Servoeabty Based

PartiaDy
i8 r.t^'

p 1
is

PrestrE!^^s earns t

Antoine E. Naaman
Associate Professor of
Structural Design
Materials Engineering Department
University of Illinois at
Chicago Circle
Chicago, Illinois

Amnuayporn Siriaksorn
Graduate Student
Materials Engineering Department
University of Illinois at
Chicago Circle

Part g AnaIytca

p
artially prestressed concrete type for at least two major reasons:
beams are concrete beams rein- (a) From a behavioral viewpoint,
forced with a combination of pre- they crack under a fraction of the
stressed and non-prestressed rein- specified live load; essentially, in the
forcement. They occupy the whole cracked state they act as reinforced
spectrum of reinforcing range be- concrete beams subjected to com-
tween fully reinforced and fully pre- bined bending and compression,
stressed concrete beams. while in the untracked state they act
Partially prestressed beams are as prestressed beams; and
more complex to design than either
(b) From a design viewpoint, they
have to accommodate simultaneously
NOTE: This paper, which is based on a the concepts of ultimate strength de-
study supported by a PCI Research Fel-
lowship, has been reviewed by the PCI sign currently used in reinforced con-
Technical Activities Committee and is crete, some concepts of working stress
hereby endorsed for publication in the PCI design mostly used in prestressed
JOURNAL. concrete and the concepts of service-

64
ability, i.e., acceptable overall be-
havior under service loads.
In European practice, concrete
structures are classified in four
categories: Class 1 for fully pre-
stressed, Class 4 for fully reinforced,
Class 2 for prestressed structures in
which tension is permitted but crack-
ing is not allowed under working
loads, and Class 3 where tension and
cracking are permitted under working
loads but crack width is limited.
According to the above categories
partial prestressing would come under
Class 3 structures. However, in
American practice Classes 1 and 2 are
essentially combined, thus leading to
three general categories.
Historically, partial prestressing ap-
pears to have originated from the work
of the Austrian engineer Fritz Em-
perger (1939) who was trying to im-
prove the cracking and deflection be-
havior of reinforced concrete beams
by adding some prestressed wires.'
Following the experiments of Em-
perger, Abeles2 developed further the
idea of partial prestressing by using
high strength wires to minimize the
effect of prestress losses. Based on
extensive research while working in
England (starting from 1940), Abeles
PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979
convinced British Railways to use
partially prestressed beams for their
bridge replacement program.3-5
Thereafter, he pursued and promoted
the use of partial prestressing in many
diverse types of applications.
Today, partial prestressing is ac-
cepted world wide (at least implicitly)
in most engineering codes of practice
and a number of researchers have al-
ready forcused on its potentials.617
Partially prestressed concrete can
offer some advantages over either
fully reinforced or fully prestressed
concrete. Compared to fully rein-
forced concrete, partial prestressing
offers better cracking and deflection
control (short and long-term) and
lesser use of materials; compared to
fully prestressed concrete, partial pre-
stressing offers better camber (short
and long-term) control, higher ductil-
ity and energy absorption to failure
and in some instances cost savings.
Cost savings will depend on the cost
ratio per unit weight of prestressing
steel to reinforcing steel in place and
appears to materialize for cost ratios
above approximately 4.
Typical load-deflection response
curves of a fully prestressed, fully rein-
forced and partially prestressed con-
65
 crete beam are shown in Fig. 1. Also
schematically shown are the mag-
nitudes of dead load moment, live
load moment and ultimate moment.
Assuming that the same beam is de-
signed for each of the above three
cases to carry the same ultimate load,
its deflection at cracking would be es-
sentially the same while the cracking
moment would change substantially.
From Fig. 1 it can be seen that a
reinforced concrete beam is cracked
under the effect of dead load, a fully
prestressed concrete beam is un-
cracked under the effect of service
load (dead load plus live load), and a
partially prestressed beam can have
any behavior in between. Thus, the
reinforced concrete and fully pre-
stressed concrete curves represent the
boundaries (or special cases) of the
behavior of a member while partially
prestressed concrete occupies a vast
(and largely unexplored) area between
the boundaries.
To take advantage of the effect of
prestressing, partially prestressed
beams are generally designed not to
crack under the sole effect ofdead
load. Cracking will occur due to the
application of full live load; it leads to
a sudden shift in the location of neu-
tral axis (zero stress point) along the
cross section of the member and a
sudden increase in stresses in the
steel and the concrete. Since live load
is usually repetitive, its effect on the
fatigue characteristics of the materials
involved must be assessed.
Fig. 2 shows schematically typical
stress changes in the steel of a par-
tially prestressed beam due to the ap-
plication of the full live load. (The
beam is that described in Fig. 8 and
the design example.) Cracking in the
concrete leads to an increase in cur-
vature and deflection (Fig. 3) and re-
duces the protection of the steel rein-
forcement against corrosion, thus
jeopardizing the serviceability of the
member.

66
 (D) ULTIMATE LOAD -
OVERREINFORCED
LOAD OR MOMENT (0) ULTIMATE LOAD -
UNDERREINFORCED

ULTIMATE RESISTANCE

---------I------ -
4
0
J
r,
w ONSET OF YIELDING
Q IN STEEL

O ( FULLY PRESTRESSED
J Zi. -
0
W o > \ PARTIALLY PRESTRESSED
N J l
rX
0
I- Ir °Q ! ++- REINFORCED CONCRETE
0 K
4 ai f / ^.

0
CAMBER— Z CURVATURE OR DEFLECTION
() (8)
U
Q
V
Fig. 1. Typical load-deflection response of concrete structures.

It can be seen from the above re-
marks that the analysis and/or design
of partially prestressed structures in-
volve the consideration of many
criteria dealing not only with allowa-
ble stresses or ultimate resistance but
also fatigue, camber, deflection,
cracking, corrosion and other perfor-
mance criteria.
In this study no attempt is made to
provide guidelines on how to propor-
tion, for a specific design problem, the
cross section of a member. It will be
assumed that the concrete cross sec-
tion is provided (using for example
methods developed for fully rein-
forced or fully prestressed beams as a
basis for a first approximation) and
that the design focuses on determin-
ing the adequate amounts of pre-
stressed and non-prestressed rein-
forcements which satisfy most rele-
vant design criteria.
In the first part of this investigation
essential background information
needed to analyze and/or design par-
tially prestressed beams is presented;
then a rational design procedure is
developed and proposed for usage; its
main advantages are to accommodate
the current ACI Code and to incorpo-
rate in the design process the most
important serviceability criteria. Flow
charts for the design of rectangular
and T sections are provided and a
numerical example is solved step by
step.
The second part of this study de-
scribes a computer program de-
veloped at the University of Illinois,
Chicago Circle, for the optimum de-
sign of partially prestressed beams.
The results of a computerized
parametric analysis of typical standard
shapes of precast prestressed sections
are presented and analyzed.
Similarly analyzed are various
equations to predict maximum crack
widths and deflection of a cracked
beam.

