ANCHORAGE OF HIGH-STRENGTH

REINFORCING BARS WITH STANDARD HOOKS:

INITIAL TESTS

By

Jeff Peckover

David Darwin

A Report on Research Sponsored by

Electric Power Research Institute

Concrete Steel Reinforcing Institute Education and Research Foundation
University of Kansas Transportation Research Institute
Charles Pankow Foundation
Commercial Metals Company
Gerdau Corporation
Nucor Corporation
MMFX Technologies Corporation

Structural Engineering and Engineering Materials

SL Report 13-1

THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH, INC.

LAWRENCE, KANSAS
January 2013
ii
 Abstract

This report describes the initial tests on the anchorage strength of standard hooked bars in

concrete. The goal of the testing is to determine the effects embedment length, side cover, tail

cover, quantity of transverse reinforcement, location of longitudinal reinforcement, concrete

strength, bar size, and bar bend on the anchorage strength of hooked bars in concrete. Initial

tests have been performed on No. 5 and No. 8 bars, with 90° and 180° hooks, cast in concrete

with a nominal compressive strength of 5000 psi. Further testing will also include No. 11 bars

and concrete strengths up to 15,000 psi. The goal of this study is to gain a firm understanding of

the anchorage strength of hooked bars in concrete as a function of the key variables and use the

data to establish reliability-based design expressions for development length.

Thus far, the testing apparatus has been fabricated, the testing procedures have been

established, and the initial specimens have been tested. The test results agree qualitatively with

those in previous studies and show that hook strength increases with increased embedment

length, side cover, and confining reinforcement. The results also show that hook strength is

greater for hooks anchored within a column core than for hooks anchored outside of the core.

The latter case is appropriate to hooks anchoring bars at the end of cantilever beams.

Keywords: anchorage, development, hooks, reinforced concrete

i
 Acknowledgements

This report is based on research performed by Jeff Peckover in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the MSCE degree from the University of Kansas. Support for the study was

provided by the Electric Power Research Institute, Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute

Education and Research Foundation, University of Kansas Transportation Research Institute,

Charles Pankow Foundation, Commercial Metals Company, Gerdau Corporation, Nucor

Corporation, and MMFX Technologies Corporation. Additional materials were supplied by

Dayton Superior and Midwest Concrete Materials.

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

1.1: Objective .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2: Definition of the Problem .................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2: Experimental Work ................................................................................................... 3

2.1: Specimens ............................................................................................................................ 3
2.1.1: Specimen Design .......................................................................................................... 3
2.1.2: Casting Specimens ........................................................................................................ 9
2.2: Material Properties ........................................................................................................... 11
2.3: Loading Systems ................................................................................................................ 12
2.3.1 Testing Apparatus ........................................................................................................ 12
2.3.2: Hooked Bar Grips ....................................................................................................... 15
2.3.3: Super Washers ............................................................................................................ 18
2.4: Instrumentation.................................................................................................................. 19
2.4.1: Load Cells ................................................................................................................... 19
2.4.2: External Slip Measurement ......................................................................................... 22
2.4.3: Internal Slip Measurement .......................................................................................... 24
2.5: Testing Procedure.............................................................................................................. 27

Chapter 3: Evaluation of Test Results ...................................................................................... 35

3.1: Test Results ........................................................................................................................ 35
3.2: Crack Patterns ................................................................................................................... 39
3.3: Failure Modes.................................................................................................................... 40
3.4: Data Trends ....................................................................................................................... 42

Chapter 4: Summary .................................................................................................................. 46

References .................................................................................................................................... 47

iii
List of Figures Page
Figure 1: Top view of hook region for No. 5 bars placed inside longitudinal reinforcement 4

Figure 2: Top view of hook region for No. 5 bars placed outside longitudinal reinforcement
......................................................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 3: Side view of a specimen with No. 5 hooks .................................................................. 6

Figure 4: Shear reinforcement placed inside of hooks .............................................................. 7

Figure 5: Typical joint regions in specimens .............................................................................. 8

Figure 6: Front and back view of forms ..................................................................................... 9

Figure 7: Assembled forms with hooks supported................................................................... 10

Figure 8: Testing apparatus ....................................................................................................... 12

Figure 9: Test frame: (a) Back view; (b) Front view ............................................................... 13

Figure 10: Forces on test specimen............................................................................................ 14

Figure 11: Hooked bars extending through the jacks with load cells supported by platform
....................................................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 12: Close up of hook extensions ..................................................................................... 17

Figure 13: Nuts tightened onto the threaded bars of the hook extensions ............................ 17

Figure 14: Super washers ........................................................................................................... 18

Figure 15: Threaded bar attached to super washer ................................................................ 19

Figure 16: Load cells placed on hooked bars ........................................................................... 20

Figure 17: Load cells measuring axial compression ................................................................ 21

Figure 18: Covered LVDTs fixed to the apparatus ................................................................. 22

Figure 19: Close up of steel extension ....................................................................................... 23

Figure 20: Wire for internal slip measurement attached to hook .......................................... 25

Figure 21: Wire protruding from specimen and attached to string pot ................................ 26

Figure 22: Frame holding string pot ......................................................................................... 26

Figure 23: Hydraulic jacks affixed to the testing apparatus................................................... 27

iv
Figure 24: Bottom cross beam placed below the base plate .................................................... 28

Figure 25: Weather stripping on the specimen ........................................................................ 29

Figure 26: Placing Hydro-Stone between specimen and apparatus....................................... 30

Figure 27: Channel sections tightened to the specimen ........................................................... 31

Figure 28: Threaded bar with proper length placed on specimen ......................................... 32

Figure 29: (a) Placing top cross beam with crane; (b) Bottom load cells in place ................ 33

Figure 30: Cracks propagating from the hooked bars ............................................................ 39

Figure 31: Vertical cracks forming a conical shape ................................................................ 40

Figure 32: Breakout failure........................................................................................................ 41

Figure 33: Side splitting failure ................................................................................................. 41

Figure 34: Side blowout failure ................................................................................................. 42

Figure 35: Ultimate bar stress versus embedment length for 90° No. 5 hooked bars with no
transverse reinforcement............................................................................................................ 43

Figure 36: Ultimate bar stress versus embedment length for 90° No. 5 hooked bars with 5
No. 3 bars transverse reinforcement ......................................................................................... 44

Figure 37: Ultimate bar stress for No. 8 bar 90° hooks with 10.25-in. nominal embedment
length and 2.5-in. nominal side cover ........................................................................................ 45

v
List of Tables Page
Table 1 - Example group of specimens ....................................................................................... 5

