulas on an LRFD Basis,” ACI
Structures Journal, Vol. 93, No. 1, January-February 1996.

1
Personal communication, Peter Pusill-Wachtsmuth, Hilti AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein,
1997.

230
STUDY ON SHEAR TRANSFER OF JOINT STEEL BAR
AND CONCRETE SHEAR KEY IN CONCRETE CONNEC-
TIONS
Katsuhiko Nakano* and Yasuhiro Matsuzaki*
*Dept. of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Science University of Tokyo, Japan

Abstract
Shear transfer across a definite interface must frequently be considered in the design of
precast concrete connections. As the following various resistances in the effecting shear
transfer strength are given: (1) Dowel action, (2) Shear-key, (3) Friction with axial force,
(4) Adherence on the concrete surface. The purpose of this paper is to reveal the com-
pound effects of the various resistance elements.
Basic experiments on the interface shear transfer at the precast joint faces ware carried
out. Ten panel type specimens with the same dimensions were tested.
As a conclusion, the relation of the shear transfer mechanism and shear displacement
behaviour in concrete connection is clarified. And the evaluation equation of the shear
transfer strength with consideration to the shear displacement conformity is proposed.

1. Introduction

General design method for the precast-concrete building structures has not yet estab-
lished, especially for the details of connections. The behaviour of precast concrete struc-
tures subjected to earthquakes may be greatly influenced by the resistances of various
elements within precast-concrete connections. The factors influencing shear transfer
strength are considered as following: (1) Characteristics of the shear interface, (2) Char-
acteristics of the reinforcement, (3) Mechanical properties of the concrete, (4) Direct
stress acting parallel and transverse to the shear interface.
The shear resistances in concrete connections are assumed as following: (1) Dowel ac-
tion of joint bars, (2) Direct shear resistance of concrete shear-key, (3) Friction with
axial compressive force, (4) Adherence of the concrete surface.
The concrete shear-key, friction and adherence show brittle failure, and the shear dis-

231
placement is tiny. Maximum dowel strength is associated with a certain amount of shear
displacement along the interface. In design of shear transfer elements, deformation char-
acteristics are also very important as well as the strength. We are based on the stress
transfer mechanism in concrete connections, and think that it is necessary to systematize
the designing method by the theoretical model.
This research aims at the following: (1) Extraction and modelling of the shear transfer
elements in the concrete connection, (2) Proposal of the additional method of the various
resistances satisfied with the condition of the shear displacement, (3) Verification by the
structural experiment.

2. Test Program

2.1 Specimens
The list of specimen parameters is shown in Table 1. And the dimensions of specimens
are shown Fig. 1. The specimens used for investigation of the shear transfer mechanism
consisted of two concrete blocks. The dimensions and reinforcement details of all the
specimens were identical: the width of 900 mm, the height of 1400 mm, the thickness of
225 mm with an interface of 860 mm × 225 mm at the height of 700mm from the base.
The following parameters are investigated:
1. The kind of shear resistance in concrete connections [friction with axial force, dowel
bar, shear-key, and compound of various elements]
2. Direct force acting transverse to the concrete interface [N = 0, 1500, -220 kN].
Combinations of parameters for all 10 specimens are given in Table 1. The joint steel
bars are used 2-D22 ( φ = 22 mm, deformed bar).

Table 1 List of specimen parameters


No. Axial force Shear resistance
(kN) Friction Dowel Sear-key 400
RF01 Variable*1 Yes No No
RF02 0 No No Yes Shear
-key
300
RF03 1500 Yes No Yes
RF04 0 No Yes No Joint bar 300
RF05 1500 Yes Yes No
RF06 -220 No Yes No
400
RF07 Variable*2 Yes Yes*3 No
RF08 0 No Yes Yes
RF09 1500 Yes Yes Yes 90
30 30
RF10 -220 No Yes Yes
*1) 250,500,750,1000,1250,1500,1750,2000kN
*2) positive loading: -220kN,
Negative loading: 100, 750, 1500kN Fig. 1 Dimensions of specimens
*3) High yield stress of joint bars

232
The shear-key is used in the central part of a concrete interface, and the height is hck = 30
mm, the length is Lck = 240 mm and the width is tck = 225 mm. Since the form ratio of a
shear-key ( hck / Lck ) is 1/8, the shear-key shows compressive failure mode. The lower
part in the Fig. 1 was cast first using steel form at the interface. The upper part was five
days after then. The steel form was removed before connecting two concrete blocks and
the interface was filled with grease. Thus, adherence of concrete surfaces was eliminated
and shear force could be transferred by means of dowel bars, concrete shear-key, and
friction with the axial force.
Mechanical properties of concrete and joint steel bar are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Mechanical properties of materials


Concrete σB Ec Steel bar σy Es σu
(N/mm2) (kN/mm2) ( D22 ) (N/mm2) (kN/mm2) (N/mm2)
Upper 31.1 281 Normal 380 180 592
Lower 66.7 350 High 735 198 897
Average 48.9 316

Shear displacement: δ sd= ( δ sd1+ δ sd2 )/2


Axial force
30
15
15 30
15
15
30
δ sd1 δ sd2
+Q -Q Loading
Joint bar

Specimen Strain gauges


Fig. 2 Loading Apparatus Fig. 3 Measuring devices for dowel bars

2.2 Testing Arrangements


The concrete interfaces of specimens were subjected to cyclic shear forces and constant
axial forces, using the loading apparatus shown in Fig. 2. The loading direction was
reversed at the horizontal displacement amplitudes of 3, 6, 9 mm, which was measured
at the height of 30 mm from the concrete interface. The location of displacement gauges
and strain gauges of dowel bars are shown in Fig. 3.

3. Test Results

3.1 Friction with Axial force


The typical hysteresis relation of the shear force (Q) of the friction with axial force and
the shear displacement ( δ sd) are shown in Fig. 4, and the relation of the frictional shear

233
force (Qf) and the axial force (N) are shown in Fig. 5. RF01 has been carried out to in-
vestigate the relation of friction and compressive axial force. It was measured on the
compressive axial force level of eight stages [N = 250, 500, 750, 1000, 1250, 1500, 1750,
2000 kN] using the same specimen.
The friction with axial force can roughly be evaluated from the hysteresis loop as the
following: (1) Qf can be estimated from the first positive maximum strengths of the
specimens under different axial force levels, and the force is proportional to the axial
force. (2) The friction with axial force under cyclic loading may be taken at the flat level
in the reloading to the other direction until the original displacement.

3.2 Dowel Action


The typical hysteresis relation of the shear force (Q) of a dowel action and the shear
displacement ( δ sd) are shown in Fig. 6. RF04 was subjected to shear force and without
axial force. Thus, the shear force could be transferred only by means of dowel action of
the two deformed bars crossing the interface. The dowel action can roughly be evaluated
from the hysteresis loop as the following: (1) Substantial stiffness decreases gradually.
(2) The maximum shear displacement with cycling increases. (3) The pinching effect is
very pronounced, and the area of hysteresis loops with cycling decreases.

300
RF01 Q(kN) N= 500kN 200
200
150
Qf (kN) Friction coefficient
100 = 0.08
0 100
-100
50 N(kN)
-200 N= 1500kN δsd(mm)
-300 0
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 0 500 1000 1500 2000

Fig. 4 Typical curves of mean values of Fig. 5 Influence of Axial force


Frictional force vs. Shear displacement on Frictional force

400 400
300 RF04 Q (kN) calculation RF02 Q (kN) calculation
300
200 1 mm 200
100 100 1 mm
0 0
-100 δsd (mm) -100 δsd (mm)
-200 -200
-300 -300
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12

Fig. 6 Typical curve of mean values of Fig. 7 Typical curve of mean values of
Dowel force vs. Shear displacement Direct shear force of shear-key vs.
Shear displacement

234
400 800
Q (kN) calculation
300 700 Q (kN) calculation
200 RF04+0.08N 600
1 mm RF03
100 RF05 500
0 400
-100 300 RF02+0.08N
-200 δsd (mm) 200
-300 100
RF04+0.08N
-400 0
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 -100
200 -200
RF06 calculation δsd (mm)
100 Q (kN) -300 1 mm
0 -400
-100 1 mm δsd (mm) -500 RF02+0.08N
-200 -600
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 -700
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12
500
400 Q (kN) RF08
300 1000
900 Q (kN) RF09
200 RF02+RF04
100 800
1 mm
0 700 RF02+RF04+0.08N
-100 600
calculation
-200 500
-300 400
-400 δsd (mm) 300 1 mm
RF02+RF04 200
-500
100
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12
0
400 -100
calculation -200
300 Q (kN) calculation
200 RF02+RF06 -300
100 RF10 -400 RF02+RF04+0.08N
0 -500
-100 δsd (mm) -600
1 mm
RF02+RF06 -700
-200
-300 -800 δsd (mm)
-400 -900
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12

Fig. 8 Hysteresis curves of mean values of Total force (dowel resistance or the shear-
key resistance with axial force) vs. Shear displacement
3.3 Direct Shear Resistance of Concrete Shear-key
The typical hysteresis relation of the shear force (Q) of a shear-key resistance and the
shear displacement ( δ sd) are shown in Fig. 7. RF02 subjected to shear force and without
axial force. Thus, the shear force could be transferred only by means of shear-key resis-

235
tance. RF02 showed compressive failure of shear-key. The stiffness of the hysteresis
loop is high and the displacement of that is tiny until compressive failure of shear-key.
The resistance after compressive failure is keeping.

3.4 Compound effect of shear resistances with different hysteresises


The hystereris relations between the shear force and the shear displacement are shown in
Fig. 8. The relations of the total shear force and shear displacement are shown with dot-
ted lines. The total shear force combines each shear resistance at the same shear dis-
placement
Combination of dowel and shear-key RF08 is the combination of the shear-key and
dowel action. And the hysteresis loop of RF08 is the compound hysteresis loop
(RF02+RF04) of the shear-key (RF02) and the dowel action (RF04) shown with the
dotted line. RF08 and RF02 showed compressive failure of the shear-key in the first
positive and negative loading. The positive and negative shear capacities of (RF02+
RF04) are almost equal to the capacity of RF08. The enveloped curves of hysteresis
loops between RF08 and (RF02+RF04) show almost equal behaviour. However, the
pinching effect of RF08 is pronounced, and decreases the area of histeresis loop with
cycling.
Combination of dowel and friction RF05 and RF06 are the combination of the dowel
action and the friction with axial force. RF05 was subjected to compressive axial force
+1500kN, and RF06 was subjected to tensile axial force –220kN. Therefore, although
the friction occurs in the interface of RF05, the friction does not occur in the interface of
RF06. The hysteresis loop of RF05 is the compound hysteresis loop (RF01+ RF04) of
the dowel action (RF04) and the friction with axial force (RF01) shown with the dotted
line. The hysterisis loops between RF05 and (RF01+ RF04) show almost equal behav-
iour. However, the shear displacement occurred suddenly in the first loading of RF05,
and the shear force was larger to that of (RF01+RF04).
Combination of shear-key and friction RF03 and RF10 are the combination of the
shear-key and the friction with axial force. RF03 was subjected to compressive axial
force +1500kN, and RF10 was subjected to tensile axial force –220kN. Therefore, al-
though the friction occurs in the interface of RF03, the friction does not occur in the
interface of RF10. The hysteresis loop of RF03 is the compound hysteresis loop (RF01+
RF02) of the shear-key (RF02) and the friction with axial force (RF01) shown with the
dotted line. RF03 and RF10 showed compressive failure of the shear-key in the first
positive and negative loading. The positive and negative shear capacities of (RF01+
RF02) are larger than the capacity of RF03 by about 80%.

4. Discussion

4.1 Strain distribution of Joint bars


Strain distributions of RF04, RF05 and RF06 to investigate the dowel action at the same
shear displacement ( δ sd = 0.5 , 1 mm ) are shown in Fig. 9. The configurations of the
front reverse sides are symmetrical to the loading direction, and the shear force is re-
sisted due to bending of the joint bars locally. Also, those configurations are equal re-

236
gardless of the axial force levels subjected, but the strain levels with tensile force are
different. The characteristics of such a strain distribution are similarly observed in RF08,
RF09 and RF10 to investigate the compound effects of dowel action and shear-key resis-
tance.
(mm) yield strain= 2114 (mm) yield strain= 2114
Ο :RF04
100 100 ∆ :RF05
80 80 ◊ :RF06
60 60
40 40 Upper
20 20 Concrete
0 0
-20 -20 Lower
-40 -40 Concrete
-60 -60
-6 -6
-80 strain (×10 ) -80 strain (×10 )
-100 -100
-4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000

Fig. 9 Strain disributions of specimens to investigate the dowel action


δ sd : shear displacement 100 calculation 100 calculation
δ sd =L δ sd +U δ sd 90 90

Depth of dowel bar (mm)


U δsd
Depth f dowel bar (mm)

80 RF04 80 RF05
Ul
U M ma
+Q=265 kN
70 +Q=132 kN 70
δsd=0.51 mm
Q U lm 60 δsd=0.51 mm 60
50 50
Anti-force 40 40
L lm Q of concrete 30 30
L M max M oment curve 20 20
L l0
10 δ sd (mm) 10 δ sd (mm)
L δsd Shear displacement
0 0
curve of Steel bar
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6

Fig. 10 Dowel mechanism Fig.11 Shear displacement of dowel bar

4.2 dowel mechanism


Referring to the dowel mechanism shown in Fig. 10. The external shear force tends to
produce slippage along the interface. It is thought that the dowel bar is subjected to
bending moment from concrete for the anti-force. The anti-force per this unit length is
expressed with Eq. 1. It assumes that the anti-force coefficient is fixed in the depth of
concrete, and the basic equation to calculate the bending displacement of the dowel bar
will be given by the Eq. 2.

p s (x) = k c ⋅ B ⋅ y (Eq. 1)
4
d y
E s Is + kc ⋅ B ⋅ y = 0 (Eq. 2)
dx 4

237
The variables are defined as:
x : Depth of the dowel bar from the interface ( mm ), y : Horizontal displacement of the
dowel bar in the depth x ( mm ), Es : Modulus of elasticity of the dowel bar ( N/mm2 ),
Is : Geometrical moment of inertia ( mm4), ps(x) : Horizontal anti-force of the concrete in
the depth x ( N/mm ), B : Diameter of the dowel bar ( mm ), kc : Coefficient of concrete
ant-force ( N/m3 )

For the calculation of dowel strength, it is assumed that the dowel behaves like a hori-
zontally loaded free-headed pile embedded in cohesive soil and that yielding of the bar
and crushing of the concrete occur simultaneously. In the interface, the shear force of the
opposite direction is loaded [ the absolute value ] mutually equally. Therefore, the dowel
bar in depth 0 mm from the interface is subjected to a shear force (Q = -H ), and is not
subjected to a bending moment ( M = 0 ). Moreover, when kc is assumed to be fixed, and
a dowel bar is assumed to be an elastic material, and the theoretical solution of Eq. 2 is
calculated, it can express with the following equations.
H
y= e −βx cos βx (Eq. 3)
2E s I s β 3

H
M = e −βx sin βx (Eq. 4)
β
π
H −4 π H
M max = − e ⋅ sin = −0.3224 (Eq. 5)
β 4 β
Where:
k ⋅B , π 2π
β=4 c l m = , l0 =
4E s I s β 4β
Mmax : Maximum bending moment of the dowel bar (N • mm), lm : Depth of Mmax ( mm ),
l0 : Depth of immobility

In general, where the dowel is simultaneously subjected to a tensile stress σ s = α ⋅ σ y


( α ≤ 1.0 ), the plastic moment of the bar decreases.

M pl =
(
d3 ⋅ σy 1− α2 ) (Eq. 6)
6
Thus, the dowel strength is calculated by Eq. 7 ( Mmax = Mpl ).

Q dwl =
(
d3 ⋅ σy ⋅ 1− α2

) 2β (Eq. 7)
6 0.3224

Shear-displacement distributions of the dowel bars in the upper concrete of RF04 and
RF05 are shown in Fig. 11. The calculations are integrated twice with the strain distribu-
tions shown in Fig.9. The calculations agree well with the measurements. Therefore, it is
thought that the proposed dowel mechanism is appropriate.

238
4.3 Total method of various shearing resistance forces
Monotonic hysterisis relations of per one dowel resistance (qdb) and shear displacement
are shown in Fig. 12. The curves (RF04 and RF05) measured by the experiment are solid
lines and the curve calculated from the Eq. 3 is shown by the dotted line. The dowel
resistance of RF05 subtracts the calculated friction with axial force from the measured
total shear force. The calculation evaluates the measurement of RF04 without axial force
appropriate. The shear displacement of RF05 occurs suddenly, and the calculation evalu-
ates the measurement of that a little more larger. This seems to be influenced by the
adherence of concrete surface.
Monotonic hysterisis relations of per one shear-key (qck) and shear displacement are
shown in Fig.13. The shear-keys of RF03 and RF09 subtract the calculated frictions with
axial force from the measured total shear forces, and also the shear-keys of RF08 and
RF09 subtract the calculated dowel resistances from the measured total shear forces. The
hysterisis curves of the shear-keys with the same axial force level show an almost equal.
These figures lead to the following: (1) Total shear resistance can be evaluated as the
sum total of each shear transfer element at the same shear displacement. (2) Dowel ac-
tion is not influenced by compressive axial force. (3) Structural performance (resistance
and stiffness) of shear-key increases by compressive axial force.

100 800
qdb(kN) RF05: N=1500kN qck(kN) RF03:N=1500kN

75 600
RF09:N=1500kN
RF04: N=0kN
50 400 RF08: N=0
calu lat io n

25 200
δsd (mm) RF02: N=0 δsd (mm)
0 0
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
-25 -200

Fig. 12 Monotonic hysterisis curves Fig. 13 Monotonic hysterisis curves


of Dowel action of shear-key resistance

4.4 Evaluation equation of the shear resistance force in the interface


Strength equations for design tools for shear transfer elements such as dowel action,
shear-key, friction with axial force and adherence are given. In the design of shear trans-
fer elements, deformation characteristics are also very important as well as the strength.
An allowable limit of the shear displacement ( δ sd) should be proposed so that the effect
of the shear displacement in concrete connections to structural response could be mini-
mized during earthquake. We propose the limit of the shear displacement is 1 mm from
the following: (1) The limit investigated by many structural experiments of Beam-
Column-Joint, Column-to-Column Connection, Beam-to-Beam Connection, Beam-to-

239
Slab, Connection of a wall, etc. is 1 mm. (2) Experimental results in this research show
the capacity of each shear transfer element is in full at the shear displacement 1 mm.
We propose the strength equation (Qsr) for total shear resistance showing in Eq. 8. The
total shear resistance (Qsr) is the sum total of the dowel bar (Qdwl), the shear-key (Qsky),
the friction with compressive axial force (Qfrc), and the adherence (Qadh). However, the
strength of dowel bar is the dowel resistance at shear displacement 1 mm. The shear
resistance due to adherence is sometimes large to neglect. However the resistance is very
sensible to the condition of the surface and subjects to change easily. Thus no value is
shown for the strength due to adherence.

Q sr = Q dwl + Q sky + Q frc + (Q adh = 0) (Eq. 8)

Q dwl = n s ⋅
(
d3 ⋅ σy ⋅ 1 − α2 )⋅ 2β ,
Q sky = n c ⋅ γ ⋅ A p ⋅ σ B , Q frc = µ ⋅ N
6 0.3224
Where
3

k ⋅B , E δ  4
β=4 c k c = κ ⋅ c ⋅  sd  ⋅ σ B , δ sd = 1 mm
4E s I s Es  2 
ns : Number of joint steel bars, α ⋅ σ y : Yield stress of joint steel bar with tensile axial
force, Ec : Elastic modulus of concrete, κ : Configuration coefficient of stress-strain
curve of concrete ( κ = 24 is recommended in this research ), nc : Number of shear-key,
γ : Effective coefficient of axial force ( γ = 1 is recommended in this research ), Ap :
Compressive Area of shear key (Ap= Wck × Hck, Wck : Width of shear-key, Hck : depth of
sear-key ) σ B : Minimum compressive strength of concrete, µ : Coefficient friction ( µ
= 0.08 is recommended in this research ), N : Axial force

We have shown the shear transfer strengths calculated by Eq.8 for Fig. 6 – Fig.8. The
measured strengths of specimens with shear-keys with axial force are larger than the
calculated strengths by about 90 %, and the rate increases of the other specimens are
about 30%. The evaluation equation should be investigated further in detail, although
there is no problem for the design of concrete connections.

5. Conclusions

Basic experiments with concrete connections were conducted on the shear transfer and
the shear displacement behaviour in concrete connections under shear and axial force.
The following conclusions may be drawn.
(1) The shear transfer mechanism and shear displacement behaviour in concrete
connections is clarified. And the shear transfer mechanism is verified by the
structural experiments.
(2) The shear transfer strength can be evaluated as the sum total of each shear transfer
element at the same shear displacement. And the evaluation equation is proposed.

240
PERFORMANCE OF UNDERCUT ANCHORS IN
COMPARISON TO CAST-IN-PLACE HEADED STUDS

Peter Pusill-Wachtsmuth
Hilti AG, Principality of Liechtenstein

Abstract
Cast-in-place headed studs are world-wide used. In general there are no major concerns
with their suitability and performance in concrete. In the meantime undercut anchors
have been developed that show similar behaviour. In this paper only the performance
under tension and shear is compared. It was not intended to discuss other differences
such as costs, installation procedures or convenience in planning of an anchorage.
The comparison shows that the performance characteristics of headed studs and undercut
anchors are approximately the same. The main difference is the required member
thickness. For the selected undercut system, HDA, it is shown that the required values of
the approval document can be drastically reduced. So headed studs and the undercut
anchors are comparable and competitive in their performance.

1. Introduction

Cast-in-place headed studs welded to a fixture are used to transfer a local acting force
into the concrete. The dimensions of the studs and the design methods may differ in
national regulations and standards. In general the design engineer has no doubts of a
proper performance of the anchorage.
In recent years post-installed anchors have been developed, which are intended to be
used for the same application as headed studs. To create confidence in this new
technique, it was necessary to run an approval procedure according national or
international codes or guidelines. The approval documents give performance
characteristics of the product and give help for the design of an anchorage.
In the following the main performance characteristics of headed studs and undercut
anchors are compared. Also the technical requirements of anchor configurations and the
dimensions of the base material are discussed. The design concept for both systems is
relatively complex. The more complex the design concept the closer the calculation can
be to the real behaviour of the anchors. The complexity makes it difficult to give a

241
complete overview. To avoid any unfair comparison the basis on which the results are
obtained must be clearly shown. Otherwise it is very easy to show the benefits of one
system and to show the weakness of the other.
The comparison is made only on performance characteristics and on the design. This
report does not cover any other characteristics of headed studs and undercut anchors,
which give help for the decision whether to choose the one or the other system. These
may be cost reasons for the product and for the installation. It also may be advantages of
post-installation versus cast-in-place and vice versa. These and all other characteristics
must be discussed separately.

2. Headed Studs

The dimensions and tolerances of headed studs used for comparison with undercut
anchors are standardised in ISO 13918 /1/. Also the material properties are given there.
In general these studs fulfil the requirements of the design guide of CEB /2/. Only the
thickness of the head is less than required, which is neglected in the following. Headed
studs can be used without any prequalification tests if the proposed values for edge
distance and spacing according to /2/ are accepted.

Fig. 1: Headed studs according to EN ISO 13918


d2

d1

hef

Table 1: Headed studs according EN ISO 13918


Diameter of the stud (d1) mm 10 13 16 19 22 25
Diameter of the head (d2) mm 19 25 32 32 35 40
Anchorage depth (hef) available in different length

242
3. Undercut Anchor

There are many undercut anchors on the market, which differ in the installation
procedure, in dimensions and shape. The following comparison is based on one selected
product, the Hilti HDA Anchor /3/. The comparison can be easily completed for other
products. For the selected undercut anchor an European Technical Approval /3/ is
available. So the anchor is prequalified according to the European rules. In the
prequalification tests it is shown, that the anchor is not very sensitive to variations in
installation compared to the written manufacturer’s instructions. Also the anchor is not
sensitive to the largest crack width that may occur in reinforced concrete construction. In
the prequlification tests it is shown that the anchor behaves properly under repeated
loads and in concrete structures , where the crack width varies.
It can be said, that a prequalified anchor will behave in a predictable and reliable
manner. For applications according to the scope of the design guide /2/ there is no
difference in reliability of headed studs or undercut anchors.

Fig. 2: HDA Undercut anchor

Table 2: HDA Undercut anchor


M 10 M12 M 16
drill bit diameter (d0) mm 20 22 30
anchorage length (hef) mm 100 125 190

4. Performance under tension loading

4.1 Performance without edge and spacing effects


The calculation of the performance of headed studs is based on Bulletin d’Information
No. 226 of CEB, ‘Design of fastenings in concrete‘, 1995 /2/. For the undercut anchor
the data are based on the European Technical Approval ETA-99/0009, ‘Hilti HDA
Anchor‘, 1999 /3/. For headed studs all sizes according to /1/ are included, for the

243
undercut anchor only the size M 12. The anchorage depth hef = 125 mm is chosen for all
anchors considered in this analysis. This can be easily completed for other sizes of the
undercut anchor.
Table 3 shows the resistance for the different failure modes under tension loading in
C 20, when there are no edge or spacing effects. For steel failure the values for headed
studs are based on the yield strength and for undercut anchors on the ultimate strength.
Also, the partial safety factors differ. So only the design resistance is comparable. For all
other failure modes the partial safety factors are the same.
Steel failure is not decisive for the headed studs or for the undercut anchor. Pull-out
failure and concrete cone failure are separated for cracked and for non-cracked concrete.
For pull-out failure of headed studs the design has to be done for the ultimate limit state
and for the serviceability limit state. In /2/ an admissible pressure under the head of the
studs is given for the serviceability limit state. This value is converted to a characteristic
action and to a design action by using the partial safety factor of 1.0. The design action is
equal to the design resistance, so this value is given in the table.
The equations to calculate concrete cone resistance differ in the k-factor for headed studs
(9.0) and undercut anchors (7.5) in /2/. In the approval procedure of the undercut anchor
it was possible to show that the factor for headed studs can also be used for this product.

Table 3: Comparison of design resistance of headed studs and undercut anchors


Headed studs according EN ISO 13918 HDA
d1 mm 10 13 16 19 22 25 M 12
hef mm 125 125 125 125 125 125 125
Steel failure
NRd,s kN 22.9 38.7 58.6 82.7 110.9 143.2 44.7
cracked concrete
Pull out failure
NRd,p kN C 20 17.1 29.8 50.3 43.4 48.5 63.8 19.4
Pull out failure, serviceability limit state
NRd,p kN C 20 10.2 17.9 30.2 26.0 29.1 38.3 19.4
Concrete cone failure
NRd,c° kN C 20 31.3 31.3 31.3 31.3 31.3 31.3 32.2
non-cracked concrete
Pull out failure
NRd,p kN C 20 25.1 43.8 73.7 63.6 71.1 93.6 45.1
Pull out failure, serviceability limit state
NRd,p kN C 20 16.4 28.7 48.3 41.7 46.6 61.3 45.1
Concrete cone failure
NRd,c° kN C 20 43.8 43.8 43.8 43.8 43.8 43.8 45.1

For the largest size of the headed studs, concrete cone design resistance is decisive in
cracked concrete. For all other sizes it is the pull-out resistance in the serviceability limit
state. Also, the pull-out design resistance is the smallest value for the undercut anchor.

244
The resistance of HDA M 12 can be compared with a headed stud size between
diameter 13 or 16 mm. For all the larger diameters the design resistance of headed suds
is larger than for the undercut anchor M 12, because the bearing area significantly
increases.
In case of non-cracked concrete, cone failure is decisive for the undercut anchor and for
one medium and the two largest sizes of the headed studs. The value for the design
resistance is the same. The small deviation for headed studs in comparison to the
undercut anchor are linked to the differently rounded values in the equation for the
calculation of the concrete resistance. For the two smallest sizes and a medium size of
the headed studs pull out is decisive. The resistance is smaller than for concrete cone
failure and therefore smaller than for the undercut anchor.

In summary it can be said that in general, pull-out resistance is decisive in cracked


concrete. The undercut anchor has the same performance as a headed stud with a
diameter of more than 13 mm and less than 16 mm. For non-cracked concrete the
undercut anchor behaves like headed studs with a diameter of more than 13 mm, when
pull-out is not decisive.

4.2 Influence of edge and spacing effects


In Table 4 the relevant edge distance, spacing and minimum member thickness are given
for headed studs and the undercut anchor.
The values for edge distance and spacing (ccr,N and scr,N) necessary to develop the
characteristic tension resistance of a single anchor without spacing and edge effects in
the case of concrete cone failure are the same for headed studs and the undercut anchor.
As shown in Table 3 the concrete cone resistance is also the same. In all configurations
of anchor groups up to the lower limit of minimum edge distance and spacing (cmin and
smin) the design resistance for concrete cone failure of headed studs and the undercut
anchor is the same.
The main difference are the values of cmin and smin , which are in general lower for
headed studs. That means headed studs can be used with smaller edge distances and
spacing compared to undercut anchors. (In this case the design resistance has to be
calculated for local blow-out failure, which is not done in Table 3 and 4. For comparison
it is not necessary here, because undercut anchors are not allowed to be used with these
small edge distances). The reason for the difference in cmin and smin is, that headed studs
are not torqued, when they are welded to a fixture. Undercut anchors are torqued after
installation to clamp the fixture to the concrete.
For splitting, the edge distance and spacing ccr,sp and scr,sp are the same as ccr,N and scr,N
in case of undercut anchors. That means, splitting failure is not decisive and can be
neglected in the design of anchorages. For headed studs the values of ccr,sp and scr,sp are
given in /2/. They are on the safe side. Smaller values are possible if an adequate
performance is shown by prequalification tests.
The biggest advantage for headed studs is the minimum member thickness. It is required
that hmin is in minimum the length of the headed stud embedded in concrete plus the
required concrete cover for reinforcement according to the reinforced concrete standards.

245
In Table 4 the minimum cover of 1.0 cm is chosen. For the undercut anchor the required
minimum thickness is approximately 75% larger than for the headed studs according to
/3/.

The following section 5. is dealing with the minimum member thickness of undercut
anchors, because the required values are a limitation for many applications.

Table 4: Edge distance, spacing, member thickness of headed studs and undercut anchors
Headed studs according EN ISO 13918 HDA
d1 mm 10 13 16 19 22 25 M 12
hef mm 125 125 125 125 125 125 125
ccr,N mm 190 190 190 190 190 190 190
scr,N mm 375 375 375 375 375 375 375
cmin mm 30 39 48 57 66 75 100
smin mm 50 65 80 95 110 125 125
ccr,sp mm 250 250 250 250 250 250 190
scr,sp mm 500 500 500 500 500 500 375
hmin mm 142 143 143 145 145 147 250

5. Behaviour of undercut anchors in thin concrete members

The minimum member thickness for all post-installed anchors in their approvals and also
in /2/ is based on the assumption hmin = 2 hef (or larger than 100 mm). The limitation is
necessary to avoid splitting failure during installation or under loading. Splitting mainly
occurs when anchors are situated close to an edge. For post-installed anchors ccr,sp and
cmin are checked in tests. For ccr,sp pullout tests in tension are required where the anchor
is situated in the corner of a concrete member with c1 = c2 = ccr,sp and the member
thickness is 2 hef. It is required that the failure load is approximately equal to the failure
load of an anchor without any edge and spacing effects. For evaluation of cmin a double
anchor group is placed parallel to the edge with cmin and smin. The member thickness is
2 hef. The anchors are either torqued or loaded up to failure, which in most cases is
splitting of the concrete. For post-installed anchors, where a torque moment is required,
the torque at failure must have a defined safety margin in comparison to the required
installation torque. When the anchors are loaded in tension, the failure load must be
compared to the failure load calculated according to the design concept in /2/ or
Annex C of /5/.
In general, design for splitting is only necessary, when it is shown that the concrete is not
cracked in the anchoring area and the higher resistance is used in the calculation. As
stated before the minimum member thickness is fixed because of splitting failure. At
present the same member thickness is required for cracked concrete. Here splitting is not
decisive (the concrete is already cracked), but even here hmin = 2 hef has to be used. Of
course this is on the safe side. In general the rule does not limit the applications, because

246
post-installed anchors are used with low anchorage depth. For undercut anchors, which
can be compared with headed studs, the limitation is not acceptable. For an anchorage
depth of 190 mm for the HDA M16 anchor, a member thickness of 380 mm is required.
This is much more than usually available on a jobsite, especially for slabs and walls.

Tests were performed with all sizes of the undercut anchor to assess reasonable member
thickness, edge distance and spacing /4/. The test conditions met the requirements of the
ETAG /5/. The minimum member thickness was chosen to avoid any damage at the
opposite side of the concrete during drilling and setting. This was assessed for a member
thickness equal to the anchorage depth plus two diameters of the drill bit. ccr,sp was
chosen to be 1.5 hef and scr,sp to be 3 hef. These are the same values as for concrete cone
failure, which ensures that splitting calculations in the design procedure are never
decisive. cmin and smin were the same values as in the approval document. In a later step
it seems to be possible to assess reduced values. But for now it was intended not to
change too many parameters.
Test parameters, results and evaluation are summarised in Table 5. In all cases, where
only c1 and c2 are given, single anchor in the corner were loaded in tension. Where c1
and s are given, it was tension loading of a double anchor group parallel to the edge.
The following failure modes were observed: splitting (Sp), concrete cone or edge failure
(C) and steel failure (S).
The evaluation is based on the fact that splitting is not decisive if the ultimate load in
these tests is equal to or larger than the concrete cone resistance. The concrete cone
resistance is calculated according to Equation (1), which is the basis for the evaluation of
the characteristic resistance of the undercut anchor.

N u ,exp = 15.5 ⋅ f c ⋅ hef1.5 [kN] (1)


1000
Table 5: Test results of HDA undercut anchors in thin concrete members
test HDA hef fc c1 c2 s h Fu fm Nu,exp Ac,N ψs,N Nu,m xi,j
M mm Mpa mm mm mm mm kN kN /A°
1.1 10 100 34.0 80 80 140 44.89 Sp 90.4 0.59 0.86 45.7 0.98
2 10 100 34.0 80 80 140 44.51 C 90.4 0.59 0.86 45.7 0.97
3 10 100 34.0 80 80 140 47.80 C 90.4 0.59 0.86 45.7 1.05
4 10 100 34.0 80 80 140 48.47 S 90.4 0.59 0.86 45.7 >1.06
2.1 10 100 34.0 150 150 140 48.82 S 90.4 1.0 1.0 90.4
2 10 100 34.0 150 150 140 47.25 S 90.4 1.0 1.0 90.4
3 10 100 34.0 150 150 140 47.90 S 90.4 1.0 1.0 90.4
4 10 100 34.0 150 150 140 48.43 S 90.4 1.0 1.0 90.4
3.1 10 100 34.0 80 100 140 90.42 S 90.4 1.02 0.86 79.5 >1.14
2 10 100 40.7 80 100 140 88.36 C 98.9 1.02 0.86 86.9 1.02
3 10 100 40.7 80 100 140 85.74 Sp 98.9 1.02 0.86 86.9 0.99

247
test HDA hef fc c1 c2 s h Fu fm Nu,exp Ac,N ψs,N Nu,m xi,j
M mm Mpa mm mm mm mm kN kN /A°
4.1 12 125 34.2 100 100 170 70.08 C 126.7 0.59 0.86 64.0 1.09
2 12 125 34.2 100 100 170 69.12 C 126.7 0.59 0.86 64.0 1.08
3 12 125 34.2 100 100 170 72.60 C 126.7 0.59 0.86 64.0 1.13
4 12 125 34.2 100 100 170 69.62 C 126.7 0.59 0.86 64.0 1.09
5.1 12 125 34.2 190 190 170 73.20 S 126.7 1.0 1.0 126.7
2 12 125 34.2 190 190 170 73.84 S 126.7 1.0 1.0 126.7
3 12 125 34.2 190 190 170 73.18 S 126.7 1.0 1.0 126.7
4 12 125 34.2 190 190 170 73.03 S 126.7 1.0 1.0 126.7
6.1 12 125 34.2 100 125 170 119.28 C 126.7 1.02 0.86 111.4 1.07
2 12 125 34.2 100 125 170 121.54 C 126.7 1.02 0.86 111.4 1.09
3 12 125 34.2 100 125 170 114.12 C 126.7 1.02 0.86 111.4 1.02
4 12 125 34.2 100 125 170 112.96 Sp 126.7 1.02 0.86 111.4 1.01
7.1 12 125 34.2 190 375 170 149.67 S 126.7 2.0 1.0 253.4
2 12 125 34.2 190 375 170 149.19 S 126.7 2.0 1.0 253.4
3 12 125 34.2 190 375 170 150.82 S 126.7 2.0 1.0 253.4
8.1 16 190 35.7 150 150 250 131.31 S 242.5 0.58 0.86 121.2 1.08
2 16 190 35.7 150 150 250 135.31 S 242.5 0.58 0.86 121.2 1.12
3 16 190 35.7 150 150 250 138.37 S 242.5 0.58 0.86 121.2 1.14
4 16 190 35.7 150 150 250 136.12 S 242.5 0.58 0.86 121.2 1.12
9.1 16 190 35.7 285 285 250 138.49 S 242.5 1.0 1.0 242.5
2 16 190 35.7 285 285 250 135.19 S 242.5 1.0 1.0 242.5
3 16 190 35.7 285 285 250 132.87 S 242.5 1.0 1.0 242.5
4 16 190 35.7 285 285 250 135.48 S 242.5 1.0 1.0 242.5
10.1 16 190 35.7 150 150 250 241.28 C 242.5 0.96 0.86 200.6 1.20
2 16 190 35.7 150 190 250 255.25 C 242.5 1.02 0.86 211.7 1.21
3 16 190 35.7 150 190 250 263.19 Sp 242.5 1.02 0.86 211.7 1.24
4 16 190 35.7 150 190 250 269.47 S 242.5 1.02 0.86 211.7 1.27
11.1 16 190 35.7 285 570 250 267.92 S 242.5 2.0 1.0 485.1
2 16 190 35.7 285 570 250 267.02 S 242.5 2.0 1.0 485.1
3 16 190 35.7 285 570 250 271.77 S 242.5 2.0 1.0 485.1

In most cases Nu,exp has to be multiplied by the influencing factors Ac,N/A° and ψs,N
according to /2/ or Annex C of /5/.. These factors take into account small edge distances
and small spacing. The result is the expected mean ultimate load of the anchor or the
anchor group Nu,m. xi,j is the ratio of the measured failure load and the mean expected
value for concrete cone failure. In cases where steel failure occurred the ratio was not
calculated. The resistance for steel failure is lower than the concrete cone resistance. The

248
ratio was calculated only in the two test series, where other failure modes were also
observed.
To show that the concrete cone resistance was reached in the tests the factor xi,j may
scatter around the value of 1.0 with a coefficient of variation of 15%. Looking at the
results it is obvious, that the requirement is fulfilled.

In summary it can be said that even with the thin member thickness splitting is not
decisive for HDA undercut anchors. All edge distances (ccr,N and cmin ) and spacing
(scr,N and smin ) can be taken from the approval document for the calculation of the
concrete cone resistance.

6. Performance under shear loading

For steel failure under shear loading without lever arm the design resistance VRd,s of the
undercut anchor M12 is 24 kN. This is in between a headed stud of 10 mm diameter
(17.2 kN) and a diameter of 13 mm (29.1 kN), calculated according to /2/. For the
calculation it has to be taken into account that the material properties of headed studs are
lower than for the undercut anchor. This also influences the partial safety factor. On the
other hand a better factor in the equation for VRd,s (0.75 instead of 0.6) can be used for
headed studs, because the resistance to shear forces is positively influenced by the stud-
welding process. As a result headed studs and the undercut anchor show approximately
the same design resistance, when the diameter of the stud and the bolt are the same. For
shear load with lever arm the same rules apply to both anchors.
For pry-out failure, the same rules also have to be used for undercut anchors and headed
studs. The pry-out resistance is based on the concrete cone resistance under tension.
Because the concrete cone resistance is the same, the design resistance under pry-out is
the same.
For concrete edge failure the design is based on the same equations and on the same
partial safety factors. The only difference might be the fitting factor lf in the equation for
VRk,c°. The value for lf is given in the approval document for the undercut anchor and is
70% of the anchorage depth for M10 and M 12 and 50% for M16. For headed studs the
design guide /2/ does not mention any values for lf. So it is assumed that the designer
will take lf = hef. In the equation for VRk,c° the factor lf is covered by (lf/dnom) to the
power of 0.2. So the difference in VRk,c° for headed studs and the undercut anchor is
relatively small.

In summary it can be said, that under shear loads headed studs and undercut anchors
follow the same equations of /2/ or /5/ Annex C, when calculating the design resistances.
The differences are only linked to steel strength, diameter of the stud or bolt and to the
stiffness of the anchor (lf/dnom). For the chosen undercut anchor the differences in the
design resistances for the different failure modes compared to headed studs are small.

249
7. References

1. ISO 13918, ‘Welding – Studs and ceramic ferrules for arc stud welding‘, 1998

2. CEB Bulletin d’Information No. 226, ‘Design of fastenings in concrete‘, 1995

3. European Technical Approval ETA-99/0009, ‘Hilti HDA Anchor‘, 1999

4. Bautechnische Versuchsanstalt an der HTL Rankweil: ‘Prüfbericht über


Zugversuche mit HDA-P M10, M 12 und M 16, ungerissener Beton C 20/25,
Einzel- und Doppelbefestigungen in dünnen Platten‘ vom 30.3.2001 (only in
German, not published)

5. EOTA, ETAG No 001: ‘Guideline for European Technical Approval of Metal


Anchors for Use in Concrete‘, Brussels 1997

250
SHEAR ANCHORING IN CONCRETE CLOSE TO THE EDGE
Norbert Randl* and Marcel John**
*Hilti AG, Kaufering, Germany
**Hilti AG, Schaan, Principality of Liechtenstein

Abstract
Since design rules for post-installed anchors are usually based on investigations in
unreinforced concrete, the design resistance of fixings set close to the concrete edge and
loaded in shear towards the edge is low. It is therefore necessary to consider the effective
strength of the reinforced concrete edge.
This paper first demonstrates that the current methods to take into account the strength
of the concrete edge are insufficient in many cases and proposes different edge
strengthening methods based on extensive laboratory testing. Finally a Eurocode 2
compatible design formula for cast-in hairpin reinforcement is derived.

1. Introduction

Limited space often requires the fixing of anchor


plates like baseplates of steel columns, railings or
lamp posts in the vicinity of the edge of the concrete
foundation.Though in practice the concrete usually
is reinforced, design rules for anchors are typically
based on investigations in unreinforced concrete.
The failure load of such fixings set close to the
concrete edge and loaded in shear towards the edge
is determined by a brittle concrete cone breaking out
in front of the anchor. The shear resistance therefore
reduces significantly with decreasing edge distance.
If the edge distance is very small, splitting due to
wedge forces must also be considered. Adhering to
prescribed minimum edge distances will typically
prevent this mode of failure.
Fig. 1 Anchoring of guard rail

251
Extensive testing has shown that standard slab lateral reinforcement is usually not
sufficient to significantly increase the shear resistance of anchors loaded towards the
edge. Higher shear resistance can be activated, for example, by using elongated holes in
the anchorage base plate for the anchors situated closest to the edge or by externally
reinforcing the edge. If no external reinforcement is to be applied, cast-in additional U-
shaped reinforcement in the concrete has been shown to be a very effective method to
strengthen the edge [1], [2].

For this strengthening method, a design formula based on the Eurocode safety concept as
described in [3] has been derived from test results. This allows the design engineer to
plan post-installed anchorages closer to the concrete edge, and with higher resistance
than would be possible with standard anchor design concepts.

2. Unreinforced Concrete

The analytical determination of the ultimate load capacity is difficult as it depends on the
behaviour of concrete under multiaxial stresses and has to consider the scatter in local
concrete strength, size effects etc. Most equations for the prediction of failure loads have
therefore been derived empirically, taking into account the observations from tests and
are available only for the case without any retaining hanger reinforcement. Based on
regression analyses of 147 tests Eligehausen and Fuchs propose the following equation
for the calculation of the average ultimate failure load in unreinforced uncracked
concrete [4, 5]:
0 ,2
 h  (units: [N, mm]) (1)
Vum ,c = k ⋅ d nom
0 ,5
⋅ f cc0,5 ⋅  ef  ⋅ c11,5
 d nom 

with:
dnom outside diameter of anchor
hef anchorage depth [5]
c1 edge distance of anchor axis
fcc concrete cube strength
k constant factor (k = 1.0)

3. Effect of Standard Reinforcement

A concrete plate with reinforcement bars parallel to the edge and with ties along the edge
shall be considered as having standard reinforcement. Reinforced concrete is typically
assumed to be cracked concrete. To account for the cracks, the load bearing capacity of
uncracked concrete has to be multiplied by a global factor of 0.7 [5]. In the presence of
minimum edge reinforcement, this reduction can be partially compensated for by a
factor of 1.2 or 1.4, depending on the density of the edge reinforcement [6].
This is only a very rough approximation, and tests have shown that, for smaller anchor

252
diameters, it may even be unsafe. Small diameter anchors have a low bending resistance
and introduce the load right at the top of the
concrete surface. Thus, the failure cone is
pushed over the edge reinforcement (Fig. 2)
[7].
With greater anchor diameters the edge
≈ reinforcement may support the shear load
more effectively because the anchor is able to
introduce the load farther away from the
concrete surface. Figures 3 and 4 show test
results with edge reinforcement of diameters
6 – 12 mm and welded wire meshes.
Especially the test results with M16 anchors
≈ are somewhat higher than those expected in
unreinforced concrete, nevertheless the effect
is rather negligible.
Fig. 2: Small anchors with edge reinforcement

Force Vu [kN]
70

60

50

40
Equ. (1)
30
unreinforced
20 series1
series2
10
Rk (steel failure)
0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Fig. 3 Tests with anchors
c1 [mm] HSL M12
Force Vu [kN]
120

100

80

60
Equ. (1)
unreinforced
40
series1
series2
20
series3
Rk (steel failure)
0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 Fig. 4 Tests with anchors
c1 [mm] HSL M16

253
4. Subsequent Constructive Measures

4.1 External Edge Support

column
anchorage baseplate

HSL HSL
HAS with HIT-HY 150
or HVU

failure cone

Fig. 5 Scheme of back anchorage Fig. 6 Shear support

A steel bar reinforces the concrete edge by anchoring the concrete edge behind the
expected failure cone. The support steel bar is designed according to the rules of steel
construction, assuming a uniformely distributed load. The anchorage is composed of
bonded anchors reaching behind the expected failure cone (Fig. 5). The shear anchors
(HSL) developed a very high resistance and typically failed by yielding of the steel rod
in shear (Fig. 6).

4.2 Use of Elongated Holes in Anchorage Baseplate


If the anchorage baseplate has two or more rows of anchors, the holes for the anchors
closest to the edge should be elongated, directed towards the edge. Thus, these anchors
do not take any shear loads. The anchors of the row farther away can activate a bigger
failure cone and, therefore, a higher load capacity.

5. Cast-In Hairpin Reinforcement

5.1 Research program


A comprehensive test program was carried out at the laboratories of Hilti AG [7] and the
Institute for Concrete Construction at the University of Innsbruck [8] in order to quantify
the effect of cast-in hairpin reinforcement and to develop corresponding design rules.
The U-shaped hairpins were set with an inclination of 5°- 10°.
The following parameters have been varied:
hairpins: - diameter ds [mm]: 12, 16
- diameter of bend resp. distance e of hairpin legs: e = 88 - 134 mm
- concrete cover to front side (csv = 10 - 30 mm) and top surface
(cso = 7 - 33 mm)
anchors: - anchor type: expansion anchors HSL, bonded anchors HVU
- anchor diameter d [mm]: 12, 16, 20

254
- edge distance c1: 55 - 150 mm
- excentricity of anchor axis (in relation to axis of the hairpin)

The concrete cube strength fcc was between 25 and 30 N/mm² for all tests. The loading
was displacement controlled.
A total of 62 tests with cast-in hairpin reinforcement and 14 tests without any
reinforcement in the anchorage area were carried out.
LINEAR POTENTIO M ETER
The load was introduced by a
steel plate parallel to the
PTFE-LAYER
concrete surface (Fig. 7).
V PTFE layers were put
~10 30 c so between steel plate and
c sv concrete in order to reduce
HAIRPIN friction.
ANCHO R BO LT

Fig. 7 Test setup

5.2 Test results:


Failure usually occurs by formation of a failure cone followed by pullout or breakage of
the anchor. Typically, the maximum load
is reached, when the failure cone starts to
break out. The cracks start from the
anchor and run towards the edge. Their
inclination to the concrete edge is 30° -
45° . Generally, the angle becomes smaller
towards the edge (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8 Concrete cone failure of specimen


12.2 (Dowel HVU 16, hairpin ø16)

Some tests showed a second increase of the load after displacements of 10mm and more:
One reason is the tensile capacity of the deformed, inclinded anchor (kinking effect) and
the second is that anchors set very close to the edge touched the hairpin reinforcement.
Four tests with bonded anchors yielded in shear failure of the anchor without formation
of a concrete cone (steel failure). These tests have not been considered in the
development of the design recommendation for the resistance at the concrete edge.
The tests confirm that cast-in hairpin reinforcement can significantly increase the
loadbearing capacity. Moreover, the post peak load behaviour becomes much more
ductile. The most significant increase of up to 200% is observed if the edge distance is
very small (Fig. 9). Due to the reinforcement, the first cracks appear at about 50% higher
loads than in unreinforced concrete.

255
Test no. 5.1 V [kN] Test no. 5.2
V [kN] HSL 12, c1 = 65 mm, unreinforced HSL 12, c1 = 65 mm, hairpin ø12, cso=11mm
50
50
45 40,8 kN
45 ∇
40
40
35
35
30
30
25 25
∇ 1 crack
st
20 20
12,9 kN
15
15 ∇
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
s [mm] s [mm]

Fig. 9 Load-displacement curves for specimens without and with hairpin reinforcement

The parameter most strongly influencing the peak load is the distance of the hairpin
reinforcement from the concrete surface (cso), especially with small reinforcement
diameters and with anchors set very close to the edge. While the peak load can be
increased by a factor of 3 with a concrete cover of 10mm for 12mm diameter hairpins,
the influence of the same reinforcement with a cover of 30mm is scarcely observable.
The tests also show that the peak load increases with the diameter of the cast-in
reinforcement. However, this increase is not directly proportional to the increase of the
steel area. The effect of the hairpin reinforcement is independent of the exact position of
the anchor between its legs.

5.3 Theoretical considerations and prediction of failure load


Anchors subjected to shear loads experience bending, shear and with increasing lateral
displacement also axial stresses. Small loads are directly introduced from the shaft into
the surface concrete. The load-displacement curve is steep and shows a linear-elastic
behaviour. The transmission of the shear force from the anchor bolt to the concrete takes
place within a depth measured from the surface of 1 to 2 times the dowel diameter
[9,10]. A hanger reinforcement makes sense only in this area, because the resulting
compression strut then finds a support. Due to the locally high pressure in front of the
bolt, the surface concrete plasticizes under increasing load and flexural stresses are
generated in the anchor shaft. For anchors situated near the edge this finally leads to the
formation of a concrete failure cone.
Some of the tests have also been analysed by means of a 3-dimensional finite element
modelling using non-linear material laws and a smeared crack approach. The computer
simulation confirmed that the failure is due to cracking and crushing of the concrete in
front of the anchor. Provided that the anchor has sufficient embedment length, this leads
to the development of a plastic hinge. The hinge is closer to the surface if the hanger
reinforcement has less concrete cover and thus significantly reduces the lever arm of the
anchor. Moreover the calculations demonstrated that the hairpins remain elastic until the
peak load is reached.
The increase of the ultimate load is not proportional to the steel area because the

256
centerpoint of the support for the compression strut moves down with increasing hairpin
diameter at constant concrete cover.
The results of the tests in unreinforced concrete correspond well to formula (1). The best
agreement is reached with a factor k = 1,0, the coefficient of variation results in a rather
low value of 14 %.
The cast-in reinforcement delays the formation of cracks starting from the anchor as well
as their propagation. The additional energy required for crack growth corresponds to the
possible increase of the load bearing capacity. Therefore, it is best represented by an
additional term to equation (1). The effectiveness of the hanger reinforcement is about
inversely proportional to the concrete cover and decreases with increasing distance
between the anchor and the hairpin reinforcement bend. Moreover, the anchor stiffness,
characterized by dowel diameter and embedment depth, has an influence on the
loadbearing behaviour.
The combination of all relevant parameters with respect to their effects leads to the
following approach for the prediction of the failure load:
k
  2
( )
Vum = Vum,c + κ ⋅ A s,h ⋅ f y ,h ⋅ 1 − f 1 (l proj , c1 , h ef ) ⋅ 

d nom
+
 < Vum,s (2)
 1 so
k c d s 
with:
κ ...... effectiveness factor taking into account that the
concrete will crush before the ultimate capacity c1
of the hairpin is reached csv
k1, 2 ... constants
f1 ....... empirical function
ds ..... nominal diameter of hairpin reinforcement
lproj e
hef .... anchorage length [5]
dnom ... outside diameter of anchor
lproj .... projective length: can be approximated in terms
of the edge distance and the concrete cover
ahead of the hairpin (Fig. 10):
lproj ≈ 1,7 ⋅ (c1 - csv) ≤ e
As,h.... total cross section of both hairpin legs Fig. 10 Projective length
fy,h..... yield strength of hairpin steel
Steel failure due to a combination of shear and bending of the anchor shaft represents an
upper bound on the shear capacity: Vum,s = α ⋅ As ⋅ fy with α ≈ 0,6 - 0,7 [5]. (AS = cross
section and fy = yield strength of anchor)
The formation of the concrete cone is considered as the failure criterion. This generally
corresponds to the first peak load or the first horizontal branch of the load displacement
curve. The systematic variation of the different parameters and the subsequent statistical
evaluation finally leads to the following form of equation (2):
 l proj0,5 ⋅ c10,5   
1,5
⋅ 1 − 0,5 ⋅
d nom (3)
Vum = Vum ,c + 0,4 ⋅ A s,h ⋅ f y ,h ⋅  
  1,2 ⋅ c so + d s
  
h ef

257
Fig. 11 shows the comparison of predicted and observed failure loads for undercut
anchors type HSL in function of the edge distance c1. Considering all specimens with
introduced hairpin reinforcement except for the 4 tests with early shear failure of the
dowels the average ratio of actual to predicted failure load is 1.05. With a coefficient of
variation of 19 % and a factor of correlation of 89%, the scatter zone is within acceptable
limits (Fig. 12).

HSL ø16
(Hairpin reinforcement ø12 and ø16)
V [kN]
120
Eq. (1) (unreinforced)
110
100 Eq. (3), hairpin ø16,
90 cso ≈ 9 mm
80 Eq. (3), hairpin ø12,
70 cso ≈ 11 mm
60 Vks (steel failure)
50
HSL 16, hairpin ø16,
40 cso ≈ 9 mm
30 HSL 16, hairpin ø12,
20 cso ≈ 11 mm
10 unreinforced
0
50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
Edge distance [mm]

Fig. 11 Predicted (calculated) and observed failure loads in function of c1

Vexp [kN]
120,0

100,0

80,0

60,0

40,0

20,0 Vcalc =Vexp

0,0 Fig. 12 Comparison of calculated and


0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0 120,0 experimental results
Vcalc [kN]

258
5.4 Design formula and recommendations for execution
For practical design purposes the transition from mean ultimate loads to characteristic
values (fractiles) is required. The characteristic resistance is derived as the 5%-fractile of
the mean value of strength with a confidence level of 90%. Admitting a log-normal
distribution, the statistical evaluation of the tests conducted in reinforced concrete yields
a global reduction factor ψ = 0,72. This corresponds to the factor of ψ = 0,7 proposed
by Eligehausen in [4] for unreinforced concrete.
The material properties are also considered by their lower fractile; this additional safety
will not be used in the design formula.
The design resistance is derived in accordance with the safety concept of MC 90 [3] and
Eurocode 2 by applying appropriate partial safety factors.
In unreinforced, cracked concrete, the design resistance is the mean ultimate load
multiplied by ψ = 0,7 for the statistical evaluation of the 5%-fractile [4], multiplied
again by 0,7 accounting for the effect of cracks [4, 5] and divided by the partial safety
factor γMc [6]:
0 ,2
1 0 ,5  h ef 
VRd ,c = ⋅ 0,5 ⋅ d nom
0 ,5
⋅ f ck ⋅   ⋅ c11,5 (units: [N, mm]) (4)
γ Mc  d nom 
with:
fck ...... characteristic cylinder compressive strength of concrete
γMc .... safety factor for system with normal installation safety:
γMc = γ1⋅ γ2 = 1,8⋅1,2 = 2,2 [6].

According to equation (3) the shear load capacity with cast-in hairpin reinforcement
becomes:
 l proj 0,5 ⋅ c10,5   
1,5
⋅ 0,3 ⋅ A s,h ⋅ f yk ,h ⋅ 1 − 0,5 ⋅
1 d nom (5)
VRd = VRd ,c + ⋅  
γ Ms  h ef   1,2 ⋅ c so + d s 
 
(valid for fyk,h ≤ 600 N/mm², fck ≤ 40 N/mm², 4 dnom ≤ hef ≤ 8 dnom, dnom ≤ 25 mm)
with:
γMs = γ1⋅ γ2⋅ γ3 = 1,15 ⋅ 1,5 ⋅ 1,2 = 2,1
γ1 .... partial safety factor for steel in tension
γ2 .... partial safety factor taking into account deviations in the height position of the
reinforcement and uncertainties due to anchor installation
γ3 .... partial safety factor accounting for scatter of failure loads and model uncertainties

Eq. (5) is valid for single anchors and sufficient thickness of the concrete member
(h > 1,5 c1) as well as an edge distance c2 perpendicular to the direction of the shear load
measured from the axis of the anchor c2 > 1,5 c1.

For execution special attention should be paid to the following aspects:


The hairpin reinforcement should be anchored outside the assumed failure cone and
consist of ribbed reinforcing bars with a diameter not larger than 16 mm. It should be

259
inclined with respect to the concrete cover. Thus the concrete cover of the hairpin legs is
bigger than that of the bend, which improves the anchorage. Corrosion generally should
not be relevant, since the baseplate of the fixed part is typically grouted over the bend of
the hairpin reinforcement. If not, the reinforcement must be protected by galvanization,
special coatings or the use of stainless steel. Sufficient bending radius will compensate
for the positioning tolerances of the hairpin reinforcement and thus make sure that the
anchors will be positioned within the hairpin.

6. Summary

After reviewing some alternative methods to most effectively utilize the concrete edge
strength, the reader has been presented with a formula to design anchors under shear
loads when hairpin reinforcement is present in the concrete. This formula is compatible
with modern design concepts and has been adapted to Eurocode 2. Moreover it has been
shown, that global design concepts do not always clearly represent the complex situation
near a concrete edge. Therefore it is strongly recommended to use engineering
judgement and well based design concepts in the planning of safety relevant fixings near
a concrete edge.

7. References

1. Paschen, H., and Schönhoff, Th., ‘Untersuchungen über in Beton eingelassene


Scherbolzen aus Betonstahl’, Deutscher Ausschuß für Stahlbeton 346 (Wilhelm
Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 1983) 105-147.
2. Klingner, R., Mendonca, J., and Malik, J., ‘Effect of reinforcing details on the shear
resistance of anchor bolts under reversed cyclic loading’, Journal of the American
Concrete Institute 79 (1) (1982) 3-12.
3. Comité Euro-International du Béton, CEB-FIP Model Code 1990 (Thomas Telford,
London, 1993) 437 pp.
4. Eligehausen, R., Mallée, R., Rehm, G., ‘Befestigungstechnik’, Betonkalender 1997,
part 2, 609-753.
5. Comité Euro-International du Béton, ‘Fastenings to concrete and masonry
structures’, Bulletín 216 (Thomas Telford, London, 1994) 249 pp.
6. Comité Euro-International du Béton, ‘Design of fastenings in concrete’, Bulletín
233 (Thomas Telford, London, 1997) 83 pp.
7. Hartmann, M., Silva, J., ‘Versuche zur Erhöhung der Tragfähigkeit von randnahen
Ankern’ (HILTI AG Konzernforschung, Report No. A-IF6-8/97, 1999).
8. Fritsche, G., Wicke, M., ‘Versuche zur Prüfung von Metalldübeln’, Institut für
Betonbau, Universität Innsbruck (Report No. 22, 1998).
9. Randl, N., Wicke, M., Schubübertragung zwischen Alt- und Neubeton, Beton- und
Stahlbetonbau 95 (8) (2000) 461-473.
10. Randl, N., Untersuchungen zur Kraftübertragung zwischen Alt- und Neubeton bei
unterschiedlichen Fugenrauhigkeiten, Doctoral thesis (Universität Innsbruck, 1997)
369 pp.

260
BEHAVIOR OF TENSILE ANCHORS IN CONCRETE:
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
RECOMMENDATIONS
Mansour Shirvani*, Richard E. Klingner**, and Herman L. Graves, III***
* Former, The University of Texas at Austin, USA.
** Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, USA.
*** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., USA.

Abstract
The overall objective of this paper is to evaluate four different procedures for predicting
the concrete breakout capacity of tensile anchors under static and dynamic loading, and
in uncracked and cracked concrete. An existing public-domain data base of tensile
anchors was evaluated and updated. Observed capacities of tensile anchors failing by
concrete breakout were compared with the predictions of four methods: the 45-Degree
Cone Method; the CC Method, and a variation on it; and a “Theoretical Method.” Each
predictive method was then evaluated using Monte Carlo analyses to predict the
probability of failure by concrete breakout, using the design framework of ACI 349-90,
Appendix B “Steel Embedments.” [1]

1. Introduction

The objective of this research was to provide the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) with a comprehensive document that could be used to establish regulatory
positions regarding fastening to concrete. Tensile behavior of anchors under static and
dynamic loading in uncracked and cracked concrete, and for cast-in-place, undercut,
sleeve and expansion anchors, is evaluated using the design framework of ACI 349-90,
and four possible predictive equations for concrete breakout:

1) the 45-Degree Cone Method;


2) the Concrete Capacity Method (CC Method), and a variation on that method;
and
3) a “Theoretical Method” related to the CC Method.

Available test data are evaluated and organized by failure mode, using descriptions and
photographs presented by the original researchers. Each set of design provisions is
evaluated based on the following criteria [2]:

261
1) An ideal design method should give ratios of observed to predicted capacity
showing no systematic error (that is, no variation in ratios with changes in
embedment depth), high precision (that is, little scatter of data).

2) An ideal design method should have acceptably low probabilities of failure in the
overall design framework in which it is to be used.

2. Test Data for Tensile Anchors in Concrete

The public-domain data base used for this purpose is maintained by ACI Committees
349 and 355, and comes from many contributors, including Dr. Werner Fuchs
(University of Stuttgart), Drilco Industries, Inc., Prof. Peter Carrato (Bucknell
University), The University of Texas at Austin, Hilti AG, and various members of ACI
Committees 349 and 355. The data base contains data for tensile breakout failures only.

3. Background

General information on anchor types and behavior is given in CEB (1991) [3]. Essential
information is summarized here.

Tensile Breakout Capacity by 45-Degree Cone Method


The 45-Degree Cone Method assumes that a constant tensile stress of 4 f c′ acts on the
projected area of a 45-degree cone radiating towards the free surface from the bearing
edge of the anchor (Figure 1).
T
2hef+dh

45º

dh

Figure 1 Tensile breakout cone as idealized by 45-degree Cone Method

262
For a single tensile anchor far from edges, the cone breakout capacity is determined by:

(
To = 4 fc′ π hef2 1 + d h hef ) lb (1a)

(
To = 0.96 f c′ π hef2 1 + d h hef ) N (1b)
where:
f c′ = specified concrete compressive cylinder strength (psi in US units, MPa in SI
units);
dh = diameter of anchor head (inch in US units, mm in SI units); and
hef = effective embedment (inch in US units, mm in SI units).

If the cone is affected by edges (c < hef) or by an adjacent concrete breakout cone, the
breakout capacity is:
AN
Tn = To (2)
ANo
where:

AN = actual projected area of failure cone or cones;


ANo = projected area of a single cone unaffected by edges
= π hef2 (1 + d h hef ) .

Tensile Breakout Capacity by Concrete Capacity Method (CC Method)


The CC Method [4] computes the concrete breakout capacity of a single tensile anchor
far from edges as:
To = k fc′ hef1.5 (3)
where:
To = tensile breakout capacity;
k = constant; for anchors in uncracked concrete the mean values originally
proposed based on previous tests are: 35 for expansion and sleeve anchors,
39 for undercut and headed anchors, in US units; or 13.48 for expansion and
sleeve anchors, 15 for undercut and headed anchors, in SI units;
f′c = specified concrete compressive strength (6 × 12 cylinder) (inch in US units,
MPa in SI units.);
hef = effective embedment depth (inch in US unit, MPa in SI unit).

In the CC Method, the breakout body is idealized as a pyramid with an inclination of


about 35 degrees between the failure surface and the concrete member surface (Figure
2).

263
As a result, the base of the pyramid measures 3hef by 3hef. If the failure pyramid is
affected by edges or by other concrete pyramids, the concrete capacity is calculated
according the following equation:
AN
Tn = ψ 2 Tno (4)
A No
where:

ANo = projected area of a single anchor at the concrete surface without edge
influences or adjacent-anchor effects, idealizing the failure cone as a pyramid
with a base length of scr = 3hef (Ano = 9 hef2) (See Appendix A of Reference
2);
AN = actual projected area at the concrete surface;
3hef
3hef

h ef

35º

Figure 2 Tensile breakout body as idealized by CC Method

ψ2 = tuning factor to consider disturbance of the radially symmetric stress


distribution caused by an edge,
= 1, if c1 ≥ 1.5hef;
c1
= 0.7 + 0.3 , if c1 ≤ 1.5hef;
1.5hef
where:
c1 = edge distance to the nearest edge.

Tensile Breakout Capacity by “Theoretical Method”


The “Theoretical Method” is based on linear elastic fracture mechanics, including the
size effect [5]. Tensile breakout capacity is:

264
k ⋅ f cc ⋅ h 2 ef
Nn = 0.5 (5)
 hef 
1 + 
 50 
where :
Nn = predicted concrete tensile breakout capacity (kN)
fcc = actual tested strength of a 200-mm concrete cube (MPa)
hef = effective embedment (mm)
k = 2.75 for undercut and cast-in-place anchors, and 2.5 for expansion and sleeve
anchors.

Tensile Breakout Capacity by the Variation on the CC Method


As a result of previous work in ACI Committees 318 and 349 (Subcommittee 3), it has
been proposed to modify the CC Method slightly, changing the exponent of the
embedment depth from 1.5 to 1.67 for effective embedments of 250 mm (9.84 in) or
greater, and changing the leading coefficient appropriately.
Effects of Dynamic Tensile Loading and Cracks on Tensile Breakout Capacity
In this research, predicted tensile breakout capacities under static loading were
multiplied by a dynamic factor equal to 1.25 for undercut, cast-in-place, and sleeve
anchors, and equal to 1.0 for expansion anchors [6, 7, 8]. Capacities in uncracked
concrete were multiplied by a crack factor equal to 0.9 for undercut and cast-in-place
anchors, equal to 0.7 for sleeve and expansion anchors [5, 7, 8, 9].

4. Statistical Evaluation of Database (static, uncracked)

The database for static testing on anchors in uncracked concrete comprises 1566 tests:

a) Single tensile anchors, effective embedment ≤ 188 mm, no edge effects (1130
tests);
b) Single tensile anchors, effective embedment > 188 mm, no edge effects (77
tests);
c) Single tensile anchors, effective embedment ≤ 188 mm, edge effects (137 tests);
d) Single tensile anchors, effective embedment > 188 mm, edge effects (33 tests);
e) Tensile 2- and 4-anchor groups, effective embedment ≤ 188 mm, no edge
effects (170 tests); and
f) Tensile 4-anchor groups, effective embedment > 188 mm, no edge effects (19
tests).

Means and coefficients of variation for ratios of observed to predicted capacity are
shown in Table 1. All are for static loading in uncracked concrete.

265
Table 1 Mean and COV of ratios of observed to predicted capacity for each anchor
category (static loading, uncracked concrete)
CC METHOD 45-DEG CONE THEORETICA
ANCHOR CATEGORY METHOD L METHOD
Mean COV Mean COV Mean COV
Single anchors, shallower
0.981 0.197 1.356 0.266 0.999 0.231
embedments
Single anchors, deeper
1.110 0.189 0.867 0.257 0.929 0.192
embedments
Single anchors, shallower
1.032 0.271 1.024 0.252 1.054 0.286
embedments, edge effects
Single anchors, deeper
1.203 0.173 0.675 0.210 1.014 0.244
embedments, edge effects
2- and 4-anchor groups,
shallower anchors, no edge 1.081 0.192 1.188 0.331 1.057 0.225
effects
4-anchor groups, deeper
embedments, no edge 1.336 0.254 0.930 0.229 1.133 0.252
effects

Examination of Table 1 shows that the CC Method and the Theoretical Method usually
are more accurate than the 45-Degree Cone Method (mean values closer to unity), and
have less scatter (smaller COV). Since the 45-Degree Cone Method generally gave a
higher COV than both the CC and Theoretical Methods, it was decided to exclude it for
analysis of other cases.

5. Probabilities of Failure associated with each Breakout Formula

Using the overall ratios of concrete breakout capacity, appropriately approximated by


normal distributions (Appendix B of Reference 2), probabilities of failure were
computed for an assumed statistical distribution of loads, and probabilities of brittle
failure were computed independent of load, for single anchors designed according to
each method for predicting concrete breakout capacity. This statistical evaluation was
carried out using the Monte Carlo approach, and assuming the ductile design framework
and the load and understrength factors of ACI 349-90, Appendix B [10, 11].

Probabilities of Failure under Known Loads, Static Loading, Uncracked Concrete


Results of the statistical analyses are summarized in Table 2. Higher values of β indicate
lower probabilities of failure.

266
Table 2 Probability of failure under known loads for different categories of tensile
anchors, ductile design approach, static loading, uncracked concrete
CC METHOD 45-DEG CONE THEORETICA
ANCHOR METHOD L METHOD
CATEGORY Probability of β Probability β Probability β
Failure of Failure of Failure
single anchors,
5.46E-05 3.87 8.56E-04 3.14 1.57E-04 3.60
shallower embedments
single anchors, deeper
1.39E-05 4.19 1.99E-03 2.88 5.10E-05 3.89
embedments
single anchors,
shallower
1.92E-03 2.89 1.00E-03 3.09 2.92E-03 2.76
embedments, edge
effects
single anchors, deeper
embedments, edge 1.70E-06 4.65 9.87E-04 3.09 7.41E-04 3.18
effects
2- and 4-anchor
groups, shallower
2.23E-05 4.08 1.79E-03 2.91 2.53E-04 3.48
anchors, no edge
effects
4-anchor groups,
deeper embedments, 5.23E-04 3.28 5.08E-04 3.29 7.45E-04 3.18
no edge effects

Because the probability of failure associated with the 45-Degree Cone Method was
consistently higher than that of the CC Method or the Theoretical Method, it is not
investigated further here.

Probabilities of Failure for Other Cases (Dynamic Loading, Cracked Concrete, or


Both)
For known loads, probabilities of failure with the CC Method and the Theoretical
Method are given in Table 3. All results are for single anchors, shallow embedment, no
edge effect). These results are somewhat different from those of Farrow et al. [10, 11],
because the anchors were categorized differently in that work (edge distance /
embedment, spacing / embedment), and because this work used a more extensive data
base.

267
Table 3 Probability of failure under known loads for different cases of tensile
anchors, ductile design approach, Category One
THEORETICAL
CC METHOD
ANCHOR CASE METHOD
Probability Probability
β β
of Failure of Failure
dynamic loading, uncracked concrete,
2.94E-13 7.20 6.47E-15 7.70
cast-in-place and undercut
dynamic loading, uncracked concrete,
9.78E-08 5.20 1.20E-08 5.58
expansion and sleeve
static loading, cracked concrete, cast-in-
2.10E-08 5.48 3.80E-08 5.38
place and undercut
static loading, cracked concrete,
1.60E-03 2.95 4.68E-04 3.31
expansion and sleeve
dynamic loading, cracked concrete,
1.58E-08 5.53 9.07E-10 6.01
caste-in-in-place and undercut
dynamic loading, cracked concrete,
3.62-06 4.49 3.02E-07 4.94
expansion and sleeve

Probabilities of Brittle Failure Independent of Load, Ductile Design Approach


Probabilities of brittle failure independent of load are given in Table 4.

Probabilities of Brittle Failure Independent of Load for Other Cases (Dynamic


Loading, Cracked Concrete, or Both)
Probabilities of brittle failure independent of load are given in Table 5.

268
Table 4 Probabilities of brittle failure independent of load for different categories
of tensile anchors, ductile design approach, Static, Uncracked
CC METHOD 45-DEG CONE THEORETICAL
ANCHOR METHOD METHOD
CATEGORY Probability Probability Probability
of Brittle β of Brittle β of Brittle β
Failure Failure Failure
single anchors, shallower
0.178 0.922 0.066 1.51 0.188 0.884
embedments
single anchors, deeper
0.088 1.36 0.369 0.335 0.248 0.680
embedments
single anchors, shallower
embedments, edge effects 0.206 0.821 0.198 0.848 0.201 0.837

single anchors, deeper


embedments, edge effects 0.0405 1.75 0.717 0.573 0.200 0.841

2- and 4-anchor groups,


shallower anchors, no 0.107 1.24 0.125 1.15 0.152 1.03
edge effects
4-anchor groups, deeper
embedments, no edge 0.0621 1.54 0.273 0.603 0.129 1.13
effects

Table 5 Probability of brittle failure independent of load for different cases of


tensile anchors, ductile design approach, Category One
CC METHOD THEORETICAL
METHOD
Probability Probability
ANCHOR CASE
of Brittle β of Brittle β
Failure Failure
dynamic loading, uncracked concrete, cast-
7.16E-02 1.46 1.03E-01 1.26
in-place and undercut
dynamic loading, uncracked concrete,
8.73E-02 1.36 8.15E-02 1.40
expansion and sleeve
static loading, cracked concrete, cast-in-
1.19E-01 1.18 1.33E-01 1.11
place and undercut
static loading, cracked concrete, expansion
1.20E-01 1.17 1.19E-01 1.18
and sleeve
dynamic loading, cracked concrete, caste-
5.89E-02 1.56 6.61E-02 1.51
in-in-place and undercut
dynamic loading, cracked concrete,
5.74E-02 1.61 1.67E-01 0.97
expansion and sleeve

269
These probabilities of failure are independent of the assumed statistical distribution of
the loads. The ductile failure criterion, which requires actual steel fracture before
concrete breakout, is quite severe, and these computed probabilities of brittle failure are
conservative (high). Results from Tables 4 and 5 imply that the CC Method generally
gives lower probabilities of brittle failure than the 45-Degree Cone Method and the
Theoretical Method.

Probabilities of Failure for the Variation on the CC Method, Known Loads


Probabilities of failure under known loads are presented in Table 6. The probabilities of
failure are of course identical in Anchor Categories One, Three and Five, since the
method is identical to the CC Method for shallower embedments, so the table includes
only deep-embedment categories. Probabilities of failure are clearly higher for the
variation in the CC Method.

Table 6 Probability of failure under known loads for different categories of tensile
anchors, ductile design approach, Static, Uncracked
VARIATION ON
CC METHOD
ANCHOR CATEGORY CC METHOD
Probability β Probability β
of Failure of Failure
single anchors, deeper embedments 3.27E-05 4.51 4.89E-05 3.89
single anchors, deeper embedments, edge
1.70E-06 4.65 8.84E-08 5.01
effects
4-anchor groups, deeper embedments, no
5.36E-04 3.27 6.78E-04 3.14
edge effects

6. Conclusions
1) The CC Method and the Theoretical Method have a generally lower probability of
failure under known loads, than the 45-Degree Cone Method. These results are
consistent with those of Farrow et al. [10, 11]. The lower probability of failure is
particularly striking for deeper embedments. The CC Method has a generally lower
probability of failure under known loads, than the Theoretical Method.
2) The CC Method has a generally lower probability of brittle failure independent of
load, than the 45-Degree Cone Method and the Theoretical Method.
3) The Variation on the CC Method, which uses an exponent of (5/3) for the effective
embedment at deeper embedments, has higher systematic error and higher
probabilities of failure than the CC Method. It has no technical justification.

270
7. Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

This paper presents partial results of a research program supported by U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) under Contract No. NRC-04-96-059. The technical
contact is Herman L. Graves, III. Any conclusions expressed in this paper are those of
the authors, and are not to be considered NRC policy or recommendations.

8. References

1. ACI Committee 349, “Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete
Structures,” American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1990.
2. Shirvani, Mansour, “Behavior of Tensile Anchors in Concrete: Statistical Analysis
and Design Recommendations,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin,
May 1998.
3. CEB, “Fastenings to Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures: State-of-Art
Report, Part 1,” Euro-International-Concrete Committee (CEB), August 1991.
4. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen and R. and Breen, J. E., “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 1,
January-February, 1995, pp. 73-94.
5. Eligehausen, R. and Ozbolt, J., “Influence of Crack Width on the Concrete Cone
Failure Load,” Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures, Z. P. Bazant, ed.,
Elsevier Applied Science, 1992, pp. 876-881.
6. Rodriguez, M., “Behavior of Anchors in Uncracked Concrete under Static and
Dynamic Loading,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, August 1995.
7. Hallowell, J. M., “Tensile and Shear Behavior of Anchors in Uncracked and
Cracked Concrete under Static and Dynamic Loading,” M.S. Thesis, The University
of Texas at Austin, August 1996.
8. Zhang, Y. “Dynamic Behavior of Multiple Anchor Connections,” Ph.D.
Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, May 1997.
9. Eligehausen, R. and Balogh, T., “Behavior of Fasteners Loaded in Tension in
Cracked Reinforced Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 3, May-June,
1995, pp. 365-379.
10. Farrow, C. Ben and Klingner, R. E., “Tensile Capacity of Anchors with Partial or
Overlapping Failure Surfaces: Evaluation of Existing Formulas on an LRFD
Basis,” ACI Structures Journal, Vol. 92, No. 6, November-December 1995, pp. 698-
710.
11. Farrow, C. Ben, Frigui, Imed and Klingner, R. E., “Tensile Capacity of Single
Anchors in Concrete: Evaluation of Existing Formulas on an LRFD Basis,” ACI
Structures Journal, Vol. 93, No. 1, January-February 1996.

271
PERFORMANCE OF SINGLE ANCHORS NEAR AN EDGE
UNDER VARYING ANGLES OF LOADING
Richard E. Wollmershauser, Ute Nestler, and Vincent Smith
HILTI, Inc., USA

Abstract
While the performance of anchors near an edge under shear loading perpendicular to the
edge is well documented, especially under the concrete capacity design (CCD) method,
virtually no published tests or reports are available to establish the influence concrete
capacity of anchors at angles other than perpendicular.

Single anchor tests on adhesive-bonded anchors have been performed at three edge
distances and under angles of shear loading varying from 0 to 180 degrees from the
perpendicular. Analysis is performed to develop influencing factors resulting from edge
distances and angles of loading.

A proposal is made for anchor influencing factors under these loading conditions for
inclusion in the CCD method.

1. Introduction

The concrete shear capacity of an anchor near the edge of a concrete element when the
loading is perpendicular to the edge is well documented. However, the capacity when
the angle of loading varies from perpendicular is not well known. This paper presents the
results of tests of adhesive-bonded anchors at three edge distances with loading angles
varying from perpendicular to the edge through 180 degrees. Finite element analysis has
been performed to correlate with the results, as well as to investigate the capacity with
very stiff anchor rods. Finally, a recommendation is made for an angle influencing factor
to account for the effects of loading angle in shear.

272
2. Current State of Knowledge

The CEB Design of Fastenings in Concrete1 provides the only known and widely
available recommendation for the effect of loading angle on the shear capacity of an
anchor near an edge and is based on very limited testing. It is assumed that there is no
influence up to 55 degrees from the perpendicular toward the edge. The following is
excerpted from ref. 1.

The factor ψα,V takes into account the angle αV between the load applied,
Vsd, and the direction perpendicular to the edge under consideration for the
calculation of the concrete resistance of the concrete member (see Figure 1).

ψα,V = 1.0 for 0° < αV < 55°


1
ψα,V = for 55° < αV < 90°
cos αV + 0.5 sin αV
ψα,V = 2.0 for 90° < αV < 180°

Fig. 1—Loading angle

The above equations are known to be conservative.

3. Test Program with Adhesive-Bonded Anchors

A test program was performed with 12 mm (1/2-inch) adhesive-bonded anchors using


threaded rods meeting ASTM A193 B7 with fut = 862 MPa (125 ksi) and fy = 724 MPa
(105 ksi). The concrete compressive strength was approximately B25 (3,200 psi). The
embedment depth, hef, was 108 mm (4-1/4 in.), with hef/do = 8.5. Three edge distances,
c, were tested, 38 mm (1-1/2 in.), 63.5 mm (2-1/2 in.), and 90 mm (3-1/2 in.). The angle
of shear loading varied in 30-degree increments from perpendicular to the edge (0
degrees) to away from the edge (180-degrees from the edge). A Teflon® sheet was
placed between the concrete and the shear loading plate. See Figures 2 and 3 for the load

273
application. All testing was in accordance with the requirements of ASTM E488-962.
Figures 2 and 3 depict the typical test setups. The load was applied by pushing toward
the free edge. Edges were prepared by saw cutting into the slab at a depth sufficient to
not influence the test results.

Fig. 2—Overall test setup Fig. 3—Detailed shear loading

4. Test Results

Test results are given in Table 1 and Figure 4. Concrete edge breakout was the typical
failure mode for all anchors loaded from 0o through 90o except at an edge distance of
90 mm, where the failure mode shifted to anchor steel. Beyond 90o the failure mode
shifted to anchor steel. Figure 5 presents typical concrete edge breakout failure modes.

Table 1—Shear test results


Adhesive-bonded anchors
Angle of c = 38 mm c = 63.5 mm c = 90 mm
loading Vult Failure mode2 Vult Failure mode2 Vult Failure mode2
(o) (kN) (kN) (kN)
0 10 5B 18 5B 30 5B
30 12 5B 20 5B 34 5B
60 18 5B 32 5B 44 5B
90 31 5B 45 5B 52 5D
120 42 5B 52 4D/1B --1 --
150 51 5B 52 5D --1 --
180 47 4B/1D 52 5D --1 --
1
not tested
2
B = concrete failure, D = anchor steel failure

274
60

50
Failure Load [kN]

40

30 90 mm

63.5 mm
20
38 mm

10

0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Angle [degrees]
Fig. 4—Shear capacity as a function of angle of loading

Fig. 5—Typical failure mode

5. Finite Element Analysis

5.1. The Model


The Finite Element model of the numerical analysis is shown in Figure 6. It shows the
anchor at an edge distance of 90 mm (3-½ inch). The adhesive ensuring the bonding
between the anchor and concrete employs a mortar like behavior. A special material
model describing this behavior is implemented in the Finite Element code. The same
material model is used to describe the behavior of the concrete. It enables the
observation of how cracks develop in the adhesive and concrete.

275
5.2. Crack Distribution
Figure 7 shows the crack distribution when
the load on the anchor is acting
perpendicular to the edge. It can be seen
that the cracks formed a cone like failure
pattern towards the free edge. There is
another crack zone forming parallel to the
free edge.

Fig. 6— Finite element model

Legs of Cracked Concrete Cone

Perpendicular Load Direction

Cracks perpendicular to Edge

Fig. 7—Crack distribution in concrete under load perpendicular to the edge

The failure cone shape changes as the load direction changes from the perpendicular
direction. The larger the load angle becomes the more the direction of the concrete
failure cone turns accordingly, as illustrated by Figure 8. It shows the crack pattern with
loads acting at angles of 30 and 60 degrees. At all angles less than 90 degrees the
fastening fails due to concrete failure.

276
Notice that the perpendicular crack is fully developed at angles less than 90 degrees. At
an angle of exactly 90 degrees it is still fully developed (see Figure 9).

30 degrees 60 degrees

Fig. 8—Crack distribution in concrete under loads acting at angles of 30 degrees


and 60 degrees

Load direction parallel to free Edge

Fig. 9—Crack distribution in concrete under load parallel to the edge

If the load angle is greater than 90 degrees the cracks perpendicular to the free edge are
not as fully developed than with smaller load angles. In fact, the anchor behavior is
much like that of anchors without any edge influence (Figure 10). No breakage cone
develops and the failure mode is steel failure.

Anchors employing smaller edge distances behave similarly to the anchor at an edge
distance of 90 mm. But the concrete failure occurs at smaller loads due to the fact that
less amount of material resists the “crack growth”.

277
150 degrees
120 degrees
180 degrees

Fig. 10—Crack distribution in concrete under loads acting at angles of 120, 150 and
180 degrees

5.3. Failure Loads


The failure loads from the simulation are shown in Table 2 and Figure 11.

Table 2—Failure loads from simulation


Edge distance Angle of loading Failure load Failure load
(mm) (o) (kN) (lb)
0 13 3,000
30 17 3,900
60 20 4,600
38 90 29 6,500
120 49 11,000
150 49 11,000
180 49 11,000
0 20 4,500
30 25 5,600
60 30 6,700
63.5 90 43 9,600
120 49 11,000
150 49 11,000
180 49 11,000
0 34 7,700
30 35 7,800
60 40 9,000
90 90 49 11,000
120 49 11,000
150 49 11,000
180 49 11,000

278
60
Failure Load [kN]

50

40

30 90 mm

63.5 mm
20
38 mm

10

0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Angle [degrees]
Fig. 11—Failure loads

5.4. „Perfect Steel“ Rods


The simulation with an edge distance of 38 mm has also been done with anchor rods
using higher strength steel. That was done to minimize the influence of steel strength on
the failure load results. Figure 12 shows the results of those simulations:

100

90

80 '"Perfect' steel"
Failure Load [kN]

70
Yield Stress 724 MPa
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Angle [degrees]
Fig. 12— Failure loads employing very stiff anchor rods

279
6. Proposed Equations

There is no single equation that can describe the anchor behavior as a function of the
angle of the applied load. The anchor behavior has been divided into two angle
segments, from 0 to 90 degrees and for angles greater than 90 degrees. The two
equations describing the anchor behavior have been obtained using regression analysis:

0° < αV < 90° F = 0.0012* αV2 + 0.0549*αV + 13.656 (kN) (Eq. 1)

90° < αV < 180° F = -0.0052*αV2 + 2.0623*αV - 113.76 (kN) (Eq. 2)

Figure 13 shows the equations compared with simulation.

100

90

80
Failure Load [kN]

70 Equations

60 '"Perfect' steel"

50
40

30

20

10

0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180

Angle [degrees]
Fig. 13—Comparison of equations and simulation

7. Summary and Recommendations

This paper has presented a limited test program of shear loading of anchors near the free
edge at varying load angles. The suggested equations have been proposed to describe the
behavior at angles from perpendicular to the free edge to 90 degrees and from 90 to 180
degrees. The equations have their limitations because they only describe the anchor
behavior for a limited sample of anchors under a limited number of conditions. Further
tests and simulations should be undertaken to investigate the sensitivity of the equation
parameters towards variables such as anchor diameter, edge distance and concrete
strength.

280
8. References
1
Design of Fastenings in Concrete, Comite Euro-International du Beton (CEB), Thomas
Telford Services Ltd., London, Jan. 1997.
2
“Standard Test Method for Strength of Anchors in Concrete and Masonry Elements,
ASTM E488-96,” American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken,
1996.

281
THE PREQUALIFICATION OF ANCHORS IN THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE
Richard E. Wollmershauser
HILTI, Inc., USA

Abstract
Anchor prequalification in the United States for fastening to concrete is undergoing
significant change in order to meet new requirements of ACI 318 Concrete Building
Code. In the past and up to the present, there have been limited requirements under the
ICBO Uniform Building Code that apply only to the western portion of the United States
that use this code. Manufacturers have generally published data based on ASTM E 488
testing requirements or the ICBO ES Acceptance Criteria AC01 or AC58. Testing has
been limited to uncracked concrete. These requirements are briefly reviewed

ACI 318 has approved a code addition based on the Concrete Capacity Design Method
to be included in the year 2002 version that requires mechanical anchor prequalification.
ACI Committee 355 Anchorage to Concrete has developed and approved a
prequalification standard, ACI 355.2, that meets the new code requirements and is
closely harmonized with the European Technical Approval Guideline 001. These
prequalification requirements are discussed. The future prequalification requirements of
bonded anchors are also included.

1. Introduction

The prequalification of post-installed anchors in the USA is currently on the midst of


significant change from the past. The first anchor prequalification standard has been in
use since July 1975, with others developed since then for adhesive-bonded anchors and
unreinforced masonry applications. With the proposed adoption of design provisions for
anchors in ACI 3181, significant developments are underway to enhance and harmonize
anchor prequalification requirements. The key organizations are ACI2, ASTM3, and
ICBO ES4.

282
2. The Past

2.1 Mechanical Anchors


In August 1975, The International Conference of Building Officials Research
Committee, later to become ICBO Evaluation Services, Inc., adopted what is believed to
be the first anchor prequalification standard in the USA, Standard for Testing Expansion
Anchors in Concrete under the Uniform Building Code5. This standard, which was
developed by the Expansion Anchor Manufacturers Institute, later became known as
Acceptance Criteria 01 (AC01)6. It contained very limited testing requirements, but
allowed for approvals in normal-weight and lightweight concrete. Included were tension
and shear tests with sample sizes of three for each tested condition. Edge and spacing
tests were optional, with unconservative default requirements if testing was not
performed. Allowable stress design capacities were prescribed using a safety factor of
eight without special inspection of anchor installation and four with special inspection.
This standard was reissued in April 1986 to bring into compliance with then current
references.

Recognizing the limitations of the standard, a group of representatives from


manufacturers and testing laboratories developed an improved version of AC01 based on
the European UEAtc M.O.A.T. 49 document7, but with significant differences that
preclude direct equivalence. This version of AC01 was adopted in July of 1991 by ICBO
ES, Inc. and included definitions, more detailed requirements for concrete, added
masonry as a base material, prescribed more detailed testing procedures in accordance
with ASTM E 488-908, and allowed the calculation of allowable loads based on a 5
percent fractile probability method. Table 1 gives a brief listing of the tests of AC01. All
tests are in uncracked concrete.

But more importantly, it introduced the concept of proper functioning (suitability


requirements) as well as service condition requirements. The suitability tests included
sensitivity to drilled-hole diameters (larger and smaller) and reduced setting torque of
0.2 Tinst. Further enhancements in 1993, 1997 and 1999 added technical corrections,
seismic testing methods for tension and shear (as a result of the January 17, 1994
Northridge earthquake) and displacement requirements. The service condition tests
evaluated single anchor tension and shear performance, edge and spacing performance,
performance under groups, and combined tension and shear loading. However, the
approvals issued under this criteria have been limited to uncracked concrete, since the
criteria contains no testing provisions to demonstrate performance in cracks.

A similar acceptance criteria for undercut anchors is under preparation and should be
adopted within 2001.

2.2 Adhesive-Bonded Anchors


Adhesive-bonded anchors remained without any specific criteria until January 1995,
when ICBO ES adopted AC589 as developed and recommended by a group of anchor

283
manufacturers, later to become the Concrete Anchor Manufacturers Association10
(CAMA). This criterion used many of the tests from AC01, but deviated significantly in
delineating suitability requirements in evaluating the performance of the many available
Table 1—Tests Contained in AC01
Test Series Description of Tests Test Parameters
Proper Functioning
1, 2 Tension tests, Tolerance on drilled hole Large hole, small hole
3 Tension tests, intensity of expansion Reduced setting torque
Service Conditions – Tension
4, 5, 6 Tension tests, single anchors Low-, medium-, and high-strength concrete
7, 8, 9, 10 Establish critical and minimum edge distances Low-, and high-strength concrete
11, 12 Anchor group tests critical and minimum Low-strength concrete
spacing
Service Conditions – Shear
13 Single anchors Low-strength concrete
14, 15, 16, 17 Establish critical and minimum edge distances Low-, high-strength concrete
18, 19 Group of two anchors, critical and minimum Low-strength concrete with minimum
edge distance spacing
Service Conditions – Oblique Loading
20, 21 Single anchors, under combined shear and Low- and high-strength concrete
tension loading at critical edge distance
Seismic Tests
22 Simulated seismic tension tests Mid-strength concrete
23 Simulated seismic shear tests Mid-strength concrete

adhesives. These suitability requirements included the following six requirements. For
each of those not performed, specific restrictions were included in the evaluation report.

• Fire resistance (optional)


• Creep under sustained loading (optional)
• In-service temperature (mandatory)
• Sensitivity to moisture in the drilled hole (optional)
• Freezing and thawing (optional)
• Seismic resistance (optional)

The service condition tests evaluated single anchor tension and shear performance, edge
and spacing performance, performance under groups, and combined tension and shear
loading. Again, the approvals issued under this criteria have been limited to uncracked
concrete, since there have been no testing provisions to demonstrate performance in
cracks. Technical enhancements were made in 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000. Table 2
gives the specific tests of AC58, all being performed in uncracked concrete.

2.3 ACI and ASTM Activities


In 1991, ACI Committee 318, voted to begin the preparation of design provisions for
anchorage to concrete, based on the then newly developed Concrete Capacity Design
(CCD) Method11. Committee 318 further requested that ASTM Subcommittee E 6.1312

284
began work on a required testing program that would prequalify post-installed
mechanical anchors in concrete, meeting the design requirements of the draft ACI
anchorage provisions. The ASTM drafts were based on the work for mechanical anchors
that had been developed in the UEAtc, and which was later transferred to EOTA and
became ETAG 00113.

Table 2—Tests Contained in AC58


Test Series Description of Tests Test Parameters
Service Conditions – Tension
1, 2, 3 Single anchors Low-, medium-, and high-strength concrete
4, 5, 6, 7 Establish critical and minimum edge distances Low- and high-strength concrete
8, 9 Group of two anchors, critical and minimum Low-strength concrete
spacing
10, 11 Group of four anchors, critical and minimum Low-strength concrete
spacing
Service Conditions – Shear
12 Single anchors Low-strength concrete
13, 14 Establish critical and minimum edge distances Low-strength concrete
Service Conditions – Oblique Loading
15 Single anchors, combined tension and shear Low-strength concrete
loading at critical edge distance
Suitability Requirements
16 Fire resistive 3,000 psi concrete
17 Creep 3,000 psi concrete
18 In-service temperature 3,000 psi concrete
19 Dampness 3,000 psi concrete
20 Freezing and thawing resistance 4,500 psi concrete
21, 22 Simulated seismic tension and shear tests 3,000 psi concrete

Progress was slow in ASTM. Then in 1997, ACI Committees 318 and 355
recommended that ACI Committee 355 take over the preparation of the standard, so that
the testing standard and the code provisions could be completed for the 1999 version of
the ACI 318 Code. While many drafts and ballots were prepared by ACI 355, the
deadline for inclusion into the 1999 version was missed. Committee 355 did complete
work in early 2000, and an ACI provisional standard, ACI 355.2-0014 was approved in
July 2000, to be required by reference in ACI 318-02.

3. The Present

3.1 Status as of Mid-2001


The most widely accepted anchor approvals in the United Stated currently are those
issued by ICBO ES, as previously discussed. While they are issued for use under the
Uniform Building Code, their applicability has been at times informally accepted for use
under other building codes by design engineers because of their reliance on formally
adopted acceptance criteria. The limitation of exclusion from use in tension zones limits
their use. There is a growing understanding in the United Stated among designers,

285
especially in higher seismic zones, that anchors need to be prequalified for use in
concrete that is prone to cracking. Enter the newly developing ACI code and standard.

3.2 ACI Activities


With the completion of balloting and approval of ACI 355.2-00, as a provisional
standard, processing is continuing toward a full standard by conducting a 90-day public
comment period, with resolution of comments expected in the fall of 2001. This standard
covers only post-installed mechanical anchors, which include undercut, torque-
controlled expansion and displacement-controlled expansion anchors. This standard
becomes effective when it is called into use under ACI 318-02 as implemented in the
IBC 2003. Thus, for practical purposes, this new prequalification standard will only
become effective with the adoption of the IBC 2003 by governmental jurisdictions in the
year 2003 and after, unless adopted by an approval entity for use before then.

3.3 What is ACI 355.2-00?


Simply stated, it is a post-installed mechanical anchor prequalification standard
containing both test methods and acceptance criteria that apply to both compression and
tension zones of concrete structures. It also contains a Commentary that provides
explanations for many of the sections of the standard that need further clarification to be
easily understood. It applies to undercut, torque-controlled, and deformation-controlled
expansion anchors.

A qualified and experienced testing laboratory under the direction of a registered


professional engineer performs tests, and a report is issued if the anchor system meets all
the requirements. Data for the anchor system is published and is used for design under
ACI 318 Appendix D. No approval agency oversees or issues an evaluation report,
which is a significant departure from current procedures.

All of the included tests, with the exception of the seismic tests, are identical to those of
the ETAG 001, Parts 1 through 4. While not all of the tests from the ETAG 001 were
used, those that were included were written so that the test methods were essentially the
same. Why? Because the design requirements that both ACI 355.2-00 and ETAG 001
are tested against are almost identical and are based on the CCD Method. ACI 318
Appendix D is generally the same as ETAG Part C. Let’s look at the specifics of ACI
355.2-00.

ACI 355.2-00 provides for the prequalification of anchors in either uncracked concrete,
or both uncracked and cracked concrete. Specific test programs are delineated for each,
giving reference tests, reliability (suitability) tests, and service condition tests.
Depending on the results of the reliability tests and their relationship to reference tests,
an anchor category, 1, 2, or 3, is established that is used by ACI 318 Appendix D for
establishing strength reduction factors (φ) applied to the resistance calculations. These
tests are summarized in the following Table 3.

286
All tests for uncracked concrete prequalification are performed in uncracked concrete,
while most of the tests for prequalification for both uncracked and cracked concrete are
performed in cracks, as shown below.

As of the writing of this paper, no anchor systems have been tested and qualified
according to ACI 355.2-00 in the United States due to the short time the standard has
been available.

Table 3—Anchor Prequalification Tests in ACI 355.2-00


Tests for uncracked concrete Tests for uncracked and cracked concrete
Reference Tests
1. Tension tests in low strength uncracked concrete 1. Tension tests in low strength uncracked concrete
2. Tension tests in high strength uncracked concrete 2. Tension tests in high strength uncracked concrete
-- 3. Tension tests in low strength concrete in
0.012 in. (0.3 mm) cracks
-- 4. Tension tests in high strength concrete in
0.012 in. (0.3 mm) cracks
Reliability Tests
3. Tension tests for sensitivity to reduced installation 5. Tension tests for sensitivity to reduced installation
effort in uncracked concrete effort in 0.012 in. (0.3 mm) cracks
4. Tension tests for sensitivity to large drilled hole 6. Tension tests for sensitivity to crack width and
diameter large drilled hole diameter in 0.020 in. (0.5 mm)
cracks
5. Tension tests for sensitivity to small drilled hole 7. Tension tests for sensitivity to crack width and
diameter small drilled hole diameter in 0.020 in. (0.5 mm)
cracks
6. Tension test under repeated load application in 8. Tension test in crack whose width is being cycled
uncracked concrete – 10,000 cycles between 0.004 and 0.012 in. (0.1 and 0.3 mm)
Service-condition tests
7. Tension tests in corner to verify concrete capacity 9. Tension tests in corner to verify concrete capacity
edge requirement of 1.5 hef in uncracked concrete edge requirement of 1.5 hef in uncracked concrete
8. Minimum edge and spacing to preclude concrete 10. Minimum edge and spacing to preclude concrete
splitting upon installation, uncracked concrete splitting upon installation, uncracked concrete
9. Shear capacity of steel in uncracked concrete 11. Shear capacity of steel in uncracked concrete
(can calculate for standard threaded sections) (can calculate for standard threaded sections)
-- 12. Seismic tension tests in 0.020 in. (0.5 mm) cracks
-- 13. Seismic shear tests in 0.020 in. (0.5 mm) cracks

3.4 ASTM Activities


Since ACI 355.2-00 does not include adhesive-bonded anchors, a project has begun in
ASTM Subcommittee E 6.13 to develop a companion standard for their prequalification.
A task group has met twice and developed a list of tests that should be included. Thus,
we move toward the future.

287
4. The Future

4.1 ACI Activities


In order to fully implemented ACI 355.2-00, Appendix D will undergo further
processing to become part of ACI 318-02 by reference, and ACI 318-02 subsequently
part of the IBC 2003 by reference. These activities have been set in motion and it is
expected that within two years, there will be a nation-wide prequalification standard for
mechanical anchors for both uncracked concrete and cracked and uncracked concrete.

ACI 318 Subcommittee B15 has initiated the development of code provisions for the
design of adhesive-bonded anchors, to be added in a future code revision (possibly 2005
or 2008). Testing has taken place at the University of Stuttgart and the University of
Florida to support analyses leading to such design proposals. Design proposals have
been proposed at a working level in fib SAG 416 and work continues to finalize specific
design methods as an extension of the CCD Method.

4.2 ASTM Activities


The ACI code provisions are expected to require a standard for the prequalification of
adhesive-bonded anchors, similar to ACI 355.2-00 for mechanical anchors. This activity
has been initiated in ASTM Subcommittee E6.13 by a joint ASTM-CAMA task group.
A first draft is expected in late 2001 with adoption to follow in accordance with ASTM
standards development procedures of balloting and development of consensus on a final
document. The final adoption date will determine which ACI 318 code (2005, 2008 or
later) will include adhesive-bonded anchors.

5. Summary

In the past and continuing into the near future, the ICBO ES acceptance criteria for
mechanical (AC01) and adhesive (AC58) anchors will remain the primary post-installed
anchor prequalification methods in the United States. Because of changing code
requirements in ACI and the IBC, it is expected that within 2 years ACI 355.2-00 will
become the primary post-installed mechanical anchor prequalification standard for both
cracked and uncracked concrete.

For adhesive-bonded anchors, AC58 will remain the only functioning prequalification
standard for adhesive-bonded anchors for the next several years, but with limitations to
uncracked concrete zones. If parity is to be maintained with mechanical anchors, the
issue of performance in cracked concrete will need to be addressed.

Activities are under way to develop code provisions and an anchor prequalification
standard for adhesive-bonded anchors, possibly covering the cracked concrete issue.
However, it is expected to take several years before full implementation is achieved.

288
6. References

1
ACI 318-99, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary
(ACI 318-99/ACI 318R-99),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, 1999.
2
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
3
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohochen, Pennsylvania.
4
International Conference of Building Officials Evaluation Service, Inc., Whittier,
California, USA.
5
“Uniform Building Code, 1997,” International Conference of Building Officials,
Whittier.
6
“Acceptance Criteria for Expansion Anchors in Concrete and Masonry Elements,
AC01,” ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc, Whittier, January 2001.
7
European Union of Agrément, “UEAtc Technical Guide on Anchors for Use in
Cracked and Non-cracked Concrete, M.O.A.T. No. 49, 1992,”
8
“Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Concrete and Masonry,” ASTM E
488, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
9
“Acceptance Criteria for Adhesive Anchors in Concrete and Masonry Elements,
AC58,” ICBO, Evaluation Services, Inc., Whittier, California, January 2001.
10
CAMA, Concrete Anchor Manufacturers Association, St. Charles, MO.
11
Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., and Breen, J., “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastenings to Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 92, No. 1, Jan.-Feb.
1995, pp. 73-94.
12
Subcommittee E 6.13 Performance of Connections in Building Construction, ASTM,
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
13
European Technical Approval Guideline 001, Edition 1997, European Organization
for Technical Approvals, Brussels.
14
“Evaluating the Performance of Post-Installed Mechanical Fasteners in Concrete (ACI
355.2-00) and Commentary (ACI 355.2R-00),” July 7, 2000, ACI, Farmington Mills,
Michigan.
15
ACI Subcommittee 318-B, Reinforcement and Development, American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
16
fib SAG 4, Fastenings to Structural Concrete and Masonry, Fedération Internationale
du Béton, Lausanne.

289
ON THE RATIO OF PLATE THICKNESS TO STUD
DIAMETER FOR STEEL CONCRETE STUD SHEAR
CONNECTORS
Howard D Wright, Anwar Elbadawy, Roy Cairns
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK

Abstract
Stud shear connection between concrete slabs and steel beams are common in composite
construction. Current design guidance for slab to beam flange composite beams merely
places a limit on steel plate thickness in relation to stud diameter. This paper shows the
behaviour of the connection when studs are welded to relatively thin steel plates. Tests
are currently made on Double skin composite (DSC) elements. DSC system comprises
steel-concrete-steel sandwich elements that consist of a layer of un-reinforced concrete,
sandwiched between two layers of thin steel plates. These in turn are connected to the
concrete by welded shear stud connectors. Shear studs are used to transfer slip shear
between the outer steel skins and concrete core. Four series of push-out tests are
presented in this paper to investigate the behaviour of the shear studs when welded to
thin steel plates. The plate thickness to stud diameter ratio was 1:3. Micro-concrete with
maximum aggregate size smaller than 2.41 mm was used. The properties of the micro-
concrete are described. The micro-concrete core is pushed through the plates in direct
shear in series 1,2 and 3 but in series 4 the compression force is applied to the steel
plates simulating direct compression on this element. Failure modes are defined for each
of the series of tests. The studies show that failure occurred by yielding for all shears
stud connectors in series 1, 2 and 3 buckling failure of the steel plate in series four.

1. Introduction

Stud shear connection between concrete slabs and steel beams is common in composite
construction. It is normally assumed that the relatively complex behaviour of the
connector under load is independent of the plate to which it is attached as long as the
plate is of a certain thickness. The behaviour of the connection when studs are welded to
relatively thin plates will be discussed in this paper. Double skin composite (DSC)
elements, are basically steel-concrete-steel sandwich elements that consist of a layer of
normally un-reinforced concrete, sandwiched between two layers of thin steel plates.

290
These in turn are connected to the concrete by welded shear stud connectors. Several
experimental and analytical studies have been carried out to understand the behaviour of
the Double skin composite element (1,2,3,4). The main conclusion from these studies was
that DSC elements could generally be designed in accordance with normal reinforced
concrete practice but satisfying the following criteria; (a) Yielding of the tension steel
plate. (b) Yielding or buckling of the compression plate. (c) Shear failure of the stud
connectors. (d) Crushing of the concrete in compression. (e) Shear failure of the
concrete. (f) Pull out failure of connectors. Of these, (b), (c), (e) and (f) are specific to
DSC. Those criteria specific to DSC are influenced by the thickness of the steel plate,
spacing of shear stud and the stud diameter.

An experimental study on DSC elements has been reported in reference (5). This work is
extended in this paper to include additional tests on plate buckling. The main aim is to
investigate the behaviour of shear studs when welded to thin steel plates and the ratio of
plate thickness to stud diameter. The experimental study involves push tests consisting
of two thin steel plates connected together to a core of concrete by shear stud connectors.
The plate thickness to stud diameter ratio was 1/3. The concrete core was pushed
through the plates in direct shear in series 1, 2 and 3 and compression force applied to
the steel plates in series 4, allowing the behaviour of the plate to stud connection to be
observed without the need for full panel bending tests. In these tests it has been decided
to investigate arrangements where the plate thickness to stud diameter is low.

2. Test program:

Twelve model push-out tests were fabricated each consisting of two 2mm steel plates
connected together by a 50mm thick core of concrete and shear stud connectors. Micro-
concrete was used the mix used being established by Hossain (6). Table (1) show the
properties of the micro-concrete control mix.

Table 1: Micro-concrete properties


Cube Cylinder Splitting Density Modulus of Ec
Strength Strength fc' Strength fs γ Rupture fb (KN/mm2)
fcu(N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (Kg/m3) (N/mm2)
28.0 19.55 1.13 2400 4.51 14.55

The twelve models are classified in four series and identified in the text as POT1 to
POT12. A typical push-out test model is shown in the figure (1) and full details of each
model are given in table (2).

291
In summary: Four test series were carried out as follows:
1-Three models with three studs connectors in one column (1x3) with spacing 100mm.
2-Three models with six studs connectors in two-columns (2x3) with spacing 150mm in
two directions.
3-Three models with six studs connectors in two-columns (2x3) with spacing 200mm in
two directions.
4- Three models with six studs connectors in two-columns (2x3) with spacing 150mm
in two directions and 5 mm reduce from top and bottom of the concrete core.

Elevation Section

Figure 1: Geometry of Push-out test model


Table 2: Detail models of push-out test
No Stud Spacing End spacing mm
Series Specimen Of Horizontal Vertical Top & Lift &
Studs mm mm Bottom Right
POT1 1x3 - 100 100 50
1 POT2 1x3 - 100 100 50
POT3 1x3 - 100 100 50
POT4 2x3 150 150 75 75
2 POT5 2x3 150 150 75 75
POT6 2x3 150 150 75 75
POT7 2x3 200 200 100 100
3 POT8 2x3 200 200 100 100
POT9 2x3 200 200 100 100
POT10 2x3 150 150 75 75
4 POT11 2x3 150 150 75 75
POT12 2x3 150 150 75 75

In series 1, 2 and 3, The perimeter of the plates was stiffened with additional steel frame
members using a sufficient number of bolts. The models were tested by applying
uniformly compressive force over the breadth of the top surface of micro-concrete core

292
to push it through the plates in direct shear. But in series 4, the model was tested by
applying uniformly compressive force over the breadth of the top surface of steel plates
to push it around the concrete core. The steel plates in this series were constructed
without a frame to observe the local buckling.

3. Material properties:
The properties of all materials used in the push-out tests were determined as follows:

3.1 Steel plates: the properties of the steel plates were determined from tensile tests on
random samples taken from each batch of steel. A summary of the steel plates tensile test
results shown in the table (3).

3.2 Stud connectors: the properties of the stud connectors were determined from tensile
tests on three specimens cut at random from the studs material. A summary of the studs'
tensile test results shown in the table (4).

3.3 Micro-concrete: the micro-concrete consisted of Ordinary Portland Cement, sea-


dredged sand of 2.41-mm maximum size. A summary of the results is given in table (1).
The properties of micro-concrete in each individual series of models were determined
from at lest three tests on 100-mm cubes and three tests of 200 mm long by 100-mm
diameter cylinders (for split cylinder tensile test and crush cylinder test). A summary of
the test results on micro-concrete is shown in the table (5). The models were cast
vertically and in stages. The models were covered with polythene and the micro-concrete
was then allowed to cure in air until testing commenced.

Table 3: Steel plate properties


Thickness 0.2%Proof stress Ultimate stress Es
(mm) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (KN/mm2)
1.93 315 393 195
Table 4: Stud connector properties
Diameter 0.2%Proof stress Ultimate stress Es
(mm) (N/mm2) (N/mm2) (KN/mm2)
6.22 360 517 196
Table 5: Properties of micro-concrete in push-out test
Cube Cylinder Splitting
Series strength strength strength Remark
(N/mm2) (N/mm2) (N/mm2)
Series 1 25.33 20.31 2.53 7 days
Series 2 24.33 18.72 1.69 7 days
Series 3 29.75 22.73 1.85 12-28 days
Series 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A

293
4. Test procedure and instrumentation:

4.1 (series 1, 2 & 3) The compressive force was applied to the top of micro-concrete
core of model by means of a 250 KN actuator using deflection control mode.
Instrumentation of the model is shown in Figure (2). The movement of the micro-
concrete core relative to the steel plate was measured by two dial gauges, which were
attached to concrete core at 5 cm from the bottom level of concrete core. One was
attached on each face. The load slip values were simultaneously recorded and printed.

Figure 2: Model instrumentation

Figure 2: Model instrumentation

4.2 (series 4) The compressive force was applied to the top surface of the steel plates of
model by means of a 250 KN actuator using deflection control mode. Five strain gauges
were fixed to each steel plate between shear studs in the top half of the specimen. The
load strain values were simultaneously recorded and printed.

5. Loading and test observation:

At the start of each test the initial dial and strain gauges reading were recorded. The
compressive force was applied to the model by increasing increment loads gradually
until the failure load. The slip between steel plates and micro-concrete core was recorded
at each increment load until end of the test. Figure (4) shows the typical load-slip
relationship of the push-out tests for series 1, 2 and 3. Same procedures were used in
series 4 and figure (5) shows the typical load-strain relationship. The observation on the
tests is as follows:

5.1 Series 1 (Specimen POT1, POT2 and POT3) During the test cracking noises were
heard at loads between 10-14 KN, 22-28 KN and 37-38 KN. All specimens cracked
vertical in the middle of concrete core and separated through the studs. The specimens

294
failed at a compressive load of 37.0 KN, 39.6 KN and 37.0 KN for specimen POT1,
POT2 and POT3 respectively. In specimen POT1 it was noted that a part of concrete
core touched one of the dial gauges following lateral movement. In specimen POT3 the
micro-concrete core started cracking in the middle of concrete core from the top and
separated through the studs in an inclined crack above the dial gauges. Stud yielding
occurred in all the specimens.

5.2 Series 2 (Specimen POT4, POT5 and POT6) During the test cracking noises were
heard at loads between 15-18 KN, 44-56 KN and 95-107 KN. All specimens were
cracked vertical in the two lines in concrete core and separated through the studs. The
specimens failed at a compressive load of 95.0 KN, 107.0 KN and 101.0 KN for
specimen POT4, POT5 and POT6 respectively. Stud yielding failure occurred in all the
specimens. Push-out Test

120

100

80
Loads KN

Series 1
60 Series 2
Series 3

40

20

0
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Slip mm

Figure 3: Typical load-slip of the push-out tests series 1, 2 and 3


Stress-Strain Relationship

70

60
D.G.1
50 D.G.2
D.G.3
D.G.4
40
Stress

D.G.5
D.G.6
30
D.G.7
D.G.8
20 D.G.9
D.G.10
10

0
-0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Strain

Figure (4) Stress-Strain for specimen POT 11 in series 4

295
5.3 Series 3 (Specimen POT7, POT8 and POT9) During the test low noises were heard
throughout and a high cracking noise at failure. None of the specimens were found to
have cracking in the concrete core. The specimens failed at a compressive load of 107.7
KN, 77.0 KN and 86.0 KN for specimen POT7, POT8 and POT9 respectively. Stud
yielding failure occurred in all the specimens. This led to separation of the stud
connectors from the steel plates.

5.4 Series 4 (Specimen POT10, POT11 and POT12) During the test low noises were
heard throughout and a high buckling noise at failure. None of the specimens were found
to have cracking in the concrete core. The specimens failed at a compressive load of
100.0 KN, 80.0 KN and 95.0 KN for specimen POT10, POT11 and POT12 respectively.
Local buckling failure occurred in all specimens. Stud yielding occurred for most of the
studs, connected with to the buckling steel plate.

6. Theoretical study

The behaviour of the DSC system is reported in many studies. This paper concentrates
on the behaviour of the shear studs when welded to thin steel plates. The arrangement
and the properties of shear stud connectors could be carried out using BS 5950 pt 3(7) or
EC 4(8). The following is a comparison between the these push-out tests and these Codes
and other studies:

6.1 Stud/plate ratio: The BS 5950(7) put the limit of the ratio between shear stud
diameter to steel plate thickness as not greater than 2.5 also EC 4(8) put the same ratio
with stud diameter not a minimum criteria of the be less than steel plate thickness. Obeid
(9)
showed that the best ratio between stud diameter to steel plate thickness equal 3 this
was derive from a study of 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 mm shear studs connectors welded to thin
steel plates. In this paper a value of 3 has been taken.

6.2 Steel plate buckling and shear studs spacing: The ratio of the centre to centre
distance between stud shear connectors Sc to plate thickness tsc is limited in BS 5950(7)
by the maximum spacing between stud being 600 mm or 4 times the concrete core
thickness and the minimum spacing not be less than the 5 time the stud diameter. The
limitation in EC 4(8) is stated as maximum stud spacing to plate thickness ratio of 40.
Wright (10) showed that this ratio must not be less than 67.5 for stud layouts where plate-
buckling mode is likely and 40 for stud layouts where a column-buckling mode is likely.
Wright (10) described a method of evaluated this ratio when the compression plate was in
contact with a rigid medium (as in the case of DSC elements). The limit reduced to the
37.71 in plastic, 47.12 in compact and 51.91 in semi-compact case. In this paper this
ratio is 50 in series 1, 75 in series 2 and 100 in series 3. During the tests in series 1, 2 and
3 the local buckling was not noted but this was due to the fact that these tests are in
direct shear with no compression in the plates. But local bucking did occur in series 4
because the compression force was applied to the steel plates directly. Wright(11) showed
local stability of plate by calculate the plate stiffness D = (t3De)/12 where De = E/(1-ν2)

296
which is plate material stiffness. Wright (10) showed that the stress in these plates can
calculated from this equation Sc/t = √(D π2/3σ). Table (6) show the stresses and the
strain in the plates at the buckling for the specimens POT 10, POT 11 and POT 12. This
table also shows the stresses calculated by used the material linearity (Hook’s law). By
using these stresses the theoretical buckle ½ wave Stheory may be evaluated. This suggests
a buckle spacing bigger than the actual spacing between the stud connectors Sc. This
may be due to the fact that the stud connectors stretch allowing the wave buckling length
to increase as shown in the figure (5).
It should be noted that the direction of the load is not always perpendicular to the stud
panel layout the yield lines may be diagonal to the edges. In this case the ratio must be
checked with the diagonal spacing between shear studs.

Stheory
Sc Steel plate

Shear stud

Before buckling After buckling

Figure (5) The spacing between shear stud

Table 6: Comparison for the stresses and strain series 4


Specimen Experimental Analytical Spacing
Stress Averg. Strain Stress Averg. Sc Stheory
N/mm2 Stress N/mm2 Stress mm mm
POT10 66.7 0.00032 62.4 150 173.6
POT11 50.0 61.11 0.00029 56.5 65.18 150 182.5
POT12 66.7 N/mm2 0.00039 76.7 N/mm2 150 156.6

6.3 Shear stud connector capacity: Many previous studies (1,2,3,4) showed that the
strength and stiffness of stud connectors in DSC elements is significantly less than
determined from push-out shear tests. Therefore, the design resistances of studs attached
to the compression and tension plates are limited in the some Codes and studies. In BS
5950(7), the capacities of shear connectors are taken as 80 % and 60 % from its
characteristic resistance when attached to the compression and tension steel plates
respectively. The values of the characteristic resistance of shear studs from 13 mm to 25
mm are tabulated. EC 4(8) limits the characteristic resistance by the lesser of:
PRd=0.29αd2 (fckEc) 0.5 / γv or PRd=0.8fu πd2/4γv. Roberts(4) used the same equations.
Wright (3) used similar equations but limits the design resistances of shear stud in the
tension zone to 50 % of the characteristic resistance of shear studs. Obeid (9) showed that
the characteristic resistance of 6-mm shear stud is 7.27 KN in tension and 6.3 KN in

297
shear (experimental). In the tests reported in this paper the characteristic resistance of 6
mm shear stud is between 6.17 to 6.59 KN in series 1, 7.92 to 8.917 KN in series 2, 6.42
to 8.975 in series 3 and 6.67 to 8.33 KN in series 4.

Table 7: Comparison with various codes of practice and research studies


Data BS 5950 EC 4 Previous Push-Out Remark
pt.3 Studies Test
Stud/plate ≤ 2.5 ≤ 2.5 & 3(Obeid) 3
ratio tsc< d
Stud spacing 100 mm Series 1
Min. 30 mm 11.41 mm - 150 mm Series 2,4
Max. 200 mm 150 mm 200 mm Series 3
Stud 40(Wright) 50,75,100m Longitudinal
spacing/plate ≤ 40 m spacing
thickness Sc>30 37.71 70.71, 106.1,
Min. Sc≤200 (Wright) 141.4 mm Diagonal
Max. spacing
Stud Tabulated not 4.67 KN 4.67 KN 6.17-6.59 Series 1
capacity given for (Concrete) (Roberts) 7.92-8.92 Series 2
6 mm stud 9.05 KN 7.27 KN 6.42-8.98 Series 3
(Stud) (Tension) 6.67-8.33 Series 4
4.67 KN 6.3 KN (KN)
(Min) (Shear)
(Obeid)

Table 7 shows comparison between the results of push-out tests with the Codes and other
research work.

7. Conclusions

The aim of this paper has been to investigate the behaviour of the connection when studs
are welded to relatively thin plates. Push-out tests have been used to establish the
behaviour of this connection. The failure modes observed include yielding failure for
shear stud connectors in all specimens, linear cracking for the concrete core in series
1&2 and yielding failure for all shear stud connectors and pull out for most in series 3.
This for concentrated shear force on the connection of stud with the steel plate and
increase the bond stresses between steel plates and large concrete core in series 3.
Buckling failure in series 4.

298
8. References:

1-Oduyemi T.O.S. & Wright H.D., An Experimental Investigation into the Behaviour of
Double-Skin Sandwich Beams, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol.14,
pp.197-220, (1989)
2-Wright H.D., Oduyemi T.O.S. & Evans H.R., The Experimental Behaviour of Double
Skin Composite Elements, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 19, pp. 97-
110, (1991)
3-Wright H.D., Oduyemi T.O.S. & Evans H.R., The Design of Double Skin Composite
Elements, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 19, pp. 111-132 (1991)
4-Roberts T.M., Edwards D.N. & Narayanan R., Testing and Analysis of Steel-Concrete-
Steel Sandwich Beams, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 38, pp. 257-279,
(1996)
5-Wright H.D., El-badawy A. & Cairns R., Shear Connection between Concrete and
Thin Steel Plates in Double Skin Composite Construction, Third International
Conference on Thin-Walled Structures, Cracow, Poland, 5-7 june 2001.
6-Hossain, K.M.A., In-plane shear behaviour of composite walling with profiled steel
sheeting, Ph.D., (1995)
7-BS 5950 Part 3.1, The Structural Use of Steelwork in Building, Design in Composite
Construction, Code of Practice for Design of Composite Beams, British Standards
Institution, London, (1990)
8-European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), Eurocode 4 Part 1.1, Design of
Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, General rules and rules for buildings, DD
ENV 1-1 (1994)
9-Obeid G. A., Stud welding and its application to ceiling supports, M. Sc., Cardiff,
University of Wales, (1986)
10-Wright H.D., Buckling of plates in contact with a rigid medium, Journal of the
Institution of Structural Engineers, Vol. 71 No.12, pp. 209-215, (1993)
11-Wright H.D., Local stability of filled and encased steel sections, Journal of Structural
Engineers, pp. 1382-1388, October (1995)

299
INCORPORATION OF THE SIZE EFFECT AND OTHER
FACTORS IN STRENGTH DESIGN OF CONCRETE
FASTENINGS, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CEB DESIGN
GUIDE
V.I. Yagust and D.Z. Yankelevsky
National Building Research Institute, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology,Haifa,
Israel

Abstract
The paper shows that the method adopted in the CEB Design Guide (hereinafter "DG")
[1] for strength design of fastening in concrete - overlooks a number of important
factors.
In strength design for cone failure or local blow-out failure of the concrete, in distinction
to DG allowance should be made for the size effect which - as know - determines the
transition from the pseudoplastic to the brittle mode with increase of the height of the
failure cone. The errors resulting from this omission are estimated.
Allowance is also obligatory for the critical stress intensity factor K1c , which should
replace the square root of concrete compressive strength ( f c ) resorted to in DG. It is
shown that use of the latter for different concretes also makes for errors.
On the basis of experimental data, formulas incorporating the two factors were obtained
for different element geometries - including the case ( not discussed in DG) of a flat
element loaded in its plane of symmetry.
The above circumstances should be taken into consideration in revising the Guide.

1. Introduction

New design methods of anchoring in concrete using the CEB Design Guide [1] have
replaced the old ones. The old estimation method of cone failure strength using the
concrete tensile strength fct assumed in fact pseudoplastic failure (PPF). Yet it was found,
that anchoring failure is attended by stable crack development [2,3,4]. Therefore, the
new estimate is based on linear fracture mechanics (LEFM) by assuming brittle fracture
and based on the fracture toughness KIC in the calculations. In fact, many experiments
have shown that either one of the mentioned failure modes occurs, or an intermediate

300
mode, depending on the characteristic length D* in the problem, i.e. a size effect is
present [5,6,7], on which the pseudoplastic failure mode changes smoothly to a brittle
one as D increases.
The size effect is neglected in the current DG [1] on the assumption that LEFM is
applicable for all values of D; during which KIC is replaced by f c (up to a constant
factor). The following discussion sheds light on the consequences of these assumptions.

2. Size effect considerations

2.1. It is well known [5,6,7] that the scopes of applicability of LEFM and of the PPF
model depend on the types of problems and the material properties. In each cone failure
or local blow-out failure problems these ranges are determined by the unique ratio
between the crack length l at the moment of fracture (or the D dimension, which is
related to l ) and the size of the fracture process zone (FPZ) behind the crack end. The
limiting value d of the FPZ depending on the maximal aggregate dimension a, is
evaluated in the Barenblatt-Dugdale-Panasyuk's fracture model [8,9,10] by the
expression
2
π K 
d =  IC  , (1)
8  f ct 
obtained for l » d and in the absence of a stress gradient in the crack continuation line
caused by external loads acting out the crack [2,6].
The D/d ratio in a specific problem defines the application limit of the LEFM and PPF
models for that problem. Therefore experimental data should be processed as a function
of D/d. The obtained curves in dimensionless coordinates are independent on the
maximal aggregate size a or other material properties. These results can also be obtained
by direct application of the two-parametric Barenblatt-Dugdale-Panasyuk's fracture
model [6].

2.2. The test data on a cone failure problem under tension were processed as the function
N (a three-dimensional problem [2,3,11-20]) or N (plane problem
1.5
K IC h ef K IC h ef0.5 h
where the force N acts in the symmetry plane of a flat element with a thickness h
[2,3,20]) of the ratio hef /d. It was found that for large values of this ratio the above
functions are stationary (Fig.1a,2a). It therefore follows that the failure load N is
proportional to K h ef1.5 or to K hef0.5h in the mentioned problems respectively,
IC IC

*The characteristic length D here is either the anchorage depth hef in a cone failure
problem under tension, or the distance c or c1 between the anchor and the edge of the
concrete element in problems of a cone failure under shear or a local blow-out failure
under tension respectively.

301
a

Fig.1. Experimental results and approximation of size effect on ratio


N/(K1Chef1.5) (a) and N/(fcthef2) (b) for 3-dimensional elements

302
a

Fig.2. Experimental results and approximation of size on ratio N/(K1Chef0.5h) (a)


and N/(fcthefh) (b) for 2-dimensional elements

303
LEFM can be applied, as was in fact done in the DG (with replacing KIC by f c ).
However, when the hef/d ratio is lower than 0.6 to 1 (3-dimensional problem) or than 3 to
4 (plane problem), the values of these functions become lower, i.e. LEFM can not be
applied and the value of N given by LEFM should be reduced. This circumstance was
not taken into account in the DG, and the anchoring strength for low hef /d values, as
determined according to the DG is higher than the one found in testing.
The replacement of KIC by fct and d using equation (1) results in different expressions for
the failure load as a function of fct, hef, h, hef /d, corresponding to the tests at any hef /d
and resembling the expression for the Bazant's size effect [21]:
5.5 f ct hef2 (2)
N=
1 − 0.5(hef / d ) + 2.05hef / d
0.5

(three-dimensional problem, Fig.1b),


1.4 fct hef h (3)
N=
1 − 0.3(hef / d ) + 0.49hef / d
0.5

(plane problem, Fig.2b).


When hef /d → 0, (2) and (3) give the pseudoplastic failure load for the considered
problems as N = 5.5 f ct hef2 and N =1.4 fcthefh respectively.
When hef /d → ∞, we obtain N for these problems at brittle failure as N = 2.4 K h ef1.5
IC
and N = 1 .25 K h ef0.5 h respectively.
IC
It should be noted that the obtained curves are independent of the value of a or any other
material properties. It is assumed that the washer diameter is much smaller than the
depth of anchorage and may be neglected.

2.3. By a similar method for processing the test results, one can obtain formulae for the
failure load in cone failure under shear loading for any value of c0/d (c0 = c - ds /d, ds is
the anchor diameter). For example, in the three-dimensional case we have:
2.2 f ct c02 , (4)
Q=
1 − 0.9(c0 / d ) + 2.82c0 / d
0.3

in the plane case (the anchor is set along the width h of the concrete element) we have:
0.73 f ct hc0 (5)
Q=
1 − 0.72(c0 / d ) + 0.64c0 / d
0.2

Figs. 2,4 in [20] show the test results and their approximations by formulae (4), (5) here.
These expressions neglect the effect of the length of the shear force lever arm, since it is
assumed that it is small compared to the anchor diameter.

2.4. The inclusion of different possible failure modes (mainly PPF and intermediate
failure) is necessary for calculating the local blow-out failure load of concrete as well.
For example, the corresponding formula (6) for a stretched anchor with a washer at its
end in crack-free concrete is (Fig.3):

304
100

Nds0.25/(fctc1(dh+0.35a)1.25)
19(1-0.1(c1/d)0.4+0.5c1/d)0.5

10
0.1 1 10

c1/d

Fig.3. Experimental results and approximation of size effect in


case of local blow-out failure in tension

19 f ct c1 (d h + 0.35a ) ds−0.25 ,
1.25
N= (6)
1 − 0.1(c1 / d ) + 0.5c1 / d
0.4

where dh is the washer diameter, N is the axial tension force in the anchor [ 3 ].

2.5. The considered types of loads and corresponding failures indicate the limited nature
of the application ranges of the PPF and LEFM models. Neglect of the scale effect and
consideration of all possible cases as the brittle case may introduce errors for small D/d
that may make , for instance, in cone failure problems under tension to 40% and higher.
As an example, let us consider an anchor with a washer at its end, which is fixed during
placing concrete into plain crack-free concrete C20 with a = 20 mm. The distance
between the anchor and the edge of the concrete element is assumed large. The
characteristic resistance NRk,c of the stretched anchor on cone failure of the concrete
needs be determined. The depth of anchorage is 20 or 4 cm in a three-dimensional
problem and 80 or 10 cm in a plane problem (the anchor is set in the symmetry plane of
a 10 cm thick concrete element). The data and calculated results for NRk,c are given in
Table 1. The calculation was made according to formulae (2) and (3) (column 1). NRk,c
was also calculated using LEFM by assuming its applicability for any anchorage depth
(column 2).
In Table 1 the characteristic values KICk and fctk for concrete, which are required for
calculating NRk,c, are based on the variation coefficient of 0.18. The mean value of KIC
for concrete with a = 20 mm was found by the empirical formula according to tests [2]:

305
0.148 fc0.64 fc ≤ 35 MPa
K IC =  (7)
− 0.00028 fc + 0.04 fc + 0.39
2
35 < fc ≤ 60 MPa
Here KIC is in MPa⋅m 0.5, fc in MPa.

Table 1

a K1Ck fctk d Dimension of hef NRk,c , kN Diff.


mm MPa.m0.5 MPa cm problem cm %
1 2
20 123.1 126.5 3
3-dimensional
4 8.7 11.3 30
20 0.61 1.3 8.6
80 66 66.7 1
2-dimensional
4 15.9 23.6 48

Table 1 clearly shows that for deep anchorage LEFM-based calculations approach those
obtained from (2) and (3), and correspond to the experiments (Fig.1,2). However, for
low-depth anchorage LEFM-based calculations overestimate the anchorage strength.

3. Replacement of the KIC value by fc

3.1. Use of LEFM for calculating cone-failure strength (under tension and shear) and
local blow-out failure strength (under tension) assumes that the failure load is
proportional to the KIC of the anchoring concrete. KIC is replaces in the formulae of the
DG [1] by f c and no by other material parameters. However, KIC is not proportional
to f c , as evident from (7), even for a constant maximal aggregate dimension a. In
addition, it is well known [2,22], that the value KIC is also dependent on a. Thus, for a =
20 mm KIC is found from (7), and for a = 5 mm from equation (8) [2]:
K IC = 0.224 f c0.4 f c ≤ 60 MPa (8)
0.5
Here KIC is in MPa⋅m , fc in MPa. The ratio between the KIC values for concrete of the
same compression strength, but with aggregate of different maximal dimensions 20 mm
and 5 mm, is not equal to 1 as differentiated from the DG, but may vary from 1.45 for
C20 concrete to 1.55 for C50 concrete. The error introduced in the replacement of KIC by
f c causes overestimation of the anchoring strength for a < 20 mm, since the formulae
of the DG were determined in tests at a = 20 mm. In brittle failure (at high D/d) this
overestimation may reach 50% when an aggregate with a maximal dimension of 5 mm is
used for mixing of the concrete.

306
3.2. As an example, let us consider an anchor with a washer at its end, fixed during
placing concrete in a depth of 15 cm into a plain crack-free C40 concrete element. The
edge of the element is far from the anchor. Let us find the characteristic resistance NRk,c
for the stretched anchor in cone failure of the concrete when using an aggregate with
a = 20 mm or with a = 5 mm. The data for the two types of concrete and the calculated
results are given in Table 2.

Table 2
a K1Ck fctk d NRk,c
mm MPa.m0.5 MPa cm KN
5 0.52 2.1 2.4 70.8
20 0.82 2.1 6.0 108.7

It is clear that the ratio between the characteristic cone failure resistances in the concrete
with a = 20 mm and with a = 5 mm is in fact 1.53 (as opposed to 1 according to [1]).

4. Conclusions

In revising the DG we consider it necessary to take the following circumstances into


account:
1. To avoid errors, the characteristic anchoring resistance should be determined using the
presented formulae, which correspond to the experiments and take into account of the
size effect, i.e. of pseudoplastic, brittle and intermediate types of anchoring cone failure
under tension and shear, as well as local blow-out failure under tension in relation to the
value of D/d.
2. The proposed expressions also take into account of the influence of the value of the
maximal aggregate dimension on the failure load value in brittle failure of the above-
enumerated modes.
3. The DG should also include the case of anchoring along the symmetry plane of a flat
concrete element.
4. In order to refine the numeric coefficients in the proposed formulae, additional testing
is needed for certain limiting values of D/d in addition to the existing data:
a) axial tension (cone failure, plane problem, anchor in the symmetry plane of the flat
element) - hef /d ≤ 0.8;
b) axial tension (local blow-out failure) - c1/d ≥ 3;
c) shear (cone failure, 3-dimensional problem) - c/d ≤ 0.2;
d) shear (cone failure, plane problem, anchor along the width of the element) -
c/d ≤ 1.2.
5. Testing is also needed for the other cases not considered in the DG and in the paper
(for example, the anchor under shear set in the symmetry plane of a flat concrete
element).

307
References

1. 'Design of Fastenings in Concrete, Design Guide', ( CEB, 1997) 83.


2. Yagust, V.I. 'Resistance to development of crack in concrete structures taking into
account the influence of material macrostructure', D.Sc. thesis ( NIIZhB, Moscow,
1982 ) 24 ( in Russian ).
3. Shapiro, G.I. and Yagust, V.I. 'Strength of plane concrete element under
concentrated load, in 'Investigation of Bearing Concrete and Reinforced Concrete
Structures of Multistory Precast Buildings', eds. G.N.Lvov and J.M. Strugatsky
( MNIITEP, Moscow, 1980 ) 74-111 (in Russian).
4. 'Fastenings to Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures', Bulletin d'formation,
N206 ( CEB, 1991) 486.
5. Entov, V.M. and Yagust, V.I. , 'Experimental investigation of the laws governing
qusi-static development of macrocracks in concrete', Mechanics Solids ( translation
from Russian), 10 (4) (1975) 87-95.
6. Yagust, V.I., 'Application of the model of Leonov-Panasuk-Dugdale for evaluation
of crack development in concrete structures', in 'Strength Investigations of Bearing
Structures of Multistory Precast Buildings', eds. G.N.Lvov and J.M.Strugatsky (
MNIITEP, Moscow, 1983 ) 66-84 ( in Russian ).
7. Bazant, Z.P. and Planas J., 'Fracture and Size Effect in Concrete and Other
Quasibrittle Materials, ( 1997) 597.
8. Barenblatt, G.I., 'The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture',
Advances in Appl. Mech., 7 (1962 ) 55-129.
9. Dugdale, D.S., 'Yielding of steel sheets containing slits', J. of Mech. and Phys. of
Solids, V.8 (1960) 100-108.
10. Panasyuk,V.V., 'The Limit Equilibrium of the Brittle Solids with
Cracks',(Kiev,1968) (in Russian ).
11. Eligehausen, R. and Sawade, G., 'A fracture mechanics based description of the
pull-out behavior of headed studs embedded in concrete', in 'Fracture Mechanics of
Concrete Structures. From Theory to Application', ed. L. Elfgren (London, 1989)
281-299.
12. Skramtaev,B.G. and Wolf,I.V. 'Control of the Concrete Strength', (Moscow, 1939)
(in Russian).
13. Kononov, I.A. 'The embedment depth determination', in 'Vibration Application in
Building ', ed. I.J. Petrov (Moscow, 1962) 31-65 ( in Russian ).
14. Sattler,K., 'Betractung über neuere Verdübelungen in Verbundbau', Der
Bauingenieur, 37 (1) (1962)1-8 (in German).
15. Lukojanov, U.N., 'The experimental study of behavior concrete in anchor fastenings
', in 'Design and Construction of Industrial Buildings and Constructions', ed. V.G.
Desjatov (Moscow, 1964) 18-27 ( in Russian ).
16. Nizhnikovsky,G.S., 'The new type of anchor bolt joining', 'Express Information',
149 (Moscow, 1964) ( in Russian ).

308
17. Holmjansky,M.M., 'The Laying Details of Precast Reinforced Concrete Structure
(Moscow, 1968) 208 ( in Russian).
18. Tchujko,P.A., 'The study of concrete strength by method of cone failure and shear
failure', in 'The Interbranch Problems of Building. Home Experience', ed. D.A.
Korshunov (CINIS, Moscow, 1972) (in Russian).
19. Zhao,G., 'Tragverhalten von randfernen Kopfbolzenverankerungen bei
Betonbruch', in 'Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton, H.454 (1995) 98 (in German).
20. Yagust, V.I. and Yankelevsky, D.Z., 'Strength of a concrete element under the
action of concentrated tensile or shear force', in 'Fracture Mechanics of Concrete
Structure', V. 2, Proc. of the Sec. Intern. Conf. on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete
Structures (FRAMCOS 2), Zurich, Switzerland, Juli 25-28,1995 (1995) 1361-1368.
21. Bazant, Z.P., 'Size effect of blunt fracture: concrete, rock, metal'. J. of Eng. Mech.,
110 (4) (1984) 518-535.
22. 'CEB-FIP Model Code 1990', CEB, Bulletin d'information N203 (1991).

309
CORROSION BEHAVIOR OF MATERIALS IN FIXING
APPLICATIONS
Norbert Arnold
Fischerwerke, Artur Fischer GmbH & Co. KG, Waldachtal, Germany

Abstract
To ensure the durability of fixing elements besides an appropriate design, the use of
suitable materials must be considered. Due to economical reasons it is necessary to
choose the material, which meets the specific needs of each application best. According
to general experience increasing corrosive potentials of specific environments require
materials of higher resistance to these conditions. This is normally associated with
higher costs.

According to increasing corrosion resistance, appropriate corrosion protection comprises


zinc-based coatings for unalloyed steels, stainless steels and highly corrosion resistant
special alloys.

Comparative results of laboratory as well as outdoor exposure tests are presented and the
application of these materials in approved fixing elements is discussed.

1. Introduction

In most applications fixings are expected to function during the whole life time of the
building. In Europe this means a period of 50 years.

Due to the difficulties of predicting the corrosion behaviour of materials for 50 years in
advance, one approach of achieving save fixing elements is to accept materials only,
which show practically no interaction with the expected corrosive media. This is the case
in Germany and the range of validity of the „European Technical Approval“ for anchors.
As a consequence two main groups of base materials are created:

313
1. Low alloyed surface-protected steel for indoor applications, which needs a corrosion
resistance (through non-permanent protective layers) mainly for storage, transportation
and installation purposes.
2. Highly alloyed stainless steel (with permanent corrosion resistance) for environments
with high corrosion potential.

A second approach for outside applications is to use protective coatings, which proved to
be durable through long-time experience under defined environmental conditions.
The most widely used protection-systems of this type are thick layers of zinc on low
alloyed steel.

2. Corrosion protection for fixings in building applications


2.1 Non-permanent protection
Table 1 displays a summary of the most widely used non-permanent protection systems:
Table 1. Non-permanent protective coatings
Type Typical layer
thickness [mm]
Zinc, electro plated, blue passivated 5 – 15
Zinc, electro plated, yellow passivated 5 - 15
Zinc, organic binder (Dacromet 320) 1 – 3
Zinc, organic binder (Delta tone) 1–3
Zinc, hot dip galvanized 20 - 100

In the field of fixings, only hot dip galvanized steel is used for outside applications.
Without further protection the other zinc-systems are used for indoor applications only.

2.2 Permanent corrosion resistance


As fixing elements have to display their full performance during the whole lifetime of
the building a reduction in the mechanical properties due to corrosion is not acceptable.
This usually means that only stainless steels or even metalls with higher corrosion
resistance (e. g. Ni- or Ti-alloys) are suitable for outside applications.
The most widely used type of stainless steel belongs to the Cr/Ni-Type (e. g. 1.4301, BS
304) or the Cr/Ni/Mo-type (e. g. 1.4401, BS 316).
Germany has probably the most detailed regulations for the use of stainless steels. The
field of applications for these alloys is regulated by „Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche
Zulassung“ 1) .

3. Corrosion behaviour of fixing elements

To determine the long time corrosion behaviour of a protective coating several short-
time tests are common. None of these can give an exact forecast of the behaviour under
the expected practical conditions. Nevertheless, testing different corrosive systems under

314
identical conditions can supply us with information about differences to expect in real
life properties.

3.1 Corrosion behaviour of non-permanent protection-systems


All coatings were tested in a salt spray box according to DIN 50 021. Anchor-bolts with
a diameter of 12 mm and an app. length of 10 cm were used as test-specimens. The
coatings were applied under industrial condition. The corrosion resistance of the various
system was measured by determining the percentage of specimen-surface covered by red
rust.
Three test-series were conducted. The details are summarized in table 2.
To determine the effect of mounting on the corrosion behaviour of the bolts, one series
(3) was conducted, where the specimens were mounted, demounted (by splitting the
concrete slab) and then exposed in the salt spray box.

Table 2: Coatings tested according DIN 50 21.


Series Specimen- Coating type Thickness
No [µm]
1 1 none -
1 2 Zinc, electro plated , yellow passivated 5-7
1 3 Zinc, electro plated, blue passivated 5-7
1 4 Dacromet ® 320 1,2 - 2,2
1 5 Delta Tone ® 1,0 - 2,2
2 6 Zinc, hot dip galvanized 40 - 50
2 7 Zinc, mechanically plated (McDermid) 40 - 50
2 8 Zinc, mechanically plated (sheradized acc. 30 - 40
BS 4921)
2 9 Zinc, mechanically plated (sheradized acc. 30 - 40
BS 4921 + passivation treatment)
3 10 Zinc, hot dip galvanized 55 - 60
3 11 Zinc, mechanically plated (McDermid) 55 - 60
3 12 Zinc, hot dip galvanized 50 - 55
3 a) 13 Zinc, hot dip galvanized, demounted 55 - 60
3 a) 14 Zinc, hot dip galvanized, demounted 55 - 60
3 a) 15 Zinc, hot dip galvanized, demounted 50 - 55

315
The results of the corrosion-tests are displayed in the according figures 1 - 4.

Figure 1: Test results of series 1

100

roh

galvanisch verzinkt
Red rust [%]

Delta Tone einfach


50
Delta Tone zweifach

Dacromet

gvz, blau

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Time [d]

Figure 2: Test results of series 2

100
Red rust [%]

6 7
50

8 9

0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Time [d]

316
Fig. 3: Test results of series 3

100

10
Red rest [%]

50 11

12

0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Time [d]

Figure 4 Test results of series 3 a)

100

13
Red rust [%]

50 14

15

0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Time [d]

317
3.2 Permanently corrosion-resistant fixing elements
3.2.1 Standard-Applications
Outdoor exposures of different stainless steels for long periods proved that
stainless steels of the Cr/Ni/Mo-type showed no substantial corrosion 2). As a
consequence they are now the standard alloys for fixing elements in outdoor
applications.

3.2.2 Highly corrosive enviroments


Practical experience also showed that in certain applications, especially indoor
swimming-pools and road-tunnels, failure of fixing elements could occur due to
stress corrosion cracking. Under these conditions even some highly alloyed steels
showed severe corrosion attack 5) (table 3).

Table 3. Pitting corrosion of different stainless steels (depth in µm).

Material-no. short-name Field research 4) Lab research 5)


(Werkstoff-Nr.) (2 years) (5.5 days)

1.4301 X 5 CrNi 18 10 50 55
1.4401 (1.4571) X 5 CrNiMo 17 12 2 55 43
1.4462 X 2 CrNiMoN 22 5 3 30 27
1.4529 X 1 NiCrMoCuN 25 20 6 0 0
1.4565 X 3 CrNiMnMoNbN 23 17 5 3

As a consequence the stainless steel 1.4529 has become the standard-material for
these applications

4. Application examples

4.1 Indoor applications


Electro plated blue or yellow passivated zinc is usual. Other thin zinc protections layers
are used in exceptions only (e. g. 6).

4.2 Outdoor applications


4.2.1 Facade fixings according to German approval
In case of approved plastic anchors with a completley closed plug-sleeve, steel-
screws protected by electro plated zinc in combination with an additional
protections of the head of the screw by a thick protective coating is sufficient.
4.2.1.1 Facade fixings in aerated concrete
Due to a lack of experience about corrosion effects in that material, screws
protected by electro plated zinc in combination with the higher corrosion-
resistant yellow passivation (compared to the blue one) is mandatory.

318
4.2.2 Standard atmospheres
According to European guidelines for urban and industrial applications 1.4401
(1.4571) is suitable.

4.2.3 Road tunnels


Typical examples are the „Engelberg-Tunnel“ (2.4 km long, opened in 2000) or
the 4th tube of the „Elbtunnel“ (2,5 km long, opening planned for 2003) where all
anchors used were made from 1.4529.

4.2.4 Extreme corrosion resistance


Flue gas desulfuration is an example where even highly alloyed steels show strong
corrosion. In this application titanium is the suitable material.

5. References

1) Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-30.3-6, Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik.

2 ) Ergang, R., Rockel, M. B., Werkstoffe und Korrosion 26, 36 – 41 (1975)

3) Hütterer, H., Schadgaskorrosion von Werkstoffen in der Befestigungstechnik,


Diplomarbeit, FH Konstanz 1994

4) Übeleis, A. Felder, G. Nock, R., Einflüsse von Schadstoffen auf die Beständigkeit
metallischer Werkstoffe in exponierten Bauwerken, Vortrag anläßlich der 23.
Jahrestagung der GUS, Finztal, 1994

5) Arnold, N. Gümpel, P. Heitz, T. W., Materials and Corrosion 50, 140 – 145 (1999)

6) Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-21.1-971, Deutsche Institut für Bautechnik

319
BEHAVIOUR OF POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS IN CASE
OF FIRE
Konrad Bergmeister, Anton Rieder
Institute of Structural Engineering, Vienna, Austria

Abstract
Due to the loss of strength of concrete and steel at high temperatures the load capacity of
anchors in case of fire is expected to be reduced. Especially in tunnels post-installed
anchors are commonly used to fix heavy equipment like ventilators, which must not fall
down and injure or even kill escaping people or firemen in case of an accident with
releated break-out of fire. The failure mode of expansion or undercut anchors depends
primarily on the embedment depth: for small embedment depths concrete spalling will
be decisive, steel failure usually is the consequence of large embedment depths. Another
important feature is the effect of cracked concrete (w = 0.3 mm).
In an experimental setup in a real motorway tunnel the behaviour of expansion and
bonded anchors is tested in cracked and uncracked concrete during a fire. For this
purpose an axial load is applied and the temperature in different depths and the
displacement of the anchors are measured continuosly.

1. Introduction

The most important variable in questions of fire protection is the temperature


propagation. Due to the fact that evolution of fire is a highly instationary process the
temperature is a function of space and time. Theoretically it can be calculated by
solution of the partial differential equation which describes the conservation of energy
and in cartesian coordinates has the following form:

∂  ∂T  ∂  ∂  ∂  ∂  ∂T
λ  +  λ  +  λ  + q = ρc (1)
∂x  ∂x  ∂y  ∂y  ∂z  ∂z  ∂t

320
λ heat conductivity [W/(mK)]
ρ density [kg/m3]

c specific heat capacity [J/(kgK)]


q heat source or heat sink [W/m3]
T temperature [K]
t time [sec]

The speed how fast the temperature rises in an element is governed by the temperature
conductivity term λ/(ρc). The time and / or space dependance of all this parameters
makes it impossible to give an analytical solution for eq. 1, therefore numeric nonlinear
approximation procedures are necessary. One of the main problems in modelling
material behaviour at high temperatures is the heat transfer from the fire szenario to the
structural part because it strongly dependends on convection and ventilation conditions,
surface roughness, geometry and temperature. For this purpose experimental data are
non-available.
It is of interest how the anchor influences the heat transfer in the concrete. Due to the
high temperature conductivity of steel it is heated much faster then concrete and this
affects the load capacity of the system steel to concrete.
In case of fire following failure modes of post-installed anchors in tension can be
observed:
1. Steel failure
The yield strength of steel decreases with increasing temperature. This leads to a critical
temperature Tcrit at a certain stress level. For a structural steel for example the residual
strength at 500°C is about 60% of the strength at room temperature.
2. Pull-out failure
Due to the opening of cracks in the concrete at high temperatures the friction between
expansion sleeve and concrete and hence the ultimate load capacity decrease. For
expansion and undercut anchors suitable in the cracked tensile concrete zone this effect
should not appear. Bonded anchors usually exhibit failure of the chemical mortar at
elevated temperatures.
3. Pull-through failure
In case of poor concrete quality and / or opening of cracks the steel cone slides through
the expansion sleeve without any concrete breakout. This is not only a consequence of
high temperatures, but it can be observed also at room temperature and in cracked
concrete.

321
4. Concrete cone failure
Concrete exhibits the quartz-inverison (α-quartz → β-quartz) at a temperature of 573°C
and has to be evaluated as a completely destroyed zone. With increasing time this zone
expands in the inside of the structural part and the anchor is pulled out with the concrete
cone. For bonded anchors this failure mode can be observed only for small embedment
depths.
5. Concrete spalling
At moisture contents ≥ 2 mass-% explosive spalling can arise due to the expansion of
water vapour in the pores: if the porosity is very low the vapour cannot expand and the
tensile strenght of the concrete is exceeded. This effect can be favourished close to an
anchor due to the higher heat input through the steel.
For the evaluation of a structural part in case of fire the full developed burning is
decisive. Reproducable laboratory fire tests are guaranteed by use of a standardized
temperature vs. time curve (T-ISO 834) which can be described by following equation:
ϑ − ϑ0 = 345 lg(8t + 1) (2)

whereas ϑ is the temperature at time t and ϑ0 is the temperature at the t = 0.

During the fire test a constant axial load is applied on the anchor. By determining the
time the anchor can bear the load it is possible to assign a fire resistance duration.
However, in natural fires the temperature development can be quite different from the
standardized curve described by eq. 2. For this purpose the thermic and mechanical
behaviour of post-installed anchors in a natural fire has been investigated.

2. Experimental setup

The experimental setup is shown in fig. 1. A kind of “minitunnel” is build up with two
concrete walls (200x200x30 cm) on both sides and four slabs (80x80x30 cm) as ceiling,
all of them of the strength class C50/60.
The temperature evolution and distribution on the surface of the expansion anchors is
measured by thermoelements of type K placed in a notch during the fire test (fig. 2). The
isolation material is glass silk and resists a permanent temperature of 700°C. For the
determination of the temperature in the chemical mortar of the bonded anchors there are
used standard thread rods without fixing element and with a notch in axial direction.
Bonded anchors and expansion anchors of different shape are installed in cracked and
uncracked concrete (see table 1). Through a lever-arm a constant axial load (fig. 3) of 10
kN is applied on three bonded anchors of the shape M12 and the displacement of the
anchors is measured through a hole from the back side of the slab via potentiometric
displacement transducers (fig. 4).

322
T4

tfix
T3

T2

T1

Fig. 1 and 2: Experimental setup and tempeature measurement

Bonded Bonded Bonded Expansion Expansion Expansion


anchor
M10 M12 M16 M8 M12 M16
material 1.4529 1.4529 1.4529 1.4401 1.4401 1.4401
Embedment
60 80 125 45 70 85
depth [mm]
Torque [Nm] 20 40 50 20 60 110
Crack width
0.3 0.3 0.3 0 0 0
[mm]
axial
Load [kN] unloaded unloaded unloaded unloaded unloaded
10 kN

tfix [mm] 20 30 35 30 30 25

Table 1: Tested anchors

323
Fig. 3: Axial load Fig. 4: Displacement transducer

3. Results

3.1 Temperature
A typical evolution of temperature on the surface of an expansion anchor in different
depths is shown in fig. 5. On the fixing element (25 mm) the temperature raises up to
800 °C and drops very fast due to the low heat capacity of the steel. The constant
temperature level at 100 °C in 50 and 100 mm depth is caused by a phase change of the
pore water. As expected, in the concrete the maximum temperature is reached later than
on the surface.

expansion anchor M16


900
800 100 mm
700 50 mm
temperature [°C]

600 0 mm
500 fixing element
400
300
200
100
0
0:00

0:05

0:10

0:15

0:20

0:25

0:30

0:35

0:40

0:45

0:50

0:55

1:00

tim e [h:m in]

Fig. 5: Temperature evolution

324
In one of the slabs on the ceiling was measured the temperature in different depths inside
the concrete. The results and a comparison with the temperature on the surface of the
expansion anchor after 15 and 30 min is shown in fig. 6 and 7. It demonstrates very
clearly the high temperature conductivity of the steel. Close to the surface the anchors
are cooled down quickly. The difference between the various shapes of anchors is small.
temperature after 15 min temperature after 30 min
600 450

concrete 400 concrete


500
350 expansion anchor M16
tem perature [°C ]

temperature [°C]
expansion anchor M16
400 300 expansion anchor M12
expansion anchor M12
250
300 expansion anchor M8
expansion anchor M8 200
200 150
100
100
50
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
depth [mm] depth [mm]

Fig. 6: Temperature distribution after Fig. 7 Temperature distribution after


15 min 30 min
In fig. 8-11 are shown the average temperatures in different depths and after different
times on the surface of the expansion anchors and of the bonded anchor M16 (without
fixing element). On the fixing element the maximum temperature is reached between 10
and 15 minutes, in the concrete it is reached after 25 – 30 minutes. With increasing depth
the maximum temperature is reached at later points of time. Under the protection of the
fixing element the temperatures on the concrete surface are lower (fig. 9) than without
fixing element ( fig. 8) for the same diameter of the anchor.

bonded anchor M16 expansion anchor M16


800
600
700 5 min
5 min
500 10 min
te m p e ra tu re [°C ]

600
te m p e ra tu re [°C ]

10 min
15 min
400 15 min 500
20 min
20 min 400
300 25 min
25 min
300 30 min
200 30 min
200
100
100
0 0
0 60 120 -25 0 50 100
depth [mm] depth [mm]

Fig. 8: Temperature distribution bonded Fig. 9: Temperature distribution


anchor M16 expansion anchor M16

325
expansion anchor M12 expansion anchor M8
700 600
5 min
600 5 min
500 10 min
10 min

te m p e ra tu re [°C ]
15 min
tem p eratu re [°C ]

500 15 min 400 20 min


20 min
400 25 min
25 min 300
300 30 min 30 min
200
200

100 100

0 0
-30 0 40 80 -30 0 25 50
depth [mm] depth [mm]

Fig. 10: Temperature distribution Fig. 11: Temperature distribution


expansion anchor M12 expansion anchor M8
3.2 Expansion anchor under axial loading in uncracked concrete
After the fire test the residual load capacity was determined by a pullout test in
uncracked concrete of the strength class C50/60. It is important to know this value for
the assessment of the reliabilty of the system after a fire szenario and for future
sanitation. The tests were performed displacement controlled with a servohydraulic
testing machine at a speed of 0.08 mm/sec. For the present the comparison of the
ultimate mean loads for the different shapes in the axial tension test in concrete with
(Fu,m) and without (Fu,m,ref) fire exposure is shown in fig. 12. After the fire test the
concrete surface was full of cracks mainly close to the anchors. The cracks propagated in
radial direction and their width varied between 0.2 and 0.4 mm. This may be interpreted
as a first indication of spalling. The expansion anchor exhibited mainly pull-through-
failure, in one case splitting failure.

50 Ultimate axial load expansion anchor


45
40
Fu,m/Fu,m,ref [%]

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
45 70 85
heff [mm]

Fig. 12: Relative ultimate axial load of expansion anchor in


uncracked concrete

326
3.3 Bonded anchor under axial loading in cracked concrete
The displacement of the bonded anchor of the shape M12 during the axial loading and
the corresponding temperatures in different depths are shown in fig. 13.

bonded anchor M12 axial


1200 1,2

1000 1

Displacement [mm]
80 mm
temperature [°C]

800 0,8 40 mm
0 mm
600 0,6
fixing element
400 0,4 anchor 1
anchor 2
200 0,2 anchor 3

0 0
0:00

0:10

0:20

0:30

0:40

0:50

1:00

1:10

1:20
time [h:min]

Fig. 13: Displacement and temperature during constant axial


loading in cracked concrete

Very interesting is the high temperature peak in the first 5 minutes even in 80 mm. It
could be possible that there was some air included in the mortar which fovourished the
heat transport at the beginning of the test and that a succeeding chemical reaction
stopped the enormous heat transfer. To clear this phenomenon further investigations are
necessary.
The displacements after 90 min were 0.8 mm, 1.04 mm and 0.7 mm respectively. The
creep of the chemical mortar is primarily a time dependent process. The first anchor
displacement can be observed 10 minutes after the beginning of the fire test, whereas the
maximum temperature in 40 mm depth is reached already in 15 minutes.
The ultimate axial load in the pull-out test in cracked concrete after the fire is shown in
fig. 14 in percent of the ultimate load in cracked concrete of the strength class C50/60
which has not been subjected to high temperatures. The crack width was the same as
during the fire test (0.3 mm). The shapes M10 and M12 exhibited concrete cone
breakout and the shape M16 pull-through failure.
The spalling was more pronounced around the thread rods without fixing element (about
34 mm in fig. 15) than close to the anchors with fixing element. Hence the fixing
element has a positiv influence by preventing concrete spalling close to the anchor.

327
Ultimate axial load bonded anchor
100
90
80
F u,m /Fu ,m ,ref [% ]

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
60 80 125
heff [mm]

Fig. 14: Relative ultimate axial load of Fig. 15: Concrete spalling near a thread
bonded anchor in cracked concrete rod

An explanation for the relatively high


ultimate load of the shape M12 (heff = 80 mm) may be the shielding effect of the mineral
wool which was wrapped around the lever-arm in order to protect the steel from high
temperatures.

4. Conclusions

In a natural fire test the temperature distribution and evolution has been measured on the
surface of expansion and bonded anchors. The displacement behaviour of axial loaded
bonded anchors in cracks was investigated. After the fire test the residual ultimate axial
load was determined and compared with the ultimate load in concrete which has not
been subjected to high temperatures. The expansion anchors exhibit a larger decrease of
the residual load capacity than the bonded anchors.

5. References

1. Kordina, K., Meyer-Ottens, C., ’Beton Brandschutz Handbuch’ (1999)


2. Wiesholzer, J., ’Berechnung der Temperaturverläufe von Befestigungsdetails
infolge Brand mittels FEM-Programm’, Diplomarbeit, University of Innsbruck
(1987)
3. Nausse, P., ’Prüfung und Beurteilung des Brandverhaltens von Dübeln’, IBK-
Baufachtagung 153, Hannover (14./15.10.1992)

328
DURABILITY OF GALVANIZED, POST-INSTALLED
FASTENERS TO CONCRETE
K. Menzel*, B. Hagmayer**
* Otto Graf Institut, University of Stuttgart, Germany
** Schlaich, Bergemann u. Partner, Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
The paper discusses the mechanisms of zinc corrosion in contact with concrete with
special emphasis on post-installed fasteners. Experimental results on the influence of
cement type,carbonation, galvanic effects and results of exposure tests up to ten years
are presented. Compared to corrosion of galvanized reinforcement embedded in concrete
and galvanized metalwork exposed to the atmospere, differences in mechanism and type
of corrosive attack are found. In case of weathered concrete, even hot dip galvanizing
does not assure corrosion protection for more than ten years because of localized attack
due to galvanic effects at the interface concrete/atmosphere.

1. Corrosion of zinc and galvanized steel

Zinc is known as a cheap and reliable protective plating for wheathered steel
components of any kind. With the exception of extreme industrial atmosphere
(containing high amounts of sulfur dioxide) zinc suffers uniform corrosion at relatively
low rates about one to seven micrometers/year (fig.1 [1-3]). Embedded in concrete,
galvanized reinforcement resists chloride induced corrosion much better than bare steel
[5]. In a first stage, up to one week,being exposed to a highly alcaline electrolyte,
corrosion rates are high because hydrogen evolution is the dominating cathodic reaction.
Passivation, followed by deposition of salt layers reduces the corrosion rate drastically
later on (fig. 1 [4,5]). As to fasteners, installed in drilled holes after hardening of the
concrete, not much information is available. The few sources on related subjects (e.g
cavity wall ties [6] and facades [7](see fig.1) report corrosion rates in a range of 1 to 12
µm/year without further explication. It was the aim of the study presented here, to
understand the specific of post installed, galvanized fasteners in concrete with regard to
corrosion and life-time of the protective coating.

329
Fig. 1: Corrosion rates of zinc

2. Experimental

Samples were designed as close as possible to reality, using cylindrical concrete blocks
of 100 mm diameter with drilled holes, where galvanized rods (∅ 12x100 mm) were
introduced (fig.2). Two types of cement (portland and slag cement) were used. One set
of samples was carbonated in an atmosphere of 1% CO2 after drilling the hole. The steel
rods were either electroplated and chromated (zinc cover 3-4 µm) or hot dip galvanized
(50-60µm zinc). As an additional parameter, some of the samples were sealed at the
interface concrete/atmospere with natural rubber and a galvanized washer. To study
galvanic effects, caused by the vicinity of carbonated and alcaline concrete, special
samples with two rods were used (fig.3). Samples were exposed on a roof in Stuttgart for
ten years. Corrosion potential was measured by means of a calomel electrode.More
details on the experimental setup are given in [8].

330
Fig.2: samples with hot-dip galvanized steel rods (section, treated with
phenolphtaleine to mark alcaline concrete ) after ten years of outdoor exposure

3. Results

During the first stage of exposure, when the corrosion potential was regularily measured,
potentials of –800 to –100 mV (SCE) were recorded. The potential drop in a range where
hydrogen evolution is thermodynamically possible (as known from fresh concrete and
galvanized reinforcement) was not observed (fig.4).In the course of exposure potentials
tend to steadily increase, until „iron-like“ behavior is observed (fig.5). The increase is
earlier for electroplated samples. It is interesting to note, that the differences regarding
the parameters carbonated/not carbonated, sealed/open or type of cement are much
smaller than expected. Evaluation after ten years of exposure gives the pictures
presented in fig.6 to 8). In all cases, corrosion attack is pronounced about 1 to 2 cm from
the outer end of the borehole. An experimental galvanic couple, consisting of identical
samples in alcaline and carbonated boreholes subjected to wet/dry-cycles produces
maximum current densities of 3,6 µA/cm² corresponding to about 50µm/year corrosion
loss of zinc (fig.3). After 10 years of exposure, the percentage of still zinc covered
surface is found to be in the range of 35 to 90 % for hot dip galvanized samples and of
only 0 to 30 % for electroplated samples (fig.9). Electroplated samples in slag cement
are heavily corroded (fig.8 below). About 30% of the samples of this type already caused
spalling of the concrete cylinder whereas the outer (atmospheric) end is only slightly
stained without significant loss of material.

331
Fig.3: Current density of a galvanic element (carbonated/alcaline) during wet-dry cycles

Fig.4: Corrosion potentials of galvanized steel

332
Fig.5: Corrosion potential of post-installed galvanized fasteners vs. Time

Fig. 6

333
Fig.7

334
Fig. 8

Fig.9: Percentage of still zinc covered area after ten years outdoor exposure

335
Fig. 10: Average corrosion loss after ten years exposure (calculated from total weight
loss)

4. Discussion

The mechanisms of corrosion of galvanized fasteners to concrete do not compare


directly to corrosion in concrete and atmospheric corrosion. Specific effects have to be
taken into account:

• Contact to concrete of different pH (alcaline-carbonated) with the effect of


additional corrosion loss due to galvanic elements
• Crevices within the borehole with high humidity and depletion of carbon dioxide
(CO2 is consumed by the carbonation reaction) hindering the formation of
protective carbonate layers as known from atmospheric corrosion.

These effects lead to local differences in corrosion rate, which will be highest at the
outer end of the borehole. Zinc dissolution can be estimated to a rate of 2,5 µm/year (fig.
10) in the average and more than 50 µm/year locally. After consumption of the zinc
layer cathodic protection of bare steel by surrounding zinc is given to a certain extent.
Newertheless steel corrosion should not be neglected after a period of about ten years
exposure for hot dip galvanized and one year for electroplated fasteners in wheathered
concrete.

336
5. References

1. Korrosionsverhalten von feuerverzinktem Stahl ; Beratung Feuerverzinken, Hagen


(1983)

2. Nürnberger, U.: Korrosion und Korrosionsschutz im Bauwesen; Bauverlag


Wiesbaden (1995)

3. Menzel, K.: Korrosionsschutz in der Befestigungstechnik; VDI Berichte 653 ,


Düsseldorf (1988)

4. Rauen, A.: Deutsche Verzinkertagung, München (1971)

5. Andrade, M.C., Macias, A.: Galvanized Reinforcements in Concrete; Surface


Coatings-2 Elsevier Applied Science ISBN 1 85166 194 8

6. Moore, J.F.A.: Building Research Current Paper 3 (1981), U.K.

7. Hermann, P.: Korrosion (Dresden) 14, (1983) 1

8. Menzel, K.: Zur Korrosion von verzinktem Stahl in Kontakt mit Beton;
Stuttgart,Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, (1992) 1

337
DURABILITY OF STAINLESS STEEL CONNECTIONS
WITH RESPECT TO CORROSION
Ulf Nürnberger
Otto-Graf-Institute, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In structural engineering connection elements for ventilated curtain walls and suspended
ceilings are more and more made of stainless steel due to reasons of corrosion
protection. A special approval process regulates the use of the steel grade in Germany.
The permitted stainless steels for substructures, connectors, fastenings, hangers and
anchorage devices are defined in dependence of environmental conditions and
installation. Normally austenitic Cr-Ni-(Mo)-steels are applied. The use of hardened
martensitic steels for self-drilling screws and concrete screws should be desirable but
such fasteners are not sufficient sure. In strong acid and/or chloride containing
environment (see-atmosphere, de-icing salt) connection elements might be endangered
by pitting corrosion, crevice corrosion and stress corrosion cracking, if these products
are made of unsuited alloys. In the contribution the corrosion situations are described in
detail. Further typical corrosion damages are discussed if unsuited stainless steel
products are applied.

1. Introduction

During the last decades pollution has eminently increased in urban agglomerations,
industrial areas and traffic structures. Because of this fact, the corrosion exposure of
metallic structural elements with a security risk is growing in constructional engineering.
Mechanical connection elements between steel and concrete, e. g. in claddings for
external walls that are ventilated at the rear and comply with DIN 18516 [1], in
suspended ceilings in special climates (humid premises, indoor swimming-pools) or in
flat roofs, are also affected. Due to corrosion, connection elements can undergo an
impairment of their functionality as well as a security risk for the whole construction. In
the past, steel fastenings, that are galvanized and plastic coated, have been particularly
affected in the exterior. Corrosion could especially be explained by high chloride
pollution of the atmosphere and the building materials and/or contact with moist

338
building materials during failures [2-5]. At contact with moist, neutrally reacting
building materials (e. g. heat insulation, wood), corrosion–protective films can not
develop and corrosion–promoting aeration cells become effective [6]. Additional serious
corrosion damages occurred in indoor swimming-pools in connection elements, that
consisted of stainless steel [6,7]. The use of unsuitable steel grades in an aggressive
atmosphere was responsible for these damages (v. paragraph 2).

Because of the above–mentioned correlation, high-quality stainless steels have been


subsequently tested in regard to an application in structurally critical climates [8-10] and
have also been increasingly used for steel connections, fastenings, substructures, hangers
and anchorage devices in structural elements outdoors [11]. The adequate steel grades
are regulated in a special approval (paragraph 5) depending on corrosion exposure and
installation conditions.

2. Corrosion problems pointed out exemplary in claddings for external


walls that are ventilated at the rear

Under critical exposure conditions various corrosion processes are possible in


mechanical connection elements as well as adjacent metallic structural elements. This is
illustrated in fig. 1 at the example of a ventilated curtain wall. Table 1 quotes the
structural elements resp. the building materials of the cladding for external walls as well

Table 1: Structural elements in an external ventilated curtain wall


mark structural type of construction material
element
1 cladding moulded metal sheet, ceramics, nature stone, fiber
plate cement, high pressure laminated
plate, aluminium alloy, copper, titan
zinc, galvanized and/or coated steel,
stainless steel
2 fastening screw, rivet, cramp, aluminium alloy, copper alloy,
element hook stainless steel
3 connection screw, rivet
element
4 substructure profile (load-bearing aluminium alloy, copper alloy,
rail) galvanized and/or coated steel,
stainless steel, wood
5 anchorage post-installed fastener, stainless steel, plastic sleeve plus
device anchor rail, concrete galvanized screw
screw
6 insulation mat mineral fiber, glass fiber,
styrofoam

339
Fig. 1: Situation of claddings for external walls that are ventilated at the rear

as fastening elements, connection elements and anchorage devices, that have to be put in.
With the help of constructive measures (construction of external walls) as well as the
choice of suitable building materials, it has to be secured that damaging influences in
case of an attack of water and especially aqueous, acidulous and/or chloride-enriched
media do not lead to an impairing corrosion.

On principal, stainless steel can be used for all metallic structural elements and it can
also get into contact with different structural metals.

3. Exposure conditions for connection elements [6,12]

Corrosion in the open atmosphere increases depending on rising humidity and


temperature as well as concentration of gaseous and/or solid contamination in the air.
Therefore, corrosion exposure of structural elements in the open air is distinguished by

340
• Climatic zones (dry, temperate, warm-humid climate).
• The type of atmosphere, that is characterised through local environmental
conditions: inland atmosphere, as a rule, is not very aggressive, at all. Urban
atmospheres and especially industrial atmospheres can, above all, be more or less
bad polluted with dirt and sulphur-dioxide or whirled-up de-icing salt. Sea
atmospheres are, depending on the distance to the shore, polluted with variable
contents of chloride aerosols.
• Micro-climate at the interface between structural element and environment, which
is of the greatest influence for the expected corrosion exposure. It is specified by the
type of atmosphere, constructive influences (heat-leaks, crevices) and the position of
the structural element in regard to its environment. Above all, a micro-climate is
influenced by humidity, temperature, short-falls of the dew-point as well as duration
of local moistening, even in combination with polluting agents and contamination as
well as air flows.

Special applications, where the corrosion exposure and the above-mentioned


classification differ, do exist:

Interior work
The external surfaces of structural elements and connectors inside buildings do not duly
get in contact with aqueous corrosion media. A corrosive exposure only takes place, if
water, moistness of structural elements or other polluting agents are affecting because of
failures.

Road tunnel
In road tunnels, fastening elements of steel are exposed to an enhanced relative
humidity, a high portion of dust, soot, abrasion of car tire and chloride salts out of de-
icing salts and acid gas such as SO2, HCl and NOx (as a consequence of diesel vehicles).
Because of the lack of detergent rain, a concentration of polluting agents occurs. Since,
in addition, the tunnel wall and the metallic components, that are fastened to it, usually
have lower temperatures than the surrounding air, suitable conditions are given for the
formation of water of condensation. Under the exposure of water of condensation a
water film, that is acidulous and rich in chloride ions, exists on the metallic components
and, because of dirt depositions, the basic requirements for crevice corrosion are given,
too. In particularly adverse cases, the corrosion conditions are thus comparable to those
in indoor swimming-pools.

Indoor swimming-pools
In the swimming-pool atmosphere very thin electrolyte films generate because of the
content of water vapour in the indoor air and, depending on aeration and structural
conditions, water of condensation develops after the short-fall of the dew-point. Further,
salts and dusts, that, among others, have contents of MgCl2, CaCl2 and especially NaCl,
settle down. Because of their hygroscopic character, these salts do already generate
saturated salt-solutions in the typical relative atmospheric humidity of “dry“ interiors.

341
A further characteristic of corrosivity of the atmosphere in indoor swimming-pools
results from the disinfection treatment of the bath-water. The chlorinated gas process is
applied to most times. Chlorine, that is in the hall’s air, can - in reaction with water -
build hydrochloric acid (HCl) and hypochloric acid (HOCl) in the films, that are rich in
neutral salt, according to the reaction
Cl2 + H2O → HCl + HOCl
As a matter of fact, the latter one is the disinfectant, because of its strong oxidation
effect. In water it disintegrates into hydrochloric acid and oxygen according to
2HOCl → 2HCl + O2
This way, an acidulous and saline electrolyte with a high concentration of chloride ions
develops on the surface of the structural element. Polluting agents accumulate on
surfaces of structural elements, that are not cleaned and washed around by water.

Characteristics of connection elements


Connection elements often are not accessible. They are, e. g. behind walls or at covered
ceilings, not within reach for inspections and maintenance. In addition, connection
elements can, at least, be partially in contact with mineral building materials, insulation
or wood.

Then, with regard to corrosion exposure, the before-mentioned conditions, especially the
micro-climate, are of importance for those zones that come into contact with air. The
corrosive exposure, that e. g. has to be expected in claddings for external walls that are
ventilated at the rear according to DIN 18516, part 1 [1], results from atmospheric
influences (relative atmospheric humidity, access of acidulous gases and chloride
aerosols) in close connection with structural parameters of the wall construction and
chemical influences from (moist) building materials. In walls and façades, that meet the
technical standards concerning humidity (proof of protection against interior
condensation and absence of dew-water in the area that is ventilated at the rear [13]) or
comply with the standards mentioned in [1] (incurring moisture has to be eliminated
because of ventilation at the rear), it can be assumed in case of flawless protection
against outdoor weathering (joints have to be formed that way, that no rain can ooze in
from outside) that in normal case the corrosion exposure is less than it is in outdoor
weathering. Formation of condensate only occurs short-time, e. g. as a result of the heat-
leak effect of fastening components. Though, corroding polluting agents, especially
chlorides (from some building materials or aerosols), can concentrate, because they can
not be washed off by the rain.

First of all, at connection elements that get into contact with building materials, it is of
importance, whether they contain in their pores and (inner) cavities the free water that is
necessary for corrosion [6,14]. Furthermore, in the case of stainless steels, conditions
that inhibit or destroy passivity have to exist. In all cases of corrosion, there is a
complicating effect, if water dissolves ingredients from the building material, that are
aggressive against steel, or eases the transport of polluting agents from the environment
to the building material.

342
A corrosion influence of materials in connection with stainless steels can only be
expected, if these materials contain a sufficient concentration of chloride ions and/or
acids in addition to water. Chlorides can only get into normal concrete in high
concentration, if there is a direct impact with sea-water or water containing de-icing salt
[6]. Normally, a such exposure of connection elements and building material with
chlorine water does not happen in practical operation.

In moist wood, in contrast, acetic acid, which is able to attack stainless steels, too, can be
released depending on the type of wood because of hydrolysis at increased temperatures
[6]. In special cases chemicals for wood protection can also contain chlorides.

Moist insulation is not only conducive to general corrosion. Because of their electrolytic
conductivity, they can also promote the formation of elements between structural
elements in the insulation (e. g. of galvanized or non-galvanized, unalloyed steel) and
more precious components. So-called foreign cathodes are e. g. steel in concrete, copper
materials and stainless steels, if they are conductively connected to the steel elements in
the insulation, that are effective as anodes. In most cases, insulation is free of corrosion-
promoting components, which could be dissolved due to an access of water.

In moist and nearly neutral building materials with open pores, the corrosion exposure of
structural metals is normally higher than e. g. in the atmosphere behind a wall, that is
ventilated at the rear. The opposite reaction rather is the case, if there is a contact with
alkaline mineral building materials.

4. Steel grades and types of corrosion [6]

High alloyed steels, which in contrast to unalloyed steels do not show general corrosion
and noticeable rust formation in normal environmental conditions (atmosphere,
humidity) and in aqueous, nearly neutral to alkaline solutions, are called stainless steels.
Basic requirement for the before-said reaction is a minimum concentration of that steel
on particular alloying elements and the existence of an oxidising agent (e. g. oxygen) in
the surrounding medium. This causes a passivation of the surface. "Passivity" describes a
condition that produces a strong inhibition of the reaction of resolving iron after forming
a passive layer on the surface. Chromium, in particular, is an element that tends to
passivation. This property is transmitted on iron resp. steel through alloying: General
corrosion decreases in corrosion-promoting media contrary to the content of chromium
(fig. 2). The content of chromium that causes passivity when exceeded depends on the
attacking agent. The content of chromium in water and in the atmosphere should at least
be 12 M.-%.

For particular types of corrosion, e. g. pitting corrosion and stress corrosion cracking, the
existence of a passive layer is a necessary requirement. Because of that, passive steels
are resistant against general corrosion, but are sensitive to local corrosion in presence of
specific media (e. g. chloride ions) in case of an insufficient content of alloy. First of all,

343
Fig. 2: Corrosion of chromium steel in industrial air (referring to Binder and Brown)

the specific standards for stainless steels concerning alloy result from the particular
corrosion exposures (e. g. attack of chloride ions or acids) and such resistivity as may be
required against pitting corrosion, crevice corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. A
special state of structure is generated through the selection of the alloying elements and
their concentration. Therefore, stainless steels are classified according to their structure.
For metallic connection elements and adjacent structural elements, ferritic, austenitic,
ferritic-austenitic and martensitic steels can be used. However, ferritic and martensitic
steels are only used for screws exceptionally. The use of austenites is predominant. They
are used in different strength levels from a solution-annealed to a cold deformed state.

In common conditions, that prevail in construction engineering (attack of light acid to


alkaline aqueous media), ferritic steels with about 11 to 17 % of chromium have a
sufficient resistivity against general corrosion. With an addition of a sufficient content of
chromium and molybdenum up to about 2 %, resistivity against pitting corrosion can be
achieved as well. Besides, ferrites have a high resistivity to stress corrosion cracking in
an environment containing chlorides. Above all, if you assume comparable contents of
chromium, the reaction of ferritic steels towards crevice corrosion is much more adverse
than it is e. g. at austenitic steels.

Austenitic steels have at least 17 to 18 M.-% of chromium and 10 to 12 M.-% of nickel.


These steels are especially used because of their positive corrosion properties and their
superior workability in comparison with other stainless steels. In case of a proper content
of alloy, they have got a high resistivity to general corrosion, pitting corrosion and
crevice corrosion, but are sensitive to stress corrosion cracking in their typical compound
with about 10 M.-% of nickel. The resistance to pitting corrosion, crevice corrosion and

344
stress corrosion cracking can be improved with an addition of molybdenum.

Ferritic-austenitic steels have a binary structure of ferrite and austenite. The typical
range of their chemical analysis is 22 to 28 M.-% of chromium, 4 to 8 M.-% of nickel.
Molybdenum can be added in order to improve the corrosion resistivity. These steels
combine good properties of ferritic steels (high yield strength) and austenitc steels (good
ductility, improved corrosion properties).

Martensitic steels with an analysis comparable to ferritic steels, but an enhanced


content of carbon, are distinguished from all other stainless steels by a substantially
higher hardness resp. strength. Because of that, especially the usual carbon martensites
are very sensitive to hydrogen-assisted stress corrosion cracking [15]. However, through
a limitation of the content of carbon to a max. of 0.05 M.-% and the addition of up to 5
% of nickel, the reaction towards stress corrosion cracking of these “soft martensites”
can be improved very much. Assuming a comparable content of chromium and
molybdenum and an equal surface quality, these materials can be classified similar to
ferritic steels in regard of corrosion.

The above-mentioned steel grades are basically chosen considering their resistivity in the
attacking medium, but particular technological characteristics are aimed at with regard to
processing and application, as well. For economic reasons, the concentration of alloy
should not be incongruously high, but likewise not too low considering the intended
application conditions, so as to achieve the necessary resistivity in the attacking medium.

The reaction of stainless steels with respect to general corrosion, pitting corrosion and
stress corrosion cracking has to be considered (fig. 3). They can only be attacked in acid
through more or less regular general corrosion. The lower the pH-value and the higher
the temperature, the more difficult it is to achieve a passivation here. Under such
conditions the steels must have higher contents of particular alloying elements in order
to reduce a corrosion wastage or to achieve passivity. It is important, that - at
atmospheric corrosion - the corrosion rate in the active state decreases very much, if
there is an increasing pH-value. Corrosion resistivity generally exists above pH 4.
Therefore, in weakly acidulous media, thus as well in an usual atmosphere and more
than ever in concrete, chromium steels with > 12 M.-% of chromium and all higher
alloyed steels are passive (fig. 2).

In case of pitting corrosion an interaction between chloride ions and the passive layer
develops, in which the passive layer is locally interrupted and a pit expansion occurs
after the depassivation. Crevice corrosion is an intensified pitting corrosion running
down in crevices. Crevice corrosion occurs whenever structural elements are in more or
less narrow contact with each other and crevices develop (fig. 1). On this occasion, it can
come to a concentration of chloride ions below corrosion products in the crevice and to a
decline of the pH-value as a result of a hydrolysis of the corrosion products. Because of
that, corrosion in crevices already occurs at even lower corrosion exposure than pitting

345
Fig. 3: Types of corrosion (schematically)

corrosion occurs in areas, that are free of crevices. Corrosion endangering towards
pitting corrosion and crevice corrosion decreases depending on declining content of
chloride, declining temperature and rising pH-value. Acid chloride enriched media are
therefore particularly critical. Because of that, stainless steels are basically more resistant
in concrete construction with a pH-value of about 8 to 13 than e. g. in atmospheric
weather conditions. As a result, the standards for reinforced steels and e. g. anchorage
devices in matters of concrete are normally lower than for structural elements in the open
atmosphere. Fig. 4 gives a general view of the corrosion behaviour of stainless steel
reinforcement that are admitted in Germany at the moment [6,16]. This situation would
be analogously transferable to post-installed fasteners and anchor rails. Corrosion
resistivity in media that generate pitting corrosion further depends on the quality of the
steel surfaces. Improvement ensues around the following order: scaled - raw grinded -
blasted - fine grinded - pickled - polished. Pitting corrosion and crevice corrosion is
especially influenced in means of material by the alloying elements chromium, nickel,
molybdenum and further nitrogen. Without influence of the steel grade, resistivity can be
roughly estimated with the “pitting resistance equivalent number” W = 1 % Cr + 3,3 %
Mo + 15 % N . Improvement of resistivity to chloride-assisted local corrosion depends
on a rising “pitting resistance equivalent number”. Nickel improves the corrosion
reaction under conditions of crevice corrosion, as it raises the resistivity to acid. Weld
joints are, above all, more exposed to the danger of pitting corrosion than similar non-
welded steels, because oxide films (temper colours) or scale layers have developed in the
weld joint area during the welding, because of incomplete or lacking gas metal arc. At an
increasing thickness, these layers restrain passivation.

steels are sufficiently secured against stress corrosion cracking all the time. Resistivity of
stainless steels to chlorine-assisted stress corrosion cracking decreases in the following
order: ferritic chromium steels, ferritic-austenitic steels, austenitic chromium-
nickel(molybdenum) steels. Above all, this can be explained with the influence of the
content of nickel on the sensitivity of steels, containing a high portion of chromium, to

346
Fig. 4: Corrosion of stainless steel reinforcement (overview) [16]

stress corrosion cracking. A minimum resistivity exists at about 10 M.-% of nickel.


From this minimum on, resistivity decreases depending on rising or declining content of
nickel. In martensitic stainless steels, the reaction towards hydrogen-assisted stress
corrosion cracking is decisive (see above).

Stainless steel can cause galvanic corrosion in another less precious metal (steel,
aluminium, zinc). Basic requirements are: both metals are connected to be electrically
conductive and are located in a well-conducting electrolyte. However, there are normally
no electrolyte films in atmospheric corrosion conditions. Being so-called „pure“ water,
rain or dew, in addition, have a very slight conductivity. Not until salts or gases, that
develop acid, dissolve in the electrolyte and e. g. an aqueous solution remains at the
contact area (e. g. in crevices) for a longer period, is a certain galvanic corrosion
possible.

5. Definition of the grades of resistance according to the approval of the


German building supervisory board

Reduction of the cross section, pitting corrosion and stress corrosion cracking are of
importance for the technical corrosion resistivity of connection elements. Table 2 gives a
general view of the admitted steels as well as the classification according to the grades of
resistance [17]. The quality of the steels increases depending on the rising grade of
resistance.

347
In normal case, connecting agents in structural elements in the outdoors should be
classified in the third grade of resistance. In many cases, e. g. behind walls, connecting
agents are not accessible to inspections and maintenance and a moderate exposure with
chloride and sulphur-dioxide from industry, traffic and sea atmosphere is often
inevitable. A concentration of polluting agents has to be excluded, otherwise the use of
steels of the fourth grade of resistance is necessary.

Because of damages, special regulations have been adopted for structural elements in
indoor swimming-pool atmosphere. For fastening elements without regular cleaning (e.
g. hangers for ceilings) and for anchorage devices the regulations mentioned in table 3
have been adopted with particularly high standards for the steels.

Today, structural elements and connecting agents, e. g. in ventilated curtain walls, are
mainly made of the materials 1.4301 (A2) and 1.4401 (A4) and therefore only comply
with the second resp. third grade of resistance. Steels of higher valence (e. g. 1.4529) are
merely already used for anchorage devices (post-installed fasteners), which even have to
comply with much higher demands.

6. Review and preview

The development of stainless steels for the field of construction as well as for mechanic
connectors has been very much influenced by damages in indoor swimming-pools due to
stress corrosion cracking over the last ten years. In 1985 the grave crash of a reinforced
concrete roof, that was hung on hangers of stainless steel 1.4301 became public [6]. On
the occasion of this accident, examinations of important construction elements have been
conducted in many other indoor swimming-pools in Switzerland, Germany, England and
the U.S. and additional examples for stress corrosion cracking were found [6,7,12]. The
materials containing molybdenum (e. g. 1.4401) indeed proved to be more resistant, but
stress corrosion cracking was detected there, as well. Analysis of the damages and
results of the research [8-10] finally lead to the conclusion, that only those higher
alloyed materials mentioned in table 3 are sufficiently secure under these critical
environmental conditions.

Present and future efforts are aimed at the creation of self drilling screws for steel
substrates (e. g. for the connection of coverings and substructure) and concrete screws
made of very high strength martensitic steels. Self drilling screws are screws that drill
their pilot hole in the steel themselves during the mounting. Concrete screws are special
screws made to be anchored in concrete. They are screwed into a prepared hole in the
concrete. In both cases cold deformed austenitic steels are used at present, as well. Since
they can not yet be screwed into hard substrates (steel, concrete) in the required way, e.
g. a tip of screw of a hardenable unalloyed steel is butt welded. There are efforts to
completely produce the above-mentioned fastenings resp. anchors of a martensitic steel
of high hardness. However, the corrosion resistivity of such materials is limited.

348
Martensitic steels proved to be susceptible to crevice corrosion and stress corrosion
cracking, especially in case of an attack of chlorine electrolytes [15].

Table 2: Classification of the steel grades for structural elements and connection
elements according to strength levels and grades of resistance against
corrosion [17]
material symbol strength level grade of corrosion exposure,
resistance typical applications
1.4003 X2Cr 11 S235, S275 indoor exposure
S460 I
1.4016 X6Cr 17 S235

1.4318 X2CrNiN 18-7 S355, S460 accessible


II constructions
1.4567 X3CrNiCu 18-9 S235, S275, without appreciable
S355, S460 contents of chloride
and sulphur-dioxide
1.4301 X5CrNi 18-10 S235, S275,
S355, S460
1.4541 X6CrNiTi 18-10 S235, S275,
S355, S460
1.4401 X5CrNiMo 17-12-2 S235, S275, non-accessible
S355, S460 III constructions with
moderate chloride-
1.4404 X2CrNiMo 17-13-2 S235, S275, and sulphur dioxide
S355, S460, exposure
S690
1.4571 X6CrNiMoTi 17-12-2 S235, S275,
S355, S460,
S690
1.4439 X2CrNiMoN 17-13-5 S275

1.4462 X2CrNiMoN 22-5-3 S460,S690 constructions with


IV high corrosion
1.4539 X1NiCrMoCuN S235, S275, exposure by
25-20-5 S355 chloride and
sulphur dioxide
1.4529 X1NiCrMoCuN S275, S355, (also in cases of
25-20-7 S460, S690 concentration
1.4565 X3CrNiMnMoNbN S460 of polluting agents,
23-17-5-3 e. g. elements in
1.4547 X1CrNiMoCuN S275,S355 seawater and road
20-18-7 tunnels)

349
Table 3: Structural elements in indoor swimming-pool atmosphere without regular
cleaning
domestic water chloride enriched water
(Cl¯ ≤ 250 mg/l) (e. g. saline water)
1.4539 (X1NiCrMoCu 25-20-5) 1.4565 (X2CrNiMnMoNbN 23-17-5-3)
1.4529 (X1NiCrMoCuN 25-20-7)
1.4547 (X1CrNiMoCuN 20-18-7)

References

1. DIN 18516, Teil 1, 'Außenwandbekleidungen, hinterlüftet; Anforderungen,


Prüfgrundsätze' (1990)
2. Rehm, G., Lehmann, R. and Nürnberger, U., 'Korrosion der Befestigungselemente
bei vorgehängten Fassaden', (FMPA BW, Stuttgart, 1980)
3. Menzel, K., 'Korrosion von Befestigungselementen hinter vorgehängten Fassaden.'
VDI-Seminar 'Befestigungstechnik im Ingenieurbau' (Stuttgart, 1987)
4. Wieland, H., 'Korrosion von Befestigern in nicht belüfteten Flachdächern' (SFS
Stadler, Heerbrugg/Switzerland, 1992)
5. Nürnberger, U., 'Korrosionsverhalten von Wellplattenbefestigern im Dachbereich.'
Bericht 33-19947 (FMPA BW, Stuttgart, 1996)
6. Nürnberger, U., 'Korrosion und Korrosionsschutz im Bauwesen' (Bauverlag,
Wiesbaden, 1995)
7. Nürnberger, U., 'Spannungsrißkorrosion an Bauteilen aus nichtrostendem Stahl in
Schwimmbadhallen', Stahl und Eisen 110 (1990) 142-148
8. Haselmair, H. Übleis, H. and Böhni, H. 'Corrosion-resistant materials for
fastenings in road tunnels - field test in the Mont Blanc Tunnels' Structural
Engineering Internat. (1992)
9. Arlt, N., Busch, H., Grimme, D., Hirschfeld, D., Michel, E., Beck, G. S. and
Stellfeld, I., 'Stress corrosion cracking behaviour of stainless steels with respect to
their use in architecture', Steel research 64 (1993), part 1: 'Corrosion in active
state', 461-465, part 2: 'Corrosion in the passive state', 526-533
10. Arnold, N., Gümpel, P. and Heitz, T. W. 'Chloride induced corrosion on stainless
steels at indoor swimming pools atmospheres. Part 3: Influence of a real indoor
swimming pool atmosphere', Materials and Corrosion 50 (1999) 140-145
11. Informationsstelle Edelstahl Rostfrei, Dokumentation 843, 'Edelstahl Rostfrei in
der Verbindungstechnik am Bau' (Düsseldorf, 1999)
12. Mietz J., 'Problemlösungen für Bauteile und Verbindungselemente im
Ingenieurbau' in: 'Nichtrostende Stähle in der Bautechnik -
Korrosionsbeständigkeit als Kriterium für innovative Anwendungen', GfKORR-
Jahrestagung 2000, 69-89
13. Liersch, K., 'Belüftete Dach- und Wandkonstruktionen' (Bauverlag, Wiesbaden,
1981)

350
14. Nürnberger, U., 'Korrosion der Baumetalle im Kontakt mit mineralischen
Baustoffen' in: ibausil, Tagungsbericht - Band 1 (Bauhaus-Universität, Weimar,
2000) 1019-1027
15. Nürnberger, U. 'Hochfeste nichtrostende Stähle - Alternative für Zugglieder im
Ingenieurbau und Blechschrauben für den Dach- und Wandbereich' in:
'Nichtrostende Stähle in der Bautechnik - Korrosionsbeständigkeit als Kriterium
für innovative Anwendungen', GfKORR-Jahrestagung 2000, 91-118
16. Nürnberger, U., 'Stainless Steel in Concrete', EFC Publications, Number 18 (The
Institute of Materials, London, 1996)
17. Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung Z-30.3-6 'Bauteile und
Verbindungselemente aus nichtrostenden Stählen' (Berlin, 25.09.1998)

351
FIRE RESISTANCE OF STEEL ANCHORS IN CONCRETE
Michael Reick
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
With the increasing use of fasteners in the field of civil-engineering the need to estimate
the fire resistance of these connections is obvious. Different test procedures for fire
tests and no commonly accepted rules to design fasteners for this use show the
problems in present. Scientific work to estimate the different failure modes known from
tests with ambient temperature has been missing so far.

To investigate the fire resistance of fasteners several numerical simulations were


performed. Programs have been developed to calculate temperature fields for fasteners
in concrete and to calculate stress-strain relationships in concrete slabs in bending and
under fire load. Qualified non-linear finite element programs have been extended to
calculate concrete cone failure in case of fire. To check the numerical simulations
several large scale fire tests with fasteners installed in loaded concrete slabs were done.

1. Introduction

In fire tests from various manufactures for their specific products, mainly steel failure
was observed. But the test methods used did not consider the worst circumstances for
concrete cone failure and pullout. Therefore theses failure modes had to be examined in
detail using scientific methods. Also the influence of the test setup on the steel
temperature of the fastener had to be investigated to clear the comparability of the
various test results and the obtained differences.

The fire resistance of steel anchors in concrete under tensile loading has been an
research project at the Institute of Construction Materials for the past 6 years. During
this period, a lot of numerical calculations and large scale fire tests have been
performed. This article gives a brief introduction in the basic results.

352
The results are documented in detail in different working papers of the Institute of
Construction Materials as well as in Reick (2001).

2. Calculation of temperature fields

The temperature field of concrete structures under fire attack is known for special
geometric shapes by measurements during fire tests and by numerical simulation. For
fasteners under ISO fire load up to 90 minutes no published calculations are known so
far. To obtain more than just a few calculations it seemed to be better to develop a
special computer program (using the finite difference method) instead of working with
a commonly available program.

Besides the well known equations of thermodynamic, the special circumstances to


obtain ISO fire loading had to be referred in the program code. Also the non-linear
thermal properties of concrete had to be implemented. For the temperature field in a
concrete body around a metallic fastener, axis symmetry can be used.

In a parameter study up to 150 different shapes of fasteners have been calculated. The
results showed that the geometry of the metallic parts has a very big influence on the
temperature field in the steel and in the surrounding concrete. The steel temperature is
of great interest to judge steel failure and the concrete temperature influences the
concrete cone capacity.

For the steel temperature a comparison for a bolt diameter of 4 mm and 20 mm shows
the influence very clear. Using an embedment depth of 50 mm, a steel length subjected
to fire of 30 mm and comparing in a distance of 21 mm from the concrete surface, the
calculated temperatures after 30 (90) minutes are
4 mm diameter: 764 °C (981 °C)
20 mm diameter: 618 °C (923 °C).

Figure 2.1 shows the decrease of steel temperature for the above mentioned conditions
from 4 to 20 mm steel diameter.

Comparing the reduced tensile strength of steel at these temperatures, remaining


relative tensile capacity of the steel bars compared to ambient temperature are
4 mm diameter: 15 % (4,4 %)
20 mm diameter: 43 % (5,5 %)

353
temperatur [°C]
1000
981 °C 21 mm below concrete surface fire duration

908 °C 923 °C 90 min.


900
60 min.
824 °C
800 30 min.
763 °C

700

618 °C
600

diameter of
fastener [mm]
500
0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Figure 2.1: Influence of diameter of fastener on steel temperature 21 mm below the


concrete surface (most relevant location for steel failure)

These calculations show that the steel geometry has a dominant influence (especially
for short duration of fire attack) on the remaining tensile capacity of the metallic
fasteners.

3. Calculation of concrete cone failure under fire load

Having calculated the temperature field around a fastener, the concrete cone capacity of
the heated concrete body was calculated using the nonlinear finite element program
MASA (Ozbolt 1998 and 1999). To simulate the fire load it was necessary to extend the
program with several subroutines. First it was necessary to calculate the concrete
temperature. This must be a function of (a) distance form the heated surface, (b)
distance from the fasteners symmetry axis and (c) embedment depth of the fastener.
With this subroutine the results form chapter 2 are considered. Second some
subroutines were programmed to calculate the concrete properties as a function of
temperature.

Figure 3.1 shows the calculated relative concrete cone capacities as a function of the
embedment depth. The results of a calculation from the author in 1995 using a former
version of the program MASA are shown as well.

354
relative concrete cone capacity [%] 70

60

50

40

30

20 Microplane (1995)
MASA (1999)
10

0
0 50 100 150 200
embedment depth [mm]

Figure 3.1: Calculated relative concrete cone capacity as a function of


embedment depth (after 90 min. ISO fire)

4. Stress and Strain in a concrete slab in fire

During a fire the temperature in a concrete slab increases non linear. The concrete fibres
next to the heated surface try to expand according to the free thermal strain and develop
compressive stress on the heated side of the slab. Figure 4.1 shows in a qualitative
manner the strain and stress distribution over the height of a loaded concrete slab in
fire.

Using the equations and material properties from EC 2 part 1-2 (DIN V ENV 1992-1-2)
a program was developed to calculate the stress and strain distribution for numerous
cases.

The results of a parameter study are illustrated in Reick 2001. A variation of the height
and the steel ratio in the cross section of the concrete slab has been calculated. This
showed that at 90 % of the design bending moment according to EC 2 for a slab height
of 20 cm and a steel ration of 15 cm2/m a tensile strain of 10 O/OO at a distance of 55 mm
from the heated surface must be expected.

355
pos. neg. compression tensile
strain strain stress stress

Figure 4.1: Strain and stress distribution in a loaded concrete slab with a fire loading
from the lower side

This result is rather serious because internal cracks in the embedment zone of fasteners
can have severe influence on the pullout capacity of anchors.

5. Fire tests

In the research project an overall of 11 large scale fire tests with concrete slabs loaded
with 70 to 90 % of the design bending moment according to Eurocode 2 were done. In
these tests 56 fasteners have been tested in fire and additional 24 fasteners have been
installed to measure steel temperatures. The test results are presented in detail in Reick
2001. In these large scale fire tests it has been shown, that concrete cone and pullout
failure can be achieved under special circumstances. These failure modes should be
considered for the development of an overall testing procedure for fire resistance of
fasteners.

Pullout failure was observed when the deflection of the concrete slab was increasing
faster shortly before failure of the concrete slab. Fasteners with less capacity to react to
opening cracks show pullout up to 10 mm for embedment depths of 50 mm. This is an
important result also for fastening groups.

The concrete cone failure loads at 90 minutes fire for an embedment depth of 40 mm
showed relative values of more than 40 % compared to ambient temperature. This is
better than the calculated results according to chapter 3. Only a fastener group using
four anchors (embedment depth of 50 mm) showed less than 30 % relative capacity at
only 75 minutes in fire.

356
The temperature measurements have been made to check the calculations according to
chapter 2. These measurements demonstrated how much the steel parts used for loading
the fasteners influence the temperature in the anchor. This seems very reasonable and
corresponds to the knowledge about the profile factor in steel construction for fire
resistance. In some cases a big influence of water from the concrete appearing at cracks
in the concrete slab could be observed.

6. Summary

In this short article only some important results from a 6 years research program are
presented. The main conclusions for the different failure modes can be summarised as
follow:

Steel failure: It is the most important failure mode and the test results from companies
can be used to estimate steel failure loads for new fasteners only very conservative.
According to numerous calculations about temperature fields and measurements of
temperatures during fire tests the geometry of fastener and anchor plate as well as the
test setup have a major influence on the steel temperature.

Concrete cone failure: Test results and finite element calculations are achieved showing
that this failure mode can be important for anchors with a small embedment depth and
for anchor groups.

Regarding these theoretical and experimental results rules to design and test anchors for
fire resistance are presented in Reick 2001.

7. Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the following companies: Fischerwerke, Hilti and Würth.
The support is very much appreciated.

8. References

1. Reick, Michael (2001): Brandverhalten von Befestigungen in Beton bei


zentrischer Zugebeanspruchung, Dissertation in Vorbereitung, 2001.
2. Ozbolt, Josko (1998): MASA – Macroscopic Space Analysis. Institut für
Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Stuttgart, 1998.
3. Ozbolt, Josko (1999): Nonlocal fracture analysis – stress relaxation method.
Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Stuttgart, 1999.
4. DIN V ENV 1992-1-2: Eurocode 2 Planung von Stahlbeton- und Spannbetontrag-
werken, Teil 1-2 Allgemeine Regeln – Tragwerksbemessung für den Brandfall,
Vornorm, 1997.

357
ANCHORING WITH BONDED FASTENERS
Ronald A. Cook and Robert C. Konz
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Florida, USA

Abstract
Bonded fasteners have been used extensively during the past twenty years. In most
cases, the estimated strength of these anchors has been determined from information
provided in manufacturers literature and has not been based on rational design models.
During the past several years, research in the US, Europe, and Japan has led to a better
understanding of the behavior of bonded fasteners. The results of this research has led to
the development of rational design models for determining strength and to proposed
product approval test procedures that can be used to ensure that bonded anchor products
will perform as intended by the designer. This paper presents an overview of the state-
of-the-art in bonded fasteners. Basic bonded fastener behavior, design models, and
factors influencing bond strength are discussed.

1. Introduction

Bonded fasteners can be divided into two distinct areas: adhesive bonded fasteners and
grouted fasteners. An adhesive fastener is a reinforcing bar or threaded rod inserted into
a drilled hole in hardened concrete with a structural adhesive acting as a bonding agent
between the concrete and the steel. Typically, the hole diameter is only about 10 to 25%
larger than the diameter of the reinforcing bar or threaded rod. Structural adhesives for
this type of anchor are available prepackaged in glass capsules or foil packets, in dual-
cartridge injection systems, or as two-component systems requiring user proportioning.
A grouted fastener may be a headed bolt, threaded rod with or without a nut at the
embedded end, or deformed reinforcing bar with or without end anchorage installed in a
pre-formed or drilled hole with a cementitious or filled polymer based grout. Grouted
fasteners are typically installed in holes at least one and one-half times the diameter of
the fastener. Figure 1 shows typical adhesive and grouted fasteners.

361
hef

Adhesive Un-headed Headed


Grouted Grouted

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of adhesive and grouted fasteners

2. Bonded Fastener Systems

Figure 2 shows the general types of bonded fastener systems available. Adhesive and
grouted fastener systems are typically composed of organic polymers or inorganic
cementitious materials. In some cases, hybrid systems utilizing both organic and
inorganic materials are available. The primary difference between the adhesive and
grouted systems is the introduction of a filler material (e.g., fine sand) into the bond
mixture.
Bonded
Fasteners

Adhesive Grouted
Fasteners Fasteners

Capsule & Injection Manually


Foil Type Type Mixed

Organic Organic Inorganic Organic Inorganic


Compounds Compounds Compounds Compounds Compounds

Epoxy Epoxy Cementitious Epoxy Cementitious

Polyester Polyester others Polyester others

Vinylester Vinylester others

Figure 2. Types of bonded fastener systems

362
3. Behavior of Bonded Fasteners

Tests of adhesive fasteners have shown failure modes as indicated in Figure 3. For
shallow embedments, the failure mode appears to be the same as that of headed cast-in-
place and mechanical fasteners. For deeper installations (the type typically used in
practice), embedment failure results in a shallow concrete cone with a bond failure
below the shallow cone. Given the thin bond line between the fastener and the concrete,
it is very difficult to determine which of the three center failure modes shown in Figure 3
actually occurred. For very deep embedments, steel failure will occur as shown on the
far right of Figure 3.

concrete adh./conc. steel/adh. adh./conc. steel


cone interface interface and steel/adh.
interface

Figure 3. Failure modes of adhesive bonded fasteners

Un-headed grouted fasteners typically fail at the grout/steel interface. The left diagram
in Figure 4 shows the typical failure mode of un-headed grouted fasteners (i.e., a shallow
cone with a bond failure at the grout/steel interface). Headed grouted fasteners eliminate
the possibility of bond failure at the grout/steel interface due to the anchor head and
force the bond failure to the grout/concrete bond line (with a shallow cone) for low bond
strength grouts or result in a full concrete cone failure for high bond strength grouts (as
shown in the right diagram of Figure 4.

Test reports on the behavior of adhesive fasteners have been collected in Europe, in the
USA and in Japan. From 38 reports, a database containing the results of 2929 tests has
been established. The database contains tensile and shear load testing in uncracked and
cracked concrete with single fasteners, groups of two fasteners and groups of four
fasteners. The database contains tests carried out with threaded rods, insert sleeves and
rebars. Finally, the database contains tests with epoxies, vinyl esters, unsaturated
polyesters, hybrid adhesives and inorganic adhesives. A database for grouted fasteners
is also being developed. Currently there are over 400 single grouted fasteners tests
available using both polymer and cementitious grouts. Both the adhesive anchor

363
database and grouted fastener database are being maintained for ACI 355 by Ronald A.
Cook, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
32611.

Un-headed Headed Headed


Bond Failure Bond Failure Cone Failure
Figure 4. Failure modes of unheaded and headed grouted fasteners (excluding steel
failure)

4. Design of Bonded Fasteners

Several design models have been presented for adhesive fasteners over the last several
years These are summarized in Cook et al (1998)1 and Kunz et al (1998)2. A wide
variation of possible models for single fastener strength were evaluated in Cook et al
(1998)1. These models included:

• Concrete cone models


• Bond models
• Bond models neglecting the shallow concrete cone
• Combined concrete cone models and bond models
• Bond models considering bond failure at two interfaces

The results of the Cook et al (1998)1 paper indicate that a simple model based on a
uniform bond stress fits the test data from the international database best. The
expression for determining the mean strength of single fasteners in tension is given by
Eqn. 1.

N bond = τ π d he (1)

Terms in Eqn. 1 and other equations are given in the “Notation” section at the end of the
paper.

364
Although each individual product has a unique mean bond stress (τ), it is possible to
normalize all products to a unique bond stress value. Figure 5 shows a comparison of
Eqn. 1 with 888 single anchor tests of products in the international data base normalized
to 10 MPa. Figure 5 also shows a comparison of a nominal strength of 0.67 of the mean
strength compared to the test data. Note that the final design strength will also include
an appropriate capacity reduction factor, φ.

700

600

500
Uniform Bond Model (mean)
Load (kN)

400

300

200

5% fractile, V=0.20 (0.67 mean)


100

0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000
2
Bond Area (mm )

Figure 5. Comparison of measured loads with the uniform bond model

As an additional verification of the uniform bond stress model, non-linear computer


analyses were performed (McVay, et al 1996)3. A typical result is shown in Figure 6.
As shown by Figure 6, as the load increases (curves moving from left to right) the bond
stress distribution changes from what might be expected in elastic analysis to a nearly
uniform bond distribution at failure. Both the database and the non-linear finite element
analysis indicate that a uniform bond stress model is appropriate for adhesive fasteners.

365
0

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1
0 4 8 12 16 20
Bond Stress (MPa)
Figure 6. Bond stress distribution versus normalized depth with increasing load

The strength of grouted fasteners depends on whether or not the fastener is headed.
Detailed test results and design recommendations for grouted fasteners are presented in
another paper in these symposium proceedings. The information provided here is only
intended to provide a brief summary of the results presented in that paper.

For unheaded fasteners, bond failure typically occurs at the grout/steel interface and Eqn.
1 provides the basis for determining the mean strength of the fastening. For headed
grouted fasteners, two failure modes are possible. For low bond strength grouts, bond
failure at the grout/concrete interface may occur. Tests have shown that this failure
mode can best be represented by a uniform bond stress model calculated using the
grout/concrete bond strength of the product (τ0) applied to the bonded area at the
grout/concrete interface. This is given by Eqn. 2:

N bond ,d 0 = τ 0 π d 0 he (2)

For higher bond strength grouts, a full concrete breakout failure occurs and the mean
concrete breakout strength developed by Fuchs et al (1995)4 is appropriate. This is
given by Eqn. 3:

N cone = 16.7 f c he1.5 (3)

The predicted mean strength of a headed bonded fastener is determined by the lower
value of Eqn. 2 and Eqn. 3.

Although grout/concrete bond failure is typically not observed in tests of unheaded


fasteners using engineered grouts, it may be prudent to base the strength of these

366
fasteners on the smaller of the bond strength determined at the grout/steel interface (Eqn.
1) and the bond strength determined at the grout/concrete interface (Eqn. 2).

Eqns 1-3 provide predictions for the mean strength of bonded fasteners. For design
purposes, these strengths must be reduced. For Load and Resistance Factor Design, the
determination of design strength from behavioral models which represent mean strengths
is typically based on establishing a nominal strength (some lower bound fractile of the
mean strength) and then applying a capacity reduction factor (φ) to limit the probability
of failure.

In current US and European design standards, the nominal strength is commonly taken
as the lower 5% fractile of the test data. The 5% fractile represents the value where it
would be expected that 95% of the tests performed would exceed the specified nominal
strength. The determination of the 5% fractile depends on the number of tests available
and the scatter of the test results. The scatter of the test results is typically expressed as
the coefficient of variation (V) which is defined as the standard deviation of the test
results divided by the mean. This leads to the following for nominal bond strengths:

(4)
τ ' = τ (1 - α V)

τ 0' = τ 0 (1 - α V) (5)

The selection of the α factor depends on the number of tests available.

The selection of an appropriate capacity reduction factor (φ) for bond can be based on
detailed studies of probability of failure and/or on what φ factors are used for similar
failure modes in existing building codes. Bond failure can be compared to shear-friction
since it involves slip along an interface. In ACI 318, the φ factor for shear-friction and
shear is 0.85. A capacity reduction factor (φ) for bond of 0.85 is recommended for
designs controlled by bond failure.

Various behavioral models for both edge effects and group effects for bonded fasteners
are being studied in both the US and Europe. Proposals for modification factors for edge
effects and group effects for bonded fasteners are presented in other papers in these
symposium proceedings.

5. Factors Influencing the Strength of Bonded Fasteners

The evaluation of both the mean bond stress (τ and τ0 ) and design bond stress (τ’ and
τ’0) must be based on product approval tests that include the effects of installation and
in-service conditions. As noted in Cook et al (2001)5, there are significant differences

367
between adhesive products. Basic tests for mean bond stress in clean, dry holes at room
temperature indicate that the mean bond stress can range from 2 MPa to 20 MPa for
adhesives and 7 MPa to 21 MPa for grouts as shown for 20 adhesives and 9 grouts in
Figure 7. The coefficient of variation for these tests can vary between 0.05 and 0.25. In
many cases, products that exhibit high bond stress in clean, dry holes at room
temperature are inadequate under typical installation and in-service conditions such as
damp holes and elevated temperatures. It is mandatory that designers require product
testing for expected in-service and installation conditions prior to the final design.

25
Adhesive τ mean = 12.7 MPa Grouted τ mean = 17.9 MPa
Average Uniform Bond Stress, [MPa]

21.0
20.9
20.3
20.0

19.8
19.6
18.2

17.8
17.8
17.7
17.1
16.1

15.9

15.9
15.6

15.3

14.5
13.9
15
12.4

12.3
11.4

11.4
11.2

11.2
10.0

10

7.3
5.5

5
3.1

2.3

0
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Product
Figure 7. Bond stress variation for adhesive and grout products

The following provides examples of the factors influencing bond strength that need to be
considered for product approval tests of bonded fastener products:

• Concrete mix (equal concrete strength does not ensure equal results)
• Temperature effects
• Damp hole
• Improperly cleaned hole
• Curing time
• Freeze-thaw effects
• Installation direction (vertical down, horizontal, overhead)
• Creep (normal and elevated temperatures)
• Mix proportioning (primarily manually-mixed products)
• Fire resistance
• Wet (submerged) hole
• Maximum torque
• Repeated load

368
• Seismic load
• Environmental effects (chemicals)
• Cracked concrete (static cracks and moving cracks)
• Other possible tests:
• Age of concrete
• Oil presence (compressed air cleanout of holes)
• Capsules driven rather than drilled
• Hammer installed capsules installed upside-down
• Hole size
• Hole drilling
• Radiation

As can be observed from the above list, a product approval standard for bonded fasteners
must be quite comprehensive to ensure reliable performance of products.

6. Status of Design and Product Approval Standards

Design models for bonded fasteners are currently being finalized in the United States
and Europe. Many of these design recommendations are presented in the symposium
proceedings. Product approval standards are also underway with the European
Organization for Technical Approvals leading the way with Part Five of the ETAG No
001 standard. In the United States, the American Society for Testing and Materials
Committee E06.13 is currently developing draft product approval standards.

Notation:

d = outside diameter of fastener [mm]


d0 = drilled hole diameter of fastener [mm]
fc = concrete strength, measured on 150 by 300 mm cylinders [MPa]
he = embedment depth [mm]
Nbond = mean strength of the fastener as controlled by bond strength
Nbond,d0 = mean strength of the fastener as controlled by grout/concrete bond strength
V = coefficient of variation (standard deviation divided by the mean)
α = a statistically determined coefficient based on the tolerance limit and
confidence to be used for design
φ = capacity reduction factor (0.85 is recommended for bond failure)
τ = mean uniform bond stress for adhesive fasteners (MPa)
τ0 = mean uniform bond stress for headed bonded fasteners (MPa)
τ‘ = nominal uniform bond stress (MPa) at the fastener/adhesive interface
τ 0‘ = nominal uniform bond stress (MPa) at the grout/concrete interface

369
References:

1. Cook, R. A., Kunz, J., Fuchs, W., and Konz, R., “Behavior and Design of Single
Adhesive Anchors Under Tensile Load in Uncracked Concrete,” ACI Structural
Journal, ACI, V. 95, No. 1, January-February 1998, pp. 9-26.

2. Kunz, J., Cook, R. A., Fuchs, W. and Spieth, H, “Tragverhalten und Bemessung
von chemischen Befestigungen (Load Bearing Behavior and Design of Adhesive
Anchors),” Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 93 (1998), H.1, S. 15-19, H. 2, S. 44-49.

3. McVay, M., Cook, R. A., and Krishnamurthy, K., "Behavior of Chemically Bonded
Anchors," Journal of Structural Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers,
V. 119, No. 9, September, 1993, pp. 2744-2762.

4. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., Breen, J. E., "Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete," ACI Structural Journal, American Concrete
Institute, V. 92, No. 1, January-February 1995, pp. 73-94.

5. Cook, R. A., and Konz, R., “Factors Influencing the Bond Strength of Adhesive
Anchors,” ACI Structural Journal, American Concrete Institute, V. 98, No. 1,
January-February 2001, pp. 76-86.

370
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON PERFORMANCE OF
BONDED ANCHORS IN THE LOW STRENGTH
REINFORCED CONCRETE

Tomoaki Akiyama*, Yasutoshi Yamamoto**, Shigekatsu Ichihashi*** and Taichi


Katagiri****
*Building Research & Engineering Department, Tokyo Soil Research. Co., Ltd., Japan
**Dept. of Architecture, Shibaura Institute of Technology, Japan
***Dept. of Architecture Nippon Institute of Technology, Japan
****Zen Design Office, Japan

Abstract
With existing RC buildings, in extreme cases, compressive strength is even less than 1/3
of design characteristic. No useful documents showing range of shear/pull-out loads for
post-install anchors are available when anchoring at connections between new and
existing concrete to retrofit such the buildings. From this background, planned research
about anchoring with the object of seismic retrofit for low strength concrete buildings.
Defined, as low strength concrete is one whose compressive strength is 13.5MPa or less
as per seismic diagnosis guideline. Used, as test parameters are compressive strength,
anchor rod diameter/embedment, and edge distance. Tested group shear and single
shear/pull-out. Also, from tests this time, shear and pull-out strength equations of
post-install bonded anchors used for low strength concrete were proposed. These
equations, on seismic reinforcement of low strength concrete buildings, concerning
design of post-install bonded anchors, useful equations were proposed.

1. Introduction

With existing RC buildings, compressive strength is even less than 1/3 of standards one.
No useful documents for behaviors in concrete blocks and post-install anchors on
shear/pull-out force have been available when anchoring at connections between new
and existing concrete to retrofit such the buildings. From this background, planned
research about anchoring with the object of seismic retrofit for low strength concrete
buildings. Defined, as low strength concrete is one whose compressive strength is
13.5MPa or less as per seismic diagnosis guideline. Used as test parameters are
compressive strength, anchor rod diameter/embedment, and edge distance. There were
tests for group shear and single shear/pull-out. Also, from tests, at this time, shear and
pull-out strength formulas of post-install bonded anchors used for low strength concrete
were proposed. These formulas, on seismic reinforcement of low strength concrete
buildings, concerning design of post-install bonded anchors, useful formulas were

371
proposed and retrofit design guideline’s formulas and test values were compared.

2. Outline of the tests

(1) Concept for tests


The testing plans were made to reflect the results from tests into the actual design as
soon as possible with considering the present situation that the quick working for the
reinforcement on buildings to resist against earthquakes would be needed.
Especially, bonded post-install anchors were taken into consideration as the method of
construction to resist against earthquakes with the steel frames and many embedded
anchors.
(2) Kinds of tests and summary for tests
(a) Shear tests on the group anchor
The part of connections between new and existing concrete to retrofit was made to tests
relationship with strength and displacement and investigate the behaviors at cracks in
the brace with steel frames.
(b) Shear/pull-out tests on the single anchor
Single anchor shear/pull-out tests were performed to investigate basic behaviors
between strength and displacement and crack ones. The number of concrete blocks on
which the anchor was embedded, were saved with tests at both sides.
(3) Parameters were decided as followings.
(a) Compressive strength in the concrete blocks:
Ordinary concrete, 5.0MPa, 10.0MPa and 15.0MPa.
(b) Post-install anchors:
D16, D19 and D22. (D means “deformed rods”)
(c) Edge distances:
Distance(c) is equal to 200mm in shear force tests, and 300mm in pull-out tests. It
was the standard types and distance(c) is equal to 100mm in all eccentric types.
Two types for effective embedded length of anchors:
7da and 10da (da; anchor diameter).
However, there was one kind of 7da for group shear test.
(4) Configurations of specimens
(a) Shear test with group anchors
The standard specimen with edge distance as 200mm, and the eccentric specimen
with edge distance as 100mm are showed in Fig. 1. There were 15 specimens as all
cases in Table 1. There was one additional specimen for each concrete strength that
had strain gauges to investigate behaviors in the anchor at the center of the
concrete blocks and in the concrete around this anchor.
(b) Shear test with a single anchor
The detail bar arrangement is showed in Fig.2. There were 108 specimens for all in
Table 2.
(c) Pull-out test with a single anchor
The bar arrangement is the same for the case of shear test.

372
Steal Flame Table1 All case of Group Anchors Specimens
C o n crete A n ch o r E d g e D is ta n c e
Mortar Q u a liti e s D i a m e te r T o ta l

(M  a) (m m )
S ta n d a r d E c c e n tric

D19 2 1 3
Fc 5
D22 1 1 2

Skeleton Concrete D19 2 1 3


Fc 10
D22 1 1 2

D19 2 1 3
Fc 15
D22 1 1 2
a)Side Section b)Standard c) Eccentric
Fig.1 Group Shear Test Specimens Table2 All case of Single Anchor Specimens
Concrete Anchor Effective Edge Distance 

Qualities Diameter Embeded Standard Eccentric
+   

 
+   
+   
S hear 
 
a) Floor Plan S urface +   

Pull-out +   

 
Surface +   
+   

 
+   
+   
 
 
+   
b) Side elevation c) Section
+   
Fig.2 Single Shear&Pull-out Test Specimens
 
+   
+   

 
+   
However, difference between shear tests is
+   
the embedded positions. The number of  

+   


specimens is 108 same as shear test cases in +   



 
Table 2. +   

3. Equipment for loading and method of measurement

3.1 The case for test on group anchors with shear force
The equipment for loading is showed in Fig.3. It was the real object to apply the
horizontal force only along the surface between the concrete block and the filler mortar
with a steel member. However, self-loading from equipments about 0.1MPa was also
applied as lateral force. Without this influence, shear force (Q) and displacement ( ) in 

the horizontal direction were measured. Displacement ( ) would be measured able to

separate into the slip displacement ( SM) at the boundary part on the steel member and

the filler mortar, and the slip one( MC) among the filler mortar and the concrete block.
The five cyclic loadings were basically applied.