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979 67



o Qfs
F
5 o nfPs

J
30
0
I-

W
D
25
N

20
J
W
W
(` I I
N

z
5 I I
W
0
z

ol 0 I I

Me M cr I M p<Mcr <Mp+M LMir M + M

WI
5

O.2 0.4 O.5 U•b lu

PPR, PARTIAL PRESTRESSING RATIO
Fig. 2. Stress changes in steel due to full live load at different levels of prestressing.

Definitions PPR = (M.) ^ (1)

(M u)p+8
In order to quantify the amount of
prestressing in a partially prestressed Estimating the ultimate moment re-
beam a parameter termed "Partial sistance of prestressed and partially
Prestressing Ratio," "Prestressing prestressed sections according to the
Index" or "Degree of Prestress" is ACI Code leads to the following
generally introduced. equation:
Partial Prestressing Ratio
PPR –
The term Partial Prestressing Ratio a
(PPR) used by the authors is the ratio APpB(d^ 2)
f ultimate resisting moment due to
o a a
the prestressing steel to the ultimate APJ (d, – 2 ) + Af,,(d $ – 2 )
resisting moment due to the total ten-
sile steel: (2)

68


4
O

U
Q
U 2

X
Q

x
0
E
3
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

O
2
W

F-
Q

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

RATIO OF LIVE LOAD TO FULL LIVE LOAD

Fig. 3. Effect of live load on cracking and curvature of a partially prestressed beam.

where (see also Fig. 5): d8 = distance from extreme com-

A P3 = area of prestressing steel
A 3 = area of reinforcing steel
a = depth of compressive stress
block of concrete at ultimate
dp = distance from the extreme
compressive fiber of concrete
to centroid of prestressing
steel
pressive fiber of concrete to
centroid of non-prestressed
(reinforcing) steel
fP8 = stress in prestressing steel at
ultimate behavior
= yield strength of reinforcing
steel

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979 69

 If dp = d 8 or if d is defined as the
distance from the extreme compres-
sive fiber to the centroid of the tensile
force, the value of PPR is reduced to a
convenient form:
PPR = `^ PgfPB
A.Jf.g + AJ.
Note that the above expression as-
sumes that at ultimate behavior of the
beam, the stress in the reinforcing
bars reaches their yield strength; this
is generally true for under-reinforced
beams. If non-tensioned prestressing
steel is used instead of reinforcing
bars, one must replace f, by an ade-
quate value which, if the beam is un-
der-reinforced, may not be equal to
the yield strength.
Prestressing Index
Thiirlimann6J has suggested the use
of a parameter termed "Prestressing
Index" and defined by:
A PB_ P_
ip = ('
A PjPU + AS/
where
fpa = yield strength of prestressing
steel taken at 0.2 percent off-
set strain
This expression is essentially simi-
lar to the definition of PPR given by
Eq. (3) except that fp,, is used instead
of f3.
Degree of Prestress
An alternative way to quantify the
extent of partial prestressing was
given by Ramaswamy, 18 who defined
the "Degree of Prestress" as the ratio
of moment at decompression to the
full service load moment
( M DEC / (MD + ML)l.
The decompression moment is the
moment which, combined with the
effective prestressing force, leads to a
zero stress in either the bottom fiber
of concrete or in the concrete at the
70
level of the steel (prestressed or non-
prestressed). When this definition is
used the exact meaning of the decom-
pression moment must be specified.
In any of the above three definitions
for partial prestressing the value of the
(3) descriptive parameter varies between
zero and one. For the value of zero,
we have essentially a fully reinforced
concrete section while for one we
have a fully prestressed section. If as
often used in the design, the moment
at decompression is made at least
equal to the dead load moment, then a
lower limit to the "Degree of Pre-
stress" can be very easily determined
from the ratio of dead load moment to
the moment at full service load.
Similarly, a lower limit to the value
of PPR would be
1.4 M D l(1.4 M D + 1.7 ML)
if the ACI approach is used for ulti-
mate design (i.e., if the prestressing
steel resisted only the dead load por-
(4) tion of the ultimate moment).
(4)
Criteria for
Flexural Design
Flexural design should take into ac-
count both the specified ultimate
moment and the appropriate service
load conditions.
At Ultimate
The main criterion here is to insure
that the ultimate moment resistance of
the section is larger than or equal to
the specified ultimate moment (fac-
torized moment):
(Mu)Res.' (Mu)sPec
Note that according to the ACI
Code:
(Mu)spec. = 1.4 M D + 1.7ML
where M D and M L are, respectively,
the dead load and live load moments.
One may also consider a "minimum
ductility criterion" based on ultimate
curvature of the section (or ultimate
deflection of the member) but this
parameter seldom controls the design.
Under Service Loads
Service load refers here to the com-
bination of dead load plus live load
(non-factorized). Service load may not
necessarily mean "full service load"
and may have to be exactly specified
for each design criterion.
Leonhardt proposes different levels
of service loads depending on re-
quirements.'4 For example, the full
live load is seldom applied to a struc-
ture during its life. In studying the
frequency distribution of actual live
loadings on a number of structures, it
has been found that in more than 95
percent of the cases, the actual live
load varies between 20 to 70 percent
of the specified live load and that the
most frequent value falls between
about 40 to 50 percent. Thus, it may
be legitimate in order to design for
fatigue to specify a value of the re-
petitive load, e.g., equal to only 50
percent of the live load.
Note, however, that this assumption
may not be realistic for all structures;
for example, the actual magnitude and
frequency of live loads in railway
bridges are known more exactly and
are quite close to the full service load
conditions.
The most frequently considered
criteria for the design of partially pre-
stressed beams under service load
conditions are as follows:
a. Allowable stresses in the con-
crete must not be exceeded
under the application of tempo-
rary loads (such as initial pre-
stressing, transportation, erec-
tion) or full service load.
b. The change in stress in the steel
(prestressed and non-pre-
stressed) and in the concrete,
due to the application of full live
PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1979
load or fraction of it (as dis-
cussed above)must be less than
or equal to the maximum stress
ranges recommended by codes
in order to guarantee a specified
fatigue life (for example, more
than 2 X 106 cycles).
c. The maximum crack width
under the effect of full service
load must be limited to a
specified value.
d. The total camber (short and
long-term) due to the combined
effect of prestressing force and
dead load must be limited to a
specified value; similarly, the
maximum change in deflection
due to the application of the live
load and the combination of live
load and additional long-term
dead load effects must satisfy
code limitations.
e. At least qualitatively, the effect
of the environment on the corro-
sion of the steel must be satis-
factory.
Once the design criteria are set, two
types of questions must generally be
clarified for each criterion, namely:
How to estimate the variable of con-
cern? What are the code limitations
for this variable? For example, how to
predict maximum crack width and
what limits on its value are set in vari-
ous codes?
Crack Width—
Prediction Formulas
Several formulas to predict crack
width in partially prestressed beams
are available in the technical litera-
ture. Generally they can be classified
into two major categories:
a. Formulas in which the crack
width is related to a fictitious
tensile stress in the concrete,
i.e., the stress which would
71
 occur if the concrete were of suffi-
cient strength to remain un-
cracked under full service load.
This concept has been mostly
promoted by Abeles 5
b. Formulas in which the crack
width is related to the tensile
stress in the reinforcement, such
as those proposed by Bennett
and Chandrasekhar, 19 Bennett
and Veerasubramanian, 8 Nawy
and Huang,2° CEB-FIP recom-
mendations,21 and Gergeley and
Lutz .23
The merits of most of the above
formulas are analyzed in Reference
24. Here only two equations will be
reviewed.
The CEB-FIP recommendations of
197021 suggest the following formula
to predict the maximum crack width
in partially prestressed beams as a
function of the tensile stress in the
non-prestressed reinforcement under
service loads:
Wma., = (fs – 40)10-3
(for static loads) (5)
and
Wmax =.fs X 10-3
(for repetitive loads) (6)
where Wmax is given in mm and f8 in
N/mm2 . The corresponding expres-
sions in the U. S. system would be given
by:
Wmax = (27f3 – 157.5)10-5
(for static loads) (7)
and
Wmax = 27f, x 10-5
(for repetitive loads) (8)
where Wmax is in inches and f8 in ksi.
Eqs. (5) to (8) are very simple to use
but they ignore a number of important
cracking parameters. The 1978 edition
of the CEB-FIP Code for concrete
structures22 contains a more complete
formula to predict maximum crack
width. It is not given here because of
its complexity and corresponding
72
lengthy nomenclature and notations.
Its effect, however, will be analyzed
on a design example in the second
part of this paper.
In 1968 Gergeley and Lutz23 pro-
posed an equation to predict the
maximum crack width at the tension
face of flexural reinforced concrete
members; the ACI Code has essen-
tially adopted their formula to predict
cracking in reinforced concrete beams
and slabs; however, this formula does
not directly apply to partially pre-
stressed beams.
In a recent investigation Nawy and
Huang2 ° proposed a prediction equa-
tion, which is to a certain extent an
adaptation to partially prestressed
beams of the ACI Code formula. The
maximum crack width (in inches) is
given by:
Wmax = a(10 5 )/3 0(O.fn8) (9)
where
/3 = ratio of distances to neutral
axis from extreme tension
fiber and from centroid of
reinforcement
A Z = area of concrete tensile zone
1O = sum of perimeters of rein-
forcing elements
Qf, = net stress change in pre-
stressing steel after decom-
pression, or tensile stress in
non-prestressing steel (i.e.,f8 )
a = a factor equal to 5.85 when
bonded tendons are used
and 6.53 when unbonded
tendons are used
Eq. (9) has the advantage of taking
into account most of the parameters
found important in the cracking be-
havior of concrete members. Eqs. (5)
to (9) assume that the steel stress is
essentially in the linear elastic range
of behavior.
Bennett and Chandrasekhar 19 and
Bennett and Veerasubramanian8 have
proposed equations relating the
maximum crack width in partially pre-
Table 1. Typical Values of Maximum Allowable Crack Widths.

