Basics of post-installed rebar connections

Basics of post installed
rebar connections

6 / 2010

678
Basi c s of post i nst al l ed r ebar c onnec t i ons
1 Applications
1.1 Advantages of post-installed rebar connections

With the use of the Hilti-HIT injection systems it is possible to connect new reinforcement to
existing structures with maximum confidence and flexibility.
design flexibility reliable like cast in horizontal, vertical and
overhead
form work
simplification
defined load
characteristics
simple, high confidence
application

1.2 Application examples

Post installed rebar connections are widely used within the construction industry in a wide range
of applications, which vary from new construction projects, to structure upgrades and
infrastructure requalifications.

Post-installed rebar connections in new construction projects

S Sl l a ab b c co on nn ne ec ct t i i o on ns s
D Di i a ap ph hr ra ag gm m w wa al l l l s s
V Ve er rt t i i c ca al l / /h ho or ri i z zo on nt t a al l c co on nn ne ec ct t i i o on ns s M Mi i s sp pl l a ac ce ed d b ba ar rs s

rebar connections

6 / 2010

679
Post-installed rebar connections in structure updgrades

Post-installed rebar connections in infrastructure requalifications

N Ne ew w s sl l a ab b c co on ns st t r ru uc ct t i i o on ns s
W Wa al l l l s st t r re en ng gh ht t e en ni i n ng g
C Ca an nt t i i l l e ev ve er rs s/ /b ba al l c co on ni i e es s J Jo oi i n nt t s st t r re en ng gh ht t e en ni i n ng g
S St t r ru uc ct t u ur ra al l u up pg gr ra ad de e
S Sl l a ab b w wi i d de en ni i n ng g
S Si i d de e- -w wa al l k k u up pg gr ra ad de e S Sl l a ab b s st t r re en ng gh ht t e en ni i n ng g
rebar connections

6 / 2010

680
2 Rebar basics
2.1 Definition of rebar

Rebar is standing for REinforcement BAR. At Hilti the word is used for a reinforcement bar
inserted into a borehole filled with Hilti HIT in reinforced concrete structures, in other words for
post-installed reinforcement. Post-installed reinforcement can be split up into four different main
applications:
Good detailing practice
Shear studs
Rebar as structural rebar
Rebar as an anchor

In the course of the Anchor FTM the focus will be on the last two types of applications.
Chapter 3, Adhesive Anchoring Systems, deals with rebar as an anchor. The current chapter
focuses on rebar as structural rebar, where the reinforcement is purely loaded in the longitudinal
direction.

Figure 2.1: Example of structural rebar application

Structural rebar is characterized by very high loads. The reinforcement is often loaded up to
steel yielding. The concrete structure (connection) shows a good serviceability. The
deformations are small and due to this the crack width and therefore the influences by the
environment (corrosion) are limited. The concrete connections behave as a monolithic structure
or in other words as if the concrete was poured in one go. The high loads which can occur in
either the anchorage or the splice can lead to an embedment length up to 15 till 80 times the
diameter of the reinforcement.
The design can be done according to two design concepts;
Structural code, for instance EC2 EN 1992-1-1:2004 chapter 8.4 anchorage of
longitudinal reinforcement, based on approvals (e.g. ETA according to EOTA TR023)
See paragraph 4 of this chapter for an overview of the approvals
Hilti HIT-Rebar design concept, based on the American Standard (ACI 318-08), where
the allowable bond stress is controlled by splitting / spalling behaviour.

For this type of connections an engineer is usually involved in the design.

l
0

l
v

10 d
s
l
bd

l
bd

rebar connections

6 / 2010

681
2.2 Rebar as an anchor

Rebar as an anchor is characterized by the fact it is not possible to splice the reinforcement
(due to e.g. lack of useable reinforcement). The loads are typically smaller as in the case of
structural rebar and the serviceability is slightly lower. The anchor failure modes like concrete
cone failure or combined concrete cone and pull-out failure are considered in this application
according to standard anchor design.
For this type of connections an engineer is usually involved in the design.

2.3 Cast-in ribbed bars

Generally, for load transfer in reinforced concrete only tensile or compressive forces in bars are
considered.
For ribbed bars, the load transfer in concrete is governed by the bearing of the ribs against the
concrete (figure 2.3.a). The force reaction in the concrete is assumed to form a compressive
strut in the direction of 45.
For higher bond stress values, the concentrated bearing forces in front of the ribs cause the
formation of cone-shaped cracks starting at the crest of the ribs. The resulting concrete keys
between the ribs transfer the bearing forces into the surrounding concrete, but the wedging
action of the ribs remains limited. In this stage the displacement of the bar with respect to the
concrete (slip) consists of bending of the keys and crushing of the concrete in front of the ribs.
The bearing forces, which are inclined with respect to the bar axis, can be decomposed into
directions parallel and perpendicular to the bar axis. The sum of the parallel components equals
the bond force, whereas the radial components induce circumferential tensile stresses in the
surrounding concrete, which may result in longitudinal radial (splitting / spalling) cracks.

Figure 2.3.a: Load transfer from ribbed bars into concrete

Two failure modes can be considered:
a) Bond failure (fig. 2.3.a):
If the confinement (concrete cover, transverse reinforcement) is sufficient to prevent splitting of
the concrete cover, bond failure is caused by pull-out of the bar. In that case the concrete keys
are sheared off and a sliding plane around the bar is created. Thus, the force transfer
mechanism changes from rib bearing to friction. The shear resistance of the keys can be
considered as a criterion for this transition. It is attended by a considerable reduction of the
bond stress. Under continued loading the sliding surface is smoothed due to wear and
compaction, which will result in a further decrease of the bond stress, similar to the case of plain
bars.
rebar connections

6 / 2010

682
Figure 2.4.2.b Figure 2.4.2.a
S litti
b) Splitting failure (fig. 2.3.b):
If the radial cracks propagate through the entire cover, bond
splitting failure is decisive. In that case the maximum bond stress
follows from the maximum concrete confinement, which is
reached when the radial cracks have penetrated the cover for
about 70%. Further crack propagation results in a decrease of
the confining stresses. At reaching the outer surface these
stresses are strongly reduced, which results in a sudden drop of
the bond stress.

2.4 Lapped bar splices
2.4.1 Model for load transfer at lapped bar splices
The load transfer between bars is performed by means of compressive struts in the concrete
(fig. 2.4.1). A 45 truss model is assumed. The resulting perpendicular forces act in a similar
way as the splitting forces. The splitting forces normally are taken up by the transverse
reinforcement. Small splitting forces are attributed to the tensile capacity of the concrete. The
amount of the transverse or tie reinforcement necessary is specified in the design codes.

2.4.2 Influence of spacing and cover on splitting and spalling of concrete
In most cases the reinforcement bars are placed close to the surface of the concrete member to
achieve good crack distribution and economical bending capacity. For splices at wide spacing
(normally in slabs, fig. 2.4.2a), the bearing capacity of the concrete depends only on the
thickness of the concrete cover. At narrow spacing (normally in beams, fig. 2.4.2.b) the bearing
capacity depends on the spacing and on the thickness of the cover. In the design codes the
reduction of bearing capacity of the cover is taken into account by means of multiplying factors
for the splice length.

2.4.3 Bond behaviour of post-installed ribbed bars
The load transfer for post-installed bars is similar to cast in bars if the stiffness of the overall
load transfer mechanism is similar to the cast-in system. The efficiency depends on the strength
Figure 2.4.1: Load transfer at lap splices
Figure 2.3.b

rebar connections

6 / 2010

683
of the adhesive mortar against the concentrated load near the ribs and on the capacity of load
transfer at the interface of the drilled hole.
In many cases the bond values of post-installed bars are higher compared to cast in bars due to
better performance of the adhesive mortar. But for small edge distance and/or narrow spacing
splitting or spalling forces become decisive due to the low tensile capacity of the concrete.

