Simplified Flexural Design

of Partially Prestressed
Concrete Members
David N. Peterson
Design Engineer
Elliott & Associates
Omaha. Nebraska

Maher K. Tadros
Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Nebraska
Omaha, Nebraska

A
common definition of partial pre-
stressing is the allowance of
flexural tension cracking under the
combined effects of prestress and full
service (unfactored) loads. Partial pre-
stressing has long been recognized as an
intermediate state between the two
limiting states of full prestressing and
conventional (nonpre stressed) rein-
forcing. Members can he designed to
avoid possible drawbacks of both limit-
ing states, such as excessive camber and
end zone stresses of fully prestressecl
members, and excessive deflection and
cracking of conventionally reinforced
members.
At present, partial prestressing is rec-
ognized in the ACI Building Code (ACI
318-83)1 in an implicit way. It is treated,
in Chapter 18 of the ACI Code, as a spe-
cial case of fully prestressed members.
Other codes, such as the CEB 1978
Model Code,2 contain a unified treat-
ment of the entire spectrum of rein-
forced concrete members, including
partial prestressing. This latter approach
has the advantage of avoiding possible
conflicts between conventionally rein-
forced concrete and prestressed con-
crete provisions.
Partial prestressing has not realized
its full potential for two main reasons:
(1) Lack of favorable and explicit recog-
nition of partial prestressing in North
American building and bridge codes,
and (2) Absence of simplified and uni-
fied design procedures for the full
range of reinforced concrete members,
as pointed out by Naaman 3 and Hill.4
The method proposed in this paper ad-
dresses the second factor.
Flexural design of partially pre-
stressed members involves satisfaction of
serviceability, such as deflection and

50
crack width, and ultimate strength
criteria. Analysis for these criteria, how- Synopsis
ever, requires the knowledge of steel
A simplified procedure is presented
areas, concrete dimensions, material
for calculating the areas of pre-
properties, and other design parameters.
stressed and nonprestressed steel in
The design process is therefore an
flexural concrete members that are
iterative one. The analysis portion of
permitted to crack at the service load
this process is time-consuming, par-
level. The proposed method is based
ticularly the service load analysis of
on simultaneously satisfying two de-
cracked members subject to combined
sign criteria; serviceability and
axial force and bending moment, which
strength.
requires the solution of complex equa-
Because cracking and deflection
tions.
are highly sensitive to the tensile steel
The primary objective of the proposed
stress level, the serviceability criterion
procedure is to provide good initial de-
used here is to place a limit on the
sign values of the flexural reinforcement
steel stress increase due to load ap-
and the prestress force level in order to
plication. Two simple equilibrium equa-
reduce or eliminate further design iter-
tions, in the form M = T (Id), are
ations. The procedure is both simple
solved simultaneously for the areas of
and adaptable to the full range of
the prestressed and the nonpre-
flexural reinforced concrete members
stressed steel; T is the tensile force
from nonprestressed to fully pre-
and (id) is the lever arm between the
stressed. It is based on simultaneous
tension and compression forces.
satisfaction of both the working stress
The procedure allows for consider-
(or service load), and the ultimate
able flexibility in design. For example,
strength equilibrium equations: M =
the two equations may be used to
T(jd), where M is the externally applied
solve for the area and tensile stress in
bending moment, T is the internal stress
the prestressed steel if the designer
resultant in the tension steel, andjd is
elects not to use nonprestressed
the lever arm between the tension and
steel. Also, its simplicity permits the
compression stress resultants.
designer to study several trial member
Discussion of the various components
shapes and prestress levels. The
of the tension force T is presented. Also
method rationally accounts for the
given are typical preliminary estimates
time-dependent change in steel
of the parameters needed to apply the
stresses. It is shown to give reasonably
two equations.
accurate results, compared with other,
A maximum of two quantities may be
more detailed methods.
obtained from the solution of the two
equations. If the designer desires to in-
vestigate sections using fully stressed
tendons, A p„ combined with non-
stressed tendons (or mild bars), A„„ the solved for A, and the effective steel
equations for A D, and A„6 may be solved. stress, after all losses. Another applica-
Negative value ofA,, will indicate that a tion is to analyze existing designs, such
conventionally reinforced member is as from the PCI Design Handbook1°
probably suitable; negative A,, yields standard member load tables, for possi-
the other boundary condition. ble modification, as will be illustrated
The designer may also elect to inves- by a numerical example.
tigate the feasibility of using partially The concept of solving two simul-
stressed tendons only (i.e., with A,, = 0). taneous equations in the design of par-
In this case, the equations would be tially prestressed members was reported