Maximum allowable crack width

Source Exposure condition in. mm in. mm
Interior exposure (dry air,
protective membrane) 0.016 0.40
Exterior exposure (moist
air, soil) 0.013 0.33
ACI Seawater; wetting and
Committee drying 0.006 0.15
224
Water-retaining structures 0.004 0.10
Deicing chemicals 0.007 0.18
Two limits are recom-
mended depending on
CP-110 the tensile stress in the 0.0078 0.20
(England) concrete and the pre- 0.0039 0.10
stressing method
Cracking not per- Cracking per-
mitted under mitted under
dead load dead load
Air or protective mem-
brane 0.012 0.30 0.010 0.25
Salt air, water and soil 0.010 0.25 0.008 0.20
Abeles
(Reference 5) Deicing chemicals, humid
tropical climate, sea
water; wetting and
drying 0.008 0.20 0.006 0.15

stressed beams to the strain in the
tensile reinforcement after decom-
pression. The main advantage of these
equations, which are analyzed in more
detail in Reference 24, is that they
also apply to the non-linear range of
behavior of the prestressed reinforce-
ment.
Once the value of maximum crack
width is calculated, it must be com-
pared to code recommended limits.
These limits are better visualized in a
table (see Table 1) where a rapid
comparison can be made between the
ACI Code, the British Code, and the
recommendations proposed by
Abeles.5 It can be seen from Table 1
that despite the variabilities expected
in predicting crack widths, the three
approaches cover essentially the same
range of crack widths.
Stress Limitations
for Fatigue
In fully prestressed members, the
changes in stresses in the concrete
and in the steel under the effect of re-
petitive live loads are not critical. For
example, the application of the full
live load will lead to an increase in
stress in the prestressing steel of only
a few ksi. Similarly, it will lead to a
change in stress in the concrete much
below the 50 or 55 percent range of
ultimate stress needed for concrete
survival up to 10 million cycles.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1979 73

 In partially prestressed beams, the
section is generally uncracked under
the sole effect of the dead load and
will crack due to the application of the
live load. Cracking of the section will
shift upward the location of the neu-
tral axis of bending by a substantial
amount leading to a sudden increase
in the steel stress and in the concrete
extreme compressive fiber (to main-
tain equilibrium of forces and mo-
ments in the section). These repetitive
changes in stresses create fatigue
damage 13•"•25,26,27 in the corresponding
materials, reduce bond propertied4
and must therefore be limited in mag-
nitude.
ACI Committee 21528 on fatigue of
concrete structures has recommended
the following limitations to prevent
fatigue failures:
a. Prestressing tendons. The ten-
sile stress range under repeated
service loads shall not exceed:
ft, = 0.10f, (for strands)
(10)
and
ft,. = 0.12f2 (for wires) (11)
This leads to a stress range limit
of the order of 27 ksi (186 N/
mm') for strands and 30 ksi (207
N/mm2 ) for wires.
b. Deformed reinforcing bars. The
stress range in tension or combi-
nation of tension and compres-
sion under repeated service
loads shall not exceed
fr , = 20 ksi (138 N/mm2 ) (12)
ACI Committee 44329 on bridge
structures recommends a differ-
ent formula as follows:
f,., = 21,000 – 0.33fmi„ + 80000
(13)
where 0 is the ratio of base radi-
us to height of rolled-on trans-
verse deformation (0.3 is recom-
mended value).
74
c. Concrete. The compressive
stress range in the concrete due
to the effect of repeated service
loads shall not exceed
fcr = 0.4 f f – (14)
where
fC = compressive strength of
concrete (cylinders)
fmin = minimum stress in con-
crete (i.e., stress due to
dead load plus prestress)
Determination of
Camber and Deflection
The determination of camber (up-
ward) and deflection (downward) due
to the prestressing force and external
loadings can be achieved using gen-
eral principles of mechanics such as
the mopent-area theorem. However,
formulas have been developed for
commonly encountered cases and can
be found in many handbooks; 30 some
of the most useful expressions are
summarized in Table 2.
In calculating camber and deflec-
tion, at least two important properties
must be defined, namely, the modulus
of elasticity of the concrete and the
moment of inertia of the section.
The modulus of elasticity of the
concrete (secant modulus at 0.45 f, )
can be estimated from the expression
recommended by the ACI Code31 in
Section 8.3.
The moment of inertia of the sec-
tion, used to compute deflection, will
depend on whether the section is
cracked or not. If the section is un-
cracked the moment of inertia of the
transformed section of concrete
should theoretically be used; how-
ever, if the amount of reinforcement is
small, the gross moment of inertia of
the concrete section can be used in-
stead without jeopardizing the accu-
racy of the results by more than a few
percent.
ble 2. Typical Midspan Cambers and Deflections.
CAMBER DUE TO PRESTRESSING FORCE DEFLECTION DUE TO LOADING