3 Design basics
3.1 Rebar design methods

Post-installed reinforcement connections can basically be designed in compliance with the
national codes. Hilti is offering two design methods of which one is based on the Eurocode 2
(EC2 EN 1992-1-1:2004) and the other one on the American Standard (ACI 318-08). The most
important characteristics will be explained in the following paragraphs.

3.2 Rebar design according to EC2/ETA approach

The new technical report EOTA TR 023 (Assessment of post-installed rebar connections)
establishes a common method to qualify chemical anchors in compliance with EC2. Chemical
anchors must comply with a predefined step-diagram for the different concrete classes (Figure
3.2: Chemical anchors without limitations). In general it shall be shown by the tests as described
in the TR 023 that the post-installed rebar systems can develop the same design values of bond
resistance with the same safety margin as cast-in place rebars according to EC2. In EC2 no
requirements for testing are given, but the values for fbd are published.
These values are valid for worst case conditions, minimum concrete cover, minimum spacing
and minimum transverse reinforcement.
In Figure 3.2 a comparison is given which bond resistance in the tests and evaluation according
TR 023 have to be reached (on y- axis) to show equivalence with the values f
bd
(on x- axis).
A European Technical Approvals according to the EOTA TR023 allows a design according to
EC2. However a design for fire resistance, fatigue, dynamic or seismic loading are excluded.
The ETA for Rebar proves that approved systems are robust and durable. Influences of bad
cleaning, wet holes, creep, freeze/thaw, durability, corrosion resistance, installation directions
are tested within the approval.
The post-installed rebar connections assessed according to TR 023 shall be designed as
straight cast-in reinforcement according to EC2 using the values of the design bond resistance
fbd for deformed bars. The definition of the bond region in EC2 is valid also for post-installed
reinforcement. The conditions in EC2 concerning detailing (e.g. concrete cover in respect to
bond and corrosion resistance, bar spacing, transverse reinforcement) shall be complied with.

rebar connections

6 / 2010

684

Figure 3.2: Chemical anchors without limitations from EOTA TR023

The following additional provisions have to be taken into account.
To prevent damage of the concrete during drilling the following requirements have to be
met:
c
min
= 30 + 0,06l
v
2d
s
(mm) for hammer drilled holes, with ds being the
diameter of the rebar
c
min
=50 +0,08l
v
2d
s
(mm) for compressed air drilled holes
The factors 0,06 and 0,08 take into account the possible deviations during the drilling
process. This value might be smaller if special drilling aid devices are used.
Minimum clear spacing between two post-installed rebars a =40 mm 4d
s

To account for potentially different behaviour of post-installed and cast-in rebars in
cracked concrete, in general, the minimum embedment length l
b,min
and l
0,min
given in
EC2 for anchorages and overlap splices shall be increased by a factor of 1,5. This
increase may be neglected if it can be shown that the bond strength of the selected post-
installed rebars and cast-in rebars in cracked concrete (w =0,3 mm) is similar. In this
case the influence of cracks openings (crack movement tests) can be neglected because
for rebar connections several rebars are present (redundant fastening) and not all of the
rebars will be situated in a longitudinal crack.
The transfer of shear forces between new and old concrete shall be designed according to EC2.
See also paragraph 3.4 strut-and-tie model.
The reader is referred to the paragraph 4 EC2 Design for more detail about this design
concept.

rebar connections

6 / 2010

685
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
c
d
f
b
d
ACI 318-08 approach
EC2/ETA approach
3.3 N/mm
2
6.9 N/mm
2
C20/25, =12 mm
c
d,min
3.3 Hilti HIT-Rebar design and ACI 318-08 approach

The American Standard ACI (American Concrete Institute) 318-08 gives an explicit formula for
the design of anchorages and splices that considers splitting and spalling as a function of
concrete cover and bar spacing. This function is adapted and extended for post-installed
reinforcement for the Hilti HIT-Rebar design concept. The embedment length of an anchorage
or splice is defined as a function of concrete strength, the bar diameter, the minimum edge
distance or spacing and a coefficient taking into account the transverse reinforcement.
In figure 3.3 a typical design bond stress f
bd
curve as a function of the minimum edge
distance/spacing distance, c
d
is shown for a concrete class C20/25 and for a rebar with a
diameter of 12 mm (EC2/ETA approach). In this figure the equivalent design bond stresses
resulting from the ACI and the EC2/ETA approaches are plotted to illustrate the two methods
(the design bond stresses shown in the figure shall not be used for design purposes). The
reduction of anchoring length allowed by ACI and EC2/ETA in specific conditions can be
assimilated to an increase of the equivalent design bond stress if c
d
changes within certain
limits. The equivalent design bond stress is defined by an inclined line and it increases with
larger values of c
d
. The increase in the design bond stress is limited by the maximum pull-out
bond stress, which is a value which is given by the standards in the case of a cast-in
reinforcement. For post-installed reinforcement, the maximum design bond stress is a function
of the bonding agent and not necessarily equals that of cast-in bars. Thus, the limitation for
bond failure in the code has been replaced by the specific design bond stress of the bonding
agent for the specific application conditions and the splitting function has been adapted
according to the tests.

c
d
=min(a/2, c, c
1
)

Figure 3.3: equivalent design bond stress f
bd
as a function of c
d
., derived from reduction of anchoring lenght
according to ACI 318-08 and EC2/ETA.

rebar connections

6 / 2010

686
Interaction of concrete cover and transverse reinforcement (splitting reinforcement)

Tests show that transverse reinforcement improves the splitting capacity. Transverse
reinforcement can be taken into account by adding a substitute value for the cover.
The ACI 318-08 code explicitly takes into account the influence of transverse reinforcement able
to prevent splitting by means of the transverse reinforcement index K
tr
.

+
=
4
tr
ck bd
K c
f f
;
bars in - cast for 5 . 2
K c
;
n s 34 . 10
f A
K
tr
yt tr
tr

=

with: A
tr
total cross-sectional area of all transverse reinforcement that is within the spacing
s and that crosses the potential plane of splitting through the reinforcement being
developed [mm
2
]
f
yt
yield strength of transverse reinforcement [N/mm
2
]
s maximum spacing of transverse reinforcement within
b
, center to center [mm]
n number of bars being developed along the plane of splitting [-]
substitute for various adjustment factors

Hilti HIT-Rebar design concept

for 5 . 2
K c
tr

+
(post-installed reinforcement and cast-in reinforcement):

4
tr
ck
bd
K c
f
f
+
=

for 5 . 2
K c
tr
>
+
(bonded-in bars only):

+
+
= 5 . 2 75 . 0 5 . 2
4
tr
ck
bd
K c
f
f
where:
f
bd
design bond strength
nominal bar size
f
ck
characteristic concrete cylinder strength
c =c
d
=min(a/2, c, c
1
)
K
tr
see above
bar size factor

For more detailed Information see: Kunz, J .; Mnger, F.: Splitting- and bond failure of post-installed rebar splices
and anchoring.; Bond in Concrete from research to standards, Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium
held at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary, 20 to 22 November 2002,
p.447 -454. (Copy available from Hilti Technical Service)

rebar connections

6 / 2010

687
3.4 Strut-and-tie model

The tensile bearing capacity of
concrete is very low compared to
its compressive strength. For this
reason tensile forces are attributed
to the steel reinforcement of the
concrete member. The
reinforcement should be
adequately anchored in the nodes
{Clause 6.5.3(2), EC2: EN 1992-1-
1:2004}.
A strut-and-tie model is used to calculate the load path in reinforced concrete members. Where
a non-linear strain distribution exists (e.g. supports) strut-and-tie models may be used {Clause
6.5.1(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}.
Strut-and-tie models consist of struts representing compressive stress fields, of ties
representing the reinforcement and of the connecting nodes. The forces in the elements of a
strut-and-tie model should be determined by maintaining the equilibrium with the applied loads
in ultimate limit state. The ties of a strut-and-tie model should coincide in position and direction
with the corresponding reinforcement {Clause 5.6.4, EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004 Analysis with strut
and tie models}.