Table 2- Concrete mixture proportions .................................................................................... 11

Table 3- Hooked bar properties................................................................................................. 11

Table 4 - Specimen properties and test results ......................................................................... 37

Table 4 Continued – Specimen properties and test results ..................................................... 38

vi
 Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1: Objective

This report describes ongoing research on the anchorage strength of bars with standard

hooks in concrete. The principal variables are embedment length (leh) which is the distance from

the back of the hooked bar to the face of the concrete, side cover, tail cover, quantity of

transverse reinforcement, location of longitudinal reinforcement, concrete strength, bar size, and

bar bend angle. Testing is focused on No. 5, No. 8, and No. 11 hooked bars with nominal yield

strengths of 60, 80, 100, and 120 ksi cast in concrete with nominal compressive strengths of

5000, 8000, 12,000, and 15,000 psi. Most tests involve hooks with bend angles of 90° and 180°;

some tests with 135° hooks are also planned. The goal of this study is to gain a firm

understanding of the anchorage strength of hooked bars in concrete as a function of the key

variables and use the data to establish reliability-based design expressions for development

length.

1.2: Definition of the Problem

To date, there has been minimal research done on the anchorage strength of hooked bars

in concrete, especially high-strength hooked bars and hooks in high-strength concrete. Previous

research on full scale specimens includes studies done by Marques and Jirsa (1975), Pinc et al.

(1977), Soroushian et al. (1988), Hamad et al. (1993), and Ramirez and Russell (2008). Of these

tests only Hamad (1993) and Ramirez and Russell (2008) used concrete strengths above 6,050

psi, which include a total of 13 tests on uncoated hooks.

1
 Current provisions in the ACI 318 Building Code (2011), the ACI 349 Code

Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures (2006), and the AASHTO Bridge

Specifications (2012) for the development length (ldh) of bars with standard hooks are based on

22 tests reported by Marques and Jirsa (1975), which used neither high-strength steel nor high-

strength concrete. Reinforcing steel for these tests had yield strengths of 64 and 68 ksi, and the

compressive strengths of the concrete were between 3,750 and 5,100 psi. Recently, the use of

both high-strength reinforcing steel and concrete has become much more common. Current

design expressions are allowed to be used for the higher-strength steels, but without sufficient

information, the safety in doing so is unknown. While the ACI Code does limit the use of

compressive strength in design equations to 10,000 psi, the accuracy of this limit has not been

verified. Also, with such a small data base, it is difficult to confidently evaluate the true

contribution of side cover, confinement, bar size, or embedment length on the anchorage strength

of hooked bars.

2
 Chapter 2: Experimental Work

2.1: Specimens

2.1.1: Specimen Design

The specimens are designed to determine the effects of the different variables on the

anchorage strength of hooked bars. Each specimen contains two hooks. The principal variables

being studied are embedment length, side cover, quantity of transverse reinforcement, location of

longitudinal reinforcement, concrete strength, bar size, and bar bend angle. The tail cover on all

specimens is 2 in., corresponding to provision 12.5.3 of the ACI 318 Building Code (2011). The

spacing between hooks is constant for each hook size. For No. 5 bars, the outside to outside

spacing is 8 in. For No. 8 bars, the outside to outside spacing is 12 in.

Specimen designations are based on the variables. For example, a specimen may be titled

8-5-90-1#3-I-2.5-2-9.5b: where 8 indicates the hooked bar size, 5 indicates the nominal concrete

compressive strength in ksi, 90 indicates the bend angle in degrees of the hook, 1#3 indicates a

confinement by 1 No. 3 bar in the hook region (to indicate no confinement a 0 is used), I

indicates that the hooks are inside the longitudinal reinforcement (an O is used to indicate that

the hooks are outside of the longitudinal reinforcement), 2.5 indicates the side cover to the hook

in in., 2 indicates the tail cover on the hook in in., 9.5 indicates the embedment length to the

nearest quarter in., and b indicates the second test done with the designation (either the letter a or

no letter at the end of the designation implies it is the first and sometimes the only test done with

the designation).

Figure 1 shows typical hook regions for No. 5 bars placed inside of the longitudinal

reinforcement, both with and without transverse reinforcement. Since the outside to outside

3
spacing of the No. 5 bars is constant for all specimens, the width of No. 5 specimens with 2.5-in.

side cover and 1.5-in. side cover will always be 13 in. and 11 in., respectively. Embedment

length is varied by changing the depth of the specimen.

13” 13”
2” Clear Cover 2.5” 2”

Figure 1: Top view of hook region for No. 5 bars placed inside longitudinal reinforcement
Figure 2 shows typical hook regions of No. 5 bars placed outside of the longitudinal

reinforcement. To vary the side cover on hooks, the spacing between hooks is not changed.

Instead, the width of the specimen is changed.

4
 13” 11”
2” Clear Cover 2.5” 2”

Clear Cover 1.5”

13” 11”
2” Clear Cover 2.5” 2”

Clear Cover 1.5”

Figure 2: Top view of hook region for No. 5 bars placed outside longitudinal reinforcement
Specimens are fabricated and cast in groups. To better compare the effect of other

variables, constant embedment lengths are typically used for all specimens in a group. Table 1

shows a group of four specimens. In this group, the bar size, concrete strength, hook bend angle,

location of hooks, and embedment length are constant, while confinement and side cover are

varied.

Table 1 - Example group of specimens

Specimen

5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-5
5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-5
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-5
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-5

Choosing only a few variables for each group gives a good indication of the effect of

those variables on the anchorage strength. An embedment length for the group is used that will

5
ensure a hook failure, rather than a bar failure, for all specimens. For the specimens described in

the report, this is accomplished by using 80% of the hook development length, ldh, based on the

ACI 318 Building Code for the strongest specimen in the group.

Specimens are designed to represent an exterior beam-column joint and column. The

depth of the column is determined based on leh and the tail cover, and the width is based on the

out-to-out hook spacing and side cover. The height of the column is selected so that the support

reactions at the top and bottom of the apparatus do not interfere with the hook region. The

shortest height that can be accommodated by the testing apparatus that meets these criteria is

selected. Figure 3 shows a specimen sized to fit into the smallest size allowable by the testing

apparatus for No. 5 bars.

Upper compression
member

Hooked bar

Bearing member

Channel sections

Figure 3: Side view of a specimen with No. 5 hooks

After the dimensions of the specimen are selected, the maximum moment and shear in

the specimen are determined by assuming that both hooks will reach their planned failure loads

simultaneously. These forces determine the amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcing

6
steel needed in the specimen. If the shear reinforcement required exceeds the amount of

confining reinforcement desired in the joint region, stirrups are placed inside the hooks, as shown

in Figure 4.

