SERVICE L O A D BEHAVIOR O F C O N C R E T E M E M B E R S

PRESTRESSED WITH UNBONDED TENDONS

By M . H. Harajli, 1 and M . Y. Kanj 2

ABSTRACT: The results of experimental and analytical investigation of the be-

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

havior of concrete members prestressed with unbonded tendons under static loading
are described. In the experimental section, a total of 26 beam specimens are tested,
and several parameters, including reinforcing index, partial prestressing ratio, mem-
ber span-to-depth ratio, and type of load application, are investigated. In the
following analysis a general method of section analysis of concrete members pre-
stressed with unbonded tendons is developed and used to reproduce the experi-
mentally observed service load stresses in the tensile reinforcement. Also, available
methods proposed in the technical literature to predict the service load deflection
of bonded prestressed and partially prestressed concrete members are generalized
to account for the slip of prestressing steel in unbonded posttensioned members
and then compared with the current experimental results.

INTRODUCTION

Extensive experimental and analytical studies have been undertaken in

recent years to evaluate the strength and serviceability of partially pre-
stressed concrete (PPC) members. This has led to significant advances in
the state of knowledge of the analysis and design of this type of concrete
construction (Naaman 1985). On the other hand, relatively few analytical
studies have so far been devoted to concrete members that use a combination
of unbonded prestressing steel and ordinary reinforcement (PPC unbonded
members). Although unbonded posttensioned construction had been used
in slab structures for quite some time, the recommendations of ACI-ASCE
Committee 423 {Recommendations 1985) for unbonded members give no
information on the accurate analysis of beams prestressed with unbonded
tendons. Furthermore, while several of the experimental and analytical
studies of unbonded prestressed (PC) and partially prestressed concrete
members have been concerned with the ultimate limit state in bending, very
few have addressed behavior at service load conditions. Evaluation of the
service load characteristics, e.g., stresses in the constituent materials, de-
flections, and crack widths, are especially important in partially prestressed
members since these members are designed to crack under service load.
This paper presents the results of an experimental and analytical inves-
tigation of the flexural response characteristics of concrete members pre-
stressed with unbonded tendons. Many aspects of behavior, including crack-
ing, load-deflection response, and stresses in the tensile reinforcement observed
in the experimental part of this investigation, are described. A general
method of elastic-section analysis (cracked-uncracked) is developed and

'Assoc. Prof., American Univ. of Beirut, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., 850 Third A v e . ,
New York, N Y 10022; formerly, Asst. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg. and Envir. Sci.,
Univ. of Oklahoma, Norman, O K 73019-0631.
2
Grad. Res. Asst., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., American Univ. of Beirut, Beirut,
Lebanon.
Note. Discussion open until February 1, 1993. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the A S C E Manager of Journals. The
manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on
January 14, 1991. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.
118, No. 9, September, 1992. © A S C E , ISSN 0733-9445/92/0009-2569/$1.00 + $.15
per page. Paper No. 1192.

2569

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 used to reproduce the experimentally observed results of service load stresses
in the tensile reinforcement. Also, several approaches proposed in the tech-
nical literature to compute the service load deflections in bonded prestressed
and partially prestressed members were modified to cover unbonded post-
tensioned construction and then compared with the current experimental
results.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

Beam Parameters and Design Variables

A total of 26 unbonded prestressed and partially prestressed beam spec-
imens were tested. Several parameters commonly known to affect the be-
havior of unbonded prestressed concrete members were investigated. These
parameters included the total amount of tension reinforcement or reinforc-
ing index, the partial prestressing ratio, the span-to-depth ratio of the mem-
ber, and the type of load application. For each similar combination of
parameters (reinforcing index, partial prestressing ratio, and span-to-depth
ratio), two beams were tested; one beam was tested under single concen-
trated load, while the other beam was tested under symmetrical two one-
third point loads.
The partial prestressing ratio is defined in this study as the ratio of tension
force in the prestressing steel to the total force in the tension reinforcement,
developed at the nominal flexural strength of the member. Two values of
partial prestressing ratios were selected, namely about 0.5 (partially pre-
stressed) and 1 (fully prestressed). The reinforcing index (defined in ac-
cordance with ACI318-89) varied for the various beam specimens between
0.021 and 0.26.
Typical cross sections and the reinforcement layout of the beam specimens
are shown in Fig. 1. The specimens were grouped into three major test
series R3, R2, and R l , depending on their span-to-depth ratios. Series R3
corresponds to beams with a span-to-depth ratio equal to about 20, while
r- -1
l i
P/2 ^ | 4 P/2
' IP '
f
T a.
•a •a
h = Varies _ . . _ . 1-
1 'K , — L = Varie riff]
'-o
S
s
"
"
5"

©\
1 ~1 i m

As 8
Aps
O—
»-
J riL~|T.75
•9
- o— —o
9 o- 1
i"
S eries R3 Se ries R2 S eries Rl
(L=120"; S = 128") (L=100"; S = 110") (L=80"; S = 88")

FIG. 1. Typical Dimensions of Beam Specimens

2570

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 series R2 and R l correspond to beams with span-to-depth ratios equal to
about 12 and 8, respectively. A summary of beam designations and rein-
forcement areas is provided in Table 1. Relevant data pertaining to each
beam specimen tested are also included in the table.
Materials
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The concrete mix consisted of portland cement type I, crushed stone

aggregate of maximum size 3/8 in. (10 mm), and fine masonry sand. A
superplasticizer was added at about 0.5% by weight of cement to increase
the workability of the concrete during mixing. The cement, sand, and ag-
gregate proportions by weight were: 1:1.8:2.4, with the water-cement ratio
wlc = 0.38. The mix was designed to achieve a 6,000 psi (41.4 Mpa) concrete
strength at testing. An average of three 6 in. x 12 in. (152 mm x 305 mm)
cylinders were tested to determine the concrete strength of each beam
specimen. Actual concrete strengths for the various beam specimens ob-
tained at the time of loading are given in Table 1.
Three different types of prestressing steel wires were used. Their diam-
eters and yield strengths were: 7 mm, 187 ksi (1,290 Mpa); 7 mm, 192 ksi
(1,324 Mpa); and 5 mm, 203 ksi (1,400 Mpa). Their ultimate strengths were,
respectively; 215 ksi (1,482 Mpa), 207 ksi (1,427 Mpa), and 233 ksi (1,606
Mpa). All wires had the same measured modulus of elasticity Eps of 30,000
ksi (207 Gpa), as well as the same measured proportional limit strain of
0.005.
The reinforcing steel consisted of grade 60, and occasionally grade 40,
deformed bars with diameters varying between 10 mm (number 3) and 16
mm (number 5). Actual yield stresses are given in Table 1. The modulus
of elasticity of the bars was estimated at 29,000 ksi (200 Gpa). Grade 40
plain bars with a 6-mm diameter (number 2) were used for shear reinforce-
ment. These bars were also used at the top and bottom of the beam, wher-
ever and whenever no longitudinal reinforcement is provided, in order to
support the shear stirrups. The spacing of shear reinforcement provided in
the shear span varied between 2 in. and 4 in. (50 mm and 100 mm), de-
pending on the design shear, with marginal safety considered to avoid shear
before flexural-type failure.
Instrumentation
Stresses in the tensile reinforcement were measured using electrical-resis-
tance strain gages attached to the surface of the prestressing wires and
reinforcing bars. Two strain gages were attached to the reinforcing steel at
the midspan section, one on each exterior bar. One strain gage was attached
to each prestressing wire at the same section location.
Deflection of the beam specimens during the test was measured at mid-
span by two linear variable displacement transformers (LVDTs) placed on
either side of the specimens. Deflection was also monitored continuously
using the digital voltmeter readout of the actuator stroke of the testing
machine.
The test was conducted using an updated MTS closed-loop servo-hy-
draulic testing machine, and all data (strain gage readings and LVDT read-
ings) were recorded and stored automatically using a computerized data-
acquisition system (system 4000 supplied by the Measurements Group).
TEST RESULTS
In the subsequent sections, a brief description of the test results is pre-
sented, followed by an analysis of the unbonded prestressed and partially
2571

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 TABLE 1. Summary of Reinforcing and Strength Parameters
Yield
Concrete Grade Effective. stress of
Beam Type of P/steel R/steel strength, of steel, prestress R/steel
designation loading Aps, in2 As, in2 / ; (ksi) fpu (ksi) fP. (ksi) /,. (ksi)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a) Beam Series R3

PP2R3-3 2-1/3 point load 1(7 mm) 2(10 mm) 6.26 215 138.00 52.35
0.06 0.24
PP2R3-0 single concen- 1(7 mm) 2(10 mm) 6.35 215 136.00 41.32
trated 0.06 0.24
PP3R3-3 2-1/3 point load
2(7 mm) 2(12 mm) • 6.26 207 128.00 64.59
0.12 0.35
PP3R3-0 single concen- 2(7 mm) 2(12 mm) 5.66 207 130.00 74.88
trated 0.12 0.35
P1R3-3 2-1/3 point load 1(5 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.44 233 147.00 40
0.03 plain
bars
P1R3-0 single concen- 1(5 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.05 233 144.00 40
trated 0.03 plain
bars
P2R3-3 2-1/3 point load 2(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 6,80 215 124.50 40
0.12 plain
bars
P2R3-0 single concen- 2(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 5.60 207 126.50 40
trated 0.12 plain
bars
P3R3-3 2-1/3 point load 3(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.75 207 127.50 40
0.18 plain
bars
P3R3-0 single concen- 3(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 5.98 207 122.50 40
trated 0.18 plain
bars

(b) Beam Series R2

PP1R2-3 2-1/3 point load 1(7 mm) 2(10 mm) 6.12 215 125.00 84.60
0.06 0.24
PP1R2-0 single concen- 1(7 mm) 2(10 mm) 6.08 215 120.00 80.65
trated 0.06 (0.24)
PP2R2-3 2-1/3 point load 2(7 mm) 2(12 mm) 6.11 215 127.50 58.68
0.12 0.35
PP2R2-0 single concen- 2(7 mm) 2(12 mm) 5.52 215 126.50 59.56
trated 0.12 0.35
PP3R2-3 2-1/3 point load
3(7 mm) 2(14 mm) 6.17 215 128.50 81.87
0.18 0.48
PP3R2-0 single concen- 3(7 mm) 2(14 mm) 6.44 215 133.00 80.71
trated 0.18 0.48
P1R2-3 2-1/3 point load 3(5 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.15 233 140.00 40
0.09 plain
bars
P1R2-0 single concen- 2(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.42 215 118.00 40
trated 0.12 plain
bars
P2R2-3 2-1/3 point load 3(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.48 215 122.00 40
0.18 plain
bars
P2R2-0 single concen- 3(7 mm) 2(6 mm) 6.60 215 124.00 40
trated 0.18 plain
bars

2572

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 1

TABLE 1. (Continued)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

(c) Beam Series Rl

PP1R1-3 2-1/3 point load 1(7 mm) 2(12 mm) 4.88 207 128.00 76.88
0.06 0.35
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

PP1R1-0 single concen- 1(7 mm) 2(12 mm) 5 207 135.00 80.75
trated 0.06 0.35
PP2R1-3 2-1/3 point load 2(7 mm) 2(14 mm) 5.55 215 136.00 89.30
0.12 0.48
PP2R1-0 single concen- 2(7 mm) 2(14 mm) 5.73 215 130.00 68.44
trated 0.12 0.48
PP3R1-3 2-1/3 point load 3(7 mm) 2(16 mm) 5.02 215 131.00 68.14
0.18 0.62
PP3R1-0 single concen- 3(7 mm) 2(16 mm) 5.27 215 129.00 66.98
trated 0.18 0.62
Note: All beams contained two 6 mm plain-top reinforcements to support shear stirrups.

prestressed members at the serviceability limit state. Extensive output re-

sults of deflections, prestressing and reinforcing steel stresses, and tendon
elongations and their variation under applied load for the 26 specimens
tested are given in detail elsewhere (Harajli and Kanj 1990).

Ultimate and Cracking Strength

The average ratio of observed to calculated (ACI 318-89) ultimate mo-
ment capacity of all beam specimens was 1.09, with a standard deviation of
0.08. The modulus of rupture of the various beam specimens varied between
a minimum of 3.5//'c (beam PP2R3-3) and a maximum of 12.8//'c (beam
P2R2-0), with an average of l.ljf'c, which is slightly lower than the l.SJf'c
specified in the ACI building code ("Building" 1989).

Cracking Behavior
At the cracking load, the fully prestressed beams tended to develop sev-
eral simultaneous cracks, which spread primarily inside the flexural span or
in the vicinity of the applied load. However, as the load increased, only
one crack, or occasionally two cracks, tended to increase considerably in
width and to propagate upward toward the compression zone of the member.
The widening of a single crack led the fully prestressed beam specimens to
respond to the load as "tied arches," which are commonly reported in several
experimental investigations of the flexural behavior of unbonded fully pre-
stressed members (Warwaruk et al. 1962; Mattock et al. 1972; Cooke et al.
1981).
Unlike fully prestressed specimens, and because of the presence of de-
formed reinforcing bars, partially prestressed specimens developed well-
distributed cracks along their span. The widths of the cracks increased
consistently as the load increased, with no sign of deformation concentrating
at a single crack location as occurred in the fully prestressed specimens.
The average crack spacing of the various partially prestressed specimens
varied between a minimum of 3.3 in. (85 mm) and a maximum of 3.5 in.
(90 mm) in test series R3; 3.8 in. (97 mm) and 4.9 in. (125 mm) in test
series R2; and 4.4 in. (110 mm) and 5.1 in. (130 mm) in test series Rl. The
percentage area of bonded reinforcement relative to the area A between
the flexural tension face and the center of gravity of the gross section in
2573

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 these specimens varied between a minimum of 0.87% (beam PP1R2) and
a maximum of 1.90% (beam PP3R1), which are both in excess of the min-
imum of 0.4% specified in the ACI building code ("Building" 1989).

Load-Deflection Response
Typical load deflection responses of the beam specimens are shown in
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 2. All beam specimens showed signs of yielding before failure. The
yielding behavior of all the partially prestressed specimens occurred due to
the yielding of the reinforcing steel. In the fully prestressed specimens, the
yielding behavior was observed to be partly due to yielding of the two 6-
mm grade 40 plain bars provided to support the shear stirrups and partly

400

& 300 "

i 200

PP3R3-0
PP2R3-3

I 100 -

I i I
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

Midspan Deflection (in.)

250

P3R3-3
.5 200
^ P3R3_0
i

A" ^ ^ -_-o o P2R3-3

I 150

100
22*^-*— * ^"~^P2R3-0

I 50
yv——
P1R3-3
fV-—-———O , .

P1R3-0

1 i . i . i
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Midspan Deflection (in)

FIG. 2. Typical Load-Deflection Response of Beam Specimens
2574

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 due to cracking of the specimens, which was usually followed by a sharp
reduction in stiffness and a considerable increase in deflection with increas-
ing load.

Stresses in Tensile Reinforcement

Results showing the increase in stresses in the prestressing steel measured
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

using strain gages with an applied midspan moment are shown in Fig. 3.
It can be observed in Fig. 3 that the increase in stresses in the tensile
reinforcement with applied moment shows a trend similar to the load-de-
flection response. Before cracking, the stresses in the unbonded prestressing

Increase in Stress in P/Steel (ksi)

400

PP3R3-0
•T "
300 •o PP3R3-3
6
B
u
I 200 -
sK
a PP2R3-0
s 100
r PP2R3-3

,1 _„. 1 i

10 20 30 40 50

Increase in Stress in P/Steel (ksi)

FIG. 3. Variation of Increase in Stress in Prestressing Steel with Applied Load

2575

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 steel showed, due to slip, only slight increases with increasing loads, varying
between as low as 0.5 ksi (3 Mpa) to as high as 3.0 ksi (20 Mpa). However,
after cracking, the stresses tended to increase significantly with applied load
at a rate depending on the content of the tension reinforcement. In general,
the rate increased as the content of tension reinforcement or reinforcing
index decreased. The observed trend of applied load versus reinforcement
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

stresses is supported analytically as illustrated in the subsequent sections.

