Further titles in this series:

1. G. SANGLERAT, THE PENETROMETER AND SOIL EXPLORATION

2. Q. ZARUBA AND V, MENCL, LANDSLIDES AND THEIR CONTROL
3. E. E. WAHLSTROM, TUNNELING IN ROCK
4. R. SILVESTER, COASTAL ENGINEERING, I and II
5. R. N. YOUNG AND B. P. WARKENTIN, SOIL PROPERTIES AND BEHAVIOUR
6. E. E. WAHLSTROM, DAMS, DAM FOUNDATIONS, AND RESERVOIR SITES
7. W. F. CHEN, LIMIT ANALYSIS AND SOIL PLASTICITY
8.L. N. PERSEN, ROCK DYNAMICS AND GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION.
Introduction to Stress Waves in Rocks
9. M. D. GIDIGASU, LATERITE SOIL ENGINEERING
10. Q. ZARUBA AND V. MENCL, ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
W.H.K. GUPTA AND B. K. RASTOGI, DAMS AND EARTHQUAKES
12. F. H. CHEN, FOUNDATIONS ON EXPANSIVE SOILS
13. L. HOBST AND J. ZAJIC, ANCHORING IN ROCK
14. B. VOIGT (Editor), ROCKSLIDES AND AVALANCHES, 1 and 2
15. C. LOMNITZ AND E. ROSENBLUETH, SEISMIC RISK AND ENGINEERING
DECISIONS
16. C. A. BAAR, APPLIED SALT-ROCK MECHANICS, 1. The In-Situ Behavior of Salt
Rocks
17. A. P. S. SELVADURAI, ELASTIC ANALYSIS OF SOIL-FOUNDATION INTERACTION
18. / . FEDA, STRESS IN SUBSOIL AND METHODS OF FINAL SETTLEMENT
CALCULATION
19. A. KEZDI, STABILIZED EARTH ROADS
20. E. W. BRAND AND R. P. BRENNER (Editors), SOFT-CLAY ENGINEERING
2\.A. MYSLIVEC AND Z. KYSELA, THE BEARING CAPACITY OF BUILDING
FOUNDATIONS
22. R. N. CHOWDHURY, SLOPE ANALYSIS
23. P. BRUUN, STABILITY OF TIDAL INLETS. Theory and Engineering
24. Z. BAZANT, METHODS OF FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
25. A. KEZDI, SOIL PHYSICS. Selected Topics
26. H. L. JESSBERGER (Editor), GROUND FREEZING
27. D. STEPHENSON, ROCKFILL IN HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING
28. P. E. FRIVIK, N. JANBU, R. SAETERSDAL AND L. I. FINBORUD (Editors),
GROUND FREEZING 1980
29. P. PETER, CANAL AND RIVER LEVEES
30. / . FEDA, MECHANICS OF PARTICULATE MATERIALS. The Principles
31. Q. ZARUBA AND V. MENCL, LANDSLIDES AND THEIR CONTROL. Second
completely revised edition
32. /. W. FARMER (Editor), STRATA MECHANICS
33. L. HOBSTAND J. ZAJIC, ANCHORING IN ROCK AND SOIL. Second completely
revised edition

Developments

in Geotechnical

Engineering

33

ANCHORING
IN ROCK AND SOIL
second completely revised edition
by
Dr. Ing. LEOS HOBST
Research Institute oj Civil Engineering, Brno ( VU1S)

and
Ing. JOSEF ZAJIC CSc
Engineering Geology, Prague (Stavebni geologie)

ELSEVIER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING COMPANY

Amsterdam Oxford New York 1983

Published in co-edition with

SNTL Publishers of Technical Literature, Prague
Distribution of this book is being handled by the following publishers:
for the USA and Canada
ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC.
52 Vanderbilt Avenue
New York, New York 10017
for the East European Countries, China, Northern Korea, Cuba, Vietnam and Mongolia
SNTL Publishers of Technical Literature, Prague
for all remaining areas
ELSEVIER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING COMPANY
Molenwerf 1, P. O. Box 211
1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Hobst, Leos.
Anchoring in rock and soil.
(Developments in geotechnical engineering ; 33)
Translation of; Kotvenido hornin.
Rev. ed. of: Anchoring in rock. 1977
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
1. Anchorage (Structural engineering) 2. Rock bolts
I. Zajic, Josef. II. Title. III. Series.
TA772.H613 1982
62fcM5
82-871*8
ISBN' 0-1^-99689-3
MCR2
I S B N 0-444-99689-3 (Vol. 33)
I S B N 0-444-41662-5 (Series)

With 525 illustrations and 28 tables

Translation by Ing. Prokop Maxa,

Translation Editor Mark Cowan
1983 Dr. Ing. Leo Hobst and Ing. Josef Zajic CSc

Printed in Czechoslovakia

PREFACE TO THE SECOND ENGLISH

EDITION

There is a growing tendency in the construction industry to exploit the

ground as a means of taking up the tensile forces produced by structures,
and to consolidate the damaged parts of rock masses or establish an effective
support for them by introducing prestressing. Rock and soil consolidation
is most effectively realized by means of prestressed reinforcements which
are placed into boreholes in the ground and which connect the structure,
or the superficial parts of the rock or soil, with the deeper mass. This efficient
construction method is usually referred to as anchoring into rock and soil,
or the tie-back method.
The authors have played a part in the application of the anchoring method
in Czechoslovakia from the very beginning, and decided more than ten years
ago to attempt to evaluate and explain its problems, and to present their
knowledge and experience in the first Czech edition of this book. The latter
was much appreciated by its technical readership and in the years 1975 1977
a supplemented second Czech edition was published together with an English
translation for Elsevier who subsequently expressed interest in a completely
revised edition.
We cannot suppress a feeling of satisfaction that our efforts in summarizing
the current knowledge on anchoring both from our own country and from
abroad, were justified, thereby establishing a basis for the wider utilization
of this knowledge. We are conscious of the fact that the success of our book
has not been due to its literary merits, since the information it contains has
been gathered from the minds of technical academic gentlemen. Success
is due rather to the lack of published material summarizing the principles
of anchoring, the advantages of its application in civil engineering, and the
suitability of the individual anchoring techniques for various ground types
and different anchored structures.
The complexity of anchoring problems has been growing rapidly during
the last decade and much new knowledge has been gained, although it has
remained scattered throughout the literature. For this reason the book has
had to be radically changed, and some chapters have been completely rewritten
for this new edition. We have endeavoured to improve the text wherever
this was desirable.
It is our pleasant duty to extend our sincere thanks and gratitude on this
occasion to our reviewers from all over the world for their stimulating
comments on the previous edition, to all the experts and companies mentioned
in the text for the use of their valuable specialized material, and of course

to all our collaborators at the Research Institute of Civil Engineering and

the national enterprise Stavebni geologie. Above all we thank Ing. Prokop
Maxa for the translation of the book. Last but not least we thank our wives
for their untiring support throughout our work.
L. Hobst J. Zajic
Brno-Praha, June 1982

XIV
RELATION

OF

Length

(metre)
(centimetre)
(millimetre)
(square metre)

Area

m
cm
mm
m2
cm 2

mm 2
Volume m 3
cm 3
Mass
kg
g
t
t/m 3
Force

N
kN
MN

Pressure Pa
(stress)

MPa

Static
Nm
moment
(work) kNm

SI U N I T S

TO

EARLIER

USED

UNITS

=
=
=
=

1.09 yard = 3.28 feet = 39.37 inches

0.39 inch
0.47 line = 0.04 inch
1.196 square yard = 10.76 square
feet = 1,550 square inches
(square centimetre) = 0.155 square inch = 0.00107 square
foot
(square millimetre) = 0.00155 square inch
(cubic metre)
= 1.308 cubic yard = 35.314 cubic feet
(cubic centimetre) = 0.06 cubic inch
(kilogram)
= 2.20 pounds = 35.274 ounces
0.0353 ounces
(gram)
(ton)
= 2,204.6 pounds = 0.984 U.K. ton =
1.102 U.S. ton = 2.2 kips
(ton/cubic metre) = 103 kg/m 3 = 62.427 pounds/cubic
feet
(newton)
= 0.1 kp (kilopond) = 3.527 ounces =
0.22 pound
(kilonewton)
= 100 kp (kilopond) == 220.5 pounds
(meganewton)
= 100 Mp (megapond) = 98.4 U.K.
tonnes = 110.2 U.S. tonnes =
220 kips
1 N/m 2 = 10" 5 bar = 0.1 kp/m 2 =
(pascal)
10" 5 kp/cm 2 = 0.0001 Mp/m 2 =
10" 5 atm = 0.000 142 pound/square
inch (psi)
1 MN/m 2 = 1 N/mm 2 = 10 bar =
(megapascal)
10 kp/cm 2 = 0.1 kp/mm 2 =
100 Mp/m 2 = 10 atm =
141. 935 pounds/square inch (psi) =
20.44 kips/square foot (ksf)
1 joule (J) = 0.1 kpm = 0.72 lbft
(newtonmetre)
(kilonewtonmetre) = 0.1 Mpm = 723.2 pounds feet (lbft)

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 TREATMENT OF THE SUBJECT

The problems associated with anchoring into the ground are extensive
and new ones arise all the time. We would like in this work to present
a comprehensive summary of the development, principles, current state
of technology and methods of application of anchoring. In order to facilitate
the approach to these problems and ensure the reliability of information,
particularly for those construction experts whose familiarity with the anchoring method is limited, we have divided the subject into three principal parts
and 29 chapters.
The chapters of the first, introductory, part A deal with the main principles
of the anchoring method and its static analysis. Chapter 9 discusses the
geotechnical properties of rocks and soils and their evaluation from the
point of view of their capacity to take the tensile forces exerted by anchors.
Chapter 10 explains the results of research concerning the behaviour of
different types of the ground under the load of anchoring forces; it also
includes the formulae derived for making approximate determinations of the
anchor fixing depth both for individual anchors and grouped anchors, given
the tensile forces and the required safety margins against failure.
The second part of the book part B deals with anchoring technology. Materials for the preparation of anchors, the main technological procedures for the
fixing of anchors by different methods in different media, and the information needed for the design of the anchor root are described. Other
chapters of part B deal with the methods of fixing anchors to the surface
of the structure, the methods of drilling and checking the anchoring boreholes, and procedures and equipment used in the prestressing and testing
of anchors together with long term monitoring of their function under
various conditions.
The third and largest part of the publication, C, presents theoretical data
for anchorage design applied to various types of structures, and introduces
some typical examples of both underground and surface constructions. The
last chapter deals with the economics of anchoring by referring to several
examples.

1.2 PRINCIPLES OF ANCHORING INTO THE GROUND

Anchoring in rock or soil is a construction process in which prestressed

components (termed anchors in this case) are embedded in the ground.
The anchors are inserted into boreholes drilled in advance, and are fixed
at the distal end. After fixing, the anchors are usually prestressed and their
exposed upper ends are fixed to heads. The structure to which the anchor
heads are attached, is either one which is dependent for its stability on the
anchors, or it is merely a plate, slab, bar, grid or another structural element
which distributes the stress induced by the anchor heads onto the wider
surface of the rock or soil (Fig. 1-1).
Anchoring in the ground fulfils three basic functions:
It establishes forces which act on the structure in a direction towards
the point of contact with the rock or soil (Fig. 1-2).
It establishes a stress acting on the ground, or at least a reinforcement
of the rock medium through which the anchor passes if non-prestressed
anchorage is used (Fig. 1-3).
It establishes prestressing of the anchored structure itself, when the
anchors pass through this structure.
These functions are mutually complementary, or one or more of them
may be inoperative, being inapplicable to the type of structure and anchoring
method of a particular situation.
Anchoring is always accompanied by the prestressing of the rock. In this
process the ground is consolidated, strengthened, and its mechanical
characteristics improved. This effect of anchoring is fully exploited when
the walls of underground excavations, the rock faces of cuttings, the steep
slopes of cuttings threatened by slumping, are secured; anchoring is utilized
for the pre-consolidation of the underlying ground mass, or for controlling
the deformation expected after completion of the construction, etc. Sometimes, particularly when the faces of underground excavations are secured,
the prestressing is substituted by a simple reinforcement with the use of
anchors, without pre-induced stress; a partial stress in the rock then appears
only when its superficial zones are loosened. This method is, however,
technically and economically less expedient.
The prestress introduced into a structure by the anchors may incorporate
the otherwise occurring tensile stresses of the structure; such stresses appear,
for example, within the masonry of gravity dams on the upstream face under
hydrostatic load, etc. The establishment and utilization of a prestress by this
means in masonry is not usually the main reason for the application of
anchorage. Nevertheless these considerations must be analysed in every
situation of an anchored structure, if not to exploit its contribution to
prestressing, then at least to prevent possible damage and failure proper

Fig. 1-1. Fixing of anchor heads

a) on the surface of the anchored structure, b) on load-distributing
structural elements, 1 anchored structure, 2 slabs, 3 sills
4 grid, 5 anchors

-^

Fig. 1-2. Schematic representation of the

principle of anchoring a dam into bedrock
/ anchor head, 2 tendon, 3 anchor
root, 4 anchored structure

Fig. 1-3. Schematic drawing of the

stabilization of a rock face with
prestressed anchors
1 anchor roots, 2 anchor heads,
3 prestressed rock

by siting of the anchors on the structure and correct location of the load
centre of the anchoring forces.
The most efficient, most widely used technique is a system of anchorage
in which forces are set up acting to lock together the structure with the rock.
(see Fig. 1-2.) With such an arrangement the rock is exploited to greater effect
and takes on the function of a proper construction material. The prestressed
anchors create forces of known direction and magnitude which contribute
to the stability of the superficial structure and tie together the entire complex
consisting of the structure and the co-operating rock medium. The rock
in which the structure is anchored takes the burden of the tensile and shear
forces which arise from the structure and its load (or from natural changes
in the superficial relief) more efficiently and to greater depths than occurs
in the case of structures which are not anchored. On the other hand, a compressive force acting towards the plane of contact with the rock also appears
in the structure, this force depending on the weight of the structure, or the
pressure of a supporting brace or strut as the case may be. The structural
complex created in this way is qualitatively superior, and exhibits mechanical
characteristics which make it more capable of fulfilling its function at a lower
capital cost.
Anchorage, as a means of locking together the structure with the ground mass,
makes it possible to choose with comparative ease on the basis of the static

analysis, the magnitude, direction, and load centre of the anchoring forces;
these forces, incorporated into the entire system of forces acting on the
structure, ensure the stability of the latter with the highest economy and
efficiency. Anchorage applied in this way secures the structure against vertical
displacement due to uplift, against turning over, tangential displacement along
the foot, shear failure along the critical surface within the underlying strata
and in more recent constructions, against seismic effect also.
The continued effectiveness of anchors can be checked easily, and the static
mechanics of anchoring forces is straightforward. Anchorage can therefore
be regarded as an efficient construction method.

1.3 SPECIAL TERMS

The anchoring of structures to rock or soil ensures their mutual interconnection. This interconnection, which is capable of transferring tensile and
shear forces, is solely dependent on the use of anchors, a system of which
forms the total anchorage.
An anchor is a device with a static function, transferring forces in a given
direction from the structure to the rock or soil medium (the ground). An
anchor is composed of three parts: the anchor head, the tendon, and the
anchor root. Depending on the material used, anchors may comprise bars,
wires or strands. Several bars, wires or strands together form a cable.
The anchor head is situated at the external (free) end of the anchor; from
it the prestressing of the anchor is carried out, and when connected it transmits the anchoring forces to the structure.
The anchor tendon connects the anchor head with the root. The tendon
usually allows, by virtue of its elastic deformation, the prestressing of the
anchor during anchoring.
The anchor root is situated at the subterranean (distal) end of the anchor,
and transfers the tensile forces from the tendon to the ground. The root
must be adequately fixed in the ground for this purpose, the fixing being
achieved by the lateral pressure of a mechanical expanding device against
the borehole walls, by bonding with a cement, and by abutting the expanded
anchor end up against the ground.
The free length of an anchor (tendon) is determined by the distance between
the starting point of the fixing of the tendon in the anchor root, and the fixing
point of the tendon in the anchor head.
The fixed portion (root) of the anchor in the rock or soil is determined
by the length along which the force within the anchor is transferred to the
ground. This length constitutes the effective root length in prestressed anchors.
A temporary anchor has a service life not exceeding two years.

A permanent anchor has a service life longer than two years, and therefore
the safety demands of the latter are higher than those of temporary anchors.
A prestressed anchor is permanently tensioned due to the elastic extension
of the tendon over its free length.
A non-prestressed anchor is one that is left without prestressing, or one
that cannot in any case be prestressed because it is fixed in the ground along
its entire length.
An anchor that is capable of being monitored, measured, or checked, has
its free tendon length movable during its working life.
A test anchor is an anchor destined only for the testing of the properties
of a particular type of production anchor, which it represents. Test anchors
are most often used for determining the load limit by loading them to the
point of failure.
A working anchor is an anchor which fulfils a static function in the overall
structure.
The prestressing of an anchor is a process in which a tensile force is
introduced.
The anchoring force is the force which is transmitted by the anchor to the
ground.
The working load of an anchor is the force which the anchor should be
capable of transmitting continuously throughout its service life.
The admissible load of an anchor is determined by the upper limit of its
bearing capacity, computed or ascertained during tests with subtraction
of a safety margin.
A testing load is a short-term loading to which the test anchor is subjected
in order to check the quality of its manufacture and establish its maximum
load.
The {limit) bearing capacity of an anchor is that load under which the
resistance of any functional part of the system (ground, anchor, anchored
structure) fails and the anchor ceases to function.
The safety factor is the ratio of the limit load or limit deformation load
of the anchor and of its admissible or working load.

Chapter 2
S E C U R I N G S T R U C T U R E S A G A I N S T VERTICAL
DISPLACEMENT

Damage caused by vertical displacement may occur to structures with

tank foundations whose weight, including the dead load , is less than the
uplift U at the highest ground water level. Such conditions may prevail, for
example, in the flood plains of rivers. Similar damage occurs when the
stability assessment of such a sunk structure is neglected.
Damage caused by vertical displacement occurs more frequently where
there is a fluctuating load (in stores, sunk reservoirs, etc.), allowing the uplift
force of ground water to dominate. This situation arises because it is uneconomical to design the structure according to the least favourable loading
state, which can occur. Moreover, the design engineer often does not possess
sufficient information on the uplift force or its potential value.
These unfavourable combinations of load are, however, exceptional, and
special measures may be adopted to prevent their appearance, such as the
pumping away of ground water when the store or reservoir is empty. However,
since these measures may fail as a result of technical failure of the pumping
installation, or because they cannot be applied quickly enough in an
emergency, it is necessary to ensure the structure's permanent stability by
increasing its weight, or by anchoring it into the substratum. This is particularly important where damage to one part of the structure can spread
to other parts. The vulnerability of a structure to vertical displacement
(uplift) is reduced by incorporating a greater volume of masonry, i.e. by
adding to the weight of the structure, or by anchoring it in the underlying
ground mass (Fig. 2-1) [69].
In the first method in which the weight of the structure is increased, the
thickness t of the foundation is usually increased by a value t'. This, however,
is accompanied by a further lowering of the foundation footing which again
increases the uplift force U. The effect of the added masonry is consequently
reduced by a value equal to the mass of the additionally displaced water.
The values of the anchoring and other forces required to secure the
structure against uplift, (assuming a rectangular alignment of forces) are
determined from a simple equilibrium of forces:
P = mvU - go = mJhF - Oyb,
where P = value of anchoring forces (kN),
mv = safety factor for vertical displacement (mv = 1.05 to 1.2),

(2-1)

U = uplift on footing (kN),

Q0 = O . yb weight of structure prior to securing, (kN),
h = ground water level above footing (m),
O = volume of masonry in the structure (m 3 ),
yb = volume weight of masonry, (kN/m 3 ),
F = foundationplan area of the structure (m 2 ).

.JM! k3
' lil in u il H tl
Fig. 2-1. Securing a basin against vertical
displacement (uplift)
a) by increasing the volume of the
bottom, b) by anchoring into the
bedrock

Fig. 2-2. Securing of a dry dock in Spain

against uplift by anchoring the weakened
bottom into the bedrock
1 removed portion of concrete bottom,
2 level of the footing base in the absence
of anchors, 3 pre stressed anchors

Assuming that the structure is secured against the effect of uplift entirely
by the weight of the foundations (such being the case in all structures with
a large groundplan area), the thickness of the foundations must be increased
by a value t' (see Fig. 2-1) over and above that of the same structure anchored
in the underlying ground. This increase can be derived from the condition
of equilibrium of forces:
m F(h + t')yvSF(tp

+ t')yb,

10
, =

yb.tp-mv.h.yv

^22)

Wv-Jv-yb

The additional weight for the whole foundation floor area required to protect
the structure against vertical displacement, is given by:
G' = yb. t'.F =

v yv - yb

ft7'*""''*'7'F*

(2-3)

where yb = volume weight of masonry of the structure (kN/m 3 ),

yv = volume weight of water (kN/m 3 ),
h = height of ground water level above the footing of the anchored
floor (m),
tp = thickness of the floor (m),
F = area of foundation floor (m 2 ),
mv = safety factor for uplift (mv = 1.05 1.2).
In the second case, in which the structure is secured by anchoring it into
the underlying ground, the forces required are less than those arising from
the weight of the additional floor mass in the former case. The forces are
calculated assuming equilibrium of forces:
mvF.

h.yv

= F. tp. yb + P

so that:
P = F(mv . h . y v -

tpyb).

The economy of forces needed to stabilize a foundationplan unit area of the

structure is determined by the relation ( = 1):
Z = G -P

= ybIr

v yb
so that, after simplification:
Z = m.y-'*-

'*.

m0.h

+ tp.yb9

(2-4)

Anchoring in the underlying ground is obviously used a great deal in

reconstruction work also. This practice was verified, for instance, in the
reconstruction of a dry dock at Cartagena in Spain. The bottom of the dock
(area 250 m 2 ) had to be made 2 m deeper in order to make it possible to
overhaul a vessel's sonar apparatus. The lowering of the bottom was achieved
by removing 2 m of concrete, that is, by reducing its original 4.5 thickness
to 2.5 m (Fig. 2-2). The weight of the removed concrete which contributed
to the stability of the original dock structure was replaced by the pull of the
prestressed anchors. This example shows clearly the advantages of anchoring

11

in rock. Had this technique not been employed, the entire concrete bottom
would have had to be removed, the footing excavated (more than an extra
2 m, as can be verified from the formula 2-2), and the bottom newly concreted (the new one being thicker than the original bottom). Such reconstruction would undoubtedly cost more and take more time than the anchoring procedure.

Chapter 3
SECURING STRUCTURES AGAINST

OVERTURNING

The stability of structures with respect to overturning is generally analysed

by considering the negative and positive moments of forces acting on the
structure in relation to the fulcrum edge. A measure of the stability is given
by the relation:
Afl-I!
m Pj

l + L*

(3-1)

The negative moment, which favours stability, depends above all on the
weight of the structure and on the distance of its centre of gravity from the
edge of the foundation. Consequently, the stability of a structure may be
improved efficiently by introducing anchoring forces (Fig. 3-1).

Fig. 3-1. Schematic representation of the

effect of anchoring on the increased
stability of a structure with respect to
overturning
L pressure of ice, V pressure of water,
U uplift, G dead weight of the
structure, P anchoring force, tL, tvy /,
to* tP radii of moments of the
individual forces

Anchoring forces are advantageous because their load centre can be

placed at a maximum distance from the fulcrum edge of the structure. The
necessary moments are thus generated by smaller forces than those which
would have to be introduced into the structure if an increased volume of
masonry were employed. Also, the position of the load centre of the latter
forces would not be so easily adjustable to the stability requirements. The
limiting distance of the load centre of anchoring forces from the loaded face
of the structure is determined by the stress in the structure, or at the footing
base before loading. This stress must not exceed the values allowed by accepted standards or computed from tests. The magnitude of the anchoring

13

forces required for securing a structure against overturning is computed

from the formula:
_ mpM^

- M
tn

(3-2)

where Pp = anchoring force required to secure the structure against overturning, acting perpendicularly to the base of the structure (kN),
mp = safety factor for overturning (mp = 1.5 to 2),
Af, + I, M 1 "' = sum of positive or negative moments, respectively, acting on
the structure prior to anchoring (kNm),
tp = radius of the moment of anchoring forces, determined according to the shape of the structure (m).
If the anchoring forces are deflected from the perpendicular to the footing
base by an angle , the value of the required anchoring force increases to
p

(3-3)

cos

When anchoring is used to increase the safety of a structure against

overturning, it is advisable to prestress the anchorage. If non-prestressed
anchorage is used, taking up stress only by the tilting of the structure, a fully
effective combination of forces and moments does not take place, as may
be seen from the following calculation.
In a structure (e.g. a retaining wall) which is anchored by prestressed
cables attached over the third part of the footing base closest to the loaded
face, a permanent pressure develops over the entire underface of the footing.
The loading of the footing in this case has the limit value (Fig. 3-2a):
1

dkz9

*)
C/3

^HJJJIJ

i
d

i||

1
J

Fig. 3-2. Effect of anchor

prestressing as a means
of increasing the load
bearing capacity of the
footing
a) prestressed anchor; the
stress is transferred on
the whole of the footing,
b)non-prestressed anchor;
only a part of the footing
is loaded

14

where TV = limit load of the structure,

M = limit moment load of the structure,
kz = limit stress in the footing.
When non-prestressed anchorage is used, tensions caused by the load on the
structure appear on one side of the footing base (Fig. 3-2b). Extension of the
non-prestressed anchors permits lifting of the structure on one side. When
the lifting equals the sinking that occurs on the opposite side, the limit
loading of the footing is:

Using prestressed anchorage, the limit moment of the structure increases

Fig. 3-3. Anchored retaining walls of a highway cutting near Lyon (France) (photo Solatanche)

15

In reality, the extraction movement of the anchor is greater than the

sinking of the opposite side of the footing, because greater plastic deformation
of the rock occurs above the anchor root. In view of this, the width of the
contact area over which the compression is acting is less than was assumed
previously (dj2) and therefore the load bearing capacity will also be less.
In the case of structures with a constant or scarcely varying load, it is
desirable from the structural point of view to place the load centre of the

Fig. 3-4. Anchored sheeting around a construction pit in the middle of a city protects the
surrounding buildings against settlement and facilitates the use of machines for excavation
(documentation Losinger Co)

16

anchoring forces near the edge that is closest to the loaded face, particularly
if the anchoring forces are introduced into the structure gradually by loading
it with fill material, by the pressure of water, etc.
Thus a more uniform distribution of stress is achieved at the base of the
structure, and consequently an increased load-bearing capacity of the foundation is arrived at.
Slender dams can be successfully anchored against overturning under
hydrostatic pressure (see Fig. 1-2). The retaining walls in railway and highway cuttings are secured against overturning under lateral earth pressure
(Fig. 3-3).
Other constructions which are threatened with overturning under the
influence of external forces are sheetings and similar structures built around
foundation pits and trenches (Fig. 3-4). These structures are fixed in the
ground and the width of their foundations is minimal. The external force
tending to cave in the sheeting, is primarily the pressure of the earth (Fig. 3-5).
ground

'9.00

*6M

Fig. 3.5. Diagram of a sheeting wall under

load from earth pressure
Sa _ resultant of earth pressure, Sp resultant
of earth resistance, Pa resultant of the
anchoring forces in one row (for detailed
description and analysis, see Chapter 22)

Fig. 3-6. Anchoring of quay wall

at Bougainville (Port du Havre-France)
1 reinforced concrete, 2 piles
2.20 X 0.50 m every 6 m, 3 anchors
900 kN every 1.2 m, a embankment,
b _ s iit, c sands, d lacustrine sands

The structure of the sheeting resists the external force on account of the back
pressure on the load bearing elements of the sheeting in the restrained section,
and (when the structure is anchored) by virtue of the tensile forces acting
within the anchors; the anchors hold the sheeting and are fixed into the ground

17

behind the sheeting (tie-back method). The values of the anchoring forces
and the safety factor are determined from the moment equilibrium of forces
acting on the structure with respect to the centre of rotation at point L,
according to equations (3-1) and (3-2).
When the sheeting is secured by anchors, these can be placed in the most
suitable positions in the course of the excavation, the great advantage being
that struts and braces can be omitted in the pit; this leaves the entire space
of the pit free for the movement of earth moving machines and thus the
progress of work is speeded up. (see Fig. 3-4 and Figs, in Chap. 22)
Anchoring has been also used with growing frequency and success in the
construction of quays (Fig. 3-6) and retaining walls installed by the slurry
trench method or by the so called "pile wall" method.

Chapter 4
SECURING STRUCTURES AGAINST

DISPLACEMENT

ALONG THE F O U N D A T I O N L I N E

The resistance of structures to horizontal displacement is determined

in most cases by their dead weight. Apart from the dead weight, horizontal
security also depends on the coefficient of friction in the foundation plane
and is determined by the relation:
ms = ^f-,

(4-1)

where ms = safety factor for shear failure (ms = 1.2 to 1.5),

N = sum of forces acting perpendicularly to the foundation plane
(kN),
T = sum of tangential forces parallel to the foundation plane,
tending to displace the structure (kN),
/ = tg = coefficient of friction at the foundation plane.
If the computed safety factor turns out to be unsatisfactory, the force N
can be increased by adding to the weight of the structure , or by anchoring
the structure to the underlying ground (Fig. 4-1).

Fig. 4-1. Values of anchoring forces in relation to the angle between their resultant and the
perpendicular to the foundation plane
p
Pb anchoring force of optimum angle of inclination y>;
value of anchoring force
cos
acting perpendicularly to the foundation plane

19

The value of the required anchoring forces Ps acting perpendicularly to the

foundation plane is obtained from the formula:

(4-2)

P. = ^- - **.

When additional forces are employed to secure the structure against shear
failure and these forces are acting at an angle from the perpendicular to the
foundation plane, the formula is modified thus:

P ; - .TrfN
5

(4-3)

,,

sin + cos

and incorporating the required safety factor ms:

Pl =

sin H

f
j

cos

(4-4)

The optimum angle of deflection of the anchoring forces from the perpendicular to the foundation plane is determined by differentiating equation
(4-3) and equating it to zero:
(cos / sin ) _
( sin + / cos ) 2
By simplification of this equation, the relationship between the optimum
inclination of the anchoring forces and the coefficient of friction is obtained:
tg = = cotg .
The tangent of the optimum angle of deflection of the additional forces,
measured from the perpendicular.ta4he foundation plane, equals the cotangent of the angle of friction (shear resistance) in the foundation plane
(see Fig. 4-1).
The effect of the angle of inclination and the coefficient of friction in the
foundation plane on the required anchoring forces is illustrated in Fig. 4-2.
The slanting of the direction of the anchoring forces has a more favourable
effect if structures are founded on a substratum with a lower angle of friction.
The greatest reduction in the magnitude of the required anchoring forces is
obtained with a small deflection of the anchors from the perpendicular to the
foundation surface. Thus, for example, in a structure with a coefficient of
friction / = 0.50 in the foundation plane, a deflection of the anchoring
forces by 10 reduces them by 35 per cent. When/ = 0.75, the economy is
about 25 per cent. Further increases of 10 bring smaller reductions, i.e.

20

an angle of 20 yields only 16 per cent, and an angle of 30, 13 per cent.
Thus it is clear that the effect of the deflection progressively diminishes.
Beyond approximately 50, and with a coefficient of friction / = 0.50,
further increases in the inclination of the anchoring forces have practically
no effect on the value of these forces.

15

10

I
i

1 1

7-25MN
N = 30MN

"ft5

r"

p **
<^

Fig. 4-2. Dependence of anchoring force

values
declination from the
^ normal onto their
the foundation plane, with
I
various coefficients of friction /. The
I
diagram assumes that, prior to the
pAg
J
L
anchoring of the structure, the forces TV
err t=
0 10 20 30 W 50 60 70 SO 90 and T act on the foundation plane
angle -

F^fc

One consequence of equation (3-3) is that the optimum inclination for

securing a structure against shear failure does not coincide with the optimum
inclination for protection against overturning. When the angle of the anchoring forces is determined, it should be chosen so as to satisfy both of these
safety requirements, namely protection against overturning and shear failure;
this should involve application of the minimum force. In most cases the
securing of a structure against shear failure will demand a larger force than
that required to prevent overturning. The angle of the anchoring forces
will thus be governed principally by the safety requirements as regards
horizontal displacement.
Gravity dams are typical of those structures which can be effectively secured against displacement under hydrostatic pressure (see Fig. 3-1). Anchoring
makes it possible either to give them extra stability or to increase the height
without major structural modifications, as illustrated in Figs. 4-3,4, 5, 6. The
stabilization of the Milton Lake Dam in the USA by anchoring was achieved with limited time in hand, and in severe weather conditions. 59 VSLy
anchors 30 m long and with a capacity of 4.8 MN, were installed on the
spillway crest with the aid of a helicopter (Fig. 4-5). The Lalla Takerhoust
Dam in Morocco was heightened by 9 m using 86 VSL anchors situated on
the new crown of the dam (Fig. 4-6). (See Section 24.3).
Structures such as abutting blocks, footings, supports, and other constructions of this kind which are loaded by tangential forces are also well

21

suited to the application of anchoring. Good results were obtained, for

example, when the supports of a suspended foot bridge in Geneva were
secured against shear failure by 50 anchorsBBRVprestressed to 1.03 MN each
(Fig. 4-7).

Fig. 4-3. Heightening of the a) El Sancho Dam (Spain) using an additional weight of concrete
and prestressed anchors and of the b) Kuroda Dam (Japan) using an additional weight of
concrete only
1 heightening of the dam, 2 anchors, 3 average chipping on the upstream face
30 cm, on the downstream face 5 cm, 4 new concrete mass

Fig. 4-4. Sectional elevation of the deteriorated spillway of Milton Lake Dam (USA constructed
191317). A helicopter was selected to transport rock-anchors from the fabrication area
(see next figure)
1 rock anchors, 2 embedded anchor block, 3 secondary grouting zone

22

Fig. 4-5. Stabilization of reconstructed Milton Lake Dam (USA, Ohio). The anchors are
installed at the spillway crest (documentation Losinger International)

23
664.00
657.00

\\
ff \

666 00

86 VSL rock anchors

max. proof load
- t e s t anchors 10800 kN
- p r o d , anchors 8800 kN
max. working force
6780 kN
max. length of
anchors
114 m

600.00
drainage holes

a)

i\

existing grout curtain

b)

Fig. 4-6. Heightening of Lalla Takerhoust Dam (Morocco) by anchoring

a) - cross section of the dam, b) - view of the anchor heads on the raised dam crown

24

136.00

Fig. 4-7. Pillars of suspended footbridge in Switzerland secured against failure by means
of prestressed BBR V anchors
A cross-section,

Fig. 4-7.
b) view of the footbridge
b)

Chapter 5
SECURING STRUCTURES AGAINST SHEAR
ALONG A C R I T I C A L S U R F A C E I N T H E

FAILURE

GROUND

A critical surface, along which a shifting or shear failure occurs causing

damage to some overlying structure, may develop directly in the ground.
Shear surfaces in solid rocks develop most frequently along existing
structural discontinuities, such as tectonic faults and failures, bed joints
and fractures. In soils, they are formed directly whenever the shear strength
of the soil is exceeded; in loose soils the shear surfaces are plane, whereas
in cohesive soils they are curved (approx. cylindrical).
Critical shear surfaces may also develop at the interface between the
superficial cover and the rock substratum. The danger of shear failure along
a critical surface of the underlying rock arises mostly when slopes, natural
or man-made, are in the process of being stabilized.
Protection against shear failure depends on the friction generated at the
contact surface of the two layers, and on the passive resistance of the soil
behind the base of the structure, whether it be a retaining wall or sealing
underground wall.
Anchoring may also be used to increase the safety of a structure threatened
by shear failure along a critical surface in the substratum (Figs. 5-1,2, 3)

The ground becomes compressed by prestressed anchors, i.e. a compressive

stress is introduced, perpendicular or nearly perpendicular to the potential
shear surfaces. These stresses increase the friction in the predicted shear zone.
If new shear surfaces were to develop, these would only occur at a greater
depth in the substratum, out of reach of the fixed anchors. Thus

26

Fig. 5-2. Securing by anchoring of a retaining wall against shear failure along critical
cylindrical slide surfaces KUK2 in the underlying soil beds

Fig. 5-3. Securing a multiple arch dam, by means

of anchors, against shear failure at the zone
of contact between the overburden and the
bedrock

anchoring increases the depth of potential shear surfaces and reduces the
danger of shear failure (see Fig. 5-2).
Stability at the shear surface is threatened by the tangential components
of forces arising from the weight of the ground above the surface, from the
load contribution of the structure, and from the pressure of permeating
water. The stability is increased by cohesion and friction along the shear
surface.
The anchoring forces required for situations involving plane shear surfaces
are computed in the same way as those for protecting structures against shear
failure along the foundation plane, that is, according to equation (4-2) and the
formulae which follow. For the stabilization of slopes, graphic analysis is
frequently used (see Chapter 21).
The anchoring depth must be great enough to ensure that there is sufficient
resistance to uprooting of the anchors from the ground both below and
behind the shear zone. The critical shear surfaces in soil are often cylindrical
in shape (see Fig. 5-2). In this case, the stability problem is usually solved
by the strip method of Pettersson which involves comparing the moments
of forces acting at the centre of the cylindrical surface. The safety factor is
determined by the forces contributing towards stability in ratio with the
forces acting against stability:

27

_ f(ZAN
Ms

+ Pn) +
IATPt

Zc.Al
'

where AN is the normal component of the weight G acting on a strip of the

shear surface (kN),
/ = tg = coefficient of friction at the shear surface
c = cohesion at the shear surface (kPa),
/ = width of strip of shear surface (m),
AT = sum of tangential forces acting on shear surface strip (kN),
Pn = normal component of the anchoring force (kN),
Pt = tangential component of the anchoring force (kN),
ms ^ 1.5 to 2.0
An assessment of the danger to a structure of shear failure along critical
surfaces in the underlying ground is most frequently needed when slopes
are being stabilized. An example of this application of anchoring is the system
proposed for the stabilization of an unstable slope of the Tweerivieren Dam
reservoir in S. Africa (Fig. 5-4).
Stabilization of a 20 m high railroad and highway near Alpnachstaad
in Switzerland is shown in Fig. 5-5. 250,000 m 3 of loamy slope material
threatened by sliding along the surface of underlying solid rock were stabilized
by 289 prestressed BBR V anchors bearing 1,400 kN. The anchors are from
12 to 38 m long, and their heads rest on concrete load-distributing slabs
5 by 5 m, placed on the slope.

Fig. 5-4. Stabilization of the unstable slope of a dam reservoir in South Africa using
prestressed anchors
1 system of cable anchors (62 wires of 7 mm dia) 39.6 m long, 2 cable anchors (10 wires
7 mm dia) 26 m long, 3 phyllite beds

28

The calculation of the anchoring forces required to secure the slopes,

the placement of the anchors to achieve the optimum distribution of forces acting over the shear surface, and the recommendations for their
structural arrangement are discussed in Chapter 21.

Fig. 5-5. High slope cutting in Switzerland threatened by sliding secured by BBR V anchors
resting on concrete slabs
a) view of the anchored cutting, b) typical cross-section of the slope
J, 2 possible sliding surfaces, 3 underlying rock, 4 loamy slope material, 5 anchors,
6 railway, 7 motorway

Chapter 6
S T A B I L I Z A T I O N OF R O C K S
A N D THE S E C U R I N G OF U N D E R G R O U N D
S T R U C T U R E S A G A I N S T CAVING I N
The stability of rock and structures built in rock must be established by
special means in all those cases in which marked changes in the state of stress
occur due to external influences, such as the driving of galleries or tunnels,
the excavation of cuttings, loading under the weight of constructions, or
sometimes purely the effects of atmospheric agents.
There are two basic principles in the stabilization of the rock medium
by anchoring: first, the rock is reinforced by steel elements which take over
the tensile, and to some extent the shear stresses also; second, the rock
medium is locked by the prestressing of anchored bolts, and this brings into
effect the frictional forces along the natural planes of discontinuity. The
prestressed anchorage draws the unstable superficial layer of the solid rock
towards the deeper parts of the rock mass which have not been affected by
breakage and which still have an untapped load-carrying capacity; alternatively the anchorage restructures the superficial loosened layers of rock
and converts them into a reinforced compressed mass capable of bearing
its own weight and preventing any loosening of the rock deeper down in the
mass. The rock overlying a break is supported and interlocked, hence the
effect of anchorage is considerably more than just that of passive support
and lining.
The effect of prestressed anchorage on loosened rock material is well
demonstrated in laboratory tests on crushed stone performed by Lang in the
USA [113]. An ordinary metal bucket was filled with gravel consisting of stones up to 1 cm. Bolts were placed in the bucket before it was filled, the gravel
was compacted to some extent by vibration, and the bolts were prestressed
on the surface of the gravel by means of nuts (Fig. 6-la). When the bucket
was turned upside down, not only did the contents remain inside, but owing
to the effect of lateral pressure caused by the prestressing, the gravel was
able to transfer a significant load from its centre on to the walls of the bucket
(Fig. 6-lb).
When non-prestressed anchorage is used for the stabilization of rock in
most cases bars embedded in concrete or resin along the entire length of the
borehole its effect is much smaller. The anchorage serves in the first place
to resist by its shear strength any displacement along the joints that are
crossed by the anchorage, and in the second place as a tensile reinforcement
after further deformation of the rock.

30

a)

b)

Fig. 6-1. Strengthening of gravel in a vessel by prestressed bolts demonstrated by T. A. Lang

a) gravel in bucket, locked by bolts,/?) prestressed gravel capable of spreading tensile
load to walls of bucket

Fig. 6-2. Anchoring diagram for a rock cutting and simple graphic analysis of the anchoring
forces required with a stratification inclined away from the cutting ( is the angle of friction
on the bedding joints)

The stabilization of loosened rock formations on natural or artificial

slopes and faces is brought about by the same method as that used in the
stabilization of structures threatened by shear failure, or overturning (see
Chapters 5 and 3). The forces threatening the stability of rock formations

31

on slopes are, in most cases, the dead weight of the rock, and the pressure
of water or ice in the joints of the rock. The calculation of the anchoring
forces required to establish equilibrium may be carried out using the basic
equations (4-2) and (3-2). A graphic solution is used more often, however.
(Fig. 6-2). Several examples of stabilization achieved by means of anchors
on rock slopes and walls are shown in Figs. 6-3, 6-4, 6-5.
Underground excavations demand a different approach to the equilibrium
of the rock medium. Disturbance of the equilibrium manifests as rock
pressure which may lead to the caving in of underground spaces. Anchoring
provides an efficient remedy in these cases also.
The dead weight of the rock over the excavated space is the main source
of rock pressure, but sometimes there is also a residual internal pressure

Fig. 6-3. Simple strengthening by means of bolts of some thick rock beds on the face of an
excavation

32

j.W
'" S i * 4*
t f ;v' %\^V" k V%-x$
*^8&&% itf&i
. V , *.M^
' .10-/*:
Fig. 6-4. Anchoring of a rock face in the railway cutting at Hofolpe (GFR)
(photo K. Bauer KG)

Fig. 6-5. Securing of the unstable part of a rock slope at the shoulders of the Kawamatu
arch dam in Japan, using long anchors (documentation of Dywidag Co.)

33

in the mass as a result of orogenic processes and changes in the surface relief.
If the cavern is sufficiently deep below the surface of the ground, it is usually
protected against the overlying rock pressure by a natural rock arch situated
above the ceiling of the cavern. The anchorage then takes the load only of
the rock beneath the natural arch (Fig. 6-6). The sooner the face of the
cavern is strengthened, the smaller is the degree of settling of the natural arch.
The magnitude of the anchoring forces required to lock the loosened rock
to the zone of the natural arch, is determined from the unit volume weight
of the rock which is to be secured by each anchored tensile element, or bolt:
(6-1)

Pz = mz . Fh. y . A,
where mz
Fh
y
h

=
=
=
=

safety factor (mz = 1.5 to 2.0),

area of supported rock (m 2 ),
volume weight of rock (t/m 3 ),
average thickness of secured layer of rock (m).

Fig. 6-6. Illustration showing the loosening

of strongly fractured rock in the vicinity of an
opening, and the securing of the rock with bolts
A, B sets of joints, C limit of the natural
arch zone in the rock mass, D probable extra
excavation manageable without anchoring,
S anchors with protecting net

In weaker rock types, in cases of chemically or mechanically damaged

rocks, and in the excavation of larger caverns where the zone of the natural
rock arch is formed at a greater distance from the face of the cavern, the
loosened rock in the immediate surroundings of the cavern is strengthened
by bolt anchors. The rock prestressed in this way forms a self-bearing arch
(Fig. 6-7) which prevents further spreading of damage within the rock. The
well known New Austrian Tunnel Driving Method is based on this principle
(see Chapter 20), The dimensions of the anchoring reinforcements are
arrived at empirically in most cases, taking into consideration the condition
of the rock, and the position and dimensions of the underground workings.

34

Fig. 6-7. Artificial arch (a) formed by

fastening the loosened rock immediately
above the opening with uniformly
arranged prestressed bolts (b)

Fig. 6-8. Anchoring used in the excavation of the Taloro underground pump-storage power
plant (Sardinia) (documentation of Losinger Co.)
a) view into the cavern, b) arrangement of VSL rock anchors

35

The number and length of the anchors are then adjusted while work is in
progress, according to the measured deformation of the rock mass around the
cavern reinforced in this way. A system of long, prestressed anchors is the most
effective stabilizing method in very large underground caverns constructed
for power houses or storage (Fig. 6-8) as documented in Section 20.3.4.

Chapter 7
T H E U S E OF A N C H O R S
FOR THE P R E C O N S O L I D A T I O N OF THE G R O U N D

Anchoring makes possible compression of the ground, which thus can be

consolidated prior to the erection of any structure. The foundations, or the
main parts of the foundations are laid first, and these structures are then
tightly tied to the underlying ground by prestressed anchors which are fixed
sufficiently deep below the foundation to ensure that the anchor roots are
beyond the influence of the weight of the construction. As the work
progresses, this prestressing of the ground, artificially introduced in advance,
can be relieved gradually so as to eliminate excessive subsidence which might
create extra stresses in the structure or even bring about its failure in extreme
cases [87].
Prestressing of the ground by anchoring into the substratum can be
applied to the foundations of statically indeterminate structures sited in the
immediate vicinity of new earth works (such as earth and rockfill dams).
This serves to correct any unequal settling, which would have an adverse
static effect, and might lead to the collapse of these structures. Unequal
settling appears in foundations built over different substrata, and also where
deformation is concentrated at the centre of a structure (Fig. 7-1) on account
of loading of the marginal areas, or the erection of a new structure close by
(Fig. 7-2).

Fig. 7-1. Effect of anchoring at the

margins of a structure as a means of
compensating for differential
deformation of the compressible
ground
Fig. 7-2. Unequal settling of a building constructed
in the immediate vicinity of another building over
consolidated subsoil. The irregularities of settlement
can be eliminated by preconsolidation
/ old building, 2 newly constructed building

The prestressing of the underlying ground can favourably influence the

load distribution on the foundations of structures resting on non-elastic
ground. Because of the pressing down and forcing out of the soil from the

37

boundary areas around the base of these structures, the reactions are transferred towards the centre of the foundation slab, and consequently the
highest moment loads appear in the middle of the slab. In some cases,
therefore, it is economically justifiable and technically sound to compress
the ground under the middle of the foundation by means of prestressed
anchors. A similar effect can be achieved to some extent by preconsolidation
of parts of the footings.
The anchoring forces required to pre consolidate the substratum are determined according to the permanent load which will act upon the substratum
after the erection of the structure, and the length of the period during which
the substratum is allowed to consolidate before construction commences.
Where a short period is allowed for preconsolidation, the anchoring forces
must be greater than those that would be required were a longer period
allowed.
The magnitude of the load and the length of the period during which the
load continues to influence the consolidation process are not linearly related.
This relationship depends primarily on the pore water content of plastic
soils and the soil permeability. Consequently, loading factors and the
corresponding periods of their influence cannot be simply obtained. From
experience of the consolidating process it would appear that in the case of
soils of low permeability it is useful to let consolidation continue for a long
period under preloading, while in the case of more permeable soils, a heavier
consolidating load may be used for a shorter time.
In all cases the anchoring forces for the preliminary consolidation should
be larger than the subsequent loading of the substratum by the structure
itself.

Chapter 8
E F F E C T OF A N C H O R I N G ON T H E S E I S M I C

STABILITY

OF S T R U C T U R E S

The destructive eifect of an earthquake depends on the distance from its

epicentre and on the degree of acceleration of the local ground mass either
in the vertical or the horizontal direction. For this reason it is necessary to
know in which direction the structure is susceptible to deformation.
At the epicentre of an earthquake stress originates from acceleration in the
vertical direction. Because of the inertia of the interacting masses, changes
in vertical forces take place during vertical vibrations, and these changes
may cause the strength of masonry, or the load-bearing capacity of the bedrock to be exceeded, with inevitable damage to structures. Thus the use of
anchoring forces in earthquake zones helps to bring about a reduction in the
additional load of the surcharge induced by acceleration in the vertical
direction, since these forces, in contradistinction to those associated with the
mass of the structure, do not change under the influence of movement.
Vertical vibration generally affects flat structures more, but in most cases
such structures are not anchored into the ground, with the exception of
foundations of the sunk-basin type which have to be secured against vertical
displacement under the influence of upward hydrostatic pressure (see
Chapter 2). A greater threat from vertical vibration is to be expected in the
case of vertical structures exposed to horizontal pressure from water or
earth, such as gravity dams, retaining walls, etc. The vertical vibration in
these structures causes fluctuations in the magnitude of the contact stress
in the footings with a consequent reduction in the safety margin against shear
failure.
In such cases the advantage of anchoring into the ground is evident, as
may be verified by simple reasoning.
Let it be assumed that a structure resists horizontal force by the action
of normal forces associated with its mass; the latter forces must be increased
to obtain the same safety margins in an earthquake-threatened area as
demanded in a non-seismic area, either by increasing the volume of the
masonry, or by anchoring the structure into the ground. The increase in
weight of a block, (7, complemented by the anchoring force, P, which will
resist the movement due to the vertical component of acceleration during
an earthquake, is determined from the equation:
AG
= a(l + a) . (1 - ),
Go

39

where
a

a = ,

= 77-,

G0 = weight of the unanchored structure at rest (kN/),

P = anchoring force (kN).
The anchoring force (Fig. 8-1) is not associated with mass and hence its
value does not change under seismic influences.
35

30

25

20

S
v\J5
1

10

5\

0.05

_]

010

0.15

$-0
{=0.10
=0.20

W\

=0.30

20

"A

/ A

1-050

-0.50

= 0.60

=\

=0.30

J'a2C\
^=QK\

0.20

0.25

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

030
a

9
Fig. 8-1. Required increase in weight, AG,
of a structure exposed to earthquakes, =
_ P

Fig. 8-2. Economy in use of concrete, (,

in a structure anchored in bedrock
subjected to vertical vibration

The saving in concrete AG' may be expressed as a percentage of the weight

of an unanchored structure G0, made safe against horizontal displacement
at rest:
AG'
Go

. (1 + a).

Values for AG'\G0 are shown in Fig. 8-2.

It is interesting to note that during an earthquake in California on 18th
May 1940 the value of a was found to be 0.33.
With increasing distance of the structure from the epicentre, the horizontal
component of any acceleration becomes increasingly predominant; it brings

40

about changes in horizontal loading forces, and at the same time acts on the
mass of the structure through the effect of inertia, thus producing an additional
horizontal force proportional to the mass of the structure. Therefore
horizontal acceleration is a greater threat to vertical structures, even when
there is no lateral loading, as in the case of towers, piers, etc.
In structures supporting horizontal loads, the danger to stability is yet
more acute. Here also it is evident that relying on anchoring forces rather
than the mass of the structure contributes to safety much more effectively.
To prove this general observation would require a lengthy structuraldynamic analysis which cannot be entered into in this book. This brief
excursion into the field of earthquake engineering has to be limited to the
following considerations:
a. The structure is regarded as completely rigid, having only one degree
of freedom, viz. horizontal displacement; thus rotational inertia and/or
possible deformation of the foundations by moment influences are not
considered;
b. the earthquake essentially involves a horizontal acceleration with
amplitude a, acting at all mass point of the structure at the same time;
c. the amplitude value, a, is taken as the same for both unanchored and
anchored structures; thus natural differences occurring between the dynamic
characteristics of the reduced-mass anchored structure and those of the
original unanchored version are not taken into account;
d. the anchoring force and its effect on the static stability of the anchored
structure are assessed in such a way as to preserve the same safety margins
against shear failure in the foundation plane, and against overturning, as
those for the unanchored structure. Thus, it may reasonably be assumed
that the necessary weight, G, of the unanchored structure (larger than that
of the anchored one) is given by:
G = GA + P
(the subscript A stands for "anchored"). Similarly, the static moment
which restores equilibrium against active load moments is of the same value
in both cases:
MG =

MGA

+ Ptp

where tp is the effective eccentricity of the vertical component of the prestressing force P in the foundation plane.
Following from these considerations, the safety factor, ma9 against shear
failure in the foundation plane may be determined from the formula:

ZH + . J b(x) ax
j

41

where/is the coefficient of friction in the foundation

the horizontal component of the static load. The
nominator expresses the horizontal seismic force
of the structural mass. Assuming a general wall

plane, and ZH represents

second term in the dearising from the inertia
cross-section (Fig. 8-3),

Fig. 8-3. Effect of horizontal acceleration

during an earthquake on a dam anchored
in bedrock

*rvl

hen taking its unit depth, the width b(x) becomes equivalent to the crossection area. The volume mass, , is taken as being constant.
Since the width b(x) of an anchored wall is less than that of an unanchored
wall, it may be concluded from the formula for ms that the anchored wall
is the safer with respect to shear failure caused by an earthquake.
Taking cohesion, C, in the foundation plane into account, the formula
for m. must be modified as follows:
mc

G/+C6(0)
ZH + a . j" b(x) ax

It would be necessary to carry out a more detailed analysis in order to

make a general statement about the security of anchored and unanchored
walls against shear failure. It may be noted, however, that for real values
of C and the usual cross-section shapes represented by the function b = b(x),
the above statement regarding the greater security of anchored walls will hold.
In the case of an anchored structure which has the same cross-section
as that of its unanchored counterpart, but has reduced mass by the inclusion
of hollows within its structure, it may be stated without any additional
considerations that the anchored structure generally displays a higher seismic
stability against shear failure in the foundation plane.
The formula for ms is analogous to the expression for the safety margin
for overturning, mp:

M2 + a.j b(x) xdx

J

42

where Mz is the active static moment of the load. The second term in the
denominator is the seismic inertial moment of the structure. Analogous
considerations apply to both mp and ms.
The danger of resonance in massive structures such as retaining walls
and dams is relatively small. It may occur in very large dams (higher than
150 m) and in very thin dams (multiple arches). By making an anchored
structure more slender, the danger of resonance is increased.
A stress state is created in rock in the vicinity of an anchor, producing
a failure in rock strength close to the anchor; in the neighbourhood of this
failure zone an area is created in which the stresses are approaching the rock
strength. In an earthquake, the stress pattern in the rock may change, and
this can result in an expansion of the failure zone into the surroundings
of the anchor, and a reduction in the fixing strength of the latter. This danger,
however, is relatively small, because the oscillations produced by the vibration of the wall are attenuated in the comparatively long anchor tendon.
One may conclude that anchoring is an economic and effective means
of increasing the resistance to shear failure during earthquakes in structures
supporting vertical and horizontal loads. It increases the safety of the structure
against overturning, too. Its advantage is particularly noticeable when the
foundation width can be kept the same as that of an equivalent unanchored
structure (assuming that the masonry which the anchoring forces replace
is taken away from the core of the structure where hollows can be formed).
It must, however, be stressed that in the case of a dam, for example, proper
location of the load centre of the anchoring forces near to the upstream face
of the dam leads to a higher degree of safety against overturning, but not
so much against shear failure. The unequivocal conclusion is that anchored
structures are safer from the effects of earthquakes than are unanchored
structures.

Chapter 9
SUITABILITY OF ROCKS
A N D S O I L S FOR A N C H O R I N G

The capacity of rock and soil under natural conditions to withstand the
tensile forces transmitted by anchors from structures above, is considerable.
Fixed anchors, having a relatively small area of contact with the ground,
utilize its strength to a much greater extent than other foundation structures
such as piles [153]. This is possible because the tensile forces from the
anchors act.at a greater depth below the ground surface, and because in the
fixing zone of anchors, radial stress perpendicular to the tensile force is
induced in the ground; this stress considerably increases the resistance of the
ground to disruption. Even if the ground is disrupted near to the anchor
fixing and some such damage may be allowable considering the depth
of this zone below the ground surface the resistance to possible tearing
out of the anchor continues to increase, as has been proved by experiment
(see Chapter 10).
The capacity of rock or soil to take anchoring forces obviously depends
on its properties. Generally, an increase in the in situ rock or soil strength
means an increase in the strength of the anchor fixing and a decrease in the
minimum depth of anchor burial in the ground. The converse applies when
the strength of the rock or soil decreases.

9.1 TYPES OF ROCK AND SOIL

Four basic types can be recognized: solid rocks (both hard and soft),
and gravelly, sandy, and cohesive soils. The most relevant of their physical
and mechanical properties are the unit volume weight, the compressive
strength, the modulus of deformation, the coefficient of transverse dilatability,
the angle of internal friction and cohesion, or directly the shear strength.
The hard rock category includes those types whose compressive strength,
as determined from samples, exceeds 10 MPa. A more detailed classification
requires a consideration of further properties, such as the mode of origin,
and the degree of weathering and fracturing. This group includes the majority
of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks.
Soft rocks have less strength and greater compressibility compared with
hard rocks. The former include, for example, various kinds of predominantly
clayey and calcareous shales, tuffs, and friable sandstones. A more detailed

44

classification is based on the degree of consolidation and weathering. Typical

values for some of the physical and mechanical properties of hard and soft
rocks are listed in Table 9-1.
The unit volume weight of solid rocks varies considerably, and depends
primarily on the mineral composition of the rock and the mutual bonding
of the minerals; the arrangement of mineral particles may be close or porous
depending on the rock's origin. Approximate unit volume weight (y) values
of existing solid rocks may range, according to origin, within the limits of
2,600 to 3,100 kg/m 3 for the majority of igneous and metamorphic rocks.
The lower values belong to the leucocratic rocks, such as granites, siliceous
porphyrites, and granodiorites, and the higher values pertain to the melanocratic rocks, such as basalts and gabbros. The lowest unit volume weights
are found in porous extrusive igneous rocks, such as liparites or trachytes
which have unit volume weights of between 1,900 and 2,500 kg/m 3 . In
sediments, the unit volume weight ranges from 2,000 to 2,800 kg/m 3 . Clayey
and sandy rocks are lighter whilst those with a calcareous component are
usually heavier.
The shear strength of hard and soft rocks depends not only on the rock
strength itself, but more so on the orientation, density, curvature, and filling
of the joints.
In very simple cases, the specific resistance to shear failure, , at a plane
surface may be computed from Coulomb's equation
T =

r/+c

(9-1)

where = pressure acting perpendicularly to the shear surface (MPa),

/ = tg = coefficient of friction at this surface,
c ~ cohesion within the existing filling or arising from irregularities
along the contact surfaces (MPa).
In more complicated cases, the shear strength has to be found from field
tests on rock blocks. The blocks are loaded simultaneously with a vertical
and a horizontal shearing force by means of hydraulic jacks, until shear
failure occurs. The tests are evaluated from the graphic representation of the
relation . From the loci of individual test results on the graph, the
strength line of the rock is obtained. According to Mohr's hypothesis, this
is also the envelope of the circles of limit stress (Fig. 9-1), which enables an
assessment of the stress of the rock under various loads to be made.
Gravelly soils are unconsolidated coarse sediments such as fluviatile
deposits, in which more than 50 per cent of the grains are larger than 2 mm.
The mechanical properties of such soils are much influenced by the granulometric composition, and particularly by the intergranular matrix.

45
TABLE 9-1
Hard and soft rocks
Class

Solid rock type

Strength
in simple
pressure)1

Modulus ' of deformation, E0

[10 5 Pa] and Poissorfs
ratio, v, at joint density

Values after
M. M. Protodja konov

[105 Pa]

small

medium

large

20,000
to
50,000

5,000
to
20,000

20
to
10

90
to
82

80

to

to

75

hard rocks
1

a) sound igneous and

metamorphic

more than
600

b) sound sedimentary
and thick bedded
2

larger
than
50,000

v = 0.10

a) partly weathered,
igneous and metamorphic
b) partly weathered
sedimentary and
thick bsdded

more than
150

larger
than
20,000

a) weathered igneous
and metamorphic
b) weathered sedimentary and thick bedded
c) partly weathered
sedimentary, flaggy

more than
100

5
larger
than
5,000

d) sound sedimentary
thin bedded
4

1,000
to
5,000

70

500
to
1,000

300
to
500

65

500 to 1,000
v = 0.25

60

300 to 500
v = 0.30

to

to

200 to 300
v = 0.35

55

to

v = 0.20

a) weathered sedimentary, flaggy2)

b) partly weathered,
thin bedded

1,000
to
5,000

v = 0.15

c) sound sedimentary,
flaggy
3

5,000
to
20,000

more than
100

500
to
1,000
v = 0.25

soft rocks
5
6
7

soundconsolidated

20 to 100

partly weathered
medium consolidated

10 to 20

weatheredlittle
consolidated

3 to 10

*) The strength in terms of a simple pressure is measured using 5 cm rock cubes. Watersaturated samples of rock are tested.
2
) Decomposed igneous or metamorphic rocks are classified as soils.

46

s^

fir\

fa
Jtf < 1* J
CZ=

c^^"""~

i_

Fig. 9-1. Rock shear strength curve, connecting

experimental points obtained in field shear
tests, and forming the envelope of Mohr's
circles determined by the maximum (a^ and
minimum (<r3) stresses at which failure occurs
at limit stress for simple tension, ad limit
stress for simple compression

^ J

Typical values for the physical and mechanical properties of gravelly

soils are given in Table 9-II. The higher values in classes 8 and 10 belong
to the more compact gravels, and those of class 9 to solid or hard cohesive
TABLE 9-II
Gravelly soils
Class Gravelly soil
type

Modulus of
Unit
volume deformation, EQ
weight [105 Pa]
[kg/m 3 ]

Effective angle Poisson's

of internal fric- ratio
tion and cohe- V
sion

Values after
M. M. Protodjakonov

[] c [105 Pa]

Coarse grains
in mutual contact, pores filledI
with soil
8

sandy

cohesive

1,800
to
2,000

1,000 to 5,000

36
to
45

0.30

500 to 1,000

32
to
38

0.33

15

Coarse grains
not in contact,
matrix filled
with soil
10

11

sandy

cohesive

0.36
1,700
to
2,000
1,900
to
2,100

500 to 2,000
(values determined ace. to
Table 9-IV for
cohesive soils);

22
to
32

0.1
to
0.2

0.40

60

47

soil matrices. In class 11 the values are similar to values for cohesive soils,
but the modulus of deformation increasingly depends on the percentage of
coarse material.
Sandy soils are unconsolidated sediments in which more than 50 per cent.
of the grains are less than 2 mm, and the plasticity index is less than 1. This
group includes fine-grained and coarse-grained sands and the sandy weathering products of solid rocks. Typical values for the physical and mechanical
properties of sandy soils are given in Table 9-III.
Cohesive soils are unconsolidated sediments containing a significant
proportion of clay, and showing a plasticity index greater than 1. A more
detailed classification takes into account the plasticity index and the consistency which relate to the content of the smallest clay particles, and the
water content respectively. This group includes various types of clays and
loams, loamy and clayey sands and gravels, and the clayey weathering
products of solid rocks. Typical values for their physical and mechanical
properties are given in Table 9-IV.
The approximate shear strength of soils is found from Coulomb's equation,
= of + c, by inserting the characteristic values for the angle of internal
friction or cohesion. More precise values may be obtained from laboratory
test on undamaged samples, or directly from in situ field tests.
9.2. I N V E S T I G A T I O N O F R O C K

AND

SOIL

Proper investigation of rock and soil is essential for successful anchor

design. Decisions as to the depth and position of the anchor fixing and the
fixing method, estimations of the load-carrying capacity of the anchor and
the proposed admissible load, all depend on the characteristics of the rock
or soil. The same applies to selection of the anchor type, the anticorrosive
measures to be taken, the method of drilling the anchor boreholes, and the
most appropriate method of embedding the anchors into the boreholes. The
preliminary design of the anchorage may be based on average values of
geological properties, as listed in the tables (Section 9.1) pertaining to different
types of ground. To ensure reliable functioning of an anchor, a detailed
knowledge of the geological profile and its characteristics, including the
level and quality of the ground water at the anchoring site, is essential.
When the geological conditions are found from exploratory boreholes to be
adverse, and it seems that the anchoring technology could only be adopted
to the situation with difficulty, another suitable anchoring site must be
selected.
In strong rocks, this investigation is best carried out by drilling cores
which yield rock samples (Fig. 9-2), not only for petrographic analysis, but
especially also for laboratory tests of the unit volume weight of the rock,

very moist to saturated

18

1,900 to 2,000

50 to 100
0.39

80 to 150
0.36

1,650 to 1,850

with more than 2 % content

of 0.05 mm particles
dry to moist

17

100 to 200
0.33

1,900 to 2,000

very moist to saturated

16

150 to 300
0.33

150 to 300
0.35

1,650 to 1,850

15

14

Medium and fine-grained sand

with less than 2 % content
of 0.05 mm particles
dry to moist

2,000 to 2,100

with more that 5 % content

of 0.05 mm particles or very
moist saturated

13

0.30

150 to 300
0.31

0.33

1,950

uniform grain

300 to 600

1,700

non-uniform grain

600 to 1,000

medium
compact

[kg/m 3 ]

100 to 200
0.36

150 to 250
0.33

200 to 400
0.30

300 to 500
0.30

300 to 500
0.32

300 to 500
0.28

compact

Modulus of deformation, E0
[105 Pa],
and Poissorfs ratio, v

Unit
volume weight

12

Corse-grained sand

Class Sandy soil type

Sandy soils

TABLE 9-III

0.33

0.30

0.28

0.28

0.30

0.27

0.28

>200

>250

>400

> 500

>500

>500

> 1,000

25 to 30

27 to 32

31 to 36

32 to 38

31 to 36

32 to 37

35 to 42

very compact friction,

[]
to cemented

Effective
angle
of internal

0.1 to 0.2

0.1 to 0.2

0.5

0.8

30

40

Effective
Values after
cohesion, M. M. Proc [105 Pa] todjakonov

Unit
volume
weight
[kg/m 3 ]

2,000
to
2,100

2,000
to
2,150

2,000

to
2,200

Cohesive
soil type

with low
plasticity

with medium
plasticity

with high

plasticity

Class

19

20

21

Cohesive soils

TABLE 9-IV

to
30
0.46

10

15
to
40
0.46

20
to
60
0.46

soft

30
to
60
0.45

40
to
80
0.45

60
to
120
0.45

solid

100
0.35 to 0.43

60

80
to
150
0.35 to 0.43

120
to
200
0.35 to 0.43

strong

Modulus of deformation, E0 (10 5 Pa), and

Poissorts ratio, v, if
the consistency of a soil is:

21

0
to
25

0
to
30

Effective
angle of
internal
friction,
<p[]

to
0.8

0.2

0.1
to
0.5

0.1
to
0.4

Effective
cohesion,
c
(10 5 Pa)

45

Values after
M. M. Protodjakonov

50

its strength, its cohesion with cement (Figs. 9-3, 4), and if necessary, its
coefficient of friction with steel, as well as other factors. An idea of the
structural condition of the ground is also gained, depending on the length
and number of cores taken and their respective losses. Judging by the
appearance of the joints, their density, angle of inclination and surface
properties, the lowest shear strength of the rock may be estimated and the
most suitable direction of the anchors selected.

Fig. 9-3. Laboratory testing of the load-bearing capacity of anchors in samples of rock.
Cement: polyester resin CHS 104; fixing length: 10 cm; setting time: 1 hour at a temperature
of7C
a) in sandstone (10.8, 15.2 kN), b) in crystalline limestone (27.5, 21.5, 38.3 kN)

Exploratory boreholes are often subjected to water-pressure tests in the

proposed anchor fixing section. In this way, data on the permeability of the
ground and the density of jointing are obtained; the width and perhaps the
degree of filling of joints can be estimated, and a suitable composition for
the grouting material proposed. Sometimes it is useful to carry out a direct
inspection of the walls of the boreholes by using direct optical equipment,
or television. The level of ground water in the boreholes must be measured
and recorded over a long period. Samples of water taken from the borehole

51
Fig. 9-4. Samples of rock
prepared for laboratory testing
of bonding with grout

are analysed, and particular note must be taken of any corrosive action of the
water on the concrete and metallic parts of the anchor.
With regard to soils, a knowledge of the geological profile at the anchoring
site is particularly important, as frequent changes occur in the composition
of the overlying soil formations together with large differences in their
mechanical properties. For the investigation of soils, large diameter holes
are usually drilled using either rotary or vibratory equipment, so as to obtain
a sufficiently large quantity of soil for petrographic analysis and laboratory
testing of its physical properties. Undamaged samples from the proposed
fixing site are particularly valuable. Laboratory tests on these samples
provide the values by which the soil shear strength and its cohesion with the
cement that is to be used for the fixing of the anchor (Fig. 9-5) can be assessed.
Exploratory holes in soils are used for load tests carried out with a presiometer, and for groutability tests. The load test using the Menard presiometer
leads to determination of the soil limit stress, pt, and with the aid of the
conversion graph (Fig. 9-6), to determination of the corresponding values
of the surface friction resistance for concrete piles [132], which for a preliminary design may also be safely used as long anchor roots. The following
table lists' the ranges of values of the limit stress, /?,, and the deformation
modulus, E, obtained from presiometric tests in different types of soil
and rock.
Careful measurements and investigation of the ground water in the soil
are very important, not only for the design of protection of the anchors
against corrosion, but also for estimating the effect of water on the mechanical
properties of the soil, and introducing the effect of upward hydrostatic
pressure into the static analysis of the anchorage.
The geological investigation of the anchoring site is most suitably supplemented by the installation of a number of test anchors (at least three) which

52
Fig. 9-5. Samples of loess after
a pull out test

liiS^Mftii"

0.15t

"0.1

0JU5\

/ f/

0.5
limit pressure IpJ

_L
MPa

1.5

Fig. 9-6. Surface friction

resistance on the lower part
of a concrete pile as
a function of the limit
stress of soil,/?/, obtained in
a loading test with
a Menard presiometer in
an exploratory borehole
[132]

are loaded by tensile forces until they are torn out of the ground. The
procedure adopted in such loading tests is described in Chapter 17. Test
anchors fixed in cohesive soils have to be subjected to lengthy monitoring
of the time-dependent reduction in anchor prestressing owing to soil creep
in the vicinity of the root (see Chapter 19); a time schedule for the restoration
of the stressing in the anchors can be worked out on the basis of the
data recorded there.

53
TABLE 9-V
Deformation moduli (E) and limit stresses (pi) of some rock and soil types
Soil or rock

Pi [MPa]

E [MPa]

moist clay
loam
consolidated loam
marl
silt
saturated fine-grained sand
consolidated sand
gravelly sand and gravel
limestone

0.050.3
0.30.8
0.62
0.64
0.21.5
0.10.5
15
1.25
310 or more

0.53
38
840
560
210
0.52
7.540
840
8020,000

9.3 METHODS OF T R A N S F E R R I N G TENSILE FORCES

TO THE G R O U N D

Tensile forces may be transferred to the ground by several methods:

by bracing the anchor against the walls of the borehole, by binding the anchor
to the rock or soil with cement, and by abutting the expanded end (bulb)
of the anchor against the ground. These methods differ markedly with
respect to their static effect on the ground, and therefore the amount of
tensile force that can be transferred also varies greatly according to the
method used.
9.3.1

Bracing of anchors

Bracing the anchor against the walls of the borehole stresses the rock
(up to 10 MPa), usually in the short section of several centimetres length
over which the anchor is fixed. Thus, the use of this method is limited to
strong rocks where relatively small tensile forces (up to 0.2 MN) are involved.
The fixing of the anchor in the borehole is achieved by a mechanical expanding or bracing device (base), which works on the principle of a wedge and
which is fixed at the anchor foot in the borehole (Fig. 9-7). The device is
expanded in the borehole by driving in, pulling out, or turning the anchor
rod, depending on the mechanism employed. The tensile force is transferred
from the anchor to the rock by friction at those points where the foot has
been forced nto the borehole wall. The advantage of mechanical anchoring
is its immediacy: as soon as the anchor is inserted and fixed, it may be loaded
or prestressed.

54
Fig. 9-7. The fixing of an
anchor in the rock by
mechanical means. Bracing
of the foot against the
borehole walls is achieved
a)by ramming a wedge into
the split rod end, b) by
pulling a cone into the
expanded sleeve

9.3.2

Fixing of the anchor by cementing

The second method of fixing the anchor in the ground is based on the
cohesive bonding of a suitable cement (usually concrete or synthetic resin)
with the steel tendon of the anchor, as well as with the rock or soil in a long
section of the borehole (Fig. 9-8). At the embedded end of the anchor tendon,
a long root is formed from the grout which is poured, or more often forced
under pressure, into the borehole. This root, after it has hardened, transfers
the tensile force from the anchor tendon to the ground by exerting a shear
force on the contact surfaces. The fixing of anchors with cement is the most
frequently used fixing method nowadays, and may be applied to all types
of rock and soil. The length of the anchor root required (from 1 to 10 metres)
depends on the strength of the rock or soil and the magnitude of the tensile
force; if necessary, the diameter of the borehole can be increased to give
a greater area of contact. The cohesion between the cement and the ground
does not have a constant value. By analogy with the drop in cohesion with
increasing length of bars embedded in concrete, there is a marked drop
in the cohesion between cement and rock or soil in boreholes, as has been
shown by experimental tests. The drop in the cohesion of the cement grout
in an anchor embedded in strong rock is shown in the graph in Fig. 9-9.
When the increase in the area of contact occurs over a low range (i.e. from
very small to small), cohesion drops considerably; over a higher range, the
increase does not affect cohesion so markedly. Similar results have been
Fig. 9-8. The fixing of an
anchor in rock or soil by
cementing into the distal
end of the borehole.
Shear stress acts on the
surfaces of contact between
cement and steel, and
cement and ground

55

5 3
~2
<u

-fLLL.

7
Oft

Q O O

Uli
f

*^

to
CM

strength was not yet exceeded -

II

j
[cm2]

fixing area in solid nock

Fig. 9-9. Relationship between the cohesion of a hardened cement mortar in a borehole in
strong rock, and the extent of the fixing area

found for non-cohesive soils by H. Ostermeyer [154], who observed the

relationship between the average value for the surface friction under the
ultimate loading of the anchor, and the length of the anchor root (Fig. 9-10).
The frictional resistance declined with increasing length of the root, this
effect being greater at greater initial friction values (i.e. at a greater degree
of consolidation and larger grain size range (of the soil). In spite of this, the
average limit surface resistance of long cylindrical anchor roots is markedly
higher than that of tensile piles reaching up to the ground surface. The values
for the limit surface resistances obtainable in soils are within the ranges
0.05-0.25 MPa for piles, and 0.30-0.80 MPa for anchors [153].
For this method of fixing, a limit load-bearing capacity of up to 0.5 MN
can be assumed for clayey soils, 1 MN (Fig. 9-11) for sandy soils and soft
rocks, up to 2 MN, for coarse gravelly soils (Fig. 9-12), and two to five times
more for strong hard rocks.
* limit bearing capacity was peached
VD "
"
// was not peached

WOO
800

- V

*-

600

&

W0

200

B-l

'

2-

T3

~ 1 "?^ :.^
n

" ~

root length [m]

10

Fig. 9-10. Drop in average

resistance at the surface
of a cylindrical root of
diameter 6.4 to 10.3 cm,
embedded in various types
of non-cohesive soil [154]
1 compact sandy gravel,
grain-size variability
number i/ = 160 150,
2 compact sand,
U= 3.0 7.9,
3 medium compact sand,
U= 1.6 2.0; 4 - soft
sand, U = 4.0

56

load [kN]
200 300 WO 500 600 700 800

WO

900 1000

Fig. 9-11. Ranges of anchor loading curves prior to the attainment of ultimate bearing
capacity in various types of non-cohesive soils (after H. Ostermayer)
1 compacted gravel, grain-size variability number U = 60 to 150, 2 fine to medium
grained, compact sand, U = 3.0 to 7.9, 3 sand with small-grained gravel, medium compact,
U = 2.6 to 3.5, 4 medium grained sand, medium compact, uniform grain-size, U = 1.6
to 2.0

1
1

/
>
' //

u/1/l

I
k
/J 1
N
/ *\/l
yfMiR
J

/
1/

A '

9.3.3

il1

//

i)
'//

ST/ /

N1/

l|l

"

Alt

11

n\

I'' 1 i III |

'

?!

\ 1

\/l

\l
V
r

t/

' ^1

i/K

//

JJ

100
200
300
WO
extraction of head [mm]

500

600

Fig. 9-12. Loading diagram

for 6 m-long anchors fixed
in dry gravel and sand
in the Vh valley
(Czechoslovakia)
1 fixing by terminal bulb
35 cm dia and 50 cm long,
2 fixing by root 3.0 m long
and 20 cm dia

Fixing of the anchor by an abutting base

The third method of anchor fixing, the abutting of the anchor foot against
the ground, is a continuation of the earlier practice of connecting structures
to rammed-in sheet piling, concreted trenches or pits (Fig. 9-13), by steel
plates or draw bars, in order to secure the structures against displacement.
Nowadays, such unwieldy and elaborate systems are dispensed with in favour
of a thick root, or bulb, concreted in at the expanded distal section of the

57

Fig. 9-13. The fixing of an anchor in the ground by means of an abutting structure formed
_ by rammed-in sheet piling, b) by steel plate, concreted trench, or concreted pit,
c) by concrete bulb in expanded borehole section

a)

anchor borehole. In some fixing systems, the borehole is expanded at several

successive points (see Fig. 13-69).
The method of transferring the tensile forces from an anchor to the ground
by abutting the expanded end against the rock or soil is technically more
difficult in its execution, but the load-carrying capacity is greater by 50 per
cent or more. The anchor borehole is expanded to two or four times its
original diameter by mechanical means or by setting oif a small charge of
explosive at the bottom of the borehole.
The fixing of an anchor by an expanded root can be carried out in all
types of rock and soil, but usually it is applied in cohesive soils in which
local expansion of the borehole is easiest and the need to increase the loadbearing capacity of the anchor is greatest (see Section 10.4).
The design of the anchor roots according to the various fixing methods,
their ultimate load-bearing capacities as obtained in field tests, and the design
and technology of complete anchoring systems, are dealt with in Chapter 13.

9.4 EVALUATION OF ROCKS AND SOILS WITH R E G A R D

TO A N C H O R I N G

Strong hard rocks, unweathered and technically little damaged, are best
suited for taking the tensile forces transmitted by anchors. They are able

58

to resist forces up to several MN even at small depths below the ground

surface, and with increasing depth, this capacity can be raised as much as
tenfold. If the hard rock has been fractured and shows dense jointing or
tectonic shattering at the anchor fixing point, it is advisable to consolidate
the rock by grouting, or alternatively select another, possibly deeper, site
for the fixing of the anchor. The tensile forces can be transferred to hard
rock by any of the previously mentioned fixing methods: bracing, cementing
and abutting. The most suitable method is selected according to the magnitude
of the tensile force.
In soft rocks, with a compressive strength as measured from samples
of less than 10 MPa, anchors must be fixed over a greater length of the borehole, or in expanded boreholes by means of a suitable cement, and they
must be fixed at greater depth below the ground surface. The anchorage design in rocks of this type must be based on reliable investigation results.
Soils are capable of taking considerable tensile forces, provided the
anchors are suitably fixed. Fixing by the expanded foot method (abutting
against the soil) gives the best results in this case. Model tests carried out
in dry sand [71, 145 and others] have shown a linear relationship between
the load-bearing capacity and the anchor foot width. A long cylindrical
anchor root can form a very efficient fixing, even in non-cohesive soils
particularly if the borehole diameter has been expanded somewhat by a higher
grouting pressure. This has been demonstrated in several tests of anchors
in soils, in which the roots were afterwards excavated [153]. Coarse noncohesive soils, gravels and gravelly sands are very suitable for anchoring
purposes. The load-bearing capacity of sands, particularly those that are
fine-grained and loose, is considerably lower (see Figs. 9-11, 9-12). According
to some authors, there is a direct relationship between the load-bearing
capacity of the anchor and the degree of compaction and grain size of sands
[145]. Saturation of the pore space of non-cohesive soils at the fixing level
of the anchor and in the overlying beds markedly reduces the load-bearing
capacity of the anchor. This has been verified both by laboratory tests and
in field tests (see Chapter 10).
Anchorages in cohesive clayey soils must be designed with due caution,
and on the basis of reliable investigation. Here, the most efficient fixing
method is the abutting of the expanded root against the soil, (see Sections 10.4 13.3). Clayey soils display large and long-lived plastic deformation (depression) which results in a gradual reduction of the prestressing of the anchor (see Chapter 19). This must be taken into acount
when short-term tensile tests of anchors in these soils are evaluated. A long,
grouted root can, however, quarantee a load-bearing capacity exceeding
0.5 MN, even in very sensitive clays (see Chapter 13); a permanent partial
anchor extraction of up to 20 mm can be expected [23], if the proper

59

technology and correct root parameters are used. Serious problems may
arise in sensitive clays by deformation of the entire earth mass into which
many of the tensile forces from the anchored structure are transferred (see
Chapter 22).
Extremely hard conditions for the fixing of anchors are encountered
in young slope sediments and fluvial sediments which may be loose, heterogeneous, often saturated, and partially composed of organic remains. Made-up
ground and deposits of industrial waste have similar characteristics.

Chapter 10
E M B E D D I N G D E P T H OF A N C H O R S I N R O C K S
AND SOILS

Satisfactory anchorage of a structure into the ground depends on the

resistance of the rock to the force tending to tear out the anchor roots. This
resistance must be equal to, or greater than, the force acting within the
anchors multiplied by the required safety factor. The resistance is principally
determined by the mechanical properties of the ground, particularly its shear
strength where that part of the ground which accepts the compressive stress
of the anchor root, meets that part of the ground unaffected by this stress.
The resistance of the ground also depends on anchor structure, particularly
the width and length of the anchor root and the method of fixing the root
into the rock. This matter is discussed in Chapter 13.
10.1 ANCHORING DEPTH IN HARD ROCKS

The resistance to uprooting of the anchor is determined by the rock shear

strength , which in strong compact rock types is approximately equal
to 1/12 of the compressive strength.
In isotropic rocks, the influence of the anchor spreads as a cone-shaped
zone with an apex angle of 90 and an axis coinciding with the anchor tendon.
The necessary depth of embedding, hh for one anchor (Fig. 10-la) is determined by the relation:

*,-/^r

CD

In a line of anchors (Fig. 10-lb) where the anchoring influences a prismshaped zone of triangular cross-section and apex angle 90 along the line
of the anchors the necessary depth is given by the relation:
h,

_mjf_

_^P

(10.2)

The uprooting of anchors which are stressed while in service is assumed

to be counteracted solely by the weight of the rock in the zone of influence
of the anchors (Fig. 10-lc). Taking this assumption, the anchoring depth is
determined from the relation:
* . - ^
y.l

00-3)

61

Fig. 10-1. Pattern of transfer of stress by the

pressure of tensioned anchor roots in an isotropic
rock medium
a) individual anchors, b) a line of anchors,
c) a grid of anchors

The symbols used in the formulae (10-1) to (10-3) denote the following
quantities:
P

/
y
mk

=
=
=
=
=

design anchoring force (kN),

shear strength of the rock (kPa),
axial interval between anchors (m),
unit volume weight of rock (kN/m 3 ),
safety factor for uprooting of the anchor.

In formulae (10-1) and (10-2) mk ranges from 2.0 to 4.0, and in formula
(10-3), from 1.2 to 1.5.
Formulae (10-2) and (10-3) are used to calculate the anchoring depth
when / is less than the product of Af as determined in formula (10-1), and the
tangent of the angle of internal friction:
/ ht. tg .
The resistance to the uprooting of anchors embedded in rock has been
tested at several sites. Very accurate results were obtained from the Allt-naLairige Dam site in Scotland; the relatively sound granite bedrock yielded
a compression strength figure of 130.9 MPa, and a shear strength of 9.8 MPa.
A borehole 120 cm in diameter and 5.4 m deep was made for the test,
with a cone-shaped widening at a depth of 3.3 m. Anchor tension was

62

simulated by forces created by a set of six Freyssinet's disc jacks, placed

concentrically at the borehole bottom. The space above the jacks was filled
with concrete. During a test loading, the pressure in the jacks reached 44 MN
without rupture of the rock, although at pressures of between 12 and 14 MN
the first cracks appeared at the level of the jacks. These cracks, however,
were not a function of the anchoring depth and would have occurred had the
jacks been placed at an even greater depth. The maximum penetration of the
anchor into the rock was 8.5 mm. Lifting of the rock around the borehole
was apparent at a load of 14 MN, but this was reduced when the anchors
were sited further from the surface.
1000

3. SOU
<

7ST 750 KN

600

1
/
1
/
1 /
1 /

V.

S400
co
<t

100
u

1 //
1

5
veriicol

10
displacement

15
of head

[mmj

20

22

Fig. 10-2. Load characteristic of an anchor with 30 cm long tendon, fixed in an anchoring
cavity 21.0 cm dia, 30 cm deep. The anchor was fixed in a trial gallery in the dolomites of the
Cierny Vh river valley

In Czechoslovakia, extraction tests on anchors fixed at depths of 30 an d

120 cm in dolomitic limestone demonstrated the considerable resistance of
the rock to release of the anchors 0.75 MN and 2.1 MN (Fig. 10-2). They
also showed the reliability of the formulae used for calculating the anchoring
depth, as described above. The extraction test is described in Section 28.4.

10.2 A N C H O R I N G D E P T H IN D A M A G E D OR SOFT ROCKS

The shear strength of a rock is always reduced by planes of discontinuity,

and depends on the orientation of these planes with respect to the direction
of the operative forces. The resistance to anchor extraction consists, in varying
proportions, of the frictional forces along these planes, the resistance to
angular displacement, and the shear strength of the parts of the solid rock.
Rock formations in which the beds run perpendicularly to the tendon are
the most suitable for the fixing of anchors, because shear stresses then
develop in a conical pattern, as in isotropic rocks. The least resistance to

63

anchor extraction occurs in rocks with numerous planes of discontinuity

running parallel to the tendon axes (Fig. 10-3).
If there is only one system of such planes, for example stratification,
resistance to extraction is determined solely by the shear strength of a rock
slab equal in width to the anchor root cross-section at the fixing point. In
this case cohesion and friction in the planes of discontinuity are neglected,
and the slab acts as a layer bearing a single load at its centre. The necessary
length of the anchor tendon is determined by the formula:
,
mk. P
mkP
K =
*
= |,
2rdj2
2.83rd

v(10-4)

>

where d is the diameter of the anchor root.

Fig. 10-3. Form and extent of the influence of anchoring on the rock medium in relation to the
angle between the axis of the anchor and the planes of discontinuity of a hard rock
a)axis of anchors perpendicular to the planes of discontinuity, b)axis of anchors parallel
to the planes of discontinuity, c) axis of anchors forming an acute angle with the planes
of discontinuity

Thus, wherever possibh, the anchors should form the greatest angle with
the bedding planes in order to spread the load on to the maximum number
of beds. However, rock masses usually have two or more systems of discontinuity planes, which means that if the anchors are unfavourably placed,
there is a further reduction in their resistance to extraction. In rocks with
dense irregular jointing, and in rocks of lower strength, the anchoring depth
is determined using a formula derived by L. Hobst, in which it is assumed
that the friction at the lateral faces of a supposed geometrical body of the
rock (cone, prism), on to which the stress from the anchor is transferred,
acts against extraction. The apex angle of this supposed body is equal to
twice the angle of friction, . The magnitude of the frictional force depends
on lateral stress resulting from the upward pressure of the fixed root, this
pressure increasing from zero near the ground surface to a final value, <,
at the root level (Fig. 10-4). is given by:
ah = .

kQ,

64

K **
f*^7

\ \
>
/*

/'

1/
/

^
1

Fig. 10-4. Diagram showing the radial forces

that give rise to friction at the lateral surfaces
of the zone affected by anchoring; the zone
has an assumed size and shape for the purposes
of calculating the required fixing depth of the
anchors

f 'f

where

fc0 =

F '
v

and F = area of the root front (i.e. root cross-section) (m 2 ),

Pkr = pressure of the root front on the rock at the failure limit (kN),
v = Poisson's ratio for the rock.
, or F, are selected on the basis of tests, or in the case of smaller projects,
according to standard values; this ensures that the anchor root does not
cut through the rock.
The necessary depth for embedding individual anchor roots in the rock
is determined from the formula:

K -/-*s4-.

(10-5)

V . tg

/ UP
If the axial interval, /, in a line of anchors is larger than / < /
,
if/ <

/
, then the following is used
*
B +
2tg(p

(10-6)

2lah

where
l2(fh

^"

l2n&h\

65

The embedding depth of anchors arranged in a grid system is calculated

using formula (10-3).
In Australia model tests were carried out during the design of the
Catagunya Dam [33] in order to ascertain the resistance of the densely
fractured rock to the extraction of anchors embedded in it. The model
consisted of a prismatic glass vessel 32 cm wide, filled with crushed stone
of grain size 10 to 20 mm. The upper ends of wires, representing anchors,
were fixed to a concrete model of the dam (scale 1 : 100), and the lower ends
were fixed to a transversely placed steel bar 6 mm in diameter, passing
across the entire width of the model, and representing the anchor root
fixings. In the tests, the wires through the gravel were first prestressed and then
the model was loaded by tangential forces and a moment. The prestressing
of the embedded wires was increased proportionally with the loading of the
model until the substratum failed, which always occurred without warring.
Such tests are not valid, particularly in the case of bedrock, if it is difficult
to represent realistically the physical properties of the ground at the anchoring
site. Planes of discontinuity were represented in the model by pairs of plates
sandwiching sets of rollers; these were buried in the gravel, which represented
the bedrock. The positions of these pairs of plates and their distance from
the anchors were varied, but their effect on the load-bearing capacity of the
anchors could not be assessed with sufficient precision to establish generally
valid rules for anchor design. It appeared from the tests that the force
resisting anchor extraction from the underlying ground was at least 2.8 times
greater than the weight of the cone, or prism, representing the field of influence
of the prestressing. A similar conclusion was reached in earlier resistance tests
using gravel and sandy soils.

10.3 ANCHORING DEPTH IN NON-COHESIVE SOILS

An anchor root of cross-section area F at depth A, is loaded in its neutral

state by the pressure of the overlying soil. If a tension is introduced into the
anchor equal to the downward force arising from this pressure, the anchor
will not move. However, this loading condition is not used in practice for
determining the anchor depth since to do so the depths of boreholes or the
cross-sections of anchors would be oversafe and uneconomic.
In practice, greater anchor loads may be considered if some pulling out
of the anchor is allowed for, together with some deformation of the
ground around and above the anchor. It is difficult to express in theoretical
terms the exact stress state of the soil produced by a given tension in the
anchor, mainly because soils cannot be considered as elastic materials
while they are undergoing plastic deformation; tensile stresses cannot occur

66

within them. If anchors are correctly dimensioned, shear failure of the soil
will occur when the ultimate shear strength is reached at that conical surface
which is inclined at half the angle of internal friction , as shown by earlier
tests [86].
The load-bearing capacity of the anchor depends on the degree of soil
compaction. In the more compacted soils, the angles of internal friction and
the coefficients of transverse expansion are greater than those of uncompacted
types. Similarly, larger radial stresses are created in more compacted soils
by the wedge of the mass into which stress has been introduced by the root,
and thus the shear strength of the soil is greater as well as the resistance to
anchor extraction. At the point of shear failure, compacted soils also show
an increase in volume (dilatancy), and therefore increased pressures are
produced in the ground, further preventing anchor extraction.
In less compacted soils, on the other hand, an increase in compaction
may take place on shear failure, thereby reducing the soil volume. In uncompacted soils, therefore, it is difficult to ensure sufficiently high resistances
to anchor extraction. When the anchor is pulled out, no shearing occurs
above the root, and in most cases the soil rather flows around it.
These considerations were fully verified in tests carried out on slot and
spatial models, as well as in field tests (Figs. 10-5, 10-6) [68]. On account
of the pressure of the root or anchor plate on the compacted soil, a relatively
solid body is formed which extends the influence of the pressure further into
the ground in the direction of the anchor tension. The shear surface above

Fig. 10-5. Experimental arrangement for tensile tests on anchors fixed in the soil (according
to the Research Institute of Civil Engineering, VUIS 1958). The results are not affected
by the transfer of reactions from the stressing equipment to the soil

67

Fig. 10-6. Jack used to test the resistance of the soil to uprooting
of the anchor base. The jack is placed in a retracted position
at the bottom of the borehole and is then gradually covered
with compacted soil. Pressure oil is delivered through a pipe
at the front of the jack (according to VUIS)

-7.3^m

Fig. 10-7. Deformation

of ground surface caused
by various tensions acting
on the 20 cm dia base of an
experimental anchor. The shape
of the body of soil affected
by the upward pressure
of the root of the tensioned
anchor may be inferred
from the deformation

the tensioned root is clearly delimited (Figs. 10-7, 10-8). The failure zone is
funnel-shaped, its lower part following the path of extraction of the root,
and its upper part forming a cone the flanks of which are inclined at the
minimum angle of internal friction of the soil, . In uncompacted and
saturated loose soils, extraction of the anchor causes the soil grains to move
to the sides in an approximately circular path around the anchoring plate.
The resistance of non-cohesive soils to anchor extraction also depends
to a considerable degree on their structural arrangement in the fixing region.
There is a fundamental difference between anchors fixed in the soil with
long roots of approximately uniform cross-section, and anchors with short

68
Fig. 10-8. Body of soil torn out
by the upward pressure
of the root
of a tensioned anchor
in model tests

U4

Fig. 10-9. Types of test anchor

a) anchor with base plate, b) anchor
fixed along its entire length, 1 tendon,
2 pipe with welded ribs, 3 insulating
wrapping

expanded roots. This difference is most marked, as has been shown in tests,
when the long root extends up to the ground surface. When anchors were
provided with projections along the entire length of the embedded tendon
(Fig. 10-9b), simulating fixing of the first type, the failure zone was limited
to a narrow cylinder around the anchor. In scale model tests, the resistance
of this type of anchor to extraction from a compacted soil was only slightly
less than that of anchors comprising a base plate at the end of the tendon
(Fig. 10-9a); in field tests, however, the difference between the two was
considerable.

69

Anchor fixing strength in soil is increased when the borehole above the
root is filled to the top with loose soil rather than with concrete. With the
use of concrete, the stronger fixing of an expanded root is lost in favour of
the weaker fixing of a long section, this difference in strength being
substantially greater in less compacted soils (see Fig. 10-16).
In further laboratory tests several other anchors were tried, including one
composed of a tendon and plain base plate, another comprising a tendon
with cross-plates secured to it along its entire length, and finally one with
a tendon of greater cross-sectional area, with indentations around the
circumference to simulate the penetration of grout into the borehole wall
cavities. The greater fixing strength of the anchor with a plain base plate
(Fig. 10-10) results from the greater size of the rock mass taking the stress
transmitted from the anchor. In the case of the anchor with a circular base
a truncated cone-shaped mass is affected by the anchor tension, and this has
an apex angle of twice the angle of friction of the soil. When the anchor is
secured along its entire length as far as the surface, the stress is transmitted
4 in l._
t on

i \y^*

7. IU |

>
w
1 '*
rfi I
A\
y.i x / l

-^

JLfl

.l/lr 1 H

<

.
V V
>>

oni-lL

Hii illSP
nvn 1 :

rfr

^,

$
8

1tau

tr

11
)t

0M

.6
\

^V
\ \ ".
\>
N V V *

Ml

II

t
I
\ \

c*

\V

* [a

U.JU II

n?n\
UmCUm

^M f

Si

'\

\<

S**

.So

n in\
U.IUl

0L

10

s >: .

^3 fe^i

50

100
extraction ofanchor

150
frnml

200

Fig. 10-10. Load diagram for test anchors embedded in sand to a depth of 35 cm
A anchor fixed along entire length, B anchor with base plate at distal end

70

to a comparatively narrow cylinder of rock around the anchor. This cylinder

widens into a funnel shape close to the surface (see also Fig. 10-12 and
Fig. 10-13). The difference between the respective fixing strengths of these
types of anchor increases in less compacted soils.
The load curves for the two types of anchor are also of characteristic
shape; that for the base-plate anchor shows a rather more attenuated shape,
and declines slowly after the maximum strength has been reached. In the
case of the anchor fixed along its entire length, the resistance to extraction
very quickly reaches a maximum, beyond which it rapidly drops. Where
a base-plate is involved the decrease in resistance to extraction is more
gradual, because when the cone is forced out the internal stress is slowly
released, starting from the base of the cone (near the ground surface) down
towards its apex at the anchor base, where the stress is maintained by the
pressure of the advancing base. When the anchor is secured by cross-plates
at intervals along the entire tendon length, separate cones are formed above
each plate. As these cones are formed simultaneously, they cannot develop,
because displacement of those cones situated nearer the ground surface
limits the extent of transfer along the anchor of frontal stress from the bases
of the more distant cones, and prevents a build-up of resistance as the lower
end of the anchor is approached. Thus the small extraction values for such
anchors prior to the attainment of limit resistance is explained.
The tests described above also showed indirectly that the factor which
largely decides the fixing strength of an anchor in loose soil is friction at the
lateral surfaces of the geometrical body (cone, prism etc.), to which the
axial stress of the anchor is transmitted.
Extensive tests on models of vertical anchors with circular anchor bases
embedded in dry sand have also been carried out by T. H. Hanna [71, 72],
H. Nendza [145] and D. Sarac [187]. The effect of anchor base inclination
under similar conditions has been investigated by A. S. Kananyan [103],
G. G. Meyerhof [133], L. Otta [159], H. Bendel [15], and others. It was
demonstrated that the load-carrying capacity depended firstly on the
compactness of the soil, then on the width of the anchor base and its depth
in the ground. A marked attenuation of sand grain movement in the vicinity
of the loaded anchoring slab was also observed.
The stress state of loose soil in the vicinity of a long-root type of fixing
after the resistance of the soil to shear failure had been exceeded, was also
plotted on a space model in the Mining Institute Laboratory (J. Kohoutek
D. Filip). The mean parameters for the sand used in the model were: = 36;
y = 1,950 kg/m 3 ; c = 0. The anchors represented were of the following
dimensions: borehole diameter 10 cm; length of fixing section 3 m with top
end of the root at ground surface (Fig. 10-12), and at a depth of 6 m
(Fig. 10-13). The root was either in the vertical position, or inclined at an

71

angle of 60 from the horizontal; the tensile force acted at the same angle
as that of the anchor tendon. At the subsurface fixing, the borehole was
strengthened with a thin-walled pipe to prevent caving-in during anchor
extraction. Vertical stresses in the sand were registered on strain gauges
placed beside, or under the root. A tensile force was applied until the
resistance to movement rapidly began to diminish, while displacement of the
anchor remained the same or increased.