CGC
+ - --- a ---
CGS W

L — ^- L
Fe 1 L 2 5wL4
384EI
8EI

CGC
e2t --- e -- CGS P
I

FL 2 5( PL3
8EI [e 2 + 6 le l e 2)] 48E1

CGC
eZ -^- _ e l - - P Pb
CGS b

FL2 (3L2
8EI [e 2 + (el- e 2) { 1 3 \ L )ZJJ 24EI 4b2^

FOR THE UNCRACKED SECTION, USE I OF TRANSFORMED SECTION OR 'gross

gross FI
APPROXIMATION. FOR THE CRACKED SECTION, USE I = EFFECTIVE MOMENT OF INER
e
GIVEN BY: g
+
cr -aMcr
M (Ig - I cr
I e = I < Ig )

If the section is cracked, the ACI I e as originally suggested by Branson32

Code recommends the use of the ef- is given by:
fective moment of inertia I e which is
an average value to be used all across
a simple span and is weighted de- Ie = I cr + I crj3(Ig-Icr)_19

pending on the extent of probable a

cracking under moment. The value of (15)

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1979 75

where
I C , = moment of inertia of cracked Design for Flexure
section
I g = gross moment of inertia of Several design methods 2,7,9,'5 can be
concrete section (without followed for the design of partially
steel) prestressed beams and are reviewed
M c,. = cracking moment = f,Ig/ya in Reference 24. A more recent ap-
M,, = maximum moment in mem- proach proposed by Moustafa l' at-
ber at stage for which deflec- tempts to simplify the procedure by
tion is computed developing charts and interaction
Several studies have shown remark- diagrams for standard beams.
able agreement between measured Generally speaking the design
deflections and deflections computed comprises two major steps:
using I. In order to compute 'e, the First the values ofA p, and A, are ar-
cracked moment of inertia I,, must be rived at using working stress limita-
known. Its value can be calculated tions and/or ultimate strength re-
from the following equation assuming quirements, and second, an analysis of
the location c of the neutral axis of the the cracked section is undertaken to
cracked section has been determined check criteria at service loads such as
as shown in a later section: cracking, fatigue, deflection. In any
c3b case a few iterations may be necessary
I cr = 3C + A na n n(d. — c )' + to finalize the design.

Designing for A,, and A,

gn$(d8 – c)2 – (b – bw) (c – h f)3
A
3
(16)
The above expression applies to
both rectangular and T-sections. For
rectangular sections use b = b,,, which
eliminates the last term of the equa-
tion.
Once the instantaneous camber or
deflection has been calculated the
long-term values must be estimated.
Branson 31 ' 33 suggested a method
which takes into consideration the
effects of creep, shrinkage and loss of
prestress; more recently Martin34 pro-
posed a number of simplified factors
to estimate long-term effects.
In order to ensure satisfactory be-
havior, the ACI Code (Section 9.5)
imposes certain limits on deflections
of concrete structures computed in
function of their clear span. These
will not be reproduced here. Note that
the British Code (CP-110) follows es-
sentially the same approach as the
ACI Code with different numerical
values.
The determination of A„, based on
working stress limitations such as the
fictitious tensile stress method pro-
posed by Abeless or the decompres-
sion moment proposed by Ramas-
wamy18 do not appear to represent a
general and rational approach for cur-
rent design situations. For example,
the British Code CP110 recommends
hypothetical allowable tensile stresses
which depend on the type of pre-
stressing, the allowable crack width,
the compressive strength of the con-
crete and the depth of the member.
A computerized evaluation of vari-
ous case studies (described in the sec-
ond part of this paper) indicates that
calculated hypothetical stresses are far
different from those suggested in the
codes and do not necessarily follow
the trends prescribed by them. These
results reinforce Lin's observation that
a fixed value or set of values of allow-
able tensile stresses will generally
yield different safety factors for differ-
ent sections and hence cannot serve as
proper design criteria."

76


Given Cross Section of Concrete

Materials Properties and
Loading Conditions

No Use Exact Analysis

f 5e > 0.5 fpu for fps (See Ref. 12)

Yes

Assume a Value of PPR

Estimate d = PPRdp + (1-PPR)ds

Compute q from
Mu q must be < 0.3
q(1 - 0.59 q) _ ^bd2f^

Yes
NoYes

=
M - M - 0.85 ^ f I (b-bw )h fl Id - h 1 I 2 Fu = gbdf,, PPR

Compute qw from
M
uw
4w (1-0.59q)w = bwd2fc

F = PPR f , [O.85 (b-bw )h fl + gwbw d]

U

No
Bonded Member
f'bd
c
Fu 100 bdpfc 2Fu
fs
+ 10000 fpu [ -^1 - bdPfc

APs = largest of
F
fu
A =-
r A
f =f I1 - 0. S bd fJ
f lF=A

py L p c Ps
F
u
f .60000
se

1-PPR " s - s
U or \ PPR ) f
As o
fps Aps P 1-PPR Fu
( P R)f

\c . SatisfyNo Change
Serviceability PPR
Criteria?
STOP

Fig. 4. Flow chart for ultimate strength flexural design of partially prestressed sections.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1979 77