3.2 Test on the single anchor with shear force


We developed the special equipment with an oil jack showed in Fig.4 to apply the shear

373
force in the exact direction
coincided with the edge line 

' 

of the concrete block. The


 ( 

&

'
value of loading was ) 


   !

measured with the load cell. 


   

The relative horizontal 


  
  " 
# $
%

displacement between
Specimen
concrete block and an anchor 
    
   

was measured at each



loading steps. The loading
was performed as monotonic
load in each step. Fig.3 Apparatus for Group Shear Test
Tension Rod

Hydraulic Jack Test Anchor

Load Cell

Skeleton Shear Block


Concrete
Test Anchor
Support

Teflon Displacement Skeleton Concrete


Meter

Fig.4 Apparatus for Single Shear Test Fig.5 Apparatus for Single Pull-out Test

3.3 Test on single anchor with pull-out force


The loading equipment showed in Fig.5 was used in this test. The monotonic pull-out
loading was applied for an anchor. It would be possible to give influence for the
measured strength in the case of the corn type failure with interference between the
each failure, as anchors put in nearly every 300mm.
By this reason, tests were performed at first time for the left anchor, and next for the
right anchor. Lastly, the center anchor was applied with pull-out force. Please reference
the diagram in Fig.8. The quantity of the relative displacement ( ) by pull-out force 
between the concrete block and the anchor was measured.

4. Materials

4.1 Concrete
(1) Mixing plan for the low strength concrete
Three types of specimens were made as 5MPa, 10MPa, and 15MPa for the compressive
strength after 4 weeks from making them such as standard curing. Specimens with
lower strength were made by reduction of quantity of cement with keeping the same
quantity of water. As water-cement ratio for the lower strength concrete are larger, rock

374
powder was installed instead of cement. Ratio of water/(cement + rock powder) was
keeping as the same value (=0.66). As the results, slump values were almost same such
as about 18cm for every strength concrete. Specimens were made of ready mixed
concrete.
(2) Test results
Compressive strength on the three types of concrete were curing standard and sealed.
Test results are showed in Table 3. Compressive strengths of concrete in sealed curing
were used in the analysis for shear test and pull-out test.

Table3 Test Results of Concrete with Age


  

  
   ’

 
      
  
 

  Table4 Test Results of Rebars
    
  
   

  
       
   #  #  #  

  "  "        

    


        
!        

 


  
  
  
  
   
 

   
  
 
 
  
  
  
  
 
     
   
  
  
  
  
  
 
      
  
   
 
  
  
  
  
 

  
 
       

  
  
   
 
 
    
   
          
  
 
  
  
  
  
 


       
 
     
   
  
   
  
 
   
  

4.2 Filling mortar without contraction


Pre-Mix type mortar without contraction was used to fill another parts of specimens.
Compressive strength from test results are showed in Table 3.

4.3 Steel bars and anchors


Material characteristics for the steel bars and anchors are showed in Table 4. All steel
bars were standardized steel at the Japanese Industrial Standard G 3112 and SD345,
without steel bars for the wire net (D6).

5. Results from test

5.1 Shear test on the group of anchors


Relation between shear force (Q) and displacement ( ), and crack diagram in the 
concrete block on two standard specimens, QG-C05-19S and QG-C15-19S are showed
in Fig.6. There is not much difference in two specimens, though maximum strength
(Qmax) is larger with the compressive strength. The number of cracks at the concrete
blocks decreased in the concrete block with stronger compressive strength. However,
the number of crack at filler mortar increased in the model of the concrete block with
the stronger compressive strength. With comparing two specimens by putting anchors in
the eccentric lines, QG-C05-19E and QG-C15-19E, loading values increased on
according to the larger displacements. The number of cracks in the concrete blocks
increased in the eccentric models. There were many cracks on the surface of the

375

  
  concrete block in C05 model with lower
  concrete strength, as many cracks on the

  

 filler mortar in the C15 model were able to
     
 see, by the reason that loading values were
       
  larger than C05 model.
 
         
5.2 Shear test on a single anchor

Relation between shear force (Q) and


displacement ( ), and crack diagram in 
a) QG7-C5-19E b) QG7-C15-19E
the concrete block on two standard
Fig.6 Q-Curve & Clacks of Group Shear Test
specimens, Q7-C05-19S and
QG-C15-19S are showed in Fig.7. Initial
stiffness for both specimens with different compressive strength were almost same in
the Q-  curve, as there was the polyethylene sheet under the block for working shear
force. Loading values were increased with accord to increase on the displacement. The
maximum shear strength (Qmax) in the C15 model was about twice as much as the value
in C05. The number of crack decreased in accordance with higher compressive strength
in the concrete block. However, the zone with the compression failure in the concrete
block was enlarged with the higher compressive strength. The maximum shear strength
(Qmax) was larger in the concrete block with the higher compressive strength from the
results in the cases of eccentric anchors. There were not influences with the difference
between initial stiffness. The slip displacement in the case of eccentric model was small
with compare to the case of central


 anchor model and, also there were


 not toughness in the lower concrete
  and the maximum shear strength
   
    

         
  

 
  
    
(Qmax) was also small. There was a
      

             
a) Q7-C05-19E



 tendency that failure in the edge
 

  distance was severe on the concrete



blocks with low compressive
 
  
    

   strength.
    

     



    

           

b) Q7-C15-19E
Fig.7 Q- Curve & Clacks of Single Shear Test
5.3 Pull-out test with a single anchor
Relation between pull-out forces (T) and displacements ( ) with those force and the 
diagrams for cracks are showed at the cases of T7-C05-19S and T7-C15-19S that had
the distances from edges to the center of anchors as 300mm in Fig.8. There was not
much difference at the initial stiffness for the compressive strength. However, the
maximum pulled-out force in the concrete block with the larger compressive strength
was about twice as high as the other pulled-out force. There is better capacity to
correspondence to large displacement for concrete blocks with the higher compressive
strength than the lower one; there is much difference for the ability to absorb the total

376
 
 
    energy between them. The cracks are

    spread out in the entire concrete block

 with the lower compressive strength.

  It is clear that there are much


    


 a) T7-C5-19E
influences with the compressive
strength. There were same behaviors
 

 
 
 in the case of eccentric models with

 
 embedded anchors a part from the
   edge of concrete block as 100mm (C).




     However, there was much influence

b) T7-C15-19E
Fig.8 P-Curve & Clacks of Single Pull-out Test with edge distance even in the larger
compressive strength model. Cracks
concentrated on the surface of the concrete block in spite of the compressive strength.

6. Investigation for experimental results

With the results from serial of tests, we propose the formulas for shear strength and
also pull-out strength on the post-install bonded anchors in the concrete block with
low compressive strength.
In this paper, our proposed formulas were induced by using the values in the case of
only one kind failure mode that means the mode with failure of concrete, as the

compressive strength of concrete ( B) would be smaller than equal to 15MPa. There
were the cases that the anchors had been yielded before concrete blocks had been
crashed in cases of D16 or D19 were used. In these formulas, there were not
considerations about those, as those problems would be exceptions. This is the
difference between the old and new formulas.

6.1 Induction of the formula for shear strength


The relations between the compressive strength of the concrete ( B) and the unit shear 

strength of the group anchor testing ( mg) and a single anchor testing ( ms) from the 
testing results are showed in Fig.9.a. mg > ms are understood if the same  
B was 
used in the concrete block. The difference in the results between the group anchor
testing and a single anchor testing would be hypothesized by the fact that though there
are large resistance on the boundary among the concrete block and filler mortars, there
are not resistance between the equipment to perform the shear force and the concrete
block with the polyethylene.
With considering the tensile yielding strength y of SD345 used as anchors, formulas 
for group anchor testing and a single anchor testing were induced without falling down
the experimental data by the bearing strength line paralleled to two regression lines as
showed in Fig.9a.
Group anchor testing : mg = {0.602 + 0.019 B} y ------(1)   
Single anchor testing : ms = {0.205 + 0.036 B} y ------(2)   

377
It is remarks : mg, ms       y : tensile yielding strength

y
Factors ( 1) was evaluated by using the results in Fig.9 b and by the hypothesis that the
bearing shear strength was fallen down like a line with thickening the diameter of
anchors as followings.
 1 = 0.84 – 0.05(da-22) ------(3)
It is the fact that the bearing shear strength would be generally larger with big edge
distance.
However, influence with edge distance (C) would be smaller with needing 100mm at
edge distance (C) in Fig.9c. By these reasons, Factors ( 2) was decided as followings. 
 2 = 0.85(C/100)
0.15
------(4)
 

  
 
  



 
   
 
    However, 2 is smaller

  
 

 
 
 than equal to 1.0. Unit of C
 
 
  is “mm”.

 


 
 3 is evaluated as standard
 
   


 value “1.0” at 7da as putting
 
 
    length (le), and “1.15” at
a)  B-mg & ms Relationship b)  -mg & ms Relationship
    
10da by inspecting the
    
       
 diagram in Fig.9d. By
  
   

 


  considering these


   
 

  

parameters, shear strength


  (QA) is evaluated as




 followings.
 
 

 
   
 
c) C- mg & ms Relationship 
b) le- mg & ms Relationship
Fig.9 Influence of Parameter

For the group anchors : QA =     A ------(5)


    A ------(6)
1 2 3 mg a
For a single anchor : QA = 1 2 3 ms a
Aa: Section area for anchors
Those formulas were evaluated by only using maximum bearing shear strength without
considering the displacements. It is necessary to take the caution that the result (QA)
would be dangerous side, when D22 and compressive strength ( B) in the concrete 
block is smaller than and equal to 10MPa.

6.2 Strength for pull-out force on a single anchor


Similarly, some formulas were evaluated with results by pull-out test for a single
anchor .The basic raw formula was evaluated with the low limit from a regression line
in Fig.10a by the results for the standard specimens as followings.

t =10.0 
B+63.7-------(7)

Factors ( 1) was evaluated by the regression lines in Fig.10b. Factors ( 1) are 1.16 for 
D16, 1.00 for D19, and 0.94 for D22.

Factors ( 2) was decided with the result in Fig.11a as followings.

378
    
 
 
  
 
 
   
  = 0.85(C/100) -----(8) 0.15

 is evaluated as standard
 
 

 
  

2
  







 
 

 


3


value “1.0” at 7da as

 embedded length (le), and
    

“1.15” at 10da by inspecting




        the diagram in Fig.11b.
a)  - Relationship (All Specimens) - Relationship b) Lastly, the maximum
Fig.10 Influence of  
B t t

t & bearing pulling-out strength


  
 
 


 

ხ  

  
 

  
   

  (TA) is expressed as
 ხ




followings.
    

 



 

 TA= 1 2 3 t Aa-(9)

 


 
 t : Tensile yielding stress
 
  for anchors

 



  Aa: Section area for anchors
 
  
   
  
   

a) C-  Relationship
t b) le-  Relationship
t
Fig.11 Influence of C & le

7. Comparison every bearing strength with the testing results

7.1 Relation between the proposed formulas and the test results
The basic formulas for shear strength, and for pull-out strength, formulas for them with
amendment by the influence factors, and the results from the test are showed together
from Fig.12a to Fig.12c. The tensile yielded strength for anchors were hypothesized as
350MPa (correspond to SD345) to evaluate the bearing strength for the shear and
pull-out strength. And also, the standard strength for design of concrete was used as B, 
and Young’s Modulus for concrete was showed as followings.
Ec = 2.1 104 ( /2.3)1.5 ( B/20)  
: Weight of concrete per unit value   

 
   

 




   
  





 
  
  ხ 
 
  
 
    
 
 
 


 

  

ყფ 
       
           

a) Shearing stress of Group Shear Test b) Shearing stress of Single Shear Test c) Pulling-out stress of Group Shear Test
Fig.12 Comparison of Design - Results
7.2 Investigation for calculated data and test results
All test results are larger than calculated results in Fig.12a. It would be reason that large
strengths on the tests were influenced with the values of y on anchors. These values 

were from 375 377 MPa. The test strengths were bigger than calculated data by about
1.07(375/350). However, as mg that concrete strengths were smaller, reserved power 
was small. It will be necessary to check it carefully. ms , that means shear stress for a 

379
single anchor, is coincided the test results almost in Fig 12b. It is clear there are no
reserved power scarcely among calculated data and test results. In checking data in
Fig.12c, pull-out strength with calculation is almost proportional to the testing results.
There are some lower calculated values than the testing results. It is the case the lower
compressive strength of concrete (5MPa) was used by anchors with D22. It is necessary
to take care for using calculated values.

7.3 Treatment for safety faction


It is important to evaluate the safety factor for the proposal formulas in order to work
effectively for the actual design. It would be real to decrease the proposed formulas
with taking about 1.33 for safety factor, though calculated formulas would be safer than
testing values. There is basically reserved strength at the yielding stress in anchor with
comparing to design values for this reason. It would be a idea to multiply bearing shear
strength  mg by 0.8 still more in the case that slope by relative member displacement
would be limited as 1/250.

8. Conclusion

There was sufficient bearing strength for the cases of the putting anchors in the low
strength concrete block, when the results from testing were corresponding with the
design formulas in the guideline recommended by the agency. However, proposed
formulas were issued with considering many parameters in the concrete blocks that
anchors were put in, by referencing to the ACI318. There were narrow variations in the
formulas for strength with considering diameter of anchors, embedded length, and the

edge distance. In the case of the lower concrete strength, B 15MPa, applicability
on the proposed formulas is better than the formulas used to now. The better results
were gotten. It is urgent to reinforce the concrete building with low strength. There
would be many cases that bonded post-install anchors would be used to reinforce these
buildings. It is one main object to investigate definitely the efficient values to design.
From now, still the meaningful study must be performed with the simulation by using
Finite Element Method.

9. Reference

1. JBDPA / Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, ‘Guideline for Seismic


Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings’, 1990, 62
2. JBDPA / Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, ‘Guideline for Seismic
Retrofitting Design of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings’, 1990, 198
3. Ronald. A. Cook, Bonded Anchors in the US, ‘Testing of Bonded Anchors’, SCFT
Workshop, Shaan, Principality of Liechtenstein, 1999
4. YAMAMOTO.Y. et al, ‘Load Carrying Capacity of Bonded Anchor at Low
Strength Concrete Members’, Proceedings of Japan Concrete Institute vol.22, No.1,
2000, 553-558

380
BEHAVIOR OF GROUTED ANCHORS
Ronald A. Cook, Noel A. Zamora, and Robert C. Konz
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Florida, USA

Abstract
An experimental research program was undertaken at the University of Florida with
funding from the Concrete Research Council and various grout manufacturers to
determine the behavior of grouted anchors and to develop rational design procedures for
grouted anchor installations. For purposes of this research, a grouted anchor was defined
as an anchor (headed or un-headed) installed into a hole in hardened concrete with a
structural grout (cementitious or polymer). Grouted anchors typically have hole
diameters that range from 150-300% larger than the anchor diameter. This is different
from adhesive anchors, which typically use a polymer material with an unheaded anchor
installed in a hole diameter only 10-25% larger than the anchor diameter.

This paper presents the results of this research, including 229 tests of both headed and
un-headed anchors installed using six cementitious and three polymer grouts. The
results indicate that the behavior of unheaded grouted anchors is similar to that of
adhesive anchors while the behavior of headed grouted anchors is similar to that of cast-
in-place headed anchors. For some grout products, a bond failure at the grout/concrete
interface is possible and needs to be considered.

1. Introduction

Post-installed bonded anchors can be classified as adhesive or grouted depending on the


bonding agent, anchor type, and hole dimensions. These types of anchors can be
installed with or without a head at the embedded end (Fig. 1). Adhesive anchors are
installed using an unheaded threaded rod or a reinforcing bar inserted in a predrilled hole
that is 10-25% larger than the anchor diameter using a polymer-based bonding agent
including epoxies, polyesters, vinylesters, and hybrid systems. A grouted anchor is a
threaded rod, stud, or reinforcing bar installed using structural grout as the bonding

381
agent. Grouted anchors are typically installed with a cementitious or polymer grout in a
predrilled hole having a diameter range of 150-300% larger than the diameter of the
fastener. Cementitious grouts are primarily composed of fine aggregates and portland
cement. Polymer grouts are similar to adhesive anchors but with a fine aggregate
component.

d d

Grout hef Grout hef

d0
d0

Unheaded Anchor Headed Anchor

Fig. 1-Headed and unheaded grouted anchors

2. Grouted Anchors

Grouted anchors can be distinguished from adhesive anchors by a larger hole-to-anchor


diameter ratio that can accommodate a headed anchor, which ultimately affects the load
transfer mechanism. Headed anchors transfer the load to the grout primarily by bearing
on the anchor head. Unheaded anchors installed with threaded rod take advantage of
mechanical interlock between the threads and the grout. In both cases, the load is
transferred from the anchor to the grout and the grout then transfers the load to the
concrete resulting in one of three potential failure modes (Fig. 2).

Unheaded grouted anchors were expected to exhibit a failure mode similar to adhesive
anchors; bond failure at the steel/grout interface with a secondary, shallow concrete
cone. Headed anchors were expected to exhibit either bond or cone failure modes
depending on the concrete strength, embedment depth, and grout/concrete bond strength.
An obvious fourth failure mode, yielding and fracture of the steel anchor rod, is excluded
from this discussion.

382
Unheaded Headed Headed
Bond Failure Bond Failure Cone Failure

Fig. 2-Potential failure modes for grouted anchors

3. Behavioral Models

The behavior of grouted anchors was expected to be similar to either cast-in-place


headed anchors or post-installed adhesive anchors depending on the anchor
configuration (headed or unheaded) and material properties. The following presents a
general discussion of appropriate behavioral models.

3.1. Concrete Capacity Design Method (CCD)


The CCD model evolved from a series of concrete cone models that were developed for
fasteners that were observed to have full concrete cones at failure. These behavioral
models assumed that the concrete failed in tension and that a full concrete cone formed
from the embedded end of the anchor to the top of the concrete. There are several
versions of the concrete cone model, but the CCD method is widely accepted. The CCD
method evolved from the Kappa-method and predicts the ultimate load of an anchor
loaded in tension or in shear1. This method was developed for cast-in-place headed
anchors and post-installed mechanical anchors installed in uncracked concrete that
developed a full concrete cone at failure. The CCD equation used to predict the tensile
capacity of a single anchor installed in uncracked concrete is as follows:

N cone = k f c′ h1.5
ef
(1)
Where:
Ncone = mean tensile strength of concrete cone, N.
f ’c = concrete compressive strength (150mm x 300mm cylinders), N/mm2.
hef = effective embedment length, mm.
k = 16.7, for cast-in-situ headed studs and headed anchors.

3.2. Uniform Bond Stress Model


The uniform bond stress model was developed to predict the failure loads of adhesive
anchors in uncracked concrete by assuming a uniform bond stress throughout the

383
embedment length of the anchor system2,3. This model assumes that the failure surface
could occur either at the steel/adhesive or adhesive/concrete interface. Because the hole-
to-anchor diameter ratio for adhesive anchors is close to unity, however, the nominal
anchor diameter can be used. Cook, et al.2,3 showed that for adhesive anchors the
uniform bond stress is product dependent and its value, τ, must be determined
experimentally. Grouted anchors can also develop failure surfaces at the steel/grout or
grout/concrete interface but the hole-to-anchor diameter ratio is generally larger than 1.5.
Therefore, the bond strength of each product should be evaluated at both potential failure
surfaces. The uniform bond stress model equation is as follows:

N bond = τ π d h ef (2)

N bond,do = τ o π d o h ef (3)

Where:
Nbond = mean tensile strength for a steel/grout failure, N.
Nbond,do = mean tensile strength for a grout/concrete failure, N.
τ = uniform bond stress at the steel/grout interface, MPa.
τ0 = uniform bond stress at the grout/concrete interface, MPa.
d = diameter of the anchor, mm.
d0 = diameter of the hole, mm.
hef = effective embedment length, mm.

4. Experimental Program

The objective of this test program was to determine the strength and behavior of grouted
anchors. The investigation included parameters typically encountered during design and
installation including binding agent (cementitious or polymer), anchor configuration
(headed or unheaded), anchor and hole diameters, embedment depth, and concrete
strength. Testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM E 488 with test
matrices shown in Tables 1 and 2.

5. Test Results for Unheaded Anchors

5.1. General Behavior


As hypothesized, the observed failure mode for unheaded anchors was a bond failure
located at the steel/grout interface with a secondary shallow cone. From all the test
series evaluated in this test program, only one test series (four anchors) exhibited a
failure mode at a location other than at the steel/grout interface. This series was installed
with product CE and produced a failure mode at the grout/concrete interface. Two other
test series were performed using the same product, but they developed a steel/grout
failure mode. The only difference between these tests series was the dimensions of the
anchor system. Therefore, transition from one failure mode to another can be explained

384
by observing that the anchors in the test series exhibiting bond failure at the
grout/concrete interface were installed using large diameter anchors. This allowed the
anchor system to develop the ultimate bond strength of the grout/concrete interface
before it could develop a steel/grout failure mode.

Table 1: Test matrix for unheaded anchors.


d (mm) hef (mm) d0 (mm) f 'c at test (MPa)
Product n
Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 1 Series 2 Series 3

CA 25 15.9 19.1 25.4 102 127 172 50.8 50.8 50.8 35.6 35.6 50.8

CB 12 15.9 19.1 25.4 102 127 178 50.8 50.8 50.8 35.6 33.4 31.0

CC 15 19.1 25.4 12.7 127 178 76 50.8 50.8 50.8 34.1 34.1 33.4
39.9
CD 15 15.9 19.1 25.4 102 127 178 50.8 50.8 50.8 39.9 35.8
35.8
CE 14 15.9 19.1 25.4 102 127 178 50.8 50.8 50.8 34.4 34.4 33.6

CF 5 19.1 - - 127 - - 50.8 - - 38.0 - -


33.9
PA 15 15.9 19.1 25.4 102 152 178 50.8 50.8 50.8 34.5 34.5
35.6
33.9
PB 15 15.9 19.1 25.4 102 152 178 50.8 50.8 50.8 33.9 34.4
35.9
PC 5 19.1 19.1 - 127 127 - 50.8 50.8 - 37.8 37.8 -
Note: Products starting with the letter “C” are cementitious grouts
Products starting with the letter “P” are polymer grouts

Table 2: Test matrix for headed anchors.


d (mm) hef (mm) d0 (mm) f 'c at test (MPa)
Product n
Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 1 Series 2 Series 3
127 35.7 50.1
CA 25 19.1 19.1 25.4 127 178 50.8 38.1 50.8 32.6
152 32.7 49.8
35.7 32.3 32.3
CB 15 19.1 19.1 25.4 127 127 178 50.8 50.8 50.8
33.4 32.1 32.1
31.0
CC 15 19.1 19.1 25.4 127 127 178 50.8 50.8 50.8 31.0 31.0
31.2
CD 15 19.1 19.1 19.1 114 127 127 38.1 38.1 38.1 59.2 35.8 35.8

CF 13 15.9 19.1 19.1 102 114 127 50.8 38.1 50.8 30.9 59.2 35.8
27.8 27.8
PA 10 19.1 19.1 - 127 127 - 50.8 50.8 - -
27.4 27.4
27.8
PB 5 19.1 - - 127 - - 50.8 - - - -
27.4
PC 10 19.1 19.1 - 127 127 - 38.1 38.1 - 63.7 36.9 -
Note: Products starting with the letter “C” are cementitious grouts
Products starting with the letter “P” are polymer grouts

5.2. Product Variability and Anchor Strength


Table 3 provides a summary of the steel/grout bond stress (τ) and coefficient of variation
for the products tested with unheaded anchors. For the entire unheaded data set, the

385
mean bond stress was 18.4 MPa with a coefficient of variation of 0.27. As shown in
Table 3, the variation between all products is greater than that within any individual
product. This indicates that the unheaded bond strength is product dependent.

Table 3- Steel/Grout Bond Stress and Coefficient of Variation for Unheaded Anchors
Product CA CB CC CD CE CF PA PB PC
Avg. Bond Stress (MPa) 20.5 21.8 7.3 21.1 21.6 15.9 17.8 19.4 17.8
Coefficient of Variation 0.11 0.18 0.22 0.08 0.09 0.20 0.06 0.09 0.13

5.3. Behavioral Model Comparison


Figure 3 illustrates the observed failure loads for all data sets as a function of bonded
area. Failure loads shown in Fig. 3 were normalized to the mean steel/concrete bond
stress (τ) of 18.4 MPa by multiplying actual failure loads by the factor 18.4/τproduct. The
solid line shown in this figure represents the mean value for the uniform bond stress
model based on the bonded area and τ = 18.4 MPa. Figure 3 shows a linear relationship,
indicating that the uniform bond stress model is appropriate for unheaded grouted
anchors. Also shown in Figure 3 is a 5% fractile boundary based on a coefficient of
variation of 0.20 and a large database. Figure 3 indicates that out of the 121 anchors
tested, only 2 anchors (1.6%) fall below this 5% fractile boundary line.

350

300
N = τ π d h ef
Uniform Bond Stress Model
250 τ = 18.4 MPa (mean)
Load (KN)

200

150

100

Uniform Bond Stress Model


50 5% fractile, 90% confidence,
COV = 0.20, Value = 0.67 mean

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
2
Bond Area (mm )

Fig. 3- Unheaded grouted anchor test results compared to the uniform bond stress model
for adhesive anchors

386
6. Test Results for Headed Anchors

6.1. General Behavior


Headed grouted anchors were expected to develop either a bond failure at the
grout/concrete interface or tensile failure leading to the development of a full concrete
cone. A total of nine different products were tested and included six cementitious grouts
and three polymer grouts. Test results showed that out of the 108 tests included in the
headed grouted anchor test program, 61 (56 %) anchors developed a bond failure at the
grout/concrete interface and 47 (44 %) anchors developed a concrete tensile failure that
resulted in a full concrete cone. This confirms the assumption that headed grouted
anchors can develop either a concrete cone failure mode or a bond failure at the
grout/concrete interface depending on the properties of the grout and the dimensions of
the anchor system.

6.2. Product Variability and Anchor Strength


The strength of a headed grouted anchor system is dependent on the grout/concrete bond
strength and the concrete cone breakout capacity of the concrete. Therefore, headed
anchors that produced a bond failure were analyzed separately from those that developed
a concrete cone. Table 4 illustrates the average bond strength and corresponding
coefficient of variation calculated for the different products that exhibited bond failure at
the grout/concrete interface. For all eight products tested with headed anchors and
exhibiting grout/concrete bond failure, the mean grout/concrete bond stress was 8.1 MPa
with a coefficient of variation of 0.30. This indicates that the variation between all
products is greater than that within any individual product. Therefore, there is enough
evidence to indicate that the unheaded bond strength is product dependent.

Table 4- Grout/Concrete Bond Stress and Coefficient of Variation for Headed Anchors
Product CA CB CC CD CF PA PB PC
Avg. Bond Stress (MPa) 10.2 7.8 4.8 9.1 8.4 7.9 7.7 11.1
Coefficient of Variation 0.12 0.15 0.12 0.21 0.24 0.10 0.06 0.07

The other failure mode observed in headed grouted anchors was a full concrete cone
failure. As indicated by Eqn. 1, the capacity of this failure mechanism depends on the
strength of the concrete and embedment length of the anchor. As shown in Table 2, the
compressive strength of the concrete for the headed anchor tests ranged from 27.4 MPa
to 63.7 MPa and the embedment length ranged from 102 mm to 178 mm.

6.3. Behavioral Models Comparison


The presence of two failure mechanisms in headed grouted anchor systems requires the
use of two different behavioral models to predict behavior. For grouted anchors that
exhibited a concrete cone breakout, the failure loads were compared to the CCD method
(Eqn. 1). Anchors that exhibited a grout/concrete bond failure were compared to the
uniform bond stress model for failure at the grout/concrete interface (Eqn. 3). The
results of these comparisons are presented in Figures 4 and 5.

387
Figure 4 shows a graph of the tensile failure load versus bonded area for all headed
anchors that developed a bond failure at the grout/concrete interface. In Figure 4, actual
failure loads were normalized to τ0 = 8.3 MPa, which is the mean value for τ0 for all tests
that exhibited grout/concrete bond failure. Figure 4 shows a linear relationship,
indicating that the uniform bond stress model for failure at the grout/concrete interface
(Eqn. 3) is appropriate for headed grouted anchors that exhibit grout/concrete bond
failure. Also shown in Figure 4 is a 5% fractile boundary based on a coefficient of
variation of 0.20 and a large database. Figure 4 shows that out of the 59 anchors that
exhibited the grout/concrete failure mode, only 2 anchors (3.3%) fall below this 5%
fractile boundary.

Figure 5 shows a comparison of the headed grouted anchor tests that were observed to
develop a full concrete cone breakout failure to the CCD method (Eqn. 1 as represented
by the solid line in Figure 5). As shown by Figure 5, the test data typically fall above the
solid line indicating a conservative model. It is believed that the conservative results
indicate that the threaded rod used in the majority of the headed anchor tests may have
contributed to the increased capacity due to a combination of thread/grout interlock and
bearing at the head of the anchor. A dashed line representing the 5% fractile associated
with the CCD method is also shown in Figure 5.

350
Uniform Bond Stress Model
N pred. = τ π d h ef τ0 = 8.3 MPa (mean)
300 0 0
250
Load (KN)

200

150

100

Uniform Bond Stress Model


50 5% fractile, 90% confidence,
COV = 0.20, Value = 0.67 mean

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
2
Bond Area (mm )

Fig. 4- Headed grouted anchor tests exhibiting grout/concrete bond failure compared to
the uniform bond stress model for grout/concrete bond failure

388
300
Concrete Capacity Design Model

250 N no = 16.7 f c′ h 1.5


ef

200
Ntest (KN)

150

100

Concrete Capacity Design Method


50 5% fractile, 90% confidence,
COV = 0.20, Value = 0.67 Mean

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Npred. (KN)

Fig. 5- Headed grouted anchor tests exhibiting concrete cone failure compared to the
CCD method

7. Conclusions

The behavior of grouted anchors is dependent on the product and whether or not the
anchor is unheaded or headed.

For most engineered grout products, the behavior of unheaded grouted anchors can be
predicted by the uniform bond stress model recommended for adhesive anchors (Eqn 2).
This model is based on a product’s bond strength (τ) at the steel/concrete interface. For
products with a low grout/concrete bond stress (τ0), bond failure may occur at the
grout/concrete interface (Eqn. 3). In general, product approval tests need to be
developed to establish both the grout product’s steel/grout bond strength (τ) and
grout/concrete bond strength (τ0). The controlling embedment strength can then be
determined as the smaller of the strength controlled by steel/grout bond failure (Eqn. 2)
and grout/concrete bond failure (Eqn. 3).

For headed grouted anchors, bond failure at the steel/grout interface is precluded by the
presence of the anchor head. For headed grouted anchors, embedment failure can occur
by bond failure at the grout/concrete interface (Eqn. 3) or more likely by a full concrete
cone breakout failure as occurs with cast-in-place headed anchors (Eqn. 1). For headed
grouted anchors, the controlling embedment strength should be determined as the
smaller of that determined by grout/concrete bond strength (Eqn. 3) or concrete cone
breakout strength (Eqn. 1).

389
References:

1. Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen; R.; and Breen, J. E., “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 92, No. 1,
January-February 1995, pp. 73-94.
2. Cook, R. A.; Kunz, J.; Fuchs, W.; and Konz, R. C., “Behavior and Design of Single
Adhesive Anchors under Tensile Load in Uncracked Concrete,” ACI Structural
Journal, V. 95, No. 1, January-February 1998.
3. Kunz, J., Cook, R. A., Fuchs, W. and Spieth, H, “Tragverhalten und Bemessung von
chemischen Befestigungen (Load Bearing Behavior and Design of Adhesive
Anchors),” Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 93 (1998), H.1, S. 15-19, H. 2, S. 44-49.

390
LONG TIME LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY OF BONDED
ANCHORS
Lennart Elfgren*, Georg Danielsson**, Ingvar Holm**, and Gunnar Söderlind***
*Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden
**Testlab, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden
***Swedish National Testing and Research Institute, Borås, Sweden

Abstract
Bonded anchor bolts with diameters of 16 and 20 mm have been tested with constant
static loads for up to 15 years indoors and outdoors. Creep deformations were measured
for different load levels. Some of the remaining bolts have been tested to failure and the
load carrying capacities were compared to design recommendations. For indoor
conditions the design recommendations were quite satisfactory. For outdoor conditions
the concrete quality is of importance and the remaining capacity of vital anchors ought to
be checked regularly.

1. Background

Bonded or adhesive anchors with polymeric resins were developed for rock
strengthening in Germany around 1955 and were further developed for use in concrete
structures during the sixties, Klöker (1984), Schuerman et al (1970).

In this paper results are given from a long time test series that were started in 1984. The
first results from the tests have earlier been presented by Elfgren et al (1988, 1993).

2. Adhesives

The resin used in the tests is an unsaturated polyester with the name of Leguval K27,
Bayer (1981). It is made of diols and dicarbolic acids. The acids are unsaturated, that is
they have double bonds between some of their coal atoms which make them very
reactive. This is a prerequisite for the curing (cross-linking) later in the process. The
reaction between the diols and the dicarboxylic acids is a polycondensation in which a
polyester and water is formed. The polyester contains long chains of molecules and it is
initially very viscous, that is it can be hard and brittle.

391
In order to adopt the polyester to further processing, it is dissolved in a liquid as
monomeric styrene, which is also unsaturated and has reactive cross-linking agents.
During curing, the unsaturated, reactive groups of the cross-linking agent (the styrene)
react with those of the polyester. In this reaction the molecules of the cross-linking
agents are incorporated as connecting links between the polyester chains resulting in
steric cross-linking.

To start the curing process the formation of radicals is necessary. Radicals are highly
reactive molecule fragments which stimulate the cross-linking. Organic peroxides are
used as donors and their mode of action is set off by adding an accelerator (initiator).
Tertiary amines are particularly effective as accelerators with benzoyl peroxide.

During curing the unsaturated polyester resin shrinks 6-8 % by volume (chemical
shrinkage). It is brought about by the chemical linkage which takes place between the
individual molecules during curing. The linkage process causes the chains to draw closer
together. By adding a filler of ballast, the shrinkage can be greatly reduced as in the case
with adhesive resins where quartz fragments and glass are added. The proportion of resin
to quartz may usually vary from 1:1.5 to 1:4.

The cured Leguval K27 resin without filler or ballast has the following mechanical
properties according to the producer:

Tensile strength frt 50 Mpa


Elongation at rupture εru 2%
Compression yield strength frc 160 Mpa
Modulus of elasticity Er 4 Gpa
Shear modulus G 1.5 Gpa
Poissons ratio νr 0.33
Thermal expansion α 1.5 ‚ 10-4

For most bonded anchors the resin is delivered in glass cartridges (glass phials). There
are two systems. In one system the radical donor (benzoyl peroxide) is stored as a
powder in an inner glass phial. The phial is placed in an outer phial together with the
resin, quartz sand and an initiator (tertiary amines). We have tested two products with
this system (Anchors of type B and E). In the other system the quartz sand and the
radical donor are stored in the inner glass phial whereas the resin and the initiator are
stored in the outer phial. We have tested one product with this system (Anchor type A).

To start the curing, the glass cartridge is placed in a hole drilled into the concrete, see
Figure 1. An anchor rod is then mounted to a rotary drill hammer. The rod is driven into
the hole. The cartridge is then crushed, the components of the resin are mixed with each
other by the rotating rod and the curing starts. Curing time varies from 10 to 20 minutes
at room temperature and up to several hours at –5oC.

392
Figure 1. Bonded anchor of capsule-type, Eligehausen (1994)

Resins with improved properties have been developed successively, e.g. epoxy acrylats
and vinyl esters, Ammann (1991), Eligehausen (1994), Zavliaris & Speare (1992).

3. Materials

The concrete used in the tests had mix and strength properties according to Table 1. The
compression strength was determined on 150 mm cubes. The tensile strength was
determined by splitting tests on the same size of cubes according to Swedish Concrete
Standard (1978). The steel in the bolts had a yield stress of 240 or 400 MPa.

4. Long time tests

The concrete was cast in foundations of the dimensions 0.40 x 0.75 x 0.75 m provided
with transport reinforcement of 12 mm Ks 400 (fyk ≥ 400 Mpa). The top 200 mm of the
foundations were reinforced only along the edges.

Bonded anchors of dimension 16 and 20 mm were used of Type A, B and E. The


anchors were tested under the following environmental conditions:

393
Table 1. Concrete mix and properties

Long time tests


Luleå Borås
Cement, kg 210 255
Gravel 0-8 mm, kg 1050 1245
Stone 8-16 mm, kg 950 620
Silica, kg 10 -
Water reducer, kg 0.8 -
Water-cement ratio 0.81 0.82
Compression/tensile strength
fcc/fct, Mpa/Mpa
100 days 37/3.0
150 days 40/3.5
269 days 32/2.9

Figure 2. Test arrangement for long time outdoor tests in Luleå. The loads are applied
by means of lever arms (approximately 1 to 10) loaded by concrete blocks.

394
I 12 anchors were placed indoors with approximately constant temperature and
humidity (20oC, RH 30-40 %).
O 4 anchors were placed outdoors in Luleå in order to check the influence of
varying temperatures and humidities.
S 6 anchors were placed indoors but had an additive (salt) of 2 % Pozzolith 122
He to the cement in the foundation blocks.
W 2 indoor anchors had a 10 mm layer of water on the top of the foundation
around the anchor.

The resin had an age of 24 hours or more when tests were started.

Figure 3. Creep tests with M16 anchors of types A and B loaded with 15 kN under
different environmental conditions.

395
Figure 4. Creep tests with M16 anchors of types A, B and H loaded with 45 kN. Results
for anchors of type H are quoted from Rankweil (1980).

5. Test results

Some of the test results are summarized in Table 3 and in Figures 3-5. In Figure 5,
photos of six indoor anchors are showed loaded to failure due to storage shortage after
13.5 years. They all had Fult >70 kN. The numbers in the photos refer to the following
anchors No 1 = I 15 A1, No 2 = I 15 A2, No 3 = I 45 A1, No 4 = I 45 A2, No 5 = W 45
A, and No 6 = W 15 A. Out of the original program of 26 anchors 12 anchors are still
loaded after 15 years (5 with 15 kN, whereof one outdoors; 3 with 30 kN; and 4 with 45
kN).

396
6. Analysis and conclusions

Design methods for bonded anchors are given in Eligehausen (1994). Fracture
mechanics methods are discussed in Elfgren et al (1989, 1991). A general state of the art
of bond of reinforcement in concrete is given in Tepfers (2000).

Table 3. Summary of test results for long time loading

Test No Load F Mean 1 year 3 years 7 years 14 yrs. Load / Age


(kN) stress def. def. def. def. at failure
τ (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (kN / days)
(MPa)
I 15 A1 15.9 M16 2.25 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.13 79 / 4960 (b)
I 15 A2 15.6 M16 2.21 0.33 0.35 0.34 0.33 72 / 4960 (c)
I 15 B1 15.0 M16 2.12 0.22 0.26 0.26 - -
I 15 B2 15.0 M16 2.12 0.35 0.37 0.38 - -
O 15 A1 16.6 M16 2.35 0.24 0.32 0.46 0.55 15? / 5700 (d)
O 15 A2 17.5 M16 2.48 0.72 0.80 1.00 1.10 -
W 15 A 15.5 M16 2.19 0.25 0.30 0.33 0.33 60 / 4960 (e)
S 15 B1 15.0 M16 2.12 - 0.10 0.10 - -
S 15 B2 15.0 M16 2.12 - 0.12 0.15 - -

I 30 B1 30.0 M16 4.24 1.71 2.10 2.15 - -


I 30 B2 30.0 M16 4.24 0.52 0.54 0.54 - -
I 30 B3 30.0 M16 4.24 0.83 0.96 1.02 - -

I 45 E1 45.0 M20 3.37 0.99 - 1.06 (a) - -


I 45 E2 45.0 M20 3.37 0.58 - 0.62 (a) - -
S 45 E1 45.0 M20 3.37 0.43 - 0.47 (a) - -
S 45 E2 45.0 M20 3.37 0.47 - 0.54 (a) - -
I 45 A1 43.7 M16 6.18 0.62 0.70 0.75 0.72 72 / 4690 (b)
I 45 A2 41.4 M16 5.86 0.79 0.95 1.04 1.06 77 / 4690 (c)
I 45 B1 45.0 M16 6.37 - - - - 45 / 42 (c)
I 45 B2 45.0 M16 6.37 - - - - 45 / 96 (c)
I 45 B3 45.0 M16 6.37 - - - - 45 / 35 (c)
S 45 B1 45.0 M16 6.37 - - - - 45 / 79 (c)
S 45 B2 45.0 M16 6.37 - - - - 45 / 2 (c)
O 45 A1 46.8 M16 6.62 - - - - 45 / 235 (c)
O 45 A2 43.4 M16 6.14 - - - - 45 / 284 (c)
W 45 A 39.9 M16 5.64 0.80 1.00 1.02 1.00 114 / 4690 (c)
(a) After 5.75 years
(b) Bolt failure in steel thread above concrete surface
(c) Bolt drawn out of hole
(d) Bolt drawn out of hole. It may have been caused by an accidental overload
(e) Bolt failed by corrosion at the concrete surface

397
Figure 5. Test of remaining load-carrying capacity of bolts after 13.5 years with
constant load (Fult =79, 72, 72, 77, 114, and 60 kN respectively for Nos 1 to 6).

398
Normal design loads for static conditions (15 kN for M16 anchors) and indoor storage
have not shown any deformation increase during the last eleven years. The two anchors
that were stored outdoors show on the other hand a continuous increase in deformation
(about 0.05 mm/year during the first years and then gradually slowing down to 0.01 -
0.02 mm/year). One bolt stored outdoors (O15A1), failed after 15 years. Unfortunately it
is not clear if the bolt failed through an accidental overload or if it was only the long
time and the climate that caused the failure. The companion bolt (O15A2) is still going
strong after 16 years. It should be born in mind that the concrete that the anchors are
installed in is not freeze-thaw resistant as it has a high water-cement ratio and contains
no air-treatment. The daily and annual temperature changes with freeze-thaw cycles can
here lead to a gradual break down of the concrete and a slow pull-out of the anchor. The
load level is about one fourth of the bearing capacity in short time loading and the
friction can alone, under favorable conditions, stand up to this load, even if the adhesion
has completely broken down.

Higher load levels (30 kN for M16 anchors) and indoor storage have caused considerable
deformations but no failures.

Still higher load levels, equal to three times the normal static design load (45 kN for M16
anchors), caused failure in seven out of 14 anchors after 2-284 days. Three of the
remaining seven anchors were tested to failure after 13.5 years and had then load-
carrying capacities of 72, 77 and 114 kN respectively.

Tests reported by Ammann (1991) and Eligehausen (1994) indicate that newly
developed epoxy accrylate resins have better resistance to water saturation and freeze-
thaw cycles than the unsaturated polyesters discussed here.

Tests reported by Håkansson et al (1981) indicate that so called non-shrinkage grouts,


used for anchors grouted in holes and recesses, usually have higher shrinkage and creep
than ordinary concrete made of portland cement.

To sum up, it can be said that the bonded anchors tested here have shown good long time
properties. However, it must be emphasized that the concrete properties and the
environmental conditions are of vital importance. Exposure of bonded anchors to water
and to outdoor temperature variations and freeze-thaw cycles may increase deformations
considerably. For that reason caution should be exercised in the design of anchors and
high quality freeze-thaw resistant concrete and a regular (e g at five years intervals)
checking of the remaining load-carrying capacity might be prescribed for vital anchors
subjected to outdoor climate.

399
7. Acknowledgements

The research program has been sponsored by the Swedish Council for Building
Research; Luleå University of Technology; SP, the Swedish National Testing and
Research Institute in Borås; and by producers of bonded anchors. In the preparation of
the program guidance has been given by Krister Cederwall, Kent Gylltoft and Lennart
Ågårdh. The program was planned and directed by Lennart Elfgren and Anders
Eriksson. The following persons have made substantial contributions to various phases
of the program during the 10 years it has been running: Roger Anneling, Stig-Ola
Granlund, Ingvar Holm and Gunnar Söderlind. The tests of the remaining load-carrying
capacity of the bolts in Luleå were carried out by Georg Danielsson.

8. References

Ammann, Walter J (1991) Static and dynamic long-term behavior of anchors. Paper
SP 130-8 in “Anchors in Concrete – Design and Behavior” (Edited by George A Senkiw
and Harry B Lancelot III), Special Publication SP-130, American Concrete Institute,
Detroit 1991, pp 205-220.

Bayer (1981) Leguval – Unsaturated polyester resins. Bayer AG, KL Division, D5090
Leverkusen. Order No KL 43016e, Edition 6.81, 40 pp and Leguval K27. Unsaturated
polyester resin (UP Resin), Order No KL 43123e, Ed 1.12.1975, 10 pp.

Elfgren, Lennart; Anneling, Roger; Eriksson, Anders and Granlund, Stig-Ola (1988)
Adhesive anchors. Tests with cyclic and long-time loads. Swedish National Testing
Institute, Technical Report SP-RAPP 1987:39, Borås 1988, 87+25 pp (ISBN 91-7848-
080-9).

Elfgren, Lennart, Editor (1989) Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures. From


theory to applications. A RILEM Report. Chapman and Hall, London 1989, 407 pp
(ISBN 0 412-30680-8).

Elfgren, Lennart and Shah, Surendra P, Editors (1991) Analysis of Concrete Structures
by Fracture Mechanics. Proceedings of the International RILEM Workshop dedicated
to Professor Arne Hillerborg. Chapman and Hall, London 1991, 305 pp (ISBN 0-412-
369870-x).

Elfgren, Lennart and Söderlind, Gunnar (1993) Bonded anchors subjected to long time
and cyclic loads. Fracture and Damage of Concrete and Rock – FDCR-2. Edited by H.
R. Rossmanith, E&FN Spon, London 1993, ISBN 0 419 18470 8, pp 513-526.

400
Eligehausen, Rolf, Editor (1994): Fastenings to concrete and masonry structures.
State of the art report. Comité Euro-International du Béton, CEB Bulletin 216.
Thomas Telford, London 1994, 249 pp. ISBN 0 7277 1937 8.

Håkanson, Mats; Johansson, Håkan E; Broms, Carl Erik and Elfgren, Lennart (1981)
Ingjutningsbruk. Tidsberoende egenskaper (Time dependent properties of grouts for
anchor bolts. In Swedish. Summary in English). Division of Structural Engineering,
Luleå University of Technology, Technical Report 1981:47T, Luleå 1981, 41 pp.

Klöker, Werner (1984) 30 Jahre Reaktionsharzmörtel, -beton und –kunststein auf Basis
ungestättiger Polyesterharze (Reaction resin mortar, reaction resin concrete and artificial
stone based on unsaturated polyester resins – 30 years experience. In German). Fourth
International Congress on Polymers in Concrete, 19-21 September 1984, Proceedings
ICPIC ’84 (Edited by Herbert Schultz), Technische Hochschule Darmstadt 1984, pp 11-
19.

Rankweil (1980) Long-time performance of HILTI HVA adhesive anchors. Test


reports issued by Höhere Technische Bundes-, Lehr- und Versuchsanstalt, Rankweil,
Austria. Size M12 No 186/78, Nov 1978, 15+15 pp; Size M20, No 170/79, July 1979,
16+24 pp; Size M16, No 52/80, April 1980, 5+26 pp (In German); Size M8, No 143/80,
June 1980, 15+20 pp (In German).

Schuerman, Fritz; Jankowski, Alfons and Novotny, Rudolf (1979) Die


Weiterentwicklung des Klebeankers (Further development of adhesive anchors. In
German). Glückauf (Essen), 26 Nov 1970, pp1145-1151.

Swedish Concrete Standard (1978) Concrete testing – Hardened concrete – Cube


strength. SS 13 72 10, 3 pp and SS 13 72 13, 3 pp.

Swedish Steel Standard (1976) Skruvförbandsnorm St BK-N3 (Code for bolted


connections. In Swedish). Statens Stålbyggnadskommitté, Svensk Byggtjänst,
Stockholm 1976, 80 pp.

Tepfers, Ralejs, Editor (2000): Bond of reinforcement in concrete. State-of-art report


prepared by Task Group Bond Models. Féderation internationale du béton, fib, Bulletin
No 10, Lusanne 2000, 427 pp. ISBN 2-88394-050-9.

Zavliaris, K D and Speare, P R S (1992) The behaviour of adhesive anchorages


installed in concrete. In “Proceedings from the International Conference Bond in
Concrete – From research to practise”, Riga, Latvia, October 15-17, 1992 (Edited by A
Skudra and R Tepfers), Technical University, Riga LV-1658, Latvia 1992, pp 11-1 to 10.

401
TRANSMISSION OF SHEAR LOADS WITH
POST-INSTALLED REBARS
Kunz Jakob
Hilti AG, Corporate Research, Liechtenstein

Abstract
Often concrete ceilings are cast against roughened walls. Design methods and
specifications for anchorage and splice lengths from literature and different construction
standards have been compared. The examples of the connection with post-installed
reinforcement of a bending slab to a wall and a short slab to a wall (here shear is
outweighing) have been designed according to the standards requiring the minimum
anchorage and splice lengths and tests have been performed. These investigations show
that shear connections with post-installed reinforcement bars can be designed as
connections with cast-in bars and that it is important to specify sufficient constructive
reinforcement to limit the opening of cracks in the joints.

1. Introduction

Concrete structures which consist of two or more parts cast at different moments can be
designed as monolithic bodies if the internal tensile, compressive and especially shear
forces can be transmitted across the joints.

One possible way to ensure the force transfer is to install reinforcement bars into drilled
holes by means of a bonding agent. In this case it is important that the connecting
reinforcement is either fully anchored in both concrete parts or connected to the cast-in
reinforcement by lap splices respectively.

This paper deals with the transmission of shear forces across the joints. Structural design
codes treat this problem with different methods, for example the shear friction model,
the anchor model or the truss model normally used for monolithic concrete. The
anchorage and splice lengths also differ from one code to another, which has a strong
influence on the required drilling depth for the post-installed connecting reinforcement.

402
After a brief review of the design models used by different codes, two slabs with
anchorage at the support and splices in the third points have been designed according to
the codes, which required minimum anchorage and splice lengths for each case. Full
scale test specimens were cast according to the design and tested at the designed working
load as well as up to failure. The goal was to compare design and reality for the case of
minimum joint reinforcement. Crack development and ultimate loads were observed.

2. Design Models

A clear design basis is the truss model based on the classic truss analogy of Mörsch.
There the flow of forces within a reinforced concrete part is approximated by a truss,
where the compression beam and the inclined compression struts are allocated to the
concrete, while the tensile strut and tensile tape are built by the reinforcement bars and
the stirrups (figure 1a). At casting in parts a rough joint is required, which makes
possible the forming of an inclined compression strut over the joint.

The stress field model is a refinement of the truss model. It models the expected cracks
and stress distribution within reinforced concrete more accurately (figure 1b). Also here
a rough joint is presupposed. Strut and tie models and stress field analysis are generally
used in european standards.
tensile strut compression beam

rough joint
tension
inclined compression strut
rough joint chord

figure 1a) truss model b) stress field model

In countries more influenced by American standards, the transmission of shear loads at


joints is represented by the shear-friction model. The transmission of shear loads is
achieved by roughening (working like a keying) and the dowel action of the
reinforcement bars. There the displacement in the rough joint causes an opening (figure
2a). The shear friction reinforcement works against this opening of the crack and
increases the friction through that. The formula shows the design of the needed
reinforcement area. Shear friction models can be applied to different surface types.

At smooth or insufficiently roughened concrete joint only the dowel action of the
reinforcement bars penetrating the joint can be used for design; they can be considered
as shear studs and work by bending, shearing and buckling of the bars (figure 2b).

403
shear / friction reinforcement A vf
works against opening of the crack
bending shearing buckling
and increases the friction through that
2• M 4• db • As • f y As • f y
Vd = = Vd = Vd = As • f y • cos α
A vf = (V d / (0.75 µf) - N d) / f y l 3•π •l 3

figure 2a) shear-friction model b) working principles of shear studs

The application area of the design models can be classified in dependence from the
surface of joint: from rough joints with roughness greater or equal 5mm from top to
bottom of roughness (amplitude) to smooth joint with roughness smaller than 2mm. The
truss model and the stress field model is used at rough joint, the model referring to the
dowel action at smooth joint. Only the shear-friction model covers the entire range.

Recently, a model taking into account bending, shearing and buckling of the anchor as
well as shear-friction has been developed by Randl [1] (figure 2b) and is now
implemented in engineering design guidelines [2]. Since this paper compares the
approaches of different concrete structural design codes, the mentioned concept is not
considered further here.

3. Bending Slab

The first example considered was a bending slab with a length of 5m and a thickness of
20cm (figure 3). The supports and the middle part were prefabricated elements. The
parts adjacent to the supports were cast in place and the connections to the support or to
the middle part respectively were carried out with post-installed reinforcement.
500
175 150 175

F F
cast in place prefabricated cast in place
smooth joint rough joint
upper reinforcement no upper reinforcement
20

100 rough joint rough joint


50

100 50
support 150 200 150 support

figure 3: geometry of the bending slab

404
The left support had a smooth joint and an upper and lower reinforcement, the right
support has a rough joint and only a lower reinforcement. The joints between the
prefabricated part and the cast-in parts is roughened and has a lower reinforcement.

a) Design
The slab was designed for a working load of F=2x10kN (cf. figure 3) according to DIN
1045. The concrete quality was C20/25. The connecting reinforcement to the supports
and the splices to the middle part were designed according to the following 8 standards,
which use different design models: German Code DIN 1045, Austrian Code ÖNORM B
4200, Swiss Code SIA 162, British Standard BS 8110, Norwegian Standard NS 3473 E,
Eurocode 2 with design according to truss models and American Standard ACI 318-89
and New Zealand Standard NZS 3101 with design according to shear-friction models.
Figure 4 shows the anchorage and splice lengths for bars 6 to 16mm nominal diameter
according to the mentioned codes. It should be mentioned that the Austrian code
ÖNORM B4200 has been replaced in the meantime by prescriptions similar to Eurocode
2 (ÖNORM B4700). Nevertheless, figure 4 shows that there is a large discrepancy
between the different code prescriptions.
slab of C20/25, spacing of rebars 10-times rebar diameter

DIN 1045 EC2 ÖN-B4200 SIA 162 ACI 318 NZS 3101 BS 8110 NS 3473 E
120 100
90
100
anchoring length [cm]

80
splice length [cm]

70
80
60
60 50
40
40 30
20
20
10

0 0
6 mm 8 mm 10 mm 12 mm 14 mm
6 mm 8 mm 10 mm 12 mm 14 mm 16 mm
rebar diameter
rebar diameter
figure 4a) anchorage lengths 4b) splice lengths

Since NZS 3101 generally yields the smallest values (figure 4), the anchorages and
splices have been designed according to this code. The bottom reinforcement was carried
out with reinforcement bars diameter 10mm with a spacing of 10mm. Only 40% of the
bars were anchored to the supports and the anchorage length was 12cm for the smooth
joint and 8cm for the rough joint. All bars were spliced to the middle prefabricated slab,
and the splice length was 36cm. The differences in the standards are mainly caused by
more or less rough simplifications of the formulae.

405
b) Test

The load on the slab was introduced by a hydraulic cylinder and distributed to the two
introduction points by a system of steel beams weighing 4kN in total. Therefore, the load
acting on the slab is always the load displayed in figure 5 plus 4kN for the load
distribution system.

First, both forces were increased 5-times from F = 2x2 kN to service load F = 2x10 kN,
held and decreased to 2x2kN again. The cracks appearing at service load were measured
and recorded. Then the load was increased and stopped every 10kN in order to observe
the appearing cracks. This procedure was continued until failure was reached.

The maximum load of 92kN (88kN piston force plus 4kN dead load of the load
introduction parts) reached in the test corresponds to 4,6-times the calculated service
load of 2-times 10kN.
90
piston force [kN]

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
displacement [mm]
figure 5: load-displacement curve of bending slab

Figure 5 shows that the load displacement behavior between no load and the service load
is stiff and that a softening occurs with loads higher than about 1.5 times service load.

In figure 6a the results of the crack measurements after the fifth loading to service load
of 2 F = 20kN are shown. A means the front side, B the back side of the slab. At service
load only cracks in the area of the 4 joints were obeyed. In the smooth joint with upper
reinforcement the cracks were in the range of the expected 0.3mm which are usually
allowed by the codes for structures not exposed to rain. However, in the rough joint,
without upper reinforcement, the cracks of 0.5mm are too wide. This underlines the
importance of a constructive upper reinforcement for the limitation and distribution of
cracks.

406
Figure 6b shows the cracks at 4,3-times service load, that is 86kN, that is shortly before
failure. At the slab joints the crack widths remain small, at the support joints they
become large. In spite of the large cracks at the supports, the slab still behaved as a
bending slab and finally failed by yielding of the lower (bending) reinforcement (figure
7).
A: crack, width = 0.30mm / length = 160mm A: crack 0.5mm / 170mm A: crack, width = 6mm / length = 180mm A: crack 8mm / 190mm
B: crack, width = 0.35mm / length = 150mm B: crack 0.55mm / 180mm B: crack, width = 6mm / length = 180mm B: crack 8mm / 190mm

smooth joint rough joint smooth joint rough joint


upper reinforcement no upper reinforcement upper reinforcement no upper reinforcement

front side A: crack 0.1mm / 100mm A: crack 0.15mm / 130mm front side A: crack 0.40mm / 140mm A: crack 0.50mm / 150mm
back side B: crack 0.1mm / 100mm B: crack 0.15mm / 130mm back side B: crack 0.35mm / 120mm B: crack 0.45mm / 140mm

figure 6a) cracks at service load b) cracks before failure

figure 7: shear slab after failure

4. Shear Slab

For a short where the load is predominately shear slab on both sides anchored at the
support, the design according to the 8 above mentioned standards was also performed.
Between two stiff, prefabricated supports a one-span slab of 2m length and 1m breadth
was cast. The lower reinforcement is spliced at the supports, the splice reinforcement
bars are anchored into the supports by adhesive bond (figure 8).
200
25 25
150
F F
cast in place
smooth joint rough joint
upper reinforcement upper reinforcement
20

100
50

100 50
support support
figure 8: geometry of shear slab

407
The slab itself was designed according to DIN1045 for a service load of 2x30kN. The
lower slab reinforcement consisted of bars of a diameter of 6mm with a spacing of 15cm.
The connecting reinforcement at the supports was designed according to the shear /
friction model of ACI 318-89 respectively NZS 3101. 6 bars with diameter 6mm were
also used on each side. The anchorage length was 14cm for the smooth joint and 11cm
for the rough joint. The splice length in the slab was 22cm.

During the test the forces were increased 5-times from 2x2kN to the calculated service
load of 2x30kN, held for 10 minutes and again decreased. The reached maximum load of
351.7kN (338kN piston force plus 13.7kN dead load of the load introduction parts) is
5.9-times the service load of 2x30kN. At maximum load a crack appeared in 40cm
distance from the left support and the force decreased to 210kN. Short time after that the
slab sheared down at the smooth support on the left side. The load-displacement curve
(figure 9) clearly shows the brittle shear failure. Therefore it seems logical that the
reached safety factor of 5.9 is higher than that reached with the bending slab.
piston force [KN]

320 entire force 2 F =


280
piston force + 13.7 kN
dead load of load
240 introduction parts
200

160

120

80
service load
40

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 displacement [mm]
figure 9: load-displacement curve of shear slab

Figure 10 shows the results of the crack measurements after 5-times loading to the
service load of 60kN. A means the front side, B is the back side of the slab. With
maximum 0,05mm the cracks are much smaller than the allowed value of 0,3mm in this
case.
front side A: crack, width = 0.03mm / length = 130mm
back side B: crack, width = 0.05mm / length = 50mm

smooth joint rough joint

A: crack 0.05mm / 90mm


B: crack 0.03mm / 30mm

figure 10: cracks in shear slab at service load

408
Figure 11 shows the specimen after shear failure of the reinforcement at the left side
support. Even just before failure, at a total load of 340kN, only very little cracking could
be observed. The crack openings were 0.6mm at the smooth joint (left side, where failure
occurred) and 0.1mm at the rough joint. Only one additional crack appeared 30cm from
the left side support shortly before failure. Its opening was 0.5mm. As seen in the load-
displacement diagram (figure 9), the failure was brittle without any prior announcement
by excessive deformations.

figure 11: shear slab after failure

5. Conclusions

In many applications the use of post-installed reinforcement can substantially simplify


the construction of shear connections between concrete elements. The reasons may for
example be that the connecting reinforcement can be placed exactly where it is required,
that installation in the part which is first cast was forgotten, that reinforcement bars
sticking out of a wall or slab are not desired or that the connection has to be made in a
renovation of the structure, i.e. that it was not planned from the beginning. Two possible
applications are shown in figure 12.

figure 12a: connection to diaphragm wall b: widening of a bridge slab

409
The investigations presented here lead to the conclusion, that for simplifying the work on
construction site the transmission of shear loads can be done with post-installed
reinforcement bars bonded in with a suitable mortar. The common design rules from the
applicable codes can be used, because the post-installed bars work like cast-in.

In order to avoid excessive cracks in the joints, sufficient constructive reinforcement


bars limiting and distributing the cracks should be installed.

References

1. Randl, N.: Untersuchungen zur Kraftübertragung zwischen Neu- und Altbeton bei
unterschiedlichen Fugenrauhigkeiten. Dissertation. Univeristät Innsbruck, 1997.
2. Connections for Concrete Overlays. Hilti Fastening Technology Manual B2.3.
issue 7/97.

410
DESIGN OF ANCHORAGES WITH BONDED ANCHORS
UNDER TENSION LOAD
Bernhard Lehr, Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Bonded anchor systems (anchors bonded into concrete with the aid of chemical and non-
chemical components) have been used for about thirty years. Their load bearing
behavior and design have been intensively studied during the past years.
To investigate the behavior of bonded anchors about 1200 tension tests with single
anchors and about 350 tests with anchor groups have been performed at the Universtiy
of Stuttgart to check the influence of main parameters on the failure load. Finite
elemente analysis were caried out to study the load behavior of anchor groups.
In this article the finite elemente simulations on anchor groups are presented.
Furthermore the results of group tests and tests near the edge are shown and compaired
with the finete elemente simulations.
Based on the numerical and experimental results a design model for anchor groups and
anchors near the edge is proposed.

1. Introduction

Modern fastening technique is increadingly employed for the transfer of concentrated


loads into concrete structures. Cast-in-place-systems (which are placed in the formwork
before casting the concrete) and post-installed-systems (which are installed in hardened
concrete) are common. Recently bonded anchors are often employed.

The load diplacement behavior of single anchors were investigated by Meszaros [1].
Several influences on the load capacity of chemical anchors (drill-hole-cleaning, wet
concrete, product, concrete compression strength, cracked concrete) were tested.

411
In order to understand the group effect of quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors an
extensive numerical investigation and a series of experiments were performed. The
studied specimens were adhesive anchors of the injection type based on resin mortar
anchored in a concrete block and subjected to tensile loading. Quadruple anchor groups
were considered. The geometry of these anchor groups is given in Fig. 1. Furthermore
numerous tests with anchor groups with bonded anchors and bonded anchors at the edge
were performed.

Figure 1 - Geometry of quadruple group anchors

2. Numerical simulation of quadruple anchor groups

Totally 32 cases were calculated. The anchors diameters were 8mm, 12 mm and 20 mm.
The analyzed cases are listed in Table 1 in which the calculated failure loads and failure
modes are given. The embedment depth was variant from 48 to 240 mm (from 4d to
20d) and the spacing between anchors from 48 to 240 mm (from 0,2 hef to 2,5 hef). In
addition calculations of single anchors were performed. The total depth of the specimen
was hef + 188 mm, which corresponds to the value used in the experiments.

The three dimensional numerical analysis were performed with the program MASA [2]
[3]. Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the specimen is simulated. The simulated system
includes the steel anchors, the adhesive mortar and the concrete block. The steel anchor

412
is assumed as a linear elastic material with Young´s modulus E = 210000 N/mm2 and
Poisson´s ration v = 0.3. The adhesive mortar is simulated by a special interface model
with shear strength of 16 N/mm2, Young´s modulus E = 2000 N/mm2 and Poisson´s
ration v = 0.
Table 1 - Numerical studies and failure of quadruple anchor groups

Anchor Embedment hef / d Spacing s s / hef Failure


diameter d depth hef [ -- ] [mm] [ -- ]
[mm] [mm]
8 96 12 96 1,0 CCB
144 18 48 0,33 CC
96 0,67 FPO
144 1,0 B
216 1,5 B
160 20 160 1,0 B
12 48 4 48 1,0 CC
96 2,0 CC
144 1,5 CC
192 2,0 CCB
96 8 48 0,5 CC
96 1,0 CCB
144 1,5 CCB
192 2,0 B
240 2,5 B
144 12 48 0,33 CC
96 0,66 CCB
144 1,0 FPO
216 1,5 B
192 16 48 0,25 CCB
96 0,5 FPO
144 0,75 FPO
192 1,0 B
240 20 48 0,2 CCB
96 0,4 FPO
144 0,6 B
240 1,0 B
20 144 7,2 96 0,67 CC
144 1,0 FPO
180 1,33 B
216 1,50 B
240 1,67 B

413
The concrete is modeled by the microplane model and the material parameters are taken
from the average data of the experiments [2] with Young´s modulus E = 30000 N/mm2,
Poisson´s ration v = 0.2, tension strength ft = 2.4N/mm2, compression strength fc = 23
N/mm2 and fracture energy Gf = 0.1 N/mm2. The load was applied at the top end of the
steel anchor. Displacement control was used in order to get the post peak load-
displacement curve. A fixed boundary condition, corresponding to support lines in
experiments, is applied on the no-symmetry edges at the loaded side of the specimen
(see Fig. 2).

Figure 2 - Finite element mesh with boundary conditions


Concrete cone failure ( CC) Pullout failure ( PO)

Concrete cone and bond failure ( CCB) False pullout failure ( FPO)

Figure 3 - Failure modes observed in the numerical analysis

In the calculations four types of failure modes were obtained which are shown in Figure
3 and listed in Table 1 as concrete cone failure (CC), bond failure (B), combined
concrete cone and bond failure (CCB) and false pullout failure (FPO). The false pullout

414
failure is characterized by cracks which initiated at the end of the anchors, propagated
towards each other and connected at peak load. Because the concrete around the outside
of the anchors is strong enough to carry the applied load the final failure mode is a bond
failure, which looks like a pullout failure but the loading capacity is much smaller than
with a real pullout failure. Therefore this type of failure is called “false pullout failure”.
A stress analysis at the interface between mortar and concrete around the anchor
perimeters revealed that the shear stresses at the part of the perimeter towards the
neighboring anchors are much smaller than the shear stresses at the opposite side of the
anchor. This can be explained by the crack between the anchors which does not allow to
transfer tensile force into the bottom part of the specimen. Another reason for the lower
shear stresses at the perimeter between anchors is tensile stresses occurring in the
concrete between anchors which reduce the shear strength. These smaller shear stresses
at peak load at the perimeter towards neighboring anchors explain the reduced failure
load in case of pullout failure, which was observed in many experiments [2].

In order to study the group effect the calculated results are presented in Fig. 4. Plotted is
the ration between calculated failure loads of groups and 4 times the calculated failure
loads of single anchor with the same embedment depth as a function of the spacing. The
group effect can be clearly observed. In the case of spacing s = 0 the failure load of the
group should be the failure load of a single anchor. When the spacing is s = 4 d, the
failure load of the group is 2.5 times the failure load of the single anchor. With s = 16 d
the load capacity of four single anchors is available. With the critical spacings scr1 and
scr2 like shown in Fig. 5 a model from FE-calculation is found.

Nu,group / N u,single [ -- ] Nu,group / N u,single [ -- ]

4,0 4,0

3,0 3,0
M12-hef = 240mm
2,0 M12-hef = 192mm 2,0
M12-hef = 144mm
M20
M12-hef = 96mm
1,0 1,0 M12
M12-hef = 48mm
M8
0,0 0,0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
s/d [ -- ] s/d [ -- ]

Figure 4 - Ratio between the failure load of an anchor group and a single anchor about
the ration spacing to diameter from FE analysis

415
Nu,group / Nu,single [ -- ] s cr1 s cr2

4,0

3,0 4•N u,single

2,0

1,0

0,0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24

s /d [ -- ]

Figure 5 - Model for the influence of spacing of quadruple fastenings with bonded
anchors according to results of FE calculations
3. Experimental studies

To control the FE analysis a lot of experiments with quadruple fastenings were


performed. Varied was the anchor diameter (d = 8 / 12 / 16 / 24 mm), the embedment
depth (hef from 4 d to 16 d) and the spacing (s from 0.33 to 4 d). Tests were carried out
in concrete with compression strength fcc ~ 25 N/mm2 and fcc ~ 55 N/mm2. Two
injection mortars were used. Single anchors with the same embedment depth like the
quadruple fastenings were tested too normally in the same slabs.

In Fig. 6 the relation between the failure load for the quadruple fastenings and the
single anchors (meanvalues) is plotted about the relation between the spacing and the
embedment depth s / hef and about the relation between the spacing and the diameter d /
hef. In Fig. 6 is to recognize, that with s = 16 d the critical spacing is found. At this
spacing the failure loads of quadruple fastening are equal to four times the failure load
of single anchors.
Nu4 / 4 • N uE [ -- ] Nu4 / 4 • N uE [ -- ]

4,0 mortar HH 4,0 mortar SP

3,0 3,0

2,0 2,0
hef = 192mm hef = 144mm
hef = 144mm hef = 120mm
1,0 hef = 96mm 1,0 hef = 96mm
hef = 48mm hef = 48mm

0,0 0,0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
s / d [ -- ] s / d [ -- ]

416
Figure 6 - Ratio between the failure load of an anchor group and a single anchor about
the ration spacing to diameter from experiments

4. Model for the design of bonded anchors in non-cracked concrete

Design models are given by Eligehausen, Mallée, Rehm [3], Cook [4] and others. At the
University of Stuttgart the following design model has been developed to calculate the
failure loads of fastenings with bonded anchors under centric tension loads. The model
is valid for fastenings with single anchors and anchor groups far away from edges, at
the edge and in a corner. The member thickness must be h ≥ 2hef to prevent splitting
failure.
A
N u = ψ s, N • c0,N • N u0 (1)
Ac ,N

N u,0 m = τ u,m • π • d • hef (2)

with τu,m = mean value of bond strength from tests


d = anchor diameter
hef = embedment depth
Ac,N = actual projected area at the concrete surface assuming the
fracture surface of the individual anchors
(examples see Fig. 8)
Ac0,N = projected area of one anchor not affected by edges or
overlapping stress cones at the concrete surface
scr, N = (16d)
2 2
=
ψ s,N = 0, 7 + 0,3 (c / c cr, N ) < 1,0
c cr,N = 8d
scr, N = 16d

This design model produces a good agreement of calculated failure loads with results of
tests. In Fig. 6 the measured failure loads of quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors
are plotted as a function of the calculated failure loads. A similar level of agreement
between test and calculation has been found in other cases (double fastenings, fastenings
at the edge).

417
Nu,test [kN]
350
300
scr,N = 16d
250

200
150
100
X = 10,2
50 V = 23,6%
n = 271
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Nu,calc [kN]
Figure 7 - Comparison of test results with predicted capacities for four-anchor-groups

If the diameter of the anchors is large and the bond strength of the mortar is high, the
failure loads predicted according Eq. (1) will be higher than predicted according to the
CC-method [6] (see Fig. 7). Quadruple tests with bonded anchors with diameter d = 24
mm are carried out. The bond strength was 12 N/mm2 (mortar HH) and 20 N/mm2
(mortar ED).

418
16d

single anchor:

16d
o
Ac,N = (16d)2

single anchor
at the edge :
8d
Ac,N = (c+8d) •16d
8d
c Š 8d

c 8d

double fastening
8d at the edge :

Ac,N = (c+s1 +8d) • 16d


8d
s Š 16d

c Š 8d
c s1 8d

quadruple fastening
8d at the edge :

Ac,N = (c+s1 +8d)


s2 • (16d +s2)
s Š 16d
8d c Š 8d

c s1 8d

Figure 8 - Design model for bonded anchors

419
Nu [kN]
1600
headed anchor

1200 bonded anchor

800

d = 20 mm
400 τ u = 16 N/mm2
hef = 240 mm
0
0 200 400 600 800
s [mm]
Figure 9 - Comparison of predicted capacities for anchor-group with for anchors

In Fig. 10 the failure loads of the tests with anchors M24 are plotted. It can be
recognized, that the failure loads of these tests are lower than the failure loads according
Eq. (1). Therefore concrete cone failure must be checked. If the concrete cone failure
load predicted by the CC-method is lower than the calculated value according Eq. (1)
and (2), this load will be correct.

Nu [kN] 8d = 192 16d = 384 3hef = 864


2000
τu = 20 N/mm2
1600 headed anchors

1200 bonded-
anchors
τu = 12 N/mm2
800
d = 24 mm
400 mortar ED hef = 288 mm = 12d
mortar HH f CC = 30 N/mm2
0
0 250 500 750 1000

s [mm]

420
Figure 10 - Failure loads of quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors, d = 24 mm, hef
= 12d = 288 mm
The failure load with fastenings of bonded anchors must be limited by the concrete cone
failure load of headed anchors calculated according to the CC-method (Eq. (3)).

N u, m = min (Nu,bond ; N u, conc )


(3)
N u,conc = N u,conc according to CC − methode for headed anchors

5. Acknowledgement

The primary funding for this research was provided by fischerwerke, Upat and Hilti.
The support of these manufactures is very appreciated. Special thanks are also according
to Yijun Li who spent many hours in preparing the FE calculations.

6. Conclusions

In order to find a model for calculating the average failure loads of fastenings with
bonded anchors FE-analysis and tests were done. Using the uniformed bond model to
calculate the failure load of single anchors and the critical spacing scr = 16d a good
agreement between tests and calculations could found. However, the failure load of
fastenings with bonded anchors must be limited by the concrete failure load calculated
according CC-method for headed anchors.

7. References

[1] MESZAROS, J., Tragverhalten von Verbunddübeln im ungerissenen und


gerissenen Beton, Dissertation, Universität Stuttgart, Germany, 2001
[2] OZBOLT, J., LI, Y.-J., KOZAR, I., Microplane model for concrete with
relaxed kinematic constraint, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38,
2683-2711, (2001)
[3] OZBOLT, J., and BAZANT, Z.P., “Numerical Smeared Fracture Analysis:
Nonlocal Microcrack Interaction Approach”, IJNME, 39(4), p. 635-661, 1996.
[4] ELIGEHAUSEN, R., MALLEE, R., Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und
Mauerwerksbau , Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, Germany, 1997.
[5] COOK, R., Behavior of Chemical Bonded Anchors, Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 119, No. 9, September 1993
[6] FUCHS, W. ELIGEHAUSEN, R., Das CC-Verfahren für die Berechnung der
Betonausbruchlast von Verankerungen, Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 90 (1995),
H. 1, S. 6 - 9; H.2, S. 38 - 44; H.3, S. 73 - 76.
[7] LEHR, B., Tragverhalten von Gruppenbefestigungen und Befestigungen am
Bauteilrand mit Verbunddübeln unter zentrischer Belastung, Dissertation,
Universität Stuttgart, Germany, 2001

421
LOAD BEARING BEHAVIOR AND DESIGN OF SINGLE
ADHESIVE ANCHORS
Juraj Meszaros, Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In the present paper the results of tests investigating the load bearing behavior of
chemical anchors used for fastenings to concrete are presented and discussed. The load-
displacement behavior of this class of anchors depends on the properties of the base
material, as well as on the installation procedures. To study the influence of the
installation procedures and the material parameters on load-displacement behavior,
nearly 2000 tests with single fastenings were performed at the University of Stuttgart.
Stress distribution along the anchor rod was determined by experimental tests, as well as
by FE analysis. To investigate the failure mechanism of bonded anchors, axisymmetric
FE models were developed. Numerical analysis was carried out using a nonlocal mixed
formulation of the microplane model for concrete.

1. Introduction

Adhesive anchor systems composed of chemical and non-chemical components are


increasingly employed as fastenings to concrete. The bond behavior is sensitive to a
number of factors including the chemical components in the adhesive mortar and the
different boundary conditions created by the installation procedures. To investigate the
behavior of bonded anchors, about 2000 tension tests with single anchors were
performed at the University of Stuttgart. The sensitivity of the anchor behavior to the
concrete strength, the cleaning of the drill hole and the humidity of the concrete has been
studied. Furthermore, the geometric parameters of anchors and the influence of concrete
cracking on the load-displacement behavior have been investigated.

To better understand the failure mechanism of bonded anchors, Finite Element (FE)
analysis with varied anchor geometry (embedment depth, anchor diameter), concrete

422
confinement (confined and unconfined) and concrete strength (low and high) has been
performed. The bond stress along the anchor length was determined from the difference
of the axial loads.
In a 2D-analysis a nonlocal microplane model was used. The top of the anchor was
loaded by described displacements. The applied microplane material model [2] is a
general macroscopical material model for friction-cohesive, quasi-brittle materials. The
model is macroscopical, i.e. it does not model the material on the microstructural level.
To prevent a localization of damage thus creating a zero volume element, the model was
coupled with a so called localization limiting procedure (nonlocal concept).

In the present paper a small part of the numerical and experimental results for a single
adhesive fastener are presented and discussed.

2. Numerical analysis

2.1 Investigated parameters and material properties


The aim of the FE analysis was to study the failure mechanism of bonded anchors.
Furthermore, the influence of the geometric characteristics of the anchors, as well as the
influence of the concrete strength on the ultimate load, was investigate.

The investigated parameters were as follows:

Load-bearing behavior Influence factors

• failure mechanism • embedment depth hef

• bond stress along the • anchor diameter da


anchor rod
• confining of the tension loads

• load-displacement • concrete strength


behavior

The study was carried out for an axisymmetric concrete element. The specimen was
loaded by controlling the axial displacement on the small load transfer zone on the top
of the anchor rod. The analysis was performed using four node quadralateral elements
with four integration points. The region close to the bond zone where load transfer
occured was modeled with a finer mesh with. The size of the elements increased moving
away from the load transfer zone. In addition to the concrete constitutive law, a
governing parameter in the nonlocal analysis is the so-called characteristic length [3]. In

423
the present study the characteristic length was set to lch = 5 mm. For the C20/25 and
C45/55 concrete member the following material properties were used:

Material properties Concrete Concrete


C20/25 C45/55
Uniaxial tensile strength ft MPa 2.4 3.8
Uniaxial compressive strength fc MPa 23.0 45.1
Fracture energy GF N/mm 0.15 0.12
Modulus of elasticity E MPa 30000 36000
Poisson’s ratio ν - 0.15 0.20

Table 1: Material properties of concrete members

2.2 Numerical results


For the bonded fastenings in unconfined concrete, two different failure modes were
obtained. Failure of bonded anchors with embedment depth hef/d= 4 occured by a
concrete cone failure (Fig. 1). Bonded anchors with embedment depth hef/d≥ 8 failed by
a combination of concrete cone failure and anchor pull-out (Fig. 2). In calculations with
confined concrete, share failure in the bond layer and in the first concrete element layer
was observed [4].
In the middle of the anchor embedment depth, nearly constant bond stress for the
confined anchors was obtained (Fig. 3). For the anchors in unconfined concrete a slight
increase in the bond stress along the anchor length occured. The calculated load-
displacement curves show nearly the same behavior as the experimental results (Fig. 4).

424
Output Set: masa2 v48w070
Contour: Avrg.E11 stra.

0.15

0.125

0.1

0.075

0.05

0.025

0.
Y

Z X

Figure 1- Failure of M12 bonded anchors hef / d= 4

OutputSet:masa2v144w060
Contour:Avrg.E11stra.

0.15

0.125

0.1

0.075

0.05

0.025

0.
Y

Z X

Figure 2- Failure of M12 bonded anchors hef / d= 12

425
30
M12 /144-B25-confined
(Concrete Element: h= 400 mm, b= 600 mm)
25

[N/mm²]
hef= 144 [mm]
0.40Fu
20
0.812Fu
1.0Fu
15
Bond Stress 0.89Fu (post-peak)

10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Normalized depth hef /d [-]

Figure 3- Stress distribution along the normalized depth

280
hef/d= 32
240 hef/d= 24
hef/d= 16
Load F [kN]

200
hef/d= 12
160 hef/d= 8
hef/d= 4
120
B25
M12
80 confined

40

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

Displacement s [mm]

Figure 4- Load-Displacement curves

426
To determine the influence of confined and unconfined concrete on the failure load,
calculations with anchors of different embedment depths were carried out. The anchor
diameter and the concrete strength, as well as the member geometry, were kept constant.
In Figure 5 the relationships between the ultimate bond strength (τ= Nu / π·d·hef) for
confined and unconfined calculations is plotted as a function of the relative embedment
depth. As expected, when the normalized embedment depth increases, the relative bond
strength between confined and unconfined anchors approach 0.90 to 0.95.
The results of FE analyse shows practically no Influence of the anchor length on the
ultimate bond strength. In contrast to this increasing anchor diameter leads to the
decrease of the ultimate bond strength (Fig. 6).
In the Figure 7 the influence of the concrete strength on the ultimate bond strength is
plotted. Concrete with uniaxial compressive strengths fc = 23 MPa and fc = 45.1 MPa,
were used. Influence of the concrete strength on the ultimate load of bonded anchors is
low.

1,5
τu,unconfined / τu,confined [-]

1,0

y = 0,7962x0,0493
y = 0,7683x0,0578
0,5
M12, B25
M12, B55

0,0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36
hef / d [-]

Figure 5- Relationship between confined and unconfined bearing of the tension loads for
M12 bonded anchors as a function of relative embedment depth.

427
24
hef/d=4
hef/d=8
20 hef/d=12

τu [N/mm 2] y = 31,423x-0,3167
16

12
B25
unconfined
8
4 8 12 16 20
Anchor diameter [mm]

Figure 6- Influence of the anchor diameter on the ultimate bond strength

1,4
y = 0,3706x0,3166
...für hef/d=4
τu / τu (fc=23 N/mm2) [-]

y = 0,5849x0,1711
...für hef/d=8
1,2
y = 0,8188x0,0637
...für hef/d=24

1,0
M12, hef=48 mm
M12, hef=96 mm
0,8 M12, hef=144 mm
M12, hef=192 mm
M12, hef=288 mm
unconfined M12, hef=384 mm

0,6
23 45
2
fc [N/mm ]

Figure 7- Influence of the concrete strength on the ultimate bond strength

428
3. Influence of installation procedure

3.1 Influence of drill-hole cleaning


Adhesive anchors transfer load from a steel rod through an adhesive layer, into the
concrete along the bonded surface. The bond strength between the adhesive and
concrete surface can be adversely influenced by a number of factors. In particular the
drill hole cleaning or a wet drill-hole surface can influence the bond capacity of
chemical anchors. To study the influence of installation related factors, approximately
400 tests with single anchors in uncracked concrete were performed.
Figure 8 shows the ratios of the bond strength in an uncleaned hole to the average values
for well-cleaned holes for various adhesive products [4]. Capsule-type bonded anchors
(product 1) and injection-type bonded anchors (product 2, 3 and 4) were used. The
figure shows that capsule-type bonded anchors installed by hammering and rotation are
less sensitive to drill hole cleaning than injection type bonded anchors. The bond
strength variation can be explained by the following observation. During the installation
of capsule-type bonded anchors, the drill dust along the wall of uncleaned drill hole is
mixed into the mortar. During the installation of injection-type bonded anchors,
however, the loose concrete particles along the surface of the drill hole can build a
boundary with decreased bond strength. A load reduction of about 20% to 60% compare
to the well-cleaned holes was observed for injection-type anchors. In the experimental
investigations of Cook and Konz [5] for 20 different adhesive products applied to an
uncleaned holes, the average relative bond strength were about 71% of their respective
baselines. The average coefficient of variation of was about 20 %.

3.2 Influence of wet concrete


Anchors installed in “wet concrete” (i.e. concrete saturated with water prior to hole
boring) or installed in “damp holes” (i.e. holes bored prior to concrete wetting) show for
most products a significant decrease in capacity compared to installation in dry concrete.
For anchors installed in “completely submarged conditions” (i.e. under water
installation) a larger reduction of the capacity was observed. The influence of wet
concrete on the bond strength, however, is product dependent. After investigations by
Cook and Konz [5] for twenty different products installed in damp holes, the average
relative bond strengths were 77% of their respective baselines, with an average
coefficient of variation of 23%.
Figure 9 shows the bond strength of bonded anchors installed a the concrete that was
stored for 7 days under water compared to the capacity measured in dry concrete [4]. In
the tests, capsule-type bonded anchors with vinylester based mortar (product 1) and
injection-type anchors (product 2 to 5) were used. The bond strength in wet concrete
was reduced by as much as 60% compared to the dry hole strength. In improperly
cleaned, wet drill holes, a further reduction of the bond strength must be expected.

429
1,2

1,0
[-]
τu,uncleaned / τu,cleaned
0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0
1 2 3 4
Product

Figure 8- Relation between bond strength of bonded anchors installed


in cleaned and uncleaned drill holes, after [4]

1,2

1,0
τu,wet / τu,dry [-]

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0
1 2 3 4 5
Product

Figure 9- Relation between bond strength of bonded anchors


installed in wet and dry concrete, after [4]

430
4. Design of single bonded anchors

Present design models for bonded anchors are given by Eligehausen, Malée, Rehm [1],
Cook et al. [6] and others. Based on the results of theoretical and experimental
investigations, a design model with a constant distribution of bond stress along the
embedment depth (uniform bond model) to calculate failure loads of fastenings with
bonded anchors under centric loads has been developed. Mean values of bond strength
τu take the characteristic mortar behavior into consideration. A design model for
fastenings with anchor groups far away from edges, at an edge and in a corner is given
in [7]. This design model is valid for embedment depths from 8d ≤ hef ≤ 12d. To prevent
splitting failure, the member thickness must be h ≥ 2hef. The failure load of single
bonded anchors far away from edges can be calculated by the Eq. (1).

N u0 = τ u ⋅ π ⋅ d ⋅ hef (1)

where τ u= mean value of bonded strength


d= anchor diameter
hef= embedment depth

This design model for single bonded anchors shows a good agreement of calculated
failure loads with experimental results (Fig. 10).

140
M8, M12, M16 HH,SP,UU,WW
120
hef/d= 4 to 12
100 unconfined
Nu,test [kN]

80 n= 345
x= 0,98
60
V= 16,4 %
40
Nu,calc= τu*π*d*hef
20 τu= f(d, fcc ,System)

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Nu,calc [kN]

Figure 10- Failure loads of tests with single bonded anchors versus
calculated failure loads according to Eq.(1), after [4].

431
5. Conclusions
The present paper deals with the behavior of single bonded anchors. Results from
numerical analyses are presented to help illustrate the failure mechanism of bonded
anchors. In the numerical analyses, the influence of different anchor geometries and
concrete strengths on the failure load has been investigated. The results shows
practically no influence of the anchor length on the ultimate bond strength. With
increasing anchor diameter, a decrease of the ultimate bond strength was observed.
Additionally the influence of the concrete strength on the ultimate load is small. This has
also been show by experimental tests.
The influence of external factors, such as drill-hole cleaning and wet concrete, on the
load-bearing behavior, is discussed. These influences shown to be product dependent. In
a particular for injection-type bonded anchors, a significant reduction of the bond
strength can be expected.
Based on the results of theoretical and experimental investigations, a design model with
constant distribution of bond stress along the embedment depth is presented. The
calculated failure loads for single bonded anchors according to the presented design
model are shown to be in good agreement with experimental studies.

6. Acknowledgement
The primary funding for this research was provided by the fischerwerke, Hilti, Upat.
The support of these manufacturers is very much appreciated. Special thanks are also
accorded to Matthew Hoehler who reviewed the paper.

7. References
1. Eligehausen, R., MaléeE, R., Rehm, G., “Befestigungstechnik, Betonkalender
1997 ”, Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, Germany, 1997.
2. Bazant; Z.P., “Size Effect in Blunt Fracture: Concrete, Rock and Metal”, JEM,
ASCE, 110(4), p. 518-535, 1984.
3. Ozbolt, J., and Bazant, Z.P., “Numerical Smeared Fracture Analysis: Nonlocal
Microcrack Interaction Approach”, IJNME, 39(4), p. 635-661, 1996.
4. Meszaros, J., “Tragverhalten von Einzelverbunddübeln unter zentrischer
Kurzzeitbelastung”, Dissertation, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen,
Universität Stuttgart, 2001.
5. Cook, R.A. and Konz, R.C., “Factors Influencing Bond Strength of Adhesive
Anchors”, ACI Structural Journal, Jan.-Feb. 2001, p. 76-86, 2001.
6. Cook, R.A., Kunz, J., Fuchs, W. and Konz, R.C., “Behavior and Design of
Single Adhesive Anchors under Tensile Load in Uncracked Concrete”, ACI
Structural Journal, Jan.-Feb. 1998, p. 5-26, 1998.
7. Lehr, B., “Tragverhalten von Gruppenbefestigungen und Befestigungen am
Bauteilrand mit Verbundankern unter zentrischer Belastung”, Dissertation,
Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, 2001.

432
REBAR ANCHORAGE IN CONCRETE WITH INJECTIONS
ADHESIVE

Martin Reuter*, Thomas Greppmeir*, Fritz Münger**


*Hilti Deutschland GmbH, Germany
**Hilti Corporation, Liechtenstein

Abstract
Subsequently installed reinforcement bar connections with injection adhesive have at all
times been applied, although design rules and installation have not been clearly regulated
in any way until recently.
This status basically changed through the issue of the first general construction super-
visory authority approval No. Z-21.8-1648 on 7th February 2000, for subsequently in-
stalled reinforcement bar connections with an injection adhesive [1].
This paper describes the regulations of the first approval by the Deutsches Institut für
Bautechnik, Berlin, for the subsequently installed reinforcement bar connections with
injection adhesive and demonstrates the requirements of the planning civil engineer, the
jobsite personnel and the companies in theory and practice.

1. Introduction

For many years, i.e. post-installed rebar connections have been made to in-place con-
crete components for restoration and renovation work, extensions to existing buildings
and to strengthen reinforced-concrete structures. Parts cast in when concreting (inserts)
call for careful prior planning before the concrete is poured, i.e. socket joints, rebar
screw connections [3, 4, 5 and 6]. To date, the design of rebar connections post installed
with construction adhesive, including their spacing, edge distance and installation (hole
cleaning and filling), has been specified solely in manufacturers‘ instructions and with
different quality levels, even though such connections are subject to construction
authority supervision in many cases.
This situation changed fundamentally when the first general construction supervisory
authority approvals were granted for rebar connections post installed with injection ad-
hesive [1, 7]. These approvals define examples of applications in reinforced concrete
construction. In addition, anchoring close to component edges is possible using sleeve /

433
socket joints or rebar screw connections. In this case, the tensile loads are transferred to
the existing reinforcement (overlap joint) or the base material (anchorage) via the bond.
In the first case, even heavy steel structures can be joined to concrete base material close
to the edge.

2. First general construction supervisory authority approval Z-21.8-1648

This approval [1] was granted in February 2000 and was granted new in November 2000
due to the extension of the rebar diameters 20 and 25 mm [2]. It provides the first rulings
on how to design rebar connections post installed with construction adhesive in Ger-
many. The rulings given in reinforced-concrete standards apply, i.e. those in DIN 1045
[8] and EC 2 [9]. Further details about the loadbearing behaviour of rebars post installed
with adhesive were published in [10] and [11]. Reinforcing steel of the BSt 500S grade,
as per DIN 488-1:1984-09 [12], may be used as well as steel with a general construction
supervisory authority approval, for example stainless-steel rebars [13 and 14] or rebars
with a subsequently cut thread [3, 4], with rolled thread [5] or with internal thread con-
nections [6]. Furthermore, the approval particularly stipulates the min. concrete
coverage, the min. rebar spacing, the min. and max. anchorage depths and the passive
fire prevention measures to be observed.

tensile load [kN]


lv = 30ds = 600 mm
200

160 lv = 15ds = 300 mm

120
lv = 10ds = 200 mm

80

diameter ds = 20 mm
40 concrete C20/25
BSt 500S, fyk,nom = 500 N/mm2

lb = 95 cm

0 5 10 15 20 Displacement [mm]

Fig.1: Load-displacement-diagram of rebars ds = 20mm installed with HIT-HY 150

The connections must be designed by an experienced structural designer who must pro-
duce verifiable calculations and work execution drawings / plans for the construction
site. The approval stipulates that certified companies must post install the rebars with
adhesive. These companies must have trained, skilled construction site personnel and the

434
equipment necessary for post installing rebars with adhesive. This paper explains the
rulings in the approval [1, 2] on making a post-installed rebar connection with injection
adhesive and provides information about the requirements to be met by the designers,
skilled construction site personnel and work execution companies.

2.1 Minimum concrete coverage and drilling the rebar hole


The engineer responsible must design rebar connections post-installed with adhesive like
cast-in rebars according to valid reinforced-concrete standards. In addition, the approval
specifies the min. concrete coverage.
The concrete coverage is necessary to ensure that there is sufficient concrete around the
rebar to take up bond stresses resulting from the interplay of forces at the rebar ribs, and
also to protect the rebar from corrosion and heat in the event of a fire. Also, the min.
concrete coverage specified in this approval ensures that no concrete spalling takes place
due to impacts, shockwaves, etc. set up when producing the rebar holes. Basically, the
approval covers the hammer drilling and pneumatic drilling methods of producing rebar
holes.
Impacts, shockwaves, etc. of various strengths are caused by the different drilling me-
thods by their very definition. This leads to the basic figure of 30 mm as the min. con-
crete coverage for hammer drilling and 50 mm for pneumatic drilling. In order to ob-
serve the specified concrete coverage at the end of the hole too, the predetermined di-
mension amounts to 6% or 8% of the depth drilled, depending on the drilling method. If
a drilling aid is used, the dimension predetermined for both drilling methods may be
reduced to 2% of the hole depth. The drilling aid is a device intended to ensure that the
hole is drilled parallel to the building component surface or edge.

Fig. 2: Using of the drilling aid for holes near to the concrete edge

435
This means that the min. concrete coverage must be 9 cm at the entrance of a hole one
metre deep produced by hammer drilling. This figure reduces to 5 cm if a drilling aid is
used.

with drilling aid without drilling aid


cmin = 3 cm + 0,02 ⋅ lv cmin = 3 cm + 0,06 ⋅ lv
cmin = 3 cm + 0,02 ⋅ 100cm cmin = 3 cm + 0,06 ⋅ 100cm
cmin = 5 cm cmin = 9 cm

100cm 100cm

5 cm
3 cm 3 cm 9 cm

Fig.3: Edge distance of rebar to be bonded in, ds = 20mm, rotary hammer drilling

2.2 Minimum rebar spacing and anchorage depths


The distance between rebars post installed with adhesive must be greater than 5 ds and at
least 50 mm according to [1, 2]. If not, there will be a risk of the holes overlapping and
of the adhesive seeping away into an other hole when it is injected.
The min. anchorage depths are given on principle in applicable reinforced-concrete stan-
dards. Furthermore, the diameter-related min. values in these standards are multiplied by
a factor of 1.5, as given in [1, 2].
Taking into account the stipulations in DIN 1045 [8] and in EC 2 [9], results in the ac-
tually required anchorage depths, which are, in fact, far greater than the anchorage
depths of metal anchors.

Fig. 4: Differences between anchor theority and reinforced concrete theority

436
2.3 Maximum anchorage depths
The max. anchorage depths are limited by the adhesive dispensers. According to [1, 2],
different dispensers are available for injecting HIT-HY 150 adhesive, i.e. a manual
MD2000 dispenser, a battery-powered BD2000 dispenser and a pneumatic P5000HY
dispenser. The max. anchorage depths given in [1, 2] are shown in fig. 5 according to
their dispensing capacities. During actual use, it soon becomes clear that users very
quickly comes up against limits when using the MD2000 manual dispenser. The dis-
penser powered by a 9.6-volt battery is much more suitable here because it enables ef-
fortless, speedy injection of the adhesive, independent of compressed air or power lines,
while ensuring a constant quality of the adhesive, even after work breaks. The 330-ml
foil cartridge used has the advantage of leaving a far smaller amount of waste after dis-
pensing the adhesive compared to hard cartridges.
Use of the pneumatic P5000HY dispenser and 1100-ml jumbo cartridge becomes mean-
ingful when anchorage depths are very large and many fastenings have to be made.

slapdia-
drilling diameter Maximum anchorage depth lv
meter
d0 dispensers
ds hammer pneumatic MD 2000
BD 2000 P5000HY
drilling drilling P3000HY
8 mm 12 mm 100 cm
10 mm 14 mm 100 cm
12 mm 16 mm 70 cm 115 cm
14 mm 18 mm 130 cm
16 mm 20 mm 150 cm
20 mm 25 mm 26 mm 50 cm 50 cm 200 cm
25 mm 32 mm 50 cm 50 cm 200 cm
Fig. 5: Maximum anchorage depths limited by dispensers

2.4 Passive fire prevention


If passive fire prevention requirements have to be met, the approval covers two cases,
namely rebar connections at right angles to the surface exposed to fire and those parallel
to it.

3. Design of rebar connections with a computer program

In the course of planning rebar connections, the structural engineers responsible produce
verifiable designs and drawings for the construction site (forming and rebar layout
drawings). Suitable software supports this design work in accordance with [1, 2]. It
implements the rules and regulations of reinforced-concrete standards and the approval
[1, 2] in practical reinforced-concrete construction for rebar anchoring and rebar overlap
joints.

437
4. Notes on installing rebars with adhesive

A key prerequisite for proper functioning of an injection adhesive is the micro-keying


action between hole wall and injection adhesive. Consequently, cleaning the entire
drilled hole and injecting the adhesive without bubbles are of major importance. Fig. 6
shows the exact cleaning process in accordance with [1, 2]. How to clean the rebar hole
is dealt with in depth when training jobsite personnel. If the cleaning process is
“forgotten“ - which must be regarded as pure negligence - the same effect takes place
after injection and curing of the adhesive in the hole as when intentionally spreading
flour on a baking tray - no bond results. Fig. 7 shows a hole being cleaned with a
compressed-air lance on a construction site at Mannheim, Germany. The very
considerable amount of drilling dust removed can be clearly seen.

Blow out hole 3 times


using compressed-air lance
from bottom of hole. Use oil-free
compressed-air ≥ 6 bar

Brush out hole 3 times


using round brush
with spindels

Blow out 3 times as a check


using compressed-air lance from
bottom of hole. Use oil-free
comoressed-air ≥ 6 bar

Fig. 6: Cleaning of the drilled hole Fig.7: Hole cleaning on a jobsite


using a compressed-air-lance

During a subsequent operation, HIT-HY 150 adhesive is injected, without air inclusions,
into the cleaned hole from the bottom upwards using a pressure build-up plug specially
developed for this purpose (fig. 8). Owing to the back pressure set up at the plug end-
face during injection, the mixer extension is gently but noticeably pushed out of the hole.
Prior to injection, a mark on the mixer extension is made to ensure that sufficient ad-
hesive is injected into the hole.
Immediately after sufficient adhesive has been injected, the rebar is pushed into its hole.
When the time for use / pot life, which is defined in [1, 2], has expired, the injection
adhesive begins to cure from the bottom of the hole upwards. It is impossible to push the
rebar into partially cured adhesive. In view of this, it is recommended that two people
inject the adhesive, especially when temperatures are high, to ensure that the work pro-
gresses quickly and smoothly. During the mentioned installer training, a time limit is set
for injecting the adhesive and a cartridge is also changed during this injection work.
Criteria for correct rebar installation are that the anchorage depth mark previously ap-
plied to the rebar aligns with the hole entrance and that some adhesive emerges from the
hole entrance after rebar insertion.

438
Fig. 8: Injection from the bottom
of the cleaned hole without
air inclusions

The individual parts, including drilling aid, required for rebar installation are contained
in a clearly set out, so-called rebar box .
The installation steps are recorded in an installation report . As a result, jobsite personnel
carrying out the work can describe and record the execution of the rebar connections,
and have this signed by the site manager. If the installation report is archived in con-
struction files, everyone responsible has proof at hand that the rebars were post installed
with adhesive in compliance with the approval.

5. Certified companies

Companies entrusted with this work according to [1, 2] require verification of their suit-
ability for making rebar connections post installed with adhesive from an independent
testing / inspection authority. Trained, skilled construction site personnel are required for
this purpose. Suitable training courses have been carried out throughout the country
since March 2000.

Fig.9: Rebar installer training: Fig. 10: Certification for installer


injection into plexiglas tube and company

439
Hilti engineers responsible for the training, to quote, are “Extremely competent and can
communicate the subject matter very well” [15]. After successfully completing this one-
day training course, participant receives a certificate with an unrestricted duration of
validity from an independent testing authority, for example the Universities of Stuttgart
and Dortmund and the Darmstadt Technical University. The company concerned must
prove they have the tools required for rebar installation and define a qualified manager
as well as a site manager. If these prerequisites can be fulfilled, the company fills out an
application form. The independent testing authority, which also certified the company‘s
installers, provides formal recognition.
Since the approvals [1, 2 and 7] were granted, as a result, only certified companies with
trained personnel have been the contacts where rebar connections post installed with
adhesive subject to construction authority supervision are concerned.

6. Typical application example

An example of implementing this pioneering achievement in reinforced-concrete con-


struction is the new construction of a diaphragm roof covering for the ice rink of the
Bundesleistungszentrum at Grefrath near Düsseldorf, Germany (fig. 11). Here, the
inserts responsible for taking up, i.e. anchoring, bending moments acting on the column
bases were wrongly installed. This would have resulted in the bases not being able to
take up the imposed bending moments to a sufficient degree. To solve this problem,
rebars of BSt 500S, ds = 25 mm, with an anchorage depth lv = 1.0 m were anchored in
the existing foundation and the steel columns fastened via a turned-on thread.

Fig. 11: Diaphragm roof covering on bending-resistant round steel columns

440
Apart of that the rebar anchorage with injection adhesive was extensively used on the
new Düsseldorf airport jobsite (airport 2000 plus).

7. Summary

The present method of post installing rebar connections was developed primarily to join
concrete building components. The basic idea is to smoothly tie up various well con-
sidered steps in planning and work execution. After due engineering consideration, this
method can also be applied to the connection of steel structures with concrete com-
ponents. In this case though, attention must be paid to the peculiarities of shear force
transfer and the transfer of tensile forces to the concrete. Bearing in mind the ever in-
creasing attention that is being paid to renovating and repairing existing buildings, the
approvals [1, 2 and 7] provide consulting engineers and the construction industry gen-
erally with an aid that permits rebars to be anchored reliably and in compliance with
construction supervision.

Reference literature
[1] DIBt approval Z-21.8-1648, issued 07.02.2000, valid until 28.02.2005:
Reinforcement connection with HIT-HY 150 Hilti injection adhesive
[2] DIBt approval Z-21.8-1648, issued 22.11.2000, valid until 28.02.2005:
Reinforcement connection with HIT-HY 150 Hilti injection adhesive
[3] DIBt approval Z-1.5-81, issued 25.03.1997, valid until 30.04.2002:
Coupling connection of reinforcing steel BSt 500S, nominal diameter: 12.0 to
28.0 mm “Reinforcement connection PH“
[4] DIBt approval Z-1.5-103, issued 01.08.1997, valid until 31.07.2002:
Mechanical connection of reinforcing steel BSt 500S, nominal diameter: 12 to 28
mm, by means of threaded coupling “Reinforcement screw connection HBS“
[5] DIBt approval Z-1.5-76, issued 24.04.1997, valid until 30.04.2002:
Threaded coupling connections and anchorage of reinforcing steel with thread-
like ribs BSt 500S-GEWI diameter: 12.0 to 32.0 mm
[6] DIBt approval Z-1.5-96, issued 26.01.1998, valid until 31.01.2003:
Mechanical connection of reinforcing steel BSt 500S by means of threaded
sleeves and coupling bolts, diameter: 8 to 32 mm „PFEIFER reinforcement screw
connections PH“
[7] DIBt approval Z-16.8-1647, issued 17.08.2000, valid until 31.08.2005:
Reinforcement connection with UPAT UPM 44 adhesive
[8] DIN 1045:1988-07, Concrete and reinforced-concrete; design and execution
[9] DIN V ENV 1992-1-1:1992-06 (EC 2), Planning of reinforced-concrete and
prestressed-concrete structures
[10] Eligehausen, R.; Spieth, H.; Sippel,T.: Reinforcing bars secured with adhesive,
loadbearing behaviour and design. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 94 (1999), Heft 12,
page 512 - 523, Ernst & Sohn Verlag

441
[11] Eligehausen, R.; Spieth, H.: Reinforcing bars secured with adhesive, loadbearing
behaviour and design. Der Prüfingenieur 04/2000, page 14 - 28, Bundes-
vereinigung der Prüfingenieure für Bautechnik e.V., 20095 Hamburg
[12] DIN 488-1:1984-09, Reinforcing steel - grades, properties, characteristics
[13] DIBt approval Z-1.6-IV NR1: Stainless, cold-formed, ribbed reinforcing steel in
coils BSt 500 NR (IV NR), nominal diameter: 6.0-8.0-10.0-12.0-14.0 mm
[14] DIBt approval Z-1.4-80, issued 05.06.1997, valid until 30.06.2002:
Stainless, cold-formed, ribbed reinforcing steel BSt 500 NR, nominal diameter: 6,
8, 10, 12, and 14 mm
[15] Lieberum, K.H.; Trägler, K.-D.: Evaluation report no. 127.3.00 dated 20.04.2000
about the rebar installer training course held on 18.04.2000 at Munich (not pub-
lished)

442
INVESTIGATIONS ON BONDING BEHAVIOUR OF
TIE REINFORCEMENTS IN HISTORIC MASONRY
Michael Raupach, Jeanette Brockmann, Axel Dominik, Michael Schürholz
Institut für Bauforschung Aachen, RWTH Aachen, Germany

Abstract
The masonry of historic buildings usually has been built in several layers. Damage often
results from the fact that the masonry structure is no longer able to absorb the shear stress and
transverse tensile stress which occurs in the masonry. In such cases, tie reinforcement can be
installed as a repair measure in conjunction with mortar injection.

As tie reinforcement involves interfering with the historic structure in an irreversible manner,
bond testing has been carried out by means of pull-out tests on two types of bond specimens
(tie anchor/injection material and tie anchor/injection material/natural stone), with the aim of
minimising interference with the historic structure by selecting the smallest possible drill hole
diameter. A mortar which is compatible with the surrounding material in many historic
buildings was used for the experiments. The tie anchors took the form of threaded rods with
and without screwed-on nuts and ribbed steel reinforcing rods (in each case in stainless steel).
Greywacke, Obernkirchen sandstone and Weibern tuff were employed for the pull-out tests
with natural stone specimens.

The test results show that the type of stone can have a substantial influence on the properties
of the injection mortar and thus on the quality of the bond between the tie anchor and the
mortar. It is also evident that a reduction in the customary drill hole diameter and subsequent
reduced interference with the existing building structure is possible under certain conditions.

443
1. Introduction

The exterior masonry of historic buildings usually consists of several layers. It often
comprises an ashlar facade layer, an interior layer and a filling between these two layers,
consisting of rubble and mortar, for example. The interior layer in conjunction with the filling
is frequently referred to as the "back-up masonry".

The internal filling of such masonry may incorporate large cavities as a result of poor
workmanship and/or leaching out of the mortar. The bond between the facade masonry and
the "back-up masonry" and the bond within the "back-up masonry" itself is often no longer
adequate and may compromise the stability of the facade and of the entire masonry. The
inadequate bond in the "back-up masonry" itself can lead to "sagging" of the masonry and
ultimately to its collapse. The example in Figure 1 shows the structure of typical historic
multi-layer masonry.

In order to anchor facade masonry ("facing shell") to the "back-up masonry" or to absorb the
tensile stress which is present in the masonry and to restore the bond, repair work is generally
carried out by means of tie reinforcement of the masonry in conjunction with mortar
injection.

Outer shell Filling Inner shell

Natural stone plug

Injection mortar

Figure 1: Cross-section through multi-layer historic masonry after repair by means of tie
reinforcement

Tie reinforcement in conjunction with mortar injection constitutes a consolidation measure


which, when carried out correctly, is able to prevent or markedly reduce progressive damage
to historic masonry as a result of stress and structural deficiencies. Due consideration must
also be accorded to the fact that tie reinforcement involves the introduction of substantial
quantities of foreign materials such as steel and injected mortar into the historic structure,
however, whereby these materials must be compatible with the existing structure. Drilling of

444
the holes which are required for tie reinforcement also always entails a significant loss of
historic material. Such attendant damage is irreversible.

To date, it has often been customary to use steel reinforcing rods as tie anchors. For reasons
of corrosion protection, this has necessitated all-round encasement in a 20 mm coating of
cement paste, which in turn has led to drilled holes with a diameter of 50 mm and more.
Follow-up examinations /incl. 1/ have shown that the injection often failed to guarantee
adequate corrosion protection. Today, it is thus recommendable to use tie anchors made of
stainless steel. A comprehensive study of relevant literature has revealed a lack of research
into tie reinforcement, in addition to which neither standards nor guidelines exist.

2. Objective

The aim of the investigations was to expand the current extent of knowledge with regard to
tie reinforcement measures. Information is to be obtained on the suitability for tie
reinforcement applications of materials whose compatibility with historic structures has
already been verified on various buildings.

The conducted investigations serve to establish ways of reducing the extent to which historic
structures are interfered with as a result of tie reinforcement. In this context, it is to be
ascertained whether it is possible to reduce the drill hole diameters which are customary to
date while at the same time maintaining a sufficiently strong bond between the tie anchor and
the surrounding material.

In practice, the use of tie anchors made of reinforcing steel has been predominant to date,
with cement suspensions serving as the injection material. Anchoring elements made of
stainless steel and screwed-on nuts were to be examined to ascertain their suitability in
combination with a given injection mortar.

The effects of different types of natural stone on the properties of the injection mortar and
thus on the quality of bond also received due consideration.

3. Investigation programme

3.1 General
In order to obtain information on the bonding behaviour between the tie anchor and the
surrounding material, pull-out tests were carried out. These represent an empirical method
which is also applied in reinforced concrete and reinforced masonry.

The bond between various types of tie anchors and the injection mortar, which was not
bonded with the surrounding material and thus was not subject to any changes in its
properties as a result of the surrounding material, was to be investigated on the bond
specimen consisting of the tie and injection material.

445
The above-stated bond specimens consisting of stainless steel reinforcing rods and threaded
stainless steel rods were employed as anchor variants. It was to be examined whether an
improvement in bond quality is possible by varying the number of nuts and the spacing
between the nuts. The influence of the rod diameter was to be determined by means of pull-
out tests with stainless steel reinforcing rods of 6 mm and 12 mm in diameter.

Pull-out tests were carried out on the bond specimen consisting of tie/injection
material/natural stone in order to assess the anchorage of the tie anchors in the ashlar shell of
a historic masonry structure. As the stone properties can have a substantial influence on the
mortar properties and thus on the bond quality (see e.g. /2/), the tests were performed with
three different types of natural stone. The key stone properties affecting the mortar properties,
such as capillary water absorption and pore radius distribution, were determined for each type
of stone.

As the manner in which the diameter of the drilled hole affects the supporting effect of tie
anchors is of interest, holes of three different diameters (25, 41 and 51 mm) were drilled in
the natural stone specimens.

The suitability of various types of anchor for use as anchoring elements in the area of ashlar
facing was investigated with the aid of bond specimens consisting of tie anchor/injection
material/natural stone. As in the experiments on the tie/injection material bond specimens,
stainless ripped steels and threaded stainless steel rods were employed. In order to determine
the possible influence of nuts screwed onto the threaded rods, threaded rods were used
without nuts, with one nut and with two nuts.

As the mortar properties can have a substantial influence on the quality of the bond between
the tie anchor and the injection mortar and on the properties of the mortar in conjunction with
natural stone, they were also determined both for mortar bonded and non bonded with the
respective natural stones.

446
Pull-out tests

on composite specimen tie/ on composite specimen


injection material/natural stone tie/injection material

Greywacke Obernkirchen Weibern


sandstone tuff

Key stone properties

Drilled hole diameter, dB

dB = 25 mm dB = 41 mm dB = 51 mm

Reinforcing elements

ripped rod threaded rod Threaded rod ripped rod


dS = 6 mm dS = 6 mm dS = 6 mm

without with Different nut d S = 6 mm d S = 12 mm


nuts nuts spacing

Variation in
no. of nuts

Figure 2: Test plan for the investigations

3.2 Materials

3.2.1 Tie anchors


Steel rods ribbed of stainless steel (material reference number 1.4571 with an modulus of
elasticity of about 166 MN/m²) were used exclusively as tie anchors for the experiments
described below, in the form of stainless steel reinforcing rods and threaded rods with and
without screwed-on nuts.

447
3.2.2 Natural stones
For each of the examined natural stones the capillary water absorption and pore radius
distribution were determined. The pore radius distribution was determined by means of high-
pressure mercury porosimetry. The capillary water absorption of the natural stones was
determined on the basis of DIN 52617, 05.81. Following determination of the capillary water
absorption, the specimens were stored fully submerged in water, so as to determine the water
absorption under atmospheric pressure in accordance with DIN 52103, 10.88.

The properties of the three natural stones differ substantially in some instances. The
greywacke stone possesses only very minimal capillary-active pore content, resulting in a
correspondingly low level of capillary water absorption.

The Oberkirchen sandstone possesses a markedly higher level of capillary-active pore


content, resulting in a water absorption level four times higher than that of the greywacke.
The Weibern tuff possesses by far the largest capillary-active pore content. The capillary
water absorption level here is around 20 times higher than that of the greywacke stone. In
comparison to the Obernkirchen sandstone, the tuff stone possesses a substantially higher
proportion of capillary-active pores of small diameter, resulting in a markedly higher suction
capacity for the tuff stone.

Table 1 shows a summary of the investigated properties of the three natural stone types.

Table 1: Properties of the different natural stones (mean values), natural stone type, apparent
density (air dry), ρl, water absorption under atmospheric pressure, Wm,a, coefficient
of capillary water absorption, ω, and total porosity, P

Natural stone type ρl Wm,a ω P


kg/dm³ M.-% kg/m²h0,5 Vol.-%
1 2 3 4 5
Greywacke 2.56 1.47 0.28 2.0
Obernkirchen sandstone 2.15 5.46 2.59 15.8
Weibern tuff 1.25 28.43 19.74 40.3

On the basis of the classification of capillary water absorption according to Klopfer /3/, at
ω=0.28 kg/m²h0,5 the greywacke may be regarded as a water-repellent building material,
while the Oberkirchen sandstone and the Weibern tuff are to be regarded as highly absorbent
building materials.

3.2.3 Injection mortar


An injection mortar should be used whose compression strength and modulus of elasticity are
adapted to the properties of the surrounding material, e.g. the existing mortar /4/. Higher
compression strength is required when using the injection mortar to produce the bond

448
between tie anchor and surrounding masonry in tie reinforcing operations, however, because
the absorbable bond stress increases as the compression strength of the mortar rises.

A modification of a commercially available mortar was employed in the planned tests.

The following characteristics were determined on the mortar:

- Tensile bending strength after 28 d: 1 N/mm²


- Compression strength after 28 d: 3.5 N/mm²
- Shrinkage rate after 28 d: -2.4 mm/m
- Water absorption: 39.8 % by mass

The compression strength of the mortar as tested on a two-stone bond specimen, was as
follows:

- Greywacke: 5.4 N/mm²


- Obernkirchen sandstone 5.1 N/mm²
- Weibern tuff 8.6 N/mm²

The investigations on the injection mortar are described in detail in /5/.

A comparison of the compression strength values obtained here with those determined on the
standard prisms (ßD,N=3.5 N/mm²) shows that the compression strength of the mortar attains
greater values in conjunction with all three stone types. A value corresponding to approx. 1.5
times the standard value is attained for mortar bonded with greywacke and Obernkirchen
sandstone, rising to almost 2.5 times with the Weibern tuff. In due consideration of the results
of pull-out tests on reinforced masonry and reinforced concrete such as those conducted by
Barlet /6/, Schießl/ Schwarzkopf /7/ and Rehm /8/, which reveal rising compression strength
on the part of the mortar to be accompanied by an increase in the absorbable bond stress, the
substantially greater joint compression strength of the drill hole suspension when bonded
with the Weibern tuff would be expected to result in greater bond stress in the pull-out tests
than applies with the other stone types.

4. Pull-out tests for tie/injection material

The bonding behaviour between tie anchors and injection mortar was to be investigated by
means of pull-out tests on anchors from mortar cubes, on the basis of the RILEM/CEB/FIP
recommendations. The following changes were carried out with regard to the
recommendations:

- The edge length of all mortar cubes was 200 mm, irrespective of the diameter of the
anchor elements.
- The bond length was set at lv=200 mm.

449
The anchor rods were secured in horizontal position in the centre of the formwork such that
they protruded out of the concrete cube by approximately 15 mm on either side. The
formwork was filled with the injection mortar according to standard practice by carefully
pouring from above at right-angles to the reinforcing element. Figure 3 shows an overview
of the produced test specimens.
Filling direction

F F
6 6

50 mm 4 25 4 25 4 25 4 25 4 30 50 mm 4 50 4 50 4 38

F F
6 6

50 mm 4 75 4 67 50 mm 4 100 4 42

F F
6 6
Ripped rods ∅ 6mm und 12 mm Threaded rods ∅ 6mm

200 mm 200 mm

Figure 3: Overview of produced test specimens

The pull-out tests to retrieve the anchor rods from the injection mortar produced the
following results:

450
- The maximum pull-out forces stood at approx. 5-6 kN for the threaded rods with and
without nuts, while for the ripped rod they were below 4 kN.

- A doubling of the rod diameter from 6 to 12 mm resulted approximately in a two-fold


increase in the maximum absorbable pull-out force.

The threaded rods with screwed-on nuts provide the highest pull-out forces, irrespective of
the number of nuts. Although the threaded rods without nuts attain a comparable maximum
pull-out resistance, at a very low level of attendant slippage failure of these rods abruptly
ensues after reaching this maximum. By screwing on nuts, failure of the rods is heralded by
increasing slippage, while a high load level is maintained (see fig. 4).

The ripped rods sustain substantial forces under the given conditions only after a certain
degree of slippage (approx. 0.5 mm). This means that such rods can be deployed where such
measured deformations are not of vital importance to the load-bearing behaviour of a
building. Although the rod does not fail abruptly when bonded with the mortar, as is the case
with threaded rods without nuts, a rapid decrease in strength is nevertheless observable, in
combination with increasing slippage.

Figure 4: Bond failure in test specimens with threaded rods and screwed-on nuts

5. Pull-out tests for tie/injection material/stone

After production, the test specimens were covered with a moist jute tarpaulin and a layer of
PE foil for 7 days. The test specimens were subsequently stored in a room climate of
20°C/65% rel. humidity for a further 21 days.

The pull-out tests were conducted 28 days after production of the test specimens. The loading
rate was selected to be 50 N/sec. As in the pull-out tests on the tie anchor/injection mortar test

451
specimen, the deformations of the tie anchor were measured both on the load side and on the
side facing away from the load, by means of inductive displacement sensors.

Figure 5: Test device for pull-out tests

A load-distributing metal plate was placed on the test specimen, in order to eliminate
additional deformation components, such as might occur as a result of compressive strain on
the natural stone under the legs of the test device.

The standard bond stress, τm, is determined at a slippage, x2, of 0.1 mm, in accordance with
/9/. For comparative purposes, the mean bond stress levels at x2=0.5 mm and at x2=1.0 mm
are also specified.

Three different failure modes were determined in the course of the pull-out tests.

1 Failure mode I: Failure in the injection mortar/natural stone bond zone


(only occurred at Weibern tuff with drill hole ∅ 25 mm)

2 Failure mode II: Failure in the tie anchor/injection mortar bond zone
(occurred at nearly all specimens with Oberkirchen Sandstone and
some with Greywacke)

3 Failure mode III: Combined failure mode consisting of failure modes I and II
(occurred at nearly all specimens with Weibern tuff and Greywacke)

452
Ancher no nut 1 nut 2 nuts ripped
Slippage 0,1 0,5 1 0,1 0,5 1 0,1 0,5 1 0,1 0,5 1
mm N/mm²
Greywacke
∅ 25 0,21 0,32 0,22 0,48 0,51 0,45 0,21 0,40 0,44 1,38 1,74 1,67
∅ 41 0,51 0,48 0,42 0,53 0,61 0,61 0,78 0,71 0,63 1,37 1,62 1,59
∅ 51 0,90 0,74 0,58 1,19 1,16 0,75 0,88 0,92 0,88 1,38 1,63 1,57
Oberkirchen Sandstone
∅ 25 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,02 0,03 0,11 0,21 0,18 0,33 0,18 0,27 0,45
∅ 41 0,19 0,20 0,22 0,32 0,37 0,51 0,18 0,18 0,41 0,45 0,51 0,73
∅ 51 0,34 0,33 0,41 0,16 0,15 0,15 0,31 0,35 0,55 0,42 0,33 0,35
Weibern tuff
∅ 25 0,03 0,06 0,10 0,12 0,23 0,27 0,12 0,14 0,20 0,20 0,33 0,49
∅ 41 0,27 0,11 0,10 0,05 0,16 0,28 0,17 0,29 0,34 0,11 0,21 0,30
∅ 51 0,30 0,26 0,23 0,28 0,25 0,21 0,33 0,24 0,22 0,04 0,16 0,24

Table 2: Bond stress measured at the specimens tie/injection material/stone

6. Discussion of the results

It is evident that the surrounding material in contact with the mortar can have a substantial
influence on the quality of the bond between tie anchor and mortar and between mortar and
stone.

The correlation between an increase in the compression strength of concrete or mortar and an
attendant rise in absorbable bond stress which has been established in tests in the fields of
reinforced concrete and reinforced masonry does not apply to the tests conducted here.
Although the lowest joint compression strength was determined in the test specimens made
of greywacke, the attained bond stress levels are substantially higher than those for the test
specimens consisting of Obernkirchen sandstone and Weibern tuff. Despite the fact that the
joint compression strength is markedly higher in some instances, no absorbable pull-out
forces or bond stress levels which would be adequate in practice are attainable with the
Oberkirchen sandstone or the Weibern tuff, irrespective of the drill hole diameter and the
type of tie anchor.

A reduction in the drill hole diameter which is predominantly used in practice at present and
an attendant reduction in the scope of interference with the historic structure while
maintaining sufficiently large pull-out resistance appears to be possible for greywacke only,
using ripped rods. When using threaded rods with screwed-on nuts it must be considered in
each individual case whether the drill hole diameter can be reduced at the expense of reduced
load-bearing capacity.

453
When threaded rods are to be employed in practice, with regard to the load-deformation
behaviour it appears expedient to screw on nuts, as deformation-induced failure will then be
indicated beforehand, whereas threaded rods without nuts fail abruptly, without prior
warning. As the tests did not reveal the number of nuts to have any influence, it is
recommended to screw on one nut in the area of end anchorages and 4 nuts per metre of
length over the entire length of the tie anchor.

No optimum spacing between the nuts was ascertainable. The theoretically most favourable
nut spacing would appear to be smaller than the smallest spacing selected in the tests.
Investigations into a further reduction of the nut spacing will not be expedient until the
factory production of such rods is in prospect, as screwing on nuts at such a minimal spacing
is very work-intensive. It would appear expedient to develop a tie anchor with idealised rib
spacing, which could be used in conjunction with a "low-strength" bonding mortar for tie
reinforcement applications.

In the tests in which bond stress levels which permit practical application were attained, the
ripped rods proved the most effective type of tie anchor, on account of their favourable
surface structure and the attendant superior load transfer between tie anchor and injection
mortar.

7. Outlook

As the failure of the bond between mortar and stone prevented the absorption of large pull-
out forces in a large proportion of the tests, particularly with regard to the test specimens
consisting of greywacke, it should be investigated whether the bond between stone and
mortar can be improved by roughening the walls of the drill hole.

The investigations with the given materials in conjunction with the study of the relevant
literature underline the fact that no sound findings which would enable generally valid
conclusions are available on the load-bearing behaviour of tie anchors in masonry. It is thus
imperative to carry out preliminary tests on the building concerned in each individual case.

The mortar property should be adapted to the specific applications concerned, particularly as
tests on injection mortars which are commonly used in practice have shown that there is no
such thing as a "shrinkage-free" mortar. The ideal mortar should be capable of sustaining
deformations, guaranteeing an adequate bond between the mortar and the surrounding
material and, where applicable, between tie anchor and mortar, while maintaining
compatibility with the existing building structure. Investigations aimed at researching the
bonding behaviour of reinforcing elements with various modules of elasticity adapted to
historic building structures would be expedient.

454
8. References

1. Maus, H.: Injiziertes und bewehrtes altes Mauerwerk: Untersuchungen zur


Wirksamkeit und Dauerhaftigkeit der Instandsetzungsmaßnahmen. In: Arbeitshefte
des Sonderforschungsbereiches 315 “Erhalten historisch bedeutsamer Bauwerke“,
Heft 32, Karlsruhe, Technische Hochschule, Diss., 1995

2. Stein, Chr.: Verfugmörtelentwicklung für drei Natursteinarten (Postaer und Cottaer


Sandstein sowie Zwickauer Kohle-Sandstein). Aachen, Technische Hochschule,
Fachbereich 3, Diplomarbeit, 1993

3. Klopfer, H.: Feuchte. – In: Lehrbuch der Bauphysik; Schall, Wärme, Feuchte, Licht,
Brand, Klima. Stuttgart, Teubner-Verlag, 3. neubearbeitete und erweiterte Auflage,
1994

4. Haberland, D.; Debilius, V.: Untersuchungen zur Sicherung von historischem


Mauerwerk durch Vernadelung. Berlin: Deutscher Ausschuß für Stahlbeton, 1988.
– In: Beiträge zum 20. Forschungskolloquium des Deutschen Ausschusses für
Stahlbeton am 24. Und 25. März 1988 an der Universität und Gesamthochschule
Kassel, S. 45-50, 1988

5. Schürholz, M.: Zur Tragfähigkeit von historischem Natursteinmauerwerk durch


Vernadelung – Verbunduntersuchungen. Increasing load-carrying capacity of
historical masonry through tie reinforcement - bond investigations. Aachen,
Technische Hochschule, Fachbereich 3, Institut für Bauforschung, Diplomarbeit,
1999. - (unveröffentlicht)

6. Barlet, U.: Verbund zwischen Stahl und Mörtel im bewehrten Mauerwerk.


München, Technische Universität, Diss., 1989

7. Schießl, P; Schwarzkopf, U.: Verbundverhalten von feuerverzinkten


Betonrippenstählen in Mauerwerk. In: Betonwerk + Fertigteiltechnik 51 (1985), Nr.
11, S. 735-740, 1985

8. Rehm, G.: Über die Grundlagen des Verbundes zwischen Stahl und Beton. – In:
Schriftenreihe des Deutschen Ausschusses für Stahlbeton (1961), Nr. 138, Berlin,
Ernst & Sohn, 1961

9. Meyer, U.: Zur Rißbreitenbeschränkung durch Lagerfugenbewehrung in


Mauerwerkbauteilen. In: Aachener Beiträge zur Bauforschung (1996), Nr. 6,
Technische Hochschule Aachen, Diss., 1996

455
ACTUAL TRENDS IN CHEMICAL FIXINGS:
FROM CAPSULE TO INJECTION SYSTEMS
Joachim Schätzle
fischerwerke Artur Fischer GmbH & Co. KG, Germany

Abstract
This paper compares the applications and properties of chemical fixings based on glass
capsule systems and injection systems. Glass capsule systems have been on the market
for nearly 40 years. They have been continuously improved during that time and have
reached a very high performance level. The younger injection systems, initially used
only in minor applications, have reached meanwhile the same performance. Due to their
higher flexibility they replace more and more capsule systems.

1. Historical background

Chemical fixings, so called bonded anchors are well known and established on the
market for a long time. The first product, which was already introduced in 1962, was
based on a glass capsule system. In a cylindrical drill-hole a threaded rod has to be
installed by an impact drilling machine with an impact rotational process.

Since 1962 several new generations of capsule type anchors have been introduced on the
market with improved properties:

Second generation capsule anchors:

The unsaturated polyester resins used in the first generation capsule anchors have been
replaced by vinyl ester resins. Long-term tests of unsaturated polyester type bonded
anchors have shown considerable loss of bond strength in wet concrete due to an alkaline
attack (Saponification) on to the ester linkage1). Vinyl esters are very insensitive against
saponification.

456
Third generation capsule anchors:

In generation 1 and 2, the solvent styrene is used as a reactive thinner. Meanwhile


styrene is suspected of being cancerogenic. As a consequence some manufactures have
replaced styrene against other reactive thinners which are not harmful.

Fourth generation capsule anchors:

Bonded anchors of generation 1-3 are suitable for non-cracked concrete.


They are not approved to be used in cracked concrete. In a crack of 0.3 mm width the
loss of pull-put load is in the range of 50 % 2)

In 1993 the first capsule bonded anchors approved for cracked concrete appeared on the
market. These torque-controlled bonded anchors are installed in cylindrical holes, the
load transfer is realized by mechanical interlock of cones in the bonding mortar.

Currently products from all the 4 generations are offered on the market.

2. Bonded anchors based on injection systems

The components used for injection systems as well as their chemical reactions are very
similar to those of capsule systems. Today injection systems equivalent to all 4
generations of capsule systems are available.
For a long time the only approved application for injection systems was the use in
hollow bricks. In solid materials considerable problems arose in cases where the drill-
hole was not cleaned properly.

In regions with high security levels and corresponding approval restrictions injection
systems have been applied only in minor applications or in perforated bricks and hollow
blocks.

Meanwhile the situation has changed. Some new formulations with improved properties
are on the market.

As a consequence more and more applications, where traditionally capsule type anchors
were used, are now realized with injection systems. Furthermore new fields have been
found, where capsules systems were not suitable. In the following chapter some of these
improvements of injection systems are described and the advantages of both types of
bonded anchors in different applications are compared.

457
3. New developments of injection systems

3.1 Behavior in not perfectly cleaned drill-holes


In solid anchoring bases first generation injection systems suffered from poor adhesion
in not properly cleaned drill-holes. In the case of capsule systems, drill-hole cleaning is
not very essential, because the friction of the broken glass and of the quartz sand cleans
the concrete surface during the rotational setting process of the anchors. Due to this fact,
the traditional injection systems, based on polyester or vinylester resins are not approved
in Germany for the anchorage in concrete.

In the case of new developed injection systems, so called hybrid systems, the loss of
adhesion, due to not properly cleaned drill-holes is considerably reduced.

In the following figure the relative bond strength of a vinylester and a hybrid injection
system are compared. The values are normalized to 100 under cleaned conditions.

Hybridsystem
Influence of Hole Cleaning method
Vinylester resin
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Cleaned (2xblow Uncleaned (ETA- Uncleaned (2xblow
out, 2xbrush, Regulation) (1xblow out)
2xblow out) out, 1xbrush,
2xblow out)

458
Hybrid systems are characterized by a four-component reactive system:

In the first chamber the organic resin is mixed with cement, the second chamber contains
an admixture of the organic hardener (peroxide) with water, the hardener of the cement.
Due to the organic part, quick hardening, with a high end-load is achieved. The
inorganic part, cement and water, improves among other things, the adhesion to the drill-
hole.

First products with approvals for rebar applications are on the market.

3.2. Behavior at high temperature


In the case of injection systems based on unsaturated polyester, the failure load is
continuously reduced with increasing temperature. At 100° C the bond strength is
reduced to about 20 % of initial value. In the case of pure organic vinylester systems, the
reduction is less than 50 %. Due to the cement content of hybrid systems, their
temperature resistance is further improved.

3.3 Rebar applications


For the connection of rebars hammer capsules are applied. As the drill-hole is often very
deep, several capsules have to be applied in one application. Due to the strong forces,
which are necessary to break the glass and to set the rebar, a high pressure at the end of a
drill-hole can destroy the concrete cover. The ratio length / diameter of the drill hole
which can be realized is often below technical requirements.
There are less restrictions for the new hybrid injection systems due to the lower pressure
during the setting of the rebar.

Consequently first approvals in Germany for rebar applications were issued for hybrid
injection systems. Up to now there are no hammer capsule products approved in
Germany.

3.4 Behavior in cracked concrete


Up to the beginning of 2001 only capsule based bonded anchors were approved for the
application in cracked concrete. Since March 2001, the first injection system is DIBt-
approved for cracked concrete.
Especially remarkable of this system is the low installation safety factor of γ2= 1.0 which
allows the realization of high permissible loads.

Another advantage of this injection system is the high flexibility. One cartridge type can
be used for all anchor sizes, whereas in the case of capsule systems, for each anchor size
a separate capsule is necessary.

459
3.5 Other applications of injection systems
Apart from the possible applications of capsule systems, injection systems can be used in
a while range of additional applications.

In perforated bricks and hollow blocks they can be used in connection with injection
anchor sleeves due to the thixotropic behavior of the mortar. This effect can not be
realized with capsule systems.

In nearly all other anchoring bases injection systems have found applications among
them a lot there capsule systems are prohibited.

4. References

1. Eligehausen, R. and Mallée, R., ‘Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und


Mauerwerkbau’, (Ernst & Sohn, Berlin 2000).
2. Eligehausen, R., Mallée, R. and Rehm, G., ‘Befestigungen mit Verbundankern‘,
Betonwerk + Fertigteiltechnik 1984, 686-692.

460
PERFORMANCE OF BONDED ANCHORS IN
DEPENDENCE OF INSTALLATION CONDITIONS, STATE
OF CURE - DEFORMATION BEHAVIOR AT ELEVATED
TEMPERATURES
G.W. Ehrenstein, A. Tome
Lehrstuhl für Kunststofftechnik, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany.

Abstract
At the moment many manufactures of bonded anchors are changing the resin base from
unsaturated polyester (UP) with styrene content to styrene-free reaction resins. The long-
term creep behaviour at static or dynamic loads, especially after installation conditions
which negatively influence the curing is not completely known yet. In this paper the
creep behaviour of two different commercially available bonded anchors (capsule
systems) for use in concrete are examined under normal conditions and at elevated
temperatures for different installation conditions and different static loads.

1. Introduction

Bonded anchors based on reaction resin, i. e. high filled duroplastic resin mortars, have
played a major role in civil engineering for more than 20 years. They are used for high-
strength anchoring in concrete and masonry. The first form of chemical anchoring was
cementitious grounting of anchor bolts. This method is still used today. Since the middle
1970’s chemical anchoring in high-strength conditions using epoxies, nowadays
unsaturated polyester, vinylester (epoxymethacrylates) or vinylesterurethanes
(urethanmethacrylates) has become an increasingly popular method of anchoring.

1.1. Installation of bonded anchors


There are different installation techniques for bonded anchors:
• Capsule placed in the hole and anchor driven in mechanically either by machine or
by hammer, Fig. 1a.
• Bonding material injected or poured into the hole, the anchor inserted manually or
mechanically, Fig. 1b.
• Anchor inserted into the hole and bonding material introduced into the hole via the
anchor or around the anchor.

461
Popular anchoring devices today are the glass/plastic capsule method or prepacked
injection systems with coaxial or side by side cartridges.

Capsule placed in the hole


Anchor driven in by machine
Resin Filler Hardener

Capsule
a)
e.g. Concrete

Bonded material injected in the hole

Anchor rod inserted manually

Anchor Sleeve
b)
e.g. Masonry

Fig. 1: Installation techniques for bonded anchors

Regardless of the installation techniques the installation of bonded anchors is divided


into the following steps:
1. Mixing of the components resin, hardener and filler or inserting the ready-to-cure
mortar into the hole (the order depends on the installation technique, e.g. capsule
system or injection system).
2. Inserting the anchor rod within the working time.
3. Curing the resin mortar.
4. Applicating the load after expiration of the recommended curing time according to
the manufacturers instructions.

1.2. Problems of installation and curing conditions


A striking feature of composite anchors based on reaction resins is that, in contrast to
other anchor materials, they are manufactured yet when the attachment is being done.

462
Due to the chemical reaction the curing of resin mortars depends on the installation and
curing conditions e.g. the environmental conditions and surrounding temperature. Earlier
experiments showed that the curing reaction can be negatively influenced by low
temperatures or wet conditions (e.g. water-filled hole), /1, 2/. This effect is measurable
e.g. as lower glass transition temperatures in dynamic torsion-pendulum-tests.
The degree of cure can affect numerous properties of the bonded anchors. An
uncomplete degree of cure can lead to higher creep-displacements and lower chemical
resistance and ageing behaviour /2/.
Bonded anchors are often subjected to changing temperatures. In Western Europe
temperatures between -5 °C and +40 °C in concrete or masonry are expected. In special
applications the surrounding temperature can be more than 80 °C to 100 °C. So the
precise knowledge of processing technique and the influence of environmental
conditions (temperature, water) on the curing behaviour are necessary for a constant
quality of the applicated bonded anchors.

2. Experimental

2.1. Testing the curing behaviour and degree of cure of resin mortars
Three test procedures for checking the reactivity and the degree of cure of resin mortars
have be proved to be useful /1/.
• The temperature measuring while installing and curing the resin mortar is used to get
statements on the resin reactivity, on the influence of surrounding temperatures, of
concrete or components of the bonded anchor (capsule, anchor rod, concrete) and on
the different curing behaviour at different places in the hole.
• The dynamic torsion-pendulum-test (DMA) is used to measure the glass transition
temperature and the mechanical behaviour by interpreting the temperature dependent
stiffness and mechanical damping. In addition different degrees of cure and the
influence of e.g. water/moisture on the mechanical behaviour can be distinguished.
• The differential scannig calorimetry (DSC) is used to determine the degree of cure by
evaluating the reaction enthalpy. This analyses leads to very exact results for resins
and other polymeric materials without water content. In case of a water/moisture
content the resolution of the measurement (exothermic peak) is negatively affected
by the endothermic peak of the water and therefore not recommended.

2.2. Testing the mechanical behaviour


The mechanical behaviour of bonded anchors is usually determined by short-time pull-
out tests, long-term creep-tests and dynamic tests e.g. with the hysteresis method. In
addition the installation safety under critical conditions must be verified by tests. To
evaluate the dependence of the mechanical behaviour on the curing conditions these tests
must be carried out under different installing and surrounding conditions.

463
3. Experimental

3.1. Glass transition temperature


The glass transition temperatures Tg were measured with specially manufactured
specimens (rectangular shape) made from the content of the capsule. The curing
conditions were kept equal as far as possible to the installation conditions. The
measurement was done by DMA MK III in bending mode with a heating rate of
2 °C/min and a frequency of 10 Hz. The glass transition temperature Tg was taken as half
height of the modulus step. Again, we only discuss the relative differences not the
absolute values of the glass transition temperature in dependence of the „installing
conditions“.

3.2. Materials and concrete


Two different commercially available bonded anchors (capsule systems) for use in
concrete were used for the tests. The one bonded anchor (specimen B) is based on
unsaturated polyester with styrene-content, the other bonded anchor (specimen A) is a
newly developed styrene-free system based on vinylester-methacrylates. In Germany the
allowed characteristic load of bonded anchors size M12 is 7 kN in concrete B15 and
12 kN for a higher compressive strength of concrete.
The tests were carried out in concrete B25 with a compressive strength of 21 MPa and a
gross density of 2.2 kg/m3 (size 200 x 200 x 200 mm).

3.3. Test Procedure


The anchors were installed and cured as specified by the manufacturer. The examined
installation conditions are „normal condition“ (23 °C, reference), „low temperature“
(-5 °C) and „wet condition“ (water-filled hole, 23 °C). The specimens „low temperature“
were annealed at 23 °C for 12 h after expiration of the recommended curing time at –
5 °C. In a force test unit with heating cabinet the static loads (12 kN, 18 kN and 24 kN)
were applied at normal conditions (23 °C/50% r.m.) and at elevated temperatures (40 °C,
60 °C and 80 °C) while the creep-displacement was measured. Depending on the
characteristic load the chosen static loads while creeping are up to a factor of 3 to the
allowed characteristic load.

3.4. Evaluation
The characterization of the creep behaviour of bonded anchors in dependence of
installing conditions, applied static loads and surrounding temperature was carried out in
comparison with „normal conditions“ (installing condition 23 °C) at each tested
surrounding temperature and applied static loads. The rating only refers to the
differences in the creep behaviour of bonded anchors which are installed under „normal
condition“ to critical conditions e.g. „low temperature“ and „wet condition“. Regarding
the large creep-displacements at the beginning and the following increase a measuring
time of 50 h was chosen. The data-points were extrapolated to larger time-ranges with
the Findley-approximation. Then we can discuss the principal influence of the installing

464
condition at ambient temperature and at elevated temperatures. We cannot rate the
absolute creep-displacements, because the test results are single-experiment data, so that
there is no statistical exclusion.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Glass transition temperatures / loss in stiffness


The glass transition temperatures Tg depend on the installation conditions, table 1. The
estimated Tg for specimen A are in the range above 85 °C, for specimen B about 30 °C
below. The very low Tg of specimen B under „wet condition“ might be due to the effects
to the preparation a specially manufactured specimen with a water content of 10% in
weigth.
The loss in stiffness can be characterized at one hand by the temperature T50% at which
50% of the stiffness at –100 °C occur. On the other hand, the relative stiffness E* at
ambient temperature (25 °C) refered to the stiffness at –100 °C characterizes the residual
relative stiffness at ambient temperature.
Specimen A (sytrene free) shows a significant decrease of T50% as well as E* under
critical installation conditions (wet and low temperature). Therefore the temperature
dependent stiffness of the resin seems to be reduced. Specimen B (styrene containing) is
susceptible to "wet conditions", low temperatures seems not to affect the stiffness very
critical. Altogether, the loss in stiffness as discussed for T50% and E* is more distinctive
at specimen B (styrene containing) than specimen A (styrene free). These effects are
strongly determined by the chosen resin mortar and should not be generalized.

"normal conditions" "wet conditions" "low temperature"


Tg loss in stiffness Tg loss in stiffness Tg loss in stiffness
≈ T50% E* ≈ T50% E* ≈ T50% E*
Specimen A 95 °C 70 °C 75% 90 °C 9 °C 45% 85 °C 25 °C 48%
(styrene free)
Specimen B 50 °C 42 °C 72% -10 °C -10 °C 14% 50 °C 46 °C 75%
(styrene
containing)
Table 1: Glass transition temperature and loss in stiffness of the examined resin mortars.
Tg: glass transition temperature in °C (DMTA); T50%: temperature at 50%-
stiffness decrease refer to –100 °C; E*: relative stiffness at 25 °C refer to
stiffness at –100 °C
Additionally to table 1, the DMA-curves of both reaction resins are illustrated in
Figure 2. In the relevant temperature range (–5 °C up to +40 °C) Specimen B shows a
more distinctive decrease in stiffness than specimen A.

465
Fig. 2: DMTA-curves for the different state of cure of specimen A, top, and B, bottom

4.2. Creep-behaviour in dependence of the installing conditions


The left side of Figure 3 shows the creep-displacement as function of time of specimen
A (styrene-free resin mortar) for the examined installation conditions at 23 °C and 80 °C
testing temperature (static load 24 kN). The creep-displacements are especially under
„wet condition“ but also under „low temperature“ significant bigger than under „normal
condition“. In addition the creep-speed, which correlates with the gradient of the creep-
curve, is much higher. This effect is at a surrounding temperature of 80 °C, lower figure,

466
much stronger than at ambient temperature, upper figure. The estimated glass transition
temperatures of specimen A are in the range above 80 °C, that means at surrounding
temperatures of 80 °C the glass transition temperatures were not exceeded but almost
reached. For the high temperature the „wet condition“ leads to creep-displacements up to
5 mm in the first 5 hours. The measured creep-displacements do not exceed the critical
values under ambient temperature and at 80 °C for „normal condition“ and „low
temperature“ for static loads up to a factor of 3 referring to the characteristic load.
In comparison the creep-displacement of specimen B (styrene content resin mortar) at
testing temperature 23 °C is more critical at installing condition „low temperature“,
figure 3 right. At „wet condition“ the creep displacement is even less critical than
„normal condition“. This is not in advance with the low glass transition temperature
found in DMA measurements and has to be investigated further. At testing temperature
80 °C (glass transition temperatures are exceeded 30 °C) the applied load of 24 kN leads
to creep-displacements up to 5 mm in the first hour. This bonded anchor is much
overloaded at these surrounding conditions for all installation conditions.

2 23oC
5 23oC
Specimen A- M12 Specimen B - M12
F = 24 kN F = 24 kN
4 Conctrete C20
Creep Displacement [mm]

1.5 Concrete C20


Creep Displacement [mm]

"Wet Condition"
23oC/Water/40min 3
1 "Low Temperature"
-5oC/Dry/5h
2 "Low Temperature"
-5oC/Dry/5h
"Normal Condition"
0.5 23oC/Dry/20min "Normal Condition"
1 23oC/Dry/20min
"Wet Condition"
23oC/Water/40min
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Time [h] Time [h]

2 80oC
5
Creep Displacement [mm]

Specimen A - M12 "Low Temperature"


F = 24 kN -5oC/Dry/5h
4
1.5 Concrete C20
Creep Displacement [mm]

"Wet Condition"
23oC/Water/40min
"Wet Condition" 3
"Normal Condition"
1 23oC/Water/40min 23oC/Dry/20min
"Low Temperature"
-5oC/Dry/5h 2

0.5 80oC
1 Specimen B - M12
"Normal Condition" F = 24 kN
23oC/Dry/20min Concrete C20
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 0.5 1 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Time [h] Time [h]

Fig. 3: Creep-displacement of Specimen A (left) and Specimen B (right) for


different installing condition at ambient temperature (top) at elevated
Temperature (bottom)

467
4.3. Dependence of the applied load at elevated temperatures
Figure 4, left, shows the dependence of the creep-displacement for different applied
loads for bonded anchors which are all installed under „normal condition“ and tested at
80 °C. Specimen A shows a minor influence between the creep-displacement at applied
loads up to 18 kN, although the creep speed (curve gradient) seems to be smaller for an
applied load of 12 kN. An applied load of 24 kN leads to larger creep-displacements and
creep-speeds. Specimen A is even for applied loads of 12 kN overloaded at 80 °C.

4.4. Dependence of the surrounding temperature


With a reduction of the surrounding temperature the creep-displacement and the creep-
speed can be reduced rapidly even for high applied loads (24 kN), especially in the range
of 60 to 40 °C for specimen A, figure 4 right. The closer the surrounding temperature
gets to the range of glass transition temperature the stronger are the creep displacements.
Specimen B as already shown in figure 3 is overloaded for that kind of applied load at
temperatures above ambient temperature.
2 80 oC 2 24 kN
Specimen A - M12 Specimen A - M12
"Normal Condition" "Normal Condition"
23oC/Dry/20min 23oC/Dry/20min
Creep Displacement [mm]
Creep Displacement [mm]

1.5 Concrete C20 1.5 Concrete C20

24 kN
1 1 80oC
60oC
18 KN
0.5 0.5
40oC
12 kN 23oC

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Time [h] Time [h]

Fig. 4: Creep-displacements of specimen A for different load levels (left) and


different surrounding temperatures (right).

5. Conclusions

It was shown, that the installation condition influence the creep behaviour of the
examined bonded anchors. At surrounding temperatures of 23 °C the creep displacement
of the installation conditions „low temperature“ and „wet condition“ exceed the creep
displacement under normal conditions by a factor of up to 3. The styrene-containing
bonded anchor (specimen B) is more sensitive to the installation conditions than the
styrene-free system (specimen A). Its creep behaviour increases strongly at elevated
temperatures. This effect correlates with the measured glass transition temperatures.
While the creep-displacement of specimen A close below its estimated glass transition
temperatures is stronger than at ambient temperatures, the creep-displacement of
specimen B about 30 °C above its glass transition temperature is rapidly increased.
Specimen B is much overloaded at that kind of temperatures even for reduced static
loads.

468
Therefore the long-term temperature should not exceed about 40 °C for the examined
styrene-containing (specimen B) and not exceed about 80 °C for the styrene-free bonded
anchors (specimen A). Otherwise the load has to be reduced significantly. If these results
are transferable to other available bonded anchors with styrene-free or styrene-
containing needs to be characterized in further examinations.

6. References

Journal article:
Bittmann, E., Tome, A., Ehrenstein, G.W. Aushärtung und Tauglichkeit von
Verbundmörtelsystemen für Dübel // Bauingenieur 72 (1997), P. 433 - 437
Book:
Bittmann, E., Ehrenstein, G.W. Duroplaste - Aushärtung, Prüfung, Eigenschaften // Carl
Hanser Verlag, München 1997
Paper in proceedings:
Letsch, R. On the behavour of deformation of epoxy-resin mortars at steady and non-
steady temperatures // ICPIC ‘84 „Polymere in Beton“, September 1984, Darmstadt

469
STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE
NEW CAPSULE TYPED BONDED ANCHOR
Masayuki YONETANI*, Akira FUKUOKA*, Yasuhiro MATSUZAKI**
*Asahikasei Corporation ,Japan
**Science University of Tokyo, Japan

Abstract
In Japan, after Hanshin earthquake disaster in 1995, the post-installed bonded capsule
anchor is used widely, specially to reinforce against the earthquake. And that reliability
and durability have been recognized .
To show more performance of anchor, we found the relation of resin composition and
the anchor tensile strength. And moreover, we attained the capsule composition which is
satisfied that resin performance. We consider the safety in use, and developed the new-
type bonded capsule anchor. We report the excellent performance of this anchor.
Moreover, we developed high speed and low noise diamond core drill , and we
checked also about the performance when this drill bores.

1. Examination of Resin

Detailed examination was performed about the composition of resin in development of


the new-type capsule anchor.
Optimum composition of resin was considered, we use the epoxy acrylate resin (vinyl
ester resin) which has strong durability of resistance to concrete alkali as the base
polymer.
In this examination, we could get especially interesting knowledge there is the big
correlation of the the physical properties (share strength ) of the resin hardening thing
and tensile strength of the bonded anchor.
It found out that this share strength was high correlation with the molecular structure of
base resin and the structure of the reactive monomer, concentration and the viscosity.
Based on the above mentioned result, we attained completing optimum composition of a
reactive monomer, a polymerization prohibition agent, a catalyst, etc.

470
2.Development of the new-type capsule anchor

The conventional bonded anchor took double glass tube structure, the hardener in inner
tube ,resin and aggregate were enclosed with the outside glass tube.
And resin contained the ingredient of which we are anxious about toxicity and
inflammability, such as styrene.
The following subjects occurred in this capsule.
(1) Badness of handling and danger by using glass tube
(2) Dispersin in the tensile strength due to un-uniformity hardening by inclination of
hardening agent
(3) Danger and harmful by using styrene monomer
In order to solve these subject, the following measures attained us to the development of
new-type capsule anchor.
(1) film foil type
(2) 1 chamber structure where hardening agent was distributed in resin
(3) Adoption of resin which contain the high molecule weight monomer

The structure of the new-type capsule anchor is shown in Fig. 1.

a.【resin】 viscous

○ c.【hardening agent】
d.【vessel】 plastic film
● b.【aggregate】
[expressio

HP-10~
AR CHEMICAL
HP-○ ○
ASAHIKASEI

HP-22~
AR CHEMICAL
HP-○ ○
ASAHIKASEI

L
Fig. 1 Structure of the new-type capsule anchor

471
3.The basic performance of the new-type capsule anchor

The basic performance of the new-type capsule anchor developed this time is shown
below.
(1) Tensile strength (Fig. 2)
(2) Inbedding Resistance (Fig. 3)
(3) Inflammability (Fig. 4)
The performance which was excellent also in which performance as compared with the
conventional glass pipe type was shown.

350
M10
M12 M16M20M22M24
Tensile strength (KN)

300
従来タイ プ
38 (ガラ
57ス 96 164 ## 311.3
250
ー タイ
ニュ 47プ 71(フィ
122
ル 217 ## 313
200
150 Past type
100 (glass tube)
50
0 New-type
M10

M12

M16

M20

M22

M24
(film foil)

bolt size

Fig. 2. Tensile strength

Inbedding time×load
M16 M30
Inbedding resistance

800
従来タイ
プ (ガラ ス
135 720 Past type
ータイ
600 ニュ プ (フィ
117
ル 610
Explosion 80℃
(glass tube)
400 New-type Burn 90℃
(film foil)
200 Past type
0 (glass tube) Fig. 4.Inflammability
M16

M30

New-type

bolt size (film foil)

Fig. 3. Inbedding Resistance

472
4. Evaluation on the actual use conditions

The evaluation results on the actual use conditions are worked up too.
The tendency of the performance was the same as that of the conventional glass tube
type.
An example is shown below.
①Relation with concrete compression strength (Fig.5)
②Relation with bore hole depth (Fig.6)

96 249 354 477


14 5.18 7.96 9.92 11.7
Tensile strength(ton)

12 6.07 8 10.34 12.2


10
8
6
4
2
Past type
0 (glass tube)
0 200 400 600 New-type
Concrete compression strength(kg/cm2) (film foil)

Fig.5 Relation with concrete compression strength

15 70 100 130 160


(標準)
Tensile strength (ton)

10 M ボル 4.3 6.5 10.8 14.4


異形
棒鋼 5 8.7
break 11.2 11.9
M bolt
D bar
5

0
50 100 150 200
bore hole depth(mm)

Fig.6 Relation with bore hole depth

473
5. Combination with Boring Machine

5.1 Introduction of SS Drill


The boring becomes the very important element in the bonded anchor to stable precisely
and to make it show that performance.
Although the hammer drill has generally been conventionally used for anchor
construction, the hammer drill is not applicable to boring, while recent years are, since
noise and vibration are large.
Conventional diamond core drill which are low noise and low vibration on the other
hand, had a slow boring speed, its working efficiency was very bad.
Now, we succeeded in the development of SS drill with low noise, low vibration ,in
addition , with a quick boring speed.
Boring speed and noise is shown in Fig. 7.
The following development has attained this performance.
(1) Adoption of small direct current motor
(2) Adoption of durable super thin edge bit

’ S DR

120 100
TIME
MAXMUM NOISE
100
90

NOISE(dB/3m)
80
TIME

SUMMARY OF 80
STANDAR
NOISE(db/3 REVOLUTIONS
TIME (rp
60 BOREHOL
NO MINIMU
MAXMU(s
NOON
e CATALOG
SS φ 2
52×63
0 65 70 16 ## - -
BORING

Hake
kφn
52
2 0 78.0 81 ## ## ## 1100 70
×80
40
STAND
B+BTEC
φ2
52×81
0 79 83 74 ## ## -
HILT
Iφ2
52×80
0 80 86 45 ## ## 2400 60
20 SS φ 20×64

0 71 73 20
HANDY
HLIT
Iφ2
01×79
0D79 80 28
0 φ2
SONOR51×61
05 76 80 53
SS 50
SS HAKKEN B+BTEC HILTI HAMMER
HANDY
HITACHI
φ2
52 ×79
DH
0-84 89 52 ## ## 370
DRILL DRILL
Fig. 7. Boring time and noise of SS drill

474
5.2 Ttensile strength of new-type capsule Anchor in SS Drill Boring
The tensile strength of new-type capsule anchor when SS drill borings was checked.
Although it was thought that the bond strength of the bonded anchor became low, since
the unevenness of hole wall was small ,when a core drill generally bored.
It was contrary to anticipation and bond strength was the value with the biggest case of
SS drill boring.(Fig. 8)

機種 項目
25D1 D1D1 D2 D2
SSドリル
平均5 9 13 11 21
R20 2 0 0 4 1
Tensile strength(ton)

平均
15 4 9 12 10 19
ハンマードリル SS drill
R 0 1 3 3 0
10 Hammer drill

0
D1

D1

D1

D2

D2

D bar size

Fig. 8. Comparison of anchorman adhesion intensity

5.3 The Feature of SS Drill Boring Wall


The following points have been checked from the observation result of hole wall bored
with SS drill.
(1) although the boring wall in SS drill has small unevenness , the aggregate part of
concrete put up inside the hole.
It is presumed, since a bit was a thin edge and this avoided the aggregate part.
(2) although unevenness of hole wall bored by the conventional core drill or hammer
drill is large, protrusion is not specialization of aggregate and cement part cannot be
performed.
This is persumed to appear in the result with high bond tensile .
Moreover, boring in SS drill is excellent in the degree of true circle, and linearity, and it
was checked that the uniform hole is bored.
It is thought that it was connected with the result which this makes reduce the variation
in the hardening situation of adhesives, i.e., the variation of tensile strength.

475
6. Conclusion

The relation of resin composition and anchor strength was newly found out this time.
Based on the result, it succeeded in development of the new-type capsule anchor.
The capsule anchor is the bonded anchor new capsule type which also considered the
safety on use further, and has checked the performance which was excellent in each
performance.
Moreover, it checked about the newly developed diamond core drill, and the original
feature of the high speed and low noise has been checked.Furthermore, it has checked
that it demonstrated the performance which was excellent also in respect of tensile
strength , when boring using this core drill bores the new type capsule anchor.

476
SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF CONNECTIONS BETWEEN
STEEL AND CONCRETE
James O. Jirsa
Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, USA

Expanded Abstract

The poor performance of many structures in recent earthquakes has resulted in the
development of an important new area of structural design—the repair and strengthening
of structures. The designer is often faced with meeting conditions that do not need to be
considered in the design of new structures. These may include:
• performance required by the owner or occupant may not be well defined
• the condition of the structure must be assessed if there has been earthquake or
other damage to the system
• construction options may be limited by the need to maintain occupancy or to
avoid interference with neighboring structures
• time to completion may a prime factor
• modifications to the structure must not lead to new zones of weakness or create
operational problems in the use of the structure
For concrete structures, these constraints often lead to the selection of steel elements to
achieve the changes needed for meeting the performance requirements of the
rehabilitated structure.

Steel elements attached to concrete require connections between the two materials that
will permit the modified element to reach desired strength, deform sufficiently to allow
inelastic response of the element and/or structure, and be constructed economically.
Because concrete and steel have very different stiffness characteristics, it is imperative
that the designer consider those differences in evaluating local, as well as global
response of the rehabilitated element or structure.

479
The purpose of the paper is to identify several rehabilitation systems that involve the use
of steel attached to concrete:
• addition of steel bracing to concrete frames that have low lateral capacity and/or
ductility
• jacketing of elements to improve shear capacity or confinement in columns or
beams that have inadequate confinement or splice details
• addition of steel straps to provide additional tension capacity in beams or to
transfer shear forces between elements.
In each case, the connection between the concrete and the steel must be carefully
detailed to ensure that the desired performance is achieved. Slip between the steel
element and the concrete must be minimized. Anchors used for connecting steel
elements to the concrete must be anchored adequately and the shear stiffness and
strength of the connector must be evaluated.

In the presentation, the use of various strengthening techniques will be described using
field examples. Laboratory tests used to assess the performance of the strengthening
elements and to provide design guidance will be discussed.

480
TESTS ON CONNECTORS FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING
OF CONCRETE AND MASONRY STRUCTURES IN
MEXICO
Sergio M. Alcocer*, Leonardo Flores**
*Director for Research, National Center for Disaster Prevention and Research Professor,
Inst. of Engineering, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
**Researcher, Structural Engineering and Geotechnical Area, National Center for
Disaster Prevention, Mexico

Abstract
The performance of inexpensive fasteners to connect reinforced concrete or mortar
jacketings to existing masonry walls subjected to earthquake-type loading is discussed.
The experimental variables were the type of masonry, amount of steel mesh
reinforcement, the wall jacket material, as well as the type, amount and distribution of
fasteners. Results clearly indicated that wall jacketing is an excellent option for
improving earthquake performance and for avoiding total or partial collapse of brittle
construction, provided that fasteners are properly designed and installed.

1. Introduction

Mexico is located in one of the most active seismic zones in the world. An assessment of
earthquake damage over the past 20 years indicates that yearly average losses amount for
305 people killed and 230 million US dollars in direct and indirect damages (Bitrán,
2000). This study indicates that the housing sector, with both urban and rural
construction, and the telephone facilities outstand as two of the most hardly hit sectors in
the economy.

One of the determining factors for the large seismic risk of housing and phone facilities
has been its high vulnerability. Indeed, Mexico has a vast inventory of existing structures
that were designed and constructed using codes and material standards that pre-date
current stringent requirements for seismic resistant construction. Moreover, a large
portion of those structures, particularly houses in rural areas, was informally built, that is
without the intervention of engineers or architects, and using local, typically weak,
materials. Adobe housing is a prime example of rural construction.

Wall jacketing is one of the rehabilitation techniques most often used to improve
earthquake performance. Wall jacketing consists of a mortar or concrete cover reinforced

481
with a steel welded wire mesh (SWWM) or a “chicken wire” mesh that is attached to the
existing walls. For this scheme to work it is indispensable that earthquake-induced shear
forces be transferred to the jacket by means of fasteners, shear keys or a combination
thereof.

Aimed at understanding the role of connectors in wall jacketing and to develop analysis,
design and construction recommendations, three experimental programs were
undertaken at the National Center for Disaster Prevention, CENAPRED. A complete
discussion of the experimental data can be found elsewhere (Alcocer et al. 1996;
Alarcón & Alcocer 1999; Flores et al. 1999). In each program, large-scale specimens
were built and tested under a constant vertical axial load and cyclic lateral loads. In all
cases, the cost of fastening technology was kept as low as possible. This was especially
the case for the application to low cost housing, both for rural and urban structures.

2. Wall Jacketing of Adobe Housing

Adobe construction in Mexico is typically found in small villages, mainly in the


countryside. Adobe houses are commonly one-story buildings, with a rectangular plan of
4x8 m. The structural system consists of perimeter load-bearing walls, 3-m high and
300-to-600-mm thick. Walls are made of adobe blocks joined by mud mortar. Although
roof systems vary, a typical roof consists of timber trusses that support shingles and clay
tiles. Earthquake damage of this type of construction may be generally attributed to the
low tensile strength of adobe masonry, aging and lack of maintenance. The most
common damage patterns in this type of construction are schematically shown in Fig. 1.

Figure 1. Damage patterns in Mexican adobe houses

482
Previous studies on rehabilitation schemes of Mexican adobe houses (Hernandez 1979)
have indicated that the construction of a perimeter tensile chord on top of the walls or
jacketing a wall with a mortar cover reinforced with a gage 14 wire (1,9-mm diameter)
were viable options for reducing the likelihood of collapse. To further evaluate the
efficiency of connectors and mesh size on wall jacketing, three full-scale adobe load-
bearing walls were built and tested. The control specimen, A1, was an unreinforced
adobe wall. After tested, A1 was repaired with a “chicken wire” mesh covered with
mortar, and was retested (specimen A1R). Specimens A2 and A3, of similar geometry to
A1, were strengthened without prior damage by means of a mortar jacket. In A2, jacket
reinforcement consisted of SWWM’s made of gage-10 wire (3,43-mm diameter) with
nominal yield stress of fy = 490 MPa and equally spaced at 150 mm in orthogonal
directions. In wall A3, a “chicken wire” mesh was used. “Chicken wire” mesh is made of
gage-20 wire spaced at 50 mm, fy = 640 MPa. In all cases, commercially available
galvanized steel staples were used for fastening the jacket SWWM’s. Staples are made
of gage-9 wire (3,76-mm diameter), with fy = 390 MPa, and were installed at 300-mm
spacing (10 staples/m²). Staples used were 38-mm long. Cover mortar had a 1½:4½
volume ratio of portland cement and sand. Mortar jackets were, on the average, 30-mm
thick and were hand-placed on both wall faces.

Strengthening guidelines have recommended fastening the SWWM’s on both wall faces
by means of steel cross ties placed through the wall thickness in holes perforated with
hand drills (UNDP 1983). Such holes are thereafter filled with some epoxy or cement-
based mortars. This recommendation is suitable for urban adobe construction, where
drill hammers and trained labor are readily available. Due to the limited applicability of
this fastening technology in Mexican rural houses, a simple and inexpensive solution, yet
technically sound, was searched for. Steel staples were then found to be easy to install
(just by hammering into the adobe wall) and very inexpensive (0.16 USD a piece). The
evaluation of its technical feasibility was part of the study.

The measured axial compressive strength of adobe blocks was fp* = 2,65 MPa; the
compressive strength of adobe prisms was fm* = 0,62 MPa; and the diagonal compressive
strength of adobe walls obtained was vm* = 0,03 MPa. The dimensions of the specimens
were 2,5? 2,5? 0,35 m. Walls were constructed according to the local practice in the
Mexican state of Michoacán. The horizontal reinforcement ratios, ph, of specimens A1R,
A2 and A3, based on adobe wall area, were 0,007%, 0,035% and 0,007%, respectively.

In one face of all rehabilitated walls, the SWWM was fastened directly in contact with
the adobe wall and then covered with mortar. On the other face, the SWWM was
fastened after a first 10-mm mortar cover was placed on the wall; the mesh was then
finally covered with mortar until it reached the final 30-mm thickness. Specimens were
tested under a constant vertical stress of 0,07 MPa.

Final crack patterns and hysteresis loops are shown in Fig. 2. In A1, one inclined shear
crack following the mortar joints controlled the behavior. Hysteresis loops were quite

483
stable and with good energy dissipation capacity. Strength was reached at over 0,4%
drift ratio, for a corresponding shear stress of 0,034 MPa. After repair, A1R was retested.
Failure mode was changed to sliding of the wall as a rigid body. This occurred at a shear
stress of 0,05 MPa (based on adobe area) that in turn, corresponded to a static friction
modulus of 0,76. To fail the specimen, horizontal and vertical loads were then
monotonically applied to simulate a large diagonal compression test. Strength was
reached at a diagonal stress of 0,2 MPa (six times the original strength).

Figure 2. Crack patterns and hysteretic behavior of adobe walls

Similarly to A1R, specimens A2 and A3 were initially tested under cyclic loads. Prior to
sliding of the walls, specimens were then tested monotonically through a diagonal
compression load. Measured strengths were equivalent to diagonal stresses of 0,28 and
0,27 MPa, respectively (based on the adobe area only). Strengths attained corresponded
to large cracks on the mortar and the yielding of SWWM’s. A more uniform distribution
of cracks was observed in wall faces where a first mortar cover was placed prior to
fastening the SWWM. In both faces, staples remained anchored to the wall, even in
locations close to the large diagonal cracks.

484
3. Wall Jacketing of Hand-Made Clay Brick Masonry

Clay brick masonry has been the most popular construction material in urban areas in
Mexico. Typically, the structural system consists of load-bearing walls confined through
vertical and horizontal RC tie-columns and bond-beams. Such system has performed
excellently under very intense earthquakes only when adequately spaced, detailed and
built confinement elements existed, as well as when sufficient lateral strength and
stiffness were available. However, it is quite usual to find houses of this material where
current requirements for seismic resistance are not fulfilled. For such cases, wall
jacketing is one rehabilitation technique suitable for improving its lateral strength,
stiffness and toughness.

To better understand the resistance mechanisms and to develop design and construction
guides, one two-story, three-dimensional confined masonry structure was repaired. Also,
a series of four full-scale isolated confined masonry walls were tested. Specimens were
built with hand-made burnt clay bricks joined with a portland cement mortar. Specimen
dimensions, reinforcement details and mechanical properties of materials are presented
in Fig. 3. All specimens were designed to fail in shear.

Figure 3. Characteristics of clay brick walls

Specimen 3D was firstly tested by applying lateral displacements controlled by drift


angle. Consistent with actual damage patterns observed after earthquakes, distress was
concentrated in the ground story walls. Therefore, only such walls were repaired.

485
Crushed and spalled tie-column concrete was removed and replaced by concrete with
similar mechanical characteristics. Largest masonry cracks were filled with mortar and
brick debris. Finally, the exterior side of the walls was jacketed with a mortar and a
SWWM. The specimen was retested using the same displacement history (Alcocer et al.
1996). Common steel nails for timber construction, 50-mm long and made of gage-10
wire were used to fasten the SWWM’s. Fasteners were placed by carefully hammering
them into the wall, of the grid intersections. The nail head was then bent around the wire
intersection to secure the mesh in position. Fastener density was 9/m². The meshes were
placed in the mid-thickness of the mortar cover, so that a 7-mm spacer was used between
the wall and the mesh. This has been a typical fastening technology used in Mexican
practice.

In the isolated wall series, M0 was the control specimen. M1 to M3 were undamaged
confined masonry walls strengthened with wall jackets on both faces, in which the
horizontal reinforcement ratios were 0,072, 0,147 and 0,211%, respectively. In M1 and
M2, with meshes made of gages-10 (3,43 mm) and -6 (4,88 mm) wire respectively, same
fasteners in 3DR were used. However, no spacers were provided, so that the mesh was
placed against the masonry wall. The amount of fasteners was different in the two faces,
namely 5 and 11/m². For M3, where a steel mesh with a 6,35 mm wire diameter was
used, Hilti ZF-51 fasteners were installed. This 51-mm long nail made of gage-10 wire
was used in combination with a 36-mm diameter metal washer also supplied by Hilti.
Fasteners were powder driven at the intersection of vertical and horizontal mesh wires
with the DXE72 tool. The washer was intended to clamp the vertical and horizontal
wires at the intersection. Again, no spacers were used. During construction it became
evident that this fastening technology was installed faster and is more reliable than the
typical hand-driven nails. The speed of installation offset the higher cost of the Hilti-type
fasteners as compared to the inexpensive nails.

Final crack patterns and hysteresis loops are shown in Fig. 4. Jacketed specimens
exhibited a very uniform distribution of cracks and increased strength as compared to
those in the control specimens (3D and M0). At same drift levels, crack widths in
jacketed specimens were smaller than those recorded in control structures. In 3DR, at
drifts to 0,46%, it became apparent that fasteners had been pulled out. This was
attributed to the increased shear flexibility of the nail-spacer system and the reduced
anchorage length of the nail into the masonry, when compared to the same nail without
spacer used in M1 and M2. M1 failed after fracture of SWWM horizontal wires that led
to shearing off the lower ends of the tie-columns.

4. Wall Jacketing of Concrete Masonry Infills

In the aftermath of the 1985 Mexico City earthquakes, the country’s telephone
infrastructure was severely damaged. The two buildings that handled international and
domestic long distances suffered structural and equipment damage, rendering to a total
loss of the country's capability of long distance service (Teléfonos 1988). To improve

486
system redundancy and reduce building vulnerability, the company has carried out a
very successful strategy of rehabilitation of their most critical facilities. One of the
techniques used to improve performance has been the addition of new RC walls attached
to both the existing RC frame and concrete masonry unit (CMU) infills at the perimeter
of the building. Note that infills and perimeter frames are flush so that, for concrete
placement, they would act as forms for one side of the new wall. To achieve a positive
shear transfer and monolithic behavior between the new and existing elements, dowel
bars have been used; however, detailing, number and distribution varied depending upon
the design office and the contractor. Some required epoxied dowels in both the masonry
infill and the RC frame; others only in the frame. In some cases, dowels in the walls
were just epoxied at the mortar joints, whereas in other instances the dowels passed
through the walls and were welded to small 6,4-mm thick steel plates inside the building.
This variety of solutions had, evidently, very different costs.

Figure 4. Final crack patterns and hysteresis curves of jacketed clay brick walls

To assess the effectiveness of this upgrading scheme, as well as the performance of


different solutions for fastening, four specimens were built and tested (Fig. 5). Structures

487
represented 1:1.3 scaled models of a one bay of a prototype building. T0 was the control
specimen. In the strengthened (undamaged) specimen TP, epoxied dowel bars were
placed in the perimeter RC frame, whereas in TD, dowel bars were distributed both in
the frame and in the infilled masonry wall. Preliminary studies on isolated small
specimens indicated that dowels with welded steel plates on the back of the wall
performed as well as epoxied dowel bars placed in the mortar joint and embedded 80
mm into the wall thickness (Flores et al. 1999). Moreover, the latter solution was
evidently more cost-effective. A two-component commercial epoxy resin was used to
install the dowel bars. In TH, Hilti ZF-72 powder driven fasteners with a 25-mm spacer
were installed. The spacers, made of a steel square tube, were provided to locate the
SWWM in the mid-thickness of the concrete jacket. In the design of fasteners of all
structures tested, it was assumed that transfer of forces between the existing and new
elements would be developed through shear friction.

Figure 5. Characteristics of RC frames infilled with CMU’s

Final crack patterns and hysteresis loops are shown in Fig. 6. Damage in T0 was
controlled by shear-compression of the masonry infill. Specimens TP and TD showed a
very similar behavior in terms of their uniform crack distribution and hysteretic curves.
Failure was triggered by shear—compression cracking and crushing of the infill.
Analysis of strain gage data indicated that strains in the dowel bars on the masonry infill
were negligible, thus suggesting that their participation in transferring forces was
minimal. Indeed, shear transfer was accomplished through shear friction between the
wall and the RC frame (where dowels were actually strained), and by means of bond
between CMU’s and the RC jacket (Flores et al. 1999). Fasteners in TH did not perform
as intended, since at drifts to 0,4%, it was apparent that the anchorage was lost and that
further shear transfer was impaired. Substandard performance was a combination of the
excessive shear flexibility of the fastener due to the spacer, as well as of its reduced
anchorage depth. During installation, part of the energy released by the powder charge
was rebound due to the elastic deformation of the spacer, thus leaving the remainder
energy to actually drive the fastener into the infill.

488
Figure 6. Final crack patterns and hysteresis curves of jacketed concrete masonry infills

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the observations made during the tests, and on the analysis of the
instrumentation, the following conclusions and recommendations regarding the design
and installation of fasteners were developed. Recommendations are applicable to
existing structures with similar material characteristics as those reported herein.

Wall jacketing proved to be a technically viable option for improving earthquake


performance of existing structures. Its cyclic behavior strongly depends on the ability to
transfer forces between new and existing elements through an adequately designed and
installed fastening technology.

For adobe rehabilitation, steel staples, 38-mm long, made of gage-9 wire and hammered
into the adobe wall, proved to be a strong and stiff fastening system. Prior to the
installation of the staples, it is recommended to place a 10-mm thick mortar cover on the
adobe wall. Final mortar thickness should be of the order of 25-to-30 mm.

In clay brick masonry, for light gage meshes (up to 4,11-mm wire diameter), 50-mm
long steel nails driven into the wall can be used as fasteners. However, powder-driven

489
connectors are most cost-effective and reliable. Nine connectors per m² are
recommended. In clay brick construction, SWWM’s should be installed directly against
the masonry wall without using spacers.

The addition of a new RC wall connected to existing infilled RC frames through epoxied
dowel bars performed satisfactorily. Moreover, it was found that dowel bars located
uniformly on the masonry infill do not significantly participate in the shear transfer
mechanism, since most shear is taken by dowels on the frame and bond between the new
concrete and the existing infill. To connect a new RC wall, it is recommended to design
the fasteners using a “capacity design approach”. Therefore, epoxied dowel bars should
have strength, based on a shear friction model, of 1.5 times the maximum shear force
expected to be resisted by the jacketed wall.

References

1. Bitrán, D., 'Características e Impacto Socioeconómico de los Principales Desastres


Ocurridos en México en el Periodo 1980-1999', Centro Nacional para la Prevención
de Desastres, Mexico, September 2000.
2. Alcocer, S.M., Ruiz, J., Pineda, J.A. and Zepeda, J.A., 'Retrofitting of Confined
Masonry Walls with Welded Wire Mesh', Proceedings of the Eleventh World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, June 1996, paper no.
1471.
3. Alarcón, P. and Alcocer S.M., 'Ensayes Experimentales sobre Rehabilitación de
Estructuras de Adobe', (in Spanish) Proceedings, XII Congreso Nacional de
Ingeniería Sísmica, Morelia, Mich., Mexico, Vol. I, (1999) 209-217.
4. Flores, L.E., Marcelino, J., Lazalde, G. and Alcocer, S.M., 'Evaluación experimental
del desempeño de marcos con bloque hueco de concreto reforzado con malla
electrosoldada y recubrimiento de concreto', Centro Nacional para la Prevención de
Desastres, Mexico, IEG/03/99, October 1999.
5. Hernández, O., Meli, R. and Padilla M., 'Refuerzo de vivienda rural en zonas
sísmicas'; Institute of Engineering, UNAM, Mexico, (1979) 45 pp.
6. UNDP/UNIDO, 'Repair and strengthening of reinforcing concrete, tone and brick
masonry buildings', RER/79/015, Building Construction under Seismic Conditions in
the Balkan Regions Vol. 5, ONU, Industrial Development Programme, Viena,
Austria, (1983).
7. Teléfonos de México, 'Reto Sísmico: Incrementar la Seguridad y Mantener el
Servicio de las Centrales Telefónicas', México, (1988) 290 pp.

Acknowledgements

The participation of J. Pineda, A. Otálora, P. Alarcón, J. Marcelino, G. Lazalde, P.


Olmos and C. Olmos is gratefully acknowledged. The support of CENAPRED,
Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo and Teléfonos de México is
recognized.

490
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL
ANCHORAGE FOR POWER-PLANTS
Peter J. Carrato, William F. Brittle
Bechtel Power Corporation, USA

Abstract
Fossil fueled power-plant projects provide many design and construction challenges for
connection of steel to concrete. Heavily loaded anchorages are required to support
building structures and hold down machinery and equipment. Column bases for coal
fired boiler support structures can transmit loads in the order of 4000 kN of tension and
2000 kN of shear. This magnitude of tension load requires groups of high strength bolts
100mm and larger in diameter. Shear loads are resisted using hot rolled structural
shapes or heavy plate (up to 50mm thick) as shear lugs. Power-plant equipment such as
turbo-generators, condensers, stacks, fans and pumps require precision placement of
anchor bolts and shear lugs, often in the vicinity of congested reinforcing steel and
embedded pipe and conduit. Construction consideration for column bases and
equipment foundations often have a significant impact on the structural design.

1. Introduction

Construction of a power
generating facility involves a
variety of applications of
anchorage to concrete.
Literally truckloads of anchor
bolts are used in the
construction of these facilities
as can be seen in Figure 1. This
paper describes some of the
wide variety of connection to
concrete found in a typical, Figure 1 - Truckload of bolts
natural gas fired power plant.

491
Special emphasis is given to seismic resistant applications from projects being
constructed in Taiwan, Turkey and California, as well as, high precision anchorage of
turbine generator sets. In a fossil fuel fired power plant, most connections to concrete
are made in cast in place foundations. These connections can be categorized into those
that support structures and those that anchor equipment.

Structural support include typical


column base plates for turbine
halls (Figure 2), pipe racks, water
treatment buildings, etc, and more
exotic bases, some of which
allowing for thermal expansion at
columns that support heat recovery
steam generator (HRSG) boilers
(Figure 3). Anchoring of tanks for
fuel, water, and chemicals presents
a unique structural application due
to the large numbers of bolts
required for a single foundation.
Figure 4 shows a template used to
set a stack.
Figure 2 Turbine Hall

Figure 3 HSRG Figure 4 Stack

Equipment anchorage is characterized by the need to resist dynamic loads using


precisely located fasteners. Rotating equipment such as turbine generators, pumps and
fans may require pre-loading anchor bolts to meet requirements given by their

492
manufacturer. Non-rotating equipment like condensers and valves can present unique
applications due to transient or operating conditions.

2. Machinery Foundation – Turbine Generators

The turbine generators (T/G) are those pieces of equipment, which turn mechanical
energy into electricity. It is often the most expensive component part of a power plant.
As such, the anchorage of this equipment is given special attention. Anchoring devices
used for turbine generators include not only those to secure the equipment in its final
locations, but also those required to precisely position the machine. It is common to see
anchor bolts 100 mm in diameter that must be placed with tolerances as tight as ± 3 mm
to ± 1 mm.

Critical design considerations for these applications include a variety of static and
dynamic loads. The most significant design loads are those due to postulated machine
malfunctions. Specifically the loss of a turbine blade or the short circuit of a generator
can produce anchor bolt loads as high as 500 kN. The structural design of T/G
anchorage also requires careful consideration of the thermal growth experienced by the
machine as it heats up during normal operation. It is common for the temperature of the
turbine casing to increase by 200 °C as
the machine goes from cold shut down to
full operation.

Some of the larger loads transferred to a


T/G foundation are those associated with
aligning the machines. The shafts of the
turbine and generator must be in perfect
alignment. Embedded structural steel
profiles (hot rolled shapes) called jacking
posts are used as reaction points for
hydraulic jacks used to position the
machines in a horizontal plane as shown
Figure 5 Jacking Posts
in Figure 5. Jacking post forces are often
as high as 150 kN.

A number of different techniques are


used for vertical alignment. These
include grout pads and shims, jacking
bolts and shims, and patented
positioning devices. The choice of
vertical alignment method depends on
weight of the machine and the Figure 6 Grout Pad
experience of the contractor performing

493
the installation. In the grout pad
method (Figure 6), small pillars of
grout are formed on which shims may
be set, if needed, to achieve the final
vertical position of the machine. The
base plate is then set.

Jacking bolts are threaded into the


base plate and thus allow the plated
Figure 7 Jacking Bolt
position to be adjusted by turning the
bolt. This is illustrated in Figure 7.
Once the final location is achieved, the plate is shimmed and then grouted.

Patented positioning devices consist of small screw or hydraulic jacks that are placed in
a pocket in the concrete foundation. After the jacks have positioned the machine the
device is grouted in place. Figure 8 shows a Fixator brand of positioning devices being
used to set a generator.

To position and anchor a T/G set


while allowing for thermal growth,
requires a wide variety of anchoring
devices. Jacking posts, positioning
devices and anchor bolts have
already been mentioned. In addition
to these fasteners, sole plates, center
line guides, and stop blocks are also
used. A sole plate is an embedded
bearing plate on which the machine
rests and/or slides during thermal
growth. Center line guides are
positioned along the shaft of the
machine and control the direction of
thermal expansion. Stop blocks are Figure 8 Positioning Device
employed to limit the extent of
thermal growth. These steel blocks
are precisely positioned at the end of sole plates and restrain the machine after a
predetermined amount of movement.

Holding down a turbine or generator often requires 20 or more anchor bolts. To


accurately cast this number of bolts into a concrete foundation typically requires one of
two possible construction methods. Either the bolts must be designed so that their
position may be adjusted after the concrete has set or the entire bolt group must be
placed using a template that assures their precise location. Use of through bolts or an
adjustable sleeve, will allow bolt positions to be adjusted after placing concrete. For

494
elevated concrete decks, through bolts in oversized holes are recommended. When
access to the underside of the slab is not available then an adjustable sleeve and pocket
arrangement may be used. Both of these applications, shown in Figure 9; allow the bolts
to be tensioned after setting the machine.

When the anchor bolts are not to be preloaded after setting the machine a template may
be used to position the bolt group.
Templates are typically made from
structural steel. The template should
be fully welded or bolted together
before drilling holes for the anchor
bolts. The holes should only be 2 mm
larger than the diameter of the bolts.
Templates should be firmly supported
preferably from existing concrete. It
is not advisable to support a template
from concrete formwork or rebar as
the forms or rebar may shift during
placement and consolidation of the
concrete. Templates are intended to Figure 9 Bolt Sleeves
fix the location of the top of the anchor
bolts. For long bolts the lower portion of the bolt should be tied to the reinforcing steel
thus assuring that the bolts will plumb.

3. Structural Anchors

Structural anchors in power generating facilities present many challenges ranging from
fastening a one half horse power pump to a 200 mm thick concrete pad to anchoring a
column carrying 5000 kN of force to a 2 meter thick slab. Each of these various
applications has its own unique concerns with designing the anchorage, positioning the
bolts, installing the base plate and grouting the final assembly. By far, the most
interesting designs are those associated with a combination large shear and uplift forces.

In high seismic zones such as those found in Turkey, Taiwan and California large lateral
loads must be transmitted from the superstructure to the foundation. Often these high
lateral seismic loads can produce overturning moments on the structure that create uplift

495
at these anchorage points. Connections such as these that must resist both uplift and
large lateral forces are the
most challenging to
design. In these cases, an
arrangement of anchor bolts
designed to resist tension
only and shear lugs designed
to resist lateral loads is
required.

Figure 10 Small Shear Lug

Figures 10 and 11 show column base plates designed for such loads. Figure 10 shows a
shear lug consisting a single 18 mm thick plate that is designed to resist moderate levels
of lateral load (75 to 10 kN).

Figure 11 shows an H shaped


shear lug made of 50 mm thick
plates. This lug is designed to
resist significant levels of shear,
up to 400 kN

Figure 11 Large Shear Lug

496
Another practical way to resist large lateral loads is to embed the lower portion of the
column shaft into a pocket in the
foundation. This method, shown
in Figure 12, works well in thick
mat foundations such as those
often used in power plant
structures.

There is little reference material


that can be used to design a shear
lug such as that shown in Figure
11. The design process should
specifically consider the following
1) the strength of the lug, 2) the
stiffness of the lug relative to the
surrounding concrete and 3) the
connection of the lug to the base Figure 12 Column Pocket
plate. Of these three items
connection of the lug to the base
plate is the least understood and has the greatest impact on the cost of the anchorage.

There are two design approaches used for this welded connection. The simplest and
most straight forward considers the weld to take only the shear load transferred from the
base plate to the lug. This results in very economical connection typically using a fillet
weld. The other design approach is to assume that the bearing pressure applied to the
face of the lug results in a bending moment on the weld of the lug to the base plate. This
assumption invariably leads to a full penetration weld of the lug to the base plate. Such a
weld applied to a 50 mm thick lug may increase the cost of the column-base plate
assembly by as much as 50%. A well documented, definitive design method for large
capacity shear lugs would be beneficial to design engineers.

4. Conclusion

Design and construction of power plant facilities provide a wide variety of connections
between steel and concrete. This paper has discussed a number of applications
associated with anchoring structures and equipment. It is important to recognize that
construction issues greatly influence the final design in many cases. Precision placement
of anchor bolts and shear lugs, as well as provisions for grouting the final installation
often require more engineering activity than the structural design of the connection.

497
DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF SINGLE AND DOUBLE NEAR-
EDGE ANCHORS LOADED IN SHEAR
Jennifer Hallowell Gross*, Richard E. Klingner**, and Herman L. Graves, III***
* Cagley, Harman & Associates, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, USA., Former The
University of Texas at Austin.
** Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
*** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., USA.

Abstract
Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program
was carried out on the dynamic behavior of anchors (fasteners) in concrete. In this
paper, the dynamic response of single and double near-edge anchors loaded in shear is
described. Hairpin reinforcement significantly increases the ductility of near-edge
anchors loaded in shear. For the anchor diameters, spacings, and edge distances of this
research program, behavior of double anchor connections could be approximated by
combining the load-displacement behavior of each anchor, evaluated independently.

1. Objectives and Scope

Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program


was carried out on the dynamic behavior of anchors in concrete. The research program
comprised four tasks:

1) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Single Tensile Anchors (250 tests);


2) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Multiple Tensile Anchors (179 tests);
3) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Near-Edge Anchors (150 tests); and
4) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections (16 tests).

In this paper, dealing primarily with Task 3, the behavior of single and multiple shear
anchors is described. Complete results are given in References 1 and 2.

498
2. Anchors, Test Setups and Procedures

Based on surveys of existing anchors in nuclear applications, the tests described here
involved cast-in-place anchors, one wedge-type expansion anchor (referred to here as
“Expansion Anchor II”), with some tests on one undercut anchor (“UC Anchor 1”).
Based on current use in nuclear applications, it was decided to test anchors ranging in
diameter from 3/8 to 1 in. (9.2 to 25.4 mm), with emphasis on 3/4 in. (19.1 mm)
diameter. The tests of Task 3 involved anchors with a diameter of 3/4 in. (19.1 mm).

The Cast-in-Place (CIP) anchors tested in Task 3 were A325 bolts, shown in Figure 1.
The Expansion Anchor II (EAII) tested in this study is shown in Figure 2. The Undercut
Anchor 1 (UC1) tested throughout this study is conventionally opening, and is shown in
Figure 3.

Figure 1 Typical cast-in-place anchor (A325 bolt) tested in Task 3


of this study

wedge dimple
wedge mandrel (cone)
D1
D2
D

lc

Figure 2 Key dimensions of EAII

threaded shank extension sleeve expansion sleeve


cone
D1

D2
D

lef lc

Figure 3 Key dimensions of UC1

An important objective of Task 3 was to determine the influence of dynamic loading on


anchor capacity as governed by concrete breakout. To ensure breakout failure, 4 in. (100
mm) embedment was chosen, which is representative of the manufacturer’s standard or
minimum embedment.

499
Single-anchor connections were tested at an edge distance of 4 in. (100 mm). Double-
anchor connections were composed of a front anchor with a 4 in. (100 mm) edge
distance, and a back anchor with a 12 in. (300 mm) edge distance. The spacing between
the two anchors was 8 in. (200 mm), twice the embedment depth. Some tests were
conducted with a U-shaped #6 (19 mm) reinforcing bar, referred to as a “hairpin,”
restraining the anchor [3]. The hairpin was placed directly against the anchor in some
tests (“close hairpin”), and at 1-1/4 in. (32 mm) from the anchor in other tests (“far
hairpin”).

The target concrete compressive strength for this testing program was 4700 lb/in.2 (32.4
MPa), with a permissible tolerance of ±500 lb/in.2 (±3.45 MPa) at the time of testing.
The concrete used a local river-gravel aggregate. Specimens for Task 3 were cast in
blocks of dimensions 87 in. x 30 in. x 14 in. (2.21 m x 0.36 m x 0.76 m) with
reinforcement located at mid-depth.

The test setup for Task 3 is shown in Figure 4. Tests on single anchors used the loading
shoe of Figure 5; on double anchors, the loading shoe of Figure 6. As shown in Figure
6, the anchors to be tested were inserted through the hole or holes in the shoe. The shank
of the anchor was surrounded by a hardened steel insert, and the anchor was tightened by
a nut placed in a recessed hole in the baseplate. For CIP anchors, the critical shear plane
passed through the unthreaded portion of the anchor shank. For post-installed anchors,
the critical shear plane passed through the anchor threads, and did not include the anchor
sleeve.
Test Frame Hydraulic Load Cell
Ram Nut

Threaded
Concrete Block Rod

Figure 4 Setup for shear tests of Task 3

9-1/2”
17-1/2”

2”
1-1/8” 2”
1-1/4”

1-1/8”
1-1/4”
2-1/8” 2-1/8”
4” 4” 8”

Figure 5 Loading shoe for single- Figure 6 Loading plate for double-anchor
anchor shear tests shear tests

500
Horizontal movement of the loading shoe was equivalent to the horizontal movement of
the anchor. A linear potentiometer placed against the shoe measured the displacement of
the anchor. The crack opening was measured with two direct-current differential
transformers (DCDT’s), placed behind the anchor and on the side of the block. The
DCDT’s were attached to a steel plate glued to the surface on the concrete and reacted
against a steel angle that was also glued to the surface of the concrete on the opposite
side of the crack.

Tests were conducted under static and dynamic loading. Static loading involved
monotonically increasing loads to failure in two to four minutes. For dynamic testing, to
ensure anchor failure, a ramp loading was used, with a rise time of about 0.1 seconds,
corresponding to that of typical earthquake response of mounted equipment.

For tests in cracked concrete, using post-installed anchors, 0.3 mm cracks were initiated
using hardened steel wedges and splitting tubes. For cast-in-place anchors, sheet-steel
crack initiators were used.

Anchors were tightened to the torque specified by the manufacturer. To simulate the
reduction of prestressing force in anchors in service due to concrete relaxation, anchors
were first fully torqued, then released after about 5 minutes to allow the relaxation to
take place, and finally torqued again, but up to only 50% of the specified values.

3. Test Results

Behavior of Single-Anchor Connections under Shear Loading


For CIP anchors, Figure 7 shows the effects of dynamic loading, cracked concrete, and
far hairpins (supplementary U-shaped reinforcement placed 1-1/4 in. or 32 mm clear
from the anchor) on the concrete breakout capacity of single CIP anchors loaded in
shear. Under dynamic loading, the breakout capacity of CIP anchors is higher than
under static loading, other conditions being the same. The increase in capacity is
approximately 20% for CIP anchors, regardless of whether hairpins are used, and
regardless of whether the concrete is cracked or not. Cracked concrete reduces the
breakout capacity of CIP anchors by about 18%, compared with the corresponding
uncracked cases. Anchors with far hairpins retain more of their original capacity. This
is because the concrete between the anchor and the far hairpin is well confined, reducing
the effect of cracking. In addition, the reduction in capacity due to cracked concrete is
lower for dynamic loading than for static loading. This is because the additional crack
opening is generally lower under dynamic loading than under static loading.

Figure 8 shows the effects of dynamic loading and far hairpins on the concrete breakout
capacity of EAII and UC1 anchors. For EAII, the increase in breakout capacity due to
dynamic loading is 20%, similar to that for CIP anchors. UC1 has an increase in
capacity of only 12%. The breakout capacity of these post-installed anchors with a far
hairpin is lower than the breakout capacity of CIP anchors with a far hairpin, possibly

501
because EAII is not as stiff as the CIP anchor. In a few cases, the concrete cracked
during installation of UC1, reducing breakout capacity. Increases in breakout capacity
due to hairpins, and decreases in breakout capacity due to cracked concrete, were similar
to those observed for CIP anchors.

Figure 9 shows the effect of those same factors on ultimate capacity, taken here as the
highest load recorded up to a maximum displacement of 1.2 in. (30 mm). Ultimate
failure of CIP single-anchor connections with no hairpin occurred at concrete cone
breakout. Connections with hairpins withstood significant additional load after concrete
cone breakout. The ultimate load is approximately the same for each test type. Anchors
restrained by a hairpin bent around the hairpin until the anchor displaced more than 1.2
in. (30 mm), or until load-carrying capacity was reduced because the anchor either
fractured, or deformed excessively. Capacity of anchors with hairpins depends on the
strength of the anchor steel rather than the strength of the concrete. Therefore, the
ultimate capacity is essentially independent of loading rate and cracking of concrete.
Effect of Loading Rate and Cracked Concrete on Concrete Cone Breakout
Load of Cast-in-Place Anchor Loaded in Shear
20.0 89.0

15.2 15.6
16.0 14.7 71.2
Maximum Load (kips)

Maximum Load (kN)


13.9
12.6
12.0
11.2
12.0 10.8 53.4
10.4 No Hairpin
9.6
8.8 Close Hairpin
7.2
8.0 35.6 Far Hairpin

4.0 17.8

0.0 0.0
CIP Static CIP CIP Static CIP
Uncracked Dynamic Cracked Dynamic
Uncracked Cracked
Test Type

Figure 7 Effect of loading rate and cracked concrete on concrete


cone breakout load of CIP single-anchor connections
loaded in shear

502
Effect of Loading Rate on Concrete Cone Breakout Load of
Expansion Anchor II and Undercut Anchor 1 Loaded in Shear
12.0 53.4

10.3
9.6
9.2
9.0 40.0
Maximum Load (kips)

Maximum Load (kN)


7.9

6.0 26.7 EAII Far Hairpin


UC1 Far Hairpin

3.0 13.3

0.0 0.0
Static Dynamic
Uncracked Uncracked
Test Type

Figure 8 Effect of loading rate on concrete cone breakout load of


EAII and UC1 single-anchor connections loaded in shear

The ultimate capacity of EAII and UC1 with a far hairpin are shown in Figure 10. The
dynamic capacity of EAII is 14% higher than the static capacity, because the anchor
tended to pull out as it displaced under static loading, but not under dynamic loading.
As with CIP anchors with hairpins, the ultimate capacity of UC1 depends on the anchor
steel, and is not significantly affected by loading rate.

503
Effect of Loading Rate and Cracked Concrete on
Ultimate Load of Cast-in-Place Anchor Loaded in Shear
30.0 133.4

24.1
25.0 111.2
22.9 22.1
21.4
Maximum Load (kips)

Maximum Load (kN)


20.0 18.0 89.0
17.3 18.0
16.1
No Hairpin
15.0 66.7 Close Hairpin
11.2
10.4 Far Hairpin
8.8
10.0 44.5
7.2

5.0 22.2

0.0 0.0
CIP Static CIP CIP Static CIP
Uncracked Dynamic Cracked Dynamic
Uncracked Cracked
Test Type

Figure 9 Effect of loading rate and cracked concrete on ultimate


load of CIP single-anchor connections loaded in shear

The ultimate capacity of these post-installed anchors with a far hairpin is lower than the
ultimate capacity of CIP anchors with a far hairpin. This is partially due to the lower
stiffness of EAII, to cracking at installation of UC1, and to differences in the load
transfer mechanism of each anchor.

As shown in Figure 11, hairpins increase the failure displacement of near-edge CIP
anchors loaded in shear by a factor between 9.5 and 14.3 for close hairpins, and between
7.5 and 13.1 for far hairpins. The largest increases in failure displacement occur for
dynamic loading in uncracked concrete; the smallest, for dynamic loading in cracked
concrete. Similar increases are observed for post-installed anchors.

Behavior of Double-Anchor Connections under Shear Loading


The objective of the double-anchor tests was to compare single- and double-anchor tests
and thereby assess the extent of load sharing as well as the interaction of the two
anchors. To achieve this objective, a conceptual model was developed and compared
with actual test results.

504
Effect of Loading Rate on Ultimate Load of
Expansion Anchor II and Undercut Anchor 1 Loaded in Shear
18.0 80.1

14.8 15.1
15.0 66.7
Maximum Load (kips)

Maximum Load (kN)


12.0 53.4
9.8
8.6
EAII Far Hairpin
9.0 40.0
UC1 Far Hairpin

6.0 26.7

3.0 13.3

0.0 0.0
Static Dynamic
Uncracked Uncracked
Test Type

Figure 10 Effect of loading rate on ultimate load of EAII and UC1 single-
anchor connections loaded in shear

Effect of Hairpin on Displacement at Ultimate Load


of Cast-in-Place Anchor Loaded in Shear
16.00
14.35
13.40 13.15 13.13
11.96
Normalized by No Hairpin

12.00
Displacement

9.46
8.91 Static Uncracked
7.47 Dynamic Uncracked
8.00
Static Cracked
Dynamic Cracked

4.00

1.001.001.001.00

0.00
No Hairpin Close Hairpin Far Hairpin

Hairpin Type

Figure 11 Effect of hairpin on displacement at ultimate load of CIP single-


anchor connections loaded in shear

The conceptual model is based on the hypothesis that the two anchors are far enough
from each other that each behaves individually, and the response of the double-anchor

505
connection is therefore equal to the sum of the responses of each anchor. The model
assumes a rigid baseplate, so that the displacements of the two anchors and the baseplate
are all equal to each other. Figure 12 shows the load-displacement results from (A)
shear tests on a single near-edge anchor, (B) shear tests on a single back anchor, (C) the
summation of those two single anchor tests, and (D) shear tests on a double-anchor
connection. All are for anchors under static loading with a close hairpin in uncracked
concrete. The summation (C) of the curves for the single-anchor behavior and the back
anchor behavior is generally close to (D) the curve for the double-anchor connection.
The curve for the double-anchor connection is shifted to the right slightly compared to
the curve for the summation of the two anchors because the baseplate slipped during the
double-anchor test. In all cases, the results for the summation of the responses of the
near-edge single-anchor connection and the back anchor are quite close to the response
of the double-anchor connections. Slight differences exist due to differences in slip of
the baseplate; as seen in Figure 12, however, the curves have the same slope, and the
change in curvature (which is used to determine the concrete cone breakout load) occurs
at essentially the same load.

It can be confidently concluded that for 3/4 in. (19 mm) diameter anchors spaced at 8 in.
(200 mm), the shear behavior of a connection with two anchors will be equal to the
summation of the behavior of each individual anchor. For anchors located closer to each
other than 8 in. (200 mm) and diameters greater than 3/4 in. (19 mm), this conclusion
may not hold.
Evaluation of Double-Anchor Model for Anchors Loaded in Shear
Static Loading, Close Hairpin, Uncracked Concrete

Displacement (mm)
0.0 5.1 10.2 15.2 20.3 25.4
60.0 266.9
(C) Summation of Single-
Anchor and Back Anchor (D) Double-Anchor
50.0 222.4
Connection (5SCR5706)
Load (kips)

40.0 177.9
Load (kN)

30.0 133.4
(B) Back
20.0 89.0
(A) Single-Anchor
10.0 Connection (1SCR5706) 44.5

0.0 Slip of Double-Anchor Connection 0.0


0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Displacement (in.)

Figure 12 Evaluation of double-anchor model for anchors loaded in shear


for the case of static loading, close hairpin, uncracked concrete

506
4. Conclusions and Recommendations

Single Near-Edge Anchors Loaded in Shear


1. In uncracked concrete, all anchors show an increase in concrete breakout capacity
under dynamic loading as compared to static. Increases range from 20% for CIP
and EAII anchors, to 12% for UC1 anchors.

2. All anchors show a decrease in concrete breakout capacity due to cracking, as


compared to the uncracked case. The decrease is 18% for CIP anchors, and similar
for post-installed anchors.

3. For all anchors, far hairpins (spaced 1-1/4 in. or 32 mm clear from the anchor)
increase concrete breakout capacity by 30% to 40%. Similar increases were
observed for CIP anchors with close hairpins (placed directly against the anchor).
While similar increases would probably have been observed for post-installed
anchors as well, it is generally not possible to install close hairpins around post-
installed anchors.

4. Ultimate capacity, evaluated at a displacement of 1.2 in. (30 mm), is obviously


increased for all anchors by hairpin reinforcement. Dynamic loading and cracked
concrete have essentially no effect on ultimate capacity, which depends on a failure
mechanism involving the restrained anchor only.
5. Hairpin reinforcement confers significant ductility. For CIP anchors with a close
hairpin the displacement at ultimate failure is increased by 9.5 to 14.3 times over the
ultimate displacement with no hairpin. CIP anchors with a far hairpin have a
slightly lower increase of 7.5 to 13.1 times. Similar results were obtained for post-
installed anchors with a far hairpin.

Double-Anchor Connections Loaded in Shear


The behavior of a double anchor connection consisting of 3/4 in. (19 mm) diameter CIP
anchors embedded 4 in. (100 mm) with the front anchor at a 4 in. (100 mm) edge
distance and the back anchor at a 12 in. (300 mm) edge distance can be determined by
superimposing the load-displacement behaviors of each anchor. This conclusion is
specific to this test program and may not hold for larger anchors, smaller embedments,
or closer spacing.

5. Acknowledgment and Disclaimer

This paper presents partial results of a research program supported by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) (NUREG/CR-5434, “Anchor Bolt Behavior and
Strength during Earthquakes”). The technical contact is Herman L Graves, III, whose
support is gratefully acknowledged. The conclusions in this paper are those of the
authors only, and are not NRC policy or recommendations.

507
6. References

1. Hallowell 1996: Hallowell, J. M., “Tensile and Shear Behavior of Anchors in


Uncracked and Cracked Concrete under Static and Dynamic Loading,” M.S. Thesis,
The University of Texas at Austin, August 1996.
2. Klingner et al. 1998: Klingner, R. E., Hallowell, J. M., Lotze, D., Park, H-G.,
Rodriguez, M. and Zhang, Y-G., Anchor Bolt Behavior and Strength during
Earthquakes, report prepared for the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NUREG/CR-5434), August 1998.
3. Malik et al. 1982: Malik, J. B., Mendonca, J. A., and Klingner, R. E., “Effect of
Reinforcing Details on the Shear Resistance of Short Anchor Bolts under Reversed
Cyclic Loading,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Proceedings Vol. 79,
No. 1, January-February 1982, pp. 3-11.

508
POST-INSTALLED REBAR CONNECTIONS UNDER
SEISMIC LOADING
Isabelle Hofacker and Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
This paper presents results of monotonic and cyclic tests with post-installed reinforcing
bars performed at the research laboratory of the University Stuttgart. The main objective
was to study the behavior of post-installed rebar connections in uncracked concrete
under cyclic loading. Varied was the type of mortar and the peak displacements during
reversed cyclic loading between constant displacements.
The results show that the behavior of post-installed rebars under cyclic loading depends
on the failure mode under monotonic loading. If pullout is caused by a bond failure
between mortar and bar, the cyclic behavior of post-installed rebars is much the same as
for cast-in-place rebars. On the contrary if pullout is caused by a bond failure between
mortar and concrete then the bond behavior of post-installed rebars under reversed cyclic
excitations maybe rather poor. In the paper the tests and the evaluation of the results are
presented.

1. Introduction

1.1. General
The requirements in earthquake resistant structures usually lead to the need for large
seismic energy input absorption and dissipation through large but controllable inelastic
deformations of the structure. To meet these requirements, the sources of potential
structural brittle failure must be eliminated and degradation of stiffness and strength
under repeated loadings must be minimized or delayed long enough to allow sufficient
energy to dissipate through stable hysteric behavior.
In reinforced concrete, one of the sources of brittle failure is the sudden loss of bond
between reinforcing bars and concrete in anchorage zones, which has been the cause of
severe damage to, and even collapse of, many structures during recent strong
earthquakes. Even if no anchorage failure occur, the hysteric behavior of reinforced
concrete structures, subjected to severe seismic excitations, is highly dependent on the

509
interaction between steel and concrete (bond-stress-relationship) [2]. Therefore the
behavior of cast-in place rebars under seismic excitations has been studied extensively
[1] and design recommendations have been formulated in codes of practice.
In practise many structures have to be strengthened to increase their seismic resistance.
This is often done by deformed reinforcing bars, which are bonded by a special mortar
into a predrilled hole.
Previous investigations with post-installed rebars in pull-out tests and overlap splices
under monotonic loading have shown that the bond behavior of post-installed rebars is
much the same as that of cast-in rebars provided the injection mortar is suitable [3], [4].
This statement is valid for the failure modes pullout and splitting.
In contrast, the behavior of post-installed rebars under cyclic loading representing
seismic excitations is not known. However, this knowledge is needed so that post-
installed rebars can safely be used in structures in seismic active areas. Therefore pull-
out tests have been carried out to study the cyclic behavior of post-installed rebars.
Varied were the type of injection mortar (product A and product B) and the peak
displacement during reversed cyclic loading (smin=± 0.2 mm to smax=± 2.0 mm (product
B) and smin=± 0.2 mm to smax=± 4.0 mm (product A)).

2. Experimental Program

2.1. Test Specimen


Pullout tests were performed with deformed reinforced bars (ds= 20 mm, fy= 900 MPa)
installed in a concrete slab (h= 400 mm). The embedment depth was hef = 10ds. In the
tests the tested rebars were produced from one lot. To avoid concrete splitting large edge
distances (c≥ 250 mm) and spacing (s≥ 500 mm) were used.
Two concrete slabs were made having a concrete compressive strength of about
fcc~ 30 MPa (measured on cubes with a side length of 200 mm).

2.2. Injection Systems


Two types of injection systems were used in the tests. Product A is a hybrid system
which employs styrene-free vinylester and cement as binding material. For the cleaning
of the holes newly developed special equipment was used. First the hole was cleaned 3
times by compressed air using a special lance. Then the hole was brushed 3 times by a
special steel wire brush which was installed in the drilling machine. Afterwards the hole
was again air lanced 3 times with compressed air.

510
Product B uses unsaturated
polyester as binding material.
The hole was also cleaned by 3
times blowing, 3 times brushing
and 3 times blowing. However
the blowing was done using a
hand pump and the brushing
was done by hand with a steel
wire brush.
With both products the
components of the mortar
(binding material, hardener,
supplement) are separately
preserved. While injecting the
mortar the components are
Figure 1. Cleaning process automatically mixed in the
mixing nozzle.

2.3. Rebar installation


Holes (d0= 25 mm) were drilled by rotary hammer drilling. After cleaning them carefully
according to manufacturers recommendations (see Section 2.2) the mortar was injected
using an injection tool, the holes were filled from the bottom of the hole up to about 2/3
of the embedment depth. Afterwards the rebars were installed under slight turning with
the required embedment depth. All tests were performed 3 hours after rebar installation.
The curing time was larger than the curing time required by the manufacturer. The
temperature of the specimen was about 19° C.
Different methods were used to install the rebar in concrete. All specimen tested in
monotonic loading were installed in a hole with a depth of h0= 200 mm (Figure 2).

511
The results of the
cyclic tests should be
compared with the
results of tests
described in [1]. In
these tests a contact
pressure at the bar
end under
compression loading
was excluded. To
achieve the same
condition in the
cyclic tests with
post-installed rebars,
the hole was first
Figure 2. Test specimen Figure 3. Test specimen (cyclic drilled through the
(monotonic loading) loading) entire depth of the
slab. After cleaning
the hole a wire sleeve (length 80 mm) with the closed end first was installed from the
lower end of the slab (Figure 3). Then the hole was injected with mortar and the bar was
installed. In this way the correct embedment depth (hef =200 mm) was ensured and no
contact pressure could build up. After the tests the wire sleeve, which could easily be
removed from the hole, showed indentations resulting from the displacements of the
rebar under cyclic compression loading.

2.4. Experimental Setup and Testing Procedure


Each specimen was attached to a specially designed testing apparatus and was loaded by
a hydraulic servo-controlled cylinder. The tests were run under displacement control by
subjecting the free end of the bar to the force needed to induce the desired displacement.
The displacement was simultaneously measured on either side of the load application
using two LVDTs; the average of the two displacements was used to control the loading.
It was necessary to prestress the loading frame to the ground to apply a compressive load
to the test specimen during cyclic loading (see Figure 4). No upwards movement of the
test setup was observed during the tests. For monotonic tests, the specimens were tested
in tension so no prestressing was applied. In all other respects the testing apparatus for
monotonic and cyclic tests was the same.

512
Figure 4. Test setup

2.5. Test Program


The program for the monotonic tests is given in Table 1. Besides post-installed rebars
cast-in place rebars were tested for comparison. The program for cyclic tests is given in
Table 2. Only tests with post-installed rebars were performed. Five identical tests were
carried out in each test series to account for the inevitable scatter of results.
The main parameters studied in the tests are as follows:
(1) Type of mortar. Two different types of mortar were used with the
corresponding cleaning method.
(2) Loading history in the cyclic loading tests. The main parameters were the
peak displacement values ∆s between the peak values of displacement
between which the specimen was cyclically loaded (∆s1=±0.2 mm,
∆s2=±0.4 mm, ∆s3=±0.8 mm, ∆s4=±2.0 mm and ∆s5=±4.0 mm (only
product A)). The number of cycles was 10. After cyclic loading a
monotonic tension test was performed.

Series A Series B Series C


Type Post-Installed Rebar Post-Installed Rebar Cast-In-Place Rebar
Product/ Product A/ Product B/ -
Cleaning Method Machine Cleaning Hand Cleaning
Number of Tests 5 5 5
Table 1. Test program for tests in monotonic loading

513
Series A Series B
Type Post-Installed Rebar Post-Installed Rebar
Product/ Product A/ Product B/
Cleaning Method Machine Cleaning Hand Cleaning
Peak Slip ∆s [mm] 0.2 0.4 0.8 2.0 4.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 2.0
Number of Cycles 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Number of Tests 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Table 2. Test program for tests with reverse cyclic loading

3. Experimental Results

For reason of clarity only the averaged bond stress-displacement curves are given in the
following diagrams. Each series was averaged by a computer program named Origin.
The bond strength τ was calculated according to Equation (1):
N
τ= [N/mm2] (1)
π ⋅ d s ⋅ h ef
N = measured load [N]
ds = bar diameter (ds = 20 mm)
hef = embedded length (hef = 200 mm)

3.1. Monotonic Loading


The test results for monotonic loading are plotted in Figure 5. It shows the average bond
stress-displacement curves of post-installed rebars using product A, product B and of
cast-in-place rebars.
In the pullout tests with rebars τ [N/mm2]
post-installed with product A the 16
bond failure occurred in the
post-installed bar (Product A)
interface between rebar and 12
mortar. In contrast to that rebars
post-installed with product B
8
failed in the interface between cast-in-place bar
mortar and concrete.
The bond stress-displacement 4
curve of the cast-in place rebar is post-installed bar (Product B)
similar to that of the rebar post- 0 s [mm]
installed with product A. The 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
rebar post-installed with product
A reached an approximately
15% higher maximum bond Figure 5. Bond stress–displacement diagram for
stress. cast-in-place rebars and post-installed rebars in
The stiffness of the ascending monotonic loading.

514
branch decreased gradually from its initial large value to zero when approaching the
maximum bond resistance at a displacement value of approximately 1.4 mm (cast-in-
place rebar) and 2.0 mm (post-installed rebar). After passing τmax, the bond resistance
decreased slowly and almost linearly until it levelled off at a slip of s≈ 11 to 12 mm.
This value is almost identical to the clear distance between the lugs of the bars used in
the tests.
The bond behavior of rebars post-installed with product B is significantly different from
those of rebars post-installed with product A and of cast-in-place rebars. The initial
stiffness of the bond stress-displacement relationship of rebars post-installed with
product B is the same as that of the other bars. However, with product B at a rather low
bond stress and corresponding small displacement the stiffness of the bond stress-
displacement and the bond strength is reached at very large displacement values (s~15 to
18 mm). The bond strength is about 60% or 45% lower than for rebars post-installed
with product A or for cast-in rebars. The bond behavior of the rebars post-installed with
product B can be explained as follows.
The adhesion between mortar and wall of the hole overcomes at low bond stress values
and the load transfer at larger displacement values is mainly due to friction because of
pulling rebar with mortar through the hole with relatively rough wall.

3.2. Cyclic Loading


The influence of reversed loading on the local bond stress-slip relationship of cast-in
rebars has been studied intensively in [1]. These results are compared with the results of
the present tests.
The results of the cyclic loading tests with post-installed rebars are plotted in Figure 6a)-
6e) (product A) and Figure 8a)-8d) (using product B). In these bond stress-displacement
diagrams, the first and the 10th cycle and the curves valid for loading to failure after 10
load reversals are plotted. Each Figure is valid for one peak displacement during
reversed cyclic loading.
Figure 7 (product A) and Figure 9 (product B) show the bond stress-displacement curves
after cycling 10 times for all peak slip values.
In all diagrams, the corresponding bond stress-displacement relationship for monotonic
loadings are shown for comparison.

515
2
τ [N/mm ]
2 16 monotonic
τ [N/mm ]
16 0,2 mm 12
12
0,4 mm
monotonic 8
8 4
4 0 s [mm]
0 s [mm] -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
-4
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
-4 -8
-8 -12 Post-Installed Bar
(Product A)
-12 Post-Installed Bar -16
(Product A)
-16

a) Product A, ∆s=±0.2 mm b) Product A, ∆s=±0.4 mm


2
τ [N/mm ] τ [N/mm ]
2

16 monotonic 16 monotonic
12 12

8 0,8 mm 8

4 4
2,0 mm
0 s [mm] 0 s [mm]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
-4 -4

-8 -8

-12 Post-Installed Bar -12 Post-Installed Bar


(Product A) (Product A)
-16 -16

c) Product A, ∆s=±0.8 mm d) Product A, ∆s=±2.0 mm


τ [N/mm ]
2
τ [N/mm ]
2

16 monotonic 16
0,2 mm Post-Installed Bar
12 monotonic (Product A)
12 0,4 mm
8

4
4,0 mm 8 0,8 mm
0 s [mm]
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
-4 2,0 mm
4
-8
4,0 mm
-12 Post-Installed Bar
0 s [mm]
(Product A)
-16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

e) Product A, ∆s=±4.0 mm
Figure 6a)-e). Bond stress-displacement Figure 7. Bond stress-displacement
relationship for monotonic and reversed relationship for monotonic loading after 10
cyclic loading (product A). Only the first load reversals (product A).
and the 10th cycle with subsequent loading
to failure are shown.

516
τ [N/mm2] τ [N/mm2]
8 8
6 6
0,2 mm
4 4 0,4 mm
monotonic monotonic
2 2
0 s [mm] 0 s [mm]
-3 -2 -1 -2 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 -2 0 1 2 3

-4 -4
-6 Post-Installed Bar -6 Post-Installed Bar
(Product B) (Product B)
-8 -8

a) Product B, ∆s=±0.2 mm b) Product B, ∆s=±0.4 mm


τ [N/mm ] 2
τ [N/mm2]
8 8
6 6
4 monotonic 4 monotonic
2 0,8 mm 2 2,0 mm
0 s [mm] 0 s [mm]
-3 -2 -1 -2 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 -2 0 1 2 3

-4 -4
-6 Post-Installed Bar -6 Post-Installed Bar
(Product B) (Product B)
-8 -8

c) Product B, ∆s=±0.8 mm d) Product B, ∆s=±2.0 mm


Figure 8a)-d). Bond stress-displacement relationship for monotonic and reversed cyclic
loading (product B). Only the first and the 10th cycle with subsequent loading to failure
are shown.

τ [N/mm2]
8

0,2 mm
6
monotonic
0,4 mm
4
0,8 mm
2,0 mm
2
Post-Installed Bar
(Product B)
0 s [mm]
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Figure 9. Bond stress-displacement


relationship for monotonic loading after 10
load reversals (product B).

517
Note the different scale for the bond stresses in Figure 8a)-8d) compared to Figure 6a)-
6e) for the bond strength which is ±8 N/mm2 (vertical axis) and ±3 N/mm2 (horizontal
axis).
If cyclic loading is performed between small peak displacement values (∆s≤±0.4 mm)
the bond stress-displacement curves of post-installed rebars reach the monotonic
envelope for displacement values larger than the peak displacement during previous
cycling. If the rebars are cycled between peak displacement values ∆s≥±0.8 mm than the
monotonic envelope is not reached again. This behavior is valid for rebars post-installed
with product A and product B.

In Figure 12 and Figure


13 the bond stresses
after n=2 to 10 cycles at
peak slip value related to
the bond stress when
reaching smax at the first
cycle (see Figure 11) are
plotted as a number of Figure 11. Graphics
load cycles.
Figure 12 shows the results using product A,
Figure 13 those for product B. For comparison
Figure 10 shows the corresponding results for
cast-in rebars according to [1].
For rebars post-installed with product A the bond
Figure 10. Deterioration of bond deterioration during reversed cyclic loading is
resistance at peak slip as a much the same as for cast-in-place rebars
function of number of cycles (compare Figure 12 with Figure 10) if cyclic is
(ds=25.4 mm, fcc~ 30 MPa)[1] done between approximately the same values ∆s.
In contrast to that the bond deterioration of rebars
post-installed with product B is much more pronounced than that for cast-in-place rebars
(compare Figure 13 with Figure 10).

518
Post-Installed Bar (Product A) Post-Installed Bar (Product B)
1 1
smax [mm]
0,2
τ(n)/τ(n=1) [N/mm ]

τ(n)/τ(n=1) [N/mm ]
2

2
0,8 0,4 0,8
smax [mm]
0,6 0,6
0,8

0,4 0,4 0,2


0,4
2,0 0,8
0,2 0,2
2,0
4,0
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Number of Cycles n [-] Number of Cycles n [-]

Figure 12. Deterioration of bond Figure 13. Deterioration of bond


resistance at peak slip as a function of resistance at peak slip as a function of
number of cycles (product A) number of cycles (product B)

The different bond behavior during monotonic and cyclic loading of the bars installed
with product A and product B can be explained as follows.
Rebars installed with product A overcome the bond resistance at the interface between
rebar and mortar. Therefore these rebars behave similar to cast-in-place rebars. The
higher bond strength of post-installed rebars is caused by the higher compressive
strength of the mortar compared to the compressive strength of the concrete.
The failure of bars installed with product B occurs at the interface between mortar and
concrete. After overcoming the adhesion strength at relatively small slip values (s~±0.2
mm), the load transfer is dominated by friction between mortar and concrete. This
friction is reduced significantly by cyclic loading.
The bond resistance of rebars post-installed with product B at small displacement values
is rather low and the relatively low bond strength is reached at displacement values
which in general can not be used in reinforced concrete structures. Furthermore the bond
deterioration during cyclic loading is much more pronounced than for cast-in-place
rebars. Therefore this product is not well suited for post-installed rebars under
monotonic and cyclic loading.

