Faster design and code-check of any anchoring project

In some cases, anchoring is just another routine task handled by the structural engineer responsible for the entire design. In others, the engineer simply provides the forces acting on the foundation block, leaving the anchoring design to concrete specialists. There are also situations where this work is outsourced entirely to subcontractors who focus on these kinds of detailed, niche problems.

Each of these scenarios calls for a different approach and workflow. That’s where IDEA StatiCa comes in. It offers multiple ways to tackle anchoring design depending on your role, inputs, and level of detail required.

So when does it make sense to use IDEA StatiCa for anchoring, and how can you integrate it effectively into your workflow?

Standard connections

What do we actually mean by standard anchoring? Typically, we’re talking about relatively simple cases, like anchoring into a foundation block, where the forces are moderate, the detailing is straightforward, and there’s enough freedom in the dimensions of the concrete block. These are situations where a conventional anchoring layout can be used.

In such cases, using IDEA StatiCa Connection is often sufficient. The design approach here is largely based on empirical methods defined by design standards, usually assuming unreinforced concrete. For many engineers, this covers a wide range of everyday projects.

That said, even in these “simple” scenarios, there’s a real opportunity to make your work more efficient. It’s worth asking: are you actually handling simple tasks in the simplest possible way? In recent years, IDEA StatiCa has introduced several features aimed less at the design itself and more at streamlining the overall workflow. For example:

• Import management helps ensure that forces brought in from other software are accurate, reducing the risk of errors during data transfer.
• Batch design and IDEA StatiCa Checkbot allow you to design multiple connections at once, including automated report generation.
• Sharing via IDEA StatiCa Viewer makes it easy to distribute models to colleagues or clients, even those without a license, along with options like sketches and IFC exports.
• CAD integrations enable reverse workflows, where you import an already detailed connection from tools like Tekla Structures or Autodesk Revit and simply apply loads for verification.
• API access opens the door to design automation and optimization.
• Parametric templates and custom libraries help standardize and speed up routine design tasks.

Even for standard anchoring, the right workflow can make a noticeable difference, not just in speed, but also in reliability and consistency.

When does it stop being just a simple task?

Of course, nothing in engineering is ever truly ideal. Very often, we find ourselves stepping outside the scope of so-called standard connections. These situations arise when, for example, we have limited space available for anchoring, when a failure mode requires the use of additional reinforcement, or when we need to transfer significant forces that exceed the assumptions of simplified design models. In other cases, the solution may involve special components such as shear lugs or even a combination of different anchoring elements. More generally, we are dealing with layouts that are only partially covered (or sometimes not covered at all) by design standards.

In these scenarios, a deeper level of analysis becomes necessary.

From the 3D model to all the necessary results

Concrete failure

When a concrete failure mode governs the design, the key question is not only what failed, but how to change the design to increase capacity. The most common ways are: 

Increase the concrete block size (most effective option)

• Increase edge distances and overall block dimensions
• Improve embedment conditions and stress distribution
• Directly improves resistance against:
  • concrete cone failure
  • edge breakout
  • shear breakout

This is usually the most straightforward and efficient solution, if geometry allows it. The IF condition is a crucial design parameter. In many cases, such as anchoring into a column or other highly confined geometry, it is simply not possible to increase edge distances or enlarge the concrete block. In these situations, a different strategy must be applied.

Add reinforcement 

• Additional reinforcement around anchors helps confine concrete
• Improves ductility and resistance to cracking
• Particularly effective for:
  • splitting failure
  • cone breakout in confined conditions

This is often necessary when geometry cannot be significantly increased.

High shear forces

When you have high shear forces, anchoring design quickly moves from a “standard connection” into a problem where the load transfer mechanism becomes critical. In these cases, you generally have several options to increase capacity or change the failure mode:

Use shear lugs 

• Transfer shear through bearing, not anchor bolts
• Greatly reduce demand on anchors in shear

Or use Anchors + headed studs

A headed stud system is primarily designed to transfer loads through bearing and shear in concrete, while conventional anchors (post-installed or cast-in bolts) are often more flexible in their role (tension, positioning, installation constraints).

When you combine them, you are essentially creating a hybrid load-transfer system, where:

• Headed studs take the shear through direct bearing into concrete
• Anchors take tension forces

Comprehensive workflow

IDEA StatiCa Detail is specifically designed for these more problematic anchoring and concrete detailing cases. Its link with IDEA StatiCa Connection enables a fully integrated workflow, where reinforcement can be designed directly within the model without starting from scratch.

When the forces or design conditions are updated in IDEA StatiCa Connection, the model in IDEA StatiCa Detail can be easily refreshed. The internal forces are automatically recalculated, while the previously designed reinforcement or adjusted concrete block geometry remains in place. This significantly reduces the number of iterative steps in the design process. After updating, it is often enough just to rerun the analysis in Detail.

It also allows combining different load-transfer mechanisms within one model, for example, headed studs together with reinforcement, which is typical in cast-in plate design. Overall, this enables a transition from a simplified connection model to a detailed and physically consistent reinforced-concrete model without breaking the design workflow continuity.

See the tutorial for a detailed workflow.

Conclusion

Whether you are dealing with more complex anchoring situations or, for example, anchors placed close to an edge, a combined use of tools can take the design further than ever before. It helps to avoid situations where the workflow reaches a so-called “dead end”, where standard methods are no longer sufficient.

With additional capabilities such as import functions, synchronization between IDEA StatiCa Connection and IDEA StatiCa Detail, API integration, and built-in sharing options, it is possible to set up a highly efficient workflow. This not only streamlines the design process but also significantly reduces effort and saves time.