 In order to avoid the inconsistency
of the hypothetical tensile stress ap-
proach, the authors propose the fol-
lowing method (based on ultimate
strength) to determine the values of
A, and A 3 ; it is based on a first esti-
mate of the partial prestressing ratio
PPR and takes into account the cur-
rent design philosophy of the ACI
Code.
The following steps are suggested
and apply to a rectangular section; a
more complete procedure which esti-
mates the value off18 at ultimate from
the ACI Code and includes the case of
T-sections and unbonded members is
shown in the flow chart (Fig. 4); it is
assumed that the concrete section,
materials properties and loading con-
ditions are known:
1. Estimate the required partial
prestressing ratio PPR. One can
use as a first approximation the
following expressions:
1.4M D MD
or
1.4 M D + 1.7 M LMD + ML
Typical values of PPR for various
standard precast sections as derived
from a computerized parametric
evaluation are suggested in the sec-
ond part of this paper.
2. Estimate d from:
d = d, PPR + d 3 (1 – PPR) (17)
3. Compute required ultimate mo-
ment resistance M u and deter-
mine required reinforcing index
q (from tables or by solving di-
rectly a quadratic equation):
q(1 – 0.59 q) = M.
(18)
If the value of f,$ is estimated
from ACI Formulas (18.3) and
(18.4), use the equations given in
the flow chart to compute A13
and A 8 ; otherwise estimate the
value of f,$ at ultimate and com-
puteA„3 and A, from:
78
M.
A P8 = PPR (19)
dfp$ (1 – 0.59 q)4
As = A nJn3 ( 1 – PPR)
(20a)
f,PPR
or
A3 = 1 [ gbdfc — A nJ 3I (20b)
fy
5. Check if estimated values of d
and f13 are adequate; if not, go
back to Step 2 and revise the de-
sign, using integer numbers of
strands, wires and bars. Note
serviceability criteria may also
require revision of the design by
increasing the estimated value of
PPR.
An example of the use of this
method is shown in Section C of the
design example (see Appendix).
Designing for Service
Load Criteria
Once A„8 and A. are determined the
section can be analyzed more com-
pletely and its adequacy checked for
the different service load criteria. This
requires using the mathematical
equations developed in the next sec-
tion for the analysis of the cracked
section. The following steps can be
used:
1. Check stresses in the steel and in
the concrete assuming a cracked
section under full service load
(Mo + M L ); in general this step is
not critical except for some
heavily loaded slabs where the
compressive stress after cracking
may become excessive.
2. Check stress changes in the steel
and in the concrete for repetitive
moments of magnitude tJML
where q is a specified factor.
(Example: qi = 0.5; see also Ref-
erence 14.)
3. Check expected maximum crack
width under full service load
 (M D + M L ). (See also Reference Uncracked Section
14 for additional suggestions.) As a first approximation one could
4. Check camber and deflection calculate the stresses in an uncracked
under short and long-term load- partially prestressed section in a way
ings. [See ACI Table 9.5(b) for similar to a fully prestressed section
maximum allowable deflections; assuming that the value of the pre-
see also References 32-34.1 stressing force (or the stress in the
5. Check corrosion protection by prestressing steel) remains constant
concrete cover, maximum crack under the effect of live load moments.
width and specified environ- However, since stress fluctuations are
ment. important in estimating fatigue resis-
If any of the above criteria are not tance, the above approximation may
acceptable, the prestressing steel or be well on the unsafe side.
equivalently the PPR must be in- The effective value of prestressing
creased accordingly (except for the force F is defined as that obtained
case of camber). One can use a "linear after all prestress losses have taken
extrapolation" type of increase or use place and in presence of the dead load
"incremental" increases of 5 or 10 moment. Any moment larger than the
percent in A,, or PPR. On the other dead load moment will increase the
hand, if all criteria are largely satis- value of F (or equivalently fp8i the
fied, one may try to reduce the value stress in the prestressing steel). Thus
of PPR. In either case, the design may fp$ is a variable and refers to the stress
require some revision and tuning. in the prestressing steel for any of the
loadings considered. Note that the in-
Service Load Analysis crease in steel stress Af 8 will affect
the value of the cracking moment and
(Bonded Tendons) vice versa.
Using the assumptions mentioned
Once the values of A P3 and A S are
above, the analysis of the section
determined the section must be
leads to a number of equations which
analyzed in order to determine
are summarized in Table 3. These ex-
stresses and stress ranges in the steel
pressions allow the determination of
and concrete under service loads.
stresses and stress ranges in the sec-
The assumptions are as follows:
tion under the effect of any moment
1. Both steel and concrete are less than the cracking moment.
linear elastic in the range of
The meaning of each mathematical
stresses considered.
symbol is summarized in the Notation
2. Plane sections remain plane
section (see Appendix) and in Figs. 5
under bending.
to 7. Note that for concrete, compres-
3. Perfect bond exists between
sion is considered positive and ten-
steel and concrete.
sion negative; while for steel, com-
4. Concrete does not withstand ten-
sile stresses (when cracked sec- pression is negative and tension is
tion analysis is considered). positive.
Based on these four assumptions a
mathematical solution can be derived Cracked Section
for both cases of uncracked and In order to determine the stresses in
cracked sections. Details of the com- the cracked section of a partially pre-
putations are given in Reference 24. stressed beam subjected to a moment
Here, however, only the main results M larger than the cracking moment,
will be summarized. one must first determine the location

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979 79

Table 3. Summary of Basic Equations for the Uncracked Section.

Loading Equation
Case Useful Equations: Untracked Section
No.

f pa = f 5e

f
(F + MD) _ se
Ese E 2
PS
I Ap s fse (r2 •e2)) _
C 3
C I

(M - M)e
f = + Do 4

ps se I Ec +
Eps

(F + M) fpAAps e o ( d s-Yt )1 M(ds-Y

f cns
MD < M Mcr + 2 I
c E
E
s
f s = - E c fcns 6

fA e MY
fct = APs 1 - k ° +' I t 7
c b

E c 1 p^
I E + Aps (r2+e o ) [s f seot)* 75z b} -Aps(ee+kt)e D
Mcr = +Aps (r 2 -e 0 kt )
(F + M cr^ I c 8
E ps

NOTE: F= A ps fps ;fps (thus F)varies with the applied moment M

of the neutral axis which is defined stressed, fully reinforced, or partially

here as the point of zero stress. prestressed rectangular or T sections
Using equilibrium of forces and with and without compressive rein-
moments, strain compatibility and forcement (for rectangular sections
linear stress-strain relationships use b = b).
leads 24 to a most general cubic equa- The solution of this equation is best
tion in c where c is the distance from obtained by trial and error noting that
the top fiber to the neutral axis (Figs. the value of c is somewhere between
6 and 7). Once c is determined other zero and d. It can also be used to
stresses along the cross section can be evaluate in a given section the redis-
calculated. tribution of stresses with time due to
The equations are summarized in the effect of creep. All that is needed
Table 4 while various symbols are ex- is to estimate the value of the appar-
plained in the Notation section (see ent modulus of elasticity of the con-
Appendix). Note that the cubic equa- crete as a function of time and solve
tion in c [Eq. (1), Table 4] is very gen- for the value of c. The procedure is
eral as it applies to cracked fully pre- repeated for different time periods.

80


b fct Ect

h fi

ill'
h dsdp

fcps
AAs
p
IIIs fcns
bw fcb cb
a) b)

Fig. 5. Typical stress and strain diagrams in concrete (uncracked section).

IHL
f t (c-ds )

i )f1I
h
^— A •d•
s s fi c
c fct c-h
c
h ds dp

Aps
As

rbw
Fig. 6. Typical stresses in concrete (cracked section, working stress range).

Concrete

Tension —T^ Compression

to
b

lhfi
iLL

hA
us

lIT Aps
As

bw

Fig. 7. Strain range diagrams from uncracked to cracked section.

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979 81

Table 4. Summary of basic equations for the cracked section.
Loading Equation
Useful Equations: Cracked Section
Case No.