Plan view at cross section A

Plan view at cross section B

Figure 4: Shear reinforcement placed inside of hooks

Figure 5 shows front, side and plan views of typical joint regions. The joint regions have

2 in. tail cover and include specimens with both 1.5 and 2.5 in. side cover, hooks inside and

outside of longitudinal reinforcement, and hooks with and without transverse reinforcement.

Appropriate dimensions are included. As stated previously, spacing between hooks is dependent

on hook size.

7
Front view of specimen with Side view of specimen Front view of specimen with
90° hooks placed outside of with hook dimensions 90° hooks placed inside of
longitudinal reinforcement called out longitudinal reinforcement

Plan view of typical

joint regions
leh
leh

2.5-in. side cover, no transverse

2.5-in. side cover, no transverse
reinforcement, and hooks inside
reinforcement, and hooks outside
of longitudinal reinforcement
of longitudinal reinforcement

leh leh

2.5-in. side cover with transverse 2.5-in. side cover with transverse
reinforcement, and hooks outside reinforcement, and hooks inside
of longitudinal reinforcement of longitudinal reinforcement

leh leh

1.5-in. side cover, no transverse 1.5-in. side cover with transverse

reinforcement, and hooks outside reinforcement, and hooks outside
of longitudinal reinforcement of longitudinal reinforcement

Figure 5: Typical joint regions in specimens

8
 2.1.2: Casting Specimens

Forms are built so that embedment lengths can be varied, allowing each form to be used

multiple times, rather than for just one specimen (Figure 6). The front of each form has holes

allowing the hooks to extend out of the specimen. The hooks are supported outside of the

specimen to maintain the desired hook spacing, embedment length, and side cover throughout

the casting process (Figure 7). Reinforcement is tied in place within the form to minimize

unwanted movement during casting. Any movement of the hooks that occurs during the casting

process, however, needs to be accounted for. This is done by marking the hooked bars at a

known distance from the tail. After casting, the distance from the mark on the hook to the

specimen face is measured to determine the actual embedment length of the hook.

Figure 6: Front and back view of forms

9
 Figure 7: Assembled forms with hooks supported

Multiple specimens are cast at one time. Specimens are placed in three lifts, with the

hook region in the second lift. After casting, the tops of the specimens are finished, and then

covered with saturated burlap and plastic to cure. Concrete samples taken after the first and

second lift.

10
2.2: Material Properties

The specimens were fabricated using non-air-entrained ready-mix concrete. The

specimens described in this report have a nominal compressive strength of 5000 psi. The

concrete contained Type I/II portland cement, ¾-in. maximum size crushed limestone, and

Kansas River sand. The water-cement ratio is 0.44. Adva 140, a Type A/F superplasticizer, was

used to improve workability. The concrete mixture proportions are listed in Table 2.

The majority of the hooked bars used in the initial specimens were fabricated using

ASTM A1035 reinforcing bars. The specimens containing hooked bars fabricated using ASTM

A615 bars were 5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-11, 5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-7, 5-5-90-2#3-O-1.5-2-11, 5-5-90-2#3-

O-2.5-2-7, 5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-6.5, 5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-8, 5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-8, 5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-

2-8, 5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-8, 5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-6.5, 5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-6.5, and 5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-

2-6.5. Deformation properties for A615 hooks were not measured. The specific bar properties

of the ASTM 1035 steel are listed in Table 3. All longitudinal and transverse reinforcement has

been fabricated using Grade 60 ASTM A615 reinforcing bars.

Table 2- Concrete mixture proportions

Material Quantity (SSD)
Type I/II Cement 600 lb/yd3
Water 263 lb/yd3
Crushed Limestone 1734 lb/yd3
Kansas River Sand 1396 lb/yd3
Estimated Air Content 1%
Type A/F Superplasticizer (Adva 140) 24 fl oz (US)

Table 3- Hooked bar properties

ASTM Nominal Yield Nominal Rib Spacing, Rib Height Gap Width Relative
Bar Size Designation Strength, ksi Diameter, in. in. ASTM, in. Average, in. Side 1, in. Side 2, in. Rib Area
5 A615 88 0.625 0.42 0.79 0.74 0.18 0.17 0.060
5 A1035 130 0.625 0.39 0.96 0.86 0.20 0.17 0.073
8 A1035 130* 1 0.57 1.45 1.31 0.16 0.16 0.078

11
2.3: Loading Systems

Full details of the loading system are presented by Al-Khafaji et al. (2012)

2.3.1 Testing Apparatus

The testing apparatus provides a self-reacting system designed to simulate the axial,

tensile, and compressive forces acting on a beam-column joint (Figures 8 and 9). The system is

a modified version of the test apparatus used by Marques and Jirsa (1975).

Figure 8: Testing apparatus

12
 (a) Back (b) Front

Jack support
Jacks Upper compression
members
member

Bearing member

Channel
sections

Figure 9: Test frame: (a) Back view; (b) Front view

Tensile forces are applied to the hooked bars, simulating the tension in the reinforcement

at the face of a beam-column joint. This pulls the concrete specimen against the apparatus,

resulting in reactions at three points (Figure 10). The main reaction, at the bearing member, is

designed to simulate compression at the face of the beam at the connection. The reactions at the

upper compression member and channel sections prevent rotation of the specimen. The

apparatus is sized using strength design based on the shears and moments developed by loading

13
two No. 11 hooked bars to 150 ksi, 25% higher than the maximum of 120 ksi planned for the

project.

Axial compression is applied to the specimen to simulate axial loading of a column

(figure 10). The value of the axial load is not a variable in this study, because Marques and Jirsa

(1975) found that changing the axial load resulted in negligible change in the anchorage strength

of the hook.

Upper compression
member

Hooked bar

Bearing member

Channel
sections

Figure 10: Forces on test specimen

14
 Considerations in the design of the specimens and apparatus included keeping the support

reactions outside of the testing region, keeping the hooks at a reasonable height, maintaining the

ability to mark cracks on all faces of the specimen, and being able to test a large variety of

specimen sizes. To prevent the support reactions from interfering with the testing region,

supports needed to be placed at least a distance of leh above and below the hook. Because leh in

the initial test matrix ranged from 5 in. to greater than 40 in., the apparatus was designed to

accommodate multiple specimen sizes. Thus, specimens with a large leh can be tall enough to

keep the support reactions from interfering with the test region, and specimens with a small leh

can be shorter to minimize the quantity of concrete and allow for easier handling. The apparatus

allows the hooked bar to be located approximately at eye level for all test configurations.