4. Conclusions

From the results obtained in this study, the following main observations can be made for
the local bond behavior of post-installed rebars under monotonic and cyclic loading.
The results show that the behavior of mortared-in bars under cyclic loading depends on
the failure mode under monotonic loading.
According to the test results the bond failure of deformed rebars post-installed with
product A failed by overcoming the bond strength at the interface between rebar and
mortar (shearing of the mortar between the lugs). Therefore the bond behavior during
monotonic and cyclic loading is very similar to the bond behavior of cast-in-place rebars.
On the contrary to that rebars post-installed with product B failed at the interface

519
between mortar and wall of the hole at relatively low bond stress values and
corresponding low displacements. The bond behavior of these rebars under monotonic
and cyclic loading was much inferior to the bond behavior of cast-in-place rebars.
Therefore product B should not be used to post-installed rebars subjected to monotonic
or cyclic loading.
Many post-installed rebars may fail by a combination of a bond failure at the interface
between rebar and mortar over a part of the embedment length and mortar and concrete
over the rest of the bond length. The behavior of these rebars under monotonic loading
and cyclic loading will lay in between the two extremes shown above. This behavior
should be investigated in tests.
The mode of failure of post-installed rebars might change with rebar diameter. Therefore
with a given injection mortar, the influence of the diameter on the bond behavior should
be checked by tests.
In the tests described above failure occurred by pullout of the rebars. In many
applications rebars will be installed with a small concrete cover and they might fail by a
splitting failure. The behavior of post-installed rebars under cyclic loading in case of
splitting failure should also be investigated.

5. Acknowledgement

Funding for this work was made available through the Institute of Construction
Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany.
Special thanks to E. Schiebelbein and F. Stockert for their encouragement in data
preparation. Thanks to M. Hoehler for improving the English.

6. References

[1] Eligehausen, R.; Popov, E.P.; Bertero V.V.: Local Bond Stress-Slip
Relationships of Deformed Bars under Generalized Excitations, Report No.
UCB/EERC-83/23, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA, 1983.

[2] Popov, E.P.: Mechanical Characteristics and Bond of Reinforcing Steel under
Seismic Loading, Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Reinforced Concrete
Building Construction, University of California, Berkeley, 1977.

[3] Eligehausen, R.; Spieth, H.A.: Anschlüsse mit nachträglich eingemörtelten


Bewehrungsstäben. Der Prüfingenieur. April 2000.

[4] Eligehausen, R.; Spieth, H.A., Sippel, T.M: Eingemörtelte Bewehrungsstäbe –


Tragverhalten und Bemessung. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 94 (1999), Heft 12.

520
AN EVALUATION OF TENSILE CAPACITY OF ANCHOR
SYSTEM IN NPPS BY ACTUAL MODEL TESTS
Jang Jung-Bum, Woo Sang-Kyun, Suh Yong-Pyo, and Lee Jong-Rim
Nuclear Power Laboratory, Korea Electric Power Research Institute, KEPCO, Korea

Abstract
The design of anchor system for fastening the equipments and piping systems, etc. to
concrete structure has based on the ACI 349 code in Korean NPPs. But, CCD method of
CEB code which was processed in Europe shows that anchor system design according to
ACI 349 code has some of overestimated effects in the evaluation of tensile and shear
capacity of the real anchor system. Also, according to US NRC SRP published in 1996,
US NRC recommended that the anchor system should be designed by test results for
each case until ACI 349 code will be newly revised. Moreover, Korean nuclear
regulatory institute, KINS asks to follow the requirements of US NRC SRP for design of
anchor system in NPPs.
Therefore, in order to accurately evaluate both behavior and tensile capacity of anchor
system used in Korean NPPs, actual model tests are carried out in this study. 60 test
specimens with cast-in-place headed anchor system which is installed in uncracked and
plain concrete test specimens, are manufactured for these actual model tests.
From the results of this study, the discrepancies between the test results and these two
design methods, ACI 349 code and CCD method of CEB code, are assessed and
applicability of ACI 349 code for design of anchor system are evaluated.

1. Introduction

The design of anchor system for fastening the equipments and piping systems, etc. to
concrete structure has based on the ACI 349 code in Korean NPPs. But, CCD method of
CEB code which was processed in Europe shows that anchor system design according to
ACI 349 code has some of overestimated effects in the evaluation of tensile and shear
capacity of the real anchor system.
This discrepancy between ACI 349 code and CCD method of CEB code is due to the
differences of their assumptions. That is, both ACI 349 code and CCD method of CEB

521
code assume differently for the inclination angle between the failure surface and
concrete surface and concrete failure shape, etc.
Also, a lot of papers related to this subject represent new movement to make some
amendment to ACI 349 code or new design code based on CCD method of CEB code.
According to US NRC SRP published in 1996, US NRC recognized that ACI 349 code
has a some problems in design of anchor system and recommended that the design of
anchor system should be performed by test results for each case until ACI 349 code will
be newly revised. Moreover, Korean nuclear regulatory institute, KINS asks to follow
the requirements of US NRC SRP for design of anchor system in NPPs.
Therefore, in order to accurately evaluate both behavior and tensile capacity of anchor
system used in Korean NPPs, KEPRI carried out the actual model tests with cast-in-
place anchor system, most used in Korean NPPs. The discrepancies between the test
results and these two design methods, ACI 349 code and CCD method of CEB code, will
be assessed and applicability of ACI 349 code for design of anchor system will be
evaluated in this paper.

2. Design Codes for Anchor System

The major differences between CCD method of CEB code and ACI 349 code are as
follows : ( a ) under tensile load, the inclination angle between the failure surface and
concrete surface is 45 degree for ACI 349 code and 35 degree for CCD method of CEB
code, ( b ) concrete tensile capacity is proportional to 2.0 power of embedment depth of
anchor bolt for ACI 349 code and 1.5 power for CCD method of CEB code, and ( c ) the
concrete failure shape is idealized by cone for ACI 349 code and pyramid for CCD
method of CEB code.
Due to above major differences between ACI 349 code and CCD method of CEB code,
the prediction of concrete cone failure load is different each other. According to test
results for anchor system, CCD method of CEB code well agrees with test results than
ACI 349 code and ACI 349 code is shown the non-conservative design for some cases.

2.1 ACI 349 Code


Under tensile load, ACI 349 code assumes that uniform tensile stress of 4φ f c acts
on the projected area of the concrete failure cone as shown in figure 1 and the inclination
angle for calculating projected area shall be 45 degree. Also, in order to avoid the
reduction of concrete cone failure load, the concrete member thickness is assumed
sufficiently large.
For a single anchor without edge influences or over-lapping failure volume, concrete
cone failure load is calculated from Eq. ( 1 )

N no = (4φ f c ) AN 0 , lb (1)

522
where φ is capacity reduction factor and AN 0 is projected area of a single anchor
without any limitations and is given by Eq. ( 2 ).

du
AN 0 = πhef2 (1 + ) (2)
hef

with
f c = Concrete compressive strength
d u = Diameter of anchor head
hef = Effective embedment depth of anchor bolt
For anchor system with edge influences ( c < hef ) or affected by other concrete
breakout cones ( s < 2hef ), the concrete cone failure load is calculated from Eq. ( 3 )

AN d
Nn = 4φ f c πhef2 ( 1 + u ),lb (3)
AN 0 hef

where c is edge distance from anchor bolt to the nearest concrete edge and s is a
distance between a neighboring anchor bolts. AN is actual projected area of stress cones
radiating from anchor head. Effective area shall be limited by over-lapping failure
volume, bearing area of anchor heads, and overall thickness of concrete member

2.2 CCD Method of CEB Code


Under tensile load, the concrete failure load of a single anchor is calculated assuming an
inclination angle between the failure surface and concrete surface of about 35 degree as
shown in figure 2.
For a single anchor in uncracked concrete without edge influences or over-lapping
failure volume under tensile load, the concrete failure load N n 0 is given by Eq. ( 4 )

N n 0 = k1 f c k 2 hef2 k 3 hef−0.5 , lb (4)

where k1 , k 2 , k 3 are calibration factors, with

k nc = k1k 2 k 3
N n 0 = k nc f c hef1.5 , lb (5)

523
with
k nc = 35 for post-installed anchor system
k nc = 40 for cast-in-place anchor system
In Eq. ( 4 ), the factor k1 f c represents the nominal concrete tensile stress at failure
2 −0.5
over the concrete failure area, given by k 2 hef , and the factor k3hef represents the so-
called size effect.
For anchor system with edge influences or affected by other concrete breakout cones, the
concrete failure load is calculated from Eq. ( 6 ).

AN
Nn = ψ 2 knc f c hef1.5 (6)
AN 0
A
N n = N ψ 2 N n0 (7)
AN 0

where ψ 2 is tuning factor to consider disturbance of the radial symmetric stress


distribution caused by an edge, valid for anchors located away from edges and is given
by Eq. ( 8 ).

ψ2 =1 if c ≥ 1.5hef ( 8.a )
c
ψ 2 = 0 .7 + 0 .3 if c ≤ 1.5hef ( 8.b )
1.5hef

3. Tensile Capacity Evaluation Tests

The objectives of this study are to identify the causes of discrepancies between ACI 349
code and CCD method of CEB code and to evaluate the applicability of ACI 349 code
for design of anchor system through the tensile capacity evaluation tests. This test plan
intended for the cast-in-place anchor system which was most prevailed in Korean NPPs.
60 test specimens with cast-in-place headed anchors which are installed in uncracked
and plain concrete test specimens, are manufactured for this actual model tests.

3.1 Test Variables


In order to compare tensile capacities of anchor system estimated by two design
procedures, ACI 349 code and CCD method of CEB code, with test results according to
the various test variables, 5 test variables are considered. That is, these test variables are
diameter of anchor bolt, embedment depth of anchor bolt, concrete compressive strength,

524
edge influence by distance between anchor system and concrete edge, and over-lapping
failure volume by interaction of neighboring anchor systems. The detailed descriptions
of these test variables are as follows.

[1] Loading condition


Anchor system is generally designed by tensile and shear load but these tests are carried
out under tensile load. 100 tonf-capacity actuator is used to apply tensile load to test
specimens and tensile load is gradually increased by displacement control so that
displacement of anchor system occurs 0.5 mm/min.

[2] Diameter of anchor bolt


Diameter of anchor bolt is selected so that concrete brittle failure is occurred at test
specimens under tensile load. The selected diameters of anchor bolts are cast-in-place
headed anchors of 3/4, 9/8, 13/8, and 2 in. with ASTM A193 Gr B7.

[3] Embedment depth of anchor bolt


Referring to the existing test results related to the anchor system, both ACI 349 code and
CCD method of CEB code are shown the conservative design for anchor system under
about 8 in. in embedment depth of anchor bolt. But, both design codes are shown the
different results for anchor system from about 8 in. up in embedment depth of anchor
bolt. Therefore, this study considers the 2, 4, 8, 12, and 14 in. as embedment depth of
anchor bolt.

[4] Concrete compressive strength


Concrete compressive strength has an less influence on concrete failure load of anchor
system than the other test variables and most concrete buildings of Korean NPPs have
been designed with concrete compressive strength of 4,500 psi excluding containment
building. Therefore, constant concrete compressive strength of 4,500 psi is used for
manufacturing the test specimens for this study.

[5] Edge influence


In order to examine the reduction of concrete failure load due to edge influence by
distance between anchor system and concrete edge, this test variable is considered. The
distances between anchor system and concrete edge are 2, 4, 6, and 7 in. with a half of
embedment depth of anchor bolt so that edge influence affects the concrete failure load.

[6] Over-lapping failure volume


In case of anchor systems for equipments and piping system, etc. installed at NPPs, the
distances between neighboring anchor bolts are very short and concrete failure load is
reduced due to over-lapping failure volume by interaction of neighboring anchor bolts.
In order to examine the reduction of concrete failure load due to over-lapping failure
volume, anchor system which 4 anchor bolts act as single anchor system is considered
and the distance between neighboring anchor bolts is determined so that it affects the
concrete failure load.

525
3.2 Test Specimens
According to ASTM E488-96, test specimens are manufactured so that the minimum
clearances between supports of test specimens are equal to or greater than 4.0 hef. Also,
the test specimens are at least 2.0 hef in thickness so long as the depth is suitable for
normal installation of the anchor system and does not result in premature failure at either
the structural member or anchor system. Table 1 shows the test specimens manufactured
for this study.
The minimum of 5 tests per test number of table 1 are carried out in accordance with
ASTM E488-96 and 5 test results are averaged for determining the tensile capacity of
anchor systems.
Figures 3 and 4 show the test specimen and view which actual model test is being
carried out with 100 tonf-capacity actuator.

3.3 Test Results


In case of single anchor system without over-lapping failure volume, both ACI 349 code
and CCD method of CEB code are shown the conservative results in comparison with
test results as shown in Figure 5(a). However, in case of multiple anchor system with
over-lapping failure volume, ACI 349 code overestimated and CCD method of CEB
code underestimated with test results as shown in Figure 5(b). This is probably due to
the fact that their assumptions like inclination angle and concrete failure shape are
different each other. That is to say, in case that over-lapping failure volume happened in
anchor system, concrete failure load predicted by CCD method of CEB code is smaller
than ACI 349 code because over-lapping failure volume by CCD method of CEB code is
larger than ACI 349 code.
Moreover, these facts are revealed in test results for examination of edge influence as
shown in Figure 6. In case that concrete failure load is reduced due to edge influence by
distance between anchor system and concrete edge, CCD method of CEB code well
agrees with test results than ACI 349 code.
Therefore, in case that anchor system for fastening the equipments and piping systems,
etc. will be designed at NPPs, CCD method of CEB code turned out reasonable than ACI
349 code through this study. Figure 7 is shown the typical concrete failure shape.

526
Table 1. Test specimens for tensile capacity evaluation of anchor system

Embedment Over-
Loading depth of lapping Edge No. of test
No. Remarks
condition anchor bolt failure influence specimen
( in. ) volume
1 2 5
2 4 5
Single
3 8 5
anchor
4 12 Center 5
5 14 point 5
6 4 5 Direct
Tensile
Multiple embedment
7 load 8 5
anchor type
8 12 5
9 4 5
10 8 Single Edge 5
11 12 anchor point 5
12 14 5
Summation 60

4. Conclusions

In order to accurately evaluate both behavior and tensile capacity of cast-in-place headed
anchor system which is most used in Korean NPPs, actual model tests are carried out.
These actual model tests are carried out for the tensile capacity evaluation of CIP anchor
system as first stage of overall test plan and tests related to the shear capacity evaluation
in uncracked and plain concrete, tensile and shear capacity evaluation in cracked and
plain concrete will be carried out near the future as second stage.
As a result of this study, CCD method of CEB code well agrees with test results than
ACI 349 code and especially ACI 349 code gives the underestimated results in case of
anchor systems with over-lapping failure volume and influence of edge distance.
Therefore, in case that anchor system for fastening the equipments and piping systems,
etc. will be designed at NPPs, CCD method of CEB code turned out reasonable than ACI
349 code.

527
References

[1] Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., and Breen, J.E.,“ Concrete Capacity Design ( CCD )
Approach for Fastening to Concrete, “ ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 1, pp. 73
– 94, 1995.
[2] Eligehausen, R. and Balogh, T.,“ Behavior of Fasteners Loaded in Tension in
Cracked Reinforced Concrete,“ ACI structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 3, 1995.
[3] Hallowell, J.M.,“ Tensile and Shear Behavior of Anchors in Uncracked and Cracked
Concrete under Static and Dynamic Loading,“ University of Texas at Austin, 1996.
[4] Primavera, E.J., Pinelli, J.P., and Kalajian, E.H.,“ Tensile Behavior of Cast-In-Place
and Undercut Anchors in High Strength Concrete,“ ACI Structural Journal, 1997.
[5] ASTM E 488-96, “ Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Concrete and
Masonry Elements,“ 1996.

Figure 1. Concrete failure shape Figure 2. Concrete failure shape


by ACI 349 code by CCD method of CEB code

Figure 3. Test specimen with CIP anchor system

528
Figure 4. Actual model test by 100 tonf-capacity actuator

100 100
Test Results Test Results
ACI 349 Code ACI 349 Code
90 CCD Method of CEB Code 90 CCD Method of CEB Code

80 80
Concrete Failure Load ( tonf )

Concrete Failure Load ( tonf )

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Embedment Depth of Anchor bolt ( in. ) Embedment Depth of Anchor bolt ( in. )

( a ) Single anchor systems ( b ) Multiple anchor systems

Figure 5. Concrete failure loads by actual model test

529
100
Test Results
ACI 349 Code
90 CCD Method of CEB Code

80

Concrete Failure Load ( tonf )


70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Distance between Concrete Edge and Anchor system ( in. )

Figure 6. Concrete failure loads by actual model test – edge influence

Figure 7. Typical concrete failure shape under tensile load

530
STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOR OF SRC COLUMN - RC BEAM
JOINT UNDER MONOTONIC AND CYCLIC LOAD
Sang-Hoon Lee, Young-Kyu Ju, Sung-Chul Chun and Dae-Young Kim
Daewoo Institute of Construction Technology, South Korea

Abstract
SRC column–RC beam joint is frequently used for the construction of underground
structure in the Top-Down construction method. Various types of joint details have
been proposed and implemented for the anchorage of the reinforcing bars. The types
can be classified by anchoring methods as follows: (1) passing through type; (2) wing
plate type; and (3) H-beam bracket type. Although these types are widely used in
Korea, the structural performance is not clearly understood.
For each type of joint, the structural characteristics such as strength, stiffness, energy
dissipation capacity, stiffness degradation, and ductility under monotonic and cyclic
loads were tested. The test results showed that the passing through type has the best
structural performance.
By advancing the passing through type, the wide beam type specimens were
experimentally investigated for the field application. The wide beam type uses a
number of reinforcing bars that are placed at the edge of the slab not to intersect a steel
column without changing its sectional shape. It is concluded that the wide beam type is
adequate in the SRC column-RC beam joint not only for its structural capacities, but also
for its economic merits.

1. Introduction

General
The Top-Down method is frequently used at a downtown construction site, because it
requires less construction space than other methods. Also, this method reduces
construction time, noise and vibration, and prevents unequal settlement of the
surrounding ground. Since its invention by Mr. Arup in 1936, characteristics,
construction procedure and several details of this method have been studied to promote
the construction efficiency. As one of these efforts, when deciding structural type, the
composite structure is mostly preferred.1)

531
In Japan, since the early recognition of the necessity of the composite structure, several
beam-column joint types have been developed. Focused joint types are SRC column-
SRC beam, RC column-steel beam, and SRC column-steel beam. When using SRC
column-RC beam joint type, the passing through type is preferred, because of the safety
from the earthquake. The reinforcing bar is anchored by making a hole at the steel
column and passing through the column.
SRC column-RC beam joint is usually adopted for the underground structures in Korea.
However, its beam cannot maintain the continuity because of the construction
characteristics. The various joint types, such as the passing through type, the wing
plate type, the bracket type, and the coupler type have been proposed and implemented
to settle this problem.2) In spite of frequent usage of these types, there were not
comprehensive experimental bases of their structural behaviors.

Research Scope
In this study, the passing through type, the wing plate type, and the H-beam bracket type
were considered. Although the coupler type is known for its best reliability of
anchorage of the reinforcing bar, it was not considered, because it can be implemented
immediately if its welding condition is proved to be good enough. First of all, the
monotonic and cyclic loading experiments were conducted for each joint type to
investigate the structural behaviors.
Then, additional monotonic tests were performed to efficiently develop the type that
showed the best performance. Special attentions were paid to investigate the efficiency
of placing the tensile reinforcing bars within the effective beam width. For the field
application, the wide beam type was explored by experiment.

2. Comparative Experiment

Monotonic and cyclic loading tests were performed to investigate the structural
capacities of three types as follows; (1) passing through type, (2) wing plate type, and (3)
H-beam bracket type. Specimens were designed as the interior joint of the underground
structure whose clear length of span was 790cm.
The same materials were used for all specimens. The measured properties of the
materials are as follows: (1) uni-axial compressive strength of the concrete (28day) was
254 kgf/cm2, (2) average uni-axial tensile strengths of the re-bars were 4,147 kgf/cm2
(D10) and 3,999 kgf/cm2 (D22), and (3) average uni-axial tensile strengths of H-beam
and plate were 3,813.5 kgf/cm2 and 3,024.67 kgf/cm2, respectively.

2.1 Monotonic Loading Test

General
Three different types were designed and tested under the monotonic load.3, 4, 5, 6) The
seismic design was not considered. The flexural failure criteria were expected to all of
the specimens. Fig. 1 shows the dimensions and the details of each specimen. As
shown in Fig.2, a static actuator was bound by the reaction frame to apply load to the top

532
φ

(a) Passing through type

(b) Wing plate type (c) H-beam bracket type


[Fig. 1] Dimensions and Reinforcement Details (Units in mm)

of the column. The ends of the beam were supported by hinge and the ends were free
to rotate only. Several transducers were placed to measure the displacement of the
column and the rotation of the beam against the column.

Test Results
The results showed that the passing through type and the wing plate type have the
satisfactory structural performances. As Table 1 presents, their ultimate strengths
exceeded the design strengths by about 20% and their ductility factors also satisfy the
required value of ordinary reinforced concrete structure, which is 4.0. However, the
bracket type specimen did not surpass either the yield design strength or the ultimate
strength. Fig. 3 shows the load-displacement relations and Fig. 4 presents the observed
cracks of the specimens.

2.2 Cyclic Loading Test

General
Reverse cyclic loading tests were conducted to investigate the behavior of the interior
beam-column joint for each type. The details of the passing through type and the H-
beam bracket type are shown in Fig. 5(a) and 5(b). The only differences from the
specimen of the monotonic loading test are the length of the column and the reinforcing

533
35
Passing through type
30
Pn=25.4t
25
Wing plate type

Load (Tonf)
20

15 H-beam
bracket type
10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Displacement (mm)

[Fig.2] Loading Method [Fig. 3] Load-Displacement Relations

[Table 1] Monotonic Loading Test Results


Yield Strength Ultimate Strength Displacement Curvature
Specimen
Design Test Ratio Design Test Ratio Ductility Ductility
Type
(ton) (ton) (T/D) (ton) (ton) (T/D) Factor Factor
Passing
24.76 23.80 0.96 25.38 31.06 1.22 7.87 8.47
Through
Wing
24.76 24.51 0.99 25.38 30.15 1.19 5.34 6.17
Plate
H-Bracket 25.78 21.34 0.83 27.11 24.11 0.89 1.86 1.47

(a) Passing through type (b) H-beam bracket type


[Fig 4] Observed Cracks of Specimens
bars of the beam due to seismic resistance.3, 4, 5, 6)
Fig. 6 shows test setup. The column was tied to the reaction frame and was allowed to
rotate only. Constant axial load (150tonf), which was about 25% of the design axial
strength of the column, was applied to the top end of the column during the test. In all
tests, a sinusoidal displacement control wave form consisting of completely reversed
cycles at the amplitude of 1δ, 2δ, 4δ, 6δ, 8δ, where δ is the displacement when the

534
tensile reinforcing bar started yielding. Fig. 7 shows the detail of the location of the
transducers to measure the displacements of the loading points and the rotation of the
beam against the column. Prefabricated angle set was used to fix all the transducers.
This angle set was attached to the specimen at the supporting point, but using ball
bearings, was not affected by the movement of the specimen.

(a) Passing through type (b) H-beam bracket type


[Fig. 5] Dimensions and Reinforcement Details

[Fig. 6] Test setup [Fig. 7] Measuring points

Test results
The measured hysteresis loops of equivalent interstory shear force(V) versus equivalent
interstory drift(δ), which can be obtained using equation (1), are shown in Fig. 8(a), 8(b),
and 8(c).
P1l1 + P2 l 2 δ + δ B2
V = , δ = B1 × lc (1)
lc l1 + l 2
Where, P1and P2 : loads applied to both beams

535
l1, l2 : distance from the center of the column to the loading point
lc : distance from upper supporting point to lower point of the column
δB1, δB2 : displacements at the loading point of each beam

The external work curve of each specimen versus cumulative displacement is shown in
Fig. 8(d). Table 2 shows the equivalent inter-story shear force and energy dissipation
capacity. The passing through type and the wing plate type surpassed the design
strength by 14% and 27%, respectively. However, H-beam bracket type did not reach
its design strength due to the premature shear failure of concrete, which resulted from
the bond failure between steel and concrete. Therefore, the test was interrupted as soon
as the shear failure occurred.
20
20 1δ 2δ 4δ
1δ 2δ 4δ 6δ

Equivalent Interstory Shear Force (tonf)


15 Vne
Equivalent Interstory Shear Force (tonf)

15 Vne
Vye
Vye 10
10

5
5

0
0
-150 -125 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150
-150 -125 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150
-5 -5

-10 -Vye -10


-Vye
-Vne -Vne -15
-15

-6δ -4δ -2δ - 1δ -4δ -2δ -1δ


-20 -20

Equivalent Interstory Drift (mm) Equivalent Interstory Drift (mm)

(a) Passing through type (b) Wing plate type

8,000
20
1δ 2δ 3δ Wing Plate type
7,000
Vne
Equivalent Interstory Shear Force (tonf)

External Work (Ton.mm)

15
6,000
10
5,000
5 Passing through type
4,000
H-beam bracket type
0
3,000
-150 -125 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150
-5 2,000
-10 1,000

-Vne -15 0
-3δ -2δ -1δ 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500
-20

Equivalent Interstory Drift (mm) Cumulative Displacement (mm)

(c) H-beam bracket type (d) Energy dissipation curve


[Fig. 8] Cyclic Loading Test Results
The passing through type specimen showed a stable behavior until 4δ. However, the
deformations due to bond slippage at the panel zone became very significant, and
pinching and severe degradation of stiffness were observed in the hysteresis loops at the
second cycle of the 4δ. The wing plate type specimen also showed a stable behavior.
Pinching and degradation of stiffness did not occur until 4δ. Because the welded area
between the wing plate and the flange of the H-beam was torn out, the test was stopped
at the first cycle of 6δ. In the case of the H-beam bracket type, inverse shear crack was
observed during the first cycle of the loading. Several inverse shear cracks occurred as
the test continued. Finally, it caused the specimen to fail.

536
[Table 2] Cyclic Loading Test Results
Yield Equivalent Inter- Ultimate Equivalent Inter-Story
Story Shear Force Shear Force Dissipated
Specimen
Energy
Type Analysis Experiment Analysis Experiment
VA/VE (tonf-mm)
(tonf) (tonf) (tonf) (tonf)
Passing 13.02 12.68 13.45 15.23 1.13
6,081
Through -13.02 -13.07 -13.45 -15.48 1.15
Wing 13.02 12.96 13.45 17.04 1.27
7,058
Plate -13.02 -13.04 -13.45 -17.08 1.27
H-Beam 17.39 16.10 17.39 16.10 0.93
3,254
Bracket -17.39 -15.89 -17.39 -16.99 0.98

3. Monotonic Loading Test for Wide-beam Sectional Specimens

General
The passing through type specimen and the wing plate type specimen satisfied the
required structural performance. However, there were some problems to be solved for
the field application. In case of passing through type, the thickness of the steel was the
significant factor. As the thickness of column steel increased, it was difficult to make
holes in thick flange and it made the passing through type less efficient for field
application. In case of wing plate type, the tensile reinforcing bars of the slab were
arranged in double layers and welded on and below the wing plate. It was difficult to
weld the bar below the wing plate while easy to do on the plate.
Therefore, additional tests for wide beam type were performed to implement these types
efficiently for the field application. Special attentions were paid to investigate the
efficiency of placing the tensile reinforcing bars. Five different specimens were
constructed, as shown in Fig. 9, based on Chapter 10.6.6 of ACI 318-99.7) The SRC1
specimen used the reinforcing bars that were placed in two layers and welded on the
wing plate for their anchorage. The design of SRC2 specimen was similar to that of the
wide-beam. Only two reinforcing bars were placed in the beam and bypassed the steel
column. The others were placed in the slab within the effective width of beam. Since
the compressive area of the beam, which was affected by the negative moment, satisfied
the required design moments, the modification of the sectional shape was not necessary.
The detail of SRC3 specimen was similar to that of the SRC2, except the anchorage of
the two reinforcing bars in the beam, which were welded on the wing plate. RC1 and
RC2 specimens, shown in Figs. 9(c) and 9(d), were also tested to compare with SRC
series specimens.
During the test, the same value of the load was applied until it reached the ultimate
strength. Strain gauges were attached to the reinforcing bars to evaluate the strain
distributions. They were attached at the critical section that was 30cm away from the
center of the column.

537
Test results
As shown in Fig. 11, behaviors of all the specimens were similar until they reached the
yielding strength. Fig. 12 shows the strain distribution of reinforcing bars of RC1, RC2,
SRC1 and SRC2 at each loading step. Since there were only two reinforcing bars in the
beam section of the SRC2, the strain increment at each loading step was larger than
those of the RC series. This phenomenon could be corrected by modifying the
placement of reinforcing bars.

(a) SRC1 (b) SRC2

(c) RC1 (d) RC2


[Fig. 9] Dimensions and details of the specimens
35
S R C -2
30 R C -2
S R C -3
25 S R C -1
Load (tonf)

20 R C -1

15

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Displacement (mm)

[Fig.10] Testing setup [Fig.11] Load-displacement relations

538
3000 3000

2500 2500 25 tonf

2000 25 tonf 2000


20 tonf
Strain

Strain
1500 20 tonf 1500
15 tonf
15 tonf
1000 1000
10 tonf
10 tonf
500 500

0 0
-40 -30 -2 0 - 10 0 10 20 30 40 -40 - 30 - 20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Distance from the center (cm) Distance from the center (cm)

(a) RC1 (b) RC2


3000 3000

2500 2500

2000 2000
25 tonf 25 tonf

Strain
Strain

1500 20 tonf 1500


20 tonf
15 tonf 1000
1000 15 tonf

10 tonf 10 tonf
500 500

0 0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance from the center (cm) Distance from the center (cm)

(c) SRC1 (d) SRC2


[Fig.12] Strain distributions

[Table 4] Monotonic Loading Test Results


Yield Strength Experimental
Specimen
Ultimate
Type Analysis(tonf) Experiment(tonf) Ratio(E/A) Strength
SRC1 26.18 26.58 1.02 27.858
SRC2 27.77 24.09 0.87 30.476
SRC3 27.77 25.42 0.92 28.897
RC1 26.35 27.00 1.02 29.785
RC2 27.93 28.58 1.02 28.615

(a) RC1 (b) RC2 (c) SRC1


[Fig. 13] Observed cracks of the beam

539
Testing results are presented in table 4. The yield strengths of SRC2 and SRC3 were
lower than the analytical value, because the experimental yield strength was evaluated
when at least one of the reinforcing bars reached its yielding strain.
Fig. 13 shows the cracks of the beam when the test was finished. All the cracks
showed typical flexural failure mode regardless of the specimen type. The cracks of
the slab of all the specimens also showed similar failure trend.

4. Conclusions

In this study, monotonic and cyclic loading test were conducted to investigate the
structural behavior of the several SRC column-RC beam joint types which are frequently
used in the Top-Down construction method such as the passing through type, the wing
plate type, and H-beam bracket type. Advanced joints for the field application, where
the most of reinforcing bars were placed in the slab within the effective width of the
beam, were also tested under the monotonic load. The following conclusions were
made:
(1) The passing through type and the wing plate type showed the satisfactory structural
performance to be implemented as SRC column-RC beam joint type. Both types
surpassed their analytical strengths and the required ductility.
(2) When using the wide beam type, it is recommended that all the reinforcing bars
bypass H-beam of the column through the slab except for the minimum number of
reinforcing bars, which can be anchored to the wing plate by welding.
(3) When the tensile reinforcing bars of the beam are placed within the slab, the bars
work as both beam and the slab, and this method is expected to reduce the construction
cost.

References
1. Daewoo Institute of Construction Technology, ‘The Development of Beam-Column
Joint in Top-Down Construction Method’, DEP-009-2000, Technical Report, (2000).
2. Kim, J. H., ‘Design of Pre-constructed SRC Column-RC Beam Joint of Underground
Structure Under Top Down Method’, Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction
10(3) (June 1998) 142-150.
3. Kim, D. H., ‘Standard for Structural Calculation of Steel Reinforced Concrete
Structures’ (January 1999).
4. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), ‘Manual of Steel Construction –
Load & Resistance Factor Design’ (1994).
5. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), ‘Manual of Steel Construction –
Allowable Stress Design’ (1989).
6. American Welding Society, ‘ANSI/AWS D1.4-92; Structural Welding Code-
Reinforced Steel’ (1992).
7. ACI Committee 318, ‘Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI318-
99) and Commentary (ACI318R-99)’ (1999) 114.

540
DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF TENSILE ANCHORS TO
CONCRETE
Milton Rodriguez1, Dieter Lotze2, Jennifer Hallowell Gross3, Yong-gang Zhang4,
Richard E. Klingner5 and Herman L. Graves, III6
1 The University of Texas at Austin, Texas, USA.
2 Halfen GmbH & Co., Wiernsheim, Germany. Former, The University of Texas at
Austin.
3 Cagley, Harman & Associates, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, USA. Former, The
University of Texas at Austin.
4 Han-Padron Associates, Houston, Texas, USA. Former, The University of Texas at
Austin.
5 Phil M. Ferguson, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
6 Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC, USA.

Abstract
Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program
was carried out on the dynamic behavior of anchors (fasteners) to concrete. In this
paper, the behavior of single and multiple tensile anchors is described. Under seismic
loading, the tensile capacities of most anchors tested in this study were at least as high as
under quasi-static loading. As a result, most anchors tested in this study, if designed for
ductile behavior under quasi-static loading, would behave in a ductile manner under
seismic-type loading as well. The above conclusions are not true for wedge-type
expansion anchors. These tend to pull out and pull through under dynamic loading and
should be evaluated individually to determine their seismic adequacy. The above
conclusions are also not true for grouted anchors installed in cored holes. These tend to
pull out in cracked concrete.

1. Introduction

Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program


has recently been completed, whose objective was to obtain technical information to
determine how the seismic behavior and strength of anchors (cast-in-place, expansion,
and undercut) and their supporting concrete differ from the static behavior. As discussed
in References 1 and 2, the research program comprised four tasks:

1) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Single Tensile Anchors (250 tests);


2) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Multiple Tensile Anchors (179 tests);
3) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Near-Edge Anchors (150 tests); and
4) Static and Dynamic Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections (16 tests).

541
2. Background

The behavior of anchors (fasteners) to concrete is discussed at length in References 2


and 3. Most tests on connections have been conducted under quasi-static, monotonic
loading. A few studies have investigated the effects on connections of impact loading,
seismic loading or reversed loading [4, 5, 6, 7]. In most such studies, the objective was
to investigate the effects of some sort of dynamic loading to low load levels, on the
anchor’s subsequent load-displacement behavior to failure under monotonic load [6, 7].
Only a few investigations [8] have addressed the influence of loading rate on the entire
load-displacement behavior of anchors. Relatively few tests had been conducted in
cracked concrete or in high-moment regions [4, 6, 8, 9, 10].

3. Anchors, Test Setups and Procedures

Based on use of existing anchors in nuclear applications, the testing program originally
emphasized one wedge-type expansion anchor (referred to here as “Expansion Anchor”),
with some tests on one undercut anchor (“UC Anchor 1”), and other tests on anchors in
one type of cementitious grout (“Grouted Anchor”). As the testing progressed, other
anchors were added: a variant on the expansion anchor (“Expansion Anchor II”);
another undercut anchor (“UC Anchor 2”); and a heavy-duty sleeve-type single-cone
expansion anchor (“Sleeve Anchor”). Anchors ranged in diameter from 3/8 to 1 in. (9.2
to 25.4 mm), with emphasis on 3/4 in. (19.1 mm) diameter.

The Cast-in-Place (CIP) anchors tested in Task 1 were A325 bolts, shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Typical cast-in-place anchor (A325 bolt) tested in Tasks 1 and 3 of this
study

The Grouted Anchors were A325 hex-head bolts, 3/4 in. (19 mm) diameter by 6 in. (152
mm) long. No washers were placed at the heads since the bearing area already meets the
minimum requirement of ACI 349 Appendix B [11].

The Expansion Anchor II (EAII), shown in Figure 2, is a wedge-type expansion anchor.


wedge dimple
wedge mandrel (cone)
D1
D2
D

lc

Figure 2 Key dimensions of Expansion Anchor II

542
The Expansion Anchor (EA) tested in Task 1 of this study is an earlier version of
Expansion Anchor II. It was used extensively in some existing nuclear power plants,
and is no longer produced. Its dimensions are generally similar to those of EAII.
Samples of EA were obtained from the manufacturer.

The Sleeve Anchor tested throughout this study is a single-cone, sleeve-type expansion
anchor with follow-up expansion capability, shown in Figure 3.

spacer sleeve plastic crushable leg expansion sleeve


structurally funished surface
cone

D1
D2
D

lc
lef

Figure 3 Key dimensions of Sleeve Anchor

The Undercut Anchor 1 (UC1) tested throughout this study is a conventionally opening
undercut anchor, consisting of a threaded rod with a steel cone at one end and an
expansion sleeve (Figure 4).

threaded shank extension sleeve expansion sleeve


cone D1

D2
D

lef lc

Figure 4 Key dimensions of Undercut Anchor 1

Undercut Anchor 2, tested in Task 1 of this study, is an inverted-opening undercut


anchor (Figure 5).

threaded shank extension sleeve cone expansion sleeve


D

lef
lc
Figure 5 Key dimensions of Undercut Anchor 2

543
Because the failure mode of deeply embedded anchors is governed by steel yield and
fracture, and is well understood, the primary objective of this testing was to examine the
influence of dynamic loading on anchor capacity as governed by concrete breakout,
pullout or pull-through. The embedments were shallow, either the manufacturer’s
standard embedment, or the minimum recommended embedment.

The target concrete compressive strength for this testing program was 4700 lb/in.2 (32.4
MPa), with a permissible tolerance of ±500 lb/in.2 (±3.45 MPa) at the time of testing.
Three types of aggregate were used: a porous limestone; a river gravel; and a local
granite.

The test setup used for some tests of Task 1 (single tensile anchors in uncracked and
cracked concrete) is shown in Figure 6.

Nut
Threaded Rod
Load Cell
Hydraulic Ram

Steel Plate
Loading Shoe

Beam
(Back-to-Back Reaction Ring
Channels)

Anchor

Concrete Block

Figure 6 Test setup for Task 1

The typical test specimen, shown in Figure 7, was a concrete block 39.5 in. (1.00 m)
wide, 24 in. (0.60 m) deep, and 87.5 in. (2.20 m) long. Seven #6 (32 mm) longitudinal
reinforcing bars were placed in the middle of each block to provide safety when the
block was moved. This reinforcement was placed at the mid-height of the block to
permit testing anchors on both the top and bottom surfaces, without interfering with
anchor behavior.

544
39.5 in

Lifting loop

24 in

in
.5
87
Reinforcement
7-#6
Figure 7 Typical specimen for Task 1

A specimen used for Task 1 tests in cracked concrete is shown in Figure 8. Tension tests
on single anchors were conducted on concrete slabs 54 in. (1372 mm) wide by 74 in.
(1880 mm) long by 10 in. (254 mm) thick. The configurations of reinforcing bars in
specimens were designed differently for tests on the two sizes of anchors, to use
specimens most efficiently.

6 in.
16 in.
6 in.
16 in.

24 in.
6 in.

Plan View

Elevation
Reinforcement Wedge Tubes Anchors

Figure 8 Specimen used for tests in cracked concrete

For Task 2, anchors were loaded through a stiff baseplate accommodating two anchors.
Quasi-static tests were run using a one-way actuator supplied by an electric pump.
Dynamic tests were run using a servo-controller under load control, using a ramp
loading, selected to ensure anchor failure. The rise time of this load (about 0.1 sec) was
set to correspond to that of typical earthquake response of mounted equipment.

545
For tests in cracked concrete with post-installed anchors, hammer-driven wedges and
split bearing tubes of high-strength steel were used to crack the concrete specimens and
to widen the crack to the desired width. For tests on cast-in-place anchors, which had to
be placed in position before casting, a piece of thin steel sheet was placed directly in the
plane of the anchor, to force the crack to form there. Anchors were tightened to the
torque specified by the manufacturer. To simulate the reduction of preload due to
concrete relaxation, anchors were first fully torqued, then released after about 5 minutes
to allow relaxation, and finally torqued again, but up to only 50% of the specified value.

4. Test Results

Results for Single-Anchor Tension Tests


Results for single-anchor tension tests are presented in terms of normalized tensile
capacity, k:
Pn
k= 1.5 (1)
h ef fc
where:
k = coefficient (normalized tensile capacity)
Pn = observed tensile capacity, lb
fc = tested concrete compressive strength, lb/in.2
hef = effective embedment, in.

The effective embedment was measured from the concrete surface to the end of the
expansion sleeve or to the point of the clip in contact with the concrete (Table 1).
Results are given in Reference 2, and are summarized in Tables 2 and 3. Each value is
the mean of at least 5 replicates, and is associated with coefficients of variation of 5% to
8%. Results are normalized by √fc′ to a reference concrete strength of 4700 lb/in.2 (32.4
MPa).

546
Table 1 Embedment and effective embedment used for each anchor

Anchor and Diameter Embedment Effective Embedment


in. (mm) in. (mm)
CIP Anchor, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 4.00 (102) 4.00 (102)
Expansion Anchor, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 3.25 (83) 2.44 (120)
4.75 (121) 3.94 (100)
Expansion Anchor II, 0.375 in. (9.5 mm) 2.25 (57) 1.94 (49)
Expansion Anchor II, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 3.25 (83) 2.69 (68)
4.00 (102) 3.44 (87)
4.75 (121) 4.19 (106)
UC Anchor 1, 0.375 in. (9.5 mm) 2.25 (57) 2.25 (57)
UC Anchor 1, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 4.00 (102) 4.00 (102)
UC Anchor 2, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 4.00 (102) 4.00 (102)
Sleeve Anchor, 0.375 in. (9.5 mm) 2.25 (57) 2.25 (57)
Sleeve Anchor, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 4.00 (102) 4.00 (102)
Grouted Anchor, 0.75 in. (19 mm) 4.00 (102) 4.00 (102)

Table 2 Mean normalization coefficients for tensile anchors in various


conditions obtained here for CC Method

Load Type and Concrete Condition


Anchor Type Static Dynamic Static Dynamic
Uncracked Uncracked Cracked Cracked
Cast-In-Place 41.6 53.9 36.2 52.3
Grouted 41.2 57.0 24.5 15.5
UC1, 3/8 in. (10 mm) 37.2 44.4 35.6 41.1
UC1, 3/4 in. (19 mm) 39.4 49.0 41.7 46.2
UC2, 3/4 in. (19 mm) 43.7 53.6 28.5 45.2
Sleeve, 10 mm 37.4 38.7 29.9 29.7
Sleeve, 20 mm 44.3 55.1 35.3 39.5
EA II 36.7 37.8 29.7 28.0

547
Table 3 Ratios of tensile breakout capacities (static, cracked; dynamic,
uncracked; and dynamic, cracked) to static tensile breakout
capacities in uncracked concrete.

Load Type and Concrete Condition


Anchor Type Static Cracked/ Dynamic Dynamic
Static Uncracked Uncracked/Static Cracked/Static
Uncracked Uncracked
Cast-In-Place 0.87 1.30 1.26
Grouted 0.59 1.38 0.38
UC1, 3/8 in. (10 mm) 0.96 1.19 1.10
UC1, 3/4 in. (19 mm) 1.06 1.24 1.17
UC2, 3/4 in. (19 mm) 0.65 1.23 1.03
Sleeve, 10 mm 0.80 1.03 0.79
Sleeve, 20 mm 0.80 1.23 0.89
EA II 0.81 1.03 0.76

Results for Multiple-Anchor Tension Tests

In Figure 9, capacities of two-anchor attachments [1] are compared as a function of the


relative anchor spacing (s / hef), with capacities predicted by the CC Method [12].
Calculated dynamic capacity is taken as 1.25 times the static capacity. In dynamic tests,
the increase in capacity with relative anchor spacing, is nearly parallel to the calculated
values. This implies that the critical anchor spacing and the critical edge distance are no
smaller under dynamic load than under static load.

548
260.00

240.00

220.00

200.00
Failure Load Fu [kN]

180.00

160.00

140.00 Sleeve Anchor Static


UC1 Static
120.00 Sleeve Anchor Dynamic
UC1 Dynamic
Calculated Static
100.00
Calculated Dynamic

80.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Relative Spacing: s / hef

Figure 9 Static and dynamic tensile capacities depending on


relative anchor spacing

5. Conclusions

1) Tensile breakout capacities are well described by the CC Method. Appropriate


dynamic capacity ratios (Table 3) should be used for dynamic loading.

2) Under dynamic loads, effects of anchor spacing and edge distance are about the
same for dynamic as for static loading, and are well predicted by the CC Method.

3) Anchors with dynamic capacity ratios greater than 1.0, designed for ductile behavior
in uncracked concrete under static loading, will probably still behave in a ductile
manner in cracked concrete under dynamic loading.

6. Acknowledgment and Disclaimer

This paper presents partial results of a research program supported by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) (NUREG/CR-5434, “Anchor Bolt Behavior and
Strength during Earthquakes”). The technical contact is Herman L Graves, III, whose
support is gratefully acknowledged. The conclusions in this paper are those of the
authors only, and are not NRC policy or recommendations.

549
7. References

1) Rodriguez, M., “Behavior of Anchors in Uncracked Concrete under Static and


Dynamic Loading,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, August 1995.
2) Klingner, R. E., Hallowell, J. M., Lotze, D., Park, H-G., Rodriguez, M. and Zhang,
Y-G., “Anchor Bolt Behavior and Strength during Earthquakes,” report prepared for
the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NUREG/CR-5434), August 1998.
3) “Fastenings to Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures: State-of-Art Report,
Part 1,” Euro-International Concrete Committee (CEB), August 1991.
4) Cannon, R. W., “Expansion Anchor Performance in Cracked Concrete,” ACI
Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 78, No. 6, November-December 1981, pp. 471-479.
5) Malik, J. B., Mendonca, J. A., and Klingner, R. E., “Effect of Reinforcing Details on
the Shear Resistance of Short Anchor Bolts under Reversed Cyclic Loading,”
Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Proceedings Vol. 79, No. 1,
January-February 1982, pp. 3-11.
6) Copley, J. D. and E. G. Burdette, “Behavior of Steel-to-Concrete Anchorage in High
Moment Regions,” ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 82, No. 2, March-April 1985,
pp. 180-187.
7) Collins, D., R. E. Klingner and D. Polyzois, “Load-Deflection Behavior of Cast-in
Place and Retrofit Concrete Anchors Subjected to Static, Fatigue, and Impact
Tensile Loads,” Research Report CTR 1126-1, Center for Transportation Research,
The University of Texas at Austin, February 1989.
8) Eibl, J. and E. Keintzel, “Zur Beanspruchung von Befestigungsmitteln bei
dynamischen Lasten,” Forschungsbericht T2169, Institut für Massivbau und
Baustofftechnologie, Universität Karlsruhe, 1989.
9) Eligehausen, R., W. Fuchs, and B. Mayer, “Bearing Behavior of Anchor Fastenings
under Tension,” Betonwerk und Fertigteil-Technik, No. 12, 1987, pp. 826-832.
10) Eligehausen, R. and T. Balogh, “Behavior of Fasteners Loaded in Tension in
Cracked Reinforced Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 3, May-June
1995, pp. 365-379.
11) “Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures,” ACI349-90),
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, MI, 1990.
12) Fuchs, W., R. Eligehausen and J. E. Breen, “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD)
Approach for Fastening to Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 1,
January-February 1995, pp. 73-94.

550
TEST METHODS FOR SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF
POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS
John F. Silva
Hilti, Inc., USA

Abstract
The qualification of post-installed anchors for use in seismic environments in the U.S.
has been addressed independently by a number of different groups, including ICBO
Evaluation Service, Inc., the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California
(SEAOSC), ACI, and the telecommunications industry. Some of these methods have
been derived from approaches developed in the nuclear industry to account for a variety
of possible events (earthquake, explosion, impact).

The primary focus of most of the test methods current and proposed is the response of
the installed anchor to external cyclic loading, tension and shear. With the exception of
the NEBS criteria, which consists of shake-table testing, strain rate effects are not taken
into account. Two methods, the Provisional Test Method developed by ACI Committee
355 and the German nuclear standard developed by the Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik
(DIBt), explicitly consider damage to the concrete in the form of a static crack passing
through the anchor location. The SEAOSC criteria provides a comparison of the post-
installed anchor with an “equivalent” cast-in-place headed anchor, and results in load-
displacement information (stiffness degradation, total slip) for cyclic loading throughout
the entire load range (to failure). Results are presented for one anchor tested to three of
these criteria: ICBO ES AC01 Method 2, SEAOSC, and the German nuclear standard.
Conclusions are drawn regarding the effectiveness of the respective test methods.

1. Earthquakes and Their Effect on Anchor Performance

Strong ground motion associated with earthquakes can be defined in terms of strain rate
(10-5 < ε& < 10-2) , number of cycles (typically N < 30) and displacement (from several
centimeters to a meter or more). Previous studies indicate that the strain rates associated
with earthquakes are not a significant factor, positive or negative, for anchor behavior.
At sub-yield load levels, cycling shear loads can lead to stiffness loss; pulsing tension

551
loads are generally less significant. At load levels at or near ultimate, stiffness
degradation is more significant. Displacement beyond the deformation capacity of the
anchor is obviously a criterion for anchor failure. Many of the documented anchor
failures in the literature can in fact be characterized as resulting from excessive
deformation demand, usually in shear.

Inertial forces generated in structures by strong ground motion are more difficult to
characterize. Historically, the design of structures for earthquake resistance has focused
on collapse prevention. For this purpose, design forces were defined as a percentage of
the building mass, typically at levels that are far below expected inertial forces. Implicit
in this approach is an expectation of structure overload with attendant member yielding
and stiffness degradation.

More recently, design methods are derived from a multi-level performance concept (life-
safety, damage limitation, continued operability, etc.) that places greater emphasis on
design for ‘real’ force levels. Material resistances are simultaneously derived to
represent ‘real’ ultimate strengths.1 Clearly, expectations of force and displacement
demands beyond the elastic range continue to form the basis for fixed base (non-
isolated) seismic design of structures.

2. History

The performance of post-installed anchors in earthquakes was initially a subject of


concern for the nuclear industry both in Canada and the United States.

Since the 1970s, attention had been focused in within the U.S. nuclear industry on
encouraging ductile failure of anchorages through the design process.2 While generally
practical for the design of cast-in-place anchorages, this approach is often difficult to
implement in the case of post-installed anchors, most of which were/are not designed to
fail in a ductile manner. A nation-wide review of as-built conditions at U.S. nuclear
facilities in the early 1990s focused on best-guess estimations of anchor static capacity
as a means of retroactively qualifying anchorages for seismic loads. Combined with the
severe loading criteria that had been established for nuclear construction, it was believed
that this approach contained sufficient conservatism to avoid further seismic
qualification testing of anchors.

552
60%Fy Ns = 50%Nu
45%Fy
tension

tension
30%Fy Ni = 1/2(Ns-Nm)+Nm
15%Fy Nm = 25%Nu

30 30 80 200 cycles 10 30 100 cycles

16%Fy
Vs= 50%Vu
12%Fy
8%Fy
Vi = 1/2(Vs-Vm)+Vm
4%Fy
Vm= 25%Vu
shear

shear

cycles
10 cycles
200 100
80 30
30
30

Figure 1 – CSA CAN N287.2 Figure 2 – ICBO ES Seismic Test


Seismic Test Cycles Cycles
Investigations in the Canadian nuclear industry centered on the response of single
anchors to cyclic loading. Ontario Hydro, based on testing of then-available anchor
systems, developed tension and shear cyclic loading regimens for the Canadian
Standards Association that were subsequently incorporated into CSA Standard CAN3-
N287.2. The testing was designed to subject the anchor to a few high load cycles (60%
Fy) followed by several hundred cycles to “..study the effect of fatigue on the anchor
after the introduction of the initial high localized stress.” (see Fig. 1) All cycles were run
with an input frequency of 5 Hz.3 On the basis of these tests, two types of anchors,
heavy-duty sleeve and lead-caulking anchors, were identified as suitable for seismic
loading. The other anchor types tested, drop-in and self-drill anchors, typically
experienced premature bolt failure. The CSA Standard, with its emphasis on fatigue
response, later served as the basis for the ICBO ES seismic qualification test.

The telecommunications industry likewise began to review the seismic requirements for
post-installed anchors in connection with the installation of then state-of-the-art digital
switching installations in the early 1980s. Both static and shake table testing of specific

553
components has since been standardized through the adoption of a synthesized
waveform and corresponding set of response spectra.4 Testing of the anchors is
conducted only in conjunction with a specific component, and qualification is based on a
pass/fail criteria.

3. Seismic Qualification Testing in the U.S.

Prior to 1997, testing of post-installed anchors for seismic performance was not common
practice outside of the nuclear and telecom industries. Based on long-standing tradition,
post-installed anchors were routinely listed by the International Conference of Building
Officials Evaluation Service (ICBO ES) as suitable for wind and seismic loading based
on static load tests in uncracked, unreinforced concrete specimens. Additionally, as late
as 1987, increases in allowable loads of 33% for seismic loads were granted in
conformance with applicable sections of the Uniform Building Code pertaining to short-
duration loading.

Connection failures in the Northridge Earthquake in January of 1994 prompted a review


of this practice, however, and for the period 1995 to 1997, mechanical post-installed
anchors were not permitted for seismic applications. A test criteria based loosely on the
CSA Standard N287.2 was adopted in 1997,5 and listing of mechanical anchors for
seismic loading resumed in 1998 with the issuance of Evaluation Reports for the Hilti
HSL and Kwik Bolt II anchors. While similar to the Ontario Hydro approach (cyclic
loading, descending load levels, compare Figs. 1 and 2) the test regimen used by ICBO
ES differs from the Canadian approach in two significant areas:

1. The number of cycles is significantly reduced. This was done to reduce the
probability of fatigue failure in the test.
2. The peak load level was reduced to 150% of the maximum allowable design load,
which in turn is limited to 133% of the static design load. Taken together, these
limits typically result in a peak load on the anchor equal to twice the static allowable
value, or roughly one-half of ultimate. Given that ultimate strength in tension for
most post-installed anchors is limited by concrete cone breakout, this often
represents a significant reduction from the CSA Standard (60% Fy, bolt).

In addition, the frequency requirement was changed from 5 Hz to a maximum of 1 Hz.

In 1991 ICBO ES ceased authorizing the use of post-installed anchors for use in tensile
zones. This issue was not re-visited in the context of seismic loading, and hence the
seismic qualification tests for both mechanical and bonded anchors6 are performed in
uncracked, unreinforced concrete specimens.

Concurrent with the development of seismic qualification testing at ICBO, the Structural
Engineers Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) proposed a test standard based
on the assumption that the historical provisions for cast-in-place anchors in the Uniform

554
Building Code had proven adequate in past earthquakes. Accordingly, the SEAOSC
Standard Method of Cyclic Load Test for Anchors in Concrete or Grouted Masonry7
requires side-by-side testing of post-installed anchors with code cast-in-place anchors
(standard hex A307 bolts) of like diameter. The anchors are loaded cyclically in steps of
five cycles each to failure, and the resulting load-slip curves and ultimate loads
compared. Qualification of the post-installed anchor is thus based on performance equal
to or exceeding that of the cast-in-place anchor. This test was subsequently adopted by
the ICBO Evaluation Service as an alternate means of qualification for seismic loading.

4. Seismic Qualification Testing in Europe

In 1998 the Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (German Construction Technology


Institute) issued testing guidelines for the use of anchors in nuclear power plants and
nuclear installations.8 The typical loading cases (earthquake, aircraft impact, explosive
shock wave) are cited. Typically, the test regimen consists of three series of tension tests,
i.e.:

1. monotonic tension loading to failure in 1.5 mm wide parallel crack (crack width
constant over depth of test member);
2. 15 tension load cycles ( f ≤ 1 Hz ) in 1.5 mm wide parallel crack; and
3. 10 crack opening and closing cycles (1.0 mm to 1.5 mm) with a constant tension
load applied to the anchor, followed by loading to failure with the crack width held
constant at 1.5 mm.

In addition, 15 shear load cycles in a 1.0-mm parallel crack are performed, followed by
shear loading to failure.

The extreme crack widths required (an earlier variant required a maximum crack width
of 2.0 mm) coupled with relatively severe pass/fail criteria make this the most rigorous
test method currently in existence.

5. Testing of the Hilti HDA

The Hilti HDA belongs to the class of self-undercutting undercut anchors (see Fig. 3).
The anchor is offered in four sizes (M10, M12, M16, and M20) and two shear sleeve
variants (preset and through-set, see Fig. 4). Equipped with an ISO Grade 8.8 bolt, the
HDA is proportioned to exhibit
bolt failure at static tension
ultimate for concrete strengths
greater than 14 MPa and where
full development of the
concrete cone breakout strength
Figure 3 – HDA Self-Undercutting Anchor is afforded. The HDA was

555
brought to market in 1998 and has since
been tested to several criteria documenting
its response to shock, fatigue, fire and
earthquake in the U.S. and Europe. The
results from selected earthquake/nuclear
qualification tests are presented for
comparison here.

6. ICBO ES AC01 Method 2

Testing of the HDA-P M12 x 100/20 per


ICBO ES Acceptance Criteria AC01,
Figure 4 – HDA Setting Details Method 2, was performed at Hilti
laboratories using a 111-kN capacity
actuator with in-line load cell and servo-controlled hydraulics. Displacement
measurements were obtained with a linear variable displacement transducer (LVDT).
The actuator was controlled via a digital readout device with peak hold and signal
conditioners. Electronic data acquisition and control systems sampled the outputs of both
the load cell and LVDTs.

The HDA M12 is equipped with a 12-mm ISO 8.8 bolt and has an effective anchoring
depth of 100 mm. The outside diameter of the HDA M12 is 21 mm.

Five tests each in cyclic tension and shear were conducted in 22 MPa (cylinder strength)
normal weight concrete. In addition, five static tension and shear tests to failure were
performed to establish reference values. All testing was conducted in accordance with
ASTM E488-90.

The average ultimate static tension


Table 1 - HDA Allowable Stress Design
capacity of the HDA M12 as determined
Seismic - ICBO ES in the reference tests (all tests resulted in
f'c = 2,500 psi steel failure) was 70.5 kN with a COV of
Anchor ASD Seismic ASD Seismic 0.05%. Accordingly, the maximum test
T ension Shear load for the seismic qualification test was
(k) (kN) (k) (kN) set at 15.85/2 = 35.3 kN. This translates to
HDA-P M10 3.5 15.6 2.2 9.6 a steel stress of approximately 418 MPa or
HDA-T M10 3.5 15.6 6.2 27.7 65% Fy (52% Fu). [Note: The allowable
HDA-P M12 5.3 23.6 3.2 14.1
earthquake load for this anchor would be
set at 15.85/3 = 23.5 kN.] The anchor
HDA-T M12 5.3 23.6 6.8 30.3
survived the seismic test with all residual
HDA-P M16 9.5 42.3 5.6 25.1
strength tests resulting in steel failure. The
HDA-T M16 9.5 42.3 12.2 54.5 maximum peak displacement was 1.0 mm.

556
Similarly, the average ultimate static shear capacity of the HDA-P M10 as determined in
the reference tests was 41.2 kN with a COV of 9.0% (all steel failures). The maximum
test load was thus set at 9.26/2 = 20.6 kN. The anchor survived the seismic test, and the
mean residual strength was determined to be 36.6 kN, or 89% of the reference capacity,
although all tests resulted in steel failure (COV = 1.5%). [Note: The criterion for passing
is 80% of Vref.] The maximum peak displacement, at 8.8 mm, was within 23% of the
allowable maximum of 10.8 mm.

The resulting allowable tension and shear values for seismic loading are shown in Table
1.

7. SEAOSC (ICBO ES AC01 Method 1)

Testing of the HDA per SEAOSC Standard Method of Cyclic Load Test for Anchors in
Concrete or Grouted Masonry was conducted at Consolidated Engineering Laboratories
in Oakland, California. Loads were applied with a 98 kN capacity hydraulic actuator
equipped with an in-line load cell and servo-controlled hydraulics. LVDTs were used to
Table 2 - HDA SEAOSC Test Result Summary measure displacement.
Cyclic T ension Results Mean The test members
Mean Ultimate Displacement
consisted of concrete
Anchor T ension Load @ Failure
blocks with a cylinder
n (k) (kN) COV (in.) (mm) compressive strength of
1/2" X 4" A307 3 11.0 49.1 1.0% 0.2 5.0 between 20 MPa and 24
HDA-P M10 x 100 5 11.4 50.8 0.4% 0.2 4.5 MPa at the time of testing.
5/8" X 4-1/2" A307 3 17.6 78.2 4.7% 0.2 4.3 The blocks were cast with
HDA-P M12 x 125 3 16.2 72.1 2.4% 0.3 7.7 1/2- (12 mm) and 5/8-inch
5/8" X 4-1/2" A307 3 17.0 75.8 4.2% 0.2 5.9 (16 mm) A307 standard
HDA-P M16 x 190 4 20.3 90.4 0.2% 0.2 4.5 1 hex head bolts placed at
minimum embedment per
1997 UBC Table 19D, i.e.,
Cyclic Shear Results
Mean 4 inches (102 mm) and 4-
Mean Ultimate Displacement 1/2 inches (114 mm),
Anchor Shear Load @ Failure respectively. Block
n (k) (kN) COV (in.) (mm) dimensions were 152 cm x
1/2" X 4" A307 3 5.2 23.1 7.9% 0.2 4.5 91 cm x 61 cm. They were
HDA-P M10 x 100 3 6.0 26.7 0.3% 0.2 5.1 2 cast vertically, with the
5/8" X 4-1/2" A307 3 9.0 40.1 7.3% 0.3 6.6 bolts placed in the side
HDA-T M10 x 100 3 15.1 67.0 0.2% 0.4 9.6 3 forms to provide
1
equivalent casting
value limited by actuator capacity
2
conditions for all anchors.
bolt only
The HDA anchors were
3
shear sleeve engaged subsequently installed in

557
Table 3 - HDA Allowable Stress Design the cured concrete blocks adjacent to
Seismic - SEAOSC the cast-in-place bolts, with sufficient
ASD Seismic ASD Seismic
spacing to allow testing per ASTM
Anchor T ension Shear
E488.
(k) (kN) (k) (kN)
1
According to the SEAOSC test
HDA-P M10 4.0 17.8 4.4 19.5
procedure, the load steps for the cyclic
1,2
HDA-T M10 4.0 17.8 8.0 35.5 loading are determined by identifying
3
HDA-P M12 5.9 26.0 8.0 35.5 (from static test data) a First Major
3,4
HDA-T M12 5.9 26.0 11.4 50.9 Event (FME), i.e., a load level at
HDA-P M16 8.6 38.5 10.8 47.9 5
which the load-displacement of the
HDA-T M16 8.6 38.5 12.6 56.2 5,6 anchor undergoes a significant
1
Equivalent to 1/2-inch A307 bolt change. Load steps are then
2
For shear, equivalent to 5/8-inch A307 bolt established as 25% increments of the
3 FME, i.e., 25%FME, 50%FME,
Equivalent to 5/8-inch A307 bolt
4
75%FME, 100%FME, 125%FME,
For shear, assume equivalent to 3/4-inch A307 bolt
5
etc. to failure. Five cycles are
Assume equivalent to 1-inch A307 bolt performed at each load step at less
6
For shear, assume equivalent to 1-1/8-inch A307 bolt than 1 Hz.

Two sizes of HDA anchors, M10 and M12, were tested in cyclic (pulsing) tension. In
addition, the M16 size was tested in tension to the actuator capacity of 90 kN. The rated
tension capacity of the M16 is 127 kN. Both the HDA M10-P and M10-T (shear sleeve
engaged) were tested in cyclic shear. All anchors were installed per manufacturer
recommendations and the maximum recommended torque applied. This torque was then
reduced to 50% of the maximum recommended torque prior to testing. Alternatively for
some specimens, 48 hours were allowed to pass prior to testing, which resulted in a
residual pre-tension value approximately equal to 50% torque.

All tests resulted in steel failure at ultimate, with the exception of the HDA M16
anchors, which were not tested, to failure.

Test results are provided in Table 2. Sample load-displacement curves are shown in Fig.
5, and the allowable loads implied from the test data are given in Table 3.

8. German Nuclear Qualification

Testing of the HDA for structural applications in German nuclear facilities was
conducted at the University of Stuttgart according to the DIBt Guideline For Evaluating
Anchor Fastenings For Granting Permission In Individual Cases According To The State
Structure Regulations Of The Federal States. Tests were conducted with three HDA
sizes, M10, M12 and M16. Three types of tension tests were conducted:

558
Table 4 - HDA - German Nuclear Standard Tension Test Result Summary
f cc T est T ype Crack Mean Ult. Displ. @
Anchor T ype Width T ension Mean Ult.
(MPa) Load Crack (mm) n (kN) COV (mm)
HDA-T M10x100 25.0 monotonic static 1.5 5 40.9 14% 5.0
HDA-T M10x100 28.8 monotonic static 1.5 5 46.1 7% 3.2
HDA-T M10x100 25.0 cycl. tension static 1.5 5 40.1 13% 1.6
HDA-T M10x100 25.0 cycl. tension static 1.5 5 37.0 13% 1.3
HDA-T M10x100 30.8 monotonic moving 1.5 5 48.2 1% 3.1
HDA-T M12x125 25.0 monotonic static 1.5 5 64.4 9% 4.4
HDA-T M12x125 27.1 cycl. tension static 1.5 5 64.4 13% 2.5
HDA-T M12x125 28.3 cycl. tension static 1.5 5 67.6 9% 2.6
HDA-T M12x125 25.0 monotonic moving 1.5 5 67.6 4% 4.6
HDA-T M16x190 25.0 monotonic static 1.5 5 119.7 5% 5.5
HDA-T M16x190 25.0 cycl. tension static 1.5 5 113.3 12% 3.6
HDA-T M16x190 25.3 cycl. tension static 1.5 5 122.8 11% 3.6
HDA-T M16x190 27.3 monotonic moving 1.5 5 125.8 8% 6.3

1. static tension tests in parallel cracks


2. pulsing tension tests in parallel cracks
3. static tension tests in opening and closing cracks

Crack widths in all cases were 1.5 mm.


Cyclic shear tests were conducted in 1.0-mm cracks with both the P and T versions of
the HDA.
Tension test results are presented in Table 4. A representative load-displacement curve is
shown in Fig. 6.
Table 5 - HDA Category A An evaluation of the test data resulted in recommended
Allowable Loads - German working loads as shown in Table 5.
Nuclear Standard
C20/25 concrete 9. Comparison of Test Methods
Anchor NRk,p VRk,s
(kN) (kN) It is remarkable that, with respect to the determination
HDA-P M10 16.5 16.8 of allowable loads for tension, all three methods arrive
HDA-T M10 16.5 33.3 at roughly the same values for allowable stress design,
HDA-P M12 23.5 22.4 albeit by very different means (compare Tables 1, 3 and
5). It should be noted that this result is likely unique to
HDA-T M12 23.5 41.3
undercut-type anchors that do not suffer dramatic
HDA-P M16 47.1 48.0
capacity reductions in cracked concrete. Anchors that
HDA-T M16 47.1 80.0 do not exhibit such behavior may not achieve a similar

559
k Steel Failure

12
11
10
HDA M10 kN
9
8 1/2” A307 std
hex bolt HDA M10
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

0
0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 in mm

Figure 5 – Sample SEAOSC Seismic Test Load- Figure 6 – DIBt Tension Cycle in 1.5
Displacement Curves mm Crack

result. The greatest differences in the allowable loads occur in shear, whereby the
increased number of cycles associated with the ICBO ES Method 2 test restricts the
shear value, essentially as a function of low-cycle fatigue. As discussed above, this is
true to the original concept of the Canadian standard on which the ICBO test is based.

Of greater interest, however, is the information to be derived from the test aside from
simple pass/fail results. Figure 5 shows typical load-slip curves derived from the
SEAOSC seismic cycle. Note that it is possible to derive stiffnesses from this data
throughout the entire load range that reflects a realistic numbers of cycles. While the
German standard provides similar information (see Fig. 6), the information provided
regarding the response at near-ultimate load levels is limited.

10. Conclusions

Seismic qualification of anchors is based on various and disparate philosophies


regarding the appropriate conditions to be simulated in testing. ICBO ES continues to
use a low-cycle fatigue standard, while the German nuclear standard focuses heavily on
the effects of base material damage on anchor behavior. The SEAOSC approach, while
concentrating on comparisons with cast-in-place anchors, allows for development of

560
stiffness behavior necessary for the employment of advanced anchor design methods.
Clearly, an argument can be made for a combination of the SEAOSC approach with a
realistic approximation of base material damage (cracking).

11. Future Test Methods

Documented anchor failures in past earthquakes are likewise in many cases attributable
to shear overload, as opposed to pullout.

Clearly, the response of anchors to earthquake-induced loads is dependent on several


factors; nevertheless, four critical parameters can be identified:

1. load direction and magnitude


2. displacement demand
3. deformation constraints
4. earthquake-induced damage to the
base material (cracking)
FEQ
It can be argued that factors 1 through 3
are controlled by and, in most cases, a by-
product of, the design process. That is,
load and deformation demands on the
anchor are dependent to a large extent on
connection detailing. Inertial loads as
derived in analysis are typically based on
assumptions regarding induced
Fy accelerations. While they may serve as a
starting point for the correct proportioning
FEQ a. of the load path, static lateral loads rarely
lead to a correct estimation of the actual
force/deformation requirements for the
anchor in the event of a significant (design
Mp level) earthquake. For this reason, newer
design codes have adopted language that
encourages a stiffness/ductile design
approach to anchorage. The 2000
International Building Code section on
anchorage9 contains provisions that
require the anchorage design to satisfy
b. either a ductile anchor criterion, or to
establish a yielding mechanism elsewhere
Figure 7 – Anchor Design Concepts in the load path (see Fig. 7). This second
a. ductile anchor approach ensures that the anchor is not the
b. yielding element weak link in the load path. In the case of

561
predominantly shear loading, provision of such a yielding ‘fuse’ is the only sensible way
to protect the anchor from catastrophic overload.

Critical for an anchorage design that considers stiffness and material interaction in the
detail design is understanding the likely response history of the components being
considered. In the case of the anchor, such information can only be provided from testing
that mimics the essential components of strong motion and measures the required
response parameters in a way that is useful for design.10 While the recently published
ACI 355.2-00 test method11 includes cracking and is therefore a dramatic improvement
over previous criteria, it continues to be based on a low cycle fatigue loading regimen.

Consideration should therefore be given to seismic qualification criteria that include


stepwise cyclic loading (with three to five cycles at each load step) as described in the
SEAOSC method, with the following modifications:
a) conduct the tests in static cracks*, and
b) report the load-slip behavior, in the form of a characteristic envelope curve, along
with the other design parameters.

12. Summary

Three methods for qualification of anchors for seismic loading are currently in use in the
U.S. and Europe. Taken together, these methods encompass the effects of cyclic loading,
base material damage, and anchor overload. An undercut anchor has been tested using
the three standards, and the results provide a limited basis for evaluation of the test
methods. A test method that combines the best elements of the three current methods is
required to meet the requirements of future design codes.

References

1. FEMA Publication 273, ‘NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of


Buildings’, Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington D.C., October 1997.
2. ACI Committee 349, ‘Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related concrete
Structures (ACI 349-85)’, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1985.
3. Senkiw, G. A., ‘Qualification Tests on Concrete Anchors for CANDU Nuclear
Power Plants’, ACI Symposium on Anchorage to Concrete, Phoenix, Arizona,
March 1984.
4. Bell Communications Research, ‘Generic Requirements GR-63-CORE, Network
Equipment-Building System (NEBS) Requirements: Physical Protection’, Bellcore
Customer Research, Piscataway, New Jersey, Issue 1, October 1995.

*
It should be noted that a cycling crack test would more closely approximate the
conditions associated with a structure subjected to strong ground motion, although the
practical implications of such a test have not been adequately explored to date.

562
5. ICBO ES, ‘AC01, Acceptance Criteria for Expansion Anchors in Concrete and
Masonry Elements’, ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc., Whittier, California, January
2001.
6. ICBO ES, ‘AC58, Acceptance Criteria for Adhesive Anchors in Concrete and
Masonry Elements’, ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc., Whittier, California, January
2001.
7. SEAOSC, ‘Standard Method for Cyclic Load Test for Anchors in Concrete or
Grouted Masonry’, Structural Engineers Association of Southern California,
Whittier, California, April 1997.
8. DIBt, ‘Verwendung von Dübeln in Kernkraftwerken und kerntechnischen Anlagen,
Leitfaden zur Beurteilung von Dübelbefestigungen bei der Erteilung von
Zustimmungen im Einzelfall nach den Landesbauordungen der Bundesländer’ (Use
of Anchors in Nuclear Power Plants and Nuclear Technology Installations,
Guideline For Evaluating Anchor Fastenings For Granting Permission In Individual
Cases According To The State Structure Regulations Of The Federal States),
Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik, Berlin, September 1998.
9. ICC: International Building Code, 2000 Edition, Whittier, CA 90601, Sec. 1916, pp.
469-477.
10. Silva, J., Eligehausen, R., ‘The Concrete Capacity Design Method for Anchors in
Concrete’, Proceedings 69th Annual Convention Structural Engineers Association of
California, August 2000, p. 10.
11. ACI Committee 355, ‘Evaluating the Performance of Post-Installed Mechanical
Anchors in Concrete (ACI 355.2-00)’, Concrete International, February 2001, pp.
108-136.

563
SAFETY CONCEPT FOR FASTENINGS IN NUCLEAR
POWER PLANTS
Thomas M. Sippel*, Jörg Asmus*, Rolf Eligehausen**
*Engineering Office Eligehausen and Sippel, Stuttgart, Germany
**Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In nuclear power plants post-installed fastenings are often used. A decisive criteria for
the use of fastenings in safety critical applications is the proper functioning of fasteners
under special conditions such as impact loading and earthquake excitations and cracks in
concrete with a width ≥ 0.5 mm due to earthquake loadings.

Such special conditions are not covered by Technical Approvals according to [1].
Therefore, in Germany a guideline for the assessment of fasteners in nuclear power
plants has been published [3]. This guideline is valid for undercut anchors with an
embedment depth hef ≥ 80 mm, which are approved according to [1].

In this paper the concept of the guideline is explained. Details of the required suitability
tests and the tests to determine admissible service conditions are given. Furthermore,
results of tests with different types and sizes of undercut anchors are shown.

564
1. Introduction

In nuclear power plants post-installed fastenings are often used. A decisive criteria for
fastenings in safety relevant applications of nuclear power plants is their proper
functioning under special conditions, which may occur during the service life of the
plant. Such conditions include impact loading, earthquake excitations and cracks in the
concrete with a width ≥ 0.5 mm due to earthquake loading.

These special conditions are not covered by Technical Approvals according to [1].
Therefore, a guideline for the assessment of fasteners intended for use in nuclear power
plants has been published in Germany [3]. This guideline gives tests methods and
assessment criteria. Furthermore modifications to the design method (CC-method)
described in [1] and [2] are given.

This paper describes the concept of the guideline [3]. It gives details of the test program,
the assessment criteria and the modification of the CC-method. Furthermore results of
tests with undercut anchors are shown.

2. Safety concept

2.1. General
Post installed fasteners are often used in nuclear power plants to fasten pipe systems
which are critical for the safe operation of the plant. Therefore the fasteners must safely
transfer the loads acting on the base plate, even under extreme conditions which may
occur during the service life of the nuclear power plant. These conditions include e.g.
impact loading, earthquake excitations and cracks in the concrete with a width ≥ 0.5 mm
due to earthquake loading.

They are not covered by Technical Approvals according to [1]. Therefore according to
[3] additional tests are necessary to check the suitability (proper functioning) of the
fastener and to deduce allowable conditions of use under the above mentioned
conditions.

565
2.2. Use Categories and related partial safety factors
For the design of fasteners in nuclear power plants the safety concept of partial safety
factors is used. It must be shown that the design actions Sd are not larger than the design
resistance Rd (Eq. (1)).

Sd ≤ Rd (1)

In the simplest case (permanent load Gk and one variable load Qk acting in the same
direction as Gk) the design actions are calculated according to Eq. (2).

Sd = γG · Gk + γQ · Qk (2)

with γ G, γ Q = partial safety factors for permanent or variable load resp.

The design resistance is given by Eq. (3).

Rd = Rk/γM (3)

with Rk = characteristic resistance (5%-quantile)


γM = material safety factor

For fastenings in nuclear power plants, three different use categories (A, B and C) have
to be considered [4]. These three categories assume different expected frequencies of
the loading within the service life of the power plant (see Table 1). In category C the
same loadings and requirements as in normal buildings are considered. Therefore the
partial safety factors given in [1] and [2] must be used (see Table 1). In category A it is
assumed that the loading will occur only once during the service life of the structure.
Examples are the maximum expected earthquake, the hitting of the containment by a
plane or explosions. Under these conditions it must be ensured that the nuclear power
plant can be safely shut down. Because cooling water is needed for the shut down,
fasteners of the corresponding cooling pipes must function properly. Therefore the safety
factors γG = γQ = 1.0 and γMc = 1.7 are used. In category B a frequency of loading n ≤ 10
during the service life of the structure is assumed, such as "normal" earthquakes. The
partial safety factors are in between the values valid for category A and C.

566
Table 1: Use categories and corresponding safety factors for fastenings used in nuclear
power plants according to [3]
use category A B C
frequency during service life 1 ≤ 10 >> 10
crack width [mm] ≥ 0.5 mm ≤ 0.5 mm ≤ 0.3 mm
concrete class acc. to [7] C20/25 to C50/60
max. long term temperature ≤ 80°C
partial safety factors
action γG = γQ 1.0 1.2 1.4
resistance (concrete) γMc = γMp 1.7 1.9 2.1

3. Requirements on Fastenings

3.1. General
In use category C cracks with a width wk ≤ 0.3 mm or wk ≤ 0.5 mm under the quasi-
permanent or allowable service load of the structure are assumed. Therefore only
fasteners with a Technical Approval according to [1] may be used. In use category A
(e.g. maximum expected earthquake) large cracks may occur in the concrete in the most
stressed areas due to yielding of the reinforcement. The width of cracks have been
evaluated based on the design actions in nuclear power plants.

According to the evaluation in general the width of cracks running in one direction is
wk ≤ 1.0 mm. Only in extreme cases the crack width may be wk ≤ 1.5 mm. Outside the
most stressed regions where the reinforcement is strained below the yield strain the crack
widths are much smaller.

During an earthquake cyclic loading on the structure and on the fastenings is induced
simultaneously. Due to this the width of the cracks will vary between a minimum and a
maximum value and the fastenings will be loaded cyclically. These conditions must be
taken into account in the test regime (see Section 4).

3.2. Fasteners
As a principle, only fasteners with a Technical Approval for use in cracked and non
cracked concrete according to [1] should be used for safety relevant fastenings in nuclear
power plants. The width of cracks under seismic excitations can not be assessed very
accurately but some variations may occur. Therefore only undercut anchors with a
sufficiently large undercut are allowed, because their behaviour will not be influenced
significantly if even larger cracks than given above may occur. Undercut anchors (Fig.
1) transfer the load by mechanical interlock into the concrete. After producing of the
cylindrical hole by drilling, the undercutting is produced in a second operation before
installation of the anchor (Fig. 1a and b) or during installation of the anchor (Fig. 1c).
The use of torque controlled expansion anchors is not allowed in [3] because their proper

567
functioning may be impaired significantly if they are anchored in a crack with a width
larger than anticipated.

For safety relevant fasteners an effective anchorage depth hef ≥ 80 mm is required.


Anchors with an effective anchorage depth hef ≥ 40 mm are allowed only if very small
loads must be transferred into the concrete (adm F ≤ 0.4 kN).

a) b) c)
Fig. 1: Undercut anchor systems

3.3. Concrete
Concrete classes B25 to B55 according to DIN 1045 [5] or C20/25 to C50/60 according
to EN 206 [7] are covered in the guideline [3].

3.4. Protection against fire, corrosion and atomic radiation


For the resistance against fire and corrosion the regulations in the Technical Approval
for normal applications are valid. The influence of atomic radiation on the load-bearing
behaviour can be neglected.

3.5. Installation
The guideline [3] is valid only for fasteners, which are installed by skilled workers
according to the installation instruction of the manufacture and additional requirements
in the guideline. The correct installation must be controlled by independent personnel.
Therefore, tests to investigate the sensibility of fasteners to installation inaccuracies
(installation safety) can be omitted (see Section 4).
3.6. Design concept
Fastenings in nuclear power plants for safety related applications should be designed in
such a way that they are ductile. The ductility can be ensured by the attachment, the
fixture or the anchors. According to [3] in general in the design of the fastening
consisting of attachment, fixture and anchors the failure mode concrete cone failure
should not be decisive.

568
The design of fasteners in nuclear power plants closely follows the design model
according to [1] or [2] (CC-method). However, the characteristic resistance for concrete
cone failure is calculated according to Eq. (1).

0 1,5
N Rk,c = k ⋅ fcc ⋅ h ef (1)
with k = 6.0
fcc = concrete cube strength
hef = effective embedment depth

The factor k = 6.0 is approximately 15% lower than the value according to [1] or [2] for
cracked concrete with a crack width w = 0.3 mm. The lower value k considers the
influence of larger cracks (w = 1.0 mm) on the ultimate load for concrete cone failure.
Furthermore, the failure load VoRk,c for concrete edge failure is reduced by about 15%
compared to [1], [2].

The characteristic resistance for pull-out failure and steel shear failure is evaluated from
the results of relevant tests.

4. Required Tests for Use Category A

The required suitability tests and tests for evaluating allowable conditions of use are
summarised in Table 2.

Tests under monotonic loading are performed with normal loading rate, because the
results of tests in [9] and [10] showed that anchor behavior is not negatively influenced
by loading rates typical for earthquake excitations. The tests will be conducted with a
crack width w1 = 1.0 mm (reference tests) and w2 = 1.5 mm. In tension tests with
w = 1.5 mm the failure load should reach ≥ 0.8times the average value valid for tension
tests with w = 1.0 mm (reference failure load) to take into account that the probability of
occurrence of such wide cracks is relatively low.

Furthermore tests with cyclic tension load on the anchor (n = 15 cycles) must be
performed. The upper load is equal to Nmax = NRk/γMc with NRk = characteristic resistance
evaluated from results of tests according to Table 2, line 4 and γMc according to Table 1
for use category A. The minimum load is N = 0. This loading represents the cyclic
excitations of the fastening due to an earthquake or other dynamic loadings. During the
test no failure of an anchor is allowed and the average failure load in the subsequent test
to failure must be at least 70% of the reference failure load.

To model the influence of cyclic excitations of the structure on anchor behaviour tests in
opening and closing cracks are required. During the test the anchors are loaded with a

569
constant tension load Nmax as given above. The crack widths are varied 10 times between
w1 = 1.0 mm and w2 = 1.5 mm. After this the crack is opened to w2 = 1.5 mm and the
anchor is loaded monotonically to failure. During the tests no anchor may fail and the
average failure load in the tension tests must be at least 70% of the reference failure
load.

During an earthquake the anchors may be cyclically loaded in tension or shear. If


reversed cyclic shear loading occurs the anchor may fail by steel rupture due to low
cyclic fatigue. To check this, tests in cracked concrete (w = 1.0 mm) with 15 reversals of
the shear load between Vmax = ± VRk,s/γMs (VRk = characteristic shear resistance for steel
failure for monotonic loading and γMs = partial safety factor = 1.5 for anchor steel with
normal ductility) must be performed. The shear load is applied in direction of the crack.
During the load reversals no anchor failure may occur and the average failure load in the
subsequent test to failure must be ≥0.9times the reference value valid for monotonic
loading.

Table 2: Suitability tests and tests for admissible service conditions for use category A
Line Purpose of test load ∆w n N V
dir. mm α = u or u 2)
1) N u,0 Vu,0

Suitability tests
1 monotonic tension loading N 1.5 ≥5 α ≥ 0.8
2 load cycles nL = 15 N 1.5 ≥5 α ≥ 0.7 3)
3 crack movements nR = 10 N 1.5/1.0 ≥5 α ≥ 0.7 3)
Admissible service conditions
4 monotonic tension loading N 1.0 ≥5 reference ultimate load
for tension tests
5 monotonic shear loading V 1.0 ≥5 reference ultimate load
for shear tests
6 load cycles nL = 15 V 1.0 ≥5 α ≥ 0.9 3)
1)
N = tensile load, V = shear load
2)
Nu (Vu) = average failure load in tension (shear) tests, Nu,0 (Vu,0) = reference
average ultimate load in monotonic tension (shear) tests with w1 = 1.0 mm
3)
no failure during cyclic loading or crack moving

570
5. Test Results

In the following typical test results of different types and sizes of undercut anchors
performed according to the above described concept of the guideline [3] are shown.

Tension tests have been performed in line cracks with a width w = 0.3 mm to 1.7 mm.
In general, with the investigated fasteners concrete cone failure was observed.

Fig. 2 shows typical load displacement curves of undercut anchors tested in cracks with
a width w = 1.5 mm. The behaviour is not significantly different compared to tests in
w = 0.3 mm; only the anchor stiffness is reduced and the scatter of the test results may
be somewhat larger. In Fig. 3 the ratio of measured to calculated failure loads in cracked
concrete are plotted as a function of crack width. It demonstrates that the measured
ultimate loads exceed the characteristic resistance for concrete cone failure according to
Eq. (1). Furthermore, with increasing crack width no significant reduction of failure
loads can be observed up to a crack width w ≈ 1.7 mm.

The tension behaviour of anchors in cracks with constant width may be influenced by
cyclic loads on the anchor. Therefore tests under repeated loading have to be carried out
in cracked concrete (w = 1.5 mm) applying 15 load cycles. Fig. 4 shows a typical load-
displacement curve of an anchor subjected to repeated loading with subsequent tension
loading to failure. During cyclic loading the anchor displacement increase, however the
failure load is generally not much influenced by the previous load cycles.

Typical results of tests with opening and closing cracks using different types and sizes of
undercut anchors are shown in Fig. 5. In Fig. 5 the average displacement of 5 test per
series with anchors in line cracks loaded with a constant tension load Np = 0.6 to
0.7 N0Rk,c (N0Rk,c according to Eq. (1)) is plotted as a function of the number of crack
openings. In the tests the maximum crack width amounts to w2 = 1.5 mm and the
minimum crack width was about 1 mm. With increasing number of crack openings the
displacements increase. This increase depends mainly on the load bearing area of the
undercut system, the magnitude of the constant tension load on the anchor and the
number of crack openings. During the crack openings none of the tested anchors failed.
However, anchors with an insufficient load bearing area may be pulled out after a small
number of crack openings.

In general the increase of displacements during tests with opening and closing cracks is
larger than in the tests with cyclic loading on anchors located in a crack with a constant
width (compare Fig. 5 with Fig. 4).

571
140

120
Test 1
Test 2
100
Test 3
Load [kN]

Test 4
80
Test 5

60

40
undercut anchor M16, type 1
20 embedment depth hef = 190 mm
fcc = 28.5N/mm²; w = 1.5 mm

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Displacement s [mm]

Fig. 2: Load displacement curves for an undercut anchor M16 in cracked concrete
w = 1.5 mm
o
Ratio Nu,test/N Rk,c (cracked concrete)
2,50

2,25

2,00

1,75

1,50

1,25

1,00
o 1,5 1,5
0,75 N Rk,c (cracked concrete) = 6,0 * hef * fcc crack

0,50 undercut anchor, type 1


0,25
undercut anchor, type 2
anchor
undercut anchor, type 3
0,00
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 2,0 2,2
Crack width w [mm]

Fig. 3: Ratio measured to calculated failure load as a function of crack width (line
cracks)

572
60
55 undercut anchor M10, type 3
50
45 Nmax = 0,59 NoRk,c
40
Load [kN]

35
30
25
Nmax
20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25

Displacement s [mm]
Fig. 4: Load-displacement behaviour of an undercut anchor M10 in cracked concrete
(w ≈ 1.5 mm) under repeated loading with subsequent tension loading to failure

average displacement d [mm]


20
undercut anchor, type 1, M10 undercut anchor M12, type 2
18 undercut anchor, type 1, M12 undercut anchor M20, type 3
undercut anchor, type 1, M16
16
wmax = 1,5 mm
14 wmin = 1,0 mm
Np = 0,6 ... 0,7 NoRk,c
12
with NoRk,c = 6 x hef1,5 x fcc0,5
10

0
1 10
number of crack openings
Fig. 5: Average displacements of different undercut anchors in tests with opening and
closing cracks as a function of the number of crack openings

573
If fasteners are located sufficiently far from edges and loaded in shear, steel failure may
occur. Under seismic excitation the fastener may be subjected to large shear loads with
changing load directions. Therefore, in [3] tests under reversed cyclic shear loading in
cracked concrete w = 1.0 mm are required.

In Fig. 6 typical shear load shear-displacement curves for undercut anchors tested under
reversed shear loads in cracked concrete (w = 1.0 mm, loaded in direction of the crack)
are plotted. The behaviour in these tests is significantly influenced by the maximum
load Vmax and the number of load cycles. Furthermore, the type of fastener (through-
positioning anchor or pre-positioning anchor) is decisive.

Fig. 6a and 6b show the displacement behaviour for different shear load levels. A
regular behaviour with relatively small displacements after 15 shear load cycles can be
seen in Fig. 6a. The peak shear load at the load cycles was about 45% of the average
shear load measured in monotonic tests. After cyclic loading, the shear load was
increased monotonically up to failure. The anchor failed by steel rupture. When
increasing the amplitude of the shear load by about 40% for the same anchor type, steel
failure occurred after 4 load cycles (Fig. 6b).

120 120
110 undercut anchor M12, type 3 110 undercut anchor M12, type 3
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
Load [kN]
Load [kN]

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
-40-35-30-25-20-15-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 -40-35-30-25-20-15-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Displacement s [mm] Displacement s [mm]

a) b)
Fig. 6: Shear force – shear displacement curves for an undercut anchor M12 (through-
positioning anchor) tested in cracked concrete (w = 1.0 mm)
a) repeated maximum shear load Vmax = ±47.5 kN and subsequent shear test to
failure
b) repeated maximum shear load Vmax = ±66.4 kN; steel failure after 4 load
cycles

574
6. Summary

In nuclear power plants post-installed fasteners are often used. A decisive criteria for the
use of fastenings in safety critical applications is the proper functioning of fastener under
special conditions such as large dynamic loadings and large cracks (w ≥ 0.5 mm) due to
earthquakes. Such special conditions are not covered by Technical Approvals according
to [1]. Therefore, in Germany a guideline for the assessment of fasteners in nuclear
power plants has been worked out [3].

In this paper the concept of the guideline is explained. Details of the required suitability
tests and the tests to determine admissible service conditions are given. Furthermore,
results of tests with different types and sizes of undercut anchors are shown.

7. References

[1] „Guideline for European Technical Approval of Anchors (Metal Anchors) for
Use in Concrete“; Mitteilungen des Deutschen Instituts für Bautechnik;
Sonderheft Nr. 16; 31.Dezember 1997.
[2] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik: Bemessungsverfahren für Dübel zur
Verankerung im Beton (Design Concept for Fasteners fastened in Concrete);
Berlin, Juni 1993
[3] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik, Berlin: Verwendung von Dübeln in
Kernkraftwerken und kerntechnischen Anlagen. Ausgabe 9/98.
[4] DIN 25449: 1987-05: Auslegung der Stahlbetonbauteile von Kernkraftwerken
unter Belastung aus inneren Störfällen
[5] DIN 1045: Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und Spannbeton, Bemessung und
Konstruktion
[6] DIN 1055: Lastannahmen für Bauten
[7] ENV 206: Beton; Eigenschaften, Herstellung, Verarbeitung und Gütenachweis.
[8] Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R.: Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und Mauerwerkbau
(Fastening Technique to Concrete and Masonry Structures). Ernst & Sohn,
2000.
[9] Eibl, J.; Keintzel, F.: Behavior of expansion anchors and undercut anchors
under dynamic loads. Institut für Massivbau und Baustofftechnologie,
Universität Karlsruhe, 1989
[10] Eibl, J.; Keintzel, F.: Behavior of expansion anchors and undercut anchors
under high impact and alternate loads. Institut für Massivbau und
Baustofftechnologie, Universität Karlsruhe, 1989

575
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON SEISMIC PERFORMANCE
OF BEAM MEMBERS CONNECTED WITH
POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS
Reiji Tanaka*
Koichi Oba**
*Tohoku Institute of Technology, Japan
**Hilti (Japan), Ltd.

Abstract
In Japan, post-installed anchors are not allowed to connect beams or columns of
buildings. The reason is that cyclic loads are applied to the connection of beams or
columns due to earthquakes.
If post-installed anchors are capable of connecting beams or columns, building
construction work gets quite easy and its advantage is enormous.
This report investigated the dynamic behavior of bonded anchors and the seismic
performance of beams through an experiment of cyclic loading simulating earthquake
that is applied to beam specimens connected with bonded anchors.
This study aims for the feasibility of bonded anchors for beam connection.
1. Objective
Post-installed anchors are currently used mainly for fastening of equipments and very
seldom for connection of structural members in Japan. But in seismic reinforcing works,
many of them are being used for connection of structural members like existing
buildings and added shear walls. This indicates that post-installed anchors are usable for
structural applications. If post-installed anchors can connect structural members in
building structural design process, then flexibility of design will quite increase and its
merits are unpredictable.
Since Japan is a seismic country, enough mechanical performance both in elastic region
and also plastic region is required, if structural post-installed anchors are utilized for
connecting beams and columns, etc.
During seismic loading, cyclic loads are applied to beams and columns, and therefore
post-installed anchors connecting these members also should have enough mechanical
performance against cyclic tension, shear and combined loads both in elastic and plastic
regions.
Thus this study plans to conduct cyclic loading experiments simulating seismic loads
and investigate the feasibility of bonded anchors for structural applications.

576
2. Outline of experiments

2.1 Specimen types


Table 1 shows the overall specimen types. Specimen quantity is 6 altogether. They are
divided into 2 series of anchor rod diameter: D13 series and D16 series. Both series
include monolithic specimens for comparison purpose. Effect of embedment depth is
studied by changing it from standard value of manufacturer’s specification (l = 1h) to
twice of standard value (l = 2h). Other parameters are the same.

Table 1 Specimen types


Specimen Specimen name Bonded anchors Main rebars/ anchor
No. rods
Dia. Quantity embedment Rebar Minimum
depth (l) dia. sectional
area (mm2)
D13 1 BN-4D13 monolithic specimen for reference D13 127
series 2 BN-4D13-H1 D13 4 1h (110 mm)
3 BN-4D13-H2 2h (220 mm)
D16 4 BN-4D16 monolithic specimen for reference D16 199
series 5 BN-4D16-H1 D16 4 1h (125 mm)
6 BN-4D16-H2 2h (250 mm)
< Common items >
- Beam section: 200 mm × 200 mm - Main rebar: SD295A
- Stirrup: 2—D6φ @50 (Pw=0.64%)
- Column concrete strength : σB =20.1 N/mm2 - Beam concrete strength: σB =22.8 N/mm2

2.2 Shape and size of specimens, and rebar arrangement


Fig. 1 shows the shape and size of specimen, and rebar arrangement. As for beams,
shape and size are common for all specimens ant its cross section size is B×D = 200
mm× 200 mm. This is a cantilever beam with test section a = 600 mm (shear span
ratio a/D =3.0) Main rebar quantity is 4 for both D13 series and D16 series. Anchor rod
length is l = 750 mm and anchor rods work as beam rebar without any connection parts.
Shear reinforcing bars are 2 – D6φ@50.
Column simulates the existing concrete, and its size is B×D×L = 700mm×400mm×
700mm for embedment parameter 1h, and B×D×L = 900mm×400mm×1,200mm
for embedment parameter 2h assuming some cone failure.

2.3 Material used


1) Bondeed anchors
Bonded anchors used are of capsule type (2 types for D13 and D16). Fig.2 shows its
details.

577
700 700(900)
250 200 250 250(350) 200 250(350) ( )BC-4D13-H2,
BC-4D16-H2
150

Q Q

2-D13 2-D13
600

or 2-D6@50 or 2-D6@50
2-D16 2-D16
1,150

Pc steel rod Pc steel rod bonded


↓ ↓ anchor

35
embedment
4-D13

depth

130
35 200
or
4-D16
4-D19 2-D19
2-D10@100
400

130
4-D19 2-D10@100 130
Stub 35 200 35
c)beam section
a)monolithic specimen b)anchor specimen (common for all
specimens)
Fig. 1 Shape and size of specimens, and rebar arrangement


le
Existing concrete

Anchor rod da
l:embedment depth
le:effective embedment depth
da:main rebar diameter
Bonded anchor capsule

Fig.2 Details of bonded anchors

2) Rebars
The material of main rebars and anchor rods D13, D16 is SD295A. The mechanical
property is given in Table 2.

578
Table 2 Mechanical property of main rebars and anchor rods
Location Rebar Rebar Sectional area Yield point Tensile Young’s
type dia. as Strength Strain strength modulus
(mm2) σy εy σmax Es×105
(N/mm2) (%) (N/mm2) (N/mm2)
Anchor rods SD295A D13 127 320 0.183 450 1.75
/ main D16 199 332 0.184 479 1.80
rebars
Shear SD345 D6 32 404 0.232 504 1.76
reinforcing
bar

3) Concrete
Ready mixed concrete was cast in two steps. First column section was cast, and anchors
were installed after curing. Then beam section was cast. The mechanical property of
concrete is given in Table 3.
Table 3 Mechanical property of concrete
Location Maximum strength σB Strain εB Young’s modulus
(N/mm2) (%) 1/3Ec×104
(N/mm2)
Beam member 22.8 0.221 1.99
Column member 20.1 0.248 1.75

2.4 Loading method


Alternating flexural shear loads were applied to cantilever beams as shown in Fig.1.
Loading was conducted in such a way that load value was controlled until yield point,
and then displacement was controlled after yield point. Load was applied with manual
hydraulic jack (300 kN), and load value was measured with load cells (100 kN).

2.5 Measuring method of displacement and rebar strain


Displacement was measured with electric transducers. We took measurement of both
relative displacement (1/200 mm accuracy) of loading point above column surface (600
mm) and upheaval of column surface (1/500 mm accuracy).
Strains of main rebars at beam end and shear reinforcing bars are measured with wire
strain gauge (capacity 2 mm).

579
3. Test result and review

3.1 Maximum load, joint translation angle at maximum load, failure mode and
Q-R curve
Table 4 shows the maximum loads, joint translation angles at maximum loads, and
failure modes of all specimens. Fig.3, Fig,4 and Fig.5 give the comparison of maximum
loads of all specimens, crack patterns at maximum loads, and load – joint translation
angle curve ( Q-R curve) respectively.
Next comments are derived from Table 4 and Fig.3~5.
① With D13 series, all specimens did not give any anchor failure, and same
performance as monolithic specimen was recognized until joint translation angle at
maximum load R= 7.5/ 100 rad. The hysteresis loop had a spindle shape with
excellent stable flexural performance. This means that D13 series did not have any
influence of embedment depth of bonded anchors.
② With D16 series, concrete cone failure caused drastic resistance reduction in case of
standard embedment (1h). But specimens with embedment 2h showed similar
performance to monolithic one in terms of resistance and displacement. This means
that the performance against cyclic loading after yielding of beams depends on the
embedment depth.
Table 4 Test result
Series No Specimen name Maximum load Joint translation Failure mode
. (kN) angle at max.load
D13 1 BN-4D13 26.6 7.5 Flexural yield
series 2 BN-4D13-H1 26.5 7.7 Flexural yield
3 BN-4D13-H2 26.9 8.0 Flexural yield
D16 4 BN-4D16 41.7 7.8 Flexural yield
series 5 BN-4D16-H1 36.1 1.5 Flexural yield and cone
failure
6 BN-4D16-H2 41.4 6.5 Flexural yield

50
max. load (kN)

40

30
D16 serise
20 D13 serise
10
●:Cone failure specimen
0
BN-4D13

BC-4D13-H1

BC-4D13-H2

BN-4D16

BC-4D16-H1

BC-4D16-H2

Fig.3 ComparisonSpecimen name


of max. loads

580
D 1 3 serie s

1)BN -4D13 2)BC -4D13 -H1 3)BC -4D13 -H2


D 1 6 serie s

4)BN -4D16 5)BC -4D16 -H1 6)BC -4D16 -H2

Fig.4 Crack pattern at max. loads of each specimen

581
30 45 ▼

BN-4D13 BN-4D16



20 R
30
(kN) (kN)

10 15

0 0

-10 -15

-20 -30
▲ ▼:at max. load ▼:at max. load
-30 -45▲
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
R (1/100rad) R (1/100rad)

30 45

BC-4D13-H1 BC-4D16-H1 ▼


20 30
(kN) (kN)

10 15

0 0

-10 -15

-20 -30


▼:at max. load ▼:at max. load
-30 -45
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
R (1/100rad) R (1/100rad)

30 45 ▼

BC-4D13-H2 BC-4D16-H2

20 30
(kN) (kN)

10 15

0 0

-10 -15

-20 -30
▼:at max. load ▲
▼:at max. load

-30 -45
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
R (1/100rad) R (1/100rad)
a) D1 3 series b) D16 series

Fig.5 Q-R curve of each specimen

582
3.2 Comparison of test result and calculated values
In this experiment, anchors receive both tensile and shear loads at the same time, and
the calculation should include both loads in priciple. But this test result gives the fact
that concrete cone failure was predominant caused by tension. Thus we focus on just
tension.
1) Tensile resistance evaluation equation of bonded anchors in Japan *1
In Japan, tensile resistance of bonded anchors is decided from the minimum value of the
calculated ones by equations (1), (2) and (3).
Equations (1), (2) and (3) give tensile yield strength of anchor rods, concrete cone
failure strength and bond strength respectively.
T1 = σy・a0-------------------(1)
T2 = 0.23 σB ・Ac----------(2)
T3 = τa・π・da・le--------(3)
τa = 10 σB / 21 ---------(4)

here σy: nominal yield point of anchor rod (N/mm2).


The values in Table 2 was adopted for calculation.
a0: Minimum sectional area of anchor rods (mm2)
σB: Compressive strength of base material (N/mm2)
Ac: Effective projected area of concrete cone failure (mm2) calculated by
equation (5).
Ac =π・le・(le +da)----------(5)
le: Effective embedment depth of anchor rods (mm)
da: Anchor rod diameter (mm)

In this experiment, anchor spacing is 130 mm as shown in Fig.1, Effective projected


area overlaps as shown in Fig.7. In such case, the effective projected area can be
calculated as the oblique line area in Fig.7.

da 45゜
da la

cone failure surface


Da
130

130

Ac=πla
( la+da)

π
A0= ・da2
4

(a)Projected area (b)Projected area


for D13 for D16

la da la

Fig.6 Effective projected area of bonded Fig.7 Effective projected area by anchor
anchors diameter

583
2) Review on condition of resisting cyclic loading after flexural yield
In order to study the condition where anchor rods can resist to cyclic loading after
flexural yield, we introduced the index of reserve ratio of cone failure strength given by
equation (6).

Reserve ratio of cone failure strength


= calculated cone failure strength / calculated anchor rod yield strength---------(6)

Fig.8 shows the relationship between effective embedment depth and reserve ratio
calculated with equation (6). The followings are derived from Fig.8.
① When the reserve ratio of cone failure strength exceeds 2.0, all specimens in both
D13 and D16 series can resist well to cyclic loading after flexural yield.
② When the reserve ratio of cone failure strength is below 1.0, D13 beam specimen
can resist well to cyclic loading after flexural yield, but D16 beam specimen gave
cone failure and can not resist to cyclic loading.
③ Summarizing the above, future additional investigation seems necessary in terms of
performance against cyclic loading after flexural yield, when the reserve ratio of
cone failure resistance is below 1.0.
Reserve ratio of cone failure resistance(T2/T1)

3.0

D13 series

2.0

D16 series
1.0

●:Cone failure
Fig.8
0.0 0 5 10 15 20
Effective embedment depth/anchor rod dia. (l
 e/da)
Reserve ratio of cone failure resistance and performance against cyclic loading
after flexural yield

584
4. Conclusion

We have obtained the following facts from this experiment.


1) Connection of beam members with bonded anchors gave substantial mechanical
performance resisting to cyclic loading after flexural yield.
2) Beam members with reserve ratio of cone failure resistance above 2.0 can resist well
to cyclic loading after flexural yield.
3) We must pay careful attention to the beam members with reserve ratio of cone failure
resistance below 1.0 that sometimes show cone failure due to cyclic loading after
flexural yield.

6. Reference
*1 Architectural Institute of Japan ,“Design Recommendations for Composite
Construction”, 1985

585
SHALLOW SHEAR ANCHOR BOLTS FOR STRUCTURAL
SEISMIC STRENGTHENING OF COLUMNS WITH WING
WALL
Yasutoshi Yamamoto*, Yuriko Hattori**, Tadaki Koh***, Mitsuharu Kato****
*Dept. of Architecture, Shibaura Institute of Technology, Tokyo
**Shibaura Institute of Technology, Tokyo
***Dept. of Architecture, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Meiji Univ.,
Tokyo
**** Dept of Architectural Engineering, Yahagi Construction Co. Ltd., Nagoya

Abstract
An improved method of seismic strengthening of existing R/C buildings using
reinforced exterior members has been developed. This method shortens the construction
period and makes it possible to use the building while under construction. The method,
called Concrete Member Included Plate (CMIP), has been used and it performed well
with school buildings and public service buildings. The next aim is expanding its use
with apartment buildings which wing walls and non-structural walls become integral
parts of columns. The reinforced member must not obstruct any part of the building and
must be thinner and lighter than other presented methods. Thus anchor bolts shallowly
embedded are used to connect existing R/C member to the reinforced member. This
paper presents mechanical behavior and transmits shear load capacity of adhesive
post-installed anchor bolts embedded in thin R/C wall. The pilot tests for these anchors
are reported and the shear capacity and the failure mechanism described. And
furthermore, a new style of anchor bolt is proposed for the thin R/C wall.

1. Introduction

Low- and middle-rise Japanese apartment buildings utilizing R/C frame structure built in
the 60s and 70s, are insufficiently seismically resistant. As a result, great damage occurs,
as has been clearly reported since the Hyogo-ken Nanbu earthquake. Typically, seismic
strengthening methods have not allowed the residents to continue living in their units.
For this reason most buildings are left in their present condition without being reinforced.
CMIP allows the use of building under construction. The construction method is shown
in Fig.1. The most important concept developed as a component of this method is an
adhesive post-installed anchor bolt for shear reinforcement. Each anchor bolt connects a
very thin reinforcing R/C wall and the existing member.

586
R/C column
Wing wall CMIP member
Existing R/C wall
Headed anchor bolt
Grouted mortar
Steel plate
30 90
Wire mesh Flange
Sprayed mortar
120 55or80 Anchor bolt
20

Fig.1. CMIP method

Several experimental studies of anchors made of short bolts embedded in concrete have
already been published. However, there has not been enough research about headed
anchor bolts in concrete subjected to shear. The objectives of this paper are to investigate
appropriate shear capacity and failure mechanism of single-headed anchor bolts in the
existing member and secondarily to address anchor bolts in the reinforced member.

2. Description of specimens

The type of threaded headed studs required by Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS) and
Japan Stud Association*1 is determined by the diameter of the anchor shank and its
length. The specimen details are shown in Fig.2. 120mm wall thickness is in common
use in Japan and 12mm to16mm anchor bolt diameters are suitable or recommended, and
the reinforced member generally has a thickness of 80 to 100mm.

The tests were performed with 3 different types of anchors. As shown in Fig. 2, Type A
featured threaded bolts with a nut, Type N featured nuts with a head and steel plate, and
Type W had one of the nuts welded with a steel plate (W-type).
75 150 150 150 75

75 150 150 150 75

Nut
600

600

Type A
hole Nut

150 150 150 150


300 300 M12,M16 Threaded anchor Type N
40 100

60 100

PL-2.3
55

Welded
80

75 150 75 75 150 75 Mortar Nut


300 300
a) KP-55 series a) KP-80 series Type W

Fig.2 Specimens and anchor type

587
The end of 100 mm anchor is subjected to shear, and it transmits loads to the specimen
through the bolt which goes through the hole (bolt diameter + 10mm) into the plate.

3. Material properties

3.1 Properties of anchor bolts


Mechanical properties of anchor bolts are shown in Table 1. The yield point σy was
determined by using the intersection between the Q-ε curve and 0.2% shifting the
strain.

Table 1 Properties of steel bolts


Diameter Effective area Modulus of elasticity Yield strength Max. strength Elongation
Type and disignation
da[mm] eas[mm] Es×105[MPa] σy[MPa] σmax[MPa] [%]
M12
JIS G3101(SS400)
12 83.4 2.16 412.8 434.7 5.32
M16
JIS G3101(SS400)
16 157.0 1.91 386.2 431.6 5.63

3.2 Mortar
Mortar was used for fixing embedded anchor bolts. The curing properties of
compound mortar are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Properties of mortar


Concrete weight of unit volume Mortar compressive strength Split tensile strength Modulus of elasticity
2 2 4
γ[kN/m ] σM[MPa] σSP[N/mm ] EM ×10 [MPa]
20.9 33.6 2.58 2.37

4. Description of tests

4.1 Setting up of the specimen


The application of shear load to the specimens is shown in Figure 3. Single anchor bolt
in specimens were subjected to monotonic lateral loading.

Anchor bolt Load cell


Load direction

Testing stand

Displacement
measurement Shear block Oil jack
Fig.3 Test set up

588
4.2 Measurement of load and displacement
Lateral loads and shear displacements were measured using the shear block indicated
in Fig.3. The crack pattern was observed after the test without setting.

5. Test results

5.1 Behavior under monotonic loading


Experimentally derived shear force (Q) - deformation (δH) diagrams are shown in
Figures. Specific differences were not observed in KP-12 series to correspond initial
rigidity and maximum load. Moreover the KP-A-12 series expresses the similar
deterioration of strength after the peak load. On the other hand KP-16 series expresses
that Type A has the highest initial rigidity.

50 Q[kN]
KP-A-12-55 KP-N-12-55 KP-A-12-80 KP-N-12-80
KP-W-12-55 KP-W-12-80
40

30
1 2
20 3
2 4
2
4
3 2 2 1
10 1 1 1
2
1
δH[mm]
0
2 4 6 a) KP-12 Series
50 Q[kN]
3
2
40
2 1
30 1
1

4 1
2
20 2 2 2
3 1 4
10 KP-N-16-55 KP-A-16-80 KP-N-16-80
KP-A-16-55 1
δH[mm] KP-W-16-55 KP-W-16-80
0
2 4 6
a) KP-16 Series

Fig4 Load–deformation diagram

5.2 Failure mode and crack Pattern


The decisive failure mode for the entire specimen is given by steel shear cutting.
Embedded bolts are not influenced by lateral pressure against mortar. The final crack
patterns of the thickness of 55mm mortar are shown in Fig.5. No cracks in the 80mm
specimens were observed.

589
Loading direction Loading direction

A-12-4 A-12-3 A-12-2 A-12-1 A-16-4 A-16-3 A-16-2 A-16-1

W-12-1 W-12-2 N-12-1 N-12-1 W-16-1 W-16-2 N-16-1 N-16-1

a) KP-12-55 Series b) KP-16-55 Series


Fig5 Crack patterns

Cracks in mortar were observed in KP-12-55 and KP-16-55 series; it was more
extensive in KP-16-55 series. It is shown that as the strength increases, the crack
increases with the steel diameter. Cracks were also observed in the perpendicular
direction. Based on the observation, it is estimated that mortar suffers from lateral
pressure and tensile strength derived from flexural moment of reinforced member
action.

6. Discussion of test data

6.1 Thickness of mortar effects


The crack in the surface occurred in both M12 and M16 in thickness of 55mm mortar.
Differences among specimens in initial rigidity and deterioration of strength are
relatively insignificant for seismic sufficiency. No crack occurred on the mortar
surface in both M12 and M16 specimens in thickness of 80mm mortar. Comparing
KP-12 and KP-16, it is recognized that different mortar thickness did not give severe
influence with regard to maximum strength and deformation.

6.2 Effects of diameter of the bolt


The experimental data are summarized in Table 3. Comparing KP-12-55 and KP-12-80
series based on the experimental data, the former specimens surpass 1.08 to 1.16 times
of the strength on average. In the tests, as the maximum load amount to the value, the
deformation increases. It is considered that anchor bolts in shear rotate to form cracks;
these cracks actually improve shear deformation. Although the notion of small
deformation at maximum strength is preferred, the test data recognized that anchor
bolts of this ductile design surpass in terms of energy absorbing capacity. Therefore the
data of KP-12-80 series showed unfavorable effect on earthquake resistance.

590
Table 3 Summary of test data
Max. Designed
Mortar Head Embedded Shear Failure Ratio of
Reference test Diameter shear shear Deformation Ave.
thickness diameter length stress mode actual /
no. load capacity
design
da[mm] t [mm] dH[mm] le [mm] Qm[kN] τm[MPa] Qc[kN] δH[mm] [mm]
KP-A-12-55-1 12 55 22 40 28.1 337.1 Steel 1.17 24.1 4.48 3.74
*6
-2 27.0 323.6 Steel 1.12 4.43
-3 26.3 315.7 Steel 1.09 3.40
-4 26.1 312.4 Steel 1.08 2.64
KP-N-12-55-1 26.1 312.4 Steel 1.08 3.81 3.41
-2 25.9 310.1 Steel 1.07 3.00
KP-W-12-55-1 25.2 302.2 Steel 1.05 3.63 3.33
-2 25.5 305.5 Steel 1.06 3.02
KP-A-12-80-1 12 80 22 60 22.9 274.0 Steel 0.95 2.62 3.02
-2 22.7 271.7 Steel 0.94 3.23
-3 24.2 289.7 Steel 1.00 3.60
-4 23.1 277.3 Steel 0.96 2.63
KP-N-12-80-1 22.9 274.0 Steel 0.95 2.63 2.52
-2 24.9 298.8 Steel 1.03 2.41
KP-W-12-80-1 24.8 297.6 Steel 1.03 3.62 3.52
-2 22.1 265.0 Steel 0.92 3.41
KP-A-16-55-1 16 55 27 40 36.6 233.0 Steel 0.86 42.5 4.61 4.26
*6
-2 43.3 275.5 Steel 1.02 4.61
-3 43.5 277.3 Steel 1.02 4.40
-4 45.1 287.5 Steel 1.06 3.43
KP-N-16-55-1 43.4 276.7 Steel 1.02 5.61 4.81
-2 42.7 271.9 Steel 1.00 4.00
KP-W-16-55-1 40.4 257.5 Steel 0.95 4.41 3.92
-2 43.3 275.5 Steel 1.02 3.43
KP-A-16-80-1 16 80 27 60 43.5 277.3 Steel 1.02 4.41 3.98
-2 42.5 270.7 Steel 1.00 4.20
-3 45.3 288.7 Steel 1.07 4.22
-4 41.3 262.9 Steel 0.97 3.08
KP-N-16-80-1 41.8 266.5 Steel 0.98 3.62 3.93
-2 42.1 268.3 Steel 0.99 4.23
KP-W-16-80-3 44.1 280.9 Steel 1.04 4.41 3.81
-2 39.8 253.3 Steel 0.94 3.20

From the test data, the strength is higher and the deformation is lesser on the average in
KP-A-16-80 series than in KP-A-16-55 series. Moreover Types N and W were inferior
to the strength and deformation slightly.
With regard to steel sizes, the maximum strength of KP-16-55 series exceeds the value
of KP-12-55 series 1.57 to 1.86 times on average. And KP-16-80 series exceeds the
strength in the efficiency of embedment length 1.76 to 1.86 times. The deformation at
the maximum load also increases.

The value of strength (as × σy) of M12 to M16 is expressed 34.4 : 60.7[kN] =1 : 1.76
from the test result. It is recognized that the M12 threaded anchor bolt surpasses the
M16 bolt in strength in regard to the shear stress. Although both 12mm and 16mm
embedded bolts are appropriated for earthquake resistance, M12 threaded anchor bolts
are slightly efficient.

591
6.3 Pilot tests
6.3.1 Anchor bolts in reinforced members under lateral monotonic loading
Results from the aforementioned test showed that anchor bolts failed in the reinforced
members because of the failure of the steel bolt. On the other hand, it is desirable that
the strength of the anchor bolts in the existing members remains equal to that in the
reinforced member. In additionally in Table 4 and 5 are shown the pilot test data
under monotonic lateral loading. In Japan, existing non-structural walls are
approximately 120mm thick, hence the embedment length is less than 100mm.

Table 4 Summary of test results of M16 anchor


Max. Ratio of Designed
Anchor type Reference Concrete Embedded shear Shear Failure actual / shear Defor-
Diameter thickness length load stress mode design capacity mation Ave.
designation test no.
da[mm] t [mm] le [mm] Qm[kN] τm[MPa] Qc[kN] δH[mm] [mm]
M16 HY150-S-1 16 120 88 43.5 277.1 Steel 0.87 49.8 14.73 10.48
JIS B1051 -2 41.5 264.3 Steel 0.83 *6 8.56
Grade 4.6 -3 45.4 289.2 Steel 0.91 8.16
σ y = 455 .7[ MPa ], E S = 1.91 × 10 5 [ MPa ], e a s = 157 .0[ mm ], σ B = 30 .6 [ MPa ], E C = 2.06 × 10 4 [ MPa ]

From Table 3, 4 and 5, the ratio of maximum shear strength (Qm) / designed shear
capacity (Qc) for M16 threaded anchor bolts are 0.86-1.06 and 0.87-0.91, and for D19
is 0.75-0.97. Moreover it is pointing out that the shear strength slightly surpasses in
M16 anchor bolts embedded in the existing member.

In comparison with the value of shear stress (τm) is 265.0-337.1 in M12 specimens,
233.0-288.7 and 264.3-289.2 in M16 specimens and 189.5-263.9 in D19 specimens.
The shear stresses of M16 anchors are poor in reinforced member. In studying Tables
3 and 4, it is recognized that the failure mode is defined in regard to the strength of
M16 anchor bolts in the reinforced member.

Table5 Summary of test results of D19 anchor


Max. Ratio of Designed
Anchor type Reference Concrete Embedded shear Shear Failure actual / shear Defor-
Diameter thickness length load stress mode design capacity mation Ave.
designation test no.
da[mm] t [mm] le [mm] Qm[kN] τm[MPa] Qc[kN] δH[mm] [mm]
D19 A15-100S-1 19 250 100 61.0 212.9 Concrete 0.84 72.5 12.00 12.23
G3112 -2 58.7 204.9 Concrete 0.81 *6 12.00
SD345 -3 54.3 189.5 Concrete 0.75 12.70
A21-100S-1 71.0 247.8 Concrete 0.91 78.0 16.10 15.40
-2 75.6 263.9 Concrete 0.97 *6 16.00
-3 58.7 204.9 Steel 0.75 14.10
σ y = 389 .1[ MPa ], E S = 1.92 × 10 5 [ MPa ], e a s = 286 .5[ mm ]
σ B = 20 .4[ MPa ], EC = 1.96 × 10 4 [ MPa ], σ B = 25 .7[ MPa ], EC = 2.48 × 10 4 [ MPa ]

6.3.2 Suggestions for a new type of anchor


Based on the experimental study discussion and present papers*2,3,4,5 according to the
numerous experimental studies calculating shear capacity in anchors of different sizes,
a new type of anchor bolt is suggested. The main factors are as follows: a) embedment

592
length of anchor bolts, b) diameter of anchor-bolt shaft, c) yielding strength of anchor
bolts, and d) concrete compressive strength.

a) Effect of embedment length of anchor bolts


Fig. 6 shows the relationship of shear strength (Qm) and shear stress (τm) to embedment
length (le) based on present experimental data. In general, the thicknesses of anchors
embedded in existing members are thinner and in reinforced member as well. The
following values of shear stress from the data are scattered in 200 to 550 [MPa] regions
that indicate the shear stress is not dependent on embedded length. From the diagram,
it indicates the possibility of strengthening the shear capacity when embedment length
of anchor bolts over 3da. The value of shear strength of anchor bolts under 16mm
diameter distributed low strength region.
200 Qm [kN] 600 τm [MPa]

150
400
100
200
50
Embedment length [da] Embedment length [da]
0 0
2 4 6 8 2 4 6 8
○ anchor in existing member (da≦16mm) ● anchor in existing member (da>16mm)
△ anchor in reinforced member (da≦16mm) ▲ anchor in reinforced member (da>16mm)
Fig.6 Q and τ- le relationship

b) Effect of anchor bolt diameter


In Fig.7, shear strength (Qm) and shear stress (τm) are shown in relation to the anchor
bolt diameter (da). Shear strength is directly proportional to the diameter of anchor bolt
and shear stress shows proportional tendency to the diameter of anchor bolt. Therefore
it is essential to strengthen the shear strength when steel diameter increases.
200 Qm [kN] 600 τm [MPa]

150
400
100
200
50
diameter [mm] diameter [mm]
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 4 8 12 16 20
Fig.7 Q and τ- da relationship

c) Effect of yielding strength of anchor bolts


In Fig.8 are given the shear strength (Qm) and shear stress (τm) to the yield strength (σy).

593
From these diagrams, the shear strength is unrelated to the yield strength of anchor
bolts with under 16mm diameter. It is recognized that a high value of yielding strength
is more effective. However, the shear strength does not increase when anchor bolt
governed by bearing concrete.
200 Qm [kN] τm [kN]
600
150
400
100
200
50
σy [MPa] σy [MPa]
0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500

Fig.8 Q and τ - σy relationship

d) Effect of concrete compressive strength


In Fig.9 are given the shear strength (Q) and shear stress (τ) to the concrete
compressive strength (σB). It is clear from these diagrams that the shear strength
increases with the concrete compressive strength when the diameter of anchor
increases.
200 Qm [kN] 600 τ m[MPa]

150
400
100
200
50
σB [MPa] σB [MPa]
0 0
10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40
Fig.9 Q and τ -σB relationship

e) Suggestion toward a new anchor bolt


From these experimental data, a preferable style of anchor bolt is recommended and
described in Fig.10.
Existing R/C wall

Grouted mortar
50 30
90 70 Steel plate
32~36 20~22 12
Sprayed mortar Shallow anchor bolt
120 80 JIS B1051-1985 8.8 grade
20
Fig.10 New anchor bolt

594
7. Conclusion and recommendation

Seismic strengthening of columns with thin wing walls in apartment buildings requires
strong shallow anchor bolt for shear. The recommended diameter of anchor bolt was
12-16mm for walls approximately 120mm thick. As the results of the experimental
data and diagrams, higher strength and larger diameter of anchors are recommended,
and a new type of anchor bolt is suggested. The experimental research of this program
will be continued in the future and more recommendations will be developed.

8. Acknowledgments

The tests were sponsored by Science Frontier Research Project in Graduate School of
Science and Technology, Meiji University, Tokyo. This experiment is supported by
Yahagi Construction Co. Ltd. and Hilti Japan Co. Ltd. The authors would like to
acknowledge the assistance, support, and efforts of S.I.T. students.

9. References

1. ‘Welding Stud’, Japan Stud Association, Sep. 1982, pp48-49


2. R.E.Klingner, et al, ‘Shear Capacity of Short Anchor Bolts and Welded Studs: A
Literature Review’, ACI JOURNAL, Technical Paper, Sep.-Oct. 1982, pp339-349
3. Nihon Decoluxe, ’Test of Chemical Anchor in Shear and Tension’, Technical Paper,
Feb.1982
4. Sugaya,S. et al, ‘Experimental Study on Anchors for Equipment and Plumbing’,
Proceedings of Architectural Institute of Japan,Sep.1981, pp1567-1568
5. Tsusai,H. et al, ‘Shear Strength of Wedge Anchor Bolts under Reversed Cyclic
Loading’, Proceedings of Japan Concrete Institute, vol.5, pp1983,233-236
6. ‘Post-installed Anchor –Design and Construction ’, Okada, T. et al, pp1990 59-73
7. Design Recommendations for Composite Constructions, Architectural Institute of
Japan, 1998, pp244-245

10. Appendix

The following anchor steel strengths calculation for predicted shear capacity has been
used. *6,7
Q c = min [Q c 1 , Q c 2 ]
Q c 1 = 0 .7 s σ y s a e governed by steel failure
Q c 2 = 0.4 E c σ B s a e governed by concrete failure
s
a e : effective area of the anchor bolt

595
SEISMIC RESPONSE OF MULTIPLE-ANCHOR
CONNECTIONS TO CONCRETE
Zhang, Yong-gang*, Richard E. Klingner**, and Herman L. Graves, III***
* Han-Padron Associates, Houston, Texas, USA.
** Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
*** U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., USA.

Abstract
Under the sponsorship of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a research program
was carried out on the dynamic behavior of anchors (fasteners) in concrete. As part of
that program, full-scale seismic tests were conducted at dynamic loading rates on 16
multiple-anchor connections to concrete. Test variables included anchor type, loading
history, and the presence of cracks. Multiple-anchor connections designed for ductile
behavior in uncracked concrete under static loading, in general behaved in a ductile
manner in cracked concrete under dynamic loading.

1. Background

A few studies have investigated the behavior of connections under impact loading,
seismic loading and reversed loading [1, 2, 3, 4]. Loading patterns primarily involved
dynamic loading far below the anchor's ultimate capacity, followed by monotonic
loading to failure [3, 4]. Only a few investigations [5, 6, 7] have studied the influence of
loading rate on the overall load-displacement behavior of anchors. Some tests have been
conducted in cracked concrete or in high-moment regions [1, 3, 5, 8]. To the best of the
authors’ knowledge, the testing program described here is the first published testing on
multiple-anchor connections under seismic loading.

2. Anchors, Test Setups and Procedures

Based on their use in nuclear applications, this research program involved one wedge-
type expansion anchor (“Expansion Anchor II”), with some tests on one normally
opening undercut anchor with large bearing area (“UC Anchor 1”). Anchors were 5/8 in.
(16 mm) diameter, installed with an effective embedment of 7 in. (178 mm) to develop
ductile response. Expansion Anchor II (EAII) is described in Figure 1. Undercut
Anchor 1 (UC1) is described in Figure 2.

596
wedge dimple
wedge mandrel (cone)

D1
D2
D
lc

Figure 1 Expansion Anchor II


threaded shank extension sleeve expansion sleeve
cone

D1

D2
D

lef lc

Figure 2 Undercut Anchor 1


The target concrete compressive strength for this testing program was 4700 lb/in.2
(32.4 MPa), with a permissible tolerance of ±500 lb/in.2 (±3.45 MPa) at the time of
testing. Aggregate was river gravel.

The overall test setup for Task 4 is shown in Figure 3. Reversed cyclic loads were
applied to the connection through a loading attachment, shown in Figure 4. The stiff
baseplate was 2 in. (51 mm) thick; the flexible one, 1 in. (25 mm). Both baseplates had
stiffeners.

External load on the connections was measured with a load cell. Tension in each anchor
was measured with a force washer placed between the normal washer and the baseplate.
Slip of the baseplate was measured with a potentiometer placed against the back of the
baseplate, and displacement of the vertical beam was measured at 12 in. (305 mm) from
the surface.
Load DCDT Hydraulic
Loading Cell Actuator
Attachment

Clamping Beams

Concrete Specimen

Reaction Frame

Tie-Down Rods
--- Lab Floor --- On Floor

Figure 3 Test setup for multiple-anchor tests of Task 4

597
The prescribed displacement history
that simulated earthquake loading
10 in. was developed by idealizing the
6 in.
attachment as a bilinear single-
degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system
12 in. 9 in. with a concentrated mass at 12 in.
Stiffeners
12 in. (305 mm) above the concrete
surface, sufficient to give a realistic
period of vibration, and to produce
Plan View yielding of the attachment under the
14 in.
Elevation selected ground motion. The
response of the SDOF system was
Figure 4 Loading attachment used for Task 4 calculated using as input the
earthquake history of El Centro 1940 (NS component). The most significant portion,
consisting of the first 6.0 sec. of that record (Figure 5), was used as the prescribed
displacement history.
D isplacem ent Input
0.8

0.6

0.4
Displacement (in.)

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec.)

Figure 5 History of estimated attachment displacements for seismic tests

Some specimens had cracks with an initial width of 0.012 in. (0.3 mm), introduced using
wedge-type splitting tubes of high-strength steel. Anchors were installed to the torque
specified by the manufacturer. To simulate the reduction of prestressing force in anchors
in service due to concrete relaxation, anchors were first fully torqued, then released after
about 5 minutes to permit relaxation, and finally torqued again, but only to 50% of the
specified torque. For multiple-anchor shear tests, two separate cracks were initiated
parallel to the loading direction. Crack widths were monitored during tests, but not
controlled.

598
For static tests, the load was applied slowly and monotonically under displacement
control. For dynamic tests, the loading pattern was dynamic reversed cyclic loading
(Figure 5), applied under displacement control. During tests, the loading sequence was
first applied with a maximum displacement of 0.6 in. (15.2 mm). If the connection did
not fail, loading sequences were applied with maximum displacements of 1.0 in.
(25 mm) and then 1.5 in. (38 mm). Further cycles, to a maximum displacement of 15 in.
(38 mm), were applied until failure. Before each loading sequence, the anchors were
finger-tightened to eliminate any initial lack-of-fit, which would have increased the
displacement required to reach any particular load level. Tests are listed in Table 1. For
all tests, the edge distance was 5 in. (127 mm), and the embedment was 7 in. (178 mm).
Table 1 Test matrix for eccentric shear tests on multiple-anchor connections
Test Description Anchor
4101 static, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, uncracked UC1
concrete, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4102 static, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, uncracked UC1
concrete, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4203 dynamic, 4-anchor group, flexible baseplate, uncracked UC1
concrete, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4204 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, uncracked EAII
concrete, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4205 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, uncracked UC1
concrete, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4206 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, uncracked UC1
concrete, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4307 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, cracked EAII
concrete, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4308 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, cracked UC1
concrete, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4309 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, cracked UC1
concrete, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4310 dynamic, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, cracked EAII
concrete, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4411 static, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, no hairpins, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4412 static, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, no hairpins, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4513 dynamic, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, no hairpins, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4514 dynamic, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, no hairpins, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4615 static, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, close hairpins, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4616 dynamic, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, close hairpins, e = 12 in. (305 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)
4617 dynamic, near-edge, 4-anchor group, rigid baseplate, UC1
uncracked concrete, close hairpins, e = 18 in. (457 mm) 5/8 in. (16 mm)

599
3. Test Results

In Figures 6 and 7, the load-displacement envelopes of dynamic tests under eccentric shear at
12 in. (305 mm) and 18 in. (457 mm) respectively, are compared with the static tests on the
same configuration (Test 4101 versus Test 4203, and Test 4102 versus Test 4206). The
following observations can be made:
1) The dynamic load-displacement curves follow the static load-displacement curves
over most of the displacement range, differing only near the ultimate load.
2) The maximum dynamic capacity was close to the maximum static capacity. It was
7% higher at a 12 in. (305 mm) eccentricity, and 7% smaller at an 18 in. (457 mm)
eccentricity. Due to the small number of tests, however, this observation is not
definitive.
3) The most significant effect of dynamic reversed cyclic loading is the increase in total
displacement, due to spalling of the concrete in front of the anchors, to the gaps
between the baseplate and the anchors and between the anchors and the concrete, and
to the larger tensile displacement of the anchors under dynamic cyclic loading.
Seismic tests on a connection with EAII under dynamic reversed cyclic loading (Test 4307)
showed large displacements of about 1 in. (25.4 mm) measured at 12 in. (305 mm) above the
concrete, although there is no corresponding static test with which this can be compared.
In Figures 8 and 9, load-displacement curves for tests with dynamic loading in cracked
concrete (Tests 4308 and 4309) are compared with the corresponding curves for tests with
static loading in uncracked concrete (Tests 4101 and 4102). The dynamic load-displacement
envelopes for these tests also follow the static load-displacement curves well, except near the
ultimate load.
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (mm)
-38.1 -25.4 -12.7 0 12.7 25.4 38.1
60 266.88

40 177.92
Applied Shear (kips)

Applied Shear (kN)

Static
20 88.96

0 0

-20 -88.96

-40 -177.92

-60 -266.88
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (in.)
Figure 6 Static versus seismic load-displacement curves, multiple-anchor connections,
UC1 Anchors, at 12 in. (305 mm) eccentricity (Tests 4101 and 4203)

600
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (mm)
-63.5 -50.8 -38.1 -25.4 -12.7 0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8 63.5
60 266.88

40 177.92
Applied Shear (kips)

Applied Shear (kN)


Static
20 88.96

0 0

-20 -88.96

-40 -177.92

-60 -266.88
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (in.)

Figure 7 Comparison of static and seismic load-displacement behaviors of


multiple-anchor connections with UC1 Anchors under shear at 18
in. (457 mm) eccentricity (Tests 4102 and 4206 respectively)
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (mm)
-63.5 -50.8 -38.1 -25.4 -12.7 0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8 63.5
60 266.88

40 Dynamic 177.92
Applied Shear (kips)

Static Applied Shear (kN)


20 88.96

0 0

-20 -88.96

-40 -177.92

-60 -266.88
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (in.)

Figure 8 Comparison of seismic load-displacement behavior of multiple-


anchor connections with UC1 Anchors at 12 in. (305 mm)
eccentricity in cracked concrete (Test 4308) with static behavior
in uncracked concrete (Test 4101)

601
Comparison of Test Results and Analytical Predictions
Test results were compared with predictions of BDA5, a macro-model program
developed at the University of Stuttgart for the static analysis of multiple-anchor
connections loaded by eccentric shear [9]. It requires as input data a complete set of
load-displacement curves of the anchor under oblique loading at angles from 0 to 90
degrees, and assumes a rigid baseplate. Comparisons were reasonable, and are discussed
in more detail in Zhang [10].

Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (mm)


-38.1 -25.4 -12.7 0 12.7 25.4 38.1
60 266.88

40 Dynamic 177.92
Applied Shear (kips)

Applied Shear (kN)


Static
20 88.96

0 0

-20 -88.96

-40 -177.92

-60 -266.88
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Horizontal Displacement at 12 in. (305 mm) (in.)

Figure 9 Comparison of seismic load-displacement behavior of multiple-


anchor connections with UC1 Anchors at 18 in. (457 mm)
eccentricity in cracked concrete (Test 4309) with static behavior
in uncracked concrete (Tests 4102)

Comparison of Test Results with Plastic Analysis Methods


The Plastic Method [11] and the Modified Plastic Method [7] predict the capacity of
multiple-anchor connections with large edge distances, loaded in shear and failing by
steel fracture. For the connection with a loading eccentricity of 18 in. (457 mm), the
capacities calculated by the Plastic Method and the BDA5 program are very close to the
test results. The Modified Plastic Method [7], however, underestimated the static
capacity by as much as 10%. For the connection with a loading eccentricity of 12 in.
(305 mm), both the Plastic Method and the BDA5 program overestimated the static
capacity. The Modified Plastic Method [7] was very close to the test results.

602
4. Conclusions and Recommendations

1) Multiple-anchor connections in uncracked or cracked concrete, with or without edge


effects, and with or without hairpins, loaded dynamically under reversed cyclic
loading histories representative of seismic response, behaved consistently with the
results of previous single- and double-anchor tests of this study. Previous
observations regarding the load-displacement behavior, and failure mechanisms of
single and double anchors, were applicable in predicting the behavior of complex,
multiple-anchor connections under simulated seismic loading. The implications of
this are clear. Multiple-anchor connections designed for ductile behavior in
uncracked concrete under static loading, will probably still behave in a ductile
manner in cracked concrete under dynamic loading.

2) Anchors that show relatively good performance when tested individually in cracked
concrete (CIP headed anchors, UC1, and 20 mm diameter Sleeve) will probably also
show relatively good performance in multiple-anchor connections subjected to
seismic loading. Anchors that show relatively poor performance when tested
individually in cracked concrete (Grouted Anchor, EAII, and 10 mm diameter
Sleeve) will probably also show relatively poor performance in multiple-anchor
connections subjected to seismic loading.

3) Cyclic load-displacement behavior of multiple-anchor connections is accurately


bounded by the corresponding static load-displacement envelope, and also by the
static load-displacement envelope predicted by the BDA5 program. Dynamic
cycling does not significantly influence the fundamental load-displacement behavior
of multiple-anchor connections.

4) Under dynamic reversed cyclic loading in both uncracked and cracked concrete, the
load-displacement envelopes of multiple-anchor connections with the UC1 Anchor
basically follow the static curves in uncracked concrete over most displacements,
differing only near the ultimate load. Dynamic reversed loading did not
significantly affect the maximum dynamic capacity. In uncracked concrete, the
connection had larger displacements under reversed dynamic than under static
loading. Under dynamic reversed loading, connections in cracked concrete had
slightly larger displacements than those in uncracked concrete.

5) Under dynamic reversed cyclic loading, multiple-anchor connections with


Expansion Anchor II had very large displacements. In both uncracked and cracked
concrete, the connections loaded at 12 in. (305 mm) eccentricity failed by steel
fracture. The test in cracked concrete had a larger displacement and smaller
capacity than that in uncracked concrete. The connection loaded at an 18 in. (457
mm) eccentricity experienced gross pull-out failure of the anchors.

603
6) The capacity of multiple-anchor connections at large edge distances was predicted
with reasonable accuracy by the plastic design procedures [7, 10, 11].

7) Capacities were reasonably predicted by the BDA5 program [9].

5. Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

This paper presents partial results of a research program supported by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) (NUREG/CR-5434, “Anchor Bolt Behavior and
Strength during Earthquakes”). The technical contact is Herman L Graves, III, whose
support is gratefully acknowledged. The conclusions in this paper are those of the
authors only, and are not NRC policy or recommendations.

6. References

1. Cannon, R. W., “Expansion Anchor Performance in Cracked Concrete,” ACI


Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 78, No. 6, November-December 1981, pp. 471-479.
2. Malik, J. B., Mendonca, J. A., and Klingner, R. E., “Effect of Reinforcing Details on
the Shear Resistance of Short Anchor Bolts under Reversed Cyclic Loading,”
Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Proceedings Vol. 79, No. 1,
January-February 1982, pp. 3-11.
3. Copley, J. D. and E. G. Burdette, “Behavior of Steel-to-Concrete Anchorage in High
Moment Regions,” ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 82, No. 2, March-April 1985,
pp. 180-187.
4. Collins, D., R. E. Klingner and D. Polyzois, “Load-Deflection Behavior of Cast-in
Place and Retrofit Concrete Anchors Subjected to Static, Fatigue, and Impact
Tensile Loads,” Research Report CTR 1126-1, Center for Transportation Research,
The University of Texas at Austin, February 1989.
5. Eibl, J. and E. Keintzel (1989): “Zur Beanspruchung von Befestigungsmitteln bei
dynamischen Lasten,” Forschungsbericht T2169, Institut für Massivbau und
Baustofftechnologie, Universität Karlsruhe, 1989.
6. Rodriguez, M., “Behavior of Anchors in Uncracked Concrete under Static and
Dynamic Loading,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, August 1995.
7. Lotze, D. and Klingner, R. E., “Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections to
Concrete From the Perspective of Plastic Theory,” PMFSEL Report No. 96-4, The
University of Texas at Austin, March 1997.
8. Eligehausen, R. and Balogh, T., “Behavior of Fasteners Loaded in Tension in
Cracked Reinforced Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 3, May-June,
1995, pp. 365-379.

604
9. Li, L., BDA: Programm zur Berechnung des Trag- und Verformungsverhaltens von
Gruppenbefestigungen unter kombinierter Schragzug- und
Momentenbeanspruchung (Programmbeschreibung), The University of Stuttgart,
June 1994.
10. Zhang, Yong-gang, “Dynamic Behavior of Multiple-Anchor Connections in
Cracked Concrete,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University
of Texas at Austin, August 1997.
11. Cook, R. A. and Klingner, R. E., “Ductile Multiple-Anchor Steel-to-Concrete
Connections,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 118, No. 6, June
1992, pp. 1645-1665.

605
SMEARED FRACTURE FE-ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED
CONCRETE STRUCTURES – THEORY AND EXAMPLES
Joško Ožbolt
Institut of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In the present paper the smeared fracture concept for the nonlinear finite element analysis
of concrete and reinforced concrete structures is discussed. After a short introduction into
the problems related to the smeared crack approach, a brief theoretical background of the
finite element code MASA is presented. The code has been developed at the Institute of
Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, and is aimed to be used for the nonlinear
smeared fracture finite element analysis of concrete and reinforced concrete structures.
The used constitutive law (microplane model for concrete) and the so called localization
limiters, which assure mesh objective results, are described. To demonstrate the ability of
the code to realistically predict the ultimate capacity and failure mode of concrete and
reinforced concrete structures, several examples are shown and briefly discussed.

1. Introduction

In recent years a significant progress in modeling of concrete like materials for general
stress-strain histories has been achieved. Presently available models for concrete can
roughly be classified in two categories: (i) Macroscopic models, in which the material
behavior is considered to be an average response of a rather complex microstructural
stress transfer mechanism and (ii) microscopic models, in which the micromechanics of
deformations are described by stress-strain relations on the microlevel. No doubt, from
the physical point of view microscopic models are more promising. However, they are
computationally extremely demanding. Therefore, in practical applications macroscopic
models have to be used.

At the macro scale the model has to correctly describe microstructural phenomena such
as cohesion, friction, aggregate interlock and interaction of microcracks. Traditionally,

609
macroscopic models are formulated by total or incremental formulation between the σij
and εij components of the stress-strain tensor, using the theory of tensorial invariants
[1][2]. In the frame work of the theory there are various possible approaches for
modeling of concrete, such as theory of plasticity, plastic-fracturing theory, continuum
damage mechanics, endocronic theory and their combinations of various form. Due to the
complexity of concrete these models can not realistically represent the behavior of
concrete for general three-dimensional stress-strain histories. Therefore, to formulate a
more general and relatively simple model significant effort has recently been done in
further development of the microplane model for concrete [3][4][5][6]. Some of the
latest results [6] confirm that the model is able to realistically simulate response of
concrete structures for arbitrary load histories.

Cracking and damage can principally be modeled in two different ways: (i) discrete
(discrete crack model) and (ii) smeared (smeared crack model). The classical local
smeared fracture analysis of materials which exhibit softening (quasi-brittle materials)
leads in the finite element analysis to the results which are mesh dependent [7]. As well
known, the reason for this is the localization of strains in a row of finite elements and a
related energy consumption capacity which depends on the element size, i.e. if the finite
element mesh is coarse the energy consumption capacity will be larger than when the
mesh is fine. Consequently, the model response is mesh dependent. To assure mesh
independent results, total energy consumption capacity has to be independent of the
element size, i.e. one has to regularize the problem by introducing a so-called
localization limiter.

Currently two different approaches are in use. The first one is relatively simple crack
band method [8] and the second ones are the so called higher order methods: Cosserat-
continuum [9] and nonlocal continuum approaches of integral type [10][11] or gradient
type [9]. Compared to the crack band method the higher order procedures are rather
complex, but more general. Mesh independent result can alternatively be obtained by the
use of the discrete crack approach [12]. The main drawback of this approach is the need
for continuous remeshing, which is a rather complex and time consuming procedure.
Moreover, some stress-strain situations (for instance compression) are difficult to model
in a discrete sense.

To overcame the problems related to the smeared crack modeling and to avoid complex
re-meshing when discrete crack approach is employed a new type of the finite elements
has recently been employed [13]. These elements are based on the discontinuous strain
field (embedded crack). The background of the method is the discrete crack approach,
however, the cracks are here treated at the finite element level with no need for
continuous re-meshing. In the concept there are still a number of theoretical difficulties
which need to be solved (more than one crack per element, three-dimensionality and
other). Presently available numerical examples are restricted to theoretical case studies.

610
Therefore, a considerable amount of work need to be done before the concept is going to
be used as a robust tool for the analysis of structures in engineering practice.

The finite element code for the "every-day" use in engineering practice has to be based
on the realistic material model for concrete, i.e. the concrete response should be
realistically predicted for arbitrary load history. Moreover, the solution strategies have to
be robust, what is from the view point of complexity of the material behaviour not a
simple task. In spite of a number of difficulties mentioned above, the smeared crack
approach is currently still one of the most general and reliable concept for realistic
analysis of concrete and reinforced concrete structures, at least for the practical
engineering applications. In the present paper a brief overview of the finite element code
which is based on the smeared crack concept and microplane model for concrete is given.
On a several numerical examples is demonstrated that the code is able to realistically
predict failure mode and resistance of concrete and reinforced concrete structures.

2. Smeared fracture finite element analysis

2.1 General
The finite element (FE) code employed in the present study (MASA) is aimed to be used
for the nonlinear smeared fracture analysis of concrete and reinforced concrete structures
[14]. It is based on the microplane model and a smeared fracture concept. As
regularization procedures the standard or improved crack band approach (stress
relaxation method) can be used. Alternatively, the nonlocal integral approach can be
employed as well. The concrete is discretized by four-node quadrilateral elements (plane
analysis) or by four to eight-node three-dimensional elements. The reinforcement is
represented by truss elements. Optionally, it can also be modeled in a smeared way, i.e.
smeared inside a row of concrete elements. Besides these standard elements, special
linear or nonlinear contact elements are available as well. The analysis is incremental
with a standard solution procedure based on the constant stiffness method (explicit
approach). The tangent (Newton-Raphson) or secant stiffness approach can also be
employed.

2.2 Constitutive law for concrete – microplane material model


In the microplane model is for each integration point of the finite element the material
characterized by a relation between the stress and strain components on planes
(microplanes) of various, in advance defined, orientations (see Fig. 1). These
"monitoring" planes may be imagined to represent the damage planes or weak planes in
the microstructure, such as contact layers between aggregates in concrete. In the model
the tensorial invariance restrictions need not to be directly enforced. They are
automatically satisfied by superimposing the responses from all microplanes in a suitable
manner. The basic concept behind the microplane model was advanced in 1938 by G.I.
Taylor [15]. Later the model was extended by Bažant and co-workers for modeling of
quasi-brittle materials which exhibit softening [3][4][5][6].

611
The advanced version of the microplane model for concrete was recently proposed by
Ožbolt et al. [6]. It is based on the so called relaxed kinematic constraint concept. In the
model the microplane (see Figure 1) is defined by its unit normal vector of components
ni. Normal and shear stress and strain components (σN, σTr; εN, εTr) are considered on
each plane. Microplane strains are assumed to be the projections of the macroscopic
strain tensor εij (kinematic constraint). Based on the virtual work approach, the
macroscopic stress tensor is obtained as an integral over all microplane orientations:

3 3 σ Tr
σ ij =
2π ò σ N n i n jd Ω +
2π ò 2
(n i δ rj + n jδ ri ) dΩ (1)
Ω Ω

To realistically model concrete, the normal microplane stress and strain components have
to be decomposed into volumetric and deviatoric parts (σN=σV+σD, εN=εV+εD; see
Figure 1), which leads to the following expression for the macroscopic stress tensor:

3 3 σ Tr
σ ij = σ V δ ij +
2π ò σ D n i n j dΩ +
2π ò 2
(n i δ rj + n jδ ri ) dΩ (2)
Ω Ω

For each microplane component, the uniaxial stress-strain relations are calculated as:

σ V = FV (ε V ,eff ) ; σ D = FD (ε D,eff ) ; σ Tr = FTr (ε Tr ,eff ) (3)

From known macroscopic strain tensor, the microplane strains are calculated based on
the kinematic constraint approach. However, in (3) only effective parts of these strains
are used to calculate microplane stresses. Finally, the macroscopic stress tensor is
obtained from (2). The integration over all microplane directions (21 directions) is
performed numerically.

To model concrete cracking for any load history realistically, the effective microplane
strains are introduced. They are calculated as:

ε m,eff = ε m ψ (4)

where subscript m denotes the corresponding microplane components (V, D, Tr) and ψ is
a so called discontinuity function. This function accounts for discontinuity of the
macroscopic strain field (cracking) on the individual microplanes. It "relaxes" the
kinematic constraint which is in the case of strong localization of strains physically
unrealistic. Consequently, in the smeared fracture type of the analysis the discontinuity
function ψ enables localization of strains, not only for tensile fracture, but also for
dominant compressive type of failure. For more detail see [6].

612
The model was implemented into the finite element code and a rather broad experience
has been gained with it so far. Some of its characteristics are: (1) The main advantage of
the model is its conceptual simplicity, i.e. only a set of uniaxial stress-strain curves on the
microplane need to be defined and the macroscopic model response comes automatically
out as a result of the numerical integration over a number of microplanes; (2) The model
covers full three-dimensional range of applicability; (3) It is relatively easy to account for
initial anisotropy; (4) The comparison between test data and model response for different
stress-strain histories shows good agreement; (5) Unlike to most macroscopic models, in
the presented microplane model there is smooth transition from hardening to softening,
without unnatural sharp discontinuities. This is very important feature which in the finite
element analysis leads to significant reduction of the mesh sensitivity and assure better
convergency of the solution; (6) Implementation in the finite element code and a number
of numerical studies that have been carried out indicated the capability of the model in
realistic prediction of concrete behavior for different stress-strain histories [16].

a) b)
z
z
ε εN
εT y
εM
εK

Integration point Microplane


y
x (finite elemen)

Unit-volumen sphere
x
Figure 1. The concept of the microplane model: a) discretization of the unit volume sphere for
each finite element integration point (21 microplane directions) and b) microplane strain
components.

2.3 Localization limiter


As mentioned above, to obtain mesh objective results the so-called localization limiter
has to be used. In the following, two possible approaches are briefly described – crack
band approach and nonlocal integral method.

613
2.3.1 Crack band method
The main assumption of the crack band method is the localization of damage (crack) into
a row of finite elements. To assure a constant and mesh independent energy consumption
capacity of concrete (concrete fracture energy GF) the constitutive law needs to be
modified such that:

G F = A f h = const. (5)

where Af = the area under the uniaxial tensile stress-strain curve and h = average element
size (width of the crack band). Principally, the same relation is valid for uniaxial
compression with the assumption that the concrete compressive fracture energy GC is a
material constant:

G C = A fc h = const. (6)

in which Afc = area under the uniaxial compressive stress-strain curve. It is assumed that
GC is approximately 100 times larger than GF (GC ≈ 100 GF). From (5) and (6), it is
obvious that the constitutive law for concrete needs to be adopted to the element size.

Although the crack band method provides results which are independent of the element
size, they can still depend on the form and orientation (alignment) of the finite elements.
This is especially true when the mesh is relatively coarse or the material is extremely
brittle. To reduce this dependency and to keep the simplicity and a relatively low
computational effort of the crack band method, a new so called "Stress Relaxation
Method" [17] was developed. The method is a combination of the crack band approach
and the nonlocal approach of integral type. Due to the low computational costs and,
compared to the standard crack band approach, reduced sensitivity to the shape of the
mesh the method is appropriate tool for practical applications.

2.3.2 Nonlocal integral approach


The nonlocal integral continuum approach offers a more general possibility to avoid
spurious mesh dependency in the smeared fracture analysis of quasi-brittle materials. An
effective form of the approach, in which all variables which control the softening are
nonlocal and all others are local (nonlocal strain approach), was proposed by Pijaudier-
Cabot and Bažant [10]. The key parameter in this approach is the so-called characteristic
length l. This length controls the size of the representative volume in which the local
quantities are averaged.

In the nonlocal continuum concept the stress at a point depends not only on the strain at
the same point but also on the strains in the (in advance) defined domain V of the point.
In general, the local variable which controls damage needs to be replaced by its nonlocal
counterpart obtained by weighted averaging over a spatial neighborhood of each point. If

614
f(x) is the local variable, which controls the material model response, then the
corresponding nonlocal variable is defined as:

1
f (x ) = ò α( x, s) f (s) dV(s) = ò α' ( x, s) f (s) dV(s) (7)
VR ( x ) V V

The bar overscript denotes the averaging operator; α(x) = nonlocal weighting function; x
and s are coordinate vectors of the averaging and contributing point, respectively;
V = volume of the entire structure and VR = the representative volume calculated as:

α( x , s)
VR ( x ) = ò α( x, s) dV(s) , α ' ( x , s) = (8)
V VR ( x )

The nonlocal weighting function is often taken as the Gauss distribution function:

r2
α(r ) = exp(− ), r = s−x (9)
2l 2

where l is the internal (characteristic) length of the nonlocal continuum. Another possible
choice is the bell-shaped function:

ìæ 2 ö
2
r
ïïç1 − ÷ 0≤r≤R
α(r ) = íç R 2 ÷ (10)
è ø
ï
ïî0 R≤r

where R (radius) is the parameter related, but not equal to the characteristic length.

The variable, which is to be averaged, must be chosen such that the nonlocal solution
exactly agrees with the local solution as long as the material behavior remains in the
elastic range. Furthermore, for homogeneous stress-strain field the nonlocal solution
must be identical with the local one. Principally, the choice of the variable which is to be
averaged is rather arbitrary. However, practically the choice depends on the type of the
constitutive law, e.g. plasticity theory, damage theory, microplane model, etc.

It was first assumed that l is a material property related to the maximum aggregate size da
(l = 3da). However, it turned out that the characteristic length generally depends not only
on the composition of concrete. Namely, it has been found that the optimum value of l/da
depends on the stress-strain state. This means that the characteristic length is not a
material constant. Therefore, to improve the concept, a new nonlocal approach of
integral type which finds the physical background in the interaction of microcracks has

615
been proposed by Bažant [18] and implemented into a finite element code by Ožbolt and
Bažant [11].

In the here presented finite element code the both above mentioned nonlocal approaches
are implemented. Theoretically, they are more general than the relatively simple crack
band approach. Using these approaches the results of the analysis are mesh independent.
However, according to the experience made in the last years there are still a number of
problems which make the use of nonlocal approaches in practical applications for
concrete and reinforced concrete structures difficult. The results are realistic only for
relatively fine meshes. Consequently, the computational costs are often too high and the
approach can not practically be used. This is especially true for three-dimensional
simulations of reinforced concrete structures.

3. Numerical examples

The discussed finite element code was in the last few years employed in a number of
theoretical and practical studies. In the following the capability of the code is
demonstrated on several numerical examples. Considered is one rather complex
theoretical case of the mixed mode fracture as well as two practical applications, pull-out
of a headed stud from a concrete block and shear failure of a slender reinforced concrete
beam with and without shear reinforcement. In all case studies the spatial discretization
of concrete is performed by 8-node isoparametric finite elements (three-dimensional
analysis) or by 4-node elements (axisymmetrical analysis). The reinforcement is modeled
by 2-node truss or beam elements assuming an ideally elasto-plastic stress-strain
relationship. To assure mesh objective results the crack band approach is employed. As a
solution strategy the secant stiffness approach with direct or indirect displacement
control was used.

3.1 Double edge notched specimen


The Double-Edge-Notched specimen tested by Nooru-Mohamed [19] was analyzed. The
geometry and the test set-up are shown in Figure 2a. The specimen was first loaded by
shear load S. Subsequently, at constant shear load, the vertical tensile load T was applied
up to failure. The load control procedure was used by moving the upper loading platens
in horizontal and vertical direction, respectively. The rotation of the loading platens was
restricted. During the application of the horizontal load S, the vertical load was kept zero
(T = 0). By subsequent tensile loading the shear force was kept constant. The bottom
(support) platens were fixed and, the same as the upper (loading) platens, glued to the
surface of the specimen. Three case studies were carried out, i.e. S = 5 kN, S = 10 kN
and S = Smax. The finite element discretization is performed by the three-dimensional
eight node solid finite elements with eight integration points (see Figure 2b). The width
of the finite element model was 5 mm (the actual width of the specimen was 50 mm). The
material properties are taken as: Young’s modulus E = 32800 MPa, Poisson’s ratio

616
ν = 0.2, tensile strength ft = 3.0 MPa, uniaxial compressive strength fc = 38.4 MPa and
concrete fracture energy GF = 0.11 N/mm.

a) b)
T

50
S

100
P
M N

5
65

M' N'

100
P'
50

25 150 25

30 30

Figure 2. a) Geometry of the DENS specimen and b) three-dimensional finite element mesh.

a) b) c)

Figure 3. Crack patterns observed in the experiment and in the analysis: a) for S = 5 kN, b) for
S = 10 kN and c) for S = Smax.

617
As discussed in more detail by Ožbolt and Reinhardt [20], although the results were not
optimized they exhibit very good agreement with the experimental results. For
illustration the corresponding crack patterns (maximal principal strains) are plotted in
Figure 3. The crack patterns obtained in the experiment are shown as well. It can be seen
that the present finite element code correctly predicts the crack propagation for mixed-
mode fracture, i.e. the calculated and observed crack patterns are for all three load
histories almost identical. As shown by di Prisco et al. [21] this was not possible to
obtain by using smeared crack models which are based on the tensorial formulation
(classical plasticity formulation, nonlocal damage model or gradient plasticity model),
especially for the case S = Smax.

3.2 Pull-out of a headed stud


In practice headed studs are used to transfer loads into concrete members. Extensive
experimental and numerical studies have shown that tensile load can be transferred into
unreinforced concrete member [22]. If the steel strength of the stud is large enough, the
failure of the stud is caused by the formation of a concrete cone. The failure mechanism
is controlled by the tensile resistance of concrete, the cracking is stable and therefore the
concrete fracture energy can effectively be utilised [23].

a) b)

Figure 4. Pull-out of a headed stud: a) Formation of the concrete cone (principal strains, dark
areas) analysed by the use of the axisymmetrical version of the code and b) crack pattern
observed in the experiment.

For a better understanding of the failure mode as well as to investigate the resistance of
the headed stud anchors of various embedment depths, a large number of numerical
studies were carried out [22][23]. The numerical simulations based on the
axisymmetrical FE-code show good agreement with the test results. Some typical
calculated and observed crack patterns for a headed anchor with an embedment depth
hef = 450 mm are shown in Figure 4. As can be seen, the calculated crack pattern agrees
well with the crack pattern obtained in the test.

The concrete pull-out failure load of a headed stud relies only on the tensile resistance of
concrete. To design safe and economical anchorage it is important to know how the

618
embedment depth influences the failure capacity of the fastenings (size effect). In
Figure 5 the nominal strength of the headed stud (σN = PU/(hef2·π); PU = ultimate load) is
plotted as a function of the embedment depth. Test results are compared with the
numerical results. Furthermore, the prediction by a design formula, which is based on the
linear elastic fracture mechanics (CC-method), is plotted as well. Figure 5 indicates that
the nominal pull-out capacity decreases with the increase of the embedment depth, i.e.
there is a strong size effect on the pull-out capacity. This important effect is correctly
predicted by the smeared fracture FE analysis as well as by the proposed design formula.
2

Concrete cone pull-out failure


fcc= 33 MPa, GF= 0.1 N/mm
10
Nominal strength [MPa]
8
6
4
2

LEFM - Design code


1

Test data
8
6

Calculated
4

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 100 1000
Embedment depth [mm]

Figure 5. Size effect on the concrete cone pull-out load.

The comparison between numerical and test results confirms that the finite element code
is able to correctly simulate failure mechanism and ultimate resistance of headed anchors.

3.3 Shear failure of reinforced concrete beam


Three-dimensional finite element analysis of reinforced concrete beam loaded in three-
point-bending was carried out. The beam failed in the so-called diagonal shear failure
mode. Two cases were studied: (a) the beam without shear reinforcement and (b) the
beam with shear reinforcement. The geometry of the beam and material properties are
shown in Figure 6. The test results for case (b) were obtained after the numerical results
were published [24]. The test results for case (a) are not yet available.

619
y

Frames φ 8,
100mm apart
2 500mm
B
A C
x

5 000mm
Concrete:
20 + 8 + 8/2 = 32mm
E = 37 272 MPa y
ν = 0.2 2 HA8 20 + 8 + 8/2 = 32mm
ft = 3.9 MPa
fc = 38.3 MPa 500mm
GF = 110 J/m²
z
2 HA32
Reinforcement: 20 + 8 + 32/2 = 44mm

200mm
E = 200 000 MPa
σy = 400 MPa
ET = 3245 MPa 20 + 8 + 32/2 = 44mm

Figure 6. Calculated and measured load-displacement curves: (a) beam without shear
reinforcement and (b) beam with shear reinforcement.

a) b)
300 300

Beam without stirrups


250 250
Analysis
Total vertical load [kN]

Total vertical load [kN]

200 200

150 150

100 100 Beam with stirrups

Analysis (before test)


50 50
Test

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Vertical midspan displacement [mm] Vertical midspan displacement [mm]

Figure 7. Calculated and measured load-displacement curves: (a) beam without shear
reinforcement and (b) beam with shear reinforcement.

620
a) b)
Y 450. Y
450.

300. 300.

150. 150.

0. 0.

X X
0. 0.
150. 150.

Y Y

Z X Z X

Figure 8. Calculated crack pattern (maximum principal strains): (a) beam without shear
reinforcement and (b) beam with shear reinforcement.

a) b)

Figure 9. Localization of strains in reinforcement: (a) beam without shear reinforcement and (b)
beam with shear reinforcement.

In Figure 7 are shown the calculated and measured (case b) load-displacement curves.
The comparison for case (b) shows good agreement. The beam without shear
reinforcement fails in diagonal shear failure mode. The crack pattern is shown in
Figure 8a (maximum principal strains). At peak load no yielding of reinforcement was
observed. The overall behavior of the beam is relatively brittle, what is a typical for this
kind of failure mechanism. On the contrary, the beam with stirrups shows rather ductile
response (see Fig. 7b). The calculated failure mode after peak load is shown in
Figure 8b. The same as in the experiment, the beam fails in the so-called compressive
shear failure mode. After ductile response caused by yielding of bending reinforcement,
sudden compressive failure took place. Figure 9 shows the strains in the main
reinforcement and in the stirrups after peak load. As can be seen, in the main
reinforcement as well as in the stirrups there is a localization of strains (yielding). It is
obvious that the finite element model is able to account for the activation of the shear
reinforcement. Consequently, the failure load compared to the beam without shear
reinforcement increases by about 20%, what is in good agreement with design codes.

621
4. Conclusions

In the present paper some theoretical aspects as well as aspects related to the application
of the smeared fracture concept in engineering practice are discussed. In spite of a
number of difficulties which can arise when the smeared fracture concept is used in the
analysis of concrete and reinforced concrete structures, it is shown that the code which is
based on the microplane constitutive law for concrete is able to realistically predict
behavior of concrete and reinforced concrete structures. The discussion of the theoretical
aspects and the comparison between calculated and test results lead to the following
conclusions: (1) The smeared fracture analysis is reliable only if a realistic material
model is coupled with an efficient localization limiter; (2) The localization limiter based
on a higher order method is computationally expensive and, if the finite element mesh is
not fine enough, it may lead to unrealistic results. For most practical problems the crack
band method can reasonably well predict behavior of concrete structures; (3) It is
demonstrated that the used finite element code is able to realistically predict structural
behavior of a rather complex practical cases. From the computational point of view the
important feature of the employed constitutive model is the fact that in the model there is
no sharp discontinuity which can cause convergency problems and strong mesh
dependency; (4) Using a realistic numerical tool a number of phenomena can be
explained and, what is important, the amount of expensive experimental work can be
reduced.

5. Acknowledgement

This work was partly supported by the DFG and by the following companies:
Fischerwerke, Hilti, Halfen and Würth. The support is very much appreciated.

6. References

1. K.J. Willam and E.P. Warnke, 'Constitutive model for triaxial behaviour of
concrete', Seminar on Concrete Structures Subjected to Triaxial Stresses,
International Association of Bridge and Structural Engineering Conference,
Bergamo, Italy, (1974).
2. M.A. Ortiz, 'A constitutive theory for the inelastic behaviour of concrete',
Mechanics of Materials, 4, 67-93, (1985).
3. Z.P. Bažant and P.C. Prat, 'Microplane model for brittle-plastic material - parts I
and II', Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 114(10), 1672-1702,
(1988).
4. J. Ožbolt and Z.P. Bažant, 'Microplane model for cyclic triaxial behaviour of
concrete', Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 118(7), 1365-1386, (1992).

622
5. I. Carol, P. Prat, and Z.P. Bažant, 'New explicit microplane model for concrete:
theoretical aspects and numerical implementation', International Journal of Solids
and Structures, 29(9), 1173-1191, (1992).
6. J. Ožbolt, Y.-J Li and I. Kožar, 'Microplane model for concrete with relaxed
kinematic constraint', International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38, 2683-
2711, (2001).
7. Z.P. Bažant and L. Cedolin, 'Blunt crack band propagation in finite element
analysis', Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 111, 381-389, (1979).
8. Z.P. Bažant and B.-H. Oh, 'Crack band theory for fracture of concrete', Materials
and Structures, 16(93), 155-177, (1983).
9. R. de Borst, 'Continuum models for discontinuous media', Proceedings of the
International RILEM/ESIS Conference on “Fracture processes in concrete, rock
and ceramics”, Ed. by van Mier, Rots and Bakker, E & FN Spon / Chapman &
Hall, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 601-618, (1991).
10. G. Pijaudier-Cabot and Z.P. Bažant, 'Nonlocal Damage Theory', Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 113(10), 1512-1533, (1987).
11. J. Ožbolt and Z.P. Bažant, 'Numerical smeared fracture analysis: Nonlocal
microcrack interaction approach', International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 39(4), 635-661, (1996).
12. A. Hillerborg, M. Moder and P.E. Petersson, “Analysis of Crack Formation and
Crack Growth in Concrete by Means of Fracture Mechanics and Finite Elements.”
Cement and Concrete Research, 6, 773-782, (1976).
13. M. Jirásek, 'Embedded crack models for concrete fracture', Computational
Modelling of Concrete Structures, de Borst, Bićanić, Mang & Meschke (eds),
Balkema, Rotterdam, 291-300, (1998).
14. J. Ožbolt, 'MASA – MAcroscopic Space Analysis', Internal Report, Institut für
Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, (1998).
15. G.I.Taylor, 'Plastic strain in metals', Journal of the Institute of Metals, London,
(62), 307-324, (1938).
16. J. Ožbolt, U. Mayer, H. Vocke and R Eligehausen, 'Das FE-Programm MASA in
Theorie und Anwendung', (Finite Element Code MASA in the Theory and
Applications), Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, 94, Heft 10, 403-412, (1999).
17. J. Ožbolt, 'Nonlocal fracture analysis - stress relaxation method', Internal Report,
Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, (1999).
18. Z.P. Bažant, 'Why continuum damage is nonlocal: micromechanics arguments',
Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, 117(5), 1070-1087. (1991).
19. M.B. Nooru-Mohamed, 'Mixed-mode fracture of concrete: an experimental
approach', Doctoral thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The
Netherlands, (1992).
20. J. Ožbolt and H.W. Reinhardt, 'Numerical study of mixed-mode fracture in
concrete', submitted for possible publication in International Journal of Fracture,
(2001).

623
21. di Prisco, M., Ferrara, L., Meftah, F. Pamin, J., De Borst, R. Mazars, J. and J.M.
Reynouard, 'Mixed mode fracture in plain and reinforced concrete: some results on
benchmark tests', International Journal of Fracture (103), 127-148, (2000).
22. J. Ožbolt, R Eligehausen and H.W. Reinhardt 'Size effect on the concrete cone
pull-out load', International Journal of Fracture, 95, 391-404, (1999).
23. J. Ožbolt, 'Maßstabseffekt in Beton- und Stahlbetonkonstruktionen', Postdoctoral
thesis, IWB-Mitteilungen 1995/2, Universität Stuttgart (1995).
24. EDF- MECA benchmark, 'Three dimensional non linear constitutive models for
fracture of concrete', Comparison Report#1, edited by EDF R&D, (2001).

624
NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE SPLITTING FAILURE MODE OF FASTENINGS
Jörg Asmus*, Joško Ožbolt**
*Ingenieurbüro Eligehausen und Sippel, Stuttgart, Germany
**Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In the present paper the numerical results for the splitting failure mode which is typical
for fastening elements that are used too close to the member edges or in a narrow
concrete members are presented and discussed. To investigate the influence of the size
and geometry on the splitting failure, three-dimensional FE analysis was carried out. In
the analysis the nonlocal mixed formulation of the microplane model for concrete was
used. The splitting fracture is generated by imposing controlled concentrated radial
displacement in the hole of the anchorage element. Geometrical parameters of a concrete
specimen (width and thickness), the size of the relatively small loading area (diameter
and height) as well as the embedment depth of the fastening element are varied. The
analysis shows a strong size effect on the ultimate pressure at splitting failure and good
agreement with experimental observations.

1. Introduction

Failure of fasteners can be caused by a rupture of steel, anchor pull-out or by a concrete


cone failure. In the past these failure modes have been intensively investigated and their
failure load can be predicted using known design equations [1]. However, when the
fasteners are pulled out from a concrete member in the anchorage zone rather high radial
splitting forces are generated. These forces may cause splitting failure. The splitting
failure load is lower than concrete cone failure. Therefore. it has to be considered on the
design of fasteners. To calculate the splitting failure load no general equation is
available. It mainly depends on the dimensions and the material properties of the
concrete member and the fastening system.

625
In a 3D-analysis using the nonlocal microplane model numerical investigations with such
radial forces acting in the anchoring zone of the concrete specimen with given nodal
displacements were carried out. The applied microplane material model [6] is a general
macroscopical three-dimensional material model for friction-cohesive, quasi-brittle
materials. The model is macroscopical i.e. it does not model the material on the
microstructural level. In order to prevent a localization of damage into a zero volume, the
model was coupled with a so called localization limiting procedure (nonlocal concept).

In the present paper a part of the numerical results for a single fastener are presented and
discussed.

2. Numerical analysis

2.1 Geometry, material properties and FE discretization


The aim of the FE analysis was to study the influences of the dimensions of concrete
member and of the load bearing area of a fastener. The detailed investigated influences
are as follows:

Concrete member Fastener


• member thickness h • embedment depth hef
• member width b or edge • drilled hole diameter dB
distance c respectively • height of the load transfer zone hLE

The study was carried out for a double symmetric concrete strip with a drilled hole in the
mid of it. The specimen was loaded by controlling the radial displacement applied over a
relatively small load transfer zone of the fastener. The analysis was performed by the use
of the eight node solid finite elements based on the linear strain field assumption (eight
integration points). The mesh size and form for different FE models was in the crack
initiation zone of the same shape and size. The volume close to the load transfer zone is
modeled by finer mesh (element size of approximately 2.5 - 3 mm). The size of the
elements increased moving away from the area of the load transfer zone (see Fig. 1).

The following material properties for concrete were used: uniaxial tensile strength
ft = 2.2 MPa, uniaxial compressive strength fc = 34 MPa, fracture energy GF = 0.05
N/mm, initial modulus of elasticity E = 25500 MPa and Poisson’s ratio ν = 0.18.

To assure the objectivity of the analysis with respect to the mesh size and orientation the
non-local integral approach (micro-crack interaction approach; [5]) was employed.
Besides the concrete constitutive law, the governing parameter in the nonlocal analysis is
the so-called characteristic length [5]. In the present study the characteristic length was
set to lch = 5 mm.

The splitting force is calculated as:

626
Sp = ò p dA (1)
A

where p= pressure over the loading area and A= area of the loading zone. Note, that this
force is actually the total radial force which generates splitting failure of the specimen.
More details of the numerical investigations are given in [3].

2.2 Comparison between two different discretizations


All here presented numerical results are obtained by modeling only a quarter of the
concrete plate, i.e. two symmetry planes are assumed (Model A, see Fig. 1a). Two

a)

b)

Y
X

Figure 1. Crack pattern in terms of maximal principal strains close after the peak load: a)
model A and b) model B.

627
additional calculations using the model where only one plane of symmetry is considered
(model B, see Fig. 1b) served as a comparison to see whether the model with two
symmetry planes could realistically predict splitting failure mode. In this comparison two
different member width were used (b = 160 and 640 mm) and all other parameters were
kept constant. No doubt, the model B is closer to reality, however, from the
computational point of view it is more time consuming. The failure modes close after the
ultimate load are plotted in Fig. 1 in terms of the maximal principal strains. The dark
zones indicate damage (cracks). Obviously, both models correctly predicted the splitting
of concrete block. The model A with two planes of symmetry seems to be reliable and
therefore it was used in all subsequent calculations.

3. Numerical results

3.1 Influence of the member width


To find the influence of the member width on the splitting failure load altogether three
calculations were carried out. The member height (h = 160 mm) and the embedment
depth (hef = 80 mm) were kept constant, while the member width was varied (b = 160,
320 and 640 mm).

150
Variation of the member width (Model A)
h= 160 mm, hef= 80 mm
125
radial force [kN]

100

75

50
b= 160 mm
b= 320 mm
25
b= 640 mm

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
displacement [mm]

Figure 2. Load-Displacement curves for three different member width.

The L-D curves for the three investigated cases (b = 160, 320 and 640 mm) are shown in
Fig. 2. For all three cases the failure is due to splitting of concrete. When small concrete
members split the typical failure is brittle and there is no indication or warning before it
happens. On the contrary, the failure of larger concrete members is more ductile. The

628
reason for this is higher local damage of concrete in the zone where the load is applied
since in larger specimen the total radial force is also larger.

In Fig. 3 the relationships between the average ultimate pressure (p = Sp/A) normalized to
the uniaxial compressive concrete strength is plotted as a function of the member width.
As expected, when the member width increases the ultimate splitting strength increases
as well and reaches for b = 640 mm value that is approximately pcrit = 7fc. Fig. 4 shows
the nominal splitting strength calculated as the ultimate splitting force divided by the
cross section area of the concrete member (Sp/(b⋅h)). The increase of the specimen width
leads to the decrease of the nominal splitting strength.

A similar trend is observed for the relative crack length wr at peak load (see Fig. 4). It is
calculated as wr = wa/l where wa = the distance of the crack front measured perpendicular
to the load surface area and l = the length of the splitting crack at failure. Obviously, with
increase of the specimen width the critical crack length decreases i.e. the cracking is less
stable and consequently the nominal strength decreases.

10
Variation of the specimen width
h= 160 mm, hef= 80 mm
8
relative pressure (p/fc)

analysis: p = Sp,ult/ (π dBLhLE)


approx.: p = 101.23 (b/hef)0.36
6

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
relative member width (b/hef)

Figure 3. Relative pressure as a function of the width of the concrete member.

629
1.0
Relative crack length
(peak load)

relative crack length (wr)


0.8 hef= 80 mm, h= 160 mm

calculation, wr= wa/ l

0.6 Approx. wr= 0.7 (b/hef)-0.36

0.4

0.2 b

0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10
relative member width (b/hef)

Figure 4. Relative crack length at peak load as a function of the relative member width.

Before the splitting failure is reached a small volume of concrete close to the loading
zone is in a high 3D compressive state. The reason is relatively small area of the load
transfer zone and strong lateral confinement. Above and under this compressed volume
zone high tensile strains (damage zones) localize in the radial as well as in the splitting
direction (splitting crack). This can be seen from Fig. 5 which shows the splitting crack
front over the specimen depth at peak load in terms of principal stresses. The dark zones
indicate the crack front. In front of this zone there is a hardening of the concrete and
behind of it the softening (cracked area). By further increase of radial displacement
(loading) the softening zones above and below the compressed concrete zone come
together what result in a splitting failure. The splitting crack localizes in the weakest
vertical plane which propagates under an angle of approximately 450 measured to the
longitudinal axis of the test specimen (see Fig. 1a).

The damage zones are the result of the non-homogeneous strain field which develops as a
consequence of the nonuniform boundary conditions. The relative non-homogeneity of
smaller concrete specimen is higher what result in a more brittle failure. This strain non-
homogeneity decreases with increase of the specimen size. As a result, the behaviour
under ultimate conditions for wider plates is more ductile since it is much harder to
produce the non-homogeneity of strains that would result in splitting failure.

630
Z
Y

Figure 5. The front of splitting crack in terms of max. principal stresses.

3.2 Influence of the concrete member height


A series of FE calculations using a constant member width (b = 320 mm), member length
(l = 640 mm) and embedment depth (hef = 80 mm) with a variable member height of
h = 120, 160 and 240 mm were carried out to investigate the influences of the member
height on the splitting failure load.

10
Variation of the member height
b= 320 mm, hef= 80 mm
8
relative pressure (p/fc)

analysis: p = Sp,ult/(πdBhLE)
approx.: p = 111.8 (h/hef)0.42
6

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
relative member height (h/hef)

Figure 6. Relative pressure as a function of the relative member height.

631
The resulting L-D curves are similar as obtained for the variation of the specimen width
i.e. thinner members show a more brittle behaviour. As expected, the numerical analysis
shows that with an increase of the member height the ultimate pressure increases as well
(see Fig. 6). However, if the member is thicker than h = 2hef only a minor increase of the
ultimate relative pressure was observed i.e. for an increase of the embedment depth from
h = 2hef to h = 3hef the pressure increases only for about 6%. Only two of the investigated
cases (b = h and 2h) showed a clear splitting failure with a localized splitting crack. For
h > 2hef the specimen tends to fail not in the splitting failure mode but rather in a
combined failure where the side concrete cone failure tends to dominate. This tendency
agrees well with results in experimental investigations [2].

3.3 Influence of the embedment depth


To investigate the influence of the embedment depth on the splitting failure load a series
of calculations were carried out by varying the embedment depth between hef = 40, 80,
160 and 320 mm. The ratios h/hef = 2 and b/hef = 4 were kept constant. Furthermore, the
size of the hole diameter as well as the height of the loading zone were kept constant as
well (dB = 18 mm and hLE = 10 mm).

15
Variation of the embedment depth
b= 4hef, h= 2hef
12
relative pressure (p/fc)

analysis: p = Sp,ult/ (π dBhLE)


approx.: P = 5.13 (hef)0.76
9

6 local concrete
compr. failure

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
embedment depth hef [mm]

Figure 7. Relative pressure as a function of the embedment depth.

Similar as in previous calculations the L-D curves indicate more brittle response for
concrete specimens with smaller embedment depths. For embedment depths hef = 40, 80
and 160 mm the resulted failure mode was splitting. In the case of hef = 320 mm a local
compression failure took place. In Fig. 7 the relationships between embedment depth and
the relative ultimate pressure is shown. It can be seen that up to approximately hef = 200

632
mm the ultimate pressure increases proportionally with the embedment depth. However,
for larger embedment depth a local concrete compression failure occurs. The relative
pressure at which this takes place was observed to be about 9fc.

3.4 Influence of the load bearing area


For all the results shown above the diameter of drilled hole and the height of load
transfer zone were kept constant. Experimental investigations showed that the height of
the loading zone influence the splitting failure load [2]. Therefore, to investigate this in
more detail a series of calculations for a concrete member of constant size (hef = 160 mm,
h = 2hef and b = 4hef) were carried out. In these calculations the diameter as well as the
height of the loading zone were scaled proportionally with the specimen size (diameter:
dB = 18 and 72 mm; the height of the load transfer zone: hLE = 10 and 40 mm).

The analysis principally shows that the failure load increases with increase of the loading
area. Furthermore, smaller loading areas promote a more ductile behaviour. For all
calculated cases a splitting failure was observed.

900
dB= 18 mm (constant), hLE= 10 mm (constant), f (hef)0.76
ultimate radial force Sp,ult. [kN]

750 dB= 18 mm (constant), hLE= varied, f(hef)1.43


dB= varied, hLE= 10 mm (constant), f(hef)1.59
dB= 0.25hef, hLE= 0.45hef, f(hef)1.94
600

450

300

150

0
0 40 80 120 160 200
embedment depth hef [mm]

Figure 8. Ultimate load for different geometrical configurations as a function of embedment


depth.

In Fig. 8 the calculated results are summarized. The failure load is for different
geometrical configurations plotted as a function of the embedment depth (characteristic
size). The largest increase of the ultimate load is observed if the geometry, including the
hole diameter and the height of the loading zone, is scaled proportionally. For this case
the ultimate load is approximately proportional to the square of the embedment depth i.e.

633
there is no size effect on the ultimate load. In contrast to this, the lowest increase of the
ultimate load is observed for the case where the specimen geometry was scaled
proportionally but the size of the loading area was kept constant.

4. Discussion of the numerical results

The presented results show that the splitting failure load of a concrete block loaded by
inside pressure depends on the size and geometry of the concrete specimen. When
plotting the calculated data of section 3.4 as a relative pressure (p/fc) versus the relative
load area (d = loading area divided by the splitting failure area), as shown in Fig. 9, then
can be seen that for the size range of practical importance all calculated data are well
fitted by the Bazant size effect formula [6]. Furthermore, a fit of the calculated data by
the power function yields to an exponent of n = -0.42. The so called characteristic size
resulting from the Bazant’s size effect formula is very small (d0 = 0.03). This shows that
the size effect on the relative ultimate pressure is strong and close to that predicted by the
linear elastic fracture mechanics size effect formula. The theoretical limit for the relative
pressure in case of d → 0 is approximately 30fc. The numerical results are in good
agreement with the experimental experience for partly loaded concrete areas [7].

20

Splitting failure
16 Calculated
relative pressure (p/fc)

Bazant SEL, p= B fc(1+d/do)-0.5; B=29.24, do = 0.03

12 Power fit: p=159 d-0.42; d= rel. load surface [%]

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
(load surface / failure surface) x 100

Figure 9. Relative pressure as a function of the relative load area – size range of practical
interest.

Furthermore, the extrapolation of the calculated results to the maximal size of d = 100
should theoretically yield to the relative strength of one (p/fc = 1) i.e. the compressive
splitting strength should coincide with the uniaxial concrete compressive strength. In Fig.
10 is this extrapolation plotted for the Bazant size effect formula and for the power
function from Fig. 10. Having on mind that both curves are obtained by fitting the

634
calculated data of a very limited size range, the agreement with the lower theoretical limit
is relatively good. This confirms that the numerical results are reliable.

7 Splitting failure

6 Calculated
relative pressure (p/fc)

Bazant SEL, p= B fc(1+d/do)-0.5; B=29.24, do = 0.03


5
Power fit: p=159 d-0.42; d= rel. load surface [%]

2
theoretical limit: p= fc
1

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
(load surface / failure surface) x 100

Figure 10. Relative pressure as a function of the relative load area – full size range.

5. Conclusions

In the present paper the numerical results of the 3D finite element study for the splitting
problem of a concrete block caused by a concentrated internal pressure are presented and
discussed. The aim of the study was to better understand the failure mechanism as well as
to investigate the influence of the member geometry and the load bearing area of a
fastener on the ultimate splitting failure load. The results show that the ultimate pressure
at splitting failure strongly depends on the size and geometry of the specimen as well as
on the size of the loading area. When the structure geometry and the loading area is
scaled proportionally, the ultimate load increases approximately proportionally as well
i.e. no size effect on the failure load is observed. However, if the structure size is scaled
proportionally but the size of the loading area is kept constant, there is an strong size
effect on the ultimate load. The reason is localization of damage and consequently
decrease of the peak resistance by increase of the size. The size effect on the average
ultimate pressure related to the relative loading area is strong and close to the prediction
according to the linear elastic fracture mechanics. When the relative loading area yields
to the maximal possible value (one) the extrapolation of the ultimate pressure results
approximately to the uniaxial concrete compressive strength. The numerical results are
in good agreement with the experimental observations [2] as well as with the theoretical

635
and experimental studies for concrete members loaded by locally applied compressive
forces [7].

6. References

1. R. Eligehausen and R. Mallee, ’Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und


Mauerwerksbau’, Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, Germany, (2000).
2. J. Asmus, ’Bemessung von zugbeanspruchten Befestigungen bei der Versagensart
Spalten’, Dissertation, Universität Stuttgart, Germany, (1998).
3. J. Ožbolt, J. Asmus, and K. Jebara, ’Dreidimensionale-Finite-Elemente-Analyse
zur Versagensart Spalten durch Befestigungsmittel’, Report Nr. 16/22-97/23, IWB,
Universität Stuttgart, Germany, (1996).
4. J. Ožbolt, Y.-J Li and I. Kožar, 'Microplane model for concrete with relaxed
kinematic constraint', International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38, 2683-
2711, (2001).
5. J. Ožbolt and Z.P. Bažant, ‘Numerical Smeared Fracture Analysis: Nonlocal
Microcrack Interaction Approach’, IJNME, 39(4), p. 635-661, (1996).
6. Z.P. Bažant, ‘Size Effect in Blunt Fracture: Concrete, Rock and Metal’, JEM,
ASCE, 110(4), p. 518-535, (1984).
7. K.-H. Lieberum, ’Das Tragverhalten von Beton bei extremer Teilfächenbelastung’,
Dissertation, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Germany, (1987).

636
THREE DIMENSIONAL MODELING OF AN ANCHORAGE
TO CONCRETE USING METAL ANCHOR BOLTS

Hocine Boussa, Ghassan Mounajed, Bruno Mesureur & Jean-Vivien Heck


CSTB, Marne La Vallée, cedex 02, France

Abstract
Modern construction is now using steel anchor bolts in order to assure the connection
between different building components and to allow loads transmission in-between
different elements of a structure. Over the past twenty years, much research work has
been carried out on anchors in different countries of the world. The majority of the
design models and methods proposed for this type of anchorage are based on a statistical
empirical approach. Practice and tests have shown that they are not always predictive for
a shear force although the values obtained are on the safe side.
This research work deals with the study of the behavior under shear loading of a single
steel bolt anchored in concrete close to the edge or the corner of the concrete slab. The
aim is to predict the failure modes and the failure load. The study is based on a
numerical resolution using the finite element method. Different types of non linearity are
considered in the model: non-linear behavior laws for steel and concrete, geometrical
non linearity due to the large displacements and non linearity due to the change in the
limit conditions i.e. contact.

1. Introduction
Modern construction is now using metal anchor bolts in order to assure the connection
between different building components and to allow loads transmission in-between
different elements of a structure. Over the past twenty years, much research work has
been carried out on anchors in different countries of the world2,3,5,6,7,8,9. The majority of
the design models and methods proposed for this type of anchorage are based on a
statistical empirical approach. Practice and tests have shown that they are not always
predictive for a shear force although the values obtained are on the safe side.
The origin of this problem is that different failure modes can arise in relation to the
values of the different parameters involved (the characteristics of the anchors and their
support, the spacing between anchors, the distance to edges and the direction of the

637
applied force). The current available models are only predictive for a restricted range of
parameters and by introducing certain factors whose physical significance is open to
criticism. Consequently, it appeared necessary to restudy the behavior of anchorage
subjected to shear loads using scientific criteria.
This research work deals with the study of the behavior under shear loading of a single
steel bolt anchored in concrete close to the edge or at the corner of the concrete slab. The
aim is to predict the failure modes, the failure load and the global load-displacement
behavior. The study is based on a numerical resolution using the finite element method.
Different types of non linearity are considered in the model: non-linear behavior laws for
steel and concrete, geometrical non linearity due to the large displacements and non
linearity due to the change in the limit conditions.
The different parts of the anchorage are explicitly modeled, i.e. screw, and sleeve,
expansion cone, fixture, concrete substrate and the initial prestressing force is applied.
Today, the qualification of anchors is currently made by testing following a relevant test
regime. Such a procedure is of course time consuming and does not provide us with a
completely satisfying description of the anchor behavior. Indeed, it does not seem
reasonable to perform a complete test program combining all the possible influencing
parameters. The idea of testing the anchors in concrete by computer simulation has
raised some years ago at the CSTB. The project is called “Virtual Laboratory for anchors
in concrete”. The present paper represents the second step of this project. The first one
was described in a paper1 published by the ACI (American Concrete Institute).
Eventually, the aim of this study is to take account of the virtual tests in the evaluation
procedure, decrease, if possible, the number of pre qualification and qualification tests
and improve the design code.

2. Current design of anchorage subjected to shear loads


The shear failure mode of steel, or the concrete failure mode at the slab edge or by pry-
out, is influenced by the distance to free edges, the anchorage depth and the stiffness of
the anchor.
Shear generally causes greater displacements than those due to tensile forces. This can
be explained by the bending in the threaded part of the bolt due to the second order
effect of displacement and to the local damage in the concrete in the front of the fixture.
The different failure modes observed under shear loading are: steel failure, concrete pry-
out failure and concrete edge breakout failure.

2.1. Steel Failure


Steel failure is generally accompanied by large relative displacements and is more
frequent in the case of deep anchors and high anchor stiffness. The failure mechanism is
generally characterized by the failure of the anchor in the plane of the applied tangential
load. It is due to shear and bending stresses in the bolt. Local damage in the concrete can

638
also be present, but it does not significantly influence the ultimate resistance of the
anchor. Indeed, when the anchor comes in contact with the concrete surface, stress
redistribution takes place along the full anchoring depth, developing by a flexing in the
shank. In general, increasing the applied load leads to a form of spalling. This mode of
concrete surface damage causes an increase in the bending moment acting on the shank
and a decrease in the pry-out effect at the base of the anchor. In the case of a deep
anchor, the applied shear load can continue to increase until total failure of the anchor
steel under the combination of shear, bending and tensile stresses.
The characteristic resistance of an anchor is given by the following formula:
VRk,c = 0.5 × A s × fuk (1)
AS is the stressed section of the thread and fuk is the characteristic tensile resistance of
steel.
When the shank is predominantly subjected to bending and tension stress the failure can
even occur beneath the concrete surface, in the reduced section of the anchors above the
expansion cone. Of course, in this case, this formula does not apply any more.

2.2. Pry-Out Failure


Pry-out failure is frequent in the case of short and stiff anchors and it occurs on the
opposite side of the applied shear load. The shear force causes a pressure at the rear of
the anchor. This pressure leads to uplift in the concrete, in the opposite direction of the
applied force.
The corresponding characteristic resistance is given, for first analysis, by the equation:
VRk,cp = k × NRk,c (2)
NRk,c is the tensile resistance of the anchor.
This model is on the safe side but is rarely predictive since the value for k must be
determined by tests for each type of anchor.

2.3. Concrete edge breakout failure


When the anchor gets close to free edges, the hydrostatic confinement pressure of
concrete and the concrete failure resistance decrease. Several failure modes can exist
depending on the direction of the applied force, the number of anchors and the distance
to edges.
For anchors group, it is assumed that the closest anchors to edges are those that
determine the characteristic resistance of the concrete. However, if these anchors are
very close to the edge, an oblong hole can be arranged in the fixture so that transmission
of the shear force takes place only, at least at the limit service condition, through the
anchors that are placed furthest from the edge.
In the case of an anchor or a group of anchors placed alongside an edge, only the
anchors, which act most unfavorably, have to be taken into account to determine the
characteristic resistance:

639
A C, V
VRk,C = VRk
0
,C × × ψ S, V × ψh, V × ψ α, V × ψ ec,N × ψ ucr, V (3)
A 0C, V
0,2
æ l ö
0
VRk ,c = 0.45 × dnom × çç f ÷÷ × fck,cube × c11,5 (4)
è dnom ø
This is the initial value for the characteristic resistance of an anchor placed in cracked
concrete and stressed perpendicular to the edge without being influenced by the spacing,
the distances to the other edges and the thickness of the concrete slab. Unless the
effective length lf is clearly defined the equation is not actually predictive and tests are
needed to assess the value of this parameter. ψ α,V is a factor which takes account of
the angle αV between the applied load and the direction perpendicular to the free edge.
The model given in the ETAG4 for concrete edge failure gives satisfactory results
(although it cannot be considered as fully predictive) when the shear load is directed
towards the free edge. However, it is not predictive when the force is directed towards
the center of the slab, and this in spite of the introduction of coefficient ψ α,V . The
experience shows that there is not a good match between the model and the
experimentation. The difference may be significant in the case of an anchor group of 4
anchors.

3. Anchorage modeling
The tests have shown that the fracture of an anchorage under shear loading is governed
by the geometry and by the mechanical properties of the anchor and its support. For a
semi-infinite medium implantation, the failure may occur with concrete damage (pry-out
for small embedment length) or steel rupture accompanied by spalling at the concrete
surface.
The concrete fracture is governed by the non-linear behavior laws under tensile loading.
It may be crushed under high compressive stresses and locally damaged when subjected
to contact phenomena with steel interfaces.
The anchors are placed in a C20/25 concrete (i.e. fck=20 MPa on cylinders). The concrete
is made of normal weight aggregates from the Seine River.
The anchor has the following dimensions:

Table 1 : anchor dimensions


External diameter: Effective embedment Angle of the Thickness of the
dnom depth: hef expansion cone fixture: tfix
[mm] [mm] [°] [mm]
21.5 125 30 25

640
3.1. Mesh generation and material properties
The three dimensional finite elements chosen to mesh the anchor and the concrete are 8-
nodes isoparametric hexahedral elements. Additional 4-nodes isoparametric tetrahedral
elements are added to the configuration in order to take account of the semi-infinite
medium of concrete. In order to capture correctly the higher stress gradient around the
anchor, we used a high mesh density in this area. The complete finite element model
consists in 12,670 nodes and 25,506 elements. Among these elements, 8,594 are 8-nodes
hexahedral elements and 16,805 are 4-nodes tetrahedral elements. Figure 2 shows the
principal parts of the mesh.

Figure 1 : global mesh Figure 2 : anchor mesh

The shear force is simulated by a horizontal displacement applied, along X-axis, on the
backside of the fixture. The concrete properties are given below:

Table 2 : concrete properties


Ultimate tensile Young’s modulus Poisson’s Mass fracture energy :
strength : f’t : Ec ratio: νc density: ρc Gf
[N/mm²] [Gpa] [-] [Kg/m3] [J/m²]
3 30 0.2 2500 65
The steel properties are given below:

Table 3 : steel properties


Young’s modulus : Poisson’s ratio : νs Mass density : Plasticity :
Es ρs
[GPa] [-] [Kg/m3] Von Mises, Isotropic
Hardening
210 0.28 7800 σs = 640 MPa

641
The behavior of concrete far from the anchor is assumed to be purely elastic. The
concrete that is located in the cracking zone around the anchor is modeled using the
fixed smeared crack approach. When the anchor is placed near the edge or at the corner
of the slab, the plasticity of concrete is not taken into account in the computation because
the failure is due to concrete edge failure, i.e. a relatively brittle failure.
To solve such complex non-linear problem, the Newton Raphson’s method for large
displacements is used. The convergence is tested on relative displacements and the
tolerance is equal to 0.5%. The computation is carried out in transient dynamic in order
to regularize the contact solution.

3.2. Concrete model-smeared crack approach


Concrete exhibits a non-linear stress strain behavior mainly because of progressive
micro-cracking and void growth. The development of micro cracks results in a
degradation of elastic stiffness. Generally they are oriented with respect of applied stress
history and the degraded elastic operator becomes gradually anisotropic due to cracking.
For our modeling, the cracking progress in concrete is modeled using the
multidirectional smeared crack approach with three orthogonal cracks. The model is
based on the decomposition of the total strain vector into two vectors - as given in the
following equation :
∆ε = ∆εco +∆εcr (5)
∆εco is the strain of the solid part (concrete) and ∆εcr is the strain of the crack part.
The global crack strain vector is given by the equation: ∆ε cr = N ⋅ ∆e cr (6)
Where ∆e cr is the local crack strain vector and N is the transformation matrix reflecting
the orientation of the crack. A fundamental feature of the present concept is that N is
assumed to be fixed upon crack formation (fixed crack concept). For uncracked
concrete:
∆σ = Dc 0 ∆ε c 0 (7)
For cracked concrete, the vector of incremental tensions across the crack is given by:
∆t cr = D cr ∆e cr (8)
cr
Where D is a diagonal matrix (DI, DII, DIII), DI, DII and DIII are the I-mode, II-mode
and III-mode stiffness moduli for a smeared single crack respectively. It is assumed that
direct shear-normal coupling is not decisive. Distinction between II-mode and III-mode
is not relevant, so that the mode II will be mentioned only.
The overall relation between global stress and strain is given by the equation10 :
[ ] −1
∆σ = éD c 0 − D c 0N D cr + N T D c 0N NT D cO ù ⋅ ∆ε
êë úû
(9)

Assuming that Ec is the initial elastic modulus, DI is the cracking stiffness modulus:
ft'2 ⋅ h β⋅G
DI = DII = (10)
2 ⋅ Gf 1− β

642
The II-mode response and the III-mode response are related to the initial shear modulus
G. A constant value of the crack shear modulus DII corresponds to a linear ascending
relation between shear stress and shear strain across the crack. This may increase the
shear stress indefinitely, and, hence, cause the rotation of the principal stresses in the
cracked elements. An improvement of the model may be obtained by making the shear
stiffness after cracking a decreasing function of the crack normal strain10. Despite this
improvement, many authors have noticed a stress locking. In order to overcome this
problem, we have chosen to reduce the shear components in the local axis to zero when a
crack initiates.
The objectivity of the model is ensured by adjusting the size of the crack bandwidth h
during crack progress. It takes account of the element dimensions and the crack normal
direction.

3.3. Contact problem : solver constraint method


The present study takes account of the contact phenomena between steel and concrete
interfaces on the one hand and between anchor components on the other hand. The
contact is assumed to be perfect (without friction).
In the presence of large relative displacements between solids in contact (e.g. in the case
of steel and concrete) the problem becomes highly non-linear. The main difficulties
encountered in contact problems come from the fact that the boundary conditions linked
to the contact are not previously known because of the large displacements.
Different methods are used for numerical contact resolution. We used the solver
constraint method. In this method, no additional parameters are added to the overall
system matrix as it is the case in the penalty method or in the Lagrange multipliers
method. When the contacting body touches the contacted body, a normal reaction force
is developed perpendicular to the contacted surface element.

3.4. Results
By comparing the test results and the numerical simulations we can show that our FE
model based on the smeared crack approach provided us with numerical results that are
in agreement with the tests results. In particular, the peak loads and the displacements at
the peak comply with the experimental results. Nevertheless the simulations show a
stiffer behavior during the initial stage. This deviation may be caused by the following
reasons: plasticity of concrete has been neglected, a few mechanical properties of the
concrete have not been accurately identified by testing (e.g. fracture energy and tensile
strength).
It must be pointed out that after the peak the experimental load decreases strongly and
numerical convergence problems logically appear.

643
Figure 3 : edge failure (CSTB test At 100 mm from the edge) and simulation

40

35

30

25
Load (KN)

20 Experiment
Simulation
15

10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Displacement (mm)

Figure 4 : Load displacement curves : edge failure experimental and simulation


results

644
Figure 5 : corner failure for α = 0° (CSTB Figure 6 : corner failure for α = 0°
test at 190 mm from the edge) (simulation)

90
80
70
60 Sim ulation
Load (KN)

Experiment
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Displacem ent (m m )

Figure 7 : Load displacement curves : corner failure for α =0 experimental and


simulation results

4. Conclusion
The three-dimensional modeling of an anchorage to concrete using metal anchor bolts
has been achieved. The numerical problems encountered in the past are now solved: i.e.
inter-penetration between contacted bodies, control of the convergence algorithms and a
too stiff behavior due to the non-respect of the gaps between bolt and fixture.

645
A modified smeared crack model used for concrete behavior law has recently been
implemented by a “CSTB-MARC” team on the MSC-MARC software. Now taking
account of the fracture energy, the model ensures the objectivity of the results with
regards to the mesh. Despite the fact that shear stress components have been reduced to
zero in the local axis of the cracks in order to avoid stress locking, the formulation
provides us with simulation results that fit the experimental results quite nicely.
These encouraging results have invited us to develop another formulation, which can
correctly take account of the shear behavior in the local axis of the cracks. Implemented
in the general 3D finite element code SYMPHONIE-CSTB, this model is likely to
simulate the cracking behavior of concrete and predict the rupture with sufficient
reliability. The future developments will aim at improving the model and enlarging its
field of application, in particular by adding plasticity. It will be the topic of another
paper in the next future.
This research work was carried out by the CSTB in cooperation with HILTI
Aktiengesellschraft, Business Unit Anchor Division (Schaan, Principality of
Liechtenstein).

5. References
1. El Dalati, R.; Mounajed, G.; Mesureur, B. et Berthaud, Y. Three dimensional
modeling of anchorage subjected to shear loads, American Concrete Institute, 2000
2. Cook, R.; Collins, D.; Klingner, E. and Polyzois. Load-eflection Behavior of cast in
place and retrofit concrete anchors. ACI Str. J. Title 89-S60, 1992, pp. 639-649.
3. Eligehausen, R. and Lehr, B. Shear capacity of anchors placed in non cracked
concrete with large edge distance. Univ. Stuttgart, Rep. N° 10/20 E-93/11E, 1993.
4. ETAG. « Guideline for European Technical Approval of Anchors (metal anchors)
for use in concrete ». Annex C: Design Methods for anchorage, 1997.
5. Hawkins, N. « Strength in shear and tension of cast-in-place anchor bolts ».
Anchorage to concrete, American Concrete Institute, SP 103, 1987, pp. 233-257.
6. Klinger, R.E & Mendonca, J.A. « Shear capacity of short anchor bolts and welded
studs : A literature review ». ACI Journal. No. 79-34, 1982, pp 339-347.
7. Ohlsson , U. & Olofsson, T. «Mixed-mode fracture and anchor bolts in concrete.
Analysis with inner softening bands». J. of Eng. Mech., 1997, pp. 1027- 1033.
8. Ozbolt, J.& Eligehausen, R. « Bending of anchors, Final Element Studies »,
Universität Stuttgart, Report n° 10/23-94/6, IWB, 1994.
9. Fuchs, W. « Tragvelhaten von Befestigungen unter Querlast in ungerissenem beton
(Bearing behavior of fastenings under shear loads in uncracked concrete) »,
dissertation Universität Stuttgart, IWB-Mitteilugen 1990/2, 1990.
10. Rots, J.G. and Blaauwendraad, J. « Crack models for concrete: Discrete or
smeared ? Fixed, multi-directional or rotating? ». Heron, Vol. 34, No.1, 1989.

646
INFLUENCE OF BENDING COMPRESSIVE STRESSES ON
THE CONCRETE CONE CAPACITY
Markus Bruckner, Rolf Eligehausen, Joško Ožbolt
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In the present paper the influence of bending compressive stresses on the concrete cone
failure load of anchor bolts used to anchor a column into a foundation was investigated.
The compressive stresses spread from the column base conically toward the foundation
base and can influence the concrete cone failure capacity. To investigate the problem a
column-foundation connection was designed and analyzed with the nonlinear FE
program MASA. The distance between the resulting compressive force and the anchor
tensile force was varied. Usually anchorages are designed using the CC-method
(Concrete Capacity Method) neglecting this positive influence of compressive stresses
on the concrete cone failure load. In order to take this effect into account the numerical
results are compared with the CC-method and a multiplication coefficient is suggested.
The multiplication coefficient is dependent on the relation between the internal lever arm
of the column and the effective embedment depth.

1. Introduction

In the last years the use of headed reinforcement increased strongly. The reason for this
could be found in the extensive use of prefabricated elements and the advantages which
are achieved by the application of this reinforcing alternative. The main advantages of
the anchorage of tension forces by headed reinforcement are the shorter load
introduction length, the very small slip values and the simple reinforcement
arrangement. In the case of a column-foundation connection a precast concrete column
or a steel column is often attached to a cast-in-place concrete foundation using headed
reinforcement. For a connection at least four headed bars are used. Depending on the
structural system the column is stressed by a normal force, a shear force and a bending
moment. The bending moment is initiated over a couple of forces (tension and
compression) into the foundation. The tension force is transferred by the anchors which
are located in the tensile zone. The compressive force is transmitted directly into the

647
foundation and spreads conically toward the foundation base (Figure 1). Depending on
the distance between the resultant compressive force and the pulled anchors the head of
the pulled anchors could be situated inside the compressed volume. This has an influence
on the concrete cone failure load. In this paper this influence is studied on the basis of a
numeric parameter study. The calculations are performed with the finite element (FE)
code MASA3 and the results are compared with the CC-method [1] since this method
represents the common calculation model for the design of anchorages with headed bars.

a) b)
Figure 1: a) Anchorage exposed to normal and shear forces as well as a bending
moment, b) top view of the base plate

Anchorages with headed bars loaded by a tensile force and a bending moment have been
already examined by Zhao [2]. He conducted tests far away from edges of a concrete
member under an eccentric tensile load. These tests are taken here as a basis to develop
an equation for a multiplication coefficient ψmoment. This coefficient represents the
relation between the measured concrete cone failure load of an eccentrically loaded
anchorage group to the concrete cone failure load calculated according to the CC-method
neglecting the influence of compression stresses under the base plate due to the applied
moment. The equations proposed by Zhao [2] are presented in equation (1) and equation
(2). The test setup is shown in Figure 2a. In Figure 2b the multiplication coefficient is
plotted as a function of the quotient of the anchor spacing to the anchorage depth
according to equation (1) and equation (2). The experimental values are shown as well.

648
hef s
ψ moment = for 0 ≤ ≤ 0.5 (1)
s 2 ⋅ hef
s
ψ moment = 1 for 0,5 < ≤ 1.0 (2)
2 ⋅ hef

a) b)
Figure 2: a) Test set-up, b) experimental values and curve according to equation(1) and
(2), after Zhao [2]

Note that the multiplication factor ψmoment depends on the internal lever arm z (distance
between tension anchors to centroid of compression force). For reason of simplicity this
distance has been assumed as the distance between the headed anchors by Zhao [2].

The results of Zhao [2] are compared with the results of the FE calculations and the use
of the proposed equations to design column-foundation connections is discussed.

2. Finite element analysis

2.1. Geometrical and material properties


The numerical studies are performed for a steel column attached to a reinforced concrete
foundation using headed reinforcement. As concrete strength the concrete cylinder
strength fc,cyl = 25 MPa has been assumed. The dimensions of the foundation are
l / h / b = 10m / 1m / 1.8 m (length / height / width). The height of the column is
hS = 10 m. The steel column is assumed as HEB profile. The headed bars have a
diameter of ds = 40 mm and are manufactured from ripped reinforcing bar with
fy = 500 MPa. The head was formed by a hydraulic press. The anchorage depth is taken
as hef = 500 mm. The bending reinforcement of the foundation is designed according to
[3] and is inserted in an upper and a lower position into the foundation. The
reinforcement (fy = 500 MPa) is not staggered along the length of the foundation. A

649
transverse reinforcement along the foundation width is used. Linear elastic behavior was
assumed for the anchors and the bending reinforcement to exclude steel failure. The base
plate (cf. Figure 1) that is used to attach the column to the foundation and the distance
between the pulled and compressed anchors are varied. These dimensions are given in
Table 1.

Table 1: Dimension of the base plate and spacing of the anchors


No. Base plate Spacing of anchor
[mm x mm] [mm]
1 300 x 300 200
2 400 x 400 300
3 500 x 500 400
4 600 x 600 500
5 1100 x 1100 1000

The load is applied by a horizontal translation at the top of the column. Using this
cantilever arm the anchorage is loaded by a bending moment and only by a relatively
small horizontal force. No vertical (normal) force is applied because this would unload
the pulled anchor. Modeling the material of the foundation the dead weight is taken into
account.

2.2. Finite-Element-Code MASA


The used finite element code is based on the microplane model. It can be used for two
and three-dimensional analysis of quasi-brittle materials. The model allows a realistic
prediction of the material behavior in case of three-dimensional stress - strain states. The
smeared crack approach is employed. To ensure mesh independent results the crack band
approach is used.
In the microplane model the material properties are characterized separately on planes of
various orientations within the material. On these microplanes there are only a few
uniaxial stress and strain components and no tonsorial invariance requirements need to
be considered. The constitutive properties are entirely characterized by relations between
the stress and strain components on each microplane in both, normal and shear directions
(Figure 3). It is assumed that the strain components on the microplanes are projections of
the macroscopic strain tensor (cinematic constraint approach). Knowing the stress-strain
relationship of all microplane components, the macroscopic stiffness and the stress
tensor are calculated from the actual strains on the microplanes by integrating the stress
components on the microplanes over all directions. The simplicity of the model is due to
the fact that only uniaxial stress-strain relationships are required for each microplane
component and the macroscopic response is obtained automatically by integration over
the microplanes. More details related to the used model can be found in Ožbolt et al. [4].

650
z
z
ε
n εN
εT
εM
y
εK
y
x
Mikroeben
Microplane

x
a) b)
Figure 3: Concept of the microplane model: a) unit volume sphere –
integration point and b) strain components

2.3. Spatial discretization


The modeling of the system and the
evaluation of the results are performed
by the commercial program FEMAP
[5]. The concrete and the soil are mod-
eled with 8-node elements (hexaeder)
and the headed reinforcement as well
as the reinforcement of the foundation
are modeled with 2-node elements.
The material representing the soil is
assumed in the way that only compres-
sive forces and no tension forces could
be transmitted. Two crossing bars Figure 4: Simplification headed bars in the
simulate the head of the anchors (Fig. numerical analysis
4). Wagner [6] has shown the applica-
bility of this simplification in detail. The material behavior of the headed bars, the
bending reinforcement and the column is assumed to be linear elastic.

2.4. Results of the analysis


All numerically examined configurations failed by a shear failure of the concrete. A
diagonal crack from the anchor head towards the compression zone of the column base
and an almost horizontal crack in the opposite direction are formed. In Figure 5a and 5b
the maximum principal strains ε11 of the system with an anchor spacing s = 300 mm at
maximum load and behind post peak load are shown. In Figure 6 the anchor tensile force
at the top of the column base is plotted against the deflection of the anchor at this point.
It shows that the maximum anchor load decreases with increasing anchor spacing. This
can be explained with the conical distribution of the bending compressive force. In the
area of the pulled anchor it comes to an overlay of tensile and compressive stresses. With

651
increasing distance of the pulled and compressed anchors and thus with increasing
internal lever arm, the influence of the bending compressive stresses on the concrete
failure load decreases (cf. Figure 1).

a) b)
Figure 5: Maximum principal strains ε11 of the system with an anchor spacing
s = 300 mm. a) maximum load, b) post peak

652
Figure 6: Anchor force versus anchor-displacement of column-foundation connections
with different anchor spacing

In order to get more information about the behavior of the investigated structure, the
maximum anchor tensile force is plotted over the quotient between anchor distance
(approximation for the internal lever arm) and effective anchorage depth (Figure 7a).
Apart from the results of the FE analysis the concrete cone failure load calculated
according to the CC-method is shown as well. The concrete cone failure load is
calculated using equation (3) and (4).

Ac , N
N u ,c = 0
⋅ψ s , N ⋅ N u0,c (3)
A c, N
with
Ac , N = ( s + 3hef ) ⋅ 3hef c ≤ 1.5hef (3a)
Ac , N = b ⋅ 3hef c > 1.5hef (3b)
A 0
c, N = (3 ⋅ hef ) 2
(3c)

ψ s , N = 0.7 + 0.3 ⋅ c 1.5h ≤ 1.0 (3d)


ef

N u0,c = 15.5 ⋅ f cc0.5 ⋅ hef1.5 (3e)

653
c = 0.5 ⋅ (b − s )
b = const. = 1800 mm
hef = 500 mm
f cc = 28.5 MPa

N u ,anchor = 0.5 ⋅ N u ,c (4)

Because of the constant width of the foundation (b = 1800 mm) there is an edge effect
0
for s ≥ 300 mm (s/hef ≥ 0.6). Therefore for s ≥ 300 mm the quotient Ac , N Ac , N = const.
= 1.2 and the calculated failure load decreases because of a decreasing factor ψs,N.

Fig. 7a shows that the peak anchor forces obtained by the numerical analysis are higher
then the failure loads calculated according to the CC-method. However, for c = 2 hef the
difference is very small (~ 1%).

In the CC-method the radius of the failure cone on the concrete surface is assumed as
r = 1.5 hef. Furthermore the resultant of the compression force is assumed to coincide
with the location of the anchors at the compressed side of the base plate. Thus for an
anchor spacing s/hef ≥1.5 (s ≥ 750 mm) no significant influence of the compression force
between baseplate and foundation on the concrete cone failure load should be expected.

For s/hef ≥ 1.5 the numerically obtained peak anchor tension forces are about 1,6%
higher than the values calculated according to the CC-method. For increasing anchor
spacing the numerically obtained peak anchor loads decrease in the same proportion as
the values according to the CC-method (Nu (FE-analysis)/Nu (CC-method) = 0.99 for
s = 2 hef). This reduction of the failure load is caused by the edge effect.

For spacings s < 1.5 hef the failure loads obtained numerically increase. This is partly
caused by the reduced edge effect and partly by the influence of the compression force.
Therefore in Fig. 7b the failure loads obtained numerically and calculated according to
the CC-method are normalized to the values valid for s = 1.5 hef. For s < 1.5 hef the
related failure loads obtained numerically are much higher than the values calculated
according to the CC-method. This is due to the restraint of the formation of the concrete
cone due to compression stresses between base plate and concrete surface.

In Fig. 8 the relation between numerically obtained relative failure loads (see Fig. 7b)
and relative values calculated according to the CC-method are plotted as a function of
the ratio s/hef. They can be approximated by equation (5) which was found by non-linear
curve fitting. This equation is also plotted in Fig. 8.

654
a) b)
Figure 7: a) Ultimate anchor forces acc. to FE-analysis and CC-method versus s/hef,
b) relative ultimate anchor forces versus s/hef

1
ψ moment = (5)
h 
1 − 0.15 ⋅  ef 
 s 
Equation (5) describes the influence of the compression stresses between base plate and
concrete surface on the concrete cone capacity of fastenings.

In Fig. 8 the test results by Zhao [2] and his proposal for ψmoment (Equ. (1) and (2)) are
plotted as well. It can be seen, that according to Zhao and the present investigation the
values ψmoment increase with decreasing ratios s/hef. However the increase predicted by
Zhao is larger than found in the present investigation. This might be due to several
reasons e.g. different conditions in the test by Zhao (tensile forces and bending moment
compared to mainly bending in the present study, smaller anchorage depth). This is
currently investigated further.

In the present evaluation it is assumed that the magnitude of the internal lever arm
coincides with the spacing of the anchors. This might be incorrect, especially if higher

655
normal compression forces act on the fastening. Therefore the ratio s/hef should be
replaced by z/hef (z = internal lever arm) in equation (5).

Equation (5) yields values ψmoment = ∞ for s/hef = 0.15. Fastenings with such small
spacing loaded by a bending moment have never been investigated. Therefore it is
proposed to use Equ. (6) in design which gives almost the same results as Equ. (5) for
z/hef ≥ 0.4 but conservative values for ψmoment for ratios z/hef < 0.4. It is proposed to add
the factor ψmoment according to Equ. (6) into Equ. (3) to take account of the beneficial
effect of a bending moment acting on the base plate of a fastening on the concrete cone
failure load.

Equ. (6) (as Equ. (1)) is valid for fastenings with one anchor row at the tensioned side of
the base plate and for a moment acting in one direction. In practice fastenings with more
than one row of tensioned anchors as well as bending moments in two directions might
occur. Further studies are needed to check whether Equ. (6) is valid also for these cases.

Figure 8: Multiplication coefficient ψmoment as a function of s/hef

z z
ψ moment = 2 − for 0 ≤ <1 (6a)
hef hef
z
ψ moment = 1 for ≥1 (6b)
hef
z = internal lever arm (distance between resultant of compression and tensile force)

656
3. Conclusions

In the present paper the results of a numerical analysis on column-foundation


connections with headed reinforcement are presented. It is demonstrated that there is a
relatively strong influence of the bending compressive force on the concrete cone failure
load. Until now this influence is not taken into account in the CC-method, which is
commonly used for the design of anchorages. In order to account for this influence a
multiplication coefficient ψmoment acc. to Equ. (6) is introduced which may be used with
the CC-method.
The presented studies were conducted with a constant anchorage depth hef = 500mm and
a variable anchor spacing. To investigate the problem in more detail, further studies with
variable anchorage depths need to be carried out. Furthermore fastenings with more than
one row of tensioned anchors loaded by normal forces and bending moments in one ore
two directions should be studied.

4. References

1. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R., Breen, J.E., ‘Concrete Capacity Design (CC)
Approach for Fastenings to Concrete’ ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 6,
1995, 794-802,
2. Zhao, G., ‘Tragverhalten von randfernen Kopfbolzenverankerungen bei
Betonausbruch’, IWB Mitteilungen, Universität Stuttgart, 1994
3. DIN 1045-1, ‘Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und Spannbeton’, Teil 1:
Bemessung und Konstruktion, Februar 1997
4. Ožbolt, J., Li, Y.-J., Kožar, I., ‘Microplane model for concrete with relaxed
kinematic constraint’, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38, 2001,
2683-2711
5. FEMAP, ‘High Performance CAE For The Desktop’, Structural Dynamic
Research Corp., Exton, 2000
6. Wagner, Gunter, ‘Numerische Untersuchungen an Rahmenecken mit Kopfbolzen-
Bewehrung’, Diplomarbeit am Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität
Stuttgart, Februar 2000

657
ATENA - AN ADVANCED TOOL FOR ENGINEERING
ANALYSIS OF CONNECTIONS
Vladimír Červenka, Jan Červenka and Radomír Pukl
Červenka Consulting, Czech Republic

Abstract
Advanced constitutive models implemented in the finite element system ATENA serve
as rational tool to explain behavior of connection between steel and concrete. Three
nonlinear material models available in ATENA are described: crack band model based
on fracture energy, fracture-plastic model with non-associated plasticity and microplane
material model. Nonlinear simulation using these advanced constitutive models can be
efficiently used to support and extend experimental investigations and to predict
behavior of structures and structural details.

1. Introduction

Structural response of anchoring elements can be simulated by a nonlinear finite element


analysis. This is a general approach based on principles of mechanics and should provide
an objective tool for all types of geometry, material properties and loading. Such
simulation is recently used to supplement experimental investigations, where it
significantly increases the value of experimental data. The goal of this approach is to
provide a tool more general than simple design formulas, which are usually valid for
very limited range of parameters. The scope of application for complex nonlinear
analysis is aimed to the development of new technical solutions of anchors, special
loading types and investigation of failure cases. It is not aimed at the normal design,
which can be accomplished by simple design formulas.

An algorithm for nonlinear analysis is based on three basic parts: Finite element
technique, constitutive model and non-linear solution methods, which should compose a
balanced approximation. Nevertheless, the constitutive models decide about the material
behavior, and therefore they are treated here more extensively, while the finite elements
and non-linear solution are mentioned only briefly. With reference to renewed research
authorities in the field of concrete mechanics and materials, such as RILEM, FIB,

658
FRAMCOS, it is recognized, that the most important effects to be included is the
constitutive model of concrete are tensile fracturing and compressive confinement.

Several constitutive models covering these effects are implemented in the computer code
ATENA, which is a finite element package designed for computer simulation of concrete
structures. The graphical user interface in ATENA provides an efficient and powerful
environment for solving of many anchoring problems. ATENA enables a virtual testing
of structures using computers, which is a present trend in research and development
world. Several practical examples of ATENA utilization for simulation of connections
between steel and concrete are presented in paper [1].

2. Material models

Program system ATENA offers variety of material models for different materials and
purposes [2]. For metals von Mises plasticity can be used, for rock and soil Drucker-
Prager plasticity with associated or non-associated flow rule is available, for steel
reinforcement multilinear uniaxial model with cycling is determined. Nonlinear and
contact springs for supports can be used, for interfaces Mohr-Coulomb friction is
available. In some cases the use of isotropic elastic material law can be advantageous.
Nevertheless, the most important material models in ATENA are the material models for
concrete. These advanced models take into account all the important aspects of the real
material behavior in tension and compression. Three nonlinear material models for
concrete are available in ATENA: crack band model based on fracture energy, fracture-
plastic model with non-associated plasticity, and microplane material model. These three
material models are described bellow in more detail.

2.1 Crack band model


The basic constitutive model in ATENA is based on the smeared crack concept and the
damage approach. Concrete without cracks is considered as isotropic and concrete with
cracks as orthotropic. The material axes of cracked concrete, the axes of orthotropy, can
be defined by two models: rotated or fixed cracks (refer [2] or [3] for details). In the
rotated crack model the crack direction always coincides with the principal strain
direction. In the fixed crack model the crack direction and the material axes are defined
by the principal stress direction at the onset of cracking. In further analysis this direction
is fixed and cannot change. An important difference in the above approaches is in the
shear model on the crack plane. In the fixed crack model, a strain field rotation generates
shear stress on the crack plane. Consequently the model of shear becomes important. In
the case of the rotated cracks a shear on the crack plane never appears and the shear
model need not to be employed.

The stress response is based on a damage concept and it is defined by means of the
equivalent uniaxial stress-strain law. This law describes the development of distinct
material variables and their damage and covers the complete material behavior under
monotonically increasing load including pre- and post-peak softening in compression

659
and tension. In the case of a uniaxial stress state it reflects the experimentally observed
uniaxial behavior. In a biaxial state, the equivalent strain is calculated using the current
secant inelastic elastic modulus. In the uncracked concrete the material is considered as
isotropic and one elastic secant modulus is defined corresponding to the lowest
compressive stress. In the cracked concrete, which is orthotropic, two moduli are
defined, the first one for compressive and the second one for tensile material axes
respectively. The effect of a stress state on the compressive and tensile strengths is
considered by modifying the peak stresses using the failure functions based on Kupfer’s
experiments.

