Classn.

THERMAL STRESSES IN CONCRETE STRUCTURES

S.J. Thurston.

ABSTRACT: Theories are presented for prediction of

thermal response of cracked reinforced and prestressed
concrete bridges under imposed differential thermal
gradients. Experimental results on model beams are
compared with theory.
A theoreitical model for predicting
temperatures and stresses in mass concrete structures
is developed.

Department of Civil Engineering, University of

Canterbury, Research Report No. 78/21
 i

ABSTRACT

This thesis considers the thermal response of mass concrete

structures under heat-of-hydration effects, and of cracked reinforced
and partially prestressed concrete bri.dges under diurnal insolation
and ambient thermal fluctuations.

The development of a linear heat-flow model for predicting

temperatures (including heat-of-hydration effects) and stresses
(including creep and shrinkage effects) is presented. Predictions
from the model were found to agree well with experimental and other
theoretical results.

An experimental programme investigating the thermal response

during transient heating of four concrete model beams, scaled from
prototype bridges, under various load combinations and distributions
1
of cracking is described. The models consisted of two /Sth scale
reinforced concrete T-section beams (one simply supported and one
1
continuous), one continuous /Sth scale prestressed box-girder and one
1
continuous /7th scale prestressed T-section beam. Measurements were
taken of temperatures and thermal deflections, concrete and steel
strains, crack widths and continuity forces.

Theoretical methods capable of predicting the thermal response

of simply supported and continuous concrete bridges, including the
effects of cracking, are developed. Theoretical predictions based on
the theory are compared with experimental results, and the significance
of cracking on the thermal response assessed.

The effect of cracking on the transverse thermal response of a

box-section and double-spine T-section are analysed. The significance
of thermal load on structures force loaded close to their ultimate
capacity is studied.
 ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to make grateful acknowledgement for help received during

the course of this project and extend my thanks to the following people:

Professor H.J. Hopkins, and subsequently Professor R. Park,

Head of the Civil Engineering Department, under whose overall. guidance
this study was made;

Dr. M.J.N. Priestley, supervisor for this study, for his

encouragement and constructive guidance throughout this project, and
for his many helpful suggestions during preparation of this thesis;

Dr. N. Cooke, assistant supervisor for this study;

Messrs. H.T. Watson and Technical Staff of the Civil Engineering

Department for their assistance in the experimental programme. I wish
in particular to acknowledge the help of the late Mr. A. Foot, and
Messrs. G. Sims, N. Hick~Y, J. Van Dyk and E. Hobbs for their valuable
contribution in constructing and testing the model beams;

Mrs. A. Watt for typing the manuscript;

Mr. H. Patterson for photographic work;

Members of the University Computer Centre, for punching cards and

for executing programs;

Ministry of Works personnel for their valuable guidance in selecting

the prototype structures that were modelled, technical information and
tracing of diagrams. In particular Dr. J.H. Wood and Messrs. M. Matthewson,
D. Bunting, K. Calder and W. Jones.

Dr. I.G. Buckle for the two dimensional finite element solutions
discussed in Section 3.2.

I wish also to gratefully thank the New Zealand Ministry of Works

and Development, and the Structures Committee of N.R.B. Road Research
Unit for their financial support.

Finally, I wish _to thank my wife, Libby, for her constant

encouragement and help.
 iv

CONTENTS
Page

1. INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF RESEARCH

1.1 Thermal Loading of Concrete Structures 1

1.2 Thermal Response of Bridges (Research Review) 3

1.3 Thermal Loading from Cement Hydration 13

(Research Review)
1.4 Scope of Research • . • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • 19
1.5 Format . ......................... 20

2. TEMPERATURE AND STRESS ANALYSIS OF UNCRACKED SECTIONS

2.1 In~roduction 22
2.2 Equation for Temperature Analysis • ,23
2.3 Numerical Solution Procedure for Temperature Analysis 26
2.4 Determination of Heat-of-Hydration Liberation Rates 27
2.5 Equations for Stress Analysis of General Section 31
2.6 Equations for Concrete Creep • • • 35
2.7 Equations for Concrete Shrinkage • 36
2.8 Computer Program Thermal • • • • • 37

3. VERIFICATION AND APPLICATION OF COMPUTER PROGRAM,THERMAL

3.1 Introduction . . • . • • . • 43
3.2 Comparison of Predicted Cooling of Bridge Sections
Using One-Dimensional and Two-Dimensional Heat-Flow
Models . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • 43
3.3 Comparison of Ambient Heating of Two Bridge Sections
With One-Dimensional and Two-Dimensional Analysis • . • • 47
3.4 Comparison of Experimental and Theoretical Thermal
Stresses and Deflections in Model Beam • • • • • • 52
3.5 Creep Effects of Prestressed Concrete Beams Under
Sustained Temperature Crossfall . • • • . . • . . 55
3.6 Creep and Shrinkage in Reinforced Concrete Beams
Under Sustained Temperature Crossfall • • • 58
3.7 Creep and Shrinkage Stresses in Prestressed Concrete
Box-Girder Bridges • . . . • • • . • • . . . . . 60
3.8 Heat-of-Hydration Simulations in Large Foundation
Pours 63
3.9 Heat~of-Hydration Simulations in a Strong-Floor
Pour 85
3 .10 Stress Predictions and Effect of Creep on Diurnal
Thermal Stresses in Prestressed Concrete Beam • • • • • • 90
 v

Page

4. THERMAL ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES

4.1 Introduction 95
4.2 Analysis of Primary Thermal Stresses 96
4.3 Analysis of Total Thermal Stresses in Restrained
Reinforced Concrete Sections • • • • 101
4.4 Computer Programs for Solution of Reinforced
Concrete Theory • . . • • • • • • • • . 108

5. EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL RESPONSE OF

TWO MODEL REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES

5.1 Introduction • . • 113

5.2 Structural Details of Model Bridges 114
5.3 Model Manufacture 127
5.4 Thermal Loading 138
5.5 Description of Model Tests • 147
5.6 Theoretical Crack Distributions for Models 152
5.7 Test Results - Beam One 157
5.8 Test Results - Beam Two 174
5.9 Sensitivity Analysis of Thermal Response 195
5.10 Conclusions 201

6. THERMAL ANALYSIS OF PARTIALLY PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

BRIDGES

6.1 Introduction 203

6.2 Thermal Analysis of Partially Prestressed Concrete Bridges . . 207

7. EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL RESPONSE OF TWO

MODEL PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES

7.1 Introduction 218

7.2 Structural and Construction Details of Model Bridges 218
7.3 Description of Model Tests 247
7.4 Experimental Temperature Distribution 252
7.5 Thermal Response of Model Beams 255
7.6 Calculation of Theoretical Crack Widths 261
7.7 Thermal Loading on Uncracked Model Beams 263
7.8 Thermal Plus Force Loading on Model Beams 271
7.9 ·Thermal Load Alone on Precracked Beams 291
 vi

Page

7.10 Thermal Load Plus Reduced Kentledge Load 294

7.11 Ultimate Loading of Model Beams 308
7.12 Conclusions 316

8. TRANSVERSE THERMAL RESPONSE OF BRIDGES

8.1 Introduction 317

8.2 Transverse Thermal Response of the Porirua Multiple
Box-Girder Bridge 317
8.3 Conclusions • . . 329

9. SIGNIFICANCE OF THERMAL LOADING AT HIGH FORCE

LOAD LEVELS

9.1 Thermal Response of Fully Flexurally Restrained Sections

at Different Force Load Levels • • • • • • • • • • • • 331
9.2 Significance of Thermal Loading on Ultimate Behaviour 334
9.3 Conclusions 338

10. CONCLUSION

10.1 Prediction of Temperatures and Stresses in Uncracked

Sections 339
10.2 Influence of Cracking on Thermal Response of Reinforced
Concrete Bridges • . . • . . • • • . . • . • • . . 339
10.3 Influence of Cracking on ~hermal Response of Partially
Prestressed Bridges • . . . . . . . . • . • • • • 340
10.4 Influence of Thermal Loading on Ultimate Capacity 341
10.5 Suggested Future Research 341

REFERENCES
APPENDIX A MOMENT - AREA THEORY
APPENDIX B MATERIAI.S USED IN EXPERIMENTAL BEAMS
APPENDIX C MAJOR COMPUTER PROGRAMS
APPENDIX D RESPONSE OF UNCRACKED BRIDGE SECTIONS TO DESIGN
AND CALCULATED TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS
APPENDIX E EFFECTIVE CRACK STRAIN AT DECK OF BEAM TWO DUE
TO SHRil'W~GE

APPENDIX G CONCRETE STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIP ADOPTED

 vii

TABLE OF FIGURE NUMBERS

(Example Fig. 3 .14 is on p_age 64)

Chapter Tens uni ts column ·

Number Column 1 .. 2 3 . . .. 4 .· .5 . . . 6 7 8 9 10

l 0 3 9 9 14 15
2 0 23 25 28 30 31 32 33 36 37 38
2 10 40
3 0 44 46 49 50 51 52 52 54 56 57
3 10 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 69 70 71
3 20 72 73 75 76 77 80 81 82 84 85
3 30 86 87 89 91 93
4 0 97 102 104 105 109 112
5 0 115 116 118 119 120 120 125 128 129 130
5 10 131 132 133 135 136 136 138 139 141 142
5 20 143 145 146 148 149 151 152 153 154 155
5 30 156 156 158 159 159 161 162 163 164 165
5 40 166 168 169 170 172 173 175 176 177 178
5 50 179 181 182 183 186 187 188 190 191 192
5 60 194 196 197 199 200
6 0 206 209 210 213 214 216
7 0 219 220 221 223 224 225 226 227 228 229
7 10 230 232 233 234 236 241 242 244 245 246
7 20 247 248 249 253 254 256 257 260 262 264
7 30 265 266 267 268 269 270 272 273 275 276
7 40 277 278 279 280 282 283 284 286 288 289
7 50 290 293 296 297 298 299 301 303 304 305
7 60 306 307 310 313 314 315
8 0 319 321 322 323 324 328
9 0 331 333 334 336
A 0 A.l A.3 A.4 A.5
B 0 B.8 B.8
c 0 15
D 0 D.4 D.5 D. 7
E 0 E.3 E.3 E.3
F 0 F.2
G 0 G.l
An example of use of Table.
Page No. of Fig. 3.14 is found as follows [underlined in table]:
Fig. 3.14 = Chapter l Fig. 10 + 4 gives page 64.
 viii

TABLE OF TABLE NUMBERS

(Example·: Table 7. 3 is on P.age 2 38)

Chapter '.rable
. '
.J:'l'urnber Within Chapter
Nµmber
l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 7
3 78· 92
5 129 167 179 180 198
7 235 237 238 243 255 273 292 309
8 323
B B.2 B.3 B.4 B.6 B.7
D D.2 I
E E.l
I
 i:x:.

INDEX OF NOTATION
(Greek letters are at end)

A transformed concrete equivalent cracked section area

AA area of concrete above crack level
A
s
= steel area
A
p
= prestress cable area
AS section area above crack level = AA + area of reinforcing
steel above crack level
A. = area of the i th reinforci.ng bar
l.
[A) = matrix (see equation 2.39)
a = length of end spans of symmetrical three span bridge
BB = area of concrete below crack level
BASER base restraint (see equation 2.44)
b = half length of middle span at symmetrical three span bridge
b beam thickness at steel level
r
C specific heat or compressive force
C
c
= cement content
C
0
= depth of concrete cover
CWD = crack width device
c l.J
.. = carry-over factor between i and j
6C(x,y)= incremental creep shortening strain at (x,y)
D = slab span (Fig. 8.6)
DL dead load
d = section depth
d' = distance from extreme compression fibre to centroid of
tension steel
d = distance from tension face to neutral axis
1
d distance from steel centroid to neutral axis
2
E ,E modulus of elasticity of concrete and steel respectively
c s
E (28)
c
= concrete 28 day modulus of elasticity
EI flexural stiffness of cross section
F = vertical force on beams
or nett section axial force
F
er
= total compression force developed across crack due to
closi.ng of crack
FA,FB, ..•. FM,FN =constants
Fl,F2 = factors for creep and shrinkage (see equations 3.4 and 3.5)
FAC = degree of flex~ral restraint of unrestrained section
thermal curvature
FEMFAC = ditto
 x.

f ,f ,f
c s p
= concrete mild and prestress steel stress respectively
f' . ultimate concrete cylinder compressive stre.ngth
c
f' ultimate concrete flexural tensile stre.ngth
t
fct . fictitious uncracked concrete tensile stress
6f(x,y) = incremental stress at (x,y)
G . concrete shear modulus
c
g = concrete compressive stress on preformed crack face
H
28
= . 28 day heat-of-hydration of cement
h = . depth of surface below neutral axis
or surface heat transfer coefficient
hl,h2 = length of longer and shorter sides of rectangle of concrete
surrounding prestressed cable
I section moment-of-inertia
I = cracked transformed equivalent concrete section
c
moment-of-inertia
I = equivalent average section moment-of-inertia
e
I = gross (uncracked) moment-of-inertia
g
I normal heat flux from sun
n
I' = transformed first moment of area about the origin
1
(see Fig. 4.1)
I I transformed second moment of area about the origin
2
(see Fig. 4.1)
K = concrete conductivity

Kt = torsional rigidity of spine beam

Kl,K2, ... Kn = constants
L = distance between torsional restraint of slab (Fig. 8.6)
L
p
= length of plastic hinge zone
9, beam length or span length
9, . . length between i and j
J_ J
M = section moment
M = maximum section moment on beam
a
M. ,M. moments at i and j
l. J
M transverse moment per unit width of slab at x
x
MI = initial total section moment from. integration of section
forces before force or thermal load applied

MDL dead load moment

M
p
= prestress moment (from equivalent loads)
M
s
= secondary (prestress) moment
M/ijJ moment-curvature
 xi

M
0
= . total section moment or maximum deck slab thermal moment
M = . moment of F about or.igin 0 (see ~ig. 4 .1)
er er
or cracki.ng moment
=.external moment
= beam torsion or thermal moment·
=.number of reinforcing bars
n =.modular ratio= E . s /Ec
p = . section prestressing force
Q = . rate of heat-of-hydration liberation per unit volume
qs,qr,qc,~ =.heat transfer per unit area (see equation 2.3)
= absolute temperature of bridge surface, sky and shade
air respectively
{R} = matrix of temperatures (see equation 2.39)
s = uniform crack spacing
s ..
1J
= stiffness of member ij
s av = average spacing of cracks
8 slope of ith heat-of-hydration curve at point B
iB
(see Fig. 2.3)
t::,,s (x, y) = .incremental shrinkage shortening strain at (x,y)
T = temperature
T ,T = total flexurally restrained concrete and steel thermal
c s
stresses respectively
T minimum temperature
m
TP temperature at node at beginning of time step
T torsion in spine beam at location x
x
{T} matrix of temperatures (see equation 2.39)
time or deck slab thickness
= bottom cover measured from centroid of lowest bar
wind speed
w = crack width
x = horizontal distance from origin (abscissa)
= height above origin (ordinate)
= height of prestress cable above o~igin (see Fige .6e2)
= height of section centroid above origin
z . cartesian coordinate
ac ,as. coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete and steel
respectively
= absorptivity
or expression given by equation 8.10
 xii

= vertical deflection
6. = . le.ngth of beam s.egment i
J.
6
er
= . average crack width at tensile surface
£ = strain or emissivity
= final tensile surface strain
= effective crack strain on tensile surface
er (see equation 4.1)
£ = . aver.age soffit strain
au
e = . angular rotation
\) = Poisson's ~tio

= crack height or penetration. Absolute distance from

tensile surface to crack root
= concrete density
= unrestrained thermal curvature
= section curvature at abscissa x
= function symbol
or angle of twist
or bar diameter
 1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF RESEARCH

1.1 THERMAL LOADING OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES

The thermal response of concrete structures is a complex phenomenon

traditionally ignored in conventional design. Apart from the provision
for gross expansion and contraction (particularly in bridge structures) it
is only recently that more complex thermal phenomena have formed an
integral part of the design.

1.1.1 Stress Inducing Mechanism

If unrestrained, concrete will expand when experiencing a temperature

rise. Localised stresses may be caused by the thermal incompatibility
between cement mortar and aggregate. These may affect concrete durability
1
during freezing and thawing but have little effect on durability for
concrete temperature changes arising from meteorological conditions in
New Zealand's temperate climate.
Restraint of free thermal expansion induces stresses. Internal
restraint may arise, under non-linear temperature distributions, from
the tendency for planar sections to remain plane (Bernoulli-Navier
hypothesis), or as a result of the presence of embedded steel of different
expansion characteristics from the concrete. External restraint develops
in indeterminate structures due to compatibility demands at joints and
supports, or by virtue of the self weight of members resting on the ground,
or by sliding restraint.

1.1.2 Variation of Thermal Properties with Temperature

The concrete temperatures considered in this study are mainly in the
range S°C to 60°C. Consequently the variation of the relevant concrete
properties with temperature will be discussed for only this temperature
range.
A high temperature during concrete setting adversely affects con.crete
1 2
stre.ngth because a more. porous structure results ' • For sealed specimens
of concrete, increases of temperature from S°C to 60°C decrease by only a
•
f ew percent t h e compressive strengt
h2 I 3 I 4 , elastic , modulus 2 , flexural

· · 2 ' 6 , wh i· i e increasing
t ensi; i· e· s t rengths an d t h erma 1 cond uctivity · · by a f ew
percent the coefficient of thermal expansion ' ' ' '
. 2 s 7 8 9
However, the
reduction in strength for specimens of concrete subjected to wide
 2

fluctuations in temperature may be several times as great as for constant

exposure 4 • The specific heat of concrete increases almost linearly by
up to 20% between 5°C and 60°C, and concrete creep increases almost
12
linearly by 200 - 300% between 20°C and 60°C lO,ll, • 13 • Even higher
creep values are obtained when the temperature is increased in stages,
10
rather than continuously maintained at the maximum temperature • The
creep rate between o0 c
and 20°C is not linear and may even show a
11
riiecrease with increasing temperatures from 0°C to l0°C .
.
Heating increases .
both the magnitude . k age 13 b ecause
and rate of s h rin
it increases the rate of fluid migration and helps release adsorbed and
hydrated water. Moisture loss affects other concrete properties, in
3 5 7 9
particular decreasing the elastic modulus by about 20% ' ' ' Once
equilibrium is reached in water content corresponding to conditions of
vapour pressure and temperature, no more strength is lost, even after
4
long periods of exposure . However this study is primarily concerned
with mass-concrete structures, and diurnal stress changes in bridges,
for which moisture losses will be small. Consequently this phenomenon
will henceforth be ignored.

1.1.3 Sources of Heating

The main sources of heating that are experienced by concrete

structures may be divided into three categories:
(a) Insolation and ambient heating. Structures thermally respond
to solar radiation, wind exposure, and ambient temperature changes (both
diurnal and annual cycles) . Concrete bridges, reservoirs, dams and
building elements (external columns, shear walls, architectural features)
have all shown distress due to this form of thermal heating.
(b) The heat released during cement hydration. This is only
important in relatively thick sections, where the low diffusivity of
concrete will allow significant temperature rises, such as in concrete
dams, foundation pads, retaining walls, bridge abutments and massive
beams.
(c) Industrial heating such as:
(1) Heating from factory plant, building heating and air-
conditioning units, boilers, etc.
(2) Heating from the passage of hot fluids, such as in cooling
towers., heat exchanges and storage vessels.
(3) Heating from radiation attenuation, such as in nuclear
4
shields. Davis suggests that Portland Cement concrete may be damaged
6
if subjected to an integrated flux in excess of 3 x 10 (neutrons and
 3

2
gammas)/mm •
This thesis concentrates on categories (a) and (b). Heating from
industrial sources will not be considered further.

1.2 THERMAL RESPONSE OF BRIDGES (RESEARCH REVIEW)

1.2.1 Temperature Predictions ·in Concrete Bridges

The basic factors affecting the thermal response of bridge sections

14
is shown in Fig. 1.1. Priestley provides a description of the heat
transfer processes. "At the outer boundaries a combination of radiative
and convective heat transfer occurs. The major form of heat input is
solar radiation on the top surface, some of which is absorbed and some
reflected, dependent on the surface colour.. On a mid-December day the
solar radiation on a horizontal surface can exceed 1 kilowatt/sq,m.
Although the soffit and external web surfaces may receive an amount of

~
~ ~ ~Q()6tr0--~
~· <00r"' / . Wind Speed
°'-:::· ~Q- / ~-
1 Re - radiation 2 o~ / 3 Blacktop

~ .....
~·····
/
• • • • • .. • ,. • • • " /J •

~ .
. .
1 ·....,..._
• .Ma feria
_______ -- -
...
I ---

·"'' .. ~ Properties
• ·-o-.-.-.-. .-.:--.-.___,,.': 6 · .L,,-~
o'-.-,·- - - . "6 .. ' •

2 3

IAMB/ENT TEMPERATURE)

FIG. 1.1 FACTORS AFFECTING THERMAL RESPONSE

.
( Af ter Priest 1 ey 14)
 4

v~flected radiation from the surroundings, this will generally be a small

proportion of the direct radiation on the deck surface.
Convective heat transfer occurs at tpe surfaces when a temperature
difference exists between the surface and the surrounding air, and is
accentuated by movement of air past the surface. Radiative los~es may
occur from the surfaces to adjacent colder surfaces or to the sky."
14
Priestley found that the maximum theoretical thermal soffit
stresses in concrete bridges occurred on days of high solar radiation,
low wind and low daily ambient temperature range. However the maximum
temperature differential within the bridge corresponded to days of high
daily ambient temperature range.
Many investigators have attempted to use meteorological data to
15 16
predict temperature distributions. Barber (1957) and Zuk (1965)
developed formulae relating observed maximum surface temperatures in
pavements and concrete bridge decks respectively, to the average daily
16
temperature, temperature range and total daily solar radiation. zuk
also developed formulae for the maximum temperature differential within
an unsurfaced concrete composite bridge.
The equations that describe heat movement in solid bodies are
17 6
well known, and were first proposed by Fourier in 1822 • Lanigan (1973)
developed a two-dimensional, heatflow, finite element computer program
(which ignored heat flow along the bridge) and found agreement between
theoretical temperature distributions and measurements on laboratory
models and prototype structures.
18
Emerson (1973) simplified the Fourier equations by assuming all
heat flow within the bridge was vertical, and developed a finite
difference iterative solution, which provided good agreement with
measured winter and summer prototype temperature distributions.
19
Hunt and Cooke (1975) extended Emerson's computer program to
cope with two-layered systems, and obtained agreement with results from
20
a ~-scale prestressed concrete model reported by Priestley However
surface temperatures were set equal to the model measurements and
theoretical material thermal properties adjusted to improve agreement.
14 6
Priestley (1976) used Lanigan•s program and a multilayer linear
heat-flow analysis to compare temperature predictions with measurements
on the Bell bridge (a continuous box-girder bridge near Melbourne,
Aust~alia) . The agreement between both analytical methods and
experimental measurement~ was very close, indicating that the simplified
linear heat-flow model is adequate for thermal analysis of box-girder
bridges.
 5

21
Rambhai (1976) developed a three-dimensional heat-flow finite
element computer program, and found agreement between theoretical and measured
temperature distributions in a model bridge diaphragm, and a prototype
box-girder diaphragm and typical section. Rambhai found that the vertical
temperature profile at the diaphragm cross-section was similar to that in
the web at a midspan section, and that longitudinal heat flow was small,
and of significance only very close to a diaphragm.
22 23
Priestley and Wood (1977) , and Wood and Adams (1977) using linear
heat-flow models reported good agreement between predicted and measured
temperatures for a box-girder bridge and a prestressed concrete reservoir
respectively.
Most invest_igators have been concerned with temperature predictions
for conditions that provided highest temperatures near the bridge top
surface. However on cold clear nights an inverse temperature gradient may
24
be set up. Leonhardt and Lippoth (1970) thought this situation would
occur only rarely, and that the temperature differentials would be much
25
lower. Radolli and Green (1975) performed theoretical analysis, using
a linear heat-flow model on slabs, with assumed summer and winter 'worst
days' for Toronto, Canada. They found that the magnitudes of the
curvatures induced by inverse gradients for the winter 'worst day' was
approximately 60% (but of the opposite sign) of the curvatures from the
summer 'worst day'. The implications of inverse gradients are discussed
further in Appendix D.

1.2.2 Measured Temperature Differentials

Although the maximum temperature differential that may be experienced

in a particular bridge depends on many factors, including the geographic
location of the bridge (particularly latitude), local environmental
conditions (particularly site exposure to wind, and the possibility of
shading), and structural cross-sectional shape, an examination of maximum
measured temperature differential is still of interest. Published
differentials will generally be less than theoretically derived maxima,
using a 'worst day' analysis, mainly because:
(a) Measurements have not been taken on a day of maxinlUITL radiati'on ..
(b) The site does not represent a critical exposure condition.
(c) The maximum recorded temperatures were below the concrete deck
surface, where the peak temperatures will occur. Some reports make
corrections for this discrepancy.
 6

1.2.2.(a) Early temperature measurements

Before 1970 there was little published data on measured temperature

differentials in concrete bridges. An estimation of the magnitude could
26
have been obtained from the 23°C differential reported by Capps for a
steel bridge in England with a 38 mm bituminous coating. Dickenson
27 28
reported a 35°c and 31°C temperature rise, within 8 hours, for the
bottom of 38 mm and 51 mm thick layers of bituminous concrete overlaying
crushed rock, for sites near Melbourne and Sydney respectively.

1.2.2. (b) Temperature measurements in prestressed concrete

box-girder bridges
Reported measured temperature differentials due to insolation and
ambient effects in prestressed concrete box-girder bridges is shown in
29
Table 1.1. Priestley and Miles reported temperature differentials
that varied between 25 - 30°C for different sections of the Bowen Street
Bridge. However this bridge had no blacktop at the time, and was
surfaced with a dark green curing compound which is thought to have
30
increased the solar absorptivity of the surface. Wood subsequently
measured a differential of 23.1°C for the same bridge after the curing
30
compound had been removed leaving a grey concrete surface. wooa
measured a differential of 22.3°C on the Shotover Bridge when it was
unsurfaced, and 27.4°C when it was surfaced with 10 mm of chip seal.
. 1 reporte d by Rambh ai· 21 was a 1 so f or an
Th e .temperature differentia
.

unsurfaced bridge.
Few vertical reverse temperature differentials have been reported.
30
Wood measured a reverse differential of ll.9°C on the unsurfaced
Shotover bridge (South Island, New Zealand) during a summer night.
Reverse gradients of more than 7°C were recorded in more than half the
nights in a 12 week continuous summer temperature monitoring.
Few temperature differentials within the webs of box-girder sections
h ave b een reporte d . . . 35 foun d t h at t h e outside
HeJnic . temperature o f
the web of a box-girder bridge was 10°C hotter tf'an a point near the web
centreline, due to solar radiation striking the web face.
 7

TABLE 1.1 REPORTED TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIALS IN PRESTRESSED

CONCRETE BOX-GIRDER ~RIDGES

TEMPERATURE
AUTHOR BRIDGE
DIFFERENTIAL (OC)

32
Maher (1970) 11. 7 Western Avenue Extension (England)
32
Maher (1970) 16.7 Victoria Bridge (Victoria,
Australia)
33
Lee (1970) 14.6 Medway Bridge (England)
Victoria Country Roads
Board (1972) 34 19.4 Bell Street Bridge (Victoria,
Australia)
6
Lanigan (1973) 17.2 New Market Viaduct (Auckland,
New Zealand)
Priestley and Miles 25 - 30 Bowen Street Bridge (Well;i.ngton,
(1974) 29 New Zealand)
21
Rambhai (1976) 22.7 Grafton Gully Bridge (Auckland,
{New Zealand)
30
Wood (1978) 22.3 Bowen Street Bridge (Wellington,
(New Zealand)
30
Wood (1978) 23.l Shotover Bridge (South Island,
(New Zealand)
30
Wood (1978) 27.4 Shotover Bridge (South Island,
(New Zealand) .

1.2.3 Proposed Design Temperature Distribution

It is impractical that each bridge designer should perform a heat-

flow analysis, using expected 'worst' likely ambient conditions, and thus
obtain a design temperature distribution applicable to his particular bridge.
Various design temperature gradients have been proposed for concrete
sections (See Fig. 1.2).
36
Stephenson (1961) proposed an exponential temperature distribution
in thick concrete sections, based on a mathematical analysis using
sinusoidal temperature variations.
32
Maher (1970) proposed a linear temperature variation for hollow
box-sections, varying from a maximum at the deck to zero at the bottom of
the deck slab regardless of the deck slab thickness. He proposed a linear
temperature distribution over the full depth of solid rectangular sections.
37
The New Zealand MWD (1970) used an equivalent rectangular
variation across the deck' slab of hollow box-sections. None of the above
 8

proposed temperature profiles had a maximum temperature specified.

$tress predictions from the MWD and Maher design temperature profiles
will be conservative for box-sections with deep deck slabs.
24
Leonhardt and Lippoth proposed a linear temperature differential
of between 15 - 20°C (depending on the thickness of the slab) over the
full depth of hollow box sections. Stress predictions from this
distribution will be conservative for deep sections.
From limited temperature measurements in two prototype and one
38
model structure, Priestley (1971) proposed a vertical temperature
distribution, defined as a sixth power parabola decreasing from 30°C at
the concrete deck, to zero at a depth of 1370.mm, regardless of section
type or depth. This gradient was adopted by the Civil Division of the
39
MWD in 1972 .
14
From a study of meteorological records, Priestley (1976) suggested
39
' •
revisions to th e MWD grad'ien t b ase d on th e se 1 ection
' o f a I wors t' d ay
for New Zealand conditions which would produce the most severe stresses
in prestressed concrete bridges. Priestley analysed the response of a
wide selection of bridge sections to this 'worst' day thermal loading.
The temperature distributions, plotted for the time that the maximum
soffit tensile stresses occurred in flexurally restrained sections, were
found to coincide closely with the temperature distribution shown in Fig. 1.3,
and currently adopted in an amendment to the Highway Bridge Design
40
Brief • The Brief also required the temporary unsurfaced condition of
bridges to be checked using a reduced deck temperature of 27°C, reflecting
the lower probability of occurrence of the peak design gradient, and the
16
probable lower surface absorptivity. For comparison, Zuk's formula
provided a differential of 25.9°C for unsurfaced bridges with Priestley's
'worst' day.
41
McQuillan (1976) proposed a similar but more severe design
temperature profile, based on theoretical analysis using a linearised
6
(less accurate) version of Lanigan 1 s program. However McQuillan
ignored the insulating effect of blacktop and used unrealistically low
values of convective heat losses. His temperature gradient does not
corre.spond to the time of maximum soffit tensile stress, and ignores t.11e
beneficial temperature rise in the soffit zones.
 9

·Assumed Actual Distributions

r----+::---~-:::::=- ~ ~-
____ ,.
,__..,.....__,
/
Tir.• To. e·0.0076:t. /

(For typical concrete

properties)

Box - Girder . After Stephenson After Moher AHer MWO

( 1961) ( 1970) ( 1970)

T- Vories with
blacktop thick

0
@
Ty' r(l2~0 )5
,After Leonhordt After Priestley
After Priestley
and Lippoth ( :976)
( 1971.)
(1970)

FIG. 1. 2 PROPOSED DESIGN TEMPERATURE PROFILES.

,~

r
1200
y

fy = T.(12~0)5

ty =5-.05h °C
T = 32-0.2h °C
h = Blacktop thickness (mm)

L
200
·r-1 L.._ Soffit
T --f1.5°Cr-

14
FIG. 1.3 DESIGN PROFILE AFTER PRIESTLEY .

1.2.4 Bridge Design Under Thermal IDading

24,38
Until recently , it has been common practice to consider the
thermal response of bridges only to the extent of calculating axial
movements due to an average temperature change across the bridge cross-
39
section (typically± 20°C) • This movement is accommodated by provision
 10

of sliding joints, bearing displacement, or by a flexible-pier design.

42 43 .
Work by Emerson and Black et al provides aid in estimating the
44
magnitude of this thermal expansion, and Reynolds and Emanue.l provide
a literature survey of this field. This phenomenon is well understood,
and will not be considered further in this thesis which studies the
thermal response of bridges to a differential temperature gradient
through the bridge superstructure.
1.2.4.(a) Reports of thermally-induced bridge damage
Recently there has been a growing awareness of the importance of
thermal stresses induced by non-uniform temperature distributions,
particularly for continuous prestressed concrete, shallow depth, box-
girder and T-beam bridges. There is an increasing use of these types
32
of bridges , and some distress attributed to differential thermal
gradients has been observed.
45
Leonhardt et al (1965) reported on a 17 m long, 5-6 mm wide,
horizontal crack that formed in the Jagst box-girder bridge. Their
calculations indicated that this was due to thermal stresses induced by
a temperature differential across the web.
24
Leonhardt and Lippoth (1970) report on serious vertical cracks
propagating from the so ff it, forming within 0. 3 d and 2. 0 d on either
side of intermediate supports of a number of pres.tressed concrete bridges
46
in Germany, where d = section depth. Leonhardt and Lippoth (1971)
attribute these cracks to tensile stresses induced by a vertical temperature
gradient, and to a lesser extent, the shape of the cable trajectory above
24
the support. Leonhardt and Lippoth (1970) also reported that deep
crci.cks, up to 1. 5 mm wide, had formed near the midspan region of
continuous prestressed concrete bridges. This was attributed to the
tensile stresses induced by a vertical temperature gradient, without any
appreciable live load stresses, although live load would increase the
tendency to crack in this zone.
•
De Serio (1. 971 )47 reports on t h ermal cracks forming
. at the columns,
below the deck of an exposed concrete parking ramp.
6
Lanigan (1973) reports on construction joints opening in the webs
of the Newmarket Viaduct box-girder bridge under the action of vertical
temperature gradients.
48
Huizing et al (1977) report on a falsework collapse at Karangahape
Road Ramp A continuous box-girder bridge. It was shown that vertical
temperature gradients and the prestressing operations could both cause
large redistributions of the dead load of the superstructure on the
 11

falsework. The failure of the falsework was attributed to dead load

redistribution effects.

1.2.4. (b) Longitudinal thermal stresses

24 .
Leonhardt and Lippoth (1970) discussed thermal cracking near
intermediate supports of prestressed concrete continuous bridges, and
proposed design formulae for calculating areas of non-prestressed steel to
be placed near the soffit for various acceptable crack widths.
49
Priestley (1972) developed a theory for prediction of longitudinal
thermal stresses, for a general section subject to an arbitrary vertical
temperature distribution, based on simple equilibrium requirements. He
50
found excellent agreement between this theory and experimental results
on a quarter-scale model of a single-cell trapezoidal box-girder section
for both thermal stresses and deflections.
44
Reynolds and Emanuel (1974) provide a general discussion and
literature survey of thermal stresses caused by ambient effects. They
conclude that considerable research is required to establish the magnitude
and significance of these stresses.
19
Hunt and Cooke (1975) showed that a thermal stress analysis of
a long prismatic box-girder bridge, with thin flanges and webs, could be
performed by solving the partial differential plane strain linear
thermoelastic equations. Their solution for stresses in a section without
curvature restraint was in excellent agreement with Priestley's method
over the full depth of the web, although they predicted maximum
compressive stresses in the top flange 38% greater than obtained by
49
Priestley's method . However in Priestley's method the longitudinal
52
and transverse stresses are uncoupled. Priestley and Thurston (1976)
showed that if the interaction between longitudinal and transverse
stresses is approximated by adding Poisson's ratio times the transverse
bending stresses to the longitudinal stresses, then this discrepancy is
substantially reduced. For design purposes, the soffit tensile stresses
induced by restraint of thermal hogging in continuous bridges tend to be
critical, and small errors in the magnitude of the compression stresses
in the unrestrained section are relatively unimportant.
25
Radolli and Green (1975) performed a linear heat-flow analysis
on concrete slabs using an assumed 'worst' day, and proposed a formula
relating maximum thermal curvature to slab depth. This approach cannot
be extended to cracked sections and is not suitable for predicting
maximum soffit tensile stresses. Radolli and Green
25 found that the
maximum thermal stresses in continuous beams were often several times
 12

the magnitude of corresponding live-load stresses. They reported that

measurements of thermal reactions, on a prestressed concrete 3-span box-
girder bridge (span lengths 13 m, 17 m and 13 m) provided a moment of
nearly 60% of the maximum dead load moment on the bridge. They found
that this reaction change could successfully be simulated using a linear
heat flow model if a day of high solar radiation was assumed.
22
Priestley and Wood (1972) measured concrete thermal stresses in
the 2-span Bowen Street box-girder bridge, (Wellington, New Zealand) , using
vibrating wire strain gauges. These showed reasonable agreement with
theoretical stresses based on recorded concrete temperatures.

1.2.4.(c) Transverse thermal stresses

24
Leonhardt and Lippoth (1970) reported that trapped warm air in
the cell of a box-girder bridge could reach temperatures up to 40°C, and
that heat losses on the external web faces at night could cause
significant web differential temperature gradients. They suggested that
restraint of web thermal curvature caused critical bending tensile stresses
to develop on the outside web face.
38
Priestley (1971) showed that large transverse tensile tpermal
stresses may form in a box-section, due to the heating of the deck by
insulation. Priestley split the temperature increase in the deck into
a uniform temperature rise, and a linear curvature inducing temperature
differential. For a typical example he found that the stresses due to
the latter effects were more significant that the former. Priestley
found that results using a manual frame analysis technique agreed well
with a finite element plane strain solution.
35
Hejnic (1974) measured the temperature distributions in the webs
of a large box-girder bridge, due to slanting solar radiation striking
the web face in the late afternoon. At one depth in the section he
found a temperature difference of 10°C over a length of 500 mm, between
the outside face of the web, and a point near the web centreline. He
calculated that this would induce a maximum web tensile stress of 3.25 MPa.
19
Hunt and Cooke (1975) proposed a technique for solution of the
transverse stresses by solution of the partial differential plane straln
thermoelastic equations, by subdividing a box-girder bridge into small
segments.
21
Rambhai (1976) developed a 2-dimensional planar thermal stress
computer program. He found that the theoretical temperatures predicted
'th
wi ' 6 '
Lanigan s computer program, using
I
measured meteorological data,
 13

would produce a maximum tensile stress of 1.65 MPa at a point near the
bottom of the deck slab on the Newmarket Viaduct box-girder bridge,
(Auckland, New Zealand) • Tensile flexural stresses also occur here due
21
to usual mechanical loading. Rambh ai.
. . found t h at t h e maximum
. .
compressive
stress was underestimated by 42% and the maximum tensile stress by 23% in
a frame analysis solution. However if the finite element solution
ignored the haunches, and used the liinearised frame analysis temperature
21
distribution, then this discrepancy was greatly reduced. Rambhai
sugge.stedthat cracking will significantly reduce the transverse thermal
response.

1.3 THERMAL LOADING FROM CEMENT HYDRATION (RESEARCH REVIEW)

1. 3 .1 Comparison of Early and Current Mass Concrete Construction

Technology

In the era before 1900, concrete in dams was placed by shovel with
little control placed on water content. Coarse cements were used (with
a low early ·hydration rate) and the rate of concrete placement was low.
Consequently the generated concrete temperatures would not have been high.
53
However few of these dams remain serviceable today In recent years
technology has allowed the exact and automatic proportioning and mixing
of materials, in large buckets at vastly increased placing rates. Great
care is taken to ensure that generated concrete temperatures are not
. 53
excessive

1.3.2 Generated Temperatures in Mass Concrete

The reaction of cement with water is exothermic and liberates a

considerable quantity of heat. Modern cements are finer, and have
54
increased heat outputs The early rate of heat-of-hydration g~neration
2 55
of concrete increases significantly with temperature ' , hence a higher
placing temperature of concrete results in a larger temperature rise, and
56 57
greater temperature differentials •
The rate of heat loss from a body is proportional to the square of
. . 56 , t h us, wh ereas a 1 5 mm wall may lose 95% of its heat
th e 1east d imension
in l! hours, a 15 m wall, subject to the same environmental conditions,
56
will require 2 years The maximum generated temperature in foundation
54
slabs is thus related to the lift height , but lifts greater than 2 m
cause little increase in maximum temperature, as shown in Fig. 1.4.
 14

. 70 NOTES

I. Cement Content 400kg/'m3 (0.P.C.)

60 2. Concrete Placed 20°c

(,)
.....
0
50
w
~
0::
w 40
0::
::>
I-
<:(
0:: 30
w
a.
~
w 20
I-

10

o, 10 1000
TIME FROM CASTING (HOURS)

FIG. 1.4 TYPICAL EFFECT OF LIFT HEIGHT ON TEMPERATURE

RISE. (AFTER BROWNE AND BLUNDELL)54.

Thin structural elements dissipate heat almost as fast as it is generated,

56
and there is little temperature differential induced
The temperature distributions in mass-concrete structures depend on
the amount and rate of heat-of-hydration emission, and the three-dimensional
heat flow. The former is a function of cement type, mix design and
concrete temperature, while the latter is a function of ambient conditions,
the properties of the concrete, subgrade material and insulating material
(if any), and the temperature distributions. Thus simulation of the
temperature/time curves for points within the structure is a complex
problem. Many investigators have reported detailed temperature readings
57 58 59 60 61
for mass-concrete dams ' ' ' ' . However because temperatures are
a function of mix, structure and weather conditions, results cannot easily
be correlated between different sites, and only the trends showing the
effect of variation of parameters at a particular site have general
appl icabi 1i ty . The most important temperature differences are those
between the hot interior and the cooled surface soon after pouring, and
the maximum and final stable temperatures of the interior. Jacquin and
59 60
Orth report a difference of 33°C for the former, and Waugh and Rhodes
 15

report a difference of 41°C for the latter. The maximum temperature

rises occur in types of structures like bridge abutments, large concrete
girders and retaining walls rather than in mass-concrete dams, because
although heat losses are less significant in the latter, the concrete
55 29
mixes are also leaner • Priestley and Miles measured a temperature
rise of 53°C in the diaphragm of a box-girder bri_dge, and a differential
62
of 43°C. Beca, Carter, Hollings,& Ferner measured a differential of
31°C in the web of a l. 5 m deep double-T bridge. The maximum temperature
35
dropped 40°C in 10 days (Fig. 1.5). Hejnic measured a differential of
60°C between fresh and old concrete in a large concrete box-girder bridge.
However the concrete had been preheated because of the cold conditions.

TEMP 0
c
0 10 cO ..JO 40 .so GO 70

CONC,{'ET!NG

FIG. 1.5 HYDRATION TEMPERATURES IN A DOUBLE-T BRIDGE.

(AFTER BECA, CARTER, HOLLINGS & FERNER62 ) •
 16

1.3.3 Predicting Thermal Stresses in Mass Concrete

Thermal stresses are induced by restraint of free thermal strain.

The three major causes of restraint in monoliths are the flexural
restraint imposed by the structures self-weight, the restraint imposed by
63
oth er monoli. th s or foundations
. , an d th e tend ency f or p 1anar sec t'ions t o
remain plane (Bernoulli-Navier hypothesis). This tendency is less
. distortions
. squat members d ue to s h ear . . 64 Th erma 1 s t resses
pronounce d in
in mass concrete dams are usually far more significant than live ],oad or
60
dead load stresses .
Over each time increment the incremental thermal stress is the
product of the incremental restrained strain and the concrete elastic
modulus. However the modulus is a function of both time and temperature,
with the early strains inducing very little thermal stress. High temperatures
2
increase the early value of elastic modulus , but reduce the ultimate value
as a more porous concrete structure is obtained.
Thermal stresses in mass structures are significantly affected by
10
creep. Neville presents an excellent literature survey on the concrete
creep/temperature relationship from which it appears that creep of
preheated sealed specimens increases linearly by 200-300% between 20°C and
13
60°C. Data presented by England and Ross indicate that the creep/
temperature relationship is similar for both sealed and unsealed specimens,
if corrections for drying shrinkage are made, and that the difference in
creep for two identical specimens loaded at 20°C and 60°C respectively
is almost the same for periods after loading between 1 and 80 days.
In short, the thermal stress distribution in a mass pour structure
is a complex function of the inter-related parameters of creep, time,
elastic modulus and temperature. In general the stress-anal,ysis will
require a 3-dimensional solution, although a 1-dimensional analysis is
54 63 65
adequate for many structures ' ' Cracking will alter the stress
distribution,and thus, the change in concrete tensile strength with time
and temperature, should be considered.

1.3.4 Cracking in Mass Structures

Many investigators have described instances of thermally induced

.
crac k ing . mass concre t e d ams 5 7, 58, 60 .
in However a stud y by Birt
. 66 wh ere

he questioned the major contractors and designers involved in projects

using large volume pours of reinforced concrete in the United Kingdom
found little evidence of thermal cracking. This may have been because
the reinforcing kept the crack width small, and those people he surveyed
 17

had only made a cursory investigation.

Cracking degrades the appearance of structures (especially with
57
efflorescence) , reduces the water t.ightness, durability, and for
unreinforced structures can affect the structural integrity. Many
investigators have identified the major modes of thermal cracking in mass-
54,56,57,60,63 mt..
concre t e . ~uese are:

(a) The exterior of a large block of concrete may be cooled by

ambient conditions, and its contraction resisted by the hot interior soon
after pouring, This induces tensile stresses near the surfa9e. These
stress.es are low and rapidly dissipated by creep as they are formed when
the concrete is fresh and weak.
(b) When the interior of the mass cools, its contraction is
resisted by the exterior, a stress reversal occurs, and the crack initiated
by (a) may be propagated deep into the structure, parallel to the
temperature gradients. A similar situation may occur in box bridge
. 67
sections , wh ere th e t h'icker e 1 ements in
. a section
. may set at h'igh er
temperatures than the thinner elements.
(c) If concrete is poured against bedrock or an older concrete
foundation that has been allowed to cool, then the free expansion due to
the temperature rise is restrained. However little compressive stresses
develop because of the low modulus of elasticity and the relatively large
amount of creep that occurs. When the concrete subsequently cools, its
contraction is restrained, and tensile stresses may cause cracks.
57
Dunstan and Mitche11 attributed cracks along or just above the concrete/
foundation junction to this cause, but it appears more likely that they
were caused by temperature gradients parallel to the. junction·.
54
Shrinkage cracks may penetrate 450 mm into fresh concrete, and
may promote further cracking from thermal stresses by reduction in cross-
54
section area and creation of stress concentration until the cracks
60 63
extend right through the monolith • • Freezing and thawing of water
can also extend cracks.

1.3.5 Techniques to Reduce Thermal Cracking in Mass Concrete

There are many techniques used to reduce temperature rises and

differentials, and hence thermal stresses in mass-concrete structures.
53 56 57 63
These include • • • :
(a) Water cooling through pipes to reduce maximum temperatures,
and top surface insulatidn to reduce temperature differentials.
 18

(b) Precooling concrete aggr.egate and water. This reduces the

temperature rise, and a1so increases workability.
(c) R.educi.ng cement content while maintaini,ng the same water to
cement ratio. Workability is maintained by.using air-entrained, water-
reducing and set-retarding admixtures, and by using large maximum
aggregate size.
(d) Reducing cement content by replacement with finely divided
68
pozzolanic materials. Blundell and Bamforth found that a 70% replacement
of ordinary Portland cement with Cemsave (a groupd granulated blast
furnace slag) reduced the maximum temperature rise in a 2.25 m lift from
54
38°C to 20°C, without any 90-day strength loss •
(e) Using cement of low and slow heat-of-hydration release
properties.

