×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

(OP)

I'm checking anchors subjected to tension for concrete breakout, according to the 2004 Canadian concrete standard CSA A23.3-04. I believe the anchor design guidelines are almost identical to those outlined in ACI 318.

The question I have arose when my boss gave me his old 1984 code (CAN3-A23.3-M84) as a reference. The concrete breakout resistance that I calculated for the anchor group based on the 1984 code was almost 2x greater than the resistance calculated according to the 2004 code.

I've attached calculations from both codes for comparative purposes. I'm hoping someone who is familiar with the codes can shed some light on why there appears to be such a big descrepancy in the breakout resistance.

Thanks in advance.   

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

2x seems alittle low, it appears to be based on ACI 318-05 App. D and UBC 1994.  So yes ACI App D will give far lower loads than any of the old code equations.

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

(OP)
So is Appendix D just really conservative?

I'm sure there is a better understanding of anchor failure mechanisms now than there was in the old codes. If these equations are more accurate, wouldn't any anchors designed according to the old codes be under-designed (theoretically)?   

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

Yes it is.

Depends on your definition of better understanding.  lol

But theoretically yes you are correct.

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

The main difference is you are designing for cracked concrete. Cracked concrete gives very large reductions. Re-run your calcs for uncracked concrete and they will be much higher.
You can also go to Hilti's website and download their Profis Anchor software. You can now design embed plates with studs! Very easy to use and fast.

As far as the old code being unconservative... the concrete has to crack first before it is uncracked :o/ If the concrete is not in tension then you're getting the uncracked capacity... Embed plates on the bottom of slabs is where I would be concerned. Basically tension zones.

www.anchorengineer.com

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

(OP)
Thanks sandman21 and anchorengineer for your help.

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

Pardon my ignorance of the design code you are referring to, but where would you ever assume uncracked concrete (except for post-tensioned design)? The flexural calculations are based on a cracked concrete cross-sections and their is quite often restraint against temperature and shrinkage.

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

kikflip - Compression zones. Top of slab, footings... If you have SDC's c-f you have to assume all concrete is cracked. A&B...judgement call.  

www.anchorengineer.com

RE: Anchor Design: Concrete Breakout Code Comparison

You don't have to assume anything for SDC C-F.  Uncracked concrete is when Mcr is greater than Mu, cracks are defined as anything over .012.  Compression zones are a safe to assume uncracked, top of slabs, footings, walls, grade beams, these can develop cracks under service loading and then would need to be analyzed as cracked.  Generally going from crack to uncracked is not going to make a huge difference, 40%, the ductile requirement is the real killer along with edge distances.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources