This invention relates to an anchoring system for a pole or column to a hard surface such as a rock, concrete or like foundation, and wherein the system comprises a plurality of plates arranged about a base of the pole or column held by anchoring fasteners symmetrically aligned and disposed a predetermined distance for securing the same to the foundation.
This invention is in the field of an anchoring system for supporting an elongated member like a sign post, light pole or jib crane pillar in a solid foundation (such as a top and bottom supported jib crane and/or floor mounted pillar type that telescopes, or the like). Moreover, the invention in this case is directed to an anchoring system for providing a pole support as shown, for example, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,878,540.
The supported pole or column is often mounted at a base having a mounting plate which extends perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis of the support pole or column to provide peripheral openings for receiving bolts so that the pole itself can be bolted to the solid foundation. In most instances, the foundation is of concrete and the bolts extend upwardly from an upper face thereof, so that the holes in the pole's mounting plate receive the bolts set in the concrete. Setting nuts and washers are placed on each bolt to fix and secure the mounting plate to the concrete foundation.
In many cases, however, the support pole is added or newly installed after the concrete has been in place—sometimes years later. In those cases, to install the support pole, the concrete is often broken and removed to form a hole, and a new concrete platform is laid therein with bolts pre-set to extend upwardly. In those cases, L-shape bolts are often set in place before the new concrete is poured, and the concrete is poured around the bolts to permanently secure the same therein.
Particular disadvantages of such installation are the cost, time, and damage to the surrounding concrete caused during the removal operation. Moreover, the concrete has to be removed by impact, such as by a jack hammer, which can cause deterioration to the structural strength of the surrounding concrete that remains outside the perimeter of the hole, as well as equipment and fixtures in close proximity. Further, the removal is labor intensive and time consuming, in that old concrete has to be chipped out, bolts set in place, new concrete poured, and time allowed for the new concrete to dry and set before the pole and/or column can be mounted and weight applied.
As an alternative to removing and then pouring new concrete, a second anchoring system is used in the art to save time and money. Using this alternative system, the pole or column is bolted to an existing floor using anchor bolts directly secured through openings spaced about the mounting plate. Moreover, holes are drilled in the concrete using a hammer drill and a carbide tip masonry drill bit, the same diameter as the anchor bolt. The concrete anchor bolts are then hammered into the drilled holes in aligned relationship to openings in the mounting plate. Then, by turning a corresponding nut, each anchor bolt is torqued to secure the mounting plate to the concrete. Unfortunately, if the anchoring system is not designed properly, the concrete can easily fracture with the expansion of the anchor bolts torqued tightly in the concrete and/or the mounting plate can be easily ripped from the concrete as shown in
Whenever designing and installing an anchoring system in an existing concrete floor, it is important to consider the concrete depth of the floor, anchor bolt pattern, depth and number of spaced anchor bolts, and area of the mounting base used to secure a mounting plate to the foundation. A large number of anchor bolts about the base of the mounting plate may be preferable. However, a large number of anchor bolts of the type typically used, can damage the integrity of the foundation. Also, if the spacing of the anchor bolts is too close, the holding strength of the existing floor can be weakened. Further yet, if the pull-out pattern is a continuous line or circle within the perimeter of the mounting base—e.g., one anchor bolt after the other like the plurality of perforations around the outside of a postage stamp used to enhance tearing—the structural integrity of the foundation can be compromised.
The instant invention solves these and other problems. Moreover, according to one embodiment, the anchoring system in this case secures a mounting plate of a pole or column to a concrete foundation using between three and seven base plates. Each base plate includes a planar surface having a symmetrical shape about a common center. A plurality of fastener openings is symmetrically arranged with each other. Further, each opening is spaced an equal distance from its respective plate center. A plurality of threaded fasteners having a common diameter is used and preferably epoxied in place to secure each base plate to the concrete foundation by passing through one of the plurality of fastener openings. An attachment bolt at the center of each base plate extends upward and perpendicular to its respective planar surface for securing to the mounting plate (which is attached perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the pole or column). The plurality of base plates can easily be attached to the mounting plate in a symmetrical pattern by corresponding attachment bolts such that all threaded fasteners are spaced apart at least ten times (10×) their common diameter.
Notably, one of the many advantages of the instant invention is the ability to engineer the hold strength by arranging the proper anchoring/fastening pattern using anchor plates (also referred to herein as “pods”). More specifically, the pull-pattern formed by the threaded fasteners can be expanded across a wider area in the foundation (i.e., both inside and outside the perimeter of the mounting plate). As a result, the turn-over force is better dispersed and distributed, and more force is needed for a failure to occur by fracture of the foundation.
Another advantage of the instant invention is that the turn-over pivot point of the mounting base at the foundation no longer has to be at the immediate perimeter of the mounting plate as in the prior art. Instead, the pivot point is extending out (i.e., beyond the perimeter of the mounting plate), thereby creating a wider holding area. Also, the break-away pattern of the threaded fasteners can be weaved in-and-out such that the fracture boundary of the foundation is extended and uneven. Therefore, more of the foundation has to fracture for there to be a failure.
With this invention, a designer can select the appropriate number of anchor plates for the best design to optimize the over-turn moment, pivot point, and break-away pattern of the pole or column. Also, with the instant anchoring system, the optimum design can be engineered so that a preferred minimum spacing between threaded fasteners can be maintained for the best strength (e.g., in most designs the spaced-distances between threaded fasteners is preferably at least 10× the common diameter of the fasteners).
Also, in most cases no two installation sites are exactly identical. The concrete foundation is old, the depth is different, and/or the concrete may or may not have reinforcement bar for enhanced strength and integrity. In summary, therefore, the anchoring system in the instant invention provides engineering options to structurally optimize the holding strength for the many different sites in the field, without having to lay new foundation. By uniquely designing the arrangement of the plurality of anchor plates using the appropriate anchoring/fastening pattern about the base of a mounting plate, the turn-over force needed to break-away the pole or column can be better engineered. For example, the turn-over force can be maximized for a jib crane or minimized for those occasions that the pole or column must be engineered to break-away easily such as for a sign or light pole along a freeway (i.e., in the preferred embodiment discussed infra, such arrangements can be engineered having different pod patterns such that the threaded fasteners are or are not within the preferred 10× the common fastener diameter).
The drawings included herewith are for the purpose of illustration only and not as a definition of the limits of the instant invention, for which reference should be made to the claims appended hereto. Other features, objects and advantages of this invention will become clear from the following more detailed description made with reference to the drawings in which:
This description begins with reference to
Moreover, holes are drilled in the concrete using a hammer drill and a carbide tip masonry drill bit, the same diameter as the anchor bolt 120. The concrete wedge anchor bolts 120 are then hammered into the drilled holes to ensure the desired depth after passing through mount openings 26 around the periphery of the mounting plate 24. Then, by turning a corresponding nut 122, the unit is “snugged up” in the hole before the nut 122 is torqued to the required torque value. Problems with this overall prior design are discussed supra, and, although wedge anchor bolts 120 can be used with the instant invention with success, the preferred fastening method is to use threaded fasteners epoxied in their corresponding holes in the concrete, so as to avoid stresses in the concrete created when the anchor bolt is “snugged up” (i.e., wedged) in the hole.