It should be pointed out that the results of the current experimental
investigation seem to indicate that the type of load application and the beam
span-to-depth ratio (for the range between 8 and 20 studied) do not have
significant effects on the magnitude of stress in the prestressing steel at the
nominal flexural strength of the members (reflected partly in Fig. 3). The
corresponding observation contradicts earlier analytical studies, in which it
was reported that the type of load application (Harajli 1990; Loov 1987;
Chouinard 1989) and the range of member span ratios between 10 and 20
(Harajli 1990) have significant influences on the magnitude of stress in the
prestressing steel at the nominal flexural strength of unbonded prestressed
concrete members. More details on the ultimate limit state characteristics
of concrete members prestressed with unbonded tendons in conjunction
with the current experimental results, as well as other extensive experimental
data reported in the technical literature, is provided elsewhere (Harajli and
Kanj 1991).

SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE ANALYSIS OF UNBONDED MEMBERS

While several experimental and analytical studies of unbonded prestressed

concrete members are concerned with the ultimate flexural strength (War-
waruk et al. 1962; Mattock et al. 1971; Tarn and Pannell 1976; Mojtahedi
and Gamble 1978; Elzanaty and Nilson 1982; Chouinard 1989), very little
published work [except for limited studies undertaken by Balaguru (1981)
and Naaman (1989)] has dealt with the analysis of PC and PPC members
in the elastic range of behavior. Among the serviceability limit state aspects
commonly considered in design, only crack control in slabs has been ex-
tensively addressed by Burns and colleagues at the University of Texas
(Burns et al. 1978; Gebre-Michael 1970; Hemakom 1970; Chen 1971).
In the following sections, the analysis of the serviceability limit state
characteristics of unbonded prestressed and partially prestressed members
is undertaken. A comprehensive evaluation of the nominal flexural strength
in unbonded members, based in part on the results of the current experi-
mental investigation, is provided elsewhere (Harajli and Kanj 1990).

Section Analysis of Unbonded Members

The problem of section analysis of unbonded prestressed and partially
prestressed members can be reduced to that of bonded ones by using a
strain-reduction coefficient CI (for the uncracked state) and D,c (for the
cracked state) to account for the slip of prestressing steel. The strain-re-
duction coefficient is defined in general as the ratio of the increase in strain
in the prestressing steel above effective prestrain in unbonded members to
the same in bonded members at any given level of applied moment at the
critical section as follows:
(A^mbonded
v
(AE;M)bonded
2576

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 Assuming that the strain reduction coefficient given in (1) is known, the
formulation of the section analysis of unbonded partially prestressed mem-
bers can be derived from the basic principles of mechanics (for the uncracked
state) and by satisfying the requirements of force and moment equilibrium
across the depth of the critical section (in the cracked state). Results are
summarized for the most general case of T-section in the following:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

• Uncracked state (Ma < Mcr):

il(Ma - M„- Ms)ec
Jps Jpe '
A + + (2)

- \% - ) 'i
f = —
Ma(ds - yt) _ Apsfps ^ + ec{ds - y,)A
L (3)
Er

U (4)
A. V h ) I.
• Cracked state (Ma > Mcr):
• Force equilibrium:
KlC2 + K2c + K3 = 0.0 . (5)
where
2
bwfc
*1 = 1 (6)

K2 = ApsEps(spe + acBce) - J - (HAPsEps + ASES + A'SES)

-{b- K)hffe (7)

K3 = jr ( f i A M + A#A + A'sE,d's) + ^ | * ^ . (8)

Moment equilibrium:

d ~c\(fc
"^a A.pstLps + ilcece + O c I ^P

_ k{c _ hffib _ K) (hf + c-^j +f-Jf

+ A'SES l ^ ) | ^ = 0.0 (9)

2577

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 (10)
fp. = Eps(spe + n c e ce ) + Vc^rfc (^7^)

(11)
t-fsfcr)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The terms c, fc, fps, and fs = the neutral axis depth, the concrete stress in
the top fiber, prestressing steel stress, and the reinforcing steel stress, re-
spectively.
Eqs. (5)-(9) contain two unknowns c and/ c . The solution can be obtained
by iteratively assuming fc and then solving for c [(5)-(8)] until the moment
equilibrium (9) is satisfied (within a specified tolerance). Once/ c and c are
determined, it becomes possible to compute fps andfs from (10) and (11),
respectively. The cracked section analysis accounts for the concrete tensile
stresses fr below the neutral axis position. Assuming fr equal to zero will
allow the combination of (5) -(9) into a single cubic equation in c (Naaman
and Siriaksorn 1979; Naaman 1989). Notice that by setting (lc = 1.0, the
analysis is reduced to that of bonded partially prestressed members.