PCI JOURNAL/May-June 1985 ҟ 51

 in Refs. 6, 11, and 12. The procedure
presented here is compatible with this
earlier work. It broadens the scope of
applications, and provides design aids
for steel stresses and resisting moment
arms. It also includes consideration of the
time-dependent affects in both types of
steel. A comparison is presented of the
results obtained by the proposed
method and by other, more detailed
procedures.
Traditionally, nonprestressed rein-
forced concrete members have been de-
signed for ultimate strength then
checked for satisfactory service load be-
havior. On the other hand, fully pre-
stressed concrete members have been
designed for working stress conditions
and then checked for adequate ultimate
strength. Obviously, both ultimate
strength and service load conditions
must be satisfied for both types of con-
struction, the only difference being
which condition is emphasized in the
initial design phase.
The proposed method is not meant to
attach more importance than deserved
to either service load or ultimate
strength criteria. Rather, it is a conven-
ient means for simultaneous satisfaction
of both service load and ultimate
strength requirements.
BACKGROUND
Hill, in a state-of-the-art paper,' de-
scribed three basic design approaches
for partially prestressed concrete mem-
bers. They are the degree of prestress-
ing method, the partial prestressing ratio
method, and the hypothetical stress
method. The first approach defines de-
gree of prestress'" as the ratio of mo-
ment at concrete decompression to full
service load moment. By this approach,
a degree of prestress is selected based
on factors such as member function and
service (unfactored) live to dead load
ratio.
The effective prestressing force and
the corresponding prestressed steel area
52
are then determined. Nonprestressed
steel is chosen to satisfy the ultimate
strength. There are several definitions
of the decompression moment to be
used in this approach. It is commonly
defined as the moment that produces
zero stress in concrete, either at the ex-
trreme fibers or at the level of the steel
centroid.
The second approach, partial pre-
stressing ratio (PPR), was developed by
Naaman and Siriaksorn, a and bears
similarity to Thurlimann's work.' 5 It
starts with selection of the PPR, defined
as:
PPR = Av._,
A nafi,, + Anafv
The PPR is based on factors such as
cross section shape, cyclic portion of
live load, and live load to dead load
ratio. The selected PPR is then used to
solve the flexural strength equation for
A18 and A,,. This is followed by a service
load analysis to check satisfaction of the
crack width, deflection, and fatigue
criteria.
The third approach, namely hypothet-
ical stress limits, is found in certain
codes (see Table 1). For example, the
ACT 318-83 Code limits the "nominal"
concrete tensile stress, calcula ted for
an uncracked section, to 12 ^i ff psi
(1.00 \17f MPa). Note that this limit
exceeds the modulus of rupture of con-
crete.
This approach, while extremely sim-
ple, is not based on rational theory, be-
cause partially prestressed members
are, by common definition, cracked. It
does not give explicit indication of the
actual concrete and steel stresses, or the
maximum crack width, nor is it useful in
deflection calculation.
The ACI Code provides an `escape
clause" that "permissible stresses in
concrete may be exceeded if shown by
test or analysis that performance will not
be impaired." The clause is seldom
used by designers as it does not ade-
quately state how impaired performance
is defined or what constitutes satisfac-
tory testing and analysis.
The authors agree with Lacroix'" that
the use of terms such as degree of pre-
stressing and partial prestressing ratio
might hinder broader utilization of par-
tial prestressing, Some designers might
find it difficult to relate to them. Also,
there is a possibility that they, mistak-
enly, may be used as quality indicators.
The design methods discussed below do
not use these terms, but rather incorpo-
rate the desired criteria into familiar
fundamental relationships.
Moustafa9 presented interaction dia-
grams for specific cross section shapes,
to simplify serviceability and strength
analyses. A prestressed steel area A,,, is
initially determined from the most criti-
cal of three ACI Code design criteria:
permissible concrete stresses at pre-
stress release, acceptable camber (or
deflection), or permissible concrete
stress at service load. An additional
nonprestressed steel areaA, if needed,
is determined to satisfy flexural strength
requirements. The method lends itself
to precasting operations where there is
repetitious use of standard concrete
shapes.
A flexural design procedure suggested
by Nilson2 for partially prestressed
members contains assumptions and
steps similar to the method proposed in
this paper. However, A,, is calculated to
provide the total ultimate strength, ig-
noring any strength contribution from
the nonprestressed steel. The prestress
force is chosen to produce desired de-
flection characteristics while AK, is se-
lected empirically, to ensure fine,
well-distributed service load cracking.
More recently Huber t2 proposed a
simplified design method in which
three equations are developed to deter-
mine the following parameters: member
depth d, or width b, Ar, , and An,. The
equations are based on satisfying the
allowable compressive stress in con-
crete and tensile stress in steel at service
load level, and on ultimate strength.
PCI JOURNAL(May-June 1985ҟ
Inomata's approach" involves the so-
lution of a cubic equation, based on ser-
vice load conditions, to determine the
neutral axis depth to the effective depth
ratio. This is followed by a simultaneous
solution of two equations in A,,, and A,,,,
to satisfy both service load and ultimate
strength requirements. The service load
criterion used is to limit the steel stress
increment beyond decompression, A f„,
to a value primarily based on the
maximum allowable crack width. This
concept was applied briefly in 1972 by
Bennett and Veerasubramanian” in a
study of deflection and crack width pre-
diction.
CRACK CONTROL
CRITERIA
A wide range of methods are used for
crack control. Table 1 shows some of
them. The methods range from a totally
empirical approach, ACI 318-83, to ac-
tual computation of the crack width, by
prediction methods such as in Refs. 2I
and 22. As mentioned before, the ACI
Code provisions for prestressed con-
crete members are not compatible with
the provisions for conventionally rein-
forced members.
Crack control for the latter is achieved
by limiting the predicted crack width to
0.013 and 0.016 in. (0,33 and 0.41 mm)
for members subject to exterior and
interior exposure, respectively. The
crack width prediction method in the
ACI Code is based on the work by
Gergely and Lutz."
Dean et al have shown" that the
Gergely-Lutz formula produces conser-
vative, yet realistic agreement with test
results on partially prestressed members
of constant width tension zone. They
have also indicated that a steel stress
Iimit of 29,000 psi (200 MPa) would en-
sure crack widths not exceeding 0.012
in. (0.30 mm). Extending the ACI Code
crack width provisions to cover pre-
stressed concrete, is therefore a better
53
Table 1. Concrete and Steel Stress Limits for Crack Control.

Stress limits
Source Concrete (psi) Steel (psi) Crack control criterion

1. AC! 318-83' 12 V }c psi (1.00 VT ,' MPa) —

2. Abelesza 800 + 500 (p – 0.3) — w = 0.004 in.
900 + 1200 (p – 0.3) --- w = 0.008 in.
1100+1300(p-0.3) — w 0.012 in.
where p = 100 (p + p,) where w is crack width limit
based on experiments on rec-
tan gular beams.

3. Inomatas — 15000 w = 0.004 in.

250(X) to = 0.008 in.
where w is anticipated maxi-
mum crack width for average
members and conditions.

4. Swiss Code"" — 13100 s = 12 in.

40600 s = 2 in.
where s is bar spacing. Limits
arc valid under normal condi-
tions, with beam depths less
than 40 in.

5. Naaman and — 10250 w = 0.00142 in.

Siriaksorn 5 15250 w = 0.00238 in.
2.4160 w = 0.00409 in.
where w is maximum crack
width computed by formula
in Ref. 22.

6. Tadros 5 — 19230 ru = 0.003 in.

where w is maximum crack
width for a standard 24 in.
precast double tee, computed
by formula in Ref. 22.

7. Dean, Park, — 21750 mean average observed,

and Tian z ' m = 0.0022 in,; mean maxi-
mum observed; w = 0.0044 in,;
mean predicted (by Ref. 23),
is = 0.0072 in.