3.5 Joint to be roughened

The model of inclined compressive struts is used to transfer the shear forces through the
construction joint at the interface between concrete cast at different times. Therefore a rough
interface is required to provide sufficient cohesion in the construction joint {Clause 6.2.5(2),
EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}. Rough means a surface with at least 3 mm roughness (R
t
>3 mm),
achieved by raking, exposing the aggregate or other methods giving an equivalent behaviour.

3.6 Anchorage of reinforcement

The reinforcement has to be anchored at places where it is no longer needed. These situations
may occur:
when the load path of the tensile force has ended (e.g. support, figure 3.6.a)
at curtailment of reinforcement (see figure 3.6.b)
compression bar anchorage (see figure 3.6.c).

Crack limitation
Compression cord and strut
(concrete)
Tension cord Tension ties
J oint to be
roughened
Figure 3.4: Strut-and-tie-model
rebar connections

6 / 2010

688

3.7 Lapped splice of reinforcement

Lapped splices are used to achieve continuity in the tensile tie of the truss
model at construction joints. The load from one bar to the other is transferred
by means of compressive struts in the concrete. A 45-truss model is
assumed.
The resulting splitting force (design bond stress) is limited to a value
depending on the surface characteristics of the reinforcement, the tensile
strength of the concrete and confinement of surrounding concrete. This
depends on sufficient concrete cover, spacing of bar, transverse pressure
and by the transverse reinforcement {Clause 6.6, EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}.

4 EC2 design
4.1 General

The actual position of the reinforcement in the existing structure shall be determined on the basis of the
construction documentation and taken into account when designing. The transfer of shear forces between new
concrete and existing structure shall be designed according to EC2 EN 1992-1-1:2004. See also paragraph 3.4
Strut-and-tie model The joints for concreting must be roughened to at least such an extent that aggregate
protrude. See also paragraph 3.5 J oint to be roughened.

The design of post-installed rebar connections and determination of the internal section forces to be transferred in
the construction joint shall be verified in accordance with EC2 EN 1992-1-1:2004. When ascertaining the tensile
force in the rebar, allowance shall be made for the statically effective height of the bonded-in reinforcement. See
also paragraph 5.2 Example with overlap joint

Figure 3.6.c:
Compression
Figure 3.6.a:
Support, truss
Figure 3.6.b:
Tensile force has ended
Figure 3.7: Lapped splice

rebar connections

6 / 2010

689
4.2 Determination of the basic anchorage length

The calculation of the required anchorage length shall take into consideration the type of steel and bond properties
of the reinforcement.

The required basic anchorage length l
b,rqd
shall be determined in accordance with clause 8.4.3, EC2:
EN1992-1-1:2004:

l
b,rqd
=(d
s
/ 4) (
sd
/ f
bd
)

with: d
s
=diameter of the rebar

sd
=calculated design stress of the rebar
f
bd
=design value of bond strength according to corresponding ETA, in consideration of the
coefficient related to the quality of bond conditions and, of the coefficient related to the bar
diameter and of the drilling technique. Refer to the relevant approval or technical data
sheet for details.

4.3 Determination of the design anchorage length

The required design anchorage length l
bd
shall be determined in accordance with clause 8.4.4, EC2: EN 1992-1-
1:2004:
l
bd
=
1

2

3

4

5
l
b,rqd
l
b,min

Where
1
,
2
,
3
,
4
and
5
are coefficients given in Table 4.1.

1
is for the effect of the form of the bars assuming adequate cover
(post-installed reinforcement is always straight)

2
is for the effect of concrete minimum cover

( )
0 0 d 2
/d d c 0,15 1 =
straight bars; ( ) c ; c ; a/2 min c
1 d
=

With no edge distance,
2
=0,7 if the spacing given in the table below are fulfilled:
d
s
(mm) 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 25 26 28 30 32 34 36 40
Spacing (mm) 56 70 84 98 112 126 140 154 168 175 182 196 210 224 238 252 280
a (mm) 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132 144 150 156 168 180 192 204 216 240

3
is for the effect of confinement by transverse reinforcement

4
is for the influence of one or more welded transverse bars along the design
anchorage length l
bd
. (no welded transverse reinforcement possible with post-
installed reinforcement)

5
is for the effect of the pressure transverse to the plane of splitting along the
design anchorage length.

The product (
2
5
) 0,7

rebar connections

6 / 2010

690
l
b,rqd
=according to section 5.2
l
b,min
=minimum anchorage length according to clause 8.4.4, EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004
=max {0.3 l
b,rqd
; 10d
s
; 100 mm}under tension
=max {0.6 l
b,rqd
; 10d
s
; 100 mm}under compression
(Please note that the minimum anchorage length may be increased by factor 1,5 according
to EOTA TR023, 4.2. Refer to the relevant approval or technical data sheet for details.)

Table 4.1: Values of
1
,
2
,
3
,
4
and
5
coefficients
Influencing factor Type of anchorage Reinforcement bar
In tension In compression
Shape of bars Straight
1
=1.0
1
=1.0
Concrete cover Straight
2
=1 0.15(c
d

)/
0.7
1.0
2
=1.0
Confinement by
transverse
reinforcement
Straight
3
=1 K
0.7
1.0
3
=1.0
Confinement by
welded transverse
reinforcement
Straight
4
=1.0
4
=1.0
Confinement by
transverse pressure
Straight
5
=1 0.04p
0.7
1.0
-
where:
=(A
st
- A
st,min
)/ A
s

A
st
cross-sectional area of the transverse reinforcement along the design anchorage length lbd
A
st,min
cross-sectional area of the minimum transverse reinforcement =0.25 As for beams and 0 for slabs
As area of a single anchored bar with maximum bar diameter
K values shown in Figure 4.10
p transverse pressure [MPa] at ultimate limit state along lbd

Figure 4.3 : Values of K for beams and slabs

4.4 Overlap joints

Forces are transmitted from one bar to another by lapping the bars. The detailing of laps between bars shall be
such that:
- the transmission of the forces from one bar to the next is assured
- spalling of the concrete in the neighbourhood of the joints does not occur
- large cracks which affect the performance of the structure do not occur

rebar connections

6 / 2010

691
Laps between bars should not be located in areas of high moments / forces (e.g. plastic hinges) and at any section
normally be arranged symmetrically. The arrangement of lapped bars should comply with Figure 4.4. The clear
distance between lapped bars should be 4 and 50 mm, otherwise the lap length should be increased by a
length equal to the clear space where it exceeds 4 or 50 mm.

Figure 4.4: Adjacent laps

The required design lap length l
0
shall be determined in accordance with clause 8.7.3, EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004:
l
0
=
1

2

3

5

6
l
b,rqd
l
0,min

with: l
b,rqd
=according to section 4.2
l
0,min
=minimum lap length =max {0.3
6
l
b,rqd
; 15d
s
; 200 mm}
(Please note that the minimum anchorage length may be increased by factor 1,5
according to EOTA TR023, 4.2. Refer to the relevant approval or technical data sheet for
details.)
Values of
1
,
2
,
3
and
5
may be taken from Table 4.1; however, for the calculation of
3
, A
st,min
should be taken
as 1,0 A
s
(
sd
/f
yd
), with A
s
=area of one lapped bar.

6
=(
1
/25)0.5 but neither not exceeding 1,5 nor less than 1,0, where
1
is the percentage of reinforcement lapped
within 0.65l
0
from the centre of the lap length considered. Values of
6
are given in Table 4.2. (Note: For post-
installed rebar applications
6
=1,5 for the majority of the cases)

Table 4.2: Values of the coefficient
6

Percentage of lapped bars
relative to the total cross-
section area
<25% 33% 50% >50%
6
1 1,15 1,4 1,5

4.5 Embedment depth for overlap joints

Overlap joint for rebars:
For calculation of the effective embedment depth of overlap joints the concrete cover at end-face of the post-
installed rebar c1 shall be considered:
l
v
l
0
+c
1

with: l
0
=required lap length according to paragraph 4.4.
c
1
=concrete cover at end-face of bonded-in rebar. See Figure 4.5

3
rebar connections

6 / 2010

692

Figure 4.5: Concrete cover c
1

If the clear distance between the overlapping bars is greater than 4d
s
the lap length shall be enlarged by the
difference between the actual clear distance and 4d
s
.

