See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322168140

Lateral Stability of Prestressed Precast Concrete Girders During Lifting: Study

Case

Chapter · January 2018

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-59471-2_176

CITATIONS READS

0 994

5 authors, including:

Albert De la Fuente Jesús Miguel Bairán

Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
129 PUBLICATIONS   887 CITATIONS    110 PUBLICATIONS   697 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sergio Henrique Pialarissi Cavalaro Chris I. Goodier

Loughborough University Loughborough University
127 PUBLICATIONS   866 CITATIONS    189 PUBLICATIONS   1,410 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Offsite in civil engineering View project

Rocking Isolation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jesús Miguel Bairán on 11 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . . 1

Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders during lifting: a

case study

A. de la Fuente1, J.M. Bairán2, S.H.P. Cavalaro3, C.I. Goodier4, A. Palmeri5

1
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Jordi Girona 1-3, C1, 08034. e-mail: albert.de.la.fuente@upc.edu
2
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Jordi Girona 1-3, C1, 08034. e-mail: jesus.miguel.bairan@upc.edu
3
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Jordi Girona 1-3, C1, 08034. e-mail: sergio.cavalaro@upc.edu
4
Loughborough University, School of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough,
Leics, UK LE11 3TU; email: c.i.goodier@lboro.ac.uk
5
Loughborough University, School of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough,
Leics, UK LE11 3TU; email: a.palmeri@lboro.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

Improvements in concrete technology, reinforcing systems and manufacturing

processes enable the use of increasingly long reinforced precast concrete girders,
contributing to the competitiveness of girders in concrete in comparison with other
alternatives. The weight of the girders should be limited however, in order to achieve
an optimum between span length and lifting and transportations costs. The current
tendency in design is to minimize the width of the flanges, thus the girder becoming
more flexible laterally and more prone to suffer instability phenomena during transient
loading situations. An increasing number of accidents and damages associated with this
instability problem are reported in the technical literature (e.g., Hurff 2010; Rose,
2013). The main objective of this study is to describe a real case of lateral instability
of a long prestressed concrete bridge girder during lifting as well as to perform a
parametric study to understand the limits of the problem observed. Special attention is
paid to the evaluation of the provisions gathered in the Model Code 2010 (MC-2010)
regarding the lateral stability, since these might not be sufficient to cover limit cases.

Keywords: concrete girders; lateral stability; lifting; failure

INTRODUCTION

Precast, prestressed concrete girders (PPCGs) are commonly used in construction

projects with demanding conditions in terms of construction speed and erection
complexity. Several technological advances (e.g., materials, more efficient cross
section shapes and larger prestressing strands) enable reaching increasingly longer
spans with PPCGs (Castrodale and White, 2004). As consequence, however, the weight
of the PPCGs increase, which makes the transport and handling stages the limiting
situations in terms of the structural design.

Rev. 10/2016
2 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . .

To increase the span, the common strategy is to minimize the weight of the PPCGs by
reducing the width of the flanges. This strategy however, reduces the minor-axis and
torsional stiffness of the element, thus amplifying the risk of lateral instability.
Traditionally, limited attention was payed to lateral instability phenomena, as PPCGs
were assumed to have a large margin of minor-axis stiffness. However, in recent years,
an increase in the number and the seriousness of accidents and damages with slender
PPCGs has raised concerns about stability (e.g., Hurff 2010; Rose, 2013).

The reported accidents and damages are associated with eccentricities that activate
second order effects during transient loading situations (lifting, transport, and support
on bearings). Typical sources of eccentricities in PPCGs include (Bairán and Cladera,
2010): (1) fabrication tolerances; (2) variations in the lateral positioning of strands; (3)
local cracking; (4) creep and shrinkage sweep; and (5) sun heating on one side, causing
the girder to bow. The study of the lateral stability of PPCGs and the assessment of
reasonable magnitudes of girder span and support imperfections (PCI 2000) has
become paramount to ensure safety during transient loading situations (Hurff 2010).

Studies regarding the stability of concrete girders began in the 1950s (Muller, 1962;
Anderson, 1972; Swann, 1972; Laszlo and Imper, 1987). Probably, the analytical
(Mast, 1989 and 1993) and experimental (Mast 1994) work by Mast is some of the
most influential in this field. In fact, the design method proposed by Mast is still in use
today (e.g., PCI 2016). These studies were the first to consider the effect of initial lateral
imperfections and to propose a safety factor accounting for the stiffness reduction due
to cracking in this condition. Later, other analytical and numerical studies (Stratford
and Burgoyne 2000; Plaut and Moen 2013) proposed more generalized approaches
based on complex calculation procedures. However, such models assume linearity of
material response and disregard concrete cracking.

