ML13333A930
| ML13333A930 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 01/16/1975 |
| From: | Lin M BECHTEL GROUP, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13317A298 | List: |
| References | |
| BR-5853-C-4, NUDOCS 8208300271 | |
| Download: ML13333A930 (93) | |
Text
BR-5853-C-4 January 1975 FFTF REPORT DRILLED-IN EXPANSION BOLTS UNDER STATIC AND ALTERNATING LOAD A Report on an Investigation by Bechtel Power Corporation to justify the use of Expansion Bolts in the Fast Flux Test Facility, Richland, Washington United States Atomic Energy Commission Prepared for Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory Richland, Washington By Date /45-75 Approved Date
_____7f_
Approved Date 1//./7ks*
BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION 50 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94119 8208300271 820824 PDR ADOCK 05000206 P
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General 1.2 Objective and Scope 1.3 Acknowledgement 2.0 TEST PROGRAM 2.1 Scope 2.2 Specimen Design 2.3 Loading Jig and Dynamic Load Simulation 3.0 TESTING PROCEDURES 3.1 Expansion Bolt Installation 3.2 Test Set-Up 3.3 Loading Sequences 3.4 Recordings 3.5 Control Tests 4.0 TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Static Tests 4.2 Dynamic Tests 4.3 Tension Tests 4.4 Shear Tests 4.5 Combined Tension and Shear Tests
5.0 CONCLUSION
S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions 5.2 Recommendations 6.0 FUTURE STUDIES 7.0 ILLUSRATIONS Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) 8.0 TABLES
9.0 REFERENCES
10.0 APPENDICES Page ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General For a number of years concrete expansion bolts have been used in Nuclear Facilities for Seismic Category I Struc tures without special experimental or analytical verifi cation of design loads and load factors for dynamic load applications.
Design Loads ranging from 1/4 to 1/10 of the static capacity have been used for general applications of expansion bolts.
In May of 1974 an experimental program was carried out at the University of California at Berkeley to investigate the static and dynamic behavior of some ex pansion bolts, and based on these tests, certain design recommendations were developed (See Reference A).
As a current effort to update the design data for nuclear power plants, Bechtel P6wer Corporation developed interim criteria for use on all Bechtel Projects. The interim criteria imposed tight limitations and rigid testing re quirements on the use of concrete expansion bolts. These reflected a few unfavorable experiences such as fatigue fractures of self-drilling anchors Tsee Figure 1), and some sub-standard workmanship during installation.
The limitations imposed left the FFTF Project no alternative but to use the grouted anchors for the installation of equipment, piping and structural items. Because of the special considerations that water should not come in con tact with plant components and the need that cells be kept in a "clean room" condition, the use of the grouted details which must use water for core drilling of the large diameter holes is undesirable.
Further, such drilling operations are time consuming and therefore adversely impact cost and schedule.
Furthermore, the large core drilling gives greater proba bility for drilling through rebar. Because of these ob jections to core drilling and grouting, in May of 1974 a testing program (Appendix A) was developed by Bechtel and approved by Hanford Engineering Development Laboratiry, to substantiate the performance of drilled-in expansion type anchor bolts.
The test specimens were cast by Bechtel field personnel at the FFTF site and tested at the Struc tural Engineering Laboratory of the University of California at Berkeley, under the technical supervision of Bechtel Power Corporation, San Francisco, California.
Page 1
1.2 Objective and Scope The objective of this investigation was to establish the allowable design loads (tension, shear, and combined load),
for expansion bolts to be installed in regular 4000 psi mix concrete, Magnetite 5000 psi mix concrete, and Steel Shot 5000 psi mix concrete at the Fast Flux Test Facility. The test loads included Static Loads and Alternating Loads which simulate the dynamic loads of vibratory equipment and dy namic earthquake loads.
The investigation included a static and dynamic testing pro gram (Appendix A) and an evaluation of the results to estab lish criteria for the use of expansion bolts for a nuclear facility. Because of funds and time limitations, only duplicate tests for a few types of expansion bolts were in cluded in the testing program. As the testing progressed the program was modified to concentrate on typical expansion bolts of sleeve type and stud type which are illustrated in Figure 2. These two types of expansion bolts were chosen because they appeared tp be least effected by the workman ship of the bolt installation and they both have the flex ibility for an adjustment of the embedment depth to set the wedges between/or behind the rebar. No attempt was made to study the influence of concrete strength, embedment depth, the minimum edge distance, minimum spacing between expansion bolts, and the effect of the installation torques.
For the effects of concrete strength, the test results of this investigation represent conservative values for the actual concrete used in FFTF project since test specimens were tested at the age of 21 days to 60 days while the ex pansion bolts are to be installed on the jobsite from 6 months to two years after placement of the concrete. The effects of embedment depth were minimized by placing the wedges of the expansion bolts in the concrete confined by the rebar. As to the minimum edge distance, minimum spac ing between expansion bolts, and the effect of the instal lation torque the values derived from industry-wide exper iences for the static loads were adapted. Since the design values of the expansion bolts were established to have a factor of safety of five (5) or more with respect to the static capacity these values should be adequate for the dynamic loads which are in the elastic range of the bolt/
concrete assembly.
The results of this investigation were used to establish the design criteria and the installation specification (Reference C) for the use of expansion bolts on the FFTF project.
Page 2
The test data represent the anchor values for the expansion bolts installed in the FFTF concrete test blocks under the workmanship of simulated jobsite conditons. The use of these test data for any other facilities should be based on interpretation by the cognizant engineer for validity of data.
1.3 Acknowledgment This investigation was funded by U.S. Atomic Energy Com mission through Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory for the support of the engineering activity of the Fast Flux Test Facility at Richland, Washington.
The expansion bolts and drill bits used in this investi gation were provided by the bolt manufacturers:
Hilti Inc.,
ITT Phillips Drill Co., The Rawlplug Co., Inc., Star Expan sion Company, Inc., Wejit Corporation, and USM Corporation.
The installation tools were provided by Hilti Inc. and ITT Phillips Drill Co.
The Expansion Anchor Manufacturers Institute, Inc. (EAMI) technical committee and dynamic test sub-committee partici pated in the test program by attending meetings for exchange of tec hnical information for the test program.
Page 3
2.0 TEST PROGRAM 2.1 Scope The test program included static tests and dynamic tests for alternating loads on stud and shell type expansion bolts for three bolt diameters (5/8", 3/4" and 1") from six manufacturers (Hilti, Rawl, Parabolt, Wej-it, Phillips, and Star).
These are considered representative of the type commonly used in the industry.
The expansion bolts were tested for three types of loads:
Tension, Shear, and Combined loads designated as T, V and C loads, respectively.
The dynamic tests included two types of loading sequences.
The first type, designated "N loading", is an S-N type fatigue cyclic loading which simulates the dynamic loading of vibratory equipment. The second type, designated as "D loading" is a low cy'cle alternating load which simulates the dynamic loads of a seismic event.
The Test Schedules are listed in Table 1. As the tests progressed this schedule was modified to concentrate on two types of the most prospective expansion bolts, (Phillips HN series sleeve type anchors and stud type wedge anchors from Rawl, Hilti and Parabolt) for deriviation of more com plete data. The actual number of tests for each type of bolt are indicated in the parenthesis.
2.2 Specimen Design The conventional test medium for expansion bolts subjected to a static load is a plain concrete slab. A portable hydraulic jack is generally used for the conventional static tests.
A portable hydraulic system was not readily available for the dynamic load capacity required for this test program, therefore, the test specimen were designed to suit the MTS dynamic test frame of the University of California at Berkeley. Figures 4, 5 and 6 illustrate the specimen for Tension, Shear, and Combined Load tests. The specimen were 15" x 12" x 15" concrete blocks cast from FFTF concrete mixes for Regular 4000 psi concrete, Magnetite 5000 psi con crete, and Steel Shot 5000 psi concrete. A 1-1/4" diameter high strength bolt was embedded into each of the test speci men for connecting to the fixed head of the MTS loading frame. A 10" diameter spiral of #2 bars at 2" pitch was used to reinforce the concrete 3 inches below the surface where the expansion bolt is located. This reinforcement was Page 4
provided to simulate the confinement of the reinforcing steel in walls and slabs of FFTF Project. The instal lation specification (Reference C) specified that the wedge portion of the expansion bolts shall be set between or behind the near face reinforcing steel in the wall or slab to make sure that the wedges are all set in the con crete confined by the rebar.
2.3 Loading Jig and Dynamic Load Simulation The test specimen was fixed to the fixed head of the MTS Loading Frame by the 1-1/4" bolt embedded into the concrete block as described in Section 2.2. The load was applied to the expansion bolt through a jig which was coupled to the loading head of the MTS Loading Frame. Figures 7, 8 and 9 illustrate the loading juigs for Tension, Shear, and Combined Load Tests.
Vibration-Fatigue It is difficult to estimate the vibratory characteristics of a piece of equipment during its lifetime. However, the general S-N type fatigue curves for Carbon, Low-Alloy, High Alloy and High Tensile Steels indicate that for load cycles where N > 106 the value of the fafigue stress, S, does not decrease with the number of the stress cycles (See Fig.
1-9-1 of ASME Code Sec. III).
Therefore, the number of load cycles for long duration fatigue tests was conservatively set at 2 million cycles for the investigation of the fatigue characteristics of the expansion bolts. The vibratory loads were simulated by an alternating load of a steady state sine wave which alternated between zero (actually it was set at 500/lbs. to avoid impact effects) and 0.2 S', where S' is the approximate static capacity of the expansion bolts. 0.2 S' was chosen to establish a factor of safety of 5 for the design capacity.
Seismic Load A typical cyclic loading for seismic peak response is illus trated in FigurelO. Figure 10(2) illustrates the El Centro 1940 (North-South) motion ground acceleration/time history.
Figure 10(b) illustrates the ground motion after it was filtered and amplified by a building system which was 5 Hz natural frequency and 5% critical damping factor. This is the floor motion time history of the building. Figure 10(c) represents the equipment motion which is the floor motion filtered and amplified by equipment which has 5 Hz natural frequency and 5% critical damping factor. Generally the peak responses of equipment during an earthquake can be represented by five to ten beats of a complex wave. The Page 5
number of maximum stress cycles approximately corresponds to the number of these beats. For the FFTF Project, the Seismic Design Criteria, JABE-WADCO-02, specified that the Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) will produce 10 cycles of maximum structural element response and the Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) will produce 6 cycles of maximum structural element response. The plant is designed for three OBE's and one DBE during its lifetime, therefore the total number of maximum element response cycles is about
- 30.
Considering each maximum element response as a sine beat which consists of 10 cycles of alternating load, the seismic loading was conservatively simulated by about 6800 cycles of a sine wave which varied from zero and 0.2 S'.
Page 6
3.0 TESTING PROCEDURES 3.1 Expansion Bolt Installation Holes for anchor test specimens were drilled with a rotary/
percussion type drill such as a Red Head 747 Roto Stop Hammer Drill.
