Prestressed Concrete Column Behavior

Robert L. Yuan
Department of Civil Engineering University of Texas at Arlington Arlington, Texas

Mohsen Issa
Department of Civil Engineering University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago, Illinois

restressed concrete columns have been used in the construction industry as precast compression members for more than 15 years. Although the prestressing force in the column reduces a small percentage of the concrete's compressive strength, the effective prestress level has been proven to be beneficial to the column's load resistant capacity when the eccentric loads induce high bending moment on the compression member. Field experience also indicates that there are few significant problems during construction with regard to fabrication, transportation, erection, and serviceability of prestressed concrete columns. Many research projects have been done on prestressed concrete compression members since the late 'SOs. Some efforts were directed toward developing rational methods for predicting the ultimate load capacity;'- 4 others concentrated on evaluating the effects of slenPCI JOURNAL/November-December 1989

derness, eccentricity, prestress level and material properties on the strength of prestressed concrete columns.5-8 However, research has not yet come to the point where the influence and contribution of lateral reinforcement regarding its type, size, and percentage of reinforcement is fully understood. The returned questionnaire surveys from the precast concrete industry9 also indicated a need for better assessment of the effectiveness of lateral reinforcement. In 1968, the first tentative recommendations for the design of prestressed concrete columns were made by the PCI Committee on Prestressed Concrete Columns. 10 Those recommendations were revised in 1976 11 and again in 1987; 12 they were presented in code language and were based on the design provisions created for reinforced concrete columns from the ACI Building Code. 51

The parameters in the investigation included (a) types of lateral reinforcement, (b) pitch spacing, (c) prestressing level, (d) diameter of lateral reinforcement, (e) concrete strength, (f) eccentricity of applied load, and (g) slenderness ratio. A total of 53 prestressed concrete columns were tested. During the experimental investigation, the ultimate load and lateral deflection were measured. In addition, strains on lateral reinforcements, prestressing strands, and concrete surface were also recorded. Experimental results were compared with computational analyses for ultimate loads and lateral deflections.

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM Test Specimens

All prestressed concrete columns were fabricated and tested in the structural laboratory at the University of Texas at Arlington. Conventional production techniques and commercially available materials were used. The normal weight concrete contained natural sand, crushed limestone, and Type III portland cement. Specified concrete compressive strengths, as obtained from 4 x 8 in. (102 x 204 mm) cylinders, were 7000 and 10,000 psi (48 and 69 MPa) at the time of column testing. Thirty relatively short, prestressed concrete columns were tested under concentric load. These columns had a cross section of 6 x 6 in. (152 x 152 mm) and a height of 8 ft (2.4 m). The corresponding slenderness ratio was kllr = 56. The test matrix of these short columns is shown in Table 1. Twenty-three intermediate and long prestressed concrete columns were tested under concentric and eccentric loads. The columns had a cross section of 8 x 8 in. (204 x 204 mm) with variable heights of 12, 16, and 19 ft 3 in. (3.6, 4.8 and 5.8 m). The corresponding slenderness ratios kl/r were 62, 83, and 100,

RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
The objectives of this study were (1) to evaluate the need for and influence of individual tie and continuous lateral reinforcement on prestressed concrete columns, (2) to determine if continuous square lateral reinforcement of small diameter is an acceptable alternative, and (3) to study the effect of slenderness on the strength and stability of prestressed concrete columns.
52

Table 1. Test matrix and results of prestressed concrete columns (6 x 6 in. cross section).
Group and column number GR1C1 GR1C2 GR1C3 GR2C1 GR2C2 GR2C3 GR2C4 GR2C5 GR3C1 GR3C2 GR3C3 GR4C1 GR4C2 GR4C3 GR5C1 GR5C2 GR5C3 GR6C1 GR6C2 GR7CI GR7C2 GR7C3 GR8C1 GR8C2 GR9C1 GR1OC1 GR11Cl GR11C2 GR12C1 GR12C2 Type of lateral reinforcement Plain concrete column Prestressed column No lateral reinforcement 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 6 6 3 3 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 210 200 202 204 207 210 210 200 237 215 210 224 210 215 210 220 218 220 200* 220 217 235 238 285 295 267 270 5833 55.55 5611 5667 5750 5833 5833 5555 6583 5972 5833 6222 5833 5972 5833 6111 6055 6111 5555 6111 6027 6527 6611 7916 8194 7416 7500 290 268.5 8055 7458 7320 7350 7400 7380 7360 7350 7340 7320 7160 7240 7120 7350 7320 7400 7310 7330 7320 7437 7343 7320 7315 7335 7344 9440 9909 9079 9252 Spacing or pitch (in.) Prestress level (psi) Ultimate load (kips) 237 240 187.5 Ultimate stress (psi) 6583 6667 5208 Average load (kips) 238.5 Average stress (psi) 6625 Concrete cylinder strength (psi) 7160 8250 8250