Thermal stresses can also be reduced by contraction and expansion

joints, and by the use of construction joints to reduce the height of
57
individual pours. Dunstan and Mitche11 found that reducing the time
between subsequent pours, reduced the incidence of cracking. Reinforcement
63169 70
can be used to control crack heights and widths • •

1.3.6 Design Procedures in Mass Concrete

It has been common to use rule of thumb techniques for estimating

3
temperature rises in mass concrete (e.g. 12°C/(100 kg OPC)/m temperature
68 60168
rise ). However this technique has been shown to be inadequate •
63
Curves presented by ACI Committee 207 allow estimation of temperature
rise as a function of the volume to surface ratio of the structure,.mix
design, placing temperature and average ambient temperature.
57
Dunstan and Mitche11 found that a difference between the maximum
concrete temperature and the yearly average shade temperature of 24.3°C
71
caused cracking, while Mihailov found that the temperature change for
7
this was 16 - 23°C. Dunstan and Mitchell 5 also found that temperature
differentials greater than 25 - 26°C in fresh concrete caused cracking.
These 'rule of thumb' temperature differentials can be used in conjunction
63
with the ACI Committee 207 temperature generation curves to check if
cracking is likely in a structure.
69 70
Hugh es • d escri'b es th e various
. t ypes o f crack'ing t h at can resu 1 t
from release of heat-of-hydration in retaining walls and massive
foundation pads. He states that it is uneconomic to attempt to avoid
concrete cracki.ng, and proposes formulae for calculating reinforcing
 19

percentages that reduce crack spacing and width to acceptable levels.

63
The ACI CoI1Ut1ittee 207 provides curves and formulae which allow:
(a) Effective base restraint on a structure cast onto a solid
foundation to be estimated.
(b) Maximum effective concrete temperature to be estimat~d.

(c) Design distributions of reinforcing steel to be obtained

from the structure dimensions and results of (a) and (b) above.
(d) Contraction joint spacings in unreinforced concrete walls to
be designed so that crack widths are limited to 0.23 mm.

1.3.7 Laboratory Models for Mass Concrete

It is difficult to simulate heat of hydration problems using

scale models, for while the time scale for heat conduction reduces by
72
the scale squared , the rate of heat generation is unaltered. However
54
apparatus has been developed where the measured temperatures/time and
strains/time in a prototype structure can be simulated on a laboratory
specimen and thus the corresponding stress/time function can be obtained.

1.4 SCOPE OF RESEARCH

This research has been prompted by two broad areas of concern

regarding thermal stresses in concrete structures.
(a) A simple technique for predicting thermal stresses in
49 22
uncracked bridges has been developed and experimentally verifiea
A suitable design temperature distribution has been developed for New
. .
Zea 1 an d con d 1t1ons 14 • . is
However it . expecte d t h at t h e t h ermal response
of cracked bridges will be significantly less than for uncracked bridges.
This research develops theory for thermal analysis of cracked reinforced
and prestressed concrete structures, and compares this theory with
experimental measurements on model structures.
(b) The thermal temperatures and stresses in a mass concrete
structure are generally estimated in design by approximate and 'rule of
thumb' methods. This research develops a user-orientated computer
program to calculate the thermal response of concrete structures, and in
particular to compare·alternative design proposals. Predictions from the
computer model ar.e compared against experimental results.
 20

1.5 FORMAT

The chapters of this thesis have been arra_nged as follows:

In Chapter 2 the theoretical development of a computer program
(THERMAL) is presented. This provides a solution for one-dimensional
transient heat flow in multi-layered concrete structures, including the
effects of heat-of-hydration generation, insolation and ambient conditions.
A simultaneous thermal stress analysis considers effects of creep and
shrinkage, base restraint, curvature restraint and variation of material
elastic modulus with time for uncracked sections.
An attempt is made to verify the computer program THERMAL in
Chapter 3 by comparing predictions from THERMAL with reported experimental
and theoretical results. The comparisons include thermal stress
predictions due to creep and shrinkage, at both room and elevated
temperatures, and temperature predictions in a box-girder bridge due to
ambient conditions. The hydration measured temperature distributions in
a large pad, slab and box-girder bridge are compared with predictions
from THERMAL using recorded meteorological conditions. Thermal stresses
are compared for the slab.
A theory is presented in Chapter 4 for predicting the thermal
response of a conventionally reinforced, cracked, concrete bridge.
Examples of computer programs for· solution of this theory are
discussed.
Chapter 5 describes the manufacture and testing of a continuous
and a simply supported reinforced concrete bridge model, and compares
the results with values predicted in the theory developed.in Chapters
2 and 4. The influence of cracking on the response of the model sections
is discussed.
A theory is presented in Chapter 6 for predicting the thermal
response of partially prestressed bridges. The manufacture and thermal
loading of two continuous partially prestressed concrete bridge models
are described in Chapter 7. A comparison of results with theory in
Chapter 6 is presented, and the influence of thermal cracking on the
response discussed.

Results from th~ theoretical analysis of transverse stresses in a

box-girder bridge, using both an approximate and finite element solution
are presented in Chapter 8. A thermal analysis technique for a double-T
bridge is presented, and the effects of cracking on the transverse thermal
response of bridges is analysed. The s_ignificance of thermal load on
structures already force loaded close to their ultimate capacity is studied
in Chapter 9.
 21

The.conclusions that have been reached are summarized in Chapter 9,

and suggestions are made for future research. Generally the conclusions
for each section of work appear at the end of the appropriate chapter,
and consequently the formal conclusions in this chapter are
comparatively brief.
The Appendices include the test results from measurements on the
experimental beams steel and microconcrete test specimens, a listing of
major computer programs developed duri.ng this research and a comparison
of the theoretical thermal response of sections to 'worst' day and
various design profile loadings.
 22

CHAPTER 2
TEMPERATURE AND STRESS ANALYSIS OF UNCRACKED
SECTIONS

Summary

Equations describing heat-flow in a body are presented, and a

temperature analysis technique developed for one-dimensional unsteady
heat flow in a multilayered body subjected to the effects of heat-of-
hydration and boundary heat transfer. Equations for a stress analysis
including the effects of temperature, shrinkage and creep are presented.
A computer program THERMAL coded to perform temperature and stress
analysis is described.

2.1 INTRODUCTION

In Section 1.2.1 it was shown that a number of researche~s

found linear heat-flow models adequate for temperature predictions in

bridges of complex section geometry. However earlier research was
limited to a maximum of two layers, with uniform boundary conditions
with time and did not consider heat-of-hydration effects nor include
thermal stress analysis. It was considered desirable to develop
analytical capability to include these effects to allow more complex
sections and problems to be analysed while retaining the analytical
simplicity of linear heat-flow. Because concrete strength, creep and
shrinkage are a function of both temperature and time, the stress
analysis must be included in the step-wise analytical procedure. The
significant influence of creep on thermal stresses in heat-of-hydration
related problems is generally recognised (Section 1.3.4) but the
influence on ambient thermal stresses is less obvious, and will be
examined further in Chapter 3.

This chapter develops analytical background to the development of

a computer program THERMAL capable of predicting temperatures and
stresses in a multilayer, multi line section subjected to insolation and.
ambient conditions, heat-of-hydration, shrinkage and creep effects,
with a user-defined force loading history and degree of curvature
restraint.
 23

2.2 EQUATIONS FOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS

(a) Body Interior

If material thermal properties are assumed to be unaffected by

temperature, then the general equation for three-dimensional heat flow
73
may be expressed

kV 2 T + Q - pc
dT
at = o (2.1)

where
-2
'i/ = Del operator
2 a2 a2 a2
= (- + - + -)
dX dy dZ
k = thermal conductivity
p = mass density
c = specific heat
t = time
T temperature
Q rate of heat generation per unit volume
x,y,z = cartesian coordinates

If heat flow is parallel to the y axis, then the temperature

gradients in other perpendicular directions are zero, and equation 2.1
reduces to:

dT
Q PC dt = 0 (2. 2)

(b) Body Surface

An equation expressing conservation of heat-flux at a boundary

surface perpendicular to the y axis (Fig. 2.1) can be expressed

In= Normal Heat Flux

From Sun

FIG. 2.1 HEAT TRANSFER AT BODY SURFACE

 24

q - q - q = 0 (2. 3)
s r c

where qs = short wave heat flux absorbed from the sun

qr = nett long wave radiation to th~ sky and other objects

qc = nett heat flux from conduction and convection to the
surrounding air
= heat flux conducted from surface into body.
~
17
Fourier I s 1 aw f or h eat cond uction provi'des
0 0

(2. 4)

By definition of the absorptivity a the heat absorbed from

the sun:

= a I
n
(2.5)

where I
n
= normal heat flux component from sun on bridge surface.

The total conduction and convection heat loss is approximately

proportional to the temperature difference between the surface T and
shade air temperature T. , for constant wind speed. By definition of
s
h
c

= h (T - T ) (2.6)
c s
. .
Th e Ste f an-Bo 1 tzman ra d iation 1 aw gives
. 74

(2.7)

where E: = bridge surface emissivity

a = Stefan-Boltzman constant
R = absolute bridge surf ace temperature
R* = effective temperature of sky and surrounding objects.

Equation 2.7 can be expressed:

4 4 4 4
= E: a (R - R ) + E: a (R - R )
s s *
2 2 4 4
=?. {Ea (R + R ) (R + R ) } (R - R ) + E: a (R - R* ) (2.8)
s s s s

where R
s
= absolute shade air temperature.
 25

If a surface heat transfer coefficient h is defined:

2 2
h=£CJ(R
.
+Rs )(R+R)
s
+h c (2.9)

then fr0m equations 2.3 - 2.9

4 4
aI - h(T - T) - e:cr (R - R ) ·+ k dT = 0 .(2.10)
n s s * dy

Equation 2.10 represents a general surface boundary condition

for linear heat flow. For small temperature ranges h is approximately
constant for constant wind speed. During the day R* ~ Rs and during
17
a cold clear night Kreith suggests R* ~ 228°K.

(c) Internal Interface

The nett heat-flux across an interface between layers of different

materials within a body must be continuous. Thus at the ith interface:

(2.11)

ClT. ClT.J.+ l
l.
where ay, Cly
represent temperature gradients taken at the
interface of the ith and (i + l)th layer respectively as shown in
Fig. 2. 2.

Layer
j-2
Ka1
I~
j-1 av
j+1
j+2 v - ~+1ali+1
av
Layer i+1

t:
<:]

FIG. 2.2 HEAT-FLOW AT INTERFACE BETWEEN DIFFERENT

MATERIALS
 26

2.3 NUMERICAL SOLUTION PROCEDURE FOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS

19
A numerical method, similar to that reported by Hunt and Cooke but
inox.e extensive in scope will be described. Initial temperatures
within the structure are assumed to be known, and the solution progresses
in time in a stepwise fashion.

Equations 2.2, 2.10 and 2.11 can be solved numerically by

. ·
s ub s t 1tut1ng stan d ar d f'1n1· t e d'1 ff erence approxima · t'1ves 75 •
· t'ions f or th e deriva
A body is divided into layers of different materials and each layer is
divided into a number of equal increments with nodes located at the
junction of increments as shown in Fig. 2.1 and 2.2. Individual layers
can have different node spacings. An equation relating the temperatures
at a node with the temperatures of adjacent nodes will be written for
each node. Thus if there are n nodes, then there will be n
simultaneous equations for each time step, and hence a solution can be
obtained.

(a) Top Surface Node On Solid/Air Boundary

From equation 2.10, an equation relating the temperature at node
one (Fig. 2.1) can be written:

4T2 -· T - 3Tl
4 4 3
a I - h (T - T ) - 8 a (R - R ) + kl ( ) = 0 ( 2 .12)
n 1 1 s s * 21\
where Ti = temperatur~ at node i etc.

(b) Bottom Surface Node On Solid/Air Boundary

If there are n nodes and m layers in the body, then from
equation 2. 10 :

- h
m
(T - T )
n s
+ k
m
0 ( 2 .13)
m

(c) Node at Interior Interface

If node j is at the ith interface, then from equation 2.11
and Fig. 2 • 2 :
(T. + 3T, - 4T. ) (4T. l - 3T, - T. )
J- 2 J J- 1 J+ J J+ 2
ki 2/::,,, = ki+l 2/::,, (2.14)
1 i+l

(d) Interior Node

If node i in layer j is not on an interface, then from
equation 2. 2 :
 27

k.
J
2/:,. 2
j
+ TP.] . - l - 2TP.]. })
C.P.
+ Q.]. _L_J_ (T. -
/:,.t ].
TP.)
].
= 0 (2.15)

where TP.
1
= known temperature at node i at the beginning of the
time increment, etc.
/:,.t = time increment.

'
Equation 2 • 15 uses th e k ' 1.son 75 imp
cran·-Nico ' l'1c1' t sch eme to

approximate the derivatives with respect to time, which is unconditionally

18
stable. Emerson used similar finite difference equations to equations
2.12 - 2.13 for a single layer analysis, but used an explicit approximation
for equation 2.15 which is stable only when

1
<
2

2.4 DETERMINATION OF HEAT-OF-HYDRATION LIBERATION RATES

The .reaction of cement with water is exothermic and liberates

sufficient heat to induce temperature strains and stresses of significant
magnitude. The amount of heat liberated is a simple additive function of
2
the compound composition of cement .
55
Lea presents a detailed description of the methods used for
measuring the heat-of-hydration, and found the two most suitable measuring
techniques for a 28 day period were:
(1) Heat of Solution technique.
(2) Adiabatic Calorimeter technique.
Technique one is cumbersome and error-prone, but is perf9rmed at
a constant temperature. Technique two is simpler, but the temperature
progressively rises throughout the test. Thus because the rate of heat
generation increases w~th temperature, the two techniques do not produce
the same information.
The temperature solution procedure described in Section 2.3
requires that the rate of heat-of-hydration liberation be known at all
times at all locations on· the heat-flowline. A method is developed
 28

below to provide this information based on the following two assumptions:

(1) The rate of heat generation for a particular concrete element

at any instant is uniquely defined by the temperature of the concrete
and the quantity of heat already generated by the element.

(2) The 28-day heat generation of the element is independent of

the temperatures experienced by the element. For typical concrete
temperatures this assumption is well supported by experimental data.

Based on these assumptions, analysis of the general heat-generation

problem requires knowledge of the variation of heat-of-hydration with
time for concrete at different constant temperatures, as graphed in
Fig. 2.3(a), and the total heat-of-hydration released by each element of

~
:J

gHB
"'""'
§Ho
"\
Detail A
He

'-
Q)
n..Hc Different
Temperatures
"'0Q)""'
I
Detail A
28 Days
Log (time)
(A) Rates Of Heat-Of-Hydration Liberation (B) Element Of Curve

FIG. 2.3 HEAT-OF-HYDRATION OF CONCRETE AT CONSTANT

TEMPERATURES

concrete at a given time. The former data will be available from Heat-
of-Solution tests, or can be synthesized from adiabatic tests, as
described later. The latter is readily available if the analysis is
proceeding in a stepwise fashion; total energy release can be
accumulated analytically.
 29

With this information and the assumptions made above, the method
involves, for a given element, locating the element temperature : heat-of-
hydration point on the constant temperature hydration curves as shown in
Fig. 2.3(a) (point B) and estimating the amount of heat generated during
a particular time interval ~t by interpolating from the two adjacent
curves. Thus for an element with temperature TB and accumulated
heat release per unit volume HB , if there was H. and
1
emitted from curves i and i+l respectively, during time interval
~t with initial ordinate HB , then the value of Q in equation 2 .15
can be found from

Q = (2 .16)

An estimate of ~. on curve i can be found from equation

1
2.17 using the nomenclature of Fig. 2.3(b) :

t. + ~t
~H. S. B log ( iB ) (2.17)
1 1 e tiB

Note that assumption (1) above implies that the time ordinate
in Fig. 2.3(a) has no significance to the problem, since the curves
apply to constant temperature conditions, whereas temperature of the
concrete element is varying in some complex fashion with time.

So far only assumption (1) has been used, and if the Heat-of-
Hydration curves can be supplied for various temperatures by the
Heat-of-Solution or similar technique, this is all that is required.
In practice constant temperature heat-of-hydration curves are difficult
to obtain. Consequently a method was developed for formulating the
curves from the adiabatic temperature rises for various placing
temperatures, such as shown in Fig. 2.4(a) for Type 1 cement concrete
.
as presented b y ACI Connnittee 20 763 •

(1) The curves are replaced by a series of short straight lines

of constant adiabatic temperature rise.

(2) The slope of each line and the temperature range (expressed
as a percentage of _the 28 day temperature rise) are extracted. For a
typical segment AB, shown in Fig. 2.4(b), the slope S and temperature
0
range can be found from equation 2 .18 - 2 .19 for a mean temperature
 30

(.)
0

w 3
(/)
..... TYPE 1 CEMENT (2'23 kg/m l Placing Temperature
0::
40
~
::>
I-
<(
a::
~
L
w 20
1-
Temperatures
(.)
......
I-
<!
co
<!
0<( o--.. . . . __.~_.___.~__.~~~--'-~~_,

2 3 4 7 14 28 t1 t2
TIME (DAYS)
LOG TIME
(A) Various Placing Temperatures
(Bl Single Placing Temperature
(After ACI Committee 207 63 )

FIG. 2.4 CONCRETE ADIABATIC TEMPERATURE/TIME

RELATIONSHIP
Tl + T2
T=T+---
m o 2

s0 = (2.18)
log t2/t
e 1

100 Tl 100 T
2
Range = to (2.19)
T28 T28

(3) The results from equations 2.18 and 2.19 are factored by the
concrete specific heat and density and stored in a tabular form. The
factored slopes R to R SH and range are now in terms of heat
1 2
emmission of the concrete per unit volwne.

(4) The graphs in Fig. 2.3(a) can now be constructed as a series

of short straight lines as follows: Assume the curve for a mean
temperature T.
J_
has been constructed up to point C as shown in Fig. 2.3(a).
For a mean temperature T.J_ ' a lower range heat emmission R
1
= H
c
is
 31

selected from tabulated results from (3) above. Segment CD is now drawn
using tl\e appropriate slope SH up to the ordinate R •
2
A sample of constant concrete temperature heat-of-hydra~ion/time

curves as derived from Fig. 2.4(a) is shown in Fig. 2.5. This graph
has been constructed as described above, except that the ordina'tes have
been divided by the 28 day heat-of-hydration, and thus can be used for

100

90

.u 80
Ul
....,
... 70
"'
:i
d
:i 60
ti)

.,,>-
"O
50
ro

-.
N

-!!
40

30
c
0
....
"O
"''- 20
>-

--.,
J:

0 10

"'
::i:: 0
0•5 1•0 2·0 3·0 5•0 10·0 15·0 20·0 28-0

Log Time (·Days)

FIG. 2.5 TYPICAL RELATIVE HEAT-OF-HYDRATION CURVES

FOR CONCRETE AT DIFFERENT CONSTANT TEMPERATURES

any normal Type I cement concrete as it is independent of cement

content. The dotted portions of the curves were estimated only, as
the appropriate temperatures and heat-emission ranges were not covered
in Fig. 2.4(a).

2.5 EQUATIONS FOR STRESS ANALYSIS OF GENERAL SECTION

The temperatures, stresses and strains in a thermally and force

loaded section are inter~related in a complex manner as illustrated in
Fig. 2.6, and a direct analytical solution is in general impractical·.
 32

,. .fR~E.... SJ~IliS__

I n sol at ion t-1111~~

Temper at ur e ~~.......-
Unrestrained
& Ambient Rise Thermal
ffects Strains

Heat-of- ~M Element Unrestrained

Hydration Temperature Creep Strains

---

Previous Unrestrained
Stress Shrinkage
History Mais ture Loss ________
Strains _.

Total
Stresses
RESTRAINT
(1) Bernoulli - Navier Hypothesis
Incremental (2) Flexural Restraint
Stresses (JJ Axial Restraint

FIG. 2.6 INTERACTION OF TEMPERATURE : STRESS : STRAIN

ON ELEMENT DURING TIME INCREMENT

Equations for an incremental time-step solution procedure for stresses

in a general section (Fig. 2.7) will be developed based on the following
assumptions:
(1) The Bernoulli-Navier assumption that plane sections remain
plane after bending is valid.
(2) Material properties are independent of temperature,
(3) Materials have a linear stress-strain curve, and the Principle
of Superposition holds.
(4) The section analysed is at a sufficient distance from a free
end for end effects to be insignificant.
(5) The transverse and longitudinal response can be decoupled.
 33
y

._.__ _..,_ Stn~ss­

Induced Strains

.'

~·
••
• . . 1·
I•
' •1
•

l•
I

.
'

General Section lB) Strain Profiles Section AA

FIG. 2.7 GENERAL SECTION SUBJECTED TO INCREMENTAL

FREE STRAINS

During a time interval (lit) a point ·. P (x,y) on the general

section shown in Fig. 2.7 will be subjected to a change in unrestrained
compressive strain llE(x,y) given by

llE(x,y) = llc(x,y) + llS(x,y) - a(x,y)llT(x,y) (2. 20)

where a(x,y) =material coefficient of thermal expansion at P(x,y)

llT(x,y) =temperature increase during lit at P (x,y)
lls (x,y) =shrinkage shortening strain developed at P(x,y) during
lit
lie (x,y) =creep shortening strain developed at P (x,y) during lit

The compressive stress to remove strain llE(x,y) at P(x,y)

llf(x,y) = -llE(x,y) E(x,y) (2 .21)

where E(x,y) =material elastic modulus at P(x,y).

The height to the section centroid can be expressed

I
A y E (x, y) dA

y =
f
A E (x,y)dA
(2.22)

A --
where··
J integration over full section area.

The axial force (L':IF) at the centroid of the section, and the
moment (L':IM) to fully restrain the incremental strains on the section
 34

during time interval 6t can be found from integration of equation 2.21:

6F = f A 6f (x,y) dA (2.23)

ill!! = f A 6f (x,y) (y - y)dA (2.24)

If during time interval 6t , an incremental force and moment of

magnitude ill!! 6P and
respectively are applied to the section, then
e
the out of balance axial force l:lE' and moment ill!! will respectively
0 0
be:

6F
0
= 6F - 6p (2 .25)

(2.26)

The incremental stresses 6f. (x,y) at point P(x,y) developed

l.
during time interval 6t can be found from

6F E(x,y) f'iM E(x,y)y

0 0
6f. (x,y) 6f(x,y) - ( 2. 27)
l. A 2
f A E(x,y)dA
f (y-y) E(x,y)dA

The magnitude of the incremental concrete stresses in equation

2.27 is dependent upon the material elastic modulus, which varies
rapidly with time for concrete soon after pouring. A general formula
for concrete elastic modulus E (t) at time t may be expressed :
c

E (t) = ( t )FNE (28) (2.28)

c FM+FLxt c

where E (28) = concrete 28 day modulus of elasticity

c
t concrete age (days)
FM,FL,FN constants.

76
For Type I cement the ACI Committee 209 recommend

f ' (t) = ( t ) r • (?8\ (2.29)

c l4.0 + 0.85tJ ~C ~ I

where f'
c
= concrete cylinder crushing strength.

Many design equations imply that the concrete elastic modulus is

77
proportional to If• . (e.g. E = 4734ff') • Thus from equations 2.28 -
c c c
2.29
 35

1
2
Ec(t) = (4.0 +t0.85t] Ec( 2 S) (2.30)

2.6 EQUATIONS FOR CONCRETE CREEP

The method of superposition for calculating creep strains will

78
be described. Fenwick found that this technique was more accurate
than the rate of creep technique, but tended to overestimate the creep
response to loads applied subsequent to initial loading. The method of
superposition assumes that each stress change upon an element generates
an independent strain/time relationship which for a particular concrete
cross section depends only upon temperature, humidity and age at loading.
Thus for each element the incremental stress change b,f, (x,y), given in
i
equation 2.27, can be used to generate an incremental creep strain within
that element for any future time step. A cumulative total of the creep
strain must therefore be maintained for each element at each time
increment.

A generalised equation for creep at 20°C based on the ACI Committee

76
209 Recommendations , with all the coefficients used in the equations
replaced by variables, may be expressed as

b,f, (x, y) tFA

C(x,y,t) = i (FI x x FC x t FD) (2. 31)
E(x,y,t) FB + tFA LA

where C(x,y,t) = concrete creep strain at P(x,y) due to

!:J.f. (x,y) at time t after loading
i

FI,FA,FB,FC,FD,FE,FF,FH,FJ,FK,FQ,FR = constants depending on

material properties and humidity, and explained further in Appendix C
with recommended values.
= concrete age at loading.
. . 10 11 12 13
Many investigators ' ' ' have found that concrete creep is
proportional to temperatures over the range 20 - 60 °c. A general
expression for creep at T°C may be written

(Creep)('l'oc) = (Creep)( C) x (1.0 + FE (T - 20) FF) (2.32)

200
11
A curve fit on data reported by Johansen and Best (Fig. 2.8)
provides

(Creep)(TOC) = (Creep)( 200 C) x (1.0 + 0.057 (T - 20)) (2.33)

 36

(/)
~ 3•01-----+----~i------;------r-
:§
~
e2·0 1-----------r-----i---
~

:.a
L
<{

g.1•01-------1---/
I

cu
L
l.)
0'------11--~~~-'--~~-'-~~~~--~~

-25 0 25 50
Temperature (°C)

FIG. 2.8 CREEP OF SEALED CONCRETE AS A PROPORTION

OF CREEP AT 20°C (AFTER JOHANSEN AND BEST11 )

From equations 2.31 and 2.32 the incremental creep strain

6C(x,y,t) in an element, which is at T°C, during the nth time
interval of duration 6t can be found from:
n

i::cn
6C(x,y,t) = (1.0 + FE(T - 20)FF) E (C(x,y,t. + 6t) - C(x,t,t.))
1 n 1
i=l

(2. 34)

2.7 EQUATIONS FOR CONCRETE SHRINKAGE

A general equation for shrinkage at 20°C, based on the ACI

76
Committee 209 Recommendations with the coefficients used in the
equations replaced by variables may be expressed as :

tFK
S(x,y,t) FH x - - - - (2.35)
FJ + tFK

S(x,y,t) = concrete shrinkage strain at P(x,y,t) at time t

after curing completed.

Heating increases the magnitude of shrinkage, as illustrated in

13
Fig. 2.9 from data presented by England and Ross • A generalised
expression for shrinkage at T°C may be written :
 37

U)

~ 400
())
CJ) --------10Q, °C
~ 200 -------soc 0
c
·c -------~go~
65 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Days from Heating

FIG. 2 .9 INFLUENCE OF TEMPERATURE ON SHRINKAGE OF TEST

CYLINDERS (305 x 114) (AFTER ENGLAND AND ROSs 13 )

(Shrinkage)T 0C = (Shrinkage) 200 c x (1.0 + FQ(T - 20)FR) (2.36)

A curve fitting at 60 days after thermal heating in Fig. 2.9

provides

' )l.66)
200 C (l.O + 0.003(T - 20
(Shrinkage)T 0C = (Shrinkage) (2 .37)

From equations 2.35 and 2.36 the incremental shrinkage

strain 6S(x,y,t) in an element, which is at T°C, during the nth
time interval of duration 6t can be found from:
n
i=n
FR
6S(x,y,t) = (1.0 + FQ(T - 20) ) ~ (S(x,y,t. + 6t) - (S(x,y,t.))
1 n 1
i=l
(2. 38)

Thus if a section is subjected to variable thermal and force

loading, an incremental solution procedure with respect to time enables
transient temperature distributions to be solved as described in
Sections 2.2 - 2.4, and transient stress distributions (including the
effects of creep and shrinkage) to be found using equations 2.20 - 2.38.
A computer program THERMAL was coded to perform these tasks.

2.8 COMPUTER PROGRAM THERMAL

A computer program THERMAL was written to analyse the thermal

stress, creep and shrinkage characteristics of multilayer, multiline
sections subjected to insolation and ambient conditions and heat-of-
hydration effects with a user-defined force loading history and degree
 38

of curvature restraint. Development of the program was based on the

equations presented in the previous sections, and was prompted by the
need of a tool for thermal stress prediction in bridge structures and
large concrete pours. The program listing, user manual and flowchart
are presented in Appendix c.
The program algorithmns allow section descriptions to be divided
into up to five parallel slices, with each slice subdivided into up to
10 different material layers (Fig. 2.10).

KEY

r
i~-,:;.·
i--~~~-.....,

~ ~:::: ~}
I

---f -
Crack Level,
p_
User defined

WI Vertical Increment
i ~ = d-~(TSTRES~
40 .

User - Defined (THERMAL)

FIG. 2.10 SUBDIVISION OF TYPICAL SECTION INTO

SLICES MATERIAL LAYERS AND INCREMENTS
FOR COMPUTER PROGRAMS THERMAL AND TSTRESS

Each layer is divided into increments with a current limit for the
total number of increments within the section set at 300. Each slice
is analysed separately but simultaneously as a heat-flow problem, but
slices are coupled together for stress analysis. The former is valid
if heat-flow is parallel in the slices, and allows complex sections
with different heat-flow characteristics within each slice (Fig. 2.1or
·to be analysed. However assumption (1) in Section 2.5 requires
the total section response to be considered simultaneously for stress
analysis.

2.8.l Temperature Analysis

The temperature analysis is solved by THERMAL using matrix solution

 39

techniques (in contrast to the iteration technique proposed by Hunt and

Cooke 19 ) • The finite difference equations 2 .12 - 2. 15 may be
surranarized by equation 2.39 as shown in Fig. 2.11:

[A] {T} {R} (2. 39)

where {T} column matrix of temperatures required at each nodal point

at the end of the time step.

Matrix [A] contains material properties, increment heights,

constants and heat transfer coefficients, and has a bandwidth of five
elements. Matrix {R} is a column matrix containing ambient data,
heat-of-hydration data, material properties, and nodal temperatures at
the beginning of the time step, and thus varies at each time step.
Formulations of matrices [A] and [R] are given in Fig. 2.11. If
the coefficients of heat transfer are constant for each time step, then
matrix [A] is constant throughout the problem, and THERMAL inverts
[A] only once per problem, and at each time increment the temperatures
are solved by matrix multiplication :

{T} = [A]-l {R} (2. 40)

The coefficient of surface heat transfer is a function of wind

speed as shown in Appendix E. Thus if variable wind speed if assumed,
the coefficients of surface heat transfer vary with respect to time
and thus matrix [A] varies at each time-step. For this problem THERMAL
obtains a solution at each time step by Gaussian Elimination rather than
inverting matrix [A] at each time step, for efficiency.

2.8.2 Stress Analysis

The stress analysis is based on equations 2.20 - 2.38. These

equations provide for different material properties and temperatures at
all points within the section. This generality was reduced in program
THERMAL, which was coded for solution in the following form :

(1) Embedded reinforcing steel could be defined at any number of

locations within the section. However its influence on the heat-flow
was ignored, and calculations were based on the assumption that the full
steel area was concentrated at the steel centroid.

(2) Material properties in any layer were assumed constant.

(3) The temperature in each increment was assumed a constant value

 2
[A] {T} {R} z.
i
= (~t.k.)/(p.c.~.
i i i i
)

MATRIX A MATRIX {T}

Top Node 3 + 2hl·1/kl , -4 . 1 .' ., ., ., etc I ( Tl ""

2nd Node -z
1
, 2 + 2z
1
I -z
1 .' ., ., .' I I T2

3rd Node . , -z
1 I 2 + 2z
1
-z1 ., ., .' I I T3

4th Node . , .' -z

1
2 + 2Zl , -zl ' ., .' T4

1st Interface . , .' kl~2 -4Kl ~2 3kl ~2 + 3k2'\ , 4K2~1 , K2~1 ' TS

Next Node

Etc.
. , • f ., -z 2 ' 2 + 2Z

etc.
2
-z
2
, .,
1 T6

etc.

MATRIX R

Top Node ( 2 (hl Ts + ain) ~l/kl

2nd Node I Q2~t/(p1Cl) + 2TP2 + Zl(TPl - 2TP2 + TP3)

3rd Node I Q3~t/(p1Cl) + 2TP3 + Zl(TP2 - 2TP3 + TP4)

t Q ~t/(p c )
4th Node
4 1 1 + 2TP
4
+ z (TP - 2TP + TP )
1 3 4 5
1st Interface I 0 , 0
Next Node I Q6~t( 2C2) + 2TP
6
+ z (TPS - 2TP + TP )
2 6 7
Etc. etc.

.i::.
0
FIG. 2.11 MATRIX FORMULATION FOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS
 41

equal to the average of the top and bottom boundary nodes, and the stress,
creep and shrinkage are assumed constant for each increment.

For a section of N slices, with the ith slice having p(i) material·
layers, and the kth layer in the ith slice having q(k,i) increments,
the above simplifications reduce equations 2.23 and 2.24 to:

i=N j=p (i) k=q(j ,i)

6.F = ~ ~ ~ 6.f(i,j,k) b(i,j) 6.(i,j) (2. 41)
.i=l j=l k=l

i=N j=p (i) k=q(j,i)

6.M = ~ ~ ~ 6.f ( i I j I k) (Y ( i I j I k) -y) b (i I j ) /:!,, ( i I j )
i=l j=l. k=l
(2.42)
where 6. (i , j ) = increment thickness in the jth layer of the
ith slice
y(i,j,k) = height of centre of kth increment in jth layer of
ith slice above the origin
b(i,j) = thickness of jth layer of the ith slice
6.f(i,j,k) stress in the kth increment in jth layer of
ith slice

Some sections experience a constant degree of flexural restraint,

due to the overall .geometry of indeterminacy. For a structure of
constant unrestrained curvature, typical values of the degree of
flexural restraint FEMFAC are 1.5 at the internal support of two span
bridges and 1.0 for internal spans of multispan bridges and at the
centreline of relatively thin pads resting on the ground. For a section
with no axial base restraints, from equation 2.24, the incremental
moment fil1 due to flexural restraint is :
e

6M = fil1 • FEMFAC (2.43)

e

If a structure is resting on a solid foundation, a degree of

axial restraint BASER of unrestrained axial movement due to foundation
63
resistance can be estimated • Assuming full flexural restraint,
from equation 2.23, the incremental moment 6.P due to base restraint.
is:

6F. BASER (2. 44)

 42

2.8.3 Simulating Cracking

52
Priestley and Thurston have shown that cracki.ng of a bridge
may significantly alter thermal stress distributions. Al though THERMAL
does not automatically assume cracki.ng if tensile stresses become
excessive, it can be simulated by res tarting the pr.ogram from the time ·
of cracking. A zero concrete strength is specified for the concrete
below the crack level, and the reduction in sectional flexural
restraining moment can be specified as an opposing external moment M
0
as :
I
M = (1 - c) (2.45)
0 - M* - I

where I = cracked section moment-of-inertia

c
I = uncracked section moment-of-inertia
M* = uncracked section flexural restraining moment.

2.8.4 Variation of Concrete Creep and Shrinkage Characteristics

Within Section

The same basic creep and shrinkage functions are coded to apply
to all the concrete within the section, although concrete initial age
is specified for each layer. However the magnitude of the unrestrained
creep and shrinkage strains are multiplied by user-specified factors
for each layer. Thus a user can adjust the scale of the creep and
shrinkage functions for any layer depending on the concrete properties,
and local material thickness and humidity. This approach corresponds
76
with the ACI Committee 209 Recommendations and differs from the
79
CEB-FIP method which provides different shaped shrinkage and creep
curves for different section thicknesses.

2.8.5 Program Output

Program THERMAL echo prints all input data. A printout of

temperature at all nodes, material stresses midway between nodes,
section flexural moment, axial force, bottom strain and curvature are
provided at each time step. Temperature and stress profiles may also
be plotted at user-seiected times. Section area, centroid location
and moment-of-inertia are provided, and final total heat-emission at
nodes is printed.
 43

CHAPTER 3
VERIFICATION AND APPLICATION OF COMPUTER
PROGRAM THERMAL

Sununary

Theoretical and experimental structural responses are compared with

predictions from THERMAL for the following cases:
(1) Temperature distribili.tions in box-girder bridges from heating due
to cement hydration, and from ambient plus insolation heating;
(2) Thermal stresses and deflections in a model prestressed concrete
beam due to transient temperature distributions;
(3) Deflections and stresses in reinforced and prestressed concrete
beams under the influence of a steady-state temperature distribution with
creep and shrinkage effects included;
(4) Stress redistribution in a prestressed concrete box-girder
section due to differential creep and shrinkage;
(5) Temperatures and stress-induced strains in a large foundation
pad and a strong-floor due to heat-of-hydration effects.

3.1 INTRODUCTION

A selection of problems covering the capabilities of THERMAL will

be analysed, and the results compared with other analytical and
experimental results. The formula for concrete creep, shrinkage and
strength gain, where applicable, are taken from equations 2.30 - 2.37
as described in Chapter 2. Unless specified otherwise, the coefficients
used in these equations are those suggested in Sections 2.6 and 2.7.

3.2 COMPARISON OF PREDICTED COOLING OF BRIDGE SECTIONS USING

ONE-DIMENSIONAL AND '!WO-DIMENSIONAL HEAT-FLOW MODELS

Typical T-beam and box-girder bridge sections, constructed with

two pours and still clad in the plywood formwork into which they were
cast, are shown in Fig. 3.1. To compare the predicted coollng
temperatures from a two-dimensional heat-flow model, as obtained by
Buekl e 80 using
• •
Lanigan I
s 6 f inite
• • e 1ement compu t er program, wi• th
predictions from THERMAL (one-dimensional heat-flow model) the fresh
concrete is initially assumed to be heated to 45°C £rom heat-of-hydration
effects, and the old concrete is assumed to be at 20°C. The junction
 ~ 0
I/)
N

EffY~ff~~-~, 0
0
I/)

0
Q
f-500

g.:!_
0 -~B
- 01
'
A~
'' .. c
"o/ e.§.

!
E 50 50

·l\;
Old Concrete at 20°C
.
~
100 100
\
'I .. .
...
0 '
··.~ Beam 't
0 ....
\ "
'
:i., /
Beam 't_

-·
u Fresh Concrete at 45°C 50 50 ·\
.s •. ~ ___.,.., A ----..:. '(

"
SI
.xi
.c
150 lea l 4 Hou••

200
150 I bl 10 Hau••

200
I
I
I
I -:
- 20mm thick wood form work
THERMAL (VERTICAL
HEAT FLOW l
~
]:

CD
.c
100

150
A
(al 4 Hours
.,i \
;.

•}•I
Above
All
100

150
(bl 18 Haurs \
•;
.~
. •\

~
All Cell
\
A~

Flon9e : Coll Flange'- ; \

~ 250 :~50 _, THERMAL lHORIZONTALl 0. 200 ·--~' ,_ 1 200 ____, ..
0 Z70 270
0 I HEAT FLOW l a 220 - 220
20 25 30 35 40 45 20 22 24 26 26 30 20 25 30 35 40 45 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Temperature (°C) Temperature {°C) Two Dimensions Tomporoluro (°C) lllmperoluro t 0 c J
Temperature Profiles in T- Beam Flange Temperature Profiles in Box - Girder Deck Slob
~ Anolys~~ ofter
}
• _ - - -\ Buckle
2400 2400
11:::1
1

B~j~
E 2000 2000
1()00 ~
~-:::·~ 0
ct. 1600 1600
<t_
~ 16
:i, .. "' 750 750j ,,. Beam

~:;::Ii
• •.• •• <t
....•. ·
500! (o l 4 Hours 500<1 (b) 16 Hours .
~
>
,.
0
1200 (o l 4 Hours

800
B
12001

600
Hours
B

,'",.:.:-: ~ 250 250 <t

~:·:·~: ·;'
:~.·.· r % 400 400
o-._~~~~~~~~ O'--~~~~~~~-
20 25 30 35 40 45 20 22 24 26 26 30 ::.··~Ix 0 ---- ·-
Temperature (°C) Temperature {°C ) 25 30 35 40 45 20 25 30 35 40 45
Temperature Profiles in T-Beom Spine Tomporaturo !°C l l Tomporoturo !°C
Temperature Profiles in Box - Girder Web
for: war~ I FIOllQO s~ Spine forth work

t ~II Soffil Slob Web form work Web form work

~
u

!
30,

24R
~ 25;
e 24
I ~0 1 ir- ~ 4-;t~I·
-: ·it- .
20 23 ! .
~ Z3 2 39
ie
26~
22 21.3
I
25 • 22
~
"'
N
( o l Section E ( b) Soc lion F e 2ol------------
~
21
{!
34
N Temperature Profiles in T- Beam at 18 Hours
(a I Soct;on C (II l Socr;on D

Temperature Prafies in Box- Girder at 16 Hours

,,,.,,..
FIG.3.1 COOLING OF BRIDGE SECTIONS HEATED FROM CEMENT HYDRATION
 45

80
temperature was assumed to be at 45°C in Buckle 1 s simulation.
However it was found that the sharp temperature change from 45°C to
20°c caused local perturbations with the simulation using THERMAL,
and consequently the initial temperature gradient was smoothed over
a length of 12.5 mm on either side of the fresh/old concrete junction.
80
The finite element mesh used by Buckle , together with material
properties, is shown in Fig. 3.2. The air temperatures throughout the
6
simulatioµs was put to 20°C, and solar radiation to zero. Lanigan 1 s
program computes and prints the heat losses from surface nodes from
radiative and convective power laws. An effective instantaneous
surface heat transfer coefficient can be calculated from equation 3.1,
and was found to vary at each node at each timestep

q(n,t)
H(n~t) (3.1)
6t.6T

where H(n,t) = surface heat transfer coefficient at node n time t

6t = time step
q(n,t) heat loss per unit area at surface node n during
time interval 6t
6T = temperature difference between node and air shade
temperature

It was found that the surface heat transfer coefficients

calculated from equation 3.1 varied by a maximum of 14% from a mean
2 2
of 9.4W/m /°C for nodes on the deck top surface, 7.5 W/m /°C for
2
nodes on the bottom of the flange and 8.33 W/m /°C for nodes on the
flange edges. These mean values were used as heat transfer
coefficients for the simulation using THERMAL. The T-beam was
analysed at two vertical lines (section Bandt in Fig. 3.2) and the
box-girder at three vertical line~ (A,B, and tin Fig. 3.2) using
program THERMAL, with 20 nodes used in the fresh concrete, 24 in
the old concrete and 5 in the formwork. As with Buckle's simulation
the air in the box-girder cell was assumed to be merely a conducting
material, with radiative and convective effects within the cell being·
ignored.
The two-dimensional solution for the T-beam was performed by
80
Buekl.~ on th e University
• ' o f Aue kl an d I s B6700 computer, an d required
'
1200 seconds processing time to complete 33 60-minute time steps.
 46

£
I
@©
---
®
I

·•

\
: •.' . . ·.. ·.·:: .. .·.·. ..... . . ··'·· .. ... \ • • r ,'' ' ··.· ,.,, . . .

\
®
- -~ KEY

~
Cons;;rite Material
Property Concrete Wood Air
Wood
0 Conductivity J/rn/sf°C 1.396 0.140 0.026
0 Air Specific Heat J/kg/•c 921
0 1423 1004
Density kg/m 3 2400 592 1.28

Materiai Properties

'
Note: Program triangulates rectangular elements

. . ....
.· .. ·.· .. •,·,.

(Al T - Beam

"
0,.,0,..0,..0 ... 0 o,..o ... o,..o 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0, I
0 0 0
0 0

0
0

0
0

0 0
0
I
0 0 0
@
0
"
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 0 •

0 0.

to 0 0 ;
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 C) •

l--~-4-~~-1----"--"1---"-+--o~-.-F-o-+.,.H.-+--+--+--+--+-++.I~
" 0

0
~
0
qJ)
0 0
0 • fO •••
• 0
"
0 0 0 i
lo 0 .
0 0
0 0 0'
0 0 • lo lo
0 0 c:
0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0

I
I
e
{B) Box Girder

FIG,3.2 FINITE ELEMENT r,EsH AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR BRIDGE SECTION COOLING
(AFTER BUCKLES )
 47

For comparison, the analysis using THERMAL on the University of

Canterbury B6700 computer required 32 seconds processi_ng time to
complete 66 30-minute time steps.
1

A comparison of the predicted vertical temperature profiles in

the deck slabs and webs of the bridge sections from the two simulations
is shown in Fig. 3.1. Selected horizontal profiles are also shown.
It can be seen that both simulations predict similar temperature
profiles for flange sections well away from the ends of the flange.
Heat-flow is essentially vertical at these sections, and the agreement
indicates that the selected heat transfer coefficients used for the
THERMAL simulations were representative of the effective heat transfer
6
coefficients used in Lanigan 1 s program, It can be seen that the two-
dimensional solution predicts a moderate temperature drop at the flange/
formwork junction, and a small temperature drop at the fla.nge/spine
junction. The predicted temperatures in the flange above the air cell
are larger than those in the cantilevered flange.
A one-dimensional vertical heat-flow analysis overestimates the
temperatures in the webs of the bridges, as it does not model horizontal
heat losses. This is particularly evident near the mid-height of the
box-girder web, where virtually no temperature drop is predicted. Thus
a vertical heat-flow would predict temperatures close to the adiabatic
temperature rise for this region in fresh concrete soon after pouring.
A close approximation to temperatures in this region can be obtained
from a one-dimensional horizontal heat flow analysis, as can be seen
in Fig. 3.1 (20 nodes were used in the concrete and five in each
formwork section). The temperatures predicted by
the vertical heat-flow model are close to the predictions from Lanigan's
program near the top and bottom of the box-girder section. Thus a
combination of results using linear horizontal and vertical heat-flow
provides good agreement with results from a two-dimensional analysis.

3.3 COMPARISON OF AMBIENT HEATING OF TWO BRIDGE SECTIONS WITH

ONE-DIMENSIONAL AND TWO-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS

In the previous example the highest temperatures occurred near

the mid-height of the box-girder web, and heat-flow in this region
was essentially horizontal. However with heating mainly from
insoiation, the maximum temperatures will occur in the deck slab,
and it is expected that heat flow will be essentially vertical.
 48

This hypothesis was studied by compari_ng measured temperatures on two

bridge prototypes with predictions from a one- and two-dimensional
heat-flow analysis.

Lanigan et a1 81 compare temperature predictions in two box-

girder bridges with results from a two-dimensional finite element
•
heat-flow analysis •
using •
Lanigan I
s 6 program. · Details of meteorol_ogical
6 81
conditions are reported by Lanigan The reported structural
details, finite element mesh and assumed material properties are
presented in Fig. 3.3. Results from a one-dimensional heat-flow
simulation using program THERMAL are compared with results reported
81
by Lanigan et al in Figs. 3. 4 - 3. 6. The time history of solar
radiation, ambient temperatures and wind speed are also presented in
Figs. 3.4 and 3.5. The material properties assumed in the simulations
by THERMAL are shown in Fig. 3.3, and the surface heat transfer
coefficients were derived from the wind speeds as shown in Appendix E.
The initial temperatures were equated to the measured temperatures, and
. . 6
th e same surface absorptivity of 0.9 as assumed b y Lanigan
. was use d .
For each section, the simulation by THERMAL used 20 nodes for each of
the concrete layers (labelled 1 and 2 in Fig. 3.3), and 10 nodes for
the blacktop layer (labelled 4) and also for the air within the cell
(labelled 3 in Fig. 3.3).