Strain Reduction Coefficient

The computation of strain-reduction coefficients ft before cracking is
simple and can be achieved from the basic principles of mechanics. Exact
values of ft derived earlier by Naaman (1989) for beams with different
tendon profiles and different types of load applications are summarized in
Table 2. On the other hand, the computation of an "exact" strain-reduction
coefficient ftc in the cracking state that accounts for different types of loading
and tendon profiles is a very difficult analytical task. It is virtually impossible.
However, a relatively simple and reasonably accurate expression for ftc can
be derived based on some simplifying assumptions of the curvature distri-
bution along the span length as illustrated in the following.
Consider the simply supported beam loaded with two concentrated loads
separated by a distance L 0 as shown in Fig. 4. Also shown in this figure is
a linearized curvature distribution along the span that is obtained by as-
suming: (1) All beam sections follow a similar idealized moment-curvature
relationship, as shown in Fig. 4(a) (correct only for straight tendon profile);
and (2) the neutral axis position is independent of the applied load (correct
only for reinforced concrete members). Based on these assumptions, the
strain reduction coefficient ftc can be calculated as the ratio of the area

TABLE 2. Values of Strain Reduction Coefficient in Uncracked State

Strain reduction coefficient
Type of loading and tendon profile (uncracked state)
(1) (2)
Uniform load and straight tendons a = 2/3
Uniform load and parabolic tendons ft = (8/15) + (l/4)(e,/ec) .
Third point load and straight tendons n = 2/3
Third point load and parabolic tendons ft = (44/81) + (10/81)(es/ec)
Concentrated midspan load and straight tendons ft = 1/2
Concentrated midspan load and parabolic tendons ft = (5/12) + (l/12)(es/ec)
Note: es = eccentricity at end supports; ec = eccentricity at midspan.

2578

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 (a)
1 ,
Ma
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Mcr 1

\ 1
k
r i
1

1
1
i i
1 -
<t>cr • a
Ma-Mcr
Eclcr

FIG. 4. Assumed Curvature Distribution along Span Length

under the curvature diagram, as shown in Fig. 4(c), to the area 4>aL. Ex-
pressing $a and $cr as functions of Mcr, Ig, Ma, and l„ (shown in Fig. 4)
and using geometry, the following approximate expression of toc can be
derived:

Ms 1
a = ti - 0.5 i - (12)
L u +1
M„ t
where to = the strain-reduction factor in the precracking stage given in
Table 2. It should be noted that while the term to in (12) is exact and takes
into account the type of load application and tendon profile, the second
term is approximate and is calculated independently of the tendon profile.
Eq. (12) can be used for members with uniformly distributed loads by
assuming that uniform loads are closely approximated by two third point
concentrated loads {LJL = 1/3). Setting Ma = Mc„ the values of O c are
reduced to the exact values of to given in Table 2.
Typical variations of 0,c obtained using (12) versus MJM„ for beams with
straight tendon profile and for different ranges of IJIg are shown in Fig. 5
to illustrate the types of variations in the strain-reduction coefficient with
applied load expected in unbonded members. It can be observed in this
figure that the strain-reduction coefficient Xlc does not differ significantly
from its value before cracking. For instance, assuming IJIg = 0.5, the
maximum drop in O c is about 10% for the third-point loading and 17% for
the single concentrated loading, compared to the magnitude of toc before
cracking. Since the primary concern herein is to simplify the cracked section
analysis of partially prestressed unbonded members, it is tempting to assume
that the strain-reduction factor in the postcracking stage is equal to its exact
value in the precracking stage as follows:
Oc = to (13)
COMPARISON OF ANALYSIS WITH EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Stresses in Tensile Reinforcement
The previously described procedure of elastic-section analysis was com-
puterized and then used to calculate the stresses in the tensile reinforcement
for all beam specimens tested in the experimental part of this investigation.
2579

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 0.9
Icr/Ig = 0.70
0.8 Icr/Ig = 0.50
Icr/Ig = 0.30
u 0.7
S3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ee -o— -a 2-1/3 point

•43
0.6 3: 5: and uniform
-o-
a loading
« 0.5
single
concentrated
0.4 load
oa
0.3
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Ma/Mcr

FIG. 5. Variation of Strain Reduction Coefficient with Applied Load

To illustrate the influence of the strain-reduction coefficient on the pre-

dicted results, two different methods of computation were undertaken: (1)
An approximate method in which the strain-reduction coefficient flc is cal-
culated using (13): and (2) a more accurate method in which tl c is calculated
using (12). Before cracking, the stresses were calculated using (2) and (3).
In the postcracking stage, the entire response of the service load versus the
reinforcement stresses for each beam specimen was generated using both
methods by incrementally increasing the concrete stress fc in the top fiber
of the critical section and then calculating Ma, f and.£ from (9)—(11),
respectively. The magnitude of the concrete tensile strength fr was taken as
the modulus of rupture, calculated from the observed cracking moment for
each beam specimen. While the use of (13) to calculate ilc leads to a direct
prediction of the postcracking stress response, the use of (12) requires an
iterative procedure that is summarized in the following steps:

1. For a given level of the prescribed stress fc in the concrete top fiber
of the critical section, assume value of Oc = ft as a first approximation.
2. Calculate c using (5)-(8), and then calculate the moment of inertia of
the cracked section Icr and the applied moment Ma. The cracked section
moment of inertia Icr can be calculated relative to the centroidal axis of the
cracked section (neglecting the tensile zone below the neutral axis position)
using the following equation:

b^f , bw(c - yf ^ r h _ u , (y - hf\2 ^ iPj^bw)h}

I„ = + + (b - bwu)hf
3 3 12
+ D,cnpAps(dp - y) 2 + nsAs(ds - y) 2 (14)
where
2
(b M + b„c + Q,cnpApsdp + nsAsds
(15)
(b - bw)hf + cbw + ilctipAps + nAs
2580

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 3. Recalculate 0,c using (12), in which Ma and / „ are calculated as in step
2.
4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until the moment Ma calculated in iteration n is
equal to that calculated in iteration n — \ within a specified level of tol-
erance. Normally, three iteration are required at most to achieve very close
results.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5. Compute the stresses^ and/ 5 from Eqs. (10) and (11), respectively.

