EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF JAPAN LIFE’S
FINE CERAMICS INSERT (FCI)
Submitted to:Japan Life Co., Ltd.
Tokyo, Japan
Prepared by:
Abdeldjelil Belarbi, Ph.D., PE, Distinguished Professor&
Abdelmounaim Mechaala, Ph.D. Post Doctoral Fellow
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Houston

July 6, 2023

Author’s Disclaimer - “The contents of this report reflect the views of theauthor(s), who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented
herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view of the University of
Houston, or Japan Life Co., Ltd.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5

2

Scope of Work ......................................................................................................................... 6

3

Preliminary Review of FCI as reported by Japan Life Co. ................................................ 6

4

Design Codes And Guidelines For Testing Anchors Performance .................................... 8
4.1 Design strength and limits (ACI 318-19) ............................................................................. 9
4.1.1

Design Limits ......................................................................................................................... 9

4.1.1.1

Concrete ............................................................................................................... 9

4.1.1.2

Anchors : .............................................................................................................. 9

4.1.2

Design strength (ACI 318-19) ............................................................................................... 9

4.1.2.1

Steel strength of anchors in tension, 𝑁𝑠𝑎 (ACI 318-19 (17.6.1)) ..................... 12

4.1.2.2

Concrete breakout strength of anchors in tension (ACI 318-19 (17.6.2)).......... 12

4.1.2.3 Pull-out strength of single cast in the anchor and single post-installed
expansion, screw and undercut anchor in tension (ACI 318-19 (17.6.3)). ........................ 15
4.1.2.4

Steel strength of anchor in shear (ACI 318-19 (17.7.1)). ................................... 15

4.1.2.5

Concrete breakout strength of anchor in shear (ACI 318-19 (17.7.2)). ............. 16

4.1.2.6

Concrete pryout strength of anchor in shear. (ACI 318-19 (17.7.3)). ................ 17

4.2 Testing procedures (ASTM-E488-22) ............................................................................... 18

5

4.2.1

Tension Test Equipment(ASTM-E488-22)........................................................................... 18

4.2.2

Shear Test Equipment (ASTM-E488-22) ............................................................................. 19

4.2.3

Testing Specimens and loading protocol ............................................................................. 20

Analytical analysis for FCI according to ACI 318-19........................................................ 20
5.1 Expected Failure modes for FCI ........................................................................................ 20
5.2 The Shape and Specimen Size ........................................................................................... 21
5.3 ACI 318-19 Prediction ....................................................................................................... 23

6

Experimental program ......................................................................................................... 25
6.1 Test Matrix and Fabrication of Test Specimens ................................................................. 25
6.2 Material and Mechanical properties ................................................................................... 27
6.2.1

FCI ...................................................................................................................................... 27

6.2.2

Concrete and Steel anchors ................................................................................................. 27

6.3 Experimental setup and testing Protocol ............................................................................ 29
6.3.1

Tension Test......................................................................................................................... 293

6.3.2

7

Shear Test ............................................................................................................................ 32

Experimental results ............................................................................................................. 36
7.1 Tension Test ....................................................................................................................... 36
7.1.1

Pull-out Tension Test: Center ............................................................................................. 36

7.1.2

Pull out Tension Test: Edge ................................................................................................ 40

7.2 Shear Test ........................................................................................................................... 42
7.2.1

Pull-out Shear Test: ha >1.5Ca1 .......................................................................................... 42

7.2.2

Pull-out Shear Test: ha <1.5Ca1 .......................................................................................... 46

8

CONCLUDING REMARKS ............................................................................................... 52

9

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... 53

10 References .............................................................................................................................. 54
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................ A-1
Appendix B.................................................................................................................................. B-1
Appendix C ................................................................................................................................ C-1
Appendix D ................................................................................................................................ D-1

4

1

Introduction

To connect structural elements with each other or to fix non-structural components and systems toreinforced concrete structures, different types of anchors can be used with different mounting
systems. These anchor types can be divided broadly into two categories: post-installed and cast-in
anchors, where each anchor type has different performance specifications and failure modes. The
cast-in anchors are installed in place prior to concrete (e.g., headed bolts, headed studs, and hookedbolts), while the post-installed anchors are installed inside a pre-drilled hole (e.g., expansion andundercut). The selection of the specific anchor type is based on the requirements of the project.
Some research has been carried out to understand the behavior of the anchors according to how
they are mounted in reinforced concrete structures and the load they carry. In addition, the anchor
characteristics and concrete properties have a major impact in determining the failure modes thatcan occur when the anchored systems are loaded (e.g., concrete breakout, steel failure, concrete
splitting, bond failure, etc.), which can lead to the detachment of the fastened item and cause
structural damage. To avoid such failures, having accurate prediction models and design equationsof the anchor capacity under different load loading conditions (tension, shear, combination oftension/shear, and combination of shear/moment) is, therefore, important. Furthermore, the anchors
can experience different modes of loading such as monotonic, cyclic, fatigue, and sustained
loading, the effect of which is also important to predict with reagrds to anchor capacity and failure
mode.
Numerous studies have dealt with rupture modes under load-displacement behavior (Fuchs et al.
1995, Elgehausen and Balogh 1995 Cook e al. 1998, Ghobarag et al. 2004 Eligehausen et al., 2006,
Al-Taan et al. 2012, Jin-Sup et al. 2013, etc.). In more recent investigations, and by way of example
but not all-inclusive, many researchers have investigated systems with different failure modes ofthe post-installed anchors for both bonded and mechanical anchor types (Sharnouby and Naggar,
2010, Jin-Sup et al. 2013, Delhomme et al. 2018, Mahrenholtz and Eligehausen 2015). Other
researchers have focused on anchors covering a wide range of cast-in anchor types and associatedfailure modes ( Furche and Eligehausen 1991, Delhomme and Debicki 2010, Pallar´es and Hajjar
2010, Lee et al. 2018, Kaipei and Ožbolt 2021, Karmokar et al. 2021).
Corrosion of the steel anchors in the concrete leads to detachment of the fastened item and causes
structural damage due to losses of the anchor properties. Based on accumulated experience andresearch that was done in order to ensure the durability of structural elements with anchors subject
to corrosion, it has become more strongly recommended for the material of the insert to be resistant
to corrosion (Japan Life Co., Ltd 2011). For this purpose Japan Life Co., Ltd has introduced
Alumina ceramics, which is the constituent material of the Fine Ceramic Insert (FCI). It is claimed
that it is a half of steel in weight, the hardest material next to diamond, and is strongly resistant toacids and alkalis. The FCI is the insert that does not corrode nor generate causes of salt damage. In
addition, the FCI is already widely used for infrastructure projects in Japan, including hanging
scaffoldings under the bridges, and other segmental structures. FCI is also considered for fixing

5the superconducting coils of Maglev. Japan Life is also consulting with JR Railway TechnicalInstitute to do the testing of FCI for applying PC railway sleepers.

2

Scope of Work

The overall objective of this research project is to test the FCI inserts under tension and shear andcompare the results to ACI318 design equations. The FCI are tested under monotonic loading
conditions based on the US standard testing protocols. In the following parts, a preliminary reviewof the FCI anchors according to the Japan Life Co. report is presented. Design codes and guidelines
for testing the anchors’ performance according to the ACI code are also included. In consultation
with the sponsor, the failure mode anticipated and targeted for both tension and shear tests isthrough concrete breakout (cone failure) though other types of failure could govern the test results
as shown in Figure 3. As such, all specimens were designed to achieve concrete breakout failure.
Furthermore, specimen had no reinforcement as directed by the sponsor. Note that specimens withthickness less than 3.0 ℎ𝑒𝑓 (and no supplementary reinforcement), the splitting failure may occur
before reaching the concrete breakout strength.The experimental program included two main steps:(1) tension tests for anchors located at the center and edge of concrete blocks, and (2) shear tests
for different cases described in detail in Section 6. Both series of tests were performed at the UH
structural laboratory based on the testing procedures in ASTM-E488. The test results should
provide a good prediction behavior model of the FCI that satisfy the ACI requirements (ACI31819) for the concrete breakout strength.
The RT who contributed to the preparation of the deliverable is composed of the Principal
Investigator, Dr. Abdeldjelil Belarbi of the University of Houston, who serves as Project Manager,
and Post-Doctoral Associate, Dr. Abdelmounaim Mechaala of the University of Houston.

3

Preliminary Review of FCI as reported by Japan Life Co.

According to the FCI technical report of the Japan Life Co., Ltd (2011), the FCI is very compatible
with concrete and due to FCI’s constituent materials, it does not corrode nor cause corrosion to
occur. All of the problems inherent to date with the use of conventional metallic inserts have been
resolved when using these inserts. The Japan Institute of Construction Engineering (JICE), in
November 1998, awarded a Technical Evaluation Certificate to FCI for the use of FCI for hanging
scaffoldings in prestressed concrete bridges. Since the beginning of its sales, FCI has been
continually developed and improved to meet the changing requirements of the constructionindustry. All FCI products do not allow cement fluids to flow into the threaded area of inserts
during concrete placement (Japan Life Co., Ltd). In 2002, the Japan Prestressed ConcreteContractors Association (JPCCA) issued the publication “Guideline for design and application of
inserts for outrigger scaffoldings for wheel guards and bridge railings:” The FCI range of productsthat comply with the requirements of this document was updated at that time. In April 2005, JPCCA
published “Guideline for Design and Application of Inserts” and the aforesaid 2002 Guideline was6discontinued. Upon the occasion of the issue of this new guideline, the technical data for FCI wasonce again updated. In July 2005, the technical data related to the fire resistance of FCI was
supplemented. In October 2008, a new integral type of FCI range was introduced: FCI was
redesigned with the sleeve and body molded into one part before being fired. All of the new FCI
range was tested independently by the Japan Testing Centre for Construction Materials (JTCCM).
Testing of types and lengths, M12 x 60 and M16 x 65, 75, 85 were conducted. Results of the pullout tests of the embedded inserts confirmed that the new one-piece integral FCI type had the sameor equivalent strength compared to those of the previous two-part types. Also for larger sizes suchas M20, M22, and M24, the integral type of FCI has been developed to meet a variety of needs.
Figure 1 shows different sizes of the one-piece integral FCI.

