• KCI Concrete Journal
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.33-41
• /
• 2001

This paper presents the crack effect on CIP anchors and prediction of tensile capacity, as governed by concrete cone failure. Single anchors where located at center of concrete specimen. Three different types of cracks such as crack width of 0.2 mm and 0.5 mm, crack depth of 10 cm and 20cm , and crack location of center and off-center point were simulated. Static tensile load was applied to 7/8-in. CIP anchors of 10 cm and 20 cm embedment length in concrete with compressive strength of 280 kgf/$\textrm{cm}^2$. Tested pullout capacities were compared to the values determined using current design methods (such as ACI 349-97, ACI 349 revision and CEB-FIP which is based on CCD Method). The comparison of CCD Method and ACI revision showed almost the same values in uncracked concrete specimen. In cracked concrete, CCD Method predicted conservative values. Three-dimensional non-linear FEM modeling also has been performed to determine the stresses distribution and crack inclination.

• Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.87-97
• /
• 2015

In this study, an experimental study was performed to evaluate the concrete breakout strength of cast-in-place(CIP) anchors in cracked concrete under static shear loading. The CIP anchors involved in this study were 30mm in diameter with an edge distance of 150mm and an embedment length of 240mm. The experiment was carried out for two specimens in uncracked concrete and three specimens in cracked concrete orthogonal and parallel to the direction of shear loading, respectively. Compared to the uncracked concrete specimen, cracked specimen orthogonal to the direction of shear loading showed no reduction in the concrete breakout strength and that parallel to the load direction about 91% strength which corresponds to 84% of uncracked concrete strength defined in ACI 318-11. Therefore, the experimental results showed smaller decrease in the shear resistance of CIP anchors in cracked concrete than that specified in ACI code which account for 71% strength of uncracked concrete in cracked concrete.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2000.04a
• /
• pp.491-496
• /
• 2000

This paper presents the evaluation of behavior and the prediction of tensile capacity of anchors that fail concrete, as the design basis for anchorage. Tests of cast-in-place headed anchors, domestically manufactured and installed in uncracked, unreinforced concrete are performed to investigate the behavior of single anchors and multiple anchors with the consideration of various embedment lengths and edge distances. The failure mode and the load-deformation response of these anchors are discussed and the concrete failure dta are then compared with capacity predictions by the two existing methods : the 45 degree cone method of ACI 349, 318 and the concrete capacity design (CCD) method. Discrepancies between the test results and these two prediction methods, FEM analysis are assessed.

• Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.11-20
• /
• 2014

The Concrete Capacity Design(CCD) method has been used in the design of anchor since 2001 and Korean design code specify that concrete breakout capacity of CIP anchor under seismic load shall be taken as 75% of static capacity. In this study, an experimental study was performed to evaluate the concrete breakout capacity of unreinforced CIP anchors under dynamic shear force. For the purpose, three static and dynamic shear-loading tests were conducted using 20mm diameter anchors, respectively. The edge distance of 120mm was considered in the tests. In the dynamic tests, 15 cycles pulsating load with 1Hz speed was applied and the magnitude of loading step was increased until concrete breakout failure occurs. From the tests, the concrete breakout capacity under dynamic shear loading showed nearly same capacity by static loading.

• Journal of the Korea institute for structural maintenance and inspection
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.141-152
• /
• 2001

This paper presents the evaluation of behavior and the prediction of tensile capacity of anchors that can cause a failure of the concrete on the basis of the design for anchorage. Tests of cast-in-place headed anchors, domestically manufactured and installed in uncracked and unreinforced concrete member are conducted to test the effected of embedment length and edge distance. The failure modes and the load-deformation responses of the anchors are discussed and then the concrete failure data are compared with capacities by the two present methods : the 45 degree cone method of ACI 349, 318 and the concrete capacity design (COD) method. Differences between the results by test and by two prediction methods are analyzed Finite Element Method (FEM).