The objective of this paper is to advance the study of the behavior of PPCGs supported
from cables attached to lifting hoops. This condition has proven to be the most
unfavorable since no restraint is provided against rigid-body rotation (the girder is free
to roll until lateral equilibrium is reached or fails due to bending forces acting in the
weak-axis). A real case study is presented, describing and analyzing the lateral
instability of a 45.6 m long PPCG in Spain. The R.F. Mast formulation (Mast 1989 and
1993) is considered to justify the phenomenon observed in reality. A sensitivity analysis
is also conducted. Based on the results, the provisions gathered in MC-2010 to take
into account the second order effects in these specific PPCGs are questioned.

ANALYSIS OF THE LIFTING

Classic studies of lateral buckling of beams were based on the assumption that the
beams are rigidly restrained from rotation at supports (Mast, 1989). Lateral instability
is characterized by the lateral deformation of the cross section at the middle of the span,
creating sideways deflection. This type of lateral instability is particularly relevant in
steel I-beams, which have low torsional stiffness. On the contrary, concrete I-beams
tend to have thicker webs and wider flanges, which lead to cross sections between 100

Rev. 10/2016
 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . . 3

and 1000 times stiffer in torsion than the steel girders of the same shape. Therefore,
torsional rigidity can be assumed in concrete girders. This allows converting a complex
coupled torsional–bending buckling problem to a lateral bending equilibrium problem
for the case of beams hanging from cables.

Lateral imperfections (ei) tend to cause the center of gravity of the beam (G) to be
slightly shifted to one side of the roll axis (Figure 1). Consequently, the girder tip about
the roll axis, forming an initial tilt θi with vertical axis. Part of the beam weight (W) is
then applied at the weak-axis (Wsinθ) and activates a lateral deflection, which further
shifts G and increases the roll angle due to second order effects. If lateral bending
stiffness is compatible with the magnitude of ei, the girder may reach equilibrium at a
tilt angle θeq, slightly larger than the initial angle θi; conversely, if the lateral bending
stiffness is not enough to prevent the girder from cracking, θ may cause a collapse.
Deflection of beam
due to bending about Roll axis
the weak
Center of gravity of the curved arcaxis
of
the beam lies directly beneath the roll
Roll axis
axis

Center of gravity
G of midspan section

Center of mass of W
deflected shape of
the beam

Figure 1. Final equilibrium position of a hanging girder.

The equilibrium tilt angle (θeq) can be assessed by means of successive approximations
using the equation 1, where yr is the height of the roll axis above G, shown in Figure
1, and zo is the lateral deflection of G of the curved beam caused by the full weight of
the beam (W) applied to the weak axis.

The negative effect in terms of stability of the prestress camber can be considered by
shifting upwards G a magnitude δG = 2δP/3 (δP is the total camber at the midspan
expected when lifting operations are performed). Moreover, zo can be calculated with
equation 2, considering the positive effect of overhanging by moving the lifting points
inwards a distance (a). Notice that E is the Young Modulus of the concrete; Iyy the
weak-axis inertia; L the total length of the girder; and L1 = L – a.

Rev. 10/2016
4 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . .

The cracking safety factor (SFcr) may be computed through equation 3, where θi is
equal to ei/yr assuming a rigid beam and θcr is the tilt angle at which the cracking is
expected to occur. θcr should be assessed by rotating the midspan section until a tensile
stress equal to the average tensile strength of the concrete (fctm) is reached. The
sectional subroutine presented in de la Fuente et al. (2012) has been used to compute
θcr. This SF combines simultaneously the effects of the lateral stability (zo/yr) and the
effects of lateral bending on cracking (θi/θcr).

CASE STUDY

This example of application consists of a 45.6 m long precast prestressed concrete

girder with an I-shaped constant cross section (Figure 2) with an area (Ac) of 0.58 m2,
and major (Ixx) and minor (Iyy) axis inertias of 0.325 and 0.021 m4, respectively. The
beam was lifted using two double-hoop cables placed at 2.0 m from the ends (a) with
a height of 0.30 m (Figure 3). Two cranes were used in the lifting operation to
guarantee a vertical alignment of the cables (ψ = 0°).