A E A E 1
lu
(E Se + Ece^bw] c * 1Lw
(F +M) where 3 b _ 2 `- (e. _i c
1 31 • Ece)bwd P J
M> M c rand
2A E 2A'E' 2A E A E
s s +s s + ps ps - ps ps (E 2(b-b h d
[2(b-b h cc w) fl p
where concrete w) fl + E E E M 1 se ce)
c c c
and steels are 2A E 2A'E'
_ (b - b ) h z _ s s (d - dp) - s s
(d' - dp)) ] c ^(b b )h z 1
w/ fl E cEc s ` s w fl
working in elas-

tic range of 2 (AS E Sd s

+ Ec + ASEsds + A +^.M
AE s
(c cc
2 / 3
+ Ece/ 1 3 \b - bwIhfl
behavior with
2A E2A'E'd' \ / )
linear stress + Ec s (ds - dp)ds + S (ds
d P )] = 0
E - p ) - (b - bw'hfl U
and. strain dis- l )

tribution in Solve above equation for the value of c then compute:

the section.
c 2
f = E (c Se + Ece)
Apsps
ct AE
be _ ^ b 2bw)
(c h
2 f /z s (dp c)
A E cE s \d s - c )
c s (ds - c)AE^

E s-c\
^ds
fs E f ct c 3
C

+ -^
fps - Eps(e se + e ce) E fct C 4
C

f
Eps Eps 5

f
_
Es E 6
s

NOTE:
a) F=A F)varies with the applied moment M.

b) For rectangular sections b =b ; if no compressive reinforcement is used then AS = 0.

w

In order to evaluate the effect of any The equations given in Tables 3

moment M which is larger than the and 4 are used in the design example,
cracking moment and less than or Section D (see Appendix and Table
equal to the service moment, Eq. (1) 5), where other remarks and com-
(Table 4) can be put in the form: ments will be found.
The preceding section dealt with
M
c3 + 1 b X c2+
the analysis of partially prestressed
members where bonded tendons are
(x3_ c– (x5+
used. it was assumed that, under
M) M — 0 loading, the strain changes in the steel
(21) and in the concrete at the level of the

82
steel are equal (see Fig. 7). Hence, the
calculated steel stress is only section
dependent.
For unbonded tendons, as the steel
can slip with respect to the surround-
ing concrete, the steel stress repre-
sents an average along the member. It
is not section dependent; it is member
dependent and cannot be calculated
without the knowledge of the geomet-
ric properties of the member, steel
profile, end conditions and loading.
The analysis in this case is more com-
plex especially after cracking of the
concrete and is left to a future study.
Concluding Remarks
This paper has presented up-to-date
background information and the
mathematical basis for the analysis
and design of partially prestressed
beams to satisfy most commonly en-
countered serviceability criteria. The
proposed design method is accurate
and has the feature of accommodating
the current philosophy of the ACI
Code.
A design flow chart was developed
particularly for use by designers.
However, the many advantages of the
above described technique can only
be fully explored with the help of a
computer or electronic calculator.
This is done in the second part of
this study which describes a computer
program for the optimum design of
partially prestressed beams and gives
the results of a parametric analysis on
standard-shape sections.
Acknowledgment
This investigation has been supported
by a Research Fellowship Award from the
Prestressed Concrete Institute to the Uni-
versity of Illinois at Chicago Circle and by
the University of Illinois Research Board.
The authors wish to express their gratitude
for this support.
PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979
References
Emperger, F. V., Stahlbeton Mit Vor-
gespannten Zulagen Aus Hbherwer-
tigem Stahl; Forschingsar Beiten Auf
Dem Gebiete Des Eisenbetons (Rein-
forced Concrete With Additions of
High Strength Pretensioned Steel; Re-
search Studies in the Field of Rein-
forced Concrete), W. Ernst & Sohn,
Berlin, 1939.
2. Abeles, P. W., "Fully and Partly Pre-
stressed Reinforced Concrete," ACI
Journal, Proceedings V. 41, No. 3,
January 1945, pp. 181-216.
3. Abeles, P. W., "Partial Prestressing
and Possibilities for Its Practical Ap-
plications," PCI JOURNAL, V. 4, No.
1, June 1959, pp. 35-51.
4. Abeles, P. W., "Partial Prestressing in
England," PCI JOURNAL, V. 8, No. 1,
February 1963, pp. 51-72.
5. Abeles, P. W., "Design of Partially
Prestressed Concrete Beams," ACI
Journal, Proceedings, V. 64, No. 10,
October 1967, pp. 669-677.
6. Thiirlimann, B., and Caflisch, R.,
"Bending Tests on Partially Pre-
stressed Beams (in German)," Report
No. 6504-1, Institute of Structural En-
gineering, Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology, Zurich, Switzerland,
1970.
7. Thurlimann, B., "A Case for Partial
Prestressing," Structural Concrete
Symposium Proceedings, University of
Toronto, May 1971, pp. 253-301.
8. Bennett, E. W., and Veerasubrama-
nian, N., "Behavior of Nonrectangular
Beams with Limited Prestress After
Flexural Cracking," ACI Journal, Pro-
ceedings, V. 69, No. 9, September
1972, pp. 533-542.
9. Ramaswamy, P. S., Parameswaran, V.
S., and Annamalai, G., "Theoretical
and Experimental Investigations on
the Flexural Behavior of Class 3
Beams," Paper presented at the
Seventh Congress of FIP, New York,
N.Y., May 28-30, 1974.
10. Westlake, B. J., "Some Considerations
of the Application of Partial Prestress-
83
 ing," Research Report No. 259, School
of Engineering, University of Sydney,
January 1975, 31 pp.
11. Brçbndum-Nielsen, T., "Partial Pre-
stressing," FIP-CIA Symposium, Syd-
ney, August-September 1976, 27 pp. 20 Nawy, E. G., and Huang, P. T., "Crack
12. Naaman, A. E., "Ultimate Analysis of
Prestressed and Partially Prestressed
Sections by Strain Compatibility," PCI
JOURNAL, V. 22, No. 1, January-Feb-
ruary 1977, pp. 32-51.
13. Lin, T. Y., "Partial Prestressing Design
Philosophy and Approach," Presenta-
tion at a joint symposium organized by
ACI, CEB, PCI and FIP held in
Philadelphia, 1976; published in FIP
Notes 69, July-August 1977, pp. 5-9.
14. Leonhardt, F., "Recommendations for
the Degree of Prestressing in Pre-
stressed Concrete Structures," Pre-
sentation at a joint symposium or-
ganized by ACI, CEB, PCI and FIP
held in Philadelphia, 1976; published
in FIP Notes 69, July-August 1977, pp.
9-14.
15. Nilson, A. H., "Flexural Stresses After
Cracking in Partially Prestressed
Beams," PCI JOURNAL, V. 21, No. 4,
July-August 1976, pp. 72-81.
16. Moustafa, S. E., "Design of Partially
Prestressed Concrete Flexural Mem- 25. Hanson, J. M., Hulsbos, C. L., and Van
bers," PCI JOURNAL, V. 22, No. 3,
May-June 1977, pp. 12-29. See also
Discussion by E. W. Bennett, M. Bir-
kenmaier, T. Br4ndum-Nielsen,
A. S. G. Bruggeling, F. Levi, A. E. 26. Bennett, E. W., and Joynes, H. W.,
Naaman and A. Siriaksorn, A. H. Nil-
son, F. N. Pannell, K. Rajagopalan and
S. E. Moustafa's Closure of above
paper; PCI JOURNAL, V. 23, No. 3,
May-June 1978, pp. 92-105.
17. Bruggeling, A. S. G., Brunekreef, S. H.,
and Walraven, J. C., "Partially Pre-
stressed Concrete: Theory and Ex-
periments," Contribution to the 8th
FIP Congress, Heron, V. 23, No. 1,
1978, Delft, The Netherlands.
18. Ramaswamy, G. S., Modern Pre-
stressed Concrete Design, Pitman
Publications Ltd., London, England,
1976, Chapter 8.
19. Bennett, E. W., and Chandrasekhar, 29. ACI Committee 443, "Analysis and
84
C. S., "Calculation of the Width of
Cracks in 'Class 3' Prestressed
Beams," Proceedings, Institution of
Civil Engineers (London), V. 49, July
1971, pp. 333-346.
and Deflection Control of Preten-
sioned Prestressed Beams," PCI
JOURNAL, V. 22, No. 3, May-June
1977, pp. 30-43.
21. CEB-FIP Joint Committee, Interna-
tional Recommendations for the De-
sign and Construction of Concrete
Structures, Cement and Concrete As-
sociation, London, June 1970.
22. CEB-FIB Code for Concrete Struc-
tures, Working Document, Paris, April
1978, pp. 1-347.
23. Gergeley, P., and Lutz, L. A., "Causes,
Mechanisms and Control of Cracking
in Concrete," ACI Publication SP-20,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
1968.
24. Siriaksorn, A., and Naaman, A. E.,
"Analysis and Design of Partially Pre-
stressed Beams to Satisfy Serviceabil-
ity Criteria," University of Illinois at
Chicago Circle, Department of Mate-
rials Engineering, Report No. 78-1,
June 1978, 182 pp.
Horn, D. A., "Fatigue Tests of Pre-
stressed Concrete I-Beams," Pro-
ceedings, ASCE, V. 96, No. ST-11,
November 1970, pp. 2443-2463.
"Fatigue Resistance of Reinforcement
in Partially Prestressed Beams," PCI
JOURNAL, V. 22, No. 2, March-April
1977, pp. 78-89.
27. Price, K. M., and Edwards, A. D.,
"Fatigue Strength of Prestressed Con-
crete Flexural Members," Proceed-
ings, Institution of Civil Engineers
(London), V. 47, October 1970, pp.
205-226.
28. ACI Committee 215, "Consideration
for Design of Concrete Structures
Subjected to Fatigue Loading," ACI
Journal, V. 71, No. 3, March 1974, pp.
97-121.
 Design of Reinforced Concrete Bridge
Structures," American Concrete In-
stitute, Detroit, 1977, pp. 67-68.
30. PCI Design Handbook, Second Edi-
tion, Prestressed Concrete Institute,
Chicago, 1978.
31. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete
(ACI 318-77)," American Concrete In-
stitute, Detroit, 1977.
32. Branson, D. E., "Design Procedures
for Computing Deflections," ACI
Journal, Proceedings, V. 65, No. 9,
September 1968, pp. 730-742.
33. Branson, D. E., "The Deformation of
Noncomposite and Composite Pre-
stressed Concrete Members," Deflec-
tions of Concrete Structures, SP -43,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
Michigan, 1974.
34. Martin, D. L., "A Rational Method for
Estimating Camber and Deflection of
Precast Prestressed Members," PCI
JOURNAL, V. 22 No. 1, January-Feb-
ruary 1977, pp. 100-108.

