Pergamon

0045-7949(94)00481-1

(hm/~uren

& Slrucrvre~ Vol. 55, No. 2, pp. 365-370, 1995 Copyright 1- 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed I Great Bntain. All nghts reserved 0045-7949/95 $9.50 + 0.00

TECHNICAL DESIGN OPTIMIZATION PRESTRESSED

Engineering,

NOTE

OF CONTINUOUS PARTIALLY CONCRETE BEAMS

and Minerals, Box no. 454,

A. S. AI-Gahtani, S. S. Al-Saadoun and E. A. Abul-Feilat

Department of Civil King Fahd University of Petroleum Dhahran 31261. Saudi Arabia (Rewind 18 December 1993)

Abstract-An effective formulation for optimum design of two-span continuous partially prestressed concrete beams is described in this paper. variable prestressing forces along the tendon profile, which may be jacked from one end or both ends with flexibility in the overlapping range and location. and the induced secondary effects are considered. The imposed constraints arc on flexural stresses, ultimate flexural strength, cracking moment, ultimate shear strength, reinforcement limits cross-section dimensions, and cable profile geometries. These constraints are formulated in accordance with AC1 (American Concrete Institute) code provisions. The capabilities of the program to solve several engineering problems are presented.

INTRODUCTION

B CR that will minimize a cost function F(h) subject to the equality and inequality constraints [I I]:

Partially prestressed concrete structures are usually reinforced with a combination of non-stressed and prestressed reinforcement, where permissible fine cracks may develop under service loads. This type of construction is described as the transition field between reinforced and fully prestressed concrete construction. A large number of papers have been published on structural optimization in recent years. Arora and Thanedar [I], and Belgundu and Arora [2] and the literature cited in them would constitute a fairly comprehensive review of the subject. Several papers related to optima1 design of fully prestressed concrete beams have also been published [3 -81. It is important to have good software for design optimiration of partially prestressed concrete beams. Cohn and MacRae[9] developed the OSCON program for optimal design of one span simply supported pre- or post-tensioned fully or partially prestressed concrete members. Saouma and Murad [IO] presented a general approach for minimum cost design of single span simply supported partially prestressed concrete beams under uniform load. This paper presents PCBDOS, which stands for partially prestressed continuous beams design optimization system. The formulation and design process for optimal design of two-span continuous partially prestressed concrete beams is presented. practical considerations such as the AC1 constraints, the use of different sectional shapes and various profiles of the prestressing tendons are considered in Ihe design process. The system also takes into consideration the variation of the prestressing force along the tendon profile and the resulting secondary moments due to prestressing. Flexibility in selecting the jacking end and overlapping range is also considered.

min F(h). Subject to: G,(h)=0 i=l.p

I =p+

(1)
I,m,

G,(h)<0
with explicit variables as lower and

(2)
on the design

upper

bounds

(3) A total of 30 design variables have been formulated in this study to take into account the concrete cross-section dimensions, areas of prestressing steel tendons, areas of normal reinforcement in tension and compression and tendon profile along the two spans of the beam. Geometrical dimensions of the concrete cross-section expressed by nine design variables representing a general standard unsymmetrical flanged section arc shown in Fig. la. The design variables related to the area of prestressing, reinforcing steel and the geometrical configuration of the tendons, are shown in Fig. lb and c. The profile may be parabolic. harped (staggered) or straight. Figure 2 shows the various cross-sectional shapes that can be handled by the system through design variable linking of the standard unsymmetrical flanged section dimensions. The objective function denoting the costs of concrete. steel and formwork considered for the problem is formulatcd as: F(h)=C~(V~)+C,(,),C;,+C,c,l,(C,+ V,)+C,A,. (4)

DESIGN

PROBLEM

FORMULATION

Optimal design of partially prestressed continuous is a standard problem of finding a design variable

beams vector

where C,. C,,. C, and C, are the cost of concrete per unit volume. prcstressing tendon steel per unit weight. normal and shear steel per unit weight and formwork per unit area, respectively. 1;, b,,. V, and V,, are the total volume of concrete. prrstrcsslng steel. normal steel and shear stirrup reinforcement, respectively. (11,is the unit weight of steel and A, is the surface area of the formwork. Several types of merit