2.3.2: Hooked Bar Grips

Two different configurations have been used for gripping the hooked bars. The preferred

method is to have long extensions on the hooked bars so they extend from the specimen, all the

way through the loading jacks (Figure 11). This way, once the bars pass through the loading

jacks, the jacks can be adjusted so there is no eccentric loading on the hook. After the jacks are

adjusted, load cells are placed on the bar, followed by the grips. The grips consist of a hollow

tapered tube, which slides over the bar, and wedges, which are placed between the hollow tube

and the bar. An adjustable platform is raised high enough to support the load cells so no vertical

load is placed on the bars. The bars are adjusted vertically to prevent any eccentric loading. A

hand pump is then used to apply the load.

15
Figure 11: Hooked bars extending through the jacks with load cells supported by platform

An alternative procedure is used for gripping the hooked bars when the bars are not long

enough to extend through the jacks. An extension is used to grip the hooked bars near the

specimen and extend through the jacks (Figure 12). The extension consists of three No. 5 bars

welded to a No.11 bar on one side and a wedge grip on the other. The No. 11 bar is welded to a

threaded bar. The grip is placed onto the hooked bar, and the threaded end of the No. 11 bar is

passed through the jacks. The load cells are placed on the threaded bar and nuts are tightened up

to the load cells (Figure 13). When the jack is loaded, it pushes the threaded bar away from the

specimen causing the wedges to tighten on the bar in the grip.

16
 No. 11 bars

No. 5 bars

Grips

Hooked bars

Figure 12: Close up of hook extensions

Load cells
Jacks
Threaded bars

Figure 13: Nuts tightened onto the threaded bars of the hook extensions

17
 2.3.3: Super Washers

Two super washers are used to apply axial compression to the specimen during testing

(Figure 14). The super washers are made of 6×6×1-in. steel plates with a 1.75-in. diameter hole

in the center, allowing a threaded bar to pass through. Eight holes are drilled and tapped in a

circular pattern around the center hole for 1-in. socket set screws.

Threaded bar

Steel plate

Socket set screws

Figure 14: Super washers

To apply a load using a super washer, the threaded bar to be loaded is passed through the

center hole of the super washer and a nut on the bar is hand tightened onto the super washer.

The other end of the threaded bar is anchored below the specimen (Figure 15). The eight socket

set screws are then tightened one by one in a circular pattern acting to elongate the threaded bar.

This places the threaded bar in tension and, in turn, places a compression force on the specimen.

18
 Super
Washer

Threaded
Bar

Figure 15: Threaded bar attached to super washer

2.4: Instrumentation

2.4.1: Load Cells

Four load cells were manufactured from steel pipes and are used on the testing apparatus.

One load cell is placed on each hooked bar between the hydraulic jack and the wedge grip or nut

(Figure 16), and one load cell is used on each of the threaded bars to measure the vertical axial

compression force applied by the super washers (Figure 17). Each load cell contains eight 120-Ω

strain gauges, four oriented perpendicular and four oriented parallel to the direction of loading.

19
The strain gauges are evenly spaced around the circumference of the load cell with alternating

orientation (Figure 16).

Nut

Jacks Load cells

Strain gauges with

alternating orientation

(a) Side View (b) Close up View

Figure 16: Load cells placed on hooked bars

20
 (b) Close up

Super washer

Load cell

(c) Unconnected load cell

Strain gauge parallel

to direction of loading

Load cell

Strain gauges perpendicular

to direction of loading
(a) Load cell on the threaded bar

Figure 17: Load cells measuring axial compression

Each load cell is calibrated three times using the data acquisition system used during

testing in a Baldwin hydraulic loading frame. A least-squares linear regression analysis of force

versus voltage output is used to determine a calibration coefficient. The load cell calibrations are

checked after every third series of tests.

21
 2.4.2: External Slip Measurement

Linear variable differential transformers, or LVDTs, are used to measure the loaded-end

slip of the hooks. The LVDTs are fixed to the bearing member directly below the hooks (Figure

18). The assumption is that once the specimen is pulled tight against the apparatus, the specimen

will not displace with respect to the apparatus. The LVDTs are covered with plywood to protect

them from debris (Figure 18).

Hooked bar LVDT housing

Steel extensions LVDT

Figure 18: Covered LVDTs fixed to the apparatus

Steel extensions (Figure 19) are connected to each hooked bar so that, as the bar slips

forward, the extensions will displace the LVDTs. The steel extensions are made by welding a

square rod to a 2-in. long steel pipe. Holes are drilled and tapped in the steel pipe, allowing it to

22
be slid onto the hooked bar and tightened. A 2×5×1/8-in. steel plate is attached to the bottom of

the square rod, creating a larger surface area for the LVDT to press against.

Steel pipe

Square rod

Steel plate

Figure 19: Close up of steel extension

The distance from the center of the bolts on the steel extension to the face of the

specimen is measured to account for elongation of the hooked bar in this region. Each LVDT is

calibrated by connecting it to the data acquisition system used during testing, then displacing the

LVDT on a calibrated Baldwin test frame. Three calibration cycles are used. The displacement

measured on the testing machine is recorded with the corresponding voltage output from the

LVDT. Using a least-squares linear regression analysis on displacement versus voltage output, a

calibration coefficient is determined for each LVDT. The LVDT calibrations are checked after

every third series of tests.

23
 2.4.3: Internal Slip Measurement

The internal slip of the hooks with respect to the concrete is measured with a string pot,

using a method similar to that used by Marques and Jirsa (1975). This is accomplished by

attaching a 0.029-in. diameter fishing wire to the hooked bar (Figure 20). The wire extends out

of the specimen and connects to the wire on the string pot. Internal slip is measured on one of

the two hooks of each specimen. To attach the wire, a 1/16-in. hole is drilled into the top of the

hooked bar just before the bend. The depth of the hole equals the radius of the bar. The wire is

glued inside the hole and placed parallel to the direction the bar is expected to slip. A 1/16-in.

diameter plastic tube is placed over the wire to ensure free movement of the wire inside the

concrete. A small amount of silicone caulk is used to fix the plastic tube to the bar at the

connection of the wire and the hook. The amount of caulk is small enough to consider the loss of

bond in the area negligible, considering that the inside of the hook bears directly on the concrete

when the bar is loaded.