From Fig. 3 .4 - 3 .6 it can be seen that agreement for temperature

predictions between the theoretical analysis and measurements is good,
especially for maximum deck temperatures. The agreement appears
marginally better · than Lanigan obtained probably due to the greater
number of nodes in the vertical direction within the deck 9lab.
Note that because of the aspect ratio limitations of the finite element
method, an increase in the number of vertical nodes requires a great
increase in the number of elements, and an even greater increase in
the cost of analysis. The agreement demonstrated justifies using a
linear heat-flow model, rather than the more sophisticated two-dimensional
model for this type of problem.
The measured maximum deck temperature above the air cell was
slightly greater than predicted by both analysis for both bridges.
6
Lanigan attributed the difference to experimental error. The
experimental temperature rise of the soffit below the air cell was
slightly larger than theroetically predicted. It is considered that
 4'!

-..aq>l\alhc cOl'otf91•-ft""' 3EI ll'lt<~- 1199"" ti f l l l i l t - " ' ~

. .............__ 1':.93.?'----'------·---"1
I ·~ 1?1 i--L;
·_:.: :, ·''EG.Jtor;:~
I
,.......,,,"
....... ......
........,,.,,
hul cttcN< hd lJ,
lll'ld IWtd With-. N
'""'"'' '""''"'~·
lltfl'l&H

! 1 "'~ 6 ck; I
e.n 111...t Url<ltO-IJPJ... l c........t""'

ll<Jil·n Jloll • c ltcltd liqutws roltt to mat1<ial

...u...........
,.....,... w.
" fnlt1 as trsttd in Tablt
lelt Slrett lrldot - dtlallt ti Dl•trlbvtlon ol 0111""'' proptrtlff
ln•i1•11
'IMI eflfftlftt ldNlluUon

THERMAL PROPERTIES FOR MATERIALS IN NCWMARl<ET VIADUCT ANO

BELL STREET BRIDGE

.,.,..
t.hllflll
f\llmbtr
U1lttl1I
lh4Ufl'lll
conducll•ltf
W/("''CI
01n11!1
•aim• ....,
Spoelhc
J/(llo •Cl
1 Concrete 1.39 2.340 920
2 ·Concrete 1.74 2.4~0 1000
3 Air 0.028 1.23 1000
4 Hot ml• 0.74 2.580 840

Ul'\lfOl"'f'IUI "'Out

flement onol)ISIS I I I
I11277·~~-------------
(0h'f'f(ltW'f .,.., '11dtlfl'f9 IO'litff/Q••Pll

....
~==~=::::::~t-='-=~----~4_4_19_ ---i
..... , hut cond11<t.-d b-f',
'""td
..
and Wlh·n TM
(ot'<ffff #\4 ""''"""
..., ""111

381 127 •• 381

i:. -=~ . .~· · . . . . . ..

Dl1gr1rnrn1lh: hilt b•l•nc•

~. circltd l•guru ,.,., to m1l1rr1l typn 11

litltd in Tablt ·
Dltlrlbvtlon or lf'ltrmtl 1NOPOrtl11

FIG.3.3 FINITE ELEMENT MESH, MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND SECTION DIMENSIONS FOR TWO BRIDGE
SECTIONS (AFTER LANIGAN61
 50

50

50 45

45
... ~
40

~ 40 35
. ' ~
2 30
e.,
0. 25
E
~ 20

15

10 ~-~_ _____._ _ _ _ _.l.___-.----l----.l. -- _.__. _ _l________J,__ _ _ ~

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 18002000 2200 2400 0 200 400 600 BOO 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 20002200 2400
Time {hours) on 15/1 /71

(a) Locotion A (b) Location B

10

50

45 u
"[
45

40
Wind speed
'E"'
35~
0

~ 40
~
6
.,
-0
2
~
2
e
35

30
.
e
0.
30

25>
'"
0.
(/)

u
"
0.
E 25
-X---
• x K < E
~ 20~
c
3
~
20
15~~~~-~-~-~~~.~-~~-
ISL
10 -~
o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400
Time (tiours) on 15/l /71

le) Location C (d) Location D

1200
900
600 50~
300 45r
x . ~
501 40
45
u x
0
u 40 35
L !'!

.. .
!
~ 35~
2 30'
2 e
e 30l
I
"0.
E
25•
Ambrent Temperature
"E
0.
25 ~ 20·
~
20 15.

15 10'---~~-~-~

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1600 2000 2200 2400 0 200 400 600 BOO tOOO 1200 1400 1600 1800 2COO 2200 2400
Time (hours l on 15/ I I 71

(e) Location E ( t) Location F

KEY

Alter Lanigan 6

x Program THERMAL

- - Ex.perimentot Measurements

FIG.3.4 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL TEMPERATURE/TIME RESULTS (BELL ST.

BRIDGE)
 51

45 45

40 40

u 35 u 35
~ ~
;. x
30 >!-
e 30
e
2 2
e 25
)I. I( e
QJ
0. 20
)I I(
"• QJ
0. •
E E
~ ~
15 15

10 IO'----'~~--'---'-----''--~--'---'-----''--~-~__,
0 200 400 600 eoo 1000 1200 1400 1600 1000 2000 2200 2400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 18002000 2200 2400

(al Location A lb) Location B

45 45
8
40 40
u
~
35
~
35
'E"'
e 30 l<
~
u
2
e 2 "'"'
Q_

"'
0.
e
QJ
(/)

E 0. u
c
~ E
15 ~ 3
10~-~~-~-~-~-~-~~~~-~-~--'

o 200 400 600 eoo 1000 12.001400 1600 1000 2000 22002400 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400
Time {hOurs) on 20/ I I 70
l cl Location C (d l Location D

1200

Wtm 2 600
300
45r

~ 40 f
e! 35.
2
e
QJ
30·
0.
E 25L x
~
20~
I
15

10~-~~~~-~-~-~-~-~~~~-~--'

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 18002000 22002400
Time (hours) on 20 I I /70

le l Locot ion E

KEY

After Lanigan 6

~ Program THERMAL

- - Experimental Measurements E

Locations

FIG. 3.5 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL TEMPERATURE/TIME RESULTS (NEW

MARKET VIADUCT)
 52

2000
] •A KEY
--
0Ill
1500
•
x
Experimental R?sults
After L an1gan
. 6
~ 1000
0
.a Program THERMAL

-0
.c
~
OI
500

0
25 30. 35 40 45 50
Terrperature (OC)

FIG. 3.6 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL

WEB TEMPERATURE PROFILES (BELL ST. BRIDGE
AT 1600 HOURS ON 15/1/71)

this is due to radiation from the hot concrete above the air cell.

3. 4 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL STRESSES

AND DEFLECTIONS IN MODEL BEAM
20
Priestley presented detailed experimental results from thermal
tests on a quarter-scale prestressed concrete model of a simply
supported single-cell trapezoidal box-girder beam (Fig. 3.7). The

i--::1:-=7=-5--:--1-------1920------~-----
l .
=----949
J40.., ~ '!l ... ,
....
..
~
...> , ... . ~
-.. ... .. ""4 :- . • • ·, • ••• • • •A.'• ,~·. . ·<(.' "' ... , . . t'

. ,. .,, .. ·.. ~ ... ·.

89

l.O
-----1011----...t_ _ __.,...

FIG. 3.7 MODEL SECTION DIMENSIONS (AFTER PRIESTLEY 2 0)

 53

relative number of heating lamps switched on at any time is shown in

Fig. 3.8(e).but the radiation intensity was not measured. When the
lamps were switched off, fans cooled the bridge surface, creating an
air speed of 3m/sec.

Priestley's results were simulated usi_ng program THERMAL. Top

surface radiation intensity was adjusted (while maintaining the same
relative heating intensities shown in Fig. 3.S(e) until predicted and
measured surf ace temperatures showed agreement. A maximum absorbed
2
radiation intensity of 1850 W/m was used, and enabled an agreement
for temperatures within 3.5°C to be obtained at any gauge location
:for Priestley's test A on the model without any deck surfacing (Fig.
3 • 8 (f)) • '
Priest 1 ey I s 20 measure d va 1ues o f concre t e e 1 as t'ic mo d u 1 us
6
(23.45 GPa) and coefficient of thermal expansion (10.65 x l0- /°C)
were used. Other material properties assumed, _and the derivation of
surface heat transfer coefficients from wind speed, are presented in
Appendix E. The central thermal deflection ~t was derived from the
computed primary curvature ~t from:

~t (3.2)

where JI, = · distance between model supports = _7. 6 m .

Fig. 3.8 compares stress, temperature and deflection predictions

by THERMAL with measured results. It can be seen th.at good agreement
was obtained, especially for stresses in the soffit region and
deflections. Note that the total soffit thermal stresses in a
continuous uncracked beam is a function of only these two variables,
and thus it is likely that agreement between theoretical and experimental
soffit stresses in a flexurally restrained section would also be good.
The agreement for stresses at the deck surface was not as good as
obtained at the soffit, probably due to variation of surface temperature
and the experimental difficulty' of obtaining thermal compensation of
strain gauges at high temperatures. Experimental results plotted are
the average of many gauges which typipa.lly showed a scatter of ± 20%
from mean value.

In summary, comparisons in the previous three sections verify the

.ability of THERMAL to accurately predict temperatures and stresses in
bridge sections of complex geometry.
 54

KEY
• Experimental Results (After PRIESTLEY 20 l
- - Simulation From Program THERMAL
-1·0 6

-0·5 5
"E
g
4
O·O c
0

0·5
• :;::
<J
3 .
• QI
:;:::
QI 2
• 0 •
1·0 •
(!)
> 1-5
.......
·u; 0 45 90 135 180 45 90 135 180
Model Time (Min.)
~ Model Time (Min)

c (A) Soffit Bottom Stresses !DJ Central Deflection

0
(/)
(/)
(!)

a. -4·0
E
0
u -2·0

E
0-0 :J
0 .E
0.. x
0
6 2·0 2: 80
(/) 0
(!) 4·0 60
(/) I ~
!!...
... :~;
(/) le
:; 40 ~:.\':
,_
(1)
6·0 c.
....... c 20 ;_::::<~
(./)

(!)
.......
8·0
0 45 90 135 180
-
......

I
0
QI
... ~

0 ........ ,.......
6 12 18 24 6
:··· ... ·.
:"· '.,'
12 18 24
,_
(!)
Model Time (Min.) Model Time (Min.)
L)
c:
0 (B) Deck ToQ Stresses (E) Heat Input
u

-4·0

-3·0 ..
50
45
Deck To~
.. Web To~

-2·0 ..
•
• • •
•
u
~
QI
<I)
40
..
• • ii
.. • QI

-1·0 •
-
3
0
L.
QI
c.
O·O ~ !'>
i-
0
0·8 -5
0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180
Model Time (Min.) Model Time (Min) Model Time (Min.)

(C) Web Stresses (Level 219mm) (F) Tem12eratures

FIG. 3.8 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL STRESSES AND DEFLECTIONS
IN SIMPLY SUPPORTED MODEL BEAM
 55

3.5 CREEP EFFECTS ON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BEAMS UNDER

SUSTAINED TEMPERATURE CROSSFALL
82
Ross et a1 provide examples of the practical significance of
the increase in creep with temperature by subjecting uniformly
prestressed sealed concrete beams to long term temperature gradients,
and measuring the large deflection changes of the beam over a period
of time. The experimental results of two such tests are presented in
Fig. 3.9, with the authors' rate of creep solution based on an
experimental specific creep curve. (Specific creep was defined as the
creep per unit stress per degree celcius). A solution using this
specific creep curve can also be obtained from THERMAL, and the results
are also presented in Fig. 3.9.

It can be seen that deflection changes predicted by THERMAL are

82
close to those predicted by Ross .et al but are less than experimental
measurements. This may have been due to temperature enhanced shrinkage
which is difficult to completely eliminate in experiments, and to a
minor degree the reduction in concrete elastic modulus.
82
Ross et al measured large creep-induced reaction changes in
continuous prestressed concrete beams subjected to sustained temperature
crossfalls. They presented a direct method for calculating a limiting
steady-state stress distribution after completion of creep for flexurally
unrestrained and fully restrained sections, which together with the
initial stresses provided a bounding stress-range envelope. A solution
82
for the initial and steady-state stresses, based on Ross et al steady-
state theory, for a prestressed concrete section under the two restraint
conditions is provided in Fig. 3.10 (curves 1 and 2 respectively).
Stress predictions from program THERMAL at specified times are also
shown in Fig. 3.10 (curves 3,4 and 5).

From Fig. 3.10 it can be seen that the steady-state stress

distribution varies significantly from the initial stress distributions
for the fully restrained section, (variable section moment), while
changing relatively little from the initial stress distribution for a
section subjected to_ a constant moment. Program THERMAL predicts stress
distributions that vary between the initial condition towards the steady-
state distribution over a period of time, and at 400 days predicts over
half the stress change towards the steady state distribution. Doubling
the creep rate (curve 5) provides significantly increased stress changes.
At the specified temperatures in Fig. ·3.10, and with the assumed
 Key s6
'0-computed (THERMAL)
........_ Experimental Measurements
+ Calculated Ross et al 82
E
E 3
c 2 e - -O:i= -o- - e+- -o- - e .-:f6l
.Q
....-
u
Q)
1
------------------~\
;:;::: Heating
Q)
0
0
"O
I...
0 10 20 30 L.O 50 60 70 80
0 -1 Time Since Heating (Days)
3:
a.
::> 88°C
-2
. - - - - - - - - 6-9 Temperature
ij ;t'MPa Curve [755°C

(A) HEATING ONLY

r--Loading
E 2 + then Heating
E ,.......,.._...
$
Unloading

-
0

.,._
c
:;::;
u
Q)
1

0
. then Cooling
Time since Heating (Days) =1
Q) ~ 20 30 L.O 50 60 70 BO 90 ~
0
-1 --8-~ I
"O
I...
-G -+ -e _"'
~ -e
~1I
-~I

~a. -2
::> -3
L.·6kN L.·6kN
88°C
Temperature [ ]
Curve
55 °C

(B) HEATING PLUS VERTICAL LOAD

FIG. 3.9 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL

DEFLECTIONS OF PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BEAMS
UNDER SUSTAINED TEMPERATURE CROSSFALL
 1
.121 ..
1
80°C
Q\J;fi?
1
Q)
vi
0
IJ
Section Dimensions
8
N
I CZ.c
CV

vi
di Temperature Distn. ~
~

CD
Q)
Q) >
0
>
0 ..0
..0 Key <(
<(
CD Initial Stresses.
(2) Steady - State Stresses.
Q) Time = 2 days . Parameters
©Time = 400 days.
I I
/
I ,/I ® Double Creep. Time =400 days.
1. Axial force = 177·9 kN.
(Average 6·9 MPa )
I I
I
I

* -6;
2. o<c = 13·0 10 C.
0

I
I
3. Ec = 41 · 4 GPa .
I
I I
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 -8 - 6 -l, - 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Tension .. • • Compression Stresses (MPa) Tension ... e .. Compression Stresses (MPa)
(A) Fully Restrained Section ( B) Unrestrained Section
(Applied Moment =O·O) (Applied Moment =9·4 kNm) (J1
-..]

FIG. 3.10 THEORETICAL STRESSES IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

SECTION UNDER SUSTAINED TEMPERATURE CROSSFALL
 58

specific creep curve, concrete will tend towards but never reach the
steady-state stress distribution.

3. 6 CREEP AND SHRINKAGE IN REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS UNDER

SUSTAINED TEMPERATURE ·· CR0SSFALL

13
England and Ross presented test results which demonstrated the
time-dependence of steel stresses in flexurally restrained model
reinforced concrete beams, subjected to constant temperature gradients.
However because the major influence was shrinkage which tends to be
larger in small sections, and because the beams were very lightly
reinforced, the results cannot be easily extended to a typical prototype.
13
The theoretical results of England and Ross from a rate-of-creep
hand solution and experimental measurements a:t.e shown in Fig. 3 .11.
It can be seen that agreement is good. The steel stresses are critically
dependent on both a and (a - a ) in a beam subjected to both large
c c s
temperature gradients and a temperature increase at the steel level.
The values derived from calculations presented by the authors in Table 1
of their report were:

a = coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete 14.1 x 10-6/oc

c
6
a = coefficient of thermal expansion of steel 11. 7 x l0- /°C.
s
13
In Table 1 of their report England and Ross derived a crack
depth t;, = 51 mm for the unsealed beam on first heating. The strain
change in the section during this heating is shown in Fig. 3.12. By
equating the nett section compressive and tensile force, equation 3.3
can be written using the nomenclature of Fig. 3.12.

E + E
b(d - f;,)Ec (( 1 2)
- E) A E {E - E ) (3. 3)
2 s s 3

where E
c
= concrete elastic modulus specified = 34.5 GPa by England and
13
Ross
E final section strain change due to heating.

The solution of equation 3.3 provides a final section strain change

E =1114µE and a steel stress change
fs = (E - E )Es = 88.9 MPa.
3
However England and Ross plot a value of f = 58.8 MPa, as shown in
s
. Fig~ 3.11, which exactly coincides with experimental results at this
13
point. It appears tha.t England and Ross have chosen to restart their
iteration at the experimental results af~~r beam heating. Similar
 c100
d:
:E .Q
110~1 110°C
- ~ ..
~~
l/l ·~·.=:·,•=::
c 0 ['... ... : ::
l/l
QI
~ 50 1' ~ :>~+.
~ _i
I '
0, , _ -;-- - _J ~ C:Zs·c
-t
....
QI

VJ
QI
0
~.:~'k---~--~-r
Concrete section and temperature
distribution diagram

- .§
QI
VJ l/l
l/l
QI
50
. I
5_100 I
Key
E No Heating Heating ..
0
:.,, · No Heating
8 CD Experimental results
0 20 L.O 60 80 100 120 11.0 160 180 after England and Ross1 3
Days From Casting (1) Program THERMAL
(al UNSEALED BEAM ® No creep or shrinkage
© Top fibre concrete
~ stress • 10
:E c 100
- o·
l/l .iii x Calculated England and Ross13
m & 50
~t
QI
0
©--!/ /
I
N

ah~·1
~'=*
..-- N
U"l
1g9
, G7 ril
........
111.·c 111.s·c
o o
ii) § 50
.ffi I
~ 8L.C 73·5C
0-....
Concrete section and temperature
~100 No Heating Hea_!i_Qg_(ll___ Heatingjl) No Heating distribution diagram
E Sealed --Sealed Unsealed
8
0 20 L.0 60 80 100 120 11.0 160 180 200 220 240
Days From Casting

(bl INITIALLY SEALED BEAM

FIG. 3.11 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL STRESSES IN FlEXURAll Y RESTRAINED

REINFORCED CONCRETE SECTIONS UNDER SUSTAINED TEMPERATURE CROSSFAll 0'1
c.o
 60

€. 2 =94ol"c

~
b :102
E. 1 ·1
1· ·1 I
Free Thermal
Strains
c1 =67c£c
I Final Strain Profile
t'--.
N
...-
_ t2r9cl< ___ ~
As= 63mm 2
II Level
f I
~-
'U
w I
~1 ! t3
= 58c:{s
I
I
(A) Section (B) Section Strains

FIG. 3.12 STRAIN CHANGES ON REINFORCED CONCRETE

UNSEALED BEAM ON FIRST HEATING

conclusions apply to the sealed beam.

Solutions for the two beruns from program THERMAL have also been
plotted in Fig. 3.11. The crack depths were calculated from a
concrete flexural tensile strength of 3.4 MPa (as reported by England
13
and Ross ) and creep and shrinkage characteristics of the concrete
taken from curves presented by the authors. It can be seen that
program THERMAL adequately predicts the trends of the large stress
variations, and provides results close to those calculated by England
and Ross if the adjustments made by these a.uthors at the time of heating
is considered. Note that the stress increments on heating and cooling
used by THERMAL were based on the calculations above, rather than
starting from the experimental values, thus effectively offsetting the
results from THERMAL.

3. 7 CREEP AND SHRINKAGE STRESSES IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

BOX-GIRDER BRIDGES
78
Fenwick performed a method of superposition analysis of creep
and shrinkage stresses in the Wellington Street Underpass box-girder
76
bridge, based on the ACI Committee 209 Recommendations . section
dimensions and the initial stresses on the section after prestress
losses are shown in Fig. 3.13(a). The inside of the box-girder
 61

.
7.31
-
1Rentorcemont~
48·96 7.31
300

1~ 7·32
•
1·00 " • 7•03
•
•
6·54
5·97 5·68
~ ~
......
38f 5.54
5.97
......_~~~.

37·93 (R~nforcernent)
5·68
;,;;;,___ •
• 6·54
381-'---'
S.97

(A) Initial Stresses

4 6'42 6·42
. 7•83 • 7·88
Humidity . 6·93 • 10'68
Humidity
9Q 0/o • 6·93
6So/o
. 5·83 • 5·83

{B) Final Fenwick 78

um1.d'1t y •
• 8·43 (1·24) • !5·14! H 8·4 6 (1 ·24l
Humidity • 7·52 (0•84) 11·66 • (4•72) 90010 • 7·52 (084)
65°/o
• 6·4 7 (0·43) 1(}60 • (4·30) • 6•47 (0·43)
.._~~----

2·93 (-2·39) 125·9 (67·2) 2·93 1- 2·39)

(C) Final Stresses From THERMAL

Note: Stresses induced by shrinkage alone thus:- (-2·39)

Location F1 F2
Internal Webs 0·5467 0·2205
External Webs Q.6175 0·4594
Deck Slab Above Air Cell 0·7153 0·6022
Deck Slab Below Air Cell 0·7293 0·6225
Flange (203 Av.) 0·7852 0·7035
Flange (178 Av.) 0·7990 0·7252

(D) Factors For Differential Creep & Shrinkage

FIG. 3.13 THEORETICAL STRESSES IN WELLINGTON ST. UNDERPASS

BOX-GIRDER BRIDGE UNDER PRESTRESS, CREEP AND SHRINKAGE
 62

was assumed to have a relative humidity of 90% and the outside 65%,
and the relative humidity used for calculating creep.and shrinkage
values for each element was taken as the aver.age value existing on
each side of the element. The analysis made the Bernoulli-Navier
assumption that plane sections before bendi.ng remain plane, and used
a concrete elastic modulus of 30.6 MPa. No flexural restraint was
assumed.

A similar analysis was performed using program THERMAL, starting

from the same initial stress distribution. As shrinkage starts to act
on the structure at the end of the curing period (14 days) and prestress
and dead load were applied at 90 days, different creep factors are
required for the shrinkage and load effects. To allow for this the
section was first analysed for differential shrinkage effects and then
for creep effects under load. The final stresses were found by summing
2
the two cases. A reinforcing steel area of 10300 mm was used in both
top and bottom slabs. Based on the concrete properties listed by
78 76
Fenwick , from the ACI Committee 209 recommendations, the creep
factor ¢ and shrinkage £ can be expressed

t06 - 0.118
¢(t) 0.98 x 1.25 t.Q.a Fl ( 3. 4)
10 + t0.6

t'
£ (t) 744 F2 µ £ (3.5)
35 + t'

where t time after loading (days)

t.Q.a= age at loading (days)
t' = time after curing completed (days)
Fl , F2 = correction factors depending on humidity and element
thickness and are shown in Fig. 3.13.

The final stresses predicted by THERMAL are shown in Fig. 3.13,

with the stress changes from the shrinkage analysis alone shown in
brackets. It can be seen that although program THERMAL predicts
slightly more stress redistribution from the deck and soffit slabs to
the thicker webs, and slightly less redistribution to the reinforcing
78
steel than was found from Fenwick 1 s calculations, agreement is
nevertheless close.
 63

A weighted mean value <Pm of a general function <P over the

section may be defined:

1
=
A
J A <jJdA ( 3. 6)

where A = section area.

From Fig. 3.13 a weighted mean value of Fl, F2 and concrete

initial stress f of 0.689, 0.547 and 6.7 MPa respectively, can be
derived. Neglecting the restraining influence of the steel, a
shortening strain at the section centroid due to shrinkage and creep
£ for very large times after.loading can be written from equations
SC
3.4 and 3.5:

£ -1__ x 0.98 x 1.25 x 90-0.ll 8 x Fl + 0.000744F2 (3. 7)

SC E
c

where E
c
concrete elastic modulus = 30.6 GPa.

A steel strain of £ would produce a change in steel stress

SC
M
s

6f
S
= E
S
£
SC
(3. 8)

where E
s
= steel elastic modulus assumed = 200 GPa.

From equations 3.7 and 3.8, 103.l MPa. Because the 6f

s
restraining influence of section steel has been ignored 8,f represents
s
an upper bound for stress change in steel at the section centroid at
large times after loading. The mean stress change of the .top and bottom
78
steel would not be expected to exceed 6f Fenwick obtained
s
stress changes of 147.6 MPa and 119.3 MPa for the top and bottom steel
respectively, giving.an average of 133.5 MPa, and thus appears to have
overestimated the stress redistribution to the steel.

3.8 HEAT-OF-HYDRATION SIMULATIONS IN LARGE FOUNDATION POURS

During the summer 1975/76 two large foundation pads were poured
at the NAC Hangar Complex, Christchurch. Pad dimensions are shown
in Fig. 3.14. Approximately four days after pouring, the formwork
was removed, the sides of the pads backfilled with a sand/gravel
mixture, and the top surface covered with 300 mm of sand/gravel. In
 64

24 000

0
Location
0
w
('f) x Number
Z (mm)
\._t
L .·ti,.
. · . , ·' a.,,,
/J;,
-·
.. " .. c:J.,.,
z."A· ·. !'1
, ,., 1 3500
Pad Elevation
2 2950
-~
3 1890
I 9000 - 4 S70
0 I
0
0 -x s 145
"' 0
ff)
ff)
CD

Pad Plan

FIG. 3.14 LOCATION OF SOME RESISTANCE ELEMENTS IN

N.A.C. HANGAR FOUNDATION PAD TWO

order to check the ability of THERMAL to predict heat-of-hydration

temperatures and stresses, both pads were instrumented with temperature
and strain recording devices.

3.8.l Temperature Measurements

Pad temperatures were measured with Degussa ceramic resistance

elements with platinium windings using a digital multimeter sensitive to
0.1 ohm. The resistance elements were embedded in concrete cubes and
tied to the reinforcing cage (Fig. 3.lS). The manufacturer's
calibration data for the resistance elements was verified to within
O.S 0 c in the laboratory, by comparing thermometer and resistance
element temperatures for constantly stir#ed water, cooling over the
range 70°C to S°C. The lead wires used in Pad Two were 14/0 .2 mm
TWC POC. It was calculated that a 2S°C temperature rise from an
average embedded length of the leads used would induce an error of less
than 0.3°C in the recorded temperature. Although this error is small,
an effort was made to reduce it by embedding a dummy length of lead at
 65

FIG. 3 . 15 CERAMIC RESISTANCE ELEMENTS EMBEDDED IN

CONCRETE CUBES AND TIED TO REINFORCING
CAGE OF N.A.C. HANGAR FOUNDATION PADS

location 3 (Fig. 3.14) and the resistance change of this set of leads
was deducted from changes in the resistance element readings before
temperature reductions were made.

3.8.2 Assumptions from Temperature Simulations

A simulation of the temperatures in Pad Two was performed with

program THERMAL using a time increment of four hours and 50 nodes within
the concrete on a single vertical line . Ambient air temperatures, wind
speeds and solar radiation intensity over the period of simulation were
extracted from records collected at the Christchurch Airport Meteorological
Centre located approximately 1.5 km from the pad. The derivation of
surface heat transfer coefficients from the wind speeds, and the assumed
material properties are reported in Appendix A.
83
The cement manufacturer provided a value of 28 - day heat- of-
hydration of the cement at 21°C of 318 kj/kg±l0%, based on the Bogue
composition derived from an oxide analysis. The cement manufacturer
83
stated that the cement hydration characteristics were similar to
 66

A.S.T.M. Type II cement. Fig. 3.16 shows that the heat emission curve
for A.S.T.M. Type I cement is similar in shape to A.S.T.M. Type II
cement, and thus the graph presented in Fig. 2.5 for the influence of

_50
u
£.. TYPE fil
ru40
Ul
TYPE 1
a::
(I) 30 TYPE TI
t..
:::>
....... TYPE. lSL
~20
(I)
0..

~ 10
I-

0
1 2 3 4 7 28
Log Time (Days}

FIG. 3.16 ADIABATIC TEMPERATURE RISE OF A.S.T.M. CEMENTS

AFTER ACI COMMITTEE 20763)

temperatures on the shape of heat-of-hydration curves for Type I cement

may be used. The ordinates of the graph in Fig. 2.5 were converted to
heat generation per unit volume by factoring by H . Cc before being
28
fed into program THERMAL
where 28 day heat-of-hydration of cement = 318 kj/kg
3
cement content = 260 kg/m .

To simulate the thermal influence of the foundations, five metres

of sand and then an insulated boundary were assumed to lie beneath the
pad. Although the measured temperature of the concrete on arrival at
the site varied between 14°C and 18°C, the placing temperature was
assumed to be 12°C, as this was a fairly consistent value for measured
temperature about half an hour after the ceramic resistance elements·
had been covered with concrete. It was assumed that at this time 8% of
the 28-day heat-of-hydration had already been emitted. This was
calculated on the basis of the first hour of heat-of-hydration at 16°C.
57
Dunstan and Mitche11 found that placing temperature had an exaggerated
effect on heat-of-hydration induced temperature rise .. To study this
phenomenon a simulation with a placing temperature of 24°C was also performed.
 67

3.8.3 Simulation of Concrete Pour Over Significant Time Duration

In many problems involving heat-of-hydration influenced temperature

rises, a structure cannot be considered to be instantaneously cast.
Although different methods could be developed, the approach ad9pted in
this chapter is described below.

(a) Temperature analysis

(1) Divide structure up into P levels (the 22 hour continuous

concrete pour in the foundation pads was simulated by five equal
instantaneous pours).
(2) Calculate temperature response of the first level, over
the period between placing of the first and second pours, with the top
node exposed to ambient conditions as shown in Fig. 3.17(a).

Ambient
Conditions
•Tp
Pour •Tp Tp ::;: Concrete
Two Placing
•Tp Temperature
Ambient •Tp
Conditions
•Tn •Tn
• Tn-1 • Tn-1
Pour Pour
One One

• T1 •T1
(A) Structure & Calculated (B) New Structure & Specied
Temperatures - Time t1- Temperatures - Time t1+

FIG. 3.17 TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS OF POUR CAST IN LAYERS

(3) Adjust structure for extra nodes in the second level as

shown in Fig. 3.17(b). Specify initial temperatures as shown in Fig.
3.17(b) and the initial quantities of heat-of-hydration emitted at each
node. This data for the nodes in the first level is obtained from the
printout from THERMAL at the completion of (2) above.
 68

(4) Calculate temperature response of first two levels over

the period between placing of second and third powers.
(5) Consider same procedure until all pour levels simulated.

(b) Stress analysis

To allow continuous creep functions the following procedure

was adopted.
(1) Calculate temperature response of structure during
construction as discussed above.
(2) Simulate temperature and stress analysis of the complete
poured structure with the following procedures adhered to:
(a) The two nodal temperatures on either side of the poured
concrete are set to values from (1) above at each time step. This
ensures that the poured concrete retains the temperatures from (1) above.
For instance during the first pour period nodes T to T in
n- 2 n+ 2
Fig. 3.17(b) are set at each time step.
(b) Concrete in the upper layers is specified with an initial
negative age, such that at the time of pouring the age becomes positive.
(Program THERMAL assumes zero concrete strength and heat-of-hydration
emission for concrete with negative age, and thus effectively ignores
unpoured concrete.)

3.8.4 Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental Temperatures

Three temperature simulations were computed by program THERMAL,

to allow the influence of insulation by top surface sand and the placing
of concrete at a higher temperature to be examined. A comparison of
theoretical and experimental temperature time curves and temperature
profiles at selected times is shown in Fig. 3.18-3.22 for temperatures
along the vertical line in Pad Two shown in Fig. 3.14. The time origin
for the graphs is 12 midnight at the beginning of 21/1/76.

The experimental temperature time measurements shown in Figs.

3.18- 3.20 have been linked by straight lines. Because the concrete was
continuously placed over a 24 hour period, the temperatures recorded for
the bottom gauges show an earlier temperature rise than recorded for the
top gauge. All gauges show a smooth temperature development except at
location 5 (Fig. 3.18) which exhibited daily temperature oscillations
up t~ the time of top surface sand placement because it is close enough
to the top surface to reppond quickly to diurnal changes of ambient
conditions.
 69

GRAPH OF TEMPERATURE TIME HISTORIES

N.R.C. HANGAR COMPLEX. SPINE BERM PRO NO. 2
Ueo.----.~:_,.:...:._:...;:.....:._,_~-r-~r--.~-.~-,-~-r~r-~r--,~-,-~-.-~I
"

. " ...

15 t--t---t--

JOl---t--

FIG. 3.18 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL

'.I'EMPERATURE/TIME CURVES (PAD TWO)

It can be seen that curve 2, which simulated the actual top

surface sand placement and assumed that concrete was laid at 12°C, as
measured insitu, provided good agreement with experimental results •
The measurements showed a more rapid temperature decay at later times
near the top surface than was predicted by curve 2, which was attributed
to the cooling effect of rain water percolating through the top surface
sand.
A comparison between curves l and 2 at the top gauge location.
(Fig. 3.18) shows the insulating effect of top surface sand, which
dramatically reduces diurnal temperature fluctuations at this location,
and also reduces the temperature differential between the top and middle
gauge by 8°C, thus reducing the tendency for cracking to occur.
 70

GRRPH OF TEMPERATURE TIME HISTORIES

N.R.C. HANGAR COMPLEX. SPINE BERM PRO NO. 2
I I I

55 -' ' •1 '• ., ' --

'. •.. --...... Location.;.
•'
I I

'.:~
I
Cf)
W50
I
I '
'' " ,• 4
·~
', l!'l
O'.'. ' ~g
• '
I
I ''
~
lO '
I ' ('Y')
'
' '
f--45
' ... . .'
:-, I
~ ..•
~
' ' ~
CI ' ' '
' '
0'.'.40 '
w ,,,,,,..---
--- -- - <D-
,, , ,
Q_ / /"'" '"""'
~

~-
L:35
w
f--30
I
I ti
I/
-- -
~

~ r---
~
i---

~
--
--- -
I---
--
1-----<2)
- - -~ ~ r---
!/
c- - .

25 '-0
'3/

Symbol Top Surface Placing

20
Gravel? Temperature
!5 CD No 12°C ~~F--=~

• @ Yes 12°C
10 ® No 24°C
C4>. Exoerimental Results__
I
5

O0 50 I 00 150 ZOO 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

I 600 650 700 750 800
TIME CHOURS)

GRRPH OF TEMPERATURE TIME HISTORIES

N.R.C. HANGAR COMPLEX. SPINE BERM PRO NO. 2
---- -- - - -- - - - - --- -~:! ,. ..
. ,, ' '
55
--- -- --- -- ..................... 0 I I

k~-
Cf) ,' '. ·1 ~ Location.;. 3
Wso I
-- '0' ~

O'.'.
:J I
I
I
I "0

. ..
, ...
lD
(""')

. ... · ....
1 •
"--,
••
. . • ·I
f--45 '
~ ·. : " ..
4 .......
---
- - - - -........_
-
. •' J

~
I •4 ',
CI ~-- ~-
- I
/.
0'.'.40
w - -- --
AI>
~

' ~
..:::....:::...
- -i)
-..::::...::. ..: - - - ---1
I
Q_ I '
L:35
w
f--30 '
I
' 1· ----r-«:
25
!I
I fr'
!Symbol Top Surface Placing
Gravel? Temperature
15
I' CD No 12°C
IJ @ Yes 12°C
10 ® No 24°C
©• Experimental Results
5
.

O0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 80'.J
TIME CHOURS)

FIG. 3.19 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL TEMPERATUREfTIME CURVES (PAD TWO)
 71

GRAPH OF TEMPERATURE TIME HISTORIES

N.A.C. HANGAR COMPLEX. SPINE BEAM PAD NO. 2

(f)
55 "t',
.. ·'4 ••
•••
•...
t
I
Location.;. 2
I

. - - - .. - ----- --- '. ~

.V0
0
Wso
er ' -- --- - -- -- - .. --- --- -- \ 0 lJ°)
I
-· 0 CJ)
.
:J I
I
I

:i;
\D N
.. ".
f---45 I: ·.~.~
([ Q) ·' . ·~.

cr40
w
I

J~
I

Q_ I

-- - -
"' ---
I 7 - -~

L:35 ,.. 1
w I
J

/.
/
·4
t---30 I

25
!/
2.0
! Symbol Top Surf ace Placing
Gravel? Temperature
1
15 Q) No 12°C
• (i) Yes 12°C
10 @ No 24°C
©• Experimental Results
5

O0 50 100 150 2.00 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 BOO
TIME (HOURS)

GRAPH OF TEMPERATURE TIME HISTORIES

N.R.C. HANGAR COMPLEX. SPINE BERM PRO NO. 2
I I I
,.. ..... I I
.. '• . ... '
~ I ' \
i,Locc t ion -:- 1
'\ 0
I•
0 ... "V
;;
••. 'it
"-0 0
. --
......
\D lJ°)

'
I
-- -- - --- - - - - - - - - - ------· .
(T)

~
(T)

. - - - -- - --
I
I ' ,

Q)
I
I
I

i.,..A--:::e: ~- - -•
1
- - i---~ ... + '!;)
/.v~
I
I

25
'
I

,f
I

Symbol Top Surface Placing

20

15 1
! Q)
Gravel?
No
Temperature
12°C
b (i) Yes 12°C
10 @ No 24°C
©• Experimental Results
I
5

00 50 . . 100 150 2.00 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800
TIME CHOURS)

FIG, 3.20 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL TEMPERATURE/TIME CURVES (PAD TWO)
 ~1-_
---
l l I
I\ I
''
'
l I I
100 Hours
180 Hours
. '
'' !Symbol Top Surface Placing

\
' Gravel?
' Temperature
'
,.-...
,......_
®, <D No

~1t-t---+-U\~ ------i--..:~1
12°C
~
~ @ Yes 12°C
~ ---- \ "' ' @ No 24°C
w
.._,. ...

w I© '
'
\
• Exoerimental Results

(f)
gj21t-t-++-1--- I
(f) I

([ zm I

co I
I

w I
I
w
>
0 ----
I
I @zocd
er I I I I I I I\ I
co •
1·
I
I
([ I
I

!J
I
I- 1-- I

I
(_!)
1-t
w
Ji-++-+_Jj I
J

I 1-~ I J
J

II
I I
I I
I I

--
J
I
J I
I

I
I
I

•
I
1/
• I
I
I

I
J
400 I

I
I I

;
I
I '
I
I
' '
0 J ;
I

lO 15 20 ZS 30 35 40 45 SO SS 60
10 15 ZO ZS :30 35 40 45 SO SS 60
TEMPEl=<ATURES ( ° C ) TEMPERATURES (°C)
(A) 100 HOURS (Bl 180 HOURS
FIG. 3.21 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL VERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROFILES IN
PAD TWO "
N
 ~- "" ._ ' I I I ----1 l'\;1 ,~,\I '.fl>I I I I I1
I72 Hours
· ['\\",:I\~ 400 Hours Symbol Top Surface Placing I I"\' \
6
I I

-~ ~ --:\ <D
Gravel?
No
Temperature
12°C
_.....,. "1\'',, \
I I
,........ ,........
I\ ~-,, -u~,,~++11- 11-JI
:E ~ Yes 12°C :E
I~\ , \,
@ :E
......,2900&_~---r--1--
:E No 24°C 1
......, .="-A \ \ 'Q) • Exoerimental Results

w
w
(f)
CI
\\ '-, - (f)
CI I\ \ "- 1-
m
w
>
._ \1 \, m._
w
>
I \ ,6:J
~I
0
\ I -
0
m ti ', m I 'i I
)LI.A.A
([I"""' I 1
\ "
CI I

I ·. \I \ -
l~~-+--l-H-rri1
I- I-
I 1.........
(!)
I
I
:I
I
(!)
t----1
T \
t----1
w I
w I

I
I
I
I I : -
I ;'
I

1....... :' i....,.

/
I

,' I I :
'

~ J / ~
@
~
I
!
I

~
,,I I

" "'-' jf /
I
J
....... ,',
,

-LJ-1--.J}!-~~l~!~11~l~J
@ ,

o•L_j__l___L_jL~~l~/~~I;-: oL I I I I l

10 15 20 ZS 30 35 40 45 50 5S SO 10 15 20 25 30 36 40 45 50 ss eo
TEMPE:RRTURES C °C ) TEMPERATURES ( °C )

(CJ 400 HOURS (0) 672 HOURS

FIG. 3.22 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL VERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROFILES IN PAD
TWO
"
w
 74

A comparison between curves 1 and 3 shows the theoretical effect

on the pad's temperature response due to increased concrete placing
temperature. In Fig. 3.19(b) it can be seen that a 12°C increase in
placing temperature caused a 13°C increase in maximum temperature,
despite the larger heat losses. More significantly the temperature
differentials between locations 3 and 5 are larger for the higher placing
temperature. (12°C larger at 46 hours reducing to 8°C larger at 650
hours.)

Based on Curve 2 (concrete placing at 12°C and simulation of top

surface sand) the maximum temperature differential generated in Pad Two
was 18°C, and occurred just prior to top surface gravel placement.
Dunstan and Mitche11 57 found that temperature gradients below 25°C
did not cause cracking in unreinforced monoliths, and thus no thermal
cracking was expected, nor found. A comparison of the theoretical
temperature profiles for Curve 2 in Figs •. 3.21- 3.22 show that initially
the basecourse absorbed heat. However after it had warmed up it
provided an insulating effect, and the temperature difference between
the bottom and middle gauge gradually decreased after 100 hours.

Experimental horizontal temperature profiles at the mid-height of

Pad One are plotted in Fig. 3.23 for selected time. It can be seen that
significant horizontal temperature gradients exist only within 2 - 3
metres of the pad edge. After sand backfilling of the pad sides at
132 hours, the horizontal temperature gradients decrease. Experimental
vertical temperature profiles, at a section 6.7 metres from the edge of
Pad One, are plotted in Fig. 3.24 for selected times. Note that at
772 hours the vertical temperature differential over the top 1.8 metres
of the pad in Fig. 3.24 is more than twice the horizontal temperature
differential within 1.8 metres of the pad edge (Fig. 3.23). However at
136 hours (just after gravel placement) the vertical and horizontal
temperature differentials are similar. These results show that the
side backfill gravel was a more effective insulator than the 300 mm
top surface gravel.

3.8.5 Thermal Stress~Induced Strain Measurements

An attempt was made to measure thermal stress-induced strains in

both pads using temperature compensated strain gauges stuck to both
pad reinforcing steel and the dumbell-shaped devices shown in Fig. 3.25.
Readings were measured on a Budd P-350 Strain Indicator using a full
 KEY PRO NO. 1 ·'

SYl"SOL + .•••. TIM:: 64 (i-aFSl HORIZONTRL TEMPERRTURE PROFILESCC,L,H,M,N,Ol

w
(.9
SYl"SOL 0 ••••• TIM::
•
• 136 (t-aF$) N.R.C. HRNGRR COMPLEX.
SYl"OOL • ••••• TIM:: • 401 Cl-aFSl
0 SYl"SOL ~ ••••• TIM:: • 772 (i-aFSl
w
w Pad CentreliQe-..
0 - - - - - -
1--f
())
f- 7000
~ ~ )
0
2: ecro
0 j
! I
I
r I
I
~1
<O
~I
0::
LL r-.. I
/
!;!/ I
51
w 5000 T
I
~

u I
z
CI
f- 4000
,
I
I
I
I
I' \
())
1--f
0 I
I
• \
3000
I I
;;
/~

/ ,/
----[]
/
/

---
I
20'.XJ
,,£
/
·"'
,/
/ "'
,_,,, -- /
_.......-:
---- -

A--- -----
1000
~
- ~ ------
/
j!/
~ "' ~
----== -
0
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 4
TEMPERRTURES ( oc)

(;=I
FIG. 3.23 MEASURED HORIZONTAL TEMPERATURE PROFILES IN PAD ONE
 KEY PRO NO. 1
SYM30L + ••••• TitE • 64 Ct-0.J<Sl VERTICRL TEMPERRTURE PROFILES CR TO E)
,.-,,
SYM30L D , •••• TitE •
SYM30L A • • • • • Til"E •
136
401
Cl-0-.RSl
(l-0-.RS)
N.R.C. HRNGRR COMPLEX.
SYM30L ~ ••••• Til"E • 772 Cl-0.RSl
L: TOP SURFACE
L: -----------------------------------------------------------·

~~=·
r
-~~...-~~::~~~:::~~~T'~~~~~~~~·
•, ' ' ~~
~ I I
,
::==-... • --
'

~
I I

':--"' ', , ,
LL ----,--- , ' I
' I''·
I I kI \ __µ..,..

~ 25001
(f)
0
I I I ....
I
~ '
I',, ',I I I !'\', I I "'" I
,. j: zeroI I -1-l- I I
.,
~ isooL-t---r-- L_-t---r---
8 I I
I
NI
~1

]1~ ~,I

500 -

om.-~~....i"-'~~....1.~~~....1..~~~..i..,6;.~"""';;;;i....~~.....i;*-~~~i.-~~--"1.o-~~....1.~~~....1..~~~...1..~~---1

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44
TEMPERRTURES (°C)

FIG. 3.24 MEASURED VERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROFILES IN PAD ONE -..!

O')
 77

(A) Dumbell Wired To Reinforcing Cage

1·
500

·r12

steel disc

~c~~ Olf
t
Scotch tape protection Strain gauge

(B) STEEL DUMBELL

Unrolled
view of -"~nse 2 ~
- ~ - Pow_e_r_2___/
steel bar - - - - --Sens e 1 id

Power 1

(C) STRAIN GAUGE CIRCUIT ON STEEL BAR

FIG. 3.25 DUMBELL-SHAPED DEVICE FOR MEASURING

STEEL STRESS-INDUCED STRAINS
 78

Wheatstone-bridge circuit (Fig. 3.25) which provides 2 (1 + V) times

the readings of a single gauge, where V = Poisson's Ratio.

The lead wire was 152 Autocable of measured resistivity of

0.0085 ohms/m at 20°C. Equal temperature changes in the lead wire
will be balanced on opposite arms of the Wheatstone-bridge circuit,
and will therefore not affect readings. It was calculated that an
unrealistically high change in temperature in one lead wire of 10°C
relative to the others, would cause a maximum error in the recorded
strain of 16µe:.

Experimental measurements in Pad One, both before and after the

pour, showed large drifts, and the readings were discarded. Subsequent
laboratory tests with a Hi-Meg meter showed that the resistance to
earth of a typical 28 m of lead wire immersed in water was 650 MSG • It
was found that the alkaline environment of the concrete, and damage to
the leads during placement and concrete pouring, provided resistances
between any two arms of the circuit of less than 300 MSG for all strain-
gauged circuit in Pad One.

In Pad Two all wires were threaded into a 13 mm diameter plastic

hosepipe and sealed with bitumen at both gauge and terminal ends.
Table 3.1 shows the resistances to earth of the four strain-gauged
dumbell shaped devices placed in Pad Two. It can be seen that all
circuits show a final resistance to earth greater than 1000 Mn, which
is considered satisfactory for stable strain readings.

TABLE 3.1 - RESISTANCE TO EARTH OF STRAIN GAUGE CIRCUITS

Label Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

(MSG) (MSG) (Mn} (Mn) (MSG)

Dumb ell A 8000 650 8000 8000 10000

II
B 8000 900 10000 3500 4000
II
c 10000 600 10000+ 4500 5000
II
D 10000 650 10000+ 5000 6000

Column 1. Laboratory measurements in air - no hosepipe.