In order to simulate the actual Field con dition, drilling was free-hand without a jig or any other special effort to obtain high degree of accuracy in align ment (see Figure 11).
The first twenty-seven holes were drilled by a crafstman from Engineering Testing Service Inc.
in Oakland, California. However, the rest of the holes were drilled by a graduate student at the University of California.
The holes were drilled by solid core carbide bits of the same nominal diameter as the expansion bolts. The toler ances of these carbide bits are +0.015" -0.0 over the nominal diameters.
The expansion bolts wer'e installed perpendicular to the surface of the test blocks within a tolerance of +30.
The anchor embedment depth was set at about 1/2" more than the minimum embedment depth recommended by the manufacturers for each size of bolt. Table 2 illustrates the typical embedment depths of this test program. The anchors were set with the torques recommended by the manufacturers.
3.2 Test Set-up The tests were perofrmed by the Engineering Materials Labor atory of the University of California at Berkeley. The tests were conducted on a 500 Kip capacity MTS Dynamic Test Frame.
Figure 12 illustrates the test set-up with each test com ponent identified by an encircled number. The test specimen was mounted on the MTS Synamic Test Frame Q) by a pair of 1-1/4" diameter bolt couplers. The dynamic load magni tude and frequency were controlled by the MTS Controlling Console and its function generator. A Tektronic 56A storage oscilloscope ©0 was used to analyze the loading fre quency and the magnitude of the load P(t).
Bolt displace ment,A, was measured by a pair of linear transformers moni tored b9 an XY recorder @
Furthermore, the overall move ment,4
, of the cross-head of the MTS loading frame was monitored by an XY recorder ().
The cumulative number of load cycles were recorded by a digital recorder in the MTS control console.
Page 7
Figure 13 illustrates the specific set-up for the shear, combined, and tension tests. The test specimen were mounted to the stationary part of the MTS Loading Frame by the 1-1/4" diameter bolts embedded on the test block.
The shear loads were applied with a loading jig to a pair of expansion bolts installed on the sides of the test specimen (see Figure 8 and Figure 13, A&B).
The combined load was applied to the expansion bolt by a loading arm which was installed on the inclined face of the test block.
The line of action of the machine load and the axis of the expansion bolt forms 450 angles such that the machine load will exert tension and shear load to the expansion bolt at an arbitrary ratio of 1 to 1 (see Figure 6 and Figure 13D).
The tension load was applied to the expansion bolt directly by a coupler on the loading head of the MTS Dy namic Test Frame (see Figure 7 and Figure 13C).
The line of action of the machine load coincides with the axes of the 1-1/4" embedded bolts and the expansion bolt.
3.3 Loading Sequences Static Test The static load capacity, S', was determined by a static test at a load rate not exceeding 5 Kips/min. to failure.
Dynamic Tests (Cyclic Loading) o Seismic Loading. The seismic loading was simulated by cyclic loads of a sine wave which had a frequency of 5 to 10 Hz and a load magnitude as follows:
Test Cycle/.
Total Cycles Period Maximum Load Second 1
.2S' 5
2,000 2
.2S' 10 4,000 3
.2S' 15 6,000 4
.3S' 10 6,600 5
.4S' 10 7,200 6
.5S' 10 7,800 7
.6S' 10 100,000 8
.6S' + 2000#
10 102,000 9
.6S' + 4000#
10 104,000 i
.6S' + (i-7)2000#
10 100,000 + (i-7)2000 Page 8
The actual zero was set at about 500 lbs. for avoiding impact effects. The tests for the first few specimen were performed at a frequency of about 2-5 cycles per second because the operator was not familiar with the characteristics of the MTS control console. Subsequent ly, the machine performance was increased to a fre quency of about 10 cycles per second.
o Dynamic S-N Type Fatigue Test (Vibratory Machine Loading)
The vibratory machine loading was also simulated by a sine wave load of two million cycles at about 20% S',
then the maximum load was repeatedly increased arbi trarily by 2000 lbs. every 2000 cycles until failure.
0.2 S' was chosen to establish a factor safety of 5 for the design capacity.
3.4 Recordings Static Tests The force vs displacement curve. P vs A B, of the bolt and the force vs cross heads displacement-, P vs A, were re corded by two XY recorders from zero load to he static capacity S'.
A typical static force displacement plot is illustrated in Figure 21.
Dynamic Tests In addition to the recording of the force displacement curves, the load cycles were recorded by a digital counter on the MTS Control Console. The XY recorders were turned on for about a dozen load cycles on each load increment for clarity of the printout. Figure 21 illustrates the typical dynamic force displacement curves.
3.5 Control Tests For each test a standard 6 x 12-inch control cylinder was tested to determine the static strength, fc', of the concrete within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to or after the load test.
4.0 TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The Test Results are presented in Report No. SI-74-1, December 1974 "Test Results on the Dynamic Testing of Ex pansion Type Concrete Anchors" by the Structural Engi neering Laboratory of University of California at Berkeley (Reference B).
The edited digest of the test data is presented in Tables 4 through 10, and in Fugures 21 through
- 29.
4.1 Static Tests Figure 21 illustrates a typical force-displacement plot for the static test. Generally the curve shows a linear re lationship from zero load up to point A, which is the yield point of the bolt/concrete assembly. The corresponding values, D and P, are the yield displacement and yield force. A ter poYnt A the slope of the curve flattens and, then increases slightly near the ultimate point B where the ultimate load Pu drops to zero (failure) at displacement Du.
The ratio of D to D -is the ductility ration, D, which is an index fo~the fXilure mode:
For D = 1.5, the test generally failed in a brittle mode which was caused either by a bolt failure or some other premature failure.. On the other hand a large ductility ratiodjsay for D > 5 was generally-the result of a slippage of the wed e during test ing. The ratio of the ultimate load, P, to the yield load, P, is P which is an index for the marhin of safety of the y eld va ue over the ultimate value. The value of P is usually less than 1.5. For P = 1, the test resultea either in bolt failure, or some other premature failure such as wedge slippage due to poor installation. Incidentally, experiment #113 was tested without setting of the wedge.
Figure 30 illustrates the force-displacement curve of this test. The bolt slipped about one half of an inch before the wedge was set for a normal loading. The corresponding bolt tension to set the wedge is about 4K which is about 20% of the static capacity of the bolt.
4.2 Dynamic Tests Figure 22 illustrates a typical force displacement plot for the dynamic tests. The envelope of the plot, represented by the dotted line, is the force displacement curve which also showed an apparent yield point A. After point A, the slope of the curve flattened and then increased again near the ultimate point B. Generally, the yield point A occurred at 6000 to 7800 load cycles of the dynamic load sequence.
At this point the force reached about 60% of the static capacity S'.
Subsequent alternating loading caused appre ciable wedge movement (or "Walking") without an increase in Page 10
the maximum load. If the bolt did not fail in a brittle mode due to pullout, or in some other premature failure mode, the "Walking" ceased after a certain number of load cycles and the slope of the force displacement curve showed a significant increase before the ultimate point B was reached (see Figure 31).
4.3 Tension Tests Figures 23, 26, and 29 are comparative bar charts of the test results on 5/8", 3/4", and 1" expansion bolts. The ultimate load capacities under alternating loading are about the same as the corresponding static load capacities. How ever, five out of six longterm fatigue tests failed in a premature manner either due to material imperfection or due to stress concentration effects. Since the bolts were in stalled with a portable drill, free-hand without any special effort to the accuracy in alignment of the bolt there were some offsets and inclidfations up to 3o between the line of action of the machine force T and the center line of the ex pansion bolt (see Figure 4).
This is considered typical for field installation. The offset and inclination produced bending in addition to tension on the stud of the expansion bolt. No records on the magnitude-of the offset and the in clination were available for a quantitative analysis.
In general there was no appreciable difference in the anchor values between the expansion bolts installed in regular con crete and in magnetite concrete. However, the anchor values of the expansion bolts in steel shot concrete were substan tially lower than those in the former two types of concrete.
This was attributed to the fact that drilling in steel shot concrete was more difficult than in other types of concrete.
The hole in steel shot concrete was formed basically by chipping off the steel shots as illustrated in Figure 11-A.
Consequently the holes in the steel shot concrete were ob served to be of larger average diameter than the holes in ordinary concrete or magnetite concrete. Due to extreme difficulty in measuring the hole diameter, the hole diameter was not measured. Generally there were three types of failure modes.
The first failure mode was the cracking of the concrete and tha-pullout of the bolts. The shell type bolts failed in this mode. Figure 14-A illustrates this mode of failure.. The second mode of failure was a simple pullout without cracking of the concrete. However, a shallow piece of concrete spalled off as the bolt was pulled out.
Figure 14-B illustrates this mode of failure. This pullout mode usually occurs with steel shot concrete test specimen.
The third mode was bolt failure either due to material im perfection or notch effect at the point of discontinuity Page 11
near the wedge. Figure 15-A illustrates a tension failure, on a Wej-It bolt initiated by the notch effect. Figure 15-B is another mode of bolt failure, and Figures 20-A, B, C and D illustrates some of the bolt failure due to mate rial imperfection.
4.4 Shear Tests Figures 24, 27, and 29 are comparative bar charts of the test results on 5/8", 3/4", and 1" diameter expansion bolts.
The tests were performed on a pair of expansion bolts in stalled on a test specimen. Again because of free-hand drilling of the holes and since no special adjustment was made to distribute the machine load uniformly between the two bolts, (see Figure 8) the test values indicate the average values for the pairs of bolts when the critical one failed. Three modes of failure were observed. The first failure mode was a bolt failure due to shear loading. The second failure mode wa a combined bending and shear fail ure which was initiated by partial pulling out of the wedge.
Figures 16 and 17 illustrate this mode of failure. The third failure mode was concrete failure which occurred only with 3/4" diameter or larger bolts. Although a stud type bolt has a much larger effective shear area and three times larger yield strength than the corresponding sleeve type bolt (see Figure 3) the test results indicated that there is practically no difference in shear capacity between stud type and sleeve type bolts. The shell type bolts (similar to Figure 1) had a larger diameter shell embedded in the concrete; however, the test results (Figure 24 Bolt LA's) indicated that they failed prematurely by pullout. Pre mature failures were observed for the shell type bolts in steel shot concrete (see Figure 27, Bolts LB, in SS).
Nevertheless, for expansion bolts in steel shot concrete the shear values were much better than the tension values.
4.5 Combined Tension and Shear Tests Figures 25, 28, and 29 are comparative bar charts of the test results on 5/8", 3/4", and 1" diameter expansion bolts.
Three modes of failure were observed. The first mode was a bolt failure due to the combined stresses of tension, shear and bending caused by the prying action of the loading arm (see Figure 9).
The second mode was concrete failure as illustrated in Figure 18-B. The third.mode was a simple pullout as illustrated in Figure 18-A, attributed to poor installation.