Note: I in. = 25.4 rim; 1000 psi = 6.895 MPa.

approach than setting an empirical con-
crete tensile stress limit.
The empirical limits on concrete ten-
sile stress, set by Abeles2' in 1967 are
more rational than the ACI Code limit in
that a steel ratio parameter is included.
However, they were developed based
on tests of rectangular beams. The con-
crete area and shape in the tension zone,
the steel area and arrangement, and the
loading level are significant parameters
that require further study before Abeles'
rather simple approach can be widely
accepted,
Perhaps the best compromise of accu-
racy and simplicity of crack control pro-
visions is offered by the Swiss Code, as
presented by Bachmann. 25 The allow-
able steel stress, using cracked section
analysis, is based on the spacing of
bonded mild bars, placed in the tension
zone. These provisions were developed
primarily for cast-in-place post-
tensioned members subject to normal
environmental conditions.
Refs. 5 and 8 have applied a crack
width formula, developed by Nawy and
Huang,22 to flanged members. Table I
shows the results which indicate that
the methods of Refs. 22 and 23 appear to
give comparable crack width predic-
tions. The results of Refs. 5, 8, and 21
also confirm that the steel stresses are
good indicators of crack width. Thus, the
proposed method incorporates the set-
ting of a limit on the steel stress increase
beyond decompression, as shown
below.
BASIC EQUATIONS
The proposed equations are written in
the familiar form T(jd) = M (see Fig. 1).
Equilibrium conditions are satisfied
both at service load moment (Fig. lb)
and ultimate moment (Fig. lc). The
equations may be used for determining
the reinforcement areas, or another two
design parameters, as illustrated by a
numerical example in a separate section.
The two equations are as follows:
A./
A ^( vs,dec +
+ Ans (na.dec +
A f,, )i d
A fna ).1a dna ^ M a
A R9fPaJ. dy, + W A nsJJ. d ,, } M. (2)
where
= area of prestressed and
nonprestressed reinforce-
ment
d„,dn, = depth to the prestressed
PCI JOURNALJMay-June 1985
and nonprestressed rein-
forcement centroid
f
= stress in prestressed and
dec
nonprestressed reinforce-
ment at decompression
stage
f,, , f,,, = stress in prestressed and
nonprestressed reinforce-
ment at ultimate flexure
A fp8f = allowable change in pre-
stressed and nonpre-
stressed steel stress be-
yond decompression
= fractional multiplier of the
effective depth to obtain
lever arm for internal re-
sisting couple at service
load and at ultimate flexure
Ms , Mg = design service load and
factored load (ultimate)
moment
= strength reduction factor
equal to 0.90 per ACI
318-83, Section 9.3 (see
Ref. 1)
As discussed in the following section,
it is common practice in initial design
stages to assume a single value for the
depth of the entire tensile steel area.
This reduces Eqs. (1) and (2) to Eqs. (1a)
and (2a) below:
LAps V PS.dec + A f, )
+An. + A f )Ii, d -_M, (I a)
m
(fnn.a ec
0 IA fns + Ansfns 1.1r d } My (2a)
where
fg
d = depth of total steel area, and
A = allowable change in steel
stress, at centroid of total steel
(1) COMMENTARY ON
BASIC EQUATIONS
Preliminary design procedures always
require approximations and assump-
tions. The following discussion suggests
reasonable, yet conservative values
which can lead to a satisfactory initial
estimate of the design parameters.
55
 b

,
C n
bw

PRESTRESSED
STEEL

NON-PRESTRESSED
STEEL

(a) CROSS SECTION

f cf 0.85fi`

ri
Cu" Tu
^s` T5

N .A.

i f sI Ts = A (f s dec^
n PP, fs^ T^ - A psf ps +A ns f ns

+ Ans(fns,dec+ d fs

(b) SERVICE LOADҟ(c) ULTIMATE LOAD

Fig, 1. Typical cross section of partially prestressed concrete member with stress
distribution at service load and ultimate flexure conditions.

56
Steel Stresses at Service Load
For most applications the steel stress
at decompression can be conservatively
taken equal to the effective stress after
consideration of time-dependent
losses 6 .8 These losses are based on a
number of factors, primarily creep,
shrinkage, relaxation, and concrete
compressive stress at the steel level.
As an estimate, the losses can be in
the range of 10 to 50 ksi (69 to 345 MPa)
for prestressed steel and 0 to 30 ksi (0 to
207 MPa) for nonprestressed steel. In
the absence of more definitive informa-
tion, preliminary time-dependent stress
losses equal to 30 ksi (207 MPa) for fully
tensioned, stress relieved, prestressed
steel and 15 ksi (104 MPa) for nonpre-
stressed steel may be used.
Note that the losses are greater in the
prestressed steel due to relaxation. Par-
tially tensioned, and/or low relaxation
tendons, should be assumed to have
preliminary loss values in the range of
15 to 30 ksi (104 to 207 MPa).
Stress at decompression in the pre-
stressed steel, f^ d^, can therefore be
taken equal to the effective prestress:
fM 30 ksi (3)
Commonly used values forf,,. in fully
tensioned tendons are 0.70f,,, for stress
relieved steel and 0.75f for low relax-
ation steel. A preliminary value for de-
compression stress in the nonpre-
stressed steel, f 18,, , is recommended as
–15 ksi (-104 MPa). The minus sign
denotes compression.
It is inaccurate to assume fR ,, a,, equal
to zero. Making this assumption will
lead to a greater area of nonprestressed
reinforcement and, correspondingly, a
smaller area of prestressed reinforce-
ment and prestress force. This could re-
sult in unsatisfactory cracking and de-
flection performance. After completion
of the initial design iteration a more de-
tailed calculation of the decompres-
sion stresses, if warranted, may be per-
formed by analytical methods available
PCI JOURNAL/May-June 1985 ҟ
for that purpose.7.8,25,26
Selection of a value for the allowable
increase in the steel stress, A f is based
on such serviceability criteria as crack
control, deflection, and fatigue.
Suggested values of A f, are summarized
in Table 1. These values range from 10
to 40 ksi (69 to 276 MPa), with a typical
range of 20 to 30 ksi (138 to 207 MPa) for
adequate crack control without special
attention to detailing of the nonpre-
stressed steel. Exact detailing of this
reinforcement may dictate a more spe-
cific value as given in the draft Swiss
Code SIA 162.0
Steel Stresses at Ultimate
Stress in the bonded prestressed ten-
don reinforcement at ultimate flexure,
f,,,, varies from 0.80f,,,. to f,, , depending
primarily on the tensile steel area rela-
tive to the concrete compression area
[see Eq. (18-3) of Ref. 1]. For flanged
sections, such as the double tees popu-
lar in the precast concrete industry, f, $ is
very close to 1.0 fp„ . An overall initial
estimate of f„ = 0.95f, may be as-
sumed. This assumption is not applic-
able to stress in unhonded tendon rein-
forcement, which could be considerably
lower than 0.95 f,,,, .
Stress in the nonprestressed rein-
forcement, .f,,, is generally taken equal
to f„ for mild steel. For the case when
nonprestressed tendons are used the
authors agree with Moustafas that the
full strength can be realized if adequate
development length is provided. How-
ever, the nonprestressed steel strain is
less than the prestressed steel strain, by
the amount of initial tension. Con-
sequently, a conservative preliminary
value of 0.90 fp, may be u ed for nonpre-
stressed tendons.
Selection of j5 and j.
It is recognized that the internal mo-
ment lever arm, jd (see Fig. 1), and thus
the multiplier, j, varies over a relatively
57
 1.00