Column 2. Laboratory measurements in water - no hosepipe.
Column 3. At site just before pour.
Column 4. At site 4 days after pour. In sealed pipe.
Column 5. At site 14 days after pour.)
 79

The measured stress-induced strains in Pad Two are shown in

Fig. 3.26 with the zero strain level being taken as readings at pour
completion. The recorded strains are all less than 32µE . Accurate
site measurements of strains at this low level are difficult to achieve,
and the results shown in Fig. 3.26 should be interpreted with caution.

3.8.6 Assumptions for Thermal Stress Simulations

Concrete creep was taken from equations 2.31 and 2.33 with
FI in equation 2.31 put equal to 1.0. The variation of concrete
elastic modulus with time was taken from equations 2.30 with the 28-day
concrete cylinder strength set at 27.6 MPa, as provided by the site
engineer. The program provides a plane stress solution with shear
distortion ignored. However away from the edges of the Pad, it is
closer to a plane strain problem, and this will tend to increase the
1
reported stresses by
1
_V where V = Poisson's Ratio.

It was assumed that changes in foundation ground pressure would

restrain the tendency of the pad to sag under the imposed temperature
gradient. The site engineer stated that regular survey checks failed
to reveal any vertical movement in the pad, thus confirming this
assumption. To provide the maximum flexural restraining moment
calculated by THERMAL for the simulations where concrete was assumed
placed at 12°C in Pad Two, the change in foundation pressure under an
assumed rectangular pressure change distribution (Fig. 3.27) must equal
0.57 of the uniform dead load distribution. In other words uplift would
not occur, and it thus appears reasonable to assume full flexural
restraint at the dumbell locations in the longitudinal direction.

It was assumed that there was no restraint to the pad sliding

on the base. Such restraint would tend to hog the pad. Although
the foundation under the pad will tend to heat up, and attempt to
expand, some restraint to pad expansion will be imposed because:
(1) The coefficient of the thermal expansion of foundation
gravel is usually less than that of concrete.
(2) Unheated gravel, deep under the pad and to the sides of ·
the pad, will provide restraint.
However the effective subgrade modulus of elasticity will be
several orders of magnitude less than that of concrete, and the degree
of restraint will be small.
 GRAPH OF THE TIME HISTORIES OF STRESS INDUCED STRAIN
N.R.C. HRNGRR COMPLEX. SPINE BERM PRO NO. 2
r-,,
(f)
z
1--t 100
120
KEY
- ----
SYl130L 2 ..... ~~ ~~ ..... DU13ELL B
::> TClUl- 1 •••••

~~ ..... DU"SELL c
SYM30l 4 ••••• ~~ L ••••• CU'13ELL D
SYM30L 3 •••••
---
---- ----
----
-- - ----
PO.R STffiTEO RT 14. 17 t-0..RS

·~r,~._.,f
TCP FCE
H
~~al~
LAID T 132 r I
([ OUMBELL DEPTH
Ct: 0
A 2'0
0
I- 80 81 1750
(f) ~ ~
0
Ct: ..-f c
0
2860
3360
u
1--t
60

L:
c: 40I
0
·u;
~
c:
12
_;..- - .,,_. ~ -- - .- 2 - -- - 2
- -- ~ - -- - - 1-£ -
I- 20I
~~

t~
~<2 1• •
l

-- - ....,_ ,_ -- -
·-
A --- - - 4
._
0
l t-4 ....!; .L ~~4- '"- - 4 - - <t l

c:
1--t
([ -20
K: '- ..,
- -s-- ... - - -
-

-
.., - -
*a ._, 3'

~ Ct:
l-
(f) -40
E
0
l)
-60

-80

-1 ()()
0 so l ()() 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750
TIME CHOURS)
FIG. 3.26 MEASURED STEEL STRESS-INDUCED STRAINS IN PAD TWO
00
0
 81

Dumb~tl
Locations
"51 • •
• <I
Pad Elevation ~ 't. .~

Uniform Bearing
Pressure __+---...!II 3
L
~ GfJ~
Assumed Th~rmal
Bearing Pressures

FIG. 3.27 FOUNDATION PRESSURE CHANGES FOR FULL FLEXURAL

RESTRAINT

Shrinkage and cracking have been ignored in the analysis, as

it was considered that they would have only been of significance close
to the top surface.

Longitudinal reinforcing steel in the vicinity of the dwnbell

locations (Fig. 3.26) was 32 mm diameter bars at 150 centres, at depths
70, 940, 1700, 2600 and 3465 from the top surface. A steel elastic
modulus of 200 GPa and a coefficient of thermal expansion of
-6
10.8 x 10 /°C, were assumed.

3.8.7 Theoretical and Measured Concrete Stresses

Six thermal stress simulations were performed. Parameters varied

were the presence or absence of 300 mm top surface gravel, concrete
placing temperature, and the influence of creep (no creep, basic creep
or temperature enhanced creep.)

Theoretical thermal concrete stress profiles at selected times are

shown in Fig. 3.28. It can be seen that all six simulations provide
similar shaped concrete thermal stress profiles for a particular time,
and the following observations can be made:
(1) The concrete stress at the pad base changes from compression
to tension between 100 hours and 672 hours. This is due to the
 Symbo~ Creep !fop Surface Placing
Sand Temperature
1 Basic No 12°C
2 nhance No 12°C
3 None No 12°C
4 None No 24°C
5 Basic No 2t.°C
6 Basic ·Yes 12°C

··- <. _C>:/- /'

(/ ""'- :'_i \ I

-- • ". ~~: ....__ " ' '1 .

~
~
~ ©>-·.__ ',. ___ ,~~-
--~-- ~\
~
. '

w
(j)
w ' . , -.-.......~
CI
Q) ~· E .. '-")..::
',\)N._'
w w
>
0
>
0 ~~-
~
GJ~~~-
Q)
CI
.
I- j:
I
(.!)
......
(.!)
...... I _ ~.'
'\\I'\ \•

w
I ~ \' \\
1 . \1 ". I ~
..£
I\
•
I I
... / \ ', j
I I/ \ j
@.. ®-1\ '\\
.1
!.

.
\ '

•
-3 -z -I 0 I z 3
-3 -z -I 0 I z 3
STRESSES C MPa) R1 TIME • 672 Hours
STRESSES ( MPaJ AT T It'£. • 100 Hours

Compres:s.ion ... o " Tension Compres:sion - o • Tension

co
I\)

FIG. 3.28 THEORETICAL CONCRETE LONGITUDINAL STRESS

PROFILES IN PAD TWO
 83

insulating effect of the basecourse.

(2) A comparison of curves 1 and 6 shows that placement of top
surface sand significantly reduces the maximum theoretical concrete
tensile stress.
(3) A comparison of curves 1 and 5 shows that concrete placement
at 24°C induces higher stresses below 200 mm from the top surface
than placement at 12°C. Close to the top of the pad higher early
stress-induced strains occur with placement at 24°C. However the
concrete at this stage is weak, with a large creep capacity and low
stresses eventuate.
(4) A comparison of curves 1, 2 and 3 shows that concrete
stresses are reduced significantly by creep (especially temperature
enhanced creep). The effect is more noticeable at 672 hours than at
100 hours.

Fig. 3.29 provides a comparison of the maximum concrete tensile

stress below 90 mm from the pad top surface, generated from the six
theoretical analysis. A smooth curve has been drawn through the peak
results to eliminate diurnal fluctuations. A curve plotting concrete
tensile splitting strength vs time is also shown in Fig. 3.28. This
. b ase d on equa t'ion 2 . 29 and a measure d re 1 a t'ions h'ip 84 b etween concre t e
is
cylinder and tensile strength for greywacke aggregate shown in Fig. 3.30.
84
Clelland reports that the flexural tensile strength of concrete is
approximately one third higher than the tensile splitting strength.
However, because the stress gradients in mass concrete are significantly
less than for a flexural tensile strength test specimen, this strength
enhancement has been conservatively ignored. The following trends
were observed in Fig. 3.29.
(1) A large stress reduction soon after placement of top surface
sand at 5 days is apparent.
(2) The curves that ignore top surface sand, and assume concrete
placement of 24°C or placement at 12°C without creep relief (curves 2,
3 and 4) show thermal tensile stresses that predict thermal cracking.
(3) Stress reduction provided by creep is significant.

A comparison of the theoretical concrete stresses in Fig. 3.28

for curve 6 (place 12°C, basic creep, top surface sand) and the
experimental concrete stresses derived from Fig. 2.26 does not show
good agreement. Stresses derived from Dumbell A did not show the
 KEY Theoretical Concrete Stresses vs Time
(Maximum below 100 mm from Surface}
Concrete tensile strenath
2 IPlaced 21. ·c. No cree
31 Placed 21. C. Cree
Note unless ?Pecified otherwise. it is assumed that concrete is
placed at 12 C, and that no sand is placed on the top surface.

0
a_
2:
61 Temperatureenhanced er
7 Creeo. 300mm sand -
. -· .
'\

--- ,,--..
~

\ .. 1
£3 I / .. ----. \.... . _,,,.- ............
Ol
c / "-.. \ .
. "'
·~·I•I ./// '-
·~. ?i_
Q)
/) \
I
"
L...

U5 .'/' \
L...
0 . ;A
\
... -..,_
"
.\ / I// .'- p ", ~.-·
~2
I \' \ 1:Ll ,_ -,{/-r
. ' .. .( ,
,---
Y ' lo. ' -
).-- ' 3
~,__, \~::!'\_/'·--\-.
- .... ,.... 4
I

-
Q)
L...

U1
Q) .-# ~
.......

lJ)
cQ) \. ~-~
.......__
I- 1
- /,,.,...-ef ---:._ "'
E
::J
E
---
x
0
2:
o-i'-~~~~~-,--~~~~~~~~~~~--.-~~~~~--~~

0 5 10 15 20
Time (Days)

FIG. 3.29 MAXIMUM THEORETICAL CONCRETE TENSILE STRESSES BELOW 100 MM FROM TOP SURFACE
co
.t
 85

5
...--
~
6 4
..c.
+-'
O>
c 3
Cl>
'- KEY
jj)
• W/c = 0·35
--cu
·~
2 0 W/c = 0·40
W/c = 0·45
Cl>
I-
x
1 6 W/c = 0·53

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Compressive Strength (MPa)

FIG. 3.30 EXPERIMENTAL RELATIONSHIP BE'IWEEN CONCRETE

TENSILE AND COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS84

anticipated early diurnal oscillations, and were too low, while those
from Dumbell B were of the correct magnitude but wrong sign.
Experimental results from Dumbells C and D were close to theoretical
results at 672 hours, but were significantly more compressive than
theoretical results at 100 hours. However because of the low level of
predicted and measured strains, discrepancies can be attributed to small
errors in strain gauge thermal compensation (within the manufacturer's
stated accuracy limits of l.8µE/°C).

3.9 HEAT-OF-HYDRATION SIMULATIONS IN A STRONG-FLOOR POUR

85
Salt and wood reported measurements of temperature and stress-
induced strain due to heat-of-hydration effects recorded during
construction of a 30.5 m x 4.6 m x 0.61 m (thick) prestressed concrete
strong-floor. The temperatures were measured with resistance
thermometers, and the strains with temperature compensated Gage Technique
TES 5.5 vibrating wire strain gauges cast into the floor. (Fig. 3.31).
 86

Vibrating Wire Gauge

FIG. 3.31 VIBRATING WIRE GAUGES IN CENTRAL LABORATORIES

STRONG-FLOOR (AFTER SALT AND woooBS )

The gauge locations for the instrumented pour (Pour Three ) are shown
in Fig. 3.32. The concrete in this pour was essentially placed in a
single lift to within 75 mm of the top surface. The top layer was
placed l~ hours after the initial lift. Moist curing was provided
by a layer of PVC sheeting 0.2 mm thick placed 18 hours after casting
and removed after 28 days.

3.9.1 Assumptions for Temperature Simulation

A simulation of the temperatures in Pour Three of the strong-

floor was performed with program THERMAL using a time increment of
0 .1 days. Assumptions differing from those in Section 3.8.2 are
discussed below.

To simulate the thermal influence of the foundations, 3 metres

of sand, initially at 8°C underlaid by an insulated boundary was
 4·57 87

.-
U1 L.
..::,. ::::>
0
0...

N
V/w gauges
N
N
...... L.
::::>
0
0... )( RT 3

00
'-$ )( R T 2--+--.-
0 I
("f')
13' 14 u
X RT 1
C"l
17, 1B
r-- I I
L.
15, 16 SECTION
("f') ::::>
.- 0
0...

PLAN

NOTE: Odd numbered gauges near top of fl()or; even near

bottom
Resistance thermometers R 1, R 2 > R 3, are near gauges
17 & 18

DIMENSIONS m
Gauge Instrument
a b c d

13, 14 V/w Gauge 17·5 2 ·29 0·050 0•527

15, 1c; II II 22•48 0·57 0·075 0•521
17 18 II II 2 2·48 2·36 0·064 0·508
R 13 Resist Therm 22·48 2·29 0·530 -
RT2 II II 22·48 2·29 0·290 -
RT1 II II 22·48 2·2 9 0·050 -

FIG. 3.32 GAUGE LOCATIONS IN CENTRAL LABORATORIES

STRONG-FLOOR
 88

assumed to lie beneath the floor. The top surface PVC sheeting was
ignored as it was too thin to have significant insulating effect in
itself.
30
Wood noted that the DSIR derived value of the 28-day heat-of-
hydration of the Golden Bay cement was 418.7 kj/kg and that the cement
3
content was 375 kg/m • These values were used in analysis as described
in Section 3.8.2.

Because the strong-floor was cast indoors, the ambient radiation

was assumed zero. The ~ir temperatures fed into THERMAL were
recorded in the same building, and are shown in Fig. 3.33(c). A
2
coefficient of surface heat transfer of 9.48 W/m /°C was used, and was
74
taken from Billington for a horizontal upwards facing surface in still
air conditions. However the tin roof of the shed probably averaged
higher temperatures than the internal air temperature, and thus reduced
heat losses from the strong-floor surface.

It was assumed that the .concrete was poured in the two layers
discussed earlier, at an initial placing temperature of 14°C. This
was based on the first recorded concrete temperatures after the gauges
were covered with concrete. The simulation by THERMAL used 20 nodes
in the bottom layer and 10 in the top layer, with 10 nodes being used
in the foundations.

3.9.2 Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental Temperatures

The theoretical and experimental temperature/time curves are

shown in Fig. 3.33. It can be seen that the theoretical curves
successfully simulate the time and magnitude of the temperature peaks.
However the theoretical curves exhibited faster cooling than evidenced
by experimental results. This is attributed to the insulating effect
of trapped air under the PVC sheeting and to radiation from the roof
of the shed. Overall agreement between theory and experiment is
good.

3.9.3 Assumptions for Thermal Stress~Induced Strain Simulation

The assumptions used for the stress-analysis were the same as

described in Section 3.8.6 with the following exceptions.
The 28-day concrete cylinder strength was taken as 49 MPa which
85
was the average measured value reported by Salt and Wood for Pour
Three. The stress analysis was performed for the longitudinal direction
and included the steel reinforcement reported to be 32 mm deformed mild
 89

40
TEMPERATURE TIME HISTORY
(A)
35 FOR TOP GAUGE ( RT 3 )

30
I
I
I
25 I
I
I

20
'
\
\
\
' -- ----
- -- - - - - - -
15

40

(B) TEMPE RA TU RE TIME HISTORY

35
FOR MI ODLE GAUGE I RT 2 )

l
30 KEY
''
\ Experimental Curve
25 '\ -----Thermal Simulation
'
I
I ' \
u
0
I
I
''
20 I '' ....
QI
....
-
:I

....0QJ 15
c..
--
---=-=-=--- --- ---- ---- - --
E 10
QJ
I- 0 50 1 0 150 200 250 3 0 350 4 0 450 500 550 600
Time (Hours )

40

35
(C) TEMPERATURE TIME HIS TORY
FOR LOWER GAUGE ( RT1)

30

25

20

15

5 Recorded Air Temperature

FIG. 3.33 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL

TEMPERATURE/TIME CURVES (STRONG-FLOOR)
 90

steel bars at 305 mm centres at 50 mm from both top and bottom surfaces.

3.9.4 Comparison of Theoretical and Experimental Stress-Induced

Concrete Strains

A comparison of experimental and theoretical stress-induced

concrete strains is presented in Fig.3.34. It can be seen that though
experimental scatter is high there is good average agreement with theory
for the tor> gauges. Agreement is reasonable for the bottom gauges for
times less than 200 hours, but experimental and theoretical results
diverge from this time. At 520 hours both the experimental and
theoretical temperature difference between top and bottom gauge levels
is approximately l.3°C. Thus if full flexural restraint of the floor
occurred (i.e. no floor curvature) then the stress-induced strain
difference between the two levels should equal where
l.3a
c
a c = coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete. (Note, this result
-6
is not influenced by creep.) Thus for a = 10.8 x 10 /°C, then
c
~£ = 14µ£ , which is in agreement with simulated results. However the
experimental average value .of ~£ = 51µ£ , thus showing experimental error.
This may have been due to stress-induced strain not detected by the
gauges soon after concrete pour, because gauge stiffness is significant
relative to fresh concrete at this stage.

The floor was cast on a 75 mm thick concrete base overlying

300 mm of cause rolled gravel. Soon after pouring, when concrete
temperatures were rising, base-restraint would reduce the average
thermal expansion of the strong-floor. However during the cooling
phase, the concrete in the strong-floor would have been stronger
and stiffer, and base-restraint would not have been as effective in
reducing contraction of the floor. Thus it is not surprising that
measured concrete strains at 600 hours exhibit a larger average
compressive stress-induced strain than the theoretical simulation
assuming zero base-restraint predicts.

3.10 STRESS PREDICTIONS AND EFFECT OF CREEP ON DIURNAL THERMAL

STRESSES IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BEAM

The theoretical thermal stress reduction in a shallow box-girder

bridge due to creep effects, were examined by feeding two successive
I worst d ays I f or New Zea 1 an d cond'itions
' (as propose d b y Priest
' 1 ey14 )
into program THERMAL. A 50 mm thick black top with a surface
absorptivity of 0.9, one hour time steps and full flexural restraint
~ 60 /Top Gauge
z STRAIN TIME- HISTORIES
~w Key
_, - Experimental Top Gauges
-
"'z
u.I
---- Experimental Bottom Gauges
- THERMAL Simulalion
.....
V'I T18
I~\II r \
0 r 1111
llV \
-----T14
\\ f,
.,,z -20 I
I\ I \ I
IV 'I
-c
~
\ I~ \1
ti\\ 11\\
Boitom Gauge
I --~, --,
~-T16

ti \ I\

w
-40 d\ -----..--JII
I
'---- ',
~-- ---
----
Tfa
"

-w_
> 'Q ' .
Sl
,--,-..,~--
\
I \ \_
/ ___\ V I ---------------,
_/ \ I
--Tl7
ct I ,v. \ l--- -----.,,____ -::. __ T15
A. I
~ V\ _,_,
Ir - - - - - - - ' \ \v/ "---------- ----

~ ''----,
\ /
I

u -8 II
\
v
/

1,---- - - - - ~-.-----.

0 I 00 '200 300 400 500 ~O l.D

I-'
Tl ME {Hours) ,..
FIG. 3.34 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL
STRESS-INDUCED CONCRETE STRAINS
 92

were used in the analysis. Section dimensions are shown in Fig. 3.35,
and the material properties and meteorological conditions assumed are
described in Appendix E. (Table E.l and Fig. E.l respectively.)
Three simulations were used:
(1) No creep.
(2) Basic creep (from equation 2.31 with FI= 1.0).
(3) Temperature enhanced creep (from equation 2.33).

The stress profiles at all time steps, as calculated by THERMAL

for the no-creep case, were checked by feedi.ng the temperatures
14
computed by THERMAL into a computer algorithmn written by Priestley
to solve for thermal stresses using the technique developed by
49
Priestley • Agreement was perfect. The temperature and no creep
stress distribution at 6 pm on day two are shown plotted in Fig. 5.35.

When thermal and live loading occur simultaneously, the highest

tension stresses in an uncracked section usually occur at the soffit.
The maximum thermal tensile stress on the section and the maximum
soffit thermal tensile stress for each day are tabulated in Table 3.2.
It will be noted that maximum stresses are induced on day two, when the
'no creep' maximum soffit stress is subjected to creep relief of 5.3%
and 6.8% by basic and temperature enhanced creep respectively. Similar
results apply .to the maximum section tensile stress, where corresponding
creep relief is 5.3% and 5.6% respectively. It thus appears that
ignoring creep is conservative, and provides little loss of accuracy
in the thermal analysis of concrete bridges under ambient conditions.

TABLE 3.2 MAXIMUM TENSILE THERMAL STRESSES ON BOX-·

GIRDER BRIDGE SECTIONS

Maximum soffit tensile Maximum section tensile

stress (MPa) stress (MPa)

Day One Day Two Day One Day Two

(1) No creep 2.215 3.121 3.845 4.182

(2) Basic creep 2.144 2.956 3.732 3.961
(3) Temperature
2 .ll5 2.909 3.707 3.948
enhanced creep
 ,
/

./Above
900
,'
.,,.,, , .... - , ,.,,.
/.
./
· Above
./
/

.JAj r Cell 800 , ,"'' -~ir Cell

I I

Flargej
700

600

I- soo
--
·-
0<II 400
(!)
>
_g 300
-
0
£ :.
O> Tension - 0 ... Compression
·-
(!) 200
I

1 Below Air Gell ( Below Air Cell

·v 100
v
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Temperatures (°C) Concrete Stresses (MPa)
\!)
w
FIG. 3.35 THEORETICAL TEMPERATURES AND (NO CREEP) STRESSES IN PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BOX-GIRDER BRIDGE. (6 PM DAY TWO)
 94

3.11 CONCLUSIONS

Comparison with experimental data and theoretical results from

alternative analytical techniques established that THERMAL could
accurately predict temperature distributions in comparatively complex
sections due to heat-of-hydration or boundary heat transfer. Stress
predictions by THERMAL are in exact agreement with other methods using
the same assumptions and agree well with experimental measurements.
Predictions of stress changes due to creep and shrinkage compared well
with published data.

THERMAL can be used to model temperatures and thermal stresses

in mass concrete structures due to heat-of-hydration effects for
cases where heat-flow is essentially linear. Simulations using THERMAL
predict little thermal stress creep relief in complex bridge sections
under diurnal heating, but significant thermal stress creep relief in
mass-concrete structures due to cement hydration heating. Additional
applications of THERMAL are presented in Chapter 5 and Appendix D.
 95

CHAPTER 4
THERMAL ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE
BRIDGES

SUMMARY

A theory is presented for the analysis of the elastic thermal

response of cracked, conventionally reinforced, statically determinate
and indeterminate bridges. Computer programs for solution of this
theory are discussed and approximate solutions for the response of
indeterminate structures are developed.

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Mechanically induced strain variation in a solid is accompanied

by temperature variations within the body. However these temperature
changes are small, and for practical purposes the thermal analysis of
a concrete suructure may be decoupled into a temperature analysis and
. 86
a s t ress ana 1ysis A d esign
. .
engineer can use a s t an d ar d d esign
.
14
temperature distribution , or obtain a distribution for a particular
6 14 21
structure by using one of the published ' ' heat-flow analysis
techniques, with assumed meteorological conditions. This chapter is
concerned with predicting the response of a structure subjected to a
specified temperature distribution.
If a statically determinate beam is loaded with a non-linear
vertical temperature distribution, the longitudinally induced stresses
will be referred to as 'primary' stresses. These arise from an
incompatibility between the two requirements that (1) plane sections
remain plane, and (2) that unstressed fibres expand by an amount
proportional to the local temperature rise. Because no nett axial force
or moment exist on an unrestrained section, primary stresses are often
referred to as self-equilibrating stresses.
Localised stresses may also be caused by thermal incompatibility
between cement and mortar. For the purpose of this thesis these stresses
are not considered to contribute to the primary stresses, and concrete· is
considered to be homogeneous, and thus unstressed when unrestrained
during thermal expansion.
If constraints are imposed on a statically determinate beam to
change it into a statically indeterminate structure, the forces required
at the constraints to maintain compatibility will give rise to a bending
 96

moment distribution along the beam which will be referred to as the

'continuity' bending moment distribution, and will induce stresses
referred to as the 'continuity' stresses. The sum of the 'primary'
and 'continuity' stresses will be referred to as the 'total' stresses.
Continuity thermal stresses are usually of greater magnitude than
primary stresses in critical regions, are often of opposite sign, and
play the major role in causing structural distress. The magnitude of
the continuity stresses is closely related to the unrestrained thermal
curvatures experienced within the structure, and thus prediction of these
curvatures is of prime importance. The primary stresses in a simply
supported structure are usually not of engineering importance, and it is
their contribution to the total stresses that merits the~r study.

4.2 ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY THERMAL STRESSES

In Reinforced Concrete

. 1 ey 49
Priest deve 1 ope d a t h eory for pre d.iction
. of longitudinal
thermal stresses for a general isotropic homogeneous section subject to
an arbitrary vertical temperature distribution. He found excellent
50
agreement between this theory and experimental results on a quarter-seal<
model of a single-cell trapezoidal box-girder section for both thermal
stresses and thermal deflections. Agreement was also good for primary
22
stresses in a prototype box-girder bridge However Priestley's theory
is effectively applicable to uncracked prestressed concrete bridges only.
In the following discussion, Priestley's theory will be modified in such
a way as to enable the analysis of cracked reinforced concrete sections
under thermal loading to be made.

4.2.1 Assumptions

The assumptions made in Section 2.5, plus the following assumptions

are made in developing the theory.
(1) The transverse and longitudinal thermally induced stresses can
be decoupled.
(2) No tensile stresses can exist across a crack face.
(3) Compressive stresses can develop across a crack face only
after loading has closed the crack.
(4) The crack height is constant across the entire width of a
section.
 97

(5) The average crack width varies linearly from zero at the
crack tip to a maximum at the extreme tensile surface.

4.2.2 Development of the Theory

Consider a general section shape as shown in Fig. 4.1 subjected

to arbitrary temperature variation in both x and y directions. The

Convention +
Compressive
Strains Positive

,.. ~1
.·. :· :' .·· ..
, ' - ....
',':. t ....

. "• .
.. . ...
. ·..

(a) Genera I Section ( b) Equivalent ( c) Final Section

Crack Strain Strain Profile

FIG. 4. 1 GENERAL SECTION WITH ASSUMED EQUIVALENT CRACK STRAIN

AND FINAL SECTION STRAIN PROFILE

temperature at a point P(x,y) is given by T(x,y). The section is

assumed to be cracked from the soffit up to a height ~ above the
origin 0 . The concept of an equivalent crack strain E (0) is
er
introduced where

E (0) = /::,
cr/Sav (4 .1 )·
er

where /::, average crack width at soffit.

er
sav average spacing of cracks.

The general section in Fig. 4.l(a) is divided into two regions

A and B , where AA is the area of concrete above the crack level
 98

and BB is the area of concrete below the crack level. A/3 is the
section area above crack level, and is equal to the area of steel above
the crack level plus AA •
The first assumption in Section 2.5 requires strain changes within
a section to be linearly related. The general case is shown in. Fig. 4.1,
where the strain change at height y (E(y)) is given by:

E(y) = + (4. 2)

where ~t is the thermally induced curvature.

The concrete and steel stress at P(x,y) are given by:

f (x,y) = E (a T(x,y) + E + ~ty) (4.3)

c c c 1
(providing y > ~)

f (x,y) = E (a T(x,y) + El + ~ty) (4. 4)

s s s

where E modulus of elasticity of concrete

c
E = modulus of elasticity of steel
s
a coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete
c
a coefficient of thermal expansion of steel.
s

For a simply supported single span bridge, two equilibrium

requirements exist.
(a) The total axial force produced by temperature induced stresses
must be zero.
(b) The nett moment on the section produced by temperature induced
stresses must be zero.

Expressed in mathematical form, these requirements respectively

imply:

AA i=N
f (x,y) dx dy + F l: f (x,y) A.
er +
F (4. 5)
JJ c
i=l
s l.

i=N
' ' AA f c(x,y) y dx dy + M + l: f (x,y) Yi A. ivi (4. 6) .
er s . l.
JJ i=l

i=N
where l: the summation over the N reinforcing bars within the section
.i=l
A. area of the .ith reinforcing bar
l.
 99

F = nett section axial force = 0 for unrestrained reinforced

concrete sections
M nett section moment = 0 for unrestrai~ed section
F
er
= total compression force developed across the crack face
due to closing of the crack
M moment of F about origin 0 in Fig. 4.l(a).
er er

Substituting equations 4.3 and 4.4 into 4.5 and 4.6 provides:

E a
c c
JI AA T(x,y) dx dy + E £1
c
If AA dx dy
i=N
+ Ec lj!t ff AA y dx dy + Fer + Es a
s
E T(x,y)A,
1
i=l
i=?N i=N
+ Es £1 E A. + Es\j!t E y,A, 0 (4. 7)
1 1 1
i=l i=l

and

Ea
c c
ff AA T (x,y) y dx dy + Ec £
1
f JAA y dx dy

+ Ec\j!t AA 2 ff i=N
y dx dy + Mer + Es a s E T(x,y) y,A,
1 1
i=l
i=N i=N
2
+ Es El E yA. + Ec~t E Yi A.1 = 0 (4 .8)
1
i=l i=l

Simplifying:

£ A
1
+ 111 I,,.
'l't 1
-F
er
- a
c
ff AA T(x,y)dx dy - E /E a i~N·T(x,y)A.
s c s i=l 1
(4.9)

and
i=N
-M
er
- a
c
ff AAT(x,y)ydxdy
.
- E /E a L T(x,y)yA, (4.10)
s c s i=l 1

where n = E /E i f y ~ t;,
y s c
= E /E -1 i f y > t;,
s c
A transformed concrete equivalent cracked section area

= ff AS dx dy + i~N n A.
i=l y 1
I{= transformed first moment of area about the origin

= If AS y dx dy + i~Ny.
i=l 1
n
y
A.
1
 100

I,,. = transformed second moment of area about the origin

2
i=N
HAS y 2 dx dy + E 2
= Yi n y A.l.
i=l

The height to the neutral axis y and the cracked section moment of
inertia about the centroid I can be obtained from equations 4.11
c
and 4.12.

y = I"' /A (4.11)
l

- 2
I
c
= I,,.
2
- Ay (4 .12)

Assumptions one to five in Section 4.2.1 will now be used to

develop an expression for and M F
Note that compression can
er er
only develop across the crack after the compressive strain induced by
thermal loading exceeds the equivalent crack strain in equations 4.1.
From Fig. 4.1 the equivalent crack strain E: (y) at height y is given
er
by:

E:
er
(y) E:cr (0) c; - y)/; (4.13)

From equations 4.3 and 4.13 the concrete compressive stress

g(x,y) on the preformed crack face can be written as the smaller of
zero or:

g(x,y) (4.14)

F and M can be written directly as:

er er

F
er
= ff BB g (x,y) dx dy (4.15)

,M
er
= ff BB g (x, y) y dx dy ( 4 .16)

The problem is now fully defined by equations 4.9, 4.10, 4.14 - 4.16
provided era.ck height ; does not increase under the action of thermal
load. Although there are five independent equations in five unknowns,
the extra requirement that g(x,y) be zero if tension is indicated by
equation 4.14 means that a direct solution is not possible except in the
case where F = M = 0 • In the general case, an iterative solution
er er
 101

may be adopted following the steps beLow.

(1) Assume F
er
= Mer = 0. This reduces the variables in
equations 4.9 and 4.10 to two, and a solution for and can
be obtaineq.
(2) Current best values of and ~t are substituted into
£
1
equations 4.14 - 4.16, which allows corresponding values of F and
er
M to be calculated.
er
(3) current values of F and M are substituted into
er er
equations 4.9 and 4.10 to obtain refined estimates of and
(4) Continue cycling steps (2) and (3) until convergence is
obtained.
(5) If the concrete crack tip tensile stress under thermal and
force loading exceeds the concrete tensile capacity, then the assumed
crack height is incremented, and the procedure returns to (1) .
From Fig. 4.1 and equation 4.3 the crack tip tensile stress ft
can be calculated from equation 4.17:

(4.17)

where T
m
(s) = minimum temperature at level s
M = total section moment = thermal moment + force-load moment
I
c
= cracked section moment of inertia

It will be shown in Chapter Five for a typical section cracked under

force loading that further crack extension will have small effect on
section stiffness and thermal curvature. Thus any crack growth predicted
in step (5) will have little effect on the structural thermal response.
In many design cases, a section will have experienced overload under
previous loading and the crack growth under step (5) will be zero di!:: negligible.

4. 3 ANALYSIS OF TOTAL THERMAL STRESSES IN RESTRAINED REINFORCED

CONCRETE SECTIONS

If a simply supported beam is subjected to insblation it hogs

upwards as shown in Fig. 4.2(a). If the beam is made statically
indeterminate by imposition of additional constraints, the forces required
at the constraints to maintain compatibility give rise to a 'continuity'
bending moment distribution along the beam. This is illustrated in
Fig. 4.2(b) for the case 9f a two-span bridge. The total stresses are
 102

Curvature l/lt (a) Thermal Deflected Shape

of 2- Span Bridge

1------

(b) Thermal Deflected Shape

of. 3- Span Bridge

j I

Jl Ji Ji.
~
00
7/W-r 7T7TT
I
-EI </Jt EI t/!t - EI</Jt EI </Jt
( c) Hardie - Cross Bending
Eil/Jt 0 0 -EI Wt Moment Distribution
EI </ft - EI </ft
2 2

0 3/2 EI t -3/2EI 0

(d) Thermal Continuty Moments

and Reactions in a Uni form
3- Span Bridge.

FIG. 4.2 INDUCED CONTINUITY MOMENTS AND REACTIONS

 103

found by adding the primary stresses to the continuity stresses from the
continuity moment. Because continuity moments are induced by restraint
of free thermal displacements, it is expected that in statically
indeterminate bridges the reduction in stiffness associated with cracking
will result in lower continuity moments than for an equivalent uncracked
bridge subjected to the same thermal loading.

4.3.l Continuity Moments in Uncracked Bridges

For a continuous uncracked bridge of constant moment of inertia I

and elastic modulus E , subjected to a constant thermal curvature 1./Jt the
solution for continuity moments is simple. The curvature of the beam can
be completely restrained by applying fixed end moments of Eil/Jt at all
support locations of the beam. Final continuity bending moments can be
found by releasing end moments at the abutments and performing a Hardie-
Cross bending moment distribution. This procedure is illustrated for a
two-span bridge in Fig. 4.2(c).

4.3.2 Continuity Moments in Cracked Bridges

(a) Simplified theory

If compressive stresses are not developed across the preformed
cracks, and if crack propagation under thermal loading is ignored, then
the analysis can proceed in much the same way as for an uncracked section.
Sufficient constraints on the bridge are released to produce a statically
determinate structure. Unrestrained curvatures are calculated using the
theory developed .in Section 4.2.2 at a sufficient number of sections to
adequately define the curvature distributi?n· This distribution is
integrated to determine the statically determinate thermal deflected shape,
and the continuity moments to restore compatibility are calculated from
the deflected shape.
Moments induced by flexural restraint of thermal rotations may be
calculated as follows. In Fig. 4.3 the general solution is made statically
determinate by releasing end rotations of each span. For a typical me~er

ij , of length t. .the unrestrained rotations at the ends of the member

1J
can be calculated from equations4.18 and 4.19.

1 tij
8 ..
1J = t .. 1./Jt (x) (t .. - x)dx
1J
(4 .18)
1J 0

8 ..
J1 = -
c1J1 c·.
0
1J
1./Jt (x) x dx (4.19)
 104

Heat Heat Heat

\ ' lj \ ' ' l;.'I I ~ f1

--1 k
(Al Structure

bx .. _J
ljk

(Bl Unrestrained Def lee tions

of
Structural Components

(C) Fixed End Moments

Mu Mji Mjk Mi<j

FIG. 4.3 GENERAL SOLUTION FOR STRUCTURE UNDER THERMAL LOADING

where ~t(x) = unrestrained thermal curvature at location x

x is measured dis.tance from support i .

The fixed-end moments at the ends of the member can be calculated

from equations 4.20 and 4.21

M. . = s. . e. . + c. . s. . e .. (4.20)
1J 1J 1J J1 Jl J1

M ..
]1
.. e..
s ]1 J1
+ c .. s .. e..
1J 1J 1]
(4.21)

Formulations for member stiffnesses (S .. , S .. ) and the carryover factors

1J Jl
(C .. , C .. ), taking into account the reduction of stiffness with cracking,
1J J1
are presented in Appendix A.
Thus for every member in a structure, the fixed-end moments can be
computed from equations 4 .18 - 4. 21. The final thermal continuity moment
distribution can now be achieved by release of joints and by performing a
Hardie-Cross moment distribution as described in Section 4.3.1, or other
appropriate techniques.
 105

(b) General theory

If a continuous bridge is loaded with a thermal gradient that has
the hottest temperatures near the top of the section, then positive
continuity moments are induced along the bridge which will tend to open
cracks propagating from the soffit and close cracks propagating from the
deck. At locations where the deck cracks close, or where the total
stresses propagate crack growth, the section stiffness and unrestrained
thermal curvature will be affected, and the superposition technique
described above cannot be directly applied. A piece-wise procedure may
be adopted as follows:
(1) The temperature profile is divided into a number of geometrically
similar subprofiles, that together make up the whole as indicated in
Fig. 4.4.

I
I
I
I
I
I

Temperature in profile at height y

= ljy
Temperature in subprofi le at height y
= ~y - liy

Temperature

FIG. 4.4 SUBDIVISION OF TEMPERATURE PROFILE

(2) A solution is found for the first temperature subprofile as

described in Section 4.3.2(a) above.
(3) The effective crack strain and moment-of-inertia distribution
 106

along the beam are recalculated, taking into account the closing of cracks
and crack propagation under the influence of dead and live load moments,
and accumulated thermal continuity moments.
(4) A solution is found for the next temperature subprofile using
the effective crack strain and moment-of-inertia distribution as calculated
in (3) above. For the ith subprofile, the thermal response is found
from the difference in thermal response using the jth and ith temperature
profile in Fig. 4.4 as described in Section 4.3.2(a) above. The thermal
response for subprofile i cannot be obtained by feeding the temperature
subprofile i into the theory in Section 4.3.2(a) because this would not
correctly calculate the compression stresses on the crack face.
(5) The thermal moments from (4) are accumulated. If any more
subprofiles remain the logic returns to (3) •

The above procedure is rather tedious. A direct method based on

the moment/curvature relationships of sections while subjected to the
final temperature loading is proposed for prestressed concrete sections in
Chapter 6, and may also be used for reinforced concrete sections. However
this method requires extensive computer facilities and specialised computer
programs.

4.3.3 Approximate Solutions for Thermal Continuity

MJments in Cracked Bridges

The solution techniques proposed in the previous section are not

suited to practical design requirements. Two different simplifying
assumptions may be made to reduce computational effort.
(a) Approximate Solution A: For this approximate solution it is
assumed that no compressive stresses develop across crack surfaces, and
that cracks do not propagate under thermal loading. The cracking
distribution, and hence moment-of-inertia distribution, along a structure
is obtained from an analysis of the mechanical loading, and the unrestrained
thermal curvature distribution obtained from the theory in Section 4.2.2.
An equivalent constant stiffness and thermal curvature
I ljJe for the
e
structure can be derived from equations 4.22 and 4.23.

I
e
=
1
I r I (x) dx (4.22)

t
0

ljJe I1 ijJt(x)dx (4.23)

0
 107

where R, = beam length

I(x) =moment of inertia at x
~t(x) =unrestrained thermal curvature at x

The thermal response of a structure of constant stiffnes~. and thermal

curvature can be simply calculated from the theory in Section 4.3.1.

(b) Approximate Solution B: This solution is inherently less

accurate than Approximate Solution A. The effective moment-of-inertia
77
I is taken from the ACI formula for deflections under force loading.
e

I (4.24)
e

where M maximum section moment

a
M = cracking moment
er
I = gross moment of inertia
g
I cracked moment of inertia.
c

The effective moment of inertia is calculated at midspan and support

loading, and the average value is assumed to apply for the entire length
of the span. Equation 4.24 was developed for deflections under force
loading, where the maximum moments coincide with regions of lowest I
c
values. At regions close to the point of contraflexure, the local
stiffness will be much greater, but the error involved in deflections is
small since M/I
is small. However for thermal loading, the moment is
c
almost constant in interior spans, and the errors in deflections are
likely to be greater, and equation 4.24 would be expected to underestimate
the effective stiffness, and thus be unconservative.
The unrestrained thermal curvature for Approximate Solution B may
'
b e ca 1 cu1 a t e d f or an uncrac k e d section '
using '
Priest 1ey I s 49 th eory. I t
will be shown in Chapter 5 for a typical reinforced concrete section that
cracking does not have a large influence on unrestrained thermal
curvature. Thus an effective constant stiffness and free thermal
curvature may be used over the entire length of the structure, and the
solution can be obtained from the theory in Section 4.3.1.

4.3.4 Calculation of Crack Widths

One of the most significant effects of thermal loading on

conventionally reinforced concrete structures is the increase in width
experienced by cracks propagating from the soffit at service loading.
 108

The two principal mechanisms involved are:

(1) Thermal continuity moment (Mt). The effective crack strain
at the soffit (0) due to the thermal continuity moment may be
£
er
derived from equation 4.24 if the thermal loading is assumed to leave
unchanged the inter-crack tensile strains

£ (0) (4.24)
er

where y = height of neutral axis above soffit.

(2) Non-linear effect of temperature profile. This induces a

soffit effective crack strain of £ as shown in Fig. 4.1. For normal
1
temperature gradients £ is compressive, and thus helps reduce crack
1
width.
The total change in crack width at the soffit 6. can be
er
calculated from equation 4.25

6.
er
= -s av (£1 - £
er
(0)) (4.25)

where S
av
= average spacing of cracks.

4.4 COMPUTER PROGRAMS FOR SOLUTION OF REINFORCED CONCRETE THEORY

Computer programs are described for solution of the theory presented

in Section 4.2.2 and Section 4.3.2. A listing and user-manual for these
programs is provided in Appendix C. The solution of the approximate
techniques presented in Section 4.3.3 is simple, and a manual analysis is
adequate.

4.4.1 Program TSTRESS

A computer program TSTRESS was written in Fortran 4 to solve

equations 4.9 to 4.21. The program accepts a section definition in the
form of a series of vertical slices as described in Section 2.8.2, for
each of which the thickness varies linearly between user-specified
heights as shown in Fig. 4.5(a). Temperature and reinforcing steel
distributions for each slice are specified as shown in Fig. 4.5(b) and (c)
respectively, and a crack height for the section is specified as
propagating from either the deck or soffit.
 109

B(y) and y specified at Either T(y) & y specified at Ai 8. Yi specified

each thickness change at each temperature change for each reinforcing
or ow er dis tn. s ecif ied level

~
~
Q) Cracl< Level
>
0
~ 1
-
.c:.
·m
t;;

:c
Section Thickness Temperature Steel Area
(A) Section Shape (B) Temperature Dis tn. (C) Steel Dis tn.

FIG. 4.5 SPECIFICATION FORMAT REQUIRED FOR TSTRESS

(FOR EACH SLICE)

The effective crack soffit strain (0) can either be specified

£
er
by the user, or calculated by the program from equation 4.26, which
ignores the effect of creep and shrinkage

Mh
£
er
(0) = E I
(4.26)
c c

where M user specified section moment

h =depth of surface below neutral axes.

If Mh is negative the crack will close under the action of the

specified moment, the value of I in equation 4.26 is taken as the
c
uncracked rather than the cracked moment-of-inertia, and calculated value
of £
(0) will become negative, with the magnitude representing a
er
surface compressive strain. A very large negative value of £ (0)
er
provides the same response as for the uncracked section. A low negative
value of (O)£provides a solution where primary tensile stress-inducing
er
strains of sufficient magnitude to re-open the crack may develop at a
particular level across the crack face.
The program divides each slice into 40 vertical increments above
the crack height (Fig. 2.10) and calculates the value of the integral
expressions in the equations by summation over the increments. Material
properties, temperatures and effective crack strain are assumed constant
within each increment of.each slice. The iterative procedure described
 llO

in Section 4.2.2 9 steps (1) to (4), is continued until changes in bottom

surface strain, £1 , and section curvature, wt , are both less than 0.5%.
TSTRESS will accept a description of a·simply supported beam as a
series of segments, with a limit currently set at 50, and calculates the
unrestrained thermal curvature wt of a representative section·within each
segment. This enables non-prismatic beams with non-uniform cracking to
be analysed. For a typical member ij of length JI.,. • , the fixed-end
l.J
moments are calculated from equations 4.18 to 4.21. Member vertical
deflections ~ are derived from Moment-Area principles as

(4. 27)

A degree of flexural restraint FAC can sometimes be determined

for sections. If FAC is specified, the total concrete stresses T (x,y)
c
can be calculated from equation 4.28 and the total steel stresses T (x,y)
s
can be calculated from equation 4.29, where f (x,y) and f (x,y) are
c s
the primary concrete and steel stresses respectively, and are given in
equations 4.3 and 4.4 respectively.

Tc(x,y) = fc(x,y) + EcWt(y - y) FAC (4. 28)

(providing y > s)
(4.29)

The output from TSTRESS optionally includes a print and plot of

defined section shapes, specified temperature profile, primary and total
stresses and simply supported deflected shape. The printout also
includes the section area, moment-of-inertia, centroid depth, final strain
profile, including unrestrained curvature, propagated crack lengths, beam
fixed-end moments, stiffnesses and carry-over factors and an echo of
input data.
Thermal stresses at cracked sections can also be found from program
THERMAL for the case of no stresses on the crack face, and no crack
propagation, by providing the concrete below the crack level with a zero
elastic modulus. The development of the theory, and verification of
program THERMAL is presented in Chapters 2 and 3. It was found that
stress predictions from THERMAL and TSTRESS were in agreement.
 111

4.4.2 Program TREACTION

A solution for continuity moments in a general structure can be

obtained from a Hardie-Cross moment distribution of the fixed-end moments
at the end of the component members as calculated by TSTRESS and described
in Section 4.3.2(a). Deflections can be calculated from the combined
thermal loading and final end moments on the component members. A more
direct solution can be obtained by using TSTRESS to calculate the simply
supported thermal deflected shape of the total length of the beam, as
shown in Fig. 4.6, and calculating the forces to achieve compatibility at
the constraints. A special purpose program must be written for each
structure to solve for these forces, and the program used for the solution
of the continuous test beam in the next chapter is described.
The structure and simply supported thermal deflected shape are
shown in Fig. 4.6. For arbitrary force loading on the simply supported
structure the vertical deflection 6 at B and rotation 6 at C can
be obtained from equations 4.30 and 4.31 derived from Moment-Area
principles

a la+b () (a M(x)
a+b EMI x (x) ·• (a+b - x)dx - J, E I (x) x dx ( 4. 30)
0 cc 0 cc

1 la+b M(x)
e a+b E I (x) • x dx (4. 31)
0 c c

where M(x) = moment in simply supported beam at point x .

From equations 4.30 and 4.31 and the bending moment diagrams shown
in Fig. 4.6(d) and 4.6(g), solutions for 6 , 6 , 6 , 6 can be obtained
2 3 2 3
by treating the integrals as summations as described in Appendix A.
Solutions for the thermal reaction Fb at B and moment Mc at C
can be obtained from solution of the simultaneous equations 4.32 and
4.33

(4.32)

The continuity moments can be directly calculated from statics

with the values of Fb and Mc obtained. Deflections can be calculated
from equation 4.27 with ~t(x) put equal to ~<&_
E I (x)
c c
 112

In the experimental work, a final rotation of Cl was noted at c.