Fig.1 Stress - crack opening law according to Hordijk [7]

The method described above is applicable for the pre-peak response and unfortunately,
cannot be simply extended in the post-peak range. It is known from material research,
that the post-peak softening is structure-dependent and a simple strain-based model is
not objective, but dependent on the finite element mesh due to strain localization in
softening. In order to avoid this problem, localization limiters should be employed.
Therefore, fracture mechanics approach (see [4]) based on the crack band model [5] and
fracture energy is implemented. Such model substantially reduces the mesh sensitivity.
In this model discrete cracks and compression failure zones, which represent
discontinuities, are modeled in the finite element displacement fields by means of strain
localization within bands. The model is based on an assumption of equal energy
dissipation. Unified approach is used for tensile and compressive softening. The
behavior of a crack in concrete is idealized by the model of a cohesive fictitious crack
according to Hillerborg [6] where the crack opening law is governed by three
parameters: tensile strength, fracture energy, and the shape of the softening curve. The
exponential shape experimentally derived by Hordijk [7] is used for descending branch,
Fig.1.

660
The unloading path of the stress-strain law is considered to the origin. This is certainly
an approximation, which can be accepted in the case of a monotonic loading history.
However, even if the load is increased monotonically, in certain material points the
stresses are unloading. For example, in the process of crack formation distributed cracks
are initiated in large material volumes, and then some cracks open while many other
cracks close. Consequently, the unloading law is essential for the strain localization. The
unloading material modulus describes a material damage due to mechanical loading. In
this respect, the model described above is similar to the damage theory.

Shear of the cracked concrete is important for the fixed crack model, as already
mentioned in the context of crack models. Many researchers found, for example Rots
[8], that a simple reduction of shear resistance by a constant factor (a constant shear
retention factor), does not work well. Therefore, the presented model utilizes the variable
shear retention factor, in which the crack shear resistance is decreasing with the crack
opening.

Decrease of compressive strength in the cracked concrete may be important in some


types of failure. It was introduced by Collins [9] and is now being used in design. This
model describes a reduction of concrete compressive due to lateral cracking. In the
present model the exponential formula based on the Collin’s experiments is employed.
The amount of the maximal reduction is given as a parameter in order to enable a control
of this effect.

The constitutive model described above can be used for plane stress analysis of normal,
as well as high strength and steel fiber reinforced concrete. For these concrete types,
special modifications of the descending branch are available.

2.2 Fracture-plastic model


This three-dimensional constitutive material model for concrete combines plasticity with
fracture. For detailed description of the model please refer [2], [10], [11]. The fracture is
modeled by an orthotropic smeared crack model based on Rankine tensile criterion.
Hardening-softening plasticity model based on Menétrey-Willam [12] three-parameter
failure surface is used to model concrete crushing. The presented model differs from the
other published formulations by ability to handle also physical changes like for instance
crack closure, and it is not restricted to any particular shape of hardening/softening laws.
Also within the proposed approach it is possible to formulate the two models (i.e. plastic
and fracture) entirely separately, and their combination can be provided in a different
algorithm or model.

The method of strain decomposition as it was introduced by de Borst [13] is used to


combine fracture and plasticity models together. Both models are developed within the
framework of return mapping algorithm. This approach guarantees the solution for all
magnitudes of strain increment. From an algorithmic point of view the problem is then
transformed into finding an optimal return point on the failure surface. The return-

661
mapping algorithm for the plastic model is based on predictor-corrector approach as is
shown in Fig.2 (for details see ref. [11]).

Fig.2 Plastic predictor-corrector algorithm according to [11]

The combined algorithm must determine the separation of strains into plastic and
fracturing components, while it must preserve the stress equivalence in both models. The
algorithm is based on a recursive iterative scheme. It can be shown that such a recursive
algorithm cannot reach convergence in certain cases such as, for instance, softening and
dilating materials. For this reason the recursive algorithm is extended by a variation of
the relaxation method to stabilize convergence.

2.3 Microplane model


The basic idea of the microplane model is to abandon constitutive modeling in terms of
tensors and their invariants and formulate the stress-strain relation in terms of stress and
strain vectors on planes of various orientations in the material, now generally called the
microplanes. This idea arose in G.I. Taylor’s pioneering study from 1938 of hardening
plasticity of polycrystalline metals. Proposing the first version of the microplane model,
Bažant [14], in order to model strain-softening, extended or modified Taylor’s model in
several ways (in detail see [15]), of which the main one was the kinematic constraint
between the strain tensor and the microplane strain vectors. Since 1984, there have been
numerous improvements and variations of the microplane approach. A detailed overview
of the history of the microplane model is included in [15]. Sketch of the fundamental
concepts of the microplane model is shown in Fig.3.

662
Fig.3 Fundamental concepts of the microplane model

In the microplane model, the constitutive equations are formulated on a plane called
microplane with an arbitrary orientation characterized by its unit normal ni .
The kinematic constraint means that the normal strain ε N and shear strains εM ,εL on
the microplane are calculated as the projections of the macroscopic strain tensor:

ε N = ni n j ε ij ,

εM =
1
2
( mi n j + m j ni ) ε ij ,
ε L = ( li n j + l j ni ) ε ij
1
2

where mi and li are chosen orthogonal vectors lying in the microplane and defining the
shear strain components.
The constitutive relations for the microplane strains and stresses can be generally stated
as:

663
σ N (t ) = Fτt=0 [ε N (τ ), ε M (τ ), ε L (τ ) ]
σ M (t ) = Gτt =0 [ε N (τ ), ε M (τ ), ε L (τ ) ]
σ L (t ) = Hτt =0 [ε N (τ ), ε M (τ ), ε L (τ ) ]

where F , G and H are functionals of the history of the microplane strains in time t.
For a detailed derivation of these functionals please refer [16]. The macroscopic stress
tensor is obtained by the principle of virtual work that is formulated for a unit
hemisphere Ω. After the integration, the following expression for the macroscopic
stress tensor is recovered:

Nm
3
σ ij = ∫
2π Ω
sij d Ω ≈ 6 ∑
µ =1
wi sij( µ )

σM σL
sij = σ N ni n j +
2
(m ni j + m j ni ) +
2
(l n
i j + l j ni )

where the integral is approximated by an optimal Gaussian integration formula for a


spherical surface.

The microplane model M4 derived above is implemented into the finite element package
ATENA. For details about the implementation and applications refer [17].

3. Software package ATENA

ATENA is a commercial finite element software package for nonlinear simulation of


concrete and reinforced concrete structures. Based on advanced material models,
described above, it can be used for realistic simulation of structural response and
behavior.

ATENA works under MS Windows operating system and its code is written in MS
Visual C++. It heavily uses MFC and ATL libraries, thereby ensuring high productivity
in code development and high compatibility with other third-party PC-based software.
The code has object-oriented architecture. It is created in hierarchical manner and each
SW layer has its own DLL library (or libraries). Code and associated data are arranged
in objects together, (in i.e. C++ classes). ATENA system consists of several dynamically
linked libraries (DLLs) and a few control programs (Fig.4). It is believed that
architecture and build up of ATENA system supersedes usual finite element packages.

664
C++ libraries MFC ATL

CCUtils_MFC

CCRealMatrix

CCFEModel AtenaDLL

CCStructures
CCElements_2D_Basic AtenaGUI
CCStructuresCreep
CCElements_2D_Extended AtenaWin
CCStructuresTransport
AtenaConsole
PollutTransport
CCElements_3D_Extended FEMAP

Modeln CCMaterials_Basic CCMaterial_Microplane4

CCMaterials_Extended_A

Fig.4 Layered structure of ATENA system

ATENA offers user-friendly graphical interface, which enables an efficient solving of


engineering problems including anchoring technology and reinforcing of concrete [1].
Native ATENA GUI is available for 2D and rotationally symmetrical problems. It
supports the user during pre- and postprocessing, and enables real-time graphical tracing
and control during the analysis. ATENA preprocessing includes an automatic meshing
procedure, which generates Q10, isoparametric quadrilateral and triangular elements.
Reinforcement in ATENA can be treated as smeared reinforcement, reinforcing bars or
prestressing cables. The discrete reinforcement is independent on the finite element
mesh. The graphical postprocessing can show cracks in concrete, with their thickness,
shear and residual normal stresses. User-defined crack filter is available for obtaining of
realistic crack patterns. Other important values (strains, stresses, deflections, forces,
reactions etc.) can be represented graphically as rendered areas, isoareas, and isolines, in
form of vector or tensor arrow fields. All values can be also obtained in well-arranged
numerical form. The interactive solution control window (Fig.5) enables graphical as
well as numerical monitoring of the actual task, and supports user interventions during
the analysis (user interrupt, restart). For the 3D pre- and postprocessing, professional
third party software FEMAP in combination with alphanumerical ATENA Console
window is employed.

ATENA enables to load the structure with various actions: body forces, nodal or linear
forces, supports, prescribed deformations, temperature, shrinkage, pre-stressing. These
loading cases are combined into load steps, which are solved utilizing advanced solution
methods: Newton-Raphson, modified Newton-Raphson or arc-length. Secant, tangential

665
or elastic material stiffness can be employed in particular models. Line-search method
with optional parameters accelerates the convergence of solution, which is controlled by
residua-based and energy-based criteria. This is only a concise survey of ATENA
features. All of the described features support the user by engineering analysis of
connections between steel and concrete and computer simulation of its behavior.

Fig.5 ATENA real-time graphical window

4. Conclusions

The nonlinear finite element package ATENA is based on advanced constitutive models.
Crack band approach employed for tensile and compressive softening avoids the finite
element mesh sensitivity of solution.

ATENA is able to predict and explain behavior of steel reinforcement as well as steel
anchors in concrete structures in a consistent way. It can be effectively used to support
and extend experimental investigations for innovative solutions in the field of
connections between steel and concrete.

Acknowledgment
This paper is related to the research topics supported by grant of Grant Agency of Czech
Republic (GAČR) No. 103/99/0755. The financial support is greatly appreciated.

References

1. Pukl, R., Červenka, J. and Červenka, V., 'Simulating a response of connections',


Proceedings of the RILEM Symposium on Connections between Steel and
Concrete, Stuttgart, Germany, September 2001.

666
2. 'ATENA Program Documentation, Part 1 - Theory', Červenka Consulting, Prague,
Czech Republic, 2000.
3. Červenka, V., 'Simulating a Response', Concrete Engineering International, 4 (4)
(2000) 45-49.
4. Margoldová, J., Červenka, V. and Pukl, R., 'Applied Brittle Analysis', Concrete
Engineering International, 2 (8) (1998) 65-69.
5. Bažant, Z.P. and Oh, B.H., 'Crack band theory for fracture of concrete', Materials
and Structures, 16 (1983) 155-177.
6. Hillerborg, A., Modéer, M. and Peterson, P.E., 'Analysis of crack formation and
crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements',
Cement Concrete Res., 6, (1976), 773-782.
7. Hordijk, D.A., 'Local Approach to Fatigue of Concrete', Ph.D. Thesis, Delft
University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1991.
8. Rots, J.G., 'Computational Modelling of Concrete Fracture', Ph.D. Thesis, Delft
University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1988.
9. Vecchio, F.J. and Collins, M.P., 'Modified Compression-Field Theory for
Reinforced Concrete Beams Subjected to Shear', ACI Journal, 83 (2) (1986) 219-
231.
10. Červenka, J., Červenka, V. and Eligehausen, R., 'Fracture-plastic material model for
concrete, application to analysis of powder actuated anchors', Proceedings of the
International Conference on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures FraMCoS 3,
Gifu, Japan, 1998 (Aedificatio Publishers, Freiburg, Germany, 1998) 1107-1116.
11. Červenka, J. and Červenka, V., 'Three Dimensional Combined Fracture-Plastic
Material Model for Concrete', Proceedings of the 5th U.S. National Congress on
Computational Mechanics, Boulder, Colorado, USA, August 1999.
12. Menétrey, P. and Willam, K.J., 'Triaxial failure criterion for concrete and its
generalization', ACI Structural Journal, 92 (3) (1995) 311-318.
13. de Borst, R., 'Non-linear analysis of frictional materials', Ph.D. Thesis, Delft
University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1986.
14. Bažant, Z.P. , 'Microplane model for strain controlled inelastic behavior', Chapter 3,
Proceedings of Conference Mechanics of Engineering Materials, University of
Arizona, Tucson, January 1984, Eds. C.S. Desai and R.H. Gallagher (J. Willey,
London, 1984), 45-59.
15. Bažant, Z.P., Caner, F.C., Carol, I., Adley, M.D., and Akers, S.A., 'Microplane
model M4 for concrete: I. Formulation with work-conjugate deviatoric stress', J. of
Engrg. Mechanics ASCE 126 (9) (2000), 944—953.
16. Caner, F.C. and Bažant, Z.P., 'Microplane model M4 for concrete: II. Algorithm and
calibration', J. of Engrg. Mechanics ASCE 126 (9) (2000), 954—961.
17. Bažant, Z.P., Červenka, J. and Wierer, M., 'Equivalent Localization Element for
Crack Band Model and as Alternative to Elements with Embedded Discontinuities',
Proceedings of the International Conference on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete
Structures FraMCoS 4, Paris, France, 2001.

667
A COMPUTATIONAL MODEL
FOR DOUBLE-HEAD STUDS
André Haufe* and Ekkehard Ramm**
*Department of Civil Engineering, University of Calgary, Canada
**Institute for Structural Mechanics, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
The advantages of so called double-head studs over conventional stirrups in concrete,
namely the employment of the full yield strength immediately behind the anchorage, more
efficient confinement near the surface and ease of placement are the main reasons for the
increasing number of their applications ([2], [3] & [5]). Their development has been
mainly driven through experimental investigations. This paper will outline the approach
that will be followed in a numerical study that is currently in progress at the University
of Calgary.
The research is mainly focused on the local anchoring effects and the confinement pro-
vided by the double-head studs. A three dimensional finite element analysis is chosen as
a suitable means to model the studs and the surrounding concrete. Classical plasticity
theory will be used to take into account the different material properties of concrete and
steel in a phenomenological sense. A common remedy to mesh sensitive results in finite
element analysis occurring from the use of softening material formulations will be shortly
addressed.

1. Motivation

The mechanical behavior of double-head studs as possible replacement for traditional


cross ties in concrete columns has been investigated in various test series at the University
of Calgary. Here straight studs with mechanical anchors at each end have been used. It
should be noted that the area of the head has been chosen equal to 10 times that of the stem
to ensure that yielding of the stem can be developed without appreciable slip of the anchor.
In particular, it has been found that with this setup the double-head studs remarkably in-
crease the ductility and the energy dissipation of the structure, which is of course a prefera-
ble design criteria in areas with a high seismic activity (see Fig. 1). While the experimental
investigations clearly show the aforementioned superior behavior over classical cross ties
[17], efforts towards numerical simulation of the local and global load carrying capacity
2500
2000 cross-ties only

load [kN]
vertical bars and
1500 cross-ties
1000 double-head studs
only
500 vertical bars and
double--head studs
0
0 5 10 15 20
strains [10 --3]
placement failure mode
experimental results
of studs of column
Fig. 1: Double-head studs as replacement of cross ties in
concrete columns (Dilger & Ghali [3])
of double-head studs are in progress. In this paper the principle constitutive models that
are applied will be presented.
For the numerical analysis, a three dimensional finite element discretization of the double-
head studs and the surrounding concrete is made. Linear kinematics are assumed in the
first step. The materially nonlinear analysis is performed within a standard incremental-it-
erative Newton-Raphson framework. All presented constitutive models are based on rate-
independent classical plasticity using Backward-Euler integration schemes.

2. Constitutive Model for Concrete

2.1 General overview

For the concrete constitutive model a multi-surface plasticity formulation is applied which
was originally proposed by Menrath [11] for two dimensional structures and later expand-
ed to the fully three dimensional stress space by Haufe [7]. The proposed model uses an
associated plastic potential (normality rule) for all regular yield surfaces
g i = F i ∀ i ∈ [1, 2, 4] and associated evolution laws that are based on the work harden-
ing principle. Furthermore it features only very few material parameters that can be easily
identified using EC2 [4] or CEB-FIP [1] recommendations. The failure surface depends
on the two stress invariants I 1 and J 2 = 12 |s|2 and is built up of two regular Drucker-Prager
cones, F 1 and F 2. Furthermore it is limited in the equitriaxial compressive stress space by
a spherical cap F 4 (see Fig. 2). A third inverted cone F 3 is introduced at the apex solely
to assure a proper stress projection within the local integration algorithm. Their defining
equations read as follows:

F i(s, I1, Á i) = |s| + α i I 1 − 23 f (Á ) ,


i i i = 1, 2 (1)

F 3(s, I1, Á 1) = |s| + α 3 I 1 − 23 f (Á )


3 1 (2)
F 4(s, I1, Á 2) = |s| + 19 (I − I 1 1,m (Á 2))2 − R(Á2) (3)

The regular Drucker-Prager cones in eqn. (1) depend on the evolution laws for tension
σ 1(Á1) and compression σ 2(Á2) which are introduced via f i(Ái) = β i σ i(Ái). Here the β i as
well as the α i in eqn. (1) define the yield surface in the invariant stress space according
to:

α1 = 23 γγ ff
1

1
cm

cm
− f ctm
+ f ctm
and β1 =
2 γ1 f cm
γ1 f cm + f ctm (4)

α2 = 23 2γγ −−11


2

2
and β2 =
γ2
2 γ2 − 1 (5)

The inverted cone (see eqn. (2)) also depends on the tensional evolution law thus its param-
eters α 3 and f 3 are obtained from geometrical considerations at the apex:

α3 = − 1 and f3 = − 1 2 f1 (6)
3α 1 3α 1
The spherical cap is C 1-continuously fixed to the second Drucker-Prager cone F 2. There-
fore two additional functions I 1,m(Á2) and R(Á 2), defining the midpoint of the sphere on the
hydrostatic axis and its radius respectively, need to be defined. They allow for kinematic
hardening or softening according to F 2:

I 1,m(Á2) = − 54 α 2 + 2 γ2σ 2(Á2) and R(Á 2) = 23 + 6α 2


2 γ2 σ 2(Á 2) (7)

The evolution laws σ 1(Á1) and σ 2(Á2) itself are functions of the equivalent plastic strains
in tension Á 1 and compression Á 2 and are defined as follows (see Fig. 3):
Á
σ(Á 1) = f ctm exp − À 1
tu
  with À tu =
Gt
l crs f ctm
(8)

2J 2 = |s|
F2
F3 F4
R(Á 2)
F1

2 1 I (Á ) I1
− γ 2σ 2(Á2) <0
3 3 1,m 2 3
Fig. 2: Multisurface-model in the I1 -J2 -invariant stress space
 Á
e
Á
f cm γ3 + 2(1 − γ 3) À2 − (1 − γ 3) À2
e
 
2

for Á 2 < À e
σ 2(Á2) = (9)
f cm  Á −À

1 − À 2 − Àe
cu e

2

for À e ≤ Á2 < À cu

f cm 3 Gc
where À e = γ4 and À cu = + Àe (10)
Ec 2 h f cm
Here G t and f ctm represent the fracture energy and the strength of concrete in tension, re-
spectively, while G c and f cm are the corresponding values for compression. h represents
a characteristic finite element length and l crs the effective average crack spacing. Further-
more four additional model parameters γ 1 ÷ γ 4 are needed to define the shape of the yield
surface and of the evolution law in compression. It has been shown by Menrath [11] that
γ 1 = 3.0 and γ 2 = 1.2 satisfactorily represent the failure envelope of Kupfer and
Gerstle [10]. Furthermore for standard grade concrete the parameters for the evolution law
in compression are chosen to γ 3 = 0.3 and γ 4 = 1.33 (Haufe et al. [6]).

2.2 Algorithmic aspects

In the following the algorithmic aspects for the concrete model, excluding the spherical
cap F 4 due its complexity, are summarized. A more detailed discussion can be found in
the references [11] and [12].

The mean stress state of cracked reinforced concrete σ rc is decomposed into two parts, the
stress contribution of the concrete, σ c and of the reinforcing steel, σ s:
σ rc = σ c + σ s (11)
The contribution of the so-called tension stiffening effect, which occasionally is
introduced as a third stress component, is negligible in this local study. Furthermore the
stress tensor σ s is only used to model smeared meshtype reinforcement. The strain tensor
is additively decomposed into a reversible elastic part Á e and a nonreversible inelastic part
Á ie ≡ Á pl, where the latter is understood as plastic in a phenomenological sense. Making

a) σ1 b) σ2
Gt f cm Gc
f ctm
l crs h

γ 3 fcm

Á1 Á2
À tu À e(γ4) À cu
Fig. 3: Evolution laws in tension (a) and compression (b)
use of Koiter’s rule [9] for multisurface plasticity models within the incremental iterative
procedure, the plastic strain increment for loadstep n+1, ∆Á pln+1, can be calculated by
3
∆Á pln+1 = c i ∆λ i,n+1
∂g i
∂σ with g i = Fi (12)
i=1

where only active yield surfaces (c i = 1) contribute to the plastic strains. For inactive
yield surfaces the algorithmic parameter is set to zero (c i = 0). The increment of the plas-
tic multipliers is restricted to ∆λ i ≥ 0. The loading and unloading conditions are deter-
mined by the well known Kuhn-Tucker-conditions.

An ’elastic predictor-plastic corrector’-stress integration algorithm is applied. Within the


Backward-Euler-scheme the consistency condition is fulfilled at the end of the time step.
For the presented two-invariant model this approach leads to the radial-return-algorithm:
Á pln+1 = Á pln + ∆Á pln+1 (13)
q n+1 = q n + ∆qn+1 = q n + ∆λ n+1 (14)

σ * n+1 = C : (Á n+1 − Á pln) (15)

σ n+1 = C : (Á n+1 − Á pln+1) = σ * n+1 − C : ∆Á pln+1 = σ * n+1 − ∆σ pln+1 (16)


Here C is the elastic constitutive tensor; σ * n+1 represents the elastic trial stress and q n+1
is the vector of the internal variables q i = Ái based on the work hardening hypothesis. By
consistent linearization of this incremental equations we finally arrive at
3
dσ n+1 = H : (dÁ n+1 − c i dλ i,n+1
∂g i
∂σ
) = H : (dÁ n+1 − Udλ ) (17)
i=1

where the modified elastic tangent H reads

 
−1
3
H= C −1
+  c i dλi,n+1
∂g i
∂σ  ∂σ
(18)
i=1

and the symbols of a generalized formulation composed of dλ = [dλ 1, dλ2, dλ 3] and

U = c1  ∂g 1
,c
∂g 2
∂σ 2 ∂σ 3 ∂σ
,c
∂g 1
 (19)

have been introduced. Making use of the consistency condition in a modified form

∂F∂σ : dσ + ∂F∂q : dq + (1 − c ) dλ


3
dF i = c i i i
i i where dq =  c dλi i (20)
i=1

and introducing the components of the hardening matrix


∂F j
E ij = − c i c j q − (1 − c i) δ ij , (21)
i

we can write
T

V = c 
∂F ∂F 1 ∂F 2 3
dλ = E V dσ
−1 T
with 1,c ,c 2 3 . (22)
∂σ ∂σ ∂σ

By inserting eqn. (22a) into eqn. (17) and using the Sherman-Morrison-formula to avoid
time consuming numerical inversion of the resulting 6x6-matrix we arrive finally at


dσ n+1 = H − HU E + V THU  V TH
−1
 : dÁ n+1 . (23)
n+1

Here the expression in square brackets is known as algorithmic elastoplastic tangent oper-
ator C ep,alg
n+1
. It should be noted that the obvious difference in the third column between
eqn. (19) and eqn. (22b) is due to a nonassociated choice of the plastic potential for the
third yield function F 3. Here the plastic potential has been chosen to g 3 = g 1 . This results
eventually in a nonsymmetric tangent operator for stress paths that activate the inverted
cone.

When applying softening materials, eventually the underlaying differential equation


changes its type from elliptic to hyperbolic which is known as loss of ellipticity. This leads
to results that are strongly dependent on the finite element mesh size and also on the mesh
orientation. All appropriate strains due to softening will eventually localize into one ele-
ment band. A popular yet easy remedy is to adjust the softening modulus to a characteristic
length of the actual size of the finite element mesh h.Thus the maximum amount of frac-
ture energy that can be released in a single integration point becomes a function of the
discretization. For plain concrete the effective average crack spacing (see eqn. (8b)) is
equal to the characteristic length l crs = h, while for reinforced concrete it is chosen to be
l crs = min [l c, h]. Here l c is the average crack spacing as defined for example in [1].
Introducing this concept to the aforementioned concrete model leads to the dependency
of À tu and À cu on the characteristic length h (compare eqns. (8b) and (10b)).

However, it should be noted that while the dependency on the mesh size is significantly
lower, it has been found that the results are still influenced by the mesh orientation. In de-
fining the characteristic length h, which not only depends on the mesh size but also on the
Ansatz-functions of the finite elements used, the proposals by Rots [14] are followed.

3. Constitutive Model for Studs And Reinforcement

The von Mises-criteria (i. e. classical associated J2 --plasticity) with nonlinear kinematic
and isotropic work-hardening has been chosen as yield surface for the steel studs. The
evolution laws can either be of Ramberg-Osgood-type or given as multilinear data. Further
constructive mesh-type reinforcement can be modeled as smeared additional stiffness in
the reinforced direction (see eqn. (11)). Since this approach is straightforward the reader
is directed to the comprehensive textbooks of Hofstetter & Mang [8] or Simo & Hughes
[16].
4. Concrete-Stud Interface
4.1 Overview of Element Formulation
The stress transfer between the profiled stems of the studs and the surrounding concrete
has a significant influence on the degree of confinement provided by the studs. Therefore
2D interface elements not having a physical thickness and incorporating a nonlinear
constitutive relationship will be used to model the bond slip, see Schellekens [15]. For the
three dimensional simulation they consist of 8 nodes for 8 node brick elements or of 16
nodes for 20 node brick elements (see Fig. 4). This leads to the following element nodal
displacement vector v for the 8 node interface element
T
v = v 1r , , v 8r , v 1s , , v 8s , v 1t , , v 8t  (24)
which is related to the continuous displacement field u via
T
u = u ur, ulr, u us, uls, u ut, u lt = H N v . (25)
Here the superscripts u and l indicate the upper or lower surface of the element and r, s,
t the directions of the tangential coordinate system with t being the normal direction. The
matrix H N contains the interpolation functions in the submatrices N1x4 in diagonal form
H N = diag[N, N, N, N, N, N ] which can be rearranged using the constant operator matrix


--1 +1 0 0 0 0


L = 0 0 --1 +1 0 0  (26)

0 0 0 0 --1 +1 
to obtain the relative displacement vector ∆u = L u = L H N v = Bv. The relative dis-
placement-nodal displacement matrix B and the elastic constitutive tensor read

 --N +N 0 0 0 0  dr 0 0

B = 0 0 --N +N 0 0  and C el
= 0 dr 0  (27)
 0 0 0 0 --N +N 0 0 d t

respectively. Thus the traction vector t can be calculated according to t = C el ∆u . Assem-


bly of the stiffness matrix K =  BCB TdS, derived from the principle of virtual work, is

a) b) §
upper ¦
surface £
¢
v 6t
¤ ¥
v 6s
¡
v 6r ©
lower surface

Fig. 4: Exemplary setup of a 16 node (a) and 8 node interface element (b)
a) b)
tr F Coul
c dc = k
c
Ô(À) dÀ
c(À) tt
c0
(< 0)
ts
À

Fig. 5: a) Yield surface of Coulomb’s friction law b) Bilinear cohesion law


straightforward. However since the physical behavior of the bond requires a very stiff re-
sponse in the elastic regime that is subsequently followed by yielding once the yield or
“slip” condition is satisfied. These extremely high stiffness contributions to the global
stiffness matrix may cause traction oscillations in the adjacent elements. It has been shown
by Menrath [11] and Schellekens [15] that they can be significantly lowered by alternative
integration techniques e. g. Newton-Cotes- or Lobatto-schemes. For linear or quadratic in-
terpolation functions both schemes are identical.

4.2 Constitutive Model


To account for the nonlinear behavior of the interface, which is characterized by bond and
subsequent slip, a nonlinear constitutive formulation based on Coulomb’s friction law (see
Fig. 5a) is used. The yield surface depends on the tractions t = [t r, t s, t t], the cohesion c
as function of the internal variable À and the friction angle Ô:
F Coul = t 2r + t 2s + t t tan Ô − c(À) = 0 (28)

 ∆u. plr
t
2 . pl 2
where À= + ∆us  dτ (29)
t=0
In cases where the normality rule is not applicable the friction angle Ô is replaced by the
dilatancy angle ψ in the plastic potential g Coul thus resulting in a nonassociated formula-
tion. The incremental traction-relative displacement relation can be derived according to
[16] as

 Θ  ∂g Coul
∂t
 ∂FCoul
∂t

T
 Θ
dt n+1 =Θ Coul − T  d(∆u) n+1 . (30)
  ∂FCoul
∂t
 Θ ∂g Coul
∂t
 + k
n+1

Again the expression within the brackets is known as algorithmic elastoplastic tangent op-
erator C ep,alg
Coul
where the modified elastic tangent is defined as

 
−1

   
T
el −1 ∂ 2g Coul ∆λ ∂F Coul ∂g Coul ∂À ∂ 2g Coul
Θ Coul = C + ∆λ + . (31)
∂t 2 k ∂À ∂t ∂∆u pl ∂t 2
n+1
k represents the usual hardening/softening parameter. In the general case of friction and
cohesion hardening/softening, thus Ô = Ô(À) and c = c(À), it reads
∂F t n ∂ tan Ô ∂c
k = − Coul = − + = − k Ô + kc . (32)
∂À ∂À ∂À
However in the present study the friction angle is not dependent on the evolution parameter
thus eqn. (32) simplifies to k = k c = ∂c∕∂À (see Fig. 5b).

5. Summary

The approach towards a detailed three dimensional numerical simulation of double-head


studs has been described. For the concrete model presented the main objective has been
to use a simple yet robust and effective formulation which uses only a small number of
readily available material parameters. It is based on classical plasticity and uses the frac-
ture energy to define softening/hardening characteristics within the framework of a multi-
surface yield criterion. The number of material parameters (fc , fctm , Gt , Gc ) has on purpose
been kept as low as possible to simplify their identification according to EC2-standard or
CEB-FIP rules.

A formulation for continuous interface elements has been presented. In order to circum-
vent oscillation problems within the traction-profiles a Newton-Cotes- or Lobatto-integra-
tion scheme is employed. The constitutive relationship of the presented interface elements
are based on Coulomb’s friction law which can be treated as a standard plasticity problem.
Linear hardening or softening characteristics are so far taken into account for the evolution
laws. The steel of the studs is modeled by standard von Mises-plasticity with multi-linear
or nonlinear Ramberg-Osgood type of hardening.

The constitutive models as well as the interface element are being implemented into the
finite element program system CARAT of the Institute of Structural Mechanics, Univer-
sity of Stuttgart [13]. Since the research project started in March 2001 no numerical exam-
ples are available at the time of writing this paper. However the proposed approach will
be followed and preliminary numerical results will be presented at the conference.

6. Acknowledgement

The financial support for this research project by the German Academic Exchange Service
(DAAD) is greatly appreciated. Furthermore the first author likes to express his deepest
gratitude to Dr. Ghali for providing advice and resources at the Department of Civil Engi-
neering at the University of Calgary.

7. References

1. CEB-FIP -- Model Code 1990, Bulletin d’Information CEB, 1990.


2. Birkle, G., Dilger, W. H., Ghali, A., Schäfer, K. (2001), ’Doppelkopfstäbe in Konso-
len’, Beton- und Stahlbetonbau, Vol. 96, No. 2, pp. 82-89.
3. Dilger, W. H. and Ghali, A. (1997), ’Double-Head Studs as Ties in Concrete’, Con-
crete International, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp. 59-66.
4. Eurocode 2 (1992), ’Planung von Stahlbeton- und Spannbetontragwerken’, DIN V
18932 (10.91), DIN ENV 1992-1-1 (06.92).
5. Ghali, A. and Dilger, W. H. (1998), ’Anchoring with Double-Head Studs’, Concrete
International, Vol. 20, No. 11, pp. 21-24.
6. Haufe, A., Menrath, H. and Ramm, E. (2000), ’Numerical Simulation of High
Strength Steel--High Strength Concrete Composite Structures’, In: Conference Pro-
ceedings of the 6th ASCCS Conference on Steel and Concrete Composite Structures
2000, Eds.: Y. Xiao and S. A. Mahin, Los Angeles, CA, USA, March 22-24, 2000.
7. Haufe, A. (2001), ’Dreidimensionale Simulation bewehrter Flächentragwerke aus
Beton mit der Plastizitätstheorie’, Ph.D.-Dissertation , Report Nr. 35, Institute for
Structural Mechanics, University of Stuttgart.
8. Hofstetter, G. and Mang, H.A. (1995): ’Computational Mechanics of Reinforced
Concrete Structures’, Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig/Wiesbaden.
9. Koiter, W. T. (1953), ’Stress-strain relations, uniqueness and variational theorems
for elastic-plastic materials with a singular yield surface’, Quart. of Appl. Mech.,
Vol. 11, pp. 350-354.
10. Kupfer, H. B. and Gerstle, K. H. (1973), ’Behavior of Concrete Under Biaxial
Stress’, Journ. Eng. Mech. Div., ASCE, EM4, pp. 853-866.
11. Menrath, H. (1999), ’Numerische Simulation des nichtlinearen Tragverhaltens von
Stahlverbundträgern’, Ph.D.-Dissertation , Report Nr. 29, Institute for Structural
Mechanics, University of Stuttgart.
12. Menrath, H., Haufe, A. and Ramm, E. (1998), ’A Model for Composite Steel-Con-
crete Structures’, Proceedings of the EURO-C 1998 Conference on Computational
Modelling of Concrete Structures, Eds.: De Borst, R., Bicanic, N., Mang, H. A.,
Meschke, G.; Badgastein/Austria, A. A. Balkema Publishers, Rotterdam, Vol-
ume 1, pp. 33-42.
13. Programmsystem CARAT (2000), ’CARAT: Eingabebeschreibung und Dokumenta-
tion’, Institute for Structural Mechanics, University of Stuttgart.
14. Rots, J. G. (1988), ’Computational Modeling of Concrete Fracture’, Ph. D.-Dis-
sertation, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
15. Schellekens, J.C.J. (1990), ’Interface Elements in Finite Element Analysis’, Ph.D.-
Dissertation, Report Nr. 25-2-90-5-17, TU-Delft, The Netherlands.
16. Simo, J. C. and Hughes, T. J. R. (1998), ’Computational Inelasticity’, Springer-Ver-
lag New York, Inc.
17. Youakim, S. A. and Ghali, A. (2001), ’Seismic Behavior of Concrete Columns with
Double-Head Studs as Cross Ties’, Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of
CSCE, Victoria/Canada.
BEHAVIOR AND DESIGN OF FASTENINGS WITH
HEADED ANCHORS AT THE EDGE UNDER ARBITRARY
LOADING DIRECTION
Jan Hofmann, Joško Ožbolt, Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In the present paper the theoretical aspects and the application of the non-linear finite
element program MASA for analysis of anchorages placed at an edge of a concrete block
are discussed. After an introduction the structure of the finite element (FE) code is
briefly described. The results of the simulations are shown and compared with
experimental data. They confirm that the FE code is able to simulate realistically the
behaviour of anchorages.

1. Introduction

The failure load of anchorages with headed studs may be calculated according to the
CC-Method by Fuchs, Eligehausen, Breen (1995). In order to understand the behaviour
of headed studs very close to an edge under tension and shear loading in more detail and
possibly to improve the CC – method, a numerical investigation was carried out with the
non-linear FE code MASA. It is based on the microplane model. The program is able to
analyze the three-dimensional nonlinear behaviour of concrete.
In the present paper it is shown that the program MASA is able to predict realistically
the behaviour of fastenings with headed anchors close to an edge.

2. Finite-Element-Ccode MASA

2.1. General
The used finite element code is based on the microplane model. It can be used for the
two and the three-dimensional analysis of quasi brittle materials. The model allows a
realistic prediction of the material behavior in case of three-dimensional stress - strain
states. The smeared crack approach is employed. To ensure a mesh independent crack
development a so-called "localization limiter " is used. This is realized by the crack band

678
approach or by a generalized nonlocal integral method. For the analyses discussed in the
present paper, the improved crack band approach was used. The material model is
described in detail in Ožbolt et al. (2001)
The concrete is discreted by 8-node brick elements. The reinforcing bars are modelled
with bar elements or smeared within the concrete elements. Beside the standard finite
elements special contact elements are available. They allow a simulation of the contact
between concrete and headed stud. The analysis is incremental. For simple handling of
the program as well as for the pre and post processing the commercial program FEMAP
(1997) is used.

2.2. Constitutive law – Microplane model


In the microplane model the material properties are characterized separately on planes of
various orientations within the material. On these microplanes there are only a few
uniaxial stress and strain components and no tonsorial invariance requirements need to
be considered. The constitutive properties are entirely characterized by relations between
the stress and strain components on each microplane in both, normal and shear directions
(Fig. 1). It is assumed that the strain components on the microplanes are projections of
the macroscopic strain tensor (kinematic constraint approach). Knowing the stress-strain
relationship of all microplane components, the macroscopic stiffness and the stress
tensor are calculated from the actual strains on the microplanes by integrating the stress
components on the microplanes over all directions. The simplicity of the model is due to
the fact that only uniaxial stress-strain relationships are required for each microplane
component and the macroscopic response is obtained automatically by integration over
the microplanes. More details related to the used model can be found in Ožbolt et al.
(2001).

z
z
ε
n εN
εT
εM
y
εK
y
x
Mikroeben
Microplane

a) b)
x

Figure 1. Concept of the microplane model: a) unit volume sphere – integration point and b)
strain components.

679
3. Comparison between experimental and numerical results in case of
blow out failure

To verify the suitability of the finite element program MASA for the numerical
simulation of headed studs placed close to the edge of a concrete block a numerical
study was carried out and the results are compared with experimental results.

3.1. Geometry and discretization


The geometry of the modelled anchorage structure is shown in Figure 2a. A concrete
slab with a width of b = c + 400 mm (c = concrete cover), a length of 800 mm and a
height of 380 mm is analysed. The material properties are adapted to the properties
known from the experiments and are summarized in Table 1.
Figure 2 also shows the finite element mesh used in the analysis. The existing symmetry
plane was used to reduce the analysis time. The mesh was refined within the area of the
headed stud. The modelled test specimen is restrained in vertical direction at a distance
of 85 mm from the anchor (Fig. 2b). The numerical analysis considers the same
boundary conditions as in the experiment (Furche, Eligehausen 1991).
The discretization of the concrete slab was per-formed by eight - node solid elements.
The microplane model was used. Linear elastic material behavior was assumed for steel
elements.

400 mm 400 mm
400 mm

restraint load
85 mm

400 mm
stud
380 mm

c
head
Headed stud d = 25 mm

a) b)

Figure 2. Dimensions of the FE – model.

680
Between the steel elements of the headed stud and the concrete elements contact
elements were placed. These elements have a thickness of 0.5 mm. They where modelled
that only compressive stresses between concrete and anchor could be taken up.
The load was applied by displacement control at the nodes of the headed stud. The
displacement was in-creased by 0.05 mm in each step.

concret geometry steel

Gf fctm EBeton βw hef a γ c EStahl fy

[Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [mm] [mm] [°] [mm] [Mpa] [Mpa]

0,075 2,5 35000 35 400 7,5 90 60 20000 2000

Table 1 : Material properties assumed in the analysis.

3.2. Numerical results and comparison with test results


In both the experimental and the numerical investigations a characteristic blow out
failure could be observed. The damage zone obtained in the analysis is shown in
Figure 3 as maximum principal strains. The dark areas are the areas of strain localization
(damage). The comparison shows a good agreement between the failure mode observed
in the experiments and the analysis.

c = 60 mm

load N c = 80 mm

c = 60 mm

c = 40 mm

c = 40 mm c = 80 mm

Figure 3. Post peak crack pattern, hef = 400 mm (embedment depth), c = 60 mm (edge distance),
a = 7,5 mm (head shoulder). Experiment made by Furche, Eligehausen, 1991.

The displacements and the anchor forces were taken at the head of the stud. At
maximum load the displacement measured in the experiment is slightly larger than in the

681
simulation. This is due to the complex conditions when local damage at the head of the
stud takes place. Figure 4 shows a comparison between the ultimate loads measured in
the experiments and obtained from the analysis. In all cases failure was caused by
blow-out. The numerical results show a good agreement with the experimental results
load N [N]

load N [N]

edge distance [mm] displacement [mm]

Figure 4. Influence of edge distance on failure load. Experimental results taken from
Furche, Eligehausen, 1991.
displacement of concrete surface s [mm]

numerical simulation N

test

force at head [N]

Figure 5. Displacement of concrete surface close to the head perpendicular to the surface. Test
results are taken from Furche, Eligehausen, 1991.
In Figure 5 the lateral deformation of the concrete surface close to the head of the stud is
plotted as a function of applied load. The numerical result agrees sufficiently well with

682
the experimental results. The lateral displacements increase fast after the maximum load
is reached, indicating the failure of the concrete close to the head.

4. Comparison between experimental and numerical results in case of edge


failure

4.1. Geometry and discretization


The geometry of the modeled structure is shown in Figure 6. A concrete slab with a
height of 420 mm, a length of 740 mm and a width of c +270 mm (c = concrete cover)
was modeled by eight node solid elements. Between the steel elements of the headed
stud and the concrete elements a contact layer with a thickness of 0.5 mm was placed.

The material properties were adapted to the material properties obtained from the
experimental investigations of Wüstholz (1999). The head stud was loaded in shear
towards the edge. The supports were selected (Fig. 6) as in the experiment with a
distance of four times the edge distance. In the analysis the available symmetry was
used.

370 mm
c + 270 mm
Restraint
Restraint
270 mm

Shear load
c

Headed stud
Restraint
2·c

Figure 6. Geometry and finite element mesh of the test specimen loaded in shear towards the edge.

683
4.2. Numerical simulations of shear load with not restraint anchors
A typical shear failure mode occurred in the numerical analysis as well as in the
experiment. It is shown in Figures 7 and 8. The crack pattern obtained in the analysis
shows a good agreement with the crack pattern observed in the test. The influence of the
edge distance on the failure load is shown in Figure 9. For edge distances of 60 mm and
100 mm a good agreement of the calculated maximum loads with the experimental data
was reached. For an edge distance of 160 mm a local failure in front of the anchor
occurred in the FE – simulation, which was not observed in the tests.

load Q load Q

failure coin

failure coin
load Q
test
test analysis

Figure 7. Post peak crack pattern (hef = 130 mm, c = 100 mm, shear load).

Failure coin

Local failure in
front of the anchor

Figure 8. Influence of the edge distance on the failure load.

684
4.3. Influence of a restraint moment to the failure load
In the numerical simulations of the shear tests different load displacement behaviours
occurred. This is probably caused by different boundary conditions. In the finite element
model the real restraining at the loading point must be simplified in the following some
calculations are analysed to show the influence of an end moment at the loading point.

Test specimen

In the experimental tests the anchor bolts were loaded towards the edge. Therefore a
steel plate is fixed with a washer and a screw nut. Normally there is a clearance between
anchor shaft and the hole of the steel plate. The anchor is able to rotate at small
displacements because of this clearance (Figure 9b) when increasing the displacement
the anchor is not able to rotate anymore and an end moment develops at the fixing point
(Fig. 9c). So the clearance between the shaft and the hole of the base plate has probably
an influence on the failure load. With a large clearance a bending force will be activated
at higher loads than with a small clearance. The bending moment probably will influence
the failure load.

anchor
s = 0 mm
s s

steel plate

a) b) c)
loading point

Figure 9. Fixed end moments caused by steel plate a) non deformed b) small deformation c) large
deformation

Finite Element Simulation specimen

The experimental test specimens are simplified for the finite element simulation. There
are two possibilities to model the loaded point. The first possibility is to restrain the
nodes at the anchor shaft (Fig 11a). In this way an end moment occurs while increasing
the displacement of the anchor. This is a realistic boundary condition for anchors with
large deformations at ultimate load or for headed anchors welded to a steel plate. The
second possibility is not to restrain the nodes of the anchor shaft (Fig 11b). So no end
moment occurs at the loading point. With the first possibility the ultimate load is
probably overestimated but seems to be more realistic because normally the clearance
between the anchor shaft and the hole of the base plate is very small and the
displacements of shear-loaded anchors at ultimate load are large.

685
To show the influence of a restraint of the anchor on the behaviour under shear loading
anchors with a diameter of 16 mm and an embedment depth of 130 mm are calculated.

c = 70 mm c = 160 mm

Figure 10. Calculated shear load – shear displacement curves and tension force in the anchor
(d = 16 mm, hef = 130 mm an) with an edge distance of a) c = 70 mm b) c =160 mm

Fastening with an edge distance of 70 mm and 160 mm are analysed. Figure 10a and 10b
shows the calculated shear load shear displacement curves for a restraint anchor bolt and
a not restraint anchor bolt. The ultimate load is about 1.6 to 2.0 times higher if the nodes
are fixed at the loading point. Not only a bending moment at the loading point occurs but
also always a compression force is inducted. For an edge distance of 70 mm the
calculated ultimate load is about 20 kN (without restraining) and about 38 kN (with
restraining). The average test load was about 26 kN. For an edge distance of 160 mm the
calculated failure load is about 45 kN (without restraining) and about 75 kN (with
restraining). The average test load in case of concrete coin failure is 74 kN (63 kN for
concrete with fcc = 30 MPa). With an edge distance of 160 mm and a restraint at the
fixing point the results of the finite element calculation are in good agreement with the
test results. For an edge distance of 70 mm the test results are between the calculated
results for a restraint and a not restraint anchor. This means that the effect of restraint is
smaller for an edge distance of 70 mm at ultimate load.

The anchorage with an edge distance of 70 mm failed at low displacements due to


concrete cone failure. Therefore probably only a small bending moment developed. The
anchorage with an edge distance of 160 mm failed at large displacements by a local
failure in front of the anchor first and followed by concrete cone failure at high
displacements. Due to the displacements a larger moment could develop.

686
The differences of shear load reaction between anchors restraint and not restraint at the
fixing point are calculated and simplified in Fig. 11a/b. The shear load reaction at the
same displacement is about 1.7 higher if the anchor is restraint at the fixing point. This
factor could be observed in the finite element calculations. For an edge distance of
70 mm in the test a small bending moment occurred at failure. In this case the
displacement was small and nearly no pressure could be introduced in front of the anchor
(Fig. 11c). For an edge distance of 160 mm the displacement at failure was large and
there was the possibility to introduce a pressure force in front of the anchor (Fig. 11d).

s s

s s

a) Model restraint b) not restraint c) small edge distance d) large edge distance

Figure 11. Model to describe the influence of bending and failure mechanism on the calculated
ultimate loads

4.4. Comparison with test results


The comparison of the results of the numerical simulations with test data is shown in
Fig. 12a. While the comparison is acceptable for a small edge distance, the calculated
failure load is much to small if the anchor was not restraint in the simulation. This is due
to local concrete cracking in front of the anchor wich could be observed in the
simulation (Fib 12b). If the anchor is not restraint at the fixing point concrete edge
failure occurred (Fig 12c) and the calculated Failure load agrees reasonably well with the
test results (Fig 12a).

687
b) c)

Q Q

Without restraint moment With restraint moment


a) at the loading point at the loading point
• local failure in front of • edge failure
the anchor

Figure 12. Comparison between a simulation with/without restraint moment at the loading point
and test data

5. Conclusion

The comparison between the results of the numerical simulations and experimental tests
shows that the FE – code MASA is able to simulate the failure mechanism of headed
stud anchorages placed close to edge under tensile loading as well as under shear
loading. Under shear loading the calculations show that there is an influence on the
anchor behavior caused by different boundary conditions of the fixing point. If the
anchor is not restraint for large edge distances the ultimate load is to low and the failure
load is caused by local failure in front of the anchor. Restraining the anchor the ultimate
load increases and failure is caused by edge failure and splitting in front of the anchor.
For this case the ultimate load is slightly overestimated. For small edge distances the
results of the calculations with no restraint are close to the results of the experimental
test.

6. Literature

1. Ožbolt, J.; Li, Y.-J. and Kožar, I. (2001). Microplane model for concrete with
relaxed kinematic constraint. International Journal of Solids and Structures.
2. Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen, R and Breen, J.E. (1995). Concrete Capacity Design
(CCD) Approach for Fastenings to Concrete. ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No.
6, S794-802
3. Furche J.; Eligehausen, R. (1991). Lateral Blouout Failure of headed Studs Near
the Free Edge. In:Senkiw,G.A. ; Lancelot, H.B., SP-130 Design an Behavior .
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, page 235 – 252.
4. Wüstholz, T (1999). Tragverhalten von randnahen Befestigungsmitteln unter
Querlasten bei der Versagensart Betonausbruch. Diploma theses at the Institute of
construction material, University Stuttgart

688
EVALUATION OF A BRIDGE DECK STRENGTHENING
WITH SHEAR CONNECTORS: FINITE ELEMENT
ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Antônio J. Leite
Salvador, Brazil

Abstract
A 10 m wide and 120 m long bridge, with three simple supported 40 m spans, showed
excessive vibrations under traffic. The structural system consisted of four unshored,
2.00 m depth, steel main girders, 2.50m center spaced, supporting a reinforced concrete
slab 0.26m thick.

To assess its dynamic performance under vehicle loads a finite element analysis and
local strain measurements were carried out. It was concluded that the girders would be
overstressed for the required design load combination and the deck flexibility should be
properly strengthened to overcome the excessive vibrations.

In order to obtain a composite action to increase the girder inertia, ∅38 mm holes were
drilled from the top of the concrete slab, through its thickness, just outside both edges of
the top main girders’ flanges. Shear connectors welded to squared plates were positioned
within the slab holes from underneath and fixed to the concrete slab with an epoxy
compound before the plates were welded to the flanges. To increase the natural
frequency a complementary reinforced slab with average thickness of 150 mm was
added to the top flange.

The finite element analysis of the strengthened deck under the load combinations and
the strain measurements on the shear connectors and on critical sections of the
composite girder under loading tests showed a satisfactory behavior.

1. Introduction

A 10 m wide and 120 m long bridge, with three simple supported 40 m spans (see photo
in Fig. 01), showed excessive vibrations under traffic. To assess its dynamic

689
performance under vehicle loads a finite element analysis and local strain measurements
were carried out. It was concluded that the girders would be overstressed under the
required design load combination and the deck flexibility should be properly
strengthened to overcome the excessive vibrations.

In order to obtain a composite action to increase the inertia of the girders, shear
connectors welded to squared plates were positioned from underneath, within slab holes
previously drilled, and fixed to the concrete slab with an epoxy compound. The plates
were butt-welded on the top flanges from below the bridge deck.

To increase the natural frequency a complementary reinforced slab with average


thickness of 150 mm was added to the top flange, as the foundations and columns
allowed the extra dead load. Cover plates designed to control the stress levels on the
lower flange of the strengthened composite girders made them compatible with the
required load combination.

The finite element analysis of the strengthened deck under the load combinations and the
strain measurements on the shear connectors and on the composite girder critical
sections during the tests showed a satisfactory behavior. The maximum girder bottom
flange strain measured was 48% proportionally to the earlier data; if we consider the
four girder actual strain data summation it reaches 62%. The measured natural frequency
after the pavement completion was 2.4 Hz and it is now fairly comfortable standing on
the bridge deck during a loaded truck passage or under normal traffic.

Fig.1 - General view of the bridge over Buranhém River.


2. Finite element analysis

The structural system consisted of four unshored, 2.00m depth, steel main girders
(weathering steel; fyk= 345 MPa), 2.50 m spaced, supporting a reinforced 260 mm thick

690
(fck= 20 MPa) overhanging 1.25 m the edge girders. The 210 mm structural slab was cast
over a set of stay-in-place 50 mm thick precast concrete deck panels. The bridge was
designed for two lanes of traffic and two extra lanes for disabled vehicles.

The bridge girder-slab system was modeled using a finite elements program (1) where the
loads and member properties were considered as the followings:
a. Load Case 1 – girders and the 260 mm slab dead load resisted by the girders alone;
b. Load Case 2 and 2A – railing dead load (LC2) and a 250 kN dump truck load
(LC2A) resisted by the girder-slab composite sections;
c. Load Case 3 – complementary slab dead load (150 mm average thickness) resisted
by the girder-slab composite sections strengthen with bottom flange cover plates;
d. Load Cases 4, 5, 6 and 6A – pavement dead load of 2.0 kN/m2 (LC4); highway live
lane load of 5.0 kN/m2 (LC5); 450 kN standard truck live load (LC6) and; a 323 kN
dump truck load (LC6A) resisted by the final strengthen girder-slab composite
sections.

A schematic of the girder and transformed mid-span cross sections for each Load Case is
shown in Fig. 02 with geometric properties and maximum bottom flange strain.

Fig.2 – Load Cases’ girder geometric properties, moment and mid-span cross section
bottom flange strain from finite element solution.
The finite element analysis LC1 showed a tensile stress on the bottom flange of
128 MPa (37% of the fyk) due to dead load on the girder’s bottom flange mid-span
critical section and a natural frequency of 0.6 Hz. Further investigations showed that the
girders would be overstressed under the required design load combination and it was

691
concluded the deck flexibility should be properly strengthened to overcome the
excessive vibrations.

The strengthening sequence started with the installation of shear connectors between the
existing slab and the girders as in the LC2 section the next step was the cover plate
welding on the bottom flanges as in the LC3 section and at last the cast of the
complementary slab, ranged from 70 mm at the column supports to 190 mm at mid-span,
added to the previous 210 mm structural slab.

3. Shear connectors

How to install shear connectors after slab casting? That was the main question. The
answer may show an easy way to strengthen other existing structures, taking advantage
of the composite action. The difficulties of drilling holes from the top of the slab and to
weld the connectors on the main girders top flange can be overcome if holes are drilled
just outside both edges of the flanges. Shear connectors welded to squared plates
positioned within the slab holes from underneath can be fixed to the slab with an epoxy
compound after the plates are butt-welded to the flanges. The connection detail used is
showed on Fig. 3; for each one of the 12 main girders (4 girders times 3 spans) 2 times
66 connectors spaced 0.60 m were installed on the top flange sides (2).

Fig.3 – Shear connection detail; connectors placed outside the girder flange.

692
4. Strain measurements

The field test data were recorded on a portable digital data acquisition system. Strain
gages were placed on the critical sections of the main girder flanges, along the web
height, on stiffeners and on connectors. The data were recorded before and after the
strengthening of the bridge.

The mid-span section gages were placed permanently in order to monitor and to limit the
truck loads as the system is capable of triggering a camera every time the specified limit
is exceeded. The comparison of the measured behavior and the load control possibilities
will be mentioned next.

After casting the 210 mm structural slab over the stay-in-place 50 mm thick precast
concrete deck panels and after casting the railings, a test was performed with a 250 kN
dump truck load at a speed of 10 km/h over the girders G1, G2, G3 and G4
consecutively. The bottom G1 to G4 flange gages at mid-span cross section showed the
strain response presented in Fig. 4 when the truck was over G1.

Fig. 4 – Girder G1 to G4 bottom flange strain; 250 kN truck forward and backward.

The Table 1 shows the measured bottom flange girder strains when the 250 kN truck is
over each girder. Note that the summation of the 4 girders strains [εM (Total) column]
due to truck load over each girder is approximately equal, ± 5% off the average, as the
girders have the same inertia and the total flexural moment on the span has to be the
same for the same load.

The girder strains due to the finite element flexural moment for the same load are also
presented in the table for comparison. The railings inertia not considered in the model
lead to higher analytical than measured strain.

693
Table 1: (LC2A) Measured/Analytical strains (εM and εA x10-6); Load over G1 to G4.
Load εM εM εM εM εM εA εA εA εA εA
over (G1) (G2) (G3) (G4) (Total) (G1) (G2) (G3) (G4) (Total)
G1 120 80 60 25 285 185 105 45 25 360
G2 80 75 65 40 260 110 95 70 40 320
G3 40 60 80 90 270 40 75 95 110 320
G4 20 55 90 125 290 25 45 105 185 360

Another field test was performed with two 323 kN and 292 kN dump truck load after
bridge strengthen completion. Fig. 5 presents the bottom strain response at mid-span G1
and G4 cross section when the 323 kN truck was over G1/G2 traffic lane.

Fig. 5 - Girder G1 and G4 bottom flange strain; 323 kN truck.

Table 2 shows the measured strains when the truck is over each girder. The finite
element flexural moment strains under the same load are also presented in the table.
When we compare the strain average before and after bridge strengthen, see Tables 1
and 2, accounting linearly for the dump truck 250 kN and 323 kN load difference, we
obtain a 62% strain decrease or an actual/original inertia equivalent ratio equal to 1.6.

Adding the 323 kN and the 292 kN load truck bottom flange strain for comparison we
obtain 215 and 190 x10-6 respectively, an error less than 3%. The normal traffic truck
loads can be monitored accordingly with satisfactory accuracy. A research program has
been proposed to the Highway State Department to monitor this bridge in order to
control the average daily truck traffic and other parameters to obtain a relationship
between vehicle weight and fatigue life (3).

Table 2: (LC6A) Measured/Analytical strains (εM / εA x10-6); Load over G1/2 and G3/4.
Load εM εM εM εM εM εA εA εA εA εA
over (G1) (G2) (G3) (G4) (Total) (G1) (G2) (G3) (G4) (Total)
G1/G2 75 55 50 35 215 90 65 40 10 205
G3/G4 40 60 60 70 230 10 40 65 90 205

694
The measured strain at G1 mid-section bottom flange and web gages [εx10-6 = 75
(bottom flange: y = 0); 50 (web: y = 695 mm) and; 15 (web: y = 1600 mm)] established
the neutral axis at about the top flange indicating satisfactory composite action.

The squared 25 x 25 mm and 250 mm long connectors above the top flange surface
plane have 200 mm grouted inside the structural slab. Strain gages were installed on four
near support connectors at the stay-in-place 50 mm thick precast concrete deck panels
mid height. Fig. 6 presents the measured flexural strains on both connector faces due to
two consecutive 323 and 292 kN dump truck. That might not tell us much about the
quantitative ultimate shear capacity but it is a good qualitative data regarding the girder-
slab composite behavior.

Fig. 6 – Front and back side near support connector flexural strains for two consecutive
323 and 292 kN dump truck.

5. Dynamic behavior

The original bridge finite element solution showed a 0.6 Hz natural frequency. Its value
increased to 0.9 Hz for the strengthen bridge finite element solution. Unfortunately we
were not able to record dynamic data for the original bridge as the roadway was not
ready for traffic, just allowing low speed or static load test.
After completion of the bridge strengthening, strain gage data were recorded for normal
speed truck load. Fig. 7 presents the girder G1 strain data under the 323 kN truck load at

695
70 km/h speed. When we count the vibration cycles in a time interval we obtain the
bridge measured natural frequency which is 2.4 Hz.

The massive concrete railings are not modeled like structural components and they are
just considered as dead load. However as they are monolithic with the slab deck, there is
a greater increase in its overall inertia and stiffness then in its mass, leading to an
increase in the natural frequency as measured.

Fig. 7 Girder G1 bottom flange strain; 323 kN truck at 70 km/h.

6. Conclusions

Connectors can be used to strengthen existing non-composite structures. Holes can be


drilled outside the girder flange edges and shear connectors welded to squared plates
positioned within slab holes from underneath can be fixed to the slab with an epoxy
compound after the plates are butt-welded to the flanges. The strengthened bridge deck
had a measured equivalent average inertia 60% increase.

The finite element structural model analysis gives very precise results and they are used
to establish the structural component ultimate capacity. However the measured strains
reflect the real structure and in this particular case the railings and pavement mass and
inertia not included in the model, since they are only considered as dead load, lead to
lower measured strains than analytical ones.
The actual portable digital data acquisition system available made the field test data
recording an easy task. The bridge mid-span girder section gages were placed

696
permanently in order to monitor and to limit the highway truck loads. The monitoring of
all girder data in one span is essential to establish the total flexural moment. The
sampled and saved data files controlled by an on-board acquisition system can be
remotely downloaded and is capable of triggering a camera or a video recording device
every time some specified limit is exceeded.

The stress range is one of the designer’s major concern in the fatigue behavior of
structures, along with the initial flaw size and the material fracture toughness: the initial
flaw size is a parameter dependent upon fabrication procedures, workmanship, etc. and
it is quantified through the level of reliability of the nondestructive inspection method
used; the fracture toughness is established with the materials choice and; the stress range
and the number of cycles can be monitored.

The highway load control through the bridge strain monitoring will permit the recording
of a valuable amount of data and to establish very important parameters as: average
daily truck traffic, vehicle weight frequency distribution, load and strain relationship at a
particular location on the structure.

7. References

1. Computer and Structures Inc., SAP2000Plus program Version 7.1, 1999, “Three
Dimensional Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis and Design of
Structures”.
2. Leite, Antônio J., ‘Strain monitoring and strengthen design of the bridge over the
Buranhém River’, March 2000. Technical Report No. E60A/0300,
ajl@atarde.com.br.
3. Fisher, J. W., “Bridge Fatigue Guide – Design and Details, ”American Institute of
Steel Construction (AISC), New York, 1977.

697
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF GROUP EFFECT IN BONDED
ANCHORS WITH DIFFERENT BOND STRENGTHS
Y.-J. Li and R. Eligehausen
Institute for Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In recent years the failure behavior of group anchors has been investigated and the group
effect for quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors has been clarified. However the
performed work is available only for an average bond strength within 8 MPa to 12 MPa.
No doubt, with the variation of the bond strength the group effect for bonded anchors
should be influenced. In this paper the influence of the bond strength on the failure mode
and the group effect is investigated. The investigation is carried out by performing a
series of numerical analysis of single and quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors. In
the calculation the concrete and the bond material are simulated by the improved
microplane model, which is implemented in the 3D nonlinear finite element program
MASA. Investigated are groups with bonded anchors (d =16 mm, hef = 96 mm) with a
spacing s = 48 mm to s = 288 mm. Varied is the average bond strength (6.2, 11.1, and
22.5 MPa). From the results of the numerical study the influence of bond strength on the
failure modes of groups with bonded anchors is revealed and the group effect as a
function of the bond strength is clarified.

1. Introduction

The bond strength plays an important role for both single and group fastenings with
bonded anchors. During the last 20 years several research works on bonded anchors have
been published (Eligehausen, Mallee & Rehm, 1984, 1997; Eligehausen, Lehr, Meszaros
& Fuchs, 1999; Cook, Doerr & Klingner, 1993; Cook, Kunz, Fuchs & Konz, 1998) and
design recommendations have been proposed both for single anchors (Eligehausen,
Mallee & Rehm, 1984; Eligehausen, Lehr, Meszaros & Fuchs, 1999; Cook, Kunz, Fuchs
& Konz, 1998) and for group anchors (Eligehausen, Mallee & Rehm, 1984; Eligehausen,
Lehr, Meszaros & Fuchs, 1999). However a general design recommendation for groups
with bonded anchors is still a challenge topic. In recent years a series of research work in
this field has been performed at the University of Stuttgart. The failure behavior of group

699
bonded anchors has been investigated both experimentally and numerically. The group
effect for quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors has been clarified (Lehr and
Eligehausen, 1998; Li, Ozbolt, Eligehausen & Lehr, 1999). However the research work
is valid only for a bond strength of about 8 MPa to 12 MPa. These bond strength values
are valid for most of bond materials currently available on the market. No doubt, with
the variation of the bond strength the group effect of bonded anchors should be
influenced. This means that with a higher or lower bond strength the load carrying
capacity as well as the failure mode should be different from those of normal bond
strength. The purpose of this work is to study how the group effect of bonded anchors is
influenced by the variation of the bond strength.

The investigation is carried out by performing a series of numerical analysis of


quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors, in which the average bond strength of single
anchors τu (τu = Nu /(π d hef ), Nu is the peak load of single bonded anchor) varies from
6.2 MPa to 22.5 MPa. The 3D nonlinear finite element program MASA is used for the
calculation (Ozbolt, 1998), in which the newly developed microplane material model for
concrete with relaxed kinematic constraint (Ozbolt, Li & Kozar, 2000) is implemented.
The studied specimens are bonded anchors of the injection type based on resin mortar
anchored in a concrete block and subjected to tensile loading. Both single and group
bonded anchors are considered for the calculation. The concrete block and bond material
are simulated by the improved microplane model and the steel bar is considered as a
linear elastic material. The attention of the research is focused on the influence of bond
strength on the failure mode of anchor groups and the group effect. Based on the
numerical results the group effect as a function of bond strengths is clarified.

d
S

hef

Fig. 1 Geometry of quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors

700
2. Numerical analysis

The analyzed specimen is schematically shown in Figure 1, in which d is the anchor


diameter (d = 16 mm), hef is the embedment depth (hef = 96 mm) and s is the spacing
between anchors. A typical finite element mesh with load and boundary conditions is
shown in Figure 2. Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the specimen is simulated. The
simulated system includes the steel anchors, the adhesive mortar and the concrete block.
The steel anchor is assumed as a linear elastic material with Young's modulus E =
210000 N/mm2 and Poisson's ratio ν = 0.3. The concrete is modeled by the improved
microplane model with relaxed kinematic constraint and the material parameters are
taken as Young's modulus E = 30000 N/mm2, Poisson's ratio ν = 0.18, tension strength ft
= 2.4 N/mm2, compression strength fc = 30 N/mm2 and fracture energy Gf = 0.1 N/mm.
The compressive fracture energy is taken as 200 times the tensile fracture energy. The
bond material is simulated by the normal microplane model with a special attention on
the shear strength as τu = 6.2 MPa, τu = 11.1 MPa and τu = 22.5 MPa, respectively. In
order to avoid concrete cone failure the value of high shear strength τu (22.5 MPa) is
calibrated by the specimen of a confined single anchor with embedment depth hef = 100
mm, which corresponds to the dimension of the specimen used for the investigation of
lateral load influence on the bond strength (Meszaros and Eligehausen, 1998). The load
is applied at the top end of the steel anchor. Displacement control is used in order to get
the post peak load-displacement curve. A fixed boundary condition, corresponding to the
support lines in experiments, is applied on the non-symmetry edges at the loaded side of
the specimen (see Figure 2).

Fig. 2 Finite element mode with boundary conditions

Totally 21 cases were calculated, which include 18 anchor groups and 3 single anchors.
The calculation is divided into 3 groups with 3 different bond strengths, namely high
bond strength with τu = 22.5 MPa, average bond strength with τu = 11.1 MPa and low
bond strength with τu = 6.2 MPa, respectively. 7 calculations were performed for each

701
group, in which 6 cases are for group anchors and 1 case for single anchor. The analyzed
specimens are listed in Table 1 and the calculated failure loads and failure modes are
presented in the same table as well. In a preliminary study a shear failure in the concrete
near the bond layer was observed in the case of a mortar with high bond strength. This
seems not realistic comparing to the experimental observations for average bond strength
(Lehr and Eligehausen, 1998), in which a concrete cone failure was observed for the
bonded anchor specimens with shorter embedment depth. In order to avoid this shear
failure the width of the elements used to simulate the bond layer is extended from 2 mm
to 6 mm. The dimension of the elements near the bond layer remain constant for all of
calculations. The spacing between anchors varies from 48 mm to 288 mm but the anchor
diameter d and the embedment depth hef remain constant for all calculations as d = 16
mm and hef = 96 mm. The concrete material properties in all calculations are kept
constant only the bond strength was varied as given above. The dimension of the
simulated concrete block is 400 mm times 400 mm wide with a depth of hef + 188 mm,
which has been shown enough to simulate a non-confinement pullout test (Li, Ozbolt,
Eligehausen & Lehr, 1999).

Table 1 Numerical results of single and group anchors with different bond strength value
Spacing Bond Strength τu [MPa]
s 6.2 11.1 22.5
[mm] Fu [kN] 1) FM 1) Fu [kN] 1) FM 1) Fu [kN] 1) FM 1)
2)
0 29.96 PO 53.78 PO 65.72 CC
48 20.95 CCB 25.18 CC 23.79 CC
96 24.74 FPO 31.34 CC 31.47 CC
144 28.46 PO 40.30 FPO 42.41 CC
192 28.94 PO 46.68 PO 51.95 CC
240 29.19 PO 48.01 PO 58.24 CC
288 30.05 PO 50.31 PO 59.05 CC
Note: 1) Fu: Failure load; FM: Failure mode ; 2) s = 0: single anchors

The load-displacement curves at the loaded side of the anchor were calculated in the
analysis and the failure modes were investigated as well. In the calculations four
different failure modes of anchor groups were observed namely concrete cone failure
(CC), pullout failure (PO), false pullout failure (FPO) and the combination failure of
concrete cone and pullout failure (CCB). The detailed description of the failure
mechanism of the 4 failure modes can be found in (Li, Ozbolt, Eligehausen & Lehr,
1999). For single anchors two failure modes were observed i.e. pullout failure and
concrete cone failure, which are shown in Figure 3. The pullout failure was observed in
the cases with average and low bond strengths and the concrete cone failure was
observed in the case with a high bond strength. This means that when the bond strength
is relatively low the failure is caused by a bond failure, but when the bond strength is
high the failure is caused by a concrete cone breakout. The reason of the concrete cone
breakout is mainly because the resistance of the bond material is stronger than the

702
resistance of the concrete cone. In fact this kind of failure occurs normally in pullout
tests with headed anchor. As we know that the CC-method (Fuchs, Eligehausen &
Breen, 1995) has been developed for evaluating the load capacity of headed anchors.
This means that the load capacity of bonded anchors with a high bond strength could be
evaluated by the CC-method.

a) b)

Fig. 3 Failure modes of single anchors: a) pullout failure with low bond strength (τu =
6.2 MPa); b) concrete cone failure with high bond strength (τu = 22.5 MPa)

s = 48 mm (τu = 6.2 MPa) s = 144 mm (τu = 6.2 MPa) s = 288 mm (τu = 6.2 MPa)

s = 48 mm (τu = 11.1 MPa) s = 144 mm (τu = 11.1 MPa) s = 288 mm (τu = 11.1 MPa)

s = 48 mm (τu = 22.5 MPa) s = 144 mm (τu = 22.5 MPa) s = 288 mm (τu = 22.5 MPa)

(a) Failure modes of anchor groups with different bond strengths

703
70 τu = 22.5 [MPa]
single anchor
s = 288 mm 30
60 s = 240 mm
s = 196 mm
s = 144 mm

50 s = 96 mm
s = 48 mm
Load [kN]

Load [kN]
20
40

30 τu = 6.2 [MPa]
single anchor
s = 288 mm
20 10 s = 240 mm
s = 196 mm
s = 144 mm
10 s = 96 mm
s = 48 mm

0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Displacement [mm] Displacement [mm]

(b) Load-displacement curves (plotted is the load of one anchor)

Fig. 4 Numerical results of anchor groups with different bond strengths

The calculated failure modes for anchor groups show a strong influence by the bond
strength. The selected failure modes for three bond strengths with typical spacings (s =
48 mm, s = 144 mm and s = 288 mm) are shown in Figure 4a and the load-displacement
curves for all calculated spacings with high and low bond strengths are shown in Figure
4b. From Figure 4a we can see that for high bond strength (τu = 22.5 MPa) the failure
modes in all spacings are concrete cone failure. But for average and low bond strengths
(τu = 11.1 MPa and τu = 6.2 MPa) the failure modes vary from concrete cone failure to
bond failure with increasing spacing. This indicates that for high bond strength the
failure mode is dominated by concrete cone breakout, while for a relatively low bond
strength the failure mode varies from concrete cone failure to bond failure with
increasing spacing. From the tendency of the calculated failure modes we can image that
when the bond strength is very low only bond failure might occur for groups with
bonded anchors.

3. Influence of bond strength on the group effect

For anchor groups with a spacing smaller than a critical value it is found that the failure
load is reduced with decreasing spacing, which is called group effect. The critical value
is called characteristic spacing scr. In our previous study the group effect in the case of an
average bond strength has been investigated and a model for evaluating the load capacity
has been proposed (Li, Ozbolt, Eligehausen & Lehr, 1999). In this work the bond
strength has been extended to both higher and lower bond strength values to investigate
if the group effect will be influenced by the value of bond strength. Figure 4 and Table 1
show that although the failure behaviors of three groups with different bond strengths are
not identical the group effect exists in all three groups. For the group with high bond

704
strength (τu = 22.5 MPa) the calculated failure modes in all investigated cases (single
anchor and groups with s ≤ 3hef) are concrete cone failure, which is caused by concrete
breakout, starting at the end of the anchor rod with a common concrete cone failure for
s ≤ 2hef . The failure mode and the load-displacement behavior of one anchor of the
group with s = 3hef is almost identical to the behavior of a single anchor. Because of the
concrete cone failure the average bond stress at peak load of the single anchor τu is only
13.6 MPa, much smaller than the bond strength value τu = 22.5 MPa, which was
identified by a confined pullout test with bond failure. The group effect is caused by an
overlapping of tensile stresses in the concrete of neighboring anchors. When the spacing
is small the peak load taken by one anchor of the group increases with increasing
spacing. The group effect vanishes at a spacing s ~ 2.5 hef to 3.0 hef . In the groups with
average and low bond strengths (τu = 11.1 MPa and τu = 6.2 MPa) the calculated failure
modes were shown not only as a CC failure but also as CCB, FPO and PO failure (see
Figure 4 and Table 1). The concrete cone failure was obtained in the cases with s = 48
mm and s = 96 mm for average bond strength and in the case with s = 48 mm for low
bond strength. The FPO failure was observed in the case with s = 144 mm for average
bond strength and in the case with s = 96 mm for low bond strength. For other spacings
in both groups pullout failure was observed. The reason of group effect for these two
groups is caused not only by the overlapping of concrete cone ( for CC and CCB failure)
but also by the reduced shear resistance of bond material due to the damage at bottom of
group anchors and tensile stress between anchors (for FPO and PO failure), as described
in (Li, Eligehausen, Lehr & Ozbolt, 2001).
s
Fu / Fu

F su : failure load of single anchor


g

4 x Fu (single)
4.0 s Fg
u : failure load of group anchors
4 X Fu
4
F (group) / F (single)

3.0
u

2.0 No group
effect zone
u

bond strength 6.2 MPa


Strong group
bond strength 11.1 MPa effect zone
1.0
bond strength 22.5 MPa 1

0.0
Scr[W] Scr[M] Scr[H]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 S
s [mm]

Fig. 5 Numerical results of group bonded Fig. 6 Group effect of bonded anchors
anchors with different bond strengths with different bond strengths

In order to evaluate the influence of bond strength on the group effect the numerical
results in all three groups are presented in Figure 5. Plotted are the ratios between the
calculated failure loads of the groups and the calculated failure load of a single anchor as
a function of the anchor spacing. From this figure one can see that the bond strength has

705
a significant influence on the group effect of bonded anchor groups. With increasing
bond strength the characteristic spacing scr increases. From the calculated results the
characteristic spacing could be abstracted as scr ~ 150 mm for a low bond strength (τu =
6.2 MPa), scr ~ 200 mm for an average bond strength (τu = 11.1 MPa) and scr ~ 290 mm
(s ~ 3 hef ) for a high bond strength (τu = 22.5 MPa ). This indicates that for a high bond
strength the group effect exists until the spacing is larger than 290 mm, but for a low
bond strength the group effect vanishes for a spacing s ~ 150 mm. The influence of the
bond strength on the group effect is schematically plotted in Figure 6.

4. Conclusions

In this paper the influence of bond strength on the failure mode and the failure load is
investigated numerically for single and quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors (d =16
mm, hef = 96 mm = 6d). The numerical results show that the bond strength has a strong
influence on the failure mode both for single anchors and for anchor groups. For single
anchors, when the bond strength is low failure is caused by pullout failure. However
when the bond strength is high rupture is caused by a concrete cone failure. For the
investigated anchor groups, rupture is caused by the concrete cone failure for a high
bond strength, but for an average and low bond strengths the failure mode varies from
concrete cone failure to bond failure with increasing spacing. Furthermore, the group
effect is influenced significantly by the bond strength. In the studied cases the
characteristic spacing increases with increasing bond strength from scr ~ 150 mm (~9d )
for low bond strength τu = 6.2 MPa to scr ~ 290 mm (~3hef ) for high bond strength τu =
22.5 MPa.

5. Reference

1. Eligehausen, R., Mallee, R. and Rehm G. (1984) “Befestigungen mit Verbundankern.”


Betonwerk + Fertigteil-Technik, Heft 10, 686-692; Heft 11, 781-785; Heft 12, 825-
829
2. Eligehausen, R., Mallee, R. and Rehm G. (1997) “Befestigungstechnik (Fastening
technique).” Betonkalender 1997, Ernst & Sohn, Berlin
3. Eligehausen, R., Lehr, B., Meszaros, J. and Fuchs, W. (1999) “Behavior and design of
anchorage with bonded anchors under tension load.” Proc. of Int. Conference on
Anchorage & Grouting towards the new Century, 6-9 Oct. 1999, Guangzhou, China,
Zhongshan University Publisher, pp 93-105
4. Cook, R. A., Doerr, G.T. and Klingner R.E. (1993) “Bond stress model for design of
adhesive anchors.” ACI Structural Journal, 90 (5): 514-524
5. Cook, R. A., Kunz, J., Fuchs W. and Konz R. (1998) “Behavior and design of single
adhesive anchors under tensile load in uncracked concrete.” ACI Structural Journal,
95(1): 9-26

706
6. Lehr, B. and Eligehausen, R. (1998) “Centric tensile tests of quadruple fastenings with
bonded anchors.” Internal research report, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen,
Universität Stuttgart, not published
7. Li, Y.-J., Ozbolt, J., Eligehausen, R. and Lehr, B. (1999) “3D numerical analysis of
quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors.” CD-Rom Proc. of 13th ASCE
Engineering Mechanics Division Conference, 13-16 Jun. 1999, Baltimore, USA.
8. Ozbolt, J. (1998) “MASA - Finite element program for nonlinear analysis of concrete
and reinforced concrete structures.” Internal research report, Institut für Werkstoffe
im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, not publish
9. Ozbolt, J., Li, Y.-J. and Kozar, I. (2000) “Microplane model for concrete with relaxed
kinematic constraint.” International Journal of Solids and Structures, in press
10. Meszaros, J. and Eligehausen, R. (1998) “Ausziehversuche mit injektionsdübeln
HIT-HY 150 bei gleichzeitiger Zweiaxialbelastung des Ankergrundes.” Internal
research report, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart, not
published
11. Fuchs, W., Eligehausen, R. and Breen J. B. (1995) “Concrete capacity design (CCD)
approach for fastening to concrete.” ACI Structural Journal, 92(1): 73-94
12. Li, Y.-J., Eligehausen, R., Lehr, B. and Ozbolt, J. (2001) “Fracture analysis
of quadruple fastenings with bonded anchors.” Accepted on the 4th Int.
Conference on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures, May 28-June 2,
2001, Cachan - France

707
SIMULATION OF FASTENING SYSTEMS UTILIZING
CHEMICAL AND MECHANICAL ANCHORS
Jürgen Nienstedt*, Richard Mattner*, Ute Nestler** and Chongmin Song*
*Hilti AG, Corporate Research, Schaan, Principality of Liechtenstein
**Hilti Inc., Technical Services Department, Tulsa, USA

Abstract
Numerical simulation is becoming more commonly used also for applications in
fastening technology. Especially the finite element method based numerical simulation
has already been successfully applied in the product development process for several
years. This was only possible by introducing a reliable material model suitable for every
stress state into the finite element code.

The simulation of complex fastening structures generally requires a three dimensional


modelling. Typical examples of these applications are the anchoring close to an edge of
the concrete base material and/or the application of a shear force on the structure. The
understanding of the load transfer mechanisms and the loading state occurring in the
base material caused by the influence of a nearby edge is an essential input also for the
evaluation of design rules. The insight into the material behaviour serves as the basis
which is required for the development of excellent products.

1. Introduction

The simulation technique of the finite element method is becoming part of the daily
business also in the field of fastening technology. The finite element method allows an
insight into the material behaviour and its stressing state. The state at every location of
the calculated structures can be considered. This detailed knowledge of the anchoring
mechanism can be utilized during the product development process. Over the last years
simulation has been proven to be a beneficial tool and an excellent supplement to the
experiment [1, 2].

708
The development of more sophisticated and robust material models for concrete
considering general stress states like tensile, compressive and mixed stress states offers a
widespread range of applications suitable for simulation possibilities. Anchoring
applications close to an edge of the base material and/or subjected to shear loads are of
special interest in the development process as well as for the evaluation of design rules.

The different working principles of anchors have been investigated by simulation and
verified by experiments. Two working principles – the bonding mechanism of chemical
anchors and the frictional principle for expansion anchors – are shown in this paper. The
representatives for the working principles chosen here are a threaded rod set in HIT HY
150 for the bonding mechanism and a Kwik Bolt II for the frictional principle. Both
types of anchors are loaded by axial tensile loads as well as shear loads. Due to the
different load transfer mechanisms from the anchor into the base material the influence
of the edge distance differs significantly for both types of anchors. The comparison with
experiments is shown as an example for the expansion anchor under shear loading.

2. Material modeling

The simulation of anchoring systems close to the edge of concrete base material requires
a realistic modelling of tensile stresses and the cracking process after reaching the tensile
strength of the material. An essential part of the material description is the modelling of
the fracturing that is generally caused by mode I fracture mechanics failure. Hence the
fracture energy necessary to develop a crack must be modelled consistently.

A widely distributed approach to describe the mode I cracking for brittle material and
especially for concrete is the so-called smeared crack approach [3]. The rotating smeared
crack concept is integrated here into an uni-axial stress-/strain environment. Figure 1
illustrates schematically the stress-strain behaviour under uni-axial loading conditions.

σ
ε

Figure 1 Constitutive law for uni-axial loading conditions

709
To consider the influence of multi-axiality of the stress states, hence the changed
material behaviour resulting from that effect, an interaction between the stress state and
the stress-strain relationship in the corresponding integration point has been introduced.
This is especially necessary in the regions of load transfer into the base material.

This constitutive model has been proven for several applications to be very robust and
easy to handle for the development engineer in his/her daily business for several
applications. Comparisons between simulated results and the corresponding
experimental results show very good agreement within the scatter of the experiments.

3. Numerical simulation

The working principles, the loading of the base material and the failure mechanism for
anchors close to an edge are illustrated with two representative anchors: the Kwik Bolt II
for expansion anchor fastenings and the HAS in HIT mortar for adhesive fastenings. As
an example one of the loading conditions is compared with experimental results.

3.1 Expansion anchor


The Kwik Bolt II is utilized as the representative example for an expansion anchor.
Figure 2 shows this type of expansion anchor. During the setting process of the anchor
the wedge with its three sleeves expands over the cone and thus transfers the force from
the anchor into the depth of the borehole.

Figure 2 Expansion anchor

The finite element model of the anchor and the considered structure are shown in figure
3. The darker left side of the structure indicates the free edge.

The working principle of friction requires a corresponding expansion force acting radial
from the anchor axis onto the base material. The load transfer from the anchor to the
base material is locally concentrated between wedge and concrete base material at least
during the setting process.

710
Figure 3 Finite element mesh of the Kwik Bolt II expansion anchor and the
simulated structure

3.1.1 Axial pull-out loading


The distribution of the maximum principal stresses in figure 4 clearly shows the locally
concentrated load transfer in the depth of the borehole. The areas without any iso-lines
indicate the domain of compressive stresses. The tensile iso-lines show a small influence
of the free edge on the stress field in the base material.

Figure 4 Distribution of the


maximum principle
stresses

The corresponding maximum principal strains are shown in figure 5. The figure
especially well illustrates the crack initiation, which can be seen on the symmetry plane
to the right of the anchor.

711
Figure 5 Distribution of the
maximum principle
strains

3.1.2 Shear loading towards the edge


The stress field of the maximum principal stresses in figure 6 shows the large
compressive domain neighbouring the anchor in the direction of the shear load. A small
compressive domain can be seen at the bottom of the borehole. The stresses already
indicate the concrete cone failure at the free edge with stresses in the softening domain
of the material.

Figure 6 Distribution of the


maximum principle
stresses

This is supported by a more detailed view (see figure 7) of the maximum principal
strains distribution. The strain iso-lines describe the existing crack line creating a
concrete failure cone and a splitting of that concrete cone along the symmetry plane.

Experimental results performed with the same boundary conditions utilized in the
simulation show a maximum load varying from 9700 N to 16200 N with a mean value of
13400 N. The maximum force calculated using numerical simulation is 12500 N. That is
in good agreement with the experimental results.

712
Figure 7 Distribution of
the maximum
principle strains

3.2 Adhesive anchor


The adhesive anchor investigated here is a threaded rod. This rod is set into mortar HIT
HY 150 which previously has been injected into the borehole. The geometry of the
considered structure is shown in figure 8. For illustrative reasons one quarter (the right
front part) is deleted.

The right side shows the free edge of the


structure. The structure is subjected to two
load cases: axial pull-out force and shear
loading towards the edge.

Figure 8 Geometry of the HAS fastening

3.2.1 Axial pull-out loading


The working principle of the adhesive anchor under tensile loading conditions is
characterized by a large area of load transfer along the embedment depth of the anchor.
The load is mainly introduced into the base material by utilizing the shear mechanism
along the interface layer between the mortar injected into the borehole and the concrete.

Figure 9 shows the distribution of the maximum principal stresses in the base material
before failure.

713
Figure 9 Distribution of the
maximum principle
stresses shortly before
failure load

As it is clearly indicated the region of iso-stresses deviates from the symmetrical stage
caused by the edge influence. Nevertheless the edge distance is of minor influence on the
maximum load and failure criterion which is also shown in figure 10 describing the
maximum principle strains as a measure for the occurring cracks.

Figure 10 Distribution of the


maximum principle
strains shortly before
failure load

Only iso-lines of smaller strains deviate in the direction of the free edge. The remaining
failure criterion is the bonding failure with a small concrete cone at the upper part of the
embedded rod.

714
3.2.2 Shear loading towards the edge
The loading of the anchor with shear acting towards the free edge completely changes
the behaviour compared to that in concrete without any edge influence. The distribution
of the maximum principle stresses clearly illustrates the stress state shortly before the
concrete cone breaks out (see figure 11).

Figure 11 Distribution of the


maximum principle
stresses shortly
before failure load

The region of compressive stresses can be seen along the upper half of the embedment
depth in the direction of the free edge.

Figure 12 Distribution of the maximum


principle strains shortly before
failure load

The strains at that stage of loading are displayed in figure 12. The observed strains are a
direct measure for the occurring cracks.

715
4. Conclusions

Numerical simulation enables us to calculate the structural behaviour of anchoring


fastenings also for complex applications and loading conditions. Different failure
mechanisms like e.g. concrete failure or bond failure can be investigated. The knowledge
of the structural behaviour and the basic mechanisms in the base material can be used
within the development process for new products. The insight understanding of the basic
principles is the basis for a successful and high quality product.

The available finite element code to date is at a development level, which also allows the
simulation of complex applications as a beneficial tool for the design engineer. Different
failure mechanisms with their corresponding load carrying capacity can be evaluated,
thus giving the designer a better understanding of load distribution, stress states and
weakest points in their design applications.

5. References

1. Nienstedt, J. and Dietrich, C., ‘Application of the finite element method to anchoring
technology in concrete’, in ‘Fracture mechanics of concrete structures’, Proceedings
of the Second International Conference on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete
Structures, Zürich, July, 1995 (Aedificatio Publishers, Freiburg/Breisgau, Germany,
1995) 1909-1914.
2. Nienstedt, J., Mattner, R. & Wiesbaum, J. 1999. Constitutive modelling of concrete
in numerical simulation of anchoring technology. In ‘Structural engineering in the
21st century’, Proceedings of the 1999 Structures Congress, New Orleans, April,
1999 (American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston/Virginia, USA) 211-214.
3. Hillerborg, A., Modeer, M. and Petersson, P.P., ‘Analysis of crack formation and
crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements’,
Cement and Concrete Research 6 (1976) 773-782.

716
HEADED STUD ANCHOR - CYCLIC LOADING AND
CREEP-CRACKING INTERACTION OF CONCRETE
Joško Ožbolt, Jan Hofmann and Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
It is well known that the ultimate resistance of a concrete member under sustained load
compared to the resistance of the same member loaded by instantaneous load can be
considerably smaller. One of the reasons for this is creep-cracking interaction which for
a sustained load causes an increase of damage zone and reduction of ultimate capacity.
This effect is stronger if the structure was previously loaded by cyclic loading. In the
present paper is demonstrated that the microplane model for concrete which is coupled
in series with the linear creep model (Maxwell chain model) is able to account for the
above phenomena. The three-dimensional finite element analysis of concrete specimen
loaded in uniaxial compression and the analysis of a headed stud anchor loaded by
monotonic and cyclic shear load was carried out. It is shown that the shear resistance of
the anchor under sustained load reduces by 15%. Moreover, the reduction of the load-
capacity increases if the anchor has previously been loaded by cyclic load.

1. Introduction

Two important aspects of durability of fastening elements in concrete and reinforced


concrete structures are the effect of repeated loading and the interaction between
concrete cracking and creep of concrete. It is well known that the ultimate resistance of a
concrete member under sustained load compared to the resistance of the same member
loaded by instantaneous static load could be considerably smaller. One of the reasons for
this is creep-cracking interaction which for a constant load leads to an increase of
damage zone and reduction of the ultimate capacity. This effect is stronger if the
structure was previously loaded by cyclic load.

717
During the last two decades significant progress in modelling of fracture and damage of
concrete-like materials has been done. However, how to describe creep rupture of
concrete theoretically has not been dealt with until recently. In the present paper a three-
dimensional finite element model which accounts for cracking and nonlinear behavior of
concrete (microplane model) is coupled in series with the creep model (Maxwell chain
model). To investigate whether the model is able to qualitatively predict the effect of
creep of concrete on the reduction of the failure load, three-dimensional parameter
studies of concrete specimen loaded by sustained uniaxial compressive load were carried
out. Moreover, a three-dimensional finite element analysis of a headed stud loaded by
monotonic and cyclic shear load and subsequently loaded by sustained load of different
levels was performed.

2. Modelling of creep fracture of concrete

It is well known that the concrete deformation and strength under sustained load are
influenced by the material and geometrical defects, i.e. larger initial flaws lead to lower
strength at sustained load. Following this argument, the main assumption of the present
approach is that the non-linear creep of concrete is a consequence of the redistribution of
stresses due to creep and with this related increase of damage. The redistribution takes
place between stronger (less damaged) and weaker (more damaged) zones of the
material. Their existence depends on the inhomogenity of concrete, on the structural
geometry as well as on the loading. When such zones do not exist (homogeneity of the
stress-strain field), no redistribution of stresses is possible and consequently there is no
non-linear creep. When the constitutive law accounts for the existence of these zones
then the coupling of such a constitutive relationship with the linear creep law should be
able to predict the effect of non-linear creep.

To confirm the above discussed assumption, in the present paper the microplane model
for concrete is coupled in series with the Maxwell chain model (see Figure 1). In an
incremental iterative procedure, at time tr the stress increment ∆σr is calculated from the
known total strain increment ∆εr based on the microplane model as:

(
∆σ r = D r ∆ε r − ∆ε "r ) (1)

in which ∆εr” is the creep strain increment, calculated from the linear creep law
(Maxwell chain model), and Dr is the material stiffness tensor obtained from the
microplane model. It is assumed that the microplane model parameters are time
independent.

One important point in the modelling of the non-linear creep is that the constitutive law
(in our case microplane model) must be able to realistically model concrete response for
cyclic loading history, i.e. realistic loading-unloading-reloading rules have to be
employed. By the use of a simple secant loading-unloading rule (see Figure 2), what is

718
common in the non-linear analysis of concrete and reinforced concrete structures, it is
not possible to account for the effect of non-linear creep. Namely, for relatively high
stress levels the unbalanced stresses of the i-th iteration step are too low in comparison
to the stresses obtained from a realistic constitutive stress-strain law (compare secant
and realistic unloading rule in Figure 2). In such a case it is not possible to realistically
reproduce the redistribution of stresses in the structure. Consequently, the effect of non-
linear creep can not be accounted for.

σµ σ


ε

µ=1 2 σ m n

Figure 1. Maxwell chain model. Figure 2. Realistic modeling of concrete for


loading-unloading-reloading stress-strain
history.

2.1 Microplane model


The microplane model is a three-dimensional macroscopic constitutive law. In the model
the material is characterised by a uniaxial relations between the stress and strain
components on planes of various orientations. At each integration point these planes
may be imagined to represent the damage planes or weak planes of the microstructure.
The tensorial invariance restrictions need not be directly enforced. Superimposing the
responses from all microplanes in a suitable manner automatically satisfies them. The
basic concept behind the microplane model was advanced in 1938 by G.I. Taylor [1].
Later the model was extended by Bažant and co-workers for modelling quasi-brittle
materials which exhibit softening [2] [3]. In the present paper an advanced version of the
microplane model for concrete proposed by Ožbolt et al. [4] is used. The model is based
on the so called "relaxed kinematic constraint" concept. For more detail see [4].

2.2 Rate-type creep law of ageing concrete – Maxwell chain model


Creep of concrete is modelled by the Maxwell chain model (see Figure 1). It is assumed
that the Poisson's ratio due to creep is the same as the elastic one. At time tr the total
strain increment is decomposed into elastic (∆εrel), cracking (∆εrcr) and creep (∆εr") strain
increments as:

719
∆ε r = ∆ε elr + ∆ε cr
r + ∆ε r
"
(2)

The elastic and damage strains are calculated from the microplane model whereas the
creep strains are obtained from the Maxwell chain model. Creep deformations are
calculated by the use of the algorithm for step-by-step integration proposed by Bažant
and Wu [5]. For time step ∆tr the creep strain increments ∆εr" are calculated as:

∆ε "r =
1  m
E "r  µ =1
{
∑ 1 − e −∆t r /τµ }σ µ r −1


 (3)

with,

( )
m 1
E "r = ∑ λ µr E µ r −1 / 2 + E ∞r −1 / 2 where E µ r −1 / 2 = E µ r −1 + E µ r
µ =1 2
(
σ µ r = σ µ r −1 e −∆t r / τµ + λ µ r −1 E µ r −1 / 2 ∆ε r − ∆ε cr
r ) (4)

( )
λ µ r = 1 − e −∆t r / τµ τ µ / ∆t r

in which µ denotes µ-th unit of the Maxwell chain model, τµ = ηµ/Eµ is the relaxation
time of the unit, ηµ and Eµ are viscosity and modulus of the µ-th unit, respectively, σµ is
the so called hidden stresses of the µ-th spring unit and Er" is pseudo-instantaneous
Young’s modulus. In the present study the model with eight units is employed.

The main advantage of the rate type formulation over the integral formulation is that the
creep deformations are calculated only from the stresses of the previous load step
whereas in the integral formulation the entire load history needs to be stored.

3. Numerical analysis of creep-fracture interaction

To investigate whether the coupling of the microplane model for concrete in series with
a Maxwell chain model can account for the effect of non-linear creep, three-dimensional
finite element analysis of concrete compressive and tensile specimen was carried out.
For both specimens the load was applied at concrete age of 28 days. The linear creep
deformation at t = ∞ was taken three times larger than the instantaneous deformation
(creep factor φ = 3). The smeared fracture finite element analysis was carried out by the
use of the eight-node solid finite elements with eight integration points. To account for
the objectivity of the analysis with respect to the size of the finite elements, the crack
band approach was used [6].

720
3.1 Uniaxial compression
Creep of concrete under compressive load was analysed for the specimen geometry
shown in Figure 3. The basic material properties were as follows: Young's modulus
E = 28000 MPa, Poisson's ratio ν = 0.18, uniaxial tensile strength ft = 2.0 MPa, uniaxial
compressive strength fc = 28 MPa, fracture energy GF = 0.10 N/mm and concrete
compressive fracture energy GC = 100GF. The typical uniaxial tensile-compressive
stress-strain curve obtained from one three-dimensional finite element, assuming a crack
band width of h = 20 mm is shown in Figure 4.

Steel plate 10
P
Uniaxial loading-unloading-reloading rules
(one 3D finite element, h= 20 mm)
15

0
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
Strain x 1000

-10

Stress [MPa]
300

-20

150
150 horizontally free -30
surface
Figure 3. Geometry and boundary Figure 4. Constitutive law for concrete – uniaxial
conditions of compressive specimen tensile-compressive relationship obtained from a single
(all in [mm]). solid finite element.

10 1.25

Concrete under sustained compressive load


Relative strength [fc,s* / fc* ]

8
Load level
Average strain (x1000)

0.70 fc 1.00
6
0.80 fc
0.90 fc
4
0.75

0 0.50
0E+0 2E+3 4E+3 6E+3 8E+3 1E+4 1E+0 1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5
Time after loading [days] Time after loading [days]
Figure 5. Calculate strain-time relationship Figure 6. The relation between the relative
for different load levels. compressive strength and time at failure.

The load was applied over a stiff loading platen. It was used because in this way the
inhomogeneity of the stress-strain field was generated and it was not necessary to
introduce a week zone or to randomly generate the material properties. First, the average
strength of the specimen under instantaneous load was calculated as fc* = PU/A, where

721
PU = ultimate load and A = cross section area. The load was performed by displacement
control. The concrete strength was obtained as fc* = 24.40 MPa (note that this strength
contains the structural effects and is not the same as fc). Subsequently, the time analysis
of the specimen loaded by constant compressive load of different levels (load control)
was carried out. The sustained load was varied from P = 0.6PU to P = PU. The maximal
duration of the loading was 10000 days. When during this period of time the specimen
did not fail it was assumed that the compressive strength under sustained load fc,s* was
higher.

a) b) c)
Figure 7. Calculated failure modes (dark zone = maximal principal strains) for: a) instantaneous
load, b) P = 0.9PU and c) P = 0.7PU.

The strength under sustained load is 30% smaller than the compressive instantaneous
strength (fc,s* = 0.7fc*). The three typical average deformation versus time curves
(P = 0.7PU, 0.8PU and 0.9PU) are shown in Figure 5. The curves show that with increase
of the load level (0.7PU to 0.9PU) the creep deformations increase and the time to failure
decreases. The calculated relation between the relative compressive strength and
duration of load is shown in Figure 6. The typical failure mode due to the instantaneous
load is shown in Figure 7a. For comparison, Figures 7b and 7c show the failure mode of
the specimen loaded by P = 0.9PU (failure after 211 days) and 0.7PU (failure after 8111
days), respectively.

The above numerical results are similar to the experimental observations, except that it
is believed that the compressive strength under sustained load is approximately 0.8PU
and not 0.7PU as obtained in the present analysis. The reason may be due to the fact that
so far no experiment has been performed over a time period of 25 years (specimen
loaded with 0.7PU failed after approximately 25 years) or this may be caused by the fact
that in the analysis the ageing effect, i.e. increase of the strength with time was not
accounted for. It is interesting to observe that the failure mode of the specimen loaded

722
with P = 0.9PU is the same as for the specimen under instantaneous load. However, the
specimen loaded by P = 0.7PU fails in a different way (compare Figures. 7b and 7c).

3.2 Headed stud anchor loaded by shear load


The influence of the creep fracture interaction on the load capacity of headed anchors
was investigated on a single anchor placed close to the edge of a concrete block and
loaded by shear load in direction perpendicular to the edge of the concrete specimen.
The anchor was first loaded by monotonic or cyclic shear load, respectively.
Subsequently, the sustained shear load was applied. Age of the concrete at application of
load was 28 days and the creep factor was assumed to be φ = 3. The geometry of the
specimen and the finite element mesh are shown in Figure 8. In the analysis the load
control was used. The anchor was discretized by three-dimensional eight-node linear
elastic finite elements. The contact between the anchor and the concrete was modeled by
the interface elements. They could take up only compressive stresses. The material
properties used in the analysis are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Material and geometrical properties used in the analysis.


Concrete [N/mm][MPa] Geometry [mm] Steel[MPa]
GF ft EC fc ν hef c ES
0.07 2.5 30000 25 0.18 120 70 200000

370 mm
c + 270mm
Restraint
Restraint
Shear load 270 mm
185 mm

Headed stud
Restraint
2c
Figure 8. The geometry and the finite element mesh of the test specimen loaded in shear towards
the edge.

3.2.1 Monotonic loading


To check whether the finite element model is able to predict the failure mode and
resistance realistically, the anchor was first loaded by instantaneous load up to failure.
The calculated results are in good agreement with the experimental evidence [7]. Similar
as in experiments, two critical cracks grow from the anchor into the direction of the free
edge (see Fig. 9). They propagate under an average angle of α = 300, measured from
direction of loading.

723
load
load
failure cone failure cone

load P

test analysis

Figure 9. Post peak crack pattern (dark zone = maximal principal strains) – comparison with the
experiment.

Subsequently, the anchor was loaded by sustained shear loads PS = γPU. The loading
coefficient γ was varied from 0.70 to 0.90. If the anchor has not failed after 10000 days,
it was assumed that the strength at sustained load is reached. The results show that the
anchor resistance under sustained load is 15% lower than the resistance obtained for
instantaneous load (PU,S = 0.85PU).

Figure 10. The relation between anchor top- Figure 11. Relative resistance of the anchor
displacement and duration of loading for under sustained load for monotonic and cyclic
different load levels. pre-loading history.

The typical average displacement versus time relationships, measured at the loading
point, are shown in Figure 10. The curves show that with increase of load the creep
deformations increase and the time at failure decreases. The calculated relationship
between the ultimate sustained load and duration of loading is plotted in Figure 11.

The typical crack patterns at application of sustained load (t' = 28 days, P = 0.9PU) and
at failure (t-t' = 1010 days) are shown in Figure 12. As can be seen, short after begin of

724
loading the damage localises into a relatively small volume close to the anchor. Due to
the creep deformations (duration of load t-t' = 1010 days) the cracks propagate from the
anchor into the direction of edge under an average angle of 300 (measured from the
loading direction). The crack pattern is similar to the crack pattern obtained for the
failure under instantaneous load (see Fig. 9).

a) b)
a)

P P

Figure 12. Crack patterns (dark zone = maximal principal strains): a) at application of load and
b) at failure - 1010 days after loading with 85 % of ultimate instantaneous resistance.

3.2.2 Cyclic loading


To investigate the influence of the cyclic load history on the anchor resistance under
sustained load, the anchor was first loaded by three different load histories: (i) shear load
PMAX = 0.8PU was applied and followed by 10 unloading-reloading cycles, (ii) the same
as (i) but only six loading cycles were applied and finally (iii) the same as (i) but
PMAX = 0.5PU. After applied cyclic load the anchor was loaded by sustained load of
different levels.

The calculated load-displacement curves for cyclic pre-loading histories and


corresponding relations between displacement at the anchor top and time under loading
are shown in Figures 13 and 14. Figure 13 shows that the increase of the displacement
due to the cyclic loading depends on the level of loading and on the number of loading
cycles. Higher the load level and larger the number of loading-unloading-reloading
cycles, larger is the increase of displacement. For the load history (i) the sustained load
PS = γPU was applied with γ = 0.40, 0.70 and 0.80. It turned out that after cyclic loading
applied at relatively high load level (PMAX = 0.80PU) the resistance under sustained load
reduces by 30% compared to the resistance under instantaneous load. For the second
load history with PMAX = 0.80PU and only six loading-unloading-reloading cycles, the

725
a) a)

b) b)

c) c)

Figure 13. Calculated load-displacement Figure 14. The relation between anchor top-
curves for three cyclic load-displacement displacement and duration of loading.
histories.

726
applied sustained load was varied with γ = 0.70 and 0.80. The results show that the
resistance at sustained load is reduced by 20% (PS = 0.80PU). As expected, the higher
the damage due to the cyclic loading history the larger is the reduction of the strength at
sustained load, i.e. the creep-fracture interaction is stronger when damage due to the
cyclic loading is higher. This confirm the results for the load history (iii) in which the
resistance under sustained load was the same as for the case where the anchor was
loaded only by monotonic load (PS = 0.85PU). The comparison between the strength
under sustained load for two different pre-loading histories, monotonic and cyclic case
(i), is shown in Figure 7.

The typical crack patterns for the load history (i) (PMAX = 0.80PU) before the application
of sustained load and at failure are shown in Figures 15a and 15b. In contrary to the
failure mode for the loading history without cyclic loading (see Fig. 12), it can be seen
that at failure two cracks from both sides of the anchor forms (see Fig. 15b). First
initiates the crack which growths under an larger angle α and close before failure forms
a new crack that propagates steeper from the anchor towards the free boundary of the
concrete block. Moreover, the damage zone is more concentrated, what is a consequence
of the damage induced by the cyclic loading.

a) b)

P P

Figure 15. Crack patterns (dark zone = maximal principal strains): a) after 10 loading cycles
with loading-unloading-reloading of 80 % of the ultimate instantaneous load b) at failure under
sustained load.

4. Conclusions

In the present paper the numerical model which is based on the serial coupling of the
microplane model for concrete and the Maxwell chain model is used to study creep-
fracture interaction for the case of a single anchor applied close to the edge of a concrete
block and loaded in shear. To verify the model, a three-dimensional finite element

727
analysis of concrete compressive specimen was first carried out. It is demonstrated that
the model is able to predict the effect of non-linear creep, i.e. nonlinear increase of creep
deformations at higher stress levels and the decrease of the concrete strength at sustained
load. The compressive strength of concrete under sustained load is found to be 30%
lower than the strength under instantaneous load. This is in good agreement with the
experimental observations. Subsequently, the three dimensional analysis of the anchor
loaded by shear force is carried out. The numerical study shows that the resistance of the
anchor under sustained load compared to the resistance under instantaneous load
decreases by about 15%. Moreover, it is shown that the cyclic load history significantly
influence the resistance of the anchor under sustained load. The decrease of the
resistance depends on the damage introduced by cyclic load history. For the studied case
it turned out that the cyclic loading-unloading-reloading between zero and 80% of the
resistance under instantaneous load decreased the resistance under sustained load by
30%. The decrease depends on the level of loading and on the number of loading cycles.
The higher the damage induced by cyclic loading the larger is the reduction of the
strength at sustained load. To investigate these effect in more detail further systematic
numerical and experimental studies are needed.

5. Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the following companies: Fischerwerke, Hilti,


Halfen and Würth. The support is very much appreciated.

6. References

1. G.I. Taylor, 'Plastic strain in metals', Journal of the Institute of Metals, London,
(62), 307-324, (1938).
2. Z.P. Bažant and P. Gambarova, 'Crack shear in concrete: Crack band microplane
model', Journal of Engineering. Mechanics, ASCE, 110, 2015-2035, (1984).
3. Z.P. Bažant and P.C. Prat, 'Microplane model for brittle-plastic material - parts I
and II', Journal of Engineering. Mechanics, ASCE, 114, 1672-1702, (1988).
4. J. Ožbolt, Y.-J Li and I. Kožar, 'Microplane model for concrete with relaxed
kinematic constraint', International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38, 2683-
2711, (2001).
5. Z.P. Bažant and S.T. Wu, 'Rate-type creep law of aging concrete based on
Maxwell chain', Materials and Structures, 7(37), 45-59, (1974).
6. Z.P. Bažant and B.-H. Oh, 'Crack band theory for fracture of concrete', Materials
and Structures, 16(93), 155-177, (1983).
7. R. Eligehausen and R., Mallée, R., 'Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und
Mauerwerkbau', Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, Germany, (2000).

728
NUMERICAL INVESTIGATIONS
OF HEADED STUDS
WITH INCLINED SHOULDER
Peter Pivonka, Roman Lackner, and Herbert A. Mang
Institute for Strength of Materials
Vienna University of Technology, Austria

Abstract
Failure of steel-concrete connections such as anchor bolts strongly depends on
the material behavior of steel and concrete, respectively, and the geometric prop-
erties. The latter are commonly represented by the so-called span/depth-ratio
(a=d-ratio), see Figure 1(a). Hereby, the embedment depth d is equal to the dis-
tance from the anchor head to the concrete surface. The span a represents the
distance from the center of the steel rod to the support.
a a
support

standard headed stud with


headed stud inclined shoulder
(a) (b)
Figure 1: Geometric properties of headed stud: (a) a=d-ratio and (b)
shape of anchor head

The aim of the investigation presented in this paper is to obtain clear insight
into the structural behavior of headed studs with inclined shoulder (see Figure
1(b)). For this purpose, two constitutive models for concrete formulated in the
framework of plasticity theory are considered in the numerical simulations. The
rst model is a multi-surface model consisting of one Drucker-Prager surface re-
formulated for the description of con ned compressive stress states, and three
Rankine surfaces for the description of the tensile material behavior of concrete.
The second model is a single-surface model considering the dependence of the
concrete strength on the Lode angle. Both models account for the in uence of
con nement on the ductile behavior of concrete.
In the numerical analyses, headed studs characterized by di erent geometric
properties, i.e., by di erent a=d-ratios will be considered. Moreover, the in uence
of the nite element (FE) mesh and the material model on the peak load and the
failure mode will be investigated.

1. Introduction

The connection of steel and concrete structures in structural engineering is gener-


ally accomplished by means of anchor devices, such as headed studs, undercut an-
chors, etc.. In the past, the development of anchor devices was mainly performed
by means of experiments. Today, this development is intensively supported by nu-
merical simulations. Such simulations provide insight into the load transfer from
the anchor to the surrounding concrete. They allow to monitor the development
of the failure mode and give an estimate for the peak load of the anchor device.
Both failure mode and peak load strongly depend on the concrete strength, the
geometric dimensions of the anchor device, and the steel strength (see Figure
2). A prerequisite for realistic analyses are sophisticated material models for the
description of the mechanical behavior of concrete. Such material models must
be capable to simulate tensile, compressive, and con ned compressive failure of
concrete.
(a) P (b) P (c) P (d) P

Figure 2: Failure mechanism of headed studs [1]: (a) concrete-cone fail-


ure, (b) pull-out failure, (c) bursting failure, and (d) steel failure

In this paper, two material models for plain concrete are considered. They are
applied to the analysis of a headed stud with inclined shoulder.
The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, the employed material models
are brie y described. Application of these material models to the simulation of
the previously mentioned headed stud is reported in Section 3. Three di erent
studies will be presented:
I The rst study will focus on the in uence of the geometric properties on the
load-carrying behavior.
II Di erent FE meshes will be employed in the second study in order to assess
the in uence of the underlying discretization on the numerical results.
III Finally, the in uence of the material model for concrete on the numerical
results will be investigated in the third study.
Section 4 contains concluding remarks.

2. Description of material models

The rst model is based on multi-surface plasticity. It consists of four yield


surfaces: a Drucker-Prager (DP) yield surface for the description of concrete sub-
jected to compressive loading and three Rankine (RK) surfaces for the description
of tensile failure. In the principal stress space, the failure criteria read
p q
fDP ( ; qDP ) = J2 DP I1 DP with qDP = fcy qDP ; (1)
DP

and
f (A ; qRK ) = A qRK with qRK = ftu qRK ;
RK;A (2)
where the subscript "A"(A=1,2,3) refers to one of the three principal axes. ftu
is the tensile strength and fcy represents the elastic limit of concrete under com-
pressive loading. DP and DP are constant material parameters. qDP and qRK
represent the hardening force of the Drucker-Prager and the Rankine criterion,
respectively. The Drucker-Prager criterion is reformulated in order to account for
con ned compressive stress states (for details, see [9]).
The second model is a single-surface plasticity model originally proposed by
Etse and Willam [3]. It is referred to as Extended Leon Model. This model
accounts for the dependence of strength on the Lode angle. The loading surface
is given as [9]
(  p  r )2
qrg(; e) 2 3 rg (; e)
f (p; r; ; q ; q ) = 1 + p h
+
ELM h s
f f cu6f 2 f
cu cu cu

 q 2  p rg(; e)   q 2 q
+ h
m(q ) + p = 0; h s
(3)
cuf f s
6f cu f f cu cu tu

with
q = f
h cy q
and qs = ftu qs :
h (4)
In Equation (3), p is the hydrostatic pressure, r is the deviatoric radius, and 
denotes the Lode angle. fcu and ftu denote the uniaxial compressive and tensile
strength, respectively. A proper representation of compressive and tensile failure
of concrete is achieved by the introduction of an elliptic function in the deviatioric
plane, g (; e) [12] (see Figure 3). Hereby, the eccentricity parameter e is de ned
as the ratio of the distance from the tensile and compressive meridian to the
hydrostatic axis, i.e., e=rt /rc [11]. It de nes the shape of the ellipse ranging from
e=0.5 (triangular form of yield surface) to e=1 (circular form of yield surface).
The size of the loading surface is controlled by means of the hardening/softening
forces qh and qs .
1 1
circle ellipse

rt
rt

2 3 2 3
rc r c

r r
(a) e = t
=1 (b) e = t
<1
r
c rc

Figure 3: Extended Leon Model: in uence of the eccentricity parameter


e on the shape of the yield surface in the deviatoric plane (rt and rc
represent the distance from the tensile and compressive meridian
to the hydrostatic axis)

Cracking of concrete is characterized by a localization of deformations. The for-


mation of localized deformations is generally accompanied by the loss of ellipticity
of the underlying boundary value problem, which in turn causes the loss of ob-
jectivity of the numerical solutions obtained by the FEM. The employed material
models are regularized by means of the fracture energy concept which guarantees
objectivity with respect to the element size. Softening functions appearing in
the formulations of both models are calibrated according to the ctitious crack
concept [4] (for details, see [8]).

3. Numerical analyses of headed stud

The headed stud considered in the numerical studies is characterized by an in-


clined shoulder (see Figure 4). The material properties of concrete and steel
employed in the numerical analyses are given in Table 1.

3.1 General remarks


In the numerical studies, the material behavior of the steel bolt is assumed to
a=200 a=200 1 =12 cone-
50 14 50 shaped
contact
surface

40

100
d=50.8
203.65 5.55 50.8

5
260

4
2 =22

334 32 334

Figure 4: Geometric dimensions (in [mm]) of headed stud with inclined


shoulder considered in the numerical studies
concrete
Young's modulus 30000 N/mm2
Poisson's ratio 0.2
uniaxial compressive strength 40 N/mm2
uniaxial tensile strength 3 N/mm2
fracture energy: GIf 0.1 Nmm/mm2
fracture energy: GIfI 50 GIf
steel
Young's modulus 210000 N/mm2
Poisson's ratio 0.3

Table 1: Material parameters of concrete and steel

be linear elastic. At the cone-shaped contact surface between the anchor head
and the concrete (see Figure 4), no slip is considered. The analyses are performed
displacement-driven. The displacements are prescribed at the top of the steel rod.
Because of axisymmetry of the geometric properties and the loading conditions,
the problem is solved by means of axisymmetric analyses.

3.2 Numerical study I: variation of a=d-ratio


In order to investigate the in uence of the a=d-ratio on the numerical results, the
a=d-ratio of 4, depicted in Figure 4, was reduced to 3, 2, and 1. The di erent
geometric properties considered in this study are shown in Figure 5.

(a) a=d=4 (b) a=d=3 (c) a=d=2 (d) a=d=1


Figure 5: Study I: considered geometric properties of headed stud

Figure 6 shows the employed FE mesh consisting of 2695 four-node elements.


A relatively ne discretization was generated in the area where failure of concrete
is expected. For the remaining part, a coarser mesh was designed.

axis of symmetry zoom

mesh1 n=2695
Figure 6: Study I: FE mesh (n: number of elements)

As regards failure of headed studs in consequence of concrete failure, two di er-


ent types of failure modes can be distinguished. On the one hand, high compres-
sive loading of concrete at the anchor head might cause local shear failure. On the
other hand, a circumferential crack initiating at the anchor head and propagating
towards the support might develop, nally resulting in a cone-shaped failure sur-
face. As already pointed out in [10], the relative displacement between the anchor
head and the concrete surface, ub us (see Figure 7(a)), allows to distinguish be-
tween the two aforementioned failure modes. Whereas an almost constant value
of ub us is typical for cone-shaped failure, local shear failure at the anchor head
is characterized by a continuously increasing value of ub us .
Figure 7(a) shows the histories of us and ub obtained from numerical analyses
with a=d=4 and 1, respectively. For a=d=4, almost identical histories are observed
for us and ub . This indicates rather small deformations and, hence, rather low
compressive loading of concrete over the anchor head. On the other hand, a
continuously increasing value of ub us is obtained for the analysis based on
a=d=1, indicating compressive failure of concrete over the anchor head. However,
the value of ub us in the post-peak regime is almost constant. Hence, similar to
the analysis with a=d=4, a cone-shaped failure surface nally develops, causing
failure of the headed stud.
Figure 7(b) shows the history of the obtained load as a function of the pre-
scribed displacement u for the considered values of the a=d-ratio. For decreasing
values of the a=d-ratio, an increase of the peak load is observed.
P
us
u a=d=4
P [kN] ub P [kN] a=d=3
150 111
000 150 a=d=2
000
111
a=d=1
100 100

50 u b
50
u u,u
b s

[mm] u [mm]
s

0 0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
(a) (b)
Figure 7: Study I: load-displacement curves obtained from multi-
surface model (a) for a=d=4 and 1 and (b) for di erent values
of the a=d-ratio

The distribution of the internal variable of the Drucker-Pager criterion, DP ,


in the vicinity of the anchor head is given in Figure 8 for a=d=4 and 1 at the
respective peak loads. Figure 8(a) indicates an almost elastic material response
of concrete over the anchor head for the headed stud with a=d=4. Peak values
of DP are observed in the region left of the upper outer corner of the anchor
head. Figure 8(b) shows the distribution of DP for an a=d-ratio equal to 1. In
contrast to the distribution given in Figure 8(a), peak values of DP are observed
over the anchor head. The respective plastic deformations are responsible for the
increasing value of the relative displacement ub us in Figure 7(a).
The distribution of the minimum in-plane principal stress, min , provides in-
sight into the load-carrying behavior of the headed stud (see Figure 9). In general,
the load is transferred from the anchor head to the support ring by means of a
[ 10 2 ]

1.0
5.000e+00

0.8
0.000e+00

0.6
-5.000e+00

0.4
-1.000e+01

0.2
-1.500e+01

0.0
-2.000e+01

(a) (b)
Figure 8: Study I: distribution of the internal hardening/softening vari-
able of the Drucker-Prager criterion, DP , in the vicinity of the
anchor head obtained for (a) a=d=4 and (b) a=d=1 at the respec-
tive peak loads

compressive strut. For a=d-ratios ranging from 3 to 1, this strut can clearly be
identi ed (see Figures 9(b) to 9(d)). The previously observed increase of the peak
load for decreasing values of the a=d-ratio is re ected by increasing compressive
stresses min in the strut. The stress distribution shown in Figure 9(a) refers
to a=d=4. The compressive strut between the anchor head and the support is
divided into two parts. The lower part of the strut is similar to the strut obtained
from the analysis with a=d=3. It starts at the anchor head and is aligned to-
wards the support. However, for a=d=4 it does not reach the support. It becomes
almost horizontal at a distance of approximately d/2 from the concrete surface.
The upper part of the strut is parallel to the concrete surface, starting at the sup-
port ring. The load transfer between the two horizontal parts of the strut from a
depth of d/2 to the concrete surface is accomplished by mixed compressive-tensile
loading.
Insight into the failure mechanism is gained from the distribution of the maxi-
mum plastic strain in the axisymmetric plane, "pmax , depicted in Figure 10. "pmax
represents the opening of circumferential cracks which nally cause cone-shaped
failure of concrete. For the headed stud considered, two di erent circumferential
cracks are observed. One of them is located in the previously mentioned com-
pressive strut between the anchor head and the support ring. It is a consequence
of high compressive loading in this strut. The second crack originates from the
geometric properties of the anchor head. It starts from the upper outer corner of
the anchor head. Depending on the geometric properties of the headed stud, de-
(a) a=d=4

3.0
5.000e+00

-13.6
0.000e+00 (b) a=d=3

-30.2
-5.000e+00

-46.8
-1.000e+01
(c) a=d=2
-63.4
-1.500e+01

-80.0
-2.000e+01

(d) a=d=1

Figure 9: Study I: distribution of minimum principal stress in the axi-


symmetric plane, min (in [N/mm2 ])

scribed by the a=d-ratio, the two cracks are developing di erently as regards both
crack width and orientation. For the analysis with a=d=4, characterized by the
compressive strut consisting of two parts, the second crack governs the structural
failure. The rst crack, i.e., the one located within the compressive strut, has only
slightly developed. The opposite situation is found for a=d=1. Here, the crack
located in the compressive strut dominates the failure of the headed stud. The
second crack is almost horizontal and, hence, has no in uence on the failure of
the stud. The analyses based on a=d=2 and 3 represent transition states between
the previously described two extreme cases a=d=4 and 1. The peak loads and the
displacements at peak load obtained from this study are summarized in Table 2.

3.3 Numerical study II: variation of discretization


The second investigation focusses on the in uence of the underlying FE mesh
on the numerical results. For this purpose three FE meshes consisting of 2695,
994, and 2676 four-node elements are considered (see Figures 6 and 11). Mesh1
[ 10 3 ] (a) a=d=4

1.00
5.000e+00

0.78
0.000e+00
(b) a=d=3

0.56
-5.000e+00

0.34
-1.000e+01

(c) a=d=2
0.12
-1.500e+01

-0.10
-2.000e+01

(d) a=d=1

Figure 10: Study I: distribution of maximum plastic strain in the axi-


symmetric plane, "pmax

has already been employed in the previous subsection. For the two remaining
meshes, mesh alignment was considered. Mesh alignment is the orientation of
element edges in the direction of opening cracks (see [7]). For mesh2, the element
edges are aligned from the anchor head towards the support ring (such meshes
are commonly used in anchor bolt analyses [2]). The element edges of mesh3 are
adapted to the expected orientation of the circumferential crack, see Figure 11.
The load-displacement curves obtained from the multi-surface model for a=d=4
are depicted in Figure 12. Remarkably, the in uence of the underlying FE mesh
on the peak load is rather small. The obtained peak loads vary only by 4.4%.
Moreover, almost the same load-displacement response is observed for the aligned
FE meshes, i.e., for mesh2 and mesh3. The orientation of the circumferential crack
obtained by means of the structured mesh, i.e., mesh1 (see Figure 12(a)), does not
coincide with the element edges of this mesh. This resulted in an arti cial stress
transfer in consequence of element locking (see [6] [5]) and, hence, in additional
cracking in neighboring elements. An increase of the crack band width because
axis of symmetry

axis of symmetry
mesh2 n=994 mesh3 n=2676
Figure 11: Study II: FE meshes characterized by mesh alignment
(n: number of elements)

of cracking of more than one row of nite elements leads to an increase of the
released energy and, hence, to an overestimation of the load-carrying behavior
(see pre-peak response obtained from mesh1 in Figure 12).
Figure 13 shows the crack pattern at the respective peak loads by means of
the distribution of "pmax . The distribution of "pmax obtained on the basis of mesh1
(see Figure 13(a)) indicates representation of the crack by at least three rows of
elements. Mesh alignment towards the support ring (mesh2, see Figure 13(b))
provides the desired representation of the crack in the context of the ctitious
crack concept [4], i.e., the representation of the crack in one element row. However,
crack propagation is strongly a ected by the orientation of the element edges.
Alignment towards the support resulted in a straight crack reaching from the
P u
P [kN]
100
111
000
000
111
000
111

50
mesh1
mesh2
mesh3
u [mm]
0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Figure 12: Study II: load-displacement curves
anchor head to the support. This crack pattern does not coincide with the crack
pattern obtained on the basis of mesh1. Mesh1 and mesh3 (see Figures 13(a) and
(c)) gave the presumably correct crack pattern. In contrast to mesh1, however,

[ 10 3 ] (a) mesh1

1.00
5.000e+00

0.78
0.000e+00

0.56
-5.000e+00

0.34
-1.000e+01
(b) mesh2

0.12
-1.500e+01

-0.10
-2.000e+01

(c) mesh3

Figure 13: Study II: distribution of maximum plastic strain in the axi-
symmetric plane, "pmax

mesh3 provides the correct representation of the crack within one row of elements.
The numerical results obtained from the second study are summarized in Ta-
ble 2.

3.4 Numerical study III: variation of material model


The last part of the numerical investigations deals with the in uence of the em-
ployed material model on the numerical results for an a=d-ratio of 4. For the
numerical simulations, mesh3 is employed (see Figure 11). From the mesh study
performed in the previous subsection mesh3 was found to give best numerical
results as regards the crack pattern and the representation of cracks by the FEM.
For the analysis based on the Extended Leon Model, a non-associative ow
rule is considered. Moreover the dependence of the strength on the Lode angle is
accounted for by means of e=rt /rc 1.
Figure 14 shows the load-displacement curves obtained from the Extended Leon
Model and the multi-surface model. A strong in uence of the employed material
model on the peak load is observed. The peak load obtained from the Extended
Leon Model is only 55% of the peak load predicted by the multi-surface model.
P u
P [kN]
100
1111
0000
0000
1111

50 multi-surface model
Extended Leon Model

u [mm]
0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5
Figure 14: Study III: load-displacement curves obtained from the
multi-surface model and Extended Leon Model
The reason for the large deviations between the two model answers might stem
from di erent behavior on
 the constitutive level and/or
 the structural level caused by di erent modes of cracking.
As regards the latter, similar crack pattern were obtained from both analyses. The
dominating circumferential crack developed exactly in the row of nite elements
which was prespeci ed for cracking by means of mesh alignment. Hence, the
reason for the observed large deviations must be found at the constitutive level.
Figure 15 shows the distribution of the internal variables of the multi-surface
model, i.e., DP and RK for the Drucker-Prager and the Rankine criterion,
respectively. A shear failure mode characterized by an active Drucker-Pager cri-
terion and an active Rankine criterion is observed.
In order to investigate the performance of the employed material models when
applied to the simulation of such shear failure modes, a plane-stress benchmark
problem is considered (see Figure 16(a)). The model depicted in Figure 16(a) is
loaded by means of a vertical pressure p. Thereafter, a horizontal displacement
u is prescribed at the top of the model. The respective stress path in the 1 -2
stress space is depicted in Figure 16(b) for di erent values of p. According to the
shape of the initial and failure surfaces shown in Figure 17, this type of loading
will result in the desired shear failure mode.
[ 10 3 ]
(a)
2.5
5.000e+00

2.0
0.000e+00

1.5
-5.000e+00

1.0
-1.000e+01

0.5
-1.500e+01

0.0
-2.000e+01 (b)

Figure 15: Study III: distribution of internal variable of (a) the Drucker-
Prager criterion, DP , and (b) the Rankine criterion, RK
(a) p (b) 2
1
u application of
con nement, p increase
of u

Figure 16: Study III { benchmark problem: (a) loading conditions


of the considered plane-stress benchmark problem and (b) stress
path in 1 -2 stress space

Figure 18 shows the stress paths obtained from the analysis of the benchmark
problem. As regards the multi-surface model (see Figure 18(a)), an increase of 1
for an increasing value of u is observed until the stress path reaches the Rankine
loading surface. It is noteworthy, that the contribution of the Rankine criterion
to the plastic strain rate tensor is controlled by means of an associative ow
rule. Consequently, softening, which is characterized by the decrease of 1 , is
accompanied by an increase of the compressive stress 2 . The stress path drifts
towards the Drucker-Prager loading surface, nally reaching the intersection point
of the Rankine surface with the Drucker-Prager loading surface. Consideration of
hardening within the Drucker-Prager criterion results in a continuous increase of
the compressive stress 2 .
(a) 2 (b) 2
f cu fcu
1 1
-1.0 f
cu -1.0 fcu

initial initial
surface surface

-1.0 -1.0
failure failure
surface surface
Figure 17: Study III { benchmark problem: initial and failure surface
in 1 -2 stress space of (a) multi-surface model and (b) Extended
Leon Model

The shape of the loading surface of the Extended Leon Model and the employed
plastic potential (see [9]) results in buy far lower values of the compressive stress
2 (see Figure 18(b)). For the analyses with p=0, 1, and 2 N/mm2 , the stress
path turns towards the origin of the stress space. The maximum values of the
compressive stress 2 are obtained as maxj2 j=6.7, 9.3, and 11.8 N/mm2 for
p=0, 1, and 2 N/mm2 . For the multi-surface model, the compressive stress 2
increases until the uniaxial compressive strength is reached and, hence, softening
of the Drucker-Prager criterion is initiated.
The stress-strain curves corresponding to the considered benchmark problem
are depicted in Figure 19. Whereas a reduction of the shear stress  is obtained
for the Extended Leon Model for p=0, 1, and 2 N/mm2 , the multi-surface model
shows a continuous increase of the shear stress for con ned loading conditions,
i.e., for p>0. The latter seems to be responsible for the resti ening observed in
the load-displacement curve of the headed stud obtained from the multi-surface
model (see Figure 14). Similar to the benchmark problem, resti ening is observed
until the uniaxial compressive strength is reached. Softening in the context of the
Drucker-Prager criterion, characterized by DP > DP;m (see Figure 15(a)), nally
leads to failure of the headed stud in the form of the expected cone-shaped failure
surface 1 . The same failure mode was detected by the Extended Leon Model,
however, at a buy far lower load level (see Figure 14).
The numerical results obtained from the material model study are summarized
in Table 2.

1 At DP = DP;m , the compressive strength is equal to the uniaxial compressive strength


fcu . In the context of the employed Drucker-Prager criterion, DP;m depends on the level of
con nement [9]. For the case of no con nement, DP;m =0.0022.
2 [N/mm2 ] 2 [N/mm2 ]
(a) 4 (b) 4

1 [N/mm2 ] 1 [N/mm2 ]
-2 2 4 -2 2 4
p=0
-4 -4 p=0
p=1
p=2
-8 -8 p=1
p=5
p=2
-12 -12

-16 -16 p=5

-20 -20
Figure 18: Study III { benchmark problem: stress paths in 1 -2 stress
space obtained from (a) multi-surface model and (b) Extended
Leon Model
 [N/mm2 ]  [N/mm2 ]

12 12
9 p= 5 9 p= 5
6 6 p= 2
p= 2
3 p= 1 3
p= 0 N/mm2 [10 3] p= 0 N/mm2 p= 1 [10 3 ]
0 0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
(a) (b)
Figure 19: Study III { benchmark problem: stress-strain curves ob-
tained from (a) multi-surface model and (b) Extended Leon Model
study a=d model mesh Pmax [kN] u (P =P
max ) [mm]
I: span/depth-ratio 4 DP-R 1 91.7 1.56
3 DP-R 1 109.0 1.43
2 DP-R 1 115.0 1.06
1 DP-R 1 142.5 1.03
II: FE mesh 4 DP-R 1 91.7 1.56
4 DP-R 2 87.7 1.25
4 DP-R 3 91.2 1.30
III: material models 4 DP-R 3 91.2 1.30
4 ELM 3 50.6 0.31

Table 2: Peak load Pmax and prescribed displacement u at peak load


obtained from numerical studies (DP-R: multi-surface model con-
sisting of Drucker-Prager and Rankine criterion, ELM: Extended
Leon Model)

4. Conclusions

In this paper, the dependence of the failure behavior of headed studs with in-
clined shoulder on the a=d-ratio, the discretization, and the material model was
investigated. For this purpose, two material models for plain concrete were used.
Both models are formulated within the theory of plasticity. One of them is a
multi-surface model, whereas the other one is a single-surface model. From the
numerical simulations of a headed stud with inclined shoulder the following con-
clusions can be drawn:
 As for the analyses based on di erent geometric properties, a strong in u-
ence of the a=d-ratio on the peak load and the load-carrying behavior was
observed. Whereas a compressive strut from the anchor head to the support
ring was identi ed for a=d-ratios ranging between 1 to 3, a strut consisting
of two separated parts was obtained from the analysis with a=d=4.
 As for the analyses based on di erent FE discretizations, almost the same
value of the peak load was obtained for all considered FE meshes. In contrast
to the employed aligned FE meshes, the structured mesh resulted in element
locking and, hence, in an overestimation of the load-carrying behavior in the
pre-peak regime of the analysis.
 As for the analyses based on di erent material models for concrete, a crucial
in uence on the predicted peak load was observed. Both the shape of the
loading surface and the plastic potential were identi ed as the main reasons
for the obtained deviations.
References

[1] Comite Euro-International du Beton CEB. Fastenings to Concrete and Ma-


sonry Structures. Thomas Telford Publishing, London, England, 1991.
[2] L. Elfgren. Fracture mechanics of concrete structures. Technical report,
RILEM, Technical Committee 90, 1990.
[3] G. Etse and K. Willam. Fracture energy formulation for inelastic behavior of
plain concrete. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE), 120:1983{2011,
1994.
[4] A. Hillerborg, M. Modeer, and P.E. Petersson. Analysis of crack formation
and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and nite ele-
ments. Cement and Concrete Research, 6:773{782, 1976.
[5] Th. Huemer, R. Lackner, and H.A. Mang. Implementation and application of
an algorithm for adaptive nite element analysis of concrete plates. In Z. Bit-
tnar, G. Pijaudier-Cabot, and B. Gerard, editors, Mechanics of Quasi-Brittle
Materials and Structures, Prague, Czech Republic, March 1999. Hermes Sci-
ence Publications, Paris.
[6] M. Jirasek and Th. Zimmermann. Analysis of rotating crack model. Journal
of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE), 124(8):842{851, 1998.
[7] R. Lackner and H.A. Mang. Adaptivity in computational mechanics of con-
crete structures. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods
in Geomechanics, 25(7):711{739, 2001.
[8] H.A. Mang, R. Lackner, P. Pivonka, and Ch. Schranz. Selected topics in
computational structural mechanics. In W.A. Wall, K.-U. Bletzinger, and
K. Schweizerhof, editors, Trends in Computational Structural Mechanics,
pages 1{25, Lake Constance, Austria/Germany, 2001.
[9] P. Pivonka, R. Lackner, and H. Mang. Numerical analyses of concrete sub-
jected to triaxial compressive loading. In CD-ROM Proceedings of the Eu-
ropean Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engi-
neering, Barcelona, Spain, 2000.
[10] P. Pivonka, R. Lackner, and H. Mang. Numerical simulation of concrete
failure in pull-out experiments. In CD-ROM Proceedings of the 10th Inter-
national Congress of Fracture, 2001.
[11] E. Pramono. Numerical simulation of distributed and localized failure in
concrete. PhD thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder, USA, 1988.
[12] K. Willam and E. Warnke. Constitutive models for the triaxial behavior of
concrete. In International Association of Bridge and Structural Engineers
Seminar on "Concrete Structures Subjected to Triaxial Stresses", volume 19,
pages 1{30, Bergamo, Italy, 1975. Int. Assoc. Bridge Struct. Eng. (IABSE),
Zurich.
SIMULATING A RESPONSE OF CONNECTIONS
Radomír Pukl, Jan Červenka and Vladimír Červenka
Červenka Consulting, Czech Republic

Abstract
Nonlinear simulation using the finite element package ATENA is presented on several
practical applications. The selected examples show the possibilities of the numerical
simulation of connections between steel and concrete in both composite structures and
anchorage technology. The presented examples show that advanced constitutive models
implemented in a finite element code such as ATENA can serve as an efficient tool to
explain behavior of connection between steel and concrete. This approach can be used to
support and extend experimental investigations and to predict behavior of structures and
structural details.

1. Introduction

Computer simulation based on realistic nonlinear material model enables successful


simulation of the real structural behavior. Selection of practical applications dealing with
connections between steel and concrete is presented in this paper. The numerical
simulations were performed using the finite element package ATENA developed by the
authors.

ATENA employs advanced material models reflecting all the essential features of
concrete behavior in tension as well as in compression. Tensile cracking model is based
on the smeared crack approach, which replaces the discrete cracks, occurring in real
concrete structures, by strain localization in a continuous displacement field. Concrete
fracture is covered by nonlinear fracture mechanics based on fracture energy with
exponential softening law derived experimentally by Hordijk. Objectivity of the finite
element solution is assured by crack band approach - the descending branch of the
stress-strain relationship is adjusted according to the finite element size and mesh
orientation. In compression, the plasticity model according to Menetrey-Willam is able
to capture concrete crushing under multi-axial pressure (confinement). More details

747
concerning the program ATENA and the implemented material models with further
references can be found in [1] and [2]. As documented on following examples, various
methods are available in ATENA for modeling of connection between steel and
concrete: fixed bond or interface elements. In case of fixed connection the bond failure is
covered by fracture mechanics of the concrete layer surrounding the steel inlay.

Three examples of the numerical simulation of connections between steel and concrete
in both composite (reinforced concrete) structures and anchorage technology are
presented. The optimization of a prestressed precast hollow core slab and the analysis of
prestressed cable anchor region document the possibilities of modeling connection
between reinforcing steel bars and surrounding concrete. Further examples on this
topics, namely simulation of cracking in a four-point bending reinforced concrete beam
and tension stiffening effect on a steel reinforcing bar embedded into concrete block, can
be found in [2] and [3]. The analysis of a containment liner anchor represents the
anchorage in concrete by steel fasteners and liners. Other examples of anchor
simulations were published in [4] (contribution to the RILEM Round Robin analysis of
anchor bolts in concrete structures) and [5] (simulation of powder actuated anchors).

2. Precast hollow core slab

Geometry of a new type of prestressed precast hollow core slab was optimized for the
producer, DYWIDAG Prefa Lysá nad Labem, Czech Republic, in order to minimize
concrete cracking due to prestressing in the anchoring region. Influence of hole shape,
number of holes, type and number of prestressing cables, prestressing force, thickness of
the concrete cover and age of the concrete by application of prestressing force were
investigated in numerical study [6]. A slab with the height of 200 mm and prestressing
cables with the diameter of 12.5 mm was analyzed (Fig.1).

Fig.1 Cross-section of hollow core slab with analyzed detail (dimensions in cm)

As a basic model, the lower part of one rib with one prestressed cable (see detail in
Fig.1) and length of 1 m was modeled by 4000 concrete 3D finite elements (Fig.2). The
prestressing cable was modeled by volumetric elements with steel material properties. It
was prestressed in the longitudinal direction using step-by-step loading procedure.

748
V1
C1

Y
X

Fig.2 Finite element model of the lower part of the rib with one prestressing cable
V1
C1 0.0001

0.00009

0.00008

0.00007

0.00006

0.00005

0.00004

0.00003

0.00002
Y
X
0.00001
Z
Output Set: Load Step ID 20 0.
Contour: C:COD CRACK_ATTRIBUTES

Fig.3 Crack widths (in m) in the anchoring region at bond failure

749
A bond failure and a longitudinal crack in the concrete cover were obtained. Based on
the numerical results, optimal geometrical shape with sufficient concrete cover was
recommended and optimal prestressing force was adjusted. Numerically obtained crack
widths for one particular case are shown in Fig.3 for illustration. Figures 2 and 3 shows
models for two different geometrical shapes of the rib for illustration.

The next task was to determine the shear carrying capacity of the projected slab. Because
of lack of shear reinforcement, avoiding the shear failure is the crucial point in design of
the precast hollow core slabs. Therefore, shear-loading test was simulated on three-
dimensional model of the symmetrical half of the slab. Finite element mesh with over
8000 volumetric elements is shown in Fig.4.
V1
L1

Fig.4 Finite element model of the symmetrical half of the hollow core slab

In this case, the prestressing cables were modeled by one-dimensional bar elements.
After prestressing the slab was subjected to the local shear load. Slab failed due to bond
failure of prestressing cables in anchoring region with consequent opening of a shear
crack near the support. The allowed shear loads for design tables were determined based
on the numerical results. Simulated failure pattern of the projected slab (Fig.5) is
compared with a typical shear test failure of a hollow core slab of recently produced type
(Fig.6).

750
V1
L1 0.000866

0.000812

0.000758

0.000704

0.00065

0.000596

0.000541

0.000487

0.000433

0.000379

0.000325

0.000271

0.000217

0.000162

0.000108

0.0000541

Output Set: Load Step ID 40 -3.02E-12


Contour: C:COD CRACK_ATTRIBUTES

Fig.5 Numerically obtained crack widths (in m) at slab shear failure

Fig.6 Typical failure of a hollow core slab in the shear loading test

751
3. Pre-stressing cable anchor

Three-dimensional simulation of prestressing cable anchors was performed using the


fracture-plastic material model [7]. Prestressing force is transferred from prestressing
cables to concrete through special cylindrical anchors, which are embedded into concrete
during casting. Shape of the anchor is shown in Fig.7 along with the finite element
model. The objective of the analysis was to simulate experiments, which are undertaken
during the anchor validation process. In the experiment, the prestressing cable anchor
was embedded into a concrete block. The anchor is surrounded by spiral reinforcement
and loaded by compressive forces at the top to simulate the action of prestressing. Very
good agreement between analytical and experimental peak loads can be seen in Fig.8.
The load-displacement curve shown in the figure was obtained from the numerical
analysis, while the experimental curve is not available to the authors. The final failure
pattern with radial cracking and crushing shear failure around the anchor is shown in
Fig.9.

Fig.7 Finite element model for the prestressing cable anchor analysis

752
9000

7000
Pre-stressing force [kN]

Analysis
5000

3000
Experimental
peak load
1000

-1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Anchor insertion displacement [mm]

Fig.8 Load-displacement diagram for prestressing anchor analysis

Fig.9 Final failure mode for prestressing cable anchor analysis. Crushed concrete is
shown in the left figure as contours of maximal plastic strain. Major radial/splitting
cracks on the specimen surface are shown in the right figure.

753
4. Containment liner anchor

In nuclear containment vessels, a steel liner is attached to the concrete using T-shaped
line anchors. Load-carrying capacity of these anchors is usually determined by
experiments (Fig.10). Experiments are performed for a single anchor, while in reality
there are many anchors in the containment vessel, and it can be expected that an anchor
behavior may be affected by neighboring anchors. The experimental setup was designed
using non-linear two-dimensional analyses, such that the behavior of the experimentally
tested single anchor is similar to the behavior of the real anchor in the containment
vessel. The fracture-plastic concrete model [7] was used in three-dimensional numerical
study to verify some of the assumptions in the two-dimensional analyses: namely, the
increase of compressive strength and ductility due to three-dimensional confinement in
front of the anchor. The specimen was loaded by horizontal force at the right end of the
liner up to the failure. The load-displacement diagrams are compared in Fig.11 and they
show very good agreement of numerical and experimental results. Cracking and
crushing patterns obtained in the 3D numerical simulation are shown in Fig.12.

Fig.10 Failure pattern in liner anchor experiments. (Photo: courtesy of Ishikawajima


Harima Heavy Industries and Tokyo Electric Power Company, Japan)

754
0.9

0.8 Experiment 1

Experiment 2
Horizontal anchor force [MN]

0.7

0.6 Experiment 3

Experiment 4
0.5
Experiment 5
0.4

0.3
Numerical Analysis
0.2

0.1

0.0
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Horizontal anchor displacement [m]

Fig.11 Load-displacement diagrams for liner anchor three-dimensional analysis and


comparison with experimental data. (Experimental data are courtesy of Ishikawajima
Harima Heavy Industries and Tokyo Electric Power Company, Japan).

Fig.12 Failure mode for liner anchor analysis - concrete cracking and crushing at the and
of the analysis

755
5. Conclusions

Three practical examples demonstrate the possibilities of numerical simulation in the


field of connections between steel and concrete, namely optimization of the precast
hollow core slab, investigation of the anchor region of prestressing cable and analysis of
the containment liner anchor. Further practical applications can be found in reference [2]
to [5]. As documented in the paper, the nonlinear finite element package ATENA, based
on advanced constitutive models, is able to predict and explain behavior of steel
reinforcement as well as steel anchors in concrete structures. It can be effectively used to
support and extend experimental investigations by innovative solutions.

Acknowledgment
The results presented in this paper are related to the research topics supported by grant of
Grant Agency of Czech Republic (GAČR) No. 103/99/0755. The financial support is
greatly appreciated.

References

1. Červenka, V., Červenka, J. and Pukl, R., 'ATENA - an advanced tool for
engineering analysis of connections', Proceedings of the RILEM Symposium on
Connections between Steel and Concrete, Stuttgart, Germany, September 2001.
2. Červenka, V., 'Simulating a Response', Concrete Engineering International, 4 (4)
(2000) 45-49.
3. Margoldová J., Červenka V., Pukl R. and Klein, D., 'Angewandte Sprödbruch-
berechnung', Bauingenieur 74 (3), (Springer VDI, München, Germany, 1999), A22-
A29 (in German).
4. Pukl, R., Eligehausen, R. and Červenka, V., 'Computer simulation of pullout test of
headed anchors in a state of plane-stress', In: Concrete design based on fracture
mechanics (eds. W. Gerstle and Z.P. Bažant), ACI SP-134, Detroit, Michigan, USA,
1992, 79-100.
5. Červenka, J., Červenka, V. and Eligehausen, R., 'Fracture-plastic material model for
concrete, application to analysis of powder actuated anchors', Proceedings of the
International Conference on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures FraMCoS 3,
Gifu, Japan, 1998 (Aedificatio Publishers, Freiburg, Germany, 1998) 1107-1116.
6. Pukl, R., 'Optimization of hollow core slab geometry' (Červenka Consulting, Praha,
Czech Republic, March 2001, in Czech).
7. Červenka, J. and Červenka, V., 'Three Dimensional Combined Fracture-Plastic
Material Model for Concrete', Proceedings of the 5th U.S. National Congress on
Computational Mechanics, Boulder, Colorado, USA, August 1999.

756
NON-SUPPORTED CRASH BARRIERS - PROOF OF THE
CONCRETE RESISTANCES ACCORDING TO THE
CONCRETE-CAPACITY-METHOD
Jochen Buhler
f i s c h e r w e r k e, Germany

Abstract
Crash barriers (see fig. 1.) made of reinforced concrete shall protect the tunnel tube
against exceptional effects caused by the traffic. These barriers are in generally fixed
additional to the bearing precast concrete tunnel segments by bonded shear bolts. The
proofs of the barrier`s concrete failure mostly result from the method of Rasmussen
according to „Deutscher Ausschuß für Stahlbeton, Heft 346“. The proofs of the concrete
segment`s failure results from the wellknown κ - method.
The Concrete-Capacity-Method provides a more economic design method and will be
applied on the shear bolts of the non-supported crash barriers in the recent Elbtunnel
project in Hamburg, Germany. As best possible solution a shear bolt with a diameter of
35mm and an effective anchorage depth of 220mm was designed. The bolt is bonded
with hybrid resin mortar and is made of stainless steel A4-70 (316Ti).
This paper will present the proofs according to the ETAG of Metal Anchors for use in
concrete, Annex C considering all edge and axial influences. The edge influence results
from both the external dimension and the screw joint bay`s locations of the concrete
lining elements.
The results of pull-out tests for determining the characteristical resistance to proof the
concrete pryout failure will be shown as well as the recommendations for additional
reinforcement to transmit the shear force in the crash barriers.
The summary compares the results of the CC-Method with those of the Method of
Rasmussen and κ - method respectively.

759
figure 1: build-up of tunnel tube

1. Introduction

The interior of road tunnels with circular section are often additionally completed with
side walls, which among other things are used as crash barriers to protect the supporting
structure, as fire protection and as support for such as emergency lights. The continous
concreted side wall will be connected by post-installed anchors to the structural lining
segments. A tension anchor – an adhesive anchor M16 for cracked concrete in the
structural lining segments in combination with a waved anchor in the side wall cast in
situ – are installed in the top region. Taking up the shear loads which are mainly
originated by dead loads adhesive shear bolts are designed at the bottom regions. This
paper will work on the design of these adhesive shear bolts.

760
figure 2: tunnel tube

The first design recommendation based on DafStb book 346 according to Rasmussen
results in eight shear bolts per precast lining segment. Rasmussen calculates the existing
load capacity of the shear bolts by

Fu = c ⋅ d ⋅ β s ⋅ β c ⋅ 1 + (c ⋅ ε ) − c ⋅ ε
2

. (1)

 s  β
ε = 3⋅ k  ⋅ c
 d  βs

This equation assumes that the force acts parallel to the surface of the concrete wall.
Using the dimensionless safety factor for the working load c = 1,3, the effective buckling
length sk = 102,5mm, the bolt diameter d = 30mm, the compressive strength of a
cylindrical concrete test specimen βc = 25N/mm² and the yield strength of steel βs =
360N/mm² the ultimate load capacity results in Fu = 87,4kN and by considering of an
additional safety factor the permissible load capacity in Fperm = 34,9kN. The dead load
per lining segment width is G = 193,5kN, this means shear action of VSk = 24,20kN per
shear bolt. The successful proof is obvious VSk = 24,20kN ≤ 34,9kN = Fperm.

2. Concrete Capacity Method

Recently designing anchors, the so-called C(oncrete) C(apacity) method results in


economic solutions and should be applied also for the crash barriers. The tension anchors
in the top region are proofed according to CC-method. This design method proofs in the
ultimate limit state for each load direction (tension and shear) all failure modes - the
concrete and steel failure modes, the pull-out failure. This is done according the safety
concept with partial safety factors. The existing application requires to consider and
calculate the resistances due to shear load in case of steel failure, concrete edge failure
and pryout failure. The proofs for the concrete failure modes have to be done for the
crash barriers as well as for the lining segments.

761
The following material data are given:

a) concrete:

a1) lining segments: βW,N = 45N/mm²


h = 700mm
a2) crash barriers: βW,N = 25N/mm²
h = 520mm

b) anchor: fyk = 560N/mm² stainless steel 316Ti


fuk = 700N/mm²
hef = lf = 220mm
d = dnom = 35mm

The acting design value of shear load is originated by the permanent weight of the side
wall VS,d = 96,75 ⋅ 1,35 = 130,61kN/m.

2.1. Steel failure


For calculation the resistance in case of steel failure

α M ⋅ M Rk, s
VRk, s = (2)
l
we use the following static assumption: full restraints on both sides but mutual
displacement. The value αM = 2,0 is given for those full restraint supports. The lever arm
l= 40mm considers that the location of the restraint for calculation have to be assumed
half of the bolt diameter behind the concrete surface, because hammer drilling leads to
slight spallings at the drill hole.
The characteristic bending moment can be calculated by

M 0Rk,s = 1,2 ⋅ Wel ⋅ f uk = 3535,764kNmm (3)

and as consequence we can derive the resistance in case of steel failure as VRk,s =
176,79kN.
According to the European Technical Guideline ETAG 001, Annex C the partial safety
factor in case of steel failure due to shear load is derived from

1
γ M,s = = 1,25 . (4)
f yk f uk

This leads to the design value VRd,s = 141,43kN.

762
2.2. Concrete edge and Pryout failure for the precast lining segments
Four different arrangements of anchor position per lining segment width are necessary
cause of the lining segment arrangements in the tube. As example this paper shows the
worst case only.
The resistance in case of concrete edge failure have to be calculated by

A c,V
VRk,c = VRk,
0
c⋅ ⋅ ψS,V ⋅ ψ h,V ⋅ ψ α,V ⋅ ψ ec,V ⋅ ψ ucr,V (5)
A c,0 V

The initial value of the characteristic resistance of an anchor placed in cracked concrete
and loaded perpendicular to the free edge depends on the edge distance c1

c = 0.45 ⋅ d nom ⋅ (l f /d nom ) ⋅ f ck,cube ⋅ c1.5


0 0.2
VRk, 1 (6)

where the value (lf/dnom)0,2 consider the stiffness of the anchor. The factor ψh,V takes
account of the fact that the shear resistance does not decrease proportionally to the
0
concrete member thickness as assumed by the ratio Ac,v / A c,V . The factor ψα,V consider
the angle between shear action and the free edge. The factor ψs,V takes account of the
disturbance of the distrubution of stresses in the concrete due to further edges of the
concrete member on the shear resistance.
0
The area of concrete cone of an individual anchor A c, V at the lateral concrete surface
not affected by edges parallel to the assumed loading direction, member thickness or
adjacent anchors, assuming the shape of the fracture area as a half pyramid with a height
equal to c1 and a base length of 1,5c1 and 3c1.
The actual area Ac,V of concrete cone of the anchorage at the lateral concrete surface is
limited by the overlapping concrete cones of adjacent anchors (s ≤ 3c1) as well as by
edges parallel to the assumed loading direction (c2 ≤ 1,5c1) and by the concrete member
thickness (h ≤ 1,5c1).
The factor ψucr,V consider the condition of concrete and of the type of reinforcement. If
anchor is placed in cracked concrete with straight edge reinforcement the increase of
load capacity is considered by ψucr,V = 1,2. If there are additional closely spaced stirrups
as in this case or if the anchor is placed in the compression zone of concrete ψucr,V = 1,4.

Considering now two bolt anchors per precast lining segment with the equation (6) we
can calculate for the worst case VRd,c = 342,61kN which includes a partial safety factor
of γM,c = 1,8. The existing edge distances are c1 = 492mm (edge parallel to the load
direction) and c2 = 295mm , the axial spacing s = 690mm.
The resistance in case of concrete pryout failure is principally dependent on the concrete
strength, the anchorage depth and in anchor groups the spacing of anchors. Tests showed
that a relationship to concrete cone failure approach this failure mode sufficiently

763
VRk,cp = k ⋅ N Rk,c (7)

where the factor k was evaluated from test results. For this application the initual value
for one anchor without any edge and axial spacing influence was determined as 300kN.
By considering the influences we calculate VRd,cp = 482,92kN which includes a partial
safety factor of γM,c = 1,8.

2.3. Concrete edge and Pryout failure for the side wall cast in situ
The values for the respective resistances of the side wall are VRd,c = 352,54kN and VRd,cp
= 359,95kN. The side wall is concreted continously without any additonal edges in the
direction of the tunnel. There might be overlapping concrete edge cones, whose
influence aren’t evaluate. Therefore the calculation assume concrete components from
same width as the respective lining segment with imaginary edges. This assumption can
be considered as calculation on the safety side.

In addition for safe load transfer in the side wall we recommend hairpin reinforcement
around the bonded bolt anchors and to limit the crack width some stirrups in the region
of the pryout failure.

2.4. The proofs


All proofs are shwon in the table below:

Summary of the proofs


[kN]

anchor bolt • steel failure VSdh ≤ VRd,s 130,61 ≤ 141,43


precast lining segment • concrete edge failure VSdg ≤ VRd, c 261,22 ≤ 342,61
• concrete pryout failure VSdg ≤ VRd,cp 261,22 ≤ 482,92
side wall cast in situ • concrete edge failure VSdg ≤ VRd, c 261,22 ≤ 352,54
• concrete pryout failure VSdg ≤ VRd,cp 261,22 ≤ 359,95

h indicates the shear load acting on the most stressed anchor bolt, g the shear load acting
on the sheared anchor of the group of two anchors.

3. Summary

This example demonstrates impressive the opportunities of the CC method. The proofs
according to CC method lead to two bolt anchors with d = 35mm per precast lining

764
segment, the design according to Rasmussens equation to eight anchors with d = 30mm.
The reduction of costs is obvious. The economy is result of both the material and the
labour costs. The theoretical assumption were confirmed by site tests.

figure 3: post-installed adhesive shear bolts

4. References

1. EOTA: 'Guideline for European technical approval of metal anchors for use in
concrete, Annex C: Design methods for anchorages', (February 1997).
2. Kühn, Siegfried, 'Speziallösungen für Seitenwand-Verankerungen bei der 4. Röhre
Elbtunnel', Beton- Und Stahlbetonbau, 95[2000] Heft 12, S.727-740.

765
RECONSTRUCTION OF MULTI-LAYER-WALLS
Edwin Dereser, Jochen Buhler
f i s c h e r w e r k e, Germany

Abstract
For reconstruction of multi-layer concrete panels special bonded anchors are used to
secure the outer leaf. If those sandwich walls (see fig. 1.) are reconstructed without an
additional insulation, thermal induced constraining stresses have to be considered.
A static model will be suggested, which enables the calculation of the thermal
constraining forces by considering the concrete stretch stiffening’s positive effect.
Different fixings are used for taking compression caused by negative wind tension. The
buckling model is based on the permissible pressure loads of the respective approvals.
Both static models serve as base for the proofs of the ultimate limit states and are applied
on a recent refurbishment of a office building.
The figure below shows the build-up of the existing sandwich wall where the reason of
the required refurbishment is obvious.

766
Figure 1.

1. Introduction

Multi layer concrete panels were frequently used for casing of public buildings during
the seventies and early eighties. A lot of the buildings need to be reconstructed over the
next years, as the supporting structure used for attaching the panels is seriously affected
by corrosion and therefore the stability of the multi layer construction endangered.

For the reconstruction of the front panelling several conditions and factors need to be
considered.

If there is no additional insulation applied to the front to panelling the stress caused by
displacements due to temperature needs to be taken in account for the design of the

767
fastener. As the fasteners for the panels can only take shear loads, the additional tension
and compression loads caused by wind need to be supported by other means.

In the following paper the Multi Layer Panel Reconstruction system is detailed using an
example from field experience.

2. Basis of design for Multi Layer Panel Reconstruction System

Conditions for the reconstruction:

• For the three layer panelling the fasteners are placed in the either reinforced or
standard concrete of the supporting layer.
• The concrete rating of the supporting layer needs to be at least B15.
• The thickness of the supporting layer needs to be 120mm at minimum.

The follwing sketch outlines the basic design of the three layer panel system:
insulation
concrete layer

concrete panel

≥ 120 25 35 80

2.1. Definition of the lever arm


The geometric dimensions of the three layer panel system define the anchor that should
be used. From the approval of the anchor, the lever arm can be derivated.

For the purpose of this example calculation the lever arm is set to

z = 128mm. (1)

768
2.2. Calculation of the constraining forces
According to DIN 1045 paragraph 16.5, the impact of changing temperatures caused by
different weather conditions needs to be taken in to account for constructions in concrete
and reinforced concrete.

For the statically defined basic system the following values are presumed:

Temperature gradient ∆T = 70 K
Coefficient of thermal expansion αk = 1*10-5 1/K
Modulus of elasticity (B15) EB = 26.000 N/mm2
AB = 80.000 mm2
EI = 1,42*1010 Nmm2
a = 450 mm

Elongation caused by temperature can be computed to: ∆l = α T ⋅ a ⋅ ∆T (2)

The statically indeterminate system for the anchors in the three layer panel system can be
simlifiedaccording to the following sketch, where the constrained loads are shown.

FZ EAAB FZ

EI EI

769
The bending for the statically defined system can be derived

- for the anchor M 1 = − FZ ⋅ x (3)

- thenormal force for the outer panel N 1 = FZ


(4)

Using the theorems of Castigliano, the equation for the lenght change can be calculated .

CASTIGLIANO`S THEOREM

The first partial derivative of total strain energy in a structure with respect to an external
load is equal to the displacement at the point of application of that load and in the same
direction of the load.
∂U
δ=
∂F

M 1 ∂M 1 N 1 ∂N 1
z a
∆l = 2 ⋅ ∫ ⋅ dx + ∫ ⋅ dx
0
EI ∂FZ 0
E B AB ∂FZ
(5)
 2 z3 a 
= FZ ⋅  ⋅ + 
 3 EI E B AB 

770
With the elongation from temperature ∆l (2), the constrained loads are defined to

∆l
FZ = 3
= 3195 N
2 z a
+
3 EI E B AB

In the example used here, the constrained load computes to 3195 N for one anchor.

Assuming a usage of 4 anchors per panel, by considering the weight of the panels (G), a
resulting load of 8,45 kN per anchor derives:

FZ

FZ

G/4
R

 G
R = FZ2 +  FZ +  (6)
 4

The bending moment in the anchor equates with the lever arm (1) and the resulting load
(6) to:

M =R⋅z (7)

in this case 1080 Nm, wich is less then the allowed bending moment for the choosen
anchor.

771
3. Absorbtion of the compression loads due to wind

The rotation in the front panel is prevented. An tensile- and compression load of 1 kN is
assumed with a slip size of 1mm.

The critical column load with no torsion allowed is according to the Euler Theorem:

4 ⋅ π ⋅ EI
PK = (8)
l2
with the distance between the panels l=70mm follows

⇒ EI=124,12 *103 Nmm2


Now it will be presumed, that rotation in the front panel is permissible, which leads to
the following load case according to the Euler Theorem:

772
4,49 2 ⋅ EI
PK = (9)
l2

Ö Pk=0,695 kN

The result for the reduced maximum column load is, that the fastener with rotation
permissible can withstand a recommended maximum load of 0,6 kN with a presumed
maximum slip of 1mm.

4. Summary

In this paper a way of calculating the loads due to temperature changes using the
theorems of Castigliano was introduced. This allows to chose the anchors on basis of this
additional design parameter more efficient.
Furthermore a method of calculating the maximum column load for the fasterners due to
wind was explained.

5. References

1. Prof. Dr.-Ing. Gerhard Adomeit, Mechanik für Ingenieure, Band 2, Festigkeitslehre


(1988)
2. Bauaufsichtliche Zulassung, Zul.-Nr. Z-21.2-973
3. Bauaufsichtliche Zulassung, Zul.-Nr. Z-21.8-1557
4. Gutachten FWS

773
LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF FASTENERS IN
CONCRETE RAILWAY SLEEPERS
Håkan Thun*, Sofia Utsi*, Lennart Elfgren*, Paul Nilsson** and
Björn Paulsson**
*Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden
**Swedish Rail Administration, Borlänge, Sweden

Abstract
The horizontal load-carrying capacity of fasteners in concrete railway sleepers is
investigated. Tests are performed on un-cracked as well as cracked concrete sleepers.
Small cracks do not seem to influence the load-carrying capacity and it is first when
cracking is very severe that the load-carrying capacity is reduced significantly.

1. Introduction

Concrete sleepers are very economic as a base for rails. The fastening of the rails is
usually taken care of by fasteners imbedded in the concrete. Due to bad production
methods, many sleepers in Sweden, produced during the 90ies, have obtained cracking
of a more or less severe kind. The cracking is believed to be cause by delayed ettringite
formation, see e g Tepponen & Eriksson (1987). In order to investigate the horizontal
load-carrying capacity of the fasteners, a test program is being carried out at Luleå
University of Technology in Sweden, Utsi & Elfgren (2000), Thun & Elfgren (2001).
The test set-up and the fasteners are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.

Figure 1. Concrete sleeper with fasteners. Illustration showing test set-up.

774
Figure 2. Photos of a fastener. View in the direction of the rails (top left) and in the
direction of the sleeper (top right and bottom).

2. Loads

The horizontal forces that act on a sleeper are partly caused by the centripetal
acceleration. It can be written as v2/R, for a train travelling with the speed v in a curve
with the radius R. In order to reduce this force, the curve can be sloped, i.e. one of the
rails is placed higher than the other one, see Figure 3.

775
Figure 3. Forces acting on a mass in a vehicle moving in a curve. The influence of a
slope ϕs is shown to the right.

Using the level of the track as reference the horizontal force due to acceleration is:
v2
ay = ⋅ cosϕ s − g ⋅ sin ϕ s (1)
R
Horizontal forces ay from equation (1) are shown in Figure 4 for two cases, a freight
train carrying iron ore and a high-speed train. The smallest radii R are used, which exist
on the railway line they traffic. From the figure it can be seen that the maximum force
from one axle is approximately 35 kN for the freight train at 70 km/h and 50 kN for the
high speed train at 130-140 km/h. This load is distributed by the rail to two or three
neighbouring sleepers. For one fastener the maximum horizontal load will thus be of the
order of 12 to 25 kN.
100 100
Curve radius: 335 m Curve radius: 600 m
80 Train type: Iron ore 80 Train type: X2000 (High speed) m
Horizontal force [kN]

Axle load: 30 tons m m


Axle load:18.75 tons 0 m
60 m 60 = 0
15
0m h =
40 h= m 40 h
0m
20 15 20
h=
0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 40 80 120 160 200
Train speed [km/h] Train speed [km/h]
a) b)

Figure 4. Horizontal force, ay , as defined in Figure ,3 as function of train speed, v, and


heightening, h, of one sleeper end. (a) Freight train with iron ore, R= 335 m. (b) High
speed train, R= 600 m.

776
3. Material properties

The tested sleepers are divided into three categories depending on the cracking:
Class 1 “Green” No cracking
Class 2 “Yellow” Some cracking
Class 3 “Red” Severe cracking
The yellow sleepers are subdivided into three categories:
Group 1 No cracking on the upper side
Group 2 Some cracking on the upper side
Group 3 Severe cracking on the upper side

The material properties of the concrete have been determined from uniaxial tensile and
compression tests on drilled out cores with a diameter of 68 mm, see Figure 5.
The concrete was specified to have a cube strength of 60 MPa. The cement content was
ordinarily 420 kg/m3. In order to increase the production speed, the cement amount was
increased to 500 kg/m3 and heat was used during the hardening process in some of the
production plants. The test results are summarised in Table 1.

i:3 i:2 i:1

i = sleeper no. 9:1p


Mid section 9:1
I:1 = tensile sleeper
I:2 = compression
I:3 = reserve 12:1p

a) b)

Figure 5. Test of material properties. (a) Location of cores. ( b) Crack planes for the test
specimens 9:1p, 9:1 and 12:1p.

The mean value for 16 compression tests was 100.7 MPa with a standard deviation of
5.9 MPa and a coefficient of variation of 0.06.
The mean value for 13 tensile tests was 3.9 MPa with a standard deviation of 0.35 MPa
and a coefficient of variation of 0.09. Three test specimens that had cracks according to
Figure 5 (b) have not been included in the mean value. If these tests are also included in
the mean value the results are 3.3 MPa with a standard deviation 1.29 MPa and a
coefficient of variation of 0.39.
The sleepers are reinforced with 10 prestressed strands of 6.5 mm in diameter.

777
Table 1. Summary of the results from the compression and tensile tests. Index p means
that the core comes from that half of the sleeper that has been exposed to the horizontal
pull test.

Sleeper no. Sleeper Compression Sleeper Tensile


strength a) strength
Class No σc No. σt
[MPa] mean [MPa] mean
8 8:2 96.5 8:1 4.25
green 8:2p 101.5 8:1p 4.10
9 9:2 102.6 9:1 (0.90)
green 9:2p 95.0 98.9 9:1p (0.99) 4.17
10 10:2 105.7 10:1 3.78
yellow/group1 10:2p 98.0 10:1p 3.42
11 11:2 108.9 11:1 4.04
yellow/group1 11:2p 109.3 105.5 11:1p 3.33 3.64
12 12:2 104.5 12:1 4.00
yellow/group2 12:2p 99.3 12:1p (0.38)
13 13:2 104.2 13:1 3.76
yellow/group2 13:2p 100.8 102.2 13:1p 4.23 4.00
14 14:2 86.6 14:1 3.78
yellow/group3 14:2p 93.3 14:1p 3.34
15 15:2 101.8 15:1 4.40
yellow/group3 15:2p 103.3 96.3 15:1p 3.74 3.81
a)
Test evaluation according to the Swedish Code BBK 94 (1996).

4. Test results

The test arrangement is shown in Figure 1. The sleeper was placed on a steel girder and
tightened to prevent movement. A hydraulic jack and a load cell were mounted on a bar.
To measure the displacement a LVDT was placed horizontally against the fastening.
Typical failures are shown in Figures 6 and 7 and typical test results are given in Figures
8 to 9. In Table 2 a summary of all horizontal shear tests is presented.

The horizontal load carrying capacity, 100-130 kN, for the fasteners in the green and
yellow sleepers are much beyond the load imposed by the trains, cf. section 2. Even the
red sleeper with a maximum capacity of 18 kN for a deformation of 5 mm may function
if it is surrounded by green and yellow sleepers.

778
Figure 6. Failure of sleeper no. 10.

Figure 7. Failure of sleeper no. 11.

779
140 Tested sleepers
Nr 7 - red
120
Nr 5 - green
Horizontal force [kN]
100 Nr 8- green
80 Nr 9 - green
Nr 10 - yellow, group1
60
Nr 11 - yellow, group1
40 Nr 12 - yellow, group2
Nr 13 - yellow, group2
20
Nr 14 - yellow, group3
0 Nr 15 - yellow, group3
0 2 4 6 8 10
Displacement fasteners [mm]

Figure 8. Result from horizontal shear test of fasteners.

140 Tested sleepers


Nr 5 - green
Nr 8- green
Horizontal force [kN]

120
Nr 9 - green
Nr 10 - yellow, group1
100 Nr 11 - yellow, group1
Nr 12 - yellow, group2
80 Nr 13 - yellow, group2
Nr 14 - yellow, group3
Nr 15 - yellow, group3
60
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2
Displacement fasteners [mm]

Figure 9. Result from horizontal shear test of fasteners. Enlarged detail of figure 8.

5. Failure mechanism

The load-carrying capacity according to the Ψ-method, Eligehausen et.al. (1994), can be
written as:
0.2
 href 
Vu = Ψ ⋅ d ⋅ f cc ⋅   ⋅ c1
1.5 ' 0.5 0.5
c
 d 
c2 75 á 100
where ψ c′ = = = 0.156 á 0.208, see Figure 10,
1.5c1 1.5 ⋅ 320
d = diameter, varies between 12 and 60 mm, fcc = concrete cube strength, 100 MPa,
and href = effective depth, 110 mm.

780
Table 2. Summary of all horizontal shear tests.

Sleeper no. Class a) Group b) Max. horizontal


force
Fmax, [kN]
7 red - 18.0
5 green - 117.1
8 green - 133.5
9 green - 111.0
10 yellow 1 108.1
11 yellow 1 103.8
12 yellow 2 110.9
13 yellow 2 114.1
14 yellow 3 133.5
15 yellow 3 122.9
a)
Classification performed by the Swedish Rail Administration.
b)
Classification performed by Luleå University of Technology (LTU).

c2 c2 c1 = 320 [mm]
c1 c2 = 75 to 100

Figure 10.Failure mode of a single anchor loaded in shear when located in a narrow
member, Eligehausen et.al. (1994).

For c2 = 75 to 100 mm and d = 16 to 60 mm, the ultimate load Vu varies between 52 and
104 kN which can be compared to the test results of 103-133 kN for the sleepers in
classes 1 and 2 (green and yellow).

When the failure mechanism is compared for the three classes, the red sleeper shows a
completely different failure process then the green and yellow ones. The failure process
for the red sleeper is calm and steady, i.e. the fastening was slowly pulled out with no
large concrete parts falling of. On the other hand, the failure process for the yellow and
green sleepers was explosive. The failure started with a crack growing from the fastening
and down towards the base where it was divided into two horizontal cracks, one going

781
towards the end and the other towards the mid section. When enough energy was built
up large sections of the concrete fell of.

Possible failure mechanisms are illustrated in Figures 11-14.

F
e = 130
mm
lb = 320

b = 200

Figure 11. Possible failure mechanism at shear test of fasteners.

If a simplified stress distribution according to figure 12 is assumed, where the tensile


stress decreases linearly along the length, lb, an equilibrium equation around A gives:

F
e = 130
A : F ⋅e−
 σ t ⋅ lb ⋅ 2lb ⋅ b  = 0 ⇒
A 
σ
H  2 3 
[mm]
F ⋅e 3 ⋅ 103800 ⋅ 130
lb/3 2lb/3 σt = = ≈ 1,98 MPa
3 ⋅ b ⋅ lb 200 ⋅ 320
2 2
lb = 320

F →: F − τ ⋅ lb ⋅ b = 0 ⇒
e = 130 F 103800
τ A τ = = ≈ 1,62 MPa
b ⋅ lb 200 ⋅ 320
σt
[mm]
lb/3 2lb/3
lb = 320

Figure 12. Simplified stress distribution. The stress is distributed along the length lb. The
lengths lb and e are measured on the tested sleepers. F=103.8 kN (sleeper no. 11).

( )
F
σ t ⋅ lb 8lb 27 ⋅ F ⋅ e
e = 130
A A : F ⋅e− ⋅ ⋅ b = 0 ⇒ σt =
H 2 ⋅3 4 ⋅ b ⋅ lb
2

σ 9
[mm] lb/9 27 ⋅ F ⋅ e 27 ⋅ 103800 ⋅ 130
lb/3 2lb/3 σt = = ≈ 4, 45 MPa
4 ⋅ b ⋅ lb 4 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 320
2 2
lb = 320

Figure 13 Simplified stress distribution. The stress is distributed along the length lb/3.
The lengths lb and e are measured on the tested sleepers. F=103.8 kN (sleeper no. 11).

782
A more realistic assumption is that the tensile stress, σt, is distributed on a distance of
lb/3, see figure 13.

The propagation of the crack may be studied if the softening properties of the concrete
are taken into consideration, cf. Figure 14 and Elfgren (1989, 1998).

F
e = 130 lb/3 2lb/3
A H
[mm] σt
lb/3
11lb/18
lb/6 lb/2
lb = 320

Figure 14. Failure process if the softening properties of the concrete is taken into
consideration.

6. Discussion and Conclusions

Small cracks, corresponding to class 2 (yellow sleepers), do not seem to influence the
horizontal load carrying capacity of the tested fasteners significantly. It is first when the
cracking is very severe (red sleepers) that the load-carrying capacity is reduced so much
that it is approaching the level of the applied load. The sleepers produced with inferior
methods are now inspected annually in order to see at what rate the cracking is
progressing.

7. References

BBK 94 (1996): Swedish Handbook on Concrete Design, Vol. 1 and 2. (Boverkets


Handbok om Betongkonstruktioner, In Swedish), Boverket, Karlskrona 1994, 1996, 185
pp and 116 pp, ISBN 91-7332-686-0, 91-7332-687-9.

Elfgren, Lennart, Editor (1989): Fracture mechanics of concrete structures. From theory
to applications. Chapman & Hall, London, London 1989, 407 pp. ISBN 0 412 30680 8.

Elfgren, Lennart, Editor (1998): Round Robin Analysis and Tests of Anchor Bolts in
Concrete Structures. RILEM Technical Committee 90-FMA Fracture Mechanics of

783
Concrete - Applications. Research Report 1998:14, Division of Structural Engineering,
Luleå University of Technology, 54 + 371 pp.

Eligehausen, Rolf, Editor (1994): Fastenings to concrete and masonry structures. State of
the art report. Comité Euro-International du Béton, CEB Bulletin 216. Thomas Telford,
London 1994, 249 pp. ISBN 0 7277 1937 8.

Tepponen, Pirjo and Eriksson, Bo-Erik (1987): Damages in concrete railway sleepers in
Finland, Nordic Concrete Research, Oslo, V.6. 1987, pp. 199-200.

Thun, Håkan and Elfgren, Lennart (2001): Testing of concrete sleepers (In Swedish).
Project report 1047106:1, Preliminary version, February 2001. Division of Structural
Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, 26 pp.

Utsi, Sofia and Elfgren, Lennart (2000): Testing of concrete sleepers (In Swedish). Test
Report. May 2000, Division of Structural Engineering, Luleå University of Technology,
20 pp.

784
ANCHORAGE WITH HEADED BARS IN EXTERIOR
BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS
J. Hegger, W. Roeser
Institut für Massivbau, RWTH Aachen, Germany

Abstract
In exterior RC beam-column joints the anchorage of the beam reinforcement within the
joint is of great importance for the load bearing capacity of the connection. The classical
arrangement is to bend down the beam bars into the column. The high amount of
reinforcement causes detailing problems in terms of placing the reinforcement bars and
casting the concrete. Therefore the application of headed bars in beam-column joints was
investigated in three test specimens. Employing headed bars the handling on site is much
easier and the load-bearing capacity can be increased. In addition to the tests a numerical
investigation was carried out.

1. Introduction

Exterior beam-column joints are subjected to high normal and shear forces as well as to
bending moments, which lead to high shear and bond stresses acting inside the joint.
Thus particular importance is assigned to the detailing of the exterior beam-column
joints because of the complex state of strains. The high amount of reinforcement requires
a special detailing with respect to the placing of reinforcing bars and obstacles during
casting the concrete. In order to achieve a short anchorage length with negligible slip the
application of headed bars was investigated.

785
2. Test specimens with welded heads

The experimental study on exterior beam-column joints [1] consisted of three specimens
with welded heads and five specimens with U-bended bars. The diameter of the beam-
flexural-reinforcement varied between 20 and 25 mm. The area of the welded head is
6.25 to 7.3 times as large as the bar area (Fig. 1a). The head of the bars was placed
within the concrete cover behind the column reinforcement (Fig.1b). The ratio between
the anchorage length and the bar diameter lb/∅ = 6.8 to 10 was very short.

2 ⋅ 3 ∅ 16
Anchor Head 2 ∅ 20 –25
∅ 20

hbeam
30 cm

Stirrups
Head
∅ 10
∅ 50

hcol
20 –24 cm

Fig. 1: a) Headed bar ∅ 20 mm b) Detailing of the beam-column joint

The shear slenderness of the beam-column joint varied from hbeam/hcol = 1.25 to 1.5 and
the concrete strength between fc,cyl = 55 and 85 MPa (table 1). The bending moment was
created by a hydraulic jack at the end of the beam. A normal force was applied to the
column independently with respect to the bending moment. The stress conditions of an
exterior beam-column joint could be simulated with sufficient accuracy by the test
arrangement.

The crack pattern was characterised by bending cracks in the beam and by diagonal
cracking in the joint. The diagonal cracks in the region of the joint developed parallely to
the direction of the concrete compressive strut. At serviceability limit state all crack
widths were less than w = 0.3 mm.

786
In the tests two different modes of failure were observed:

• Ductile beam failure (Fig. 2a)

At ultimate limit state the main cracks in the beam opened more than w = 1.0 mm and
the tensile reinforcement yielded. The load deflection curve revealed a very ductile
behaviour (Fig. 3) with large plastic beam rotations.

• Semi ductile joint failure (Fig. 2b)

At ultimate limit state one main diagonal crack developed from the compression zone of
the beam to the compression zone of the upper column. Finally a concrete crushing of
the compression zone of the lower column was observed. The load deflection curve is
characterised by a semi ductile behaviour (Fig. 3) with considerable shear distortions in
the joint.

a) beam b) joint
failure failure

Fig. 2: Characteristic failure pattern: a) Beam failure; b) Joint failure

In none of the tests a local anchorage failure or lateral “blow out failure” of the concrete
cover was observed. This is in accordance to pull-out tests of Bashandy [2], who
observed a “blow out failure” only in cases with an anchor in front of the column
reinforcement. In comparison to tests with hooked bar reinforcement the load bearing
was increased considerably.

787
160

140 RK 3: beam failure (ductile)

120

100
F [kN]

80
RK 5:
60 joint failure
(semi ductile)
40

20

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
w [mm]
Fig.3: Load deflection curves of the test specimens RK 3 (beam failure) and RK 5
(joint failure)

Table 1: Test Parameters

Test hbeam/hcol fc,cyl ∅ Ncolumn,ULS Mtest/Mcalc Mode of


[MPa] [mm] [kN] failure
RK 3 1.25 57.2 20 -500 1.13 Beam

RK 5 1.50 54.9 25 -500 0.75 Joint

RK 6 1.50 86.5 25 -500 1.03 Joint

hbeam/hcol = shear slenderness; fc,cyl =concrete cylinder strength; ∅ = diameter anchored


bar; Ncolumn = axial column load at ultimate load; Mtest/Mcalc = ratio maximum bending
moment in the test and calculated bending moment of the beam

In figure 4 the measured stresses of the reinforcement in the beam-column intersection


σbeam and at the anchor head σanchor are compared. As a result of the bond action in the
joint area the stress of the reinforcement is decreased. The bond forces depend on the
anchorage length, the bar diameter, the column load and the concrete strength. Within
the anchorage length lb the following observations were done: If the column load

788
decreases the bond action close to the beam decreases. If the beam moment decreases the
bond action in the anchor region increases and decreases close to the beam. In the
ultimate limit state 50 to 60 % of the yield load was carried by the anchor.

600
lb
500 T
σanchor [MPa]

400 σanchor σbeam


300
bond action

200

100
anchor action

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 fy 600
σbeam [MPa]
Fig. 4: Stress of the beam reinforcement versus stress of the anchor for the specimen
RK 5

3. Semi Empirical Model

In [1] a semi empirical model on the basis of the formula of Vollum [3] was developed,
which can predict the failure mode and the load bearing capacity in good accordance
with a test databank including more than 180 tests on exterior beam-column joints. This
model takes into account different detailing of the beam reinforcement (180° hook, 90°
hook, anchor) and the shear reinforcement. The variation coefficient of Vx = 12%
confirms the good agreement between predicted and experimental failure load (Fig. 5).
On the basis of the half-empirical model simple design rules were developed for
traditional detailing with bended bars (chapter 3.1) and headed bars (chapter 3.2). These
design rules already includes the partial safety factors for material properties.

789
600
Vj,exp / Vj,calc
500 Mx = 1,0
Mx
Sx = 0,12
Vx = 0,12
400
Vj,exp [kN]

Xk = 0,8 Mx
Xk
300

200

100

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Vj,calc [kN]
Fig. 5: Comparison of experimental and predicted joint failure load by semi empirical
model [1]: mean value Mx; standard deviation Sx, variation coefficient Vx,
characteristic value Xk

3.1 Design in the case of anchorage with hooked bars

In the case of anchorage with hooked bars the design joint shear resistance can be
calculated with the equations (1) to (3).

• Design shear resistance without stirrups:


hbeam
Vj,cd = 1.4 (1.2 – 0.3 ) beff hcol fcd1/4 (1)
hcol
Where: hbeam/hcol = slenderness (1.0 ≤ hbeam/hcol ≤ 2.0)
beff = (bcol+bbeam/2) ≥ bcol

• Design shear resistance with stirrups:

Vj,Rd = Vj,cd + 0,4 ⋅ Asj,eff ⋅ fyd ≤ 2 Vj,cd


≤ γ 0.25 ⋅ fcd ⋅ beff ⋅ hcol (2)

Where: Asj,eff = effective shear reinforcement (stirrups in the joint area above the
beam compression zone)
γ = Min {1; 1.5 (1-0.8 NSdcol/(Ac ⋅ fck)} ⋅ Min {1;1.9 –0.6 hbeam/hcol}

790
• Design shear force:

Vjh,Sd = As ⋅ fyd – VSd,col (3)

It has to be shown that the design shear force Vjh,Sd is less than the resistance Vj,Rd.

3.2 Design in the case of anchorage with headed bars

In the case of headed bars the improved anchorage behaviour is considered in equations
(4) to (6):

• Design shear resistance without stirrups:


hbeam
Vj,cd = 1.55 (1.2 – 0.3 ) beff hcol fcd1/4 (4)
hcol
Where: hbeam/hcol = slenderness (1.0 ≤ hbeam/hcol ≤ 2.0)
beff = (bcol+bbeam/2) ≥ bcol

• Design shear resistance with stirrups:

Vj,Rd = Vj,cd + 0.45 ⋅ Asj,eff ⋅ fyd ≤ 2 Vj,cd


≤ γ 0.3 ⋅ fcd ⋅ beff ⋅ hcol (5)
Where: Asj,eff = effective shear reinforcement (stirrups in the joint area above the
beam compression zone)
N Sd ,col
γ = Min {1; 1.5 (1- 0.8 )} ⋅ Min {1;1.9 –0.6 hbeam/hcol}
Ac ⋅ f ck

• Design shear force:

Vjh,Sd = As ⋅ fyd – VSd,col (6)

It has to be shown that the design shear force Vjh,Sd is less than the resistance Vj,Rd.

4. Numerical Investigations

In addition to the tests extensive numerical simulations were carried out. Finite Elemente
studies on exterior beam-column joints employing the program SBETA were already
done by Hamil [4]. The successor program ATENA 2D [5] was applied for the own
simulations. In difference to Hamil the arc-length-method was used instead of the
Newton-Rhapson-solution method, so that a descending branch in the load deflection
curve could be simulated and the load bearing capacity could be clearly identified. In the
own calculation the compressive fracture energy Gc was modified in order to prevent a

791
progressive concrete failure within the two axial compressive zone at the beam-column
intersection.

In ATENA rigid bond is assumed between concrete and reinforcement. Therefore the
FE-mesh in the area of the joint was refined, in order to simulate the bond characteristics
by the local deformations of the concrete elements. The anchors were simulated by
elastic sheet elements.

Figure 6 compares the load-deflection response of ATENA and test specimen RK 5.


Before reaching the maximum load the simulation is very close to the test results. After
joint failure at maximum load a descending branch could be observed. Figure 7
compares the measured with the calculated strains of the stirrup in the middle of the joint
of test specimen RK 3. Due to the crack formation in the joint at a load level of F ≈ 60
kN the strains of the stirrups increase. Generally, the calculated values are in very good
accordance with the measured values, confirming that ATENA can predict the anchorage
behaviour quite well. Figure 8 presents the calculated deformations and crack
formations, being in good accordance with the test specimens.

140
RK 5
120

100
Vbeam [kN]

80 F
ATENA

60
w
40

20

0
0 10 20 30 40
w [mm]

Fig.6: Load-deflection-diagram calculated by ATENA and from test RK 5

792
160

140

120 ATENA

100
RK 3
F [kN]

80

60

40

20

0
0 0,0005 0,001 0,0015 0,002 0,0025 0,003
ε [-]

Fig.7: Load-strain-diagram of joint-stirrup calculated by ATENA and from test RK 3

Fig. 8: Specimen RK 6 after test and numerical simulation (principal compression


strains ε2, crack pattern and deformations)

793
5. Conclusions

From the test results and the numerical simulations the following conclusions can be
drawn:

• In the tests of exterior beam-column joints two different failure modes were
observed: a) beam failure with ductile behaviour and b) joint failure with semi
ductile behaviour.
• Employing headed bars the load bearing capacity increased by 20 % in comparison
to hooked bars. The anchor head was placed behind the exterior column
reinforcement.
• At serviceability limit state the crack width in all specimens was less than w = 0.3
mm.
• From theoretical investigations a semi empirical model was developed. This model
predicts the failure mode and the ultimate bearing load in good accordance with the
own data-base of more than 180 tests on exterior beam-column joints. Simple design
rules for the use of welded anchors were developed.
• Numerical simulations with the nonlinear FE-program ATENA demonstrate a very
good correlation with the test program.
• The handling on site with headed bars is much easier compared to traditional
detailing because only straight bars are used.

Further investigations are going on and will be published soon.

6. References

[1] Hegger, J., Roeser, W.: Bemessung und Konstruktion von Rahmenendknoten;
Abschlußbericht zu AiF-Vorhaben 11834 N (DBV 213), Bericht des Institutes für
Massivbau der RWTH Aachen, 2000

[2] Bashandy, T.R.: Application of Headed Bars in Concrete Members; Dissertation;


University of Texas, Austin, 1996

[3] Vollum, R.L.: Design and Analysis of reinforced concrete beam-column joints;
PhD-Thesis; Concrete Structures Section; Department of Civil Engineering;
Imperial College; London; April 1998

[4] Hamil, S.J.: Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Connection Behaviour; PhD


Thesis (Final Draft); University of Durham; 1999

[5] Cervenka Consulting: ATENA Program Documentation (Revision 05/2000);


Prag, 2000

794
HALFEN HDB-S BARS AS SHEAR REINFORCEMENT IN
SLABS AND BEAMS
J. Hegger*, K. Fröhlich***, R. Beutel**, W. Roeser*

* Institut für Massivbau, RWTH Aachen, Germany


** Hegger und Partner GbR, Aachen, Germany
*** Halfen GmbH & Co KG, Wiernsheim, Germany

Abstract
By obtaining the German approval Z-15.1-165 (DIBT) [1] the application of Halfen
double headed studs has been extended generally to slabs and beams subjected to shear-
forces.

1. Introduction

HDB bars are reinforcement devices made of high bond reinforcement S 500 with
forged plate-shaped heads at both ends (triple stud diameter; the ribbed surfaces reach to
the heads). In slabs with a low effective depth the heads ensure a very effective
anchoring behaviour.

Up to 1999 the double headed studs have been used successfully as punching shear
reinforcement in slabs and foundations. In such situations, notable features are the high
shear capacity and the easy installation on site.

An effective shear reinforcement can also be required for line-supported slabs of highly
loaded industrial constructions as well as in the areas of concentrated loads in ordinary
buildings. The Institute for Structural Concrete (IMB) of the Aachen University of
Technology (RWTH) carried out tests on shear reinforced line-supported slabs and
beams in order to determine the ultimate shear capacities of HDB bars (figure 1) [2].

795
Phase I
Q Q
Series P
h

a a 40

Series
h
A and B
40
Phase II Q 68

h
h
a
30

Series C

Fig. 1: Tests on shear reinforced slab-strips and beams: left : HDB-stud ; right : test
specimens-geometry and loading

2. Tests on slabs
2.1 Ultimate load bearing capacity of shear reinforced slabs (DIN 1045:
τ < τ02)

For load levels which induce yielding of the shear reinforcement the structural
behaviour of HDB studs was investigated in test-series P, with the dimensions l/b/d =
3.20/0.40/0.25. Intention of these tests was to evaluate the influence of the longitudinal
and transverse spacing of the HDB bars, the influence of the transverse reinforcement
and the combination of HDB bars and stirrups. For this purpose two slab-strps with
stirrups were tested, four with a mixed reinforcement of HDB bars and stirrups as well
and six slabs reinforced by HDB bars only. The concrete compressive cube strength
βw200 (200mm side length) of the specimens reached 20.2 to 24.5 MPa. The flexural
reinforcement ratio varied between µL = 1.52 % and 1.85 %.

All tests failed in shear. After formation of the first shear cracks the strains of the HDB
bars increased considerably and an early failure of the concrete compressive zone was
avoided by the HDB anchors. By increasing the load the yield strength of the HDB
anchors was reached. Due to the well anchored HDB bars the concrete contribution of
the shear capacity increased in comparison to stirrups. Therefore, the amount of the
HDB bars could be decreased in comparison to slabs with ordinary shear reinforcement.

Figure 2 shows an example for the midspan deflection behaviour and the strain
developement of the HDB bars in specimen P2. The verification of the measured strains
by a strut and tie analogy results in a strut inclination between θ = 35 ° and 45 °. The

796
evaluation of the failure loads according to DIN 1045 (88) [3] leads to the following
results:

● Each specimen of the series P required shear reinforcement.

● All specimens with HDB bars reached a considerably higher shear capacity than
the calculated shear capacity for members with stirrups according to DIN 1045
(88).

• All specimens including stirrups and HDB bars and all tests with HDB bars only
reached a higher shear capacity than the tests with stirrups. This also applies to
shear stresses that are higher than the admissible shear stresses for shear assemblies
(shear ladders) according to DIN 1045 (88).
200 200
2Q
160
Shear force V in [kN]

160
70 70 Shear force V in [kN]
120
120
80
80
40
40
0
0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 strains HDB-anchor in [‰]
Plastic strains of
Deflection in midspan in [mm] phase I

Fig. 2: Slab test P2: left: Load-deflection behaviour; right: anchor strains

2.2 Maximum shear capacity of shear reinforced slabs (DIN 1045:


τ = τ02)

The specimens in test series A and B are very similar in dimensions and structural
design. The specimens (h/b/l = 0.14-0.25/0.40/1.40-2.50) were tested with a shear
slenderness a/d of 3 up to 4. An early bending failure was avoided by a T-beam cross
section and flexural reinforcement of grade St885/1080. More over, an anchorage
failure of this reinforcement was excluded by detailing. The variation of the test
parameters are given in table 1.

Table 1: Parameters in Test Series A and B


Series ∅HDB [mm] ßw200 [MPa] sl st
A 14-25 mm 25.4-43.5 0.75 d 0.6 d
B 14-25 mm 28.8-40.0 0.75 –1.5 d 0.6 –1.5 d
∅HDB = diameter HDB studs; βw200 =concrete cube strength according to DIN 1045(88);
sl =longitudinal HDB spacing; st =transverse HDB spacing

797
The crack formation of the specimens during loading can be characterised by the
following items: The first cracks occurred in the middle of the beam due to bending and
continued up to the compression zone. Further bending cracks appeared near the
supports. Out of these bending cracks first shear cracks developed by increasing the
load. Finally, two main shear cracks with a large width of 1 to 2 mm were observed.

The crack inclination at failure formed approximately a line between support and load
bearing plate. In addition, horizontal cracks occurred suddenly before reaching the
ultimate load. Their width increased at once to several millimetres and leads to a
splitting of the concrete compression zone (figure 3). In the area of the load bearing plate
the concrete split of above the studs. Usually, the shear reinforcement did not reach the
yield strength in series A and B. Thus, in contrast to the test series P a concrete failure
was always observed. This concrete failure is typical for slabs reaching the maximum
shear capacity, being lower compared to beams with an large effective depth.

Load bearing

Tensile reinforcement

IMB RWTH Aachen

Halfen HDB-Stud
Ø16

A1-left

Fig. 3: Test specimen A1 after failure

The maximum shear capacity is determined by the failure of the concrete struts or by
splitting of the bending compression zone. This behaviour is considered by the
admissible design shear strength τ02 according to DIN 1045 (88) in dependence of the
concrete strength. Figure 4 shows that a global safety factor γ > 2,1 was reached.

798
3.0

2.5
Mean value γ = 2,37

2.0
Required safety factor γ = 2,1

1.5

1.0
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2

Ratio asw,prov. / asw,req. [-]

Fig. 4: Influence of shear reinforcement ratio on global safety factor γ in series A


and B (Vu = Ultimate load at test; VDIN τ02 = Upper design shear strength for
slabs according to DIN 1045 (88); asw = amount of shear reinforcement)

Furthermore, the flexural reinforcement ratio determines the maximum shear load, as
well. In order to determine the required amount of HDB bars as shear reinforcement in
spot-supported and line-supported slabs the upper stress limit was formulated according
to the regulations for HDB bars as punching shear reinforcement (equation 1).

max τ = 0,7 ⋅ 1,4 ⋅ τ02 ⋅ µg . (1)

with: τ02 = upper shear limit for slabs according to DIN 1045 (88)
µg = geometric ratio of longitudinal reinforcement according to DIN 1045(88)

3 Test on beams

Three beam specimens (h/b/l = 0.71/0.08/3.90) were tested in series C with a I-


crosssection and Halfen HDB bars as shear reinforcement. The test parameters were the
diameter and the longitudinal spacing of HDB bars (∅ 16, sl = 13 cm and ∅ 20, sl = 15
cm) as well as the concrete compressive strength (26,5 < βw200 < 35,8 MPa). The
longitudinal reinforcement was designed to exclude a bending failure. The test set-up
corresponded to a three-point bending test with a shear slenderness a/d of 3. All three
tests failed by a concrete strut crushing in the thin web, when the HDB bars did not
reach the yield strength (figure 5). In order to verify the results, the variable strut
inclination method for shear design was employed. All measured strains could be
verified considering a strut inclination between 37° and 39°.

799
Fig.5: Test specimen C2 after failure

The beams with HDB-studs reached the maximum shear capacity according to DIN
1045 and EC 2 [4]. The global safety factor γ between the failure shear stress of the tests
and the ultimate limit shear strength τ03, according to DIN 1045, exceeded the value 2.1.

4 Anchorage behaviour

The tests indicated that the HDB stud-diameter of the shear reinforcement has to be
limited in dependence on the total slab depth (figure 6). It has to be pointed out, that
stirrups and bend-up bars also require a similar limitation. These limits are governed by
the anchorage behaviour in the compression zone. For HDB studs the limitation was
defined according to the test data by equation (2).

∅HDB max ≤ 4 ⋅ d (2)

with: ∅HDB max bar diameter in [mm]


d height of slab or beam in [cm]

2.8

2.6

2.4

2.2

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 25
Anchor diameter in [mm]
Fig. 6: Influence of the anchor diameter ∅HDB on the global safety factor γ =VTest /
VDIN 1045(88)

800
The local bearing behaviour of HDB bars can be compared directly with headed dowels
of fixing systems. Eligehausen et al. [5] defined three different types of failure for
headed dowels in tension. The lateral “blow out” concrete failure (figure 7) has to be
controlled in case of slabs and beams reinforced with HDB studs. In order to avoid this
concrete failure the edge distances aQHDB according to tables 2 and 3 are required.

FHDB

Lateral blow
out failure

Concrete wedge
0.2.FHDB

aQ,HDB
Fig. 7: Blow Out failure

The reduced edge distances aQHDB in table 4 may only be used if at least one
longitudinal bar and a stirrup is placed between the free edge and the HDB stud (figure
8). Due to the large stud diameter of the HDB bars there will be a medium level of local
compression under the head, thus, according to [5] a lateral force of 0,2 FHDB can be
estimated (figure 7). The stirrups in the lateral blow out area have to be designed in
minimum for this force. For structural reasons the stirrup cross section shall not be
smaller than ∅ 8.

Profiled cross sections generally have to be designed for shear between web and
flanges. This required shear reinforcement is also able to carry the tension force Z
according to figure 7 and to avoid a blow-out failure.

801
Table 2: Minimum distances to free edges aQ,HDB [cm] of double headed studs
depending on concrete strength βwN and stud diameter ∅HDB.
∅HDB [mm]
10 12 14 16 20 25
25 12 15 17 20 25 31
βwN [N/mm2] 35 11 13 15 17 21 26
45 9 11 13 15 19 23
55 8 10 12 13 17 21

Table 3: Reduced minimum distances to free edges aQ, HDB [cm], by providing a
minimum stirrup diameter and longitudinal bar diameter according to fig. 8.
Ø HDB- Minimum- Minimum Clear distance aQ, HDB [cm]
anchor stirrup-Ø longitudinal-Ø depending
on concrete strength
[mm] [mm] [mm] B25 B35 B45 B55
10 8 10 7 6 6 5
12 8 10 9 8 7 6
14 8 10 10 9 8 7
16 8 10 12 10 9 8
20 10 12 15 13 11 10
25 12 16 19 16 14 13

stirrup HDB stud

longitudinal
reinforcement

aQ,HDB

Fig. 8 : Clear distance to free edges aQ, HDB

802
Fig. 9: Installation of HDB double headed studs after placing the main flexural
reinforcement

Fig. 10: Installation clip bars can be fixed between any position of the clear stud space

803
5. Summary

By obtaining the new approval Z-15.1-165 of the Halfen HDB double head studs the
application of punching reinforcement was extended to slabs and beams subjected to
shear-stresses. The maximum shear stresses according to DIN 1045, τ02 for slabs and τ03
for beams, can also be employed for HDB anchors. In case of thin slabs the shear
reinforcement quantity can be reduced by 20 % in comparison to stirrups. The
substantial advantage of the HDB shear reinforcement is the quick and easy placing on
site and thus the reduction of the labour costs. During a pilot project two days of the
construction time could be saved by using the HDB assemblies. Moreover, the
installation of the HDB studs allows any adjustments to the positioning after placing the
flexural reinforcement.

The disadvantages of high stirrup quantities can be reduced considerably by using HDB
studs with larger diameters so that gravel damps in concrete can be easily avoided.
Large bar diameters can also be used in beams with thin webs, because the plate-shaped
heads of the stud require less space than the bends of the stirrups.

6. References

[1] Zulassung Nr. Z-15.1-165: Halfen –Schubbewehrung Typ HDB-S; Deutsches


Institut für Bautechnik, 1999

[2] Hegger, J.: Albartus, D.; Beutel, R.; Roeser, W.: Neue Anwendungen für
HDB-Doppelkopfanker, Schubbewehrung in Platten und Balken; Beton- und
Stahlbetonbau, Heft 12/1999; S. 537-545

[3] DIN 1045: Beton und Stahlbeton: Bemessung und Ausführung. Juli 1988.

[4] Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1: General Rules and Rules
for Buildings; December 1989

[5] Eligehausen, R.; Mallee, R.; Rehm, G.: Befestigungstechnik; Betonkalender


1997; Ernst und Sohn

804
BEHAVIOUR OF FASTENERS IN CONCRETE WITH
COARSE RECYCLED CONCRETE AND MASONRY
AGGREGATES
D.A. Hordijk*, R. van der Pluijm**
*Adviesbureau ir. J.G. Hageman B.V., The Netherlands
**TNO Building and Construction Research, The Netherlands

Abstract
In the Netherlands for already about two decades, there is a strong interest in reuse of
concrete and masonry aggregates in new concrete structures. According to the current
Dutch Concrete Code it is allowed to replace 20% of coarse dense aggregates by mixed
recycled aggregates (combination of concrete and masonry aggregates). Furthermore
according to a CUR Recommendation [1] replacement of 100% of the coarse aggregates
is allowed in concrete walls for structures in safety class 1 and 2 (no or small risk for
human life).
Before further extending the possibilities for the use of concrete and masonry aggregates
in concrete, it was decided to first investigate the behaviour of mixed recycled aggregate
with respect to several phenomena. As part of an extensive research programme TNO
Building and Construction Research performed tensile tests on cast-in-place and post-
installed anchors. The anchors were loaded in tension till failure. For the base material
gravel concrete (reference), mixed recycled aggregate concrete and masonry concrete
(100% masonry aggregates for the coarse aggregates) was used. In the paper the
experiments and the obtained results are presented.

1. Introduction

The interest for our environment and the effect of all our human actions on it, is getting
more and more interest nowadays. So, also in the construction industry building
activities are increasingly being judged from a sustainability point of view. In that
respect the use of recycled concrete and demolition waste, as aggregate in new concrete
structures, can be regarded as one of the best ways to meet the challenges of
sustainability in the concrete industry.

Already for many years reuse of concrete and masonry is an issue in crowded countries
with limited land space for dumping demolition debris. In the Netherlands, a first
extensive investigation with respect to reuse of concrete and masonry aggregates was

805
performed in the first half of the eighties. As an outcome of these investigations it is in
the Netherlands allowed to replace coarse aggregates by a maximum of 20% by volume.
As replacement concrete aggregates, masonry aggregates, lightweight aggregates, or a
combination may be used with the restriction that the total amount of masonry and
lightweight aggregates is not more than 10% by volume. For these replacements the
Concrete Code can be used without any modification. According to a CUR
Recommendation [1], dating from 1997, replacement of 100% of the coarse aggregates
is allowed in concrete walls for structures in safety class 1 and 2 (no or small risk for
human life).

In order to extent the possibilities for reuse of concrete and masonry aggregates in
concrete an extensive research programme was performed by the Delft University of
Technology and TNO Building and Construction Research under the auspices of CUR
Research Committee C107B [2]. As part of the investigations the behaviour of anchors
in concrete with mixed recycled aggregates was investigated. The experiments and
results are presented in this paper.

2. Aim

Mixed recycled aggregate concrete also contains masonry aggregates with a relative low
stiffness and strength. In that respect questions were raised about the possible
consequences of these weak spots on mechanisms were concentrated loads play an
important role, like for instance with short (expansion) anchors. The same, of course,
holds true for lightweight aggregate concrete. It is known that the behaviour of
lightweight aggregate concrete under concentrated loads is different from gravel
aggregate concrete [3]. However, for the behaviour of short anchors in lightweight
concrete only very little is known. Since fastenings made with short anchors are more
and more being used in daily practice it was decided to study their behaviour in mixed
recycled aggregate concrete in a pragmatic way by applying a number of tensile tests.

3. Effect of base material on the behaviour of anchors

The behaviour of various types of anchors and anchor groups is studied extensively in
recent years (see for instance [4]). However, for the effect of the base material on the
anchor properties, not much information can be found in the literature. In the following,
first some properties of recycled aggregate concrete will be discussed.

From the investigations into the behaviour of concrete with mixed recycled aggregates it
appeared that there is a great similarity with lightweight aggregate concrete. So, for most
clauses in the Concrete Code adaptations in a way analogous to lightweight aggregate
concrete are applicable. For instance, the Young’s modulus is lower than for normal
weight concrete and a reduction factor based on the concrete density can be used to
account for this. It appeared, however, that the time dependent properties, shrinkage and

806
creep, are significantly larger for recycled aggregate concrete than for lightweight
aggregate concrete [4].

Tensile experiments on anchors in concrete and/or masonry aggregate concrete as well


as in lightweight concrete are not known to the authors. Therefore, in order to get an idea
about the possible influence of the base material on the anchor behaviour, a theoretical
model in [4] can be used. For the tensile strength Nu for concrete failure of headed and
expansion anchors usually the following empirical equation is used:

Nu = a ⋅ fc0.5 ⋅ hef1,5 (1)

In equation 1 a is a constant, hef is the effective depth and fc is the concrete compressive
strength. In this relation the compressive strength is used for practical reasons. Since a
concrete cone is breaking out using the concrete tensile strength would be more logical.
Eligehausen and Sawade [4,6], however, presented a model based on nonlinear fracture
mechanics and concluded that the cone failure load depends on the factor (E⋅GF)0.5 and
not on the tensile strength. E is the Young’s modulus and GF is the fracture energy of the
concrete. The term (E⋅GF)0.5 represents the term fc0.5 in equation 1 and accounts for the
influence of the concrete mix on the failure load [4].

4. Experiments

4.1 General
Tensile tests are performed on anchors in three different types of concrete. Besides the
concrete with mixed recycled aggregates, concrete with ordinary river gravel was used
as a reference. Furthermore, concrete with solely masonry aggregates as coarse
aggregates. In fact, it was intended to investigate a possible effect of a masonry
aggregate in the highly stressed anchorage area of an anchor. Since, in theory, with
mixed recycled aggregates it is still possible that only concrete aggregates are located
around the anchorage zone, the masonry aggregate concrete was introduced.

4.2 Concrete
The mix compositions for the applied types of concrete are given in Table 1. There, also
some properties of the fresh concrete are given. The goal was to obtain the same
compressive strength for the three types of concrete. Because of the weaker masonry
aggregates the cement content was increased and the water-cement ratio was decreased
for the mixed recycled aggregate concrete and even more for the masonry aggregate
concrete. It turned out that for the latter these measures caused a little too much increase
in strength, as can be seen in Table 2, where the measured properties of the hardened
concrete are listed.

807
Table 1 Mix compositions and some fresh concrete properties for the three applied types
of concrete.
mixed
masonry
gravel recycled
Mix composition aggregate
concrete aggregate
concrete
concrete
cement CEM III/B 42.5 LH HS (kg/m3) 280 300 320
3
water content (kg/m ) 180 181 170
water/cement-ratio 0.64 0.60 0.53
3
dry sand 0-4 (kg/m ) 822 896 857
3
river gravel 4-16 (kg/m ) 1017 - -
mixed recycled aggregate1) 4-16 (kg/m3) - 815 -
1) 3
masonry aggregate 4-16 (kg/m ) - - 839
fines < 250 µm (l/m3) 133 143 146
3
fresh density (kg/m ) 2328 2204 2207
air content (% V/V) 0.4 1.0 2.2
1)
The coarse mixed recycled and masonry aggregates were pre-wetted.

From Table 2 it can be seen that the tensile splitting strength after 28 days was almost
equal for the three applied concrete mixes. The Young’s modulus of the mixed recycled
aggregate and the masonry aggregate is approximately 70% of the Young’s modulus of
the gravel concrete. A reduction of Young’s modulus coincides with what is usually
found for lightweight aggregate concrete. Although a decrease of 30% is relatively large
for a concrete with a density of 2200 kg/m3.

The fracture energy was not determined for the concrete mixes used for the tensile tests
on anchors. However, in an accompanying test programme performed in the Stevin
Laboratory of the Delft University of Technology, fracture energy was determined on
concrete specimens made with a slightly different concrete composition. The obtained
values for the fracture energy of mixed recycled aggregate and masonry aggregate
concrete are in the range that is found for lightweight aggregate concrete [3]. For the
fracture energy of gravel concrete in Table 2 a value is listed, that can usually be found
in the literature.

808
Table 2 28-day-properties of the hardened concrete; variation coefficient between
brackets ( ).
mixed
masonry
gravel recycled
Mix composition aggregate
concrete aggregate
concrete
concrete
cube compressive strength (N/mm2) 31.1 (1.7) 31.8 (2.4) 37.8 (2.6)
2
cube splitting strength (N/mm ) 2.72 (0.6) 2.71 (4.2) 2.80 (5.1)
2
Young’s modulus (N/mm ) 30700 (9.3) 21700 (2.4) 21500 (2.5)
3
density (kg/m ) 2328 (0.2) 2204 (0.2) 2207 (0.5)
1)
Fracture energy (N/m) 80 - 100 62 60
1)
Fracture energy as obtained in an accompanying test programme with slightly
different mix compositions.

Based on the values obtained for respectively the Young’s modulus and the fracture
energy and the theory that the tensile capacity of an anchor for concrete cone failure
depends on a factor (E⋅GF)0.5 a reduction of the tensile capacity till a value between 65%
and 75% of the capacity for normal gravel concrete can be expected.

4.3 Fasteners
In the experiments two types of cast-in-place and two types of post-installed anchors
were used (see Figure 1). For the post-installed anchors torque-controlled expansions
anchors M8 and M16 with an effective depth of respectively 44 mm and 66 mm were
used. For the cast-in-place anchors a M12 threaded inserts with an effective depth of
approximately 55 mm and a headed anchors M16 with an effective depth of 127 mm
were used.

Fig. 1: Photo of the anchors used in the experiments

809
Per type of anchor four tensile tests were performed. The anchors were placed in
concrete elements with the dimensions of 1.6m x 1.3m x 0.3m. For each type of concrete
two elements were used. The cast-in-place anchors were placed in the bottom of the
formwork. After the concrete was hardened, the elements were turned around and the
expansion anchors were placed in the same cast site as the cast-in-place anchors.

4.4 Experiments
For the tensile tests on the anchors the guidelines given in Annex A of the ETAG
(European Technical Approval Guideline) for metal anchors for use in concrete [7] were
followed. A photo of the applied tensile equipment is given in Figure 2. For the
measurement of the deformation of the anchors two displacement transducers (LVDT’s)
at a distance 1.5⋅hef from the anchor were used. For the M8 and M12 anchors the
LVDT’s were mounted to the anchor at a distance of 65 mm above the concrete surface,
while this was 100 mm for the M16 anchors.

Fig. 2: Photo of the test arrangement used for the tensile tests on the anchors.

The load was applied by means of an actuator connected to a hand pump. By this way
also a descending branch could be obtained.

5. Results

In Table 3 the measured maximum load in the tensile tests is given. In Figures 3 to 6
hand-smoothed average load-deformation relations are presented for the four types of
anchors respectively.

810
Table 3: Measured maximum loads (kN) in the tensile test on the anchors.
Headed anchors M16 Threaded insert M12
1)
Gravel Mixed Masonry Gravel Mixed Masonry
recycled recycled
fck = fck = 31.8 fck = 37.8 fck = 31.1 fck = 31.8 fck = 37.8
31.12)
106.2 105.6 106.2 32,1 31,2 30,4
(3.0)3) (3.7) (2.7) (1,1) (3,1) (6,2)
Torque-controlled expansion anchor M16 Torque-controlled expansion anchor M 8
Gravel Mixed Masonry Gravel Mixed Masonry
recycled recycled
fck = 31.1 fck = 31.8 fck = 37.8 fck = 31.1 fck = 31.8 fck = 37.8
43.4 33.4 33.1 17.1 15.2 16.0
(7.5) (9.4) (6.9) (0.5) (7.2) (6.9)
1)
Type of aggregate used
2)
fck is the mean concrete compressive strength in MPa;
3)
Coefficient of variation in % between brackets.

For the headed anchors the maximum load was more or less equal for the three concrete
mixes. This can be explained by the fact that steel failure was governing instead of
concrete cone failure. For the bolt steel grade 8.8 was used. The part with the inner
thread, however, was of a lower strength preventing concrete cone failure to occur.
Based on a relation in the literature [4] (eq. 1 with a=15.5) for the mean concrete cone
failure load of headed anchors a value of 124 kN can be calculated for the cube
compressive strength of 31.1 MPa and the effective depth of 127 mm. The (steel) failure
load of 106 kN is about 86% of this value. Therefore, it can be assumed that the failure
load of the investigated mixed recycled aggregate concrete and masonry aggregate
concrete is at a maximum not more reduced than 14%. As far as the load-deformation
relation is concerned (see Figure 3), no significant differences were found.

Also in case of the threaded inserts the governing failure mode was steel failure (see
Figure 7) causing a rather plastic behaviour (see Figure 4). Again, the load-deformation
relations are almost similar for the three types of concrete. Assuming an effective depth
determined by the horizontal pin (see Figure 1) and equal to 55 mm a mean concrete
cone failure load of 35 kN can be calculated. Although the effect of the pin on the
effective depth is not known, it can be assumed that for all the three types of concrete the
maximum load in the experiments was not far from a concrete failure load.

In case of the torque-controlled expansion anchors the failure mode was that significant
radial cracking could be observed on the concrete surface, which was followed by the
pulling-out of the anchor. For these anchors a reduction of the maximum load for the
mixed recycled aggregate concrete and masonry concrete, as compared with the gravel

811
concrete, could be observed. For both types of recycled aggregate concrete the maximum
load was almost equal and about 77% and 90% of the maximum load for gravel concrete
for respectively the M16 and the M8 anchor. It should be noted, however, that the
compressive strength of the masonry concrete was larger than that of the two other types
of concrete. For the M16 anchor (see Figure 5) a little less stiff behaviour for the
recycled aggregate concrete compared to the gravel concrete can be seen, which can be
explained by the lower Young’s modulus. This was not observed for the M8 anchor, for
which no explanation is found. Furthermore, the load-deformation relations did not
differ significantly, especially when the scatter (not shown) is taken into account.
tensile load (kN)

120

100

80

60 headed anchors M16


40 gravel aggregates
mixed recycled aggregates
20 masonry aggregates
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
deformation (mm)
Fig. 3: Average load-deformation relations for the headed anchors M16.
tensile load (kN)

40

32

24
threaded inserts M12
16 gravel aggregates
mixed recycled aggregates
8 masonry aggregates

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
deformation (mm)
Fig. 4: Average load-deformation relations for the threaded inserts M12.

812
tensile load (kN)
50

40

30

20 torque-controlled expansion anchor M16


gravel aggregates
10 mixed recycled aggregates
masonry aggregates
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
deformation (mm)
Fig. 5: Average load-deformation relations for the torque-controlled expansion anchors
M 16.
tensile load (kN)

20

16

12
torque-controlled expansion anchor M8
8 gravel aggregates
mixed recycled aggregates
4 masonry aggregates

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
deformation (mm)
Fig. 6: Average load-deformation relations for the torque-controlled expansion anchors
M 8.

6. Concluding remarks

The effect of the use of concrete with recycled aggregates for the coarse aggregates on
the behaviour of short anchors was investigated. For the applied cast-in-place headed
anchors and threaded inserts the effect of the different base material on the concrete
failure load could not be studied, because steel failure was governing. Nevertheless, it is
expected that, if there is a reduction in failure load, it will be less than what would be
expected on basis of a fracture mechanics model presented in literature [4,6].

813
Fig.7.: Failure mode governed by steel failure in case of cast-in-place threaded inserts
(figure at left and left-hand side of figure at right) and headed anchors (right-hand
side of figure at right).

For the torque-controlled expansion anchors used in this investigation the maximum load
was reduced by using the mixed recycled and masonry aggregates instead of gravel for
the coarse aggregates. However, the reduction as observed, was less than what is
predicted by the nonlinear fracture mechanics model. For all applied types of anchors the
types of concrete did not significantly influence the load-deformation relations.

7. References

1. CUR-Recommendation 58, ‘Mixed aggregates in concrete walls for structures in


safety class 1 and 2, 1997, (in Dutch).
2. Hordijk, D.A., ‘Mixed recycled aggregate concrete; Results of experimental
investigation and background report to CUR-recommendation’ TNO report 00-
CON-BM-R1270, October 2000 (in Dutch).
3. Walraven, J.C., Den Uijl, J., Stroband, J., Al-Zubi, N., Gijsbers, J. and
Naaktgeboren, M., ‘Structural lightweight concrete’, Heron 40(1), 1995.
4. CEB, ‘Fastenings to concrete and masonry structures – State-of-the-art’, CEB-
Bulletin no. 216, Thomas Telford, July 1994.
5. Hordijk, D.A. and Den Uijl, J., ‘Creep and shrinkage behaviour of concrete with
mixed recycled aggregates’, in ‘Construction materials - Theory and application –
For the 60th birthday of Hans-Wolf Reinhardt’ (Ed. R. Eligehausen), pp. 341-350.
6. Eligehausen, R. and Sawade, G., ‘A fracture mechanics based description of the
pull-out behaviour of headed studs embedded in concrete’ in ‘Fracture mechanics of
concrete structures from theory to application’, Report of RILEM Committee TC90-
FMA. London: Chapman and Hall, pp. 281-299.
7. Guideline for European Technical Approval of Anchors (metal anchors) for use in
concrete. Part 1, 2 and 3 and Annexes A, B and C, EOTA, Brussels.

814
REGARDING STRENGTH OF ANCHOR BOLTS USED FOR
PCa CURTAIN WALL FASTENERS
Hiroyuki Kawamura*, Taizo Otobe**, Seiichi Oka***
*Kyushu Sangyo University, Japan
**PRE-CON System Association, Japan
*** PRE-CON System Association, Japan

Abstract
PCa concrete curtain wall panels are attached to the structural frames by the jointing
methods that enable the walls to rock or to sway, so as to be able to follow the
horizontal displacement of the frames without sharing shear force. But, it was
discovered from the results of the damage investigation caused by the Hanshin-Awaji
earthquake, 1995 in Japan that some cracks occurred around the anchor bolts in
concrete curtain walls.
The anchor bolts receive not only tensile force caused by negative wind pressure, but
also shear force shared by the dead weight and seismic inertia force. While they are apt
to be located near the corner of the thin walls, that is, the end distances or edge
distances are short because of design details.
In this paper, the authors present the results of the experiments on the tensile and the
shear strength of the anchor bolts with several kinds of anchor bolts shapes, that were
embedded at short end distances or short edge distances in the full size walls. And
propose the estimating method of the strength of these anchor bolts, then introduce the
cautions and the measures on the occasion of the installing fasteners.

1. Introduction

During the past 10 years, demand for PCa curtain walls in Japan has soared to 200,000
to 250,000 walls, with a total surface area of 1.8 to 2.0 million m2. However, due to the
absence of official design specifications and strength design equations for the fasteners
used to attach curtain walls to buildings, manufacturers set their own specifications.
Therefore about 8 years ago, the Precast Concrete System Association of manufacturers
surveyed the existing fastener and anchoring methods of anchor bolt developed by
various manufacturers, and performed loading tests on popular anchoring methods

815
using full-size specimens to establish fastener design specifications. This report
introduces typical methods of installing PCa curtain walls, proposes an appropriate
fastener design method based on the test results, and reports on outstanding problems.

2. Installing PCa curtain walls on building bodies

The method of installing a PCa curtain wall on a building body must of course
guarantee safety against its dead load, but must also be safe from negative and positive
wind force during a typhoon and from in-plane and out-of-plane inertial forces during
an earthquake.

In Japan, PCa curtain walls are treated structurally as non-bearing walls because many
exterior walls have windows and other openings and the shear resistance of the panels
is low compared with its stiffness [1]. Installation methods that satisfy the sway method
or the rocking method as shown in Figure 1 (a) (b) are recommended to prevent the
panels from carrying in-plane shear force caused by deformation of building stories in
particular, and large- to medium-size PCa panels (10 to 20 m2) almost all conform to
the latter method. Figure 2 shows an example of this representative PCa panel
installation [2]. As shown in Figure 3, shows the anchor bolt and anchoring methods
used to install fasteners, and anchors are of installed-in-site type in almost all cases.
The plate type is used most often followed by the stick type, and then the hook type. In
some cases, under spread type post-installed metallic anchors are used.