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• v.58 no.1
• /
• pp.39-58
• /
• 2016

Since the publication of ACI 318-02, the concrete capacity design (CCD) method has been used to determine the resistance of unreinforced concrete anchors. The regulation of steel-reinforced anchors was proposed in ACI 318-08. Until ACI 318-08, the shear resistance of concrete breakout for an unreinforced anchor during an earthquake was reduced to 75% of the static shear strength, but this reduction has been eliminated since ACI 318-11. In addition, the resistance of a hairpin-reinforced anchor was calculated using only the strength of the steel, and a regulation on the dynamic strength was not given for reinforced anchors. In this study, shaking table tests were performed to evaluate the dynamic shear strength of unreinforced and hairpin-reinforced cast-in-place (CIP) anchors during earthquakes. The anchors used in this study were 30 mm in diameter, with edge distances of 150 mm and embedment depths of 240 mm. The diameter of the hairpin steel was 10 mm. Shaking table tests were carried out on two specimens using the artificial earthquake, based on the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC)'s Regulatory Guide 1.60, and the Northridge earthquake. The experimental results were compared to the current ACI 318 and ETAG 001 design codes.

• Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.21-30
• /
• 2014

In this study, an experimental study was performed to evaluate the shear resistance of cast-in-place(CIP) anchors reinforced with hairpin and stirrup bars under static and dynamic loads. The reinforcement was developed using D6 bars, and the anchors were installed with 20mm diameter and 120mm edge distance. Three tests were conducted for each type of reinforced anchor under static and dynamic shear load with a pulsating frequency of 1 Hz, respectively. It was found that the strength of hairpin-reinforced anchor was affected by the concrete cover and the dynamic tests showed no capacity reduction of anchors compared with static tests. The stirrup-reinforced anchor showed little increase of resistance compared with unreinforced anchor and the resistance under dynamic loading showed nearly same strength by static loading.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.169-174
• /
• 2001

This study concerns crack effect on concrete anchor system and prediction of tensile capacity, as governed by concrete cone failure, of single anchors located at center of concrete specimen. To Investigate crack effect three different types of crack such as crack width of 0.2mm and 0.5nm, crack depth of loom and 20cm, and crack location of center and biased point were simulated. The static tensile load was subjected to 7/8 in. CIP anchor embedded in concrete of strength 280kg/$cm^{2}$. Tested pullout capacity was compared to prediction value by each current design method (such as ACI 349-97, ACI 349 revision and CEB-FIP which is based on CC Method), In these comparison CC Method and ACI revision showed almost same value in uncracked concrete specimen, however in cracked concrete CC Method showed conservativeness. Therefore the design by ACI 349 revision is recommended for the safe and economic design.

• Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.493-501
• /
• 2011

The $45^{\circ}$cone failure theory has been used for concrete anchor bolt design, but the CCD (concrete capacity design) method was adopted as a new design method in 2000. The method was allowed to be used, however, only for anchors with a diameter of less than 50 mm and an embedment depth of less than 635 mm because it is based on the experiment results from medium-sized to small anchor bolts. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a rational concrete breakout capacity equation for medium-sized to large anchor bolts. In this study, tension tests on an M56 cast-in-place single anchor bolt with an effective embedment depth of 400-450 mm were carried out for the five test specimens. Based on the test results together with the other recent test results, the applicability of the concrete breakout capacity equation in the current design code to the large to medium-sized anchor bolts with an embedment depth of 280-1,200 mm was estimated.

• Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.347-357
• /
• 2015

In this study, an experimental study was performed to evaluate the concrete breakout strength of unreinforced cast-in-place anchors by seismic qualification test under shear loading. The CIP anchors tested herein were 30mm in diameter with an edge distance of 150mm and an embedment depth of 240mm in uncracked and cracked concrete. The cracked specimen consisted of orthogonal and parallel crack to the loading direction, respectively. The dynamic loading sequence during the seismic qualification test was determined based on CSA N287.2, ACI 355.2 and ETAG 001 codes. After the dynamic loading, the static loading was applied until failure occurs. The shear resistance by seismic qualification tests showed almost the same strength as that obtained from the static tests in uncrcaked and cracked concrete, respectively. Meanwhile, the breakout depth did not reach $8d_0$, therefore the modified strength equation of ACI 318-11 could estimate properly the concrete breakout strength, which does not consider effective bearing length.