The expected prestress force at the moment of the lifting operations (t > 28 days) was
Pk = 8,514 kN (assuming 15% of losses). The eccentricity with respect to the centroid
of the cross section was ep = 0.73 m. The concrete mix was designed to reach a
compressive strength (fck) of 60 N/mm2 at 28 days. The estimated elastic modulus of
the concrete was Ec = 34,694 N/mm2 and the average tensile strength was fctm = 4.528
N/mm2.

Figure 2. Dimensions (cm) and active reinforcement of the cross section.

Rev. 10/2016
 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . . 5

Figure 3. Lifting configuration and deformed shape of the girder.

An eccentricity of approximately 12 mm of the lifting loops from the central axis was
detected during the visual inspections. The sweep measured before the lifting was 90
mm (equivalent to L/510 and smaller than L/500 allowed by the EN 15050). Thus, the
site-job supervisor permitted the lifting operation. During this operation, a tilt was
observed (Figure 3) with a drastic increase of the lateral displacement up to 300 mm.
Technicians decided to unload the beam.

After an extensive visual inspection of the beam, vertical cracks were observed at the
left upper flange (where maximum tensile stresses are expected due to this
phenomenon). Although the crack widths were acceptable, the beam was unable to
recover the original shape, showing a lateral sweep of more than L/400. Thus, the
PCCG was discarded.

A parametric analysis considering a range of values of the lateral imperfection was

conducted using a formulation by Mast (1989, 1993), as described in the previous
section. The initial sweep assumed for calculation ranged between L/250 (182 mm)
and L/1000 (45.6 mm). The total eccentricity of the centre of the gravity of the beam
with the roll axis (ei) was assumed equal to the lateral sweep adding a the lateral
eccentricity of the lifting hoops (12 mm).

The results in terms of equilibrium tilt of the midspan section (θeq), the maximum tilt
to prevent the girder from cracking (θcr), the ratio σct,max/fctm (σct,max being the
maximum tensile stress) and the cracking safety factor (SFcr) are gathered in Table 1.

Table 1. Results obtained from the sensitivity analysis.

L/250 L/500 L/750 L/1000
θeq 14.87° 5.36° 3.88° 3.13°
σct,max/fctm 4.14 0.80 0.27 0.01
θcr 5.94° 5.94° 5.94° 5.94°
SFcr 0.61 1.07 1.28 1.43

Rev. 10/2016
6 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . .

The results presented in Table 1 confirm that the initial sweep L/500 (91 mm) would
be sufficient to guarantee an equilibrium tilt θeq = 5.36° and SFcr = 1.07, which satisfies
the recommendations found in PCI 2016 (SFcr ≥ 1.00). Nevertheless, the sensitivity
analysis presented highlight that this beam is prone to suffer from cracking and lateral
instability problems since the safety margin is close to the proposed limit.

To go deeper in this analysis, Figures 4 shows the curve relating θeq and the sweep
(L/ei). This figure highlights a strong dependency of θeq on L/ei. Values of θeq from
3.13° (L/1000) to 14.87° (L/250) are expected. Notice that θeq increases exponentially
for L/ei < 600. Likewise, θcr is barely 10% bigger than that expected for L/500 (θeq =
5.36°). Indeed, for a lateral imperfection L/475 the beam is expected to crack. This
value may be easily reached prior to the lifting operations due to other phenomenon,
such as differential temperature (solar radiation) coupled with deformations caused by
creep and shrinkage.

16

14

12 θeq

10
θ (°)

6 θcr=5.94°

θeq=5.36°
4

0
250 500 750 1000

L/ei

Figure 4. Relationship between θeq – L/ei.

Figure 5 shows the curve that relates the ratio σct,max/fctm (left-hand y-axis) and SFcr
(right-hand y-axis) with L/ei. As observed, σct,max/fctm increases exponentially for
values of L/ei < 500. In fact, for L/500, σct,max is just 20% above the expected fctm and
SFcr is 1.07. Therefore, a risk of cracking in the upper flange exists. The results and
analysis confirm that the lifting configuration makes the beam prone to cracking and
to lateral instability with potentially catastrophic consequences.

Rev. 10/2016
 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . . 7

5.00 1.50

σct,max
4.00 θeq

3.00
σct,max/fctm

SFcr
1.25

2.00

1.00 σct,max/fctm=0.80

SFcr=1.07
0.00 1.00
250 500 750 1000
L/ei
Figure 5. Relationship between σct,max/fctm – L/ei and SFcr – L/ei.

