Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs, Part 2, 1988, 88, Mar., 161-184 PAPER 9292 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING GROUP Cable design for continuous prestressed concrete bridges C. J. BURGOYNE, Ma, PhD, DIC, MICE* The Paper discusses the criteria which govern the cable design in continuous prestressed concrete beams. A rigorous analysis is used to show that Low’s condition regarding the shortening of the extreme fibres is a particular case of a more general condition on the existence of a line of thrust within the allowable zone permitted by the stress conditions. An example of how these conditions can be applied in a continuous beam with three different spans is given, Notation Position measured positive downwards from the centroid Tensile stresses are positive Sagging moments are positive A area ¢, highest position of cable allowing for cover lowest position of cable allowing for cover d permissible range of position of cable (allowing for cover) e eccentricity eq eccentricity of line of thrust at mid-span ena lower limit on eccentricity Coin Upper limit on eccentricity e, eccentricity of line of thrust em eccentricity of line of thrust at left pier eye eccentricity of line of thrust at right pier eccentricity of cable profile E Young's modulus J permissible stress in compression at transfer fiw permissible stress in compression at working load ‘Jy permissible stress in tension at transfer Yow etmissible stress in tension at working load 1 second moment of area about centroid 1, lever arm in hogging bending is lever arm in saguing bending | pan M, minimum working load moment (My M,atleft pier (M),, Mat right pier M, "maximum working load moment (My, Myat mid-span M, "moment range in one span (mid-span sagging - pier hogging) M, mean live load moment in one span M, moment range at one section (sagging - hogging) Written discussion closes 18 May 1988; for further details see p. ii * Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, tolBURGOYNE moment at transfer ‘maximum possible prestress at one section ‘minimum possible prestress at one section prestressing force at transfer minimum prestress to satisfy moment range ‘minimum prestress to satisfy lever arm minimum prestress for existence of line of thrust ‘minimum prestress for existence of line of thrust and maximum cable range secondary moment at internal support j (working load prestress)/(transfer prest linear transformation at left pier ‘ linear transformation at mid-span f, linear transformation at right pier x position in span y position in beam ¥ position of top fibre (always — ve) ¥ position of bottom fibre (always + ve) Z, = ly, always ~ ve) Z) = I/vy{always +¥e) 8, distribution coefficient for Q, Introduction The design of continuous prestressed concrete bridges gives the engineer consider- able freedom when compared with the design of statically determinate structures. By varying the secondary (or parasitic) moments, the relative magnitudes of the bending moments at mid-span and pier positions can be varied, thus allowing structures to be designed in which the line of thrust of the cable is outside the section, while the cable itself lies safely within the section. 2. The penalty to be paid for this freedom is greater complexity in design. It is necessary to determine the line of thrust of the actual cable that is used, or to choose a cable profile that is concordant. Fither way, a knowledge and thorough understanding of the secondary moments in the structure are required. 3. Virtually all the standard texts on prestressed concrete design'~* dwell on the problems associated with the calculation of the line of thrust and secondary moments associated with a given cable profile, but do not consider in detail the wider implications for the designer. However, one Author has considered other aspects of the problem. Low* determined limits on the cable forces for the internal spans of a multi-span structure, based on considerations of potential crack patterns. 4. This Paper generalizes these ideas to include both the internal and end spans of a wider class of structures; those with unequal spans and those in which compressive stress limits govern, Low’s work 5. Low considered a typical internal span of a multi-span viaduct and distin- guished four governing conditions which he expressed as limits on the minimum prestressing force within that span. These conditions were derived on the assump- tion that the beams were limited by tensile stresses, which can be visualized by potential crack patterns if the limits are exceeded (Fig. 1). The four cases can be summarized as follows. 162CONTINUOUS PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES Upperiimit Cable Potwntal oneable profile Lowertimit - jh _ oncableprotile a (a) 3 Cable atupper Iimtot zone Cable atupper limitatzone JAI IA TORSO B @ a Fig. 1. Low's limits on cable forces (after reference 4): (a) limited by moment range (P,); (b) limited by range of eccentricity (P>): (¢) limited by extension of extreme fibres (P 3): (d) as(c), but limited by cover over pier (P) 163BURGOYNE Case 1: governed by moment range 6. The beam cracks at the bottom under the maximum sagging load and at the top under the minimum sagging load, at the same section. The minimum prestress- ing force is shown to be a function of the live load moment range M,, and is independent of the parasitic moment a) Case 2: governed by lever arms 7. The beam cracks at the bottom at mid-span under the maximum moment and at the top over the piers under minimum moment. The limiting value of the minimum prestressing force is shown to be a function of the full moment range of the span M, and the maximum lever arms within the section. M, “14m io {is implicit in this result that the parasitic moment has a specified value, in order to make maximum use of the section depth. Case 3: governed by shortening of the