Figure 1. Different sizes of FCI (Japan Life Co., Ltd, 2011).
The FCI contains more than 96% of the purity of Alumina for the parts of the body. The FCI does
not cause any bimetallic corrosion to steel reinforcements, and the integral wedge-shaped bodysecures firmly the effects of anchoring. The strength of the body at its parts having threads for the
M12 and M16 (see Figure 1) are more than 11.55 kips and 21.54 kips, respectively. More details
about the mounting methods and examples of uses are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Mounting methods and examples of uses of FCI (Japan Life Co., Ltd, 2011).
7

When an external tension load is applied, the pull-out tension for FCI insert is determined byconical breaking of concrete. The design formula for various anchor bolts provided in “Indicationand its exposition for designing various comprehensive structures” by Architectural Institute ofJapan is given by Eq.(1):𝑃𝑡 = 𝜙1 √𝜎𝑐 × 10.2 × 𝜋 × 𝐿 × (𝐿 + 𝐷) × 0.098(1)

Where:
𝑃𝑡: Pull-out tension.
𝜎𝑐 : Standard strength of concrete for design (N/mm2).
𝐿: Inserting depth of FCI.
𝐷: Outer diameter of FCI (mm)
𝜙1 : Reduction coefficients ( For Long term load = 0.4; For Short term load = 0.6; For JPCCA=1/3).
In the case of an externally applied shear load,the design formula is given by Eq.(2):′𝑄𝑎 = 𝜙 × (0.5 × 𝐴𝑠 × √𝑓𝑐𝑘
× 𝐸𝑐 )(2)

Where:
𝑄𝑎: Shearing strength per a piece of FCI (N).
𝜙: Reduction coefficient assumed to be 0.4 and 0.6 for long/short term load respectively.
𝐴𝑠 : Design standard strength of concrete (N/mm).
′
𝑓𝑐𝑘: The smaller value (mm) between the section area for the threaded parts and other parts offixing bolt.
𝐸𝑐 : Young modulus for concrete.

4

Design Codes And Guidelines For Testing Anchors Performance

Different design codes cover the design of anchors embedded in concrete and provide predictionsof their failure modes such as EN 1992-4 Eurocode 2 Part 4, ACI 318 Chapter 17, ACI 355, andStandards Australia committee AS 5216.
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) design code ACI 318 -19 CHAPTER 17 covers anchor
design including seismic design requirements. Different types of anchors connected to concrete
have been introduced by ACI in order to have good prediction models of the anchor’s capacity
under different load loading conditions. Typical cast-in-headed studs and headed bolts with headgeometries consistent with ASME B1.1, B18.2.1, and B18.2.6 have been tested. Post-installed
expansion, screw and undercut anchors pull-out strengths are established according to ACI 355.2
requirements. For adhesive anchors, the characteristic bond stress and suitability for structural
applications are established by testing in accordance with ACI 355.4.
In addition, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) developed a standard andguideline for Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Concrete and Masonry Elements ASTM
E488 (2003). These test methods cover procedures for determining the static, seismic, fatigue and8shock, tensile, and shear strengths of post-installed and cast-in-place anchorage systems instructural members made of concrete or structural members made of masonry. Furthermore, ASTM
C900 (2020) Standard Test Method for Pullout Strength of Hardened Concrete covers thedetermination of the pull-out strength of hardened concrete by measuring the force required to pull
an embedded metal insert and the attached concrete fragment from a concrete test specimen or
structure. The insert is either cast into fresh concrete or installed in hardened concrete. This test
method does not provide statistical procedures to estimate other strength properties.
4.1

DESIGN STRENGTH AND LIMITS (ACI 318-19)

4.1.1 Design Limits
4.1.1.1

Concrete

According to ACI 318-19, the compressive strength of concrete used for calculation purposes inanchor design shall not exceed 10 ksi for cast-in anchors and 8 ksi for post-installed anchors.
4.1.1.2

Anchors :✓ For anchors with diameters da < 4 in., concrete breakout strength requirements
shall be considered satisfied by the design procedure.
✓ For adhesive anchors with embedment depth 4da ≤ hef ≤ 20da, the bond strength
requirement shall be considered satisfied by the design procedure of bondstrength of adhesive anchors in tension (ACI 318-19 (17.6.5)).
✓ For screw anchors with embedment depths 5da ≤ hef ≤ 10da and hef ≥1.5in.,concrete breakout strength requirement shall be considered satisfied by thedesign procedure of concrete breakout strength of anchors in tension and shear(ACI 318-19 (17.6.2) and (17.7.2)).
4.1.2 Design strength (ACI 318-19)
The strength of anchors shall be based on design models that satisfy ACI requirements. For eachapplicable factored load combination, design strength of individual anchors and anchor groups
shall satisfy 𝜙𝑆𝑛 ≥ 𝑈 where:
𝑆𝑛 : Nominal moment, shear, axial, torsion, or bearing strength.
𝜙: Strength reduction factor.
𝑈: Strength of a member or cross section required to resist factored loads or related internal
moments and forces in such combinations as stipulated in the ACI code. (ACI 318-19 (17.5.1)).
The Strength reduction factor 𝜙 for anchors in concrete shall be determinted based on the anchor
strength if it is governed by steel, concrete breakout, bond, and side-face blowout, concrete pullout,or pryout strength. The strength reduction factor φ shall be in accordance with Table 1, Table 2,
and Table 3.

9Table 1. Anchor strength governed by steel.
Type of steel element
DuctileBrittleStrength reduction factor 𝜙Tension (steel)
Shear (steel)
0.75
0.65
0.65
0.60

Table 2. Anchor strength governed by concrete breakout, bond, and side-face blowout.
Supplementary
reinforcement

Supplementary
reinforcement
present

Supplementary
reinforcement
not present

Type ofanchorinstallation

Anchor Category*
From ACI 355.2 or ACI
355.4

Cast-inanchors
Postinstalledanchors
Cast-inanchors
Postinstalledanchors

Not
applicable
1
2
3
Not
applicable1
2
3

Strength reduction factor 𝜙Tension (concrete
Shear
breakout, bond, or(concreteside-face blowout)
breakout)
0.75
0.75
0.65
0.55

0.75

0.70
0.65
0.55
0.45

0.7

Table 3. Anchor strength governed by steel.
Type of anchor
installation
Cast-inanchors
Postinstalledanchors

Anchor Category*
From ACI 355.2 or
ACI 355.4
Not
applicable1
2
3

Strength reduction factor 𝜙Tension (concrete pullout)

Shear (concrete pullout)

0.75
0.65
0.55
0.45

0.70

* Anchor Category 1 indicates low sensitivity to installation and high reliability; Anchor Category 2 indicates medium sensitivity
and medium reliability; Anchor Category 3 indicates high sensitivity and lower reliability.

Different external loading can be applied to the anchor such as individual tension, individual shear,or the combination of tension and shear loading. In such cases, various types of steel and concrete
failure modes for anchors presented by ACI 318-19 are shown in Figure 3.

10Figure 3. Failure modes for anchors (ACI 318-19).
It is therefore important to have accurate prediction models of the anchors’ strength under different
types of external load. The strength of anchors shall be based on design models that satisfy ACI
318-19 as presented in Table 4.

11

Table 4. Design strength requirements of anchors (ACI 318-19).
Anchor group[1]Individual anchor in a
Anchors as a group
group

Failure mode

Single anchor

Steel strength intensionConcrete breakout
strength in tension
Pullout strength intensionConcrete side-faceblowout strength intensionBond strength ofadhesive anchor intensionSteel strength in shear

𝜙𝑁𝑠𝑎 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎 [2]Concrete breakout
strength in shear
Concrete pryout strengthin shear

𝜙𝑉𝑐𝑏 ≥ 𝑉𝑢𝑎

𝜙𝑉𝑐𝑏𝑔 ≥ 𝑉𝑢𝑎,𝑔𝜙𝑉𝑐𝑝 ≥ 𝑉𝑢𝑎

𝜙𝑉𝑐𝑝𝑔 ≥ 𝑉𝑢𝑎,𝑔𝜙𝑁𝑠𝑎 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑖 [3]𝜙𝑁𝑐𝑏𝑔 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑔 [4]𝜙𝑁𝑐𝑏 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎
𝜙𝑁𝑝𝑛 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎

𝜙𝑁𝑝𝑛 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑖𝜙𝑁𝑠𝑏 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎

𝜙𝑁𝑠𝑏𝑔 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑔𝜙𝑁𝑎 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎𝜙𝑁𝑎𝑔 ≥ 𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑔𝜙𝑉𝑠𝑎 ≥ 𝑉𝑢𝑎,𝑖𝜙𝑉𝑠𝑎 ≥ 𝑉𝑢𝑎[1] Design strengths for steel and pullout failure modes shall be calculated for the most highly stressed anchor in the group.

𝑁𝑢𝑎 factored tensile force applied to anchor or individual anchor in a group of anchors, lb.
𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑖 factored tensile force applied to most highly stressed anchor in a group of anchors, lb.
[4] 𝑁𝑢𝑎,𝑔 total factored tensile force applied to anchor group,lb.
[2][3]

4.1.2.1

Steel strength of anchors in tension, 𝑁𝑠𝑎 (ACI 318-19 (17.6.1))

Nominal steel strength of an anchor in tension, 𝑁𝑠𝑎 , shall be calculated by Eq.(3):𝑁𝑠𝑎 = 𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑁 × 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎

(3)

where 𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑁 is the effective cross-sectional area of an anchor in tension, in.2. For threaded rods
and headed bolts, ASME B1.1 defines 𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑁 as :𝜋

𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑁 = 4 (𝑑𝑎 −0.9743 2
𝑛𝑡

)

(4)

where 𝑛𝑡 is the number of threads per inch, and 𝑑𝑎 is the nominal diameter of bolt.
𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎 used for calculations shall not exceed either 1.9𝑓𝑦𝑎 or 125,000 psi. The limitation of 1.9𝑓𝑦𝑎on 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎 is to ensure that, under service load conditions, the anchor does not exceed 𝑓𝑦𝑎 (maximum
value of 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎 ⁄𝑓𝑦𝑎 is 1.6 for ASTM A307).
4.1.2.2

Concrete breakout strength of anchors in tension (ACI 318-19 (17.6.2)).

To compute the failure load associated with concrete cone breakout, Fuchs et al.1995 proposed theConcrete Capacity Design (CCD) method. The equation for the basic concrete breakout strength
was derived assuming concrete breakout with an angle of approximately 35 degrees. The proposed
method has been incorporated into ACI 318-19 as follows,
Nominal concrete breakout strength in tension, 𝑁𝑐𝑏 of a single anchor shall be calculated by Eq.(5)12𝐴

𝑁𝑐𝑏 = 𝐴 𝑁𝑐 Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁 Ψ𝑐,𝑁 Ψ𝑐𝑝,𝑁 𝑁𝑏
𝑁𝑐𝑜

(5)

Where:
𝐴𝑁𝑐𝑜 : is the maximum projected area for a single anchor
𝐴𝑁𝑐 : is the projected concrete failure area of a single anchor or of an anchor group that is
approximated as the base of the rectilinear geometrical shape that results from projecting the failuresurface outward 1.5ℎ𝑒𝑓 ef from the centerlines of the anchor. Figure 4 shows the calculation of
𝐴𝑁𝑐𝑜 and 𝐴𝑁𝑐 .