Page 12
The anchor values for the combined shear and tension tests were somewhat lower than the corresponding values for the tension tests or shear tests; however, because of the fact that the loading arm for the combined load test tends to impose a prying effect on the expansion bolt and the test block was too small to provide adequate strength for the prevention of premature failure, we cannot draw a quanti tative conclusion from the test results.
Page 13
5.0 CONCLUSION
S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions The following conclusions may be drawn from the test results:
- 1. All expansion bolts tested have successfully withstood the 6000 cycles of 0 to.2 S' alternating load as designated for seismic qualification.
- 2. The dynamic load capacities of the expansion bolts are about the same as their corresponding static load capacities.
- 3. The expansion bolts which had no apparent material im perfections or installation errors withstood two million cycles of long term fatigue loading at about 0.2 S' maximum intensity and then established dynamic load capacities which were as good as or stronger than the corresponding results of the static tests.
Even those expansion bolts which failed prematurely due to material defects or installation error withstood a minimum of 386,000 cycles at 0.2 S' maximum intensity.
- 4. The expansion bolts can take combined tension and shear loading as well as the tension load or the shear load by itself. There seems to be no specific reason to prohibit the use of expansion bolts for combined tension and shear loading.
- 5. The anchor values of expansion bolts in regular con crete and in magnetite concrete are about equal, how ever, those in steel shot concrete are about one half to two thirds of the corresponding values in regular or magnetite concrete. The cause of this behavior is attributed to thalarger average diameter of the holes in the steel shot concrete.
- 6. Although shell type expansion bolts tested have a larger diameter shell embedment in the concrete, their anchor strength was only half as good or no better than that of the sleeve type bolts or stud type wedge anchors tested. The cause of the inferior behavior may be attributed to the relatively small expansion re quired for setting the shell anchors and the shorter length of embedment.
- 7. A significant number of expansion bolts (about 10% of the test specimens) failed by pull-out or fracture of bolt in a premature manner because of material imper fections. A material imperfection tends to augment the Page 14
effects of stress concentration at the notch of the wedge or at the root of the threads. Furthermore, installation quality could also have induced unde sirable bending effects on the expansion bolts.
5.2 Recommendations Based on the above conclusions expansion bolts are con sidered acceptable for use on the FFTF project with the following provisions:
- 1. The admissible types of expansion bolts should be limited to sleeve type anchors equal to Phillips Read Head Sleeve anchors and to stud wedge anchors equal to the HILTI QUIK BOLT and similar stud bolts manu factured by Rawl and Pardoolt.
These two types ap pear to be least affected by the workmanship of the bolt installation, and they also have the flexibility for an adjustment of their embedment depth to meet the requirement of-,item 2 below.
- 2. The wedge of the expansion bolts should be embedded between or behind the near side reinforcing steel.
- 3. The allowable anchor values shbuld be established with a factor of safety of 5 with respect to the static capacity of the expansion bolts.
In no case should the values be greater than the lowest dynamic test data, even if that bolt failed prematurely.
The allowable anchor values for each bolt tested are indicated in Figures 23 through 29 with horizontal bars.
- 4. A redundancy rule should be imposed on the design of the equipment mount anchors such that 50% of the ex pansion bolts will be able to sustain the design load with a factor of safety not less than 2 with respect to the static capacity. The disc spring washers re quired in item 1 will serve as a device to identify any impaired expansion bolts during service.
Furthermore, although they are not directly derived from the test results, the following items are recommended for the assurance of the integrity and reliability of the ex pansion bolts:
- 1. A pair of spring washers should be placed on every expansion bolt according to Figure 3. These spring washers should be sized to produce a bolt tension of (1 + 0.4) 5, where S is the maximum allowable anchor value.
Page 15
- 2. All expansion bolts should be set with the lowest practical torque within the range recommended by the manufacturers. This torque requirement will prevent overstressing the studs beyond the yield point, assure proper setting of the wedges, and partially proof load the studs, (under the manufacturers recom mended minimum torque the studs may be stretched to about the yield point of the material for the smaller sizes)
- 3. A minimum bolt spacing of 12 bolt diameters and minimum edge distance of 6 bolt diameters should be enforced.
- 4. The smallest bolt diameter should be 1/2" and the allowable anchor values should be extrapolated ac cording to the net cross sectional area of the stud at the root of threads. The maximum bolt size tested was 1 inch diameter, and a larger diameter bolt size should not be used without further investigation.
- 5. Test requirements for quality assurance. Due to the fact that measurement of the hole diameter will be a laborious and generally fruitless task, it is recom mended to apply Q/A to the final product rather than to the workmanship of the bolt installation. The test ing procedures shall be establ-ished to expose sub standard workmanship of a craft for corrective action, before the same mistake is repeated.
Page 16
6.0 FUTURE STUDIES This investigation was conducted to develop and to qualify specific expansion bolts for use on the Fast Flux Test Facility. The tests performed were inadequate in quantity to establish statistical data for general application.
Also, due to limited test data, a much higher factor of safety than that commonly used for engineering design are recommended to establish allowable anchor values, and many additional restrictions are recommended to assure the in tegrity and reliability of the expansion bolts.
In order to remove some of these restrictions, additional tests should be performed. Specifically, the following items are of immediate interest for additional investigation.
- 1. Establishment of verified data for general application of expansion bolts.
- 2. Establishment of the minimum bolt tension which is re quired for setting the wedges. The torque require ments established py the manufacturers cannot establish a uniform bolt preload because of possible variation in bolt threads friction. Also setting the expansion bolts to a specified torque will cause additional quality assurance measures such as calibration and maintenance of tools for installation of the expansion bolts.
Figure 30 shows that the anchor could possibly be set by a bolt tension of about 0.2 S'.
Additional tests should be carried out to establish the minimum bolt ten sions which are necessary for setting the wedges. Then the expansion bolts could.be installed by turning the nuts to set the gap between the spring washers to match a specified feeler gage.
- 3. Investigate the effepts of embedment depth, and setting the wedge against or near the rebar.
- 4. Development of a simple jig for minimizing of the human factors in the drilling of holes.
Furthermore, the manufacturers should establish a quality control program to minimize material defects in their bolts and also modify the geometry of the expansion bolts to mini mize stress concentration effects.
Page 17
7.0 ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1 Fatigue Cracks on a Phillip Read-Head Self-Drilling Anchor Fig. 2 Sleeve Type Anchors and Stud Type Anchors Fig. 3 Anchor Plate Installation by Drilled-in Expansion Bolts Fig. 4 Specimen for Tension Test Fig. 5 Speciman for Shear Test Fig. 6 Specimen for Combined Load Test Fig. 7 Couplers for Tension Tests Fig. 8 Loading Jig for Shear Tests Fig. 9 Loading Arm for Combined Load Tests Fig. 10 Cyclic Loading of Seismic Peak Response Fig. 11 Drilling and Installation of Expansion Bolt Fig. 12 General Test Set-up Fig. 13 Test Set-ups for Shear, Tension, and Combined Load Tests Page 18
ILLUSTRATIONS (Continued)
Fig. 14 Typical Failure Modes for Tension Tests Fig. 15 Failure Modes, Tension Test on Wej-it tolt and Fatigue Test Fig. 16 Typical Failure Modes for Shear Tests Fig. 17 Failure Modes for Shear Tests on Steel Shot Concrete Fig. 18 Failure Modes for Combined Load Tests Fig. 19 Fatigue Failure Due to Stress Concentration Fig. 20 Premature Failures Due to Material Imperfections Fig. 21 Typical Force Displacement, P vs H' Plot (Static Test)
Fig. 22 Typical Force Displacement, P vs B Plot (Dynamic Test)
Fig. 23 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 5/8 Inch, Tension Fig. 24 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 5/8 Inch, Shear Fig. 25 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 5/8 Inch, Combined Fig. 26 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 3/4 Inch, Tension Page 19
ILLUSTRATIONS (Continued)
Fig. 27 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 3/4 Inch, Shear Fig. 28 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 3/4 Inch, Combined Fig. 29 Comparative Bar Chart for Expansion Anchor Bolts, Bolt Dia. 1 Inch, T, V and C Fig. 30 Minimum Bolt Tension for Setting an Expansion Bolt Fig. 31 Wedge Movement, "Walking", During the Cyclic Loading Page 20
FIG, 1 - FATIGUE CRACKS ON PHILLIP READ-HEAD SELF-DRILLING ANCHOR Page 21
JI SLEEVE TYPE ANCHORS STUD TYPE WEDGE ANCHORS FIG. 2 SLEEVE TYPE ANCHORS AND STUD TYPE WEDGE ANCHORS Page 22
SLEEVE TIYPE ANCHORS Disc Spring
- Washers STUD TYPE ANCHORS Stud Type nchorPL Dt o
ID
'rie a
Io'Hole I
b, 0
A CONVENTIONAL METHOD B
FFTF METHOD FIG. 3 ANCHOR PLATE INSTALLATION USING DRILLED-IN EXPANSION BOLTS Page 23
4 05 ARS 7
EQ. SR4CED 1*-
/5 70"v LIA. SP/AL 02 e 2 TV/ED,AWVN AT LAS T ONE RE VOt lT/ON 4 A 325 eOLT 9"L.
Oa I-U3 4
x lXPASiiON BOLT FIG.
4 SPECIMEN FOR TENSION TEST Page 24
I
/yz-o
/A4IN 4325m BOLT 9 L 6.
E*4 Io CL-IT
-/O" D/A. -SP/RAL # 2 & 2 "
/5' PV/ENDS9 A&4J/AG AT LEAST (er 2'
-ONE/
COMPLETE REV LG.
5SPECIME.
SPACED Page 25
74 AO *D/A. 5P/RAL #2 C?"
WI/END5 HqAV/H AT LEST rE COfPL ETE rEV&OL1 uT/Co Ii
'0 4 #3 94RS
/*4/A.
A72580LT EQ. SPACED
.9" L.
C4 I h Expansion FIG. 6 SPECIMEN FOR COMBINED LOAD TEST o
P a g e 2 6
V/A. COUPLER BYUC.
- 7.
/F's
& F COUPLER q *x
,4'UAC THREAD
/x
/4, FIG. 7 COUPLERS FOR TENSION TESTS Page 27
24 2V
.IfA COPE'R BY U.C
--s' D/4 A/LW 4CIOR BOLT MSHER
-- +
'0
/'4 D/A 4325 8OLT /'L G.
ILIL 141 1 lo4. ROID 20 oCR T4o 9/.COUPLER BY QC.
2V FIG. 8 LOADING JIG FOR SHEAR TEST Page 28
I P0 DA.COUPL ER B. C.
AZL
/
D/A UC TD ROD 6 "L C
/4 D/4. COUPLER BY UC.
