Tests reported by Rangan and Hall (25)

on prestressed concrete box beams

(1) (2) (3) (4 ) (5 ) (6) (1) (8 ) (9 )
TTES,T MTESTI
Level of
Mem- r
Tc - Tc
l
~
K
Kactual
I prestress
ber
Tuo
(air' c)
ID (in-k)
A1 0.33 144 0.64 ' 1. 16 1.55 1.55 1.21 0.03
A2 0.33 99 0.14 0.88 1.63 1.63 1.05 0.04
A3 0.33 39
1.01 0.82 1.63 1.63 1.12 0.04
A4 0.33 18 1 15 0.14 1.65 1.65 1. 12 0.04
B1 0.33 146 0.61 1.14 1.66 1.66 1.24 0.04
B2 0.33 141 0.62 0.86 1.66 1.66 0.99 0.04
B3 0.33 120 0.15 0.14 1.61 1.61 0.95 0.04
B4 0.33 63 0.98 0.10 1.66 1.66 1.00 0.04
B5 0.33 15 1.15 0.55 1.15 1.15 0.99 0.04
C1 0.33 36 0.81 1 11 1.81 1.81 1.28 0.05
C2 0.33 42 0.81 0.84 1.82 1.82 1.04 0.05
x 1.10
s 0.12
Tests reported by Mitchell and Collins (17)
on prestressed concrete box beams
TB3 1.0 92 0.35 0.98 2.0 3.01 1.09 0.23
Overall Table 2.1 x 1.10 N
=
12
s O. 11
Table 2. 1 Evaluation of beams subjected to torsion and bending
failing in the transition state
53
54
Tests reported by Johnston and Zia (26)
on Erestressed concrete box beams
(1) (2) (3) (4 ) (5) (6) (7 ) (8 ) (9 )
TTEST HTESTI
Level of
Hem- r
Tc - Tel
Muo
K
Kactual
I prestress
ber
Tuo
(alf'c)
1D (in-k)
H-0-6-3 0.5 11 0.73 0.84 2.0 2.27 1.08 0.13
H-0-6-5 0.4
7 0.92 0.50 2.0 2.18 0.95 0.10
H-0-6-6 0.5 92 0.03 1.08 2.0 2.18 1.08 0.10
x 1.04
s 0.08
Tests reported by Warwaruk and Taylor (27)
on Erestressed concrete double celled beams
R2 0.24 93 0.69 1.13 1.85 1.85 1.38 0.07
T1 0.36 4 0.85 0.68 2.0 2.19 0.95 0.12
T2 0.36 108 0.26 1.09 2.0 2.22 1 11 0.12
x 1.15
s 0.22
Overall Table 2.2 x 1.09 N
=
6
s 0.16
Table 2.2 Evaluation of the truss model procedure with test
data of beams failing in the transition state
subjected to combined torsion bending
55
reevaluated taking into account the concrete contribution in the
transition state. The analysis of these specimens revealed that all of
them were in the full truss state at failure and therefore the results
presented in Secs. 3.4 and 3.7 remain unaltered.
In the case of members subjected to combined bending and shear
the reevaluation of the 141 specimens with various amounts of web
reinforcement analyzed in Secs. 3.5 and 3.8 of Report 248-3 showed that
of all those specimens only 34 failed in the transition state. The data
for these specimens are shown in Tables 2.3 and 2.4.
As can be seen from the value of the mean and the standard
deviation from Table 2.3, the truss model approach with the addition of
the concrete contribution to the shear strength of the member is in good
agreement with test obtained values and yields conservative results in
all cases. The failure of specimen C2Al previously discussed in Sec.
3.5 of Report 248-3 was due to poor detailing of the longitudinal
reinforcement which produced a premature failure and thus should not be
considered in the overall evaluation.
Shown in Table 2.4 are data on beams wi th light amounts of web
reinforcement (pC 100 psi). These beams were previously studied in
Sec. 3.8 of Report 248-3 to evaluate the proposed concrete contribution
in members which failed right after first diagonal cracking, Le., at
the limit value between the uncracked and the transition state.
It might seem fr'om the values of the dispersion index I shown in
Table 2.4 that the proposed concrete contribution would be unsafe for
members with very light amounts of web reinforcement failing 1n shear.
56
Tests reEorted by Hernandez
~ 2 : g ~ on prestressed concrete I-beams
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9 ) (10)
V
TEST
MTESTI
p
Level
v
Mem-
Vc - Vc
l
Muo fy
tan a I K
Kactual
of pre-
ber
Vuo
stress
(10) (kips) (psi) off'
c
G28 0.16 0.71 0.99 120 0.24 1.36 2.0 2.31 0.14
Tests reEorted by
Moayer, Regan (29) on prestressed concrete T-beams
P4 3.66 0.49 1.21 105 0.52 1.38 1.91 1.91 0.07
P13 1.24 0.94 1. 11 104 0.14 1.64 1.7 1.7 0.05
P18 0.16 0.97 1.0 104 0.13 1.59 2.0 2.49 0.13
P24 1.47 0.51 1 11 155 0.49 1.31 1. 73 1.73 0.05
P25 10.13 0.39 1.19 104 0.21 1.31 1.73 1.73 0.05
P27 10.72 0.41 1.09 104 0.18 1.23 2.0 2.50 0.13
P29 7.00 0.47 1.06 104 0.23 1.24 2.0 2.52 0.13
Test reported by Rodriguez , Bianchini , Viest, Kesler (30')
on two-span continuous reinforced concrete beams
C2A 1 0.65 0.45 0.58 190 0.58 0.83
Overall for Table 2.3 x 1. 32 N
=
9
s 0.23
Overall for Table 2.3 x 1.38 N
=
8
wi thout spec imen C2A 1 s 0.15
Table 2.3 Evaluation of beams under bending and shear
failing in the transition state
0.0