3. Relationship between strengths and bolt anchoring method

a) Force applied to anchor bolts

816
As shown in Figure 2,
with a rocking method
fastener, the vertical
portion of the dead load
is supported by a height
adjustment bolt installed
on a load bearing fastener.
To guarantee safety even
under out-of-plane forces
produced by wind load or
in-plane and out-of-plane
inertia during an
earthquake of P = KH*W
(KH = 1.0, W is the dead
load), the out-of-plane
force must offset the
fastener on the positive
side and the tensile force
of anchor bolt on the
negative side, and the
horizontal shear force by
the inertia of the
earthquake of the
in-plane force must offset
the shear force of the
anchor bolt.

b) Anchor bolt loading


test
Many experiments have
been performed to test
the strength of anchor
bolts, but there have been
few experiments on
anchor bolts embedded in
thin panels such as
curtain walls. To verify
existing empirical
equations, loading tests
of typical plate type and
stick type anchor bolts
were conducted. The test

817
Table.1 Resurts of anchor bolt tension and shear test
Maximum load (kgf) Compressive Corrected Anchor End Edge Projected Calculated
Specimen Anchor Ratio
strength strength depth distance distance area value
number No.1 No.2 No.3 Mean Fc(kg/cm2) bar P1/P2
P1(kg) h e1(cm) e2(cm) Ac(cm2) P2(kgt)
TS24E 2.82 3.30 3.27 3.13 358.0 F6 2.87 8 15 145.3 2.27 1.27
TS24E 3.06 3.20 3.09 3.12 386.0 F6 2.75 8 15 145.3 2.27 1.21
TS24C 2.90 2.58 2.41 2.63 307.0 F6 2.60 8 50 145.3 2.27 1.15
TS24C 2.55 2.88 2.75 2.73 369.0 F6 2.46 8 50 145.3 2.27 1.09
TS24C 2.87 2.68 3.08 2.88 380.0 F6 2.56 8 50 145.3 2.27 1.13
TP24E 5.53 4.92 5.08 5.18 468.0 F1 4.14 8 15 329.0 5.13 0.81
TP24E 5.01 4.89 5.47 5.12 394.0 F1 4.47 8 15 329.0 5.13 0.87
TP24E 5.72 5.79 5.62 5.71 340.6 F1 5.36 8 15 364.4 5.68 0.94
TP24E 6.37 6.82 5.83 6.34 325.3 F1 6.09 8 25 364.4 5.68 1.07
TP24E 4.49 4.51 4.75 4.58 344.0 F1 4.28 8 15 329.0 5.13 0.83
TP24C 5.64 5.60 6.40 5.88 348.0 F1 5.46 8 50 364.4 5.68 0.96
TP24C 10.37 9.66 9.69 9.90 321.2 F2 9.57 11 50 604.8 9.43 1.02
TP24C 16.93 15.49 15.29 15.90 304.9 F3 15.77 14 50 901.6 14.05 1.12
TP24C 7.11 7.17 7.67 7.31 404.8 F4 6.30 8 50 389.6 6.07 1.04
TP24C 7.39 7.95 7.42 7.59 379.3 F5 6.75 8 50 427.3 6.66 1.01
TP24C 6.19 6.41 6.55 6.38 344.0 F1 5.96 8 50 364.4 5.68 1.05
TP24C 6.00 6.58 6.66 6.41 386.0 F1 5.65 8 50 364.4 5.68 1.00
SoS24EA 3.93 4.10 3.73 3.92 358.0 F6 3.59 8 15 8 297.0 4.63 0.78
SoS24CA 5.45 5.33 4.51 5.10 297.8 F6 5.11 8 15 ∽ 362.4 5.65 0.90
SoS24CA 10.58 9.67 8.95 9.73 344.7 F6 9.08 8 25 ∽ 550.2 8.58 1.06
SoS24EA 3.87 3.70 3.50 3.69 386.0 F6 3.25 15 8 297.0 4.63 0.70
SoP24E 5.07 5.18 4.62 4.96 394.0 F1 4.33 15 8 297.0 4.63 0.94
SoP24C 6.82 5.78 4.96 5.85 305.9 F1 5.80 8 15 ∽ 362.3 5.65 1.03
SoP24C 9.30 9.32 9.30 9.31 335.5 F1 8.80 8 25 ∽ 549.6 8.57 1.03
SoP24C 3.86 3.35 3.19 3.47 281.4 F2 3.58 11 8 ∽ 219.3 3.42 1.05
SoP24C 4.10 2.86 3.08 3.34 337.5 F3 3.15 14 8 ∽ 219.3 3.42 0.92
P1=P* (300/Fc)
Legend :Loading direction(T:tension,So:shear outside) Loading direction┐    ┌Bolt size ┌Anchor bar
Anchor type(P:plate,S:stick) Anchor bar location(C:center,E:end) T P 24 C A orientation
P2=0.9* Fc*Ac Anchor bar orientation(A:90゜,B:180゜,C:0゜)   └Anchor type└Anchor location

818
819
results are presented in Table 1. As shown in Figure 4, the tensile tests were done by
loading experiments as shown in Figure 4 and the shear tests were done under loaded
conditions as shown in Figure 5.

c) Results of tensile loading test of anchor bolts and estimation of the tensile
strength Pu
Regarding the tensile tests, the suitability of the equation shown below was examined
for anchor bolt strength, which is proportional to the laterally projected effective area
of the failure cone when the vertical angle/2 = 0.785 radians. This equation is now used
by the Composite Construction Guideline [3] and the Seismic Retrofitting Design
Guideline [4].

Pu(Qu) = 0.9 * Fc * Ac (kg) (1)


Fc: concrete strength (kg/cm2)
Ac: laterally projected effective area of the failure cone (cm2)

The Pu – Ac relationship is for the anchor plate type shown in Figure 6, and when Ac
was found as shown in Figure 7(a), it conformed closely to the case where the edge
distance e2 was adequate for the anchor depth. But when specimens with a small edge
distance were tested, the test value was about 20% smaller then the calculated value
even accounting for the loss of the laterally projected effective area. Possible causes
were that the failure cone’s vertical angle is about 90° near the anchor hardware, but
the further away the larger the angle, and also that the stress distribution is not point
symmetrical. It is assumed that if an edge distance of about 3 times the anchor depth h

20.00
Specimen of changing anchor depth
Specimen of changing plate size Plate type
15.00
Tensile strength Pu(t)

Specimen of changing edge distance


Stick type
10.00

5.00

0.00
0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1000.0
Laterally projected effective area (cm2)

Figuer 6. Pu-Ac relation of tensile test

820
is ensured, the edge distance will be adequate. Therefore, equation (1) should be used
in such a case, and a value 0.8 times that obtained by equation (1) should be used to
ensure safety when the edge distance is smaller.

When a stick type anchor bolt is subjected to tensile force, a well-shaped failure cone is
not observed because failure occurs so the panel peels off from the anchor bar location,
but for convenience, as shown in Figure 7(b), if Ac is found assuming that the anchor
depth is the surface of the anchor bar and assuming spindle-shaped failure, and the
tensile strength Pu is estimated by equation (1), then good fit is obtained as shown in
Figure 6.

When the anchor depth and edge distance are sufficiently large, the strength is
determined based on the tensile yield of the bolt and:

Pu = sσy *sae (2)


sσy: yield point of the bolt
sae: effective section area of the bolt

d) Results of shear loading tests of anchor bolts and estimation of shear strength
Qu
Because the shear loading tests were conducted by applying shear force to the concrete
surface, if the end distance e1 was small and the bearing strength was determined based

821
on spindle-shaped failure of the concrete, there was little difference between the shear
strengths of the plate type and the stick type, and the difference according to the anchor
depth h is also negligeable.

The size of the end distance e1 has the greatest effect on the shear strength, but if the
thickness of the base concrete for embedded anchors is adequate compared with the
end distance, spindle-shaped failure occurs. In the case of a thin material such as a wall
panel, failure occurs outwardly as shown in Figure 8. But because the shape of failure
was spindle-shaped near the loading point, as in the case when subjected to tension, the
laterally projected effective area of the failure cone is accounted for. Hence, assuming
that the failure cone’s vertical angle/2 = α is equal to the experimentally obtained
vertical angle/2,α= 0.925 radians when the end distance e1 = 8 cm,α= 0.750 radians
when e1 = 15 cm, andα= 0.611 radians when e1 = 25 cm. The relationship of effective
projected surface area Ac and experimental value Qu is as shown in Figure 9. If in the
plate type case Pu in equation (1) is substituted by Qu, the experimental values and
calculated values almost concur. But if the edge distance e2 is smaller than the end
distance e1, as in the tension case, the calculated value indicates a high risk. Therefore,
e2 ≧ 2e1 is recommended. There is a danger of the stick type losing some strength as
well.

If the edge distance and end distance are both sufficiently large, Qu is determined by
the bolt’s shear strength equation (3) or by the concrete bearing strength equation (4),
whichever is smaller.

822
20
Specimen of changing end distance
Shear strength Pu(t) Specimen of changing edge distance
15

10

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Laterally projected effective area(cm2)

Figuer 9. Pu-Ac relation of shear test

Qu = 0.7 sσy * sae (3)


Qu > 0.3 Ec・σ B *sae (4)

4. Anchor bolt design strength and design precautions

a) Tensile strength
Ac is calculated based on Figure 7(a) (b), Pu is obtained with equations (1) and (2), and
the smaller is considered to be the design strength. But the anchor should be set so that
the edge distance e2 ≧ 3h.

b) Shear strength
Ac is calculated based on Figure 8, Qu is obtained with equations (1), (3), and (4), and
the smallest is considered to be the strength. But the anchor should be set so that the
end distance e1 ≧ 15 cm, and the edge distance e2 ≧ 2e1.

5. Outstanding issues

In a case where shear force is applied to an anchor bolt that is embedded in a thin PCa
concrete panel, in this experiment, PL 50 x 100 x 100 was applied to the side surface as
load reaction force on the concrete surface, but because the location of the actual
external force is considered to be the center of the panel thickness, in reality slightly
larger out-of-plane bending force is applied locally. Therefore, because the tension
generated by this bending force is added to the concrete tension near the bolt’s bearing
pressure point, the bearing strength could be slightly lower. Further experiments
should be conducted to confirm this.

823
References

1. ‘Exterior finishing construction seismic resistance manual – medium rise


buildings’, Building Center of Japan, June 1998
2. ‘Seismic design for non-structural building parts: guidelines and commentaries,
and seismic design and execution guidelines’, Architectural Institute of Japan,
November 1985
3. ‘Composite structure design guidelines and commentaries’, Architectural Institute
of Japan, August, 1988
4. ‘Reinforced concrete structure seismic retrofitting design guidelines and
commentaries’, The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association, July, 1995

824
NEW METHOD OF RECONSTRUCTION-
STRENGTHENING OF OLD BUILDINGS
M. Marjanishvili *,T.Zuzadze**, D. Ramishvili**, A.Lebanidze*
*Tbilisi, Georgia
**Company “Kvali”, Tbilisi, Georgia

Abstract
During the recent decade the reconstruction and strengthening of buildings of the
significance of architectural heritage, which are located in the historical parts alongside
with constructions of modern buildings has become rather urgent in Georgia. The
resources of carrying capacity have been noticeably decreased during 100-150 years
exploitation of such buildings. It was abetted by the performed planned changes (new
openings, dismantling of walls and etc.) and damages of conduits during exploitation in
different periods, which followed urbanization process (water supply, sewerage, heating,
ventilation, power supply).Building-designed company “Kvaly” was set up in 1995, it
has elaborated original methods for reconstruction and strengthening of old buildings.
Strengthening of foundations is made by means of the reinforced concrete edge
supported monolith plates, which greatly reduces the loading on the ground and is easy
to be realized technologically. Strengthening of damaged carrying walls is performed by
the application of rigidly reinforced air-placed concrete; replacement of the old wood
floors is made by edge supported reinforced concrete plates on the counters, which are
fixed in a carrying wall by means of the edges and anchor dowels existing on the
counter.The above given measures of constructional work offered by us enable one to
increase the carrying capacity and exploitation term of buildings. Furthermore
arrangement of additional storeys is also available.

1. Introduction

In order to take successful measures for strengthening of buildings it is necessary to


determine the causes of their damages. The major cause often represents to the non-
uniformly laid foundation, as well as decreased capacity of currying vertical elements
and roofs.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 1 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
2
D.1. Reinforced Concrete
Space Foundation

1 3 1-Plate;
4 2-Rigid edge;
5 3-Anchor dowels;
4-Artificial base;
""""
""
"" ""
""
""""
""""
6 5-Tamping ground
"" ""
""""
"" ""
"" "
"
""
"" " ""
""
""
"""" 6-Ground.
" "" " """"
""
"""" """"""
""
" "
"" "" ""
""""
" "" """"
""
"" """"
" ""
"" ""
"""" """" " "
""
"" """" "" ""
"""" """" """" "" "" "
"""" ""
""

There is a scheme of the reinforced concrete space foundation on the draft No 1, which
enables us to strengthen various kinds of foundations. The space foundation is a box
resembling construction that consists of monolith reinforced concrete plate (1) and rigid
edges (2). It is connected to the foundation and walls of the building by means of anchor
dowels (3). Space foundation is formed in the cells of closed counters of the building
after pressing down the ground (5) and arranging the artificial base (4).Space foundation
may be arranged on the different levels- according to a building constructional scheme,
deepening and type of a foundation, geological conditions.Space foundation gets into
work after a building has additionally settled down. In accordance with our practice its
arrangement reduces a settle process minimally and stabilization is guaranteed after a
certain period of time.

2. Different cases of use of space foundation

For the most part strip foundations are deformed as a result of settling processes. We
have elaborated a new method of strengthening of strip foundations. It provides for a
combination of a new space foundation with the inner space of an existing strip
foundation (D.2). The reinforced concrete plate (1) and reinforced concrete rigid beam
(7) situated on its perimeter are its principal elements. Space foundation is connected to
a building by means of previously arranged plummets of reinforcement of a strip
foundation.
These plummets from their part provide moving up of the vertical loading of the building
into the space foundation. Combination of the space foundation with the strip foundation
and walls of the basement provides an increase of a building’s supporting area and
strengthening of walls of the basement that from its part excludes development of
settling processes and increases the seismology of a building. In most cases because of
its insufficient rigidity ground floor is damaged by non-uniform laying of the foundation.
For this matter it is necessary to enlarge the length of a rigid beam up to the level of the
ground floor’s covering.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 2 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
1
a)

3 2

I I
5

I-I
3
5
b)
" "
" "
" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " "

4
6

2 1 7

D.2 Strengthening of Strip Foundation.


a) Plan
b) Cut
1-Plate; 2-Rigid beam;
3-Rigid edge; 4-Anchor dowels;
5-Wall of an existing building;
6-Strip foundation of an existing building;
7-Rigid beam.

During strengthening of basement buildings that are damaged by non-uniform settling


processes it often occurs that virgin bases are very weak and principal rocks are of
noticeable deepening. In this case application of only strip foundation doesn’t produce a
desired effect. Many problems are causes while strengthening such kinds of buildings.
Load on space foundation may be moved up to principal virgin by means of piles of little
diameters (3). For this reason, latitudinal and longitudinal rigid beams (4) must be
arranged in the plate of foundation, which are combined with reinforced concrete pile (5)
fixed on the principal virgin lands.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 3 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
a) D.3 Strengthening of a
Building By Means of
Space Foundation
and Piles.
a) Plan b) Cut
1- Plate;
2- Rigid edge
I I 3- Anchor dowels
4- Rigid beams;
I-I 5- Piles of a little
diameter;
6- Weak ground;
I-I 7- Principal rock.
b)

"
" 2 "
"
" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " "

3 4 1

6
5

It is necessary to approach differently a strengthening point of buildings with high


basements, which are flooded as a result of permanent water flow, and when complete
water drainage is impossible. (D.4)

" " "


" "
" "
"
" "
" "
2 "
" "
" "
"
" "
" "

3
5

" " " " " " " "


" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " "
4
1

D.4 Strengthening of Building in Case of Ground Water


Existing in a Basement.
1- Plate; 2- Rigid edge 3- Anchor dowels;
4- Artificial foundation; 5-Level of the ground water.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 4 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
In this case, in order to be able to strengthen the building by means of space foundation,
we must throw crushed stone into the building (4) in such way when the surface of its
level covers the water level.

Than space foundation must be laid on an artificial foundation of crushed stone


according to the mentioned method.

Non-inform laying of foundation are noticed in such buildings that are of little deepening
and have no basement (5). Strengthening of such kind of damaged buildings by means
of space foundation is typical for its certain specifications.

"
" 1 "
"
" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " "

4
5

2
6

D.5. Strengthening of a Building without a Basement

1-Plate; 2- Rigid edge 3- Anchor dowels


4- Artificial foundation 5-Wall of a Building
6- Foundation of a building

In contrast to other cases here rigid edges situated on the plate counter must be arranged
not above the plate but under it. For this reason ground level must be raised below floor
mark on the entire perimeter of the currying walls, rigid edges must be combined with
previously arranged anchor dowels of the walls, reinforced concrete monolith plate of
space foundation must be placed on the floor mark.

In case of large vertebra damaged building it will be better to use modified variant of the
present construction. In this case we can use either negative or positive hulls of curve
instead of flat plate.(D.6). In the first case it will work as a hull of jam and in the second
case as a membrane of tension.

In case of positive hull of curve if a large bracer is formed, counters of the hull may be
connected by means of binding plate, which will perform a function of a floor.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 5 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
a)

" "
" "
" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " "

b)
" "
" "
" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " "

D.6 Space Foundation for Strengthening of a Large


Vertebra Building
1 – Plate –“hull”
2 – Plate - “membrane”

In contrast to other existing methods of damaged foundations’ strengthening, after a


certain modification the space foundation offered by us may be used for strengthening of
damaged buildings having different kinds of constructions.

One of these kinds of cases is given in the D.7. The present building has a reinforced
concrete monolith foundation plate (1). It is settles non-uniformly as a result of the
ground washing off. The ground must be excavated and rigid edge must be arranged (2).
This will provide for increasing of the entire building’s steadiness and stopping of
washing process of the ground.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 6 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
" "
" "
" " " " " " " "
" " " " " " " "
" " ""

" " ""


1
""

""
3
"" ""

" ""
"" "" "
"" ""

""
""
""

""
2

D.7 Strengthening of a R/C Monolith Foundation


1- Monolith foundation plate of a building;
2- Rigid edge;
3- Anchor dowels.

A computational model (8) of the space foundation represents to the combination of


existing foundations (C1) situated on the flexible base and new foundations (C 11). It is
formed by means of flexible connections of shearing action (t). Rigidity of connections
is equal to rigidity of reinforcement bar. Flexible base is modified according two
coefficients of lining, shear and compression. Vertical load is applied onto the basement
wall of the existing building and is moved up to the foundation. Space foundation is put
to work proportionally to the intensification of settling processes caused by decreasing of
virgin land properties.
N

c11 c11
c1
D.8 Computational Scheme of Space Foundation
We have elaborated various variants of computation, which provide for imitation of nun-
uniform lying of foundation. These changes in the computation model are expressed by
means of changes of lining coefficient in certain zones of the foundation.

3. Strengthening of floors and currying walls

Setting of building-construction foundations often causes a decrease of currying capacity


of the currying walls and floors. It becomes necessary to elaborate measures for their

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 7 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
constructional strengthening. Using of reinforced air-placed concrete for strengthening
of walls built by bricks or small blocks is effective (D.9). For this reason existing
damaged walls must be cleaned off grinding material and anchor dowels (5) must be
assembled in them. Reinforcement bars are arranged on these dowels horizontally and
vertically as well.
These form a metal lath. Reinforcement vertical bars through the floors are extended for
the full height of the wall without a break. Walls felt into reinforcing fabric are covered
with air-placed concrete (2), which has a thickness of 5-8 sm.
Air-placed concrete increases the damaged wall’s currying capacity of vertical load.
a)

I I

I-I
b)

3 4

" "
" "
" "
" " 6 " "
" "
" "
" "
2

D.9 Strengthening of Currying Walls and Floors


a) Plan
b) Cut I-I
1-Currying walls of a building;
2-Reinforced air-placed concrete
3-R/C plate without a girder; 4-Rigid edge;
5- Anchor dowels 6-Foam plastic insets.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 8 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
In case of damages of floors (mainly old, wood currying elements) old covering may be
used as a gauge. The monolith reinforced concrete plate without a girder (3), which is
lightened by means of foam plastic insets (6) in certain cells, must be arranged above it.
The reinforced concrete monolith plate arranged on the perimeter by means of rigid edge
(4) is fixed into currying walls with the aid of anchor dowels (5).
The new reinforced concrete floors and air-placed concrete on the walls provide the
building with additional vertical and horizontal rigidity.

4. Arrangement of additional storeys of a building

City planing development and urbanization processes are often accompanied by


arrangement of additional storeys of the existing building. It increases vertical loads on a
building that is why it becomes necessary to enlarge a supporting area of the foundation
and distribute vertical loads. In this case application of the space foundation will produce
an effect (1). It increases a supporting area of the building. Metallic columns (2)
combined with the existing walls must be arranged on the rigid edges of a new
foundation. It will provide for moving up of an additional loads, which are caused by
additional storeys, to space foundation.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 9 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
3

4
6 4

5
2 2

""
"" "" "" "" ""

1 1
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

D.10 Increasing of a number of storeys of the building


1- Space foundation;
2- Metallic columns;
3- Currying elements of an additional storey;
4- Currying walls of a building
5- Old floor
6- New floor

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 10 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
5. Implementation examples of the given strengthening methods

In 1995 the letters patent No 185 –“Strengthening of Foundations of Building-


Constructions” was issued in the name of the Studio “Kvali”. During the past period
according to the mentioned method many important objects have been reconstructed and
strengthened:

- “Georgian Bank”, Tbilisi


- Georgian Central Television, Tbilisi
- No3 Experimental Secondary School, Tbilisi
- Secondary School , Signagi
- Secondary school, Gurdjaani
- A building of 9 storeys, No 25 Gamsakhurdia St., Tbilisi
- A building of 5 storeys, No 26 Chavchavadze St., Tbilisi

6. Conclusion
Special tools for fixing deformations have been assembled on the buildings, which were
strengthened according to above-mentioned method. In accordance with the monitoring
results it has been determined that no deformation took place in any of these buildings.
The stabilization proves the affectivity of this given method. Building- reconstructing
works are easy to be curried out from the point of view of technology and is not of need
of much investigation.
Implementations of this given method enable us to increase exploitation term of
buildings and their seismology.

Marjanishvili. “Reconstruction of Buildings”, 11 of 11


Fax +(995-32) 22 79 01
E-mail shalva@fresh.ge
FASTENING IN MASONRY
Andrea Meyer, Thilo Pregartner
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
In this paper the behaviour of plastic and injection anchors in masonry will be discussed.
The results of tests with different anchors in different types of brick and the main
parameters influencing the behaviour are presented.

1. Introduction

Masonry is a very diverse material. It is composed of masonry units (i.e. bricks) and
mortar. The bricks used in masonry structures are made of a variety of materials
including clay, lime stone and concrete. They differ in geometry (e.g. dimensions,
holes).
For fastenings in masonry several plastic and injection anchors are typically used. Their
behaviour is influenced by many parameters such as design of the fastener, type of brick,
the drilling system and hole configuration. Admissible loads are defined in Technical
Approvals for the different fastening systems.

The main parameters influencing the behaviour of plastic and injection anchors in
different materials were investigated extensively in tensile tests with different fastening
systems [2, 5, 6, 9, 10]. In this paper the key results of these tests are presented. An
overview on bricks used in Germany will also be given.

836
2. Masonry in Germany

In Germany, mainly four types of masonry units are typically used (Figure 1): (a) solid
or hollow clay bricks, (b) solid or hollow bricks made out of limestone, (c) solid units
produced from aerated concrete and (d) hollow units made from lightweight or normal
weight concrete. According to Figure 1 the most popular brick material is clay (42%
market share) followed by limestone units (33%) and aerated concrete (15%). The use of
bricks made from lightweight or normal weight concrete has been constantly decreasing
over the past few years. There market share is only about 10%.

Normalbetonsteine
Normal weight concrete 2,8
100%
Leichtbetonsteine
lightweight concrete 7,7
11,9
23,1
27,8
Porenbetonsteine
aerated concrete 14,9
80% 10,3

4,3
[%]

60% 24,7 Kalksandsteine 33,0


34,1
Anteil [%]

limestone
Percent

38,8

40%

46,4
20% 38,4 Ziegelsteine 41,6
clay
33,8

0%
1950 1960 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1994
Jahr
Year
Figure 1:
Market shares of different brick types

The requirements for dimensions, density and strength of masonry units are given in
DIN Standards. Additionally units are produced according to Technical Approvals of
the “Deutsche Institut für Bautechnik” (DIBt). These products are developed for better
heat insulation or improved economy. In general large size masonry units are
increasingly used to speed up construction.
The standards or Technical Approvals only regulate the ratio of hole area to total area.
Therefore the shape and size of holes, as well as the thickness of the walls, may vary
significantly. Figure 2 shows two examples of bricks that satisfy DIN standards.

To improve heat insulation properties, the ratio of the area of holes to the total area of
the brick has increased and the thickness of the walls has decreased during the last two
decades. This is problematic in respect to the transmission of loads by fastening systems

837
because less and less material is engaged. Therefore, it become important to investigate
the behaviour of typical fastening systems in a variety of types of masonry used in
Germany.
Maße [mm]

14 16 6
14

ca. 17 15-17 ca. 17


38

38
70
6

78 78
38

6
38
6

240
235
60 60

13 11 8 16 8 16 8 40 300

490
(b)
(a)

Figure 2: Examples for bricks as defined by a DIN Standard (a) HLz 12-0,9-16DF;
(b) KSL 12-1,2-10DF

3. Anchors with a Technical Approval for use in masonry

There are basically two anchorage systems used in Germany for fastening in masonry.
These are plastic anchors and injection anchors. They are described in detail in [11].

Plastic anchors (Figure 3) can be used in concrete and in masonry. They consist of a
plastic sleeve made of polyamid PA6 and a screw or nail. These two parts work together
to provide anchorage. The embedment depth is clearly marked on the sleeve and a collar
on the top inhibits the sleeve from slipping into the borehole.
The load transmission results from friction between the sleeve and the base material. In
perforated blocks supplemental tensile resistance is provided by keying action. The load-
displacement behaviour of the anchorage is mainly influenced by the thickness and the
number of webs along the embedment depth. Plastic anchors usually fail by pullout
without destroying the base material.
The use of injection anchors (Figure 4) is allowed in solid block and hollow masonry.
An injection system consists of a mesh sleeve, an adhesive mortar and a threaded rod.
There are many different systems on the market. They differ in the type of filling
material, the design of the sleeve and in the method of injection. The mortar is injected
into the sleeve and allowed to cure before loading.

838
Figure 3 : Examples for plastic anchors with a Technical Approval of the DIBt

Mesh sleeves and threaded rod Injection cartridge, mixing nozzle and pressure tool
Figure 4 : Examples for injection systems with a DIBt Technical Approval

4. Behaviour of plastic anchors

The behaviour of plastic anchors is influenced by several parameters.


Moisture and temperature in particular change the properties of the plastic sleeve. The
moisture content of plastic anchors made of polyamide under standard conditions is
about 2.5%. If the moisture content increases, the material becomes softer and the
maximum load decreases. On the other hand the failure load increases for lower
moisture contents. A similar effect can be observed for temperature. With increasing
temperature the stiffness and strength of the plastic decreases, therefore the failure load
decreases. The opposite is true for decreasing temperatures.
A significant influencing factor for plastic anchor behaviour in hollow masonry units are
the thickness and strength of the walls. In the following, results of tests using perforated
bricks made out of clay and limestone are presented. In all tests, anchors with a
Technical Approval were used. The numbering of the anchor types used in the following
figures does not correspond with the ordering of the anchors in Figure 3. The moisture
content and temperature of the sleeves was maintained at about 2,5% and 20°C,
respectively. More test results in other materials are given in [12].

839
4.1 Plastic anchors in vertically perforated clay bricks
In the Technical Approvals for plastic anchors, it is required that the drillhole in hollow
brick masonry be made by rotary drilling (without percussion). Percussion drilling is
allowed only under special circumstances.
In Figure 6 the pullout loads for different anchor types of plastic anchors in Hlz 12-0,9-
16DF (sleeve diameter d= 10mm) are shown. The drillholes were made by rotary
drilling. The anchors were set with the nominal embedment depth. In this brick two
positions for setting are possible because of the hole configuration (Figure 5).
5,0 anchor type22
anchor type11
Dübel Typ Dübel Typ anchor type55
Dübel Typ anchor type 33
Dübel Typ anchor type 44
Dübel Typ anchor
Dübel type
Typ 66 anchor type 77
Dübel Typ

Position B Position A
4,5 DIN 105 HLz12-16DF, Drehbohren

4,0 hef,soll= 70mm hef,soll= 90mm

3,5
[kN]
load[kN]

3,0
Höchstlast

2,5
failure

2,0

1,5

1,0

0,5 Admissible
Zulässige Last load

0,0 A B A B A B A B A B A B A B
Setzposition
Setting position

Figure 5: Setting Figure 6: Pullout loads for plastic anchors d= 10mm in Hlz12-0,9-
positions in Hlz12- 16DF as defined in DIN Standard 105 in dependence of anchor
0,9-16DF type and setting position

The embedment depth effectivly amounts to 70mm or 90mm depending on the anchor
type. For these two possibilities, the anchor can reach one large cell or one small and
one large cell. As it is shown in Figure 6, the measured failure loads scatter significantly
and depend on the anchor type. Anchor type 1 and 5 show comparatively high failure
loads. The lowest failure load measured for anchor type 4. It is important to note that a
larger embedment depth does not necessarily result in higher failure loads. The influence
of setting position is not predictable.
The ultimate loads decreases significantly if the drillhole is made by a percussion drill,
as it is often done in practice [11].

In figure 7 pullout loads for plastic anchors recorded during the last 20 years are shown.
This diagram is base on more than 2000 tests, which have been carried out on- site and
in the laboratory 1982. The mean failure loads and the standard deviation are plotted.
The letter “H” means percussion drilling, the letter “D” means rotary drilling. One can
observe that the pullout loads have decreased over the years.

840
This is due to changes in the hole configuration and the reduced thickness of the webs in
masonry.
7,0 1982 1990 1994- 96 1982 1990

on site
Baustelle laboratory
Labor Baustelle
on site laboratory
Labor
6,0
Dübel Typ 2 (10 mm)
[kN]
load [kN]

5,0
Bruchlast

4,0
value of failure
Mittelwerte

3,0

2,0
Mean

1,0

D H D H D H
0,0
HLz HLz20-1,2-2DF HLz12-0,9-16DF LHLz LHLz4-0,9-2DF

Figure 7: Development of failure load of plastic anchors (d= 10mm) in vertically


perforated bricks since 1982, data taken from [1,2,5,6,9,10]

4.2 Plastic anchors in perforated limestone bricks


According to DIBt Technical Approvals the admissible load for plastic anchors with
diameter of d= 10mm embeded in perforated limestone bricks, which conform to DIN
standard 106 (strength ≥ KSL 6), is admF= 0,4kN. This value assumes that holes are
made using drill. If the conditions are not complied within an application (maybe none
conform brick or percussion drill), then tensile tests on construction site are obligatory.
4,5 hef,soll= 70 mm hef,soll= 90 mm

4,0

3,5

3,0
load [kN]
[kN]

2,5
Höchstlast
failure

2,0

1,5

1,0

Zulässige Last
0,5

0,0 Dübel Typ 1 Dübel Typ 2 Dübel Typ 5 Dübel Typ 3 Dübel Typ 4 Dübel Typ 7

841
Figure 8 : Pullout loads for plastic anchors d= 10mm in KSL12-1,2-16DF (DIN 106 )

Bricks such as those shown in Figure 2 are not optimal for fastening due to the large
holes and the thin webs.
In Figure 8 pullout loads are plotted for different anchor types (d=10mm) in KSL12-1,2-
10DF with dimensions as given in Figure 2. The web thickness in the middle of the
brick was 19mm. Rotary drilling was used. It is obvious that the ultimate load depends
on the anchor type. The lowest failure loads were measured for anchor type 3 and 7.

4.3 Tensile tests performed on a construction site


According to the Technical Approvals of the DIBt, tests on- site are required if plastic
anchors are to be fastened in bricks whose strength or density does not reach the
minimum value that is given in the approvals or if the drillhole is drilled by percussion
drilling.
For the determination the admissible load,at least 15 pullout tests are required. Thereby,
the load N1 (load plateau at increasing displacement) and the failure load NU have to be
measured.
N [kN]

NU

N1

NN1:: load plateau


erstes Lastmaximum s [mm]
NNU1:: failure load
Höchstlast
U

Figure 9 Typical load- diplacement curve for plastic anchors with load plateau
N1 and failure load NU.

The admissible load is calculated by

0,23 ⋅ N1m Mit


zulF = Min N1m= mean value of the 5 lowest values N1
0,14 ⋅ NUm NUm= mean value of the 5 lowest values NU (4.1)

During the test, the load must be applied slowly and continuesly. The failure load should
not be reached in under 1 minute. The calculated admissible load must not exceed the
maximum allowable load, which amounts to 0,6kN for vertically perforated bricks and
perforated calcium silicate bricks and 0,5kN for precast concrete blocks. Both values are
valid for plastic anchors with diameter d= 10mm or d= 14mm.

842
5. Behaviour of injection systems

Injection systems transmit load by mechanical interlock. The mortar passes through the
openings of the mesh sleeve and forms a grafting. Injection installed anchors are
typically very stiff, so that failure is caused by a type of cone failure and the failure load
depends on the brick strength. A typical load- displacement curve first increases steeply
untill reaching the maximum load and drops sharply after brick failure. One injection
system is approved for use in hollow bricks and solid bricks.
The functioning in solid units differs from the behaviour in hollow bricks, because the
failure load in solid bricks is influenced by the bond between mortar and base material.
The behaviour is strongly influenced by the cleaning of the borehole. For these anchors
the installation instructions provided by the manufacturer have to be observed.

5.1 Injection systems in vertically perforated bricks


The admissible load in vertically perforated bricks as defined in DIN Standard 105 with
a strength equal to or greater than 12N/mm² amounts to 0,8kN (hammer drilling). The
load can be increased to 1,0kN if rotary drilling is used. The admissible load decreases
with decreasing strength of the bricks. Parameters affecting the performance are the
brick strength, hole configuration, anchor type, drilling system and setting direction. An
injection anchor can be set in the vertical or in the horizontal direction. In the laboratory,
vertical setting usually is choosen. In practice however the anchors are often set in the
horizontal direction. In Figure 10 the ultimate loads of different anchor types are plotted.
Parameters are the anchor type, the setting position (see Fig. 5) and the setting direction.
10,0 Dübel TypAA Dübel TypBB Dübeltype
TypD
D
anchor type anchor type anchor
9,0

8,0

7,0
load [kN]
[kN]

6,0
Höchstlast

5,0
Failure

4,0

3,0

2,0
Zulässige Last load
Admissible
1,0
vertikal horizontal vertikal horizontal vertikal horizontal
0,0
A B A B A B A B A B A B
Setzposition
setting position

Figure 10 : Pullout loads for injection systems in Hlz12-0,9-16DF as defined in DIN


standard 105 depending on anchor type, setting position and setting
direction

843
The failure load are not significantly influenced by setting position and setting direction
but are slightly influenced by anchor type. Figure 10 shows the development of pullout
loads since 1984. In the diagram the mean failure load and the standard deviation are
given. Similar to plastic anchors the pullout loads of injection anchors decreased over
the past years because of the reasons given in section 4.

9,0 1984 1994 1994 1999


1)
1986 1999

8,0 HLz12-0,8-12/ 16DF


Drehbohren

7,0
Mittelwerte Bruchlast [kN]
Mean value of failure load [kN]

6,0

5,0

4,0

3,0

2,0

1,0 Hersteller A Hersteller B

0,0 Typ C Typ B Typ D Typ G


1):
Versuche mit Hammerbohren

Figure 11: Development of failure loads of injection anchors in vertically perforated


bricks since 1984

5.2 Injection systems in perforated limestone bricks


According to the Technical Approvals of the DIBt the admissible load for injection
anchors in perforated limestone bricks as defined in DIN 106 with a strength ≥ 12N/mm²
amounts to 0,8kN (percussion drilling). The load can be increased to 1,4kN if rotary
drilling is used and the thickness of the exterior web is ≥30mm. The admissible load
decreases with decreasing strength of the bricks.
In figure 11 the failure loads of different anchor types in KSL 12 for both setting
directions are shown. Bricks with one hole configuration were used for these tests (see
Figure 1), however the thickness of the exterior web changed in some of the sperimens
from 20mm to 15 (17)mm. The failure loads for anchor type E, F and G are noticeably
lower.

844
10,0
DIN 106 KSL12-1,2-10DF
9,0

8,0

7,0
Höchstlast [kN]
Failure load [kN]

6,0

5,0

4,0

3,0

2,0

Admissible
1,0 Zulässige Lastload
vertikal horizontal horizontal vertikal horizontal vertikal horizontal horizontal vertikal vertikal

0,0 E H
B C D F G
Dübeltype
Anchor Typ

Figure 12 : Pullout loads of injection anchors in KSL12-1,2-16DF (DIN 106 ), rotary


drilling

6. Summary

Masonry is a challenging base material for fastenings because of the multitude of types,
geometries, density classes, hole configurations and strengths. The form and size of the
holes and the thickness of the webs vary between the manufacturers.

There are two possibilities for fastening systems in masonry: plastic anchors and
injection systems.
Plastic anchors are cheap and mounting is very fast. Anchors with technical approvals
are qualified for fastening in concrete and in solid bricks. In hollow bricks, it is
recomended to make tests on- site in the material in which the anchor will have to work.
Injection systems are suitable for hollow bricks because load transmission results from
mechanical interlock. Here the strength of the brick is the decisive factor. The
installation procedures given by the manufacturer have to be observed.

7. Acknowledgement

Special thanks are accorded to Matthew Hoehler who spent many hours in reviewing the
paper.

845
8. References

1. Rehm, G., 'Gutachterliche Stellungnahme zur Frage der Beanspruchbarkeit von


Kunststoffdübeln, not published (1982)
2. Sippel, T., 'Einfluss des Bohrverfahrens auf das Tragverhalten von Kunststoff- und
Injektionsdübeln in Mauerwerk', Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Werkstoffe im
Bauwesen, Bericht Nr. 8/8-90/1, not published, (1990).
3. Mitteilungen DIBt, 'Aus der Arbeit der Sachverständigenausschüsse- SVA
Verankerungen und Befestigungen', (1995).
4. Bundesverband der Kalksandsteinindustrie e.V., 'Jahresberichte', (1996)
5. Weber S., Lehr, B., Sippel T., Eligehausen R., 'Tragverhalten von Kunststoffdübeln
in Hohlmauerwerk', Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen,
Bericht Nr. AF 97/1-1/1, not published, (1997).
6. Weber S., Eligehausen R., 'Tragfähigkeit von Injektionsdübeln in Mauerwerk', Uni-
versität Stuttgart, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Bericht Nr. AF 97/5-
96407/1, not published, (1997).
7. Eligehausen R., Mallée R., Rehm G., 'Befestigungstechnik', in 'Betonkalender 1997',
(Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 1997).
8. Mitteilungen DIBt, 'Aus der Arbeit der Sachverständigenausschüsse- SVA
Verankerungen und Befestigungen', (1997).
9. Pregartner T., Eligehausen R., Fuchs W., 'Zugversuche in Hochlochziegeln, Leicht-
beton-Hohlblöcken und Kalksandlochsteinen mit Kunststoffdübeln verschiedener
Hersteller', Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Bericht Nr.
AF 98/4-402/4, not published, (1998).
10. Pregartner T., Eligehausen R., Fuchs W., 'Zugversuche in Hochlochziegeln, Leicht-
beton-Hohlblöcken und Kalksandlochsteinen mit Injektionsankern', Universität
Stutt-gart, Institut für Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Bericht Nr. AF 98/4-402/4, not
published, (1998).
11. Laternser K., 'Dübelverankerungen in Mauerwerk', in 'Mauerwerkkalender 1999',
(Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 1999).
12. Eligehausen R., Pregartner T., Weber S., 'Befestigungen in Mauerwerk', in 'Mauer-
werkkalender 2000', (Verlag Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 2000).
13. Bundesverband der deutschen Ziegelindustrie e.V., 'Statistische Angaben', not
published.
14. Bundesverband Kalksandsteinindustrie e.V., 'Die Kalksandsteinindustrie in der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland', Kalksandstein-Kurzinformation.

846
STUDY ON DESIGN METHOD OF JOINT PANELS FOR
HYBRID RAILWAY RIGID-FRAME BRIDGES
Hisao Nishida , Kiyomitsu Murata , Tomohiro Takayama
Railway Technical Research Institute,Japan

Abstract
Railway elevated bridges in urban areas are often constructed under spatial restrictions in
a limited span of time. So, an improved work efficiency and rapid work progress are
essential requirements. Moreover, railway structures are required to show a high seismic
resistance. The hybrid railway elevated bridge is a type of structure which meets such
requirements. The authors have already proposed a method of evaluating the
performance of the column of concrete filled steel tube (CFT) and beam of
steel/reinforced concrete beam, which compose the hybrid railway rigid frame elevated
bridge. However, there has been almost no study on the joint with concrete filled steel
tube column.
This paper discusses a design method of a newly developed beam-to-column insert joint,
with cruciform steel and reinforcing bars inserted into CFT, on the basis of experimental
study on its load bearing capability.

1. Introduction

These days an ever increasing number of railway elevated bridges are built in urban
areas as part of projects for augmenting the transport capacity or for constructing
continuous overhead crossings. This type of projects must be carried out at a very
restricted space surrounded by existing structures and within a short period of time at
night when there is no train service. This results in high demands for a technique
enabling more efficient and more rapid work. In addition, structures have been required
to be more seismically resistant since Hyogoken Nanbu Earthquake caused serious
damages.
Under the circumstances, the concrete filled steel tube (CFT) has come to the fore. Its
essential merit is higher seismic performance providing a great load bearing capability
and an excellent ductility. Furthermore, it enables a shorter work period because the
steel tube can be used as a form for concrete placing. So it is frequently used for

847
constructing columns and piles.
As a technique of joining different materials of hybrid rigid frame elevated bridges, the
insert joint has been devised, which offers ease of construction, labor-saving effect, and
offsetting construction errors1). By the inset joint practice, inserts of cruciform steel and
reinforcing bars (rebars) are made to penetrate into a specified depth in the CFT column,
which transmit loads between beams and columns.
The design principle of avoiding failure of joint considers the possibility that fracture of
the joint, being a weak point, would induce falling down of the whole structure.
However, this principle may require an excessively large strength than other members,
resulting in difficult arrangement of steel members in the joint in some cases. It is
necessary, therefore, to accurately assess the load bearing capability of the joint and
reflect its results upon the design method.
In the study reported here, for cases where bending fracture of the joint takes place
before the column fails from bending, the fracture mode of the joint was investigated
through alternating loading test, to review the load bearing capability of the insert joint
already proposed.

2. Alternating loading test of insert joint


Horizontal load
2.1 Overview of the experiment
The test specimen is an about 1/2-scale Axial force
model of the beam-column joint of an
ordinary railway rigid frame elevated Steel tube 406.4 diam

1600
bridge. The standard column tube is 406.4 CFT column
mm in diameter, 6.4 mm thick (STK490). Cruciform steel
Rebar

Shear span
The filling concrete f’ck was 24 N/mm2.
The strength of the joint was determined,
Insertion

according to Design standard for railway


length

structures and commentary, Steel-concrete


hybrid structures 2) (hereinafter referred to
as “Hybrid Structure Design Standard”).
750

The strength of the insert was assumed to


be not more than the bending strength of the
CFT member, so as to induce bending
failure of the insert before the CFT member
Footing 1400
fracture. The shape and characteristics of
the test specimens are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1: Geometry of the specimen
Figure 1.
Alternating horizontal loads were applied in the quasi-static manner to the loading point
of column head. Specimens JTSC-7 and 8 were subjected to constant compressive axial
forces equal to the fully plastic compressive strength multiplied by a factor of 0.1 and
0.25, then to horizontal loads.
Every specimen underwent the same loading pattern. The horizontal displacement of
the loading point on the column head when the insert cruciform steel or rebars yielded,

848
was deemed as experimental yield displacement δy. The displacement was gradually
increased, with the amplitude of integral multiples of δy in each direction, and three
cycles per step.

Table 1: Specifications of the specimens


Steel tube Inserts
Specimen
Tube diam Thickness Insertion
No. Type D/t Steel grade
(mm) (mm) length (mm)
JTSC-1 406.4 4.0 Ordinary 102 SM490 530
JTSC-2 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520
JTSC-3 406.4 9.0 Ordinary 45 SM490 510
JTSC-4 400.0 9.0 w/protrusions 44 SKK490NR 510
JTSC-5 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520
JTSC-6 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520
JTSC-7 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520
JTSC-8 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520
JTSC-9 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520
JTSC-10 406.4 6.4 Ordinary 64 STK490 520

Inserts Parameters
No. Steel Cruciform steel Axial force
Cruciform steel Rebar ratio / rebar ratio ratio
Parameters
H260×130×6×12 D13-16
1 (SM490) (SD345)
0.051 2.24 0 Steel ratio
H260×130×6×19 D16-16
2 (SM490) (SD345)
0.078 2.18 0 Standard
H260×130×12×25 D19-16
3 (SM490) (SD345)
0.105 1.97 0 Steel ratio
H260×130×12×25 D19-16 Tube
4 (SM490) (SD345)
0.108 1.97 0 w/protrusions
H280×150×12×22 D10-16 Cruciform
5 (SM490) (SD345)
0.082 8.26 0 steel/rebar ratio
D22-24 Cruciform
6 ------------------
(SD345)
0.072 0.00 0 steel/rebar ratio
H260×130×9×19 D16-16
7 (SM490)
0.078 2.18 0.10 Axial force ratio
(SD345)
H260×130×9×19 D16-16
8 (SM490) (SD345)
0.078 2.18 0.25 Axial force ratio
H260×130×6×12 D16-16
9 (SM570) (SD345)
0.059 1.43 0 Steel grade
H260×140×12×25 D16-16
10 (LYP253) (SD295)
0.098 3.00 0 Steel grade

2.2 Test results


a) Fracture mode
All the specimens for this test were designed in such a manner that they would fail from
bending fracture of inserts. Nevertheless, both bending fracture of CFT column and that

849
of inserts occurred in the test. The fracture mode was assessed by strain of the inserts,
local buckling of the steel tube and cracking in the footing. Photos 1 and 2 are the views
of the fractured specimens.
In the case of CFT tube bending fracture, the steel tube locally buckled near the insert tip,
at around the maximum load. Due to cracking induced by development of the local
buckling and low cycle fatigue at the top of locally buckled portion, the specimen
reached the ultimate state. On the other hand, the cracking in the footing surface, which
was observed from yield point to maximum load, ceased growing as the local buckling
developed.
In the case of bending fracture of inserts, no local buckling was found in the steel tube;
the axial strain of the insert cruciform steel and rebars developed as the loading cycle
increased, resulting in floating up of the steel tube from the footing surface, and
separation of concrete in the vicinity of the boundary between steel tube and footing.
There were cases where exposed rebars were broken.
Figure 2 illustrates the cracking status in the upper surface of footing concrete of JTSC-9
broken at the joint, at the time of initial cracking observed (5δy), maximum load (7δy)
and near the ultimate strain (11δy). The circle at the center represents the steel tube
section.
Bending fracture of inserts Bending fracture of CFT column
Damaged concrete Local buckling of tube and
cracking

Photo 1: View after loading (JTSC-9) Photo 2: View after loading (JTSC-2)
Loading direction

(5δy) (7δy) (11δy)


Figure 2: Crack propagation in upper surface of concrete footing (JTSC-9)
b) Load-displacement relationship

850
Table 2 shows the experimental maximum load of each specimen with calculated
bending strength of CFT member and insert. The bending strength of the CFT member
was calculated according to Design standard for railway structures and commentary,
Seismic design 3) (hereinafter referred to as “Seismic Design Standard”). In this
calculation, the distance from loading point to insert tip was taken as the shear span, and
the maximum bending moment Mm was obtained; the magnitude of Mm was divided
by the shear span to determine the magnitude of load at the loading point. The bending
strength of the insert was calculated conforming to the Hybrid Structure Design
Standard, assuming a circular SRC section in the boundary between footing and steel
tube. The figures in the shaded cells represent the calculated strength corresponding to
the fracture mode. In the case of CFT column bending fracture, there is a good
agreement between the calculated bending strength of the CFT column and
experimental maximum load. In contrast, in the case of insert bending fracture, the
experimental maximum load significantly exceeds the calculated bending strength.
Considering such a large difference, we can conclude that predicted fracture (bending
fracture of the insert) did not take place.

Table 2: Maximum load and fracture mode


Specimen Experimental Calculated bending strength (kN)
Fracture mode
No. max.load (kN) CFT column Insert
JTSC-1 313.4 CFT column bending fracture 317.7 188.0
JTSC-2 455.3 CFT column bending fracture 429.7 282.3
JTSC-3 580.0 Insert bending fracture 551.8 348.9
JTSC-4 563.0 Insert bending fracture 551.1 351.8
JTSC-5 448.0 CFT column bending fracture 430.9 276.4
JTSC-6 341.0 Insert bending fracture 432.4 283.5
JTSC-7 467.2 CFT column bending fracture 461.5 299.3
JTSC-8 468.9 CFT column bending fracture 487.4 300.1
JTSC-9 456.1 Insert bending fracture 427.8 247.1
JTSC-10 433.9 Insert bending fracture 452.8 262.6
600 600

400 400
H o rizo n tal lo ad (k N )
Horizontal load (kN)

200 200

0 0

-200 -200

-400 -400

-600 -600
-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

Horizontal displacement (mm) Horizontal displacement (mm)

Relationship between horizontal load and column head displacement


Figure 3: JTSC-9 Figure 4: JTSC-2
Figures 3 and 4 show the load

851
500
hysteresis curves of JTSC-2 (CFT
column bending fracture) and JTSC-9 400
(insert bending fracture) respectively,

Horizontal load (kN)


and Figure 5 provides comparison of 300

envelopes of both cases. It has been


said that the insert is prone to brittle 200

fracture. However, as known from


100 JTSC-2 ( Bending fracture of CFT column )
these graphs, with the case of bending JTSC-9 ( Fracture of insert joint )

fracture of inserts, the displacement at 0


the maximum load and displacement 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175

Horizontal displacement (mm)


up to ultimate state are larger than the
case of CFT column bending fracture, Figure 5: Comparison of envelopes of load-
offering qualitatively higher ductility. displacement relationships
This can be explained by the fact that, with CFT column bending fracture, the structural
performance continues to degrade because of local buckling of the steel tube, and finally,
the ductility is limited by cracking from low cycle fatigue. On the other hand, with
insert bending fracture, the deterioration depends upon relatively slow progress of
concrete damage in the footing surface at the steel tube base, resulting in a greater
ductility. Furthermore, the shape of the hysteresis curve demonstrates that high energy
absorbing capability of the CFT structure is sufficiently maintained even at the bending
fracture of inserts.

3. Evaluation of the load-carrying capacity of the inserts

The Hybrid Structure Design Standard considers these three fracture modes of the joint
with cruciform steel/rebar inserts.
- Yielding failure of steel tube at the joint
- Bending fracture of inserts
- Shear fracture of inserts
In the study on yielding failure of steel tube at the joint, and bending fracture of inserts,
whichever smaller the bending strength of CFT column (ultimate strength Mu calculated
by the Hybrid Structure Design Standard) multiplied by 1.4 or the bending strength of
RC or SRC beam multiplied by 1.3, is taken as the design moment, that is, validation
reference for the bending strength of each member. This prescription considers the
largest difference between past experimental results and calculated strengths, and is
based on the principle that the joint will not fail before the fracture of column or beam.
As for the bending strength of CFT member, a study1) published after the edition of the
Hybrid Structure Design Standard proposes Mm which is obtained by multiplying Mu,
involving the equivalent plastic hinge given as a function of the axial force ratio.
In the design of the specimens, the bending strength of the inserts were set to a value
equal to or less than that of the CFT column, in order to focus upon the study of bending
failure of the inserts. However, as mentioned earlier, no specimen showed the predicted
fracture mode, with significant disagreement between test results and calculation.
Considering such disagreement, we will study below corrections of the current

852
calculation method of the bending strength of inserts.
The following are possible causes for the significant difference between design bending
strength and test results of the inserts.
(1) According to the conventional design practice, the weak axis member of the
cruciform steel (i.e., member whose web is normal to the loading direction) is ignored in
calculation of the bending strength.
(2) By the effect of steel column restraining the concrete, the strength of concrete in the
axial direction increases. The calculation does not take into account this phenomenon.
Involving these points, we corrected the calculation method as follows.
The weak axis member of the cruciform steel is also included in the bending strength
calculation (corrected calculation 1). In stead of the strain at the concrete compressive
fiber, 0.0035, specified for calculation of bending strength of SRC member, the
compressive strain at the outermost fiber of concrete for calculation of bending strength
of CFT member is used3) , to involve the concrete restraining effect by the steel tube, as
with CFT member. (corrected calculation 2)
The yield stress of the steel tube is supposed to work as concrete restraining force in the
circumferential direction, since in the test the strain in the circumferential direction was
around the yield point in any specimen. Under this supposition, on the basis of the
references by Park, R. et al.4) and Mander, J.B. et al.5), the compressive strength
corrected as follows is used. (corrected calculation 3)
The restraining stress f l is given by
f l = 2t ⋅ fy / D Equation (3.a)
where
f y = yield stress of steel tube
D = steel tube diameter
t = steel tube wall thickness
The compressive strength of concrete f ' cc in this case is given by
 7.94 ⋅ fl f 
f 'cc = f 'c  2.254 1 + − 2 l − 1.254  Equation (3.b)
 f 'c f 'c 
 
where
f ' c = unconfined compressive strength of concrete
As demonstrated by the values in Table 3, the experimental magnitudes of bending
strength of the inserts can be predicted with a much improved accuracy, by the
calculation with fully plastic moment, and taking into account the weak axis member
and concrete restraining effect.
Figure 6 shows the ratio of bending strength of the inserts (corrected calculation value 3)
to that of CFT column (converted from the load at the loading point). Since this ratio of
the specimens of the present test lies in a narrow range from 0.9 to 1.1, it is difficult to
predict which fracture mode would occur for each specimen. However, as shown in the
figure, different fracture modes are distinctively distributed around the ratio of 1.0.

853
Table 3: Comparison between maximum load and calculated strength
Specimen Experimental Fracture Calculated strength of CFT column (kN)
No. max.load (kN) mode calculation 1 calculation 2 calculation 3
JTSC-1 313.4 CFT column 229.4 243.6 318.8
JTSC-2 455.3 CFT column 321.6 344.5 466.9
JTSC-3 580.0 Insert 383.4 411.0 557.3
JTSC-4 563.0 Insert 390.1 416.9 518.8
JTSC-5 448.0 CFT column 329.5 351.6 475.3
JTSC-6 341.0 Insert 283.5 294.4 343.2
JTSC-7 467.2 CFT column 318.0 344.1 479.8
JTSC-8 468.9 CFT column 321.0 349.8 509.4
JTSC-9 456.1 Insert 275.7 303.9 414.9
JTSC-10 433.9 Insert 306.8 322.1 427.0

The ratio of JTSC-3 is 1.01, so either 1.50

Bending strength of inserts / CFT bending strength


fracture mode would take place with 1.40

approximately the same probability. In 1.30

conclusion, it is possible to predict the 1.20


fracture mode by the bending strength 1.10
ratio. 1.00
The insert joint section is designed by the 0.90
current assessment method so as to
0.80
present a ratio of about 1.9 or more, if
0.70
expressed by the evaluation technique of
0.60
Figure 6. We know that the evaluation
0.50
has been (excessively) conservative for
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
inducing insert bending fracture, under Specimen No.
the principle of avoiding joint fracture
preceding mode. Figure 6: Bending stress ratio of CFT
column and inserts
4. Design method of the insert joint

The alternating loading test revealed that, even in the case of insert bending fracture,
there is little risk of brittle fracture, and the subject configurations offer an excellent
energy absorbing capability.
However;
- There remain unknown points about the behavior with further decreased ratio of the
strength of the inserts to that of CFT member.
- It is easier to repair the damaged tube than replacing the damaged inserts.
- Through review of the evaluation method of the bending strength of inserts, it will be
possible to design more compact inserts.
For these reasons, the joint fracture preceding mode is not allowed when designing the
insert, following the design principle. It is therefore necessary in designing to provide
inserts with a bending strength (moment) higher than that of CFT column, when

854
compared at the same section.
It should be noted that, considering possible variance of calculation accuracy of each
bending strength, the strength should be conservatively determined. As for the bending
strength of the CFT column, calculation may underestimate it by up to 10 % in terms of
the experimental value, as revealed by the results of the previous loading test with a
simple CFT column 1) and those of the present test with 22 specimens in total. In
contrast, as for the bending strength of inserts, even the maximum calculated value is
about the same as the experimental value, that is, calculated values are in general equal
to or less than experimental results.
Hence, we can achieve conservative assessment by designing a strength of inserts 1.1
times as large as the bending strength of CFT column.
It is reasonable to apply Equation (4.a) when assessing the safety for bending fracture of
inserts.
Md l j
γ i⋅ ⋅ ≦ 1.0 Equation (4.a)
M ud l c
where
Md = design bending moment, whichever smaller that of CFT column or beam. In
the case of CFT collumn, 1.1 times the maximum bending strength calculated
by the Seismic Design Standard. In the case of RC or SRC beam, 1.3 times the
bending strength calculated by the RC standard6) or Hybrid Structure Design
Standard.
Mud = bending strength of inserts (fully plastic moments of steel and concrete are
used in calculation)
l j = span from loading point (bending moment = zero) to the steel tube base
l c = span from loading point (bending moment = zero) to the tip of insert
When the bending moment of beam is used as Md, 1j = 1c.
In almost all cases of assessment of the bending strength of inserts by this method, the
bending moment of CFT column is used for determining the design bending moment Md.
This method provides a section with a bending strength decreased by about 55% (from
1.9 to 1.1) in terms of the strength by the current evaluation method.

5. Conclusions

Alternating loading tests were conducted with specimens simulating the specifications of
cruciform steel/rebar joints. These joints are proposed for hybrid rigid frame elevated
bridges with CFT column and RC or SRC beams. Based on the experimental results, the
load carrying capability and ductility of CFT columns with such a type of joint were
evaluated. The results of the study are summarized as follows.

(1) It has been said that inserts are prone to brittle failure. However, if the CFT/insert
strength ratio is similar to that of the present test, even in the case of bending fracture of
the inserts, brittle failure does not occur, and a satisfactory ductility is provided.

855
(2) The bending strength of the inserts can be accurately evaluated, through calculation
of the fully plastic moment of the section, involving the contribution of weak axis
member of the cruciform steel and concrete restraining effect by steel tube.
(3) For assessing the safety of the inserts, the bending strength of CFT member
multiplied by a factor of 1.1 is taken as design bending moment, and is multiplied by the
ratio of spans to each failure point. This technique ensures a suitable safety margin.

References
1) K.Murata, M.Yamada, M.Ikeda, M.Takiguchi,T.Watanabe,M.Kinoshita: Review of
the ductility of concrete filled circular steel columns, Proceedings of the Japan Society
of Civil Engineers, No.640/I-50, pp.149 to 163, January 2000
2) Railway Technical Research Institute, under the editorship of Railway Bureau of
Ministry of Transport : Design standard for railway structures and commentary, Steel-
concrete hybrid structures, July 1998, Maruzen
3) Railway Technical Research Institute, under the editorship of Railway Bureau of
Ministry of Transport : Design standard for railway structures and commentary, Seismic
design, October 1999, Maruzen
4) Park,R., and T.Paulay : Reinforced Concrete Structure, Wiley, New York, p.769,
1992
5) Mander,J.B., M.J.N.Priestly, and R.Park : Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for
Confined Concrete : Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.114, No.8, pp.1804-
1826, 1998.8
6) Railway Technical Research Institute, under the editorship of Railway Bureau of
Ministry of Transport : Design standard for railway structures and commentary, Version
in SI unit system (Concrete structures), October 1999, Maruzen

856
TENSION STIFFENING MODEL BASED ON BOND
Maria Anna Polak* and Kevin Blackwell**
*Department of Civil Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario,Canada
**Morrison Hershfield Ltd, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada

Abstract
The paper presents a new formulation for modelling tension in cracked reinforced
concrete where the main parameter influencing the response of a member is bond
between concrete and reinforcement. The proposed formulation consists of a model for
concrete before and after cracking, bond model and a method of predicting crack
spacing. The formulation was developed for members subjected to bending and axial
loads. It was implemented into a cross-sectional analysis program and was used to
analyze specimens which were designed to study the influence of bond on the amount of
tension carried by cracked concrete. The comparison between the experiments and the
analyses is presented and it shows the same characteristics for both the experimental
results and the analyses.

1. Introduction

Bond between concrete and reinforcement is necessary for a composite reinforced


concrete material behaviour. After cracking of a reinforced concrete member it allows to
transfer tensile stresses between reinforcement and the uncracked pieces of the concrete.
The phenomenon is called tension stiffening and its proper modeling is important in
many design and analysis situations. In flexure, the influence of tension stiffening is
most important up to service loads and should therefore be included in the deflection
calculations. The ability of concrete to carry tension between cracks is also important in
the analyses where cracking is a primary concern (e.g. thermal analysis) and where
significant shear stresses exist. Tension stiffening has been studied and modelled in the
past and it is included in several structural analysis material models (e.g. Gupta and
Maestrini 1990, Marti et. al 1998, , Izumo et. al 1992, Clark and Spiers 1978).

This paper presents a new formulation for modeling tension in cracked reinforced
concrete where the main parameter influencing the response of a member is bond

857
between concrete and reinforcement. The formulation was developed for members
subjected to bending and in-plane loading only, however, the presented concepts can be
extended to more complex loading conditions. The development of the model (Polak and
Blackwell 1998 1, Blackwell 1996) was done after the analysis of recently conducted
tests (Polak and Killen 1998, Polak and Blackwell 1998 2, Polak and Vecchio 1994) on
the behavior of members subjected to bending and in-plane loading. In the specimens,
the flexural reinforcement was provided using different sizes of reinforcing bars. Since
reinforcement sizes varied, the bond characteristics of these bars varied, leading to
different load-displacement responses. The model was developed from the analysis of
the mechanics of the behaviour, implemented into a numerical routine and used to
analyze the tested specimens.

2. The Proposed Formulation

Let us consider a reinforced concrete member subjected to bending and in-plane load. In
the presented description, the moment causes tension in the bottom part and compression
in the top part of the member. Member cross-section is divided into concrete and steel
layers (Fig. 1, 2). Uncracked concrete subjected to tension is treated as a linear elastic
material. It is assumed that cracking occurs first when the centroid of the first concrete
layer from the bottom reaches the tensile strength, f’t. and it is also assumed that the
layer is subjected to uniform stress equal to f’t, . The total force in the bottom layer is
thus equal to:
F 1 = f t A c1 = ε cr E c A c1 (1)
/

where ε cr is the cracking strain of concrete, Ec is the Young's modulus of uncracked


concrete, and Ac1 is the cross-sectional area of the bottom layer.

With further load increase, the stress at the centroid of the second layer from the bottom
approaches the tensile strength. At this instant it is assumed that the stress in the second
layer is equal to the tensile strength (Fig.1.), the first bottom layer has completely
cracked, the strain in the first layer away from the crack is equal to the cracking strain,
and the first layer does not transfer any axial stress directly across the crack. Therefore,
the total force in the layer second from the bottom is now equal to (Fig.1):
/
F 2 = f t A c2 + F V1 (2)
where Ac2 is the cross sectional area of the layer second from the bottom and
FV 1 = F 1 = f t / A c1 is the force transferred between bottom two layers.

With the increase of the applied load, the concrete layers systematically reach the
cracking strain. The total force transferred between cracked and uncracked layers can be
expressed as:
F Vt = ε cr E c ∑ i A ci
t
(3)

858
where: Aci is the cross-sectional area of the "i" cracked layer and t is a number of cracked
layers.

The process of force transfer described above continues until the crack tip reaches the
reinforcing steel. At this instant the steel layer reaches the cracking strain of concrete.
From this moment, it is assumed that all forces from all cracked layers (below and above
reinforcement layer) are transferred to the reinforcement layer (Fig.2). This transfer is
now dependent also on bond between concrete and reinforcement.

3. Bond Between Concrete and Reinforcement

Bond between concrete and reinforcement depends on chemical bonding between steel
and concrete, friction developing between steel and concrete, and mechanical interlock,
i.e. bearing of the concrete on the reinforcement lugs. In the proposed model the
adhesion and friction bond are ignored and it is assumed that the bearing of concrete on
the reinforcing bar lugs is the primary source of force transfer.

At every reinforcing bar lug, the force transferred to the reinforcement from the
surrounding concrete equals the bearing stress times the contact area (Fig.3a and b).
This contact area is located between the outer perimeter of the lug and the inner
perimeter of the concrete (Fig.3b). As the reinforcing bar undergoes tensile strain, the
contact decreases due to the Poisson effect and due to slip between concrete and
reinforcement (Fig.4a and b).

Slip between concrete and reinforcement occurs when the strain in reinforcement
becomes greater than the cracking strain of concrete (crack tip is above the
reinforcement layer). It is assumed that the slip is the largest at the crack, it is equal to
zero at the midpoint between cracks and there is a linear change in slip between these
two locations. Slip is is expressed by the following relationship:
s(D) = ( ε s - ε cr ) D for ε s ≥ ε cr (4)
where s is the slip, D is equal to the distance between the given location where slip is
calculated and the midpoint between the cracks and ε s is strain in reinforcement.

Several reinforcing bars were examined and the ratio of "rise to run" (Fig.3a) for the lug
was found to be equal to approximately three. Therefore, the increase in radius of
concrete inner perimeter is defined as:
∆r = 3 s (5)

and the expression for the calculating the contact area between the concrete and one lug
(lug "i") is given by:
Ai =
π
4
[(φ − ε µ φ )
s
2
− (φ − 2 d h + 6 s i )
2
] (6)

859
where φ is the bar diameter at the lug location, µ is the Poisson ratio for steel, dh is the
height of the lug, and si is the slip between the steel and concrete at lug “i”.

The bearing stress on lugs is based on the assumption that it is zero at the midpoint
between the cracks and increases linearly to f'c at the crack. The stress produced by the
concrete bearing on a lug "i" is calculated from the following expression:
Di
σ bi = f 'c (7)
cl
where σ bi is the bearing stress on lug “i”, Di is the distance of lug "i" from the from the
centerpoint between two cracks, cl is equal to half crack spacing.

The total bond force that can be transferred between concrete and reinforcement can now
be calculated as:
F B= N ∑ j Ajσ
n
j (8)
where FB is the total bond force, N is the number of tension reinforcing bars contributing
to bond, n is the number of lugs between the crack and midpoint between the cracks (n =
cl/dl ,where dl is the lug spacing).

4. Crack Spacing

Crack spacing influences bond forces (Eq. 4 to 7) and it depends on the type, size,
amount and distribution of reinforcement. In the presented formulation, the CEB-FIP
model was adopted (CEB 1978) to estimate crack spacing:
lb φ (9)
cs = 2 (c c + ) + k1k2 b
10 ρ ef
where: cc is the clear cover, lb the maximum spacing between the longitudinal bars, φ b
is the bar diameter, k1 is a coefficient which characterizes the bond properties (equals 0.4
for deformed bars), k2 is a coefficient to account for strain gradient:
ε 1 + ε 2 , ε and ε are the largest and the smallest tensile strains in
k 2 = 0.25 1 2
2 ε1
the effective embedment zone, ρ ef is equal to As/Aecf, where As is the area of
reinforcement and Aecf is the area of the effective embedment zone. The effective
embedment zone is the area of concrete around the reinforcing bar at the distance of 7.5
bar diameter.

In the proposed formulation, the crack spacing is evaluated using Equation (9) for strain
distribution corresponding to yield of the tensile reinforcement. Based on test
observations it is assumed that right after first cracking the crack spacing is
approximately two times larger than the crack spacing at yield of the tensile
reinforcement. Therefore, crack spacings for different strain distributions are calculated
using the following approximate expression:

860
2
 c 
c s = c s y 1 + 
(10)
 H 
where csy is the crack spacing at yield (evaluated using Equation 9) , c is the distance of
the neutral axis to the compression face of a member and H is the height of a member.

5. Experimental Verification

The presented formulation for tension was implemented into a cross-sectional analysis
program BARC. For concrete in compression, the model proposed by Thorenfeldt,
Tomaszewicz and Jenssen (1987) and calibrated by Collins and Porasz (1990) was used.
The constitutive model for reinforcement is linear elastic until yielding and then
perfectly plastic. An iterative solution is used which allows to find the strain distribution
corresponding to the specified load: axial force and bending moment.

The presented experimental verification includes analyses of specimens (slab-strips)


which were tested in bending and in-plane loading (specimens KB1-KB8) (Polak and
Blackwell 1998, Blackwell 1996). The goal of the experimental program was to study
the influence of the ratio of in-plane loading to bending, bar diameter, reinforcement
ratio and concrete cover on the behavior of members. The specimens were cast in pairs
where one specimen was reinforced with large diameter bars while the other was
reinforced with small diameter bars. Both specimens had identical overall dimensions,
were cast from the same concrete batch, contained the same cross-sectional area and
centroid location of the longitudinal reinforcement and were subjected to the the same
moment to axial load ratio. The specimens were symmetrically reinforced at both faces,
in tension and compression zones.

Both the analytical predictions and experimentally obtained moment-curvatures for 3 pairs
of specimens (KB1 and KB2, KB5 and KB6, KB7 and KB8) are shown in Figures 5, 6 and
7. The first specimen in each pair had smaller diameter bars. Each pair was tested at
different axial force to moment ratio (N/M). Good agreement between the predicted and
observed responses is clearly visible from these Figures. A good match was achieved at the
load levels close to cracking and up to the service load. These are the load levels for which
the influence of tension stiffening is most important.

861
crack plane
c
location c o m p re s s io n
l

c o m p re s s io n
in s te el
te n s ion
in s te e l

0 0
0 5 10
-0 ,0002 F o rc e F v1 tra n s fe0re d fro m c ra c k e d
cra ckin g stra in c o-6n c re te la ye r 5
State of Concrete
S train D is trib u tio n te n s io n
Layers Aw ay F ro m S tre ss e s an d F o rc e s
Just After Cracking C ra c k P la n e T ran s fe red Ac ro s s C ra c k
P la n e

Figure 1. Stress and strain distributions just after first cracking

c crack plane
l location

compression steel in
compression

0 tension
steel in 0
0 l5 10
0 -50tension
-39 -28 -17 -6 5 16 27 38 49
c -0.003 Plus additional force at
cracking strain
steel layer from bond
Concrete La ye rs Stresses and Forces
After Significant Cracking Transferred Across Crack
Plane
Strain Distribution Away
From Crack Plane

Figure 2. Stress and strain distribition after significant cracking

862
A
29 concrete
1 (run)
bearing
27 component

25 3 (rise)

23 reinforcing
bar
tensile
21
force
19
in bar inner perimeter of
17 concrete
outer perimeter of the bar lug
15 A
5

(a)

inner perimeter
Cross Section A-A
of concrete

surface contact area outer perimeter of


between concrete and the bar lug
bar lug
(b)

Figure 3. a) Reinforcing bar and concrete geometry before cracking,


b) contact area between concrete and reinforcement before cracking

6. Conclusions

The paper presents a constitutive formulation for modeling tension stiffening in the
cracked reinforced concrete. The approach taken in the development of the model was to
assume that bond between concrete and reinforcement was the main factor influencing
the tensile response of cracked members. The formulation considers different factors
incluencing mechanics of the behaviour. It is formulated for the analysis of members
subjected to monotonic bending and axial load. However, the same concepts can be
extended in future for the analysis of members subjected to other combination of forces

863
and it can be implemented into nonlinear structural analysis of reinforced concrete.

inner perimeter
B
29 of concrete outer perimeter of
27 perimeter of
inner the bar lug
the bar space
25
P
23 reinforcing
inward bar
21movement
from Poisson space
19
outward movement
17 = 3x slip
concrete
slip
15
B
5

(a)

inner perimeter
Cross Section B-B of concrete

reduced surface contact area outer perimeter of the


between concrete and bar lug
bar lug

(b)
Figure 4 a) Reinforcing bar and concrete geometry after cracking
b) Contact area between concrete and reinforcement after cracking

8. References

Blackwell, K.G., (1996), "Modeling the Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Members


Subjected to Bending and Axial Loads", M.A.Sc. thesis, University of Waterloo, 281 pp.
CEB-FIP Model Code for Concrete Structures, Third Edition, CEB, Paris. 1978, 348 pp.
Clark, L.A., Spiers, D.M., (1978), " Tension Stiffening in Reinforced Concrete Beams
and Slabs Under Short term Load", Cement and Concrete Association, Report 42.521 19.

864
Collins, M.P., Porasz, A. (1989), "Shear Strength for High Strength Concrete", Bulletin
D'Information, No. 193, "Design Aspects of High Strength Concrete", CEB, pp.75-83.
Gupta, A.K., Maestrini, S.R. (1990), "Tension Stiffness Model for Reinforced Concrete
Bars", ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 116(3), pp.769-790.
Polak, M.A., Blackwell, K.G., (1998), "Modeling Tension in Reinforced Concrete
Members Subjected to Bending and Axial Load", ASCE Journal of Structural
Engineering, 124(9), 1018-1024.
Polak, M.A., Blackwell, K.G., (1998), " Reinforced Concrete Members Subjected to
Bending and In-Plane Loading ", ACI Structural Journal, 95(6), 740-748.
Polak, M.A., Killen, D.T.( 1998), "The Influence of the Reinforcing Bar Diameter on the
Behavior of Members", ACI Structural Journal, in print.
Polak, M.A., Vecchio F.J., (1994) " Reinforced Concrete Shell Elements Subjected to
Bending and Membrane Loads", ACI Structural Journal, Vol.91, No.3, pp.261-268.
Thorenfeldt, E., Tomaszewicz, A. and Jensen, J.J., (1987), "Mechanical Properties of
High-Strength Concrete and Application in Design", Proceedings of the Symposium
"Utilization of High-Strength Concrete", Stavanger, Norway, June, Tapir Trondheim.
Marti, P., Alvarez, M., Kaufmann, W., Sigrist, V., (1998), "Tension Chord Model for
Structural Concrete", Structural Engineering International 4, pp. 287-298.

90
80 KB1 (10M)
MOMENT (kNm)

70 KB2 (25M)
60 N/M = 4 [1/m]
50
40
30 KB1 Test
KB2 Test
20 KB1 Analysis
10 KB2 Analysis
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
CURVATURE (RAD/1000)

Figure 5. Moment -curvature response for specimens KB1 and KB2

865
90
80 KB5 (10M)
KB5 Test
MOMENT (kNm)
70 KB6 (20M) KB6 Test
60 N/M = 4 [1/m] KB5 Analysis
50 KB6 Analysis
40
30
20
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
CURVATURE (RAD/1000)

Figure 6. Moment -curvature response for specimens KB5 and KB6


90
80 KB7 (10M)
MOMENT (kNm)

70 KB8 (20M)
60
N/M = -3 [1/m]
50
40
30 KB7 Test
KB8 Test
20 KB7 Analysis
10 KB8 Analysis
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
CURVATURE (RAD/1000)

Figure 7. Moment -curvature response for specimens KB7 and KB8

866
OVER-CLADDING OF EXISTING CONCRETE BUILDINGS
USING COLD FORMED LIGHT STEEL SECTIONS AND
COMPOSITE CLADDING PANELS
S.O. Popo-Ola+*, R.M. Lawson*, P.J. Sullivan$
+
Department of Civil Engineering, Imperial College of Science,Technology & Medicine
*
The Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, United Kingdom
$
City University London, United Kingdom

Abstract
The results of research into the effective use of steel sub-frames as part of re-cladding
and over-cladding systems for high- and low-rise buildings are presented. An objective
of the research was to study the interaction between new cladding systems and their
attachment to existing buildings, and to develop appropriate guidance on the use of steel
in this application.

Existing over/re-cladding systems using aluminium extrusions require many fixings to


attach the support rails to the underlying concrete structure. Cold-formed steel (CFS)
sub-frames exist whose greater stiffness helps to reduce the number of fixings. Such a
sub-frame, with fewer but stronger fixings yet with the redundancy to provide alternative
load paths once one fixing fails, has been the subject of an experimental study, with the
results correlated with individual fixing tests.

The sub-frame systems were also modelled numerically and a design model was
developed. The numerical work has been used to interpret the sub-frame tests and to
establish the criteria for the overall factor of safety for such systems. The analysis
evaluates the effects of the sub-frame flexibility and anchor stiffness on the behaviour of
the cladding support system.

867
1. Introduction

'System' buildings were constructed prior to the energy crisis of the mid-1970's by public
authorities to offer low-cost post-war housing and even now, many continue to be built
in the former Eastern block countries of Europe. It is estimated that over 4000 tower
blocks will need major renovation in the UK(1), of which currently less than 2% have
been overclad. This indicates a large potential market for cladding renovations.

Cold-formed steel sheeting and purlins have been used as cladding and sub-frame
materials in industrial buildings for many years yet, despite an established technology
for the manufacture and construction of these components, they are little used in the
over-cladding or re-cladding of non-industrial, housing or office buildings.

This project concerns the effective use of cold-formed steelwork in a re-cladding and
over-cladding system for high- and low-rise buildings. Of particular interest was to
explore the structural performance of the cladding support frame and its attachment to
the building, and to develop appropriate design guidance.

2. Experimental work

2.1 Fixing tests


A study was carried out of the variability of response of a wide range of undercut (U),
expansion (E) and resin (R) anchors. The effects of the proximity of a concrete edge, of
variations in concrete strength, and also of concrete type (normal (NWC) and light
weight (LWC) concrete) were explored(2). Key performance parameters identified were
the fixing's stiffness, strength and ductility.

2.2 Sub-frame tests


Sixteen tests were carried out, based on a cold-formed steel lipped channel, attached
either directly through the flange or through cleats to the web, using fixings selected
from the small scale tests. Two point loads were applied to the frames, to allow study of
the redistribution of loading between fixings as the highly loaded fixings began to fail
(Figure 1).

To represent the worst case from the point of view of distribution of fixing loads the sub-
frame was loaded in line with fixing Nos. 2 and 4. The load was however, distributed
over a 200mm length of steel plate attached to the web of the sub-frame. The extent to
which first fixing failure did not mean system failure was demonstrated(3).

868
Figure 1: Sub-frame tests set-up.

TABLE 1: Summary of sub-frame tests results


Tes Fixing Thickness Type Applied Sum of Ratio Mode
t type of sub- of failure fixing F/P of
No. and Dia. frame Concrete load forces Failure
d (mm) t (mm) P (kN) F (kN)
1 E4 (8) 2.0D NWC 81.2 193 2.38 C+P
2 E4 (8) 2.0 D NWC(R) 93.4 147 1.57 C+P+S
3 E4 (8) 2.0 C LWC 83 171 2.06 C+P
4 E4 (8) 2.0 C+ NWC(R) 73.4 159 2.17 S+P+C
5 E4 (10) 2.0 D NWC 115 195 1.70 T
6 E4 (10) 2.4 D NWC 120 321 2.68 Cs+P
7 E4 (10) 2.4 D LWC(R) 120 318 2.65 C+P
8 E4 (10) 2.4 D NWC(R) 134 271 2.02 C+P
9 E4 (10) 2.4 C NWC(R) 111 317 2.86 C+P
C+
10 E4 (10) 2.4 NWC(R) 94.1 167 1.77 C+P
11 E1 (8) 2.0 D NWC 86.8 195 2.25 C+P
12 E1 (8) 2.0 D NWC(R) 96.2 242 2.52 P
13 E1 (8) 2.4 C NWC(R) 90 269 2.99 P+S
14 E1 (10) 2.4 D NWC 95.5 233 2.44 T+P
15 E1 (10) 2.4 D NWC(R) 117 287 2.45 T+P+C
C
16 R1 (10) 2.4 NWC(R) 58 105 1.81 S+P
D
Attachment directly to slab, CAttachment using stell cleat,
+
Attached to edge beam with 75mm edge distance.
NWC(R) = Reinforced concrete grade 15.

869
Figure 2 shows a typical graph of load against vertical displacement of fixing and Table
1 shows the results of a series of tests with the following parameters being investigated:

• Fixings characteristics i.e. expansion anchors with stiffer or more 'ductile' load slip
relationships, and resin anchors.
• Fixing diameter (8mm or 10mm diameter)
• Channel stiffness (thickness of 2.0 or 2.4mm)
• Fixing of channel to the slab (directly or via cleats)
• Concrete type (normal and lightweight concretes of various grades, with or without
reinforcement, and with or without the proximity of an edge)

140

120
Applied Load, P (kN)

100
80

60

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Vertical deflection, v (mm)

Figure 2: Load against vertical displacement of a typical fixing (Test 5).

2.3 Failure modes


The following failure modes were identified :

- Tearing of the flange of the section through the head of the fixing (T) see Figure
3a.
- Anchor bolt pull-out from the concrete base (P) see Figure 3b.
- Cracking/Splitting of the concrete base (Cs).
- Concrete cone break-out (C) see Figure 3c.

870
- Stud failure in tension (S) see Figure 3d

Figure 3a Figure 3b

Figure 3c

2.4 Basic structural action


Fixing 'E4' was considered to have a 'ductile' load-displacement relationship and
therefore would potentially give a significant sharing of load among the fixings in the
event of one or two fixings reaching their maximum load.

At system failure, attention is focused on the pattern of the individual fixing forces F and
on the ratio of the sum of all the forces ΣF to the applied load P (where F includes fixing
pre-load), as follows:

871
• More uniform patterns of fixing forces result from a combination of a flexurally
rigid channel section and flexible fixings.
• Once preload is overcome, values of the ratio ΣF/P much greater than unity indicate
significant contributions of prying to the fixing forces.

3. Discussion of test results

The results of 16 sub-frame tests are summarised in Table 1. The effect of various test
parameters is discussed in the following paragraphs.

3.1 Effect of fixing types and characteristics


In general the results showed a less uniform distribution of fixing forces for stiffer, less-
ductile fixings, although, distortion of the channel cross-section at the fixing point often
muted the influence of fixing stiffness.

3.2 Thickness of Cold-formed channel section


Only one test, Test 5, used 10mm fixings in 2mm thick channel as this combination
resulted in tearing of the channel. Test 6 which uses 2.4mm thick channel, but is
otherwise similar, failed by splitting of the concrete along the line of the fixings,
coupled with fixing pull-out at 4% higher maximum load (see Table 1).

3.3 Effect of concrete type


Expansion fixings in lightweight concrete (LWC) develop less interlock between the
expansion sleeve and the drilled hole. This results in reduced embedment of the failing
cone of concrete and a reduction in load capacity (compare Tests 7 and 8 of Table 1).
Also a fixing in LWC will tend to have greater secondary expansion and hence a greater
overall ductility, which may explain the more uniform force distribution in LWC than in
NWC.

3.4 Method of attachment


Comparing Tests 8 (direct system) with 9 (cleat system), or Tests 12 with 13, shows that
prying in the fixings increased with the use of cleats with a consequent reduction in
maximum applied load. Comparing Tests 9 and 10 it can also be seen that the effect of a
partially developed cone due to the proximity of an edge has reduced the maximum load
by 15%.

872
3.5 Distribution of load to the fixings
Generally, the tests showed that on overcoming preload, fixings 2 and 4 carried most
load as expected, but are frequently almost matched by fixing 3, due to the flexibility of
the sub-frame and of its attachment to the concrete. Once fixings 2 and 4 begin to fail
more load distributes to the other fixings, especially to fixing 3 (see Figure 4). The
maximum applied load is up to 20% greater than the load causing first fixing failure,
after which the fixing loads become more uniform. This behaviour demonstrstes the load
re-distribution capability of the system as failure is approached.

'E4' M10 Fixings and 2.0mm thick channel on direct connection

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Applie d Load, P (kN)

Figure 4: Load distribution among fixings (Test 5).

3.6 Prying action


Eight control tests (in pairs) isolated the effect of prying on the fixings. These tests
consisted of two separate lengths of channel beneath the two load points described in
section 2.2. These tests eliminate any redistribution of load among the fixings as the
fixings are subject only to the applied load and any prying action. Prying forces are
determined by comparing fixing forces with applied load. Figure 5 shows typical graphs
of fixing forces against applied load from which the non-linear calibration of prying was
found, enabling the elimination of prying forces from the sub-frame test results. The
resulting reactions were then compared with reactions found from the finite element

873
analysis. Prying forces varied from 70% to 200% of nominal bolt force, being greater for
thinner sections, or where cleats were used.

60
Fixing force f (kN)

50 Exp1
40
30 Preload Exp4
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Applied load, P (kN)

Figure 5: Measured fixing forces against applied load (Control Tests).

4. Analysis
The experimental results were modelled numerically using the finite element program
LUSAS. The analysis was also used to demonstrate the influence of various parameters,
for example evaluating the effects of sub-frame flexibility and anchor stiffness on
structural performance.

Figure 6: Finite element modelling using LUSAS.


3D 4-noded shell elements were used to represent the cold-formed channel section as
shown in Figure 6. The fixing/channel connection to the concrete base was modelled

874
using a non-linear spring element with the spring stiffness determined from control tests
described in section 3.6. Table 2 compares the results of the LUSAS analysis with Test 1
at maximum load.

TABLE 2: Comparison of theoretical reactions with experimental values.


Experimental Estimated Exp. Theoretical beam
Fixing fixing forces at reaction at reactions Ratio
No. failure, failure (LUSAS) Fr.exp / Fc
Fexp (kN) Fr.exp (kN) Fc (kN)
B1 26.2 13.6 14.0 0.97
B2 36.4 17.7 17.3 1.02
B3 32.8 16.3 18.2 0.90
B4 32.1 16.2 16.8 0.96
B5 30.6 15.2 13.9 1.09
Average = 0.986

Fixing forces (Fexp) in Table 2 were adjusted to (Fr.exp) to eliminate prying effects and to
better estimate the experimental beam reactions. The ratio of these estimated reactions to
the finite element values was very close to unity. Comparisons with 12 of the sub-frame
tests gave an average ratio (at maximum load) of 0.962 with a standard deviation of 0.31.
Having thus validated the numerical model, LUSAS was used to undertake a parametric
study on the effect of the following parameters: spacing between anchors, anchor type
and diameter, anchor strength and ductility, section properties of the sub-frame and load
type(4).

5. General conclusions
(i) The behaviour of concrete fixings is more variable than that of the supported
steelwork giving rise to a commonly used factor of safety of 3 to 5 in fixing
design, much greater than would be used in the design of concrete or steelwork. It
is thus important to identify the degree to which a fixing failure does not mean
system failure. Tests described herein have achieved their objective of
demonstrating reserve of strength after first fixing failure.

(ii) In these tests a cleated connection increased bolt prying and reduced maximum
load by 14% but remains preferable to direct connection as it is easier to install
and provides some tolerance for attachment to uneven surfaces. Furthermore,
overcladding through existing facades will necessitate some form of cleat or
bracket.

875
(iii) Basic tension tests on the fixings are recommended prior to commencement of
any overcladding project and such tests should take the edge-distance into
account.

(iv) Transverse bending of the channel flange and consequent prying action was
found to increase the fixing forces by 70% to 200%. This can be reduced by
minimising eccentricity between the line of applied load and the point of fixing
(i.e. reduction of the prying lever arm). Prying variability along with that noted in
(i) may require higher factors of safety for fixings in this application.

(v) The sub-frame system studied was able to carry an additional 20% of load after
first fixing failure, with consequent re-distribution of fixing force, before reaching
maximum load capacity.

6. Acknowledgement
The Imperial College research was funded by SERC under the LINK CMR programme,
with industrial input from Consulting Engineers, Architects, Fixing Manufacturers,
Kingspan Ltd, Hi-Span Ltd and British Steel plc. Industrial contribution was co-
ordinated by the Steel Construction Institute. The authors are grateful to all for their
generous contributions.

References
1. Pedreschi R.F. (1992). "The use of Cold-formed Steel in re-cladding and
Overcladding." Dept. of Architecture, University of Edinburgh, Scotland.

2. Popo-Ola O.S., Lawson, R. M., Sullivan, P. J. (1991) "Small Scale Tests on


Fixings." Dept. of Civil Eng. Imperial College, London, Phase I report (RT-04).

3. Popo-Ola O.S., Lawson, R. M., Sullivan, P. J., Davidson, P. C., England, G. L.


(1992). "Re-distribution of Load in Over/Re-Cladding Sub-frame fixed to
Concrete base with five anchor bolts." Dept. of Civil Eng. Imperial College,
London, Phase II report (RT-07).

4. Popo-Ola O.S. (1996) "Cold Formed Steel Support Systems in the Over/Re-
Cladding of Concrete Buildings." PhD Thesis. Dept. of Civil Eng. Imperial
College, University of London.

876
REDUNDANT STRUCTURES FIXED WITH CONCRETE
FASTENERS
Michael Rößle and Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Concrete fasteners providing redundant fixture for structures will be covered in the
future by ETAG, Part 6. The requirements for anchors for these applications should be
less strict than for anchors used to fasten statically determinant attachments. The logic
behind this is that failure of a single anchorage in a redundantly supported structure will
normally not cause complete structural failure, as long as load transfer to neighboring
anchors is possible. The probability of failure of redundant structures fixed with
fasteners according to ETAG, Part 6 should be in the same range as statically
determinant structures fixed with fasteners according to ETAG, Part 1. The failure of
anchors is significantly influenced by the presence of cracks in concrete and in particular
their widths. Anchors designed according to ETAG, Part 6 may fail if they are located in
a wide crack. Therefore, to ensure that a structural system behaves in a redundant way,
the degree of utilization of the admissible bending stress and deflection of the attachment
must be relatively small in the intact state (i.e. the state where no anchor failure has
occured). Finally, requirements for the behavior of anchors in redundant use are shown
in Chapter 4.

1. Introduction

Fastenings to concrete of various types are used for a wide variety of applications in the
building industry. They are often used to fasten statically indeterminant structures such
as suspended ceilings, pipes, railings and facades.
For these applications, it should be allowed in the future not only to use fasteners that
fulfill the stringent requirements of ETAG, Part 1 [1], which may be used to fasten
statically determinant attachments, but also fasteners optimized for redundant systems.
Requirements for fasteners in redundant structures will be covered in ETAG, Part 6
'Metal anchors for redundant use in concrete for lightweight systems'. The test conditions
and the requirements for these anchors should be less strict than those for anchors

877
according to ETAG, Part 1. Accordingly, anchors for redundant use should be tested in
concrete members with reduced crack widths, e.g. w = 0.2mm and 0.4mm. Anchors
tested only in relatively small cracks, however, might fail if located in a relatively wide
crack, e.g. w = 0.5mm. In this case the structural system must transfer the load taken by
this fastener to neighboring anchors. Redundancy is the intentional overspecification of
anchorages to maintain structural integrity when such a failure occurs.
The probability of failure of redundant systems fixed with fasteners suitable for such
applications should be in the same range as systems providing statically determinant
anchorage. Failure of a statically determinant system occurs when one anchors fails,
because no state of equilibrium can be found after failure of a single support (see
Figure 1a). Failure of a redundant system, however, does not necessarily occur after the
failure of one anchor, but rather when the bending strength (design resistance) of the
structure is exceeded (see Figure 1b).

anchor failure anchor failure


(= system failure) (≠ system failure)

EI
q

N1 N2 N3 N4 N5

l l l l
N2 falls down
a) single use (SU) b) multiple (redundant) use (MU)

Figure 1: Relation between anchor failure and system failure;


a) single use, b) multiple use

To ensure that structural systems behave in a redundant way and still fulfill the
requirements in the serviceability limit state, they must fulfill following requirements:

• The structural system must have sufficient resistance to transfer the load from one
fastener to neighboring fasteners if one anchor should fail. The admissible stresses of
the structural system should be observed after failure of only one anchor.
• The deformations caused by the load transfer should not significantly exceed the
requirements in the serviceability limit state of the structure.
• The neighboring fasteners should not fail, even they are stressed beyond their
admissible load.

878
If the above mentioned requirements are observed, failure of the complete structural
system will be avoided in case of failure of one anchor. Furthermore, the structural
system can still be used without any restrictions.

Load transfer within redundant systems is governed by the geometry and stiffness of the
attachment (i.e. the structural system) and the performance of the fasteners characterized
by their load-displacement-behavior.

2. Behavior of anchors in cracked concrete

Under service conditions cracks are to be expected in reinforced concrete structures.


There is a variety of reasons for the formation of cracks in concrete. A survey of
possible reasons is given in reference [2]. Cracks may form before or after hardening of
the concrete. More interesting for fastenings are cracks that develop after hardening of
the concrete. These cracks may be caused by load effects (design loads, accidental
overload, creep), imposed deformations (due to shrinkage, early thermal contraction,
external seasonal temperature variations, freeze/thaw cycles and/or support settlements)
and by chemical or physical actions.

Fasteners tend to initialize crack formation. Torqueing and loading of anchors creates
splitting forces in the surrounding concrete (see Figure 2a). Furthermore, drill holes have
the effect of notches in concrete (see Figure 2b). If the tension strength of the
surrounding concrete is exceeded the concrete will crack near the anchor [3].

σ F σmax

σm = F/Ab
a) Splitting forces caused by b) Drill holes have the effect of
torqueing and loading of anchors notches in concrete

Figure 2: Crack initiation by anchors

Therefore, anchors must be tested in cracked concrete. The crack widths may
significantly influence the behavior of anchors.

879
Figure 3 to Figure 5 show load-displacement curves of various anchors obtained from
centric tension tests in non-cracked and cracked concrete.
Figure 3 shows load-displacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors M12,
which were developed for use in non-cracked concrete. In non-cracked concrete the
load-displacement curves show a continuous increase of load with displacements. In
contrast, the behavior of the anchors in cracked concrete is quite poor. The ultimate load
and the load-displacement curves vary greatly and cannot be predicted.

hef = 60 mm

Figure 3: Load-displacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors M12;


which were developed for use in non-cracked concrete, after [5]

Figure 4 shows load-displacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors that are


often used for fixing suspended ceilings. This anchor does not have a Technical
Approval. In non-cracked concrete these anchors perform excellently. In cracked
concrete, however, the test results show poor performance for crack widths as small as
0.2mm. Anchors fail by pull-out in cracked concrete. The ultimate load can be less than
10% of the value in non-cracked concrete. This anchor is not suitable for use in cracked
concrete.

Figure 5 shows load-displacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors that are


also often used for fixing suspended ceilings. This anchor has a Technical Approval for
this application. The admissible load is 0.8 kN. This anchor fails in non-cracked and in
cracked concrete (w=0.2mm) by steel failure. The displacements are increased in
cracked concrete. If this anchor is tested in wide cracks (w=0.5mm) the failure mode
changes. Three of the five tested anchors failed by pull-out. The minimal measured
ultimate load is about 0.3 kN. That is less than 40% of the admissible load of the anchor.

880
14
non-cracked concrete

12 cracked concrete; w=0.2mm


cracked concrete; w=0.4mm
10

8
Load [kN]

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Displacement [mm]

Figure 4: Load-displacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors M6


(hef=46mm), anchor without a Technical Approval, behavior in non-cracked
and cracked concrete, after [6]

10
non-cracked concrete
9
cracked concrete; w=0.2mm
8 cracked concrete; w=0.5mm

6
Load [kN]

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Displacement [mm]

Figure 5: Load-displacement curves of torque-controlled expansion anchors M6


(hef=40mm), anchors with a Technical Approval (adm. load = 0.8 kN),
behavior in non-cracked and cracked concrete, after [6]

881
3. Load redistribution after support failure

After failure of a support (e.g. anchor) the length of the assumed continuous span
doubles. This influences the behavior of the overall structural system.

25 The results of statical analysis of


Deflection continuous beams with an
Bending moment infinite number of spans depend
20 on the span length, the applied
Support reaction
F2/F1, M2/M1, f2,f1

load and bending stiffness of the


16
15 beam.
The support reaction increases
linearly, the bending moments
10 quadraticaly and the deflections
to the 4th power with reference to
54 the span length. Doubling the
span length (lspan2/lspan1 = 2)
2 causes an increase of support
0 reaction by a factor of 2,
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 bending moments by a factor
lspan2/lspan1 of 4 and deflections of the beam
by a factor of 16 compared to
the base value (lspan1). Figure 6
Figure 6: Influence of span on support reaction, shows these relationships.
bending moment and deflection

If only one fastening element fails in a continuous beam (infinite number of spans) these
values are not exactly correct, because the span length doubles only once and the
neighboring spans are constant. This very simple investigation, however, gives an
approximation of the expected values for the increase of internal forces, moments and
deflections if one anchor fails in a redundant structure.

To illustrate these results, the values for an intact 4-span beam and the values valid after
failure of one support are given in Table 1. To ensure that a 4-span beam is not
overloaded after failure of one support (i.e. it continues to fulfill the requirements in the
serviceability limit state), the utilization of the bending stress for the intact system
should not be more than 21% and the utilization of the deflection not more than about
3% of the allowable values (see Table 2, failure of external support).

Beams with more than 4 spans and frame systems behave in general more favorably and
therefore the allowable degree of utilization can be higher. Furthermore, one can get a
higher allowable degree of utilization after optimization of the length of each span.

882
4-span-beam support span support deflection
reaction moment moment of beam
Nmax Msp,max Msu,max fmax
. . . .
ql q l² q l² q l4/EI
intact system 1.142 0.077 -0.107 0.0065
failure external support 2.033 0.089 -0.500 0.2442
failure first internal support 2.021 0.332 -0.369 0.1172
failure internal support 1.781 0.219 -0.281 0.0677
Table 1: Results of statical analysis valid for 4-span beams:
intact structural system - failure of one support

4-span-beam Nmax,int Msp,max,int Msu,max,int fmax,int


Nmax Msp,max Msu,max fmax
[-] [-] [-] [-]
failure external support 0.562 0.870 0.214 0.027
failure first internal support 0.565 0.233 0.290 0.055
failure internal support 0.641 0.353 0.380 0.095
Table 2: Ratio of support reactions, moments and deflections for the intact system to
values valid after failure of one support, 4-span beam

4. Probability of failure: anchors for single use - anchors for multiple use

The probability of failure Pf of redundant systems fixed with fasteners according to


ETAG, Part 6, should be in the same range (Pf ≈ 1.0 10-6) as statically determinant
structures fixed with high performance anchors for single use (i.e. anchors according to
ETAG, Part 1). .
In this section the probability of failure for a statically determinant and indeterminant
structure is calculated. For the statically indeterminant structure it is assumed that the
fastened structure is stiff enough to transfer the load to neighboring anchors after failure
of one anchor.
Failure of a statically determinate structure is defined as failure of only one anchor. In
contrast, failure of a statically indeterminant structure that has sufficient resistance
(strength and stiffness) for the load transfer to the neighboring anchors after failure of
one anchor (see Chapter 3) is defined in this investigation as failure of two neighboring
anchors. In the following the probabilities of failure of both systems (see Figure 1) were
calculated with the program SYSREL (SORM-method). The anchor loads for the single

883
use system (SU) are assumed to be the support reactions of the intact 4-span beam (MU).
This allows for comparison of the results for both systems.
In the stochastical model the ultimate anchor load, as well as the applied load, are taken
into account. It is assumed that 50% of the anchors (e.g. M6/M8) are influenced by
cracks in concrete. The ultimate anchor load depends on the measured crack width W
under quasi permanent load and the increase of the crack width under maximum load of
the structure (see [8], [9]). The reduction of the ultimate anchor load Nu,o dependent on
the crack width w is described by Equation (2). The factor (fb.b) is responsible for the
degree of load reduction dependent on the crack width w (Figure 8). The load for each
anchor is calculated by the FE-Program NELIN with consideration of any cases of
anchor failure dependent on the applied load (g, p) and the span l. The span l is assumed
to be deterministic. The limit state function for every anchor is given in Equation (4).
The distribution functions, mean values and standard deviations of all variables are
summarized in Table 3 and Table 4.

  
0.64 
G + PStruc
wi = Wi ⋅ 1.6 ⋅ Struc 
 − 0.7 (Eq. 1)
  2  
 
Nu,i(w) = f N ⋅ N u , 0 , i ⋅1− f b ⋅ bi ⋅ w i ⋅ e i 
-w
(Eq. 2)
 

Si = fL,i . l . (0.33 . g + 0.667 . p) (Eq. 3)

Gi = Ri - Si = Nu,i(w) - Si (Eq. 4)

Basic Variable Distrib. Mean Standard


function deviation
Nu,0,1 … Nu,0,5 Ultimate load (w=0) [kN] Lognormal 8 0.8
Crack width (under [mm]
W1 … W5 Gamma1) 0.11) 0.11)
quasi permanent load)
Factor for load [-]
b1 … b5 Lognormal 1 0.1 - 0.3
reduction
g Dead load (line load) [kN/m] Normal 1 0.1
p Live load (line load) [kN/m] Gumbel 1 0.1
Dead load [-]
GStruc Normal 1.3 0.1
(concrete structure)
Live load [-]
PStruc Gumbel 1.3 0.2
(concrete structure)
1)
values taken from [8]
Table 3: Basic variables for probabilistic analyses

884
Basic Variable Value
fb Scale factor for b [-] 1-3
fL,i Load factor for [-] Statical analyses
anchor i
l Span [m] 1.0
Table 4: Deterministic parameters for probabilistic analyses

The results of this probabilistic investigation are shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. To
observe a probability of failure of about Pf = 1.10-6 in the single use system (SU), the
mean of factor b should be less than bm = 1.15 with a coefficient of variation of 20%
(Figure 7). If the complete system does not fail by the failure of only one anchor
(multiple use, MU) the requirements for the anchor are less strict. In this case the
appropriate value is about bm = 1.95, with a coefficient of variation of 20%.

1.0E-9
SU (bv=10%)
1.0E-8 SU (bv=20%)
[-]

1.0E-7 SU (bv=30%)
f

MU (bv=10%)
Probability of failure P

1.0E-6
MU (bv=20%)
1.0E-5 MU (bv=30%)

1.0E-4
8,5

1.0E-3
1.0E-2
1.0E-1
1.0E+0
1.15 1.95
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Factor bmean [-]

Figure 7: Probability of failure dependent on the factor bmean (V=10, 20 and 30%),
Single Use (SU) - Multiple Use (MU)

Figure 8 shows the different requirements for anchor behavior in cracked concrete
dependent on their use in a single or multiple (redundant) system. To observe the same
probability of failure (Pf = 10-6) the ratio Nu,w/Nu,0 for anchors in single use must be
about 0.7, for anchors in multiple use only 0.5, with a crack width w = 0.4mm. The

885
difference is even more clear, if one considers the 5%-fractiles. The value valid for
single use anchors is about 0.6, for multiple use anchors about 0.3. The results for
anchors for single use agree approximately with the requirements in [1].

1,2
SU: bm = 1.15
SU: bV = 20%
1,0 95%-fractile
MU: bm = 1.95
MU: bV = 20%
0,8
Nu,w/Nu,0 [-]

0,6

0,4
5%-fractile
0,2

0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7
crack width w [mm]

Figure 8: Requirements for behavior of anchor in cracked concrete:


single use (SU) - multiple use (MU)

In further calculations the influence of


• the different distribution functions and standard deviations of the applied load,
• the distance between the mean of applied load and ultimate anchor load and
• the behavior of anchors after exceeding the ultimate load
must be investigated.

5. Conclusions

For redundant structures it should be allowed in the future not only to use fasteners that
fulfill the stringent requirements of ETAG, Part 1, which covers anchors for fastening of
statically determinant structures. The test conditions and requirements for fasteners for
these applications will be covered in ETAG, Part 6 'Metal anchors for redundant use in
concrete for lightweight systems'. These anchors should be tested in smaller cracks than
anchors according to ETAG, Part 1. Therefore, it may be possible that anchors according
ETAG, Part 6 will fail in a relatively wide crack, e.g. 0.5mm. To ensure load transfer to

886
neighboring anchors after failure of one anchor, the degree of utilization of allowable
bending stress and allowable deflection in the intact state should be limited. Probabilistic
investigations show that the requirements for anchors in redundant use can be
significantly lower than for anchor in single use, if the structural system is able to
transfer the load taken by the failed anchor.

6. Acknowledgement

The primary funding for this research was provided by the firms fischerwerke, Hilti and
Würth. The support of these manufacturers is very much appreciated. Special thanks are
also accorded to Matthew Hoehler who helped review this paper.

7. References

[1] European Organisation for Technical Approvals (EOTA): ETAG 001, Guideline for
European Technical Approvals of Metal Anchors for Use in Concrete. Part One:
Anchors in General, 1997
[2] Beeby, A.W.: Causes of cracking. Proceedings, CEB/RILEM Workshop on
'Durability of concrete structures', Copenhagen 1983, also in CEB Bulletin No. 158
'Cracking and deformation', Paris 1983

[3] Lotze, D.: Untersuchung zur Frage der Wahrscheinlichkeit, mit der Dübel in Rissen
liegen - Einfluß der Querbewehrung (Investigation of the probability that anchors
are located in cracks - influence of transverse reinforcement), Report No. 1/24-87/6,
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, 1987, not published

[4] Eligehausen, R.; Bozenhardt, A.: Crack widths as measured in actual structures and
conclusions for the testing of fastening elements, Report No. 1/42-89/9, Institute of
Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, 1989, not published

[5] Dieterle, H.; Bozenhardt, A.; Hirth, W.; Opitz, V.: Tragverhalten von Dübeln in
Parallelrissen unter Schrägzugbeanspruchung (Load bearing capacity of anchors
located in parallel cracks under combined tension and shear loading), Report No.
1/45-89/19, Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, 1990, not
published

[6] Rößle, M.: Redundante Befestigungen - Verifizierung des Prüfprogrammes -


Zusammenstellung aller bisherigen Versuche in statischen Linienrissen (Redundant
Fastenings - verification of test conditions - review of all previous tests in static line
cracks), Report No. 00/33-3/11, Institute of Construction Materials, University of
Stuttgart, 2000, not published

887
[7] Rößle, M.; Eligehausen, R.: Metal Anchors for Redundant Use in Concrete,
Behavior of Anchors in cracked concrete and statically effects after failure of one
anchor, Report No. 1/03-3/13, Institute of Construction Materials, University of
Stuttgart, 2001, not published
[8] Bergmeister, K.: Stochastik in der Befestigungstechnik mit realistischen
Einflußgrößen (Stochastics in fastening technology with realistic parameters),
Dissertation, Universität Innsbruck, 1988

[9] Bergmeister, K.: Neue Bemessung von Dübelverbindungen im Stahlbetonbau (New


design of connections using anchors in reinforced concrete), Report No. 7/5-89/20,
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, 1989, not published

888
NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF POST-
INSTALLED REBARS SPLICED WITH CAST-IN-PLACE
REBARS
Hannes A. Spieth, Joško Ožbolt, R. Eligehausen, Jörg Appl
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Post-installed rebar connections are increasingly used in practice. Several different sys-
tems are on the market. To investigate the bond behavior of these systems pullout tests
with single rebars and tests with splices were performed. Cast-in-place and post-installed
rebars using different systems were tested side-by-side. To investigate the influence of
different bond stiffness on transverse cracking three dimensional finite element simula-
tions of splices with different splice length were done.
The Investigations show that the bond stiffness and bond strength influences the splice
strength and the crack formation along the lap length. When the used systems to post-
install rebars provide comparable bond stiffness and no lower bond strength than cast-in-
place rebars, design can be done according to the codes for reinforced concrete. Excep-
tions have to e made at minimum concrete cover, minimum embedment length and at
elevated temperature.

1. Introduction

In practice more and more connections between reinforced concrete elements are carried
out by bonding deformed reinforcing bars with an adhesive mortar in holes drilled into
the existing concrete. Examples are casting secondary floor slabs, closing temporary
openings, connecting new walls and columns to the existing foundation, connecting
cantilevering elements such as balconies with the existing structure, etc. In these cases
the reinforcing bars have to be anchored in existing reinforced elements or have to be
spliced with existing reinforcing bars. Normally holes are drilled in the existing concrete
with hammer or diamond drilling machines. After cleaning the hole the adhesive mortar
is injected; subsequently the reinforcing bar is pressed into the filled hole.

889
2. Types of systems and installation

There are different systems on the market. They vary in the type of used mortar and the
installation procedure. Two systems have been officially approved for this application
[3,4]. All systems have in common that a hole has to be drilled and cleaned. The clean-
ing procedure vary with each product. In most cases the hole has to be cleaned by brush-
ing and pumping. The officially approved systems require cleaning of the hole with
compressed air and machine driven wire brush.
Most common are the so called injection systems. Here the hole is filled with mortar
using an injection tool. The two components of the mortar are mixed automatically dur-
ing injection. Used are mortars based on organic compounds (epoxy, polyester, vinyle-
ster), inorganic compounds (cementious) and combinations of organic and inorganic
compounds. After filling the hole the bar is pressed in with a twisting motion. The offi-
cially approved systems are as well injection systems with a combination of organic and
inorganic compounds.
Furthermore glass capsule systems are used. The capsules contain the mortar which is
based on the above mentioned resins. They are put into the hole. Then the bar is driven
into the hole by hammer blows. There by the capsule is destroyed and resin and hardener
are mixed.

3. Transmission of load

Bonded reinforcing bars can be separated into two kinds of applications:


• Bonded bars in concrete without connection reinforcement (Figure 1 a)). These
bonded rebars transfer the load into the concrete in the same way as bonded anchors.
• Bonded bars in concrete with connection reinforcement (Figure 1 b)). These bonded
rebars act in the same way as spliced reinforcement.
F F F F

F F
a) With connection reinforcement b) Without connection reinforcement
Figure 1: Bonded reinforcement

890
In these two cases the transmission of load is totally different. In case of bars without
connection reinforcement the load must be taken up by the surrounding concrete, utiliz-
ing the concrete tensile strength in a rather large volume. Failure may be caused by bar
pullout or by concrete breakout. With rebars spliced with existing reinforcement the load
is transferred by compression struts to the cast-in-place reinforcing bar. The tensile
strength of concrete is utilized only locally.

4. Experimental studies

To investigate the influencing parameters on general bond behavior of post-installed


rebar connections pullout tests with single post-installed rebars were performed. Further
tests of post-installed rebars spliced with cast-in-place rebars were done to investigate
the bond distribution of the rebars and load transfer between the spliced rebars.

4.1. Bond behaviour of single post-installed rebars without connection rein-


forcement
The bond behavior of single post-installed rebars may be influenced significantly by
several material, installation, environmental and geometrical parameters. The influen-
cing parameters of the installation can be e.g. drilling system, hole cleaning and injection
tools used. As environmental parameters e.g. temperature of base material and mortar as
well as the moisture content of concrete can influence the bond behavior. Further materi-
al and geometrical parameter as concrete strength and cracks in the concrete influence
the performance of post-installed rebars. The influence of these parameters is discussed
in more detail in [1]. It has been shown by pullout tests where concrete cone failure was
restricted, that post-installed rebars can behave as cast-in-place rebars, provided that a
suitable product is used and the installation is done properly. Different behavior is ob-
served at elevated temperatures and in cracked concrete.
250

Epoxy System Hybrid System


200
Cast-in-place

150
Load [kN]

Polyester System
100

50

0
0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5
Displacement [mm]

Figure 2: Load-displacement curves of post-installed and cast-in-place bars measured in a con-


fined pullout test

Even if the installation is done properly and the hole cleaning is done perfectly there are
large differences between the bond behavior of different products. In Figure 2 the load

891
displacement curves measured in confined pullout tests of post-installed rebars installed
with different products are shown. All bars were installed with large concrete cover to
prevent splitting of the concrete. The formation of a concrete cone was prevented by
placing a steel plate with a hole on the concrete surface, where the bars were pulled
through. The curves show that rebars embedded with different products show a different
behavior in respect to stiffness and bond strength. The Hybrid-System (combination of
Vinylester and cementitious compounds) has a behavior closest to a cast-in-place rebar,
which is included in the graph for comparison. While the Epoxy-System showed a much
higher stiffness and a larger bond strength than the cast-in-place rebar, the Polyester-
System had a softer behavior and a significantly smaller bond strength. The stiffness of
the Cement-System was comparable to the Epoxy-System but the bond strength was
smaller than for cast-in-place rebars. While the stiffness is influenced by the composition
of the mortar (mainly amount of aggregates) and the diameter of the drilled hole in rela-
tion to the bar diameter, the bond strength is mainly influenced by the shear strength of
the mortar and the gluing capacity of the resin with the wall of the concrete hole.

4.2. Bond behaviour of post-installed rebars spliced with cast-in-place rebars


In most applications the post-installed rebars are spliced with existing reinforcement.
Often the concrete cover is rather small. These connections must be treated as an overlap
splice. In general the failure mode is splitting of the concrete cover or of the concrete
member.
To investigate the influence of bond strength and bond stiffness on the behavior of post-
installed rebar connections, splice tests with all product shown in Section 4.1 and Figure
2 were performed. A drawing of the tension test specimens is shown in Figure 3. Splice
length and clear spacing were kept constant. To get a more ductile failure transverse
reinforcement was placed along the splice length. To simulate two sections of the splice
separated by a transverse crack, crack formers were placed in the middle of the test spe-
cimen. The rebars were loaded displacement controlled until the specimens failed by
splitting. The failure was very brittle. The splitting failure plane is shown in Figure 3.
The outer bars were cast-in-place. 28 days after casting holes were drilled into the ele-
ments and the inner bars were post-installed. For comparison elements with cast-in-place
spliced rebars only were tested. The displacements at the unloaded and loaded ends of
the rebars in reference to the concrete surface as well as the opening of the splitting
cracks were measured. All together 12 tests with post-installed rebars and 3 tests with
spliced cast-in-place rebars only were performed.
Failure of the specimens was caused by splitting cracks along the crack plane indicated
in Figure 3. Figure 4 (a) shows the steel stress at peak load of the performed tests. The
rebars post-installed with the Hybrid-System show failure loads comparable to cast-in-
place rebars, which was expected taking into account the results shown in Figure 2. The
low failure loads of the bars post-installed with the Polyester-System were expected as
well, because of the low stiffness and the low bond strength of single bars (compare
Figure 2). The tests using a cementious mortar showed a similar splice strength com-
pared to cast-in-place spliced bars, even though the bond strength of single rebars is

892
significant lower than the bond strength of cast-in-place rebars (compare Figure 2). This
is due to the fact, that splitting failure occurred before the pullout bond strength was
utilized. The splices with the Epoxy-System show a larger scatter of the peak loads than
the tests with cast-in-place rebars. Test S1 showed a much lower steel stress at peak load
compared to cast-in-place spliced rebars, even though the bond strength of single rebars
is significantly higher than the bond strength of cast-in-place rebars. The reasons of the
lower strength of the splices with rebars installed using a Epoxy-System is discussed
below using the measured distribution of the steel strains along the bond length.
600

A B
Crack former 40 mm

A B
Section A-A
SectionB-B
40 40 Crack former 40 mm

80 Failure plane

80
20
Mortar

60

Figure 3:Drawing of a tension specimen with failure plane; tests with transverse reinforcement
and crack formers, rebar diameter ds = 20 mm

In Figure 4 (b) the average steel stresses – splitting crack opening curves of the tested
specimens are shown. It can be seen that at all tests, not relevant if the bars were cast-in-
place or post-installed using anyone of the systems, the splitting cracks started forming
at the same load level. Due to this it can be assumed that the splitting force development
is only dependent on the bond stress. At further elevated loads differences can be seen.
The specimen with the cast-in-place splices showed the smallest crack openings. It can
be assumed that differences in the bond distribution and different behavior of the bars in
cracked concrete caused the larger crack openings.
600 500
Cast-in-place Hybrid-System Cement-System Epoxy-System Polyester-System
450

500 A2 400
A1 A3 U1 U2 P1 P2 S2 S3
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

U3 P3 350
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

S1
400 300
W2 W3
W1 250
300 Cast-in-place
200
Hybrid-System
150
Cement-System
200
100
Epoxy-System
50 Polyester-System
100
0
-0,05 0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25
0 Crack Opening [mm]

(a) Steel stress at peak load (b) Average splitting crack openings
Figure 4: Results on splice tests with transverse reinforcement and crack formers

893
To investigate the bond distribution along the lap length of spliced rebars, strain gauges
were applied at the cast-in-place and post-installed rebars. A slot was milled into the
reinforcing bar and the strain gauges were applied at the center of the rebar. The spacing
of the strain gauges was 75 mm.
Figure 5 shows the distribution of steel stresses (calculated from the measured strains) of
two cast-in-place rebars spliced with each other and of a cast-in-place rebar spliced with
a post-installed rebar for stress levels 150 N/mm², 300 N/mm² and at failure load. At the
element with cast-in-place spliced rebars the measured steel stresses are almost symme-
trical to the middle of the element, where a transverse crack formed. At failure the bond
stresses are almost constant along the bond length. At the element using the Hybrid-
System the steel stresses are slightly unsymmetrical. The loaded ends of the post-
installed rebar transfers a higher tension force than the cast-in-place rebar at the loaded
end. Due to the high stiffness of the Epoxy-System (specimen S1) high bond stresses
were generated which caused an extensive transverse cracking of the specimen in this
area. Due to this the far end of the bond length was only slightly activated and the bond
stress distribution was highly non-linear. Therefore the steel stress at failure was lower
than for the other tests. At the test using the Polyester-System bond was activated al-
ready at a lower load level than at the other tests due to the low bond stiffness of the
Polyester-System. Failure occurred also due to splitting but at an lower level. As seen in
Figure 4 b) splitting cracks formed at the same load level at all tests. As seen in Figure 5
the bond capacity of the specimen using the Polyester-System at the time of splitting
crack formation was utilized higher and bond was activated over a larger area than at the
other specimen. Therefore the splitting cracks enlarged faster at this specimen at increas-
ing load and failure occurred at a lower load level.
cast-in-place cast-in-place cast-in-place Hybrid-System
500 500

450 150 N/mm² 450 150 N/mm²

400 300 N/mm² 400 300 N/mm²


Steel Stress [N/mm²]
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

Failure Load Failure Load


350 350

300 300

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]

cast-in-place Epoxy-System cast-in-place Polyester-System


500 500

450 450
150 N/mm²
400 300 N/mm² 400 150 N/mm²
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

350
Steel Stress [kN]

350 Failure Load 300 N/mm²


300 300 Failure Load
250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]

Figure 5: Stress distribution along the lap length of spliced rebars, experimental studies

894
5. Numerical Analysis

5.1. Finite element program MASA and calibration of the bond element
The used finite element code Masa is based on the microplane model. It can be used for
the two and the three-dimensional analysis of quasi-brittle materials. The model allows a
realistic prediction of the material behavior in case of three-dimensional stress - strain
states. The smeared crack approach is employed. To ensure mesh independent results the
crack band approach is used. More detail related to the used model can be found in [2].
The calibration of the different bond elements was performed based on pullout tests with
cast-in-place and post-installed rebars using different types of systems. The bond ele-
ments were calibrated at tests with embedment depth of 10 and 15 times of the bar di-
ameter. At some of the pullout tests strain gauges were applied at the bars to measure the
bond distribution along the embedment length. These data were taken to calibrate the
bond stiffness of the different types of systems for the numerical simulation. A bond
element for each of the systems shown in chapter 4 was calibrated.

5.2. Numerical Simulation of splices


To investigate the influence of bond properties on splice behavior numerical simulations
of splices were performed. A post-installed bar spliced with a cast-in-place bar in a ten-
sion element were simulated. In the numerical simulations the failure mode splitting was
excluded to get an more stable behavior and to study the transverse crack formation at
higher loads. Two different splice length were analysed – ls = 30ds as in the experimen-
tals (Figure 3) and ls = 70ds which is according to the codes for reinforced concrete ap-
proximately the maximum splice length that is required.
simulation cast-in-place simulation cast-in-place simulation cast-in-place simulation Hybrid System
600 600

150 N/mm²
500 500
150 N/mm² 300 N/mm²
Steel Stress [N/mm²]
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

300 N/mm² 500 N/mm²


400 400
500 N/mm²

300 300

200 200

100 100

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]

simulation cast-in-place simulation Epoxy System simulation cast-in-place simulation Polyester System
600 600

150 N/mm²
500 150 N/mm² 500
300 N/mm²
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

Steel Stress [N/mm²]

300 N/mm²
500 N/mm²
400 500 N/mm² 400

300 300

200 200

100 100

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]

Figure 6: Stress distribution along the lap length of spliced rebars; numerical simulation; lv =30ds

895
Figure 6 shows the distribution of calculated steel stresses for two cast-in-place rebars
spliced with each other and of a cast-in-place rebar spliced with a post-installed rebar.
The results are shown for the stress levels of 150 N/mm², 300 N/mm² and 500 N/mm² (lv
= 30 ds). In all simulations the splitting was excluded. The calculated failure loads are
higher than measured in the experimental studies. Therefore the curves are shown only
up to the yield strength of the steel. It can be seen that the distribution of the steel
stresses is comparable with the distribution obtained in the experiments (Figure 5). The
splice with cast-in-place rebars has symmetrical distribution of stresses. At the post-
installed splice using the Hybrid System the steel stress distribution is slightly unsymme-
trical and shifted towards the post-installed side. The Epoxy System shows as well a
stiffer bond characteristic than the cast-in-place rebar. At the Polyester System it can be
seen that at steel stress of 300 N/mm² bond at the whole splice length is already acti-
vated. This is in good agreement with the experiments.

The numerical simulations compared to the experimental studies show that the different
calibrated bond elements can simulate the post-installed rebars using the here presented
three systems and the cast-in-place rebar realistically. Using the same bond elements
splices with length lv = 70 ds were investigated. Again splitting failure of the element
was excluded. To investigate the influence of the bond stiffness on steel stress distribu-
tion and transverse crack formation, simulations with the stiffest (Epoxy) and softest
(Polyester) system were carried out and compared with the spliced cast-in-place rebars.
Figure 7 shows the steel stress distribution and the concrete strain distribution along the
lap length of the performed simulations. It can be seen that the bond stiffness influences
significantly the shape of the steel stress distribution and crack formation. At the graphs
of the steel stress distributions it can be seen, that the bond stiffness effects the gradient
of the curve. At the loaded end the reduction of the steel stresses at the simulation with
Epoxy System is rather fast. In the case of the Polyester System the force is introduced
much slower into the concrete member. At the specimen with cast-in-place spliced
rebars the cracks are symmetrical to the middle axis (see Figure 7). The crack distances
measured from both sides are comparable. The specimen with the Epoxy System the
crack pattern is slightly unsymmetrical. The crack distances on the side of the post-
installed rebar are smaller than on the side of the cast-in-place rebar. At the specimen
with the simulated soft Polyester System the first crack occurs at a much larger distance
measured from the end of the specimen and just one crack occurs at the side of the post-
installed rebar. Comparing all three graphs it can be seen that the crack pattern at the
side of the simulated cast-in-place rebar is comparable for all simulations.

The numerical simulations show that the bond stiffness influences the crack spacing and
the number of cracks formed. Further numerical investigations are in progress to investi-
gate the influence of bond stiffness and bond strength to the crack formation and to the
displacement at the loaded ends of spliced rebars.

896
(a) (b)
simulation cast-in-place simulation cast-in-place simulation cast-in-place simulation cast-in-place
700 0,014
300 N/mm²
600 0,012 400 N/mm²
300 N/mm²
Steel Stress [N/mm²] 500 N/mm²
400 N/mm² 0,010

Concrete Strain
500
500 N/mm²
400 0,008

300 0,006

200 0,004

100 0,002

0 0,000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]
simulation cast-in-place simulation Epoxy system
700 simulation cast-in-place simulation Epoxy system
0,014
600 300 N/mm²
0,012
400 N/mm²
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

500
500 N/mm² 0,010

Concrete Strain
400
0,008

300 0,006

200 0,004

100 0,002

0 0,000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]

simulation cast-in-place simulation Polyesther system


700 simulation cast-in-place simulation Polyester system
0,014
600 300 N/mm² 300 N/mm²
0,012
400 N/mm²
Steel Stress [N/mm²]

500 400 N/mm² 500 N/mm²


0,010
Concrete Strain

400 500 N/mm²


0,008

300 0,006

200 0,004

100 0,002

0 0,000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Embedment Length [mm] Embedment Length [mm]

Figure 7: Stress distribution along the lap length of spliced rebars(a) and concrete strain distribu-
tion along lap length (b); numerical simulation; lv =70ds

Figure 8: Finite element mesh; max. principal strains in concrete; splice with post-installed rebar
using simulated Epoxy System; numerical simulation; lv =70ds

897
6. Conclusions

The systems to post-install rebars can provide different bond strength and bond stiffness
than comparable cast-in-place rebars. The experimental investigations show that if bond
stiffness and bond strength of the systems used are comparable to the behavior of cast-
in-place rebars, splices with post-installed and cast-in-place rebars show the same beha-
vior, even at failure mode splitting of the concrete element.
The numerical studies show that the bond stiffness and the bond strength influence the
splice strength and the crack formation along the lap length. The crack distances are
directly dependent to the bond stiffness of the used system. With increasing bond stiff-
ness the crack distances at the loaded ends become smaller. The effect of the bond stiff-
ness can be seen as well at the gradient of the steel stress distribution of the spliced re-
bars (bond stress). Further numerical simulations are currently in progress to investigate
the influence of bond characteristic to splice strength, crack formation and displacements
at the loaded ends of the splices.
The investigations show that when the used systems of post-install rebars provide com-
parable bond stiffness and not lower bond strength than the cast-in-place rebars, design
can be done according to the codes for reinforced concrete. Exceptions have to be made
for the minimum concrete cover and minimum embedment length as well at elevated
temperature. These exceptions are discussed in [1].

7. Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the following companies: Fischerwerke and Hilti.
The support is very much appreciated.

8. References

[1] Eligehausen R., Spieth H. A., Sippel Th. M.: Eingemörtelte Bewehrungsstäbe. Be-
ton- und Stahlbetonbau, 12/1999, pp. 512 – 523
[2] Ožbolt, J., Li, Y.-J., Kožar, I.: ‘Microplane model for concrete with relaxed kinemat-
ic constraint’, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38, 2001, 2683-2711
[3] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBT): Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung
(Z-21.8-1648). Bewehrungsanschluss mit Hilti-Injektionsmörtel HIT – HY 150; 2000
[4] Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBT): Allgemeine bauaufsichtliche Zulassung
(Z-21.8-1647). Bewehrungsanschluss mit Upat-Injektionsmörtel UPM 44; 2000

898
DOWEL ACTION OF TITANIUM BARS CONNECTING
MARBLE ELEMENTS
Elizabeth Vintzileou, Konstantinos Papadopoulos
National Technical University of Athens, Greece

Abstract
This paper presents the results of 48 tests that were performed to gain evidence
concerning the dowel action of titanium bars connecting marble elements. The
parameters investigated within the program were: the diameter of titanium bars (6, 8, 10
and 12 mm), their cover (2, 4 or 6 bar diameters), as well as the loading direction
(against the strong or the weak direction of marble’s anisotropy). The main aim of the
testing program was to determine the minimum cover required to ensure that failure will
occur in the titanium bar and not in the marble. It was proved that a cover equal to 6
times the dowel diameter is sufficient to ensure dowel failure, whereas for loading
against the marble’s strong direction, even a cover of 4 times the bar diameter is
sufficient. Adequate formulae, calibrated on the basis of the experimental results, are
proposed for the calculation of the dowel resistance.

1. Introduction

Titanium is quite extensively used in the conservation works of the monuments at the
Athens Acropolis. The commercially pure titanium was selected both for its resistance to
all types of corrosion and for its physicochemical compatibility with the marble.

Threaded titanium bars, installed in drilled holes and connected with the marble by
means of a white cement mortar, have been used up to now, to connect pieces of
fractured architectural members. In those applications, in which titanium bars are
subjected to tension, the connections are designed in a way to exclude failure of the
connected marble pieces. The relevant design method1,2 is supported by experimental
evidence.

899
There are, however, numerous applications, in which the marble to titanium connection
is expected to be subjected to shear. For this type of loading, neither experimental
evidence nor a design method is available.

In order to provide relevant experimental evidence, an experimental program was


carried out at the Laboratory of Reinforced Concrete, NTUA. Threaded titanium bars
were installed in drilled holes in Dionysos marble and they were subjected to shear up to
failure. Various parameters were investigated, namely the diameter of the titanium bars,
their cover and the direction of loading (against the strong or the weak direction of
marble’s anisotropy).

In this paper, the main experimental findings of the program are presented and
commented. In addition, formulae are proposed for the calculation of the maximum
shear force carried by the titanium to marble connection.

2. The materials

2.1. Dionysos marble


Pentelic marble is the basic material of the Acropolis monuments. However, since the
quarries of Penteli were closed for environmental reasons, marble from Dionysos
mountain, near Penteli, is used in restoration works, to produce both patches and copies
of lost members. Dionysos marble was selected because its physical and mechanical
properties are similar to those of the remarkably durable Pentelic marble.1

According to tests carried out at the National Technical University of Athens3,4, the
compressive strength of Dionysos marble is equal to 83 N/mm2 and 70 N/mm2 in its
strong and weak direction respectively. Its strength in direct tension is equal to 8.7
N/mm2 in the strong direction of the marble. The available data regarding the tensile
strength of the marble in its weak direction are not considered to be reliable. The
Poisson’s ratio is equal to 0.33 in both directions.

2.2. Titanium
Titanium bars, threaded along their whole length, are used to provide continuity between
the fractured pieces of the architectural members.

Commercially pure titanium (Grade 2, in accordance with ASTM B348) was selected
because of its high resistance to all types of corrosion, as well as for its physical and
mechanical properties that render it suitable for joining together pieces of the original
marble. In fact, the Poisson’s ratio of titanium (=0.32) is practically equal to that of the
marble. In addition, titanium exhibits a low coefficient of thermal expansion (=9x10-6
grad-1), sufficient (but not excessively high) mechanical strength and high elongation at
failure (20%÷22%). The yield strength of titanium is equal to 300 N/mm2, whereas its
tensile strength is equal to 420 N/mm2.

900
2.3. Cement mortar

As mentioned previously, titanium bars are inserted into drilled holes and connected to
the marble by means of white cement mortar. To this purpose, white Portland cement is
used. The mechanical properties of the mortar were measured on conventional
40x40x160 [mm] specimens. Its mean compressive strength at 28 days was equal to 12.1
N/mm2, whereas its tensile strength (in flexure) was equal to 0.96 N/mm2.

3. The specimen

Two pieces of Dionysos marble, 0.24x0.24x2.64 [m], were used for testing, one for each
loading direction. Both were cut from the same major piece of marble and they were free
of discontinuities and imperfections. Holes were drilled to the marble, perpendicular to
the marble face, to accommodate titanium dowels.

0.27 0.22 0.275 0.36 0.36 0.30 0.28

strong 6 6 8 6
direction 12 12 12
10 6 8 10 10 8
c=6db
0.385 0.24 0.265 0.415 0.272
0.225
0.3 0.3 0.33 0.285 0.285 0.245
strong 8 8 12 6
8 12 12
direction
c=2or4db 6 10 10 10 6
0.97 0.2 0.26 0.28 0.24

0.705 0.23 0.275 0.36 0.355 0.24


weak 10 6
8 8 10 12 10
direction, 12 12
6 8
c=6db
0.81 0.515 0.357 0.363 0.43

0.94 0.3 0.28 0.28 0.27


weak 8 10 10 8
10
direction 12
6 6 6 10 12 8
c=2or4db
0.59 0.15 0.15 0.2 0.285 0.285 0.24

Fig.1 Arrangement of dowels in the two faces of the two marble pieces (plan)

The diameter of holes was by 4mm larger than the diameter of the dowel. The distance
of consecutive holes (see Fig. 1) was large enough to avoid overlapping of marble cones

901
in case of cone failure. The depth of holes was equal to 10 times the dowel diameter.
The holes were cleaned from dust before the insertion of titanium dowels.

Four titanium bars, 2 meters long, with a diameter of 6mm, 8mm, 10mm and 12mm
respectively were used to form the dowels. The bars were first threaded and they were
subsequently cut into pieces. Each piece was of a length equal to 10 times the bar
diameter (equal to their embedment length) plus 50mm (equal to their protruding
length). Cement mortar was poured into each hole and the respective dowel was pushed-
in by hand. All tests were carried out 28 days after the application of dowels, to allow
for sufficient hardening and strength gaining of the mortar.

4. Experimental set up

Fig. 2 shows the set up used for testing the dowels: The specimen was placed
horizontally on the strong floor of the Laboratory. A steel ring (A) was screwed to the
dowel under testing. Subsequently, a steel plate (B), having a hole of diameter by 2mm
larger than the external diameter of the ring was placed on the specimen. Gradually
increasing displacements were applied by an MTS hydraulic actuator (C), with
maximum capacity of 500 KN, to the steel plate. The longitudinal axis of the actuator
coincided with the surface of the marble element, to avoid eccentric loading of the
dowels. The reaction was transmitted to one of the strong steel frames of the Laboratory

steel plate (B) steel ring (A)


MTS actuator (C)
LVDT (E)

LVDT (E)
Loading dowel
axis LVDT (E)
steel tube (D)
steel frame

steel frame

marble
element

strong floor

Fig. 2. Experimental set up (schematic)

by means of two horizontal steel tubes (D). The distance of the two tubes was large
enough to avoid any parasitic loading of the marble at the vicinity of the dowel under

902
testing. Three LVDTs (E) were used to record displacements of the steel plate and of the
marble element during testing.

5. Experimental results

5.1. Failure mode


Two failure modes were observed, depending on the cover of the dowels, as well as on
the direction of loading. Both failure modes are schematically shown in Fig. 3: Failure
mode I consists in fracture of the dowel at the surface of the marble element,
accompanied by limited in depth spalling of the marble. Failure mode II consists in the
separation of a cone of marble. The angle of separation was approximately equal to 23°,
whereas the depth of the cone was almost equal to 2c (c being the cover of the dowel).
It was observed (see also Table 1) that failure mode I occurred to all dowels to which a
cover equal to 6 times the bar diameter was provided. The same failure mode was
observed also for a cover equal to 4 times the bar diameter, when the dowels were
loaded against the strong direction of the marble. On the contrary, a cover equal to twice
the dowel diameter led to a cone failure. The same holds true for dowels with a cover of
4 times the bar diameter, loaded against the weak direction of the marble.

Failure
mode I

Failure
c ~23° mode II
~2c

Fig. 3 Modes of failure (schematic)

5.2. Shear force-shear displacement curves


In Fig. 4, some shear force vs. shear displacement curves are presented. It may be
observed that, independently of the failure mode that occurred, there is a practically
linear relationship between shear force and shear displacement up to approximately 80%
of the maximum mobilized shear force. A less steep curve follows up to failure. Since
for both failure modes failure is brittle, the falling branch was practically vertical.
In several cases, an initial part of the curve was recorded, for which shear displacement
was increasing without substantial increase of the mobilized shear resistance. This
feature is attributed to the fact that this initial part of loading is governed by the
characteristics of the cement mortar that lies between the dowel and the marble.
Expectedly, this layer of (much softer and less strong than the marble) mortar affects
more the behaviour of the smaller diameter dowels, as explained in section 6.1.

903
It may also be observed (see also Table 1) that the values of shear displacement at
failure are very scattered. In some cases, the failure was very sudden and, thus, the
displacement at failure was not reliably recorded.

6,6,w 6,6,s 6,4,w 6,4,s 6,2,w 6,2,s


8,6,w 8,6,s 8,4,w 8,4,s 10,6,w 10,6,s
10,4,w 10,2,w 10,2,s 12,6,s 12,4,w 12,4,s
28000 12,2,w 12,2,s
26000
24000
22000
20000
18000
shear force (N)

16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
shear displacement (mm)

Figure 4. Shear force vs. shear displacement curves

6. Discussion of test results

Concerning the failure mode of the dowel mechanism, it seems that the results obtained
within this program are in accordance with the available experimental data that regard
the dowel mechanism of steel bars embedded in concrete. In fact, numerous tests
(summarized by Vintzileou5) have shown that a concrete cover equal to 4 to 6 times the
bar diameter is sufficient for a concrete cone failure to be avoided.
Nevertheless, in case of steel bars embedded in concrete, failure mode I implies
simultaneous yielding of the bar and failure of the concrete due to local crushing under
the bar, thus ensuring a very ductile behaviour. On the contrary, the combination of a
relatively low strength dowel (made of titanium) and a very strong substrate (marble)
leads to fracture of the dowel, hence, to a brittle failure of the connection.

904
Table 1. Summary of test results
Dowe db c/db Load. Du (N) du (mm) Failure
l No. (mm) Dir. mode
1-6 6 6 W 3,780-6,230-6,910- 2.34-(*)-1.705- I
S 2,370-4,710-5,125 5.52-6.525-2.33
7-12 8 6 W 10,780-10,945-11,095- (*)-0.16-4.66- I
S 9,940-9,940-12,210 4.77-8.59-3.73
13-18 10 6 W 18,440-18,690-18,145- 7.49-0.865-(*)- I
S 18,430-16,290-18,340 9.12-6.75-10.49
19-24 12 6 W 22,520-24,365-23,430- 0.41-(*)-(*)- I
S 22,890-23,390-22,925 8.91-8.24-5.75
25 6 4 W 5,015 2.51 I
26 6 4 S 5,525 3.71 I
27-28 8 4 W 11,020-11,360 6.4-5.52 I
29-30 8 4 S 7,980-10,365 3.66-7.24 I
31 10 4 W 18,375 9.315 II
32 10 4 S 15,605 (*) I
33-34 12 4 W 21,045-20,270 1.945-3.4 II
35-36 12 4 S 23,210-27,235 20.0-8.23 I
37-38 6 2 W 2,210-2,285 1.11-0.405 II
39-40 6 2 S 3,210-2,630 3.48-3.148 II
41 8 2 W 6,370 (*) II
42 8 2 S 6,700 2.466 II
43-44 10 2 W 5,760-4,735 4.94-1.66 II
45-46 10 2 S 4,220-5,235 0.77-1.04 II
47 12 2 W 7,745 3.154 II
48 12 2 S 11,265 7.91 II
Notation
db: Nominal bar diameter
c: Cover of the dowel
Du: Maximum mobilized shear resistance
du: Shear displacement corresponding to Du
W,S: Loading against weak or strong direction of marble

6.1. Prediction of ultimate shear force-Failure mode I


In an attempt to predict the maximum shear force transferred by the titanium dowels, the
following two well known formulae were applied:
(a) Fracture of dowel in shear: Du=0.6Asft (1)
(b) Simultaneous fracture of the dowel in shear and crushing of the marble:
Du =1.3d b2 ft fm (2)

905
where,
As denotes the area of the dowel,
db denotes the diameter of the bar,
ft denotes the tensile strength of the dowel, and
fm denotes the compressive strength of the marble (=83 or 70 N/mm2 depending on the
loading direction)

Equations (1) and (2) were applied for the dowels that exhibited failure mode I. In Table
2, the predicted Du values are compared with the experimental ones.

One may observe that Equ. (2) clearly overestimates the maximum dowel resistance,
whereas the predictions of Equ. (1) are more accurate. The fact that Equ. (2) fails to
accurately predict Du insinuates that dowel and marble resistances cannot be
simultaneously mobilized due to the substantially diferring mechanical properties of the
two materials.

In addition, as shown in Tables 1 and 3, in case of 6mm dowels, less accurate prediction
of the maximum shear force is observed even in case of Equ. (1), due to the large scatter
of the experimental results. This large scatter is attributed to the more pronounced effect
of the cement mortar when it surrounds small diameter dowels. In fact, the inspection of
specimens after the completion of tests has proved that some 6mm dowels have failed
due to a combination of shear and bending. Those dowels failed under lower shear force
than expected for pure dowel action. It seems, therefore, that in order to take into
account this feature, adequate partial safety factor values should be adopted, when the
design shear resistance of a connection is calculated.

6.2. Prediction of ultimate shear force-Failure mode II


Although this failure mode is to be avoided by an appropriate arrangement of dowels,
the following empirical formula was derived for calculating the maximum shear
resistance of dowel to marble connection, in case of cone failure:
Du=1.625c2fmt (3)
where fmt denotes the tensile strength of the marble in the relevant loading direction.

Equ. (3) was applied to calculate the ultimate dowel resistance of the 15 bars that
exhibited a cone failure. A quite satisfactory agreement was observed between
calculated and experimental Du values. In fact, the mean value of the ratio between
calculated and experimental values of the shear resistance was equal to 0.97, whereas its
standard deviation is equal to 0.25.

906
Table 2. Failure mode I: Comparison between experimental and predicted ultimate shear
force values
Dowel db Loading exp. Du (N) calc.Du(N) calc.Du(N)
No. (mm) direction equ. (1) equ. (2)
1-3 6 W 3,780-6,230-6,910 6,173 6,953
4-6 6 S 2,370-4,710-5,125 6,173 7,571
7-9 8 W 10,780-10,945-11,095 10,794 12,157
10-12 8 S 9,940-9,940-12,210 10,794 13,238
13-15 10 W 18,440-18,690-18,145 16,570 18,662
16-18 10 S 18,430-16,290-18,340 16,570 20,321
19-21 12 W 22,520-24,365-23,430 23,883 26,898
22-24 12 S 22,890-23,390-22,925 23,883 29,289
25 6 W 5,015 6,173 6,953
26 6 S 5,525 6,173 7,571
27-28 8 W 11,020-11,360 10,794 12,157
29-30 8 S 7,980-10,365 10,794 13,238
32 10 S 15,605 16,570 20,321
35-36 12 S 23,210-27,235 23,883 29,289

Table 3. Application of Equs (1) and (2): Statistical data


Equation (1) Equation (2)
pred.Du/exp.Du pred.Du/exp.Du
Diameter mean standard COV mean standard COV
(mm) value deviation value deviation
6 1.37 0.54 0.40 1.62 0.69 0.42
8 1.03 0.13 0.12 1.22 0.19 0.15
10 0.94 0.07 0.08 1.11 0.12 0.11
12 1.01 0.06 0.06 1.20 0.08 0.07
All 1.09 0.31 0.29 1.29 0.39 0.31

7. Conclusions

Regarding the dowel action of titanium bars connecting marble elements, the following
conclusions can be drawn:
1. A cover equal to 4 or 6 times the dowel diameter is required to avoid a cone failure
of the marble, depending on whether the dowel is loaded against the strong or the
weak direction of the marble.
2. When sufficient cover is provided to the bars, failure of the dowels occurs, whereas
the substrate remains practically unaffected.

907
3. In case of very small dowel diameters, the maximum mobilized shear resistance is
substantially affected by the cement mortar used to connect the dowels to the marble.
4. The maximum dowel resistance can be quite accurately predicted by means of simple
formulae, for both failure mechanisms.

8. References

1. Zambas C., “Principles for the structural restoration of the Acropolis monuments”,
The Engineering Geology of Ancient Works, Monuments and Historical Sites,
(Edited by P.Marinos and G.C.Koukis), Balkema, Rotterdam, 1988, pp. 1813-1818.
2. Zambas C., “Structural repairs to the monuments of the Acropolis-The Parthenon”,
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 1992, pp. 166-176.
3. Vardoulakis, I. And Kourkoulis, S.K., “Mechanical properties of Dionysos marble”,
Final Report of the Environment Project EV5V-CT93-0300 “Monuments under
seismic action”, Nat. Tech. Univ. of Athens, Athens, 1997.
4. Vardoulakis, I., Stavropoulou, M., and Papadopoulos, Ch., “Direct tension tests on
Dionysos marble”, EU DG XII SMT Programme No SMT4-CT96-2130, Final
Report, 2000
5. Vintzileou, E., “Shear transfer by dowel action and friction as related to size effects”,
CEB Bulletin No 237, “Concrete tension and size effects”, 1999, pp. 53-77.

9. Acknowledgments

The materials needed for testing (Dionysos marble and titanium bars) were offered by
the Committee for Conservation of the Acropolis Monuments.

908
CASE STUDY -APPLICATION OF HIGH STRENGTH POST-
TENSIONED RODS FOR ANCHORING AERIAL TRAM
STRUCTURES TO ROCK
George Patrick Wheatley
Heery International, Inc.

Abstract
Forces generated by large aerial trams with rigid track cable end anchorage can be
significant at locations where the cables anchor to the concrete. These forces are
typically accounted for by providing mass concrete foundations or reinforced concrete
mats and rock anchors.

This paper presents a case study of an 80 person aerial tram located at Stone Mountain,
Georgia, USA. This tram’s reinforced concrete bollards used high strength post-
tensioned rock anchors to anchor the bollards. This system minimized the amount of
concrete transported to the top of the mountain and the impact to the environmentally
sensitive mountaintop area

Addressed is a description of the post-tensioned rock anchor/concrete bollard design


philosophy and system behavior. Focus is made on strength of rock, high strength rod
and rock anchor grout characteristics, reinforcement details for localized concrete post-
tensioning stresses, the post-tensioning operation, and an overview of admixtures used in
the long distance concrete pump mix design.

1. Introduction

The Stone Mountain Aerial Tram was designed and constructed in 1996 as a
replacement of the existing tram which was constructed in 1962. Located adjacent to the
existing tram, it consists of an upper station at elevation 692m, one intermediate tower
with two 1.8m diameter pipe columns, and a lower station at elevation 474m. There are
two tracks that have two, 49mm diameter track cables each.

The project was on an accelerated schedule and required close attention to construction
materials and procedures in order to meet the aggressive schedule in time for the Atlanta

909
1996 Olympic Games. The new tram was scheduled to carry the Olympic Flame to the
mountain top for it‘s journey to Atlanta‘s Olympic Stadium.

Feasibility studies for the tram replacement were conducted previously to determine
options of everyday visitor transportation to the mountaintop and the most economically
viable means to do so. Options included a funicular tram, aerial tram with
counterweight/hydraulic track cables, and an aerial tram with rigid track cables. The
most viable choice for the configuration at Stone Mountain was to use an aerial tram
with rigid track cables (haul ropes have counterweights).

The tram manufacturer selected was VonRoll out of Seilbahnen, Switzerland who
contracted with North+Perret SA, out of Neuchatel, Switzerland for the cable and
intermediate tower analysis.

2. Engineering

2.1 Configuration/Criteria
Because of the rigid attachment of the track cables, forces generated by the tram when
between supports became significant at the bollards (upper and lower station anchor
points). The forces from the analysis to be used in design were 1690 KN per track
which generated approximately 1290 KN at each anchor location at the base of the
bollards.

Adding to the complexity of the forces was configuring the bollard structure at the
mountaintop around existing operational facilities. These facilities included a public
television transmitter station, public radio transmitter station, emergency medical
transmitter relay station, cellular telephone broadcast grids, and existing tram. All of
which had to remain in service and effected the design and procedures used to construct
the bollard structure.

To accommodate these facilities, the new upper bollard structure was placed behind the
existing mountain top facilities and cantilevered over those one and two story structures.
This cantilever turned out to be approximately 12m where the track cables attached and
created large overturning forces. Because of concern to minimize the scarring impact of
new construction on the mountain, reducing the footprint of the bollard structure was a
priority. This necessitated using high strength rock anchors to resist the overturning
forces.

Rigid track cable attachment also created large sliding forces on the bollard structures
that would have to be resisted by either blasting and socketting the foundation into rock
or, use of post-tensioned rock anchors to essentially clamp the bollards to the rock
utilizing Sliding Resistance (R) = µN, where µ is the coefficient of friction between
concrete and rock of 0.4 and N is the post-tensioning force. To minimize impact to the
mountaintop, the post-tensioning option was used.

910
2.2 The Rock
Geologically, the project site is in the Piedmont Physiographic Area of the North
American Continent which is underlain by igneous and metamorphic rock formations
whose age is around 600 million years. Within this region, the Stone Mountain
formation is predominantly an intrusive dome mass igneous structure.

Five rock cores of this igneous mass were taken in accordance with ASTM D 21131 at
depths varying from 2m to approximately 5.5m at the proposed location of the lower
station.

All samples extracted from depths shallower than 2m were observed to be moderately
soft to moderately hard gray fractured granite. All samples extracted from depths deeper
than 2m were observed to be moderately hard gray continuous granite.

Rock samples were then sent to the laboratory to determine the ultimate unconfined
compressive strength, unit weight, REC (recovery) and RQD (rock quality designation).
Rock lab results are as follows:

Approximate Unit Compressive


Depth (m) Weight (KN/m3) Strength (MPa) REC RQD

Above 2m 24. 26. 100% 12.5%


Below 2m 25. 53. 100% 100%

RQD ratings below 25% are generally considered to be poor quality fragmented material
and somewhat undesirable. A RDQ rating of 100% is considered to be rock of excellent
quality. The 25% RDQ rock at the lower station was removed down to the 100% RDQ
rock and at the upper station, the 100% RDQ rock was already at the surface.

2.3 The Rods


To resist overturning from the forces generated by the track cables, mass rock had to be
engaged. To accomplish this, rock anchor rods were embedded deep into the rock mass
and attached to the rock at the base of their embedment. This entailed a portion of the
rod that is bonded at the base of the embedment and remainder of the rod unbonded (free
stressing length). By doing this, a wedge of rock is engaged starting at the top of the
bonded area and extending to the surface.

Two rock failure modes were investigated: one of an individual anchor failing under a
rock wedge within an included angle of 90° projecting from the top of the bonded area
and, one of a group effect that used the same 90° included angle failure plane which
essentially became a truncated pyramid of the group of anchors. This failure plane was
determined by the geotechnical engineer based on subsurface investigations and

911
laboratory testing. Calculations using the established rock unit weight indicated the
truncated pyramid condition controlled the design embedment length.

To determine grout-to-rock bond length of the rock anchor and diameter of hole, on-site
testing was conducted to determine the bond strength between the rock and grout. This
testing consisted of drilling and grouting with a non-shrink hydraulic cement grout
three, 63mm diameter test holes around a 25mm ASTM A7222 Grade 1034MPa all-
thread bar. Test cubes were taken at the time of grouting and when the test cube
compressive strength reached 28MPa the reinforcing bar was pulled with a calibrated
hydraulic jack until failure of the bond between the grout and rock occurred. The
allowable working bond strength was then determined to be 1.4 MPa and incorporated a
factor of safety of two.

Under North+Perret‘s worst load condition (there were 65 loading combinations), it was
found that under the group effect that a 130mm diameter hole with 3m of bond length
and 8m free stressing length would be required. Calculations indicated the upper bollard
required a mat foundation with 10 rock anchors at 2.5m on center each way, the
intermediate tower required two mat foundations with 4 anchors each, and the lower
bollard a mat foundation with 8 anchors.

The rods used for the rock anchors were 64mm diameter 1034 MPa all-thread rod that
conformed to ASTM A6153 and ASTM 722. Threads for these rods were cold cut and
were specified to be throughout the entire length; including the free stressing area.
While continuous threading increased the initial cost of the rods, adjustments of length
in the field because of increasing bond lengths due to the type of rock material
encountered, varying surface contours, and construction tolerances more than offset the
additional initial cost.

Anchor holes were drilled with a self propelled mechanical air drill and the anchors
included a plastic grout tube affixed from the bottom of the bar and extended to the
anchor bearing plate. To provide free stressing length, anchors had mastic filled PVC
sleeves along the entire free stressing length.

2.4 The Rock Anchor Grout


Under normal grouting procedures in mass rock, the hole in the rock is flushed with
water to remove laintent dust from drilling. For this project, it was not allowed to flush
holes due to potential contamination of adjacent wet weather pools by rock dust/drill
hydraulics. These pools were classified as environmentally sensitive spawning areas for
seasonal small freshwater shrimp.

Because of this condition, the grout mix design had to be formulated with additional
water content to account for the residual dust in the holes. Shrinkage of the grout was of
great concern and, the grout properties of the on-site field testing had to be replicated
for the test data to remain valid. Also, during the original on-site testing, holes were

912
flushed with water. Another concern because of schedule, was that a high early
compressive strength would be required which would increase the potential for
shrinkage and was not used in the original test configuration.

To address these concerns, a grout mix was designed using an ASTM C 1504 type III
portland cement (high early strength), fly ash (pozzolan), masonry sand conforming to
ASTM C335 (a readily available sand to reduce shrinkage), and a high water/cement
ratio of 0.55 (to provide additional moisture to compensate for residual drill dust in the
holes). Potential shrinkage of the mix was further reduced by adding a shrinkage
compensating admixture that was specified to conform to ASTM C 9376. A trial mix of
the grout was made and test cubes taken of the grout mix design.

During curing of the test cubes in the prism molds, it was observed that the exposed top
of the test specimens domed during hydration indicating a slight expansion of the grout
during curing and no shrinkage. Laboratory compression tests indicated 6 day break
compressive strengths of 36 MPa, well above the 28 MPa strength of the grout used for
determining rock bond strength. Based on the test results, approval was given to the
contractor to proceed with installation of the anchors.

2.5 The Concrete Reinforcement


The reinforced concrete bollard structures were designed to resist track cable forces by
shear wall behavior with pure tension elements (as defined in ACI 3187, Section 12.15)
on the boundaries. These tension elements extended from track anchor attachment to the
mat foundations at the base and are 35M reinforcing bars conforming to ASTM A615 .
All tension elements used threaded mechanical couplers at bar splice locations and were
staggered in accordance with ACI 318, Section 12.15. The tension forces applied to the
mat foundations are resisted through bending and shear to the post-tensioned rock
anchors.

For the localized post-tensioning forces on the mats at the rock anchor attachments,
additional reinforcement had to added to account for bursting forces. Instead of using a
tight wound, continuous spiral wound sets of reinforcing ties around each rock anchor in
the mat, pipe sleeves were used with steel studs attached around the outside perimeter of
the pipes. These sleeves were sized as freestanding columns supporting the post-
tensioning load and stud size and quantity determined by allowable stud shear in
concrete of 70 KN/stud. Length of stud was determined by assuming a shear failure
plane at stud length/2 and concrete capacity of φ2(f‘c)(perimeter length)(depth).

2.6 The Post-tensioning Operation


Two post-tensioning operations occurred: one in which the anchors were installed and
post-tensioned and proof-tested prior to constructing the reinforced concrete bollards
and, one in which the anchors were post-tensioned and locked-off after the bollards were
constructed.

913
Proof-testing of the anchors prior to constructing the bollards was an additional step but
in the event of anchor failure, it facilitated reinstallation/replacement of anchors while
drilling and grouting equipment was still on-site and anchor locations were readily
accessible. The proof-test configuration consisted of calibrated, 227 tonne (t) hydraulic,
center pull rams (jacks) reacting against a grouted 76mm thick steel bearing plate. All
anchors were loaded in accordance with ANSI B77.18 in increments equal to 25% of
the design load up to the proof-test load of 133% of the design load (1721KN).
Movement of the anchor bar was monitored by an independently mounted micrometer
dial gauge which measured movement of the top of the anchor and readings were taken
at the time of load application and after 5 minutes. To determine reserve strength of the
anchors, four anchors were stressed above the 133% to maximum capacity of the rams of
2224KN which was still below the ACI maximum jacking force of 0.8fpu = 3457KN.

Using load vs. displacement data, curves were plotted and that indicated direct linear
behavior through the loading cycle including the four anchors jacked above 0.6fpu.
Measurements indicated no positive creep (pullout) occurred and rebound was to 0. All
anchors were found to be acceptable and approval was given to proceed with
construction of the reinforced concrete bollards.

Upon completion and acceptance of the bollard and tower construction, the anchors
were post-tensioned using a calibrated system of two, 91t hydraulic jacks connected in
parallel. Each anchor was stressed to a load of 1512KN (= 0.44f pu) and the anchor nuts
were tightened (locked-off) while the load was held.

3. Construction

Construction of the bollard and tower at the top of the mountain required evaluating
options to get concrete to the top. One option was to batch (mix) concrete on top of the
mountain which was quickly ruled out because of the environmental issues. Another
option was to airlift concrete from the base of the mountain to the top which was also
quickly ruled out because of expense. The last option considered was to pump the
concrete up the mountain and turned out to be the most viable option it terms of meeting
budget and schedule.

To accomplish pumping concrete 600m horizontally and 140m vertically, it required a


pump mix that had the characteristics of low set time (to avoid setting in the line), high
early compressive strength (to meet schedule), flowable (to minimize friction forces in
the pump line), and minimal setting shrinkage (to minimize cracking in the exposed
concrete structure).

This pump mix had two primary admixtures and adjustments were made to the
aggregates. As with most pump mixes, adjustments to the aggregates consisted of a
smaller large aggregate and natural sand in greater proportion for the fine aggregate. For
the sand, natural sand has smooth edges together with greater proportion increased the

914
pumpablity of the mix. To further increase pumpability and obtain the desired set
characteristics, a high-range water reducing admixture (superplasticizer) conforming to
ASTM A4949 type F was added. This admixture has the characteristics of placing the
concrete in an almost fluid state for pumping and accelerates set time but, could cause
segregation of cement and aggregate that could clog the pump line. To offset this
segregation characteristic, a water reducing and retarder adimix conforming to ASTM
494 type A and D was used. This admix increases the gel content of the concrete which
adds to internal cohesiveness and retards the set time allowing longer time to pump and
place.

Performance of this mix was better than expected. It pumped well and would remain
plastic for an extended period of time and obtain a high early strength. During
construction, it was noted that the pour of the bollard mat concrete remained plastic 24
hours after placement and then hydrated to a 3 day strength of 24MPa with no
significant shrinkage cracking. 28-day strength test results for this mix averaged
34MPa, well above the required 28MPa for the bollard and tower structures.

4. Conclusion

This moderately sized project provided some interesting challenges to the design and
construction aspects of completing a project successfully. As with many projects, testing
was a very important factor in evaluating materials and verifying design assumptions.

The Stone Mountain Aerial Tram project met it’s budget and completed on schedule in
time to transport the Olympic Flame to the mountain top.

915
5. References

1. ASTM D 2133, Standard Specification for Practice for Diamond Core


Drilling for Site Investigation.
2. ASTM A 722, Standard Specification for Uncoated High-Strength Bars for
Prestressing Concrete.
3. ASTM A 615, Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain Billet-Steel Bars
for Concrete Reinforcement.
4. ASTM C 150, Standard Specification for Portland Cement.
5. ASTM C 33, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregate.
6. ASTM C 937, Standard Specification for Grout Fluidifier for Preplaced-
Aggregate Concrete.
7. ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich.
8. ANSI B77.1, Aerial Tramways, Aerial Lifts, Surface Lifts, Tows and
Conveyors - Safety Requirements, American National Standards Institute,
Washington, DC.
9. ASTM A 494, Standard Specification for Chemical Admixtures for Concrete.

Note: ASTM is the American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.

916
BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF FASTENINGS WITH
CONCRETE SCREWS
Jürgen H.R. Küenzlen* and Thomas M. Sippel**
*
Institute of Construction Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany
**
Engineering Office Eligehausen and Sippel, Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Concrete screws are a new fastening system easy to install. Concrete screws are screwed
into predrilled cylindrical holes. During installation, concrete screws cut a thread into
the wall of the drilled hole. Therefore, tensile loads are transferred into the base material
by mechanical interlock. The load transfer mechanism is similar to that of deformed
reinforcing bars cast into concrete.

In the present paper the results of installation and tension tests in non-cracked and
cracked concrete are presented. Furthermore, the test results are compared with the
prediction of the CC-method for the concrete cone failure load. It is shown that the CC-
method cannot be used for the design of fastenings with concrete screws without some
modification.

1. Introduction

Concrete screws should be easy to install and the torque moment at failure should be
sufficiently high to prevent failure of the fastening during installation. Therefore the
behaviour of concrete screws during installation was investigated in numerous tests.
Varied were the types of screws, type of electrical-screw-gun, drill hole diameter,
strength and composition of concrete. The torque moments at correct installation and at
failure were measured. Furthermore, a large number of tension tests were performed in
non-cracked and cracked concrete. Varied parameters were the type of screw, their
diameter and embedment depth, installation torque moment and crack width. In this
paper the results of these tests are presented.

919
2. Tests

2.1 Setting tests


At the Institute of Construction Materials at the University of Stuttgart several setting
tests in concrete with a cube strength fcc ~ 30 N/mm² and 60 N/mm² with different
grading curves were carried out. The concrete screws portrayed in Figure 1 (drill hole
diameter d0=10mm) were installed into concrete slabs which were produced from
concrete with a grading curve BC8 (aggregates with maximum size 8mm) to AB32
(aggregates with maximum size 32mm) according to DIN 1045. Natural round
aggregates from the Rhine valley were used. Moreover, the drill hole diameter was
varied. Measured were the torque moment for correct installation and the failure moment
of the concrete screw. Digital torque wrenches were used for this.

Figure 2 shows a concrete screw which cut a thread into a large aggregate. Figure 3
shows the thread cut into the concrete by the used concrete screws. The maximum
aggregate size in these tests was 16mm. In order to cut a thread into the concrete, a
certain torque moment is necessary. Depending on type of screw, composition and
strength of concrete and the drill hole diameter the torque moment for correct
installation can vary in wide range (Figure 4).

Figure 1: Concrete screws used in the setting tests [1]

Figure 2: Concrete screw in a big piece of concrete aggregate [1]

920
Figure 3: Threads cut into the wall of the drilled hole using different concrete screws
[1]

2.1.1 Influence of concrete composition and drill hole diameter on installation


and failure torque
If during installation the torque is increased beyond the value which is valid for correct
installation, failure may occur by shearing off the thread cut into the concrete or by steel
failure. The torque moment for shearing off the thread cut into the concrete depends
significantly on the design of the concrete screw. Further influencing factors are the hole
diameter (d0), concrete strength and maximum aggregate size (BC 8, fcc = 20,2N/mm²
and AB 32, fcc = 70N/mm²). The failure mode “shearing off the thread” should be
prevented because in this case the tension resistance is reduced almost to zero. This can
be achieved by increasing the embedment depth.

80
Typ 1 Typ 2
70

60

50
TE [Nm]

40

30

20

10

0 BC 8 BC 8 AB 32 AB 32
dcut = 10,40mm dcut = 10,06mm dcut = 10,42mm dcut = 10,08mm
fcc = 20N/mm² fcc = 20N/mm² fcc = 70N/mm² fcc = 70N/mm²

Figure 4: Influences on the installation torque moment TE (do = 10mm; hef = 45mm)
[2]

921
250
steel failure, Typ 1
steel failure, Typ 2
shearing of thread, Typ 2

200

150
TU [Nm]

100

50
BC 8 BC 8 AB 32 AB 32
dcut = 10,40mm dcut = 10,06mm dcut = 10,42mm dcut = 10,08mm
fcc = 20N/mm² fcc = 20N/mm² fcc = 70N/mm² fcc = 70N/mm²
0

Figure 5: Influences on the failure torque moment TU (d0=10mm, hef = 45mm) [2]

2.1.2 Influence of electrical-screw-gun on installation and failure


In [3] tests with 2 different electrical-screw-guns were carried out. The setting tests were
carried out in low-strength concrete (fcc ~ 20N/mm²) with natural round aggregates in
the range of the grading curve BC8. A torque moment was put onto the screws with the
electrical-screw-gun until the concrete screws started to shear off the thread. In Figure 6
the time until failure of both concrete screws with the used electrical-screw-guns is
portrayed. It can be seen that the time tK until failure depends significantly on the type of
screw and is also influenced by the used screw gun.

60
Typ 1

Typ 2
50

40
tK [sec]

30

20

10

electrical-screw-gun 1 electrical-screw-gun 2
0

Figure 6: Influence of electrical-screw-gun on the time until failure tK (d0=10mm, hef


= 45mm) [2]
In practice it may happen that after installation the screw is partly unscrewed (e.g. to
ease the installation of all fasteners of a group). Additional tests with screws which were
slightly unscrewed and then torqued again show that the time to shear off the thread is

922
significantly reduced compared to the results shown in Figure 6. If the installation of the
screw is relatively easy then it is difficult to switch off the screw-gun exactly when the
correct installation is achieved. Therefore, a certain minimum time should be required to
shear off the thread in the concrete in order to prevent this failure mode in practice. This
requirement can be achieved by a proper embedment depth.

2.2 Pull-out-test under static tension load


Static tension load tests were carried out in cracked and non-cracked concrete. The test
equipment shown in Figure 7 was used. The load and the displacements were
continuously measured electronically and recorded. Moreover, the crack width was
recorded for the tests in cracked concrete. The embedment depth, the type of concrete
screw, the installation torque moment and the crack width were varied. The diameter of
the screw and the drill hole diameter (d0=10mm) were kept constant.
Figure 8 shows typical load-displacement curves of tests with concrete screws with an
embedment depth at hef = 45mm.
30
1

2
25
3

4
20
5
load [kN]

15

10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
displacement [mm]

Figure 7: Test equipment which Figure 8: Typical load-displacement


was used [4] curves (hef = 45mm) [1]

2.2.1 Influence of type of concrete screw on failure load


According to Figure 9, the failure load is significantly influenced by the embedment
depth. A further major influencing factor is the type of screw. This may be due to the
dimensions of the screws (external and core diameter) and how precisely the threads are
cut into the concrete. However, further research is needed to clarify the reasons for the
different behaviour of different concrete screws. This will be carried out within the near
future. FEM modelling will be done as well.

923
60

50

hef = 85mm
40
Nu [kN]

hef = 65mm
30

hef = 45mm
20

10 hef = 35mm

Typ 1 Typ 2
0

Figure 9: Influence of the embedment depth (hef) and the concrete screw type on the
failure load (Nu) in non-cracked concrete (d0 = 10mm, fcc = 30N/mm²) [1]

2.2.2 Influence of embedment depth on failure load


Figure 10 shows that the failure load in non-cracked concrete increases continually with
increasing embedment depth. Steel failure was achieved for part of the tests. The deeper
a concrete screw is screwed into the concrete, the more threads are cut into the concrete.
Therefore, the mechanical interlock improves and the failure load increases.

60

50

40
Nu [kN]

30

20

10

0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
h ef [mm]

Figure 10: Influence of embedment depth (hef) on the failure load (screw type 2, fcc =
30N/mm²; d0 = 10mm) [1]

2.2.3. Influence of installation torque moment on failure load


To clarify the influence of the installation torque moment on pullout load, tests in [3]
were carried out in low-strength concrete. Concrete screws (type 1) were installed at
different embedment depths and torqued with installation torques Tinst = 30Nm to
105Nm. Figure 11 shows the results of these tests. It demonstrates that the ultimate

924
failure load is not much influenced by the installation torque moment, provided the
threads have not been damaged significantly during installation.
50
Tinst = 30Nm
Tinst = 80Nm
Tinst = 105Nm
40

30
Fu [kN]

20

10

0
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
hef [mm]

Figure 11: Influence of installation torque moment (Tinst) and embedment depth (hef) on
failure load (Fu) (fcc = 30N/mm², d0=10mm, screw type 1) [2]

2.2.4. Influence of the kind of installation


In order to check the influence of the kind of installation on the failure load, tests were
carried out in [3] with concrete screws in low-strength concrete. The screws (type 1,
d0=10mm) were installed at two embedment depths using an electrical-screw-gun or a
torque wrench. When using the screw gun the installation was intentionally prolonged to
11 seconds after reaching the correct installation. With the torque wrench the installation
torque was varied. According to Figure 12 the failure load is not much influenced by the
type of installation. Precondition is of course that the threads in the concrete are not
significantly damaged during installation.
30

screw-gun, tK = 11s

25 torque wrench, Tinst = 30Nm

torque wrench, Tinst = 105Nm

20
Fu [kN]

15

10

0
35 40 45 50 55
hef [mm]

Figure 12: Influence of kind of installation moment on the failure load [2]

2.2.5 Influence of crack width


Tests in cracked concrete with a crack width of 0,3mm and 0,5mm were carried out in
low-strength concrete [6]. Figure 13 shows typical load displacement curves in non-

925
cracked and cracked concrete. In Figure 14 the measured failure loads are plotted as a
function of the crack width. Figure 13 and 14 demonstrate that cracks in the concrete
influence the behaviour of concrete screws almost in the same way as with undercut
anchors: the anchor stiffness is slightly reduced and the failure load is decreased
compared to non-cracked concrete. This could be expected because of the load transfer
mechanism “mechanical interlock”.
30
hef = 65 mm
dcut = 10,25 mm
25 fcc200 = 30 N/mm²
Aggregate Size AB 16
uncracked concrete
20
cracked concrete ∆w = 0,3mm
Last [kN]

15

10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Verschiebung [mm]

Figure 13: Typical load-displacement curves in cracked and non-cracked


concrete [5]

50

40
Failure Load Nu [kN]

30

20

10

0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6
crack width ∆w [mm]

Figure 14: Influence of crack width on failure load [6]

926
2.2.6 Failure mechanism of concrete screws
In the tests in non-cracked concrete the concrete screws failed at low embedment depth
due to a complete concrete cone failure (Figure 15). With increasing embedment depth
the concrete cone failure depth became smaller (Figure 16).

Figure 15: Concrete failure cone at hef = 45mm [1]

Figure 16: Concrete failure cone at hef = 85mm [1]

3. CC-method used for concrete screws

For the design of fastenings with metal anchors the CC-method which is described in
detail in [7, 8] is used. To check whether the equation for concrete cone failure given in
[7, 8] can also be used for concrete screws all results of tests in non-cracked concrete
were plotted in Figure 17 as a function of the embedment depth. In Figure 17 the
influence of type of concrete screw on the failure load is neglected. The figure shows
that the measured failure loads are smaller than the concrete cone failure load of metal
anchors predicted by the CC-method. This can be explained by the failure mechanism
(compare chapter 2.2.6).

The test results show that the CC-method cannot be used for concrete screws without
some modifications. Corresponding investigations are under way.

927
120

100

80 Nu,cc = 13,5 * β w * h1,5


ef
Nu [kN]

60

40

20

0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
hef [mm]

Figure 17: Results of tests [1] with different concrete screws in uncracked low-
strength concrete and comparison with prediction by the CC-method for
concrete cone failure.

4. Summary

Concrete screws are a new fastening system easy to install. Concrete screws are screwed
into predrilled cylindrical holes. During installation, concrete screws cut a thread into
the wall of the drilled hole. Therefore, tensile loads are transferred into the base material
by mechanical interlock. The load transfer mechanism is similar to that of deformed
reinforcing bars cast into concrete.
In the present paper the results of installation and tension tests in non-cracked and
cracked concrete are presented. Furthermore, the test results are compared with the
prediction of the CC-method for the concrete cone failure load. It is shown that the CC-
method cannot be used for the design of fastenings with concrete screws without some
modification.
Much more research is needed to clarify the behaviour of concrete screws in non
cracked and cracked concrete.

5. Acknowledgement

The primary funding for this research was provided by the Ludwig Hettich GmbH &
Co., Toge-Dübel A. Gerhard KG and the Adolf Würth GmbH & Co. KG. The support
of these manufacturers is very much appreciated. Special thanks are also accorded to
Beate Vladika who spent many hours in improving the English.

928
6. References

[1] Küenzlen, J.H.R.; Eligehausen, R. 2001


Tragverhalten von Schraubdübeln in niederfestem Beton, Bericht über
Ausziehversuche mit Schraubdübeln; W8/1-01/1 (in preparation)

[2] Küenzlen, J.H.R; Eligehausen, R. 2001


Tragverhalten von Schraubdübeln in ungerissenem Beton; Einflüsse auf das
Setzverhalten von Schraubdübeln in Beton und die Auswirkungen auf die
Ausziehlasten; W8/2-01/2 (in preparation)

[3] Küenzlen, J.H.R; Eligehausen, R. 2001


Bericht über Setz- und Ausziehversuche in ungerissenem Beton mit
Schraubdübeln; AF01/01-E00202/1 (not published)

[4] Müßig, M.G. 2001


Tragverhalten von Schraubdübeln in ungerissenem Beton; Untersuchung
verschiedener Einflüsse auf das Eindrehverhalten und Entwicklung eines
Sicherheitskonzeptes im Versagensfall Durchdrehen. Diplomarbeit, Institut für
Werkstoffe im Bauwesen, Universität Stuttgart (in preparation)

[5] Eligehausen, R.; Hofacker, I.N.; Spieth, H.A.; Küenzlen, J.H.R. 2000
Neue Entwicklungen in der Befestigungstechnik
Tagungsband, IBK-Bau-Fachtagung 263; Dübel und Befestigungstechnik 2000

[6] Küenzlen, J.H.R.; Eligehausen, R. 2000


Forschungsdatenbank Schraubdübel Version 1.5 (not published)

[7] Fuchs, W.; Eligehausen, R.; Breen, J.E. 1995


Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) Approach for Fastening to Concrete. ACI
Structural Journal, Vol. 92 (1995), No. 1, S 73-94

[8] Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R. 2000


Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und Mauerwerkbau
Ernst & Sohn 2000

929
BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF ANCHORS FOR LIFTING
AND HANDLING IN PRECAST CONCRETE ELEMENTS

Dieter Lotze
Halfen GmbH & Co. KG, Wiernsheim, Germany

Abstract
Lifting anchors are widely used in the precast concrete industry. If anchors are failing,
lives are endangered and considerable material damage can occur. Therefore anchors for
lifting and handling should be chosen carefully and the anchor design should be done by
engineers. Technically, three major questions have to be answered:

a) How to determine the type and magnitude of loads and how to distribute it on the
anchors?
The most important loads like self weight, adhesion, form friction and dynamic
actions will be described and discussed

b) What are the possible failure mechanisms and which one is governing?
The most important failure mechanisms depending on the shape, size and
reinforcement of the precast element, on the lifting situation and equipment, and on
the type and size of the anchor will be described and discussed. Failure can occur by
fracture of the anchor, fracture of the reinforcement, breakout of a concrete cone,
pullout of the anchor, pullout of the reinforcement, splitting of the concrete or local
lateral breakout of the concrete.

c) How to get characteristic resistance values for the different failure modes?
Design models which allow design by calculation are only available for very few
situations and failure modes. In all other cases values are taken from tests performed
by anchor manufacturers or by precast concrete manufacturers. A common basis how
to perform tests and how to evaluate the results is not established up to now.
Different test methods will be shown. Their significance on real applications and the
effect of the test method on the results will be discussed.

930
1. Introduction

Precast elements are taking an increasing part in concrete construction. These elements
have to be moved, in the precast plant as well as on the construction site using cranes or
similar devices. In most cases cast in lifting anchors are used to connect the elements to
the lifting equipment. The design of anchors for lifting and handling of precast concrete
elements is not regulated in European design standards because the anchors are used
temporarily and not loaded permanently. National regulations show major differences
between European countries. Nevertheless in case of an anchor failure, lives can be
endangered and considerable economic damage can be done.

2. Origin, Magnitude and Distribution of Loads

Lifting anchors are loaded by the self weight of the concrete element, by forces due to
adhesion and form friction and by dynamic actions due to acceleration.

The self weight of the precast concrete element can be calculated using a specific gravity
of 23 to 25 kN/m³ for normal weight concrete, depending on the percentage of
reinforcement. Mostly this value is already known from the static calculation.

Inertia forces act when the element is accelerated or decelerated by the lifting equipment.
These forces must also be transferred by the lifting anchors. The size of the inertia forces
scatters between 5 and 50 % of the elements weight depending on the type of crane and
the ratio between the weight of the element and the capacity of the crane. Under normal
conditions it should be conservative to calculate inertia forces with 30 % of the self
weight . Additional considerations have to be made for special situations like transport of
elements through rough terrain, for example with an excavator. Inertia forces up to
300 % of the self weight can be expected in such cases.

When the concrete element is lifted out of the mould, forces between the concrete and
the formwork surface, due to adhesion and form friction must be added to the self
weight. As long as the formwork is fixed to the floor or heavy enough to stay in place (it
normally is), dynamic actions must not be considered together with adhesion and form
friction. Only in cases where the form is not fixed and not heavy enough to stay in place,
inertia forces have to be taken into account on the mass of the element and on the mass
of the formwork as well. Later, when the element is moved in the precast plant or on site,
self weight and inertia forces both have to be considered.

After the estimation of the forces acting on the element, forces on each anchor have to be
calculated, taking into account the position of anchors, number and length of ropes or
chains and the static system. In most cases, the aim is to have a statically determinate
system, because then the forces on each anchor and on each rope or chain can be clearly
calculated. In statically indeterminate systems, load distribution depends on length and
stiffness of the ropes, which are mostly unknown. If statically indeterminate systems are

931
used for special reasons, only the statically determinate part should be used in
calculating the load distribution, and additional ropes or chains should only be used for
stabilisation.

Figure 1a: Figure 1b:


statically indeterminate system Statically determinate systems

Vges Vges Vges

F δ
F F
δ F
β β
β F
F F
G G F
F G
F
4 anchors loaded
Only 2 anchors 4 anchors loaded
loaded

3. Failure Mechanisms of Lifting Anchors

Analogous to other fastening elements, many different failure modes are possible
depending on the anchor itself, the concrete, edge distances, anchor spacing, loading
direction and, of course, reinforcement.

Within the limits of this paper, the failure modes described in the following will only
refer to common lifting situations with anchors in slabs, beams and walls loaded in
tension, shear, or combined tension and shear. The following drawings and photos will
illustrate the various failure modes obtained in anchor testing.

3.1 Failure in pure tension:

Figure 2: Anchor failure and steel failure of special hanger reinforcement /2/, /3/

932
Figure 3: Concrete cone failure for anchors in top surface (lifting of slabs) /3/

Figure 4: Concrete cone in tension for anchors in edge surface (lifting of walls) /2/

Figure 5: Splitting failure in tension for anchors in edge surface /2/

933
Figure 6: Lateral Blow Out failure of the concrete /4/

3.2 Failure in pure shear


Pure shear can occur, when wall elements have to be erected from the mould, when
anchors in beams and columns are placed on the side surface and when walls are
mounted with the tilt up method (almost pure shear).

Figure 7: Erection of wall element, Small cone Figure 8: Steel failure in shear /3/
starting at anchor position, big cone starting at (anchor far from edges)
the anchorage depth of the reinforcement /5/

934
Figure 9: Anchor far from edges, Figure 10: Pure shear in a wall
Splitting and local failure Splitting Failure /4/
of concrete /3/

3.3 Failure under combined tension and shear


Combined tension and shear mostly occurs due to inclined ropes or chains, but also in
tilt up mounting or when precast elements must be turned while they are lifted. The
failure mechanisms in the following pictures are representing examples observed in tests
done by the author.

Figure 11: Steel failure (fracture of the Figure 12: Concrete cone failure
insert), angle of loading 45° /2/ angle of loading 45° /2/

935
Figure 13: Splitting cracks to both sides Figure 14: Local failure of the concrete
under oblique loading /2/ in front of the ring clutch /4/

4. Effect of reinforcement

Only two of the above described failure modes, concrete cone failure and splitting failure
may be significantly influenced by placing reinforcement in the area of the anchor.
Forming of a concrete cone does not lead to failure, when stirrups are placed closely
around the anchor. The stirrups have to be designed with sufficient anchorage length in
the cone itself and in the concrete outside of the cone and they have to be placed parallel
to the loading direction. A mash reinforcement perpendicular to the loading direction
(parallel to the surface in slabs) does not significantly increase the failure load (see
Figure 3). In case of splitting of the concrete, reinforcement can keep the cracks small
and take up the splitting forces.

The best example for effective reinforcement are stirrups on both sides of the anchor in
thin wall elements. These stirrups can act as a hanger reinforcement for concrete cone
failure and also as a splitting reinforcement. In addition, horizontal U-shaped stirrups
(shear stirrups) are usually placed around the anchor as a hanger and splitting
reinforcement for the shear components of the load. Figure 15 demonstrates this kind of
reinforcement for a wall element.

936
Figure 15: Wall element with lifting anchor, shear stirrup and hanger / splitting stirrups

Very special types of hanger reinforcement can be seen when wall elements are cast
horizontally and shall be erected for transport and assembly. The anchors then are
positioned in the middle of an edge surface and a hanger reinforcement is normally
placed around the anchor to transfer the load a far as possible towards the unloaded side
of the wall (Figure 16).

Figure 16: Shear reinforcement for walls to be erected

a) Lifting socket b) Frimeda erection-anchor

937
5. Test Procedures for Lifting Anchors

The optimal way of testing cast in lifting anchors is to perform pullout tests in
unreinforced concrete with minimum embedment, minimum edge distances, and
minimum member thickness, and always keep a distance of at least 2 times the anchors
length between the anchor and the support of the load on the specimen. This procedure
has only one negative: it is not possible to do it this way! Therefore, test procedures have
to be chosen in such a way that yields results relevant to the practical applications and
therefore should be standardised to a point which ensures comparable results for
different test series. In the following, test procedures for the most common situations
will be presented and discussed.

5.1 Test procedures for tension


5.1.1 Steel failure of the anchor
Steel failure of the anchor under tension can usually be tested in a universal testing
machine on anchors which are not cast in concrete. The test setup has to be chosen
according to the anchors construction and dimensions.

5.1.2 Tension tests on cast in anchors in concrete slabs


For tests on anchors far from edges frequently used test configurations can be divided in
two fundamentally different systems. The system illustrated in Figure 17 is based on a
simple beam and results in bending cracks in the area of the anchor, leading to an anchor
position in a concrete crack. On the other hand a system based on a cantilever beam can
be used, resulting in cracks underneath the support (Figure 18). The load level of crack
initiation depends on the spacing of support and on the member thickness. The
advantage of the simple beam setup is, that cracks which can also occur during a real
situation are included in the testing procedure. On the other side bending reinforcement
is needed in the area of the anchor to prevent a bending failure of the concrete specimen.
In addition this setup is not possible in corner situations with small edge distances.

Figure 17: beam setup


Reinforcement

Support Support
Anchor Force

>=4 * anchor length

Bending cracks

938
Figure 18: Cantilever setup
Support

Anchor Force
>=2 * anchor length

Reinforcement Bending cracks

5.1.3 Tension tests on cast in anchors in concrete beams and walls


In beams and walls longer anchors are used than in slabs to compensate for smaller edge
distances. Therefore in the plane of the wall the necessary edge distances for full
concrete capacity and the necessary spacing of supports are high. In addition splitting
failure and lateral blow out failure become more likely. Therefore anchorage principles
with distributed load transfer along the anchor i.e. with reinforcement bars are used in
many cases.

For very long anchors the minimum distance between the anchor and the end of the wall
or beam is usually smaller than 1.5 times the anchors length. Therefore no support
should be placed between the anchor and the end of the wall or beam. This is only
possible using the cantilever setup very similar to the setup for oblique loading shown in
Figure 19 .

For anchors anchored by bond of reinforcement it is very difficult to keep a distance


between the anchor and the support of 2 times the anchors length which is needed to
allow a complete concrete cone breakout. Because for anchorage by bond this failure
mode is not likely, a smaller clearance can be used but not smaller than 1.5 times the
anchors length for reinforcement bars with hooks or similar anchorage devices and 1.0
times the anchors length for straight bars. It should never be smaller than twice the
thickness of the wall or beam.

5.2 Test procedures for combined tension and shear


5.2.1 Steel failure of the anchor
For anchors loaded in combined tension and shear, the supporting action of the concrete
is needed for the performance of the anchor and therefore in many cases tests have to be
performed on cast in anchors. The test configurations can be chosen like described for
concrete failure below. Simplifications are possible because no large spacing is needed
between supports.

939
5.2.2 Tests on cast in anchors under angled tension in concrete slabs, beams and walls
Oblique testing of cast in anchors can be performed using a strong floor. Other testing
procedures such as tests on two anchors together (so that the equilibrium between the
horizontal forces on both anchors is satisfied) is not dealt with in this paper. An example
for a configuration in a testing frame with a stiff baseplate acting like a strong floor is
shown in Figure 19. This setup provides sufficient spacing of supports for vertical and
horizontal load components as well. It is therefore usable for tests with horizontal load -
components towards the free edge like shown in Figure 19, but it can also be used for
tests with the horizontal load component towards the centre of the wall.

Figure 19: Cantilever setup for oblique loading with a test frame on a stiff baseplate /2/

5.3 Test procedures for shear


Pure shear is not a very common load situation in lifting and handling, but it can occur,
when wall elements are cast horizontally and have to be erected from the mould.
Anchors designed for this situation are positioned in the middle of an edge surface and a
hanger reinforcement is normally placed around the anchor to transfer the load towards
the unloaded side (Figure 16). Testing is possible using the beam system or cantilever
system. Using the beam system requires large bending reinforcement over the anchor
which may increase the failure load, while cracks in the area of the anchor lead to lower
failure loads. It is not known which effect governs depending on other parameters like
the dimensions of the anchor, the shape and dimensions of the hanger reinforcement, and
the elements thickness. Therefore the cantilever system appears to be the better solution.
Figure 20 shows an example for a setup which was already used successfully.

940
Figure 20: Test setup for shear tests (erection of walls) /5/

6. Summary and conclusions

Anchorage points for lifting and handling of precast concrete elements must be designed
for the self weight of the element and forces due to adhesion, form friction and dynamic
actions (inertia forces due to acceleration). These forces must be distributed to the
anchors in accordance with the static system. Depending on the steel and concrete
strength, on the principle and length of the anchorage to the concrete, on the loading
angle, on the amount and position of reinforcement, and on the edge distances of the
anchor many different failure modes are likely to govern the behaviour of the anchor. In
many cases the relevant failure mode and the capacity of the anchorage can only be
identified by testing. Test conditions have to be chosen very carefully in order to get
representative results with minimised influence of the reinforcement and the dimensions
of the specimen. Test procedures should be harmonised to a point which allows
comparable results in different test series in order to increase basic knowledge and
maintain certain safety levels.

7. References

/1/ Halfen GmbH & Co. KG, Catalogues and technical handbooks
/2/ Lotze, D.; Sippel, T. M.: Bericht über Versuche mit einbetonierten Demu –
Transportankern, Wiernsheim / Stuttgart 1993
/3/ Versuchsanstalt für Stahl, Holz und Steine (Amtliche Materialprüfanstalt),
Universität Karlsruhe, Prüfzeugnis Nr. 90 0102 vom 10.08.1990: Untersuchung
von Frimeda Transportankern in einbetonierten Beton-Versuchskörpern
/4/ Versuchsanstalt für Stahl, Holz und Steine (Amtliche Materialprüfanstalt),
Universität Karlsruhe, Prüfzeugnis Nr. 90 0480 vom 18.02.1991: Untersuchung
von Frimeda Transportankern in einbetonierten Beton-Versuchskörpern
/5/ Halfen GmbH & Co. KG, Internal test reports

941
BEHAVIOUR OF PLASTIC ANCHORS IN CRACKED AND
UNCRACKED CONCRETE
Thilo Pregartner, Rolf Eligehausen
Institute of Materials, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
Plastic anchors consist of a plastic sleeve and a special screw or nail. In Germany the
sleeve is made of polyamide PA6 or PA6.6. The behaviour of plastic anchors in concrete
is influenced by different parameters changing the properties of the plastic (e.g.
temperature, water content) [1]. Furthermore, the behaviour of plastic anchors in
concrete is determined by the visco- elastic properties of the plastic (relaxation and
creep). Therefore the pullout loads are dependent on time and load history. Other
parameters affecting the pullout loads in concrete are the anchor type, the widths of
cracks in the concrete, the drill bit diameter and the orientation of the sleeve in the
cracks.

The performance of plastic anchors in cracked and uncracked concrete has been
investigated in pullout tests. In addition to tensile tests, creep tests and tests in opening
and closing cracks have been performed. In tests in which the splitting force of plastic
anchors has been measured the basic behaviour of plastic anchors in concrete has been
investigated.

1. General behaviour of plastic anchors


Plastic anchors are fastening systems consisting of a plastic sleeve and a special screw or
nail. The sleeve is divided into an expansion area and a collar. The collar prevents the
anchor from slipping into the hole during expansion (Figure 1). The screw or nail fits
exactly to the geometry of the plastic sleeve, so an optimal expansion force is developed
during the expansion of the anchor. The plastic sleeves used in Germany are made of
polyamide PA6 or PA 6.6. In other European countries sleeves made of polyethylene or
polypropylene are used as well. The test results shown in this paper are valid for plastic
sleeves made of polyamide 6 or 6.6.

942
Figure 2 shows the splitting force developed along the anchor axis of a typical German
plastic anchor. The expansion area of the plastic sleeve and the special screw is shown as
a location reference. The maximum splitting force is reached in an area where the screw
is thickest. The splitting force has a nearly constant distribution along the anchor axis.
During the first 10 minutes after expansion of the anchor, the splitting force is strongly
reduced because of relaxation of the plastic (Figure 3). The distribution of the splitting
force along the axis is dependent on the anchor construction.

Figure 1 Typical plastic anchors (screw-in anchors) for use in concrete.

1,2 Anchor Type 4 (d= 10 mm)


t = 0 min

1,0 t = 0,5 min


t = 1,0 min
Splitting force [kN]

0,8 t = 10,0 min

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Anchor axis [mm]

Figure 2 Distribution of splitting force along anchor axis; anchor type 4 (d= 10 mm).

943
11,0
Anchor Type 4 (d= 10 mm)
Total Splitting force [kN]
Loss 34 %
9,0

7,0

5,0

3,0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [min]

Figure 3 Splitting force as a function of time; anchor type 4 (d= 10 mm); hef= 70 mm.

2. Influence of time on anchor behaviour


For plastic anchors two major time dependent effects influence the pullout loads. The
two effects are relaxation and creep. Due to relaxation, the expansion force decreases
after expansion of the anchor (Figure 3). The behaviour is counteracted however, by an
increase of the coefficient of friction over time because of the toothing of plastic with
micropores of the concrete [3]. In summary the pull out loads increase slightly with time
(Figure 4). The creeping of plastic results in increasing displacements for loaded
anchors. For typical design loads however, plastic anchors do not reach critical
displacements [1].
Figure 5 shows the total splitting force of a plastic anchor. The anchor is expanded in
uncracked concrete. After 10 minutes (600 sec) a crack (w= 0,2 mm) has been opened in
the concrete. The splitting force is reduced from 4,6 kN to 0,1 kN. Forty minutes later
the splitting force has increased to a value of 1,3 kN. Figure 6 shows pullout loads of the
same anchor in cracked concrete (w= 0,4 mm). It is obvious that the failure loads
increase with increasing time difference between crack opening and testing.
The mechanism behind the increase of the expansion force in cracked concrete is
explained in Figure 7 by a rheological model. On driving the screw into the sleeve the
plastic is strained. This is represented in the model by a compression of the “free” spring
(Maxwell I). With increasing time the spring of the “Maxwell I”- system relaxes due to
expansion of the damper in system “Maxwell II”, however the spring- dashpot- system
“Kelvin- Voigt” is loaded too. When a crack is opened in the concrete the expansion
force of the anchor drops. The elastic deformation in the “Maxwell”- system is
immediately recovered, but the deformation in the “Kelvin- Voigt”- system increases
over time. This time- dependent expansion accounts for the increasing expansion force
after crack- opening observed in Figure 5 and Figure 6.

944
18 Uncracked concrete
Anchor type 5 (d= 10 mm)
16
hef= 70 mm
14
Maximum load NU [kN]

12

10

0
0,1 1 10 100 1000
Time [h]

Figure 4 Influence of time difference between loading and installation on pullout


loads in uncracked concrete; anchor type 5 (d= 10 mm); hef= 70 mm [2].
Anchor Type 5 (10 mm)
10

Expansion of anchor

7.5
Splitting force [kN]

crack opening w= 0,2 mm

2.5

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Time [sec]

Figure 5 Total splitting force in cracked and uncracked concrete; anchor type 5
(d= 10 mm); hef= 70 mm.

945
14,0 Cracked concrete w= 0,4 mm
Anchor type 5 (d= 10 mm)
12,0 hef= 70 mm

10,0
Maximum load NU [kN]

8,0

6,0

4,0

2,0

0,0
0,1 1,0 10,0 100,0
Time [h]

Figure 6 Influence of time difference between crack opening and pullout test in
cracked concrete (w= 0,2 mm); anchor type 5 (d= 10 mm); hef= 70 mm.

"Maxwell II" "Kelvin- Voigt" "Maxwell I"

Initial state

ε0

Sleeve Expansion

εpl+εv-el

Relaxation

Crack opening

εv-el

Memory- effect

Figure 7 4- Parameter model explaining visco-elastic behaviour of plastic sleeve in


uncracked and cracked concrete.

946
3. Influence of crack width
Figure 8 shows related pullout loads of anchor type 4 in cracked and uncracked concrete.
The reference value is the median pullout load (NU,m) in uncracked concrete. The pullout
loads decrease with increasing crack width. By opening the crack up to 0,2 mm, the
pullout loads are reduced by 60%. With further crack opening the values are reduced
nearly linearly. In very wide cracks of 0,5 mm, the pullout loads are still 20% of the
median value in uncracked concrete (NU,m,uncracked= 19,9 kN). The behaviour of plastic
anchors in cracked concrete depends on the anchor design. For other types of anchors a
relation of about 50% of the average failure load valid for uncracked concrete for a crack
width of w= 0,3 mm has been observed.

1,2 Anchor type 4 (d= 10 mm), hef= 70 mm

Expansion direction perpendicular


1,0
Expansion direction parallel

NU,m,uncracked = 19,9 kN
NU/ NU,m,uncracked [-]

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5
Crack width [mm]

Figure 8 Influence of crack width in cracked concrete; anchor type 4 (d= 10 mm);
hef= 70 mm.

4. Influence of temperature
Temperature has an influence on the mechanical behaviour of plastic. With increasing
temperature the stiffness and the strength of plastic decreases. Therefore, the pullout
loads are lower in uncracked concrete at increased temperature [2]. Figure 9 shows the
influence of temperature on pullout loads of tests in cracked concrete. The values are
normalised by the median value of the reference tests (T= 20°C). Additionally, the
reduction of pullout loads for anchors made of Ultramid B3L (PA6) as a function of
temperature obtained from tests in uncracked concrete [3, 4] is shown. The figure shows,
that the pullout loads in cracked concrete can increase or decrease with temperature
depending on the type of anchor. This is partially in contradiction to the experience in

947
uncracked concrete, because in uncracked concrete the pullout loads decrease with
increasing temperature [3, 4].

5. Influence of water content of plastic sleeve


Polyamide is a hygroscopic material. This means that the plastic sleeve absorbs water
(up to a content of f= 9%). Under standard conditions the moisture content of the sleeve
is 2,5%. Figure 10 shows the pullout loads of plastic anchors (diameter 14 mm) as a
function of the water content of the sleeve. The values are normalised by the median
value of the reference tests (f≈ 2,5%). Additionally, the reduction of pullout loads for
anchors made of Ultramid B3L (PA6) obtained from tests in uncracked concrete [3, 4] is
shown. According to these results in cracked concrete the pullout loads can increase with
increasing water content, in contrast to the behaviour in uncracked concrete. In
uncracked concrete the expansion force decreases because of the lower stiffness of the
material with increasing water content. The pullout loads also get smaller. In cracked
concrete the expansion force is reduced because of the crack opening, however, the loss
of expansion force must be dependent on the water content of the sleeve. This behaviour
is also time dependent (see Section 2).

1,6 Cracked concrete w= 0,2 mm

1,4

1,2
NU(T)/NU,m (T= 20°C) [-]

1,0

0,8

0,6

0,4

Anchor type 1 (d= 14 mm)


0,2
Anchor type 5 (d= 14 mm)
Ultramid B3L, uncracked concrete
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Temperature T [°]

Figure 9 Influence of temperature of plastic sleeve on pullout loads in cracked and


uncracked concrete; d= 14 mm; hef= 70 mm.

948
2,2 Cracked concrete w= 0,2 mm
2,0

1,8

1,6
NU(f)/NU,m(f= 2,5%) [-]

1,4

1,2

1,0

0,8

0,6

0,4
Anchor type 1 (d= 14 mm)
0,2 Anchor type 5 (d= 14 mm)
Ultramid B3L, uncracked concrete
0,0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Moisture content of sleeve f [%]

Figure 10 Influence of moisture content of plastic sleeve on pullout loads in cracked


and uncracked concrete; d= 14 mm; hef= 70 mm.

6. Behaviour in opening and closing cracks


Figure 11 shows the behaviour of a nailed- in anchors in tests with opening and closing
cracks. The crack width varied between 0,1 mm and 0,2 mm. The anchors were loaded
by a constant tension load NP which was 30% larger than the design load (NP=1,3 zulN).
The anchor displacements increase with an increasing number of crack openings. All
anchors, however, endure the test without failure. The displacement behaviour fulfils the
criteria of the ETAG [5].

949
0,80
Crack opening tests
(w= 0,1 mm- 0,2 mm)
Nailed-in anchor (d= 8mm)
NP= 1,3* zulN
0,60
Displacement s [mm]

0,40

0,20

0,00
1 10 100 1.000
Number of crack openings n [-]

Figure 11 Anchor displacements as a function of crack opening of a nailed- in anchor;


anchor type 16 (d= 8 mm); hef= 55 mm.

7. Conclusions
Plastic anchors are fastening systems consisting of a plastic sleeve and a special screw or
nail. The sleeve is divided into an expansion area and a collar. The collar prevents the
anchor from slipping into the hole during expansion (Figure 1). The screw or nail fits
exactly to the geometry of the plastic sleeve, so an optimal expansion force is developed
during the expansion of the anchor. The plastic sleeves used in Germany are made of
polyamide PA6 or PA 66. In other European countries anchors of polyethylene or
polypropylene are used as well. The test results are valid for sleeves made out of
polyamide PA 6 or PA 6.6.
The distribution of the expansion force along the anchor axis is dependent on the design
of the anchor. Relaxation of the plastic reduces the expansion force mainly during the
first 10 minutes after expansion. In spite of this, in uncracked concrete the pullout loads
increase with time because of an increase of the friction coefficient. In cracked concrete
the splitting force is sharply reduced by the crack opening, however, it increases very
rapidly after crack opening. This increase is dependent on the stiffness of the plastic. The
pullout loads increase in cracked concrete with increasing time, however much faster
than in uncracked concrete.
An increase of the temperature and the water content of the sleeve results in decreasing
pullout loads in uncracked concrete. In cracked concrete this tendency could be reversed
depending on the anchor type.
Opening and closing cracks within a range of 0,1 mm to 0,2 mm are no problem for
usual plastic anchors.

950
8. Acknowledgement
The primary funding for this research was provided by the manufacturers of plastic
anchors fischerwerke, Hilti and Würth. The support of these manufacturers is very much
appreciated. Special thanks are also accorded to Matthew Hoehler who spent many hours
in reviewing the paper.

9. References
[1] Eligehausen , R., Mallée, R.: “Befestigungstechnik im Beton- und
Mauerwerksbau”, Verlag Ernst & Sohn, 2000.
[2] Eligehausen, R., Sippel, T., Pregartner, T., Mallée, R..: „Kunststoffe in der
Befestigungstechnik“, Bauen mit Kunststoffen- Jahrbuch 2001, Verlag Ernst &
Sohn, 2001.
[3] Ehrenstein, G. W.: Bauwerksdübel aus Thermoplasten, auch zugelassen als
tragende Bauelemente; Verbindungstechnik 1976, Heft 4, S. 25- 28.
[4] Ehrenstein, G. W.: Aus Reihenuntersuchungen mit Bauwerksdübeln aus
Polyamid; Verbindungstechnik 1976, Heft 12, S. 13- 14.
[5] European Organisation for technical Approvals (EOTA): Guideline for European
Technial Approvals of Plastic Anchors for redundant Use in Concrete and
Masonry for lightweight systems. DIBt April 2000, Draft ETAG, Part 1 and 2.

951
TESTING OF A DOWEL CONNECTION FOR A BRIDGE
WITH A CONCRETE DECK AND A SANDWICH PANEL
TRUSS STRUCTURE

Hendrik Blontrock*, Luc Taerwe*, Antonio Nurchi**, John Vantomme***,


Cédric De Roover***, Jan Wastiels****, Kim Croes****
*Dept. of Structural Engineering, Ghent University, Belgium
**Dept. of Structural Engineering, University of Cagliari, Italy
***Dept. of Civil Engineering, Royal Military Academy, Belgium
****Dept. of Mechanics of Materials and Construction, Vrije Universiteit Brussel,
Belgium

Abstract
Fastenings to concrete can be subjected to complex loading situations. The resistance of
the connection under the combined action of shear, bending moment and normal force
depends strongly on the failure mode of the connection. In order to investigate the
resistance of dowel connections under combined actions, a special test set-up has been
developed which allows to submit a dowel connection to complex loading conditions. A
case study was made for a connection element of a light-weight pedestrian bridge,
composed of a concrete deck with a truss substructure. The truss is composed of
sandwich panels, consisting of glass fibre reinforced IPC skins (Inorganic Phosphate
Cement, a non-alkaline inorganic resin developed at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel)
separated by a polystyrene core. The dowel connection is needed for the connection
between the concrete deck and the sandwich diagonal members of the truss. Connection
elements with different dowel diameters and different spacings between the dowels are
tested.

1. Introduction

A design code for cast-in-place headed anchors is proposed in CEB bulletin N°226, part
3 'Characteristic Resistance of Fastenings with cast-in-place headed anchors'. The design
procedure considers different failure modes of the connection in pure shear or in pure
tension. For cases with combined shear and tension, an interaction formula is given. For
this latter case however, experimental evidence is very limited [CEB Bulletin N°206]. In
order to investigate the behaviour of cast-in-place headed anchors under the combined
action of shear force, bending moment and normal force, an experimental programme
was set up in which a specific connection element for the pedestrian bridge (described in
section 2), was tested to failure.

955
2. Concept of the pedestrian bridge

IPC (Inorganic Phosphate Cement) is a non-alkaline inorganic resin developed at the


Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Due to the non-alkaline conditions of the IPC (pH = 1 in fresh
state and pH = 7 after hardening), it can be reinforced with glass fibre mats or with
unidirectional glass fibres. The skins of the sandwich panels will be made of glass fibre
reinforced IPC, while the core of the sandwich is expanded polystyrene foam. The result
is a sandwich panel with a relatively high bending stiffness/weight and strength/weight
ratio. [Wastiels 1999]
The pedestrian bridge will be composed of three parallel truss girders (fig. 1). The
sandwich panel for the bottom chord is composed of a polystyrene foam core with a
thickness of 50mm with IPC skins reinforced with unidirectional glass fibres, in order to
increase the bending stiffness of the total structure. The skins have a thickness of 10mm.
The sandwich panels for the diagonals are composed of a polystyrene foam core with a
thickness of 50mm (thickness required in order to avoid buckling of the sandwich
panels) with IPC skins reinforced by random glass fibre mats. The top chord of the truss
is a concrete deck with a thickness of 120mm. A concrete deck is needed to take up the
compressive forces and to increase sufficiently the lowest natural frequency of the bridge
.[De Roover 2000]

Figure 1 : Elevation and cross-section of the pedestrian bridge

A design calculation was made in accordance with the requirements for pedestrian
bridges in the Belgian Standard NBN B 03-101. The design load for the structure is a
distributed load of 5 kN/m² and a concentrated load of 10 kN. The deflection at mid-
span, which is limited to span/500 in the design, is the most determining criterion.
The hinges at the nodes of the structure are made of steel. A U-shaped profile with the
same thickness as the sandwich-core, is inserted in the sandwich panels and the skins of
the sandwich panels are bolted on the flanges of this U-shaped profile. The assembly of
the panels is made by means of connection plates and pins. In order to transfer shear
forces between the diagonals and the concrete deck, dowels welded on the upper flange
of the T-shaped connection plates are provided (fig. 2).

956
Figure 2 : Connection element between the diagonals and the concrete deck

3. Test programme and test set-up

In order to test the mechanical behaviour of the connection between the diagonals and
the concrete deck, a test set-up is proposed to subject the connection to a specific load
combination (fig.3). A steel profile is fixed to two reaction walls. A compression jack
and a tension jack are fixed to wedges attached to this profile, in order to obtain the same
angle as in the truss system (the angle between the diagonal and the vertical is 27°). The
ratio between the tensile and the compressive force applied in the tests, was determined
from the design calculation. The magnitude of the compressive and tensile force and
their ratio differs for the different nodes of the bridge. The forces in the test were applied
according to the node in the bridge with the highest values for the compressive and
tensile force. Although the ratio between the maximum compressive and maximum
tensile force of this node is lower than for all other nodes of the bridge, it was assumed
to be the most critical connection.
Tension Jack
Diagonal 2

Steel Profile
Compression Jack
Diagonal 1

LVDT's

Reaction wall Slab specimen Reaction wall

500 mm

Figure 3 : test set-up

957
Small connection elements consisting of a T-shaped profile with two dowels welded on
the flange were embedded in a concrete plate (dimensions : length 1000mm, width
300mm, height : 120mm) with the same thickness of the bridge deck. The internal
reinforcement of the plate consisted of two bars of φ 10mm as upper reinforcement and
two bars of φ 10mm as lower reinforcement. The plate is supported by two hinge
supports with a free span of 500mm.
Two types of connection elements were tested : type A with the centre lines of the
diagonals crossing at the centre of the concrete deck and type B with the centre lines of
the diagonals crossing at the bottom of the concrete deck (fig. 4). For type A, no local
moment is introduced in the slab, whereas this is the case for type B. However, for type
A the connection is submitted to bending whereas for type B this is not the case. The
tests also had to clarify the possible influence of the bending moment on the resistance
of the connection. The compressive force is measured with a pressure transducer, the
tensile force is measured with a load cell. The horizontal displacement of the connection
is measured with a LVDT, as well as the vertical displacements of the connection at the
centre lines of the holes for the connection with the pins.
Different hydraulic units are used for the compressive and tensile forces. The forces are
applied in 8 steps to the SLS design load which equals 25.1 kN for the compressive force
and 21.2 kN for the tensile force, ratio of 1.18. Next, the specimens is unloaded and
finally reloaded up to failure, continuing with the same step size for both forces.
The parameters of the test-specimens can be found in table 1.

Figure 4 : dimensions of connection type A and connection type B

4. Test results

4.1 Test results of connections with two dowels φ 16 mm


The measured horizontal displacement in function of the compressive force can be found
in figure 5 for connection type A and in figure 6 for connection type B. Since the
maximum capacity of the compression jack was reached prior to failure, it was

958
impossible to test these connections to failure. There is little difference in deformation
behaviour between connection system type A and connection system type B.

Table 1 : properties of the tested elements


Test Type d1 d2 d3 l2 k fcm fctm
Specimen [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [N/mm²] [N/mm²]
16-A1 A 15.87 31.70 21.0 75.0 8.0 64.4 5.4
16-A2 A 15.87 31.70 21.0 75.0 8.0 64.4 5.4
16-B1 B 15.87 31.70 21.0 75.0 8.0 66.1 4.4
16-B2 B 15.87 31.70 21.0 75.0 8.0 66.1 4.4
13-A1 A 12.70 25.40 17.0 75.0 8.0 56.0 4.6
13-A2 A 12.70 25.40 17.0 75.0 8.0 56.0 4.6
13-B1 B 12.70 25.40 17.0 75.0 8.0 57.6 5.0
13-B2 B 12.70 25.40 17.0 75.0 8.0 57.6 5.0
10-A1 A 9.52 19.05 12.5 75.0 7.1 57.9 5.8
10-A2 A 9.52 19.05 12.5 75.0 7.1 57.9 5.8
10-B1 B 9.52 19.05 12.5 75.0 7.1 59.0 4.9
10-B2 B 9.52 19.05 12.5 75.0 7.1 59.0 4.9

0.80

0.70

0.60
Horizontal displacement [mm]

0.50

0.40 16-A1

16-A2
0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
Compressive Force [kN]

Figure 6 : test results for connections type 16-A

4.2 Test results on connections with two dowels φ 13 mm


The measured horizontal displacement in function of the compressive force can be found
in figure 7 for connection type A and in figure 8 for connection type B. Shear failure
occurred in the shaft of the dowel just above the weld fillet. Damage to the concrete is
limited to concrete crushing just in front of the dowels. Failure loads for connection
types A and B are nearly identical, but the deformation capacity of connection type A is
nearly twice as large as connection type B.

959
1.00

0.90

0.80

Horizontal displacement [mm]


0.70

0.60

0.50 16-B1

0.40 16-B2

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
Compressive Force [kN]

Figure 6 : Test results for connections type 16-B


12.00

10.00
Horizontal displacement [mm]

8.00

6.00 13-A1

13-A2

4.00

2.00

0.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00 200.00
Compressive Force [kN]

Figure 7 : Test results for connections type 13-A


6.00

5.00
Horizontal displacement [mm]

4.00

3.00 13-B1

13-B2

2.00

1.00

0.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00 200.00
Compressive Force [kN]

Figure 8 : Test results for connections type 13-B

4.3 Test results on connections with two dowels φ 10 mm


The measured horizontal displacement in function of the compressive force can be found
in figure 9 for connection type A and in figure 10 for connection type B. The same

960
failure mode for these connections is observed as for the dowels φ 13mm. The shafts of
the dowels shear off immediately above the weld fillet, with little concrete crushing in
front of the dowels.
6.00

5.00
Horizontal displacement [mm]

4.00

3.00 10-A1

10-A2

2.00

1.00

0.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
Compressive Force [kN]

Figure 9 : Test results for connections type 10-A


6.00

5.00
Horizontal displacement [mm]

4.00

3.00 10-B1

10-B2

2.00

1.00

0.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
Compressive Force [kN]

Figure 10 : Test results for connections type 10-B

4.4 Summary of test results


The failure load and the horizontal displacement at failure for the connections with
dowels diameter 13 and 10 mm can be found in table 2.

5. Conclusions

The connection systems tested failed in a quite ductile way (shear failure of the dowels
with little concrete crushing). The location of the crossing point of the centrelines of the
diagonals (Type A or Type B) has no significant influence on the magnitude of the
failure load, but has a stronger influence on the deformation capacity (horizontal
displacement). Connection type A with the centrelines of the diagonals crossing at the
centre of the deck results in a greater deformation capacity at failure than connection
type B with the centrelines of the diagonals crossing at the bottom of the concrete deck.

961
The ratio between the failure loads of the connection elements diameter 10mm and the
connection elements diameter 13mm (ratio of 0.61), corresponds well with the ratio of
the cross sectional area of the dowels (ratio of 0.56). These two ratios should be equal
for pure shear failure in the dowels.

Table 2 : Summary of test results


Compr. force Hor. displ.
at failure at failure
[kN] [mm]
13-A1 180.0 9.1
13-A2 173.0 10.3
13-B1 175.6 5.3
13-B2 169.6 5.1
10-A1 96.0 4.6
10-A2 110.8 4.6
10-B1 110.6 2.6
10-B2 110.8 3.5

Further testing will be performed on dowel connections with a shorter shaft to


investigate changes in failure load and failure mode. Failure is then expected to occur in
the concrete deck.

6. Acknowledgment

Funding by the Flemish Fund for Scientific Research (FWO) under the contract of
G.0191.98 is greatly acknowledged, as well as the Confibrecrete TMR network
"Development of guidelines for the design of concrete structures, reinforced, prestressed
of strengthened with advanced composites".

7. References

Wastiels J., "Sandwich panels in construction with HPFRCC-faces : new possibilities


and adequate modelling" in "High Performance Fibre Reinforced Cement Composites",
ed. H. W. Reinhardt, A. E. Naamen, RILEM Publications, 1999, pp 143-151.

De Roover C., Vantomme J., Wastiels J., Croes K., Taerwe L., Blontrock H., 'A new
non-alkaline cement material reinforced by glass fibres (IPC) for the construction of
bridges', Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Advanced Composite Materials in
Bridges and Structures,Eds. J. Humar and A. Razaqpur, The Canadian Society for Civil
Engineering, Ottawa, 2000, pp. 429-436

962
De Roover C., Vantomme J., Wastiels J., Croes K., Cuypers H., Taerwe L., Blontrock
H., "Modeling of a pedestrian Bridge composed of a Concrete Deck and a Truss Girder
with IPC Sandwich Panels", Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on
Computational Structures Technology, Leuven, Belgium, September 6-8 2000

CEB Bulletin N°206, "Fastenings to reinforced concrete and masonry structures, State-
of-art report, Part I", 1991

CEB Bulletin N°226, "Design of Fastening in Concrete, Draft CEB guide - Part 1 to 3",
1995

963
A NEW STEP FORWARD FOR COMPOSITE BRIDGES
THE BRAS DE LA PLAINE BRIDGE
Eric Barlet*, Gilles Causse** and Jean-Pierre Viallon**
*JMI, France
**BOUYGUES TP, France

Abstract
This article presents the Bras de la Plaine Bridge on the island of Réunion in the Indian
Ocean (France). The bridge structure is a single 280-m long span embedded in
counterweight abutments. The deck is a composite truss structure comprising two
concrete slabs linked by two planes of steel diagonals. Only the upper slab is continuous
at the key. This bridge constitutes a step forward for composite structures.

1. Introduction

The Bras de la Plaine Bridge, situated in the south of Réunion, was designed initially to
provide a link between the towns of Le Tampon and L’Entre-Deux and will later
become part of the planned link to improve access to the area known as the « Hauts du
Sud-Ouest » link. The bridge structure is a single 280-m long span embedded in
counterweight abutments. The deck is a composite truss structure comprising two
concrete slabs linked by two planes of steel diagonals.

Further to a restricted European tender during the first half of 1999, the Bras de la Plaine
Bridge was awarded to the consortium BOUYGUES TP / DTP Terrassements.

In its bid, the consortium eliminated the articulation at the key included in the basic
design and made the upper slab continuous after horizontal jacking. The connection of
the steel diagonals to the upper and lower slabs was completely modified. In addition,
the abutments were reduced due to the effect of the horizontal jacking at the key before
stitching the two halves together.
Construction began in December 1999 and will last 24 months.

964
2. Description of the chosen Structure

2.1. Functional Characteristics and Geometry

Functional cross-section

The bridge’s functional cross-section has a useful width (between the safety devices) of
10.90m which comprises:
• a 6-m-wide bi-directional carriageway,
• two pedestrian pavements each 1.35m wide,
• two cycle-paths each 1.10m wide,
• standard BN4-type lateral safety barriers.
• the deck cross-section is roof-shaped: each side slopes down with a 2.5% gradient.

Vertical alignment

The vertical alignment is a convex parabola with a radius of 1,500 m. It slopes down to
the right bank abutment with a 1.013% gradient and to the left bank abutment with a
5.017% gradient.

965
Plane alignment

The Bras de la Plaine Bridge is situated on a straight alignment over the ravine and
slightly overlaps on either bank.

2.2. Structural Characteristics

Background Information

The structure designed to cross the Bras de la Plaine ravine comprises a single 280-m-
long span embedded at both ends in huge abutments. At the key, only the upper slab is
continuous.

The deck has a constant width of 11.90m and a depth varying between 17.60m on the
abutment and 4m at the key. It is a composite prestressed concrete and steel truss
structure comprising:
• an upper slab with a constant section in high-performance prestressed concrete,
• a lower slab with a variable section in high-performance concrete,
• 2 planes of steel tubes arranged in V-shaped triangulation inclined at about 6° off
vertical.
The truss mesh is a constant 12.70 m along the whole structure.
The deck intrados is a parabola with a radius of 661m.

966
Abutments

The abutments consist of a reinforced concrete box-shaped structure about 45m long,
11.90 m wide and between 18 m and 21 m in height. This structure has 2 compartments:
• a back compartment 11m long, filled with ballast
• a hollow front compartment.
The invert (bottom slab) has a constant thickness of 1m. The side walls of the front
compartment are 0.70m thick. The side walls of the back compartment are 1m thick. The
upper slab has an average thickness of 0.60m.

967
Deck: the upper slab

The slab is built in B60 high-performance concrete (60 MPa characteristic strength at 28
days). Its total width is 11.90m.
The slab is of varying thickness as follows:
• 0.270m for the cantilevers which are 1.7m long
• a constant 0.250m for the central part, 3.8m long
• 0.810m at the ribs which are 0.850m wide edged by 2 gussets 0.735m and 0.775m
wide.

The slab formwork is constant for the whole structure except around the key where a
transverse beam enables the structure to be jacked apart (6000 t horizontally at the key)
before stitching the two cantilevers.
The slabs for either side will be cast successively in 12.70-m-long segments.
The upper slabs of each half are prestressed using 12 or 19T15 super tendons with an
elastic strength of 1860 MPa.
This cantilever prestressing can be divided into internal and external prestressing.
On the deck side, the tendons are anchored in groups of four at the end of each segment
and then at the back of the abutment.
The tendons are tensioned at both ends. They are disposed in a plane alignment like fish
bones and there is no vertical undulation in the slab except locally, near the deck
anchoring points.

968
Deck: lower slab

Like the upper slab, the lower slab is in B60 high-performance concrete. The intrados is
a parabola with a 661-m radius. The lower slab has variable width and thickness so as to
both:
• adapt to the transverse interval between the ends of the diagonals which is variable,
and
• accompany the increase in compression effort of the key towards the abutment.

The section on the abutment is rectangular: 4,120m wide and 1,700m high. As it nears
the key, the lower slab has the shape of an inverted cradle). The section near the key is
0,200m thick with ribbing 0,650m high.
The lower slab is cast in place in 12.70-m-long sections (pours).

Deck: Diagonals

The diagonals are comprised of S355 steel tubes. A single range of tubes with an
external diameter of 610mm is used. Their thickness varies between 28mm and 36mm
for the compressed diagonals and is a constant 14.2mm for the tensioned diagonals.
The diagonals are welded onto rectangular plates between 55mm and 65mm thick.
Around the upper nodes, the meeting point of the diagonals is situated at the neutral
axis.
The plates are fixed onto the concrete by means of screws whose number varies
depending on whether the diagonals are tensioned or compressed.
The tensioned diagonals are prestressed by a pair of tendons comprising between 10 and
17 strands. The prestressing anchors are situated in the upper and lower slabs.

969
3. Structural Behaviour

3.1. General Behaviour

Apart from the aesthetic aspect which is visible in the original architectural design, the
new bridge over the Bras de la Plaine river is an exceptional bridge structurally
speaking.
The structure functions like a variable depth Warren beam whose upper and lower slabs
are the heart of an arch effect after horizontal jacking and stitching at the key.
As the arch, or lower slab, is not continuous at the key, the positive flexion moment in
mid-span generates compression efforts in the lower slab of the beam and in the upper
slab at the key. Where the beam is embedded in the abutments, traction efforts are
generated in the upper slab.

970
971
3.2. General Stability
The structure’s stability is achieved at each abutment by using ballast weighing 7500 t.
The deadweight of the abutment is 7250 t whereas the deck weighs 4400 t on each bank
(deadweight 3000 t, equipment 800 t, extra loads 600 t).
The safety coefficient against overturning is 2.1 in Service Limit States and 1.6 in
Ultimate Limit States.

3.3. Efforts in the Deck

Efforts in the Diagonals

Due to the curve of the lower slab, the normal efforts in the diagonals are similar in both
the compressed diagonals and in the prestressed tensioned diagonals.
The compressed diagonals bear an average effort of 600 t whereas the tensioned
diagonals always remain compressed in Static Limit States due to their prestressing and
the residual compression is 150 t on average. The prestressing using diagonals varies
between 500 and 600 t.

Efforts in the deck

Under the effect of live loads (3.5 t/m), the arch effect of the stitched deck develops the
following efforts:
• compression at the key: 570 t,
• traction of the upper slab where embedded at the abutment: 760 t,
• compression of the lower slab where embedded at the abutment: 1300 t.
Deflection at the key is 83mm.
Under the effect of the deck dilating 20°, the structure moves vertically 214mm at the
key resulting in compression of 2850 t in the upper slab and tension of up to 300 t in the
lower slab near the abutments.

4. Building the Bridge

4.1. General Site Organisation


As access from the right bank is difficult, the site was set up mainly on the left bank
with a batching plant to produce the B35 concrete for the 2 abutments and the B60
concrete for the deck.
For material supplies and concrete for the right band, an elevated cableway crane was
set up between the two banks. Its span between the two pylons is 415m. The 2 pylons
are 40m high and can be inclined ±10° which corresponds to a horizontal movement at
the top of ±7m. The elevated cableway crane loading capacity is 8t.

972
4.2. Building the Abutments
The walls were built in sections 6m high and 10m long. The upper slab was built using
sacrificial slabs resting on a temporary support half way along the transverse span.

4.3. Deck Construction


To build the deck, 2 sets of travelling forms were designed, 1 for each side, each
weighing 150 t. Each set of forms casts 12,70m of upper deck, then 12,70m of lower
deck as shown in the diagrams below.

973
The travelling forms are moved as follows:
• upper part: drawer-like system with the formwork and the steel structure
successively resting on the concrete upper slab already built;
• lower part: the steel structure and the lower framework are moved as indicated on the
diagram below.

In addition, the standard phasing for building a segment (upper slab and lower slab) is as
follows:
STANDARD SEGMENT PHASING
Phase Description
I Placing compressed diagonals in segment Vn
II Reinforcing and concreting segment Vn top slab
III Connecting the compressed diagonals of segment Vn with concrete slabs
IV Tensioning the first pair of cantilever tendons in segment Vn
V Removing the top slab formwork of segment Vn
VI Tensioning the second pair of cantilever tendons in segment Vn
VII Moving the travelling form to prepare for casting the bottom slab of segment
Vn
VIII Placing tensioned diagonals of segment Vn
IX Reinforcing and concreting the bottom slab of Vn segment
X Connecting the tensioned diagonals of segment Vn with concrete slabs
XI Removing the bottom slab formwork of segment Vn
XII Moving the travelling form to prepare casting of top slab of segment Vn+1
XIII Prestressing the tensioned diagonals of segment Vn
XIV Placing compressed diagonals of segment Vn+1

974
5. Main Quantities

ABUTMENTS
B35 CONCRETE 5437 M3
B60 CONCRETE 318 M3
REINFORCEMENT 910 T
RATIO 158 KG/ M3

DECK
B60 CONCRETE 2595 M3
AVERAGE THICKNESS 0.72 M
REINFORCEMENT 530 T
RATIO 221 KG/ M3
INTERNAL LONGITUDINAL PRESTRESSING 158 T
EXTERNAL LONGITUDINAL PRESTRESSING 49 T
PRESTRESSING FOR DIAGONALS 15 T
STEEL FOR DIAGONALS 201 T
STEEL PLATES 45 T

6. Participants

Owner : Réunion (France)


Project Manager :
(design and construction supervision) JMI & SCETAUROUTE
Owner’s Engineering Consultancy : JMI
Architect : A. AMEDEO, PADLEWSKI & Associates
Contractors : Bouygues Travaux Publics / DTP Terrassements
Final Designs : Bouygues Travaux Publics Design Office
Principal sub-contractors : VSL (Prestressing)

975
ANCHORAGE OF THE STEEL ELEMENTS TO THE
CONCRETE PIERS AT THE SPECIFIC PIPE BRIDGES
OVER A DANUBE-BAY IN BUDAPEST
Béla Csíki
Peristyl Engineering Consulting Ltd., Budapest, Hungary

Abstract
The paper presents the details of anchoring the structural steel elements to the high
volume reinforced concrete piers at two specific civil engineering structures recently
have been built in Budapest, Hungary. Besides satisfying the load bearing requirements,
the aspects of the special building technology and the demand for geometrical
regulation of the structures during the construction had to be also taken into account at
the design stage of the connections. To satisfy the latter two aspects creating special
joins allowing free axial movement and rotation of the steel elements during the
execution was necessary. The whole structures are also outlined shortly in relation to
the local behaviour of the anchorages.