/ / D/4 HOLE IBUS//NG TO 4CC4OOD144/
.411CHOR OLT (S/Z Es, 5"14,
/eJ FIG. 9 LOADING ARM EDR COMBINED LOAD TEST Page 29
5.0111 4 x Reduced Scale 0
72g Peak Response
-5.0g (c) Equipment Motion Magnified 6.6 x at 5 HzE, =5% Damping P
L4 1I (X 1g Full Scale 0
(b) Floor Motion Filtered and Magnified Zx by Building Model at 5 Hz,
=% Damping 0.5g Full Scale 0
0.g0 5
105 Tim, sec (a) EA Centro (N-S) Motion at Ground Level tandom sine wave response of an equipment and building model resonance excited by random horizontal earthquake motion (El Centro-1940)
FIG. 10 CYCLIC LOADING OF SEISMIC PEAK RESPONSE Page 30
C CLOSE-UP OF SHEAR B SPECIMEN FOR SHEAR TEST LOADING ARM TEST A DRILLING FOR SHEAR TEST ON STEEL SHOT CONCRETE FIG. 11 DRILLING AND INSTALLATION OF EXPANSION BOLT Page 31
LEGEND
- BOLT DISPLACEMENT B
H : X-HEAD DISPLACEMENT H
P : COMBINED LOAD T : BOLT TENSION V : BOLT SHEAR FIXED EA/
COUPLER LU
=
9 MTS LOADING FRAME MTS CONTROL CONSOLE TECTRONIC SCOPE, P(T) 77777*:XY RECORDERA vs P XY RECORDER,A vs P COMBINED LOAD TEST BLOCK FIG. 12 GENERAL TEST SET-UP
......Pacge 32
B SHEAR TEST A SHEAR TEST SIDE VIEW FRONT VIEW D COMBINED LOAD TEST C TENSION TEST FIG. 13 TEST SET-UPS FOR SHEAR, TENSION AND COMBINED LOADS Page 33
I~
N Li~&.
V. 4, i*~
i f g
T 7"
p
.Q'i uA*
A TENSION TEST ON ELARHO CONC.
FIG. ~
TENSPCAFILUTE MODESTEEL SHOTSIONCTST Page 34
4r:
1:;
, 0 A
TNINTS NVE-TBL I,
t 4s FIG.15 AILUE MDEA TENSION TEST ON WEJ IT BOLT ADFTGETS age3
'ryn A SHEAR FAILURE REGULAR CONCRETE B SHEAR FAILURE MAGNETITE CONC.
iz FIG. 16 TYPICAL FAILURE MODES FOR SHEAR TESTS Page 36
A SHEAR FAILURE STEEl. SHOT CONC.
-r,
-S 1
c at B SHEAR FAILURE STEEL SHOT CONC.
FIG. 17 FAILURE MODES FOR SHEAR TESTS ON STEEL SHOT CONCRETE Page 37
I::7
_41 It ktIN tV~&4' R.-At.
.~
.~
.~
t
- 7.
a!.
.~
.~?
B COMBINED LOAD FAILURE MODE (SLEEVE BOLT) 0FIG.
18 FAILURE MODES FOR COMBINED LOAD TESTS
'4 Page 38
-x I4 FIG.
19 FATIGUE FAILURES DUE TO STRESS CONCENTRATION Page 39
4 7i
~A A
FIG 2
PEMTUR FILRE DU T
MTEIALIMERECIO Vnffim An
I L
a~~cA 3Z
-rr..jz TFT T~.
7 i.
-II PectmemI A_
_W_.4 32 4W ZE W4'IIi~i~.~
I~i I'J4.
- I11,
- 4.
O~~.Y'
~
it if t I
.L2. f{~i~74T IIPAC N IH INCES FIG.. 21 TYICAL FORCE DIPAEET4PV#4 LT SAI ET
~ ~~~~~~~
44--~
4 -FT 4
j.44.
- 4.
-~
~
fit 7_rw-v
- t jH4i-Ti
.. r:
It I!-
i9
- 44.
F K
11i44 I
4..
.t F1 I
I 0
- H I t I
.7711-7 LU_
I I
i 1L I q ft.
zi I
-A
[&7, 774
-T 0
p1
.- L...
.-jj A.6.0 I NO
.00
.60 12 1
=.1in D =1.05 in Dy DSLCMNA (ICE)U FIG. 22 TYPICAL FORCE DISPLACEMENTO P VS AoPLOT (DYNAMIC TEST)
o('
-'/
N O
0 U
H1o HO
'NII 4J 44J 10
-d 41 (d'
C)'
Z Z
E-*
r Ar-r-42.~
H
-1 vH HWH 44 H
0 I4 4
0 (1) 0J Lm :3 E0
-44 0
(UN Ln~~
- 14.
C14Ns HH r-HJrjE4A 0
s 0Ho Test Medium
-I h--
o Type of Load TENSION LOAD
- For ANCHOR BOLT CODE see Table 3
-~
. 1.
Allowable Lad FIG 23 CnOPRAuE BA CHART FOR EXPANSIN ANCHOR BOLTS, BOLT DIA, 5/8 INCH, TENSIOU
ULTIMATE LOAD, P, in Kips 00
- 1. 0 Sh.'prta 9,171.
then btnt an she'are twad>t{
-0 32, 1.9, 18j C-)
fi 5,29.0
-2Shl 0 ed-oor a tway, of o.t 39,1.7 1.0 c2., 21.0
)-Brittle oe 8.0,1.,3 1.0 9.2, 2,0
.0, 5.8oo ~gnetofO I
Ii
____ Mode 81.0,12
, 1 0 c)33.
,1.5, 1.0 )-Brittle qode 23, 3.0,1.)
II I
0 0
r STATIC TEST
- ~~ O 1
7 m
I DYNAMIC NDRPR 0
oN: f Toal Load Cye q:N mb 0 ef4 so rC DR=DU/DYD ucR S.jiy Ratio O0 0
0 a m *A P PR=PU/PY w
- -J 0 n
- (L oo o.{
10 rn I
I
-1~01
-J, 5.
m m
0 E-44 0~~0 Z
0 Q41 M
OM q4
-4 S4 o
Test Medi-m I C I
un!
to 01)1 00~~
~~
'1..
D EGN 04a CIA o Type of Load COMBINED LOAD
- For ANCHOR BOLT 4
-CODE see Table 3 Max.
Allowable Load 0
K ]OR L
[LL-SA
-SB Ls FIG. 25 COMPARATIVE BAR CHART FOR XPANSION ANCHOR BOLTS, BOLT DIA.
5/8 INCH COMBINED
ULTIMATE LOAD, P, in Kips CD(,C)
-n 0=
N3 Pull-out 1 3 6!.7
- 2.
9.7, 2.4, 1.4 000, -j -,
IDU =.03", B lt Failur e 535 Stud S eared, Mat 'l Imperfctio Pull-out) poor instal lation 107.8, 2.5, 3.2 102, 2.9, 2.5 C
Pull-out, po r installati nj
-n110, 2 6, 1.9 Pull 6.8-Poo; inst&llatio.
-0
_Conc.
failuie 100, 4.2, 1.2
-z-1,l441.
14, 1.0 Bolt failed CD, 117_
-051 1.5 1.8 00m i---
f
- 108, C) 86, 3.0, 1.0! Bolt sheared Mat'1 2 5, 2.2 C/)
Imperfection' 94 1.4, 1..
]10, 1.5, 1.4 Pul-e0*
I.
- 102, 5,1 0
0 STATIC TEST 00O
-4 T>
m t'
1w 2
0 DYNAMIC N,DR,PR N:Nmbof To a
n 0
0aTIGU N,DR,PR O N: Nu of T tal Load Cy 19 x
0-C1 EDR
=/8uece y Ratio CIA PR=PU/PY m
U 0
0
-b>
1 01 O4 J!14 r0
,4J E
O D.
1F-100 1
p f d
> 1 9.44 "1
- 94.
I I1 4H
~I
~
0 0~~~~
0 es edu 0>
C R
-S R-14 4j WO 1A S
- C C144 EO4E pop9.
T ye o9Iad 10 AS.
SHAR LOAD
/ NHSHEAR
>ULTIMATE L.D.,
Kips en C
-n
)-
Con. 5r cBedo the n Conc. fa lure 39.5, 1.0, 1.0 tu.Bor sher 63.3,-
1 0 C,5,
)67, 1,.0 Pull-Otu Bolt sheared
-n.
Conc. fa lure IC-h 41.6 5.5, 16 Stud she red 7.9 1.0 1P0 Pull-Out CD
~10.7, 1.0, 1.0 Pull-out 2005, 29, 4.0 C)l 102, 2.0,
- 1. 5 )
ailure 7118, 5.? 2.0 Bolt failed C/)84,
- 1.,1.0 Bolt faile4 14;
.2006,
.4, 1.2 Bolt sheared Conc cracked, tt en'ptill-out 102, 2.0, C.
1104, 1.2, 1.8
_rr Bolt fail ure H
M STATIC TEST F"~
0 4
m gw t=;
DYNAMIC N,DRPR 0
e":
o U
N,DR,PR 00 q 0
=
I N:
66Oo 1
a~
Load Cyclo DR=DU/DY=Dueility Ratio
- aPRPU/PY (Dt-
>1 l.-T 5
1-15 asson
- gg
- SA-SA 'S 0
to Co_
0 I
9.E-4 LOA TENSION
-HA COMINE r-4 FI._oCMARTVFRCHRFREPASO ANCHOR BOLTSCORBOLT DeD S0 Type o
&ESO-LLOADSE~
FIG.~ ~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~~~~~~~o 29HO COPRTVBARCATFRPNSOLNHRBLTTBL IS1 NHT CODE se Tbl Al-owable**oad LOAD~~~~~RGUA CONC.
N:
SEA 1
CMBN FIG-29 COMPARATIVE BR CHART FOR EXPANFor ANCHOR BOLTSIBL I.IC.T
1109 NOISNVdX3: MUM.L3 HIOiNOISN~IL.lOq WOWI'NIW Oi '91 I1o MI IIa osilOII a.4 A
- 1*I it
, b vit 7:::~ a liiit.TIIt...IT I~
1, Rw-~*
ii, r~C2~
l ilt 1-1!
i il. 3e I~~~
I, I T.A1
-11
-I
-i M
1 4~IIT Ih111171 I t-It 144t7 K
I-It t..i;'..