'0.03

0.05
partial

5.0
0.1
0.5
1J0(3cm) 2.0 30
10.0 /o
extraction of anchor in pen cent, of its length(3m) (30cm)

Fig. 10-11. Load diagrams from model tests of anchors with long root fixings (3 m) in sand
I vertical anchor, 3 m root extending to ground surface, 2 vertical anchor, root at
a depth of 6 m (upper end) to 9 m (lower end), 3 inclined anchor, 3 m root extending
to ground surface, 4 inclined anchor, root at a depth of 6 m (upper end) to 9 m (lower end)

The relationship between the resistance to anchor movement and anchor

displacement is graphically represented in Fig. 10-11. The stress states in the
vicinity of the root at maximum resistance are shown for individual cases
in Figs. 10-12 and 10-13.
Tests on anchors with long fixing sections also confirm that the soil is
intensively compressed after the shear strength in the close vicinity of the root
had been exceeded. In the more distant surroundings around and below the
fixing, there i r a relaxation of compression. The resistance to extraction
increases until a certain limit state is reached which depends on the original
stress state of the soil; this stress state increases with depth. The mass of soil
affected, together with the limit strength, becomes greater with increasing
depth, although the relationship between the two is not linear. If the root

72

extends to ground level (Fig. 10-12) and the mean limit resistance at its
lateral surfaces is 0.125 MPa, the changes of stress in the soil extend, on
average, about 1 m away from the root. With a mean fixing depth of 7.5 m,
and a mean limit resistance at the surface of the lateral surface of the root
of 0.43 MPa, the affected zone is nearly twice as large. Even above the root
this zone extends almost to 2 m; hence the limit strength of the anchor is
exceeded because of soil flow around the root as it is extracted. Thus a long
root embedded at a greater depth behaves in a way similar to that of an
stress

depth

of the model
surface of the ground
\7

2one of increased

g-S

stresses

' zone of reduced stresses

*A

0.2 1
20

distance
on the model
in the field
m

Fig. 10-12. State of stress in the vicinity of model anchor (lines connect points of equal
vertical stress)
A root extending to ground surface

73

expanded root (base-plate). This is also demonstrated by the zone of increased

stress in the vicinity of the root (Figs. 10-12 and 13 B). Inclination of the
root, in accordance with the above assumptions, shows a greater resistance
to extraction with an almost identical extension of the aifected stress zone,
which is somewhat enlarged on the side facing the ground surface (Fig. 10-13).
The extraction resistance of an anchor is also greatly aifected by the degree
of pore space saturation in non-cohesive soils. Fig. 10-14 shows the decrease

stress depth

I*
surface of the model
surface of the ground

in the field

B root at a depth of 6 to 9 m

74
stress

depth

-8^

of the ground

the hit

of the model

surface

thefi

surface

on the
in the

< ^

-S

in the field

Fig. 10-13. State of stress in the vicinity of inclined model anchor

A root extending to ground surface. State of stress in the vicinity of inclined model anchor,

that occurred in the fixing strength of an anchor in a sand model after it had
been filled with water. It is clear that in loose soils, at depths below the
ground water table, the resistance to anchor extraction drops by 50 % or
more. This is even more apparent in the field. In experiments performed
in dry gravels and sands, the cables were not torn out under forces of up to
2 MN [82, 84], the load characteristics showing the favourable mechanical
properties of compressed gravel and sand beds (Fig. 10-15). On the other
hand, in tests performed in saturated gravel and sand, the fixing strength
was nearly an order of magnitude lower (Fig. 10-16). Although tests were
conducted in various localities and in gravels with different granulometric
curves, they show that in the design of anchors for emplacement in loose
soils, close attention must be given to the question of whether the anchoring
is carried out in dry beds permanently above the ground water level, or in
beds which are temporarily or permanently saturated.

75

stress depth

B root at a depth of 6 to 9 m

I;

I
I

73

tO

35
30
25
20
15
10
water level below the surface [cm]

Fig. 10-14. Dscrease in fixing strength of an anchor after saturation of soil

76
after 24 hours

20

30
0
50
60
70
extraction of anchor head'/mml

80

90

100

Fig. 10-15. Load curve for an anchor fixed in dry beds of gravel and sand under repeated
loading (length of tendon 5 m; anchoring cavity 50 cm dia, 60 cm long)
I

-A-

3C * * * ^
.06

>

-37

-&

*
30[cm]

-37

extraction of head

Fig. 10-16. Load curve of anchors fixed in saturated gravel and sand in a borehole of
406 mm dia
A borehole filled with local gravel and sand, B borehole filled with concrete

10.3.1

Anchoring depth in dry loose soils

In determining the tendon length required for anchoring in dry loose

soils, assumptions similar to those applied in the case of soft rocks are made.
It is recommended that tests on the load-bearing capacity of the soil to
depths as great as the maximum likely penetration of the anchor root be
made prior to the design cf the anchorage. These tests may be conducted
with downward directed loads, because at the depths at which anchoring

77

will have to be carried out, the deformation produce 1 by a downward-acting

test load is nearly equal to that created by an upward-acting load. These
loading tests enable the maximum permissible soil stress under a concentrated
pressure, akr, to be determined. From this the minimum cross-sectional area
of the root that will prevent soil flow around the root under the required
anchor loading is ascertained. From akr is derived the initial stress, , acting
at the lateral surfaces of the soil mass affected by the root pressure. The
frictional resistance against anchor extraction occurs at this surface.
The stress ar represents the radial transverse stress; this is derived from
the normal stress which arises from the upward pressure of the root at the
critical load limit akr (occurring when the soil is subjected to excess non-linear
deformation). It is assumed in the calculation that the critical load limitdepends on the specific pressure of the anchor at a position not more than
1 m above the level of the pressure-exerting root face. Deformation taking
place above this level shows an approximately linear relationship with depth:
0V = <7ftr

1-v *

Assuming that the friction effect is confined to that part of the soil affected
by the anchoring force (see Fig. 10-1), the length of the tendon is derived
from formulae (10-7) and (10-8). For individual anchors:
3Pmfe

K = J tg-2 f- + l ,

(10-7)

, 12P
< I.

and for a line of anchors with axial interval / <

B = - + 2 cos
2tg<p

if/>

1^-, then

tg

-Ti
^ *^
2/,

L-+ +
K = -
2 tg
where

,
+ i !

00-8)

'{-*-)

formula (10-7) is valid.

In the above formulae,

P = anchoring force (kN),
= angle of friction (),
= stress acting at the lateral surfaces of the affected soil mass immediately above the anchor (kPa),
/ = axial interval between anchors (m),
mk = safety factor for extraction (mk = 3-i-5).

78

If the critical stress value at the anchoring level cannot be ascertained

(by taking measurements at the bottom of the borehole), it is then derived
from load test calculations for the surfaces of layers of similar structure. The
values obtained by surface measurement are increased by 10 to 30 per cent.,
depending on the difference in soil constitution between the surface layers
and at the anchoring depth.
Only in the less important case can akr be estimated, in this case from
parameters obtained in the laboratory from undamaged samples, or from
tabulated values for a given soil.
The load characteristics established in the tests are shown in Fig. 10-17,
while actual and computed values for the load-bearing capacity are compared
in Fig. 10-18. A rough estimate of the required rooting depths for given
forces can be derived from the graphs in Figs. 10-19 and 10-20; the values
calculated from laboratory and field tests are also shown.
Formulae (10-7) and (10-8),firstderived by L. Hobst, are valid for anchors
inclined at up to 45 from the vertical. This has been proved independently
by A. S. Kananyan [103] in tests carried out to establish the resistance to

<0

*Q05
5

10
15
20
extraction ofbase[cm]

Fig. 10-17. Load diagrams for anchors with

base plate dia 20 cm, embedded in a bed
of dry gravel and sand (maximum grain
size, 50 mm) at depths of 1.0 to 2.20 m.
Values A were obtained from the tension in the
anchor, without directing the reaction
of the stressing equipment on to the soil
around the anchor; values B were obtained
using an embedded jack of 20 cm dia

0S0

1.00
1.50 2.00
anchoring depth [m]

2.50

Fig. 10-18. Load-bearing capacity

of anchors fixed in a bed of dry gravel
and sand
A values measured in field tests,
B values corresponding to the weight
of the soil mass to which the stress
is transferred from the anchor base,
C values computed according to
formula 10-7

79
WO

%300
.
Q

/
f

Z50

/
/

Fig. 10-19. Diagram for determining,

approximately, the embedding depth
for solitary anchors in dry gravel
(<P = 36)

f\

w
8 IM

1
<

ja
ZP

iO
&0
anchoring depth[m]

8.0

>o NO
<\f csT

|
c>

3D0

*.

225

.Co

X*A

S*

T
At
T T
#

0,75

< y

-c

NO

10

*
+i

' \* "T

J?

L*
<V

15
20
25
~ anchoring depth [m]

Fig. 10-20. Diagram for determining approximately the embedding depth for a line of
anchors in dry gravel ( = 36)

extraction of anchors inclined from the vertical at angles of 0 to 45. The

anchors were provided with an anchoring plate 80 cm in d ameter, and were
placed 1.0 m below the surface of a compacted layer of sand of the following
properties: y = 1.65 t/m3, = 6.5 per cent., = 32, c = 5 kPa. The
resultant values, Pmax (each the arithmetic mean of three identical tests),
which caused the anchor to be uprooted, are set out in the graph in Fig. 10-21.
For comparison the values calculated according to formula (10-7) are also
shown; this assumes that mk = 1, = (F being the area of the abutted
F

80

base). Moreover, the additional depth of 1 m which appears in the computed

embedding depths of anchors is not considered. The increased fixing strength
of inclined anchors embedded at the same depth below the ground surface,
may be explained by the greater overall surface area at which the shear
strength of the soil mass expelled by the anchor base is active. The deformation (lifting) of the sand surface was not found to follow the tendon noticeably
when the latter was inclined, buf appeared in the majority of cases to be
approximately above the centre of the inclined anchoring plate (Fig. 10-22).
It is evident, therefore, that lifting was a consequence of transverse stresses
resulting from the compression of the sand by the front of the anchor plate.
There is no proportional increase in resistance to anchor extraction with
increasing tendon length, or with increasing angles of inclination over 45
from the vertical. From 45 to 90, the resistance to extraction more and more
depends on the resistance of the anchor to lateral deflection, or the resistance
of a group of anchors to movement towards the surface. Because of this,

1i

or
anct Wem
0 cm

Id* 8

soil

y-rt
o
f = 32

* 1

1
O) C;

I.I
tTO

W-10

I-1
II
Co X

20

30

Wott5

deflection of tendon from

the perpendicular
(deflection of anchoring plqte
from the horizontal)

Fig. 10-21. Graph showing the

dependence of anchor load on the
limit of overall failure of the soil,
and the inclination of the anchor
(according to A. S. Kananyan)

3 mm

2
1

^^fe--r-^a^
\
A

shearing surface

surface
v

Fig. 10-22. Diagram of surface deformation

arising from the tensile force of an
anchor inclined at 30 from the vertical
(according to A. S. Kananyan)

81

the forces introduced into inclined or horizontal anchors must be limited.

The length of the tendon, as computed from formula (10-7) and (10-8),
should not exceed 1.4 times the embedding depth of the root regardless
of the tendon direction.
10.3.2

Anchoring depth in saturated loose soils

When an anchor root is extracted from a saturated loose soil, the volume
of the soil does not increase, as is found to occur in unconsolidated soil.
Consequently, the radial stress does not increase as there is no wedge-like
effect of the pulled-out soil; it is the radial stress that produces any increases
in shear strength, as in the case of dry soils.
The stress in an otherwise unloaded soil results solely from the soil dead
weight minus the effect of uplift; there is a linear increase in this stress with
depth. The stress in a vertical direction, at depth h, is given by:
* = ( ? - 1) h>
and that in the horizontal direction by:

where
1 v
(v is the Poisson's number for the soil).
Assuming that for all anchor positions the stress acts radially over the
entire root circumference, the shear strength of saturated non-cohesive soils
in the vertical direction is given by:
= . tg ,

and in the horizontal direction by:

= . tg .
Along an anchor forming an angle with the horizontal, the shear
strength is:
2 = . cos tg + sin = cos ^(tg + tg ).
In calculating the soil's resistance to root displacement (uprooting of the
anchor), it is assumed that the shear strength is active at the lateral surface
of a cylinder coaxial with the anchor. The cylinder is of diameter, d, equal
to the maximum root diameter, and of length, h, equal to the distance between
the root centre and the ground surface; h can be expressed by the relation:

82

max
. d. x

By substituting for in this equation, we obtain, for the required force P

and safety factor mk, the necessary embedding depth for a vertical anchor:
m
/
V^ f
,
M
V . d(y - 1) fc0 . tg
the depth for a horizontal anchor:
h

v=

ft =

*'^

(10-9)

(10-10)

and the depth for an inclined anchor:

h

n.d(y-

fc^
l)fc.cos^(tgp + t g ^ ) '

0 1 0
" ;

where is the depth of the root centre below the horizontal ground surface.

10.4 ANCHORING DEPTH IN COHESIVE SOILS

Cohesive soils are less capable, compared with non-cohesive soils, of

resisting the uprooting of anchors fixed in them. This fact relates to the
specific characteristics of cohesive soils, particularly the presence of bound
water, a larger void ratio, and a different mineralogical structure; in any
case, it leads the anchor designers to specify longer anchor roots, and consequently longer anchors overall. A longer anchor, however, means more
work and higher cost. Experience tells us that improvements in the functional
reliability of anchors are not always proportional to the increased cost
involved. Moreover, the necessity of extending the anchor root disproportionately leads to reduction or omission of the anchor tendon, so that the
anchor looses its original form and takes over the qualitatively inferior
function of a tensioned pile. L. Hobst, giving due regard to these facts,
conducted a number of experiments in 1958 and 1959 in which anchors were
fixed in cohesive soil by means of expanded bulb-shaped roots. The tests
were carried out in beds of Brno Pleistocene (Fig. 10-23) loess with the following characteristics: = 1,935 kg/m 3 , = 26 %, c = 0.5, granulometric
curve as shown in Fig. 10-24. The stressing equipment was mounted on bridge
beams (see Fig. 10-5) in order to avoid the transfer of the reaction forces
on to the soil medium in the immediate vicinity of the anchors, with consequent invalidation of the test results. The anchoring bulbs were created
by concrete fillings at the ends of the boreholes, the latter being widened with
expanded swinging knives fixed to the end of the drilling tool, or with

83

72
11

Fig. 10-23. Relationship

between load-bearing capacity
of anchors fixed in loess with
35 cm dia bulb, and fixing depth

72
o

10
9
8

8s

11 <

hk

3
2
7
0

100

sand

100

ZOO 300 400 500

capatity
of anchor

medium I

|~~

fine

du

J
I vent\

/\90
30
70

BO

40

ayey
irticle

III

v-llt
Nflt

lfr | |

30

20

10
0

900

UN

en

DU

600 700 800

[kfi]

Q5

0.25

0.1 0.05
mm

Fig. 10-24. Granulometric curve

of Brno Pleistecene loess in the
0.01 0.005 0.002
locality of anchorage tests

explosive charges (see Fig. 13-67, 13-68). In the course of the tests observations were made on the deformations occurring in the anchors, and the
deformations and cracks appearing on the surface of the soil medium in
relation to the magnitude of the tensile force. It has been demonstrated that
during the loading of a cohesive soil by an expanded anchor root, friction
plays an important part as a result of the transverse stresses arising in the
compressed soil medium above the root front. Thus, when the required
length of the anchor tendon is calculated, it may be assumed that the soil

84

mass affected by the prestressed anchor is cone-shaped, with an apex angle

equal to twice the angle of internal friction . Friction and internal cohesion
act along the flanks of this cone, and the magnitudes of these components
vary according to the characteristics of the soil in which the anchors are
fixed. At present, the shear strength of the soil at any particular root fixing
depth is determined, as stated earlier, from Coulomb's equation by substituting the appropriate values of and c:
= tg ' + c'.
Starting from this assumption, a formula has been derived for the calculation of the tendon length, taking into account the effect of increasing friction
from the ground surface to the root front, as occurs in the case of dry noncohesive soils (see Section 10.3.1). If cohesion is considered to be uniform
over the entire shearing area, then for an individual anchor:
/
mk3P cos
_
/1
/
^,
^

(1(2)
V f(3c + . / . cos )
The soil characteristics are taken as being within the following limits:
K=

c = 1 to lOkPa,
= 10 to 2 5 , / = tgcp,
Gr = <*kr-7^Z

2 0 0 t0

5 0 0

%
k P a

'

The ultimate stress, akr, of the soil is obtained from the results of tests,
and derived approximately from standard values. When this stress is exceeded
at the interface between the soil and the root front, the root starts cutting
through the soil. In view of this, the maximum loading, Pkr, of an anchor is
given by the expression PKr = akr. F, in which F is the area over which the upward pressure of the expanded root is exerted. The load-bearing capacity of an
anchor is directly proportional to the difference between the cross-sectional
area of the anchor root and that of the anchor base proper. In less strong
soils showing low values of akr, the expanded root base must be designed with
the largest possible diameter.
Computed values for the fixing depth limits for variously loaded anchors
are shown graphically in Fig. 10-25. When the curves obtained in this way
are compared with a curve showing measured soil resistance to anchor
extraction at various depths, it is evident that the formula for calculating
anchoring depth is applicable in practice (see Fig. 10-23).
When a series of cables are anchored, the volume of the affected soil
contributing to the resistance to anchor extraction decreases with the axial
interval, /, between anchors.
The necessary anchoring depth h'z is obtained from the equation:

S5

mkP . cos
l(2c + f. ) '

(10-13)

Depth values, A', in relation to the axial interval, /, between anchors,

and the anchoring force, P, are shown graphically in Fig. 10-26. The formula
is valid up to the limit defined by / = h . tg (denoted in the graph by
a thick broken line); for larger values of /, however, formula (10-12) is

100

200 300

400

500 600

700 600 900 1000

tension [kN]

Fig. 10-25. Diagram for determining approximately the embedding depth of solitary anchors
in cohesive soils, according to formula (1012).
6^300kPal

f=25,

C>10kPa

mk*M

100 200 300 WO 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 12001300

*~P [kN]

Fig. 10-26. Diagram for determining approximately the embedding depth of a line of anchors
in cohesive soils, according to formula (10-13). In the area below the thick broken line the
embedding depth is determined as for solitary anchors

86

used. The effect of the pressure of the root front on the soil above the root
is to overcome molecular cohesion among the soil grains, extrude water
from the pores, and modify the internal structure of the soil by forcing the
grains of the compressed soil up against one another. These changes result
in major or minor permanent deformation displacement of the root apparent
in every stress-strain diagram for an anchor fixed in cohesive soil (see
Fig. 10-27). The development of this deformation is a long-term process, which
means that the anchors have to be designed and the anchor heads mounted on
the anchored structure in such a way as to make possible additional stressing
of the anchor up to the time of complete consolidation of the loaded soil
(see Chapter 19, Fig. 19-5).
The validity of formulae (10-12) and (10-13) depends on the magnitude
of the soil shear strength around the root, and this strength is decisively
affected by the soil moisture content. In naturally moist loess loams, the
formation of a conical shear surface has been observed in the laboratory [86].
Following saturation of the soil (28 per cent moisture) the cone did not form
and a local failure occurred in the vicinity of the anchoring plate. The soil
was displaced to the underside of the plate and laterally as the plate was
pulled out under constant tension, but it was only when the plate was nearing
the surface that the conical soil body and the anchoring plate were torn out
completely.
It is clear that the soil undergoes plastic deformation under the pressure
of the expanded root, and recedes to the sides. Initially, the resistance to
anchor movement increases sharply until local soil failure occurs; then the
resistance remains constant, since by forcing the root through the soil further
failures occur continuously, with the soil flowing around the root.
L. N. Dzhioyev [46] has observed similar phenomena during field tests
on vertical anchors with expanded roots (concrete bulbs), in a soil with the
following parameters: y = 17kN/m 3 , = 23.8 per cent., tg = 0.42,
c = 17.7 kPa. Bulbs with diameters of 20, 35 and 50 cm were tested, anchored
at depths of 110 and 200 cm. The load characteristics showed three successive
stages of deformation (Fig. 10-27); the first part of the curve (up to the
deformation of soil

.
[.depressiony

circum flowing

yextractiony

^, partial extraction of anchor

/f

Fig. 10-27. Load diagram obtained

during tensile testing of an anchor
with an expanded root (bulb)
in cohesive soil (according
to Dzhioyev)

87

Fig. 10-28. Results of comparative tests of the load-bearing capacities of anchors in sandy clay
1 unexpanded borehole, anchor: bar of 32 mm dia; root fixed with poured-in cement
slurry, 2 unexpanded borehole, anchor: pipe 5/25 mm; root grouted under pressure and
regrouted, 3 borehole mechanically expanded, anchor: bar of 32 mm dia with base, root
grouted under pressure, 4 borehole expanded by blast, anchor: bar 32 mm dia, root
grouted under pressure, 5 borehole filled with cement mix and expanded by blast, anchor:
bundle of 12 x P 7 wires, 6 borehole filled with cement mix and expanded by blast, anchor:
bundle of two 6-strand ropes 24.5 mm dia splayed into strands in the root section

88

P c r i t point) was linear, corresponding to the phase of increasing soil compression above the anchoring bulb; no failure occurred. The second part represented continuous local soil failure, as the bulb was extracted under
a constant force, PCTlt, without any apparent disturbance of the ground
surface; in the tests this stage was abbreviated as the ratio of bulb depth
to bulb width (hjd) decreased. The third stage commenced when the force
necessary to lift out the soil above the root coincided with P c r i t , at which
point the ground surface started to deform and the tensile force dropped.
P c r i t could be computed from the equilibrium of forces occurring at this point.
Tests performed at various sites have shown that the load-bearing capacity
of anchors fixed in cohesive soils depends on the width of expansion of the
anchor root. It has been confirmed that the fixing of anchors in unexpanded
boreholes is of little effect in cohesive soils. An example may be cited of
measurements of the load-carrying capacity of horizontal anchors conducted
by Geoindustria (Czechoslovakia). The tests were carried out on anchors
with expanded and unexpanded roots of identical length (3 m) embedded
in sandy clay at a depth of about 2.5 m below the ground surface. Two
anchors were inserted in unexpanded boreholes, a third into a borehole
expanded with a Bhler Klemm mechanical reamer, and a fourth into
a borehole expanded by letting off two charges in the hole, each consisting
of 300 g of Semtex. Two further boreholes were expanded by means of two
charges (250 and 150g) which were inserted in the grout together with the
anchors and blasted. When the grout in the boreholes had hardened, tensile
tests were carried out on the anchors up to their ultimate loads. All the
anchor roots were then dug out and investigated. The results of the tests
are shown in Fig. 10-28. The greatest load-bearing capacity was attained with
roots expanded by blasting in the grout, even where the second cavity was
incompletely filled owing to insufficient grouting following blasting. The
least load-carrying capacity was that of the anchor which was fixed in the
unexpanded borehole with grout poured into it.

Chapter 11
MATERIALS U S E D IN THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A N C H O R S ( T E N D O N M A T E R I A L )

Anchor tendons can consist of bars, and exceptionally, of steel pipes;

in most cases, however, they are composed of straight patented wires or
strands. The use of strands is becoming increasingly widespread in spite of
their greater cost over other tendon components.
The selection of a suitable type of anchor for securing a particular structure
to ground, depends on the required load-bearing capacity, the length and
number of anchors needed, and the available facilities for placing, fixing
and stressing the anchors at the site.
As far as purpose is concerned, the use of the various types of anchorage
may be outlined as follows: short bar anchors (bolts) are useful where small
tensile forces (up to 100 kN), are to be distributed among a large number of
short anchors, for example in the stabilization - of a rock face. Lcv^ ! r
anchors (up to 15 m) can be rapidly installed for taking up larger forces
(up to 400 kN) where sufficient boring capacity and space for manipulation
are available, as for example in foundation pits. Cable anchors, on the
other hand, are useful for the transfer of considerable tensile forces from
structures to the deeper zones of the bedrock.
With regard to manipulation, short anchoring ^bars are the simplest in
terms of preparation, placing and prestressing. Longer bars are rather more
difficult to handle, and for long anchors, tendons of wire or strands are
preferable; the latter are flexible, and are thus more easily transported and
inserted into boreholes of several tens of metres long, evenjfroni relatively
smalLmanipulating platforms and regardless of borehole direction.
Functionally prestressed high quality steel anchor tendons are the most
suitable for anchoring structures into rock and soil. They reduce expenditure
on steel and minimize the boring and prestressing requirements. Moreover,
reductions in prestressing caused by rock creep, and more especially by soil
creep, will be diminished. The prestressing of high quality steel up to the
yield point, produces an elongation several times greater than that created
by a similar stress in a steel bar.
Assuming the same modulus of elasticity for all types of steel (E =
= 190,000 MPa), the following elongations are obtained by prestressing to
the yield point.
For bars of steel:

91

---""
For steel wire:

sb = E*L = _J2_ = 0.0042.

*

190,000

For steel strands:

s

_ <x0.2 _ 1,440

190,000 "

/0

When a tendon of prestressed strands is used, there is less danger of the

prestressing disappearing as a result of ground creep. Seven times more
ground creep is allowable (before prestressing in the tendon is lost), where
strands are used and prestressed to the yield point instead of steel bars.
Successful anchoring of structures and stabilization of slopes depends,
therefore, on the use of tendons made of prestressing wire and strands, or
prestressing bars of high yield point. Bars of low quality steel are normally
suitable only for short anchors with a short service life, such as those used
in securing rock surfaces in small underground excavations, or in situations
where no prestressing is employed.
The required characteristics of the material for prestressed anchor tendons
may be divided into principal and complementary characteristics.
The principal characteristics are strength (Rm), ductility (A), and relaxation value (Rr). The initial prestressing must be maintained over a long time,
and therefore high strength coupled with low relaxation losses are desirable.
The capacity to absorb energy is represented by the ductility, which is directly
proportional to the safety of the tendon against sudden failure.
Among the complementary characteristics the following may be mentioned:
resistance to corrosion, absence of twists or kinks, flexibility and contractibility (Z), stress-strain characteristics and modulus of elasticity (E), yield
point (Rp 0.2 and/or Rt 1.0), elastic limit (Rp 0.1), and fatigue load-bearing
capacity. Some complementary characteristics are closely connected with the
principal ones. Thus, for example, the requirements that Rp 0.2/Rm = 1.0,
that a long linear section is shown extending from the origin on the stressstrain diagram, and that the value of the ratio Rp 0.01 IRm is high, are related
to the requirement for low Rr and high Rm values. Contractibility characterizes
the plastic properties of the steel better than the value of ductility (4).

92
11.1 MATERIALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BAR ANCHORS

Neither plain nor ribbed bars exhibit mechanical characteristics as

favourable as those of wires; bars are less flexible, although they do ensure
a simple, slip-free threaded anchorage, and show greater resistance to corrosion on account of their smaller surface-to-mass ratio.
Until recently bar anchor tendons were made of reinforcement steel, with
a yield strength of up to 400 MPa, and a strength limit of 600 MPa for
anchors secured with cement; some were made of structural steel, with a yield
strength of from 285 to 383 MPa, and a strength limit of from 600 to 700 MPa
for anchors fixed mechanically. Recently other steels, with a yield strength
of 1,100 MPa and a strength limit of 1,300 MPa have been used. Table 11-1
compares the properties of various steels.
The use of steels of low yield point is permissible for short anchors (bolts),
which can be fixed simply by forcing a wedge into the split end of the bar
(see Fig. 13-4). The fixing of such bars in boreholes with grout or cement is
TABLE 11-1
Properties of prestressing and threaded steel bar
Description,
{Standard)

Min. breaking
strength
[N/mm2]

Macalloy
(England)
Macalloy
Dywidag
(GFR)

1,000

Dywidag
Krupp HWR
(GFR)
JISG 3109-1871
(Japan)
Sumitomo
(Japan)
Neturen
(Japan)
*) Threaded bar

T1)

Min. yield
strength
[N/mm2]

1,030
1,030

824980
835

0 16 mm
T1)

1,230
1,470
1,080
1,290

1,080
1,325
930
1,060

A2
A2
Bl
B2
T1)

940
1,030
1,080
1,175
1,175

785
785
930
930
930

, 1,225

1,080

Max.
relaxation
[per cent]

1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

93

favourably affected by their larger surface area per unit prestressing force.
Furthermore they are cheaper than bolts made of steel of high yield point.
For anchors longer than 2 m, and particularly for those anchors intended
to maintain permanent anchoring forces or permanent prestressing of rock,
bars of reinforcing steel are unsuitable. In such cases prestressing bars with
a yield strength of 1,000 MPa or more must be used (Fig. 11-1). Bars used
for anchoring have pressed ribs on the surface (Fig. 11-2) and are supplied
in 12 m lengths; for special requirements they can be supplied in 18 m
lengths, and with diameters of up to 50 mm. In Japan high parameter
Neturen bars are in use. In Europe, the Dywidag bars are widely used for
anchorages in rock; the currently available diameters are 12.2, 26, 32 and
36 mm, and their strength is somewhat higher than that of the bars listed
in Table 11-11. Plain bars are used, and bars with rolled-on threads along
their entire length (Fig. 11-3) are increasingly coming into use. The latter
are supplied in two qualities, in diameters from 15 to 36 mm (Table ll-III).
Bars provided with threads in the rolling mill have some advantages, and are
therefore preferred in practice over plain bars; one important factor is that

Fig. 11-1. Macalloy bars with cold rolled threads

Fig. 11-2. Bars with pressed

ribs

94

the threading strengthens the bond with the grout in the borehole. In addition,
the setting up of anchors based on these bars is easier than with the use of
plain bars (see Chapter 12).
TABLE 11-11
Technical data for prestressmg bars
Bar dia
in mms

Sectional
area
in sq. mms

Breaking load (kN)

Macalloy

Dywidag

Sumitomo

9.2

66.2

68.3 (3)
78.1 (4)

11.0

95.1

98.4 (3)
112.4(4)

13.0

132.7

137.3 (3)
156.4 (4)

15.0

176.7

16.0

201.1

17.0

227.0

20.0

314.2

23.0

415.5

25.0

500.0

191

234.5 (3)
267.9 (4)

476.4 (4)
490.9

26.0

530.9
551.5

32.0

804.2

800

35.0

862.1

950

*)
)
3
)
4
)

534.1 (3)
610.5 (4)
568 (1)
678 (2)

36.0

416.7 (3)

325

26.5

40.0

191
296

828 (1)
989 (2)

812.7 (3)
928.8 (4)

1,049 (1)
1,252(2)
1,256.6

1,250

Grade St 835/1030
Grade St 1080/1230
Class A2
Class B2
Fig. 11-3. Prestressing bars with
pressed threads along the
entire length

95
TABLE ll-III
Technical data for Dywidag threaded prestressing bars
Bar diameter

mm

Sectional area

15.0

16.0

26.5

32.0

36.0

mm2 176.7

201.1

551.5

804.0

1,017.8

Min. yield
strength

MPa 885

1,325

835

1,080

835

1,080

835

1,080

Min. tensile
strength

MPa 1,080

1,470

1,030

1,230

1,030

1,230

1,030

1,230

Min. breaking
load

kN

296

568

678

828

989

1,049

1,252

191

11.2 PRESTRESSING WIRE

Wire for the preparation of anchor tendons is made of cold-drawn plain

carbon steel melted in the Siemens Martin furnace. The basic heat treatment the patenting which gives the material its special structural properties
and which provides the necessary strengthening during the cold-drawing,
takes place in furnaces with automatic thermal control (i.e. control of the
heating temperature and the temperature of the lead bath which constitutes
the cooling medium). Heat treatment is followed by the pickling process,
in which the material is de-scaled with chemicals and its surface is prepared
for the subsequent shaping by cold-drawing.
In cold-drawing the wire cross-section is gradually reduced as the wire
is extended. At the same time, the tensile strength, the elastic limit and the
yield strength are increased. Nowadays an additional heat treatment, referred
to as low temperature tempering, is carried out on patented wires and cables
made from this material. This treatment at 400 C produces a further increase
in the yield strength, which rises to more than 80 per cent, of the overall
strength. In some countries, stabilized prestressing wire is also made.
Cold-drawn wires are prestressed at a temperature such that a permanent
elongation of the wire takes place. The relaxation losses of these wires are
less than 2 per cent. (Fig. 11-4). It should be realized that prestress losses
which can appear due to the relaxation of the steel are very small compared
with those arising from creep of the rock. It is not necessary therefore, to
use stabilized wire for anchors, since any losses of prestress by relaxation
are made good in most cases by additional stressing (see Chapter 17).
Steel works generally supply the following types of prestressing steels:

96

Patented, untempered, high-strength smooth steel wire, diameter 2.0 to

7.0 mm, coil weight approximately 120 kg, internal coil diameter 500 to
600 mm (Table 11-IV).
TABLE 11-IV
Smooth patented wires
Standard

Diameter
(mm)

Type

tfpt

ASTM
A 421-74
(USA)

4.88
4.98
6.35)
7.01
4.98
6.35

WA
WA
WA
WA
BA
BA

1,725
1,725
1,655
1,622
1,655
1,655

BS 2691-1969
(Great Britain)

4
5
5
7
7
4
5
5
7
7

NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR

1,720- -1,950
1,720- -1,950
1,570- -1,800
1,570- -1,800
1,470- -1,700
1,720- -1,950
1,7201,950
1,570--1,800
1,5701,800
1,470- -1,700

1,460
1,460
1,330
1,330
1,250
1,550
1,550
1,410
1,410
1,320

P
P
P
PP
PP
PP
PP

1,570
1,470
1,370
1,960
1,760
1,670
1,570

1,420
1,320
1,220
1,760
1,570
1,470
1,370

1,930
1,680
1,670
1,600
1,620
1,560
1,520
1,470
1,420

1,710
1,480
1,480
1,420
1,420
1,370
1,320
1,280
1,230

DIN 4227
(GFR)

JIS
G 3536-1971
(Japan)

opt
minimum
tf0,2 minimum
tfip.c minimum

minimum

5 . 2 - -6.0
7 . 0 - -9.5
1 0 . 0 - -13.0
1 . 5 - -3.0
3 . 0 - -4.9
3 . 0 - -7.5
4 . 0 - -10.0
2.9
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0

tensile strength (MPa)

yield strength (MPa)
stress at 1 per cent tensile extension (MPa)
ductility (per cent)

^0,2

^lp.c.

^(P.c.)

1,380
1,380
1,325
1,295
1,382
1,382

4
4
4
4
4
4

3.5
3.5
3.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.5
4,5
4.5

97
continued
Standard

Diameter
(mm)

Type

PN 22-178-73
(CSSR)

4
4.5
5
6
5

LR
LR
LR
LR
NR

WA
BA
NR
LR
P
PP

#0,2

1,760
1,720
1,670
1,570
1,800

1,410
1,370
1,330
1,250
1,530

4
4
4
4
4

wedge anchorage
button head anchorage
normal relaxation
low relaxation
patented
tempered

1000

Fig. 11-4. Relaxation of British

tendons from the initial prestressing
of 0.7 UTS at 20 C
1 stabilized wires; 2 stabilized
stranded cables; 3 range of
values for stress-relieved wires;
4 alloy bars; 5 range of values
for stress relieved strands;
6 range of values for 19-strand
cables

Patented high strength smooth steel wire, low temperature tempered,

diameter 4.0 to 7.0 mm (Table 11-IV), coil weight 80 to 500 kg, internal
diameter of coil 2,000 mm.
Patented, stabilized, high-strength smooth steel wire, diameter 4.0 to
7.0 mm, coil weight 80 to 500 kg, internal coil diameter 2,500 mm.
Patented, stabilized, high-strength steel wire with surface indentations,
either untempered or low temperature tempered, diameter 4.0 to 7.0 mm,
coil weight 80 to 500 kg, coil internal diameter 600 to 700 mm for untempered
wire and 2,000 to 2,500 mm for tempered or stabilized wire.
11.3 STRANDS AND CABLES

In order to exploit to the full the mechanical properties of wires and

maintain their flexibility while creating larger prestressing tendons, wires
are stranded together into seven-wire, twelve-wire and nineteen-wire cables
and occasionally into cables with more than nineteen wires. At present,

98
strands appear to be gaining popularity as tendon material. Cables used for
this purpose should not contain any compressible components, such as
a hemp core, nor must they be greased or oiled, as this causes problems with
the effectiveness of grouting.
Seven-wire strands have the simplest structure. Their load-bearing capacity
is limited by the largest practicable diameter of the wire, viz. 6 to 7 mm;
strands made from wires of greater diameter cannot be manufactured on the
available equipment in the wire mills. Using 7 mm wire, a strand composed
of 7 wires would have a diameter of 21 mm, and cross-sectional area of
269.25 mm 2 . Given a nominal wire strength of 1,400 MPa, the load-bearing
capacity of such a strand would be 370 kN. Technical data for these strands
are listed in Table 11-V.
Untempered strands are supplied on minimum 600 mm diameter wooden
reels and weigh about 2,000 kg. Low temperature tempered strands are
supplied in coils weighing from 1,000 to 2,500 kg, and strands, composed
of wires 4.0 to 6.0 mm in diameter with an overall diameter of 12 to 18 mm,
are supplied in 3,500 kg coils.
Another suitable cable structure is the 1 + 6 + 12 arrangement. In Czechoslovakia, for example, such cables are manufactured with a maximum
diameter of 28 mm for anchoring in rock (these are unsuitable for prestressed
concrete). The cable has a lower modulus of elasticity than cables of the
1 + 6 pattern, but has a regular layering and the internal layer does not slip
during prestressing, once the cable has been locked at the head.
General practice prefers the 7-wire strands also used in prestressed
concrete. These strands are low temperature tempered and sometimes also
stabilized, although, as stated before, the latter treatment is not essential for
anchoring, considering the large permanent deformations which develop in
rocks. In Great Britain and in some other countries, Dyform strands are
used. These are strands which have already been through preliminary stressing
and tempering (i.e. through the process of stabilization), and then are subjected to a compacting or dyforming process, whereby about 20 per cent, more
of the nominal cross-sectional area is occupied by steel, compared with
ordinary strand cables. Dyform strands have better mechanical properties
and a 25 30 per cent, greater load-bearing capacity (see Table 11-V). In
Great Britain, it is also possible to obtain 19-wire cables of the Seale or
Warrington type (Fig. 11-5) with diameters from 22.2 to 31.8 mm.
a)
b)
c)
Fig. 11-5. Structures of cables used
in Great Britain
a) 7-strand cable, b) Seale cable,
c) Warrington cable

3
PQ

J3

4>

'S

I g> cr

>3

^- S>

<

1
CO

fN fN fN fN

r- ^ r r-

2 o
vo
fN

<N

o
CO

NO
VO NO
OO VO OO OO

q
fN

r-' r"

00

r-

"

o
o

2
*-*
*-*fN vo

co co O T *
vo
r- fN
ON

fN

VO
vo fN
fN

VO vo
vo vo vo vo VO
en co co co co co co eo

vo
vo

co fN fN
fN N O
O co
fN

fN

^t
*i

TT ON
00
^
Tt Tt oo'
VO
ON

fN co ON r- r
fN r-" co
vo <t O co 00 NO

o _

i-H

fN vo

r- fN

vo
OO
NO ON CO
ON fN ON
VO ON co

ON
OO fN

cr ,
vo

<
^ CO

NO

I-H

co co
vo '--j
ON -H'

s
CO

< <D

V0 Tt

(0

U>

-I

B B

r- r- r- vo PC PC ti

o 8 o o ON
o ON
o
o
ON

r^ r^ 1^

HJ

wo vo co
fN

fN

s?s
~4

CO
co

CO

00

-^ o o

CO

ON CS
O O

vo vo
NO VO

vo vo vo o
vo
vo NO vo 00

vo

co
co

O o

fN

vo 00

ON

NO co
fN

co
vo
ON
co

fN

fN fN

o
o

CO 00

vo 00 00

co O

ON

vo NO VO vo
oo 00 OO OO

so
OO

ON
fN 00 vo
O co
OO fN
OO
NO O OO
ON OO
1^ vo
fN
vo vo
fN fN
fN
00
vo CO co vo
00
^
fN co
fN CO CO

fN
oo

vo

ON

fN
vo

fN
ON fN
^t fN fN
ON
CO vo
vo
CO ON CO

ON <N

vo r-

fN

_c

vo

2 fNoo
O co O
fN

CO

\ 0 (N

VO

60

CO CO 00 TJON
fN

O
G
PH

CO 00 Tf
fN

Jo

ON O

00

fN

VO

r- fN q
fN

-H

fN

q q q 9 P P
Ti
CO VO vo r-'
ON fN VO fN
^ H CN

fN r#
OO
co
ON

_; rt
^

CO ON VO fN
fN VO
ON

CO
fN
O

0 0 VO
11 f N

PC PC tf c^ Pd P4 & ti >, >> >^

J J J

zzzz

co
ON

fN

r-

00

vo vo o r> > VO vo vo
co co CO co co CO co co

co co
T-H

vo NO
ON

t^

fN

o fN

co

Tf OO

q q

ei

PQ

r4 n

ON

,_**ON
r

O
vo
co vo <o K
ON CN VO fN

co
CN
VO

co
ON

ON
1

NO
co
CO

PQ

fN

ON

ON

vo

t^ CO

CO

co
vo
VO
fN
fN

CO

CO
vo vo
ON

ON CO

vo
co

ON

o
o

vo rvo ^

OO NO VO

PC PC PC

1-H i-H

00 ^O
-H CO
fN 00

vo vo vo
co co*

CO*

fN

vo fN ON
vo VO fN
fN ^ H CN

ON

TJ-

vo CO VO

00
ON

vo o vo
vo fN V0

>

CO

r-

CO

vo
fN

1^
fN

00
ON
O N fN CO
00 co
CO 00

O N 00 CO
vo ON
VO *- vo
vo
00

vo vo vo
co CO

f-

PQ

00 00 OO

o o o
o
o o fN
vo NO

fN

<

vo
CO

vo
v->

o
vo

CO

vo
vo
00
00 ON ON
vo
00

vo

OO

00
ON
ON fN 00
ON co

fN vo
vo ON

vo

NO
vo vo

ON

cm

CO 00
fN
ON

VO
CO CO
vo
CO

100

Large anchors are constructed using multiple cables which are arranged
in the same way as the multi-wire cable. The manipulation of bundled cables
is, however, more difficult than the handling of compound cables, and some
contractors prefer compound strand cables for this reason. In Czechoslovakia,
cables compound of 7 strands, each of 7 wires of 6 mm diameter, are used
for 1.1 MN anchors, and for 4.0 MN anchors compound rope (strand)
cables Hercules are used, these comprising 37 strands each of 19 wires of
2.9 mm diameter, giving a total cross-sectional area of 4,320 mm 2 . The
cable diameter is 100 mm, the weight is 34 kg/r.m., and the nominal load
bearing capacity is 7.6 MN (Fig. 11-6).

Fig. 11-6. Hercules cables; 39 bundles of

19 wires of 2.8 mm dia. nominal load-bearing capacity 7.6 MN

The disadvantage of stranded cables compared with multi-wire cables

is their larger tendency to creep and their lower tensile strength. This creep,
however, is still small in comparison with that of the rock, and does not
detract frcm the advantages of stranded cables for anchoring.
The difference between the actual cable strength and the nominal cable
strength (the sum of the strengths of the individual wires) arises from the
stress distribution in the loaded cable. Its magnitude depends on the structure
of the cable, the extent of transference of wire loading, and the extent of
defects in cable manufacture, etc. Any drop in the actual cable strength
below its nominal strength depends on the type of structure involved. It
amounts to 13 %, for example, in compound strand cables.
For an anchorage consisting of patented 3.6 or 4.1 mm diameter wires,
the Grands Travaux de Marseille contracting company specify a strength
range of 1,700 to 2,100 MPa and a load-carrying capacity of at least 90 per
cent, of the sum of the individual wire bearing capacities. The relaxation
after 100 hours under load should be less than 5 %.
A lower actual strength need not be an obstacle to use of stranded cables
for anchoring; this disadvantage must be balanced against the greater ease
of handling and transport on site, the greater cost effectiveness, easier fixing,

101

and improved resistance to corrosion. This last advantage has been demonstrated at the Vir Dam in Czechoslovakia, where after 10 years of
service, cables composed of straight wires were found to be corroded along
the sections passing through the open air, while stranded cables remained
intact under the same adverse conditions.
The disadvantage of steel rope cables and compound strand cables is that
specially designed strong anchoring heads must be used where the cable is
attached to the anchored structure (see Chapter 16).

Chapter 12
P R E P A R A T I O N OF A N C H O R S

The preparation of modern anchors, particularly with respect to anticorrosive protection, requires specialized equipment. Special workshops are
assigned to this work, which is entrusted to highly skilled men. The equipment and techniques used in these workshops vary according to the tendon
material that is being handled.

12.1 PREPARATION OF BAR ANCHORS

Bar anchors are the simplest to prepare. The required length of bar is
cut and a thread is cold rolled at the head end to take the fixing nut. The
thread should not be cut, because this reduces the effective cross-section of
the bar. At the root end of the anchor, threading improves the bond between
the anchor and the cement (grout or resin) used to fill the borehole in this
section, or serves for the fixing of the anchor base (Fig. 12-1).
The bars are supplied in 12 m lengths for ease of transport and handling.
Longer anchor bars are made up by connecting these bars with couplings
(Fig. 12-2).

Fig. 12-2. Coupling of prestressing bars

103

The preparation of anchors from bars with rolled-on threads is extremely

simple. The preparation can be carried on directly on site, including the
application of an insulating coating or the slipping-on of a plain insulating
pipe over the free section of the bar corresponding to the anchor tendon.
Suspended pipes, which provide double anticorrosive protection along the
anchor root (see Chapter 18) are preferably mounted and filled with grout
or resin in the shop where special injecting equipment can be used and
careful control exercised. Bar anchors are sometimes inserted into, and fixed
in pipes crimped along their entire length, in order to increase anticorrosive
protection. In these cases the root section is separated by a seal which must
also be made in the workshop.
12.2 CONSTRUCTION OF MULTI-WIRE ANCHORS

The assembly of large cables from individual wires is time-consuming,

and requires a large work area. The wires are straightened and cut to the
required lengths, then they are arranged in layers with the aid of a metal
sheet guide (Fig. 12-3) with holes for the wires, and bound together every
0.5 to 1.0 m. The most important part of this work is the positioning of the
wires, because their cross-sectional area is not fully utilized and their strength
is reduced if the wires are not mutually parallel throughout. Thus, for
example, the 1 MN anchors, that are used in Czechoslovakia (24 wires of
P 7 m m diameter) are constructed in two layers (Fig. 12-4). The internal
layer consists of 8 wires, each 7 mm in diameter, around a helix of internal
diameter 12 mm and axial length per coil turn 5 to 6 mm. Around each layer
is wound a 2.2 mm diameter wire. The winding of this wire around the internal
layer serves as a spacer between the two layers, and together with the central
helix, ensures reliable interpenetration of the cable by the grout.

Fig. 12-3. Putting together

cables of patented wires P 5 mm
dia

104

Fig. 12-4. Anchor head and cable made from 24 P 7 mm diameter wires (HlasivecMichlek
system)
1 central helix, 2 internal layer (8 wires), 3 external layer ("16 wires), a) head,
b) cone, c) wires

For the assembly of a large number of anchors, a mobile workshop may

be set up. The cable is assembled on a special piece of equipment consisting
of a carriage fitted with a perforated guide, an inserter for the central helix,
an end gauge, winding equipment with storage space for winding wire, and
equipment for the application of an anticorrosive coating. The straightening,
positioning and winding of the wire are fully mechanized.
A new system for the manufacture of tendons has been developed in the
USSR. A continuous wire, or a bundle of several wires, is stretched around
two pins spaced at a distance equal to the length of the cable required.
A special carriage is used for the winding.
In other countries, anchors composed of straight wire assembled according
to the BBRVsystem have been used over the last few years (Fig. 12-5). They
can accommodate anchoring forces of up to 12 MN, providing a sufficient
number of wires is used. The setting of the wires in large bundles is facilitated
by using a base, which consists of a steel plate with holes through which
the wires are inserted; the ends of the wires are then hammered to form small
heads (see Fig. 16-5). The diameter of the wire may range from 4 to 12 mm
according to the manufacturer's data. A cable composed of 121 wires of
7 mm diameter, with a strength of 7.7 MN, may be cited as an example.
The wires of large BBRV cables are not positioned by means of spacing
grids as this would greatly increase the cable diameter; thus sometimes the

105

Fig. 12-5. BBR V anchors used in anchoring the Spullersee Dams

1 grouting pipe, 2 anchor head, 3 supporting ring, 4 load distribution plate,
5 reinforcing coil, 6 sheath into which the head is inserted prior to the stressing of the
cable, 7 sealing collar, 8 anchor base, 9 de-aeration pipe

only spacing is the helical coil at the core of the cable. The wires are automatically measured and cut to the required length on a special workshop table.
When the wires are arranged together, the bundle is straightened by pulling
the wires through a guide and a base piece where the ends are cold hammered
to form heads (Fig. 12-6). To keep the wires parallel, the cable is held by
the base while the guide is pulled in the opposite direction. Finally, the cable
is twisted three or four turns to take up any slack in the wires arising from
lack of straightness of the axis and it is then bound around with a thin wire

Fig. 12.6. Assembling BBRV

cables in the factory

106

in sections 3 m long. The twisting of the cable also allows it to be bent or

wound on to drums for transport to the site.
Several other systems of anchoring cables also employ straight wires;
The Polensky & Zllner system used in the GFR and Austria (see Fig. 16-3)
and the Losinger system (VSL) of Switzerland (Fig. 12-7) are examples.
It should be noted that some of the cable assemblies mentioned here are
at present going out of use and are being replaced by other types developed
by the same companies, but using steel ropes as the basic anchor ebment
(see Fig. 13-26).

Fig. 12.7. Cable anchors 2 MN prepared for transport (Ingstav Brno)

1 flexible sheathing tube, 2 grouting pipe, 3 locking ring, 4 spacing ring;
A spacing of rings 60 cm, B length of fixing section 3 to 5 m

12.3 C O N S T R U C T I O N OF ANCHORS FROM STRANDS

Strand anchors are prepared in the same workshops as those in which

anchors composed of individual wires are made. The process is less timeconsuming because a smaller number of tendon components has to be
manipulated. The use of ropes is a sign of the growing tendency to industrialize
the manufacturing process, that is, to transfer cable construction from the
anchoring site or temporary workshop to specially equipped factories. (Fig.
12-8).
The strands are supplied to the works on reels or as reelless packs
The coils are arranged on pins in such a way that the prescribed
number of ropes required for the cable can be unwound from them along the
shortest possible distances. An important part of the fabrication of cables
is the provision of insulation which must give durable anticorrosive protection. The insulating layers are often formed on the individual ropes before

107

m-

is

<?*>**;
:JftS** -V* * ^

*%,? Ht, '^'

Fig. 12-8. Anchors system Losinger iVSL)

Fig. 12-9. Tendon protection

a) unprotected strand, b) plastics covered strand, c) greased
and plastics covered strand, 1 plastics covering, 2 protective
grease

the latter are incorporated into the cable, by coating and pressing the insulating compound on to the surface of the rope (see Chapter 18), or pulling the
ropes into plain or crimped pipes. The insulation type depends on the function
of that part of the anchor being treated and its overall structural arrangement. This work, in particular the coating of insulation, is also now being
transferred to special factories.
The bundles of strands constituting anchors of high load-bearing capacity
are usually inserted into plastic pipes (Fig. 12-9). The workshop, in this
case, must be equipped for the filling of the internal free volume of the pipe
with an insulating compound; the latter may be one of various vaselines

108
Fig. 12-10.. Transport
of tendons in loops

(see Chapter 18) or a mixture of asphalt and synthetic resin. In the grouted
section, that is, in the section sheathed with a crimped pipe, the pipe is
internally filled with grout. In some cases the cables, instead of being inserted
into pipes, are wrapped with a textile bandage impregnated with insulating
vaseline. The bandage is wound on so as to be self-overlapping, and if need
be, covered with another layer of plastic material to protect the anchor from
mechanical injury during manipulation. The bandage is put on with special
winding equipment. The cables are prepared in specified lengths and delivered
to the site in bundles (Fig. 12-10), or in reels or as reelless packs (see Fig. 12-8).

Chapter 13
F I X I N G OF A N C H O R S IN ROCK AND S O I L

The fixing of anchors so that the tension within them is taken up by the
ground is achieved by three basic methods:
by mechanically bracing the anchor foot (base) up against the rock at the
end of the borehole;
by bonding the anchor tendon to the rock or soil with cement;
by fitting an expanded base (i.e. a bulb) at the distal end of the anchor.
The face of the bulb abuts against ground when the anchor is prestressed.
The first of these methods relies on the forces of friction set up between
the steel jaws, or other parts of the base, and the borehole walls (see Fig. 9-7).
The ground is subjected to considerable radial pressure concentrated over
the small area of contact with the base.
The second method relies upon the bond strength developed between the
anchor root and the rock or soil of the borehole wall (see Fig. 9-8). This
bond is achieved by using a suitable cement (cement grout, synthetic resin).
The rock is mostly stressed by shear forces which are distributed over the
relatively large lateral surface area of the root cylinder.
The third method depends upon the strength of the ground, or its resistance
to the extraction of the deep-situated base (or bulb). The rock in this case
is subjected to a locally concentrated compression.
In some special cases, combinations of these fixing methods may be used.
The fixing method that is finally selected depends on the mechanical characteristics of the rock or soil, the magnitude of the tensile force for which the
anchor has been designed, the design of the anchor itself, and frequently
also the facilities and equipment available to the contractor.

13.1 MECHANICAL FIXING OF ANCHORS

Mechanical fixing is mainly employed in temporary short anchors (bolts)

in strong rocks. The mechanical fixing device (the fixing base) is fastened at
the end of the anchor inserted into the borehole, and the fixing is achieved
by the expansion of this base against the borehole wall; in theory the pressure
of expansion may be increased until the compressive strength limit of the
rock is reached. When the anchor is under stress, displacement of the anchor
base is prevented by the friction of contact with the borehole wall. The

110

<0

Fig. 13-1. Fixing of a wedge bolt in a borehole [113]

a) wings of the cleft forced against the rock of the borehole wall at the fixing position,
b)y c) parabolic shape of area of contact between the bolt wing and rock on which stress
is concentrated, (A) after loading the bolt with tension, d) magnified view of the wing
surface at the contact area. Steel in the middle {AB) is damaged by the shear stress, and
crushed rock is pressed into the cavities. Edges become knurled

Ill

resistance to extraction of the bolt is determined not only by the magnitude

of the friction, but also to a large extent by the shear strength of the rock
against which the base is forced (Fig. 13-1).
The stress state in the rock caused by the pressure of the mechanical base
has been investigated by using photoelastic measurement and computing
techniques. For example, Ewoldsen [65] used the finite element method.
to investigate the axial, radial, and tangential stress components around
a bolt fixed into elastic homogenous rock (Fig. 13-2). He found by computation that if the anchor base were given a prestressing force of 44 kN (with
borehole fixing section 51 mm diameter, 76 mm long), a maximum compressive stress of over 7.6 MPa was created in the rock, parallel to the anchor,
at the point where the base was connected to the tendon; at the other end
of the base there was a nearly identical tensile stress in the rock. Because of
this stress, cracks can appear behind the base, near the borehole bottom.
When this occurs, however, the pattern of rock stress does not change
significantly; indeed the distribution of stress may become more uniform,
as can be seen in the bottom diagram of Fig. 13-3. The distribution of the
radial and tangential stresses in the close vicinity of the mechanical fixing
is also shown.
Similarly, the stresses in the rock have been assessed for a 3 m-long bolt
a) axial

b) tangential

c) radial
rock surface

2m

2m

Fig. 13-2. Stress state of rock in the vicinity of a bolt with a prestressing force of 44 kN

5 tress

( stresses in psi\ pressure marked with positive sign )

axial 6a

tangential 6t

raaial

ar

scale of lengths:

-50

ID

15 cm

conversion table
D si

50

too

200
300

too

500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100

,'<g/cmz MPa
3-5
7.0

21
28
35
U2
L9
55
63
70
77

OM
0.66
1.37
2.06
2.75
3M
U2
4.80
550
6.16
6.85 i
Z55

hissure

Fig. 13-3. Stresses in the vicinity of an anchor base mechanically expanded against the walls
of the borehole by a force of 56 kN, and pulled by a tension of 44 kN (according to
H. Ewoldsen)

113

under a prestressing of 44 kN. The iso-stress lines in Fig. 13-2 show a markedly
steep decline in stress with distance from the borehole. At a distance of 10 cm,
the radial and tangential stresses amount to less than a twentieth of the
maximum value, and they practically disappsar at a distance of one metre. The
compressive stress along the borehole (between the supporting washer and
the base) also declines rapidly towards the centre of the zone to a figure as
low as one thousandth of the maximum value calculated at the base front.
By analysing the forces acting within the base and in the contact area
between the base and the rock, formulae can be derived for calculating both
the optimum fixing force for a mechanical base, and the fixing strength of
a given rock type. These problems have been discussed in detail by A. Hugon
and A. Costes [94], and by T. A. Lang [113].
Tensile tests carried out on mechanical fixings in rock do not agree
completely with results obtained using these formulae. Differences of up
to 100 per cent are attributable, above all, to highly inaccurate values being
substituted in the formulae. Thus, for example, the rock strength at the
fixing point of the borehole wall is determined from laboratory strength
on rock samples, and the value for the coefficient of friction between the
steel base and the rock is simply an estimate.
Testing of the load-bearing capacity of bolts on site is comparatively
easy, and it is always better to rely on values for the average fixing strength
of a given type of anchor and rock, obtained from in situ tensile tests.
Mechanically fixed anchors have the following characteristic properties:
They acquire full strength immediately on fixing, which means they
can be prestressed or loaded as soon as they have been placed.
The fixing against the walls of the borehole is usually in a short section
of 10 to 20 cm. This introduces large stresses into the rock, so that the
demands on the rock strength at the fixing point are very considerable.
The fixing strength is principally determined by the fixing force with
which the jaws of the mechanical base are pressed against the rock.
When a mechanical anchor is overloaded, the expanded base slips
along the borehole walls if these are of hard rock, whereas in softer ground
the base may be pressed deep into the borehole walls, and therefore breaks
under overload.
They are not usually protected against corrosion and therefore their
life expectancy is limited. Because of this they are mainly used for the
temporary securing of rocks.
Their cost is greater than that of bonded bolts, because their manufacture is more complicated and they are usually made of high quality steel;
the borehole diameter must also be greater (30 to 70 mm).
Mechanical bases differ according to the method of expansion in the
borehole.

114

13.1.1. Fixing by thrust (wedge base)

The anchor with a wedge base is the oldest type, and the simplest to
manufacture. The tendon of the anchor, which is made of circular crosssection steel of diameter 22 to 26 mm, is given a longitudinal cut at the basal
end, and a steel wedge is inserted into the cleft thus formed. The bolt is
fixed by hammering inwards so that the wedge is forced into the cleft which
thus opens and presses against the borehole wall (Fig. 13-4).
The wedge-base bolt has been used for many years, particularly in mines.
This type of bolt can also be made quite easily on site. The cleft is cut with
a welding torch, and the wedge is forged from a piece of drill rod or similar
material. If a wedge bolt is to be fixed successfully, the optimum dimensions
and correct positioning in suitably hard rock must be observed. An optimum
specification for such a bolt is as follows: diameter of bar, 22 to 26 mm;
overall length, up to 3 m; length of cleft and wedge, approximately 14 cm;
taper of wedge 7; difference in diameter between bar and borehole, 5 to 7 mm
maximum; the length of the borehole should be 10 to 15 cm less than the
bar length. When fixing the anchor, deep wedging of the cleft at the borehole
bottom must be achieved, and the best tool for this operation is a medium
sized pneumatic pick (possibly with a pneumatic strut) fitted with a cut-away
bit and guide pipe (see Fig. 13-4). Driving the bolt in with a mallet generally
has little effect.
The wedge-base bolt can be used successfully in all hard rocks. Loadbearing capacities of 70 to 120 kN can be attained, with a partial extraction
of up to 10 mm. A correctly fixed wedge-base bolt did not show any decrease
in fixing strength during repeated tensile tests, even after several years.
13.1.2 Fixing by tension (tensile base)
Bolts with tensile bases are the simplest both in terms of fixing and prestressing. Following insertion into the borehole, the bolt can be loaded
immediately by pulling in the cuneiform or conical support located at the
end of the bar between the expanding toothed jaws. This is usually done
at first by hand and then by a nut at the external end of the bolt bar.
Bolts of this type are made in various countries. The best known is the
Goldenberg bolt made in France (Fig. 13-5). Another arrangement of this
type is the GD anchor. The conical end of the bar is pulled into four expanding jaws made of high quality synthetic material (Fig. 13-6). This material
has a greater plasticity and lower modulus than that of steel, but shows
a similar modulus to that of rock. Thus the transfer of force from the steel
tendon to the rock face is more effective sometimes more so than that
achieved with a steel base.

10

Fig. 13-4. Wedge bolt and method of driving-in using a pneumatic pick

l|

iw

1800

20 cm

HO

20

~^$0\

116

A special type of bolt fixed by tension has been developed by the American
Worley Co. (Fig. 13-7). By tightening the nut on the external end of the rod,
both parts of the bolt are forced against the rock along their entire length.
The bolt may thus be used in weaker rocks. If desired it may be taken apart
and used again.

Fig. 13-5. Tensile anchor base

of Goldenberg bolt

Fig. 13-6. Synthetic base of GD anchor (Farex-Sv/eden); 4 jaws surround the conical bar end

13.1.3 Fixing by screwing (threaded base)

Bolts with threaded bases are fixed by turning the bolt bar. In this way
a conical or cuneiform piece at the distal end of the bar is drawn between
the jaws which are bridged by a holder (Fig. 13-8), and the jaws are thus
forced against the borehole walls. Penetration of the rock when the jaws can
be opened no further is in practice between 3 and 10 mm. The softer the rocks
the deeper is the penetration. The rolled 4 mm thread on the bar end allows
rapid tightening with high torque transmission. The initial locking of the
bolt while it is under tension may be carried out by hand turning using
a 50 cm lever. A torsional moment of 350 Nm induces a prestress of about
70 kN in the bolt.
This type of fixing is somewhat more complicated in its manufacture and
therefore is also more expensive than the types mentioned above. It is,
however, generally considered to be the most reliable, because the base can
be expanded to a greater width, and requires only light initial contact between the expanding components and the borehole walls. It also evens out
more effectively the accidental roughness of the borehole circumference,
thus making contact with areas of higher compressibility in the borehole
walls.

117

Fig. 13-7. Worley bolt (USA) with anchoring effect along entire borehole length

Fig. 13-8. Threaded anchor

base of Pat tin bolt

The contact surface area and dimensions of the expanding components

may be adjusted according to the rock strength. For hard rock, a small
contact area and shallow, but sharp, indentations on the surface suffices
(see Figs. 13-8, 13-12). For medium hard and soft rock, the expansion
surface requires a larger contact area and a rough face (see Fig. 13-10);
in some cases two or more co-axial shells are used. The load-bearing capacity

118

of such bolts can range from 170 to 220 kN in strong rock. Their ultimate
bearing capacity, however, is usually determined by the smallest diameter
of the bolt rod (16 to 36 mm). When the bolt is no longer required in the
same position, the rod may be screwed out of the shell, extracted from the
borehole and used again. Sometimes, by giving repeated knocks to the rod
just before it is completely unscrewed, it is possible to retrieve also the expanding base from the borehole. The possibility of recovering bolts is only of
value in mining.
Mechanically fixed bolts with threaded bases are much used nowadays,
and they are made by many manufacturers all over the world. Renowned
makes, such as Pattin (see Fig. 13-8), Ancrall (Fig. 13-9), Lenoir et Mernier
in France (Fig. 13-10), Rawlbolts, Bayliss (Fig. 13-11), Torque Tension in
England, Dywidag in the GFR, Bail in South Africa (Fig. 13-12), Williams

b)
Fig. 13-9. Threaded anchor base of Ancrall bolt
a) dismantled, b) assembled

Fig. 13-10. Expansion bolts

made by Lenoir et Mernier

119
Fig. 13-11. Threaded anchor base
of Bayliss bolt (England). Above:
as inserted into the borehole;
below: after the sleeve is opened
by pulling-in the cone

^IMA!
Fig. 13-12. Threaded anchor
base of Bail bolt (Republic of
South Africa)

in the USA, Titan in Australia, may be mentioned as examples. A large

variety of bolts with expanding bases is offered by the French firm of
Lenoir et Mernier Co. They manufacture 8 types of base with different
dimensions (Table 13-1), for various types of rock. Most of the bases
are fitted with a special pre-bolting spring, which provides for the initial
expansion on insertion of the bolt into the borehole.
TABLE 13-1
Mechanical bolt types made by Lenoir et Mernier
Type

Initial
diameter
[mm]

Expansion
[mm]

Length
[mm]

Surface
area
of contact
[cm2]

Borehole
diameter
tolerances
[mm]

Rock

31
34
36
41
41
46

LN
LS
UM
UP
UM
UP

31
34
36
41
41
46

+
+
+
+
+
+

16
16
18
18
18
18

98
75
120
100
120
120

80
70
100
100
140
180

close fit
close fit
36+4
41+5
41+5
46 + 8

56 UM

56

+ 18

200

300

56 + 8

66 UM

66

+22

250

400

66 + 9

hard
fairly hard
fairly soft
soft to hard
compressible
all types
of rock
all types
of rock
all types
of rock

120

13.1.4 Fixing of hollow bolts by expansion (friction bolts)

These bolts, made from steel tubes, are pressed against the borehole wall
along their entire length by expansion of the tubes. The resistance against
any displacement of this anchoring tube fixed in the rock is due to friction
between the rock and tube throughout its full length.
Bolts of this type are usually indicated as friction bolts [188c]. A special
type of bolt, fixed in the borehole along its entire length of 2 m by swelling
of a steel tube by means of a high water-pressure was presented as Swellex
by the Swedish Atlas Copco (Fig. 13-13).
Swellex is manufactured from a steel tube of 41 mm diameter, which has
been mechanically reshaped to assume an outer diameter of only 28 mm.
Sleeves are pressed onto the ends sealed through welding. One of the sleeves
retains a washer in place and has also a small hole to allow water to be
b)

o)

Fig. 13-13. Swellex bolt

a) bolting tube before expansion,
b) bolting tube fixed in the borehole
by expansion

121

injected into the tube during a quick installation of the bolt in the borehole.
High-pressure water expands the bolt immediately. As the borehole diameter
(30 to 39 mm) is smaller than the original diameter of the tube, a tongue is
left inside the profile (see Fig. 13-136). This tongue acts as a spring when the
water pressure is released, and produces radial forces which continue to
press the bolt against the rock walls of the hole. During the swelling process,
the length of the bolt is reduced due to contraction, resulting in forcing the
washer of the bolt against the rock face. About 50 bolts may be fixed in this
way in an hour's time.
A steel tube provided with a slot throughout its length, which is forced
into a borehole of a corespondingly smaller diameter, has a similar, although
somewhat smaller, effect.
This type of friction bolt is currently produced under the trade name
Split Set Stabilizer by the American IngersoilRand Co according to the
design of J. J. Scott [188] (Fig. 13-14). This bolt is driven home into a borehole
of 35 mm (13/8 in.) diameter by means of a percussive or vibrating equipment
as jackdrill or stopper, but air or hydraulic drifter or rotary roof bolter can
be used as well. When set, the initial holding power is about 27 kN and
further increases with time. When the pull-out force acting in the roof on the
bolt plate exceeds the bolts holding force, the tube slips a little while maintaining its friction resistance. This possibility of support yielding without failure
is preferable for rock mass stabilization as mentioned in the next Section.

Fig. 13-14. Split set stabilizers of IngersoilRand Co.

a) view of the bolting tubes with rings and washers,/?) cross-section of the slotted tube

122

Another advantage of these hollow bolts is that they allow water drainage
of the supported rock.
Split Set bolts are delivered in lengths varying from 0.9 m to 2.44 m
(3 ft. to 8 ft.) in 0.3 m (1 ft.) increments. Because of their simple installation
technique they are widely used, especially in the United States metal mining
industry, where they form approximately 50% of all roof fixtures [188a].
13.1.5 Controlled yielding bolts
Ordinary rock bolts yield and extend up to 18% and then they break
[188c]. Recent knowledge in rock mechanics concerning the advantages of
allowing some yielding of the supports in underground caverns, has led to the
design of bolts with controlled yielding [61, 152]. A special coupling allows
controlled elongation of the bolt if its load exceeds the admissible limit. This
elongation of the bolts which are used to reinforce caverns, takes place
automatically and allows the rock to undergo slight movement. This movement reduces the pressures in the rock and the cavern develops a new state
of equilibrium.
The elongation coupling of the bolt developed in the USA (Fig. 13-15) [61]
consists of a sleeve around the outer part of the stem of a standard bolt, the
latter being provided with rolled threads with an overall diameter greater
than that of the stem. Because the inside diameter of the inner end of the
sleeve is less than th? outside diameter of the threads on the bolt, the bolt

<00*
'^ 0- 0 ;

^ mine roof ;:.'00

or other \J'd'i'-oQ
\. wall rock.: : %0o

stem portion
of standard
. v rock bolt

as

\c o
O O

rOD

0 o note rolled.*<<
7 ^ 7 threads .(/* 1
OU.-O-L'-G

-0

Op o<-. t\

Q\
'oZ.oc[<o-i*p;(

0
Vr C t C X Cn(
t-2 sleeve
, C P ; y^

plate

-nut

Fig. 13-15. Controlled yielding coupling

for standard rock bolts developed in the
USA

123

may be prestressed to the permitted load by tightening the nut threaded

on the external section of the sleeve. When the loading of the bolt reaches
a predetermined limit value, the threads on the bolt stem are partially
stripped with the stem moving into the sleeve to some extent. In this way,
tension in the bolt automatically drops below the admissible limit, which is
determined by the strength of the threads. This arrangement allows the bolt
to elongate while it continues to exert a strong restraining force on the surrounding rock.
Yielding bolts of a different design are offered by the Austrian Meynadier
Company. A special Meypo head is slipped onto an anchoring steel rebar
with a diameter of 24 mm without thread at its end; this head induces an
effective thrust of a headplate on the rock and at the same time allows
a yielding of up to 50 cm while transferring a constant tensile force of about
214 kN. Smooth yielding is provided by means of steel balls filling out the
inner conical cavity of the head, closed by a nut.

13.2 FIXING OF ANCHORS WITH CEMENT

The bonding of cement (cement grout, cement slurry, synthetic resins) to

both the anchor tendon and the ground is the most often utilized method
of fixing anchors into rock and soil. The cementing of an anchor into a borehole is carried out over a comparatively long section of the anchor (1 to 10 m);
the specific load on the rock or soil is therefore small. This method of fixing
requiring a long root is particularly effective in weak rocks and loose soils;
it is also used for transferring large tensile forces into strong rocks, and may
be used with success even in cohesive clayey soils. The anchorage is protected
from corrosion in the root section, but it can be loaded only when the cement
has hardened.
The efficiency of the fixing depends on the adhesion of the cement both
to the anchor surface and to the rock or soil in the borehole.
13.2.1 Design of anchors fixed with cement
The length and cross section of the part of the root cemented in the
ground is usually determined under the assumption that there is uniform
cohesion of the cement over the area of contact, both with the steel tendon
and with the rock or soil of the borehole wall. The contact area, and consequently also the root dimensions, are determined from the simple relationship between the tensile force, P, and the average shear strength at the surface
of the cemented root, where the latter is considered to be of regular
cylindrical shape:

124

m . P . d2 . / . tb,
or between the force, P, and the bond strength between the cement and the
surface of the steel components of the anchor root section:
m . P = n . . dl . / . ,
where m
dl
d2
n
/
xb
xa

= safety factor (1.5 2)

diameter of the cemented section of the anchor tendon
= borehole diameter
= number of steel components in the root
= fixing length of the anchor root
= bond strength between cement and rock or soil (working value)
= bond strength between cement and steel.

In designing the fixing the weakest component is considered, and means

are found for increasing the load-bearing capacity of the anchor solely by
improving the function of this component. A sufficiently large fixing area
is established first of all, as determined by the length and diameter of the
anchor root.
The most frequently used cement for fixing either short or long anchors
in the ground is grout. Information concerning its adhesion to various types
of rock, soil, and the steel of the anchor root, is contained in the following
Sections.
IS.2.1.1 Cohesion between grout and rock
The bond between the grout and the borehole wall depends on the strength
of both the rock and the grout, the roughness of the borehole walls, the
cleanness of the borehole, and the area of contact between the grout and
the rock a factor partly depending on the length of the root. With increasing
root length the required strength of the bond decreases in proportion (see
Chapter 9.3.2 and Fig. 9-9).
The approximate strength of the grout-to-rock bond is ascertained in the
laboratory, using cores from anchoring boreholes or from exploratory boreholes. The core is placed inside a strong steel mould (Fig. 13-16) which is
filled with grout to a predetermined level. After at least seven days for hardening, the core is pressed out of the mould in a laboratory press. Bond strengths
obtained in this way are usually somewhat higher than those found in field
tests because the contact area in the laboratory test is much smaller, but
particularly because the core expands under compression rather than contracting, as it would under tension. A test in which the core were under
tension would correspond more accurately to the mode of stressing of rock

125

surrounding a tensioned anchor. The adopted working strength of the bond

is therefore set by introducing a high safety factor, 3 or 4.
According to Littlejohn and Bruce [120], the ultimate cohesion between
cement tnid rock may be taken as being approximately one tenth of the
compressive strength of the rock, up to the strength of the hardened grout.
^^
^^^^|

Fig. 13-16. Laboratory cohesion test between rock (drilling

core, F) and grout (documentation of Losinger Co.)

Assuming that the strength of grout is 42 MPa, the ultimate bond strength
is then 4.2 MPa, and the admissible bond strength is 1.4 MPa, taking
a safety factor of 3. Coates [32] refers to a maximum working value of
2.45 MPa for the bond strength, but with a safety factor of 1.75; hence the
ultimate strength is the same (4.3 MPa). For weaker and partly weathered
rocks it is more correct to take the ultimate bond strength as being 20
to 35 per cent of the compressive strength of the rock [120].
Koch [120] suggests working values for cohesion of between 0.35 and
0.70 MPa for soft rocks, 0.70 and 1.05 MPa for medium hard rocks, and
1.05 and 1.4 MPa for very hard rocks. According to the Australian Standard,
a value of 1.05 MPa is satisfactory for the majority of strong rocks. Weathering of rocks significantly reduces their bonding strength with grout.
The most reliable measurements of bond strength are obtained in pull
out tests at the anchoring site. The average value for the ultimate bearing
capacity of the anchor divided by a safety factor of 1.5 to 3.5, is used in the
design of the anchorage. A lower safety factor may be used for compact,
strong rocks and for temporary anchors, while a higher safety factor should
be applied for weaker, jointed, or weathered rocks, and for permanent
anchors.
Table 13-11 lists bond values obtained in field tests for different types of
rock at different sites [120]. The ultimate values could not be obtained
in all cases. It appeared that even for similar rock types the bond values
varied considerablv. This variation arose from local deviations and ir-

126

regularities in the geological structure of the rock mass, from the different
design details of the test anchors, from different drilling and flushing methods
as well as from different pressures used in the grouting of the test anchor
roots.
TABLE 13-11
Rock/grout bond values found in field tests [120]
Rock type

Test bond strength

[MPa]

Granite
Basalt
Sandstone

0.81, 1.24, 1.72, 1.72

0.72, 1.0, 3.6
0.4, 0.84, 0.95, 0.98
1.2, 1.56, 1.58
1.42
0.63
1.19
0.55
1.66
0.88
0.21,0.28,0.36

Limestone
Limestone (loamy)
Limestone (fissured)
Limestone (with marly bands)
Dolomite
Mudstone
Marl
Shale
Shale and sandstone
Shale (strongly weathered)
Chalk
Quartzite
Breccia
Slate
Slate and greywacke
Micaschist
Micaschist (very sound)
Micaschist and D/;ite-gneiss
Meta tuff (weathered)

Ultimate bond strength

[MPa]

6.37
1.73
2.83, 4.56, 4.80

1.8

0.63
0.10
0.39
0.7
1.02, 1.32, 1.72
0.93
0.90, 1.24
1.4
0.65, 0.80, 0.92
2.16
0.80
0.29

1.80

The stress distribution along a cylindrical anchor root was studied theoretically by the finite element method. [32] The stress distribution depends
on the ratio of the elastic moduli of the anchor material and the rock,
respectively. The smaller the difference between these moduli, the greater is
the stress concentration at the proximal fixing end of the anchor. The
greater the difference, the more the stress diagram approaches uniformity
of distribution. For a modulus ratio higher than 10 (i.e. for soft rocks with
an elasticity modulus of less than 2,000 MPa), the stress distribution is
uniform with respect to most of the anchor root length. For stronger rocks,

127

on the other hand, the stress concentrated at the proximal end of the anchor
is five to ten times greater than the mean theoretical stress. Thus, under
high loading of the anchor partial debonding takes place at the proximal
end, and this debonding progresses towards the distal anchor end as the
load is further increased.

, . 0
strait L / . .

Is

*.0
<f> 131mm ,

r-|

V (
1
-

3.0
1

S3

2.0

um/

//

1.5m/

,. y

1
1

1.8SMN

anchor cross-section
5V No. wires
7 mm diameter

Fig. 13-17. Strain distribution

along the tendon in the
fixing zone of a 2.2 MN capacity test anchor [144]

Non-uniform stress distribution along a long grouted anchor root transferring tensile forces to the rock has been confirmed in experimental tests
carried out in situ by various authors [16, 144, 99a]. By means of strain
gauges fixed to the anchor tendon at various points along the fixing section,
the decrease in tension from the proximal to the distal end of the root may
be observed, together with the changing degree of transfer, of tensile force
from the anchor to the rock. Results obtained for a BBRVanchor with a bearing capacity of 2.2 MN, length 8 m, are shown in Fig. 13-17 [144], Thus
under a load of 0.5 MN, the force was transferred at the upper end of the
root with an average bond/rock stress of 0.22 MPa. When the load was
increased to 1.85 MN, the bond failed along an upper root section of length
3.9 m, and the load was taken up by the remaining lower root section (4.10 m
long) with an average bond stress of 0.98 MPa. The anchor base withstood
about 0.3 MN. At a loading of 2.8 MN, a comparison between the theoretical
and measured extensions of the anchor tendon in the fixing section suggested
that the tendon was debonded along its entire length so that the load was
transferred completely to the anchor base. Nevertheless, the ultimate loadbearing capacity of the anchor had not been reached. The average value
of the bond strength computed with the assumption of a uniform load
distribution along the root, was 0.65 MPa; this was much less than the actual
value obtained with a test load of 1.85 MN, and was also much lower than
the shear strength of the grout.
The results of the above-described experiment are very instructive. They
prove that in anchorages in strong rocks, the grout/steel bond is the weak
point of the fixing and they also confirm that the most efficient fixing is
achieved with an anchor base, even if the base is not formed in an expanded
anchor borehole.

128

13.2.1.2 Cohesion between grout and soil

Where anchoring is carried out in soil, the weak point of the fixing is the
interface between the anchor root surface and the soil.
The resistance to extraction of the anchor root from the soil is determined
by the shear strength (force of friction) at the soil/root interface; this value
may be expressed by Coulomb's relation:
= . tg + c.
In non-cohesive soils the grout/soil bond strength at this interface is
usually larger than the shear strength of the soil, and it is possible to determine the shear strength around the root using the parameters obtained
for soil, and derive the soil stress, , on the root, from the weight, of the
anchor root overburden. Tensile tests of anchors fixed in soil have indicated
that the resistance to extraction is usually higher than that calculated from
the ultimate shear stress around the root.
L. Hobst explains this as being a result of the fact that the overall diameter of the root, d2, delimited by the soil/root interface at which the shear
strength is critical, is greater than the diameter of the borehole itself. Moreover, over the entire surface of the root which has an irregular form owing
to uneven penetration of the grout, a transverse pressure appears which
considerably increases the effect of the frictional component of the fixing
strength of the anchor in the soil. Hobst used this phenomenon as the basis
of a formula whereby the minimum necessary embedding depth of the anchor
may be calculated (see Section 10.3.1); the validity of this formula has been
verified in many experiments [82].
Other authors have reached the same conclusion. Ostermayer, for instance,
has shown that normal stresses at the anchor root surface increase to 2 to
10 times the stress attributable to the mass of the overburden [153].
It is nevertheless correct, as far as an approximate calculation of the
required root length is concerned, to start with the average value for the
shear strength at the root surface. On the basis of a steadily increasing
number of experiments, it is possible to consider the following approximate
values for xb:
fine to medium-grained sand, moderately compacted
to highly compacted (Fig. 13-18)

0.14-0.51

medium to coarse-grained sand and sandy gravel,

moderately compacted

0.32 1.00

The value of zb increases markedly with soil compactedness, soil grain

coarseness, and the coefficient of grain uniformity. The value of xb per unit
length decreases with increasing root length, as occurs in hard rocks, and

129

therefore a disproportionately long root is uneconomical. L. Hobst obtained

good results with the fixing of anchors in non-saturated coarse-grained gravel
sands, using an anchoring length of only 3 m (see Fig. 9-12); he recommends,
a root length of 4 to 6 m depending on anchor size and the quality of the
soil. Ostermayer recommends an optimum root length of between 6 and 7 m.
The graph in Fig. 13-19 shows ranges of experimentally obtained loadbearing capacities in relation to root length.

Fig. 13-18. Influence on friction at root

surface of diameter and length of
grouted root fixed in sand (fine to
medium, strongly compacted
to medium compact U = 1.6 3.1)
[153]

bond-to-ground length [m]

2000
very dense

medium dense
^ dense
dense
medium dense
medium dense

sandy gravel
U-5-33

bond to ground length

fine to medium sand

U- 1.6-3-1

medium to coarse sand

(with gravel)
diameter of grouted oody
d010- 15 cm
overburden ^^m

Fig. 13-19. Loading capacity of anchors in non-cohesive soils in relation to soil type and
root length [155]; diameter of grouted body 1015 cm; overburden height 4 m; U coefficient of uniformity

130

In cohesive soils, the shear strength at the surface of long anchors is much
lower than that of corresponding anchors in non-cohesive soils. The required
anchor length must be determined on the basis of extraction tests, particularly in larger projects. However, the relationships obtained both in research
and in practice up to now [154] may serve well as a basis for approximate
calculations:
a) Surface resistance to movement (friction) increases with increasing
consistency and decreasing plasticity of the soil. The lowest computed values
(0.05 to 0.08 MPa) of the average shear strength (friction) at the root/soil
interface were found in stiff clays (I0 = 0.8 1.0) with medium to high
plasticity; the highest values (around 0.4 MPa) were found in sandy silts
of medium plasticity and very stiff to hard consistency (I0 = 1.25) (Fig. 13-20)
[154, 53].
600

very stiff to hard

sandy silt
with
medium
post-grouting
plasticity
very stiff to hard (marl)
without
}
pst- groutina

^00
cloy
200

medium
plasticity
(marl)

very stiff
without
post-grouting
stiff
without
post-grouting

6
*
bond-to ground-length

c
^200

clay
. medium
to high
plasticity

iS
[mj

very stiff
with
post-grouting
very stiff
without
post-grouting
stiff without
post-grouting
t
6
bond- to -ground leng th [m]

10

12

Fig. 13-20. Surface friction occurring in cohesive soils for various lengths of grout fixing
with and without post-grouting [154]

Approximate surface resistance values may be also obtained for a given soil
by means of pressiometric tests carried out in exploratory boreholes (see
Chapter 9.2).
b) The shear strength at the interface between test anchors and soil did
not change with the fixing length up to a xh value of 0.1 MPa. The shear
strength decreased slightly with fixing length at higher values of xb, but

131

this decrease may be neglected for the purpose of approximate calculations,

the shear strength for any given soil being taken as constant. The maximum
load-bearing capacity of an anchor thus increases, approximately in proportion to the root length.
c) A similar situation to that in b) was observed for root diameters the
range 9 to 16 cm. The ultimate surface friction value did not change within
this range and the load-bearing capacity of the anchor increased proportionally with the root diameter.
d) The surface friction of the anchor root can be increased substantially
(up to 100 per cent.) by carrying out second, third etc., groutings, the effect
being nearly proportional to the applied grouting pressure [102] (see also
Fig. 13-20). It is important, however, that a rupture of the previous grout body
occurs first, and that high pressure is maintained until the grouting is
completed.
In order continuously to improve the data available for deciding on
anchor fixing length, intensive investigations in situ, in which anchors are
tested to the point of failure in various types of ground, should continue.
Data concerning the load-bearing capacities of anchors and the mean
grout/rock or grout/soil bond strengths obtained in the course of research
and in practice should be accompanied in all cases by exact information
on the anchors, the anchoring method, and the characteristics of the ground.
It will then be possible gradually to establish which are the critical parameters of ground conditions and how these relate to the load-bearing
capacities of anchors.
13.2.1.3 Cohesion between grout and the steel components
of anchor root
It has already been stated that in rock anchorages the weakest part of the
fixing is the bond between the grout and the anchor tendon, rather than that
between the grout and the rock. The grout/steel bond involves three factors:
Adhesion, resulting from physical bonding between the surface of the
steel and the adhering grout. Adhesion accounts for the first resistance that
comes into play when both materials are stressed by shear forces. It disappears
when movement of the root takes place.
Mechanical interlocking with the steel parts of the anchor owing to the
presence of rolled-on ribs, threads, cavities and projections; the latter are
moulded into the adhering grout body. Interlocking acts in combination
with adhesion.
Friction, arising as a function of the clamping pressure and the
roughness of the steel surface; the magnitude of the friction factor also
depends on whether it is acting prior to movement along the contact surface,

132

in which case its value is higher, or whether it is acting during the course
of movement, when the residual coefficient of friction at the surface is
smaller.
In the initial stages of stressing, adhesion and interlocking between
uneven-surfaced elements are responsible for the integrity of the bond.
When these factors are progressively overcome, beginning at the connecting
point between the root and the tendon and moving towards the root end
the friction factor comes into effect, in its lesser value as kinetic friction.
The fixing strength obtainable by friction in this case is only a fraction ofthat
provided by adhesion enhanced by interlocking; thus the friction factor in the
case of long roots cannot be regarded as important in practice. Friction
becomes a significant component of the fixing strength only where cable ends
are fixed to conical anchor bases (see Chapter 13.3), and to some extent also
where ropes and corrugated wires are used, as will be explained subsequently.
The limit cohesion per unit surface area of the steel anchor is usually taken
as being about one tenth of the compressive strength, or 4 MPa at most.
The limit cohesion decreases with fixing length (Fig. 13-21), in the same way
as grout/reck cohesion. This decrease arises from the non-uniform distribution
of stress along the length of the fixing. On stressing the anchor, adhesion
comes into effect initially at the proximal root end, while at the distal end it
remains unexploited. When adhesion is overcome in the proximal section,

b)

Q)

a) kg/cm
150 -130
100
50
0

^^T"""

kg/cm Oospti)
50 _

>40

10
20
30 mm Tor
anchoring length = 10

20 Tor

80
65

N^2

>37

10 20 30 W 50 cm I

Fig. 13-21. Relationship between anchoring length and cohesion between the shaped Tor
bar and concrete (according to S. Soretz)

a process which is advanced by contraction of the anchor cross-section under

tension, a slip takes place and most of the stress is gradually transferred to
deeper sections, while at the proximal root end only the small effect of
friction remains. It is clear that cohesive resistance does not act along the
entire root length, except when the anchor is about to be torn out from
the grout and only the effect of friction is resisting further movement.
This behaviour of grouted anchors has been confirmed by L. Hobst and
other authors in loading tests (Fig. 13-22), in which the stress distribution

133
4.0

SS 7 0

&P

to 5>

1.0

^<^g4v;

direction of- tension n

distribution of 3-4 5-6
tensionmeten . , , ,

0.0

0.5

7
i .

J_J

l_

1.5
depth of embedding in

72-75
2.0
concrete[mj

2.5

Fig. 13-22. Stress diagram obtaining under conditions of adhesion between concrete and
steel, with different tensile forces in the latter

at the surface of steel bars and wires embedded in concrete was observed.
When the extraction of steel anchor elements from concrete is carried out,
care must be taken that the steel elements are embedded in concrete masses
of sufficiently large diameter. In any case, embedding in cylindrical masses
enclosed in steel containers must be excluded. With such an arrangement.
the reaction transmitted through the support parts of the extraction equipment to a position near the zone of tension, or the reinforcing effect of the
steel container, will affect the distribution of stress; this leads to values for
the cohesion strength which are higher then any that could be considered
in the design of tensioned roots fixed in rock. In comparing different anchor
designs with respect to the necessary grouted fixing length, one can use the
method recommended by the FIP-CEB regulations for prestressed reinforcing
elements embedded in precast structures. According to these regulations,
the length of an effective fixing is determined from the amount of contraction
observed at the ends of the prestressed components embedded in the prefabricated structure, upon release from the prestressing equipment. The
following relation is used:
lk =

3.5Ea.Fa.A7lP,

where is the contraction distance of the reinforcing element into the

precast structure after 7 days.
The values obtained in this way for the fixing length are lower than those
which could be recommended for anchor roots, the reason being that, when
these measurements are made, the reinforcing elements are enveloped by
fconcrete, and when the prestressing force is released, the cross-section of
these elements expands. The expansion progresses outwards to the surface
of the material as the cross-section reaches its original dimensions. The
reinforcing elements have the effect of a plug which is pulled into a socket

134

formed by the adjacent concrete. On the other hand, the tensioning of anchor
tendon is the very reverse process.
The root length of an anchor, or more precisely, the length of the necessary
wrapping of the steel anchor components with grout poured into the borehole,
depends on the following factors: the anchor prestress, , the surface area
of the prestressed steel, the strength of the concrete, the rate at which prestressing is introduced into the anchor, the distance of the steel components
from the root surface, the strength of the rock medium surrounding the root,
the shape of the root (a conical root is preferable, because the shear stress
vector at the surface of the steel can be increased by the vector of the product
of compressive stress and coefficient of friction.), etc. Formulae for the
calculation of the fixing length, in which the effects of the above factors are
included, have been derived by various authors. These formulae, however,
are capable of giving different values for the fixing length, the reason for these
differences being that some of the coefficients included in the formulae are
taken from the results of tests, the design and interpretation of which may
differ considerably.
When calculating the required root length of an anchor as a function
of the fixing strength of the anchor steel parts to the grout, the equilibrium
of forces acting at the limit state at the grout/anchor interface is considered:
mP = n . . dx . / . (see page 124).
The formula also takes into account the anchor characteristics, particularly the tensile stress of the steel, ', at the point of cohesion failure, and
the sum total of the perimeters u of the anchor elements in contact with the
grout:
I = m . K.
u .
K is a coefficient expressing the uneven distribution of shear stress along the
fixing length corresponding to values of the ratio ' : u. It is determined
experimentally. Mamontov, for instance, gives the value of K for steel ropes
(Fig. 13-23) [125].
The summed perimeter, u, of the anchor elements is determined for an
-fold bundle of wires or bars as the -multiple of the perimeter of an
1.8
1.6
lit
1.2
1.0
0

1L

Pt

/<9

MI
cm3

22

2f

28

Fig. 13-23. Coefficient, K, expressing the uneven

distribution of shear stress, , along the anchor
fixing length

135

individual element (u = nn . dt). For steel ropes, u is taken as the total outer
perimeter of the external layer of wires, which for a 7-strand rope is
approximately four times the perimeter of an individual strand of diameter d\
(u7 = An . d')\ for a couple of 7-strand ropes, ulml = In . d\ etc.
The cohesive strength, , for concrete structures is taken, as stated previously, as one tenth of the compressive strength of the grout, up to a maximum
of 4 MPa. Considering the difficulty of determining safely the quality of
concrete made by grouting the anchor borehole (in which standard conditions
for the preparation of good quality concrete cannot be established), it is
safer to rely only on the lower values within the range of (12 MPa).
It should be noted that the strength of the grout affects, to a relatively small
extent, the required fixing length of plain bars and wires in concrete, although,
theoretically, the fixing length should be inversely proportional to the grout
strength. Grout strength develops at a considerably slower rate than the
strength of concrete, and also more slowly than is assumed in some Standards.
In tests on concrete structures it appears that the cohesion strength can still
grow at compressive strengths of the concrete up to 30 or 40 MPa, while at
higher compressive strengths the growth is negligible [120]. The strength
of concrete, however, is fully exploited where anchors are composed of deformed bars with which the concrete interlocks. In the latter case cohesion
becomes the most important factor, acting permanently and not becoming
lost by creep of the concrete.
The root length necessary for an anchor increases with the number of
anchor elements. This increase is not, however, proportional to the number
of elements, as will be explained further on.
For practical calculations of the fixing lengths of bars, values for the
admissible stresses, , acting on the cohesive bond (as recommended in
individual national Standards) are substituted in the following formula:
I, = m

where ur is the sum of the perimeters of the individual bars multiplied by kr,
a coefficient, expressing the effect of the number of bars on the magnitude
of /. The British regulations, for instance, give the following values for this
coefficient: for two bars fixed in a common channel (borehole), kra = 0.8;
for three bars, krt3 = 0.6; for 4 bars, krA = 0.4. Where anchors are composed of larger bundles of bars, the ends must be provided with a base.
The fixing length of wires in the grout of the anchor root is usually calculated in terms of a multiple of the cross-section of a single wire. For single
wires the recommended fixing length is from 100 to 200 times the diameter.
The need to increase the fixing length, as the anchor usually contains
a larger number of wires, is at least partially eliminated in the majority of

136

wire anchors by corrugating the wires in the root section, usually by pulling
them through a system of clamping and spreader rings, or by crimping them
in the workshop (see Figs 12-7, 13-29). When corrugated wires are pulled,
frictional forces come into effect, as shown by a simple diagram of the forces
acting on a stressed wire (Fig. 13-24).

Fig. 13-25. a) Stress distribution in area of contact of rope, b) Dependence of the friction
component, p, on the angle a (see text)
1 ~ a = 10, 2 -a = 12, 3 a = 12 (limit state), 4 a = 16

The necessary fixing length of strands in the grout of the anchor root can
be taken as lying within the range of 30 to 50 times the cross-section. This
relatively low value arises from the favourable nature of the rope surface.
The concrete forming in the depressions among the helically twisted wires is
stressed by a friction effect arising from the normal component, N9 of the
force P. N increases with the angle, a, between the axis of the outer rope
strands and the axis of the rope itself (N = P. sin a). As an example, if a
increases from 12 to 16, the area of contact and the initial resistance to
displacement increase by 1.75 %, but the frictional effect, as a component

137

of cohesion coming into play after adhesion failure, grows to 150 p.c.
(Fig. 13-25).
It appears from the above that for interlocked strands of the Dyform type,
the fixing length must be increased by 20 to 30 %.
The fixing strength of an anchor composed of a bundle of ropes decreases
in the same way as that of anchors made of bundles of bars decreases in
comparison with single bar anchors, with the difference that the coefficient
of decrease of efficiency has a higher value (e.g. for 2 ropes, kr>2 = 0.85).
This means that the adverse effect of increasing the number of anchor
elements in extending the necessary fixing length is smaller for ropes than it is
for bars; moreover, this effect can be further reduced by corrugating the fixed
sections of the ropes in the same way as wire anchors (Fig. 13-26).
Ropes with a cross-section of more than 20 mm and comprising a larger
number of strands should be spliced in the root section to ensure thorough
contact with the grout (Fig. 13-27). In this case the method of fixing is the same
as that used for a bundle of corrugated wires (see Fig. 12-7).

Fig. 13-26. Arrangement of steel strands in the fixing section of VSL rock anchor

Fig. 13-27. Prising apart the end of a Hercules rope of nominal load-bearing capacity 7.5 MN
(Reconstruction of Bystficka Dam, Czechoslovakia)

138

When the root length of any type of anchoring is being considered, it

should be borne in mind that in the course of time the fixing will become
loosened by rheological phenomena, particularly where anchors are prestressed shortly after grouting. For this reason it is recommended that the
safety factor for failure of cohesion between the grout and the surface of the
anchor steel components should be greater than 2, and that the calculated
length be increased by 50 to 100 per cent.
A basic condition for reliable fixing is also a high strength, or noncompressibility, of the ground in the vicinity of the root. This is aided
by grouting under pressure.
13.2.2 Technology of fixing anchors by grouting
The fixing of anchors by grouting is the most highly developed fixing
technique at the present time. The aim of every grouting system is to drill
the borehole as quickly as possible, insert the assembled anchor tendon into
the borehole with ease, and then perfectly grout the borehole and/or the
immediate rock or soil so as to create a load-bearing root and reliable anticorrosive protection of the tendon throughout the service life of the anchor.
The appropriate procedure is selected according to the type of ground involved, and the design of the anchor. Generally it has to be borne in mind
that the weaker the rock or soil and the smaller the assumed cohesion between the ground and the anchor root, the more exacting are the requirements
placed on the anchoring technology if reliability and economy of installation
are to be ensured.
13.2.2.1 Short bar anchors (bolts)
Short steel bars, usually shaped (rebars) and with threaded external ends,
are fitted into prepared boreholes in rock which are then filled partly or
completely with grout or mortar. If they are fixed only at the remote end
of the borehole, they can also be prestressed. If, however, the entire length
is embedded in grout, the bolt remains unstressed and reinforces only the
rock mass in the vicinity of the excavation. Compared with mechanically
fixed bolts, those embedded in grout are very much cheaper and can be used
with success in softer rock types; however, the fixing of grouted bolts into
boreholes is more complicated and it takes longer for these bolts to be brought
into use, since the strength develops with hardening of the grout or mortar.
In case that an accelerator is added the mortar may start to harden after
a few minutes and a sufficient strength is reached in two or three hours.
Anchoring bolts of rebars, fixed throughout the borehole length by grout,
which is injected through a special tube inserted down to the borehole

139

bottom and pulled out step-by-step with the progress of grouting, are called
SN-bolts in Europe after Store Norfors, a place in Sweden, where they
were used for the first time. Bolts, enveloped by grout along their entire
length, are more effectively protected against corrosion. Correct positioning
in the centre of the borehole must be established by means of suitable spacers
attached to the bolt. The bottom part of the borehole must be often de-aerated
to ensure its perfect filling by grout. This is provided by a plastic tube of
small diameter, inserted together with the anchor bar down to the bottom of
the borehole, or by the bar itself, which is hollow in this case.
The so-called dry bolts without prestress are short rebars fixed in soft
rock throughout their full length only by the grip of the rock, without cement.
They are driven mechanically into the borehole whose diameter is smaller
by 2 to 3 mm than that of the bar. This type of anchorage was successful,
TABLE 13-111
Bolts fixed with cement mortar into hard rock
Admissible Loading
loading
capacity
form = 1.5 [kN]
[kN]

Bar
diameter1)
[mm]

10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
120
140
160
180
200

8
12
14
16
18
20
22
25
25
28
28
32
36
36
36

15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
180
210
240
270
300

Threading
on bar

M8
M12
M 14
M16
M18
M20
M22
M24
M24
M27
M27
M30
M33
M33
M36

Fixing
length2)
[cm]

Borehole
diameter2)
[mm]

24
32
41
48
53
58
61
61
69
69
82
86
85
96
106

11
17
20
23
25
29
32
36
36
40
40
45
52
52
52

Grout
volume*)
[dm3]

0.02
0.05

0.1
0.15

0.2
0.25
0.35
0.45

0.5
0.6
0.7
0.9
0.8
1.4
1.6

) For deformed (shaped) steel bars (rebars) of yield point 400 MPa. For the analysis, the
diameter of the shaft of the bar (excluding the thread) is considered.
Taking the strength of the bar/concrete bond as 2.5 MPa.
The figures represent the diameter of the drill bit. The necessary diameter is determined
2
) from the required safe load-bearing capacity of the fixing between the anchor and the
3
) rock, taking an average cohesion of 1.8 MPa between the concrete and the rock of the
borehole
4
) The figures represent 4/3 of the theoretical free space of the borehole

140

for example, in the anchoring of the faces of excavations in clayey shales

for the Prague Underground railway, or in the excavation of a gallery in
much saturated shales under the Rhine bed in the GFR.
Some important data pertaining to bolts grouted in strong rocks, with the
fixing length necessary for taking the admissible tensile force, are listed in
Table 13-111. The data are compiled on the principle of full exploitation of
the materials used, taking the safety factor a s m = 1.5.
For the current fixing of short prestressed bolts, 300 to 1,000 cm 3 of
grout must be injected into the borehole. To place these limited quantities
of grout in upward-directed boreholes, simple hand-operated aids as discussed
in Section 15.3 are used.
13.2.2.2 Long anchors in hard rock
Long anchors are normally fitted into boreholes with solid walls. Where
layers of unconsolidated sediments overlie the bedrock, the boreholes must
be cased. It is sometime expedient to employ the Duplex system, where
drilling is effected by the central rods as well as by the external casing pipe
(see Section 14.2).
Prior to insertion of the anchor into the borehole, the section of tendon
destined to transfer the tensile forces to the ground is arranged according
to the system used, the anticorrosive protection of the tendon is checked,
and a pipe and sealing element for single or repeated grouting are attached
to the anchor.
Unless increased anticorrosive protection of the anchor is stipulated, the
steel parts of the tendon in the fixing section are left without any protection.
The prestressed sections of the tendons are simply covered with a plain
flexible tube or an insulating coating to protect them from contact with the
grout, as well as from possible aggressivity in the ground medium. The anchor is grouted by means of a single grouting pipe from the deepest point upwards, applying low pressure until the grout completely fills the borehole (Fig.
13-28). In densely jointed or soft rocks the grout must be pumped in under
pressure. To achieve this, the fixing section of the borehole is closed off by either an elastic seal (Fig. 13-29), or a linen sealing bag fixed on the anchor tendon (sec Fig. 13-43). Under particularly exacting conditions such as those encountered in soils, a grouting sleeve pipe is employed (see Fig. 13-40). In such
cases the grouting is repeated, either once, or possibly several times.
The arrangement of the anchor tendon in the fixing section varies according to the type of steel elements employed. Plain wires and strands are usually
undulated and spread alternately by means of clamps and spreader rings (see
Fig. 12-7), sometimes also by cold shaping of the wires (see Fig. 13-29). The
splicing of steel ropes together with thorough cleaning of the wires is often

hex nut
anchor plate

*ent and grout tube

sheathing

Fig. 13-28. Details of

temporary rock anchors
A Dywidag single bar
anchor, B VSL 9-strand
(7 wires in each strand) anchor

qement gnoat

Section A-A

smooth sheath

grout tube*

smooth sheath

threadban

142

sufficient (see Fig. 13-27). For shaped bars (as used, for example, in the
Dywidag and Bauer systems), the steel/grout bond suffices without any
further measures. The centering of the bar in the borehole must be established
with the aid of spacers which are attached to the bar and shaped so as to glide
easily against the borehole walls when the anchor is inserted. The spacers
must ensure that there is a minimum grout layer of 2 cm covering the steel.