204.6

5683

Ties

206.6

5740

Square spiral

220.6

6129

Round spiral Ties Ties Square spiral Round spiral Round spiral Square spiral Round spiral Square spiral Square spiral Square spiral Square spiral

216.3

6009

215 219

5972 6083

218.5

6069

All columns were subjected to concentric loads (e = 0). * Columns failed at the ends. Material failure occurred for all 6 x 6 in. x 8 ft columns. Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa; 1 kip = 4.45 kN.

PCI JOURNAL/November-December 1989

53

Table 2. Test matrix and results of prestressed concrete columns (8 x 8 in. cross section).
Series and column number S1C1 Square spiral lateral reinforcement Pitch diameter(in.) (in.) Prestress level (psi) Failure load (kips) Concrete cylinder strength (psi)

P.

Llr

eld

Mode of failure Instability Instability Instability Instability Instability Instability Instability Material Instability Instability Instability Instability Instability Material Instability Instability Instability Instability Material Instability Instability Instability Instability

S2C1 S3C1 S4C1 S4C2 S5C1 S6C1RC S7C1 S7C2 S7C3 S7C4 S7C5 S8C1 S9C1 S9C2 S9C3 S9C4 S9C5
S10C1

0.135 0.135 0.135 0.135 0.135 0.135 0.135 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219 0.219

9 6 3 3 4.5 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

0 0.01 0.00155 0.0031 0.0031 0.00207 0.0031 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006

300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 600 300 300 300 300 300 600 300 300 300 300 600

100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 0 100 0.25 100 0.5 100 1 100 1 95 1 83 83 83 83 83 62 62 62 62 62 0 0.25 0.5 1 1 0 0.25 0.50 1 1

30.5 27.5 28 31 28 30.5 28 285 92 45 30 30 30 295 105 60 32.5 36.0 320* 125* 77.5 38.0 46

7133 7146 6700 7365 6800 7186 7100 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7200 7180 7180 7180 7180 7180

SIOC2 S1OC3 S1OC4 SI005

pg

= ratio of lateral steel reinforcement. * Columns failed at the ends. Note: 1 psi = 6.895 kPa; 1 kip = 4.45 kN.

respectively. The test matrix of the intermediate and long columns is shown in Table 2.

Prestressing Strands
The seven-wire stress-relieved strands, with Grade 270, have a diame/8 in. (9.5 mm) for short columns ter of 3 and '/2 in. (13 mm) for intermediate and long columns. Strands in the column were tensioned individually by using a center-pull stressing ram. Prestress levels at a given column cross section were 1000 psi (6.9 MPa) for short columns, 300 and 600 psi (2.1 and 9.2 MPa) for intermediate and
54

long columns. Strain gauges were mounted on the individual strands at predetermined locations in order to measure prestressing force, prestressing loss, and the change of strains.

Lateral Reinforcement
Individual tie and continuous lateral reinforcements were fabricated from plain round steel wires of two different sizes. The wire with a diameter of 0.135 in. (3.4 mm) had a yield strength of 77 ksi (531 MPa) and an ultimate strength of 108 ksi (745 MPa). The wire with a diameter of 0.219 in. (5.6 mm) had a yield strength of 43 ksi (296 MPa) and an

(a) Tie lateral reinforcement

(b) Continuous square lateral reinforcement

Fig. 1. Three types of lateral reinforcement.

ultimate strength of 58 ksi (400 MPa). The configurations of lateral reinforcement are shown in Fig. 1.

