Point Load Tests on

Double Tee Flanges

P.E.

Associate Profeskr of En&?ering

The Pennsylvania State University
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Presents the results of nine full-scale load tests on double

tees with 4 in. (102 mm) thick cantilevered flanges. In five of
the tests, the concentrated loads were applied at locations
away from the corners. In the remaining four tests, the
concentrated load was close or very close to the unsupported
corners. Tests were terminated either when the first crack
appeared or at a later stage. Full failure, however, was not
pursued because of test setup limitations or because of safety
concerns. The results are, therefore, lower (conservative)
bounds to the actual capacity Comparison with predictions
based on elastic and yield line theories are also made. Based
on the given reinforcement and layout, lower bounds of 4.2
kips (18.7 kN) for the corner failure and 9.5 kips (42 kN) for
failure away from the corners have been obtained. It is
concluded that code mandated point loads of 2.0 kips (8.9
kN) can be safely carried by these flanges.
ost building codes require that
parking decks be able to withstand a concentrated load
from single wheels. For passenger
cars, the unfactored point load is set at
2lXlO lbs (8.90 kN). If utility vehicles
or fm trucks are allowed over a parking deck, the load will be much higher
and such cases should be investigated
separately. In the latter case, the point
load is often required to be equal to 40
percent of the vehicle weight.
Theoretical analyses of thin, cantilevered elastic slabs have been done
by Timoshenko, Pucher and others.
Values for the elastic, transverse
moment m, at the flange-to-stem junction can be derived easily and its variation along the stem may be represented graphically by the curves
shown in Fig. 1. However, all con-

George Burnley, P.E.

Senior Engineer
High Concrete Structures, Inc.
Denver, Pennsylvania

trolled tests using point loads over

slabs consistently have shown much
higher failure capacities than predicted
by the elastic or the yield line theories.
The systematic research work on
concrete bridges conducted by the
Ontario Ministry of Transportation in
Canada in the late 1970s and early
1980s at Queens University, in addition to WI-scale tests on bridge slabs,
have confirmed the presence of compressive membrane forces and arching
action. These forces substantially
enhance the carrying capacity of slabs.
It was also observed that slabs which
had spalling or internal cracks were
still capable of sustaining multiples of
the ultimate design load.
This beneficial behavior could not be
explained by the simple plate bending
theory. The end result of the Ontario
PCI JOURNAL

a. 1. Influence surface for m, at Point A in the middle of a long cantilever strip

research has been to drastically

reduce reinforcement requirements of
bridge slabs in eastern Canada. Following the Canadian experience, state
DOTS in New York and Florida have
similarly reduced reinforcement
requirements in bridge slabs. In addi-

tion, this practice has been followed in

some federally sponsored bridge projects. Reduction in the steel area may
be quite high when compared to approximate AASHTO procedure which
is based on early elastic plate analyses
by Nadai, Westergaard and others.

The tests were conducted in March

1988 and September 1990 at the main
plant of High Concrete Structures,
Inc., in Denver, Pennsylvania. Two
full-scale, standard production line
double tee specimens were used.
The objective of the investigation

/2 T E E - 3 s a 12 O . C . ( N O R T H S I D E ) I

7x7-9/6 W . W . F .
FOR 4-8 EA. LEG
(AT ENDS ONLY 1

PULL TO 4k

I
Fig. 2. Test Specimen A (lODT26).
July-August ,991

67

The member length was 45 ft (14 I)

and the flange was 4 in. (102 mm)
thick. The deck reinforcement used
was a 6 x 10.W6lW2.9 WWF where
the 6 in. (152 mm) spacing is in the
direction of the strand. The ccrete
strength at the time of the test was
5060 psi (34.9 MPa). Four % in. (6.3
mm) diameter strands were lightly
stressed to 2 kips (9 kN) each and
were used to support the mesh reinforcement.