Annex 11 of the Spanish Concrete Code EHE-08 establishes an allowable lateral

imperfection of L/750, which leads to SFcr > 1.25. Contrarily, the MC-2010 (see
section 7.3.8) suggests considering a lateral deflection of L/300 in the stability analysis,
which would not be acceptable for this beam according to the results presented in
Figure 5. MC-2010 also suggests to ignore the second order effects with regard to
lateral instability in case of elements that fulfil the condition L/b ≤ 50/(h/b)1/3, (b and
h being the width of the upper flange and h the height of the cross section, respectively)
The girder analysed in this study fulfils this condition since L/b = 38 and 50/(h/b)1/3
= 42. Therefore, problems of lateral instability could occur despite complying with the
requirements from the codes.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the current tendency of stretching PPCGs whilst maintaining
the same cross-sections available in traditional catalogues increases the risk of lateral
instability. Additional measures should be taken in order to prevent this problem.

Despite complying with the requirements of EN 15050 and MC-2010, the girder
analysed here showed cracking and non-recoverable deflections as a result of lateral
instability during lifting. The analysis conducted with the assumptions proposed in this
paper confirms the slim safety margin of the element during the lifting.

Such results suggest that the allowable lateral imperfections and the criteria to
disregard the influence of second order effects defined in guidelines should be revised
in accordance with these new trends. In this sense, it is worth mentioning that the fib

Rev. 10/2016
8 fib_symposium_2017, 224, v4: ’Lateral stability of prestressed precast concrete girders . . .

TG 6.5 Precast Bridges is already proposing new provisions adapted to the current
practices in the precast concrete engineering field.

REFERENCES

Anderson, A. R. "Lateral stability of long prestressed concrete beams". PCI Journal,

16(3), 7-9. May-June 1971.
Bairán, J. M. and Cladera, A. (2014). “Collapse of a precast concrete beam for a light
roof. Importance of elastomeric bearing pads in the element’s stability.” Eng.
Failure Analysis, 39, 188-199.
Castrodale, R. W. and White, C. D. "Extending Span Ranges of Precast Prestressed
Concrete Girders". National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Report
517. Washington D. C., 2004.
de la Fuente, A., Aguado, A., Molins, C., and Armengou, J. (2012). “Numerical model
for the analysis up to failure of precast concrete sections.” Comput. Struct.,106-
107, 105-14.
EHE-08. Comisión Permanente del Hormigón. Instrucción de Hormigón Estructural.
Ministerio de Fomento. 3th Edition, 2009.
EN 15050:2008 +A1:2012. Precast concrete products – Bridge elements.
fib Bulletins 65-66, Model Code 2010. Final Draft, 2010. fédération internationale du
béton (fib), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Hurff, J. "Stability of Precast Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders Considering
Imperfections and Thermal Effects". Georgia Institute of Technology, School
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, August 2010.
Laszlo, G. and Imper, R. R. "Handling and Shipping of Long Span Bridge Beams".
PCI Journal, November-December 1987, pp. 86-101.
Mast, R. F. (1989). “Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams, Part 1.”
PCI J. 34(1), 34–53.
Mast, R. F. (1993). “Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete Beams, Part 2.”
PCI J., 38(1), 70–88.
Mast, R. F. (1994). “Lateral bending test to destruction of a 149 ft. prestressed
concrete I-beam.” PCI J., 39(1), 54-62.
Muller, J. "Lateral Stability of Precast Members During Handling and Placing". PCI
Journal, February 1962, pp. 20-31.
PCI. Tolerance Manual for Precast and Prestressed Concrete Construction. Precast
Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL. 1st ed., 2000.
PCI. Recommended practice for lateral stability of precast, prestressed concrete
bridge girders (CB-02-16). PCI committee on Bridges. 2016.
Plaut, R. H., and Moen, C. D. (2013). “Analysis of elastic, doubly symmetric,
horizontally curved beams during lifting." J. Struct. Eng., 139(1), 39-46.
Rose, J. "Marquam Bridge wreck likely caused by truck with massive beam braking
for Portland traffic jam". The Oregonian, April 2013.
Stratford, T. J., and Burgoyne, C. J. (2000). “The toppling of hanging beams.” Int. J.
Solids Struct., 27(26), 3569-3589.
Swann, R. A., Readers comment to "Lateral Stability of Long Prestressed Concrete
Beams", PCI Journal, 16(6), November-December 1971.

Rev. 10/2016

View publication stats