Test Procedures
All columns were tested in a vertical position as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. As soon as a column was aligned in the reaction frame with roller supports at both ends, a hydraulic ram was operated from the top to keep the column in place. The column was then loaded either in concentric or eccentric monotonic compression. One direct current differential transducer (DCDT) was placed on the top plate and one on the bottom plate to measure the longitudinal deformation of the column and the rotations at the ends. Mechanical dial gauges were placed at PCI JOURNAL/November-December 1989

(c) Continuous round lateral reinforcement

55

Fig. 2. Short column under concentric load. Fig. 3. Long column under eccentric load. (Column testing in a vertical position.) (Column testing in a vertical position.)

the quarter points of the column height to measure lateral deflections of short columns; transits and theodolites were also used to record lateral deflections of long columns. A high speed, automatic, data acquisition system was used to collect the load and strain readings.13

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Effect of Concrete Strength
All prestressed concrete columns in this investigation had the same concrete mix proportion. The average cylinder strength reached about 4000 psi (28 MPa) at 24 hours, 7000 psi (48 MPa) at 3 days, and 10,000 psi (69 MPa) at 28 days. The test results in Table 2 indicate that the ultimate load of prestressed concrete columns increases with an increase in 56

concrete strength. Everything else being equal, for concrete strength = 7200 psi (50 MPa), the ultimate load of a prestressed concrete column, with a cross section of 6 x 6 in. (152 x 152 mm) and a height of 96 in. (2.4 m), is 220 kips (979 kN); for concrete strength that increases to f, = 9700 psi (67 MPa), the ultimate strength is 290 kips (1.3 MN). The increase of 30 percent in column ultimate strength is due to an increase in the same order of concrete strength.

f,

Effect on Lateral Reinforcement

The test results for short columns are presented in Table 2. For plain concrete columns, the average ultimate load is 239 kips (1.1 MN). For prestressed concrete columns without lateral reinforcement, the average ultimate load is 205 kips (912 kN). The reduction of 34

C.

LATERAL REINFORCEMENT O.2I9" 6x 6"COLUMN CROSS SECTION PITCH SPACING = 3 IN.

w w w 5 z

w 0 I Iz w J

J 0 v

} ^E

3/LATERAL DEFLECTION AT 160 KIPS 2 +-SQUARE SPIRAL PC COLUMN *- ROUND SPIRAL PC COLUMN 0- TIED PC COLUMN

.125

.25

.375

.5

.625

.75

.875

LATERAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

Fig. 4. Deflection configuration of prestressed concrete columns (6 x 6 in.). Note: 1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.
kips (151 kN) of ultimate load capacity in prestressed concrete columns is primarily due to the prestress 1000 psi (6.9 MPa) or the preloading 36 kips (160 kN) on the columns. For prestressed concrete columns with lateral reinforcements, the average ultimate load is 215 kips (956 kN) in 6 in. (152 mm) pitch spacing, 218 kips (970 kN) in 3 in. (76 mm) pitch spacing, and 237 kips (1.1 MN) in 1 in. (25 mm) pitch spacing. Thus, the ultimate loads of the prestressed concrete columns with lateral reinforcements of 1 in. (25 mm) pitch spacing are 10 percent higher than PCI JOURNAUNovember-December 1989 that of columns with 3 in. (76 mm) or 6 in. (152 mm) pitch spacing lateral reinforcement, and 15 percent higher than that of columns without lateral reinforcement. For a given pitch spacing, the average ultimate loads of prestressed concrete columns with continuous lateral reinforcements are 6 percent higher than that of columns with tie lateral reinforcement. The results tend to indicate that, for a given concrete strength, there is no significant difference in ultimate load capacity between columns with 3 and 6

57

1.4

17

5 5
0

CONTINUOUS SQUARE SPIRAL LATERAL REINFORCEMENT 0.135 IN. DIAMETER

LATERAL DEFLECTION AT 22.5 KIPS L/r = 100 PL = 300 PSI X e/d=1

w w 12. 5 IL z J 0 0 U0 2 I2 w J x $
jE

FJ 5

1)1
x$ +
U Z

0-NO LATERAL REINFORCEMENT *-PITCH SPACING = 9 IN. +PITCH SPACING= 6 IN.

2. 5

-PITCH SPACING= 4.5 IN. X-PITCH SPACING= 3 IN.

LATERAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

Fig. 5. Deflection configurations of prestressed columns (8 x 8 in.). Note: 1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.

in. (76 and 152 mm) pitch spacing lateral reinforcement. However, the concrete core in the 3 in. (76 mm) pitch spacing lateral reinforcement remains intact at the section of failure, while the core in the 6 in. (152 mm) pitch spacing lateral reinforcement completely disintegrates. The effect of lateral reinforcement on column deflection is shown in Fig. 4. It appears that the lateral reinforcements help to increase column deflectional stiffness and that columns with continuous square lateral reinforcement show the least lateral deflection.

For a given concentric load, the strains on the continuous lateral reinforcement are less than that on the tie lateral reinforcement. It appears that the columns with continuous lateral reinforcement provide an effective confinement. For a given lateral reinforcement, the strains on 3 in. (76 mm) pitch lateral reinforcement are less than that on the 6 in. (152 mm) pitch lateral reinforcement. The research shows that a decrease in pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement increases the effectiveness of core confinement.