The described iterative procedure determines only one point in the post-
cracking load versus the stress response. To determine another point, the
concrete stress fc in the top fiber is increased by a small increment, and the
same iterative procedure is repeated until the entire response is generated.
Typical results of variations in the increase in stress in the prestressing
steel and reinforcing steel stress with applied midspan moment obtained
using the previously described method of section analysis are compared to
experimentally observed results in Fig. 6.
It is shown in Fig. 6 that despite some discrepancy, and given the vari-
ability in the response of unbonded prestressed and partially prestressed
members, there is generally very good agreement between the analysis and
the experimental results. It is also clear that the trend of the applied moment
versus the stress response using (13) to calculate the strain-reduction coef-
ficient Oc does not differ significantly from the results obtained using (12).
The same observation, but with much less difference in the predicted results,
was also obtained for the stress in the reinforcing steel (results are not
shown). This clearly indicates that the slip of prestressing steel in unbonded
prestressed and partially prestressed members can be accounted for in a
reasonably accurate and simple manner using the strain-reduction coefficient
given in (13).

— Experiment a PP3R2-3

" ^jt0&"
x<5^ PP2R2-3
300
<^Za ...*."° PP1R2-3
D
200 C^ ' - °
/j$ -<,.ffl.-.-.--b--
100 ®*n . . . . < „ „ Ana( (using Eq. 2)
-o Anal (using Eq. 3)
i i i
01
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Increase in Stress Increase In Stress In P/Steel (ksl)

Experiment

PP2R3-3

50 100 150 200 250 300

Midspan Moment (k-in)

FIG. 6. Comparison between Experimental and Analytical Results of Stress in

Steel

2581

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 Service Load Deflection
Several methods have been proposed in the technical literature to predict
the service-load deflection of bonded prestressed and partially prestressed
members. A summary is provided by Harajli and Alameh (1989). In this
section, the validity of extending some of these methods to predict the
service-load deflection in unbonded members is compared to the current
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

experimental results. The corresponding methods were slightly modified,

however, to account for the slip of the prestressing steel by using the simple
strain-reduction coefficient expressed in (13). A summary of the modified
prediction methods is given in the following (see also Fig. 7). These methods
include Branson's / effective method (Branson and Trost 1982), the method
proposed by Harajli and Alameh (1989), and the PCI bilinear load-deflec-
tion model (PCI). Setting ii c = 1.0, the three methods presented in the
following are reduced to those originally proposed for bonded members.
Method 1 is Branson's /-effective method (Branson and Frost 1982):
At = Ap + An (16)

K„ (17)

where

M„ M,0<f> Ma M,o*
/„ = L+ 1 - / < / (18)
Ma - Mni Ma - M0I

Mcr = ^ + FJ* (19a)

Agyb + Feec
M0A, = Feec (196)

M05 = -p2 Feec (19c)

and Icr is calculated assuming Aps — Iic-A^.

Method 2 is that presented by Haralji and Alameh (1989):
M,
A, ±xK„ (20)
EJt
where

FIG. 7. Idealization of Service Load-Deflection Response: (a) Branson and Trost

(1982); (b) Harajli and Alameh (1989)
2582

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 It = Ig, if Ma < Mcr (21)

/«* = y r, ifMa^M„ (22)

-. *V*cr I -* *_cra 1
Ma \ Ig
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

fl FI
Mcr = l& + ***« (23)
v ;
yb Agyb + Feec
b
/«,• = ~f + ^ ^ + (b - K)hf (^)2 + £-^2

+ Q,cnpAps{dp - yf + nsAs{ds - y) 2 (24)

{b
~2w)H' +
^f +
ncnpApsdp + nsAsds
y= (25)
v
(b - bw)hf + cbw + flcnpAps + nsAs
and c = neutral axis depth [see (5)].
Method 3 is the PCI bilinear model (PCJ 1985):

A, = ~je Ka (26)

where
Ie = Ig, if Ma < M-r (27)

Ie = ^ r, if Ma > Mcr (28)

Mcr/ 7 cr \
M. V /J
2
/ „ = (ncnpApsd p + nsAsd2s)(l - Vflcft, + P,) (29)
The variations in elastic deflection with applied midspan moment cal-
culated using methods 1 and 2 were compared with the experimentally
observed results of the various beam specimens in the three test series R3,
R2, and Rl. Typical results are shown in Fig. 8. A comparison between
deflections predicted using the three methods outlined and the experimental
results of all beam specimens are shown in Figs. 9(a)-9(c). The data pre-
sented in Fig. 9 correspond to three or four levels of deflection for each
beam specimen taken at different levels of applied load after cracking.
Figs. 8 and 9 clearly show that deflections predicted using method 2
produce the least scatter compared to the experimental results. These pre-
dictions are far more accurate than those produced using the other methods.
This is particularly notable for beams in test series R3, which have the
greatest practical span-to-depth ratio of the three. It is also of interest that
with its simplicity in application, results obtained using the PCI bilinear
model (method 3), in which Icr is calculated using (29), are in very good
agreement with the experimental results of beam specimens in test series
R3.
The deflections of the various beam specimens were also computed using
the three methods presented, assuming ilc — 1 (bonded members). A com-
2583

