Title:
Performance-Based Seismic Design Framework for Post-Installed Anchors
Author(s):
Dorian Borosnyoi-Crawley
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
123
Issue:
2
Appears on pages(s):
157-170
Keywords:
anchoring; concrete-anchor system damage; crack width; holistic design framework; performance-based design; post-installed anchors; seismic qualification
DOI:
10.14359/51749169
Date:
3/1/2026
Abstract:
It can be demonstrated that performance-based seismic design of post-installed anchors in accordance with ACI 318 is not possible using the anchor qualification information provided by ACI 355. The current state-of-the-art anchor qualification does not provide capacities that reflect actual earthquake responses in seismic design scenarios. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis and highlights the gaps in the current approach. A performance-based framework is proposed for the basis of future developments in seismic design and qualification of post-installed anchors. It is demonstrated that the approach is fully transparent and provides the possibility to identify key driving parameters that need further experimental investigation. The approach acknowledges that performance-based seismic design of post-installed anchors needs the understanding of the seismic damage of the concrete-anchor system. Currently, no design tools are available to predict this damage. The proposed framework adopts the theory of the accumulated damage potential (ADP) as the damage parameter. It is demonstrated that the selected damage parameter is simple but meaningful enough to represent the seismic damage of the concrete-anchor system at the design level. Possibilities for future development of the approach are explored, and directions for the next steps are suggested. It is highlighted that definition of a framework for realistic seismic performance objectives of post-installed anchors is needed for the development of design tools in the future. The proposed framework has great practical significance and may help fill a gap in the seismic design of post-installed anchors. Promoting a transparent framework that is driven by the needs of performance-based seismic design may help develop a feasible qualification system and replace the currently used pass-or-fail assessment approach, which is not suitable to provide anchor capacities for performance-based seismic design.
Related References:
1. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code for Structural Concrete—Code Requirements and Commentary (ACI CODE-318-25),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2025, 702 pp.
2. ACI Committee 355, “Post-Installed Mechanical Anchors in Concrete—Qualification Requirements and Commentary (ACI CODE-355.2-24),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2024, 118 pp.
3. ACI Committee 355, “Post-Installed Adhesive Anchors in Concrete—Qualification Requirements and Commentary (ACI CODE-355.4-24),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2024, 127 pp.
4. Hoehler, M. S., and Eligehausen, R., “Behavior of Anchors in Cracked Concrete under Tension Cycling at Near-Ultimate Loads,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 105, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2008, pp. 601-608. doi: 10.14359/19943
5. Hoehler, M. S.; Mahrenholtz, P.; and Eligehausen, R., “Behavior of Anchors in Concrete at Seismic-Relevant Loading Rates,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 108, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2011, pp. 238-247. doi: 10.14359/51664259
6. Mahrenholtz, P.; Eligehausen, R.; Hutchinson, T. C.; and Hoehler, M. S., “Behavior of Post-Installed Anchors Tested by Stepwise Increasing Cyclic Load Protocols,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 113, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2016, pp. 997-1008. doi: 10.14359/51689023
7. Mahrenholtz, C.; Eligehausen, R.; Hutchinson, T. C.; and Hoehler, M. S., “Behavior of Post-Installed Anchors Tested by Stepwise Increasing Cyclic Crack Protocols,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 114, No. 3, May-June 2017, pp. 621-630. doi: 10.14359/51689431
8. Wood, R. L.; Hutchinson, T. C.; and Hoehler, M. S., “Cyclic Load and Crack Protocols for Anchored Nonstructural Components and Systems,” Structural Systems Research Project, Report No. SSRP-2009/12, Final Report, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, Aug. 9, 2010, 229 pp.
9. Mahrenholtz, P., “Experimental Performance and Recommendations for Qualification of Post-Installed Anchors for Seismic Applications,” PhD thesis, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, June 2012, 345 pp. doi: 10.18419/opus-477
10. CAN3-N287.2-M82, “Material Requirements for Concrete Containment Structures for CANDU Nuclear Power Plants,” CSA Group, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1982.
11. Tang, J. H. K., and Deans, J. J., “Test Criteria and Method for Seismic Qualification of Concrete Expansion Anchors,” Proceedings of the 4th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 1983, pp. 58-69.
12. Silva, J. F., “Test Methods for Seismic Qualification of Post-Installed Anchors,” International RILEM Symposium on Connections between Steel and Concrete, R. Eligehausen, ed., Stuttgart, Germany, Sept. 2001, pp. 551-563.
