CNCC Technical Group

PECO Anchor test (Chinese ECO anchor)

Anchor Test Bed 01/2008

Test date: 05 October 2008

Location: Ingleton Quarry, North Yorkshire, UK

Substrate: Carboniferous Limestone

Anchor type: Eco anchor-Chinese design - 316 stainless steel

Chemical anchor mortar: KMR RES polyester chemical anchor mortar

Chemical anchor mortar number: 18053/11/08

Test equipment: Hilti UK, load bridge, hydraulic cylinder and pump, gauge.

Test supervisor: R. Laybourn Hilti UK

Anchors installation:

Three anchors installed on 06/07/2008, using the procedure as defined in BCA anchor installation guidelines.

Anchor installer: Les Sykes CNCC Technical Group/BCA Equipment & Techniques Committee. Assistant: Mike Sykes

Test 1 Axial load to destruction

The test equipment was assembled and a preload exerted to align the test apparatus.

The apparatus was then loaded for the test and the following observations were recorded.

8kn the surface of the resin that surrounds and covers the inner edge of the anchor attachment eye started to spall. This is caused by the lower edge of the anchor’s attachment point lifting from the groove drilled in the substrate in the direction of the applied load and lifting the resin with it. (Note: This did not affect the resin securing the anchor in the hole)
18kn the eye of the anchor started to deform in the direction of the load. Note: this is normal and considered a safety feature.
38Kn the first movement of the anchor from the chemical anchor mortar.
40Kn the anchor moved significantly and the test gauge dropped to 24Kn, each successive reading of 40Kn caused the anchor to move with a repeated drop to around 20kn. The anchor could not be full removed from the substrate because of the travel constraints of the test equipment.

Test 2 Axial load to destruction

The test equipment was assembled and a preload exerted to align the test apparatus.

The apparatus was then loaded for the test and the following observations were recorded.

4Kn the surface of the resin that surrounds and covers the inner edge of the anchor attachment eye started to spall. This is caused by the lower edge of the anchor’s attachment point lifting from the groove drilled in the substrate in the direction of the applied load and lifting the resin with it
20kn the eye of the anchor started to deform in the direction of the load. Note: this is normal and considered a safety feature.
30kn elongation of the eye continues.
40Kn no egress of anchor from chemical anchor mortar visible.
45Kn egress of the anchor from the chemical anchor mortar visible.
46Kn egress is continuing significant movement, test gauge drops to 20Kn, a peak load of 36Kn is required to maintain egress of anchor with drops to 20Kn each time. The anchor could not be full removed from the substrate because of the travel constraints of the test equipment.

Test 3 Axial load to destruction

The test equipment was assembled and a preload exerted to align the test apparatus. The apparatus was then loaded for the test and the following observations were recorded.

10Kn cracking of the surface chemical anchor mortar surrounding the anchor. This is caused by the lower edge of the anchor’s attachment point lifting from the groove drilled in the substrate in the direction of the applied load and lifting the resin with it.
20Kn elongation of the attachment eye in the direction of the applied load.
30Kn egress of the anchor from the chemical anchor mortar, this is followed by defined movement of the anchor with the test gauge showing 20Kn, a peak load of 30kn is required to initial egress each time with a repeated movement and gauge reading of 20kn. The anchor could not be full removed from the substrate because of the travel constraints of the test equipment.

Note: The observations taken demonstrate that the Chinese manufactured Eco anchor (Peco) is performing consistently as with the DMM Eco anchor. The anchor does pass the BMC axial load test and does meet the criteria agreed by the British Caving Association’s Equipment & Techniques Committee.

The Peco anchor has the same safety features that were present on the DMM Eco anchor (elongation of the eye in the direction of the load with an applied load of >19Kn), which allows uses to see if the anchor has sustained a high load. Failure is gradual, and requires a significant peak load force (30-45Kn) to initiate egress, even after slippage due to the welds creeping in the chemical anchor mortar the placement has a resting resistance of around 20Kn. Egress only occurs as the load is increased significantly (>10Kn), followed by a drop in pressure and a resting resistance of 20Kn each time.