Fig. 13-29. Polensky & Zllner anchor system (PZ). The fixing section of the borehole is
sealed off by two leather collars
a) anchor root, b) tendon, c) anchor head; 1 cable, 2 plastic pipe or insulative
wrapping, 3 sealing collars, 4 grouting pipe leading to fixing section of borehole,
5 grouting pipe for tendon section, 6 de-aeration pipe, 7 helical reinforcement

The fixing efficiency of anchors embedded in hard rock or soil, provided

that the adhesive properties of the grout have been fully exploited, can be
increased by ensuring that the anchor tension acts at the distal end of the
root rather than the front (Fig. 13-30b). This is achieved by forming the long
insulating coat not only along the part of the tendon outside the root, but
also along the entire length within the root. In this way, adhesion between
the surface of the wires, bars, or strands of the anchor and the grout is
disposed with, but adhesion between the grout and the borehole wall remains
unimpaired. The missing component of the fixing system (adhesion between
grout and steel) is substituted by an anchor base formed by a distribution
plate or a head piece abutting against the filling of the borehole. When the

143

Fig. 13-30. Basic types of

anchor fixing involving
a concrete root, and the
stress occurring in the
root
a) gradual stress
development caused by
tension, b) stress caused
by concentric compression
at base, c) shear and
compression stresses
distributed over a larger
area

tendon extends to this base, compression of the hardened grout of the

anchor root takes place on prestressing of the anchor. The compression
induces a transverse stress in the grout above the root base, tending to cause
radial deformation, that is, giving rise to an expansion pressure against the
borehole wall. The transverse stress increases with the force exerted by the
base in the loading direction of the anchor; this occurs according to the
Poisson's ratio v, of the grout:
<?h =

If for a compact concrete the value of the Poisson's ratio is assumed to be 0.17
the transverse stress created by the force of the anchor base has a value
of 1/5. Let us consider by way of example, an anchor of 1,000 kN tension
embedded in a borehole of 15 cm diameter, with a base of the same diameter,
and a 6 cm diameter tendon. In the concrete immediately above the base
of this anchor, a stress of 68 MPa is developed with a transverse pressure
on the borehole wall of 13.5 MPa. This transverse pressure increases the
fixing strength of the anchor in any type of rock; therefore, it is not advantageous to contain the radial pressures acting in a compressed root within
any form of reinforcement, such as a helical coil or a coaxial steel pipe
similarly fixed to the anchor base, as some authors recommend for soils
(Fig. 13-31). A pipe transfers the pressure of the base over a greater length
of the root, and this reduces the stress in the concrete immediately above
the base; at the same time, however, the transveise pressures are contained
by the pipe and the advantage of expansion of the concrete so that it is forcibly
pressed against the borehole wall is lost.
The concentration of stress immediately above the anchor base creates
the possibility of the root concrete being crushed; however, this outcome

144
3

0.8
r-G-7

if a*
^0.3
$0.2

0.7
0

\YaS
\s*

b.

type of the ba

.^
ff=

Fig. 13-31. Relationship between the ultimate loading

capacity of an anchor in soil and the length of
a steel cylinder fitted at the base, according to
H. Bendel [15]
a sand and gravel, b fine sand

*/"

1 2
3 * +
length of the base [mj

cannot, apart from exceptional cases, reduce the fixing strength of the anchor
as a whole. Indeed, the Poisson's ratio v, for crushed concrete is less than 0.17
and takes a value similar to that for condensed sand or rock fragments
v = 0.250.33, so that the transverse pressure of the grout increases to a value
within the range ah = 0.33 to 0.5. In the above example of an anchor
of 1,000 kN load, ah would then be 22 to 34 MPa.
The radial pressure exerted on the surrounding rock by both the anchor
root and the borehole filling above the root, decreases progressively towards
the borehole mouth. In spite of this, the overall effect of this pressure is to
produce the chief component of the resistance to extraction of the anchor
from the ground, the most important characteristic of which, particularly
with respect to cohesive and loose soils, is the angle of internal friction.
Thus L. Hobst recommends that for anchoring in soil, the space of the borehole around the anchor above the base should be filled with a wall compacted
gravelly sand showing a continuous granulometric curve. This is preferable
to concrete, unless, of course, concrete is essential for the basic anticorrosive
protection of the anchor. The outward pressure of the borehole filling as
a result of its being compressed by the tensioned anchor base, makes it
possible to exploit fully the internal friction of the soil and gain a high
fixing strength. The validity of this analysis has been demonstrated in
laboratory and field tests.
Where anchors are installed in strong rocks it is technically preferable
to fill the borehole space around the anchor (i.e. above the base and along
the length of the tendon) with concrete, because the concrete, on account
of its good adhesion to the borehole walls, facilitates full exploitation of the
rock shear strength, which is the dominant component of the fixing strength
in strong rock; it also protects the anchor against corrosion (see Chapter 18).
In tensioned roots which are fixed to the tendon along the entire fixing
length of the root (see Fig. 13-30a), there appear transverse cracks close to
the root front, and these can be the cause of steel corrosion. For this reason
the roots of permanent anchors designed in this way are protected by a special
plastic tube extending into the fixing section (Figs. 13-32, 13-33); the tendon
section inside this tube is carefully grouted or filled with resin, and then sealed

smooth
sheathing

Section A-A

corrugated sheathing

Fig. 13-32. Arrangement of permanent rock anchors with double anticorrosive protection
A __ Dywidag single bar anchor, B VSL 9-strand anchor (see Chapter 18)

///

cap
anticorrosive
compound
hex nut

vent andgnout tube

anchor plate

plastic coated and

greased strands

146

either before or after insertion of the anchor into the borehole. A strong
connection of the tendon thus protected with the grout of the root is ensured
by the undulatory surface of the plastic tube. Even if transverse cracks occur
in the filling of the tube, usually after the tendon has been loaded, they are
no longer dangerous since the> are covered by the undamaged wall of the
plastic (Polyvinylchloride or polyethylene) tube (see Chapter 18).
13.2.2.3 Grouted anchors in loose soils
Many procedures have been developed for obtaining anchorage in loose
soils by grouting; an anchor root of the required load-bearing capacity can
be formed without difficulty in these soils, by grouting.
BBRV

'

CON A ~ Sol

Fig. 13-33.-I. Cross-section of tendon and fixing sections of BBRV wire anchors and
CONA-Sol strand anchors for temporary and permanent anchoring (documentation
Stahl Ton, Switzerland)
A temporary anchor, B permanent anchor, C monitored (permanent) anchor,
1 borehole, 2 wire dia 7 mm, 3 strand dia 12.7 mm (0.5 in.), 4 protective plastic
tube (smooth), 5 pipe for primary grouting, 6 pipe for additional grouting, 7 grout
outside the protective tube, 8 grout inside the protective tube, 9 permanent plasticity
compound, 10 spacer, / / corrugated plastic protective tube

147

The procedure develop d by the Swedish company Hagconsult AB

(Stockholm) is the simplest. The borehole need not be cased and the same
drillrod is used for boring, g outing and anchoring (Fig. 13-34). The drillrod
set which is made of highgr de steel (32 by 16 mm outside and inside diameters, tensile strength 520 kN), is taken to the required depth by means
of a light wagon drill. In the final drilling stage, pressurised grout is substituted for the drilling fluid, and the end of the drillrod, together with the
BBR V

"

CONA - Sol

Fig. 13-33.-II.
a double anticorrosive protection by means of grout and plastic tube, b protection
by means of 20 mm grout layer, c extra protection by means of steel tube

148

Ot

O
1

O / O

c?
o /

>

4? o
-

O
o

<6

'

' ffl< <*

Fig. 13-34. Mounting and

injection of an anchor
composed of drillrods
(Hagconsult system)

SJ

,>

* /

/ '

bit, is grouted in the soil thus forming the anchor root. The outer end of the
drillrod set is then fitted with a threaded endpiece to take the tensioning
nut, and after the grout has hardened the anchor is prestressed in the usual
way. However, such an anchor can only be a temporary one, as the tendon
is not protected from corrosion.
Uninterrupted grouting of a perforated anchoring pipe directly rammed
into the soil is the basis of the MV system (Fig. 13-35). It is most frequently
used in saturated soils of high ground water level for the transfer of tensile,
but more often compressive, forces in emergency work, and in making
improvements to the load-bearing capacity of foundations. Such loadbearing elements of small diameter are often referred to as micropiles.
In other anchoring systems for use in loose soils, the anchor tendons are
placed in cased boreholes, drilled either by rotation or percussion. Very
often the casing pipes are vibrated or rammed into a loose soil, in which
case the end of the pipe is equipped with a shoe which remains in the ground.
The entire anchoring procedure is shown in Fig. 13-36, illustrating the type
patented by the West German Bauer Company. This system uses tendons

149

made of shaped bars which are provided with anticorrosive protection and
placed in cased boreholes. The root and the free tendon length are grouted
from above through the casing pipe, which is gradually pulled out of the

Fig. 13-35. MV anchoring system

1 rammed anchor pipe, 2 lost shoe through which
grout is squeezed, 3 grouted soil, 4 grout input,
5 ramming direction, 6 water level in stressed
ground, 7 completed anchor

Fig. 13-36. The steps of

establishing an anchorage in soil
by the method of the
K. Bauer Co. (GRF)
1 a cased borehole of
70150 mm diameter is drilled
with a shoe at the inner end,
2 the tendon with protective
tube is inserted and connected
with the shoe, 3 the casing
pipe is extracted from the
borehole with simultaneous
grouting of the fixing section,
4 a tensile test of the anchor
is carried out 68 days
after grouting, 5 the
anchoring head is connected to
the anchored structure, and
the anchor is prestressed with
the required force

150
ground at the same time. If the tendon, after insertion into the casing pipe,
is screwed into the deposited shoe and provided with a protective coating
along its entire length, then the root is favourably stressed by compression
from below when the anchor is loaded.
Fig. 13-37. Weber anchoring
system used by Stump
Bohr AG
1 assumed shear surface,
2 protective outer
wrapping of the anchorage,
3 double wrapping with
perforations and steel
grouting base (4),
5 prestressed bar (tendon),
6 grouted zone in
a permeable soil, 7 stress
diagram indicating the
varying magnitude of the
shear stress at the surface
of contact between the
anchor base and the
concrete of the anchor root

The Swiss company Stump Bohr AG of Zurich [15] uses the Weber
system, in which the force from the tendon is directly transferred to the
root by compression. A protective tube, made of thin corrugated sheet or
plastic provided with a long grouting steel base at its-lower end, is inserted
into the cased borehole. The steel base is of double thickness, and the
external surface is perforated in the section designated for grouting
(Fig. 13-37). A grout pipe is then screwed into the grouting base. As the
casing is extracted from the borehole, the soil is grouted in the fixing section,
and an anchor root is formed at the lower end of the borehole in conjunction
with the grouting base. When grouting is completed, the grout pipe is unscrewed from the base, and a bar representing the anchor tendon is screwed
on and prestressed. The bar is free between the lower and upper threads,
and is stressed only by tension. In a temporarily anchored structure, the
tendon may be taken out when it is no longer required; the outer protective
sheathing and the base are not recoverable. In the case of a permanent
anchorage, the prestressed bar is grouted in the sheathing or wrapped in
advance with a suitable material to protect it against corrosion.
A more recent anchoring method used by this company is that shown in
Fig. 13-38. A bar anchor provided with an insulative wrapping and a steel
compression member at the base is inserted into the borehole and is grouted
through the casing pipe, as in the Bauer system.
Some anchoring systems used m so:ls successfully adopt the technology

151

of rock anchors, with small modifications (Fig. 13-39). These anchors

obviously are placed into cased boreholes and are better protected against
corrosion.

Fig. 13-38. Recently introduced anchoring system used by Stump Bohr AG

1 the cased borehole is prepared, 2 the borehole is filled with grout from the bottom
upwards with the aid of a pipe, 3 the assembled anchor is inserted, 4 the anchor root
is grouted with simultaneous extraction of the casing pipe from the borehole, 5 the anchor
is tested and prestressed after hardening of the grout

Fig. 13-39. Main types of Dywidag soil anchors

A single bar anchor with simple anticorrosive protection, including*post-grouting system,
B single bar anchor with simple anticorrosive protection, recoverable, C multiple bar
anchor (3 to 9 threaded bars) with simple anticorrosive protection, D single bar anchor
with double anticorrosive protection

154

A significant contribution to the technology of long grouted anchors in

soils is represented by the procedure introduced by the French Soletanche
Company (IRP system). By using a sealing bag to separate the anchor root
from the free section of the anchor tendon and a collared grouting tube (see
Fig. 13-40), high-pressure grouting of the root, and also of further sections of
the anchor is made possible and repeated grouting can be carried out whenever needed.
The sealing bag replaces the rubber or leather seal located in the borehole
when grouting in rock. The sealing jute bag is usually 2 m long; it is slipped
on to the anchor at the upper end of the fixing section and tightly fastened
to the anchor at both ends. When the anchor has been inserted into the
cased borehole and the casing pipe pulled out, the bag, filled with grout
under low pressure (up to 0.5 MPa), presses against the borehole walls
and isolates the fixing section (Fig. 13-40).
The collared tube is a large diameter PVC tube provided with lateral apertures at 1 m intervals, these being covered on the outside by rubber collars
(Fig. 13-41) so that the grout can flow from the tube into the borehole, but
not in the reverse direction. The collared tube is attached to the anchor tendon
and passes through the sealing bag (see Fig. 13-40). A steel grouting pipe of
smaller diameter is passed into the collared tube; the perforated section of
this steel pipe, delimited by two seals, is located at the opening of the collared
tube at the necessary depth, and the borehole is then grouted under pressure
(see Fig. 13-40). When grouting at this position is completed, the grouting
pipe and the collared tube are flushed with water to keep them clean, and
grouting can then be carried out at the next aperture. When an anchor is
grouted by means of a collared tube in this way, the sealing bag is filled first.
When the grout in the bag has set (after 6 to 12 hours), grout is forced into
the fixing section by stages, starting from the bottom of the borehole; where
the anchor has been prestressed, the free tendon section is grouted also.
If the required load-bearing capacity of the root has not been attained,
grouting of the root is repeated using a higher pressure which ruptures the
former hardened grout and forms a better and stronger fixing with the surrounding soil (Fig. 13-42).
The collared tube principle is used by many companies for anchoring in
soils. The collared tube is placed inside the tendon among the wires, strands,
or ropes, or it is fastened at the side in the case of a bar anchor (Fig. 13-43);
alternatively, the anchor tendon is inserted into a sufficiently large collared
tube after all the stages of the grouting o r t h e soil have been completed. This
latter arrangement does not allow for subsequent re-grouting of the soil,
but it furnishes additional protection against corrosion of the tendon. The
Soletanche Company offers a bar anchor which is designed on this principle,
and is perfectly protected against corrosion; it has a compressed grouted

155
i-1 ni.

'o

Fig. 13-40. IRP anchoring system with sealing bag and collared tube developed by the
Soletanche Company

Fig. 13-41. Collared grouting tube

in fixing section (holes covered
with rubber sleeves)
a) with an internal overpressure
the sleeve allows the grout to
escape into the surroundings,
b) with an external overpressure
the sleeve seals the holes in the
tube

156
Fig. 13-42. Cross-section of a regrouted body showing the
7 steel bars of the tendon and the centrally located
collared tube for grouting. The white lines are cracks filled
with post-grouting material (documentation of K. Bauer Co.)

Fig. 13-43. Long bar anchors

of Vodni stavby Czechoslovakia
fitted with polyethylene collared
tubes, centering metal sleeves,
and linen sealing bags

root in the soil (Fig. 13-44). The Tubfix system employs a steel collared tube
of sufficient strength to act as the anchor tendon itself. It has only a simple
anticorrosive protection by a grout layer which cannot be increased by
applying a protecting coat, because the fixing strength would then be reduced.
13.2.2.4

Grouted anchors in cohesive soils

The fixing of anchors with long roots in cohesive clayey soils is more
difficult to achieve compared with anchorages in loose soils. It is successful
only when the right technology is applied and when the following principles,
verified both by theory and in practice, are observed:
1. The boreholes should be larger than 10 cm diameter. The load-bearing
capacities of anchors in cohesive soils increases proportionally with the
cross-sectional area of the root, as research results indicate (see Section 13.2.1.2).

157

Fig. 13-44. Anchor installed inside a collared tube which provides for grouting and anticorrosive protection of the bar (Soletanche system)
1 external bar end, 2 nut, 3 retaining wall, 4 smooth protective tube in the free
length section, 5 coupling, 6 grouting rubber collar, 7 collared grouting and protecting
tube, 8 anchor bar tendon, 9 bar fixing base, 10 cap, 11 protecting layer of grout,
12 grouting hole, 13 strengthened tube in the fixing section

2. The boreholes should by drilled with rotary drills, and cased simultaneously to prevent loosening of the borehole walls and excessive exposure of
the clayey soil to the flushing water.
3. The fixing section should be thoroughly cleaned with compressed air
and the root should be grouted as soon as possible after completion of the
boring operation (within 12 hours). It is essential to place centering spacers
in the fixing section of the anchor tendon.
4. The grout should be as thick as possible (maximum w/c, 0.4), and the
pressure as high as possible without rupturing the soil. The pressure should
be maintained until grouting is completed.
5. There should be a facility for re-grouting, allowing the load-bearing
capacity of an anchor in a cohesive soil to be increased by up to 100 %.
6. Anchors in which the tensile stress is transmitted right up to the end
of the fixing section (compressed root anchors) should be used.
By applying the correct procedures good results can be obtained, even
in cohesive soils. For example, ultimate loads of more than 500 kN were
obtained using anchors with long tensioned roots fixed in Frankfurt clays.
The permanent deformation of the clays was up to 20 mm, the consistency
was 0.8 to 0.9, the peak strength parameters were = 20, c = 0.02 MPa,
and the clays were very sensitive to water [23, 24].

158

13.2.3

Fixing of anchors with synthetic resins

The cohesion developed between synthetic resins and strong rocks is

two to three times greater than that between grout and rock. Another
advantage of resins is a quick setting time which can be selected from within
a range of several minutes up to several hours. Resins also exhibit excellent
resistance to the corrosive effects of the rock medium and the dynamic effects
of shocks. The disadvantages are the high cost compared with grout, and some
degree of dependence of the setting time on the temperature of the surrounding rock. The placing of anchors in resin and the filling of boreholes are
also somewhat more exacting. For these reasons, resin has only been used
up to now for fixing short bar anchors (bolts) in situations where the face
of a rock excavation has had to be reinforced quickly and effectively. Only
exceptionally has resin been used for fixing long anchor roots in rock, since
rapid setting is not essential, and the profit gained from any reduction in the
setting time before commencement of the prestressing does not cover the
increase in cost involved in using the resin.
The best resin characteristics for the fixing of anchors have been found to
be those of non-saturated polyester resins. These are the least sensitive to
low temperatures and moisture coming from the medium with which they
are in contact during setting; they are also capable of taking a large quantity
of inorganic filler. They are thixotropic, which reduces their viscosity in the
course of insertion of the bolt and minimizes the tendency of uncured resin
to run out of the borehole during the installation work. The curing takes
place also under water after mixing of the resin with the appropriate catalyst
on the basis of peroxide. The quantity of catalyst used governs the curing
and setting times, the latter being about five times longer than the former.
The curing time of the currently used mixtures ranges from 1 to 30 minutes
at a temperature of about 20 C. Lower temperatures significantly retard
curing and setting, while higher temperature accelerate them. The quantity
of resin used, the time taken to prepare the mixture, and the ambient
temperature, together determine the viscosity of the mixture. The longer the
borehole, the more difficult it is to place the bolt, and the lower the temperature, the lower must be the viscosity of the resin so as to achieve thorough
mixing with the catalyst; this is very important for proper setting.
A perfectly set polyester resin was found to have the following values for
the limit cohesion, Tmax, with the main rock types (according to tests conducted at Imperial College, London):Table 13-IV.
In designing a bolt fixed by resin, it can be assumed that the maximum
load-bearing capacity increases uniformly with the length of the fixing in the
borehole. The attainment of the full strength of the resin as a function of the
curing time at 24 C, for mixtures with different initial setting times, is shown

159

in the graph in Fig. 13-45; the relationship between curing time and temperature is shown in Fig. 13-46. Both graphs are published by the American
Du Pont Company,
Bolts fixed with resin may be prestressefr so as to exert a pressure on the
rock, non-prestressed, in which case the rock is reinforced by the dowel
effect, or they may fulfil both of these functions (Fig. 13-47). To be able
TABLE 13-IV
Limit cohesion of polyester resin with rock
Rock type

Limit cohesion

Rock of average compressive strength 5 MPa

(claystones, siltstones)

1.21.6 MPa

Rock of average compressive strength 14 MPa

(coal, shales, marlstones, sandstones)

1.63.0 MPa

Rocks of average compressive strength 50 MPa

(sandstones, limestones)

3.05.0 MPa

Rocks of average compressive strength 100 MPa

(igneous rocks such as granite)

4.07.0 MPa

36
\l5-30 min.resin

32
28
2k

JO

100

*16

-15-30 min. resin

60

1 20

12

^5-1 0 min. nes/n

\i
\J

1-2 min. resin

10 20 30 40 50 60
cure time [min]

Fig. 13-45. Relationship between final

strength and curing time at 24 C for
Fasloc polyester resins of different
setting times

510 min. resin

8 \l-2n
im. resin

70

<

0 35 H5 55 65
85 95 F
<65 7.2 12.7 18.2 23.7 29.1 370
temperature

Fig. 13-46. Relationship between curing

time and temperature for Fasloc resins
of Du pont Co.

160

lluu*-___\|

KUttwttwwaawwwwwua

Fig. 13-47. Three modes of application

of resin-anchored rock bolts, using
fast (dark), and slow (stippled) setting

iensioned bolts with resin point anchorage

tens zoned bolts fully resin anchored and grouted

mmmmm
unten sioned dowels fully resin grouted

to prestress the bolt it must be fixed only at the inner end of the borehole.
In this case the bolt is not protected against corrosion. However it is possible
to install bolts using fast setting resin for the fixing of the bolt at the inner
end, and slow setting resin as an anticorrosive protection for the remainder.
Such a bolt is prestressed after the curing of the fast setting resin, but before
curing of the slow setting resin. Non-prestressed dowels are fully embedded
in resin and are loaded only when movement of the rock takes place.
Formerly the resin used to be transferred into the borehole by forcing
the compound mixed, so as to have a longer curing time, with a power
pump or hand pump (see Fig. 15-6). Nowadays there is a widespread
use of cartridges "^nich are filled in the factory and which contain resin
and catalyst in, separate plastic wrappings ready for use on the spot
(Fig. 13-48). S u 4 cartridges can be stored for more than six months. They
are usually 30 cm long with a diameter of 20 to 40 mm for boreholes of 22 to
50 mm diameter. They are supplied, for example, by Celtite (Seifix), Du Pont,
Williams, Titan, Dywidag, Nobel Cyanamid Meynadier, Torque Tension,
Lenpir et Mernier, and many other manufacturers.
The entire procedure for fixing a bolt in resin" and prestressing it is
summarized in the following paragraphs. The procedure should be followed
very carefully to ensure success with this method (Fig. 13-49).
Fig. 13-48. A resin cartridge for
insertion into an anchor
borehole

161
Fig. 13-49. Installation sequence of
resin-fixed bolt
1 insertion of resin cartridges,
2 insertion and spinning of bolt,
3 stressing of the bolt after the resin
has cured

V
1. The drilled borehole must be carefully cleaned. It should have the
smallest diameter compatible with the selected bolt and cartridge size.
2. The appropriate resin cartridges are inserted into the borehole. Fastsetting cartridges are placed at the inner end of the borehole so that tensioning
of the bolt is not delayed, while slower setting cartridges are placed in the
remaining length of the borehole to complete the protection of the bolt.
3. The number of cartridges needed, given the diameters of the borehole
and bolt and the length of the latter, are indicated by each manufacturer
in the instructions provided. Damaged or partly set cartridges should not
be used.
4. The bolt is inserted by hand and then spun with a drilling tool so that
it breaks through the cartridges in the borehole. The spinning should continue
for 30 to 60 seconds after the bolt has reached the bottom of the hole to
ensure thorough mixing of the ingredients of the cartridges. The bolts should
be shaped so as to exploit the full strength of the resin.
5. Rotation of the bolt is stopped, and it is then pushed inwards with the
maximum thrust available from the drilling tool, and held in this way for
several minutes until the fast setting resin sets.
6. The bearing plate is mounted and secured with a nut. Wedge washers
are used if the plate is not resting at right angles to the bolt.
7. The bolt is tightened with the nut and stressed with a hydraulic jack,
torque wrench, or impact tool (see Chapter 17). This is done after the fast
cartridges have been allowed to set (5 minutes), but before the slow cartridges
have set (20 minutes).
One hour after installation, the slow resin has set thus locking the tension
of the bolt and giving complete anticorrosive protection together with permanent reinforcement of the rock.
Bolt anchors installed in this way maintain their tension in spite of vibration, or blasting which may be carried out nearby. When such bolts are

162

loaded beyond the failure point of the bond, rupture of the anchorage is
not sudden, but rather the bolt begins to yield very slowly; in fact, the
resistance to extraction may increase as the plug of material, which is moulded
to the shape of the borehole, starts to move and thus pick up fine particles
from the wall of the borehole.
Fiber glass anchoring rods
Reports have appeared during the last decade on the successful employment of glass-reinforced plastic bars as prestressed reinforcement structures,
and therefore also as the elements of anchors. The advantages of such bars
are their resistance to corrosion and the ease of fixing, not only in rock but
particularly also with the use of resins at the anchor head. (Fixing with
grout is not very efficient and is possible only when the bars are threaded
(Fig. 13-50) or a base piece is attached at the end).

Fig. 13-50. Glass-reinforced plastic anchors of various types tested at VUIS. The surface
of the anchor is smooth in the fixing section or threaded and provided with a base

Reinforced resin bars supplied, for example, by the Celtite group

(France, England, USA) have a tensile strength almost identical to that
of steel used for classical anchoring bolts (600 MPa),but a weight considerably
lower (four times), and do not need anticorrosive protection. They can be
placed reliably in the areas where cutting tools and machines are to be used
because they can be cut easily and surely like a wooden rod.
The bars can be prepared on site, adopting the procedures developed by
the Spokane Mining Research Center in the USA [61]. The anchor consists
of a glass-fibre rope, which is inserted into the borehole by means of special
remote control apparatus (for reasons of safety), with resin and catalyst.

163

The latter components are kept in separate containers, and the rope is housed
on a reel situated below the mixing and mounting head of the equipment.
The fluid components are metred and pumped into the head, which is brought
by the machine near to the roof of the excavation. The components are then
mixed at a point close to the borehole mouth and the rope is pulled through
the head while the plastic compound is pumped into the borehole. The boreholes may be of any length, and need not be straight. The resin in the hole
sets within a few minutes and the machine can then proceed to the next
borehole. This type of bolt is fastened to the rock along its entire length,
is not prestressed, and is fully resistant to corrosion and the effects of shocks
(Fig. 13-51).
13.2.4

Fixing of anchors by means of both cement and a mechanical base

Combined cement and base fixing is adopted only where short anchors
(bolts) are used for the stabilization of rock. It provides the advantages of
both mechanical and cementing methods, gives greater reliability of fixing
in the rock, and affords the steel permanent protection against corrosion.
The bolt can be prestressed immediately after installation, and its subsequent
cementing to the rock along the entire length of the borehole prevents any
losses of prestressing of bolt or rock, and enhances the resistance to extraction
of the bolt. The method does not increase the load-bearing capacity substantially,
because the resistance provided by the base and that attributable to the cohesion of the cement do not act simultaneously, but rather in succession, when
the bolt is loaded. Only when the cohesion of the cement is overcome and
fails does the mechanical base take the load. Either grout or polyester resin
are used as the cement. The cement may be introduced into the borehole
before or after installation of the bolt.
Cement of less fluid consistency is placed in the borehole by hand in thin
polyethylene wrappings which are ruptured when the bolt is inserted. Otherwise a hand pump (see Fig. 15-6), or a powered pump and grouting hose
can be used (Fig. 13-52). A wedge-shaped base is most suitable, as this easily
penetrates the cement to the bottom of the borehole. A convenient base for
this purpose is formed by a cross-shaped cleft at the end of a shaped bar,
and a cross-shaped wedge with conical termination (Fig. 13-53). The wedge
bolts are inserted and rammed into the borehole already filled with cement,
using a pneumatic pick of sufficient thrust (see Fig. 13-4).
The borehole may be filled with cement after the insertion, fixing, and
prestressing of the mechanical bolt, by injecting a more fluid mix under
pressure (0.2 0.7 MPa) with the aid of an injecting tube and a pump. The
borehole mouth must be sealed first of all. This procedure ensures a more
thorough filling of the borehole and makes for the strengthening of any

164

fiberglass
roving

polyester
resin

</ borehole

Mechanical
Expanding
Anchorage

Fig. 13-51. Pumpable resin bolt of USBM

Vent Tube

Fig. 13-52. Dywidag combination rock bolt

with threaded bar, expanding shell and
injection tubes

165

Fig. 13-53. Kiruna type combination wedge bolt (Sweden)

) bolt bar with cross cleft, b) cross wedging arrangement

jointed rock in its vicinity. If the rock is of compact structure without joints,
allowance must be made for displacement of the air in the outer section of the
borehole (see Fig. 13-52).
A simple combination bolt can be made from thick-walled steel pipe,
threaded at one end and with a cross-shaped cleft and conical wedge at the
other (Fig. 13-54). After the pipe has been rammed on to the wedge resting
at the borehole bottom, the filling of the borehole is carried out through this
hollow tendon. To expedite the filling, the pipe is provided with lateral holes.
A very effective type of combination bolt is offered by the American
Williams Company (Fig. 13-55). Robust expanding shells of various lengths
are used according to the type of rock, and these are fixed against the borehole
walls by turning the bolting rod. The rod consists of a thick-walled pipe of
high-tensile steel, its surface being specially shaped so as to interlock with the
hardened cement and provide the possibility of simple extension of the rod
by means of connecting pieces. Filling is carried out following prestressing
of the bolt, either via the interior of the pipe or by means of a short plastic
tube, always starting from the bottom of the borehole and proceeding outwards. A second tube allows air to escape and indicates the progress of the
filling. For the sealing of the borehole mouth and the grouting itself, the manufacturer supplies special compounds based on quick-setting and expanding
cements, but other materials can be used instead.
13.3 FIXING OF ANCHORS WITH ABUTTING BASES

Anchor roots which are to transmit large tensile forces especially in soils,
should be designed as bases abutting on to load distribution structures built
at, or sunk to, an appropriate depth of the ground (see Fig. 9-13). The load

&
JA

^, !P,

VSSJ/M

JO ID 10

vt>>?i

PL

V//S>A

tinftttVAM

^fys/yjA

VSJSJX 0v/Jssi

M
790

v/T;/i uoV;TS;A

Fig. 13-55. Williams combination rock bolt of hollow bar

HEX NUT

THRUST
RlNO

EXPANSION

J^.'Sim

CROSS-SECTiON OF
DE-AIR IN 1 RE-BAR'4

PfiiHG

v//s;jjj/j;jj//;;/.

///////<
//
kO V;^"

^ j g ^ - - - - $ $ ~ $ -

t-

Fig. 13-54. Combination tube bolt with conical spreading wedge (proposed by the Dept.
of Geotechnology of the Czech Technical University, Prague)

section A-A'

167

distribution structures are usually sunk reinforced concrete parapet walls,

trench walls, sunken wells (see Fig. 22-23), etc. In some cases it is possible
to use the walls of construction pits made with rammed steel members or r.c.
sheet piling (see Fig. 22-20). Where anchors are installed in newly made
embankments, their bases can abut on to load-distributing slabs which are
covered with fill as the work proceeds (Fig. 13-56).

Fig. 13-56. Anchoring of

a precast quay wall using
bearing plates embedded
in the back-fill

Load distribution walls and slabs for the abutment of anchor bases must
be placed a sufficient distance back from the anchored structure. This
distance is determined by calculation (see Chapter 22), which must seek to
ensure that there is sufficient resistance to loosening of the ground responsible
for taking over the stresses from the load distribution structures and for
securing the stability of the anchored structure. Reassurance must also be obtained, particularly for shallowly placed abutting structures, that these will not
be deflected towards the surface of the ground when the anchors are prestressed, or when an increase in the load of the anchored structure occurs.
Sometimes, for structural or architectural reasons, the anchor base is
fixed directly in the anchored structure, while the head of the anchor abuts
against a load-distributing wall (see Fig. 22-21).
The use of abutting structures is uneconomical for anchor roots situated
deep under the ground surface. Such roots are formed as bulbs by
concreting the expanded end of the borehole in which the anchor end, spliced
in the shape of a broom or provided with a strongly attached base, is inserted.
In this fixing method the concrete-to-ground bond does not determine the
fixing strength of the anchor, which is more a function of the diameter of the
bulb and the compactness of the rock or soil. It is expedient to increase the
soil compactness wherever technically possible, by injecting the concrete under
high pressure, etc. The fixing of anchors by the expanded root (bulb) method
is relatively little used in practice, but the results of research show that they

168

have a higher load-bearing capacity than anchors with long fixed roots. By
using expanded roots, the length of both borehole and anchor can be reduced.
Tests carried out by L. B. Underwood [214] on the St. Randall Dam site
(USA) showed that anchor fixing by means of a root bulb is more reliable
than methods of long anchor root based on the cohesion of cement. The
tests were performed in a Cretaceous formation, with both horizontal and
vertical boreholes. Seventy five bars were used, each 32 mm in diameter
and equipped with a welded 114 mm diameter base. The diameter of the
boreholes was 152 mm and that of the anchoring cavity 420 mm. The anchors
were tested in 10 loading cycles, and only in the last cycle were they torn out.
The greater reliability of anchors with bulbs was very evident, particularly
under repeated or dynamic loadings.
In Czechoslovakia a series of comparative tests was carried out on expanded and unexpanded roots fixed in sandy clay; the tests are described in
Chapter 10 (see Fig. 10-28).
Roots which are expanded induce by the tension of the anchor pressures
and tensions in the ground, and the pattern of these stresses is similar to
that resulting from a concentrated pressure at the ground surface. The limit
strength of the rock or soil in the vicinity of an expanded anchor root (plate or bulb) is, however, several times greater than the limit strength at the
surface. This fact makes for greater economy in the design and use of these
anchors in practice. An anchor may be designed to take a considerable load
without the necessity of making a large cavity for the bulb at the bottom of the
borehole; it is not necessary to keep the stress loading on the ground around
such a root within limits based on standards for surface loads. In practice it is
possible, and indeed necessary in most cases, to assume that any ground failure takes place adjacent to the root, including the development of fissures near
the base and at the bulb front, and plastic deformation of the entire ground in
the vicinity of the anchor fixing.
However, such changes in the rock or soil only appear at a certain depth
below the ground surface, and extend over a very restricted area; further
propagation is prevented by the strength of the ground around the damaged
zone, there being a rapid decrease in stress with increasing distance from the
fixing position. A failure in the ground next to the anchor base may be
permitted without any risk of the uprooting of the anchor, provided the
fixing depth is selected deep enough, according to the principles outlined in
Chapter 10. This anchoring theory is supported by the results of many tests.
In the tests on the Allt-na Lairige Dam site, described in Section 10.1,
the stress created by the concentrated pressure at the front of the expanded
base reached 188 MPa; similarly a stress of 132 MPa was measured in
anchoring tests in the dolomitic limestones of the Cierny Vh river (see
Section 28.4). Anchoring tests in dry, noncohesive soils in Nosice and

169

Sucany produced stresses of up to 53.5 MPa at the front of the anchor bulb,
while in tests in loess (see Section 10.4) a value of 7.1 MPa was registered.
The concentrated stress created directly at the abutment of the anchor base
on the soil was not, however, the cause of failure in the latter case. The
failure occurred in the loess, because its shear strength was exceeded along
the lateral surface of an inverted cone with its apex at the anchor base [86].
13.3.1

Design of anchors with root bulbs

The relationship between the load-bearing capacity of an anchor and the

diameter, d, of an abutting disc base has been studied by Y. Barraud [9].
He found that there was a direct relationship between load-bearing capacity
and the ratio h\d(h being the depth of the base in the ground). By experimenting with a mixture of fine sand and gypsum ( = 1.5 to 1.6g/cm 3 ), he
concluded that the stress was transferred from the anchor base to a body of
soil of the shape of a truncated cone, with its apex at the anchor base. A total
failure of the soil above the base would be expected only at shallow depths,
where the ratio h\d does not exceed 10. Otherwise, failure of the soil occurs
only in the immediate vicinity of the front of the anchor, whereupon the soil
flows around it (local failure).
T. H. Hanna [71], testing models in dry sand to the limit of overall soil
failure, arrived at a minimum value of h\d = 13. According to H. Nendza
[145], an exponential increase in load-bearing capacity was observed up
to h\d 14 for anchors with expanded bases fixed in medium and strongly
compacted sand; at greater depths and with the same base diameters the
relationship was linear.
The transition between these two types of failure has also been studied
in models by A. G. Mller and R. Haefeli [139]. They found that the angle
of the uprooted cone of a sandy soil decreased from 60 to 10 with increasing
depth of the anchor base. The transition from the one type of failure to the
other has also been clearly demonstrated by L. N. Dzhioyev [46] in site tests
on the load-bearing capacity of anchors fixed into clayey soil by means of
spherical bulbs (described in Section 10.4).
In both types of failure above the anchor base, the soil yields in the direction of minimum resistance. In the first type of failure, (general damage)
the soil overburden in the shape of a truncated cone is lifted as a result of its
small weight, and in the second type the weight of the overburden is too
great, so that local damage due to soil compression takes place. When the
anchor is pulled out to some extent, this soil compression is accompanied
by a squeezing of the soil into the space vacated underneath the anchor base.
The soil grains around a flat anchor plate move (according to tests performed
by L. Hobst in the late fifties) along circular shear surfaces.

170

The type of soil damage that occurs above the anchor base is governed
not only by the ratio h\d, but also, and more particularly, by the physical
properties of the soil: its compactedness, moisture content, angle of internal
friction, and cohesion, as demonstrated by experiments [71, 133, 145, 187,
104]. For a given set of soil parameters, it is always possible to calculate
theoretically the depth at which local soil damage will change into general
damage on the extraction of an anchor of given base diameter. A similar
calculation can be made with respect to the diameter, d, at constant depth.
The depth of an anchor with an expanded base should be such that under
the maximum load-bearing capacity of the anchor, the transition from total
failure to local failure cannot take place.
In the design of anchors with root bulbs, the physical and mechanical
properties of the soil must be considered first, and it is advisable to carry
out load-bearing tests in this respect (see Section 10.3). The admissible
stress, ac of the soil under coaxial pressure is determined from these load
tests, and the minimum cross-sectional root area that will prevent soil flow
around the root under the required anchor loading, JP, is calculated.
Area of abutting base:

diameter of circular- section abutting base (bulb)

V cr
It is clear from field tests that in good load-bearing ground (hard and
soft rocks, dry non-cohesive soils), a bulb diameter 20 to 50 cm greater than
the borehole diameter is usually sufficient to ensure that the critical load
limit is not exceeded. In saturated and otherwise softer non-cohesive soils,
and also in cohesive soils, the anchor bulb must be wider in order to achieve
a load-bearing fixing. A diameter of 50 to 100 cm is generally required if
the critical stress resistance of the soil, as ascertained in tests, is not to be
overcome (see Section 10.4). The load-bearing capacity of anchors and their
margin of safety, m, are determined by in situ tensile tests carried out prior
to the erection of the structure (see Chapter 17).
To calculate the bearing capacity of anchor foundation bases and inclined
piles, the empirical method may be used as presented by A. S. Kananyan,
M. J. Nikitenko, J. A. Sobolevskij and V. N. Sukhodoev in 1977 [104]. This
method offers the possibility of plotting coincidence diagrams in terms of
non-dimensional co-ordinates after conducting several model test at different
model scales. The principle of approximate model testing is to create a model

171

of the geometrical relationships of the foundations, thus maintaining

a dynamic similarity, the soil being the same in both the model and the
actual structure.
13.3.2

Fixing of the tendon to the bulb

In anchors with terminal bulbs, there must be a

connection between the tendon and the root. In the
a circular load-distributing plate is fastened on to the
or bundle of bars. The diameter of this plate should be
that of the borehole (Fig. 13-57).

reliable and strong

case of bar anchors
root end of the bar,
5 to 10 mm less than

Fig. 13-57. Load-distributing circular base at the end of an anchor consisting of a bundle
of three bars {Macalloy system)

The anchoring cavity, or, where appropriate, the expanded end of the
borehole must be filled with concrete; the concrete bulb thus created extends
the pathway that the flow of soil grains must follow when local failure of
the soil occurs in the advance zone of an overloaded root. Where the load
distribution plate is embedded directly in the soil, that is, where the borehole
around the plate is back-filled with soil of the same structure, the anchor
can be extracted by a much smaller force, since the flow of soil articles can
occur from the front face of the plate to the rear along a relatively short
pathway. However, in coarse-grained compact gravels, even this method
of fixing provides considerable strength (see Fig. 10-17).
The ends of cable anchors are spread out fan-wise to a length corresponding to the expanded region of the borehole; this guarantees thorough embedding of the individual cable wires in the concrete (Fig. 13-58) and a strong
connection between the tendon and the concrete bulb. The wires also provide
bulb reinforcement. When cable anchors are inserted into boreholes, the
unwound and spread-out wires must be temporarily bound together with

172

Fig. 13-58. End of a cable prised apart into a broom shape

mild binding wire to allow the end of the cable to pass easily down to the
anchoring cavity. After insertion, the binding wire is severed and removed,
so that the cable wires spring out at the bottom of the borehole. Breaking
cones are normally used to split the anchor end (Fig. 13-59). In the case of
vertical boreholes, the breaking cones are pressed among the wires at the
end of the anchor cable as the cable comes to rest under its own weight on
the cavity bottom. In oblique and horizontal boreholes, the cones are pressed
into the cable by means of a draw-bar which passes through the axial grout
pipe of the cable, or by removable draw-bars placed at the sides of the
inserted cable. An expanding bag has also been experimented with for
spreading the wires, this being placed among the ends of the wires and attached to the grout pipe passing down the cable axis. The material of the bag
should be thin enough to rupture when the binding holding the wires together
is released. Then free passage of grout into the cavity is ensured.
The fixing of the wires in the concrete of the cavity filling is improved by
the gripping effect of the force R (arising from reaction Q) when the bulb
is under tension (Fig. 13-60). If an anchorage experiences a force P, the
latter is resisted both by adhesion and by the reaction, Q, of the rock, where

173

Fig. 13-59. Spreading cone for prising apart cable anchor ends {Hobst system)

2 cos (a <pb) '

The gripping force, R, is given by
p
R = Q sin (a - <pb) = tg (a - <pb),
a is the angle of spread of the base, and q>b is the angle of friction of steel
on concrete.
The anchoring cavities of vertical anchors are sometimes filled with
cement mortar before the anchor is inserted, but usually the grouting is only
carried out after the anchor has been inserted. In the latter case the borehole
section that is to be filled prior to anchor stressing is delimited by a collar
or a seal. The grout pipe must lead into the anchoring cavity, and a smaller
pipe allowing air to escape from the sealed section of the borehole is inserted
along with the grout pipe.

174

Fig. 13-60. Locking forces increasing the strength of an

anchorage in rock

Fig. 13-61. Anchors used in Muda Dam

1 pipe for asphalt grouting of the borehole,
2 washer, 3 grout sealing, 4 spacing cylinder,
5 anchor heads in which wires are fixed individually,
6 sheet-steel mould, 7 helical reinforcement,
8 fixing of separate wires

In some cases the fixing efficiency of the cable end into the concrete bulb
is further improved by the use of a base (a plate) attached to the anchor end.
Sometimes these bases are made from short pieces of seamless steel pipe
into which the looped ends of the wires are concreted in advance. All the
above-mentioned methods of connecting the anchor to the bulb have been
tested and shown to be reliable.
An interesting method was used at the Muda Dam site in Malaysia [215].
Here, each wire (patented w ; re, 7 mm diameter) of the root section of the
anchor, passed through the tapered hole of a small head, and the heads were
secured at different root levels by small wedges. The system of small anchor
heads created in this way was placed in a slightly tapered mould and embedded
in concrete. When the concrete hardened, the root of the cable was inserted
into the borehole (121 mm diameter) and was grouted in with a cement
slurry (Fig. 13-61). The conical expansion of the root towards the borehole
bottom provided a more efficient anchorage similar to that obtained with
a bulb-shaped root.

175

The most suitable arrangement for an anchor bulb, and the most appropriate method of forming the anchoring cavity, largely depend on the
properties of the rock or soil into which the anchorage is made.
13.3.3

Fixing of anchors in concrete structures by means of bulbs

In some cases there may be a need to anchor structures into preconstructed

concrete foundations, or other massive structures. If such an anchorage is
planned, small shafts (or pits) can be formed in the concrete structure to
take the anchorage, and the bottoms of these shafts can be shaped as anchoring cavities. The right type of cavity is created by embedding in the concrete
well reinforced (or prestressed) precast concrete components with tapering
hollows, or by using seamless steel pipes (Fig. 13-62). For example, in the
construction of a cofferdam at the Orlik Dam in Czechoslovakia, the anchor
cables (of 4 MN load-bearing capacity) were fixed in steel pipes set in concrete,
as shown in Fig. 13-62a.
370

Fig. 13-62. Anchoring cavities formed in a concrete structure by embedding special steel
bases in the concrete (proposed by VUIS)
a) type of base used in the 2ermanice and Orlik Water Projects (Czechoslovakia),
b) type of base used in the Bariri hydro-electric power station (Brazil), 1 300 mm dia.
pipe of 16 mm wall thickness, 2 load distribution cone lowered with anchor, 3 corners
filled with concrete, 4 spreading cone welded to bottom of steel cavity, 5seating plate

In the case of the additional cables installed in order to anchor the guide
vanes of the Bariri hydroelectric power station in Brasil, the anchoring
cavities were made by setting steel structures, as illustrated in Fig. 13-62b,
in the concrete. At the bottom of each cavity a breaking cone was welded
in position so as to spread the cable end.

176

13.3.4

Fixing of bulb anchors in rocks

Rock cavities are made by using various accessories attached to the

boring equipment (see Section 14), or by using explosive charges.
Excavation with explosive charges is quicker, but cannot be applied in
all cases. When blasting a cavity, successive charges must be used since one
heavy charge may cause major rock damage. An experimental cavity was
made in flysch sandstones in a cutting; charges of 1.6 kg and 3.20 kg of
Danubite 20 were inserted in a borehole of 80 mm diameter, and after
serial blasting was carried out a cavity approximately 60 cm high and 40 cm
in diameter was formed. The charges were fixed around the circumference of
a cylinder 40 cm long. The length of the charge is determined by the length
of anchoring cavity required, whilst the size of the charge used depends
on the rock type and the required cavity diameter.
A specially designed anchor fixing in rock using concrete bulbs was
applied in the stabilization of a rock slope in cavernous limestones [228]
(see Fig. 21-25). The anchoring boreholes, including the fixing sections,
passed through large karst cavities which were impossible to fill. The tendon
section destined for fixing was placed inside a linen bag, a grouting pipe
was provided, and then the fixing section was fitted with a seal and inserted
into the borehole. When the grouting was carried out, the bag, which had
twice the diameter of the borehole, formed expanded sections of the root
in the cavities (Fig. 13-63). On prestressing, these bulbs abutted against the
rock and safely transferred the tensile forces of the anchors, which were
prestressed to 600 kN, to the ground.

Fig. 13-63. Fixing of cable anchor in cavernous limestone by means of grout-filled linen
bags (ace. to Zajic)
1 anchoring borehole, 2 bundle of patented wires in fixing section, 3 spreader ring,
4 locking sleeve, 5 outline of linen bag after grouting, 6 grout filling of bag,
7 protective PVC tube of anchor tendon, 8 pipe for grouting root, 9 sealing at end
of bag and at end of protective tube, K karst cavities in limestone

13.3.5

Fixing of bulb anchors in non-cohesive soils

In compacted dry gravels and sands, the anchoring cavity is made with
a reamer designed for widening boreholes. In saturated loose soils, making
anchoring cavities is difficult. The walls of the boreholes tend to cave-in

177

when the casings are removed, and the use of a thick drilling fluid is necessary.
An experimental anchoring bulb was made by setting off an explosive
charge placed among the ends of the anchor wires. The experiment was
carried out in a borehole at an angle of 52 to the horizontal, and 0.8 kg
of Perunite 20 explosive was used with double detonating fuses and ignition
wiring. The anchor cable was inserted into the borehole together with a polyethylene grouting pipe. Prior to blasting, the casing was pulled out 150 cm
and the lower part of the borehole was filled with 20 litres of grout. Immediately after the blast, the root was thoroughly grouted with a further
60 litres of cement slurry, and in this way a bulb 100 cm long and maximum
diameter 50 cm, was created (Fig. 13-64). A strength check confirmed that
the cable steel had not been affected by the blast.
When anchors are fixed in coarse non-cohesive soils (grain size over 5 mm),
an anchor bulb of irregular shape can be formed simply by filling the unexpanded borehole with cement slurry under pressure, so that the slurry
penetrates into the surrounding gravel. The cross-section of a root expanded
in this way depends on the permeability of the ground and the grouting
pressure applied. In sands, a substantial increase in root diameter can be
achieved in this way (Fig. 13-65).
An investigation has also been made of the type of material most suitable
for the filling of the borehole above the root O.e. in the tendon section) in

Fig. 13-64. Anchor bulb created by the blast of an explosive charge placed among the ends
of the wires of a cable anchor already grouted in saturated gravel and sand

178

non-cohesive soils. Laboratory and field tests indicated that concrete was
less suitable for this purpose, and that compacted soil of similar composition
to that of the borehole surrounds was much more advisable, since this
increased the anchor fixing strength.

Fig. 13-65. Irregular shape of

a bulb created by the high
pressure grouting of a long
anchor base (Weber system) in
relatively impermeable sand
(photo: Stump Bohr Co.)

An interesting method of fixing anchors in soil involving the use of

a slanting pile has been published by the Soviet authors Nikitenko and
others [148]. To anchor the stabilizing cables of electric pylons in soil,
r.c. piles 56 cm in diameter and 3 m long were rammed or inserted
into oblique boreholes; the piles were provided with a tip up tie-bar equipped
with a removable cutting edge (Fig. 13-66). After the pile has been installed,

w_

77J777777777777777777777777Z&77777.

Fig. 13-66. Anchor root formed

by slanting pile [148] and
hinged draw bar
1 pile axis, 2 hinged draw
bar (diameter 36 mm, length
190 cm) with removable cutting
edge, 3 steel sleeve by
which draw bar is attached
to pile, 4 draw bar in final
position after having been
fixed to a cable from the pylon,
5 sand and gravel filling
of the borehole after installation
of the pile

179

the tie-bar is drawn laterally so that it cuts through the soil, until it finally
reaches the required position whereupon it is connected to a cable from the
pylon. In tensile tests this anchorage registered a load-bearing capacity of
150 to 160 kN in coarse sand, 100-110 kN in fine sand, and 70&QkN
in loamy sand. The advantage of this method is that it saves time and
excavation work.
13.3.6

Fixing of bulb anchors in cohesive soils

Bulb anchors are the best for cohesive soils, because in such soils the
advantage of bulb fixings over unexpanded root fixings is greatest, and also
because cavities made in cohesive soils do not tend to collapse. The cavities
at the ends of the boreholes are made with special drilling tools fitted with
reaming knives, or by exploding small charges in the boreholes (Figs. 13-67
and 68). Drilling poses the problem of how to remove the loosened material
from the cavity as drilling proceeds (see Section 14.2.5). Borehole expansion

Fig. 13-67. Anchor bulb formed

by concreting a cavity bored
in loam

Fig. 13-68. Anchor bulb created by concreting a cavity

formed by blasting. The end of the wire cable was prised
apart by a cone

180

by blasting is only suitable for deeper anchors, since blasting close to the
surface (i.e. less than about 5 m) causes widespread damage in the surrounding
soil with the result that the fixing strength of the anchor is impaired. A view
of such a cavity formed by blasting is shown in Fig. 14-15. The load-bearing
capacity of bulb anchors depends largely on the area of cross-section of
the anchor bulb, and cavities should therefore have the maximum possible
diameter. For fixing the tendons of large cable anchors in cavities formed
either by blasting or by mechanical means, the spliced end of the cable is
spread, as the cable approaches full insertion, by a cone resting at the bottom
of the cavity; this procedure is followed even in cohesive soils. The cavity
is then grouted. The transverse stresses occurring at the point where the
tendon merges with the root are countered by a strong cable bandage,
formed either by leaving a part of the borehole casing in the lower section
of the borehole, or by inserting a helical reinforcing coil into the upper part
of the cavity. Such measures are not necessary for bar anchors with simple
anchoring bases.
A different type of expanded root anchor fixing has been introduced by
some British companies. Instead of creating one large cavity at the end of

Fig. 13-69. Excavated root showing two bells of a Fondedile anchor

181

the borehole, special drilling and reaming equipment is used to make several
successive borehole expansions of two or four times the shaft diameter,
each with the shape of a truncated cone or bell (Fig. 13-69). The Universal
Anchorage Co. achieved the following service load-bearing capacities of
anchors by this method: 0.25 MN in a clayey soil of cohesion c = 0.1 MPa;
0.50 MN in a gravel and sand soil; 1 to 4 MN in rock, according to rock
type.
The Fondedile Foundations Ltd. prepared for its Multibell anchor system
a guide line of an approximate ultimate load-bearing capacity as shown in
Table 13-V. A safety factor of 3 is generally applied for permanent, and
of 1.5 to 2 for temporary, anchorage.
TABLE 13-V.
Ultimate load capacity of Fondedile Multibell anchors
Number of bells

2
3
4
5
6
7

Bell
Bell
Bell
Bell
Bell
Bell

anchors
anchors
anchors
anchors
anchors
anchors

Shear strength of clay

120 kN/m2
160 kN/m2

200 kN/m2

400 kN
590 kN
790 kN
980 kN
1,180 kN
1,380 kN

660 kN
980 kN
1,310 kN
1,640 kN
1,970 kN
2,300 kN

520 kN
790 kN
1,050 kN
1,310 kN
1,540 kN
1,830 kN

Test results on these Multibell anchors in typical London clay are presented
in Fig. 13-70. A root in service having seven bells as shown in Fig. 23-17.
The excavated root of a Universal anchorage Co. bar anchor is shown
in Fig. 13-71.
The increased load-bearing capacity of anchors with roots consisting of
a succession of bulbs results from the greater area of contact developed
between root and soil when the anchor is pulled out. By increasing this area,
it is possible to increase the loading force on the anchor before the ultimate
stress, acr9 is reached, this stress being critical for the security of the anchor
against extraction of the root by cutting through the soil (see Section 10.4).
This stress is the governing factor in the determination of the fixing strength
in soils of lower strength. An increase in the number of bulbs in an expanded
root has, at least in the initial stages of prestressing, about the same effect
as an increase in bulb cross-section. Forming a greater number of smaller
cavities is technically easier than creating a single large cavity at the borehole end.

182

Fig. 13-70. Results of load tests

on Fondedile Multibell
anchors in typical London clay

7 bell anchor.
'c'valueof
jJay-MktUffl2
5 beJUa/fcbor 2
c MkH/m
3be//anchor
c- I70kfl//n2

10

20 30
0 50
Extension in millimetres

Fig. 13-71. Two bells of an Universal Anchorage Co-bar anchor

The studies of L. Hobst have shown that the resistance of the soil medium
as a whole against extraction of the anchor is not increased substantially when
multiple bulbs are used in place of single larger bulbs. The conical shear
surface develops only above the upper bulb of the series. The soil which is
displaced by the movement of the lower bulbs, is transferred into the space
vacated by the upper bulbs and does not contribute substantially to the
fixing strength of the anchor.
The manufacturers of Multibell anchors usually recommend to design
these anchors under the assumption that failure of clay occurs along the
cylinder defined by the tangents of the bells and containing all the bells.
Thus if the shear strength of the clay is known, the number of bells and
their depth may be determined by simple calculation.

Chapter 14
D R I L L I N G OF A N C H O R

BOREHOLES

The drilling of the boreholes is usually the costliest operation in anchoring,

and it is often, therefore, the determining economic factor in decisions about
whether to employ anchoring at all. Clearly the most efficient drilling methods
must be selected, and the time schedule of the drilling operations must be
carefully estimated.
Two basic types of drilling can be distinguished, namely, drilling for short
anchors (bolts) of small load, and drilling for long anchors transmitting large
tensile forces.

14.1 SHORT BOREHOLES OF SMALL DIAMETER

For short bDlts, that is, for boreholes up to 3 to 4 m in length and 45 mm

in diameter, ordinary hand-operated percussion drills are adequate. To
obtain the necessary thrust and correct guidance, particularly in back holes
directed upward, pneumatic props or mechanical braces between the roof
and the floor of the gallery must be used, as well as a guide along which the
hammer drill moves (Fig. 14-1). In other cases, multi-purpose pneumatic
hammer drills are normally used, these machines being economic, timewise,
in all anchoring applications. The Swedish Atlas Copco pneumatic hammer,
type Falcon BD 46, weighing 35 kg, drills at a considerable rate (20 to
30 cm/min). It also drives the bolt bar into the borehole and tightens the
nuts with a moment of 343 Nm; -usin^special adapters. The English Victor
drilling hammer is similar, with the drilling machine mounted on a guide
column braced between the roof and gallery floor (Fig. 14-2). The hammer
is available with a pneumatic drive or an electric drive, and is able to remove
the dulst from the borehole during dry drilling.
When larger underground caverns are strengthened with anchors, the
boreholes, even those for short bolts, are drilled with the efficient and mobile
Jumbo machines, which have one or two drilling arms and are operated
from a control panel on the carriage (Fig. 14-3). Some of these machines
(e.g. IngersoilRand, Secoma, Atlas Copco, Tamrock, Bhler, Alimak
Montabert) are specially designed for anchoring operations, and are adapted
and automated for driling boreholes, placing the bar anchors into the
boreholes (together with resin, if used), and prestressing the anchors to the

184

U'sA

f l f t l * ! ^..V.

Fig. 14-1. Drilling hammer on light thrusting equirment used in Czechoslovakia

(photo Osan)

force selected by the operator (see also Fig. 20-21 and Chapter 20). For
a smaller volume of work a light mobile drill (Fig. 14-4) may be very
useful.

185

Fig. 14-2. Multi-purpose

drilling hammer of the English
Victor Wallsend Co.

Fig. 14-3. Jumbo drilling

equipment of Ingersoll-Rand
being used for anchoring
in an underground opening

Fig. 14-4. Alimak BT 121a light, self-propelled,

compressed-air-driven carrier
for mechanized drilling

186
14.2 BOREHOLES OF LARGE DIAMETER AND LENGTH

Anchors of high load-bearing capacity generally require long boreholes

(5 to 50 m) of large diameter (60 to 150 mm). However, the maximum volume
that is to be handled by drilling restricts the size of boreholes to less than
100 mm diameter and 25 m in length.
14.2.1 Suitable drilling methods
For long boreholes, percussion drilling, rotary drilling, or the two
combined may be used. A rotary drill (Fig. 14-5) transmits two basic actions
to the rock through the drill rod and circular three-cone (roller) or auger bit

Fig. 14-5. Rotary drilling set (Hausherr Co.) in use for making slanting boreholes for
anchoring the walls of construction pits (documentation of Soletanche Co.)

(Fig. 14-6), viz. axial thrust and rotational torque. Percussion drills (Fig. 14-7)
penetrate the rock by the action of repeated impulse blows, usually from a chisel or wedgeshaped bit with hammer and drill rods. The torque, rotational
speed, and thrust requirements are significantly lower for rotary percussion
systems than they are for rotary systems. The flushing media most commonly
used to remove particles of rock from the drill bit are air, water or "mud", the
latter usually being a suspension of bentonite in water.

187

Fig. 14-6. Wirth B-O rotary drilling set with auger bit, in use in loamy deposits
(photo Geotest)

, friftL

JP^ 1flPw*U

!1 B I BidNiliii^iiiilSsii!!

jBHKHBBiii!

e^t"

Fig. 14-7. Tamrock percussion drilling jumbo with three booms for use in underground
excavations

188

Suitable drilling equipment must be selected with regard to the type and
quality of the rock, the diameter and length of the borehole, the accessibility
of the anchoring site, the type of flushing medium to be used, the anchor
type, and the required drilling rate of the machine. The rock type and the
dimensions of the boreholes are the most important factors in most cases.
A guide to the most suitable drilling method for a particular type of rock
and diameter of the borehole is given by the diagram in Fig. 14-8 compiled

3^
Co

S-

<-o

ry

rota

^ }

\D-T-H

300

1
J

^rt -\200\
11
^ 1
A

Co

/e

percuss]
I,

^
^

... _..

Fig. 14-8. Preferred methods of drilling

according to class of rock and hole
diameter [129]
(D T H = down-the-hole hammer)

by McGregor [129]. In cohesive plastic soils, rotary drilling with an auger

bit without flushing is most appropriate; in loose soils and friable rocks,
rotary drilling with a roller bit and water, or better still, a thick flush, is
more efficient. In strong rocks, percussion drilling with air flushing is the
most convenient method where the borehole diameter is small, whereas
percussion drilling with a down-the-hole hammer is preferable for larger
diameters. Rotary drilling with circular hard-faced bits are used in softer
rocks, and diamond bits are required for hard rocks and very large diameters,
whether in hard or soft rock. Water is always used as the flushing medium.
The advantage of the last-mentioned drilling method is that it yields cores
which provide information about the quality of the rock along the entire
length of the borehole. The disadvantage is that the walls of the borehole
are very smooth with the result that the grout-rock bond is lower (Fig. 14-9).
For boreholes which traverse various types of rock, McGregor
recommends that only the diameter and length be considered. He provides
a diagram (Fig. 14-10) as an aid to selecting the most appropriate drilling
method. Some authors (e.g. Parker [163]) consider percussion drilling by
light wagon drills to be the most effective in all types of rock and soil with
the exception of soft ground, provided that the borehole diameter is less
than 100 mm and its length does not exceed 50 m.
When the borehole is to be drilled through a deep soil into strong underlying rock, the Duplex combined drilling system developed by Atlas Copco
of Sweden can be used to advantage. This drilling machine can work with

189

mm
-

.WE I

.*#*^v*1

's?

Fig. 14-9. Drilling of boreholes using core drilling equipment supplied by Stump Bohr AG
of Switzerland; the placement of the anchors in casings is shown

|00
200
300

percussive-rotary
-|
drills

__L

rotary
JL

4-

diamond
drills

drills
J

0.3 1.5 3.0 7.5 15 30 60 150 300

depth (m)

Fig. 14-10. Preferred drilling methods

in mixed strata [129]

a percussive drilling rod or with a rotary external

annular bit together or with both of these if required
of the borehole in loose soil or weathered soft reck is
reck the drilling proceeds with the central percussive
14.2.2

casing fitted with an

(Fig. 14-11). The part
cased, while in strong
bit alone.

Work rate of the drilling equipment and drillability of rock

The work rate of a drilling machine is measured in terms of the length of

a borehole of predetermined diameter drilled per unit time. Usually this is
determined in a direct test on rock of a defined type. Percussion machines

190
Fig. 14-11. Double drilling
system using a drill rod set and
casing, introduced by the
Sandvik-Coromant Co. of
Atlas Copco, Sweden

of the wagon drill type, drilling 100 mm boreholes in strong rocks, with air
flushing, attain rates of 5 to 15 m per hour. Rotary core drilling machines
work at half this rate at best. The drilling rate depends on a number of factors
including the condition of the machine and drill bits, the flushing method
employed, the air pressure (in pneumatically driven machines), the torque
developed (in rotary machines), and the rock type and borehole diameter.
The power output needed to drill a borehole in a particular rock is referred
to as the drillability of that rock. This characteristic is largely dependent
upon the hardness of the rock; usually, the harder the rock the more difficult
is the drilling. Drillability, however, also depends on the mineral composition, the strength of the rock, the grain size, porosity, stratification, and
density and direction of the joints, etc. No generally accepted procedure for
determining the drillability of rocks has yet been worked out. The best
known test for establishing the coeffic;ent of rock strength was published by
Protodyakonov [169] and subsequently modified by the U.S. Bureau of
Mines (1968). Basically it involves fracturing rock samples by an impact of
known value, and then weighing the broken pieces.
14.2.3

Flushing

The flushing method used may markedly influence both the rate of
drilling and the quality of the borehole. Air flushing is the most commonly
used method for percussion drilling and roller bits. It is highly efficient in
dry rocks, and may also be used in moist situations if a sufficient quantity

191

of air is available, although its efficiency does not differ greatly from water
flushing in the latter case. Water flushing is used mostly in rt>tary core drilling;
it results in clean boreholes and makes for a good grout-rock bond, even
where percussion drilling is employed in moist rock or saturated noncohesive soil. On the other hand, if water flushing is used in clays, marls,
and other cohesive soils, it must be reduced to a minimum because the
flushing causes a deterioration of the mechanical properties of these soils
and reduces the shear resistance at the anchor root surface. The design length
of the anchor borehole must be extended by 30 to 70 cm to create a "sump"
for the debris and mud which cannot be removed by the flushing. When
drilling is terminated, it is important that flushing of the borehole is continued
from the bottom up for at least 10 minutes [120].
14.2.4

The anchoring site

The accessibility and situation of the anchoring site may be the decisive
factors in the selection of the drilling method and type of drilling machine.
Considering that the anchors are usually arranged in parallel lines, a drilling
machine mounted on a wheeled undercarriage is an advantage (see
Figs. 14-4, 12), the more so if it can be power driven from one anchor position to another. Drilling machines mounted on crawler tracks need to be used
on the uneven and unreliable floors of foundation pits (see Figs. 14-5, 6).
Machines for drilling anchor boreholes must be able to drill at any angle
from the horizontal to the vertical up to a height of 2 m above the base.
Percussion drilling machines present difficulties in built-up areas because
of the noise produced. The admissible noise limit in urban areas is 70 dBA
at a distance of 15 m from the source of the noise. The use of percussion
drilling machines with air flushing is forbidden in subterranean rooms on
account of the great quantity of dust which is produced. In both types of
situation, percussion machines are being replaced by rotary drilling sets with
water flushing.
Frequently the need to drill boreholes from a scaffolding arises. Provided
the location is accessible, and a heavy, rigid scaffolding can be constructed
with a load-bearing capacity of at least 5 kN/m 2 , then equipment of the
wagon drill type weighing about 1,000 kg can be mounted and used from
this scaffolding (Fig. 14-12). The horizontal forces created by these machines
are not very great and therefore can be withstood easily by the scaffolding
and mounted working platform. Drilling becomes more complicated in
places with poor accessibility such as steep rocky slopes, where only light or
possibly suspended scaffolding can be erected. In these situations, only the
lightest drilling sets can be used, and they have to be transported and
assembled by hand on the scaffolding. In such cases, light, simple, electrically

192

Fig. 14-12. Bhler ET 11/35 percussion drilling machine, placed on a scaffolding and
making anchoring boreholes of 70 mm in diameter and 25 m long in limestone

or pneumatically driven rotary sets are convenient, as they do not transfer

any major vibration to the scaffold structure; their drilling rate, however,
is relatively low. Fig. 14-13 shows the operation of such a set on a light
scaffolding suspended over a railway line. An adapted mine core drilling
machine with pneumatic drive was used; this older machine weighed 535 kg
and drilled slightly inclined boreholes 61 mm in diameter and 20 m long in
limestone at an average rate of 0.5 m/hour. Nowadays, light drilling machines
with a much higher work rate are available on the market. For drilling short
anchor boreholes from a scaffolding, the more powerful of the pneumatic
hand hammers can also be used (Fig. 14-14).
14.2.5

Expanding of anchor boreholes

Boreholes are sometimes expanded at the innermost end in order to

increase the load-bearing capacity of the anchor. This expansion is carried
out by means of a special mechanical boring tool, or by blasting a small
quantity of explosive in the borehole.

193
Fig. 14-13. Drilling boreholes
on a steep rock slope near the
Tetin ruin (Czechoslovakia)
a) scaffolding on the steep
slope above the railway line,

b) drilling of boreholes from

an assembled platform. The
rock surface is covered with
synthetic netting

194

Fig. 14-14. Drilling short anchoring boreholes from a scaffolding on a rock slope using
aPermon VK 22 light drilling machine (diameter of boreholes 45 mm, length 7 m; phonolite)

A number of tools of varying complexity and efficiency have been developed for expanding a borehole to four times the original shaft diameter,
Thus, for example, the French Soletanche Company uses equipment shaped
like a core barrel, which, depending on the sense of rotation, either extends
or retracts the longitudinal reaming knives. The device cuts a barrel-shaped
cavity. The Calweld company supplies a very similar tool for producing larger
borehole diameters. There is one problem common to all reaming equipment,
i.e. that of the continuous extraction of the reamed material from the borehole. Unless the work is done very carefully, the borehole may sometimes
become overfilled, so that the jaws or knives cannot be retracted and the tool
becomes jammed in the borehole. The extending knife (wing) of the West Ger-

195

man Klemm Company disintegrates the material of the borehole wall to

such extent that it can be removed by water flushing. However, even
with this equipment the operation is not always entirely successful,
the actual diameter of the expanded region sometimes being smaller than the
diameter potentially attainable with maximum projection of the knife. This
reduced performance occurs particularly in the case of horizontal boreholes.
The British company Fondedile uses for its Multibell system a special
tool which reams the borehole, drilled in clay, to the shape of several bells
at the same time (see Fig. 13-69). The reaming tool consists of a number of
hinged blades which open in succession to form a series of quadrilaterals
equal to the number of bells required, while the spoil cut by the blades is
brought to the surface by direct circulation of flushing water. Thus all the
bells are formed in one operation.
Mechanical methods of reaming boreholes are suitable for compact and
cohesive soils where the walls of the newly made cavities are to remain intact for some time.
Borehole expansion can be achieved more efficient by using small explosive
charges, this method being applicable to all ground types, even in noncohesive
soils below the ground water level (see Fig. 13-64) where mechanically
reamed boreholes would cave in. The diameter of the extended part
of the borehole made in this way is usually larger and more irregular
compared with that made by a mechanical reaming device (Fig. 14-15).
The blasting can be effected either in an open borehole prior to insertion of
the anchor, or after the borehole has been filled with grout and the anchor
inserted. In the latter case the charges are placed among the reinforcing
elements. This method has proved to be effective in tests. However, borehole
expansion by blasting requires considerable experience in deciding on the
size of charge that is most suitable. Misuse of explosives by unqualified
persons can damage the ground and the anchorage, greatly reducing the
load-bearing capacity of the anchor.
14.2.6

Defects of anchor boreholes

The most frequent defects of anchor boreholes arise from incorrect

positioning and alignment of the borehole, and deviation or curvature of the
axis away from the intended direction and inclination.
Correct alignment of a borehole is a matter of careful preparation and
the use of appropriate surveying instruments. Straightness of the borehole
direction depends on the drilling set and the drilling technology. Boreholes
become curved when the drilling rods are too slender, when excessive thrust
is applied, and when there is a tendency for the bit to follow joints or other
planar rock features which cross the borehole obliquely. Rotary core diilling

196

Fig. 14-15. View of a cavity made in a 137 mm dia. borehole in sandy clay by a charge of
150 g Semtex 186. Note the cracks in the cavity face

is particularly prone to curving in long boreholes. Deviation from the straight

may be as much as 1 : 10 in a faulty drilling operation. Boreholes drilled
by the percussion down-the-hole method show the least tendency to curving.
In horizontal and inclined boreholes the weight of the drill rods presses the
rods against the lower side of the borehole, nearly always causing a slight
upward curving of the borehole. If the curvature of the borehole is sufficiently
great, the drill rods damage the borehole walls and cause fragments of rock
to fall into the borehole. Re-straightening of a borehole during the course
of the drilling is very difficult. In checking the direction of an anchor borehole, a deviation of up to 1 (2 per cent) [120] may be admitted.
14.2.7

Permeability of anchor boreholes

Permeability testing of anchor boreholes is often demanded after completion of the drilling operations. The most suitable type of grout for the fixing
of the anchor and its anticorrosive protection, the volume of grout required,
and the most appropriate grouting pressure may be reliably established from
the loss of water in the permeability test. If the losses are considerable, the
permeable ground must be sealed first of all with a thick grout, and then the

197

borehole must be rebored after 24 hours and a further permeability test

carried out (see Chapter 18).
Pressure tests in strong rock are carried out in borehole sections from 1 to
5 m long, using one or two seals and beginning at the bottom of the borehole.
The pressures used in the test must not exceed values which might damage
the rock of the borehole walls, or open the joints. The upper pressure limit
can be taken as twice that of the overburden lying over the section of the
borehole in which the test is carried out.

Chapter 15
GROUTS AND METHODS
OF G R O U T I N G A N C H O R B O R E H O L E S

Most anchors are either bonded with the ground, or are protected
by a fluid cement mix (slurry), which on hardening forms a strong filling
of the borehole, and may also strengthen the immediate rock or soil. The
strength of the bond and the effectiveness of the anticorrosive protection
depend very much on the composition of the mix, the thoroughness of its
preparation, and the method used to forward it into the anchor borehole.

15.1 COMPOSITION OF CEMENT G R O U T S

These grouts are usually prepared from ordinary good quality Portland
cement and clean water with or without the addition of fine-grained sand.
The Portland cement should be fresh (not older than one month) and high
grade (at least 300). The quality of cement deteriorates with age and is reduced
by damp or over-hot storage, or storage in large quantities.
The mixing water should be of the right quality. Water with a high content
of sulphate (more than 0.1 per cent), chloride (more than 0.5 per cent),
sugars, or suspended organic matter, is not suitable. Generally, any water
which is suitable for drinking can be used for cement [120].
The sand used in the grout mixture should be fine (up to 2 mm grain size)
and clean, without any loamy content. Sand is added to the cement in a weight
ratio of 1 : 1 to 1 : 2.
The weight ratio of water and cement is particularly important for the
quality of a cement grout. Excess water results in bleeding of the mix and
low strength, as well as greater shrinkage and lower durability of the
hardened grout. The strength of hardened grout in relation to the water/
cement ratio is shown in Fig. 15-1 and 15-2. Experience shows that the most
suitable water/cement ratio for grouts used in the fixing of anchors lies
within the range 0.4 to 0.45. At these ratios, the grout is still sufficiently
fluid for pumping, and penetrates easily into small openings and pores; the
hardened grout is sufficiently strong and waterproof, showing little shrinkage.
Additives can be put in grouts to accelerate or retard setting, to prevent
shrinkage of the grout in the course of setting, to induce expansion, to
increase the fluidity of the mix at low water/cement ratios, to prevent bleeding

199

*>20
10

'3 OU 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10

water/cement ratio

Fig. 15-1. Effect of water content on the

compressive strength of grout [120]
Fig. 15-2. Gain in strength with time of
ordinary Portland grouts at various water/
cement ratios (7 0.40, 2 0.45, 3 0.50,
4 0.60) [120]

3 4 5 7 10
time [days]

2d

of the mix, etc. The additives and respective dosages required to bring about
the above-mentioned effects, are shown in Table 15-1.
When additives are used, good quality grout is of particular importance.
A combination of several types of additive with the intention of obtaining
a combined effect is not recommended. It may be stated generally that
experience in the use of grout additives is still very limited. Additives should
therefore be used only when absolutely necessary, and then very careful
preparation and control of the grout becomes essential. Additives for grouts
are currently available under special trade marks; e.g. VSL Companies use
Sica-Intracrete additives for anchoring grouts [122].
Apart from ordinary Portland cements, special sulphate-resistant and
TABLE 15-1
Additives for grouts [120]
Additive

Active chemical
or mineral constituent

Optimum dosage
(% of cement
by weight)

Remarks

Accelerator

Calcium Chloride

1-2%

Retarder

0.20.5 %

Expander
Anti-bleed

Calcium
Lignosulphonate
Aluminium powder
Cellulose Ether

0.0050.02 %
0.20.3 %

Fluidifier

Bentonite

2-3%

Accelerates setting
and hardening
Retards setting
and increases fluidity
up to 15 % expansion
Equivalent to 0.5 %
of mixing water
Also acts as anti-bleed

200

rapid hardening cements are sometimes used. High Alumina Cement is

a well known example; in the fresh state it attains 50 per cent of its final
strength within 24 hours of mixing. This cement is recommended only for
short-term test anchors, in view of the larger quantity of water needed to
ensure fluidity of the grout, and the long-term volume instability of concretes
made of this cement.
The strength of the hardened grout is also very important. Strength
depends not only on the type of cement used, but also on the hardening time.
Usually a compressive strength of about 30 N/mm 2 (30 MPa) developing
within 7 days of hardening is the minimum required. The effect of the water/
cement ratio and hardening time on the compressive strength of grout
prepared from ordinary Portland cement is shown in Fig. 15-2.

15.2 PREPARATION OF CEMENT GROUTS

The following basic rules according to Littlejohn and Bruce [120] must
be observed in preparing good quality cement grout:
a"i the cement and the filler (sand), if applicable, must be measured by
weight;
b) water in the quantity required for the most suitable water/cement
ratio must be transferred to the mixer before the cement (and fillers);
c) any additive should be placed in the mixer, carefully measured out,
during the latter half of the mixing time;
d) although the mixing time depends on the type of mixer, it should not
be less than 2 minutes.
Mixing grout by hand should be avoided.
The mixers used for the preparation of grout must ensure perfect intermixing of the cement, and must be able to produce grout of uniform consistency. This can best be achieved in small, rapidly rotating mixers with
speeds of 1,500 2,000 rpm. The Swedish Cemag mixer of the Atlas Copco
Company (capacity 175 litres, weight 255 kg, Fig. 15-3), or the English
Colcrete mixer, satisfy these requirements. After mixing the grout should
be stored in a special tank and slowly agitated before use. Such a storage tank
is shown in Fig. 15-3.
The mixers, pumps, and delivery pipes should be kept scrupulously clean
to ensure optimum output and smooth operation. The equipment must be
attended to throughout the operation in case obstructions occur in the filters,
the delivery outlets of the mixing vessels, or the bends and couplings of the
pipes. Delivery pipes with an inside diameter of 12 to 35 mm are used;
these are made of flexible material rather than steel, since this allows the
position of any obstruction to be found without delay.

201

Fig. 15-3. Complete grouting equipment of the Swedish Atlas Copco Company in service
in a gallery (from left: ZHS pump, Cemag 350 mixer, Cemix 75 storage tank and batching
vessel for water)

15.3 F O R W A R D I N G OF C E M E N T MIXES INTO BOREHOLES

The method of forwarding the cement mix into the borehole must guarantee
complete envelopment of the anchor and filling of the borehole; if necessary,
it must also result in a strengthening of the surrounding ground.
15.3.1

Hand-filling of boreholes

Preparation and forwarding of the cement mix by hand is the simplest

method, but this is only suitable for small quantities of grout placed in short
boreholes free from the presence of ground water. Otherwise, the preferred
method depends on the quantity of grout that is to be handled, the consistency
of the mix, the borehole direction, and the type of bar anchor (bolt) that is to
be grouted.
The best known method is the Perfomethod; two longitudinal halves of
a sheet metal tube, perforated with 1 cm holes, are filled by hand with a very
thick grout. The two parts of the tube are then bound with a wire and inserted
into the borehole (Fig. 15-4). The action of driving in the bolt bar causes
the grout to be extruded into the space between the tube and the rock; after

202

Fig. 15-4. Placing of grout in a borehole

by means of a perforated sheet metal
tube (Perfomethod)
1 sheet metal tube in halves,
2 filling of several dismantled tubes
with grout, 3 driving of the anchor
bar into the tube, thus forcing the
grout into the borehole,
4 cross-section of the filled borehole

borthok

Fig. 15-5. The grout contained in a tube of thin plastic material is pushed by the bolt into the
borehole

203

hardening of the grout, all these components aie bonded together. In other
cases, a tube made of fine-meshed wire netting has been used [105], the
grout being pressed into it quickly and easily from the sides.
Elastic tubes of polyamide, which are very cheap, have been used successfully for the transport of fluid grout. Bsing smooth and pliable, these tubes
circumvent borehole irregularities more easily than rigid tubes made from
metal sheet or glass. They are supplied in a range of diameters and can be
used for fillings up to a length of 80 cm, although several lengths can be
inserted one after another. When the filled tube has been pushed to the end
of the borehole by the bolt (Fig. 15-5), the wrapping bursts under no more
than hand pressure, the grout escapes, and the wrapping is pushed at the tip
of the bar to the borehole bottom. A conical collar of soft rubber, previously
slipped on to the bolt bar, prevents backflow of the thin grout as the bar is
inserted, delimits the fixing section, centres the bar in the borehole, and holds
the bolt and grout, even in an upward-directed roof borehole, until the
grout becomes hard [228].
Another simple method is based on the bicycle pump principle. By moving
a rubber piston in a plastic tube, fluid grout is drawn in from the supply
vessel and then pumped into the borehole (Fig. 15-6). Then the bar fitted
with a sealing collar is inserted. However, this kind of pump is only practical
for filling short boreholes up to 2 metres long.

Fig. 15-6. Forwarding grout into a borehole by means of a plastic hand-operated air-pump

204

A very efficient method of forwarding thin grout into boreholes uses

a hose and grout pipe connected to a grouting tank which is subjected to a low
air pressure. This method is particularly suitable where a larger quantity
of grout is needed for filling boreholes completely.
The method used to grout boreholes is also determined by local site
conditions, such as the availability of equipment at the site, the purpose
of the anchorage, the anchor length, and the number and position of the
bolts. Usually from 300 to 1,000 cm 3 of grout must be introduced into each
borehole for anchoring the ends of short prestressed bolts. When calculating
the quantity of grout required for a particular borehole length, that is, the
space in the borehole around the bar in a given section that is to be filled,
approximately 33 per cent, must be added, according to experience gained
both in Czechoslovakia and elsewhere. This extra quantity is needed on
account of irregularities of the borehole walls compared with a true
cylinder, and allows for grout losses during handling (see Table 13-111,
Section 13.2.2.1).
15.3.2

Grouting under pressure

Cement grout is forwarded into long boreholes under pressure, using

mechanical piston pumps with electric or pneumatic drive. These pumps
operate at pressures from 0.1 to 12.0 MPa; light weight and small dimensions
are preferred to high pumping output. The grouting of anchors usually
does not involve large quantities of mix; however, high quality of the grout
and short forwarding distances in pipes of small diameter are prerequisites
to successful grouting. Consequently, light, mobile grouting equipment is
the most convenient. The Swedish grouting pumps supplied by Atlas Copco
deliver 50 litres of mix per minute (piston diameter, 110 mm) under pressures
of up to 7 MPa, or 30 litres per minute (piston diameter, 80 mm), under
pressures of up to 12 MPa. The weight of these pumps including the driving
unit is about-350'kg. The pumps of other renowned manufacturers, such as
Wirth, Hny, Clivio, Meynadier, and others, have similar specifications. Screwtype pumps such as the Colmono and Moyno, are used in England and the USA.
All the specialized equipment for the grouting of anchors is kept at one
location at the site; the equipment includes, besides a pump and a high-speed
mixer, a special low-speed mixing tank for grout storage. The latter is a vessel
in which the mix is gently kept in motion until it is required for use. The
storage tank also serves as a batch unit in the control of grout production.
At sites requiring large volumes of grout, a high capacity facility for grout
preparation is established at one location, employing a number of mixers
and pumps. The grout is then distributed to various points through large
diameter pipes.

205

For a smaller volume of work, and for places of difficult access including
underground galleries, grout-making facilities assembled from light-weight
units (see Fig. 15-3) so as to be easily movable, are more convenient. A complete Many grouting set-up mounted on a steel frame is shown in Fig. 15-7,
and another type mounted on wheels is shown in Fig. 15-8. The special
light-weight portable Spedel mixers and pumps weigh only 15 kg. They are
driven pneumatically, producing a pressure of up to 2 MPa at which the
output is 20 litres per minute.
The grout is forwarded from the pump to the borehole through pressure
rubber hose, and for the greater part of the length of the borehole, it is passed
through a plastic pipe of inside diameter 12 to 25 mm, depending on the

206

Fig. 15-8. Mobile grouting set of Geoindustria Praha

operating pressure and the grouting method used. The grout pipe leading
to the root is located within the anchor tendon or alongside the insulating
wrapping, as far as the remote end of the anchor root. This pipe is usually
short of the borehole bottom by 150 mm, and its end is protected from
clogging while it is being inserted into the borehole together with the anchor.
The pipe is attached to the anchor with adhesive tape at intervals of 1 to
2 metres, and remains in the borehole after grouting. Only where the anchor
is short and the borehole narrow, is the pipe inserted independently. After
the borehole has been filled under low pressure, the pipe is extracted and the
anchor is inserted. When the grouted section is sealed off with a collar or
bag (or sometimes only a concrete sealing plug at the mouth of the borehole),
air must be allowed to escape from this section through another, smaller
diameter pipe leading from] the top end of the section to the borehole
mouth. Outflow of grout from this pipe is a reliable sign that the section
is full. This breathing pipe must then be closed before the pressure is further
increased. If there is to be separate grouting of the sealing bag, the tendon

207

section, or the insulating-wrapped prestressed tendon, separate grout pipes

must be attached to the anchors.
In cased boreholes, the grouting of the entire borehole including the fixing
section of the anchor is sometimes carried out through the casing; the casing
is fitted at the top with a removable grouting head, which has a flange to take
the hose leading from the pump. This method, however, is not always
reliable, particularly if the anchor root is below the ground water level.
Various methods for grouting long anchor roots with cement mix are
discussed in Section 13.2.2. The safest method at present appears to be that
in which collared tubes are used (see Fig. 13-40); these have a diameter of at
least 36 mm, and are provided with lateral holes covered by rubber collars.
Into this tube a steel grout pipe is inserted and sealed at the required position
with a double leather seal. When grouting of the section delimited by the seal
is complete and the collared tube has been flushed with water, the steel pipe
with the seals is moved back to the next lateral hole, or completely removed.
The collared tube remains accessible all the time. This arrangement provides,
for a sequential grouting of the anchor along the entire length of the borehole,
as well as allowing for further grouting at a later stage (re-grouting).
The grouting pressure applied depends on the purpose of the grouting, the
quality of the ground, and the depth of the grouted section below ground
level. The grouting pressures for anchors usually need not exceed 2 MPa.
The first filling of the borehole with cement mix prior to, or immediately
after, insertion of the tendon is carried out under low pressure, or in simple
cases without any pressure, by simply pouring the liquid cement mortar into
the borehole. When the mix has hardened (usually within 24 hours), further
grouting of the root section alone is carried out under a higher pressure.
As this section of the borehole is usually closed off with a sealing bag or collar,
and is situated deep below the ground surface, high grouting pressure may
be applied. This secondary grouting through a collared grouting tube, may
be repeated several times if need be, until the required load-bearing capacity
of the anchor is attained. The grouting pressure required for anticorrosive
protection of the tendon is relatively low. In order to obtain a complete
filling in horizontal anchor boreholes, it is recommended that such holes
be drilled with a gentle inclination (3 5) away from the horizontal.
Some specialized companies (such as Soletanche) maintain that there is
a direct relationship between the load-bearing capacity of an anchor and the
grouting pressure applied for the root fixing. It has been demonstrated in tests
that the load-bearing capacity of anchors increases with increasing grouting
pressure (Fig. 15-9). Similar experiments were carried out by the British
company ATC Ltd. They arrived at the conclusion that when the grouting
pressure exceeded 4 MPa, further increments in the load-bearing capacity
were insignificant.

208
0/f

Fig. 15-9. Increase in strength of anchor

fixing in relation to the grouting
pressure applied [102]
1 medium Brssel sands, 2 marly
limestone, 3 marls, 4 Seine
fluvial deposits, 5 clayey gravels
and sands, 6 soft Cretaceous
sediments, 7 hard limestone

-7
.35

^0.25\

S 0.75
^ 0-1
0.05

.0.2

1\k

/J

lUnt

/m
7
injection

2
3
pressure

4
[MPa]

Higher grouting pressures are expedient in highly fissured rock, which is

strengthened by the grouting, and in soil, in which the higher pressure induces
a radial stress in the surroundings of the borehole, thus increasing the shear
resistance at the root surface. Grouting pressures applied to soils, however,
should not exceed values appropriate for the height or weight of the overburden. Littlejohn [120] recommends an admissible pressure of 0.023 N/mm 2
per 1 m of overburden height above the anchor root.

Chapter 16
FIXING OF A N C H O R S TO T H E A N C H O R E D

STRUCTURE

The method of fixing an anchor to a structure depends on the size of the

structure and the anchor. Bar anchors are generally secured at the outer end
by means of a nut (Fig. 16-1), while cable anchors are provided with heads
clamped to the anchor ends, normally assembled after completion of the
prestressing (Fig. 16-2), but occasionally beforehand (Fig. 16-3). The fixing
2

/ \

1~ T $ 3 L ^

^=.
.--3
*
*

Fig. 16-1. Four threaded bars with nuts and

washers bearing on a plate; the immediate
bearing surfaces of the plate are angled
to suit the diverging angle of the bars (system
Macalloy)

1*
I

-J

**

r* '

\o"
I. o

Fig. 16-2. Fixing of an anchor to a locking

head after prestressing {Freyssinet
system)
I sleeve, 2 locking cone after
depression

of cable anchors by concreting the ends of the cables into strong anchoring
heads (Fig. 16-4) is less frequently practiced now on account of the lengthy
preparation involved, although the method has many advantages to recommend it. Factory production of these heads is simple, and they are
cheaper than locking heads, particularly where large prestressing forces are
intended; more important than this is that these heads provide the best
anticorrosive protection (see Chapter 18). A special type of end piece is the
BBR V head, in which the cables are fixed by the forging of knobs at the wire
ends (Fig. 16-5).

210

'

, anchor plate
/de -aerating hole
vring nut

.grout
pipe

B-B

A-A

Fig. 16-3. Polensky & Zllner anchor head system (PZ)

a) before prestressing, b) after prestressing and tightening of the nut; 1 fixingsleeve,
2 conically expanded end of the anchor head

46.3

Fig. 16-4. Fixed anchor head for 4 MN

anchor
1 cast steel bucket, 2 wire ends
embedded in concrete, 3 spacing shims
of various thicknesses for the purpose
of prestressing

211

Fig. 16-5. BBR V anchor head system for 55 wires of 7 mm dia

16.1 A N C H O R S F I X E D BY NUTS

Nuts are used for securing bar anchors and those types of cable anchors
that are provided with clamping or solid heads (see Figs. 16-3, 5, 21, 22 and
Section 16.3). The threads which are to take the nuts are pressed on to the
anchoring bars rather than cut, as this latter method reduces the mean
anchor diameter. The nuts rest on steel washers which distribute the compressive stress over the surface of the structure or rock.
The headplates which are placed on the concrete surface of the anchored
structure are made of thick sheet (Fig. 16-6) and are square-shaped, with a hole
in the centre for the anchor and perhaps further holes for the grouting or
de-aerating pipes (see Fig. 16-3). Some systems employ specially shaped plates
with turned saddles which make for the exact seating of nuts with shaped
seating surfaces (Fig. 16-7).
Of particular importance is the shape of the washers placed between the
nut and the rock surface, because this shape markedly affects the function
of the anchor and the maintenance of the prestressing of the anchor when
used to secure underground excavations. Washers which are either plane or
inclined at 30 to the rock surface are suitable only for the plane roof faces
of galleries in bedded rocks. On the uneven faces of hard rocks in other
types of underground excavations, the nuts or bars may be seated excentrically
if such washers are used; this creates unfavourable loading of part of the bolt
by a bending moment, and reduces its load-bearing capacity. In addition, the
prestressing operation is more difficult and errors may occur in the application
of torque spanners. Accurate centering of the bolt in the borehole and uniform
distribution of the transmitted force over the rock surface can only be

212

achieved with supplementary spherical-surfaced washers, currently supplied

by some specialized firms. The washer itself, bearing on the surface of the
rock and usually holding in place a protective netting, is suitably formed so as
to improve its function and economise on material (see Fig. 16-7).

Fig. 16-6. Dywidag distribution plate system

a) plate located on the surface of the structure,
b) plate embedded in concrete, levels with the surface
of the structure, c) hollowed saddle in the seating plate
ensuring precise seating of the nut

Fig. 16-7. Washer and bolt

nut supplied by Pneumatisk
Transport AB, Sweden

The South African firm of Roof bolts S. A. Ltd. has developed a special
washer for fixing bar anchors on to rock surfaces. This washer is slipped
on to the unthreaded bolt rod, and after prestressing, the washer grips the
rod strongly and reliably by a self-locking effect; this fixing thus belongs to the
next category of anchor heads (locking heads). The triangular curved shape
of this washer guarantees support at three points on the rock surface. A given
tilt of the thickened part of the washer with respect to the anchor rod corresponds to a particular tensile force in the anchor; thus, the washer also
acts as a check on the stress within the bolt (Fig. 16-8). Bolts fitted with these
heads are capable of supplementing prestress, if required.

213

Fig. 16-8. Self-locking and indicating washer of Roofbolts S. A. Ltd., Johannesburg

prestressing a) 050 kN, b) 50 60 kN, c) 60103 kN; over 100 kNi/), fixing of washer
breaks down

16.2 L O C K I N G HEADS (WEDGE B L O C K I N G SYSTEM)

Locking heads are mainly used for fixing cable anchors composed of
straight wires, or single and multiple strand anchors. The locking effect
is obtained by means of wedges or truncated cones, which are pressed among
the wires or cable strands and forced during the prestressing into tapered
holes in steel bearing plates. Locking heads (functioning by the effect of
friction) do not project on the surface of the structure. The length of the
cable can easily be adapted according to the dimensions of the structure.
Manipulation of this type of head is simple, no time is needed for the concrete
to harden, and these heads do not require the special attention demanded
by other systems (e.g. protection of the threaded parts from damage during
transport and fitting).
For the anchoring of cables composed of straight wires, heads consisting
of a sleeve and cone are used; the cone is pressed among the wires and into
the sleeve by hydraulic force when the required prestressing is applied
(Fig. 16-9, see also Fig. 12-4). This system does not permit any post-fixing
adjustment of the anchor prestressing, a problem which has been solved,
for example, by the firm of Polensky & Zllner (GFR) who secure the wires
in a reversed anchoring head (see Fig. 16-3). The anchoring cone is tapered
outwards, continuing as a screw to which the stressing equipment is attached;
the screw also holds the nut which secures the anchoring head in its final

214

^?jfiSi

Fig. 16-9. Anchor head for 1 MN anchors Horel system in service on a rock slope

A Fig. 16-10. Losinger anchor

head system (VSL)
1 cone, 2 grout intake,
3 hole to facilitate
assembly, 4 elongation
-^ 100 mm, 5 fixing
sleeve, 6 securing ring
with recesses for spanner

position after prestressing. The prestressing of the anchor can be altered if

desired after the fixing has been made.
The anchoring head of the Losiwer firm (Fig. 16-10) represents another
arrangement with the same facility. On prestressing, the cone is automatically
drawn into the sleeve among the wires; the prestressing equipment is attached

215

by a securing nut to the outer threaded surface of the sleeve. When the
required anchor prestressing is reached, the ring-nut is tightened with
a spanner against a strong washer on the anchored structure and the prestressing equipment is disconnected from the anchor head.
In neither of the arrangements mentioned above are there prestressing
losses as a result of slipping, as occurs in locking heads when the cable end
is fixed by the action of the cones; the prestressing can also be easily adjusted
at a later stage. In spite of the fact that the fixing equipment is more complicated and requires careful maintenance, both of these methods are in
common use.
The same type of head is sometimes used for the fixing of anchors composed of strands (Fig. 16-11). In order to ensure reliable fixing of each of the
strands of the cable, various modifications have been devised to prevent
the slipping of individual strands.
0W7

Fig. 16-11. Monogroup anchor head

Fig. 16-12. VUIS segmented anchor head,

loading capacity 1 MN
1 segments, 2 locked strand space
between segments

^^^
^^^^M

y^

11.5

f^^f^

->

"

Segmented heads of the VUIS type are used in Czechoslovakia for the
fixing of multiple rope anchors. Using these, load-bearing capacities of up
to 1 MN may be obtained for seven strand anchors ( 7 x 7 wires diameter
6 mm; or 7 x 19 wires diameter 4.5 mm (Fig. 16-12)).
The PSC head, used in Great Britain for fixing cables, follows the Freyssinet system and consists of a conical ring into which a bevelled cone fits.
On the inner surface of the ring and on the surface of the cone, grooves are
formed so as to interlock with the anchoring rope surface when the rope is
clamped in the grooves (Fig. 16-13).