APPENDIX A-DESIGN EXAMPLE

Consider the 70-ft span simply sup- E,^ = 3.834 X 106 psi
ported beam whose cross section is E 2 = 4.287 x 108 psi
shown in Fig. 8. Its geometric prop- E, = 27 x 10 6 psi
erties (gross) and other relevant in- E ., = 29 x 10 6 psi
fc = 5000 psi; f,; = 4000 psi
formation are given as follows:
= 150 ksi; fQ" = 270 ksi
DATA np = 6.298; n, = 6.765
A = 550 in?
Midspan Moments:
I = 82,065 in?
r2 = 149.2 in .2 MD = 375.463 kip-ft
yt = 12.9 in.; yb = 27.1 in. Mg = 350.91 kip-ft
zt = 6362 in 3; z b = 3028 in .3 ML = 245 kip-ft
k, = 5.51 in.; kb = 11.57 in. M D + M L = 620.463 kip-ft
we = 0.573 kips per ft M„ = 1.4M D + 1.7ML
Superimposed Dead Load = 40 lb per ft = 942.148 kip-ft
Live Load = 400 lb per ft = 0.9

48" 48"
3.5" 5.75"
4.5"
tD ^`
r1 _
jj
ao
j OD

O
V-

X
8"
Fig. 8. Cross section of example beam (b) Idealized for cracked section and
(a) Actual cross section. ultimate analysis.

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979 85

SOLUTION Apg = bdJ 1 _ 1 _ 2F"I
A. The beam shown in Fig. 8 has bdRf
been first designed as a fully pre-
stressed beam (using an allowable = 0.953 in.2
tensile stress in service of 6 f f and
d, = 34.6 in.). The initial design Asfvu)
led to a value of A, = 1.53 in.2, .fps =.fvu (1_ 0.5 bd
i.e., 10 strands, 1/2 in. diameter, 270
ksi strength. Ultimate resistance, = 265.8 ksi
deflection, camber and fatigue
were all satisfactory. A (1-PPR A.
B. The design for a fully reinforced g -PPR}
concrete beam by the ACI ulti-
mate strength design approach = 1.81 in.2
and for d $ = 36.25 in., led to a
value of A s 5.94 in. 2 However, Step 5: Using integer numbers of
deflection requirements were not strands and bars, the actual values
satisfied. are:
A, = 1.07 in.2 (or 7 strands)
C. Let us design the beam as a par-
A 8 = 1.80 in.2 (or 3 #7 bars)
tially prestressed beam to satisfy fP$ = 265.3 ksi
the ACI Code requirements and in PPR = 0.725
accordance with the method pro- d = 35.54 in.
posed in this paper and in the flow q = 0.046
chart (see Fig. 4). First the values
ofA„S and A, must be determined. (Mu),egj,ting = 1017 kip-ft which is
Step 1: Select a value of PPR, say greater than (Mu)required = 952
PPR = 0.70. Note that the sug- kip-ft
gested lower bound value of M c,. = 504 kip-ft
M D/(M D + ML ) — 0.60 was found
inadequate in a first iteration.
Step 2: Computed:
d = d,PPR + d8(1-PPR)
= 34.6 x 0.7 + 38 x 0.3
= 35.62 in.
Step 3: Compute required q from:
q(1 -059 q) _ ^ b 2fc = 0.04125

Thus
q = 0.04235
Note that 1.18 qd = 1.78 in. < h„
5.75. Hence, the beam behaves as
a rectangular section.
Step 4: As the value off, at ulti-
mate is given by ACI Code For-
mula (18.3), compute:
F u = gbdf f PPR = 253,429 lbs

86
Table 5. Summary of computed results for design example.
Deflections
Crack
Loading c fct fs fps if if Widtht
Afs Afps Inst. long-term*
in. ksi ksi ksi ksi ksi ksi
(F+M5) °
C A +.'40LL
in.