extreme fibre 8. The span is assumed to be a typical internal span, so there must be no net rotation along the span caused by the prestressing force, The prestressing force is assumed to be sufficient just to eliminate the tensile stresses at all points in the bottom fibre owing to the average maximum live load moment M,,. This leads to a limiting minimum prestressing force M,A Py= 3 Z, 3) One corollary of this result is that the cable is placed near the top of its allowable zone everywhere. Low demonstrates that this is often the governing condition for design. Case 4 9. Case 4 is a special case derived on the same principles as case 3, but limited by the condition that the cable cannot be placed at the top of its allowable zone over the piers as this would fail to satisfy cover requirements. A more complicated limiting value for the prestressing force results, which need not concern us here. 10. Cases 1 and 2 are well established in practice and in texts, but case 3 was as far as the Author can establish, novel. It was the desire to put case 3 on a more Tigorous theoretical foundation which led to the work presented in this Paper. In order to establish common ground between the various cases, and ‘conventional views of prestressing, it is necessary to review, briefly, the main principles of section and cable design, Magnel diagram and equations Il. The design of prestressed concrete beams at the working load is governed by stress criteria (see Appendix 1). These can be rearranged into eight inequalities 164CONTINUOUS PR D CONCRETE BRIDGES TRE! of the general form aeceaee ee Dees 4 ep ‘These relationships form straight bound lines on a plot of e against (1/P), a construction known as the Magnel diagram.* Each line passes through one of the Kern points (e = —Z,/A or —Z,/A) when 1/P = 0 (P = 00). Therefore, four (and only four) of the inequalities define a feasible region which gives all valid com- binations of force and eccentricity. Which four of the possible eight equations govern depends on the circumstances, but two will relate to the top fibre and two to the bottom fibre. Of each pair, one will be a tension limit and the other a compression limit. 12. The condition that the feasible region exists, which is an overriding condi- tion in all cases (although not necessarily the governing one), is that the range of stresses in a particular fibre is less than the permissible stress range. These condi- tions can be expressed as limits on the elastic section moduli (Z, and Z,). These inequalities are detailed in Appendix 1. It will be assumed henceforth that a section has been chosen already such that all these conditions are satisfied at all points along the length of the beam. 13. A typical Magnel diagram is shown in Fig. 2. The minimum and maximum ZA chosen ° os Fig. 2. Typical Magnel diagram 165BURGOYNE prestressing forces P,,, and P,,,, can be identified. If the chosen prestressing force is close to P,,,,, then compressive stresses will govern, while if P is close to P, then tensile stress conditions will govern. Because minimizing the prestressing force usually results in greater economy, it will normally be found that a design is limited by tensile stresses. 14. However, if a section is chosen that only just satisfies the limiting cond tions on the elastic modulus, a different result may be obtained, Suppose a road bridge is being considered, which will necessarily have a large top slab to carry the traffic. Local bending criteria will normally govern, so the section will have a top ibre modulus that is larger than required by the global flexural conditions. There is no reason why the bottom slab need be any larger than required to satisly flexural criteria, so it is found that the Magnel diagram can look like that shown in Fig. 3 15. The feasible region is long, but thin, and for most allowable prestressing forces is bounded by one tension limit and one compressive limit, even when P is WJ Top ange governéa byroad with and local bending Eottom lange ‘governed by verallbending 2uA Narrow zone ‘ombattom fibre sires itera UP pp 4 Wide ange otpormissiia ~ prestressingtorce from top fibre A ain Narrowrango oleccontricties forspeciied prestressing force Fig. 3. Magnel diagram for a road bridge 166CONTINUOUS PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES close to Pain. A similar result obtains for trough beam railway bridges, in which the rails are mounted on the bottom slab, which therefore is large, and it is the top flange which can be kept small. 16. The applied moments vary along the length of the beam. We can thus calculate Pi, and P,,, at all positions along the length of the beam, and plot these as functions of position. P,yjg Will be largest at mid-span and over the piers, which are the positions where the moment range is largest, so the feasible region of the Magnel diagram is smallest. Similarly, P,,., will be smallest at these positions. If the tensile stress limits are put to zero, then P,,,, is identical to Low's value P, Line of thrust design 17. The parasitic moments and their implication for design now need to be considered. Generally, any prestressing cable profile will induce fiexural deflexions in the beam: if the beam is statically determinate, these cause no additional moments, as they are not resisted by the supports; if the beam is indeterminate, the tendency to deflect is resisted by the supports, whose reactions cause additional moments in the beam, known as secondary or parasitic moments M,. However, because these moments are neither necessarily small (as implied by secondary) nor necessarily deleterious (as implied by parasitic), both terms are confusing, 18. If the actual position of the cable is given by ¢,, it can be stated that the cable appears to act at its line of thrust e, , where Pe, = Pe,— M, (3) so that ee 19. The calculation of M,, and hence e,, for a particular cable profile is straightforward. The forces that the cable exerts on the concrete can be calculated, and the response of the structure to these loads determined by a continuous beam program. This equivalent load method is well described in many texts (see, for example, reference 3). 