216

The CCL system (Fig. 16-14) can be used for various types of multi-strand
cable, but cables composed of seven strands, each 12.7 mm in diameter, are
recommended as the most suitable type, although cables composed of
a larger number of strands can also be accommodated. A special feature
of the system is that each rope is prestressed and fixed separately, using
light-weight equipment in which the end of the rope passes through the axis
of the prestressing jack cylinder. The system developed at the VUIS, Bratislava (Czechoslovakia), in which the cable is prestressed by taking pairs
of ropes, has a similar design (Fig. 16-15).
Another proven type of head consists of a plate against which cylindrical
components (collars) attached to each of the individual ropes abut (Fig. 16-16).
108+153 mm

Fig. 16-13. PSC FreyssiMonogroup cable head system.

The head dimensions depend
on the number of strands
fixed. The head is designed for
cables with a maximum loadbearing capacity of 8 MN

cables 7/12.7mm 7/15,2mm 7/17.8 mm

Fig. 16-14. CCL Multiforce

cable head system

O
Fig. 16-15. Anchor head in which strands are stressed in pairs {VUIS system)

217
Fig. 16-16. Fixing of the cable

Fig. 16-17. Stress Block head

fixing system for 21 strands

Fig. 16-18. KA head fixing

system

In these systems the individual strands are prestressed one by one with light
prestressing guns, or all together with a set of several such guns (Chapter 17).
Individual prestressing of the cables is also a feature of the Stress Block
system (Fig. 16-17), which differs from the latter systems only with respect
to the arrangement of the cable ropes and the shape of the head. Ropes
12,7 mm in diameter are assembled in triads into bundles of up to 45 ropes
(5.1 MN) with a rectangular cross-section overall. Parallelism of all the
cable ropes is ensured by using spacing grids, which also make for uniform
envelopment of all the ropes with grout.
In all the types of head described in the foregoing, the anchorage was
fastened to the head by the locking effect of various shaped wedges, cones, or
segments, inserted so as to press the wires or strands of the anchor against

218

an outer sleeve member. Recently, however, heads have been introduced

in which wires and steel bars are locked by compression in a system of steel
shims between two bolted plates (Fig. 16-18). Thus in the KA system, a high
fixing strength is obtained by using wires of oval cross-section for the cables.
These wires have a ragged surface which corresponds with a similar ragged
surface on the shims and locking plates. The manufacture of BBB heads,
designed to take an even number of strands (2 to 12) of 12.5 mm diameter,
is very simple. These heads are made of cast iron and have bulb-shaped
cavities; the strands are inserted in pairs and are pressed against the cavity
walls by a wedge placed between them. Heads for cables composed of 2
or 4 ropes are concreted in advance at the borehole mouth (Fig. 16-19a).

Fig. 16-19. BBB anchor head system

a)head embedded in concrete for 2 or 4 strands, b) star-shaped head for 12 strands

The head for 12 ropes is star-shaped and rests on a mild steel bearing plate
cast into the concrete (Fig. 16-19b). The wedges or conical segments are
designed and inserted into the stressing equipment in such a way as not to
obstruct release of prestressing tension after completion of the prestressing;
this is essential, particularly when soil and rock anchors are prestressed
(see Section 17-6). The heads are padded only in those cases in which anchors
have to be later re-stressed in order to compensate for losses of stress caused
by creep of the ground.

219
16.3 IMMOVABLE ANCHORING HEADS

Immovable anchoring heads were used in the early days of the application
of rock anchorage, when large cable anchors were fixed to the surfaces of
anchored structures; however, with modifications and simplification of
assembly, these heads are still useful in many present-day types of anchorage.
Immovable heads are made either of prestressed concrete, or of steel cast
in a shell-like form, and are filled with white metal or concrete after having
been mounted on the external end of a bundle of wires. Cable ends such as
those of cableways and suspension bridges, can also be fitted with these
anchor heads. The heads are conical inside. The fixing of wires is achieved
by cohesion and the transverse pressures created by the pulling-in of the cone
of wires and white metal into the cast steel head. Alloys with a smelting
point of not more than 330 C are used for the cast around the wires, otherwise the wires may be damaged by overheating.
Steel buckets filled with grout are often used to make strong anchor heads,
and good results have been obtained with these at Czechoslovak dam sites
for the surface fixing of steel ropes, prestressed to 4 MN (see Fig. 16-4).
The buckets are 50 cm deep, have a seating area of 45 cm diameter, and an
11 cm diameter opening for the cables.
A reinforced concrete anchoring head may also be created by embedding
the spread end of a cable consisting of straight wires in concrete (Fig. 16-20).
The transverse tensile stresses in the head and the shear stresses brought
about by the pull of the anchor tendon are taken up by helical (and also
sometimes radial) reinforcements. The manufacture of these reinforced
concrete anchor heads is a labourious process, and heads of this type are
only suitable for the largest cable anchors, with carrying capacities of
7 - 1 2 MN (see Section 24, the Cheurfas Dam).
All types of immovable head must be supported on suitable headplates
in position before the anchor is prestressed, although some types of fixed
anchor head are provided with a thread and nut for that purpose.
In the SEEE system (Societe d'Etudes et d'Equipements d'Enterprises),
special heads are used which are fixed by being pressed on to the outer end
of the anchor cable (Fig. 16-21). The rope ends are inserted into thick-walled
steel tubes of certain specified properties, and the tubes are then pressed to
a smaller diameter. Thus, for example, a tube 500 mm long and 108 mm in
diameter, after being pressed, forms an anchor head 620 mm long and 94 mm
in diameter. In some cases a helical coil is inserted around the rope in the
tube in order to increase the strength of the fixing. When the tube has been
pressed on to the rope, a fine thread is cut or pressed on its surface. Following
prestressing of the anchor a nut is screwed on to this thread and tightened
against the load distribution plate on the front of the structure. SEEE pre-

220
Fig. 16-20. Reinforced concrete anchor head for cable
of straight wires
1 head, 2 load-distributing steel plate, 3 steel
washers, 4 reinforced concrete props
W2
5

MM

WKKKeKHmKm
Fig. 16-21. SEEE system heads of different lengths

view of the stressed rope end

prepared in the structure
1

Fig. 16-22.
Baudin Chteaimeuf
fixing system
/ rope, 2 resting plate,
3 anchor head,
4 stressing head,
5 helix reinforcement,
6 casing, 7 cast-in
metal, 8 compression of
ropes by jaws

stressing units are designed to withstand forces of 1.12 and 2.75 MN. In the
first case they are constructed of a single rope with 61 regular lay wires of
4.1 mm diameter, and in the second case the unit consists of 19 ropes, each
of7 wires 3.6 mm in diameter. The anchoring heads of this system can be
prepared entirely in the workshop; their assembly for prestressing, and the
initial and subsequent (adjustment) prestressing operations are simple.
The Baudin Chteauneuf system (Fig. 16-22) was also developed in
France. Here a special type of head is used for fixing ropes. To form the head,
the rope is held at two points in the jaws. When these are closed somewhat5

221

the wires of the rope between the two holding positions are loosened and
a bulge is formed; the bulge is then covered with a thin-walled protecting
tube and the wires are cast inside.
Prestressed units of this system have a loading capacity of 5 MN or more,
and are supplied to the site, complete, in coils.
The BBR V heads are much used on structures made of prestressed concrete. They are designed for cables composed of wires and are mounted
on the anchors during manufacture in the workshop. The ends of the wires
are slipped through holes drilled in the anchor head, and cold forged
in specially designed equipment. When long anchors are assembled, the
heads are inserted into the expanded mouth of the fixing hole to a depth
such as to obviate padding of the head with thick plates after prestressing.
If the depth of the head has been correctly calculated, the head will be located
at the surface of the structure after prestressing. Safe seating of the anchor is
achieved with the aid of a ring screwed on to the anchor head. The new
position of the anchor head after additional prestressing is also set by turning
this ring. For shorter anchors, the heads are padded after prestressing with
annular washers split in halves (Fig. 16-23).
a)

b)

Fig. 16-23. BBRVanchor head

a) for long tendons with large stressing
elongations. (In the non-stressed condition
of the tendon, the anchor head is located
inside the trumpet), b) for short tendons
with a limited elongation. After
prestressing the anchor is locked with
a pair of shims

16.4 SADDLE ANCHOR HEADS

In some cases an upper movable anchor head is replaced by a concrete

metal-clad saddle (Fig. 16-24). A cable is led over the centre of this saddle,
and both ends are fixed into the rock. When the cable is prestressed, a jack
is placed under the centre of the saddle, and is replaced on completion of the

222

prestressing by reinforced concrete and steel blocks. This method appears

to be simple enough, especially as the number of cable ends that have to be
manipulated at the head is halved. There is, however, a disadvantage in that
the boreholes into which the cable ends are fixed must be located close
together, and this means that the resistance to extraction of the anchor
from the rock does not greatly exceed the extraction resistance of a cable
fixed in one borehole. Because of this, the use of saddle anchors necessitates
doubling of the borehole length, thus making the method uneconomic. In
concrete structures, in which anchoring holes are formed by embedded
pipes, this disadvantage may be avoided by arranging the embedded pipes
so that they diverge away from the opening of the common hole in the
footing of the anchored structure, which leads to the fixing head of the
anchor. Saddle anchors can be used to advantage where the cables are laid
on each side of the anchored structure (see Fig. 24-2).

Chapter 17
P R E S T R E S S I N G AND T E S T I N G OF A N C H O R S

The purpose of prestressing an anchor is to create an elastic tension in the

free section of the steel anchor tendon with the aid of suitable stressing
equipment; in this way, the tendon section exerts a predetermined force on
the anchored structure.
The prestressing of an anchor provides a test of the anchor at the same
time. It confirms the suitability of the anchor type to some extent, it suggests
what future behaviour of the anchor can be expected and it indicates errors
in the design and installation of the anchor. Changes in the characteristics
of the ground and deviations from the anticipated installation conditions
can be the cause of substantial differences between the load-bearing capacities
of anchors at one and the same construction site. Hence, it is important to
subject each anchor at the site to a test.
The methods of prestressing, testing, and checking anchors are now
fixed by Standards and Codes in many countries [233 241]. The Standards
and recommendations differ in detail, but the basic procedures must take
account of the characteristics of the materials used and the safety demands
of the anchored structure, and are therefore the same everywhere.

17.1 STRESSING FORCES

Anchors may be stressed to the production load or the testing load. The
production load of an anchor is given by the working (admissible) force, Pw9
calculated according to the static analysis; the anchor must be able to sustain
this force throughout its entire service life. The production stressing of an
anchor usually corresponds to this force. The working force must be extended
by some safety margin before the anchor's ultimate state is reached, as
determined by the point of failure of one of its main components (breaking
strength failure), or the exceeding of the admissible deformation (e.g. yielding
failure of the tendon steel).
The safety margin is determined from the results of basic anchor tests, or
it is laid down by a standard code of practice drawn up in the country
concerned. A range of safety factor values, compiled from accessible Standards
and recommendations, is listed in Table 17-1:

224
TABLE 17-1
Safety factors for establishing Pw
With regard to the ultimate strength of anchor steel

1.652.00

With regard to the yield strength (and/or elastic limit) of steel

1.331.65

With regard to the ultimate strength of the anchor root in rock or soil

1.601.70

In some countries a distinction is made between a temporary and

a permanent anchor, in determining Pw. The safety factor for temporary
anchors is usually lower by one or two tenths than that for permanent
anchors.
The testing load is a short-term loading applied to the anchor in order
to test the integrity of the whole installation, check the safety factor chosen,
and make sure that the anchor has the capacity permanently, to transmit
the working force, Pw; alternatively, the ultimate strength may be measured
by the test carried out in a given type of ground. The testing load generally
reaches higher values than the production load. The maximum testing force,
Ptt max for production anchors is established as a function of the working
force, P w , or is given by the limit states of the tendon steel-the tensile or
yield strength (and/or elastic limit). Values of testing forces are introduced
in the next Section.
A.max i s usually the largest stress experienced by the anchor during its
service life, with the exception of circumstances in which the anchored
structure or ground is overloaded by forces which had not been anticipated
in the static analysis. Besides checking the installation, the higher testing
load to some extent makes good losses of prestressing which appear in the
anchor tendon as a result of compression of the ground or anchored structure
the fixing procedure of the anchoring head and headplates, relaxation of the
tendon, etc.
In special tests on anchors, P f , m a x is determined by the ultimate load
of the anchor, until failure occurs.

17.2 STRESSING^OF P R O D U C T I O N ANCHORSACCEPTANCE TESTS

The stressing of all production anchors is carried out in the form of an

acceptance test, in which the anchor is subjected to a test load greater than
the working force, Pw, for a predetermined time.
The purpose of the short-term loading of an anchor by a larger force is
to obtain measurable safety coefficients relating to the designed production

225

load, Pw, or to discover defects in the design or installation of the anchor

in good time.
In the test, the displacement of the anchoring head is measured as the
tensile force is increased, and the displacement continues to be monitored
throughout the period of the test. The force-displacement diagram gives
information about the operating characteristics and parameters of the anchor
(e.g. the free tendon length). The displacement-time diagram gives an indication of the integrity of the anchor fixing in the ground.
The maximum value of the testing force for production anchors is generally
laid down by different national Standards, or it is chosen according to recommended values. For permanent anchors, the testing force is usually
higher than that applied to temporary anchors. Values of Pu max , compiled
from available Standards and other sources, are given in Table 17-11.
TABLE 17-11
Maximum testing force, Ptt max, for production anchors
Permanent anchors

A.max = 1-20l.50Pw
= 0.700.85PS
= 0.900.95Py

Temporary anchors

, = 1.151.25,
= 0.700.85PS
= 0.90IMP,

P is the ultimate tensile force for tendon steel,

Py is the yield-point force (or elastic limit force) for tendon steel.
(The yield-point is usually defined as 87 per cent, of the tensile strength, the elastic limit
as 83.5 per cent, of the tensile strength)

Simple acceptance test

The current stressing procedure follows that of the simple acceptance
test. The procedure is as follows:
The anchor is stressed by an initial force P0 = 0APw to 0.2PW (0.1 P y ),
and the initial reading at the anchoring head is registered. The loading of the
anchor is progressively increased to Pu max = \A5PW to 1.5PW, the displacement of the anchoring head is registered, and subsequent further displacement of the anchoring head under this load is monitored for a minimum test
period. The test period is usually 5 to 15 minutes, according to the standard
adhered to, and sometimes depending on the type of rock or soil in which
the anchor is fixed. For strong rocks 5 minutes are sufficient, whereas for
cohesive soils 15 minutes should be considered a minimum. Usually it is

226

demanded that stabilization of the anchor (no further change in the displacement) has occured by the end of the test period (see more detailed test), or
that a predetermined total allowable displacement has not been exceeded
( 1 - 2 mm). If this condition is fulfilled, the anchor load is decreased to P 0 ,
and the drop in the displacement at the anchoring head is recorded, thus
giving the elastic and permanent components of the total displacement. Then
the anchor is loaded by the working force Pw9 increased by the assumed losses
caused by friction and relaxation (usually 0.1PJ, and the anchoring head
fixed.
The results of the test are presented in a report, which contains all data
concerning the dimensions and installation details of the anchor, and the
values obtained in the test. The report includes the load-displacement
diagram, plotted from the measured values (Fig. 17-1). The total displacement is divided into permanent and elastic components. If the measured
elastic displacement lies between the points Bx and B2, then the free length
of the anchor tendon corresponds to the designed length and the transmission
of forces to the anchor root corresponds to the assumptions made in the
design. The two points, Bx and B2, represent the calculated elastic deformation
of the tendon free length, reduced by 20 per cent (point BJ, and increased
by a half of the root length (point B2). For anchors in which the tendon
is fixed to a steel base at the extreme end of the root and is insulated up to
p

t-ma*

l0Qd

permanent
displacement
line

boundary fine 1

elastic displacement
tine
total displacement
line
boundary line 2

B2

Fig. 17-1. Load-displacement diagram obtained during a simple acceptance test of an anchor

227

this fixing point, the points and B2 are given by the free length of the
tendon multiplied by-4he coefficients 0.9 and 1.1, respectively.
The elongation of the steel tendon under a given load is calculated from
the equation
P.L
where P = tensile force acting on the anchor,
L = the free length of the tendon, multiplied by the coefficient for
Bx or B2,
E the modulus of elasticity for tendon steel,
A = the area of cross-section of the tendon steel.
Detailed acceptance test
Most Standards stipulate detailed tests on a minimum number of production anchors. Usually this concerns the first (3 1.0) anchors installed at the
site, and thereafter one or more anchors from each group of 10 to 25 subsequently installed, or a percentage (5 per cent, on average) of the total
number of production anchors at the site. In this acceptance test the loading
starts with the initial force P0, and is increased gradually to the maximum
testing force. Usually there are 4 to 5 loading steps, for example 0.4PW,
0.8PW, 1.0PW, 1.2PW, (1.4 or l.5Pw). At each step the anchor is relieved as
far as P0, and when the residual deformation has been measured, the loading
is increased to the next step.
At each loading step the force is maintained and the displacement at the
anchor head is measured until stability is observed. In the last loading step
the observation period is usually longer, being 1 to 24 hours according to the
type of rock or soil in which the anchor root is fixed. The displacement must
be recorded s having stabilized, or a maximum overall rate of displacement
must not be exceeded, as in the previous test. It is recommended that the
displacement increment be measured with a dial gauge at progressively
1 3
1 1
increasing time intervals, e.g. 1 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 5, 7, 10, 14, 20, 28,
40, 56, 80, 112, 160 minutes, etc. Stabilization of the displacement can be
considered as having occurred when the displacement increments measured
at the anchor head remain unchanged over three successive time intervals,
or if they change by no more than 0.1 0.2 mm.
Other details of the procedure and the graphic expression of the results are
similar to those of the simple test. Besides the load-displacement diagram
(Fig. 17-2), the displacement-time diagram is often drawn as well. If the time
values are plotted on a logarithmic scale, a displacement movement that is

228

approaching stability will be represented by a nearly straight line. From the

time-displacement diagram the approximate prestressing losses R, due to
friction during the stressing of the anchor can be determined also (see
Fig. 17-4).
a

j A^a1p*

^
g
*,*

^gS^X

\<
& -^

^ ^
~^ ^
^
.U
^

-8Pw Pw

<x
x^
^vvv
^
*WCsX
^vx
v \
^^

permanent
displacement
line
X
. X

\NsJ^s
x \

-+

! '

1-2PW 1MPW load

Cvfcv

CM

MPw

-+^

\J
Vl
*3

"I1
^'

x 1 boundary
line 1

elastic
displacement
line
Nl \
^xV~. \ X total displacement
^ X i line
X>J
Xl

C
\^
NX

boundary line 2

Fig. 17-2. Evaluation of a detailed acceptance test of an anchor according to K. Klein [235]

17.3

SPECIAL A N C H O R TESTS

Special tests are carried out on those anchors which are not used as
production anchors, but are perhaps prototypes for researching new anchoring systems, or test anchors used to verify the suitability of a known type of
anchorage for a particular site. These tests are called basic tests in the former
case, and suitability tests in the latter case. In both cases the behaviour of the
anchorage specified the design is examined, particularly the safety margin
afforded against failure; the tests should also reveal any defects which might
influence the load-bearing capacity of the anchors during their long-term
service.
Basic tests
The technical suitability of a new type of anchor and the method of
construction of anchors for temporary and permanent use, must be verified
by conducting a basic test in the type of ground in which the anchor will be
used (strong rock, soft rock, loose soil, cohesive soil). It must be demonstrated
that the anchor satisfies the expectations of the design, or the stipulations
of a given Standard.

229

In every type of rock or soil for which the anchor has been designed, at
least three anchors must be tested. The anchors are loaded in stages as in the
detailed acceptance test, the stages being established as functions of the yieldpoint force of the tendon, and increasing, for example, in steps of 0A5Py.
A constant force is maintained at each loading stage and the displacement at
the anchoring head is measured until it becomes stable. All forces are measured with special instruments (see Chapter 19) and displacements with dial
gauges of 0.01 mm accuracy. Displacements are registered for a period sufficiently long to take account of creep of the ground. For example, the German
Standard recommends that displacements occurring under the higher loading
stages be measured for at least 2 hours where the anchorage is made in
coarse-grained soils, 24 hours in fine-grained (cohesive) soils, and in any
case until the displacement increments are less than 0.2 mm. From the
load-displacement graph the force, Pc9 under which the measured deformation
has attained 2 mm (Fig. 17-3), can be found. The force Pc is also used as
a criterion for finding the safety factor, as will be explained later.

aww
u

o.dPw 1.2PW 1.5PW

fen sile

load

Fig. 17-3. Determination of the limit anchoring force, Pc

[120]

The load in a basic test is increased until failure of the anchor occurs, and
this should take place in the root, not in the tendon. Failure occurs when the
displacement increases with time under a constant loading force. On the
basic test graph of Fig. 17-4, the load-bearing capacity of the anchor root
was exceeded under a load of 0.94P y , and the free tendon length behaved
according to expectation.
When the test is completed, the anchor is dug out and examined. Particular
attention is given to the root, its shape and dimensions, the quality of the
hardened grout, the contact established between the tendon and the grout,
the position of the tendon in the grout body, the covering of the steel parts
by the grout, the appearance, number, and mutual spacing of cracks in the
grout body, and the effectiveness of the anticorrosive protection of the root
and tendon, particularly in the case of permanent anchors.

230

-^displacement
a)

elastic displacement - * M

-^permanent
displacement

Fig. 17-4. Evaluation of the basic test of an anchor, according to DIN [236]
a) stress/strain diagram, b) curves of elastic and permanent displacements. At a loading
of 0.75Py, stabilization of the displacement was not registered. R designates the loss of tensile
force involved in overcoming friction during stressing of the anchor

The complete results of the test are contained in a report which also gives
the characteristics of the ground, the anchor parameters, the test method,
and a discussion of the test values in relation to what has been found in the
examination of the excavated anchor. The construction, testing, and subsequent excavation of the anchors must be supervised by a recognized
professional body, which also classifies the ground at the test site. According
to the German Standard, the admissible working load, Pw9 of a given anchor
type is taken as the smallest of the values P y /1.75, Py/1.75, PJ1.50, obtained
from the basic test. Pw is taken as 0.50Pf for permanent anchors, and as
0.67Pf for temporary anchors, according to the French Standard. Py is the force at the guaranteed yield strength of the anchor tendon, Pf is the load at
the failure limit of the root as found, in the test, and Pc is the test force
that produces a displacement of 2 mm of the anchoring head.
Suitability tests
The purpose of these tests, as has been stated earlier, is to check the
suitability of an anchor type for use at a given site by subjecting it to harsh
or little-known conditions. The suitability tests are performed on site before
construction work is started. Usually three test anchors are positioned where
the least favourable geological conditions are assumed to exist, and they
are subjected to loading and release cycles with simultaneous recording of the
displacement at the head, as in the basic test. From these results, the elastic

231

and plastic deformations are obtained, and then the actual free length of the
tendon can be calculated. The plastic deformation approximately corresponds
to the displacement of the root [154]. The particular linear relationship
between the displacement and loading on an anchor characterizes the loadbearing capacity of that anchor.
The maximum load test is usually fixed at 1.5 or 1.6 times the design
working force, Pw, for temporary and/or permanent anchors; sometimes
the anchors are loaded until the ultimate load is exceeded, but then they are
not dug out afterwards. A detailed certificate is drawn up from the test
results.
On a site where, according to the design, the anchors are to be placed
less 1 m apart in a line, the possibility of their mutual interference must be
investigated. In this case, test anchors are installed as the design specifies,
and are loaded simultaneously while their behaviour is observed.

17.4 TESTS ON ROCK BOLTS

17A.1 Destructive tests

Pulling tests are usually carried out on rock bolts as an aid for the selection
of bolts, most suitable fixing materials, and installation methods. Pulling
tests are based on the same principle as the basic testing of long anchors, the
applied load obviously being smaller. The bolts are loaded in stages
over a short time interval until failure occurs, and the changes of displacement
of the bolt head are measured simultaneously. The result is plotted in a loaddisplacement diagram, which represents the behaviour of the bolt in the same
way as that of a prestressed long anchor in rock. The test is destructive and
therefore cannot be carried out on bolts that form a part of the actual rock
reinforcement or support system.
A method for determining the strength of rockbolts by applying a pulling
test was given, for example, by the International Society for Rock Mechanics
[95]. The main principles are:
1. At least five tests are required to evaluate an anchor in a given set of
rock and installation conditions.
2. The loading equipment is assembled, taking care to ensure that the
direction of the pull is coaxial with the bolt, that the equipment sits firmly
on the rock, and that no part of the bolt or hardened grout will interfere
with the application or measurement of the load during the test.
3. An initial arbitrary load not greater than 5 kN is applied to take up
any slack in the equipment. The displacement measuring equipment is
assembled and checked.

232

4. The anchor is tested by increasing the load until a total displacement

of more than 40 mm has been recorded, or the bolt yields or fractures first.
5. The load and displacement are recorded at increments of approximately
5 kN load, or 5 mm displacement, whichever comes first at each step. The
rate of loading should be within the range 5 10 kN/min. Readings are taken
only after both the load and displacement have become stable. The times
required for stabilization to take place should be recorded.
6. The test data are plotted graphically, as shown in Fig. 17-5. The anchor
strength, defined as the maximum load reached in the test without the bolt
yielding or failing, is recorded in this graph. If the bolt yields or fails, the
load "<Y" at which this occurs is recorded, and the anchor strength is specified
as "unknown", greater than "A"'.
120\
100

3
2

i\

}^

** \

\\\iI /

/
/

<100

*
\
\

uv\
LL

20

10 20 30 0 50
bolt head displacement [mm]
Fig. 17-5. Example of graphic plot of bolt
test results [95]
1 elastic deformation line, 2 yield-point load, 3 ultimate load

120

^>

>80

r*i

^ 60

}
II
/ LLrj

4-

20

0.5 10 15 2.0
bonded length [m]

2.5

Fig. 17-6. Graph showing the influence of

bond length and curing time on the strength
of bolts. (The results shown are
hypothetical) [95]
1 five-day cure, 2 one-day cure

7. The elastic elongation s of the bolt at a given applied load, P is given by

P .L
where L is the tensioned, ungrouted length of the bolt, plus one third of the
grouted length, plus the length of the extension bar if used,
A is the cross-sectional area of the bolt,
E is the modulus of elasticity of the bolt steel.
A straight line (1) is constructed to connect the origin of the load-displacement graph with the point on the graph representing the load, P, and corresponding displacement, s. Straight lines (2) and (3) are drawn at the theoretical

233

yield-point and ultimate loads of the bolt. Comparison of the actual test
curve with these three lines, leads to an understanding of the behaviour of the
bolt and its anchorage.
8. For the evaluation of grouted anchors, the results of several tests should
be abstracted and presented graphically to show the influence of the grout
setting time and the length of the bonded section on the anchor strength
(e.g. Fig. 17-6).
9. The report of the test should include data sheets and graphs, together
with full details of:
a) the rock in which the anchors were tested,
b) the anchors and associated equipment,
c) the drillholes, including the length, diameter, method of drilling,
straightness, state of cleanness and dryness, orientation,
d) the method and time taken for installation,
e) the method and time taken for the testing,
f) the nature of any failure, and other observations pertinent to the test
results.
17.4.2 Non-destructive tests
The first non-destructive method for in situ testing of rock bolts, especially
grouted bolts, was p r esented by the Geodynamic AB Stockholm. A compact,
easy-to-use field instrument, based on electronic technique (Fig. 17-7), is

Fig. 17-7. Non-destructive test

of Geodynamic AB applied to
a rock bolt

234

capable to detect if a bolt is cut, if grouting has not enveloped the entire
length of the bolt, if the bolt is too short, if the contact between the bolt and
grouting or between the rock and grouting is defective, and also if the contact
between the expander and the rock is insufficient for the mechanical fixing
of the bolt.
The instrument has a head which contains a transducer senzor of
piezo-electric crystals. The head is held against the exposed bolt end and the
transducer transfers elastic waves to the bolt. These waves propagate down
the bolt at different rates (depending on the bolt length, grouting and contact
conditions) and are reflected back to the sensor. By processing the detailed
signal informations received, both bolt length and contact conditions can be
determined.
17.5 REQUIREMENTS OF THE EQUIPMENT USED
FOR THE PRESTRESSING AND TESTING OF ANCHORS

The equipment used for prestressing is practically the same as that used
for testing anchors. It consists of a hydraulic set, stressing head, anchoring
head, and a part of the tendon at the near end of the anchor. Sometimes it
also contains a load sensor for precise measurement of the tensile force, and
a dial gauge for precise measurement of the tendon displacement (Fig. 17-8).
The hydraulic set comprises a pump, a jack, a connecting hose, and pressure
gauges of appropriate range and accuracy (1 2\ per cent.).
The stressing equipment must be capable of creating a tensile force in the
anchor tendon, and must maintain this force at a constant value. The value
of the stressing force acting on the anchor tendon must be measured by
sufficiently accurate instruments checked by a recognized authority at regular
intervals. It suffices to measure this force with two calibrated pressure gauges
of the required accuracy, connected to the hydraulic system between the
pump and jack. Measurement of the stressing force with a dynamometer
mounted on the anchor tendon is more reliable and more precise.
Approximate measurements of the tendon displacement can be obtained
with the scale fixed to the jack piston. Precise values are obtained with a dial
gauge, which should be mounted on a supporting structure independent of
the prestressed object, so that movements caused by prestressing are reliably
registered on the gauge. To establish the relationship between stressing
force and displacement, it suffices to measure the tendon displacement to the
nearest 0.1 mm; to obtain the displacement-time relationship at a constant
stressing force, the measurements of the tendon displacement must be
accurate to 0.01 mm, because the tendon displacement measured at the
anchoring head may be small, yet continue to change over a long period
on account of creep of the anchor tendon, anchor root, or the rock or soil.

235

The measuring instruments must be kept in good working order and must
be regularly calibrated to ensure reliability of the readings. It is advisable
[120] to have the measuring instruments calibrated before each stressing
operation and to check them on the spot against control instruments at
monthly intervals, or after every thirtieth production anchor installation.
An independent calibration of the stressing equipment should take place
every three months.
Even with the greatest possible accuracy and care, errors in the measurements nevertheless occur on account of inaccuracy in the pressure gauges,
internal friction in the jacks, inaccuracy in the displacement gauges, and
particularly on account of the manufacturing tolerances of the anchor tendon.
The difference between the actual (measured) and calculated values of the
stressing force may be up to 15 per cent, for anchors, and generally averages
5 per cent, in current installations [120].
In the stressing and testing of anchors, considerable forces are employed.
Consequently, the area immediately behind the stressing equipment must be

Fig. 17-8. Equipment for stressing and testing anchors

(A Brckner Grundbau Co.,)

236

Precision
_/ manometer

Smooth duct

Fig. 17-8.
(B, C Losinger Ltd.) in
service on test sites for
the precise measurement of load
and displacement

237

cleared for safety reasons; and access to this*rea must be prohibited. Serious
injury could otherwise be inflicted by sudden failure of the anchor, or collapse
of the stressing equipment.

17.6 PRESTRESSING TECHNIQUES

The method of prestressing an anchor and the design of the prestressing

equipment, both depend on the type of head used at the accessible end of the
anchor, and the magnitude of the stressing force. It is very important that
the stressing force always acts in the direction of the tendon axis, and that
no bending of the tendon can therefore take place. This can be achieved by
means of a suitable load distribution plate mounted on the surface of the
anchored structure or rock so as to keep the anchoring head oriented coaxially with the tendon axis.
17.6.1

Prestressing of bolts

Short bar anchors (bolts) with only a minor degree of prestressing are
often tensioned by simply tightening the securing nut. The torque needed
to turn the nut on the bar anchor does not indicate directly the tension within
the anchor; calculation of the latter depends largely on the frictional resistance
of the nut on the thread and washer in the course of tightening. A. Hugon
and A. Costes [94] expressed this relationship by the formula:
C ^ - ^ - ( t g j 9 + 2tg^),
where C = the torque (Nm),
P = the tensile force (N),
d = diameter of the bar, excluding the thread (m),
= angle of the threading,
angle of friction of the nut on the thread and washer.
With the metric thread currently used for bolts, the average value of
is 230\ but in the Ancrall type is 9, and in the Pattin type, 5. The median
value of the friction angle, , (according to Hugon and Costes) is 14,
assuming that the thread and the nut are in good order. The graph shown
in Fig. 17-9 gives the necessary turning moment, calculated from the above
equation, for producing a given tension in bolts of the most frequently used
diameters (20 and 24 mm, with M 20 and M 24 metric threads). Average
figures for the tensile force obtained by direct measurements on bar anchors,
were found to be approximately 20 per cent, lower than the calculated

238

values. This discrepancy can be removed by introducing a friction-reducing

material beneath the lock-nut prior to stressing.
In countries where the Whitworth thread and older units of measurement
are still in use the torque-tension graph in Fig. 17-10 will be more convenient;
it is published by the American Williams Co. for bolts of various diameters.

50

100

150

200

250

300 350 400 450

torque moment N/m

500

Fig. 17-9. Relationship between the torsional moment on the securing nut, and the tension
in the bar, for bolt bars with M 20 and M 24 threads

Fig. 17-10. Torque-tension graph for bolts, according to the American Williams Company

In mines and tunnels bolts are often prestressed by hand, using a flat
spanner with its arm extended to 80 or 100 cm. If a hand force of approximately 0.3 kN is attainable at the end of the spanner (although this varies
considerably, of course, according to the position of the workman doing
the tightening), the resulting torque is 235 Nm, which corresponds to a tension
of 39 kN in a bar 24 mm in diameter with a metric thread. More accurate
tensioning of bar anchors is achieved with a torque spanner (wrench).
Torque spanners for tightening nuts are currently made from light alloys,

239
and have various measured moment ranges. Torque spanners producing
moments of up to 700 Nm are most often used for prestressing bolts. They
are equipped with exchangeable ratchet adaptors. For example the well
known Spanish Torcometro torque spanners (Fig. 17-11) which are made
in three sizes.
W0wiiMBMMk:':'i:i'

Fig. 17-11. Torcometro torque wrench

The largest type, with a torque range from 275 740 Nm (weight 3.2 kg,
length 80 cm) can also be used for tightening the bolt nuts to achieve the
required prestress. The required moment (in Nm) is set on the scale of a screw
gauge on the handle of the spanner; a click indicates when the moment has
been reached.
A more suitable instrument for prestressing bolts is the T-shaped type of
torque spanner turned with both hands (Fig. 17-12). The Tona factory in
Czechoslovakia makes such a spanner with a range of 0 to 500 Nm. The
tightening force is shown on a dial.
The turning moment exerted on the spanner and nut is indicative of the
tension generated in the bolt. The moment necessary to start turning the
nut at any point is usually 20 per cent, higher than the moment required
once the starting resistance (static friction) has been overcome.
Universal pneumatic hammer drills (see Fig. 14-2), or pneumatic impact

240

tools (Fig. 17-13) equipped with wrench adaptors can be used to tighten bolts
more quickly and easily (see Section 14.1), torques of up to 832 Nm and
more being obtainable with these machines.

IMPACT TOOL

Fig. 17-13. Light-weight impact

tool (IngersollRand) with
adaptor; torque capacity up
to 4,000 Nm

Fig. 17-14. Light hydraulic

stressing equipment of Elbroc,
Bate man Co.

Torque wrenches and pneumatic impact tools enable a relatively accurately

controlled torque to be exerted on the bolt nut, but the tension in the bolt
is less predictable because of variability in the resistance to revolution of the
nut. Several controlled experiments have shown that the actual tension in the
bolt can vary within a range of 25 per cent, of the stated value [208].
For this reason, there is a tendency to prestress bolts using light hydraulic
jacks. In South African mines, for example, a one-man, hand operated,
hydraulic jack manufactured by Elbroc, Bateman (Fig. 17-14) is used. This
is a compact piece of equipment weighing approximately 10 kg, which
incorporates a fixing device that is screwed on to the protruding end of the
bolt together with the nut, a hydraulic pump for generating tensions from
10 to 100 kN, and a device for tightening the nut when the bar is fully

241

tensioned. The equipment has no delicate gauges; it automatically indicates

the tension setting, and stops at this value. Another type of tensioner of the
same make with a built-in pump is shown in Fig. 17-15.
a)

Fig. 17-15. Durable rock bolt

tensioners of Elbroc (South Africa) a) Mark VIII
(0100 kN), b) Mark X
(0300 kN)
b)

242
17.6.2

Prestressing of bar anchors of high load-bearing capacity

For the larger bar anchors with higher load-bearing capacities and
prestressing forces greater than 100 kN, larger hydraulic jacks have to be
used. Various types of jack and hydraulic equipment designed to grip the
threaded end of the bar (or cable) are available on the market (e.g. Enerpac).
They are generally small in size, but have a high performance (Fig. 17-16). The

Fig. 17-16. Centre hole hydraulic jacks Proceq CP 100 and CP 150 with manual pump for
anchor testing and pre-stressing up to the tensile load of 1 MN and 1.5 MN respectively

end of the anchor bar passes through a hollow cylinder in most types. In some
cases (e.g. the American CCS system), the stressing equipment consists of
a couple of small jacks connected by a bridge to which the end f the bar
or anchor rope is fixed. Weights of the hollow cylinder stressing equipment
used by the Dywidag Co. are quoted as an example; the equipment for
tensioning bar anchors with forces of 250, 600 and 1,100 kN weighs 23, 36
and 47 kg respectively. Also the equipment used in Great Britain and in
other countries is relatively easy to handle. A typical arrangement cf the
stressing equipment for bar anchors is shown in Fig. 17-17.
Oil is supplied to the hydraulic jack by a pressure pump. A hand-operated
pump is sufficient for dealing with a small number of anchors. For larger

243

sgroutpad

hydraulic pump
{manual)

hydraulic hollow ram-jack

Fig. 17-17. Arrangement of stressing equipment for bar anchors, according to Littlejohn
and Bruce [120]

Fig. 17-18. Alevin pump BA 3

(max. pressure 60 MPa,
delivery 6.5 1/min)

anchoring schemes, electric pumps (or less often combustion engine pumps)
are employed. The stressing equipment is generally designed to generate
working pressures of 40 to 70 MPa. Some of the specification details of
pumps used by the Stronghold Co. (working pressure, 60 MPa) are given
for the sake of illustration. A portable pump with an output of 2.62 litres/min,
capacity 20 litres, weighs 90 kg and is 750 mm long and 540 mm in height;
pumps with outputs of 3.7 and 6.5 litres/min, capacity 45 litres, weigh
210 kg and 220 kg, respectively. These two pumps are mounted on a simple
undercarriage (Fig. 17-18) and difTer only with respect to the driving power.
Where the anchor tendon is composed of a bundle of bars, bars are usually
stressed one at a time (Fig. 17-19a). In Great Britain a piece of equipment

244

Fig. 17-19. Stressing of Macalloy bar

system
a) individual bar stressing,
b) equipment for stressing 4 bars
at a time

for prestressing a bundle of four bars together has been developed

(Fig. 17-19b); allowance is made for the nuts at the ends of the bars to be
easily screwed on and tightened. With this equipment a total prestressing
force of 2.2 MN can be applied. It is comparatively light and small, can be
easily adapted for prestressing a six-bar bundle with a force of 3.24 MN.

245

When the required tensile force is produced by the jack, the anchor tension
is maintained by tightening the nut with a spanner, which gains access to the
nut through an opening in the spacing chair below the jack (Fig. 17-20).
Perfect seating of the nut on the bearing plate is indicated by a slight drop
in pressure on the jack manometer (equivalent, approximately, to 5 kN force
at the jack). After this has occurred, the pressure in the equipment can be
released altogether.

Fig. 17-20. Stressing of

anchors to 500 kN with
Proceq Co. equipment.
(Note opening in the spacing
chair for tightening the
anchor nut, using special
spanner)

Specially designed jacks for prestressing Dywidag bar anchors are shown
in Fig. 17-21. A ratchet wrench for tightening the anchor nut after the tendon
has been prestressed is incorporated in the jack.
17.6.3

Prestressing of cable anchors with locking heads

The tensioning of heads provided with a screw thread on the outside is

simple; the stressed state is maintained by a ring nut resting on a loaddistributing headplate (see Figs. 16-3,5, 10,21). With this arrangement, no
loss of prestressing can occur from slip, and the prestressing may be increased

246
Fig. 17-21. Electrically powered
hydraulic jack with built-in socket
wrench for single bar anchors
(Dywidag Co.). Maximum jacking
force, 590 kN

Fig. 17-22. Stressing gun of

up to 2 MN formerly
used for cable anchors by
the Losinger Co. The anchor
nut is tightened by hand
on to the distribution plate
after prestressing

if necessary (see Section 16.1). These anchors are stressed, like the e.g. PZ
anchors, by means of a hydraulic jack with a hollow cylinder; the threaded
rod passes through this cylinder and is fixed into the centre of the anchoring
head at one end and onto the cylinder face by a screwed on nut at the other
end. The required prestressing is maintained by tightening the nut or ring on
the outside of the head (Fig. 17-22), or by fixing the tendon in position with
a nut bearing on the surface of the anchored structure. In the latter case, the
rod in fact is an extension of the anchor (see Fig. 16-3).
Most anchors with locking heads holding cables made up of individual
wires or strands are prestressed with special prestressing guns. The wires or
strands are fixed either around the perimeter of the gun on the gun cover
(Fig. 17-23), at one end of the hollow cylinder in many cases (Fig. 17-24),

247

./..

nJ% \ m.
m,4

Fig. 17-23. Anchor head and stressing equipment for 1 MN anchors of smooth patented
wire (Horel system)

Fig. 17-24. Hydraulic jack in use for anchor stressing, and anchor head shown after prestressing {Losinger system)

248

inside the hollow cylinder (see Fig. 17-27), or around the perimeter of the
jack as well as at the end of the hollow cylinder (Fig. 17-25). On placing the
anchor, sufficiently long ends of the wires or ropes must be left projecting.
from the borehole for fixing to the stressing equipment. The cable wires or
strands are fixed with wedges into a ring strongly fastened around the perimeter of the gun; at the end of the hollow cylinder they are fixed into a stressing head of a design corresponding to that of the anchoring head (Fig. 17-26).
The gripping wedges, being re-usable, are made of special steel, and must be
lightly greased before they are placed so as to facilitate removal after prestressing has been carried out.

Fig. 17-26. Arrangement of stressing equipment fixed at the anchoring head of a multiple
strand cable anchor before it is prestressed (documentation VSL)

Prestressing of cable anchors of strands with locking heads proceeds

usually in the following way (see Fig. 17-26):
1. The individual parts of the tendon, anchoring head and bearing plate
are thoroughly cleaned.
2. The anchoring head is slipped on to the tendon, and moved along until
it touches the distribution plate, by pulling the individual ropes through the
openings in the head; the gripping wedges are inserted in the openings, beside
the strands. Care must be taken that the strands remain parallel, and do not
cross.
3. The resting chair, stressing jack, and stressing head are mounted on

249

the tendon, and lightly greased wedges are inserted into the openings in the
stressing head. Prior to the stressing of short anchors, it is important to
make sure that the displacement of the anchor head will exceed 30 mm under
the highest loading. Otherwise it becomes impossible to remove the gripping
wedges from the stressing head following the release of the jack. Wherever
a displacement of 30 mm or less is expected, the jack piston must be advanced
30 mm before the stressing and mounting of the stressing head are carried out.
4. The oil hose from the high-pressure power or hand-driven pump is
connected to the jack, and the stressing is begun.
5. With the initial movement of the jack piston, the tendon ropes become
fixed in the stressing head. The anchor head and its free wedges are held in
position by the resting chair.
6. The pressure of the jack is progressively raised to the maximum value
required. The magnitude of the pressure and the advance of the piston are
carefully observed and recorded.
7. When the prescribed tensile force, or the maximum advance of the
piston has been reached, the pressure in the jack is released and the ropes are
automatically fixed in the anchor head by the forcing of the wedges into
position. The stressing head is freed by light tapping.
8. The jack can be disconnected, or, after retraction of the piston to its
original position, stressing can be continued to the next stage by repeating
the procedure. To obtain the final tensile force in the tendon, or in compensating for losses of prestress, a higher resting chair and headplates are positioned
under the anchoring head.
Equipment for prestressing cables varies only with respect to size, thrust
distance, and working pressure. Some parameters of BBRV stressing equipment are given in Table 17-111. The Cona-Multi system of the BBR Co.
consists of a series of prestressing guns for forces ranging from 110 kN up
to 10,000 kN. The equipment for 10 MN (CM 1000), has a cylinder of
diameter 725 mm and thrust distance 400 mm, and weighs 3,380 kg.
TABLE 17-111
Parameters of BBR V stressing equipment
Type

NP60

NP100

NP 200

NP 300

NP 500

force (kN)
cylinder diameter (mm)
thrust distance (mm)
weight (kg)

620
205
100
28

1,030
260
100
85

2,060
290
100
117

3,090
350
100
196

5,150
560
100
1,260

250

The BEB Multiforce Ram 12x12.5 mm system weighs only 15 kg for

equipment producing a prestressing force of 320 kN, and 280 kg for 1,920 kN
equipment.
The West German Eberspcher Co. and Losinger Meili of Switzerland
employ also hydraulic jacks with a hollow cylinder. This range of equipment
includes types producing forces of 100 to 10,000 kN. The specifications of the
10 MN equipment are: 780 mm diameter, 54.9 MPa working pressure,
1,884 kg weight at a thrust distance of 200 mm, and 2,260 kg at 300 mm. The
10 MN types are designated ZD 869 and ZD 870. The diameter of the internal
opening is 260 mm for both types.
The English Stronghold system (Fig. 17-27) again uses a hollow hydraulic
cylinder but without an opening. It differs from the other types in having
the wires or ropes fixed inside the cylinder rather than passing right through
the cylinder. With this arrangement, economy in the length of the cable

^fc^4l

Fig. 17-27. Operating sequence of the

Stronghold jack in the stressing of an
anchor cable

is achieved. The cable components are fixed in the anchoring head by means
of an indexing plate. This template, after release and restressing,
presses the gripping wedges into position and seats them forcibly under pressure from the jack's lock-off mechanism. Reversal of the oil
flow retracts the jack which automatically releases the internal fixings
for removal and preparation for the next operation. The individual steps of

251

the sequence are remotely controlled from the pump without the need for
attendance at the jack face.
The range of equipment available from this firm includes jacks with
forces of 600 to 12,000 kN. The specifications for the 12 MN equipment are:
900 mm diameter, 80 MPa working pressure, weight 2,200 kg, 400 mm
thrust distance; this type is designated G-1200.
The French Freyssinet system made by the STUP Co. employs a traditional
prestressing gun with the wires or strands fixed around the perimeter; in the
guns that produce greater forces, the cable components also pass through
the gun, and in the latest versions a hydraulic cylinder with a central opening
is in use. The weight of the equipment depends on what working pressure is
required, the smallest weight being 400 kg and the largest 900 kg {Freyssi
Monogroup).
Even when high working pressures are applied, equipment for prestressing
large anchors is difficult to handle on account of its bulk. Some companies
therefore use lightweight equipment designed to stress the individual
strands of which large anchors are composed. The Italian Tensacciai
system, for example, is based on light prestressing guns for the stressing of
individual ropes. It is used for prestressing anchors composed of up to
20 strands each of 15.2 mm diameter, prestressed to a total force for whole
anchor of 3.8 MN (working capacity 3.02 MN). The process can be speeded
up by using a number of guns together (Fig. 17-28), and for this reason the
guns are made with a small diameter and are connected to a central pump.
The easily portable Stbet gun system with an output of 60 to 200 kN is
made in Bulgaria under licence from the German firm of Max Paul. These
guns weigh only 16 to 20 kg. The Czechoslovakian VUIS system employs
equipment designed for twin ropes (Fig. 17-29).

Fig. 17-28. Prestressing of multi-rope anchors by means of a system of light Tensacciai guns

252

^^~^

**: - \
^^

Fig. 17-29. KC//5 system equipment for prestressing a couple of ropes of 15.5 mm dia

Fig. 17-30. Head with immovable fixing of tendon

a) cross-section of a head showing cushions
(supports) made of steel pipe filled with concrete
b) view of a prestressed head with supporting
steel plates

253

17.6A Prestressing of anchors with immovable head fixings

Where these anchoring heads are provided with an external thread (e.g. the
SEEE and BBRV systems), they are stressed in the same way as bar anchors
or threaded locking heads. Tension is maintained by tightening a nut. For
the more robust anchor heads in which ropes or tendon wires are fixed
with grout (Fig. 17-30), individual stressing equipment was used. It was
equipped with currently used hydraulic jacks (Fig. 17-31). The prestressing
is maintained by means of headplates under the anchor head (see Fig. 17-30).
The stressing of an anchor of this type with a force of 10 MN on the
Bou-Hanifia Dam in Algeria in 1936 is shown in Fig. 17-32. Various designs
of these heads are described in the Section dealing with the anchoring
of gravity dams.

Fig. 17-31. Stressing of an anchor with a force of 4 MN VUIS. Dynamometers are

placed under the stressing equipment for checking the induced force

254
Fig. 17-32. Prestressing
of anchoring cables by a force
of 1,000 metric tons (10 MN)
on the Bou-Hanifia Dam
in Algeria in 1936

h*tf* f]

v1, 4* / **-v;

i J
' ^H

ri|
*> ' ,; **W *
i " ..* v ^
- /v
l' '"if; *" >, "*^*% .
?Wv~

* * * > .

* * i \

^
;'i
*

Sf

-<

'*<'

Chapter 18
P R O T E C T I O N OF A N C H O R S A G A I N S T

CORROSION

The service life of structures anchored in rock depends upon the durability
of the anchorage. The greatest threat is from corrosion, which is particularly
likely to occur in the environment in which the anchor root is embedded.

18.1 PRINCIPLE OF CORROSION

Corrosion is the damage caused to metals by their chemical or electrochemical reaction with the surrounding medium, typically heterogenous
reactions taking place at the boundaries between solid, liquid and gaseous
phases. The mechanisms of corrosion are governed by many factors which
cannot be easily defined, and which, moreover, change in the course of the
reactions themselves. It is thus extremely difficult to give a reliable explanation of corrosion; simplified accounts are often presented, but these cannot
be considered as being comprehensive or reliable. It is safer to draw conclusions from the results of experiments wherever anticorrosive treatment is
planned, particularly in large projects.
It may be stated generally, that steel structures embedded in the ground,
mainly suffer the type of corrosion caused by electrochemical reaction; this
entails a transformation of the metal into free ions and electrons as a result
of the interaction of the metal surface with an electrolyte (soil moisture).
If ions of only one metal take part in this reaction, the process is anodic,
the ions passing from the metal into solution as free hydrated ions; when
metal ions separate out from the solution and recombine with the metal,
the process is cathodic.
Corrosive processes involve both anodic and cathodic reactions. They are
usually limited to definite areas on the metal surface owing to the heterogenous
nature of the metal, or because of differences in the composition of the
ground in which the metal is placed. It is the electric current passing between
these specific areas which causes the corrosion. The cathodic reaction reinforces the anodic reaction by drawing off the electrons released by the
latter. After some time, however, the primary anodic and cathodic products
mutually combine to produce insoluble substances which prevent further
corrosion, unless oxygen or hydrogen arising from the reduction of hydrogen
ions penetrates the metal at the site of corrosion. These products disturb the

256

anodic and cathodic processes and facilitate further transformation of the

metal into the free ion form.
The ground consists of solid, fluid, and gaseous matter, and nearly
always provides suitable conditions for electrochemical corrosion. Even the
slightest moisture within the ground capillaries can act as an electrolyte, and
it is not necessary for potential anodic and cathodic sites to be completely
surrounded by electrolyte. In fact, metal corrosion tends to be depressed in
saturated rocks (Fig. 18-1). The degree of aeration, and its local differences
have a considerable influence on the progress of corrosion. Thus, for example,
the anodic part of the corrosive process may take place in an area surrounded
by unaerated medium, yet is accelerated if other areas are exposed to aerated
medium.
1.2

>/
/
/

0.6

0
0.2 /
0

>

z> \
9 _A

*=q

8
12 16 20 24
humidity [%]

Fig. 18-1. Effect of soil moisture content on the

corrosion of steel
1 clayey-loamy soil, 2 sandy-loamy soil I,
3 sandy-loamy soil II

Under some conditions the metal of anchors is also attacked by aerobic

and anaerobic bacteria. This biocorrosion can be caused, for example, by
an irregular distribution of bacteria on the metal surface, which produces
varying degrees of aeration. Bacteria also accelerate chemical processes,
such as the formation of sulphuric acid from pyrites.
The chemical composition of the soil has an important bearing on the
development of corrosion. The presence of salts, particularly those of sodium,
calcium and magnesium (generally acidic carbonates, sulphates or chlorides),
particularly encourages corrosion. Because of their high solubility, these
salts are mobilized readily by the soil moisture.
In order to select the best method for protecting anchors against corrosion, the corrosive activity of the ground in which the anchors will be
embedded must be known. The corrosive activity is determined by making
measurements of the following:
a) the composition of the ground and the ground water level;
b) the virtual ground resistivity;
c) the specific conductivity of the ground water and surface water;
d) the chemical composition and moisture content of the individual
geological beds of the ground;

257

e) the chemical composition of the ground and surface water;

f) physical and chemical properties (pH, redox potential, etc.);
g) the possible existence of extraneous electric fields.
When the anchors have been fixed, it is expedient to check the anchor/
ground potential by measurement.
A summary evaluation of the aggressiveness of the rock, soil, and water
to steel, according to the results of the investigation, can be worked out from
Standards which are often available for the evaluation of the aggressiveness
of ground conditions to steel pipes. It is essential that at least two of the
data from Table 18-1 should correspond with measured values to state the
respective degree of classification. If the anchor tendon passes through beds
of different geological type and composition, the danger of corrosion is
greatly increased.
TABLE 18-1
Classes of aggressiveness of ground to steel
Aggressivity
of the ground

Virtual ground
resistivity
[/m]

Water
conductivity
[^S/cm]

Redox
potential
[mV]

I
low

> 100

< 100

400

II
medium

50 to 100

200 to 100

200 to 400

III
high

23 to 50

430 to 200

100 to 200

IV
very high

< 23

> 430

100

TABLE 18-1 cont.

Current density
in ground
[mA/m2]

pH

Rock or soil
content of
total sulphur
[%1

< 1.10"4
3

MO"

to3.10"

> MO"

Cl
[%1

so3 + ci

co 2

[mg/1]

[mg/1]

6.5 to 8.5

< 0.1

< 0.02

< 100

8.5 to 14

0.1 to 0.2

0.02 to 0.05

100 to 200

6.0 to 6.5

0.2 to 0.3

0.05 to 0.1

200 to 300

< 6.0

> 0.3

0.1

> 300

3.10" to l.lO"
1

Water content
of aggressive

258
The cables from which anchors are made, consist exclusively of wires
treated by patenting and cold drawing. The high mechanical stresses in the
individual strands of a rope can contribute to the development of severe
and very dangerous corrosion under stress, including corrosive cracking and
hydrogen brittleness. These corrosive effects develop into intercrystalline and
transcrystalline corrosive attack.
It is in the nature of these types of corrosion that they are hardly noticeable at the outset; subsequent stages, characterized by very fine cracks
without any visible products of corrosion (rust), can be discovered only with
the aid of a microscope. Failure of the wire occurs at once, without any
preceding drop in strength. In this context, it should be noted that of all the
processes employed for heat-treating wires, patenting is the most suitable.

Fig. 18-2. Cracks caused by

corrosion in a steel wire viewed
under the microscope (cracks
invisible to the naked eye)

Patented wires are less susceptible to corrosive cracking than wires heattreated by other methods. The danger of corrosion under stress is much
reduced by a further treatment following patenting and drawing, namely
low-temperature tempering and curing of the wire. This process removes
a substantial part of the non-uniform internal stress, which in turn reduces
the total mechanical stresses developing within the wire as a result of the
summed internal stresses (strain), and those stresses induced by external
forces (prestress). Great care must therefore be taken to protect anchors

259

against corrosion, and every design for a permanent anchor in rock or soil
must include details of efficient protection measures.
Anticorrosion measures for anchors are considered, with respect to three
main criteria:
1. Method of providing anticorrosive protection:
a) Direct protection by coating, wrapping, or sheathing with waterproof
material which keeps out the aggressive external medium. This method is
also referred to as passive protection.
b) Electric cathodic protection by creating an electric circuit, the anchor
surface thus being cathodically polarized and maintained at a potential
which prevents occurrence of the corrosive process. This method is designated
active protection. It should be noted that cathodic protection is usually
applied in the form of a complementary installation for the protection of
a large group of anchors; the method is discussed in later Sections.
2. Anchor type:
a) Permanent protection such that the service life of the anchor corresponds
to the service life of the anchored structure.
b) Short-term protection of subsidiary site anchors in service for not
longer than five years.
3. Requirements of the static function of the anchor:
a) Anticorrosive treatment which allows for static co-operation of the
anchor with the ground along its entire length or a part of its length, which
nearly always includes the full root length.
b) Anticorrosive treatment which prevents adhesion of the anchor to the
ground within a predetermined section of the anchor; usually the tendon
receives this type of protection.
Obviously the designer of the anticorrosive treatment must take into
account the functions of the individual anchor parts that are to be protected,
and specify the details of the treatment accordingly. For the majority of
anchors, different anticorrosive treatments for the tendon and root sections
must be considered.
Anticorrosive protection must also be provided for the third main part
of the anchor the head. The treatment here is comparatively simple,
because the heads are easily accessible and their condition can be checked
directly.
A special type of treatment is involved in the temporary protection of
anchors; some degree of protection must be given to newly made anchors
which are awaiting installation, or to the material (wires, ropes, steel bars)
from which anchors are to be made. This protection serves during the transport, storage, and handling of anchors, until its function is eventually taken
over by the more permanent treatment specified in the design.

260
18.2 DIRECT PROTECTION OF ANCHORS AGAINST CORROSION

Direct protection means that the steel is safeguarded without attempting

to remove the causes of corrosion. This protection is designed according
to the purpose for which the anchor is intended, the type of corrosion expected, and the insulating material available for making a protective enclosure.
The design of any sort of structural protection should be accompanied by
recommendations for carrying out the work efficiently, taking into account
that the protective material will be applied to the anchor under difficult
conditions, without any possibility of exact control of the process. The latter
problem has lately given rise to the practice of insulating anchors in special
workshops, where the anchors can be assembled and conditions created for
closely supervised preparation of the protective sheeting and other materials.
Further protection carried out at the installation site is then additional to the
primary treatment.
18.2.1

Anticorrosive protection adhering to the anchor

Anticorrosive protection which adheres to the anchor and provides for

static co-operation with the ground, is used mainly for short anchors (bolts)
of small loading capacity intended for the stabilization of the rock faces of
underground caverns, slopes, etc. It is generally used without reference to
the rock type for the root section of the anchor, on account of the static
function of the latter.
The material used to envelop the anchor both as an anticorrosive protection and as a fixing in the ground, is in most cases grout, although synthetic
resins are occasionally used (see Chapter 13).
From the point of view of anticorrosive protection, cement mortar (grout)
is preferable. According to its composition, however, hardened grout is
itself subjected to direct corrosive effects of the medium.
It is threatened particularly by rock with a high content of sulphate. The
rate of corrosion is much affected by the moisture content, the degree of
aeration of the ground, and by local gradients of aeration. Since the
grout itself cannot be protected from access by aggressive agents, the harmful
effects have to be resisted by adjusting the composition of the grout.
The activation of cement in activating mixers, the use of plasticizing
additives which reduce the water/cement ratio, stabilizing mixtures, etc.,
all help to build up the resistance of the grout. Hardening accelerators,
however, must be avoided, because all types in use at present increase
corrosion, quite considerably in most cases. When these accelerators come
into contact with a moist ground, they give rise to very strong electrolytes which induce electrochemical corrosion. The grouting pressure applied
is also very important, because the degree of compactness and impermeability

261

of the enveloping concrete depend on it. By increasing the pressure the pores
and joints in the rock surrounding the borehole are filled with greater
certainty, the rock is better sealed, and access of water to the anchor wrapping
proper is prevented.
A compact cement wrapping 3 to 4 cm thick around an anchor gives fully
reliable anticorrosive protection. The long-term anticorrosive effect is determined by the alkalinity of the cement wrapping. Furthermore agents which
create an inert layer of calcium ferrite and other calcium salts on the surface
of the anchor bars or wires, are released from the cement in the course of
tricalcium silicate hydration. For this reason it is preferable to use Portland
cement for grouting anchors. Mixed cements are less suitable, because they
create a lower degree of alkalinity in the medium surrounding the anchor.
It appears from the diagram of pH and electrical potential for iron, that
this metal is best protected from corrosion at pH values between 9.8 and 12.3.
Hence under normal temperatures, corrosion of an anchor enveloped in an
integral body of cement mortar cannot occur, even if the capillaries of the
concrete in contact with steel contain water; this is because aqueous solutions of the hydrated products of cement have a basic reaction between
p H l l and pH 12.5.
When the anchor is stressed, the steel components elongate. It has been
demonstrated that the stress in the free anchor section is transmitted into
the grouted section for a distance equivalent to 0.30.6 of its length; hence,
cracks tend to appear in this particular region of the grouted section, that
is, in the root part of the anchor. The width of the cracks depends on their
density along the surface of the steel, while the density of cracks depends
on the grout/steel bond and the characteristics of the ground in which
the anchor is fixed, particularly the jointing of the rock. An increase in the
density of cracks and the resulting narrowing of these cracks to an admissible
value, can be achieved by using bars with transverse ribs or a pressed-on
thread (as employed by the Dywidag Co.), or by dividing the anchor root into
the largest possible number of separate wires in order to increase the surface
area of the root in contact with the grout. The adverse effect of the presence
of joints in the ground can be partly eliminated by effective grouting,
and if large cracks are liable to appear, these can be filled by repeated grouting after the anchors have been prestressed. Collared pipes are used to enable
the grouting to be repeated (see Chapter 13).
18.2.1.1 Double protection of anchors with reliable ground fixing
Where anchorage is exploited as a long-term permanent stabilizing element,
additional protection with plastic sheets of synthetic dielectric, and waterproof material (polyethylene, PVC, etc.) has increasingly been applied in

262
recent years. This additional protective layer has an indented profile which is
acted upon by the shearing forces between the steel and the grout and ground
(Fig. 18-3).

Fig. 18-3. Geotest anchor system protected in the root section by plastic corrugated
(concertina-like) ducting

The length of the (concertina like) corrugated pipe is determined by the

length of the anchor section which is intended to co-operate with the rock,
that is, the root length in most cases. Usually the anchor ropes or bars are
protected individually in pipes of small diameter; less often, as for example
in the BBRV, IRP-Tirsol or APS Tensacciai systems, the entire bundle of
ropes forming the anchor is protected by a single common pipe (Fig. 18-4).
In the first case, the anchor ropes or bars are grouted into the protecting pipe
in advance in the workshop where the anchors are prepared. The grouting
can be carried out with special equipment, and the filling of the pipe checked.
Wires or ropes grouted in the pipes remain flexible enough to be undulated
by means of alternating spacers and clamps, thus giving a greater fixing
strength of the anchor in the borehole (Fig. 18-3).
Laboratory tests together with experience gained at anchor sites indicate
that a pipe diameter 2 to 4 mm greater (at its narrowest point) than the diameter of the enclosed steel component, suffices for reliable envelopment of
the steel with grout, and gives a strong fixing of the anchor. The free space
between the steel and the pipe wall is then only 1 to 2 mm wide. The grout
must be prepared with very finely powdered cement, and a plasticizing
additive to increase the flexibility of the mix. Where a corrugated pipe of
large diameter protects a whole bundle of strands or bars, the inside space
is grouted after the anchor has been inserted into the borehole (Fig. 18-4).

263

b)

o)

Det

^N

4
"

KSO^IIIJ

/
/ ML^VM
/

III L

J-"-*"1

11

IjxsS

Fig. 18-4. Root of a multiple rope anchor protected by a common corrugated pipe
a)with the possibility of regrouting inside the sheath, b) with the possibility of regrouting
both inside and outside the sheath (APS Tensacciai system)
1 grip, 2 anchor plate, 3 smooth PVC sheathing, 4 manchette valve,
5 resin pad, 6 obturator bag, 7 corrugated PVC sheathing, 8 strand,
9 end cap, 10 distance piece, / / injection tubes

264

Collared pipes are used for grouting so that this can be repeated after the
first grouting of the space between the pipe and the borehole wall.
The space between the anchor sheath and the borehole wall is usually
filled with grout, although synthetic resin is occasionally used. Interlocking
between the anchor and the concrete is ensured on account of the corrugation of the pipe.
The grouting pipes are inserted as far as the end of the anchor root.
A vent pipe is also lowered as far as the upper end of the section that is to
be grouted, so that air and water can escape from the borehole. Both pipes
pass through an obturator (bag) which makes it possible to grout the section
under pressure. When the borehole is full, the vent pipe is closed to allow
pressure to build up; this pressure is essential for compaction of the grout
and penetration of the grout into the spaces in the ground around the borehole (see Section 13.2).
The pipes used for grouting are made of rubber, polyethylene or other
plastic material, because these are easier to handle than steel pipes. The
grouting pipes are inserted together with the anchor; where cables are used,
the pipe is sometimes passed down the centre of the cable. In some systems,
grout pipes are not used at all, the grout being pumped along the entire
borehole cross-section, or into the casing (see Section 13.2). In short vertical
boreholes, the grout may also be poured in, provided the holes do not reach
below ground water level. Secondary grouting, for the purpose of filling
small cracks in the concrete wrapping of the root, is accomplished with the
aid of a collared tube.
In some instances, cracks in the concrete filling of the borehole may be
sealed by pumping grout into the root zone through extra boreholes.
18.2.2

Anticorrosive protection of anchor tendons

In nearly all anchors, with the exception of bolts fixed in sound rock,
perfect freedom of movement of the tendon (the section between the head
and the root) in the coaxial direction must be established, otherwise the
anchor cannot be prestressed. Sometimes the prestressing of fixed anchors
decreases due to creep of the ground, and must be restored to the original
value; or the ground may be additionally loaded by the weight of a newly built
construction, and the anchor prestressing must therefore be reduced proportionally (see Chapter 7). For such adjustments to be made, the tendon must
be able to move freely. Displacements of the anchor tendon are made possible
by the spreading of insulating layers on the anchor surface, or by locating
the tendon inside plastic or metal pipes (see Figs. 18-4, 18-11, 18-13).

265

18.2.2.1

Free insulating layers for anchor tendons

Insulating layers must be correctly applied and must have the following
properties: they should prevent the access of moisture to the anchorage;
they must be pliable and abrasion-resistant so as not to become damaged
during manipulation of the anchor; they should be non-conductive, thus
preventing the formation of galvanic cells on the surface of the steel, or
they should, by their nature, give rise to a potential at which corrosion cannot
ensue; they must be durable and resistant to chemical attack; finally, they
should be sufficiently thick and plastic to allow displacement of the internal
surface adhering to the anchor tendon relative to the external surface adhering
to the borehole wall (or the concrete in the space between the borehole wall
and the tendon). It is important in any case, that no displacement should
occur between the anchor tendon and the inner surface of the insulation with
which it is in contact.
The insulating coats are made from various bitumenous materials reinforced with a protective fabric, or interlain with plastic membranes. The
thickness of the bitumenous protecting layer is usually 3 to 10 mm, but in
some cases may be more. The surface of the protecting layer is generally
shielded from mechanical damage by a 1015 cm-wide insulating bandage
made from Polyvinylchloride, polyethylene, or impregnated glass fibre fabric.
The bandage is wound on to the anchor with a half width overlapping, and
is glued on to form a single integrated wrapping.
Until recently, insulating coats were made with asphalt modified by an
admixture of plastics. These materials afforded a very high degree of insulation provided that they were enclosed to prevent viscous flow of the material
and that the asphalt was washed with running water.
To prevent flow of the insulating layer, it must be as viscous as possible,
and protected by a covering that can withstand mechanical damage. The
asphalt coat of the anchoring cables used in the reconstruction of the
Cheurfas Dam (1934), was protected by an impermeable cloth wrapping.
The insulation was applied as the cables were lowered into position, by
pouring molten asphalt into the wrapping and progressively closing the
wrapping with a zip fastener. Uniform thickness of the asphalt layer was
obtained by winding a rope in a helix around the cable, underneath the
wrapping (Fig. 18-5).
In recent years, the development of insulating materials has seen extraordinarily rapid progress. The new insulating materials which form the coat
not only form a barrier preventing access of the corrosive medium to the
urface of the anchor, but also contribute towards changing the properties
of the corrosive products and increasing the protection of the anchor by
being electrochemically active, and by being able to inhibit corrosion by

266

changing the composition of the surrounding medium. Agents are added

which considerably reduce the effects of those aerobic and anaerobic bacteria
and moulds causing biocorrosion. The new insulating materials, when
correctly selected and applied, guarantee a long-term, almost unlimited,
service life for the anchor.

Fig. 18-5. The insulating wrapping oF

cables used in thefirstreconstruction of
the Cheurfas Dam
1 hemp rope, 2 asphalt filling,
3 watertight wrapping closed by
a zip fastener, 4 borehole wall

The best procedure is to apply an insulating coat of anticorrosive paste

combined with insulating bandages. The primary insulating coat of anticorrosive paste is particularly recommended for anchors consisting of ropes.
The paste fills the spaces among the strands nearest the surface of the rope.
These spaces do not alter shape when the ropes are flexed, transported, or
inserted into boreholes; this is not the case, however, with cables assembled
from individual wires. The paste spread on the anchor surface and wrapped
in the appropriate bandage, forms a condensed unit which is plastic enough
to allow for movement of the anchor during prestressing; at the same time
it is compact enough to prevent access by corrosion-inducing agents to the
surfaces of the anchor wires.
In Czechoslovakia, a combination of PLU anticorrosive paste with bandaging is employed. The PL U paste consists of a basic paraffin substance containing 50 to 60 per cent, mineral matter, particularly barytes and glass, and
5 per cent, alkaline chromate sludge.
A very important characteristic of the anticorrosive paste is that in the
presence of water the chromates are extracted from it very quickly. Hence,
if water penetrates the insulation (the latter, for example, having suffered
mechanical damage), or if the paste has been spread on to wet steel compo-

267

nents, the inhibitors are rapidly extracted at high concentration. The anticorrosive PLU paste is also a strong fungicide because of the presence of
chromates.
The PLU bandage is made of glass fibre fabric, 50, 100 and 200 mm wide,
treated on both sides with a compound of similar composition to that of the
paste. The biological resistance of the insulating layer is enhanced by the
presence of heavy metal salts and cyclohexane-carboxylic acids. The amount
of compound used is 1.60 kg + 5 per cent, per 1 m 2 of the fabric. The PLU
paste and bandage were used for the first time in 1957, and insulation made
at that time with these materials has retained its original properties to this
day. Hence, assertions as to its long service life are fully justified.
Another similar product is Plastikor. The fabric of this insulating bandage
is made as Arachne non-woven propylene textile; it is impregnated with
a special plastic anticorrosive compound containing corrosion inhibitors,
polar substances and fungicides. Its main advantage over the PLU bandage
is its greater elasticity, which makes it easier to use, and more effective on
uneven surfaces.
The general procedure for applying insulating bandages is relatively
simple. The PLU or Plastikor bandage is tightly hand-wound in the cold
state, with 50 per cent, overlap, on a clean anchor cable, or better still, on
a cable coated with anticorrosive PLU paste (Fig. 18-6). The bandage is
smoothed by hand or with a special tool so that it forms an uniform layer.
A well made wrapping should be at least 3 mm thick. The thickness may
be checked non-destructively by means of eddy currents the principle used,
for example, in the portable Isotron Fe apparatus. Another convenient test
is the so-called spark test, which helps to find any deficiencies in the insulation such as excessive porosity, insufficient thickness, and mechanical injuries
invisible to the naked eye. The insulation should resist puncture by a spark
of up to a minimum of 15 kV.
To avoid mechanical injury while inserting an anchor into the borehole,
the insulating bandages can be protected by wound-on PVC strips.
The cables of the Firth of Forth suspension bridge in Scotland are insulated
by this method. They are composed of 60 patented 5 mm-diameter wires
insulated by a triple coating. The first layer is formed of Denso insulating
paste which was spread on the individual wires on a work-table. The basic
component of the Denso paste is a hydrocarbon derivative of paraffin oil,
with a siliceous filler and anticorrosion agents. This paste removes all surface
moisture in contact with the steel, and neutralizes oxides which have formed.
It does not harden, and permanently retains its insulating properties (the
insulation is guaranteed for 100 years). The second layer consists of a Denso
bandage, wound with 50 per cent, overlap and smoothed to form an impermeable wrapping. This bandage is a cotton fabric impregnated from either side

268

"'"**$/: *~~ v^v

^Jf|WMt,

<

^^ *
s^S&^fe?
.- . 4 .

^^

MB^ISefc:
:.Sjf%

Fig. 18-6. Application of insulating wrapping to a cable

269

with a mixture similar to the Denso paste, but with stronger anticorrosive
properties. The outer layer provides protection from mechanical damage
and consists of a Denselt bandage wrapped around the cable. This bandage
is of jute fabric impregnated with plastic^zed asphalt containing an inert
filler. The bandage is warmed with a blow lamp as it is wound, to soften the
asphalt; on cooling, the bandage becomes a strong impermeable wrapping
resistant to abrasion and other possible mechanical damage.
The practice of applying insulating wrappings to anchors composed of
parallel wires has the disadvantage that it is necessarily carried out at the
installation site. Otherwise, the technique is highly advantageous for this
type of anchor, since the insulating compound fills the spaces between the
wires inside the cable. This is not so with rope cables, in which the interior
surfaces of the wires are often attacked by corrosion. Nevertheless the use
of rope cables is profitable, because they reduce the labour costs at the site,
have a higher ductility which reduces losses of prestressing on permanent
deformation of the prestressed rock (see Chapter 11), and, furthermore,
they can be insulated in the workshop. To prolong the life of rope cables it
has been proposed that the insulating envelope be made in two stages. In the
rope factory, the individual strands of the rope are insulated prior to stranding
by passing them through a bath of fluid insulating paste. In this way all the
interwire spaces are reliably filled. In Czechoslovakia, the rope factory at
Bohumin supplies ropes in which the internal spaces are filled with a red lead
sealing compound.
When the prestressing of such ropes was checked after 16 years in service,
no weakening due to corrosion was found, although a short section of the
ropes was in contact with humid air; the outer asphalt wrapping was not
protected by concrete, but only by a glass fibre bandage in this section
(Fig. 18-7). The external insulating layer may also be made in the factory
by pulling the rope through a nozzle, the insulating compound being forced
into the nozzle at the same time, either as a hot melt or a cold solution. It
should be pointed out that the external layer usually cannot replace the
function of the primary coat, (of anticorrosive paste, grease etc.) because the
applied compound cannot penetrate the spaces in strands of more than
7 wires when they are arranged in several layers. Unfilled spaces admit the
entry of water and oxygen, and thus anchors can be attacked during storage
and during installation before the insulating wrapping of the tendon has
been watertightly sealed at the anchor head and root. Most anchoring
systems, however, use seven-wire strand as the basic unit of assembly, and
the interwire spaces become filled with the compound without any difficulty
(Fig. 18-8), provided that the paste is pressed on to the surface of the strand
and thus forced between the wires. In the construction of the London Thames
Flood Protection Scheme (Fig. 18-9) the anchor cables used to stabilize the

270

o)
b)
Fig. 18-7. Anchoring rope 37 x 19 dia 2.9 mm, denuded after 16 years of service
a)superficial damage to the sheath occurred at the level of the ground surface,/?)surface
of the cable stripped of insulation
<4 Fig. 18-8. 7-strand ropes and insulating
compound filling the internal space of
the protecting pipe

Fig. 18-9. Double protection system with

encapsulation of the tendons submitted
by VAC. (International Construction
1979/Sept.)
/ polypropylene-covered LR Dyform
strands, 2 polyester grout,
3 corrugated lead-coated steel duct,
4 seal, 5 recess grouted after stressing
of anchor, 6 anchor cap, 7 grease

271

quay wall were protected from corrosion with 2 mm-thick polypropylene

sheets supplied by Chemical Products Ltd.
Applying insulating coats by spraying or brushing is not reliable enough.
18.2.2.2

Protection of anchor tendons by pipes

The application of insulating coats, whether this is done on site or in

the workshop, is laborious, and the quality of the work depends on working
conditions which cannot always be guaranteed. For this reason, increasing
use is being made of a method in which the anchor tendon is inserted into
a rigid or flexible plastic pipe. Smooth plastic ducts, made of so-called branched polyethylene, are most often used for this purpose. They are flexible and
are supplied in coils in lengths of 50 to 100 m, diameter 60 to 70 mm. Pipes
of larger diameter are mostly made of so-called linear polyethylene. The
latter pipes are rigid and are supplied in lengths of 6 to 10 m.
The spaces around anchor tendons inserted into these smooth ducts are
filled in special workshops with a mixture of asphalt and plastics or with an
other compound of guaranteed plasticity (see Fig. 18-8), so that the anchor
is free to move during the prestressing. When the required additional stressing
of the anchor has been completed shortly after its insertion into the borehole,
the anchor enclosed in its duct can be grouted on the site. The anchors
securing the underground structures of the tyre factory at Otrokovice (Czechoslovakia) against displacement by upward hydrostatic pressure, were protected in this way. For the insulating pipe a flexible vacuum hose reinforced
with metal rings was used; this hose enclosed a free space around the tendon,
while the space between the hose and the borehole was grouted in order to
fix the anchor root. After the prestressing and subsequent additional stressing
of the anchor had been carried out, the space inside the hose was grouted
by means of a grouting pipe reaching to the lowest point of the hose (in this
case close to the anchor root, Fig. 18-10). The grouting pipe was connected
to the hose and was inserted together with the hose into the borehole
(Fig. 18-11). In the upper section of the space inside the hose, that is, under
the anchoring head, a bleed pipe led out of the hose.
An anchor should not be left longer than a month inside an unfilled
protecting pipe. This period can be extended, however, if a moisture adsorbing agent is placed in the pipe, or the surface of the anchor is provided with
a temporary protective sheath (see Section 18.4). Methods have been
proposed of providing the anchor wHh a sheath affording its permanent
protection against corrosion before it is inserted into the protecting hose or
pipe and enveloped in grout (Fig. 18-12).
Such an arrangement represents treble or quadruple protection against
corrosion; since it is costly and complicated to set up, it is recommended

272
section '

Fig. 18-10. Anchor protected by an insulating tube connected to the steel surround of the base
1 anchor cable, 2 insulating tub?, 3 grout pipe, 4 borehole, 5 anchoring cavity,
6 anchor base constructed prior to installation of the anchor

9;<\$fW

Fig. 18-11. View of an anchor

protected by a flexible tube
to which a grout pipe is
connected for secondary
grouting of the tendon

only for the anchoring of very exposed structures. It was used in the construction of the pumping station for the water supply of Bratislava (Czechoslovakia) (see Chapter 22). The wires of the anchor cables were coated with
red-lead in the factory. The second insulating envelope consists of a layer
of PL U insulating paste and anticorrosive bandage, protected from mechanical injury during manipulation of the anchor by a bandage of PVC foil. The
anticorrosive protection is further increased by the casing (diameter 133 mm,
wall thickness 12 mm) which remains in the borehole; the space between the
casing and the anchor is grouted. Uniform thickness of this grout layer was
achieved by winding a 10 mm diameter wire in a helix around the anchor,

273

Fig. 18-12. Design of the permanent anchors used to secure the pumping station supplying
water to Bratislava
1 2 MN VUIS anchor head, 2 protective wrapping, 3 flange for fixing rubber sleeve,
4 de-aerating pipe, 5 washer, 6 steel plate (720 x800 mm), 7 rubber sleeve,
5 insulating wrapping, 9 pipe (135 mm dia.), 10 casing (135 mm dia.), 11 cable
(65 mm dia), 12 sealing ring, 13 load-distributing sill, 14 sealing for the casing,
15 walls of the pumping station, 16 spacing insert of a 10 mm dia. helix, 17 PL U paste,
ISPLU bandage, 19 PVC bandage, 20 cement grout

thus allowing free passage for the grout. At either end, the casing is freely
inserted into a pipe, the upper pipe being embedded in the concrete of the
seating sill positioned on the surface of the station or caisson wall (see
Fig. 18-12).
A design has also been used in which the space between the protecting
pipe and the cable (the latter bsing provided with an insulating wrapping)
was left without an insulating filling. In this case the protecting pipe had to
be corrosion-resistant, that part of the anchor tendon inside the pipe had to
be provided with a reliable anticorrosive wrapping, and the ends of the
protecting pipe, where the tendon was connected with the root and with the
anchoring head, had to be sealed thoroughly. The pipe in this case merely
played the part of a dielectric. Such an arrangement may assist in the removal
of the anchor, if this should be deemed necessary at some future time.
18.2.3

Waterproof connection of the insulating envelope with the anchor

root

Every anticorrosive system has some weak point, namely the connection
of the insulating wrapping of the anchor with the anchor root being a potential point of failure. This connection is relatively reliable in those cases in

274

which the root is protected from corrosion by a transversely corrugated pipe,

because such a pipe can be watertightly connected with the insulating envelope
of the tendon (see Fig. 18-4). An equally reliable type of connection is that
formed between the insulating envelope and an anchor base with a cylindrical
steel sheathing; the insulating wrapping is slipped over a flange on the base
and the connection is made watertight with a locking sleeve or bandage
(see Fig. 18-10, 18-11).
Where anchors are grouted along a section delimited by a seal or bag,
reliable grouting of the connection point of the covering with the anchor
root and proper filling of cracks which have formed in the root concrete
during the prestressing of the anchor (see Chapter 13), is achieved by repeated
applications of grout using collared pipes (see Fig. 13-40). The borehole space
around the root and the space around the covered anchor are not to be filled
with grout in one operation, because the connection between the covering
and the concrete of the root cannot be resealed, should it break. The filling
of the borehole in two stages, first in the fixing of root zone, and then in the
insulated, tensioned part of the anchor, is undoubtedly safer, particularly
if a facility is created for re-grouting. Two-stage grouting and re-grouting
both raise the costs of anchoring operations. However, these procedures
may not always be necessary, provided that the tendon is able to move freely
in the insulating envelope during prestressing and that no tension is induced
in the grout filling above the anchor root, but rather a compression occurs
which adds to the watertightness of the insulation. When the cable is pulled
against the restraining influence of the root during prestressing of the anchor,
it slips inside the insulating wrapping of the tendon section and remains
protected against corrosion. In spite of this, it is good practice to strengthen
the insulating wrapping at the transition zone between the fixed and tensioned
parts (Fig. 18-13).
With a view to improving the protection of the anchor at the neck of the
anchoring bulb, it is expeditious to increase the thickness of the insulating
layer to the full width of the borehole. When the anchorage is tensioned
under these conditions, the movement of the bulb, and the reaction of the
concrete filling of the borehole, cause the insulating material to be pressed
into any cracks which appear in the concrete of the transition zone during the
first stressing stage. This effect can only be realized in anchors with bases.
A non-compressible plastic material is applied in a layer 1 to 3 cm thick on
the front of the base, and is then covered with a freely mounted cover
(Fig. 18-14).
The protection of the neck of the anchor bulb is comparatively simple;
a metal sheet cover is mounted on the anchor. The effect of this protecting
cover is increased by the application of a plastic insulating paste around the
anchorage, where it is attached to the bulb (i.e. around the neck). A fully

275

Fig. 18-13. Strengthening of the insulating

coat at the transition zone between
the tendon and the base
a) in a bar anchor, b) in a cable anchor;
1 anchor base, 2 insulating wrapping,
3 strengthening of insulating wrapping,
4 concrete filling of the borehole, 5 nut,
6 mounted insulating tube

Fig. 18-14. Diagram showing

mechanically compressed protection of
the connection point between anchor
tendon and base
1 anchor, 2 anchor base, 3 nut,
4 incompressible insulating plastic
material (e.g. PLU paste), 5 cover,
6 insulating sheath. 7 cement
mortar

watertight covering of the anchor base is ensured by incorporating the end

margin of the insulating wrapping into the material of the anchor base.
Such an arrangement was used, for example, in the above-mentioned construction of the Thames quay wall. The tendons, enclosed in a steel pipe,
consisted of three prestressed strands insulated with polypropylene sheets
2 mm thick. The ends of the strands were grouted inside the steel duct with
a pre-mixed polyester compound. They were inserted individually in such
a way that a margin of the polypropylene cover 100 mm wide was also
immersed in the grout (see Fig. 18-9).
The embedding of a section of the insulating wrapping of an anchor
within the base undoubtedly guarantees a watertight connection between
base and tendon. However, it reduces the effective distance along which
a bond is formed between the anchor wires or ropes and the base filling
(i.e. the stress transfer region is reduced); this means that the length of the
anchor base must be extended by the width of the margin of embedded
insulating cover. From this point of view, it is less costly to protect anchors
by the arrangements described earlier, viz. by applying a layer of insulating
material (paste) where the cable is inserted into the front of the anchor base

276

(see Fig. 18-14), or by making a watertight connection between the insulating

cover and a flange on the base (see Fig. 18-11), or between the insulating cover
and an anchor root sheath made of crimped plastic pipe (see Fig. 18-4).
18.2.4

Anticorrosive protection of anchor heads

The protection of anchor cables around the point of connection with the
anchor head is easier to achieve, because this region is usually accessible,
allowing the arrangement to be checked. Even so, defects in this part of the
cable have been known to occur leading directly to anchor failure, and
therefore a discussion of design principles relating to the protection of anchor
heads, together with some examples of arrangements which have been used,
will be appropriate here.
Until now, anchoring heads have usually been protected by grouting the
mouth of the borehole following prestressing of the anchor, concreting the
space under the head base (Fig. 18-15), and eventually, covering the entire

Fig. 18-15. Supporting plates

embedded in concrete under the
base of the fixed head of a 4 MN
anchor. Grouting pipe visible in
foreground (Hricov Dam,
Czechoslovakia)

head with concrete (Fig. 18-16). These methods, however, do not guarantee
effective covering of the bare steel between the end of the insulating sheath
and the seating structure of the head, and often do not provide proper
protection around the head itself where a locking head has been employed.
The reliability and watertightness of the connection can be increased by
welding pipes to the underside of the headplate, and arranging these telescopically over the insulating sheath of the anchor tendon. Alternatively, the end
of the sheath may be extended into an expanded cavity, coaxial with the
borehole (Fig. 18-17), in the anchored structure. The connection formed in
this way must be sealed with a sleeve slipped over this connection, with

277

bonehole fi 150-110mm

Fig. 18-16. Prepared recess for

the embedding of a VSL
anchor head in concrete
{Tarbela Dam)
1 anchor, 2 recess grouted
after stressing the anchor,
3 reinforcement

278

Fig. 18-17. Sealing of the connection of a Cona-Sol G. M. anchor head a) anchor cased
along its free length, b) anchor fully cased
1 trumpet, 2 seal, 5 secondary filling, 4 smooth plastic duct, 5 secondary grout
pipe, 6 tendon, 7 corrugated plastic duct, 8 spacer, 9 primary filling, 10 grout
pipe

a rubber strap, or by some means compatible with the structural arrangement of the anchor. When the prestressing has been carried out, the head
is covered with a cap made of sheet steel or reinforced plastic material to
facilitate grouting of the head with cement mortar or synthetic resin under
increased pressure (Fig. 18-18).

279

A very reliable anticorrosive protection was devised for the heads of the
above-mentioned anchors installed at the pumping station for the water
supply to Bratislava (Czechoslovakia). The steel casing pipe of the borehole,
left in the ground as an external sheathing, was telescopically inserted into
a steel pipe of larger diameter concreted into the anchored structure co-

Fig. 18-18. Protection of a 4.9 MN BBRV anchor head

{Ringhals, Sweden)
/ anchor head, 2 grease

axially with the anchor (see Fig. 18-12). Such a telescopic connection of the casing pipe to the structure excludes the danger of a drop in the prestressing of
the anchor together with a lack of response from the prestressed ground;
such would be the case if there were a fixed connection between the casing
pipe and the structure, because the casing pipe would then function as
a compressed pile.
The telescopically free connection is sealed with a rubber ring, and after
prestressing of the anchor by grout. The internal insulating sheathing of the
anchor, passing through the casing, is connected to a flange on the anchor
head. The anchor has a cast-steel head in which the spliced end of the cable
is concreted; this fixing arrangement is the least susceptible to corrosion.
Considering that even where fixed heads are used the wires are pulled out to
some extent from the head during prestressing of the anchor (Fig. 18-19),
the connecting flange must have a watertight fixing to its seating surface and
the insulating sheath of the anchor inserted into this flange must be sealed
inside the latter with a flexible rubber collar. The head, including the spacer
headplates on which the head is supported after prestressing, is covered by
a protective wrapping which makes it possible to grout the head, the headplates, and the mouth of the borehole in the final stage of installation.

280

tensile force MN
Fig. 18-19. Extraction of wires from an anchor head under tensile stress.
(The wires are embedded in concrete within a steel cone-shaped bucket)

18.2.5

Anticorrosive protection of anchors of short service life

The previously described methods of protecting permanent anchors are

i n many instances very laborious and costly. Their complex design often
arises out of a lack of long-term experience (although the anchors in the
Cheurfas Dam have served for 50 years), and a desire to overcome the initial
mistrust of some of the investors in this up-to-date technology. For anchors
of short service life, a simpler type of anticorrosive protection suffices: often
just grouting the borehole in the root section closed off with a seal, and
subsequently filling the remaining length of the borehole with cement or
mortar following prestressing of the anchor.
If the anchor tendon is to remain free, the borehole above the seal is
not filled with grout, but the anchor wires, ropes or bars are provided with
an anticorrosive coat. Temporary cable-type anchors can also be made with
wires protected by a layer of zinc which is applied by dipping the wires in
the molten metal, or by spraying them with zinc or aluminium (metallization). It must be emphasized that even these metals are attacked in the ground
after a time, and therefore should only be used as a protection for temporary
anchors. Such a metal coating should act as an anode, which then provides
anticorrosive protection, even if it is locally damaged (pierced) by the galvanic
effect. From experience, the service life of a zinc coat on iron in a moderately
aggressive soil is about 10 years. Protective coats can also be formed by
phosphate or chromate treatment, but as these coats are porous and are easily
damaged mechanically, they are unsuitable for permanent anchors.

281

18.2.6

Anticorrosive filling of boreholes

As stated earlier, anchors passing through rock must be protected by

an anticorrosive filling in the space between the borehole walls and the anchor,
even if the anchors are already covered with an anticorrosive coat, wrapping,
or pipe.
This filling also contributes to the strength of the rock, and prevents rock
decay by the action of air and water, etc. The best type of filling, and the
method used to manipulate it, must be selected with these considerations in
mind. Generally, the filling mixture is forced into the borehole under pressure,
since this results in the cracks and cavities in the vicinity of the borehole being
filled as well.
In some cases, the filling of the borehole forms the only anticorrosive
protection. The borehole walls are sealed with grout under high pressure,
and soon after this grout has set, the borehole is rebored [106]. When the
borehole has been flushed, the anchor cable, thoroughly cleaned along the
fixing section, is inserted into the borehole. The fixing section is embedded
in grout, and when this has hardened, the cable is prestressed. Following the
prestressing, the free cable section, which is usually coated with a watersoluble oil for temporary protection (see Section 18.4), is rinsed with a detergent and embedded in grout.
Instead of grout, bitumen compounds are sometimes used as anticorrosive
fillings (Fig. 18-20). In the second reconstruction of the Cheurfas Dam in 1967
(see Section 24.3.1), the boreholes were filled with a heavy bitumen oil,

Fig. 18-20. Protection of

2 MN anchor heads used
in the second reconstruction
of the Cheurfas Dam
1 anchor head,
2 bitumen oil, 3 load
distribution plate, 4 load
distribution sill, 5 sand,
6 mortar, 7 grouting
pipe, 8 levelling
concrete course, 9 base,
10 sleeve

282

the specific weight of which was increased to 1,200 kg/m 3 by an addition

of red lead [106]. The increased specific weight of the compound resulted
in the expulsion of res : dual water from the otherwise sealed borehole (the
borehole walls having been grouted before insertion of the cable). The
initial sealing of the borehole walls was carried out to overcome the
difficulties of inserting and insulating the cable in the presence of water, and
also to create an additional protective zone around the anchors. Since the
effect of this grouting was only to seal the cracks rather than make the hole
watertight, the borehole walls were subsequently sealed by carrying out
chemical injections in two stages. In the first stage the boreholes were injected
with a dilute solution of water glass which had been left to gel for a considerable time; this solution was able to penetrate the rock to a depth of 30 to
50 cm around the hole. In the second stage, a thicker, rapidly setting solution
was used. This prevented the thin solution from running back into the borehole under back-pressure from the rock. The insulating wrapping filling the
borehole space around the cable had a viscosity of 400 poises at 20 C, and
200 poises at 25 C. Tt did not contain any aggressive additives which could
threaten the anchor steel and it was electrically non-conductive. The insulating compound was diluted to obtain perfect envelopment of the anchor
wires, and to facilitate the filling of the borehole. The anchors of the Muda
Dam were protected in a similar way [215].

18.3 E L E C T R I C A L A N T I C O R R O S I V E P R O T E C T I O N

Electrical protection measures suppress simple soil-mediated corrosion,

and neutralize the effects of stray currents. The effects of stray currents on
an anchorage are usually insignificant, even in an area of strong electrical
fields, because anchors are not large enough to transfer stray currents from
one part of a field to another, as pipelines or cables may do. The various types
of electrical protection function in the same way, namely they maintain the
material of the anchor at a potential which either prevents corrosion from
taking place at all, or only allows corrosion to occur at an acceptable rate.
The potential required to protect steel (the so-called protecting potential)
varies little over a wide range of conditions, and amounts to 0.85 V. For
reasons of economy, electrical protection is mainly used for the passive
protection of structures buried in soil [232].
Electrical anticorrosive protection includes not only the familiar cathodic
protection but also various types of electrical grounding to divert and leak
away stray currents; as far as anchorages are concerned, however, cathodic
protection is the most important. This method of metal protection is of
comparatively recent origin, and is used principally for underground pipe-

283

lines. Other underground installations are protected by this method only to

a limited extent, although here too cathodic protection gives good results.
The main reason for its underuse is the somewhat superficial knowledge of
this relatively simple method generally held by technicians and engineers.
Anchors fulfil the basic prerequisites for the successful application of cathodic
protection, when the following conditions exist:
a) An electrically conducting medium (electrolyte) occurs in the vicinity
of the protected metal surface.
b) The electrolyte enveloping the protected surface forms a sufficiently
thick layer to carry a uniform distributed current towards the protected
metal.
c) The protected equipment does not have a complicated shape (large
projections or hollows).
The principle of cathodic protection rests in the induction of an electric
current in such a way that the surface of the protected equipment is cathodically polarized. Thus a potential is set up which, on the basis of thermodynamic
principles, limits or prevents corrosion on the cathode (Fig. 18-21). The

Fig. 18-21. Cathodic anchor protection by

means of sacrificed anodes
1 sacrificed anode (protector),
2 insulating washer, 3 anchor steel

Fig. 18-22. Relationship between current

density and the effectiveness of cathodic
protection

value of the protecting potential for steel is - 0 . 8 5 V, although in practice,

it is usually maintained within the range - 0 . 9 to - 1 . 1 V. To achieve
a maximum protective efficiency, an optimum current density has to be
attained. Any increase over the optimum protecting current density results
in practice in a reduced protective efficiency. The dependence of the efficiency
of protection on the protective current density, for example in a bathing
solution of 0.005 (M) ZnCl 2 (zinc chloride) is represented by the curve in
Fig. 18-22. Some minimum current density values for the protection of
metals are listed in Table 18-11.

284
TABLE 18-11
Minimum current density value for the protection of metals
Metal

Medium

Minimum
protecting
current
density
[mA/m 2 ]

Author

Experimental
conditions

Steel

0.0010.1 %
H2S04

600

Klement

Gentle mechanical
stirring

Iron

0.00020.6 % NaCl

106

Bayer
and Forel

Zinc

0.05 % KC1

1,500

Bulach

Steel

Highly corrosive soil

with 0.5 % NaCl

400

Pritula

Iron

Sea water

170

Negrejev

Iron

Soil

16.6

Olsen

With damaged
bitumen coat

Iron

Soil

0.7

Olsen

With undamaged
bitumen coat

18.3.1

Gentle
stirring

Circuit arrangement in cathodic protection schemes

The basic arrangement of a cathodic protection scheme is shown in

Fig. 18-23. A protecting electrical circuit may be set up on this basis, the
components of the circuit determining to a large extent what current will

W/w/X.

6^

7 ^

I
?>0

- +

source of current

Fig. 18-23. Cathodic anchor protection

1 anchor, 2 source of current, 3 anode

Fig. 18-24. Electrical circuit for cathodic

protection

285

be necessary from the source (Fig. 18-24). Rt to R6 denote the following,

respectively: The resistance of the conductor connecting the source to the
anode, the contact resistance of the anode, the resistance of the corrosive
medium, the contact resistance of the corrosive medium on the protected
metal surface, the surface resistance of the protected equipment, and the
resistance of the conductor leading from the protected equipment back to
the source.
The total resistance of the cathodic protection circuit is given by the sum
of the individual component resistances:
R0 = Rl + ... + R6,
and the total voltage drop in the protecting circuit is given by the sum of the
voltage drops across each of the component resistances:
E0 = Ei + ... + E6.
The total output required depends on the necessary protecting current
density. (Table 18-11)
18.3.2

Anodes and sources of electric current

One of the most important parts of the cathodic protection system is the
anode, from which current is distributed over the protected surface. The
placement of the anode should therefore be such as to distribute the current
as uniformly as possible over the protected surface; in order to achieve this,.
a system of anodes is often used (see Fig. 18-21).
The Sigri Elektrographit Co. of Meitingen (GFR) has developed a system
of electric protection, "Elprot", consisting of graphite anodes impregnated
in a vacuum. These have a much longer service life than metal anodes. They
are connected by specially designed cables to batteries in which graphite
powder is used for the filling between the anodes. This system guarantees
reliable long-term protection for structures embedded in the ground, using
small amounts of power.
The electric current for the system can be obtained from an external
source (usually a mains rectifier), or can be created internally, by setting up
a galvanic cell involving the protected surface itself and some less noble
metal, which is then termed the sacrificed anode, or protector. In the latter
case the system and its installation are considerably simplified, because output
required from the source is very small. The protectors can continue to supply
a low output for a long time, which means that this type of system is the more
cost-effective; there are no operating costs, and no service or maintenance
is required. External sources can nevertheless be used to advantage under
certain conditions (large numbers of anchors, proximity of an electricity

286
supply, protection system already in operation for other installations
nearby, etc.
In Czechoslovakia, protectors are usually made from magnesium alloys,
and are 10 cm in diameter and 80 cm long. Another type of protector is made
from zinc and aluminium alloy. Below are listed some data pertaining to
sacrificed anodes. (Table 18-111).
TABLE 18-111
Characteristics of sacrificed anodes

Specific weight
Theoretical current yield, [Ah/kg]
Theoretical loss of weight, [kg/A year]
Effective current per cent, of theoretical
Actual current yield [Ah/kg]
Actual loss of weight, [kg/A year]
Potential relative to copper sulphate
electrode [V]
Part of potential more negative than
potential of steel 0.85 V (relative
to copper sulphate electrode)

Pure
magnesium

Special alloy
of magnesium H

Aluminium
with 5 % zinc

1.73

1.94

2.92

2,200

2,200

2,870

39.5

39.5

29.5

49

55

39

1,080

1,210

1,120

80.5

71.8

75.7

1.7

1.55

1.1

0.85

0.70

0.25

Assuming an anchor length of 10 to 15 m and a diameter of about 80 mm,

one protector of Czechoslovak manufacture will aiford protection to an
anchor for at least ten years, if its insulation is poor or damaged. If the insulation is carefully made from fabric bandages, or with a layer of plastic material
the lifetime extends to 50 or more years. Where anchors are positioned far
apart, the sacrificed anodes are mounted directly on the anchors. In these
cases, it is recommended that magnesium anodes with a variable resistor
in the upper part and a fixed resistor in the lower part, be installed.
It should be noted that to exceed a potential of 1.1 V may harm the
steel installation, causing steel brittleness in extreme cases, and a weakening
of the steel-concrete bond. This danger, however, only arises when the current
density needed for obtaining cathodic protection has been exceeded
several-fold.
The cathodic protection of a system of anchors is usually considered as
a complementary part of the overall protection system, providing an extra
line of defence in case of damage to the insulation. In this respect cathodic
protection has the advantage of concentrating its effect on a limited area
where some deficiency of the insulation has occurred, so that only small

287

currents are needed. In any case, cathodic protection gives confidence and
reassurance to all concerned that their anchors will have a service life outlasting that of the structure which is being secured.