0.95

0.90

is

0.85

0.80

0.75
1 2 3
1.27

(t3 /nf0)

Fig. 2. Service load lever arm fractional multiplier, j .

small range when the member is sub-
jected to its full design loadings. Figs. 2
and 3 provide approximate values for j.
Service load values for j5 are derived on
the basis of the concrete stress, f. = 0.45
f, and on allowable steel stress incre-
ment, 3 f„ which can be chosen as dis-
cussed previously.
The curves for T sections are based on
members with the following propor-
tions: Type A, average precast concrete
double tee – bld = 5.6, hrld = 0.12, bid
= 0.56; Type B, average cast-in-place
single tee – bld = 1.2, hfld = 0.14, hld
= 0.20. The Type C curve is independent
of the bid ratio. The average value indi-
cated for A f$ Inff corresponds to A f$ = 20
ksi (138 MPa), n = 7, and f,, = 2.25 ksi.
At ultimate strength conditions, the
relationship between j 5 and the rein-
forcement index, m, is developed from
the internal equilibrium of tension and
compression forces with the compres-
sion force being determined by the
equivalent stress block theory. Deriva-
tion of the j, and ju relationships are
given in more detail in Ref. 29.
Selection of Actual Steel Areas
and Concrete Dimensions
Solution of Eqs. (1) and (2) forA,, and
A, produces quantities that may not cor-
respond to an integer number of strands
and bars. If this occurs, an integer
number of tendons should be chosen as
close as possible to the calculated value
ofA„s. The newA P5 , based on the chosen
tendons, should then be substituted into
Eqs. (1) and (2) to obtain two values of
Ans . The larger of the two should be
used to select the nonprestressed bars,

58
,3

0c
C-

1.00
Dj
z
Note: w and ju values are based on sections and
T- Sections ҟ reinforcement given in the standard sec-
tion load tables of PCI Design Handbook
C-
C 0.95
(second edition }.
CD
CD

Cn \ ^ju=1 l.7
[n

090

ju
0.85 Rectangular
Sections

0.80

Average value of w Average value of uZ

for T– section for rectangular section

0.75 0.40
0.15
0.10ҟ
0.05ҟ 0,20ҟ 0.35ҟ
0.30ҟ
0.25ҟ
0
F

(0 Fig. 3. Ultimate strength lever arm fractional multiplier, j.

 or prestressed tendons.
It can be shown that if A,, (chosen) >
A,,, (calculated), Eq. (2) yields a larger
A„^ than Eq. (1), and vice versa. This rule
is valid for the condition:
V)ix.de( + fPS)IVnadec + A fne) >JF,If.,
which is usually the case in practical
applications.
Selection of the nonprestressed steel
arrangement should be made with the
realization of its impact on crack control.
As most available crack control formulas
recognize, a large number of small sized
bars provide reduced crack widths and
more uniform crack distribution in
zones of high tensile stress. This is
exemplified by the Swiss Code provi-
sions (see Table 1).
If configuration and dimensioning of
the concrete tension zone is necessary,
it must account for the following. The
area of concrete in tension should be as
small as possible, in order to minimize
crack width. On the other hand, it must
be large enough to accommodate the
selected reinforcement, with satisfac-
tory cover and clear spacing.
Of course, several other factors could
affect the sizing of the concrete tension
zone. They include shear, bond and end
zones stresses, as well as construction
type (precast versus cast-in-place). Also,
the forming costs and appearance re-
quirements may govern the use of a
bottom flange.
DESIGN STEPS
The proposed design steps are dis-
cussed below, as summarized in the
flow chart given in Fig. 4. The input
data, given or assumed, necessary to im-
plement the proposed procedures are
the member span and support condi-
tions, the tributary width, the unit
weight, the superimposed loads, and the
material properties. In precast concrete
construction, the designer may also wish
to use a standard section shape.
60
Step 1
Select the total member depth, h. This
might be obtained from a span-to-depth
ratio for controlling deflection.
Suggested ratios are given in several
references such as Refs. 10, 20, 27, and
28. Other dimensions such as web
width, b, and flange thickness, hr, are a
function of requirements such as shear
strength, steel placement, and web
spacing.
Judgment and experience are helpful
in the preliminary selection of these di-
mensions, which are necessary to de-
termine the beam weight. For standard
precast sections, if the depth is given,
other dimensions and member weight
may be selected from the appropriate
charts.
Step 2
Assume an effective depth, d, equal to
"h" less reasonable cover to the antici-
pated total steel area centroid. The
cover should satisfy the minimum code
steel corrosion and fire protection re-
quirements. In some precast concrete
applications, with straight tendon pro-
files, the location of the prestressing
steel is controlled by the end (support)
section concrete stresses at prestress
transfer.
The effective depth of that steel, da„
should he estimated using available
load tables. If d,, is much less than the
nonprestressed steel depth, d,,,, using
minimum cover provisions, the two
depths should be used, and Eqs. (1) and
(2) applied. Otherwise, an average
depth, d, and Eqs. (1a) and (2a) would
be adequate.
Step 3
Determine the service load moment,
M„ and ultimate (factored) load mo-
ment, M,..
M,=M,+MD +Mc (4)
Mu = 1.4(kf, +M0)+ 1.7Mt (5)
 Input span,ҟ Select cross
Read p fs , j and j
STARTsuperimposedҟ
ҟ
loads andҟ
section dimensionsҟ sҟ u
and compute ҟfrom design aids
material p ropertiesҟM and M
sҟ ^