A psuedo-theroetical result, taking this rotation into account, w~s

obtained by subtracting a from

in equation 4.33.
8
1
The output from program TREACTION includes a printout of beam
continuity moments and reactions and a print and plot of the beam deflected
shape.

(A) Structure

(B) Thermal Def lee ti ons

(from TS TRESS)

(C) Unit Centre Reaction

~
(D) Bending Moment Diagram

I
(E) Deflection from (c)

-=r======l]
'
(F)

....~_ _
(G
Unit End Moment

Be_.n. . .,d. . .,in~g. _. . M. . :. ;o=-m:. :. .;e:;_;_n;,. .;.t- -= D"'"'"a_.g.._r_a_m

i

~lix3 ===x: (H) Def lee ti on from (f)

FIG. 4.6 SOLUTION TECHNIQUE BY PROGRAM TREACTION

CHAPTER 5
EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL RESPONSE OF TWO
MODEL REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES

SUMMARY

A literature survey of measurements of thermal reactions,

stresses and deflections is report~d. The construction and thermal
testing of a simply supported reinforced concrete model beam, and a
continuous reinforced concrete beam are presented. Experimental
results for temperature, deflections, reactions and strains are
compared with computed results based on the theory developed in
Chapters Two and Four. Sensitivity of the thermal continuity
reactions to the assumed cracking distribution, crack heights and
effective crack strains is examined;

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Little experimental data on thermal response (reactions,

deflections and stresses) of concrete bridges have been reported.
. 1 ey 50 f
Priest oun d agreement b etween theoretica
. 1 an d experunenta
. 1
thermal stresses and deflections in a simply supported quarter-scale
model of a single-cell trapezoidal box-girder section. Radolli and
25
Green found measured reaction changes in a continuous prototype
bridge corresponded with those theoretically induced for a day of
22
high solar radiation. Priestley and Wood found that experimental
thermal stresses in a two-span prototype box-girder bridge were in
moderate agreement with theoretical stresses, based on recorded
temperatures. Instances 6f distress due to thermal effects have
6,24,45,46,47 .
been repor t e d and are discussed in Chapter One.

All the literature cited has been recorded on prestressed

concrete bridges, and there has been little reported on the influence
87
of cracking on thermal response. Kurenkov tested flexurally
restrained rectangular reinforced concrete beams under linear
temperature gradients. He found that cracking was initiated at
gradients between 20° and 30°C, and that cracking significantly
reduced the restraining moment. The greatest reductions occurred
 114

in beams with the least reinforcing percentage. Beams with lowest

reinforcing ratios (p) also disintegrated at the lowest temperatures,
87
as evidenced by Kurenkov's test results. The disintegration temperatures
88
were 162°C and 275°C for p = 0.41% and 1.4% respectively. Hannah
tested flexurally restrained slabs and found that cracking was initiated
at temperature crossfalls of about 41°C, and that reinforcing ratios
greater than 0.2 - 0.3% were required to ensure that more than a single crack
89
formed. Hannant and Pe11 tested flexurally restrained cracked slabs,
and observed that although steel stresses were initially close to the
predicted elastic value, large redistributions occurred due to temperature
13
enhanced creep and shrinkage. England and Ross tested flexurally
restrained reinforced concrete beams under sustained thermal gradients
and observed large stress redistributions due to creep and shrinkage.
They presented a numerical procedure for estimating the time/temperature
82
dependent behaviour. Ross et al tested a 3-span prestressed concrete
beam under sustained temperature gradients. No cracking occurred on
application of thermal load. After a period of time to allow the
stress distribution to approach a predicted stable state solution
under the action of creep and shrinkage, it was observed that removal
of the thermal load induced cracking.

Because of lack of experimental data in a form suitable for

testing the theory developed in Chapters Two and Four, two model
reinforced concrete beams were constructed and tested under thermal
loading. The first, a simply supported beam, was tested to assess
the ability of the theory to predict curvatures for both cracked and
uncracked states, while a second, a two-span continuous beam, was
tested to investigate accuracy of continuity restraint force predictions.

5.2 STRUCTURAL DETAILS OF MODEL BRIDGES

The two reinforced concrete model bridges were constructed from

microconcrete. Structural dimensions and reinforcing details of
Beams One and Two are shown in Figs. 5.1 and 5.2 respectively. Note
that both beams have the same section dimensions. Longitudinal
reinforcing in Beam One was continuous throughout the length of the beam,
and the bottom steel was the same as in Beam Two at Section AA (Fig. 5.2).
Top .steel was the same as in Beam Two at Section BB (Fig. 5.2).
A 16 mm diameter prestressing duct was cast into the web of Beam One
 115

r 31 Stirrup!:) at 90 mm crs
i+A jt45
It t.A
- '284'2 J
ELEVATION OF MODEL

Section A A (Typical)

NOTES
1 Stirrups are 4·4 mm <!> mild steel bars at 90mm crs.
2 Lateral deck steel is 6 mm 4> mild steel bars at 65 mm crs.
3 Longitudinal bars are 10mm <I> mild steel bars.

FIG. 5.1 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS AND REINFORCING

DETAILS OF BEAM ONE
Note -- All lonqifud/nol
..steel JO dio. f or centre support
I
II /::3 ~~1~-4~83t-23 /O"'f5117-i--9t6l~53-22·511
66!!7
cr~.4
!;;~
901.
.90 66 45 45 4J.1- 66 66 66 4-5 J- =
I
rA r
. - r-r r- n

-1W- LA 3·266 ~Bl LL 1......c .._D

4·4-54
f of' end support
ELEVATION of Model
End column
508
-

r +~G_
A

ct: .-~

I
.I
+All
<t..

I
steel 6
deck.
d/o. of 65 cr.s_ fyp.
i
I
---~
of beam.

-7- · <7- mm. dio.

sfirrup.s fyp.
10 fo rt_
of stirrups

A-A B-B Secf/o,0s c-c D-D I-'

I-'
O'I

FIG. 5.2 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS AND REINFORCING

DETAILS OF BEAM TWO
 117

to enable initial tests to be carried out in a crack-free state.

5.2.l Relationship Between Model and Prototype

1
Beam Two is intended to represent a /5 scale model of the four-
span Curletts Road-Rail overbridge now (May 1978) under construction
in Christchurch. Structural dimensions and reinforcing details of
the prototype are shown in Figs. 5.3 and 5.4. The pr0totype was
selected as it is considered to represent a typical contemporary design
of a continuous T-beam reinforced concrete bridge. It is shown in
Appendix D that thermal loading on a T section generates relatively
large thermal tensile stresses compared to other typical section shapes.

Although the prototype has 12 spines in the cross-section, a

1
model with only one spine and a flange width of /12th the full bridge
width was considered to adequately represent the longitudinal thermal
behaviour of the bridge. Because the prototype curved in plan, the
length of each spine varied. The model was straight and adopted lengths
scaled from the third to shortest prototype spine. Advantage was
taken of the symmetry of the loading and structure, by only modelling
one half of the length of the prototype. This required that curvature
of the model be restrained at the end support representing the prototype
centre support. To facilitate this, the end of the model was built
into a short stiff column, as indicated in Figs. 5.2, 5.5 and 5.6.
Dial gauges recorded longitudinal movement of the beam as shown in
Fig. 5. 5. Because all supports of Beam Two, except the end column,
are on rollers, the end column will be subject to a moment but no shear
force. Calculations showed that the dead load of the column plus beam
reaction was sufficient by a factor of 2.0 to resist any tendency of
the column base to tilt on the floor when subjected to the largest
measured experimental thermal moment. Under force loading this safety
factor was 1.1. As a further precaution the pedestal was bolted
rigidly to the strong-floor.

The column longitudinal deflection under beam loading was larger

than anticipated, probably due to cracking in the column. Theoretic~l

results reported later in this chapter have been computed for the cases
of zero column rotation, and column rotation measured by dial gauges
during testing.

For simplicity qf modelling, the models also varied from the

prototype in the following features:
 r -r ~ " ~~ ·~ u-. . ...,. ~ M~·~D
L -
• •. . ,
-
1
,<t,,'-"f &.

------,,,,
!!i!i!U';Ji~
fn/1·1 1•1;•;::
''" '''~·-·· .
1--iEii
. I'"·' ! ". ___
D
_.~- ·---
..C
- Tracks.......
Railf!'l'.Y __ ./
/

/
i
!

I . . :.••
I I I' (I

£L£VATION OF" 8&>1DG£

I
l
f/
-
~--0- ...·.. ,,~ ...

£~si;r._,;11·~

-+-"'.op•oxli :lob
PLAN OF BP.!DG£
I

~~otpt;;fh
I-'
I-'
\ co
~JI Ji ii

---
·,
FIG. 5.3 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS OF CURLETTS ' "-.
ROAD-RAIL OVERBRIDGE ........_
 1016 IOI' IOI~

Girdar 1 ~oq_ j22~ 6irdar ,305 ,229

32mm dia-\

~'-+f-- ,.
16 mm
Deel< .sfaal
dia stirrups
~
C\J
Dack .sfa<ZI

~
!3mm d/a
-1---
B
a>) I
lb mm dia .stirrup.s
!3mm dia -,++-32 rnm dia
NOT£ = Dack staal is 10 mm dia ~.....,_____.++------ 32 mm dia
bars af .34.3 cr.s bofh fop
SECTION A-A an<? bottom, plf 16mm
d1a bars af 3 3 era SECTION C-C
crank-ad a:s .shown.
!52mm 7~
71Dl IL62
cr.smm_ 7~ I ' ~62 mm-1 -crs
1
, J crs I
I I I
~-.-./--.--
--------
~ -32mm ~ .32_mm LDack :staal
(\J .., dia <\JI d1a
~ Ire mm dla .::stirrups ~ !3mm dia
CW)~-- OJ · -lC:,mm· dia ofirrups
" • ," .32 mm dia M111 !6mm d~a 5f irrups
lbmm dia
Bfirrups 32 mm dia I-'
I-'
~

SECTION 8-13 5£CTION D-D

FIG. 5.4 REINFORCING DETAILS OF CURLETTS ROAD-RAIL OVERBRIDGE
 120

Environr-.er.tal
n ox

FIG. 5.5 BEAM TWO - TEST SETUP

FIG. 5.6 BEAM TWO - END COLUMN REINFORCING DETAILS

 122

(a) The prototype had one diaphragm running laterally in the end
spans of the bridge and two in the centre span. The model, wa.s built
without diaphragms because it was thought that they would have little
influence on longitudinal thermal response.

(b) The internal supports of the prototype consist of two 1295 mm

diameter columns of varying height but averaging approximately 6000 mm
above ground level. Across the full width of the bridge linking the
columns is a Pier Capping Beam 1168 mm deep and 3658 mm wide. The end
supports consist of 6 circular columns of 533 mm diameter linked by an
Abutment Capping Beam 1168 mm deep and 1524 mm wide. Although some
fixity at the supports would be imposed by the columns, and extra
stiffness provided by the pier capping beam, the modelling assumed
hinges between supports and superstructure with the influence of the
pier capping beam being ignored.

(c) The slightly tapered prototype spine (Fig. 5.4) was represented
in the model by a scaled uniform average thickness.

(d) Theoretically each prototype reinforcing bar should have a

1 2
corresponding bar, with the same steel properties and ( /5) the area
in the model. However there are limited commercially available
reinforcing bar sizes available, and the following compromise was made.
1 2
Steel was selected for the model to provide close to ( /5) the
corresponding yield force of the prototype steel, but the number of
I
longitudinal bars in the model was reduced to 60% of the prototype
number, and the number of transverse bars and stirrups reduced to
about 50% of the prototype value. The model used plain bar reinforcement
90
rather than the deformed steel used in the prototype. Base et al ,
1
in studying the results of over /4 million measured beam surface crack
widths, found that the increase in both beam average crack width and
beam maximum crack width was only 13%, for the same loading level, when
deformed bars were replaced by mild steel bars. Differences in crack
spacing were also small. Thus it was concluded unnecessary to knurl
or thread the commercially available mild steel bars to model prototype
steel deformations.

5.2.2 Physical Model/Prototype Scale Factors

The behaviour of a model should accurately reflect that of the

prototype. This can be approximated in reinforced concrete if the
loading, prototype dimensions (including aggregate gradation and
 123

reinforcing bar sizes), material properties and effective concrete

density are appropriately scaled.

(a) Mieroconcrete constituents

All the concrete used in the experiments for this thesis used
a microconcrete mix described in Appendix B, which includes measured
values of elastic modulus, coefficient of thermal expansion and the
compressive and tensile strength of the microconcrete. These compare
closely with typical prototype values and thus represent good modelling
similitude.

Most crack width formulae suggest that a scaled model of a beam

31
will have a corresponding scaled crack width • Model tests by Alami
91
and Ferguson on reinforced concrete in flexure, using scaled down
92
aggregate confirmed thi.s prediction. However Kaar found in
experiments on T-beams where the aggregate was not scaled, that more
cracks occurred in the prototype than in scaled models, and that for
scaling ratios of 1 : ~: ~the average crack widths were in the ratios
93 f
7 : 6 : 4 • Swamy an d Qures h i. oun d t h at mo d e 1 s wit
. h sea 1 e d - d own
aggregates gave good similitude for flexure and shear, although they
reported that the models showed minor increases in both ultimate
strength and deflection compared with values scaled from full size
tests. They attributed this to the capacity of the concrete and steel
to sustain greater strains before failure, which in the microconcrete
could be due to the increased strain gradient in the compression zone
in the model. However in model beams with aggregate larger than the
. 93
sea 1 e d size, Swamy an d Qures h.i faun d t h at, compare d wit
. h f u 11 -sea 1 e
tests, large increases in both section cracking and ultimate loads
resulted, fewer but wider cracks developed, and often a different
failure mode occurred.

The work reviewed above demonstrates that scaled-aggregate must

be used for modelling similitude in reinforced concrete. Consequently
the model aggregate grading was directly scaled from a typical
prototype mix.

(b) Effective Concrete Density

It is e'ffectivel.y impossible to exactly scale dead-load stresses,

while satisfying the requirements for material similitude as discussed
in the previous section, as will be seen from the calculation below.
 124

If a representative dimension in the structure = L , then the dead

load bending moment M on a particular section may be expressed:

== (S.l)

where p density of structure

A = representative cross-sectional area
kl,k2 •••• kn = constants.

The dead-load stress at a point y above the centroid of the

above section may be expressed as:

f = ~ = k ML- 3
I 3

where I = section moment of inertia.

Thus substituting from equatiQn S.l

f (S.2)

Using a subscript p to denote prototype values, and m to

denote model values, then for the same dead-load stresses in the model
and prototype

f pp L
__£ __£
1 ""' (S.3)
f pm L
m m
L
__£
or pm = pp L p /scale (S.4)
p
m

1 .
Thus as Beams One and Two were /S scale models, the concrete
density in the model should be five times the prototype value. Clearly
this is not possible by manipulation of material constituents and an
approximate solution was achieved by suspending kentledge weights
totalling four times the model weight from the model Beam Two as shown
in Fig. S.S. A comparison in Fig. S.7 of the theoretical longitudinal
bending moments computed from the actual loading and from five times
the beam self weight shows that the error induced by this approximation
is less than 2%. No kentledges were used on Beam One, as modelling of
dead load stresses was not required for tests on this beam.

(c) Thermal Modelling Scale Factors

Thermal scale factors are necessary to ensure that a model and

prototype starting from the same initial conditions will retain similar
 125

Kentledge
X Cm) Load CkN)
-8
0.335 1.384
-1 0.766 1.358
1.199 1.400
-6 1.629 1.409
2.061 1 .396 - Kentledge + DL BMD
2.497 1. 391
-s 2.927 1.436 UDL BMD
3.573 1.429
-4 4.007 1.39s Wd= 5• 0•815 kN/m
4.435 1 • 411 <td; 23.51 kN/m~>
4.872 1.422
E -3 5.300 1.398
z 1.378
JC 5.730
.... -2 6 .164 1.418
6.595 1.416
7.028 1.384
7.463 1.418

Cl
c
·-oc
a>
m 2

3
i----c-- x
4

FIG. 5.7 BEAM TWO - KENTLEDGE AND DEAD-LOAD BENDING

MOMENT DIAGRAM

temperature distributions in psuedo-time.

From equation 2.1, the heat flow in a solid that is not generating
its own heat is governed by the equation:

(5. 5)

From equation 2.10 heat-flow at the surface· can be expressed:

dT
k -dy + h(T - T ) = aF(t) (5. 6)
s

If the following dimensionless parameters are defined:

(T*, y*, t*) [ f , f ,f )

0 0.
where T
0
, L and t
0
are representative temperature, length and time constants, then equations
(5.5) and (5.6) becom.e

C)T*
V2 T* = dt* (5. 7)

and
 126

dT* hL a FL
dy* + k
(T* - T *)
s
::c
kT
(5. 8)
0

vt0 hL aFL )
Therefore T* = cp(y*,t*,
L2 ' k' kT
0

Vt
T t
i.e. :::: <I> (;r_ , 0
, -hL , aFL) (5. 9)
T
0
L ' t0 L2 k kT
0

It is necessary that all the dimensionless variables inside the

brackets of equation 5.9 are the same for both model and prototype to
provide the required temperature similitude: (le> T
= (To) Thus
if there is exact geometric modelling, and the mode~ is madepof material
of the same thermal properties as the prototype, from equation (5.9)
it is required that:

2
(to)m = (L /L ) (to)p
P m

(F) = (L /L ) F (5.10)
m P m p

h = (L /L ) h
m P m p

1 1
Thus for a /5 scale, the model requires /25th the time duration
with five times the radiation intensity and five times the surface heat
transfer coefficient to obtain modelling similitude. These theoretical
results were verified with computer program THERMAL.

The larger surface heat transfer coefficient for the model can
theoretically be simulated by forcing large wind speeds over the model
surface. A more practical solution is to approximate similitude by
simply reducing top surface radiation intensity to compensate for the
top surface heat losses that should have occurred. For example,
2 2
consider ctF = 866 W/m, h 20 W/m /°C and (T - T )= 25°C.
p p s
Net inward heat flow will be:

2
Hp = 866 - 20
- * 25 = 366 W/m
For exact modelling theory, equation 5.10 requires:
2
F = 5 * 866 = 4330 W/m
m
5 * 20 ::::
 127

2
m=
However if h h20 W/m /°C the nett model heat gain can be
p
2
maintained by putting aF = 4330 - 80 * 25 = 2330 W/m , i.e. the
m
2330
radiation is factored by
4330
= 0.538 and the surf ace heat transfer
coefficient left unaltered. It is reasonable to expect that a constant
radiation reduction would provide similar temperature profiles at all
times with a surface heat transfer coefficient scale factor of unity.
Runs of program THERMAL confirmed that this was approximately achieved
for the model and prototype Beam Two section for a typical Christchurch
cloudless summer day, as can be seen from a comparison of the temperature
profiles at selected times, and temperature : time curves at the concrete
deck surface. (Fig. 5.8.) Discrepancies increase as the radiation
intensities decrease in the afternoon, and the influence of surface
heat transfer becomes dominant. No black top was used in this simulation
and a top surface absorptivity of 0.8 was assumed. Other details of the
simulation, including ambient data, are presented in Appendix E.

Note that exact thermal similitude was not necessary for this
investigation which is concerned with prediction of stress and deformation
induced by a given temperature distribution. In effect, any measured
temperature distribution would be satisfactory for this purpose.
Consequently the small similitude error involved in the experimental
approach adopted has no significance.

5.3 MODEL MANUFACTURE

5.3.l Model Materials

The two beams were cast in a mould formed from a steel base and
braced 19 mm thick chipboard sides (Fig. 5.9). The mould was painted,
coated lightly with parting oil, and bolted to the strong floor. The
reinforcing cage was wired together in the mould, and the microconcrete
was mixed in a pan-type mixer. Full details of the concrete mix, and
the tests performed on steel and concrete test specimens are given in
Appendix B. All measured section dimensions after curing had
completed were found to be within 2 mm of specified dimensions.

5,3.2 Instrumentation of Models

The location of instrumentation used in Beams One and Two is shown

in Figs .5 .10 - 5 .11 and Table 5 .1.
 128

Flange Spine
Note: Model top surface radiation x Scale x 0·5385
- Time+ Scale2

-a-> 4550
-~40
:J
12 ~
035
r.... - - - - Prototye
~30 Model
E
~25
20
15
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Prototype Time (Hours)
(A) Top Surface Temperatures

1200 ...............~....-.........~...................~...-~--,
E Spine
J;. 1100 ...
Flange & Spine
...... Indistinguishable
-.:: 1000
0
(./) 900
Q)
>
.8 800
<(
...... 700
..c.
·ffi 600
I
Q) 500
a. Prototype Time Prototype Time
]:;- 400 = 9 Hours =14 Hours
.....0
0r.... 300
Cl.
200

100
.1 -

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Temperature Rise (°C) Temperature Rise (OC)
(B) Temperature Profiles At Stated Times

FIG. 5.8 COMPARISON BETWEEN SCALED MODEL AND PROTOTYPE

THEORETICAL TEMPERATURES FOR A DAY OF HIGH
SOLAR RADIATION
 129

F I G. 5 . 9 BEAMS ONE AND 'IWO - CASTING MOULD .

TABLE 5.1 LOCATION OF SECTIONS INSTRUMENTED IN BEAM 'IWO

Instrument Label Distance x (mm)

Thermocouple 1 1110
Thermocouple 2 2915
Thermocouple 3 4490
Thermocouple 4 7395

LVDT 1 2000
LVDT 2 4707
LVDT 3 6017

*
Dial Gauge 4 8333 87*
Dial Gauge 5 8333 393*
Dial Gauge 6 0 87

Strain Gauge A 1790

Strain Gauge B 3160
Strain Gauge c 3680
Strain Gauge Dl 5445
Strain Gauge D2 5635
Strain Gauge D3 5820
Strain Gauge E 7600

* Note: Values r-epresent depth from deck.

 130

~
1-- :84:27Q__ -~
West I A B c ro E F I East
11~ I
-· 1892
2497
--J I
L - 1125
1~ 62

2562

Key A,8,C,D.E,F - strain gauges.

CD (2) O> - thermocouples.

Location Diagram for the reinforcement strain gauges

and the thermocouple briquetts.

Note:- LVDT and D.G. location!; vary and are

shown for individual deflection profiles

Flange thermocouple
Typical Thermo£Puple Junction briquette
Location
(DEPTH (MM) FROM DECK)
SPINE. FLANGE
3
1.0

Spine Pre stressing

Thermocouple ~.--duct
Briquettes

NOTE:- All 5train gauges are

on the top surface of fhe 5teel
(Labeled 1-8 l

Loe at ion of Strain Gauges and Thermocouples Within Section

FIG. 5.10 INSTRUMENTATION OF BEAM ONE

Note : all strain gauges are on the top
surface of the steel, except No. 36.

Location A Location 8 Location C 3270

1.562 . I
A 010203 Tl E
I I I

,,:~1
I I I
"""
x 3
KEY
(fl Thermocouples
A,B,C,01,02,03.E Strain Gauges
©,@,@ UJ.D.ts
©.@.@ D.G.s

Location 01 Location 02 Location 0 3 Elevation of Beam Showing Thermocouple

Straingauge and LVDT locations

Typical Thermocouple Junction
Flange ThermOCDUP,le
Briquette '

Note: Further Location Details

Of Instrumented Sections
Location E Are Shown in TABLE 5.1

Loe atio n of Strain Gouges and Thermocouples Within Section

FIG. 5.11 INSTRUMENTATION OF BEAM TWO ...w

...
 132

(a) Measurement of Concrete Temperatures

The concrete temperatures were measured with copper/constantine

thermocouples(sensitivity 42µv/°C} which were accurately located within
concrete briquettes and then wired onto the reinforcing cage, (Fig. 5.12) .

Thermocouple

FIG. 5.12 THERMOCOUPLE BRIQUETTES WIRED TO REINFORCING CAGE

The depth from the concrete surface to the briquette was recorded. During
testing, the reference junctions of the thermocouples were maintained at
0°C by placing the junctions in buckets of ice.

The thermocouples were calibrated as follows. A bucket of water

was constantly stirred and allowed to cool from 65°C to 20°C under the
influence of room conditions, and from 20°C to 5°C by addition of ice.
Temperature readings were taken with a thermometer graduated every 0.2°C
and plotted against thermocouple readings monitored by a Solartron type
LM 1426 digital voltmeter with a resolution of 2.Sµv. Within the limits
of the sensitivity of the thermometer, agreement was found with the
manufacturer's calibration data.

(b) Measurement of Steel Strains

The thermal stress-induced strains were measured with 2 mm gauge

length temperature compensated electrical resistance strain gauges, (Kyowa
 133

type KFC -2-Cl - ll) . Steel surfaces of strain gauge locations wer8
carefully prepared with emery paper , and cleaned with Methyl ethyl
ketone, using dental swabs . Care was taken not to directly handle the
p r oposed gauge location . The steel sur face was then sprayed with an
activator (Loctite I.S. 12), a cyanoacrylate adhesive. Then the contact
adhesive was applied to the underside of the gauge and the gauge placed
in position. The gauge was then overlaid with a thin sheet of clear
plastic, and hand pressure was applied to the gauge for 2 minutes through
rubber moulded to the shape of the bar, backed by wood . The system of
moisture and mechanical protection consisted of a flexible layer, about
1 mm thick of Shinkoh SN/4 Strain Gage Coating Cement surrounding the
gauge and t erminal str ip, overlaid by a hard shell of Expandite '5 minute
Epoxy' (Fig. 5.13) .

FIG. 5.13 STRAIN GAUGES AT LOCATION D (BEAM TWO)

(c) Measurement of Deflection

Vertical displacements were measured with Hewlett Packard linear

variable displacement transducers (LVDT) Model 24 DCDT-3000. The LVDTs
were calibrated against a displacement standard and powered with 24 volts
from a Reid Model K2 30 volt direct current variable power supply.
Displacements in Beam One were also measured using 25 mm travel dial
gauges graduated to 0.01 mm. Small brass plates were fixed to the
concrete to provide smooth bearing surfaces for the ends of the dial
gauges or to attach the LVDT coil. The LVDTs and dial gauges were
clamped to a rigid st.and bolted to the strong- floor.
 134

(d) Measurement of Reactions

Reactions were measured with two Philips 20 kN load cells per
support, as shown. in Fig. 5.14. Restraint to longitudinal movement
and rotation at the supports was minimal due to provision of the ball
bearings and rollers shown in Fig. 5.14. The load cells were
calibrated with a Budd P-350 Strain Indicator and an Avery 100 kN
Universal Testing Machine Type 7104 DCJ, with current 'A' Grade
certification.

(e) Measurement of Concrete Strains

Concrete strains were recorded during force loading and shrinkage

measurements on the beams. Longitudinally aligned 102 and/or 203 mm
gauge lengths were set out as required on the beam surface, and steel
buttons waxed onto the surface at each end of the gauge lengths. Strains
were measured with a demountable mechanical (Demec) gauge.

5.3.3 Casting and Curing of Models

The concrete mix was transported to the models by wheel-barrow,

and the pours were each completed within a period of two hours. Two
electric vibrators bolted to the mould base were used with caution to
avoid excessive bleeding. The top surface was screeded with a steel
screed, and finally smoothed with a metal trowel. The models were
covered with wet hessian for five days after the pour, at which stage
the formwork was stripped. No cavities due to lack of vibration were
found on any surface, and pitting was minimal.

To study the shrinkage stresses and cracking in the reinforced

concrete model beams, and to obtain experimental data to verify program
THERMAL, shrinkage measurements were performed on Beam One as follows.
Soon after the beam was stripped, 18 - 203 mm longitudinally aligned
gauge lengths were set out on the beam surface as shown in Fig. 5.15.
Six of the gauge lengths were on top of the flange, four on the underside
I
of the flange and four at each of two depths on the beam spine. Readings
were taken with the beam resting on the ground. It was found that
shrinkage strains were resisted by friction at the base of the beam, and
so before each set of measurements were taken, the beam was lifted by
crane and lowered into the original position. Because of reduced
section thickness the flange dried more rapidly than the spine, as
79
predicted by CEB/FIP recommendations • This resulted in a tendency
for the beam to curl upwards. However it was estimated that this would
 Support I 1
l :;
Support

l:: i
·.e." ·:<:1>:
• • • •- •
Beam spine
:<: ' •.-. -~ -_, _;;: .: : .:..
· ;-·.···."·' ... :-:.·~--- .•. -. -~
• <l • . • • • . . •• •~ • :?'.. ;·
-'-~J,··_,· _Steel wedges : · .. -_ ·· · .: -~ · ~ ::. ... ·.- -··.
,) -( ; j ' Stee l plate . ·.. •.... ·' : .; :-.·.-.: :.- . ;:.:

Boll Bearings

Load Cells ~j~J!

I •
•e.'

' i..
I 0>
9".

. •,, I •

~.
,
·~. Concrete pillar ·•. • (!

•• 'P."

(a) Front elevation (b) Side elevation Supports

(c ) General Vi ew

.......
w
(.Jl

FIG. 5.14 SUPPORT DETAILS FOR BEAMS ONE AND TWO

 136

(a) BEAM
1900 I I 1900 I
I~=~~--~5~684~-~~~~=
ELEVATION

<f_
...,__...,_....,._, 27
KEY
(b) SECTION A~A OR 8-8 • DE MEC STUDS

--"ts9
===f 19

FIG. 5.15 BEAM ONE SHHINKAGE GAUGE LOCATIONS

- S'{MBtllr ·+·-;;·;·;JL!~r Rl _ _ !___

SYMBOL. D ..... LOCATION A3
SYMBOL I A • • • • • LOCATION 81
-------
-·-·-·-~
f-----!---- ___j
l,,lt£ ...
;
I
__j ____ __
I
....SYMBdL~-~-:;:.:.- LOCATION S3 --~-;;,-_·. ·.;....;...;.!·-=i=-·
. I --- ----
1

@@
I "i

-----t----.. I
,---
1 ------!-------

~ 2SC1

.~_ ___ I rI -+----+-J4~-~-J'

L__ 71-_--+-,---+----+---l-------J

I
YJ/'~/':
(j) Lt-'U - - - - ----·--+
1
/ i / p --~--
T ·--- --
1 ---'---1-------1

.____.___ -+--~rt7/~,·-~ :_____ _,_'_

O'/ • I ,I I
___,l__
I
+---1-----1

_.l',.d.---!- 1L
15--o -- -_;.. I ~-~L---·-·~
1

Sj!-177
I// I
11
I 11
I
I I I I .,-· ~---·---4>----
I
' .. I
;;~--_J---'-P.---+-. . ___..~~- . . . ~-
- - __ _L_ .... ' ~J
. I'/'. ~ I ·I : ..,,,. ,,./ --~
/ ¢/ ~ ~-
I .
I1 I . / : ; I II I :
l CO - /,
' /-~<i>-r----1----+- ·, 0 -;/-"-"/c--,..,---,r;J...-,.---
/ I I I

! 1(~~:-~----1
'¥ /, 1o;..- '

=ti=I · '

t--1-
--,9o/;/ i I
·x----r---+----~r--:--1 - -----
sc f :~~f i '·j ' ' ' -
--------- 1·---------·---l-----,---- -- -+-+------1
o.... ~-.-*.°""'.'.""'~~~"""'.""-..~~""'.""'.............,.,.....----~---~~..._--._..-1
1 UCJ 2iJU 30.·_1 41J_1 500 5r _11J 7(f,: 8UCJ 9.~J!J
TIME CHOURS)
FIG. 5.16 BEAM ONE SHRINKAGE STRAIN MEASUREMENTS
 137

impose a maximum flexural strain due to the self weight of the beam at
any demec location of 27µ£ As this is a second order effect it was
ignored in the theoretical analysis.

When shrinkage strains were plotted against time it was found

that a smooth curve could be fitted close to experimental results
(Fig. 5.16). Between 350 and 400 hours after wet curing had been
terminated, the shrinkage strains suddenly decreased at most gauge
locations. This was attributed to cracking which was first observed
during this period. Cracks were located within gauge lengths for which
readings dropped, but no cracks were observed within the five gauge
lengths for which this discontinuity did not occur. The apparent drop in
shrinkage strains in the flange was due to the finite crack width within
the gauge length. The smaller apparent drop in the spine is attributed
to relief of compressive stresses from differential shrinkage. An estimate
of the experimental uncracked section shrinkage strains was obtained by
adding the strain drop at cracking to the measured total strain after
cracking.

Three theoretical solutions were calculated for an uncracked section,

using an average measured relative humidity (54%).
79
(a) Effective modulus solution using CEB-FIP recommended creep and
shrinkage curves, and the experimental 28-day concrete elastic modulus
given in Appendix B.
(b) Rate of creep solution with input values as in (a) .
(c) Method of superposition solution using program THERMAL with ACI-
76
Committee 209 recommended creep and rate of shrinkage formulae. The
magnitude of the shrinkage for 900 hours was obtained as in (a) above.
The assumed variation of concrete elastic modulus with time is given
by equation 2.30.
A comparison between the three solutions and experimental results
is presented in Fig. 5.17 and shows that all three methods provide similar
results and give good agreement with experimental measurements. Of the
three methods, the rate of creep solution is in closest agreement with
experimental results.

5.3.4 Erection of Models

The models were lifted from the casting bed with an overhead crane,
and placed onto prelevelled supports. Minor adjustments were performed
at this stage by inserting the steel wedges shown in Fig. 5.14 so that
 138

----------- r----~ r~r----i

Effective
;r----- /.

J
I

Effective Modulus
/:1. I_______ : .J

Modulus Soln.------'"-1
Soln.
·I . y
(//Jr Method of
//': Superposition Soln.
rt+-- Rate· of Creep
/ / : Soln .
. I
, I

I ~Rate of Creep
0
/· 1 Method of
/; : Superposition Soln.
I / : Soln.
I I

I I I
'-CEB' -FIP Unrestrained
I
I
'--CEB - FIP Unrestrained
: Shrinkage Strains.
I . Shrinkage Strains. I
/- Average experimental --.:-Average experimental
~ ..: : _ ~ results. - .J results.
Shrinkage (;te) at L.00 hours. Shrinkage (fa e: ) at 900 hours.
0 100 200 300 0 100 200 300 L.00

FIG. 5.17 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND THEORETICAL

SHRINKAGE STRAINS (BEAM ONE)
the measured and theoretical reactions were the same. This adjustment
was also performed prior to any of the tests.

The beams were carefully lifted with ropes threaded through hooks
cast into the concrete. To avoid cracking, these hooks were located
1.2 metres from each end of Beam One, and at each support location of
Beam Two.

5.4 THERMAL LOADING

5.4.1 Environmental Box

The model beams were heated by 375-Watt Philips infra-red lamps

staggered 120 mm laterally either side of the beam centreline, and at
200 mm longitudinal centres (Fig. 5.18). The bulbs were supported within
a chipboard environmental box with the faces of the bulbs being held at
400 mm above the top surface of the beam. The environmental box was
constructed in two metre lengths and joined as shown in Fig. 5.18(b)~

and an aluminium faced insulation paper (sisilation) glued to the inside

faces to provide a diffuse reflection of a high proportion of incident
radiation. The ends of the box were boarded up to prevent air currents
creating non-uniform top surface temperatures. During the tests the
environmental box hung loosely over 25 mm of insulation glued to the flange
edge (Fig. 5.18(a)) and was supported by an overhead mobile crane, so
U choped rod. 800 crs Crone hook welded to Rtt.S.

75 x 75 R.H.S.
R . H. S.

Chipboard
0 joining board
O> £ 120mm £ 120mm £ 19m m thi c k
Chipboard
Screws

Pointed block

S i silotion

0 0
U) 0
U) v
Strengthening
rod ot 800 crs

No te :
All joints glued
and screwed

25mm Chipboard
in sula ti on SEA M

(a ) Front E levo ti on Cb) Side E l evo tion (cl Pl at e

FIG. 5.18 ENVIRONMENTAL BOX

 140

that the beam was completely free to deform without restraint from the
environmental box.

5.4.2 Measured Model Radiation Intensities

A radiation measuring device was required to check that the radiation

intensity over the surface of the beams was reasonably uniform. Because
the cost of commercially available solarimeters was prohibitive, a
device was made that basically consisted of a number of thermocouples
connected in series, which gave readings indicative of the temperature
difference between black and white painted zones (Fig. 5.19). This
6130
device is similar to Radiation Measuring Devices made elsewhere and
a description of its construction is given below.
A 98 nun disc was cut from copper covered fibre-board of 0.150 nun
thickness, and the disc divided into 8 equal segments. Forty holes
giving 20 thermocouple junctions were drilled through the disc, and
corresponding holes joined with ink from a Daleo pen, so that when the
disc was immersed in saturated ferric chloride solution only these areas
remained coated. A 0.15 mm diameter constantine wire was threaded through
the holes and soldered onto the copper strips, and then the segments
on the disc were painted alternately black and white. The disc was
then glued onto a polystyrene disc which was itself glued to a plywood
base. A glass hemisphere was then glued over the two discs, to form an
air-tight seal.
(a) Calibration of Solarimeter
Calibration tests were carried out at Christchurch Airport on 27/1/76,
2
a windy but clear cloudless day of maximum radiation intensity 1018 W/m
2
and total radiation 8.66 kW hr/m • On this day, at half hour intervals,
the radiation device was positioned outside, clear of any reflecting
body, and after checking that the device was registering zero, it was
exposed to sunlight. Exactly 60 seconds later a reading in millivolts
was recorded. Over the next two minutes the reading increased by 5 to
10% and then slowly reduced until at about 8 minutes after the start of
the test, the one-minute reading was again obtained. This is because of
heat conduction to the 'cold' junctions. By plotting the 60 second
reading in millivolts against the radiation intensity from Meteorological
records obtained at Christchurch airport with an Eppley Solarimeter, a
linear relationship between radiation intensity and device output voltage
was obtained (Fig. 5.20).
 141

(a) General View

. . . LJ>~~----...;..-1-~---~~-o,
't I ,, • ', 11 I • t I '

I f , I ! • I '
I # I I I t I t '
lff , I t I fl I• I I.. '\

I .. 11 I , ' ti I I I *t '\ '

, ol I I # I I t t I '\ '
I # I t 'I I ,' f I t t I I ' '

'···.···,'··~···.···· ', ,',''

•,It .,·,~. t It f •• f ,1 f 4 I ' ', •• _ , · • f I ....

·. . ... . . ... , .. · , ...

, , ! : ': • • , , : •••• ••• •• • • ' ' ' ' : • • • • :"' • •• •• ,•
, ,, :
, ... ,.
I .' # '· f t It I I I I I I ff
' : '. t I \, I # ' I

#, # "' ',I• •,# ' ' I f I • • '\ t It ,' I ' • '• t : ,, I • t '

~~
I: ', ' ...I If'.'~·.
• I t , I t I f \, I '.: I It;, t t t I I t ' t ,'I

·,·,~ I I.·.:. I I .·~, 1',

, ,' .. ' ....
f ft •,

' ,' •,' ' • t ',' :,•

, . ' . ..t t
, . .
' • t t ti t I I .. I

#, ~ t: ...
..
..
I • :I t I I Ip I' t ·, I I ' I t : I I t 11

• I I I I :i. 1 t
11
If I t I ft: ft II I

I tf t I : t ,1 If I ' ' '

I , 1 I I f - I I

..... .... . . . .. . ilo . . . . .• • ,t : • • f

. :.: . .. .
,. f I I' I t

.. . ..
..... :
\

.. '.:
\
.. I 'I I fl I ......

'' o, I 11 I I '~' ; . . .•

•. . ..t.: .... ~·.·: . :...., ... , ,

• \ . ,·
•
1
.·.. ',' .
.. ,·· to•'"
: . : ,·'~· :..... ,''
',
~
,> ',u----1~·-·.:...'.;·~
I I

• ,,
, ,

,,,
,
,
=,,------"""'. . . ~ . ¥ ,
,,
1
,flt ,,, 1 ',',· 1' t' I I ' o ; , ,
~.: .· ~~:--.·~ :'~'
1

-
. ...
\1,.
. . ·.··•,,:
,J',
I ~ # '\
.... : ·.:,' . . ·.. ,'
I I'','·····.,'•, ,,
.. ' '.
:·· . . . ....,.·.·., ,,
\io.
.. ' ..
11.'
.
, '\
·.·I,'
•••

I I
""

' \
"

t
•• · ' ,

rt , '

'\ If,

f I
•,

It
', • ' • , ' , 111

I,' I I I I , I
I

.·,,~
:-:\
I: ,
, '
',, I I I·: I I
I I I
I 1•'','
t •f : ,
'1',I

'.. 1' If I "t I I f I.,', I

o---~~~~-1-::--~~~-o'
.....
\I.·.'
·: .l!t •
f

Painted .· Painted
White Black
KEY
-
Ori\ led hole
Copper lead
Constantine lead (under disc)
(b) Circuit Diagram
FIG. 5.19 RADIATION MEASURING DEVICE
 142
5·0
-
+-
0
! /)

>
4·0
2
........
+-
:J
a.
+-
KEY
:J
0 3·0 0 Measurements
Q)
.~
>
Q)
0
2·0
c
0
+-
.Q
"O
0
0:: l·O Best (linear) Fit

200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Measured Radiation Intensity Ni//m 2 )

FIG. 5.20 CALIBRATION CURVE FOR RADIATION

MEASURING DEVICE
(b) Radiation Measurements on Beam Two
Radiation intensities were measured at various points on the beam
surface under the enviro.nmental box. From a cold start the lamps were
turned on for 60 seconds to allow the lamps to warm up, the· radiation
device was then exposed and a reading in millivolts taken 60 seconds
later. Radiation readings were taken at 27 locations on the beam
surface, and the averages for corresponding positions found. These
averages are plotted in Fig. 5.21. It was found that repeatable
readings were obtained at individual locations.but that individual
readings varied by up to 6% from the average for other locations which
were at corresponding positions with respect to light location. This
may have been due to the differences in intensities from individual
lights, or because light filaments were not perfectly vertical.
The manufacturers of the heat lamps provide data of radiation
intensity in planes at various distances from the front of the bulb,
and this enabled contours of direct intensity also to be plotted in
Fig. 5.21. The measured radiation intensity at the beam centreline
averaged 36% more than the direct radiation from the manufacturer's
data, and beneath the lamps the result is 71% higher. Experimental
 Manufacturers Technical Data.
Infra -Red Reflector Heat Lamp Radiation Intensity in Planes
at various distances from
front of bulb.
~

---
200mm ... 1
0·6 0·7 0·8 Flange Edge
;un
1000

Lamp

E
1.6~-!ii
E
0
Type No 133ll. E/ll -.s
N
10 .!Ot::m
Philips 375 w
01•t11111c• from uua of lamp

1·3
-2_.1·2
r •a:
Lamp

Flange Edge
----- Note :- 1 unit on contour
graph = 1000 w/m
2

~
X Measured radiation
intensities

Graph Showing Contours of Relative Radiation Intensities on Beam

Flange. using lamps at 200 mm crs. longitudinally, and 240 mm crs
laterally. The Beam Flange face is 400 mm from bulb front.

FIG. 5.21 MEASURED RADIATION INTENSITIES ON BEAM TWO COMPARED WITH THEORETICAL
...
&:'

INTENSITIES BASED ON MANUFACTURER'S DATA "'

 144

readings were much more uniform than calculated from direct radiation.
This is attributed to reflection of radiation from the sisilation. It
can be seen that a satisfactory even distribution of radiation was
obtained, with maximum deviation from the average being only 6%.

5.4.3 Comparison of Predicted and Measured Model Temperature Distributions

The theoretical analysis was based on the following assumptions:

(1) Top surface radiation was constant, and equal to an average
2
experimental value of 1.698 W/m (Fig. 5.21) and top surface absorptivity =
0 .8 •
(2) The total measured air temperature rise within the box of 40°C
at 1700 seconds was assumed to have increased linearly with time.
(3) ~ir
temperature outside the box was assumed to remain constant.
2
(4) Top and bottom surface heat transfer coefficients of'_ 9. 5. W/m /°C
2
and 4.75W/m / 0 c respectively were assumed. These are consistent with
values derived for still air conditions in Section 3.9.
(5) Material thermal properties are as tabulated in Appendix E.
It can be seen from Fig. 5.22 that a good agreement was obtained
at all times in the spine, but that theoretical temperatures were less
than experimental temperatures in the flange. This may be due to hot air
seeping between the flange edge and environmental box, and warming the
underside of the flange.

5.4.4 Comparison Between Model and Prototype Heating Mechanisms

A comparison between the model and typical prototype radiation

heat loading is shown in Fig. 5.23. The model radiation intensity is
factored by 1/5 and the 1700 second time lapse factored by 25 for
reasons discussed in Section 5.2.2(c). It can be seen that the scaled
modelling radiation block is of lower severity than the maximum
experienced by a prototype. However the scaled model surface heat
transfer coefficient was also lower, and the temperature rise of the
air above the model in the environmental box (40°C at 1700 seconds)
higher than that of a corresponding prototype. Thus scaled heat
losses from the model are less than in a corresponding prototype.
The cumulative effect of the factors discussed in the above
paragraph can be gauged from Fig. 5.22. It can be seen that the
temperature distribution at 1700 seconds is slightly more severe than
49
Priestley's fifth power distribution (Fig. 1.3) as the 35°C model
temperature rise at the deck exceeds the 32°C rise proposed by
 --- ----
___- --
-- - - -
240 ,

- --
- ""'" - -
-- ... --
J_
7 .- = -- -+- ~-

220
Deck top surface

~ --
../1.: - -<.
_-:;::-::::
+
~-
-~

- ....
~ .... ,
~ __.-::::""'""

+
~-

~ w- .... . . ---- - i.- of'

~ -~ ~ - ('
200
7-1""-\- - ..
-~ -.-r
+

-v
+
-
~
1200 Seconds 1700 Seconds -Deck bottom surface :_.r--
700 Seconds
180 /
-..

E
E 160 0
I /
-- 140
le
I 0

K-EY
'+-
'+-
0
I
CJ)
120 G Experimental Results (Spine)
~ (Fierge}
0 + Experimental Results
.0
100

-
<{
- - Theoretical Results (Spine)
..c - - - Theoretical Results (Flange)
.2' 80 8 0 l\.:J
Q)
I
60
I I ! I I
I I I I I
NOTE
40 Curves at 1200 seconds plotted with zero at 10°c
Curves at 1700 seconds plotted with zero at 20°c
20

0
0I 0
• ~ I
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

Temperature Rise ( °C)

I-'
*"'
(Jl

FIG. 5.22 MEASURED AND THEORETICAL TE:MPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS

FOR BEAM 'IWO, TEST THREE
 146

1200
Christchurch 15I12 /62
Day of maximum solar
1000 radiation since 1959

T
en 800
N
'E
""?

~ 600
I/)
c
....c
Q)

c 400
0
....0
(Measured model radiation) I 5 · O
"O
0
n:: 200 Time scale * 25· 0
4 8 12 16 20
TIME (Hours)

FIG. 5.23 COMPARISON BE'IWEEN FACTORED MODEL AND TYPICAL

MAXIMUM PROTOTYPE RADIATION HEAT LOADING
49
Priestley for unsurfaced bridges. The distribution in the spine of
the model approximates a sixth,power curve reaching zero at 240 mm depth.
Temperatures at the flange deck level exceed those above the spine,
because of the insulating effect of the low heat losses from the underside
of the model flange.