366

Technical

Note

(4

(b)

Cc)
Fig. 1. Design variables of the proposed models. (a) Cross-section geometry. reinforcement. (c) Tendon profile geometry. (b) Cross-section areas of

functions such as cost, volume and weight can be obtained by controlling the unit cost values C,, C,, C, and Cr. The optimal design process of PPC is seen as a series of analysis-optimization cycles. At each design iteration, constraint functions should be evaluated using the results obtained from structural analysis and the allowable limits specified by the AC1 code specifications [12]. The constraint functions are classified into the following categories [ 131: (1) Geometrical consrrainrs. These inciude constraints imposed on the cross-sectional dimensions and tendon profile layout. (2) Flesural stresses in concrete sections. The flexural stresses at the top and bottom fibres of the concrete section during the transfer and service stages of loading must be maintained within the allowable limits in compression as well as in tension, if full prestress design is required at critical locations. In continuous beams, the exterior and interior supports, in addition to midspans. are selected as the most critical section locations. However, any other locations may be considered should it seem necessary. (3) Ultimare JIexural swengrh. The ultimate moment capacity of prestressed concrete members are checked at the critical sections where these locations are selected correspondingly to the maximum factored bending moments, whether positive or negative, due to gravity loads, taking

into consideration the unfactored secondary moment due to prestressing. These locations are usually located in the midspans for positive moments and over the interior supports for negative moments. (4) Ultimate shear srrength. The shear strength to be provided by the shear stirrups is not to be greater than the allowable limit. (5) Reinforcement conswain&. Two requirements regarding the amount of steel to be provided within a cross-section have to be satisfied. A minimum area of reinforcement is required in the tension zone, free of prestressing steel. to carry any concrete tensile force that may develop. Also a limit should be imposed on the total reinforcement index to ensure adequate ductility for fully and partially prestressed continuous beams. (6) Special constraints ,jbr partidy pres!res.vrtl tieqqn. In partially prestressed concrete beams. additional constraints are imposed over that required for fully prestressed concrete beams. Once a partially prestressed concrete section cracks, additional stresses in the prestressing steel tendon as well as normal steel are induced. The final stress level should be maintained below the maximum allowable stress in the tendon steel and the yield limit for normal steel. As the tensile flexural stresses in concrete exceed the modulus of rupture, cracks initiate and develop through the zones subjected to these stresses. Limitations are imposed on computed crack widths [9].

Technical

Note

367

examples also show a comparison between the fully prestressed concrete design and the partially prestressed concrete design in terms of minimum cost. General design data

It is required to design the two-span continuous prestressed concrete beam shown in Fig. 4. The following design data and parameters will be used to solve the subsequent examples unless specified otherwise.
Material properfies Concrete: fi = concrete strength at 28 days, 500 psi f;, = concrete strength at time of initial prestress, 3750 psi f;, = allowable tensile stress in concrete section at initial state, 370 psi f,, = allowable tensile stress in concrete section at service stage, 425 psi f,, = allowable tensile stress in compresservice sive section at stage, - 2250 psi .A, = allowable tensile stress in compressive section at initial stage. - 2250 psi f,, = modulus of rupture at service stage, 530 psi f,, = modulus of rupture at initial stage, 460 psi c,, = concrete crushing strain, 0.003 time interval = 1 year shrinkage coefficient, %l = ultimate 550 x 10-6 C, = ultimate creep coefficient, 2.35 d,, = cover concrete, 2 in for mild steel d,, = cover concrete, 3 in for tendons steel minimum web width = 4 in IV,,,,, = normal maximum crack width, 0.016 in t, = unit weight, I50 lb ft -I. Normal steel reinforcement: /i = yield strength of normal tensile steel, 60 ksi ,J; = yield strength of normal comprehensive steel, 60 ksi J,, = yield strength of shear reinforcement, 60 ksi E, = elastic modulus of normal steel, 30 x 102ksi c, = unit weight, 490 lb ftt. Prestressing strands: .&, = tensile strength, 270 ksi ,J~) = yield strength = 230 ksi (0.85 ,/L,) ,1;, =,r;Z = 216 ksi (0.80,/,,) E, = elastic modulus of prestressing steel. 28 x IOksi K = Wobble coefficient of friction, 0.0012 ft- p = curvature coefficient of friction. 0.15 C, = sequential jacking, 0.50 C, = steel stress relaxation coefficient, IO A, = A2 = anchorage 0.25 in. Unit costs: concrete, mild steel, prestressing steel. formwork. C, C, C, C, = 80.0 S yd-- = 0.385 S lb- = I .35 S lb- = 2.80 $ ft ?. seating slippage,