TEST SETUP
AND LOADING

was to establish a lower bound on the

ultimate point load carrying capacity
of 4 in. (102 mm) thick double tee
flanges regardless of the spacing of inplace flange connections. In actual
structres, the applied point loads will
be smaller because of the significant
strength contribution from opposite
tee connections. Only normal weight
concrete was used. Reinforcing bars
were Grade 60, ASTM A-615 and
mesh specification was A185

DESCRIPTION OF
TEE SPECIMENS
Double tee Specimen A consisted of
a 10 ft wide x 26 in. deep (3.05 x 0.66
m) slab as described in Figs. 2 and 3.
68

The specimen length was 62 ft 6 in.

(19 m) and the flange was 4 in. (102
mm) thick and cast monolithically
with the double tee. The deck reinforcement consisted of #3 bars (9.5
mm) at 12 in.(305 mm) on center in
the northern half of the tee while the
southern half had a 12 x 4 W2/W4
welded wire fabric.
Four % in. (9.5 mm) diameter
strands located in the middle of the
flange were used to provide support
for the reinforcement. These strands
were lightly stressed to 4 kips (18 kh)
each. The concrete strength at the time
of the test was 5300 psi (36.6 MPa).
Double tee Specimen B consisted of
a 11 ft 6 in. wide x 34 in. deep (3.5 x
0.9 m) slab as shown in Figs. 4 and 5.

Fig. 6 shows the test setup used for

Specimen A. The double tee was simply supported at the ends. Load was
applied at the tip of the flange sing a
5 x 5 x % in. (127 x 127 x 9.5 mm)
steel plate set on a 5 x 5 x !4 in. (127 x
127 x 13 mm) elastomeric pad in contact with the top of the flange.
Load increments at the tip of the
flange were equal to 1 kip (4.45 kN)
each and consisted of one-half of the
2 kip (8.90 kN) weight of ccrete
loading blocks. Each block was separated from the one below by two loose
steel plates. Because of the sudden
nature of some failures, timber cribbing was erected under the flange
while leaving about 2 in. (50 mm)
clearance below it. Deflections were
not measured.
In Test 1, the point load was located
18 ft (5.5 m) from the north end of the
tee (see Fig. 3). I Test 2 the load was
located diagonally across from the
first location and at 19 ft 6 in. (6 m)
from the south end of the tee. In both
cases the tests fall into the category of
loads away from the end.
Fig. 7 shows the test setup used in
the seven tests on Specimen B which
was simply supported at the ends.
Load was applied at the tip of the
flange sing a 4% x 4% x % in. (114 x
114 x 9.5 n) steel plate set on a 4% x
4% x X in. (114 x 114 x 9.5 mm) elastomeric pad in cntact with the top of
the flange.
A center-hole jacking system and
ram were used to apply a concentrated
force by means of a 0.6 in. (15 mm)
strand passing through a 1 in. (25 mm)
sleeve in the flange. Load increments
PCI JOURNAL

6x10-WUW2.9 W.W.F.

OF TEE LEG MESH

FOR S-0 AT ENDS.

FLANGE REINFORCING AT ENDS

( T O P VIEW1

were larger at the beginning of each

test and smaller afterwards. Load levels were kept constant for about 2
minutes to observe possible flange
cracks before jacking was resumed.
In Tests 3,4 and 5, point loads were

located away from the ends of the tee

[14 ft (4.3 m) or more]. In Test 6, the
comer load was positioned 1 ft 3 in.
(381 mm) from the end of the tee while
in Tests 7, 8 and 9, loads were located
only 3 in. (76 mm) away from the ends.

45-0

4,

3.

14-IO

14-IO
I

E%r& j
?

Since failure loads may be influend by the level of longitudinal pre

compression in the flanges, the adopted setup had precompression stresses
that were lower or roughly equal to a
loaded tee on an actual project.

U-10

~ . Y-3
I

- - - - - - - - -

10 H O L E S ( E A C H SIOE)

PLAN VIEW

LIGHT BROOM FINISH,,

f
ELEVATION

69

SLAB END
/ NORTH 1

TEST RESULTS
/ I
I I

BACK
PADS
(FRONT PAD)

h
TOP VIEW

I K.