18.4 TEMPORARY ANTICORROSIVE PROTECTION

The material of an anchor is attacked by corrosion to varying degrees,

depending on local conditions, and corrosion may set in as soon as material
is delivered to the site, before the proper anticorrosive treatment is applied.
Anchors which are to be protected from corrosion by grout, may be attacked
before the space in the borehole around the anchor can be filled, either with
cement grout or other protective grouting material. To overcome this
problem, the surface of the wires, bars or ropes of which the anchors are
composed, are provided with a coating guaranteeing anticorrosive protection
for one month, or up to six months at most.
Temporary anticorrosive coatings are made of paint-on materials based
on oil with added inhibitors; resins or epoxytars are also used, but less
frequently. All these materials are relatively expensive, and what is more
important, they are difficult to remove, some of them presenting an obstacle
to the formation of a cohesive bond between grout and steel. Thus for
anchors or parts of anchors, the function of which depends on their adhesion
to the grout-filling of the borehole, only those coatings can be used in which
molecular interaction with the grout occurs. Given this requirement, the
simplest coating is one of cement slurry, either pure, or modified with additions of various plastic materials. The problem with this kind of protection
is that it may peel off, and drop down to clog the lower end of the borehole;
this may seriously interfere with the later wrapping of the anchor with grout
which is intended to provide permanent anticorrosive protection.
Good results have been obtained with protective coatings consisting of
water emulsions of special paint materials', their composition makes it possible
to wash them off with water, either immediately before the anchor is inserted
into the borehole, or after it has been embedded; in other types the physical
properties of the coating are adjusted so that grout adhesion is not affected.
An obvious requirement of these coatings is, of course, that they do not
adversely affect the concrete. Examples of such protective coatings are,
Rust-Ban 310 in the form of a water emulsion, and Rust-Ban 393, supplied
as a solution. Both are used by the Dywidag Co. in the German Federal
Republic.
However, the makers of these coatings aim at developing temporary
anticorrosive treatments which function efficiently until the final anticorrosive
protection is applied, and which do not affect the adhesion of grout or other

288

materials used for the fixing of the anchor in the borehole. In Czechoslovakia, for example, the three-component reactive paint S 2008 is recommended; this creates a phosphate layer and an organic anticorrosive
film on the surface of the steel. Wires for prestressing purposes treated with
this paint and exposed to the atmosphere, have not been found to show any
signs of corrosion for at least three months. The protective coating does not
reduce the adhesion of grout to steel. The coats are applied by painting,
spraying, or immersing in a bath of the protective material.
Dipping in a bath is the most efficient application method. Coils of wire
or rope which are to be used for the preparation of anchors should be
protected under Polyvinylchloride or polyester wrapping during transport
and storage. Coils of wire wrapped in this way together with a suitable
desiccant, were found to be untouched by corrosion after a year of storage
in an open, unprotected place.

Chapter 19
LONG-TERM OBSERVATION OF ANCHORS

The observation of an anchor is referred to as being long-term when the

observation continues beyond 24 hours after the installation is carried out
[120], The purpose of this observation is to record any changes taking place
in the prestressing, or displacement of anchors as a result of temperature
fluctuations, shocks, load variations of the anchored structure, changes in the
state of stress of the rock, etc.
The long-term observation of prestressed anchors provides important
supplementary data to that obtained in short-term anchor tests, and it may
also furnish valuable information concerning the anchored structure and the
ground. In spite of the considerable importance of data obtained from
long-term observation, there is still relatively little material available in this
respect.
In the following Section, the time-dependent losses of anchor prestressing
which occur in the absence of external influence, will be discussed first.
19.1 LOSSES OF ANCHOR PRESTRESSING WITH TIME

Anchors which transmit a permanent tensile forca into the ground

always show a drop in the initial prestressing with time. This loss is largely
a result of the combined effects of relaxation of the anchor steel, and creep
of the loaded ground. Relaxation is defined as a drop in the prestressing
without deformation, while creep involves the deformation of a material
under a permanent load. Knowledge concerning the relaxation of steel is
now comprehensive, but much less is known about the creep of a rock
or soil permanently under load from an anchor, there being few data
available on the actual magnitude and distribution of stresses in the root
zones of anchors. The losses attributable to creep in particular, can be
considerable.
19.1.1 Relaxation of steel
The characteristics of steel relaxation are wall knowa and are included
among the data supplied by manufacturers from investigations on prestressed
concrete. The relaxation losses in prestressed steel under long-term loading
are usually within a range of 5 to 10 per cent.

290
On the basis of tests made on various types of steel [2], the losses caused
by relaxation after 100 hours of loading are found to be approximately double
the losses occurring after 1 hour of loading, 80 per cent, of the loss of stress
after 1,000 hours of loading, and 40 per cent, of the loss after 30 years of
loading.
The relaxation values vary in relation to the loading of the steel. When
steel is stressed to 50 per cent, of its strength, the relaxation losses are
negligible, but they rapidly increase with higher loads, and also increase
significantly with temperature above 20 C.
The introduction of stabilized wires and strands has reduced stress losses
from the 5 10 per cent range of ordinary stress-relieved steel to 1.5 per cent.
at 75 per cent, of the guaranteed tensile strength at 20 C.
In steel loaded for long periods, losses of prestressing due to creep deformation have also been found. These losses are negligible, however, compared with the effects of relaxation.
19.1.2

Creep of the ground

Creep of the ground under load arises from plastic compression, or failure
of the rock or soil under the stresses brought about in the zone affected by the
load. In the case of prestressed anchors, creep occurs primarily in places
of concentrated stress near the anchor root and below the anchor head
at the surface of the anchored structure.
19.1.2.1

Behaviour of hard rocks

In dense hard rock in which the loading stress is accommodated by the

strength of the rock, some additional compression of the natural planes of
separation (joints, cracks) takes place. The fall in anchor prestressing
rapidly diminishes with time, until an equilibrium state is reached. In the
case of bar anchors, the total loss is approximately 20 per cent, of the original
prestressing, but in cable anchors of greater ductility the loss is considerably
less, particularly in longer anchors (more than 10 m). The original prestressing
can easily be restored by increasing the anchor tension using the stressing
equipment; any subsequent drop is substantially less. Where strong rock is
concerned, additional stressing is usually carried out twice: after 24 hours,
and then after a week or two. The time-dependent development of prestressing
losses in two different bolts and long bar anchors is shown in Fig. 19-1.
Creep in strong, hard rock is very small, even under high and prolonged
loading. According to the PCI [238] the prestressing losses of rock anchors
reach 3 per cent, after 7 days and are attributable entirely to the relaxation
of the steel. Long-term observations of anchored dams also show that the

291

20

30
time

40

50

[days]

50,
300

20
100
0

- - 00
<o<o <o

time

(months)

^^:
Fig. 19-1. Drop in prestressing in different types of anchor with time
A bolts; 1 wedge bolt 1.80 m long (the ultimate strength of the bolt not exceeded),
2 wedge bolt (ultimate strength exceeded). (Both bolts fixed in strong migmatite). 3 bolt
in cement mortar (60 cm root) in clayey shale [227], B bar anchor 11.00 m long, 5.00 m
root, C bar anchor 14.00 m long, 5.00 m root [159]

losses reach a maximum of 10 per cent, and are caused more by the relaxation
of steel and creep of the concrete than by creep in the bedrock. The longest
monitoring of anchor prestressing has been carried out at the Cheurfas Dam
in Algeria. After three years the losses were 4 per cent., and after 18 years
they had reached only 5.5 per cent [120]. The anchors, prestressed to 10 MN,
were fixed in strong sandstone (see Chapter 24).
Comte [34] recorded losses of 4 8 per cent in 1,250 kN BBRV anchors
fixed in very variable fissured argillaceous schist in the Nendaz Cavern.
These losses were notably within the 10 per cent, margin allowed, and the

292
greater part of the loss was found to occur in the very early stages of a fiveyear period of observation.
In the course of prestressing two test anchors (fixed anchor length 6 m,
diameter 99 mm), Barron et al. [8] subjected one of the anchors to three
loading cycles prior to lock-off, whereas the other anchor was loaded
directly with the lock-off load. Both were installed in jointed granite
(Fig. 19-2). The tension in the first anchor remained stable throughout the
no
135
130
-^125

\l20
\l15
|Wj
^105

wo r
95

90

r*> ~
10 V \
-0)

_-*
v

*-*-Xs

10
3
4
*
6
time(monfns)

10

Fig. 19-2. Comparison of anchor prestressing performance with time and temperature [8]
1 length of tendon 59.5 m, anchor not repeatedly loaded before lock-off, initial load
133.8 kN, 2 length of tendon 10.1 m, anchor subjected to three loading cycles before
lock-off, initial load 119.5 kN
observation period, whereas a stable state was achieved in the second anchor
only after a marked loss had occurred (by the end of the first week) owing
to the closing of fissures in the rock. The authors concluded that it is better
to raise the loading to its maximum value through a series of cycles, as
a means of minimizing tension losses after lock-off. There also appeared
to be a temperature effect on the apparent tension in the shorter anchor.
Mschler and Matt [138] presented data on the performance of a 1,330 kN
VSL anchor (root length 4.50 m) after test-loading it to 1,725 kN in fractured
calcareous schist in Waldeck Cavern (Fig. 19-3).
19.1.2.2

Creep of soils and soft rocks

In soft rocks and soils deformation arising from ground compression is

considerable, and the attenuation of this deformation is relatively slower.
Very marked and long lasting deformations have been found in cohesive

293

clayey soils and in fine, uniformly grained sands [154]. In these soils large
creep displacements of the anchor root, and plastic flow of the soil around
the root, take place at the ultimate load. The displacements continue to
increase with time and the required tension in the anchor cannot be maintained
permanently; thus the load-bearing capacity drops and the danger increases
that the anchor root will be torn out of the soil.
1.33.

\j\\ . / ^

.132

2
3

1.131

1.29

\ f

1000 hours
i
i

1M

-c:

c:

5^

<=5 I

1.23
1.27

CO

6
8
time (months)

10

11

1t

Fig. 19-3. Performance with time of a monitored anchor [138]

1 initial reading, 2 design load (1.33 MN), 3 theoretical tendon relaxation curve,
4 actual anchor performance, 5 lowest stress recorded (loss of 0.04 MN = 3 %)

It is therefore important to know how creep deformation develops with

time, especially where anchors are to be installed in the more compressible
types of ground. Generally, the creep-time relationship for permanently
loaded anchors is near-exponential. The results of anchor tests carried out
by Ostermayer [153] in uniformly grained sand are shown in Fig. 19-4.
The gradients of straight lines in the time-displacement diagram give the
value of the coefficient of creep, ks, which increases with the load tension
in the anchor. That part of the displacement attributable to the partial
separation of the tendon from contact with the grout and to relaxation, has
a ks value of approximately 0.4 mm. Values of the coefficient above this
signify creep along the root/soil interface. It is possible to calculate theoretically the expected long-term creep displacements of the root, using the creep
coefficient found in an anchor test, and thus form an idea of the losses of
stress that can be expected with time. Ostermayer recommends that the
admissible limit of the coefficient of creep should be set at 1 mm under a load
of 1.5PW, for the testing of permanent anchors in cohesive soils. A value
of 1 mm for ks theoretically corresponds to a displacement of 6 mm occurring
in a time interval stretching from 30 minutes to 50 years.
The results of many tests show that anchors 20 25 m long with long

294
time
10

/minutes)
100

1000

Fig. 19-4. Time-displacement curves and

creep coefficient for different
loads in a uniform sand.
Two anchors monitored.
Values obtained in the first
anchor are marked with
circles (o), in the second
anchor with triangles ()
[154]

580kN

\580kN

2610 20 30 W 50 60

80 90 100 110 120130 W1S0

duration of prestress[days]

Fig. 19-5. Extraction distance

of an anchor under a sustained
force of 345 kN. The anchor
was fixed in loess loam at
a depth of 11 m by a bulb 35 cm
in diameter

grouted roots of 1015 cm diameter register a prestressing loss of about

6 per cent in hard clays, and 12 per cent, in stiff clays, because of creep [154].
It is interesting to note that these losses are usually registered within the

295

first 2 4 months following the prestressing of the anchor and do not increase
thereafter. Measured values are generally lower than those calculated using
the creep coefficient obtained during the initial loading.
The test result of a cable anchor fixed at a depth of 11 m in loess loam
with a bulb concreted at the foot of the blasted-out borehole (permanent
loading force 345 kN), is shown in Fig. 19-5.
Losses of prestressing caused by creep in soils and soft rocks may be
compensated for by repeated additional stressing at increasingly longer time
intervals (up to one year). This can be done provided that there is no danger
of the load-carrying capacity of the root being exceeded, and that the anchor
was designed for additional prestressing.
Anchors cannot be installed in highly compressible soils with large
amounts of organic matter, or in very soft ground (made-up ground, loose
sand) of low consistency ( < 0.9) or high liquid limit ( > 50 %), because of the
large creep deformations that would occur.
19.1.3

Observation of prestressing losses caused by relaxation

and creep in production anchors

The monitoring of prestressing losses caused by relaxation and creep is

usually prescribed or recommended for a proportion of all production
anchors. The FIP [120] recommends that 10 per cent, of anchors should
be monitored. The French Standard prescribes the monitoring of 5 to 15 per
cent, of permanent anchors (depending on the total number) for at least
10 years. In the first year the anchors are inspected every 3 months, in the
second year every 6 months, and then at intervals of one year.
In Great Britain and the South African Republic prestressing loss is
measured after 24 and/or 48 hours following the prestressing of all temporary
and permanent anchors. If the results are satisfactory, observation is
continued on 5 per cent, of all production anchors for one year [120]. The
admissible change in the prestressing of an anchor is usually 0.1PW. In
Germany and in other countries the magnitude and development of tendon
displacement under constant load are followed in detailed acceptance tests
of production anchors. An anchor is satisfactory if the displacement increases
in proportion with the logarithm of the time, or if displacements decrease
with time.
Long-term observation of prestressing losses, and their rectification by
additional prestressing of the anchor, are possible only in those anchors
which have permanently free tendons (between the root and the head of the
anchor).

296
19.2 CHANGES IN ANCHOR PRESTRESSING DUE TO EXTERNAL
FACTORS

Various external factors can bring about changes in the loading of an

anchor, leading to a permanent reduction of the prestressing in production
anchors. This may be caused, for example, by shocks in the anchoring
medium, or by a variable or fluctuating load exerted by the anchored
structure. Other effects may even result in an increase in anchor stress, e.g.
changes in temperature, changes in the equilibrium stress system of the
ground, etc. Such changes in anchor prestressing can markedly affect or
even impair the function which the anchor was intended to fulfil.
19.2.1

Shocks occurring in the anchoring medium

The highest intensity shocks recorded in anchor-holding rocks are most

often the result of blasting. Shocks can also be caused by heavy machinery,
and by earthquakes in seismically active regions (see Chapter 8). Shocks are
the cause of prestressing losses in anchors much greater than those caused
by long-term static loading; in extreme cases (frequent occurence, high
intensity) shocks may lead not only to prestressing loss, but also to a substantial reduction of the load-bearing capacity of the anchor.
As in the case of time-dependent losses, ther is currently little data available
on the effects of shocks on anchors. In the USA, research has been carried
out on the effects of blasting on bolt anchorages in horizontally stratified
dolomite in mines [68]. There was a marked drop in prestressing when
explosives were used within 3 m of the anchors. This drop was approximately
36 times greater than the drop in prestressing that occurred in the same bolts
over a similar time interval under static load (Fig. 19-6). At a distance of
more than 5 m the effect of ordinary blasts was insignificant.
Conditions for the propagation of seismic waves are particularly favourable
in hard and compact rocks, and in rocks fissured along cleavage planes.
Shocks may bring about a change in the prestressing and load-bearing capacity of anchors in poorly compacted non-cohesive soils, and they can have
particularly unfavourable consequences in cohesive soils with labile thixotropic properties. Careful laboratory tests on soils, and in-situ testing of
anchors, are essential before construction work is started.
Of the various types of anchors, bolts with a mechanical fixing in the borehole suffer the most from shocks; cemented or combined anchor fixings
(particularly those with synthetic resins) are much less sensitive. Anchors
fixed in the rock or soil by means of an expanded root (abutting base) [214]
show a higher resistance to shocks than anchors fixed by means of a long
root. A mechanical device has been developed in S. Africa [152], which

297

allows a gliding movement of the tendon in the base, and gives very efficient
shock protection to prestressed bolts with mechanical bases. Whereas normal
bolts were found to lose all their load-bearing capacity, and collapsed along
with the rock after a blast was let off in the anchored roof, yielding bolts
held the rock roof intact and only required tightening. Some types of yielding
bolts are described in Section 13.1.5.

40 L-Li

1 I i

U 5

i | i

10 11 12 13 1k 15 16 17
^ - time[days]

Fig. 19-6. Drop in prestressing of bolts with time and as a result of shocks from blasts [68]
a> byc,d tests bolts, 1 to 30 successive blasts

Restressing of anchors within range of shocks must be carried out

regularly, if the anchorage is to maintain its action on the structure or
ground.
Long cable anchors are less affected by shocks than short bolts. In Czechoslovakia, several measurements have been carried out on anchored structures
to ascertain the amplitude of variations in the anchoring forces during
blasting operations. The variations were found to be very small. This may
be explained by the fact that any variation in the anchoring force must be
accompanied by a simultaneous change in the distance between the anchor
head and the root. In blasting operations, a vibratory motion of the bedrock
takes place within a frequency spectrum of 5 to 50 Hz. The amount of the
charge is arranged so that the velocity of the vibratory motion does not
exceed the limit for the structure that is threatened. A velocity, Fmax =
= 80 mm/s, is taken as the highest permissible limit. As an example, let us
suppose that the bedrock suffers a harmonic vibration so that the maximum
displacement of the ground surface is 2.5 mm at a frequency of 5 Hz, and
only 0.25 mm at 50 Hz. If the free length, L, of the anchor is 10 m, and this
is prestressed so that the relative elongation, , is 0.006, the elastic elongation,
/, will be 60 mm. Thus the amplitude of variation of the anchoring force

298

at a frequency of 5 Hz is 4 % of the total anchoring force, and only 0.4 %

at 50 Hz. Considering that blasting operations give rise only to a short-term
change in the loading, long cable anchors are not seriously threatened by
a large drop in the anchoring force caused by blast shocks.
19.2.2

Variable loading of anchors

Continuing long-term rapid variations in the anchor load can have an

adverse effect on the maintenance of tension in the tendon, and/or fixing
strength of the root.
The effecs of a rapidly fluctuating load on an anchored structure has been
studied in Czechoslovakia. The structure in question was a concrete compensator block; the weight of the rotor was 200,000 kg, and the rotation
speed was 12.5 Hz. The block was built on gravel and sand 10 m thick covering
strata of clayey shales and sandstones in which the anchor bulbs were fixed.
After 10 years of service, a drop of only 17 % in the prestressing of the anchor
was observed. At more extreme fluctuations of the load (for example, those
occurring in the anchored concrete blocks of high masts involving load
variations of up to 50 %), a large drop in the prestressing is to be expected.
In these cases, regular checking of the anchoring force must be provided for,
and a facility for additional prestressing must be included.
19.2.3

Changes in temperature and the state of stress

of the anchoring medium

Changes in temperature and changes in the stress state of the

anchoring medium can bring about a decrease or an increase in the anchor
stress, and unless this is foreseen in the anchor design, these effects present
a real danger to the anchor, and can eventually be the cause of failure.
Temperature changes bring about expansion or contraction in anchors
and in anchored structures, these dimensional changes depending on the
coefficient of thermal extensibility for the material concerned (i.e. the effect
of the same temperature change is different with respect to the anchor and the
anchored structure). The effect on anchors of changes in air temperature is
negligible, since anchors are for the most part below ground, and the steel
of which anchors are made is of high ductility. Anchored structures, on the
other hand, with large areas exposed to the atmosphere and direct radiation
from the sun, can expand or contract and thus affect the prestressing of the
anchor to some extent. Since these effects operate slowly and are restricted
to within a narrow range, they do not threaten the function of anchors in most
cases.
Much greater effects on anchor prestressing can be caused by changes in the

299

state of stress of the anchored structure, especially where such changes could
not, or were not considered as part of the static analysis. A very dangerous
phenomenon is the increasing tension that occurs in short bar anchors
supporting underground excavations when the latter are extended, or when
new excavations are going on nearby. The increase of stress within the rock
can give rise to a load exceeding the tensile strength of the bolt. In such cases
a minute displacement of the anchor head suffices to decrease the load to
within the admissible limit, so that the bolt can maintain its stabilizing
function. As in the case in dealing with the effects of shocks, the problem is
solved by using bolts with a small automatic yielding capacity, which comes
into operation as soon as the tensile force reaches a critical value. Another
solution is to supplement the reinforcement with further bolts.
Sometimes a foreseeable increase in the load is allowed for by setting
a lower value for the initial prestressing of the anchor, or by installing the
anchor without any prestressing. The most reliable assessment, of course, is
provided by a systematic observation of the changes of stress (deformation)
occurring in the rock, and measurement of changes in anchor prestressing. Thus
appropriate steps can be taken in time, these usually involving a strengthening
of the reinforcement. Sometimes special measuring anchors are installed
solely for the purpose of observing the changes which take place in the state
of stress of the ground with time, and under the influence of external factors.
Of the latter, the effect of further excavations on the surface or underground
is of primary importance.
Changes in the prestressing of stabilizing anchors caused by a change
in the state of stress and of pressure within the rock or soil medium in the
surroundings of the excavation, are often observed on the supports of underground openings or on the sheeting walls used in the course of construction
operations (see Figs. 20-16 and 22-30). The measured values are compared
with those considered in the design. From the results the correctness of the
calculations in the design, and the effectiveness of the support, can be assessed.

19.3 INSTRUMENTS FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF ANCHOR

PRESTRESSING

Long-term and short-term observations of changes in the loading of prestressed anchors are carried out with numerous types of instruments (load
cells), working on mechanical, hydraulic, electrical, vibrational and photoclastic principles. According to the system used, these instruments have
different ranges of measurement, different degrees of precision and independence from external influences, and different susceptibilities to damage. They

300

are usually slipped on to the anchor tendon below the anchoring or stressing head, and care must always be taken to ensure that they are loaded centrically (evenly around the perimeter of the instrument). Their condition must be
checked regularly.
19.3.1

Mechanical instruments

These operate on the basis of elastic deformations taking place in various

types of steel washer or steel spring. Their measurement range and response
are small, but they are very robust.
A simple monitoring of the stress in short bar anchors can be achieved
with the aid of calibrated spring washers placed beneath the tightening nut.
The degree of compression of these washers indicates the change in stress, and
can be measured. In ore mines, steel cup springs are sometimes used; these
become inverted with respect to their concavity as they are forced against
the nut (Fig. 19-7) under a critical pressure from the rock. This condition
indicates that the maximum prestressing of the bolt has been reached.

Fig. 19-7. Dish-shaped washer made by the Elbroc,

Bateman Co.
A before loading, B after loading the bolt to more
than 350 kN

Fig. 19-8. Resplat spring

washer (Bachy)
1 removable cover,
2 concrete, 3 anchor
head, 4 sensing element,
5 adjustment distance of the
setting of the sensor, 6 spring
washers, 7 anchor

Further progress in this direction is represented in the Roof bolts' 'lockplate'\ which functions as a nut at the same time (see Fig. 16-8). This washer is
slipped on to the unthreaded bolt rod, and after prestressing, the washer grips
the rod strongly and reliably by means of self-gripping. The curved and triangular shape of this washer guarantees support at three points on the rock

301

surface. The deformation of the lockplate is so consistent that its various stages of deformity can be used as a visible guide as to the different tensile force
in the bolt and stresses or movements of the bolted rock formations as
illustrated in the photographs. Bolts with these heads can be restressed, if
necessary.
The French Bachy Company makes use of a set of spring washers to check
changes in the prestressing of anchors with large loads (up to 10 MPa). The
washers are covered, together with the anchoring head, by a wrapping
containing sensing elements which automatically register anchor deformation
beyond an admissible set value (Fig. 19-8).
19.3.2

Hydraulic instruments

These instruments essentially consist of a closed pressure vessel which

is filled with oil and is connected to a manometer. Their advantages are:
direct reading of pressures on the manometer scale, small dimensions and
weight of the instrument, and considerable resistance to damage (with the
exception of the manometer). Hydraulic instruments can be made relatively
easily by constructing a small pressure vessel with an outlet for the manometer (Fig. 19-9).

Fig. 19-9. Hydraulic dynamometer BE-5 of Ostroj

(Czechoslovakia)

Precise hydraulic load-measuring instruments for anchors are made by the

German firm of F. Gloetzl (Fig. 19-10), for loads of up to min. 250 and/or
max. 5,000 kN. These instruments weigh from 4 to 125 kg. They are accurate
to 1 %, and the thermal error is only 1.2% of the measured range at
a temperature diiference of 20 C. The manometer calibrated for direct
measurement can be provided with contacts for a signal light which is
switched on when the set limit force has been reached.

302
Fig. 19-10. Hydraulic
instrument for measuring
anchor load (Maihak)
A view of complete
instrument, B Cross-section of instrument;
dimensions A, B, C, D, E
vary according to the
capacity of the instrument,
1 anchor, 2 pressure
vessel containing liquid,
3 equalizing washer,
4 pressure gauge

B)

19.3.3

Photoelastic instruments

In these instruments, the deformation of an optically sensitive material

takes place. A sensitive glass disc is fixed in a strong steel body which is
slipped on to the anchor tendon below the head (Fig. 19-11). The stress is
measured on a portable optical gauge equipped with a red filter and an
internal light source. The pattern on the sensitive material is compared with
the standard patterns of force lines, and the bolt tension is then ascertained
from a conversion diagram. The accuracy of the reading is within 1 %.
Such instruments are made, for example, by the English firm of Horstmann,
with measuring ranges of 0 - 20 kN up to 0 6,000 kN. They are relatively
cheap, simple to use and are unaffected by external influences.
19.3.4

Electrical resistance instruments

These enable measurements to be made remotely on a portable apparatus

which registers changes in the electrical resistance of loaded elastic measuring
elements fixed in a strong steel hollow cylinder. The instruments are generally

303
Fig. 19-11. Horstman optical load
meter in service
a) small type (up to 100 kN) on the
bolt head, b) large type (up to
400 kN), installed in cast-steel tubing
forming tunnel reinforcement (in
the left bottom corner the portable
optical gauge is shown in use)

affected by external humidity. The reading apparatus is simple, being

essentially a voltmeter. The accuracy is at short-term test + 1 / 00 a t long-term
test no greater than 1 % of the measured range. These instruments are
made in various sizes by several specialized firms, such as Terrametrics in the USA (Fig. 19-12) or the Swiss firm of Huggenberger (Fig. 19-13).
Instruments made by the latter firm have a compensation facility for balancing a non-uniform loading around the cell perimeter.

304

Fig. 19-13. Huggenberger A. G. load meter. The dynamometer is shown on a bar anchor
in (A) and the reading equipment is shown in (B)

19.3.5

String instruments

These are among the most reliable and most accurate load-measuring
instruments. The measuring system is based on the vibration of three or six
strings fixed in a cylindrical body with a central opening for the anchor. The
vibration of the strings, induced by a vibration exciter in the reading apparatus, changes with the load. These instruments are made by the renowned
German firm of Maihak, with ranges of 0 to 200, 0 to 500, 0 to 1,000, 0 to
2,000, and 0 to 3,000 kN (Fig. 19-14). They can be read directly or from
a remote point, and are equipped with automatic recording.
19.3.6

Tensiometric instruments

Satisfactory measurements of the load in prestressed anchors can be

obtained by using the well known strain gauge strips; these are fixed on the
walls of a loaded steel cylinder, the deformation of which is then registered

305
Fig. 19-14. Maihak string dynamometer

electrically. An instrument of this type with a range of 1,000 3,000 kN

was made at the Research Institute of Civil Engineering (Czechoslovakia);
it is shown in Fig. 19-15 together with the reading apparatus. The accuracy
of measurement was + 1 %. The load meters made by the Swiss Stump Bohr
AG and Proceq SA (Fig. 19-16) are based on the same principle.

Fig. 19-15. VUIS tensionmetric

dynamometer in use on a dam site
(Czechoslovakia)

306

ill

Fig. 19-16. Strain gauge dynamometers DMS of Proceq SA for compressive forces of 1120,
2020, 3030, and 5050 kN

Chapter 20
A N C H O R I N G OF U N D E R G R O U N D

EXCAVATIONS

The anchoring of underground excavations was one of the first ways

in which anchoring technology was applied, and is now the most widely
used form of anchoring. The first reports on the strengthening of rock with
steel bars date from before 1890. The reports relate to reinforcement work
in the coal mines of North Wales, and work carried out in the USA before
1905 [61]. In Central Europe, bar anchors fixed in rock were used for the
first time in 1918 [208] to secure the roof of an underground excavation
in the Mir mine in Upper Silesia (now in Poland). In Czechoslovakia, the
first successful use of anchored reinforcement in mining was made as early
as in 1926, when shales were secured in the wall of a dipping shaft. The use
of anchors, however, did not become widespread at that time.
The general use of bolt reinforcement as a replacement for timbering
in mines began in the USA during the Second World War, and then spread
all over the world as further developments took place in the drilling technology
used in mines. This made for quick and cheap drilling of anchor boreholes,
and brought with it a better theoretical knowledge of the mechanics of rock
masses. In the mines of the USA, more than two million bolts were being
fixed per month by the end of 1952.
In the fifties, this method was used on a large scale for the first time in the
excavation of tunnels and underground caverns [172, 137]. It became widely
used in underground constructions, not only as a temporary reinforcement
instead of timbering and other types of frame structure, but also as the
main permanent support system for the rock faces of excavations, instead of
masonry and concrete linings. It also gave birth to a new tunnelling technologythe New Austrian tunnel-driving method.

20.1 PRESSURES ACTING ON ROCK SPACES,

AND THE CALCULATION OF A N C H O R A G E PARAMETERS

An underground excavation disturbs the equilibrium stress state of the

rock mass, and as a consequence, lumps of rock become loosened and fall
from the exposed rock face, the rock is forced towards the excavated space,
and the support system that is constructed experiences an additional stress
load. These effects can generally be described as manifestations of rock

309

pressure. The source of this pressure is principally the force of gravity,

although sometimes the residual stresses of orogenic activity within the earth's
crust, including forces responsible for the formation of the surface relief,
are also operative. Usually only the weight of the overlying rock above the
excavation is considered.
For a given depth below the surface, a vertical stress,
= y . K
acts within the rock mass, as well as a horizontal stress,

1 - v

= .

(Fig. 20-1)

where h = the depth below the surface,

y = the volume weight of the rock,
v = the Poisson number of the rock.

.-*"

\r

Fig. 20-1. Theoretical stress pattern

in the vicinity of a circular
opening in strong, homogeneous,
isotropic rock with Poisson number
v = 0.2 (according to K. Terzaghi),
vertical stress, ah horizontal
stress, 0 stress at zero level,
as stress at level S after
completion of opening breaking,
H depth below surface

If the slow changes taking place in the stress pattern of the rock during
excavation are considered in terms of Mohr's representation for homogenous
medium (Fig. 20-2), then circle 2 denotes the state prior to excavation.
Circle 3, which touches the rock failure curve, represents the limit state of the
rock load-bearing capacity at the commencement of excavation, and circle 4
represents the substantially increased tangential stress developing in the rock
as excavation proceeds (the radial stress being zero). The rock is usually
unable to withstand the increased tangential stress, and consequently fails
(loosens). Failure occurs initially in the roof, where tensile stresses occur
(as shown in Fig. 20-1); the rock is unable to withstand these to the same
extent as compressive stress. Only when the weight of the overburden

310
Fig. 20-2. Stress values in a rock mass before and
after the breaking of an opening, represented in
a Mohr's diagram (ace. to A. Hugon)
1 envelope of full rock strength, 2 circle
representing stress state in the mass before the
breaking of the opening, 3 stress state at the
moment of rock failure, 4 stress state in the natural
arch after completion of the opening (radial
stress = 0), p radial stress needed to secure the
face against collapse

increases substantially, do the lateral stresses at the sides of the excavation

grow to such an extent that disintegration and loosening are inevitable there
also. If collapse at the sides is to be prevented, radial stresses (minimum
pressure, p, see Fig. 20-2) must be created in the excavation face to bring
the Mohr circle circumscribed over the difference of stresses below the curve
of failure (circle 3). Such a pressure would have to be very considerable.
In most cases however, it is not necessary. After some loosening of the rock
at the excavation face, the stress increases and moves deeper into the rock
mass where it is easily accommodated by the rock (Fig. 20-3). The loosened
rock nearest the exposed surface must be supported or strengthened to
prevent collapse under its own weight. If collapse occurs, the excavation
has to be expanded and thus the stress is again increased, with the result that
the stress is also shifted even further into the rock.
Traditional timber, steel, or concrete supports for underground excavations
support the loosened rock and prevent it pressing inward into the excavated

Fig. 20-3. Natural arch zone created in the

rock when the stress has shifted inward
from the rock face
/zone of reduced stress around the opening,
/ / zone of increased tangential stress
(of the natural arch), , ah vertical
and horizontal stresses within the mass before
excavation, H0 depth of the centre
of the opening below the surface

311

space. However, the construction of such reinforcement is usually very

time-consuming, and the irregular points of contact with the broken rock
face of the excavation are unsatisfactory, since high concentrations of
pressure are created both in the supported rock and in the supports. This
leads to greater loosening of the rock in the vicinity of the excavation, and
increased pressures.
Anchors function on a different principle: they either connect the loosened
parts of a strong rock with more stable regions of the mass, or they strengthen
these parts by reinforcement and prestressing, the prestressing of the anchors
being especially responsible for transmitting a definite load (see Fig. 6-1).
Another advantage is that the anchorage can rapidly be put into action
before the unsupported rock has been loosened too much.
Both types of support in their usual form, however, are only able to withstand the full weight of the rock overlying the excavation to relatively small
depths (approximately 10 m). Larger loads would inevitably lead to destruction. Over a certain depth below the ground surface collapse cannot
occur, as the load-carrying function of the excavated rock is taken over,
as mentioned above, by the surrounding rock mass; the reinforcement only
supports the weight of the loosened rock in the immediate surrounds of the
excavation.
The transfer of the load-carrying function of the excavated rock to the
surrounding rock can occur in either of two ways: either by the formation
of a natural arch in the rock mass (the arch being supported by the undamaged
rock at the sides of the opening), or by the formation of a rock beam resting
at either end on the surrounding rock mass. The details of both theories
follow from a consideration of the pressure zone in the rock mass lying over
the excavation.
20.1.1 Rock beam theory
This theory is applicable particularly to rectangular excavations in rock
with strong, approximately horizontal bedding planes. Beds of smaller
load-bearing capacity can be supported by anchors fixed into the more
competent overlying rock, or a rock beam can be formed by extensive anchoring of such beds.
In the first case, in which the roof is suspended from a load-bearing bed,
the bolts anchored into the strong rock are tensioned by the weight of the
suspended rock, and their length is determined both by the distance of the
load-bearing bed from the roof of the excavation, and by the length required
to fix the bolt into this bed. Other parameters of the anchorage can be determined as follows:
The spacing of bolts, / r , is given by

312

WTT
where Fs
xt
hs
y

=
=
=
=

<cm)

area of cross-section of the bolt, excluding the thread (cm 2 ),

permissible tensile stress of the bolt material (10" 1 MPa),
thickness of the suspended strata (cm),
volume weight of rock (kg/cm 3 ).

The bolts are always prestressed to the assumed value of the load, P (given
by P = y . hs. / r 2 ), in order to verify their load-bearing capacity and reestablish (at least partially) the stress state in the rock existing before the
commencement of excavation. The extreme bolts are placed as close as
possible to the walls of the excavation, because the support zone of the rock
beam can only be assumed to extend for a short distance back from the face.
This distance is theoretically given by h I tg 45 J, as with a natural arch
(see Fig. 20-6).
The distance lr is sometimes assessed by considering the admissible tensile
stress on the lowermost bed of the supported strata, between the two bolts.
The bed is assumed to be partially fixed in the anchoring point.
The permissible span is:
/ 20 .hf
h = J-V m .q
where 0
ht
m
q

=
=
=
=

(cm),

the tensile strength of the rock under the influence of bending,

the thickness of the lowermost roof bed,
safety factor (usually 2),
uniform load of the bed arising from its dead weight.

If l'r < / r , either the spacing of the bolts must be equal to l'r and narrower
bolts used, or the bolts must be connected by flangeplates in one direction,
whilst the spacing is reduced to l'r in the other. It is also possible to secure
the roof bed with wire netting, fixed to the roof with bolts spaced at the
distance lr apart. The latter procedure is recommended as the most reliable
means of preventing the loosening of the rock between bolts; the tensile
strength of rock under the influence of bending is highly variable because
of the presence of many transverse cracks and fissures, and is therefore
preferably not taken into account.
The fixing depth of the bolt in the load-bearing rock is determined by the
requirement that the resistance to extraction of the bolt be greater than the
bolt strength. It has been shown in tests that a dish-shaped body of rock is
torn out by the anchor from a strong compact rock mass, whereas in fissured
rock the natural planes of separation have a strong influence on the shape

313

of the torn-out part of the rock, which in this case closely resembles a regular
cone with its apex (apex angle 90) at the bolt fixing point (Fig. 20-4).
From the condition:
Fs. ] ^ . hu. Th

sin 45 '

a /

_l_y\4f

*-A

er
1

^l^

Fig. 20-4. Extraction of a bolt from

load-bearing strong rock
1 probable surface of separation in
compact rock, 2 surface of separation
assumed in the analysis, 3 roof,
hu fixing depth in load-bearing bed

the fixing depth can be derived:

_

10.22 .F..o>

where Fs = area of cross-section of the bolt,

ast = tensile strength of steel,
xh = shear strength of the rock.
If the bolt is fixed in the load-bearing bed with cement, the required
fixing length / is usually greater than AM, so that the total bolt length in the
rock will be:

/= K + K

or

/ = K + /.

If the level roof of an opening is formed of strong, thinly bedded rock,

the individual beds can be held together by bolts to form a single beam.
The strength of beds locked in this way is considerably greater than that of
unconnected beds. L. A. Panek [162] has made a theoretical study of the
strengthening of a plane roof in this way. He compiled a nomogram from
which the parameters of the bolt anchorage can be derived; it was assumed
that the roof beds are of identical thickness and strength, and that the bed
surfaces show no resistance to reciprocal movement. This nomogram has
been converted to the metric system by R. Kvapil and K. Luffr, who also
extended it to give some of the characteristics of the rock, as determined by the
strength and thickness of the beds (Fig. 20-5). Information can be readily

314

derived from the nomogram as to the effect of the proposed bolt anchorage
under different conditions. A coefficient of consolidation of 1.5 to 2 may
be considered satisfactory, since this will mean that the downward displacement of the roof is reduced by 33 to 50 per cent, at the collapse limit, compared
with a roof without anchorage.

Fig. 20-5. Nomogram for the design of bolt anchorage in stratified rock over openings
(according to L. A. Panek, modified by R. Kvapil and K. Luffr)

20.1.2

Natural arch theory

This theory is applicable to all types of compact and fissured rocks, to

soft rocks, and even to soils. When the rock beam which was considered
in the previous section fails, a natural arch develops over the opening, even
in a stratified rock mass.
The natural arch corresponds to a zone of increased stress which exists
within the rock mass and is unaffected directly by the excavation. The pressure
of the overburden is supported by this natural arch and transferred on to
the sides of the opening and hence into the substrata. The weight of the
loosened rock underneath the natural arch may load the support of the
opening (see Fig. 20-3). It is therefore essential to know the position of the
natural arch, at least approximately, and to calculate the pressures that will
arise, as far as the support is concerned.

315

In subterranean constructions, the procedure of M. M. Protodjakonov

[168] which is based on the theory of unconsolidated materials, is generally
used. The lower edge of the natural arch directly over the opening is represented by a parabola (Fig. 20-6). The maximum thickness of the rock
surface of ground

Fig. 20-6. Compressive zone of parabolic shape

over an opening (according to
M. M. Protodjakonov)

threatened by collapse under the natural arch is obtained from the formula:

-x-h'-*(-*)]-

<

where a, h = dimensions of the rectangular opening,

= angle of internal friction of the rock,
H = distance of the roof below the ground surface,
fp = coefficient derived from the cube strength of the rock l-j7wr L
corrected for the estimated effects of Assuring and weathering.
Values of fp and <pp, according to Protodjakonov, are tabulated in
Chapter 9 for different types of rock and soil. This method does have some
deficiencies; for example, it does not accurately take into account the
effects of planes of discontinuity within the rock mass (fissures, bedding
joints) and their orientation with respect to the excavation.
K. Terzaghi [205] (see Table 20-1) has estimated the probable extent
of the loosened rock by another method. He classified rocks into six categories
according to their strength and degree of fracturing and jointing. The
maximum height of the loosened rock zone bearing on the roof support is
determined according to the total width, b, and height, A, of a rectangular
opening. The minimum height, H, of the overburden is assumed to
be 1.5(6 + A).

316
TABLE 20-1
Height of rock load over an opening (according to Terzaghi)
Category of rock

Rock load height (v)

Behaviour of rock

A - - massive rock

00.256

possibility of larger bursts and

falling of smaller fragments, no
lateral pressure

B - - bedded rock
horizontal beds
vertical beds
inclined beds

00.500
00.256
0.250.506

falling of stones, no
pressure

C - - irregularly
jointed rock

0.250.35 (6 4- h)

falling of stones, lateral pressure

small or absent

0.351.10(6 + h)

unstable roof, lateral pressure

small to considerable

E - - cohesive soil
of medium depth

1.102.10(6 + h)

unstable roof, large lateral pressure

F - - deep cohesive soil

2.104.50(6 + 6)

unstable roof, large lateral pressure

D - densely jointed
rock, crumbly
rock
non-cohesive
soil

lateral

Caverns are usually designed with vaulted ceilings, so that the major part
of the loosened rock below the natural arch is removed in the excavation.
In caverns which have already been excavated, the zone of the natural arch
can be ascertained approximately by any direct measuring method (for
example geophysically).
If the theoretical height of the natural arch is known, the optimum length
and spacing of the bolts can be roughly assessed. The purpose of the anchorage
is either to suspend the loosened rock of the cavern roof from the loadbearing zone of the natural arch, or to strengthen the loosened rock so that
it becomes self-supporting, further loosening of the rock thus being prevented.
The former type of anchorage which draws the excavated face in towards
the zone of the natural arch, can be used if the arch zone is not too far in
from the cavern face, and comprises strong and little-damaged rock. The
maximum bolt length required is usually that of the bolts placed in the centre
of the roof, and is equal to the sum of the distance between the lower edge
of the natural rock arch and the ceiling, and the fixing length of the bolt
in this zone:

317
I = + hu

or

v + /,

where / is the fixing length of the bolt in cement.

The spacing of the bolts, / r , is determined, as in the preceding Section,
from the bolt's load-bearing capacity and the weight of the suspended rock
at the point of the longest bolt:

/,- /SIS,

V
where Fs =
xt =
y=
v =

.
area of cross-section of the bolt,
permissible tensile stress of the bolt material,
volume weight of the rock,
loading height.

For practical purposes and for the sake of economy lr is usually taken as
being at least 1 m, and the diameter of the bolts is adjusted accordingly.
In the second case, which applies in the presence of weaker or damaged
rocks and where the natural arch is formed farther in from the excavation
face, the rock in the loosened zone is reinforced and prestressed by bolt
anchorage to form a load-bearing arch, d [166] (Fig. 20-7).

Fig. 20-7. Artificial arch formed by locking the loosened rock above the opening with a system
of prestressed bolts
/
/
A width of arch formed where = 3, B width of arch formed where = 2
lr

lr

If the apex angle of the pressure cones issuing from both ends of a bolt
of effective length / is 2a, and the bolt is prestressed with a tensile force P,
the compressed zone, d is subjected to a radial stress from each bolt [69] r
given by the expression:
8P
Gp

nl2Ag2a'

This radial stress induces a peripheral stress in the rock mass; the latter

318

stress acts in a direction perpendicular to the axis of the bolt, and substantially
increases the strength of the rock in the compressed zone [113]. It has been
found from triaxial tests that a rock, the strength of which was very low
under uniaxial compression, acquired a strength of 2 to 8 MPa under a lateral
compression load of 0.2 MPa. An arch formed from rock which when
prestressed acquires a strength of 5 MPa in a zone 100 cm wide, can take
a peripheral load of up to 50 kN/cm, and is thus equivalent to a concrete
arch 20 cm thick [69]. The width of the compressed zone, d, with effective
bolt length /, bolt spacing / r , and pressure cone apex angle 2a = 90, may be
approximated as
d= I - lr.
In this way, a continuous compressed zone of rock is created of sufficient
thickness to transfer the dead weight of the loosened section of the overburden. The length of the bolts is often determined empirically, as described
in Section 20.2.2.
20.1.3

Effect of natural planes of discontinuity

The natural planes of discontinuity which always occur in strong rock,

although with different densities and different degrees of regularity, may
considerably affect the stability of a cavern and must therefore be taken into
consideration in the design of anchorages for the face of the cavern.
If one system of discontinuity planes, such as stratification, is markedly
developed in the rock, the orientation and position of the bolts have to be
adjusted to the natural conditions (Fig. 20-8). The mounted bolts should
traverse these planes of discontinuity either perpendicularly or at an angle
of at least 90 , in order to increase sufficiently the resistance to mutual
displacement along the planes, and enable the rock to transfer compressive
forces both along and across the planes, in the manner of an independent
arch. The magnitude of this additional resistance within the area secured by
one bolt must be such that the total resistance to movement between planes
of discontinuity must be greater than the forces (usually the dead weight

Fig. 20-8. Placement of bolts for various directions of the planes of discontinuity
A horizontal, B vertical, C slanting

319
of the rock mass) which tend to bring about this movement. If the angle of
inclination of the main system of planes is a (see Fig. 20-8), then the maximum
tangential force, , which must be secured is given by T = G . sin a =
= G cos a . tg + Rk = y . V . /r2 . cos a . tg + Rk, and therefore,
Rk = y . . /r2(sin a cos a . tg ),
where y
/'
lr

=
=
=
=

volume weight of rock,

effective length of bolt (/' = v or /' = /?s),
spacing of bolts,
angle of friction along the plane discontinuity.

The additional resistance, Rk, to movement along the discontinuity is

usually created by a tension, Pk, in the bolt. If the bolt forms an angle
with the horizontal (see Fig. 20-8c), then in a vertical section perpendicular
to the plane of discontinuity,
Rk = Pk . cos (a ) . tg + Pk . sin (a ).
Substituting for Rk above,
_
k

y . /'. / 2 (sin a cos a . tg )

sin (a 4- xj/) + cos (a + i/0 . tg . '

Furthermore,
where Fs = area of cross-section of the bolt,
xt = permissible tensile stress of steel.
The force Pk will be most efficient (creating maximum Rk) when the angle
of inclination of the bolts, , is + 90. For horizontal beds and
vertical bolts, Pk = G.tg(p.
A detailed analysis of the equilibrium conditions in a block of rock near
the walls or ceiling surface of an underground excavation was worked out
by Lang [113] on the basis of a two-dimensional stress system. He considered
a block in the ceiling or wall, intersected by one or two joints, and subjected
to (apart from the effect of its dead weight) the resultant of external forces
and the compression effects of prestressed bolts in various directions. The
conditions of equilibrium for the block of rock in the roof and wall of the
excavation are shown in Fig. 20-9. At the joint surfaces, it is assumed that
the only resistance to movement is that induced by friction.
According to Heuze [77], there is still another resistance to displacement
along the joints in strong rocks, namely that occurring as a result of the
unevennesses of the joint surface; this effect would have to be overcome by the
dilatancy of the rock (lifting, increase of volume) before any sliding could
take place along the joint. The difference between the shear resistance at the

< tg ( + )
B : tg (>

tg (a + )

Fig. 20-9. Conditions of stability of a block of rock at

the face of an opening. A in the ceiling, B in the
wall [113]. The block is divided by two planes
of discontinuity (joints) and is subjected to the dead
weight of the rock, G, the resultant of the forces
exerted by the surrounding rock mass, Ry and the tension
of the bolts, P

displacement mm

Fig. 20-10. Comparison of peak

shear strength for a non-dilatant
joint (/), with that for
a dilatant joint (//), with the
same peak angle of friction [77]

joint which does induce dilatancy, and that which does not induce dilatancy
on shearing, is shown in Fig. 20-10. Prestressed bolts are an effective restraint
on rock dilatancy.
If non-prestressed bolts, cemented in the boreholes along their entire
length, are used for roof stabilization, they resist movement along the
discontinuity by virtue of their shear strength. In this case only the permissible
shear stress, , of the bolt steel is considered:
k

cos ( + ) '
and the required cross-section of the non-prestressed bolt (to provide the
necessary shear strength) is given by:
_ y . /' . /,(sin a cos a . tg ) cos (a + )
If the angle of friction along the planes of discontinuity is small, nonprestressed bolts embedded in grout along the entire borehole length offer
greater resistance. Such bolts offer resistance only when the rock strength
is exceeded.
20.2 A N C H O R A G E D E S I G N FOR U N D E R G R O U N D EXCAVATIONS

The stability analysis and anchorage design for an underground excavation

must take into account the geometry of the excavation, the geological
structure in the wider surroundings of the excavation, the physical and
mechanical characteristics of the rock mass including its initial state of stress,

321
and the excavation method. These starting conditions may vary from the simple to the very complex, and from situations which are well understood at the
outset to those that can only be more accurately understood as the excavation
proceeds. The anchorage design is decided by these starting conditions, which
are known either empirically or from the results of analysis; thus the design
may be complemented, if necessary, by the results of observations and
measurements carried out in the course of excavation.
Even where rule of thumb is followed, preference must always be given to
a general pattern of bolting, rather than to the installation of bolts only where
the engineer or inspector considers they might be needed [61].
No jointing pattern in the rock is completely regular, and therefore the
positioning of bolts only according to superficial surface conditions could well
have disastrous consequences. Pattern bolting has many advantages from the
construction point of view. The number of bolts in each row and the distance
between each row are arranged so that it is possible to install one or more
rows after each round (cut) is fired, and the installation crews can then
work systematically and quickly. With such systematic working, each bolt
is assured greater attention both during its installation and its subsequent
checking. These advantages far outweigh the cost of the few extra bolts that
may be used in this way.
The design must in every case be based on up-to-date geological information concerning the location of joints and other major features of the geological structure, and there must be a careful appraisal of the information
obtained from rock behaviour measurements in areas that are already
opened up.
A very important part of this appraisal is the observation of the effect
of deformation on the loading of the excavation and the change of this
loading with time. Immediately after excavation of the cavity an elastic
displacement of the rock into the free space takes place together with a marked
drop in radial pressure. The time of this occurrence is also the most suitable
time for setting up the support and reinforcement of the rock, because
a relatively weak reinforcement then suffices for its stabilization [175].
Delay in placing the reinforcement leads to a gradual loosening of the rock
in the surroundings of the excavation and a further increase in pressure.
An inadequate reinforcement then has to be strengthened, and above less deep
excavations, the ground surface may sink [35].
20.2.1

Analytical procedure

According to Gerhart [61] the analytical methods used for assessing the
stability of rock structures are direct developments from structural analysis
and applied mechanics. Their complexity ranges from the simple case of

322

a block sliding on a plane surface of known frictional resistance, to highly

complex finite element solutions that include the effects of slippage along
discontinuities and the fracture of reck blocks. The usefulness of any
analytical solution is determined not by its arithmetical accuracy, but rather
by the accuracy with which it represents the parameters of rock mentioned in
the introduction to Section 20.2.
Analytical methods are basically divided into two types, those including
elastic analysis and limit analysis, which perhaps is more valuable in the
design of rock reinforcement. Elastic analysis techniques currently in use are:
a. methods of calculating stress concentrations around openings,
b. finite element method,
c. laboratory model methods using optically sensitive materials (photoelasticimetry).
Several authors [97, 149, 143, 200] have already presented solutions for
calculating the stress conditions near single and multiple openings in stressed
elastic media. Goodman and Heuze have given useful supplementary design
tools for finite element analyses. Limit analyses for rock structures have
been presented by many authors, and simple examples of this have been
introduced in Section 20.1.
At present, the finite element method is most often used for the stability
analysis of underground excavations. It takes into account, with minimum
difficulty, many of the factors which affect the stability. The calculations,
obviously, can only be done with the aid of a computer.
Analysis by the finite element method is based on the assumption that
the surroundings of an underground excavation can be considered as a great
number of small geometric elements with three or four apices (Fig. 20-11),
increasing in size with distance from the opening as their effect on the stress
state diminishes. The calculation considers a unit displacement of one apex
of the element and the force which can be said to have induced the deformation of the element is sought. This force must be equal to the resultant of
all forces actually acting on the rock element. Physical and mechanical
characteristics of the rock mass, found as a result of investigation, are
substituted into the deformation equations set up for one element. Similar
equations are obtained for the other elements of the net. The entire program
comprises a system of several hundred to a thousand equations. The computation gives the magnitude of the stress at different points in the excavation
surroundings. By studying these points, any zone in which the strength of the
rock might be exceeded can be identified. The effect of prestressed anchors
is then introduced into the equations as an external loading of the rock, and
the procedure is repeated, giving an indication of how this effect influences
the state of stress in the surroundings of the excavation, and to what extent
the dangerous stresses are brought below the admissible limit.

323

Fig. 20-11. Distribution of finite elements in the

surroundings of a rock opening

kx>

A**TZ

As an example, the stability solution obtained by this method for the

underground cavern of the Machu Picchu power station (Peru), is shown
in Fig. 20-12. The nets of elements are laid out in cross-sections so that the
effect of two main systems of planes of discontinuity in the granodiorite,
and the effect of the stabilizing anchors in the roof and walls of the cavern
are shown up by the analysis.
20.2.2

Empirical procedure

When neither the geological conditions nor the scale of the operation
justify the use of exacting analytical procedures, anchorages for the stabilization of underground excavations can be designed according to empirical
rules based on experience. Many kilometres of tunnels all over the world
have been successfully built in this way. Also the well known New Austrian
tunnel driving method, which is described in detail in the following Section,
is based on a rule-of-thumb anchorage design according to qualitative
evaluation of the natural rock conditions.
In Europe, the most widely used empirical rule for the design of bolt
anchorage in tunnels was laid down by Rabcewicz in the fifties [172]. He
recommended that the effective length of the bolt should be equal to, or
greater than, one third of the excavation width, and that the spacing of the
bolts should not exceed a half of the effective bolt length. The prestressing
of the bolt should equal approximately the weight of the secured rock.

324

0
I

5
'

10 15
'

20

1 m

Fig. 20-12. Finite element mesh for Machu Picchu underground power station in Peru [42]

In the USA, a detailed set of empirical rules governing the length, spacing
and prestressing of bolts was laid down by the Corps of Engineers [61].
They recommend the following parameters:
Length (minimum)
a) Two times the bolt spacing.
b) Three times the width of unstable rock blocks.
c) For roof bolts
spans less then 6 m one half of span,
spans from 6 to 18 m interpolated within the range 3 to 4.5 m bolt
length,
spans 18 to 30 m one quarter of span

325
d) For wall bolts
height less than 18 m length as determined in c) above,
height more than 18 m one fifth of height.
Spacing (maximum)
a) one half of the bolt length,
b) one-and-a-half times the width of unstable rock blocks,
c) 1.8 m (a spacing of more than 1.8 m makes the attachment of a surface
net such as chain-link fabric difficult).
Prestressing (minimum average confinement pressure at yield point of
bolts)
1. For roof bolts
a) pressure equal to that of a rock load of vertical thickness 0.2 times
the opening width,
b) pressure of 42 kPa.
2. For wall bolts
a) pressure equal to that of a rock load of vertical thickness 0.1 times
the opening height,
b) pressure of 42 kPa.
3. At intersections of underground passages
Twice the confinement pressure as indicated above. This reinforcement
should be installed in the first passage (opening) excavated prior to
forming the intersection. Stress concentrations are generally higher at
intersections, and rock blocks are free to move towards openings.
20.2.3

New Austrian tunnel driving method

This method has come into use all over the world during the last two
decades, although it is based mostly on empirically derived knowledge. It is
not new as regards the driving procedure, the main innovation being the
method of securing the excavation by the stabilizing effect of anchors. The
rock in the surroundings of the opening, damaged and loosened by the
excavation work, is strengthened by a regular system of steel bolts to form
a self-bearing, but yielding, roof arch. The bolt system is complemented at
the rock surface by a layer of gunite of varying thickness, reinforced by wire
mesh or steel ribs, if necessary. This reinforcement can be adapted for either
temporary or permanent stabilization of underground excavations of a variety
of cross-sections; it can be used in full face tunnel sections or in parts, while
explosives, tunnelling machines or shields are being used nearby. The extent
of the strengthened zone around the excavation can be varied according to
the quality of the rock and the outline of the opening. This zone can easily
be strengthened with further anchors or layers of gunite, if such seems
necessary on the basis of deformations of the rock and rock reinforcement

326

registered by instruments set up in the course of excavation. The reinforcement is quickly installed with a high degree of mechanization, made possible
by the fact that the opening remains free all the time. The full opening usually
has a circular or horseshoe shape.
The design of the anchorage and its complementary strengthening is
usually carried out according to a standard scheme, there being groups of
such schemes corresponding to particular qualities of the rock or soil. In
Europe, the classification of standard schemes compiled by the Austrian
experts Rabcewicz, Lauffer and Pacher [114, 161] is well known. There are six
classes with corresponding construction sequences and reinforcement
(Fig. 20-13).
1st class. Massive, unjointed, or slightly jointed dry rocks the compressive
strength of which is sufficient to withstand the tangential stress in the excavation line. The complete excavation is permanently stable without reinforcement, or with minimal local strengthening of individual rock blocks, or
places susceptible to bursting; for the latter purpose, short bolts are fixed
individually or in groups.
/.

//.

///

Fig. 20-13. Six classes of tunnel excavation scheme, with corresponding support construction
sequences (New Austrian tunnelling method, according to Pacher) [161]

2nd class. Rocks penetrated by a network of planes of discontinuity

(bedding joints, vertical joints). Water seepage is not great, and the rock
strength in the excavation line is not exceeded. The full tunnel section is
excavated, and permanent stability is secured by a regular system of anchors

327

in the roof, together with wire mesh. The walls and floor are locally
strengthened with anchors as required.
3rd class. Rocks densely or very densely dissected by planes of discontinuity
in different directions (stratification, foliation, and/or jointing). Crushed zones
and clayey infillings are present and there is visible water seepage. The rock
strength in the excavation line is exceeded and the rock must be systematically
strengthened to form a load-bearing roof arch around the excavation. The
zone of loosened rock above the ceiling is threatened by collapse first of all.
Excavation proceeds in two stages, first the roof section and then the floor
section, with immediate securing with gunite initially, then with anchors
or steel girders, and subsequently with gunite again. Prestressed bar anchors
can be used for this category of rock, but after prestressing they must be
fixed in the rock with cement over the entire borehole length. The more
the quality of the rock mass has deteriorated, the more do prestressed anchors
have to be replaced by non-prestressed anchors fixed in the rock along their
entire length.
4th class. Badly broken to technically crushed rocks, regions of rock
failure and cohesive soils of stiff consistency. Plastically deforming rock or
soil intrudes spontaneously into the excavation from the roof and walls and
the floor rises. There is marked water influx. Excavation proceeds in several
successive stages, always with immediate securing with anchors, steel girders
and gunite. The strengthened rock zone must be completed with an adjoining
concrete vault at the bottom. The class 4 standard anchored reinforcement
scheme used for the Taurus motorway tunnel in Austria, is shown in
Fig. 20-14 [69].
5th class. Crushed, mylonitized rocks, cohesive soils uncompacted, much
squeezing (pressure-exerting). Plastically deforming material intrudes into
the excavation from all sides. There is a considerable water influx. Securing
is achieved in the same way as in the previous class, except that longer
anchors are used. Excavation and anchoring sequences are shown in
Fig. 20-15.
6th class. Loose soils, detritus and crushed rocks at great depth, and
generally the most difficult conditions for excavation. Excavation progresses
in short stages analogous to the sequence for class 5, or a shield is used;
however the length and density of anchors is greater, and the spacing of
steel girders smaller. Even the front face of the excavation must be secured
with gunite or anchors. The bottom of the excavation is also anchored to
create a conjoined load-bearing arch, which must, however, show a sufficient
degree of yielding. The rock pressure is significantly reduced if a small
yielding of the reinforcement is possible. If, however, excessive deformations
of the rock are registered in the surroundings of the opening (Fig. 20-16),
the reinforcement is strengthened with further anchors.

328
Fig. 20-14. Standard support system
for the 4th class of rock (according
to the New Austrian tunnelling method),
as applied in the Taurus motorway
tunnel in the Alps. Anchors installed
in the sections with strong lateral
pressures are shown by dashed
lines [69]

cross-section
0.15

A-A
, 0-15

concrete
ottom vault

0.75ml

\ steel laggings
> wire mesh A 65
\ shoterete 26 MPo
steel nis TM 36/58
isolation
inside concrete lining

Fig. 20-15. Excavation and anchoring sequences for the 5th class of rock, according to the
Austrian classification [69]

329
Fig. 20-16. Installation of measuring
equipment in tunnel excavation, according
to. Mller [143]
A 1 prestressed anchors with load
meters, 2 multiple position extensionmeter, 3 section between studs fixed
in the rock face for the measurement of
the convergency of the excavation
B measurements of convergency in the
Taurus tunnel by workers of Interf els,
Salzburg;

330

The New Austrian tunnel driving method has proved its worth not only
in strong rocks, but particularly also in squeezing and loose ground where
astonishingly good results have been obtained. For instance, during the
construction of the Massenberg tunnel (Austria) [174] in slope detritus and
weathered shales, caving-in occurred even with strong concrete reinforcement 80 cm thick; the rock was eventually stabilized by the use of anchorage.
Another example of the successful application of this method in very
adverse conditions is that of the construction of the underground railway
in Frankfurt (GFR) [69]. The tunnel of diameter 6.35 m was driven through
cohesive soils with a maximum compressive strength of 0.3 MPa, angle of
friction 20, and cohesiveness 10 65 kPa. The overburden was only a few
meters thick and the tunnel passed the foundations of buildings at a distance
of only 6.20 m. The geological data necessary for the design of the anchorage
system were obtained from an exploratory gallery, driven in advance. The
faces of the full excavation were anchored with particular care to minimize
settlement of the ground surface.
The New Austrian tunnel driving method is very adaptable to new conditions of the rock mass met with in the course of excavation, and the reinforcement can be strengthened almost arbitrarily, if necessary. For example,
when sections of the Taurus tunnel were driven at a depth of 800 to 1,000 m
into highly compressed phyllites originally placed in class 4, the reinforcement turned out to be inadequate. Large deformations rapidly developed
during excavation of the roof section as a result of large lateral pressures.
To deal with this, further non-prestressed grouted anchors 6 m long (and
later 9 m long) were installed, and ultimately two rows of 13 m-long rope
anchors, prestressed to 600 kN had to be added. Only then was the section
stabilized.
Most of the communication tunnels all over the world are driven by this
method nowadays.

20.3 EXAMPLES OF T H E A N C H O R I N G OF U N D E R G R O U N D
EXCAVATIONS

20.3.1

Anchoring of the roof of an excavation

The first part of an underground excavation to be secured and stabilized

is its upper part, that is, the roof, because collapse of the rock under the
force of gravity occurs most easily, and therefore most frequently in the
roof. This procedure was adopted in the classical tunnelling methods, and
is followed in present-day excavations of full sections. Rock anchoring is
a rapid and very efficient means of roof stabilization.

331

The basic anchorage parameters for an underground opening (gallery,

tunnel or cavern) were considered in the preceding Sections. The distance in
the longitudinal direction between individually anchored cross-sections is
often equivalent to the bolt spacing within a cross-section (s = lr); this
distance is greater if steel bands are used in the longitudinal direction.
Deciding on the reach of each cut during driving is also important, and
depends on the rock type and the available equipment. The distance of cut, z,
is often set about the same as the bolt spacing in the opening cross-section.
This distance of cut is thus related to the standing capacity of the rock with
time and the excavation width, as verified in previous work or from geotechnical surveying or the information given in Table 20-11. The latter is
based on Austrian experience of present-day tunnel cross-sections up to
a frontal area of 100 m 2 [114]. This classification was simplified by Bieniawski [41].
TABLE 20-11
Approximate period of stability, and spacing of supports in tunnels in different types of rock
(according to H. Lauffer)
Type of rock

Period
of stability

Maximum
spacing
between
supports

A strong rock (compact, igneous rock, massive thickbedded sediments, massive gneiss)
B jointed rock (jointed igneous rock, thin-bedded sediments, metamorphic rock with marked foliation)
C densely jointed rock (densely jointed igneous rock,
shales and weaker metamorphic rocks)
D crumbly rock (soft rocks, clayey shales, disturbed and
partly weathered hard rocks)
E very crumbly, disturbed rock (weaker soft rocks, much
disturbed and weathered hard rocks)
F pressure-exerting rock (weathered and disturbed clayey
shales, cohesive soils with solid to hard consistency, sand
and gravel with high moisture content)
G high-pressure-exerting rock (cohesive soils with soft to
stiff consistency, saturated sand and gravel, fills, organic

20 years

4 m

6 months

4m

1 week

3m

5 hours

1.5 m

20 minutes

0.8 m

2 minutes

0.4 m

10 seconds

0.15 m

soils)

When a new cut is made, a rock arch or beam is assumed to come into
effect between the last line of bolts and the excavation face. Over the newly
broken roof section, between the points of support, a normally parabolic

332

zone of loosened rock develops, with a height not exceeding . A new line
of bolts is placed at the stated distance lr to secure the roof. By tightening
the nut on each bolt the washer is pressed against the rock surface with
a force of at least 30 40 kN, and this prestressing strengthens, stabilizes
and prevents further loosening of the reck in the close vicinity of the anchoring point.
When the rock is densely fractured, there is the danger that rock fragments
may fall from the roof in between anchoring points, or in massive rocks,
bursts may occur as a result of concentrations of stress in the excavation face.
In such cases protective wire nets are laid along the roof surface immediately after its first rough dressing, which can be carried out from the preceding,
already secured section. The fixing washers of the anchors press the wire net
against the rock surface (Fig. 20-17). Steel bands, connecting several bolts
in a row, and used in place of the individual washers, provide a high degree
of stability. A layer of gunite or concrete sprayed on after the anchors have
been prestressed provides a lasting protection of the surface (Fig. 20-18
and 20-19).

Fig. 20-17. Wire mesh on

the surface of an excavation
secured with anchors (photo
Goldenberg)

333

Fig. 20-18. Application of

gunite to the face of an
excavation (a) and
a machine for shotcreting,
guniting and pneumatic
conveying Meyco GM 060
of Intradym AG,
Switzerland (b)

S*C

;Xf''V> ? ;', ''&;']

a)

*>'-'/:
^^mm^^mM
*j*jT
^

*>)
The whole cutting cycle, including drilling, placing the explosives, blasting,
dressing the roof, removing the spoil, and anchoring the roof, should be
organized in one working day. When suitable machines are available,
particularly multi-purpose wagon-drills and loaders, the cutting may advance
across the full cross-section (Fig. 20-20), even though this may be very large
(over 100 m 2 ). Thus, for example, when a railway tunnel in Norway (area
of cross-section, 70 m 2 ) was driven into strong granite, the length of cut9

IM

bolting floor

f^f

^ f

^r

Fig. 20-20. Excavation sequence in the Gotthard highway tunnel

in Switzerland [66]

*4 Fig. 20-19. Excavation of a gallery (diameter 5.8 m) for the Suassaz hydroelectric
power plant (France). The excavation is secured with a regular array of bolts
covered with a layer of gunite [212]

335

and therefore the daily advance, was 3.60 m. Eighty boreholes were made in
the advancing face, the peripheral boreholes carrying limited amounts of
charge so as to obtain a smooth blast face. A Jumbo wagon-drill with four
drilling booms of Atlas Copco advanced 50 cm/minute using a 1 7/8" (48 mm)
bit [74].
The entire roof anchoring operation across the full width of the excavation is now highly mechanized. Several firms produce special Jumbo wagondrills which are remotely controlled from the previously secured section.
Such a machine (Fig. 20-21) automatically drills the anchoring boreholes
whether vertical or inclined, places the mechanical or grouted bolts and then
prestresses them by tightening the nut to the required tension. Only 3 minutes
are required for the fixing of one bolt into the roof.
The smallest existing self-propelled single-boom hydraulic jumbo
Secoma ATH 12-1F can drill and bolt in galleries as small as 2 x 2 m and
as large as 3,9 x 4,2 m. For higher openings, other types of wagons are
manufactured with telescopic platforms (Fig. 20-22) from which the roof
is dressed, anchored, and covered with wire net or mesh after the blasting.
20.3.2

Anchoring of communications tunnels

As mentioned earlier, the majority of tunnels for highways, railway lines,

and urban underground ways are now driven and secured by anchored reinforcement according to the principles of the New Austrian tunnel driving
method. Some examples were described in Section 20.2.3, and another
example is shown in Fig. 20-23. In the Katschberg tunnel, anchors were
installed to one side of the tunnel to strengthen the excavation where it is cut
into shales (Fig. 20-24). The remaining part of the tunnel section, cut into
gneiss, was stable without reinforcement. The anchors were of the mechanical
GD type, with a diameter of 16 mm and a synthetic base; the reinforcement
was complemented by wire mesh.
Communication tunnels very often are driven by non-destructive methods
in which partial- or full-face cutting machines are employed. In this progressive
method, it was impossible to secure the rock face by anchors immediately
following the excavation, but only at the rear of the cutting machine; this
caused a loss of time, which could impair the stability of the excavation. At
present, for example the cutting machines a boom cutter or a full-facer
are being equipped by the Austrian Bhler Co., with a drilling attachment
(Fig. 20-25), allowing to anchor the excavation directly at the rear of the
cutting head. This drilling attachment is useful also in blasting operations,
when hard rock is encountered at the front of the excavation.
Tunnels of larger cross-section, and tunnels built in difficult geological
conditions, are driven in parts divided by working faces. Thus, for example,

336

a)

Fig. 20-21. Bolting jumbos of Tamrock BH 20-8 (a) and Secoma CTH 15-1B (b) for fully remote-controlled rock bolting

the Gothard motorway tunnel in Switzerland had an excavation width of

about 11 m and was mostly driven in full cross-section (see Fig. 20-20) with
simple ancorage of classes 2 and 3. However a short section 320 m long in
paragneiss turned out to be very difficult; it was necessary, first of all, to

337

Fig. 20-21.

drive and reinforce narrow galleries around the perimeter of the full cross
section (Fig. 20-26). Because a reduction of the cross-section width by up to
150 cm took place under the very high lateral pressures, more than 800 anchors
from 6 to 9 m long, prestressed to 580 kN, had to be installed in this section.
The final concrete lining of the tunnel could only be carried out after gradual
disappearance of the rock pressure.
The stabilizing effect of anchors was exploited in a remarkable way when
the wide stations of the Washington underground railway were excavated
at a short distance below the ground surface [35]. The stations, excavated to
a width of more than 20 m, are mostly less than 30 m below the ground
surface, and the rock cover over the crown is often less than 10 m. The
schistose gneiss in which many of the stations are cut is unweathered, and
contains four or five sets of joints which are planar, continuous, and often
smooth-faced. The joint spacing commonly ranges from 1 to 2 m. The shear

338
Fig. 20-22. Wagon-drill with
telescopic platform, in service, A anchoring the face
of the cavern for the Churchill Falls hydroelectric power plant in Labrador
(photo Williams)

ill.
1

\Mmmm

i f f If?

'"/'"

wmwM i

B laying of wire mesh

on the face of an excavation
already covered with a layer
of gunite in the Monte
Piazzo Tunnel in Itally
(photo Titanite)

zones which strike parallel to the foliation are typically 0.5 to 2.0 m wide
and consist of layers of fractured rock with smooth interfaces. The quality
of the rock apart from the shear zones is usually high (RQD = 70 % or
more). At first the inter-station tunnels of 6 m diameter were excavated by

339
cross - sectional

^ 777^?Zyr^77r^7/>

luMjitudinel section

Fig. 20-24. Strengthening by means of

short bolts a part of the roof formed by
shales in the Katschberg tunnel (Austria)
[69]

io

bolts 3.5m
<
) 2 layers of
J shoicreie with mesh Fig. 20-23. Support for the Monte Piazzo
tunnel, according to class 3 of the New
inside concrete
1

11

12

1.1

Austrian tunnelling method [212]

T-*

^R;

o)

Fig. 20-25. Two hydraulic booms HB 450 of Bhler with drilling and bolting equipment
mounted on a boom cutter
a) schematic drawing, b) see page 340

tunnel-boring machines cutting through the station areas as well. The

openings for the stations were excavated and secured in a later phase.
Fig. 20-27 illustrates the construction techniques which were developed for
some of the stations. Inclined bolt anchors were installed from the previously
excavated line tunnels to provide protection for the future station aich as the
upper heading was excavated. This pre-support system permitted subsequent
excavation stages to be of greater width than would otherwise have been
possible. During the initial stages the sidewalls were also secured by casting

340

II,

b)

Fig. 20-25.
6) view of a cutting machine with two booms of Bhler in idling position

Fig. 20-26. Excavation of the

Gotthard tunnel in parts (galleries)
in a difficult section in paragneiss
a) excavation scheme,

341

b)
Fig. 20-26.
b) view of excavation [66]

the wall plate and the lower portion of the concrete arch. The final structural
lining, consisting of steel ribs and gunite, was installed as the heading of the
fullwidth excavation was advanced (Fig. 20-28). Detailed measurements of
rock deformation made with extensionmeter demonstrated the high efficiency

342

typical joint
orientations

recessed
rock bolt

Fig. 20-27. Excavation

sequence for the stations of
the Washington
Underground [35]. Bolt
spacing: 1.5 m along the
tunnel

foliation
shears

1a,b running tunnels ; 2 pilot tunnel

initial

^rib W n*61

shoterete layer

sho terete

Fig. 20-28. Typical

dimensions of the surface
lining in the Washington
Underground stations

of the anchorage, even under the extremely adverse conditions prevailing in the
Dupont Circle Station (Fig. 20-29), where the line tunnels had not been
excavated in advance.
20.3.3

Anchoring of small openings, rock pillars, galleries and shafts

The anchoring of smaller openings and rock formations in the course of

constructing underground systems is usually based on empirical procedures.
Short bar anchors or bolts, without prestressing and with their entire length
embedded in grout or resin, are used to reinforce the superficial zone of the
rock, for which purpose they are very effective even in swelling rock. The
securing of flat ceilings in horizontally bedded rocks (Fig. 20-30) is a typical
example of the use of such anchorage. The anchored excavation roof in the
White Pine copper mine (Michigan) is shown schematically in Fig. 20-31 [69].
The width of excavation achieved by securing with short bolts in the overlying
beds of sandstone is remarkable.
The application of anchoring to the roofs and faces of inclined openings
and haulage shafts (Fig. 20-32) is particularly appropriate, since the construction of any other type of support in these situations is very difficult.
In stabilizing the greatly stressed surfaces of hauling drifts and shoot holes*

343
multiple position

Connecticut A ve
underpass

Fig. 20-29. Instrumentation (A),

excavation and support
construction sequence (B),
in the Dupont Circle Station

cluster ofdouble
V strain gauges attached to
position ettensometer
steel sets

rock bolts f 28 mm

Jo
0f\^

3cr>sho terete 3b-\ s|

bolts^z
f35mm

concrete

^b

/ 6b
0

1 i

i i i

1 i

10m

i i ij

bolts and ribs spaced 1. 52 m

longitudinally
ribs WMx61,shotcrere 15to 60cm thick

the best results are obtained with non-prestressed bars without externally
projecting heads which might obstruct the passage of spoil etc. Cements based
on synthetic resins are particularly suitable in these situations, as they remain
sufficiently elastic after hardening to absorb and withstand the severe shocks
produced by explosives and movement of disintegrating rock [130].
The anchoring of the concrete linings of pressure galleries and penstock
shafts fulfils a different function, namely that of combining the strength
of the lining with the strength of the surrounding rock against the internal
pressure of water. A reinforced and anchored gunite lining (see Fig. 20-19) can
be used successfully in place of more costly steel armouring.
Very effective strengthening by means of prestressed bolts and anchors
can be achieved in rock pillars and in corners, where the anchors assist in
distributing high concentrations of stress throughout the rock of these forma-

344

Fig. 20-30. Anchored flat roof of a gallery in underground mine (photo Titan, Australia)

tions. A good example of an anchored rock pillar is given by Polish authors

[201] (Fig. 20-33).
In cases of swelling rocks, non-prestressed bolts have proved to be very
efficient [172]. Thus, in the experimental section of a gallery 2.40 m wide
in which the floor was pushed upward by 1.40 m, the floor level was restored
to 10 cm above the original level after four bolts 1.50 m long were fixed
in successive cross-sections 0.90 m apart. Another example of the stabiliza-

345

Fig. 20-31. Strengthening of

roof bed with bolts in
a wide opening of the White
Pine mine (Michigan) [69]

:.?1
9.0 m

-A

section A -A

3m

Fig. 20-32. Reinforcement of a boxhole with

non-prestressed bolts fixed with resin

tion of a swelling clayey shale forming the floor of a coal mine gallery is
shown in Fig. 20-34 [69]. In these situations the bolts must be fitted at the
earliest opportunity after excavation, the anchoring must be of sufficient
depth (1/3 to 1/2 of the gallery width), and the grout must be of a rapid
hardening type.
20.3.4

Stabilization of large underground caverns

Large underground caverns are constructed for various purposes, often

to contain the equipment for hydro-electric power plants and also as special
storage for materials such as oil products and foodstuffs. Caverns may be
excavated for the installation of military equipment, for sport halls, cinemas
and churches, etc. This widespread underground construction method, even
in places where the rock does not have the most favourable characteristics,

346

wmi

mm

9*
'-.

Ji
v&e^'i'w
4-

b>r

'

^
v

-*/*'

t * * , l&h,~*&.

,*M%ippi

Fig. 20-33. Anchoring of the upper part of a rock pillar 6 m high iii the Olkusz mine
(Poland) [201]

has been made possible by the technique of rock anchoring. As long as only
supporting types of reinforcement were available, the excavation of large
caverns in weaker types of rock was difficult and very- costly. Nowadays
the excavation of large spaces proceeds quickly and is economical. Under-

ground

plan

^J

fc

S*
-o

-o

o-

fcs

-oo

-i

o-

4.2/77
o~

"if
5k

cross - sect/on

Fig. 20-34. Successful anchorage of

a gallery floor consisting of swelling
clayey shales in the Hugo coal mine in
the Ruhr (GFR) [69]

ground caverns are much cheaper than surface constructions of the same
usable volume.
Among the first large, anchored underground caverns in the world was
the machine hall of the power plant at Lipno in Czechoslovakia (Fig. 20-35),
the maximum width of the arch being 32 m [230]. The project involved an
investigation of the structural conditions of the granite mass, carried out
by geophysical surveying in pilot tunnels. As a result, faces of up to 30 m
in height in the main cavern were reliably secured with anchors. Steel bolts,
36 mm in diameter and from 4 to 9 m long, were installed in boreholes filled
with grout, the grout having been passed to the blind end of the borehole
by means of a glass tube. When the grout had hardened, the bolt's were
prestressed with a tensile force of between 40 50 kN, by tightening the
nuts with a flat spanner. The average density of bolt placement was one per
4.2 m 2 (Fig. 20-36).
Of the large number of anchor-stabilized underground power plants
constructed in the past 25 years, some typical examples are cited in the
following.
The Lutz underground power station excavated in a flysh series of sandstone, limestone and soft marly shales, is exemplary as a project in which all
modern construction methods were used in the securing of the excavation
as appropriate for the existing geological conditions (Fig. 20-37) [188b]. During

348

V
M%

\>;

*s%

>

>

Fig. 20-35. View of the northern part of the excavation for the main cavern of the underground
hydroelectric power plant at Lipno (Czechoslovakia)

349

Fig. 20-36. Typical cross-section of the main cavern at Lipno

A distribution of anchors proposed on the basis of the structural condition of the
granite as found in pilot tunnels, B structural conditions discovered during the
full-scale excavation and actual positioning of bar anchors, 1 lines of intersection
where the joint planes meet the section plane (type of joint designated), 2 anchors,
with lengths indicated, 3 outli of the proposed full excavation, 4 outline of the
excavation for pilot tunnels, J> actual full-scale excavation, 6 concrete protecting
structures

350

the breaking of the roof for the protective parabolic vault, the former was
temporarily secured with short bolts mechanically fixed in the rock. The
longitudinal walls were stabilized by means of vertical pillars secured with
long anchoring reaching deep into the rock, across the beds. The shorter
walls, however, were protected from sliding and the collapse of pieces of the
rock bedding into the excavated space, by thin reinforced concrete vaults.
The Veytaux underground power plant in Switzerland has a cavern
30.5 m wide, 23 to 26.5 m high, and 137.5 m long. It wa& excavated in stages
in horizontally bedded and much jointed limestones and marlstones; the
perimeter was excavated first, followed by the core of the cavern. The entire
face of the excavation was temporarily secured by a regular system of bar
anchors, wire mesh, and gunite of 15 cm minimum thickness. The bolts
which were 4 m long, were fixed with resin so that it was possible to prestress
them (to 160 kN) after several hours. When the excavation had been complet-

Fig. 20-37. Securing of the Lutz cavern (Austria), excavated in a flysch series
a) groundplan (double lines with bedding symbols of strike and dip denote the main
positions of soft shales), b) cross-section of the cavern

ed, the roof and the walls were permanently secured with VSL cable anchors
11 to 18m long, with service loads of 1.35 and 1.15MN. There was an
average of one cable anchor per 14 m 2 of roof area (Fig. 20-38). The originally
planned concrete arch was abandoned.
The underground El Toro power plant in Chile is built in a cavern shown
in cross-section in Fig. 20-39. It was excavated in granodiorite with three
main systems of joints. The excavation progressed from the top downwards.
At each stage of the excavation the rock was immediately secured with long

351

cable anchors (service load, 1,200 kN), together with short bar anchors
prestressed to 160 kN, according to the local requirements in regions between
long anchors. The spacing of the long anchors was 6 m longitudinally, and
3 to 5 m transversely. When the entire length of the roof section had been

b)

Fig. 20-38. Veytaux underground power plant in Switzerland

A excavation scheme and support construction sequence, B view inside cavern

352

long anchors VSL not MR, l15-17m

short anchors: VSL 181 ER,l= 1m

Fig. 20-39. El Toro underground power plant (Chile), showing excavation sequence
and anchorage [122]

excavated, a concrete arch 1 m thick was constructed at the crown. This

served as an additional strengthening against earthquakes.
The Vianden HI power plant in Luxemburg is installed in a shaft 50 m
deep and 24,40 en in diameter. The shaft was excavated in a series of clayey
shales with Marked foliation inclined at an angle of 57. A large rock wedge
threatening to slide towards the excavation (Fig. 20-40) under its own weight
was secured with 102 Dywidag anchors of various lengths passing across the
wedge, fixed into the rock mass on either side. Each anchor had a loadcarrying capacity of 1.4 MN and consisted of a bundle of 9 shaped bars
16 mm in diameter with double anticorrosive protection.
Mechanical jexpanding bolts (dovetail type, ribbed steel) 9 m long and
32 mm in diameter were used for anchoring the cavern for the Paolo
Alfonso IV power station (Brazil), excavated in a complex of hard crystalline
rock [58J, The bolts were placed at intervals of 1.5 m to form a grid pattern,
and were tensioned to 225 kN with a torque wrench, thus providing a mean
compression of 0.1 MPa on the rock surface of the heading (Fig. 20-41).
After tensioning, all the bolts were grouted. The first layer of a gunite lining
(about 4 cm thick) was then applied. A 10 cm-square mesh of 4.2 mm steel
wire was attached to the gunite layer with steel pins, and was tied also to
the heads of the bolts. Finally, a second gunite layer was applied to the roof,
giving a total lining thickness of 1015 cm. On the sidewalls of the cavern,

353

a)

lA=20m 15m 10m

Fig. 20-40. Anchorage of rock walls of a circular shaft for the Vianden III power plant
(Luxemburg)
a) cross-section and horizontal section, b) see page 354

bolts and dowels (non-prestressed bolts) were placed at regular intervals,

and at a later stage, gunite was applied over wire mesh to the unstable
regions at the intersections between the cavern and the tunnels. The purpose
of the prestressed bolts in the walls was to help stabilize the rock mass by
applying a pressure at the rock surface varying progressively from 0.35 MPa
in the zones under travelling crane beams, to zero at an elevation of 140.00 m.
Bdow this level, only dowels were installed. The crane beams were fixed
with 18 m-long anchors of the Freyssinet type, stressed to 1.32 MN.

354

b)
Fig. 20-40.
b) view into the shaft

One of the largest caverns in the world (for the underground Waldeck II
power station in the German Federal Republic) is 106 m long, 54 m high,
and 33.5 m wide. It is situated in a series of clayey shales and greywackes,
inclined at 20, with marked thick-bedded jointing. The compressive strength
of these rocks [69, 45, 122] was found to vary from 50 to 80 MPa, and the
shear parameters for the bed joints were = 20, c = 0.15 MPa. In view
of the dimensions of the cavern, the only feasible method of stabilizing the
rock was to construct a self-supporting vault with the aid of prestressed
anchors, since an adequate concrete lining would have been far too costly. The
stress conditions around the cavity were computed from photoelastic analyses,
and the necessary anchoring forces and anchor lengths were determined

355
rockbolts

long tendons 1.
(1320kNtensioned)IH

(22 5 kN

tensioned)

elev.
-y 151.00
I long tenders
~^j(132QkH tensioned)

rockbolts
(22 5 kN tensioned}

unten sionedgrouted
dowels(32mm diameter)

unten sioned grouted

dowels (32-mm diameter)

(all measurements in metres)

Fig. 20-41. Anchoring scheme and excavation sequence for the cavern of the Paolo Alfonso IV
power station (Brazil) [122]

accordingly. The excavation of an oval cross-section of area 1,390 m 2 was

carried out in stages from the top downwards, and immediately secured at
each stage (Fig. 20-42). The surface of the excavation was provided with
a double layer of gunite 20 cm thick, reinforced with wire mesh in each layer.
The superficial rock around the entire perimeter was reinforced with Dywidag
bar anchors (6 m long in the roof, 4 m long in the walls). The anchors were
fixed with resin and were prestressed to 120 kN after 20 minutes. Otherwise,
the main anchorage of the cavern consisted of VSL cable anchors of loadbearing capacity 1.7 MN (33 wires of 8 mm diameter, anchor length 23.5 m,
spacing 4 m). The walls of the boreholes were tested for impermeability
prior to the installation of the cables, and wherever necessary, they were
sealed with grout and the holes re-drilled. The anchors and the prefabricated
concrete foundation blocks were then placed in position. A few days after
the anchors were grout-fixed (fixing length 4.5 m), they were tested to 1.5 times
the working force (1.35 MN), and this test was repeated one week later.
Ninety anchors of a total of 716 altogether were installed as measuring
anchors for long-term observation; the stressed sections were injected with
grease instead of grout, and the anchors were fitted with load sensors
connected to a central monitoring unit.

356

1.7 MN

^ /

/ /

Fig. 20-42. Waldeck 11

underground power plant
(GFR). Excavation and
support construction sequence
d)\ view into the secured
cavern^) [45, 69, 122]

The enormous excavation rate of 42,000 m 3 per year in the underground

cavern of the Norad Expansion Project near Colorado Springs (USA) [170]
was made possible by anchoring. The project required the excavation of three
large chambers for the power plant, the cooling tower, and the exhaust
valve. The excavation of these amounted to 60 per cent, of the excavation
in the entire project (Fig. 20-43). The rock varied from coarse-grained, highly
altered and fractured granite, to fine-grained granite. The method of excavation was drill-blasting, using smooth wall and controlled blasting techniques.

357

Fig. 20-43. Situation and geological features of the site of the Norad Expansion Project
(USA) [170]

Prestressed, grouted bolts were installed in a regular pattern to provide

permanent support. The bolts were of a hollow-core type, with a thrustring mechanical expansion shell (see Section 13.2.4). A pad of quick-setting
mortar was built up (35 per cent, failed) in order to seal the orifice round the
bolt at the collar, and provide a seating for the plate. The bolt was then
tensioned to 110 to 130 kN by means of a straight-pull hydraulic jack, and
grouted. BDth of these operations turned out to be excessively time consum
ing. 8,664 bolts from 3 to 5.5 m long were used for the primary support
(one bolt per 1.3 m3 excavated). Besides these bolts, non-prestressed Perfo
anchors 5.5 m long were installed in the roofs of the large chambers to stabilize
the excavation (Fig. 20-44), and gunite and wire mesh were used where the
rock surface was highly fractured.

358

Fig. 20-44. Excavation and support of exhaust valve chamber of the Norad Expansion
Project [170]

Chapter 21
S T A B I L I Z A T I O N OF R O C K
A N D S O I L S L O P E S BY A N C H O R I N G

The stability of a rock or soil slope depends on its gradient and height,
the stresses (vertical and horizontal) within the slope, the weight and strength
of the ground as it has been naturally formed, the pressure of water in the
soil pores or rock joints, and the effect of various external forces, such as
permanent and changing loads impinging on the surface, shocks of all kinds,
changes of temperature, etc. Slope surfaces are formed over long periods
of time by the activity of all these factors, as well as atmospheric processes
and sometimes also the effects of vegetation which break up the surface and
reduce the stability of the slope.
The main forces contributing to slope failure are those arising from the
dead weight of the rock, soil, or other materials which place a load on the
slope and from the pressure of water in the slope. These forces tend to bring
about a downward movement of material as long as a gradient exists. A restraint on this tendency is provided by the shear strength of the ground.
This strength is considerable where the ground consists of solid rocks,
although it is often reduced by planes of discontinuity (cracks, joints,
failures, fracture zones). It is substantially lower in the case of soils.
The stability of slopes can be increased to good effect by anchoring them
into the bedrock below the probable shear surface. The prestressing of the
anchor increases the effect of friction at this surface and creates forces which
directly act against possible movement%af the slope.
The anchoring method can also be applied profitably when artificial
slopes are created in the construction of roads etc., and in open pit mines.
If the slope faces are secured with anchors as excavation proceeds, steeper
gradients can be created. This not only means economy in terms of land,
but also reduces the cost compared with earthmoving for unanchored,
flatter gradients. This is shown by data given later in Chapter 29.
Anchoring is most applicable where the superficial layers of existing or
newly formed steep rock slopes need to be strengthened. A prestressed
superficial layer of rock, unless it undergoes weathering, may well serve
instead of concrete retaining walls, and at far less cost.

360
21.1 CALCULATION OF A N C H O R I N G FORCES

The stability of a slope is threatened by the tangential forces resulting

from the weight of the rock or soil above the shear surface, any additional
loading of the slope, and the pressure of percolating or retained water.
Stability is maintained by cohesion and friction along the slide surface.
The anchoring forces needed to stabilize a slope against shear failure are
such, that when they are included in the system of all the forces acting on the
shear surface, the condition of equilibrium is fulfilled within the required
safety margin.
21.1.1

Soil slopes

The surface along which failure most often occurs in soils is cylindrical.
The equilibrium of such a surface is usually expressed according to the
method of K. E. Petterson, as described in any textbook on soil mechanics.
The stability of a slope is maintained when the moments of those forces
acting on the cylindrical shear surface (i.e. moments contributing to slope
stability) are greater than the moment tending to bring about slope failure
(Fig. 21-1):
AN.f.r

+ Ic . / . r ^ AT. r,

where AN = the normal component (with respect to the shear surface) of

the weight, AG, of a vertical strip of ground (AN = AG. cos a),
/ = coefficient of friction of the soil ( / = tg ),
r = radius of shear surface,
c = cohesion of the soil,
/ = width of a strip of the shear surface,
AT = sum of the tangential forces acting on the strip of the shear
surface.

77

^^^^P7^7P^^

Fig. 21-1. Effect of the dead weight

of the soil and that of a prestressed
anchor on the shear surface
beneath a slope

361

Slope safety demands that the stabilizing (passive) moments should be

greater than the moments tending to cause failure (active moments). This
difference, or safety margin is given by the relation:
./

Ic.Al

A more detailed analysis of the stability of earth slopes is given by

Q. Zruba and V. Mencl [231].
If an anchoring force, P, acts at the shear surface, this force contributes
to the stabilization of the slope by virtue of the normal component, P,
and the tangential component, Pt (see Fig. 21-1). The safety margin for an
anchored slope is given by:
,

f(I AN + Pn) + Ic . Al

-Pt

If the axis of the prestressed anchor is deflected from the perpendicular

to the shear surface by an angle , then,
Pt = P . sin
and,
Pn = P . cos .
The necessary prestressing P, of the anchors is given by:
p = mlAT-flAN-Ic.Al
1
m . sin + / . cos

The optimum value for the angle has been stated by Hobst (see Chapter 4) as being the complementary angle of the angle of friction, :
tg = -j = cotg .
The importance both of the inclination of prestressed anchors, and the
coefficient of friction along the shear surface, for the degree of prestressing
needed to stabilize a slope is apparent from Fig. 21-2. The effect of inclining
anchors is more pronounced when the friction at the slide surface is low.
However, as the angle between the prestressed anchors and the normal to
the shear surface increases, the effect diminishes.
The attainment of slope stability depends solely on the magnitude and
angle of inclination of the resultant of the anchoring forces (Fig. 21-3). The
point at which the resultant of these forces intersects the shear surface is
of no particular importance, unless the coefficient of friction changes along
the shear surface. If the latter is the case, the anchoring forces should be

362

Fig. 21-2. Dependence of the required anchoring force on its angle of deflection from the
perpendicular to the shear surface (deflected so as to oppose the active tangential forces),
taking the components acting at the shear surface as N = T = 1 MN, with safety factor
m--= 1.5

Fig. 21-3. Diagram of forces acting on strips of prestress-anchored soil above the shear
surface of a slope. A uniform height of the strips is assumed
a) in the vicinity of the emergence of the cylindrical shear surface at the foot of the slope,
)__at the lowest level of the slide surface, c) near the upper edge of the shear surface
located in the zone of the maximum coefficient of friction. Usually it is
convenient to arrange for the anchoring forces to act near the lower point of
intersection between the shear surface and the ground surface. It is quite
possible to obtain a favourable angle of inclination for the anchors in this

363

lower position, where the boreholes may be short and only slightly deflected
from the vertical; the drilling of such boreholes is technically the simplest.
The analysis of slope stability and the calculation of the necessary anchoring forces must be carried out assuming the least favourable shear surface.
The position of the latter is usually not known, except in very simple cases.
Thus the analysis involves a large number of similar calculations, which were
formerly carried out graphically, but are nowadays done with the aid of
a computer. For the setting up of the computer program, the method of
taking slices is expedient, since not only heterogeneities of the ground and
variations of pore water pressure, but also surface loads and the influences
of the individual anchor forces can be taken into account.
When the least favourable cylindrical shear surface is sought, the procedure
described by Otta [160] may be adopted. First, a circular shear path is
selected in the longitudinal cross-section of the slope, such that it passes
through the soils of the lowest shear parameters found in the investigation
(Fig. 21-4). The safety factor for this path (the sum of the stabilizing forces
divided by the sum of the destabilizing forces, acting on the shear surface of
unit width) is determined without considering any effect of anchors. Further
centre points of sliding surfaces

-25

10.0 22.5

35.0

7.5

500

72.5

85.0

97.5

110.0 122.5 135.0

Fig. 21-4. Longitudinal slope cross-section, and data required for stability analysis according
to Otta [160]

364
cylindrical surfaces with smaller and greater radii, but with the same centre
locus are considered, and the respective degrees of safety are noted. Proceeding further, small changes are made in the locus of the centre of the shear
surface (as shown, for example, in Fig. 21-4), until it is found that the calculated degree of safety cannot be decreased any further. The magnitude of the
anchoring forces required for stabilizing the shear surface of the smallest
degree of safety is then calculated, taking into account the required safety
margin also, and the positioning and lengths of the anchors are determined.
To conclude, the overall stability of the anchored slope is assessed by substituting the parameters of all the relevant forces into the computer program. The
use of computers has made it possible to analyse the stability of slopes and
retaining structures of all types (see Chapters 22 and 23) in situations far
more complex than those that could be handled by graphic methods or
simple calculation. Thus, for example, the program of the Swiss Stump
Bohr Co. has a capacity for dealing with 15 soil layer boundaries, 10 surface
loads, 5 horizontal loads, 3 ground water levels, 1 ground water table, 10 pore
water isobars, 15 anchor lines and 5 lines of support structures (for example
piles).
21.1.2

Rock slopes

The stability of a rock slope is usually threatened when there is a reduction

in rock strength, and shearing or tension develops along one or more of the
natural planes of discontinuity transversing the rock slope. The greatest
danger is from fractures and joints running approximately parallel to the
slope surface, and inclined away from the slope at an angle (a) which is
smaller than that of the slope gradient, but greater than the possible angle
of friction, <p, of the joints. These planes of discontinuity directly form slip
surfaces.
If the slope is secured with prestressed anchors, the resistance to movement
along these shear surfaces is much increased. Not only is the frictional force
increased by the pressure of the anchoring forces (according to Coulomb's
relation), but the dilation which so often overcomes the unevenness of the
surfaces of discontinuities in strong rocks is also prevented from occurring [78].
To determine what anchoring forces are needed to stabilize rock slopes
against shear failure along planes of discontinuity running parallel to the
slope in the direction of the steepest gradient (Fig. 21-5), the volume of the
rock above the lowest possible slip surface is ascertained first. Then the
degree of safety against shear failure as a result of the weight, G, of the slope
material is assessed in the same way as the stability of a body on an inclined
plane is assessed. When this body of rock is labile, or its stability is capable

365

/ /
Fig. 21-5. Simple stability analysis of a rock slope with plane, parallel shear surfaces inclined
in the same direction as the slope. Diagrams of forces are shown for: a) an unstable slope
( < ), b) a slope at the limit of equilibrium (<p = a), K^,K2 main stabilizing anchors,
K local strengthening anchors, Pl9 P2 anchoring forces at the limit of equilibrium,
P,Pm2 anchoring forces required to stabilize the slope with a safety margin, m(m = 1.5),
/ length of the unstable part of the slope, G weight of the unstable part of the slope

V
<p>oc

til

Fig. 21-6. Securing of a stable slope

( > ), threatened by collapse
along a plane slip surface, when
loaded by an additional force, Q

of being upset by external forces such as additional loading of the slope (Fig.
21-6), ground water pressure, or atmospheric effects, the required prestressing
of anchors acting perpendicularly to the slip surface is computed from the basic formula:
P =

m T

-l.c
f

N.