20. Alternatively, and for our purposes, more conveniently, the secondary moments can be determined by considering the cable profile directly, using the principle of virtual work. The relevant equations are given in Appendix 2. The benefit for our purposes is that the method combines the structural analysis with the determination of the secondary moments, so we end up with a direct relation- ship between the cable profile and the secondary moments. 21. A few definitions will be required, but they are well known and are derived elsewhere.” If M, = 0, ¢, and e, coincide, and the profile is concordant. All e, are themselves concordant profiles. Since M, is the result of a set of self-equilibrating support reactions, it varies linearly between supports; the difference e, — e, will also vary linearly ifthe prestressing force is constant, must be zero at end supports, and is known as a linear transformation. Once e, is known, any linear transform- ation will give a cable profile with the same line of thrust. 22. Two design philosophies can be identified, but they are equivalent. —M,/P 6 (a) If the secondary moments are considered as prestressing eflects, the stress conditions which lead to the Magne! diagram give limits on e,. For any chosen prestressing force, these can be plotted along the length of the beam; the designer has to find a concordant profile that satisfies these 167BURGOYNE limits. A suitable linear transformation can be determined to find a practical cable profile that satisfies cover requirements. (b) IF the designer has some estimate of the secondary moments, they can be regarded as loads, and included in the moments from which the Magnel diagram is calculated. The eccentricity limits are thus limits on e,, and the problem becomes one of finding an actual cable profile which satisfies these conditions and causes the assumed secondary moments. In practice, the choice between these methods is one of personal preference; the present Author finds the first easier, but knows many engineers who claim that they do not ‘bother about concordant profiles’, yet still correctly deal with second- ary moments and indeed use them to considerable advantage. 23. For present purposes the first method will be used, as it requires no a priori knowledge of the secondary moments. The eccentricity inequalities (equations (25}(32)) will be used to produce envelopes of the permissible line of thrust. The upper limit on the cable position will be termed eyi, and the lower limit ey, These limits may be governed by different conditions at different positions along the beam, and will be functions of the chosen prestressing force. Design for limiting eccentricity 24. For any particular structure, with specified spans and loading, limits on the line of thrust e, can be determined. A typical allowable zone will look like that shown in Fig. 4. The line of thrust will be high over the piers, and low at mid-span, as would be expected. 25. The effect of applying a linear transformation to the limiting values of e,, can now be considered, If'a sagging secondary moment is chosen, the effect will be to produce a cable profile e, which is lower than e,. This can be an advantage: cover requirements for ¢, have to be satisfied, but not for e,. Therefore, it does not matter if the line of thrust lies outside the section over the piers, provided that the corresponding cable is within the section. 26. What range of secondary moments is permissible? In the case of the e, -LULLLL Upper bound Srrrrer Lower bound Fig. 4. Typical limits on line of thrust 168CONTINUOUS PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES “ig, 4, the secondary moments must be large enough to bring the cable into the section (and allow for cover) over the piers, but not so large that the cable loses cover at the bottom at mid-span. Bearing in mind that the form of the secondary moment variation is known along the beam, in that it is zero at pinned ends and varies linearly between supports, there is either an infinity of possible solutions, a unique solution or no solution. The condition that there is a unique solution needs to be determined, as this represents the dividing line between a feasible and an unfeasible design. 27. Consider the single internal span shown in Fig. 5(a). The existence of symmetry will not be assumed for the moment. A positive linear transformation is required at both pier positions, to bring the cable within the allowed zone, but a larger value is required at the left-hand pier. However, the linear transformation must not be too large near mid-span. The two limits are shown in Fig. 5(b) as functions of position within the span. The difference e, — e, varies linearly along the span, and, as drawn, many possible lines can be fitted between the bounds. The condition that one line can just be fitted between the bounds on the transform- ation is being sought. This will occur when a point on the upper bound is just tangential to the line joining the two values over the piers, as shown in Fig. 5(c). 28. Let the position within the span where the transformation is tangential be ata distance of x from the left-hand end. Then o O and (6) which can be rearranged to give > em ~ lye =~ ep og r 2 } 29. Inany particular design, the stress conditions which govern at each section will be known; as there are four possibilities for each of ¢q, éy- and e,,, there are 64 different combinations, so it is not sensible to detail all of them here. However, we can consider one case as an illustrative example. 30. If itis assumed that the working load conditions govern at each point, this gives (10) 169