24
 (a) Wire Connected to Hook

Caulk
Wire inside plastic tube

Hooked bar

Wire inside plastic tube

(b) Side View (c) Zoomed Side View

Figure 20: Wire for internal slip measurement attached to hook

During testing, the wire is attached to a string pot (Figure 21). A frame was built to hold

the string pot directly behind the specimen, where the wire protrudes (Figure 22). The frame

holding the string pot is fixed to the bearing member directly below the hook. This operation is

based on the assumption that once the specimen is pulled tight against the testing apparatus, the

specimen will not displace with respect to the testing apparatus. The string pot is calibrated

using the data acquisition system used during testing. It is displaced using a Baldwin hydraulic

testing frame. Three calibration cycles are used, and a least-squares linear regression analysis of

displacement versus voltage output is used to establish the calibration coefficient. The

calibration coefficient is checked after every third set of tests.

25
 Wire Protruding
from Specimen

String pot

Figure 21: Wire protruding from specimen and attached to string pot

Side View Back View

String pot frame

Figure 22: Frame holding string pot

26
2.5: Testing Procedure

1. Prior to each test, the location of each component of the loading apparatus and the height

and location of the base plate are checked to ensure they are correctly positioned. All

bolts on the apparatus are double nutted and checked for tightness, including the bolts

attaching the loading apparatus to the strong floor.

2. The data acquisition system for the LVDTs, load cells, and string pot is checked prior to

each test. This includes ensuring all wires are connected and that load cells, LVDTs, and

the string pot are working properly.

3. The hydraulic jacks are attached to the testing apparatus and connected to the hand pump

(Figure 23).

Figure 23: Hydraulic jacks affixed to the testing apparatus

4. The bottom cross beam is placed underneath the base plate (Figures 8 and 24).

27
 Bottom cross beam

Figure 24: Bottom cross beam placed below the base plate

5. The steel extensions used to measure external slip are placed on the hooks of the

specimen being tested. This is done prior to placing the specimen on the loading

apparatus, because once the hooks extend through the jacks, it is no longer possible to

slide the extensions onto the hooked bar.

6. Using the lab crane, the specimen is placed on the testing apparatus approximately 6 in.

from the bearing and upper compression members, with the bars passing through the

jacks.
3
7. /8-in. sponge rubber weather stripping is used to create U-shapes on the specimen at the

height of the bearing and upper compression members (Figure 25). When the specimen

is snug to the bearing and upper compression members, the weather stripping allows

28
 Hydro-Stone (a high-strength gypsum grout) to be placed between the specimen and the

bearing members.

Upper bearing member

Weather stripping Bearing member

Zoomed in view of weather stripping

Figure 25: Weather stripping on the specimen

8. The specimen is lifted off of the base plate using the crane, and Hydro-Stone is placed on

the base plate to ensure even loading of the base, when axial compression is applied to

the specimen.

9. The specimen is moved forward to the testing apparatus then lowered onto the Hydro-

Stone, while ensuring that the weather stripping is pressing against the testing apparatus,

creating a tight seal.

10. The jacks are moved horizontally, as needed, on the jack support member, to ensure the

hooks will not be loaded eccentrically.

11. Hydro-Stone is placed in the voids between the specimen and the bearing members,

created by the weather stripping to ensure even loading during the test (Figure 26).

29
 Hydro-Stone

Bearing member

Figure 26: Placing Hydro-Stone between specimen and apparatus

12. The channel sections are supported behind the specimen and threaded rods are passed

through both sets of channels. Nuts are then hand-tightened on the threaded bars (Figure

27).

30
 Channel sections

Figure 27: Channel sections tightened to the specimen

13. While the top cross beam (Figure 8) is still on the ground, threaded bars are placed

through the holes with proper length to pass through the bottom cross beam and load cell,

when the top cross beam is on the specimen (Figure 28).

31
 Top cross beam

Proper Length

Bottom cross beam

Load cell

Figure 28: Threaded bar with proper length placed on specimen

14. Once the threaded bars have the proper length, a super washer is slid onto the top of each

threaded bar, and a nut is hand tightened on the super washer.

15. The top cross beam is then lifted with the crane and lowered onto the top of the specimen

while guiding the threaded bars through the holes on the bottom cross beam (Figure 29a).

Hydro-Stone is placed between the specimen and top cross beam to ensure even loading

of the axial compression.

16. Load cells are placed on the threaded rod below the bottom cross beam and nuts are

hand-tightened below the load cells (Figure 29b).

32
 a Top cross beam b

Load
Cell

Figure 29: (a) Placing top cross beam with crane; (b) Bottom load cells in place

17. A total axial load of 80 kips is applied to the specimen by simultaneously tightening the

super washers on each bar.

18. The LVDTs are fixed to the bearing member directly below the hooks, and the steel

extensions are tightened to each hook so that as the hooks slip forward, the extensions

will displace the LVDTs.

33
19. The string pot fixture is clamped to the bearing member, holding the string pot directly

behind the internal slip measurement wire protruding from the specimen. This wire is

then connected to the string pot.

20. The load cells are placed on the hooked bars and placed tight to the jacks, followed by

wedge grips.

21. The adjustable height platform is raised high enough to support the load cells so that no

weight is placed on the hooked bars. The platform is adjusted vertically to ensure that the

bars are tensioned perpendicular to the specimen without any eccentric loading.

22. Measurements of the specimen are recorded, including the center-to-center spacing of

hooked bars, side cover, distance from the specimen face to LVDTs, and dimension used

to establish the actual value of leh.

23. Load is applied to the hooks using the jacks, pausing to mark cracks at 5 kip intervals.

24. After the failure of one or both of the hooks, cracks, failure load, and failure type are

documented.

25. If one of the hooks has not yet failed, the jack for the failed hook is shut off and

incremental loading of the other hook is resumed.

26. Upon failure of the second hook, cracks, failure load, and failure type are documented.

27. After failure of both hooks, the specimen is removed and later autopsied.

34
 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Test Results

3.1: Test Results

Results for the first 26 specimens in this study are described in this chapter. Each

specimen contained two hooks. Some of the No. 5 bars in the early tests yielded before an

anchorage failure occurred. The results from those hooks are included, but not used in the

analysis of the results. Bar properties are summarized in Table 3 (Chapter 2). Specimen

properties and test results are summarized in Table 4.

Test results include 17 specimens with No. 5 hooked bars and nine specimens with No. 8

hooked bars, all cast with 5 ksi concrete.