58

CONTINUOUS SQUARE SPIRAL LATERAL REINFORCEMENT 0.135 IN. DIAMETER f^ =7200 PSI 35 Ii L/r = 100 PL = 300 PSI e/d= i

a0 J

25

15 J 10 p-NO LATERAL REINFORCEMENT *PITCH SPACING= 9 IN --PITCH SPACING = 6 IN. X-PITCH SPACING= 4.5 IN. $-PITCH SPACING = 31N.

4 2 3 5 6 CENTRAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

Fig. 6. Load - deflection curves of prestressed columns (8 x 8 in.) with different pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement. Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.

The test results of long columns are presented in Table 2. For a prestressed concrete column with a slenderness ratio hr = 100 and loading eccentricity eld = 1, the ultimate loads are about the same for columns with and without lateral reinforcements. Apparently, instability dominates the critical load. The effects of lateral reinforcement on long column deflection are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. The lateral deflection of the column decreases with a decrease in pitch spacing; in a column with a pitch spacing less than 4.5 in. (114 mm), de-

flection is significantly smaller than deflection of a column with a pitch spacing larger than 6 in. (152 mm).

Effect of Slenderness Ratio

Typical load-deflection curves of prestressed concrete columns with various slenderness ratios are shown in Fig. 7. For a given eccentricity ratio, the ultimate loads decrease with an increase in slenderness ratio, while the lateral deflections increase with an increase in slenderness ratio.

PCI JOURNAL/November-December 1989

59

50 40 30 H 120
110 jF 00 ^ r

e/d = 0.25 O- L/r = 100 'JE L/r= 83 +-L/r= 62 }

90
U)

a. 80 0 J 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 00 :

i ^F

III

I I'

+ ^F

PL = 300 Psi

iii 111111111111 4 3 S

LATERAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

Fig. 7. Load-deflection curves of prestressed concrete columns with different slenderness ratios (eld = 0.25). Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.

The results indicate that, for high slenderness ratio (hr = 100) and large eccentricity (eld = 1), the ultimate loads of prestressed columns are about the same regardless of pitch spacing and diameter of lateral reinforcements.

crease with an increase in the eccentricity ratio. The effect of eccentricity ratio on the ultimate load appears to be more significant than that of slenderness ratio.

Effects of Prestress Level Effects of Eccentricity Ratio

The effects of the eccentricity ratio on lateral deflection are represented by the curves in Fig. 8. The results indicate that, for a given slenderness ratio, the deflectional stiffness and ultimate load of prestressed concrete columns de60

The effects of prestress level on load-deflection curves are represented by the curves in Fig. 9. For eccentricity ratio eld = 1, the results indicate that there is no effect of prestress level on deflectional stiffness before the eccentric load reaches about 15 kips (67 kN) or

30 20 l 0 00 90 80
U)

L /r =83 +- e/d = 0.25 -e/d= 0.50 D-e/d= 1.0 + +/

70

O J

i60 50 40

I
PL=300 PSI I
4 2 3 LATERAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

30/! 20
10

00

Fig. 8. Load-deflection curves of prestressed columns with different eccentricity ratios (L/r = 83). Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.
level in the column was 1000 psi (6.9 MPa); the initial compressive strain on the concrete surface was 0.00025; the initial tensile strain on the prestressing strands was 0.003. Prior to column failure, the compressive strain on the concrete surface was in the range of 0.0013 to 0.002 for unconfined columns and 0.002 to 0.003 for confined columns; the tensile strain on the steel was in the range of 0.0005 to 0.0015. Typical eccentric load-strain relation for confined long columns is shown in Fig. 11. The initial concrete compressive strains were 0.00012 and 0.0022 for 61

induced column stress of 235 psi (1.62 MPa). Beyond that point, the ultimate load and deflectional stiffness increase with an increase in prestress level. The effects of prestress level on ultimate load and deflectional stiffness are more significant in a relatively short column under an eccentric load than in a long slender column.