Figure 4. (a) Calculation of ANco and (b) calculation of ANc for single anchors and anchor groups(ACI 318-19).
Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁 : Breakout edge effect factor(a) If 𝑐𝑎,𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≥ 1.5ℎ𝑒𝑓 then Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁 = 1.0
𝑐𝑎,𝑚𝑖𝑛(b) If 𝑐𝑎,𝑚𝑖𝑛 < 1.5ℎ𝑒𝑓 then Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁 = 0.7 + 0.3 1.5ℎ𝑒𝑓

13Ψ𝑐,𝑁 :Breakout cracking factor(a) For anchors located in a region of a concrete member where analysis indicates no cracking
at service load levels:➢ Ψ𝑐,𝑁 = 1.25 for cast-in anchors➢ Ψ𝑐,𝑁 = 1.4 for post-installed anchor.
(b) For anchors located in a region of a concrete member where analysis indicates cracking atservice load levels:➢ Ψ𝑐,𝑁 = 1.0 for both cast-in anchors and post-installed anchors.
The anchor qualification tests of ACI 355.2 or ACI 355.4 require that anchors are in cracked
concrete. For these tests the anchors are considered to be in a region of cracked concrete.
Ψ𝑐𝑝,𝑁 : Breakout splitting factor,.
For all other cases, including cast-in anchors, Ψ𝑐𝑝,𝑁 shall be taken as 1.0. When a tensile load isapplied, the splitting failure may occur before reaching the concrete breakout strength when themember thickness is thin (Rasoul Nilforoush et al. 2017). To control the splitting failure,supplementary reinforcement might be included. For additional information Rasoul Nilforoush etal. 2017 studied the effect of member thickness and the results are shown in Figure 5 and Figure
6.

Figure 5. Load-displacement curves of anchor bolts in NPC members of various thicknesses:(a)H = 1.5ℎ𝑒𝑓 , (a)H = 2.0ℎ𝑒𝑓 , (a)H = 3.0ℎ𝑒𝑓 (Rasoul Nilforoush et al. 2017).

Figure 6. Crack pattern at failure in plain normal-strength concrete members of various
thicknesses: (a)H = 1.5ℎ𝑒𝑓 , (a)H = 2.0ℎ𝑒𝑓 , (a)H = 3.0ℎ𝑒𝑓 (Rasoul Nilforoush et al. 2017).

14

𝑁𝑏 : Basic single anchor breakout strength,
The basic concrete breakout strength of a single anchor in tension in cracked concrete, 𝑁𝑏 , shall becalculated by Eq.(6)𝑁𝑏 = k 𝑐 λ𝑎 √𝑓𝑐′ ℎ1,5
𝑒𝑓

(6)

where k 𝑐 = 24 for cast-in anchors and 17 for post-installed anchors.
The values of k 𝑐 were determined from a large database of test results in uncracked concrete at
the 5 percent fractile (Fuchs et al. 1995). The values were adjusted to corresponding kc values forcracked concrete (Elige-hausen and Balogh 1995; Goto 1971).
4.1.2.3

Pull-out strength of single cast in the anchor and single post-installed expansion, screw
and undercut anchor in tension (ACI 318-19 (17.6.3)).

Nominal pullout strength of a single cast-in anchor or a single-post-installed expansion, screw, or
undercut anchor in tension, 𝑁𝑝𝑛 , shall be calculated by Eq.7:
𝑁𝑝𝑛 = Ψ𝑐,𝑝 𝑁𝑝(7)

Where:
Ψ𝑐,𝑝 : Pullout cracking factor(a) For anchors located in a region of a concrete member where analysis indicates no cracking
at service load levels :➢ Ψ𝑐,𝑝 = 1.4(b) For anchors located in a region of a concrete member where analysis indicates cracking atservice load levels :➢ Ψ𝑐,𝑝 = 1.0
𝑁𝑝 : Basic single anchor pullout strength
For cast-in headed studs and headed bolts, 𝑁𝑝 shall be calculated by Eq.8:
𝑁𝑝𝑛 = 8𝐴𝑏𝑟𝑔 𝑓𝑐′(8)

𝐴𝑏𝑟𝑔 :is the bearing area.
4.1.2.4

Steel strength of anchor in shear (ACI 318-19 (17.7.1)).

Nominal strength of an anchor in shear, Vsa, shall not exceed (a) through (b):a) For cast-in headed stud anchor :𝑉𝑠𝑎 = 𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑉 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎
Where
𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑉 is the effective cross-sectional area of an anchor in shear, in.2 (see Eq.4).
15(9)

𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎 used for calculations shall not exceed either 1.9𝑓𝑦𝑎 or 125,000 psi.
b) For cast-in headed bolt and hooked bolt anchors and for post-installed anchors
where sleeves do not extend through the shear plane
𝑉𝑠𝑎 = 0.6𝐴𝑠𝑒,𝑉 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑎
(10)
4.1.2.5

Concrete breakout strength of anchor in shear (ACI 318-19 (17.7.2)).

Nominal concrete breakout strength in shear, 𝑉𝑐𝑏 , of a single anchor shall be calculated inaccordance with (a) through (d):𝐴

𝑉𝑐𝑏 = 𝐴 𝑣𝑐 Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑣 Ψ𝑐,𝑣 Ψℎ,𝑣 𝑉𝑏

(11)

𝑣𝑐𝑜

𝐴𝑣𝑐𝑜 : is the maximum projected area for a single anchor that approximates the surface area of thefull breakout volume for an anchor unaffected by edge distance, spacing, or depth of member.
𝐴𝑣𝑐 :is the projected area of the failure surface on the side of the concrete member at its edge (seeFigure 7).
Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑉 : Breakout edge effect factor(c) If 𝑐𝑎,2 ≥ 1.5𝑐𝑎1 then Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁 = 1.0𝑐𝑎,2(d) If 𝑐𝑎,2 < 1.5𝑐𝑎1 then Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁 = 0.7 + 0.3 1.5𝑐𝑎1Ψ𝑐,𝑉 :Breakout cracking factor(c) For anchors located in a region of a concrete member where analysis indicates no cracking
at service load levels :➢ Ψ𝑐,𝑉 = 1.4 for cast-in anchors(d) For anchors located in a region of a concrete member where analysis indicates cracking atservice load levels :Table 5. Modification factor where analysis indicates cracking at service load levels
Condition
Anchors without supplementary reinforcement or with edge reinforcement smaller than a No.
4 bar
Anchors with reinforcement of at least a No. 4 bar or greater between the anchor and the edge
Anchors with reinforcement of at least a No. 4 bar or greater between the anchor and the edge,
and with the reinforcement enclosed within stirrups spaced at not more than 4 in

Ψ𝑐,𝑉
1.0
1.2
1.4

Ψ𝑣,𝑁 : Breakout thickness factor for anchors located in a concrete member where ℎ𝑎 < 1.5𝑐𝑎1 ,Ψ𝑣,𝑁 shall be calculated by Eq.12:
1.5𝑐Ψ𝑣,𝑁 = √ ℎ 𝑎1 ≥ 1.0𝑎𝑉𝑏 : Basic single anchor breakout strength of a single anchor in shear in cracked concrete, Vb,
shall not exceed the lesser of (a) and (c):
16

(12)

a.
𝑙

V𝑏 = (7 (𝑑𝑒 )0.2𝑎√𝑑𝑎 ) 𝜆𝑎 √𝑓𝑐′ (𝑐𝑎1 )1.5 ≥ 1.0(13)

where 𝑙𝑒 is the load-bearing length of the anchor for shear:𝑙𝑒 = ℎ𝑒𝑓 for anchors with a constant stiffness over the full length of embedded section, such asheaded studs and post-installed anchors with one tubular shell over full length ofthe embedment depth;
𝑙𝑒 = 𝑑𝑎 for torque-controlled expansion anchors with adistance sleeve separated from expansion sleeve;𝑙𝑒 ≤ 8𝑑𝑎 in all cases.
b.

V𝑏 = 9𝜆𝑎 √𝑓𝑐′ (𝑐𝑎1 )1.5 ≥ 1.0

(14)

c.
𝑙

V𝑏 = (8 (𝑑𝑒 )𝑎4.1.2.6

0.2√𝑑𝑎 ) 𝜆𝑎 √𝑓𝑐′ (𝑐𝑎1 )1.5 ≥ 1.0(15)

Concrete pryout strength of anchor in shear. (ACI 318-19 (17.7.3)).

Nominal pryout strength, Vcp of a single anchor shall not
exceed Eq.16 :𝑉𝑐𝑝 = 𝑘𝑐𝑝 𝑁𝑐𝑝(16)

𝑘𝑐𝑝 = 1.0 𝑓𝑜𝑟 ℎ𝑒𝑓 < 2.5𝑖𝑛.
𝑘𝑐𝑝 = 2.0 𝑓𝑜𝑟 ℎ𝑒𝑓 ≥ 2.5𝑖𝑛.
For cast-in anchors and post-installed expansion, screw, and undercut anchors, 𝑁𝑐𝑝 shall be taken
as 𝑁𝑐𝑏 .

17

Figure 7. Calculation of 𝐴𝑣𝑐𝑜 and 𝐴𝑁𝑐 for single anchors (ACI 318-19).
4.2

TESTING PROCEDURES (ASTM-E488-22)

ASTM E488 addresses the tensile and shear strengths of post-installed and cast-in-place anchorsin test members made of cracked or uncracked concrete. These test methods provide basic testingprocedures for use with product-specific evaluation and acceptance standards and are intended tobe performed in a testing laboratory. Product-specific evaluation and acceptance standards may
add specific details and appropriate parameters as needed to accomplish the testing. Only thosetests required by the specifying authority need to be performed. These test methods are intended
for use with the FCI insert.
4.2.1 Tension Test Equipment(ASTM-E488-22)
The support for the tension test equipment shall be of sufficient size to prevent failure of
the surrounding test member. The displacement measuring device(s) shall be positioned to measure18

the movement of the anchors with respect to points on the test member so that the device is not
influenced during the test by deflection or failure of the anchor or test member. According to
ASTM-E488-22, the minimum required clear distance from the test support to the anchor for
loading is presented in Table 6. Figure 8 presents an example of a typical test setup for tension
test.
Table 6. Minimum Clearance Requirements for Test Equipment Supports (Tension Loads)

Tension Loads

All Anchors
Spacing Between Test Supports
Distance from Anchor to Edge of Test Support

4.0 ℎ𝑒𝑓

2.0 ℎ𝑒𝑓

Figure 8. Example of Unconfined Tension Test Setup – Displacement Measurement with Dual
LVDTs (ASTM E488, 2003).
4.2.2 Shear Test Equipment (ASTM-E488-22)
ASTM-E488 requires that the displacement measuring device(s) should be positioned to measuredisplacement in the direction of the applied load only. The device should be placed on the test
member so that the sensing element bears perpendicularly on the anchor or on a contact plate
located on the loading plate, or using another method that restricts deflections other than those in
the direction of the applied load. According to ASTM-E488-22, the minimum required clear
distance from the test support to the anchor shear loading toward a free edge is presented in Table
7. Figure 9 presents and example of a typical test setup for shear tests.
Table 7. Minimum Clearance Requirements for Test Equipment Supports (Shear Loads)

Tension Loads

All Anchors
Spacing Between Test Supports
Distance from Anchor to Edge of Test Support

4.0 𝑐𝑎2.0 𝑐𝑐19

Figure 9. Example of a Shear Test Setup (ASTM E488, 2003).
For tension and shear loading, the plate thickness, 𝑡𝑓𝑖𝑥 , of the test anchor shall be equal to or
greater than the nominal anchor diameter to be tested.
4.2.3 Testing Specimens and loading protocol
The minimum number of replicate anchor test specimens shall be specified as part of the testing
program. For tension and shear tests, three repetitions for each insert type will be used.
Two different loading rates were selected according to ASTM-E488➢ Initial Load: apply an initial load up to 5 % of the estimated maximum load capacityof the anchorage system to be tested, in order to bring all members into full bearing.
➢ Rate of Loading: two loading rates are given.The first method requires a continuous
increase in load up to failure or up to a maximum specified load or displacement (aminimum 1-min total test time and a maximum 3-min). The second is a step-loading
method in 15 % increments of the expected ultimate load. For tests that requireprecise anchor load-displacement data for calculating stiffness or assessing proper
functioning, the continuous load application method is required.