This study is concerned with predicting the thermal response of

structures under a given temperature distribution. Thus there is no
reason for slavish modelling of prototype ambient conditions. The need
is merely for realistic temperature distributions to be developed, which
is considered to have been achieved. The slightly exaggerated
temperature scale should lead to more accurate experimental measurements.

Although the heating lamp pattern was not altered, the maximum
temperatures measured in Beam One at corresponding times were
approximately 25% higher than measured in Beam Tw'o. This was because
the lamps in Beam TWo were connected in series on one phase only of the
power supply which reduced the efficiency of the supply. The smaller
number of lamps required in Beam One were distributed evenly among the
three power supply phases.
 147

5.5 DESCRIPTION OF MODEL TESTS

Thermal and force loading tests were performed on both model beams.
The changes in reactions and applied loads as registered with a Philips
20 kN Load Cell were recorded manually with a Budd P-350 Strai~ Indicator.
Deflections were either read manually from dial gauges or read through
voltage changes on LVDTs with a HP-Model 3440 A digital voltmeter with
a resolution of lOOµv. Temperatures and steel strains were measured
on a 50 channel Solartron Compact Series II Datalogger, with a voltmeter
resolution of 2.5µv. The thermocouple voltage was read directly, and
the steel strains were measured using a Wheatstone-bridge circuit powered
by a four-volt power supply. The out-of-balance potential was measured
by the Solartron datalogger. Input voltage to the strain gauges was
measured once per cycle, and although it was effectively constant, all
strain gauge readings were automatically adjusted for any variation during
data processing. It was found that the repeatability of readings
deteriorated when automatic switching and printing facilities of the
datalogger were used, so manual channel selection was adopted and the
display recorded by hand.

During thermal tests the time of instrument readings was manually

recorded from a digital clock. All test data were punched onto computer
cards, and fed into the University of Canterbury's Burroughs B6718 computer.
Datawere reduced by special purpose computer programs which provided
output in discrete-number and graphical form.

5.5.l Tests on Beam One

In order to be able to check the vario.:us assumptions used in the

development of the theory in Section 4.2.2, thermal tests were first
performed on Beam One in the uncracked state. The beam was then cracked
under positive moment (to simulate conditions near the midspan of
continuous beams) and thermally loaded,and finally cracked under negative
moment (to simulate conditions near the supports of continuous beams)
and thermally loaded.

A schematic presentation of the sequence of tests performed on Beam

One is shown in Fig. 5.24. All the thermal tests were performed twice
and results averaged. It was found that results for both tests were
essentially identical.
 148

Heat Heat
~ ~ ~ \
~
'
(a} Heat on Prestressed Beam
A A (Tests 8 and 9}

r r (b} Prestress Removed

f300J 5300
l.1300t Poree Load Causing Cracks
propagating from soff it
I I
Heat Heat
~ 1\ \ ~ ~ ~ ( c ) Heat on Beam

-A- A (Test 10 and 11 )

( d ) Heat on Beam with constant

r Heat'
~ ~ !F Force Load

A
~
'A (Test 12 and 13 )

r £ J£
r (e } Supports Rearranged
Force Load Causing Cracks
propagating from deck

I I
r ~ Ji Heat
~ \ \
Heat
~ f
(f) Heat on Beam with constant

'
Force Load
J;fu. {Test 14 and 1.5)

FIG. 5.24 TESTS PERFORMED ON BEAM ONE

(a) Prestress Loading
A straight steel sheath, which held 4 - 7 mm diameter prestressing
strands, was embedded at the section centroid as shown in Figs. 5.1 and
5.25(a). A temporary prestress force of 175 kN was applied to the beam
with a prestressing jack and measured with a 200 kN load cell (Fig. 5.25(b)).
The.ioad cell was calibrated on an Avery 1000 kN Universal Testing
Machine Type 7104 DCJ • . The average prestress compressive stress of
5.06 MPa maintained the whole section in compression during the initial
 149

(A) Prestressing Details (Beam One}

(B) Prestressing Operation (Beam One)

FIG. 5.25 PRESTRESSING - BEAM ONE

 150

thermal tests shown in Fig. 5.24(a). The prestress load and ungrouted
wires were removed after this series of tests.
(b) ·Force Loading
Force load was applied to Beam One incrementally at the locations
shown in Fig. 5.24 with a 100 kN double acting hydraulic jack, the oil
pressure being applied with a hand pump. The load was measured with a
Philips 20 kN Load Cell precalibrated on an Avery 100 kN Universal
Testing machine using a Budd P-350 strain Indicator. During thermal
tests where the force loads were applied, continuous adjustments were
made with the hand pump to ensure that the force load recorded by the
strain indicator remained constant. The hydraulic jack was located
beneath the beam as shown in Fig. 5.26(a) so that minimum interference
from the hydraulic loading apparatus resulted during thermal tests.

5.5.2 Tests on Beam Two

The sequence of tests carried out on Beam Two is indicated in

Fig. 5.27. Two initial thermal tests were performed on Beam Two without
kentledge loading as shown in Fig. 5.27(b). Shrinkage cracks were
observed in the deck slab before these tests, and the beam in this state
is referred to as semi-cracked. After the initial thermal tests, forces
in each span were simultaneously applied (Fig. 5.26(b)) to induce
cracking and cause a maximum theoretical steel stress of approximately
240 MPa in each span. This procedure was repeated three times at
slightly different locations over the regions in Beam Two shown in
Fig. 5.27(b). Four thermal tests were performed on Beam Two with full
kentledge loading after the force loading had extensively cracked the
beam, as shown in Fig. 5.27(c). The beam in this state is. referred to
as fully-cracked. In the last two thermal tests on the fully-cracked
beam only sufficient temperatures were recorded to ensure duplication of
previous test temperatures was obtained, and steel strains and reactions
were followed manually with a Budd P-350 Strain Indicator rather than
using a datalogger. Essentially the same experimental results for steel
strains and reactions were obtained for all four thermal tests on the
fully-cracked beam. Apart from noting the above consistency, only steel
stress-induced strain measurements from the last two tests have been
used further in this thesis.
End Support Load

(B} Beam Two

(A) Beam One

FIG. 5.26 FORCE LOADING OF MODEL BEAMS

 152

Heat Heat
(a) Heat on.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~

l
Semi - Cracked Beam.
A ~Ab Tests I and 2

( b) Force Load
on Beam
Range Range

I· 1188+7i21·1320 + 1728
.. 1.. t ·+
1143 1691 ·I

(c) Heat on.

Fully-.:. Cracked Beam.
Tests 3,4, 5 and 6

Key,....., D = Kentledge Weights

FIG. 5.27 TESTS PERFORMED ON BEAM TWO

5.6 THEORETICAL CRACK DISTRIBUTIONS FOR MODELS

Theory for analysis of theoretical thermal response developed in

Section 4.3.2(a) requires the specification of crack heights. Theory
for computing crack height and cracked-section-stiffness resulting from
non-thermal loading will be briefly developed below.

5.6.l Theoretical Crack Height

Methods of calculating crack heights in elastic reinforced concrete

sections under flexural loading are well known. However for completeness
one technique will be briefly summarised. Although a direct solution is
possible, an iterative procedure providing a simple computer-orientated
solution for a general section will be used. The theory differs from
normal reinforced concrete theory in that concrete is assumed to develop
tensile stress up to the flexural tensile concrete strength f' at the
t
root of the crack.

Fig. 5.28 shows a reinforced concrete section subjected to a

moment M• Initially ft is put to zero, and the crack height s1
 153
KEY
T,C Tension, Compression respectivety
. . . . ..
•

:
.:.,,: ~: .... "'-~:..~'
t • , .....
Concrete Stresses

Steel Stresses (not to scale )

cc..
I l1 ., .I
:·~:::
.....
:l\::· :.: :.~·.
..
I•·,~ \."
.. .... ~:..
·~ :·:
.. ·.
....:~... f
T" • lo c
(a) Section (b) Strain ( c ) Stress Profile (d) Stress Profile
Profile (No concrete tensile (With concrete
stresses) tensile stresses)

FIG. 5.28 EQUILIBRIUM OF CRACKED REINFORCED CONCRETE SECTION

for equilibrium found, (Fig. 5.28(b)). This may be achieved by putting
E
1
= 1, and varying ~l until the nett compressive force on the section
equals the nett tensile force as shown in Fig. 5.28(c). A first
~
approximation for
2 can now be found from:
I f'
c t
= y (5.11)
M

where are given by equations 4.11 and 4.12, using the

y and I
c
current best estimate of crack height. New values of y and I are
c
recalculated from the crack height obtained from equation 5.11, which
when inserted back into equation 5.11 provide a better approximation for
crack height. The process is repeated until variations in computed
values of crack height are negligible. The technique is similar for
reverse loading, except that the crack will propagate from the deck
rather than from the soffit.

A computer program was written to obtain the crack heights for the
model beams with specified positive or negative moments, and a typical
relationship between crack height and moment so obtained is plotted in
Fig. 5. 29. The crack height is taken as the absolute distance from the
tensile su~face .to the crack tip. It will be noted that crack height,
rather than being stable as would be the case for zero concrete tension,
is highly dependent on the moment, particularly for cracks initiating at
the web soffit (positive moment cracking). The experimentally
 154

Positive
f( = o. Cracked NA 187mm
180
....
Positive Negative
160 Region Cracked NA 1L.8 mm

ft'= o.
11.0

E
E
120

100
(
/
/
--- -
\_Negative
RegiC!n
Moment

I
..... I
..c
·a;
Ol 80 I
I
~
I
u
0
....
60 I
u

L.O
n = 7·00 =Es/Ee
f/=L.·26MPa
20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Moment (kNm)

FIG. 5.29 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MOMENT AND CRACK HEIGHT

FOR BEAM TWO
determined values of material properties used in generation of these
graphs are summarised in Appendix B. Although some concrete tension
will develop below the cracking level between cracks which will provide
a region stiffness greater than that computed at a cracked section,
this stiffness will reduce with bond deterioration under repeated loading.

5.6.2 Moment-of-Inertia Distributions

The bending moment at any section in Beam One due to the dead load
plus force load in Fig. 5.30 can be obtained from statics. Thus the
theoretical crack height s at any section can be found from the theory
described in the previous section, and the moment-of-inertia I
c
derived
from equation 4.12.

The situation is more complex in Beam Two, because of the moment

redistribution due to cracking. The solution technique proceeded as
follows.
 155

10·89 kN 'ICJ.97 kN 10·70 kN 10·79kN

I I l l
. ,. 1300 .1
.....: _ _ _ _ _ _
L 1300 ~
=53~0~0_ _ _~
STRUCTURE
: 1300
•"l 1iliIl1 1300
I 5300

lJ ~i~Jic:.'l ~I__:-------_,___~I
5
0 E
~
5 :£0
10 ~ KEY
15 ~ r E><perimental D.G.
e Experimental L.V.D.T.

(a) Positive Moment (b) Negative Moment

FIG. 5.30 BEAM ONE FORCE LOADING RESULTS

A graph of I vs was derived from equation 4.12 for

c
Beam Two sections (Fig. 5.31). For each force loading case an I
c
distribution was assumed, and a bending moment distribution along
the beam calculated with a computer program based on the Moment-Area
theory developed in Appendix A. A new crack distribution was
calculated from the bending moment distribution (from Fig. 5.29) and
from the crack distribution from the previous loading. A new I
c
distribution was generated from the crack distribution using Fig. 5.31,
which enabled a new bending moment distribution to be calculated.
The cycle was repeated until negligible changes occurred. I It
c
was found that this could be achieved in three cycles.

Unfortunately at one stage an overload force of 44.5 kN was

applied on the shorter span of Beam Two during crack formation loading.
It was noted that for the load pattern adopted (Fig. 5.27) steel yielding
theoretically occurred at a force load of 42.2 kN and a full mechanism
should form at 60.6 kN. The bending moment distribution was obtained
by finding the elastic distribution from a force of 42.2 kN, plus the
bending moment distribution due to a force of 2.3 kN applied assuming
a hinge at the yield location. However it will be noticed from
Fig. 5.31 that the overload caused little decrease in section stiffness,
and thus in the . thermal continuity moments. The final theoretical
crack distribution for Beam Two after crack-formation loading, and the
measured surface crack distribution at this st.age is shown in Fig. 5. 32.
It will be noted that there is a good agreement between both theoretical
 156

250

Note: Section CC !Fig 5.2) Used for Deck

"E Crack Analysis
... E 20 Section DD (Fig 5.2) Used for Soffit
....
0 Crack Analysis

-
.Q
ti;
c
150

.....
~ 100
E Soffit crack
0
~

50

Q-+-~--.--~-.-~~---~~---~--,.--~--.-~~......-~~--~-....~~--~

0 20 LO 60 80 100 120 11.0 160 180 200

Crack Penetration (mm l

FIG. 5.31 RELATIONSHIP BE'IWEEN MOMENT-OF-INERTIA

AND CRACK HEIGHT FOR BEAM '!WO

240.
I - T o p of flange
I
L, rJ
200. . I
L - -- -- -- I
.J
'-----
·I
r
I
Bottom of flange
I

E 160.
.5
....
,._
<;::::
0
VI - ----- I
120~
QJ I
>
0
I 1$EY
.0 ,-- J
0
I - - Theoretical crack height
80. I
en
'(jj
r- based on BM envelope &
f/= I.· 25 MPa. BM taken at
:x: J.' from support.
- - - - Measured crack height
1.0. (lntluence of a crack
assumed to extend cl.'
, either side.)
I,~ flexural tensile strength
O·O .1.·~ Effective depth of section
!& I
di I
~ ~ "Hegion of overload.

O·O 1·0 2·0 HJ t.·0 5·0 6·0 7·0 8·0

Distance along Beam (ml

FIG. 5.32 BEAM TWO CRACK DISTRIBUTION IN 'FULLY CRACKED'

STATE
 157

and measured crack height and distribution for cracks propagating

from the soffit. Although the measured distribution of cracks
propagating from the deck is similar to the theoretical distribution,
the measured crack heights are significantly less. This is attributed
to the difficulty of ascertaining the extent of penetration of' these
cracks.

5.7 TEST RESULTS - BEAM ONE

5.7.1 Force Loading

Beam One was incrementally force loaded for several cycles in both
configurations shown in Fig. 5.24. After several cycles it was found
that a linear force/deflection relationship was obtained, as can be seen
from Fig. 5.33 for the two loading configurations. The locations of
the deflection gauges vary between the two tests and are shown in Fig.
5.33. A comparison of the theoretical and experimental deflection
profiles is included in Fig. 5.30. Excellent agreement exists for
positive moment cracking, and agreement is satisfactory for negative
moment cracking. Deflections beneath the load point for negative
cracking (Fig. 5.30(b)) .exceed theoretical deflections, suggesting that
shrinkage stresses may have caused the beam to crack closer to the ends
than calculated as described in Section 5.6.2.

A uniform crack spacing resulted from both force loading cases,

with an average crack spacing of 117 mm for the cracks initiating from
the soffit, and 92 mm for cracks initiating from the deck.

The steel strain gauge readings were compared with theory during
both force loading phases shown in Fig. 5.24. It was found that generally
the experimental steel tensile strains were slightly less than the
theoretical strains, and the steel compressive strains correlated well
with surface concrete strains read with a demountable mechanical (Demec)
gauge on steel buttons waxed to the surface at two sections (Fig. 5.34).
The discrepancies are probably due to the different strain profiles
experienced between cracks than at crack faces, as illustrated in Fi~. 5.35,
where the tensile stress flow into the concrete below crack level between
the cracks is shown. A reduction in steel tensile force and an increase
in the height of the centre of the tension forces results. To balance
the applied moment, compression and tension forces will rise from those
at the crack, and the neutral axis drops.
 ..
158

KEY GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS FORCE

~-
" ~ ~ .,
A O.G. 3

18
~ g.~. ~

@
IS
- I I 1 I I /

....___
lffTI 0

/ /
/A ·@&©

i~Ht t
>--

z
Ji
We.sf
A
Ea.sf
/ "/
0
,_, II
12 i---

..___ // A cD&@
/ /
I-
~ 10 - Dial Goug_rz i locations // /

_J
/ / ,,/
b0 .9" / /'/ /
•//" /
~
/
6
/
/'.'. VS' / -
s
4
w !/
3
f /
,# /
I
A~
0
I~
0 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 II
FORCE (kN)

(a) Positive Moment

KEY GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS FORCE

~~
n .~.,

A L\,UT 3
.
~
~·~· !
18
.
• I I I I I ~· "'CD
U/.DJ.

r·~
O.G. 3
O,G, 4
15
mo I· i,6~ •
/ / ~u1.o:r.
/
@
I ""' I ///

'tl I r,~itt
11
z
4 / r/
~~:t'f
12
0
...... II
//'/
/
t-
u 10
//
~ / /
LL a
w Dial Gau2es And LVDTLocafions / ~/
0 e O.G.
I//" __.
f(D& ©
4
7

6
/ v ~
V"

L.V.O. T.
~~

-----
/ 'i ~
i.,...'~

--~--
5
~
// ~ D.G.
4
v ~& ® 3

/ v
--- ~ .... ~ L---
-
--- ----- ----- ----
3 .,....... u
~

---
~
2

/~ ~~
~ ,::::::::;-_,,,... L---

0
0 z 3 5 6 7 e 9 11
FORCE {kN)

(b) Negative Moment

FIG. 5.33 EXPERIMENTAL DEFLECTIONS UNDER FORCE

LOADING (BEAM ONE)
 159

Demec Locations

KEY
Oemec readings
- S.G. Range

10 s 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 86420246
Tension Compression Tension Compression

Strains x 10 4 Strains x 104

(a) Positive Moment (b) Negative Moment

FIG. 5.34 ?TRAINS IN BEAM ONE UNDER FORCE LOADING

(a) Stresses At (b) Stresses Between (c) Strain

~rack Face Crack Faces Profiles

FIG. 5.35 STRESSES AND STRAINS AT POSITIVE MOMENT

CRACKED REGION
 160

5.7.2 Concrete Temperatures During Thermal Load Tests

A typical sample of the temperature/time curves for thermocouples

in Beam One is shown in Fig. 5.36. A smooth curve has been fitted
through the experimental measurements. A typical sample of th,e
experimentally determined temperature profiles is shown in pig. 5.37.
Although a smooth curve can be drawn close to experimental points, it
can be seen that a temperature range from 0-5°C occurs at various levels.
However for corresponding times a maximum temperature variation of l.5°C
occurred for particular gauges between tests. Comparisons between
theoretical and experimental temperature profileshavebeen discussed in
Section 5.4.3.

5.7.3 Beam Deflections During Thermal Load Tests

(a) Deflection Time-Histories

The experimental deflection/time curves for the four thermal loading
configurations depicted in Fig. 5.28 are presented in Figs. 5.38-5.41.
Gauges 8 and 9 were located 30 nun below the deck surface and measure,
beam longitudinal movement. Note that Figs. 5.38-5.41 show the sum of
the movements measured by gauges 8 and 9, and have been factored as shown
for clarity. The location of the other gauges are defined in Fig. 5.33.
It will be noted that maximum deflections recorded for the uncracked
beams at 2000 seconds (Fig. 5.38) were 10% more than for the positive
moment cracked beam without force loading (Fig. 5.39), and 40% more
than for the same beam with force loading (Fig. 5.40), An average
thermal curvature can be derived for the length of beam between the
supports from the maximum deflection. The average thermal curvature
of the uncracked beam was 28% greater than for the negatively cracked
beam.

Two thermal tests were performed for each loading configuration

shown in Fig. 5.24. It was found that the maximum beam deflections at
1700 seconds in corresponding tests were within 2.5% of the deflections
shown in Fig. 5 . 38 - 5. 41.

(b) Longitudinal Deflections

Table 5.2 compares the experimental beam longitudinal movement at
1700 seconds, as recorded by dial gauges 8 and 9 with the theoretical
movement 6 given by
e
·R,
6 E dx (5.12)
e f0 x
 KEY TEST N0.17
,.-...
u
0
Heat <;t Heat
'-'
60
f~5~f(fS
We.st East
(j) SS ~.
w ..:.1
Q'. Location Of' Thermo-coupkz Line
~ 50
f-
CI
Q'. 45
w
Q_
L:
w 40
f-
35

30

25

20 I I I I b#"" I I I I 21" I l """ "Sil...- I I I I I =- -r I I I I I

151-- I I /I I I ±:,......- I :2!"'1 ~<1 I I I =-=--<f"2 I I I I I I I I I

101 l:;H' I I p.ir__..:r- ;1;;....-=-1 I _:=-!.,..-=

..:~J .1.1. lk l *I ~I~ I: t :I :Et l :i:f@ I

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1 JOO 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100
TIME (SECONDS)

FIG. 5.36 EXPERIMENTAL TEMPERATURE!TIME CURVES (BEAM ONE) ....

....
O')
 KEY TEST N0.17
SY!"SOL + .•••• Lii'£ l
TEMPERRTURE PROFILES RT TIME 1700 SECONDS
2
.
,........ SYt130L 0 • • • • • LI!'£
SY!'all "" • • • • • LI 1'£ 3

L:: Deck Top Surface-......_

L::
'-"
z40
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1-- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ - _ _ 1-- _ _ _ L . . . ___ - - - - __ 1-- _ _ _ _ I - - - - - - - - r- - · - - - i-' - - - .

I- - --l--4--"-- ~
o~H- o
~
zzo
w-- -~ _.J~
~
+

r :v - -·
~-o---i---
0
l..J_ ,, · Flange
~
~
200
- - - - - ~ < ~- - - - - - - - - ~
- r- -1
~ '

~ 1so V Spine Deck Bottom Surface

0 160 /
~ l/
1- 140 I
I
(..!) lZO
I ~ 1e-f f"!hf
0
¢ tee ~ ~
(

/
~

w We.st East
I 100 I
s
Ill
.....
.~I"
. ·.C::
.....1:.::i
location OF Thermo-covg_/12 lines
80 Iii-

60

40

20

~
0
0 z 4 6 8 lO lZ 14 16 18 20 zz 24 26 Z8 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 !:;

TEMPERRTURES ( oc)

FIG. 5.37 EXPERIMENTAL TEMPERATURE PROFILE FOR BEAM ONE AT 1700 SECONDS ....
al
N
 KEY GRRPH BF DEFLECTION VS TIME
SYM30L LOCATION TEST N • 9
+ INST. 1 LVOT
CJ INST. 2 LVOT
INST. 3 LVDT

$
x
. by 2·5 -t-----ii--t-+-+--1--1--+-+--l----+--1--_j__];aJ
8

:L L I Heat t Heat

~u·~: ~®
L?
z
0
1-1

I-
6 ~--+-
-+-®
"'1' ] ~ ll'°''
Uncrackrzd Beam
Dial Gauge And L.V.IJ.T Locofions
u

~ '~-i--r--r---r---t---t--t--t--t--t-~~:i~~~~::._+--i--~~~::::~::J
w
5

@
I
7

3 1-- I I I I I I I 7 ' d' I :.........- I I :;.1.c I I I 1 ~ >r I I I

z 1-- I I I I 71"'.,a' I 7"9f" I :b.....- I _ L;.SWF I I I I I I I I I

0 I 00 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 l 000 l l 00 1200 l 300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000
TIME CSECONDS)
....
en
FIG. 5.38 BEAM ONE EXPERIMENTAL DEFLECTION/TIME CURVES (UNCRACKED)
w
 KEY GRAPH No:1T
TEST OF DEFLECTION VS TIME
SYl'130L LOCRTICN
+ INST-:-1 LVDT
D INST. 2 LVDT
INST. 3 LVDT

$
x
by 2·0
B -;-~-r---t~-t----'-1f----f-~l---l-~+--+-~-l--i-~-l.---l.~
I I I -
f

tHfik:
Heat Heat

u~~iJ
7

Ll
:

s
1-
6 cracked beam
Dial Gauge And L.V.~T Locations

u
w
_J 5
l.J... tB+S\
w ~
0
4

0~111111111111111111
0 l 00 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 l l 00 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1800 2000
TIME CSECONOS)
FIG. 5.39 BEAM ONE EXPERIMENTAL DEFLECTION{TIME CURVES (POSITIVE MOMENT CRACKS - NO
FORCE LOADING)
....
0)
.i::.
 KEY ¥~~~HNB;19EELECTION VS TIME
SYM30L LOCATIO'I
+ INST. l LVOT
0 INST. 2 LVDT
INST. 3 LVDT

r
$
x
8 e---" I 1 1
• r'-~actor~d by ~·5_-1---4---4-----l---+---+-___,f--_ _ _+---+---+---+----;----;----t
Heat F ~ F Heat

~11 HH1~·,®
L:
2:: 7

z
0
cracked btl!am
1-1 6 Dial Gauge And L.V./J.T Locations '7--'-,1'

f-

8
_J
LL
s I I I I I I I ....... ~I :2'"'1 "'o;:lf
w
0
4 I-- I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.... ,.....~,......-r I ~ ::J.- -=><:1 I

0
0 l 00 200 300 400 500 GOO ~ 700 800 900 1000 l I 00 l 200 1300 1400 l 500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000
TIME CSECONOS)
FIG. 5.40 BEAM ONE EXPERIMENTAL DEFLECTION(flME CURVES (POSITIVE MOMENT CRACKS - WITH ...
FORCE LOADING)
m
 KEY ~ERPH OE DEEL ECTION
ST N0.15 VS TIME
SYl"BOL LOCATION
+ INST. l LVDT
D Il'IST. 2 LVDT
INST. 3 LVDT
"'
v
$
11'<::> I •
INsT. ~ D.G.
INsT. E D.G.
U.b., I I
x INsT. D.G.
8
• C.G. Ell 2 -Factored by 2·0

I I I
Hrzot ~ Hrzof
F F
L l ~ . ~
L 7 -- (6) •
A
3 t ~ ~West Cj) 2 ~
A
~ DEastc ~ 1:
(9)

z
0
""'"
(;.rg_r;..krzd Ba.am
~'~UN

1-i 6 - /Jial Gauga And LJl!J.T locations

t-
u
w 0)
s
-0-
~
_J
LL -r
~ ~ _....---
w
0
v .- ~ I
__. ®-
4
v
---
/
/ ~ ,.,..,.- ~
~
3

~
/-"'
~ _..,.,,. ~
/

...--..- ~
~
~

---
-~ ([;)_
z

A~ ~.
p __.,,,...
~~

,..,.........-
rt'

-- "'""-"
~
-
-
~

-
,___.,,.. ~ ~
~

::l..-
.-:r7'

:0
@~
... .,. "
~
~
-- ~
~
~

- - .
.,,,,

--- - ~ &61
0
0 l 00 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 l JOO l ZOO l 300 1400 1500 l 600 1700 1800 1900 2000
TIME CSECONOS)
FIG. 5.41 BEAM ONE EXPERIMENTAL DEFLECTION/TIME CURVES NEGATIVE MOMENT CRACKS-WITH
...
Cl'I
FORCE LOADING) O'>
 167

where Ji, = . beam le_ngth

E
x
= . theoretical thermal strain at level of dial gauges
at longitudinal location x , . given by equation 4. 2 .

TABLE 5. 2 THEORETICAL/EXPERIMENTAL END MOVEMENT IN BEAM

.ONE AT 1700 SECONDS

Force Theoretical Experimental

Beam Configuration
Load Movement (mm) Movement (mm)

Uncracked No 1.61 1.62

Positive Moment
No l. 75 1.85
Cracks
Positive Moment
Yes l . 75 1.83
Cracks
Negative Moment
Yes 1.67 l . 72
Cracks

Agreement between the experimental and theoretical movements shown

in Table 5.2 is good, especially for the uncracked beam. The average
experimental movement is 3.5% more than the theoretical, which-suggests
that the measured coefficient of thermal expansion may have been slightly
low.

(c) Comparison Between Theoretical and Experimental

Deflection Profiles

The theoretical and experimental deflection profiles at three times

for each of the four loading configurations depicted in Fig. 5.24 are
shown in Figs. 5.42-5.44. Theoretical deflections were calculated and
plotted by TSTRESS, based on the theory developed in Section 4.2.2.

Fig. 5.42 illustrates the excellent correlation between the

experimental and theoretical deflections for the uncracked beam.
20
.
Priest 1 ey a 1 so f ound goo d agreement in
. tests h e per f ormed on uncrac k e d
beams. The theoretical deflection for Beam One ignoring the reinforcing
steel has also been plotted for time 1700 seconds. It can be seen that
this causes only a 2.5% increase in deflection.

Fig. 5.43 shows the theoretical and experimental thermal

deflections for the beam with positive moment cracks, for the loading
cases of with and without constant force load. Within the plotting
accuracy the theoretical curves are the same for both loading cases,
 168

Heat Heat Heat

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
' ''
t ~ ~ ) t \
'
.

A A
I.
SECONDS
E
g 3 0
J,
•§ 2r-~-t-~-t"7"i:;_T--~-t-~--t~~+-~-+~~l----Clc___;~~--+~~+-~-l
.........

-
~

o
u
Q)
1 r-~--t-:."'--t~~-t-~-t-~--t~~-+-~-+-~~1--~-+-~-?....._~-1--~-1

Oi-,.""--t-~-+------+----+-~......+~~-+-~-+-~~1--~-i.-~......+~.......:::ii.......---1

6
I I
1200 SECONDS
-Es ""
~ ~~ .
.5 / ...
ct. 17
0
_,_, 3 / D
~ ...
u
~
/
~
a; 2 /
0
/ ~
0
y
/ \
5( IO 10: IO J 5( () 2()( IO 25( ~ 30( 0 35( IO 4CX ~ 45( IO soc lo 55(
~ 00:
0
-1

1700 SECONDS
-Nos ·pp!
7 --
~
6
;~ ~--

E 5
7 "' ~
~
//

.5 j '~
t.
c .v '\
0 /
4= 3
\
-~
u
2
v
I \

0
Q)

J . \
o· I \
zo ~ 30(~ 40I lo
60~
11 9 :0 to:IO lS Ile 4S Ile 50 llO
ZS IO 35( IO 55(
\
-1

FIG. 5.42 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL BEAM ONE THERMAL DEFLECTIONS
(UNCRACKED)
 r
169

i
Heat
~ ~ ~ f1 ~ 0
) ~
Heat
~
Crack.ed Beam
F • O·OOl<N
~ ~ ~ ~
Heat
~. ~
A
~

X F 111 /0 ·!JO k. N

t.
E 700 SECONDS
g 3
c
0 2
+-'
u
~
4--
O.>
0 0

-1

6
1200 SEcm OS
E
gs v- ~

§ t. v
/ r.- 0 ~~
+-'
u
°' 3 v
/ "
~
.... " I<
~
"
~
4--

0
Q)
2 /
v~
0 '
~

f'\
0
I \
·1
:rt 9 :0 10 ro 19 ro zo :0 29 :0 30 ID 39 :0 40 ID 49 ro so ro 59
t\ 60
ro

1700 SECOt- OS
7 f-Norr )W f:r1 irk
.t
p---
-~
6 ~ l') ........

E 5
/ 0

"
"
""""'0~
..s t. /,, ....

c
0
/
v -
""
+-'
u 3
~
...__
?. 0\
M
I\
0°' 2
j
v \
0 I \
-1
11 s
ltO JO: IXJ JS ro 20 ro 29 ro 3()( to 35( ro 40 ro 49 ro so :0 SS
\ ro
!(]

FIG. 5.43 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL BEAM ONE THERMAL DEFLECTIONS
(POSITIVE MOMENT CRACKS)
 17U

Heat Heat
~ f ~ , t ) )
:A F=10·7kN

700 SECOt OS

_,,.,-- ~ 0 -5--..-. ..._

E o
.5 0 s0 10:
~ lo '2CX 0 29; IO 30: IO 351 )0 40 lo~
~&X lo
55( IO ea IO
~
§ -1
....... 0/
/ '~ ~
~ -2
...._
0
Cl>
-3

-4
/
'"
-5

-6

1200 SECONDS

-E /
~
\:.J

~ t'--.._
J; 0
0 SC io JCX
~7 IO ro: iO 25( IO 30: I() 35( IO 4C(
~~ I() 50( 0 55l ~ so: )()
c0
.......
u
-1

/ ' '\
~ -2
...._
Cl> ,,. /
/ ·~
0 -3
'\D
-4 /
/ i\.
\
-5

-6

1700 SECONDS
2
0 ............... i.....
1 ~

E o0
E
__.. -1
51 IO JI)
io?
[7
/
io 2CX IO 2SC IO 30: lo 35( io ""
4CX
r--....
o~ 0 50( IO SS( KJ 6CXO

~
c
0
:z; -2 ~
u \
~
Qi -3
/
I \
0
- l.
-;/ \
\~
-5

-6
7 \
FIG. 5.44 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL BEAM ONE THERMAL DEFLECTIONS
(NEGATIVE MOMENT CRACKS}
because the theoretical crack strains were large enough to cause
insignificant theoretical compressive stresses to develop across the crack
face, and there was little difference in final propagated crack height.
For comparative purposes, the deflection for the beam, with an assumed
narrow crack soffit strain of 50µ£ over the entire cracked region, has
been plotted for time 1700 seconds. It can be seen that this causes
only a 1.5% decrease in deflections. The agreement between the theory
and experiment for the beam with positive cracks, is not as good as the
agreement obtained for the uncracked beam. Typical discrepancies are
of the order of 8% and 23% for the two cases respectively. Crack growth
during the test would have decreased the beam stiffness, increased the
sagging force load deflection and thus apparently reduced the thermal
hogging deflection. However calculations showed that this would only
reduce deflections by 1.5% maximum. A more likely explanation is that
the shrinkage cracks propagating from the deck did not fully close.
It will be shown in Section 5.9 that shrinkage cracks only 20 mm deep
reduce thermal curvatures by about 20% in Beam One.

Fig. 5.44 shows that there is good agreement between experimental

and theoretical thermal deflections for the beam with negative moment
cracks, while experiencing constant force load. It will be shown in
Section 5.8.9 that small cracks propagating from the soffit have little
effect on thermal curvature, and thus even if the positive moment
induced cracks did not close under negative moment, the effect on thermal
curvature is expected to be small. Shrinkage cracks propagating from
the deck would clearly not influence response under negative moment
cracking.

5.7.4 Steel Stress-Induced Strains

A typical example of the steel stress-induced strain time-

histor ies for the strain gauges in Beam One is shown in Fig. 5.45. It
can be seen that experimental scatter is minimal and that a smooth curve
can be drawn through the experimental points. Readings over a 24 hour
period prior to the test gave stable steel stress-induced strain
readings with a maximum drift of ±10µ£ •

The experimental mean and range of steel stress-induced strains

for corresponding locations are plotted in Fig. 5.46 for the four thermal
loading cases at time 1700 seconds. For clarity the points for the
beam flange have been plotted marginally below their true level to avoid
 KEY TEST N0.11 ~
0,/~<0-
120 ,

I
,..-... ~~ -~
(j) 100 J 0
/•"I" ··ii
z ~
~
~
f--j

([ 80
" a( rff i !'© 4
/ ~
~

~
Ct'. iz...--- '-"""
I- ~
(j) ~ ~
0
Ct'.
u
6()1- ®-1o
<i ;&
--
.-@

~ ~
V"
~
L.--a-
'-"""

4 - - 4
/
G-
CV CD
f--j 40 ..... __, .- ..._____
:L
.......,.
~
-::;:::;;:,.._ ~
~
I~
-- ..12

20 A- '-

, -j:I

Ill 10
~~
t:::A""'
"' -
-- -- ~
"'
ff,
5 '"'
KB,
":©
"'
--
I=
/
,
~

-20
7 ... - /
/ / I/ I
(j)
z
f--j
([
-40
' '0
Ct'.
I-
(j) -60

-so

-100

-120
0 100 200 300 400 500 60J 700 800 9CO 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 160'.l 1700 lSOJ 19CO 2000 2100
TIME CSECONOS)

FIG. 5.45 BEAM ONE EXPERIMENTAL STEEL STRESS.INDUCED STRAIN/TIME CURVES (POSITIVE
MOMENT CRACKS) ...
"""'
N
 173

He of Haaf
\ t ~ \ A East A East
I 240
240

100 I
E
E 160 1601

-
;;:
....
0
(/)
140!

120J
Cl>
>
0 100·
.0

-
<{

.c so'
OI
Q)
J:

Spine Spine

-200 -100 200 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200

Steel Stress - Induce Strains y.«£) Steel Stress - Induced Strains y£)

Tension "' • • Compression Tension ..,ci..__--~ Compression

(a) No Cracks ( b) Crocks Propagating From Deck

(No Applied Load )

Heat F F Heat F Heclf f Heat F

w~sfl_ f ! \ ,L f fjiEasf Wesf ~--f....,J~f•! ~h"""'f........J! Eosf

.i....i

240 240

- -tr'

200
';,LFloog•
180 180

160 160
E
E KEY
140
Measured range and I
0
(/)
mean (Spine ) 120j
Cl> Measured range and
> 1001
0 mean (Flange)
.0
<{ (Plotted just below
-
.s::.
.£'
true level)
80

Cll Theoretical Curve

J:

Spine Spine

-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 - 200 - 100 0 100 200

Steel Stress - Induced Strains yti Steel Stress - Induced Strains (p El
Tension .i • '" Compression Tension '"' • ao Compre-~sion
· ( c ) Ci'acks Propagating From Soffit (d) Cracks Propagating From Deck
(With Applied Load ) (With Applied Load )

FIG. 5.46 COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL BEAM ONE THERMAL STEEL STRESS·
INDUCED STRAIN PROFILES
 174

overlapping the points from the spine. The theoretical steel stress-
induced strain profiles are also plotted in Fig. 5.46. These were
calculated using a rearranged form of equation 4.4 as shown below.

(5.13)

Values of and were derived from the section solution

111

"'t
provided by TSTRESS, and the temperatures T(x,y) were obtained from
the experimental measurements.

Although the range of experimental results is relatively small

for corresponding gauges, especially for the soffit steel, and although
repeated tests showed excellent agreement for individual gauges, the
correlation with theoretical results is rather poor. The following is
possible:
(1) The manufacturers state that the temperature compensating
capacity of the strain gauges = 10.8 ± l.8µE/°C over the range used.
An error of 2µE/°C between the steel coefficient of thermal expansion
and the gauge compensation factor would induce errors over 50µE for
the deck steel in the spine, and 75µE for the flange steel, which
compares with the measured discrepancy.
(2) Strain gauges located between cracks will be subjected to a
different stress-induced strain than would be experienced at a cracked
section.

Note that strain gauges are not located at positions of maximum

theoretical strain, and so are poorly located for testing theory.
Reinforcing could have been provided near the section centroid to allow
the large strains to have been measured, but this would have invalidated
the modelling.

5.8 TEST RESULTS - BEAM TWO

5.8.l Measured Crack Distributions

(a) Semi-Cracked State
The theoretical analysis of Beam Two in the semi-cracked state
(shrinkage plus dead-load cracking only) was based on the measured
surface crack distribution, as shown in Fig. 5.47. The cracks penetrated
about 30 mm at the flan9e edges, and continued across the deck top until
close to the flange/spine junction (Fig. 5.47). No cracks were observed
 175

2500 2100 2900

1~

4454

Vertical scale is exaggerated

(A) Distribution Of Cracks On North Flange

Shrinkage cracks appeared to

penetrate 30mm into deck

(B) Typical Observed Shrinkage Cracks

FIG. 5.47 SEMI-CRACKED BEAM 'IWO MEASURED CRACK DISTRIBUTION

on the flange bottom surface. Two cracks were observed in the south
flange, near the midspan of BC in Fig. 5.47, but as these cracks were
isolated and would tend to close under thermal loading they were ignored.
An assumed uniform crack penetration of 30 mm over the regions shown in
Fig. 5.47 was used in the theoretical analysis but it is probable that
actual crack penetration in flange and spine were quite different.

(b) Fully-Cracked State

The theoretical thermal analysis of the beam in the fully-cracked
state was based on the crack distribution calculated from the theory in
Section 5.6.2. A comparison of theoretical and measured surface crack
distributions is shown in Fig. 5.32, and is discussed in Section 5.6.2.
Where the shrinkage crack heights shown in Fig. 5.47 exceed the crack
heights in Fig. 5.32 the former is used. Photographs of surface crack
distributions are shown in Fig. 5.48 and Fig. 5.49. Note that crack
width has been accentuated with black felt-pen.
 176

FIG. 5.48 CRACK DISTRIBUTI ON IN BEAM ONE (SHRINKAGE CRACKS)

AND BEAM 'IWO (FULLY CRACKED)

5.8.2 Force Loading

Beam Two was cracked with repeated cycles of force load over the
regions shown in Fig. 5.27. Deflections were recorded at locations shown
in Table 5.1 and plotted against load in the final cycles (Fig . 5.50).
In the early stages of loading the force load on the shorter span was
substantially greater than on the other span, and consequently there
are larger deflections measur ed on the shor ter span, relative to the
other, during the early phases of loading. A theoretical force - load
bending moment distribution was calculated using the theory developed
in Appendix A, and a theoretical deflection profile calculated from
equation 4.30. (Fig. 5.51.) Beam deflections due to measured column
rotation alone were calculated with program TREACTION as described in
Section 4.4.2, and corrections to the theoretical force - load deflection
profile made (Fig . 5.57), Note that the influence of column rotation
on the deflections is not large.

A comparison of theoretical and measured deflections in Fig . 5 . 51

shows good agreement, and confirms the theoretical fully - cracked stiffness
distribution computed for Beam Two . The theoretical and experimental
reactions at this loading are shown in Table 5 . 3 . Again there is good
agreement with values for a rigid column giving best agreement with
experiment . Measurements of steel strain at this loading provided the
same trends noted for corresponding tests on Beam One described in
Section 5.7.1. The experimental steel tensile strains lay between 0- 21%
below the theoretical strains, while the experimental compressive strains
varied from 8% below to 45% above the theoretical strains (average 29%
above).
 177

( A} Web Cracks Midspan (Longspan }

(B) Web Crac ks Midspan (Short span)

(C} Peck Cracks (Column End)

' - . -

. .-_:-~- --- ----.-

' 'jl) •

(0) Deck Cracks {Centre Support)

FIG. 5.49 SURFACE CRACK DISTRIBUTION IN BEAM '!WO

(FULLY CRACKED)
 KEY GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS FORCE
~ LQCATI!J'!
+ 3
D 2 -----

: ~I ~-f-=-1 I I I / -·--
5
tF1 iF2 ~ ./
Ji CD A ~ ~ Ji~ //i' ,,v·~
-E Sign Convention For This Graphs Dtd'lection V _,"'
.s ./ ./
F1 F2
I/
/+ /.
z 4 Loadine
Increment
Short Span
Load (ltN)
Long Span
Load (kli)
v /

v. .
0 2 .3.55 5.d7 /
1-1
4 17°25 14.29 Jv • t..D/~
t- 26.25 23.39
u
w
t>
a 35.05 31.37 /
,,,.
v "'
_J / / ....
LL 3 1----+---+--Table Of Force Loads / 7 · / i,,,....o
w ~- ~
0 /- ,,.,,,..o. .
v /
/ [/

2
/vY 1 / ..
I// o / ...
v~ /~
v +/
A

/
1...-,,,.

/
.
/
/ V //
....
,,,o"'
~/@
. v ./
/I/ + _...v ,.D i--- - -¢
-----

A/ / / ~- _1---¢ - _.. - - - - @

._~
.-0 _..s:>-- - - v

/
,.......... .
_~---
,,,,. /
~--====- - ~
_. -
- - : : - -- -- - - - v -

Cl
0
"'
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 so 55 60 65 70 75 80
FORCE F1 + F2 (kN)
........
FIG. 5.50 EXPERIMENTAL LOAD/DEFLECTION FOR BEAM TWO (FULLY-CRACKED) cg
 179

KEY

0 Experimental Resulls
Theory No Column Curvature
Theory Estimated Column Curvature

r- 1568 =135.05kN 12063 l31.97kN

2 ~

E
E 3
c
0
+- 4
0
~
14-
Q) 5 ,_ .,,
0
6

FIG. 5.51 FORCE DEFLECTION PROFILES FOR BEAM TWO

(FULLY CRACKED)

TABLE 5.3 REACTIONS FROM FORCE LOADINGS ON BEAM '!WO

(FULLY CRACKED)

End Reaction Central Reaction

(kN) (kN)

Experimental 12.14 41.80

Theory (No column rotation) 11. 72 41.94
Theory (Estimated column rotation) 11.44 43.53

Measurements recorded during the first force-load increment that

was applied to Beam Two indicate the response of the beam in the semi-
cracked state if additional cracki.ng occurring during this load increment
is .ignored. Table 5.4 provides a comparison of theoretical and
experimental reactions and deflections for this load increment. The
loading locations are the same as shown in Fig. 5.51, and the loads on
 180

the shorter and longer span were 4.87 kN and 5.39 kN respectively.
The agreement between theory and experiment is only moderate, which
reflects the rather indeterminate nature of the cracking in the
structure at this stage,

TABLE 5.4 REACTIONS AND DEFLECTIONS FROM FORCE LOADING

ON BEAM '!WO (SEMI-CRACKED)

Deflection (rrnn) Reaction (kN)

1 2 3 End Central

Experimental 4.14 4.25 4.33 l.4~ 7.03

Theory (No column rotation) 2.18 3.49 4.53 1.69 6.13
Theory (Estimated column rotation) 2.13 3.62 4.86 1.55 6.78

5.8.3 Concrete Temperatures During Thermal Tests

A sample of the experimentally determined temperature profiles is

shown in Fig. 5.52. It can be seen that a temperature range from 0 - 7°C
occurs at various levels. However for corresponding times a maximum
temperature variation of 3.5°C occurred for particular gauges in the
four tests that temperatures were measured.

A sample of the experimentally determined developing temperature

profiles is shown in Fig. 5.53. It can be seen that temp~rature­

penetration increased with time. At 500 seconds the curve approximately

corresponds to a 14th power parabolic curve with depth 240 mm, while at
2000 seconds it is approximately a fifth power curve. Comparisons
between theoretical and experimental temperatures have been made in
Section 5.4.3.

5.8.4 Thermal Continuity Forces

(a) Semi-Cracked Beam

The experimental and theoretical (assuming no column rotation)
continuity forces on the semi-cracked beam are shown in Fig. 5.54.
Estimated column rotation, based on measured lateral column deflection,
will increase the theoretical end reaction by less than 1.5% and the
theoretical central reaction by less than 5%. It can be seen that the
iterative solution technique discussed in Section 4.3.2(b) overestimates
the continuity forces. The simplified theory discussed in Section
4.3.2(a) provides good agreement with experimental measurements for the
 KEY TEST NO. 4
SYt130L + • • • • • LINS l TEMPERATURE PROFILES RT TIME 1700 SECONDS
SYt130L D • • • • • LH£ 2
SYM30L ~ ••••• LIN£ 3
SYM30L <!> • • • • • LINS 4
L Deck Top Surface-........._
L
'-'
240
- - --- ---- - - --- - - - - - - 1-- - - - - - - j\_ - ---~-

~
~ +~-
----- -----1--
I- 220
~
~ 1'-Ftange
1-i <!> _,__
iLJ
LL l.--"" ~·L I
LL
0
200 I -
- ~
<!> --
~
~
- - ~
- i - ~

(f)

w 180
/ Deck Bottom Surface/

>
0 160
/ r'-spine
m y~
CI
140
Heat
t ~
~ f t ~~
~
(!)
1-i
120 I ~ ~
West~
::i
:At ~f
.i=
..J
·-
..J
f
WEast
..::::i
w J location Or Thermo-couple Lines
I loo

so .. f

60

40

20

'!t""
0
15 20 Z5 30 35 40 45 50 SS 60 65 70 75
TEMPERATURES C°C)

FIG. 5.52 EXPERIMENTAL TEMPERATURE PROFILE FOR BEAM TWO AT 1700 SECONDS
....
....co
 KEY TEST NO. 4
svrroL + ..••. nr-E 0 DEVELOP I NG TEMPERATURE PROF I LES, LINE 2
SYl'130L 0 • • • • • Tif"E 500 - - - - - -
SYr-EOL"" ••••• TIME IO'.JO - -- --
SYl'130L ¢ ••••• Tir-E !SOD •- • --·
L SYl'130L S • • • • • Tir-E ZCXlO " -111. - -
2: 240

I' t_~ ----~

. .1.. ---· ~ t - r

--
I
r--- --rI _ _ _ _ _ - g-P" --! • !
I-

--
220 I ,_ - -- .