........r
....... ~v
)
FIG 31 WEDE MVEMNT
'WL I MDRN H CCI ODN
8.0 TABLES Table 1 Summary of Test Schedule Table 2 -
Embedment Depth of Expansion Bolts Table 3 -
Code for Types of Expansion Bolts Tested Table 4 -
Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 5/8 Inch Bolts Tested in Tension Table 5 -
Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 5/8 Inch Bolts Tested in Shear Table 6 -
Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 5/8 Inch Bolts Tested in Combined Tengion and Shear Table 7 -
Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 3/4 Inch Bolts Tested in Tension Table 8 -
Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 3/4 Inch Bolts Tested in Shear Table 9 -
Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 3/4 Inch Bolts Tested in Combined Tension and Shear Table 10 Results of Anchor Bolt Test Program 1 Inch Bolts Page 52
FFTF TESTING-PROGRAM FOR DRILLED-IN EXPANSION TYPE CONCRETE ANCHORS TABLE 1
SUMMARY
OF TEST SCHEDULE Con-Type and Type of Loading crete Size of Type of Static Dynamic Reserve Mix Concrete Code Testing S'
D Phillips Red LB-5 NT 2(2) 1(0)
Head Sleeve NV 2(2) 1(0)
Type HN Service T
2(1) 2(2) 1(0) 5/8" Dia.
V 2(2) 2(2) 1(15')
C 2(2) 2(2) 1(0)
Parabolt SB-6 NT 2(0) 1(0)
Stud NV 2(0) 1(0)
Wedge Anchor T
2(2) 2(2) 1(0) 5/8" Dia V
2(2) 2(2) 1(0)
C 2(2) 2(2) 1(0)
Rawl Stud SA-6 T
2(2) 1 Type Anchor V
2(2) 1 5/8" Dia.
C 2(2) 1 Wej-it SC-5 T
2(2) 1 V
5/8" Dia.
V 2(2) 1 Ow C
2(2) 1 Hilti Shell LA-5 T
2(2) 1 c
Type 5/8" V
2(2) 1 r
C 2(2) 1(15')
Hi ell LA-6 T
2 1
4 Type 3/4" V
2 1
C 2(2) 1 Typical Stud SP-6 T
2(2) 2(2) 1(2NT)
Type, 3/4" V
2(2) 2(2) 1 C
2(1) 2(2) l(1NC)
Phillips Red LB-6 T
2(2) 2(2) 1(2NT)
Head Sleeve V
2(3) 2(2) 1(0)
Type HN C
a(2) 2(2) 1(0)
Typical Stud SP-8 T
2(2) 2(2) 1(0)
Type, 1" V
2(2) 2(2) 1(0) c
_)
?_2(2) 1 f(o Sub-Total 30(28) 62(52) 31(7)
NOTES:
- 1. Rawl Stud Anchors, Parabolt Stud Anchors or Hilti Kwik-bolt Anchors were used as the Typical Stud Type Expansion Bolts.
- 2. Type of Loading:
S' -
Static loading 3
D -
Dynamic loading
- 3.
Type of Testing:
6 o NT, NV, NC:
Long term (2 x 10 cyales or more) fatigue test for tension shear, and Combined Load, respectively.
o T, V, C: Tension, Shear, and Combined Loads.
- 4. Number in parenthesis indicates the actual number of specimens tested.
Page 53
FFTF TESTING-PROGRAM FOR DRILLED-IN EXPANSION TYPE CONCRETE ANCHORS TABLE 1
SUMMARY
OF TEST SCHEDULE (Continued)
Con-Type and Type of Loading crete Size of Type of Static Dynamic Reserve Mix Concrete Code Testing R
Typical Stud SP-6 T
2(2) 2(2) 1 (1NT)
- Type, 3/4" V
2(2) 2(2) 1 (1NV) 0_H C
2(1) 2(2) 1 (lNC)
-o Phillip Red LB-6 T
2(2) 2(2) 1 we 0 Head Sleeve V
2(2) 2(2) 1 Type HN, 3/4" C
2(2) 2(2) 1 Sub-Total 12(11) 12(12) 6(3)
Typical Stud SP-6 T
2(2) 2(2) 1 Type, 3/4" V
2(2) 2(2) 1 C
2(2) 2(2) 1 Phillips Red Head LB-6 T
2(2) 2(2) 1 Head Sleeve V
2(2) 2(2) 1 Type HN, 3/4" C
2(2) 2(2) 1 Sub-Total 12(12) 12(12) 6(0)
TOTAL Total Test Specimens 54(51) 76(76) 43(12)
Total 6" x 12" Control Cylinders 54(51) 76(76) 43(12)
Page 54
TABLE 2 EMBEDMENT DEPTH OF EXPANSION BOLTS Min. Depth Embedment Bolt Type Size Recommended by Depth Manufacturer for Tests Stud Type 5/8".
2-3/4" 3-1/2" Wedge Anchor 3/4" 3" -
3-1/4" 3-1/2" -
4-1/2" 1"
4-1/4" -
4-1/2" 4-1/2" -
5-1/2" Sleeve Type 5/8" 2"
2-1/2" Anchor 3/4" 2"
3-1/2" -
4-1/2" Shell Type 5/8" 2-3/8" 2-1/2" Anchor 3/4" 3-1/4" 3-1/4" Page 55
TABLE 3. CODE FOR TYPES OF EXPANSION BOLTS TESTED Expansion Bolt Type/Size Code Manufacturer Hilti Shell Type 5/8" stud, 27/32" shell LA-5 Hilti Shell Type 3/4" stud, 1" shell LA-6 Hilti Stud Type Hilti Fastening Systems 5/8" dia. stud SH-5 Stamford, Connecticut Hilti Kwik-bolt Stud 3/4" dia. stud SH-6 Hilti Kwik-bolt Stud 1" dia. stud SH-8 Molly Parabolt Stud 5/8" dia. stud SB-5 Molly Parabolt Stud USM Corporation 3/4" dia. stud SB-6 Shelton, Connecticut Molly Parabolt Stud 1" dia. stud SB-8 Phillips Red-head Sleeve 1/2" dia. stud, 5/8" dia.
LB-5 sleeve Phillips Drill Company, Inc.
Michigan City, Indiana Phillips Red Head Sleeve 5/8" dia. stud, 3/4" dia.
LB-6 sleeve Rawl Stud Anchor 5/8" dia. stud SA-5 Rawl Stud Anchor The Rawlplug Company 3/4" dia. stud SA-6 Rawl Stud Anchor 1" dia. stud SA-8 WEj-it Stud Anchor 5/8" dia. stud SC-5 Weij-it Stud Anchor Wej-it Corporation 3/4" dia. stud SC-6 Broomfield, Colorado Weij-it Stud Anchor 1" dia. stud SC-8 Page 56
TABLE 4 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 5/8 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN TENSION BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE LB-5 REG 5.60 STAT 12.0
.25 13.0
.40 1.6 1.1 BOLT FAILURE LA-5 REG 7.49 DYN 6.6
.08 7.8 10.0
.22 102 2.8 1.5 CONC FAILURE LA-5 REG 6.20 DYN 7.8
.06 7.8 10.6
.14 101 2.3 1.4 CONC FAILURE LB-5 REG 4.50 DYN 11.0
.20 10.2 11.0
.45 11.7 2.3 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-5 REG 4.40 DYN 6.8
.15 22.0 6.8
.20 71 1.3 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-5 REG 6.10 FAT 2.6
.25 3.0 2.6
.35 504 1.4 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-5 REG 5.50 FAT 9.0
'.28 2052 12.8
.47 2056 1.7 1.4 BOLT FAILURE SB-5 REG 6.54 STAT 8.0
.20 14.4
.40 2.0 1.8 PULLOUT SB-5 REG 6.20 STAT 11.6
.35 11.6
.80 2.3 1.0 PULLOUT M SC-5 REG 6.86 DYN 10.7
.15 7.8 10.7
.20 102 1.4 1.0 PULLOUT SC-5 REG 6.55 DYN 11.0
.10 100 12.6
.20 101 2.0 1.1 PULLOUT SA-5 REG 5.50 DYN 15.0
.32 106 118.6
.60 110 1.9 1.2 PULLOUT SA-5 REG 6.86 DYN 8.6
.50 7.8 12.6 1.0 102 2.0 1.5 CONC FAILURE SB-5 REG 6.30 DYN 4.0
'.10 6.0 16.0
.75 112 7.5 4.0**
PULLOUT SB-5 REG 6.60 DYN 5.0
.05 6.6 12.0
-.50 102 10.0 2.4 PULLOUT
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
Wedge walked 0.35" from 4K load at 6000 cycles to 7K load at 8000 cycles. See Fig. 31.
