Headed Studs in Concrete: State of the Art

Ghali, Amin; Youakim, Samer A

doi:10.14359/14661

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To reduce reinforcement congestion and simplify concrete pouring, the best alternative to straight bars and hook anchorages is headed bars as mechanical anchorage (Tran et al 2018;Alrasyid et al 2017;Kang et al 2009;Kawale and Patil 2016). Headed bars are formed by welding or threading a steel plate onto a steel rebar (Perumal and Varkeesh 2018; Ghali and Youakim 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pullout Tests on Concrete Breakout Strength of Headed Reinforcement Bars Embedded in Roof Exterior Beam-Column Joints

Mohsuni,

Matsui,

Sanada

et al. 2023

ACT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, the use of headed bars as mechanical anchorage in reinforced concrete beam-column joints has increased rapidly. This type of anchorage is used for T-shaped beam and exterior column joints at middle floors and for L-and T-shaped beam-column joints at the rooftops of buildings. However, few experimental data are available regarding the anchorage capacity of headed bars embedded in L-shaped beam-column joints. Nine pullout tests are conducted to investigate the anchorage capacity of headed bars embedded in L-shaped beam-column joints. Parameters affecting the anchorage capacity, such as the diameter, embedment length, location of the headed bars, and the number of supplementary bars are considered. The anchorage capacity of the headed bars is evaluated using empirical formulas proposed by Kubota and Murakami and a formula for concrete cone failure. The failure behavior of the specimens is concrete failure with cracks propagating in the diagonal direction at the maximum applied load. The anchorage capacity increases with the embedment length and diameter of the headed bars, number of supplementary bars, and concrete area. For most specimens, the Kubota and Murakami formulas overestimate the anchorage capacity, whereas formula for concrete cone failure yields lower anchorage capacities as compared with the test results.

show abstract