4.6 Concrete cover

The minimum concrete cover required for bonded-in rebars is shown in the ETA approvals in relation to the drilling
method and the hole tolerance. Furthermore the minimum concrete cover given in clause 4.4.1.2, EC2: EN 1992-1-
1: 2004 shall be observed.

4.7 Transverse reinforcement

The requirements of transverse reinforcement in the area of the post-installed rebar connection shall comply with
clause 8.7.4, EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004.

4.8 Connection joint

In case of a carbonated surface of the existing concrete structure the carbonated layer shall be removed in the
area of the post installed rebar connection with a diameter of d
s
+60 mm prior to the installation of the new rebar.
The depth of concrete to be removed shall correspond to at least the minimum concrete cover for the respective
environmental conditions in accordance with EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004.

rebar connections

6 / 2010

693
h =300 d =260
h =300
a
1
=130 a
l
=260
l
n
=6,50 m
5 Design examples
5.1 Anchorage: End support of slab, simply supported

slab: l
n
= 6,50 m, Q
k
= 5 kN/m
2
,h = 300 mm,d = 260 mm
wall: h =300 mm
Concrete strength class: C20/25, dry concrete
Properties of reinforcement: f
yk
=500 N/mm2
Short-term/long-term temperature is 20C
Fire resistance: F90 (90 minutes)
Loads: G
d
=1,35 x 7,5 =10,1 kN/m;
Q
d
=1,5 x 5,0 =7,5 kN/m
= 17,6 kN/m

Structural analysis (design forces) based on l
eff
:
M
Sd
=17,6 x 6,762 / 8 =100,5 kNm/m
V
Sd
=17,6 x (6,76 / 2) =59,5 kN/m

Bottom reinforcement required at mid span:
A
s,req
=100,5 x 1,15 / (0,26 x 0,9 x 0,5) =988 mm/m
reinforcement provided: 16, s =200 mm;
A
s,prov
=1010 mm/m

Bottom reinforcement at support:
A
s,min
=0,4 x 1 x 2,2 x 150 x 1000 / 500 =264 mm/m {Clause 7.3.2(2), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
A
s,min
=0,50 x 988 =494 mm
2
/m {Clause 9.3.1.2(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}

{Clause 9.3.1.1(4), EC 2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
A
s,min
=0,25 x 988 =247 mm/m {Clause 9.2.1.4(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
A
s,req
=59,5 x 1 / 0,9 x 1,15 / 0,5 =152 mm
2
/m (al =d) {Clause 9.2.1.4(2), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
Decisive is 494 mm/m reinforcement provided: 12, s =200 mm; A
s,prov
=565 mm/m

a) Anchorage according to European Technical Approval (ETA) 08/0105, Post-installed
rebar connections with Hilti injection mortar HIT-RE 500

Determination of the basic anchorage length

b,rqd
shall be determined in accordance with EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004, section
8.4.3:
l
b,rqd
=(d
s
/ 4) x (
sd
/ f
bd
)
with: d
s
=diameter of the rebar =12 mm

sd
=calculated design stress of the rebar =(494 / 565) x (500 / 1,15) =380 N/mm
f
bd
=design value of bond strength according to corresponding ETA =2,3 N/mm
l
b,rqd
=(12 / 4) x (380 / 2,3) =496 mm

rebar connections

6 / 2010

694
Determination of the design anchorage length
bd
8.4.4:
l
bd
=
1

2

3

4

5
l
b,rqd
l
b,min

with: l
b,rqd
as above

1
=1,0 for straight bars

2
=1 0,15(c
d
)/

2
is for the effect of concrete minimum cover 0,7 1,0
a =200 12 =188 mm
a/2 =94 mm with c1 and c >94 mm
=12 mm

2
=0,7 Straight bars, c
d
=min (a/2, c
1
, c)

3
=1,0 because of no transverse reinforcement

4
=1,0 because of no welded transverse reinforcement

5
=1,0 influence of transverse pressure is neglected in this example

l
bd
=0,7 x 496 =347 mm

2/3l
bd
=231 mm 230 mm
l
b,min
=minimum anchorage length
{Clause 8.4.4(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
=max {0,3 x 496; 10 x 12; 100}=149 mm

b) Anchorage according to Hilti HIT-Rebar design method (splitting):

Reinforcement provided: 12, s =200 mm; A
s,prov
=565 mm/m
Mortar: Hilti HIT-RE 500
F
Sd
=494 x 0,5 / 1,15 =214,8 kN/m

Steel:
F
Rd
=5 x (f
yk
x x x ) /
s
=245,9 kN/m >214,8 kN/m ok

Concrete (splitting) / Mortar (pull-out):
Due to large edge distances in all directions (confined concrete) the failure mode splitting of
concrete is not becoming decisive, but the pull out failure mode: f
bd
=6.9 N/mm
2

F
Rd
=n(l
bd
x x x f
bd
) =5(l
bd
x 12 x x 6.9) =214.8 kN/m
l
bd
=165 mm
l
b,min
=120 mm (10 x ) ok

Fire resistance:
Fire rating class F 90 (90 min.) (design table see paragraph 4.7):

F
sT,req
=0,6 x 66,1 =39,7 kN/m =7,9 kN/bar {Clause 2.4.3 (4) and (5), EC2: ENV 1992-1-2:1995}

Hilti HIT-RE 500: 12 l
inst
=14,5 cm; F
s,T
=6,02 kN
l
inst
=18 cm; F
s,T
=15,0 kN

rebar connections

6 / 2010

695
Intermediate values may be interpolated linearly: l
inst
=16,5 cm; F
s,T
=11,2 kN/bar >7,9 kN/bar

l
inst
=165 mm

Top reinforcement

Top reinforcement at support:
Minimum reinforcement:
25% of bottom steel required at mid-span
{Clause 9.3.1.2(2), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
A
s,req
=0,25 x 988 =247 mm
2
/m
A
s,min
=0,4 x 1 x 2,2 x 150 x 1000 / 500 =264 mm
2
/m
{Clause 7.3.2(2), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}

Decisive is 264 mm/m
reinforcement provided: 12, s =300 mm; A
s,prov
=377 mm/m

a) Anchorage according to European Technical Approval (ETA) 08/0105, Post-installed

Determination of the basic anchorage length

b,rqd
8.4.3:
l
b,rqd
=(d
s
/ 4) x (
sd
/ f
bd)

with: d
s

sd
=calculated design stress of the rebar =(264 / 377) x (500 / 1.15) =304 N/mm
f
bd
l
b,rqd
=(12 / 4) x (304 / 2,3) =397 mm

Determination of the design anchorage length

bd
8.4.4:
l
bd
=
1

2

3

4

5
l
b,rqd
l
b,min

with: l
b,rqd
as above

1

2
=1 0,15(c
d
)/

2
a =300 12 =288 mm
a/2 =144 mm with c1 and c >144 mm
=12 mm
0,7

3

4
=1,0 because of no welded transverse reinforcement

5
l
bd
=0,7 x 397 =278 mm 280 mm Can be critical with drilling!
l
b,min
=minimum anchorage length {Clause 8.4.4(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
=max {0.3 x 397; 10 x 12; 100}=120 mm ok

h =300 d =260
300
a
1
=130 a
l
=260
l
n
=6.50 m
rebar connections

6 / 2010

696
b) Anchorage according to Hilti HIT Rebar Design Method (CC-Method):

s,prov
=377 mm
2
/m

A
s,min
=264 mm
2
/m

Design Load:
F
Sd
=A
s,min
f
yk
/
s
=264 x 500 / 1.15 =114.8 kN/m

F
bd
=F
sd
s/1000
=114.8 kN/m 300/1000 =34.4 kN/bar

Steel Verification:
F
Rd
=

4
1 1000
2

s
yk
f
s
mm

=
m kN m kN / 8 . 114 / 9 . 163
4
1
12
15 . 1
500
300
1000
2
> =

Steel ok!