Column Load - Strain Relations

Typical axial load-strain relation for confined short prestressed concrete column is shown in Fig. 10. The prestress PCI JOURNAUNovember-December 1989

f'C

=7200 PSI L/r= 100

e/d=1.o

35r

a_

0 O J

10

0-EXPERIMENTAL DATA PL=300 PSI

1- -EXPERIMENTAL DATA PL=600 PSI

10

LATERAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

Fig. 9. Load-deflection curves of prestressed concrete columns with different prestress levels (L/r = 100). Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.

prestress levels of 300 and 600 psi (2.1 and 4.2 MPa), respectively. When the eccentric load increased, the strain on the compression surface of the concrete increased; the strain on the tension surface decreased and changed from compressive strain to tensile strain. Prior to column failure, the compressive strain on the compression face of the column reached a value of 0.0025 to 0.0038, while the strain on the tension face of the column developed tensile strain of 0.0025. The initial tensile strains on pre-

stressing steel were 0.0011 and 0.0022, corresponding to prestress levels of 300 and 600 psi (2.1 and 4.2 MPa), respectively. When the eccentric load increased, the tensile strain on the steel in the tension side increased, while the tensile strain on the steel in the compression side decreased. Prior to failure, the tensile strain was in the range of 0.004 to 0.008, which was below the yield point strain of the prestressing steel; while the strands in the compression side were about to change from tension to compression.

62

30

LATERAL REINFORCEMENT 0 =0.219 IN, SQUARE SPIRAL PC COLUMN PITCH SPACING= 6 IN. ULTIMATE LOAD= 237 KIPS ULTIMATE STRESS=6583 PSI

225 200
U)

175 150

0 J

J a 125 x

L.J
75F50 25 // STRAIN GAGES ON: 0-CONCRETE SURFACE *-PRESTRESSING STEEL

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

CHANGE OF STRAIN (MICRO IN./IN.)

Fig. 10. Load-strain curves of prestressed column 6 x 6 in. at midheight (withI lateral reinforcement, (A = 0.219 in., S = 6 in.). Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 imm.

Percentage of Lateral Reinforcement

The percentage of lateral reinforcement, p, is defined as the ratio of the volume of continuous lateral reinforcement in one loop to the volume of concrete core. The calculated values are shown in Table 3. The experimental results indicate that, with continuous square lateral reinforcement, the percentage of steel p = 0.0124 for a 6 x 6 in. (152 x 152 mm) column and p = 0.006 for a 8 x 8 in. (203 PCI JOURNAUNovember-December 1989

x 203 mm) column were considered adequate for confinement and deflectional stiffness. According to ACI Code 318, the minimum percentage of continuous square lateral reinforcement with a diameter d = 0.219 in. (5.6 mm) shall be p = 0.1107 for a 6 x 6 in. (152 x 152 mm) column and p = 0.1122 for a 8 x 8 in. (203 x 203 mm) column; these figures imply that the pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement shall be reduced to less than 1 in. (25 mm) for the size of column tested. It is apparent that the ACI requirement for lateral reinforcement is

63

Table 3. Test matrix of the percentage of the continuous lateral reinforcement. Column and lateral reinforcement (A) 6 x 6 in. cross section (i) Square lateral reinforcement, 4) = 0.219 in., p value (ii) Round lateral reinforcement, = 0.219 in., p value (B) 8 x 8 in. cross section (i) Square lateral reinforcement, 4) = 0.219 in., p value (ii) Square lateral reinforcement, = 0.135 in., p value Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm. Pitch spacing 9 in. 6 in. 4.5 in. 4 in. 3 in. 1 in.

0.0062

0.0124 0.0372

0.0048

0.0095 0.0285

0.0040

0.0060 0.0080

0.0010 0.0015 0.0021

0.0031

f'c =7200 PSI L /r= 100 PL=600 PSI e/d= I a3

J7

0-COMPRESSION FACE

Q *1-10

TENSION FACE

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -5000 -4000 -3000 -2000 -1000 TENSION COMPRESSION CONCRETE STRAIN (MICRO IN./IN.) Fig. 11. Load-strain curves of prestressed concrete column 8 x 8 in. at midheight (Lh = 100). Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 mm. 64

Table 4. Comparison of experimental results and computational analysis for prestressed concrete columns (ultimate load, kips). Column No. S1C1 S2C1 S3C1 S4C1 S4C2 S5C1 S6C1* S7C1 S7C2 S7C3 S7C4 S7C5 S8Ci S9C1 S9C2 S9C3 S9C4 S9C5 S10C1 S1OC2 SIOC3 STOC4 S 1005 Nathan's UTA's Test computational computational results results results 30.0 27.5 28.0 31.0 28.0 30.5 28.0 249.0 77.5 44.0 28.5 30.5 254.0 81.0 42.5 29.0 31.5 28.5 28.5 27.5 28.5 28.0 28.5 29.0 29.0 28.5 29.5 28.5 29.0

efd
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.25 0.50 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.25 0.50 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.25 0.50 1.0 1.0