Method of reinforcing

Partially tensioned ҟ Fully tensionedҟ Fully tensioned

tendonsҟ tendons plusҟ tendons plus
non tensioned tendons nontensioned bars
J

Set A nn = 11 andҟ Set f„509fp„ f„ 6 = f y and

Iset
solve forҟ and solve forҟ
I solve for
f ps_ dec and A psҟ Ap5 and A„g ҟ
J Ap9 and A„5

/ Is arrangement ҟ
NO Recompute new
of tension steel and
Go to
satisfactory? weight A

YES

Does sleet satisfy

minimum andҟ N0 Modify section Go to
maxim um code and/or reinforcement A
limits?

YES

End of f1 necessary, perform

"Simplified Design detailed strength and Stop
serviceability analysis

Fig. 4. Flow chart of proposed design procedure.

PCI JOURNALJMay-June 1985ҟ 61

where MG, MD , and ML are the moments
due to self weight, superimposed dead
load, and live load, respectively.
Step 4
Select a value for 0 f, from Table I
based on crack control requirements. If
d„ a is significantly larger than d.„ Eq. (1)
rather than Eq, (1a) is applicable. In this
case select A f1, from the table and use a
smaller value for ,^ fn„ . The ratio 4f/
A f,,B is equal to the ratio of the respec-
tive distances of the steel areas from the
cracked section neutral axis, An approx-
imate value of f may be taken equal to
A ,J N88 Id.
Next, read values ofj 8 andj„ from Figs.
2 and 3. As mentioned before, the ranges
of j., and j,, are small. Using an average
steel depth, d, rather than individual d,,
and d, values, should not significantly
affect the accuracy ofj„ and j„ .
Step 5
Develop Eqs. (la) and (2a) [or Eqs. (1)
and (2) for different d values]. Solve the
developed equations forAps. Choose the
size and integer number of prestressing
tendons (strands, wires, or bars) to ap-
proximate this value. Determine A. by
substituting the chosen A. value into
Eq. (2a) [or Eq. (2)] ifA, r (chosen) > A,,,
(calculated) and Eq. (1a) [or Eq. (1)] if
A p„ (chosen) < Ape (calculated),
Step 6
Dimension the concrete tension zone
for adequate reinforcement spacing and
concrete cover. If a standard precast
section shape is used, check the avail-
able concrete tension zone.
Step 7
Check that the steel area is less than
the maximum permitted value for duc-
tile failure. The AC! 318-83 Code, Sec-
tion 18.8 provisions may be used here. If
the steel content is too large, increased
62
section dimensions in the compression
zone and/or concrete strength may be
necessary. Also, if the steel provided is
less than the minimum steel limit, the
member may fail upon cracking of the
tension zone. If necessary, this limit
could be met by simply adding nonpre-
stressed steel.
Step 8
The selected member may now be
checked, by more detailed methods to
see if it satisfies service load criteria
(e.g., crack width, deflection, fatigue,
etc.) and strength requirements (flexure,
shear, bond, etc.). This step is beyond
the scope of the present paper. Refs. 8,
21, 23, 26, 29-32 and others may be used
for this purpose.
The above-listed steps are illustrated
by the following example.
NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
It is required to determine the rein-
forcement and prestressing force for the
PCI Design Handbook (3rd Edition)]°
8 DT 20 member whose cross sections is
shown in Fig. 5. The member spans 42 ft
(12.8 in). It supports, besides its own
weight of 47 psf (2250 Pa), a superim-
posed dead load of 10 psf (479 Pa) and
live load of 60 psf (2873 Pa). The
member is subject to normal interior ex-
posure. Straight tendon prestressing is
to be used.
Other data are as follows: tendons are
seven-wire strands, fps – 270 ksi (1863
MPa); mild bars are Grade 60 steel, f„
60 ksi (414 MPa); normal weight con-
crete, f. = 5 ksi (34.5 MPa); E, – 4300
ksi (29,700 MPa); n = E,/E = 6.7.
Solution
Reinforcement of the member may be
achieved by one of the following three
arrangements:
1. Fully tensioned strands combined
with nonprestressed bars.
C.)
C-
0
C
M
z

2#8 4_ 6 ^ 7/ 16"
C
m 42' (12.8m)
G
m
Cn BEAM ELEVATION

8'- 0" (2438mm) (33mm)

Hҟ
5 3/4 ( 146 mm ) "(l3mm)
2"(51mm)
[ 25mm)
20°
(508 mmT SEE ,(38mm)
0" (1219mm) DETAIL A
33/4
(95mm) 33/4 (95mm) ,
CROSS SECTION
DETAIL A

Fig. 5. Double tee member considered in "Numerical Example" with steel arrangement Number 1