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 300

Experiment

200
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0-— Method I
—*.—. Method II
'
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Midspan Deflection (in)

—— Experiment

Method II
i__
0.5
Midspan Deflection (in)
FIG. 8. Comparison between Experimental and Calculated Service Load-Deflec-
tion Response

parison between the analytical predictions obtained using the /-effective

method (method I with 0,c = 1) and the experimental results is shown in
Fig. 9d). Comparing the trends of Figs. 9(a) and 9(d) clearly shows that
the magnitude of the strain-reduction coefficient Oc does not have a signif-
icant effect on the predicted deflections. A similar trend was also observed
for methods 2 and 3 (results are not shown). This further indicates that
approximating the strain-reduction factors in the postcracking stage from
their values in the precracking stage, as suggested in this study, produces
satisfactory results.

2584

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 1.0
0.9
Method I u /
(a)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0.8
o' Series R3
0.7 — A Series R2
B Series Rl D
0.6
0.5
o
0.4
o
0.3 K& ><£?A
A O Oo u

0.2 Nco Q
ugp A — cF
0.1 » o

0.0
U.O 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Calculated Deflection (in)

0.7 i
Method I
0.6
I y(u'

0.5
A

0.4
A
A %p°
0.3 O
A X OO

0.2 J* «*0O
Wo<S\
p
O
A
Series R3 -
Series R2
M O
O Series R1
0.1

0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Calculated Deflection (in)
FIG. 9. Comparison of Deflections Computed Using Various Prediction Methods
with Experimentally Observed Results

2585

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 0.7 I
Method I I I O (c)
0.6
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0.5 OO
i .
O
0.4
&
A
t
£
0.3
AOA ) O Series R3
b'
gS<9 A Series R2
0.2 y D
• Series R1

0.1

0.0
U.O 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Calculated Deflection (in)

1.0
I-effective Method (d)
0.9 (Bonded Mem bers)
0.8
^^ o' Series R3
M 0.7 A Series R2
a a Series Rl / C
o 06
u /
C OS CO
a
•a 0.4
3
o
>
u
(A
a
0.3 niV ® & tfr ° c
>u
O 0.2 u
CO
o
0.1
P <&T

0.0
U0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Calculated Deflection (in)

FIG. 9. (Continued)

2586

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The results of a comprehensive experimental and analytical investigation

of the flexural behavior of partially prestressed unbonded members were
presented. Several parameters and their effect on the flexural response
characteristics of unbonded members were investigated, including the rein-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

forcing index, the partial prestressing ratio, the type of load application,
and the member span-to-depth ratio.
The experimental results supported the advantage of using reinforcing
bars in concrete members prestressed with unbonded tendons for the control
of cracking and crack widths. While fully prestressed specimens developed
a single major crack, the crack distribution and the response characteristics
of the partially prestressed specimens under applied load was very similar
to those of bonded concrete members. It was found that neither the type
of load application nor the member span-to-depth ratio (for the range be-
tween 8 and 20 studied) has a significant effect on the nominal flexural
characteristics of unbonded prestressed and partially prestressed concrete
members.
In the analytical part of this investigation, a method for the section analysis
of unbonded members (cracked-uncracked) was developed, in which a sim-
ple strain-reduction coefficient is proposed to account for the slip of pre-
stressing steel between the anchorage ends. The developed method of sec-
tion analysis was shown to be in very good agreement with the experimentally
observed response of applied service load versus reinforcement stresses.
Further, several methods for computing service-load deflections in bonded
prestressed and partially prestressed members were generalized to account
for unbonded posttensioned construction and then checked against the cur-
rent experimental results. The method that reproduced most accurately the
experimental service load versus the deflection response was to use a bilinear
load-deflection model in which the slope of the precracking path is pro-
portional to the gross moment of inertia in the critical section Ig, while the
slope of the postcracking path is taken proportional to the cracked section
moment of inertia Icr, calculated relative to the centroidal axis of the cracked
section.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The experimental phase of this study was supported by the University

Research Board of the American University of Beirut. The writers are most
grateful to the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture at the American
University of Beirut for providing the lab equipment, and to the Civil En-
gineering Department at the University of Oklahoma for providing the
computer facilities.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

Balaguru, P. N. (1981). "Increase of stress in unbonded tendons in prestressed

concrete beams and slabs," Can. J. Civ Engrg., 8, 262-268.
Branson, D. E., and Trost, H. (1982). "Unified procedures for predicting the de-
flection and centroidal axis location of partially cracked non-prestressed and pre-
stressed concrete members." ACI J., 79(2), 119-130,
"Building code requirements for reinforced." (1989). ACI 318-90. American Con-
crete Institute, Detroit, Mich.
2587