/cl

Fig. 2. Geometrical shapes obtained by design variables linking of the standard unsymmetrical flanged section.
DESIGN OF SYSTEM PCBDOS has been developed on the IBM 3090-150E and combines modern developments in structural analysis, optimum design and software engineering. The system deals with the analysis and optimum design of a post-tensioned, two-span continuous, fully or partially prestressed concrete beam. The span lengths and the uniformly distributed loads considered may be different for each span. PCBDOS consists of several subroutines that perform the analysis of partially prestressed continuous beams and defines the optimization problem to be connected to the IDESIGN program [14], which is used as an optimizer. For specified input data, the merit function and constraint formulation are generated by the program PCBDOS. At each iteration of the design process, updated values of the prestress losses, flexural stresses, ultimate flexural stresses, cracking moments and ultimate shear stresses are computed by the structural analysis process of PCBDOS to create the constraint functions. PCBDOS interacts with the IDESIGN program to develop the optimal solution of the design problem as shown in Fig. 3. The system is designed in modular form. Advantages of the modular design are that each module can be expanded, modified or maintained with changes in the particular module only. APPLICATIONS OF PCBDOS

The capabilities of PCBDOS are illustrated through several application examples. For the purpose of this paper, the examples are selected to show the various merit functions and cross-sections that can be handled by the system. The

368

Technical

Note

Definition

of

(IDESIGN)

Fig. 3. Structure
Example 1. F(h) = minimum cost design of PPC. The beam is designed as a partially prestressed concrete member and according to the previously mentioned design data and the following data:

of PCBDOS concrete volume is reduced for the optimum concrete while the steel reinforcement is increased. Considering the high cost of steel reinforcement compared to concrete and the results of Table 2, it is seen that the cost of this design is higher than that obtained in example I. Tendon profile geometry remains similar to that of example I. The active constraint at optimum is the tendon profile requirement of minimum concrete cover.
E.xumpk 3. F(h) = minimum steel reinforcement. The data used for this example are similar to the data of example I, except that C, = C, = 0.0. For minimum steel reinforcement. reduction in the steel reinforcement is achieved in certain sections but remains unchanged in both end sections. The height of the section is almost doubled to increase the strength of the section while reducing the reinforcement. Considering the cost of concrete and reinforcement and the results of Table 2 it is seen that the cost of the obtained section is also higher than that of example I. At optimum. the constraints on ultimate moment capacity and minimum mild steel requirement are active. E.wmpk

Tendon profile: Span length: Loading: Cross-section:

parabolic, L, = Lz = 80 ft, dead load for both spans = 600 lb ft , live load for both spans = 1200 lb ft . unsymmetric I-shape.

Table 1 shows values of the design variables at optimum for this example and the other following examples. Values of the various merit functions at optimum are also shown in Table 2. Results of this example in Tables 1 and 2 will be used as reference data to compare with other examples. At optimum, constraints on flexural stresses in concrete. ultimate moment capacity and reinforcement index are active.
Example 2. F(h) = minimum concrete volume. The data used for this example are similar to the data of example 1, except that C, = I.0 and C, = C, = C, = 0.0. Comparing the results of this example with those of example 1 shown in Tables I and 2. we found that the

for this example

4. F(h) = minimum weight design. The data example are also similar to the data of I. except that C, = 3888 Ibyd . C, = C, =

I-----_-LIP%+
Fig. 4. Two-span beam under loading.