Combined pull-out and concrete cone failure:
Np s
N p
N p
p Rk p Rk
A
A
N N
,
0
,
, 0
, ,
=

Rk
Mc bd
bd
Mp
Rk
bk p Rd
F
l l N

= =
0 0 0
,

mm l
bd
9 . 127
15 12
1 . 2 4 . 34
0
=

=
(
Rk
from approval ETA-04/0027; table 13)

2
, ,
0
,
115200mm s s A
Np cr Np cr N p
= =

mm s c
mm
h s
Np cr Np cr
ef
ucr Rk
Np cr
7 . 169 5 . 0
7 . 383 9 . 127 3 4 . 339
5 . 7
15
12 20
3
5 . 7
20
, ,
5 . 0
5 . 0
,
,
= =
= =

( )
2
, , ,
, ,
101820 4 . 339 300 5 . 0
;
mm s c s A
s s c c
Np cr Np cr N p
Np cr Np cr
= = + =
< >

0 . 1 1 3 . 0 7 . 0
,
,
,
= + =
Np s
Np cr
Np s
c
c

mm
A
A F
l
Np s N p
Mp
Rk
N p bd
cc po bd
5 . 144
0 . 1 101820
1 . 2
15
12
115200 4 . 34
, ,
0
,
) & (
=

=

rebar connections

6 / 2010

697
Concrete cone failure:

N s
N c
N c
c Rk c Rk
A
A
N N
,
0
,
, 0
, ,
=

Mc
cube ck
bd
bd ef cube ck c Rk
f k
F
l h f k N
= =
3
2
, 1
0 5 . 1
, 1
0
,

k
1
=7.2 cracked concrete
k
1
=10.1 uncracked concrete

mm l
bd
1 . 116 5 . 1
25 1 . 10
4 . 34
3
2
0
=
=

mm c h s
N cr ef N cr
15 . 174 ; 3 . 348 1 . 116 3 3
, ,
= = = =

A
0
c,N
=121312.9mm
2

2
, , ,
, ,
104490 3 . 348 300 ) 5 . 0 (
;
mm s c s A
s s c c
N cr N cr N c
N cr N cr
= = + =
< >

0 . 1 1 3 . 0 7 . 0
,
,
,
= + =
Np s
Np cr
Np s
c
c

mm
A
A
f k
F
l
Mc
N s N c
N c
cube ck
bd
cc bd
8 . 134 5 . 1
0 . 1
1
104490
9 . 121312
25 1 . 10
4 . 34 1
3
2
, ,
,
0
3
2
, 1
) (
=

Splitting failure:

only needed if c 1.2c
cr,sp
and h 2h
min
:

h/h
ef
=300mm / 144.5mm =2.08; c
cr,sp
=1.0h
ef
=144.5mm

c >173.4mm ok

h
min
=max(h
ef
+30mm; h
ef
+2d
0
) =max(174.5; 176.5) =176.5mm

h=300mm 353mm not true, verification needed!!!

sp h N s
N c
N c
sp Rk sp Rk
A
A
N N
, ,
0
,
, 0
, ,
=

A
0
c,N
=83521mm
2

s
cr,sp
=289mm

2
, , ,
, ,
86700 289 300 ) 5 . 0 (
;
mm s c s A
s s c c
N cr N cr N c
N cr N cr
= = + =
< >

rebar connections

6 / 2010

698
0 . 1 1 3 . 0 7 . 0
,
,
,
= + =
Np s
Np cr
Np s
c
c

39 . 1
39 . 1
2
1
42 . 1
5 . 176
300
,
3
2
min
,
3
2
3
2
min
,
=
=
=
sp h
ef
sp h
sp h
h
h
h
h

mm
A
A
f k
F
l
Mc
sp h N s N c
N c
cube ck
bd
sp bd
5 . 80 5 . 1
39 . 1 0 . 1
1
86700
83521
25 1 . 10
4 . 34 1
3
2
, , ,
,
0
3
2
, 1
) (
=
=

Embedment depth to use:

l
bd
=max[l
bd(pp&cc)
; l
bd(cc)
; l
bd(sp)
]

l
bd
= 144.5mm 10 =120mm ok

5.2 Example with overlap joint

Bending moment: M
Sd
=120 kNm/m
slab: h =300 mm; d =250 mm, cs =50 mm
Concrete strength class: C25/30,
Properties of reinforcement: f
yk
=500 N/mm
Fire resistance: F60 (60 minutes),
Light weight plaster for fire protection: 30 mm

top reinforcement: 16, s =150 mm; A
s,prov
=1340 mm/m
cover to face c
1
=30 mm
bottom reinforcement: 10, s =200 mm; A
s,prov
=393 mm/m
Note: reduced load in cast-in bar due to lever arm: =250 / 270 =0,93

a) Overlap joints according to European Technical Approval (ETA) 08/0105, Post-installed

Post-installed reinforcement
The required design lap length l
0
shall be determined in accordance with EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004, section 8.7.3:
l
0
=
1

2

3

5

6
l
b,rqd
l
0,min

with: l
b,rqd
the basic anchorage length, l
b,rqd
=(d
s
/ 4) x (
sd
/ f
bd
)
d
s

sd
d =250 mm, z 0,9 x 250 =225 mm
A
s,req
=120 x 1,15 / (0,225 x 0,5) =1227 mm
2
/m

sd
=(1227 / 1340) x (500 / 1,15) =398 N/mm
2

f
bd
2
10

d =250
30
c
s
=50
30
h =300
l
0
l
v

rebar connections

6 / 2010

699
l
b,rqd
=(16 / 4) x (398 / 2.7) =590 mm

1

2
=1 0,15(c
d
)/

2
c =50 - 8 =42 mm c
d
=42 mm
=16 mm
0,76

3

5

6
=1,5 influence of percentage of lapped bars relative to the total cross-section area
{Clause 8.7.3(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
l
0
=0,76 x 1,5 x 590 =673 mm 675 mm
l
0,min
=minimum lap length {Clause 8.7.3(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
=max{0.3 x 1.5 x 590; 15 x 16; 200}=266 mm ok

Cast-in reinforcement
l
0
=
1

2

3

5

6
l
b,rqd
l
0,min

with: l
b,rqd
the basic anchorage length, l
b,rqd
=(d
s
/ 4) x (
sd
/ f
bd
)
d
s

sd
d =270 mm, z 0,9 x 270 =243 mm
A
s,req
=120 x 1,15 / (0,243 x 0,5) =1136 mm
2
/m

sd
=(1136 / 1340) x (500 / 1,15) =369 N/mm
2

f
bd
2

l
b,rqd
=(16 / 4) x (369 / 2.7) =547 mm

2
=1 0,15(c
d
)/

2
c =30 - 8 =22 mm c
d
=22 mm
=16 mm
0,94
l
0
=0,94 x 1,5 x 547 =771 mm 770 mm Cast-in reinforcement is decisive!
l
0,min
=minimum lap length {Clause 8.7.3(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
=max{0,3 x 1,5 x 547; 15 x 16; 200}=246 mm ok