Further describing the instant invention, it improves the prior art by affording better engineering and design of the anchoring system at each installation. Moreover, the anchoring system in this case can be engineered based on conditions and factors unique to each installation. Moreover, with the preferred embodiment of the instant invention (beginning with reference to
Each pod or base plate 110 includes a planar surface 124 having a symmetrical shape about a common center point 130. A plurality of fastener openings 128 is symmetrically arranged about a perimeter of each base plate 110. Further, each opening 128 is spaced an equal distance from the respective center 130. In the preferred embodiment, the pod 110 is hexagonal in shape and the openings are evenly spaced in respective corners as best seen in
A plurality of concrete anchor bolts 120 (such as common wedge-type concrete anchor bolts or, more preferably, threaded fasteners epoxied in place as described above) having a common diameter are used to secure each base plate 110 to the concrete foundation 22 by passing tightly through one of the plurality of fastener openings 128 and into the concrete. An attachment bolt 142 at the center of each base plate 110 extends perpendicularly upward to its respective planar surface 124 for securing the base plate 110 to the mounting plate 24 by bolt nuts 144. A plurality of base plates 110 can easily be attached to the mounting plate 24 in a symmetrical pattern by corresponding attachment bolts 142, such that all anchor bolts 120 are preferably arranged to be spaced no closer than at least ten times (i.e., 10X) the common diameter “x” of the anchor bolts 120, as best seen in
It is important to note the preferred engineering design of the instant invention. Each pod 110 has a central tension point at the attachment bolt 142. Further, since the anchor bolts 120 of each pod are preferably symmetrically aligned about the central tension point, the tension on the pod caused by an over-turn force (F) is evenly dispersed and distributed to its respective anchor bolts 120. Specifically, with reference to
Moreover, unlike anchor systems in the prior art which create a continuous perforation that weakens the concrete for a crack fault and ultimate failure as shown in
Finally, for added support
It will thus be seen that variations of a new and useful anchoring system 100 with a plurality of base plates or pods 110 have been illustrated and described. With this description, it would be apparent to those skilled in the art that various combinations, changes or modifications may be made to the invention without departing from its spirit. For example, other variations of the anchoring systems 100 could include three-sided, four-sided, and/or five-sided pods, as well as circular pods, in place of the hexagonal pods illustrated in the Figures, or a combination of these different symmetrical shapes can be used, to form the most appropriate anchor for the conditions of the concrete foundation (i.e., having the appropriate strength and capacity to create the needed hold-down force for the desired over-turn rating).
In accordance with the provisions of the patent statutes, therefore, this invention has been explained and illustrated in the various preferred embodiments. It must be understood, however, that this invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically illustrated without departing from the scope of the claims that follow.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1430136 | Williams | Sep 1922 | A |
1722352 | Rawley | Jul 1929 | A |
2862252 | Beach, Jr. | Dec 1958 | A |
3371458 | Sturgill | Mar 1968 | A |
4000624 | Chow | Jan 1977 | A |
4295308 | Korfanta | Oct 1981 | A |
4553878 | Willemse | Nov 1985 | A |
4557629 | Meek | Dec 1985 | A |
4669917 | Sveen | Jun 1987 | A |
4687380 | Meek | Aug 1987 | A |
4860507 | Garza-Tamez | Aug 1989 | A |
4972641 | Barrios | Nov 1990 | A |
5002252 | Setala | Mar 1991 | A |
5051037 | Haney | Sep 1991 | A |
5063719 | Matsuo | Nov 1991 | A |
5233809 | Gropper | Aug 1993 | A |
5465529 | Park | Nov 1995 | A |
5499885 | Chapman | Mar 1996 | A |
5570546 | Butterworth | Nov 1996 | A |
5572846 | Sosa | Nov 1996 | A |
6014843 | Crumley | Jan 2000 | A |
6240689 | Haddad | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6343445 | Ryan | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6735911 | Alexander | May 2004 | B1 |
6857808 | Sugimoto | Feb 2005 | B1 |
7156586 | Nim | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7252083 | Hayden | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7508088 | Kothnur | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7591119 | Ritz | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7993107 | Gevers | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8161698 | Migliore | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8245458 | Johnson | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8269690 | Caruso | Sep 2012 | B1 |
8302357 | Nolte | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8302365 | Gee | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8319697 | Conrad | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8347514 | McCollum | Jan 2013 | B1 |
8960615 | Johnson | Feb 2015 | B1 |
20030021636 | Silber | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030101634 | Bhullar | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030196393 | Bowman | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040131428 | Henderson | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050081465 | Crumley | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050183362 | McCarthy | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060022189 | Collins | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20070181767 | Wobben | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080155907 | Wobben | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080236073 | Bagepalli | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080302038 | Wobben | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090217607 | Stark | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100257794 | Stark | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100301613 | Oosterling | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110215206 | Conrad | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120228442 | Clifton | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120325761 | Kubsch | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130227897 | Palmer | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130227898 | Fairbairn | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130233231 | Dagher | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130326992 | Takagi | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140069483 | Wolter | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140115978 | Fairbairn | May 2014 | A1 |
20150159337 | Kellner | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150191929 | Takahashi | Jul 2015 | A1 |