Technical I .O and C, = 0.0. Results of these examples show that the volume of concrete is reduced to achieve reduction in total weight, while reinforcement is increased to satisfy all constraints. When cost is calculated for this section, as shown in Table 2, it becomes higher than that obtained in example I. From this example and the previous three examples, we found that the best merit function to be considered is the minimum cost which was also obtained by Cohn and MacRae [9] for the simply supported beams. Example 5. F(b) = height optimization of section. This example is solved to show the capability of system to handle different cross-sections. By controlling design variables, other sections such as the T-section can obtained from the standard unsymmetrical I section. The data for this example are similar to the data example 1 except that: dead load on both spans Wo, = I+,, = 120 lb ftt concrete cover D,, = 4, = 2.0 in cross section: T-section b, = 40 in b, = 0 b, = 4 in b4 = 0 b,= 12in b, = 0 b,= 12in b, = 0. At optimum, the active constraints are flexural stresses in concrete and ultimate moment capacity. Due to the difference in loading, no comparison can be drawn from this example and the previous four examples. Example 6. F(b) = minimum cost design for FPC. This example demonstrates the ability of the system to deal with fully prestressed concrete continuous beams, where the Tthe the be of

Note

369

section is free of tension cracks. The data for this example are similar to example I, except that it is a fully prestressed concrete design with maximum tensile stress in concrete of 185 psi at transfer and 425 psi at service. The obtained cost value as shown in Table 2 is higher than that of example I, which means that the partially prestressed design is more economical. The active constraints at optimum include the constraints on flexural stress in concrete, ultimate moment capacity and reinforcement index.

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

An experimental software system for structural analysis and design optimization of partially prestressed continuous concrete beams has been designed, developed and tested. The optimal problem is the minimization of the cost, weight or volume of a two-span continuous beam subjected to constraints on safety and performance specifications. These constraints are imposed in accordance with the AC1 code. A variety of design environments can be handled with the system. Various merit functions can be obtained from the adopted generalized cost function such as minimum cost, volume or weight. Several examples have been solved with these as merit functions. The system can handle several cross-sections as illustrated by the examples. These sample applications show that the software system can be highly~bendficial either for analysis or design of practical structural systems. It can also be used to generate a parametric study to obtain optimum relations between design variables and other parameters such as loading and span length to be used as preliminary guidance for design. The developed system is not only important for structural design engineers and construction firms, from a practical point of view, but it is also beneficial for research

Table Design variable 1 13.71 2.43 11.17 7.68 12.02 9.77 4.00 0.00 61.67 I.41 1.41 0.40 0.40 1.34 1.63 0.81 2.53 1.33 1.63 0.40 0.40 220.19 220.19 24.89 3.00 41.12 58.67 41.13 3.00 24.89

1. Design 2 5.22 0.00 0.05 3.84 3.29 4.05 4.04 0.00 67.72 0.77 0.78 1.40 1.40 8.93 9.37 9.71 10.00 8.87 9.34 1.40 1.40 220.52 220.53 24.19 3.91 42.97 64.72 43.00 3.96 24.19

variables

at optimum no. 4 4.00 2.04 1.79 1.38 1.41 4.00 4.00 0.00 65.11 1.08 1.08 0.40 0.40 6.47 4.52 4.54 10.00 6.43 4.57 0.40 0.40 204.10 204.08 28.26 3.00 3.00 62.12 3.00 3.00 28.28 5 40.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 58.10 1.37 1.37 0.91 0.31 0.91 I .69 3.88 0.37 0.91 1.69 0.91 0.31 219.38 219.38 32.57 3.00 3 I .46 56.10 31.46 3.00 32.57 6 20.66 2.29 13.54 8.74 11.66 14.52 4.00 0.00 63.60 1.76 1.76 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.43 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.43 0.40 0.40 218.62 218.62 19.15 3.00 25.82 60.59 25.82 3.00 19.14