The forces acting normal to the slip surface are increased most efficiently

366

when the anchoring forces also act perpendicularly to this surface. However,
structures can be secured more effectively against shear failure when the
inclination of the anchoring forces to the slip surface is less than 90, as
pointed out in the preceding Section (see Figs. 21-5 and 21-6). Although the
pressure, Pn, on the slip surface is reduced, a force component, Pt, is created
acting parallel to the tangential destabilizing force, T, but in the opposite
direction. The greatest effect of anchoring forces is achieved when they are
deflected (by an angle, , equal to 90 ) from the normal to the slip
surface, or when their angle of inclination to the slip surface is equal to the
angle of friction along this surface (as can be seen from the graphical solutions in Figs. 21-5 and 21-6).
The value required for an anchoring force deflected from the perpendicular
to the slip surface by an angle , is usually computed from the formula:
p> =

- l . c - ^m - . N

sin + -* . cos \1/

m
where T
N
/
/
c

=
=
=
=
=

sum of tangential forces acting along the shear plane,

sum of forces acting normal to the shear plane,
tg a = coefficient of friction along the shear plane,
length of the shear plane,
cohesion of the plastic filling of the shearing joint, or the effect
of unevenness (indentation) of a strong rock along the shear
plane on the joint shear strength.

If reliable data from field tests are not available, c is assumed to be zero
for hard rocks, or the effects of cohesion or unevenness are included in the
value for the angle of internal friction, . Usually it is difficult, if not impossible, to obtain precise values for , since otherwise the condition of
limit equilibrium of the slope in its natural state could be expressed by:
tg<P
=^1
tga

or

= a,

where a is the gradient of the slip surface. The degree of stability could then
be increased by anchorage, etc. to obtain the required value for w, e.g. m =
= 1.2.Usually, however, it is more economical and generally more reliable
to ascertain the angle of friction for the simple sliding of at least one small
rock block over another.
Z. Roth [181] analysed a more general case of slope stability with one
or more joint systems inclined away from the slope face. He came to the
conclusion that where there is a definite slip surface, a rock slope is permanently stable, regardless of the frictional resistance, provided that the slope

367

intersects this joint slip surface along its line of steepest descent (pitch line)
(Fig. 21-7). If is the maximum gradient of a stable slope, a is the gradient
of the planes of the joint system, and is the angle between the slope face
foot line and joint system, respectively, then

Fig. 21-7. Three-dimensional

diagram of the structure of
a permanently stable rock face
with one system of planes of
discontinuity inclined towards
the face (according to Z. Roth)
,, planes of
discontinuity of the joint system,
a gradient of joint planes,
s dip vectors of joint planes,
angle formed between joint
planes and rock base,
gradient of the
permanently stable slope. The
shear surfaces of labile rock
blocks in the vertical face of the
cutting are shown hatched

Of all the joint systems that are surveyed in the field, those which are
considered as being not conducive to stability have a gradient angle flatter
than their probable angle of friction, . For the remainder of the systems,
the permanently stable (slope) gradient is ascertained by substituting the
angle of the least favourable case into the above formula, that is, the smallest
angle computed for an individual joint system inclined in the same direction
as the slope.
If the proposed or existing slope is steeper, the weight of the rock above the
plane of the permanently stable gradient must be secured by anchoring. The
simplified calculation of the required anchoring force (incorporating a greater
safety margin) can be done by assuming a slip surface of inclinatin /?,
parallel to the slope, and a substitute angle of friction > j8, as in the
preceding case in Fig. 21-5.
The total anchoring force, P, allocated to a unit width of slope, is divided
equally between as many individual anchors up and down the length of the
slope as are needed to ensure that all potential slip surfaces above the foot
of the slope are intersected and locked. If necessary, shorter local anchors
can also be used (see Figs. 21-5 and 6-3).

368

The above-described solution to the stability of slopes threatened by

planes of discontinuity inclined away from the slope and in a different
direction from that of the slope, is very simple but very uneconomical. One
may often see rock slopes with a V-shaped failure zone, brought about by
two surfaces of discontinuity inclined in different directions (Fig. 21-8).
For this reason some authors (Talobre, Peck, Goodman, Londe, Wittke,
John, Hoek), have considered the possibility of a three-dimensional solution
to the stability of wedge-shaped masses on rock slopes. A graphic method
was worked out using the projection of a hemisphere on a plane (Fig. 21-9),
on which three-dimensional diagrams of forces could be constructed. Using
slope crest
line of
intersection

slope face
rock wedge

a)

Fig. 21-8. Pictorial a) and

natural b) view of a rock
wedge failure

369

great circle
representing slope face

Pensioned
anchor
average friction
angle <p

Fig. 21-9. Simple stability analysis of

a slope using a stereonet [91]. The slope
is potentially unstable when great circles
(representing planes of discontinuity)
intersect each other in the shaded region
(the plunge of the line of intersection
exceeds angle of friction, i.e., %pf > >
> )

Fig. 21-10. Optimum anchor

positioning for the reinforcement
of a rock wedge [91]

this projection, the planes representing the surfaces of discontinuity within

the slope appear as circular arcs and the force vectors as straight lines passing
through the centre of the hemisphere. The angle of friction, , of the shear
surfaces (the cohesion c is neglected for the sake of obtaining greater safety)
is represented by a circle with a radius proportional to (see Fig. 21-9).
After having marked out the various parameters, it is easily shown that the
rock wedge is unstable on account of its weight, when the intersection of the
shear plane circles falls within the hatched area delimited by the circle of the
slope face and that of the angle of friction, . The method makes possible the
solution of much more complicated cases of stability. For example, the shear
surfaces delimiting a labile rock wedge may have different angles of friction,
and the wedge may be subjected to forces other than its dead weight, such as
water pressure in the joints, the dynamic effects of shocks, loads on the slope
surface, and of course the forces exerted by anchors installed to give the
required degree of stability [91, 64, 100]. At the present time, however,
these problems are mostly solved analytically with the help of small calculators
or computer programs. The method of calculation is very clearly explained,
for example, by J. W. Bray [91]. A simple rule for the anchoring of rock
wedges emerges from all these solutions: the tensioned anchor should be

370

aligned according to the line of intersection of the two shear planes, and it
should make an angle equal to the average angle of friction with the line
of intersection (Fig. 21-10).
In rock slopes and faces in which the dominant planes of discontinuity
are dipping towards the slope, the equilibrium analysis and determination
of the necessary anchoring forces is also complicated. A completely reliable
transfer of forces to the bottom region of the slope, across a joint system
of angle of inclination, a, is only possible when the angle between the plane
of the slope and the perpendicular to the planes of discontinuity is equal
or less than (Fig. 21-11). The stable part of the slope is delimited by the

Fig. 21-11. Anchoring of a rock face with planes of discontinuity inclined towards the slope.
The labile part of the rock formation is shown hatched; Kx to K3 are anchors placed in various
directions in relation to the joints

theoretical stability plane (of inclination 90 + ) which passes through

the slope foot. In the slope above this plane the rock beds experience shear
forces at the bedding joints, or tension from the bending of undamaged beds.
The problem may be solved graphically and numerically, using the methods
of various authors. Another approach to the investigation of the equilibrium
of a rock slope with this orientation of the discontinuity surfaces has also
been introduced [143, 225]. However, all the methods referred to here are
rather laborious, and recourse is often taken to making the safe assumption
that a limit slip surface forms in the plane of the steepest stable slope. The
assumed labile rock mass is still delimited by a bedding joint which appears
at the surface at a distance of 0.1 to 0.5/7 from the crest of the slope; this
joint opens on failure of the slope. The anchoring forces required for any

371

selected gradient (Kl, K2, K3) are determined from the force diagram,
and the total force is again divided equally among the individual anchors.
More complicated slope stability situations in which the surfaces of
discontinuity are parallel to the slope and dipping towards it or vertical,
can be successfully solved by the well knownfiniteelement method [64]. A suitable computer program must be available for such an analysis. By this method
it is possible, for a slope of given shape, to locate zones of tensile stress which
are always sites of potential failure. In thefield,open joints may be observed at
such sites. A typical example of the use of this method was given by Bukovansky and Pierce [27]; this concerned the stability of a high cutting made in a rock
slope composed of a horizontal sequence of marlstones and shales with vertical
joint planes running parallel to the direction of the slope. Fig. 21-12 shows
the calculated lines of the principal stresses in a diagrammatic section of the
slope, both before excavation, and after excavation of the step-shaped
cutting of overall gradient 3 to 1. An outstandingly tensile zone appears,
prior to excavation, behind the upper edge of the slope. After excavation,
the zone is still affecting the rock ledges, but the stresses are of much smaller
value (max. 0.2 ksf = 10 kPa). Tensile stresses of this magnitude can be
handled effectively with horizontal rock bolts.

tensile stresses

0 6 12 18 meters
negative, stresses in KSF (1 KSF=50kPa appro*.)

Fig. 21-12. Model of the slope in Parachute Creek Valley, showing rock joints, and minor
principal stress contours before and after excavation [27]

372

A relatively simple method of computing the anchoring forces required

to secure rock slopes in open-cast mines and quarries has been published
by a group of specialists, K. Barron, D. F. Coates and M. Gyenge of the
Canadian Mining Research Centre in Ottawa [8]; included is a favourable
cost analysis of the method (see Chapter 29). The authors begin with the fact
that where there is a complicated, dense network of natural discontinuity
planes in a rock mass it is extremely difficult to determine in advance the most
probable slip surface (unless there are outstanding stress zones and fault
surfaces). In the method, a hypothetical slip plane is considered, this being
inclined away from the slope face in the same direction, but at a different
angle, and passing through the slope foot (Fig. 21-13). The angle of this plane

v=4-(cotg'Cofa<*)

Fig. 21-13. Diagram of a rock slope with

a hypothetical shear plane at which the
specific tangential force is at a maximum,
V volume of labile part of the slope of unit
width, / length of the shear plane

with the horizontal, , is not known in advance, but may be determined

from the required slope inclination, a, and the probable or measured
coefficient of friction, / = tg , between the existing joint surfaces of the
rocks, taking the condition of maximum active force. The cohesion, c,
usually does not have a constant value at the discontinuity surfaces of the
superficially loosened zone of a rock mass, and is simply neglected with respect
to the slip surface in the interests of increasing the margin of safety.
The part of the slope above the assumed slip surface will tend to collapse,
whilst the part below is permanently stable. If it is assumed that the labile
part of the slope is a rigid body able to slide integrally along the slide surface
(as is often the case in hard rocks), then by a simple analysis of the equilibrium
of forces on an inclined plane, the tangential force, T (which after substraction of the respective frictional force must be secured by opposing
anchoring forces), can be ascertained. The value of this shear force with
respect to unit area of the slide plane inclined at an angle , is computed
from the equation:
yH
2
= - (cotg cotg a) (sin tg . sin . cos ),
where y is the volume weight of the rock in the slope, and the other symbols
are as indicated in Fig. 21-13. The value of is determined by the slope
gradient, a, and the coefficient of friction,/, for constant values of y and H.
For every value of a and , there will be a corresponding value for /?, for

373

which will be maximal. This maximum value can easily be determined by

differentiating the equation for with respect to /?, and by ascertaining the
value of . The authors of this method thus computed all the values of
for a in the range 0 to 90, and / = tg in the range 0 to 1, assuming that
^ . The results are shown graphically in Fig. 21-14. From this diagram,
can be determined for known values of a and . Thus, from the equation
H
P = m .
sin
the anchoring forces giving a safety margin of m = 1.5 can be calculated for
a strip of the slope of total height / / a n d unit width. The same computations
can be applied where a higher slope is divided by stabilizing benches. In this
case the angle a represents the mean gradient of the entire slope, as shown
in Fig. 21-15.
The effect of ground water on the stability of a rock slope must be taken
into account where considerable gradients exist, and where water can
accumulate in the joint system, there exerting a hydrostatic pressure on the
major vertical faces. The horizontal component of this pressure can very
substantially upset the equilibrium, even in a rock slope formed of large
blocks [231]. A lesser, but nevertheless continuous effect of water is its
action on the rock surface, causing mechanical and chemical weathering.

50

60

70

slope angle oc

Fig. 21-14. Relationship by which the inclination, , of the shear plane of maximum shear
stress, , can be determined for a given slope gradient, a, and coefficient of friction, /, in the
shear plane [8]

374

Fig. 21-15. Anchoring scheme for

a stepped slope [8]
pk anchoring forces, K cable anchors prestressed with force pk, n reinforced
concrete beams (sills) connecting the anchor heads, s wire nets, u fixing section of
anchors (several metres long) in the stable part of the slope, theoretical conical zone
of distribution of anchoring force in the rock mass

21.1.3

Dimensioning of non-prestressed anchors

Slopes should always be stabilized by using prestressed anchors. Where

there is any danger, for whatever reason, that the prestressing might disappear,
or in the case of small-scale operations in which the forces are small and
therefore for the sake of simplicity the slope is locked to the bedrock with
non-prestressed anchors, it is to be expected that prior to activation of the
anchorage a partial displacement of the slope along the slip surface will
occur. As a consequence of this the shear resistance of the rock is reduced,
because the cohesion factor, c, is lost, and the angle of static friction is
replaced by the angle of kinetic friction, , which can be as much as 30 per
cent, lower. The quantity of non-prestressed anchorage required to secure
a slope with a curved potential slip surface must be that which safely transfers
a tensile force, Pnr, perpendicularly across the slip surface, where:
P- =

ml AT
-,
fr

or a force, Pr9 inclined with respect to the slip surface:

375

mIAT-frIAN
m sin -f fr cos ^

To secure a slope with a plane potential slip surface, the non-prestressed

anchors must be such as to transmit a perpendicularly oriented tensile force,
P'nr, given by:
nr

fr

'

or an inclined tensile force, P'r, where:

p t =
r

m.T-fr.N
m . sin + fr. cos '

The actual forces Pnr9 Pr, P'nr, Pfr generally need to be twice as great as the
calculated values when the prestressing is introduced in advance; hence, it is
recommended that nonprestressed anchors be used for stabilizing small
slides only.
The coefficient of kinetic friction also comes into effect in soil slopes in the
active zone near the upper edge of the slip surface. It is therefore profitable
to introduce prestressing forces into this zone also, in order to prevent any
initial movement of the ground with the consequent loss of cohesion, and
transition from a situation of static friction to one of kinetic friction.
When a rock slope is threatened with collapse along a plane surface, and
where failure occurs, as it often does, at the slope foot, anchors should be
concentrated at these sites, and should provide an adequate degree of locking
of all the beds that are traversed by dangerous planes of discontinuity. In
other cases, the distribution of anchors over the entire slope is not necessary
either, because solid rocks are usually strong and are sufficiently incompressible to remove any possibility of their gradually slipping down from the upper
edge of the slip surface, as occurs on soil slopes. In fact any movement tends
to occur simultaneously over the entire surface, and it therefore suffices to
secure the most dangerous region near the slope foot.
L. Mller introduced an original method of slope stabilization (usually
applied to rock) [143], in which a system of non-prestressed steel ropes is laid
on the slope surface, either across the slope (with the contour lines), or down
the slope (with the lines of steepest gradient) according to which is the more efficient (Fig. 21-16). The ropes are anchored at both ends into concrete blocks,
or directly into the stable strong rock.
In the first case, where a slope bulge is anchored, the great advantage
of the method is that there is minimal interference with the labile part of the
slope, and yet a large force can be created. This arises from the fact that an
arched anchoring arrangement provides a support (i.e. a force opposing

376

Fig. 21-16. Stabilization of a rock slope by laying a surface reinforcement of steel ropes [143]
a) parallel with the contour lines, b) parallel with the lines of steepest gradient

movement) nearly twice as great as the tensile force in the ropes. In the second
case, in which the ropes are laid up and down the slope and are anchored into
concrete blocks (sills) at the foot of the slope and above its upper edge,
the main purpose is to relieve the rock at the foot of the slope which is under
the greatest stress, and transfer a part of the dead weight load to the upper,
less heavily loaded part of the slope.
In both cases the condition of the anchorage can be checked at any time
since the entire system is accessible, and further ropes can be added if necessary.
The stabilization of a rocky ridge slope with horizontal surface-laid steel
ropes fixed to either side of the ridge, was carried out in the German
Federal Republic. The densely fractured front slope of the basalt ridge was
found to be sliding into the brown coal open-cast mine at Hessen. The slope
was stabilized with four steel ropes of combined load-carrying capacity
2.4 MN (Fig. 21-17A). The lateral anchoring blocks were embedded in sound
bedrock.
Another, much larger scheme of this type, in which foundations were
stabilized under historically important buildings, was carried out in Kassel
[47]. Stabilization with horizontal anchored ropes provides a useful means
of preserving structures generally.

377

Fig. 21-17. A Sliding basalt

ridge stabilized by means of
horizontal, anchored steel ropes

CROSS -

SECTION

ig. 21-17. B Design of high mountain slopes anchoring for coal pit mining in Czechoslovakia (according to J. Zajic)

378

Stabilisation of several hundred metres high mountain slopes of crystalline

rock above very large pit mines in Tertiary brown-coal basin is under preparation in north-western Bohemia at present. The principal stabilizing system
will consist of huge 200 MN anchors made of steel ropesfixedin 100 to 200 m
long galleries (Fig. 21-17B).
21.2 STRUCTURAL ANCHORING METHODS

Slope movements and the destruction of slopes can occur over large areas
along deep-situated shear surfaces. In rock slopes, it is often only the superficial parts of the slope, individual rock blocks, or the superficial rock layers
damaged by weathering, that are in danger of collapse. The design and method
of applying slope anchorage must therefore take into account the size of the
anchored part of the slope and its importance. Reliable functioning of all
the proposed components of the system must be ensured, and maximum
effectiveness and economy must be kept in mind.
21.2.1 Stabilization of slopes
The conditions for anchoring slopes to prevent them from slipping along
shear surfaces extending through the entire slope or through a major part
of the slope, were discussed in the preceding Sections of this Chapter. Besides
the magnitude of the anchoring forces, the positioning of the anchors on the
slope is also important.
The anchoring forces calculated to be necessary, are usually divided
equally among the individual anchors, or among lines of anchors running up
and down, or across the slope. On non-uniform slopes, the anchors are
placed on ledges, at the feet of the steeper parts of the slope (see Fig. 21-15).
The loosened rock on the slope surface between individual anchor heads is
secured by means of concrete sills with reinforcement and wire netting
attached to the anchors. The dimensions of the latter structures can either
be calculated by making a simplifying assumption concerning the effective
rock weight [8], or, as is more frequently the case, they can be empirically
designed according to the local conditions.
The distribution structures, such as bearing plates, reinforced concrete
sills, pillars or grids, are assembled from precast elements or are concreted
in situ.
The width of distribution sills and their foundation depth both principally
depend on the type and quality of the rock. In strong hard rocks, the
dimensions can be reduced to a minimum. In soils, on the other hand, bases
1 m2 or more in area have to be used. However, where soils are likely to

379

freeze, the bases must be founded sufficiently deep to prevent their being
lifted by freezing, with a pressure greater than that of the prestressing.
On rock slopes, the superficial rock layer on which the anchor heads
bear may become weathered, and its compactness may be reduced. This
surface must therefore be protected with gunite or reinforced concrete ribs,
and those parts of the surface that are apt to fail must be covered with
reinforced concrete slabs, or filled with concrete.
As mentioned earlier, rock slopes are best stabilized with anchors sited
in the lower part of the slope, particularly near its foot, with a suitable angle
of inclination (Fig. 21-18). However, it is sometimes convenient, or even

o llol
ollol
o Mol
o o
o o
ollol
<^=-

=J
ZJ

|
ZZJ
J
z==-^o

Fig. 21-18. Favourably placed

concrete sills for the support of
anchor heads at the slope foot

necessary where-cuttings are made, to place anchors first in the upper part
of the slope, thus improving the stability as excavation of the cutting
progresses. Inclined anchor boreholes are usually made in lines along different
cutting levels (see e.g. Fig. 21-15). Sometimes, anchors are installed in
vertical boreholes (Fig. 21-19), although this practice is statically incorrect
since a vertical anchoring force always has a tangential component acting
along the potential slip surface, thus increasing the danger of movement.
This unfavourable effect can be partially eliminated by bracing beams,
oriented up and down the slope [195], fitting between the transverse horizontal
sills which support the anchor heads.
Anchors installed on slopes are fixed into the mass beneath or behind the
slip surface (or beneath that surface which delimits the labile rock body).
The fixing depth measured from this surface must be such as to ensure
sufficient rock resistance against extraction of the anchor (see Chapter 10).
Due regard must be given to the possibility of other ground stresses developing, or the appearance of new slip surfaces immediately below the roots of the
anchors. In any case the positioning and length of the anchors must prevent
the development of any potential slip surfaces in the slope.

380
Fig. 21-19. Distribution of
vertical anchors stabilizing
a cutting for the Oakdale
highway in California. Such
anchors are only suitable for
securing the bases of large
rockslide masses, the anchors
being placed in large diameter
boreholes

Rock prestressing brought about by anchoring is particularly useful

where transverse tensile stresses need to be eliminated. These stresses are
caused by the concentration of pressure under structures situated on the
edges of rock formations, or they may exist, for example, in the fixings
of arched dams into the sides of valleys (Figs. 21-20 and 21-37), or under
the foundations of bridge piers in the vicinity of deep cuttings. In Mexico,
the centre pier of a bridge which was founded on piles and subjected to
horizontal forces, was secured in this way (Fig. 21-21).

1111

/*4VAS.WA*U*y/4*

Fig. 21-20. Relief of transverse tensile stress in a rock by means of prestressed anchorage:
a) where a structure is sited at the edge of a steep rock formation, b) at the fixing points
of arched dams

381

I
!

I
i

I
i

I
i

" "

Fig. 21-21. Stabilization of a bridge pier founded

on piles cast in situ (Mexico)
1 anchors, 2 piles of the bridge pier,
3 pier

W\\x*\\o\VA\\W<

oo
21.2.2

Securing of rock blocks

Rock slopes often contain detached blocks whicrTate liable either to slide
downwards over a plane of discontinuity, or to collapse when the rock
strength is overcome at a point of weakness. Stability of these blocks is
achieved by locking them to the stable rock mass with anchors. The necessary
anchoring forces are computed in the same way as those required Tor the
stabilization of rock slopes threatened by slides along plane shear surfaces
(Section 2L1.2). If the block seems likely to fall by tipping up, the anchorage
design* must stake into account the magnitude of the component (moment)
of the block dead weight giving rise to movement.
The stabilization of rock blocks on slopes by anchoring may be usefully
complemented by the insertion of concrete beneath the labile block, or by
grouting the surrounding joint spaces. Concrete applied under the block
forms a sill and has a marked stabilizing effect; the anchorage may be used
to secure the sill thus formed (Fig. 21-22). On a steep slope, where a rock
block may be displaced as a result of being overturned, the anchorage must
pass through the centre of the threatened block, close to its centre of gravity,
Smaller rock blocks are anchored with short non-prestressed bolts fixed
into the rock with grout along their entire length; the grout also protects the

382

b)

Fig. 21-22. Securing of rock blocks

overlooking a roadway near Passau
[190]
a) front view, b) cross-section;
1 secured rock blocks,
2 reinforced concrete sill,
3 concrete filling, made in belts
(/IV), 4 supporting concrete
buttresses, 5 cable anchors
prestressed to 500 kN, c view
of actual construction (photo
PolenskySc Zllner)

bolts from corrosion. For larger rock formations, prestressed cable anchors
may even be used. The anchor heads are sometimes located in a small hollow
cut in the rock surface, and are covered to preserve the natural appearance
of the rock.
The region of Cretaceous, boulder-shaped sandstones in Northern
Bohemia typically suffers from block-like disintegration of the rock on the
upper parts of valley slopes. After a survey, a large programme of conservation was drawn up, mainly relying on anchoring techniques. In

383

Fig. 21-23, a scheme is shown for the stabilization of individual rock columns
and blocks near Decin, where a large collapse of rock occurred several
years ago.

Fig. 21-23. Scheme for securing an articulated sandstone face near Decin (Czechoslovakia)
with a system of anchors (groundplan horizontal section)

27.2.5

Protection of the surfaces of rock slopes

Stable rock faces can be a source of falling rock fragments and pieces of
oose rock. Once they become detached, these fragments accelerate and
present a danger to structures, vehicles, or people nearby. Anchored nets
provide an efficient and economical means of eliminating this danger, for
although these do not strengthen the rock, they retain any fragments detached
from its face. The minimum anchoring forces necessary for the nets are
obtainable at a relatively small depth into the stable rock surface.
Protective nets are usually made of wire mesh or welded wire grids of
various wire diameters (3 to 6 mm, depending on the size of the fragments
to be retained). If necessary, double nets can be used. The wire grid is supplied
in rolls of varying mesh size. For less exacting purposes, ordinary zinc-plated
wire fence netting (3 mm diameter wire with a 5 x 5 cm mesh) is satisfactory
(Fig. 21-24). When work is carried out on slopes and under rock faces,
effective protection from falling fragments and pieces of rock is provided
by synthetic fibre nets (Figs. 21-25 and 14-13). These are very elastic, strong,
non-corrosive, easily handled, and give good adherence to the rock even
on a very uneven surface. However, they are liable to severance on the sharp
edges of large rock fragments, and they are more expensive than wire netting.
Lengths 2 to 4 m wide, are most convenient for this purpose. Such nets are

384

Fig. 21-24. Protection of a rock slope near Freiburg with wire nets (documentation /. Kaim,
Wien)

used only temporarily, and are usually fastened near upper edge of the slope,
otherwise lying freely on the slope face.
Wire nets are anchored to the rock surface with short non-prestressed
steel bolts in boreholes 30 to 80 cm deep, according to the rock quality. The
bolts are regularly distributed on the slope at a maximum density of one bolt
per 4 m 2 of the rock face. The bolts are of the deformed bar type, with
a minimum diameter of 20 mm, and a thread at the external end. They are
inserted into boreholes 34 to 38 mm in diameter and grouted with a thin
grout along their entire length. When the grout is hard, the protecting net is
tightened against the rock surface with the nuts and larger washers of the
bolts. The service life of these wire nets is estimated to be 15 to 20 years.

21.3 EXAMPLES OF SLOPE STABILIZATION BY ANCHORING

21.3.1

Stabilization using prestressed anchors

The first application of prestressed anchors as a means of stabilizing the

slope of a cutting in cohesive soil took place in Czechoslovakia in 1961,
when a section of the railway cutting near Cebin was saved. The cables used
in this instance consisted of 7 wires of 4.5 mm diameter. The lower ends were
fixed into anchoring cavities made by blasting, and the upper ends were

385

Fig. 21-25. Rock slope above a railway line near Prague covered with synthetic fibre nets.
These served as a temporary protection for workers during the drilling and installation
of anchors

fixed into Horel anchor heads supported on prefabricated load distribution

slabs 80 cm square. The anchors were spaced 170 cm apart, and were each
prestressed to 120 kN (Fig. 21-26). The successful saving of this section justified the proposed measures and showed them to be cost-effective, even
though the project was not completed as regards one very important aspect
of the structural detail, namely the foundations for the load distribution
slabs. The slabs were simply laid on the slope face, which was of a soil type
susceptible to swelling when frozen. Thus the anchorage experienced greater
stress in winter when the slabs were pressed upwards by the frozen soil;
and the anchor roots, which were pulled by a greater force than that which

386

^^:
Fig. 21-26. Cross-section of the slope of a railway cutting near Cebin stabilized by means of
prestressed anchors (VU1S 1961)
1 anchor head, 2 load distribution plate, 3 anchor tendon, 4 anchor root cavity,
5 slip surface

they were designed to withstand, were partially displaced. In summer, when

the soil was drier, the stress in the cables dropped. It appeared therefore
that prestressing was only imparted from the anchors to the soil in the winter
and spring, fortunately when it was most needed to ensure slope stability.
This state of affairs is consistent with the fact that the secured experimental
section of the slope has so far remained stable, while neighbouring sections
have failed and the slope gradients in these sections have had to be reduced.
A system of individual anchored precast slabs is nowadays used frequently
for stabilizing soil and rock slopes, especially in cuttings (see Figs. 5-5 and 6-4).
The slabs cover only 30 to 50 per cent of the slope surface and enable to
design them in very steep gradients (60 to 70).
An example of a more complicated stabilization scheme in which anchors
were installed in a slope of unstable soil is shown in Fig. 21-27. The slope
drops away from a road leading to the construction site of a new building
near Lutry.

it.

HIT-- -L^
Fig. 21-27. Stabilization of a slope at Tallepied 8, Lutry with i?Fanchors for the construction of a new building, a eluvium, b old landslide, c dense lake sands, 1 most
dangerous theoretical slip surfaces, 2 BBRV anchors (2.4 MN, / 23.30 and 34 m),
3 planned building, 4 road

387

The prestressing of rock by means of anchors also gave good results in the
stabilization of a cutting at one end of the Ruzbachy tunnel on the Orlov
Podolinec railway line. The slope is formed in flysch beds of interbedded
sandstones and shales. When excavation of the cutting started, a slope failure
occurred and the work had to be halted until the rock had been anchored to
a depth of 11 to 13 m in the substratum, with cable anchors (Fig. 21-28). The

Fig. 21-28. Cross-section of a cutting of the PodolinecRuzbachy railway line which was
saved from collapse by anchoring the rock
1 cables of 1 MN load-bearing capacity, 2 load-distributing precast slabs, 3 calculated
slip surface, 4 position centre line of the railway track

slip surface was found (from the digging of test pits) to be situated at an
average depth of 6 m below the ground surface. The coefficient of friction,/,
along the slip plane was 0.2, and the cohesion, c, was 10 kPa. The slope was
secured by 212 anchoring cables (each with a load-bearing capacity of 1 MN)
concentrated in a belt near the top of the cutting (Fig. 21-29).
Rock slopes, natural or excavated, are particularly amenable to stabilization by anchoring, because the strong rock on the surface of the slope forms
a convenient distribution layer for the compression forces exerted by prestressed anchors.
An example of a very simple anchoring arrangement on a rock slope above
a railway line in Czechoslovakia is shown in Fig. 21-30. Bar anchors of diameter 36 mm and length 7.5 m and 9.5 m were fixed with grout into a strong
rock (phonolite), and then were prestressed to 100 kN and grouted in along

388

Fig. 21-29. Flysch beds of a slope in which the cutting of the PodolinecRuzbachy railway
line was excavated

their remaining free length. A somewhat more complicated procedure than

this was adopted to save a steep rock slope under the Orlik Castle which was
threatened by predicted variations in the water level of the Vltava river in the
basin of the Orlik Dam (Fig. 21-31). Bar bolts (30 mm in diameter and 6 m
long) were placed in boreholes and grouted, to secure the protective cover
of reinforced concrete to the dressed surface of the rock. The cover was
concreted behind a stone lining, and had recesses for the anchor heads. The
holes were sealed with masonry after the anchors had been prestressed to
approximately 150kN and grouted to give a final smooth surface to the
lining.
The largest operation of this type being carried out in Czechoslovakia is
the stabilization of a rock face 90 m high and more than 250 m long in the
Labe valley, in the town of Decin [229]. The wall is formed of Turonian
thick-bedded sandstones with a prevalent kaolinitic cement. Most of this
cement was washed out on to the rock surface along well-marked bedding
and vertical joints., Weathering of the bedding joints to a depth of 1 m
from the rock surface has led to the formation of overhangs affecting the
stability of the rock wall. Transverse and longitudinal vertical fractures of
tectonic origin have also been gradually widened by freeze-and-thaw, which
has even caused local displacements of rock fragments and boulders in these
opened fractures. Owing to these destructive influences, separate blocks and
pillars threatened with collapse rim the periphery of the rock wall.

389

'S

%i

VVVV \

i
Fig. 21-30. Simple stabilization of a rock slope above a railway line near Usti n. L.
(Czechoslovakia) by means of anchors and protecting wire nets

The static analysis was carried out for typical cross-sections where the slope
was steeper or the overhang greater. The most frequently obtained stable
angle was about 65 from the horizontal. The weight of the labile rock above
a theoretical shear surface inclined at 65 ( = ) was simply determined from

390
Fig. 21-31. Anchoring of the rock face
under the Orlik Castle
1 granodiorite, 2 veinous syenite
porphyry, 3 failure zone, 4 depth of
superficial weathering, a injection
boreholes, b protective reinforced
concrete lining anchored into rock

Fig. 21-32. Typical cross-section

of the rock face near Decin,
showing the arrangement
of stabilizing anchors
1 theoretical shear surface,
2 design parameters of anchors
(prestressing, length, spacing),
3 exploratory boreholes
situated behind the upper edge
of the face in cross-sections
Nos. 30 and 38; open joints are
marked (4), as well as places
of strong weathering of the
sandstone (5), 6 railway tunnel

Sec

-No.33

151m

nom
130 m

6
*-*
0

10

15 m

0.6tlN\\
mnmfn
70/77 3 m

132 m

391

the area of an equivalent regular body of unit width and given volume weight.
The equilibrium of forces on this shear surface, taking a safety factor of 1.2,
may be expressed by the equation
1.2 G. sin 6 5 = G . cos 65 . tg 65 + 65. tg 65 + K. cos 65,
where K represents the total of the horizontal anchoring forces for the entire
height of the rock wall. This yields the relation K = 0.768 G (kN). The
anchoring forces required in the vicinity of cross-section No. 33, for example,
(Fig. 21-32) amount to 1.04 MN. This total force was distributed over
a number of anchoring levels in such a way as to provide the force needed
at the foot of the slope, and to secure labile rock blocks at the surface, the
stability of which was analysed separately. For these blocks, the degree of
stability according to the ascertained state had to be assessed individually
and the necessary anchoring forces had to be stated. The anchoring forces
necessary for stabilizing individual blocks were determined using a safety
margin of 2, because the parameters introduced into the calculation were
taken from field investigations, and therefore did not incorporate a reserve
factor as in the foregoing case of the theoretical slip plane. Following from
the static analysis, several horizontal rows of prestressed cable anchors were
designed. These anchors were 10 to 30 m long, with working loads of 0.2
to 0.6 MN. The entire rock face needed 436 such cable anchors, and 157 short
bar anchors (Fig. 21-33).
Effective anchoring of the rock abutments of the 233 mhigh bowed
Vajont Dam in Italy was the principal reason for the survival of the main
dam structure without serious damage during the disastrous overflow of
water in 1963. The overflow resulted from the sliding of the entire left-hand
valley face above the dam into the basin. The slopes near the dam were
strengthened with 300 anchoring cables 18 to 56 m long, prestressed to 0.5
to 1.0 MN. The support system for the anchor heads comprised vertical and
horizontal beams and blocks, concreted on to the slopes (Fig. 21-34); the
anchor heads were made permanently accessible by the installation of a system
of climbing irons, gangways and catwalks. About 10 per cent, of the anchors
were fitted with load sensors to allow the prestressing to be checked, and these
were connected to the building on the top of the dam housing the controls for
the entire dam. The disastrous overflow (a wave 100 m high was formed)
as a consequence of the landslide swept away the control building together
with the railings and all the access ways to the anchors, but the abutting
anchored structures remained almost completely intact, as did the dam
itself. In this case the large-scale anchoring of the valley sides was carried
out by Polensky and Zllner of the GFR.
Fig. 21-35 shows a similar example of the anchoring of a high rock face
at the bowed La Soledad Dam in Mexico, using anchors of the same PZ

392
Fig. 21-33. Securing of the rock
face at Decin (Czechoslovakia
performed by TSD and Stavebni
geologie n. p.); general view (a),
anchors installed in the face (b)

system (length 45 m, prestressing 1.4 MN). The often very simple arrangements by means of which complicated drilling, placing and prestressing
operations are carried out for long anchoring cables, are particularly noteworthy (Fig. 21-36).
At the site of the Kawamata Dam in Japan, prestressed anchors were used
to secure a wall to the rock, the purpose of the wall being to distribute the
pressure of the bowed dam into deeper, sound rock beds [56]. The superficial

393

Fig. 21-34. Steep rock slope below the Vajont Dam in Italy anchored by Polensky & Zllner

rock strata were permeated by fractures and failure zones, and could not be
relied upon to take the stresses transmitted by the dam unless special measures
were adopted. The load-distributing cross wall was constructed along an
extension of the centre-line of the dam, projected from the fixing point
(Figs. 21-37 and 6-5). The cross wall was secured to the surrounding rock
with prestressed anchors, using either the Dywidag type (total 155 MN) or the
BBRVtype (total 85 MN) according to local conditions. The Dywidag anchors
were made from high quality steel bars (diameter 27 mm), each prestressed
to 0.4 MN (i.e. to 80 per cent, of the yield limit). Each anchor consisted
of six parts interconnected by special couplings these parts being lowered sepa-

Fig. 21-35. Stabilization of rock face below the bowed La Soledad Dam in Mexico (photo
Polensky & Zllner)
a) view on the right-hand valley slope with PZ anchors, b) transport of a 1.5 MN anchor
to the site

395

Fig. 21-36. Anchoring of the steep rock face under the foundations of the abutment for the
Rio del Oro bridge in Mexico, using VSL anchors 10 m long, prestressed to 400 kN

rately into the boreholes from a special gallery excavated for the construction
of the cross wall. The prestressing of the tendons was adjusted after a month
or two, and finally the boreholes were filled with grout along their entire lengths
to establish an anticorrosive protection. The BBRVanchors were used to lock
the foot of the retaining wall to the slope mass.
At the site of the Aldeadavia Dam, the corroded beds on the left-hand side
of the dam were stabilized with prestressed anchors before the slope was
strengthened by pressure grouting; the designers feared that the pressure of
the grout might loosen and lift the superficial beds on the slope. 169 cable
anchors of 30 mm diameter and lengths between 12 and 36 m were used,
and each was prestressed to 200 kN [150].
The anchors used to secure blocks against shear failure at the left-hand

396

10 15 20 m

Fig. 21-38. Stabilization of the bedrock of the left bank of the Santa Eulalia arch dam in
Spain, by means of anchors A quartzite bank, B alternative quartzite and schists,
C siliceous schists

side of the 74 m-high Santa Eulalia arch dam in Spain, were designed to increase the strength of the bedrock under the dam by bracing the relatively
narrow beds of shales and quartzites (Fig. 21-38). The anchors were 30 to

397

40 m long, and were fixed into sound quartzite beds unaffected by the excavations for the foundations of the dam.
More than 1,000 anchors with load-bearing capacities of 1.0 to 2.3 MN
were installed in the immediate vicinity of the heel of the 134m-high El
Atazar arch dam. The anchors were needed to strengthen the slope, formed
of much jointed shales and sandstones, at the left-hand side of the dam,
which was threatened by the high water level. The anchoring heads were
seated on a reinforced concrete grid placed on the slope surface (Fig. 21-39).

0 10 2030W5060 m
Fig, 21-39. Slope reinforcement in the vicinity of the El Atazar arch dam (Spain), using
a system of anchored reinforced concrete sills
/ the dam body, 2 anchors 1.0 to 2.3 MN, 3 reinforced concrete grid, 4 concrete
slabs

The slope at the dam heel was protected by a continuous reinforced concrete
slab on the surface. Nearly 3,000 zinc anodes were used for the anticorrosive
protection of the anchors.
The abutment of the Libby Dam, Montana, USA, was secured by means
of prestressed anchors following the fall of a wedge-shaped mass of rock
of 300,000 m 3 volume from the left-hand slope, during the excavation for the
abutment foundations. On the basis of detailed investigation, the rock slope
was secured with 50 VSL anchors (Fig. 21-40), each with a working force of
1.8 MN (60 % of the ultimate strength) and a length between 20 and 45 m.
The fixing length was 6 m in all cases. The stability of the slope was continu-

398

Fig. 21-40. Anchored rock slope of the Libby Dam (photo VSL Corp.)

ously monitored by means of 5 measuring anchors. Since the anchors could

not be visited in winter, the load sensors were connected to a central reading
station.
Securing the sides of construction pits by anchoring the exposed, and excavation-damaged labile beds of rock to sounder beds deep in the ground, is
often considered as excessive additional work. This is all the more so where
pits are excavated only for the short time needed to lay the foundations of
a building. The work involved is generally very difficult, requiring highly
skilled workmen and special machines; there are additional expenses which
the client and the contractor are reluctant to accept, and so in order to reduce
the construction costs and speed up the progress of construction, they take
upon themselves the risk of failure of the pit slopes, and do not anchor them.
The need for economy in the design and execution of engineering work
undoubtedly involves a certain amount of risk, particularly where the
structural arrangement and stability both depend on local geological conditions, as in the case of large construction pits. Generally, it is impossible
to collect data on the characteristics of the ground in which the excavation
is to be carried out with sufficient reliability to be able to make valid decisions
about gradients and security measures for pit slopes. It is, however, necessary

399

to be able to determine the extent of the accepted risk; in an attempt to gain

a relatively small saving by dispensing with anchors, far-reaching damage
may occur, and additional outlay is then needed for repairs or for belated
stabilization of the slopes, this outlay always being greater than that required
for anchoring an initially undamaged slope. Moreover, a pit landslide will
probably bring work to a halt, and delay the completion of the contract,
which usually means further large financial loss.
When a relatively long pit was excavated for the foundations of penstocks
for the hydraulic power station of the Dalesice Dam in Czechoslovakia, the
extent of the anchoring was limited, and the installation of the anchors was
delayed in order to reduce the volume of construction work and speed up
the progress of the operation. The result was a large landslide (Fig. 21-41 a).
a)

Fig. 21-41. Landslide from a valley slope into a construction pit of the lOOm-high rockfill
Dalesice Dam (Czechoslovakia)
a) view of the damaged slope, b) see page 400

400

Fig. 21-41.
b) stabilization of the slope with anchors

The excavated valley slope contained a serpentine wedge between two blocks
of damaged amphibolite. The slope had been stabilized by the installation
of a line of anchors at about its midheight, but the necessary number of
anchors and their dimensions were underestimated to such an extent that
they were unable to prevent the landslide from occurring when the foot of the
slope was cut away. The inadequate dimensions of the anchors were demonstrated by the fact that the anchors were severed in the landslide zone,
at a distance of 40 cm below the anchoring head. The anchors outside the
landslide region remained intact, and probably helped to limit the extent
of the disaster.
A great amount of unscheduled work was needed to prevent further earth
movements. First of all, a loading rockfill bench was constructed at the foot of
the slope, which was then relieved as the concreting of the penstock blocks
progressed. The weight of the bench was substituted by several lines of
slanting and vertical anchors fixed into the rock which remained unaffected
by the slide at the bottom of the pit. Prior to the removal of the loading bench
the slope was further secured by a line of anchors each of 1.0 MN, placed one
third of the way up the slope (Fig. 21-41 b).
The drilling of boreholes in the damaged rock of the landslide was

401
extremely difficult. The drilling proceeded from one level to the next down
the slope, with simultaneous grouting or cement mortar filling of the boreholes, which otherwise would have collapsed. The grouting of the boreholes
was complicated, by the presence of running water and the leaking of the
grout through the open joints. Here, as in many similar cases, it was clearly
shown how the coat of effective anchoring installed at the proper time in the
slopes of the excavated pit would have amounted to only a fraction of the
cost of salvaging the slope after a landslide. The disproportion is yet more
marked when the time needed to carry out the work is taken into account
in each case.
The very strong and very little technically damaged rock masses of
Scandinavia make possible not only the excavation of large underground
caverns, but also the formation of other structures out of rock. Very large,
stable, vertical rock faces can be formed, the surface being secured only by
prestressed anchors. In Finland, for example, several docks 380 x 56 m,
or 250 x80 m, with water depths of 9.5 and 12 m, were excavated in these
rocks (Fig. 21-42).
.0f

DCs

r"
1

/ <

"12.00

ii

Fig. 21-42. Anchoring of the rock faces of a dry dock in Finland (Oy Wrtsil Ab's Perno).
The anchors are Dywidag bar anchors of 32 mm diameter protected with steel sheet ducts,
lengths and spacing as follows:
1 12 m, 2.5 m, 2 12 m, 5 m, 3 (2 x dia. 32 mm), 12 m, 6.6 m

The stabilization of slopes finds application in many types of construction

work.
Rock prestressing made it possible to run a highway tunnel through a low
rock headland, on which were the ruins of historic fortifications, in a narrow
gorge of the Lueg Pass in the valley of the river Salzach in Austria. It was
feared that the upper ridge of this headland might collapse whilst the tunnel
was being driven, and this part was therefore anchored first with a row of

402

30 m-long cables (1 MN). These were fixed into the massive part of the slope
behind the headland; only then did the cutting of the tunnel commence
(Fig. 21-43). Smaller blocks in this section were secured with separate
anchors installed on the slope according to need.

Fig. 21-43. Securing of a rock headland in the Lueg Pass in the Salzach Valley (Austria) with
movable anchors PZ of 0.5 to 1.0 MN prestressing

The stability of galleries built below steep, high mountain slopes to protect
highways from falling stones and avalanches, can also be achieved by means
of anchoring. This method was used, for example, in Switzerland on the
Zurich Sargans highway along the steep banks of the Walensee lake
(Fig. 21-44) or in Austria (Fig. 21-45).
Another example of a purpose-designed anchorage system is that which
was used to stabilize the foot of a cutting for the A 8 motorway in France.
The foot of the cutting was strengthened with a system of concrete beams,
oriented in the direction of maximum slope, and anchored at three levels.
The prestressing of the anchors was 540 kN in the highest line, increasing to
1,080 kN in the lowest line. Precast reinforced concrete slabs were slipped
into rectangular grooves in the sides of the beams (Fig. 21-46). With this
arrangement, the progress of the construction was speeded up and an
aesthetically pleasing view of the slope was created.

403

b)
c)
Fig. 21-44. Anchoring gallery foundations into the foot of a rock slope near the Walensee
lake (Switzerland)
a) transport of VSL 1.22 MN anchor cables to the slope foot, b)inserting the cables
into the boreholes, c) bottom part of the gallery with two rows of anchors

21.3.2

Stabilization of slopes with non-prestressed anchors

In practice, slopes exposed to shear stresses are sometimes secured with

non-prestressed, or insufficiently stressed anchors. Such a solution is, however,
uneconomical, because the installation of a large number of anchors means
a larger amount of boreholes. Moreover, anchors that are exposed to direct
shearing do not guarantee complete safety, least of all where the rock is soft,
because failure can be caused not only by the shearing of the tendons, but also
by the pressing of the tendons into the anchoring rock. This method of slope

404

Fig. 21-45. Securing

of a motorway cutting
in Austria by means
of a retaining arch wall
concreted and anchored in steps
from the top down
(documentation "Bureau
BBR Ltd.)

section

,^^ y

Fig. 21-46. Stabilization of the foot of a cutting for the A 8 Esteret-Cte d'Azur motorway
in France
1 anchored ribs, 2 retaining slabs, 3 porous concrete, 4 anchors, 5 motorway
stabilization can only be used in a modified form in which the shear-stressed
anchors are located in concrete-filled boreholes or in pits of sufficient diameter for the rock face to rest on the concrete wrapping of the anchors.

405

An example of such a solution is given by a variant of the technique that

was used to save a railway bridge founded on a slope; the slope was expected
to become unstable, since its foot was to be inundated by the rising water
behind a dam still under construction (Fig. 21-47). The slope was prevented
from sliding by the installation of concrete blocks, which cut across beds of
sandy and clayey loam and other horizons through which the slip surface

Fig. 21-48. Securing of an unstable

slope of the Presna Dam (Poland)
1 bedrock surface, 2 anchors

Fig. 21-47. Stabilization of a slope by

means of anchored concrete blocks
under shear stress
1 prestressed concrete blocks,
2 cable anchored in bedrock and
prestressed to 2 MN, 3 shaft filled
after the prestressing of the block

was expected to pass. The concrete blocks reached down to the bedrock
and were anchored to it by means of prestressed cable anchors. Extra safety
against shear failure under the slope and the retaining wall was obtained
by increasing the size and prestressing of the blocks. Such a stabilization
method is technically simple, because it involves a gradual, step-by-step
excavation of the pits, concreting of the blocks, and prestressing of the blocks
by anchors fixed into the bedrock.
The slope of the Presna Dam lake in Poland was stabilized in a similar
manner (Fig. 21-48).
Non-prestressed anchors should always be placed so as to intersect the
shear surface at the most acute angle possible, since shearing movement is
then resisted by a larger cross-section of the anchor, and when movement
begins, tensile stress is created in the non-prestressed anchor and becomes
effective at the earliest possible moment. This method has been used, for
example, in Jurassic stratified limestones to secure a rock cliff above the
fixing zone of the left abutment of the bowed Chaudanne Dam, on the river

406

Verdon in France (Fig. 21-49). The anchor cables were composed of 125 wires
of 5 mm-diameter high quality heat-treated steel with a strength of 1,400 MPa.
The wires were placed in 13 layers separated by spacing nets to facilitate
complete envelopment in grout. The diameter of the cable was 90 mm and
that of the borehole 100 mm. The rock in the vicinity of the boreholes was
grouted thoroughly from the top downward, whilst the cables were grouted
in the opposite direction [221].

Fig. 21-49. Anchoring cables securing a rock cliff on the

left bank of the Chaudanne Dam (France)
1 rock mass threatened by collapse, 2 critical slip
surfaces, 3 anchors

Fig. 21-50. Securing of the rock slopes of the Kukuan

Dam (Taiwan)
1 beds of quartzite and sandstone, 2 shafts
(1.8 x 1.5 m), 3 dam abutment

Short shafts filled with concrete have been used for the stabilization of
rock slopes; the concrete filling is connected with concrete facing slabs on the
slope surface by means of steel cables. This method was used for securing
the slopes of the 94 m-high Kukuan arch dam in the central mountain range
of Taiwan, completed in 1961. The rock slope, composed of beds of quartzite
and sandstone, was to have been stabilized by prestressed anchorage, but
since the Chinese engineers were highly skilled at tunnelling, they decided
on a system of reinforced concrete prisms (1.80x 1.50 m in cross-section);
these were made by filling specially made shafts (drifts) with concrete (Fig.
21-50). The shafts were driven at right angles to the slip planes (bedding planes), and were 6 to 12 m deep. According to the data cited in the report [147],
this solution was the most convenient one under the existing conditions.
The stabilization of rock slopes with steel ropes placed on the slope
surface (see Fig 21-17) is also based on the principle of non-prestressed
reinforcement, which is stressed by tension only after a slight movement
of the slope has taken place.

Chapter 22
A N C H O R I N G OF WALLED

EXCAVATIONS

The walls of foundation pits and trenches up to 10 m wide are usually

braced, but if they are wider than this, or it is necessary to have the maximum
free space for the operation of earth moving machines and other construction
equipment, the walls have to be tied back into the ground (Fig. 22-1). Anchoring is generally used where a deep wall is put in position in advance,

Fig. 22-1. Anchoring of the concrete walls of a foundation pit, thus allowing fully mechanized
excavation (Langnau, Switzerland)

408

such as driven sheet piling, an underground concrete wall, lines of closely

placed piles, or laggings held by pre-positioned soldier beams. The fixing
of these structures into the ground well below the pit bottom is generally
either unprofitable or impossible. The most suitable type of wall sheeting
is selected according to the geological conditions, and this is anchored in
stages from the top downward as the excavation proceeds, at levels determined
from the static analysis. The first part of the calculation establishes the soil
or rock pressures acting on the supporting structure; the second part concerns
the anchor design, while the third part is an assessment of stability.
22.1 EARTH AND ROCK PRESSURES ON RETAINING WALLS
The earth pressure on a retaining wall depends on the depth of the excavation, the physical and mechanical properties of the ground, and the deformation (angular or horizontal displacement) of the supporting structure.
According to the extent of this angular displacement, the potential loading
of the structure can range from the lowest active earth pressure, when the structure is deflected away from the earth, to the maximum resistance of the earth
when the structure is pressed up against the earth, the load varying according
to the degree of activation of the shear strength at the soil shear surfaces or
rock discontinuity planes. If there is no deformation of the supporting
structure, and the shear strength of the ground has not come into effect,
the structure is subjected to a pressure at rest.
Research on models carried out initially by K. Terzaghi [203] and then
subsequently by other authors, has shown that a horizontal displacement
of the top of the supporting structure of 0.001 to 0.005 of its height is
necessary if the earth pressure is to drop to the value of active pressure, while
an opposite and larger deformation is required to obtain passive pressure
values. The necessary deformation for a favourable lowering of the earth
pressure to its stress-activated value is obtained by slightly loosening the
anchors at one level. The loading of a supporting structure which is anchored
progressively from one level to the next manifests itself in a slightly different
way.
22.7.7

Earth pressure

The earth pressure on a supporting structure is usually expressed in terms

of a horizontal stress from the vertical stress in the soil, as determined by the
soil volume weight, , the depth, A, and the respective coefficient, K:
Gh = . AT,
where = y . h.

409

The pressure increases in proportion to the depth, and can be represented

by a simple triangular or trapezoidal loading diagram over the entire height
of the support; the resultant acts at the centre of gravity of the diagram.
The active pressure and the passive resistance represent the extreme
values of the earth pressure with respect to the movement of the supporting
structure and the soil. The equilibrium pressure settles at some intermediate
value, since the actual earth pressure can, according to circumstances, assume
any value between the two extremes.
Pressure at rest
This is the pressure exerted when no further deformation takes place.
The coefficient of the pressure at rest is given by K0 = -

, or for a loose

soil, K0 = 1 sin . In this equation, v is the Poisson ratio for the soil,
and is the effective angle of internal friction. The total pressure at rest, S0,
on the vertical rear face of a supporting structure of height //, with
a horizontal ground surface behind the support, is:
S0 =

^yH2.K0.

The resultant of the pressure acts horizontally in the lower third of the
height, H, at the centre of gravity of the loading triangle. If another uniform
load, q, rests on the ground surface, the earth pressure is increased by =
= q . K09 and the resultant pressure on the back of the support is increased
by 5 0 = q . K0 . H. The total pressure at rest is given by the sum S0 + AS0,
and acts at the centre of gravity of the loading trapezoid.
The pressure at rest in partly consolidated, or lcose, saturated soils is
increased by the pore stress, or hydrostatic pressure. Extra'-pressure-^afr rest
is also exerted on the supporting structure by swelling cohesive soils or by
excessive mechanical compaction of the soil behind the supporting structure.
Active pressure
This pressure is exerted by non-cohesive soils only when the deflection
of the upper edge of the support attains 0.001 H to 0.002//(for cohesive soils,
0.003// to 0.005//). The coefficient of this pressure, Ka, depends on the inclination of the supporting structure, the inclination of the ground surface
behind the support, and the friction, cr adhesion of the soil to the rear of the
support. Generally, Kah determined separately for cohesive and non-cohesive
soils, according to current textbooks on soil mechanics. The design requirements usually involve a horizontal ground surface and a vertical
support structure; friction on the rear of the support usually need not be
considered.

410
For non-cohesive soils,

K. = t g * ( 4 5 - f ) ,
and the pressure of the activated earth, , at depth /?, is given by,

= .

\5-\.

The total pressure acting on a support of height H, is again determined

by a load triangle (Fig. 22-2), and the horizontal resultant, Sa, acting on the
lower third of the height //, is given by,

Sa = l y . f i 2 . t g 2 ( 4 5 - f ) .
surface of ground

"7

I 7(H-hc)Ka\

Fig. 22-2. Loading of a vertical

wall by earth pressure. The ^
diagram is valid for loose soils,
taking the loading height, H; it is
valid for cohesive soils, taking
the loading height H hc

If the ground surface is loaded with a uniform, vertically-acting,

sustained load, q, this is represented in the calculation by a layer of soil of
depth H' = , which increases the earth pressure on the support structure.
y
A similar approach is adopted in calculating the pressure of an earth body
composed of beds of different properties. The pressure is determined for each
bed separately, and the weight of the overburden is considered as a sustained
uniform load, which increases the effective height of the bed. The loading
of a supporting structure below ground water level is taken as the pressure
of the earth in its state of buoyancy in the water, plus the hydrostatic pressure.
According to the type of support structure used, and the soil type, account
must also be taken of the frictional resistance developed at the rear of the
structure, with an angle of friction of the soil of 0 to --1 this resistance

411

deflects the resultant of the pressure Sa upwards from the perpendicular to

the retaining structure.
For cohesive soils the pressure of activated earth at depth A, under the
same simple conditions assuming a vertical support and horizontal ground
surface is given by,
aa =

y.h.Ka-2Cy[K;9

where

and c is the effective cohesion of the soil.

The first component in this equation represents the pressure of loose soil
with a uniform angle of internal friction, . The second component represents
the effect of the cohesion, c, which reduces this pressure. It is a characteristic
of cohesive soils that they are able to maintain a vertical face of a particular
height for some time, without exerting any pressure on the supporting
structure. The critical height, hc, for this condition can thus be found from
the relation 0. By retaining the preceding equation we obtain,

The total active pressure of a cohesive soil on a supporting structure of

height H, is given by,
Sa = ^y{H-hc)2Ag2(^5

^j.

In this way the calculation of the pressure of a cohesive soil can be carried
out as the calculation of the pressure of a loose soil of reduced height (see
Fig. 22-2); similar graphic or calculation methods may be used to solve
more complicated problems.
If a cohesive and relatively impermeable soil has to be supported below
ground water level, the hydrostatic pressure need not be considered, providing
that the soil acts directly on the rear of the sheeting or wall. The pressure
of a stratified medium is ascertained by taking each bed separately, and
considering the overburden in each case as a permanent uniform load.
The frictional resistance of the soil on the rear of the sheeting is estimated,
according to the conditions, in terms of a deflection of the resultant total
pressure, Sa, from the horizontal by an angle, 5, not exceeding the angle
of friction of the soil, .

412
Passive resistance
This is the pressure that is exerted where a supporting structure is pressed
hard against the soil (e.g. at its lower, embedded margin) within the limit
of shear failure of the soil. It is determined principally from a consideration
of curved shear surfaces by using graphical methods; these methods can
also be found in current text books on soil mechanics. For approximate
calculations, or in situations where the support has a smooth rear face and
the shear resistance at the plane of contact between the soil and the support
can be neglected, plane shear surfaces may be assumed, thus simplifying
the numerical solution. When the surface of the ground is horizontal and
the rear of the support is vertical, the coefficient of passive resistance of the
soil is given by,

K = tg*(45 + f-).
For non-cohesive soils, the passive resistance is, at depth h

ap^y.h.Kp

= y.h.tS2^45

+ ^y

The total resistance of the soil on a structure of height, H, can be represented by a loading triangle, and the resultant, acting in the lower third
of the height, H, is given by,

S,-^.*".tf(+*).
With a uniform, vertical, sustained load on the ground surface, the nonstressed earth pressure is increased by = q. Kp.
For cohesive soils, the assumption of a plane shear surface is too far
removed from reality to be acceptable, and therefore a cylindrical shear
surface is usually assumed for an approximate solution. Nevertheless,
a simplified relation derived for loose soils is frequently used (as in the case
of active pressure), when the passive resistance is increased by a permanent
cohesion effect. The pressure at depth h, is given by,

= . h . Kp + 2cV^7= V . h . tg2^45 + y ) + 2c tg^45 + | \

The total pressure on a structure of height, H, is obtained from a load
trapezoid with sides equal to (2c y/Kp), and (y . H. Kp + 2c yfKp) respectively; the resultant acting at the centre of gravity of the trapezoid is given by,

413

Pressure on retaining walls anchored progressively at different levels.

The pressure of earth on a retaining wall anchored progressively at
different levels is analysed in a different manner from that of the preceding
cases concerning a yielding wall anchored at one level. This situation is
considered to be similar to that of structures such as sheet piling or framing,
which are braced in stages. The upper line of anchors which is installed first,
is already stressed by the time the next layer line is put in. The distribution
of pressure is not, therefore, triangular with the maximum pressure occurring
at the foot of the wall, but rather the pressures are shifted upwards, as
confirmed by experimental data [204].
For loose soils, a uniform pressure is usually considered to be exerted
over the entire support height. If the friction between the soil and the wall is
disregarded, then according to the Czechoslovak Standard quoted [242]
(Fig. 22-3),
= 0.65y . H. Ka.

Fig. 22-3. Distribution

of earth pressure on
a progressively supported
retaining structure
a) non-cohesive soil,
b) cohesive soft soil,
c) cohesive stiff soil, or
consolidated soil and soft
rock

With a vertical support and horizontal ground, the coefficient of active

pressure is given by Ka = tg 2 45 - -~ 1. Hence,
2

ffl=0.65y.ff^g

i45-|\

This rectangular pressure distribution behind the support is 30 per cent.

greater than the active pressure of triangular distribution.
In soft, plastic cohesive soils (diagram b, Fig. 22-3), the earth pressure,.
2 , is given by,
2 = y . H Ac,
whilst in stiff and consolidated cohesive soils and soft rock (load diagram c
Fig. 22-3), the pressure, 3 , is given by,
3 = (0.2 to 0.4) y . H.

414

Some authors and also the compilers of the Swiss Standard [239] consider
it correct to assume a uniform load of earth pressure over the entire height
of the retaining wall (see Fig. 22-3a), when the latter is anchored at one or
more levels in non-cohesive and cohesive soils. Therefore
= 0.65. H. Ka.
If a uniform load, q, on the ground surface behind the wall is considered,
then,
=
22.1.2

\.3(0.5. . Ka +

Ka.q).

Pressure of hard rocks on retaining walls

In excavation work generally, hard rocks are usually considered to be

temporarily stable. If there are unfavourably oriented planes of discontinuity
dipping into the excavation, either individually or in a group (a system of
joints), then individual labile blocks, or the entire face are directly anchored
without any other major supporting structures. This is carried out as described in Chapter 21.

22.2 DESIGN OF A N C H O R A G E FOR CASED EXCAVATIONS

In the design of the anchorage for a cased excavation, the dimensions

of the foundation pit and support structure, and the geological characteristics
of the ground are taken as a starting point. Usually a two-dimensional system
of forces acting in the plane of a vertical cross-section of the excavation face
is analysed statically; earth pressure and other forces are taken into account.
The equilibrium of forces and the stability of the excavation both involve
forces created by the prestressing of the anchor tendons which are secured
to stable regions of the ground behind the support.
In computing the earth pressure, the probable behaviour of the support
structure when it is loaded must be considered. The values for the soil
strength characteristics that are entered into the calculation are either reliable
values obtained from field tests, or values taken from the Tables given in
Chapter 9.
The anchoring forces are distributed over the supporting structure with
the maximum economy, that is, with the maximum negative moments at the
anchoring points approximately equal to the maximum positive moments
acting on the support between anchors. The prestressing of the anchor
tendons is adjusted according to the assumptions made in the static analysis.

415

The anchors are fixed in a sufficiently stable region of the ground behind
the supporting structure, and the overall stability of the entire structure
is assessed.
22.2.1

Retaining walls suitable for anchoring

Types of retaining wall that can be anchored are sheet steel piling, soldier
beams with laggings (Berlin method), piled sheeting, underground walls
(Milanese method), and element walls (Swiss method). The static efficiency
and distribution of earth pressure on the wall are influenced principally by
the rigidity and continuity between components of the wall.
Steel sheet piling is a relatively pliable, continuous supporting structure,
which allows sufficient deformation above the excavation floor for the active
earth pressure to develop. This characteristic is particularly valuable when
the sheet piling yields along the line of the supporting anchors installed at one
level.
Sheet piles are usually driven below the excavation floor to a depth which
still permits some angular displacement of the embedded pile ends to take
place. The resistance of the soil to shear failure at the foot of the sheet piling
prevents soil extrusion in the excavation floor. It is assumed in the static
analysis that the displacement of the piles may even suffice to form a passive
earth resistance. The loading diagram is shown in Fig. 22-4a. If it is expected
that the displacement of the piling below the floor of the excavation will
be less than that required to develop a passive resistance, a reduced value for
this pressure must be introduced into the calculation, or if necessary, the

r)

b)

Fig. 22-4. Earth pressure load on the anchored vertical sheeting of an excavation
a) loading of sheet piling, b) loading of sheet bracing

416

part of the sheet piles embedded below the floor must be lengthened. A reduction of the earth pressure can be made, for example, by a reduction
of the coefficient, Kp, by 1/3 of the value of Kp K0, for the given soil.
The Berlin method, using soldier beams with timber, concrete, or steel
laggings inserted in succession, also represents a yielding type of sheeting
(Fig. 22-5). Steel soldier beams are erected in, or sometimes rammed into,

Fig. 22-5. Sheeting comprising timber laggings (Berlin method), anchored in two rows
(photo Brckner Grundbau)

vertical boreholes below the floor level of the excavation. Although they are
very rigid relative to their small width, these beams still allow sufficient soil
deformation for the development of an active earth pressure with a triangular load distribution. Each beam receives the earth pressure from a width
of ground equivalent to the axial interval between beams.
According to Krey [110], the passive resistance of the soil, Sp, acts to
prevent any angular displacement of the beam around the point of a one-line
anchorage, while the resistance, Rp, acts against shear failure of the soil on
either side of the beam. This resistance is expressed in terms of the resistance

417

to movement along two parallel vertical planes FLM (Fig. 22-4b). In loose
soils, Rp is determined by the friction at the vertical shear planes
Rp = Es. tg .
The horizontal pressure, Es, acting on these planes, is expressed as the
pressure at rest of the given soil (with K0 = 1) on the area FLM. Thus,

s = !v.</ 3 .tg(45 + f - ) .
For cohesive soils, Rp is constant (assuming = 0), and is equal to the
cohesion c at the two planes FLM:

Rp = c.d\tg(45

+ ^\.

Piled sheeting comprises a row of piles, with intervening gaps greater

than the pile diameters (Fig. 22-6). This sheeting method is suitable for
cohesive soils or soft rock, which will be retained by the piles without sheeting
owing to the arch-forming effect of their cohesiveness. The exposed surface
may be strengthened with gunned concrete. Conditions in the gaps between
very rigid piles are highly favourable for the development of active earth
pressure. The displacement of the piles in the soil does not fulfil the
excavation face

gunned concrete

I I t D' i t

earth pressure

t t i

Fi 22_6 Pile st ckade

( <> )

sheeting (horizontal section)

conditions for an active earth pressure above the excavation floor, nor for
a passive resistance below the floor. Therefore it is recommended, especially
when there is no significant yielding of the anchors, that the coefficients Ka
and Kp in the load diagram be reduced to the values K'a and Kp, respectively,
as in the following:
K'a

Ka + (K0 Ka),

K'p = Kp (Kp K0),

and that the calculation at the anchor level be carried out, taking the earth
pressure at rest (Fig. 22-7).

418

it

|.

tfKj

|.

t_

r(Htd)KZ

j,

Fig. 22-7. Earth pressure and earth resistance loading on an anchored pile wall (K' values),
and an underground wall {K" values)

Underground walls for supporting the soil are usually continuous reinforced concrete structures cast in deep, narrow trenches. This type of
structure is very rigid and creates a soil angle cf friction of to at
its rear face. It is recommended, therefore, that the coefficient of earth
pressure and earth resistance be adjusted in the following way:
2
K"a = Ka + {KQ Ka),
K'p = Kp (Kp K0).
This is shown in Fig. 22-7, where the earth pressure at rest must also be considered at the anchoring level.
Element walls are made and anchored in a succession of horizontal levels
from the top downwards, as the pit excavation proceeds (Fig. 22-8). Their
advantage over the preceding methods is that any drilling, ramming, or
excavation with special machines, does not have to be carried out prior to the
opening of the pit. The individual reinforced elements are made on the spot
and the reinforcements of the elements are welded together as the elements
are formed.

419
front

view

cross-section
v///////,

>/////////
O

llll

1 I ~T
I I

|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l

v)//////}///////\
v///;///;///;//////;///,
>///////;//;

/V// >////,
>////////)//

v///////;

I I 1
W///////V))})///

y/////////

x I * 1 I
1 1
\ , \ \

v$/\))/\
e

'///////////////},

777777777

^7 >/////////)/,

Fig. 22-8. Wall of anchored concrete elements construction sequence [158] (A), anchored
element wall for the Beaux Arts underground station at Charleroi (Belgium), constructed
by Bruckner Comp. (B)

Such element walls are yielding and the calculations therefore assume
an earth pressure evenly distributed up and down the entire height of the wall.
For the individual stages of the excavation, however, an additional arch
loading on each line of mostly recently installed anchors arises from the

420

pressure of the yet unanchored next part of the excavation [158], and this
has to be taken into account. For the bottom lines of anchors, this transient
load will be greater than the sustained load (Fig. 22-9).

22.2.2

Calculation of anchoring forces

The required anchoring forces are calculated on the basis of the equilibrium
of forces acting on the retaining wall. If the anchors are fixed in one line,
the calculation is simpler than that needed for several lines of anchors one
above the other.
22.2.2.1

Anchoring forces along one level of the retaining wall

A calculating method for one anchorage level is given by Z. Bazant [14].

The load-bearing wall is sunk below the floor of the excavation to a depth, d,
the magnitude of which is determined by the requirement that the foot of
the wall should not shear over the soil beneath it, nor rotate about the
anchorage point K. The sum of the moments of all the forces acting on the
wall with respect to the point K9 must be zero. Thus according to the scheme
shown in Fig. 22-4b,
*Vi + S2r2 - S3r3 - 2Rprp = 0,

421

where Sx, S2, S3 are horizontal components of the earth pressure or resistances already solved graphically, and Rp is the resistance to shearing along
vertical planes on either side of the beam, as indicated previously.
By substituting the respective dimensions of the structure and the soil parameters into the equation, values for the individual forces and their distances
from point K are determined (according to the loading diagram) in terms
of the unknown d. Substituting into the equation IMk = 0, a value of d
is tentatively obtained from the biquadratic equation; this should then be
increased by 10 to 20 per cent, (according to H. Blum [20]) for the actual
construction of the wall. By entering the value of d, values for the individual
forces are computed, with the exception of the anchoring force which is
determined from the equilibrium of forces in the horizontal direction:
Pk = St + S2 - S3 -

2Rp.

The dimensions of the retaining wall is computed from M m a x , which acts

at the depth, y, (below ground level) at which P = 0; at this depth the earth
pressure is exactly balanced by the anchoring force:
Pk = Si.
The steel anchor tendon, the abutting head, the load distribution beams
YYi

and the anchor root are designed to take a force Pw = mPk, or Pw r- 9

sina
if the anchor is inclined at an angle a. The safety factor m in this case is
determined according to an accepted Standard, or according to the data
given in Section 17.1.
The length lt of the tendon is initially taken as being equal to the excavation depth (lt = H) [50], and the angle of inclination is fixed between 10
and 30, provided that the anchors reach the required load-bearing bed.
The size and length of the anchor fixing depends on the type of root used,
and follows the principles given in Chapter 13. In the final part of the design
the overal stability of the anchored structure is assessed according to the
principles set out in the next Section.
The design must state the prestressing force of the anchors. It is recommended that some allowance be made for a small angular displacement
of the supporting structure (1/1,000 H for non-cohesive soils, 3/1,000 H for
cohesive soils), in order to satisfy the assumption that a stress-activated earth
pressure will be exerted. This means that the anchor prestressing can be
decreased in proportion to the displacement of the structure, and the stressactivated earth pressure on the supporting structure then adjusts the anchor
prestressing to the computed value (see Chapter 23.1). Some experts have recommended, however, that even where a stress-activated earth pressure is
assumed, the full prestressing force should be introduced into the anchors.

422

This approach must allow a margin of displacement in case a reduction of

anchor prestressing takes place as a result of long term soil and anchorage
creep.
22.2.2.2

Anchoring forces along several levels of the retaining wall

The supporting structure is treated as a continuous vertical beam supported

at successive anchoring levels and at the extremity, F, of the embedded end;
the beam is loaded by a system of earth pressures and resistances.
The embedding depth, d, as the length of the lower part of the continuous
beam, is determined first of all and is then used to determine the reactions
of the continuous beam. The available passive earth resistance on the embedded part of the supporting structure, should be 50 per cent, greater than the
basal reaction of the continuous beam at point F. If this safety factor of 1.5
cannot be fulfilled, the calculation must be repeated with another value for the
embedding depth. Although this procedure takes much time and computation,
the final correct analysis immediately gives the static values required for
establishing the dimensions of both the structure and the anchors. The static
analysis for the continuous beam, particularly in cases in which the system
of forces is more complicated, may be carried out graphically, by transforming
the distributed load into concentrated loads in horizontal lines, and applying
the strip method.
The embedding depth for a continuous sheet piling wall or an underground
reinforced concrete wall (which, with different water levels on either side,
also prevents bursting of the floor of the excavation) is not necessarily determined by the need to prevent shear failure below the excavation floor, but
rather by the need to prevent bursting of the floor when the soil gives way
under the pressure of the water. It is of particular importance that this requirement be satisfied where there is only a shallow embedding of the wall,
this being sufficient to resist shear failure of the soil.
The dimensions of the supporting structure and the anchors are established
after the static values have been determined, in the same way as for anchors
at one level. The tendon lengths of the lower lines of anchors may be reduced,
but the prestressing of the anchors is kept at the full value. The static analysis
is completed by assessing the stability of the anchored structure, as described
in the following Section.
22.2.3

Stability assessment of anchored retaining walls

The security of individual anchors against extraction from the soil was
discussed in Chapters 10 and 13. This security is achieved by using an anchor
root (a plate or bulb) of appropriate dimensions at the fixing point of the

423

anchor in the soil. The system must be tested by loading test anchors before
work begins on the anchored structure, and by overstressing standard service
anchors with a higher, testing load (see Chapter 17). All this, however, is not enough to guarantee the stability of the anchored structure.
It is also necessary to ensure that the tendons are of sufficient length and
orientation to reach a region of the ground of which the load-bearing capacity
is unaffected by the excavation. In principle, the anchor root is at a greater
distance from the wall than that of the shear surface delimiting the soil
wedge which loads the wall. Two shear zones are formed behind the wall,
these being defined by an upper and a lower slip plane (see Fig. 22-11).
The formation of two slip planes behind an anchored wall has been demonstrated in model tests carried out by H. Bendel [15] (Fig. 22-10). The
fixing of anchors beyond the surface of the permanently stable slope, as
discussed in Chapter 23 in the context of permanent retaining walls, is
uneconomic for the temporary walls of excavations. To establish the most
reliable anchor lengths and the conditions for of internal stability of the
system: wall-earth body-anchors along the so called deeper shear surface,
the methods proposed by E. Kranz [108] and N. Janbu [98] are most
often used. Both methods were compared by Huder and Arnold [93].
cm

135-

^ ^ V,\
\
\ ' k\\\ \\
k
I
I

S\\\,u
fr\
I
^\ vu
' \\\
\v w
\\\
v
< \w\ \ \\\
I
\
M \
I
\
t\ \\ ^
*\ l
5 \N\\
1
1
\ \\ Si \
\
V
^ 1\ ' v
\] s
^v|\

>
\
\
\ \'
I
I
I

115

*v

35
75

'v

55
35
15

20

22.2.3.1

40

60

w w
w

0 100 120 Wem

Fig. 22-10. Failure of a sand block model

with double anchorage; diagram shows
motion vectors at the points of a grid
in a perpendicular cross-section through
the model [15]

Internal stability

The stability can fail when the soil mass behind the wall, compressed by
the forces (Rk) of the anchors, shears along a plane connecting the theoretical
foot, F, of the embedded load-bearing wall with either the centre of gravity
of the mass, or the tips of the fixing devices, D, of the anchors (Fig. 22-11).
In addition, when the anchor roots are placed near the ground surface, the
soil may fail along a shear plane running through the points D, up to the

424

f t

^ X anchor plate (screen)

A6F\ loading
CJDf wedges of soil
FbCO earih body securing
stability of anchoring
area

Fig. 22-11. Stability analysis

of a wall with different
anchor fixing methods
(after E. Kranz)
/ anchoring by trench-wall or plate, / / by long
concrete root or tensile
pile, / / / by expanded root
bulb

long anchor
roof

anchor
bulb

surface at point C. The stability solution according to Kranz is based on the

equilibrium of all forces acting on the soil body CDFB, which ensures the
stability of the anchorage behind the wall. These forces are: the weight of the
soil, G1, the earth pressure, St, the resistances along the shear surface, Ra
and Rt, and the limit force of the anchors, Rk. The latter is usually determined
graphically from the diagram of forces.
The diagram of forces can be constructed from the known vectors Gt,
Sl9 Ra, from the direction, Rt, of the frictional pressure acting on the shear
plane, and from the direction of the anchoring force, Rk. According to the
usual practice adopted for a graphical solution, the distribution of forces
on the slip surface is not taken into consideration. The calculation is simplified
if the reaction Ra, which supports the labile soil wedge ABF, is replaced by
opposite forces with which it is in equilibrium, viz. the weight of the wedge (Ga)
and the reaction of the wall to the earth pressure (Sa). The force Ra is thus
eliminated and the slip surface of the loading soil wedge ABF need not be

425

separately considered. It remains, then, to solve the equilibrium of the entire

soil body CDFA, involving the weight of the body, G = Gt + Ga, and the
forces Sa, Si9 Rt and Rk. The force diagram is considerably simplified in
this way. Arithmetically Rk is expressed as follows:

_ A - A + [G - (hSa - A ) t g 3 ] . tg(y - )

cos a + sin a . tg ( #)

'

where hSa, hS1 are horizontal components of the relevant earth pressures
(see Fig. 22-11),
a = angle of inclination of the anchor,
= angle of internal friction of the soil,
$ = angle of inclination of shear surface FD,
= deviation of earth pressure Sa and St from the perpendicular to the wall, as determined by the friction between the
soil and the rear of the wall.
It may be necessary to introduce the extra pressure of ground water into
the static analysis. The sustained service load, q, of the ground surface behind
the wall is introduced into the calculation only if the inclination of the slip
plane FD is reduced to a safer, lower angle.
The anchored structure is stable when the limit anchoring force, Rk,
which disturbs the equilibrium at the shear surface DF, is 50 per cent, greater
than the anchoring force, Pk, needed to secure the wall (see Section 22.2.2).
The safety margin, m, is thus

If this condition is not fulfilled, the anchor tendons must be extended or

inclined more steeply, and thus fixed deeper in the soil mass. A more precise
solution for the stability of an anchored wall with a curved shear surface
between D and F h a s been elaborated by R. Jelinek and H. Ostermayer [99].
They have demonstrated both theoretically and by experiment that in most
cases of anchored supporting walls, shorter anchors could be used than those
suggested by the approximate computation in which the lower shear surface
is assumed to be planar.
22.2.3.2

Verification of internal stability under various anchoring conditions

The procedure just described was initially proposed for sheet piling
anchored in a non-cohesive soil, the anchor tendons being fixed in the soil
with the aid of vertical anchoring plates or trench walls (see Fig. 22-11, I).
It was subsequently applied to other fixing methods involving a long or

426

expanded grouted root, or a rammed tensile pile (see Fig. 22-11, II, III). In the
latter examples, a hypothetical vertical anchoring plane CD, is assumed for
the purposes of the calculation. This plane passes through the centre of the
anchor root or fixing section of the pile (length /), or within 2 m of the expanded anchor root bulb (Fig. 22-11, III) [50]. When the anchors are arranged
with their roots in a row, their spacing is assumed to be more than /.
For cohesive soils, the calculation is similar to that for non-cohesive soils
but the earth pressure on the supports and the resistance at the shear surface
FD are determined taking an effective angle of friction of the soil, ', and
an effective soil cohesion, c'. In unconsolidated cohesive soils, it is assumed
that = 0. In the diagram of forces, a force C = c'. FD, acting along
the slip plane, is introduced before the force Rt.
When the soil is of more than one type, so that the soil mass behind the
wall comprises two or more beds, of different physical and mechanical
properties, the stability is calculated as follows (Fig. 22-12):

Fig. 22-12. Graphic analysis of the stability of an anchored wall in front of a stratified medium

The body AFDC is divided vertically into parts at the points of intersection
between the shear surface FD and the individual beds. The weights of these
parts always act in the diagram of forces from the points of intersection
of Rly R2, etc. with the direction of the anchoring force, Rk. The section
between the point of action of the first force, Sx, and the point of intersection
of the previous component of shear resistance with the anchoring direction,
determines the value of the limit anchoring force, Rk.
If the supporting structure is anchored at several different levels, the
stability of the structure is calculated in stages from the diagram of forces
(Fig. 22-13). The state of equilibrium for the first line of anchoring forces is
considered initially, (this involves the weight, Gl9 of the body FDXCXA and

427

Fig. 22-13. Analysis of the stability of a wall anchored at several levels in homogeneous
non-cohesive soil

the forces acting at the shear surface FD^), and thus Rkl is found. The next
force diagram is constructed for the soil body FD2C2A, the shear plane FD2,
and the sum of the anchoring forces Rkl and Rk2. This procedure is repeated
until the lowest shear surface is reached. The resulting safety factor is obtained
from the relation

In Fig. 22-13, this analysis is shown for three lines of anchors in a homogenous non-cohesive soil.
22.2.3.3 External (overall) stability
It appears from the results of research and from recent practical experience
that an assessment of the external, or overall stability is necessary, particularly
for high structures or where complex geological conditions exist. Here, the
formation of a curved shear surface is assumed, the depth of this depending
on the depth of the foot of the structure (Fig. 22-14). In the analysis, the least
favourable shear surface with respect to the supporting structure is sought,
using the above-described procedure for the internal stability. The position
and shape of the least favourable shear surface is not known in advance and
therefore the investigation requires a large number of similar calculations,
for which a computer and suitable program must be available.
To set up this program, it is convenient to use the method of slices as
applied to the stability of a soil slope. The procedure for finding the least
favourable shear surface may be that described in the preceding Chapter

428

Fig. 22-14. Overall stability analysis for a tied-back wall, assuming cylindrical slip surfaces.
Geological parameters, the topography of the site, and an account of the loading are given
according to L. Otta [160]

(21.1). The axis of the cylinder is gradually shifted as shown in Fig. 22-14,
until it is found that the calculated degree of safety does not decrease any
further. To obtain a more accurate result, it may also be useful to investigate
the state of stability at that part of the shear surface where the cylindrical
surface approaches ground level; the shear surface in this section takes the
form of a plane inclined at the angle a = 45 , according to the theory
of active earth pressure.
If the smallest degree of safety found in this way is less than the required
degree of safety (usually 1.5), longer anchor tendons must be used, or the
number of anchors at the lower levels must be increased. The new design
is assessed in the same way.
Several hundreds of shear surfaces can be processed by the computer for
one design of an anchored wall, and conditions can be introduced into the
analysis that are for more complicated than any that could be handled by
graphic methods.
22.3 EXAMPLES OF A N C H O R E D WALLS AND THE M O N I T O R I N G
OF THEIR FUNCTION

A simple example of an anchored pile sheeting around a construction

pit excavated in unconsolidated topsoil and soft clayey shales is shown in
Fig. 22-15. The sheeting required to withstand an earth pressure of the

429

Fig. 22-15. Anchored sheeting of drilled-in piles in the foundation pit for the National
Assembly Building in Prague

following parameters: = 35, y = 2,000 kg/m 3 , = 2/3 (the angle of

friction between the soft rock and the sheeting), consists of a row of drilled-in
piles. These are embedded into the ground 3.5 m below the pit floor, and are
supported higher up by an anchored reinforced concrete belt (anchors 1.8 m
apart). The anchor cables are each composed of 20 patented 4.5 mm diameter wires. The roots, which are 4 m long, are fixed in shales.
The pile sheeting of the excavation for an underground railway station
in Prague was anchored by two lines of anchors mounted on longitudinal
reinforced concrete load-distributing sills (Fig. 22-16A). Bar anchors with
a load-carrying capacity of 370 kN (see Fig. 13-43) were fixed over a length
of 6 m in weathered clayey shales, by repeated grouting with a collared pipe.
An example of collapse in the anchored sheeting for the Prague underground railway is shown in Fig. 22-17. At the top of the excavation are about
10 m of compact loamy gravels and sands, beneath which lie highly weathered
clayey shales. Braces, made of No. 40 steel I-beams, were inserted into boreholes extending below the pit floor. As the excavation progressed, wooden
laggings were inserted between the beams and these were anchored successively
by two lines of anchors which were slightly inclined from the horizontal.
The first line was fixed 2 m below the ground surface in the gravels and sands,
and the second was fixed at a depth of 12 m in the weathered shales. The
sheeting was stable until the ground became over-saturated with water
escaping from a burst water main situated below the ground surface 15 m
from the sheeting. The pressure on the wall increased and the shear strength

430

Fig. 22-16.
A Anchored pile sheeting of the foundation pit for the Kacerov underground station,
Praha,

of the anchored soil was reduced, both under the anchored soil mass and
along the anchor roots. The soil failed along a curved surface emerging at
ground level up to 8 m from the top of the wall; the anchors were torn out
and the braces uprooted.
Anchored drill-rod sets (Hagconsult system) have been successfully used
in Sweden to anchor the sheet piling of foundation pits in dense urban areas.
Fig. 22-18 shows a cross-section of the sheet piling for a foundation pit in
Stockholm. The sheet piling is anchored by an upper line of bar anchors
fixed in morainic gravels and sands, whilst the lower line is anchored in the
bedrock. The bored anchor bars, which were of 32x16 mm cross-section,
were grouted with cement slurry under a pressure of 0.52.0. MPa, and
prestressed to 360 kN; they underwent elastic elongation only. A view of the
sheeted pit is shown in Fig. 22-19. The external anchor heads were mounted
on load-distributing rolled steel beams, and these in turn were seated on
oblique props welded to the sheet piles.
Anchored sheet pilings are also commonly used to support banks, and
are used in the construction of embankments. Sheet piles are rammed into
the underlying strata of the bank, and the ground level is raised up to the top

431

of the sheet piling which is then anchored with tie bars, usually positioned
from above. The tie bars are connected at one end to the sheet piles, and
at the other to embedded or rammed-in anchoring screens (or plates)
(Fig. 22-20). Another example involving an embankment is given in
Chapter 23.
Anchoring is used in a similar way to secure quay walls constructed by
the slurry trench method or the so-called pile-wall method. The quay wall at
a port near Cremona in Italy may serve as an example; the port is built on
a canal connecting Milan with the Adriatic Sea. The quay wall was constructed as an underground wall of reinforced concrete, 70 cm thick
(Fig. 22-21). It was secured by tendons spaced at intervals of 3 m and
prestressed to 540 kN. A parapet wall served as a base for the anchors; this
wall was concreted in a trench 2 m deep below the ground surface, at
a distance of 10 m from the quay wall.

432

Fig. 22-17. Collapse in the

anchored wall of the foundation
pit for the PragueBudejovick
underground railway station

21.70
^rayelandsand
\

\ Qs^wage main

Fig. 22-18. Section through the anchored sheet

piling for a foundation pit in Stockholm

The anchoring of a reinforced concrete wall at the sides of an excavation

for a water canal leading from a nuclear power station in France, is shown
in Fig. 22-22. Permanent anchors, fixed in sand, can be seen at three levels.
The upper level comprises bar anchors with a load-bearing capacity of

433

tir-

J?**'

Fig. 22-19. View of a foundation pit walled by sheet piling (Anchoring by Hagconsult AB
Stockholm)
t

embankment

sheet
piling

Fig. 22-20. Detail of an embankment wall anchored with steel tie-bars

500 kN and a fixing length of 6 m while the two lower levels comprise rope
anchors with a load-bearing capacity of 1 MN, and a fixing length of 13 m.
The construction was carried out by the Soletanche Co.
The underground walls of the pumping station supplying water to
Bratislava (Czechoslovakia) provide an illustration of another method of
anchoring. The station is sited on the flood plain of the Danube, where

434
330

Fig. 22-21. Quay wall at Cremona

(Italy)
/ reinforced concrete,
2 anchors of 540 kN each,
3 anchor base, 4 anchor foot
embedded in the concrete of the
Milanese wall, 5 anchor head
on the base wall

Fig. 22-22. Anchored walls at the sides of an excavation for a canal in France
(Soletanche Co.);
) view into the canal, b) see page 435

both frequent floods and considerable fluctuations in the ground water level
occur. The anchors had to be fixed in beds of fine-grained gravel and sand
which are often saturated, and because of the small load-bearing capacity
of anchors fixed in such material, an excessively large number of them would

435

'ft 2
r

^alfu'viaf-t. ~

vv

+7.5

"

Fig. 22-22.
b) cross-section

b)

ill
i I

--

=^
TT
I

I
I
I

JJ-

^ ^

**:

/
/
/

! ''
I

tfj

I / /
I /

'

Fig. 22-23: Anchoring of the walls of the pumping

station for the water supply of Bratislava
(Czechoslovakia) with the aid of sunk open caissons
a) plan, b) vertical section,
/ underground wall of the pumping station, 2 open
caissons, J - 2 M N anchors, 4 anchor heads

436

have been needed to secure the station walls. Thus it was proposed that the
anchor bases might rest against the walls of open caissons lowered in advance
around the circumference of the pumping station (Fig. 22-23). The anchors
were to be made from 65 mm diameter single ropes with both ends fixed in
cast steel heads.
The design gave particular attention to anticorrosive protection, the
individual strands of the anchor rope being coated with red lead during the
stranding. The insulating wrapping of the rope consisted of a layer of insulating paste and an anticorrosive bandage, which was protected from mechanical
injury during manipulation of the anchor by a PVC foil bandage.

horizontal

section

open pit

Fig. 22-24. Anchored element wall of the excavation for a new hospital at Chur (Svitzerland)
a) plan; b) cross-section showing the anchoring system and the distribution of horizontal
deformation in the wall [159]

When excavations are carried out in comparatively dry cohesive soils,

the anchored sheeting is often constructed according to the Swiss method
(see Section 22.2.1). An anchored element wall protecting the excavation
of a new hospital at Chur [158] is shown in Fig. 22-24. The excavation was
dug to a depth of about 16 m in heterogenous detritus below the old hospital.
The wall was composed of reinforced concrete blocks measuring 3.25 x 1.90 m,
and was anchored successively at eight levels with Stump-Duplex bar anchors
32 mm in diameter, with a working load of 450 kN. The movement of earth
behind the wall was registered by inclinometers in two monitoring boreholes
drilled before excavation commenced. The deformation is shown diagrammatically in Fig. 22-24b; the top of the wall was displaced 1.1 cm horizontally,
and no vertical deformation was observed. The wall was pressed into the
seil at about mid-height, most probably as a result of the greater anchor

437

prestressing that was applied, since the calculations were based on a wall
load of 1.2 times the active earth pressure. The old building did not suffer
any damage.
An interesting example of the movement of an entire sheeting wall into
the soil was reported by S. K. Saxena in the USA [73]. The wall, securing
the excavation for the World Trade Centre building, was 18 m high and
1 m thick. It was constructed of reinforced concrete panels and was secured
by six lines of anchors with a fixing length of about 10 m. The movements
of 10 panels were observed throughout the construction. The wall acted as
a semi-rigid member and tended to rotate about a point near its base, the
position of this point being determined to some extent by the depth of the
foot of the wall in the bedrock. It was observed that the wall moved continuously into the soil as excavation proceeded and successive layers of ties were
prestressed. The maximum lateral movement was about 6.5 cm, recorded
a year and a half after the excavation had been started. The anchor loads
decreased steadily with increasing deformation of the wall, owing to elastic
contraction of the prestressed tendons (Fig. 22-25).
The excavation for a new telephone building in New York was protected
by means of timber panels and steel battens anchored by long triple rope
prestressed tendons grouted into the rock [73]. Above the centre section
of the wall the tied-back concrete underpinning of the existing six-storey
telephone building was realized. The total depth of the excavation was 23 m.
A problem arose when the basement excavation was required to be taken
down into a rock stratum underlying an earth overburden. The support
system for the overburden could have been tied back with anchors dipping
at 45 degrees into the rock, but these would have given rise to a vertical
loading on the support system that would have been transmitted to the rock
in which the support was resting, very close to the excavation face. This
would have created a danger of rock failure at the face.
Both the importance and the usefulness of monitoring excavation support
structures are apparent from the example described by Otta [159]. An
excavation 16.5 m deep, carried out in Zurich, was protected with a reinforced concrete underground wall anchored at four levels under unfavourable
conditions (Fig. 22-26). The behaviour of the structure and the surrounding
ground were observed during the progress of the excavation and afterwards
by measuring the inclination of monitoring boreholes behind the wall, and
by measuring the changes in the prestressing of the anchors. Systematic
measurements commenced when the excavation reached a depth of 7 m,
at the level of the second line of anchors (day 0, see Fig. 22-26). Until then,
no deformation had been registered either at the ground surface or in the
wall. The deformation was considerable, however, when the excavation reached the third anchoring level (after 16 days) and the fourth anchoring level

438

^- IT|ti

. Ilil i:aa :

^*>*<

rrpfi^

^^^^^mm^mm

600
(3.0j
[

50 .
|(25)| \^4

.^.V.-

-..---^:.~.

- -; "

.5- 300
(1.5)

- 1 .- _ ; :

^ - > "~

^?2
^5

\
X

150
150

300

50 600 750
time days

900 1050 1200

Fig. 22-25. Anchors securing the excavation wall for the World Trade Centre [73]
A view into the foundation pit, B measured decreasing loads in different anchors

(after 139 days). Gradually the ground behind the wall sunk by as much as
3 cm (at a distance of 5 m from the wall), the upper edge of the wall was
displaced 4 cm horizontally, and at the level of the third line of anchors the

439
deformations and distances

cross- section

o 2 i 6 fe^fe1L(control points
observo^ ^
^tion borehole

Fig. 22-26. Measured

deformation of the wall
and displacement at the
ground surface at
construction pit in Zurich
[159]

*>.*A/
^

horizontal displacement was 8 cm. On the basis of these measurements, the

procedure by which the last stage of the excavation was carried out was
modified in time to prevent the deformation exceeding the admissible value.
The ground water level in the surroundings of the pit was lowered by pumping
the water from drilled wells, and the last three-metre stage of the excavation
was undertaken in parts, in each of which the concrete foundation slab was
cast without delay. The increments in the ground and wall deformations
were markedly reduced, both in the course of the last excavation stage and
after completion of the excavation work.
In the construction of the underground railway in Nuremberg, anchored
sheeting was employed in a novel manner. The tunnels for the stations had
to be excavated in sandstone at a shallow level below the surface, close to
the foundations of the 75 m-high southern tower of the church of St. Lorenz.
To avoid the risk of damaging this magnificent Gothic building, the tunnels
were located on the opposite side of an anchored pile wall (Fig. 22-27).
The drilled-in piles had a diameter of 80 cm, and the anchors were prestressed
to 400 kN. During the excavation of the tunnels, deformation of the surrounding ground was carefully recorded, and it was found that the total vertical
displacement of the foundations amounted to only 2.6 millimetres [12].
An interesting example of a braced and anchored inclined supporting wall
is shown in Fig. 22-28 [222]. The wall was constructed to protect a foundation
pit for the Munich subway tunnel and prevent subsidence under the foundations of a nearby multi-storeyed building. The wall was installed by means
of a Benoto boring rig. The ground water level was not lowered.
The stabilizing of excavations in plastic clays by means of anchored walls
is very exacting, on account of the considerable pressures and deformations
which occur in these soils. H. Breth and D. Stroh give an example of a large
construction pit excavated in clay in Frankfurt a. M. [23]. The pit was 20 m

440
Fig. 22-27. The use of
anchored piles to protect the
foundations of a Gothic
church against ground
settlement in the course
of excavation of the station
tunnels for the Nuremberg
Underground (GFR).
a) cross-section; b)plan

securing of
St Lorenz Church

a)
cross - section
Knigstrosse
L 9.60 , | * & , 9.60

i; \ ! / > j \

i / >

441

deep and 177 m long, and the computed force exerted by the earth per 1 lineal
metre of the supporting wall was 1,900 kN. The excavation was secured by anchors installed at six levels in succession, beginning at the top, with a spacing
of 1 m between anchors in the same line. The anchors were 20 to 27 m long,
slightly inclined from the horizontal, and the injected cylindrical roots were
7 m long. The horizontal displacement of the top of the wall was regularly
checked during the excavation (Fig. 22-29). Midway along the pit, the top
of the wall was displaced horizontally by almost 12 cm in the course of seven
months of excavation, after which time it remained stable. In view of this

Fig. 22-28. Inclined wall of

a foundation pit in Munich
/ street level,
2 building foundations,
3 subway tunnel,
4 braces (H beams),
5 prestressed anchors,
6 ground water level,
a silty gravel, b sandy
silt, c silty sand

**'

0
r-

120

100
80 |

1
1

1
1

/
(

10

40

1
J
^ J

15-

20

//
XI

XII

1969

20

/
t
1

II

///

IV
1970

VI

VII

VIII

yo
|

Fig. 22-29. Excavation

progress (in terms of depth)
and deformation of the wall
of a construction pit at
Frankfurt a. M. [23]

442

large deflection of the wall, the forces in the anchors were checked, and were
found to correspond with the force of active earth pressure, which the anchors
were designed to hold.
In another example from the same locality [24] a large excavation in clay
was secured by an anchored wall; in addition to the systematic observation
of the loading and deformation of the wall as well as the anchor prestressing,
comparative calculations of these values were carried out by the finite element
method (Fig. 22-30). The results of the calculations and measurements were

calculated

measured

Fig. 22-30. Deformations and anchoring forces in the wall of a construction pit in Frankfurt
(GFR), according to the results of both calculations and measurements [24]
A profile of the wall and geological profile; 1 gravel, 2 clay, 3 limestone;
B deformation of the wall, C earth pressure, D increase in anchoring forces with
excavation depth

in very close agreement, both for the deformations and the anchoring forces.
Some differences appeared at the foot of the wall, where the effects of interlayers of strong limestone in the clay was not considered.
The displacements of walls anchored in plastic cohesive soils, not only
in the upper part but also at the foot of the wall, are a consequence of the
compressibility of the soil below the excavation floor. The various forces
involved are shown in Fig. 22-31 [154]. The earth block AB DE experiences a horizontal pressure, and in order to satisfy the condition
of equilibrium, the resulting earth resistance at CD must be equal
to the earth pressure acting on AE. This means that the soil below the floor
of the excavation, compared with its original state before excavation began
(pressure at rest) is now under a lower vertical pressure and a higher horizontal
pressure, resulting in compression of the earth and displacement of the wall.
In addition, shear strains are imposed on the block ABDE which must be
compatible with the strains occurring below the excavationfloor.The displacement of the walls may be influenced favourably by the length of the anchors,

443

excavation

Fig. 22-31. Stresses and strains around an anchored soil block behind an excavation wall,
according to Ostermayer

according to Breth and Stroh [23]; the magnitude of the displacement

decreases almost linearly with increasing length of the anchors. On the other
hand, the earth pressure and the anchor load are not affected by the length of
the anchors.

Chapter 23
A N C H O R I N G OF SLOPE R E T A I N I N G WALLS

Retaining walls are usually built to take over the function (static effect)
of a ground body removed from a natural slope. These vertical, or slightly
inclined walls are constructed for the purpose of preparing a horizontal
surfaces for roads (Fig. 23-1), water course (Fig. 23-2), or foundations for
cranes, industrial buildings, warehouses, quays, and harbours. The purpose
of the retaining wall does not usually have any bearing on its design.

Fig. 23-1. Anchored supporting gallery for

the Lukmanier highway (Switzerland)
1 slope detritus, 2 293 Tubfix anchors
(137.5 kN)

Fig. 23-2. Anchored retaining wall for the

covered part of a canal connecting the basins
of the Tage and Tietar Dams (Spain)
7 BBRV cables, 2 strong diabase into
which the anchors are fixed

The structure of the wall must be capable of transferring the lateral

pressure of soils or rocks, together with the weight of the wall and any
load placed above it, safely into the load-bearing foundation ground. The
following basic conditions apply in the static analysis of a slope retaining wall.
The force, N, normal to the bottom multiplied by the coefficient of frict i o n / , in ratio with the tangential force, T, acting at the foot of the wall must
be equal to or greater than the safety margin for shear failure, ms (this is
taken to be within the range 1.2 to 1.5). The ratio of the sum of the negative
moments divided by the sum of the positive moments acting on the retaining
wall must be equal to, or greater than, the safety margin for overturning, mp
(this is taken to be within the range 1.5 to 2.0). The maximum stress in the
footing of the wall must not exceed the safe stress of the foundation ground,
which is ascertained on the basis of standard values or from load tests.