2.000lbs. TYP. BLOCK

R
NE(

ISAFETY

SLAB SECTION
CRl88lNC NOT SHOWN)

Fig. 6. Test setup for Specimen A

Results of the load tests for Specimens A and B are summarized in Table
1, which also contains the flange reinforcement and concrete strengths.
These results are lower bounds to the
actual failure load which is usually
accompanied by moderate or substantial deformations of the order of 1 in.
(25 mm) or more. No visible deflections were observed during any of the
nine tests.
Cracking patterns are shown in Figs.
3 and 8 and other pertinent photographs are included in Figs. 10 to 12.
The minimum value for test load at
locations away from the end of the tee
was 9.5 kips (42 kN), while the average load was 10.76 kips (48 kN). For
corner locations, the minimum value
for all flange cantilevers was 4.2 kips
(18.7 kN) while the average load
reached 4.8 kips (21.3 kN).
A comparison of Test 2 with Test 1
shows that the mesh is slightly more
efficient than the reinforcing bars in
delaying first cracking of the flange.
These results will now be compared to
predicted cracking and ultimate loads
as obtained from elastic and yield line
theories, respectively.

ANALYTICAL PREDICTION
OF CRACKING LOAD
BY ELASTIC THEORY

8.ox10x2-0

BLOCKING

CONCRETE BLOCKS
AT SUPPORTS

,+6x45-0 DOUBLE TEE

1. 7. Test setup for Specimen B.

For simplicity, linear elastic response and thin, isotropic plate behavior are assumed. Timoshenko and
Fuche? have both rigorously analyzed
the problem of long cantilever plates
subjected to concentrated loads. Fuchas influence chart for cantilevers (see
Fig. 9), is generally used by designers
and investigators because of its accuracy, convenience and versatility in
the case of patch (distributed) loads.
Fig. 1 represents in a schematic way
the influence surface for the negative
moment m, per unit length at the fixed
edge of a long cantilever plate. This
negative moment is also present at the
flange-to-stem junction in a double tee
member. When this influence surface
is cut by equally spaced horizontal
planes, the contour lines of Fig. 9 are
obtained. In the analysis for the 2 ft 6
in. (762 mm) cantilever, the width a is
PCI JOURNAL

assumed equal to 30 3.25 in. = 26.75

in. (680 mm).
Contact area between the point load
and the flange was a 4X x 4X in. (114
x 114 mm) pad, here, it is reasonable
to assume a distribution surface at 45
degrees up to the middle plane of the
flange. Therefore, the effective distributed area, or patch size, is 8X x 6% in.
(216 x 165 mm) with the 8% in. (216
mm) dimension parallel to the tee axis.
Distribution area is shown in dashed
lines and superimposed in Fig. 9.
In the Pucher procedure, m, is calculated as follows:
m, = (avg chart reading) (P/8x)

(1)

where P is the applied load.

To calculate the negative moment
mzl due to applied load P, the patch is
subdivided into sixteen small rectangles. The average reading at the rectangle centroids is 10.9. Therefore:
in,, = 10.9 P/8x
= 0.434 P kip-ft/ft
= 5.2 P kip-in./ft
July-August 1991

The moment due to the weight of

the flange is:

mx2 = [0.050x (26.75/12)WllZ

= 1.49 kip-in./ft
Assuming the modulus of rupture f,
is equal to 7.5 G as stipulated by
Section 9.5, AC1 318-89, we have for
Specimen A:
f, =7.5c
(2)
= 7.5 J5300 = 546 psi
The section modulus for a 1 ft width
of slab is:
S, = 12 x 416 = 32 in.
The nominal cracking moment is:

MC, = &fr

(3)

= 32 (546/1ooO)
= 17.47 kip-in./ft
Equating M,, to m, = m,, + m,,:
17.47 = 5.2 P + 1.49
Solving for P:

P =P,,

(4)
= 3.07 kips (13.7 kN)
where
P,, is the nominal load which

induces flange cracking

The minimum test load causing first
cracks to appear was at least 6.5 kips
(28.9 W) in Specimen A and 8.2 kips
(36.5 kN) in Specimen B. Both values
are much larger than the one predicted
by W.(4).