- 1--·_~_...+-
1--1 I _.,.L__ - - .-- " ' ! I
i - 'i -
u..
LL
0
(!)
zoo
-- -~
/r ./
'
,[3'
-

----~.
--
'
--
•

·--
-
- . ~,
_...,
'._ __.-s
I -
!

:
-

I
!
-r
' -
!

i
I

w 180 ; I / • _i- ! ' i

>
0
co 160 !-+---7-
./ '---. / I
i
--+-----· +----·
I
I
'
I
I
I
·
I
!

~r :I . ~ ~
---- ·-. ' I
I' I I
C[
I . i i H<i!at
i
I-
140
I ----- I t t f r f k f
l /t / _____ -- -----+---- --- ----T-- -- --w~st
I -- · • I l A <1> A East
(.9
1--1
120 1:§ I 1.
w Ir':llif'
I. !' J,i I
Loccr t.ion Of'
I Thermo-couplrz Lmes
.I I
I JOO
I I ' : j !
I '
!I.Iii 1 I
I i
II ;: Ii
80 1
i
~
.,.,
i . I : '
I I I I
60 I I ' I I
I I
I I
I I
• ' ' i
40
~ • '
'
I
:
'
;
I I
i
!
l
I
i I ; ; I
I
20 -

I
,.~ :II : '
I
i I I
0 I
JS 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 SS 60 65 70 75
TEMPERATURES C°C)

FIG. 5.53 EXPERIMENTAL DEVELOPING TEMPERATURE PROFILES (BEAM TWO)

_.
00
N
 183

Heat Heat Heat

5
~ i lt
l,
l;
R1 ' ' J; R2
/ -~-
r.... 0:::
/ o-
/ a.c
; a.o
:J,_
l/) .......
3 /
/
g
-z /
/ "O Cl>
c 0:::
lJJ
-
.;:;(.

I/)
2- /
/

c
0
.......
(.)
0 1
(I)
0:::
0
E
L...
(I) 0
.c 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
I-
Time (Seconds x 100)
-1

-2
''
'
'' ...
'
0
-3 ''
KEY
(Al Theoretical Results
'
'
' ,o
' -
N
....... 0:::
(1) Uncracked Beam ' ' 5-
a.
-4 (2) Semi- Cracked Beam ' ' a.c
:J 0
(3) Fully- Cracked Beam ' l/)-.;::;
(.)
Cracks Remain Open ' ' (I) 0
-- - - Iterative Solution -~ r.... (])
....... 0::
c
-s (B) Ex(2erimental Results
Cl>
u
0 Semi- Cracked Beam
-6
• Fully- Cracked Beam

FIG. 5.54 BEAM 'IWO THERMAL CONTINUITY FORCES

 184

end reaction but underestimated the magnitude of the central reaction by

13%. The experimental end reaction is only 61%, and the experimental
centre reaction 52% of the magnitudes of the corresponding theoretical
uncracked beam reactions.

(b) Fully-Cracked Beam

The experimental and theoretical (assuming no column rotation)
continuity forces on the fully-cracked beam are shown in Fig. 5.54.
Estimated column rotation, based on measured column lateral deflection,
will increase the theoretical end reaction by less than 3.5% and the
theoretical centre reaction by less than 12%. Again the iterative
solution overestimates continuity forces. The simplified theory provides
good agreement with experimental measurements, overestimating the
continuity reactions by approximately 9%, and is this conservative. The
experimental reactions are approximately 47% of the magnitude of the
corresponding theoretical uncracked beam reactions.

(c) Effect of Shrinkage-Increased Crack Widths

During the thermal tests, the theoretical thermal continuity moment
exceeds the magnitude of the dead-load and kentledge-load negative moment
near the supports, and will thus theoretically close the cracks propagating
from the deck. The iterative solution includes this effect.
However
76
calculations presented in Appendix F, based on the ACI Committee 209
shrinkage formulae, suggest that an equivalent crack strain of 503µ€ will
be caused at the deck due to shrinkage. The experimental thermal
continuity moment of 6.27 kNm at 1700 seconds in the fully-cracked beam
will only close the cracks by an equivalent crack strain of 267µ£; and
thus the stiffening predicted by the iterative approach will not occur
and the simplified theory, assuming no crack closing, is appropriate.
The critical thermal design loading case in reinforced concrete is a
combination of thermal load plus live load. For this situation it is
likely that the force loading plus dead load will hold the deck cracks
open, and inhibit local stiffening due to cracks closing under thermal
load. Shrinkage equivalent-crack strains will be smaller in the prototype
because of the size effect, but will play some part in keeping deck
cracks open under thermal loading.

(d) Comparison of Theoretical Continuity Moment Distributions

A comparison of the theoretical thermal continuity moment
distributions, assuming no column rotation, for the experimental temperature
 185

distributions at time 1200 seconds is presented in Fig. 5.55. It can

be seen that the theoretical uncracked moments are more than twice the
fully-cracked moment for corresponding sections. The theoretical semi-
cracked response lies between these two extremes.

A reinforced concrete bridge may be uncracked above the supports for

a short period after construction. On a day of high thermal loading, if
a high live load should move onto the bridge, it is conceivable that the
thermal load may inhibit any cracking in the support region. To examine
this situation, Beam Two was analysed with the same theoretical soffit
crack distribution but with no deck cracks. The results are included in
Fig. 5.55, and it can be seen that the absence of deck cracks increases
the maximum theoretical continuity moment by 40%. This illustrates the
sensitivity of the theoretical thermal response to variations in cracking
regions.

Two theoretical approximate solution techniques were described in

Section 4.3.3, and results using these techniques are plotted in Fig. 5.55.
Moments compared with Method B, using an effective moment-of-inertia
provided by the ACI formula given in equation 4.24, are 17% less than
by using Method A, which adopted weighted mean stiffnesses and curvatures.
The approximate solutions straddle the theoretical results provided by the
theory in Section 4.3.2(a), with Method A providing the closest agreement.

5.8.5 Beam Deflections Under Thermal Loading

(a) Deflection Time-Histories

A sample of experimental deflection/time curves for the semi.-cracked
and fully-cracked beam are shown in Figs. 5.56 and 5.57 resp~ctively.

Note that values need to be divided by the multiplying factors provided

to get the true deflections, and that all deflections have been plotted
as positive. The sign corrections for the gauges are shown in Figs. 5.56
and 5.57 and gauge locations are given in Table 5.1. The deflections in
the fully-cracked beam are 74% of the semi-cracked beam at location one,
and 117% at location two.

(b) Longitudinal _Deflections

Longitudinal deflections were recorded at the centroid of the beam at
both the simply supported end and column end, and are plotted in Figs.5.56
and 5.57. At 1700 seconds the sum of the longitudinal deflections ~i in
the beam= 1.449 mm. Equation 5.14 can be used to provide a mean
experimental concrete temperature T of 17.2°C :
av
 186
Heat Heat
(

TIME 1200 SECONDS

1·0

Theoretical curves calculated assuming no c.olumn

curvature :rnd no stresses on crack faces
2·0

3·0
I I

Approximate Method B ~ .. .,. ......... .,. .. E

. z
... .,. .,. .::L.
. .. ......... +-'
c
OJ
E
0
L
- 5·0
CJ)
c
-0
c
/ OJ
- 6·0 en
_.,; / Semi - Cracked
/

LNo deck cracks · - 7·0

- 8·0

9·0

10·0

- 11·0
I

FIG. 5.55 BEAM TWO THEORETICAL THERMAL CONTINUITY

MOMENT DISTRIBUTION
 KEY GRSPH OF
TEST ~o; -
2o~- FLECTION VS TIME
' ""'· TIPL.YINS FCCTr:t:'
1 ----
... 1 - - ---
~
..,. ~g = ~=~1-~I~1~l~I~I~l~I~,~~I~I~
!5h
I
!I I I I I I I I I :V0·
I I I..ktYt©·''
Heat Heat Heat
E
0
E
i4--

131--
1 c,r4 i (j) (6) ®
~ ]:!:® @
+-
~

)(
121-
Sign Convention For This Graphs lJef'lection I / 17~....l/
z
0 1l
II ~vr
r-i
f- 10
..+':l/
u
w
~ -+-1-t--+---+-l-
_J
e !
LL
w
CJ
8:c-1-
-
I
I j_ ,
i I
_j
..
x 10

/ I
II • ...--·
~
I ! I

---r ·- 1-~,714-_J~+-+-+-j__l_
, .,.,. ,,,.--
61·----j --- __
: I .I
i i
-1-, I '
s • ----:--- · I : 1

I ~ : -~l : +----
•
- - _,_ -- -
-- I
- ! --
,..
I .,
" " I
1
i
'

.'~~-~-------=~--10'
. v 4--:t-2c-r-tt~-- :
" I ! j • . , 4 - - f - - - L_

.. ' ' ·-+··--· I - I I -

i
_..,. ... '
I
vf2\
- . , ---,-_L _L ! - - _d- - _.,- - - =--:--

==~~~~~tti~-0
_[_\_]+-f-~-t-_J__
I
' --:-rrf-_-_cT_:!-1_ -i---
(.: 1CXJ zr::.: ... :J.J.; ."!(_)'_! ~01 hUj /',J, I
;v-.r·
-:-..> . .J.J ?r:..-.J ~ cc~_j 1 1a::_) ~ 2c.r.·; ~ xc 1400 : c.Jou }fflJ ; ,7CJO J KG 1:n; .::GCXJ
TIME CSECONOS)
....
CIO
FIG. 5.56 EXPERIMENTAL THERMAL DEFLECTIONS OF BEAM TWO (SEMI CRACKED)
"
 KEY EFCEcrroN v
SYNBOl
+
1 fY'OT ICJ'i
3
2
M II TTDI VTNC
1
F1=1 :Tffi
- --
i------
I t.....J I l'tU. c+

/
0 x10
,.D 1
1
1 --·-
23 ..,.~ 4
5
10
,,.,.
10 ~·-·-
/
$ 6 --- v

E
22
21 ,__
I I I I I I v "'
.5 /

:rr:
20 ,__ Heat Heat Heat
0
..,.- 19
le- ©A' f ~ i ~ l
/
/

z
x
18l>-

17 ,_ Si~n
f
CD
J
(f)
Convention For This Graphs f)eflecfion
@
f
I/
/

!/"""'"
® x10

/~
0 16:
/
t-;
~/v ./
I-
u
15
v ,...,.. .,./
LJ
_J
14~

13:
/ 1.- .'
LL
LJ 12
/ v.·
0 v /
·0
,/
11
/ ,/
.- 1-~

.-
10
v
/ /+' ... .-tr"
9
/ .. _..-
~·-

.... -
8
/"' ...
~ ~+
/ ...-·~""
7 /
___ ...
I/ ,./

_.., .... ~©. x 0·4

I;-

_...
-
6:
+"'

---
I--&-
s / v"' '-. ~i..-· I

,.../"
- s---
0'.
/~
4 ~--·· -
3:
_fo
. / _,... ~ __ ..... i.---·- - - -
~ _n - - --;:.,- -- i-e:r-
v......., ~:.-· -- - - ·-w -

·-
~ _::::B- 1-G-
./
2

~
~; !-'"'" jLJ

0)
0
-
~

100
~
/

200
-
30J
---
_.._
400
-
500
..Q-$""

6CO
-
700
I.I....--

80:l
'"---+ >---- .--+--
900 l 0::0 1100
-
1200
+----
l 3CD 1400
.-:!1---- ..__ ""!-- ,__

l 500 l 6CO 1700

- ~±-
l so:J
>--- · -

1900 2CDJ
H- ·-

TIME CSECONOS)
...
CIO
FIG. 5.57 EXPERIMENTAL THERMAL DEFLECTIONS OF BEAM TWO (FULLY-CRACKED) CIO
 189

T
av
= (5.14)

where dA = element of area on beam cross-section

T = temperature on element of area
L beam length

Equation 5.15 can be used to provide an approximate concrete

6
coefficient of thermal expansion a of 10.6 x l0- /°C, which corresponds
-6c
well with the value of 10.30 x 10 /°C measured in test specimens as
reported in Appendix B.

ac = /J. 0
;v
/ (L • T
av
) (5.15)

(c) Comparison Between Theoretical and Experimental

Deflection Profiles
The theoretical thermal deflected shapes were obtained using
program TREACTION as described in Section 4.4.2, and are plotted in
Fig. 5.58(a) and 5.58(b) for the semi-cracked and fully-cracked beam
respectively at time 1700 seconds, assuming no stresses develop across
the concrete crack face. The solution procedure is described in Section
4.4.2. The central reaction and end moment redundancy are removed,
and the simply supported deflected shape under both the thermal loading and
redundancy-forces loading calculated. The two deflection profiles are
almost equal in magnitude and opposite in sign, with the sum being
relatively small in comparison with either component, as can be seen from
Fig. 5.58, which includes the continuity deflection profiles for comparison
with the final total deflections. Consequently small errors in
calculated unrestrained thermal curvature, or moment-of-inertia
distribution, may cause relatively large errors in total deflected shape.
On this basis the agreement between the experimental and theoretical
deflections is considered satisfactory

5.8.6 Steel Stress-Induced Strains During Thermal Loading

Two experimental steel stress-induced strain plots for Beam Two·

(Test Four) are shown· in Figs. 5.59 and 5.60. These represent typical
results for the fully-cracked beam at a support (Location C) and midspan
(Location Dl) section as shown in Fig. 5.11. It can be seen that similar
results were obtained for gauges at corresponding locations within the
section, and there is little experimental scatter. The strain repeatability
noted at 10µ£ is less than 5%.of the maximum stress-induced strains measured.
 190

. SEMI- CRACKED BEAM QEFLECTION UNDER THERMRL LORDING

TIME .. 1700 CSECONDS) KEY
OCFL£CTl!l'i D..E TO ro;rf~ITY ~lll'IS - - - - -
TOTA.. OCFUI:TtD 9ff'C • , •• ,. ,. •• ,. • , , , - - - - -
ZERO COLUMN CURVATURE ..............................
6
Experimental Results ..
e
.5 4

0
.-
><
z
0
.....
2

0
/,,.,.. -- ----- -- -- !
I
I
.. - --: :-=-:: =-=-= .-.:-: 7!"':.:":""::-::-:.-:-.

tJ
~ -2
I~ I
b
0 -4 ~ H«Of
I~
I
~
l_ i f I I f \
w.,,
A
I
::zr £!.t /
-8
~ /
-10
~· /
......... v
-12
'--- ___../"

-14
0 z 3 4 5 e 7 6
LENGTH (METRES)

(a) Semi- Cracked

FULLY CRACKED BEAM QEFLECT I ON UNDER THERf"lRL LO~O I NG

TIME • 1700 CSECONDSl KEY
OCFL.£CTIO'i D..E TO crnTl~ITY FCl'Cllll'IS - - - - -
TOT<l. C£Fl.£CTaJ ~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , - __ - -
ZERO COLUMN CURVATURE - - - - - - • - - - - - - -•
6
Experimental Results .,
E
.5 4

x 2.

z
0
..... 0 --- - -----~ ....... ........_..__ -
............ .. .................. .. ....................... -- --
1-
u
~ -z
\ I
LL
w
0 .... \ '\ ~ i
Hqaf
t :aI I ! I I~ v
I
£. E!•t
Wul
I
-6

"'~ I
v
-II

-10
""""' /

-sz ~ __.../
/
-14
0 2 ~ 4 5 6 7 e
LENGTH CMETRESl

(b) Fully Cracked

FIG. 5.58 BEAM TWO THERMAL DEFLECTION PROFILES

 600
KEY TEST NO. 4
,......
Cf) 500
z
1-i
... ~~~..
, ,.,,,.
Soffitr
-------
Deck (Spine)
-·-·-·-
Deck (Flan gel
CI 400
a:
I- •<:/!.
Cf)
Location C (Fig 5.11)
0300

. ..,_. -·- ~0
a:
u
r:
1-i
I:
200
.- . :;z--
. ·-
.-
_g .._,.
...r: • ..-:?
-~
~
100
• .,.:r ,_. . - !"""""
~

l - .- -- . -· I~
~·
--
c •t
lo ---l lb -
~ ~ c:-
"' - "'
- "'
~m1
1111
"Jd!!;-
,9:, :, 4 4 4 4 4
- ~

4
-
<;>
., ~
.F;
a
c: -100
- ~

.o
I
0
·;;; Cf) ~ E
e 6 s
~CL
z "" "" --, @,
E 1-i_zoo
3 CI
a:
I-
(f)-300
,. r t t
Hrzat
t f k f~ .
A. Aiu East
-40'.) We: st '
'-~
c (.)
0
-50:1 ...l

-600
0 100 200 300 400 SCIO 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100
TIME CSECONOS)

FIG. 5.59 BEAM TWO EXPERIMENTAL THERMAL STEEL STRESS-INDUCED STRAINS NEAR SUPPORTS ...
(FULLY CRACKED)
....
(g
 600
KEY
.. iEST NO. 4 -
Deck (Flange)

(j) 500
z
I . q>. . <p
• I
Bottom Soffit. Steel

1-1
-Top - Soffitsteet
CI 400 ----- ---
Ct: @. -: ~:. ___..G Deck (Spine)
1- -
(j)
Location D1 (Fig 5.11) ~
0 300
--
--.-
-e-- I
Ct: - - -6
u
- -·- -~e
__... ..s-
c
..
.2
1-1
L: zoo
1

....- - ~-
-· ~-
--- ..,..
~-
·-3
4
.
3·
.~

I
-- :-k:--
c _s- I- - ..l
~ , __
I .-
100)

__..j
__,_ t- . - -~·-
-z- --2
. - - - -z- ---
, .
- -Z- --- lz-- .__z ~u
) "~
~

. I

c
800

-100
·0
.!!! (j)
!z
... 1-1
§ cr-:zoo Heat
Ct:
l- A
t t t At t £ t f ~ I
I~
(j)-300 West 10 East·
I
c
0

-400I
:g
0
0 -
..J

-500I

-600
O 100 ZOO 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 lZOO 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 ZOOO ZlOO
TIME (SECONDS)

FIG. 5.60 BEAM TWO EXPERIMENTAL THERMAL STEEL STRESS-INDUCED STRAINS NEAR MIDSPAN
(FULLY-CRACKED) _.
U)
N
 193

The experimental results from the four thermal tests on the fully-
cracked beam are presented in Fig. 5.61. For clarity the points for the
beam flange have been plotted just below their true level to avoid
overlapping the points from the spine at the same elevation. Theoretical
profiles are also plotted in Fig. 5.61 and were derived-from a primary
strain given by equation 5.13, plus the theoretical strain from the
continuity moment calculated from the theory in Section 4.3.2(a),
incorporating estimated column curvature.

It can be seen that the experimental strains in the bottom steel at

the midspan sections (sections A, Dl, D3 in Fig. 5.11) agree well with
theoretical results, being in general slightly less than theoretical
results. This is attributed· to intercrack steel/concrete bond stresses.
The bottom steel stresses and crack widths at midspan regions is usually
considered the most critical thermal loading effect in design. The
agreement for the top spine steel was close at section A, but averaged
25 and 50µE more tensile than theory at sections Dl and D3 respectively.
Agreement for the flange steel was poor, and this is attributed to stress
relief due to flange shrinkage cracks not fully closing.

The experimental results at sections of negative cracking (sections

B, C and E in Fig. 5.11) may have been affected by bearing stresses from
support reaction changes, and by forces generated by deck cracks partially
closing under thermal load, and correlation with theory is not good.
The experimental results for the bottom steel consistently show far
larger tensile strains than were predicted at these sections. Despite
searches no cracks propagating from the soffit were detected near these
sections. However if there were undetected cracks then theory would
predict large tensile strains for the bottom steel, as can be seen by
examination of the theoretical predictions for sections Dl and D3.
Cracks propagating from the soffit near sections B,C or E would most
likely be caused by thermal loading on the semi-cracked beam (when there
is no kentledges, and therefore little soffit force-load compression
stresses near these sections) • Calculations showed that the maximum
experimental thermal moment induced soffit stress plus theoretical primary
compressive stress= 2.72 MPa at section C for thermal tests on the semi-
cracked beam, which is below the experimentally determined concrete
flexural tensile strength reported in Appendix B.
 194
240

220

180

160

140

120

100

80
60
60
40
VA 40
20
""" . 20 Teniion Com renion
1i nsion - Com rn i
IOO 'r.4 100 l!O IOO !Ill 50 IOC l!x3 ~ "8 SQ0
W 2Y IOI !.O loO IOO l!IO tOO tiO
nu:L SlRUS INDUCED STRAINS(µ&J STUL STILUS INDUCED STllAINS""'t)

~ATION A LOCATION B
..!.U.
t Test 3
240 240
Test 4
D
V
Tel\ 5
Tut I 200 ~ ng

180

160

~ ILO

120
i 100

t 80 80

60

..
60
SpW\11
Spine
40 40
A
20 A a 'i' 20
A
·~
....-....-....-........-.---r-+--.-~~-..---.
ioG WI 200 llO \00 IO 0 !ID lllll lloO 1llO UO IOO W 'l!iO 100 1!111 IOO 50 0 50 IOO $ '200 r!iO ~
STf:lL SThES!!. INDUCED STRAIN$Lu.t} STHL ~TRESS INDUCED STRAINSl.M-t
Tan•ion Compreuion Tilnilon - Co;:npr..!~o

LOCATION C LOCATION 01

140

120

l()Q
Spine
80

60

40

b'V 20

FIG. 5.61 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORl;TICAL THERMAL STRESS·INDUCED STEEL

STRAINS FOR BEAM I.WO (FULLY CRACKED)
 195

The experimental stress-induced strain results for the semi-cracked

beam confirmed the deductions made for the fully cracked beam, except
that experimental strains in the lower spine region for sections Dl and
D3 exceed the theoretical results for an uncracked section, which again
suggests that thermal loading may have initiated soffit cracking.

5.9 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF THERMAL RESPONSE

Discrepancies were noted between experimental results and theoretical

results based on the theoretical crack heights. Preliminary calculations
indicated that shrinkage cracking would contribute significantly to
discrepancies. Consequently a sensitivity analysis into the influence of
crack height and width on the section thermal response is reported below.

5.9.l Sensitivity of Thermal Curvature to Crack Height and Effective Crack

Strain
The theoretical variation of thermal curvature with crack height and
effective crack strain is studied by subjecting typical Beam Two sections
to the 30°C temperature gradient shown in Appendix E. The concrete and
-5
steel coefficient of thermal expansion were assumed equal to 10 /°C, .with
other assumed material properties taken from experimental measurements
reported in Appendix B.

A graph of the variation of thermal curvature with crack height is

presented in Fig. 5.62, and was calculated from the theory presented in
Section 4.2.2 for the case of wide cracks, (i.e. no stresses across
crack faces). Note that crack height is taken as the absolute distance
from crack root to the extreme tensile surface. It can be seen that for
this typical reinforced concrete beam crack height does not affect thermal
curvature to a great extent. Note, however, that the curves clearly show
the significance of small deck shrinkage cracks, with a 20 mm deep crack
reducing the uncracked thermal curvature by 20%. This is the order of
magnitude of the discrepancy in the simply supported beam tests under
positive moment. It will be shown in Chapter 7 that the thermal
curvature is more significantly affected by crack penetration for a typical
lightly reinforced prestressed concrete section.

Cracked sections subjected to insufficient force moment to hold the

cracks open under thermal loading will develop stresses a.cross the crack
face. These arise from two separate mechanisms.
(1) If the thermal continuity moment is of greater magnitude than and of
opposite sign to the force moment, then the crack~ will close, the section
 196

Heat
Note: Section CC (Fig 5.2) Used for Deck
Crack Analysis ·
Section DD (Fig 5.2) Used for Soffit
Crack Analysis

1t.

12
E
~ 10 ~---- Deck Crack
...0
.--
. 8
<11
L.
....:::>0 5
>
I- 6· Section subject to a temperature distribution T= 30(~)
u
:J T = temperature (°C)
d = depth from deck to soffit
I. y = height .• ot.Cpoint from soffit
o<c= 1011 10 1 = d.s

0
0 20 1.0 60 80 100 120 11.0 160 180 200
Crack Height Imm) - -

FIG. 5 .62 VARIATION OF UNRESTRAINED THERMAL CURVATURE

WITH CRACK HEIGHT (BEAM TWO)

increase in stiffness, and compressive stresses develop across the crack

face. For normal temperature gradients this may occur only at sections
with cracks propagating from the deck.

(2) If the nett section momen·t (force moment plus thermal continuity
moment) induces insufficient equivalent crack strain, then compressive
stresses may develop across the crack face under unrestrained thermal
loading as discussed in Section 4.2.2. If the equivalent crack strain
is negative (compressive strains have developed across crack face due to
the nett section moment) then unrestrained primary tensile stresses may
develop across the crack face, up to a maximum (at any point) of the
compressive stress at that point due to the nett section moment. If the
magnitude of the negative equivalent crack strain is sufficiently large,
the unrestrained thermal response of the pre-cracked section will be
identical to that of an uncracked section.
 The variation of unrestrained thermal curvature with effective
crack strain at shown crack heights due to mechanism two described above
is presented in Fig. 5.63 and was calculated using the theory in Section
4.2.2. It can be seen that low positive crack strains will theoretically

Crock Closed -.. a ""Crock Open

Both value for uncrocked section 1&

ccr =-10•)' c.
-'- - -==-- - --
I
Both value for uncrocked
Section and e. er = - 10 61' E.
- -1;:

IO.
'o
BEAM
• 20
~
Crock Propagating from So ff it (Section DI)
Beam One at sections C and DI
(See Fig, 5·2) s::. 15 - - - Crack Propagotin9 from Deck (Sec lion C )

0
Q.
GI I Curvature henceforth constant
Crock Hei9ht
c
0
Temperature
160mm (Crock propagating from (,) 10
GI
soffit l (/)
Ty : 30 y5/d5
120mm (Crock propa9oting from
deck )
x Ty = Temperature at depth y (0 c )
~
5
y = Hei9ht of point above soffil
~ d Section depth
Coefficients of thermal expansion
d..s= J.c: 6
1011110" / 0
c
..
0
>
::J
0

-120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Equivalent Crock Strain Ecr (,µe)

FIG. 5.63 VARIATION OF UNRESTRAINED THERMAL CURVATURE

WITH EQUIVALENT CRACK STRAIN (BEAM TWO)

increase the thermal curvature of negative moment cracked sections, and

decrease the curvatures of positive moment cracked sections, for the shown
Beam Two sections with wide cracks. An increasing negative crack strain
returns the unrestrained thermal curvatures asymptotically to the uncracked
section thermal curvatures.

5.9.2 sensitivity of Thermal Reactions to Crack Height

The moment-of-inertia of Beam Two changes rapidly at first cracking,

but stabilizes for larger crack heights (Fig. 5.31). Thus at large c~ack

heights both thermal curvature and moment-of-inertia are not significantly

affected by further changes in crack height, and it is expected that large
changes in crack height will not significantly alter the thermal response
of Beam Two unless the assumed initial crack height is small. This is
confirmed in Table 5.5 which shows the variation in thermal continuity
reactions for changes in assumed beam crack heights, calculated from the
theory in Section 4.3.2(a). It can be seen that large differences in
crack heights for the fully-cracked beam make little difference in the
theoretical reactions. Reaction changes are more responsive to crack
height changes in the semi-cracked beam, where shallow shrinkage cracking
was assumed. It would require a very small extent of shrinkage cracking
in the deck to reduce the moment-of-inertia to levels required to give
good theoretical/experimental comparisons in continuity moments for Beam
Two in the semi-cracked state.

TABLE 5.5 CHANGE IN THEORETICAL REACTIONS FOR BEAM TWO AT

TIME 1700 SECONDS (ASSUMING NO COLUMN ROTATION)

Description of Crack Reaction Increases

Beam State
Height Changes End Simple centre
Support Support

Semi-Cracked Crack depths factored by 0.5 34% 57%

Crack depths reduced to 5 mm 53% 88%
Fully-Cracked Crack depths factored by 0.25 10% 16%
Crack depths reduced to 10 mm 47% 74%

Because crack height in reinforced concrete sections varies little

with the magnitude of applied moment (Fig. 5.29), a designer will be more
concerned to isolate the boundaries of the regions of cracking rather than
precise crack heights. Although shallow depth shrinkage cracking may
significantly reduce the design thermal response, the extent of shrinkage
cracking is generally indeterminate and the effects should be conservatively
ignored.

5.9.3 Sensitivity of Thermal Stresses to Crack Height

To study the variation of theoretical concrete thermal stress

profiles with crack height, based on the theory presented in Section 4.2.2,
typical Beam Two sections were thermally loaded as described in Section
5.9.1. Concrete stresses across the crack faces were ignored.

Concrete and steel thermal primary stresses on a midspan positive·

moment cracked section are presented in Fig. 5.64(a) and Fig. 5.65
respectively, The crack level in Fig. 5.64(a) is at the horizontal line
 199

240 240

220 22

200 200

180 180
E E
E E
160 160
I- I-
u::: u:::
u. 140
u. 140
0 0
Ul Ul
w 120
w 120
>
O· >
0
~ 100 co
<( 100
I- I-
I I
(!) 80 (!)
80
ill
I w
I
60 60

40 40

20

0 o+-........ --.-'-...-_,....--.-~1--....--.--...,...-.....-.-...--.,

-3 -2 -1 0 2 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 5 6

CONCRETE STRESSES (MPa) CONCRETE STRESSES (MPa)

(a) Primary Stresses (b) Total Stresses

POSITIVE MOMENT CRACKS (SECTION 0-D FIG 5.2)

240 240

- - -- - ---- - :, -.... ~.-.. -

/
220 220
Top Slee), ,- , , ' '
200 200 / ,'
/ ,
/ ,
/ ,,7 7
180 180 / , .
E
E / ', /
E / ,',
.§ 160 160 I ,'

1- 1- I ,' I
H: 140 H: 140
I
I
,'
/
I •
0
Ul
~ I , /!

~
120 ~
0
120
/ ./ t'
0
~ 100 ~ 100 ,' :' II
I-
I 80 "'. -~' ,'\
'."':.',' -~.
I-
I
(!) 80 ::f .nlj,,. -·
(!)
w " ".-~ w
I
I/'
I
60
"" " 60 I
.I
40 "" 40 IIi
20 20
..''Ii 1!
o+-~~..-~~..-~--t~~-.-_,__,.-i-_....~~ o+--.---1~:.--.-..~~1--~~~~~~--.

-3 -2 -1 0 3 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 5

CONCRETE STRESSES (MPa ) CONCRETE STRESSES ( MPa)

(c) Primary Stresses (d) Total Stresses

NEGATIVE MOMENT CRACKS (SECTION C-C FIG 5.2)

FIG. 5.64 CONCRETE THERMAL STRESS VARIATION WITH CRACK HEIGHT IN BEAM TWO
 15 Unrestrained Stresses 200
10
5

~t 0
-5
w·w woo~ m ~
Crock Height (mm) -
~ ~ ~

-10
Section DD (Fig 5.2) Used for Soffit
-15 Crack Analysis
.,"'"' -20
~
-25
:a;
en - 30
- 35
-LO
(a) Bottom Steel Stresses (Positive Moment Crack)

35

c 30
a..
~ 25
.,"' 20 Section CC !Fig 5.2) Used for Deck
"'
"'~
en 15 Crack Analysis
10
.,
iii
Stresses
en 5
0
o 20 w w oo m m ~ ~ ~
Crock Height I mm) - -
(b) Top Stee I Stresses (Negative Moment Crack)

FIG. 5.65 TENSILE STEEL THERMAL STRESS VARIATION WITH

CRACK HEIGHT IN BEAM TWO

from the stress profile to the zero ordinate. It can be seen that cracking
slightly reduces deck primary compression stresses. At crack heights
greater than 120 mm for Beam Two, the crack tip tensile stress is larger
than the uncracked primary stress for the same level, which will tend to
propagate the crack if the section has not been previously subjected to a
higher loading. From Fig. 5.65 it can be seen that small cracks increase
the bottom steel primary compressive stresses, while large cracks decrease
them.

Fully flexurally restrained concrete thermal stresses on a midspan

positive moment cracked section are presented in Fig. 5.64(b) with steel
stresses included in Fig. 5.65. It can be seen that increases in crack
height reduce the deck compressive stresses, and increase the steel tensile
stresses. The flexural restraining moment Mt was derived in Section
4.3.l as Mt = EI~t . It was shown in Section 5.9.l that thermal
curvature ~t for the same beam section varied little with crack height,
and thus Mt responds almost proportionally with moment-of-inertia I for
any crack height changes. However the thermal continuity moment at a
cracked section, on a bridge with few cracks, will be close to the uncracked
section thermal continuity moment, and thus stresses will be more severe
than predicted in Fig. 5.64(b).
 Primary and fully flexurally restrained thermal concrete stresses on
a centre support negative moment cracked section of Beam Two are presented
in Fig. 5.64(c) and 5.64(d) respectively, with steel stresses included in
Fig. 5.65. Under force loading the top steel stresses are tensile, and
have a beneficial compressive component aided by the thermal loading.
However except at small crack heights, the thermal loading provides a
tensile crack tip stress.

5.10 CONCLUSIONS

When measured model beam top surface radiation intensities were fed
into program THERMAL, good agreement was found between measured and
predicted temperatures.

Good agreement was found between experimental and theoretical thermal

deflections for a simply supported reinforced concrete model beam (Beam
One), for the cases of: (1) Uncracked beam (shrinkage cracks closed by
prestress load) •
(2) Beam precracked under negative moment.

Experimental thermal deflections were slightly smaller than predicted

by theory for the case of the beam precracked by a positive moment.
Calculations indicated that this resulted from the influence of shrinkage
cracks in the deck-slab.

Good agreement was found between experimental and theoretical

continuity reactions for the continuous model beam (Beam Two) from the
theory based on the assumption of no stresses developing across any crack
face (Section 4.3.2(a). The calculated magnitudes of shrinkage strains
for this problem showed that this was a realistic assumption. Theoretical
thermal continuity reactions for the fully-cracked model beam were of the
order of 50% of corresponding values for the uncracked beam. A significant
increase in thermal continuity reactions was calculated from the theory
including the effects of stresses developing across crack faces and ignoring
the effect of shrinkage strains.

Experimental and theoretical thermal stress-induced steel strains

were in general not in good agreement for both model beams. This was
attributed to the inter-crack bond stresses and the problem associated with
strain-gauge temperature compensation.
 Theoretical thermal continuity moments are sensitive to the assumed
zone of cracking, but (apart from shallow shrinkage cracks) are not
sensitive to crack height.
 203

CHAPTER 6
THERMAL ANAL VSIS OF PARTIALL V PRESTRESSED
CONCRETE BRIDGES

SUMMARY

Theories are presented for the analysis of the inelastic thermal

response of prestressed statically determinate and indeterminate bridges
under loading sufficient to induce cracking.

6.1 INTRODUCTION

6.1.l Current New Zealand Prestressed Concrete Design Philosophy

40
Current prestressed concrete thermal design practice in New
Zealand is based on the uncracked structural response, with limited
tensile strength assumed for the concrete and provision of sufficient
49
mild steel to carry the tension force deueloped. Priestley developed
· 11 y veri'f'ie·d 20
and experimenta a so 1 ution
· proced ure f or t h erma 1 response
appropriate to these conditions.

As discussed in Section 1.2.3, it is only recently that differential

thermal gradients have formed an integral part of design. The effect has
been an expensive increase in level of prestressing in many prestressed
concrete bridges to design against the following concrete thermal tensile
stresses:
(1) Stresses near the midspan soffit region of continuous bridges.
If these stresses become critical when combined with live-load, an
increase in prestress force is required.
(2) Stresses near the internal support soffit region of continuous
bridges, when the critical loading case is a combination with minimum
live-load and prestress before losses. If the computed stresses are too
high, the prestress tendon profile must be dropped at interior supports,
resulting in reduced prestress efficiency and hence larger prestress
force.

6.1.2 A Partially Prestressed Approach for Thermal Load

It is proposed that a viable design approach would maintain existing

requirements for normal service loading, but allow controlled cracking
under thermal load. Thus the structure behaves as prestressed for
service force loading alone and partially prestressed for thermal load
 204

combinations. For the latter, crack widths (for corrosion checks), steel
stress changes (for fatigue checks) and deflections should be calculated.
Note that high thermal loading is associated with fine weather (reducing
corrosion risk) and is likely to occur rarely in combination with maximum
design live loading (reducing risk of steel fatigue failure) .
31 94
Blaikie and Phythian discussed the growing tendency for
countries to allow partial prestress design, in which sufficient mild
steel is incorporated to control crack widths. Such design is currently
. . t h e FIP-CEB 79 , the British
d in 95
permitte . . Code for Structura 1 Concrete CP 110
. 77
and the ACI Code , and has economic and structural advantages including
savings in steel, reduced structural depth and camber, .and better crack
width distribution. Existing partially prestressed concrete structures
96
are reported to be behaving we11 The special serviceability checks
required for partially prestressed design are discussed below.

(a) Steel Corrosion in Partially Prestressed Structures

Prestress steel is more susceptible to corrosion than mild steel,
and the effect on structural integrity more pronounced. Although for
given environmental conditions, the degree of corrosion is influenced by
a wide variety of factors including depth and permeability of concrete
cover, crack width at the surface and reinforcing, and the time that the
crack is open, the usual design check is on surface crack width with
minimum concrete cover and quality specified.
31 97198
B1 ai'k'ie an d Pra kas h provi'd e a l'iterature survey of crac k wi'd t h
formulae,most of which are based on reinforcing crack width experiments,
and few that consider increases in crack width due to repeated loading.
79 95 .
Many code ' crack width formulae for partially prestressed sections
are simplistic, do not model scale, and are based on fictitious uncracked
section stresses with limiting values related to environmental conditions.

After the initial penetration, crack heights in reinforced concrete

sections show little increase with increased loading. However cracking on
prestressed c.oncrete sections exhibits stable crack growth at loads close
to service loads, with the crack height dependent on the level of loading.
Because crack height affects the stress distributions between cracks, and
. 99 . .
crac k spacing in prestressed concrete beams, the reinforced concrete
crack width formulae do not appear to be directly applicable to
prestressed concrete.
 205

Selected crack width formulae that are used in comparisons of

theoretical and experimental results in the next chapter are discussed.
100
(1) After Beeby et a1 •
Beeby et allOO proposed an equation for determining crack widths
in partially prestressed concrete members with bonded prestressed cables
2
Co - (4Co/ s)
w = (l.33C
0
+ kl T k3 e ) Eav (6.1)

where w = crack width at the tensile surf ace

c0 clear bottom cover to prestress cable
kl constant depending on cable type
¢ bar diameter
k3 l(h~-=-¢) (h-;-.:.--;p)
hl, h2 = length of longer and shorter sides of the effective rectangle
of concrete surrounding the cable
brdt
E: average total soffit strain = E - 4 A
av 1
s
E:l = soffit strain calculated at crack

dt = depth from compression face to cable centroid

A = total cable area.
s
101
(2) After Gergely and Lutz
One of the most widely recognised crack width formula was based
101
on a statistical analysis of crack widths observed in six experimental
investigations on reinforced concrete by different researches. As this
31 97
equation has been widely used .' for partially prestressed concrete it
has been investigated.

w = 13.2 31tbA R (fs - 34.5) x 10-

6
mm (6.2)

where tb = bottom cover measured from centroid of lowest bar

A = average effective concrete area surrounding each bar
R = dl/d2
dl = distance from tension face of beam to neutral axis
d2 distance from steel centroid to neutral axis
f steel stress (MPa) - taken as steel stress change after
s
decompression at steel level
 206

102
(3) After Bennett and Chandrasehar
A design technique of estimating crack widths based on
calculation of a fictitious uncracked concrete tensile stress fct has
become popular because of its simplicity. The equation by Bennett and
102
Chandrasehar has been found to produce good results in a statically
96
determinate beam under force loading , although it ignores steel
percentages.

(6.3)

k = constant depending on cable type.

4
Because fct is calculated from the moment on the uncracked
structure advantage cannot be taken of reduction of thermal continuity
moments due to cracking. Thus equation 6.3.is expected ~o be conservative.

(b) Deflections in Partially Prestressed Structures

Vehicle vertical vibrations usually limit service load deflections,

and the maximum allowable deflection is usually expressed as a proportion
of span length. Cracking has significant effect on deflections of
prestressed concrete beams (Fig. 6.1) and deflections under cyclic loading
31 103
of cracked beams may be 100% greater than under monotonic loading •

Camber Def lee ti on

FIG. 6.1 ~HEORETICAL DEFLECTIONS OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED

BEAMS WITH THE SAME ULTIMATE MOMENT
 207

The most thorough method of calculating deflections is by finding and

integrating the curvatures along the beam based on the moment/curvature
relationship of sections. Some regard may be taken of inter-crack
concrete tensions.

(c) Fatigue Failure in Partially Prestressed Structures

Phythian 94 presents a literature survey on this subject, and reports
that fatigue failure of the concrete is unlikely to occur before fatigue
failure of the main prestress tendons or mild steel. An estimate of the
number of cycles to failure for a given stress range in the steel can be
obtained from S-N curves; although fatigue strength of bars tested in air
104
is slightly lower than for bars tested in beams •

6.2 THERMAL ANALYSIS ·OF PARTIALLY PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES

If the thermal load design philosophy proposed in Section 6.1.2 is

used, a prestressed concrete section will remain uncracked until a thermal
plus live-load combination induces stresses that exceed the concrete tensile
flexural strength, after which the crack height becomes a function of the
loading. On load removal cracks will close unless large inelastic steel
strains have occurred. Subsequent loading will induce a different load :
crack-height relationship as no concrete tension can exist on the original
crack face. Due mainly to the effects of crack growth and the restraining
influence of the prestress force, the moment-curvature relationship is
significantly nonlinear.
The general approach described for thermal analysis of conventionally
reinforced concrete structures in Chapter 4 could be adapted for analysis
of partially prestressed concrete structures by including the effects of
the prestress force. However, the simplified theory described for
reinforced concrete structures in Section 4.3.2(a) is inapplicable to
partially prestressed structures because it does not consider crack growth,
an~ the general theory described in Section 4.3.2(b) becomes tedious due
to the large number of temperature subprof iles required to simulate, the
partially prestressed concrete non-linear relationship accurately. A
more suitable solution procedure will be developed below, based on the
moment-curvature relationships at sections, and including the effects of
the nonlinear concrete and steel stress-strain relationships.
Note that under the thermal load design philosophy proposed in
Section 6.1.2, no top surface cracks will be induced. Thus the inclusion
 208

of change in section stiffness due to deck cracks closing in the

reinforced concrete thermal analysis is not applicable in partially
prestressed design. However the solution procedure described below
would automatically include this effect.

6.2.1 Development of Section Moment-Curvature (M/~) Relationship

Including Thermal Load

The same assumptions listed in Section 4.2.1 are required for the
theoretical development of this section, except that rather than assuming
linear material stress-strain curves, the concrete stress f c , . mild steel
stress f
and prestress steel stress f are assumed to be uniquely
s p
related to a stress-induced strain E by f f = <j> (E ) and
c s s s
fp = <j>p(Ep) respectively.

(a) Initial Uncracked Conditions : Dead Load + Prestress

Under prestress plus dead load conditions, the prestress cable
tensile force P , the dead load moment MDL and prestress moment Mp
(based on equivalent vertical loads) can be simply calculated at any section
if the structure remains uncracked. Under these conditions the strain in
the prestress cable e and the concrete strain at the level of the
p
tendon (Fig. 6.2(b)) are given by:

-1
e <Pp (-P/A ) (6.4)
p p
M + MDL
-1 (p /A -
eI <P.c
J2
I
(y p - y) ) (6. 5)

where A
p = area of prestress cable
A = transformed equivalent concrete area
I = transformed moment-of-inertia about the centroid
y height of centroid above the origin (Fig. 6.2(a)).

Note A, I and y are calculated ignoring the prestress steel in

the above equations, and can be calculated from equations 4.10 - 4.12.

The total section moment MI in Fig. 6.2 can be found by

integrating the forces about a fixed point.

= (6.6)'

Note that M + P(y is the secondary moment M and is equal to

p s
zero for a concordant cable.
 209

Centroid
- - ....... -
Level

I>. p

Origin
(b) Concrete & (c) Forces On
(a) General Section
Cable Strains Section

FIG. 6.2 GENERAL UNCRACKED PRESTRESSED CONCRETE SECTION

UNDER PRESTRESS PLUS DEAD LOAD

(b) Thermal Load on Cracked Section

49
Priestley developed a solution technique for uncracked structures
under thermal load. Equations to derive a M/$ relationship for a
general partially prestressed section (Fig. 6.3(b)) follow closely the
development presented in Section 4.2.2 for a general reinforced concrete
section. However because nonlinear material stress-strain relationships
are now being assumed, the method of superposition does not apply, and
the total section strain profile (Fig. 6.3(b)) of the thermally loaded
cracked section must be used in calculation of stress distributions. Thus
the total section strain E(y) at height y is

E (y) = + $y (6. 7)

General expressions for concrete, mild steel and prestress cable

stress are given respectively by:

f (x,y)
c
= ~
c
(a T(x,y) + E + $y)
c 1
(6.8)

f (x,y) ~ (a T(x,y) + E + $y) (6.9)

s s s 1
(6.10)

For a cracked prestressed section, equations 4.5 and 4.6 can be

rewritten:
 210

Temperature
T(x ,y)

-r----
Crack
Level

~~J~
~-E1----I
(a) General Section (b) Strain Profiles (c) Stresses

FIG. 6.3 GENERAL CRACKED PRESTRESSED CONCRETE SECTION

UNDER THERMAL PLUS FORCE LOAD

i=N
JI AA fc '(x,y)dx dy + F er + E ( f {x, y) A. )
i=l s J.
+ f A
PP
= F (6.11)

i=N
JJAA fc{x,y)ydxdy + M + l: {f {x,y)yA,) + f Ay = M (6.12)
er i=l s J. PPP

where F and M are compressive force and moment developed across

er er
the crack due to ~rack closing.

Note that F equals zero on an axially unrestrained section and

that M equals total section moment. It is convenient to subtract the
prestress secondary moment M from the total section moment M so that
s
the computed moment under dead load plus prestress equals MDL (see
equation 6 .6).

A complete M/~ relationship for an axially unrestrained section,

including the effects of a constant temperature distribution, can be found
by selecting a series of values of ~ and finding corresponding values
of M and E which satisfy equations 6.11 and 6.12. It is convenient
1
to start with ~ = 0 , then continue to add a positive increment to ~

until maximum section positive curvature is reached; return to ~ = 0 ·and

continue to add a negative increment to ~ until the maximum negative
magnitude of curvature is reached. Maximum curvature is exceeded when
equation 6.11 cannot be satisfied for assumed values of ~. This
 211

corresponds to magnitudes of ~ greater than at ultimate section moment or

concrete crushing,. Results are not expected to be reliable after concrete
crushing, due to the effects of spalling, and the more indeterminate
nature of the concrete stress-strain curve. The procedure adopted for
solution of the moment M corresponding to the curvature ~ is described
below.