445

Anchoring the retaining wall into the underlying ground helps to satisfy
these requirements efficiently.
Slope retaining walls offer a wide range of possibilities for the positioning
and orientation of anchors. The vectors of the anchoring forces can be
vertical, inclined, or horizontal, and they can be arranged so as to pass
through the centre of gravity of the cross-section of the wall, or even across
its upper edge (according to which best contributes to the stability of the
wall).
When the stability of slope retaining walls is achieved by anchoring.
objections are sometimes raised, unjustifiably, that the anchoring must
inevitably lead to an increased pressure in the soil, since the wall is pressed
against it and gives rise to a passive earth pressure as a result. Such a situation, however, can only develop if the moments or shear forces arising from
the anchoring pressure, are larger than the sum of the forces arising from the
earth pressure and the weight of the wall acting in the opposite direction.
The application of anchor prestressing to this extent is obviously uneconomic
and out of question, and a passive earth pressure as a reaction to the anchoring cannot be allowed to appear behind an anchored retaining wall.
The greatest pressure exerted by the soil itself on the supporting structure
is its pressure at rest. This occurs where the supporting structure, including
the anchorage, is designed in such a way as to disallow even a small degree
of deformation, the soil behind the retaining wall being held in its original
position. When a linear or angular displacement takes place, the pressure
of the soil gradually falls to the lowest value of active earth pressure. The
displacement at the top of a retaining wall is assumed to range from 0.001 to
0.005 times its height, according to the soil type.
A discussion of earth pressures on supporting structures was given in the
preceding chapter. Slope retaining walls are comparatively massive, rigid
structures, and their loading is therefore generally considered in terms of the
pressure at rest, with coefficient K0 (see Section 22.1), or, if the active earth
pressure is considered, the coefficient is increased by 2/3 of the difference
K0 Ka, to the value K"a (see Section 22.1.2). The load on the wall at depth, ,
in a non-cohesive soil is determined from the expression:
= ..0

or

y . h . K"a

and for a cohesive soil:

ah = y.h.K0

or

y.h.K"a-2cJK.

The additional loading of slope retaining walls by the hydrostatic pressure of ground water trapped behind them is reduced as much as possible by
providing reliable drainage. Thus a vertical sand or gravel layer is interpo-

446

sed behind the wall, and this is drained from its base. In this case the effect
of friction between the soil and the rear of the retaining wall need not be
considered in the static analysis of the external forces.

23.1 CALCULATION OF A N C H O R I N G FORCES AND THE D E S I G N

OF ANCHOR F I X I N G S

The value of the anchoring force required is determined simply from the
equilibrium of the moments of forces with respect to the fulcrum (most
often the external lower edge of the wall), if overturning of the wall is considered, or from the diagram of forces acting on the wall, if a displacement
of the wall along its foundation is considered. The basic formulae for the
static analysis were introduced in Chapter 3 and 4. Whether the problem is
one of overturning or one of displacement, it is clear that there is an essential
requirement for the foundation of the masonry to be sited on a stable and
load-bearing rock bed.
If active earth pressure is considered in the analysis, the necessary deformation of the support must be made possible. In most cases it is recommended
that the anchors be designed so as to allow development of the full active
pressure together with the necessary deformation of the wall; on average
the latter is about 0.002//(see Section 22.1). The required stressing force, P'k,
may thus be determined from the expression:
P'k = , 5 ;

-XE.F.

If
. / = 0.002//,
then,
P'k = &-0.002^-.
where tS'a
H

/
E
F

=
=
=
=
=
=

E.F,

force of the full active earth pressure on one anchor,

height of the retaining wall,
coefficient of ductility of the steel of the anchor tendon,
length of the anchor tendon,
modulus of elasticity of the steel,
area of cross-section of the tendon.

where h is the safe stress of the steel.

447

Substituting for F, we have,

*-(I-

0.0024^).

The partial yielding of the anchor head as a result of displacement of the

anchor root in the soil, is neglected.
The anchor roots must be fixed into permanently stable part of the ground
behind the support. In a loose soil, the region below the plane sloping upward
at the angle from the lower edge of the wall may be considered as being
such a stable part. In cohesive soils, the stable region behind the support is
located by identifying potential shear surfaces, using the well known methods
of soil mechanics for the solution of slope stability such as Pettersson's
strip method or the graphic solution of Fellenius, both of which are described
in all good textbooks. For a rapid solution, the graph in Fig. 23-3 may
also be used. With hard rock behind the retaining wall, the stable region is
delimited by a plane inclined at an angle ; the determination of this angle
where unfavourable planes of discontinuity are present was dealt with in
Section 21.1.2. If hard rocks appear behind the retaining wall beneath
a cover of soil, the stable region is usually taken as being within the rock
mass. The anchor root must be fixed with its entire length within the stable
region with due regard for the required safety margin against uprooting
(see Chapters 10 and 13).

^tga
Fig. 23-3. Graph for rapid determination of the limit gradient of a permanently stable
slope in a cohesive soil (after Fellenius)

448
23.2 S T R U C T U R A L A R R A N G E M E N T OF A N C H O R E D SLOPE
R E T A I N I N G WALLS

The loading of slope retaining walls generally remains constant, and

therefore the centre of the anchoring forces should 'be located as far as
possible from the centre of gravity of the footing of the wall, in the opposite
direction to that of the loading pressure. Thus it is useful to increase the
strength and width of the foundation by providing the structure with vertical
buttresses (Fig. 23-4), by shaping the foundation like a cantilever (Fig. 23-5),
or by bringing the horizontal force to act near the top of the structure

/;

J\1c 0 | .
> s

i J

< 3' '

560
660

100
*^ I "

660

Fig. 23-4. Example of the anchorage of a buttressed retaining wall loaded on one side
1 foundation of a buttress, 2 buttress, 3 retaining screen

S2

Fig. 23-5. Loading of a cantilever retaining

wall by both earth pressure (5, S2) and the
weight of supported material (Gi to G6)

Fig. 23-6. Retaining wall anchored by

horizontal forces

449
(Fig. 23-6). The anchorage should be prestressed because this makes good
use of the load-bearing capacity of the wall footing (Chapter 4), and is fully
complemented by the masonry weight in contributing to the stability of the
structure.
Anchors which introduce horizontal forces only into the wall, do not
increase the pressure in the wall footing, which is an important advantage
where walls are founded on ground of low load-bearing capacity. On the
other hand, horizontal boreholes are more difficult to drill than vertical
boreholes, especially in non-cohesive soils and detritus. Retaining walls held
by horizontal anchoring forces acting near the top are also loaded by bending
moments, which they must be designed to withstand.
The wall is secured against shear failure not only by the anchoring, but
also by the passive resistance of the soil to extrusion above the footing at
the wall face; the foundations are generally situated below ground level in
order to protect the footing from frost. A wall anchored by horizontal forces
is thus secured in the same way as anchored sheet piling or underground
screens, except that in the case of a slope retaining wall the weight of the
structure is an extra aid to stability.
Anchoring finds application, both economically and technically, in all
current types of retaining wall. Its economic advantage is increased, as
already mentioned, in structures of reduced weight and increased stress
moment (foundation width), such as buttressed walls and reinforced concrete
cantilever retaining walls. In some instances it is possible to reduce the
weight to such an extent that this factor can be entirely neglected in the static
analysis; thus the retaining wall functions purely as a load-distribution plate
supporting the anchor heads.
23.2.1

Precast slope retaining walls

In buttressed retaining walls, the load-bearing and stabilizing function

is separate from the retaining function. These walls require less masonry
and may be built from precast elements (see Fig. 23-4).
Fig. 23-7 shows a retaining wall consisting of buttresses (cast in situ)
which are stabilized by anchoring into the foundation rock; these support
the retaining screens. The buttresses are positioned in individual rectangular
foundation pits so as to prevent any possible loss of stability of the slope
detritus, which would occur if continuous trenches were to be excavated
for the foundation sills of a compact and uninterrupted retaining wall. By
excavating relatively small and well braced foundation pits for independent
buttresses, the stability of the slope is unaffected. Also once the buttresses
are constructed and anchored, the slope can be cut away with earth-moving
machinery to make a space for the foundations of a building. The stability

450

additional load of the slope by a building

Fig. 23-7. Buttressed retaining wall

1 buttresses, 2 prestressed cables, 3 retaining screens (precast), 4 labile bed of
detritus, 5 natural arch in soil

of the slope as a whole will be ensured by the buttresses and the natural soil
arches which are formed in the detritus and which rest on the buttresses. The
precast elements of the retaining screen only take the pressure of the detritus
inside the natural arches and protect the site from falling stones. Where
extra fill is placed behind an anchored retaining wall, (e.g. quay and harbour
walls), the anchors are oriented horizontally and pass through the fill to
connect with anchoring plates. The latter are of sufficient area to create
the necessary resistance to anchor extraction, yet allowing an admissible
displacement of the plate under pressure (Fig, 23-8 and 23-9).
23.2.2

Cantilever retaining walls

If a cantilever wall is anchored, the projection of the cantilever can be

reduced; the necessary vertical forces can be created without the large
projecting area that is otherwise required when the forces are created entirely
by the weight of the fill (Fig. 23-10). Anchoring thus makes it possible to
reduce the distance between the centre of gravity and the free foot of the
structure. The structure may even be designed without rear cantilevers and
the load centre of the anchoring forces is then placed either close to the free
foot of the retaining wall, or the anchorage may pass through the wall
(Fig. 23-11). This arrangement is economical because it reduces the amount
of earth-moving work needed. An anchorage which passes through the
wall also balances a part of the stress caused by the bending moment. The

451
Fig. 23-8. Design
for an embankment
wall anchored into
the back-fill
1 buttress, 2 arched
retaining screen,
3 tie bar,
4 anchoring plate
a) vertical section,
b) plan

^\\^^^^^

Fig. 23-9. Widening of a quay by means

of cantilevers built out from a wall
1 anchors, 2 prestress units,
3 heads of prestressing units,
4 retaining walls

452
Fig. 23-10. Cantilever retaining wall anchored into
bedrock (Rio de Janeiro). The rear of the wall is
provided with a drainage layer

11 |0*y/4v//

Fig. 23-11. Retaining wall

with an interior foundation
cantilever

economy is further increased where the cantilever at the interior side of

the wall also forms a foundation platform for other purposes, such as roadways, etc.
An interesting example of such an arrangement is the retaining wall
around the Guillemine railway station area near Liege. The wall is founded
on a grid mounted on piles, and the anchor tendons pass through those piles
which are directly under the wall part of the structure (Fig. 23-12).

Fig. 23-12. Retaining wall

for the Guillemine railway
station
1 pile grid, 2 anchorage

453

23.2.3 Retaining walls on steep slopes

Anchored retaining walls in cuttings are often constructed stage-by-stage
in horizontal belts from the top downwards. Such a procedure can be followed where the soil is relatively dry and cohesive, and therefore temporarily
stable up to a certain height without the need for any support. The excavation deepened to this extent is then secured with a screen of porous concrete
which is supported with anchors placed into the load-bearing reinforced concrete buttresses. The anchors are oriented either horizontally or
at a slight inclination, according to the degree of friction between the soil
and the rear of the screen. The forces created by the prestressing of the

Fig. 23-13. Replacing an old retaining wall with an anchored structure (Brunnen,
Switzerland)
a) general view of the reconstruction work, b) drilling of boreholes from a scaffolding,
c) anchored load-bearing buttresses

454
anchors also support the weight of the partly completed supporting structure,
until the entire wall has been completed.
This method was used in Switzerland for the reconstruction of an old
retaining wall when a highway was widened (Fig. 23-13). The old retaining
wall, 42 m long, and made of rubble stone, was replaced in stages by a revetment wall anchored from the top downwards and shifted progressively
deeper into the slope. The load-bearing elements were anchored into reinforced concrete buttresses which were lengthened in stages (Fig. 23-14).
VSL anchoring cables 14 to 22 m long, prestressed to 650 kN were passed
through a thick morainic overlayer containing large blocks, and fixed into
a fractured limestone bedrock. A concrete layer made with coarse aggregate
was built at the rear of the revetment wall to prevent any accumulation of
water which might percolate through the slope and thus increase the pressure
on the supporting structure.
Again in Switzerland, a single track railway was widened to make a double
track line through a long, 7 m-high cutting, without causing any interruption

Fig. 23-14. Detailed view of work on the anchored retaining wall (shown in Fig. 23-13)
progressing from the top downwards (Brunnen, Switzerland)
J

455

to the traffic. 122 anchors 7 to 10 m long, prestressed to 320 kN, were fixed
into the non-cohesive soil of the slope.
The construction of a light retaining wall with load-bearing anchored
buttresses is shown in Fig. 23-15. Here, a slope had to be cut in blocky limestones for the foundation's of a new hospital. The buttresses were secured
with a total of 111 VSL cable anchors from 16 to 2 0 m long, prestressed
to 1.23 MN.

Fig. 23-15. Anchored revetment wall of the excavation for a hospital in Monaco

The approach cutting to a tunnel of the "Ricard Sud" motorway in

France was also protected by a wall anchored into the reck. Behind the
retaining wall was the tunnel of the other, northern branch of the motorway, and the anchors had therefore to be directed away from this tunnel
(Fig. 23-16). The placement of anchors in the vicinity of the existing tunnel

456
Fig. 23-16. Stabilization by
an anchored wall of the
entrance cutting for the
Richard Sud tunnel (France)
1 tunnel for the northern
motorway branch,
2 tunnel for the southern
motorway branch, 3 retaining wall, 4,5 anchors

resulted in the bottom of the tunnel starting to rise, as soon as test anchors
were installed; this was followed by damage to the lining and the penetration of grout into the tunnel. When the circumstances of these problems were
investigated, it appeared that there had been a change in the hydrogeological
conditions as a result of the flushing water permeating into the rock mass, and
above all, as a result of the high grouting pressure (2 MPa) applied in the
fixing of the anchors. It was recommended, therefore, that water flushing
be abandoned during drilling, and that the grouting pressure be reduced to
0.5 MPa. Following the completion of grouting, drainage was provided to
reduce the hydrostatic pressure of the ground water [57].
This example demonstrates the correctness of the recommendations made
in Chapters 14, 15 and 17, namely that when deciding on which drilling system
to use, and more particularly on the optimum grouting pressure to apply,
it is necessary to have a thorough knowledge of the characteristics of the
ground in which the anchors are to be installed. Only then is it possible
to avoid any unfavourable effects of the anchoring technique on the hydrogeological conditions within the ground, and its overall stability.
The diaphragm retaining walls for the new Neasden Lane underpass on
the North Circular Road in London are permanently tied back with a total
of 580 Fondedile Multibell anchors (Fig. 23-17). These anchors have working
loads ranging from 100 to 500 kN, and are fixed (with a safety factor of 3)
in clay.

457

*td.75m

Fig. 23-17. Retaining wall of an underpass

in London tied back with Fondedile Multibell
anchors
1 anchor tendon, 2 multibells root,
3 anchor borehole, 4 anchor head,
5 face of the retaining wall, 6 retaining
wall, 7 top of the retaining wall

3d

33^0

Landslides along highway cuttings in residual and colluvial soils have been
a recurring problem in some areas of Brasil. The mass of the slope soil,
rainfall, a slip plane in an undrained water layer collecting on the underlying rock, and the force of gravity, all occurring in various combinations,
give rise to landslides of greater or lesser importance. An effective solution
to this problem was found by reshaping the slope into a sequence of terraces,
starting from the top, and building concrete walls against the exposed faces
of each terrace with post-tensioned tie-backs to anchor the walls into the
underlying rock. A 15m-high cutting near Agra dos Reis for an access
road to the construction site of a nuclear power station, was stabilized by
creating four terraces. These were supported by precast concrete elements
measuring 1.25 x 1.00 m, each anchored with 20 to 28 m long cables (working
load, 280 kN) comprising 12 wires of 8 mm diameter (Fig. 23-18). The anchors
were installed in 100 mm-diameter boreholes dipping 15 from the horizontal.
The holes were extended about 15 m into the rock and the fixing length was
10 m. The work was undertaken by Tecnosolo SA of Rio de Janeiro [22].
The anchored wall of the basement hall at the reconstructed central market
Forum des Halles de Paris facing the Pierre Lescot street has a special
foundation on piles. On these piles of 80 cm diameter rest the pillars of the

458
wall, which is 5.30 m wide and 1.50 m thick. Between the pillars are blocking
screens of 2.70 x 0.60 m cross-section to take the horizontal earth pressure
[92] (Fig. 23-19).

Fig. 23-18. The upper ledge

of a slope cut in landslide
terrain in Brasil, secured
by an anchored element wall

Fig. 23-19. Anchored wall of the basement

rooms for the reconstructed central market
(Forum des Halles de Paris)
1 wall on piles, diameter 80 cm,
2 piles, 3 cantilever for way,
4 anchors, a aluvium; b marl;
c limestone

Chapter 24
A N C H O R I N G OF C O N C R E T E

DAMS

In the construction of concrete dams there is much opportunity for

adapting the structure to local conditions, so as to achieve the maximum
economy of construction. The local conditions which most determine what
the structure of a concrete dam will be, are the shape of the valley and the
mechanical properties of the rock strata. In narrow valleys, arch dams are
constructed which exploit the rock material to the optimum, making use of
their static effect. Anchoring for this type of dam therefore arises only when
the lateral slopes are in need of consolidatation (see Section 21.3), or when
the morphological conditions are less favourable, making it necessary the
arch to rest on gravitational concrete blocks. These blocks must then be
secured by anchorage to the rock of the valley flanks [52].
For more open valleys, gravity dams are designed, whilst in valleys with
wide flat bottoms multiple arch dams of various types are constructed. In
both these types, anchoring into the bedrock substantially reduces the
necessary weight of the dam, and therefore lowers the construction cost.
On the 22 m-high gravity Allt-na-Lairige Dam in Scotland (Fig. 24-1), the
volume of concrete required was reduced by 50 per cent, by anchoring, thus
bringing down the construction cost by 17 per cent. [4], [44]. In the construction of the multiple arch dam at St. Michel in France (Fig. 24-2), where
anchoring was first used in the design of a new dam, 340 m 3 of concrete
were saved for every 1,000 kg of anchorage (steel), reducing the total construction cost by approximately 20 per cent.

24.1 A N C H O R I N G OF CONCRETE D A M S
BY NON-PRESTRESSED A N C H O R A G E
Dams should, in principle, be anchored in bedrock with prestressed
anchors, because this guarantees efficient co-operation between the shear
resistance of the rock and the anchoring forces from the very start of the
loading of the dam. When non-prestressed anchorage is used, a partial shear
failure of the dam may take place before the anchorage becomes activated.
This leads to a reduction of the absolute shear resistance value of the rock,
because the co-operative effect of the rock cohesion, c, will be lost and the
static coefficient of static friction, / , will be replaced by the coefficient of

460
Fig. 24-1. Allt-na-Lairige Dam (Scotland)
1 bar bundles of the anchors,
2 anchoring shaft, 3 anchor root,
4 anchor head, 5 couplings

-'
A

c3

\\
\v

SJQ

Fig. 24-2. St. Michel multiple dam (France)

1 cables embracing the buttresses, 2 saddle heads

461

kinetic friction, fr, which has a lower value (see also Section 21.1). For these
reasons, non-prestressed bar anchors are only used for dams under a height
of 6.5 m (according to J. K. Wilkins and J. Fidler [223]).
Only in exceptional cases is non-prestressed anchorage used in the construction of taller dams. The 54 m-high Aventino Dam in Italy (in the
Apennines) was secured with non-prestressed steel bars 24 to 30 mm in
diameter. These were placed in 95 mm-diameter boreholes 10 m deep, and
grouted along their entire lengths [5]. The upper ends of the anchoring bars
projected 2.0 m into the dam buttresses, which at this level were strongly
reinforced with 24 mm-diameter steel bars (Fig. 24-3). The bedrock of the
A-A'

B-B'
B'

Fig. 24-3. Anchoring

of the Aventino Dam (Italy)

dam consisted of low permeability beds of calcareous breccias, more or less

cemented breccias of calcareous marlstones, and clay beds with interlayers
of limestone and sandstone. In order to secure the dam, 1,335 boreholes
had to be drilled, with a total length of 12,149 m. The total amounts of steel
and cement used were 78,000 kg, and 352,000 kg, respectively. The reinforced parts of the buttresses at the footings had an overall volume of
12,000 m 3 and consumed 486,000 kg of steel. Although the measures adopted
have proved reliable, it is clear from the volumes of materials used that this
success was bought at great cost. The same results could have been obtained
with rather less material and effort, had prestressed anchorage been used for
fastening the buttresses to the bedrock.
24.2 A N C H O R I N G OF CONCRETE D A M S BY PRESTRESSED
ANCHORAGE
In the calculation of the anchoring forces required, the stability of the
dam against horizontal displacement at the foot is considered first. The
stability of the dam against overturning, or against shear failure along the

462

critical subsoil surface, is assessed in the second stage, and if neccessary,

the computed value of the anchoring forces is modified to guarantee the
stability of the dam against any possible failure.
24.2.7

Design of anchorage for gravity dams

The anchoring forces required to secure a concrete dam against horizontal

displacement are determined as follows (Fig. 24-4):

Fig. 24-4. Forces considered in the

anchoring of gravity dams against
horizontal displacement

The safety factor for horizontal displacement of the dam is determined

by the relation:

m, = -*

7b -

ih1
2

+ Kjtgcp =

[{n-T)+lf\^

where ms = safety factor for horizontal displacement of the dam,

i = = slenderness ratio,
h
s = width of the dam base [m],
h = height of the static triangle of the dam [m],
yb = density of concrete [kN/m 3 ],
u = uplift pressure (the value of u depends on the quality of the
bedrock and the function of the grout curtain) [kN],
K = weight of the concrete crest [kN].
If it is found that the calculated safety factor, w s , is too small, it is increased by introducing anchoring forces, P, as follows:

463

m,

-['(- ) + <P + K >f]<

Therefore,

-4[<i-)^]If the anchoring forces form an angle, , with the perpendicular to the
footing of the dam, their required value is given by:

-K

_m^_

. sin i/r + cos t^

tg<P
For an approximate calculation of the required anchoring forces, the
values of individual components of the above expression may be set out in
a diagram. To calculate the anchoring forces acting perpendicularly to the
footing of the dam, the values of the expressions,
and

-'(T-)

B =

tg<P

are determined separately for the quantities /, u, ms and tg (Fig. 24-5).

40

10
2.0

B\

1.0\

%=0,65 1 = 0.60

~~

^OB

0.0'
-1.0

OJO J0.20

0.30

^ ^

0.40

T*
&9

0601

0.70 \ :

>

^#?

'2.0.

I, B =
, in the computation of
h
J
tg<p
the anchoring forces required to secure gravity dams against horizontal displacement

464

By summing these values, the component C = A + B is obtained, and C

ft2
multiplied by - gives the required vertical anchoring forces, which can
finally be reduced by the weight of the masonry of the dam crest:
2
In order to visualize how the required anchoring forces grow with increasing dam height, their values are set out in a graph. It is assumed (a) that the
dam value is decreased by reduction in the downstream batter between the
limits = 0.80 to 0.25), (b) that the coefficient of friction in the footing of
the dam has a value / = tg = 0.75, and (c) that the safety factor (ms)
is 1.5 (Fig. 24-6).
The safety of the dam with respect to overturning has not been considered
in the above, since this can be achieved by designing a suitable articulation
of the dam, which may even result in a reduced volume of concrete in the
anchored construction.

15

20

25

30

35

40

45
50
H[m]

Fig. 24-6. Relationship between required anchoring forces and the gradient of the downstream
face of the dam

The magnitude of the necessary anchoring forces was determined for

a basic dam cross-section with the shape of a trapezoid, in which a 2 m-wide
layer of masonry on the upstream side, not taken into account in the calculations concerning the triangular part of the section, can substitute for the
masonry of the crest, etc. The shape of the dam is the governing factor in

465

determining the degree to which the function of the weight of material can
be substituted by anchoring forces.
The Australian engineers [223] who over the last decade have made
significant contributions to the development of anchoring in dam construction, have drawn up a synoptic aid for obtaining an approximate design
encompassing the anchoring forces and corresponding shape of the dam
cross-section (Fig. 24-7).
a

h)

force PMN.m1

width ofprofile in height h[m]

Fig. 24-7. Synoptic graph, compiled in the Hydro-Electric Commission of Tasmania, for
obtaining an approximate static analysis of the profile of a gravity dam anchored into the
bedrock;
a) diagram for determining the anchoring forces,P, according to the height of the dam, and
obtaining the profile width at different depths below the crest for any selected value of P,
b) diagram for determining the height of a 3 m-wide dam crest, according to the value
of P9 c) example of a design for the dam profile, using diagrams a and b, A optimum
width line for the footing of the dam, B optimum value line for the anchoring force, P,
C height of the dam crest (width 3 m), according to the applied force, P

This design, however, does not take sufficient account of the mechanical
properties of the foundation ground; the behaviour of the ground is important
with respect to the anchoring forces that will be required, and can be highly
variable. When the dam is founded on sound rock, the anchoring forces
can attain, or even exceed the force arising from the weight of the dam
masonry. On the Allt-na-Lairige Dam, for example, the force arising from the
weight of the masonry was 440 MN, and the anchoring forces amounted
to 480 MN per meter along the dam. The weight of the wing part of the

466

Mellegue Dam was equivalent to 100 MN, while the force in the anchors
was 124 MN. On ground with a low bearing capacity, the magnitude of
the anchoring forces depends on the area of the footings and the groundplan
shape of the structure. By articulating the structure, the moment of resistance
is increased (Fig. 24-8) and the safety of the structure with respect to the
I

I JL *

* JL *

J |\_ ^ "
' i i

Fig. 24-8. Articulation of a dam built on foundation ground of low load-bearing capacity

danger of overturning is improved; moreover, the load acting on the foundation ground is reduced. The exact effect of the shape of the structure on the
value of the anchoring forces required as a substitute for weight in the
structure, cannot be generalized, and each case must be solved separately.
This is particularly important because the stress pattern induced in the
structure by the anchoring forces is also of considerable significance.
The effect of the properties of the foundation ground (particularly the
load-bearing capacity) on the relationship between the necessary anchoring
forces and the weight of the structure, is apparent from the graph in Fig. 24-9.
This shows the maximum and minimum stresses transferred to the footing
base as the weight is progressively replaced by anchoring forces. The reduction achieved in the volume of masonry of the dam is represented in the
graph by a reduction in the gradient of the downstream face of the dam.
In the graph the stress in the footing of the dam is determined for different
loading states, namely, a dam with a variable gradient of the downstream
face, but without anchoring; a dam anchored into the bedrock by a force
directed through the centre of gravity of the footing; and finally, a dam
anchored by a force located within a metre of the upstream face. In all cases,
the empty and full basin conditions are considered, and the stresses pertaining to both the downstream and upstream sides are determined.
Apart from the stress pattern within the footing, the safety limits for
overturning of the structure with various types of anchoring, plus the adopted
safety factor, mp = 1.5, have also been shown in the graph.
Graphs such as this, for different dam heights, contribute to the first
stage of the design in which the anchoring forces required to stabilize the

467

QfiQ

OfiQ

0A3 0.34
0.25
gradient of downstream face

Fig. 24-9. Growth of stress in the footing of the dam when the weight function of a 50 m-high
dam is replaced by anchoring forces

structure are considered. From the maximum permissible load, the limit
to which the volume of the dam concrete can be reduced may be fixed. To
achieve this, the permissible load on the footing is set out on the stress-axis;
a line parallel to the gradient-axis is drawn from this point until it intersects
the maximum stress line computed for the examined type of load. It is then
ascertained whether, with this limit volume of concrete, tensile stresses
appear at the upstream heel of the dam under a full load, or tensile stresses
appear at the downstream heel of the dam when the basin is empty. If such

468

stresses do appear, the volume of masonry must be increased until the stress
is eliminated, particularly on the upstream side. In well founded dams,
a small tensile stress may be permitted on the downstream side, or the dam
body may be secured by means of tensile reinforcement, in the concrete of
the dam. Finally it is ascertained whether the proposed design guarantees
safety from overturning; for this purpose vertical lines are drawn on the
graph for the different types of load.
24.2.2

Anchoring design for multiple dams

Anchoring into the bedrock is particularly applicable as an aid to design

economy in various types of multiple dam. In this type of dam the safety
with respect to horizontal displacement can be increased by anchoring, and
a more uniform distribution of stress over the footings can be achieved
(i.e., the maximum stresses can be reduced).
Graphic aids, such as those used in the design of gravity dams, can also
be drawn up for estimating the optimum forces for bedrock-anchored multiple
dams. Such aids, however, tend to have very limited applicability, as there
are many variants of the way in which a dam may be divided, and its shape
adapted to the conditions of the valley cross-section.
Anchoring makes it possible to reduce the gradient of the retaining screen
in multiple dams; this screen can then be concreted in a sliding shuttering,
without the necessity for costly support scaffolding. The anchoring forces
substitute for the reduction in the vertical component of the hydrostatic
pressure, and their optimum value can easily be determined using the formulae
given in Chapter 3 and 4.

24.3 EXAMPLES OF CONCRETE DAMS A N C H O R E D

IN THE BEDROCK

The first dam to be anchored in the bedrock was the Cheurfas gravity dam
in Algeria during its reconstruction in 1934. This operation followed the
design of A. Coyne, who was also the author of this idea. Since then it has
been used on many sites, mainly at first in dam reconstruction, and then
increasingly in the design of new dams and coffer-dams.
24.3.1

Reconstruction of concrete dams with anchoring in the bedrock

The reconstruction of the Cheurfas Dam [106], built between 1880 and
1882 as a 30 m-high masonry gravity dam on sandstone bedrock (Fig.24-10)
was started when failures occurred in the Bouzey, Oued Fergona, and Hebra

469
Fig. 24-10. Cheurfas (Algeria), the world's
first anchored dam (1934)
1 anchors (10 MN), 2 anchors
(2 MN) installed in 1967, 3 drainage
boreholes

darns, built at the same time with identical structural features. In its reconstruction, the Cheurfas Dam was raised by 3 m. The dam was secured
with 37 cables, each composed of 630 high quality steel wires of 5 mm diameter, and prestressed to 10 MN. (The sum total of the anchoring forces
were equivalent to one third of the dam weight). Reinforced concrete cable
heads were located on the raised dam crest (6.0 m apart), whilst the lower
cable ends were fixed into twin anchoring cavities. After 20 years the prestressing loss was only 3 per cent.
In another check in 1965, after 30 years of operation, summary prestressing losses amounting to 9 per cent, were found; these losses were caused by
corrosive damage in two anchors at the connection between the tendon and
the anchor head. A second reconstruction was carried out in which the forces
contributing to the stability of the dam were increased by installing 30 new
anchors each prestressed to 2 MN [106]. The new BBRV anchors were
composed of 54 7 mm-diameter wires (Chatillon 07-B) arranged in three
layers of 12, 18 and 24 wires, respectively, around a grouting pipe. The
diameter of the cable was 70 mm, and that of the borehole was 146 mm. The
anchors were from 55 to 60 m long and reached 25 m below the footing.
They were fixed in the bedrock by grouting the lowermost 10 m with a plasticized cement mortar. The anchor tendon was protected against corrosion
with heavy bitumen oil forwarded into the borehole after the borehole walls
had been sealed by chemical grouting (see Section 18.2.6). The oil also
protected the anchoring head and the space above it. Such an arrangement
allowed for the possibility of checking whether the wires or the anchoring
head were properly covered, and if necessary, topping up the sealing medium.

470

The Tansa Dam in India, a gravity masonry dam 40 m high and 2,700 m
long built in 1892 on a foundation of basalt, was reconstructed in 1955 [52].
2,400 cables, each composed of 37 5 mm-diameter wires, were used for the
anchoring; the final prestressing of the cables was 700 kN, after expected
losses had taken place. The cables were inserted into 65 mm-diameter
boreholes and fixed at their lower ends by adhesion over a length of 5.5 m;
their upper ends were fixed into strong cast steel heads. The cables were
prestressed to 800 kN three weeks after the concreting of the lower ends.
After four more weeks the prestressing was checked. Those cables which
retained a tension of more than 700 kN were grouted, since it was assumed
that prestressing losses as a result of cable relaxation and plastic creep of
the rock and masonry would not increase further. The cables were enveloped
in cement mortar injected into the boreholes from the dam crest.
The heights of the Joux (France) and Gafarsa (Ethiopia) stone masonry
gravity dams (Fig. 24-11) were increased in a similar way. The advantages
of anchorage are particularly evident in the case of the Gafarsa Dam the
original height of which was increased by a half. The reinforced concrete
anchoring heads of the Joux Dam are installed in a covered gallery to
facilitate access and inspection. The new masonry on the downstream side
is lined with stones taken from the original dam crest, so as to preserve the
appearance of the structure.
The Steenbras Dam in South Africa, the Mazoe Dam in Zimbabwe, the

116.20

Fig. 24-11. Installation of anchor heads on the crowns of raised dams

a) Joux Dam (France), heads installed in a gallery, b) Gafarsa Dam (Ethiopia), heads
embedded in concrete. 1 anchors (prestressed ties), 2 original masonry dam, 3 reinforced concrete

471

Witbank, and Argal Dams in Great Britain, the Spullersee Dam in Austria, and
many other dams have also been heightened with the aid of anchoring. The
height of the concrete Steenbras Dam (Fig. 24-12) which supplies Capetown
with water, was doubled in 1927 by enlarging the body of the dam at the same

Fig. 24-12. Reconstruction

of the Steenbras Dam (South Africa)
a first heightening in 1927, b second
heightening by 3.6 m in 1953

Fig. 24-13. Reconstruction of the

Mazoe Dam (Zimbabwe)
1 reinforced concrete, 2 original
concrete dam, 3 prestressed ties

time; this was possible because the dam was founded on sound rock. For the
second increase in height (3.6 m) executed in 1953, anchors composed of
37 wires of 5 mm diameter were installed [136]. The cables were doubled-back over saddleheads mounted on the dam crest, and thus the anchors
were prestressed inpairs. The lower free cable ends were inserted into cement
mortar over a length of 2.5 m. This mortar was forwarded into the
65 mm-diameter boreholes in 50 mm-diameter tube containers, so as to
prevent the cement mixture from being diluted as it passed through water.
The cables were prestressed with a 2 MN jack placed under the saddle-head,
exerting a force double that of the 770 kN for each cable. A control
measurement showed that after 28 days, each pair of cables retained a tension
of 2 x 700 kN after all losses had taken place. The tension was made fast with
reinforced concrete blocks inserted under the saddle-heads on completion of
prestressing. After checking the prestressing, the boreholes were grouted
under a pressure of 1.4 MPa. The reconstruction took 18 months to complete.
At the Mazoe Dam the anchors were extended through the underlying
ground so that they could be fixed in undamaged strata of the bedrock
(Fig. 24-13). Both theory (see Section 9.3) and site experience indicate that

472

damaged rock beds are quite capable of resisting the extraction of anchors;
hence, anchors need only be fixed into sound rock, as in the dam described
above, if this rock is not too deep below the footing of the dam [70].
In Great Britain, the Argal Dam near Falmouth [134] was heightened by
the application of anchoring. This concrete gravity dam (Fig. 24-14) was

200mt cables

(2MN)

Fig. 24-14. Reconstruction of the

Argal Dam in Great Britain

built just before the Second World War, and soon after the end of the war,
it was found necessary to increase the height by 3.0 m. The reconstructed
dam was stabilized with 47 cable anchors up to 41.5 m in length, prestressed
to 2 MN per cable. The cables were composed of 102 wires (4.5 mm diameter)
arranged in three coaxial layers with ring-spacers in between layers. A grout
pipe 12 mm in diameter was passed through the centre of each cable. The
cables were located in 100 mm-diameter boreholes which connected with
AC pipes embedded in the concrete of the added height of the dam. Through
the original dam body and the bedrock, the holes were bored with a pneumatic
percussion drill set. The boreholes reached not less than 8 m below the footing
of the dam, into beds of relatively sound granite. Impermeability of the borehole walls was ensured by grouting and re-drilling within 48 hours. The
boreholes were rinsed with water prior to insertion of the cables. When the
grout (water-cement ratio, 0.4) which enveloped the fixed cable ends had
hardened (after a minimum of three days), its level was checked to make sure
that the fixed length of the cable was 4.0 m. Then a reinforced concrete
anchoring head was made for the upper end of each cable. The heads were
cylindrical, 60 cm in diameter and 45 cm high. Each was seated 37 cm above
the dam crest to leave room for the stressing jacks and seating blocks, which
consisted of steel pipes filled with concrete. 21 days after the concreting of

473

the heads, the cables were prestressed in three stages to overcome prestressing
losses from cable relaxation.
Between 1963 and 1965, both dams of the Spullersee water scheme in
Austria (Vorarlberg) were heightened. These concrete gravity dams were
built between 1920 and 1925 by the poured concrete construction technique.
The southern dam is 34 m high and 278 m long, whilst the northern one is
24 m high and 186 m long (Fig. 24-15). The dams retain a common reservoir
3.80
1829.60 S

JS2S.00 \

W& 1826.33

~rBS^t

8
S3
l|
v
Jj

180930

\p,
Y*1

[rJ

7 1800.00

1"

1| -=1799.50
\

_ 2 1797.00

Fig. 24-15. Raising of the northern

dam of the Spullersee water scheme
(Austria)

for a peak power station, and were therefore raised by the same amount
4.6 m. They were secured by anchoring into the bedrock with 119 BBRV
cables, prestressed to 1 MN. These cables were fixed into boreholes in the
Cretaceous limestone bedrock, by the cohesion of concrete roots 2.5 m
long [185].
Sometimes it is necessary to reconstruct a dam because it no longer
satisfies present day design standards, or because in the original design the
effects of possible extreme loading conditions were underestimated. Another
reason may be that some components of the system, such as ground water
drains, etc., have been impaired or put out of action. Even in these cases
anchorage is an efficient method by which the structure can be saved. In
Czechoslovakia, anchoring was used to make safe the Bystficka Dam
(a masonry gravity dam, Fig. 24-16) which was constructed between 1908
and 1912. It was found during routine inspection that the dam was no longer

474

Fig. 24-16. Reconstruction of the Bystncka Dam (Czechoslovakia), by anchoring into the
bedrock

safe enough, and the maximum permitted water level behind the dam had
to be lowered. To improve the stability of the dam, a grout curtain was
constructed to reduce the penetration of water into the bedrock, the effects
of uplift were reduced by curtain drains and wells located at the downstream
heel of the dam, and third and most important, the body of the dam was
anchored into the bedrock with 26 cables of load-bearing capacity 4 MN
per cable (Fig. 24-17). Each cable, between 33 and 54 m long, was made
from Hercules multiple rope comprising 37 strands of 19 2.8 mm-diameter
wires each. Anchoring cavities for the fixing of the cables were made with
depth charges at the borehole bottoms. 110 mm-diameter boreholes for the
cables were drilled after the surrounding rock had been thoroughly grouted.
The grouting of the sealing curtain was completed after the cables had been
prestressed and the borehole space around the cables had been filled with

475

Fig. 24-17. Cross-section of the reconstructed masonry Bystricka Dam

1 masonry, 2 foundation concrete, 3 lining masonry, 4 plaster with impermeable
surface coat, 5 drains, 6 clay, 7 mixed soil, 8 dry rubble, 9 anchor borehole,
10 inspection borehole, 11 drainage boreholes, 12 piezometric probes, 13 drainage,
14 load distribution sill, 75 anchor head, 16 anchor bulb, a loam, b valley
gravel, c sandstone conglomerate and clayey shale beds

grout to seal all possible cracks in the rock around the anchoring bulbs.
The upper cable ends were fixed into cast steel heads resting on a reinforced
concrete load-distribution sill along the dam crest. The prestressed sections
of the cables were insulated with a multiple layer of paste and PLU bandage
(see Section 18.2.2.1).
The Laing Dam, situated on the Buffalo River 40 km west of East London
in South Africa, was secured by similar means in 1977. During a flood
in 1970 the flow over the spillway exceeded the original design discharge
(4,100 m 3 sec" 1 ) by 80 per cent, and it was decided to stabilize the dam so
as to comply with present-day standards, using large prestressed anchors
(Fig. 24-18). 131 anchors with working capacities of 4.80 to 6.0 MN were
installed 1 m from the upstream face; the distance between centres ranged
from 0.9 to 5.3 m, depending on the height of the dam wall at the same
position. The anchor lengths varied from 14 to 63 m. They were embedded
in the doleritic bedrock at a minimum depth of 12 m below the footing of
the dam.

476
Fig. 24-18. Laing Dam on the Buffalo River
(South Africa)
/ reconstructed profile, 2 anchor block,
3 distribution beam, 4 prestressed ties,
5 inspection gallery, 6 drains, 7 anchor
roots

The anchors were composed of 36 strands of 15 mm diameter (overall

diameter, 140 mm) and the anchors were inserted into boreholes 160 mm
in diameter. The ropes were delivered to the site in wrapped cheeses, and
were protected from corrosion by a soluble oil coating (see Section 18.4).
This coating was thoroughly scrubbed with detergent along the 8 m root
length immediately before the anchor was lowered into position, thus ensuring effective bonding between the cable and the grout. After the anchors had
been inserted into the boreholes, they were left hanging free for 24 hours,.
where upon their scrubbed ends were grouted under water using a grout
pipe which was withdrawn with a vibrator. The VSL anchoring heads were
mounted on a 50 cm-thick load distribution plate. A special 10 MN capacity
jack was used for the prestressing.
After checking for prestressing permanence about four days after the
prestressing had been carried out, the boreholes were flushed with detergent
to remove the soluble oil from the free length sections of the cables, and the
boreholes were filled with a protective grout. When all this work was
completed, the spillway part of the dam in which the anchoring heads were
incorporated was concreted [210].
Anchors were used to create tangential bracing forces on the Vir Dam
site. These tangential forces, according to a proposal by Professor Wnsch,
were established by using a system of wedges pressed into a tapered V-gap
between the dam heel and the brace, by the prestressed anchors (Fig. 24-19).
Anchoring was successfully applied in the stabilization of the stilling basin
of the Tarbela Dam in Pakistan [216]; this basin was damaged by the dynamic
effects of a test discharge of water from the reservoir during its construction

477

in 1974 and 1976. 576 vertical anchors each prestressed to 2.5 MN, were
used for the stabilization. The stilling basin is 186 m long and 36.60 m wide
(Fig. 24-20), and it is divided lengthwise into 12 sections. The bedrock
changes along the basin, shales, limestone and gypsum being the most

Fig. 24-19. Vir Dam. The safety of the

dam with respect to shear failure
has been increased using a brace;
this is prestressed by means of a system
of wedges pulled into a V-shaped
crevice by 4 MN anchors
A schematic section, B view of
pulled-in wedges

common rock type. The bottom slab is 3 m thick. Between sections 5 and 10
the bottom rests on a concrete filler which was used to repair the concrete
wash-outs. The anchor boreholes of 152 to 171 mm diameter were stabilized
and sealed by grouting. The anchors, ranging from 16.8 to 38.1 m long,
were composed of 14 and 16 strands of 15.5 mm diameter. The root length
was 6 m. Anticorrosive protection was provided by using a grout of sulphateresistant cement. The VSL anchoring heads were embedded in concrete

Fig. 24-21. Ernestina prestressed concrete dam

(Brazil). The dam was secured by embedding and
anchoring the structure into the bedrock
1 prestressed reinforcement, 2 anchor bulbs

Fig. 24-20. Cross-section of the Tarbela Dam stilling basin on the

river Indus (Pakistan)
1 stilling basin blocks, 2 wash-outs, 3 prestressed anchors

479

after prestressing, and the entire floor of the stilling basin was surfaced with
a layer of concrete containing a fibrous filler to resist cavitation.
The Conowingo Dam on the Susonchanna River in the USA was reconstructed after the events of 1972, when hurricane Agnes passed over the
river basin causing the rate of flow to increase to 27,216 m 3 sec" 1 , and the
water table to rise by 92 cm, which was outside the design limits of the dam.
The dam was reconstructed to withstand a water level increase of 1.6 m
(with a flow rate of 35,000 m 3 sec - 1 ). It was secured with 537 anchors
prestressed to forces of between 2.5 and 4.45 MN. The anchors were installed
in 152 and 178 mm-diameter boreholes sealed by grouting [126].
24.3.2

Gravity concrete dams anchored in the bedrock

The first dam to be fully anchored into the bedrock, and in which the
concrete was also prestressed, was the Emestina Dam in Brasil, completed
in 1955 (Fig. 24-21). The dam is 300 m long, 20 m high from the foundation
level, and 13 m above the river bottom. The dam foundation is embedded
deep in the rock so that the dam acts as a cantilever fixed into the bedrock.
The securing of the dam is further enhanced by anchorage installed in boreholes under the upstream heel of the dam. With this design, the volume of
concrete was reduced from 22,000 m 3 for the classical dam shape, to 7,300 m 3 .
The anchorage consumed 140 t of steel.
The Allt-na-Lairige Dam in Scotland, completed in 1956, is founded on
sound granite in a wide valley [7]. It is 22 m high (see Fig. 24-1) and 408 m
long, and is anchored into the bedrock only along the higher central section
(a length of 290 m). The anchors were made of high grade alloy steel with
a 30 mm-diameter circular cross-section. The bars were assembled in 28-bar
circular bundles and placed in pits 120 cm in diameter and 7.8 m deep.
They were stressed on the surface by the procedure of the Lee McCall
Company, that is, by means of nuts resting on steel washers at the threaded
ends of the prestressed bars. The individual bars were coated with Denso
paste to enable them to slide inside the concrete during prestressing (see
Section 18.2.2). They were each stressed to 420 kN, bringing the total
anchoring force to 11.54 MN.
The relatively large diameter of the anchoring pits was intended to provide
access to the lower ends of the anchoring bars, which were fixed by abutment
on to common steel plates. The pits were driven by a combination of
pneumatic drilling and small blasts. A length of 2.4 m of the lowermost
part of the pits was expanded conically to increase the reliability of the
anchor fixing. Access to the anchoring pits and anchor installation was
facilitated by mounting the bars in sections, and connecting them with
Macalloy couplings as the concreting progressed. The bundles of prestressed

480

bars (anchors) extend to a depth of 6 m from the dam crest in the central
third of the cross-section; in this part, therefore, no tensile stress appears
on both sides of the dam. Below this level the anchors pass in the upstream
third (see Fig. 24-1); hence, when the basin is empty, these anchors create
tensile stresses of up to 0.35 MPa on the downstream side, which are taken
by tensile reinforcement [7], [44].
Anchoring into the bedrock enabled the gravity wings of the multiple
Mellegue Dam in Tunisia [135] to be designed with the maximum economy.
It was possible to narrow the cross-section of the dam to such an extent
that the gradient of the downstream face was reduced from the original
0.75 to 0.22. Thus the volume of concrete required for the dam was reduced
by 50 per cent. The dam was anchored by cables each prestressed to 12 MN.

Fig. 24-22. Spillway block of the

anchored Catagunya Dam
(Tasmania). The spillway
surface is extended by forming
a cantilever projecting upstream

The reduction of the gradient of the downstream face of the dam, however,
made it more difficult to create a hydraulically adequate spillway surface.
This problem was overcome in the 45 m-high anchored Catagunya Dam
on the river Derwent in Tasmania [33], by curving the upper part of the
spillway block upstream (Fig. 24-22).
The Catagunya Dam, completed in 1960, was designed as an anchored
structure because this reduced the construction costs by 50 per cent, compared with those of an unanchored dam. The anchoring force of 5.25 MN
per metre along the dam was transmitted by 7.5 cm cables (102 high quality
steel wires 5 mm in diameter) to 2 MN. The individual wires were separated
by means of spacing grids to facilitate their envelopment in grout, which
provided protection for the anchorage against corrosion after the prestressing

481

(see Section 18.2.1). A 2.5 cm-diameter pipe located centrally within the
cable allowed the grout pipe to be passed through. The cable wires were
undulated in the root section by alternately placed spacers and rings, which
tightened the cable in 1 m sections (see Fig. 12-7). The upper ends of the
cables were fixed into reinforced concrete heads 61 cm in diameter and
61 cm high. The anchoring boreholes, which were up to 58 m long, took
the form of embedded 12 cm-diameter AC pipes through the concrete of
the dam (a similar method was used in the construction of the sealing curtain
for the iermanice Dam in Czechoslovakia [81]), and were percussiondrilled (10.2 cm diameter) through the bedrock.
v97.9

^^j

Fig. 24-23. Spillway of the anchored Cluny Dam

1 anchors, 2 drainage boreholes, 3 injection
boreholes

Fig. 24-24. Repulse arched dam (Tasmania)

1 anchors (2.54 MN), 2 stilling basin, 3 gravity wings, 4 spillway lip

A similar design was followed for the Cluny Dam [221], where the stilling
basin was also anchored (Fig. 24-23). Similar measures were adopted for
the Harlan County Dam in the USA [19], and the arched Repulse Dam in
Tasmania [3] (Fig. 24-24).
At the Avon Dam in England, allowances were made in the design for
a later 3.9 m increase in height, and for anchoring into the bedrock [206],

482

Pits 51 cm in diameter, and spaced 4.5 m apart, were prepared near the
upstream face. When the decision is taken to increase the dam height,
boreholes for the anchorage will be drilled from these pits into the bedrock.
The Thossfell and Neuensalz retention dams of the Pohl Water Scheme [60]
are founded on a relatively strong bedrock of paleozoic shales with interbedded diabase-breccias and conglomerates with tuffs. The mechanical
properties of the bedrock allowed a relatively large stress to be transferred
into the ground, hence it was possible to reduce the cross-sections of the
dams and replace the effect of dead weight by anchoring forces (Fig. 24-25).

Fig. 24-25. Thossfell Dam

(GDR)
1 anchors (bar bundles),
2 anchor root,
3 spillway, 4 keyways

Fig. 24-26. Rauschenbach gravity dam (GDR). The

dam is secured by means of anchored projecting blocks
/ prestressed reinforcement, 2 anchors,
3 injection curtain, 4 projecting anchored blocks

The anchors were made from high quality steel bars arranged in bundles,
the size of which varied according to the height of the anchored block. The
larger bundles were inserted into shafts driven into the rock, while the smaller
bundles which were used for the lower extreme blocks, were inserted into
boreholes. The bars were fixed at both ends with nuts resting on steel loaddistributing plates. The bars were coated with asphalt along the prestressed
sections, and provided with a steel sheet wrapping. The anticorrosive protection was supplemented by cathode protection.
At the site of the Rauschenbach gravity dam (GDR), the coefficient of

483

friction (tg = 0.4) and the cohesion (c = 0.2 MPa) were ascertained in
a preliminary survey. The dam was thus secured by means of projecting blocks
which were anchored into the bedrock (Fig. 24-26) and connected to the dam
by prestressed anchorage [43]. With this arrangement, uplift under the footing of the dam is reduced by extending the filtration path. The stability of the
dam is further improved by the action of the vertical component of the
hydrostatic pressure on the horizontal area of the projecting blocks.
24.3.3

Multiple dams anchored in the bedrock

The St Michel Dam in Southern France, constructed in 1946, was the

first of its kind to be anchored into the bedrock. This dam with its 10 m
water level, has its retaining arches resting on 1 m-thick buttresses spaced
26 m apart. The arched retaining screen has a relatively steep gradient,
which made it possible to use cantilever sliding shuttering without supporting
scaffolding. As a consequence, the effect of the vertical component of the
hydrostatic pressure was not sufficient to secure the structure against
horizontal displacement; the dam had therefore to be anchored into the
bedrock. The buttresses were anchored with cables (800 kN each) composed
of 61 4.8 mm-diameter wires. The cables were passed freely along the faces
of the buttresses and were fixed along a length of 5 m at either end into the
foundation rock. At the downstream (front) of the buttresses, the cables
were passed over saddle-heads and prestressed by jacks mounted between
the buttress fronts and these heads.
A similar anchoring arrangement was used in the construction of the
Fumel Dam in France, and later at the 65 m high Mellegue Dam in Tunisia
[135]. The retaining screen of the arched Mellegue Dam rests on buttresses
spaced as much as 50 m apart. The gradient of the screen is only 1.633 for
the same reason as in the example given above, and the buttresses are therefore anchored by slanting cables.
Each buttress is anchored by 3 cables composed of 610 5 mm-diameter
wires prestressed to 12 MN. The prestressing was carried out with jacks
placed under the anchor heads at the upper ends of the cable.
The Mont-Larron Dam in France [116] consists of three arches resting
on two buttresses and the valley sides (Fig. 24-27). The buttresses, which take
a force of 200 MN, are secured against horizontal displacement by means
of anchors in the bedrock. The anchorage consists of 36 cables inclined
so as to be parallel with the upstream edges of the buttresses; each cable is
composed of 64 5 mm-diameter wires, and is prestressed to 1.23 MN. The
cables were passed through 90 mm-diameter pipes embedded in the buttress
concrete. Several days after prestressing, the cables were re-stressed and
grouted.

484

A-A'

Fig. 24-27. Mont-Larron multiple-arch dam (France). Security against horizontal displacement
was achieved by anchoring the buttresses into the bedrock

The Meadow-Bank Dam in Tasmania [3] was constructed on a bedrock

of horizontal beds of sandstones, marlstones and shales of variable thickness,
interspersed with failure zones and slip surfaces. Coefficients of friction
between the various beds ranged from 0.35 to 0.5, and the cohesion was nil.
Because of these unfavourable conditions of the rock a multiple dam with
an inclined upstream face was designed (Fig. 24-28), and the rock beds were
max.H.W.L.S.L.259.0

normol.FS.L.S.L.2i*0.0
S122k9

Fig. 24-28. Meadow-Bank

multiple dam (Tasmania)
1 155 anchors each tensioned
to 2.65 MN,
2 sealing curtain,
3 uplift drains

485

prestressed with cables forming an angle of 35 with the vertical, in a direction giving maximal opposition of the anchoring forces to the tangential
stress. The upper heads of the cables were placed on blocks resting on the
buttress bases, and the buttresses and the anchoring blocks were prestressed
together by the horizontal component of the anchoring force. Altogether
there were 155 cables, 16 to 55 m long, each prestressed to 2.65 MN.
The bedrock of the 32 m-high Muda Dam in the Kedah State of Malaysia
[215] was also highly unsuitable for construction purposes. It consisted of
quartzite beds 0.60 to 3.0 m thick, with claystone partings 7 to 30 cm wide
the properties of which were found to be even less favourable than expected
when the foundations were excavated. In some places the claystone passed
into soft clay, for which an angle of friction of 16 had to be considered
in the main design instead of the angle of 27 assumed in the preliminary
study. In view of these foundation problems a type of multiple slab design
was selected. This was secured against shear failure by means of 205 cable
anchors, each prestressed to 3 MN, and inclined at an angle of 10 to 15
from the vertical (Fig. 24-29). The cables consisted of 72 patented wires of

's
Fig. 24-29. Cross-section of the Muda Dam (Malaysia)
1 buttress, 2 spillway lip, 3 precast retaining screen, 4 spillway surface, 5 bracing
walls, 6 upstream heel, 7 stilling basin, 8 205 anchors prestressed to 3 MN each,
9 base concrete, 10 anchored blocks connected to the dam buttresses

P 7 mm diameter coated with polypropylene. The upper end of each cable

was parted in two and fixed in two separate heads, because stressing equipment of sufficiently high capacity was not available. The anchor heads rested
on reinforced concrete blocks connecting symmetrically with the sides of
the dam buttresses. Each block was anchored into the bedrock by two cables.

486

24.3.4

Anchoring of weirs and the functional parts of earth dams into the
bedrock

A typical example of this type of anchoring is the weir on the river Tarn
in France [112]. The buttresses of this weir were anchored on the upstream
side to a depth of 11 m below the river bottom, the anchors being fixed in
excavated shafts which were conically expanded at the bottom. Each buttress
was anchored with 18 cables composed of 18 5 mm-diameter wires, which
were protected from corrosion by filling the shafts with concrete.
The buttresses of the spillway blocks of the dam on the river Vh near
Hricov (Czechoslovakia) were each anchored with three cables prestressed
to 4 MN (Fig. 24-30). The bedrock of the dam is formed of flysch sandstone

Fig. 24-30. View of the buttresses on the spillway section of the Hricov Dam on the Vh
(Slovakia). Each buttress was anchored with 3 cables prestressed to 4 MN

and marly shale beds (in proportions of approximately 1 : 1). Anchoring

into rocks of this composition was accepted as being feasible after successful
tests had been conducted for the Nosice Water Project on the river Vh [86];
these tests confirmed that losses of prestressing in anchor cables installed

487

in rocks of similar composition did not exceed 2.4 per cent, after 19 months.
The cables were made of stranded Hercules ropes, consisting of 37 strands
with 19 wires of 2.8 mm diameter each (see Section 11.3). These were inserted
into vertical holes formed within the buttresses by steel tubes embedded
in the concrete, and continuing into the bedrock to a depth of 10 m below
the footing (Fig. 24-31). The lower cable ends were fixed into bulbs formed
by filling the terminal borehole cavities with concrete, while the upper ends
were fixed into cast steel heads. The prestressing losses resulting from relaxation of the cables and rock creep were restored by re-stressing the cables six
months after the initial prestressing. The cables were protected from corrosion
by grouting.

The weir on the Rhine near Schaff hausen, constructed between 1959 and
1963, was anchored with 66 BBRV cables prestressed with forces ranging
from 0.3 to 2.2 MN (Fig. 24-32). The bedrock of the weir consists of sound
limestone [34].

488
Fig. 24-32. Cross-section
of a weir on the Rhine near
Schaffhausen

24.3.5

Anchoring of cofferdams in the bedrock

Anchoring into the substrata is a common feature of the design and

construction of cofferdams. It was first used on a large scale in the construction of a cofferdam protecting the foundation pit of a hydro-electric power
station on the river Tarn in France [112]. The cofferdam consisted of a continuous foundation 2.65 m high and 3.15 m wide, on which a clay-filled
wooden structure was mounted. The reinforced concrete foundation was
laid in a trench 1.5 m deep, and was anchored by a force of 530 kN per metre
of the dam length. The anchor cables consisted of 10 5 mm-diameter wires,
and each was stressed with a force of 200 kN. They were installed in 40-mm
diameter boreholes.
A concrete cofferdam at the Orlik Dam site in Czechoslovakia (Fig. 24-33)

Fig. 24-33. Cross-section of a cofferdam at the

Orlik Dam site
1 anchor (4 MN), 2 steel anchor fixing
embedded in concrete, 3 masonry of
stilling basin

489

was founded on the reinforced concrete slab of the stilling basin, and was
anchored with compound ropes prestressed to 4 MN. The ropes were secured
at their lower ends in pots made of seamless 30 cm-diameter steel pipe
embedded in the concrete, and the upper ends were fixed in cast steel heads.
With this design, there was a saving both in the amount of concrete used for
the cofferdam (reduced cross-section), and in the expenditure of labour when
the cofferdam was demolished at a later stage. By relieving the prestressing,
the masonry of the cofferdam could be removed as if it were plain concrete
structure (Fig. 24-34).
In the Kamyk Dam site on the river Vltava (Czechoslovakia) anchoring
was used to secure a dividing pillar, which during the construction formed
a common part of the right bank and (subsequently) left bank cofferdams.
The dividing pillar in its cofferdam role was successively loaded under
hydraulic pressure from both sides. In the immediate vicinity of the pillar,
an excavation was made to a depth of 7 m below the level of the pillar
foundation for the dam and power station foundations (Fig. 24-35). The

Fig. 24-34. View of the anchored part of the cofferdam

490
Fig. 24-35. Cross-section
of a dividing pillar of the Kamyk
Dam. The pillar, which during
the construction served as a part
of the cofferdam for the foundation
pit of the power house,
was anchored with anchors
prestressed to 4 MN

_^k

4-

*fMTiT>f^VP!i

dividing pillar was founded on caissons lowered into the bedrock, which
consisted of fractured beds of amphibolite-biotite, granodiorite, and granite
porphyry. The lowering of the caissons under these conditions was time
consuming, and threatened to delay the work schedule. For this reason the
cutting edges of the caissons were not lowered to the originally intended
level, but were placed somewhat higher; the pillar was then secured by
anchoring before the excavation for the power station foundation pit
encroached upon the pillar. The load centre of the anchoring forces was
located near the upstream side so as to reduce the stress under the foot of the
pillar to 0.3 MPa, even with a flood-water loading. In this way the structure
was also made safe from the possibility of a part of the rock breaking loose
from under the downstream side in the course of blasting. Multiple Hercules
ropes, prestressed to 4 MN, were used for the anchorage. They were installed
in inclined 156 mm-diameter boreholes. Within the pillar, the inclined holes
were originally to have been formed by steel pipes embedded in the concrete,
but they were eventually drilled instead. In the course of this drilling, however,
various parts of the reinforcement such as the steel components of the
caissons, obstructred and delayed the work, thus highlighting the advantages
of the original scheme using steel pipes.
For a similar reason the middle and lower parts of a dividing pillar in the
Aschach Water Scheme on the Danube (Austria) were anchored. The dividing
pillar also served as a cofferdam during the construction, and its height was
increased when another cofferdam was mounted on top of it (Fig. 24-36).
This extended pillar was secured with 46 bar anchors, each with a diameter
of 26 mm arid a yield strength of 600 MPa [109]. The anchoring provided

491

a safety margin against overturning of only 1.5, and it was admitted that the
pressure and uplift effect of flood water would create a tensile load over half
of the width of the footing. Consequently some opening and closing of the
footing was expected, the extent of this depending on the modulus of deformation of the bedrock. Such a deformation was capable of bringing about

mo

Fig. 24-36. Dividing pillar of the Aschach

Water Scheme on the Danube (Austria)
1 46 bar anchors, 2 insulating
wrapping 2 m long

a local increase of stress in the anchorage, and in order to limit this increase
to an admissible 10 per cent., the anchoring bars were coated with 1 mm
of insulating asphalt over a length of 2 m on either side of the footing of the
pillar. This provision was made to allow the elongation of the anchoring
bars over a greater part of their length.

Chapter 25
A N C H O R I N G OF B R I D G E

STRUCTURES

Recently, rock anchorage has been applied in the structural design of

bridges, and to a growing extent it has played a part in new methods of
bridge erection.
In Brno (Czechoslovakia) a foot bridge is currently under construction,
the structure of which consists of a prestressed concrete suspended ribbon
supported on cast-in-place abutments. As the end segments are supported
on rubber bearings which do not transmit tension, the bridge span can move
on the bearings, in one sense when the span is contracting on cooling and
is under load, and in the opposite sense when span expands on warming,
Both the span and the sag of the foot bridge are variable. At a temperature
of 10 C the span (stress ribbon) is 7.819 cm and the sag is 130 cm (Fig. 25-1).
This load-bearing structure exerts a horizontal force of 18,000 kN on the
abutments, and the force is taken by VJJIS anchors prestressed to 1,200 kN.
The abutments have flat foundations. The right-hand abutment rests on the
surface of Brno igneous rock into which a tensile force is transmitted by
20 rock anchors of average length 13.5 m. The anchors are stressed in two
stages, before and after assembly of the load-bearing structure.
The anchoring of the footings for the suspension cables of the Rucka-Chucky bridge in California represents an entirely new concept in bridge
construction (Fig. 25-2). The bridge, of curved plan geometry, was designed in
the offices of Lin. T. Y. International. With a span of 396 m and curves
at both ends continuing on to embankments built on the steep banks of the
river canyon, the bridge is to be suspended on a system of cables fixed into
blocks on both slopes. The best distribution of the cables was arrived at by
investigating a hundred model variants, taking into account the possibility
of seismic loading; it was ultimately decided to arrange the cables in the
shape of a hyperbolic paraboloid. A model of the structure was subjected to
dynamic loading at the Berkeley University laboratories, and an aerodynamic
investigation was carried out at the University of Colorado. Success with the
erection of this bridge will undoubtedly serve as a good basis and incentive
for the development of a new type of bridge for spanning very deep river
valleys, where bridge piers will be replaced by a suspension system of cables
anchored into the valley slopes.
Rock anchorage was used to facilitate the erection of a bridge over the
river Gouritz in South Africa, the anchorage taking the place of the usual

longitudinal section
7819

Fig. 25-1. Suspended footbridge in Brno (Czechoslovakia)

7 20 anchors (1,200 kN each), 2 1 8 anchors (1,200 kN each), 3 steel sheet piles,
4 rubber bearings

\300\
\300\

900

494
GROUHDPLAN

VIEW

BLOCKS

Fig. 25-2. Prospective view of Ruck-a-Chucky suspended arc bridge (California)

supporting scaffolding. The design of the bridge was decided by the

characteristics of the locality; the valley of the river is 70 m deep, the bedrock, which provided a suitable foundation for piers, is covered by a layer
of gravel and sand up to 43 m thick, while the slopes of the valley are formed
of relatively strong beds of siliceous sandstone which were capable of supporting the inclined bridge struts. The struts were concreted without scaffolding
in sections 3 m long, and were held in the prescribed position by suspension
cables. The cables were composed of Dywidag bars arranged in four levels
at intervals of 9 m. On the eastern side the cables were fixed in the foundations of the bridge pier, and on the western side they were fixed into the
abutment of the bridge. The horizontally loaded foundations and other
footings constructed for the purpose of holding auxiliary equipment in the

495

course of concreting, were anchored in the rock with a total of 63 anchors

of load-bearing capacity 2,000 kN (Fig. 25-3). The lateral spans were concreted by means of sliding shuttering, which together with the already concreted
parts, was secured by cablesfixedin the head of the temporary pier constructed from braced precast parts. The main span was concreted from either end
without scaffolding. The suspension ropes of the lateral spans were released
gradually as the concreting progressed [118].

Fig. 25-3. Anchoring applied in the construction of a bridge over the river Gouritz (South
Africa)
1 63 anchors of 2 MN each; 2 tendons from Dywidag bars

Difficulties arose when the ends of the suspended lateral spans came to be
connected with the ends of the suspended inclined struts; changes had
occurred in the lengths of the suspension cables as a result of daily variations
in the ambient temperature. Before work commenced on the connection of
these parts of the structure, the cycle of their movements was recorded for
some time so that they could eventually be avoided with respect to both
their vertical and horizontal components. Consequently, the work was
scheduled for the early morning hours.
The shuttering for an arched bridge with a span of 124 m over the Krummbach creek in Switzerland (Fig. 25-4) was suspended in a similar way. The
bars on which the bridge arch and the shuttering were suspended during the
concreting, were held by pylons anchored to footings located on both sides
of the valley; the footings themselves were secured with anchors fixed in the
bedrock. When the arch was closed, the suspension ropes were removed.
In the construction of suspension bridges, it may be profitable to dispense
with anchoring blocks altogether. A footbridge near the town of Porvoo in
Finland, erected in 1975 (Fig. 25-5), may serve as an example. The footbridge,
with a clear width of 3.5 m and a span of 78 m, was suspended on ropes
connected to inclined pylons from which the ropes were directed downwards
to fixings in the bedrock [151]. The anchors were protected by the concrete
of piles driven into the 20 m-thick layer of gravel and sand covering the
bedrock. A similar system, but on a much larger scale, was used in the con-

496

struction of the Forth road bridge in Scotland, opened to traffic in 1964.

The load-carrying ropes were anchored co-axially in a 60 m-long gallery
with an area of cross-section of 9 m2 (Fig. 25-6).

Fig. 25-4. Krummbach bridge (Switzerland). Anchoring was used to secure the shuttering
1 tendons, 2 pylon, 3 anchored footing

Fig. 25-5. Footbridge at Porvoo (Finland)

1 bedrock, 2 piles, 3 anchors

Fig. 25-6. Anchoring of main load-bearing ropes of the Forth Suspension Bridge in Scotland
1 anchoring, 2 load-bearing ropes, 3 bridge approach

Chapter 26
A N C H O R I N G OF

FOUNDATIONS

The purposes of foundations are, firstly to distribute the weight of the

supported structure evenly over the underlying ground, secondly to secure
the structure against tangential displacement or overturning, and thirdly to
resist the tensile forces which act at various angles and directions around
the foundations. In the first case a foundation fulfils its function by virtue
of its structural arrangement, by which the load-carrying area of the structure
is increased and the bearing pressure reduced. Anchoring this type of foundation into the ground is unprofitable, except where anchoring forces are
employed to preconsolidate the rock beneath the foundation. Otherwise the
foundation fulfils its function by the effect of its weight, and this can be
replaced in part by anchoring. Thus, in these instances, it is structurally and
economically advantageous to anchor the foundations into the rock.
26.1 PRECONSOLIDATION OF THE SUBSTRATUM
UNDER LOAD-DISTRIBUTING FOUNDATIONS

In the foundations for arched bridges and other structures in which the
weight is concentrated on a limited area, the ground may undergo sinking
and displacement as a result of plastic creep of the underlying ground. These
phenomena may, under adverse conditions, cause damage to the entire
structure. Deformation of the ground after the structure is erected can be
reduced by preliminary loading of the foundations by anchoring forces. Thus
deformation occurs before the ground is loaded by the structure's weight,
and precludes the possibility of structural damage. As construction work
progresses, the anchoring forces are gradually relieved, and in the final stage
they exert no additional loading on the foundation ground.
This procedure was followed in the construction of a 246 m arched steel
bridge spanning the Frser River in British Columbia [62]. The supports of
the bridge were founded on a bed of gravel and sand up to 24 m thick interpenetrated by layers of clay. The supports were loaded by a force of 80 MN
acting at an angle of 20 from the vertical. It was feared that this load, possibly
increased by dynamic effects, might under some conditions cause a depression
and displacement of the springings. Thus after various possibilities had been
considered, a decision was taken to preload the foundation ground before
the arch was constructed. The relatively massive bridge support (Fig. 26-1)

498

was first pressed into the subsoil by vertical anchoring forces equivalent to
the sum of the weight of the bridge and that of its load. Then the soil at the
rear of the support was compressed by means of horizontally acting jacks
placed in an excavated pit. The jacks exerted a force (T = 18 MN) equal
to the calculated horizontal load component exerted by the structure on the
support. By means of a cyclically reiterated load the choice between a gradual
relief of the prestressing during construction, and a complete immediate
relief was made. The deformation caused by the anchoring and bracing
of the support was small, the maximum depression being 12 mm, and the
displacement 2.1 mm. When the anchoring forces were relieved, the ground
showed an elastic relaxation of 3 mm. The depression under full load for
12 days was increased by another 3 mm, of which 1.5 mm were attributable
to an elastic response, and 1.5 mm to a permanent deformation.

A
8
-H Tl
~
+[

1i

II ^

lbs M

Fig. 26-1. Preconsolidation

of the ground under the supports
of the arched bridge over the Frser
River in British Columbia
1 boreholes, 2 axes of anchor
cables, 3 hydraulic jacks,
4 cavity additionally filled with
concrete after preconsolidation
of the support,
5 load-distributing blocks,
6 construction joints,
7 centre-line of the bridge arch,
8 bridge stanchion, 9 backfill,
10 fill
26.2 F O U N D A T I O N S L O A D E D BY TANGENTIAL FORCES

Lateral forces tend to appear in the supports of arched bridges and

vaults, and in the anchoring blocks of pipelines. The forces acting on arch
supports can be determined comparatively easily, and thus the anchoring
forces needed to secure the supports against shear failure can be calculated

499

from formula (4-2) derived in Chapter 4. Where structures are founded on

strong bedrock, the anchors can pass directly through the body of the
supports. The anchors are usually oriented obliquely to obtain a component
of the anchoring force which provides an equal and opposite force to the
shear stress. With this arrangement the anchoring force requirement
diminishes, and may be calculated according to formula (4-4).
Foundations resting on less solid ground cannot be additionally loaded
by anchoring forces, as the safe stress of the ground below may be exceeded.
Such foundations are best secured by constructing auxiliary footings, anchoring these into the underlying ground, and connecting them with the main
foundation by means of tie bars (Fig. 26-2).
Anchoring blocks for pipelines are usually located where there is a change
of direction or gradient, so as to prevent the pipeline from being buckled
by the weight of the liquid-filled line as it follows the slope of the ground
(Fig 26-3), liquid pressure in the bends, dynamic shocks, or thermal expan-

Fig. 26-2. Foundation of exhibition

hall in Paris secured by an auxiliary
anchor under shear stress
1 main foundation, 2 anchored
base, 3 tendon, 4 anchors,
5 limestone bed

Fig. 26-3. Anchoring block

at a change of gradient
on the Ried Mrel pipeline
(Switzerland). The blocks are
anchored by 4 BBR V cables
with a loading of 1 MN

500

sion. The static analysis by which the shape and dimensions of the anchoring
blocks are determined, is consequently rather complicated. The least favourable combinations of loading forces, originating both externally and within
the pipeline, have to be considered. The safety of blocks with respect to
lateral displacement and overturning has to be assessed at all points of
change of gradient. The magnitude and direction of the anchoring forces
required to obtain stability are calculated in the same way as those for
retaining walls.
Blocks under tangential (shear) stress (Fig. 26-4) are sometimes used
instead of blocks loaded by straightforward tension (e.g. where the ground
surface is of suitable shape, or where the blocks are to take tensile forces
making a small angle with the ground surface).
Tangentially stressed blocks can be used as auxiliary structures when
obstructions of various kinds have to be removed. In Vienna, for example,
blocks were anchored into the ground in order to provide a reliable support
for the heads of draw bars (Fig. 26-5); the latter were used to haul the

Fig. 26-4. Tangentially

stressed foundation
structures to take over
tensile forces

Q 10MN

.----^

Fig. 26-5. Anchored block for attaching the equipment used to retrieve the remains of the
collapsed Reichsbrcke from the bottom of the Danube
1 sheet piling, 2 VSL anchors (600 kN)

501

wreckage of the Reichsbrcke (which collapsed on September 1st, 1976)

on to the banks of the Danube. The lifting equipment had a capacity of
up to 140 MN.

26.3 ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS

Masts for power lines, the supports for overhead pipelines and similar
structures, are mainly influenced by tipping moments when in service. These
moments are created by horizontal forces which act on the upper ends of the
structures. Stability is generally achieved by fixing the bases of the structure
into massive concrete foundations, which fulfil their purpose by virtue of
their dead weight, and because they are embedded in the ground. However,
this method requires large excavations for the foundations, and large volumes
of concrete, making it uneconomic particularly at less accessible sites.
When anchoring is applied, these massive blocks can be replaced by
foundation slabs or foundation beams, anchored by prestressed tendons into
the underlying ground. After they have been anchored, slabs and foundation
beams (cast in situ or prefabricated) form a stable structural unit with the
bedrock.
For the anchoring of foundation slabs, one anchor placed in the centre
of the slab (Fig. 26-6), or alternatively, two or more anchors placed near
the edges of the slab may be used; the anchors are oriented so that the
anchoring forces oppose the main tensile load forces. Foundation beams are
best anchored midway along their length.
The geometry of the anchors is governed by the properties of the underlying ground, the cost of drilling, the size of the anchors and stressing equipment which can be mounted on the foundation of the structure, the cost of
the seating plate (or the increased cost of this item if a central position for
the anchor head is considered), and the morphology of the ground.
A mast structure is fastened to the foundation slabs or beams with bolts
into a compact unit. The foundations distribute the weight of the mast and
the anchoring force over a wider area of the ground (Fig. 26-7). It is the
opinion of some experts that the anchors should not be fully prestressed, so
as to reduce the bearing pressure on the foundations (the dimensions of which
are determined by the safe bearing capacity of the ground). However this
opinion is incorrect, particularly with respect to foundations established
on less solid ground. When the structure is loaded by a tipping moment,
the anchorage is additionally stressed and tensioned, and the foundation is
torsionally displaced. As a consequence, pressure is concentrated in
a narrower belt of the foundation and its loading is increased in this area
(see Chapter 3).

502

VAV/A

PA~?,

Fig. 26-6. Anchoring of separate mast foundation slabs

When foundations are established on solid rock, the strength of the

concrete of the foundation is the deciding factor in its construction, and even
a partial prestressing cannot reduce the construction cost. Moreover, by
applying partially prestressed anchors, the possibility of direct control of
the fixing is l o s t - a possibility which exists only when the anchorage is fully
prestressed.
The effect of anchoring on the stability of masts was investigated in the
switching station for an extra high tension line, in Central Bohemia [86].
A short, strengthened mast was founded on four independent footings, each
130 cm square, placed under the legs of the pylon. A base structure was
fixed to the legs, and this supported the anchor head of a cable of 2 MN
load-bearing capacity; the cable was coaxial with the mast's vertical axis.
The bedrock beneath the mast consisted of banks of platey marlstones (sandy
marls).
A borehole 160 mm in diameter was drilled for the cable with a VA 80

503

auger drill mounted on a Tatra 111 undercarriage. The drilling of a hole

6.0 m deep took approximately 1.5 hours. The cable, composed of three
ropes each of 61 wires (4 mm in diameter), was fixed at its lower end in
a blasted-out cavity, and at its upper end it was concreted into a strong cast
steel head. In the breaking test (Fig. 26-8) a force of 200 kN (toppling moment
M = 1.3 MNm) was applied; the flange of the pylon fixing was visibly
deformed, and two of the footings were partially damaged by the shear
force. The anchor was pulled out 4 mm.
The anchoring of pylons is used to considerable advantage wherever the
work has to be carried out in inaccessible places. Thus, for example, the

504
Fig. 26-8. Breaking test
being carried out on the
footing of a pylon
anchored in the bedrock
(VIS)

weight of a foundation structure for the 162 m-high pylon of a television

transmitter in California (built on the top of Mt. Wilson at an elevation of
1,740 m above sea level) was substantially reduced [189]. The posts of
the pylon were supported on separate footings (Fig. 26-9), and each of these
was anchored into the bedrock with eight bars of 44.5 mm-diameter highA-A'

521

--^

-^
13.90

Fig. 26-9. Anchoring of the footings of the 162 m-high television transmitter pylon on
Mt. Wilson in California
1 bar anchors of high-grade steel (44.5 mm dia.; 8 per pylon foot), 2 load-distributing
steel plates, 3 anchor bolts (8 per pylon), 4 levelling plate, 5 pylon stanchion

505

grade steel. The bars with nuts threaded on at both ends were lowered into
boreholes of 18 cm diameter and 7.6 m depth. The lowermost 3.0 m of the
boreholes were then filled with grout prepared from an expanding cement.
After this had hardened, the bars were prestressed to test forces of 600 to
800 kN. When the prestressing was relieved and the fixing of the anchors
in the rock had been found to be fully reliable, the remaining voids in the
boreholes were filled with grout.
Prefabricated supports for a conduit carrying sea water for cooling an
atomic power station in India were secured by anchoring instead of transverse
wind-bracing beams. The individual supports were anchored by cables,
prestressed to 102 kN, passing down the axis of the supports; on the outer
supports, a force of 184 kN was applied.
The foundation for the pylon of the cableway in Thule (GDR) was
anchored with bars of high-grade steel mark 10,600. These had a diameter
of only 26 mm, and were prestressed to 200 kN. Owing to the remoteness
of the site, drilling machines could not be used, and boreholes 60 mm in
diameter and 4 m deep had to be bored with a hand drill. To help overcome
these difficulties, the Research Institute of Civil Engineering in Brno proposed
that anchoring bars be fixed into cavities at the extremities of the boreholes,
so as to obtain a larger zone of contact with the substratum. Reliable fixing
of the anchoring bar into the concrete bulb was ensured by means of a base
consisting of a steel cylinder 35 mm in diameter and 500 mm long the surface
of which was threaded with a large lead-angle thread. At one end of the
cylinder a hole was drilled and threaded (M 27 x 2 thread), and at the other
end was a hollow 26 mm in diameter and 400 mm long. At the hollow end
the cylinder was cut longitudinally in an axial plane. An expanding cone
was inserted into the hollow (Fig. 26-10), and when the anchoring bar had
been placed in the borehole, its upper end was tapped, causing the cone to
splay the cut end of the cylinder, so that the arms opened to the full width
of the anchoring cavity. Immediately before insertion of the anchor, the
cavity was filled with grout; thus when the cone was rammed into the cylinder,
remaining spaces in the cavity and cylinder were reliably filled.
Anchoring gives the greatest economic advantage when it is applied to
inclined masts and similar structures, where the excentric loading does not
change to any great extent. The Capellis reflector antenna in Switzerland,
erected on the edge of a rock cliff of shales (see Fig. 26-7) can again be cited as
an example, as well as the graceful structure of the ski-jump at Obersdorf
(GFR). The ski-jump is fixed to the rock by a system of anchors (Fig. 26-11)
which take the tensile forces arising from the cantilever effect of the overhanging ramp. By adopting this design, it was not necessary to provide
supports which are unsightly in most instances, and would obstruct the
space around the structure which might otherwise be put to better use.

506

es

I \2-100-

Fig. 26-10. Anchoring a pylon foundation for the

cableway at Thule (GDR)
1 borehole (42 to 60 mm dia), 2 anchoring cavity,
3 prestressed steel bar (26 mm dia),
4 load-distributing washer, 5 nut, 6 protecting
cover filled with insulating material, 7 insulating
wrapping, 8 plastic insulating material, 9 cement
mortar, 10 screwed-on end piece, 11 spreading
cone, 12 M 27 x 2 thread

Fig. 26-11. Ski-jump at Obersdorf (GFR), showing foundations anchored in the bedrock

507
26.4 ANCHORED BLOCKS UNDER TENSILE LOADS

Blocks are often used to anchor the tie bars which hold high masts in
position, as well as the stay ropes of cable cranes, suspension bridges, suspended roofs, etc. At present, these blocks are designed with sufficient weight to
resist the tensile forces created by the structures which they support. The
installation of such anchoring blocks requires the excavation of deep cuttings,
and large volumes of concrete are used, particularly when the blocks are
sited on slopes. Therefore it is often highly profitable to apply an anchoring
technique, so that the weight of construction materials can be replaced by
the forces of the anchorage.
The anchoring block which is under tensile stress and also anchored into
the rock, is generally constructed as a slab of such a shape and size that the
pressure of the anchor head is well distributed over the ground, and the block
fits the main stabilized structure (Fig. 26-12). Thus the block represents

Fig. 26-12. Anchoring of a block for a cable crane at the site of the Luzzone Dam in
Switzerland (1 MN VSL cables)

a kind of link between the anchorage and the structure. Its function and its
positioning are mainly dictated by the respective directions of the anchoring
forces and the tensile loading forces. If the axis of the anchor coincides with
that of the tensile force (Fig. 26-13), this link is a direct one in which the upper
ends of the cables or steel bars embedded in the rock are connected to the
tensile elements of the supported structure. In the case of blocks which are
loaded by forces making an acute angle with the ground surface and acting
in a direction different from that of the anchor axis, the blocks must be
of suitable dimensions to accept the loading forces (Fig. 26-14).
The blocks of crane ways must also be considered as anchoring blocks
stressed by shear forces. As a part of the Dalesice Water Project,
a 503.5 m-long radial crane way was constructed (Fig. 26-15). This had
a groundplan radius of 700 m and a maximum gradient of 28 per cent.; it

508
^J?
_

^M Qn
P

Fig. 26-13. Connecting link in place of an

anchoring block, where the axis of the
anchoring force coincides with that of the
tensile force

73^^^?

Fig. 26-J4. Anchoring block under both

shear and tensile stresses
P anchoring force, Q service load

Fig. 26-15. Radial crane way anchored on a slope as part of the Dalesice Water Project
) cross-section, b) view of the crane way

509

was subjected to a moving horizontal load of 1.88 MNper m. The crane way
was divided by expansion joints into blocks 12 m long, each of which was secured by four 1.2 MN anchors oriented at an angle of 30 from the horizontal
(Fig. 26-15). The anchor heads were provided with a projection by means
of which additional prestressing could be applied if prestressing losses arising
from dynamic loading of the anchors occurred. The prestressing in a number
of selected anchors was observed continuously on dynamometers placed
between the head and the block of the crane way.
If the anchor axis coincides with that of the tensile loading force, the
value of the required anchoring force, Pz, is simply determined by multiplying
the load force, Z, by the safety factor, mz:
Pz = mx. Z.
mz has a value ranging from 2 to 3, depending on the type of structure
secured by the anchoring block. The area of the base of the block must be
such that the safe pressure loading of the rock is not exceeded; this loading
is usually a half or a third of the load-bearing capacity ascertained in loading
tests. Where anchored blocks are permanently loaded by tensile forces, as,
for example, blocks from which roofs are suspended, a higher pressure on the
underlying rock may be permitted compared with that which can be allowed^
for example, in the case of stabilizing blocks for masts since the stay ropes
of the latter exert a variable tensile loading on the blocks.
The settlement of foundation blocks, eh, under an anchoring load, q
(Fig. 26-16), need not be considered as it has no substantial effect on the
stability of the structure.
The settlement of blocks as a result of rock creep may cause small losses,
, of anchor prestressing, but these are partly restored where the blocks
are subjected to a tensile load, which relieves the pressure on the ground at
the same time.
The increase of tension in the anchor induced by a tensile load force,
Z(Z < Pz), may be determined from the extension of the anchor, or displace-

Fig. 26-16. Deformation of the rock surface under anchored blocks

510

ment, , in the direction of the force Z. The value of is computed from

the equation for the loading of a flat half-space surface, for example a square
slab of side a, loaded by a force, Z.
Aeh = 0.088(1
where
a
Fh
Eh
Z

=
=
=
=
=

Vh)

FhEh

Poisson ratio for the rock,

side of the square block (m),
area of the base of the block (m 2 ),
deformation modulus of the rock (kPa),
tensile load (kN).

The losses in prestressing, , of the anchor are computed from the

formula
=

where Ea = modulus of elasticity for the anchor (kPa),

/ = length of the anchor tendon (m).
The value of is generally very small, amounting to a few per cent.
of the total anchor prestressing, . It may be greater where the rocks show
a low deformation modulus , in which case the basal area of the block, Fh,
must be increased, particularly if a fluctuating load is expected. A complete
lifting of the pressure on the ground beneath the block, accompanied by
an increase in anchor tension (Fig. 26-17) may occur if the loading tensile
forces on the block become equal to, or eventually exceed the force, P z ,

unprestressed
prestressed

1.5

-^ - -

1.0

0.5

'

V 20

/
A -A

40 60 80 WO 120 M

160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300

elongation\rnm\

Fig. 26-17. Elongation of an anchor loaded by a tensile force, Z, in relation to the value of
anchor prestressing force, PA

511

with which the block is anchored into the rock. Such a situation is precluded
by ensuring that the anchoring forces are double or triple the loading force, Z.
Thus, the variation in the anchor prestressing (tension), ', under fluctuating
loading of the block can reach a maximum value of one third or a half of the
prestressing losses .
In no case can the prestressing of the anchorage increase by an amount
equal to the tensile load on the block, as is sometimes erroneously maintained.
The anchoring of blocks into rock is finding increasingly widespread
application. It can be used to advantage, for example, in the erection of
cable cranes (see Fig. 26-12), power-line pylons [148], and in loading tests
on masts (Fig. 26-18). In bridge construction, application of the method
on the largest scale so far can be found in the anchoring of the load-bearing
ropes of the Forth suspension bridge in Scotland (see Fig. 25-6). Anchored
blocks are often used to take the tensile forces of ropes from which the roofs
of large halls are suspended. With the use of anchored footings, the tensile
forces in the suspension ropes are transmitted into the underlying ground,
where they are opposed by the resistance of the ground to the extraction of
the anchors (Fig. 26-19). The transfer of the rope tension on the circumference
of the ceiling gives rise to large buckling stresses in this structure, and with
larger structures this method may be uneconomic to apply. By the use of
anchored footings, new designs for halls can be realized, such as the cantilever
roofed hangar at Munich airport (Fig. 26-20).

Fig. 26-18. Loading equipment for testing HT pylons at the National Testing Laboratory
in England
1 anchors, 2 concrete footings for the fixing of ropes, 3 pylon, 4 fixing in the
bedrock

512

In four of the pillars supporting a church roof at Kannelmki in Finland

[119], the upward forces were taken by anchoring; the existence of these
forces was due to the fact that the resultant of the roof's dead weight was
not in line with the strut axis (Fig. 26-21), but forming an angle with it.

Fig. 26-19. Anchoring of suspension ropes for the roof of the Sports Stadium at Dortmund
1 foundation, 2 anchored block, 3 prestressed anchor

65m

Fig. 26-20. Cantilever

roof of a hangar
at Munich Airport

513

Fig. 26-21. Anchoring of pillars in the church at Kannelmki (Finland)

1 Freyssinet anchoring cables (12 mm dia.) located in a protecting pipe, 2 shaft of
90 mm dia. pipes, 3 grout pipe, 4 air escape pipe, 5 concrete laid after prestressing
of the anchors

Chapter 27
S T A B I L I Z A T I O N OF F O U N D A T I O N
AND SUNKEN

BASINS

RESERVOIRS

Foundation basins generally form part of a larger structure. Their function

includes supporting the weight of the structure and any extra load imposed,
withstanding the lateral pressure of the ground, and opposing the uplift
effect and lateral pressure of ground water. In principle, therefore, foundation basins are sunken reservoirs, whose internal space forms part of the
internal space of the supported structure and may be used for the installation
of service machinery, heavy mechanical equipment in the case of a factory,
or for storage. However the static analysis and structural design of foundation basins differs from that of sunken reservoirs on account of the different
type of load involved. In order to support some sort of structure, the bottom,
and sometimes also the walls of a foundation basin must be appropriately
dimensioned. The weight of the structure and the lateral pressure of the
ground represent constant load components which can be ascertained with
considerable accuracy. Stability failures in foundation basins, where the
main loading is the weight of the supported structure, is very rare. Failure
occurs only when there is an exceptionally high ground water level as a result
of severe flooding, or when the internal areas of buildings are demolished
without due consideration for the consequences.
Damage caused by uplift usually occurs in sunken warehouses and basins
when they are emptied, and when for any reason the effect of uplift is
increased (as a result of the failure of drainage or pumps, etc.).
Until now, the stability of structures has usually been achieved by virtue
of their weight, which in structures of large groundplan area, means extra
thickness of the floor (Fig. 27-1). At present, vertical displacement is usually
prevented by anchoring the floor into the underlying ground.
The force P, required to stabilize a structure by anchoring it into the
bedrock, is less than the force G", equivalent to the extra weight of floor
material required to maintain stability. The anchoring force which must be
applied to secure a structure against a vertical displacement, mv, is calculated
according to formula (2-1) (Chapter 2):
P = mv.hF

0.yb.

In the course of securing structures against vertical displacement, the

weight of the structure actively co-operates with the anchors under all loading
conditions, including circumstances in which the structure is partly raised

515
a)

30m

Fig. 27-1. Stabilization of a sedimentation basin against vertical displacement

a) by increasing the thickness of the bottom, b) by anchoring the bottom into the
underlying ground, 1 gravel and sand, 2 clay, 3 backfill, 4 additional layer of
concrete, 5 anchors, 6 rib

by uplift forces. Prestressed anchorage therefore may be unnecessary if the

anchors are installed solely to secure the structure against vertical displacement.
When, for example, the bottoms of stilling pools and draught tubes in
hydroelectric power stations are secured (Fig. 27-2), steel of large reinforcement bars diameter are sometimes used with little or no prestressing. This
solution does not, however, prevent some vertical movement of the structure
from occurring before activation of the anchorage. As a consequence of this
movement the anchorage becomes stressed by a force sufficient to secure the
structure against further disturbance.
Thus, it is more correct to use prestressed anchorage for structures loaded
by uplift. Prestressing of the anchorage, effected before the structure is
loaded, also has the advantage of providing a preliminary check on the
anchoring. The calculation of the required quantity of non-prestressed
anchors is the same as that for prestressed anchors.

516
Fig. 27-2. Anchoring of the stilling basin of a dam

Fig. 27-3. Anchoring of the stilling basin of the 40m-high Soulage sur le Gier dam (France)
1 anchors, 2 stilling basin, 3 spillway

Prestressed anchors were used on the Soulage sur le Gier dam in France
[140] to secure the stilling basin against uplift, should the drainage system
under the basin be put out of action (Fig. 27-3). It is noteworthy in this
case that the stilling basin was also secured by anchors against the dynamic
effect of the overflowing water.
In the static analysis of structural foundation slabs, the anchoring forces
are considered as single loads acting at the points where the anchor heads
are located. It is clearly better to use smaller anchoring units regularly spaced
at small intervals over the slab area, and thus reduce expenditure on reinforcement which would otherwise be needed to take the stresses of moment
loads. However, where a large number of boreholes for small anchors would

517

increase the construction cost, the slab can be strengthened with a system
of ribs. These are arranged to form a grid for siting anchor heads of greater
load-bearing capacity. Locating the anchors in the walls of the structure also
has an economic advantage (Fig. 27-4), because the walls in this respect
are similar in function to strengthening ribs. Moreover, prestressed anchor
tendons create a stress in the walls and this can be exploited statically as
partially substituting for wall reinforcement provided that the anchors
are suitably positioned in the perimeter walls of the structure.

Fig. 27-4. Anchoring of the

foundation basin of the Post
Office Building in Enge
(Switzerland), using Tubfix
anchors prestressed to 0.83 MN

Prestressed anchorage has been used, for example, to secure the foundation basin of the C.N.R.S. office building (Centre National de la Recherche
Scientifique) against vertical displacement. The building is founded on beds
of gravel and sand; the ground water level is high, giving rise to an uplift
pressure of up to 80 kPa on the bottom of the foundation basin. The foundation basin rests on bored piles, some of which are alternately stressed by
pressure and tension because of fluctuation of the ground water level
(Fig. 27-5). At points where the upper surface of the foundation slab is not
occupied by the building's masonry, anchoring cables pass through the
piles into limestone beds; the cables are prestressed to 350 400 kN.
Anchoring was installed without piles to secure the bottom of a sump
for the hot-water plant of the new tyre factory in Otrokovice, in Czechoslovakia (Fig. 27-6). The cables, comprising 24 wires of P 7 mm diameter
prestressed to 1 MN were inserted into 156 mm-diameter boreholes
prepared in a bed of saturated gravel and sand on which the tyre factory is
founded. The boreholes extended 5 m into lower claystone beds. The cables,
which were provided with strong bases contracted in advance at their lower
ends, were fixed into the rock by means of anchoring cavities which were

518
Fig. 27-5. Anchoring of the
foundation basin of the C.N.R.S.
Building in Paris
1 beds of gravel and sand,
2 bedrock, 3 piles,
4 prestressed anchors

section A ~A'

Fig. 27-6. Securing of a hot water basin for the Tyre factory at Otrokovice (Czechoslovakia),
by anchoring into the substrata
1 bottom of the basin, 2 stiffening rib of the basin bottom, 3 anchor prestressed
to 1 MN

widened by depth charges and eventually filled with grout (Fig. 27-7). The
walls of the boreholes were permanently cased with steel casing in the section
passing through the gravel and sand. This facilitated watertight sealing of the
sump floor where it was traversed by the anchor cables. The cables were
prestressed and fixed at the upper end using Horel equipment. The efficiency of
the anchors was checked by means of dynamometers placed under the anchor
heads of two selected cables.
The foundation pit of a house for retired people in Zurich [220] was
secured against uplift in a similar way, using bar tendons (Duplex system)
supplied by Stump Bohr AG. A section of the tendon where it passes through

519
Fig. 27-7. Anchor of 1 MN capacity
made from 24 P 7 mm dia wires
{VUIS design)
1 fixed base, concreted in advance,
2 anchoring cavity filled with cement
mortar, 3 plastic tube, 4 grout pipe
for grouting the space between
the cable and the tube (3), 5 grout pipe
for grouting the anchoring cavity
and the borehole, 6 casing
(152 mm dia), 7 insulated covering
of the anchored structure,
8 strengthening rib of the anchored
structure at the anchoring point,
9joining of the insulating layer
with PVC foil wrapping

the insulating layer of the pit floor, and the joining of this layer to the
anchor's insulating wrapping, are shown in Fig. 27-8.
Non-prestressed anchorage similar to the tensioned piles of the MV system
was used at the purification plant at Werdhlzli in Zurich to secure the
bottom of a sedimentation tank against uplift [143]. In this case nonprestressed anchorage was used because the structure was founded in a thick
bed of saturated gravel, and prestressing between the foundation pit and
the substratum was extremely difficult to achieve.
The tensioned piles of the MV system (patented by Professor L. Mller)
consist of steel pipes with a strongly fitted conical base. The diameter of the
base is larger than that of the pipe, to facilitate the driving of the pile into
the soil. Ramming is carried out simultaneously with the pumping of grout
which penetrates the base into the space around the pipe, and creates an
effective anticorrosive protection both on the inside and the outside of the
pipe. With this system, piles can be installed and grouted under water. In the

520

Fig. 27-8. Connection of the insulating wrapping of Duplex anchors (Stump Bohr A.G.)
with the insulating layer of the floor of a foundatin basin
1 bar of high-grade steel (32 mm dia.), 2 plastic wrapping, 3 asphalt insulation,
4 cover of anchor head, 5 asphalt insulating layer (10 mm thick), 6 sealing sleeves,
7 graphite sealing, 8 lead sealing sheet, 9 circular plates, 10 concrete

above example (Fig. 27-9), the pipes were rammed in until a small part was left
projecting into the foundation pit; the projections were then embedded in
the floor of the foundation, which was also concreted under water. When the
concrete floor and the grout of the piles had hardened, the water was pumped
out of the foundation pit and erection of the remainder of the structure
commenced.
A similar solution involving cables with fixing heads at both ends installed
in boreholes prepared in advance, was proposed as an alternative method of
securing the foundations for the locks of the Danube River Project near
Gabcikovo (Czechoslovakia).
An interesting method of installing and prestressing a large number
of 2MN anchors at a depth of 15 m below the water level was adopted in the
construction of the Submarine Complex at Devonport. The scheme involved
the construction of two dry docks (separated by a central quay with workshops and other facilities) in an existing basin which was built between 1896
and 1907, and which was surrounded by concrete retaining walls from 18
to 30 metres deep (Fig. 27-10). The most difficult problem was to create a

521

<0.

*>)

Fig. 27-9. Underwater anchoring of the floor of a sedimentation tank at the Werdhlzli
filtration plant in Zurich
a) pit excavated under water, b) floorof tank concreted under water and secured against
uplift with non-prestressed tensile MV piles rammed in under water before concreting
commenced. 1 sheet piling, 2 bottom of tank, 3 MV anchors

Fig. 27-10. Devonport dry docksanchoring of the bottom under water 1 142 anchors
(2 MN each), 2 rock, 3 thrust slab, 4 thrust block, 5 2 MN anchors securing
the walls

dredged and unflooded pit approximately 15 m below normal dock water

level. It was necessary to construct a cellular steel sheet-pile cofferdam, and
stabilize the existing basin against the danger of overturning; 330 inclined

522

anchors, prestressed to 2 MN and axially spaced from 10 to 20 m apart,

were used to this end. In the north-western corner of the dock, where the bedrock dipped under the wall, the wall had to be secured against shear failure
along its foundation. This was achieved by means of a thrust block concreted
inside the basin and anchored into the bedrock with 142 anchors prestressed
to 2 MN each (see Fig. 27-10); the foot of the wall was supported by the block.
The anchorage in this case was not applied primarily to stabilize the bottom
of the dock against uplift when the basin was emptied, but rather in the
manner of anchorage for a cofferdam bottom. When the bottom had been
cleaned under water, the thrust block was concreted in a prefabricated
L-shaped shuttering. Load-distributing blocks 80 cm x 80 cm x 60 cm high with
a steel load-distributing plate, were installed on the upper surface of the
thrust block at prearranged axial intervals. The placement of the blocks
was carried out by divers. A working platform made from a number of
coupled Uniflotes was erected for the drilling and installation of the anchors.
The divers guided the hammer into the central sleeve tube, and installed the
anchors 15 metres deep.
The anchors were brought to the site wound on reels, from which they
were lowered slowly into the boreholes. The grout level was checked by
means of an electrical grout level indicator probe. A diving chamber 2.1 m x
1.5 m x 1.8 m high was used for the prestressing.