Lir
100 100 100 100 100 100 100

100 285.0 100 92.0 100 45.0 100 30.0 100 30.0 90 30.0

80 295.0 80 105.0 80 60.0 80 32.5 80 36.0 60 320.Ot 60 125.Ot 60 77.5 60 38.0 60 46.0

308.0 99.0 54.5 34.0 36.0 385.0 139.0 74.0 41.5 43.5

303.0 101.5 54.0 35.0 37.0 371.0 137.5 73.5 44.0 46.0

* S6C1 is a reinforced concrete column. t Columns failed at the ends. Note: 1 kip= 4.45 kN.

considerably higher than the lateral reinforcement used in this research program; the p value specified in the ACI Code seems to be impractical for the arrangement of lateral reinforcement.

Comparison Between Experimental and Computational Results

A comparison was made on the ultiPCI JOURNAUNovember-December 1989

mate load and lateral deflection of prestressed concrete columns between the experimental data and computational results from the finite element program 14 and from Professor Nathan's analysis.' The procedure of nonlinear finite element analysis is capable of establishing the equilibrium position at discrete load steps through the elastic, inelastic, and ultimate load ranges. Both 65

50 45 40 7200 PSI PL=600 PSI L/r = 1 O0

e/d= 1.0

35

30 a 25
0 0 J

20

IS q -TEST DATA UTA *-COMPUTATIONAL DATA +-COMPUTATIONAL DATA UTA NATHAN

10

0 0 ILI I 1

III

Iii ill III 2 3 4

liii III I

I.;t II till R

lii a

CENTRAL DEFLECTION (IN.)

Fig. 12. Comparison of prestressed concrete column load-deflection relations from experimental results and computational analysis (PL = 600 psi, L/r = 100). Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25.4 mm.

material and geometric nonlinearities and the effect of progressive cracking on the structural stiffness are considered. Nathan's theory was developed by equating the external and internal moments, where the external moment at any point in beam-column was given by a primary moment plus the secondary moment.

The comparison of the ultimate loads is presented in Table 4. A comparison of load-deflection curves is shown in Fig. 12. In general, the experimental results are in close agreement with the computational data. They indicate that both the finite element program and Nathan's computer program are reasonably accurate in predicting ultimate loads.

66

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions can be made as a result of this investigation on prestressed concrete columns: 1. The ultimate load capacity of a prestressed concrete (PC) column increases with a decrease in the pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement. If the pitch spacing is small, the ultimate load capacity of a PC column with lateral reinforcement is greater than that of a PC column without lateral reinforcement. If the pitch spacing is large, there is no significant difference in the ultimate load between PC columns with and without lateral reinforcement. 2. For a given load, deflectional stiffness of the PC column increases significantly with a decrease in pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement. 3. The ultimate load capacity of a PC column with continuous lateral reinforcement is slightly higher than that of a PC column with tie lateral reinforcement. Continuous lateral reinforcement appears to be more effective in confining concrete than tie lateral reinforcement. Continuous square lateral reinforcement is as effective in confinement as continuous round lateral reinforcement. A decrease in pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement would increase the effectiveness of core confinement. 4. The stress and strain on the lateral reinforcement with a diameter d = 0.219 in. (5.6 mm) are small compared to material's yield strength and yield strain. Thus, the steel wire with such a small diameter can be used for continuous lateral reinforcement of large size PC columns. 5. The test results of long, intermediate, and short columns have indicated that the percentage of continuous lateral reinforcement specified in the ACI Code seems too high, and is not appropriate for application to PC columns. Rather, the pitch spacing should be considered in the arrangement of lateral reinforcement. 6. Based upon the experimental and theoretical analyses, the pitch spacing of lateral reinforcement is recommended to be one-half of the least core dimension of the PC column as far as confinement and deflectional stiffness are concerned. 7. For a PC column under eccentric load, both ultimate load and deflectional stiffness increase with an increase in prestress level. The effect of prestress level is more significant in the relatively short column with a larger eccentricity than in a long slender column under eccentric load. 8. The ultimate load of the PC column decreases with an increase in slenderness ratio. For the PC column with a slenderness ratio larger than 81), instability dominates the mode of failure. 9. The computational results indicate that both Nathan's computer program and UTA's finite element program are reasonably accurate in predicting ultimate loads and lateral deflections of PC columns.

PCI JOURNAL/November-December 1989

67