The No. 5 hook tests include specimens with 90° and 180° hooks, side covers of 1.5 in.

and 2.5 in., transverse reinforcement consisting of 5 No. 3 bars, 2 No. 3 bars, or no transverse

reinforcement, and embedment lengths ranging from 5 in. to 11.25 in. These specimens were

cast with the hooks outside of the longitudinal reinforcement.

The No. 8 hook test specimens included three sets of three identical specimens. All

specimens were cast in 5 ksi concrete, with 90° hooks, 2.5-in. side cover, and a 10-in.

embedment length. The variables of these specimens were the location of the hook, both inside

and outside of the longitudinal reinforcement, and the quantity of transverse reinforcement, 5 No.

3 bars or no transverse reinforcement confining the hook.

35
Notation:

Ah Bar area of hook

Atr Area of transverse bars in hook region
b Column width
cb Cover of reinforcement being developed, measured to tension face of member, in.
cth Clear cover measured from the tail of the hook to the back of the column
cso Clear cover measured from the side of the hook to the side of the column
ch Clear spacing between hooked bars, inside-to-inside spacing
db Nominal bar diameter of the hook
dtr Nominal bar diameter of transverse reinforcement
𝑓𝑐′ Concrete compressive strength
fsu Stress in hook at failure
fyt Yield strength of transverse reinforcement
hcl Height measured from the center of the hook to the top of the compression block
hc Height of compression plate
leh Embedment length of the hook
Nh Number of hooks loaded simultaneously
Ntr Number of stirrups/ties crossing the hook
T Load at failure
Rr Relative rib area
str Center-to-center spacing of stirrups/ties around the hook

Failure types described further in Section 3.3

K Kick out of the hook tail at failure
B Breakout failure
SB Side blowout failure
SS Side splitting failure

Specimen identification
A-B-C-D#E-F-G-H-Ix
A ASTM in.-lb bar size
B Nominal compressive strength of concrete
C Angle of bend
D Number of bars used as transverse reinforcement within the hook region
E ASTM in.-lb bar size of transverse reinforcement
(D#E = 0 = no transverse reinforcement)
F Hooked bars placed inside (i) or outside (o) of longitudinal reinforcement
G Nominal value of cso
H Nominal value of cth
I Nominal value of leh
x Replication, blank (or a), b, c, etc.

36
 Table 4 - Specimen properties and test results
Radius
Transverse
Specimen Hook Bend of Reinf. ldh f'c Age fy db Rr b hcl hc
Angle Bend in. psi days ksi in. in. in. in.
In. Orientation
5-5-90-0-O-1.5sc-2tc-11 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 10.6 3950 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 10.6 3950 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-2.5sc-2tc-7 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.4 3950 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.4 3950 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-2#3-O-1.5sc-2tc-11 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 10.6 4080 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 10.6 4080 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-2#3-O-2.5sc-2tc-7 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.4 4080 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.4 4080 * 60 0.625 * 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.00 4930 4 60 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.00 4930 4 60 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 4.75 4930 4 60 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 4.75 4930 4 60 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.00 5205 5 60 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.00 5205 5 60 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.19 4930 4 60 0.625 0.077 13 5.38 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.13 4930 4 60 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-6.5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.50 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 5.88 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-8 B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.88 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.88 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-8 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 8.00 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.75 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-8 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.50 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 7.50 5650 6 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-8 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 9.00 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 9.00 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-6.5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.50 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.50 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-0-O-2.5sc-2tc-6.5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.5 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.5 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5sc-2tc-6.5 A 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.5 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 90° 1 7/8 Horizontal 6.5 5780 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-2#3-O-2.5-2-9.5 A 180° 2 Horizontal 9.13 4420 7 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 9.25 4420 7 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-0-O-1.5-2-9.5 A 180° 2 Horizontal 9.63 4420 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 9.25 4420 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-2#3-1.5-2-11.25 A 180° 2 Horizontal 11.63 4420 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 11.50 4420 7 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-0-O-2.5-2-9.5 A 180° 2 Horizontal 9.50 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 9.50 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-2#3-O-1.5-2-9.5 A 180° 2 Horizontal 8.75 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 8.75 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-2#3-O-2.5-2-11.25 A 180° 2 Horizontal 11.13 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 11.38 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 13 5.25 8.375
5-5-180-0-O-1.5-2-11.25 A 180° 2 Horizontal 11.25 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
B 180° 2 Horizontal 11.25 4520 8 120 0.625 0.077 11 5.25 8.375
8-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-10a A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.25 5270 7 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5270 7 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-10b A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 9.25 5440 8 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.25 5440 8 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-10c A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.75 5650 9 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5650 9 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-10a A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.25 5270 7 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5270 7 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-10b A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5440 8 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5440 8 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-10c A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 11.25 5650 9 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5650 9 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-5#3-I-2.5-2-10a A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5270 7 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5270 7 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-5#3-I-2.5-2-10b A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.25 5440 8 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5440 8 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
8-5-90-5#3-I-2.5-2-10c A 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5650 9 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
B 90° 3 1/16 Horizontal 10.50 5650 9 120 1 0.084 17 10.50 8.375
* Not available