5

Analytical analysis for FCI according to ACI 318-19

5.1 EXPECTED FAILURE MODES FOR FCIIn this investigation, revised provisions will be proposed for the use of FCI insert according to the
ACI Design Code. The main expected failure mode is concrete breakout (cone failure) for bothtensile and shear tests. The steel anchor failure is not applicable for FCI tests since the purpose ofthis research is to study the effectiveness of the FCI insert independent of the anchor strength. For
this reason, high-strength threaded rods were used. Furthermore, the members with thickness lessthan 3.0 ℎ𝑒𝑓 (and no supplementary reinforcement), the splitting failure may occur before reaching20

the concrete breakout strength. Table 8 shows the expected and the improbable mode of failure
for the FCI tests.
Table 8. The expected and improbable mode of failure for the FCI Test.
Expected Failure Modes for FCI➢ Concrete Breakout (center )➢ Side-Face Blowout (edge)➢ Concrete Splitting (when the
thickness less then 3.0 hef )5.2

Improbable Failure Modes for FCI➢ Steel Failure (center/edge ): High- Strength threadedrods will be used.
➢ Bond Failure (center/edge ): Evaluation of bond strength
applies only to adhesive anchors.
➢ Pullout Failure (center/edge ): requires higher loading.

THE SHAPE AND SPECIMEN SIZE

The specimens’ sizes followed the procedures indicated in ASTM-E488 (Standard Test Methods forStrength of Anchors in Concrete Elements) and the minimum requirements of ACI 318-19. Three FCI
inserts were used for this study (FCI 1/2 in.- FCI 5/8 in.- FCI 1 in.). More details about the chosen
FCI and their standard dimensions are shown in Figure 10. The dimensions of the specimens forthe tension and shear tests are presented in Table 9 and Table 10.

(a): Standard dimensions
1/2in.

1in.

5/8in.

(b) : FCI inserts chosen

Figure 10. Standard dimensions of the FCI (Japan Life Co., Ltd, 2011).

21

Table 9. The shape and size of the specimens for the tension tests.
Specimen Shape and Size Tension Test (Center)
Insert Type : FCI 1/2in.- FCI 5/8in.- FCI 1in.
Total number of specimens: 18

Specimen Shape and Size Tension Test (Edge)
Insert Type : FCI 1/2in.- FCI 5/8in.- FCI 1in.
Total number of specimens: 18

Table 10. The shape and size of the specimens for the shear tests.
Specimen Shape and Size Shear Test (ha<1.5Ca1)
Insert Type : FCI 1/2in.- FCI 5/8in.
Total number of specimens: 12

Specimen Shape and Size Shear Test (ha>1.5Ca1)
Insert Type : FCI 1/2in.- FCI 5/8in.
Total number of specimens: 1222

Insert Type : FCI 1in.
Total number of specimens: 06

Insert Type : FCI 1in.
Total number of specimens: 06

5.3

ACI 318-19 PREDICTION

The ACI prediction of the concrete breakout strength of FCI inserts in tension and shear are
summarized in Table 11 and Table 12, respectively. The details regarding the experimental dataof the concrete strength is used in this section to validate the prediction equation. Eq.5 and Eq.11
described above will be used to calculate the nominal concrete breakout strength in tension, 𝑁𝑐𝑏
and in shear 𝑉𝑐𝑏 .
Table 11. The ACI prediction of the concrete breakout strength of FCI insert in tension.
Test

FCI Typeℎ𝑒𝑓

Location

23/8˝Center
Edge
Center
Edge
Center
Edge
Center
Edge
Center
Edge
CenterEdge

FCI1/2in.
31/8˝
3˝
Tension

FCI5/8in.
33/8˝
43/4˝
FCI1in.
51/2˝

𝑓𝑐′
(ksi)
3.8
4.0
3.8
4.0
4.5
3.8
4.5
3.8
4.5
4.0
4.5
4.0

𝐴𝑁𝑐𝑜
(in2)
49.28
49.28
87.05
87.05
79.39
79.39
102.21102.21200.51200.51
273.24273.24

23

𝐴𝑁𝑐
(in2)
49.28
41.07
87.05
72.54
79.39
66.16
102.2185.18
200.51167.09273.24227.70

Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑁

Ψ𝑐,𝑁

Ψ𝑐𝑝,𝑁

1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

𝑁𝑏
(kips)
5.30
5.43
8.11
8.32
8.24
7.57
9.96
9.15
15.37
15.57
20.82
19.63

𝑁𝑐𝑏
(kips)
5.30
4.07
8.11
6.24
8.24
5.68
9.96
6.86
15.73
11.67
20.82
14.72

Table 12. The ACI prediction of the concrete breakout strength of FCI insert in shear.

Test

FCI
Type

ℎ𝑒𝑓

23/8˝
FCI
1/2in.
31/8˝

3˝
Shear

FCI
5/8in.
33/8˝

43/4˝
FCI
1in.
51/2˝

Locationha<1.5Ca1ha>1.5Ca1ha<1.5Ca1ha>1.5Ca1ha<1.5Ca1ha>1.5Ca1ha<1.5Ca1ha>1.5Ca1ha<1.5Ca1ha>1.5Ca1ha<1.5Ca1ha>1.5Ca1

Eq.13

𝑉𝑏 (kips)
Eq.14

Eq.15

𝑉𝑐𝑏
(kips)

1.02

8.68

10.41

9.92

9.07

1.0

1.0

5.69

6.82

6.6.50

5.69

1.0

1.0

1.02

8.68

10.41

9.92

9.07

112.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

5.69

6.82

6.6.50

5.69

220.5

210

1.0

1.0

1.02

9.70

10.41

11.09

10.14

4.6

112.5

112.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

6.36

6.82

7.27

6.36

3.9

220.5

210

1.0

1.0

1.02

9.70

10.41

11.09

10.14

4.6

112.5

112.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

6.36

6.82

7.27

6.36

4.9

364.5

324

1.0

1.0

1.06

20.05

17.01

22.92

16.04

4.0

220.5

220.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

12.43

10.54

14.20

10.54

4.9

364.5

324

1.0

1.0

1.06

20.05

17.01

22.92

16.04

4.0

220.5

220.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

12.34

10.54

14.20

10.54

𝑓𝑐′
(ksi)

𝐴𝑁𝑐𝑜
(in2)

𝐴𝑁𝑐
(in2)

Ψ𝑒𝑑,𝑣 Ψ𝑐,𝑣

Ψℎ,𝑣

3.9

220.5

210

1.0

1.0

4.6

112.5

112.5

1.0

3.9

220.5

210

4.6

112.5

3.9

The concrete breakout strengths in tension using the design formula (given in Eq.1) for various
anchor bolts provided in “Indication and its exposition for designing various comprehensive
structures” by Architectural Institute of Japan are presented in Table 13.
Table 13. The pull-out tension for FCI prediction based on JPCCA in tension.
Test

FCI Typeℎ𝑒𝑓

Location

𝑁𝑐𝑏(kips)

23/8˝Center

5.29

31/8˝

Center8.79

3˝

Center

9.63

33/8˝

Center

11.97

43/4˝

Center

23.68

51/2˝

Center

31.11

FCI1/2in.

Tension

FCI5/8in.

FCI1in.

24

6Experimental program

To evaluate the performance and the design of FCI in the USA, a comprehensive research program
involving different monotonic loading tests (tension and shear) were performed based on theAmerican Society for Testing and Materials for Anchors (ASTM E488). The test results should
provide an accurate prediction behavior model of the FCI that satisfy the ACI requirements(ACI318-19). The influence of the mounting position and the insert depth on the failure mode andthe capacity of the insert is discussed in this section.
6.1

TEST MATRIX AND FABRICATION OF TEST SPECIMENS

A total of 77 specimens were cast at Legacy Precast LLC located in Brookshire, TX. The form
used to cast the specimens consisted of a steel casting bed with two steel plates welded on eachside and positioned based on the required dimensions of the FCI specimens. Wooden bulkheads
were used as separation between each specimen (see Figure 11(a)). The objective of using the steel
angle as shown in Figure 11 is to position the FCI insert in the chosen location within the concrete
block. For each specimen, careful effort was made to ensure the position of the insert. The bottom
and sides of the casting bed were then cleaned and sprayed with lubricant (see Figure 11(b)). To
cast the specimens, ready-mix concrete utilizing an in-house 4.3 ksi self-consolidating concrete
mix was provided by Legacy Precast LLC. Concrete was poured from the ready-mix truck into thespecimens from one end of the casting bed to the other (see Figure 11(c)). Finally, two lift inserts
were positioned around each specimen for removal, handling, and transportation of the specimens(see Figure 11(d)).

Figure 11. a) Adjustment of the specimen forms and position of the insert; b) casting bed cleaned
and sprayed with lubricant; c) concrete being poured into the forms; d) position of the lift inserts.
25

Pull-out tension tests of the FCI were performed for two different anchor locations (center andedge) using three FCI insert sizes. Three test repetitions were done for each FCI type, which meetthe minimum requirement to calculate a coefficient of variation (see Table 14). Similarly, for the
shear tests, three FCI inserts were used (FCI 1/2in.- FCI 5/8in.- FCI 1in.) for two different cases(ha < 1.5Ca1 and ha > 1.5Ca1) as outlined in Table 15. More details about the standard dimensions
and the chosen FCI are shown in Figure 10. Standard dimensions of the FCI (Japan Life Co., Ltd,
2011)..
Table 14. Details for specimens with FCI inserts subject to tension loads.

Embedment
depth ofanchorInsertType

Specimens Dimensions

Lemb (hef)Specimens Dimensions

Clear
Distance
between
Supports

ASTM
Check
(4*hef)a(in.)b(in.)h (in.)

20

34

12

20

34

12

a(in.)b(in.)

h
(in.)

34

34

12

24

9.36

34

34

12

24

12.44

(in.)