13. Mahrenholtz, P., and Wood, R. L., “European Seismic Performance Categories C1 and C2 for Post-Installed Anchors,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 117, No. 6, Nov. 2020, pp. 31-44. doi: 10.14359/51728071
14. ASCE/SEI 7-05, “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,” American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 2006, 424 pp.
15. Wood, R., and Hutchinson, T. C., “Effects of Ground Motion Scaling on Nonlinear Higher Mode Building Response,” Earthquakes and Structures, V. 3, No. 6, 2012, pp. 869-887. doi: 10.12989/eas.2012.3.6.869
16. Wood, R. L., and Hutchinson, T. C., “Crack Protocols for Anchored Components and Systems,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 110, No. 3, May-June 2013, pp. 391-401. doi: 10.14359/51685597
17. Hutchinson, T. C., and Wood, R. L., “Cyclic Load Protocol for Anchored Nonstructural Components and Systems,” Earthquake Spectra, V. 29, No. 3, 2013, pp. 817-842. doi: 10.1193/1.4000169
18. EOTA TR 049, “Post-Installed Fasteners in Concrete under Seismic Action,” European Organisation for Technical Assessment, Brussels, Belgium, 2016, 44 pp.
19. Eligehausen, R.; Mallée, R.; and Silva, J. F., Anchorage in Concrete Construction, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2006, 391 pp.
20. Hoehler, M. S., “Behavior and Testing of Fastenings to Concrete for Use in Seismic Applications,” PhD thesis, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, Aug. 2006, 261 pp. doi: 10.18419/opus-239
21. Gergely, P., and Lutz, L. A., “Maximum Crack Width in Reinforced Concrete Flexural Members,” Causes, Mechanism, and Control of Cracking in Concrete, SP-20, R. E. Philleo, ed., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1968, pp. 87-117. doi: 10.14359/17348
22. Martin, H.; Schießl, P.; and Schwarzkopf, M., “Ableitung eines allgemeingültigen Berechnungsverfahrens für Rissbreiten aus Lastbeanspruchung auf der Grundlage von theoretischen Erkenntnissen und Versuchsergebnissen,” Forschung Straßenbau und Straßenverkehrstechnik, V. 309, 1980, pp. 33-66. (in German)
23. Oh, B. H., and Kang, Y.-J., “New Formulas for Maximum Crack Width and Crack Spacing in Reinforced Concrete Flexural Members,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 84, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1987, pp. 103-112. doi: 10.14359/2787
24. EN 1992-1-1:2004, “Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures - Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings,” European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2004, 225 pp.
25. Borosnyoi-Crawley, D., “Crack Width in NZS 3101:2006 New Zealand Concrete Standard – Model Calibration and Sensitivity Analysis,” BCR Consulting Ltd., 2023, 93 pp. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4547572
26. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-95) and Commentary (ACI 318R-95),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1995, 370 pp.
27. ACI Committee 224, “Control of Cracking in Concrete Structures (ACI 224R-01) (Reapproved 2008),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, 2001, 46 pp.
28. ACI Committee 355, “Qualification of Post-Installed Mechanical Anchors in Concrete (ACI 355.2-19) and Commentary,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2019, 92 pp.
29. Watkins, D. A., and Hutchinson, T. C., “Seismic Behavior of Anchored Nonstructural Components Considering the Influence of Cyclic Cracks: Experimental Program,” Structural Systems Research Project, Report No. SSRP-2010/07, Final Report, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, Dec. 30, 2011, 469 pp.
30. Mahrenholtz, P.; Hutchinson, T. C.; and Eligehausen, R., “Shake Table Tests on Anchors Connecting Suspended Components to Cyclically Cracked Concrete,” Structural Systems Research Project, Report No. SSRP-12/01, Final Report, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, July 31, 2012, 344 pp.
31. Mahrenholtz, P.; Hutchinson, T. C.; and Eligehausen, R., “Performance of Suspended Nonstructural Components and Their Anchorage during Shake Table Tests,” Earthquake Spectra, V. 32, No. 3, 2016, pp. 1325-1343. doi: 10.1193/031115EQS040M
32. Mahrenholtz, P., and Eligehausen, R., “Anchor Displacement Behavior during Simultaneous Load and Crack Cycling,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 113, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2016, pp. 645-652. doi: 10.14359/51689109
33. McLeod, C. H., “Model Uncertainty in the Prediction of Crack Widths in Reinforced Concrete Structures and Reliability Implications,” PhD thesis, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa, Apr. 2019, 212 pp.