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 Burns, N. H., Charney, F. A., and Vines, W. R. (1978). "Tests of one-way post-
tensioned slabs with unbonded tendons." PCI J., 33(6), 66-83.
Chen, R. J. (1971). "The strength and behavior of post-tensioned prestressed con-
crete slabs with unbonded tendons," MS thesis, Univ. of Texas, Austin, Texas.
Chouinard, K. L. (1989). "Tendon stress at ultimate in unbonded partially pre-
stressed concrete beams," MS thesis, Queen's Univ., Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Cooke, N., Park, R., and Yong, P. (1981). "Flexural behavior of post-tensioned
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

partially prestressed members with unbonded tendons." PCI J., 26(6), 52-80.
Elzanaty, A. and Nilson, A. (1982). "Flexural behavior of unbonded post-tensioned
partially prestressed concrete beams." Research Report No. 82-15, Cornell Uni-
versity, Ithaca, N.Y.
Gebre-Michael, Z. (1970). "Behavior of post-tensioned slabs with unbonded rein-
forcement," MS thesis, Univ. of Texas, Austin, Texas.
Harajli, M. H. (1990). "Effect of span-depth ratio on the ultimate steel stress in
unbonded prestressed concrete members." ACI J., 87(3), 305-312.
Harajli, M. H., and Alameh, A. (1989). "Deflection, of progressively cracking par-
tially prestressed flexural members;" PCI I., 34(3), 94-128.
Harajli, M. H., and Hijazi, S. (1991). ^'Evaluation of the ultimate, steel stress in
unbonded partially prestressed members." PCI I., 36(1), 62-82.
Harajli, M. H., and Kanj, M. Y. (1990). "Experimental and analytical study of the
behavior of concrete members prestressed with unbonded tendons." Research
Report, No. CE/FSEL 90-02. University of Oklahoma, Norman, Okla.
Harajli, M. H., and Kanj, M. Y. (1991). "Ultimate^flexural strength of concrete
members prestressed with unbonded tendons." ACI J., 88(6), 663-673.
Hemakom, R. (1970). "Behavior of unbonded post-tensioned concrete slabs with
unbonded reinforcement," MS thesis, Univ. of Texas, Austin, Texas.
Loov, R. (1987). "Flexural strength of prestressed beams with unbonded tendons."
Lecture, North East Forestry University, Harbin, China.
Mattock, A. H., Yamazaki, J., and Katula, B. (1971). "Comparative study of pre-
stressed concrete beams, with and without bond." ACI J., 68(2), 116-125.
Mojtahedi, S., and Gamble, W. (1978). "Ultimate steel stress in unbonded pre-
stressed concrete." /. Struct. Div., ASCE, 104(7), 1159-1165.
Naaman, A. E. (1985). "Partially prestressed concrete: Review and recommenda-
tions." PCI J., 30(6), 30-71.
Naaman, A. E. (1989). "A new methodology for the analysis of beams prestressed
with external or unbonded tendons." External prestressing in bridges; Proc, Int.
Symp., A. E. Naaman and J. E. Breen, eds. American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
Mich.
Naaman, A. E., and Siriaksorn, A. (1979). "Serviceability-based design of partially
prestressed beams, Part 1: Analytical formulation." PCI J., 24(2), 64-89.
PCI design handbook—Precast prestressed concrete. (1985). 3d Ed., Prestressed Con-
crete Institute, Chicago, 111.
"Recommendations for concrete members prestressed with unbonded tendons." (1989).
ACI423. 3R-89, American Concr. Inst., Detroit, Mich.
Tarn, A.,andPannell, F.N. (1976). "The ultimate moment of resistance of unbonded
partially prestressed reinforced concrete beams." Mag. Concr. Res., 28(97), 203-
208.
Warwaruk, J., Sozen, M. A., and Siess, C. P. (1962). "Investigation of prestressed
concrete for highway bridges. Part III: Strength and behavior in flexure of pre-
stressed concrete beams." Bulletin No. 464, Engineering Experiment Station, Univ.
of Illinois, Urbana, 111.

APPENDIX II. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

Ag = area of gross section;

Aps = area of prestressing steel;
2588

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.

 As = area of ordinary tension steel;
As = area of compression steel;
b = flange width;
bw = web width;
c = neutral axis depth;
dp = depth to center of prestressing steel;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tokyo Univ Seisan Gijutsu on 05/14/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ds = depth to center of ordinary tension steel;

d's = depth to center of compression steel;
Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete;
Eps = modulus of elasticity of prestressing steel;
Es = modulus of elasticity of reinforcing steel;
ec = eccentricity of prestressing steel at midspan;
F = A f •
fc = concrete stress in top fiber;
f'c = concrete compressive strength;
fpe = effective prestress;
fps = stress in prestressing steel;
fr = concrete tensile strength;
fs = stress in reinforcing steel;
hf — flange thickness;
ICr> I era — cracked section moment of inertia;
Ig — gross section moment of inertia;
Kp = prestressing force moment multiplier = L 2 /8 for straight tendon
profile;
ka = applied load moment multiplier = (23/216)L 2 for two third-point
loads = (1/12)L 2 for single concentrated load;
L = beam length;
Ma = total applied moment;
Mcr = cracking moment;
Mg = moment due to girder load;
Ms = moment due to superimposed dead load;

ns = EJEC;
yb = distance between neutral axis and bottom fiber of section;
v, = distance between neutral axis and top fiber of section;
A, = total beam deflection measured from camber position;
ece = (ApsjpeiAg + Apsjpeec llg)IEc;
F = f IFt
•
°pe Jpe' -'psy
Pp = ApJbdp
ps = AJbds
4> = curvature; and
ft, £lr = strain reduction coefficient.

2589

J. Struct. Eng. 1992.118:2569-2589.