Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: More On Ungrouted Baseplates for Traffic Signal/Signage Struc ture s

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
But this only PARTIALLY answers my question (which, I'll admit, probably
wasn't framed in such a way to catch all of it).

HOW do you design the anchor bolt embedments?

If it is a "mechanical anchor" I suppose the old "tried and true" method of
ACI 349 might pertain (surely we don't count the "bond strength" between the
smoot anchor bolt and the concrete).

But a "pull out cone" only gets you so much; there is a point beyond which
further embedment is pointless.

I'm just out of my comfy paradigm here and need some further opinions.

Is the study or studies mentioned by you below, available anywhere on the
'net?

-----Original Message-----
From: Sprague, Harold O. [mailto:SpragueHO(--nospam--at)bv.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 1:54 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: More On Ungrouted Baseplates for Traffic Signal/Signage
Struc ture s


Bill,

I would be very surprised if the Texas DOT assumes the embedded template is
serving as a mechanical anchor.  The Texas DOT was the sponsor of several
studies by Lee, Breen, Cook, Doerr, Klinger, Collins and Polyzois on anchor
bolts at the Center for Highway Research and the Center for Transportation
Research at the University of Texas in Austin that concluded that the
embedded nut was more than adequate for anchor bolt anchorage.