(mm)

FCI
1/2"

2.34

59.5

3.11

79

FCI
5/8"

2.97

75.5

34

34

12

24

11.88

20

34

12

3.37

85.5

34

34

12

24

13.48

20

34

12

FCI
1"

4.72

120

34

34

12

24

18.88

20

34

12

5.51

140

34

34

12

24

22.04

20

34

12

Tension(Center)

Tension(Edge)

Table 15. Details for specimens with FCI inserts subject to shear loads.
Embedment
depth ofanchorLemb (hef)InsertType

Specimens Dimensions

a(in.)b(in.)h (in.)

Ca1(in.)a(in.)b(in.)h (in.)

Ca1(in.)

25

34

10

7

25

34

10

5

25

34

10

7

25

34

10

5

25

34

10

7

25

34

10

5

85.5

25

34

10

7

25

34

10

5

4.72

120

34

50

12

9

30

34

12

7

5.51

140

34

50

12

9

30

34

12

7

(in.)

(mm)

FCI
1/2"

2.34

59.5

3.11

79

FCI
5/8"

2.97

75.5

3.37

FCI
1"

Shear
(ha<1.5Ca1)

26

Shear
(ha>1.5Ca1)

The specimens outlined in Table 14 corresponding to the FCI 1" with an anchor depth of 5.51 in.
have a thickness less than 3 hef. For such cases, splitting failure is expected before reaching theconcrete breakout strength (Rasoul Nilforoush et al. 2017). To avoid the splitting failure, additional
specimens with adjusted dimensions were cast. Furthermore, two additional specimens for FCI
4.72 in. where cast to replace the main specimens which were damaged during transportation fromthe precast plant to the laboratory. Table 16 summarizes the additional specimens.
Table 16. Summary of the additional specimens for FCI 1” tension test
Embedment depthof anchor
InsertType

FCI 1"

Specimens Dimensions

Lemb (hef)
(in.)

(mm)

4.72

120

5.51

140

Tension(Center)a(in.)b(in.)h (in.)

NumberofSpecimens

34

34

12

2

34

34

18

3

As shown in Table 14 and Table 15, the concrete block dimensions depend on the FCI depth andall the tests were performed on single anchors.
6.2 MATERIAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
6.2.1 FCI
As mentioned in the preliminary review, the FCI contains more than 96% of the purity of Alumina,
for the parts of the body. The FCI does not cause any bimetallic corrosion to steel reinforcements,
and the integral wedge-shaped body secures firmly the effects of anchoring. The strength of the
body at the parts that have threads for the FCI 1/2" and FCI 1" are more than 11.55 kips and 21.54
kips respectively. Table 17 presents the mechanical properties of the Alumina sintered body.
Table 17. Mechanical properties of Alumina sintered body (Japan Life Co., Ltd).
Item
Hardness
Flexural Strength
Compressive Strength
Young Modulus
Poisson Ratio
Unit Weight/Volume

Unit
kN
N/mm2
N/mm2
N/mm2
g/cm3

Value
12.7
398
2160
3.17×107
0.227
3.8

6.2.2 Concrete and Steel anchors
For each concrete batch used for casting the specimens, 4” x 8” cylinder samples were preparedfor compression strength tests. First, the samples were demolded and then both surfaces were
grinded prior to testing. All measurements were performed using a compressive strength machine(see Figure 12) using a controlled loading rate of 400 ± 20 Lb/s, according to ASTM C39/39M.
The 77 specimens were cast in six batches. The summarized results of the maximum applied27

compressive force (Fc) and compressive strength (fc) are presented in Table 19 (fc is presented
separately for each casting period as well as the mean values and corresponding standard
deviations for all investigated batches). In most cases, diagonal fracture with cracking through one
end or columnar vertical cracking occurred at failure.

Figure 12. Setup of the compressive strength tests.
Table 18. Results of maximum load (Fc) and compressive strength (fc) for each sample as well as themean values (fc,av) and corresponding standard deviations (fc,st.dev) for both investigated concrete
batches.
Casting

TestingCuringtime(days)

FCI
1

2/20/2023

3/20/2023

28

FCI
2

2/23/2023

3/23/2023

28

FCI
3

2/28/2023

3/20/2023

20

FCI
4

2/28/2023

3/28/2023

28

FCI
5

3/29/2023

4/26/2023

28

FCI
6

3/30/2023

4/27/2023

28

Sample
#01
#02
#03
#01
#02
#03
#01
#02
#03
#01
#02
#03
#01
#02
#03
#01
#02
#03

D1

D2

D3

D4

Dav

H1

H2

Hav

Fc

fc

fc,av

fc,st.dev

[in]

[in]

[in]

[in]

[in]

[in]

[in]

[in]

[Lb]

[psi]

[psi]

[psi]

4.04
4.00
4.00
4.02
4.00
4.01
4.04
4.00
4.00
4.02
3.98
3.96
3.98
4.03
4.02
4.03
3.99
4.02

4.04
4.01
4.01
4.00
4.00
3.99
4.04
4.01
4.01
4.00
3.99
3.99
4.02
4.02
4.05
4.01
4.03
3.97

4.00
4.01
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.01
4.00
3.98
4.06
4.03
3.99
3.97
3.97
3.99
3.99
3.99

4.00
4.00
3.99
3.99
4.01
4.00
4.00
4.00
3.99
3.98
4.00
4.01
3.98
3.99
3.97
4.00
3.99
4.00

4.02
4.01
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.02
4.01
4.00
4.00
4.01
4.00
3.99
4.00
4.00
4.01
4.00
4.00

7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.90
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.87
7.87
7.87
7.75
7.69
7.63
7.75
7.94
7.94

7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.90
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.87
7.94
7.87
7.75
7.69
7.63
7.81
7.94
7.94

7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.90
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.87
7.91
7.87
7.75
7.69
7.63
7.78
7.94
7.94

59030
54850
56405
48355
47895
48050
49395
51460
51010
61495
59735
65270
50260
48645
50195

4654
4353
4490
3851
3806
3828
3895
4084
4061
4906
4736
5248
3980
3886
3989
4426
4714
4581

4499

123

3828

19

4013

84

4947

192

3952

47

4574

118

55825
59240
57420

High-strength bolts (Grade BD) were used for testing with the FCI 1/2in. and FCI 5/8in. while
high-strength threaded rods (Grade F1554 GR 105) were used with the FCI 1in.. Table 19 presents
the mechanical properties for the threaded rod and bolts used. The ACI prediction of the steel
28

strength of anchors in tension and shear based on Eq.3 and Eq.9-10, respectively, are summarizedin Table 20. For FCI 1/2in., the steel strength is close to the concrete breakout strength of the FCI
insert in shear. Thus, the steel failure may occur before reaching the concrete breakout strength forthe case of ha <1.5Cal.
Table 19. Specified Mechanical Properties for the used threaded rod and bolts.

Location

Grade/ Specification

Nominal size(in.)

Tensile Strength
Min (psi)

Yield Strength
Min (psi)

ASTM A354 GradeBD

1/4˝ - 2-1/2˝

150,000

130,000> 2-1/2˝ - 4˝

140,000

120,000

ASTM F1554
Grade 105

All size

125,000 150,000

105,000

Table 20. The ACI prediction of the steel strength of anchor in tension and shear.
FCI Type

Test
TensionSteel strength of anchor (kips)
Eq.3
Eq.9
Eq.10
17.74

FCI1/2in.
Shear
Tension

14.74

10.64

28.25

16.95

75.72

45.43

28.25

FCI5/8in.
Shear
Tension

75.72

FCI1in.
Shear

6.3

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND TESTING PROTOCOL

The experimental procedure was performed using a hydraulic jack fixed on the top of a steel frame
which was anchored to the strong-floor of the Univeristy of Houston structural laboratory. Loadmeasurements were recorded using OMEGA load cells. String potentiometers and linear variabledisplacement transducers (LVDTs) were used to measure the displacement of the insert. All sensors
were connected to a VISHAY System 7000 Data Acquisition System which recorded continuous
measurements from each sensor throughout the duration of the test.
6.3.1 Tension Test
In the tension tests, a hydraulic jack with a 100-kip load capacity was used to load the specimens
in tension. The load cell was attached to the top of the hydraulic jack to measure the applied force.
The load was increased in accordance with ASTM. E488M – 22 until the failure of the specimen.

29

The experimental setup for evaluating FCI capacity in tension is shown in Figure 13 and Figure
15.

Figure 13. Planned experimental setup for tension tests (including boundary conditions, sensor
positions, and specimen position).
To prepare the specimens for testing, the first step was to position the specimen below the hydraulicjack and on its supports (Figure 14(a)). Centerlines were marked at the proper locations on thefloor of the lab using lasers and chalk-lines. Lead pads were used at the points of load application
to obtain a smooth interface between the surface of the specimens and the supporting elements(HSS members were used as support elements as shown in Figure 14(b)). In addition, LVDTs
were mounted at the level of the coupler as shown in Figure 14(c). The final experimental setup
is shown in Figure 15. Figure 16 shows a schematic view of the pullout tension test for the twodifferent anchor locations (center and edge).

30

Figure 14. a) Positioning of the specimen; b) Positioning of the supports; c) LVDT mounting at
the level of the coupler.

Figure 15. Experimental setup for the tension test.

31

Figure 16. a) The schematic view of the pull-out tension tests: Center; b) The schematic view ofthe pull-out tension tests: Edge
6.3.2 Shear Test
In the shear test, a hydraulic jack with a 100-kip load capacity was used to load the specimens inshear. The load cell was attached to the top of the hydraulic jack to measure the applied force. The
load was increased in accordance with ASTM. E488M – 22 until the failure of the specimen. The
experimental setup for evaluating FCI capacity in tension is shown in Figure 17 and Figure 19.

32

Figure 17. Planned experimental setup for shear tests (including boundary conditions, sensor
positions, and specimen position).
To prepare the specimens for testing, the first step was to position the specimen below the hydraulicjack and on its supports (Figure 18(a)). Centerlines were marked at the proper locations on thefloor of the lab using lasers and chalk-lines. Lead pads were used at the points of load application
to obtain a smooth interface between the surface of the specimens and the supporting elements(HSS members were used as support elements as shown in Figure 18(b)). In addition, the string
potentiometer was attached to the steel plate using wax-coated string tied to eye screws that weretightly fastened in wooden blocks that were glued to the face of the specimen using high-strength
epoxy weld adhesive (see Figure 18(b)). The final experimental setup is shown in Figure 19.
Figure 20 shows the schematic view of the pull-out shear test for the two different cases (ha<1.5Ca1
and ha>1.5Ca1).

33

Figure 18. a) Positioning of the specimen; b) Positioning of the supports and mounting the string
potentiometer at the level of the coupler.

Figure 19. Experimental setup for the shear test.
34

aFigure 20. a) The schematic view of the pull-out shear test: ha<1.5Ca1; b) The schematic view ofthe pull-out shear test: ha>1.5Ca1.