37
 Table 4 Continued – Specimen properties and test results
Loaded-
End
c cso cth ch Ah2 fyt dtr Atr2 Ntr str T fsu Failure
Specimen Hook in.b in. in. in. Nh in. ksi in. in. in. kip ksi Slip at Type
Failure
in.
5-5-90-0-O-1.5sc-2tc-11 A - 1.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 20.8 67.00 - Yield
B - 1.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 20.8 67.00 - Yield
5-5-90-0-O-2.5sc-2tc-7 A - 2.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 20.8 67.00 - Yield
B - 2.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 20.8 67.00 - Yield
5-5-90-2#3-O-1.5sc-2tc-11 A - 1.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 3 20.8 67.00 - Yield
B - 1.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 3 20.8 67.00 - Yield
5-5-90-2#3-O-2.5sc-2tc-7 A - 2.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 3 20.8 67.00 - Yield
B - 2.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 3 20.7 67.00 - Yield
5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-5 A - 1.50 2.00 6.75 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 14.1 45.48 - B/SB
B - 1.75 2.00 6.75 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 19.6 63.23 - B/SB
5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-5 A - 2.50 2.13 6.38 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 19.5 62.90 - B/SB
B - 2.50 2.13 6.38 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 23.5 75.81 - B/SB
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-5 A - 1.50 2.00 6.50 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 26.0 83.90 - SB
B - 1.50 2.00 6.50 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 22.0 70.97 - B/SB
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-5 A - 2.63 1.88 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 22.0 70.97 - B/SB
B - 2.63 1.88 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 29.0 93.55 - B/SB
5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-6.5 A - 1.53 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 20.8 67.10 - B
B - 1.63 2.75 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 18.2 58.71 - B/SB
5-5-90-0-O-1.5-2-8 B - 1.50 2.13 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 23.5 75.81 - No Failure
B - 1.50 2.13 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 23.5 75.81 - SB
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-8 A - 1.56 2.25 6.38 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 25.2 81.29 - B/SB
B - 1.50 2.63 6.38 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 30.4 98.06 - B/SB
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-8 A - 2.56 2.13 6.50 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 28.4 91.61 - B
B - 2.56 2.13 6.50 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 23.0 74.19 - Yield
5-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-8 A - 2.56 1.50 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 30.3 97.74 - SB
B - 2.56 1.50 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 30.6 98.70 - Yield
5-5-90-5#3-O-1.5-2-6.5 A - 1.56 2.00 6.50 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 26.2 84.52 - B/SB
B - 1.56 2.00 6.50 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 20.9 67.42 - B/SB
5-5-90-0-O-2.5sc-2tc-6.5 A - 2.63 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 30.0 96.70 - Yield
B - 2.63 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 30.0 96.70 - Yield
5-5-90-5#3-O-2.5sc-2tc-6.5 A - 2.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 25.0 80.60 - Yield
B - 2.63 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.55 5 1.9 25.0 80.60 - Yield
5-5-180-2#3-O-2.5-2-9.5 A - 2.50 2.13 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 35.5 114.52 - B/SB
B - 2.50 2.00 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 43.9 141.61 - B
5-5-180-0-O-1.5-2-9.5 A - 1.63 2.13 6.38 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 35.2 113.55 - B
B - 1.63 2.13 6.38 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 30.4 98.06 - B/SB
5-5-180-2#3-1.5-2-11.25 A - 1.63 1.88 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 48.3 155.81 - B/SB
B - 1.50 1.88 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 43.0 138.71 - B/SB
5-5-180-0-O-2.5-2-9.5 A - 2.50 1.88 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 40.4 130.32 - B
B - 2.50 1.75 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 34.0 109.68 - B
5-5-180-2#3-O-1.5-2-9.5 A - 1.63 2.38 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 30.0 96.70 - No Failure
B - 1.63 2.38 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 20.3 65.48 - B/SB
5-5-180-2#3-O-2.5-2-11.25 A - 2.50 2.50 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 43.6 140.65 - B
B - 2.75 2.13 6.63 2 0.31 60 0.375 0.22 2 2 42.5 137.10 - B/SB
5-5-180-0-O-1.5-2-11.25 A - 1.75 2.25 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 32.4 104.52 - B/SB
B - 1.75 2.25 6.63 2 0.31 60 - 0 0 - 35.0 112.90 - No Failure
8-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-10a A - 2.50 2.00 10.00 2 0.79 60 - 0 0 - 40.6 51.39 - B/SS
B - 2.63 1.75 10.00 2 0.79 60 - 0 0 - 46.6 58.99 0.186 SS/B
8-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-10b A - 2.50 3.25 10.00 2 0.79 60 - 0 0 - 47.9 60.63 - B/SS
B - 2.50 2.25 10.00 2 0.79 60 - 0 0 - 30.6 38.73 - SS/B
8-5-90-0-O-2.5-2-10c A - 2.50 1.50 10.00 2 0.79 60 - 0 0 - 62.7 79.37 - B/SS
B - 2.50 1.75 10.00 2 0.79 60 - 0 0 - 54.6 69.11 0.132 SS/B/K
8-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-10a A - 2.63 1.75 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 55.7 70.51 - SS
B - 2.63 2.00 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 55.8 70.63 0.213 SB
8-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-10b A - 2.50 2.00 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 66.4 84.05 0.203 B/SB
B - 2.63 2.00 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 69.5 87.97 0.235 SB/B
8-5-90-5#3-O-2.5-2-10c A - 2.63 1.25 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 80.6 102.03 - SS/B
B - 2.50 2.00 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 57.7 73.04 - SS/B
8-5-90-5#3-I-2.5-2-10a A - 2.50 1.75 9.75 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 82.8 104.81 - No Failure
B - 2.50 1.75 9.75 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 82.8 104.81 0.164 B/SS
8-5-90-5#3-I-2.5-2-10b A - 2.75 2.00 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 78.8 99.75 0.129 B/SS
B - 2.63 1.75 9.88 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 66.7 84.43 - B
8-5-90-5#3-I-2.5-2-10c A - 2.50 2.00 10.00 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 68.9 87.22 - B/SS
B - 2.50 2.00 10.00 2 0.79 60 0.375 0.55 5 3 69.6 88.10 - B/SS

38
3.2: Crack Patterns

Crack patterns were similar for most of the specimens. The first cracks appear on the

loaded face of the specimen radiating from the hooks (Figure 30). These cracks propagate from

the face, around the edge and then onto the sides of the specimen. Once cracks have reached the

sides of the specimen, vertical cracks begin to propagate and grow both above and below the

transverse cracks. As the cracks on the sides of the specimen propagate vertically, they also

angle towards the loaded face of the specimen, resulting in a conical shape within the failure

region (Figure 31). Cracks continue to grow larger until failure occurs. In some tests, cracks

appear on the back of the specimen behind the hooks, though this does not always happen and is

much more common for No. 8 bars than No. 5 bars.

Figure 30: Cracks propagating from the hooked bars

39
 Figure 31: Vertical cracks forming a conical shape

3.3: Failure Modes

The specimens failed in three ways: breakout failure (Figure 32), side splitting failure

(Figure 33), and side blowout failure (Figure 34). Breakout failures are defined by a section of

concrete around the hook being pulled forward out of the specimen at failure. Side splitting

failures occur when cracks in the plane of the hooks on the side of the specimen continue to grow

until the hook loses anchorage strength. Side blowout failures are similar to side splitting

failures, in that they are also a result of excessive cracking on the side of the specimen in the

plane of the hook. The difference is primarily in the degree of cracking, with side blowout

failures exhibiting significant spalling at failure. Breakout failures often occur in conjunction

with side splitting and side blowout failures. Kickout also occurs from some hooks. Kickout

occurs when the tail of the hooked bar breaks the concrete cover and is exposed on the back side
40
of the specimen. Kickout of hooked bars has occurred, but only in conjunction with other types

of failure. It has not yet been observed as the cause of failure.

Figure 32: Breakout failure

Figure 33: Side splitting failure

41
 Figure 34: Side blowout failure

3.4: Data Trends

The 17 No. 5 hook tests focused on the effects of side cover, embedment length, and

confinement on anchorage strength. The effect of these variables is shown in Figures 35 and 36.