F +M D - 0.452 0.123 150.0 0 0 0 0.0347 0.37 -

F + M D + 0.5 M L - 0.679 2.822 151.864 0.227 2.70 1.864 0.0347 0.67 -

F + M cr - 0.691 2.957 152.44 0.239 2.834 2.44 0.0347 0.69 -

F + M +cr 12.7 0.827 10.372 159.12 0.375 10.25 9.12 0.0347 0.69 0.00142

F + M D + 0.7 M L 10.73 0.960 15.368 163.60 0.508 15.245 13.60 0.0347 0.86 0.00238

F + M D + ML 8.94 1.186 24.28 171.58 0.734 24.157 21.58 0.0347 1.27 0.00409

Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; I ksi ` 7 MN/m2

Additional long-term deflections assuming creep coefficient, C-2.

Using equation by Nawy and Huang (Reference 20).

D. Now that A P3 and A 8 have been where M is in kip-in. and c in

determined, the section can be
analyzed for various serviceability
criteria. The equations given in
Tables 3 and 4 are used to deter-
mine stresses and stress ranges in
the concrete and in the steel, as
well as crack width and deflec-
tions. Results for various values of
loadings under service conditions
are summarized in Table 5.
Note that for the example beam,
Eq. (1) of Table 4 can be put in
the following form and solved for
c for various values of M:
428.8 c3 + 18 - 44,510
496.2 - 2,334,282 \ c _
2651 - 6,071,847) _ 0
\\\ M
inches.
Referring to the numerical results
of Table 5, it can be seen that the
stress range in the reinforcing
steel under full alternating live
load (24.15 ksi) would not be ac-
ceptable strictly according to the
ACT recommended value of 20 ksi.
However, the live load is seldom
considered to act fully in cyclic
fatigue.
The maximum crack width has
been calculated according to the
formula of Nawy and Huang 20 and
2 +
is acceptable with regards to most
of the limitations recommended in
Table 1. Also acceptable are the
short-term camber and the long-
term deflection. For the additional
long-term deflection under dead
load, a creep coefficient of two
was used.

Discussion of this paper is invited. Nevertheless,

please hold on to your discussion until the second
part of this paper is published.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1979 87

 APPENDIX B-NOTATION
A, = area of concrete at cross sec-
tion considered (depending
on the particular case it may
be the net area, the gross area
or the transformed area)
A,, = area of prestressing steel in
tension zone
Ag = area of non-prestressed ten-
sion reinforcement
A = area of compression rein-
forcement
A, = concrete area in tension
a = depth of equivalent rectangu-
lar compression block in
concrete
b = width of upper flange of
flanged member
= web width of flanged mem-
her
bl = width of lower flange of
flanged member
b2 = distance from support to con-
centrated load
C. = creep coefficient
c = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to neutral axis
d = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to centroid of
tensile force
d, = thickness of concrete cover
over reinforcement
d„ = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to centroid of
prestressing steel
d, = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to centroid of
non-prestressed tension rein-
forcement
d8 = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to centroid of
non-prestressed compression
reinforcement
E, = modulus of elasticity of con-
crete
E,t = modulus of elasticity of con-
crete at time of initial pre-
stress
88
E, = modulus of elasticity of pre-
stressing steel
E, = modulus of elasticity of non-
prestressed tension steel
E = modulus of elasticity of non-
prestressed compression steel
e0, e l = eccentricity of prestressing
force with respect to centroid
of section at midspan
e2 = eccentricity of prestressing
force with respect to centroid
of section at supports
F = force due to prestressing steel
Fe = effective prestressing force
F, = initial prestressing force at
time of transfer
Fu = force due to prestressing
f' =
steel at ultimate
specified compressive
strength of concrete
fi = compressive strength of con-
crete at time of initial pre-
stress
fen,$ = stress inconcrete at level of
non-prestressed tension steel
f = allowable stress range under
repeated service load in con-
crete
f1t = stress in concrete at top fiber
fmin = minimum stress in concrete
f,, = calculated stress in prestress-
ing steel at any applied load
fp. = ultimate strength of prestress-
ing steel
fP, = specified yield strength of
prestressing steel
f,., = stress range under repeated
service load in non-pre-
stressed tension steel
f = calculated stress in non-pre-
stressed steel at any applied
load
f8 = calculated stress in non-pre-
stressed compression steel at
any applied load
fee = effective stress in prestress-
ing steel, after losses

ft , = stress range under repeated
service load in prestressing
steel
= specified yield strength of
non-prestressed steel
h = overall thickness or depth of
member
hn = thickness of upper flange of
flanged member
I,I ( = moment of inertia of section
about centroidal axis
I C , = cracking moment of inertia
I e = effective moment of inertia
i p = prestressing index
k b = distance from centroid of
concrete section to lower lim-
it of central kern
k, = reduction factor to take into
account effect of non-pre-
stressed reinforcement
k, = distance from centroid of con-
crete section to upper limit of
central kern
L = span length
M = any moment
M,, = maximum moment in mem-
ber at stage for which de-
flection is computed
M C,. = cracking moment
M D = dead load moment
M DeCb = moment that causes decom-
pression in concrete at bot-
tom fiber of member
MDecn = moment that causes decom-
pression in concrete at level
of non-prestressed steel
M DeC„ = moment that causes decom-
pression in concrete at level
of prestressing steel
M L = live load moment
M ma, , = maximum moment
M u = ultimate moment
= ultimate moment for web por-
tion of flanged member
n = modular ratio, n. = E p8 IE ^,
n 8 = E$/E,
P = concentrated load
PPR = partial prestressing ratio
q = reinforcement index =
(A j1. + A$f,,)lbdff
PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1979
r = radius of gyration
W a = allowable crack width
W max = maximum crack width
w = distributed load
w d = distributed dead load
w e = distributed dead load due to
weight of member
WI = distributed live load
x = centroid of compressive force
y b = distance from centroidal .axis
to bottom fiber
y t = distance from centroidal axis
to top fiber
z b = section modulus with respect
to extreme bottom fiber =
I/yb
Z t = section modulus with respect
to extreme top fiber = I /yt
/3 = ratio of distance from tension
face and from steel centroid
to neutral axis
YC = unit weight of concrete
AfCt = change in stress in concrete
at top fiber
Of$ = change in stress in non-pre-
stressed steel
Of, = change in stress in prestress-
ing steel
E Ce = strain in concrete at level of
prestressing steel due to ef-
fective prestress and dead
load
e„8 = strain in prestressing steel
e 8 = strain in non-prestressed
steel
E Se = strain in prestressing steel at
effective prestress
7) = ratio of effective and initial
prestressing forces
0 = ratio of base radius to height
of rolled-on transverse defor-
mation
X 1,X 2 = constants used in Eq. (21)
= reduction factor in ultimate
moment formula
i/r = percentage of live load (M =
M D + JML)
= specific percentages of live
tP i,grj
load
EO = sum of reinforcing element
circumferences
89