35

7Experimental results

7.1 TENSION TEST
7.1.1 Pull-out Tension Test: CenterIn the case of tension tests where the anchors were located at the center of the concrete block, thefailure of all the FCI 1/2in. and FCI 5/8in specimens were caused by the concrete breakout cone
failure. The same failure occurred for the FCI 1in. with an embedment depth of anchor hef = 4.72in.
(see Figure 21(a)). However, a splitting failure occurred for FCI 1in. with an embedment depthof anchor hef = 5.51in. before reaching the concrete breakout cone (see Figure 21(b)) . The detailed
results of the tension tests with anchors located in the center are presented in Appendix A. The
summarized results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen
type, and the ACI prediction (based on equations presented in Section 5), are shown in Table 21.
The experimental results versus the prediction equation of the tension tests where the anchor is
located in the center (FCI 1", FCI 2", FCI 3") are presented in Figure 22.

Figure 21. Failure mode (center): a) concrete breakout cone failure and b) splitting failure.

36

Table 21. Results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen type,
and the design capacity of the FCI insert (center).
InsertType

Embedment
depth ofanchor

5.51
FCI
1"
4.72

3.37
FCI
5/8"
2.97

3.11
FCI
1/2"
2.34

Test
#

FailureLoad(kips)

1

26.75

2

22.5

3
1
2D*
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3

24.5
19.9
21.3
20.5
10.3
9.99
10.14
8.3
10.1
8.35
9.7
8.5
8.23
5.85
5.56
6.35

Fav
(kips)

24.58

St.dev(kips)

1.74

ACI31819(kips)

20.8

20.57

0.57

15.37

10.14

0.13

9.96

8.92

0.84

8.24

8.81

0.64

8.11

5.92

0.33

5.30

Failure mode
Splitting + Cone
breakout
Splitting + Cone
breakout
SplittingCone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout

Insertbottom
part
broke

FCI
Concrete
mix

Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No

1

2

1

1

2

2

* Specimen damaged at the edge

For all the FCI insert types, the ACI predictions for the failure load are lower than the experimental
failure loads (the prediction equation yields values between 75% and 98% of the experimental test
values). Hence, one may conclude that the experimental results provide a satisfactory agreementwith the ACI equation for the concrete breakout strength of anchors in tension (center).

37

Pull-out Tension Test: Center
30

Failure Load (kips)

25

20
Max
15

Average
Min

10

ACI318-19

50
FCI 1in.(hef=5.51'')

FCI 1in.(hef=4.72'')

FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef=3.37'')=2.97'')=3.11'')=2.34'')

Figure 22. The ACI prediction versus experimental result for FCI 1in., FCI 5/8in., FCI 1/2in.
(center).
To obtain results that avoid the splitting failure of the FCI 1" with 5.51in. anchor depth a total ofthree additional specimens with adjusted dimensions were fabricated and tested at University of
Houston laboratory. Furthermore, two additional specimens for FCI 4.72 in. where fabricated andtested to replace the main specimens which were damaged during transportation from the precast
plant to the laboratory. For all additional tests, the summarized results of the maximum load, theaverage load for all repetitions of each specimen type, and the ACI prediction (based on equations
presented in Section 5) are shown in Table 22.
Figure 23 shows the failure of the FCI 1in. with specimens thickness h > 3 hef. The failure wascaused by the concrete breakout cone unlike the first specimens with thickness h < 3 hef where thefailure was controlled by mixed-mode concrete cone and splitting failure. These results show that
increasing member thickness leads to transition of the failure mode from mixed-mode concretecone and splitting to pure concrete breakout cone failure as well as an increase in the failure load.
Increasing member thickness also leads to an increase in the concrete capacity which gives higher
concrete breakout strength. The experimental results versus the prediction equation of theadditional specimens (FCI 1" with 5.51in. anchor depth) are presented in Figure 24.

38

Table 22. The results of the additional specimens.
Insert
Type

FCI
1"

Embedment
depth ofanchor

5.51

4.72

Test
#

FailureLoad(kips)

1

29.50

2

33.40

3
1
2

33.20
25.00
25.58

Fav
(kips)

32.03

25.25

St.dev(kips)

1.79

0.25

ACI31819(kips)

20.8

16.51

Failure mode
Splitting + Cone
breakout
Splitting + Cone
breakout
SplittingCone breakout
Cone breakout

Insertbottom
part
broke

FCI
Concret
e mix

No
No
No
No
No

6

6
6

Figure 23. Failure mode of the FCI 1in. (center) with specimen thickness 3 hef.

Pull-out Tension Test: Center
40

Failure Load (kips)

35
30
25

Max

20

Average
Min

15

ACI318-19

10
50
FCI 1in.(hef =5.51'') when the specimen depth h > 3hef

Figure 24. The ACI prediction versus experimental result for FCI 1in. (center) with specimen
thickness h > 3 hef.
39

7.1.2 Pull out Tension Test: Edge
In the case of tension tests where the anchors were located at the edge of the concrete block, thefailure of the FCI 1/2in. and FCI 5/8in specimens were caused by concrete breakout cone failure(see Figure 25(a)). However, a splitting failure occurred for all the FCI 1in. before reaching theconcrete breakout cone failure (see Figure 25(b)). The detailed results of the tension tests where
the anchors were located in the edge are presented in Appendix B. The summarized results of the
maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen type, and the ACI prediction(based on equations presented in Section 5) are shown in Table 23. The experimental results versus
the prediction equation of the tension tests where the anchor is located on the edge (FCI 1", FCI2", FCI 3") are presented in Figure 26.
During the test of the 1st specimen of FCI 1/2" with 2.34in. depth, the RT experienced an issue withthe controller that caused loss of the data for this test. As a result, the average for this case wascalculated from the two remaining tests.

Figure 25. Failure mode (edge): a) concrete breakout cone failure and b) splitting failure.

40

Table 23. Results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen type,
and the design capacity of the FCI insert (edge).
InsertType

Embedment
depth ofanchor
5.51

FCI
1"
4.72

3.37
FCI
5/8"
2.97

3.11
FCI
1/2"
2.34

Test
#

FailureLoad(kips)

1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3

14.3
14.7
16.4
16.03
15.13
14.87
7.94
8.03
7.85
6.78
7.13
6.4
7.64
8.23
8.97
*
6.31
5.56

Fav
(kips)

St.dev(kips)

ACI31819(kips)

15.13

0.91

14.72

15.34

0.50

11.67

7.94

0.07

6.95

6.77

0.30

5.75

8.28

0.54

6.24

5.94

0.37

4.07

Failure mode
Splitting
Splitting
SplittingCone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout

Insertbottom
part
broke
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No

FCI
Concret
e mix
4

4

5

5

5

5

*Data lost due to a software issue

Pull-out Tension Test: Edge
18
16

Failure Load (kips)

14
12
Max

10

Average
8

Min
ACI318-19

6

4
2
0
FCI 1in.(hef=5.51'')

FCI 1in.(hef=4.72'')

FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef=3.37'')=2.97'')=3.11'')=2.34'')

Figure 26. The ACI prediction versus experimental results for FCI 1in., FCI 5/8in., FCI 1/2in.
(edge).
41

Similar to the pull-out tension tests in the center, all the FCI insert types resulted in ACI predicted
failure loads lower than the experimental failure loads (the prediction equation yielded values
between 69% and 97% of the experimental results). Thus, the experimental results for the edge
tests also provide a satisfactory agreement with the ACI equation for the concrete breakout
strength.
7.2

SHEAR TEST

7.2.1 Pull-out Shear Test: ha >1.5Ca1
In the case of shear tests where ha >1.5Ca1, the failure of all the FCI 1in specimens was caused by
concrete breakout cone failure (see Figure 27(a)). However, two specimens had, in addition to theinclined crack on the top surface, a vertical crack along the depth of the specimen (see Figure27(b)). Similar failures have been observed in the work that has been done by Tamon Ueda etal.1990 where the vertical crack was considered to be a flexural crack. The researchers behind thisstudy, therefore, added a third reaction beam in the longitudinal direction to prevent the flexural
cracks (see Figure 28(a)). Jong-Han Lee et al.2018 studied the shear capacity of cast-in headed
anchors in steel fiber-reinforced concrete, and, for the anchors in plain concrete, there was an
inclined crack on both sides of the top surface followed by a vertical crack along the depth of theanchor (see Figure 28(b)).

Figure 27. Failure mode for FCI 1in. (ha >1.5Ca1,): a) concrete breakout cone failure and b)
vertical crack along the depth of the specimen.

42

Figure 28. Failure mode for: (a) Shear capacity of cast-in headed anchors by J.Han Lee etal.2018. (b) Anchor bolts under shear by Tamon Ueda et al.1990.
A unique behavior of the FCI that was observed in the shear tests (and not the tension tests) is that
the FCI experienced high stresses at the top part of the insert which caused the FCI to fracture asshown in Figure 29. This occurred as a result of the FCI inserts not being fully threaded along theirlength thereby allowing for contact of the anchor with the un-threaded part of the insert under shear
loading coditions (see Figure 30). For tests with FCI 1/2in. and FCI 5/8in, the failure mode of all
the specimens was the concrete breakout cone failure (see Figure 31); however, all of the FCI
inserts failed at the top part. The concrete breakout cone failure in Figure 31 is similar to thepredicted failure according to ACI in the case of ha <1.5Ca1 (see Figure 3).

Figure 29. FCI insert fracture at the top.
43

Figure 30. (a) Embedded length for the tension tests; (b) Non-threaded part in the shear tests.

The detailed results of of shear tests when ha >1.5Ca1 are presented in Appendix C. The
summarized results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen
type, and the ACI prediction (based on equations presented in Section 5) are shown in Table 24.
The experimental results versus the prediction equation of the shear tests where ha >1.5Ca1 (FCI
1", FCI 2", FCI 3") are presented in Figure 32.

Figure 31. Failure mode of (a) FCI 5/8in. and (b) FCI 1/2in.

