Evaluation of Structural Performance of Post-Installed Anchors Embedded in Cracked Concrete in Power Plant Facilities

Abstract

In this study, a field survey was conducted on the fixed anchorages of the operation and power generation facilities installed in domestic power plants. A static/dynamic performance evaluation was conducted to present safety evaluation guidelines that meet the domestic seismic performance requirements. Seismic performance tests were performed on the post-installed set anchors M10 and M12, which are mainly used for anchorages in accordance with the US and European seismic performance standards. The dynamic shear test results showed that the M12 anchor met the seismic performance verification criterion, whereas the M10 anchor did not because its dynamic performance was reduced, owing to the cyclic loading. In the results of the dynamic pull-out test, M12 also met the seismic performance verification criterion, whereas M10 was safe only in a non-cracked state. In summary, the seismic performance of M12 in both cracks and non-cracks was satisfied, but, in the case of M10, the results were not satisfied in cracks. This was an experimental study; it will be necessary to conduct additional analytical research in the future to verify the reliability and parameters of the experiment.

Ultimate Shear Force of an Any Anchor Group Post-Installed into Concrete

“…Nevertheless, in order to transmit those compressive stresses is sufficient that a circumference with diameter 1.5· D concentric to the cylinder be uncracked. That result agrees with [ 7 , 12 , 16 , 65 ].…”

“…For the sake of completeness, it should also be mentioned that this research work included the comparison between the shear strength of some tests that collapsed by a premature failure mode, i.e., by edge effect [ 12 , 16 ], prying actions [ 41 ], or steel shear failure [ 9 , 61 ]. The theoretical shear strength predictions of the analytical model surpassed every homologous experimental shear strength.…”

“…If the concrete is cracked, the anchors should have adequate clearance from the cracks, so that the failure mode is not dictated by cracking existing prior the installation. Where this criterion cannot be met, the shear strength of the anchor is lower than that predicted by this model, but however only moderately [ 7 , 12 , 16 , 65 ].…”

“…There has been much valuable work conducted in the field of adhesive and mechanical anchors intended for use in concrete, and concrete anchors have been the subject matter of many valuable papers. However, a detailed insight into those documents reveals that most of the papers are devoted to the anchor’s extraction strength, i.e., pull-out resistance [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ], and to cast-in anchors, i.e., anchors installed in new structures, before pouring the concrete [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. As a result, only a minor part of those papers deals with the anchors’ shear strength and with post-installed anchors.…”

Shake table tests of concrete anchors for non-structural components including innovative and alternative anchorage detailing

“…Over the past few decades, a significant amount of research work investigating the behaviour of post-installed anchors of different anchor types has been carried out (Eligehausen 1991;Vintzéleou and Eligehausen 1991;Eligehausen and Balogh 1995;Kim et al 2004;Hoehler 2006;Silva 2007;Mahrenholtz and Eligehausen 2010;Mahrenholtz 2012;Guillet 2011;Hoehler et al 2011;Çalışkan et al 2013;Mahrenholdz et al 2016;Stehle and Sharma 2019;Lee and Jung 2021). These experimental campaigns have implemented different anchor configurations and alternative testing protocols, namely: (a) individually or within a group of anchors, (b) under quasi-static loading with monotonic or cyclic protocol, either force or displacement-controlled, and (c) inserted into uncracked or cracked concrete (Hoehler and Eligehausen 2008).…”