Les Sykes

CNCC Technical Group

BCA Equipment & Techniques Committee


welcome guides & agreements constitution access Leck Fell FAQ meeting minutes technical group contact info
PECO Anchor test (Chinese ECO anchor) Anchor Test Bed 01/2008 Test date: 05 October 2008 Location: Ingleton Quarry, North Yorkshire, UK Substrate: Carboniferous Limestone Anchor type: Eco anchor-Chinese design - 316 stainless steel Chemical anchor mortar: KMR RES polyester chemical anchor mortar Chemical anchor mortar number: 18053/11/08 Test equipment: Hilti UK, load bridge, hydraulic cylinder and pump, gauge. Test supervisor: R. Laybourn Hilti UK Anchors installation: Three anchors installed on 06/07/2008, using the procedure as defined in BCA anchor installation guidelines. Anchor installer: Les Sykes CNCC Technical Group/BCA Equipment & Techniques Committee. Assistant: Mike Sykes Test 1 Axial load to destruction The test equipment was assembled and a preload exerted to align the test apparatus. The apparatus was then loaded for the test and the following observations were recorded. 8kn the surface of the resin that surrounds and covers the inner edge of the anchor attachment eye started to spall. This is caused by the lower edge of the anchor’s attachment point lifting from the groove drilled in the substrate in the direction of the applied load and lifting the resin with it. (Note: This did not affect the resin securing the anchor in the hole) 18kn the eye of the anchor started to deform in the direction of the load. Note: this is normal and considered a safety feature. 38Kn the first movement of the anchor from the chemical anchor mortar. 40Kn the anchor moved significantly and the test gauge dropped to 24Kn, each successive reading of 40Kn caused the anchor to move with a repeated drop to around 20kn. The anchor could not be full removed from the substrate because of the travel constraints of the test equipment. Test 2 Axial load to destruction The test equipment was assembled and a preload exerted to align the test apparatus. The apparatus was then loaded for the test and the following observations were recorded. 4Kn the surface of the resin that surrounds and covers the inner edge of the anchor attachment eye started to spall. This is caused by the lower edge of the anchor’s attachment point lifting from the groove drilled in the substrate in the direction of the applied load and lifting the resin with it 20kn the eye of the anchor started to deform in the direction of the load. Note: this is normal and considered a safety feature. 30kn elongation of the eye continues. 40Kn no egress of anchor from chemical anchor mortar visible. 45Kn egress of the anchor from the chemical anchor mortar visible. 46Kn egress is continuing significant movement, test gauge drops to 20Kn, a peak load of 36Kn is required to maintain egress of anchor with drops to 20Kn each time. The anchor could not be full removed from the substrate because of the travel constraints of the test equipment. Test 3 Axial load to destruction The test equipment was assembled and a preload exerted to align the test apparatus. The apparatus was then loaded for the test and the following observations were recorded. 10Kn cracking of the surface chemical anchor mortar surrounding the anchor. This is caused by the lower edge of the anchor’s attachment point lifting from the groove drilled in the substrate in the direction of the applied load and lifting the resin with it. 20Kn elongation of the attachment eye in the direction of the applied load. 30Kn egress of the anchor from the chemical anchor mortar, this is followed by defined movement of the anchor with the test gauge showing 20Kn, a peak load of 30kn is required to initial egress each time with a repeated movement and gauge reading of 20kn. The anchor could not be full removed from the substrate because of the travel constraints of the test equipment. Note: The observations taken demonstrate that the Chinese manufactured Eco anchor (Peco) is performing consistently as with the DMM Eco anchor. The anchor does pass the BMC axial load test and does meet the criteria agreed by the British Caving Association’s Equipment & Techniques Committee. The Peco anchor has the same safety features that were present on the DMM Eco anchor (elongation of the eye in the direction of the load with an applied load of >19Kn), which allows uses to see if the anchor has sustained a high load. Failure is gradual, and requires a significant peak load force (30-45Kn) to initiate egress, even after slippage due to the welds creeping in the chemical anchor mortar the placement has a resting resistance of around 20Kn. Egress only occurs as the load is increased significantly (>10Kn), followed by a drop in pressure and a resting resistance of 20Kn each time. Les Sykes CNCC Technical Group BCA Equipment & Techniques Committee	Home About Us Tests Test 04/93 Test 07/94 Test 08/95 Test Update PECO Tests Rope Care Locations Information Placement Rigging Safety Warning
©Copyright Council of Northern Caving Clubs 2007 \| caving links \| site design by e-kinetics uk