Chapter 28
ANCHORING OF THE LOADING E Q U I P M E N T
IN FIELD TESTS

The loading equipment used in field tests in which the mechanical properties of both the ground and the foundation structure are investigated, can
be anchored into the underlying ground to great advantage. The anchoring
forces take place of a counterweight, which usually consists of concrete
blocks, iron ingots, or other, more voluminous materials. Anchoring forces
are not only more effective, but they can also act at various angles to the
ground surface. They can be established on sloping and inaccessible
foundation sites, and in deep test pits where setting up a counterweight is
practically impossible. Obviously, anchoring can only be applied in this way
when the ground is of sufficient load-bearing capacity at an accessible depth.
It is also essential that the stresses created in the ground by the anchors do not
substantially affect the stress conditions in the investigated zone.
Anchoring is particularly applicable in the following types of test: loading
test for ascertaining the load-bearing capacity of the foundation ground,
and for calculating the modulus of elasticity and deformability of the rock
or soil in situ; loading tests for ascertaining the load-bearing capacity of piles
and pillars; shear and tear tests for determining the coefficient of friction and
the shear strength of rocks in their natural situation.
28.1 TEST LOADING OF THE FOUNDATION GROUND

The load-bearing capacity of the foundation ground and the modulus of

its elasticity and deformability are determined by pressing a test block (or
steel plate) into the surface of the ground in question. The boreholes for the
fixing of anchors are placed as far as possible from the block. If the width
of the loaded block is b, then the boreholes are placed at least this distance
away from the block; the depth of fixing in vertical boreholes should be at
least 3b. If the fixing depth is greater than this, the distance of the anchors
from the loaded block may be reduced.
The arrangement of the anchors is simple if the loading forces are small
(up to 150 200 kN) and the bedrock is strong. In such a situation two
bar anchors, fixed mechanically or with grout in vertical boreholes, are
sufficient. The support structure for the hydraulic jack is made of two steel
beams between which the anchor bars pass at either end (Fig. 28-1).

524
section A-A'

^footing

Fig. 28-1. Testing of ground

load capacity on a sloping
surface, using bar anchors

otto,

Fig. 28-2. Loading test on a concrete block on the ground surface (Universal AnchorageCo.)
a) concrete block and two anchors, b) loading test arrangement

A similar arrangement for carrying out loading tests on concrete blocks

on the ground surface was used by the British Universal Anchorage Co,
(Fig. 28-2). However, for larger anchoring forces, multi-wire tendons are
used instead of bars.

525

If very large compressive forces are required, anchoring ropes are recommended. Where possible, these are fixed into inclined boreholes so that
the tensile forces are transmitted well away from the testing zone. The value
of the anchoring force has to be increased, according to the diagram of
forces, by a factor -, where is the angle of inclination of the borehole
from the horizontal. There are usually four anchors equally spaced around
the circumference of the loading head or structure. The best method is to
use two lengths of anchoring rope splayed apart at either end; the ends are
then thoroughly degreased and fixed into opposite boreholes. The intact
ropes thus pass without interruption over the supporting structure. In the
course of loading, such an arrangement facilitates the compensation of small
differences of length (see Figs. 28-7 and 28-8), which occur in the individual
branches of the anchoring system as a result of differences of ductility and
displacement of the rope along the curved surface of the supporting structure.
Test loads of 1 MN were applied to 5,000 cm 2 concrete blocks on the
lateral footing area of an arched dam, by the simple anchoring of four steel
ropes concreted in four boreholes and in a supporting steel bucket (Fig. 28-3).
The individual 25 mm-diameter ropes of load-bearing capacity 300 kN, were
anchored in gneiss by means of a thick cement slurry poured into the lower
3 m of 4 m-long inclined boreholes (42 mm diameter). Because of the permanent fixing of the ropes in the supporting head without any possibility of ad-

Fig. 28-3. Loading test on a concrete block by means of steel ropes anchored into the bedrock
(Vrchlice Dam, Czechoslovakia)

o)

mm

broken line -plates in side breakings with bracing

full line-middle plate with anchoring (a)

stress under the plate

U
5
6

(b)

4.53

U.30

9 kgI cm

9 kglcmzpQsPt)

s/afe
breaking

[*)

section

/Q\

a)

pit

rope fixed
in borehole

b)m

scheme of load tests

Fig. 28-5. Comparative loading tests on clayey shales in Prague. The loading arrangement
is shown together with load diagrams, a) anchored system, b) counterweight formed by the
rock mass in the roof of undercutting

^ Fig. 28-4. Steel supporting head for the steel ropes in loading
tests of up to 2 MN (Zajic system)

ON

527

justment, the ropes were unequally loaded, causing the rupture of one of them.
This difficulty was overcome by making a special supporting head (Fig. 28-4).
In loading test on clayey shales in two nearly identical exploratory pits,
an anchored support and a counterweight formed by the rock mass over an
undercutting were compared (Fig. 28-5). In both cases the load diagrams
were very similar, and the maximum difference in the moduli of deformation
(as determined by an evaluation of both loading operations) was entirely
within the limits of variation of the test results. The surface deformation
of the rock surface between the slab and the anchor was also observed
during the loading of the slab (Fig. 28-6). The arrangement of the test with
the anchoring is shown in Fig. 28-7.

J
100

1
600

1
500

I
400

distance

I
300

n<....

i
200

100

I5
mm

Fig. 28-6. Deformation of the rock surface between the plate and the anchor

Another loading test with a 4 MN anchored support was carried out in

Czechoslovakia in a pit 6 m deep. Diorites which were intended to support
a future bridge pier, were loaded under a 70 cm square concrete block.
The hydraulic jacks pressed against a load-distributing steel bridge, which
was held by multiple steel ropes anchored in vertical boreholes. The loading
arrangement is shown in Fig. 28-8.
A series of methods based on elastic, optically sensitive materials were
set up in the Mining Institute laboratory, and were tested using a photoelastic recording method. The purpose of these tests was to investigate in more

528
Fig. 28-7. Loading test of the rock
at the bottom of an exploratory pit
using a supporting steel head and a steel
rope anchored at both ends.
The applied force was 0.2 MN.

SMflHHHBiiiii

detail the changes in the stress state of the medium, under a slab when the
latter is loaded either by weight, or by anchors of different types and arrangements. Five variations of the test are shown in Fig. 28-9, and the
vertical stress patterns on the surface of the medium directly beneath the
slab, and at depths of 1 and 2 m from the surface, are outlined in Fig. 28-10.
It appears that even in an elastic medium the changes of stress occurring
when gravitational or anchoring forces are applied, are not significant.
Anchoring brings about a small decrease in the vertical stress. This is at
a maximum of 10 per cent, directly under the slab on the surface of the
medium (variant II). The stresses induced by the load on the upper surface
diminish with increasing depth; in the anchored test this fall-off is more rapid
compared with the weight test (variant I). For the sake of comparison, the
diagram also shows the pattern of stress occurring, assuming a theoretical
ideally rigid slab, and a uniform distribution of stress beneath such a slab.
In Great Britain [54], a method was developed for carrying out a load
test at the bottom of a test borehole so as to ascertain the modulus of elasticity
within the rock mass. In this method which employs cables anchored into
the bedrock (Fig. 28-11), very high pressures of up to 500 MPa can be
applied. The equipment consists of a lever beam, the fulcrum of which is
formed by the upper end of an anchoring cable. A jack is placed under the
end of the longer arm of the lever, and a loading column under the end of the
shorter arm. The column is terminated by a loading plate which presses
evenly on the rock at the borehole bottom by means of a levelling layer oj
sand. A bar for measuring the deformation passes through the loading
column and the loading plate.

529
section A-

section B -B'

Fig. 28-8. Loading test carried out by means of an anchored support in an exploratory pit
for the motorway bridge pier foundation near Hvezdonice (Czechoslovakia)
1 reinforced loading block, 2 hydraulic jacks, 3 dynamometers, 4 steel supporting
bridge of I girders, 5 boreholes for anchoring ropes, 6 casings, 7 anchor of 4 six-strand
steel ropes (22 mm dia.), 8 splayed end of the rope fixed in the borehole with cement
mortar, 9 semi-circular top of the steel bridge filled with hardwood (10)

H Ch. Jaeger [96] proposed an effective anchoring method for carrying

out triaxial tests on rocks in the field. This method was further developed
in the German Federal Republic [127]. The tests are performed in vertical
boreholes in which radial pressures are induced by means of flat jacks. At
the same time a force parallel to the borehole axis is created by the tensioning
of an anchor fixed at the lower end of the borehole; the upper head of the
anchor rests on hydraulic jacks on the loading slab.

530
load variants l-V
Pz = 100mt (1t1N) pressure
/ } = 50 mt (0.5MN) tension

I supporting head
[supporting beam

v.

I.

////

99&77

wo y mo (, loo

rigid square loading

Plate
am 100 cm

dimensions in cm
Two types of anchoring;long root (cylinder)
abutting bast [sphere)

Fig. 28-9. Load test models with a slab resting on the surface of an elastic medium. Variant / :
force on the slab induced by weight. Variants IIV: force on the slab induced by various
types of anchoring

?- 1Mht

Fig. 28-10. Diagram of the

vertical stresses occurring
in an elastic medium beneath
a loading slab, according
to photo-elastic measurements
obtained from different models
with equal loading of the slab
(1 MN)

theoretical calculation
model values
variant
I.
variant
II.
variant
Hi.
variant IV.
variant
V.

531
Fig. 28-11. Equipment for determining
the modulus of elasticity of the rock
at the bottom of a borehole.
(Capacity of equipment: 500 MPa)
1 anchor fixed in the rock, 2 girder,
3 jack (1 MN), 4 flat jack,
5 loading column, 6 levelling bed
of sand, 7 indicator

28.2 TEST L O A D I N G OF PILES

The testing of piles and pillars to establish their load-bearing capacity can
also be carried out by means of anchors or tensile piles. Fig. 28-12 shows such
a test on a 43 cm-diameter pile (loaded by a force of 2 M N ) made by Stavebni
geologie in Prague. A loading test conducted by the English Economc
Foundations Co. on a slanting pile with the aid of multi-wire anchors is
shown in Fig. 28-13.

Fig. 28-12. Test load of 2 MN

on a pile, using tensile piles
on either side (test conducted
by the Stavebni geologie Praha
in Prosek)

532

Fig. 28-13. Testing a slanting pile under reaction from anchors drilled into the rock substratum
(photo Economic Foundations Ltd.)

Tensile piles are used to advantage in soft rocks or cohesive soils in which
the boreholes for the piles (even with a deflection of up to 15 from the
vertical) can be bored without casings, and with diameters sufficiently large
to obtain a large surface area for the pile fixing. The lowest average shear
resistance yet recorded by the authors at the surface of a large tensile pile
(diameter 75 cm, length 10 m) was 15kPa. This pile passed throught
alternating beds of sands and marls. The loading diagrams for the loaded
pile and both of the tensile piles are shown in Fig. 28-14.

533

Fig. 28-14. Loading

diagrams for a loaded pile
and two tensile piles, the
ultimate strength of which
is exceeded. Test conducted
by Stavebni geologie,
Praha

2 tensile
piles
PZ ' 750mmld=10.0m
500mm,d* 10.0m

100 200 300 WO 500 600 100 /cN tension

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 * N pessune
~i

10

loaded pile
Pz 750 mm
d= 10-0 m

5 20
0)

30

30.8 mm fatal compression

at 100 k N
mm

A test loading of 13,5 MN, imposed on a 130 cm-diameter bored pillar

with the aid of anchoring piles, was carried out as shown in Fig. 28-15. The
pillar was installed by the Frankipfahl Co. in the GFR [219]. Eight anchoring piles with a diameter of 60 cm and a length of about 9 m were equally
spaced around the loaded pillar. These transferred the tensile forces from

534

1 Mi
1 ,

Fig. 28-15. Load test carried out on

a large bored pillar by the Frankipfahl Co.
in the GFR
a view of the testing, b sectional
diagram of test arrangement

535

a heavy steel supporting structure into a bed of sand. The bases of the piles
were expanded by ramming concrete into the bottom of the borehole.
A test load of 11 MN imposed by means of an anchored loading bridge
is described in [51].
The effect of the anchoring elements used in these tests on the stress state
of the ground in the vicinity of the pile or pillar under test, was again
investigated by means of elastic models made from optically sensitive
materials. As well as a pile loaded only by weight, four different types of
anchoring were investigated, as shown in Fig. 28-16. In the second variant,
load variants H
pz~ 2 MN pressure
p =1MN tension
surface
7////

I supporting beam /yf

300
\////

300

///////

300

-X-

]///?]/

7T. 7777

20

m
dimensions in cm

11-

JjooL

sc >
20\

I .300
7 7 *

H-

Fig. 28-16. Loading tests on piles carried out in model systems with elastic materials
Variant /: pile loaded by weight. Variants IIV: load on pile induced by various types of
anchoring

the tensile anchoring pile was extended to the ground surface; in the third
variant the pile was shortened and concreted only in the lower half of the
borehole; in the fourth variant the tensile force was transmitted to deeper
strata by means of a cylindrical anchor root of small diameter fixed below
the base level of the loaded pile; in the fifth variant the tensile force was
transmitted by an anchor with a spherical root bulb. The lines of the maximum
shear stresses created in the medium under the conditions of the test, and
with a loading force of 2 MN, are shown in Fig. 28-17, I IV. It appears
that by using anchoring elements, the maximum shear stresses occurring
at the surface of the loaded pile are somewhat ^educed. In practice, this small
decrease in maximum stress occurring within the zone of elastic deformation
of the ground is insignificant. It also appears from the diagrams in Fig. 28-17
that the capacity of the ground to take the anchoring forces is much better
exploited when shortened piles, and particularly small diameter anchors,
are used.

\Pf2MN

\10

pt-1MN

Fig. 28-17. Curves of

maximum shear stress
in an elastic medium
in the vicinity
of a cylindrical pile loaded
by a force of 2 MN.
Load imposed by weight (I),
or by various types
of anchorage (II, III, IV),
Shear stress values given in
kg/cm2 (0.1 MPa)

^^7

7"

// fe/7/ /

- ac// depth m

LS

538
28.3 SHEAR TESTING OF BLOCKS

Anchoxing forces can also be employed to exert normal forces on concrete

or rock test blocks for the determination of the resistance to shear failure
at the base of the block, or within a rock mass. The test blocks are usually
arranged in pairs. They are pressed on to the ground by a beam which rests
on jacks, and which is anchored at its centre into the bedrock (Fig. 28-18).

Fig. 28-18. Alternative proposals for the shear testing of concrete blocks on the ground
surface
1 cable of load capacity 1 MN, 2 cable of load capacity 2 MN, 3 jack of capacity
1 MN, 4 jack of capacity 0.7 MN, 5 free space around anchorage

The blocks can also be anchored individually by cables passing through

their centre of gravity. With the latter arrangement, neither the upper length
of the borehole around the anchorage, nor the channel in the block through
which the anchorage passes should be filled with concrete, otherwise the
test results will be affected by shear stress of the anchorage. The test blocks
are subjected to a horizontal force, either by means of tendons and jacks
placed beneath the heads of the tendons, or by jacks placed between the
blocks. On uneven ground, or at the bottom of a foundation pit, shear tests
may also be carried out on single blocks [60]. Anchoring can serve to support
horizontal as well as vertical jacks.
The advantages of anchoring test blocks during loading and shear tests
are that it enables loading forces of different magnitude and different
directions to be applied, and the test can be carried out on the ground
surface (until now they have been carried out mainly in galleries, where the
effect of weight was obtained by bracing against strong rock). The boreholes
for the anchor may also serve to investigate the rock in the close vicinity
of the test zone, and the relationships between the deformation behaviour and
other characteristics of the rock can then be determined.

539
28.4 TEAR T E S T I N G OF ROCK FOR THE D E T E R M I N A T I O N
OF SHEAR S T R E N G T H

The anchoring technique is also applicable to tear tests by which the shear
strength of rock can be determined in situ. This method was used on a large
scale at the site of the Kawamata Dam in Japan to investigate variably
weathered rock [56]. The tests were conducted in 100 mm-diameter boreholes expanded at the bottom to 130 mm; the holes were 50 to 100 cm long.
The shear strength of local dolomitic limestones was ascertained by means
of tear tests as part of a general survey for the construction of a hydroelectric storage power station in Czechoslovakia. The tests were carried out
in a trial gallery in two boreholes 10 m apart. The diameter of the boreholes
was 156 mm, and that of the reamed cavities 210 mm. A twisted 65 mm-diameter rope of nominal load-bearing capacity 3.5 MN was used. The fixing
end of the rope was splayed, cleaned, and temporarily enclosed in a piece
of pipe for insertion into the borehole. The pipe was then pulled out so that
the rope's splayed end could spread out into the cavity whereupon the root
was grouted. (For longer cables a Hobst expanding cone is used to splay
the end of the cable).

Fig. 28-19. Arrangement of shear strength testing in hard rock

/ drilled anchoring cavity, 2 anchor head of load capacity 2 MN, 3jack of capacity
1 MN, 4 insulated wrapping of the anchor cables

The tensioned section of the rope was wrapped in an insulating coat to

facilitate movement within the enveloping concrete. The upper end of the
rope was connected to a 2 MN cast steel head (Fig. 28-19) which rested on

540
a stressing bridge consisting of two I 50 steel girders. These were supported
on concrete blocks which were positioned on either side of the borehole
with an intervening distance greater than the depth of the anchor cable.
The rope was stressed by a pair of jacks placed in saddles on the supporting
blocks of the bridge, and connected by pressure hoses to a common pump.
Two tests were carried out with anchoring depths of 30 cm, and 120 cm
respectively.

70
lifting of head [mm]

15

20

Fig. 28-20. Loading diagram for two cable anchors undergoing extraction from anchoring
cavities 210 mm in diameter and 30 cm long in limestone
A anchoring depth 120 mm, B anchoring depth 30 cm

Displacement of the rope and deformation of the surface around the borehole were measured in relation to the stressing force applied in the course
of the tests (Fig. 28-20). The surface of the cone which was torn out by the
rope anchored at 30 cm depth is outlined in Fig. 28-21. The irregularity
of the failure is shown by the system of cracks and fractures in the rock. The
shorter anchor was torn out by a force of 0.75 MN, but the rope anchored
at a depth of 120 cm could not be torn out by a force of 2.1 MN the maximum
force available in the test. It may be concluded from the results of the former
test that the shear strength of the dolomite at the planned construction site
was 1.84 MPa. Following from this, a rope anchored at a depth of 1.2 m
would be torn out by a force of approximately 12 MN.

541

1
Fig. 28-21. Lines of failure at a rock surface caused by the uprooting of an anchor fixed
30 cm below the surface
1 cross-section of the cable, 2 wall of the borehole, 3 outline of the anchoring cavity,
4 outline of the cone torn out by the anchor, 5 cracks

Chapter 29
A N C H O R I N G A N D THE E C O N O M I C S
A N D SAFETY OF S T R U C T U R E S

The anchoring of structures must be economically beneficial if it is to

find widespread application. An economic assessment of the technique may
be made, by comparing a basic type of structure of traditional design with
a variant of the same structure in which anchoring has been used.
By anchoring a structure into the ground, forces are established in the
structure which either replace the function of its weight as a force contributing
to its stability, or replace the function of strengthening braces which would
otherwise be needed. In most cases the anchoring forces can be established at
a lower cost and with less labour, compared with the equivalent bracing
systems and temporary supporting systems for foundation pits and underground structures. Moreover, anchoring forces are statically well defined,
they are easily checked, and their point of action and direction can be arranged
so that the stability of the structure is achieved with the greatest efficiency.
This is the chief advantage of anchors, particularly where anchoring is used
for reinforcing and reconstructing existing structures, as mentioned in
earlier chapters.
Another outstanding advantage of the anchoring method is that it
facilitates full utilization of construction machinery in walled foundation
pits and underground excavations. Technical operations are possible with
anchoring which would otherwise be very complicated and costly; anchoring
also significantly increases the safety conditions for both the workmen and
the structure. These factors generally cannot be expressed in economic
terms.

29.1] ECONOMIES IN SURFACE STRUCTURES

The stability of structures subjected to horizontal forces is generally

achieved by virtue of the vertical component of their weight (force due to
gravity). This force may be replaced by an anchoring force of the same
magnitude, but very often the designed anchoring force is greater than its
gravitational counterpart. In structures secured against tangential displacement, the anchoring forces are usually deflected from the normal to the
base of the structure, so as to oppose the tangential (horizontal) load. Where
structures are secured to prevent overturning, the point of action of applied

543

anchoring forces can be established at a distance from the foot of the structure,
greater than the distance that can be allowed for the emplacement of mass
to obtain the same effect by the force of gravity.
The construction cost of the Kullagrund lighthouse (Fig. 29-1) amounted
to 2.0 million Swedish kronor. The lighthouse tower is anchored with 6 VSL
permanent soil anchors which are oriented vertically, and distributed uniformly around the cylindrical concrete wall. A cost comparison showed,
that if a gravity structure were to have provided a safety factor of 1.3 in
resisting the horizontal forces of 10 m-high waves, it would have required
a much thicker foundation slab than that needed for the anchored structure.
Also, the diameter of the slab would have had to be increased from 15.0 m
to 19.5 m, and altogether, there would have been an increase in cost of
14 per cent.

In gravity dams, 10 kN of anchoring force acting perpendicularly to the

foundations ( = 0), can take the place of 0.5 m 3 of concrete (gravitational
force, 12 kN), assuming a coefficient of friction, / , of 0.65; the amount of
concrete replaced f o r / = 0.75 is 0.6 m 3 (gravitational force, 14 kN). If the
anchoring forces make an angle of 15 with the perpendicular, and oppose the
horizontal load force, 10 kN of anchoring force take the place of 0.73 m 3
of concrete (17.2 kN gravitational force), and 0.82 m 3 of concrete (19.4 kN

544

gravitational force), for / values of 0.65 and 0.75, respectively (Fig. 29-2).
In multiple dams, the economy in the use of concrete achieved by anchoring the structure into the bedrock is relatively less, because in this case
stability is partly assured by the vertical component of the hydrostatic
pressure on the retaining screen. If the profile of the dam is to be made more
slender, this component is reduced and must be replaced by anchoring

2.00 t.00
6.00 8.00
economy in concrete M N

10.00

Fig. 29-2. Economy of concrete in a gravity dam,

according to the magnitude of the anchoring
force applied

forces. Thus the anchoring must replace not only the gravitational effect of
the structural concrete, but also that of the water. The latter force can be
augmented at very little extra cost, by increasing the area of the upstream
dam face. (The construction of an oblique screen, its shuttering in particular,
is more expensive than that of a more erect screen). As an example, let us
consider an anchored multiple dam of height 50 m, span 25 m, upstream
face gradient 0.6 to 1.0, anchoring face 88 MN in a direction normal to the
foundation plane (or 64 MN if the direction of the anchors makes an angle
of 15 with the normal to the foundation plane), coefficient of friction, 0.75.
In this case the saving of concrete in the construction of the dam amounts
to 1,950 m 3 . If the coefficient of friction is taken as 0.65, then the anchoring
forces would need to be 96 MN (normal), or 68 MN (at an angle of 15
from the normal) to obtain the same economy. Thus it appears that even
in the most favourable circumstances an economy of only 7.2 kN of masonry
(0.3 m 3 of concrete) is gained per 10 kN of anchoring force. Even if the
reinforced concrete of a multiple dam is more expensive than the plain
concrete of a gravity dam, it is clear that the savings to be gained by anchoring

545

multiple dams do not reach the same proportions as those obtainable in

gravity dams (Table 29-1). However, the relative economy gained even in
multiple dams is considerable (16 per cent, in the above example).
TABLE 29-1
Reduction in the capital cost of concrete dams as a result of anchoring the structure
Inclination
of anchoring
forces from the
vertical

Magnitude
of anchoring
forces
[lOkN/m]

Saving
of concrete
[m 3 /m]

Economy
[per cent.
reduction of cost]

Gravity dam
= 0.72
i = 0.77

0
15

107
78

100
100

5.9
6.5

Gravity dam
-= 0.55
i = 0.60

0
15

520
380

312
312

13.6
16.0

Multiple arch dam

= 0
0
i = 1.00

352
256

77
77

6.1
9.4

Type of dam

An important aspect of the anchoring of multiple arch dams is that the

retaining screen can be constructed with a reduced gradient, (see Fig. 24-2)
and can therefore be cast in sliding shuttering without costly support
scaffolding. This reduces the cost of the concreting work.
In the final assessment of the economic contribution of anchoring, on the
basis of which the optimum relationship between anchoring forces and the
weight of the dam structure is determined, account must also be taken of
local circumstances which affect the cost of concreting. Furthermore, the
unit cost of concrete in anchored dams is increased by the fact that the
smaller volume of concrete used in an anchored dam still incurs the same
costs in terms of site equipment, etc. Also, the shuttering area of more
slender structures is proportionately larger than that of plain gravity dams.
It is evident, however, from the relative costs of working with concrete and
establishing anchoring forces, that the maximum extent to which the weight
of concrete can be replaced by anchoring forces will always be determined
by the strength characteristics of the bedrock (see Fig. 24-9).
At present in Czechoslovakia, the cost of establishing a unit of anchoring
force (1 kN) is approximately 50 per cent, of the cost of archiving the same
force by means of the weight of material. In other countries, the cost of anchoring forces is about one third of the cost of structural weight. As much as 50 per

546

cent, or more of the mass of a structure can be substituted by anchoring

forces. Thus on the Allt-na-Lairige Dam in Great Britain, the construction
cost was reduced by 17 per cent, as a result of the use of anchoring, and on
the St. Michel Dam in France the reduction in cost was as much as 20 per
cent., comparing with the cost of a traditional design. This economy was
obtained purely by cutting down on the expenditure of concrete (see Section 24.3).
When the feasibility of making a dam profile more slender is studied,
consideration must be made of the difficulties which may be created, in the
design of spillways, for example. By building a cantilever structure for the
spillway of the Catagunya Dam (see Fig. 24-22), the expenditure on shuttering, scaffolding, and precast elements was undoubtedly increased, contributing to an overall increase in the cost of the concrete work. However, such an
increase as this represents only a small fraction of the sum which can be
saved by anchoring.
Where anchoring is applied, the foundations of concrete dams can be
laid on less strong bedrock. This advantage cannot be asserted generally
without some difficulty. Assuming the correctness of the design, anchoring
promotes a more uniform distribution of stress over the entire foundation
area, and so reduces the maximum possible stress. Anchors bring about
a prestressing of the rock, which totally alters its behaviour (see Fig. 24-28).

I
L Z_

^%^^^^|

\H

Fig. 29-3. Securing of the floor

of an underground railway station
by anchoring into the substrata
1 anchored floor, 2 additional
thickness that would have been
required to secure an unanchored
floor against uplift,
3 underground (Milanese) wall,
4 extension of walls for
unanchored floor, 5 roof
structure

The economic advantage of anchoring is particularly great where structures

are secured against vertical displacement. If, for example, the floor of an
underground railway station (Fig. 29-3) is secured against uplift by increasing
the thickness of the floor by a value, t' (calculated according to Chapter 2),
the level of the foundation base has to be lowered by a similar amount. This
increases the uplift, U, so that the effective weight of masonry needed to

547

stabilize the structure is decreased by a value equal to the weight of the extra
displaced water.
Assuming that h = 10.0 m, t = 1.5 m, mv = 1.2, yv = 10 kN, and yb =
= 23 kN/m 3 ), the required increase in the thickness of the bottom
will be h' = 7.78 m, that is, the added weight of the structure will need to
be G' = 176 kN/m 2 , while the anchoring force required to stabilize the structure will be P = 83.8 kN/m 2 . The economy of forces
realized by anchoring the structure is thus 91.8 kN/m 2 , ar approximately
50 per cent, of the gravitational force exerted by the thickened bottom.
Proportionally expressed, the financial economy is about the same as the
economy of forces, if it is supposed that the cost of establishing force by
anchoring is equal to the cost of setting up gravitational force. The latter is
usually the case where anchoring is applied in saturated loose soils. In many
situations, however, the cost of establishing anchoring forces is the lower,
and the financial economy is thus further increased.
A particularly significant reduction in the volume of construction work
is obtained when dry docks and similar structures are reconstructed using
anchorage instead of the classical methods. In the reconstruction of a dry
dock at Cartagena, for example, it was necessary to lower the bottom by 2 m
(see Fig. 2-2). This was achieved by taking away a 2 m-thick layer of concrete
from the bottom, and stabilizing the weakened bottom by applying an
anchoring force of 55.5 kN/m 2 . By the classical approach, it would have
been necessary to take away the entire thickness of the bottom, excavate the
soil for the new bottom to a depth of 4.9 m below the existing foundation
base, and build a new bottom 6.9 m thick (see Chapter 2). When the volumes
of material in the two construction designs are compared, it appears that the
application of a single 1 MN anchor substitutes for the removal of 45 m 3
of old concrete, the excavation of 82 m 3 of ground and the preparation of
120 m 3 of new concrete. It is obvious from this comparison that the reconstruction carried out by the classical method would be at least five times
more costly than reconstruction with the use of anchorage. The same ratio
applies in the saving of time taken to carry out the reconstruction.
In some structural systems anchoring represents a significant part of the
cost. This is apparent from a summary of the construction cost of anchored
sheet piling installed to contain earth pressure, recorded during recent years
in the German Federal Republic:
a)
b)
c)
d)

materials supplied for sheet piling

materials supplied for anchoring
construction of sheet piling
total anchoring work

approx.
approx.
approx.
approx.

45 per
25 per
20 per
10 per

cent.
cent.
cent.
cent.

In view of the high cost of materials, careful planning and optimum

548

utilization of anchoring structures based on reliable calculations, are essential

for maximizing economy.
By means of anchoring, considerable economies can be achieved in opencast ore mines and pit quarries, because their slopes can then be made
steeper. For example, in a quarry 200 m deep an increase in the steepness
of the slope from 45 to 50 represents an economy of approximately
3,000 dollars per metre along the quarry face, according to Canadian sources [8]. This amount is the cost difference achieved by anchoring a steeper
slope. If the steeper gradient also creates the possibility of exploiting
material from safety buttresses, the economy is still higher.
A detailed cost-benefit analysis enables the most economically favourable
gradient to be determined for an anchored slope, as shown in Table 29-11.
This Table was compiled by Barron et al. [8] for an open-cast mine of total
height 150 m, in rock with a permanently stable gradient of 37. The assumed
anchoring system involves 10 m-high terrace cuttings with reinforced concrete
load-distributing sills between the anchor heads, and a welded wire grid
covering the entire slope.
TABLE 29-11
Cost reduction per metre width achieved by anchoring a slope
Slope
angle

Saving in removal of material

[m 3 ]

40
45
50
55
60

1,570
3,760
5,600
7,200
8,610

metric tons

46.5
113.0
166.5
214.0
256.0

Cost of removal
without
anchoring
[US doll.]

Cost of removal
with anchoring
[US doll.]

Economy
[US doll.]

1,560
3,780
5,580
7,180
8,580

1,010
1,390
2,450
4,350
6,260

550
2,390
3,150
2,830
2,320

In the above example the optimum gradient of the anchored slope is

between 50 and 55. If the characteristics of the rock permit omission of the
load-distributing sills and wire grid between the anchors, the economy per
metre along the slope would be increased by a further 40 per cent.

29.2 ECONOMIES IN U N D E R G R O U N D S T R U C T U R E S

Direct cost benefits can easily be demonstrated when galleries and tunnels
in otherwise identical conditions are strengthened with bolts instead of the
classical wooden or steel supports. The same results can be achieved with less

549

material and labour on account of the greater efficiency of the anchoring

forces in the rock.
In the Ostrava-Karvin coal fields in Czechoslovakia it was found that
securing the roof of a mine entrance of trapezoidal cross-section (3.20 x 2.10m)
by bolt anchorage (4 SK6 wedge bolts spaced 1 m apart in a line), cost about
380 Kcs less than supporting the roof with a steel arch. Such a cost reduction
arises principally from the material saved and the reduced area of rock
removal. In mines, steel supports can be removed and re-used when the
deposits have been exhausted, whilst in tunnels the temporary steelwork is
usually covered by the concrete lining and is lost. The use of bolts is therefore
even more economic in the latter circumstances.
A comparison between the labour requirements and costs for a classical
support using sets, and those for permanent bolt anchorage in galleries was
carried out in the San Cristobal ore mine in Peru [123]. The results apply
generally. Galleries (2.4 x2.1 m) were driven into saturated phyllites, which
were initially supported by 20 cm-diameter prop supports every 1.5 m. The
work achieved by two men in one 8-hour shift amounted to the erection of
one set. After some time, however, the timber support had to be supplemented
or replaced, and at a later date permanent bolt anchorage was successfully
installed under the same conditions. This anchorage consisted of prestressed
bolts 1.8 m long, positioned in the gallery roof in lines with 5 bolts per line
and an inter-bolt spacing of 1.5 m. The preparation of the grout, the introduction of the grout into the boreholes using the Perfo system, and the fixing
of the bolts, were all done manually. In an eight-hour shift a gang of three
men fitted an average of 30 bolts, including drilling and prestressing. This
represented an advance of 11 metres along the gallery. In sections of more
weathered rock the bolts were combined with wire netting, and the progress
was slowed down to 7 to 8 m per shift (about 30 m 2 of roof). A comparison
of the costs of both methods, expressed per unit of reinforcement (1.5 metres
along the gallery), is given in Table 29-III.
The bolt anchorage was quicker to install, more durable and cheaper,
and therefore more economical overall.
As another example, a cost analysis for the reinforcement of a water
gallery in New York (after L. Rabcewicz [172]) is given in Table 29-IV. An
arch steel support {type A) was initially used as a temporary support for a rock
face, but later, at the suggestion of the Swedish Sentab Co., it was replaced
by a temporary bolt anchorage with a mechanical base (type B). A permanent
bolt anchorage combined with a surface lining of reinforced gunned concrete
10 cm thick was proposed as an alternative (type C). It can be seen from the
Table that, per metre of tunnel excavation, the cost was reduced by 30 per
cent, with the temporary bolt anchorage, and by 42 per cent, with the
anchored lining of gunned concrete relative to the cost of using steel supports.

550

The design of the type C reinforcement did not, however, take into account
the unfavourable hydraulic conditions for the thin concrete lining, sprayed
on the uneven rock face.
The differences in cost among different methods of securing the excavations for large underground caverns (for example those for hydro-electric
power stations) can be very considerable. In the course of the work for the
TABLE 29-111
Comparison of costs of different support systems in galleries of the San Cristobal mine [123]
(in US dollars)
Item

Jamb timbering
(I jamb)

Bolt anchorage
(I line)

Material
Manufacture
Transport
Installation
Total
Maintenance
Total

31.60
2.61
1.28
7.76
43.25(100%)
39.40
82.65(100%)

21.80
1.55
0.10
4.60
28.05 (63 %)

31.30(70%)

28.05 (33 %)

Anchoring with wire

netting

31.30(37%)

TABLE 29-IV
Comparison of costs of different types of reinforcement for a water-supply tunnel
in New York (In Swedish kronor, 1957 [172];>
Item

Urht

Unit cost

Type of reinforcement
B

Mechanical bolts
r.c. bolts
working time
rock breaking
concrete
formwork
gunite
steel centering
steel sections
timber
wire netting
Total cost

pcs
pcs
h
m3
m3
m3
m3
kg
kg
m3
kg

12.00
15.20
10.00
58.00
87.00
7.00
15.00
1.40
0.80
250.00
1.00

quant.

cost

quant.
4.5

54

137
15.5
4.1
12

1,370
899
356
84

108
14
2.6
12

1,080
812
226
84

170
350
0.1

240
280
25

48

38

30

24

3
2,297

3
1,894

3,254

cost

quant.

cost

4.5
97
13

68
970
754

75

551

underground hydro-electric power station at Lipno (Czechoslovakia),

progress on the full excavation for the main cavern was analysed, and the
securing of the walls by means of concrete slabs anchored in short galleries
(as used in similar earlier projects) was compared with bolt anchorage. Both
methods allowed the entire cavern to be kept free for mechanized breaking
of the core, as demanded; nevertheless, the bolt anchorage represented an
economy of 13.5 million Kcs in the saving of time alone.

29.3 INCREASE OF SAFETY

The anchoring technique, on account of its well-defined static function

and behaviour, is safer than other support systems in terms of the number
of accidents that occur on construction sites. Thus, for example, in the
West Virginian coal mine in the USA, an average of 148 fatal accidents per
year were caused by loose rock prior to the introduction of bolt anchorage.
After the introduction of bolt anchorage, this number was reduced by nearly
50 per cent. [208]. A modern mine in Kentucky experienced an 80 per cent.
reduction in the number of accidents of all kinds, and a 70 per cent, increase
in productivity after the introduction of bolt anchorage.
A couple of very important factors leading to increased safety, are the
proving of the anchor's load-bearing capacity in the initial prestressing, and
the permanent control of the prestressing. This means that the functional
capacity of every anchor to carry the required tensile force is verified in
advance at the fixing site. Such a degree of operative control is outstanding,
not only in the construction industry, but indeed in any other industrial
activities. The only problem that may have to be considered is the possibility
of deterioration of the load-carryingxapacity of the anchor with time (either
in the ground or in the supported structure). This possibility must be reduced
to a minimum by careful design based on a thorough knowledge of the
ground and its behaviour under permanent load from the anchor. Careful
construction of the anchor and its protection against corrosion is also important. In the interests of extra safety it may be desirable to arrange for
permanent monitoring of the anchor prestressing (see Chapters 17, 19), and
eventual replacement of individual failed anchors. The high safety record
of anchored structures is largely attributable to the large number of
load-bearing elements used, the mutual interconnection of these, and
the reserve margin of load-bearing capacity. If one anchor fails, its
neighbours take over its function.

REFERENCES

[1] Aichhorn, J.: Ausziehversuche mit abnormal kurzen Perfo-Dbelankern bzw. Steinankern. Osten. Ingenieur-Zeitschrift 7, 1964
[2] Antill, J. M.: Relaxation Characteristics of Prestressing Tendons. Civ. Eng. Trans.
Inst. Eng. Aust., 7(2), 1965
[3] Applications of Rock Mechanics in Hydro-Electric Development in Tasmania. The
Hydro-Electric Commission of Tasmania 1969
[4] A Prestressed Dam in Scotland. Concrete 7, 1966
[5] Arredi, F.: Techniques for Rock Characteristics at Two Dams in the Central Apennines
(Italy). VHth International Congress on Large Dams, Edinburgh 1964
[6] Arrigo, M. et al.: Confortement des fondations de l'eglise de Tourny. Travaux 78,
1978
[7] Banks, J. A.: Allt-na-Lairige Prestressed Concrete Dam. Proc. ICE 6, 1957
[8] Barron, K., Coates, D. F., Gyenge, M.: Artificial Support of Rock Slopes. Mining
Research Centre, Dep. of Energy, Mines and Resources, Report 228, Ottawa 1970
[9] Barraud, Y.: Fondations de pylones classiques habanes, recherche experimentale.
Bull. Soc. Franc. Electr., 7 e serie, Tome VIII, 94, 1958
[10] Bauer, K. H.: Injektionsanker und seine Anwendung. Baumasch.-Bautech. 6, 1966
[11] Bauer, K. H.: Verfahren zum Herstellen von Erdankern. Strassen- u. Tiefbau 8, 1968
[12] Bauernfeind, P., Mller, F., Mller, L.: Tunnelbau unter historischen Gebuden
in Nrnberg. Rock Mechanics, Suppl. 6, 1978
[13] Bauzil, V.: Vulnerabilite des barrages. Dispositions prises pour assurer leur securite.
Travaux 78, 1978
[14] Bazant, Z.: Methods of Foundation Engineering. Developments in Geotechnical
Engineering. Volume 24, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1979
[15] Bendel, H., Weber, E.: Erdanker System Stump Bohr A. G. Schweiz. Bauztung. 6,
1966
[16] Berardi, G.: Comportamento degli ancorraggi immersi in terreni diversi. Univ. Genoa,
Inst. Constr. Sc. Series III, No. 60, 1967
[17] Berardi, G.: Predimento per la bonifica e sostegno dei pendii a mezzo di chiodatura
ed ancorraggi. 3rd Conf. on Problems of Foundation Engineering, Turin, 1972
[18] Bloch, J., Mendelson, E.: Precast Tied Back Retaining Wall. Civil Engineering 12,
1976
[19] Bloor, R. L.: Safety and Economy in Concrete Gravity Dams of the Corps of Engineers. Ve Congres des Grands Barrages, Paris 1955
[20] Blum, H.: Beitrag zur Berechnung von Bohlwerken. Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 1951
[21] Brackemann, F.: Verankerung von Stahlspundwnden mittels gerahmter Stahl- und
MV-Pfhler. Baumasch.-Bauteeh. 6, 1966
[22] Brazil-Anchored Banks Stabilise Hillside Highway Cut. Constr. Industry International,
5, 1979
[23] Breth, H., Stroh, D.: Das Tragverhalten von Injektionsankern in Ton. Vortrge der
Baugrundtagung in Dsseldorf 1970. Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Erd- und Grundbau
e. V. Essen, 1971

553
[24] Breth, H., Stroh, D.: Ursachen der Verformung in Boden beim Aushub tiefer Baugruben und konstruktive Mglichkeiten zur Verminderung der Verformung von verankerten Baugruben. Bauingenieur 51, Springer Berlin, 1976
\,
[25] Brillant, J., Jorge, G. R.: Essai de deux tirants de 250 tonnes ancres dans les sables et
graviers. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols et des Travaux de Fondation. VIF Congres
International Mexico 1969
[25a] Bruder, P. H.: Sicherheitstechnische berwachung von veranherten Bauwerken. Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft fr Boden- und Felsmechanik Nr. 102/1981
[26] Bujak, M., Moraczewski, K., Wolski, W.: Zabezpieczenie zapory w Presnej przed
dzialaniem osuwiska (Securing of the Presna Dam Against Landslide). Gosp. wodna 12,
1967
[27] Bukovansky, M., Piercy, N. H.: High Road Cuts in a Rock Mass with Horizontal
Bedding. Dames & Moore, Denver, Colorado 1975
[28] Bustamante, M. et al.: Behaviour of Prestressed Ground Anchors in Plastic Clay. Bull.
Liaison Lab. P. et Ch. Special Issue VIE, April 1978
[29] Camski, M.: Relaxion des cables de deux centrales nucleaires. Annales de VInst. Tech.
du Bat. et des Travaux Publics 203, 1964
[30] Caron, C : Ancrages definitifs. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols et des Travaux de Fondation. VIP Congres International Mexico 1969
[31] Carriere, M. R.: Systeme de precontrainte. Baudin-Chteauneuf. Annales de VInst.
Techn. du Bat. et des Travaux Publics 214, 1965
[32] Coates, D. F., Yu, Y. S.: Three Dimensional Stress Distribution Around a Cylindrical
Hole and Anchor. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Rock Mechanics, Belgrade, 1970
[33] Colebatch, G. T., Wilkins, J. K.: Design of the Cataguny Prestressed Dam. VIP Congres des Grands Barrages, Roma 1961
[34] Comte, Ch.: L'utilisation des ancrages en rocher et en terrain meuble. Bull. Suise Rom.
22, 1965
[35] Cording, E. J., Mahar, J. W., Bierley, G. S.: Observations for Shallow Chambers
in Rock. Symposium Field Measurements in Rock Mechanics, Zrich, 1977
[36] Corrosion Protection for the Forth Road Bridge. Building Industries and Scottish
Architect 5, 1961
[37] Coyne, A.: Nouvelles applications de la synthese statique des constructions. Genie
Civil II, 1963
[38] Crivelli, G.: Application de la methode de la reprise en sous-oeuvre la construction
de murs de soutenement ancres en terrain meuble. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols et
des Travaux de Fondation. VIP Congres International Mexico 1969
[39] Custom Rig Rides Rails to Speed Tieback Wall. Engineering News-Record 19,
1976
[40] Delisle, J. P.: Prestressed Concrete in Switzerland Ouvrages remarquabies autres que
ponts et bailments. Schweiz. Bauzeitung 96, 1978
[41] Denkhaus, H. G.: Rock mass classification as a means of predicting rock wall stability.
Symposium Protection against Rock Fall, Katowice, 1973
[42] Dolezalov, M.: A contribution to the Common Application of Field Measurements
and the Finite Element Method. Symposium Field Measurements in Rock Mechanics, Zrich, 1977
[43] Droge, L.: Talsperre Rauchenbach. Besondere Mitteilungen zum IX. Intern. Talsperrenkongress. Berlin. VEB Verlag fr Bauwesen 1967
[44] Duncan, G,: The Construction of the Allt-na Lairige Dam in the North of Scotland.
Civil and Struct. Eng. Rev. 1956
[45] Dyckerhoff & Widmann AG.: Dywidag Berichte, Sonderheft 3, Mnchen, 1976

554
[46] Dzhioyev, L. N.: Eksperimentalnye issledovania ankernykh kreplenyi v glinistykh
gruntakh (Experimental research of anchor fixings in loamy soils) Ghidrotekhnitcheskoe
stroitelstvo 9, 1956
[47] Eckert, O.: Consolidation des massifs rocheux par ancrage de cables. Sols-Soils 1819,
1966
[48] Edeling, H., Schulz, W.: Die Neue sterreichische Tunnelbauweise im Frankfurter
U-Bahnbau. Der Bauingenieur 47, 1972
[49] Elfman, S.: Design of a Tunnel in a Rock Burst Zone. Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Large Permanent Openings, Oslo 1969
[50] Empfehlungen des Arbeitsausschusses Ufereinfassungen". 3. Ausgabe. Berlin, W. Ernst
1964
[51] Engineers discuss concrete pile testing. Ground Engineering, London, September
1975
[52] Evans, R. H.: Application of Prestressed Concrete to Water Supply and Drainage.
Public Health Engineering Division Meeting 3rd May 1955. Public Health Paper 12,
1955
[53] Feddersen, I.: Verpressanker im Lockergestein. Bauingenieur 49, 1974
[54] Fergusson, F., Lancaster-Jones, P.: Testing the Efficiency of Grouting Operations at
Dam Sites. VHIth International Congress on Large Dams, Edinburgh 1964
[55] 50-ton Ground Anchor in London Clay. Civil Engng PWR 64, 1969
[56] Foundation Treatment of Kawamata Dam. VHIth International Congress on Large Dams, Edinburgh 1964
[57] Fransois, M., Augeard, H., Hingant, P.: Deux examples d'ouvrages de soutenement
en site difficile sur l'autoroute A8 NiceRoquebrune. Travaux, 1980
[58] Freire, F. C. V., Souza, R. J. B.: Lining, support and instrumentation of the cavern
for the Paolo Alfonso IV power station, Brazil. Symposium Tunnelling '79, London,
1979
[59] Geisen, P.: Progres qualitatifs recents des revetements d'etancheite. Annales ITBTP,
1978
[60] Gerecke, W.: Das strukturelle Verhalten zweier vorgespannter Gewichtsstaumauern.
Besondere Mitteilungen zum IX. Intern. Talsperrenkongress. BerliTi, VEB Verlag fr
Bauwesen 1967
[61] Gerhart, P. C.: Rock Anchorage and Reinforcement with Tendons and Bolts. University
of Colorado, C. E587, 1978
[62] Golder, H. Q., Sanderson, A. B.: Bridge Foundation Preloaded to Eliminate Settlement. Civil Engng 10, 1961
[63] Goodman, R. E.: Analysis of Structures in Jointed Rock. Report of Investigation,
University of Berkeley, California, 1967
[64] Goodman, R. E.: Methods of Geological Engineering in Discontinuous Rocks. West
Publishing Co., New York 1976
[65] Goodman, R. E., Ewoldsen, H.: Analysis of Structures in Jointed Rock. University
of Berkeley 1967
[66] GotthardStrassenTunnel. Bulletin der Bauherrschaft Kantone Uri und Tessin,
Schweiz, 1976
[67] Ground Anchors in Chalk. Roads R. C. 541, 1968
[68] Habenicht, H.: The Influence of Shock Waves on the Stability of Rock-Bolt Anchorage.
Society of Mining Engineers of AIME, Reprint No. 66FM17, New York 1967
[69] Habenicht, H.: Anker und Ankerungen zur Stabilisierung des Gebirges. Springer
Verlag, Wien, 1976
[70] Hamon, M., Schlosser, F.: Surelevation et construction par etapes de barrages. Quelques

555
examples de problemes de raccordement XIIP Congres des grands Barrages, Q 48,
R. 15, New Delhi 1979
[71] Hanna, T. H.: Notes on the Use and Behaviour of Ground anchors in Civil Engineering.
Proceedings of the Second seminary on soil mechanics and foundation engineering.
Lodz 1970
[72] Hanna, T. H., Sparks, R., Yilmaz, M.: Anchor Behaviour in Sand. Journal of the Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Division, SM 11, Nov. 1972
[73] Hanna, T. H., West, A. S.: Diaphragm walls and anchorages. A review of the ICE conference papers, Ground Engineering, London, January, 1975
[74] Heltzen, A. M., Moxon, S., Schach, R.: Support Considerations for a Railway Tunnel
in Norway. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Large Permanent Underground Openings, Oslo 1969
[75] Hentschel, G.: Injektionszuganker fr die Hotelbaugrubs Alexanderplatz Berlin.
Bauplanung-Bautechnik 12, 1967
[76] Herbst, Th., Kern, G.: Besondere Aspekte moderner Ankerkonstruktionen. Deutschsprachiger technischer Beitrag zum 8. Inter. Spannbeton-Kongress, London 1978
[77] Heuze, F. E., Barbour, T. G.: Stability Analysis for Rock Structures. Proceedings 19th
Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Stateline, Nevada, May 1978
[78] Heuze, F. E., Goodman, R. E.: Numerical and Physical Modelling of Reinforcement
Systems for Tunnels in Jointed Rock. Technical report No. 16, Omaha District, Corps
of Engineers, 1973
[79] Hilton, A. R.: The Construction of High Strength Under-reamed Anchorages in Soft
Ground. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols et des Travaux de Fondation. VIIe Congres
International Mexico 1969
[80] Hobst, L.: Kotvenie do skalnych vrtov Zaistenie blokov 5. az 8. priehrady u Viru
(Anchoring in Rock BoreholesSecuring of Nos. 5 and 8 blocks of the Vir Dam).
Report of the VUIS Bratislava, 1952
[81] Hobst, L.: Pokus s napinnim kabelu zakotveneho v skalnim podlozi (Experiment
with the Stressing of Cable Anchored in Bedrock). Stavba 5, 1955
[82] Hobst, L.: Kotvenie do podloznych vrstiev strkov (Anchoring in Gravel Substrata
Beds). Report of the VUIS Bratislava, Dept. Brno 1958
[83] Hobst, L.: Kotvenie stavebnych objektov do sypkych zemin (Anchoring of Structures
in Loose Soils). Stavba 10, 1959
[84] Hobst, L.: Pokusne zakotveni stozr rozvodny VVN (Experimental Anchoring of
Masts for Extra-HT Switchgear). Final Report VUIS TP-8259, Dept. Brno 1960
[85] Hobst, L.: Vyvojove konstrukce vodnich staveb (Developmental Structures of Water
Constructions). Praha, SNTL 1962
[86] Hobst, L.: Kotvenie do podlozia (Anchoring in Subsoil). Bratislava, published by
VUIS, Dept. Brno 1962
[87] Hobst, L.: Increasing Dam Stability by Prestressing the Soil Foundation. VHP Congres
des Grands Barrages, Edinburgh 1964
[88] Hobst, L.: Anchoring and Prestressing of Dams. Proceedings Large Dams in the
Carpathian Flysch of Moravia. Brno 1969
[89] Hobst, L.: Kotveni prehrady Bystricka do podlozi (Anchoring of Bystficka Dam in
Bedrock). Inzenyrske stavby 5, 1969
[90] Hobst, L.: Stabilizace svah predpetim (Stabilization of Slopes by Prestress). Inzenyrske
stavby 910, 1969
[91] Hoek, E., Bray, J. W.: Rock Slope Engineering. Institution of Mining and Metallurgy,
2nd Edition, London 1977
[92] Hollos, A.: Forum des halles de Paris. Travaux 3, 1979

556
[93] Huder, J., Arnold, R.: Die Berechnung der freien Ankerlnge bei verankerten Baugrubenwnden unter Bercksichtigung der neuen SIA Norm. Referate der Studientagung Boden und Felsanker, SIA Dokumentation 27, Zrich, 1978.
[94] Hugon, A., Costes, A.: Le boulonnage des roches en souterrain. Paris, Edition Eyrolles
1959
[95] International Society of Rock Mechanics: Suggested Methods for Rockbolt Testing.
Committee on Field Tests, Document No. 2, Lisboa, 1974
[96] Jaeger, Ch.: The Development of the Science of Rock Mechanics. British Power Engng
5, 1962
[97] Jaeger, J. C , Cook, N . G. W.: Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics. Methuen Ltd.,
London,1969
[98] Janbu, N.: Application of composite slip surfaces for stability analyses. European
Conf. on Stability of Earth Slopes, Vol. III., Stockholm, 1954
[99] Jelinek, R., Ostermayer, H.: Verpressanker in Bden. Bauingenieur 51, 1976
[99a] Jirovec, P.: Wechselwirkung zwischen Anker und Gebirge. Rock Mechanics, Suppl. 7,
Springer-Verlag, Wien, 1978
[100] John, K. W.: Graphical Stability Analysis of Slopes in Jointed Rock. Journal Soil
Mech. a. Found. Div. ASCE, V. 94, 1968
[101] John, K. W.: Engineering Analysis of Three-dimensional Stability Problems Utilizing
the Reference Hemisphere. Proc. 2nd Congress Inst. Soc. Rock Mech. Vol. 2, Belgrade
1970
[102] Jorge, G. R.: Le tirant IRP veinjectable special pour terrains meubles, karstiques ou
a faible caracteristiques geotechniques. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols et des Travaux
de Fondation. VIP Congres International Mexico 1969
[103] Kananyan, A. S.: Eksperimentalnoe issledovanye ustoytchivosti ankernykh put (Experimental Investigation of the Stability of Anchoring Plates).
[104] Kananyan, A. S., Nikitenko, M. I., Sobolovsky, Yu. A., Sukhodoev, V. N . : Calculation
of Anchor Foundations Using Approximate Model Testing. 9th Intern. Conference
of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, 1977
[105] Kennedy, B. A., Talbot, R., Wade, E. J.: What's new in mining in 1972. World Mining.
June 25, 1973
[106] Khaona, M., Montel, B., Civard, A., Langa, R.: Les tirants du barrage des Cheurfas:
30 ans du controle et reinforcement recent. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols et des Travaux
de Fondation. VIP Congres International Mexico 1969
[107] Kozlov, S. M.: Issledovanye raboty ankernykh ustroystv pri deystvii na nikh gorizontalnykh nagruzok (Investigation of Anchorage Under the Effect of Horizontal Loads).
Osnov. fund, i mekh. gruntov 6, 1967
[108] Kranz, E.: ber die Verankerung von Spundwnden. 2. Aufl., Verlag W. Ernst u. Sohn,
Berlin 1953
[109] Kratochvilla, J.: Anwendung und Prfung vorgespannter Anker beim Bau des Donaukraftwerkes Aschach. sterr. Zeitschrift fr Elektrizitt swirtschajt 5, 1962
[110] Krey, H.: Erddruck, Erdwiderstand und Tragfhigheit des Baugrundes. Ernst & Sohn,
Berlin, 1936
[111] Lacour, J., Delmas, F., Bustamante, M.: Essais de tirants d'ancrage sceles dans une
argile plastique. Annales ITBTP 6, 1978
[112] Lalande, M.: Diversite des applications du beton precontraint. Trcvaux 2, 1959
[113] Lang, T. A.: Theory and Practice of Rock Bolting. AIME-Transaction 220, 1961
[114] Lauffer, H.: Gebirgsklassifizierung im Stollenbau. Geologie und Bauwesen, 24/1, 1958
[115] Le Systeme de precontraint Interspan, SEEE, Freyssinet, BBR-B, Coignet. Construction
78, 1965

557
[116] Les barrages du Mont-Larron. Travaux 8, 1958
[117] Les ouvrages souterrains de l'amenagement de Montezic. Tunnels et ouvrages souterrains
29,1978
[118] Liebenberg, A. C : Gouritz River Bridge, Mossel Bay. Concrete)Beton 9, 1978
[119] Limingoja, E.: Prestressed Rock Anchors. Rakennus tekniikta, Spec, publication FIP
Prestressed Concrete Construction in Finland 6, 1970
[120] Littlejohn, G. S., Bruce, A. A.: Rock Anchors State of the Art. Part 13. Ground
Engineering, 19751976
[121] Londe, P., Vigier, G., Vermeringer, R.: Stability of Slopes Graphical Methods.
/. SoilMech. and Found. Div. ASCE, 96, 1970
[122] Losinger Ltd.: Soil and Rock Anchors Examples from Practice, Berne, 1978
[123] Lucion, F.: Cerro Saves Money Using Cemented Rock Bolts in Phyllite at San Cristobal.
World Mining 11, 1969
[124] Lthi, P.: Anwendungsmglichkeiten vorgespannter Alluvialanker. Schweiz. Bauztg 11,
1967
[125] Mamontov, N., Kuznecov, K.: Informacionnyi listok No 2/37. Osnovnoy kriteri
samoankerovky pryadevoy armatury (Information Paper No 2/37. Criterion of Strength
Embedding). Lvov 1979
[126] Marcinkewich, E. A., Ephros, A. Z.: Dam Anchored to Foundation to Withstand
Floods. Civil Engineering ASCE 4, 1978
[127] Martini, H. J. et al.: Methods to Determine the Physical Properties of Rock. Vlllth
International Congress on Large Dams, Edinburgh 1964
[128] Mayfield, B., Bates, M. W., Snell, C : Resin Anchorage. Civil Engineering 3, 1978
[129] Mc Gregor, K.: The Drilling of Rock. C. R. Books Ltd., London 1967
[130] Mc Lean, D. C , Mc Kay, S. A.: Use of Resins in Mine Roof Support. SME Transactions, Vol.229, 1964
[131] Meissner, H.: Ankerpfhle ,,Mcnierbau". Baumasch.-Bautechn. 6, 1966
[132] Menard pressuremeter Interpretation and Application of Pressuremeter Test Results.
Sols Soils No 26, Paris, 1975
[133] Meyerhof, G. G., Adams, J. I.: The Ultimate Uplift Capacity of Foundations. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal 5, 1968
[134] Middleton, H.: Raising the Argal Dam. The Consulting Engineer 11, 1961
[135] Montmarin, A. de, Ter-Minassian, W.: Interet economique des differents types d'ouvrages du barrage composite de l'Oued Mellegue en Tunisie. Ve Ccngres des Grands Barrages, Paris 1955
[136] Morris, S. S.: Steenbras Dam Strengthened by Post-tensioning Cables. Civil Engng 2,.
1956
[137] Moye, D. G.: Rock Mechanics in the Investigation and Construction of T.l Underground Power Station, Snowy Mountains, Australia. Annual Meeting Geological
Society of America, St. Louis, November 1958
[138] Mschler, E., Matt, P.: Felsanker und Kraftmessanlage in der Kaverne Waldeck
II. Schweizerische Bauzeitung 90, 1972
[139] Mller, A. G., Haefeli, R.: Die Zugverankerurg im Baugrund unter besonderer Bercksichtigung der Fundationsprobleme des Freileitungsbaues. Bulletin SEV 21, 1953
[140] Muller, J.: Le barrage de Soulages sur le Gier. Travaux 5, 1973
[141] Muller, J. et al.: La protection contre la corrosion dans le btiment. I. partie: Corrosion
et protection des armatures du beton. Annales ITTP 9, 1978
[142] Muriel, J. A.: Placing of Anchorings of Great Length as Reinforcements for the Right
Bank Abutment of General Belgramo Dam in Cabra Corral. XIIP Congress on Large
Dams Q49, R 39 New Delhi 1979

558
[143] Mller, L.: Der Felsbau. Stuttgart, Enke 1. Band 1963 3. Band 1978
[144] Mller, H.: Erfahrungen mit Verankerung System BBRV in Fels und Lockergestein.
Schweizerische Bauzeitung 84, 1966
[145] Nendza, H.: ber die Tragfhigkeit von Zugpfhlen mit Fussverbreitung in Sandboden. Vortrge der Baugrundtagung in Mnchen 1966. Deutsche Gesellschaft fr
Erd- und Grundbau, Essen 1966
[146] Neubauer, F.: Vereinfachung fr die Verrechnung einfach verankerter Spundwnde
bei abgeschirmtem Erddruck. III. Bautechnik 3, 1939
[147] Niederhoff, A. E.: Concrete Dowels Anchor Cliff. Engng News-Record 10, 1960
[148] Nikitenko, M. I., Aleksandrov, V. D., Rokhlin, A. Z , Sirotinskij, L. M., Sasko, S. D.,
Silov, E. L.: Issledovanye roboty naklonnykh, cylindricheskikh ankerov dla kreplenya
ottyazhek opor VL. (Ascertaining of the Load Bearing Capacity of Inclined Cylindrical
Anchors Designed for Stabilization of VL Blocks). Energeticeskoe stroitelstvo 11, 1978
[149] Obert, L., Duvall, W. L: Rock Mechanics and the Design of Structures in Rock.
John Wiley Inc., New York, 1967
[150] Olaguibel, L., Fora, J., Madrigal, S.: Les travaux de consolidation du terrain de
fondation du barrage de la chute de Aldeadavia. VHP Congres International des Grands
Barrages. Edinburgh 1964
[151] Ollila, M.: Pedestrian Bridge at Porvoo. Prestressed Concrete in Finland 19741978.
Concr. Ass. of Finland, Helsinki 1978
[152] Ortlepp, W. D.: An Empirical Determination of the Effectiveness of Rockbolt Support
under Impulse Loading. Oslo, Proceedings of ISLPUO 1969
[153] Ostermayer, H.: Erdanker Tragverhalten und konstruktive Durchbildung. Vortrge
der Baugrundtagung in Dsseldorf, 1970. Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Erd- und Grundbau e.V., Essen 1971
[154] Ostermayer, H.: Construction, Carrying Behaviour and Creep Characteristics of
Ground Anchors. Diaphragm Walls and Anchorages, Paper 18, Institution of Civil
Engineers, London 1975
[155] Ostermayer, H., Scheele, F.: Research on Ground Anchors in Non-cohesive Soils.
Proc. of IXth Intern. Conf. Tokyo 1977
[156] Ott, J. C : Les ancrages en rochers ou dans le sol. Bull. Suisse Rom. 93, 1967
[157] Otta, L.: berwachung von verankerten Baugruben- und Hangsicherungen. Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft fr Boden- und Felsmechanik, Nr 92, Bern, 1975
[158] Otta, L.: Verankerte Elementwnde. Bulletin of Stump Bohr AG, Zurich
[159] Otta, L.: Messungen an verankerten Bauwerken. Referate der Studientagung SIA
Boden und Felsanker, Lausanne 1978
[160] Otta, L.: Stability Analysis of Tie-back Walls, Slopes, Dams and Strip Foundations.
3rd Intern. Conf. of Numerical Methods in Geotechnics, Aachen 1979
[161] Pacher, F.: Gebirgsklassifizierung fr den Tunnelbau. Ingenieurbro fr Geologie und
Bauwesen, Salzburg, 1973
[162] Panek, L. A.: Konstruktionsberlegungen bsi Anwendung von Gebirgsankern im
geschichteten Hangenden. Materials of 3rd Intern. Mining Congress in Salzburg
1963
[163] Parker, P. I.: The Raising of Dams with Particular Reference to the Use of Stressed
Cables. Proc. 6th Congress on Large Dams, New York, 1958
[164] Peck, R. B.: Stability of Natural Slopes. Proc. ASCE 93, 1967
[165] Peguigont, C. A., Proctor, P. W.: Injection Anchors Remove Wall from Critical Path.
Civ. Engng Publ. Works Rev. 12, 1967
[166] Pender, E. P., Hosking, A. D., Mattner, R. H.: Grouted Rock Bolts for Permanent
Support of Major Underground Works. Institute of Engineers, Australia 35, 1963

559
[167] Prescription pour l'essai de la determination du caractere d'adherence des armatures
de precontrainte. Materiaux et Constructions 3, 1970
[168] Protodjakonov, M. M.: Davienye gornykh porcd na rudnitchnuyu krep (Pressure of
rocks on supports in mines) 1907. See Dandurov, M. I.: Tonneli, Moskva 1952
[169] Protodjakonov, M. M. jr.: Mechanical Properties and Drillability of Rocks. Proc. 5th
Symposium on Rock Mechanics, University of Minnesota 1962
"170] Provost, A. G., Griswold, G. G.: Excavation and support of the Norad expansion
project. Symposium Tunnelling 79, London 1979
[171] Quast, D.: Erdanker aus einzelnen Betonsteinen. Betonwerk und Fertigtl-Techn. 45,
1979
[172] Rabcewicz, L.: Die Ankerung im Tunnelbau. Schweizerische Bauzeitung 75, Zrich,
1957
[173] Rabcewicz, L.: The New Austrian Tunnelling Method. Parts I, II, III, Water Power,
November, December 1964, January 1965
[174] Rabcewicz, L.: Die Neue sterreichische Tunnelbauweise. Der Bauingenieur 40, 1965
[175] Rabcewicz, L., Gosler, J., Hackl, E.: Die Bedeutung der Messung im Hohlraumbau.
Der Bauingenieur, 47, 1972
[176] Raisch, D.: Stabilittsuntersuchungen zur aufgelsten Elementwand im bindigen
Lockergestein. Bauingenieur 54, 1979
[177] Raman, T. S.: Anchoring Concrete Piles into Rock by Prestressing Cables. Eng. Concr.
Journal*, 1960
[178] Recommandations concernant la conception, le calcul, l'execution et le contrle des
tirants d'ancrage. IP edition. Ed. Eyrolles, Paris 1972
[179] Revazov, M. A., Postovoytova, T. K.: Ustoytchivost skalnykh massivov v bortakh
kanonov gornykh rek (Stability of Rock Masses on the Edges of Canyons of Mountain
Rivers). Gydrotekh. stroit. 1, 1968
[180] Robinson, K. E.: Grouted Rod and Multi-helix Anchors. Soc. Intern, de Mec. des Sols
et des Travaux de Fondation. VIIe Congres Intern. Mexico 1969
[181] Roth, Z.: Problemy horskeho tlaku skalnich masiv z hlediska geologic (Problems of
roof pressures of rock masses from the geological point of view.) Praha, NCSAV 1954
[182] Rousset, P.: Fessenheim du premier m 3 de beton au premier kWh. Travaux 4, 1978
[183] Roy, E., Hunt, T.: Retaining Walls Taking in from the Top. Civil Engineering ASCE73,
1978
[184] Ruffert, G.: Felssicherung im Torkret-Betonspritzverfahren. Tief-Ing.- u. Strassenbau 8,
1977
[185] Rurrner, A.: Anwendung von vorgespannten Felsankern (System BBRV) bei der
Erhhung der Spullersee-Talsperren. Schweiz. Bauztg. 4, 1966.
[186] Sandstrm, A.: Rock Anchors. Prestressed Concrete in Finland 19741978. Concr.
Ass. of Finland, Helsinki 1978
[187] Sarac, D.: Bearing Capacity of Anchor Foundations as Loaded by Vertical Force.
Institut za geotechniku i fundiranje gradevinskog fakulteta, Sarajevo 1975
[188] Scott, J. J.: A New Innovation in Rock Support-Friction Rock Stabilizers. Canadian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy Anual Meeting, Montreal, 1979
[188a] Scott, J. J.: Interior Rock Reinforcement Fixtures. 21st U.S. Symposium on Rock
Mechanics, University of Missouri-Rolla, 1980
[188b] Seelmeier, H.: Ingenieurgeologische Bemerkungen ber Kraftwerkskavernen in den
sterreichischen Alpen. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Large Permanent Underground Openings, Oslo 1969
[188c] Schach, R., Garshol, K., Heltzen, A. M.: Rock bolting. Pergamon Press, Oxford,
1979

560
[189] Schmidt, A. E.: Rock Anchors Hold TV Tower on Mt. Wilson. Civil Engng 1, 1956
[190] Schlke, E.: Die Durchfhrung von Sicherungsmassnahmen zur Verhinderung des
Absturzes des Mannerfelsens bei Passau. Die Bautechnik 5, 1960
[191] Schwarz, H.: Permanentverankerung einer 30 m hohen Sttzwand im Stuttgarter
Tonmergel durch korrosionsgeschtzte Injektionsanker, System Duplex. Die Bautechnik 9/1972
[192] Simpson, R. E.: Grouting Roof Bolts with Fast-setting Cements. Wld. Constr. 32,1979
[193] Sivko, R. I.: Primenenie ankerov v podpornykh stenakh i fundamentakhnastrojitelstve
vtorogo skluza Dneproges (Anchoring in retaining walls and foundation footings on
2nd sluice of the Dneproges Dam). Gidrotech. stroit. 7, 1979
[194] Smith, R. T.: The National Tower Testing Station. Water Power 10, 1966
[195] Stress Rods Tie Down Unstable Cut Slope. Roads and Streets 3, 1961
[196] Stdemann, 0 . : Neuere Erfahrungen bei der Verwendung von Stahl-Spundwnden.
Wasserwirtschaft 3, 1962
197] Svoboda, B.: Kotveni do pDdlozi jerbove drhy na stavbe vodniho dila Dalesice
(Anchoring of Crane Way on the Dalesice Water Project Site) Inzenyrske stavby 6,
1973
[198] Szaraniec, T.: Zdolnosc kotwiaca blokow szesciennych i prostopalosciennych w gruncie
piaszczystym (badania modelowe) (Anchoring Strength of Cubic and Prismatic Blocks
in Sandy Ground on Models). Gosp. wodna 2, 1966
[199] Talobre, J.: La statique du boulon d'ancrage dans les travaux au rocher. La Technique
Moderne Construction 12, 1957
[200] Talobre, J.: La mecanique des roches. Dunod 1957
[201] Takuski, S., Piechota, S.: Horizontal Bolting of Workings and Pillars Sides. Symposium
Protection against Rock Fall, Katowice, 1973
[202] Taylor, J. B.: Prestressed Granite Masonry for Retaining Wall. Civil Engng 1, 1961
[203] Terzaghi, K.: Large Retaining-Wall Tests. Engng News Record 1934
[204] Terzaghi, K., Peck, R. B.: Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. J. Wiley & Sons,
New York 1948, 1967
[205] Terzaghi, K., Richart, J.: Stresses in Rock about Cavities. Geotechnique 6, 1952
[206] The Avon Dam. Civil Engng and Public Works Review 11, 156
[207] Thiel, F. S.: Recent Developments in Roof Bolting and Roof Installation Procedure.
The Canadian Mining and Metallurgical Bulletin 10, 1964
[208] Thomas, E.: Stabilization of Rock by Bolting. New York, Reviews in Engineering
Geology, Vol. I, II, 1962
[209] Thomass, S.: Sicherungsmassnahmen fr den Drachenfels bei Bonn. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 8, 1977
[210] Thompson, C. J.: Laing Dam, East London. Concrete)Beton 9, 1978. / . of the Concrete
Society of Southern Africa
[211] Trost, H.: VIII. Internationaler Spannbeton-Kongress. Beitrge der deutschen Gruppe
der FIP- Bemerkenswerte Bauwerke Hochbau. Beton- und Stahlbetonbau 73, 1978
[212] Tunnels et ouvrages Souterrains, No. 31, Paris, 1979
[213] Turner, M. J.: Rock Anchors at Lock Kisborn. Ground Engng 10/1977
[214] Underwood, L. B.: Chalk Foundation at Four Major Dams in the Missouri River
Basin. VHIth International Congress on Large Dams, Q. 28, Edinburgh 1964
[215] Unique Post-tensioned Cables Anchor Muda D a m to Foundations. Engng News
Records, 1970
[216] Use of Rock Anchors at Tarbela. Water Power & Dam Constr. 2, 1978
[217] Veder, Ca.: Vorgespannte Verankerungen im Fels nach dem System Freyssinet. Bauingenieur 12, 1957

561
[218] Verfel, J.: Rekonstrukce Nrodniho divadla zakldni (Foundation Pit for the
Reconstruction of the National Theatre, Prague). Acta Polytechn. 2, 1979
[219] Vortrge der Baugrundtagung 1970 in Dsseldorf. Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Erd- und
Grundbau e. V. Essen
[220] Weber, E.: Injektionsanker, System Stump Bohr A G fr Verankerung im Lockergestein und Fels. Schweiz. Bauztg 6, 1966
[221] Weingaertner, P., Jarrige, J.: Barrage de la Chaudanne Consolidation des
Appuis. La Technique Moderne Construction 4, 1956
[222] Weinhold, H.: Inclined Walls for the Munich Subway. Diaphragm Walls and Anchorages, Conference organised by the Institution of Civil Engineers, London, 1975
[223] Wilkins, J. K., Fidler, J.: The Catagunya Prestressed Dam. Water Power 12, 1960
[224] Wittfoht, H.: Die Hangbrcke am Krahnenberg bei Anderach. Beton und Stahlbeton
78, 1964
[225] Wittke, W.: Influence of the Shear Strength of the Joints on the Design of Prestressed
Anchors to Stabilize a Rock Slope. Proceedings of the Geotechnical Conference, Oslo
1969
[226] Wolff, G., Hermsen, W.: Sttzmauersanierung mit Verpressankern am Reinhller
in Linz. Bautechnik 2, 1968
[227] Zajic, J.: Injektationsanker im Grund- und Bergbau. Neue Bergbautechnik 4, 1973
[228] Zajic, J.: Rock Anchorage Technology. Building Research and Practice (Btiment
International) Paris 1977
[229] Zajic, J.: Stabilization of the Rock Wall "Pastyfska stena" by Anchoring. Bulletin
of the Intern. Association of Engineering Geology 16, 1977
[230] Zajic, J., Hejda, R.: Geotechnical Survey Applied to Underground Hydro-electric
Power Plant in Czechoslovakia. Proceedings of the Geotechnical Conference, Oslo 1969
[231] Zruba, Q., Mencl, V.: Landslides and their Control. Developments in Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol. 2, Elsevier, Amsterdam 1969
[232] Zalman, Zb.: Ochrana ovinute predpjate vyztuze proti korozi (Anticorrosive Protection
of Spiral Reinforcement). VUIS Bratislava 1971
Standards and Recommendations:
[233] British Standard BS 4447: The performance of prestressing anchorages for posttensioned constructions. British Standards Institution, London 1973
[234] Bureau Securitas: Recommendations Regarding the Design, Calculation, Installation
and Inspection of Ground Anchors. Editions Eyrolles, Paris, 1972
[235] Czechoslovak Standard O N 73 1008: Predpte kotvy v horninch (Prestressed anchors
in ground). Ufad pro normalizaci a mefeni, Praha, 1980
[236] Deutsche Normen, D I N 4125, Blatt 1,2: Erd- und Felsanker. Fachnormenausschuss
Bauwesen, Berlin, 1974
[237] sterreichischer Norm B 4455: Vorgespannte Anker fr Lockergestein und Felsgestein.
sterreichisches Normungsinstitut, Wien, 1978
[238] PCI Post-Tensioning Committee: Tentative recommendations for prestressed rock
and soil anchors. PCI, Chicago, 1974
[239] Schweizer Norm 191: Boden- und Felsanker. Schweizerischer Ingenieur- und Architekten Verein, Zrich, 1977
[240] South Africa Code of Practice: Lateral support in surface excavations. The South
African Institution of Civil Engineers, Johannesburg, 1972
[241] Standards Association of Australia, Code CA 35: Prestressed Concrete, Section 5
Ground Anchors, Sydney, 1973
[242] Soil and rock pressure applied on engineering structures, Czechoslov. Standart
CSN 73 0037, Praha 1969

INDEX

A
abutting base, 170
abutting blocks, 20
accelerators of cement, 199
acceptance test, 224
activation of cement, 260
active earth pressure, 408, 409, 410, 411, 446
active protection, 259
admissible force, 223
admissible load, 7
aditives for grouts, 198, 199
aggressiveness of ground, 257
Aldeadavia Dam, 395
Alimak Co., 183, 185
Alpnachstaad, 27
Alt-na-Lairige Dam, 61, 168, 459, 460, 465,
479, 546
analytical procedure, 321
anchor base, 67, 68, 70, 102
anchor bulbs, 82, 179, 180, 274
anchor head, 6
anchor plate, 66
anchor root, 6, 88
anchor tendon, 6
anchoring cavity, 171, 172, 173
anchoring design, 2, 89, 320
anchoring depth in rocks, 60, 62
anchoring depth in soils, 65, 75, 81, 82
anchoring in cavernous rocks, 176
anchoring of blocks, 498, 499
anchoring of bridges, 492, 499
anchoring of cofferdams, 488
anchoring of crane blocks, 507
anchoring of dams, 459
anchoring of footings, 511
anchoring of foundation basins 514
anchoring of foundations, 497
anchoring of pylons, 503
anchoring of rock pillars, 342
anchoring of slopes, 359
anchoring of small openings, 342

anchoring of strucktures, 6
anchoring of the load equipment, 524
anchoring of the roof, 330
anchoring of underground excavations, 308
anchoring of weirs, 486
anchoring technology, 2, 89
Ancrallbolt, 118, 237
anticorrosion measures, 259
anticorrosive protection, 153, 259, 260
Argal Dam, 470, 472
Arnold, R., 423
artificial arch of rock, 34
Aschach Water Scheme, 490, 491
ATCLtd.,207
Atlas Copco, 120, 183, 188, 190, 200, 201,
204, 335
Aventino Dam, 461
Avon Dam, 481
B
Bachy Co., 300, 301
bar anchors, 6, 90, 92, 102
Bariri power station, 175
Barraud,Y.,169
Barron,K.,292, 372, 548
basic tests, 228
Bateman Group, 240, 300
Bauer Co., 32, 142, 148, 149, 150, 156
BaudinChteauneuf system, 220
Baylissbolt, 119
Bazant, Z.,420
BBB anchor head system, 218, 250
BBRV, 21, 23, 27, 28,104,105, 127, 146, 209,
211, 221, 249, 262, 279, 291, 386, 393,
395, 404, 444, 469, 473, 499
Blum, H., 421
bearing capacity of anchors, 7
Beaux Arts station, 419
Bendel, H., 70, 144,423
Benoto, 439
Berlin method, 416
Bieniawski, Z. T.,331

563
bitumen compounds, 281
blasting a cavity, 176, 296, 297, 298
bolts, 90, 92, 138, 158, 163, 237, 311, 31
317,321,324,342,350,357
bond values, 125
bond strength, 125
bonding of cement, 123
Bhler Co., 88,183, 192, 335, 339, 340
bracing of anchors, 53
Bratislava pumping station, 272, 273, 27
435
Bray, J. W., 369
Breth, H.,439, 443
Brno footbridge, 492, 493
Bruce, A. A., 125,200,243
Brckner Grundbau Co., 235, 416, 419
Brunnen retaining wall, 453, 454
Budejovick station, 432
Bukovansky, M., 371
bulb, 57, 86, 167, 169, 170
Bystricka Dam, 137, 473, 474, 475
C
cable, 6, 98
cable anchors, 90, 97
cable Hercules, 100, 137, 474, 487, 490
cable multi wire, 100
cable stranded, 100
Calweld Co., 194
Canadian Mining Research Centre, 372
cantilever walls, 450, 452
Capellis antenna, 503, 505
Cartagena dry dock, 10, 547
cased excavations, 414
Catagunya Dam, 65, 480, 546
cathodic protection, 283, 284, 286, 287, 482
CCL multiforce system, 216
CCS system, 242
CeltiteCo.,160
cement grouts, 198, 200
cement slurry, 287
changes in anchor prestressing, 296
changes in temperature, 298
changes in the stress state, 298
Chaudanne Dam, 405, 406
Chemical Products Ltd., 271
Cheurfas Dam, 265, 266, 280, 281, 291, 46
469
Churchill Falls power plant, 338
CL - Cablo system, 217

Clivio pumps, 204

Cluny Dam, 481
Coates,D. F.,125, 372
coefficient of creep, 293, 294
cofferdams, 488
cohesion, 46
cohesion between grout and rock, 124
cohesion between grout and soil, 128
cohesion between grout and steel, 131
cohesion test, 125
Colcrete mixer, 200
collapse of anchors, 429
Colmono pumps, 204
combination bolt, 165, 166
combined fixing, 163
comparative tests, 87
Comte, Ch.,291
Cona multi system, 249
Cona-Sol, 146, 278
Conowingo Dam, 477
consistency, 49
construction pits, 398
Corps of Engineers, 324
corrosion, 255
corrosive cracking, 258
Costes, A., 113,237
corrugated tube, 146
Coulomb's equation, 44, 47, 128, 364
coupling of bars, 102
Coyne, A., 468
creep displacement, 293
creep in anchors, 295
creep of the ground, 290
Cremona quay wall, 431, 434
current density, 283, 284
cutting, 14, 16, 32, 386, 387, 457
cutting machines, 335
Cyanamid Co., 160
Czechoslovak Standard, 413
Czech Technical University, 166
Cebin cutting, 386
Cerny Van river, 168
D
Dalesice crane way, 508
Dalesice Dam, 399, 400, 507
dams, 16, 20, 26, 459
Danube River Project, 520
Denso paste, 267, 479
design of anchors, 123, 169

564
design of anchored structures, 307, 462
destructive effect of earthquake, 38
detailed acceptance test, 227
Devonport Submarine Complex, 520
Decin rock face, 283, 388, 390
Decin TS, 392
DIN, 230
discontinuity planes, 63, 318, 320, 364, 367,
369,370,371,414
Dortmund Sports Stadium, 512
drillability of rock, 189, 190
drilling methods, 186
drilling of anchor boreholes, 183
drop in prestressing, 291
dry bolts, 139
dry docks, 10,521, 545
duplex drilling system, 14-0, 188
Dupont Circle Station, 342, 343
D u P o n t C o . , 1 5 9 , 160
Dyform rope, 98, 137, 248, 270
Dywidag, 32, 92, 93, 94, 95, 118, 141, 142,
145, 153, 160, 164, 212, 242, 245, 246,
261, 287, 352, 355, 393, 401, 494
Dzhioyev, L. N., 86, 169
E
earth pressure, 16, 408
earthquakethreatened area, 38
Ebersprcher Co., 250
Economic Foundations Co., 531, 532
economies in surface structures, 542
economies in underground structures, 548
economy of anchoring, 2, 542
effective angle of friction, 46, 48, 49, 409
effective cohesion, 48, 49, 411
effective root length, 6
effect of water content, 199
El Atazar Dam, 397
ElbrockCo.,240,241, 300
electrical anticorrosive protection, 282
element walls, 418, 436, 458
El Sancho Dam, 21
El Toro power plant, 351, 352
embankment walls, 451
embedding depth of anchors, 60
empirical procedure, 323
Enerpac Co., 242
Enge Post Office Building, 527
Ernestina Dam, 478, 479
Esteret Cte d'Azur highway, 404

examples of anchoring, 2, 330, 384, 428, 468

expanded root, 58, 69, 86
expanding of anchor boreholes, 192
exploratory boreholes, 50
external stability, 427
evaluation of rocks and soils, 57
E w o l d s e n , H . , l l l , 112
F
failure of the soil, 169
Farex Co., 116
Fellenius, 447
fiberglass rods, 162
Fiedler, J., 461
Filip, D.,70
finite element method, 322
FIP - CEB regulations, 133
Firth of Forth bridge, 267, 496, 511
fixed portion of an anchor, 6
fixing anchors by grouting, 138
fixing anchors with resins, 158
fixing length of bars, 135
fixing length of strands, 136
fixing length of wires, 135
fixing of anchors, 54, 109
fixing of anchors to the structure, 209
fixing of anchors with cement, 123
fixing of bulb anchors, 176, 179
fixing of long root, 70, 71
fixing strength, 42
fixing with abutting bases, 165
Fondedile Foundation Co., 181, 195
Fondedile Multibell anchors, 181, 182, 456
footings, 20
Forum des Halles de Paris, 458
Frankfurt/M construction pit, 441, 442
FrankipfahlCo.,533, 534
Frser bridge, 497, 498
free length of anchors, 6
French Standard, 230, 295
Freyssi-Monogroup system, 251
Freyssinet system, 62, 209, 215, 251, 353, 513
Fumel Dam, 483
foundation pits, 16, 514
G
Gabcikovo Dam, 520
Gafarsa Dam, 470
G D anchor, 114, 116,335
Geneva footbridge, 21

565
Geodynamic Co., 233
Geoindustria, 88
geotechnical properties of rock and soil, 2,43
Geotest, 187
Geotest anchor system, 262
Gerhart, P. C , 321
German Standard, 230
Geyenge, M., 372
GloetzlCo.,302
Goldenberg bolt, 114, 116, 332
Goodman, R. E., 322, 368
Gotthard tunnel, 334, 336, 340, 341
Gouritz bridge, 492
gravelly soils, 44, 46
gripping effect, 172
ground, 6, 43
ground water, 51
grout, 124, 198, 200
grouted anchors in soils, 146, 156
grouting of anchors, 198, 204
grouting under pressure, 204, 207, 260
grout steel bond, 131
H
Haefeli, R., 169
Hagconsult Co., 147, 148, 430, 433
Hanna, T. H., 70, 169
Hny Co., 204, 205
hard rocks, 43, 45
Harlan County Dam, 481
Hausherr Co., 186
Hercules rope, 100, 137, 474, 487, 490
Heuze, F., 319, 322
HlasivecMichlek system, 104
Hobst, L., 63, 78, 82, 128, 129, 132, 144, 169,
182
Hobst system, 173
Hoek, E., 368
Hofolpe cutting, 32
Horel system, 214, 247, 385, 518
horizontal anchors, 81
horizontal displacement of structures, 18
HorstmanCo.,302, 303
Hricov Dam, 276, 486
Huder, J., 423
Huggenberger Co., 303, 304
Hugo coal mine, 347
Hugon, A., 113,237,310
Hvezdonice bridge, 529
hydraulic jacks, 242

I
immovable anchoring heads, 219
impact tools, 239
Imperial College, 158
inclined anchors, 71, 79, 80
Ingersoll-Rand Co., 121, 183, 185, 240
Ingstav, 107
insulating layers, 265, 274
insulating materials, 265
InterfelsCo.,329
internal stability, 423
International Society for Rock Mechanics
(ISRM),231
Intradym Co., 333
investigation of the ground, 47
IRP system, 154, 155
IRP-Tirsol system, 262
J
Janbu, N.,423
Jelinek, R.,425
JIS steel, 92
John, K. W., 368
joints, 63, 318, 320, 364, 367, 369, 370, 371
joint density, 45
Joux Dam, 470
Jumbo machines, 183, 335
K
Kacerov Station, 430
KA head system, 217, 218
Kaim, J.,384
Kamyk Dam, 489, 490
Kannelmki church, 511, 513
Kananyan, A. S., 70, 78, 80, 170
Katschberg tunnel, 339
Kawamata Dam, 32, 392, 396, 539
Kentucky mine, 551
Kiruna wedge bolt, 165
Klemm Co., 88, 195
Koch, 125
Kohoutek, J., 70
Kranz, E., 423, 424
Krey, H.,416
Krumbach bridge, 495, 496
Krupp Co., 92
Kukuan Dam, 406
Kullagrund lighthouse, 543
Kuroda Dam, 21
Kvapil, R., 313, 314

566
L
laboratory testing, 50, 51, 69
Laing Dam, 475, 476
Lalla Takerhoust Dam, 20, 23
Langnau foundation pit, 407
Lang, T. A., 29, 30, 113,319
La Soledad Dam, 391, 394
Lauffer, H., 326, 331
Lenoir et Mernier Co., 118, 119, 160
Libby Dam, 397, 398
Lin. T. Y. International, 492
Lipno Dam, 347, 348, 349, 551
Littlejohn, G. S., 125, 200, 208, 243
load cells, 299
load-displacement diagram, 226, 231
loading test, 528, 529
load tests, 51, 132
load test models, 530
locking effect, 213
locking heads, 213
lockplate, 30
Londe, P., 368
Losinger Co., 15, 22, 34, 105, 125, 214, 236,
246, 247
LosingerMeili Co., 250
losses of prestressing, 289
Lueg Pass, 401
Luffer, K., 313, 314
Lukmanier highway, 444
Lutry cutting, 386
Lutz power station, 347, 350
Luzzon Dam, 507
Lyon cutting, 14
M
Macalloy steel, 92, 94, 479
Macalloy system, 171, 209, 244
Machu Picchu power station, 323, 324
Maihak Co., 304, 305
Malostransk Station, 431
Massenberg tunnel, 330
masts for power lines, 501, 502
materials of anchors, 90
Matt, P., 292
Max Paul, 251
Mazoe Dam, 470, 471
Mc Call Co., 479
Mc Gregor, 188
Meadow-Bank Dam, 484
measuring anchors, 299

mechanical bases, 113

mechanical fixing of anchors, 109, 113
Mellegue Dam, 466, 480, 483
Menard, L., 52
Mencl, V., 361
Meyco gunite machine, 333
Meyerhof, G. G., 70
Meynadier Co., 123, 160, 204
mixers of grout, 200, 205
micropiles, 148
Milton Lake Dam, 20, 21, 22
Mir mine, 308
model anchor, 72, 74
model tests, 68, 70, 71, 530
modulus of deformation, 45, 46, 48, 49
Mohr's circles, 46, 310
Mohr's hypothesis, 44
Monogroup system, 215, 248
MontabertCo.,183
Mont Larron Dam, 483
Monte Piazzo tunnel, 338, 339
Mschler, E., 292
Moyno pump, 204
Mt. Wilson television pylon, 504
M u d a D a m , 174,282,485
Mller, A. G., 169
Mller, L., 339, 375, 519
multi-wire anchors, 103
Munich air port hangar, 511, 512
Munich subway, 439, 441
Multibell anchor system, 181
MV system, 148, 149, 519, 520, 521
N
National Assembly Building, 429
National Testing Laboratory, 511
natural rock arch, 33, 310, 311, 312, 314, 315,
316, 317
Neasden Lane underpass, 456
Nendaz Cavern, 291
Nendza, H . , 7 0 , 169
Neturen steel, 92
Neuensalz Dam, 482
New Austrian tunnel driving method, 33, 308,
323, 324, 325, 326, 328, 330, 335
New York water gallery, 549
New York World Trade Center, 438
Nikitenko, M. J., 170
Nobel Co., 160
Norad Project, 356, 357, 358

567
Nosice Water Project, 168, 486
non-destructive tests, 233
non-cohesive soils, 128
non-prestressed anchors, 7, 374, 375, 403
non-prestressed bolts, 320, 343, 344, 381, 384
Nuremberg Underground, 439, 440
O
Oakdale highway, 380
Obersdorf ski-jump, 505, 506
observation of anchors, 289
Oklusz mine, 346
Orlik Castle, 388, 390
Orlik Dam, 175, 488
Osan, 184
Ostermayer, H., 55, 56, 128, 129, 293, 425,
443
Ostrava-Kar vin mines, 547
Ostroj, 301
Otta, L., 70, 363,428,437
Otrokovice faktory 271, 517, 518
overall soil failure, 169
overall stability, 427
P
Pacher, F., 326
Panek, L. A., 314,
Paolo Alfonso IV power station, 352, 355
Parachute Creek Valley, 371
Paris CNRS Building, 518
Parker, P. I., 188
passive protection of anchors, 259
passive earth resistance, 409, 412
patented wire, 96, 97, 103
pattern bolting, 321
Pattinbolt, 117, 237
PCI Committee, 290
Peck, R. B., 368
Perfomethod, 201, 202, 357, 549
permanent anchors, 7, 125, 144, 224, 259
permeability of anchor boreholes, 196
permeability test, 196
Petterson, K. E., 26, 360, 447
Pierce, N. H., 371
pile-wall method, 17, 431
piled sheeting, 417
planes of discontinuity, 63, 318, 320, 364, 367,
369, 370, 414
plastic bars, 162
plastic sheets, 261

PLU anticorrosive system, 266, 267

Pneumatisk Transport Co., 212
PodolinecRuzbachy cutting, 387, 388
Poisson's ratio (number), 45, 46, 48, 49, 81,
144, 309, 409, 510
Polensky & Zllner Co., 106, 142, 210, 213,
382, 391, 393, 394
Portland cement, 261
Porvoo footbridge, 495, 496
Pohl Water Scheme, 482
preconsolidation of the ground, 3, 36, 497,
498
preparation of anchors, 102
Presna Dam, 405
pressure at rest, 408, 409
pressures on retaining walls, 408, 413
prestressed anchor, 7
prestressing equipment, 234
prestressing guns, 246
prestressing of anchors, 7, 223
prestressing of bolts, 237
prestressing of the ground, 3, 36
prestressing of the rock, 3, 29
prestressing techniques, 237
prestressing wire, 95
principles of anchoring, 2, 3
Proceq Co., 242, 245, 305, 306
production anchors, 224, 227
production load, 223
protection against corrosion, 255, 260
protection of anchor head, 276
protection of anchor tendon, 271
protective layer, 262
Protodjakonov, M. M., 45, 46, 48, 190, 315
PSC-Freyssi-Monogroup system, 215, 216
pulling tests, 231
pumps for grouting, 200, 205
PZ anchors, 142, 210, 391, 392
Q
quay walls, 431, 451
quays, 17
Quillemine railway station, 452
R
Rabcewicz, L., 323, 326, 549
Rauschenbach Dam, 482
reconstruction of dams, 468
reduction in cost, 543
Reichsbrcke, 500, 501

568
relaxation in anchors, 295
relaxation losses of wires, 95
relaxation of steel, 289
Repulse Dam, 481
Research Institute of Civil Engineering, 3
505
resin bars, 162
resin bolt of USBM, 164
resistance of the earth, 408
retaining walls, 14, 16, 26, 444, 445, 448, 4
453
Rhine weir, 487
Ricard Sud motorway, 455, 456
Rio de Janeiro retaining wall, 452
Rio del Oro bridge, 395
rock blocks, 381, 382
rock beam theory, 311
rock pillars, 343
rock pressure, 308, 309, 337
rock slopes, 364, 383
roof support, 315
RoofboltsCo.,212, 213, 300
root length of anchors, 134
Roth, Z., 366, 367
Ruck-a-Chucky bridge, 492, 494
rule of thumb, 321, 323
Ruzbachy tunnel, 387
S
sacrificed anode, 283, 285, 286
saddle anchor heads, 221
safety factor, 7, 40, 224
safety factor for overturning, 13
safety factor for shear failure, 18, 26, 38
safety factor for uplift, 10
safety margin, 7, 223, 228
safety of anchored structures, 542, 551
samples of rocks and soils, 50, 51, 52
samples of water, 50
San Christobal mine, 549
Sandvik-Coromant Co., 190
sandy soils, 47, 48
Santa Eulalia Dam, 396
Sarac, D.,70
Saussaz power plant, 334
Saxena, S. K., 437
Scott, J. J., 121
Seale cable, 98
SecomaCo., 183,335,336
securing against horizontal displacement,

securing against overturning, 12

securing against shear failure, 25
securing against vertical displacement, 8, 514
SEEE system, 219, 220
seismic stability of structures, 38
self bearing arch, 33
self-locking effect, 212
Sentab Co., 549
shear strength of rocks, 44
shear strength of soils, 47
shear testing, 538
sheeting, 15, 16, 17, 415, 416
shocks, 296, 297
Sica-Intracrete, 199
Sigri Elektrographit Co., 285
slurry trench method, 17
Smith, R. T., 361
SN bolts, 139
Sobolevskij, J. A., 170
soft rocks, 43, 45, 58
soil failure, 86, 169
soil slopes, 360
soldier beams, 416
Soletanche Co., 14, 154, 155, 186, 194, 207,
433, 434
Soretz, S., 132
Soulage sur le Gier Dam, 516
spacing of bolts, 311, 312
spark test, 267
SpedelCo.,205
Split Set bolt (Stabilizer), 121, 122
Spokane Mining Research Center, 162
spring washers, 300, 301
Spullersee Dams, 105, 473
stability assessment, 422
stabilization of rocks, 29, 359, 384
stabilization of slopes, 359, 384
Stahl-TonCo.,146
Standards and Codes, 223, 561
Stavebni geologie, 392, 531
steel sheet piling, 415
Steenbras Dam, 470, 471
Stbet Co., 251
Stockholm sheet piling, 432
Store Norfors bolting system, 139
strand anchors, 106
strands, 6, 17, 98
strength in pressure, 45
Stress Block system, 217
Stroh, D., 439, 443

569
Stronghold Co., 243
Stronghold system, 250
St. Michel Dam, 459, 460, 483, 546
St. Randall Dam, 168
Stump Bohr Co., 25, 150, 151, 178, 189, 305,
364, 436, 503, 518, 520
STUPCo.,251
Sucany Dam, 169
suitability of rocks and soils for anchoring, 43
suitability tests, 228, 230
Sukhodoev, V. N., 170
Sumitomo steel, 92, 94
sunken reservoirs, 514
Swellex bolt, 120
swelling rocks, 344
Swiss method, 436
Swiss Standard, 414
T
Tage and Tietar Dams, 444
Talobre,J.,368
Taloro power plant, 34
TamrockCo.,183, 187, 336
Tansa Dam, 470
Tarbela Dam, 277, 476, 478
Tarn cofferdam, 488
Tasmania Hydro Electric Commision, 465
Taurus tunnel, 327, 328, 329, 330
tear testing of rock, 539
Tecnosolo Co., 457
temporary anchor, 6, 109, 125, 141, 224
temporary anticorrosive protection, 287
tendon material, 90
tendon protection, 107
Tensacciai system, 251, 262, 263
tensile bolt base, 114
tensile tests, 66, 113, 114, 170, 223, 228
Terrametrics Co., 303
Terzaghi, K., 309, 315, 316, 408
test anchor, 7, 68, 69, 127
test loading, 523, 531,533
testing force (load), 7, 224, 225
testing of anchors, 223, 228
tests on anchors, 224
tests on bolts, 231
Tetin ruin, 193
Thames quay wall, 275
Thossfell Dam, 482
threaded bolt base, 116
Thule cableway, 505, 506

tie-back method, 17
Titan Co., 119, 160,344
TitaniteCo.,338
torque spanner, 238
Torque Tension Co., 118, 160
torque-tension graph for bolts, 238
torque wrench, 239
transport to the site, 106, 108, 394
triaxial test, 529
Tubfix system, 156, 444, 517
tunnel-boring machines, 339
tunnels, 335
Tweerivieren Dam, 27
U
underground caverns, 35, 345, 347
underground walls, 418
Underwood, L. B., 168
Universal Anchorage Co., 181, 182, 270, 524
uplift, 8, 9, 514, 515, 518, 519, 546
U.S. Bureau of Mines, 190
V
Vh valley, 56
Vajont Dam, 391
variable loading, 298
vertical displacement, 8, 514, 546
Veytaux power plant, 349, 351
Vianden III power plant, 352, 353, 354
vibrations, 38, 39
Victor Wallsend Co., 183, 185
Vir Dam, 101,477
Virginian coal mine, 551
volume weight of rocks and soils, 44, 46, 48,
49
Vrchlice Dam, 525
VSL anchors, 20, 23, 34, 106, 137, 141, 145,
199, 214, 248, 277, 292, 351, 355, 395, 397,
398, 403, 454, 455, 476, 477, 500, 507, 543
VUIS, 66, 175, 216, 504, 519
VUIS system, 215, 216, 251, 252, 253, 305
W
Waldeck II Cavern, 292, 354, 356
Walensee gallery, 402, 403
walled excavations, 407
Washington Underground, 337, 342
Warrington cable, 98
washers, 211,212, 213
water-pressure tests, 50, 197

570
Weber system, 150,178
wedge base, 114
wedge bolt, 110,114,115
Werdhlzli sedimentation tank, 521
White Pine mine, 342, 345
Wilkins,J. K.,461
Williams Co., 160, 165, 166, 238, 338
wire nets, 332
wires, 6, 95
Wirth Co., 187, 204
Witbank Dam, 470
Wittke, W., 368
wooden rod, 162

working force, 223

working load, 7, 223
Worleybolt, 116, 117
Y
yielding bolts, 297, 299
Z
Zajic system, 176, 377, 526
Zruba, Q.,361
Zurich construction pit, 439
Zurich Sargans highway, 402
Zermanice Dam, 175, 481