Embedment depth for overlap joints for rebars:
l
v
l
0
+c
1

with: l
0
=required lap length =770 mm (see above)
c
1
=concrete cover at end face of cast-in rebar =30 mm
l
v
=800 mm
If the clear distance between the overlapping rebars is greater than 4d
s
(4 x 16 =64 mm) the lap length shall be
enlarged by the difference between the clear distance and 4d
s
.
Most unfavorable case post-installed rebar is located right in the middle between the cast-in rebars. The clear
distance between the overlap is: s
22
=a
1
/2
2
/2 ; a =(75
2
+20
2
)
1/2

s
22
= 77,6 mm 8 mm 8 mm =61,6 mm
61,6 <64 l
v
=800 mm

rebar connections

6 / 2010

700
b) Overlap joints according to Hilti HIT-Rebar design method (splitting):

Post-installed reinforcement
s,prov
=1340 mm/m
F
Sd
=1340 x 398 =533,3 kN/m (see above)

Steel:
F
Rd
=6,66(f
yk
x x 2 x ) / s =582,2 kN/m >533,3 kN/m ok

Mortar (pull-out):
f
bd
=7,1 N/mm
2

Concrete (splitting):
(c +Ktr) / =3.1 >2.5 f
bd
is calculated according
with: c =min{c, s/2}=50 mm
Ktr =0
=16 mm

'
c
f =compressive strength of concrete =25 N/mm2 for C25/30
=reinforcement size factor =0.8 for 18
f
bd
=4,6 N/mm
2

Due to edge distances (c =50 mm) and spacing (s =150 mm) the failure mode splitting of
concrete is decisive.

6
=1,5 f
bd
=3,1 N/mm
2
{Clause 8.7.3(1), EC2: EN 1992-1-1:2004}
F
Rd
=n(l
0
x x x f
bd
) =6.66(l
0
x 16 x x 3,1) =533,3 kN/m
l
0
=514 mm

Cast-in reinforcement
(as above)
l
0
=770 mm Cast-in reinforcement is decisive!

Embedment depth for overlap joints for rebars:
l
v
= 800 mm

Fire resistance:
Fire rating class F 60 (60 minutes) (design table see paragraph 4.7):
Clear concrete cover including light weight plaster: c =4 +3 =7 cm
F
sT,req
=0.6 x 120 / 0,225 =320 kN/m =48 kN/bar {Clause 2.4.3 (4) und (5), EC2: ENV 1992-
1-2:1995}
T,req
=48000 / (16 x x 770) =1,2 N/mm
2

Hilti HIT-RE 500:
T
=1,0 N/mm2 <1,2 N/mm
2
increase plaster to 4 cm c =8 cm,
T
=1,4 N/mm
2
ok

4
5 . 2 75 . 0 5 . 2
'

+
+
=
tr
c
bd
K c
f
f

rebar connections

6 / 2010

701
6 Corrosion behavior

The Swiss Association for Protection against Corrosion (SGK) was given the assignment of evaluating the
corrosion behavior of fastenings post-installed in concrete using the Hilti HIT-HY 150, Hilti HIT-HY 150 MAX and
Hilti HIT-RE 500 injection systems.

Corrosion tests were carried out. The behavior of the two systems had to be evaluated in relation to their use in
field practice and compared with the behavior of cast-in reinforcement. The SGK can look back on extensive
experience in this field, especially on expertise in the field of repair and maintenance work.
The result can be summarized as follows:

Hilti HIT-HY 150 + Hilti HIT-HY 150 MAX
The Hilti HIT-HY 150 and Hilti HIT-HY 150 MAX systems in combination with reinforcing bars can be
considered resistant to corrosion when they are used in sound, alkaline concrete. The alkalinity of the
adhesive mortar safeguards the initial passivation of the steel. Owing to the porosity of the adhesive mortar,
an exchange takes place with the alkaline pore solution of the concrete.
If rebars are bonded-in into chloride-free concrete using this system, in the event of later chloride exposure,
the rates of corrosion are about half those of rebars that are cast-in.
In concrete containing chlorides, the corrosion behavior of the system corresponds to that of cast-in rebars.
Consequently, the use of unprotected steel in concrete exposed to chlorides in the past or possibly in the
future is not recommended because corrosion must be expected after only short exposure times.

Hilti HIT-RE 500
If the Hilti HIT-RE 500 system is used in corrosive surroundings, a sufficiently thick coat of adhesive
significantly increases the time before corrosion starts to attack the bonded-in steel.
The HIT-RE 500 system may be described as resistant to corrosion, even in concrete that is carbonated and
contains chlorides, if a coat thickness of at least 1 mm can be ensured. In this case, the unprotected steel in
the concrete joint and in the new concrete is critical.
If the coat thickness is not ensured, the HIT-RE 500 system may be used only in sound concrete. A rebar may
then also be in contact with the wall of the drilled hole. At these points, the steel behaves as though it has a
thin coating of epoxy resin.
In none of the cases investigated did previously rusted steel (without chlorides) show signs of an attack by
corrosion, even in concrete containing chlorides.
Neither during this study an acceleration of corrosion was found at defective points in the adhesive nor was
there any reference to this in literature. Even if a macro-element forms, the high resistance to it spreading
inhibits a locally increased rate of corrosion.
Information in reference data corresponds with the results of this study.

7 Fire design
If passive fire prevention requirements have to be met, the suitability of rebar connections should be verified
additionally to ULS cold design.

Large-area building components (walls and floors) can be verified according to tables 1 and 2. The design tables
are derived from tests at the University / IBMB Braunschweig following the Standard ISO 834 temperature/time
curve. Design for fire resistance is carried out in line with several specific standards. On the following pages only
the fire data for Standard according EC2 are given.
Details to all available Standards and specific reports are named below the following tables.

Note for the following tables 1 to 6: F
s,T
=force in bar when exposed to fire.
Intermediate values may be interpolated linearly. Extrapolating is not permitted.

rebar connections

6 / 2010

702
Hilti HIT-HY 150 rebar

Bar perpendicular to slab or wall surface exposed to fire
Temperature time curve (acc. ISO 834)

Table 1: Maximum force in rebar in conjuction with HIT-HY 150 as a function of embedment depth for the
fire resistance classes F30 to F180 (yield strength f
yk
= 500 N/mm) according EC2
a)

Bar
Drill
hole
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
[mm] [mm]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
120 10,6 120 5,0 120 2,8 120 1,9 120 0,7
140 14,1 140 8,4 140 4,5 140 3,3 140 1,5
150 15,6 160 11,9 160 7,9 160 5,2 160 2,7
180 15,4 180 11,4 180 8,6 200 5,3
190 15,6 200 14,9 200 12,1 240 9,6
8 10
210 15,6 220 15,6 280 15,6
150 19,8 150 12,7 150 1,7 150 5,1 150 2,6
160 22,0 160 14,9 160 9,9 160 6,5 160 3,3
180 24,3 180 19,3 180 14,3 180 10,7 180 4,9
200 23,7 200 18,7 200 15,1 220 8,5
210 24,3 220 23,1 220 19,5 260 16,4
10 12
230 24,3 250 24,3 300 24,3
180 31,7 180 23,1 180 17,1 180 12,9 180 5,9
200 35,1 200 28,4 200 22,4 200 18,1 200 8,0
220 33,7 220 27,7 220 23,4 240 14.,4
230 35,1 240 32,9 240 28,7 280 24,9
12 16
250 35,1 270 35,1 320 35,1
210 46,2 210 36,2 210 29,2 210 24,2 210 10,6
220 47,7 220 39,3 220 32,2 220 27,3 220 11,9
240 45,4 240 38,4 240 33,5 240 16,8
250 47,7 260 44,6 260 39,6 280 29,1
270 47,7 280 45,8 320 41,4
14 18
290 47,7 350 47,7
240 62,3 240 51,9 240 43,9 240 38,3 240 19,2
260 59,0 260 51,0 260 45,3 280 33,2
270 62,3 280 58,0 280 52,3 320 47,3
300 62,3 300 59,4 360 61,4
16 20
310 62,3 370 62,3
300 97,4 300 91,3 300 81,3 300 74,3 300 50,3
320 97,4 320 90,1 320 83,0 320 59,1
340 97,4 340 91,8 360 76,7
360 97,4 400 94,3
20 25
410 97,4
l
inst

rebar connections

6 / 2010

703
Bar
Drill
hole
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
[mm] [mm]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
l
inst

[mm]
F
S,T
[kN]
375 152,2 375 152,2 375 142,9 375 134,0 375 104,1
380 145,6 380 136,7 380 106,9
400 152,2 400 147,7 400 117,9
410 152,2 440 139,9
25 32
470 152,2
Remark: The minimum setting depth is related to l > 15 x d
s

a)
For tables according British- and Singapore Standard (resistance class up to F240) see Warringtonfire report WF
166402 or/and IBMB Braunschweig report No 3162/6989 (including supplements).