rn
w
 2. Fully tensioned strands combined
with nonprestressed strands.
3. Partially tensioned strands.
Solution with the first arrangement
will be presented here in detail, fol-
lowed by a discussion of the other two
arrangements and of the PCI Design
Handbook method.
Step 1 - A total member depth, h =
20 in. (508 mm), which corresponds to a
span-to-depth ratio of 25.2, appears to be
a reasonable preliminary value. Other
dimensions are already available for this
standard shape (see Fig. 5).
Step 2 - The effective depth to the
total steel area may be assumed to be
approximately equal to h minus 3 in. of
cover; d = 17 in. (432 mm).
Step 3 - The moments, per Eqs. (4)
and (5), are determined by the well-
known formula M = (w1 2/8), to be M, =
2477 in.-kips (280 kN-m) andM,, = 3848
in.-kips (435 kN-m).
Step 4 -- Because the member is
subject to interior environment and be-
cause the area of concrete in the tension
zone is relatively small, limiting the
steel stress increment, c^ f„ to 30 ksi (207
MPa) should yield acceptable crack
control (see Table 1).
With A f,/n f^ = 301[(6.7) (0.45) (5)] = 2,
bid = 96/17 = 5.6, and hrld = 2/17 =
0.12, Fig. 2 givesj, = 0.94. Fig. 3 givesj„
= 0.97 for tee members with average
steel content.
Step 5 - Develop formulas inA,, and
A,,, using Eqs. (la) and (2a). Use fya,a, =
0.7f5 u - 30 ksi = 159 ksi (1097 MPa) and
f^e.af^ = -15 ksi (-104 MPa), f, =
0.95f= 256.5 ksi (1770 MPa) andf„=
60 ksi (414 MPa).
Thus, 3020A,,, + 239.7A„, = 2477, and
3807A, + 890.5 A,, = 3848.
Solution of the above two equations,
yieldsA, = 0.722 in.' (466 mm 2) andAn,
= 1.23 in.2 (794 mm2).
64
If six 7116 in. diameter strands are used,
the chosen A, = 6(0.115) = 0.69 in.2
A,, (calculated). The corresponding AR,
is thus controlled by the service load
condition. Eq. (la) yields A,,, = 1.64 in.2
(1058 mm2 ) or two #8 bars, one in each
web. The chosen prestressed steel area
corresponds to an effective prestress
force = 159 (0.69) = 109.7 kips (488 kN).
Step 6 - The steel arrangement,
shown in Fig. 5, meets the ACI Code
cover requirements. It corresponds to an
effective depth, d, to the centroid of the
total steel area, equal to 17.5 in. (445
mm).
Step 7 - Minimum reinforcement
limit: per ACI 318-83, Section 18.8, 0 M„
> 1.2 M,,.. Substituting into the left hand
side of Eq. (2a) above:
M„ = 3807 (0.69) + 890.5 (1.58) = 4034
in.-kips (456 kN-m)
Using the effective prestress force =
109.7 kips (488 kN) and assuming the
concrete modulus of rupture = 0.53 ksi
(3.66 MPa), the cracking moment, Me,
2285 in.-kips (258 kN-m). Thus, 0 M. >
1.2M,.r.
Maximum ACI Code reinforcement
index u,, 0.36 /3, = 0.288. This is
larger than the actual steel index:
= [1,581(96) (17.5)1 (60/5) + [0.691(96)
(17.5)1 (256.5/5)
= 0.032
Step 8 - Detailed serviceability
(crack control, deflection, etc.) and
strength analysis are to be done by
available methods to verify compliance
with the design criteria.
Reworking the same problem with
reinforcement arrangement No. 2,
which is identical to arrangement No, 1
except that nonprestressed strands are
substituted for nonprestressed bars
yields:
A,, = 0.780 in.2 (503 mm2 ) and
A„$ = 0.212 in.2 (137 mm2).
These values correspond to f,,, = 243
ksi (1677 MPa) and d = 17.5 in. (445
 mm). Other data are as before.
Note that for both arrangements Nos.
1 and 2, the nonprestressed steel need
not be extended the full length of the
beam. The bar length can be deter-
mined by satisfying the resistance mo-
ment diagram. Also note that if concrete
stresses at transfer of prestress are ex-
cessive, conditions may be specified to
avoid premature concrete cracking, such
as higher concrete strength at release.
Arrangement No. 3, partially ten-
sioned strands and zero nonprestressed
steel, has several advantages over the
preceding two. The relaxation Ioss,
which is sensitive to the initial tension
in steel, can be reduced and often elimi-
nated. Also, the transfer length of the
strands at member ends is smaller. This
is particularly useful for short members.
However, in this case, all strands must
extend the full member length.
Eqs. (1) and (2) here will be solved for
A, and f,,,, dec as follows:
Eq. (2) yields:
=M„ /(fj„f ..d,,)=0.982in.2(634
mm2 ).
Eq. (1) yields:
fp*. de[ = [Ma lj, d , Ap81 – A f2B = 123.3 ksi
(849 MPa).
This stress approximates the effective
steel stress. Thus, the effective stress to
ultimate strength ratio = 123.3/270
0.46.
It is possible to use the proposed
method to modify the existing design.
For example, the PCI Design Hand-
book, p. 2-14 shows that the beam, being
designed here, wih six 1/a-in, diameter
straight strands (i.e., strand pattern 68-S)
located atdd, = 14 in. (356 mm), is capa-
ble of carrying a total superimposed load
of 46 psf (2203 Pa).
This beam may be strengthened to
carry the required load of 70 psf by ad-
dition of nonprestressed steel. In this
case, d, 2 is chosen = 18 in. (457 mm) to
satisfy concrete cover requirements. If
Afne is taken equal to the limiting stress
of 30 ksi (207 MPa), 0 f1e would be ap-
proximatedas (A f„ g d ld„s ) = 23 ksi (159
PCI JOURNAL/May-June 1985ҟ
MPa). Both Eqs, (1) and (2) are then
solved separately forA,, , and the larger
value adopted. This yieldsA 1, = 0.99 in .2
(639 mm2).
The PCI Design Handbook load table
on p. 2-14 indicates that, for the
specified loading and span length,
straight tendons cannot be used. The
proposed method offers, not only possi-
ble savings in steel, but also simplicity
of design and a broad range of choices.
The savings are more pronounced in
cases where the present ACI service
load limits on concrete stress control the
design.
COMPARISON WITH
OTHER METHODS
The proposed method is here applied
to published design examples in Refs. 5,
6, 9, and 12. Comparison of the results
should give an indication of the influ-
ence of the approximations introduced,
and verify the reliability of the method.
Table 2 lists the input data, and a
comparison of the results by the pro-
posed method with those reported in the
references. Item (a) is the actual bend-
ing moment resistance of the members.
These moments were calculated by the
authors from the values given in the ref-
erences forA p, andA„b , their respective
stresses, and reinforcement depths.
To maintain the initial requirements
of each design, it was also necessary to
use the decompression stresses fa,,^ec
and fnx.dec as well as the incremental
stress A fa , chosen or calculated in each
reference [see Items (b) and (c)]. The
effective depths, Item (d), were either
available from the references, or esti-
mated by the authors based on the final
design dimensions given.
Values of j,, j,,, f,,, and f,,,, were cal-
culated by the proposed procedure, as
discussed before, One exception was
Huber's beam, for which f d, and f,,,
given by him were retained. These val-
ues are considerably lower than stresses
65
commonly used in American practice.
The proposed method was then used
to calculate the reinforcement areas, A„
andA„jsee Items (g) and (h) of Table 2].
Comparison with quantities reported in
the respective references, indicates a
close agreement. Even closer agreement
is shown when comparing the ultimate
tensile force, T 5 , which is the force in
the total tensile steel area at ultimate
flexure.
This indicates the ability of the pro-
posed procedure to provide the required
ultimate strength. It is reasonable,
therefore, to state that the proposed pro-
cedure, while extremely simple, gives
close results to those of more detailed
methods.
CONCLUSIONS
A simplified flexural design proce-
dure for partially prestressed concrete
members is presented, for use as a pow-
erful first step in the design process.
Simple steps are given for implement-

Table 2. Comparison of Design Results of Proposed Method and Other Methods.

