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


ACI 318 - App D - pullout & blowout

ACI 318 - App D - pullout & blowout

ACI 318 - App D - pullout & blowout

I have a question regarding concrete pullout & side-face blowout requirements for a highly loaded anchor bolt(s) in tension. This bolt will be supporting a column base plate that sits on a drilled shaft, which will have a (yet to be designed) rebar cage of some sort.

Taken from the "8 Nov 14 22:26" response on this thread:


As far as development goes, it is perfectly acceptable to lap an anchor with a rebar cage. The same rules would apply as for non-contact lap splices. Presumably the anchor rods would be inside the confined core of the foundation, so most of the limit states from App D are restrained by the surrounding reinforcement, i.e., "supplemental reinforcement." Appendix D is typically applied to reduce the embedment depth to less than a typical Ld. Also, many anchors are higher capacity than a similarly-sized rebar, making a strict lap a bit difficult.

And there's a paragraph in ACI-318 (08, in front of me) D.5.2.9 that states:


Where anchor reinforcement is developed in accordance with Chapter 12 on both sides of the breakout surface, the design strength of the anchor reinforcement shall be permitted to be used instead of the concrete breakout strength in determining φNn...

Is there an ACI/CRSI document or paragraph that makes a similar statement with regard to Pullout (D.5.3) and Side-Face Blowout (D.5.4)?

i.e.: Is there definitive statement somewhere that says if you provide a sufficient rebar cage, with a long enough anchor rod, you can ignore the pullout & blowout requirements of Appendix D?

Thanks for the feedback!

RE: ACI 318 - App D - pullout & blowout


RE: ACI 318 - App D - pullout & blowout

Definitive statement - no. Though, I wouldn't worry about requiring a definitive code statement, because this problem is solved relatively easily with some careful thinking. Providing a non-contact lap splice of bars and anchor will preclude anchor pull out if you have a headed or nutted anchor - it is evident when you compare the required anchor pull-out length verses the lap length required of the vertical rebar. 9 times out of 10, your required rebar length is longer that that required for anchor pull-out. Again, there is no specific US code statement, but this practice has been going on for decades with success.

Side blow out restraint is a bit trickier to quantify(unless you meet the minimum edge distance to preclude it). Typically, at a minimum I require 4#3 ties at 2" o/c at the anchor heads, which I believe restrains the side blow out wedge much a like a hairpin for pre-eng building foundations, precast connections, etc. The detailing is important here, because the ties need to be close to the anchor heads but not so close that the blow out wedge develops outside the ties. Also, I am not super convinced that this spall would "take down" the entire connection. If there is amble anchor length above this spall to the top of the pier/pile, the blowout will remain local and a non-issue at the strength limit state, IMO.

Strut and tie method is a very good way to capture the most important parts. It is referenced in other engtips threads.

"It is imperative Cunth doesn't get his hands on those codes."

RE: ACI 318 - App D - pullout & blowout

Thanks for the feedback!

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! Already a Member? Login


White Paper - Considerations for choosing a 3D printing technology
The adoption of 3D printing into major companies’ product development life cycles is a testament to the technology’s incredible benefits to consumers, designers, engineers and manufacturers. While traditional production methods have limitations in manufacturability, 3D printing provides unparalleled design freedom due to the additive method of building parts layer by layer. Download Now
White Paper - Are all 3D printed metals the same?
With so many different 3D printing metal systems and processes today, how can you know exactly what you’re getting? Today, there are several different methods for manufacturing 3D printed metal components with their own strengths and limits. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close