Figures 35 and 36 compare ultimate bar stress versus embedment length for specimens

with No. 5 hooked bars, with 1.5 and 2.5-in. nominal side covers. The specimens in Figure 35

have no transverse reinforcement confining the hook, while those in Figure 36 contain hooks

confined by 5 No. 3 transverse bars. Comparing hook strengths in the two figures, the hooks in

Figure 36 have higher anchorage strengths. The strengths of most hooks with no transverse

reinforcement cluster between 60 to 80 ksi, while the anchorage strength of most hooks confined

by 5 No. 3 bars cluster between 70 and 100 ksi. Since both graphs compare hooks with similar

42
side covers and embedment lengths, this shows that increasing confinement in the hook region

increases anchorage strength. Also, both figures show that increasing embedment length

increases anchorage strength, and hooks with 2.5-in. side cover are stronger than hooks with 1.5-

in. side cover. These observations agree with those in studies by Marques and Jirsa (1975), Pinc

et al. (1977), Soroushian et al. (1988), Hamad et al. (1993), and Ramirez and Russell (2008).

One of the principal goals of this study is to quantify the effects of these variables on anchorage

strength.

110

100

90

80
Ultimate Bar Stress, fsu (ksi)

70

60

50 1.5-in. Nominal Side Cover

2.5-in. Nominal Side Cover
40

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Embedment Length, leh (in.)

Figure 35: Ultimate bar stress versus embedment length for 90° No. 5 hooked bars with no
transverse reinforcement

43
 110

100

90

80
Ultimate Bar Stress, fsu (ksi)

70

60

50 1.5-in. Nominal Side Cover

2.5-in. Nominal Side Cover
40

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Embedment Length, leh (in.)

Figure 36: Ultimate bar stress versus embedment length for 90° No. 5 hooked bars with 5
No. 3 bars transverse reinforcement
The No. 8 bar tests were intended to provide an initial evaluation of the effect of hook

location with respect to the core of a column on anchorage strength. In previous studies, hooked

bars confined by transverse reinforcement have been cast both inside and outside of the

longitudinal reinforcement, that is, inside and outside of the core of the test column. Casting the

hooks outside of the longitudinal reinforcement contrasts with requirements in ACI 318 for

beam-column joints, which requires hooks to be anchored within the column core. Tests of

hooks outside of a core are appropriate, however, for cantilever beams, such as shown in the Fig.

R12.5.4 of the ACI 318 (2011). The specimens contain 90° hooks with the same embedment

length, side cover, and tail cover. Specimens differ in the location of the longitudinal and

44
transverse reinforcement with respect to the hooks. Three specimens were cast with the hook

outside of both the transverse and longitudinal reinforcement, three were cast with the hooks

inside the transverse reinforcement but outside the longitudinal reinforcement, and three were

cast with the hooks inside both the longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. A nominal clear

side cover of 2.5 in. was used for all specimens.

Figure 37 shows the average values and ranges of ultimate bar strengths in these tests.

The figure demonstrates that having hooks inside the core of a column increases anchorage

strength compared to hooks outside of the longitudinal reinforcement. The results also show that

hooks confined by transverse reinforcement are stronger than hooks without transverse

reinforcement. These results are consistent with those for the No. 5 bars.

120

100
Ultimate Bar Stress, fsu (ksi) with data range

80

60

40

20

0
No transverse reinforcement 5 No. 3 bars of transverse 5 No. 3 bars of transverse
with hooks outside core reinforcment with hooks reinforcment with hooks
outside core inside core

Figure 37: Ultimate bar stress for No. 8 bar 90° hooks with 10.25-in. nominal embedment
length and 2.5-in. nominal side cover

45
 Chapter 4: Summary

One goal of this study is to determine the effects of embedment length, side cover,

confinement, bar size, concrete strength, and hook geometry on the anchorage strength of hooked

bars. Concrete strengths of up to 15,000 psi will be used, as well as hooked bars with yield

strengths in excess of 100 ksi.

Thus far, the testing apparatus has been fabricated, the testing procedures have been

established, and the initial specimens have been tested. The test results agree qualitatively with

those in previous studies and show that hook strength increases with increased embedment

length, side cover, and confining reinforcement. The results also show that hook strength is

greater for hooks anchored within a column core than for hooks anchored outside of the core.

The latter case is appropriate to hooks anchoring bars at the end of cantilever beams.

Testing will continue, to provide data that will be used to establish reliability-based

design expressions for development length of bars with standard hooks.

46
 References

ACI Committee 318, 2011, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11)
and Commentary (ACI 318R-11), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan,
505 pp.

ACI Committee 349, 2006, Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Concrete Structures
(ACI 349-06), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 157 pp.

AASHTO, 2012, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 6th edition, American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 1672 pp.

Al-Khafaji, A., Darwin, D., and O’Reilly, M., 2012, “Test Apparatus for Measuring Bond Strength
of Hooked Bars in Concrete Members.” SL Report No. 12-5, University of Kansas Center for
Research, Lawrence, KS, 46 pp.

Hamad, B.S., Jirsa, J. O., and d’Abreu d Paolo, N. I., 1993, “Effect of Epoxy Coating on Bond
Anchorage of Reinforcing in Concrete Structures,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 90, No. 1, Jan.-
Feb., 77-88 pp.

Hamad, B.S., Jirsa, J. O., and d’Abreu d Paolo, N. I., 1993, “Anchorage Strength of Epoxy-Coated
Hooked Bars,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 90, No. 2, Mar.-Apr., 210-217 pp.

Marques, J. L., and Jirsa, J. O., 1975, “A Study of Hooked Bar Anchorages in Beam-Column
Joints,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 72, No. 5, May-Jun., 198-209 pp.

Pinc, R., Watkins, M., and Jirsa, J., 1977, “The Strength of The Hooked Bar Anchorages in Beam-
Column Joints,” Report on a Research Project Sponsored by Reinforced Concrete Research
Council, Project 33, Department of Civil Engineering-Structures Research Laboratory, University
of Texas, Austin.

Ramirez, J. A., and Russell, B. W., 2008, Transfer, Development, and Splice Length for
Strand/reinforcement in High-strength Concrete, Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research
Board, National Research Council

Soroushian, P., Obaseki, K., and Nagi, M., Rojas, M., 1988, “Pullout Behavior of Hooked Bars in
Exterior Beam-Column Connections,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 85, No. 3, May-Jun., 269-276
pp.

47