Naaman-
Parameter Siriaksorn Inomatae Moustafa e Huber's
a. Bending moment (in. -kips)
Service load 7339 39828 5281 3000{)
Factored load 11858 60119 8813 49770

b. Steel stresses at decompression

Input (ksi): f,,. 150 155 139.4 125
0 0 0 0

c_ Allowable stress increment

L f, (ksi) 20 20 30 25

d. Effective depth, d (in.) 36 63 20.6 43

e. Internal moment arm

multipliers; j, 0.90 0.90 0.94 0.92
jy 0.96 0.96 0.95 0,94

£ Steel stresses at ultimate flexure

(ksi): f,, 256.5 256.5 256.5 200*
f^ Q 60 60 243.0 60
Calcu-
lated g. Prestressed steel area At 1.07 3.672 1.53 3.02
A,,,, (in.)ҟ
B 1.18 3.63 1.53 2.86

h. Nonprestressed steel area A 1.80 2.38 0.306 12.56

A,,. (in. $ )ҟ B 1.27 2.26 0.44 13.34

i. Ultimate tensile force A. 392 1105 496 1358

T. (kips)ҟ B 379 1067 499 1372

*Author's value was used in proposed procedure because it is considerably lower than used in American
practice.
`The figures in Line A are those determined by the method in the respective reference; the figures in Line B
are determined by the proposed method.
Note; 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 in .t = 645.2 mm= ; 1 kip = 4.448 kN; 1 in-lop = 113 N-rn; 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa.