1. Foreword

It is great honour to participate in this Symposium being held at the University of


Stuttgart well-known for its famous structural engineers having been working in
research and practice, respectively. Hopefully, the details will be presented herein are
worth reviewing for both the design engineering public and the specialists.

Two pipe bridges carrying waste water over a Danube-bay in Budapest were built in
1997 and put in operation in 1998. The bridges were designed in 1996 by the author
working for Mélyépterv Komplex Engineering Co. Ltd. (Budapest) at the time. This
paper gives a description of the special steel to concrete connections of the pipe bridges
satisfying a combination of several requirements in relation to loading, construction
technology and a special demand for geometrical regulation of the structural elements.
Although the presentation focuses on the local behaviour of the joins, the general

975
layout of the bridges will also be outlined, because certain knowledge on the global
behaviour is necessary to have a better understanding of the requirements to be satisfied
by the connections.

2. General layout of the pipe bridges

The two new pipe bridges with parallel horizontal axes and the same axial heights and
length surround symmetrically an existing combined foot- and pipe bridge which had
been built a few decades earlier. This unusual arrangement of the three bridges is a result
of consideration of several factors presented in Ref. 1. which are beyond the scope of
this paper. An elevation of one of the two new pipe bridges is given in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. View of the southern pipe bridge

The new pipe bridges are of the same length of 87.40 m and of the same specific
structural arrangement. Both of them fundamentally consists of three parts: the two
joined, supporting (or bank) units on the banks of the Danube-bay and the pipe 1000
mm in diameter spanning the bank units. The two supporting units are arranged
symmetrically to the middle of the whole structure on the banks. The longitudinal
vertical section of a bank unit with the supported pipe is presented in Fig. 2.

976
Fig. 2. Vertical section of a bank unit with the pipe

The bank units are assembled from three main structural elements: the eccentric, high
volume, 9.60 m high, reinforced concrete pier on pile foundation, the horizontal steel
main beam of 28.00 m length - with a 17.20 m cantilever toward the middle of the whole
structure - supported on the top of the pier, and anchored at the end to the bottom of the
pier by the third element, an inclined steel bar. The main beam and the anchoring bar
are joined structures themselves made of welded steel elements. They consist of
doubled girders with axial distance of 2.80 m, connected by transverse beams and
stiffening bars. The structural heights of the I-shaped cross-section doubled girders of
the horizontal main beam and of the inclined anchoring bar are 2.00 m and 0.40 m,
respectively.

The steel pipe spanning freely the bank units is hidden in the horizontal main beams at
the banks. Statically the pipe is a continuous beam of 81.80 m length on four elastic
supports. Each bank unit contains two supports located on the transverse beams at the
two ends of the main beam. (The pipe on the supporting units is independent statically
from the connecting parts of the network arriving to or leading away the bridge.)

The required camber of the pipe was produced by setting a specified difference between
the absolute heights of the two pipe-supports on each bank unit before placing the pipe.
The difference determined by considerations based on stress and strain calculations
could be created by adjusting a prescribed inclination of the “quasi” horizontal main

977
beam containing the pipe supports. The conceptual scheme of this geometrical
adjustment of the bank units harmonising with the aspects of the assemble of the
elements is shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Geometrical regulation of the bank units during construction

The possibility of the denoted axial movements and rotations of the connecting steel
elements at the top and at the bottom of the concrete pier was assured by using specific
anchoring devices. These joins will be presented in the next paragraph. The third
connection of the structural triangle between the steel main beam and the inclined
anchoring bar is a usual bolted headplate join also involved in the adjustment. It should
be mentioned that during the regulation the weight of the main beam was balanced by
the crane hoisted it in place. Hence, the inclined bar was unloaded and the horizontal
force at the support on the top of the pier could also be avoided to make easier the
adjustment.

3. The connections between steel and concrete

It was shown in the previous chapter that there are two steel and concrete connections at
each bank unit: the support of the main beam at the top and the anchoring point of the
inclined bar at the bottom of the pier. In harmony with the shaping of the whole
structure and the structural elements the structural joins are traditionally formed, as
well. In the final stage the connection at the top of the pier is a usual fix hinged support

978
and the anchorage at the bottom seems to be a usual bolted bedplate join. But, because
of the geometrical regulation during the construction, design of a first stage of the joins
was necessary in order to make possible the required movements of the connecting
structural elements. There was one common principle of forming the two different joins.
Each had to be easily and quickly transformed into the final (service) stage after the
regulation had been finished.

3.1. Anchoring at the bottom of the pier


According to the functions of the anchoring the lower part of the reinforced concrete
pier was built in two stages. In the first stage two “bites” were left at the transverse
edges of the bottom of the pier in order to hide one-one regulation element of the
anchorage in the axes of the doubled girders of the inclined bar (Fig. 4.).

Fig. 4. Anchorage of the inclined steel bar consisting of doubled girders (Ref. 1.)

The lower ends of the regulation elements are tied to a common cylindrical compact
steel dowel deeply embedded into the reinforced concrete rib shaping the final border of
the pier between the “bites”. The upper headplate of the regulation elements is joined to
the bedplate of the doubled girders of the inclined bar through a certain gap by screw
shafts with fixing and adjusting nuts. The required movements of the inclined bar
during the construction could be produced by a free rotation around the dowel and an
axial displacement adjusted by the nuts of the screw shafts. The final (service) stage of

979
the connection was reached simply by filling the “bites” with concrete in order to hide
the elements of adjusting after the geometrical regulation had been done.

Regarding the load-bearing behaviour the connection provides the anchorage of the
axial tensile force of the inclined bar consisting of doubled parallel girders. Due to the
forming of the join presented above the connection has the same load-bearing capacity
during the regulation process as in its final stage. The tension of the anchoring elements
is taken by shear and bending of the cylindrical dowel anchored with steel ties along the
rib to the inside of the high volume pier.

3.2. Support on the top of the pier


The main beam is supported under the doubled “quasi” horizontal girders on two
hinged supports allowing free rotation around the common axis of the two cylindrical
hinges in the final (service) stage (Fig. 5.).

Fig. 5. Hinged support on the top of the pier

During the assemble and the geometrical regulation of the bank units allowing axial
displacement of the main beam was also needed. Therefore in the first stage the lower
parts of the two joints (the bedplates) were not fixed to the receiving steel boxes placed
in advance into the concrete on the top of the pier. All the elements of the joints were
fixed onto the corresponding girder of the main beam. Hence, the two hinges on the

980
doubled girders were able to move together with the main beam. The possible
displacements were limited to the extent of the gaps between the rigid lower part of the
bedplates hanging down into the receiving boxes and the elements (walls and plates) of
them. After the regulation had been finished the support was fixed on the one hand by
welding the bedplate of the joints to the upper plate of the receiving steel boxes, on the
other hand by injecting high strength epoxi resin into the boxes through the holes on the
top.

In the final (service) stage the connection supports vertically the main beam and
transmits the horizontal projection of the tensile reaction force of the inclined anchoring
bar to the pier balancing it by shear and bending. The transmitting of the horizontal
force is solved by local pressures at the front walls of the receiving boxes anchored with
vertical ties into the inside of the pier.

4. Summary

The connections between the steel and the reinforced concrete structural elements of two
specific pipe bridges were presented. Besides the load-bearing requirements the
considerations of the construction technology in harmony with a special need of
geometrical regulation of the structures had to be also taken into account during the
design of the joins. Satisfying the latter two aspects by the shaping of the connections
allowing free movements during the assemble of the main elements of the bridges were
focused in the paper.

5. References

1. Csíki, B., ‘Design of pipe bridges at People’s Island’, Magyar Építõipar,


(11-12) (1997) 321-324. (in Hungarian)

981
BEHAVIOR AND DESIGN OF STEEL GIRDER-TO-CONCRETE
COLUMN CONNECTION FOR A CANTILEVER-CONSTRUCTION
HIGHWAY BRIDGE
Ling Huang*, Hiroshi Hikosaka*, Masafumi Shimozono* and Katsuyoshi Akehashi**
* Dept. Civil Engineering, Kyushu University, Japan
** Research Institute, Yokogawa Bridge Corp., Japan

Abstract
Designing rigid and durable steel girder-to-concrete column connection is important for
a new type of highway bridge constructed using a cantilever-erection method. To
develop a full strength of the hybrid connection, the perforated steel plate is applied as a
bonding means for the steel-concrete interface. A nonlinear finite element program has
been developed to investigate the inelastic response of the steel-concrete hybrid
structure. The model considers the essential nonlinearities arising in the materials: 1)
nonlinear behavior of concrete under multiaxial stress states; 2) tensile cracking of
concrete; and 3) elasto-plastic behavior of steel plates and reinforcing steel bars. Special
attention has been paid to the two-dimensional nonlinear effect of perforated steel plates
at the steel-concrete interface. Effectiveness of the analysis method is demonstrated
through comparison of measured and numerical results on a highway bridge which has
been constructed recently in Japan. It is followed by the analytical confirmation of the
ultimate strength and deformation characteristics for a prototype connection region.

1. Introduction

A new cantilever-erection method has recently been developed in Japan for the
construction of two parallel steel plate girders spaced widely apart between axes and
rigidly connected to reinforced concrete (RC) piers. By rigidly connecting the steel
girders to concrete piers, high maintenance cost items such as bearings and deck joints
are eliminated. The moment-resisting capacity of the connection creates the potential for
additional redundancy in the seismic force resisting path. Wider spacing of girders
means less steel fabrication cost although at the expense of deeper sections. Either a
precast or cast-in-place prestressed concrete slab can be used for the deck, which may
be designed as composite or non-composite. Use of the transverse prestressing increases
the span length of the concrete slab with greatly reduced cracking. The large stiffness of

982
the deck in the horizontal plane can also minimize the lateral bracing of plate girders.

The new cantilever-erection method for steel plate girders would be a better choice,
especially in the mountainous regions where the use of other conventional erection
method is difficult and the construction yard is limited to a rather small space around the
pier. However, particular attention has to be paid to the stability of laterally unstiffened
plate girders under cantilever-erection. Designing the rigid and durable steel plate
girder-to-RC column connection is significantly important for the bridge constructed
using the cantilever-erection method. The perforated bonding plate, that is a steel plate
with large holes at close intervals, is applied for the hybrid steel-concrete connection.

2. Description of the bridge and its cantilever erection

2.1 Bridge type and dimensions


Fig. 1 shows an elevation of the prototype bridge1), for which the behavior and design of
the steel girder-to-concrete column connection are discussed in detail. It has three
continuous spans, 48.2+81.5+57.2 m, for a total length of 188 m, with two RC piers, P1
and P2, which are rectangular columns 2.5x6.7 m. The main girders are divided into 23
steel framework segments, each of which is made up of two parallel welded I-girders 5.6
m apart between axes. The girders are 2.9 m deep except for three segments of varying
depth (4.5 m maximum) adjacent to each pier. The transverse beams are rolled steel
profiles spaced every 4.8 m.

Fig. 1 Elevation view of the prototype bridge

2.2 Cyclic cantilever- erection of main steel girders


The cantilever-erection method of the main steel girders as well as the construction
sequence is illustrated in Fig. 2. The first step for steel girder erection after pier
construction is rigidly connecting the steel framework No.1 to pier P2 using a truck

983
Fig. 2 Cantilever-erection sequence of the main steel girders

crane. The steel segment is set on four stay-in-place supporting devices and positioned
800 mm above the pier top. After providing local reinforcement underneath the bottom
flanges of the girders and setting up casting forms, concrete is placed in the 2.5x5.6x3.8
m pier head.

The truck crane is also used to erect the steel segments 2 and 3 on alternate sides of the
pier, and then to erect the traveling erection gantry (TEG) crane on the main girders.
The TEG crane traveling on rails over the top flanges of girders is used for the cyclic
cantilever-erection of main girders and later for the laying of precast concrete deck slabs.
The TEG crane weighs about 600 kN including two main beams, a traveling device, a
hoisting device running on the main beams, and a supporting floor used as the work
platform during erection.

Photo 1 Cantilever-erection using TEG crane

984
Each steel framework is assembled by bolting on the supporting floor at ground level,
before it is hoisted and transported to the previously erected girders. The maximum
segment weight is 250 kN. The main beams of TEG, hanging the supporting floor with
an assembled steel segment as shown in Photo 1, travel first to the cantilever tip. The
hoisting device alone then moves to the correct position to connect the joints between
two steel segments. Combined welding and high-strength bolting is adopted for the field
splice of main girders. The webs and bottom flanges are bolted together, whereas the
welding of top flanges is required as the precast concrete deck slabs have to be laid on a
smooth surface of the flanges.

3. Design evaluation of steel girder-to-concrete column connection

3.1 Design of girder-to-column connection


The girder-to-column connection (Fig.3) has two main I-girders made of 570 MPa steel
(yield strength 450 MPa). The top and bottom flanges have a constant width of 800 mm
and 950 mm to limit their thickness to 59 mm and 50 mm, respectively, and the web
thickness is 32 mm. Two cross beams have a web of 3,000x28 mm and are expected to
transfer various forces between main girders and RC piers by means of four perforated
vertical stiffeners and two perforated diaphragms of 22 mm thick steel plate with 70 mm
diameter holes. The perforated stiffeners and diaphragms become embedded in the pier
when concrete is placed up to the upper flange height of the cross beams. Stud
connectors are also provided on the webs and underneath the bottom flanges of main
girders to improve the bonding at the steel-concrete interface.

Fig. 3 Steel girder-to-column connection

The perforated steel plate was originally proposed and named “perfobond strip” by
Leonhardt et al.2) as an efficient bonding means for steel-concrete composite structures.
In their push-out type experiments on the perforated steel plate embedded in concrete, it
was observed that shear-slip relations depend on factors including: 1) concrete

985
compressive strength, 2) hole diameter, 3) lateral confining pressure, and 4) amount of
lateral reinforcement provided through the hole.

3.2 Problem description


The perforated steel plates have not been practically used in Japan as bonding means for
the steel-concrete interface. Designing the rigid and durable steel girder-to-RC column
connection is significantly important for the bridge constructed using the
cantilever-erection. Because a single TEG crane is used for the cantilever-erection of the
main girders, a large unbalanced pier moment will take place during the erection,
producing a potential for damage in the connection region. One main design goal is to
ensure that ultimate failure is associated with a flexural mechanism developing in either
the main girder or column, rather than a failure in the connection region. Concerns
regarding design details in the connection region prompted the testing programs3,4) and
associated analyses5), as well as the monitoring of connection behavior during the
cantilever-erection, as described hereafter.

3.3 Modeling of material nonlinearity and perforated bonding plate


A finite element program suited to nonlinear analyses of the girder-to-column
connection was developed in this study. The program solution algorithm and material
models were verified through comparisons with various test results for RC structures6).

Webs of the main I-girders are modeled by plane stress quadrilaterals, whose material
model is based on a plasticity theory under von-Mises yield criterion. Flanges and cross
beams are represented by 1-D truss elements, whose material model is idealized as
bilinear elastic strain-hardening plastic. Concrete continuum is represented by plane
stress elements. A plasticity-based constitutive
model is used to simulate the nonlinear behavior Qy
of concrete in compression. A smeared crack
k sy
model is used to represent the concrete fracture.
k sx
Reinforcing bars are modeled in a discrete Qx
manner by the 1-D truss element described
above.
Fig. 4 Bond link
The 2-D link-type elements (Fig.4) are used to element
Q
model the bonding actions between concrete and
perforated steel plate. A series of pull-out tests on
perforated steel plates with a single hole was
performed by Japan Highway Public Corporation4).
Qu /3 unloading reloading
The test specimens had the same parameters as
those in the prototype girder-to-column connection, k
unloading reloading
such as the concrete strength (30 MPa), the plate se
thickness (22 mm) and the hole diameter (70 mm). Fig. 5 Shear-slip relation for perfobond

986
No lateral reinforcement was provided in both the specimen and the prototype structure.
Based on the pull-out test results, nonlinear shear-slip relation for the perforated steel
plate is assumed to take the form shown by a curve in Fig.5, in which Qu is the shear
strength per hole of a perforated plate embedded in solid concrete. The orthogonal link
shear stiffness, ksx = ksy in Fig.4, is defined as the secant modulus from the origin to Qu
/3 and is adjusted by means of the nonlinear shear-slip relation given in Fig.5.

3.4 Two-dimensional model construction


The steel girder-to-RC column connection is modeled using the steel framework
segment connected to pier P2. The 2-D finite element idealization of the connection
region and its boundary conditions is shown in Fig.6. The nodal loads are specified
based on both the bending moments, Ml and Mr, and the vertical shears, Ql and Qr,
acting on the field spliced cross-sections. In the analysis the load factor λ, multiplied to
each load, is increased incrementally.

Fig. 6 FE idealization of the connection region

3.5 Monitoring of the connection region under cantilever-erection


Because a single TEG crane was used for the cantilever-erection of main girders, a large
unbalanced pier moment took place during the construction of the prototype bridge1).
Several parameters were monitored in the steel-concrete connection region at each pier
head, including strains in the main steel girders and RC piers, as well as the construction
camber of each girder segment.

Fig. 7 shows the variation of measured and calculated stresses in the longitudinal
reinforcing bars at the positions 650 mm below top of pier P2, as the main girders were
cantilevered on alternate sides of the pier. The largest unbalanced pier moment occurs
when the girder segment G20 is being erected in the A2 side span before the segment G12

987
Stress in rebar (N/mm2)

Fig. 7 Variation of rebar stresses in pier P2 during cantilever- erection


Stress in main girder (N/mm2)

Fig. 8 Variation of normal stresses in main girders during cantilever- erection

in the center span is completed. The measured stresses in three different rebars spaced
2.1 m transversely have almost the same values, validating the use of 2-D finite element
idealization of the connection region. Fig. 8 illustrates the variation of normal stresses in
the flanges and webs of the two parallel main girders, G1 and G2, measured at the
cross-sections just out of the girder-to-pier connection. The differences between the
measured and calculated values are relatively small, which indicates that the FE analysis
model used for the calculation is satisfactory.

988
4. Behavior and ultimate strength of girder-to-column connection

Structural behavior and ultimate strength of the steel girder-to-RC column connection
in the prototype bridge are numerically predicted using again the 2-D model of
connection region already shown in Fig.6. The bending moments, Ml and Mr, and the
vertical shears, Ql and Qr, are given the ratios Mr /Ml = 0.81 and Qr /Ql = 0.95, which
were calculated from the completed prototype structure given in Fig. 1 for the design
load including the dead and live load. The load factor λ is multiplied to the design load,
with λ=1 corresponding to the design load, and λ=1.7 to the ultimate limit state until
which the failure condition should not be exceeded.

Fig. 9 Load vs. deflection curve

Fig. 10 Normal stress distribution across vertical cross sections in the main girder

The vertical displacement versus load factor, at the left cantilever-tip of the steel girder
segment, is plotted in Fig.9. The analysis predicts the linear relationship up to the first
yield of the bottom flanges in main girders at λ=2.2. Fig.10 shows the normal stress
distribution across vertical cross sections in the main girder, just to the left and right
sides of cross beam and at the center of pier width, respectively, for several load levels.
Since the concrete is placed up to 3 m from the bottom flange within the 4.5 m-deep

989
connection, the change of normal stress distribution due to the sudden transition from
non-composite to composite section is apparent.

The distribution of horizontal and vertical shears, Qx and Qy, per hole on the perforated
vertical stiffeners welded to the cross beam webs at λ = 1 is plotted in Fig.11. The
distribution of Qx corresponds to the horizontal bearing pressure from the cross beam
webs to concrete, although the severe horizontal pulling-out forces occur on the web
A-A of cross beam above the neutral axis of the main girder. Fig.12 shows the
distribution of shears Qx and Qy per hole along four edges on the perforated diaphragm
at λ = 1.

Fig. 11 Distribution of shears on the perforated vertical stiffeners

Fig. 12 Distribution of shears on the perforated diaphragm (kN)

5. Concluding remarks

Nonlinear behavior and design of the newly developed steel girder-to-concrete column
connection, including its serviceability and ultimate strength, were discussed in the
present paper. This type of connection was adopted in Japan for a cantilever-construction
highway bridge, in which steel girders were rigidly connected to RC piers. Use of the
perforated steel plates in place of conventional stud connectors led to simplification and
rationalization in the construction of steel-concrete hybrid structure.

A nonlinear finite element program was developed to investigate the inelastic response
of the proposed hybrid connection, in which special attention was paid to the 2-D
nonlinear effect of the perforated steel plates at the steel-concrete interface. The

990
program solution algorithm and material models were verified through comparisons
with some measured parameters, including stresses in the main girders and RC piers
monitored during the girder erection.

The FE analyses can provide simple, nonlinear descriptions of the connection behavior,
particularly a clear concept of the stress flows in the connection region. Such
information would be useful in the initial stage of design process and for making
appropriate member changes prior to the final design. However, the 2-D approach to
modeling the connection region is unable to account for 3-D phenomena, and its
performance needs to be validated against additional experimental and theoretical
results.

References

1. Nakamura, K., Imaizumi, Y., Kaneshige, H., Nakahigashi, T., Sasaki, Y. and
Ogawa, T., ‘Design and Construction of Imabeppu River Bridge’, Bridge and
Foundation Engineering, 34 (12) (2000) 2-9.
2. Leonhardt, F., Andrä, W., Andrä, H-P. and Harre, W., ‘Neues, vorteilhaftes
Verbundmittel für Stahlverbund-Tragwerke mit hoher Dauerfestigkeit’, Beton- und
Stahlbetonbau, (12) (1987) 325-331.
3. Sasaki, Y., Hirai, T. and Akehashi, K., ‘Experimental study on rigid connection for
hybrid frame bridge consisting of steel girder and reinforced concrete pier,’ Journal
of Structural Engineering, JSCE, 44A (1998) 1347-1357.
4. Kano, Y., ‘Studies on steel plate girder-to-RC column connection for highway
bridges’, EXTEC, 13 (4) (2000) 41-43.
5. Liu, Y., Hikosaka, H., and Huang, L., ‘Finite element analysis of steel
girder-to-column connection considering nonlinear behavior of studs,” Journal of
Applied Mechanics, JSCE, 1 (1998) 481-488.
6. Han, S., Hikosaka, H., Huang, L., Bolander, J.E. and Satake, M., ‘Simulating
distributed discrete cracking in reinforced concrete structures using smeared crack
FE model’, Proc. 1st International Conference on Engineering Computation and
Computer Simulation, Changsha, China, (1995) 284-293.

991
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND CHANCES OF
COMPOSITE STRUCTURES
Ulrike Kuhlmann
Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart

Abstract
Composite structures combine the advantages of both materials concrete and steel. De-
velopments in the recent years show a tendency to optimise design and construction of
composite constructions by an increasing flexible use of structural forms and techniques.
An overview over some innovative trends is given. As a consequence of that tendency
the borderline between buildings and bridges as well as the difference between girders,
slabs and other structural elements start to diminish which demands of the structural en-
gineers a broad knowledge and a holistic conceptual view.

1 Introduction
Composite constructions combine the high-strength performance of structural steel with
the stiffness and compressive strength of concrete. As each material can be used to its
best advantage, composite structures show economy in overall cost and are fast to con-
struct. For these reasons they have become increasingly popular.

As composite structures also show an increasing variety, it is nearly impossible to give a


complete overview. In the following some specific topics showing especially innovative
developments will be addressed such as
- composite columns,
- partially encased composite beams,
- composite slabs and slim-floor structures,
- connection devices and composite joints,
- high strength structural steel and
- composite bridges.
On the basis of these examples the attempt will be made to highlight also some general
tendencies and chances of composite structures in the future.

995
2 Composite Columns
Columns have been one of the first elements built as composite. Nevertheless, two inter-
esting new developments can be noticed.

moment due to
imperfection

Eurocode 4: DIN 18 800-5:


M Sd (Fd ) ≤ 0,9 ⋅ µ ⋅ M pl,Rd M Sd (Fd , w 0 ) ≤ 0,9 ⋅ µ d ⋅ M pl,Rd

Figure 1: Verification of composite columns according to Eurocode 4 [1] and DIN


18800-5 [2], see also [3]
The rules for composite columns according to Eurocode 4 [1] are restricted to non-sway
systems. As shown in Figure 1 a simplified design method is applied. The global analy-
sis has to be performed considering the second order effects whereas the local influences
of second order theory and imperfections are taken into account indirectly by the design
procedure based on the buckling length and the European buckling curves. For the col-
umn no equivalent imperfections are given.

The moment due to imperfection is taken proportional to the moment belonging to the
reduction value κ of the allowable compression force according to the European buck-
ling curves. Therefore, for the moment induced by imposed loads only an amount of
µ ⋅ M pl,Rd is available. The reduction of 90 % considers
- the influence of the realistic stress-strain laws and
- the approximation according to the effective stiffness values.

This procedure is only valid for single columns in non-sway frames. For the verification
of sway framed systems explicit values for the equivalent initial imperfection have to be
known. Investigations by Dr. Bergmann in Bochum and Prof. Lindner in Berlin [3], [6]
have determined representative values which have meanwhile been included in the re-
cent version of the German standard DIN 18800-5 [2], see Table 1:

996
Table 1: Member imperfections and buckling curves for composite columns accord-
ing to DIN 18800-5 [2]
axis of buckling member
cross-section
buckling curve imperfection
concrete filled
sections y-y
L/300
a (C20 - C60)
z-z

L/250
completely or partially (C20 - C35)
encased I-sections y-y b L/210
(C40 - C60)
L/200
(C20 - C35)
z-z c L/170
(C40 - C60)

These imperfections are included in an ordinary verification according to second order


theory. Figure 1 shows the procedure in comparison to the simplified method of Euro-
code 4. The internal moments within the columns are now also determined under consid-
eration of imperfections and local effects of second order theory. As a consequence the
full plastic moment - only reduced to 90 %, see reasons above - is regarded as resistance.

However, in contrast to pure steel structures an effective flexural stiffness has to be


taken into account for the composite column to consider the effects of cracking and long
term duration, see details in [2] and [3]. As often during erection the same column is first
used as pure steel column and only later integrated in a composite frame, this change of
stiffness plays an important role. By enlarging the scope to sway frame systems defor-
mations become of eminent importance, therefore the temporal development of stiffness
has to be followed consequently.

The effects of creep and shrinkage or the temporal development of stiffness also have to
be closely observed for a special kind of columns which are sometimes called “Mega
columns” [7] or else “Super-columns” [8], see Figure 2.

In fact, it is questionable whether these elements should be called columns or not. The
framed steel structure is erected first and transfers gravity loads as well as horizontal
loads. This allows the erection of the upper stories to proceed ahead of the concreting of
the columns at the lower level. The procedure essentially speeds up the overall erection
time and is regarded as a major advantage for tall buildings. However, because of the
high percentage of concrete section and the high vertical loads loading history as well as
creep and shrinkage are important.

997
Cross-section
StE 460 / St 52 B 65
studs 22 x1 00 BSt 500 S, ∅ 28

Figure 2: Mega column, Commerzbank Headquarters, Frankfurt/Main [7]


Both developments of composite columns, the second order design of sway frames as
well as the trend of giant columns show a tendency to enlarge the scope and enable a
more flexible usage. However, this necessitates a more sophisticated calculation.

3 Partially encased composite beams


The second element which has traditionally been built as composite are beams. Nowa-
days they are often integrated into frame systems, as explained before. But also the shape
has changed: Composite beams are today frequently partially encased into concrete.

Figure 3: Material distribution of the main girders of the body unit of Porsche and the
paint unit of Opel according to Hanswille [9].
Originally the purpose of encasement was to improve the resistance to fire as e.g. for the
main girder of the body unit of Porsche in Stuttgart (1985), see Fig. 3. For the normal
temperature design following Eurocode 4 [1] only the improved buckling behaviour of
the web could be taken into account. The development may be recognised considering
the second girder in Fig. 3. For the main girder of the paint unit of Opel in Eisenach
(1992) the concrete encasement and the reinforcement were also taken into account in
calculating the bending resistance and the flexural stiffness for the normal temperature
design. Instead of altering the lower steel flanges, additional reinforcement in the con-

998
crete encasement was provided. The example given by Hanswille in [9] showed for a
20 m span a reduction of the steel weight from 7.85 tons to 6 tons and an advantage
concerning the overall costs of nearly 6 %.

Figure 4: Partially encased composite beams, according to [10]


Rules given explicitly in the new German standard DIN 18800-5 [2] restrict the consid-
eration of the concrete encasement for the bending resistance to the compressed part,
thus neglecting the concrete acting in tension. The regulations require a full shear con-
nection to be provided between steel web and concrete encasement. It is also pointed out
that for reasons of ductility the plastic zone in compression should be limited to 0.15 of
the overall height and that reinforcement in the lower third of the concrete height should
fulfil ductility requirements. A full moment redistribution according to plastic hinge the-
ory should not take into account the concrete encasement, as the transfer of shear forces
in a widely cracked area is uncertain, see also [3].

If adequately connected the reinforced concrete encasement is also able to carry part of
the vertical shear load which originally is thought to be transmitted only by the steel
web. The vertical shear force in the concrete encasement may be assumed proportional
to the internal moment distribution between the moment of concrete encasement, the
steel girder moment and the moment resistance based on the pair of internal normal
forces of the composite section, for further explanation see [3].

999
Neglecting the encased concrete in zones of tension may lead to unrealistic high defor-
mations. So for this purpose it is proposed to consider an effective stiffness derived from
the mean value of the cracked and uncracked section, see [10].

4 Composite slabs
Stiffness starts to be of importance also for another composite element: for composite
slabs. As composite slabs consisting of thin, cold-formed metal sheeting and in-situ cast
reinforced concrete, the steel-concrete interaction can be achieved by pure adhesion,
frictional and mechanical interlock and end anchorage. In practice a combination of
these effects exists. The efficiency of frictional and mechanical interlock mainly depends
on the shape of the metal decking and its indentations. Therefore strong efforts have
been undertaken to improve the shape e.g. by embossments or by end anchorage, see
[11]. These improvements aim at a higher load capacity as well as at a more ductile be-
haviour. But however the full interaction leading to a full plastic moment resistance is
nearly never attained.

Therefore, for composite slabs the model how to consider the partial interaction between
steel and concrete in design is of vital importance. In Eurocode 4 [1] two methods are
given to verify the longitudinal shear resistance
- the m + k method, a purely empirical shear bond method and
- the partial connection method which is based on a mechanical model using tests
only to obtain shear strength values.
Especially the latter has recently been focused on by several researchers [11], [12], [13].

MRd (with end anchorage)


MRd (without end anchorage)
Mpl,Rd q
MSd Nc
Lx
L Ved

Lx
MSd
Lx
Mpla
Lsf L
Ved
b ⋅ τ u ,Rd

Figure 5: Partial connection method [3]


As explained in Figure 5, the moment resistance results from the pair of forces Nt of the
steel sheeting and Nc of the concrete plus a small contribution of the plastic moment re-
sistance of the pure metal decking Mpla. The concrete force Nc is equal to the longitudi-
nal shear force τ u ,Rd ⋅ b ⋅ L x introduced from the sheeting into the concrete over a length

1000
Lx. With increasing length Lx starting e.g. from the support of a simple girder the mo-
ment resistance increases up to the full plastic moment Mpl,Rd. The verification is done if
the moment distribution due to loading case MSd, see Figure 5, stays under the curve of
resistance. The values τu,Rd are assumed to be constant over the length though in reality
have proved to be locally influenced e.g. by friction. Thus it is recommended to shift
proportionally to the friction force the graph of resistance into the negative length area,
similar to the procedure for the end anchorage force Ved.

However, the design of composite slabs is not restricted to single spans. In some cases it
is useful to take advantage of the benefits of continuous slabs which are in comparison to
single spans: reduced deflections, higher architectural slenderness and larger load capac-
ity. To make use of the full redistribution of bending moments according to plastic
analysis it is obvious that sufficient rotational capacity at the regions of negative bending
moments is necessary. As also presented in [11] I. Sauerborn developed a modified plas-
tic hinge method and defined some rules for the limits of application [14].

As a consequence and in contrast to the regulations of Eurocode 4 [1] the new German
code DIN 18800-5 [2] restricts together with the corresponding new German concrete
code DIN 1045-1 [5] the application of plastic hinge theory to composite slabs with
- re-entrant profile shape with mechanical interlock,
- highly ductile reinforcement,
- spans L less than 6 m,
- concrete compression zone at support with a height x less than 0,25 ⋅ d and
- a relation Mpl,support to Mpl,span between 0.5 and 2.

This close interference with the concrete code reminds of the fact that at least at the sup-
port the composite slab is a reinforced concrete slab which is of course largely improved
by the ductility and bending resistance of the steel decking.

It seems to be typical for the development of recent years that as well as the differences
between concrete elements and composite elements diminish, also a clear distinction be-
tween composite slab and composite girder becomes more and more difficult. Examples
of this are given in Figure 6.

5 Slim-floor structures
A light weight composite floor like the Hoesch additiv floor [15], see Fig. 6a), behaves
very similar to a pure steel or a pure reinforced concrete beam, whereas slim-floor gird-
ers like the ASB section [16] or the UPE hat section.[17] in Figure 6b) and c) resemble
composite slabs.

Slim-floor structures are characterised by the supporting beam being within the depth of
the floor deck. It has a number of advantages including reduced depth of construction
and improved fire resistance. Currently most forms of slim-floor girders are designed as

1001
non-composite, but for an increasing number composite action is tried to be activated by
means of mechanical shear connectors or by consideration of frictional interlock or
clamping effects. However, a full shear interaction is seldom achieved, so that the rigid-
ity in the interface between steel and concrete has to be considered especially when cal-
culating deformations.

a) b) c)
Figure 6: Slim-floor systems: a) Hoesch additive floor [15], b) Slimdek construction
with ASB section [16], c) UPE hat section [17]
In Eurocode 4 [1], 5.2.2 (6) a factor is given to increase the deformation of full interac-
tion in order to take care of the slip between steel and concrete. This factor is propor-
tional to the relation between the deformations of the pure steel girder and the composite
girder with full interaction. This relation increases to a value of 10 to 15, if slim-floor
girders are concerned, see Figure 7.

δa/δv type of girder

1 pure steel girder

normal composite
1÷3
girder

composite girder
4÷9
with reduced height

10 ÷ 15 slim-floor girder

Figure 7: Relation of deformations of pure steel girders δa and composite girders with
full interaction δv [18]
The diagrams in Figure 8 show – as has also meanwhile been proved by experimental
and numerical investigations [17] – that the factor given in Eurocode 4 overestimates
more realistic values as e.g. by Dabaon [19] by up to 5 to 2.

1002
δ/δv δ/δv
8 8
7 7
6 6
5 5
4 4
3 0,4 3 0
2 2
0,6 0,6
1 1
0 0,8 0,8
0
19 16 13 1
η 19 16
η
10 7 13 10 1
δa/δv δa/δv
4 1 7 4 1

a) b)
Figure 8: Relation of deformations of composite girder with partial interaction δ and
composite girders with full interaction δv in dependence of the degree of
connection η a) by Eurocode 4 [1] and b) by Dabaon [19]

6 Connection devices
Composite action strongly depends on the connection devices which transfer the longi-
tudinal shear from the steel interface into the reinforced concrete. Two main develop-
ments can be observed concerning these devices:
- a more refined usage of headed studs, the most common connectors in composite
construction and
- the development of alternative devices.

The usage of headed studs has recently been extended to unusual positioning like hori-
zontally lying studs in thin concrete slabs, see [20]. It is shown that the reduction of the
resistance due to splitting failure may be minimised by an optimum reinforcement.

For studs in composite bridges the fatigue verification as given in Eurocode 4 Part 2 [4]
has been reviewed, see [21]. It is discussed whether inconsistencies or scatter of results
are not partly due to the various fatigue test evaluation methods, [22].

Stud connectors in troughs of profiled sheetings have been covered by many research
projects. A thorough investigation of existing results [22] showed that in Eurocode 4 [1]
not all relevant parameters are taken into account.

Concrete dowels as alternative connection devices had been subject to an intensive re-
search in Stuttgart already nearly 25 years ago [23]. But only now concrete dowels
arouse a wider interest and are investigated by a number of groups in diverse countries.
Thus, a thorough investigation of the fatigue behaviour has recently been undertaken

1003
[24], see Figure 9. In Japan concrete dowels are even applied in combination with corru-
gated webs for bridges [25].

Figure 9: Composite beam with concrete dowel [24]


As an alternative to headed studs shear rib connectors of folded angles, of which one leg
is embedded in the concrete, whereas the other is fastened to the beam by powder actu-
ated fasteners, allow for a shear connection without welding [26]. Similar adapted to the
special usage for composite columns with concrete filled tubes are nails which are shot-
fired from outside through the steel shell [27].

Besides the development of connectors and other devices the integration of these means
in connections and the assembly of connections to joints have seen a rapid progress.

7 Composite Joints
In conventional steel structures the concrete slabs do not belong to the structural system.
To avoid interaction the slabs are even separated by gaps from the column. With the
spreading use of composite beams there is at least a longitudinal shear connection be-
tween slab and steel girder. But only if the gap around the column is closed and special
reinforcement takes care for a systematic introduction of a normal force ∆N into the col-
umn, one speaks of a composite joint. Figure 10 gives an example of the Millenium
Tower Vienna where these details have been realised even for composite slim-floor gird-
ers [28].

European recommendations [29], [30] have been developed to consider the influence of
the slab reinforcement for the stiffness and resistance of such composite joints. The rec-
ommendations are based on the component method which has first been developed only
for steel joints. A joint is considered as a set of individual basic components which are
modelled as translational springs. The structural properties of the joints like stiffness and
resistance are determined by assembly of the components characteristics. Thus most of
the necessary tests can be made as component tests. Besides saving costs this procedure
allows for a very flexible composition of various types of joints out of different compo-
nents.

1004
tubular steel section
Stahlrohr
Träger
steel girder

25 headed studs
Kopfbolzen
30

contact pieces
Paßbleche
bracket
Knagge

Stahlrohr
steel girder
Träger

headed studs
Kopfbolzen

contact pieces
Knagge Paßbleche
bracket

Figure 10: Composite slim-floor joints of exterior columns in Millennium Tower Vi-
enna [28]
As a further step of the development these composite joints are integrated as semi-
continuous joints in structural systems taking advantage also from plastic hinge theory.
As the moment resistance of composite joints is in general lower than the beam bending
resistance, the first plastic hinge is likely to form at the support within the joints. To ex-
ploit the real advantage of plastic hinge theory - which is especially interesting for com-
posite structures because of the difference between the plastic moments of span and sup-
port - plastic rotation capacity is demanded also of the composite joints. This question is
dealt at the moment in a number of research projects [29], [31].

8 High-strength materials
The use of high-strength materials allows a remarkable increase of the load-bearing ca-
pacities without increasing the dead load of the structure. For a composite beam, chang-
ing from a normal-strength steel S235 and a normal-strength concrete C30/37 to a high-
strength steel S460 and a high strength concrete C70/85 means an increase of the plastic
moment resistance of about 90 % for the sagging moment and of 70 % for the hogging
moment region [32]. But some special considerations are needed to take advantage of
this increase.

The design regulations for beams and columns, especially those for practical application,
are all based on the assumption of full plastic behaviour resulting in the model of a stress
block diagram for the section. In reality the true stress-strain curves of steel and concrete
lead to a different stress distribution. In general, this difference is neglected for normal-
strength composite sections, whereas for high-strength materials it may lead to a reduc-
tion of the resistance which cannot be ignored anymore.

For composite columns the steel strength and the buckling curve are based on Annex H
of Eurocode 3 [33] dealing with the usage of steel grade S420 and S460. Due to the

1005
combination with concrete and taking account of the real stress-strain distribution Annex
H of Eurocode 4 [1] gives reduction factors αN for the buckling factor κ and factors αM
replacing the moment factor 0.9, see Table 2 according to [34]. As the material influence
is of importance only for the low and medium slenderness range, the reduction factors
depend on the reduced slenderness value λ .

Examples as the Commerzbank Headquarters in Frankfurt/Main [7] show that the use of
high-strength steel for the lower stories enables the designer to keep the same slender di-
ameter for the composite columns over the whole building height.
Table 2: Reduction factors for composite columns for the use of high-strength steel,
[34]
Reducing factor Replacement of
of χ for pure 0.9 for compres-
Cross-section compression sion and bending
α N ≤ 0,9 α M ≤ 0,9
bending
completely about strong 0,1 ⋅ λ + 0,9 0,1 ⋅ λ + 0,8
encased axis
with bending
concrete about weak 0,2 ⋅ λ + 0,8 0,2 ⋅ λ + 0,7
axis
bending
partially about strong 0,1 ⋅ λ + 0,9 0,1 ⋅ λ + 0,8
encased axis
with bending
concrete about weak 0,2 ⋅ λ + 0,8 0,2 ⋅ λ + 0,7
axis

concrete filled sections 0,1 ⋅ λ + 0,9 0,2 ⋅ λ + 0,7

Similar to composite columns, in Annex H of Eurocode 4 a moment reduction factor β


has also been defined for the use of high-strength steel in composite beams. This factor
has been reviewed within a comprehensive European research project and modified in
order to take care also of the influence of high-strength concrete [32]. As an interesting
observation it came out that the application of partial shear connection may lead to a
higher bending resistance than the full shear connection if the strain restrictions of the
concrete determine the resistance. This is due to the fact that the partial longitudinal
shear connection has a balancing effect on the slip distribution, so that all studs can reach
their ultimate resistance.

1006
9 Composite Bridges
Composite bridges used to be a field for experts, not only because bridges are submitted
to special requirements of serviceability and durability, but also because designers had to
be closely familiar with both materials steel and concrete, as for bridges the composite
action of steel and concrete in general has to be calculated by elastic theory considering
in detail all effects of creep and shrinkage. Meanwhile the singular position of composite
bridges has changed:
- As pointed out before, the increasing importance of serviceability criteria and the
growing complexity of building structures as “ Mega columns” or composite frames
with composite joints etc. nowadays also require a certain amount of sophistication
for the structural design of buildings.
- On the other hand the increasing use of composite bridges has driven forward the
development of “simple systems” even for bridges which promise to see a vivid
spread in future.
So the borderline between buildings and bridges has started to vanish. Nevertheless
bridge design still forms the origin of many interesting new trends, which may become a
module for composite constructions in general. Therefore 3 examples for new tendencies
are given in the following.

Example 1: BW 1 near Ravensburg


The first example concerns the development of so called “simple systems”. Supported by
the Federal Ministry of Transport, a composite bridge system for small and medium
spans of 25 to 45 m span lengths has been developed [35], which systematically makes
use of precast concrete elements not only as lost falsework but also as part of the carry-
ing concrete slab. A well defined reinforcement transfers the shear forces between pre-
cast and cast-in-situ concrete.

Figure 11: Steel girders and precast elements of a bridge structure near Ravensburg,
Baden-Württemberg [36]

1007
The two small bridges shown in Figure 11 with a span length of only 28 meters are situ-
ated in the north of Ravensburg. The designer [36] has adapted the original design [35]
by cutting the web of this simply supported girder system according to the shape of the
bending moments. By such simple means the aesthetical outlook is improved. To allow
the precast concrete deck to cantilever the headed studs on the external girders are
welded in groups which are filled by the concrete cast in situ.

As a special feature, these new composite girder systems are only stiffened by cross
girders at the bearings. These cross girders made of concrete form a unity with the cast-
in-situ part of the slab. End plates with horizontal studs transfer the shear forces from the
steel girders into the concrete transverse girder. The transverse girders are only sup-
ported at two bearing points. The high amount of reinforcement is necessary because of
the severe load introduction of shear forces and torsional moments, see Figure 11.

These bridges form an example that by an optimum use of modern techniques of both
materials, concrete and steel, very effective alternatives to standard bridge systems can
be developed. The economy is mainly due to the advantages concerning the erection: So
no scaffolding is needed and all elements which have a function during erection also as-
sist in the final system.

Example 2: Amperbrücke
The following example should demonstrate that the consequent application of new de-
sign developments may also lead to new structural forms.

Figure 12: Amperbrücke [37]


Figure 13 shows the structural system and cross section of two composite tied-arch
bridges with a span of 70.2 meters for the motorway A 96 across the Amper near Mu-
nich [37].

In standard composite tied-arch bridges [38] two main steel girder in the plane of the
steel arches form the tension tie and equilibrate the compression force of the arch. At the
same time they carry the transverse girders which form together with the concrete slab

1008
composite plate girders in transverse direction. The concrete slab acts in three structural
subsystems
- as deck for the direct wheel loading
- as flange of the composite transverse girders
- and as part of the tension tie of the arch system.

Former tied-arch bridges had been designed to avoid or to reduce the contribution of the
concrete slab as tension tie. For example the top steel flange of the transverse girder was
tapered from the beginning of the slab towards the main girder. Thus, the horizontal
connection between concrete slab and steel girder was weakened. Nevertheless, the par-
ticipation of the concrete slab to the tension tie function could not be neglected. Accord-
ing to former design philosophy, the tension stresses in the concrete slab had to be sur-
charged by high prestressing by cables.
Meanwhile concerning the prestressing of concrete slabs in composite constructions sev-
eral developments have induced a general change of concept. Instead of longitudinal
prestressing by cables the amount of simple reinforcement steel in the slab has been in-
creased. As a consequence a controlled cracking of the concrete has been allowed. Be-
sides economical advantages an increasing sensitivity for the importance of durability
has led to a preference of simple reinforced slabs compared to slabs prestressed by ca-
bles.
However, there are few examples of new tied-arch bridges which also try to adapt the
cross section to the special needs of the new concept of simple reinforced slabs. So
whereas the former design philosophy aimed at weakening the connection between main
steel girder and concrete slab, the new concept requires a strong load transmission.

Figure 13: Structural system and cross section of Amperbrücke [37]


This idea is consequently realised by the system of the Amperbrücke [37]. There is no
reason anymore to separate longitudinal steel girders and concrete slab: Instead of the
two main girders aside of the concrete slab, three longitudinal steel girders underneath
the slab act as composite plate girders in longitudinal direction. The deck is not spanned
any longer between the transverse girders, but between the three longitudinal girders.
The economical concept of a composite deck bridge has been combined with the system
of a tied-arch bridge.
By integrating steel and concrete into one single composite girder, a very close connec-
tion between concrete and steel member is attained. Rather than numerous transverse
girders and hangers, there are only four strong girders and hangers transferring the loads

1009
from the deck system to the two arches. A considerable economical advantage is
achieved by the obvious reduction of the number of structural members. The few points
of crossing of transverse and main girders and the small number of joints of hangers to
arches and girders contribute to this cost reduction.
At the two bridge ends a strong bracing system connects the compressed arches to the
tensioned deck. For the longitudinal girders as well as for the bracings, shear forces are
transferred to the concrete slab by studs. The slab is not prestressed by cables, but only
simply reinforced resulting in a considerable high amount of simple reinforcement.
However, according to the new design philosophy the contribution of the concrete slab
and its reinforcement to the tension tie function is no longer prevented but considered
right on schedule.

This example shows the mutual relationship between design and calculation philosophy
and design concept. Considering criteria like safety, function, durability and economy
may lead to new and even unconventional ideas.

Example 3: Viaduct of Wilde Gera


As an example of such new ideas some main features of the viaduct of Wilde Gera are
explained in the following.
As an alternative to a continuous deck bridge of 6 spans an arch bridge design was se-
lected for the crossing of the deep valley of the Wilde Gera when constructing the new
motorway A71 southwest of Ilmenau in Thüringen. Figure 14 shows the structural sys-
tem and cross section according to [39], [40]. Besides of economical reasons the concept
of a large arch bridge was chosen because of environmental and aesthetical advantages
as it did nor require any foundations in the valley.
The same reason has led to the choice of only one superstructure instead of two, which
are normally constructed for motorways to be able to close one bridge for rehabilitation
while the traffic is diverted to the second bridge. To allow also with one superstructure
for a partial renewal of the concrete slab, the loading case of an opening of half of the
deck for a length of 12 to 15 m, while the traffic is still running on the other half of the
bridge section, had to be considered for the design of Wilde Gera and decisively deter-
mined the dimensions.
The section consists of a composite hollow section with a trapezoidal steel trough and a
simply reinforced concrete slab of multiple functions:
- longitudinal compression and tension forces as part of the composite section
- local bending stresses as a concrete deck spanned in transverse direction
- transverse tension and bending stresses as part of the transverse girder and tension
tie integrated in the transverse frame system.
As can be seen in Figure 14 the transverse tension ties are formed by a reinforced con-
crete beam with a steel plate as external reinforcement. This may be considered as a kind
of “slim-floor” section. The slab is supported by the two steel webs, two longitudinal
composite girders at the cantilevers and a reinforced concrete beam in the middle. It is
obvious that this unusual combination of concrete, steel and composite structural ele-
ments needed some special considerations, see [39].

1010
View

Cross section

Detail A Section B-B

Figure 14: Structural system and cross section of Wilde Gera [39], [40]
This mixed section integrated into a mixed structural system of a concrete arch and a
steel concrete composite bridge girder clearly demonstrates the need of strong collabora-
tion of the concrete and the steel side. It is an example that the future requires engineers
who do not only see themselves as “steel or concrete people”, but as structural engineers
who dominantly try to find the best solution for a given problem. The University of

1011
Stuttgart has started a new educational program that tries to direct the new engineers to
such a holistic view of conceptual design. It will hopefully enable them to develop new
concepts of really mixed structures like the viaduct of Wilde Gera.

10 Summary and outlook


For the fields of composite buildings and bridges a number of innovative developments
have been pointed out. On this basis the attempt was made to highlight also some general
tendencies and chances of composite structures in the future.
Composite structures are especially qualified to satisfy basic modern requirements like
- economy,
- functional ability,
- environmental and aesthetical needs and
- durability.
Fulfilling these requirements leads to new concepts of mixed structures and a new think-
ing of engineers as fair responsible partners regardless whether from concrete or steel
side.

11 References
[1] ENV 1994-1-1, Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures -
Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings, 1992
[2] DIN 18800-5, Stahlbauten Teil 5, Verbundtragwerke aus Stahl und Beton, Be-
messung und Konstruktion, Draft, January 1999
[3] G. Hanswille, R. Bergmann: Neue Verbundnorm E DIN 18800-5 mit Kommen-
tar und Beispielen, Stahlbaukalender 2000, p. 288 - 461
[4] ENV 1994-2, Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures –
Part 2: Composite bridges, 1997
[5] EDIN 1045 – 1, Tragwerke aus Beton, Stahlbeton und Spannbeton, Teil 1 Be-
messung und Konstruktion, Draft, February 1997
[6] J. Lindner, R. Bergmann: Zur Bemessung von Verbundstützen nach DIN 18800
Teil 5, Stahlbau 67, July 1998
[7] W. Ladberg: Commerzbank - Hochhaus Frankfurt/Main, Planung, Fertigung
und Montage der Stahlkonstruktion, Der Stahlbau 65, October 1996
[8] R.T. Leon: Measurements on a large composite column during construction,
Theorie und Praxis im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Festschrift Bode, edited by
W. Ramm, T. Däuwel, H.-J. Kronenberger, ibidem - Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, pp
237 – 259
[9] G. Hanswille: Outstanding composite structures for buildings, Conference re-
port, Composite Construction – Conventional and Innovative, IABSE – Confer-
ence, Innsbruck, September 1997, pp. 41 - 52
[10] G. Hanswille: Bemessung von Verbundträgern nach EC 4, Proceedings of Ver-
bundbau, Fachseminar und Workshop, FH München and Bauen mit Stahl e.V.,
Munich, November 1997

1012
[11] H. Bode, T. Däuwel: Steel-concrete composite slabs - Design based on partial
connection, Proceedings of Steel and composite structures, International confer-
ence, Delft, February 1999
[12] R.G. Schuurman, J.W.B. Stark: Longitudinal shear resistance of composite slabs
- A new model, Proceedings of Composite Construction IV, Engineering Foun-
dation Conference, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May/June 2000
[13] M. Patrick, R.Q. Bridge: Composite floors in Australian building practice, The-
orie und Praxis im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Festschrift Bode, edited by W.
Ramm, T. Däuwel, H.-J. Kronenberger, ibidem - Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, pp. 261
- 272
[14] H. Bode, I. Sauerborn: Zur Berechnung durchlaufender Verbunddecken, Stahl-
bau 66, July 1997
[15] T. Winterstetter, H. Schmidt, A. Ross: Numerische Untersuchungen zum nicht-
linearen Tragverhalten von Hoesch-Additivdecken, Theorie und Praxis im Kon-
struktiven Ingenieurbau, Festschrift Bode, edited by W. Ramm, T. Däuwel, H.-
J. Kronenberger, ibidem - Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, pp. 297 - 304
[16] R.M. Lawson: Developments in ´Slimdek´ Constructions, Theorie und Praxis im
Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Festschrift Bode, edited by W. Ramm, T. Däuwel,
H.-J. Kronenberger, ibidem - Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, p. 213 - 224
[17] U. Kuhlmann, J. Fries, A. Rieg: Composite girders of reduced height, Proceed-
ings of 55th Rilem annual week: Connections between steel and concrete, Stutt-
gart, September 2001
[18] K. Kürschner: Trag- und Verformungsverhalten von teilweise verdübelten Ver-
bundträgern, Internal report, Institut für Konstruktion und Entwurf I, University
of Stuttgart, June 1998
[19] M.A. Dabaon: Beitrag zur teilweisen Verdübelung bei Verbundträgern, Disser-
tation, University of Innsbruck, 1993
[20] U. Kuhlmann, U. Breuninger: Behaviour of lying studs with longitudinal shear
force, Proceedings of Composite Construction IV, Engineering Foundation Con-
ference, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May/June 2000
[21] M. Mensinger: Zum Ermüdungsverhalten von Kopfbolzendübeln im Verbund-
bau, Dissertation, University of Kaiserslautern, Chair for steel structures of Prof.
Bode, 1999
[22] R.P. Johnson: Shear connection – Three recent studies, Proceedings of Compos-
ite Construction IV, Engineering Foundation Conference, Banff, Alberta, Can-
ada, May/June 2000
[23] F. Leonhardt, W. Andrä, H.-P. Andrä, W. Harre: Neues, vorteilhaftes Verbund-
mittel für Stahlverbund-Tragwerke mit hoher Dauerfestigkeit, Beton- und Stahl-
betonbau 1987, pp. 325-331
[24] I. Mangerig, C. Zapfe: Ermüdungsfestigkeit von Betondübeln, Theorie und Pra-
xis im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Festschrift Bode, edited by W. Ramm, T.
Däuwel, H.-J. Kronenberger, ibidem - Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, pp. 337 – 360

1013
[25] Tategami, H., Ebina, T., Uehira, K., Sonoda, K.: Shear connectors in PC box
girders bridge with corrugated steel webs, Proceedings of Composite Construc-
tion IV, Engineering Foundation Conference, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May/June
2000
[26] M. Fontana, H. Beck: Novel shear rib connectors with powder actuated fasten-
ers, Proceedings of Composite Construction IV, Engineering Foundation Con-
ference, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May/June 2000
[27] H. Beck: Nailed shear connection in composite tube columns, Conference Re-
port, Eurosteel ´99, Prague, pp. 565 – 568
[28] F. Tschmmernegg: To the development of composite and mixed connections,
Proceedings of Steel and composite structures, International conference, Delft,
February 1999
[29] D. Anderson: European recommendations for the design of composite joints,
Theorie und Praxis im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Festschrift Bode, edited by
W. Ramm, T. Däuwel, H.-J. Kronenberger, ibidem - Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, pp.
457 – 464
[30] ECCS: Design of composite joints for buildings, ECCS Document 109, 1999,
Brussels
[31] U. Kuhlmann, M. Schäfer: Innovative verschiebliche Verbundrahmen mit teil-
tragfähigen Verbundknoten, Research project P505, Studiengesellschaft Stahl-
anwendung e. V., Düsseldorf
[32] J. Hegger, P. Döinghaus: High performance steel and high performance concrete
in composite structures, Proceedings of Composite Construction IV, Engineer-
ing Foundation Conference, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May/June 2000
[33] ENV 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3: Design of composite steel structures – Part 1-1:
General rules and rules for buildings, 1991
[34] R. Bergmann: Steel concrete composite beams and columns, Proceedings of
Steel and composite structures, International conference, Delft, February 1999
[35] H. Schmackpfeffer: Typenentwürfe für Brücken in Stahlverbundbauweise im
mittleren Spannweitenbereich, Stahlbau 68, April,1999
[36] Straßenbauverwaltung Baden-Württemberg, Regierungspräsidium Tübingen:
BW1 Feldwegunterführung, Straßenkl. u. Nr. B30, OU. Ravensburg, Design
Rittich, Bornscheuer u. Partner GmbH, Stuttgart
[37] M. Hagedorn, U. Kuhlmann, H. Pfisterer, J. Weber: Eine Neuentwicklung im
Stabbogenverbundbrückenbau - Die Amperbrücke - , Stahlbau 66, July 1997
[38] U. Kuhlmann: Design, calculation and details of tied-arch bridges in composite
constructions, Proceedings of Composite Construction III, Engineering Founda-
tion Conference, Irsee, Germany, June 1996, published by ASCE 1997
[39] G. Denzer, W. Gräßlin, G. Hanswille, W. Schmidtmann: Die Talbrücke über die
Wilde Gera, Stahlbau 69, November 2000
[40] R. Wölfel: Talbrücke über die Wilde Gera, Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 94, De-
cember 1999

1014
DESIGN OF LYING STUDS WITH LONGITUDINAL SHEAR
FORCE
Ulrich Breuninger
Structural Engineers Weischede, Herrmann und Partner, Germany

Abstract
Innovative composite cross sections lead to an unusual positioning of the headed studs
horizontally in the thin concrete slab. The behavior of this lying studs with longitudinal
shear force has been investigated. The results of experimental and numerical
investigations show that the failure characterized by splitting of the thin slab is
influenced by different parameters compared to vertically positioned studs. Based on the
investigations a design rule is presented.

1. Introduction

Composite sections of steel and concrete have a continuous connection between both
parts. In standard composite beams headed studs are welded vertical on the top flange of
the steel girder as shear connector.

Fig. 1 Composite beam without top Fig. 2 Slim-floor composite beam (1)
steel flange

The development of innovative composite cross sections for bridges and buildings leads
to modified and new sections of composite beams. The section of Fig. 1, for example,
eliminates the less efficient steel top flange by welding the headed studs directly to the
web. For the final usage the concrete slabs serves as top flange. During erection

1015
sufficient resistance is provided by the precasted concrete web. As a second example
Fig. 2 shows a slim-floor structure. Again the function of the omitted top steel flange is
taken over by the concrete slab. The horizontally lying studs allow a very thin slab which
is an advantage also from the architectural point of view.

A strong load transmission between arch and slab for tied arch bridges is achieved by
connecting the slab directly to the stiffening girder, see Fig. 3. Again studs are
positioned horizontally in the slab. Additional advantages of this construction are a
better corrosion protection of the transverse girders and the transverse girder acting as
composite beam in its entire length.

Fig. 3 Section of a tied arch bridge with lying studs connecting the slab to the stiffening
steel girder (2)

In contrast to the standard composite beam section the axis of the studs in the sections of
Fig. 1, 2 and 3 is not vertical anymore but parallel to the plane of the slab. Therefore
studs arranged this way are called “lying studs”.
cleavage cracks
compression

Fig. 4 Section through the shear connection of


lying studs

The shear connection of composite beams is dominantly subjected to a longitudinal shear


force. So every lying stud mainly has to transfer a longitudinal shear load into the slab.
The concentrated shear load of the stud has to spread across the thickness of the slab thus
initiating compression and tension forces vertical to the extension of the slab (Fig. 4).
The tensile forces result in both a splitting action of the thin slab producing cleavage

1016
cracks parallel to the plate surface and an expansion of the concrete. The failure of these
lying studs is mainly due to the splitting of the concrete. Vertical stirrups surround the
expanding concrete and prevent the extension of the cracks.

The design rule for headed studs in Eurocode 4 (3) is based on experimental
investigations for conventional vertical studs only and therefore it does not cover the
splitting failure of lying studs. To identify the major parameters for this special mode of
failure and to quantify the carrying capacity of lying studs, a comprehensive research
program has been carried out(4) (5) (6). In this paper the results are presented.

In design practice the shear connection also can be used to transfer transverse shear load
from the slab into the steel girder. The content of a prosecuted research program is
presented in the next paper (7).

2. Experimental investigations

Two different situations of the shear connection with lying studs relative to the concrete
slab can be distinguished. In composite girders without a top flange e.g., see Fig. 1 and
2, the shear connection is situated in the middle of the concrete slab, whereas the
example of the tied arch bridge of Fig. 3 shows lying studs at the front side of the
concrete slab. Therefore two test series were carried out: series I with the shear
connection in the middle of the concrete slab corresponding to sections in buildings and
series II with the connection at the two edges of the concrete slab corresponding to
bridge sections, see Fig. 5 and 6.
80-130

A A 800
500

lineare measure in mm Section A-A


Fig. 5 Test specimen of series I with the shear connection in the middle of the concrete
plate

1017
132 800 132
studs in one row

A A

300-400
300

studs in two rows

100
1190

400
200
100
lineare measure in mm Section A-A

Fig. 6 Test specimen of series II with the shear connection at the edges of the concrete slab

These two series comprising altogether 51 push-out specimens were designed as


variations of a so called basic sample. For a group of at least 3 specimens always only
one main parameter was varied whereas the other parameters were kept constant. The
following parameters were varied:
· strength of concrete
· thickness of concrete slab
· distance, diameter and length of the studs
· number, diameter and situation of the stirrups
· tension or compression parallel to the shear force

According to Figure 7 three failure modes were observed in the tests:


a) splitting of the slab, If the reinforcement of the concrete is sufficiently strong,
tear off of the studs the carrying capacity is not reduced immediately after
splitting and the lying studs suffer high deformations until
finally the studs tear off.
b) splitting of the slab For low degrees of reinforcement or small distances
between stud and slab surface, the carrying capacity of the
shear connection starts reducing just after the splitting of
the slab has first occurred.
c) pull out of the studs In some rare cases, when the lying studs were situated at
the edge of the slab and the studs were too short, the shear
connection failed because of a pull-out of the studs.

1018
a) Splitting of the plate/tear off of b) Splitting of the plate c) Pull-out of the studs
the studs
Fig. 7 Failure modes of lying studs

load per stud [kN]


200

Splitting of the slab, tear off of the studs

150

Splitting of the slab

100

50

Pull out of the studs

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

slip [mm]

Fig. 8 Load-slip curves of different failure modes.

Typical load-slip curves of these three failure modes are given in Figure 8. If lying studs
fail according to mode a) or b) the load slip curve shows a high carrying capacity a

1019
ductile deformation behavior beyond. If the failure is caused by pull-out of the studs
(mode c), the carrying capacity decreases and the ductility is limited.

3. Variation of the parameters

Beside the experiments numerous numerical investigation were carried out. A non-linear
FE program considering the size effect of concrete structures was used (8). Based on the
experimental and numerical investigations the influence of the parameters on the
carrying capacity can be determined

Concrete strength
The splitting of the slab depending on the concrete tensile strength causes the collapse of
the shear connection. Because of the well known relation between tensile and
compressive strength the carrying capacity can be described with an exponent function
of the concrete compressive strength that is more usual (Fig. 9).

Pe [kN] P/Pv [-]


180 1.2
0.4
K (ar´/80mm)
150 1.1
120
1.0
90
0.9
60 2 0.4 Test series I-1
K (fc/30N/mm )
Test series I-2
Test series I-6 0.8
30 Test series II-2
Test series II-1 FE
0 0.7
0 10 20 30 40 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
2
fc [N/mm ] ar´ [mm]

Fig. 9 Carrying capacity Pe of lying Fig. 10 Relative carrying capacity P/Pv of


studs dependent on the lying studs dependent on the
concrete compressive strength effective edge distance of the
fc studs ar´ (for different distances
between the studs a)

Edge distance of the studs


The carrying capacity depends strong on the effective edge distance of the studs (ar´ =
the edge distance of the studs without the concrete cover and a half of the stirrup
diameter) (Fig.10). The influence is big if the edge distance is small. With increasing
edge distance (more than 100mm) the influence on the carrying capacity disappears.
Also Fig. 11 shows with different FE models the strong influence of the edge distance on
the cleavage cracks in the structure.

1020
x deformation direction

ar´ = 30 mm

ar´ = 75 mm

ar´ = 120 mm
Fig. 11 Cleavage cracks following main strains at maximum carrying capacity (black areas
show a strain ≥ 5 ‰)

Reinforcement of the slab


Fig. 11 shows the importance of the reinforcement in the slab. The stirrups and
especially the intersection between stirrups and longitudinal reinforcement is used as
anchoring for the cracks. It can be concluded, that the carrying capacity increases with
the amount of stirrups per stud because this leads to more anchoring points. The effect of
stirrups with a greater diameter on the carrying capacity can be neglected.

The longitudinal distance between the studs and the stirrups has no decisive influence on
the carrying capacity. The support of the stirrups for the shear connection is still intact.
This means that assembling inaccuracies are of less importance.

A minimum reinforcement is necessary for the cleavage tensile forces. According to (9)
and to the magnitude of strains in the stirrups of the specimens, the reinforcement should
be dimensioned for the splitting force Zd
d
Z d = Pd 0.3 (1 - ) [1]
a r´
Where Pd is the longitudinal shear design force.

1021
Length of the studs
If the studs are not long enough a premature pull-out failure occurs (compare Fig. 7c).
This phenomena is explained very well in (10). To prevent this brittle failure the studs
have to be anchored with an overlapping v behind the stirrups. The overlapping depends
if the concrete is cracked or not.
uncracked concrete: > ≤ 30°
v ≥ 110 mm; v ≥ 1.7 ar´; v ≥ 1.7 s/2
cracked concrete: > ≤ 23°
v ≥ 160 mm; v ≥ 2.4 ar´; v ≥ 2.4 s/2 [2]

Further parameters
Although not shown by data presented here the following additional conclusions follow
from the investigations:
· An increase of the diameter d of the stud leads to a higher carrying capacity of the shear
connection.
· If the distance a between the studs and the distance s between the stirrups increases by
the same amount the carrying capacity stays on the same level.
· For a concrete slab in tension, e.g. the slab of the tied arch bridges the carrying capacity
of the lying stud is insignificantly lower than for the slab in compression.

4. Design rule

Derived from the experimental (4), (5) and numerical (6) investigations the following
design rule for the carrying capacity of lying studs with failure because of cleavage
cracks is proposed.
0.3
æaö 1
PRd,sp = 1.42 (f ck × d × a r ´) 0.4 ç ÷ A [3]
èsø gv
PRd,sp design resistance [kN] (index sp from german spalten)
fck compressive strength of the concrete [N/mm2]
19 mm ≤ d ≤ 25 mm diameter of stud [mm]
50 mm ≤ ar´ distance between studs and stirrups vertical to the force
[mm]
110 mm ≤ a ≤ 440 mm distance between studs parallel to the force [mm]
s/ar´ ≤ 3 distance between stirrups / distance between studs and
stirrups
a/2 ≤ s ≤ a distance between stirrups [mm]
A = 1.00 modification factor if the shear connection is situated at
the edge of the slab
= 1.14 modification factor if the shear connection is situated in
the middle of the slab
ds ≥ 8 mm stirrup diameter [mm]
Cv = 1.25 partial safety factor according to Eurocode 4 (3)

1022
h
d v headroom of the stud
concrete cover + s
2
a d
ß ds

a'r
ar
ds
concrete cover +
2
s

section A-A

Fig. 12 Designation of the geometrical parameters of the shear connection with lying studs

Formula [3] can be used under the following conditions:


· The stirrups are able to bear the splitting forces according to formula [1].
· The overlapping v of the studs fulfils formula [2].
· The above limited parameters are checked.
· The carrying capacity for standard studs in Eurocode 4 (3) is not exceeded.

Fig. 13 compares the carrying capacity of lying studs with standard studs according to
Eurocode (3) for one diameter.

PRd [kN] PRd [kN]


150 150
d = 22 mm d = 22 mm
2 2
fuk = 500 N/mm fuk = 500 N/mm
120 a/s = 1 120 a/s = 1
A = 1.14 A = 1.00

90 90

60 60
Eurocode 4 (3)
Formula [3] with ar´ = 130 mm
Eurocode 4 (3) Formula [3] with ar´ = 110 mm
30 Formula [3] with ar´ = 90 mm 30 Formula [3] with ar´ = 90 mm
Formula [3] with ar´ = 70 mm
Formula [3] with ar´ = 70 mm
Formula [3] with ar´ = 50 mm
Formula [3] with ar´ = 50 mm
0 0
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
2 2
fck [N/mm ] fck [N/mm ]

a) shear connection in the middle of the b) shear connection at the front side of the
concrete plate concrete plate
Fig. 13 Design resistance of lying studs compared to studs in standard composite
sections

1023
5. Conclusion

Stimulated from new composite cross sections and with the aim to support the
development of further new composite constructions the carrying behavior of lying studs
is investigated. First efforts are carried out to describe the carrying behaviour of lying
studs for longitudinal shear. They lead to a practical design equation. Following
investigations will study lying studs under vertical and combined shear force and as well
as fatigue. At the moment the ”Institut für Konstruktion und Entwurf” of the University
of Stuttgart is continuing the work in this field of research.

I would like to thank the “Bundesministerium für Verkehr” and the “Deutsches Institut für
Bautechnik” for their support. They sponsored the experimental and numerical research.

6. References

1 Muess, H. (1996); ”Interessante Tragwerkslösungen im Verbund”; Stahlbau 65/10. S.


349; Verlag Ernst & Sohn; Berlin.
2 Kuhlmann, U. (1996): “Design, Calculation and Details of Tied-Arch Bridges in
Composite Construction”; Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete III,
Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation Conference in Irsee, Germany, p. 359,
published by ASCE 1997.
3 Eurocode 4 (1994): “Bemessung und Konstruktion von Verbundtragwerken aus Stahl
und Beton, Teil 1-1: Allgemeine Bemessungsregeln und Bemessungsregeln für den
Hochbau“; Comité Européen de Normalisation.
4 Kuhlmann, U.; Breuninger, U. (1999): “Liegende Kopfbolzendübel unter Längsschub
im Brückenbau“; Forschungsbericht; Bundesministerium für Verkehr; Bonn-Bad
Godesberg.
5 Kuhlmann, U.; Breuninger, U. (1999): “Liegende Kopfbolzendübel unter Längsschub
im Hochbau“; Forschungsbericht; Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik; Berlin.
6 Breuninger, U. (Feb. 2000): ”Zum Tragverhalten von liegenden Kopfbolzendübeln unter
Längsschubbeanspruchung”; Dissertation, Institut für Konstruktion und Entwurf I;
Universität Stuttgart.
7 Kuhlmann, U.; Kürschner, K. (2001): “Behaviour of Lying Shear Studs in Reinforced
Concrete Slabs”; Symposium on Connections between Steel and Concrete, 55th Rilem
Annual Week in Stuttgart, Germany.
8 Ožbolt, J.; Li, Y.; Kožar, I. (1999): “Mixed constrained microplane model for concrete“;
to publish in: International Journal of Solids and Structures.
9 Leonhardt, F. (1962): “Spannbeton für die Praxis“; Verlag Ernst & Sohn; Berlin.
10 Eligehausen, R.; Mallee, R.; Rehm, G. (1997): “Befestigungstechnik“ in: Betonkalender
Teil II; S. 609; Verlag Ernst & Sohn; Berlin.

1024
STUDIES ON THE DUCTILITY OF
SHEAR CONNECTORS WHEN USING
HIGH-STRENGTH STEEL
AND HIGH-STRENGTH CONCRETE
Josef Hegger*, Gerhard Sedlacek **, Peter Döinghaus*, Heiko Trumpf**
*Institute for Structural Concrete, Aachen Technical University, Germany
**Institute for Steel Construction, Aachen Technical University, Germany

Abstract
Both the strength of the steel used in steel constructions and that of the reinforced con-
crete in the concrete constructions have increased considerably in recent years (e.g. steel
S460 and concrete grades C60 to C90). Making meaningful use of such considerable
increases in the material strength in composite constructions requires testing the shear-
resistant connection in the composite joint between the steel and the concrete construc-
tion members.

This article summarises the knowledge from the research project “Studies on the ductil-
ity of shear connectors when using high-strength steel and high-strength concrete” gath-
ered within the scope of the support from AiF and provides explanatory notes on the
proposals developed from the findings here for construction and design.

The purpose of the series of experiments conducted was to determine the load-bearing
capacity as well as the ductility of the headed stud shear connectors commonly used in
high-strength concrete and to develop new shear connectors of sufficient ductility,
whereby a check was also made here of the applicability of the method of evaluation
used up to now for the Push-Out tests carried out according to the Eurocode 4 proce-
dure. Recommendations have also been developed for better characterisation of the
load-bearing behaviour of shear connectors.

1025
1. Status of the research project and summary of results

Initial pilot studies into the use of high-strength steel and of high-strength concrete in
composite constructions were carried out as part of the coal and steel research project
(ECSC) Use of High Strength Steel S460 [1] funded by the European Union. Besides
questions regarding the flexural load-bearing capacity, the behaviour of the composite
joint was investigated in 18 Push-Out tests performed on headed stud shear connectors
in high-strength concrete.
Frontal View
∅ 10

50
200
Load High Strength
Concrete

250

600
Normal Strength
200
Concrete
Displacement

50
150 240 150

Side View Cross


∅ 10 110 Section 15 15

∅ 10
150
150

100
240

600
100 150

∅ 10

150 240 150


180 180 180
200 200 200 [mm]

Figure 1: Push-Out standard test specimen and typical load-deformation curves for
headed stud shear connectors in different types of concrete.

1026
This showed that the ductility criterion according to Eurocode 4 [2] – the characteristic
value of the deformation capacity δuk must be at least 6 mm – was not fulfilled by any of
the connector diameters which were tested (Fig. 1). On the other hand, the load-bearing
capacity of the headed stud shear connector in high-strength concrete is grossly under-
estimated by the EC 4 method of calculation. The applicability of high-strength concrete
to the design rules given in EC 4 for full and partial shear connection is therefore ques-
tionable as a result of this.

Within the scope of the research project here, the headed stud shear connectors were
first modified in order to obtain a more ductile behaviour by the composite joint before
designing and investigating alternative connectors appearing more favourable for use in
high-strength concrete.
So as to be able to test a large number of different connectors, a shearing test was de-
veloped at the Institute for Structural Concrete which made a quick check possible of
just one shear stud. It was possible by applying this test to recognise favourites. These
were then checked by the standardised Push-Out test per EC 4. The principle differen-
tiation was made here between single (e.g. headed stud shear connector, T-profiles) and
continuous connections (e.g. combined fixing strip, T-bulb fixing strip).
An explanation of the selected headed stud shear connectors and alternative connectors
is given in this article in terms of the load-bearing capacity and the ductility by using
load-deformation curves. The applicability of the evaluation method according to EC 4
to determine the load-bearing capacity and ductility is also reviewed.

A load-bearing model for headed stud shear connectors in high-strength concrete could
be developed from the experiments which were conducted. This model differs from the
earlier model for connections in standard-strength concrete, and is principally suitable
both for standard-strength as well as for high-strength types of concrete.
The applicability of the connector characteristics to composite girders could be verified
by numerical studies. Possible approaches for improving the evaluation method ac-
cording to EC 4 have been worked out from the results. Only an excerpt of the results
can be presented in this article; it is for this reason that reference is made to the research
project report [3].

2. Test set-up for shearing tests

2.1 The Push-Out Standard Test (POST)

The Push-Out Standard Test (POST) according to EC 4 simulates transfer of the shearing
forces in the composite joint of composite girders. The dimensioning of these test
specimens is matched to standard-strength concrete. By using the higher concrete-quality
grades and the thereby associated reduction of the load propagation zone, the magnitude of

1027
this test specimen is no longer necessary for preventing premature failing of the concrete
yet for reasons of comparability, the Push-Out Standard Test is also used where high-
strength concrete is concerned. The statics of this system are not optimal. During the
experiments, the steel girder shall be displaced relative to both of the reinforced-concrete
belts such that the shear connectors undergo stress of the purely shearing type. Horizontal
forces cannot however be avoided between the three construction members in the practical
execution of the experiment. The load-bearing capacity of the connection which can be
attained is however reduced by this.
The test specimen was modified slightly for the Push-Out tests with the fixing strips, and
was subsequently adapted to the specific requirements of the fixing strips in the high-
strength concrete. The dimensions of the test specimen were determined by a truss model
for the load transfer using a compression-strut angle of α=45 degrees. The reinforcement
required for the horizontal tensile struts in the lower area of the test specimen was
determined from the load-bearing capacity estimated for the fixing strips.

2.2 The Single Push-Out Test (SPOT)

In order to obtain the characteristic curve for a single connector, a new shearing test was
developed where a single connector can be tested individually (SPOT). A test specimen had
to be found where the structural stability of which is not attributable to the symmetrical
construction and where the straining lines of the forces causing the shear are almost
identical. Since the result of the connector’s lateral force during shearing does not however
remain at a constant level, the experimental set-up should be capable of tracking such
changes without loosing its stable state of equilibrium.
A shoe enveloping the reinforced concrete was chosen as the solution (Fig. 2). Two
additionally attached stirrups created a moment to oppose the moment from the ma-
chine’s forces (M = 0.055 m ⋅ F; 0.055 m: distance between the straining lines). This
neutralising moment adapts to every load level. Even a shift in the resulting shearing
force (perpendicular to the shaft of the connector) is accepted by the system without any
kinematic reaction. A slight twist of the steel half-shell relative to the reinforced con-
crete is to be expected during the experiment. The upper stirrup of the shoe does how-
ever constitute a restriction at the same time in the horizontal path for the top edge of
the steel plates. As soon as twisting has set in, the tensioned-steel nuts impact on the
stirrup and form a vertical sliding bearing. As the detachment process progresses, the
plate turns back to a parallel position. A falsifying influence on the load-bearing be-
haviour could not be seen in the series of experiments conducted.
This test specimen is straightforward to fabricate, can be inserted in the tester by a sin-
gle person and can be tested in a smaller hydraulic press than the test specimen for the
Push-Out Standard Test. It is particularly suitable for high-strength concrete because of
the limited volume of concrete. A comparison of the results from the experiments with

1028
the 18 Push-Out standard experiments and the 6 single Push-Out experiments with
headed stud shear connectors with a connector diameter of 19, 22 and 25 mm respec-
tively showed that because of the better static load transfer in the Single Push-Out Test,
a generally higher carry load of between 10% and 20% is reached compared to the
Push-Out Standard Test.

F F Tendons ∅ 16
3 3 15
Nuts 33 15

Felt Retaining Steelpanels


Stirrup
5 5
0,172 F
10 10
32
20 F 20
0,172 F
5 5 F
Felt Stirrup
5,5 Tendons ∅ 16 F
F [cm]

Figure 2: Side view of the Single Push-Out Test showing the forces which are acting.

3. Load-bearing behaviour of headed stud shear connectors in high-


strength concrete

A description of the load-bearing and deformation behaviour of headed stud shear con-
nectors in standard-strength concrete is given by Lungershausen [4] by the four load-
bearing portions of concrete compression strut force before the weld collar, bending
and shearing load-bearing capacity in the lower area of the connector shaft, tensile
force in the connector shaft as well as friction forces in the composite joint. There is
almost no load-bearing portion for connectors in high-strength concrete from the tensile
force because the bending deformation of the connector shaft due to the clamping ef-
fects of the high-strength concrete is only low here. Friction forces do occur not in the
form described by Lungershausen either in standard-strength or in high-strength con-
crete.

1029
Beginning Concrete Concrete Plastic
of Testing a Wedge b moves c Zones, d
in front of relatively Stud
Weld to the Failure
Collar Weld
Collar

Figure 3: Failure mechanism for a stud shear connector in high-strength concrete.


Fig. 3 shows the stages of deformation for a stud shear connector in high-strength con-
crete. Compression forces in the concrete develop directly in front of the weld collar (a).
Increasing the load causes this force to concentrate within a compressive wedge (b).
Deformation of the connector only takes place in area of the bolt weld. The high-
strength concrete ensures the connector is rigidly held above this deformation zone. If
the load is increased further, then the compression wedge plasticizes and the remainder
of the concrete body moves away over this wedge (c). The force from the connector is
still transferred over the concrete wedge and base of the connector since there are high
friction forces acting in the joint between the wedge and the concrete body. These de-
formations lead to plasticization of the connector in the region of the base (d). Friction
can not occur in the joint between concrete and steel. The external forces acting on the
connector are shown in greater detail in Fig. 4 in order to illustrate the deformation be-
haviour.

Load-Distribution Load-Distribution
at non-deformed stud at deformed stud
Reaction to
Uplifting
Force
Concrete Concrete

Front Back
pplast
Cavity

Steel Force in Steel


Uplifting
Concrete Force
Cavity
Wedge

Figure 4: Load distribution and deformation of the connector shaft.

1030
4. Experiments with shear connectors in high-strength concrete

4.1 Overview of all experiments conducted

The experimental programme was based on the following considerations: for a good
serviceability of the composite girders, the range for using the load-deformation curve
of the connector should be associated with a range where the slip is low. A subsequent
horizontal plastic plateau or a further increase in the load indicate good and stable be-
haviour. Plastic rearrangement, and hence economical utilisation of the connectors in
the load-bearing range, is made possible by this.
Before carrying out the experiments, the basic load-bearing behaviour of the differing
connector types in the high-strength concrete (fck,cube,150mm = 90 – 95 N/mm² compres-
sive strength) was estimated. Because of the time constraints, it was unfortunately not
possible to implement all the conclusions theoretically possible, e.g. the very promising
increase in size of the weld collar that would be possible by using newly developed ce-
ramic rings, adaptation of the welding parameters, etc..
Headed stud connectors of 19, 22 and 25 mm diameter without any modifications were
used in the first test series. These were investigated by means of the Push-Out Standard
Test and the Single Push-Out Test. Also, the first series of experiments included testing
the following modifications made to headed stud shear connectors (Fig. 5):
Grouping in the direction of the shearing force (double connector),


Cushioning the shaft of headed stud shear connectors (two cushion variants),


Elliptical shaft cross-section,




Slanted headed stud shear connector (inclined at an angle of 45 degrees).




High-
Strenth

Figure 5: Modifications to headed stud shear connectors.


The following alternative connector types were also considered (Fig. 6):
Combined fixing strip (round recess),


T-bulb fixing strip (bead-type cross-section with rectangular recess),




T-shape profile (with and without cushioning),




High-strength bolts (M20 8.8 HV as removable connector).




For the second series of experiments, the favourites from the series of experiments were
optimised from the design and additional connector types were included in the experi-
mental programme:

1031
T-profiles of different degrees of inclinations (HEB and IPE, 30° and 45°),

Various types of cushioning, sleeves and metal rings around the shaft of the headed

stud shear connector,


High-strength headed stud shear connector (base material S355 J2 G3),

Headed stud shear connector with profiled sheet (through-welded technique).


Figure 6: Alternative connectors.


The results from the first and second series of experiments are summarised in Tables 1
and 2. The most important of these are presented in greater detail in the following.
PRk δuk PRd
series format type modification evaluat. evaluat.
[kN] [mm] [kN]
1 POST KBD 19 none 125,8 4,51 - 100,7 +
2 POST KBD 22 none 171,8 4,89 - 137,4 +
3 POST KBD 25 none 203,4 5,98 - 162,7 +
9 SPOT KBD 19 none 151,3 4,19 - 121,1 +
10 SPOT KBD 22 none 211,9 7,31 ++ 169,5 +
11 POST KBD 19 none 139,7 5,68 - 111,8 +
12 POST KBD 22 none 189,8 6,71 + 151,9 +
13 POST KBD 25 none 189,8 7,62 ++ 151,8 +
14 POST KBD 19 Double stud 132,2 7,42 ++ 105,8 +
15 POST T-IPE180 none 227,4 14,85 ++ 181,9 -
16 POST T-IPE200 Web cushion 240,8 12,47 ++ 192,6 -
19 POST SV none 135,3 5,80 - 108,3 O
20 SPOT KBD 19 Cushion (1) 136,5 8,04 ++ 109,2 O
21 SPOT KBD 19 Cushion (2) 154,1 7,07 ++ 123,3 +
22 SPOT KBD 22 Cushion (1) 226,5 10,92 ++ 181,3 ++
23 SPOT KBD 22 Inclined 215,2 5,22 - 172,2 +
24 SPOT KBD 22 Elliptical 189,2 5,17 - 151,4 -
30 POST con.-strip w-o/w reinf. 858,8 11/20 + 344/603 +
31 POST T-Bulb w-o/w reinf. 995,3 32/22 ++ 398/593 ++

Table 1: Results from the first series of experiments.

1032
PRk δuk PRd
series format type modification evaluat. evaluat.
[kN] [mm] [kN]
17 POST T-IPE200 45° inclined 399,8 8,82 ++ 319,8 ++
18 POST T-IPE200 30° inclined 313,6 15,38 ++ 250,9 +
25 SPOT KBD 22 none 194,7 5,55 - 155,7 -
26 POST THEB200 45° inclined 484,3 8,17 ++ 387,4 ++
27 POST KBD 19 Double stud 124,7 5,95 - 99,7 O
28 SPOT KBD 19 Cushion (3) 133,7 8,15 ++ 107,0 O
29 SPOT KBD 19 Metal ring 153,7 6,52 + 128,7 +
32 POST KBD 19 Metal sleeve 149,3 7,11 ++ 119,5 +
33 SPOT KBD 19 Metal sleeve 152,8 6,30 + 122,2 +
34 POST KBD 19 High-strength 159,1 3,62 - 127,3 O
35 SPOT KBD 19 High-strength 172,4 2,71 - 137,9 O
36 POST KBD 22 Profiled sheet 116,1 3,46 - 92,9 -

Table 2: Results from the second series of experiments.

4.2 Double connector

Increasing the ductility is aimed for by using two headed stud shear connectors welded
very close together, whereby a decrease in the load-bearing capacity is accepted (Fig.
7). The resistance of two headed studs connected in series is sufficiently high that the
concrete compression zone plasticizes in front of the first connector such that there is
displacement taking place. The first connector creates an area behind its base where the
compression strains are lower so that the deformation to the following connector is
lower.

Frontal View Side View Detail


40 130 50
150

Detail
∅ 10
150
50 180 40 210

150
100 150


80

150 240 150 180 180 180 40

Figure 7: Arrangement of the double connector, ∅ 19 mm.

1033
Although the connector slip is the same, the distortions of the second connector are dis-
tributed over a greater height. This leads to a better upwards redistribution of the forces
along the shaft and hence to further relative displacement. The wedge in front of the
weld collar taking up about 20% of the ultimate load can only develop to a limited ex-
tent for the second connector. With this solution, the spacing between connectors is less
than the minimum given in EC 4. This means there is a deviation from the rules EC 4 in
designing the ultimate load for the connectors.
The test specimen 14-1 failed early because of the too large initial load steps (Fig. 8).
Compared to the single headed stud shear connectors ∅ 19 mm, an average loss in the
load-carrying force of 5.4 % was given with the double stirrup. The losses are entirely
attributable to the screened connector. The first headed stud shear connector can make
use of its load-bearing capacity to the full and at the point in time of its failing by
shearing, the second connector is not yet at the limit of its load-bearing capacity. The
ductility criterion according to EC 4 is thus fulfilled (Table 3). No additional traverse
reinforcement should be applied.

Load [kN] Load [kN]


1400 1400

1200 1200

1000 1000

800 800

600 Series 14: POST KBD 19 DD/1 600


Series 14: POST KBD 19 DD/2 Series 27: POST KBD 19 DD(2)/1
400 400
Series 14: POST KBD 19 DD/3 Series 27: POST KBD 19 DD(2)/2
200 200
Series 14: POST KBD 19 DD/4 Series 27: POST KBD 19 DD(2)/3
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Displacement [mm] Displacement [mm]

Figure 8: Results from experiments with double connector, ∅ 19 mm, left: without
traverse reinforcement; right: with additional traverse reinforcement.

Pmax PRk δu δuk δuk PRd


series test type
[kN] [kN] [mm] [mm] [mm] [kN]
14/2 POST KBD 19 1175,7 8,47 7,62
14/3 POST KBD 19 1253,2 132,3 8,24 7,42 7,42 105,8
14/4 POST KBD 19 1293,9 8,77 7,89

Table 3: Evaluating the results from experiments with the double connector ∅ 19 mm
without additional traverse reinforcement according to EC 4.

1034
4.3 Connector-strip system (combined and T-bulb fixing strip)

The combined fixing strip designed for the series of experiments consists of a strip of
sheet material with round recesses opened at the top that have been welded upright to
the upper flange of the steel girder (Fig. 9). The recesses have been made by burning
these out to a radius of r = 40 mm, whereby the overall depth of the cut into the sheet
has been selected as h = 70 mm.
Side View Cross Section Detail

25

25

Figure 9: Arrangement of the T-bulb connector strip.


The development of the T-bulb profile is based on the endeavour to combine the ad-
vantages of the geometry of the headed stud shear connector with the high load-bearing
capacity of the fixing-strip system. The geometry of the T-bulb fixing strip is based on a
standardised rolled flat-bead steel profile. As is the case with the headed stud shear con-
nector, the concrete belt is prevented from lifting from the steel girder by a profile head
being formed. It is thus no longer necessary to cut back the recesses.
The centre of gravity of the profile end, and by this the position of the resulting forces
which are introduced, lies more at the level of the concrete-belt centre than is the case
with the combined fixing strip because of the way the head is formed. The vertical ten-
sile forces in front of the recesses are reduced to a minimum in this way. Analogous to

1035
the combined fixing strip, the rectangular recess was burned out at a depth of 70 mm
over a length of 80 mm.
The transfer of shearing forces is the same as for the concrete connector model. Design
models already exist for this that are generally known [5]. Both fixing-strip systems
principally exhibit similar load-bearing and ductility behaviour. The T-bulb fixing strip
did however show higher initial stiffness and a more ductile overall load-bearing be-
haviour. The results from the T-bulb fixing strip both with (T-bulb 1 and 3) and without
(T-bulb 2) traverse reinforcement in the recess are shown in Figure 10 and are tabulated
in Table 4. The influence of the traverse reinforcement can be clearly seen. The expen-
diture for laying is however higher as the load-bearing capacity increases.

Load [kN]
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
T-Bulb 1
1000
T-Bulb 2 (without reinforcement)
500
T-Bulb 3
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Displacement [mm]
Figure 10: Experimental results from the T-bulb fixing strip with and without traverse
reinforcement in the recess.

Pmax PRk δu δuk δuk PRd


series test type
[kN] [kN] [mm] [mm] [mm] [kN]
31/2 POST T-Bulb 2211,9 497,7 35,5 32,0 32,0 398
31/1 POST T-Bulb 3342,4 24,5 22,0
741,6 22,0 593
31/3 POST T-Bulb 3250,1 30,9 27,8

Table 4: Evaluation of the results from experiments with the T-bulb fixing strip ac-
cording to EC 4.

1036
4.4 T-profile from a half IPE 200 at a welding angle of 45°

The characteristics of a straight T-profile as a connector (Fig. 11) have already been
determined by other research institutes [6]. In the limiting region, the end face of the
profile intersects with the concrete such that a high degree of ductility is reached. The
load that is carried is not however satisfactory for the amount of material in service. The
projected area is increased by inclining the profile such that better use is made of the
cross-section. Unlike headed bolts, the profile should contribute to the transfer of forces
by its whole component height.
Frontal View Cross Section Detail
100
84

100 15 15
5,6
180
183
0

10
13

80
116

140
120
220

Detail
183

10
70
84

140 240 140 28

Figure 11: Arrangement of the T-profile from a half IPE 200 at 45°.

Load [kN]
2000

1500

1000
POST TIPE 45°/1
500 POST TIPE 45°/2
POST TIPE 45°/3
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Displacement [mm]
Figure 12: Results of experiments with the T-profile from a half IPE 200 at 45°.

1037
The flange did not change its position in the concrete bed during the experiment and neither
did any parting cracks occur. This is because the forces are well-distributed over the
flange’s projected surface. The displacements were taken up exclusively by the shear
deformation of the web and the failure initiated by having exceeded the ductile yield on the
reverse side. The values shown for the ductility in Figure 12 and Table 5 suffice according
to EC 4.

Pmax PRk δu δuk δuk PRd


series test type
[kN] [kN] [mm] [mm] [mm] [kN]
17/1 POST TIPE 200 1776,8 9,80 8,82
17/2 POST TIPE 200 1852,8 399,8 17,2 15,5 8,82 320
17/3 POST TIPE 200 1895,8 12,7 11,4

Table 5: Evaluating the T-profile from a half IPE 200 at 45° according to EC 4.

4.5 Metal sleeve and cushion around the headed stud shear connector
shaft

The metal sleeve and the cushion give a certain amount of play to the headed stud shear
connector and at the same time, strengthen the connector shaft (Fig. 13). The metal
sleeve was pushed over the shaft and the cushions arranged on the sleeve. Greater duc-
tility and a higher load until failure from the bending and tensile forces can theoretically
be attained outside the zone of thermal influence of the headed stud shear connector by
this.

Load [kN]
1400

1200

1000

800
150

600
Series 32: POST KBD 19 H+P/1
400
38 Series 32: POST KBD 19 H+P/2
200
80

26 Series 32: POST KBD 19 H+P/3


5,0 0
5,0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
5,0
2,0 Displacement [mm]

Figure 13: Arrangement of the headed stud shear connector with metal sleeve and
cushion around the shaft and experimental results.

1038
Pmax PRk δu δuk δuk PRd
series test type
[kN] [kN] [mm] [mm] [mm] [kN]
32/1 POST KBD 19 1356 11,0 9,86
32/2 POST KBD 19 1328 149,3 7,90 7,11 7,11 119,5
32/3 POST KBD 19 1327 8,12 7,31

Table 6: Evaluation of the results from the headed stud shear connector with metal
sleeve and cushion around the shaft according to EC 4.
The load-bearing capacities of these variants were about 10% higher than those for non-
modified connectors of the same diameter (Fig. 16). The initial stiffness was very high
and the ductility criterion according to EC 4 was attained by all test specimens (Table
6). The practical execution of this system proved to be problematical due to the irregu-
larly formed weld collar preventing the exactness in arranging the metal sleeve.

4.6 High-strength headed stud shear connector

It is appropriate to improve the shear-stress load-bearing capacity of the cold-formed


headed stud shear connector so as to increase the strength of the base material by at least
the same ductile yield. The following material properties were aimed for in order to
obtain a better load-bearing behaviour by a high-strength headed stud shear connector:
Tensile strength Rm = 800 N/mm²
Yield stress Re = 650 N/mm²
Ultimate strain εu ≥ 12 - 15%

Load [kN] Load [kN]


1600 225
1400 200

1200 175
150
1000
125
800
100
600 POST KBD 19 High Strength/1 75 SPOT KBD 19 High Strength/1
400 POST KBD 19 High Strength/2 50 SPOT KBD 19 High Strength/2
200 POST KBD 19 High Strength/3 25 SPOT KBD 19 High Strength/3
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Displacement [mm] Displacement [mm]

Figure 14: Experimental results of the high-strength stud shear connector, ∅ 19 mm.
The use of such materials had to be dispensed with because of the time constraints of this
research project. The base material S355 J2 G3 was therefore used. The experiments with
the high-strength headed stud shear connectors shown in Figure 14 give almost identical

1039
load-deformation curves. The sudden drop in the second experiment in the ultimate load
and the increase in this again at a relative displacement of δ = 4.0 mm result from a
connector failing suddenly.
According to Table 7, the ultimate loads that were reached, Pmax, are about 4% higher than
the limiting shearing forces determined in accordance with EC 4. The attained ductility of
δuk = 3.62 mm is however completely inadequate since the ductile yield of the connector
material is apparently too low.

Pmax PRk δu δuk δuk PRd


series test type
[kN] [kN] [mm] [mm] [mm] [kN]
34/1 POST KBD 19 1444,6 4,32 3,89
34/2 POST KBD 19 1414,8 159,1 4,02 3,62 3,62 127,3
34/3 POST KBD 19 1438,2 4,60 4,14

Table 7: Evaluation of the high-strength headed stud shear connector, ∅ 19 mm, ac-
cording to EC 4.
The problematical nature of an inadequate ductile yield was already recognised within
the scope of the tensile tension tests according to DIN EN 10002 before carrying out the
experiments. In each case, the tensile test runs were carried out after the cold-forming
processes in the drawing shop using solid rods of ∅ 21.9 mm and ∅ 18.85 mm respec-
tively. This was not the case at the RWTH University where the tensile test runs were
made using standardised test specimens having a diameter of ∅ 8.0 mm.

The results from the different tensile-testing experiments showed that the values deter-
mined for the tensile strength were approximately of the same magnitude (Rm,18.85 = 750
N/mm² compared to Rm,8 = 743.9 N/mm²), whereas the apparent yielding point (Rel,18.85
= 675 N/mm² compared to Rel,8 = 720.7 N/mm²) and the ultimate strain (εu,18.85 = 14.5 %
compared to εu,8 = 10.0 %) differed considerably. According to this, the ductility hoped
for was not reached when using S355 J2 G3 with a diameter of 23 mm as the base mate-
rial for a headed stud shear connector ∅ 19 mm.
The qualitative load-deformation characteristics of this connector for use in high-
strength concrete are very promising and it all depends on finding the right material.

1040
5. Load-bearing capacity model for headed stud shear connector in
high-strength concrete

A load-bearing capacity model is presented in the following on the basis of the me-
chanical model presented at the beginning for headed stud shear connectors in high-
strength concrete. It is assumed when calculating the load-bearing capacity that both the
connector as well as the weld collar contribute to the overall load-bearing capacity of
the connector. Since the connector in high-strength concrete is subjected to an almost
purely shearing type of stress, the shear-stress bearing capacity of this is calculated us-
ing the full stress to failure. The concrete forces that are activated in front of the collar
depend on the area projected by the weld bead as well as on the strength of the concrete
(greater than 70 N/mm²).
The following can only be considered as a proposal because of the limited amount of
data available for this research project and the varying influencing variables as well. A
systematic check and a statistical evaluation of the experiments as well as a comparison
with results from other experiments and numerical calculation will soon be published
within the scope of a dissertation [7].
Assumed shearing force of the shaft directly above the weld collar:


FS = Rm ⋅ AS

Rm: Tensile strength of the connector material used


AS: Cross-sectional area of the shaft

Concrete compression force activated by the weld collar in the concrete wedge in


front of the connector:

FSW = AP ⋅ ηconcrete ⋅ fck,cube,average

AP : Projected area of the bead


ηconcrete: Empirical correction value to determine the multi-axial load-bearing
action of the concrete in front of a shear connector (= 1.5)
fck,cube,average: Mean cube compressive strength on the 150-mm cube


Assumed connector shearing force:

F connector = FS + FSW

Figure 15 shows a comparison of the theoretical load-bearing capacities determined


using this model and the load-bearing capacities determined experimentally.

1041
POST 19 mm
300 Pm
SPOT 19 mm

250 POST 22 mm
SPOT 22 mm Pk
200 POST 25 mm

150 Pd

100

50

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
P-Calculated
Figure 15: Comparison of the theoretical and experimentally determined load-bearing
capacities for shear studs in high-strength concrete.

6. Evaluation of load-deformation curves for shear connectors

6.1 Classification of the load-deformation curves for shear connectors


according to EC 4

The assessment of the deformation capacity is particularly problematical when using


shear connectors in high-strength types of concrete. The load-deformation curves de-
termined in the research project for the various connector types in high-strength con-
crete exhibit very differing characteristics for the curve. In simplified terms, connector
characteristic curves can be classified according to three types of load-deformation
curves (Figures 16a to 16c).

There is no standard evaluation possible for these different curve characteristics in order
to determine the load-bearing behaviour and the ductility of the connector according to
EC 4. Whereas evaluation of the bi-linear load-deformation curve (Fig. 16a) can be car-
ried out according to EC 4 as long as δelastic lies in the range of the serviceability and
δplastic as the limit for ductility fulfils the criterion δuk = δelast + δpla ≥ 6 mm, evaluation of
the connectors with a tri-linear load-deformation curve (in particular for the connector
characteristic curve II) (Fig. 16b) is not regulated.
It is questionable whether for a large elastic-plastic portion, δelastic-plastic in the building,
the maximum load-bearing capacity of the connector will be reached at a plastic level

1042
and whether the stress of the connector could already lie in the plastic range under
service loads.

a) b) c)
P [kN] P [kN] P [kN]
Pmax Pmax Pmax
I)
II)

δ [mm] δ [mm] δ [mm]

δelastic δplastic δelastic δelasto-plastic δplastic δelastic δelasto-plastic

Figure 16: a) Bi-linear load-deformation curve, b) Tri-linear load-deformation curve, c)


Load-deformation curve of low stiffness (very flexible).
This question applies in particular in the case for high-flexibility connectors (Fig. 16c).
If the connectors have been designed with 90% of the maximum ultimate load Pmax as
the characteristic load-bearing capacity for the connector PRk, then they have already
reached the elastic-plastic deformation range under the service loads, and this is thus
associated with a large degree of slip.

The question is therefore also applicable as to how large the initial stiffness should be for
designs for full shear connection or for partial shear connection.

6.2 Recommendations for expanding the evaluations according to EC 4

Within the scope of the research project, non-linear composite-girder calculations for
representative composite cross-sections of high-strength materials (S460 and C90) were
carried out using the programme system DYNACS from the Institute for Steel Construction
in order to determine the required deformations of shear connectors in various load states
(SLS and ULS). The differing load-deformation curves of the connectors were thereby
considered for the various degrees of connecting. The characteristic load-bearing capacity
of the connector in the partial connection and the load-deformation curves of the connectors
were applied in accordance with EC 4.
The following recommendations for expanding the evaluations according to EC 4 can be
derived from the numerical investigations performed to date:
Limiting the characteristic load-bearing capacity of the connector for service loads


PRk,SLS to the elastic range of the load-deformation curve.

1043
Limiting the characteristic load-bearing capacity of the connector for ultimate loads


PRk to approximately PRk ≤ PRk,SLS ⋅ 1.65.


Limiting the characteristic load-bearing capacity of the connector for ultimate loads


PRk by a maximum slip deformation of δ = 6.0 mm.


These approaches shall be verified by studying the parameters further together with
numerical calculations and accompanied by series of experiments.

7. Summary

Experiments with Push-Out standard test specimens (POST) and the newly developed
single Push-Out test specimens (SPOT) for connecting high-strength concrete with high-
strength steel were carried out.

The load-bearing capacity of headed stud shear connectors in high-strength concrete is


made up of a load-bearing portion of the connector shaft and a load-bearing portion of
the connector’s weld collar.
So that headed stud shear connector in high-strength concrete will exhibit ductile behaviour
while retaining its ultimate load, its use can be modified to currently four different types:
Enlarging the weld collar,


Strengthening the connector shaft, e.g. with a sleeve made of metal,




Using a high-strength base material for fabricating a cold-formed headed stud shear


connector (S460),
Arrangement of double connectors without intermediate traverse reinforcement.


Coming into question as further shear connectors in high-strength concrete are slightly
inclined T-profiles. These are simple to fabricate by cutting open rolled I-shaped pro-
files into symmetrical parts.
The continuous connectors, combined fixing strip and T-bulb fixing strip can be manu-
factured very economically by fully automated production and welding with the com-
posite girder. In addition to this, the fixing strips exhibit very positive curve character-
istics with high ultimate loads and extremely high values for the ductility.
The evaluation procedure according to EC 4 cannot appropriately measure the different
load-deformation curves which are determined in the experiments. Recommendations
are given for expanding the evaluations performed according to EC 4. These recom-
mendations shall be verified by carrying out further numerical and experimental inves-
tigations.

The research institutes express thanks to the AiF and participating firms for their finan-
cial support, as well as to the committee accompanying the project for their helpful sug-
gestions.

1044
8. Literature

[1] ECSC Project No. 7210-SA, Use of High Strength Steel S460, Reports, unpublis-
hed, Institute of Steel Construction and Institute for Structural Concrete, RWTH
Aachen, 1996 – 2000.
[2] Eurocode 4: Bemessung und Konstruktion von Verbundtragwerken aus Stahl und
Beton, Teil 1-1: Allgemeine Bemessungsregeln, Bemessungsregeln für den Hoch-
bau, Deutsche Fassung: ENV 1994-1-1: 1992.
[3] Abschlussbericht zum Forschungsvorhaben „Untersuchungen zur Duktilität der
Verbundmittel bei Anwendung von hochfestem Stahl und hochfestem Beton“;
AIF-Nr.: 12124; Studiengesellschaft Stahlanwendung e.V.: Projektnummer P
486/25/99; Aachen, November 2000.
[4] Lungershausen, H.: Zur Schubtragfähigkeit von Kopfbolzendübeln, Technisch-
wissenschaftliche Mitteilung Nr. 88-7, Institut für konstruktiven Ingenieurbau,
Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 1988.
[5] Bode, H., Künzel R.: Zum Tragverhalten des neuartigen Verbundmittels der Fa.
Kombi-Tragwerk GmbH. Gutachterliche Stellungnahme zur Vorlage beim Institut
für Bautechnik, Universität Kaiserslautern, November 1988.

[6] Galjaard, J.C.; Walraven, J.C.: New and existing shear connector devices for steel-
concrete composite structures. Static tests, results and observations, First Inter-
national Conference on Structural Engineering, Kunming, China, Oktober 1999,
ISSN 1000-4750 .
[7] Döinghaus, P.: Zum Zusammenwirken hochfester Baustoffe in Verbundkonstruk-
tionen, Dissertation in Vorbereitung, Institut für Massivbau, RWTH Aachen, 2001.

Authors of this article:


Prof. Dr.-Ing. Josef Hegger and Dipl.-Ing. Peter Döinghaus
Institute for Structural Concrete
RWTH Aachen, Mies-van-der Rohe Straße 1, 52074 Aachen.

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Gerhard Sedlacek and Dipl.-Ing. Heiko Trumpf


Institute for Steel Construction
RWTH Aachen, Mies-van-der Rohe Straße 1, 52074 Aachen.

1045
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS ON THE
BEHAVIOUR OF STRIP SHEAR CONNECTORS WITH
POWDER ACTUATED FASTENERS
Mario Fontana*, Hermann Beck**, Roland Bärtschi***
*Institute of Structural Engineering, ETH Zurich, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland
**Hilti Corp., Direct Fastening Development, Principality of Liechtenstein
***Institute of Structural Engineering, ETH Zurich, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland

Abstract
Nailed strip shear connectors are presented as an alternative to welded headed stud
connectors for composite beams. The strip shear connector has a trapezoidal shape to fit
the geometry of metal decks. The strips are fixed by means of powder-actuated fasteners.
The legs and the crests of the strip connector are equipped with openings to improve
anchorage of the strip in the concrete plate by activating concrete dowels. By means of
these openings the overall ductility of the system is improved. The connectors are
designed to be used with automatic installation systems to improve installation
efficiency.

The objectives of the push-out tests were to derive design parameters and to optimise the
geometry of the strip shear connector. The test results indicate that optimised strip shear
connectors will achieve high ultimate resistance in the range of 20 kN per fastener and
sufficient ductility to allow plastic beam design. Further series of push-out tests are
necessary to verify this behaviour statistically and to derive the characteristic resistance.

1. Introduction

Nailed shear connectors in composite beams have been an


alternative to welded headed stud shear connectors for over 15
years. An example of a cold formed angle shear connector –
whereby one leg of the angle is fixed by two powder-actuated
fasteners driven with a powder-actuated tool – is shown in Fig. 1
(Hilti X-HVB shear connector). Compared to welded studs,
nailed shear connector systems exhibit the following advantages:

• They require minimum installation equipment and set-up


time, therefore allowing flexible scheduling of work on site. Fig. 1: Hilti X-HVB

1046
• They are efficient for small projects and for projects in remote locations.
• The installation quality is not affected by moisture on site or by zinc coatings of the
base material resulting in less work interruptions due to bad weather or less
preparation efforts like scraping of paint at the headed stud location.

However, the installation costs of nailed systems based on a “per kN basis” were up to
now generally greater in comparison to welded studs. This is due to the fact that the
design resistance of, for example, a Hilti X-HVB amounts to just approximately 40
percent of the design shear resistance of a 19 mm welded headed stud shear connector.
To improve this situation, two different alternatives were investigated. Experimental
research on the first option – the nailed shear rib connector – was begun in [1]. This
paper now describes the strip shear connector as the second investigated solution. Both
designs allow the use of automatic installation systems. Consequently, the installation
speed increases reducing the overall costs of a nailed shear connector system.

2. Description of the nailed strip shear connector

The nailed strip shear connector system consists of two components, the strip shear
connector itself and the powder-actuated fasteners fixing the strip connector to the
beam’s flange. First investigations on such a type of shear connecting system were
reported in [2]. The strip is folded from a flat zinc-coated steel sheet with a thickness in
the range of 1.0 to 2.0 mm. The use of the connector on secondary beams with a
composite deck spanning perpendicular to the beam is of most practical relevance.
Therefore, the distance of the two troughs of the trapezoidal strip connector must be
chosen to fit to the geometry of the metal deck (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2: Typical nailed strip shear connector system

The strip connector is fixed to the beam flange by Hilti powder-actuated fasteners
ENPH2-21L15 providing shear transfer between the concrete plate and the steel section.
The leg of the steel strip acts as a diagonal reinforcement of the concrete rib. To improve
the anchorage of the tension legs the connector strip must be higher than the metal deck.
In all Stripcon push-out tests performed at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

1047
(ETH), Zurich, a trapezoidal deck (Vikam TR60/235) with a height of 60 mm was used
combined with a strip connector of height 110 mm. The anchorage is provided by the
folded shape itself and additionally improved by openings in the crests and the legs of
the connector to develop a dowel mechanism within the concrete. Furthermore these
openings allow reliable concrete compaction between metal deck and strip connector.

The high strength nails Hilti ENPH2-21L15 allow penetration of the strip connector and
the beam flange without any predrilling. The ultimate strength of these fasteners is in the
range of 2,200 N/mm² resulting in a shear resistance of approximately 20 kN per
fastener. Though the nails show very high strength they remain ductile due to their
bainite metallurgical structure as a result of specific heat treatment during
manufacturing. The ability to bend without a brittle failure is very important with regard
to meeting the ductility requirements of shear connectors in composite beam
construction.

3. Experimental investigation

3.1 Push-out test set-up and test procedure

Fig. 3: Push-out test specimen adapted to Eurocode 4

The geometry of the push-out test specimen and the test procedure correspond to the
specifications provided in Eurocode 4 [3] except for the fact that strip connectors were
used instead of headed studs. Fig. 3 shows the geometry of the standard European push-
out test specimen. The vertical slip was measured by 2 gauges on each side, and
additionally horizontal gauges were applied to measure the uplift movement of the
concrete plates. The load protocol followed the procedure given in Eurocode 4. Before

1048
the actual push-out test was performed a static load of 40% of the expected ultimate
capacity Vu was gradually applied followed by 25 load cycles of this load range. The
push-out tests were performed deformation controlled with a speed of 0.5 mm/min.

3.2 Specimen manufacturing


The strip shear connectors were fastened by ENPH2-21L15
powder-actuated fasteners using the Hilti DX750
installation tool. The nailhead stand-offs were recorded. The
nailhead stand-off (NHS) as defined in Fig. 4 indicates the
correct depth of penetration hnom which governs the
fastening quality. In the case of the ENPH2-21L15 the
Fig. 4: Nailhead stand-off optimum value of NHS is 8.5 mm. NHS is controlled by
correct choice of cartridge type and tool setting.

According to Eurocode 4 the concrete of each plate has to be placed in a horizontal


position. Therefore the two plates of the specimen differ in age (one day for each
specimen) and compressive strength. Table 1 indicates the concrete compressive strength
fc of the two plates. The concrete age at the day of testing varied between one and two
weeks. The plates were reinforced according to the specifications given in Eurocode 4.

3.3 Push-out test program


Table 1 provides an overview of the test programme, the parameters investigated and the
properties of the material. All tests were performed at ETH Zurich and are documented
in reports [4], [5] and [6].

Table 1: Push-out Tests: Test program and test parameters


Strip shear connector Concrete strength Deck type and properties
fca [N/mm²]
Specimen #

Ultimate fu
Thickness

[N/mm²]

[N/mm²]
Yield fy

panel 1

panel 2
t [mm]
Series

Typeb

S1 1 1 1.5 409.8 303.0 24.8 31.6 Vikam TR60/235


4 1 2.0 465.4 394.0 21.1 22.0 • thickness: 0.88 mm,
5 2 1.5 410.4 303.0 21.1 22.0 • height: 60 mm
6 3 1.5 410.4 303.0 21.1 22.0
S2 3 6 2.0 465.4 394.0 28.3 33.6 • trough distance: 235 mm
4 7 1.5 410.4 303.0 30.6 40.4 • fu = 434.1 N/mm²
5 8 2.0 465.4 394.0 30.6 40.4 • fy = 348.7 N/mm²
6 8 2.0 383.1 348.4 30.6 40.4

a
Cylinder strength: diameter = 150, height = 300
b
see fig. 5

1049
3.4 Geometry and properties of strip shear connectors
All strip connectors used were made of zinc-plated steel sheets. The steel used for the
strip connector in test S2.6 was specified as DX51D according to EN 10142 [7]. For all
other connectors tested, steel sheets specified as S280GD according to EN 10147 [8]
were used. The material properties listed in Table 1 were evaluated by standard tensile
tests according to EN 10002. Fig. 5 shows the detailed geometry of the different types of
strip shear connectors listed in Table 1.

Type 1: slot width = 30 mm

Type 2: slot width = 15 mm

Type 3: no slots

Type 6

Type 7

Type 8

Fig. 5: Geometry of strip shear connector

1050
The geometry of the strip connector type 1 was theoretically based on the results of 24
push-out tests performed at Hilti Corporation in 1998. The fundamental behaviour of
nailed strip shear connectors, using generally Holorib HR51 as metal deck, was
investigated in this test programme. From these tests, the beneficial effect of openings in
the legs on the ductility of the connection was obtained. Because of the dove-tail shape
of the Holorib 51, the contribution of the Holorib 51 to shear transfer was significantly
greater than it would be in the case of a trapezoidal deck like the Vikam TR60/235.
Provided the same type of shear connector is used, it will therefore be less stressed in
combination with dove-tail metal decks.

Additionally, the existence of a stiffener in the troughs of the Vikam TR60/235


influences the geometry of the strip shear connector. Therefore, the troughs of the strip
connector are also made with a centre ridge to fit the shape of the metal deck. This
geometrical condition is advantageous with regard to an easy positioning of the strip
connector on site. However, the ridge element in the plane of the nails affects the
uniform load distribution to all nails.

4. Possible failure mechanism of nailed strip shear connectors

The following failure modes may potentially occur:

Failure in the nailed interface: Concrete failure:

• Shear failure of the nail shank • Bearing failure of the concrete


• Pullout of nails combined with local dowels
bearing deformations in the flange • Shear failure of the concrete dowels
• Shear failure of the concrete rib
Steel failure of the strip connector: • Splitting of the concrete plate

• Local bearing failure in the nail interface


• Net section fracture in the tension leg
• Net section fracture in the nailed troughs

For greatest efficiency of a nailed shear connector system, it is important to develop an


ultimate capacity close to the total nail shear capacity of all fasteners installed. However,
to allow plastic design of the composite beam the strip shear connector must develop
sufficient plastic deformations at a high load level. Therefore, the thickness of the sheet
must not be too thick to avoid brittle nail shank fracture without local bearing
deformations. On the other hand, the following conditions require a stiff strip connector
sheet:

• Smaller shear connecting contribution of the open trapezoidal metal deck.


• Greater stress in the tension legs as four nails are fixed per trough.
• Existence of the ridge in the trough, with two nails on both sides of the ridge.

1051
In previous tests with the dove-tail-shaped Holorib metal deck no ridge was necessary
and only two fasteners were installed per trough. Strip connectors of thickness 1.0 and
1.5 mm were used. For both thicknesses ultimate loads above 20 kN per fastener with
excellent ductile behaviour especially due to local bearing deformations in the interface
were developed. Consequently, finding the optimum design of the strip connector for use
with the open trapezoidal Vikam TR60/235 required an iterative process to finally
achieve satisfying results.

5. Description of load-deformation behaviour – test results

The changes in geometry from strip connector type 1 to type 8 reflect the continuous
improvements based on the experience made during the test programme. For a better
understanding of that process, the tests are described in their chronological sequence.
The list of the push-out tests in Table 1 follows that sequence.

The result of test S1.1 reflects excellent ductile behaviour, developed from plastic steel
deformations in the tension leg. Failure was governed by net section fracture in the
tension legs. However, the ultimate load with 14.08 kN per fastener was significantly
smaller than expected from the tests with the Holorib HR51, where resistances slightly
above 20 kN per fastener were observed. Therefore, changes to type 1 were made to
increase the strength of the tensile legs of the strip connector. Test S1.4 used a type 1
connector shape with greater thickness (2 mm instead of 1.5 mm) and with increased
steel strength. Types 2 and 3 were made of the same material in the same steel thickness
as used in test S1.1, but the slot width in the tension leg was reduced to 15 mm (test
S1.5) or no slot was made (test S1.6).

700 S1.1
S1.4 S1.4
600 S1.6 S1.5
S1.6
500
Load [kN]

400
S1.1
300
S1.5
200

100

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Deformation [mm]
Fig. 6: Load-deformation behaviour of series S1

1052
However, these measures were only partially successful due to non-uniform load
distribution between top and bottom rib observed in all three tests S1.4, S1.5 and S1.6.
From examinations of cut specimens it was clearly seen, that the connector troughs
located in the bottom rib of the plate were subjected to higher forces than those in the top
rib. Furthermore, it could be seen that the nails located next to the tension leg were more
stressed than those separated by the ridge in the trough. Net section fracture of the
tension legs located in the bottom rib governed failure in test S1.4, whereas net section
fracture of the nailed trough determined the ultimate capacity in tests S1.5 and S1.6. All
three tests principally showed ductile behaviour, but again the loads achieved did not
fulfil the targets (see Table 2).

Therefore, the type 6 strip connector used in test S2.3 incorporated further circular
openings in the crests and an additional anchor tab at its ends (cf. Fig. 5). Both measures
were intended to improve the anchorage of the strip connector in the concrete, especially
of the upper “free” tension leg of the strip connector. The improved anchorage finally
led to a more uniform load distribution between the top and the bottom ribs resulting in a
high resistance of 21.03 kN per fastener. A further adaptation in the geometry was to
change the parallel slot geometry into a conical one to prevent net section fracture at the
bottom of the slot. The goal was to achieve the fracture in the middle of the tension leg
and improve overall ductility by utilising a greater strain length.

In the last 2 tests S2.5 and S2.6 the geometry of type 6 was further modified resulting in
the geometry of type 8, with slight adaptations in geometry and location of the openings
in the crest and the leg. To further investigate the effect of the steel sheet strength, type 8
used in test S2.5 was manufactured of higher strength steel than for type 8 used in S2.6.

700 S2.3
S2.6
S2.4
600 S2.5
S2.6
500
S2.5
Load [kN]

400 S2.4

300
S2.3
200

100

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Deformation [mm]
Fig. 7: Load-deformation behaviour of series S2

1053
Table 2: Push-out tests: Summary of test results
Ultimate Load Deformations δ [mm]
Specimen #
Vu [kN]
Series

total per at Vu δu at δuk = Dominating Failure Mechanism


nail a 0.9 Vu 0.9 δu b
S1 1 450.4 14.08 4.1 17.1 15.4 Net section fract. tension leg
4 584.5 18.27 6.1 7.1 6.4 Net section fract. tension leg c
5 511.5 15.98 5.5 8.9 8.0 Net section fract. trough c
6 532.2 16.63 6.4 8.7 7.8 Net section fract. trough c
S2 3 672.8 21.03 7.2 7.3 6.6 Nail shear + connector bearing
4 539.0 16.84 6.8 9.0 8.1 Nail shear + connector bearing
5 663.8 20.74 7.5 8.2 7.4 Nail shear + connector bearing
6 707.2 22.10 7.4 11.1 10.0 Nail shear + connector bearing
In test S2.5, the upper tension legs failed in the middle of the net sectional area. This
indicates the effectiveness of the improved anchorage measures at the ends of the strip
connector and in the top concrete rib and also proves the effectiveness of the slot
adaptations. The achieved ultimate load per nail was 20.7 kN. Though this value is
sufficiently high for an economic use of the nailed system, it does not reach the ultimate
loads of up to 25.7 kN developed for the rib shear connectors reported in [1]. This
difference can be explained by the existence of the ridge in the strip connector trough,
which is detrimental to a uniform load distribution to all fasteners installed for the entire
deformation range.

Ductility and interestingly also the ultimate load were greater for test S2.6 in which the
strip connector with the smaller strength was used. This behaviour indicates an improved
load distribution to all fasteners installed due to earlier plastic bearing deformations in
the strip in the vicinity of the fasteners. The intention of test S2.4 followed the same
assumption that local bearing deformations of the thinner 1.5 mm strip type 7 might
activate all nails more uniformly. In comparison with types 2 and 3 the width of type 7
was increased from 80 to 100 mm to prevent premature failure owing to net section
fracture of the nailed trough. However, as indicated by Table 2 and Fig. 7, the assumed
behaviour did not occur due to the reduction in connector thickness which also reduced
the bending stiffness of the ridge affecting again the equal activation of all four fasteners
installed on both sides of the ridge.

a
Total number of nails: 32 for each test.
b
Note: According to Eurocode 4 the calculation of δuk requires 3 equal push-out tests
performed and certain limits of the scatter of the 3 tests within a series. Nevertheless,
as the ductility is an essential criterion, δuk is calculated here just based on the result of
a single test to allow a first ductility assessment.
c
Only occurred in the bottom rib of the concrete plate

1054
6. Conclusions and outlook

Based on the results of this test programme on nailed strip shear connectors the
following conclusions are summarised:

• Optimised design of the strip shear connector results in a high resistance of the
nailed connections above 20 kN per fastener. With nail shank fracture, connector
bearing deformations and partially net section fracture in the tension legs, a
combined failure behaviour was observed. Therefore, the resistance of the fasteners
was not as high as in the case of the nailed rib shear connectors [1].
• The characteristic deformations δuk were greater than the required limit of 6 mm
indicating that the connector performance allows for plastic beam design.
• For the definition of design resistances further series of push-out tests must be
performed.

Recently, beam tests were performed by the authors to verify the behaviour observed in
the push-out tests in a full scale beam situation. The results will be reported later in a
future publication.

7. References

1. Fontana, M., Beck, H., ´Novel rib shear connectors with powder actuated fasteners´,
(2000), Proceedings of UEF-Conference Composite Construction IV, Banff, May
2000
2. Shanit, G., Chryssanthopoulos, M., Dowling, P.J. (1990), ´New profiled unwelded
shear connectors in composite construction´, Steel Constr. Today 1990, 4, 141-147
3. Eurocode 4, ENV 1994-1-1 (1992), ´Design of composite steel and concrete
structures, part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings´, October 1992
4. Knobloch, M., ´Schubtragfähigkeit von gefalteten Blechverbundstreifen mit Hilti-
Setzbolzen´, (2000), Studienarbeit in Konstruktion, Institute of Structural
Engineering, ETH-Zurich.
5. Bärtschi, R., ´Stripcon Versuche 10-12, Schubtragfähigkeit von gefalteten
Blechleisten mit Hilti-Setzbolzen´, (2000), Test Report, Institute of Structural
Engineering, ETH-Zurich.
6. Fontana, M., Bärtschi, R., ´New-type shear connectors with powder-actuated
fasteners´, (2000), Institute of Structural Engineering, ETH-Zurich.
7. European Code EN 10142 (1995), ´Continuously hot-dip zinc coated low carbon
steel strip and sheet for cold forming – Technical delivery conditions´, August 1995
8. European Code EN 10147 (1995), ´Continuously hot-dip zinc coated structural steel
strip and sheet – Technical delivery conditions´, August 1995

1055
DESIGN CONCEPT OF NAILED SHEAR CONNECTIONS
IN COMPOSITE TUBE COLUMNS
Gerhard Hanswille*, Hermann Beck** and Till Neubauer*
*Institute of Steel and Composite Structures, University of Wuppertal, Germany
**Hilti Corp., Direct Fastening Development, Principality of Liechtenstein

Abstract
Nailed shear connections are a new alternative type of shear connection in composite
columns with concrete filled circular and rectangular tubes. The main advantage of a
nailed shear connection is, that it can be applied from the outside of the tube without any
prefabrication efforts. Based on the behaviour derived experimentally from push-out
tests, proposals for the design resistance of nails for ultimate and serviceability limit
states are made, providing provisions with regards to minimum steel thickness, concrete
grade and nail spacing are fulfilled. In order to get a more realistic knowledge of the
deformation behaviour in serviceability limit states, the combined shear resistance of the
nails and the shear strength due to bond and friction and including long-term effects has
to be considered. The background of a corresponding test program will be discussed.

1. Introduction

Nailed shear connection in composite tube columns was introduced in practice in 1998
and 1999 in buildings in Austria and Germany [1], [2]. The design of the nailed shear
connection for these projects was based on experimental work performed within the
VHF-Research Project [3], [4]. Additional tests were also performed by Hilti
Corporation [5] in order to investigate the load-slip behaviour of the nailed shear
connections for general conditions.

The objective of this paper is to introduce the design method for nailed shear
connections in buildings for a limited area of application. A design resistance for the
ultimate limit state will be proposed. All the push-out tests described in [3] to [5] were
performed to evaluate conservative resistances for the ultimate limit state. Therefore, the
inside surface of the tube specimens was always lubricated prior to concreting, in order
to eliminate load contributions of chemical bond and friction in the interface between

1056
concrete and steel. However, neglecting chemical bond and friction completely
overestimates deformations in the serviceability limit state, leading to inefficient
utilisation of the nailed shear connections. To gain a more realistic knowledge of the
behaviour in the serviceability limit state, an additional test program was worked out.
Backgrounds of this new program will be introduced, in addition results of ongoing
creep tests will be presented. Finally the paper will provide an example of a
constructional detail with the corresponding design equations for the ultimate and the
serviceability limit state.

2. Nailing method

High strength nails with smooth shanks are driven through the tube wall from the outside
using a powder-actuated tool. No predrilling of the tube is required to enable the
penetration process. The front sections of the nails protrude into the inside of the hollow
tube. After the tube has been filled with concrete, the nail shank acts as shear connector
between the concrete core and the hollow tube. The method is applicable for both pipes
and rectangular hollow sections.
Powder-actuated fastener:
Hilti X-DSH32 P10
fu = 2200 N/mm²
Embedment Depth Diameter = 4.5 mm

Powder-actuated tool:
Hilti DX750G,
Power loads and tool
energy settings dependent
on strength and thickness of
the tube to finally achieve
flush installation.

Fig. 1. Principle of method

3. Push-out test results

Fig. 2 shows examples of typical load-slip behaviour of nailed shear connections derived
from push-out tests. With regards to details of the performed test program, it is referred
to [4] and [5]. At great slips a high load-bearing capacity per fastener is attainable
reflecting excellent ductile behaviour. Due to concrete confinement inside the tube, the
concrete develops high local compressive stresses amounting a multiple of the uniaxial
concrete compressive strength. As the overall behaviour is significantly affected by local
concrete deformations, the load-slip curves typically exhibit a parabolic shape. From the
examples in Fig. 2 the effect of the concrete strength can be clearly observed. With
increasing concrete strength, the ultimate capacity of the nailed connection increases as
well as a greater initial stiffness combined with smaller initial deformation is given.

1057
Additional tests with specimens without nails proved that the lubrication of the inner
pipe surface was completely effective as only negligible small ultimate values (in total
16.7 kN, 0.6 kN per nail) developed in these control tests. Nevertheless, the ultimate
loads generally exceed significantly the total shear load capacity of all nails installed, as
indicated in Fig. 2. Caused by the lateral restraint of the local concrete deformations [5],
a significant local compression between the pipe and the concrete develops (see Fig. 3),
which is finally responsible for the additional friction load contribution.

Pipe: d = 508 mm, wall thickness = 8.8 mm


1100
P [kN]

1000 C20/25
900
C45/55
800
700
600 24 nails per
500 specimen
400 Level of nail
300 shear strength
200
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Slip [mm]

Fig. 2: Examples of load-slip curves from push-out tests [5]

Dark areas caused by


lateral compression

Fig. 3. Inside view of push-out test specimens: Right: Detail of a bent nail;
Left: Bent nails and visible dark areas of lateral compression at the location of each nail.

1058
4. Design concept

The basic idea of the design concept is to provide constant values for the design shear
strength for the ultimate and the serviceability limit states in combination with the
following scope and detailing provisions:
• circular and rectangular tubes with no limits in the outside dimensions,
• wall thickness: 5.6 to 12.5 mm. For higher strength steel grades, the application
restrictions with regards to installability of the nails have to be considered
according to manufacturers provisions,
• limitation of diameter/thickness ratios [6] to avoid local buckling of steel tubes,
• concrete strength classes not lower than C30/37 and maximum aggregate size
not exceeding 16 mm,
• minimum spacing between the fasteners not less than 50 mm in vertical and
lateral direction,
• minimum distance of 20 cm to a possible concrete joint,
• installation of the X-DSH32P10 according to manufacturers specifications.

4.1 Ultimate limit state


Considering the restrictions above, the design resistance for the ultimate limit state can
be based on the steel shear strength of the nails. For the X-DSH32P10 a design
resistance was determined from test results in accordance with Annex Z of Eurocode 3.
A characteristic value Rk = 21 kN and a design value Rd = Rk / γv = 16.8 kN per nail was
evaluated [6], where the partial safety factor is given by γv = 1.25. This pragmatic
conservative approach is justified as follows:
• Contribution of chemical bond and large area friction between tube and concrete
was virtually completely excluded in the push-out test.
• In all tests in the defined scope, the ultimate loads in the push-out tests were
generally significantly greater than the ultimate shear capacities of the nails. This
beneficial effect is explained with local frictional forces developing owing to the
restriction of the local concrete deformations in the compression area to the nail,
comp. Fig. 3.
• In [4] tests have also been performed with very low strength concrete (fc = 15.7
N/mm²) utilising recycled aggregates. Also in such low strength concrete, the
ultimate load was in the range and beyond the total shear capacity of all installed
nails. However, with regards to serviceability and also practical relevance, concrete
strength Class C30/37 (fc = 30 N/mm²) was selected as minimum grade.

Utilising the high ultimate loads evaluated in the tests for practical design, would require
an accurate theoretical knowledge of the combined influence of the shape and
dimensions of the hollow sections and the concrete strength. However, due to the
significant slip, these higher values could not be utilised at the end, because
serviceability requirements would govern design. Furthermore the design methods for
columns are based on the assumption that the composite section remains plane.

1059
Therefore in the load introduction area of columns excessive slip at the interface
between steel and concrete must be avoided.

4.2 Serviceability limit state


With regard to serviceability limit state requirements, the slip at the interface between
the steel tube and concrete must be limited. Based on the experience with other types of
shear connection like headed studs or gusset plates trough the profile, slip between steel
and concrete should be limited to values of approximately δ = 0.5 mm in order to avoid
uncontrolled redistribution of the sectional forces of the column. The load slip curve
according to Fig. 2 demonstrates that this serviceability criterion can govern the design
of nailed shear connectors.

In [5] a proposal was made to limit the design resistance for the serviceability limit state
with 8.5 kN per nail. However, that value results in an inefficient utilisation of the nails,
because it was evaluated from push-out tests in which chemical bond and large area
friction was excluded due to lubrication of the inner tube surface. However, with regard
to the serviceability limit state neglecting effects of bond strength and friction in the
interface between steel and concrete seems to be a too conservative approach.

5. Ongoing experimental investigations on serviceability limit state

5.1 Slip at the serviceability limit state


Bond and adhesion in combination with friction between steel and concrete was
extensively investigated in the past (for example [7]), resulting in corresponding design
provisions. Push-out tests typically show a peak load corresponding to the load at which
bond and adhesion is destroyed. With increasing deformations the load drops to the
remaining level of effects of friction. Because the ultimate capacity of bond and
adhesion shows a great scatter, it is not considered explicitly in design. Only effects of
friction can be utilised. Literature [7] further indicates, that deformations before
debonding are very small. Basically no slip in the interface was measured for loads up to
70 percent of the ultimate load.

Therefore, an additional test program was worked out to investigate the combined
behaviour of effects of friction with the nailed shear connection. The principle set-up of
series I (Fig. 4) corresponds with those in the former tests. The load will be introduced
into the concrete and has to be transferred into the uniformly supported pipe. For the
purpose of this investigation, the symmetric test set-up I with an axial load introduction
represents the most critical practical situation. To measure realistic initial deformations,
no lubrication of the inner tube surface will be made. The introduction length is selected
with 2.5-times the pipe diameter following the provisions given in [8]. The load
sequence is selected in such a way to describe a practical situation realistically. The
primary objective of these tests is to verify a design load PSLS for serviceability limit
state verifications of approximately 12 kN per nail. Therefore, the specimen will be
loaded in the first step up the target working load PSLS (compare Fig. 4) and relieved to

1060
zero to measure remaining deformations. Afterwards 100 load cycles varying between
0.5 and 0.8-times of PSLS will be performed to simulate live loads. Then the specimen
will be relieved again followed with the loading up to failure.

323,9

Pipe 323.9/
6.3, S235
50

810

Concrete:
C30/37

Air gap

X-DSH32 P10

Series I Series II
(schematic)
Type A: 16 nails: PSLS = 16 . 12 = 192 kN
Type B: 32 nails: PSLS = 32 . 12 = 384 kN
Fig. 4: SLS-Tests: Series I and II: Set-up and load sequence
Tests with two different numbers of nails (16 and 32) will be performed. It is known
from [7], that the peak strength of bond and adhesion varies in a range between 0.45 and
1.4 N/mm². That means that for the given geometry the load before debonding may vary
between 350 and 1100 kN. Test series I comprises also control tests without any nails.
With the results from the control tests and those from the two different nail patterns, the
combined behaviour will be known for this specific configuration. Therefore, the tests
serve as the experimental basis for a numerical generalisation of the combined behaviour
in the service state, in which just the allowable frictional bond will be utilised.

Series II differs from series I in the load introduction and the specimen support. The load
introduction corresponds to the practical situation in which to load is introduced into the
tube by a fillet welded vertical gusset plate. The objective of these tests is to investigate
the plastic load bearing behaviour of the composite column. Specifically shall be
clarified, if the actual pipe deformations are high enough to activate all installed nails.
The number of nails was selected in such a way, that the plastic resistance of the
composite section can be achieved.

1061
5.2 Long-term effects
Tests have been performed in order to investigate the long-term behaviour and influence
of creep of concrete of the nailed shear connections. The test set-up of the creep tests
performed at Hilti Corporation is shown in Fig. 5. Additional tests have been performed
at the University of Innsbruck [9] using basically the same test set-up and specimen
configuration. Only four nails were used per specimen, as the specimen size had to be
kept smaller with regards to test execution. In order to eliminate potential effects of
bond, adhesion and friction, the inner pipe surface was again lubricated. The load was
applied at an age of concrete of eight days.
Spring tensioned
pressure device

Centric threaded
rod M 16
Circular plate d = 195
2 displacement gages
30

Lubricated inner
pipe surface
180

Plastic pipe
4 nails
300

with gap to the X-DSH32 P10


anchor r od
100

ca. 2 cm air gap


20

30

M16 thread
240

Pipe 219 / 6,3

240

Fig. 5: Test set-up for long-term tests

Table 1: Parameter and results of long-term tests


Test at # fc at fc at 28 Load P Initial deformation deformation
loading (8 days per nail slip after 90 after 395
days) [N/mm²] [kN] [mm] days [mm] days [mm]
[N/mm²]
Hilti 1 27.8 44.4 10 1.04 0.76 0.88
2 27.8 44.4 10 1.28 0.75 0.85
3 27.8 44.4 5 0.56 0.24 0.29
Innsbruck 4 na 47.2 15 na 0.03 -
5 na 47.2 15 na 0.03 -

In comparison with the measurements from the push-out tests [4], [5], the initial slips are
greater. Reasons for that behaviour might be the small concrete age of 8 days at loading
and the small number of just four nails. It is assumed that with increasing nail number

1062
the stiffness per fastener also would increase caused by the fact, that the contact area
between nail and concrete is of the same order as the concrete aggregates themselves.
Fig. 6 shows the development of the creep deformations. Up to approximately 10 days
the deformation exhibits a parabolic shape, beyond which the development of the
deformation flattens significantly. The creep deformation after 10 days amounts to
approximately 75 percent of the value measured after one year of loading. Considering
the range of permanent dead loads, creep deformations derived from test #3 amount to
approximately 50 percent of the initial slip.
1,2

1,1
Test #1 Test #2 Test #3
1
Test #4 Test #5
0,9
Creep deformation [mm]

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Duration of loading [days]

Fig. 6: Deformations derived from long-term tests #1 to #5

Interestingly the tests performed at the University of Innsbruck led to complete different
results. As basically the same test equipment was used as in the tests 1 to 3, it was
speculated that bond, adhesion and friction was not adequately prevented by the
lubrication measurement of the inner tube surface. Therefore, the tests were stopped after
90 days to perform push-out tests with these specimens, followed by a visual
investigation of the inner tube surface. From these visual comparison it was clearly seen,
that bond and adhesion and large area friction was partially active. That incomplete
prevention of natural bond explains that even with the greater load of 15 kN per nail
basically no creep deformations were recorded.

This observation is a further indication, that natural bond effects shall be considered for
a realistic and economical assessment of the slip characteristics in the service state. The
results of the push-out tests summarised in Table 2 further support that assumption. As
natural bond was partially active the achieved loads at a slip of 0.5 mm are significantly
greater than the target value of 12 kN per nail for the serviceability limit state. In these
push-out tests no real load maximum was observed within the recorded slips up to 35
mm, indicating that already a few number of nails will change the characteristics of
bond, adhesion and large area friction completely.

1063
Table 2: Result of push-out tests of creep specimen #4 and #5
Test load P [kN] per nail at slip of
Test at # fc [N/mm²] 0.5 mm 30 mm
Innsbruck 4 47,2 30.7 170.0
5 47,2 20.0 172.5

6. Worked design example

Fig. 7 shows a typical example of nailed shear connection as part of a composite joint.
The load is introduced into the column by a fillet-welded gusset plate connected on the
outside of the pipe. Generally the nails can be uniformly distributed along the
circumference of the pipe.

Fig. 7: Example of composite beam column joint

Table 3: Summary of design equations, load introduction into steel tube


Ultimate limit state (ULS) Serviceability limit state (SLS)
ηULS FSd ≤ n RDSH,Rd,ULS ηSLS Fk ≤ n RDSH,Rd,SLS
A c f cd + A s f sd Ac / n o + As
ηULS = ηSLS =
N pl, Rd Ai
Npl,Rd = Aa fyd + Ac fcd + As fsd Ai = Aa + Ac/n0 + As
Composite tube columns ∅ 508 x 6,3 S235; C45/55; 8∅28 S 500
Nails X-DSH 32 P10; Rk = 21,0 kN, RDSH,Rd, ULS = 21,0 / 1,25 = 16,8 kN
Aa = 99,3 cm² As = 49,3 cm² Ac = 1878,2 cm²
Npla,Rd = 2121,4 kN Npls,Rd = 2143,5 cm² Nplc,Rd = 5634,6 kN
Npl,Rd = 9899,5 kN no = 21000 / 3600 = 5,8
Two composite beams with ΣFG = 530 kN (permanent load), ΣFQ = 320 kN (variable
load)

1064
FSd =1,35 ⋅530 + 1,50 ⋅320 = 1195,5kN Fk = 530 + 320 = 850,0 kN
2143,5 + 5634,6 1878,2 / 5,8 + 49,3
η ULS = = 0,79 η SLS = = 0,79
9899,5 1878,2 / 5,8 + 49,3 + 99,3
required number of nails: required number of nails:
nULS = 0,79 ⋅ 1195,5 / 16,8 = 56,2 nSLS = 0,79 ⋅ 850 / 12 = 56,0
ref. 3 ⋅ 20 = 60 X-DSH 32 P10
with
Fk ... Characteristic value of the total support reaction
FSd .. Design value of the total support reaction
RDSH,Rd,ULS =16,8 kN Design resistance per X-DSH32P10 for the ULS
RDSH,Rd, SLS =12,0 kN Design resistance per X-DSH32P10 for the SLS
n .... total number of nails per joint
Npl,Rd ... Plastic resistance to compression of a composite cross-section according to [8]
Ai ... Cross-sectional area of the composite cross-section based on steel properties
n0 ... Modular ratio for short term loading

7. References

1. Tschemmernegg, F., ´Innsbrucker Mischbautechnologie im Wiener Millennium


Tower´, Stahlbau 68, Heft 8, (1999), 606-611
2. Angerer, T., Rubin, D., Taus, M., ´Verbundstützen und Querkraftanschlüsse der Ver-
bundflachdecken beim Millennium Tower´, Stahlbau 68, Heft 8, (1999), 641-646.
3. Tschemmernegg, F., Beck, H. ´Nailed shear connection in composite tube columns´,
(1998) March 1998 ACI Convention, Houston, Session on Performance of Systems
with Steel-Concrete Columns
4. Larcher, T.Z., ´Versuche zur Krafteinleitung der Trägerauflagerkräfte bei
Hohlprofilstützen mit Setznägeln´, (1997), Diplomawork at the Institute of Timber
and Mixed Building Technology, Leopold-Franzens-University of Innsbruck
5. Beck, H., ´Nailed shear connection in composite tube columns´, (1999) Proceedings
of the Conference Eurosteel ´99, Prague, 26-29 May 1999
6. Hanswille, G., Neubauer, T., ´Zulassungsantrag beim DIBt. Stellungnahme für die
Nägel X-DSH32P10 zum Einsatz bei betongefüllten Hohlprofilen als
Verbundmittel´.
7. Roik, K., Breit, M., Schwalbenhofer, K., ´Untersuchung der Verbundwirkung
zwischen Stahlprofil und Beton bei Stützenkonstruktion´. (1984) Projekt 51, Institut
für konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Ruhr-Universität Bochum.
8. DIN 18800-5, ´Stahlbauten: Teil 5: Verbundtragwerke aus Stahl und Beton,
Bemessung und Konstruktion´. (1999), Draft, January 1999
9. Frischhut, M., Michl, T., ´Versuchsbericht: Hilti-Nägel im Verbundbau,
Langzeitverformungen und Late-Push-Out´, (2000), Test report 13.09.2000, Institute
of Timber and Mixed Build. Technology, Leopold-Franzens-University of Innsbruck

1065
AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON SHEAR
CHARACTERISTICS OF PERFOBOND STRIP AND ITS
RATIONAL STRENGTH EQUATIONS
Ushijima Yoshitaka*, Hosaka Tetsuya**, Mitsuki Kaoru**,
Watanabe Hiroshi**,Tachibana Yoshihiro**, Hiragi Hirokazu***
*Kawada Industries, Inc., Japan
**Japan Railway Construction,PC.
***Setsunan University, Japan

Abstract
This paper deals with the rational shearing strength equation and the slip behavior for
shear connectors called the Perfobond Strip (Concrete Dowel: hereinafter, abbreviated to
PBL) that is used at the continuous composite girder of railroad bridges. This PBL is the
shear connector proposed by Leonhardt in Germany, and its composite effect between
steel and concrete is very high due to the shearing resistance of the concrete in
perforations of the steel plate. Also, the PBL shear connectors Strip is recognized having
high fatigue strength. Strength evaluation equations for the design of PBL shear
connectors are proposed by various investigators in the world. Existing research has
clarified that the shearing strength of PBL shear connectors is very dependent on the
perforation diameter and the compression strength of concrete in case of no
reinforcement bars. In actual structure, however, the reinforcing bars were arranged to
the neighborhood of shear connectors in most of the case.
Thus, in this investigation, the authors chose the strip thickness, the distance of strips,
the presence of reinforcing bars and the perforation diameter as experimental parameters.
Also, from the result of a multi linear regression analysis based on data published in the
world including our data, two kinds of new rational strength equations for PBL shear
connectors were derived. One is a strength equation without reinforcing bars and the
other is a strength equation with reinforcing bars. It became clear that these evaluation
equations express data of push-out test well. The strength equations for design are also
proposed, respectively.

1066
1. Introduction

At present, the construction of continuous composite girders is being examined from the
consideration of noise and vibration in the train transit-time on steel railway bridges.
Much research on shear connectors of steel beam and concrete slab has been carried out
until now for the multi-main girder bridge [1], [2], [3]. And, the research on 2 main I
cross section girder bridges, in which the floor system span is wide, is carried out for the
continuous composite railway girder in order to promote further rationalization [4], [5].
As shear connector structure in this bridge type, it is also anticipated that the necessity of
arranging many horseshoe-shaped shear connectors occurs and that its arrangement
becomes physically difficult, since the horizontal shearing force that has to be
transmitted from the girder to the concrete slab by 2 main girders increases, when the
horseshoe-shaped shear connectors in railway bridge are applied with heretofore
similarly. On the other hand, one has to worry about the fatigue strength of the flange
plane of steel beams at the intermediate support division of continuous girder bridges,
when stud shear connectors were applied. Therefore, the development of a shear
connector structure that is resistant to tensile force of bridge axial direction is required.
Then, the application of PBL shear connectors developed by Leonhardt et al [6]. of
Germany, which also have high durability, to the continuous composite girder is
examined with the transmission force of the equivalent horizontal shearing force with
horseshoe-shaped shear connectors and stud shear connectors in railway bridges. There
are results which have already adopted the PBL shear connectors at intermediate support
parts such as Hokuriku Shinkansen "the Hokuriku way overbrige" in Japan.
In until now research, these PBL shear connectors were designed so that the concrete in
the perforations was fractured by shearing stress as precondition. In the reason, the
following are considered as factors influencing the ultimate strength: perforation
diameter and compression strength of the concrete [6], [7], [8]. Afterwards, experimental
researchs were carried out in Japan [9], [10], [11]. However, there seems to be no
research yet, which clarifies the behavior of the reinforcing bars, the plate thickness of
PBL shear connectors, existence of the reinforcing bars running through the perforations
of PBL and the number of sheets of PBL shear connectors placed on the flange plane.
Thus, in this study, test specimens of 8 types with those factors were manufactured, and
static push-out shearing tests were carried out. Especially, a comparison examination
was carried out for the slippage constant and failure mode.
And, collection, arrangement and statistic analysis in respect of the test data (including
this experiment result) for previous shear capacity were made, in order to lead to
strength evaluation equations of necessary shear load-carrying capacity in the design of
the PBL shear connectors. The purpose of this investigation is to arrange knowledge on
the PBL shear connectors.

1067
2. Failure conditions

In order to understand the conditions of concrete cracks after completing the tests, a
concrete block part of the specimen was cut, and the final failure condition was visually
observed.

2.1 Influence of strip thickness


Here, specimens without penetration reinforcing bars re-bars will be observed. First,
concrete in perforations of the thin 8mm-strip specimen was pulverized in the steel plate
of PBL. However, concrete of the thicker strip specimens sheared on both sides of the
strip.
As differences in failure phenomena by strip thickness are shown in Figure 1, the small
thickness causes the area of compression to be minimized and the force to be
concentrated. This concentration of force is thought to have generated splitting tension.
On the other hand, when the strip thickness is large, the area of compression is large, and
the force is thought to dispersively work on the concrete. This dispersed force is thought
to finally reach the maximum shear strength of concrete on extended lines of both sides
of the strip, and subsequently cause it to shear (see Photos 1 and 2). Failures in
specimens with penetration reinforcing bars re-bars will be shown later 2.2. Furthermore,

Shearing force Shearing force

Steel strip Steel


Area of 3 axial Area of 3 axial
compressive stress strip compressive stress
Compressive area Compressive area
Tension failure Shear failure
(a)Specimen with (b)Specimen with
thin strip thick strip
Figure 1. Failure conditions
(Influence of strip thickness)
Shearing force

Steel strip Area of 3 axial


compressive stress
Penetration
reinforcing bars Compressive area Pulverized
Finished test
Splitting tension is restrained or Concrete in the perforations
shear resistance is improved by is pulverized by penetration
reinforcing baras reinforcing baras
Figure 2. Failure conditions
(Influence of penetration reinforcing bars)

1068
3-axial compressive stress areas shown in Figures 1 and 2 were assumed to be those in
which concrete does not completely generate tension (areas in the figures are
assumptions).

2.2 Influence by the existence of the penetraion reinforcing bars


It was clarified that final failure conditions of specimens without penetration reinforcing
bars would vary depending on the strip thickness as mentioned above. 8 and 16mm
specimens with penetration reinforcing bars both failed because the concrete in the
perforations pulverized from compression. Factors for these specimens with penetration
reinforcing bars to indicate similar tendencies in final failure conditions are thought to be
the penetration reinforcing bars restraining each compressive area of Figure 1 (a) shown
in Figure 2, which contributed to the improvement of shear strength at the same time
(see Photos 3 and 4). Here, it was also confirmed that the specimen with penetration
reinforcing bars had local deformations on the inner sides of the perforations in contact
with the reinforcing bars.

3. Study on strength evaluation equations

The authors of this research have decided to collect and organize previous experiment
data on PBL shear connectors including experiment values of maximum shear strengths

Photo 1. Failure condition Photo 2. Failure condition


(Strip thickness: 8mm) (Strip thickness: 16mm)

Photo 3. Failure condition Photo 4. Failure condition


(Strip thickness: 8mm) (Strip thickness: 16mm)

1069
to obtain new rational strength evaluation equations Table 3. Average values and
for specimens with and without penetration variation range for test
reinforcing bars. data of Perfobond strips
Average Max Min
d(mm) 58.9 80.0 35.0
3.1 Previous strength evaluation equations t(mm) 17.1 22.0 8.0
The influenceial factors on shear strengths of PBL fcu(N/mm2) 39.0 57.6 23.8
shear connectors are thought to be many, and do not φst(mm) 11.9 28.6 5.1
seem to be unified. A relationship of influencing fst(N/mm2) 468.1 500.0 440.0

factors used by the equations (d2fcu; where, d:


perforation diameter; fcu: concrete cylinder compressive strength) and experimental shear
strength value per perforation in PBL (Qmax) is shown in Figures 3,4. Here, the equation
proposed by Leonhardt, et al., is without consideration of penetration reinforcing bars in
perforations of PBL, and as made clear by Figure 4, it can be seen that all test data were
not successfully taken into account. Also, H. Andrä [7] himself proposed equation by
expanding equation of Leonhardt. Also in 1994 in Japan, Ogata et al., [9] proposed
equation for PBL shear connectors to be applied to bridge piers. According to the
strength equations proposed previously, concrete shear failure was assumed to precede;
therefore, influential factors on ultimate shear strengths were thought to be perforation
diameters in PBL (d) and concrete cylinder compressive strength (fcu). Furthermore,
equation (1) shown in Figures 3 and 4 include coefficients to convert cube strengths into
cylinder strengths in order to have the same condition as the concrete strength used in
this experiment. Later, Kraus et al., [12] proposed equation which limited the perforation
diameter and strip thickness (t) of PBL (d=70mm, t=10mm), adding its thickness t to the
influencing factors. Experiments were conducted, changing the number of perforations
in PBL, their diameters, reinforcing bars arrangement, etc., by Taira et al., [10] in 1997,
Hosaka, Hiragi, Koeda, et al., [5] and Tominaga, Nishiumi et al., [13] in 1998. Ebina et
al., [11] conducted experiments on a shear connector structure to be applied to lower
floor slabs of a PC bridge with corrugated web, and Uehira et al., [15] also similarly
proposed equation. In addition, there are experiment reports on rigid connection
structures to be applied to RC piers and steel girders in a few references [15], [16], [17].
Thus in this research, efforts were made to collect as much test data as possible, and in
the experiment values shown above, only experiment results that had all definite data
were selected to taken into account. And strength equation relations previously proposed
on shear strength were used in an attempt to reorganize test data collected and organized
for this research.

3.2 Proposal of strength evaluation equations


Using previous research results, the results of the experiments conducted this time, and
selecting d, t, fcu, fst, etc., as influential factors on experiment values of shear strengths
for PBL (Q max per perforation), an attempt was made to propose a strength evaluation
equation through a statistical analysis method shown in Reference [18].
(1) Organization based on the influence factor d 2f cu
Failure conditions of the results of this experiment shown in Section 2.2 were thought to
differ depending on the existence of penetration reinforcing bars. Thus, the experiment

1070
data without penetration reinforcing bars were plotted in Figure 3, and those with
reinforcing bars placed were plotted in Figure 4. These figures also have evaluation
equation accompanying the equations (1) proposed by Leonhardt. The correlation
coefficients shown in the figures 3 and 4 are indices showing a variation in experiment
values for this arranging sorting method, and data of this experiment shows a positive
correlation. As a result, although experiment data without penetration reinforcing bars
had a significantly high coefficient 0.935 as shown in Figure 3, it was confirmed that this
coefficient varied slightly in all areas of the experiment data. This is thought to be
caused by the lack of consideration for the progression of failure condition progress
influenced by the strip thickness shown in Figure 1 of Section 2.1. On the other hand,
data from experiments with penetration reinforcing bars shown in Figure 4 had a
coefficient of 0.810, which confirmed a wide variation for this arranging method.
However, the influence of penetration reinforcing bars was not considered in equation
(1). Thus, it was concluded that strength evaluation equations for PBL shear connectors
should be proposed in 2 types of strength equations by having or not having penetration
reinforcing bars to consider failure conditions.
(2) Rational strength evaluation equation without penetration reinforcing bars
(kN/hole)

800 Correlation coefficient=0.935


2
700 Qu=1.79d fcu ----(1)
Shear strength per perforation

600
500
400
300
200 fcu:Cylinders concrete strength
100
Test data without reinforcing bars
0 Profosed by Leonhardt equation (1)
0 100 200 300 400 500
2 (kN/hole)
d ×fcu
Figure 3. Influence factor d 2f cu (without reinforcing bars)
(kN/hole)

800 Qu=1.79d2fcu ----(1)


Shear strength per perforation

700 Correlation coefficient=0.810


600
500
400
300 fcu:Cylinders concrete strength
200 fst:Tensile strength of reinforcing bars
100 Test data of with reinforcing bars
0 Profosed by Leonhardt equation (1)
0 100 200 300 400 500
(kN/hole)
d2×fcu
Figure 4. Influence factor d 2f cu (with reinforcing bars)

1071
(kN/hole)
800 Correlation coefficient=0.971

Shear strength per perforation


700 2σ
t
600
500 d
400
300
200 fcu:Cylinders concrete strength
100
Test data of without reinforcing bars
0 rational strength equation (2)
0 60 120 180 240
2 1/2 (kN/hole)
d (t/d) fcu
Figure 5.Rational evaluation equation (without reinforcing bars)
(kN/hole)

800 Correlation coefficient=0.979


Shear strength per perforation


700
600
500 Dst
d
400
300
fcu:Cylinders concrete strength
200
fst:Tensile strength of reinforcing bars
100
Test data of with reinforcing bars
0 rational strength equation (4)
0 200 400 600
(d -Dst )fcu+Dst2fst (kN/hole)
2 2

Figure 6. Rational evaluation equation (with reinforcing bars)


Failure conditions without penetration reinforcing bars were seen as bearing splitting
failures besides shear failures in the experiment results of the 8mm-thick specimen.
Therefore, failure conditions without penetration reinforcing bars are thought to be
caused by the coupling of shear and bearing progresses. The difference between these
progresses in respect of the thickness variation is thought to be influenced by the
dimension effects of the perforations in PBL, i.e., the ratio between strip thickness (t)
and perforation diameter (d) in PBL, although shear failure occurs at the ultimoate. Thus,
a multiple regression analysis was conducted to add the influence of thickness-diameter
ratio (t/d) to the equation (1) proposed by Leonhardt et al., using all test data (without
penetration reinforcing bars) collected and organized for this investingation. As a result,
the equation (2) was obtained as a rational evaluation equation on ultimate shear strength
per perforation in PBL.
1/2
Q = 3.38d 2  t / d  f - 39.0 (2)
u cu
Where,
Qu: Ultimate shear strength(N)
t: Strip thickness(mm)
d: Perforation diameter(mm)
f cu: Concrete cylinder compressive strength(N/mm2)

1072
Also, considering experiment values, the range of application for equation (2) is assumed
to be:
1/2
22 .0 < d 2  t / d  f < 194 .0
cu
The result reorganized by the influencing factors of evaluation equation (2) is shown in
Figure 5. As a result, the correlation with the experiment values further increased
compared to the expression method proposed by Leonhardt et al., and the correlation
coefficient became 0.971. Here in equation (2), the thickness-diameter ratio (t/d)
increased with the increase in the strip thickness, and a dominance of shear failure can be
reproduced; the thickness-diameter ratio (t/d) decreased with the decrease in the strip
thickness, and a tendency of bearing splitting failure dominating prior to shear failure
can also be reproduced. Also, as a shear strength equation to be used for design (Qd),
equation (3) shifted twice as low as the standard deviation is shown in a form including
the lowest limit value of scattering experiment values.
Q = 3.38d 2 (t d )1/2 f - 121.0 (3)
d cu
Here,
Qd: Design shear strength(N)
(3) Rational strength evaluation equation with penetration reinforcing bars
With penetration reinforcing bars, it is confirmed from Figures 3-6 of Section 2.1 and
Section 2.2 that penetration reinforcing bars contribute to shear strength. Thus, a
multiple regression analysis similarly mentioned above was conducted by adding the
penetration reinforcing bars diameter (Dst ) and its tensile strength (fst) as influence
factors. As a result, the relation shown in Figure 6 was finally obtained. Here, the
experiment value Dst shown in the figure was the diameter of a penetration reinforcing
bars inserted into a perforation of PBL, and for the case, that not all perforations had
reinforcing bars, a reinforcing bar diameter converted into diameter per perforation in
PBL was used. As a result, equation (4) was obtained as an evaluation equation for
ultimate shear strength per perforation in PBL.
{( )
Q = 1.45 d 2 - Dst 2 f cu + Dst 2 f st - 26.1
u
} (4)
Where,
Dst: Penetrating re-bar diameter(mm)
f st: Penetrating re-bar tensile strength
Also, considering the experiment values, the range of application is of equation (4)
assumed to be:
( )
51.0 < d 2 - Dst 2 f cu + Dst 2 f st < 488.0
The first item bracketed { } in equation (4) is the shear strength for the actual area of
concrete between perforations in PBL and penetration reinforcing bars (the value which
subtracted the reinforcing bar cross section area subtracted from the perforation area in
PBL), and the second item is the factor equivalent to the tensile strength of the
penetration reinforcing bars. Superimposing these factors lead to obtaining an arranging
method with a high correlation and even a correlation coefficient of 0.979, which
resulted in supporting the explanation of failure conditions shown in Figure 2. Also, as a
shear strength equation for PBL to be used for design, equation (5) shifted twice as low

1073
as the standard deviation is shown in a form including the lowest limit value of
scattering experiment values.
{( ) }
Q = 1.45 d 2 - Dst 2 f cu + Dst 2 f st - 106.1
d
(5)
From the results above, it can be judged that a rational evaluation equation with a high
correlation was obtained on ultimate shear strengths for PBL shear connectors with and
without penetrating re-bars.

4. Conclusion

In this paper, special attention was paid to important factors of Perfobond Strips such as
strip thickness, existence of penetration reinforcing bars and the number of strips, to
describe results of basic push-out tests. Also, based on existing previous results
including the our present results, a rational strength evaluation equation for PBL was
proposed. Main results obtained in this experiment are summarized below.
(1) This experiment made it possible to propose a rational shear strength evaluation
equation (Qu) on PBL without penetration reinforcing bars. This evaluation equation was
derived considering the influence of dimension effect (thickness/diameter ratio) to
methods of expression obtained in the previous research. In addition, a shear strength
evaluation equation for design (Qd) was proposed.
(2) It became possible to propose a rational shear strength evaluation equation (Qu) on
PBL shear connectors with penetration reinforcing bars. This evaluation equation was
derived, based on relation expressions obtained in previous research, from adding shear
strength in the actual area of concrete between perforations in PBL and penetration
reinforcing bars (a value which subtracted the reinforcing bar area from the perforation
area) and the tensile strength of penetration reinforcing bars. Also, a shear strength
evaluation equation for design (Qd) was proposed.
Considering the application of wide span floor slabs to 2 continuous composite I-
sectional main girder systems on railway bridges, and based on this research, it is
intended to conduct further fatigue experiments on the PBL shear connectors subject to
uplift action from a floor slab.

5. References

[1]Abe.H: Experimental Investigation of Shear Connectors for Railway Composite


Bridges , Railway Technical Research Report , No.961,1975.(in Japanese)
[2] Abe.H, Nakajima.A, Hirohi.H:Efect of Division of Slabs in Composite Girder and
Development of Flexible Connectors, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.35A ,
pp1205-1211,1989. (in Japanese)
[3]Hosaka: Attempt of Economical Steel Railway Bridge, Proceeding of The 1st
Symposium on Steel Structures and Bridges, pp89-97,1998. (in Japanese)
[4]Ushijima, Hosaka, Tachibana, et al: An Experimental Study on Cracking Behavior in
Continuous Concrete and Steel Composite Girder Bridge, Proceedings of the 52th
Ananual Conference of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, I-A123,1997. (in Japanese)

1074
[5]Hosaka, Hiragi, Koeda, Tachibana, Watanabe: An Experimental Study on
Characterristics of Shear Connectors in Composite Continuous Girders for Railway
Bridges, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.44A , pp1497-1504,1998. (in German)
[6]Leonhardt Fritz , Wolfhart Andrä , Hans-Peter Andrä and Wolfgang Harre : Neues ,
vorteilhaftes Verbundmittel Für Stahlverbund-Tragwerke mit hoher Dauerfestigkeit,
Beton-und Stahlbetonbau , Heft , 12/1987. (in Japanese)
[7]Hans-Peter Andrä : Economical Shear Connectors with High Fatigue Strength ,
IABSE SYMPOSIUM , 1990.
[8]Wayne S . Roberts and Robert J . Heywood : An Innovation To Increase The
Competitiveness of Short Span Steel Concrete Composite Bridges , Developments in
Short Medium Span Bridge Engineering , 1994.
[9]Ogata, Murayama, Okimoto, Imanishi: Study on Adhesion Characteristic of Steel-
made Element and Concrete, Proceedings of Third National Concrete and Masonry
Engineering Conference, Vol.16, No.2,1994. (in Japanese)
[10]Taira, Amano, Ootsuka: Fatigue Characteristic of Perfobond Strip, Proceedings of
the 52th Ananual Conference of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Proceedings of
Third National Concrete and Masonry Engineering Conference, Vol.19, No.2, pp15031-
1508,1997. (in Japanese)
[11]Ebina, Takahashi, Uehira, Yanagisita: Basic research on Perfobond Strips under
Shear Strength, symposium of the eighth times thesis collection, Proceedings of The 8th
Symposium on Developments in Prestressed Concrite, pp31 -36,1998. (in Japanese)
[12] Dieter KRAUS and Otto WURZER : Bearing Capacity of Concrete Dowels ,
Composite Construction-Conventional and Innovative , 1997.
[13] Tominaga, Nisiumi, Muroi, Furuichi: Shear Strength of Perfobond Rib Shear
Connector Under The Confinement, Proceedings of the 53th Ananual Conference of the
Japan Society of Civil Engineers, I-A323, pp646 -647,1998. (in Japanese)
[14]Shintani, Ebina, Uehirai, Yanagisita: To the method of uniting a wavy steel board
and the concrete floor version Concerned experimental research, Proceedings of The 8th
Symposium on Developments in Prestressed Concrite, pp91-96, 1999. (in Japanese)
[15]Taira, Furuichi, Yamamura, Nishiumi: Study on Strength of Perfobond Strip,
Proceedings of the 53th Ananual Conference of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, I-
A324, pp648-649,1998. (in Japanese)
[16]Nagata, Akehashi, Watanabe: An Examination on Pull out of Perfobond Strip in,
Science lecture lecture outline collection of the 54th time of engineering works academy
annual and I-A149 and pp298-299,1999. (in Japanese)
[17]Suzuki, Ueda, Furuucti:Base Concerning Push Out Shearing Strength of Perfobond
Strip, Proceedings of the 54th Ananual Conference of the Japan Society of Civil
Engineers, I-A150, pp300-301,1999. (in Japanese)
[18] Hiragi Hirokazu, Matsui Shigeyuki, Fukumoto Yuhshi: Derivation of Equations of
Headed Stud Shear Connectors -Static Strengths-, Journal of Structural Engineering,
Vol.35A , pp1221-1232,1989. (in Japanese)

1075
BEHAVIOR OF LYING SHEAR STUDS IN REINFORCED
CONCRETE SLABS
Ulrike Kuhlmann, Kai Kürschner
Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
As a basis for innovative composite structures with horizontally lying headed studs in
thin reinforced concrete slabs results of investigations about the carrying behavior under
vertical shear and combined vertical and longitudinal shear are presented. The signifi-
cance of the reinforcement and the influence of various other design parameters for the
carrying capacity and the deformation behavior are demonstrated and assessed. A design
method for the application of lying shear studs in practice is illustrated.

1. Introduction

Some new interesting composite cross sections for buildings and bridges lead to a hori-
zontally lying arrangement of headed studs partly with only a small distance ar,o to the
upper surface of the thin reinforced concrete slab (see Fig. 1.1).

(a) Position of the Shear Connection (b) Cracking Action


A A Section A-A (Without Reinforcement)
a r,o

A A
Edge Position Middle Position Due to Longitudinal Shear Due to Vertical Shear
Figure 1.1 Position of the Shear Connection and Cracking Action due to Shear

In contrast to the common arrangement of studs perpendicular to the steel flange the
transfer of the longitudinal shear by horizontally lying studs causes a splitting action in
the direction of the slab thickness producing cleavage cracks parallel to the slab surface
/1/, /2/, /3/. In practice however often not only longitudinal shear but also vertical shear

1076
due to vertical loading is often acting on this kind of connection. In contrast to standard
composite girders there is no upper steel flange which may transmit the vertical shear to
the steel web by contact pressure. The stud is subjected to an additional shear action.

Basically two different positions of the shear connection relative to the reinforced con-
crete slab exists: at the edge or in the middle of the slab (see Fig. 1.1). Analogous to the
strut-and-tie models for the longitudinal shear action /1/, /3/, due to different stiffness
conditions the position of the shear connection influences the carrying behavior of hori-
zontally lying studs subjected to vertical shear action. For the transfer of vertical shear
the following two simplified strut-and-tie models are developed (see Fig. 1.2).

Middle Position of the Shear Connection Edge Position of the Shear Connection
T/2
T T
T/2

Reinforced Steel Web Tension


Concrete Slab Compression

Figure 1.2 Strut-and-Tie Models for the Transfer of the Vertical Shear Action

In both cases the vertical reaction force of the slab is induced in the steel web by an in-
clined spatial compression field. The resulting inclined strut may be resolved in its hori-
zontal and vertical component.

For the shear connection in the middle of the slab the horizontal components on both
sides of the steel web are adjusted in equilibrium by themselves. Friction and bearing
stress are expected to result in an increase of the vertical shear resistance.

For the shear connection at the edge of the slab the geometry and stiffness do not enable
a direct compensation of the horizontal components. As a consequence due to anchorage
of the headed stud the reinforced concrete slab is subjected to an additional tensile stress.

To identify the major parameters of failure and to quantify the carrying capacity of hori-
zontally lying studs under vertical and combined vertical and longitudinal shear at the
edge of the slab a research project has been carried out /4/.

2. Experimental Outline

The test series is subdivided into ten test groups. Altogether 22 pushout tests under verti-
cal shear and four tests under combined vertical and longitudinal shear have been carried
out. According to Table 2.1 within each test group of two up to four specimens only one
design parameter is varied whereas the other parameters are kept constant.

1077
Test Number
Group Variation of Design Parameters of Tests
Concrete Strength
R1 3
C 20/25 → C 30/37 → C40/50
Thickness of the Slab
R2 2
300 mm → 350 mm → 400 mm
Horizontal Distance Between the Studs
Stud ∅ 22, R3
110 mm → 165 mm → 220 mm
2
studs in
one row Stirrup Reinforcement per Stud
R4 3
(except for R7), 1∅10 → 1∅12 → 2∅10 → 2∅12
dc = 300 mm
(except for R2) Diameter of the Longitudinal Reinforcement
R5 2 22
∅12 → ∅14 → ∅16
Position of the Studs Relative to the Centre Plane of Slab
R6 2
below → concentric → upside
Horizontal Distance Between the Studs (two rows but not parallel)
R7 3
110 mm → 165 mm → 220 mm
Stud ∅ 22, Number of Stirrups per Stud (studs in two rows)
R8 2
dc = 400 mm 1∅12 → 2∅12
Stud ∅ 25, Horizontal Distance Between the Studs
R9 3
dc = 300 mm 125 mm → 187,5 mm → 250 mm
Stud ∅ 22, Combined Vertical and Longitudinal Shear
R10 4 4
dc = 300 mm 0 → 0,25 → 0,45 → 0,55 → 0,75 → 1
Remark: The underlined design parameters corresponds to the basic specimen B.
Table 2.1 Allocation of the Test Groups to the Design Parameters

R1 to R9 R10 SectionA-A
Top View 800 Side View 800 300
A 150 150
70

B
402.5

B
a = 110 to 250

165 165 165


a
1300

1300
a

402.5

A A
70

Section A-A Section B-B A


300 to 400

All Dimensions in mm
Figure 2.1 Geometry of the Specimens Subjected to Vertical Shear (R1 to R9) and
Combined Vertical and Longitudinal Shear (R10)

1078
To be able to compare one basic specimen B is identified and included in each test series
with the exception of R7, R8 and R9. The four specimens of the test group R10 are pro-
duced identically. The geometry of the specimens subjected to vertical shear only (R1 to
R9) and combined vertical and longitudinal shear (R10) is given in Figure 2.1.

The test procedure was chosen as consistent as possible with the specifications in Euro-
code 4 /7/. During the tests the slip, the displacement between the steel web and the front
face of the slab and diverse strain measurements have been documented.

3. Vertical Shear

3.1. Experimental Investigations


See Figure 3.1 for a typical load-slip behavior of a stud subjected to vertical shear only.
After 25 load cycles the loading was applied at a very slow displacement rate until the
specimen failed. After exceeding the carrying capacity a relatively high residual load ca-
pacity remained. The high ductility of the shear connection is ensured by the reinforce-
ment close to the front face of the concrete slab.

Load Pe,Q per Stud [kN]


100
Carrying Capacity
80
Maximum Load per Stud
60 Load per Stud
at Termination
40
of the Test
20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Vertical Slip [mm]
Figure 3.1 Typical Load-Slip Behavior

The following three failure modes were observed in the tests:


Concrete For low degrees of reinforcement close to the shear connection the
concrete edge above the studs broke out gradually.
Concrete/Stud For higher degrees of reinforcement at first the concrete edge above
the row of studs broke out gradually. This gradual concrete failure
came along with high deformations of the stud shanks until a slip de-
formation of more than 35 mm led to a shear off of the studs.
Stud Shear off of the studs just above the welds.

For 91 % of the tests concrete failure was predominant.

1079
3.2. Parametrical Study
The experimental studies as well as the additional numerical investigations indicate, that
the following design parameters influence the carrying capacity:
– concrete strength,
– effective distance between the stud and the upper surface of the slab,
– number of stirrups per stud,
– diameter of the longitudinal reinforcement, and
– diameter of the headed stud.
Moreover the investigations show that the horizontal distance a between the studs and
the stirrup diameter ds,Bü do not decisively affect the carrying capacity.

Concrete Strength
The investigations reveal, that the failure of the shear connection is initiated by an in-
tense cracking formation. Therefore the tensile strength of the concrete, which is directly
related to the compressive strength fc of the concrete, is of significance for the carrying
capacity (see Fig. 3.2).
An increase of the concrete strength leads to a distinct rise of the carrying capacity.

Effective Upper Edge Distance Between the Stud and the Surface of the Slab
If the shear connection is subjected to vertical shear primarily the concrete above the
studs but within the reinforced part of the slab – defined by the effective upper edge dis-
tance ar,o′ between the stud and the surface of the slab according to Eq. (3.1) – offers re-
sistance against the splitting forces in the direction of the slab thickness (see Fig. 3.3).
ar,o′ = ar,o – nom cv – ds,Bü / 2 (3.1)
The carrying capacity increases significantly with rising effective distance between the
studs and the stirrups at the upper slab surface.

Pe,Q [kN] Trend: Pe,Q ~ (fc)


0,5
Pe,Q' [kN] Trend: Pe,Q' ~ (ar,o')
0,7

100 100
R6/1
80 R1/3 80
B1 R2/3
60 60 R2/2
R1/1 B1
40 40
R6/3 FE
20 FE 20
Tests Tests
0 0
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 25 50 75 100 125 150 175
2
fc [N/mm ] ar,o' [mm]
Figure 3.2 Carrying Capacity Pe,Q per Figure 3.3 Carrying Capacity Pe,Q′ per
Stud Depending on the Compressive Cyl- Stud Depending on the Effective Upper
inder Strength fc of Concrete Edge Distance ar,o′ between the Studs
and the Stirrups

1080
Number of Stirrups per Stud
In contrast to an increase of the stirrup Pe,Q' [kN] Mean Trend: Pe,Q' ~ (a/s)
0,4

diameter an increase from one to two 120


R8/2
stirrups per stud leads according to 100
R8/1 R4/3
Fig. 3.4 to a distinct rise of the carrying 80
capacity. The increase of the carrying B1 R4/4
60
capacity is caused by a more homoge- R4/1
nous embracement of the front face of 40
20 FE
the slab. For example a doubled number Tests
a/s of stirrups per stud causes also a dou- 0
bling of the edge points of the stirrups 0 1 2 3
thus improving the support of the com- a/s [-]
pression struts at the reinforcement. In Figure 3.4 Carrying Capacity Pe,Q′ per Stud
addition due to the refined distribution of Depending on the Number a/s of Stirrups
the stirrup reinforcement the stirrups cut per Stud
the cracks at an earlier stage of the crack-
ing process.
A higher amount of stirrups per stud leads to a significant increase of the resistance.

Diameter of the Longitudinal Reinforcement and Diameter of the Headed Stud


Only a small rise of the carrying capacity of the shear connection may be achieved by an
increased diameter ds,L of the longitudinal reinforcement and by an increased diameter
dDü of the shank of the stud. The first is due to a higher flexural stiffness, the latter a re-
sult of a slightly increased width of force transition.

3.3. Results
Model of Structural Behavior
According to Fig. 3.5 the vertical load, to be transmitted into the steel web, is mainly in-
troduced to the headed shear stud by two struts.

(a) Flow of Force (b) Cracking Formation

Figure 3.5 Flow of Force and Cracking Formation Close to the Shear Connection

The vertical load is partly transferred by an inclined strut, which is supported by the
lower edge point of the stirrup. The further flow of force can be explained by the speci-
fied strut-and-tie model. Additionally a part of the vertical load is transmitted by an even
more inclined strut, directly supported by the shear stud. Due to anchorage of the headed

1081
stud the horizontal components of the struts cause tensile stresses in the reinforced con-
crete slab. With increasing slip deformation combined shear and tensile forces are acting
on the headed stud.

In spite of cracking formation mainly on the front face of the slab the break-out of a
nearly conical concrete block is prevented by the reinforcement which embraces the
edge of the concrete slab (see Fig 3.5).

Carrying Capacity and Design Rule


On the basis of experimental and numerical results an equation describing the carrying
capacity of horizontally lying studs subjected to vertical shear has been derived.

Pt,Q = 0,0396 ⋅ f c ⋅ d s,L ⋅ (dDü ⋅ a/s)0,4 ⋅ (ar,o′)0,7 (3.2)

assumptions for design:


22,2 N/mm2 ≤ fc ≤ 50,2 N/mm2 1 ≤ a/s ≤ 2 10 mm ≤ ds,Bü ≤ 12 mm
12 mm ≤ ds,L ≤ 16 mm 110 mm ≤ a ≤ 250 mm av ≥ 100 mm
22 mm ≤ dDü ≤ 25 mm 49 mm ≤ ar,o′ ≤ 249 mm hDü ≥ 150 mm
where:
Pt,Q carrying capacity [kN],
fc compressive cylinder strength of the concrete [N/mm2],
ds,L diameter of the longitudinal reinforcement [mm],
dDü diameter of the shank of the stud [mm],
a horizontal distance between the studs [mm],
s horizontal distance between the stirrups [mm],
ar,o′ effective upper edge distance according to Equation (3.1) [mm],
ar,o upper edge distance [mm],
nom cv nominal vertical concrete cover [mm],
ds,Bü diameter of the stirrup [mm],
av vertical distance between the studs in the case of two rows of studs [mm], and
hDü length of the stud [mm].

The geometrical parameters of the shear connection are given in Figure 3.6.

Considering some simplifications the design resistance of a stud to vertical shear can be
determined from:

PRd,Q = 0,385 ⋅ f ck ⋅ (a/s)0,4 ⋅ (ar,o′)0,7 / γV (3.3)

where: γV = 1,25 partial safety factor according to Eurocode 4 /7/


Equation (3.3) has been developed for the edge position of the shear connection. As ex-
plained in Chapter 1 the results are applicable also for the position in the middle of the
slab because this situation is less critical.

1082
h Dü
ds,Bü
nom c h +
2
h Dü
ds,Bü
nom c h +
A

nom c v
A

nom c v
2

d s,Bü

d s,Bü
ar,o
2

2
a'r,o

a'r,o
ds,Bü ds,Bü
nom c v + nom c v +
2 2

A A
Section A-A
studs in one row studs in two rows studs in two rows and not parallel
a d Dü a a

a'r,o,oben

a'r,o,oben
a'r,o,unten

a'r,o,unten
a'r,o

av

av
s ds,L s s

Figure 3.6 Geometrical Parameters of Shear Connections with Horizontally Lying Studs

Figure 3.7 shows a satisfying conformity of the test results with the theoretical resis-
tance, the characteristic and design resistance of headed studs subjected to vertical shear.

Pe,Q [kN] PRd [kN]


140 120
Arrangement of Studs:
120 one row 100
two rows 250 mm
100
80 200 mm
80
Pt,Q PRk,Q 60 150 mm
60
PRd,Q 100 mm
40
40
ar,o' = 50 mm
20 20
Vertical Studs
Lying Studs
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
2
Pt,Q [kN] fck [N/mm ]
Figure 3.7 Comparison of the Test Re- Figure 3.8 Design Resistance of Hori-
sults Pe,Q with the Theoretical Resis- zontally Lying Studs according to Equa-
tance Pt,Q , the Characteristic and Design tion (3.3) Compared to Vertical Studs
Resistance PRk,Q and PRd,Q (Assumption: a/s = 1)

1083
Figure 3.8 compares the design resistance of horizontally lying studs subjected to verti-
cal shear according to Equation (3.3) with the design values of vertical studs according
to Eurocode 4 /7/. The shear resistance of vertical studs is considered to form an upper
limit for the resistance of horizontally lying studs.

4. Combined Vertical and Longitudinal Shear

4.1. Experimental Investigations


The load-slip behavior features a good correspondance to both cases of longitudinal
shear only /1/, /2/, /3/ and vertical shear only (see Chapter 3). After exceeding the carry-
ing capacity a distinct ductile behavior was observed.

The following failure mode occured:


Concrete/Stud For the carrying capacity the concrete failure was decisive. Depending
on the ratio of acting forces a combination of splitting of the slab /1/,
/2/, /3/ and break-out of the concrete edge determined the failure. The
gradual concrete cracking came along with high deformations of the
stud shanks until the studs sheared off.

4.2. Results ηL = Pe,L' / PRk,L' [-]


A combination of vertical and longitudinal 1,2
shear acting on the horizontally lying stud B2
leads to a mutual interference of the resis- 1,0 R10/1 R10/2
R10/3
tances, so that the single resistances have to
be reduced (see Fig. 4.1). For design the 0,8
Elliptical Interaction
combination of forces should satisfy the fol- Relation with k = 1,2
0,6
lowing condition: R10/4
(Fd,Q / PRd,Q)1,2 + (Fd,L / PRd,L)1,2 ≤ 1 (4.1) 0,4
Linear
where: 0,2 Interaction
Fd,Q , Fd,L design vertical and longitudi- Relation B1
nal shear force respectively, 0,0
PRd,Q , PRd,L corresponding design vertical 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2
ηQ = Pe,Q' / PRk,Q' [-]
and longitudinal shear resis-
tance of the stud according to Figure 4.1 Interaction Diagram for
Equation (3.3) and /1/, /2/, /3/. Horizontally Lying Studs Subjected to
Vertical and Longitudinal Shear

1084
5. Conclusions and Outlook

Considering the present investigations a significant step forward to clarify the load
transmission of shear connections with horizontally lying studs is almost concluded. In
near future the results presented are completed by further investigations considering the
shear connections in the middle of the slab /5/. On the basis of both research projects a
common design rule is intended. For applications in bridge design fatigue tests for hori-
zontally lying studs under longitudinal shear are performed at the moment /6/.

Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of their research by the Bunde-
sanstalt für Straßenwesen and the Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik /4/, /5/, /6/.

References
/1/ Breuninger, U.: Zum Tragverhalten liegender Kopfbolzendübel unter Längsschub-
beanspruchung, Dissertation, Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart,
No. 2000-1, January 2000.

/2/ Breuninger, U.: Design of Lying Studs with Longitudinal Shear Force, 55th Rilem
Annual Week: Connections between Steel and Concrete, Stuttgart, September 2001.

/3/ Kuhlmann, U., Kürschner, K., Breuninger, U.: Zum Tragverhalten von liegenden
Kopfbolzendübeln, Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart, No. 2001-
14X – Article in “Festschrift zu Ehren von Prof. Dr.-Ing. H. Bode”, September 2000.

/4/ Kuhlmann, U., Kürschner, K.: Liegende Kopfbolzendübel unter Quer- und Längs-
schub im Brückenbau, Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart, No.
2001-1 – Report on Project financed by the Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen, Febru-
ary 2001.

/5/ Kuhlmann, U., Kürschner, K.: Liegende Kopfbolzendübel unter Quer- und Längs-
schub im Hochbau, Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart – Report on
Project financed by the Deutsche Institut für Bautechnik, in Process.

/6/ Kuhlmann, U., Kürschner, K.: Ermüdungsbeanspruchte liegende Kopfbolzendübel


unter Längsschub im Brückenbau, Institute of Structural Design, University of Stutt-
gart – Report on Project financed by Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen, in Process.

/7/ CEN: ENV 1994-1-1 Eurocode 4, Part 1-1: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete
Structures: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, February 1994.

1085
COMPOSITE BRIDGE WITH COMPRESSION JOINT
CONNECTION CONCRETE END SLAB TO STEEL GIRDER
FINITE ELEMENT METHOD
M.V. Lammens
Mercon Steel Structures B.V., Netherlands

Abstract
To prevent concrete deckslabs in steel-concrete bridges from cracking, a new technique
has been developed by three Dutch companies. The benefits of using a composite
solution in bridge design are enlarged with this technique which is called “hydraulic
compression joint”. In the introduction a short summary of this technique is given. For
all ins and outs of this technique a reference is made to the paper of Mr. D. Tuinstra in
these congress proceedings [4].

In chapter 2 of this paper the use of the hydraulic compression joint in statically
undetermined bridges is explained. The hydraulic compression joint gives the
opportunity to reach a high compression force in the concrete slab at the mid support
without using high-tensile strands or bars.

The anchor plates through which the compression force of the hydraulic joint is exerted
as a tensile force and a bending moment to the steel girder are part of a follow up
investigation at the TU Delft [3]. Results of this investigation in which finite element
methods are used are showed in chapter 3 of this article.

1. Introduction: The hydraulic compression joint

The hydraulic compression joint is developed by Beton Son, Mercon Steel Structures
B.V. and Iv-consult. This innovative technique is a result of a project “composite
bridges”. The objective of this project was to develop a general suitable design for
composite bridges with spans between 50 and 100 meters, which is economical as well
as build for permanence. The emphasis is put on the efficiency in use of materials, a
short construction time and a low level of maintenance costs.
Studies in Germany, France and Austria showed cracking in concrete bridge decks as the

1086
reason for requiring early maintenance. It was decided, for that reason, to look at the
possibility of a monolithic deck compressed in two directions and without the pockets
for connection with the steel girders.
The objective of in this project was achieved by making a design that incorporated a
high level of prefabricated elements.
By using prefabricated elements, due to fabrication in shop rather than on site, a high
quality could be achieved and the construction time on site could be reduced
considerably.
With the hydraulic compression joint, for which a
patent is granted, a concrete slab of prefabricated
elements can be pre-stressed in the perpendicular
direction to the span direction of the joints. A flattened
steel pipe is locked in the joints between the elements.
This “joint pipe” (fig.2) is put under a high pressure
(about 400 bar). The pressure is transmitted to the
concrete elements and compresses the concrete up to
10 N/mm2 from support to support (fig. 1).
The principle of the hydraulic compression joint is that
of a hydraulic jack. The elements are connected to the Figure 1: Test of compression joint
steel girder by sliding guides. The first and the last
elements (end plates) are connected to the steel girder
by anchor plates. The end plates make up the rigid
endpoints towards which the other elements can be
compressed.
Through the end plates the compression force of the
hydraulic joint is exerted as a tensile force and a
bending moment to the steel Girder. Applying this
method with its resultant forces allows the support
steel to be reduced in weight by 15% over normal
methods. Figure 2: Cross section joint
The concrete elements are individually prestressed in their length in the factory using
standard methods. The compression force in both directions in the concrete slab
prevents cracking of the concrete. The compression from the hydraulic joint is
maintained by an innovative method of filling the joint. The filling sequence is showed
in the figures below (fig. 3).
Joint (up)

Rubber profile Joint (down)

A: inflating of tube B: filling of joint (up and down) C: injecting the tube
Figure 3: Filling sequence of hydraulic joint

1087
In accordance with the graduation at the Faculty
of Civil Engineering and Geosciences in Delft
follow up investigation is being done on this
innovation [1]. The investigation deals with two
subjects, the possibility of reducing the thickness
of the concrete slab [2] and the detail calculation
(by FE-analysis (fig. 4)) and optimization of the
anchor plate [3].

Figure 4: Stress in end plate in


longitudinal direction

2. Statically undetermined system


The benefits of using the hydraulic compression joint are not limited to statically
determined bridges only. The hydraulic compression joint gives the opportunity to
compress the concrete deck slab at the middle support on a much higher and different
level as in the field. Using this method, tensile stresses in the concrete deck slab can be
reduced with 100% in all design phases and of additional reinforcement or high tensile
steel is not necessary.
The building sequence is explained in the figures below (fig. 5 to 12).

Stage 1:

Fig. 5: Starting point Fig. 6: Placing the steel girders

The U-shaped steel girders are positioned on the bearing pads, one after one (fig. 6).
(Girders on two supports, statically determined)

Stage 2:

First the end slab is fixed in position and the steel connection between the slab and girder
is welded (fig. 7).
jack

Fig. 7: Placing the end slab Fig. 8: Placing the deck slabs

1088
Next the precast intermediate deck slabs are positioned one after the other, while a steel
tube is placed in the joint before the next slab is placed. A rubber strip, glued at one side
of a slab closes the vertical joint.
The slabs are pressed against each other and positioned by jacks (fig. 8). The pressing of
the jacks also makes that the rubber strip is sufficient pressed to keep the joint closed
after filling the tube under high pressure. The rubber strip is required to allow filling of
the joint with mortar. The slabs are still unconnected with the steel girder, only a fixing
to avoid buckling of the deck during compressing is present. The positioning of the
intermediate slabs always starts from the end of a steel girder, because the end slab is
used to press the other slabs against to.

Stage 3:

Fig 9: Situation before filling the joints Fig. 10: Situation after filling the field joints

After all slabs are positioned, all tubes are connected to each other (fig. 9), water is
pumped into the tubes under very high pressure (fig. 10). When sufficient compression
force is present in the slabs, the joint is filled with mortar and after hardening of the
mortar the water pressure is released and replaced by a filling of mortar under pressure.
The joint is ready; the pressure is still present in the deck. The open space between the
groove in the deck slab and the top flange of the steel girder, where the perfobond strips
are, will be filled with mortar. Each of the two spans is a separate composite
construction, now statically determined.

Stage 4:

At the middle support, the top flanges of the steel girder of the two separate spans are
connected to each other by welding (fig. 11).
connecti on "pumpj oInt" mortar
top f langes support

Fig. 11: Connecting the top flanges Fig. 12: Filling the joint at the support

Subsequently a slab is positioned at the middle support. To be able to position the slab
and the tube precisely, some extra space is needed. This space will be filled after
positioning the slab with a special mortar. After hardening of the mortar the steel tube in
the joint is directly filled with mortar under pressure (fig. 12). After hardening the webs
and the bottom flange of the steel U-shaped girders are connected by welding (fig. 13).

1089
The bridge is now a continuous girder with a fully working composite construction,
statically undetermined.

Stage 5:

Finishing the bridge and ballasting if necessary.

connection
steel girder

Fig. 13: Situation after finishing and ballasting


plate at mid-support

compression force compression force


joint ‘field’ stage 3 joint ‘support’ stage 4
dowel plate
end plate

steel- girder

mid support
investigated area

Fig. 14: Forces on end slab connection

3. Finite element research on concrete end slab

An essential element in the steel-concrete bridge with hydraulic compression joint is the
end plate. The end plate forms the connection between the compressed deck slab and the
tensioned steel girder (fig. 14).

To get a better view of the stress distribution in the end plate in all (assembly-)phases
and the influence of connection type and connection stiffness in the stress distribution, a
follow up investigation is being done. The finite element program Mark and
postprocessor Mentat has been used in this investigation.

A case study has been made on the ‘Westrandbridge 511’. The alternative steel-concrete
design of this bridge consists of two U-shaped statically undetermined steel girders. The
bridge is about 16 meters wide (fig. 15).

Due to symmetry in this design a calculationmodel of only 1/16th of the complete bridge
had to be made.

1090
Figure 15: Cross section

A comparison of several steel-concrete connection types has been made. In the end a
dowel connection has been chosen in the design model. The dowels are welded in large
numbers on the top of a steel plate. The steel plate is positioned in the mould before
casting the concrete slab (fig. 16). The connection between end-slab and steel girder, by
welding the steel plate and the girder together, is essential for the structural capacity of
bridge system and is executed before compressing of the deck takes place.

Springs in three directions represent the model of a dowel (fig. 17). The vertical spring
represents the tension stiffness of the dowel, the other two springs represent the bending
stiffness. The bending stiffness is based on the results of deformation tests on dowel
connections (fig. 18). The (bending) stiffness of the dowel connection strongly depends
on factors like dowel diameter, dowel length, concrete quality.

Concrete end slab


Kh (x-direction)
0,5mm

Kh y direction.
z
Dowel plate

Plug Kv (z-direction) y
Embedded welding
Dowel plate x

Figure 16: Connection dowel plate Figure 17: Model of a dowel


to top flange girder

To get a better view at the


influence of the dowel stiffness
on the stress distribution in the
end plate, calculations have
been made with two different
stiffnessmoduli. Solid elements,
for the concrete deck slab and
the upper flange of the steel
girder are used to calculate the
stresses in the end plate (fig.19).
Plate elements are used for the
steel girders bottom flange and
Figure 18: Results of deformation tests web, which are loaded in plain.

Further details concerning applied edge conditions and calculation methods reference is
made to relevant literature [3].

1091
o Results of FE-study
4.

The main goal of the FE-study was getting a true view


at the stresses and stress distribution in the end plate.
The distribution of forces in the dowel plate
connection and the relation between the force
distribution over the dowels and the stresses in the end
plate are investigated and put into graphics. Some of
these graphics are presented in this chapter.
Figure 20 shows the dowel displacement in the end
plate connection. On each dowel plate 5 rows of 21
dowels are welded. Dowel(row) 1 (in the graphic) is
the dowel(row) at the field side, dowel(row) 21 the Figure 19: Modelling of the deck slab
one at the support side.

The figure shows two different lines each corresponding with a different stiffness
modulus. The calculations results shown in the graphic are easy to explain and according
with the expectations.
The dowels at the front deform more than the dowels near the end. All displacements are
within the linear elastic range. The distribution of forces (= displacements) is not linear
due to elastic behavior of the material between the connection points.
The calculated displacements in the model with the stiffer dowels are, according with the
expectations, less.
In figure 21 the dowel forces are presented in a graphic. The figure shows that the
distribution of forces does not depend on the stiffness of a dowel. Only the ‘peak’ forces
in the front row in the stiffest dowel connection are higher.
Dowel displacement in the dowel plate Dowel forces in the end plate

0,60 160.00
dowel (K=240e3)
0,50 140.00 dowel (K=240e3)
dowel (K=480e3)
dowel (K=480e3)
120.00
Dowel displacement (mm)

Dowel forces (kN)

0,40
100.00

0,30 80.00

60.00
0,20
40.00
0,10
20.00

0,00 0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Dowel number Dowel number

Figure 20: Dowel displacement in end plate Figure 21: Dowel forces in end plate

The dowels are connected in the mod to the bottom side of the end slab. The dowel
forces produce a stress distribution (in longitudinal direction) at the bottom site of the
end slab, presented in figure 24.

1092
Figure 22: Stresses at the bottom site of the end Figure 23: Stress introduction in steel girder
slab near the mid support

In perpendicular direction the compression forces result in tensile stresses at the front of
the end slab. Prestressing in this direction using high tensile steel prevents the end slab
from cracking reducing these tensile stresses. The behavior of the end slab is similar to
the behavior of a high fixed wall.
Similar results are found by mr. D. Tuinstra in his graduation study of the end plate
connection [4].

The stress distribution in the steel girder is shown in figure 23.

The difference between the stresses at the bottom side and the upper side of the end plate
can be explained by the fact that the dowels are connected only to the bottom side of the
end slab.

Stresses in perpendicular direction of the end slab


12
10 Bottom side
8 Upper side
stress (N/mm2)

6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25
x-coordinate (m)

Figure 24: Perpendicular stresses in end plate

1093
5. Conclusions

A comparison between different end plate connections show that the dowel connection
has the benefit of many variation possibilities (diameter, length, number, position). The
introduction of forces in the end plate can be send easily through the parameters
mentioned.

The dowel has also the benefit that many experiences are present with this type of
connection. It is proven that the use of alternative connection types also can give reliable
solutions.

Several connection types are tested in the Stevin Lab of the Delft University of
Technology. For more details about these connection types and the results of the tests, a
reference is made to the paper of ing. S.J. Poot “Perfo-bond connections and tests” [5].
The results of the FE-calculations show that the influence of the stiffness of the modeled
dowels in the distribution of forces in the end plate is minor.
The stiffer connection shows a little more concentration of forces at the front dowel
rows.
In general the results show a concentration of forces at the front rows.
The stresses in the end plate mostly depend on the equability of the distribution of
forces. Strength and stiffness of the dowel connection must be chosen in such a way that
on the one side a more ore less equable distribution of forces is achieved. On the other
hand the number of dowels and the displacement (plastic deformation) of the dowels
must be reduced to a minimum.

6. References

1. Lammens, M.V., ‘Staal-beton-bruggen met pompvoeg,


Deelrapport 1: Literatuurstudie’. University of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
March 1999
2. Lammens, M.V., ‘Staal-beton-bruggen met pompvoeg,
Deelrapport 2: Onderzoek naar de toepassing van een gereduceerde dekplaat’.
University of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, March 1999
3. Lammens, M.V., ‘Staal-beton-bruggen met pompvoeg,
Deelrapport 3: Ontwerp en dimensionering van een eindverankeringsconstructie
voor een brug met pompvoeg’.
University of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, March 1999
4. Tuinstra, D., ‘Composite bridge with compression joints
Connection concrete end slab to steel girder - Dowels divided in groups’
Conference proceedings symposium Stuttgart September 2001
5. Poot, S.J.,‘Composite bridge with compression joints
Perfo-bond connections and tests’
Conference proceedings symposium Stuttgart September 2001

1094
PERFO-BOND CONNECTION AND TESTS
Simon Poot
Beton Son B.V. NL

Abstract
This paper outlines the first set up of the connection of precast deck slabs on steel
girders for a new type of composite bridge in the developing stage. According to the
published results about the perfo-bond connection in Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 12/1987
[1] calculations and a test set-up are made for the perfo-bond connection of the in
between slabs and tested according to chapter 10 of ENV 1994-1:1992 (EuroCode 4-1).

1. Introduction

The prestressed steel – concrete bridge is one of the latest developments. Beton Son
B.V., Mercon Steel Structures B.V. and Iv-Infra are the inventors of the system. The
development concept combines the strengths of the materials steel and concrete more as
usual, while the in situ construction activities are limited. It is an innovative system, for
rapid assembling and constructing activities at the building site.

The deck structure consists of concrete precast prestressed deck-slabs, supported by steel
U-shaped girders. The key of the system is the prestressing of the structure by
prestressing the joint between these deck-slabs. High water pressure is expending a steel
tube positioned between the deck-slabs. By grouting the joint the pressure is kept on
level. The prestressing force changes both the stress distributions and the deformations.
The system is able to resist normal as well as railroad transport actions.

2. The concept of the construction

In the separate paper of ir D. Tuinstra [2] the concept is fully explained. The connection
of the end slabs to the steel girders is part of his master thesis at the Technical University
of Eindhoven. An other separate paper of ir. M.V. Lammens [3]contents the results of a

1095
numerical analysis of the connection of the end slab to the steel girder as a part of his
master thesis at the Technical University of Delft. This paper deals with the connection
of the intermediate slabs.

Concrete slab End-slab

St eel U-girders

Figure 1:schematic overview of the bridge system

3. Perfo-bond connection

3.1 The deck-slabs


The concrete deck-structure consists of monolith precast slabs, prestressed with strands,
in the longitudinal direction of the slab, during the slab production in the factory. The
width of the slab is 3.0 meter; transportable with a lorry without too much trouble. The
slab is provided with profiled sides to shape the joint between the adjacent slabs and
provided at the bottom side with ‘perfobond strips’ in a groove running in the transverse
direction of the slab, which means in the longitudinal direction of the bridge.

Figure 2: top view of the deck slab with cross-sections

1096
The cast-in part of the perfo-bond strips is cammed to place the reinforcement and
strands. For easier production the strips are placed as one item in each groove.

Figure 3: cammed perfo-bond strip (combi-strip)

3.2 The perfobond strips on top of the steel girders


On the steel flanges of the girder two perfo-bond strips are welded at a small distance of
each other. The shear force does not require these strips over the complete length. Figure
4 shows a practical approach.

Figure 4: three strips per slab width (3 m)

Instead of round perforations slotted holes allow to bring reinforcement bars in the
connection without special attention to the position of the strips.

3.3 The connection


The structural connection is completed and effective when the open joint-space is
grouted and the grout has been hardened. See Figure 5.

Figure 5: Grouted connection

1097
A rubber profile, present at both sides of the groove, closes the opening during the
grouting operations and will not be removed afterwards. The openings in the strips are
filled with strong mortar. The mortar acts like a dowel and via the perfobond – mortar
connection forces can be transferred from the deck to the slabs and visa versa.

4. Tests

Although the publication about perfo-bond [1] was already from 1987, not much more
information was available 10 years later. Part of the development of the bridge system
was external research. At that time research on shear connections was running and a
suitable test rig was available in the Stevin Lab of the University of Technology at Delft
to test the perfo-bond as designed for the connections of the slabs between the end slabs.

4.1 Considerations for the test set up


In the factory of Betonson a daily production cycle of prestressed elements such as box
girders, I-shaped beams and double T-elements, and intensive use of floor space has
been made possible by a separate prefabrication of reinforcement packages in which
bars, stirrups and strands are combined. The cast-in part of the perfo-bondstrip therefore
is designed with cut-ins.
For the parts to be grouted for the connection with the steel girder a cammed version
(combi-strip)should be compared with a perforated perfo-bond version. The welded
strips on the top flange should have sleeve-shaped perforations to make it possible to
place reinforcement bars through the perforations in the double flange strips and the slab
strip in between.

Figure 6: combi-, perforated- and top flange version of perfo-bond strips for the tests.

The space between the concrete slab and the steel flange must allow placing of such bars
from the internal of the U-shaped steel girder before tightening the space with a rubber
profile (see figure 5).

1098
4.2 Test specimen
Specimen dimensions within 650 x 650 x 650 were possible in the test rig and a
compressive force of 5000 kN was the maximum. From the combi version as well as
from the perforated version 4 specimen were tested without reinforcement bars and only
one of each type with reinforcement bars through the perforations in the grout, just to
have an indication of the influence of those bars. The steel flange was simulated as a 40
mm thick steel plate with a connection on each site. Figure 7 shows the specimen.

Figure 7: top-, side- and cross views of the test specimen

In the concept of the bridge design the concrete


slabs are prestressed

Prestressing of the small specimen is expensive.


To avoid slip of the short reinforcement bars in
the concrete of the specimen parts a special end
construction is designed. This detail is showed
in figure 8.
Figure 8: end detail reinforcement bars

1099
4.3 Test results
Tests are executed according to chapter 10 of ENV 1994-1:1992 (Eurocode 4-1) with the
exception of the geometry of the specimen. The geometry is in accordance with the
designed connection for the bridge concept.

Force-displacement diagram combi strip

Figure 9: force-displacement diagram of combi-strips

Force-displacement diagram perfo-bond strip

Figure 10: force-displacement diagram of perfo-bond strips

1100
Figure 11: pictures of the top of the specimen, the cams of the combi-strip, the sleeve-
strips and the perfo-bond strips after testing.

1101
5. Comparison (pre-calculations and tests)

When we started with the test set up we made some calculations to define the
dimensions of the strips. Guideline was the article of Fritz Leonardt, Wolfhart Andreä,
Hans-Peter Andreä and Wolfgang Harre in Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 12/1987 [1].
The 5 concrete dowels Ø45 have a total cross-section of 7.948 mm2. The concrete
quality of the specimen was B75 and of the grout B55. The shear force for the specimen
is 2*7.948*0,9*0,075=1073 kN and for the grout 2*7.948*0,9*0,055=787 kN.
The steel cross-section of this strip over the dowels 6*35*12=2.520 mm2. Shear force of
the strip 1,44*2.520*0,235=835kN. This matches concrete dowels B60.
Each welded strips on the steel top flange has 4 sleeve-shaped concrete dowels with a
total surface of 11.226 mm2. There are 2 strips, with only 1 active cross-section. If we
compare the 7.948 mm2 with the 11.226 mm2 the dowels in the central strip, the central
strip is normative.
The steel cross-sections of the welded strips are 3.000 mm2, so also for steel the central
strip is normative.
According to these calculations the needed force in the test rig for B55 will be
2*787=1574 kN.

If we compare the situation for which these calculations are valid with the test specimen
in this paper, we may conclude that there is not much equality. The grout around the
central strip is not a part of a monolithic concrete piece, but implied between two other
strips, the steel top flange and the bottom sleeve of the concrete deck slab. An other
difference is the aggregate size. For the grout only sand is used with a grading 0-4 mm.

The concrete quality of the specimen at the moment of testing is not exactly known but
control cubes of the same mixture show a quality of 75 MPa. It was self compacting
concrete.
The grout was Pagel V 40. The specimens were grouted and tested 4 days later.
Measured on prisms 160x40x40 the average bending strength was 10,2 MPa and the
average compressive strength on 80x40x40 was 65,8 MPa (calculated was 55 MPa). The
calculated force for the test rig is 1860 kN for B65.

Pu Prk δu δuk

Combi-strip 1 1393 1156 34,26


Combi-strip 2 1417 1156 34,25 16,2
Combi-strip 3 1284 1156 18,01 16,2
Combi-strip 4 1359 1156 34,47 16,2
With reinforcement 1491
Table 1: results of combi-strip tests

The average force of the combi-strip tests without reinforcement is 1363 kN.

1102
Pu Prk δu δuk

Perfo-bond 1 1333 1200 23,42 16,2


Perfo-bond 2 1631 1200 31,91 16,2
Perfo-bond 3 1437 1200 26,52 16,2
Perfo-bond 4 1364 1200 18,01 16,2
With reinforcement 2022
Table 2: results of perfo-bond tests

The average force of the perfo-bond strip tests without reinforcement is 1441 kN. This is
77,5 % of the calculated value according to [1].

6. Conclusions

The scatter of the different tests is very low. The first cracks in the concrete connection
are for the combi-strips a little lower as for the perfo-bond strips. The mechanism of
deformation after the cracks for both types of connection is different if we look at the
deformation of the cams of the combi-strips and the grooves of the broken aggregate on
the nearly deformed perfo-bond strips.
For the combi-strips it is a combination of shear off of the concrete between the cams
and in the sleeves, hook resistance of the aggregate, cracks in the concrete structure and
deformation of the cams. In figure 9 the highest curve is the combi-strip with
reinforcement. The curve after the top is similar to those without reinforcement.
For the perfo-bond it is a combination of shear off of the concrete in the perforations and
hook resistance without much cracks of the concrete structure. The reinforcement bars
have significant influence on the behaviour of the connection, but not before the top of
the connection without reinforcement bars. Even at the end of the displacement the force
is still rising.
Since only one test is made with reinforcement bars in each connection the results are
only indicative.
The dimensions of the strips and concrete dowels were designed for a first failure of the
dowels in the central strip. Because of the higher concrete quality as calculated some
deformation of the central strip was expected. The results show for this system a
reduction of about 25 % of the maximum force of direct cast-in strips in reference.

According to ENV 1994-1 90 % of the highest failure load of the lowest test value is the
characteristic value Prk. For the combi-strip that is 1156 kN and for the perfo-bond strip
it is 1200 kN.
With δuk = 16,2 and characteristic values Prk = 1156 respectively 1200 kN the
connections are very ductile.

1103
An important aspect for the results is the retaining of the grout in the slotted hole of the
slab. Test series with welded steel dowels were part of the research, but not included in
this paper because of a not retained grout filling. The graphs showed an increase of the
forces after the first cracks in the joint but a quick fall of the forces followed after 4 mm
displacement.

7. Recommendation

Cost calculations are made and the perfo-bond system for the slabs in intermediate slabs
has been abandoned.

For the heavily prestressed end slabs however perfo-bond might be a preferable
connection above welded steel dowels.

8. References

1 Fritz Leonardt, Wolfhart Andreä, Hans-Peter Andreä and Wolfgang Harre


"Neues, vorteilhaftes Verbundmittel für Stahlverbund-Tragwerke mit hoher
Dauerfestigkeit" Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 12/1987

2 Dimitri Tuinstra "Composite bridge with compression joints


Connection concrete end slab to steel girder - Dowels divided in groups"
Symposium Stuttgart 2001

3 Michel Lammens "Composite bridge with compression joints


Connection concrete end slab to steel girder - Finite Element Method"
Symposium Stuttgart 2001

1104
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF SAW-TOOTH
CONNECTIONS FOR COMPOSITE STRUCTURES
Jörg Schlaich
University of Stuttgart, Germany
Schlaich Bergermann und Partner, Consulting Engineers, Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
High-capacity saw-tooth connections, as against those with headed studs, enable the
highly concentrated transmission of large forces between steel members and slender
concrete slabs. The connection is made from a welded or cast steel bar provided with a
saw-tooth shaped geometry along the interacting face of the connection. The geometry
of the teeth is universally applicable for most sorts of connections and ensures a very
high fatigue strength of the connection.

In this paper the initial typical engineering approach to this development and its early
practical applications are described as well as its later application based on an improved
geometry of the teeth. With respect to its detailed scientific investigation resulting in
this improved new geometry, reference is made to the work of Volker Schmid and his
paper [1] also submitted for this Symposium and a more extensive joint paper [2].

1. Early Applications of Saw-Tooth Connectors

1.1 A footbridge suspended from a hotel-building


The two main cables of this self-anchored suspension bridge with 2.5 MN each have to
be anchored on either side of the 28 cm thick deck slab (Fig. 1). The vertical com-
ponents of the cable force are held down by pendula. For the load transfer of the
predominant horizontal components into the concrete slab saw-tooth connections made
from cast steel were developed (Fig. 2) [3] following the type as shown in figure 12b.

1105
Fig. 1: View and plan of the bridge

Fig. 2: Anchorage of the main cables at deck with saw-tooth connections and vertical tie
on either side of the deck slab

Since to the knowledge of the author, this was the first time such saw-tooth connection
was explicitly used for the transfer of a high concentrated load from steel into concrete,
its genesis is described in some detail here. This is also a good example for the fact that
strut-and-tie-models are not only valid for a design check but may also be successfully
applied in the conceptual design by consequently materialising a smooth flow of forces.
This case itself has been worked out by M. Jennewein [4] – [7].

1106
Fig.3: Step-by-step design of the
horizontal cable forces´transfer into
the concrete shell

In figure 3 the transfer of the horizontal components S of the cable forces into a
concrete deck slab is discussed. Figure 3a describes the problem. For generalisation or
clarification the forces S are assumed to act outside the contour of the slab as seen in
plan. At the separation lines between the D- and B-regions the axial stresses in the
concrete slab are clearly known (Fig. 3b) and from there the basic strut-and-tie models
directly follow (Fig. 3c). One straight forward solution would be to follow this model
by joining the two cable ends directly with the concrete slab, this assuming the role of a
cable saddle (Fig. 3d). The more common solution (Fig. 3e) will work only for small
cable forces, because it provides only a very short length for the anchorages or bond of
the cross-ties. Therefore one might prefer to introduce steel elements there, to which
these ties can be welded (Fig. 3f). It is to be observed that the front of these elements is
sloped in the direction of the struts. This is very helpful, because if not done, a very
complicated strut-and-tie model (Fig. 3g) is needed to take care of the cantilevering
moment, and accordingly a difficult reinforcement layout results (Fig. 3h). To avoid this
moment we return to figure 3f. To ensure a safe load transfer into the concrete, the
stresses σc in figure 3f need to be checked. If they are excessive, one choice would be to
increase the width of these steel elements (Fig. 3i); they become sort of dowels
penetrating the slab. The model describing their flow of forces (Fig. 3i) and also the
corresponding reinforcement layout is again rather intricate (Fig. 3k). The improvement
due to the increased width is eaten away by a cantilevering moment which is now larger

1107
than in figure 3g, asking for an additional longitudinal reinforcement. This finding
already leads into the right direction. In order to reduce the concrete stresses σc in
figure 3f it is more reasonable to increase the length instead of the width of the steel
elements and to provide them with saw-teeth (Fig. 3l). Accordingly the strut-and-tie
model develops along the length of the deck slab and the struts and transversal ties
distribute. Obviously by increasing the number and decreasing the size of the teeth the
flow of forces becomes more smooth and harmonic (Fig. 3m). The depth of the teeth
should reflect the diameter of the concrete’s aggregate, i.e. be in the order between 20
and 50 mm. Their inclination of Θ = 30° was kept constant throughout. The length of
the connectors was calculated from fc = α x fck/γc in the inclined compression stress
field, without a further reduction factor for transversal cracking, because the height h of
the teeth was chosen to be 1/3 of the slab thickness only, permitting on the other side an
increase for this partially loaded concrete surface.

For the sake of completeness it should be added that in case of this footbridge the saw-
tooth connection as shown in figure 3m, having a constant width there and looking
rather clumsy, was visually improved with the tooth-connector itself hidden in the
concrete and the cable anchorage projecting out (Fig. 2). Unfortunately this results in a
cantilever moment characterised by the lever arm or eccentricity e (Fig. 3n). To
understand this new situation, it is helpful to subdivide it into two cases 3o and p. For
the cantilevering moment alone (Fig. 3o) we find again the above quite complicated
strut-and-tie model, requiring a local transversal tie at the end of the corbel; therefore,
obviously this corbel should not be too short along the deck. The second case (Fig. 3p)
is again smooth. The superposition results in the reinforcement as shown in figure 3p,
certainly still preferable to the solution shown in figure 3h or k, and finally in the
configuration as built (Figs. 2 and 4). The transversal reinforcement was welded onto
the cast-steel teeth connectors.

Comparing in retrospective this early teeth geometry (Figs. 2 and 4: continuous teeth
with slope 30°/60°) with the later optimised one by V. Schmid [1][2][8] (Fig. 13,
discontinuous teeth with slope 70°) for a stress field with Θ varying from 20° to 70°,
one finds that the early configuration holds good for Θ = 20° if a minor friction value of
10° is accepted at the interface of steel and concrete, whereas for Θ = 70° there remains
as small triangle (shaded in figure 4) which appears to be not in equilibrium. This
(minor) problem – which of course disappears if instead of the theory of elasticity we
apply the theory of plasticity – may not only be overcome by choosing the optimised
teeth but also with an “open” and from point of manufacture even simpler teeth
connector as shown in figure 5.

1108
Θ = 70°
10° Θ =20°

Fig. 4: The early teeth connector from Fig. 2 for Θ = 70° and 20°

Θ = 70° 10° Θ =20°

Fig. 5: An open teeth connector, welded from steel plates, which satisfies 20°< Θ < 70°

1109
1.2 Some other Self-Anchored suspended Foot-Bridges [9]
For two bridges built in Stuttgart at Nordbahnhof, the same type of anchorages of the
main cables was successfully repeated (Fig. 6). Further the cable-anchorage at the abut-
ment is shown which follows the approach as shown in figure 3d.

Fig. 6: Movable and fixed anchorages of


self-anchored suspension bridges at
Stuttgart

Further for a bridge in Pforzheim the tied-down anchorage was varied or simplified
(Fig. 7). The teeth are welded onto a vertical steel plate which at its one end provides
the anchorage for the main cable, at its other end for the holding down pendulum. The
cable anchorage at the abutment again makes use of a typical tooth connection.

Fig. 7: Movable and fixed anchorages of


a self-anchored suspension bridge at
Pforzheim

1110
1.3 The Evripos Cable-Stayed Highway Bridge [10]
The deck of this bridge with a main span of 215 m and two side spans of 90 m each is
14.14 m wide and made of a solid concrete slab with a mean thickness of 45 cm. This
slab is monolithically connected to the concrete pylons, since these are high enough
between the foundation and the deck level to respond elastically to the temperature
expansion of the deck. Only at the ends movable supports are provided. The benefits of
such a monolithic connection are an increased overall robustness, including an
improved ductility with respect to seismic attack, and savings in cable steel, because the
deck loads enter the pylon base directly and avoid the detour through the cables and the
top part of the pylons.

Concerning the cable anchorages at the concrete pylon heads of this bridge, in order to
achieve a very smooth and direct flow of forces and to avoid any prestress or
sophisticated reinforcement, the inner faces of the “chamber” or slotted mast heads are
lined with steel plates (Fig. 8). The pairs of cross-bars, provided to support one cable
socket each, transfer their loads to these plates in which the horizontal components of
the cable forces can easily balance in tension whereas the merging vertical components
are transferred to the concrete through horizontally arranged block-dowels with welded
loop reinforcement. This results in a very compact arrangement of the cable anchorages,
very close to the ideal fan-geometry with minimised mast bending. On the other side,
since the flower-pot shape is desirable anyhow to accommodate the steep cables close to
the mast, there is no difficulty to keep sufficient clearance between the sockets to
accommodate hydraulic jacks for cable-adjustment and prestress there. This makes it
very convenient to stress all cables from within one chamber at each mast head without
the need to move the jacks over long distances.

Fig.8 Cable Fig. 9: Cable anchorages


anchorages at along the 45 cm deck slab
pylon heads (right) and of back-stays (left)

1111
Since with that there is no need anymore to stress the cables at their anchorages along
the deck, the bottom anchorages can be really simple and made from completely pre-
fabricated welded steel elements (Fig. 9). Their vertical plate provides for the cable
anchorages: teeth welded to it introduce the horizontal components of the cable forces
into the deck; the horizontal bottom plate provides for the vertical support. The trans-
versal tension is taken by prestress to avoid cracks passing the compressive stress fields
which would reduce its strength. This anchorage could easily be expanded to serve for
the back-stays which include pendulum eye-bars to hold down the vertical components
of the back-stays, permitting horizontal movements simultaneously (Fig. 9).

1.4 The Cable-Supported Highway Bridge at Ingolstadt [11]


This is by definition not a composite bridge, though it incorporates concrete and steel,
but these are not combined to act jointly but independently to their best (Fig. 10). This
bridge is included here because it makes use of a typical teeth-connection for the
anchorages of its main cables at the abutments. The two bundles of four locked coil
ropes of 118 mm diameter each carry an ultimate load of 4 x 15 = 60 MN to their
anchorages. There they are supported by steel boxes with teeth ribs at their bottom face,
which are embedded into the concrete of the abutments. The vertical tension is taken by
prestressed tendons. If the concrete slab underneath the teeth is sufficiently thick to
provide ample length and space for the anchorages of these tendons, this is a satis-
factory solution (Fig. 11).

Fig. 10: The cable-supported highway bridge at Ingolstadt, 1998


Overall view with the location of the cable anchorage discussed here

Fig. 11: Teeth-shaped anchorage of 4 locked coil ropes ∅ 118 mm at an abutment

1112
2. First Application of improved Saw-Tooth Connectors

2.1 The basic types


Saw-tooth connectors may project into the interior of a concrete slab (Fig. 12a) or be
applied to its sides (Fig. 12b).

a) b)

Fig. 12: Saw-tooth connections for concentrated load transfer


a) projecting into the interior of the concrete slab (see Fig. 14b)
b) applied to the sides of a concrete slab (see Figs. 2, 6, 7, 9)

In both cases all efforts should be made to fit the axis of the saw-tooth connector with
that of the concrete slab and both of them with the resultants of the applied loads, i.e. of

1113
the point of intersection of the diagonals in figure 12a or of the suspension/holding-
down cables in figure 12b. This guarantees that the load transfer solely happens with
transversal tension in the plane of the slab, i.e. transversal reinforcement but no vertical
tension, i.e. without the need for stirrups (as against that see figure 15).

2.2 The improved Geometry


In his dissertation [8] as well as in his paper [1] included in the proceedings of this
symposium, V. Schmid has shown that a teeth-geometry as shown in figure 13 leads to
better results as that of the early applications shown above, see also [2].

b)

Fig. 13: a) best teeth geometry b) all possible inclinations of the compression stress
field (see also figure 5)

1114
2.3 The Bridge over the Nesenbachtal at Stuttgart [12]

Fig. 14: The Bridge over the


Nesenbachtal, Stuttgart, 1999
a) view and plan
b) teeth-connectors, made
from cast-steel, project into
the concrete slab

This innercity highway bridge (near the venue of this symposium) offers a number of
innovations which can be listed but not discussed in the context of this paper (Fig. 14):
- The concrete deck slab is supported by a tubular steel truss on “tree-columns”
- All tubular joints are made from cast-steel to avoid the direct intersection and
welding of the tubes. This results in more robust, easy to maintain and more
appealing joints.
- The concrete bridge deck has no lateral joints but is monolithically connected with
the adjacent tunnels on either side. It is provided with sufficient reinforcement to
ensure a good crack distribution when acting in tension at low temperature. (One of
the less mentioned advantages of such composite bridges is that their concrete
section and with that their restraint forces under such circumstances are mini-
mised.) Since also the deck, the truss and the columns are monolithically joined,
this bridge has neither any bearing nor any joint! This is not only favourable from

1115
the point of view of robustness and durability – no bearing is the best bearing – but
also avoids the noise usually emitted from expansion joints when passed by trucks.
- Noise avoidance was a key issue of this bridge situated in a residential area. Arches
with movable panels, but always open on one side, envelop the traffic, with a
foot-/bicycle path on top.

For the locally concentrated connections of the concrete slab with the tubular truss at
the top intersection of its diagonals the investigations and experience described in this
paper were brought forward and the saw-tooth connections, as described above, applied
in principle.

Since at the time of the final design of this bridge, the research work of V. Schmid
[1][8] was still under way, the geometry of the teeth as proposed in figure 13 was not
yet fully available and therefore the one used for this bridge is slightly different (Fig.
14b) but, as shown in figure 5, the load transfer is not very sensitive in this respect. On
the other side, eccentricities have to be followed up carefully (Fig. 15). As long as the
intersection of the diagonals coincides with the centreline of the teeth-connector but
does not match that of the slab (eA ≠ 0), no moment will build up between the slab and
the connector. Therefore in this case the vertical ties in the slab can be covered by
stirrups which need not to be welded to the connector (eL ≠ 0), a moment is produced
calling for vertical reinforcement, which is to be welded to the connector (Fig. 15
below). This situation should be and can be always avoided in most practical cases. In
case of this actual bridge, the situation as described in figure 15 in fact occurred out of
its given special boundary conditions. Nevertheless the bridge was built without
difficulties and behaves satisfactorily.