Example 3 4.00 20.00 4.86 1.58 6.50 11.30 4.00 0.00 120.00 0.47 0.47 0.40 0.40 0.40 2.16 1.05 0.40 0.40 2.16 0.40 0.40 220.98 220.93 24.30 3.00 25.03 117.00 25.03 3.00 24.30

b,
b,

b; 6, 6

b, b, b, b, b 1 b,,

6;

b II b ld b 15 b I* b 17 b 18 b 19 b 20 b 21
.

b 22 b 21 b 24 b 25 b 26 b 21 b z* b 29 b 30

370

Technical

Note at optimum 3 4 8707.8 10.183 3413.3 46.685 1790 5 10499 33.071 2022.9 136.935 2083 6 9361.5 23.456 1909.7 97.065 1991

Table 2. Merit functions Example no.

I
8461.5 17.00 2025.6 71.387 1816

2 16813.6 9.24 10826.8 64.217 1874

Total cost ($) Concrete volume (yd) Steel cost (S) Total weight (kips) Formwork area (ft*)

14909.8 21.828 945.1 90.273 3417

purposes. From an academic point of view, it can be used for structural modeling as it helps to visualize and understand the behavior of a member under different loadings, materials, geometrical conditions and code provisions. The following conclusions can also be drawn from these applications (1) The PCBDOS system can be utilized either for analysis or optimum design of partially prestressed concrete and fully prestressed concrete members. (2) The cost function is the most appealing design criterion compared to volume or weight, as shown in examples l-3. This is also in agreement with Cohn and MacRae [9], for simply supported beams. (3) The partially prestressed concrete design is more economical than the fully prestressed concrete design for the two span continuous beams, as can be seen from examples I and 6. The same conclusion was reached by Cohn and MacRae [9] for simply supported beams. (4) The optimum span of the interior parabola of the tendon profile over the interior support is 0.23 times the total length of the continuous span length. Acknowledgement-The authors greatly acknowledge the support provided by the Civil Engineering Department at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals. Dhahran, during this research.

3. 4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

II. 12.

REFERENCES 1. J. S. Arora and P. B. Thanedar, Computational methods for optimum design of large complex systems. Comput. Mech. 1, 221-242 (1986). 2. A. D. Belgundu and J. S. Arora, A study of mathematical programming methods for structuralmization.

13.

14.

Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng 21, 158331624 (1985). U. Kirsh, Optimum design of prestressed beams. Comput. Struct. 2, 573-583 (1972). F. R. Johnson Jr, An interactive design algorithm for prestressed concrete girders. Compul. Struct. 2. 107551088 (1972). R. J. Aguilar, K. Movassaghi, J. A. Brewer and J. C. Porter, Computerize optimization of bridge structures. Comput. Srruct. 3, 429441 (1973). A. E. Naaman, Minimum cost versus minimum weight of prestressed slabs. J. Sfruct. Div. AXE 102 (ST7). 1493-1505 (1976). H. L. Jones, Minimum cost prestressed concrete beam design. J. Struct. Div. ASCE III, 2464-2478 (1985). A. Hussain and M. A. Bhatti, Optimal design of continuous prestressed concrete girders. In Symp. ElecIronic, Computarion pp. 1688179 (1986). M. 2. Cohn and A. J. MacRae, Optimization of structural concrete beams. J. Srruct. Eng. AXE 110, 157331855 (1984). V. E. Saouma and R. S. Murad, Partially prestressed concrete beam optimization. J. Struct. Eng. AXE 110, 589-604 (1984). J. S. Arora, Introduction of Optimum Design. Wiley, New York (1989). American Concrete Institute Building Code. ACI31883. E. A. Abul-Feilat, Optimum design of continuous partially prestressed concrete beams. M.Sc. thesis. King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran (1991). J. S. Arora and C. H. Tseng, Interactive IDESIGN Program. Engng Optim. 13, 173-188 (1988).