TABLE 5 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 5/8 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN SHEAR BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE LB-5 REG 4.90 STAT 9.5
.45 10.0
.70 1.6 1.1 BOLT SHEARED LB-5 REG 5.00 STAT 8.5
.20 12.0
.70 3.5 1.4 BOLT SHEARED LB-5 REG 6.87 STAT 8.0
.30 8.6
.40 1.3 1.1 BOLT SHEARED LA-5 REG 6.22 DYN 4.8
.15 7.8 4.8
.30 51.0 2.0 1.0 BOLT SHEARED LA-5 REG 6.52 DYN 4.8
.15 7.8 4.8
.25 39.0 1.7 1.0, BOLT SHEARED LB-5 REG 4.50 DYN 7.2
.20 7.8 7.2
.40 31.6 2.0 1.0 BOLT SHEARED LB-5 REG 5.50 DYN 7.2
.35 7.8 7.2
.65 32.0 1.9 1.0 BOLT SHEARED LB-5 REG 5.80 FAT 8.2
.30 2006 13.2 1.10 2000 3.7 1.6 BOLT SHEARED m LB-5 REG 7.17 FAT 7.3
.30 2000 13.3 1.0 2010 3.3 1.8 BOLT SHEARED SB-5 REG 6.20 STAT 14.0
.15 16.5
.45 3.0 1.2 BOLT SHEARED SB-5 REG 5.90 STAT 8.0
.10 110.5
.17 1.7 1.3 BOLT SHEARED SB-5 REG 6.40 DYN 10.0
.10 7.8 10.0
.20 9.2 2.0 1.0 BOLT SHEARED SB-5 REG DYN 9.0
.22 7.8 9.0 10.2 1.0 BOLT SHEARED SC-5 REG 6.40 DYN 7.2
.15 7.8 7.2
.23 33.9 1.5 1.0 BOLT SHEARED SC-5 REG 6.64 DYN 7.2
.25 7.8 7.2
.75 23.0 3.0 1.0 BOLT SHEARED SA-5 REG 7.16 DYN 9.6
.17 7.8 9.6
.45 17.9 2.6 1.0 BOLT SHEARED SA-5 REG 6.77 DYN 9.6
.30 7.8 9.6
.35 8.0 1.2 1.0 BOLT SHEARED
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
TABLE 6 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 5/8 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN COMBINED TENSION AND SHEAR BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE LA-5 REG 6.11 STAT 10.0
.20 11.2
.95 4.7 1.1 BOLT FAILURE LB-5 REG 5.80 STAT 8.0
.20 11.8 1.0 5.0 1.5 PULLOUT LB-5 REG 5.30 STAT 8.0
.30 11.4 1.1 3.7 1.4 PULLOUT LB-5 REG 5.70 DYN 7.0
.05 7.2 7.0
.46 41 9.2 1.0 PULLOUT LB-5 REG 5.00 DYN 7.2
.15 7.8 7.2 16.5 2.7 1.0 BOLT SHEARED LA-5 REG 6.61 DYN 6.6
.07 7.8 6.6
.07 7.8 1.0 1.0 PULLOUT LA-5 REG 5.92 DYN 6.6
.07 7.8 6.6
.07 7.8 1.0 1.0 PULLOUT SB-5 REG 4.90 STAT 11.6
.07 11.6
.10 1.4 1.0 CONC FAILURE m SB-5 REG STAT 6.8
.12 10.6
.43 3.6 1.6 CONC FAILURE SB-5 REG 5.80 DYN 6.6
.07 7.8 6.6 17.9 1.0 BOLT SHEARED SB-5 REG 6.10 DYN 6.6
.10 7.8 19.6
.35 102 3.5 1.5 BOLT SHEARED SC-5 REG 6.70 DYN 6.6
.27 7.8 6.6 28.0 1.0 PULLOUT SC-5 REG 6.20 DYN 6.6
.05 7.8 6.6
.07 15.6 1.4 1.0 PULLOUT SA-5 REG 6.50 DYN 6.6
.09 7.8 6.6
.10 22.0 1.1 1.0 PULLOUT SA-5 REG 6.30 DYN 6.6
.15 7.8 6.6
.45 37.0 3.0 1.0 PULLOUT
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
TABLE 7 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 3/4 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN TENSION BOLT*
CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE LB-6 REG 7.16 STAT 14.8
.78 15.4
.98 1.3 1.1 PULLOUT LB-6 REG 6.91 STAT 9.4 PULLOUT LB-6 REG 5.51 DYN 7.8
.15 7.8 15.6 1.01 103 6.7 2.0 PULLOUT LB-6 REG 7.24 DYN 7.0
.40 7.2 9.7
.96 9.7 2.4 1.4 PULLOUT LB-6 REG 6.08 FAT 2.6
.02 1.0 4.2
.03 2000 1.5 1.6 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 REG 6.38 FAT 2.6
.05 1.0 2.6
.15 535 3.0 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 MAG 6.17 STET 16.6 PULLOUT LB-6 MAG 6.20 STAT 3.7
.01 5.6 1.5 PULLOUT LB-6 MAG 6.17 DYN 4.0
.05 6.0 13.0 1.26 107.8 25 3.2**
CONC FAILURE m LB-6 MAG 6.15 DYN 5.0
.03 7.2 12.5
.76 103 29 2.5***
CONC FAILURE LB-6 SS 6.27 STAT 2.8
.02 4.0 1.4 PULLOUT LB-6 SS 6.29 STAT 4.8
.38 7.2 1.05 2.8 1.5 PULLOUT LB-6 SS 6.20 DYN 3.4
.38 7.8 6.4
.97 110 2.6 1.9 PULLOUT LB-6 SS 6.24 DYN 2.2
.83 6.8 PULLOUT SB-6 REG 7.49 STAT 17.3
.50 17.3
.50 1.0 1.0 PULLOUT SA-6 REG 7.44 STAT 22.0
.35 22.0
.35 1.0 1.0 PULLOUT SA-6 REG 6.86 DYN 10.0
.25 7.8 18.2
.45 105 1.8 1.8 PULLOUT SA-6 REG 7.12 DYN 10.0
.18 7.8 21.8
.45 108 2.5 2.2 CONC FAILURE SA-6 REG FAT 4.0
.01 4.0
.03 386 3.0 1.0 BOLT SHEAR SA-6 REG FAT SB-6 MAG 6.93 STAT 8.0
.04 14.2
.15 3.7 1.8 CONC FAILURE SA-6 MAG 7.05 STAT 8.0
.05 25.5
.42 8.4 3.2 CONC FAILURE SB-6 MAG 6.78 DYN 13.6
.10 7.8 15.7
.42 100 4.2 1.2 BOLT FAILURE SA-6 MAG 7.07 DYN 13.6
.18 7.8 13.6
.26 94 1.4 1.0 BOLT FAILURE
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
Wedge walked 1.0" from 4K load at 6000 cycles to 7K load at 8000 cycles.
e Wedge walked 0.45" from 5K load at 6000 cycles to 7K load at 8000 cycles.
TABLE 7 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 3/4 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN TENSION (Continued)
BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE SA-6 SS 6.50 STAT 12.0
.30 15.6
.60 2.0 1.3 PULLOUT SB-6 SS 7.38 STAT 6.0
.40 7.6
.60 1.5 1.3 PULLOUT SA-6 SS 7.33 DYN 9.6
.21 7.8 13.6
.30 101 1.5 1.4 PULLOUT SA-6 SS 7.58 DYN 8.4
.27 7.8 14.4
.40 102 1.5 1.7 PULLOUT SB-6 SS 7.61 FAT 3.2
.05 3.2
.70 1440 14.0 1.0 BOLT FAILED b
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
TABLE 8 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 3/4 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN SHEAR BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE LB-6 REG 6.78 STAT 10.7
.30 14.6
.85 2.8 1.4 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 REG 6.67 STAT 14.0
.40 15.8
.65 1.6 1.1 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 REG 7.35 DYN 8.9
.27 7.8 8.9
.80 27.5 3.0 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 REG 6.54 DYN 8.9 1.10 7.8 8.9 19.8 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 MAG 6.54 STAT 11.5
.34 16.2 1.4 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 MAG 6.57 STAT 12.5
.40 14.1
..90 2.3 1.1 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 MAG 6.48 DYN 8.7
.25 7.8 8.7 k,55 39.6 2.2 1.0 BOLT FAILURE LB-6 MAG 6.70 DYN 8.7
.27 7.8 8.7 1.25 26.9 4.6 1.0**
BOLT FAILURE LB-6 SS 6.40 STAT 9.4
.17 11.0 1.20 7.0 1.2**
PULLOUT LB-6 SS 6.96 STAT 13.0
.40 14.0
.60 1.5 1.1**
PULLOUT LB-6 SS 5.16 DYN 5.4
.22 7.8 5.4 34 1.0**
PULLOUT LB-6 SS 6.43 DYN 5.4 1.10 7.8 5.4 7.8 1.0**
PULLOUT SH-6 REG 5.87 STAT 15.0
.23 16.4
.30 1.3 1.1 BOLT SHEAR SA-6 REG 6.10 STAT 15.1
.15 17.0
.20 1.3 1.1 BOLT SHEAR SB-6 REG 6.38 DYN 10.0
.13 7.8 11.7
.25 101 1.9 1.2 BOLT SHEAR SA-6 REG 6.68 DYN 10.0
.20 7.8 10.0
.25 18.7 1.3 1.0 BOLT SHEAR SA-6 MAG 5.81 STAT 19.0
.25 21.0
.33 1.3 1.0 CONC FAILURE SH-6 MAG 6.08 STAT 17.0
.30 18.9
.70 2.3 1.1 BOLT FAILURE SH-6 MAG 5.87 DYN 12.0
.30 7.8 12.0
.80 8.1 2.7 1.0 BOLT FAILURE SB-6 MAG 5.49 DYN 12.0
.20 7.8 12.0
.25 8.1 1.3 1.0 BOLT FAILURE SA-6 SS 7.30 STAT 12.0
.20 16.0
.30 1.5 1.3 CONC FAILURE SH-6 SS 6.84 STAT 10.0
.15 13.0
.22 1.5 1.3 CONC FAILURE SB-6 SS 7.44 DYN 9.2
.20 7.8 9.2
.40 36.4 2.0 1.0 PULLOUT SA-6 SS 7.10 DYN 9.0
.10 7.8 13.1
.19 103 1.9 1.5 CONC FAILURE SA-6 SS 7.23 FAT 2.9
.05 17.0 10.0
.16 1504 3.2 1.0
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
Wedge slipped after P
TABLE 9 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 3/4 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN COMBINED TENSION AND SHEAR BOLT*
CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE LA-6 REG 7.10 STAT 13.3
.55 13.3
.55 1.0 1.0 PULLOUT LA-6 REG 7.12 STAT 12.0
.16 12.0
.16 1.0 1.0 CONC FAILURE LB-6 REG STAT 6.0
.15 10.4
.50 3.3 1.7 CONC FAILURE LB-6 REG 5.85 STAT 8.4
.14 14.5 1.7 CONC FAILURE LB-6 REG 6.43 DYN 6.0
.10 6.6 7.2
.80 39.5 8.0 1.2**
BOLT SHEAR LB-6 REG 7.01 DYN 7.2
.32 7.8 7.2 63.3 1.0**
BOLT SHEAR LB-6 MAG 8.14 STAT 5.8
.08 15.4
.46 5.5 2.7**
CONC FAILURE LB-6 MAG 8.07 STAT 7.2
.09 14.2
.93 10.3 2.0**
CONC FAILURE LB-6 MAG 8.07 DYN 6.4
.07 7.8 6.4
.07 67 1.0 1.0 PULLOUT LB-6 MAG 7.90 DYN 6.4
.09 7.8 6.2
.15 95.5 1.7 1.0 BOLT SHEAR LB-6 SS 7.65 STAT 9.6
.11 11.2
.94 8.5 1.2**
CONC FAILURE LB-6 SS 6.38 STAT 8.6
.12 11.2
.41 3.4 1.3**
CONC FAILURE LB-6 SS 8.77 DYN 6.3
.11 7.8 6 25
.60 44.6 5.5 1.0**
STUD SHEAR LB-6 SS 6.86 DYN 6.4
.14 7.8 6.40
.14 7.9 1.0 1
PULLOUT SB-6 REG 7.17 STAT 13.0
.30 13.0
.30 1.0 1.0**
PULLOUT SA-6 REG 6.86 DYN 13.2
.50 7.8 13.2
.50 107 1.0 1.0**
PULLOUT SB-6 REG 6.71 DYN 6.5
.10 7.2 11.8 1.0 102 10.0 1.8***
PULLOUT SA-6 REG 6.22 FAT 8.0
.13 2000 10.3
.29 2005 2.2 1.3 CONC FAILURE SA-6 MAG STAT 11.4
.20 11.4
.20 1.0 1.0 CONC FAILURE SB-6 MAG STAT 12.0
.02 15.4
.23 11.5 1.3**
CONC FAILURE SB-6 MAG DYN 8.0
.20 7.8 14.6
.24 104 1.2 1.8 CONC FAILURE SA-6 MAG 8.62 DYN 8.2
.04 7.8 12.0
.08 102 2.0 1.5 CONC FAILURE SB-6 SS 7.90 STAT 10.4
.17 10.4
.17 1.0 1.0 BOLT FAILURE SA-6 SS 8.14 DYN 5.0
.08 7.2 10.0
.43 71.8 5.4 2.0***
BOLT FAILURE SA-6 SS 8.53 DYN 6.1
.17 7.8 6.1
.26 84.0 1.5 1.0 BOLT FAILURE SA-6 SS 8.09 FAT 5.0
.24 2000 6.0
.35 2006 1.4 1.2 BOLT SHEAR
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
Wedge slipped after P Wedqe walked after P
TABLE 10 -
RESULTS OF ANCHOR BOLT TEST PROGRAM 1 INCH BOLTS 1 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN TENSION BOLT*
CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE SA-8 REG 6.96 STAT 26.4
.60 26.4
.60 1.0 1.0 CONC FAILURE SB-8 REG 6.13 STAT 16.0 1.0 22.5 1.20 1.2 1.4 CONC FAILURE SB-8 REG 7.00 DYN 15.8
.65 7.8 20.8
.85 101 1.3 1.3 CONC FAILURE SA-8 REG 5.69 DYN 16.0
.10 7.8 26.0
.33 103 3.3 1.6 CONC FAILURE 1 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN SHEAR BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE SA-8 REG 6.66 STAT 18.4
.20 19.4
.20 1.0 1.0 CONC FAILURE SA-8 REG 7.14 STAT 17.0
.20 17.2
.40 2.0 1.0 CONC FAILURE SA-8 REG 6.36 DYN 10.9
.25 7.8 19.0
.66 76 2.6 1.7 BOLT FAILURE SA-8 REG 6.10 DYN 10.9
.10 7.8 15.2
.25 106 2.5 1.4 CONC FAILURE 1 INCH BOLTS TESTED IN COMBINED TENSION AND SHEAR BOLT* CONC F'C TEST PY DY CYCLE PU DU CYCLE DR =
PR =
FAILURE TYPE TYPE KSI TYPE KIP IN KC KIP IN KC DU/DY PU/PY MODE SB-8 REG 6.02 STAT 7.5
.10 13.0
.25 2.5 2.6 CONC FAILURE SA-8 REG 7.14 STAT 12.6
.25 12.6
.25 1.0 1.0 CONC FAILURE SA-8 REG 6.52 DYN 8.0
.14 7.8 8.0
.34 74 2.4 1.0 CONC FAILURE SA-8 REG 6.77 DYN 8.0
.36 7.8 11.6
.57 102 1.6 1.5 CONC FAILURE
- See Table 3 for anchor bolt code.