Hilti HIT-HY 150 rebar

Bar connection parallel to slab or wall surface exposed to fire

Max. bond stress,
T
, depending on actual clear concrete cover for classifying the fire
resistance.
It must be verified that the actual force in the bar during a fire, F
s,T
, can be taken up by the bar
connection of the selected length, l
inst
. Note: Cold design for ULS is mandatory.
F
s, T
(l
inst
c
f
)
T
where: (l
inst
c
f
)

l
s
;

l
s
=lap length

=nominal diameter of bar
l
inst
c
f

=selected overlap joint length; this must be at least l
s
,
but may not be assumed to be more than 80
T
=bond stress when exposed to fire

Table 2: Critical temperature-dependent bond stress,
crit,T,
concerning overlap joint for Hilti-HIT-HY 150
injection adhesive in relation to fire resistance class and required minimum concrete coverage c.
Clear concrete cover c Max. bond stress,
T
[N/mm]
[mm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
20 0,7 0
30 1,4 0,2
40 1,9 0,7
0
50 2,4 1,2 0,4
0
60 2,8 1,7 0,7 0,3
70 4,9 2,2 1,2 0,7
0
l
inst
c

c
f
rebar connections

6 / 2010

704
T
[N/mm]
[mm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
80 2,5 1,7 1,0 0,2
90 2,8 2,0 1,5 0,5
100 4,0 2,3 1,9 0,7
110 4,5 2,7 2,3 1,2
120 6,5 2,9 2,6 1,6
130 4,0 2,8 1,9
140 6,5 3,0 2,2
150 4,5 2,3
160 6,5 2,5
170 2,6
180 2,7
190 2,8
200 2,9
210 3,0
220 4,5
230 6,5
240
7,0
7,0
7,0
7,0
7,0

Hilti HIT-HY 150 MAX rebar


Table 3: Maximum force in rebar in conjuction with HIT-HY 150 MAX as a function of embedment depth for
the fire resistance classes F30 to F180 (yield strength f
yk
a)
.
Bar Drill hole Max. F
s,T
l
inst
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
[mm] [mm] [kN] [mm] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN]
80 2,18 0,73 0,24 0,05 0
120 8,21 2,90 1,44 0,82 0,18
170 16,2 9,95 5,99 3,69 1,35
210 16,2 13,01 9,52 3,6
230 16,2 13,04 5,74
250 16,2 9,26
8 12 16,2
300 16,2
100 5,87 1,95 0,84 0,4 0
150 16,86 8,06 4,45 2,82 0,96
190 25,3 16,83 11,86 7,65 2,91
230 25,3 20,66 16,29 7,18
260 25,3 22,89 13,77
280 25,3 18,17
10 14 25,3
320 25,3
l
inst

rebar connections

6 / 2010

705
Bar Drill hole Max. F
s,T
l
inst
F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
[mm] [mm] [kN] [mm] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN]
120 12,32 4,35 2,16 1,23 0,27
180 28,15 17,56 11,59 7,14 2,69
220 36,4 28,12 22,15 16,91 6,82
260 36,4 32,7 27,47 16,53
280 36,4 32,75 21,81
300 36,4 27,08
12 16 36,4
340 36,4
140 20,53 8,77 4,74 2,95 0,95
210 42,08 29,72 22,76 16,66 6,3
240 49,6 38,96 32,0 25,89 13,12
280 49,6 44,31 38,21 25,44
300 49,6 44,36 31,6
330 49,6 40,83
14 18 49,6
360 49,6
160 30,5 16,38 9,26 5,77 2,04
240 58,65 44,53 36,57 29,59 15,0
260 64,8 51,56 43,61 36,63 22,04
300 64,8 57,68 50,70 36,11
330 64,8 61,26 46,67
360 64,8 57,22
16 20 64,8
400 64,8
200 55,72 38,06 28,12 19,39 7,22
250 77,71 60,06 50,11 41,39 23,15
310 101,2 86,45 76,5 67,78 49,54
350 101,2 94,09 85,37 67,13
370 101,2 94,16 75,93
390 101,2 84,72
20 25 101,2
430 101,2
250 97,13 75,07 62,46 51,73 28,94
280 113,63 91,56 79,13 68,23 45,43
370 158,1 141,04 128,61 117,71 94,91
410 158,1 150,60 139,70 116,90
430 158,1 150,69 127,90
450 158,1 138,89
25 32 158,1
500 158,1
a)
For HIT-HY 150 MAX rebar only the standard acc. EC2 is available (Data also in Warringtonfire report
WF 166402 or/and IBMB Braunschweig report No 3884/8246-CM.

Hilti HIT-HY 150 MAX rebar

Max. bond stress,
T
, depending on actual clear concrete cover for classifying the fire resistance.
s,T
, can be taken up by the bar connection of the
selected length, l
inst
F
s, T
(l
inst
c
f
)
T
where: (l
inst
c
f
)

l
s
;
l
s
=lap length

l
inst
c
f

s
,
T
rebar connections

6 / 2010

706
crit,T,
concerning overlap joint for Hilti-HIT-HY 150
MAX injection adhesive in relation to fire resistance class and required minimum concrete coverage c.
T
[N/mm]
[mm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180
30 0,46
35 0,56
40 0,69
0
45 0,84 0,37
50 1,04 0,45
55 1,22 0,53
60 1,47 0,62
0
65 1,85 0,73 0,38
70 0,87 0,46
75 1,02 0,52
0
80 1,21 0,59 0,37
85 1,35 0,67 0,43
90 1,52 0,78 0,52
95 1,74 0,91 0,58
100 2,02 1,07 0,66
0
105 1,21 0,77 0,38
110 1,39 0,91 0,44
115 1,61 1,05 0,48
120 1,89 1,21 0,53
125 2,12 1,37 0,61
130 1,57 0,69
135 1,82 0,75
140 2,13 0,81
145 0,89
150 0,88
155 0,97
160 1,08
165 1,22
170 1,40
175 1,62
180 1,90
185 2,05
190
2,20
2,20
2,20
2,20
2,20

Hilti HIT-RE 500 rebar


l
inst

rebar connections

6 / 2010

707
Table 5: Maximum force in rebar in conjuction with HIT-RE 500 as a function of embedment depth for the
fire resistance classes F30 to F240 (yield strength f
yk
a)
.
Bar
Drill hole