44

Table 24. Results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen type,
and the design capacity of the FCI insert (ha >1.5Ca1).
InsertType

Embedment
depth ofanchor

Test#

FailureLoad(kips)

1

17.80

2
3

17.20
16.20

1

17.40

2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3

18.6
16.6
8.10
9.20
7.80
9.00
8.10
8.40
8.50
8.65
8.10
7.50
8.30
8.60

5.51
FCI
1"

17.07

4.72

3.37
FCI
5/8"
2.97

3.11
FCI
1/2"
2.34

Fav
(kips)

17.53

St.dev(kips)

0.66

0.85

ACI31819(kips)

10.54

10.54

8.37

0.6

6.36

8.5

0.37

6.36

8.42

0.23

5.69

8.13

0.46

5.69

Failure mode
Cone breakout +Vertical crack
along the depth
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout +Vertical crack
along the depth
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout

Insert
Top
part
broke
yes

FCI
Concret
e mix

3
yes
yes
yes
3
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

6

6

6

6

Pull-out Shear Test: ha >1.5Ca1
20
18

Failure Load (kips)

16
14
12

Max

10

Average

8Min

6

ACI318-19

4
2
0
FCI 1in.(hef=5.51'')

FCI 1in.(hef=4.72'')

FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef=3.37'')=2.97'')=3.11'')=2.34'')

Figure 32. The ACI prediction versus experimental result for FCI 1in., FCI 5/8in., FCI 1/2in. (ha>1.5Ca1).
45

As shown in Figure 32, the ACI predictions resulted in lower failure loads for all the FCI insert
types compared to the experimental failure loads (the prediction equation yielded values between
60% and 76% of the experimental results). Thus, it may be concluded that the experimental results
provide a satisfactory agreement with the ACI equation for the concrete breakout strength ofanchors in shear tests in the case of ha >1.5Ca1.
7.2.2 Pull-out Shear Test: ha <1.5Ca1
In the case of shear tests where ha <1.5Ca1, the failure mode of all the FCI 1in. specimens was theconcrete breakout cone failure (see Figure 33). A similar failure occurred for FCI 5/8in. (seeFigure 34) except for one specimen that exhibited an additional vertical crack along the depth of
the specimen (see Figure 35). The general failure is similar to the predicted failure defined by
ACI and shown in Figure 3. For tests with the FCI 1/2in., the steel strength was close to theconcrete breakout strength of the FCI insert in shear. As a result, the steel failure occured before
reaching the concrete breakout strength for FCI 1/2in. with depth of anchor hef = 3.11in. (see Figure36(a)) For the FCI 1/2in. with depth of anchor hef = 2.34in. the failure was controlled by mixedmode concrete cone and anchor bending (see Figure 36(b)).

Figure 33. Failure mode for FCI 1in. (ha <1.5Ca1,): concrete breakout cone failure.

46

Figure 34. Failure mode for FCI 5/8in. (ha <1.5Ca1,): concrete breakout cone failure.

Figure 35. Failure mode for FCI 5/8in. (ha <1.5Ca1,): concrete breakout cone failure + verticalcrack along the depth of the specimen.

47

Figure 36. Failure mode for FCI 1/2in. (ha <1.5Ca1,): (a) 3.11in. anchor failure (a) 2.34in.
anchor failure.
Similar to the shear tests of ha >1.5Ca1, the FCI experienced high stresses at the top part of theinsert which caused fracture of the FCI as shown in Figure 37.

Figure 37. FCI insert fracture at the top.
The detailed results of of shear tests when ha <1.5Ca1 are presented in Appendix D. The
summarized results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen
type, and the ACI prediction (based on equations presented in Section 5) are shown in Table 25.
The experimental results versus the prediction equation of the shear tests where ha <1.5Ca1 (FCI
1", FCI 2", FCI 3") are presented in Figure 38.

48

Table 25. Results of the maximum load, the average load for all repetitions of each specimen type,
and the design capacity of the FCI insert (ha <1.5Ca1).
InsertType

Embedment
depth ofanchor
5.51

FCI
1"
4.72

Test
#

FailureLoad(kips)

1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2

28.00
29.70
28.50
26.10
26.80
28.40
14.40
13.30

3

13.26

1
2
3
1
2
3

13.50
12.77
12.63
10.13
9.20
12.50

1

12.00

2

12.90

3

9.20

3.37
FCI
5/8"
2.97

3.11
FCI
1/2"
2.34

Fav
(kips)

St.dev(kips)

ACI31819(kips)

28.73

0.71

16.04

27.10

0.96

16.04

13.65

0.53

10.14

12.97

0.38

10.14

10.61

1.39

9.07

11.37

1.58

9.07

49

Failure mode
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout+
Vertical crack
along the depth
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Cone breakout
Anchor failure
Anchor failure
Anchor failure
FCI failure +Anchor failure
FCI failure +Anchor failure
Cone breakout +Anchor failure

Insert
Top
part
broke
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

FCI
Concret
e mix
4

4

5

5

5

5

Pull-out Shear Test: ha <1.5Ca1
35

Failure Load (kips)

30
25
Max

20

Average
15

Min
ACI318-19

10
50
FCI 1in.(hef=5.51'')

FCI 1in.(hef=4.72'')

FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 5/8in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef FCI 1/2in.(hef=3.37'')=2.97'')=3.11'')=2.34'')

Figure 38. The ACI prediction versus experimental result for FCI 1in., FCI 5/8in., FCI 1/2in.(ha<1.5Ca1).
For the 1in. and 5/8 in. FCI inserts, the predictions for the failure loads using the ACI equation arelower than the experimental failure loads (the prediction equation yielded values between 56% and
80% of the experimental results). Therefore,it may be concluded that the experimental results
provide a satisfactory agreement with the ACI equation for the concrete breakout strength in thecase of ha <1.5Ca1. For the FCI 1/2in., the steel strength was close to the concrete breakout strengthof the FCI insert in shear. As a result, the steel failure occurred before the specimen could reachthe concrete breakout strength for FCI 1/2in. However, the failure load was above the ACI
prediction of the concrete breakout strength of anchors in shear.
The overall testing results for both tension and shear are shown in Figure 39. The results from allof the 76 experimental tests are above the ACI prediction. Thus, the results from the experimental
program within the scope of this work show that the use of the ACI equation will provide a
relatively conservative estimation of the concrete capacity of the FCI insert.

50

35

Tension Test

30

ACI318-19 Prediction (kips)

Shear Test
25

20

15

10

5

0
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Experimental Tests (kips)

Figure 39. The overall testing results for both tension and shear tests for FCI 1in., FCI 5/8in.,
FCI 1/2in.

51

8

CONCLUDING REMARKSThe overall objective of this research project was to evaluate the strength FCI inserts under tension
and shear tests. The FCI was tested under different monotonic loading conditions based on the US
standard testing protocol. The experimental program included tension tests for anchors located in
the center and edge of concrete blocks as well as shear tests for two different cases. The test
specimens were all designed to induce concrete failure and insert failure. The main conclusions
derived from the results obtained from this investigation are summarized as follows. Note that thetest results are based on average results and without including any statistical analysis.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

For all the FCI insert types tested in the pull-out tension tests (with anchors located at thecenter), the ACI predictions of the failure load are lower than the experimental failure loads(the prediction equation yielded results between 75% and 98% of the experimental results).
Similarly, all of the FCI insert types for pull-out tension tests with anchors located at theedge, the ACI prediction for the failure load was lower than the experimental tests (theprediction equation yielded values between 69% and 97% of the experimental results).
Based on the results of all pull-out tension tests, it may be concluded that the experimental
results for both the center and the edge tests provide a satisfactory results when comparing
ACI equation for concrete breakout strength.
For shear tests with ha >1.5Ca1, the ACI predictions resulted in lower failure loads for all
the FCI insert types compared to the experimental failure loads (the prediction equation
yielded values between 60% and 76% of the experimental results).
In the case of the shear test (ha <1.5Ca1), the predictions of the failure loads using the ACI
equation are lower than the experimental tests for the case of 1in. and 5/8 in. FCI inserts.
(the prediction equation is between 56% and 80% of the experimental results). Therefore,
it may be concluded that the experimental results provide a satisfactory results based on the
ACI equation for the concrete breakout strength in the case of ha <1.5Ca1.
For the FCI 1/2in., the steel strength of the anchor was close to the concrete breakout
strength of the FCI insert in shear, and the steel failure occurred before reaching theconcrete breakout strength for FCI 1/2in. However, the failure load was above the ACI
prediction of the concrete breakout strength of the anchor in shear.
The results from all of the 76 experimental tests exceeded the ACI prediction for concretecone . Thus, the results from the experimental program within the scope of this work showthat the use of the ACI equation will provide a relatively conservative estimation of theconcrete capacity of the FCI insert.
The general failure for the majority of the tested specimens are similar to the predicted
failures defined by ACI (see Figure 3).

52

9Acknowledgements

The Experimental study included in this report was suppoted by Japan Life Co., Ltd. Theirfinancial support is gratefully acknowledged. Special thanks and appreciations go to Mr. Jay M.
Cariveau of Legacy Precast, LLC and Dr. Larbi Sennour of CEG International, Inc for facilitating
and assisting in the fabrication of test specimens as well as Mr. Scott Smart, lab specialist at the
University of Houston’s Structural Laboratory for his contribution in fabrication and testing of test
specimens.

53

10 References
ACI 355.2, 2007. Qualification of Post-installed Mechanical Anchors in Concrete (ACI 355.2-07)
and Commentary. American Concrete Institute (ACI), Farmington Hills, MI.
ACI Committee 318. ACI 318-19 (2019). Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
and Commentary; .
Al-Taan, S., Al-Jaffal, A., and Mohammed, A. A. (2012). “Breakout capacity of headed anchors insteel fibre normal and high strength concrete.” Asian Journal of Applied Sciences, pp. 485-496,
DOI: 10.3923/ajaps.2012.485.496.
ASTM E 488-96 reapproved (2003). Standard Test Methods for Strength of Anchors in Concreteand Masonry Elements, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,US.
ASTM C900 (2020). Standard Test Methods for Pullout Strength of Hardened Concrete, American
Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, US.
Chen, Z. (2021, December). A review of current research progress on tensile behavior of expansion
anchors in concrete. In Structures (Vol. 34, pp. 2276-2287). Elsevier.
Cook, R. A., Kunz, J., Fuchs, W., & Konz, R. C. (1998). Behavior and design of single adhesive
anchors under tensile load in uncracked concrete. Structural Journal, 95(1), 9-26.
Cook, R. A., & Klingner, R. E. (1992). Ductile multiple-anchor steel-to-concrete connections.
Journal of structural engineering, 118(6), 1645-1665.
Delhomme, F., & Debicki, G. (2010). Numerical modelling of anchor bolts under pull-out andrelaxation tests. Construction and Building Materials, 24(7), 1232-1238.
Delhomme, F., Pallud, B., & Rouane, N. (2018). Tightening torque influence on pull-out behaviorof post-installed expansion anchors. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 22(10), 3931-3939.
Eligehausen, R., Mallee, R., and Solva, J. F. (2006). Anchorage in Concrete Construction, Ernst &Sohn, Berlin, Germany.
Eligehausen, R., & Balogh, T. (1995). Behavior of fasteners loaded in tension in cracked reinforced
concrete. Structural Journal, 92(3), 365-379.
El Sharnouby, M. M., & El Naggar, M. H. (2010). Numerical investigation of the response of
expansion anchors used to attach helical pile connectors to concrete foundations. Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering, 37(6), 866-877.
EN 1992-4, Eurocode 2. Design of concrete structures. Design of fastenings for use in concrete.
BSI; 2018.