66
ing the proposed procedure. It is flexi-
ble in allowing for the following possi-
ble applications of partial prestressing:
(a) fully tensioned tendons combined
with nonprestressed tendons or mild
bars, and (b) partially tensioned ten-
dons.
The method is applicable to rectan-
gular, as well as flanged members. It ac-
cepts different values of the prestressed
and the nonprestressed steel effective
depths. Although the values of the lever
arm fractional multipliers, j, and j, and
steel stresses proposed to be used are
approximate, the resulting error appears
to be within acceptable limits.
Furthermore, the method accounts for
time-dependent effects in a more ra-
tional way than some more detailed
methods. It is shown that the stress in
the nonprestressed steel, corresponding
to concrete decompression, is not zero.
It could be a rather significant compres-
sion stress that should be accounted for,
to obtain realistic crack width and de-
flection estimates.
The proposed method does not in-
clude calculation of crack width or de-
flection. However, members are de-
REFERENCES
1. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete
(ACI 318-83)," American Concrete Insti-
tute, Detroit, Michigan, 1983.
2. CEB-FIP, "Model Code for Concrete
Structures, 1978," Comit6 Euro-
International du Beton, 6 rue Lauriston,
F-75116, Paris, France.
3. Naaman, A. E., "Summary Review of
FIP Symposia in Bucharest, Romania,"
PCI JOURNAL, V. 25, No. 6,
November-December 1980, pp. 24-27.
4. Hill, A. W., "Partial Prestressing — A
Report on FIP Symposium Bucharest
1980 and Recommendations," FIP Notes,
March-April 1981, pp. 3-9.
5. Naaman, A. E., and Siriaksorn, A., "Ser-
viceability Based Design of Partially
Prestressed Beams," PCI JOURNAL, V.
PCI JOURNAUMay-Juno 1985 67
signed on the basis of limiting the steel
stress to values that have been shown by
experience to correspond to acceptable
service load behavior.
The present ACI Code limits on con-
crete stresses in prestressed concrete
members, 0.45 ff in compression and
12 ^+ f^ in tension, impose unnecessary
restrictions on prestressed concrete,
Maintenance of these limits, in addition
to being inconsistent with convention-
ally reinforced concrete provisions, does
not help in realizing the full potential of
partial prestressing. For these reasons,
corresponding concrete stress limits
have been dropped from codes in other
countries, as Table 1 shows.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was developed from re-
search conducted under a Research
Fellowship awarded by the Prestressed
Concrete Institute and the Nebraska
Prestressed Concrete Association to the
first author while enrolled in an MSCE
degree program at the University of
Nebraska.
24, Nos. 2 and 3, March-April and May-
June 1979, pp. 64-89 and 40-60.
6. Inomata, S., "A Design Procedure for
Partially Prestressed Concrete Beams
Based on Strength and Serviceability,"
PCI JOURNAL, V. 27, No. 5,
September-October 1982, pp. IW-116.
7. Nilson, A. H., "Flexural Stresses After
Cracking in Partially Prestressed
Beams," PCI JOURNAL, V. 21, No. 4,
July-August 1976, pp. 72-81.
8. Tadros, M. K., "Expedient Service Load
Analysis of Cracked Prestressed Con-
crete Sections," PCI JOURNAL, V. 27,
No. 6, November-December 1982, pp.
86-111. See also discussion, V. 28, No. 6,
November-December 1983, pp. 137-158.
9. Moustafa, S. E,, "Design of Partially Pre-
stressed Concrete Flexural Members,"
 PCI JOURNAL, V. 22, No. 3, May-June
1977, pp. 13-29. See also discussion, PCI
JOURNAL, V. 23, No. 3, May-June 1978,
pp. 92-105.
10. PCI Design Handbook –Precast and Pre-
stressed Concrete, Third Edition, Pre-
stressed Concrete Institute, Chicago,
Illinois, 1985.
11, Bennett, E. W., and Veerasubramanian,
N., "Behavior of Nonrectangular Beams
with Limited Prestress After Flexural
Cracking," ACI Journal, V. 69, No. 9,
September 1972, pp. 533-542.
12. Huber, A., "Practical Design of Partially
Prestressed Concrete Beams," Concrete
International, V. 5, No. 4, April 1983, pp.
49-54.
13. Prasada Rao, A. S., "Design of Limited
and Moderately Prestressed Concrete
Members," Proceedings, Seminar on
Problems of Prestressing, Madras, India,
1970, pp. 83-98.
14. Ramaswamy, G. S., Modern Prestressed
Concrete Design, Pitman Publications
Ltd., London, England, 1976, Chapter 8.
15. Bachmann, H., "Ten Theses on Partial
Prestressing," Proceedings, FIP Sym-
posium on Partial Prestressing,
Bucharest, Romania, 1980, pp. 92-103.
16, Bruggeling, A. S. G., "Partially Pre-
stressed Concrete Structures — A De-
sign Challenge," PCI JOURNAL, V. 30,
No. 2, March-April 1985, pp. 140-171.
17. Brondum-Nielsen, T., "Analysis of Pre-
stressed Concrete Structures for Ser-
viceability and Ultimate Limit States,"
International Symposium on Nonlinear-
ity and Continuity in Prestressed Con-
crete, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,
Ontario, Canada, V. 1, 1983, pp. 15-28.
18. Thurlimann, B., "A Case for Partial Pre-
stressing," Proceedings, Structural Con-
crete Symposium, University of Toronto,
May 1971, pp. 253-3(11.
19. Lacroix, R., "Partially Prestressed Con-
crete," IABSE Periodica 211983, IABSE
Proceedings P-62/83, pp. 87 and 88.
20. Nilson, A. H., Design of Prestressed
Concrete, First Edition, John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1978.
21. Dean, J. A., Park, R., and Tian, L. C.,
"The Observed and Predicted Cracking
Behavior of Four Partially Prestressed
Concrete Beam Sections," New Zealand
68
Institute of Engineers Transactions, V. 8,
310E, November 1981, pp. 65-76.
22, Nawy, E. G., and Huang, P. T., "Crack
and Deflection Control of Pretensioned
Prestressed Beams," PCI JOURNAL, V.
22, No, 3, May-June 1977, pp. 30-47.
23. Gergely, P., and Lutz, L. A., "Causes,
Mechanisms and Control of Cracking in
Concrete," ACI Publication SP-20,
American Concrete Institute, 1968.
24. Abeles, P. W., "Design of Partially Pre-
stressed Concrete Beams," ACI Journal,
V. 64, No. 10, October 1967, pp, 669-677.
25. Bachmann, H., "Design of Partially Pre-
stressed Concrete Structures Based on
Swiss Experiences," PCI JOURNAL, V.
29, No. 4, July-August 1984, pp. 84-105.
26. Tadros, M. K., Ghali, A., Dilger, W. H.
"Effect of Non-Prestressed Steel on Loss
and Deflection," PCI JOURNAL, V. 22,
No. 2, March-April 1977, pp. 50-63.
27. Lin, T. Y., and Burns, N,, Design of Pre-
stressed Concrete Structures, Third
Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New
York, N.Y., 1981.
28. Naaman, A. E., Prestressed Concrete
Analysis and Design, First Edition,
McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1982.
29. Tadros, M. K., and Peterson, D. N.,
"Code Consideration of Flexural Design
with Partial Prestressing," Proceedings,
International Symposium on Nonlinear-
ity and Continuity in Prestressed Con-
crete, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,
Ontario, Canada, July 1983, V. 3, pp.
125-156.
30. Meyer, A. W., Tadros, M. K., and Jit-
tawait, V., "Time-Dependent Deflection
of Cracked Prestressed Concrete Mem-
bers," Proceedings, International Sym-
posium on Nonlinearity and Continuity
in Prestressed Concrete, University of
Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, V.
1, 1983, pp, 123-146.
31. Tadros, M. K., Ghali, A., and Meyer,
A. W., "Prestress Loss and Deflection of
Precast Concrete Members," PCI
JOURNAL, V. 30, No. 2, January-
February 1985, pp. 114-141.
32. Ghali, A., and Tadros, M. K., "Partially
Prestressed Concrete Structures," Jour-
nal of Structural Engineering, American
Society of Civil Engineers, V. 3, No. 8,
August 1985.
 APPENDIX - NOTATION
A = gross concrete cross section area
A,, area of nonprestressed rein-
forcement
A,, = area of prestressed reinforce-
ment
b = compression flange width
b, = web width
C = compression force
d = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to reinforcement
centroid
d. = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to nonpre-
stressed reinforcement centroid
4 = distance from extreme com-
pression fiber to prestressed
reinforcement centroid
Ee = concrete modulus of elasticity
E. = steel modulus of elasticity
= stress in concrete
specified compression strength
of concrete
f1 = stress in nonprestressed rein-
forcement at ultimate flexure
f P&dec = stress in nonprestressed rein-
forcement at decompression
I = stress in prestressed reinforce-
ment at ultimate flexure
stress in prestressed reinforce-
ment at decompression
fD^ = initial stress in prestressed re-
inforcement
= specified ultimate strength of
prestressed reinforcement
ϗ
lie = effective stress in prestressed
NOTE: Discussion of this paper is invited. Please submit
your comments to PCI Headquarters by January 1, 1986.
PCI JOURNAUMay-June 1985 ҟ
reinforcement after all losses
Af , = allowable change in nonpre-
stressed steel stress beyond de-
compression
= allowable change in pre-
stressed steel stress beyond de-
compression
A f, = allowable change in total steel
stress beyond decompression
f„ = specified yield strength of mild
bar reinforcement
h = total member depth
h,, = compression flange depth
j ,j = fractional multiplier of d to ob-
tain lever arm for internal re-
sisting couple at service load
and at ultimate flexure, respec-
tively
M, = full service load moment
M„ = factored load (ultimate) mo-
ment
T = tension force
f3, = equivalent rectangular concrete
stress distribution factor defined
in ACI Code, Section 10.2.7.3
= strength reduction factor de-
fined in ACI Code Section 9.3,
equals 0.90 for flexure
W — P.fu!lf,
6j D = P" Pz ll l'
p = ratio of nonprestressed tension
reinforcement, AIbd
pn = ratio of prestressed reinforce-
ment, A,,, Ibd
69