9.0 REFERENCES
A. Static and Dynamic Loading of 5/8-inch Concrete Anchors, an unpublished report No. 7745.10-72, August 10, 1972, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Department of Engineer ing Research.
B. Test Results on Dynamic Testing of Expansion Type Concrete Anchors, Report No. SI-74-1, December, 1974, Structural Engineering Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California.
C. Specification 5853-C-81 (HWS-2230) Installation of Drilled-in Expansion Bolts, for the Fast Flux Test Facility of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Richland, Washington by Bechtel Power Corporation, San Francisco, California.
Page 65
10.0 APPENDICES A.
Use of Expansion Anchors, Document ID C-1450, Bechtel Power Corporation Interoffice Memorandum from H.W.
Wah1 to Group Supervisors, dated May 10, 1973.
Page 66
BR-5853-C4 Appendix A FFTF REPORT DRILLED-IN EXPANSION BOLTS UNDER STATIC AND ALTERNATING LOAD APPENDIX A TESTING PROGRAM FOR DRILLED-IN EXPANSION TYPE CONCRETE ANCHORS FOR THE FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY RICHLAND, WASHINGTON FOR THE UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA Page 67
TESTING PROGRAM FOR DRILLED-IN EXPANSION TYPE CONCRETE ANCHORS
- 1. Objectives and Scopes The objective of this test program is to establish the design loads (tension, shear, and combined) of a drilled-in expansion type anchors. The design loads will be established from a fatigue S-N testing program for 1. installation of vibratory equipments, 2. seismic anchors for ASME Code Section III Class 1 pipings and vessels, and 3. general equipment and piping anchors.
The scope of this testing program includes a dynamic testing of stud and shell type expansion bolts for three bolt dia meters (5/8", 3/4", and 1"), from five makers (Hilti, Para bolts, Wej-it, Phillips, and Star), embedded in test block made of FFTF concrete mixes. The details of testing are presented in the Testing Schedules of this program.
The dynamic testing will be carried out by the Engineering Material Laboratory of University of California at Berkeley.
The test blocks and-dontrol cylinders will be cast and shipped to the testing laboratory by Bechtel Field Engineers. The test data will be analyzed as soon as they are available for establishment of the design values for the anchor bolts.
- 2. Test Program Basic data on dynamic behavior will be obtained from two types of fatigue S-N testing; NT and NV series for long term fatigue which may be caused by dynamic loads of steady state machine vibrations; T (tension), V (shear), and C (combined) series for low cycle fatigue which may be caused by dynamic loads similar to those experienced during an earthquake. Static tests will also be conducted to establish the static capacity, S', of the anchor values as the basis for establishment of the magnitude of the dynamic loads for the fatigue S-N testing.
2.1 Variable parameters considered in this test program are as follows:
o Diameters -
5/8", 3/4", and 1" o Types of Anchors:
SA =
Rawl Stud Type Expansion Anchors SB =
Parabolt Stud Type (wedge type)
SC =
Wej-it standard anchor bolt Page 68
SP =
Typical Stud Anchors TBD based on test results LA =
Hilti Shell Type Expansion Anchors (HDI)
LB =
Phillips Read Head Expansion Anchors (HN)
LC =
Star Shell Type Expansion Anchors LP
=
Typical Shell Anchors TBD based on test results o Concrete Types:
R
=
FFTF Regular Concrete 4000 psi Mix M
=
FFTF Magnetite Concrete 5000 psi Mix SS
=
FFTF Steel Shot Concrete 5000 psi Mix 2.2 Test Specimens and Loading Jigs Figures 1, 2, and 3 illustrates the test specimens for Tension (T), Shear (V) and Combined (C) loading test. The combt'ned loading consists of a constant T and V ratio which is set equal to one. The loading couplers and loading jigs for the T, V, and C type loading are illustrated in Figures 4, 5 and 6. For each test specimen one 6 x 12 in. control cylinder will be prepared.
The test specimens, loading jigs and couplers, and the control cylinders will be prepared by Bechtel Field Engineers and shipped to Davis Hall, University of California (Attention: Roy Stephens) for testing.
2.3 Static and Dynamic Loading Sequences 2.3.1 Static Test. The static load capacity, S',
is determined by a static test at a loading rate not exceeding 5K/min.
2.3.2 NT and NV.long term fatigue test. This test starts with a cyclic load of 10 cycle/sec. with magnitude of 0.1 S' for two million load cycles (N=2x106 ). If the specimen does not fail, increase the magnitude of the cyclic load by 0.05S' and apply the load at 5 cps for a duration of 60 seconds. Repeat this later loading process until failure.
2.3.3 T.V. and C low cycles fatigue test. These dynamic loads are applied according to the following sequence:
Page 69
Cumulative n
Load Magnitude Cycles/Sec.
Duration Sec.
Cycles, N 0
0.1 S' 5
30 150 10 30 450 15 30 900 5
30 1050 10 30 1350 15 30 1800 5
60 2100 10 60 2700 15 60 3600 1
0.15 S' 5
60 3900 2
0.20 S' 5
60 4200 3
0.25 S' 5
60 4500 n
(0.1+0.05n) S' 5
60 3600+300n Remark:
The initial loal and the load increments will be adjusted according to the initial test results to expedite the testing.
2.4 Test Schedule Table 1 illustrates a summary of the test schedule for 60 static testings and 82 dynamic testings. For each dynamic testing a duplicate test will be performed.
If the results of the two tests fall within +/-15% of the average value, the average value will be used for derivation of the design value.
If the results of the two test varies more than 15% from the average value, a stand-by specimen is reserved for the third testing.
In this instance the average value of the three tests will be used for derivation of the design value.
The test specimens will be cast on the weeks of June 3, June 24, and July 15.
Testing will be started on'the weeks of June 24, July 15, and August 5. If there is any delay on the casting date the testing will be delayed on day-by-day basis. The tests are scheduled to be finished by the end of August, however, the test results will be analyzed for project use as soon as they are available. The detail casting and testing sche dules are listed in Table 2. (Only schedule for the first casting is prepared by May 31, 1974.
The rest will be transmitted as soon as they are complete.)
Page 70
- 3. Testing Medium The test specimens are cast from concrete mixes for Regular 4000 psi concrete, Magnetite 5000 psi concrete, and Steel Shop 5000 psi concrete. The proportions of the corresponding concrete mixes are specified in Mixes C-lP, M-225-C, and IM-290-C of Specification HWS-1420 (5853-C-21) for FFTF project.
For each test specimen an accompanying 6 x 12 in. control cylinder shall be cast from the same batch of concrete.
The test specimen and its control cylinder shall be marked with the same identification number and batch number. The test specimens and control cylinders will be prepared and shipped to Davis Hall, University of California at Berkeley by Bechtel Field Engineers.
The testing will be conducted at a minimum of 21 days of concrete age. Testing of three to eight specimens (4 static and up to 4 dynamic), from the same batch of concrete, will be conducted in a day.
Three control cylinders shall be crushed and average compressive strength noted during a twelve-hour period immediately proceeding and/or following any testing series.
- 4. Testing Procedures 4.1 Anchor Installation 4.1.1 Holes for anchor test specimens shall be drilled in accordance with published recommendations of manufacturer as to hole diameters and depths.
Equipment used for hole drilling should be of the type commonly used for field installations and testing data should note brand, model number, and size of power tool and drill bit used.
Hole drilling shall be done without using special drilling jig not commonly used for field instal lations.
4.1.2 Test holes for anchors of the self-drilling type shall be drilled with the anchor to be tested in accordance with the published recommendations of the manufacturer as to drilling procedures and equipment.
4.1.3 The test holes shall be thoroughly cleaned out and the diameter of each hole shall be considered as the average of measurements taken at a point equivalent to one anchor diameter or one-quarter Page 71
of the depth of maximum imbedment, whichever is smaller, from the face of the test block, and at approximately the point of maximum imbedment of the anchor. These diameters shall be noted and regarded as part of the test data.
4.1.4 All test anchors shall be installed perpendi cular to the surface of the test block.
4.1.5 Installation and "setting" of the anchors shall be in accordance with published recommendation of the manufacturer and such pertinent data as anchor imbedment depth (if appropriate, torque required for setting), etc. shall be observed and noted by the testing laboratory and/or other witnessing agency.
4.2 Testing and Equipment 4.2.1 Tests are to be conducted using the 500k MTS Dynamic Testing Frame and its related control equipment and instrumentation located in Davis Hall, University of California, Berkeley campus.
4.2.2 Test Arrangement and Readings The test set-up is shown on Figure 7. The readings consist of dial gage readings, D, for anchor displacement, load magnitude, F, and cumulative load cycles, N. A XY recorder shall be used to record the overall displacement of the MTS loading frame versus the applied load.
4.2.3 Testing A static test shall be performed to determine the static load capacity, S', prior to the dynamic test. The loading sequences for dynamic tests are described in Section 2.3 of this test program.