Max. F
s,T
l
inst
Fire resistance of bar in [kN]
[mm] [mm] [kN] [mm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240
65 1,38 0,57 0,19 0,05 0 0
80 2,35 1,02 0,47 0,26 0 0
95 3,87 1,68 0,88 0,55 0,12 0
115 7,3 3,07 1,71 1,14 0,44 0,18
150 16,19 8,15 4,59 3,14 1,41 0,8
180 16,19 9,99 6,75 2,94 1,7
205 16,19 12,38 5,08 2,86
220 16,19 6,95 3,82
265 16,19 8,57
8 10 16,19
305 16,19
80 2,94 1,27 0,59 0,33 0 0
100 5,68 2,45 1,31 0,85 0,24 0
120 10,66 4,44 2,48 1,68 0,68 0,31
140 17,57 7,76 4,38 2,99 1,33 0,73
165 25,29 15,06 8,5 5,79 2,58 1,5
195 25,29 17,63 12,18 5,12 2,93
220 25,29 20,66 8,69 4,78
235 25,29 11,8 6,30
280 25,29 13,86
10 12 25,29
320 25,29
95 5,8 2,52 1,32 0,83 0,18 0
120 12,79 5,33 2,97 2,01 0,82 0,37
145 23,16 10,68 6,02 4,12 1,84 1,03
180 36,42 24,29 14,99 10,12 4,41 2,55
210 36,42 27,38 20,65 8,47 4,74
235 36,42 312,01 14,16 7,56
250 36,42 19,13 9,89
295 36,42 21,43
12 16 36,42
335 36,42
110 10,92 4,65 2,55 1,7 0,61 0,20
140 24,60 10,87 6,13 4,19 1,86 1,03
170 39,12 23,50 13,55 9,2 4,07 2,37
195 49.58 35,6 24,69 17,05 7,17 4,10
225 49.58 39,20 31,34 13,48 7,34
250 49.58 43,44 22,32 11,54
265 49.58 29,49 15,00
310 49.58 31,98
14 18 49.58
350 49.58
130 22,59 9,42 5,30 3,61 1,56 0,8
160 39,17 21,33 11,95 8,15 3,65 2,11
190 55,76 37,92 24,45 17,25 7,35 4,22
210 64,75 48,98 36,51 27,53 11,29 6,32
240 64,75 53,10 44,12 20,88 11,04
265 64,75 57,94 33,7 17,14
280 64,75 42,0 22,17
325 64,75 44,84
16 20 64,75
365 64,75
rebar connections

6 / 2010

708
Bar
Drill hole

Max. F
s,T
l
inst
Fire resistance of bar in [kN]
[mm] [mm] [kN] [mm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240
160 48,97 26,67 14,93 10,18 4,56 2,64
200 76,61 54,31 38,73 27,5 11,42 6,48
240 101,18 81,96 66,37 55,15 26,10 13,8
270 101,18 87,11 75,88 45,58 23,36
295 101,18 93,16 62,86 35,72
310 101,18 73,23 45,69
355 101,18 76,79

20
25 101,18
395 101,18
200 95,77 67,89 48,41 34,37 14,27 8,10
250 138,96 111,09 91,60 77,51 39,86 20,61
275 158,09 132,69 113,2 99,17 61,30 31,81
305 158,09 139,12 125,09 87,22 52,79
330 158,09 146,69 108,82 74,39
345 158,09 121,77 87,34
390 158,09 126,22
25 30 158,09
430 158,09
255 183,40 147,72 122,78 104,82 56,35 28,80
275 205,52 169,84 144,90 126,94 78,46 40,71
325 259,02 225,13 200,19 182,23 133,75 89,68
368 259,02 238,89 220,93 172,46 128,39
380 259,02 243,05 194,58 150,51
395 259,02 211,16 167,09
440 259,02 216,86
32 40 259,02
480 259,02
290 249,87 209,73 181,67 161,46 106,93 59,1
325 293,41 253,27 225,21 205,01 150,47 100,89
355 327,82 290,59 262,54 242,33 187,80 138,22
385 327,82 299,86 279,65 225,12 175,54
410 327,82 310,75 256,22 206,64
425 327,82 274,88 225,30
470 327,82 281,28
36 44 327,82
510 327,82
320 319,10 274,50 243,33 220,87 160,28 105,19
355 367,48 322,88 291,71 269,25 208,66 153,57
385 404,71 364,35 333,18 310,72 250,13 195,04
415 404,71 374,64 352,19 291,60 236,51
440 404,71 386,75 326,16 271,07
455 404,71 346,89 291,80
500 404,71 354,01
40 47 404,71
540 404,71
a)
For tables according the standards to DIN 1045-1988, NF-ENV 1991-2-2(EC2), sterreichische Norm B 4700-
2000, British-, Singapore- and Australian Standards see Warringtonfire report WF 166402 or/and IBMB
Braunschweig report No 3357/0550-5.

Hilti HIT-RE 500 rebar


Max. bond stress,
T
, depending on actual clear concrete cover for classifying the fire resistance.
s,T
, can be taken up by the bar connection of the
selected length, l
inst
F
s, T
(l
inst
c
f
)
T
where: (l
inst
c
f
)

l
s
;

rebar connections

6 / 2010

709
l
s
=lap length

l
inst
c
f

s
,
T

crit,T,
concerning overlap joint for Hilti-HIT RE 500
injection adhesive in relation to fire resistance class and required minimum concrete coverage c.
T
[N/mm]
[mm] F30 F60 F90 F120 F180 F240
10 0
20 0,494
30 0,665
0
40 0,897 0,481
50 1,209 0,623
0
60 1,630 0,806 0,513
0
70 2,197 1,043 0,655 0,487
80 2,962 1,351 0,835 0,614
0
90 3,992 1,748 1,065 0,775 0,457
100 5,382 2,263 1,358 0,977 0,553
0
110 7,255 2,930 1,733 1,233 0,669 0,469
120 9,780 3,792 2,210 1,556 0,810 0,551
130 4,909 2,818 1,963 0,980 0,647
140 6,355 3,594 2,477 1,185 0,759
150 8,226 4,584 3,125 1,434 0,829
160 10.649 5,846 3,943 1,735 1,047
170 7,456 4,974 2,099 1,230
180 9,510 6,276 2,540 1,445
190 7,918 3,037 1,697
200 9,990 3,718 1,993
210 4,498 2,341
220 5,442 2,749
230 6,584 3,228
240 7,966 3,792
250 9,639 4,453
260 5,230
270 6,143
280 7,214
290 8,473
300 9,951
310
11,00
11,00
11,00
11,00
11,00
11,00

rebar connections

6 / 2010

710
8 Fatigue of bonded-in reinforcement for joints with
predominantly cyclical imposed loading
8.1 General notes
For loadbearing elements which are subjected to considerable cyclic stress the bonded-in connections should be
designed for fatigue. In that case evidence for fatigue of reinforcing steel bars, concrete and bond should be
provided separately.
For simple cases it is reasonable to use simplified methods on the safe side.
The partial safety factors for loads are specified in the code for reinforced concrete.
The partial safety factors for material are specified in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Partial safety factors for materials subjected to cyclic loading
Evidence for concrete bond reinforcing bars (steel)
Partial safety factor 1.5 1.8 1.15

8.2 Fatigue of reinforcing bars (steel)
The resistance for fatigue of reinforcing bars (steel) is specified in the actual code for reinforced concrete. The
behaviour of the steel of reinforcing bars bonded-in by means of Hilti HIT is at least as good as cast-in place
reinforcement.

8.3 Fatigue of bond and concrete (simplified approach)
As a simple and conservative approach on the safe side evidence for fatigue is proven if the following equation is
valid:

F
Sd,fat
N
Rd
f
fat

where:
F
Sd,fat
Design value of the anchorage force for the ruling loading model for fatigue.
N
Rd
Design resistance for static load of the anchorage (bond and concrete).
f
fat
Reduction factor for fatigue for bond and concrete: f
fat
=0.5
If max/min of cycles is known, reduction factors are shown in Figure 4.13.

Diagram for a simplified approach
with 210
6
cycles (Weyrauch diagram)

Figure 4.13: Reduction factors for fatigue for bond and concrete
Hilti design software for rebar connections does also the fatigue design.

If the simplified method is not satisfying, additional information using the Woehler - lines is available.
Ask Hilti Technical Service for the Hilti Guideline: TWU-TPF 06a/02 Hilti HIT-Rebar: Fatigue.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
/ N
Rd
Sd,fat max
/ N
Rd
Sd,fat min
0
F
Sd,fat max
F
Sd,fat min
F
Sd,fat
time

Basics of post-installed rebar connections

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Basics of post-installed rebar connections

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Basics of post installed

Você também pode gostar