1116
Fig. 15: Teeth-connectors with eccentricities eA (above) and eA + eL (below)

1117
References

1. Schmid, V., Geometry, behaviour and design of high capacity teeth connectors.
Paper included in the Proceedings of the Symposium on ‘Connections between
Steel and Concrete’, 55th Rilem Annual Week, Stuttgart, Germany, Sept. 9-12,
2001
2. Schlaich, J., Schlaich, M. and Schmid, V., Composite Bridges – Recent
Experience – The Development of Teeth Connectors, Proceedings of the 3rd
International Meeting on ‘Composite Bridges’, Madrid, Spain
3. Schlaich, J. and Bergermann, R., Hotel in Stuttgart trägt Fußgängerbrücke, Beton-
und Stahlbetonbau 86 (1991), Verlag Ernst und Sohn, Berlin
4. Schlaich, J. and Schäfer, K., Konstruieren im Stahlbetonbau, Beton-Kalender
1998, pg. 791-985, Verlag Ernst und Sohn, Berlin
5. Schlaich, J., Schäfer, K. and Jennewein, M.: Towards a Consistent Design of
Structural Concrete, PCI Journal May/June 1987, Vol. 32 No. 3
6. Jennewein, M., Zum Verständnis des Tragverhaltens von Stahlbetontragwerken
mittels Stabwerkmodellen, Dissertation Universität Stuttgart, 1988
7. Schlaich, M.: Computerunterstützte Bemessung von Stahlbetonscheiben
mit Fachwerkmodellen, Dissertation ETH Zürich, 1989, Verlag der Fachvereine
Zürich
8. Schmid, V.: Hochbelastete Verbindungen mit Zahnleisten in Hybridtragwerken
aus Konstruktionsbeton und Stahl, Dissertation Universität Stuttgart, 2000, Verlag
Grauer, Stuttgart
9. Schlaich, J., Bergermann, R., Fußgängerbrücken, Katalog zur Ausstellung an der
ETH Zürich
10. Bergermann, R. and Stathopoulos, S.: Design of the Evripos Bridge in Greece,
Cable-stayed Bridge Seminar, Bangalore, India 1988
11. Schlaich, J., Schlaich, M. and Werwigk, M.: Die neue Glacisbrücke Ingolstadt,
Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 94 (1999), Verlag Ernst und Sohn, Berlin
12. Schlaich, J., Pötzl, M., Beiche, H., Ehrke, E. and Decker, U.:
Die Brücke über das Nesenbachtal im Zuge der Ostumfahrung Stuttgart-
Vaihingen, Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 95 (2000), Verlag Ernst und Sohn, Berlin

1118
GEOMETRY, BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF HIGH
CAPACITY SAW-TOOTH CONNECTIONS

Volker Schmid
Institute for Structural Design II, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Abstract
High-capacity saw-tooth connections enable the highly concentrated transmission of
large forces between steel members and slender concrete slabs. The connection is made
from a welded or cast steel bar which has a saw-tooth shaped geometry along the
interacting face of the connection. The geometry of the teeth is universally applicable for
most sorts of connections and ensures a very high fatigue strength of the connection.
Based on the investigations carried out in the Institute for Structural Design II,
University of Stuttgart, with Prof. J. Schlaich, the paper presents the most important
results of the research on the behaviour and design of saw-tooth connections. The paper
describes the flow of forces in the connection area and explains the interdependent
factors which govern the dimensioning of the connection. Emphasis is laid on the new
geometry of the teeth, which is derived from a close look into the stress distribution in
front of a single tooth using non-linear analyses. Reference is made to Prof. J. Schlaich’s
paper [1] also submitted for this Symposium and a more extensive joint paper [2].

1. Introduction

The use of different materials such as steel and reinforced concrete within one design
enables very efficient and interesting structures. The common problem of connecting the
steel elements to the reinforced concrete is usually solved using headed studs. Differing
examples are the self anchored pedestrian suspension bridge (Fig. 1a) and the road
bridge made from a steel girder and a concrete deck (Fig. 1b), both designed by J.
Schlaich [1] [3]. For the anchorage of the steel cable or the steel truss at the slender
concrete deck a special high capacity saw-tooth connection was developed which allows
the transmission of huge and highly concentrated forces from the steel element into the
concrete slab.

1119

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


Steel truss
cable concrete slab
concrete slab

Fig. 1: a) Anchorage of a steel cable at b) Anchorage of a steel girder within a


the edge of a thin concrete slab thin concrete slab

Fig 2: Arrangement of saw-tooth connections and corresponding strut-and-tie models for


a saw-tooth connection
a) at the edge of the slab b) within the slab

2. Arrangement of saw-tooth connections

The anchorage of the steel cable at the edge of the rc-slab is shown in Fig. 2a. The plan
of the connection area includes a simplified strut-and-tie model. The cable is fixed to a
welded or cast steel bar which distributes the tangential forces along a sufficient length,
reducing the stress concentration within the interacting surface to a level which is
appropriate for the rc-slab. The deviation of the cable forces into the slab requires
tension forces perpendicular to the edge of the slab. Therefore reinforcement bars, or
even better post-tensioned tendons, have to be positioned along the connection. The
inter-acting face of the steel bar has a saw-tooth shaped geometry. The teeth prop the
inclined compression struts within the concrete slab. If the connection has about the
same height as the slab the forces within the slab will be uniformly distributed over the
height of the connection and will not cause any splitting forces perpendicular to the slab
plane.
Fig 2b shows the anchorage of a steel truss within a thin concrete slab. Neglecting the
relatively small vertical force in the slab the two axial forces in the steel diagonals equal
the horizontal force in the rc-slab. The most efficient geometry of the connection is

1120

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


obtained if the centre lines of the steel truss and the slab coincide in one single point as
shown in Fig 2b. Therefore the saw-tooth connection should be arranged perpendicular
to the slab plain. This arrangement allows to carry the forces from the steel diagonals to
the centre of the concrete slab within the steel section. From there compression forces
spread horizontally into the concrete slab. To prevent the concrete from vertically
splitting the height of the saw teeth connection should be close to the height of the slab.
Sometimes it is not possible to achieve this favourable geometry. Examples for other
arrangements of saw teeth connections are explained in [4].

3. Structural behaviour and detailing of saw-tooth connections

The load capacity of a saw-tooth connection as well as the amount and arrangement of
the reinforcement can only be determined using a strut-and-tie model (see Fig 3).
Following [5] the model has to be adapted to the results of a linear elastic FE-Analysis
which provides the distribution of the forces per meter vf and nf transmitted in tangential
and perpendicular direction along the connecting surface between steel and concrete.
Assuming the cracks propagate parallel to the main compressive stresses at stage 1, the
angles θ of the compression struts can be derived from the FE-analysis as well. The
angles range from approximately 20° at the tip to 70° at the end of the connection. The
forces Ccw,i and Ti [MN] in the struts and ties related to a discrete area ∆lL,I may be
derived from the equations given in Fig. 3.

Fig 3: Strut-and-tie model for the anchorage of a tangential force at the edge of a slab

1121

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


Following a conservative assumption the load capacity of the connection is reached as
soon as one concrete strut fails in compression. At the interacting face the maximal
compression stress σcw(x) in the concrete struts depends on the shear forces vf(x) [MN/m],
the height h [m] of the saw-tooth connection and the angle θ(x) (see Fig 4):

σcw(x) = vf(x) / (h sinθ(x) cosθ(x))

Notice:
θ(x) = 45° ⇒ σcw(x) = 2,00 vf(x) / h
θ(x) = 20° or 70°⇒ σcw(x) = 3.11 vf(x) / h

Fig 4: Interdependence of shear force vf, concrete compression stress σcw and angle θ

For concrete struts with cracks parallel to the struts the maximal effective concrete
strength fc,eff [MN/m2] may be estimated as follows:

fc,eff = 0.8 f1c = 0.68 fck f1c: uniaxial compressive strength; f1c = 0.85 fck

Different arrangements of saw teeth connections require different strut-and-tie models.


In [4] further models are described such as the model shown in Fig 2b, which is suitable
for the anchorage of a steel truss within a concrete slab.

4. Influences on the load capacity of saw-tooth connections

As described above, the connection’s load capacity depends most of all on the
distribution of the shear forces vf(x) [MN/m] along the connecting surface. The following
parameters have a major influence on vf(x) and have been examined in [4] using strut-
and-tie models as well as physically non-linear FE-Analyses with the program “Sbeta”.
shear force per meter vf(x) [MN/m]

loaded area

[m]

Fig 5: Distribution of the shear forces vf(x) along connections of different length

1122

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


The relationship between the stiffness of the rc-slab and the stiffness and length of the
saw-tooth connection is of great importance. Based on a parameter study [4] gives rules
of thumb for reasonable values. Fig 5 shows the distribution of the tangential forces vf
along three connections with equal stiffness but different length and exemplifies why
there is an under-proportional correlation between the connecting length and the load
capacity. This diagram explains why this kind of connection can neither be detailed by
using the theory of plasticity nor by employing a certain average “shear resistance”.
The strain in the rc-slab has a great influence on the load capacity of a connection.
Different strains in rc-slabs occur e.g. in bridges as shown in Fig. 1b, where the slab acts
in tension above the columns and in compression in mid span. A Comparison shows that
the load capacity of a saw-tooth connection arranged in the tension zone of the slab may
be up to 40% less than the load capacity of a connection arranged in the compression
zone.
Cracking of concrete reduces the stiffness of the rc-slab in the cracked areas, which is of
minor importance for saw-tooth connections within the rc-slab (see Fig 2b). But cracking
may have a considerable influence on the load capacity of connections situated at the
edge of the slab (see Fig 2a). The non linear FE-analysis of a 15m long saw-tooth
connection taking into account cracking shows the uneven redistribution of the shear
forces vf [MN/m] as the cracked areas increase during the loading process (Fig. 6 and 7).
This analysis results in a load capacity of FLk = 41.3 MN which is 17% less than accor-
ding to a strut-and-tie model based on a linear elastic FE-Analysis with FLk = 49.9 MN.

Ultimate Load

Fig 6: Development of cracks during the loading process of a saw-tooth connection of


15m in length

1123

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


shear force per meter vf(x) [MN/m]

Fig 7: Change of shear forces per meter vf(x) as loading FLk [MN] increases

To compensate for the negative effects due to cracking it is recommended to use post-
tensioned tendons perpendicular to the connection. Prestressing prevents large areas
from cracking and causes a more uniformly distribution of the tangential forces. As a
result the load capacity increases by 35% to FLk = 55.7 MN (see Fig. 8 and 9).

Fig 8: Development of cracks during the loading process of a saw-tooth connection of


15 m in length with post-tensioned tendons

Fig 9: Change of shear forces per meter vf(x) as loading FLk [MN] increases

1124

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


Using a curved layout of the tendons as shown in Fig. 10 may even increase the load
capacity by 75% up to FLk = 72.3 MN.

Fig. 10: Development of cracks during the loading process of a saw-tooth connection of
15 m in length with curved post-tensioned tendons

5. Geometry of the connection surface

5.1 Principal idea


The concrete stresses within the compression field in front of the connection govern the
load capacity of the connection. For this reason it is crucial to support the concrete struts
uniformly, avoiding an increase of the compression stresses in front of the connection
which would inevitably result in a reduction of the connection’s load capacity and
resistance to fatigue. Therefore the front of each steel tooth is arranged perpendicular to
the struts (see Fig. 11). Furthermore the steel tooth should be fabricated to almost the
same height as the concrete slab. As a result of this geometry the concrete stresses in
front of the saw-tooth connection do not exceed the effective compressive strength fc,eff
which ensures an unrestricted load capacity and resistance to fatigue.

Fig 11:
Fan shaped compression
field propped by teeth
which provide a front
perpendicular to the struts

1125

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


5.2 Geometry of the teeth
The teeth’s changing geometry along the connection (see Fig. 11) is difficult to construct
and requires a lot of steel. Therefore a casted steel tooth was shaped which allows to
prop the arbitrarily inclined concrete struts using only one single geometry for all teeth
(see Fig. 12).

Fig. 12: Optimised geometry of the teeth made from casted steel

Teeth with this geometry perform in the same way even for changing load directions and
don’t rely on friction forces between steel and concrete. Therefore the following
investigations were carried out neglecting friction. A simplified model with compression
fields (Fig. 13) explains the principal structural behaviour of the saw tooth connection
for struts inclined at an angle of 20°, 45° and 70° degrees. Here the local stresses σf at
the surface of the teeth and within the nodes are equal to the stresses σcw in the concrete
compression struts. These connections are designed so that the stresses σc in the adjacent
compression field do not exceed fc,eff = 0.8 f1c = 0.68 fck (see 3.) whereas the allowable
stresses in compressive nodes exposed to biaxial compression reach up to 1.2 f1c
= 0.96 fck (see [5]).

steel teeth

Fig 13: Compression fields with different angles ? and forces ncw [MN/m] in front of the
teeth

1126

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


concrete
failure

cracks
cracks

Fig. 14: Single tooth and compressive strut inclined with θ = 30°: Areas with concrete
failure and cracks

Fig 15: Group of teeth and compression field inclined with θ = 45°: Areas with concrete
failure and cracks

1127

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


These figures suggest that failure of the concrete in between the teeth will not occur.
This is verified by non-linear FE-analysis of a single tooth propping struts with different
inclinations. The most unfavourable example with θ = 30° is shown in Fig 14. The
concrete failure occurs distant from the tooth, resulting in a load bearing capacity of
1.16 fc,eff . The black areas in front of the teeth indicate the compression failure of the
concrete.
Analysis of entire compression fields inclined by angles of 20°, 45° and 70° resulted in a
load bearing capacity of 1.22 fc,eff , 1.18 fc,eff and 1.24 fc,eff . Fig. 15 shows the results of
a compression field inclined by 45°.

6. Conclusion

Saw-tooth connections are suitable for the concentrated transmission of large forces into
thin concrete slabs. Their design has to be carried out using strut-and-tie models
orientated on the results of a linear FE-analysis. A close look into the flow of forces
within the connecting area leads to an optimised geometry of the teeth. This geometry
ensures that the load bearing capacity along the connecting surface is higher than the
effective strength within the slab.

References
[1] Schlaich, J (2001): Development and Application of Teeth Connectors for Composite
Structures. Proceedings of the Symposium on “Connections between Steel and
Concrete”, 55th Rilem Annual Week Stuttgart, Germany, Sept. 9th – 12th, 2001
[2] Schlaich, J.; Schlaich M.; Schmid, V. (2001): Composite Bridges – Recent
Experience, The Development of Teeth Connectors. Proceedings of the 3rd
International Meeting on “Composite Bridges”, Madrid, Spain, 2001
[3] Schlaich, J.; Bergermann, R. (1992): Fußgängerbrücken. Katalog zur Ausstellung an
der ETH Zürich, 1992
[4] Schmid V. (2000): Hochbelastete Verbindungen mit Zahnleisten in Hybridtrag-
werken aus Konstruktionsbeton und Stahl. Dissertation am Institut für Konstruktion
und Entwurf II, Universität Stuttgart 2000
[5] Schlaich, J.; Schäfer, K. (1998): Konstruieren im Stahlbetonbau. 721-895 in: Beton-
Kalender 1998, T.2, W. Ernst und Sohn, Berlin

1128

J:\transfer\volker\paper 78-02.doc 04/02/01


COMPOSITE BRIDGE WITH COMPRESSION JOINT.
CONNECTION CONCRETE END SLAB TO STEEL
GIRDER - DOWELS DIVIDED IN GROUPS
Dimitri Tuinstra*
Iv-Infra B.V., The Netherlands

Abstract
A new prestressing system for composite bridges with precast concrete deck slabs is
introduced. The prestressing system focuses on low costs and a long lifecycle through
the economic use of materials, prefabrication and short construction periods.

In the bridge system precast deck slabs on top of a steel girder are prestressed by a
hydraulic compression joint. The bridge deck is prestressed before the composite
connection has been made. The force is transferred to the steel girder by concrete slabs
at both ends of the span. In order to do so, the end slabs are connected to the upper
flange of the steel girder with dowels. In this paper the distribution of the prestressing
force over the dowels is determined, using a simplified analytic model.

The study is part of the author's master thesis at the Technical University of Eindhoven.

1. Introduction

In today's society with severe traffic problems, short construction periods and the least
possible hinder, are almost a must. The prestressed composite bridge is one of the latest
developments by Beton Son b.v, Mercon Steel Structures b.v and Iv-Infra b.v. The main
goal of the system is to develop a bridge system that causes the least possible obstruction
by limiting the construction activities on site and long lifecycle with low maintenance
costs.

*
Prof.ir.H.W.Bennenk, Prof.ir.H.H.Snijder and ir.H.Janssen
Faculty of Building Technology, Technical University of Eindhoven

1129
In chapter 2 the bridge system and the hydraulic compression joint are introduced. In
chapter 3 the stresses in the end slab due to prestressing are explained. The stiffness of
the shear connection between the end slab and the steel girder is of great influence on the
stress level in the end slab. The connection consists of a large amount of dowels. A
relation between the stiffness of the concrete slab, the steel girder and the dowels is
retrieved. The study results in a design approach for the end slab connection of a single
span bridge.

2. The prestressed composite bridge system

The bridge system consists of steel girders Concrete slab End-slab


supporting a concrete deck. The deck is built up
with prestressed precast concrete slabs. The first
and last deck slab are different from the rest
because they transfer the prestressing force to Steel U-girders
the steel girders during construction. The end
slab has other dimensions and is prestressed in Figure 1 Schematic overview of the bridge
its longitudinal direction to a higher rate as system.
normal deck slabs. Figure 1 shows the schematic
overview of the bridge.

The substructure of the bridge system consists of


U-shaped steel girders as shown in figure 2 The
number of girders depends on the width of the
bridge and the loading situation. The upper
flange of the steel girder acts as the support of
the concrete deck and the spacing between the
girders can be chosen in such a way, that the Figure 2 The steel U-shaped girders.
concrete deck slabs are optimised in transverse
direction. The abutments at both sides of the bridge support the steel girders. Apart from
the self weight, the steel girders carry the dead load of the concrete deck in the
construction stage and, as part of the composite structure, they partly carry the additional
loading.

1130
3000 mm perf obondst rips

prestressed strands
Open space

Perf obond strip

3000 mm

Figure 3 Prestressed precast deck-slabs provided with cast-in ‘perfobond strips’.

The concrete deck consists of monolith precast slabs (figure 3). During slab production
in the factory, the slabs are prestressed with strands in the longitudinal direction of the
slab. The width of the slab is limited to 3.0 metres because of maximum allowable
transportation dimensions with a lorry. The length of the slab depends on the desired
width of the deck. The sides of the slab are provided with a groove to shape the
compression joint between the adjacent slabs. The longitudinal sides of the slab are
thicker in order to support the slab during construction. In the transverse direction of the
slab, after construction this will be the longitudinal direction of the bridge, ‘perfobond
strips’ are cast in at the bottom side.

The perfobond strips are perforated steel strips that will act as shear connectors.
Concerning the performance of this type of shear connectors reference is made to the
paper of Mr. S.Poot in these proceedings [1]. The strips are present at both the upper
Concrete slab flange of the steel girder and the
concrete deck slab as shown in figure
4. The cavity between the steel and
concrete will be filled with mortar. A
Perfobond strips Rubber profile
rubber sealing at both sides of the
Upper flange and w eb flange prevents mortar from being
of steel girder
spilled. The openings in the perfobond
Figure 4 Connection of steel girder and deck-slab via the strips are filled with mortar. After
‘perfobond strip’ hardening of the mortar the strips will
be able to transfer shear forces.
End-slab
The precast and prestressed end slabs
have the same length and width but are
Steel plat e St eel dow els thicker than the deck slabs (figure 5).
Welded at the side
The end slab is prestressed in
longitudinal direction in the factory to
Figure 5 Cross-section of end-slab supported and welded a higher level than the deck slabs.
on the top of the steel girder. Other than the intermediate deck slabs,

1131
the end slab is connected to the steel girder with dowels. The dowels are welded to a
steel plate which is positioned in the mould before casting the concrete. The connection
between end slab and steel girder, by welding the steel plate and the girder together, will
be essential for the structural capacity of bridge system and is executed before any
prestressing of the deck takes place. In chapter 3 the action of the end slab during
prestressing will be explained more elaborately.

2.1. The hydraulic compression joint


The key of the system is the hydraulic compression joint. This is a flattened steel tube
that acts like a jack in the joint between the deck slabs. Each tube is connected with all
other tubes. When all tubes are present and connected with each other, water under very
high pressure is pumped into the joints. The tube expands and acts as a force on the
deck-slabs (figure 6A). Under maintaining the water pressure, the joint is grouted with
rapid hardening and high strength mortar. When the mortar strength is sufficient the
water pressure is lowered, the present prestressing force will be transferred to the mortar
in the joint (figure 6B). Grouting mortar is pressed into the empty tubes under a
relatively high pressure. After the grout in the tube has hardened, the stress is levelled
over the height of the joint (figure 6C).
Joint (up)

Rubber profile Joint (dow n)

A: inflating of tube B: filling of joint (up and down) C: injecting the tube

Figure 6 The execution of the prestressed joint step by step


At the time of prestressing the deck slabs are not
connected with the steel girder. However, the deck
slabs are closed in by the end slabs and because of
restricted deformation the concrete deck is
prestressed in longitudinal direction of the bridge.
The prestressing force loads the end-slab, which is
connected with the steel girder. This introduces a
tensile force at the upper flange of the steel girder.
The vertical eccentricity of the tensile force
introduces a upward bending moment. The
prestressing force changes both the stress Figure 7 The action of the prestressing
distributions and the deformations of the structure. force in the joint on the bridge system
The actions are shown in figure 7.

2.2. The stress distribution in general terms


The prestressed steel concrete bridge system is constructed in stages, which means that
the stress distribution follows the construction activities step by step.

1132
Stage 1:
The dead load of the steel girders and deck-slabs is acting on the steel U-shaped girder
alone. The centroidal axis is positioned rather low in the cross-section. The stress
distribution is shown in figure 8. The dead load causes compressive stresses in the upper
flange of the steel girder.

end slab end slab


concrete deck w ithout pressure

cent roidal axis st eel girder

pressure t ension pressure t ension

centroidal axis

Figure 8 Stress distribution in steel girder, due to dead load.

Stage 2:
The deck is prestressed. The centroidal axis is still low positioned. The prestressing force
acts as a tensile force in the steel girder and the eccentricity causes a constant upward
bending moment in the girder. The deck slabs compressed. The stress distribution is
shown in figure 9. Due to the bending moment and the normal tension force in the steel
girder, the upper flange of the steel girder is loaded with tensile stress.
concrete deck under pressure caused by inf lated t ubes

excent ricity
cent roidal axis st eel girder

bending moment and t ension in


st eel girder pressure t ension pressure t ension

cent roidal axis

Figure 9 Stress distribution caused by the prestressing force in the deck structure.
Stage 3:
The connection between the steel girder and the deck-slabs is fixed by grouting the
cavity with the perfobond-strips. From this moment the structure acts as a composite
bridge. The centroidal axis is now at a higher position in the total cross-section of the
bridge. The additional permanent load and live load causes positive bending moments.
The stress distribution due to the permanent load is shown in figure 10.

centroidal axis composite

pressure tension pressure tension

centroidal axis

Figure 10 Stress distribution in the composite structure, due to


permanent load and live load.

1133
After construction stages the resulting stresses in the cross section are shown in figure
11. The compressive forces in the upper flange of the steel girder due to dead load can be
counterbalanced. Depending on the level of prestressing, this can result in a complete
cross section under tensile stress. Due to the prestressing of the deck the compression
stress in the deck tends to be higher than normal composite structures.

centroidal axis composite

pressure tension pressure tension

centroidal axis

Figure 11 Stress distribution after construction stages.

3. End slab connection

During prestressing the steel girder acts as a tension member for the concrete deck. The
end slab transfers the prestressing force to the upper flange of the steel girder by means
of a shear connection as shown in figure 12. The shear connection is 3 metres long and
over this length it has to transfer the prestressing force to the steel girder.
End slab

Prestress from
Shear connection
compression joint

Steel girder

Figure 12 Isometric view of the end slab during prestressing.

Other than the deck slabs, the end slab for a statically determined span is loaded from
one side only. For action of prestressing in a statically undetermined system reference is
made the paper of Mr. M.Lammens in these proceedings [2]. The prestress acts in the
plane of the slab. Because of the ratio of the width of the plate to its length the slab is
considered to act as a wall element. This means that stresses due to prestressing will not
be divided equally over the slab. A probable distribution of stresses over the length of
the shear connection is shown in figure 13. For the origin of this image of stresses
reference is made to "Wandartige Träger" [3]. At the left side stresses perpendicular to
the direction of prestressing are shown. Shear forces in the slab are shown at the right
side.

1134
In the image the shear connection
11250 mm
is assumed to be rigid. As a result
3000 mm 5250 mm
the prestressing force will be
500 Upper flange transferred to the steel girder at the
End slab
Prestress front (bridge) side of the slab. This
will inevitably lead to high tensile
tension and shear stresses in the slab. This
3000 mm

concentration of stresses could


pressure
lead to cracking of the concrete
Normal st ress Shear stress and possible rupture of the shear
connection. To reduce the stresses
Figure 13 Top view of the stresses in the end slab during
in the slab and the connection the
prestressing in case of rigid shear connection. aim is to distribute the force over
the total length of the connection.

This can be achieved through the use of a flexible connection. In the design under
consideration dowels are used to transfer the prestressing force to the steel girder.
Dowels are easy to apply and capable of taking large deformations before failing. By
deforming, the dowels next in line will be loaded during prestressing. Once the
prestressing force is equally distributed over the length of the connection a stress
distribution in the slab as shown in figure 14 will occur. Again at the left side transverse
normal stresses and at the right
side shear forces in the slab.
tension This will result in a considerable
reduction of peak stresses, as well
pressure tensile as shear tresses. The level
Normal stress Shear stress
of transverse prestressing and
posttensioning of the end slab can
be reduced to a minimum and the
Figure 14 Top view of the stresses in the end slab during
prestressing in case of flexible shear connection. chance of failure of the connectors
is reduced.

Because of the flexibility of dowels the shear connection is made of dowels. Dowels are
easy to weld to steel and are readily available in all sizes and strengths. The dowels are
welded on a steel plate which is placed in the concrete formwork of the end slab in the
factory before the concrete is poured. As soon as the concrete is hardened it is
prestressed with pretensioning strands in the factory in its longitudinal direction
(transverse direction of the bridge). On site the end slab is welded to the upper flange of
the steel girder as shown in figure 15.

1135
Transverse
w eld

dow elplat e dow elplate


flangeplate propw eld Upper f lange
f langeplate

Figuur 15 Transverse and longitudinal cross section of the shear connection.


Research has been done to retrieve a relationship between the stiffness of the shear
connection and the distribution of the prestressing force over the shear connectors. This
has been done with a model in which the shear connection has been simplified to a one
dimensional problem as shown in figure 16.
End slab Deck slab

group3 group2 Upper flange


group1

concret e concret e F Prestressing force

steel st eel

Figure 16 Longitudinal cross section of the end slab and schematisation for the analytical model.

In the model the dowels are divided into three groups, first (front side) second (middle)
and third (rear end) in line. These groups are represented by longitudinal springs
connecting the steel girder and the concrete end slab. The steel and concrete are
modelled as pinned beams, only capable of taking axial force. The prestressing force
coming from the hydraulic compression joint is acting on the concrete as a concentrated
force. The model is supported on only one side where the steel girder is cut off in the
model. This does not influence the results because deformation of this part of the steel
girder causes the model to translate but does not influence the behaviour of the
connection.

Formulas have been deducted for this model where all dowel groups have equal
stiffness. These formulas have been input in a spreadsheet program. With this program it
is possible to vary the ratio of stiffness between the three actors in the model and derive
the influence on the distribution of the prestressing force over the groups of dowels.

4. Results

The reference value for the dowels has been set to 1.0 representing the elastic behaviour
of a group of 24 dowels with a 22 mm diameter. These values have been implemented in

1136
the first model, with equal stiffness of the dowel groups, and varied from 0.01 to 100
times the reference value. Results are shown in figure 17. The horizontal axis represents
the stiffness of the dowel groups, relative to the reference value. The vertical axis
indicates the percentile part of the prestressing force taken by the dowel groups.

The stiffness is of great influence on


100% the distribution. The reference value
force

90% groep 1
80% for the stiffness of the groups results
in de kracht

groep 2
70% in overloading of group 1, taking
prestressing

groep 3
60%
50%
55% of the force. Enlarging the
stiffness of the groups causes
Share of theaandeel

40%
30%
20%
divergence of the results. Reducing
10% stiffness to 0.3*reference leads to
0% equal distribution. The corresponding
0,01 0,02 0,04 0,12 0,35 1,00 2,86 8,16 23,30 66,54
strain of the groups can only be met
Relative stiffness
relatieve stijfheid dowel groups
deuvelgroepen
with plastic deformation of the
dowels [4]. In this region the model is
Figure 17 Distribution of the prestressing force over the
dowel groups with equal dowel stiffness. invalid and the structure has no back-
up strength.

As reducing dowel stiffness is not sufficient the effect of varying the stiffness of the steel
is studied. In this study the stiffness of the dowels is kept constant and the stiffness of
the steel girder is varied. Results are shown in figure 18. The horizontal axis represents
the stiffness of the steel girder, relative to the reference value of a flange thickness of 30
mm. The vertical axis indicates the percentile part of the prestressing force taken by the
dowel groups.
The influence of the stiffness of the
100%
90% groep 1
steel is visible. Increasing the
force

80% stiffness (thickening the upper


aandeel in de kracht

groep 2
70% groep 3 flange) leads to more equal
Share of the prestressing

60%
50% distribution over the dowel groups,
40% reducing the steel stiffness leads to
30%
20%
divergence of the results. The figure
10% shows that doubling the steel
0%
0,09 0,16 0,27 0,46 0,77 1,30 2,20 3,71 6,27 10,60 17,92
stiffness does not lead to equal
distribution over the dowel groups.
Relative stiffness
relatieve stijfheidsteel
stalenbeam
ligger

A different design approach has been


Figure 18 Influence of the stiffness of the steel girder on
chosen in the second case, where the
the distribution of the prestressing force over the dowel
groups. stiffness between the groups of
dowels is variable. In the former
study the dowels at the front side of the connection attracted a larger part of the
prestressing force. By increasing the number of the dowels towards the end of the

1137
connection by increasing the number of the dowels. This will cause the rear end of the
shear connection to attract more force.

As a cause of prestressing with the compression joint the end slab is pressed and the steel
flange is . The difference in deformation is forced upon the dowels. This deformation
can be determined by assuming that the force is equally distributed over the dowels. In
this situation the end slab transfers an equal part of the prestressing force over the length
of the connection. From this fact the deformation of the end slab can be derived. The
deformation of the steel girder can be determined by assuming that the force increases
from 0 at the rear end of the connection to the entire prestressing force at the front end.
The deformation of the dowels is determined as the sum of the deformation of the end
slab and the steel girder. Knowing that the dowels transfer an equal part of the
prestressing force over the length of the connection the stiffness of the dowels can be
derived. With this information the number of dowels can be determined.

5. Conclusions

With a simple analytical model the number of dowels in the shear connection can be
determined. By increasing the stiffness of dowels towards the end of the shear
connection the prestressing force can be equally distributed over the dowels. This
reduces the maximum shear stress in the end slab to an acceptable level. The peak
stresses in the end slab in transverse direction of the span are reduced and tension can be
avoided by prestressing the end slab in the factory.

6. References

1. "Perfo-bond connection and tests", S.J. Poot. Symposium on Connections between


Steel and Concrete, September 2001, Stuttgart.
2. "Composite bridge with compression joints. Connection concrete end slab to steel
girder - Finite Element Method", M.V. Lammens, Symposium on Connections
between Steel and Concrete, September 2001, Stuttgart.
3. "Wandartige träger", Förster/Stegbauer. Werner-Verlag 1974.
4. "Statisch onbepaalde betonliggers", CUR-rapport 4, 1987.

1138
THE FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR OF THE SHEAR
CONNECTION IN THE HOGGING REGION OF STEEL
AND CONCRETE COMPOSITE CONTINUOUS BEAMS
UNDER REALISTIC LOADING
Helmut Bode, Andreas Leffer
Department of Steel Constructions, University of Kaiserslautern

Abstract
At Kaiserslautern University four large-scale tests on two span continuous composite
beams have been performed [1,2]. The tests were aimed at investigating the fatigue
behaviour of the shear connection in the hogging region under approximately realistic
conditions. Therefore a new experimental simulation of the crossing of vehicles over
bridges has been developed using two alternating hydraulic cylinders. It is shown that
the studs’ flexibility and the cyclic cracking of the concrete directly adjacent to the stud
influence the fatigue behaviour significantly. Both cannot be taken into account using
the basis of design provided by the European standardization [3] or by the new national
codes [4]. It turned out that some parts of the structure do not show elastic behaviour
under service loads. Considerable shear force redistribution takes place along the
connection and it seems probable that the fatigue phenomenon cannot be described in a
sufficiently exact manner with the classical load-life fatigue approach.

1. Introduction

Headed studs are normally used as shear connectors in steel and concrete composite
structures. In bridge constructions repeated non-static loading occurs originated by
lorries or trains. Therefore special attention has to be paid to the fatigue phenomenon.
Due to the harmonization of the European Codes a standardized proof of the fatigue
strength for the shear connectors is required [3] and partly simplifying national codes,
for e.g. [5], will be replaced. In [3] the classical load life approach is used, like it is the
same as the high cycle fatigue concept for steel elements. The concept is based on
nominal stresses and uses a fatigue strength curve, the so called Wöhler curve, to
determine the expected number of load cycles for the connectors.
In general, the load life approach is limited to the elastic behaviour of all structural
components under non-static (service-)loads. In that case, the fatigue resistance mainly

1141
depends on the amplitude of the load. Because of that in [3] the longitudinal shear per
unit length has to be calculated by elastic theory, a complete shear connection has to be
provided and the size and spacing of the studs should be such that the maximum shear
force does not exceed 0.6*PRK. Furthermore a full interaction between structural steel,
reinforcement and concrete is assumed, so that the redistributions of shear forces along
the connection can be neglected.
The characteristic value of the fatigue strength curve (eq. 1) [6] and the derived design
value of the Wöhler curve (eq. 2) [3] are drawn up from a statistical re-evaluation of
international data from stress controlled push-out tests.
log N = 25.340 − 9.2 ⋅ log ∆ τR ”Characteristic fatigue strength curve“ [6] (1)
log N = 22.123 − 8.0 ⋅ log ∆ τR “Design fatigue strength curve” [3] (2)
Because of the very low inclination of the fatigue strength curves the lifetime prediction
is very sensible to inaccurately calculated shear forces.
In the hogging region of composite beams it is very likely that concrete cracking occurs.
This can be taken into account according to [3] by considering the tension stiffening
effects. Because of the concrete cracking the neutral axis descends into the web of the
steel profile and causes considerable amplitudes of normal tensile stresses in the upper
flange. Fatigue cracks in the flange may develop when shear connectors are welded over
the centre support and the so-called fatigue failure mode “C” can occur, which causes a
global failure of the beam. For this case a functional interaction relationship is proposed
in [3] according to eq. (3).
 ∆ σE ∆ τE , c 
γ Ff ⋅  γ Mf ,a ⋅ + γ Mf , v ⋅  ≤ 1,3 (3)
 ∆ σc ∆ τc 

In reality even for low load levels significant shear force redistributions along the
connection take place, which are not constant over the course of time. Besides concrete
cracking in tension this is mainly due to the following two effects:
1. In principle the shear connection with headed studs is not rigid. Even for very low
values of the load, the load-slip relationship is non-linear. Plastic deformations occur
which are strongly developed for the first load cycle [7].
2. The concrete directly adjacent to the feet of the headed studs is subjected to very
high multiaxial stresses. Therefore a progressive cyclic crushing of concrete occurs and
the slip at the steel-concrete interface steadily increases. The headed studs are more and
more subjected to bending, which further amplifies the redistributions caused by the
cyclic concrete crushing.
As a matter of fact, after each load cycle an increment of slip is accumulated due to the
progressive damage both in the concrete adjacent to the stud and in the shank of the stud
[8,9]. Because of that larger areas of the shear connection are subjected to alternating
cyclic loads, which cannot be estimated in a sufficiently exact way using linear
calculation methods. Besides that these alternating amplitudes cannot be judged
regarding the fatigue damage caused because the fatigue strength curve is derived from
push-out tests subjected to unidirectional cyclic loads.

1142
2. Large scale tests on two span continuous composite beams

In the past, the most common method to perform beam tests where the fatigue behaviour
of the shear connection in the hogging region has been investigated was to carry out tests
on single span beams with an inverted test set-up. This means that the specimens were
turned upside down and therefore the hogging region was isolated from the whole
structure. Besides that the tests were usually carried out as single range tests.
In literature, for e.g. [10], other test set-ups can also be found but most of them have the
single range loading in common. Fig. 1 shows the test set-up chosen at Kaiserslautern
University.

2,41 m 1,59 m 1,59 m 2,41 m


Figure 1 Test set-up

Within the scope of two research projects at Kaiserslautern University [1,2] tests on two
span continuous composite beams have been performed. The simulation of the crossing
of vehicles was approximated using two alternating hydraulic cylinders which were
synchronized. The crossing was approximated by a “run over” in five steps. It turned out
that the fatigue behaviour under more realistic loading conditions differs significantly
from single range (beam-) tests. Only under more realistic conditions the various
different sections along the shear connection in real structures can be modelled. Fig. 2
shows the scheme of the simulation. One load cycle took one second, which results in a
test frequency of 1 Hz.

1143
Eigengewicht
Synchronisation of the Cylinders
Synchronisation of Cylinders
450,0

maxF1 Cylinder 1
Eigengewicht 400,0 Cylinder 2

Force [kN]
350,0

maxF1 maxF2 300,0

Force [kN]
Eigengewicht 250,0

200,0

minF1 maxF2 150,0


Eigengewicht
100,0 1s
50,0

minF1 minF2 0,0


Eigengewicht
0,00 0,20 0,40 0,60 0,80 1,00 1,20 1,40 1,60 1,80 2,00

Time [s]
Time [s]

Figure 2 Scheme of the simulation

In the Constructional Engineering Laboratory at Kaiserslautern University it is not


possible to carry out large-scale tests on real bridge girders. Therefore girders on a
reduced scale were tested. The first two (T7_1 and T7_2) of four specimens were
performed to robtain an idea of the fatigue behaviour under realistic loading. The major
aim was to realize the desired, very complicated synchronisation.
The third (T7_3) and fourth (T7_4) tests, which will be mainly referred to in the
discussion of the test results, can be distinguished from the first two tests by an
improved arrangement of shear connectors, the width of the concrete slab and the ratio
of reinforcement (table 1 and 2). Those parameters were determined by a linear
predesign based on elastic analysis. The cracking of the concrete and the tension
stiffening effects were taken into account according to [3]. The main difference to
normal design methods was, that no design values were used, but characteristic,
predicted material properties (table 3). When the longitudinal shear forces are
determined the cracking of the concrete has to be considered. This results in three
different values for the stud spacing according to fig. 3:
• e1 within the length L1
• e2 within the length (L3-L1) and
• e3 within the length L4.
The obtained values are given in the following tables. The studs directly over the centre
support are subjected to alternating cyclic loads (Load step 2 + Load step 4) whereas all
the other shear connectors are theoretically subjected to unidirectional amplitudes of
shear forces (Load step 1 + Load step 3). The spacing of the shear connectors was
chosen so that the required boundary conditions in [3] for non-static loads are satisfied
and therefore the design concept mentioned should be theoretically applicable to
determine the lifetime of the shear connectors as well as for the whole structure, by
means of a safe lifetime prediction.

1144
EI2
EI1 EI1
Stiffnesses

L3 L4 L4 L3
minF1 minF2
Loadstep 1 (LS1)
L1 L2 L2 L1
maxF1 minF2
Loadstep 2 (LS2)

maxF1 maxF2
Loadstep 3 (LS3)

minF1 maxF2

Loadstep 4 (LS4)

Figure 3 Structural System of the predesign, linear shear forces (schematic) and
designations

Table 1 Dimensions and results of the linear predesign


Test lTOTAL l0 Fmax Fmin l1 l2 l3 e1 e2 e3
[m] [m] [kN] [kN] [m] [m] [m] [cm] [cm] [cm]
T7_3 8,20 4,10 400 20 2,51 1,02 0,57 31 12,5 25
T7_4 8,20 4,10 400 20 2,51 1,02 0,57 31 15 24

Table 2 Cross sections and ratios of reinforcement


Test Concrete Concrete Steel- µ l1 µ l2 µ l3
width bc depth hc profile [%] [%] [%]
[cm] [cm]
T7_3 80 12,5 HE300A 0,63 1,1 1,1
T7_4 80 12,5 HE300A 0,63 1,1 1,1

1145
Table 3 Expected and real material properties
Test fy fy fck,cube fck,cube fsk fsk KD
expected test expected test expected test [mm]
[N/mm2] [N/mm2] [N/mm2] [N/mm²] [N/mm2] [N/mm2]
T7_3 300 362 40 42,2 500 540 22
T7_4 300 362 40 47,4 500 561 22

3. Test results [1,2,11]

3.1. Global beam failure


All tests including T7_1 and T7_2 finally failed according to failure mode „C“. The
number of load cycles achieved in comparison to the number of cycles calculated using
eq. (3) is displayed in table 4. It seems to be obvious that the design concept for the
global beam failure underestimates the lifetime significantly. The functional relationship
regarding the interactive effects in the hogging region seems to give very conservative
results. The fact that the maximum values for ∆τ and ∆σ do not coincide, which is the
regular case in real bridge girders, obviously influences the fatigue behaviour positively.

Table 4 Comparison of the calculated number of load cycles for failure mode „C“ (ncalc)
with the real number (ntest)
Test Failure ncalc for ntest for n test
mode type “C” type “C” n calc

T7/3 Type „C“ 153.695 797.000 5.19a


T7/4 Type „C“ 185.845 803.000 4,32a

3.2. Shear stud failure and slip development


Regarding the pure shear stud failure and neglecting interaction effects, the four test
specimens showed some similar results. The concrete slab was opened after the beams
finally failed. It turned out that in all beam tests large areas of the shear connection had
already failed due to fatigue effects.
In beam tests it is quite difficult to determine the moment of stud failure exactly. In
literature [7,10] there are some different proposals how to measure the moment of failure
or even the moment where a fatigue crack starts to develop. Most of these proposals are
based on specific applications of strain gauges or ultrasound scans. These methods were
also applied in the first two tests but this was more or less unsuccessful. Those methods
are very sensible, some experience is required and sometimes “luck” is required. The
estimated value of load cycles for the first stud failure by evaluating secondary test data
of T7_1 and T7_2 was 200.000. Preparing the tests T7_3 and T7_4 new test methods
were developed to determine the moment of shear stud failure exactly [11]. Fig. 4 and
fig. 5 show the comparison of the number of load cycles reached for each row of headed

1146
studs with the number calculated using eq. (2). In both tests the shear studs over the
centre support failed first. They are subjected to high amplitudes of alternating shear
forces (fig. 6). After that a successive failure from the inside to the outside occurs. Table
5 shows the total number of failed shear studs and the comparison of the moments for
the first real stud failure (nfirst,real) with the calculated number for these studs (nfirst,calc).

Table 5 Shear stud failure


Test No. of studs No. of studs nfirst Position nfirst,calc Position
between failed between (Real) (Real) (Calc.) (Calc.)
loaded points loaded points
T7_3 42 26 348.000 Centre 456.000 Centre
T7_4 38 28 254.250 Centre 664.000 Centre

Test T7/3

8,E+05

7,E+05
Number of load cycles n

6,E+05

5,E+05

4,E+05
Real stud failure
3,E+05
Calculated stud failure
2,E+05

1,E+05 F F

0,E+00
2,5 2,75 3 3,25 3,5 3,75 4 4,25 4,5 4,75 5 5,25 5,5

Longitudinal axis [m]

Figure 4 Comparison of the calculated lifetime for pure shear stud failure with the
lifetime obtained in test T7_3

By neglecting the tensile stresses in the upper flange of the steel profile (pure stud
failure, no interaction effects) the extreme sensibility of the lifetime prediction for
inaccuracies in the calculated shear forces becomes obvious. Regarding fig. 4 the curve
representing the real stud failure always shows smaller values than the dashed curve
which represents the results from the linear predesign. For the stud arrangement in T7_4
only the lifetime of the studs over the centre support is overestimated (fig. 5) although
the differences in the stud arrangement were very small (table 1, table 5).

1147
Test T7/4

Real stud failure


8,E+05
Calculated stud failure
7,E+05
Number of load cycles n

6,E+05

5,E+05

4,E+05

3,E+05

2,E+05

1,E+05 F F

0,E+00
2,5 2,75 3 3,25 3,5 3,75 4 4,25 4,5 4,75 5 5,25 5,5

Longitudinal axis [m]

Figure 5 Comparison of the calculated lifetime for pure shear stud failure with the
lifetime obtained in test T7_4

In T7_4 there is only one pair of shear studs less near the two loaded points within (L3-
L1) (e2 = 15cm instead of 12.5cm) than in T7_4. This results in a total of 38 instead of
42. However the fatigue behaviour of the shear connection was in fact significantly
influenced. Regarding the final failure of the beam no significant difference occurred
(797.000 load cycles instead of 803.000), but the stud failure started much earlier in the
more flexible, “weaker” beam T7_4. Both tests have in common that the shear studs over
the centre support -the studs with the largest amplitude of alternating shear forces- failed
first and earlier than expected. After that a successive stud failure occurs which runs
faster the weaker the whole connection is.

Regarding fig. 6 and fig. 7 some important notes have to be pointed out:
• The studs over the centre support are subjected to alternating cyclic loads (fig. 6).
• An initial slip occurs at the very beginning of the tests. The value is dependant on the
friction on the steel-concrete interface, the peak of the shear force, the concrete
compressive strength, the flexibility of the shear connectors and the stiffness of the
whole shear connection (fig. 7).
• After that only small and slow changes in the system take place. A slow but almost
linear slip growth occurs. This is mainly due to the cyclic cracking of the concrete
adjacent to the stud. Towards the end of the test a strong and faster slip growth
occurs but the shear studs have already failed (fig. 7).

1148
• The slip growth is stronger the less stiffness is provided in the whole shear
connection from the very beginning (fig. 7).
• The faster the slip develops the earlier the failure occurs. The value of slip
determines the failure.
• Small changes in the stiffness of the shear connection affect the lifetime of
several studs significantly.
• The studs fail due to fatigue for very small amplitudes of slip (fig. 6, fig. 7). These
values are not comparable to the slip amplitudes obtained from stress controlled
push-out tests. Nevertheless, the general course of the slip development (fig. 7) is
quite similar, but in beam tests the moment of failure generally occurs before the
major slip growth takes place.
Slip hysteresis throughout several load cycles Slip hyteresis throughout several load cycles
for T7/3 and x = 4,10 m (centre support) for T7/4 and x = 4,10 m (centre support)
700 700
n=100
∆s ~ 0.3mm Loadstep 3 ∆s ~ 0.4mm Loadstep 3 n=1000
600 600
Load cell centre support

Load cell centre support


for moment of failure for moment of failure n=100.000
500 500
n=280.000

400 400 n=576.000


[kN]

[kN]
Loadstep 4 Loadstep 2 Loadstep 4 Loadstep 2
300 300

n=1000
200 200
n=325600
100 100
n=378000
Loadstep 5 Loadstep 5
0 n=797000 0
-0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6
-100 -100
Slip s [mm] Slip s [mm]

Figure 6 Slip development with a load cycle over the centre support (Alternating cyclic
load)
Maximum and minimum values of slip Maximum and minimum values of slip
for T7/3 and x=4,10m (centre support) for T7/4 and x=4,10m (centre support)
0,6 0,6

0,4 0,4
∆s~0,3mm for ∆s~0,4mm for
moment of failure moment of failure
Initial slip Initial slip
Slip s [mm]

0,2 0,2
Slip s [mm]

0 0
0,E+00 1,E+05 2,E+05 3,E+05 4,E+05 5,E+05 6,E+05 7,E+05 8,E+05 9,E+05 0,E+00 1,E+05 2,E+05 3,E+05 4,E+05 5,E+05 6,E+05 7,E+05

-0,2 -0,2
Loadstep 2 Loadstep 2
Loadstep 4 Loadstep 4
-0,4 "Linear" slip growth -0,4
"Linear" slip growth

-0,6 -0,6
Load cycles n Load cycles n

Figure 7 Boundary curves for the slip over the centre support over the course of time

Regarding all shear studs between the loaded points it can be shown that the amplitudes
of shear forces range from a pure alternating cyclic load to pure unidirectional cyclic
loads. Fig. 8 shows the slip hyteresis and the boundary curves for a pair of shear studs
between the loaded points and the centre (x=3.235m). For unidirectional cyclic loads the
(one-sided) initial slip is usually greater than for alternating amplitudes (for comparable
amplitudes), because it is strongly dependant on the peak of the cyclic load. The slip

1149
growth throughout the first cycles is mostly larger, although this is heavily influenced by
the stiffness of the whole shear connection.

Slip hysteresis througout several load cycles Maximum and minimum values of slip
for T7/3 and x = 3,235 m for T7/3 and x=3,235 m (~80 cm left from centre)
700

Loadstep 3 0,5
Load cell centre support

600
∆s ~ 0.40 mm 0,4
for moment of failure Loadstep 3
500 0,3
Loadstep 4
0,2
400

Slip s [mm]
∆s~0,40 mm for
[kN]

0,1
Initial slip
Loadstep 4
300 moment of failure
n=1000 0
0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000
200 n=70000 -0,1
n=150000
-0,2
100 n=557000
n=797000 -0,3
0
-0,4
-0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 "Linear" slip growth
-100 -0,5
Slip [mm] Load cycles n

Figure 8 Slip hysteresis and boundary curves for a pair of shear studs arranged 80cm left
of the centre support in test T7_3

Summary
This paper deals with results of testing done on two span continuous composite beams
under cyclic loading. The special feature is the realistic loading situation, realized by two
alternating, synchronized hydraulic cylinders. Therefore especially the hogging region
could be investigated under more or less realistic conditions. It must be pointed out that
the existing design concept for preventing the global failure of the beam (failure mode
“C”) delivers very conservative results. It became obvious however that with the existing
design models the real fatigue behaviour of the shear connection in the hogging region
under realistic (service-) loading cannot be described in a sufficiently exact manner.
Concrete cracking has to be considered, but it was shown that the flexibility of the shear
connection, which is not taken into account in the European standardization, also
influences the fatigue behaviour significantly, also under service loads. The headed studs
over the centre support are subjected to large amplitudes of alternating shear forces and a
considerable number of shear studs failed due to fatigue a long time before the whole
beam failed according to failure mode “C”.
It is important to point out that the shear connectors fail for very small amplitudes of slip
(some tenth of a millimetre) and for a greater part of the lifetime of the beam the shear
connection is interrupted. By neglecting the interaction effects and regarding the pure
stud failure the sensibility of the existing design format to inaccuracies in the calculated
shear forces becomes obvious. This is due to the very flat inclination of the fatigue
strength curve. On the other hand it turned out that the moment of failure for a single
shear stud is almost unpredictable. The high cycle fatigue concept, transferred from pure
steel constructions, which assumes a constant relationship between the applied (service-)
loads and the resulting fatigue-stress-amplitudes seems to be hardly applicable. There are
ongoing and significant shear force redistributions along the shear connection, which are
mainly due to the studs’ flexibility and the cyclic crushing of the concrete adjacent to the
studs. Both are neglected in the existing design concept if the constructive requirements

1150
mentioned in the introduction are satisfied. It turned out that the slip at the steel-concrete
interface, which is heavily dependant on the stiffness of the whole shear connection
determines the moment of fatigue failure. Further research activities at Kaiserslautern
University are dealing with the question if a strain-life approach which assumes a
correlation between the slip and the resulting lifetime of the shear connectors may be
more applicable.

4. References

[1] Bode, H.; Mensinger, M.; Leffer, A.: Verdübelung von Verbundträgern unter
nichtruhender Belastung im Brückenbau; AIF Forschungsbericht Nr. 11266, Düsseldorf
2000.
[2] Bode, H.; Leffer, A.: Die Übertragungsfunktion beim Nachweis der
Betriebsfestigkeit von Stahlverbundbrücken im negativen Momentenbereich unter
besonderer Berücksichtigung einer nachgiebigen Verdübelung. DFG-Forschungsprojekt
BO 733/11 (in progress).
[3] ENV 1994-2, Eurocode 4, Teil 2: Bemessung und Konstruktion von
Verbundtragwerken aus Stahl und Beton, Teil 2: Verbundbrücken; Deutsche Fassung, 1.
Entwurf, Mai 1999.
[4] EDIN 18800-5: 1999-01: Verbundtragwerke aus Stahl und Beton, Bemessung und
Konstruktion (Entwurf, November 1999).
[5] Richtlinie für die Bemessung und Ausführung von Stahlverbundträgern, März
1981; Ergänzende Bestimmungen zu den Richtlinien für die Bemessung und Ausführung
von Stahlverbundträgern, März 1984.
[6] Roik, K.; Hanswille, G.: Hintergrundbericht zu EC 4: Nachweis des
Grenzzustandes der Betriebsfestigkeit für Kopfbolzendübel; Bericht EC4/11/90;
Bochum,1990.
[7] Mensinger, M.: Zum Ermüdungsverhalten von Kopfbolzendübeln im Verbundbau;
Dissertation, Kaiserslautern 1999.
[8] Gattesco, N.; Giuriani, E.; .Gubana, A.: Low-Cycle fatigue test on stud shear
connectors, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 2, February 1997.
[9] Gattesco, N.; Giuriani, E.: Experimental study on stud shear connectors subjected
to cyclic loading, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 1-21,
1996.
[10] Leonhardt, F.; Andrä, W.; Andrä, H.-P.; Saul, R.; Harre, W.: Zur Bemessung
durchlaufender Verbundträger die dynamischer Belastung, Der Bauingenieur 62 (1987),
S. 311-324.
[11] Leffer, A.: Zum Nachweis der Betriebsfestigkeit von Stahlverbundbrücken im
negativen Momentenbereich unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Nachgiebigkeit der
Verdübelung, Dissertation, Kaiserslautern (in preparation).

1151
INFLUENCE OF FATIGUE LOADS IN TENSION ON
SHORT CAST-IN-PLACE ANCHORS IN CONCRETE
Ezio Cadoni
Istituto Meccanica dei Materiali, Switzerland

Abstract
In the modern civil engineering field the anchorages play a very important role. In fact,
the standardization of industrial process, like precasting industry, puts in evidence the
need to develop modular elements. For the connections of these elements can be used:
anchoring industrial systems (chemical anchors, undercut anchors, ecc.), cast-in-place
anchors (designed before the casting of concrete). These anchors are often short cast-in-
place anchors. They are used for fixing anchored panels, for fixing other elements to
structure (publicity panels for example), or for fixing operating machine to ground.
The anchors are subjected to cyclic loads. In particular, in the case of blocking operating
machine, problematic of fatigue is present and can be predominant.
In this paper the fatigue behaviour of three types of short cast-in-place anchors is
described. For this research have been used: anchor bolt, ribbed and rod bar. The
experimental results permit to describe the evolution of some variables like
displacement, stiffness, dissipated energy during the fatigue life.
The correlation between the load-displacement curve during the static pull-out test and
the cyclic behaviour of anchor is also discussed.

1. Introduction

The great development of anchor bolts and their direct appliance in the field of structural
engineering, has pointed out the necessity of knowing their behaviour under not usual
loading case. In particular with the appearing of new types of structures (off-shore, high
towers, ecc.) the anchors are often subjected to fatigue load.
A short anchor is usually defined as one whose embedded length is insufficient to
develop tensile yield in the bolt. They are normally used in the connection between
structural members.
For this research [1] have been used: anchor bolt, ribbed and rod bar. Cast-in-place steel
anchors, threaded rods with nuts and washers at the bottom, which are widely used

1152
throughout the world, are here considered as the short anchor to study the fatigue
behaviour of concrete. The ribbed and rod bar have been chosen in order to emphasize
the diffused damage and bond failure, respectively.
The fatigue failure of these anchors has been investigated through pull-out tests carried
out on concrete slabs by applying sinusoidal shaped loading cycles to anchors previously
embedded in the casting.

2. Experimental technique

The tests were performed on 40 anchors embedded, before the casting, in as many
concrete slabs sized 500*500*150 mm. Only one type of micro-concrete, having the
composition and mechanical properties given in Table 1, was tested. Compressive
strength, R, was evaluated on standard cubes. The determination of secant modules, E,
and fracture energy, Gf, were performed on 160*160*500 mm prism and 100*100*840
mm notched prisms, respectively.

Table 1 - Material
Composition:
• cement CEM I 42.5 400 kg/m³
• alluvional sand with 0-8 mm diameter 1700 kg/m³
• water/cement ratio 0.50
Compressive strength, R 25 MPa
Young's modulus, E 20.4 GPa
Fracture energy, Gf 62 N/m

Before the tests, the slabs and tests pieces were kept for 30 days at a temperature of
about 20°C at a relative humidity of approx. 65%. The pull-out tests were performed by
means of an MTS with maximum load of 250 kN by imposing a constant velocity of the

load application point of η = 5 ⋅ 10 − 6 m/s.
Instantaneous displacement, η, was calculated as the arithmetical mean of η1 and η2
values measured by two LVDT (linear variable displacement transformer) transducers
placed in a diametrically opposed position with respect to the anchor bolt.
The measuring points of the transducers on the surface of the slab and on the testing
machine were chosen so as to minimize possible displacement errors due to play in the
mechanical connection or elastic strains in the materials. A large diameter contrast ring
(500 mm) was used so as not to affect the cracking surface.
The fatigue tests were carried out by applying a sinusoidal loading cycle with a
frequency of 1 Hz. Maximum load, Pmax, was kept constant throughout the test.
Load-displacement diagrams were recorded keeping the load increase rate constant at the
first loading/unloading cycle and after N0, N1, N2, ....Ni fatigue cycles.
The anchor bolts were embedded at 40 mm while the rod and ribbed bars were
embedded at 60 mm. All three types had a nominal diameter of 16 mm.

1153
3. Failure mode of short cast-in-place anchors

The potential failure modes of a short anchor bolt can be of four kinds according to the
materials and geometrical characteristics. The first mode is obtained by the pulling out of
the rod and it depends exclusively on the interface quality between the two materials, the
inadequate anchor length and the absence of the washer at the bottom. The second mode
is the typical one which shows the concrete frustum cone shape failure. The third mode
is half way between the two and mixed-mode named. In the fourth we finally have the
threaded rod failure. This occurs in case of high anchor lengths or high resistance
concretes. There is another ‘structural’ failure mode that is the splitting of the member
due to the loading anchor.
In the typical failure (extraction of cone) of anchor bolts, due to axial-symmetric
conditions, the crack more over enucleate at the top edge of the washer. As is known, in
pull-out tests involving a contrast ring of considerable size compared to bolt depth,
concrete failure is caused by a tensile stress field localised at the end of the bolt head, as
born out by the fact that is the area where both the main crack and the micro-cracking
zone are initiated. Moreover, the stress field produced by support reactions turns out to
be negligible compared to the stress field close to the stem. In this case, a tensile stress
field around the bolt heads triggers off the crack and, when static tests are considered,
brittle behaviour is observed during collapse. The load-bearing capacity depends on the
fracture energy and the tensile strength of concrete. By using smaller diameter contrast
rings or different types of anchorage, such as those commonly used in the building
industry, a brittle-ductile, or ductile behaviour is observed instead, that is to say, friction
or hooping phenomena, due to the presence of reinforcement, or interlocking effects, etc.
occur alongside with diffused micro and macro-cracking that enhance the ductility of the
material [2].
The presence of a head or lateral pressure in short anchor permits a more uniform
distribution of the shear stress and a better transferring of loads. The drawback is that
this type provokes a brittle failure of concrete.
In the rod and ribbed bar the transferring of loads depends on hardly to the interface
condition between anchor and concrete but in the case of short anchor it is ever present
the slipping failure (that is more o less brittle).
In the case of anchor bolts, the fatigue collapse process evolves in two states: the initial
phase, in which appears little local crack that arriving to a sufficient dimension develops,
and a second phase in which the last one increases up to failure.
In the case of ribbed bar, it should take into account that during the fatigue life the stress
are not uniformly distributed along the anchorage; this fact implies a new stress
distribution during the load sequence and to failure with high interlocking effect.
The geometry of anchors is very important for the failure analysis of anchors.

1154
4. Evolution of the mechanical behaviour during fatigue life of anchors

During the fatigue life the short anchor shows a variation of some variables that indicate
a progressive damage [3-4]. The variables chosen as tool for checking the fatigue
process were the energy dissipated of cycles, compliance and displacement of
anchorage.
The fatigue process can be subdivided in three zone corresponding to the three known
states. Considering the displacement of anchors as variable the state can be defined as
follows:
• State I is the rapid increase of displacement up to 10% of the life
• State II is the stable growth between 10% and 80% of the life
• State III is the rapid increase up to failure
In Fig. 1 the dimensionless displacement versus dimensionless number of cycles (fatigue
life) is shown.

1
III phase
0.9
Displacement / displacement at failure

0.8
II phase
0.7

0.6

I phase
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

N° cycles / N° cycles at failure

Fig. 1 - Dimensionless displacement vs. dimensionless number of cycles

The fatigue effect on anchors depends on several factors as anchorages type, the concrete
around, the presence of stress state or reinforcements near the anchors, the confinement,
the load history of loads in time, the maximum stress and so on.
The shape of cycles change a little bit for each cycle. In Figs. 2, 3, 4 the variation of
cycles shape for the three types of anchors are shown.

1155
30

25

N=2 N=3000 N=30000


20 ED=100% ED=85% ED=161%
N/Nf= 0% N/Nf= 8.8% N/Nf= 88%
Load [kN]

15

10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Displacement [mm]

Fig. 2 - Evolution of the cycle shape during fatigue life (anchor bolts)

Analysing the variation of the cycle is possible to study the evolution of the variable
chosen for the damage process in fatigue. In Figs. 5 and 6 are shown the displacement of
anchor bolt and ribbed bar, respectively.
In Figs. 7 and 8 are described the evolution of the compliance and the energy dissipated
per cycles during the fatigue life of anchor bolts.
The energy dissipated per cycles in the case of anchor bolts decreases during the firsts
cycles, and increases steadily thereafter, up to failure. For the rod and ribbed bars, this
does not occur.
The same behaviour was observed for the compliance of anchorage.
The displacement of anchorage seems to be the most suited feature that can be used as
variable to check the fatigue process.

1156
30

25

N=2 N=50'000 N=332'500 N=700'000


20 ED=100% ED=15% ED=12.5% ED=13%
N/Nf= 0% N/Nf= 6.5% N/Nf= 46% N/Nf= 95%
Load [kN]

15

10

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Displacement [mm]

Fig. 3 - Evolution of the cycle shape during fatigue life (ribbed bar)

4.5

4
N=2 N=40'000 N=302'240
ED=100% ED=74 % ED=140 %
3.5
N/Nf= 0% N/Nf= 12 % N/Nf= 95 %

3
Load [kN]

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14

Displacement [mm]

Fig. 4 - Evolution of the cycle shape during fatigue life (rod bar)

1157
9

T7 T4 T5
8
Displacement / Diplacement at first cycle

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Log N° cycles

Fig. 5 – Displacement/displacement at first cycle vs. log number of cycles curves of


anchor bolts
3
Displacement / displacement at first cycle

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Log. number of cycles

Fig. 6 – Displacement / displacement at first cycle vs. log number cycles curves of
ribbed bar

1158
0.0007

T7 T4 T5

0.0006

0.0005
Compliance [mm/daN]

0.0004

0.0003

0.0002

0.0001

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Log N° cycles

Fig. 7 – Compliance vs. log number of cycles curves of anchor bolts

2
Dissipated energy / Dissipated energy of 2nd cycle

T7 T4 T5
1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Log N° cycles

Fig. 8 – Energy dissipated per cycle vs. log number of cycles curves of anchor bolts

1159
5. Correlation between static and cyclic behaviour of anchor bolt.

The displacement, more generally the deformation, gives the possibility to understand if
the fatigue process is in a stable or an unstable zone.
Does exist a link between the static and cyclic deformation? The answer can be positive.
The same conclusion [5] was reached through a theoric-experimental study that
described a local approach to fatigue concrete.
The descending branch of the load-displacement curve of static pull-out test could be the
boundary for the displacement in fatigue tests.
As it has been reported before, the load-displacement curve during the cycles shows
damage that consists of a decrease of slope with respect to the displacement axis hence,
increase of compliance for the whole system.
The failure occurs when the cyclic load-displacement intersects the descending branch
of the static pull-out curve.
It should be considered that is necessary to make some comments before verifying this
hypothesis. It is difficult to know the exact pull-out curve for each type of anchor. In
fact, each anchor possesses its own curve, in the sense that this depends on numerous
factors as the concrete composition, the disposition of particular aggregate near the
anchor, the modality of extraction and so on. It must be considered that the deduction
and the hypothesis are referred to a mean behaviour; therefore, with a statistic dispersion
that in some cases can be elevated, more caution is necessary.
The same difficulties are encountered when one wants to establish the bearing capacity
of anchor or the displacement at failure.
The displacement that corresponds to the displacement of maximum load in static pull-
out load has been considered as the end of linear growth of displacement, after the non
linear growth begins up to reach the point of intesection with descending part of static
pull-out test where the failure occurs. The same hypothesis for the description of τ-slip
law of bars embedded in concrete [6] was also used.
The tests on anchor bolts have shown a behaviour similar to Hordijk’s observations.
Therefore, it is possible to define a failure criterion based on displacement because a
relationship between the static and dynamic deformation (or displacement) recorded in
static and cyclic tests respectively exists.
As a result of this hypothesis, it is possible to point out the fundamental features that
govern the cyclic behaviour by means of the static pull-out test. The maximum
displacement is represented by the intersection of the line at predetermined percentage of
load and the descending branch of the static pull-out test. However, in the fatigue life of
anchor it is better not to exceed the displacement at static failure because in this case the
process of fatigue is in the unstable zone.

1160
6. Conclusion

The type of anchor have to be considered when it is subjected to cyclic load. The
experiments have shown a non linear damage of anchorage during the fatigue life. The
damage is influenced by anchor geometries thus one needs to consider this aspect in
anchor type choice, especially if subjected to cyclic load .
By comparing the evolution of load cycles it is possible to say that the most suited
feature for the control of fatigue process is the displacement.
The relationship between displacement in static and cyclic tests exists, therefore, by the
load-displacement recorded during the static pull-out test, it is possible to point out the
fundamental features that govern the cyclic behaviour.
As result, the anchor fatigue life may be predicted more effectively through a
relationship based on the increase in the displacement of the load application point as a
function of the number of cycles rather than through a relationship based on the crack
propagation velocity as a function of the number of cycles as in metals [2].

7. References.

1. E. Cadoni. ‘Sul comportamento a fatica degli ancoraggi nel calcestruzzo’, Doctoral


Thesis, , Politecnico Torino, (1994)
2. P. Bocca, E. Cadoni, S. Valente. ‘On concrete fatigue fracture in pull-out tests’, in
“Fracture and Damage of Concrete and Rock”, Chapman & Hall, (1993) 637-646.
3. E. Cadoni. ‘Tension fatigue failure of short anchor bolts in concrete’, in ‘Anchors in
Theory and Practice’, ed. Widmann, A.A. Balkema, (1995) 405-410.
4. E. Cadoni. ‘Fatigue behaviour of anchor bolts in concrete’, in ‘Fracture Mechanics
of Concrete Structures’, Wittmann editor, Aedificatio, 2, (1995) 1555-1565.
5. Hordijk, D.A. Local approach to fatigue of concrete. Doctoral Thesis, Technische
Universiteit Delft: Delft (1991).
6. Balazs, G.L. Bond behaviour under repeated loads. Studi e Ricerche. 8, (1986) 395-
430.

1161
A TEST PROPOSAL FOR FATIGUE EXPERIMENTAL
STUDIES ON STUD SHEAR CONNECTORS
Gattesco Natalino* and Ezio Giuriani**
*Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Università di Udine, Italy.
**Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Università di Brescia, Italy.

Abstract
A new fatigue test for stud connectors able to represent as confidently as possible the
actual behavior of the stud in a composite beam is herein proposed. This test method
avoid most of the shortcomings of the standard push-out test and allows to perform
easily reverse cyclic loading with either load or displacement control procedure. The
specimen is arranged with one single connector so to allow on the one hand to survey
the local behavior of the stud during fatigue life and on the other hand to permit to draw
analytical relationships under cyclic loading (cyclic load-slip relationship). Some
monotonic and fatigue tests evidenced the reliability of the test method proposed.

1. Introduction

The push-out test was devised in the early nineteen-thirties to determine the transfer
capacity of spiral type shear connectors; since then, it has been used widely to study the
behavior of different types of connectors. Although the stress conditions in the concrete
block of the push-out specimen do not truly represent the stress conditions which occur
in an actual composite beam, push-out test permits to obtain reliable load-slip
characteristics of connectors in case of monotonic loading. For cyclic loading, the
different stress conditions in the concrete of the specimen and some intrinsic
shortcomings of the test [1] may influence significantly both the cyclic load-slip
relationship of the connector and its endurance resistance. Moreover it is not easy to
perform reverse cyclic loading using the push-out test.
Most of the studies on connection fatigue available in the literature [e.g. 2, 3, 4] are
focused to low-intensity cyclic loads leading thus to the connection failure in a large
number of cycles (high-cycle fatigue). In these cases the endurance depends markedly to
the load range while the dependence to the ratio between the minimum and maximum
load is almost negligible [3]. For such a reason, the majority of the experimental cyclic

1162
test results available were performed using standard push-out specimens subjected to
unidirectional loading cycles [2, 3, 4]. The reference endurance curves (Wöhler curves)
present in the codes of practice were obtained from these experimental results [5].
The complex load histories of bridges include also cyclic loading of high intensity which
involve in the stud significant nonlinear deformations at each cycle, so that the
endurance depends both to the load range (amplitude) and to the load ratio (min/max
load ratio). For high intensity cyclic loads, then, it is necessary to evaluate the stud
endurance using the strain control approach, suitable for low-cycle fatigue. Moreover,
for the check of connection fatigue using this approach, it is necessary to determine the
cyclic load-slip relationship of the connector for any loading condition.
Moving loads on bridges causes also cyclic loading with opposite sign in the connectors
so the test method has to allow reverse cyclic loading. Some researchers conducted
reverse cyclic loading using either push-out specimens arranged in a purpose built
reaction steel frame [6] or doubling specularly the specimen with respect to its base [7].
These techniques allowed to perform reverse cyclic loading tests, using either a load
controlled or a displacement controlled test procedure, without excessive experimental
difficulties; but most of the shortcomings of the standard push-out test are still present.
The scope of this research work is to discuss in detail a specific test proposal to carry out
experimental investigations on the fatigue of stud connectors; the test herein presented is
a refinement of that illustrated by the authors in some preceding papers [1, 8]. In
particular this method aims to correctly represent the actual stud behavior in the beam,
so to remove the shortcomings of the push-out test, and to allow easily carrying out
reverse cyclic tests, so to determine the cyclic load slip curve of the single connector.

2. Stud features in the composite beam

The study of the behavior of connectors subjected to cyclic loading requires specimens
and test procedures able to simulate as confidently as possible the actual behavior of the
stud in the structure. In fact, small behavior divergences of the specimen can accumulate
at each cycle leading to quite different responses, with respect to the beam, after a
significant number of cycles. It is then important to firstly analyze the actual forces and
boundary conditions applied to the stud in the beam.
A composite beam with a single row of equally spaced studs is considered. Each stud is
submitted at its base to a shear force Q and a moment M (Fig. 1a). The force Q is
transmitted to the concrete slab by longitudinal shear flow q acting on both sides of the
element surrounding the stud, as illustrated in Fig. 1a,b. The longitudinal compression of
the slab, due to the bending moment in the beam, is normally very low because where
the connection shear force has great values the moment tends to zero (e.g. close to
supports in simply supported beams subjected to uniformly distributed loads).

1163
Fig. 1 – Concrete element surrounding the stud: (a) longitudinal view in the beam, (b)
assonometric view, (c) forces acting on the element.

Fig. 2 – Equilibrium forces in push-out test: base of concrete blocks (a) laterally
restrained and (b) laterally free.

The shear force Q, the stud moment M and the shear flow q do not satisfy the rotation
equilibrium of the element (Fig. 1 c); it is needed a couple of vertical shear forces V*.
No axial forces are involved in the stud. As a matter of fact the flexural deformability of
the slab between two studs may cause the uplift of the slab and consequently a tensile
force in the connector; however such a force becomes appreciable only when very large
slip values occur at the interface (second order effect on the stud).

3. Push-out test considerations

As stated above, the push-out specimen do not truly represent the actual behavior of the
stud in the beam. The concrete block of the specimen, simulating the concrete element
surrounding the connectors in the beam (Fig. 1a,b), is subjected to different forces
causing diverse stress conditions in the studs.

1164
Shear forces Q and Q’ are equilibrated by bottom reaction force Fv acting on the
concrete block (Fig. 2). Such a force, that is not aligned with shear forces Q and Q’,
causes a stress distribution inside the block according to the schematic strut-and-tie
systems shown in Fig. 2, with some struts thrusting against the steel element surface.
Thrusts cause an additional force δQ, due to the friction between the steel flange and the
concrete blocks, so that a greater stud capacity than the actual one is obtained. This
additional force is different whether the concrete blocks of the specimen are at the
bottom restrained or free to move laterally (Fig. 2a,b).
In the latter case, moreover, the lower connectors are also subjected to a tensile force
(Fig. 2 b), so the studs of the specimen are differently loaded (Q ≠ Q’). This difference
cause a diverse fatigue damage in the connectors, yielding to collapse the studs of the
bottom row appreciably earlier than those of the top row [2]. It has also to be noted that
the deformability of the concrete member between the two rows of studs is in general
greater than that of the steel member, so again bottom and top groups of connectors are
subjected to a different shear force.
The push-out specimen has a double symmetry from a geometric point of view, but an
asymmetric mechanical response may occur due mainly to the unavoidable
inhomogeneity of the concrete surrounding each stud. For this asymmetry may occur
relative rotations between the steel element and the concrete blocks, both in the plane of
concrete-steel interface and in the plane of the steel web. These rotations do not allow to
obtain the local slip and the shear force of each connector, but only average values; that
is the cyclic load-slip curve of the single connector can not be determined with this test.
Another important issue concern the casting direction of concrete in the specimen. In
fact, it was pointed out by many researchers (e.g. [9]) that placing concrete in the
direction perpendicular to the stud axis causes significant static and fatigue resistance
reduction, because beneath the connector bleeding water accumulates leading to local
softer concrete. It is then necessary to place concrete in the direction of stud axis, as
occurs in the concrete slab of composite beams.
For such a problem some researchers proposed to cast the two concrete blocks of push-
out specimens in two times (the latter when the former hardened), with the disadvantage
that each specimen is cast from a separate concrete mix (likely have slightly different
properties); some others proposed to use two plates, with the studs welded to them, to
cast the concrete blocks against the plates, taking the studs with vertical axis and, after
concrete has hardened, the plates are mounted with bolts to the flanges of an I-shaped
steel member [6].

4. Proposed Test Method

A specific test method, able to avoid most of the shortcomings of the push-out test listed
above, is presented and discussed in detail in the follow. In order to obtain a good
agreement with the situation of Fig. 1c, a direct shear test, based on the scheme of Fig. 3,
is herein proposed. In this test the action lines of the opposite forces Q have a relative
distance equal to e so to nullify the vertical shear forces V* (Fig. 1c). The distance e is

1165
obtained from the relationship e=M/Q, where M is the moment corresponding to the
force Q in the hypothesis that the stud is considered as a beam resting on a cohesionless
elastic foundation with one end restrained to rotation. The occurrence of different values
of the moment M, with respect to that predicted, needs forces R1 and R2 for rotation
equilibrium of concrete block. Steel ties were used to resist eventual tensile values for
forces R1 or R2. Compressive values induce a friction action which is negligible in
comparison with the shear force Q.
A U-shaped concrete block is used so to simulate the concrete element in the beam (Fig.
1a,b,c), which is subjected to a longitudinal shear flow q for equilibrating the shear force
Q. In fact, the force Q, applied to the concrete ribs, equilibrates the opposite force Q,
transmitted to the slab element by the connector, through a shear flow q at slab-rib
interfaces (Fig. 4), similarly to scheme of Fig. 1b.
In detail the proposed specimen concern the U-shaped concrete block (a) and the T-
shaped steel element (b). In the flange of the steel element a single stud connector (c) is
welded and embedded in the concrete block. The concrete block is 340 mm wide, 400
mm deep and 130 mm thick; the longitudinal ribs (wings of the U) are 70 mm wide and
90 mm thick. The steel flange is 70 mm wide and 20 mm thick while the web is 170 mm
wide and 15 mm thick (Fig. 5).
The concrete block is pierced through longitudinally so to allocate four threaded bars (d)
for fixing the specimen to the contrast frame of the loading system or to an adequately
designed steel device to allow the specimen to be clamped to the grips of a common
testing machine. Moreover six transversal steel ties (e), (f) are needed to prevent relative
rotations between the steel element and the concrete block; four ties (e) are in the
interface plane and two ties (f) are perpendicular to the interface (see Fig. 3). Large
elliptic holes are provided so to avoid any lateral interaction (flexure and shear) between
ties and concrete (Fig. 5). To reduce friction at steel-concrete interface a thin layer of
stearic acid was interposed. A stiff L-shaped steel device (g) is bolted to the web of the
steel element with high-strength bolts so to prevent slip. In the top of such a device a big
nut is welded, which is needed to fix the specimen to the hydraulic actuator, or
alternatively a device to be clamped to the grips of a common testing machine.

Fig. 3 – Forces acting on the specimen which simulates the actual behavior in the beam.

1166
Fig. 4 – Shear flow in test specimen in assonometric view.

Fig. 5 – Specimen details.

Fig. 6 – Gauge arrangement.

The size of concrete block is important in push-out tests because it influences the
capacity of the connection. In fact, when the concrete block is of limited width a low
ultimate load may be obtained because cracking of concrete involves the entire block. In
the proposed test the single connector produces limited stresses in the concrete block so
that no macroscopic cracks may develop up to the connection failure, as confirmed by
experiments. Hence, in the proposed test the width of the concrete part is of minor
importance.

1167
The specimen proposed allows to perform both load and displacement controlled tests.
Specimens may be subjected to tension, compression and reverse cyclic loading by
simply using a common dynamic testing machine.
The slip between the concrete block and the steel element is measured by means of two
inductive transducers LVDT (A) (Fig. 6). The check of the effectiveness of steel ties (e)
and (f) (Fig. 5) against the relative rotation between concrete and steel elements can be
done by means of dial gauges (B) and (C), or alternatively other inductive transducers.
In all tests carried out up to now, the rotation was always negligible.

5. Application of the test method

The test method was applied to study the behavior of single studs subjected to
monotonic and cyclic loading. In the first case the maximum capacity, the maximum slip
at failure and the load-slip relationship were determined. In the latter case tests were
carried out at constant load amplitude; the fatigue endurance and the cyclic load-slip
relationship were determined.
For the concrete of specimens was used Portland cement and river aggregate (15 mm
maximum size). The water-cement ratio was fixed to 0.5 and 3 l/m3 of superplasticizer
(MAC – Reobuild 716) was added to obtain a good workability. After casting, the
concrete was cured under moist sacks for one week and then the specimens were stored
in air at 20 °C until subjected to test. The compressive strength of concrete was
determined on cylinders (100x200 mm) and cubes (150 mm), cast and cured under the
same conditions as the concrete of specimens. The cylindrical and cubic compressive
strength at testing of specimens were on the average of 43.5 MPa and 58.5 MPa,
respectively. Stud connectors with a shank diameter of 19 mm and a height of 110 mm
were used; the yielding stress and the ultimate strength were 415 MPa and 547 MPa.

5.1 Monotonic tests


Four specimens were subjected to monotonic loading; the tests, identified with letter A,
were performed at displacement control imposing a constant slip rate of 0.001 mm/s.
The average values of the maximum shear resistance and of the slip at failure were 109
kN and 8.70 mm, respectively. The failure of all specimens was reached by shearing of
the shank of the stud just beyond the weld collar. This stud capacity was used as
reference static resistance in the cyclic test program.
In Fig. 7, the shear load Q is expressed as the ratio of the ultimate load Qu in order to
make the comparison possible among results from different mechanical characteristics of
concrete and steel of studs. The curve of specimen A1 is compared with some other
results available in literature [1, 10, 11].

5.2 Fatigue tests


For fatigue tests a load controlled procedure was adopted varying the load sinusoidally
between the fixed limits (constant amplitude). Cycle frequency was kept constant during
the test and equal to 1.0 Hz. The peak values of the slip at each cycle were recorded as

1168
well as the entire load-slip curve for a certain number of cycles (1,2,...,10,20,..,etc.), so
to avoid excessive amounts of data. All the tests concern reverse cyclic loading.
The specimens identified with B, C, D refer to a load ratio equal to –0.1, the specimens
E, F, G refer to a load ratio equal to –0.5 and the specimens H, I, L refer to the complete
reverse loading (load ratio equal to –1.0). Moreover, the specimens B, E, H are
subjected to a load range approximately equal to 44% of the static resistance Qu, the
specimens C, F, I to a range of 67% of Qu and the specimens D, G, L to a range close to
88% of Qu. A couple of each specimen type was studied. The details concerning cyclic
loading are summarized in Tab. 1.

Fig. 7 – Comparison of monotonic test results with results in the literature [1,10,11].

Tab. 1 – Fatigue test results.


Spec. Fatigue load Fatigue/static Loading Slip max Fatigue
Ident. Max Min/max max load ratio range first cycle Ultimate life
[kN] [kN] [mm] [mm] [cycles]
B1 43.9 -0.1 0.40 48.3 0.176 3.35 65997
B2 43.9 -0.1 0.40 48.3 0.159 3.02 48532
C1 65.6 -0.1 0.60 72.2 0.125 3.67 3980
C2 65.6 -0.1 0.60 72.2 0.191 3.73 4922
D1 85.4 -0.1 0.78 93.9 0.225 3.81 618
D2 85.4 -0.1 0.78 93.9 0.241 4.26 1019
E1 33.1 -0.5 0.30 49.6 0.120 3.90 91600
E2 33.1 -0.5 0.30 49.6 0.103 3.18 69730
F1 49.5 -0.5 0.45 74.2 0.188 3.90 6452
F2 49.5 -0.5 0.45 74.2 0.170 3.67 8105
G1 64.8 -0.5 0.60 97.2 0.195 3.83 790
G2 64.8 -0.5 0.60 97.2 0.206 4.18 492
H1 27.8 -1.0 0.26 55.6 0.078 1.69 36500
H2 27.8 -1.0 0.26 55.6 0.089 1.89 47133
I1 36.6 -1.0 0.34 73.2 0.116 2.46 2400
I2 36.6 -1.0 0.34 73.2 0.105 2.66 2982
L1 46.5 -1.0 0.43 93.0 0.210 4.07 491
L2 46.5 -1.0 0.43 93.0 0.173 3.79 339

1169
200
Q
∆Q
t

Load range (kN)


100
80
60
Headed studs 19 mm
EC4 fatigue curve
40 Qmin /Qmax = -0.1
Qmin /Qmax = -0.5
Qmin /Qmax = -1.0
20
1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5
Number of cycles

Fig. 8 – Experimental endurance limits compared with the fatigue curve proposed in [5].

4.0
Limits of cyclic slip (mm)

Headed studs 19 mm
3.5 Q /Q = -1.0
min max L1
3.0 smax
2.5 smin I1
2.0
H1
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Cycle ratio

Fig. 9 – Cyclic slip versus cycle ratio for completely reversed cyclic tests.

The fatigue life as well as the maximum slip at first and ultimate cycles are also reported
in Tab. 1. The maximum slip at failure was almost always lower for the smallest loading
range considered, independently to the value of the load ratio. In Fig. 8 the experimental
endurance limits are plotted against the load range. The rhombi, squares and triangles
refer to specimens tested with a load ratio equal to -0.1, -0.5 and -1.0, respectively. The
solid line represents the endurance curve of high-cycle fatigue [5]. It can be noted that
the endurance of specimens with a load range greater than 60% of the static capacity Qu
(spec. C, D, F, G, I, L) is, as expected, notably lower than that predicted by code curve.
Moreover, for greater load ranges the dependence to the load ratio is more pronounced.
The values of the peak slip values at each cycle are plotted in Fig. 9 in function of the
cycle ratio (ratio between current number of cycle and number of cycles at failure), for
specimens H1, I1, L1. In the figure thick lines refer to the maximum slip while thin lines
refer to the minimum slip. Such a plot evidences large variations of the slips with cycles
for specimens I and L due to the significant nonlinear deformations involved in the stud.
For such cases fatigue check need to be based on the strain life approach [8].

1170
6. Concluding remarks

The push-out test do not represents consistently the actual behavior of studs in
composite beams; this inconsistency may influence significantly test results when cyclic
loading are carried out.
The direct shear test proposed was devised in the purpose to correctly represent the
actual stress conditions that characterize the steel-stud-slab system in the composite
beam. The test method allows to perform easily monotonic and cyclic tests operating
either with a load control or a displacement control procedure. The specimen has a
single connector so that the actual load-slip relationship of this stud can be obtained.
Some monotonic and cyclic tests evidenced the reliability of the test method proposed.
Moreover, fatigue tests results showed that for a loading range greater than 60% of the
static resistance the strain life approach has to be used to study the connection fatigue.

7. References

1. Gattesco, N. and Giuriani, E., ‘Experimental Study on Stud Shear Connectors


Subjected to Cyclic Loading’, J. Constr. Steel Res., 38 (1), (1996), 1-21.
2. Slutter, R.G. and Fisher, J.W., ‘Fatigue Strength of Shear Connectors’, Highway
Research Record, 147, (1966).
3. Mainstone, R.J. and Menzies, J.B., ‘Shear Connectors in Steel-Concrete Composite
Beams for Bridges: part 1. Static and Fatigue Tests on Push-Out Specimens’,
Concrete, 1, (1967), 291-302.
4. Oehlers, D.J. and Foley, L., ‘The Fatigue Strength of Stud Shear Connections in
Composite Beams’, Proc. Inst. Civil Eng., Part 2, 79, (1985), 349-364.
5. ENV 1994-2 : 1997, Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete
Structures. Part 2: Bridges, (1996).
6. Taplin, G. and Grundy, P., ‘Incremental Slip of Stud Shear Connectors under
Repeated Loading’, Proceedings of the International Conference – Composite
Construction – Conventional and Innovative, Innsbruck, (1997), 145-150.
7. Leonhardt, F., ‘Critical Remarks on the Testing of Fatigue Strength of Shear Studs
for Composite Girders’, (in German), Bauingenieur, 63, (1988), 307-310.
8. Gattesco, N., Giuriani, E. and Gubana, A., ‘Low-Cycle Fatigue Test on Stud Shear
Connectors’, J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 123 (2), (1997), 145-150.
9. Maeda, Y., Matsui, S. and Hiragi, H., ‘Effect of Concrete Placing Direction on
Static and Fatigue Strengths of Stud Shear Connectors’, Technology Reports of the
Osaka University, 33 (1733), (1983), 397-406.
10. Menzies, J.B., ‘C.P. 117 and Shear Connectors in Steel-Concrete Composite
Beams Made with Normal-Density or Lightweight Concrete’, Struct. Engr., 49 (3),
(1971), 137-154.
11. Johnson, R.P. and Molenstra, N., ‘Partial Shear Connection in Composite Beams
for Buildings’, Proc. Institution Civil Engrs., Part 2, 91, (1991), 679-704.

1171
INNOVATIVE INTERFACE SYSTEMS FOR STEEL-
GIRDERS/CONCRETE-DECK CONNECTION
Maher K. Tadros, Sameh S. Badie, Amgad M. Girgis
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA

Abstract
Shear studs used in composite steel bridge construction are typically 19.1 mm or 22.2
mm in diameter. This paper presents the development and implementation of the 31.8
mm stud diameter. Because the 31.8 mm stud has about twice the strength and higher
fatigue capacity than the 22.2 mm stud, fewer studs are required along the length of the
steel girder. This would increase bridge construction speed and future deck replacement
and reduce the possibility of damage to the studs and girder top flange during deck
removal. Studs also can be placed in one row only, over the web centerline, freeing up
most of the top flange width and improving safety of field workers. This paper provides
information on the development, welding, quality control, and testing of the 31.8 mm
stud. Information on the first bridge built in the state of Nebraska with the 31.8 mm
studs is provided.

1. Introduction

Composite members in bridges consist of a reinforced concrete slab supported on steel


or concrete girders where the two elements act together as a unit under live and
superimposed dead loads. Shear connectors are used to resist the horizontal shear at the
girder-deck interface caused by the superimposed loads. Composite construction is an
economical and efficient way to increase the span, girder spacing, or live load capacity
of a bridge. Girders in composite construction are shallower and lighter than those of
non-composite construction. The headed steel stud system is the most common type of
shear connectors used on steel girders. In this system, headed studs are welded to the top
flange using an arc-welding process. Two sizes of studs, the 19.1 mm and 22.2 mm
diameter, are typically used.

In high shear areas of steel girder bridges, as many as four 22.2 mm diameter studs per
row are used to satisfy design requirements. The relatively high number of studs has

1172
many disadvantages. Among them are: 1) long installation time, 2) difficult deck
removal that may damage the studs as well as the girder top flange, and 3) the
construction workers are left with little room on the top flange to walk, which raises
safety concerns. For these reasons, a girder-to-deck connection that reduces the number
of shear studs could be advantageous. Since a 31.8 mm diameter circle has almost twice
the cross sectional area of a 22.2 mm diameter circle, using a 31.8 mm stud would
reduce the number of studs by 50%.

This paper discuses the development and application of the 31.8 mm diameter stud in
steel girder bridges. This paper covers the following items:
1. Stud welding and quality control programs conducted to establish the most
suitable steel material for the stud and the most economic, efficient way to weld
and test the stud for quality control;
2. Feasibility of applying equations given by the AASHTO Standard Specifications
(1996) [1] and the AASHTO LRFD Specifications (1998) [2] in the design of the
large stud; and
3. A demonstration project, where the 31.8 mm studs were used on a three-span
continuous bridge in Nebraska.

2. Stud Material and Geometry Development

Although the use of 31.8 mm studs is not entirely new (Viest 1956)[3], no convenient
method of stud welding or testing of welding quality of these large studs has been
developed. No evidence also was found in the literature search that this stud size of studs
has been used in bridge applications.

The researchers conducted a search in cooperation with stud manufacturers in order to


find the steel grade that can be used in producing the 31.8 mm stud. The study revealed
that the Society of Automotive Engineering (SAE) 1008 steel, currently used for the 22.2
mm studs, or SAE 1018 steel could be used for the 31.8 mm stud. Table 1 gives a
comparison of the mechanical properties between the SAE 1008 and SAE 1018 steel
grades.

Table 1: Mechanical Properties of SAE 1018 and 1008


Specified minimum properties SAE 1008 SAE 1018
Tensile Strength, Mpa 340 440
Yield strength, Mpa 290 372
Elongation, % 20 15
Reduction in area, % 45 40
Brinell hardness 95 126

1173
Figure 1 shows the dimensions of the
31.8 mm stud. The stud head can be
produced by creating an integral head,
similar to the 19.1 mm and 22.2 mm
studs, using a hot forge process; or by
threading the top part of the stud and
adding a hexagonal nut.

3. Stud Welding Technique

The researchers determined that the arc stud welding process that is currently used in
welding the 19.1 mm and the 22.2 mm studs could be used for the larger stud, because of
its availability, productivity, and familiarity. During this welding process, a controlled
electric arc is used to melt the base of the stud and a portion of the base metal. The stud
is thrust automatically into the molten metal and a high quality fusion weld is produced.

Figure 2: Welding of the 31.8 mm Stud

The "chuck" of the welding gun that grips the stud was
modified to fit the large stud diameter, as shown in
Figure 2. Many welding trials were conducted to
determine the factors that may affect the welding quality.
Three factors were the slope of the stud chamfer; amount
of flux; and power supply. During early welding trials, it
was evident that steeper chamfer and more flux than
those used with the 22.2 mm studs would facilitate the
welding process and lead to high quality welding. Thus,
the 31.8 mm stud was provided with a steep chamfer and
the amount of flux material was tripled compared to that
used with the 22.2 mm studs.

Since the 31.8 mm stud has a larger cross sectional area than the 22.2 mm studs, it was
expected that welding would require a power source with higher amperage. Welding
trials showed that a power source with minimum amperage of 2,400, which is available

1174
from commercial vendors, would produce enough heat to melt the stud base and lead to
good welding quality. Note that welding the 22.2 mm stud usually requires amperage in
the range of 1,800 to 2,000. With the above modifications, excellent welding quality was
achieved.

4. Quality Control

Bridge owners require testing of studs for quality assurance. Most specifications require
that studs welded to the steel girders be bent at a 45o angle without failure at the weld.
The researchers determined that it was not practical to bend the large stud. Thus, they
developed a portable hydraulic jacking system that could be used in the shop or in the
field for testing pairs of studs. The device, shown in Figure 3, consists of two collars
placed around two adjacent studs, a small hydraulic jack and a top tie. The collar
consists of two steel blocks tied together with four screws. By tightening the four
screws, the collar is in full contact with the stud. The base of the collar is chamfered to
accommodate the weld at the stud base. A hydraulic jack is placed between the collars to
provide lateral shearing force at the stud base. The top tie, which consists of two hooks
and a turnbuckle, is used to protect the studs from bending.

Figure 3: Quality Control Setup

The quality control test was conducted


by applying a horizontal force to
cause a tension failure in the stud. The
force was calculated by analyzing the
studs with the top tie as a frame
structure, where the studs are fixed at
the base and hinged at the top. By
equating the principal stresses at the
stud base with the stud yield strength,
a relation between the applied force
and the stud yield strength was
derived. In order to protect the stud
from damage during the quality
control test, an appropriate factor of
safety may be applied.

5. Experimental Program

The experimental program comprised three parts: 1) twenty push-off specimens for
ultimate strength investigation; 2) twenty-five push-off specimens for fatigue resistance
investigation; and 3) one full-scale beam test.

1175
5.1 Ultimate Strength Investigation
Twenty push-off specimens were tested in the ultimate strength investigation. In all
specimens, studs were welded on the top flange of a W-steel beam and a cast-in-place
concrete slab was then poured on top of the steel beam.

Equation 6.10.7.4.4c-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications [2] is used to


determine the ultimate strength for studs. Equation 6.10.7.4.4c-1 is as folow:
Qn=0.5Asc ( f c' Ec ) <= Asc Fu
Where
f c' = specified 28-days compressive srength (MPa)
Asc = cross-sectional area of stud shear connector (mm2)
Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete, (MPa)
Fu = specified minimum tensile strength of astud shear connector, (MPa)

From the ultimate investigation, it has been found that the AASHTO LRFD Equation
6.10.7.4.4c-1 can be safly applied for the designe of the 31.8 mm stude. Also it has been
found that confinement of the concrete around the stud affects the ultimate stud capacity.
A high level of concrete confinement is usually achieved in bridge decks by using
continuous top and bottom transverse reinforcement over the girder lines. This issue is
recognized by the empirical deck design of the AASHTO LRFD Specifications (1998)
[2], which mandates the use of continuous top and bottom transverse reinforcement over
the girder lines.

5.2 Fatigue Resistance Investigation


Twenty-five push-off specimens were tested, eleven specimens were built with 22.2 mm
headed studs and fourteen specimens were built with 31.8 mm headed studs. From the
fatigue investigation, the authors came up with the following equations for the fatigue
stud capacity:
38 2
Zr = Alpha d2 >= d (1)
2
where:
Zr = stud capacity in fatigue
N = number of cycles
Alpha (MPa) = 278.8 – 31.4 Log (N) For the 31.8 mm studs (2)

AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications [2] gives the following equations for fatigue stud
capacity
38 2
Zr = Alpha d2 >= d (3)
2

1176
Where

Alpha (MPa) = 238.0 –29.4 Log (N) (4)

Figure 4 gives a comparison of the Alpha-value between the AASHTO LRFD


Specifications (1998) [2], and the current testing program. From the comparison, the
following conclusions can be drawn

Figure 4: Comparison of the Alpha-values

1. It is conservative to use the Alpha-values given by the AASHTO Specifications to


calculate the allowable range of horizontal shear force for the 31.8 mm.
2. Designers are encouraged to use Equation 2 developed in this research. Using these
equations will reduce the amount of studs by about 30%, which will reduce the
initial cost of a bridge as well as the cost of future deck removal.
3. If Equation 2 is used, it is expected that one row of 31.8 mm studs over the girder-
web location, spaced at 150 mm or more, will be adequate to maintain full
composite action for the majority of bridges. This will ease deck replacement in the
future and will increase safety of the construction workers.
4. Equation 2 for the 31.8 mm studs is perhaps too conservative for stress-range of 110
MPa or less. That is because no failure was observed in this testing program at this
stress range, even after as many cycles as about 7,000,000 cycles.
5. It is recommended to use the 31.8 mm stud with a flange with a minimum thickness
of 12 mm.

5.3 Full-Scale Beam Test


A full-scale beam was tested to evaluate the performance of 31.8 mm studs in a flexural
beam test. A 12.2 m long W36x160 rolled section, with alternate headed and headless
31.8 mm shear studs spaced at 152.4 mm, were used in the test. A 1.22-m wide and 203-
mm thick concrete deck was placed on the top of the girder. The beam was tested in

1177
fatigue for 4,800,000 cycles under HS-25 truck loading positioned at the critical shear
section as specified by AASHTO Specifications. The truck load was then moved to the
midspan section and run for another 4,800,000 cycles. Figure 5 shows the test setup of
the beam.

Figure 5: Full-Scale Beam Test

Slippage between the concrete deck and the steel beam


is given in Table 2, where the maximum slippage was as
0.049 mm Linear stress distribution over the beam
height due to live load was observed before and after
applying the fatigue load. Fatigue testing showed no
loss of composite action between the concrete deck and
the steel beam or distress in the concrete deck due to the
use of 31.8 mm studs. The researchers could not test this
beam to failure because of the limited capacity of the
structural floor of the laboratory. For more information,
please refer to Kakish (1997) [4].

Table2: Slippage Measurements of the Full-Scale Beam Test


Slippage at Slippage at
Load position Cycles x 106 Section #1 Section #2
Mm mm
Zero 0.0370 0.0152
Section #1:
1.76 0.0389 0.0153
Shear Critical Section
4.80 0.0494 0.0206
Section #2:
4.80 0.03971 0.0206
Midspan Section

6. Demonstration Project

The Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR) assigned a three-span continuous bridge in


western Nebraska to implement the 31.8 mm stud. The bridge, on Highway 71 in Gering
South, Nebraska, consists of three continuous spans of 13.7, 18.28, and 13.7 m. The
cross section of the bridge consists of five W30x99 rolled steel girders spaced at 2.67 m
supporting a 190 mm thick cast-in-place composite slab. Total width of the bridge is
12.60 m.

Preliminary design of the composite action included three 22.2 mm studs per row at
spacing from 254 to 407 mm. NDOR decided to use the 31.8 mm studs on the South

1178
span, and 22.2 mm studs on the center and North span. This arrangement was chosen to
give NDOR the opportunity to compare the structural performance of the 22.2 mm and
31.8 mm studs. After letting the project, NDOR called for a change order from 22.2 mm
studs on the other exterior span to 31.8 mm studs. Use of the 31.8 mm studs resulted in
using one stud per row welded directly over the girder web with spacing from 177 to 254
mm.

Tri-Sales Associates, Omaha, Nebraska, produced the 31.8 mm studs the steel fabricator,
Capital Contractors, welded them in their shop. An electric source of 2,500 Amps was
used in welding the studs. Welding of the studs on the steel girders proceeded at a rate of
40 seconds per stud without any problems. The quality control test previously described
before was conducted at three locations of each girder. Even though a factor of safety of
one was used in the quality control test, no welding failure was observed in the quality
control test. Figure 11 shows the 31.8 mm studs after welding.

Since this was the first time the 31.8 mm studs were used in bridges, and since the
fatigue investigation was underway when the bridge was being constructed, NDOR’s
bridge designers decided to use only headed studs and to add a washer to the stud
assembly. The washer was 4.8 mm thick with an outside diameter of 76 mm, and was
tack welded to the stud head. It was added to the stud assembly to ensure sufficient
confinement of the concrete around the stud. However, upon completion of the fatigue
resistance investigation, it was evident that providing continuous top and bottom
reinforcement in the deck slab can provide adequate confinement to the concrete. Thus,
the researchers have advised NDOR not to add the washer to the stud in future projects.

Figure 6 The 31.8 Stud after Welded on the Girder

Figure 6 shows the steel girders with 31.8


mm studs installed in the field. The bridge
construction was completed in the fall of
1999. The researchers and NDOR designers
took deflection measurements of the bridge
using a three-axle dump truck. Deflection
measurements were taken at the maximum
positive moment section of the center girder
of the exterior spans. Both exterior spans
showed the same amount of deflection, 3

1179
mm. Visual inspection of the bridge deck showed no cracks or distress on the South span
where the 31.8 mm were used. The bridge contractor commented that using one line of
studs provided the construction crew with a higher level of safety during deck
construction. He also noted that welding the studs in the steel fabricator shop increased
the construction speed and produced high welding quality for the studs. The bridge was
opened to traffic in August 2000.

Figure 7 Steel Girders with the 31.8 mm Studs installed in the Field

7. Conclusions

This paper presents the development and application of 31.8 mm studs to steel girder
bridges. The new stud has almost double the cross sectional area of the 22.2 mm stud. It
can be produced using 31.8 mm SAE 1008 or 1018 rods that are commercially available
and can be produced as headless or forged headed studs. The research showed that arc
stud welding current practice, used in welding 19.1 mm and 22.2 mm studs, can be used
in welding the proposed stud. However, a 2,400 minimum Amperage is recommended
for welding. The quality of stud welding can be checked by shearing off two adjacent
studs using a small hydraulic jack.

Use of the 31.8 mm studs will significantly reduce the number of studs needed to
achieve full composite action with the concrete deck. This will increase construction
speed, ease deck replacement and reduce the possibility of damaging studs and girder
top flange during deck removal. It also will enhance the safety factor for construction
workers because more space on the steel top flange will be available for the construction
workers.

The ultimate strength testing program of the proposed stud showed that: 1) stud capacity
can be safely determined using the equation given in the AASHTO LRFD Specifications
(1998); 2) prior cyclic loading up to 2,000,000 cycles has no detrimental effect on the
stud capacity; and 3) a composite member built with the proposed stud has less slippage
than that of a member built with 22.2 mm studs.

1180
Fatigue testing showed that current α-values included in the AASHTO Standard
(1996)[1] and AASHTO LRFD Specifications (1998)[2] can be conservatively used with
31.8 mm stud. However, the designers are encouraged to use the α-values developed in
this research. This will reduce the number of studs by about 30% compared to the
AASHTO Specifications. It is also recommended to weld the 31.8 mm stud on steel
plates that are thicker than 12.7 mm.

The full-scale beam test showed that full composite action could be achieve even up to
4,800,000 cycles. Also, it showed that using alternate headed and headless 31.8 mm
(22.2 mm) studs has no harmful effect on the slippage or deflection of the beam. Further
research is warranted for using only headless 31.8 mm stud.

8. Acknowledgments

The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 12-41 titled “Rapid
Replacement of Bridge Decks” and Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR) Project
SPR-PL-1(35)P516 titled “I-Girder/Deck Connection for Efficient Deck Replacement.”
Additional support was provided by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Center for
Infrastructure Research, Kiewit Construction Company and HDR Engineering Inc.

Special thanks goes to Hussam F. Kakish, Darin L. Splittgerber, Mantu C. Baishya,


University of Nebraska for their help in conducting the testing program.

9. References

1. AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges (1996), 16th Edition,


American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, with 1997,
1998, 1999 Interims, Washington D.C.
2. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (1998), 2nd Edn, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington D.C.
3. Viest, I. M., ‘Investigation of Stud Shear Connectors for Composite Concrete and
Steel T-Beams’, Journal of the American Concrete Institute, (1956) 875-89.
4. Kakish, H. F., ‘Composite Action in Bridge I-Girder Systems’, Dissertation
presented to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the University of Nebraska in
Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy,
Nebraska. (1997).

1181
NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS OF STEEL-CONCRETE
COMPOSITE BEAMS: A FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Ciro Faella*, Enzo Martinelli* and Emidio Nigro*


* Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Università di Salerno, Fisciano (SA), Italy

Abstract
In the scientific literature several models devoted to non-linear analysis of steel-concrete
composite beams are already available. Utilising finite element models generally based
on classical displacement approach, some problems may occur, as relevant
discontinuities in the nodal forces, especially when non-linear behaviour of both shear
connection and structural materials are considered. In this case the necessity of very fine
discretization of the structural members arises.
In the present paper a different non-linear procedure is proposed, based on a finite
element model derived by the extension of the “exact” solution of the Newmark’s model
to the composite beam with mechanical characteristics variable along the axis. A
“modified Newton-Raphson approach” is used to achieve the convergence considering
also the non-linearity of shear connection, concrete and steel.
Some comparisons with other numerical procedures and experimental results, both
available in the scientific literature, are also proposed and, finally, a brief discussion on
the solution convergence varying the number and the types of beam-element subdivision
is reported, in order to point out the effectiveness of the proposed procedure.

1. Introduction

The behaviour of steel-concrete composite beams at serviceability and ultimate states


depends on the shear connection between steel profile and concrete slab, which
influences both the distribution of the internal stresses over the cross-section and the
distribution of the internal forces in statically indeterminate beams.
Several finite element models denounce some problems concerning discontinuities in the
internal forces, due to the assumption of usual shape functions, as remarked also in [1] and [2].
The proposed finite element model takes its advantage by starting from an “exact” elastic
finite element, based on the solution of the Newmark’s differential equation [3]. The
elastic finite element model has been extended in [4] in order to introduce both the non-

1185
linear behaviour of the shear connection between concrete slab and steel profile and the
cracking of the concrete slab: so the important topic of the assessment of the beam
deflections due to service loads has been widely investigated.
In the present paper this finite element model is rearranged in order to consider also the non-
linear behaviour of the materials (steel and concrete) and to reduce the number of elements
per beam, as it is useful in the analysis of complex structures: the aim is to utilise up to a
single element per member considering all the non-linearities without lack of accuracy.
Each element is characterised by mechanical properties variable along the axis, due to
the non-linearity of the shear connection, concrete slab and steel beam properties (see
pars. 3 and 4).
The solution of the whole mechanical problem is reached iteratively, by means of a
procedure similar to the “modified Newton-Raphson Approach”, as described in par. 2.

2. A non-linear procedure for the analysis of steel-concrete composite beams


with flexible shear connection: description of the general algorithm

The general solution procedure is within the displacement approach, based on the
knowledge of the stiffness matrix and the vector of the equivalent nodal forces of the
structure. Due to the various mechanical non-linearities, the mathematical problem may
be written in the “pseudo-linear” form
K (s) ⋅ s = Q − Q 0 (s) , (1)
where the stiffness matrix K (s) and the vector Q 0 (s) depend on the internal forces over
the element and hence on the actual displacements s, still unknown.
The solution procedure is obviously iterative and two level of iterations may be
distinguished:
- external iteration: it regards the whole structure and allows to evaluate the
increments of nodal displacements due to the un-balanced residual nodal forces
deriving by previous iteration;
- internal iteration: for each element it allows to evaluate the nodal forces which
correspond in the non-linear field to the current nodal displacements by means of the
stiffness matrix of the element.
With regard to the external iteration, applying the “modified Newton-Raphson
Approach”, for a single load step, the total displacements s of the structure is obtained
iteratively by the superposition of several increments of displacement due to the un-
balanced residual nodal forces R i−1 , each deriving by the previous iteration (Fig. 1a):

R i −1 = Q − Q i(−NL )
1 ,
(2)

s i = s i−1 + ∆s i−1 = s i−1 + K −1R i−1 , (3)

1186
( NL)
In the previous formulas the vector Q i− 1 contains the nodal forces which correspond
to the prescribed displacement s i −1 taking account of the non-linear behaviour of the
structural members, while K is the initial tangent stiffness matrix of the whole structure.
The convergence of the iterative procedure, especially for load levels which lead to wide
non-linear behaviour of the structure, may be improved if the stiffness matrix K, utilised
in (3) for the iterations of the generic load level, is updated at the end of the iterations of
the previous load step (Fig. 1b).

R(s) R(s)
∆s1 ∆si-1
Q3
Q
Ri-1
Q(NL)i-1
R2 ∆Q2
R1
Q(NL)i Q2

∆Q1

Q1

K1 K3

s1 s2 si-1 si sn s K1 K2 sn s

Fig. 1a,b: Modified Newton-Raphson Approach

Mi Mj
i j
Fi Fj
Ti Tj

si

vi sj
ϕi vj
i j

ϕj

Fig. 2: Nodal forces and displacements of composite beam with flexible shear-connection.

For a steel-concrete composite beam-element with flexible shear-connection (see Fig. 2),
the vectors of nodal displacements and nodal forces are respectively
s h = ( v i ϕi s i v j ϕ j s j ) T and Q h = (Ti M i Fi T j M j Fj ) T . The vector of nodal

forces Q ( NL) of the whole structure is obtained assembling the vectors of nodal forces of
each h-th element, Q h , which correspond in non-linear field to the current nodal
displacements s h by means of the stiffness matrix K h of the element:

1187
Q h = K h s h + Q 0, h (4)
being Q 0,h the vector of the equivalent nodal forces of the h-th element. The evaluation
of the nodal forces Q h of each element is iterative (internal iteration): at each step of
the iterations, K h and Q 0,h vary due to non-linear behaviour of the component
materials and shear connection. This topic is explained in the following paragraphs.

3. The element “composite beam with flexible shear connection” with


mechanical characteristics variable along the beam

The non-linear σ−ε constitutive laws of concrete and steel, the cracking of the concrete
in tension and the non-linear relationship P-s of the shear connection between the
concrete slab and the steel profile are introduced in an internal procedure, which utilises
the subdivision in segments of the beam-element, each part having mechanical
characteristics depending on the current internal forces.
As previously said, for a steel-concrete composite beam with flexible shear-connection
(see Fig. 2), the vectors of nodal displacements and nodal forces are respectively:
(
s h = v i ϕi s i v j ϕ j s j )T , (
Q h = Ti M i Fi T j M j Fj )T (5)
In respect of usual beams, a composite beam with flexible shear-connection is
characterised by interface slips s(z) between concrete slab and steel profile, related to the
longitudinal shear force per unit length F′(z):
F′(z) = k (z ) ⋅ s(z) (6)
The presence of interface slips prevents from defining a moment-curvature relationship
of the cross-section: instead of express it by algebraic relations, as it is usual for
Bernoulli’s beam, it is possible to derive the curvatures along the beam solving the well-
known Newmark’s differential equation [3]:
q M k ⋅ d ⋅ ε sh
χ′′ − α 2 χ = − − α2 − (7)
EI abs EI full EI abs
being
kd 2 EI full
α2 = (8)
EI full − EI abs EI abs
where k is the shear connection stiffness, EIfull and EIabs are the two values of the
flexural stiffness evaluated for full and absent shear connection, respectively, d is the
distance between concrete slab and steel profile centroids. Obviously, in presence of
non-linear behaviour, the stiffness parameters EI abs , EI full , k and α are variable along
the beam-element and then equation (7) may be utilised to obtain the curvature in a finite
number of segments, in which the beam-element is subdivided, by solving algebraically
the problem (7).

1188
The h-th beam-element is subdivided in n segments, each one characterised by the
stiffness parameters k k (shear connection stiffness), EI abs,k (flexural stiffness with
absent shear connection), EI full,k (flexural stiffness with full shear connection), being
k=1,…,n . For a simply-supported beam with prescribed values of nodal forces and
external loads, the curvature along the whole beam is assessed on the basis of the local
expressions of the curvatures χ k (z k ) , being z k the local abscissa (see Fig. 3)
χ k (z k ) = C 2k −1 ⋅ cosh (α k z k ) + C 2k ⋅ sinh (α k z k ) + χ 0,k (z k ) (9)
The 2n constants (C 2k −1 , C 2k ) k =1,...,n are determined solving a system of 2n linear
equation, derived imposing the following boundary conditions at the external nodes of
the beam-element and at the internal points between the segments:
z=0 ⇒ F1 (0 ) = −Fi
F (∆z ) = Fk +1 (0)
z = k∆z ⇒  k
s k (∆z ) = s k +1 (0 )
(10)

z=L ⇒ Fn (∆z ) = Fj
In (10) Fi and Fj are the external nodal forces of the beam-element, while the local
values of the longitudinal shear force Fk (z k ) and the interface slip s k (z k ) are related
to the curvature χ k (z k ) by means of the following formulas:
M(z k ) − χ k (z k ) ⋅ EI abs,k
Fk (z k ) =
d
d  M(z k ) − χ k (z k ) ⋅ EI abs,k 
(11)
Fk′
s k (z k ) =
1
= ⋅  
kk k k dz k  d 

Mi Mj
1 2 k n-1 n

Fi 0 1 2 n-2 n-1 n Fj
i z ∆z zk j

si sj
ϕi
ϕj

Fig. 3: Subdivision of the beam-element in n segments with different mechanical characteristics

1189
As the constants {C m }m=1,...,2n and the curvatures χ k (z k ) are known, the nodal
displacements (rotations and interface slips) at the end of the beam-element are deduced
by means of the following formulas:
n ∆z
 (k − 1) ⋅ ∆z + z k  ⋅ dz
ϕi = − ∑ ∫ χ k (z k ) ⋅ 1 − L


k , s i = s1 (0 ) (12)
k =1 0

n ∆z
(k − 1) ⋅ ∆z + z k
ϕj = ∑ ∫ χ k (z k ) ⋅ L
⋅ dz k , s j = s n (∆z ) (13)
k =1 0

being the interface slips obtained directly by the second of (11), whereas the rotations
are deduced applying the Principle of Virtual Works.
The previously described procedure may be utilised also in order to determine, for a
beam-element with mechanical characteristics variable along the axis, the reduced 4×4
flexibility matrix D h ,r , which relates the vector of the nodal displacements
s h , r = (ϕi s i ϕ j s j ) T with the vector of nodal forces Q h , r = (M i Fi M j Fj ) T :

s h , r = D h , r ⋅ Q h , r + s 0, h , r (14)
being s 0,h ,r the vector of the nodal displacement due to the external loads.
In fact, each column of the D h ,r matrix may be deduced by applying to the beam the
corresponding set of nodal forces, with one force equal to 1 and the others equal to 0,
solving the equation system (10) and evaluating the nodal displacement by means of (12)
and (13). In a similar way the terms of the vector s 0,h ,r , due to the external loads, may
be also determined. By inverting the reduced flexibility matrix D h ,r , the reduced 4×4
stiffness matrix of the simply-supported beam K h ,r and the 4×1 vector of equivalent
nodal forces Q 0,h ,r may be obtained:

( )
Q 0, h , r = − D h , r −1 ⋅ s 0, h , r = −K h , r ⋅ s 0, h , r (15)
The stiffness matrix K h and the vector Q 0,h of the beam-element with three degree of
freedom per joint may be easily deduced, as explained in [3].

4. “Internal iterations” for each composite beam-element in non-linear field

As previously said, the internal iterations allow to determine, for each beam-element,
the nodal forces Q h which correspond in non-linear field to the current nodal
displacements (see eq. (4)).
With this aim, the previously described solution of the simply-supported composite beam
with stiffness characteristics variable along the axis may be utilised.

1190
Starting from the current nodal forces, evaluated applying (4) and utilising the current
K h and Q 0,h , the solution of equation system (10) allows to known the curvatures
χ k (z k ) , the longitudinal shear forces Fk (z k ) and the interface slips s k (z k ) , whose
values at midpoint of each segment are:
χ k = χ k (∆z 2) ; Fk = Fk (∆z 2) ; s k = s k (∆z 2) (16)
The equivalent mechanical characteristics are assessed on the base of the non-linear
constitutive relationships for each segment.
With regard to the shear connection, assuming a P−s law (longitudinal shear force-
interface slip), as suggested by Johnson and Molenstra ([5])

(
P(s) = Pmax 1 − e −β c s )
αc
(17)
the equivalent stiffness of the shear connection is defined as

kk =
P( sk ) Pmax
i c sk
=
i c sk
(
1 − e −β c s k
αc
) (18)

being i c the distance between the shear connectors, α c and βc two constants depending
on the type of the connectors.
Moreover, in order to evaluate the equivalent stiffness parameters EI abs,k ed EI full,k of
the k-th segment, the axial strains ε c,k ed ε a ,k in concrete slab and steel profile are
evaluated on the basis of the current values of the axial stiffness EA c,k ed EA a ,k

Fk Fk
ε c, k = ; ε a ,k = (19)
EA c,k EA a ,k
and then the strain path of the midpoint cross-section of the segment may be determined
utilising also the curvature χ k (see Fig. 4).
For the σ−ε constitutive relationships of the materials (see Fig. 5) the Saenz’s law for
concrete in compression and an elastic-plastic-hardening law for steel are assumed. A non-
linear relationship for concrete in tension, whose softening branch takes account of tension
stiffening effect, is also considered.

εc,m

dc s'
x
da εa,m
y
εay

fay
Fig. 4: Stress and strain paths along the cross-section

1191
Utilising the σ−ε relationships, the stress paths are immediately deduced starting from the
strain ones; hence, the resulting internal forces ( N c,k , N a , k ) and bending moments
( M c,k , M a ,k ) may be assessed by means of the usual equilibrium equations.
The equivalent mechanical characteristics of the concrete and steel components related
to the current internal forces hold:
N c,k N a ,k
E A c, k = , E A a ,k =
ε c, k ε a ,k
(20)
M c, k M a ,k
E I c, k = , EI a ,k =
χk χk
which allow to define the secant flexural stiffness EI abs,k and EI full,k of the k-th
segment of the composite beam:
E A c, k ⋅ E A a , k
EI abs, k = EI c, k + EI a , k , EI full, k = E I c, k + E I a , k + d2 (21)
E A c, k + E A a , k
The values of the secant flexural stiffness of the segments allow to define the stiffness
matrix K h and the vector Q 0,h of the beam-element applying the method described in
the previous paragraph; hence, the nodal forces Q h , taking account of the non-linear
behaviour, may be deduced by (4).
The internal iterations in each beam-element are stopped when the nodal forces Q h ,
corresponding to the prescribed displacements s h , do not differ, unless a little tolerance,
by the ones of the previous iteration.
45
fc 40 σa
35
30
25 σu
20
σy
15 Esh
10
5
εc1=0,0022 εcu=0,0035
0
-0,002 -0,001 -50,000 0,001 0,002 0,003 0,004
E
-10

εy εsh εu εa
Fig. 5: Constitutive relationships of concrete and steel

5. Some comparisons with numerical analyses and experimental results


and discussion about the convergence

The non-linear procedure described in the previous paragraphs is now compared with
other theoretical procedures and available experimental tests.

1192
The first comparisons refer to two simply-supported beams with two different degrees of
shear connection ( N / N f = 1.0 and 0.55), subjected to a midspan concentrated force and
analysed by Aribert and Labib in [6]. With regard to Fig. 6a,b, it may be observed that
the agreement between the two numerical procedure is good, both for low load levels
and in non-linear field.
Moreover, some theoretical-experimental comparisons are performed with the
experimental results provided by Ansourian in [7], which refer to two-spans continuous
beam loaded by concentrated forces applied at midspan: also in this case a good
agreement may be observed. Fig. 7a shows also the influence of the beam subdivision, as
well as the number n of segments per element, on the result accuracy. The represented
load−deflection curves are obtained dividing each span in two elements (N=2), as it is
necessary due to the concentrated force applied at midspan, and assuming different
segment subdivisions for each beam-element (n = 3,4,5,6). It may be observed that the
experimental results are well fitted with a number n = 5 or 6; moreover, the numerical
results do not change significantly when the number of internal subdivisions is greater
than 6.
400 400

350 350

300 P 300

P
250 250
P [kN]

200
P [kN]

200
N/Nf=1.0
150 150
Proposed simulation N/Nf=0.55
100 100
Aribert-Labib [1982] Proposed simulation
50 50
Aribert-Labib [1982]
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
f [mm] f [mm]

Fig. 6a,b: Comparisons with theoretical analyses of Aribert and Labib ([6]).
600 500

400

400
Ansourian [1982] Ansourian [1982]
300
F [kN]
F [kN]

Beam CTB4 Beam CTB4


Experimental
200 N=2 n=6
3
200
4 N=4 n=3
5
n
100 N=12 n=1
6
Experimental
0 0
0 20 f [mm] 40 60 0 5 10 f [mm] 15 20 25

Fig. 7a,b: Comparison with experimental tests of Ansourian ([7]) and influence of the
beam subdivision (number of segments per element)

1193
Finally in Fig. 7b different types of “external subdivision” of the beam are compared: the
cases (N=2 , n=6) , (N=4 , n=3) and (N=12 , n=1) for each span are considered, all
characterised by the same number of “total parts”. The obtained results, deriving from
different discretizations, are quite coincident, but the total dimension of the
mathematical problem is significantly different: this leads to an increment of the
computing time about 50% in the third case with respect to the first one. Therefore, it
may be remarked that the proposed solution of subdividing the beam-element in internal
segments represents an useful tool.

6. Conclusions

In the paper a non-linear procedure able to analyse steel-concrete composite beams with
flexible shear connection is proposed. The model starts from the an “exact” finite
element model, previously presented by the authors, and allows to avoid also in non-
linear field the discontinuity of the nodal forces, which classical finite element models
based on displacement approach denounce.
The proposed model takes into account the non-linearity of the shear connection and of
the component materials in a finite number of segments, which each beam-element is
subdivided in: in such a way the global problem is characterised by a reduced number of
unknown nodal displacements. This represents an useful result when structures with a
large number of joints have to be analysed in non-linear field.

References
[1] Ayoub A., Filippou F.C.: Mixed Formulation of Nonlinear Steel-Concrete
Composite Beam-element, A.S.C.E. J. Struct. Eng., 2000, vol.126, n. 3, pp.371-381;
[2] Reza Salari M., Spacone E., Benson Shing P., Frangopol D.M. (1998): Nonlinear
Analysis of Composite Beams with Deformable Shear Connectors, A.S.C.E. J.
Struct. Eng., vol. 124, n. 10, 1148-1158;
[3] Faella C., Consalvo V., Nigro E.: An “Exact” Finite Element Model for the Linear
Analysis of Continuous Composite Beams with Flexible Shear Connections, Fourth
International Conference on Steel and Aluminium Structures, ICSAS ’99, Espoo,
Finland, June 20-23 1999, pp.761-770;
[4] Faella C., Martinelli E., Nigro E.: Inflessione di travi composte acciaio-calcestruzzo
con connessione deformabile: proposta di una formulazione semplificata, IV
Workshop Italiano sulle Strutture Composte, Palermo, 23-24 novembre 2000;
[5] Johnson R.P., Molenstra I.N.: Partial shear connection in composite beams for
buildings, Proc. of the Institutions Civil Engineers, Part 2, 1991, 91, Dec., pp.679-704;
[6] Aribert J.M., Labib A.G.: Modèle de calcul élasto-plastique de poutre mixtes a
connexion partielle, Costrution Métallique, n°4, 1982, pp.3-51;
[7] Ansourian, P.: Experiments on continuous composite beams, Proc. of the
Institutions Civil Engineers, Part 2, 1981, 71, Dec. pp.25-51;
[8] Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete structures - Part 1: General
rules and rules for buildings , 1994.
Acknowledgements: This work has been partially supported by Research Grant PRIN 1999

1194
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
BRIDGE DECKS AND COMPOSITE BRIDGE DECKS –
HYBRID CONSTRUCTION
Dirk Jankowski*, Oliver Fischer**, Manfred Matthes**
*AJG Ingenieure GmbH – Abelein Jankowski Gebbeken, Consulting Engineers
BYIK,VBI, Munich / Germany
**Engineering Department, Bilfinger + Berger Bauaktiengesellschaft, Munich /
Germany

Abstract
Bridges that can be constructed with prestressed concrete decks economically might lead
to difficulties in some spans. These difficulties for example can be river-crossings. Here
the question arises what is the best concept for the superstructure. The rigid connection
between prestressed concrete bridge decks and composite bridge decks lead to economi-
cal solutions. Two applications are given:

The new Isarbridge in Dingolfing/Bavaria shows the combination of prestressed con-


crete bridge decks in the approaches and composite bridge decks in the river area. In the
approach-parts the decks are constructed with prefabricated pc-beams and the plate
structure is cast in place. The longer spans are built as composite constructions. For the
plate structure of the composite part semi-prefabricated concrete elements are used.

While the Isarbridge is a beam bridge in both parts of the decks the river Donaubridge in
Vilshofen/Bavaria connects prestressed concrete bridge decks with an arch bridge deck
in the middle span.

The topics of this article are the special problems in the connection zone.

1. Introduction

Trend setting constructioning is increasingly ruled by the optimised choice of materials


according to the structural necessities. Moreover, the designing engineer has the advan-
tage to use the achievements of research and development of recent years. This gives the
opportunity to assemble new materials, improved material properties, and optimised
connectors to newly formed structural elements. This is helped by the growing together
of German and also European code regulations for the different materials. In the follow-
ing, "hybrid structures" are explained by applications in the field of bridge construc-

1195
tioning using different materials and systems. Besides the description of the general
applicabilities in bridge construction, examples of constructions are given.

2. Intensions and effects of hybrid constructions

The basic idea of hybrid constructions is the appropriation of occurring stresses to suit-
able structural material. Hence, the conventional approach in engineering applies cheap
concrete for compressive stresses, whereas for tensile stresses steel is used. The com-
posite steel-concrete is the best example in this context. In particular for the development
of the double composite the stress distribution is obvious.

Extending this approach to the whole structure suggests a combination of different


structural systems. Especially in bridge constructioning the design is chosen to build the
whole superstructure with the same system. So, for short and medium spans the rein-
forced or prestressed concrete is preferred, whereas for long spans steel constructions or
composite steel-concrete is used. In the case of largely varying spans or because of other
limiting conditions, such as river crossings and approaches, or for distribution of loads
the combination of reinforced and prestressed concrete with steel or composite structures
is conceivable. Some structures even become practicable only by applying hybrid sys-
tems. Furthermore, due to the optimisation process these structures are highly cost effi-
cient.

3. Choice of applications in bridge constructioning

The commonly used connectors between steel and concrete are headed studs. They are,
in particular for bridge constructioning, used to transmit shear forces only. This way of
stress transmission is used for the linking of steel and concrete.

Figure 1 shows one example of such a connecting part. Here, top and bottom flange, and
web of the steel beam are equipped with headed studs in a way that load transmission is
possible for the appropriate forces (tension, compression, shear). Special treatment is
necessary to transfer the stresses within the concrete. Therefore appropriate reinforce-
ment is required. This demands for a careful spatial reinforcement design, since the high
reinforcement ratio for different kinds of reinforcement in different directions needs tight
fitting.

New developments in composite construction - like the connectors given in Eurocode 4


and e. g. perfobond strips - may yield better solutions for design details of this kind.

Another question by joining several elements is the choice of coupling points. Generally,
there are two main possibilities, first the coupling with cross beams at the support points
and second in the zone of zero bending moments. The coupling by transverse beams
gives the opportunity to use nearly any kind of structural elements and cross sections.

1196
Most suitable are open cross sections and plate structures as well as prefabricated con-
crete elements. The coupling at the zones of zero bending moments is suggested for
prestressed box girders. Thereby, longitudinal tensional forces are taken over by
prestressing tendons. Especially with unbonded external post-tensioning this construc-
tion is advantageous because no cross sectional areas are intersected.

Figure 1: Coupling point at the cross beam

4. Examples of applications

The application of hybrid structures in the way of combining prestressed concrete with
concrete-steel composite is explained by examples of the bridge over the river Isar in
Dingolfing and the Donau crossing in Vilshofen.

4.1 Isarbridge Dingolfing


The bridge was built in 1999 and 2000 as a part of the newly planed eastern by-pass of
the small city of Dingolfing over the meadows of the river Isar and the river itself. The
road has a standard 11.5 m wide two-lane cross-section (RQ 11,5). The height over the
terrain is relatively low and the outline is mostly straight with a slight curvature to the
right at the southern end. The structure is a nine-span continuous beam designed as deck
bridge with the length of 296 m.

1197
The specified design in the invitation to bid suggested spans between 25 m and 46 m
with a box girder at a constant depth of 2.30 m. This should have been longitudinal
prestressed either by post-tensioned internal tendons or alternatively by external tendons.
The substructure was conceived as piled panels and shallow founded box piers.

Figures 2 and 3: Views of the Isarbridge Dingolfing

During the tender preparation, the design concept with its rigid superstructure, governed
by only one span length of 46 m, was considered to be uneconomical. In addition, the
superstructure would have been built on false work in sections with a large number of
coupling points. Thereby, the crossing of the river would have been most complicated.
The search for a together economic and pleasing design lead to a combination of two
multiple side spans made of prefabricated prestressed girders supported by pairs of round
columns and steel composite beams used for the two spans over the river. All sections
were connected to assure a continuous spanning beam. The different surface and colour
design of the two river spans emphasise their technical and geometrical characteristics.

The special location of the middle pier is especially outlined by the increasing construc-
tion height to 2.30 m from 1.70 m at standard cross section. This greater depth is benefi-
cial for structural purpose too, after all during construction as it functions as a two-span
beam. Further, the installation of the concrete bottom plate over the middle pier (double
composite) was another advantageous application of hybrid design. The choice of steel
in sectional change with prestressed concrete made it possible to extend the structure
harmonically over the river, even though the length of the spans enlarged to 42 m.

Moreover, the assembly of the girders was possible with cranes located at the riverbanks.
The economical usage of steel composite structures - especially in exchange with con-
ventional cross sections of reinforced and prestressed concrete - is met by the permissi-
bility of prefabricated form plates according to the "Allgemeines Rundschreiben
Straßenbau Nr. 42/1998" (ARS 42/1998, German circular for road constructioning),
because it avoids expensive formwork systems or formwork carriers. Here, the 10 cm
thick form plates overhang on both sides and are statically efficient with its full cross
section in transverse direction. To resist the compression stress in longitudinal direction

1198
mainly the 23 cm thick in-situ concrete is supplemented. The bonding results from
headed studs of 175 mm length and a diameter of 22 mm, which are concentrated in gaps
of the form plates.

Figure 4: Coupling point of steel girder Figure 5: View into the cross beam

The rigid connection of the two-span steel composite structure to the side spans formed
from prestressed concrete was desired out of the following reasons:

- statical relieving of the long spans


- avoiding of additional joint constructions
- horizontal connection of the whole superstructure whose longitudinal fixed bearings
are located at the middle piers.

The cross beams on top of the bank piers are the transition zones between the different
structural systems. These beams are design purely of reinforced concrete and consist of a
35 cm thick prefabricated base whereon the prestressed prefabricated beams as well as
the longitudinal steel girders during the construction process were placed. The webs of
the cross beams where the load is mostly transmitted were filled with concrete after-
wards. Parallel to the hardening of the concrete the statical connection is established
continuously. This makes the time of concreting become most relevant. For this con-
struction the cross beams were formed when the deck slab of the side spans had nearly
reached the coupling cross beams, whereas on top of the formwork girders only form-
work panels where placed. The connection of the structural elements before pouring the

1199
in-situ concrete in the river spans lead to a release of the steel beams due to partially
fixed-ends. Therefore, smaller cross sections could be used. For compensation of the
fixed-end moments the resistance to the tensional forces needed to be assured structur-
ally.

Figures 6 and 7: Coupling of cross beam with load transmission plate

The tensional forces were transferred via horizontal blades with headed studs to the cross
beams on the level of the top flange. There, reinforcement loops take the load within the
deck slab. To take effect early, not only the webs of the cross beams were filled with
concrete, but also a 2 m long slab strip with included support reinforcement was con-
creted. The compressional forces were treated alike with bottom blades and headed
studs. Shear was taken by vertical plates in extension of the webs. The additional in-situ
concrete affects the nine-span continuous beam structure without composite action,
whereas service loads, live loads, and compulsion act on the final composite structure.

4.2 Donaucrossing in Vilshofen


Another example for the combination of post-tensioning and composite action is the
newly built bridge over the river Donau near Vilshofen, Germany.

After the expansion of the clearance width for ships from now 49 m to 90 m, a renewal
of the existing eight-span road bridge including the demolition of two piers in the river
(reduced number of spans) was announced. According to the design concept provided by
the client the existing deck bridge, an orthotrope steel structure built in 1978, was apriori
slided transversely to auxiliary supports. This enabled a continuous traffic crossing over
the river during construction time. The design suggested a steel arch structure for the
large span with a length of 116 m. It was further intended to rigidly connect the new
composite steel superstructure to the south approach with two short spans of 25,80 m.

1200
Figures 8 and 9: Models of the Donau crossing in Vilshofen [1]

To the north of the steel arch an existing part, despite of its smaller width, was meant to
be redesigned as a three-span structure and connected by an expansion joint. It should
have been moved back to almost its initial location. And again, an alternative tender pro-
posal, introduced by Bilfinger+Berger Bauaktiengesellschaft, with hybrid constructions
was less costly and finally built.

Starting with the new large middle span with its 15° inclined double steel arch and a
hanging composite steel roadway, the northern as well as the southern post-tensioned
concrete parts were rigidly joint to the roadway slab of the arch. Despite of the aban-
donment of 800 m² of existing bridge area with its restricted width and the instead newly
built 1100 m² area bridge deck, the design of the structure outside the arch with precast
prestressed girders proofed to be very economical. The advantages of the hybrid solution
of coupling prestressed girders with the arch structure are for this example:

- minimisation of costs
- uniform roadway geometry for the whole length of the bridge
- no reduction of the roadway from 3 to 2 lanes due to restrictions of the existing struc-
ture
- no expansion joint at the end of the arch
- reduction of road closing time due to the left out of the sliding back of the existing
bridge part.

The arch structure is connected to the adjacent parts at the end of the arches near the
cross girders. These are primarily the end cross connectors of the arch and therefore steel
composite elements on deck level. Secondary, a massive in-situ concrete part is added to
mainly transfer the forces from the three longitudinal deck girders of the arch structure to
the five webs of the prestressed girders. The sectional optimisation of the longitudinal
structural elements leads, as a matter of course, to additional stresses in the joints such as
torsional moments and splitting tensional stresses due to change of force direction.

1201
Fig. 10: Detail of the end cross girder Fig. 11: Part of post-tensioned concrete girder

Here, the cross beam between the main span and the approach have a width of 1.80 m
with 40 cm designed as torsional rigid steel box and the rest executed with B 55 con-
crete. The normal and shear forces are again transferred by studs. The normal forces in
the top and bottom flanges may alter from tension to compression and vice versa due to
changing traffic load moments. Negative moments at support are usually absorbed by
reinforcement within the deck slab. The structural analysis showed that, because of the
stiffness ratio of the arch and the adjacent parts, larger positive moments at support oc-
curred for traffic loads on half of the arch. These moments had to be transferred to the
prefabricated longitudinal girders within the cross beams.

Therefore, in the bottom zone additional threaded bars (Gewi Ø 32 mm) were placed to
connect tensional reinforcement (see figure 11). The design of the steel parts of the cross
girder with the required diaphragms and studs can be seen figure 10. For this combina-
tion it becomes obvious that a unification of the standards for concrete construction on
one hand, and for steel construction and steel-concrete composite construction on the
other hand is desperately needed. According to the current German standards the ques-
tion arises whether the concrete encased end cross girder of the arch span is treated as a
concrete structure (factor of safety is 1.75) or treated as a steel composite structure (fac-
tor of safety is 1.4)? With the introduction of the new generation of standards this con-
tradiction would be solved.

5. Final statement
This report shows how the combinations of reinforced and prestressed concrete, as well
as steel and composite elements yield hybrid structures for bridge constructioning. These
structures are characterised by its robust load bearing behaviour, low maintenance de-
mand, and its high efficiency. The use of similar structures will increase in the future.

6. References
[1] Freistaat Bayern, Straßenbauamt Passau: Neubau der Donaubrücke Vilshofen,
2000

1202
ANCHORAGE BEHAVIOR OF 90-DEGREE HOOKED
BEAM BARS IN REINFORCED CONCRETE WALL-BEAM
INTERSECTIONS
Osamu Joh, Yasuaki Goto and Atsunori Kitano
Graduate School of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Japan

Abstract
Experiments were conducted to determine anchorage performances of 90-degree hooked
beam bars in a joint at which a beam intersects a structural wall at right angles. Seven
wall-beam joint specimens that had some variations in the arrangements of wall
reinforcement and L-shaped beam bar anchorage were used in the experiments. All of
the specimens subjected to pullout loading on the beam bars failed in beam bar
anchorage. The anchorage strength increased as the amount of wall reinforcements
increased, especially when the wall reinforcement was arranged in the direction of
thickness as tie bars. The following results were obtained: (1) the inclusion of many tie
bars made the zone of transmission stress become wider and the anchorage strength
increase, (2) the anchorage strength of hooked bars without tie bars increased by only
10% even though spacing of wall bars was reduced by 50%, and (3) accurate estimation
of anchorage strength was possible by considering the dowel action of wall bars.

1. Introduction

In a reinforced-concrete structure, when a beam is connected to one face of a structural


wall at right angles, the main bars of the beam are anchored into the wall usually with
90-degree hooks. We have been experimentally investigating anchorage behaviors of
steel bar hooks arranged in exterior beam-column joints with a rotated T shape for a
middle story of a building [1] and with a reversed L shape for a roof story [2], and we
have proposed formulas for evaluating anchorage strengths.
Based on our previous experimental results, failure modes of a 90-degree hooked-bar
anchorage in a beam-column joint can be divided into three types: 1) side split failure, in
which the concrete covering the bend portion of the beam bars in a joint peels away,
leaving dish-shaped depressions on both sides of the joint; 2) local compression failure,
in which a small amount of concrete adjoining the inside part of the 90-degree-bent
portion of each beam bar is crushed; and 3) raking-out failure, in which a concrete block,

1203
approximately the same size as the inside dimensions of the hooked bar, is raked out
toward the beam side of the column, and all beam bars simultaneously lose their
resistance. Raking-out failure is caused by the use of many beam bars and/or a short
horizontal development length inside the joint.
From the results of our previous experiments, it became clear that the anchorage strength
of the raking-out failue mode depends on the number of hoops in the joint and the
horizontal development length (Ldh ). This length is the lateral distance between an inside
face of the column and an outside face of beam bar tails and it consists of horizontal bar
length of a straight portion in the joint, radius of bar bent and diameter of the bar.
Judging from the anchorage behaviors in a beam-column joint, it can be easily predicted
that the mode of anchorage failure of a beam-wall joint depends on raking-out and that
the anchorage strength of hooked beam bars in this joint is lower than that in a beam-
column joint because the depth of the wall is smaller than that of the column and there is
no lateral reinforcement in the depth direction. Most structural design codes, however,
do not prescribe any special requirement for reinforcement.
The purpose of this study was to clarify anchorage behaviors of 90-degree hooked beam
bars in a beam-wall joint intersecting each other at right angles. For this purpose,
experiments in which specimens were subjected to pullout loading on the beam bars
were carried out. The results were compared with results of anchorage strengths in
beam-column joints obtained from our previous experiments.

2. Experiment

2.1. Test specimens


Nearly actual sized specimens, which were simulated tensile beam bars with 90-degree
hooks anchored into a beam-wall joint, were used (see Figure 1). Beam concrete or
compressive beam bars was not used in order to simplify the production of specimens.
The dimensions of the specimens were identical: 2700 mm in height (the distance
between two reaction points on the wall being 2300 mm); 900 mm and 250 mm in wall
width and thickness, respectively; and 250 mm and 600 mm in imaginary beam width
and depth, respectively. The beam bars were two threaded deformed bars of 19 mm in
nominal diameter (db), the wall bars were deformed bars of 16 mm or 19 mm in diameter,
and the tie bars were deformed bars of 10 mm in diameter. These bars were arranged in
the specimens as shown in Figure 1 and in Table 1.
A total of seven variables were used: 1) two horizontal development lengths (Ldh)
(distance from the critical section of the beam to the center of the tail), 2) two vertical
development lengths (Ldv) (distance from the tip of the tail to the center of the lateral
beam bar), and 3) three spacings of wall-tie bars. Specimen WA25-1A was a standard
specimen, and the other specimens differed from the standard specimen in only one or
two test variables.

2.2. Mechanical properties of materials


Only beam bars made from high-strength steel were used in order to generate anchorage
failure. Wall bars and tie bars made from normal-strength steel were generally used, but

1204
250 250 100 900 100
58 134 58 900 77 96 77
50 50
Out side
200
Qw

corner
Compression
In

Upper wall
385 385 side
Out side

In side 130
925

Horizontal section

Steel plate of Reaction


90 250

Virtual beam
Beam-wall

100
R1
2700

joint
450
600
450

200
Tb Wall-

100
tie bar
60

Lower wall
925

@200

WA25-1AP3
Elevation

@100
WA25-1AP2
200

R2

100
Ldh=155
74 Ldh=83 59.5 59.5
Ldv=295

74 131
102
Ldv=539

WA25-1A Tb Tb WA25-1BP2
Vertical 60 60
section 130
WB25-1A WB25-3A WA25-1BP2
(-1B)
Figure 1. Diagrammatic representations of specimens
those made from high-strength steel were used for specimens having high anchorage
strength in order to avoid premature failure in yielding of the bars. Concrete strength
varied from 34.5 MPa to 41.2 MPa. The mechanical properties of the steel bars and
ypical concrete used in the specimens are shown in Table 2. The aggregate used was
crushed stone with a maximum diameter of 20 mm, which was normal size to match the
actual scale of specimens.

Table 1. Specification of specimens


beam-bar (2-D19) wall-bar wall-tie bar (D10)
Specimen
L dh L dv grade d b spaceing grade spaceing
WA25-1A 155 295 SD490 D16a @200 non -
WA25-3A 155 539 SD490 D16a @200 non -
WB25-1A 83 295 SD490 D16a @200 non -
WA25-1B 155 295 SD490 D16a @100 non -
WA25-1AP2 155 295 SD490 D16a @200 SD295 @200
WA25-1AP3 155 295 SD685 D16b @200 SD685+(SD295) @100+@200
WA25-1BP2 155 295 SD685 D16b @100 SD685+(SD295) @100
[Notes] D : diameter of reinforcing bar, a / b : distinction of strength,
D16 : deformed bar of 16mm in normal diameter

1205
Table 2. Measured propaties of materials Pin support
σy εy σ max Qw
reinfocing bars
(MPa) (%) (MPa)

Virtual beam
SD490 558 0.34 749 Steel frame
beam-bar D19
SD685 788 0.50 967
D16a SD345 421 0.25 583
wall-bar
D16b SD345 372 0.26 556 R1
SD295 364 0.20 557
wall-tie bar D10
SD685 729 0.40 889
σB σt ε max Ε 1/3 Ε 2/3 Cantilever-type Tb
concrete (MPa) (MPa) (µ) (GPa) (GPa) measuring
39.1 3.17 2520 30.4 26.1 instrument
Pin support

Roller support
R2
25 100 125 Beam-bar
Figure 2. Steel frame for measurement [mm] Roller support

2.3. Instrumentation for loading and measuring


Tensile load (Tb), controlled so as to distribute the increasing pull-out displacement
equally between two beam bars, was supplied horizontally to both bars. In order to
simulate a moment diagram in actual beam-wall joints, the following loading system was
used. An apparatus supported by a pin and an apparatus by a roller were set on the
compression zone of an imaginary beam and on the reflection point at the bottom of the
wall, respectively, and another load (Qw) applied to the top of the wall was controlled at
Qw = 0.19 Tb so as to generate the same shear forces in the upper and lower parts of the
wall. Reaction R1 was generated in the compression zone of the imaginary slab cross-
section by a steel plate with a height of 180 mm and a width of 900 mm, and reaction R2
was generated at the bottom of the wall by a steel plate with a height of 100 mm and a
with of 900 mm, as shown in Figure 1.
Using a steel frame for measurement attached at the top and bottom reflection points of
the wall, relative displacements were measured in the direction of out-plane of the wall
and lateral displacement of each beam bar was also measured as relative displacements
from the mid depth of the wall, as shown in Figure 2.

3. Test results

3.1. Behavior of Failure


Figure 3 is a schema showing a typical crack pattern that appeared on the inside faces of
specimens. Failure was dominated by three types of cracks: radially oriented UV and DV
cracks caused by the formation of a shallow cone, the top of which was located at the
position of the beam bars, due to expansion of the wall; and a C crack that formed along
the circumference on the side opposite the tails. The C crack was a shearing crack
oriented inward from the bent part of the bar and upward at an angle of 45-degrees. The
properties of this crack are the same as those of a diagonal crack occurring in a beam-

1206
R1

C
C UV
WF
Tb
TV
TH
EH EH DV

Figure 3. Crack pattern


Figure 4. Circumstances of failure after testing
column joints due to raking-out anchorage failure. Figure 4 shows photographs of
specimens taken after the loading test.

3.2. Relationship between load and displacement


The existence of tie bars and the number of wall bars affect the relationship between
load and displacement as shown in Figure 5.
(1) Specimen WA25-1A (with no tie bars and with wall bar spacing of 200 mm): First,
the initial stiffness in the relationship was decreased by the occurrence of WF cracking
(shown by ▲ in Figure 5). Next, the stiffness in the relationship was greatly decreased
again by the occurrence of UV cracking (V in Figure 5). Finally, the occurrence of C
crack led to maximum strength or to strength just before maximum strength.
(2) Specimens WA25-1AP2 and -1AP3 (with tie bars and wall bar spacing of 200 mm):
The stiffness of each specimen was decreased remarkably by the occurrence of WF
cracking, and the occurrence of C crack led to maximum strength.
(3) Specimens WA25-1BP2 and -1B'P2 (with tie bars and wall bar spacing of 100 mm):
Since the small spacing of tie bars and wall bars generated a truss mechanism that could
effectively transmit local compressive stress from the bar bent to the supporting points,
anchorage strength increased after the occurrence of C cracking. These specimens
reached maximum strength due to the occurrence of TV cracking (shown by ◇ in Figure
5) or EH cracking (shown by ◆ in Figure 5).

Table 3 Results of experiment 400


Tb(kN) WA25-1BP2

Specimen σ B T d T d ' Crack Tu T u'


WA25-1AP3
(MPa) (kN) (kN) at T d (kN) (kN) 300 WA25-1AP2
WA25-1A 34.5 116 124 WF 153 163 WA25-1B
WA25-3A 38.9 105 105 WF 155 155 200 WA25-3A
WB25-1A 38.8 51 51 WF 93 93
WA25-1B 38.8 96 96 WF 172 179 100
WA25-1AP2 37.3 119 122 WF 179 183 WA25-1A
WB25-1A Db(mm)
WA25-1AP3 37.8 140 142 WF 224 228 0 5 10 15
WA25-1BP2 38.3 121 122 WF 377 380 Figure 5. load vs. disp. relationship

1207
3.3. Strength at degradation of initial stiffness
The test results of strengths are shown in Table 3. The value Td is the strength at
degradation of initial stiffness (shown by ▲ or V in Figure 5) expressed by total tensile
force in the beam bars, and the value Tu is maximum strength. The values Td' and Tu'
were normalized by the average compressive strength of concrete (=39.1 MPa) using
Equation (1) in order to eliminate the differences in concrete strengthσB among the
specimens. All of the specimens except WB25-1A had almost the same strength Td'.
This means the strength at degradation of initial stiffness does not depend on the spacing
of wall bars and tie bars, but it is proportional to the lateral development length.

Td’ or Tu’ = Td or Tu・√(39.1/σB). (1)

3.4. Factors affecting maximum strength


(1) Spacing of wall bars
In the standard specimen (WA25-1A) with no tie bars and with wall bar spacing of 200
mm, the resistance against pull-out loading on the beam bars is thought to consist mainly
of sliding resistance of the concrete on a plane along the shear crack (C crack) and a
dowel action caused by wall bars intersecting the crack plane. When the spacing of the
wall bars was decreased to 100 mm (the same as that of specimen WA25-1B), the
enhancement of maximum strength was limited to about 10% because the wall bars were
not confined in the direction of wall thickness due to the absence of tie bars. However,
when the spacing was decreased and the tie bars were added (as in specimen WA25-
1AP3), maximum strength was greatly enhanced.
(2) Number of tie bars
The relationship between normalized maximum strength (Tu’) and tie-bar ratio (Pb) is
shown in Figure 6. The tie-bar ratio is the ratio of the total cross-sectional area of tie bars
arranged in a unit area of the wall surface. The maximum strength increased in
proportion to Pb for each wall bar spacing, as shown by ▲ for spacing of 100 mm and

400
Tu'(kN)
R1
350
WA25-1BP2
300
WA25-1B
250
WA25-1AP3 Tb Tb
200
WA25-1AP2
150 WA25-1A Wall-bar spacing
▲ @100
100
◆ @200
50 Truss mechanism R2
Pb(%)
Strut mechanism
0 0.5 1 1.5
Figure 6. Maximum strength (Tu’) and wall-tie bar ratio (Pb) relationship

1208
LH
(mm) 200 200
200
Tt(kN) 100 100
40 40 40
30 0 0 30 0
20 30
10 20
10 -100 20
10 -100
0 0 0
300 -200 -200 -200
100 -100 100 0 150
-300 -100-200 50 -50
LV(mm) -300 -150-250
WA25-1AP2 WA25-1AP3 WA25-1BP2
: measured values : surmised values : beam bar position
Figure 7. Distributions of wall-tie bar stress Tt (kN)

by ◆ for spacing of 200 mm in Figure 6. The maximum strength increased because the
route of shear stress transmission through both the truss and strut mechanisms (see
Figure 6) was formed by the inclusion of tie bars, because the tie bars could transmit
shear stress from the inside to the outside of the wall.

3.5. Performance of tie bars


Stress distributions of tie bars in some specimens are shown in Figure 7. When the tie
bars were arranged with a smaller spacing (100 mm), the effective area of stress
transmission through the tie bars spread widely around the beam bar tails by generating
the truss mechanism. When the tie bars were arranged with a larger spacing (200 mm),
the tie bars near the tips of the tails did not work effectively. Thus, the effective area of
tie bars with spacing of 200 mm was smaller than 300 mm within the tail side.

3.6. Validity of our previously proposed equation for anchorage strength


We previously proposed the following equation for estimating anchorage strength in a
beam-column joint that has failed in raking-out [3]:

calTu = kN ( calTc + calTw ), (2)

where calTc is the horizontal resistance of concrete (= kh・kc・bce・L1’・σe), calTw is the


horizontal resistance of lateral reinforcement ( = kw・kb・aw・σwy), andσwy is the
axial stress modification factor ( = 1 + 0.020σo).
The definitions of the terms in the above equation are as follows:
kc : effective factor for sliding resistance of concrete
(= 0.85 when the bar tail is bent toward the beam compressive zone, and
= 1.20 when the bar tail is bent toward the wall-supporting point)

1209
kw : effective hoop stress factor
(= 0.8 when the bar tail is bent toward the beam compressive zone, and
= 0.9 when the bar tale is bent toward the wall-supporting point)
kb : effective factor by the thickness of cover concrete (= 1.0 when Co ≦0.8 Ldh )
bce : effective column width (= bs + 0.53 bc )
L1’: diagonal crack length measured along the horizontal plane (= Ldh – db – Cc )
aw : total cross-sectional area of lateral reinforcement crossing failure planes
bs : distance between extreme beam bars
bc : total thickness of cover concrete on both sides
Cc : thickness of cover concrete on extreme beam bar
Dc : depth of beam
db : diameter of beam bar
σo: column axial stress (not larger than 0.08σB)
σe: sliding strength of concrete (= √σB )
σwy: yield strength of lateral reinforcement

A comparison of the calculated and experimental results is shown in Table 4 and Figure
8. The values of the variables in Equation (2) were calculated on the basis of the
assumption that the tie bars within the effective area of the walls (the walls of the
specimens considered as being wide columns) correspond to lateral reinforcement of the
equation. In case in which tie bars were used, Equation (2), which is the sum of concrete
resistance (calTc ) and lateral reinforcement resistance (calTw ), could be used to estimate
anchorage strength of beam-wall joints, since the ratio of calculated values to experi-
mental values for all of the specimens with tie bars (except for specimen WA25-1AP2,
which had the smallest tie-bar ratio) were in the range of 0.85 to 0.96. However, further
study is needed to determine the reason for the minimum value (0.85) in specimen
WA25-1AP3, in which tie bars were alternately spaced at 100 mm and 200 mm.
When tie bars were not used, the calculated values (calTu) were less than the experimental
values (expTu) because these calculated values were obtained by only the concrete
resistance Tc and the dowel action of wall bars was disregarded in the calculation.
Lateral resistance by the dowel action maybe is estimated as the difference TΔ between
the calculated and experimental strengths of WB25-1A (TΔ=92-6=86 MPa), which
had the smallest value of calTc among all specimens because it had the smallest horizontal

Table 4 Comparison of calculated and experimental values [kN]


Specimen cal T c cal T w cal T u exp T u exp/cal cal Tu ∆ exp/cal
WA25-1A 60 - 60 153 2.55 146 1.05
WA25-3A 64 - 64 155 2.43 150 1.03
WB25-1A 6 - 6 93 14.47 93 1.00
WA25-1B 63 - 63 172 2.73 149 1.15
WA25-1AP2 62 47 109 179 1.64 195 0.92
WA25-1AP3 63 201 264 224 0.85 modified value
WA25-1BP2 65 327 391 377 0.96 =86.2(kN) (fixed)

1210
400
expTu (kN)

0%

e
in
12

lL
ua
cal Tu

Eq
300 %
80
cal Tu∆

200

100

cal Tu (kN)

0 100 200 300 400

Figure 8. Comparison of the calculated


and experimental results

development length Ldh. Using modified strength calTuΔ, which is the sum of the original
calculated value calTu and the dowel resistance T Δ , the ratios of expTu to calTu Δ for
specimens without tie bars and for specimen WA25-1AP3 ranged from 0.92 to 1.15, and
the experimental and calculated values showed good agreement. However, the ratio for
WA25-1B, which had a large number of wall bars, was the largest value (1.15) because
the effect of the number of wall bars was disregarded.
The phenomena mentioned above indicated the following results: in the case of no tie
bars, dowel resistance predominated in total resistance and it depended on the number of
wall bars; in the case of using many tie bars, resistance of tie bars at yielding
predominated; and in the case of using few tie bars, both of the resistances needed to be
considered to estimate anchorage strength.

4. Conclusions

The anchorage behavior of beam-wall joints using wall panels with 90-degree hooked
beam bars at right angles as study specimens was examined. The test variables of the
specimens were horizontal and vertical development lengths, lateral reinforcement ratio
of tie bars, spacing of wall bars. The conclusions based on the experimental results are as
follows.
(1) The inclusion of many tie bars in walls around beam bars, especially around tails,
made shear-stress transmission zone become wider and anchorage strength increase,
because of the generation of the truss mechanism.
(2) The anchorage strength of hooked bars without tie bars increased by only 10% even
though the spacing of wall bars was reduced to by 50%, but the strength was greatly
enhanced by inclusion of tie bars.

1211
(3) Our previously proposed equation for estimating anchorage strength in beam-column
joints could be applied to estimation of anchorage strength in beam-wall joints with tie
bars, dowel resistance caused by wall bars crossing shear crack planes needed to be
included in the calculation in order to get good agreement with experiment results.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Japanese
Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research
No.11450201) and the experiments carried out by students of Hokkaido University.

References

1. Joh O., Goto, Y. & Shibata, T., ‘Anchorage of Beam Bars with 90-Degree Bend in
Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints’, Proceedings of Tom Paulay Symposium
on Recent Developments in Lateral Force Transfer in Building, La Jolla/California,
September, 1993 (American Concrete Institute, 1995), SP-157, 97-116
2. Joh, O. & Goto, Y., ‘Anchorage behavior of 90-degree hooked beam bars in
reinforced concrete knee joints’, Proceedings of Second International Symposium on
Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures, Catania/Italy, June, 1999, (2) 33-42
3. Joh O. & Shibata, T., ‘Anchorage Behavior of 90-Degree Hooked Beam Bars in
Reinforced Concrete Beam-Column Joints’, Proceedings of the 12th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, June, 1996, CD-ROM-3

1212
EMBEDDED STEEL BEARINGS INSTEAD OF CONCRETE
NIBS
Matthias R. Kintscher
Pfeifer Seil- und Hebetechnik GmbH, Memmingen, Germany

Abstract
The steel bearing which is equivalent to a steel cantilever embedded in concrete and
anchored by an rebar anchored in the stemm of the TT is transfering the dead load from
a TT-beam to a supporting beam. The supporting beam can have a rectangular shape so
that no intrusive and work intensive nibs are necessary. This provides technical as well
as architectural advantages.
Additional reinforcement together with the steel cantilever of the steel bearing helps to
transfer the live load to the supporting beam so that the whole construction works
together between steel and concrete. The whole design provides the user with a couple of
advantages which are discussed in the following article.

1. Introduction

Often there is a deep mistrust within the precast


industry against welded steel constructions. But
assembles of steel buildings demonstrate that the
methods of the steel industry are very fast and in
times of decreasing programme requirements for
building situations the advantages of the erection
methods of the steel industry are slowly
approaching the precast industry. Connecting
precast elements, bolts and nuts or other steel
construction tools get more and more fashionable.
A typical example is the steel bearing for TT-
Image 1: Hot rolled steel bearing with beams (image 1) which is equivalent to a steel
screwable anchor bar and centring cantilever embedded in concrete (image 2) and
bearing plate anchored with an anchor bar.

1213
Therefore, this steel bearing is transferring the dead load from a TT-beam to a
supporting beam. The big advantage is that there is no neoprene pad necessary to be
mounted in situ on the supporting beam. Everything is prepared in a precast company.
The supporting beam can have a rectangular shape so that no intrusive and work
intensive nibs are necessary. This provides also architectural advantages (image 3).

Image 2: Steel bearing embedded in TT- Image 3: TT-beam on rectangular


beams supporting beam gives a clear architectural
view
Additional reinforcement together with the steel cantilever of the steel bearing helps to
transfer the live load to the supporting beam so that the whole construction works
together between steel and concrete. The whole design and engineering is done easily in
load selection tables. The tables and the design scheme have a German type approval.
From the quality management point of view, there is a big advantage as no work has to
be done by a non skilled person on the site. The TT-beam has only to be placed on the
supporting beam and that is all. This accelerates the installation of the TT-beams by one
third of the time so that the biggest advantage is given if one considers the whole
procedure from producing the TT-beams, the rectangular shaped supporting beams and
the erection work.
By using the embedded steel bearing there is a reduction of cantilever arm for the
supporting beam. That means the torque moment is less than with nibs at the supporting
beams and this helps to prove the stability of the supporting beams on the corbels of the
columns without any braces necessary under the TT-beams or the supporting beams.
To get this benefit it is necessary to overcome the mistrust of the precasters against
welded steel construction and it is necessary to see the thing not only from the eyes of
the purchaser but also from the general manager who is responsible for the whole costing
process.

1214
2. Advantages using embedded steel bearings instead of concrete nibs
The traditional way of building load bearing constructions with TT-beams is shown on
image 4 and 5 as a view from the underside and and a cross section. Greatest
disadvantage is the complicated cross section of the supporting beam with nibs. A more
straight forward way of achieving the same result is shown on image 6 and 7 but that
requires far more height.
The steel bearing combines the two advantages: a low building height and a simple
shaped supporting beam, shown on image 8 and 9.

Image 4: Underside view of TT-beam on Image 5: Cross section of TT-beams on


supporting beam with nibs supporting nibs

Image 6: Ineffective height with TT-beams Image 7: Cross section of TT-beams on


upon rectangular supporting beam rectangular supporting nibs costs height

Image 8: Optimized construction: TT- Image 9: Cross section shows the steel-
beams sustained rectangular supporting bearings reducing height and making the
beam with steel bearing design easier

1215
The formwork for a supporting beam with 2 nibs on the sides is normally very
complicated. If a supporting beam system formwork is used, plywood extension boxes
must be used in order to achieve this nib cross section shape (image 10). Also, the
reinforcement is less complicated if only rectangular shaped supporting beams are
adopted, as shown on image 11. If nibs are necessary much more reinforcement is
necessary, specificially a second layer of stirrups in transverse direction will be required.

Image 10: Complicated formwork and Image 11: Straight forward formwork for
reinforcement for supporting beam with rectangular supporting beam
nibs
A lot of money can be saved if the supporting beams are built rectangular. From the
transportation view point the rectangular shaped beams obviously have a reduced dead
weight compared with the lateral nibs. Dispite the reduction of concrete volume, the
supporting beams can be built rectangular. Therefore, the costs for the steel bearings are
compensated by the reduced costs of concrete, the reduction of reinforcement and the
reduced formwork costs.

Image 12: Large eccentricity with nibs at Image 13: Minimal load eccentrictiy with
the supporting beam steel bearing
One of the main disadvantages of the nib shaped supporting beam is that it creates a
relatively high eccentricity for the load bearing. In comparison with this the centered
load bearing plate of the steel bearing gives a critical reduction in eccentricity for the

1216
load bearing (images 12 and 13). Due to the fact that the eccentricity is significantly
reduced the sequence of assembling the TT-beams into the building is no longer of
importance. Previously the site manager had to ensure that the TT-beams on the opening
sides of the supporting beam were assembled in the correct sequence so that no rotation
of the supporting beam could take place. This was associated with the requirement to use
2 cranes to move 1 crane from one side to the other which caused additional costs. To
avoid these effects very often strong and high braces were used to support the supporting
beams (image 14) under the nibs but nowadays with the utilisation of a TT-beam steel
bearing this is no longer a consideration as the reduced eccentricity also reduces the
torque moments and the rotation of the supporting beam is eliminated (image 15).
Previously once rotation had taken place by means of friction it could not be reversed.

Image 14: Beams with nibs supported by Image 15: Assembling on one side of the
braces beam without any worries about the
sequences by using steel bearings
This positive effect of reducing the torque moment helps also to cope with edge
conditions. Previously it was extremely complicated to construct edge zones such that
the forces were balanced.

Image 16: Complicated edge situation Image 17: Easy done edge with steel bearing

1217
3. How it works
The reinforcement necessary in the area around the steel bearing may look initially a
little complicated but it is not actually the case. The philosophy of the load bearing
behaviour is very simple, as shown on image 18. The steel bearing bears the whole
dead weight of the precast element, the TT, and the additional weight of the liquid
concrete which is poured upon the table of the TT as a top layer. For this load condition
the steel bearing works like a cantilever arm and transfers the loads over bending and
shear from the anchor bolt to the hot rolled beam and to the load centering plate.

Image 18: Superposition of transferring mechanisms: Precast element dead weight


and liquid concrete weight transferred by steel bearing and live load transferred by
reinforcement plus concrete

1218
The hot rolled beam works in conjunction with longitudinal reinforcement with hooks at
the front end. As the concrete around the beam and the reinforcement is hardened, this
area of concrete incorporating additional reinforcement (longitudinal rebars as well as
the vertical stirrups) transfers the live load to the supporting beam. This combination
affects the transferance of the live load over the concrete element as well as transferring
of the dead weight by means of bending and shear of the steel bearing working together
in such a manner that the flection of the components are equal. Only this solution offers
the possibility to use this construction without cracks and other damage.

Image 19: The essential


reinforcement required
with the steel bearing

Most of the elements shown make up that the rebar cage around the steel bearing is not
necessary for the steel bearing itself but only for the anchorage of the prestressing
strength or such like. There is an additional link with an angle of inclination which helps
to avoid cracks in the stem or the table, where the stem ends accross the internal corner.
The forces would like to unfold this sharp corner so that some cracks could occur but by
using this inclined rebar the unfolding forces are nutralized, so that no cracks will occur
there.

Image 20: Prestressed TT-beam with a pitch in the middle and an angle of inclination at
the end at the steel bearing due to the curvature

The bearing situation without a neoprene pad poses the question, whether the loads can
be securely transferred to the supporting beam, especially if the TT-beam has an

1219
inclinded angle at its end. This could result for instance from the prestressing procedure.
Image 21 demonstrates what can happen. We take into account that we have a span of
16 meter and a pitch of 5 centimeters. This gives an angle of inclination of 0,143
degrees. This causes a gap of 0,2 millimetres at the outer end of the bearing plate which
should center the load. It is clear that 0,2 millimeter is much less than the roughness of
the concrete surface. Thus, such an angle of inclination will not influence the load
bearing behaviour.

Image 21: Detail view on the steel


bearing at the end of a curved
prestressed TT-beam

Fire protection is also provided with this


steel bearing construction as the whole
steel bearing is embedded totally into
concrete. The hot fumes can not come into
direct contact with the steel so that the
critical temperature of 500 ° will not be
reached within a time limit of 90 minutes.
The only location where the steel bearing is
slightly closer to the surrounding air, is
where the stem ends. There is a gap
between stem and the supporting beam
under the table of the TT-beam but this gap
has a limited width of 20 mm (image 22),
so that the hot fumes transferred to the
table will come into contact on the surface
Image 22: The position of the steel bearing of the stem or the supporting beam beside
totally embedded in concrete and the the gap. Through this contact the fumes
narrow gap gives sufficient fire protection will be cooled down so that no critical
(F90). The gap is too narrow to allow hot temperature will be transferred to the table
fumes transfer to the steel bearing. where the steel bearing is embedded and
has the lowest protection.

1220
4. Practice in the precast industry
Image 23: Prepared rebar cages
incorporating steel bearings to be set
into the formwork

Image 25: Freshly cast in steel bearing held


down from a fixing timber bar

Image 24: Installed steel bearing, properly


fixed to the formwork, with additional Image 25: Assembled TT-beams ready
longitudinal reinforcement and links to be reinforced and to be cast with the
top concrete

1221
5. Conclusion

It is not possible to demonstrate every advantage that can be offered in conjunction with
the steel bearing. However, it is clear that considerable economic benefit can be gained
from the use of steel bearings as an alternative to concrete nibs in the design process.
Simplified design of the elements is reflected through production drawings. In turn the
precaster is able to produce less complicated formwork and use less reinforcement and
save on labour costs by simplifying the transportation of the supporting beams.
The reduced weight and volume of the units allows for easier assembly on site. In this
way it is conceivable that savings of more than 30 % can be achieved during the
erection process.
In order to obtain the greatest advantage the whole system should be considered from
design through production to the construction process on site. In this way the design
engineer can influence the quality of precast concrete structures and the problems of
in situ concrete and offer fast-track construction previously only associated with steel
framed buildings.

1222
ANCHORAGE ZONE IN A STEEL-CONCRETE
COMPOSITE SLAB WITH UNBONDED TENDONS
Heli Koukkari
VTT Building and Transport, Finland

Abstract
At VTT Building and Transport, Finland, the composite action between the concrete part
and steel sheet of a composite slab with unbonded tendons was investigated by fifteen
column tests simulating a load-balanced state. The results from the column tests showed
that the transfer lengths were between 350 and 400 mm. They were in agreement with
the previous results that the length of an anchorage zone is between the slab thickness
(presented for a solid concrete slab) and two times the column side (as for composite
columns). The tests showed also that the location of anchors influences on the transfer
length of the compressive force to the sheet and on the resistance of the concrete end
block.

1. Foreword

This presentation is based on the experimental results in two research programs that
dealt with prestressing of steel-concrete composite floor construction. The National
Technology Agency of Finland, TEKES, the Rautaruukki Company and VTT Building
Technology financed the projects.

2. General

A steel-concrete composite slab with unbonded tendons is a new type of structure that
combines the benefits of composite construction and prestressing. Prestressing induces a
stress state mainly counteracting the effects of permanent loading. It is a method to
improve the performance of a composite slab particularly under service loads because
cracking of concrete can be eliminated or substantially reduced. The increase of the
flexural stiffness can be utilized in span lengths and slab thickness.

1223
A post-tensioned steel-concrete composite slab is a combination of prefabricated steel
sheets, in-situ concrete with its reinforcement and a post-tensioning system (Fig. 1).

A B C

A B C
A-A B-B C-C

concrete anchor
steel sheet tendon

Fig. 1. A post-tensioned composite slab with unbonded tendons.

The composite action between concrete and steel sheet relies mainly on the joint
detailing but also on the profile of the sheet. Typical joint details are embossments or
perforations. The shapes, heights, depths, locations and inclinations from the
longitudinal axis vary in great ranges. Compared to an ordinary reinforced slab, the joint
details are usually flexible. A great variety of ribbed sheet products for composite slabs
can be found on the market. The total cross-sectional steel area is about 1000 - 1500
mm2/m depending on the type of the sheet. The heights of the sheets vary commonly
from 40 to 55 mm. Deep profiles to 210 mm are also on the market for the purpose of
minimum propping during construction.

A post-tensioning system with unbonded tendons contains the tendons in their


sheathings, active and passive anchor assemblies and tensioning jacks. The tendons will
be lengthened and then fixed to the surrounding hardened concrete only at their anchors.
The lubricating material between the sheathing and tendon allows for free movement of
the tendon. In concrete slabs with unbonded tendons the long-term compressive stresses
are typically between 1.5 and 2.5 N/mm2.

The behaviour of the joint depends mainly on the location, mechanical resistance and
ductility of the joint details made in the sheets. The basic requirement for a composite
slab suitable for post-tensioning is that the joint between concrete and steel sheet has
enough strength and ductility to resist the actions in different loading situations. In a
ductile joint, the shear stresses at ultimate limit state can reach the same strength value
over a length that is called a shear span. All sheet types for composite slabs on the
market are experimentally proved to have composite action in normal loading
conditions. Brittle behaviour is also accepted with an additional safety factor. Post-
tensioning causes a concentrated force in the joint at the slab ends.

1224
3. Analysis of a composite slab with unbonded tendons

The behaviour of a post-tensioned steel-concrete composite slab depends upon the


deformation and strength properties of the steel and concrete parts and of the joint
between them. The composite slab is commonly analysed as a one-way slab due to the
geometry of a sheet. A post-tensioned steel-concrete composite slab remains uncracked
or slightly cracked in most design cases and the deflections will increase linearly as the
loading increases. The elastic theory will be used to calculate the stresses and
deformations due to loading and post-tensioning. The strains and stresses are calculated
based on the Hooke´s law, Bernoulli´s hypothesis and principle of force equilibrium.

3.1 Cross-sectional values

The notation used in analyses is given in Fig. 2.

A c Ec I c
centroid of concrete
h h centroid of the slab ec
c
ecl ep
y ea e
eal dp
ha
da ds centroid of sheeting
Ap Ep
Aa E a I a
A s Es
Fig. 2. Notation for the cross-sectional values:
Aa effective area of the steel sheet in tension, compression or flexure
Ac gross area of concrete (including the area of the tendons)
Ea elastic modulus of steel
Ec elastic modulus of concrete
Ia effective second moment of area of the sheet
Ic second moment of area of concrete
dc distance from the centroidal axis of concrete to the bottom fibre of the slab
da distance from the centroidal axis of the sheet to the bottom fibre of the slab
e distance from the centroidal axis of concrete to that of the sheet
ea y- co-ordinate of the centroidal axis of the sheet
ec y- co-ordinate of the centroidal axis of the concrete component
ep y- co-ordinate of the centroid of the tendons
h total thickness of the composite slab
ha height of the steel sheet
hc thickness of concrete above the upper flange of the sheet
na modular ratio of structural steel to concrete

1225
In calculations, the nominal measures and characteristic values are used in general. For
steel sheet, the thickness of the steel core and effective cross-section is used. The cross-
sectional values of a composite section transformed into concrete are sums of those of
the components with respect to the centroidal axis of the slab:

Am = ∑ n k Ak (1)
(
I m = ∑ n k I k + nk A e 2
k k ) (2)

where nk is modular ratio Ek/Ec.

The effective area of a sheet under tension is different from that under compression or
flexure. The steel sheeting in compression is not taken into account in the cross-sectional
values at the internal support. However, when the anchorage zone is treated, the sheet is
taken into account in the axial stiffness.

3.2 Effects of the tendon force

A tendon is usually curved or otherwise shaped along the length in order to counteract
the effects of permanent loads, including the self-weight. The magnitude of the tendon
force depends on the cross-section and time of consideration. The losses due to friction
between the curved sheathing and the tendon can be ignored in slab design. The tendon
force will also be reduced by the anchorage slippage just after the fixing, by creep and
shrinkage of the concrete and by the relaxation of the steel with the time.

The force P in a curved tendon can be divided in horizontal and vertical components, Phor
and Pver, respectively:

Phor = Pcosβ ≅ P
Pver = P sinβ (3)

where β is the angle between the horizontal axis and the force P.

The horizontal component is roughly equal to P in a slab as the length L is large compa-
red to the thickness h, and the angle β is small.

When the vertical loads on the concrete due to post-tensioning equal to the external
loads, the slab is load-balanced presuming that the tendon is anchored at the centroidal
axis of the composite slab. The external loads include here the self-weight of the slab.
Such a composite slab is uniformly compressed due to the horizontal component, when
there are no stresses induced by restricted deformations.

1226
3.3 Anchorage zone

The anchors of the tendons cause concentrated loads on the concrete at the ends of the
composite slab. A zone with both tensile and compressive stresses is induced. Splitting
of the concrete may take place due to the bursting stresses. Additional reinforcement is
needed to ascertain the resistance with respect to the concentrated load. However,
accurate determination of the stresses in the vicinity of anchors is complex and
expensive, especially when the anchors are closely spaced. In practice, empirical design
equations are used for the cracking load. No special consideration of the strength of the
concrete is needed, when the recommendations of the suppliers of the post-tensioning
systems are followed in applications with profiled steel sheets.

The horizontal component of a tendon force produces uniformly compressed cross-


sections in a load-balanced slab. The length of the anchorage zone is determined as a
distance where a uniformly compressed cross-section takes place. At the slab ends
however, a part of the force at anchorage is transferred by shear stresses in the joint from
the concrete to compressive force of the sheeting. For this reason, two anchorage zones
are defined. Anchorage zone 1 is defined to represent a plain concrete and 2 composite
slab with a little longer anchorage zone (Fig. 3).

anchorage 1 uniform compressive


compression stresses
zones 2

anchor
concrete
Pc
P
hor
P P
a
sheet

Fig. 3. Anchorage zones from an anchor to the concrete (1) and composite section (2).

The tendon force Phor≅P on the anchor is divided into a force Pa of the sheeting and a
force Pc of the concrete following where na and Am are calculated according to the
formula (1).

Pa = PAana/Am
Pc = PAc/Am (4)

The length of the transferring area of the Pa is not known by calculations. The exact
length of the anchorage zone of concrete is difficult to determine by calculations, too.
Consequently, experimental methods are seen preferable to study the anchorage zone of
a composite slab.

1227
4 Column tests

4.1 Specimens and testing arrangements

The composite action between the concrete and steel sheeting was investigated by fifteen
column tests simulating a balanced composite slab. The specimens were short concrete
columns with steel sheets on two opposite surfaces. Nine columns were composed of so
called shallow sheets which have a ductile joint behaviour in most common loading
cases (Finnish SteelComp sheets). No stirrups were placed in those specimens P1 – P9
because the calculated failure load was higher than the force needed to induce a high
compressive stress 7 N/mm2 (about 720 kN), which seldom is used in post-tensioned
structures. Six columns had deep steel sheets with handmade embossments in webs
(Finnish RAN120 sheet), and stirrups were placed at the ends (Fig. 6 and Table 2).

Table 1 gives data about the specimens P1-P9. In those tests, strains of concrete and
sheet and slips of the sheet were measured. The strains were measured over a length of
200 mm or 300 mm by transducers in all tests and by strain gauges in two tests. After
first tests, the points of measurements were moved on the narrow flanges (bottom of the
trough) located inside the concrete. The compressive force was introduced on a steel
plate of an area 320x120 mm2 located in the middle of the columns P1- P9. The testing
and measuring arrangement of the tests P1-P6 is presented in Fig. 6. The same
arrangement as in Fig. 6 b was used in the tests P7-P9, too.

steel sheet
embossments
in flange 150 300

concrete
320

117
steel sheet
231.6
a) 320 b) 300

Fig. 4. Cross-sections of test columns. a) P1-P9, b) P10-P13

1228
a) P b) P

Steel plate

50 2 0 50 50 2 0 50

22
10 (12)
20

200
or 200
300
7 4 (5) 6 7 5 4 21 6
23

11 (13)

50 3 1 50 50 3 1 50

P P

Fig. 5. The loading arrangements and measurements in the column tests (see Table 1).
a) Specimens P1, P2, P4, P5, b) specimens P3 and P6. The numbers in parenthesis refer
to the opposite side.

Table 1. Specimens in the column tests P1-P9. The length of a column is Lc, the nominal
thickness of the sheet t0, the distance between the measurement points Lm and the
distance of the measurement point to the end of a column dm.
SPECIMEN Lc to Lm dm Remarks
mm mm mm mm

P1 500 0.7 300 100


P2 500 0.7 300 100
P3 500 0.7 200 150 strain gauges on wide flanges
transducers on narrow flanges
P4 500 0.9 200 150
P5 500 0.9 200 150
P6 500 0.9 200 150 strain gauges on wide flanges
transducers on narrow flanges
P7 1000 0.9 200 400 transducers on narrow flanges
P8 1000 0.9 200 400 transducers on narrow flanges
P9 1000 0.9 200 400 transducers on narrow flanges

The measurement arrangement is presented in Fig. 6.

1229
P
P10, P12 P14
987
SIDE C SIDE C
8 7
SIDE D SIDE B 9
10 6 10 6
11 5
12 4 11 5
12 Sivu D SIDE B 4
3
250 1
SIDE A
500
600

2
400

123 SIDE A

250 P11, P13 3 P15


3

4 4 2
2

1
P
Fig. 6. Measurements in tests P10 – P15 (see also Table 2).

Table 2 gives data about the specimens P10-P15. In those tests, the deformations of
concrete and sheets were measured by the aid of transducers in the middle of the
specimen. The distance between the measurement points were 400, 500 and 600 mm in
specimens P10 and P14 and 500 mm in other tests as presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Specimens in the column tests P10-P15. The length of a column is Lc, the nomi-
nal thickness of the sheet t0, the distance between the measurement points Lm, and the
distance of the measurement point to the end of a column dm.
SPECIMEN Lc to Lm dm
mm mm mm mm

P10 1200 0.9 400, 500 and 600 400, 350 and 300
P11 1200 0.9 500 350
P12 1200 0.9 500 350
P13 1200 0.9 400, 500 and 600 400, 350 and 300
P14 1200 0.9 500 350
P15 1200 0.9 500 350

The compressive force in tests P10-P15 was divided on two steel plates of an area
75x150 mm2 that were located in different ways with respect to the troughs.

1230
3.2 Results of column tests

The strains of the sheet and concrete increased almost equally in the tests, where the
distance of strain measurement points to the column end was long enough to cover the
anchorage zone in the concrete and the transfer length of the compressive force Pa to the
sheet. One example of the measured strains is presented in Fig. 7.

1400

1200

1000
FORCE P, kN

800

600
4, concrete
5, concrete
400
6, sheet
7, sheet
200
P9

0
-0,800 -0,700 -0,600 -0,500 -0,400 -0,300 -0,200 -0,100 0,000
STRAIN, %o

Fig. 7. Measured strains of concrete and sheet in the specimen P9.

In the tests P1-P9 the failure of a specimen took place in the concrete and not in the
joint. The forces at the failure are presented in Table 3. In all the column tests P10-P15
failure of the specimen took place in the concrete. However, in the tests P10-P13 the
sheet broke off on one side of a specimen. Table 4 presents the forces at failure of the
joint and that of concrete in the tests P10 – P15.

Table 3. The ultimate forces Pu in column tests P1-P9 at the failure of the concrete.
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9

Pu ,kN 1070 1035 1135 987 950 1075 1175 1268 1250

1231
Table 4. The force Pub at the beginning of buckling, Puj at joint failure and Puc at the
failure of concrete in column tests P10 – P15.
P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15
Pub, kN
1075 1187 930 - -
Puj , kN 1350 1266 1740 1199 - -
Puc , kN 1375 1338 1905 1745 1510 1553

The column tests showed that at the distance of the anchorage length the compressive
force is transferred into the steel sheeting and the parts have equal strains at least in the
location of the embossments. Summary of the measuring lengths in columns and results
are presented in Table 5.

Table 5. The agreement of strain measurements on sheets and concrete surface at


different transfer lengths Lt. Projected breadth of a sheet is bs and distance between the
outer flanges in P1-P6 and inner flanges in P7-P9 is bc.
Lt mm Test bs .bc, mm2 Remarks
100 P1, P2, P4, P5 320x320 No correlation
150 P3, P6 320x320 No correlation in strain gauges
Weak correlation of results
from transducers (narrow flanges)
300 P10, P12 295x300 Increasing differential strain
350 P10, P11, P12, P13 295x300 Good or excellent correlation
400 P7, P8, P9 320x320 Good or excellent correlation
400 P10, P12 295x300 Good or excellent correlation

5 Conclusions

The share of the sheet Pa from the total tension force is from 11.5 kN to 28.7 kN, when
the concrete compressive stress was from 1.5 to 2.5 N/mm2 (concrete grade K30, na
7.67. This force caused a shear stress in the joint that is from 0.04 to 0.1 N/mm2
supposing that the transfer length is 300 mm. These shear stresses are low compared to
the characteristic shear strength values of the products on the market, in general.

The results from the column tests showed that the specimen lengths 1000 and 1200 mm
were suitable. The transfer lengths 350 and 400 mm gave a good agreement of the
measured strains of concrete and steel sheets. The results of column test showed that
post-tensioning can be applied to a composite slab with a ductile joint. The tests
undertaken on columns with a high profile also showed that the sheet type having lower
ductility but strength enough could be used in post-tensioned slabs. The column tests are
recommended in verification of joint resistance for a post-tensioned slab, as the effects
of a compressive force on the joint and sheet are different from those of bending.

1232
CONNECTIONS FOR CONTINUOUS FRAMING IN
PRECAST CONCRETE STRUCTURES
G.Krummel
PEIKKO GmbH, Waldeck, Germany

Abstract
Connections for continuous framing in precast concrete structures have been a problem
almost impossible to solve.
A frame system is more economical in comparison with to the standard system for
precast concrete elements, consisting of a rigid column to foundation connection and a
jointed beam to column connection. But the rigid beam to column connection was
difficult and expensive to realise. Therefore an easy and economical bolt system has
been developed. This system allows a fast assembling of the column to the foundation
and a fast assembling of the beam to the column, independent of weather conditions.
The roots of this system are in Scandinavia / Finland.

1. Introduction

The economical aspect and the details of precast concrete frames have been researched
and tested in the ELECON [1] project. The most common ways of rigid column to
foundation and column to beam connections in Europe have been compared with a bolt
system to screw the precast concrete elements together. Two bolted rigid frame systems
were studied to clarify how big material savings can be obtained. Finally the assembling
time of the different frame types was compared. The static calculations have been
proceeded according to ENV 1992, the anchoring of the headed bolts is calculated
according to concrete capacity (cc-designing).

1233
2. Bolt based frame system

2.1 Column-foundation connection


2.1.1 Details
The common ways for rigid column anchorage have been socket bases and grout –sleeve
bases.

Figure 1: Socket foundation

Figure 2: Grout sleeve base

These systems are expensive and costly. The socket requires a deep foundation. The
column is fixed by wedges during assembling time and might need a support (tall
columns). The grout- sleeve base carries the loads by overlapping in the foundation and
has to be supported during assembling time until the grouting is hardened.

The bolted connection consists of the following parts:


1. Anchor bolts (base bolts), which are placed to right position before casting.
2. Column shoes, which transmit forces from the column to the anchor bolts. There
can be 4 shoes in every corner and shoes in the middle, too. The shoes are placed
entirely inside the column thus the formwork can be done easily.
3. After the column has been erected and the anchor bolts are tightened, the gap
between column and foundation is grouted with non shrinkage mortar.

1234
Figure 3: Bolted column foundation connection
The connection is also suitable for column to column joints.

2.1.2 Load transfer


The column shoes transmit the loads normally by overlapping with the longitudinal
reinforcement of the column. The load transfer after grouting can be calculated
according to ENV 1992. The compression force is taken by the mortar and the bolts, the
tensile force from the bending moment is taken by the bolts. The stiffness of the joint
depends on the size of the cross section and the diameter of the bolts.
The shear force can be taken by the bolts, the concrete section or an extra shear dowel.
During assembling time all loads can be taken by the bolts.

The anchoring of the bolts depends on the dimensions of the foundation. Anchor bolts
with headed studs can be calculated according the German approval (HPM/L, PPM/L
anchor bolts) or a truss and tie model. Other anchorings like overlapping etc. according
ENV 1992 are also possible (HPM/P, PPM/P anchor bolts).
A special software to calculate the load transfer and the anchoring is available.

Figure 4: Column shoe Figure 5: HPM/L anchor bolt

1235
2.1.3 Assembling
A levelling plate is adjusted in the right level on the foundation. The lower nuts are
screwed under the right level, the column is screwed with the upper nuts in the right
direction. After that the lower nuts are tightened to the base plate of the column shoe. It
is a rigid connection already during assembling state and no extra support for the column
is needed.
Finally the gap between the foundation and the column is grouted with an non shrinkage
mortar.

2.2 Beam to Column connection


2.2.1 Details
The connection between column and beam was basically realised by welding joints or
grout –sleeves. Both systems are difficult during assembling time and can be very
expensive.

The bolted joint consists of the following parts


1. Anchor bolts with or without muffs cast in the column
2. Beam shoes cast in the beam (similar like column shoes)
3. Corbel for shear force- if required
4. Niches on the columns face and the end of the beam for shearforces
5. After the beam has been erected and the anchor bolts are tightened, the gap between
column and beam is grouted with non shrinkage mortar.

Figure 6: Bolted connection

Three different connections are mainly used:

1236
• Connection between a column and a precast beam:

Figure 7:
The beam is screwed to the
column, the beam shoes can have
a long hole. The top connection
is realised by bolts with muffs or
couplers.

• Connection between a column and a half precast beam:

Figure 8:
The beam is screwed to the
column, the upper connection is
realised by couplers and are
casted in situ, depending on the
floor system (f.e. filigran floor
system).

1237
• Connection between column and precast top beam

Figure 9:
The top beam is assembled in the
same way as the column to
column or column to foundation
connection. The bars of the
column shoes can be bent
according to the structure of the
top beam.

2.2.2 Load transfer


The beam shoes carrying the normal forces by overlapping with the longitudinal beam
reinforcement. The bolts are screwed with the beam shoes and transfer the loads inside
the column. The shear forces are normally taken by corbels, depending on loads. Niches
in the column and in the beam are also possible to take shear forces after grouting with
non shrinkage mortar.
The anchoring is mainly calculated to ENV 1992 (f.e. overlapping , anchor plate). The
usage of headed studs for anchoring the tensile forces has been tested . Mainly it can be
calculated according to cc- method and the tie and truss model.

2.2.3 Assembling
A levelling plate is adjusted in the right level on the corbel. The beam is seated on the
levelling plate, the nuts are tightened. The gap and the niches are casted with non
shrinkage mortar.

3. Economical aspects

When the elements have been screwed together, the connection is rigid and need not to
be braced. The assembling is independent of weather conditions. The hardening time of
the grout is not critical. The erection time of two one storey high frames (bolted system
and socket foundation) has been compared [1] , 35% savings of assembling time are
possible to reach with a bolted column foundation connection in comparison with a
socket foundation.

1238
The assembling time for the bolted system to fix a beam rigidly to a column is much
shorter than the welding joints or the grouted sleeves. The erection is independent of
weather conditions, the system is rigid during assembly time.

The material savings for a frame system have been tested and researched [1]. The
amounts of concrete and steel can be reduced by up to 30% with a rigid frame system in
comparison with the common system with hinged beam to column connections. The
material saving starts with the foundation. The quantity of topsoil which has to be
removed is smaller in comparison with to the socket foundation, the length of the
column can be shorter.
The rigid beam to column connection reduces the bending moment for the column
foundation connection in comparison with the hinged joint.

4. Conclusion

Bolted rigid frame systems for precast concrete elements offer an economical and fast
are more than an alternative to the common connections for precast concrete elements.
These systems allow an easy and economical assembling for rigid column to foundation
and rigid column to beam connections. The assembling advantages for steel
constructions are translated to precast reinforced concrete constructions.

5. References

1. ELECON project: Research project for bolted connections (Bolt based connection
for precast frames) 1996, Tampere University of Technology
2. Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt), Berlin 1997: Bemessungsverfahren für
Teräspeikko Ankerbolzen HPM/L
3. Technical data PEIKKO GmbH

1239
STANDOFF SCREWS AS SHEAR CONNECTORS FOR
COMPOSITE TRUSSES: PUSH-OUT TEST RESULTS AND
ANALYSIS

J.R. Ubejd Mujagic*, W. Samuel Easterling**, Thomas M. Murray**


*Pinnacle Structures, Inc., USA
**Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA

Abstract
Composite trusses, or joists, are structural members that have become increasingly
popular in the last several years due to economical and functional considerations. These
members typically consist of a steel truss and composite slab that are connected by
welded headed shear studs. The trusses are specifically designed for the composite
application. Composite slabs are constructed using steel deck, topped with normal or
lightweight concrete.

Typically, welded, headed shear studs are used to connect the slab and top chord of the
truss. Welding studs in the field can present problems if the chord angles, or other
structural shape, are relatively narrow or thin. An alternative type of shear connector has
been under investigation at Virginia Tech for several years. The shear connector is a
standoff screw that has a self-tapping, self-drilling point. A number of push-out tests and
full-scale composite truss tests have been conducted to evaluate the performance of the
shear connector. Results from the push-out tests and related analysis are described in this
paper.

1. Introduction

Along with improvements and innovations in composite construction in general, specific


improvements in composite floors have been made in recent years. One development that
continues to gain popularity in the U.S. is the composite open-web joist. Open web joists
are prefabricated steel trusses in which the top and bottom chords usually consist of

1240
double angle sections, and web members are either double angles, single (crimped)
angles, or continuous round rods. (Hereafter, the composite joists will be referred to as
composite trusses.) Composite trusses have several advantages when compared to other
types of floor framing. These advantages include the ability to span large openings, thus
providing large column free areas. Also, the open web structure permits HVAC ducts and
utilities (plumbing, electrical, telecommunications) to be placed within the depth of the
truss.

Using the most popular form of shear connector, the welded shear stud, can be
problematic for certain trusses. This is particularly true for shorter-span members, which
generally use relatively thin angles for the top chord. Specifically, problems can arise
with welding of headed shear studs to the double angle top chords. The double angle
section is narrow and thus presents a target that is difficult for the stud installer to hit
when welding the studs. The requirement used for limiting the ratio of stud diameter to
base metal thickness is given in the AISC specifications1 as 2.5. This criterion sometimes
limits the use of composite trusses because the top chords must be increased in size to
accommodate the welded shear stud, resulting in a loss of economy. These circumstances
warrant the need for a different shear connector that satisfies the strength requirements, is
functional and easy to install, and at the same time does not govern the size of the truss
chord to the extent that welded shear connectors do.

The development of a ductile shear connector, which can be screwed into the top chord,
would solve the problem of strict welding requirements and also eliminate the need for
sizeable welding equipment and the necessary energy sources at the job site. This new
shear connector would also be simple to install, not requiring the presence of trained and
expensive welding personnel. The new connector would potentially be ideal for small-
and medium-sized construction jobs where lighter trusses with thinner top chords could
be used in composite floors.
14
In response to this need, there has been ongoing 11
research at Virginia Tech for the last several 10

years. The researchers have focused on the


development of a shear connector that would 1.25

make trusses even more practical and appealing 7 38


7
for use in composite floors. Earlier work on 67

similar types of connectors was reported by El- 2.5


Shihy2 and Moy, et al3. The ongoing
investigation has narrowed the possible choices
down to a standoff screw, a schematic of which Fig 1. Standoff Screw Schematic
is shown in Fig 1. The screw has a self-drilling,
self-tapping point and is manufactured from ASTM Grade 8 material with a minimum
specified tensile strength of 1034 MPa.

1241
The standoff screws have been evaluated in three different types of tests: push-out tests;
full-scale short span truss tests; and simple shear and tension tests. Push-out tests are the
primary way of evaluating the strength of standoff screws due to the relative simplicity
and economy, as compared to full-scale tests. The role of full-scale tests has been
primarily to verify the results obtained from the push-out tests. Simple shear and tension
tests were used to determine material properties for the screws. Only push-out test results
and related analyses are presented in this paper. Detailed results can be obtained from the
project reports.4-9

2. Push-out Tests

A total of 254 push-out tests were conducted using the Grade 8 screws. Specimen
fabrication and test procedures did not differ significantly between the various studies.
Specimen configuration included variations in slab construction (solid concrete slab or
composite deck slab), deck depth, base material thickness, concrete strength, number of
screws per specimen, and screw height above the deck. Detailed descriptions of specimen
fabrication, instrumentation and test set-ups for each specific series are presented in the
project reports.4-9

A schematic of the typical push-out test configuration is shown in Figure 2. The push-out
specimens were subjected to a vertical load that simulated the load at the steel concrete
interface. Elastomeric bearing pads were placed under each slab to insure that the slabs
were uniformly loaded along their bottom surfaces. The swivel and the loading plates,
which were placed atop the steel section, insured that the load from the hydraulic ram was
evenly distributed between the two halves of the specimen, and that the axial load indeed
remained axial. The hydraulic ram used to apply the axial load was fixed to the loading
frame. A normal load apparatus was used to simulate the application of gravity load in a
composite truss and to prevent premature separation of the concrete and steel. The
apparatus consisted of a hydraulic ram and two beam sections that were used to distribute
normal load along the length of top chords.

The three quantities measured during the test were axial load, normal load, and slab vs.
top chord relative slip. The axial load was measured with a load cell placed between the
hydraulic ram and crosshead, as shown in Figure 2. Normal load was measured with a
load cell that was placed between the normal load distribution frame and the hydraulic
ram. Movement between the steel and composite slab was measured using linear
potentiometers at four evenly distributed locations on each slab.

The loading scheme for all the tests was relatively similar. Axial load was applied in
increments of 22-45 kN with the normal load kept at 10% of the magnitude of the applied
axial load. After each loading application, the system was left to stabilize for about three

1242
minutes, at which point all the measurements were recorded, and the next higher load
applied.

500 Kip
Cross-head located
Load Cell
between cross beams

Hydraulic Ram
Loading
Plate

50 Kip Load Cell Normal Load


Distribution Frame

Reaction
Floor

Elastomeric
Bearing Pad

Fig 2 Typical Test Setup (Alander et al.5)

3. Analysis of Results

3.1 Ribbed Slab Analysis


The tests evaluated in this section are those constructed with formed steel deck used to
simulate the condition in which the deck is perpendicular to the steel member. Three
types of failures were identified in the tests performed: screw pullout, screw shear, and
concrete rib shear.

Screw pull-out is the failure of the shear connection where localized yielding of the base
material around the screws occurs, causing severe deformation of the base material,
allowing the screw to slip out of the angle with the threads experiencing minimal or no
damage at all.

Screw shear is any kind of failure where the section failed due to screws breaking through
their threaded portion. Rupture may occur due to shear or a combination of shear and
tension.

Concrete rib failure is any type of failure where the specimen failed due to the separation
of a concrete rib from the rest of the slab before breaking of the screws or screw pull-out

1243
occurs. Although a distinction was made in the past between concrete rib failure and
concrete cone pull-out, concrete rib failure is used herein to cover both types of failure.

Previous studies by Hankins et al.4, Alander et al.5, and Webler et al.7 focused on
predicting the strength of the standoff screws at a slip of 5 mm. The choice of this slip
magnitude was based on the notion that standoff screws should exhibit behavior similar to
that of headed shear studs. Another motivation to use the slip of 5 mm was that the
behavior of the test specimens was generally consistent up to that point. The researchers
experienced difficulty in consistently predicting ultimate strengths that occurred at slips
greater than 5 mm. Thus, it was felt that the strength corresponding to the 5 mm
displacement would be more reliably calculated.

A negative aspect of this approach is that the screws typically exhibit significant strength
beyond the level attained at the 5 mm displacement. Thus the need to develop strength
calculation models for the ultimate strength of the screws.

The push-out test results were grouped based on their mode of failure and three separate
analyses performed. This resulted in three different models to predict the shear strength
for each individual mode of failure, with the smallest being the controlling value.

The following variables were identified as important in determining the mode of failure
and strength of a given configuration:
Screw Pullout Failures - screw height, rib height, top chord thickness, bottom rib width
Screw Shear - top chord thickness, screw tensile strength, screw cross-sectional area
Concrete Rib Failure - concrete compressive strength, length of shear plane, number of
screws per rib, bottom rib width

Test results confirmed that screw pull-out failures occur in specimens with relatively thin
top chord angles. Specifically, angles with thickness ranging from 3 to 3.5 mm exhibited
screw pull-out. Specimen parameters, other than top chord angle thickness, that were
determined to influence pull-out strength are listed above. These parameters primarily
affect screw rotation and thus the pull-out strength. The strength model was developed
using regression analysis techniques.

If the thickness of the top chord angle is large enough to prevent a screw pull-out failure,
then a screw shear or concrete rib failure will occur. The screw shear failures observed in
the push-out tests were often thought to be a combination of shear and tension.
Depending on the combination of specimen parameters, rotation of the screw/rib/top
chord angle occurred. Thus, the screw was not in direct shear, but rather a combination
of shear and tension. This influence was evaluated through regression analysis.

1244
The shear plane, depicted in Figure 3, represents the plane through which the applied
shear force is transferred. This plane is highly dependant on screw height and deck
geometry. The vertical distance between screws in a rib containing more than one screw
is a part of the shear plane length and is also depicted in Figure 3 along with other
variables.

Fig 3 Shear Plane in Concrete Rib Failures

Several expressions for the effect of concrete compressive strength were investigated. In
one of the models considered, it was suggested that the square root of the product of
concrete compressive strength and corresponding concrete modulus of elasticity
adequately accounts for the effect of concrete shear strength.10 However, based on
statistical analysis of the models investigated and the available test data, it appeared that
the effect of concrete compressive strength was best represented by a constant multiple of
ln (f ’c). This, along with other variables noted, was used in a regression analysis to
develop the strength equation for concrete rib failure.

3b. Solid Slab Analysis


Push-out tests were conducted using screws in solid slabs. The number of screws per half
specimen ranged from 14 to 26, and the screw spacing ranged from 51 to 102 mm. The
only mode of failure observed in this type of configuration was screw shear. The
equation for calculating screw shear in the solid slabs is the commonly used shear rupture
criteria based on a von Mises failure theory.

3c. Strength Prediction Model


The equations below represent the strength prediction model for the standoff screws
evaluated in this study. Based on the range of experimental variables and the fact that
statistical analyses were used in the development of the equations, the equations are
applicable for concrete compressive strengths of 21 to 48 MPa, 1 to 12 screws per rib and
angle thickness of 3 to 6.5 mm.

The first equation in the deck rib perpendicular to truss case represents the strength in the
screw pull-out mode, the second screw shear and the third concrete rib. Note that all the

1245
equation variables are identified in United States Customary (USC) units. This is because
of the coefficients generated in the statistical analyses.

The solid slab equation is the commonly used shear rupture criteria based on a von Mises
failure criterion. This is expression is obviously applicable as is in either USC or SI units.

Deck rib perpendicular to the truss:

0.75
H 
36.71 (t tc )1.61  s  (1 - 0.15w 2
r1 + 0.98w r1 ) (1)
 hr 
φ Rn = φ CA sc Fut ( 2)
0.13
0.18 (ln f ' c)L sp w r1
0.74
(3)
min N

Solid slab:
A ts Fut
φR n = φ (4)
3

A reliability analysis was conducted to determine the strength reduction factor, φ, for use
in a load and resistance design factor design (LRFD) format. The analysis was performed
separately for each component of the strength equation, using the approach proposed by
Galambos and Ravindra.11 Based on a target reliability index of 3.5, the range of φ
factors calculated for the three strength equations ranged from 0.82-0.89. A single φ
factor of 0.85 was determined to be appropriate.

3d. Simplified Strength Prediction Model


A simplified strength prediction model was developed. As will be noted, the simple
model is not as accurate as the model in section 3c., however the simple model benefits
from a more mechanistic based development, and thus it is easier to visualize.

As in Section 3c, the first equation below represents screw pull-out, the second screw
shear and the third concrete rib shear. Also because certain coefficients are statistically
based, the expressions are given in USC units. The screw pull-out expression was based
on statistical analysis of screw shear tests in which the only variable was the base metal
thickness. This is the same relationship used in the more elaborate equation of Section 3c
for the base metal thickness. The difference in the two is that the influence of other
parameters was ignored due to their relatively minor affect on the strength. The second
equation is the commonly used shear rupture criteria based on a von Mises failure
criterion.

1246
The third equation represents a concrete rib failure. An analogy is made to reinforced
concrete corbels in which the shear friction concept is applied. Only the concrete shear
strength portion of the concept is applied here. An area of concrete defined by Lsp x 1.67
Lsp is multiplied by 0.3 ksi. The length of the shear plane perpendicular to the rib of the
deck, Lsp, is defined quantitatively in Section 5 and can visualized in Fig. 3. The failure
surface of the rib, particularly the length along the rib, is a quantity that varies
significantly in push-out tests. The choice of a 1.67 multiple of the Lsp value appeared to
give reasonable results.
Deck rib perpendicular to the truss:

130 t1tc.6 (5)


A ts Fut
φR n = φ (6 )
3
0.5 L2sp
(7 )
min N

The calculations for the strength reduction factor, using the simplified equations, continue
to be evaluated at the time of this writing. Preliminary calculations indicate that a
strength reduction factor of 0.8 is applicable.

3e. Comparison of Models for Deck Rib Perpendicular to Truss


A graphical comparison of the two models for the deck rib perpendicular to truss case is
presented in Fig. 4. As can be noted from the figure, the distribution is smoother for the
more detailed model than for the simplified model. Additionally, the coefficient of
variation is lower for the more detailed model.
45

39 Standoff Screw Strength Prediction Model


40 Screw Prediction Model
C.O.V. = 0.105
No. of Tests = 163
35 Simplified Prediction Model Mean = 1.018
31
Simplified Strength Prediction Model
Number of Tests per Range

30 28
C.O.V. = 0.155
26
No. of Tests = 163
25 Mean = 1.026
21 21
19
20
17
15
15
12
11 11
10 10
9
10 8
7
6
5
4 4
5 3
2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0.55-0.60

0.60-0.65

0.65-0.70

0.70-0.75

0.75-0.80

0.80-0.85

0.85-0.90

0.90-0.95

0.95-1.00

1.00-1.05

1.05-1.10

1.10-1.15

1.15-1.20

1.20-1.25

1.25-1.30

1.30-1.35

1.35-1.40

1.40-1.45

Experimental/Predicted Strength Ratio Range

Fig. 4. Comparison of Strength Ratios for Standoff Screw Calculation Models

1247
4. Summary and Conclusions

Results from an on-going study of the behavior and strength of a new type of shear
connector for use in composite design were presented. The connector consists of a stand-
off screw with a self-tapping, self-drilling point, made from ASTM Grade 8 material.
Push-out test results, obtained from a wide variety of specimen parameters, were used to
develop strength calculation equations for configurations in which the steel deck was
oriented perpendicular to the truss. These equations represent three modes of failure:
screw pull-out, screw shear, concrete rib shear. Two sets of equations were presented,
one relatively simpler than the other. Strength reduction factors were calculated based on
the models and test data.

The models developed provide an acceptable means by which the shear connector
strength can be calculated for use in design of composite trusses. Both forms of the
model provide acceptable accuracy for design as reflected in Fig. 4, with means of
experimental/predicted strengths of 1.018 (c.o.v. of 0.105) and 1.026 (c.o.v. of 0.155). A
strength reduction factor of 0.85 was determined to be applicable for use with the more
detailed strength model. Additional work is required to arrive at a final recommendation
for a strength reduction factor for the simplified calculation procedure. Further studies
are required to evaluate the applicability of the solid slab test results to the configuration
in which the steel deck ribs are parallel to the flexural member.

5. Nomenclature

φ = strength reduction factor Lsp = length of the shear plane


Asc = gross area of the screw, in.2 perpendicular to deck rib, in.
Ats = tensile stress area of the screw, in.2 2
w −l 
= 0.7854(D – 0.9743/n)2 = 2  r 2 s  + (H s − h r ) 2 + ls
C = top chord thickness coefficient  2 
= (2/5) for ttc ≤ 0.205 in. n = number of threads per inch
= (2/3)(1-2ttc) for ttc > 0.205 in. N = number of screws per rib
D = screw diameter Rn = shear strength per screw, kips
f ‘c = concrete compressive strength, psi ttc = top chord thickness, in.
Fut = screw tensile strength, ksi wr1 = bottom rib width, in.
hr = rib height, in. wr2 = top rib width, in.
Hs = screw height, in.
ls = vert. dist. between screws in rib, in.

1248
6. Acknowledgements

The research described in this paper was sponsored by Nucor Research and Development
and the ELCO division of Textron. The authors are grateful for the assistance provided
by David Samuelson and G. Wayne Studebaker of Nucor R&D and Mike Janusz of
ELCO.

7. References

1. Load and Resistance Factor Design Specifications for Structural Steel Buildings
(1993). American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois.
2. El-Shihy, A.M. (1986). “Unwelded Shear Connectors in Composite Steel and
Concrete Structures.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southampton, Southampton,
United Kingdom.
3. Moy, S., Jolly, C., and El-Shihy, A. (1987). “Unwelded Shear Connectors for
Composite Joists.” Proceedings of the International Conference on Steel and
Aluminum Structures, Cardiff, UK, July 8-10, 1987.
4. Hankins, S.C., Gibbings, D.R., Easterling, W.S., and Murray, T.M. (1995).
"Standoff Screws Functioning as Shear Connectors in Composite Joists.” Report
CE/VPI-ST 94/16, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA.
5. Alander, C.C., Easterling, W.S., and Murray, T.M. (1998a). "Standoff Screws Used
in Composite Joists." Report No. CE/VPI - ST 98/02, Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
6. Alander, C.C., Easterling, W.S., and Murray, T.M. (1998b). "Data Report for
Standoff Screws Used in Composite Joists." Report No. CE/VPI - ST 98/03, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
7. Webler, J.E., Easterling, W.S. and Murray, T.M. (2000). "Further Investigation of
Standoff Screws Used in Composite Joists." Report No. CE/VPI - ST 00/18,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
8. Mujagic, U., Easterling, W.S., and Murray, T.M. (2000a). "Further Investigation of
Standoff Screws Used in Composite Joists (Addendum.)" Report No. CE/VPI - ST
00/19, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
9. Mujagic U., Easterling, W.S., and Murray, T.M. (2000b). "Further Investigation of
Short Span Composite Joists." Report No. CE/VPI - ST 00/20, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
10. Grant, J.A., Fisher, J.W., and Slutter, R.G. (1977). “Composite Beams with Formed
Steel Deck.” AISC Engineering Journal, 14 (1).
11. Galambos, T.V. and Ravindra, M.K. (1976). Load and Resistance Factor Design
Criteria for Composite Beams. Research Report No. 44, Washington University, St.
Louis, MO.

1249
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON A NEW JOINT FOR
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE COMPOSITE BRIDGE WITH
STEEL TRUSS WEB
Kousuke Furuichi**, Masato Yamamura*, Hiroyuki Nagumo* and Kentaro Yoshida**
*Civil Engineering Design Department, Kajima Corporation, Japan
** Technical Research Institute, Kajima Corporation, Japan

Abstract
A composite truss bridge has been developed that comprises concrete upper and lower slabs
and steel truss as the web. This structure rationalizes structural performances, reduces weight
and labor costs.
A structure is proposed to simplify the cantilever construction, and to utilize both steel and
concrete effectively to realize a new composite joint structure for a composite truss bridge.
This joint structure is achieved by inserting the diagonal tubular steel into a box-shaped steel
structure called a steel BOX made from welded perforated steel plates. The force flow in this
joint structure was expected to be complicated. Therefore, static destructive tests were carried
out using scale models to conceive their force propagation conditions and ultimate strengths,
and to obtain basic data for designing.
These tests confirmed that the force was propagated in the steel BOX until shear cracks
occurred at the joint. At this point, re-bars in the joint carried some of the forces. It was thus
confirmed that varying both quantity and placement of re-bars could control the ultimate
strength at the joint.

1. Introduction

Hybrid bridge structures have


recently been developed that utilize
the advantages of both steel and
concrete 1), 2). These structures have
enabled cost saving by rationalizing
structural performances, and
reducing bridge weight and labor
costs. An example of this type of
hybrid structure is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig.1 PC Composite Bridges with Steel Truss Web

1250
引張斜材 圧縮斜材
Tensile Diagonal Member Compressive Diagonal Member

Joint of Compressive
Diagonal Member

Rings of Rebar

Concrete Slab

Main Re-bars
Steel BOX

Stirrups

Fig.2 Joint Structure Fig. 3 Object Bridge

This is a composite truss bridge comprising concrete upper and lower slabs and steel truss as
the web. This structure draws a bead on decreasing bridge weight while maintaining high
rigidity against live loads, and reducing labor costs. The concrete web is replaced with steel
truss, because it contributes little to the resisting moment in a PC box girder. Applications of
this structure are found in the Albore Bridge, the Loars Bridge, etc. However, in this type of
bridge, there is a possibility of brittle failure of the total system due to breakdown of the joints
between concrete slabs and steel truss members. Therefore, it is necessary to develop the joint
structure that can propagate the required forces.
Various joint structures have been proposed, but authors have developed a new joint structure
5), 6), 7), 8)
which is compact and has sufficient strength, as shown in Fig. 2. This joint is easy to
construct during the cantilever construction, and effectively utilizes steel and concrete to
produce joint with a composite structure. This joint structure is achieved by inserting tensile
and compressive tubular steel diagonal members into a box-shaped steel structure called a
steel BOX. The steel BOX is made of welded perforated steel plates. The steel BOX and the
tensile diagonal members are welded to form an integrated structure. The compressive
diagonal members and the concrete in the steel BOX are unified by the effect of bonding of
the re-bars, which are welded along the internal perimeter of the tubular steel.
This paper reports static loading tests using scale models of the joint to conceive the force
propagation conditions and the ultimate strengths of the joint structure, and to establish a
concept of designing. And further more, it proposes the equation of shear strength derived
from test results.
2500

2500 2350 2@32=64


33 33
2350 100 6@125=750 6@125=750 100
50 2@80.5 50 18@125=2250 50 50 2@80.5 50 4@65=260 4@65=260
D10 D10 D10
D10 68°68° 50
50 D10 50 D10
81
425

3@75=225
425

2@81.5=163
81 50
50 50
50 50 D13 Steel BOX 50 50 D13 Steel BOX
5@65=325 t=6.0 5@65=325 t=6.0
1361
1361

D13 Hall of Diameter 25.0 Hall of Diameter 25.0


Pith of Hall 50.0 Pith of Hall 50.0
Tensile Diagonal Tensile Diagonal
Member Compressive Diagonal Member Compressive Diagonal
φ=165.2 Member φ=165.2 φ=165.2
t=7.1 φ=165.2 t=7.1 t=7.1
t=7.1

a) No.1 Specimen b) No.2 Specimen

Fig.4 Aspect of Specimen

1251
2. Test outline 35 195 5035

4@50=200
2.1 Specimens

162.5
Dimensions of specimens and applied design loads
for the specimens were determined to simulate the
joint with a 1:2 scale model of the bridge, as shown 111 φ25.0
φ25.0 t=6,SM490
in Fig. 3. Fig. 4 and 5 show the configurations of 315 325

50
the specimens and the steel BOX, respectively.

250

250
Two specimens were tested. The first specimen

80
(No.1) was used to evaluate the shear strength of the
152 5@50=250 152 313
joint. In the second specimen (No.2), the quantity
of re-bars in the joint is approximately doubled to Fig.5 Steel BOX
prevent failure in the joint before failure in the other
members.
The diagonal tubular steel has an outside diameter of 165.2 mm and a wall thickness of 7.1
mm (diameter-thickness ratio 23). To unify the joint of the compressive diagonal members
with the slab, re-bars with diameter of 6 mm were welded along the perimeter of the steel pipe
at 30 mm pitch in three stages. This design referred to results of previously implemented axial
compression element tests.
24 perforations of 25.0 mm diameter were aligned at 50.0 mm spacing on the side steel plates
of the steel BOX taking into an account of the integration with the slab concrete and of filling
capability during the concrete placement.
Table 1 shows the mechanical properties of the diagonal tubular steel and the steel plates of
the steel BOX.
The slab concrete was determined as 42.5 cm high and 42.5 cm wide. For the 1/2 scale model,
the maximum grain diameter of coarse aggregate was set to be 10 mm. Table 2 shows the
material properties of the concrete.
Re-bars with diameter of 10.0 mm and 16.0 mm were used in the slabs. Table 3 shows the
material properties of the re-bars.

Table 1 Material Properties of Steel Tubular and Steel BOX Table 2 Material Properties of Concrete
Tensile Strength Yield Point Elastic Modulus Elongation No.1:21days No.2:25days
N/mm2 N/mm2 ×103N/mm2 % No Compressive Strength Elastic Modulus
Steel Tubular 450 408 207 39 N/mm2 ×103N/mm2
Steel BOX 532 361 207 26 No.1 Specimen 39.7 25.7
No.2 Specimen 41.4 26.2

Table 3 Material Properties of Reinforcement


D10 D13
No Tensile Strength Yield Strength Elastic Modulus Tensile Strength Yield Strength Elastic Modulus
N/mm2 N/mm2 ×103N/mm2 N/mm2 N/mm2 ×103N/mm2
No.1 Specimen
512 349 18.8 508 356 18.9
No.2 Specimen

2.2 Test method


A horizontal load was applied at the end of the concrete slab using the apparatus shown in
Fig.6, so that it was precisely transferred to the joint, tensile diagonal member and
compressive diagonal member. In order to determine the horizontal load P, the linear frame

1252
反力壁
2950 1100
Result of Linear Analysis
1000 Maximum Load 983.5kN
Displacement 51.1mm
5500 900
800 Maximum Load 931.4kN
Specimen No.2
3000 700 Displacement 31.3mm

P(kN)
580 230195 2500
600
2500 Load of S er viceability
500 Condition×3(P=663kN) Shear
P=839.0kN Specimen No.1
Specimen 400
700

2000 Hydrauric

Load of Ult imat e C ondition Displacement 59.4mm


球座
Jack

2000kN
300 (P=377kN)

1378.5
1500 Load cell 200 viceabilityy C
Load of S er viceabilit
100 (P=221kN)

1978.5
1000
0
500 600 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

600
δ(mm)

Fig.6 Side View of Load Carrying Fig.7 Load-Displacement Relationship

analysis was conducted separately to evaluate the relationship between the axial forces in the
diagonal members and the axial forces in the subject bridge. The following static repeated
loads were applied: 1) the design load (P=221kN), 2) the design ultimate load (No.1:
P=584kN, No.2: P=671kN), and 3) the maximum load and load conformable to maximum
load to confirm the conditions of developed displacements. The design load and design
ultimate load were specified to originate the axial force in the tensile diagonal member
identical to the axial force for each loading state based on the separately conducted linear
frame analysis.
The measured parameters were horizontal load (load cell), specimen displacement
(displacement meter), open width between concrete and diagonal tubular steel (cantilever type
displacement meter), diagonal tubular steel strain (strain gauge), slab concrete strain (strain
gauge and mold gauge), and re-bar strain (strain gauge).

3. Test Results and discussions

3.1 Horizontal load – horizontal displacement


Fig. 7 shows the relationship between horizontal load P and horizontal displacement δ for the
specimen No.1 and No.2.
Both specimens showed an increase in displacement of about 2.8 mm at the beginning of the
loading. This is caused by the margin at the hinge that fixed the specimen on the platform.
Thereafter, the gradient of P-δ (rigidity) became larger and the relationship was linear up to
P=550 kN, which was larger than the design ultimate load (P=377 kN).
The gradient (rigidity) up to that point was almost the same as that of the gradient obtained
from the linear frame analysis, which took into account the rigid connection of nodes and the
eccentricity of the joint. In the process, both specimens showed a similar trend up to P=931.4
kN (the maximum load of specimen No.1), indicating that increase in displacement was
gradually enhanced.
For specimen No.1, the width of the shear crack at the joint increased and at the same time the
load started to decrease at the maximum load of P=931.4 kN (δ=31.1 mm). The load rapidly
decreased after P=839.0 kN (δ=59.4 mm) due to the shear failure, and thereafter specimen
No.1 reached its ultimate strength.
For specimen No.2, the load increased beyond the maximum load for specimen No.1 (P-931.4
kN). It reached a maximum at P=983.6 kN (δ=51.1 mm), and specimen No.2 reached its

1253
upper view upper view

Load Load

side view side view

Load Load

lower view lower view

Load Load

a) Specimen No.1 b) Specimen No.2

Fig.8 Specimen Cracking after Loading

ultimate strength due to full plastic buckling of the compressive diagonal member.

3.2 Cracking patterns


Shear cracking occurred in both specimens at a force P of about 600 kN. There were no signs
of cracking at the design load and design ultimate load.
Fig.8 shows the cracking patterns observed at the completion of tests.
In specimen No.1, cracking occurred on the side face of the joint in an angle of 45 degrees.
The crack development was also observed along the main re-bars. On the upper side, the
crack extended from the center to the periphery of the steel BOX. This is probably caused by
the fact that the compressive diagonal member was trying to extrude the steel BOX to the
upper side.
In specimen No.2, shear cracking occurred on the side face of the joint as for specimen No.1.
However, unlike specimen No.1, the cracks were concentrated on the side face of the steel
BOX. More cracks induced by the diagonal tubular member were found on the lower side of
specimen No.2 than that of specimen No.1. The joint in specimen No.2 has higher shear
strength and shear rigidity owing to the increased number of re-bars. As a result, the larger
forces were converged at the joint between the tubular steel and the concrete slab for specimen
No.2 than that of specimen No.1 causing more cracks at that point.

3.3 Strains in tubular steel


Fig. 9 shows the axial strains and the bending strains of the tubular steel. It is found that no
portion of either specimen reached yield strain at design ultimate load (P=377 kN). Strains of
the two specimens were almost identical up to the maximum load of specimen No.1. For
specimen No.2, it was observed that at around the maximum load of specimen No.1, the
middle-stage bending strain of the compressive diagonal member was released and the other
strains were greatly increased. Therefore, it was possible to confirm that the full plastic
buckling in the compressive tubular member occurred around this point. The smaller strains
took place in the upper stage than in the other stages because the upper stage was situated
inside of the slab concrete and the force was propagated through the concrete in the tubular
steel.