During dynamic testing the dial gage shall be read at the maximum loads and at mean load values. For the first three tests on each type of concrete (Regular, Magnetite, and Steel Shot),
the displacement readings shall be continued up to failure load. Thereafter, the displacement readings may be discontinued at about 1/8 inch of displacement.
The total numbers of testing are 60 and 82 for static and dynamic testing respectively. A tentative casting and testing schedule is presented in Table 2.
Page 72
4.2.4 Test Data and Test Reports A copy of test data shall be transmitted to Bechtel, San Francisco Home Office (SFHO) as soon as they are available. SFHO Engineers will process these data for derivation of the design values for FFTF project use. At the end of this test program, U.C. will submit a test report to Bechtel. The U.C. Test Report shall include all reduced test data and photographs of test equipments, test set-ups, and typical failure modes of the test specimens.
Page 73
FFTF TESTING-PROGRAM FOR DRILLED-IN EXPANSION TYPE CONCRETE ANCHORS TABLE 1 SUMM!ARY OF TEST SCHEDULE Con-Type And crete Size of Type of Static Dynamic Reserve Anchors.
Testing S'
D R
NT 2
1, NV
- 2.
1 LB 5 T
2, 2
1 (6+10+5)
V 2
2
- 1 C
2 2
1 NT 2
1 NV 2
1 SB 5 T
2 2
.1 (6+10+5)
V 2
2 1
C 2
2 1
SA T
2 1
SC V
2 1
m 2(0+6+3)
C 2
1 o
LA T
2 1
ri 0
LC V
2 1
2(0+6+3)
C 2
1 14 Sp T (NT)* 2 2
1 6
(
Lp V (NV)-
2 2
1
-P 0
2(6+6+3)
C.
2 2
1
- 0)
Sp 8T 2
2 1
V.
2 2
1 o4 2(6+6+3)
C 2
2 1
3 52 14W0 Sub-Total 30 52 31 T
Sp T(NT)*
2 2
1 Ma o
Lp V (NV)* 2.
2 1
o 04 2(64-6+3)
C 2
2 1
'oe
- 00.
o0x Sub-Total 12 12 6
0 T (NT)*
2 2
1 to Lp V (NV)*
2 2
1 4n 2(6+6+3)
C 2
2 1
00 W
O x Sub-Total 12 12 6
W.
'Total Test Total Specimens 54 76 43 We0 Total 6"xl2" 54 76 43 Control Cylinders Pace 74
- 4.
TABLE -1 (Continued)
LEGEND
- Type of Anchors LA:
Hilti Shell Type LB:
Phillips Shell Type LC:
Star.
LP:
Typical SA:
Hilti Stud Type SB:
Parabolt Stud Type SC: Wej-it Stud Type SP: Typical Stud Type*.
- Typical anchors to be detern.ned based on test results
- Size of Anchors 5:
5/8" dia.
6:
3/4" dia.
8: 1" dia.
e Type of Testing 6
NT, NV:
Long term (2x10 cycles or more) fatigue test for tension and shear respectively.
T,V,C : Low cycle (5000 + cycles) fatigue test for tension, shear and combined loading respectively.
Page 75
74OLE 2 TEST/MG SCHEDULE FOR F/RST C4ST/N6 j-YPE'-
nep_
C..
12 CHOR R-
_F 11 7
A) 0
.5'r-1
-A-7"7
.*9 C
'U
-r DiD I
r 1-----
a-
&1...-.....
~
C j...
LEVzF.'A j4 PT
-A I.1
-r-
/on.
.748LE 2 TES77M SCHEVULE FOR FIRST C4STING
.E yPE '
Y rle OF 15 4 Is I I/
it 11d it8r.1 W
3 1 1CIP9 rEsr 26 LL.. kGEA C4 6
C
__0_.r, o
6 DYNAMIAC 0
oSA/
-5
-5 0
C 0
fl Al r
0C 0
F A11104
(
SY rI
.qr7 C ~
OF L2 o
-i I___ _o_
DYN4MoC
-O
TA E 2 TES T/VG SCHEDUL E FOR FIRST C45TNG 7
y-YPE TYPE 0o1 or DYNA4M/C F
ow.
/U NONT 3
rt.
I A__
7
~-
EGEN 0-
7ABLE 2 TES T/NG SCHEDULE FOR SECO/D C457/N6 SEPTEfBER s
YPE
- YPE Or or I
- 41. v--
r 9
F
.T---
-LEGEND 4
DYNA/f!.
.I A.5
/ 9 Lp
- p
/
A Fr-
J AlL E TES7 T/VG SCHEDULE FOR E
r
- MTWTFS OF T
T 9
TYI tor I.~;.11 0
/
o O
I
/ n4 r, 7
.:4
'f j/6.
I
$115_
r~JLI _-_---___
P-E_/
K1" !,~L
~-
o L~~ F42.'E Fr..-
-A
-77.
rt_._____VO_*_'_
Lh3A/f......LL-Fr.- on.~J ~I
___'IL..L
-I nn. -- Thvr II M
Fri i
-n
.5 4
TABLE 2 TEST/N6 SCHEDULE FOR T1-I/RD cASTING 1TES I,
I.
SMTWYFS tA UL, 9G PAT W 5 PT M
R II AiM5e ETTYPE
- 3 to T
Oo
- t 1-
-s
-0 J::__
A'aE AAHOD q_
A._5 I.T A
- P6-I Y
A
/-T
/51
/
-'0 t
0 I
,9_____.__
70 zzt 1 z A
A
_SMW___
~~4.
~~.- -..
D..-
- ___sfS I_
/*
o I
7()
-OI-
TABL E 2 TES T//N SC/HEDUL E FOR 77//RD C65 ING U-y SEPTEMBEf/R OCTOSt R e
?
a ri 4
j E
TYPE 1
YPE rnt 5OFc u
a I
I r
~s o16 F
G A4veC/IOR TEiST ~?!S7)2
/6 123
.. L.....
. J1...
5 II n
/__
b.t o.
LEGEND Tues.- Fr LE3
.YA/
C
-I
/o
'A wa__
SS Fr-M Fr.
fo
__-Fri Mon R o 6 -7 1...
Afon-Thor R_-
Tr n
Ar-onU-SS5 S'o6 A'-T
-fr_.-
Pr
__l
-I
TABLE 2 TES TING SCHEDUL E FOR 7/I/PD C4ST/t6 EPT/~fEP
~TCER OC TOBER A
OA'm 0107; 11,1 60,7 2773 N2526
-,ilm
'13*.? 15 7 11 t II AVC/-/OP TEST 21 n._
EEEN
.1"I-T4 T
CDt TYPE-TYPE---
orL OF
~
.AVN~I&
-/
-T 1
.KJ1
___jl
-S1!g9
- ___, i a
z21::____
3_-3
/6237_/__
-JT-4-TIC_
I Fr._,a.E Y/4M
-or.__
T_
- ~ ~~
71
/____________
[4
3k.
CALCULATION SHEET FAST FLUE T7.ST FAC!LITY y ~ a t
- DAYW Pgc?/'I LED - N I-XPANS;VN TypE c0v,VET -aNCog~
q EQa.5PACEO CA 5TMNA; P(GUZAR 1.,4qGNETITE sTEEL SHoT 4000 PSI 5.OO0OPJ1
.1000,05/
-~~
____m MIX A'
I L.
/
ATE 6 -2874_
CWT R.:VO'L U72LW A
T--
I lk FIG I, SE I
Irl YINTs
CALCULATION SHEET rASTFL1X TEST FACILITY arJoe we DQ1 OP/L £-IN EXPANSION TYPE COCRETE AMVCOF 4u6 12
-c-C4S/NG REGtAR dAgNET/TE STEEL SHOT 4CEDLE *.000105/
- 5. oo P/
A 000 as/
. ILDE 6-2<-74 1
11 I I
c Gl./AH77TY O
,r'DrA. JP/RAL '2 e2*
s M//0NS HAV/m/4r AT LEAST DAT 1
&E COMPLEWT REP
/
OUAHTry
'-7
_0 ZD/ AA25
& e'j4RS
.0 LT9L6.
I I
111,~
.r*
A -
V C
1 I15/
1 c.. -----.
I FIG 2 SPEC/MVr FOR SHEAR 77ST
CALCULATION SHEET FAST LWX TEST FACTLITY suner DATE TITSX JOB0 No_
a a
ar
/L LED -
IV EXP0ANSION*A YPE CONCRE T OMA/OET A'zHEE "a 3
C45771NG REGULAR MAGNE6 T17E S~tELs'C Li~CEOA 4.000 P51.5. 000 P51 A 00O PS/
MIXMIX MIX I
.1.1 DATE 6-28k_
~~~~
LT.U
,oi~
ALS 8LTDATrE 7-22-_
EQ. SPACED QUA9iT 6
,oE
- .*I ch
- ,Jc
- u FIG. 3 SpECMLWV FoR5 COMB/MEvD Tesr a p 0'
CALCULATION SHEET FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY TT DATI 09/L LED -///
EXPANS/OA' TYPE COMCR'ETE 4/chVC/iq SET*
- 4 0A. COZPIER 16r vC.
.A4LE -FEM4LE (MF)
COUPLER 80 r-FF L
.o t F.4LOADVG coupLErRS FOR TENvS/oN TEST
CALCULATION SHEET FAST FLUX TEST FACILITT SIGNAUE___________
DATE TITLE Jo o
hif suswer~~ ~~~~
D.L
-I EXPANS/.N TYP 4
O-EE.N7R swa o.....
/ Aw D/A. COAW
.B
/.
c Pr" I
-- 11 4
- i
/ C L4 ROD o-as W1s-of rYo L
/1410/A4. COWLER Flar 5 to sG R sAR Es.r (2 JIGS REQCE)
CALCULATION SHEET FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY meAsUsr DAlE sui re
/L L ED -IN EXPANSION TYPE CONCRE TE ANCHOR.
' D4/A. CO/PLER Br 6UC.
.1 AAGORA ccc EL
- 0L1/ jV484 MC THRA0ED ROD 6'.
/4* D14. COUPLER BY tIC.
W.4 ACCMOE A//C//ORI 80L~
L 6.
l:l FI6; 6 L OADINj. JI6 Foq COM6/M5D TE5T (2 JI6S AQI'O
CALCULATION SHEET FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY SUNADATE JOB NO w LLEp XPA'S/ON TYPE CONCRETE 4AMCMOR sME o..
MT-075 STAr'OAIRY FRAME CO(FLER 7ESr. SFEC/MEN we 40 C)
DIA L GAG6E READIN, D
COWCL ER
.ff LM$ LOADN6 FRAME' LOAD AA'PLUDE, F IV-LOADOAD9V6PPA N= CUWATVE LOAD CCLES IG 7 - TST SET-UP
& READINZS. D, N/
sp V
'*