54

Fushs, W., Eligehausen, R., and Breen, J. E. (1995). “Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) approachfor fastening to concrete.” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, pp. 73-94.
Furche, J., & Eligehausen, R. (1991). Lateral blow-out failure of headed studs near a free edge.
Ghobarag, A. and Aziz, T. (2004). “Seismic qualification of expansion anchors to Canadian nuclear
standards.” Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 228, Issues 1-3, pp. 377-392, DOI:
10.1016/j.nucengdes. 2004.01.021.
Goto, Y. (1971, April). Cracks formed in concrete around deformed tension bars. In Journal
Proceedings (Vol. 68, No. 4, pp. 244-251).
Japan Life Co., Ltd, (2011). FINE CERAMIC INSERT,Technical Data, Japan Life Co., Ltd,
Tokyp, Japan.
Karmokar, T., Mohyeddin, A., Lee, J., & Paraskeva, T. (2021). Concrete cone failure of single
cast-in anchors under tensile loading–A literature review. Engineering Structures, 243, 112615.
Kim, J. S., Jung, W. Y., Kwon, M. H., & Ju, B. S. (2013). Performance evaluation of the postinstalled anchor for sign structure in South Korea. Construction and Building Materials, 44, 496506.
Lee, J. H., Cho, B., Kim, J. B., Lee, K. J., & Jung, C. Y. (2018). “Shear capacity of cast-in headed
anchors in steel fiber-reinforced concrete”. Engineering Structures, 171, 421-432.
Mahrenholtz, P., & Eligehausen, R. (2015). “Post-installed concrete anchors in nuclear power
plants: Performance and qualification”. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 287, 48-56.
Nilforoush, R., Nilsson, M., & Elfgren, L. (2017). Experimental evaluation of tensile behaviour of
single cast-in-place anchor bolts in plain and steel fibre-reinforced normal-and high-strength
concrete. Engineering Structures, 147, 195-206.
Pallarés, L., & Hajjar, J. F. (2010). “Headed steel stud anchors in composite structures, Part I:
Shear”. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 66(2), 198-212.
Pallarés, L., & Hajjar, J. F. (2010). “Headed steel stud anchors in composite structures, Part II:
Tension and interaction”. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 66(2), 213-228.
Standards Australia committee, AS 5216:2018: Design of post-installed and cast-in fastenings in
concrete. Sai Global; 2018.
Tian, Kaipei, and Joško Ožbolt. "Concrete pry-out failure of single headed stud anchors after fire
exposure: Experimental and numerical study." Engineering Structures 232 (2021): 111816.
Ueda, T., Kitipornchai, S., & Ling, K. (1990). Experimental investigation of anchor bolts undershear. Journal of structural engineering, 116(4), 910-921.

55

Appendix A
Pull-out Tension Test
(Center)A-1

Appendix A1.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 01
Splitting + Cone breakout
26.75
The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A1.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-2

Appendix A1.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 02
Splitting + Cone breakout
22.5
The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A1.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-3

Appendix A1.3
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 03

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Splitting
24.5
The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A1.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-4

Appendix A2.1
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 01

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Cone breakout
19.9-

Figure A2.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-5

Appendix A2.2
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 02

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):

Cone breakout
21.3- The insert in the bottom part broke- The specimen damaged at the edge while they weretransporting them.

Observation

Figure A2.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-6

Appendix A2.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 03
Cone breakout
20.5-

Figure A2.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-7

Appendix A3.1
Sample:FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 01

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Cone breakout
10.3-

Figure A3.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-8

Appendix A3.2
Sample:FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 02

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Cone breakout
9.99-

Figure A3.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-9

Appendix A3.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 03
Cone breakout
10.3-

Figure A3.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-10

Appendix A4.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 01
Cone breakout
8.3-

Figure A4.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-11

Appendix A4.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 02
Cone breakout
10.1-

Figure A4.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-12

Appendix A4.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 03
Cone breakout
8.35-

Figure A4.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-13

Appendix A5.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =3.11in.) - 01
Cone breakout
9.7- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A5.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-14

Appendix A5.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =3.11in.) - 02
Cone breakout
8.5- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A5.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-15

Appendix A5.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =3.11in.) - 03
Cone breakout
8.23- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A5.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-16

Appendix A6.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =2.34in.) - 01
Cone breakout
5.85- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure A6.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-17

Appendix A6.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =2.34in.) - 02
Cone breakout
5.56-

Figure A6.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-18

Appendix A6.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =2.34in.) - 03
Cone breakout
6.35-

Figure A6.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-19

Appendix A7.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 01
Cone breakout
29.5
The insert in the top part broke

Figure A7.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-20

Appendix A7.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 02
Cone breakout
33.4
The insert in the top part broke

Figure A7.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-21

Appendix A7.3
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 03

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Cone breakout
33.2-

Figure A7.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

A-22

Appendix B
Pull-out Tension Test
(Edge)

B-1

Appendix B1.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 01
Splitting + Cone breakout
14.3

Figure B1.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-2

Appendix B1.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 02
Splitting
14.7-

Figure B1.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-3

Appendix B1.3
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 03

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Splitting
16.4
The insert in the top part broke

Figure B1.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-4

Appendix B2.1
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 01

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Splitting + Cone breakout
16.03-

Figure B2.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-5

Appendix B2.2
Sample:FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 02

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Splitting + Cone breakout
15.13-

Figure B2.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-6

Appendix B2.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 03
Splitting + Cone breakout
14.87-

Figure B2.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-7

Appendix B3.1
Sample:FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 01

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Cone breakout
7.94-

Figure B3.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-8

Appendix B3.2
Sample:FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 02

Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

Cone breakout
8.03-

Figure B3.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-9

Appendix B3.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 03
Cone breakout
7.85-

Figure B3.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-10

Appendix B4.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 01
Cone breakout
6.78-

Figure B4.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-11

Appendix B4.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 02
Cone breakout
7.13-

Figure B4.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-12

Appendix B4.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 03
Cone breakout
6.40-

Figure B4.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-13

Appendix B5.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =3.11in.) - 01
Cone breakout
7.64- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure B5.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-14

Appendix B5.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =3.11in.) - 02
Cone breakout
8.23- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure B5.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-15

Appendix B5.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =3.11in.) - 03
Cone breakout
8.97- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure B5.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-16

Appendix B6.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =2.34in.) - 01
Cone breakout- The insert in the bottom part broke

Figure B6.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-17

Appendix B6.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =2.34in.) - 02
Cone breakout
5.56-

Figure B6.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-18

Appendix B6.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef =2.34in.) - 03
Cone breakout
6.31-

Figure B6.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

B-19

Appendix C
Pull-out Shear Test(ha >1.5 Ca1)

C-1

Appendix C1.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 01
Cone breakout + Vertical crack along the specimen depth
17.80- Vertical crack along the specimen depth- FCI failure at the top

Figure C1.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-2

Appendix C1.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 02
Cone breakout
17.20- FCI failure at the top

Figure C1.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-3

Appendix C1.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 03
Cone breakout
16.20- FCI failure at the top

Figure C1.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-4

Appendix C2.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72 in.) - 01
Cone breakout + Vertical crack along the specimen depth
17.40- FCI failure at the top- Vertical crack along the specimen depth

Figure C2.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-5

Appendix C2.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72 in.) - 02
Cone breakout
18.60- FCI failure at the top

Figure C2.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-6

Appendix C2.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72 in.) - 03
Cone breakout
16.60- FCI failure at the top

Figure C2.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-7

Appendix C3.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37 in.) - 01
Cone breakout
8.10- FCI failure at the top

Figure C3.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-8

Appendix C3.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37 in.) - 02
Cone breakout
9.20- FCI failure at the top

Figure C3.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-9

Appendix C3.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37 in.) - 03
Cone breakout
7.80- FCI failure at the top

Figure C3.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-10

Appendix C4.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97 in.) - 01
Cone breakout
9.00- FCI failure at the top

Figure C4.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-11

Appendix C4.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97 in.) - 02
Cone breakout
8.10- FCI failure at the top

Figure C4.2The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-12

Appendix C4.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97 in.) - 03
Cone breakout
8.40- FCI failure at the top

Figure C4.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-13

Appendix C5.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 3.11 in.) - 01
Cone breakout
8.50- FCI failure at the top

Figure C5.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-14

Appendix C5.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 3.11 in.) - 02
Cone breakout
8.65- FCI failure at the top

Figure C5.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-15

Appendix C5.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 3.11 in.) - 03
Cone breakout
8.10- FCI failure at the top

Figure C5.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-16

Appendix C6.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 2.34 in.) - 01
Cone breakout
7.50- FCI failure at the top

Figure C6.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-17

Appendix C6.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 2.34 in.) - 02
Cone breakout
8.30- FCI failure at the top

Figure C6.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-18

Appendix C6.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 2.34 in.) - 03
Cone breakout
8.60- FCI failure at the top

Figure C6.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

C-19

Appendix D
Pull-out Shear Test(ha < 1.5Ca1)

D-1

Appendix D1.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 01
Cone breakout
28.00- FCI failure at the top

Figure D1.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-2

Appendix D1.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 02
Cone breakout
29.7- FCI failure at the top

Figure D1.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-3

Appendix D1.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 5.51in.) - 03
Cone breakout
28.50- FCI failure at the top

Figure D1.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-4

Appendix D2.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 01
Cone breakout
26.10- FCI failure at the top

Figure D2.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-5

Appendix D2.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 02
Cone breakout
26.80- FCI failure at the top

Figure D2.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-6

Appendix D2.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1in. (hef = 4.72in.) - 03
Cone breakout
28.40- FCI failure at the top

Figure D2.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-7

Appendix D3.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 01
Cone breakout
14.40- FCI failure at the top

Figure D3.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-8

Appendix D3.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 02
Cone breakout
13.3- FCI failure at the top

Figure D3.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-9

Appendix D3.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 3.37in.) - 03
Cone breakout
13.26- FCI failure at the top- Vertical crack along the specimen depth

Figure D3.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-10

Appendix D4.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 01
Cone breakout
13.70- FCI failure at the top

Figure D4.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-11

Appendix D4.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 02
Cone breakout
12.77- FCI failure at the top

Figure D4.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-12

Appendix D4.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 5/8in. (hef = 2.97in.) - 03
Cone breakout
12.63- FCI failure at the top

Figure D4.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-13

Appendix D5.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 3.11in.) - 01
Anchor Failure
10.13- FCI failure at the top

Figure D5.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-14

Appendix D5.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 3.11in.) - 02
Anchor Failure
9.2- FCI failure at the top

Figure D5.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-15

Appendix D5.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 3.11in.) - 03
Anchor Failure
12.5- FCI failure at the top

Figure D5.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-16

Appendix D6.1
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 2.34 in.) - 01
Anchor Bending
12.00- FCI failure at the top

Figure D6.1 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-17

Appendix D6.2
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 2.34 in.) - 02
Anchor Bending
12.90- FCI failure at the top

Figure D6.2 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-18

Appendix D6.3
Sample:Mode of failure:
Maximum load (kips):
Observation

FCI 1/2in. (hef = 2.34 in.) - 03
Cone Breakout Anchor Bending
9.20- FCI failure at the top

Figure D6.3 The image of the specimen before failure and after failure.

D-19