1254
① Allowable Strain (667μ)
② Nominal Yield Strain (1143μ)
③ Actual Yield Strain (1916μ)
1100
①②③ 1100
①②③
Upper Lower Lower Middle
1000 1000
Upper
900 900

800 Middle 800


700 Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN) 700 Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN)
600
P(kN)

600

P(kN)
500 500
400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN) 400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN)

300 300
Load of Serviceability Condition (P=221kN) Load of Serviceability Condition
200 200 (P=221kN)
Positive
100 100
0 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
ε(μ) ε(μ)

a) No.1 Specimen (Axial Strains of Tensile Tubular Steel) b) No.1 Specimen (Bending Strains of Tensile Tubular Steel)
③②① ①②③
1100
1100
1000 Lower
Lower 1000
900 Upper Upper
900
800 800
Middle
Middle
700 700
600 Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN) Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN)
P(kN)

600
P(kN)

500 500
400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN) 400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN)

300 300
Load of Serviceability Condition (P=221kN) Load of Serviceability Condition
200 200 (P=221kN)
Positive
100 100

0 0
-16000 -14000 -12000 -10000 -8000 -6000 -4000 -2000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
ε(μ) ε(μ)

c) No.1 Specimen (Axial Strains of Comp. Tubular Steel) d) No.1 Specimen (Bending Strains of Comp. Tubular Steel)

①②③ ①②③
1100 1100
Lower
1000 Upper 1000 Middle

900 900 Lower


800 800 Upper
Middle
700 700
Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN) Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN)
P(kN)

600 600
P(kN)

500 500

400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN) 400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN)

300 300
Load of Serviceability Condition (P=221kN) Load of Serviceability Condition
200 200 (P=221kN)
Positive
100 100

0 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
ε(μ) ε(μ)

a) No.2 Specimen (Axial Strains of Tensile Tubular Steel) b) No.2 Specimen (Bending Strains of Tensile Tubular Steel)
③②① ①②③
1100 1100
Lower
1000 1000
Lower
900 Upper 900 Upper

800 800
Middle
700 Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN) 700
600 600 Load of Serviceability Condition×3 (P=663kN)
P(kN)

P(kN)

Middle
500 500
400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN) 400 Load of Ultimate Condition (P=377kN)

300 300
Load of Serviceability Condition (P=221kN) Load of Serviceability Condition
200 200 (P=221kN)
Positive
100 100
0 0
-16000 -14000 -12000 -10000 -8000 -6000 -4000 -2000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
ε(μ) ε(μ)

c) No.2 Specimen (Axial Strains of Comp. Tubular Steel) d) No.2 Specimen (Bending Strains of Comp. Tubular Steel)

Fig.9 Load-Steel Tubular Strain Relationship

1255
a) Main Re-bar b) Stirrups

Fig.10 Strain Distribution of Reinforcements on the Joint

3.4 Reinforcing bar strains


Fig.10 shows the strain distributions of the main re-bars and stirrups in the joint when the load
equivalent to the design load (P=200 kN) was applied and after cracking took place (P=900
kN). Neither shear cracking nor strain was observed in the re-bars at P=200 kN for either
specimen. However, strains were observed mainly at the joint in the main re-bars and in the
stirrups at P=900 kN. In specimen No.2, the strains in the re-bars were small and were more
evenly distributed than in specimen No.1. The strains in the main re-bars were found to be
evenly distributed over the height of the steel BOX and the strains in the stirrups were found
to be concentrated near the
intersection with the centroid of the
tension 引張

diagonal member. compression 圧縮

3.5 Steel BOX strains


Fig.11 shows the principal strains
(P=200 kN and P=900 kN)
occurring in the steel BOX. On the 50μ 1000μ

side face of the steel BOX, diagonal


compressive strains and diagonal
tensile strains occurred at an angle 引張
圧縮
50μ
引張
圧縮
1000μ

a) No.1No.1試験体(200KN)
Specimen (P=200kN) b) No.1No.1試験
Specimen (P=900kN)
体(900KN)
of 45 degrees at P=200 kN. At
P=900 kN, the principal tensile
strains were lateral. Furthermore, tension
引張

compression
the principal tensile strains wee 圧縮

vertical at near the compressive


diagonal member. This is
considered to be the result of the
constraint of the concrete in the 50μ 1000μ
steel BOX and the resistance
against slipping-out of the
compressive diagonal member to
c) No.2 Specimen (P=200kN) d) No.2 Specimen (P=900kN)
the upper face. It is noted that the No.2試験 体(200KN) No.2試験体(900KN)

principal strains on the side face of Fig.11 Principal Strains of Steel BOX

1256
the steel BOX were smaller than the yield strain even at P=900 kN.
On the upper side of the steel BOX, tensile strains were directed toward the center of the
tensile diagonal member, because the steel Box was welded to the tensile diagonal member.
Although the principal tensile strains exceeded the yield strain at P=900 kN, they were smaller
than the allowable strain for three times the design load (P=663 kN).
In the steel member connected to the side face of the steel BOX, the tensile strains were about
450 μ and 200μ on the tensile side and the compressive side, respectively. The steel
member on the tensile side had larger strains.

4. Discussions and points to be clarified for joint design method

4.1 Force distribution in joint


The strain distributions of the re-bars (main re-bars and stirrups) placed in the joint, and of the
steel Box showed a difference between the force distributions of the joints before and after
cracking when design load was applied.
With the design load, almost no reinforcement strains were observed. The force is considered
to be propagated mainly in the steel BOX.
In contrast, the re-bar strains increased after cracking took place. At this point, the surface of
the steel BOX would be contributing to the strength. The following re-bar strain distributions
were observed at that time. The main re-bar strains ranged over the height of the steel BOX
and, the stirrup strains occurred at the intersection of the centroids of the diagonal members.
It is considered that this can be used as a reference to determine the range of the contributing
re-bar when estimating the ultimate shear strength of the joint.
The principal strains on the side face of the steel BOX resulting from the shear are decisive
with the design load. As the load level increases after shear cracking, the rigidity of the joint
decrease and the amount of deformation increases. It is therefore considered that, as well as
the effect of shear, the constraint of the concrete inside the steel BOX, slipping-out of the
tensile diagonal member and the rotation effect due to the extrusion of the compressive
diagonal member influenced this behavior. Therefore, additional analyses or experiments are
necessary to clarify the ambiguities for further improvement in the detailed designing for the
configuration of the steel BOX, arrangement
and size of the perforations, etc.

5. Equation of Shear Strength

5.1 Relationship between the applied


horizontal force and shear force at the
joint
To formulate the equation of shear strength,
the relationship between the applied
horizontal force and shear force at the joint is
calculated by using the frame analysis. From
results of the frame analysis, an applied
horizontal force of 100kN results in 103kN of
force at the joint.
Fig.12 Shear-Strain Diagram of Steel BOX

1257
5.2 Formulating the equation of shear strength
Fig.12 shows the shear-strain diagram of a steel BOX with applied horizontal force of 931kN.
All gages attached on the surface of the steel BOX show that all of the strains exceeds the
shear yield strain of 2078μ. As a result, the shear-stress distribution may be assumed as a
rectangular shape. Fig.10-b) shows the transition of strains measured from the gages attached
on stirrups. Consequently, if the applied horizontal force is large enough to bring the steel
plate to the point of shear yield, stirrups would also yield. The shear strength at the joint is
sum of shear strengths of the concrete, stirrups, and steel BOX. Therefore, the equation of
shear strength at the joint can be described as
Vnd = Vcd + Vstd + Vssd
Vnd: nominal shear strength at joint
Vcd: nominal shear strength provided by concrete at joint
Vcd = βd・βp・βn・fvcd・bw・d
fvcd = 0.23√fcd
βd =4√1/d
βp =3√100pw
βn = 1.0
fcd: compressive strength of concrete
bw: web width
d: distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement
pw = As/(bw・d)
As: area of tension reinforcement
Vstd: nominal shear strength provided by stirrup at joint
Vstd = Aw・fyd・z / s
s: pitch of spiral reinforcement
Aw: total amount of area of shear reinforcement over the interval
z: distance from compression resultant to centroid of tension reinforcement
fyd: design yield strength of tension reinforcement
Vssd: nominal shear strength provided by steel BOX at joint
Vstd = 2・t・h・σsy / √3
t: thickness of surface steel plate
h: height of surface steel plate
σsy: allowable tension stress

Table 4 shows both experimental and calculated shear strengths of specimen No.1 and 2.

Table 4 Comparison of Experimental and Calculated Shear Strengths


Unit:kN
No.1 Specimen No.2 Specimen
Vcd 82 82
Vstd 130 508
Vssd 623 623
Vnd 835 1213
Experimental Value: Vn 978 1356
Vn / Vnd 0.854 0.895

Comparing with experimental values, calculated values are fairly good and are 80% of that of
experimental values. Farther analysis such as a non-linear analysis would be carried out in a

1258
future to clarify both shear transfer capacity and system of applied load endurance, and to
decide whether using equation to calculate the shear strength is proper way to do.

The restraint of the concrete in steel BOX makes the actual shear strength provided by the
concrete larger than that of the calculated one.

6. Concluding remarks

Destructive tests were conducted using scale models. The object of the tests was the joint
structure made by inserting tensile diagonal members and compressive diagonal members into
a steel BOX made of welded perforated steel plates. The acquisitions obtained from the tests
are summarized as follows:
a. By actually destroying the joint, properties of shear failure in the joint were conceived.
b. No abnormalities such as shear cracking were found under the design loading.
c. It was confirmed that the joint was safe at over three times the design load.
d. The force propagation conditions in the joint were conceived from the strain distributions
in the re-bars (main re-bars and stirrups) of the joint and in the steel BOX.
e. The force propagation conditions in the joint of the compressive diagonal members were
conceived.
f. The equation of shear strength was derived from the tests results.
It is planned to conduct additional analysis and tests to confirm the current test results and to
improve and refine the designing method of full-scale joint structures.

APPENDIX. REFERENCES

1) Keiichiro Sonoda, “Hybrid Structures”, Bridge and Foundation, pp23-29, 1997


2) Atsuo Ogawa, and Norio Terada, “Composite Bridges in J.H.”, Bridge and Foundation,
pp48-55, 1997
3) Express Highway Research Foundation of Japan, Report on Investigation of Prestressed
Concrete Composite Bridges, 1997
4) Yasuo Inokuma, et al., “Scheme of Tomoe-gwa (Prestressed Concrete Composite
Bridge) ”, Proceedings of the 51st Annual Conference of the JSCE, pp514-515, 1996
5) Yasuo Inokuma, et al., “Analytical/Experimental Study of a joint in Prestressed Concrete
Composite Bridges with Steel Truss Web”, Proceedings of the Prestressed Concrete
Symposium, pp73-78, 1999
6) Hiroshi Miwa, et al., “Experimental Study on the Mechanical Behavior of Panel Joints in
PC Hybrid Truss Bridges ”, Journal of Structural Engineering, pp1475-1484, 1998
7) Masaaki Hoshino, et al., “Experimental Study of a Panal Joint in Prestressed Concrete
Hybrid Truss Bridges”, Journal of Structural Engineering, pp1423-1430, 1999
8) Kyoji Niitani, et al., “Experimental Study on a Joint in Prestressed Concrete Composite
Bridges with Steel Truss Web”, Journal of Structural Engineering, pp1509-1516, 1999
9) Youhei Taira, et al., “Investigation of Connecting Steel Pipe and RC member Using
Dubel ”, Proceedings of the 54th Annual Conference of the JSCE , pp288-289, 1999

1259
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A CONCRETE-FILLED
STEEL TUBE JOINT
Stephen P. Schneider, Donald R. Kramer, Douglas L. Sarkkinen
Kramer Gehlen and Associates, Inc.

Abstract
A wide-flange girder connection to a concrete-filled steel tube column was recently
designed for two low-rise building structures. Preliminary cost estimates indicated that
this system was more economical than the more traditional structural steel column
counterpart. A methodology to compute strength, stiffness and joint equilibrium is
presented. Finally, some differences and limitations of the current U.S. design
specifications are discussed.

1. Introduction

Concrete-filled steel tube (CFT) columns combine the advantages of a ductile system,
generally associated with steel structures, with the stiffness of concrete components.
The advantages of the concrete-filled steel tube column over other composite systems
includes: the steel tube provides formwork for the concrete, the concrete prolongs local
buckling of the steel tube wall, the tube prohibits excessive concrete spalling, and
composite columns add significant stiffness to a frame compared to more traditional
steel frame construction. While many advantages exist, the use of CFTs in building
construction has been limited due to, in part, a lack of construction experience and to the
complexity of connection detailing. Consequently, a joint was needed that could utilize
the favorable strength and stiffness characteristics of the concrete-filled tube column and
yet be constructible.
This paper summarizes a steel girder to concrete-filled steel tube (CFT) connection detail
that has been designed for several recent projects constructed in Vancouver, WA.,
U.S.A. Similar connections have exhibited significant inelastic cyclic behavior and the
detail discussed in this paper has shown to be fairly economical and constructible. The
connection has been designed to accommodate the needed tolerances resulting from the

1270
rolling process, fabrication and construction. Circular CFTs were used because of their
favorable ductility characteristics relative to the square tube, and were more
accommodating when the structural frames were not oriented along orthogonal axes.
The design of this connection is discussed along with the relevant requirements from the
applicable U.S. design codes. A design methodology is presented, which consists of the
flexural strength, stiffness and equilibrium at the joint. Results suggest that the moment
depended on the assumptions used to determine strength. However, stiffness controls
the design of many structural systems using moment-resisting connections. Flexural
stiffness was shown to be highly variable depending on the method of computation.
Finally, a reasonable evaluation of joint equilibrium was needed to ensure proper
inelastic behavior of the structural system. These issues were critical in obtaining a safe
and economical CFT joint design.

2. Basis of Connection

Figure 1 shows the results from two of the six circular CFT connections tested by
Schneider, et. al. (1998). Only circular tubes were studied since this connection tends to
be more difficult compared to the square tube counterpart. The Type I connection was a
connection that was attached to the skin of the steel tube only. This connection was
favored by many of the practitioners on the advisory panel for this research project since
it appeared to be the easiest to construct. Effectively, the flanges and the web were
welded to the skin of the tube, and the through thickness shear of the tube wall
controlled the distribution of flange force, or the flared geometry of the flange plate, to
the tube wall. The Type II connection continued the girder section through the concrete-
filled steel tube. An opening was cut in the steel tube to allow the girder to pass through
the core. Each connection tested consisted of a 356 mm diameter pipe with a 6.4 mm
wall thickness, and a W14x38 for the girder. The yield strength of the pipe and the
girder was 320 MPa, with an approximate concrete strength of 35 MPa.
In all cases in this test program, assembly of the connection was to be done in the
fabrication shop. This was primarily to control the quality of all welded joints. A stub-
out of the connection would be attached to the tube column and shipped to the
construction site. The field splice would be made to the end of the connection stub-out
of the connection. As the construction of the structural system progressed, the tube
would be filled with concrete. Clearly, a connection like Type I provides the least
amount of interference with the placement of the concrete infill. However, a connection
like Type II may introduce significant difficulty in getting good consolidation of the
concrete in the tube for lifts over several floors.
As demonstrated by the normalized moment-rotation behavior shown in Fig. 1, the
connection that continued through the CFT exhibited far superior behavior relative to the
exterior-only Type I connection. For the Type I connection, the steel tube experienced
high local distortions in the connected region. Fracture initiated in the connection stub at
approximately 1.25% total rotation, and propagated into the tube wall by 2.75% rotation.

1271
This tearing propagate from the tips of the flange toward the web. Only one flange
fractured, resulting in an unsymmetric M-θ behavior and a pinching of the hysteretic
curves. Results of connection Type II exhibited quite stable inelastic behavior. Local
flange buckling was observed at approximately 2.75% total rotation, and the web
buckling was observed at about 3.0% total rotation. Deterioration of the inelastic
characteristics were observed after the onset of local web buckling. Failure of the
connection was caused by fracture of the beam flange in the connection stub region.
This flange tearing eventually propagated into the web. Although the flexural strength
Top & bottom Ty p. Top & bottom.
Each side.

Each side Ty p. Each side Ty p.

Plate to match flange


& web thickness Section to match girder

Type I: Type II:


Simple Welded Connection Continuous Girder Connection
1.5
1.0
M / Mpp))
Moment( (M/M
0.5
Normalized Moment
0.0
Normalized
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5

-6.0 -3.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 -6.0 -3.0 0.0 3.0 6.0
Connection Rotation ( % ) Connection Rotation ( % )

Figure 1. Moment-Rotation Behavior of Tested CFT Connections.

1272
decreased approximately 30% from peak value, the hysteretic behavior remained stable
even at large rotations. No crushing of the concrete was observed, and there was no
apparent signs of local distress on the tube wall. These results clearly indicate that
connections used in moment-resisting steel frame using CFT columns should utilize the
continuous connection-type if the system is subjected to large seismic demands.

3. Connection Design

A schematic of the connection recently designed for two moment-resisting systems using
CFT columns is shown in Fig. 2. Both buildings were two stories: The first floor used a
composite concrete slab on a steel girder framing system and the roof used a corrugated
metal deck with open web joists. Although one building had an orthogonal layout for
the lateral-load resisting frames, the second building had a highly irregular layout. Thus,
connection design to a square tube would have been impractical in at least the second
case. Circular CFTs were used for both buildings in lieu of the more traditional steel
wide-flange columns because the preliminary cost estimates were that CFTs could be as
much as 20% more economical.
The basic premise of the connection in Fig. 2 was similar to the continuous girder test
specimen, however, it was modified to accommodate construction tolerances. Primarily,
the steel tube was slotted so that the steel girder could be placed in from above. The
convenience of this was that girders can span over many of the CFT columns minimizing
the number of field connections for the girder. The field splice for the girder can be
located away from the column-girder joint, eliminating the critical flange welds that
would otherwise be needed for moment-resisting steel frame connections. Further, the
girder splice can be a bolted, end plate connection thereby minimizing the number of
complete-joint penetration field welds.

1273
Slot Tube to Width of the
Girder Flange. Ea. Side

Bent Closure Pl Typ.

Flange Holes for the


Consolidation of
the Concrete Infill

Figure 2. Continuous Girder CFT Joint.

The slot in the tube provided other advantages in frame construction. Allowing for the
tolerances needed for U.S. construction practices may preclude the use of some
connections that have otherwise exhibited favorable experimental behavior. This may be
due to a complex field assembly, or a detail that requires a tighter tolerance than may
otherwise be possible. With the slotted steel tube connection the girders can be
connected without significantly racking the frame. Further, the girder can be slightly out
of alignment in plan, or in elevation, without introducing significant internal
misalignment stresses in the girder or the columns. Finally, leveling of the girders can
be made by leveling nuts applied to the girder at the bottom of the slot. This could be
done by slightly over-cutting the base of the slot in the shop to ensure ease of
construction.
Experience during the construction of the first low-rise building in Vancouver, WA.
suggested that the steel tube for the next level should be erected before the girder
connection is fully welded. The connection of the upper steel tube must have a
complete-joint penetration groove weld with a backing bar attached to the inside of the
joint. Once the frame girders and columns were in place the joint of each CFT
connection was completed. The vertical welds along the girder depth are critical. A
bent plate welded to the girder web, spanning full depth between the girder flanges, must
be used as a closure plate. This was either welded to the steel tube wall directly, or a

1274
filler plate was welded between the steel tube and the closure plate. Closure plates may
or may not be needed between the bottom girder flange and the tube, but a closure will
be needed above the top flange. Finally, the concrete can be placed in the steel tube. As
shown in the detail, holes were drilled in the girder flange to allow good consolidation of
the concrete around the girder flanges in the core of the steel tube.
One drawback of this particular connection was that each column lift extended over only
one floor. Thus, a complete-joint penetration weld was made for each column at each
level. This was adequate for the two story buildings, but the slotted tube column might
be impractical for buildings with several floors. In these cases, it was considered that a
tube column could be used that could extend over several floors per lift. At the
intermediate floors, a slot could be cut in the tube to accept a girder stub-out assembled
in the shop. The girder could be only partially assembled so that girders and the frame
could be aligned without introducing significant internal stresses. However, frame
geometry would dictate whether a single- or multi-story lift would be more economical,
since many more girder connections may be required in the multi-story lift compared to
the number of column connections required in the single-story lift. Regardless, it was
considered that the same basic connection could be used for either condition.

4. Design Issues

The design of connections like this in the U.S. can be controlled by either the concrete
code ACI-318 (1999) or by the steel code AISC (1994). Each specification results in
slightly different design requirements. On some issues, like flexural stiffness, the code
differences can make a significant impact on the design and analysis of the structural
system. The following is the methodology used for design of this connection, and a
discussion of some of the limitations from the available research.

4.1. Flexural Strength


Since the current U.S. code is strength-based, the flexural strength of the structural
elements was a primary consideration. The strength prediction of a wide-flange girder
has evolved over many years and is therefore fairly well prescribed. However, the two
available specifications differ slightly in the assumptions used to compute the flexural-
strength, axial-load interaction surface of the CFT column.
In general, the concrete code (ACI) applied the same basic assumptions used for
reinforced concrete sections to the composite element. The interaction surface was
obtained by varying the curvature through the cross-section from full compression to full
tension. Compatibility was enforced by the plane section assumption, and the
compressive strain was maintained at 0.003 mm/mm. The compressive strength of the
concrete was obtained by the Whitney rectangular stress block. Tension on the concrete
section was ignored. The strength provided by the steel tube depended on the strain
through the cross-section. Tube stress was computed as the strain times the elastic
modulus, but was limited by the yield stress. Axial capacity of the cross-section for the

1275
imposed curvature was computed by the summation of stresses through the cross-
section. The flexural strength of the cross-section was computed by the summation of
the first moment of stresses.
The major difference between the concrete code and the steel code was the assumption
of curvature at full strength. Since the steel code (AISC/LRFD [1994]) is strength based,
the axial-load, moment interaction surface was obtained by assuming a fully plastic
cross-section. This was equivalent to an infinite curvature about the plastic neutral axis.
A schematic of a stress distribution acceptable to the AISC/LRFD is shown in Fig. 3.
This indicates that the tube wall on either side of the plastic neutral axis was at yield.
The portion of the concrete in compression was then determined by the rectangular stress
block assumptions.
The strength of the CFT column was determined by both methods. In general the
strength computed using the ACI assumptions produced less flexural capacity than the
strength predicted by the ultimate strength calculations. As the interaction surface
approached full tension or compression, the two methods converged on the same
solution. The strength must be scaled by the appropriate resistance factors to produce an
interaction surface to be used in design. A comparison in the strength from the two
methods is shown in Fig. 4 (compression is shown as positive). These values were for
406 mm diameter steel tube pipes with 6.35 mm wall thickness, which was typical for the
building designs.
AISC described each quadrant of the strength interaction surface using a bilinear
relation. The transition occurred at 30% of the axial capacity of the particular quadrant
of the failure surface. To demonstrate the approximation of the AISC method, the
factored strength surface was computed for the location of the plastic neutral axis at
every location through the cross-section. As shown by this figure, several regions within

1276
PNA
= =

AREA of
CONCRETE
in COMPRESSION
Plastic
Neutral
Axis

MOMENT

STEEL
STRESS

CONCRETE
STRESS

Figure 3. Stress Distribution in CFT Column at Ultimate Strength.

the interaction surface resulted in large differences between the two specifications.
Also shown in Fig. 4 is the axial load moment demand for the CFT columns for one of
the building designs. Since the building was only two stories, the axial load in the
columns was relatively small. In general, the capacity of the CFT columns far exceeded
the demand.
General philosophy in the design of the CFT column is that the steel tube provides the
longitudinal reinforcement and the confinement of the concrete core. However, the steel
tube may be unable to resist the compression and the confinement of the concrete core
simultaneously. Confinement of the core induces hoop, or tensile, stresses in the tube,

1277
while trying to resist compression due to flexure. Thus, it is possible that the tube resists
primarily the confinement forces. Figure 4 illustrates the effect of ignoring the

6,000

Ultimate Strength
4,000

Ultimate Strength AISC/LRFD


Axial Capacity ( kN )

No Compression in Steel Tube


2,000
ACI

0.0
100 200 300 400 600
CFT Column Demand 500

-2,000

-4,000
Flexural Capacity ( kN-m )

Figure 4. Axial Load – Moment Interaction Used for CFT Design.

compression in the steel tube. As shown, this impacts the compression and flexural
capacities of the CFT column, but not the tensile strength. The curve shows the impact
of losing the compression capacity of the steel, while the concrete strength remained the
same. It is likely that the concrete strength might increase due to the confinement.
Thus, some additional axial load and moment might be achieved by an increase in
concrete strength due to the added confinement.

4.2. Joint Equilibrium


To achieve an adequate seismic design, the strength of the joint must be considered. For
the frames designed in Vancouver, WA. the hinging girder type of structural system was
used. While it was easy to proportion the sizes of the CFT column and girder at the joint
to provide the proper strength ratio, the joint must be able to sustain this load.
Equilibrium of the joint is shown in Fig. 5.
The moment in the joint must balance the moment induced by the girders, which in turn
must be transferred to the CFT column. Two components were needed to resist the joint
moment: The bearing strength between the flange of the steel girder and the concrete
core, and the tension in the steel tube. The contact area between the steel girder and the
compressive strength of the concrete core determined bearing strength. It was assumed

1278
that girder rotation occurred about the centroid of the CFT column. Locally, the strength
of the concrete was considered to be approximately 20% higher than the cylinder
strength because of the confinement in the core. Further, depending on the diameter of
the concrete-filled steel tube and the wide-flange girder width, the upper
MCT

MBL

MBR

T=Tension in Steel Tube

MCB

Figure 5. Equilibrium at the Joint.

flange could also be considered for bearing strength. Finally, the remaining moment
must be transferred to the steel tube. This will dictate the amount of shear transfer
needed between the closure plates and the steel tube wall. This equilibrium was needed
to induce the moment distribution in the cross-section as shown in Fig. 3.

4.3. Flexural Stiffness


While the ability to predict the flexural strength of the CFT column is critical, the size of
these elements was still controlled by flexural stiffness. Although both building systems
were only two stories, they were both controlled by drift. It was found that the flexural
stiffness of the CFT columns were responsible for 30% to 40% of the drift. Flexural
stiffness of the girder accounted for almost the entire remaining portion of drift.
Flexural stiffness varied significantly between the concrete and the steel codes. Flexural
stiffness computed by ACI was EICFT = 1.223 EIS, where IS is the moment of inertia of
the steel tube only. The stiffness predicted by the AISC/LRFD was EICFT = 1.903 EIS,
which results in a 56% difference. For comparison, the flexural stiffness computed
using a transformed section analysis was EICFT = 1.933 EIS. Further, flexural stiffness

1279
was 1.696 EIS when 70% of the core stiffness was used due to the cracked section
modulus of the concrete. Because of the differences between the two code values, the
transformed section method assuming a cracked moment of inertia of the concrete core
seemed to be the most reasonable approximation.

5. Concluding Remarks

This paper discussed an economical connection for a steel girder to a concrete-filled


steel tube (CFT) column that has been designed for two recent building projects near
Vancouver, WA. The anticipated behavior during a seismic event, and some critical
issues in the design of the connection were also presented. Some comments regarding
this joint behavior and design are worth noting:
1. A girder connection that continues through the core of the CFT column will
clearly have the potential to sustain a large seismic event. The continuous
connection detail shown in this paper has proven to be reasonably economical and
constructible relative to the wide-flange column frame.
2. The flexural capacity computed by the ultimate strength method, as allowed by
the AISC steel specification, resulted in more capacity than provided by the ACI
concrete specification. This was a combination of the assumptions used in the
analysis and the resistance factors imposed on the design.
3. The computed flexural stiffness was shown to vary as much as 60% for the
column sizes investigated for these building designs. A stiffness consistent with
transformed properties of composite materials, and utilizing the limits of cracked
moment of inertia were found to provide a reasonable value.
4. Research is needed to identify true behavior of the CFT column regarding the
strain demand on the compression side of the column in flexure, the compression
capacity of the concrete core, the distribution of stresses and equilibrium of the
joint and the flexural stiffness. Verification on the accuracy of the axial load,
moment interaction surface is also needed. While reasonable assumptions can be
made, these assumptions should be verified with test data.

6. References

American Concrete Institute. (1999). ACI318-99. Building Code Requirements for


Structural Concrete and Commentary. 1st Printing. ACI. Farmington Hills, MI.
American Institute of Steel Construction. (1994). Manual of Steel Construction. Load
& Resistance Factor. 2nd Edition. AISC. Chicago, IL.
Schneider, S. P. and Y. M. Alostaz. (1998). “Experimental Behavior of Connections to
Concrete-Filled Steel Tubes.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, pp. 321-352.

1280
FRICTION SLIPPING BEHAVIOR BETWEEN CONCRETE
AND STEEL
-AIMING THE DEVELOPMENT OF BOLTED FRICTION-
SLIPPING JOINT -

Tomokazu Yoshioka, Masamichi Ohkubo


Kyushu Institute of Design, Japan

Abstract
The authors are developing the connecting seismic shear walls to the surrounding
structural frame through the bolted friction-slipping joints that function as energy
dissipation dampers during an earthquake. This friction-slipping joint is composed of a
steel plate, concrete plate, and the bolts to joint both together. This paper presents the
outline of the dynamic loading tests to investigate the friction coefficient of the joint
during slipping, changing displacement amplitude, loading velocity, concrete
compression strength, thickness of concrete plate and the initial tension given into the
bolts. And this paper also presents a simplified equation to predict the friction-slipping
behavior of the joint.

1. Introduction

In order to use a building continuously after a great earthquake, it is desirable to keep the
earthquake response of the building into the elastic range. The concept called damage
control design has been proposed as one of the seismic design methodology to archive
such the strategy. In the building designed through the concept, seismic dampers as
adjuncts are often applied to the main structure to dissipate earthquake vibration energy,
and it is expected that the earthquake response displacement of the building is
consequently minimized.
The authors are developing the seismic shear wall installed into the structural frame
through the bolted friction-slipping joints that function as energy dissipation dampers
during an earthquake. At the joint, the surfaces between the steel plate attached to the
structural frame and the reinforced concrete walls are rigidity tightened by steel bolts in
general. However, slipping with a constant friction is allowed between the jointing
surfaces, if the joint is subjected to the force that exceeds the friction force provided by
the bolts. The concept of the shear wall system is illustrated in Fig.1. This joint system
can dissipate the induced earthquake energy during slipping. In addition, the lateral

1281
FRICTIO N -SLIPPIN G JO IN TS
BEAM

C LEAR A N C E
C LEA R AN CE
LATER AL FO RCE
REIN FO RCED CO N CRETE W A LLS
SLIP

FRIC TION JO IN TS N OT ALLO W ED SLIPPIN G


H Y STERESIS LO O P

B EA M

CO LU M N COLUM N

Figure 1: Concept of Shear Wall System

force transmitted to the shear wall through the joint can be controlled by the setting
adequately friction force due to the tightened bolt tension, so that the installed reinforced
concrete wall can be prevented from earthquake damage as well.
In this paper, the dynamic loading tests focussed on the friction-slipping joint were
conducted to get the fundamental information regarding the slipping characteristics
between the steel plate and concrete surface tightened by the bolts. And a simplified
equation to predict the friction coefficient during slipping is presented on the basis of the
statistical analysis for the test results.

2. Specimens

Fig.2 shows the overall view of the assembled joint model specimen given in this test.
The same two concrete blocks, which correspond a part of the concrete wall at the
friction-slipping joint shown in Fig.1, sandwich a steel plate and the two concrete blocks
and a steel plate are tightened together through a 19mm diameter high-tension steel bolt.
In the loading test, the concrete blocks were rigidly fixed to the reaction steel frame and
the sandwiched steel plate was loaded with a servo-actuator. To make the slipping
displacement possible, the 26mm wide and 100mm long slot was provided in the steel
plate as shown in Fig.3. Two slots are provided in the steel plate to use the same plate
twice turning reversely and both side slots are applied to the one loading test. A double
surfaces’ friction that consisted of two concrete plates and one steel plate was adopted in
this test. However, another double surfaces’ friction technique such as the combination
of two steel plates and one concrete plate can be actually considered.

1282
19mm DIA.BOLT 600
FRICTION-SLIPPING REACTION
SURFACES BLOCKS
100 100

250
REACTION

26
26
REACTIONS
STEEL PLATE

16
LOADING
REACTION
CONCRETE
PLATES
REACTION Figure 3: Steel Plate
BLOCKS
THICKNESS=200/100

SLOT
LOADING SLIPPING
DIRECTION
STEEL PLATE CONCRETE 200 180
PLATE FRICTION-SLIPPING
SURFACE
Figure 2: Assembled Joint Model Figure 4: Concrete Block

Table 1: Summary of Testing Condition


Bolt Thickness fc Maximum Cyclic
Number of
Series Tension (*1) (*2) Velocity Amplitude Patterns
Specimen
(kN) (mm) (MPa) (cm/s) (mm)
CS1 56.8 40 1
4
CS2 51.6 80 3
200
CS3 4 120 56.8 1 2
CS4 35.9
CS5 100 57.0 40
4 1
CS61 90
1 200 51.6
CS62 60
*1:thickness of concrete block,*2:concrete compression strength

The size of the steel plate is 250mm in width, 600mm in length and 16mm in thickness
as shown in Fig.3. The steel plate is a mild steel of the Grade 400MPa tensile strength.
The mill scale covered on the surface of the steel plate wasn’t eliminated in the tests. The
size of the concrete block, which corresponds to the friction surface, is 180mm x 200mm
rectangle as shown in Fig.4. The friction surface of the concrete block was provided with
the condition after removing plywood. However, the tow corners of the concrete block
intersected to the slipping axis were removed with about 10mm width to prevent
stumbling.
In the experiments, six test series were planned to compare the differences of the
loading amplitude (40mm and 80mm), the loading velocity (4cm/sec and 1cm/sec),
the concrete compression strength (50MPa and 30MPa), the concrete thickness

1283
Table 2: Detail of Cyclic Patterns
Cyclic Amplitude (mm) 10 20 → 40 → 20 10
Pattern Frequency (Hz) 2 1 → 0.5 → 1 2
No.1 Num. of Cycs. 1 1 → 10 → 1 1
Cyclic Amplitude (mm) 10 20 → 40 → 20 10
Pattern Frequency (Hz) 0.5 0.25 → 0.125 → 0.25 0.5
No.2 Num. of Cycs. 1 1 → 10 → 1 1
Cyclic Amplitude (mm) 10 20 40 80 40 20 10
Pattern Frequency (Hz) 2 1 0.5 0.25 0.5 1 2
No.2 Num. of Cycs. 1 1 1 5 1 1 1

(200mm and 100mm) and the initial tension given into the bolt (60kN, 90kN and
120kN). Table 1 summarizes the entire scheme. For the CS1 to CS5 series four
specimens were prepared under the same testing condition, while for the CS61 and CS62
only one specimen was prepared

3. Testing setup

The load that enforced slipping at the joint surfaces was applied to the sandwiched steel
plate by a 200kN servo actuator while the concrete blocks were fixed to the steel
reaction frame as shown in Fig.2. Three different cyclic patterns were planed to make the
time history of the enforced displacement. Table 2 shows the detail of the cyclic patterns
that are arranged by the amplitude, the frequency and the number of cycles with a
sinusoidal wave.
The friction force, the relative slipping displacement between the steel plate and the
concrete blocks and the bolt tension were measured. The intervals of the data sampling
were set to 6 milliseconds, which was the maximum speed of the measuring equipment,
for CS1, CS2, CS4 and CS6, 7 milliseconds for CS3, and 22 milliseconds for CS2.

4. Test Results

Fig.5 shows the relations between the friction coefficient and the slipping displacement
obtained by the experiments of CS1-1 and CS3-1. Here, the friction coefficient is that the
load applied to the steel plate was divided by the tension force, which was introduced
into the steel bolt before loading, considering the number of friction surfaces. Fig.6
shows the relations between the friction coefficient and the total slipping displacement in
the specimens CS1-1 and CS3-1. Here, the total slipping displacement is the summation
of slipping displacement experienced by the time from the beginning of the test. Both the
specimens, which are the first one of specimens in the standard CS1 series and the CS3
series with the lower velocity than the standard series respectively, represent the
common friction slipping characteristics to all the tests.
In Fig.6, one characteristic behavior is observed regarding the relations between

1284
FRICTION COEFFICIENT 1.0 CS1-1:V=4cm/sec CS3-1:V=1cm/sec

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm) SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm)

Figure 5: Friction Coefficient and Slipping Displacement Relations


1.0 CS1-1:V=4cm/sec CS3-1:V=1cm/sec
FRICTION COEFFICIENT

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 00 200 400 600 800 1000
TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm) TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm)

Figure 6: Friction Coefficient and Total Slipping Displacement Relations

the friction coefficient and the total slipping displacement. It is that if an envelope curve
is drawn on the relations between the friction coefficient and the total slipping
displacement, the curve can be represent by two lines which consist of the first
characteristic that the peak value of friction coefficients increases gradually as the total
slipping displacement increases and the second characteristic that the peak value of the
friction coefficients is almost stable after the total slip displacement reached a certain
amount. This first characteristic is observed in all the tests although they were under the
different testing conditions. However, the second one was not observed in only the CS5
series in which the thin of concrete blocks were used. In the cycle, while the stable
friction slipping is kept, the relation between the friction coefficient and the slipping
displacement approximately shows a rigid-plastic pattern as shown in Fig.5.

1285
5. Influence of Various Testing Conditions to the Friction Coefficients

In order to actually apply the concept of bolted friction-slipping joints to the structural
design of a building, the variation and the stability regarding friction coefficient
1.0 (a) MAXIMUM AMPLITUDE (b)T.S.D.=100mm (c)T.S.D.=800mm
FRICTION COEFFICIENT

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2 CS1(40mm)
CS2(80mm) CS1 CS2 CS1 CS2
0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 00 20 40 60 20
20 40 60 80
TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm) AMPLITUDE (mm) AMPLITUDE (mm)

Figure 7: Influence of Slipping Amplitude

(a)CS1 (b)CS2

SLIPPING WEAR SCARS

Figure 8: Conditions of Slipping Wear Scar

during the slipping should be investigated under the various different conditions.
However, it is difficult to discuss the friction coefficient by adopting the concept of
tribology, because the friction-wear mechanism that occurred on the joint surfaces
between steel and concrete are extremely complex. Therefore, several series of
experiments under the various conditions were carried out, and the influences of the
testing conditions to the friction-slipping behavior are investigated here.
Firstly, we discuss the influence of the slipping amplitude comparing the result of the
CS1 and CS2 series whose maximum amplitudes in the cyclic loading were 40 mm and
80 mm, respectively. Fig.7 shows the friction coefficients obtained from both CS1 and
CS2. Here, the values of the friction coefficient plotted in these figures are represented at
the time when the slipping displacement goes across the zero axis in each half cycle. As
seen in Fig.7 (a), the friction coefficients in the CS1 series are generally higher than
those in the CS2 series. According to Fig.7 (b), the difference between both the series is
approximately 18 percents regarding the average friction coefficient in the range where
the friction coefficient increases as the total slipping displacement increases. The

1286
coefficient of variation is approximately the same 10 percents in both the series.
According to Fig.7(c), the difference of the friction coefficient between both the series is
approximately 23 percents in the range where the friction-slipping behavior has
stabilized, and it is little larger than those in Fig.7 (b). Fig. 8 shows the conditions
1.0 (a) SLIPPING VELOCITY (b) CONCRETE STRENGTH
FRICTION COEFFICIENT

0.8

0.6

0.4
CS1(4cm/sec) CS1(56.8MPa)
0.2
CS3(1cm/sec) CS4(35.9MPa)
0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 00 200 400 600 800 1000
TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm) TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm)

1.0 (c) CONCRETE THICKNESS (d) BOLT TENSION


FRICTION COEFFICIENT

0.8

0.6

0.4 CS1(N=120kN)
CS1(200mm) CS61(N=90kN)
0.2
CS5(100mm) CS62(N=60kN)
0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 00 200 400 600 800 1000
TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm) TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm)

Figure 9: Influence of Several Testing Conditions


of the slipping wear scars observed on the surfaces of the steel plates after the testing.
The slipping wear scar of the CS1 widely distributed along the slot, while the scars in the
CS2 concentrated only in the diagonal corner areas on the plate. This difference of the
scar distribution between both the series may cause the difference of friction coefficient.
However, the reason why the difference of displacement amplitude causes the difference
of the scars distribution is not cleared up in the tests.
Secondary, in order to investigate the influence of other testing conditions, the
comparisons of the friction coefficients between the CS1 and the other series are shown
in Fig. 9(a) through (d). As seen in Fig. 9(a) and (b), the approximately same trends were
observed among the three series of CS1, CS3, and CS4, regarding the relations between
the friction coefficients and the total slipping displacement. This indicates that the
loading velocity and the concrete compression strength little influence to the friction
coefficient. In the comparison of the CS1 and CS5 series which identify except for the
concrete block thickness, however, it was observed that the friction coefficients in the
CS5 using thinner concrete blocks slightly decrease in the slipping after about 400mm of

1287
the total slipping displacement as shown in Fig.9(c). The decreasing of the friction
coefficient wasn’t caused by the applicable decreasing of the bolt tension.
Finally, the friction coefficients of the CS1 series, CS61 and CS62 were compared to
investigate the influence of the initial bolt tension. As seen in Fig.9 (d), the friction
coefficients in the range of the stable slipping of the CS61 and CS62 whose initial bolt
tensions were 60kN and 90kN were smaller than those of the CS1 series with the higher
120kN bolt tension. The behaviors of the friction coefficient of the CS61 and CS62
resembled those of the CS2 shown in Fig.7, and the slipping wear scar distributions on
the steel surface observed in the CS61 and CS62 also resembled those of the CS2 series
shown in Fig.8. Therefore, smaller friction coefficients obtained in the CS61 and CS62
may be caused by the narrow contact area on the friction surfaces as mentioned before.
However, the reason why the difference of the initial bolt tension caused the smaller
contact area on the friction surfaces is not cleared up in the tests.

6. Equations to Predict the Friction Coefficient

The variation of the friction coefficients during slipping was at maximum some 20
percents, according to the test results based on the various testing conditions. This
suggests that if the differences of the slipping amplitude, the loading velocity, the
concrete compression strength, the concrete plate thickness and the initial bolt tension
are within the scope of the examined conditions, the friction coefficient during slipping
seems to be little influenced by those conditions. In this paper, assumed that the variation
and the decreasing behavior of the friction coefficient are so small that they can be
ignored, the equations to predict the relations between the friction coefficient and the
slipping displacement is obtained on the basis of the all test results. Equation (1) and (2)
represent two characteristics that were observed in the range of the friction coefficient
increasing and the range of the stable friction slipping.
0mm <= TSD <= 180 mm: FC = 0.69 -1.25x10-5(TSD-180)2 (1)
180mm < TSD <=1000mm: FC = 0.69 (2)
where FC = predicted friction coefficient
TSD = total slipping displacement
Equation (1) was derived by a regression analysis, which adopted a secondary
polynomial model, by using all the friction coefficients measured at each end of a half
cycle until 200mm of the total slipping displacement. We set the maximum friction
coefficient during the stable slipping that was defined in equation (2).
Table 3 shows the average friction coefficient and the standard deviation at each total

Table 3: Average and Standard Deviation of Friction Coefficient


Start 1Cyc. 2Cyc. 3Cyc. 4Cyc. 5Cyc. 6Cyc. 7Cyc. 8Cyc. 9Cyc. 10Cyc. 11Cyc. 12Cyc. 13Cyc. 14Cyc.
T.S.D. 0 23 67 153 239 325 411 497 583 668 753 838 925 967 988
Ave. 0.36 0.38 0.54 0.65 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.68
S.D. 0.035 0.084 0.069 0.072 0.085 0.076 0.077 0.078 0.077 0.083 0.075 0.080 0.076 0.082 0.084

1288
FRICTION COEFFICIENT 1.0 Expriment 1.0 Assumption

FRICTION COEFFICIENT
0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5

-1.0 -1.0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm) SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm)

Figure 10: Comparison of Hysteresis Loops

140 1.25 1.00 140 1.25 1.00

120 (a) 120 (b)


0.80
TEST RESULT Ar(mm)

TEST RESULT Ar(mm) 0.80


100 100

80 80

60 60

40 CS1 CS2 40 CS1 CS2


CS3 CS4 CS3 CS4
20 20
CS5 CS6 CS5 CS6
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
PREDICTED VALUE Ap(mm) PREDICTED VALUE Ap(mm)

Figure 11: Comparison of Hysteresis Loop Areas


1.0 Upper Limit (=average plus 2 x S.D.)
MAX. FRICTION COEFFICIENT

0.8

0.6 Average of M.F.C.


Obtained from Results
CS1 CS2 in CS1, 3,4 and 5
0.4 CS3 CS4
CS5 CS6
0.2
0 200 400 600 800 1000
TOTAL SLIPPING DISPLACEMENT (mm)
Figure 12: Variation of Maximum Friction Coefficient

1289
slipping displacement that were based on the data observed at the first slipping and the
end of slipping in each cycle in the total of twenty-two specimens. The average friction
coefficients obtained after 4th cycle are equal to the value of equation (2) approximately.
Fig. 10 shows the comparison between the hysteresis loops of the relations between the
friction coefficient and slipping displacement obtained from the experiment of CS1-3
and those predicted by Equation (1) and (2). Both the hysteresis loops approximately
match. Fig.11 shows the comparison of the loop’s area obtained from all the experiments
and predicted by the equations, which area corresponds to the energy dissipation due to
each cyclic friction slipping. Making the hysteresis loops by using Equation (1) and (2),
the behavior of rigid-plastic pattern for the relations between friction coefficient and
slipping displacement was assumed. As seen in Fig.11 (a), the proposed equations
estimate approximately good hysteresis loop areas. The average and standard deviation
regarding the ratio of the experiments to the predicted loops were 0.99 and 0.12,
respectively. In addition, the comparison between the loop areas of the experiment and
the equations subtracted 2 x S.D. is shown in Fig.11 (b). Here, the value of standard
deviation S.D. was assumed to be equal to 0.085 which corresponds to the maximum
standard deviation shown in Table 3. As seen in Fig.11 (b), the proposed equations that
subtracted 2 x S.D. approximately estimated the lower limit for the test results.
Finally, we discuss the maximum friction coefficient of the bolted friction-slipping joint.
Fig.12 shows the maximum friction coefficients in every cycle obtained from all the test
results. The average and the standard deviation of the maximum friction coefficients
throughout the overall slipping, which are the sixteen values obtained from the results of
CS1, CS3, CS4 and CS5 series, are 0.83 and 0.026, respectively. The maximum friction
coefficient plus the two times of standard deviation equals to 0.88 and the value which
estimates a upper limit of the test results is shown by a chained line in Fig.12.

7. Conclusion

We presented the equations that represented the relations between friction-coefficient


and slipping displacement for the bolted friction-slipping joint composed by concrete
and steel plates. The equations are derived on the basis of the dynamic loading tests and
the data analysis that considered the influences of the maximum slipping amplitude, the
loading velocity, the concrete compression strength, the thickness of concrete plate and
the initial bolt tension and the equations well predicted the friction-slipping behavior.

1290
AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON THE CONNECTION
JOINTS BETWEEN STEEL GIRDER AND REINFORCED
CONCRETE COLUMN WITH VARIOUS TYPES OF
EMBEDDED LOAD TRANSFERRING PLATES
Nobuyoshi Ando, Isao Nishimura, Koichi Kamo
Department of Architecture, Musashi Institute of Technology, Japan

Abstract
This paper discusses the load bearing mechanism of the connection joins between
reinforced concrete columns and steel girders. The discussion is based on the
experimental results and data that have been obtained from six pieces of specimens.
Because of the complexity of the bearing mechanism in the vicinity of the connection
joints, the authors selected one experimental parameter in common for all of the
specimens: the steel girder is arranged to penetrate into the joint core. Additional
reinforcing steel parts are necessary to be placed inside of the panel zone so that the
bending moment of the steel girder should be transferred to the columns by way of the
connection joint. These reinforcing parts are the key parameters for this experimental
study: 1 Band Plate, 2 Face Bearing Plate, and 3 Steel Web Plate. Attention is paid to the
load bearing strength, stiffness, deformation capacity, and ductility factor associated with
the panel zone. The experimentally obtained and clarified roles of those plates are stated
qualitatively at the end of the paper.

1. Scope of the study


There have been proposed various types of connection joints between reinforced concrete
column and steel girder [3,4,5,6]. Because of the complex load transferring mechanism in
the vicinity of the panel zone, there have been proposed a wide variety of formations for
the reinforcing parts surrounding the connection joint. The illustrated in Figure 1 is the
typical load bearing mechanism, which necessitates the following three reinforcing items;
Band Plate, Face Bearing Plate, and Steel Web Plate. The expected role of Band Plate is
enhancing the confine effect of concrete material at the end of column and transferring the
reaction shear induced at the connection joint. On the other hand, Face Bearing Plate is
supposed to transfer the reaction shear at the end of girder as well as to confine the
concrete inside of the panel zone. Steel Web Plate has a rather subordinate contribution to
increase the panel zone ductility after shear crack is induced at the panel zone. If the
confinement of the panel zone is secured by the arrangement of both Face Bearing Plate
and Band Plate, we could expect that the panel zone shear strength be mainly due to the

1293
concrete material shear strength. What this paper tries to clarify is the minimum
requirements for those reinforcing plates which make it possible to transfer the full plastic
moments induced at the ends of columns to the connected girders.

2. Specimens
Illustrated in Figure 1 are the typical reinforcing formations adopted as the main
parameters for the series of specimens. The key issue is the load transferring capacity or
the shear strength of the panel zone. We wish to identify the shear strength and the
ductility of the panel zone clearly from those of adjacent members. If the concrete
column’s reinforcing bars got yielded during the static test loading, the displacement due
to the column’s plastic moment rotation would be the main source for the total
displacement, which should be avoided. Hence, attention is paid to the relative strength of
the concrete columns to the shear strength of the panel zone. Obviously the full plastic
moment of the steel girder should be high enough to avoid girder’s plastic deformation.
The perspectives of all the specimens are shown in Figure 2. A-series specimens have the
identical Band Plate and Face Bearing Plate in common.

A: Band Plates for transferring


RC Column’s shear force
B: Face Bearing Plates for transferring
Steel Girder’s shear force
C: Steel Web Plates for transferring
Panes Zone’s shear force to
the adjacent members

Figure 1 Load bearing mechanism and reinforcing plates embedded in the panel zone

Table 1 Material Strength obtained from Steel Tensile Tests and Concrete Cylinder Test
Thickness Yielding N/mm2 Tensile N/mm2
[mm] A-series B-series A-series B-series
Joint S.W.P 9 286.1 423.6
Cover P. 20 or 28 252.6 259.6 409.5 425.7
F.B.P. 9 286.1 306.7 423.6 439.8
B.P. 6 286.1 306.7 423.6 439.8
RC Concrete [35.9] [18.6]
Column Bar 392.4 392.1 571.1 593.8
Hoop 560.5 542
Steel Web 16 250.7 269.2 406.2 441.1
Girder Flange 16 250.7 269.2 406.2 441.1
(*) RC Column's results are from compression tests.

1294
Figure 2 Perspectives of Reinforcing Plates for Specimens

Figure 3 Details of Reinforcing Plates for Specimens

1295
Steel Web Plate is the only parameter for
A-series specimens. Concrete Strength of
A-series is 1.5 times as much as that of B-
series. (See Table 1.) B-2 has neither Band
Plate nor Steel Web Plate, while B-1 has
only Band Plate. Comparing A-4 with B-1,
we can observe how concrete strength
effects on the panel zone shear strength.
There are six specimens in all for this
experiment. They are all shown in Figure 3,
where dimensions and rein-forcing plates
are indicated. The tensile tests of the steel
materials as well as concrete cylinder
Figure 4 Cross Section of RC Column compression tests are all given in Table 1.

3. Loading set up and measuring instruments


The set up for the loading and measuring instruments is shown in Figure 5. We wish to
separate the shear deformation of the connection joint from other displacements such as
the plastic deformation of the column or the elastic displacement due to the steel girder.
Hence, the shear angle at the panel zone is measured by a set of two linear displacement
sensors, which is shown in Figure 6. At the same time, we also detect the absolute rotation
of the connection joint so that we can clearly separate the panel zone shear rotation from
the concrete column’s bending rotation. The comparison between the overall rotational
displacement and the panel zone shear rotation clarifies the fact that where the damage is
concentrated.

Steel Girder :
H-300x150x16x16 (SS400)

Figure 6 Displacement Sensors for


Figure 5 Loading and Measuring Instruments Shear Strain and Volumetric Strain

1296
4. Shear strain and volumetric strain of the panel zone
The total tilting angle of steel girder, or R of the specimen girder, is plotted versus the
actuator’s reaction force P in Figure 8, where the whole experimental results with respect
to each specimen is shown for comparison. The comprehensive lateral displacement is
divided into three elements, steel girder’s elastic displacement, panel zone shear rotation,
and the RC column’s rotation at the face end of the joint. They are all illustrated in Figure
7. The strain tensor E at the panel zone is given by (1) and the strains e is obtained by
multiplying the unit vector along with the displacement sensors. (See Equation (2).)

 1 
 εx γ
Strain tensor: E =  2  (1)
1γ ε y 

2 
Strain in the direction of {u}: e = {u}t E{u} (2)
Hence, strain e1 and e 2 in Figure 8 are measured, and then evaluated by
 1  1   1  − 1 
 1 1  ε x γ
2  2  e =  −  1 1  εx γ
2  2
e1 =    
 1 (3)
 2 2  1 γ  1  2
    1 
ε y  2 2  γ ε 
 2   2 
y
2 2
Hence, the volumetric strain ε and the shear strain γ are obtained by substituting (3) into
(4) and (5), which are shown in Figure 11 and 10, respectively. (See Figure 8.)
ε = ε x + ε y = e1 + e 2 (4)
γ = e1 − e 2 (5)
The whole lateral displacement divided by height h is the total tilting rotation R, which is
plotted versus lateral load P in Figure 9. The residue rotational angle, or R-γ, is supposed
to be the summation of the elastic deformation angle of the steel girder and the moment
rotation of the RC column. (See Figure 7 and 12.)

 1   1 
−  y {u } =  2 
{u2 } =  2
1  1  1 
   
 2   2 

Figure 7 Notations for Deformation Angles Figure 8 Strain in {u 1 } and {u 2 }directions

1297
25 25
P (t ) A-1 P (t ) A-2
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
R (×10−3 rad ) R (×10−3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
P (t ) A-3 P (t ) A-4
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
R (×10−3 rad ) R (×10−3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
P (t ) B-1 P (t ) B-2
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
R (×10−3 rad ) R (×10−3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Figure 9 Rotation R (=θ +γ +δ /h, See Figure 7 for notations.) versus Lateral Load P

1298
25 25
P (t ) A-1 P (t ) A-2
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
γ (×10 −3 rad ) γ (×10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
P (t ) A-3 P (t ) A-4
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
γ (×10 −3 rad ) γ (×10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
P (t ) B-1 P (t ) B-2
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
γ (×10 −3 rad ) γ (×10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Figure 10 Shear Strain γ versus Lateral Load P

1299
25 25
20 P (t ) A-1 20 P (t ) A-2
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 ε (× 10 −3 rad ) -20 ε (× 10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
20 P (t ) A-3 P (t ) A-4
20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 ε (× 10 −3 rad ) -20 ε (× 10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
20 P (t ) B-1 20 P(t ) B-2
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 ε (× 10 −3 rad ) -20 ε (× 10−3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Figure 11 Volumetric Strain ε versus Lateral Load P

1300
25 25
P (t ) A-1 P (t ) A-2
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
R − γ (×10 −3 rad ) R − γ (× 10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
P (t ) A-3 P (t ) A-4
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
R − γ (×10 −3 rad ) R − γ (× 10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

25 25
P (t ) B-1 P (t ) B-2
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
-5 -5
-10 -10
-15 -15
-20 -20
R − γ (×10 −3 rad ) R − γ (× 10 −3 rad )
-25 -25
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Figure 12 Residue Rotation R-γ versus Lateral Load P

1301
5. Summary of experiment
By comparing specimen B-1 and B2, especially by reviewing Figure 12, it would be safe
to say that Band Plate has a vital effect on preventing the concrete column from cracking
around the main reinforcing bars, which might be the major damage. Specimen B-2,
which has no Band Plate, suffered from this type of failure.
The shear angle γ and the volumetric strain ε are successfully separated by the method
explained in this paper. Therefore, it was made possible to evaluate the advantage of Steel
Web Plate by comparing Figure 10 and 11. Various types of Steel Web Plates are examined.
As is shown in Figure11, the stiffness expected from those reinforcing plate’s influences on
the volumetric strain. (See A-series specimens.) It is, however, not clear how much Steel
Web Plates improve the comprehensive load-deformation performance. Yet, as the shear
strength of the panel zone increases because of concrete high compressive strength, it will be
necessary to secure the shear strength of the panel zone by means of Steel Web Plate. (See
Figure 12 for A-4.)
Judging from Figure 12, most of the specimens, except A-4 and B-2, remained elastic
as far as RC columns and steel girders are concerned. Hence, we would deduce that the
damage is concentrated on the panel zone. The maximum strength of any specimens of A-
series is around 1.5 times as much as that of specimen B-series. Hence, the major factor
that influences the panel zone strength is the concrete material’s compressive strength. It
is also noted from Figure 10 that the load-displacement curve has a slip character, which
is a typical phenomenon associated with concrete failure due to shear damage.
Further study will be necessary for qualitatively identifying how the weak-beam design
frame will work with the connection joints reinforced by the load transferring plates.

References
[1]. ACI Committee 318,”Building code requirements for reinforced concrete,” Report No.
ACI 318-89, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1989
[2]. ACI-ASCE Committee 352,”Recommendations for design of beam column joints in
monolithic reinforced concrete structures,” Journal of ACI, 82(3), pp.266-283, 1985
[3]. Nishiyama, I., Hasegawa, T., Yamanouch, H.,”Strength and deformation capacity of
reinforced concrete column to steel beam joint panels,” Kenchiku Kenkyusho, No.71,
Sept., Building Research Institute, Ministry of Construction of Japan, 1990
[4]. Sheikh, T.M., Deierlein, G.G., Yura, J.A., Jirsa, J.O.,”Moment connections between
steel beams and concrete columns,” PMFSEL Report No.87-4, Univ., of Texas, Austin,
1987
[5]. Wakabayashi, M.,”A historical study of research on composite construction in
Japan,” Composite construction in steel and concrete, C.D.Buckner and I. M. Viest, eds.,
ASCE, New York, N.Y., pp.400-427, 1988
[6]. Nishimura, Y., Minami, K.,”Stress transfer from steel beams to reinforced concrete
columns,” Proceedings of Mixed Structures Including New Materials, IABSE, Zurich,
Switzerland, pp.389-394, 1990

1302
LOW-CYCLE FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR OF PULL-PUSH
SPECIMENS WITH HEADED STUD SHEAR CONNECTORS
Silvano Erlicher, Oreste S. Bursi and Riccardo Zandonini
Department of Mechanical and Structural Engineering, University of Trento, Italy.

Abstract
Two series of pull-push specimens with 16 mm and 22 mm diameter headed stud shear
connectors were built and tested as part of a general investigation on seismic design of
steel-concrete composite beams with full and partial shear connection. In order to assess
the shear connector performances from a seismic and damage standpoint, pull-push
specimens have been exposed to series of variable, random and constant reversed slips.
Main results are commented upon and evaluated in terms of yielding and maximum
shear strength capacity as well as ultimate slip ductility. A comparison between
experimental and prediction strengths derived by relevant design code provisions
provides an estimate of their accuracy. Finally, a low-cycle fatigue damage model is
investigated to establish damage limit domains for headed studs.

1. Introduction

The earthquake resistant design of steel-concrete composite structures is still hindered by


inadequate design code provisions. As a matter of fact, the part of Eurocode 8 (EC8)
dealing with steel-concrete composite systems still appears as an informative Annex
owing to lack of data [1]. Hence, extensive experimental and numerical research into the
seismic resistance of composite members and structures under simulated-earthquake
conditions is under way [2]. On the North-American side, a major step taken in recent
years was the development of the provisions for the seismic design of composite
structures [3]. With regard to composite beams of special moment frames, these
provisions require both proper welding of shear connectors and additional connectors
beyond those required in AISC LRFD [4] for dissipative zones. Nonetheless, there are
several situations in which the required composite action between the steel beam and the
concrete deck is rather low [5] and, thereby, full shear connection is needless. Eurocode
4 (EC4) [6] and AISC specifications [4] permit partial shear connection where the
interface slip between the steel beam and the concrete deck cannot be ignored. In these

1303
conditions, the connector ability to exhibit ductility and dissipate energy depends mainly
on its capability to withstand low-cycle fatigue during the seismic event. Thereby, if
members embodying composite dissipative zones need to be designed, a better
understanding of the cyclic behaviour of shear connection is required. The analysis of
the low-cycle fatigue behaviour of shear connectors requires the availability of data for
connectors loaded cyclically to failure. The vast majority of available useful data,
however, is for connectors loaded monotonically. As far as the experimental analysis of
push-type specimens exposed to cyclic loading is concerned, few exceptions are the
recent works of Astaneh et al. [7] and Aribert et al. [8].
The study presented in this paper extends the recent research work conducted on 16 mm
diameter headed stud shear connectors by Bursi and Gramola [9] to the cyclic behaviour
and analysis of 22 mm headed stud shear connectors. Thereby, experimental data
relevant to pull-push specimens subjected to monotonic, variable and random reversed
displacements are evaluated with regard to their seismic performance in terms of
strength and slip ductility. Moreover, a comparison between experimental and predicted
strengths based on EC4 [6] and AISC specifications [4] provides some design
indications. Finally, an energy-based fatigue model is calibrated on experimental data to
establish damage limit domains for headed stud connectors. As a result, low statistical
correlation among the experimental data has been found.

2. Experimental investigation

The investigation focused on the determination of the seismic performance of headed


stud shear connectors. To comply with the connector ductility requirements suggested
for buildings in the EC4 specifications [6], connectors with 16 and 22 mm diameter and
with an overall length after welding not less than 4 times the shank diameter have been
considered. Thereby, eighteen elemental push-type specimens divided into two series
Table 1. Nomenclature and test procedures Table 2. Nomenclature and test
of specimens with 16 mm shear connectors procedures of specimens with 22 mm
(Series I) shear connectors (Series II)

Test Test
Specimen Specimen
protocol protocol
NPM-01 Monotonic RPM-01 Monotonic
NPM-02 Monotonic RPM-02 Monotonic
NPC-01 ECCS RPC-01 ECCS
NPC-02 ECCS RPC-02 ATC (3 ey+)
NPC-03 ATC (10 ey+) RPC-03 ATC (6 ey+)
NPC-04 ECCS type RPC-04 ATC (9 ey+)
NPC-05 ATC (40 ey+) RPC-05 ATC type
RPC-06 ATC type
RPC-07 ATC type
RPC-08 Random
RPC-09 Random

1304
were fabricated. The nomenclature that identifies the specimens is reported in Column 1
of Tables 1 and 2, whilst the relevant geometrical characteristics are depicted in Figs. 1
and 2, respectively.
Both geometrical and mechanical characteristics of Series I specimens are similar to
those of the companion steel-concrete composite beams exposed to cyclic and pseudo-
dynamic loading [10]. In detail, shear studs are placed in two rows with large spacing as
illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2, to allow stud shear loads within the concrete slabs to be
redistributed. The reinforcement consists of a mesh of φ 12 whilst transverse rebars are
designed against slab longitudinal splitting. TRW Nelson studs have a shank diameter of
16 mm and a mean height of 102 mm in Series I whilst Series II comprises Nelson studs
with a shank diameter of 22 mm and a mean height of 126 mm. By using a TRW Nelson
welding system a mean welded height of 4.5 mm has been obtained. The mechanical
properties of concrete and shear studs are listed in Table 3.
Specimens of all series were monotonically (push regime) and cyclically (pull-push
regime) loaded in a quasi-static fashion, by means of a series of representative slip
histories. Due to the random nature of seismic loading, several test protocols comprised
between the extremes of constant-amplitude and random-amplitude slip reversals were
applied to the specimens: i) the so-called Complete Testing Procedure proposed by the
ECCS [11]; ii) the Cumulative Damage Testing Program suggested by the ATC [12]; iii)
test procedures characterized by large slip reversals superimposed upon constant
amplitude slips; iv) test protocols endowed with slip reversals of random amplitude. The
first type of procedure is adopted to acquire data relevant to the maximum shear
strength, the ultimate slip ductility, etc. Conversely, the second type of procedure
provides the basis for developing fatigue-life relationships. The test program is described
in Column 2 of the Tables 1 and 2, respectively. It comprises two classical monotonic
tests to develop the backbone force-slip envelope for each specimen response. As a
matter of fact, some seismic damage models use strength and deformation quantities
derived from monotonic tests to normalize and/or formulate damage expressions. In
addition, a slip elastic limit ey+ and the corresponding yield shear strength Py+ were
determined as illustrated in Fig. 3. The ECCS test protocol [11], applied to the NPC-01
and RPC-01 specimens and depicted in Fig. 4, is characterized by sets of equi-amplitude
slip (1+k)ey+, (k = 0,...,n). This sequence would provide a convenient benchmark against
which to compare specimen performances subjected to variable amplitude testing. The
ATC test protocol [12] with a set of equi-amplitude constant slips at 10ey+ is applied to
the NPC-03 specimen and is illustrated in Fig. 5. This test protocol has been applied to
the specimens NPC-05, RPC-02, RPC-03 and RPC-04 with equi-amplitude slip at 40ey+,
3ey+, 6ey+ and 9ey+ , respectively, and provides the basis for developing fatigue-life
relationships.
Table 3. Material properties of push-type specimens
Concrete Shear stud
Displacement
Series fcm fctm Ecm fy fu
test procedure
(Mpa) (Mpa) (Mpa) (Mpa) (Mpa)
I Mon. & cyclic 32.6 3.1 30379 414 528
II Mon. & cyclic 41.9 3.6 32986 324 457

1305
Figure 1: Geometrical characteristics Figure 2: Geometrical characteristics
of Series I specimens of Series II specimens

40
ECCS, 1986
30
P (Pmax+,emax+)
(Py+,ey+) (Pp ,ep )
+ + 20
Kh+ 10

(Pu+ ,eu+ )
e/ey

0
Ke,r+
-10

-20
(Pe+,ee+) Envelope
Trilinear approx. -30
Bilinear approx.
Ke+ -40
e
CYCLE NUMBER
Figure 3: Bi- and trilinear fits Figure 4: ECCS test protocol with constant
of a shear force-slip envelope and variable cycles
10
15 ATC (1992) 8
RANDOM

10 6
4
5
2
e/ey
e/ey

0 0
-2
-5
-4
-10 -6

-15 -8
-10
CYCLE NUMBER CYCLE NUMBER
Figure 5: ATC test protocol with Figure 6: Test protocol with
constant amplitude cycles random amplitude cycles

1306
Moreover, additional procedures were conceived to analyze the slip sequence effects on
cumulative damage. In detail, the test protocols applied to the RPC-05, RPC-06 and
RPC-07 specimens are characterized by large slip reversals reproducing seismic pulses
superimposed upon constant amplitude slips. Finally, the last two protocols applied to
the specimens RPC-08 and RPC-09 were tracked from pseudo-dynamic tests on
composite substructures exposed to the N69W component of the 1952 Taft earthquake
[10]. In detail, the procedure applied to the RPC-09 specimen, depicted in Fig. 6, traces
over slips from composite substructures with full shear connection. As a matter of fact,
an amplified slip peak level greater than 6ey+ brings the specimens of Series II to
collapse. This type of sequence provides a benchmark against which to compare random
amplitude testing.

3. Main results and code comparison

For brevity, hereinafter only the most significant results are commented upon. As far as
the Series I is concerned, the monotonic shear force-slip (P – e) response of the NPM-02
specimen is depicted in Fig. 7. The observed inelastic behaviour is governed by stud
yielding and concrete cracking. The specimen collapse was governed by local concrete
crushing. With regard to the corresponding cyclic behaviour, the response of the NPC-02
specimen is plotted in the same figure. In this test, both stiffness and strength of stud
connectors reduce at all stages owing to stud cyclic yielding and fatigue as well as to
propagation and coalescence of micro-cracks in concrete. However, failure was
governed by local concrete crushing.
As far as Series II is concerned, the shear force-slip response relevant both to the RPM-
01 and the RPC-01 specimen are plotted in Fig. 8. The inelastic behaviour and failure are
governed by stud shearing. With regard to the cyclic response, the RPC-01 specimen
exhibits both stiffness and strength reduction owing to shear yielding and low-cycle
fatigue in the studs. Reversed displacement cycles cause a limited reduction of the shear
strength owing to the high concrete strength (see Column 3 of Table 3) whilst the
ultimate slip reduction is evident. Due to the relatively high value of concrete strength
collapse is governed by low-cycle fatigue of studs. Moreover, the pinching phenomena
are evident, and the plateau corresponding to the minimum reloading force can be
observed in the Figs. 7 and 8. The amount of the plateau may be related to the friction
between concrete slab and steel flange.
To extend our knowledge on stud connector seismic performances, they are compared
from a cyclic standpoint. Thereby, a conventional elastic limit state characterized by the
displacement ey+ and the corresponding force Py+ can be defined on the first part of each
skeleton curve as schematically illustrated in Fig. 3. To determine these values the
trilinear approximation of each curve, is determined on the basis of best-fitting and of
the equivalence of the dissipated energy between the actual non-linear response and the
idealized trilinear approximation up to (emax+ , Pmax+). Then, the linear elastic
approximation with slope Ke+ and the linear strain-hardening approximation with slope
Kh+ define the coordinates (ey+ , Py+). Imposing the condition P+ = Py+ = Pu+ the ultimate
slip capacity eu+ can be identified. Thereby, the stud seismic performances can be

1307
evaluated also by means of the ultimate slip ductility factor eu+/ey+. The Columns 4 and 5
of Table 4 allow the slip reduction exhibited by the specimens subjected to cyclic
loading with respect to those exposed to monotonic loading to be quantified.
The minimum ductility ratio (eu+/ey+)NPC-02/(eu+/ey+)NPM-02 is about 55.4 per cent if ATC
[12] tests at equi-constant amplitude and the ECCS [11] test protocol with unloading are
disregarded. From the Columns 6 and 7 of the same table, the maximum shear strength
reduction can be assessed. The strength ratio Pmax,NPC-02+/Pmax,NPM-02 reaches 71.8 per cent
according to Column 7 of Table 4.
At present, design codes do not predict the stud shear strength of connectors under cyclic
loading and therefore, it is worthwhile to quantify their accuracy in such conditions. To
verify the capabilities of headed stud strength provisions calibrated on monotonic
loading, stud strength calculations according to EC4 [6] and AISC [4] are applied to the
specimens under exam. These values have been evaluated with and without partial safety
factors γ or reduction factors φ, respectively, using measured rather than nominal
material properties. Predictions for individual connectors are indicated in Fig. 9 for
Series I specimens. In the same figure, the experimental strength values Pmax+ are
indicated too. It can be observed that codes predict correctly the failure mode, viz.
concrete cracking and crushing. However, owing to reversed slip effects predicted
strength values are non-conservative under cyclic loading. More specifically, test and
predicted strength values draw the conclusion that the design resistance of headed stud
shear connectors in dissipative zones can be obtained from the design resistance
provided by EC4 [6] applying a concrete penalty factor equal to 0.75. This value agrees
with the reduction factor proposed in the draft of the Eurocode 8 [1] regarding specific
rules for steel-concrete composite buildings [13]. Conversely, a reduction factor of 0.55
is suggested for the AISC specifications [4], to achieve the same safety level of EC4 [6].
As far as slip is concerned, the slip capacity of the specimens NPC-01 and NPC-02
subjected to the ECCS test protocol [11] has been examined. Slip values collected in
Table 4 bring to the conclusion that the minimum cyclic slip capacity is at least half of
the slip capacity, i.e. 6 mm, required from EC4 [6] for ductile connectors. Similar
conclusions can be drawn for Series II specimens with regard to strength (see Fig. 10)
and cyclic slip capacity.

4. Seismic damage assessment

Several of the pull-push specimens subjected to cyclic loading failed owing to low-cycle
fatigue, viz. a damage process which results from a limited number of excursion well
into the inelastic range. Therefore, a damage assessment of test results was conducted to
provide a new quantitative evaluation strategy to the demand versus capacity. More
specifically, additional limit states associated with low-cycle fatigue, viz. damage
control (Damage index Di << 1) and low-cycle fatigue failure (Di = 1) can be defined,
and the damageability of components can be predicted by means of non-linear dynamic
computational analyses. In view of a damage model validation, it is deemed to be
necessary to define failure, viz. to evaluate the cycle number Nf that entails collapse.

1308
80 160
PUSH
60 120

REACTION FORCE (kN)


REACTION FORCE (kN)

40 80

20 40
PUSH
0 0
PULL
-20 -40

-40 -80
NPM-02 -120 RPM-01
-60 RPC-01
PULL NPC-02
-80 -160
-16 -12 -8 -4 0 4 8 12 16 -16 -12 -8 -4 0 4 8 12 16
SLIP (mm) SLIP (mm)
Figure 7: Monotonic shear force Figure 8: Monotonic shear force
vs. controlled slip and hysteresis loops vs. controlled slip and hysteresis loops
of Series I specimens of Series II specimens
120 180

110 Cyclic
LRFD (φ = 1) 170 LRFD (φ = 1)
SHEAR STRENGTH (kN)

SHEAR STRENGTH (kN)


Monotonic 160
100
150 LRFD ( φ= 0.85)
LRFD (φ = 0.85)
90
140
EC4 (γυ = 1) EC4 (γ υ = 1)
80 130

70 120
EC4 (γυ = 1.25) EC4 (γυ = 1.25)
110
60
100 Cyclic
50 90 Monotonic
40 80
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
f 'c , fck (MPa) f 'c , fck (MPa)
Figure 9: Connector maximum strengths Figure 10: Connector maximum strengths
and code predictions of Series I specimens and code predictions of Series II specimens

4.0 2.5
NPC-04 Monotonic
3.5 Monotonic RPC-02
RPC-03 Cyclic
NPC-02 Cyclic RPC-01
2.0
3.0
NPC-03 NPC-05 RPC-04
E h / Py eu,m
Eh / Py eu,m

RPC-07 RPC-06
2.5
NPC-01
1.5 RPC-09 RPM-01
2.0
-1.76 RPC-05 -1.13
NPM-02
1.5
1.0

1.0 Di = 1.0 Di = 1.0 RPM-02


NPM-01
R 2 = 0.57 R 2 = 0.57
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

eu / eu,m eu / eu,m
Figure 11: Damage limit domain Figure 12: Damage limit domain
of Series I specimens of Series II specimens

1309
Table 4. Connector shear force-slip response parameters of Series I specimens
+ + + + + +
Specimen Ke ey eu eu /ey Py Pmax
(kN/mm) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kN)
NPM-01 405.2 0.1 9.9 101.6 39.5 69.3
NPM-02 431.3 0.1 14.7 153.3 41.3 68.7
NPC-01 1106.6 0.03 3.2 125.9 28.3 48.7
NPC-02 803.6 0.04 3.7 84.9 34.6 49.3
NPC-03 534.2 0.01 1 85.5 6.3 47.4
NPC-04 1106.2 0.03 3.2 109.5 32.6 53.9
NPC-05 234.4 0.17 4 23.8 39.4 58.5

Due to the large uncertainty in the failure definition, different criteria have been adopted
in this study. However, for the sake of brevity only two of them are discussed
hereinafter.
Firstly, Calado and Castiglioni [14] propose the use of the ratio ηf / η0 ≤ α with α = 0.5.
This quantity is defined as the ratio ηf between the absorbed energy at the last cycle
before failure and the energy that might be absorbed in the same cycle if the component
would exhibit an elastic-perfectly-plastic behaviour over the same ratio η0, with
reference to the first cycle in the inelastic range. Moreover, the criterion of Chai et al.
[15] has been adopted. It relies on the design assumption that failure happens when the
deteriorated resistance P+ approaches the plastic failure resistance Pu+ = Py+ depicted in
Fig. 3. All the above-mentioned criteria have been applied to the specimens under
investigation. With regard to the response provided by the ECCS procedure [11], a cycle
number Nf of about 50 for Series I and of about 15 for Series II was estimated,
respectively.
Once failure is defined, it is appropriate to associate the final state of the specimen under
cyclic loading to a unique point of an equivalent monotonic response. More specifically,
it is deemed to be necessary the definition of a damage indicator, viz. a state variable that
enables a one-to-one correspondence from any damaged state caused by cyclic loading
to a unique point of a monotonic specimen response. In these conditions, the safety
assessment is straightforward being unique the distance from failure. More specifically,
a damage index Di is introduced, viz. a normalized damage indicator such that zero
corresponds to the virgin state and one to the achievement of collapse, in agreement with
the assumed failure criterion. Different choices relevant to damage indicators are
available. Anew for brevity, only the damage model proposed by Chai et al. [15] and
derived from the widely used model of Park and Ang [16] is discussed.
In detail, this model takes into account the energy absorbed by the component during a
monotonic loading process, labelled Ehm, and only the surplus of cumulative energy (Eh –
Ehm) is considered significant to damage, Eh being the absorbed total energy. In these
conditions, the damage index reads
eM β *
(E h − E hm )
Di = + (1)
eum Py eum

1310
in which eM defines the maximum slip reached by the component so far; eum is the
maximum slip under monotonic loading, i.e. a measure of the maximum deformation
capacity and β* an empirical factor evaluated on experimental basis.
The application of the damage model expressed by Eq. (1) with Di = 1 to Series I
specimens entails the damage limit domain illustrated in Fig. 11 with a slope of –1.76,
an intercept equal to 3.34, Py = 323.2 kN, eum = 12.3 mm and a determination
(correlation) coefficient R2 = 0.57. The application of the same model to Series II is
illustrated in Fig. 12. In detail, a slope of –1.13, an intercept equal to 2.24, Py = 467.8
kN, eum = 10.2 mm and a determination coefficient R2 = 0.57 has been obtained. The
slopes of the damage limit domains are rather different both for Series I and II whilst the
coefficient R2 is small in both cases. The limited values of R2 show that a damage
analysis is not easily applicable to steel-concrete shear connectors. Therefore, the
definition of a damage model based on a simple linear combination of energy and of
displacement, as in Eq. (1), should be improved. Moreover, the damage model should be
strongly related to the evolution both of strength and of stiffness, in order to trace the
shear connection response through its whole range.

5. Conclusions

Test results relevant to two series of pull-push specimens embodying headed stud shear
connectors have been presented in this paper. These results were derived from specimens
subjected to series of monotonic, variable and constant equi-amplitude slips. Then, they
were re-evaluated and compared in terms of global parameters such as yield shear
strength, maximum strength as well as slip ductility factors. Some considerations about
pinching phenomena were reported. Test results of Series I and Series II point out that
connector slip ductility is enhanced if the cyclic behaviour is governed by concrete
cracking and crushing. Moreover, a comparison between experimental and predicted
shear strength values provided by relevant code provisions indicates that design
specifications calibrated upon monotonic loading overestimate actual stud shear strength.
Thereby, strength penalty factors are required whilst an assessment of maximum cyclic
slip is possible. Furthermore, the damage index proposed by Chai et al. [15] has been
applied to pull-push specimens, showing that its application to the composite specimens
could be satisfactory only for design. Further analyses are currently underway to develop
an improved damage model, related to suitable stiffness and strength degradation rules
over the full range of the shear connector response.

Acknowledgements

This research project is sponsored by grants from the Italian Ministry of the University
and Scientific and Technological Research (M.U.R.S.T.) for which the authors are
grateful. However, opinions expressed in this paper are those of the writers, and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring agency.

1311
References

1. CEN, 'ENV 1998-1-3, Eurocode 8 - Design provisions for earthquake resistance of


structures - Part 1-3: Specific rules for various materials and elements', 1998.
2. Plumier, A., 'European research and code developments on seismic design of
composite steel concrete structures', Paper 1147 Twelve World Conf. Earth. Eng.
A., 2000.
3. American Institute of Steel Construction, 'Seismic provisions for structural steel
buildings', AISC, Chicago, IL, 1997.
4. American Institute for Steel Construction, 'Load and Resistance Factor Design -
Specifications for Structural Steel Building', 1. AISC, Chicago, IL, 1993.
5. Civjan, S.A., Engelhardt, M.D. and Gross, J.L., 'Experimental program and
proposed design method for the retrofit of steel moment connections', Paper 257 in
Twelve World Conf. on Earthquake Eng., Auckland, 2000.
6. CEN, 'ENV 1994-1-1, Eurocode 4 - Design of composite steel and concrete
structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings', 1994.
7. Astaneh-Asl, A., McMullin, K.M., Fenves, G.L. and Fukuzava, E., 'Innovative
semi-rigid steel frames for control of the seismic response of buildings', Report
UCB/EERC-93/03, 1993.
8. Aribert, J.M. and Lachal, A., 'Comportement de connecteurs acier-beton sous
chargement cyclique repete en vue du dimensionnement parasismique des
connexions', Proc. of 5th National Colloquium AFPS, Cachan, October 1999, 19-21,
479-488.
9. Bursi, O.S. and Gramola, G., 'Behaviour of headed shear connectors under low-
cycle high amplitude displacements', Materials and Structures, RILEM, 32, 290-
297, 1999.
10. Bursi, O. S., and Gramola, G., 'Behaviour of composite substructures with full and
partial shear connection under quasi-static cyclic and pseudo-dynamic
displacements', Materials and Structures, RILEM, 33, 154-163, 2000.
11. ECCS, 'Recommended testing procedures for assessing the behaviour of structural
steel elements under cyclic loads', No. 45, Technical Committee 13, 1986.
12. Applied Technology Council, 'Guidelines for cyclic testing of components of steel
structures', 24, 1992.
13. ICONS Topic 4 Extended Group, A., 'Draft of a 6 to Eurocode 8, Part 1.3. Specific
rules for steel concrete composite buildings', ICONS Project Report, University of
Liege, 1998.
14. Calado, L. and Castiglioni, C.A. , 'Steel beam-to-column connections under low
cycle fatigue: experimental and numerical research', 11th WCCE, Acapulco, Paper
No. 1227, 1996.
15. Chai, Y. H., Romstad, K. M., and Bird, S. M. ,'Energy-based linear damage model
for high-intensity seismic loading', J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 121(5), 857-864, 1995.
16. Park, Y. J, and Ang, A. H.-S., 'Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced
concrete' J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 111(4), 722-739, 1985.

1312
STATIC TESTS ON VARIOUS TYPES OF SHEAR
CONNECTORS FOR COMPOSITE STRUCTURES
Hans (J.) C. Galjaard* and Joost C. Walraven**
*Van Hattum en Blankevoort/Volker Stevin Construction Europe, The Netherlands
**Delft University of Technology, Division of Concrete Structures, The Netherlands

Abstract
The results and interpretations of push-out tests on shear connector devices for steel-
concrete composite structures/bridges carried out in the Stevin laboratory are presented.
The devices under investigation are headed studs, perfobondstrips, oscillating per-
fobondstrips, waveform strips and T-connectors. The oscillating-perfobondstrip, wave-
form strip and T-connector have specially been developed for this research project. Dif-
ferent concrete grades and types are used, like ordinary concrete, lightweight concrete,
high strength concrete and lightweight high strength concrete, with and without steel
fibres. The tests are done as specified in EuroCode 4 for standard push-out test. Large
differences in ductility and strength between the various connector devices and concrete
types have been observed. Sometimes unexpected behaviour occurred during testing,
like brittle splitting failure in case of the (oscillating) perfobondstrip in normal concrete.
A direct comparison for a specific shear connector device in combination with a certain
concrete grade/type is possible. Although the number of samples in a test series is lim-
ited, it is still realistic to draw conclusions with respect to their strength/ductility based
on EuroCode 4.

1. Introduction

Application of high strength (lightweight) concrete could be useful for bridge decks, not
only because of its enhanced strength, but moreover because of its improved endurance
in a harsh environment. The design code for steel-concrete composite bridges EuroCode
4-2 [1] is however limited to concrete grades up to a strength of C50/60 (3.1.1(2)). This
discourages the use of these materials for the decks of steel-concrete bridges. In steel-
concrete composite bridges headed studs are often applied as an economic shear connec-
tion device. A major drawback is that the strength for concrete grades higher than
C30/37 is governed by the strength of the steel cross section of the stud. Hence higher

1313
concrete grades will not be utilised by this connector device. Another drawback is the
impossibility to automate the welding of headed studs.
A prime objective of this research project is therefore the development of new shear
connection devices with less disadvantages. For the purpose of comparison, and to in-
vestigate their behaviour in high strength (lightweight) concrete, existing shear connec-
tion devices like the headed stud and the perfobondstrip have been included in the re-
search project.

2. Connector devices

New connector devices were proposed, from which the three most promising devices
have been selected based on economics, feasibility
and diversity. The devices tested, including the ‘old’
headed-stud and perfobondstrip, are:
- Headed studs φ 19 mm and a length of 125 mm,
see Fig. 1.
- Continuous perfobondstrip with a height of 100
mm, a thickness of 12 mm and 5 holes φ 50 mm, Fig. 1: Headed studs φ19 mm
see Fig. 2. A continuous strip was selected be-
cause it is better weldable, using standard shop
welding equipment, than a discontinuous one.
Two fillet welds of 7 mm have been used to weld
in on the HE-section.
- Oscillating perfobondstrip with a height of 100
mm, a thickness of 8 mm, 5 holes φ 50 mm, and
bend in 1.5 wave with an amplitude of 110 mm,
see Fig. 3. It is believed that the curved form will Fig. 2: Continuous perfobondstrip
give a better force transfer between steel and
concrete compared with a straight connector. It is
however recognised that welding might be diffi-
cult using present automated weld equipment.
The strip is welded to the HE-shape with two fil-
let welds of 5 mm.
- Waveform strip with a width of 50 mm, a thick-
ness of 6 mm and bend in 2 waves with ampli- Fig. 3: Oscillating perfobondstrip
tude 110 mm, see Fig. 4. The idea was to use
point weld equipment for the production. Equip-
ment with sufficient capacity is however very
scarce, and it is doubtful whether the connector
could be successfully welded in this way. For the
tests it was welded to the HE-shape with prop-
welds φ25 mm.
Fig. 4: Waveform strip

1314
- T-connector: a section with a length of 300 mm of
a standard T-shape 120 welded to the HE shape
with two fillet welds of 6 mm, see Fig. 5. This
connector evolved from the observation by
Oguejiofor [2] that a large part of the bearing ca-
pacity of a perfobondstrip was the result of the di-
rect bearing of the concrete at the front end of the
(discontinuous) perfobondstrip. Therefore a T- Fig. 5: T-connector
shape, which has a larger contact area than a single
strip, and because of its shape will prevent vertical separation between HE-shape and
concrete, seemed a good alternative.
The main objective of this project is to get information about the behaviour of the ‘con-
nection’ between steel and concrete. Other kinds of failure also had to be excluded. This
resulted in a, sometimes, vast amount of splitting/shear reinforcement, see Fig. 7, and
welds of the perfobondstrip, oscillating perfobondstrip and T-connector purposely made
stronger than the connector itself.

3. Experimental set-up

Three modifications have been made to the standard push-out test as described in chapter
10 of EuroCode 4 [1]: ‘Design assisted by testing’:
- The test-specimens have been placed on a sliding sup-
port made of a greased Teflon plate between two
stainless steel plates. These support conditions are simi-
lar to those used by Mainstone and Menzies [3], and are
considered to give conservative results compared to the
fixed supports of EuroCode 4.
- For some connector devices concrete panels of 150 mm
thick are too thin, and plates of 200 mm thick have
been used. In particular for all tests with the (oscillat-
ing) perfobondstrip and for the later series with the T-
connector because of spalling problems with the first
series.
- For some tests the standard HE 260B section would not
have sufficient capacity, and was replaced by a HE
240M section.
Preliminary calculations for the capacity of the connector
devices learned that the combination of (oscillating) per-
fobondstrip and high strength concrete could have a failure
load of nearly 4000 kN. A special closed testing frame
with an ultimate capacity of 5000 kN was developed for Fig. 6: Test set-up
these tests, see Fig. 6. The longitudinal displacement between the concrete panels and
the steel section was measured by LVDT’s with a range of 20 mm. The transverse sepa-
ration between steel section and concrete panels was measured by LVDT’s with a range

1315
of 2, 3 and 5 mm respectively. The elongation at the outside of the concrete panels was
measured by LVDT’s with a range of 2 mm. All data has been collected at an interval of
0.01 mm longitudinal displacement.
The specimens have been tested in a deformation controlled way until failure or the
maximum possible deformation of approximately 45 mm.
For the test specimens certain combinations of connector device and concrete grade are
used. The concrete grades vary from an ordinary C30/37 to high strength concrete
C70/85. Lightweight concrete is included in the series as normal strength LC30/37 and
high strength LC62/75. Concrete was used with and without added steel fibres giving a
total of 8 possible concrete grades/compositions. The mix designs used are presented in
Table 1. This table also shows the number of tests executed for a certain combination.

Table 1: Concrete mixes used [kg/m3], averaged strengths [MPa], and number of tests
Mix
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
+ fibres + fibres + fibres + fibres
Portland cement/
Blast-furnace 320/0 238/237 320/0 238/237 320/0 238/237 320/0 238/237
cement
Microsilica slurry - 50 - 50 - 50 - 50
Water 192 125 160 124 192 124 160 124
Sand 0-4 mm 787 797 751 797 787 797 751 797
Gravel 4-16 mm 1044 974* - - 1044 974* - -
Lytag 4-8 mm+ - - 249 - - - 249 -
Lytag 6-12.5 mm+ - - 464 - - - 464 -
Liapor F10+ - - - 633 - - - 633
Dramix RC 80/60 - - - - 80BN 60BP 80BN 60BP
Strength
Average cube
41.1 99.2 46.8 82.5 35.7 107.9 36.9 87.2
strength [MPa]
Average splitting
tensile strength 2.90 6.11 3.23 5.48 2.68 7.16 3.07 7.47
[MPa]
Number of tests
Headed-studs 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Perfobondstrip 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Oscillating
2 2 2 2 2 - - -
perfobondstrip
Waveform strip 2 - - - - - - -
T-connector 2 2 2 2 2 - - -
* + BN
Broken gravel 100% saturated Type BN BP Type BP

Splitting or shear failure of the concrete panels had to be avoided, sometimes resulting in
heavy reinforcement, see Fig. 7. All reinforcement is standard grade S500. The type of
reinforcement provided is listed in Table 2.

1316
Table 2: Type of reinforcement per test-specimen
Concrete grade
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
+ fibres + fibres + fibres + fibres
Headed-studs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Perfobondstrip 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 5
Oscillating
4 8 4 8 4 - - -
perfobondstrip
Waveform strip 1 - - - - - - -
T-connector 2 6 7 6 7 - - -
Type:
1 2 x 5 φ10 BF and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per panel
2 2 x 5 φ16 BF and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per plate
(for panel of 150 mm)
3 2 x 5 φ16 BF and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per plate
(for panel of 200 mm)
4 2 x 5 φ20 BF and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per panel
5 2 x 5 φ25 BF and 4 x 10 mm anchor-plate and 10
hairpins and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per panel
6 2 x 5 φ25 BF and 2 x 10 mm anchor-plate and 2
x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per panel
7 2 x 5 φ12 BF and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per panel
8 2 x 5 φ25 BF and 4 x 10 mm anchor-plate and 10
hairpins and 2 x 4 stirrups φ10 BF per panel
BF
: Both Faces Fig. 7: Reinforcement perfobondstrip in
high strength concrete
4. Test results

The differences between the various connector-devices with respect to ultimate load,
ultimate displacement and general behaviour are considerable. An overview of the
maximum loads and the accompanying displacements for these loads is given in Table 3.
Only 2 tests per test specimen have been carried out. The results of these tests can never-
theless be regarded as a good indication for the behaviour of the connector device since
the differences found between these 2 tests, and especially for the pre-peak behaviour,
are generally very small. The graphs in this section always show the minimum force at a
certain displacement for the 2 test-specimens investigated.

The discussion of the results will be subdivided into two parts:


1 A comparison of the behaviour of the connector devices for a particular concrete
type.
2 A comparison of the characteristic strength and ductility according to EuroCode 4.
Due to its rather disappointing behaviour the waveform-strip is only included in the
graphs for C30/37, and is not discussed any further.

1317
Table 3: Maximum load [kN]/displacement at maximum load [mm] per test
Concrete grade
C30/37 + C70/85 + LC30/37 LC62/75 +
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
fibres fibres + fibres fibres
Headed- 961/5.6
1015/4.6 818/6.2 1001/5.3 878/5.4 1035/3.3 891/11.3 1081/6.7
studs 901/6.7
1032/3.2 888/11.7 1024/5.7 900/6.2 1068/5.4 811/6.5 974/2.9
904/5.4
Perfobond-
1512/1.6 3209/11.0 1219/3.0 2556/6.2 1419/3.0 3269/11.0 1227/8.9 3001/15.2
fobond-
1454/2.0 3151/10.2 1077/2.2 2474/6.4 1500/3.6 3264/11.2 1285/8.4 3088/13.4
strip
Oscillating
2193/2.2 3787/4.6 1962/1.7 3334/4.7 2443/3.6
perfobond- - - -
2164/2.4 3918/5.7 1907/1.7 3424/2.2 2232/3.4
strip
Waveform 510/3.8
- - - - - - -
strip 445/1.8
T- 1468/12.9 2006/11.3 1491/16.3 2111/15.2 1740/14.1
- - -
connector 1406/9.7 2084/12.9 1476/19.5 2077/13.9 1711/11.0

4.1 Comparison of connector devices for a particular concrete type

The comparisons of connector devices for a particular concrete type are shown in the
Figs. 8 and 9 for all concrete types without fibres and for C30/37 with fibres. The dotted
lines in these figures show the characteristic capacity obtained according to the testing
procedure of EuroCode 4. The following conclusions can be drawn per concrete type:
- The behaviour of the (oscillating) perfobondstrip is a bit disappointing for concrete
C30/37 without fibres compared to, for instance, headed studs. This mainly has to do
with the fast drop of the load capacity after the peak caused by splitting of the con-
crete panels in the plane of the bottom reinforcement (running through the holes in
the perfobondstrip). It is not directly possible to conclude that the (oscillating) per-
fobondstrip should not be applied for C30/37; the splitting failure mode may have
been induced by the (sliding) support conditions, what could be too conservative.
The capacity of the perfobondstrip, and especially the oscillating-perfobondstrip, is
larger than that of the headed studs. Both strips hardly deformed during testing, and
could have been reused. An expected vertical splitting crack parallel to the longitudi-
nal direction of the strip was not observed. Although this crack was observed for the
T-connector it there seemed quite innocent compared to the spalling of the concrete
cover of the bottom part of the T-connector during testing. This spalling however
hardly effected the behaviour of the T-connector, which performed very well com-
pared to headed studs. The T-connector equals the capacity of the perfobondstrip, but
has a much larger ductility. The graph also reveals the rather disappointing behaviour
of the waveform strip.
- Concrete type C30/37 is the only mix where all connectors have been tested in com-
bination with fibres (except the waveform connector. Fig. 8b. clearly reveals the ef-
fects which fibres have on the behaviour of T-connector and perfobondstrip, and es-
pecially the oscillating perfobondstrip; a significant greater ductility is obtained.

1318
- All connectors show a better 2500
C30/37 without fibres
ductility for LC30/37 com- Oscillating-perfobondstrip
2000
pared to C30/37 without fi-
bres, but it is especially re- 1500

force [kN]
Perfobondstrip
markable to notice the dif- T-connector
ference in behaviour of the 1000 Headed studs
oscillating-perfobondstrip. Waveform strip
500
This despite that LC30/37 is
regarded to be a more brittle 0
material than C30/37. The T- 0 10 20
displacement [mm]
30 40

connector still behaves very


well with respect to strength 2500
C30/37 with fibres
and ductility. Oscillating-perfobondstrip
2000
- The graphs for LC62/75
T-connector
reveal that there is a signifi- 1500
force [kN]

Perfobondstrip
cant increase in strength and
ductility of the (oscillating) 1000 Headed studs

perfobondstrip, and some in- 500


crease for the T-connector,
compared to LC30/37. They 0
0 10 20 30 40
all behave much better than displacement [mm]
headed studs, and could very 2500
LC30/37 without fibres
well be applied in combina-
2000
tion with LC62/75. For the Oscillating-perfobondstrip
T-connector the concrete is 1500
force [kN]

no longer decisive, but the T-connector


Perfobondstrip
strength of the connector it- 1000 Headed studs
self.
500
- The graphs for C70/85 in
Fig. 9 immediately reveal 0
the possibilities of the (oscil- 0 10 20 30 40
displacement [mm]
lating) perfobondstrip. They
both have a much higher 4000 LC62/75 without fibres
strength combined with a Oscillating-perfobondstrip
much better ductility. High 3000
force [kN]

strength concrete really Perfobondstrip

could use the potential of 2000 T-connector


these connectors. The
Headed studs
strength of the T-connector 1000
is comparable to that of
0
LC62/75. For all connectors 0 10 20 30 40
the strength of the concrete displacement [mm]
is no longer decisive, but the Fig. 8: Comparison of connector devices for a particu-
lar concrete type (Dotted line = cap. acc. EC4)

1319
strength of the connector it- 4000
C70/85 without fibres
Oscillating-perfobondstrip
self.
3000 Perfobondstrip

4.2 Strength and ductility

force [kN]
according to EuroCode 4 2000
T-connector

The procedure for the determi- 1000 Headed studs

nation of the characteristic resis-


tance and slip capacity of con- 0
0 10 20 30 40
nector devices based on push- displacement [mm]
out tests is given in section
10.2.5 of ENV 1994-1-1 (Euro- Fig.9: Comparison of connector devices for a particu-
Code 4-1) [1]. The characteristic lar concrete type
resistance PRk should be taken as the minimum failure load of 3 tests reduced by 10%.
Results for PRk for the connector devices
investigated based on Table 3 can be
found in Table 4.
The slip capacity of a connector should be
taken as the maximum slip measured at
the characteristic load level, as shown in
Fig. 10. The characteristic slip capacity δuk
should be taken as the minimum test value
of δu reduced by 10%. Conservatively not
the maximum slip is measured for indi-
vidual connector devices, but for the bot-
tom limit of the curves of a particular
connector device as shown in Figs 8 and
9. The calculated values for δuk are shown
in Table 4 and Fig. 11. Fig. 10: Determination of characteristic
Section 6.1.2(3)(b) of ENV 1994-1-1 resistance and slip capacity connec-
states that connector devices with a char- tor according EC 4-1
acteristic slip of not less than 6 mm have
the same deformation capacity as headed studs. Headed studs of sufficient length in turn
may be regarded to be ductile connectors. Examination of Table 4 learns that a lot of
connectors, even headed studs, do not fulfil this requirement. It should however be noted
that this ductility is only required when ideal plastic behaviour of the shear connection in
the structure is considered. This is generally not the case for bridge structures where a
number of shear connector devices discussed in this article could be well applied.
Fig. 11 shows that there is an increase in capacity for all connector devices for higher
cube strengths. This increase in cube strength is most beneficial for the (oscillating)
perfobondstrip. It should however be remarked that the failure modes for the T-
connector and the (oscillating) perfobondstrip are different for lower and higher concrete
strengths; the connectors device itself becomes governing for the higher concrete
strengths. The capacity of the T-connector could easily be increased by providing a

1320
longer connector, what is 4000
Cube strength -
less easy for the (oscillating) Characteristic strength (EC 4)
perfobondstrip. The increase 3000
Oscillating-perfobondstrip
in strength for headed studs Perfobondstrip
looks like a contradiction to

Frk [kN]
2000
the general accepted idea
T-connector
that the steel strength of the
studs is governing from 1000
Headed studs
concrete grade C30/37 and
up, and that the concrete
0
strength therefore should 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
have no effect. Due to the Cube strength [Mpa]
increase in Youngs-modulus 50
of the concrete, and hence Cube strength - Ductility (EC 4)
the increase in the bedding 40
stiffness of the stud, the
failure mode of the studs 30 T-connector
δu [mm]

changes from a combined


tension and shear failure to a 20
pure shear failure mode. As a
Oscillating-perfobondstrip Perfobondstrip
result the tensile force in the 10

stud will reduce, and leave Headed studs


more capacity for the shear 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
mode of failure. Cube strength [Mpa]

Fig. 11: Strength and ductility according to EC 4


Table 4: Strength and ductility according to EuroCode 4
Concrete grade
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
C30/37 C70/85 LC30/37 LC62/75
+fibres +fibres +fibres +fibres
Headed-studs PRk [kN] 814 907 732 901 790 930 730 877
(8) δuk[mm] 5.0 3.4 4.9 4.4 4.6 3.0 5.4 3.1
Perfobondstrip PRk [kN] 1305 2836 969 2227 1277 2936 1104 2696
(2) δuk[mm] 0.8 9.4 2.9 5.7 2.9 7.9 16.4 10.5
Oscillating PRk [kN] 1947 3409 1716 2976 2008
- - -
perfobondstrip δuk[mm] 1.9 6.5 2.7 4.6 7.6
Waveform strip PRk [kN] 400
- - - - - - -
(2) δuk[mm] 1.8
T-connector PRk [kN] 1266 1805 1314 1870 1537
- - -
(2) δuk[mm] 16.1 15.8 38.8 16.4 37.8
(number of connectors per test-specimen)

For headed-studs and the T-connector there is some decrease in ductility for higher con-
crete strengths, whilst there is some increase for the (oscillating) perfobondstrip. Despite

1321
the decrease in ductility of the T-connector this device still is the most ductile connector
for higher concrete strengths.

5. Conclusions

The following general conclusions can be drawn with respect to the connector devices
and concrete mixes investigated:
- A failure mechanism not known from literature was observed for the (oscillating)
perfobondstrip in concrete C30/37, LC30/37 and LC75/80 without fibres.
- The addition of steel fibres had a very beneficial effect on the behaviour of the con-
nection in general. The only exception are the headed studs where the behaviour of
the steel limited the strength.
- The connection in high strength concrete, which was expected to be very brittle,
behaved in a very ductile way. The observation that the concrete panels did not split,
and that the steel connector device had to deliver most of the deformations, seems an
explanation for this ductility.
- The behaviour of the T-connector is very promising, but there may be questions
about its behaviour under dynamic loads. It actually has a very small bearing area on
the concrete. Subsequently the stresses in the concrete must be very high, and local
crushing of the concrete may occur. This in particular could cause a degradation of
the connection under a dynamic load. This has to be further investigated.
- Lightweight aggregate concrete often seemed to behave in a little bit more ductile
way when compared to normal weight concrete, especially in the post-peak stage.

6. References

1 EuroCode 4: ENV 1994-2:1997, Design of composite steel and concrete structures –


Part 2: Composite bridges (1997), European Committee for Standardisation (CEN)
2 Oguejiofor E.C. and Hosain M.U. (1994). A parametric study of perfobond rib shear
connectors. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 21, 614-624
3 Mainstone R.J. and Menzies J.B. (1967). Shear connectors in steel-concrete compos-
ite beams for bridges – 1: Static and fatigue tests on push-out specimens. Concrete
1:9, 291-302

1322
STRUCTURAL MONITORING OF HYBRID SPECIMENS
AT EARLY AGE USING FIBRE OPTIC SENSORS
Branko Glisic , Daniele Inaudi
SMARTEC SA, Switzerland

Abstract
Hybrid structures, notably bridges, consisting of steel girders and concrete decks, are
designed to exploit in the best way the mechanical properties of both materials. In order
to guarantee safe, durable and low-cost service of such structures, a long-term quality
and a robust connection between steel and concrete must be guaranteed. Even if
experience in construction, maintenance and exploitation of these structures is large, a
good and long-lived connection remains a challenging point in their realisation. This is
mainly due to the initial incompatibility in the dimensional behaviour of two materials:
early and very early age deformations of concrete (thermal expansion and total
shrinkage) generate stresses in both materials even before service and imperils their good
interaction.
With the intention of a better understanding and an accurate numerical modelling of the
steel-concrete connection in hybrid structures, measurements are indispensable and, in
particular the deformation evolution in both materials during the early and very early age
of concrete.
In this paper we present examples of this type of measurements, the monitoring of the
total dimensional evolution of hybrid elements, the determination of hardening time of
concrete and structural monolithisation and, indirectly, the determination of concrete’s
Young modulus evolution. An approach to concrete delamination detection is also
assessed. All these parameters are evaluated using fibre optic sensors directly embedded
in the fresh concrete or attached to steel elements. Their high accuracy, long-term
stability and especially their ability to measure early and very early deformation of
concrete are essential for monitoring of mentioned parameters.

1. Introduction

Hydration is a complex physico-chemical exothermal process. During hydration, the


water-cement suspension transforms to hardened cement paste; strength and stiffness of

1323
concrete increase; a considerable amount of heat is discharged; and early age
deformation occurs. The deformation due to hydration is caused by hydration heating
and cooling and by material transition to hardened cement paste (autogenous
deformation).
In case of hybrid structures, the early age deformation is restrained by steel elements.
Therefore, residual tensile and compressive stresses are generated. Residual tensile
stresses, generated before the tensile strength of concrete is fully developed, provoke
early age cracking.
Recent studies and research (e.g. [1, 2]) have shown that early age cracking of concrete
can significantly increase the vulnerability of structures to noxious environmental
influences. The cracks form "open doors" to the infiltration and penetration of noxious
substances such as chlorides and sulphate water. These substances attack the concrete
and rebars, and damage the structure, thereby reducing its long-term capacity and
durability.
Figure 1 [1] shows the influence of early age cracking on durability for a hybrid old-
concrete new-concrete structure. We assume that a similar law is valid in case of a new
concrete – steel structure. Even small gains in concrete performance during very early
age, have a consequence of extending considerably the life span of the structure.
How does one evaluate the risk of the early age cracking? Generally there are two
approaches, numerical simulation and monitoring. Numerical simulations are very
complicated because of the problem complexity. They may be successful [1], only after
calibration provided by measurements (notably of concrete parameters as Young
modulus, strength, creep ratio etc.). Data collected by early age monitoring therefore
represents a unique source of information for understanding the real structural behaviour.

Performance Initial
Early age
damage

Residual
Capacity gained
Propagation

during early age


Damage

Gained
Minimal admitted level of capacity extension of life Age
Durability of structure (life span)

Figure 1: Influence of early age damage on the durability of an hybrid structure [1]

It is recommended to start deformation monitoring of hybrid structures from the moment


of concrete pouring. In this way, the whole history of deformation is collected. This
includes the very early age deformation, which is generated while the concrete is still not

1324
hardened. For this purpose, it is necessary to carry out the monitoring with sensor
systems that are capable of such measurements.

2. SOFO monitoring system

The deformation monitoring system named SOFO (French acronym of "Surveillance


d'Ouvrage par Fibres Optiques" - "Monitoring of Structures by Optical Fibers") has been
developed at the Stress Analysis Laboratory of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
(IMAC-EPFL) [3]. It is based on fibre optic technology and is capable of monitoring
micrometer deformations over measurement bases up to a few meters. It is particularly
adapted to measure civil structures built with civil engineering materials such as
concrete, steel and timber. Since 1993 it has been successfully applied to the monitoring
of different types of structures such as bridges, tunnels and piles. Performance data are
presented in more details in [3] and [4]. SOFO Standard Sensors can be applied
externally, attached to the surface of the structure, but also, and more importantly, they
can be applied internally, embedded in fresh concrete. Installation of sensors before the
pouring of concrete is a required condition for deformation monitoring at very early age.
A second obligatory condition is a good transfer of deformation from concrete to the
sensor, which is guaranteed by the low stiffness of the sensor [4]. A typical application
of the SOFO system to a civil structure is presented in Figure 2.

Independent System
Structure Sensors Optical Cable

Intermediate Central
Connection Boxes Connection
Channel Box
Switch

SOFO

User's PC

Figure 2: Concept of the SOFO monitoring system

3. Early and very early age deformation of concrete

The period which begins with pouring and finishes when all thermal processes in
concrete are finished is considered here as the early age of concrete. It consists of the
dormant period and the period of intense heat release, until the concrete temperature is
balanced with the environment temperature. The duration of the early age varies from a
couple of days to several weeks depending on the thermal properties of the concrete

1325
components, the heat production potential of cement, the additives, the environmental
conditions (temperature and relative humidity), the cure (thermoisolation) and geometry
of the concrete element (massive and thick elements need more time to cool than thin
elements).
The period included in the early age, during which the concrete is still not hardened, is
conventionally called the very early age. The duration of the very early age is between
several hours and one day depending mainly on the rate of hydration, concrete
composition (notably the water-cement ratio) and curing conditions. Since the processes
of solidification and hardening of concrete are continuous, it is difficult to precisely
define the end of the very early age. American standards propose the setting time of
concrete [5]. In this paper, the end of the very early age of concrete is conventionally
called the hardening time of concrete [4].
The early age deformation of concrete is provoked by internal and external causes that
have mechanical, thermal or hydraulic origins [6]. The sources of the early age
deformation are presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Origins of the early age deformation
Mechanical Thermal actions Hydraulic actions
Hydration hydraulic
Internal - Hydration heat
processes
Ambient temperature Ambient humidity
External Load variation, natural or variation, natural or
artificial artificial

The six following forms of the early age deformation are distinguished [4, 6]:
• Plastic shrinkage, εp
• Autogenous shrinkage, εa
• Drying shrinkage and swelling, εh
• Carbonatation shrinkage, εcar
• Thermal deformation (expansion and contraction), εt , εt,e
• Load and creep deformation, εs and εϕ.
Some of them often appear simultaneously. In this case, their sum represents the total
deformation. The total deformation of concrete at early age depends of different factors,
such as concrete composition, curing, loads etc. It is always composed of at least two
different types of deformation. In Figure 3, periods and possible simultaneous apparition
of different types of early age deformation are represented.
An example of total early and very early age deformation measured on a concrete
element (see Figure 4) using SOFO Standard Sensor is represented in Figure 5. During
monitoring, the concrete element was thermally and hydro isolated. Two components of
deformation are dominant: thermal and autogenous deformation, but their action was
restrained by the workform and friction with the steel beam.

1326
Early age
Very
early age

Dormant period Period of intense Period of slow hydration


hydration

Internal
influences εt εa εca εa εcar

External
ε εt,e εp
influences t,e εt,e εh εs εϕ
εs εc
0.125 0.5 1 2 4 8 16 32
Time [Day]

Figure 3: Periods of apparition of different types of deformations

4. Early age deformation measurement on steel - concrete specimens

In this section we demonstrate how the early age monitoring helps to understand real
behaviour of the structure. The aim of test is to compare two concretes with
approximately equal mixtures but with different initial temperatures.

800x140
Concrete F2 P6

160x10
SOFO Sensors in
specimens P6
and F2
6x800

Steel
300x20

Dimensions in mm
Figure 4: Cross-section of the specimens P5, P6 and F2

The hybrid steel-concrete specimens, called P6 and F2, are analysed. Both specimens are
mixed with 350 kg/m3 of the cement CEM I 52.5, the water cement ratio is of 0.48,
granulate with maximal diameter of 32 mm, and 1.2% of plasticiser. The most important
difference between these two concretes is the initial temperature: Concrete for the
specimen P6 is refrigerated to 5°C using liquid nitrogen. Both specimens are cured in the

1327
same conditions after the pouring. Each specimen has the same length of 8.4 m, and
identical dimensions of the cross section. The specimens are equipped with
thermocouples and Standard Sensors. The sensor emplacement and the cross-section are
presented in Figure 4. Both sensors are presented in the same figure only in order to
facilitate the comparison. In the longitudinal direction the sensor are centred in the
middle of the specimens' spans. The monitored deformations of both specimens are
presented in Figure 5. Initial, maximal and final (71 hour after the pouring) temperatures
of specimens are presented in Table 2.
The difference between the very early age behaviour of the specimens is noticeable in
Figure 5. The difference between the initial and the final temperature is approximately
equal for both specimens (29.5°C for specimen P6 and 26.2°C for specimen F2).
However, the thermal expansion of specimen P6 is higher by 75%. Moreover, the
maximum in expansion of specimen P6 is achieved 8 hours later than for specimen F2.
This difference in behaviour of specimens is the consequence of their different initial
temperature: the hydration process of refrigerated concrete was slowed down due to low
temperature, therefore the period of intense heating was long, and since in this period the
thermal expansion coefficient (TEC) of concrete is elevated, the thermal expansion of
concrete is higher than in the case of non-refrigerated concrete.
200 Expansion Contraction
St. & Dorm. period

P6
150
Deformation [µε]

F2

100
13 µε
50
89 µε
0

Expan. Contraction
-50
24 h
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time [h]

Figure 5: Behaviour of two different concretes cured in the same conditions

Table 2. Initial, maximal and final temperatures of specimens P6 and F2


Specimen Initial temperature Maximal temperature Final temperature*
P6 6.2 35.7 26.7
F2 26.1 52.3 33.1
*
71 hour after the pouring

If we suppose that a monitoring systems using external sensor was applied on the
concrete 24 hours after the poring, then after 71 hours it would register a significantly

1328
smaller difference between total specimen deformations (13 µε instead 102 µε, see
encircled area in Figure 5). The error obtained using such a way of monitoring is very
high and it does not allow to understand the different behaviour between the specimens.

5. Hardening time of concrete and monolithisation of hybrid structures

In the case of hybrid structures, the very early age deformation is partially restrained by
the interaction with the steel element. Due to the dominant viscous behaviour of concrete
at this stage, there are no important stresses generated by the interaction. During
concrete hydration both materials deform, the concrete due to hydration, and the steel
due to heat transferred from the concrete. Before hardening, the deformations of the new
concrete and of the steel element are generally different since the mechanical interaction
between them is weak, the new concrete is viscous and the thermal expansion
coefficients are different [4,7].
With ageing, the concrete hardens, the interaction with steel element starts and their
deformations become more and more interdependent. Furthermore, at the interface, the
difference of deformations converges to a constant value. When this constant value is
established, both materials deform equally. This means that a good interaction between
them is created, and this is possible only if the concrete is hardened. Therefore, in the
case of hybrid structures, the moment when the deformations of both materials (concrete
and steel) at the interface begin to be equal is proposed as the hardening time of concrete
[4]. The following example illustrates the determination of the hardening time in case of
the specimen F1, which contains the same concrete and has the same length as the
specimen F2. The cross-section of the specimen and the placement of the sensors are
presented in Figure 6.

A-A
800x140
Concrete B5 B3 A-A
16
160x10
Sensors in
specimen F1
112

6x800
B5 B3
12

Steel
200x15
30 2010 42 8 20 30
Dimensions in mm

Figure 6: Cross-section and sensors placement of specimen F1

The sensors B3 and B5 have been positioned 720 mm from the end of the specimen. The
sensor B3 is attached to iron corners welded to the steel (see Figure 6). In this way it

1329
measures the deformation of the steel support. The sensor B5 is embedded into the
concrete in order to measure its very early age deformation. The measurements of both
sensors and their difference are presented in Figure 7. The hardening time is successfully
determined using the difference between the measured deformations. The difference
between measured deformations is presented in more details in Figure 8.
175
150
125
Deformation [µε]

100
75 B3 (Steel)
50 B5 (Concrete)
B3-B5 (Difference)
25
~8h30

0
-25
-50
-75
0:00:00 6:00:00 12:00:00 18:00:00 24:00:00 30:00:00 36:00:00 42:00:00 48:00:00

Age [Hours]

Figure 7: The (very) early age deformation of the specimen F1 and new concrete
hardening time identification
10
5
0
Deformation [µε]

-5
-10
-15
~8h30 Hardening time
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45 -44 µε
-50
0:00:00 6:00:00 12:00:00 18:00:00 24:00:00 30:00:00 36:00:00 42:00:00 48:00:00
Age [Hours]
Figure 8: The difference between deformations of steel and concrete and concrete
hardening time identification

1330
After the hardening time, the concrete and the steel deform at the interface in the same
manner, meaning that both materials are well bonded and begin to behave as a
monolithic structural element. Consequently, the hardening time presents also the time
of monolithisation of the structure. In different numerical approaches, which include the
analysis of structural behaviour at early age, the question of the time to start the analysis
is very delicate. Before the hardening of concrete, the stresses generated in concrete are
not so important, since the concrete is still plastic, and the restrained or imposed
deformation is relaxed. That’s why we propose the hardening time of concrete as a
starting time for numerical modellings of concrete.

6. Further research - Approach to delamination detection and evolution of


Young modulus of concrete

In this section, two approaches are proposed for further research. The first concerns the
detection of delamination and the second evolution of Young modulus of concrete.
The pair of sensors installed as shown in Figure 6 could be used to detect possible
delaminations of concrete. If the structure behaves as a monolithic body, the
deformations of both sensors are supposed to be equal. Since the sensors have a long
gage length (0.2 to 6m), cracking of concrete without delamination will not affect
significantly the difference between measurements performed by sensors. If a
delamination appears, concrete and steel do not bond completely so their behaviour is
more independent, and the absolute value of the difference between the measurements
will significantly increase. This increase in the absolute value of the difference between
the measurements will indicate the delamination.
Using standard SOFO sensors embedded into the concrete of hybrid structures, could
also allow the evolution of the Young modulus of concrete. For this purpose
simultaneous deformation and temperature monitoring of the steel element is required.
Since the mechanical behaviour of the steel is known, data obtained from its monitoring
will allow the determination of the evolution of the bonding forces between the steel and
concrete. Finally, by correlating the stresses obtained from bonding forces and
deformation measured by the embedded standard sensor, it could be possible to retrieve
evolution of relation strain – stress, e.g. the evolution of the Young modulus. This
approach is very delicate since, at the early age, the thermal expansion coefficient of
concrete is variable, and the creep can be significant. However some initial results
obtained using this method showed good agreement with numerical modelling [8].

7. Conclusions

An aspect of early and very early age monitoring of concrete in the case of hybrid, steel -
concrete specimens is presented, as well as its benefit for a better understanding the real
structural behaviour. For this purpose a unique long-gage fibre optic monitoring system,
allowing such measurements, is applied. The permanent monitoring of deformations
using Standard SOFO Sensors, starting immediately after pouring, provides accurate

1331
measurements that help to enlarge and improve the knowledge of the real behaviour of
concrete at early and very early age
Diagrams that demonstrate early and very early age deformations of hybrid specimens
cured in laboratory conditions were presented in this paper. Four characteristic periods
are distinguished in the diagrams: the dormant period, the stabilisation period, the
thermal expansion period and the contraction period.
The alteration of TEC during the very early age is confirmed by the tests. Different
behaviour of two identical concretes with different initial temperatures has proven this
important characteristic of concrete at very early age. High difference between final
thermal expansion deformations would not be determined accurately using traditional
monitoring systems.
A definition of the hardening time and an original approach for its determination are
presented in this paper. The method is applicable to hybrid structures and was laboratory
tested and validated.

Acknowledgements

The work presented in this paper is performed in the ISS and IMAC laboratories of
EPFL (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland). The authors of
this paper would like to thank Dr. Jean-Marc Ducret from Ferward SA, Dr. Miguel
Navarro Gomez and Mr. Alexandre Blanc from ICOM-EPFL for their help, advise and
generosity during the realisation of the tests, Dr. Olivier Bernard from MCS-EPFL for
advise concerning research on concrete at very early age and Mr. Raymond Délez from
IMAC-EPFL whose help and mechanical knowledge was imperative.

References
1. Bernard O., "Comportement à long terme des éléments de structures formés de
bétons d'âges différents", Ph.D. Thesis N° 2283, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2000
2. “Thermal Cracking in Concrete at Early Age”, RILEM International Symposium,
Munich, Germany, 1994
3. Inaudi D., “Fiber Optic Sensor Network for the Monitoring of Civil Structures”,
Ph.D. Thesis N° 1612, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland,1997
4. Glisic B., “Fibre optic sensors and behaviour in concrete at early age”, Ph.D. Thesis
N° 2283, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2000
5. ASTM 04.02, US Norms
6. Aïtcin P.-C., Neville A., Acker P., "Les différents types de retrait du béton", Bulletin
des laboratoires des Ponts et Chaussées, Vol. 215, pp 41-51, LCPC, Paris, 1998
7. Laplante P., Boulay C., "Evolution du coefficient de dilatation thermique du béton en
fonction de sa maturité aux tout premiers âges", Materials and Structures, Vol.27,
pp. 596-605, 1994
8. Ducret J.-M., "Etude du comportement réel des ponts mixtes et modélisation pour le
dimensionnement", Ph.D. Thesis N° 1738, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland, 1997

1332
DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATIVE COMPOSITE SYSTEM
– BETWEEN STEEL AND CONCRETE MEMBERS
Koji Kitagawa*, Hiroshi Watanabe*, Yoshihiro Tachibana*, Hirokazu Hiragi**
and Akimitsu Kurita***
* Bridge Structure Division, Kawada Industries, Inc., Japan
** Department of Civil Engineering, Setsunan University, Japan
*** Department of Civil Engineering, Osaka Institute of Technology, Japan

Abstract
The authors have developed an innovative composite system between steel and concrete
members combining the headed stud shear connectors and epoxy resin mortar. This
system is called Post Rigid System (hereinafter, abbreviated to PR System), where the
system have the behaviors of non- and full composite action under construction and in
service, respectively. By using the PR System in steel-concrete composite structures,
therefore, the introduction of prestressing force only into the concrete member can be
done effectively. To confirm the applicability of PR System, fundamental tests were
carried out. The resin mortar consist of epoxy resin and silica sands. It is possible to
control the hardening time of resin mortar subject to a constructional plan of structure.
To eliminate the composite action between steel and concrete, the shank of each stud is
wrapped by the resin mortar-A and also the attaching surface of steel girder against the
concrete member is plastered by resin mortar-B. The stud shear connector used in the PR
System is named Post Rigid Stud (hereinafter, abbreviated to PR Stud). The concept of
the PR System, various test results of resin mortar and PR Studs, also an application
example for an actual bridge are presented and discussed in this paper.

1. Introduction

In the past, no structural system that changes with the progress in the time from non- to
full composite system has been developed. The fact of such structure system is called PR
System. If this kind of PR System (Figure 1) is possible, the tensile stress that occurs
during drying shrinkage in concrete restrained by steel members can be mitigated, and
prestressing can be applied to concrete without restraint of steel members because the
PR System is non-composite during prestressing and is composite when live load is
applied later. The PR System will therefore extend the versatility of composite structures.

We have developed a new type of stud called PR Stud (Photo 1) as a shear connector,
and used Time-setting resin mortar-A and -B to realize the PR System, which is flexible

1333
for a while but becomes rigid at the serviceability state. In advance of the development
of the PR Stud, testing and development were conducted on both of resin mortars, which
plays an important role in the PR System, as to compressive strength and Young's
modulus after hardening as well as viscosity and adhesive strength before the hardening.
This paper also describes the construction work of Shiratori-bridge, which is the first
bridge adopted the PR System.

After hardening
Headed stud
Non-composite shear connector
State of resin

Full composite

Resin mortar-A
Under construction for shear
connectors
Before hardening In service
Resin mortar-B
Initial Setting time of hardening Time
for steel plates
Figure 1. Behavior of the PR System Photo 1. Details of PR Stud

2. Outline and required performance of the PR System

In the PR System, as shown in Photo 1, Time-setting resin mortar-A is plastered to a


steel plate surface that will later face concrete and resin mortar-B is also wrapped around
each connector. Each resin mortar is cold-setting epoxy resin whose hardening time in
practical use can be adjusted between 1 ~ 12 months by changing the amount of
hardener, as confirmed through mix design tests. These gelatinous resin mortars before
hardening permit the relative movement between steel plate and concrete, but resin
mortar-A and -B do not permit the movement after hardening because of those increased
compressive and adhesive strength.

The PR Stud is a shear connector consisting of a headed stud shear connector whose
shank is wrapped up with Time-setting resin mortar-A. Two-thirds of the total length of
the stud from its welding reinforcement of base is wrapped in the resin mortar-A to
provide resistance against pull-out force at the stud head, and the resin thickness is
selected by the required amount of relative slip.

The requirements and remarks on each resin mortar and the PR Stud are described below.

1334
2.1. Viscosity of resin mortars
There are constructional requirements on both of resin mortars before hardening. The
resin mortar-B should have a low viscosity so that it can be plastered by using a roller,
and the resin mortar-A it should have a high viscosity so that it will not sag.

2.2. Compressive strength and Young’s modulus of resin mortars


After hardening, both of resin mortars should be over compressive strength of the
concrete, and resin mortar-B should be the Young's modulus of the degree which PR
Stud behaves equivalent to ordinary studs.

2.3. Bond strength of resin mortar-B


They are required that the bond strength of the resin mortar-B is very low before
hardening, and that it is high after hardening.

2.4. Resistance of the PR Stud


As shown in Figure 1, the PR Stud must have a low resistance against horizontal shear
for a while after construction, but have shear resistance equivalent to that of ordinary
studs after the hardening of the resin mortar-A.

3. Characteristic tests on Time-setting resin mortars

The viscosity of each resin before hardening was adjusted by changing the amount of
filler as described in 2.1, and low-viscosity resin-B for steel plates and high-viscosity
resin-A for connectors were formulated. Silica sand was added to each resin to prepare
Time-setting resin mortar, which was then subjected to compression and adhesion tests
to select a mix proportion of resin mortars having characteristics suited for the PR
System as described in 2.2 and 2.3.

3.1. Young's modulus and strength after hardening


The test results are shown in Table 1. The values of Young's modulus and Poisson's
ratio were obtained by the secant method for a compressive stress of 10 N/mm2 expected
to occur in the serviceability state of resin surrounded by concrete.

In the compression test, the compressive strength of the resins, more than 100 N/mm2, in
any case far exceeds that of the concrete, but is nearly constant regardless of the content
of silica sand. In addition, greater values of Young's modulus (close to the values
specified in 2.2) were obtained at silica sand contents of 80% and 30% for the resins for
connectors and steel plates, respectively. Resin mortars with these silica sand contents
were used for the verification tests that followed.

3.2. Adhesive strength before and after hardening


The test results are shown in Table 2. Adhesive strength before hardening is low and
nearly constant regardless of displacement, and it after hardening is great (the

1335
requirement described in 2.3). The adhesive strength of the resin before hardening is
expected to be lower at higher temperatures.

Table 1. Results of a compression test


Weight Compressive Young's Poisson's
Resin mortar type strength modulus ratio
Resin : Silica sand fr' (N/mm2) Er (N/mm2) µ
Resin mortar-A 1 : 0.0 103 0.68 ×104 0.37
for shear connectors 1 : 0.8 134 1.53 ×104 0.32
4
Resin mortar-B 1 : 0.8 130 0.41 ×10 0.38
for steel plates 1 : 0.3 131 0.65 ×104 0.35

Table 2. Result of an adhesion test (at an air temperature of 5 deg C)


Average bond strength
Surface treatment Remarks
tr' (N/mm2)
Time-setting Before hardening 0.09 Cohesion of resin
resin mortar After hardening 5.03 Concrete failure

4. Push-out shear test of the PR Stud

A push-out shear tests were carried out to confirm that restraining force of PR Studs
before the hardening of resin mortars is low for the horizontal shearing force and that it
has the shear resistance which is equivalent to ordinary studs, after the hardening of the
resin mortars (the requirement described in 2.4).

4.1. Test specimen and method


Three specimens were prepared for each of the five different specimen types to
investigate the change of slip behavior and shear resistance in the push-out test before
and after the hardening of resin mortars.

An ordinary headed stud was used in type 1 to make a comparison with the PR Stud.
Types 2 and 3 respectively correspond to before and after the hardening of the resin
mortars having silica sand, with which the PR Stud was wrapped up the resin mortar-A;
as mentioned in section 3.1, the Young's modulus of its mortar-A after hardening was
about half that of the concrete. Types 4 and 5 respectively correspond to before and after
the hardening of the resin mortars containing no silica sand; they were intended to
investigate the effect of Young's modulus on the slip characteristic of the resin mortars.

1336
An H-shaped steel beam in the push-out specimen was split into two parts at web plate,
which were positioned in the perpendicular condition weld PR Stud and connected with
bolts after the casting and curing of concrete (Figure 2). The width of wrapping by resin
mortar-A was set to 70 mm against pull-out force at the stud heads and the thickness of
wrapping was set to 8 mm so that the amount of slip before the hardening, characteristic
of the PR Stud, could be investigated. As for the surface treatment of steel plates in
contact with concrete, resin mortar-B was plastered to a thickness of 1.5 mm, like in
practical cases, in specimen types 2 and 4 (tested before the hardening of resin mortar),
while wax was applied to the steel plates in types 1, 3, and 5 to investigate the shear
characteristic provided only by the studs.

The strength of concrete was suppressed to about 30 N/mm2, comparable to values in


actual bridges.

Details of studs

ϕ19
ϕ35
Direction of loading

Load cell 70
110
Direction of
concrete casting
Direction of
concrete casting
0
50

160 Resin mortar (type 2 and 4)


Waxed (type 1, 3 and 5)
60
=1
80
2x
500

PR Stud (type 2, 3, 4 and 5)


Ordinary headed stud (type 1)

Displacement meter

Figure 2. Push-over shear test specimen and arrangement

Concrete failure plane Stud failure plane

a) Concrete failure b) Stud failure

Figure 3. State of failure

1337
4.2. Test results
The results of the static push-out shear test by increment cyclic method are shown in
Table 3.

Table 3. Result of a static push-out shear test


Shear Slip constants for different
Specime Type of Material strength relative slip State of
n type studs properties Qmax 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.5 5.0 failure
(kN/stud mm mm mm mm mm
1 140 778 235 205 192 169 Stud
Type 1

2 Ordinary fc'=28.9 113 596 234 219 186 164 Stud


3 headed stud Ec=23750 111 345 207 169 147 121 Concrete
Avg. 122 573 225 198 175 151
1 PR Stud 132 56 27 20 18 19 Concrete
(with silica fc'=28.9
Type 2

2 109 48 29 23 23 21 Concrete
sand) Ec=23750
3 before 131 94 38 22 21 21 Concrete
Avg. hardening frd'=115.0 124 66 31 22 21 20
1 PR Stud Erd=15750 136 346 224 195 172 161 Stud
(with silica
Type 3

2 118 457 223 176 117 104 Concrete


sand) frs'=101.0
3 after Ers=6200 134 603 282 218 181 142 Stud
Avg. hardening 129 469 243 196 157 136
1 PR Stud 135 48 25 19 17 23 Concrete
(without fc'=33.3
Type 4

2 137 88 33 21 19 19 Concrete
silica sand) Ec=35200
3 before 110 74 28 19 19 18 Concrete
Avg. hardening frd'=103.0 127 70 29 20 18 20
1 PR Stud Erd=6800 117 171 106 76 87 99 Stud
(without
Type 5

2 120 191 164 103 86 108 Stud


silica sand) frs'=130.0
3 after Ers=4100 119 223 141 116 113 118 Stud
Avg. hardening 119 195 137 98 95 108
fc' : Compressive strength of concrete
Ec' : Young's modulus of concrete
frd' : Compressive strength of resin mortar-A for connectors
Erd' : Young's modulus of resin mortar-A for connectors
frs' : Compressive strength of resin mortar-B for steel palates
Ers' : Young's modulus of resin mortar-B for steel palates

1338
150

Shearing force Q
(kN/stud) 100

50

0
0 5 10 15 20
Relative slip δ (mm)
a) Type 1: ordinary stud

150
Type 3
Shearing force Q
(kN/stud)

100

50

Type 2
0
0 5 10 15 20
Relative slip δ (mm)
b) Type 2 and 3: PR Stud (resin mortar with silica sand)

150
Shearing force Q

Type 5
(kN/stud)

100

50
Type 4
0
0 5 10 15 20
Relative slip δ (mm)
c) Type 4 and 5: PR Stud (resin mortar without silica sand)

Figure 4. Relationship between shearing force and relative slip

1339
Qa The slope of the unloading line from the point of load
Qa at relative slip δa to the point of load 0 at relative
Q (kN)

slip δb is defined as slip constant K at δa.

K(δa) = Qa
0 δb δa δa – δb
δ (mm) Here, δa – δb is the amount of elastic recovery slippage.
Figure 5. Calculation of the slip constant

4.2.1. Maximum shear strength (Qmax)


Table 3 indicates that in the cases of the ordinary stud and the PR Stud after the
hardening, the ultimate state of failure is mostly the breaking of the base part of the stud,
and in the case of the PR Stud before the hardening, the ultimate state of failure is the
shear failure of concrete (Figure 3). Nevertheless, the average Qmax values are nearly
the same at types 1 ~ 5. From this case, the PR Stud has shear strength comparable to
that of an ordinary stud both before and after the hardening of resin mortars.

4.2.2. Slippage property


Figure 4 indicates that the slippage property of the PR Stud changes drastically before
and after the hardening of resin mortars in specimen of types 2 ~ 5. The shear force of
the PR Stud before the hardening remained nearly constant as relative slip increased up
to 5 ~ 8 mm, which corresponds to the wrapping thickness of the resin mortar-A (8 mm).
This implies that the amount of slip at a constant shear force can increase up to the
wrapping thickness of resin mortar-A. The PR Stud after the hardening of the resin
mortar-A in type 3 showed shear resistance similar to that of the ordinary stud. The type
5 resin, containing no silica sand, was found to be more flexible than the ordinary stud
because of its low Young's modulus after the hardening.

4.2.3. Slip constant, K


Figure 5 shows how to calculate the slip constant, K. The slope of each unloading line in
Figure 4 was calculated as a slip constant for the corresponding relative slip and was
listed in Table 3. Types 3 and 1 resulted in nearly the same slip constants for any
relative slip; this means the elastic recovery slip of the PR Stud after the hardening of the
resin mortar having silica sand is almost the same as that of the ordinary stud. The slip
constants of types 2 and 4 are about one-tenth of those of types 1 and 3; this means the
PR Stud before the hardening of the resin mortar-A wrapping around the base part of the
stud results in greater relative slip compared to the ordinary stud or the PR Stud after the
hardening of the resin mortar, but exhibits excellent elastic recovery slip.

4.2.4. Summary of the push-out shear test


The test results indicate that the PR Stud wrapped up with the resin mortar-A with silica
is suited for the PR System (the requirement described in 2.4).

1340
5. Construction of Shiratori-bridge

As one application example of PR System, it is non-composite, when the prestress is


introduced by prestressed concrete steel, and the structure as composite structure is
mentioned in service. The advantage of this PR System is that the loss of prestress due to
the adhesion and friction of steel members can be minimized, and concrete and steel
members can function efficiently as a result. Shiratori-bridge was designed and
constructed based on the PR System concept as a connecting bridge in a golf course.

Side view
50 350 17900 350 50

Prestressing cable

Cross section Main beam cross section


400 3600 400 100 240 100

140
140

Resin Mortar PR Stud

756
756

Prestressing
cable
1000 2400 1000 340
Figure 6. General drawing of Shiratori-bridge

Table 4. Bridge specifications Table 5. Construction steps


1. Steel beam manufacturing
Bridge type Pedestrian bridge 2. Resin mortar application
Bridge length 18.700 m
3. Concrete placement
Bridge width 4.400 m
Angle of skew 90.0 ° 4. Concrete curing
Plane R= ∞ 5. Tensioning of prestressing cable
Pavement Asphalt (30 mm thick) 6. Resin mortar curing
Floor slab Precast RC slab (140 mm
7. PRS beam (SC Beam) erection
Steel member SM400
Floor slab : σck=30 N/mm2 8. Floor slab construction
Concrete
Web : σck=30 N/mm2 9. Bridge deck construction

5.1. Specification of Shiratori-bridge


Shiratori-bridge is designed for sidewalk live load and golf carts, a general drawing is
given in Figure 6, the specifications are shown in Table 4, and construction steps are

1341
shown Table 5. The two main beams are PRS beams (named SC beams) in which steel
beams are combined with prestressed web concrete by means of PR Studs and Time-
setting resin mortar-B for steel plates. Precast concrete was used for the floor slab for the
sake of reducing the construction period. The interface of the slab and the beams are
combined through ordinary studs to form a composite beam system. While this was the
first case to construct a PR System bridge, a sufficient cross section was adopted for the
steel beams to ensure safety even without the web concrete.

5.2. Introduction of prestress to the PR System


When the prestress is introduced to concrete in a conventional composite system,
resistance caused by steel members needs to be taken into consideration. Even though
only the concrete needs to be prestressed, the required input of prestress tends to increase
due to this resistance. As a result, arrangement of prestressing cables may become
difficult. In the PR System, however, concrete can be prestressed efficiently with little
resistance from steel members, which are not well combined with the concrete before the
hardening of resin mortars.

6. Summary

In this paper, the basic concept of the PR System was first explained, and Time-setting
resin mortars and PR Studs were tested to verify the practicability of the PR System (the
requirement described in 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4). We have reported on the construction of
Shiratori-bridge as an example of a practical bridge by PR System. Because the PR
System can be widely applied to various areas and structures, the effect of replacing a
conventional structure with a PR System needs to be investigated on a case-by-case basis
to identify the effective construction methods and the extent of application.

The viscosity and hardening with the progress in the time of the Time-setting resin
mortars used in the present study vary with temperature, and the slip constant before the
hardening and the maximum sustainable shear depend on the stud diameter and the range
wrapped by resin mortar-A. Such aspects require further investigation.

7. References

[1] M.Sudo, H.Hiragi, A.Kurita, H.Watanabe, Y.Tachibana, and K.Kitagawa: Physical


property tests on Time-setting resin mortar used for composite systems, The 55th Annual
Conference of Japan Society of Civil Engineers (I), September 2000 (in Japanese).
[2] K.Kitagawa, H.Hiragi, H.Watanabe, Y.Tachibana, and Y.Ushijima: Push-over shear
test on Post Rigid (PR) Studs, The 55th Annual Conference of Japan Society of Civil
Engineers (I), September 2000 (in Japanese).
[3] Y.Tachibana, H.Hiragi, H.Watanabe, and K.Kitagawa: Outline of Shiratori-bridge, a
Post Rigid System (PR System) bridge, The 55th Annual Conference of Japan Society of
Civil Engineers (I), September 2000 (in Japanese).

1342
AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON THE BOND-SLIP
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CONCRETE AND STEEL
WITH STUD
Katsuyuki Konno*, Ahmed Farghaly** and Tamon Ueda**
* Hokkaido Institute of Technology, Japan
** Hokkaido University, Japan

Abstract
Beam type specimens where studs are used as shear connector are prepared to
investigate constitutive relations. Parameters are stud height, compressive strength of
concrete, stud spacing and steel plate thickness. The influences of these parameters are
investigated in this study. The influence of the stud height is evaluated quantitatively and
the influences of compressive strength of concrete, stud spacing and steel plate thickness
are evaluated qualitatively.

1. Introduction

Practical application of steel-concrete sandwich structure is getting more popular because of


its high strength and easy construction. One of likely application is slab. However, capacity
of sandwich slab, such as punching shear capacity, cannot be predicted with reasonable
accuracy1). This is because load-carrying mechanism of sandwich slab has not been
clarified yet. One of key issues for the clarification is constitutive relation for shear
connector.

In this study constitutive relation, transferred force-relative slip relationship, of stud


shear connector is experimentally studied. There are studies on constitutive relations for
stud. However, they are for studs in composite beam where stud is attached on flange
plate of steel beam2). In sandwich structures steel plate on which shear connector is
attached is externally attached to core concrete. This implies that steel plate in sandwich
structure is more easily deformed in out-plane direction than flange plate in composite
beam. Therefore, constitutive relations in sandwich structure are expected to be different
from those in composite beam.

1343
2. Details of specimens

Eight specimens were prepared for this experiment as shown in Table 1. Beam type of
specimens was prepared as shown in Fig.1. No shear reinforcement was provided. The
left side of the specimen in Fig.1 is tested side in which four studs were welded, while
the right side was strengthened by arranging more studs. Headed studs that have 13mm
diameter were welded to the steel plate. Material properties of the stud and steel plates
are shown in Table 2. Parameters are stud height, compressive strength of concrete, stud
spacing in longitudinal direction and steel plate thickness.

Table 1 Specification of specimens


fc’ fsy bt b S Ds hs ts r
Specimen
(N/mm2) (N/mm2) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
S-1 21.5 306 200 400 200 13 100 9 50
S-2 47.1 306 200 400 150 13 100 9 50
S-3 47.1 306 200 400 200 13 100 9 50
S-4 45.5 306 200 400 250 13 100 9 50
S-5 32.1 306 200 400 200 13 50 9 50
S-6 32.1 306 200 400 200 13 100 9 50
S-7 32.1 306 200 400 200 13 150 9 50
S-8 20.4 292 200 400 200 13 100 12 50
fc’ :compressive strength of concrete , fsy :yielding stress of steel plate , bt :spacing of stud in
transverse direction , b :width of beam , S :spacing of stud in longitudinal direction , Ds :diameter
of stud , hs :height of stud , ts :thickness of steel plate , r :width of loading plate

Table 2 Material properties of stud and steel plate


Young’s modulus Yielding stress Poisson’s
Material
(GPa) (MPa) ratio
Stud 196 378 0.30
Steel plate (6mm thickness) 169 255 0.30
Steel plate (9mm thickness) 174 306 0.28
Steel plate (12mm thickness) 175 291 0.29
1000
Displacement Displacement
Displacement transducer transducer
transducer A
Artificial crack
400

Displacement
transducer B

Unit:mm

Stud 2 Stud 4

Stud 1 Stud 3

Figure 1 Shape of specimen

1344
3. Experimental setup

The deflection at the center of specimen


was measured by displacement transducer stud
B in Fig.1. The relative displacement
between concrete and steel plate at the end
of the beam was measured by displacement : strain gage
transducer A in Fig.1. Strain gages were
mounted on the steel plate (see Chapter 4)
and studs (see Fig.2). The slip and the
transferred force at studs were calculated
by the strains of steel plate. Curvatures of Figure 2 Location of strain gages for stud
studs were calculated by the strains of
studs. The stud of 50mm height had 6
strain gages. The studs of 100mm height and 150mm height had 8 strain gages.

The preliminary test of a specimen indicated that load decreased immediately after the
crack had occurred at the center of the specimen. In order to prevent this immediate
decrease in load, an artificial crack at the center of the span was introduced for the rest of
the specimens.

4. Results of experiment

4.1 Transferred force and relative displacement at stud


Figure 3(a) shows strain gages that were attached on the upper and lower surface of the
steel plate to estimate the transferred shear force. Strain distribution in cross section d1 is
shown in Fig.3(b) as an example. Strain at each location is an average of the upper and
lower gages. Tensile force in cross section d1 was calculated by the hatched area (see
Fig.3(b)) multiplied by the thickness and Young’s modulus of steel plate. Tensile force
in cross section d2 was also calculated by the same procedure. The transferred force at
stud 4 was assumed as difference between those two tensile forces. The load level of
Fig.3(b) does not correspond to that of Fig.4(b).

The slip δ was calculated by Eq.(1).

δ = δ 0 − ∫ ε dl  (1)
δ0 is relative displacement between concrete and steel plate at the end of the beam as
shown in Fig.4(a). Figure 4(b) is strain distribution of the steel plate along the
longitudinal direction obtained by the strain gages as shown in Fig.4(a). The relative
displacement for stud 4 is obtained by taking integration of strain as shown by the
hatched area in Fig.4(b). Four transferred force-relative slip relationships were obtained

1345
from four studs in one specimen. The average of the four transferred force-relative slip
relationships is used to represent the experimental results of each specimen.

d c
C
L
3500
1 3000 Specimen S- 7
3

Strain(×10-6 )
Cross section d2
2500
Stud 2000
4 2 1500
1000
500
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
:strain gage Distance from the side of specimen (mm)
d1 d2 c1 c2 Steel plate

(a) Top view of steel plate (b) Strain distribution


Figure 3 Calculation of transferred force
CL

Steel plate stud 3 stud 1


180 0
160 0
stud 4 stud 2
140 0
120 0
Strain (×10 -6 )

100 0
8 00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 (mm)
6 00
:strain gage Location of stud
4 00
Top view 2 00
0
-20 0 0 200 400 600 800 1 00 0

-40 0
Concrete Distance form center (mm)

Steel plate
(b) Strain distribution
l 0
Side view
(a) Measurement
Figure 4 Calculation of relative slip

Figure 5 shows the transferred force-relative slip relationship of specimens S-1 and S-8.
Points A and B in Fig.5 correspond to points A’ and B’ in Fig.6 which indicates the
transferred force-curvature relationships. The stiffness of specimen S-8 suddenly starts
to decrease at point A in Fig.5 at which the curvature suddenly start to increase as shown

1346
in Fig.6 (a). This fact implies that the relative displacement calculated by Eq.(1) is
caused by deformation of the stud rather than that of the surrounding concrete.

45
B
40
Transferred force (kN)
(68.3kN)
35
30 →
25 A
20(58.8kN)
ts= 9mm
15 ←
10 ts= 12mm
5 Assumed line of (ts= 9mm)
0
-5
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Slip (mm)
Figure 5 Transferred force-relative slip relationship (parameter of steel plate thickness)
180 180
160 160
140 140
120 120
N)
Load (kN)

80mm
Load (k

100 60mm 100


40mm 80mm
80 20mm 80 60mm
← B' 40mm
60 ← A' 60 20mm
68.3kN
40 58.8kN 40
20 20
0 0
-20 -20
-0.001 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 -0.00025 0.00075 0.00175 0.00275
Curvature (r
ad) Curvature (r
ad)

(a) Case of ts=12mm (b) Case of ts=9mm


Figure 6 Curvature of stud (parameter of steel plate thickness)

4.2 Stud height


Figure 7 shows transferred force-relative slip relationships of specimens S-5, S-6 and S-
7. The transferred force and relative slip relationship of specimen S-6 is close to that of
specimen S-7. Curvatures of the stud were calculated by the strain gages attached on the
stud and shown in Fig.8. Locations of the strain gages from the bottom of the studs are

1347
denoted in the legend. The curvatures of portions at height equal to or lower than 60mm
become larger with increasing load, however the curvature of portion at height equal to
or higher than 80mm is almost zero. Those behaviors indicate that the effective height of
stud below which the stud is deformed exists. It was assumed that 70mm is the effective
height of stud. Namely if a stud is higher than 70mm, its performance is almost same as
a stud with 70mm height. It was also assumed that when a stud is lower than 70mm, its
rigidity in the transferred force-relative slip relationship is proportional to height of the
stud. The broken line in Fig.7 is the transferred force-relative slip relationship of
specimen S-5 multiplied by 70/50 that is ratio of the assumed effective height to the stud
height of specimen S-5. The broken line is close to the curves of specimens S-6 and S-7.

120
Transferred force (kN)

100
80
60
hs= 50mm
40 hs= 100mm
hs= 150mm
20 70/50×(hs= 50mm)

0
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Slip ( mm)
Figure 7 Transferred force-relative slip relationship (parameter of stud height)

200 200 250

150 200
150
150
Load (kN)
Load (kN)

Load (kN)

100 100
36m m 80m m
60m m 100 120m m
24m m
50 50 40m m 90m m
12m m
20m m 50 60m m
30m m
0 0 0
-0.002 0 0.002 0.004 -0.001 0 0.001 0.002 -0.001 0 0.001 0.002
-50 -50 -50
Curvature (rad) Curvature (rad) Curvature (rad)

(a) hs=50mm (b) hs=100mm (c) hs=150mm


Figure 8 Curvature of stud (parameter of stud height)

1348
4.3 Other factors
Figure 9 shows the transferred force-relative slip relationship of specimens S-1, S-3 and
S-6. The higher compressive strength of concrete has higher stiffness. It was observed
that the difference in stiffness was greater than the difference in the compressive strength
(transferred force ratio for the same relative displacement is greater than the compressive
strength ratio).

180
160 fc'= 21.5MPa
Transferred force (kN)

140 fc'= 47.1MPa


120 fc'= 30.1MPa
100
80
60
40
20
0
-20
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Slip (mm)

Figure 9 Transferred force-relative slip relationship (parameter of compressive strength)

Figure 10 shows transferred force-relative slip relationship of specimens S-2, S-3 and S-
4. The transferred shear force was largest in the case of 200mm stud spacing. From the
figure any clear effect of stud spacing in longitudinal direction cannot be seen. Variation
in the transferred force–relative displacement relationships might be due to experimental
scatter.

180
kN)

160
Transferred force (

140
120
100
80
s= 250mm
60
40 s= 200mm
20 s= 150mm
0
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Slip (mm)

Figure 10 Transferred force-relative slip relationship (parameter of steel plate thickness)

1349
Figure 5 shows the transferred force-relative slip relationship of specimens S-1 and S-8.
Specimen S-1 shows lower stiffness for lower transferred force and higher stiffness for
higher transferred shear force, however the difference is not so significant between two
specimens.
Generally there was a rather large scatter among the observed transferred shear force-
relative displacement relationships, so that the effects of factors could not be seen clearly.
Further experimental study is necessary.

5. Conclusions

1) It was considered that relative displacement at stud was induced by deformation of


stud itself rather than that of its surrounding concrete.
2) It was clarified that there is an effective height of stud, which was around 70 mm,
for shear transfer. Stiffness of the transferred force-relative slip relationship might
be proportional to stud height when stud height is lower than the effective height.
3) It was observed that concrete compressive strength increases significantly stiffness
of transferred force-relative displacement of stud.
4) Effects of other parameters considered in this study, stud spacing in longitudinal
direction (loading direction) and thickness of base steel plate could not be seen
clearly probably due to experimental scatter. Further experimental study is
necessary.

6. References

1. Takahashi,R., Ueda,T., Sato,Y., Konno,K. and Farghaly, A., ‘ Study on punching


shear falure mechanism of open-sandwich slab with finite element method’,
Proceedings of the 4th symposium on research and application of hybrid
constructions, Nagoya, November, 1999 (Japan Society of Civil Engineering, Tokyo,
1999) 43-46.
2. Tajima,J, Machida,A, and Ohtomo,T, ‘Behavior of stud connector in joints
between steel member and reinforced concrete member’, Proceedings of symposium
on research and application of composite constructions, Tokyo, September,
1986(Japan Society of Civil Engineering, Tokyo, 1999)137-144.

1350
THE BEHAVIOR OF BEAM-TO-BOX COLUMN
CONNECTION OF CFT WITH AIR CAVITY
Lee, Myung-Jae*, Choi, Moon-Sik**, Kim, Jin-Ho*** and Jun, Sang-Woo****
*Dept. of Architectural Eng., Chung-Ang Univ., Korea
**Dept. of Architectural Eng. Dan-Kuk Univ., Korea
***RIST, Korea
****RIST, Korea

Abstract
The objective of this study is to investigate the structural behavior of beam-to-column
connection of CFT(Concrete Filled Tube) when air cavity exists under the diaphragm of
CFT members. CFT can be expected the confined effect between steel tube and infilled
concrete if only the concrete is filled perfectly without air cavity. The rectangular hollow
section members are used for steel tubing of CFT member in this study. The short
column tests and the beam-to-column connection test with air cavity are carried out. The
ratio of air cavity with respected to the infilled concrete area is also discussed about the
strength and the deformation of connection by using of CFT. It is seen that the influence
of air cavity about CFT is not severe within admissible range.

1. Introduction

CFT(Concrete Filled Tube) columns have better structural performance compared with
hollow tubular columns. The confined effect of CFT is well known from the test results.
The width-to-thickness ratio of hollow tubular members is restricted respectively to use
it for structural elements. The encasement of concrete can prevent steel parts from
occurring local buckling in case of CFT. Infilled concrete can take a share in large axial
forces of columns in case of high rise buildings.

But it must be careful that air cavity occurs in the tube when concrete is not perfectly
filled. There were some short column test about CFT with air cavity by another
researchers, but the test of beam-to-column connection is seldom in the case of the CFT
connection with air cavity. The objective of this study is to investigate the behavior of
short columns and the structural behavior of beam-to-column connection of CFT when
air cavity occurs under the diaphragm. The rectangular hollow section members are used
for steel tube of CFT member. The parameters of the test for this study are the ratio of
axial force and the ratio of air cavity with respect to the infilled area of concrete. The

1351
influences of those parameters are investigated from the test results. The ratio of air
cavity with respected to the infilled area of concrete is also discussed about the strength
and the deformation of connection by using of CFT.

2. Short Column Test with Air Cavity

2.1 Material properties of tubes and H-shaped section steel


Two types of rectangular tube and one type of H-shaped section steel were used for
specimens which are for short column test and beam-to-column connection test. The
results of tension test are shown in Table 1. It was ascertained that their material
properties satisfied Korean Standards (KS) as SS400 class steel.

2.2 Specimens with air cavity


Six short columns with air cavity were tested to investigate the influence of strength and
deformation. †-250×250×6 is used for rectangular hollow section members. The
configuration of specimens is shown in Figure 1. They have penetration type diaphragms
with thickness 9mm and circular hole to fill concrete continuously. The ratio of air cavity
varies from 0% to 75%, and it means the ratio of air cavity area with respected to the
infilled area of concrete. The location of air cavity and the circular holes to fill concrete
are shown in Figure 2. Soft styrene with 5mm thickness was used for artificial air cavity.
The infilled concrete with 24 MPa compressive strength was used.

2.3 Short column test results


Figure 3 shows the short column test setup. Test machine with 9800kN capacity was
used. Maximum loads of short columns are shown in Table 2. Specimen RF-20 and
specimen RF-20M are different in the diameter of circular hole. The ratios of strength in
case of air cavity with respected to that without air cavity also shown in this table.

Figure 4 shows the load-displacement relationships of short columns. CFT short columns
have better structural performance compared with hollow tubular columns such as
specimen RH-0 as shown in this figure. It can be seen from Figure 4 that the maximum
strengths of all specimens are higher than the superposition strength of tube and concrete.
The difference of initial stiffness can not be found even though in case of the ratio of air
cavity of 50%. The initial stiffness changes in case of the ratio of air cavity of 75%
compared with another cases.

Table 1 : The results of tension test


Yield strength Maximum
Yield ratio Elongation (%)
(MPa) strength (MPa)
†-250×250×6 403 484 0.83 33
†-500×500×12 288 459 0.63 42
H-582×300×12×17 296 427 0.69 46

1352
Table 2 : The results of short column test with air cavity
Diameter Ratio of
Maximum Case of air cavity/
Specimen Tube of hole air cavity
load (kN) Case of no air cavity
(mm) (%)
RH-0 0 1089 -
RF-0 128 0 3736 1.00
RF-20 20 3559 0.95
†-250×250×6
RF-20M 100 20 3550 0.95
RF-50 50 3197 0.86
128
RF-75 75 3003 0.80

Figure 1 : Configuration of specimens

Figure 2 : Location of air cavity

Figure 3 : Short column test setup

1353
The regression curves about air cavity of CFT was suggested as follows in Ref. 5.

(c N c N0 )n + (α 100)n = 1 (1)

where,

cN = N max − s A⋅s σ y
c N0 =c A ⋅ σ B
N max : Maximum strength from test
s A : Section area of steel tube
c A : Section area of concrete

sσ y : Yield stress of steel


σ B : Compressive strength of concrete
α : The ratio of air cavity (%)

Test results are compared with Eq.(1) in Figure 5. The strengths of each specimen are
presented in nondimension with their axial forces in this figure.

3. Beam-to-Column Connection test

3.1 Specimen with air cavity


Five subassemblage specimens were tested to investigate the structural behavior. Their
geometrical configurations are shown in Figure 6. The story height is 3600mm and span
length is 5600mm. The steel section of column was fabricated by partial-penetration
welding at every corner seam. Cross section of columns are 500mm square and shear
span length is 1509mm. Distance from loading point of the beam to the column face is
2550mm. The beam-to-column connections were reinforced by two horizontal
diaphragms with circular hole.

The parameters of specimen are the ratio of axial force, the ratio of air cavity. The
specimens of BSM-00 and BSM-02 in Table 3 do not have air cavity. The specimens of
BSM-02-10, BSM-02-20 and BSM-02-30 in Table 3 have 10%, 20% and 30% air cavity
respectively. Soft styrene with 5mm thickness was also used for artificial air cavity as
like as short columns. All the specimens except BSM-00 were tested in the condition of
axial force ratio of 0.2.

3.2 The Results of Beam-to-Column Connection Test


Three sets of loading system were used for test. Monotonic loading applied to each
specimens assuming lateral loading condition. The configuration of beam-to-column
connection specimen is shown in Figure 6. Dial gauges and wire strain gauges were used
to measure displacements and strains.

1354
4500

4000

3500

3000
Load (kN)

2500
prediction load
2000 R H -0
R F-0
1500
R F-20
1000 R F-20M
R F-50
500
m axim um load R F-75
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
A xialD isplacem ent (m m )

Figure 4 : Load-Displacement relationships of rectangular CFT short columns

1 .0

0 .8

0 .6
cN / cNo

0 .4

0 .2 E q .(1 ) (n = 2 )
E q .(1 ) (n = 1 .5 )
C FT
0 .0
0 20 40 60 80 100
R a tio o f a ir c a vity (% )

Figure 5 : Relationships between CFT strength and air cavity

1355
2940kN
Actuator

980kN 980kN
Actuator Actuator

1509
D9
D5

D7 D8

500
12 207

D6 H-582x300x12x17 30
D3
D4
1509

D2 D1
¡ à -500x500x13 500

Reinforced diaphragm detail

2800 2800

Figure 6 : Setup of beam-to-column connection specimen

Table 3 : The results of beam-to column connection test


Ratio Ratio
Maximum Maximum
Specimen H-shaped of air of
Tube story shear story drift
identification section steel cavity axial
force (kN) (rad)
(%) force
BSM-00 0 0.0 900 0.51
BSM-02 0 0.2 737 0.20
BSM-02-10 †-500×500×12 H-582×300×12×17 10 0.2 778 0.18
BSM-02-20 20 0.2 738 0.13
BSM-02-30 30 0.2 734 0.14

The results of beam-to-column connection test are listed in Table 3. The relationships of
story shear force and story drift of each specimen are shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8.
Qpb and Qyb mean equivalent plastic shear force and equivalent yielding shear force of
beam respectively. Qcp and Qyc mean equivalent plastic shear force and equivalent
yielding shear force of CFT column respectively. The structural behavior of BSM-00
specimen, which do not have air cavity and do not loaded axially, is shown in Figure 7(a).
Maximum strength occurred in the point of welding crack of the flange of H-shaped
beam. Local buckling happened in case of BSM-02 specimen but the behavior continued
until the fracture of flange. The loading test was stopped in case of BSM-02-10
specimen when the flange fractured. The specimens of BSM-02-20 and BSM-02-30
showed very unstable behavior after the fracture of flange.

1356
1200 1200
Crack of Fracture Q pc
1000 w elding of flange 1000 Q yc
Q pc Local Fracture
800 800 buckling of flange
Q yc
Q c (kN)

Q c (kN)
600 600
Q pb Q pb
400 Q yb 400 Q yb

200 200

0 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
R t (rad) R t (rad)
(a) BSM-00 (b)BSM-02
1200 1200
Q pc Q pc
1000 Q yc 1000 Q yc
Fracture of flange
Fracture of flange
800 800
Q c (kN)

Q c (kN)

600 600
Q pb Q pb
400 Q yb 400 Q yb

200 200

0 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
R t (rad) R t (rad)
(c) BSM-02-10 (d) BSM-02-20
1200
Q pc
1000 Fracture of Q yc
flange
800 Local
Q c (kN)

buckling
600
Q pb
400 Q yb

200

0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
R t (rad)
(e) BSM-02-30

Figure 7 : Story shear force–Story drift of BSM specimen

1357
1200
Q pc(N /N y=0 .2 )

1000 Qyc(N/Ny=0.2)
Q pc(N /N y=0 .0 )

800
Qyc(N/Ny=0.0)
Q c (kN) .

600

Qpb
400 Qyb
BS M- 00
BS M- 02
200 BS M- 02- 10
BS M- 02- 20
BS M- 02- 30
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
R t (rad)

Figure 8 : Story shear force – Story drift of specimens according to air cavity

It is seen in Figure 7 and Figure 8 that the connection strengths of all specimens are
higher than the equivalent plastic shear force of H-shaped section beam although the
crack of welding part or the fracture of flange occurred in all specimens. N/Ny in Figure
8 means the ratio of axial force. The deformation capacity of specimens with air cavity,
that are BSM-02-10, BSM-02-20 and BSM-02-30, is lower than that of BSM-02
specimen, but it is thought that the tendency is not so severe. The difference of the
quantity of air cavity is not seen from this test results. Almost same structural behaviors
of specimens with air cavity were shown in the strength and the deformation as like as
Figure 7. The influence of air cavity is not clear within the ratio of air cavity of 30%
compared with the test result of BSM-02 specimen.

4. Conclusions

The air cavity of CFT was investigated through the short column test and beam-to-
column connection subassemblages test. Concluding remarks could be obtained as
follows;

(1) The difference of initial stiffness can not be found even though in case of the ratio of
air cavity 50% from short column test results.

(2) The strength of CFT columns depends on the ratio of air cavity, but the strengths of
all specimens are higher than the superposition strength of tube and concrete.

1358
(3) The influence of air cavity is not clear from the beam-to-column connection
subassemblages test within the ratio of air cavity 30%.

(4) However the welding part of flange was fractured in all specimens with air cavity in
case of axial loading and the deformation capacity of CFT can not be expected from test
results.

5. References

1. Korean Society of Steel Construction, ‘Recommendations for Design and


Construction of Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures’, 2001 (in Korean)
2. Matsui, C. et. al., ‘Concrete Filled Steel Tubes A Comparison of International
Codes and Practices’, ASCCS, 1997
3. Architectural Institute of Japan, ‘Standard for Structural Calculation of Steel
Reinforced Concrete Structures’, 1987 (in Japanese)
4. Architectural Institute of Japan, ‘Recommendations for Design and Construction
of Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures’, 1997 (in Japanese)
5. Kosugi, et al, ‘A Experimental Study on Filling Up of CFT Columns (Stub
Column Test)’, the proceedings of anniversary meeting of AIJ, 1989 (in
Japanese)

1359
SHEET REINFORCEMENT
O. Matthaei*, H.-P. Andrä**, Nguyen Viet Tue***
*Matthaei und Schotte Ingenieure, Consulting Engineers, Stuttgart, Germany
**Leonhardt, Andrä und Partner, Consulting Engineers, Stuttgart, Germany
***König, Heunisch und Partner, Consulting Engineers, Frankfurt, Germany

Abstract
Especially in case of shear or punching-shear failures the connection of concrete and
steel elements influence the global behaviour of failure loads. In reinforced concrete
structures, to exploit the material properties, shear elements are essential to connect the
tension zone with the compression zone to increase the bending and shear capacity.
Instead of using shear hooks or dowels a new shear and punching shear reinforcement
working with concrete dowels will be presented. The local failure mechanism of
concrete dowels to prevent the shear failure in flat slabs will be explained.

1. Introduction

The most standards to design flat slabs with shear reinforcement in case of punching
shear action have been developed out of the models from beams.
Significant differences between stress results and stress combinations of continuous
beams or slabs haven’t been considered.
The major different is the direction and redistribution of stresses. In continuous beams,
bending moment and shear stresses act in the same direction, in slabs independent from
each other and for slabs which are supported on surrounded holes even orthogonal.
Reinforced concrete slabs approach in case of increasing the crack widths to hole
supported slabs.
Therefore the division of effects of bending moment and shear force, especially the
internal forces near interior-column don’t allow a comparison between shear behaviour
in beams and in flat slabs. In some design standards, where no consideration of the
„real“ physical behaviour of slabs is used, the lack is tried to compensate with safety
factors.

1360
In order to find a „near“ physical model for the punching shear behaviour we define:

Punching shear failure is the burst of a concentric stamp of cone out of the plate, where
the internal forces next to the column are comparable to slabs, which are, supported
circuit the column, with a hole in the middle. The resistance only depend on the normal
to the cone surface activated tensile strength of concrete.

2. Failure mechanism and mode of action of shear reinforcement

Failure mechanism often means rotation of plate sectors around the column side,
figure 1.

Figure 1: Rotation of Plate sectors

In case of this failure mechanism one or more circlet cracks opened wedge-shaped. This
means by using shear reinforcement that steel elements at the close range to the column
have less strain and therefore less stress than the elements at the outer perimeter,
figure 2.

1361
Figure 2: “theoretical” strain in shear reinforcement according to the opened
wedge-shaped

Compared to test results, stresses in shear reinforcement generally appear like in


figure 3.
Finally you will come to the conclusion that the expected cracks and failure mechanism
should be wrong.

Figure 3: stresses and strains in shear reinforcement according to measured


results in tests

1362
In analogy with failure mode and measured results you must come to the conclusion that
the shear reinforcement is working like a suspension through the separated shapes, not
only to increase the shear capacity also to connect the compression zone with the tensile
zone, which is essential for the bending capacity, figure 4.

Figure 4: circuit supported slab round column

Shear reinforcement in the inner perimeter have to carry in comparison to outer


perimeters more loads. These forces are supported next to the column, so due to this
tensile forces in the compression zone will appear next to the column especially during
increasing the loads up to the failure load. Thereby with this theoretical model, the
measured strains in shear reinforcement are comparable with the crack-width observed
in several tests.

1363
Figure 5: radial bending in the zone close to the column, observed and
measured crack-width

Close to the column the thickness of the separated plate is not enough to anchor single
hooks. These elements will broke and won’t further work as proper shear elements to
prevent the punching shear failure, figure 6. In figure 7 the classical stud-rail is able to
fulfil this, cause of the rail, which is penetrating into the column.

1364
Figure 6: anchorage problem of single hooks in the inner perimeter

Figure 7: prevention of anchorage problems by using of stud-rails

The isolation of the direction of action from bending and shear forces enable other
possibilities to increase the punching shear resistance by the use of steel cellar inside the
plate, i.e. like the “Geilinger Kragen” or the “Tobler Walm”. Herein the shear forces
were carried radial to “steel column head” and not like in the classical strut and tie
model.

Figure 8: steel column head

1365
3. Sheet reinforcement

As a consequence to the observed mechanism of failure mode the authors suggest thin
vertical sheet metals, called „sheet reinforcement“, arranged round the column, between
the top and bottom reinforcement, figure 9.

3 2 1 1 2 3

Figure 9: Perfobond Sheet Reinforcement

These sheets will carry the shear forces out of the concrete, by concrete-dowels, and will
carry them to the column. These holes are preventing a possible cut off into sectors due
to the sheets. The shear reinforcement is extremely thin, only about 3mm thick. A
stability problem won’t exist cause of the covered and surrounded concrete. To prevent a
drop down failure in case of dynamic loads like in case of earthquakes the sheet will
envelope the bending reinforcement of the column. Once the shear forces are in the sheet
the internal loads can easily be redistributed, up to the minimal punching shear cone in
the failure state.

According to the steel column head an isolate direction of action of bending and shear is
possible, figure 10.

1366
Figure 10: Perfobond Sheet Reinforcement in circuit supported slab round
column

With this kind of shear reinforcement a punching shear failure can easily be prevented.
The failure mechanism will be in analogy to the yield-line theory, figure 11.

Figure 11: failure mechanism forced to sheet reinforcement according to yield


line theory

1367
4. Conclusion

From the characteristics of the punching shear failure in comparison to “simple” shear
fracture the different mode of operation in case of different reinforcements is explained.
As a consequence to the observed mechanism of failure mode the authors suggest thin
vertical sheet metals, called „sheet reinforcement“, as a new shear reinforcement,
working in analogy to the perfobond. To the true model of action at this time tests and a
Non-linear FE-Analysis is in progress.

1368
COMPOSITE GIRDERS OF REDUCED HEIGHT
Ulrike Kuhlmann, Jürgen Fries, Andreas Rieg
Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart

Abstract
Composite girders with reduced height and slim-floor girders are an attractive and
economical alternative to normal reinforced concrete beams and slabs. Due to the
shallow height of these section types their structural behaviour differs decisively from
normal composite beams. As a consequence the common design philosophy for normal
composite beams leads to uneconomical safe side assumptions for the ultimate carrying
capacity and to far too large calculated deformation values for the serviceability limit
state. The results of investigations on a slim-floor hat section are presented and some
specific problems of these composite section types are discussed. The design method of
common composite beams have to be modified for composite girders with reduced
height and especially the contribution of the concrete section to the structural behaviour
of composite girders with reduced height is relevant.

1. Introduction

Economical and architectural advantages have led to new forms of composite cross
sections which consist of a reinforced concrete slab connected to a steel girder that only
slightly exceeds the slab thickness (see Figure 1.1 a)). Innovative sections even include
the steel section within the slab (see Figure 1.1 b)). Especially for the latter, named slim-
floor sections, a rapid and promising development has taken place.
transverse reinforcement transverse reinforcement

headed studs headed studs

steel I-profile profiled steel sheets or


filigree floor elements UPE-profile
welded bottom flange

1371
Figure 1.1: a) Composite section with reduced height, b) Slim-floor section
In comparison to common reinforced concrete slabs and beams composite girders of
reduced height show significant advantages [2], [3]:
- They have a high load resistance and flexural stiffness.
- The reduced depth allows a better exploitation of the building height or even extra
floors.
a) b)
- Due to the high degree of prefabrication of the steelwork they are easily and
quickly erected.
- Standard fasteners may be used for installation.
- The dead load per floor is reduced.

The hat section shown in Figure 1.1 b) has been chosen for further investigations
because of the following reasons:
- The plane bottom view allows a free architectural design and may be used as final
room enclosure.
- Headed studs can be applied to realise a systematical composite action.
- Transverse to the slim-floor girder spanning slabs may act continuously.
- By welding of the steel hat section precamber can easily be attained.
For the slim-floor hat section intensive investigations as well experimentally as
numerically have been undertaken. They led to design guides for practical usage [3],
[12] but also revealed some specific problems.

2. Definition of composite girders with reduced height

For normal composite sections an external moment is balanced by a pair of internal


normal forces only completed by the bending resistance of the steel section. The bending
resistance of the concrete slab is usually negligible. In contrary due to their geometrical
properties composite girders with reduced height lie between composite beams and pure
reinforced concrete beams. Their concrete bending resistance and flexural stiffness are of
importance. Neglecting this influence e. g. by usage of the common calculation methods
developed for normal composite sections leads to an uneconomical safe side estimation
of the ultimate carrying capacity and to unrealistic high calculated deformation values in
the serviceability limit state.

To distinct composite sections with normal height and reduced height the following
criteria may be applied:
a) Ratio of the flexural stiffness of the concrete to the overall flexural stiffness
Ic,0/Ii,0 > 0,1
b) Appearance of cracks due to bending in the concrete chord in serviceability

1372
Figure 2.1 a) shows the distinction of composite beams of reduced and normal height in
dependence of the slab thickness hc. Two lines separate the ranges of composite girders
with normal height and composite girders with reduced height. Line 1 represents the
borderline between composite sections in cracked and uncracked condition in
serviceability limit state. Line 2 gives composite sections characterised by a ratio of the
flexural stiffness of the concrete chord to the overall flexural stiffness Ic,0 / Ii,0 = 0,1. In
HEA possible span lb [m]
1000 25
normal height normal height
8 00 20

reduced height
6 00 15
reduced height
4 00 10
1 1
hc
2
2 00 HEA 5 lb 2

slab thickness hc [cm] slab thickness hc [cm]


0 0
16 20 24 28 32 16 20 24 28 32

Figure 2.1 b) the possible simple beam spans lb corresponding to the cross sections
shown in Figure 2.1 a) for the ultimate limit state are given. The possible spans range up
to 10 ÷ 20 m. So composite girders with reduced height have a wide field of application.
a) b)
Figure 2.1: Distinction of composite girders with reduced height (concrete C30/37,
steel S 355, live load p = 3,5 kN/m²). Line 1: cracks in concrete chord,
line 2: Ic,0/Ii,0 = 0,1
But also the even more slender slim-floor girders with the hat section show a range of
application [1], [3] which forms an attractive alternative to usual reinforced concrete
beams underneath the slab, see Figure 2.2.
transverse reinforcement
p = 3,5 kN/m² span of slim-floor girders lb [m]
C 30/37 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4 headed studs
span of slab ls [m]

5
6
7 UPE-profile
8
9 welded bottom flange
10
profiled steel sheets or
simple beam filigree floor elements
continuos beam

Figure 2.2: Slim-floor beams composed of channel profile welded to a steel plate

1373
3. Structural behaviour of composite girders with reduced height and
slim-floor girders

3.1. Behaviour in ultimate limit state


3.1.1. Moment resistance
For composite girders with reduced height the distribution of the internal moments and
forces differs decisively from the behaviour of normal composite beams (see Table 3.1).
Whereas for normal composite beams almost the whole external moment is balanced by
a pair of internal forces and the internal concrete and steel moment are of the order of
only 5 %, for composite girders with reduced height the contribution of the concrete
moment Mc to the overall load resistance reaches up to 30 % provided a common degree
of partial shear connection of η ≥ 0,7. There are two main reasons for this increase of the
concrete moment: First the concrete chord of composite girders with reduced height has
a higher reinforcement ratio than normal composite girders due to crack-width limitation
(see paragraph 3.2.2) and a possible fire protection reinforcement. Additionally the lever
arm of this reinforcement is comparably large to the shallow overall height of the
composite girder.
Table 3.1: Internal forces and moments of composite girders with reduced height

Internal moments Mc Ma MV = Na * ast


normal height 5% 5% 90 %
ULS
slim-floor 30 % 5% 65 %
normal height 5% 30 % 65 %
SLS
slim-floor 30 % 10 % 60 %

The concrete moment does not only contribute to the moment resistance of the
composite section but also reduces the amount of necessary shear connectors because the
concrete moment acts just in the concrete member.
3.1.2. Influence of the structural system of the slab
In the case of slim-floor girders the effects of the continuous slab must be taken into
account: The support moment of the continuous slab at the slim-floor beam is balanced
by a pair of forces (see Figure 3.1 a)), tension in the upper slab reinforcement and
pressure at the lower part of the steel section. Additionally the supporting of the slab on
the lower flange of the steel section causes a transverse moment in the lower steel flange
(see Figure 3.1 b)).

a) Support moment of the slab b) Supporting of the slab on the lower flange
Figure 3.1: Effects of the continuous slab on the steel section of the slim-floor girder

1374
Both effects may be considered by reducing the effective cross section of the steel
section in the structural analysis of the composite girder [1], [2], [3].
3.1.3. Shear force resistance
In contrast to normal composite beams the shear force of the concrete chord of
composite sections with reduced height should not be neglected. The shear force of the
concrete chord reaches up to 140 % of the shear force of the steel section [1], [12]. But
to take advantage of the shear resistance of the concrete the concrete chord must be
supported directly so that the shear force of the concrete chord is transferred straight to
the support.

It is recommended to perform the check of the shear force resistance in three steps so
that the higher steps are only used if first is proved to be insufficient [1]:
1. The shear force shall be transferred by the resistance of the steel section only.
2. Additionally the shear resistance of the concrete chord without shear
reinforcement may be taken into account.
3. The shear resistance of the concrete chord is increased by shear reinforcement.
3.1.4. Shear connection between steel and concrete
In case of slim-floor girders the connection between concrete and steel is located in the
lower region of the concrete section. According to Becker [6] the load bearing capacity
of headed studs decreases down to 90 % of the normal value because of the presence of
transverse tension. However in tests performed at the University of Stuttgart this
influence of the location of the shear connection on the load bearing capacity of the
headed studs could not be observed [1].

3.1.5. Fire resistance


In the case of composite girders with reduced height similar to conventional composite
sections the required fire resistance periods are normally achieved by common
preventive measures against fire, e. g. fire protection casing. For slim-floor sections
often sufficient fire resistance can be attained by arranging of fire protection
reinforcement, fire resistance periods up to R120 are possible. Therefore these girders
feature a high economy. In corporation with Salzgitter AG, Peine, Germany design
tables for the slim-floor hat section shown in Figure 1.1 b) for diverse fire protection
periods have been carried out [3].

3.2. Behaviour in serviceability limit state


3.2.1. General
The flexural stiffness Ic,0 of the concrete chord of composite girders with reduced height
normally amounts about 30 ÷ 60 % of the total flexural stiffness Ii,0 of the composite
girder and therefore should not be neglected. The high bending moments in the concrete
chord result cracking of the concrete already in the serviceability limit state (see Figure
3.2). The theory of elasticity is not valid anymore. The assumptions of the common

1375
elastic calculation methods are not fulfilled. In contrast to normal composite beams,
whose concrete chord is fully under compression and therefore uncracked (see Figure

hc hc ε
ε ha
ha

3.2), elastic calculation methods need modification when being applied to composite
girders with reduced height in serviceability limit state.
a) normal height – concrete under pressure b) reduced height – cracks in concrete
Figure 3.2: Composite beams with conventional sections in serviceability limit state
The different distribution of the internal forces and moments of normal composite beams
and composite girders with reduced height in serviceability limit state shows Table 3.1.
To prevent the formation of wide cracks in composite girders with reduced height a
longitudinal bottom reinforcement has to be added to the concrete section.

The calculation of deflections of composite girders with reduced height with the
common elastic calculation methods often leads to unrealistic high deflection values. In
order to meet the requirements of serviceability a steel section is chosen that is bigger
than for the ultimate limit state [1], [3]. In these cases the check of serviceability
determines the design of the cross section and the high load resistance of these
composite sections cannot be fully exploited.

3.2.2. Reinforced concrete chord


In order to calculate the flexural stiffness of composite girders with reduced height and
of slim-floor girders more realistically and to take advantage of the economy of these
types of sections it is important to consider the contribution of the reinforced concrete
chord [1], [2].
The additionally crack width limiting reinforcement and a possible fire resistance
reinforcement highly increase the stiffness of the composite section. This influence
becomes more significant with decreasing depth of the composite section, because the
relative lever arm of the reinforcement increases.
For the determination of a realistic stiffness the non-linear structural behaviour of the
concrete chord in cracked condition has to be considered. In the case of a rigid shear
connection this can be dealt with moment-curvature relationships for the whole
composite section [1], [4] and in the case of a ductile shear connection with moment-
axial-force-curvature relationships for the concrete section [1].

In the serviceability limit state for positive moments the influence of tension-stiffening
on the flexural stiffness of composite girders with reduced height may be neglected [2],

1376
[4]. Tension-stiffening can be considered as an additional tension force which for a
constant curvature causes an additional moment Mcm in the section. If the initial flexural
stiffness of the composite section is high, such as for composite girders in serviceability,
M
Mcm
high initial stiffness
low initial stiffness

Mcm
κ
this only effects a slight increase of the flexural stiffness (see Figure 3.3). If the initial
flexural stiffness is low, e. g. for composite girders with a yielding steel section, the
increase of the flexural stiffness becomes more significant.
Figure 3.3: Influence of tension-stiffening depending on the flexural stiffness
As in the serviceability limit state the steel section of composite girders with reduced
height remains elastical the increase of the stiffness due to tension-stiffening cannot be
taken advantage of in building practice [1], [2], [4].
3.2.3. Long-term behaviour of the concrete
The long-term behaviour of the concrete caused by creep and shrinkage has to be
considered in the cracked condition, too.
Normally the distribution of the shrinkage strains εcs over the depth of the concrete chord
is assumed to be constant. However in cracked regions of the concrete the stress
resulting of shrinkage may be neglected. Thus in the design of ordinary reinforced
concrete structures a triangular distribution of the shrinkage strains is considered (see
Figure 3.4) [2], [4]. If this assumption is applied to composite girders with reduced
height the calculated shrinkage deflections can be reduced up to 20 ÷ 50 %.
εcs,∞ εcs,∞
(a) (b)

Figure 3.4: Shrinkage of composite girders with reduced height. (a) composite girders
with normal height, (b) recommendation for composite girders with reduced height.
The time-dependent deflections resulting of creep and shrinkage of the concrete as well
as the deflections resulting of imposed live loads and temperature stress cannot be
influenced by precamber. If division walls cannot follow this deflections without damage
a composite section with a higher stiffness or division walls which are not liable to
settlement have to be chosen. Both measures reduce the economy of the system.

1377
3.2.4. Effective width of the concrete chord
The effective width beff of the concrete chord takes the non-linear stress distribution in
transverse direction into account. Whereas the influence of the effective width on the
load bearing capacity is little, the flexural stiffness in the serviceability limit state is
decisively concerned. The design rules of Eurocode 4, part 1-1 [9] only consider the
parameters span length and support conditions. The load level is not taken into account.
So in the serviceability limit state and the ultimate limit state the same values are
applied.
The effective width of the concrete chord for bending significantly exceeds the value for
axial forces. It can even reach the existing width of the concrete chord in the case that
the concrete chord is line-supported over the whole width. As in the common elastic
calculation methods the concrete moment is neglected, this influence is not taken into
account. First investigations indicate that as a consequence the flexural stiffness Ii,0 of
composite sections with reduced height increases up to 30 ÷ 100 %. Further on the
formation of cracks in the concrete causes a redistribution of the concrete stresses near
the steel section to more outside lying regions of the concrete chord and the effective
width increases, too. In the case of partial shear connection this increase rises higher
because the contribution of the flexural stiffness of the concrete chord to the overall
flexural stiffness becomes more important.

Shrinkage of the concrete is restrained by the steel section. Because of the shear lag of
the concrete chord this restraint decreases with increasing distance from the steel section
[1], [4]. This may be considered by a fictitious width beff,s of the concrete chord. Neither
in Eurocode 4 [9] nor in the known literature this fictitious width beff,s of the concrete
chord is specified. So in design practice often the width beff,s for shrinkage is taken equal
to the existing width of the concrete chord. That leads to unrealistically high calculated
shrinkage deflections especially in the case of composite girders with reduced height.
First investigations indicated that by the use of a more realistic width beff,s the calculated
total deflection of composite girders with reduced height may be reduced to 20 ÷ 40 %.

At the moment investigations concerning the effective width of concrete chords of


composite girders with reduced height at the Institute of Structural Design, University of
Stuttgart intend to specify the effective width of the concrete chord more precisely. The
aim is that by a more realistic deformation check in many cases the verification for
serviceability limit state can be fulfilled.
3.2.5. Shear connection between steel and concrete
In case of partial shear connection the deflection of composite girders exceeds the one
with full shear connection, because the slip between the steel and concrete reduces the
composite action. In Eurocode 4, part 1-1 [9], 5.2.2 (6) this effect is taken into account
by the following increasing factor δ/δc:
δ δ 
= 1 + α ⋅ (1 − η) ⋅  a − 1
δc  δc 

1378
With δa deflection if only the flexural stiffness of the steel section is considered
δc deflection of the composite girder with full shear connection
η degree of partial shear connection
α factor to consider the production process

In the case of composite girders with reduced height and slim-floor sections the
increasing factor δ/δc according to Eurcode 4 results up to five and more [1], [2]. This
leads to unrealistically high calculated deflection values and an uneconomical safe side
design.
In the French standard DAN [11] additionally the influence of the span of the beam on
the increasing factor δ/δc is taken into account. For common degrees of partial shear
connection of η ≥ 0,6 the increasing factor δ/δc is lower than 2. Also Dabaon determined
the increasing factor δ/δc experimentally to less than 2 [5].
Further on an additional reason leads to the recommendation not to use the design rules
of Eurocode 4 [9] concerning the increasing factor δ/δc [1]: Due to the partial shear
connection the restraint of the steel section against shrinkage is lower than for full shear
connection. If there is no shear connection at all the concrete chord shortens and slips on
the steel section. Thus for partial shear connection the increasing factor of the shrinkage
deflection lies between 1, for full shear connection, and 0, without shear connection. The
calculation according to Eurocode 4, part 1-1 leads to a mechanical wrong deflection and
an increasing factor δ/δc more than one [1], [2].

We recommend to consider the influence of a partial shear connection on the deflection


of composite girders by the following modified flexural stiffness Ii of the composite
girders [1], [12]:
I i = α g ⋅ I i ,elastic = α c ⋅ I c,elastic + α a ⋅ I a ,elastic + α St ⋅ (Si ,elastic ⋅ a St ) [cm4]
With αg, αc, αa, αst reducing factors of the flexural stiffness of the composite, the
concrete and the steel section as well as the static moment
Ii,elastic flexural stiffness of the composite section for full shear
connection according to the elastic theory
Ii effective flexural stiffness of the composite section with partial
shear connection
Ic,elastic, Ia,elastic elastic flexural stiffness of the concrete and the steel section
Si,elastic static moment of the composite section
ast lever arm between steel and concrete

The global reduction factor αg can be estimated to 0,55 ÷ 0,65 for short term loading and
to 0,15 ÷ 0,35 for long term loading [1], [12]. The reduction factors αc and αSt interact
and depend on the degree of partial shear connection, the amount and position of the
reinforcement, the time dependent behaviour of the concrete, etc [1], [12].

1379
4. Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of their research by


Arbeitsgemeinschaft industrieller Forschungsvereinigungen „Otto von Guericke“ e.V.
AiF and Salzgitter AG, Peine.

5. Conclusions

In this paper the different behaviour of composite girders with reduced height and slim-
floor girders compared to normal composite beams are discussed and a distinction
between these two girder typs is proposed. It is shown, that for the treated composite
sections especially the contribution of the internal concrete moment to the load bearing
capacity and the stiffness of the concrete section is of importance and for a realistic
calculation and economic design should not be neglected.
Composite girders offer the chance of combining the advantages of both materials to
receive a common section which is as fire resistant as a concrete slab as quickly erected
as a steel girder with similar easy means of connecting girders and columns and shows a
higher stiffness and resistance than both. But to achieve this design and calculation must
reflect the true behaviour of the section which for composite girders with reduced height
lies between that of a normal composite girder and a pure concrete girder.

References

[1] Kuhlmann, U., Fries, J.: Optimierung der Bemessung von deckengleichen
Verbundträgern in Hutform, AiF research project, Institute of Structural Design,
University of Stuttgart, Germany, 2001
[2] Kuhlmann, U., Fries, J.: Slim-Floor Deckenträger mit Hutprofil, Fachseminar und
Workshop, Verbundbau 2, FH München und Bauen mit Stahl e.V. München, 1998
[3] Kuhlmann, U., Fries, J., Leukart, M.: Bemessung von Flachdecken mit Hutprofil,
Stahlbaukalender 2000, Verlag Ernst & Sohn, 2000
[4] Rieg, A.: Kriechen und Schwinden bei Verbundträgern mit niedriger Bauhöhe,
Diplomarbeit, Institute of Structural Design, University of Stuttgart, Germany,
1998
[5] Dabaon, M.: Beitrag zur teilweisen Verdübelung bei Verbundträgern, Dissertation,
Institute of Steel, Timber and Mixed Building Technology, University of
Innsbruck, Austria, 1993
[6] Becker, J.: Beitrag zur Auslegung der Verdübelung von Verbundträgern des
Hochbaus unter ruhender und nichtruhender Belastung, Dissertation, Fachgebiet
Stahlbau, University of Kaiserslautern, 1997
[7] Michl, T.: Gebrauchstauglichkeitsuntersuchungen beim Millenium Tower, Stahlbau
68 (1999), issue 8, page 631-640
[8] Kuhlmann, U., Kürschner, K.: Ausgewählte Trägeranschlüsse im Verbundbau,
Stahlbaukalender 2001, Verlag Ernst & Sohn, 2001

1380
[9] Eurocode 4, Design of composite steel and concrete structures, Part 1-1: General
rules and rules for buildings, ENV 1994-1-1, 1992
[10] Eurocode 3, Design of steel structures; Part 1.1: General rules and rules for
buildings, ENV 1993-1-1, 1992
[11] Norme expérmentale AFNOR P22-391, Document d’Application National de la
France pour ENV 1994, Partie 1-1 (DAN), 1994
[12] Fries, J.: Zum Tragverhalten von Flachdecken mit Hutprofil im positiven
Momentenbereich, Dissertation, Institute of Structural Design, University of
Stuttgart, Germany, 2001, in preparation

1381
INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF LIGHT STEEL
COMPOSITES IN BUILDINGS
R.M. Lawson*, S.O. Popo-Ola*+, D. N. Varley$
*
The Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, United Kingdom
+
Department of Civil Engineering, Imperial College of Science,Technology & Medicine
$
Terrapin International Limited, United Kingdom

Abstract
Light steel construction comprises cold formed steel sections of typically 1.2 to 3.2 mm
thickness. Composite construction is well established using hot rolled steel sections, but
this paper explores the applications of light steel construction acting compositely with
in-situ concrete or heavy duty boarding materials.

A composite beam system is described which uses profiled strip or ‘top-hat’ shear
connectors attached by pins to double C sections. A full-scale load test demonstrates its
load resistance and stiffness for a 9m beam span.

A complete building system may be envisaged which uses C and Z sections acting as
permanent formwork to in-situ concrete. Walls may be constructed from two skins of
vertically orientated decking which possess high compression and shear resistance, as
demonstrated by a series of load tests.

Flooring and walling materials can improve the stiffness of light steel floor joists and
wall panels, and the results of various serviceability tests are presented which
demonstrate the increase in stiffness that can be achieved. A full-scale test on a 2 storey
building constructed using light steel framing shows that the masonry cladding can have
an important effect on the shear resistance and stiffness of the building.

1382
1. Introduction

Composite construction is well established in modern building practice(1,2). The main


components are a steel framework, steel decking, shear connectors, and in-situ concrete
with mesh reinforcement. The benefits of composite construction are: speed of
construction due to rapid erection of the steel framework, economy in use of materials,
robustness to damage, and good performance in service

The same principles can be extended to other forms of steel construction. Light steel
framing comprises galvanized cold formed steel sections of C or Z or similar forms of
1.2 to 3.2 mm thickness. Steel decking is often used as a flooring element with floor
boarding, or acting with in-situ concrete to form a composite slab. Composite action can
be achieved in various ways, but as yet no design methods exist for the composite design
of light steel frames or floors, other than conventional composite slabs designed to BS
5950 Part 4(3).

This paper reviews the various opportunities for, and applications of composite
construction using light steel frames and components, and presents the available test
results that demonstrate the degree of composite action that can be achieved. The forms
of construction reviewed in this paper are:

• composite beams using double-C sections with steel decking and in-situ concrete,
and strip shear connectors attached by powder actuated pins.
• composite frames using C and Z sections with steel decking and in-situ concrete
in which the framework acts as permanent formwork.
• steel decking orientated vertically acting with in-situ concrete to form a double-
skin composite wall.
• heavy duty flooring acting compositely with light steel floor joists to improve the
stiffness of the floor.
• heavy duty walling acting compositely with light steel wall panels to improve the
diaphragm action of the wall.

In modern composite construction, the steel framing elements are erected first and
provide a stable structure which is capable of supporting construction loads. The
composite action that is developed later with the concrete or other material serves to
provide resistance to imposed loads, and importantly, to improve the stiffness of the
construction. Often serviceability criteria dominate in modern design and therefore
control of deflections and vibration response are as important as load resistance. More
slender construction can be achieved by composite action, which leads to benefits in
terms of floor-floor zones. Good robustness and seismic resistance are also achieved by
these composite systems.

1383
2. Composite Light Steel Beams

Composite light steel beams use double C sections rather than hot rolled steel I beams,
but the general form of construction is similar to conventional composite construction.
Importantly, welded shear connectors cannot be used for the relatively thin steel used in
light steel construction, and therefore it has been necessary to develop alternative forms
of shear connectors using powder actuated, or pneumatically driven pins. These shear
connectors use ‘top hat’ or profiled strip steel elements which are fixed by 2, 3 or 4 pins
per deck rib. The precise form of these shear connectors is not so important because of
the relatively low force that is transferred locally to the concrete. However, the ‘top hat’
or profiled shape is designed to support the mesh reinforcement and help to provide
crack control at the supports. The two forms of shear connector are illustrated in Figure
1.

Figure 1: Typical light steel composite beam using profiled strip shear connectors

The general principles of composite design using light steel sections are:

• the light steel beams are designed elastically to support the loads acting during
construction. Single temporary props may also be used to control deflections at
this stage.

• the composite light steel beams are designed plastically to support the loads acting
at the ultimate limit state. Plastic design is possible because the steel section acts
entirely in tension.

• the minimum degree of shear connections should observe the requirements of


EC4 or BS 5950 Part 3. This is justified if the shear connectors achieve the
‘ductility’ requirements of EC4, corresponding to 6 mm minimum deformation at
their design resistance.

Push-out tests have been carried out to establish the load-slip relationship of the profiled
strip shear connectors using 2 powder-actuated pins per deck rib(4). The test shear
resistance per pin is approximately 13 kN for a base steel thickness of 2.4 mm. Failure
occurs by rotation of the pin and eventually by pull out of the pin at a deformation of
over 6 mm.

1384
2.1. Tests on Light Steel Composite Beams
Terrapin Limited wished to extend the spanning capabilities of their 425 mm double C
sections, and have developed a ‘top hat’ shear connector for use in composite
applications. A full-scale beam test was devised to demonstrate the degree of composite
action that can be achieved. The configuration of this test is illustrated in Figure 2. The
beam span was 9.3m and the slab span was 2.4m. The steel thickness was 3 mm, and the
steel grade was nominally S280 (280 N/mm2 yield strength).

Figure 2: Configuration of test on light steel composite beam

The ‘top hat’ shear connectors were attached separately to each C section using 2 pins
per rib, and mesh reinforcement was placed on top. The total slab depth was 110 mm
using normal weight concrete placed on PMF CF 46 decking. The beam was propped
during and after the concreting operation until the concrete had reached its design
strength.

Loading was applied by pallets of plasterboard each weighing approximately 18.0 kN.
Because of the practicalities of this form of loading, the load-deflection performance is
not exactly linear. An acceptance test was first carried out at the design imposed load of
6.7 kN/m2, and the permanent deflection on unloading was less than 1 mm.

Later, the design factored load of 9.3 kN/m2 was applied, corresponding to a moment of
226 kNm, which is 109% more than the elastic moment resistance of the steel sections.
The maximum slip recorded at this load was 9.8 mm. The load-displacement graph is
shown in Figure 3. The maximum displacement was 49 mm (span/190), and the
permanent deflection on unloading was 24 mm.

1385
A load of 3.4 kN/m2 was then re-applied and maintained for 30 days. This load was
considered to be representative of the maximum long-term or permanent load that might
be experienced in a typical building. The creep deflection was less than 1 mm after this
duration of loading(5).

400

350

300
P, (kN)

250
Failure Load = 336 kN
Applied Load

200 Max mid-span defl. = 68mm

150 Strength Load = 259 kN


Mid-span defl. = 50mm
100
End-support, failure load

50 Mid-span, strength load

Mid-span, failure load


0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Vertical deflection (mm)

Figure 3: Load-deflection curve for beam test

Finally, the test load was increased to failure which occurred at 12.7 kN/m2. Just prior to
this point, the maximum displacement was 68 mm (span/132). The maximum moment
was 312 kNm, which is 188% more than the elastic moment resistance of the beam.
Based on the measured yield strength of the steel, the degree of shear connection was
84%.

Beam failure occurred by longitudinal shear due to rotation of the pins. This mode of
failure also provoked local buckling of the top flange due to local compression and the
lack of restraint between the ribs of the composite slab. Local buckling did not occur
prior to this point.

Back-analysis of the composite beams showed that the plastic composite resistance of
the beam could be developed. The comparison between the test and back-analysed
bending resistances and stiffnesses are presented in Table 1.

The natural frequency of the unloaded composite beam was also measured at 8 Hz,
which when reduced for the other permanent loads would give a ‘design’ value of
approximately 6.5 Hz. This natural frequency is satisfactory for almost all building
applications.

1386
Table 1: Results of composite beam test using ‘top hat’ shear connectors.
Parameter Measured Calculated Design
property property property
Steel bending resistance - 149 kNm 108 kNm
Composite bending resistance 312 kNm - 308 kNm
Steel second moment of area - - 9,034 cm4
Composite second moment of area - - 34,570 cm4

2.2. Design Tables for Light Steel Composite Beams


The load-span characteristics of light steel composite beams using double C sections
may be determined from conventional composite theory to BS 5950 Part 3 or EC4. The
design criteria are:
• bending resistance of the steel section at the construction stage (using elastic
properties).
• bending resistance of the composite section, taking account of partial shear
connection.
• imposed load deflection (based on elastic composite properties).
• total deflection including the construction stage and imposed load deflections.
• minimum natural frequency (> 4 Hz).

Load-span tables for typical unpropped and propped beams are presented in Table 2.
The design of unpropped beams is generally limited by total deflection, and the design of
propped beams is limited by bending resistance of the composite section.

Table 2: Load-span table for unpropped and propped beams


IMPOSED LOAD Unpropped Propped
kN/m2 2.5 2.5
DESIGNATION LE δE δS Ν LP δP δS Ν
Matrex-Channel m mm mm m mm mm
425 x 90 x 2.4 8.4 a 9 29 14 9.9 c 16 14 17
425 x 90 x 2.5 8.5 a 10 29 14 10.1 c 16 14 17
425 x 90 x 2.6 8.7 a 10 31 15 10.2 d 17 15 17
425 x 90 x 2.7 8.9 a 11 31 15 10.3 d 18 16 17
425 x 90 x 2.8 9.0 a 11 33 15 10.4 d 19 16 18
425 x 90 x 2.9 9.2 a 12 34 16 10.5 d 19 17 18
426 x 90 x 3.0 9.3 a 12 35 16 10.6 d 20 18 18
428 x 90 x 3.1 9.4 g 13 35 16 10.7 d 21 18 18
430 x 90 x 3.2 9.5 g 13 36 16 10.8 d 21 19 18

By comparison, the spanning capabilities of the equivalent non-composite beams would


be only 60% of these spans, which demonstrates clearly the benefit of composite action.

1387
Importantly, the increase in stiffness of the composite section is over 5 times that of the
steel section.

The first practical application of this form of construction was in the extension to British
Steel’s Training Centre at Ashorne Hill, Warwickshire as shown on Figure 4. In this
project, the beam spans ranged from 8 to 10m. Wider ‘top hat’ sections were used, but
the same general principles of design apply.

Figure 4: Application of light steel composite construction using ‘top-hat’


shear connectors

3. Light Steel Composite Frames

There are various examples worldwide of the use of cold-formed sections or decking to
provide the formwork to in-situ concrete frames. A system of slim floor construction
developed in France is illustrated in Figure 5. In this form of construction, the Z sections
used as secondary beams span between the primary slim floor beams. The depth and
spacing of the secondary beams can be selected to match the slab depth and span
requirements of the construction.

1388
Figure 5: Slim floor beam using Figure 6: Finnish system of
composite Z sections as secondary beams light steel composite construction

In Finland, the steel company Rautaruukki have developed a wide ribbed U section
which acts compositely with the in-situ concrete placed in it. The U section is propped
approximately every 3m at the construction stage. The system also incorporates
composite concrete-filled hollow sections with special ‘saddles’ on which the U section
beam is supported. No fire protection is required, if additional bar reinforcement is
placed in the in-situ concrete, as in a conventional T beam. This construction system is
illustrated in Figure 6.

In Australia, profiled decking is used to provide permanent formwork to the sides and
soffit of deep beams and large columns. The disadvantage of the system is that
secondary frames are required to support the decking and to resist concrete pressures. A
cross-section is shown in Figure 7.

In New Zealand and Canada, C and Z sections have been combined to form primary and
secondary beams, and as complete frameworks which support in-situ concrete. These
composite frames achieve excellent seismic resistance by confining the in-situ concrete
under repeated loading and by enhancing the bending resistance of the connections.

Figure 7: Profiled sheeting Figure 8: Light steel


used as permanent formwork to deep framework as permanent formwork to
beams and columns in-situ concrete

An extension of this system to incorporate double-skin shear walls is presented in Figure


8. The edge beams are formed by C and Z sections. C sections within the wall support
the top and bottom of the decking.

1389
4. Composite Walls

Composite walls use two skins of vertically orientated decking, usually of re-entrant
form, with in-situ concrete between them. Ties placed at approximately 1.0m apart
vertically resist the concrete pressures during construction. Tests on composite walls of
various width and deck configurations have been carried out at the University of
Strathclyde. Because of the difficulty in achieving shear transfer at the top of the wall,
the composite wall is structurally more efficient when it is relatively slender, so that its
composite properties are utilized in resisting buckling at mid-height.

The advantages of composite walls are therefore:

• Slender wall construction can be achieved.


• Permanent formwork requires no external support.
• Internal ties resist the concrete pressure.
• Acts as a shear wall to eliminate bracing.
• Attachments can be made easily.

Various forms of composite walls using deck profiles are shown in Figure 9.

Inter-locking wall units

Composite walls using re-entrant steel decking

Composite walls using trapezoidal steel decking

Figure 9: Different forms of composite walls using decking and inter-


locking units

1390
5. Light Steel Flooring

Light steel floor joists are widely used in housing and in low-rise building construction
for spans of 3 to 5m. They comprise C sections of 150 to 250 mm depth and 1.2 to 2.4
mm thickness which are placed 400 to 600 mm apart. Floor boarding attached to the
joists improves their stiffness considerably, but until recently, no test data existed to
quantify this effect. Furthermore, multiple layers of board and plasterboard, and
suspended ceilings are often used to increase the acoustic insulation of the floors, and
these additional layers can have a considerable beneficial effect on stiffness.

Similarly, profiled decking may be used as part of a composite flooring system in which
boarding is fixed by frequent pins or screws. This system has been shown to provide a
very stiff construction, which improves the lateral transfer of loads across the decking.

6. Diaphragm action of wall panels

Light steel framing uses storey high wall panels which are either unbraced or braced
depending on whether they provide shear resistance to wind loads applied to the
building. Bracing may be in the form of integral bracing members within the thickness
of the wall panels or as external flats attached to the face of the panel. Internally,
plasterboard is attached directly to the wall panels, and provides a stiffening effect,
which is dependent on the frequency of fixings, on the rigidity of the plasterboard and
the presence of openings.

References

1. British Standards Institution, BS 5950: Part 3.1


Code of practice for design in composite construction, BSI, 1991
2. Eurocode 4: ENV 1994-1-1:
3. British Standards Institution, BS 5950: Part 4
Code of practice for design of composite slabs profiled steel sheeting. BSI, 1992
4. Popo-Ola, S. O. and Lawson, R. M
Push-out Tests with Matrex Bolted Channel Connector & Fibre Reinforced
Concrete, The Steel Construction Institute, Report No. RT-794 submitted to
Terrapin International Limited. February 2000.
5. Popo-Ola, S. O. and Lawson, R. M
Full-scale Test on Matrex Composite Floor System using Top-hat Strip
Connectors fastened with Hilti X-EDNK22 pins. The Steel Construction Institute,
Report No. RT-704 submitted to Terrapin International Limited. July 1998.

1391
INTENTIONAL AND UNINTENTIONAL SHEAR
CONNECTIONS IN SHALLOW FLOOR COMPOSITE
STRUCTURES
Matti V. Leskelä
University of OULU, Structural Engineering Laboratory, FINLAND

Abstract
Developments in shallow floor structures over the last ten years have produced systems
in which composite behaviour is frequently encountered due to various bond interfaces
between concrete and steel components. Depending on the types of structural elements
used in the floor, this composite action may be defined as either intentional or
unintentional. Both forms have an influence on structural behaviour and on design
decisions, and this paper discusses the important features to bear in mind when
considering composite interaction, its rating in the serviceability state and possible
deterioration when entering the plastic behaviour and ultimate limit states. A special
case in shallow floor construction is the integration of hollow core slabs with beams, and
these problems are also discussed. The phenomena observed are explained on the basis
of the general flexural theory of composite structures and numerical studies carried out
by the finite element method. An overview of development during the last ten years is
given.

1. Introduction

One of the basic ideas of employing steel beams integrated within the depth of a
concrete slab is that the concrete should provide natural fire protection for the steel
member. A number of steel profiles, both open and boxed sections, and three main types
of decking are available. For fast erection of the floor, propping of the beams and slabs
is avoided as far as possible, which implies that the steel members should be capable of
carrying the entire weight of the decking.

1.1 Composite interaction


Composite interaction in ordinary composite beams is always intentional and is ensured
by a mechanical connection. A designer who is used to dealing with shear connections
of this kind may feel that composite behaviour in a shallow floor construction is

1392
complicated. It may perhaps be understood that the connection is distributed over a
number of locations, but it may not be clear how the interaction between the material
components works. The problem becomes easier when it is realized that there is a
general principle according to which two members connected to each other continuously
in one interface form a composite system independent of the location of the connection
interface (see [1, 3]). Thus, it is only the overall properties of a multiply interfaced
connection that are of interest, and not their distribution within the cross-section.

Due to the limited depth of shallow floors, it is not possible to employ stud shear
connectors effectively, and designs with no mechanical connections between the decking
slab and the beam have been implemented. In the most conservative approach,
composite interaction is omitted in the resistance design, referring to a lack of
mechanical connection.

Composite interaction will occur at least in the serviceability state, and the phenomena
induced have sometimes been referred to as ‘unintentional composite effects’ [2], as the
assumptions made by the designer cannot change the real physical behaviour of the
system. The effects are highly variable: in the serviceability state the bond connections
are rigid and composite interaction is highly effective, whereas in the plastic range of
behaviour only limited use can be made of the initially rigid bond shear connections.

1.2 Steel sections and types of decking


Various open asymmetric sections are common in countries with rolled section
production and welded boxed and built-up sections are typical of Scandinavian
countries. Three main types of the decking may be recognized in shallow floors, (1)
hollow core slabs, (2) deep decking composite slabs and (3) concrete composite slabs
with prestressed planks [1]. The general term ‘solid type’ may be used for (2) and (3).

Hollow core slabs provide for fast, efficient erection of the floor, and fresh concrete is
required only for grouting the joints and possibly filling the beam section. Precast
decking elements form a good working platform as soon as they have been assembled,
and no propping is required even in long spans. Deep decking composite slabs differ in
the depth and form of their profile, and these variations influence the spans that can be
employed without propping. Slabs with prefabricated planks do not differ in principle
from uniform solid slabs, and their connection to the beam is similar to that used with
deep decking composite slabs. More weight is involved, however, so that these systems
are mostly used in heavy-duty floors where high eigenfrequencies are required.

2. Connection characteristics

Good connection characteristics in any composite beam are ones that provide high initial
stiffness and enough ductility in the connection to enable the system to maintain the
compressive stress resultant of the concrete flange as high as possible during plastic
straining. Unfortunately grouted joints do not meet the ductility requirement, although

1393
the initial stiffness of the joint is high. A general form of the load-slip relationship for a
connection is presented in Figure 1, where the parameters Fsmax and δs1 influence the
effective bending stiffness of the composite system and the residual force Fsmin
correlates with the degree of shear connection when applying the partial connection
theory of shallow floor beams [4].

Connection force Fs
Fsmax

Fsmin

δ s1 Connection slip δ s

Figure 1: Load-slip curve of a connection

When Fsmin is considerably smaller than Fsmax, the effective design strength of the
connection cannot be assumed to be high, as slips δs >> δs1 normally occur in the plastic
state of stresses. The connection forces first reach their maximum in the sections where
the vertical shear forces of the beam are highest. Consequently, the first unloading in the
connection and the maximum slips occur in the same regions, i.e. the supports. What
gradually happens in such connections may be described as the ‘zip-flyer effect’, and
this influences the plastic bending resistance obtained in the beam.

2.1 Beams integrated with hollow core slabs


Hollow core slabs are the most common decking elements used in Scandinavia, and the
initial aim when developing new shallow floor beams in the early 1990’s was to exploit
the upper hull of the voided decking elements as the compression flange of the
composite beam. Thus connections arranged between the beam and the slab elements
were intentional from the very beginning, even though not all the consequences of the
interaction were understood until full-scale flooring tests and their associated research
had been carried out [5, 6].

It was observed in the tests that the failure of the hollow core units often occurred before
the onset of yielding in the beam section, and it was not possible to develop full
plasticity in the beam without the slabs collapsing. Fortunately the failure loads on the
decking are high enough to make a reasonable design of floor possible, provided that
special rules are followed and the phenomena involved are taken into account [5, 6 and
7].

1394
Several explanations have been presented for the reduced vertical shear resistance of
hollow core slabs, but the composite interaction maintained by the joints on the sides of
the beam covers the overall behaviour well and is also observed in connection with other
types of slab.

Shallow floors are normally erected without propping the beams, and only a live load
will activate composite action in them. Initially, the joints on the sides of the beam are
not cracked and their stiffness is high, and consequently the bending stiffness of the
composite system is at its highest. The load path between the compressive force of the
concrete flange (= upper hull of the hollow core units), Nc, and the tensile force of the
beam, Nt, goes directly from the hulls to the top of the beam (interface i1 in Figure 2),
i.e. in the most efficient way. The shear forces in the connection can be evaluated by
applying the full interaction theory of composite beams.

As the load increases, horizontally extending vertical cracks develop, starting from
where the shear force on the beam is highest. Cracking reduces the stiffness of interface
i1 and redistribution of the connection forces follows. At the same time, the load path
changes to go through the depth of the slab to the bottom flange of the beam, where the
connection is still effective (interface i3 in Figure 2), and the webs of the slab units
(interface i2 in Figure 2) take on the role of maintaining a shear connection between the
hulls of the decking.

i1
N
c
i2

N
t i3
Horizontal shear

Figure 2: Connection interfaces and load paths in case of hollow core decking

If no major slipping occurs in the bottom connection, the horizontal shear forces in the
web of the slab will increase more or less linearly and cause failure of the webs when
their multi-directional failure condition is exceeded. Fsmin (Figure 1) varies depending
on the properties of the bottom connection, but unloading of connection forces there will
release horizontal shear forces from the webs of the slab. This is a favourable effect for
the capacity of the slab, and it was also observed in the tests that the reduction in slab
capacity is smallest in systems in which the slabs are supported on the beams with the
weakest bond interfaces [5]. As the horizontal slip capacity between the hulls of the slab
is quite limited, the webs can fail due to the ‘Vierendeel effect’(see right hand side of
Figure 2), which becomes more prominent as the deflection of the beam increases [6].

1395
The sensitivity of hollow core units to a reduction in capacity varies depending on the
type of the slab cross-section and its details [5, 7]. Other factors that affect the capacity
arise from the characteristics of the connections, and it may be understood from Figure 2
that measures taken to keep the interfaces i1 intact will improve the capacity of slabs
supported on beams.

2.2 Beams integrated with solid types of slab


In principle, connections between the solid types of slab and steel beams do not differ
from those of hollow core slabs, and interfaces i1 to i3 can be identified in the same way.
Interface i2 can be ignored here, however, as it has been seen in tests that web failures
are not possible in the slabs employed. The main difference between the types of slab is
that in the solid types the cross-section of the slab in the direction of the beam follows
the Bernoulli hypothesis of planes remaining plane during bending, which is not the case
in voided sections.

Considering the connections, there may be differences in the quality of the concrete
work, e.g. depending on the site conditions, detailing, etc., and this may affect the role of
individual interfaces. In asymmetric open sections good contact is easily obtained in the
web surfaces, but there will be air trapped in the voids under the top flange, i.e. the only
effective contact will be in the web.

The behaviour of the system with increasing load is similar to that explained in the
previous section, but there are no limitations with respect to the development of
plasticity in the steel section. In deep decking composite slabs the depth of concrete
above the sheet profile serves as the compression flange for the beam and its total area
within the design width influences the load at which the bond resistance of the
connection (Fsmax) is exceeded, while beyond that point it is the ratio Fsmin/Fsmax that
defines how high an axial force can be maintained during slipping of the concrete.

A partial connection theory of shallow floor beams [4] was developed for evaluating the
bending resistance between Mpl.Rd (= maximum plastic resistance of the composite
beam) and Mapl.Rd (= plastic resistance of the steel section alone). Information on the
connection resistance is required in order to employ the method for design purposes.

3. Load-slip properties of various connections

Interfaces i1 and i3 are of no interest separately, but when summed they form the
connection that is used in the partial connection theory. There are a variety of
possibilities for arranging a mechanical connection in shallow floor beams, but the bond
and friction effects are always present and influence the behaviour. Initially it is the
bond that governs any connection behaviour, and it is only after the bond resistance has
been exceeded that other components can become active.

1396
The idea in the standard push-out test for shear connectors explained in Eurocode 4 [8] is
that the steel joist is axially loaded with respect to the concrete parts of the specimen
causing longitudinal shear in the connection interfaces. The same principle can be
applied when comparing the connections in shallow floor structures experimentally. The
question of the validity of such tests for indicating the real properties of the connection is
frequently raised in discussions, but they are in any case useful for comparing different
configurations. Push-out specimens cast in an upright position (Figure 3) contain better
compacted concrete and the effective bond area is greater than in structures cast
horizontally.

Various connection characteristics are presented in Figure 4 as mean curves from push-
out tests with an asymmetric I-section [4]. When the total bond area in the specimen is
denoted as Ab and the bond area of the web as Ab,w, then Aw,b/Ab = 0.46.

FRam FRam
Slip transducer Loading plate

F Tie FTie FTie

Concrete block

FTie FTie
FRam

Figure 3: General principle for the push-out test employed for the shallow floor beam

3.1 Bond connections


A considerable scatter has been observed in the bond strengths between steel and
concrete in various tests, and the situation is evidently influenced by the properties of the
concrete and the condition of the steel surface. In Eurocode 4 [8] the bond is considered
only in the columns, and 0.4 MPa is given as the design strength for the interfaces of
concrete filled tubes. This value can be used when evaluating the possibility of
exceeding the bond strength in the serviceability limit state. As seen in Figure 4, these
connections are not ductile, and the residual strength depends on the frictional effects
involved.

3.2 Checkered interfaces


Checkered steel surfaces provide a better adhesive bond with the concrete, but their
ductility depends on how well the transverse separation of the concrete from the steel

1397
interface is prevented. This effect is referred to as lateral confinement in Figure 4, which
is based on a previous report [4]. It should be pointed out that all the curves in this
figure were obtained from specimens with identical dimensions and similar material
properties. In some of the tests lateral confinement of the concrete was arranged by
employing adjustable ties that prevent separation of the concrete from the web surface.
The tightening was varied in order to observe the effect of the confinement. As seen in
Figure 4, the prevention of transverse separation at checkered interfaces noticeably
improves the resistance and produces a connection with excellent ductility.

Checkered webs + bars through the web


1

Checkered webs with lateral confinement


0.75
Bars through the web
0.5
Checkered webs

0.25
Bond connection in plain web surfaces

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

Slip displacement, mm
Figure 4: Properties of various shear connections

3.3 Transverse bars through the web


The behaviour of transverse ribbed bars (2 φ12 per specimen) was studied both in
specimens with plain web surfaces and in specimens with checkered web surfaces.
These tests were identified by the tags ‘Bars through the web’, and the bars were also
seen work well in producing lateral confinement. The properties of the specimens make
it possible to distinguish various component characteristics from the overall behaviour,
on the assumption that these will appear to be superimposed. The characteristics of the
bars were deducted by extracting the ‘Bond connection’ diagram from the ‘Bars through
the web’ diagram, whereupon it became clear that the bars start taking up load only after
the occurrence of a certain slip, which correlates with the looseness of the web holes.
The maximum load in the bars is reached only after a total slip of 10 mm, which is not
ideal for the stiffness of these connections. It should also be noted that the maximum
load is related to nominal shear stress 0.8fsk in the bar rather than to fsk, which is the
yield strength of the bar.

1398
3.4 Frictional effects
Floors are two-way systems that are formally regarded as one-way structures by
separating the behaviour of slabs and beams. When wishing to avoid excessive
conservatism in the design of the shear connection, the frictional effects due to
transverse bending in the slabs should be allowed for, as it is not reasonable to make
complicated designs for the connections that may reduce the efficiency of the
construction. Considering Figure 5, the resistance of the connection on one side of the
steel member should be evaluated as the minimum of the two values vRd.1 and vRd.2:

vRd.1 = vRd.mc + µAefsk/γs


vRd.2 = 2.5AcvητRd + Aefsk/γs

where vRd.1 is the resistance at the steel concrete interface, which follows the surface of
the steel section, vRd.2 is the resistance at the vertical interface, through concrete slab [8]
and vRd.mc ≥ 0 is the total resistance of the bond and mechanical connection. Ae is the
area of the hogging reinforcement in the slab per unit length of the beam and µ is the
coefficient of friction at the steel-concrete interface. The value vRd.mc for the bond
connection should be evaluated on the basis of the residual strength available after
slipping. Numerical evaluation indicates that vRd.1 will give the minimum result.
A e, strength fsk /γs Ae

Fr Fr
Mslab Mslab
Fj. Fj.
A cv µFj.
Fr F
r

Beam section Elevation outside the steel beam

Figure 5: Influence of slab bending on the connection interfaces of the beam.

The existence of the frictional effects µFj.⊥ cannot be verified in the beam tests, where
no transverse bending is produced, but on the basis of the equilibrium of the internal
forces, the maximum for Fj.⊥ is the plastic force Aefsk/γs in the reinforcement. It has
been doubted, whether Fj.⊥ can develop unconditionally or not, but this argumentation
can be rebutted by considering the following statements. (1) Frictional forces can be
allowed for whenever there is a hogging reinforcement of the slab designed for the
decking loads. The ultimate limit state of the floor beam follows from the same loading
arrangement as for the hogging moment of the slab, i.e. the slabs are loaded on both
sides of the beam by the maximum design load (dead weight + live load). If there is

1399
maximum load on one side of the beam only, this is not the determining case, as the
intermediate beams are never designed for this kind of loading. (2) Verification of the
connection resistance is required at the ends of the beam, where its deflection can never
eliminate Fj.⊥. The shear spans in which µFj.⊥ is considered are defined in the same way
as in the composite slabs to Eurocode 4.

4. Discussion

Hollow core slabs were intuitively supported on beams even before 1990’s, but research
into their real composite interaction with the beams was started only after the findings in
the tests conducted in Finland [5]. Non-linear finite element analyses in connection with
the tests have revealed the important role of the connection characteristics for the
resistance of precast units. In fact, the brittle characteristics of a typical bond connection
are favourable for the resistance of the slab units, although the performance of these
connections should be improved in case of the solid types of slab [4]. It has become
customary in Finland that a fictitious plastic bending resistance is evaluated for the
beams that support hollow core slabs as well, omitting the concrete compression flanges
outside the beam section. This procedure, originally proposed by Bode et al. [2],
provides an estimate of the capacity more easier than does evaluation of the elastic
bending resistance based on stress histories and use of composite cross-sectional
properties. The flanges outside the beam section should always be taken into account
when evaluating the deflections, however. This is important for defining the precamber
correctly.

Although it is not desirable to improve the resistance of the shear connection with
hollow core slabs, this may be required in the case of the solid types of slab, for which
there are no limitations on achieving the plastic bending resistance. The partial
connection theory [4] developed on the basis of the principles presented in Eurocode 4
[8] implies that in slabs with greater solid depth more attention should be paid to shear
connection, and mechanical connection should be considered. This conclusion can also
be drawn from the beam tests.

The general bending theory of shallow floor beams indicates that, to make a system
composite, a shear connection is only required in one location in the depth of the section,
provided that the associated components follow the Bernoulli hypothesis of planes
remaining planes in bending. The same rule has also been observed to be valid in
inelastic behaviour states when carrying out non-linear finite element analyses.

The upper flange is the natural and only location for a connection in traditional
composite beams in which the sectional parts appear to be stacked, but shallow floor
beams do not normally have enough concrete above the top flange for headed stud
connectors, and it should also be understood that bond connections to the upper surface
of the top flange will not be efficient if there is nothing to prevent separation of the

1400
concrete from the interface. The web interfaces of the steel section are the most
effective location for the connection, as transverse bending of the slab creates frictional
effects against the web and the splitting effects in the concrete due to mechanical
connection are best avoided between the flanges. Horizontally placed studs have been
studied in Germany [9], and the resistance and ductility of such studs depend on the
prevention of splitting. A connection based on longitudinal reinforcing bars of large
diameter welded to the web has been proposed in a previous report [4], and the
properties for this connection may readily be evaluated from the CEB Model Code [10].
When placed appropriately, the reinforcing bars may have a double function of serving
as a fire reinforcement as well.

5. References

1. Leskelä, M.V., ‘Shallow Floor Integrated Beams - Research on the Composite


Behaviour’, in ‘Theorie und Praxis im Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau’, Festschrift
zu Ehren von Prof. Dr.-Ing. Helmut Bode, ibidem Verlag, Stuttgart, 2000 199-
212.
2. Bode, H., Dorka, U.E., Stengel, J., Sedlacek, G. and Feldmann, M., ‘Composite
Action in Slim Floor Systems’, in ‘Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete
III’, Proceedings of an Engineering Foundation Conference, Irsee, Germany
1996, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1997 472-485.
3. Leskelä, M.V., ‘Shallow Floor Beam Behaviour - General Theory’ in ‘VII
Suomen Mekaniikkapäivät Tampereella 25. - 26.5.2000’, Nide 2, 2.kokouspäivän
esitelmät. Pressus Oy. (Proceedings of the VII Finnish Mechanics Days, Vol. 2,
prentations on the 2nd day), Tampere University of Technology, Engineering
Mechanics, Tampere, Finland, 2000 489-498.
4. Leskelä, M.V. and Hopia, J., ‘Steel Sections for Composite Shallow Floors’,
Report RTL 0053E, University of Oulu, Structural Engineering Laboratory,
March 2000, Oulu, Finland.
5. Pajari, M., ‘Shear resistance of prestressed hollow core slabs on flexible
supports’, VTT Publications 228, Espoo, Finland 1995.
6. Leskelä, M.V. and Pajari, M., ‘Reduction of the Vertical Shear Resistance in
Hollow Core Slabs when Supported on Beams’, in ‘Concrete 95, Conference
Papers’, Volume One, CIA and FIP, Brisbane, Australia, 1995 559-568.
7. ‘Special design considerations for precast prestressed hollow core floors. Guide
to good practice prepared by fib Commission 6’, Sprint-Druck Stuttgart, 2000.
8. ENV 1994-1-1, ‘Design of steel and concrete composite structures, Part 1-1:
General rules and rules for buildings’, CEN 1992.
9. Kuhlmann, U., Kürschner, K. and Breuninger U., ‘Zum Tragverhalten von
liegenden Kopfbolzdübeln’, in ‘Theorie und Praxis im Konstruktiven
Ingenieurbau’, Festschrift zu Ehren von Prof. Dr.-Ing. Helmut Bode, ibidem
Verlag, Stuttgart, 2000 361-373.
10. Comité Euro-International du Béton, ‘CEB-FIP Model Code 1990. Design Code’,
Thomas Telford, Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, 1993.

1401

También podría gustarte