PREDICTION OF
ULTIMATE LOAD USING
YIELD LINE THEORY
Using yield line theory, distribution
of moments is quite different from the
elastic condition. Like other plastic
analysis methods, the yield line method is valid for the majority of slabs
because they possess sufficient ductility due to small reinforcement ratios.
Park4 lists the solution for the case
of point loads on cantilevers. Neglecting slab weight, the nominal failure
load, for a point away from the ends
and based on a circular fan mode, is:

wnere
Qr = positive moment strength in
x direction
nzuY = positive moment strength in
y direction
=
negative moment strength in
m&Y
n direction
= negative moment strength in
QY
y direction
In this case, it will be assumed that
all the reinforcement is placed in the
middle plane of the flange. Hence, m,
= In;, ; i?luy = in&. Assuming j;, = 65
ksi (448 MPa) and $ = 1.0, the nominal moment strengths are easily calculated by standard methods assuming
A,, = 0.120 in?/ft and As2 = 0.0348
in:/ft for the 6 x 10 W6iW2.9 WWF.
These mOmentS are:
m, = m,
= 15.0 kip-in./ft

= 1.25 kip-ft/ft
=
%), = %y 4 . 3 kip-in./ft
= 0.36 kip-ft/ft
Therefore, the ultimate load can be
calculated from:
P, =2x,/1.25x0.36
(6)
= 4.2 kips (18.7 kN)
The flexural strength in the y diection may be somewhat higher due to
the presence of a slightly tensioned %
in. (6.3 mm) strand in the flange.
However, it is very difficult to
assign a rational value to the excess
capacity. In any case, it is felt that the
calculated P, will not exceed 5.0 kips
(22.3 W) due to the square root sign
g. 8. Crack patterns for Specimen 6.

in Eq. (5).

ig. 9. Influence surface for m,, the moment per unit length at Point A, in the middle of a long cantilever plate. Divide chart
._
72

PCI JOURNAL

Fig. 10. Loading system for tests on Specimen B using a

center-hole ram

J. 11. Test 5 in which load is away from the corners

(P= 12 kips).

CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
The tests have clearly demonstrated
that any one of the three reinforcing
schemes shown in this paper is adequate for carrying a cantilever tip load
of at least 9.5 kips (42 kN) before failure at locations away from the ends.
Furthermore, the 6 x IO W6/W2.9
WWF is capable of carrying at least
4.2 kips (18.7 kN) at corner locations
before failure.
These lower bound values, for a
nominal concrete strength of 5000 psi
(34.5 MPa), are substantially higher
than those predicted by the yield line
theory. This clearly demonstrates the
existence of a significant arching
action in the slab which is not considered by the yield line nor the elastic
theories. Thus, these theories are not
good predictors of ultimate capacity
under point loads when the cantileverto-thickness ratio is 8 or less.
Under AC1 load factors, a code
mandated concentrated service load of
2.0 kips (8.9 kN) anywhere on the slab
can be safely resisted by the 6 x 10
W6lW2.9 mesh reinforcement and
related end details for 12 or 10 ft (3.66
or 3.05 m) wide tees. In addition, there

is also an ample safety margin before

first cracks appear. It is worthy of note
that the flange reinforcing ratio in the
longitudinal direction is substantially
less than the minimum required by the
July-August 19%

Fig. 12. Cracking pattern at the end of a comer test (Specimen 6).

AC1 Code (AC1 318.89) for temperature and shrinkage effects.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge
the financial support of High Concrete
Structures, Inc. The experimental program was conducted at its plant in
Denver, Pennsylvania. Valuable contributions by the technical staff in the
CAD office are also acknowledged
with appreciation.

REFERENCES
l.Timoshenko. S., and WoinowskyKrieger, S., Theory of Plates and Shells,

McGraw-Hill Book Company, New

York, N.Y., 1959.
Pucher, A., Einflussfelder Elostischer
Plotten, Second Edition, Springer Ver-

lag, Berlin, Germany, 1958.

Csagoly, P. F., Future Bridge Deck
Slab Construction, Concrete Construction, January. 1989.
Park, R., and Gamble, W., Reinforced
Concrete Slabs, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York, N.Y., 1980.
73