(1) Estimate E as discussed below

1
(2) Calculate crack height ~ from the minimum value of y in
equation 6.8 for which (x,y) > f' Note f' is zero up to the
f
c t t
preformed crack level, and can be taken as the concrete flexural tensile
strength for uncracked concrete.
(3) Calculate and M F
from equations 4.15 and 4.16 respectively.
er er
For a monotonically loaded initially uncracked section F = M :::: o.
er er
(4) Solve for F in equation 6.11 using values from equations
6.8 - 6.10. The integral can be replaced by summations as described in
Section 4.2.2.
(5) If F is not equal to zero, return to (1).

(6) Calculate M from equation 6.12. The curvature and crack height
corresponding to M are and Subtract the secondary moment M
s
from M to convert total section moment into corresponding force-load
moment.
Estimation of Soffit Strain E
1
The procedure adopted for refining estimates of
E is discussed
1
below. For the ith stored value of soffit strain E (i), the
1
corresponding value of F calculated from step (4) above is F(i).
(a) First estimate E (1)
1
Unless· l/J = O, use value for E (l) from previous first solution.
1
If l/J = 0 put El (1) = <fie -1 (p /A) . .

(b) Second estimate. El (2) = El (1) - 6\jJ.y

where 6l/J = increment of l/J
(c) 3rd and subsequent estimate. El (3).
A linear numerical interpolation is used
£ (3) = (E: (2) F(l) - E (1) F(2))/(F(l) - F(2))
1 1 1
Either {E (1), F(l)} or {E (2), F(2)} is replaced by
1 1
{E (3), F(3)} •
1
 212

6.2.2 Thermal Analysis of Statically Determinate Partially Prestressed

Concrete Bridge

Because of cable drape the M/~ relationships at all representative

elements on the structure (Fig. 6.4) must be calculated both with and without
imposed temperatures as shown in the previous section. At each section
the moment due to dead load ~L and live load MLL is calculated from
statics and the solution obtained using normal procedures. (Point A Fig.
6.4(b)). The calculation of structural response under additional thermal
loading is simple, as the section moments will not change. Thus in Fig.
6.4 the section response at element i will change from A to H under
thermal loading. Data corresponding to point H (such as crack height
l; , soffit strain e:
or steel stresses f or f were calculated in
1 s p
the derivation of Curve 2 (Fig. 6.4(b)), and so are assumed known. The
change in section curvature during thermal loading at each section (,1, for
'l't
element i in Fig. 6.4) can be used to compute thermal deflections from
equation 4.]7. Thus full structural response can be determined.

6.2.3 Thermal Analysis of Statically Indeterminate Partially Prestressed

Concrete Bridge

Three different approaches for solution of thermal loading of

indeterminate inelastic bridges will be discussed. Each approach assumes
the structure to be segmented into representative elements as shown in
Fig. 6.4(a), and that the initial solution under force loading is known at
each element (Point A Fig. 6.4(b)). The M/~ relationships at each element
are assumed to be constant over the full length of the element, and are
calculated at the element midpoint. The section moments will change under
thermal loading, and the final intersection point on Curve 2 (Fig. 6.4(b))
must be found.

(a) Incremental Load Solution

The solution procedure may be broken into steps as follows:
(1) The temperature profile is divided into a number of geometrically
similar subprofiles, that together make up the whole, as described in
Section 4.3.2(b) and Fig. 4.4.
(2) A M/~ relationship is developed for each element for each
imposed temperature profile as discussed in Section 6.2.1 and shown in
Fig. 6.5.
(3) The thermal load is applied in increments with each increment
corresponding to an additional temperature subprofile. Point I (Fig. 6.5)
 213

i-3 j ... 2 i-1

(A) Beam

.----Curve 2
(Includes thermal load )
l/fo
-r-
I a
/
I
Curve 1
I
I ( No thermal load )
......
c
Q)
I
E
ilMo L
0
I
I

Ms

u Cl
:L:L

- _ - - Initial--~
loading
...J
...J
2.:
+
...J
0
2.:
Prestress loading only

Curvature

(8) Moment - Curvature Relationships Of Element

FIG. 6.4 MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP OF SECTION WITH

AND WITHOUT AN IMPOSED DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE PROFILE
 214

- - -k

-- -- j
i
h
~Mj / _,.,., / gNOTE:
/ / Curve i derived
/ / /using temperature
~Mi / profile i etc.
.......
/
cQ) / /
E / /
0
::L / /
~Mh
/ /
Mh - - - - - -JI. /
/H
I I
I
Mg -- - --I
G ...... Temperature in profile i at height y
.c.
I ~
Ol = ljy
Temperature in subprofi le i at height y
= ~y - liy

Temperature

Curvature 'I

FIG. 6.5 MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIPS OF SECTIONS WITH

VARIOUS INCREMENTAL TEMPERATURE PROFILES

represents the known condition at a given section when loaded with the ith
temperature profile. A procedure for finding the solution when loaded with
the jth temperature profile (Point J Fig. 6.5) will be described.
(a) The unrestrained incremental thermal curvature ~i and element
stiffness s.1. are obtained as shown in Fig. 6.5 for· each element.
(b) The incremental moments at each element t.M.1. are calculated from
the theory for reinforced concrete (Section 4.3.2(a)) using the values from
(a) •

(c) The intersection point on Curve j (Point J Fig. 6.5) is fouhd

from M.
J
= M.1. + 6M . .
1.

The procedure continues until all temperature subprofiles have been

considered.
 215

(b) Newton-Raphson Solution

A more efficient solution procedure than described in Section
105
6.2.3(a), based on the Newton-Raphson method will be described in steps:
(1) A M/ljl relationship is developed for each element for ithe cases
of
(a) No thermal load on the element (Curve 1, Fig. 6.4).
(b) Total thermal load on the element (Curve 2, Fig. 6.4) as for the
statically determinate case.
(2) The unrestrained thermal curvature (ljlt Fig. 6.4) and initial
stiffness S (slope at A Fig. 6.4) are obtained for each element. A first
0
estimate of the change in bending moment fil1 at each element due to the
0
total thermal load, based on the initial stiffness s0 and thermal
curvature ljlt at each element, is calculated as described for reinforced
concrete in section 4.3.2(a).
(3) Point B in Fig. 6.4 is located from the coordinates (ljJB,MB)
where MB = MA + illto and lj!B = lj!A + LiMo/So 0

(4) The moment MB - MC (Fig. 6.4) represents an out-of-balance moment

on each element, and thus -(MB - MC) is added as an independent loading,
with the stiffness of element s 1 taken as the slope at C (Fig. 6.4).
The fixed end moments on the structure are found from Moment-Area methods
as developed in Appendix A (equations A.15 and A.16). The change in bending
moment ill1
at any section are then found by normal moment distribution
1
techniques, based on the current stiffness distribution (s .>, as developed
1
in Section 4.3.2(a).
(5) Point D in Fig. 6.4 is located from the coordinates (lji ,M )
0 0
where M =Mc+ 6M and ~D
0 1
= ~c + ill11 ;s .
1
(6) The solution continues along the path DE, EF, FG .••. ,until
convergence.

(c) Trial and Error Bending Moment Approach

If an assumed structural bending moment distribution both satisfies
statics and compatibility (based on deflections calculated from section M/lji
relationships including thermal load), then the bending moment distribution
106
is correct • Thus an iterative procedure of adjusting the bending moment
distribution is a possible solution technique for simple structures. This
technique has been used to analyse the experimental xrodels described in' the
next chapter.

Consider the general structure of n simple supports under thermal

 216

load in Fig. 6.6(a). A proposed bending moment distribution (Fig. 6.6(c))

HG?at Heat
~ t ~ { i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Al '
~
j
&;;
k
(o) Structure

- ~ (b) Deflected
~ ~ Shape
k
x4: . . • . . .,,.z

]~
IM; (c) Assumed
Moment
Dis tri but ion

FIG. 6.6 GENERAL SOLUTION FOR STRUCTURE UNDER THERMAL LOADING

'usING TRIAL BENDING MOMENT DISTRIBUTION

must define a bending moment at each internal support (i.e. n-2 specified
moments). Thus the moment at any section and hence curvature w can be
found. An equation can be written to check for compatibility at each of the
n-2 internal supports:

e1]
.. + = 0 (6 .13)

where e1]
.. = c
1 l
0
2 1]
..
wx (21]
.. - x)dx (6 .14)
1]

Eljk
1
2jk
l
0
2 jk w (2.
z Jk
- z)dz (6.15)

Thus the number of redundancies equals the number of equations.

If equation 6.13 is not satisfied at all supports for the assumed bending
moment distribution, the bending moment distribution is sequentially adjusted
(at internal supports) to improve the compatibility imbalance, until
convergence) •
 217

6.2.4 Proposed Crack Width Formula

A crack width formula incorporating the effects of thermal loading,

creep and shrinkage will be derived from first principles. Consider a beam
in a constant moment zone with cracking at uniform spacing S . The soffit
crack width
2
w = 8 £ + ( s/ (£ (x) + £ (x) - a T(x))dx (6 .16)
av J_ s/ 2 c sc c

where £ average total section strain at the soffit, including the

av
effects of temperature, creep and shrinkage.
£ concrete stress induced strain
c
£ concrete unrestrained shrinkage and creep strain
SC
T = concrete temperature rise at soffit.

If at a distance ~b from a single crack the curvature of the beam

ahd transfer of force by bond from steel to concrete create a tensile stress
107
ft at the tensile surface, then it may be argued that crack spacing will
vary randomly between tb and 2tb , with an average spacing of l.Stb
For uniform spading S the concrete stress is assumed to vary linearly
from zero at the crack face to 0.75ft' at distance S/2 from the crack face.
s/2
Thus ·f £ (x)dx = -0.37ft'/E • If is assumed that £
av
= £1 (conservative)
-s/2 c . c
and shrinkage and creep .strains are ignored (i.e. £
SC
= 0) then equation
6.16 reduces to:

(6.17)

Theory for the estimation of average crack spacing S will be

discussed in context with the experimental models in the next chapter, and
results from equation 6.17 will be compared with experimental results and
predictions of established formulae in Section 6.l.2(a).
 218

CHAPTER 1 .
EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL RESPONSE
OF TWO MODEL PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BRIDGES

SUMMARY

The construction and thermal testing of two continuous prestressed

concrete model beams is presented. Thermal testing included three
different conditions.
(1) Beams uncracked throughout test.
(2) Initially uncracked beams with a sufficiently large force load
so that cracking initiated under thermal loads.
(3) As (2), but initially cracked beams.

Thermal tests were performed to induce positive moment cracking both

near midspan (in combination with force loading) and near internal supports
(no force loading and prestress overbalance) . The beams were also loaded
to failure under force loading.

Experimental results for deflections, reactions, strains and crack

widths are compared with computed results based on the theory in Chapter 6.

7.1 INTRODUCTION

.
Priest l ey 50 , Ra d o 11.i and Green 25 , and Priest
. l ey an d Wood 22 , as
discussed in Section 5.1, have found agreement between thermal measurements
and predictions on uncracked prestressed concrete bridges under transient
thermal loading. A literature survey revealed no reported data for
similar bridges loaded in the cracked condition. It was shown in Section
6.1.2 that there are significant advantages in a cracked partially
prestressed design approach, and to test the analysis theory presented in
Chapter 6, two prestressed concrete model beams were thermally tested in
various cracked conditions, and the experimental results compared with
theory. Because of limited ultimate load testing of such bridges, the
bridges were also loaded to failure, with comparisons being made between
theory and experiment.

7.2 STRUCTURAL AND CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF MODEL BRIDGES

The structural dimensions and mild steel reinforcing details of the

prestressed microconcrete model beams are shown in Fig. 7.1 (Beam Three)
and Fig. 7.2 (Beam Four) •. The model beam cable profiles are shown in Fig.7.3.
 <t .50 . <t
1- -i
I I
.560

r-1
'50 ..
I
J Top sfee.I 12
at 46mm crs
n 7q

.
wzq- IQ
I I £
. . - . : . I . .z='\:?, 1 \ • ; • I==t
-5T!RRUP Dllvt£NSIONS 54
(()
NOTE 0 "~ Pre.stress ducfmg
~
I. Lafera/ ::,feel & sflrrups
are 6 mm (/> of 81 m"' crs
2.. Longdudmal ::,fee.I 1:s 2·5mm ¢.

J
It")

11200 '- 2q; 6

\'r)

114.... I~ 3048 . I. 48 76 .....,.. 304-B =1I114

.... .366

AA £ 8 Ac Ao TYPICAL SECTION
1- 4300 _,. 1
... 4,3q4 · ... 1
.... z.so6 ... I
Pour 2. !'our -3 Pour I

Co~fruchon Drz.fatls
""
I-'
l.O

FIG. 7.1 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS AND MILD STEEL

REINFORCING DETAILS OF BEAM THREE
 f 4-2.5
i-- /09 ""'"'
"'Pffii1·'6
I I bar D I I \: ,,,,_ c _---::!
__Elj
Pr1Z. t;fnc.:,5 ~TEEL NOT£S
Dµc/1113--~­ !Jar A ts +·4mtn ¢> sfockptlui slu.J. Runs full la.ngfh.
.,.. I.\ 111 /:Jar£. Bar 8 1s oufer stirrup. Bar £. ts inner stirrup. 8ofh 45mm (/> shAel
"'""
/Jar C 1s :sfra1ghk.mz.d 6mm w1nt.
&r D IS 8!8mm of 6mm </> bars of 7.5crs
bar C
;, ~
'\I 5Tll?RUP 7YP£5
L Type I Oufer stirrup,:, of 20 ~ mnu- at 80 er$.
0-
bar8 ,, 2 .. " 30 .. "
. 80" NOTE
Q .. 3 ~ ,, 60 .. . • 120 " Cover fo sfec.I ·S111m

borA . 4 " .. 120

.. ,, • 240 ,,

10 7 .3000 -1286 3000 107

71' 71 • II· .~. ....11-

TYPICAL SECT/ON

t
S"pp~f A 1 Supped 6
i
I8-
/07
. ., i..
I
3000
~.!75 : · : 42-6 .1
2143 ••
I
I :'
&02 ±K• + ,., ,
I •

.i:sa ~'~ l ioso -

=:J '--+:so
"n' -•L
=
l,,m
ao.s
·t'"" + "~'+28 L '+3
+"'" I .!
L 64.5

STIRRUP LAYOUT

FIG. 7.2 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS AND MILD STEEL

REINFORCING DETAILS OF BEAM FOUR N

""
0
 221

0•085

Interior 1 Support

5 x 500 4 x soo

(A) Beam Three

End Support I
Interior Support

CABLE
CENTROro

. Lil
Lil
N .-
en

6 x 500 3 x 500

(B) Beam Four

NOTE 1 Vertical Sc ale - 5 x Horizontal Scale

FIG. 7.3 PRESTRESS CABLE PROFILES IN MODEL BEAMS

 222

7.2.1 Relationship Between Models and Prototypes

(a) Beam Three

Beam Three (Fig. 7.1) is intended to represent a i-scale model of
the Porirua Station OVerbridge (Wellington, New Zealand). Structural
dimensions and reinforcing details of the prototype are shown in Figs.
7.4 and 7.5. The prototype was selected because initial thermal analysis
on this and two other box-girder bridges, using computer program THERMAL
with assumed material properties and meteorological conditions reported in
Appendix E, indicated that the highest soffit thermal stresses were
generated with the shallow depth Porirua bridge.

Although the prototype has four boxes in cross-section (Fig. 7.4)

1
a model with only one box and /20th the prototype area (Fig. 7.1) was
considered to adequately represent the bridge longitudinal thermal behaviour.
The eight-span prototype was modelled with three spans, with the length
of the model end and centre span being a scaled length of the prototype
end span and typical internal span respectively. The cable profile, the
prototype full prestress dead load balance, the lateral, longitudinal and
stirrup steel percentages were accurately modelled, although lateral
diaphragms were ignored and the pier-capping beam and columns represented
by simple supports.

Six kentledge weights in the end spans and 10 in the centre span were
used for modelling the dead load of the prototype (Fig. 7.6) as discussed
for Beam Two (Section 5.2.2(b)). However the kentledge weights in the
centre span were increased above the requirement for dead load simulation,
thus effectively providing an extra uniformly distributed load wk over
the centre span. The magnitude of wk was based on the scaled MWD Highway
40
Bridge Design Brief HN live load of 10.5kN/m/lane. Thus wk = 10.5 x
~ (~ lane modelled) x i (scale) = 1.05 kN/m.
Model prestress was provided by two 7 mm diameter wires per web,
stressed to an initial tension of 1110 MPa, resulting in an average section
stress under dead load plus prestress of 3.53 MPa. Test results on the
prestress wire are presented in Appendix B.

(b) Beam Four

1
Beam Four (Fig. 7 .2) represents a 7th scale model of the Auckland
Urban Motorway - Newton Interchange Bridge No. 1.. Structural dimensions
and reinforcing details of the prototype are shown in Figs.7.7 and 7.8.
 n A
15·140 I
t
I
'24-584
iI '14-984
D

I
'14·584 i
'
"14·584 J
,
24·S84- \
•

:
'24·384 I
M

!
lb-140 ri
I
I I I I I
I

.
I ,~.1 ·~'Ld...-1..::~.::~'_=:i==_:::r=r'
I • '

I I 'I L.1 l,;JA

_lf=
3 3'¥ I I • 11 I I

~' II 1.1 II H m'--·.J"'

I I - ------------- ------M l ! !I ii i'

!l J: l:.; ! l 11 If :! :: I!

EL£YA7"ION

t
f ,,,,...., •"'·~ ~
'Ptr•..& Ill d '"n-f 'ii •"':•·I

··,~--r------
l,,1
~I
I ::
LI I !' .,.iii I I: i : : i
,i .,.,. <!__..,...
___ _ I'• 'r,...- ••"1' ,., r-..;t'}I ' "
-~T
:, I I ,• I: i II
!rt
H --<·- . --·f l ,-,
y'
___J!ii i
111 ::
:1!I\, I' 9i
I,
l :11'
o
.-,,-·-. ' ' 1_.... ...........1
......__ .
I
I l '

~ Ii , :: ~I t44J !
Jll
-(( :+-'- . ': :: ;I, .
..~ .. -!
1
j:"
C-~
1-1
L
\--1I
1-
r--1
I

.eJd!!'
l t

WICAL apll SCCTfON

(\.)
(\.)
FIG. 7 .4 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS OF PORIRUA STATION w
OVERBRIDGE
 224

fSmm</Jfyp. 16mm rp fyp.al '154t:r.'

·fe>mm f
.ffOmm.p

· 31JmmCover
temmaf 15mm lyp.
2!J4cr:J

AH weM.- 54 of ff0mf71 bars of '154 ,, All webs - 90 of' flPmm (' bar6 of '154 cr.5.

l.ONG/TVDINAL SECTION SNC:W-AV6 /W:IJ 11£1/W"ORCEMENT

___ __.,,,/

Ki.EV. $/fCW!/\3 t:ENTIUJ!O

C,1' t:AIJi.8$.

FIG. 7.5 REINFORCING DETAILS OF PORIRUA STATION OVERBRIDGE

The prototype was selected because it is considered to represent a typical

contemporary design of a continuous T-beam prestressed concrete bridge.
It is shown in Appendix D that thermal loading of relatively wide flanged
and shallow depth T-sections generates relatively large thermal soffit
tensile stresses compared to other typical section shapes.

Although the prototype has two spines in cross-section, it is

considered that a model of only one spine would adequately represent
bridge longitudinal thermal behaviour. The model consists of only three
 225

FIG. 7.6 TEST SETUP (BEAM THREE)

spans, with the centre span modelling the length, lateral, longitudinal and
stirrup steel percentages, and centre of gravity of the prestress cables of
the interior prototype span NM (Fig. 7 . 7). The model end spans modelled
the steel percentages of the prototype end span ON (Fig . 7.7). However the
length of the model end spans was put equal to 0 .7 of the model centre span,
and the cable drape adjusted to provide the same load balance as the centre
span. Prototype lateral diaphragms were ignored, the pier capping beam
and columns modelled by simple supports, and the slightly tapered prototype
spine (Fig . 7.7) modelled by a scaled uniform average thickness.

Six kentledge weights in the end spans and nine in the centre span
(Fig . 7.9) were used to model the dead load of the prototype as discussed
for Beam Two (Sec tion 5 .2.2 (b)) . No additional weights in the centre span
to simulate lane live load were used in Beam Four.

Model prestress was provided by a 7/5 mm monostrand cable of ultimate

load 255 kN, stressed to a f orce of 174.7 kN, resulting in an average
section stress under dead load plus prestress of 2.97 MPa.
 30·.:SO

~ 2
I ..;
~ ~ ~ ~

[)~\t_E.l.PPED .S'-.E.,'A.TION

•J 0

t "0 G

t·4'31! ~226_ '.H!26 2·43S

---- ~par --;- -- -,
-.0
f>.

rfP
2:11%.

F~, f ;f-1l~ ~hi

.,_>'

\ ' I I ~
\ \
L+.J
I
l·
r---$----,
I
;..

I
L_ - -- - -.:.r;::· - - ~tlt~r...1
SECTION AT t_ PIER M

FIG. 7.7 STRUCTURAL DIMENSIONS OF AUCKLAND URBAN

MOTORWAY NEWTON INTERCHANGE BRIDGE NO. 1 t\J
t\J
O'I
 609!0
--Ty_p~J[ f:. Tc45:2:ur- -+----~JY
-4
_(Jfp______
- -- ---- +-rv41I~
J--!.!1 -t--- ¢u~'°jr_
.r4-32mm b. --~

·LLtJ____4sze ____ __j 4-32mm 3- /9mm af 305 cr.s b.P.

~
I0-3cmm 2-32mm
___A_gil_ ___ -+- _304_~ -___7JJ,g_a .:JI! "" I" ~-~, ,. I ~, - ...-'l

1
, T912a;JI_ + Typa1ll...j 4- 32mm TYPE. OfJTE,g /NNEB

.1L
I GO
7fD
'°
203
4-3Zmm .J- /9mm at 305 ~ b.I: III 15Z 305
b~32mm
-:JY 305 <DIO
LONGITUDINAL 8£AM 1)£/NFO~CING

13mm af---. ~ baam -f~pan

Standard JOS crs i: I • r
hook. ~
/0mm a.t /0mm a-f 305 as~ /6mm af 305 crs b I1
457 ~ b. _J \_ J J(;mtn af 457 crs b "t; 3mm
?
''mm at -/IOmm aft:?SO l\11 3o5crs
305 c~ b. crs b. 4-/3mm a !!!I b.P.
4- 13 mm at J05 crs b. L
JO.Sens b
DECK SLAB R£1NFO/,;;C/NG DETAILS

-~~aam
)_ [Dack cabla:s ~8.9 {Coup/a cab/as 7,8

-r- -- I r __ I __ -f ~C ~oupla cab:.a ~l __ I _--~-~id

' re_ab/as 1,2,3 I - ~ -- ' Of. PQ,3rQE,SS cAlH-~
~
- -· __ =--i---r----- l
I .
1-------· -- - -- . - r;FNTl2E. -
. tS(?AVITl I -- ----
r--- \ -- -- L
I

I\
Cab/as 4,5,&:.
~
Note: Metric dimencioni; of lenoth
Leab/as 4,5,t;, L...Coupla cab/as 4,~ whero no symbols ore olven
Whole numbers = mm
5AMPL£ OF PR£STQ£SS DUCTING PROFILE Decimalised expresslons ::: m

FIG. 7.8 REINFORCING DETAILS OF AUCKLAND URBAN

MOTORWAY NEWTON INTERCHANGE BRIDGE No. 1 N
....,
N
 228

FIG. 7.9 TEST SETUP (BEAM FOUR)

7.2.2 Model Manufacture

The reinforcing cages for Beams Three and Four were wired together
in the pre-painted casting moulds. The cages were then raised by crane
while the moulds were lightly coated with oil. The microconcrete for the
two beams was cast in a pan-type mixer, and full details of concrete mix
and tests performed on the concrete and steel test specimens are reported
in Appendix B. The concrete pours were completed within two hours with
vibration provided by pneumatic Kango Hammers, used with caution against
the mould sides to avoid excessive bleeding. No cavities due to lack of
vibration were found on any surface, and pitting was minimal. The top
surface was screeded with a steel screed and smoothed with a metal trowel.
Curing was achieved by wrapping the beams in hessian (kept perpetually wet
by driphose) and plastic sheeting.

(a) Beam Three

Accurate model construction presented problems because of the large
length, thin wall sections and the difficulty of removing the internal
formwork. The following construction procedure was used.
(1) The back of a 305 mm wide channel was ground smooth and placed
uppermost on solid supports for the full length of the model. Tapered
wooden wedges were bolted onto the channel sides, to set the angle for the
 229

model webs and to widen the channel (Fig. 7 . 10) .

(a) GenC:?ral ViC:?w

(b) End SC:?ct ion

FIG. 7 . 10 FORMWORK FOR POUR OF BEAM THREE SOFFIT SLAB

(2) The soffit slab and a small portion of the webs was cast in one
pour (Fig. 7.10) . The construction joint was coated with FEBMIX retarding
agent two hours after the pour, and then wire brushed clean 22 hours later.
(3) The formwork shown in Fig . 7.ll(a) was clamped into position
(Fig. 7.ll(b)) and the upper portion of the beam was cast in three pours
(Fig . 7.1). The internal boxing was removed 48 hours after pouring, and
was constructed so that when the glued horizontal bracing strip was knocked
out, (Fig . 7.ll(a)), the boxing fell into two sections, thus facilitating
removal.
 2 30

F inal surface level Spacer screws Cardboard sheet

Steel brace

Glu ed Steel
block s ' ·. , "'• •• J s ides
• •• t .:

Spacer~~-::i::.~~~~~~:.~~,~~~~J'~.~~.~~-:. · Bolt ed
bloc ks & clomped

' • ..
• 4
•. ·• , .. -
~ ••• :

."
• • • • ,· i ;

.
, .
.
,
. ' . . .... 4' ·,.. '3
.. . • 4 ._, "'
. . ·, ... , , ~ ' '
~
"' • I • • , .. • 4

(a ) Sect ion Details

(b) Gener al View

 231

(4) A 17 nun diameter perspex tube was cast into each web, following
the shape of the intended prestress cable profile. The tube was pulled
out 24 hours after pouring and the prestress cables subsequently threaded
into the preformed duct.

The accuracy of the construction was verified by cutting a section

from the beam after testing completion. It was found that all specified
section dimensions were accurate to within 2 nun.

(b) Beam Four

Beam Four was cast in one pour over a period of l~ hours in the mould
shown in Fig. 7.12. The longitudinal mild steel reinforcing rods were
welded to a 12 mm steel plate, shaped to the beam cross-section, at both
ends of the mould. This provided a good surface for subsequent prestressing
operations, and a suitable earth for the datalogger for steel strain gauge
readings during subsequent beam testing. A 16 mm diameter steel
prestressing sheath was cast into the beam, following the shape of the
intended prestress cable profile (Fig. 7.12(b)).

7.2.3 Model Transportation and Erection

After the minimum age of concrete reached 28 days, the formwork on

the sides of the beams was stripped, and a low prestress was applied to
the prestress rods so that the upwards load, caused by cable drape, balanced
the dead load of the beam. A further uniform compressive stress of 2.75 MPa
was applied to Beam Three, using a high tensile bar, passing through the
hollow box section at the centroid location. The prestress load was
applied with a hydraulic jack and hand pump and measured with load cells
calibrated on Avery Universal Testing Machines with a Budd P-350 Strain
Indicator.

The beams were lifted by crane as shown diagramatically in Fig. 7.13

with the lifting points on the concrete beams corresponding to support
locations., and the lifting points on the steel beams chosen so that the
correct theoretical dead load reactions would be obtained at the concrete
beam support locations. Thus the beams would theoretically be under
uniform compression during t.~e lifting operation. Beam Three was also
transported approximately 40 metres by trolleys (Fig. 7.13) ,where again
the beam was theoretically under uniform compression.

The beams were lowered gently by crane and plastered onto the two
outside prelevelled supports (Figs. 7.1 and 7.2) so that the initial
reactions recorded on the load cells were approximately 0.3 kN. The
 232

NOTE: All in side faces of

mould painted
th e n oiled
Glued &
Nailed Chipboard

Shaped Wedge

Steel Channels ngle Braces

\ ( 9 per side)

Concrete Block s
at 1500 crs
:a • ~ . .·, .' ,&I . "V • .' ,Q : . ..4· •

. :
I;. -·
. • fl: . 'Y. '
.
4 . - . '.
...6.. .
•.
.
• . . ' .'
.. ,. ..
" :
: I>,
. .~.
.· . .- . ". • . .V' . .
. ,.
.V' I
·.
•. : -: • /:;' • • ••• • ' • • • " '· , ; • _. •• 'II' •••• _

,. ~~-.. - .. -y. - -., . . ~~- . . i:i' . .. .

i. • ,'q
• •• , '
",
I::. •
b,. • -
. ..
• •
l
• ? ' . •• -', • ' • '
• • ... , • 6•
I .,{.:

,:._:-:~._ ... :..~:;· .....~ ...·~.: .. :.~· .....~ ·~ ·.._·.-..·..,,_· .. -;,

Strcngfloor

(a) S~ct ion Details

(b) General Vi ew
FIG. 7.12 FORMWORK FOR BEAM FOUR
 233
Crane

steel cable

Bolted
through steel beam
kentledge holes
·~_,;::r-~-:--~~~~~,

to steel angles-
:~ ....... : ::a.: .. :·:':.~:.:·.=: .:._r._.: .: .:,. I?'·.':' .....-~·:.:::·'.:~:-:·:.::~.-.~.:-.:-.:~~ :." :: ;·.~:·:·:·. ·:. : : :.. : ~·=·:: :·:~ :::.·:..~:··:.~-.:.=4::'1".::".)'. -::.: ::.::?~·:··...........:J::·6.:·::: ~..
I softwood
I
I block
steel beam

steel roller
FIG. 7.13 TRANSPORTATION OF MODEL BEAMS

centre supports were then plastered and screwed upwards until recorded
reactions were approximately 0.6 kN. The crane then lowered the beam
completely onto the supports, and adjustments made to obtain the correct
theoretical dead load reactions by marginally raising and lowering the
supports by the screw mechanism (Fig. 7.14).

7.2.4 Prestressing Operation

The kentledge blocks were weighed and placed on bricks stacked on

the floor, below their allocated position, and the kentledge rods bolted
finger-tight onto the beam top surfaces (Fig. 7.14). Prestress cables
were stressed hydraulically (one end at a time) inducing beam hogging,
thus transferring kentledge load to the beam during the prestress operation.
The bricks below the kentledge blocks were removed at the end of the
prestress operation, thus transferring the weight of any kentledge blocks
to the beam that had not been fully released by the prestress operation.

An excess of grout was forced through the grout holes (Fig. 7.14)
with a pressure of 0.6 MPa, using a compressed air-operated chamber, ~d

the holes plugged. Beam testing commenced two weeks later. Details of
grout composition and testing are reported in Appendix B.
 KEY
Steel R.H. S.
2 Bushes & Sleeves
3 Full bridge S.G. circuit
Removed ofter
I. Steel channels
5 Anchor block stressing
6 Anchor guide ""
7 Hydraulic Jack
8 Switch box
9 Budd Strain - bridge
10 Load Cell
11 Rollers
12 Height adjustment bolts
13 Steel column
1l. Kentledge rods
15 Prestress steel
16 Grout hole

(A) Beam Three

KEY
I. p s c. Monostrond Coble ct.
2 3 4 6 7 15
2. Anchor block and sleeve
3.
4.
Monostrond Hydraulic Jock
Spring - loaded Rom
Bearing Pod (Slee I)
\ 14

5.
6. 200kN Load Cell
7. SteelEnd Plate
8. Electric Pump
9. Budd Strain - bridge
10. Rollers 10
II. Height Adiustmenl bolts 13
9 II
12. Steel Column
12
13. Kenledge Rods
14. Ducting Sheath
15. Grout hole

(B) Beam Four

FIG. 7.14 PRESTRESSING OPERATION AND SUPPORT OETAILS

 235

(a) Beam Three

The prestress load was applied one end of the beam at a time but
simultaneously to all four prestress strands, using a hand pump that forced
oil through a pressure gauge and into a T junction. Oil from each end of
the T then passed through an adjustable tap before pressurising one
hydraulic ram for each web (Fig. 7.14(a)). Thus fine adjustments could
be made to ensure that the force in each web was the same. A bush and
sleeve anchorage system (Fig. 7.14(a)) was used.

Strain gauges were stuck onto opposite generators at both ends of all
four prestress rods (Fig. 7.14(a)). The prestress force in each wire at
each end was obtained using a Budd P-350 Strain Indicator, on a full
Wheatstone-bridge circuit. Calibration was obtained on an Avery 100 kN
Universal Testing Machine Type 7109 DCJ, using test lengths cut from the
same prestressing rods and strain gauges with the same batch number. The
oil pressure was used as an additional check during the prestress operations.
Stressing commenced at the West end with a force of 85.5 kN before load
release being applied to each web. It was observed that an average of
72% of this force was transferred to the East end of the beam. The force
at the west end was then increased to 99.4 kN/web, the sleeves knocked
home (Fig. 7.14(a)) and the load released. This procedure was repeated at
the East end. The final prestress loads are listed in Table 7.1. Note
that large non-uniform slip in the sleeves has reduced the prestress force
significantly, and there is a small load variation per web.

TABLE 7 .1 FINAL PRESTRESS FORCE IN BEAM 'l'HREE

Beam End North Web (kN) South Web (kN)

West 74.7 76.2

East 72.6 78.5

The observed prestress losses due to cable friction were consistent

with a wobble coefficient of 0.007/m and a coefficient of friction of 0.29
for the prestress cable profile shown in Fig. 7.3(a). From these values a
prestress force and bending moment distribution (Fig. 7.15(a)) were
determined for the stressing sequence adopted.

The first thermal tests were performed using full kentledge load
as defined in Table 7.2. (Test Groups A, Band C.) Subsequently some
 236

~
lol BENDING MOMENTS
-12 - - Dead load • full Kenlledge
.......... Dead load • reduced Kentledge
- - . Prestress (Sign ~I
lb) STRAINS 1,..._§j
-9 --Thi!Oieticar
----- MeaSUl'Ed I~ I

·6

z
e
~ ·3
c
•~
:::E
0 S-2
.~ ,._ ,.._04 08 1·2
,,...
l 3
.--
''
6 '

nk=====-=========================ir===========-~-=-=-.c.========4•8

Beam Three

till
!al BENDING MOMENTS
·12 - Dead load + full kentledge
•••••• Dead load • reduced kentledge
- - - Prestress (Sign Reversed l
e .g (b) STRAINS \&E)
z
= - Theoretical
6109

0
~o Measured

112 :13S
STRAIN PROFILE

0 '··· •• , ().l. 1·2 2:4 2:6 3·2 J.6 1.-0 4·4 l.·6
...
'' /
"'
'\'"
3
- - -- ..... /
" ~
'•
. ___

6 "'
'" .._
'
9

(B) Beam Four

FIG. 7.15 MODEL BEAMS BENDING MOMENT DISTRIBUTIONS UNDER

PRESTRESS, KENTLEDGE AND DEAD LOAD
 237

TABLE 7.2 DEAD LOADS SUPPORTED ON MODELS DURING SPECIFIED

LOAD GROUPS

Distance From Dead Load Weight (kg)

Load Description West End (mm) Groups A,B,C Group D Group E

Beam Three
Kentledge 1 368 247.5 158.3 247.5
II
2 876 247.9 157.6 247.9
II
3 1384 242.7 152.9 242.7
11
4 1892 242.0 154.0 242.0
11
5 2400 240.3 149.7 240.3
11
6 2908 244.9 154.5 244.9
11
7 3418 288.3 200.3 200.3
II
8 3903 290.5 201.0 201.0
II
9 4388 285.6 196.0 196.0
11
10 4876 289.9 - 200.l
II
11 5385 285.2 - 195.9
F.L.E * 5100 59.5*** - 59.5
T.S. D.L.** 495 - - 577 .o

Beam Four
Kentledge 1 457 346.3 346.3 346.3
2 917 347.1 347.l 347.1
3 1377 344.7 344.7 344.7
4 1873 348.4 348.4 348.4
5 2297 346.3 346.3 346.3
6 2757 352.3 352.3 352.3
I
7 3410 348.9 348.9 348.9
II
8 3870 352.4 352.4 352.4
II
9 4330 351.2 351.2 351.2
II
10 4790 347.1 - -
II
11**** 5250 350.8 - -
F.L.E* 4572 113.9*** - 113.9***
T.S.D.L** 381 - - 704.0

F.L.E* = Force Load Equipment

T.S.D.L** = Top Surface Dead Load
*** = Only for Load Group B
**** = Full Load at Beam Centreline Shown.

kentledge blocks were removed to simulate a prestress overbalance state.

(Test Group D) • On ultimate beam loading some kentledge load was replaced.
(Test Group E) • Steel weights were added as necessary at each kentledge
arrangement so that the kentledge loading was the same for both halves of
the beam. The kentledge plus beam dead load bending moment distribution,
as derived from Table 7.2 for the two kentledge distributions used in the
 238

thermal tests are shown in Fig. 7.15(a). Note that prestress loading
inc;tuced an equivalent load moment 17% less than the full kentledge plus
dead load moment at the centre of the middle span, due mainly to the
kentledge-simulated live load described in Section 7.2.l(a). The average
theoretical concrete compressive stress at this section was 3.53 MPa.

Section strains developed during prestressing were measured with a

demountable mechanical (Demec) gauge over 102 rran gauge lengths at locations
shown in Fig. 7.15(a), and averaged results are compared with theoretical
total stress-induced section strains in Fig. 7.15(a). Agreement is good,
with experimental prestress moments slightly exceeding theoretical values.
Note that when the beams were placed on the supports under load balancing
prestress only, they were propped in position, temporary prestress removed,
and zero strain readings taken. Thus experimental strains include strains
due to beam self weight.

(b) Beam Four

The prestress force at the ends of the P.S.C. Monostrand Cable

(ultimate strength 255 kN) used in Beam Four was applied by electric motor
and measured with 200 kN load cells at each end of the beam as shown in
Fig. 7.14(b). The load cells were calibrated on an Avery 1000 kN Universal
Testing Machine Type 7104 DCJ, using a Budd P-350 Strain Indicator. The
sequence of applied and measured prestress forces is shown in Table 7.3.

TABLE 7 .3 PRESTRESS LOADING SEQUENCE (BEAM FOUR)

Loading West End East End Coroments

Number Forces (kN) Forces (kN)

1 226.0 149.2 Load Applied West End

2 145.9 144.0 Load Release
3 151.0 227.0 Load Applied East End
4 145.9 144.9 Load Release

The observed prestress losses due to cable friction for the first load
cycle were consistent with a wobble coefficient of 0.007/m and a coefficient
of friction of 0.32 for the prestress profile shown in Fig. 7.3(b). From
these values a prestress force distribution was determined from the loading
sequence, and thus a prestress bending moment distribution calculated (Fig.
7 .15 (b,)) • .Note that prestress approximately balances the full kentledge
 239

loading plus beam self weight. The aver.age theoretical concrete compressive
stress over the section at the centre of the middle span of the beam was
2.97 MPa.

Strain distributions under dead load plus kentledge plus prestress

were measured at the central section by 102 mm gauge length Demec gauges.
Comparisons of theoretical and averaged experimental strains (Fig. 7.15(b))
show that measurements exceeded predictions by about 16%. This discrepancy
is attributed to creep in the beam and shortening due to a temperature fall
during the three hours between initial and final strain readings.

7.2.5 Surface Treatment and Shrinkage

Because the beams have thin section elements, shrinkage strains are
potentially large, and will affect stress distributions. The following
procedure was used to reduce shrinkage:
Shortly after the concrete curing wraps were removed, the beams were
rubbed down with carborundum stone, etched with two parts HCL acid to one
part water, washed with warm soapy then clear water and allowed to dry
overnight. Over the next four weeks four coats of Taubmans High Gloss
Acryllic Chlorinated-Rubber swimming pool paint were applied.
Strain measurements were recorded at locations near the Beam Four
central section as described in Section 7.2.4(b). over the four weeks
from completion of curing until prestressing, demec readings were taken
which showed a shortening strain gradient of 154µE at the soffit reducing
to 147µE at the deck. Although this was larger than expected, calculations
showed that the effect on theoretical crack width after the section had
cracked was less than 6% of the maximum calculated under force plus thermal
loading.

7.2.6 Environmental Box

The environmental box used for Beams One and Two (Section 5.4.1) was
increased in length and adjusted in cross-section as shown in the Frontis-
piece to fit over the top surface flanges of Beams Three and Four, with the
same lamp pattern used as shown in Fig. 5.21. The inside top surface of
the box (painted black in earlier tests) was covered in sisilation. During
thermal testing the box was supported on steel frames welded to the beam
support columns (Figs. 7.6 and 7.9) such that the box fitted loosely around
12 mm of soft rubber insulation glued to the flange edge.
 240

7.2.7 Instrumentation of Beams Three and Four

The locations of strain gauges, thermocouples and dial gauges for

Beams Three and Four are shown in Figs. 7.16 and 7.17 respectively and
Table 7.4. Reactions, temperatures, mild steel strains, surface concrete
strains and dial gauge deflections were measured as described in Section
5.3.2.

(a) Data Acquisition

Temperatures, strains (from strain gauges) and reactions were

automatically recorded during testing using a newly acquired 200 channel
Solartron D.T.U. Datalogger comprising a voltmeter (model A210, resolution
lµV), analogue scanners, Facit printer (model 4553) and Facit tape punch
(model 4070). Output was by printer in tests on Beam Three and paper tape
in tests on Beam Four.

(b) Temperatures

For accurate vertical location 32 copper/constantine thermocouples

in Beam Three and 66 thermocouples in Beam Four were cast into concrete
briquettes formed in steel moulds.

(c) Reactions

Reactions were measured with two Philips 20 kN Load Cells at the end
supports and two 50 kN Load Cells at the centre supports. Restraint to
longitudinal movement and rotation at the supports was minimal due to
provision of ball bearings and rollers shown in Figs. 7.14 and 7.16.

(d) Vertical Deflections

Vertical displacements were measured at nine locations in Beam Three

and seven locations in Beam Four with 25 nun travel dial gauges. Hewlett
Packard linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs) were also used on
Beam Three. However the current from the LVDTs appeared to interfere with
other datalogger measurements. It was confirmed that dial gauge and LVDT
measurements were in agreement and then the latter instrumentation was
dismantled. Note that all vertical deflections presented in this chapter
conform with the following sign convention. The usual measured deflections
of upwards in the end spans and downwards in the middle span are taken.as
positive.
 Note: Thermocouple briquettes P, Q & R
used only at locations 1 & 4 {Table 7·4)
1 2 3 -4 5 6 7 8 g 10 11 12
Q

S IR
S.G. Location Reinforcing Bars Straingauged Concrete S.G.
a
Label Dist.•• Label o-
. lS.
tit~

A· 2 6 13 17 18 15 P1 1 Q1 1
B 14 15 17 18 16 P2 17 02 15
c 3 13 14 16 21 22 P3 33 03 29
D 10 23 24 22 P4 65 R1 178
E 19 20 22 PS 99 R2 206
F 7 8 23 22 51 198
STRAIN THERMOCOUPLE LOCATIONS
T1 F 14 KEY
A,B,C .D ,E .F Straingauges
T1 •T2. 13 • T4 ·Thermocouples
1, 2 .... 10 ,11 Dial Gauges
.- Gauge tied above listed bars
• • Distance of thermocouple junction
below deck top
FIG. 7.16 BEAM THREE INSTRUMENTATION N
ii':>
I-'
 Note: Thermocouple briquettes
Q used only at locations 1,2,5 &6
! [.----- ......---~
(Table 7.4)
IP r"'-----io~....----'-ij
--:--1

Depth of Thermocouple Junction Below

Deck - Tc
Note: S.G. attached symmetrically
about oentreline Label Distance Label Distance
P1 1 P6 52
P2 8 P7 95
P3 18 Q1 1
5
P4 28 Q2 18
[ PS 42 Q3 34
STRAIN GAUGE LOCATIONS
THERMOCOUPLE LOCATIONS

I - ..-x T1 T3 t T4 T5 T6 Symmetrical about ~

Flange
.r .r 51 typ. Spine
. . • "

KEY
A Straingauges
T1 .... T6 Thermocouples
\{')
• Demec Studs ~

OEMEC STUDS AT BEAM CENTRE

(\.)
FIG. 7.17 BEAM FOUR INSTRUMENTATION .i:::.
(\.)
 243

TABLE 7.4 LONGITUDINAL LOCATION OF INSTRUMENTED SECTIONS

(BE¥1S .TUREE .ANP FOUR (Fl;GS. 7.1,.6 .AND 7.17)
-

Instrument Label Di$tance x (m) Fr<r?m West End of Beam

Beam Three aeq.m }.i'our

Thermocouple 1 1.912 1.630

II
2 4.950 3.670
II
3 6.240 4.743
II
4 9.140 5.785
II
5 - 6.843
II
6 - 8.885

Strain Gauge A 3.405 5.250

II II
B 4.538 -
II II
c 5.361 -
II II
D 5.828 -
II
" E 6.656 -
" II
F 7.790 -
Dial Gauge 1 o.o 90* 1.611
2 1.614 3.818
3 4.193 4.520
4 4.657 5.250
5 5.230 5.980
6 5.650 6.682
7 5.965 8.889
8 6.540. -
9 7.061 -
10 9.571 -
" 11 11. 200 90* -

* Note - value represents depth below deck surface.

(e) Strains
Surface concrete strains were recorded with demountable.mechanical
(Demec) gauges on steel buttons waxed to the surface. Internal concrete
strains were measured in Beam Three only using Kyowa concrete gauges Type
KM-120-H2-ll (Fig. 7.18(a)). However these gauges were not temperature
compensated and so could only be used near the soffit. Mild steel strains
were measured with 2 nun Kyowa temperature compensated gauges Type KF-2-C3
attached to the steel with contact adhesive (Fig. 7.18).
 244

(a) Beam Three

St ee l S . G.

- - ~

I'
t '·• 'i
, I
/

{b) Beam Four

FIG . 7 . 18 TYPICAL MODEL BEAM STRAIN GAUGE INSTRUMENTATION

(f) Crack Width Devices

Three types of crack width measuring devices (CWDs) were designed to
enable time histories of crack width development to be obtained. The CWDs
were attached to the beam, straddling the crack, as shown in Figs. 7 . 19 and
7.20. Crack width development thus strained the perspex to which the strain
gauges were attached (Fig. 7 . 19) due to axial load (CWD A) and flexure
(CWD B and C) . Changes in resistance of the strain gauges were therefore
related to changes of crack width. Each CWD had two active and two dwnmy
gauges glued onto the surface (Fig. 7.19) and connected into a full
Wheatstone-bridge circuit. Changes in strain gauge resistance were
monitored using a Budd P- 350 Strain Indicator during calibration, and the
Solartron datalogger during testing.
 l,£»_- ??>-[9'%9,=:~=-:J~?:.~~J_y ,.-screw ATTACHMENT METHOD
PROFILE
Smm &Gmm P._erspex Active 5.G/Side ·'2 Dummy S.G
'.3mm per5pex Persoe~ Concrete
Perspex
Steel Concrete
Steel Steel
Dummy Gauges --screw
fl..Af!
.CBACJLWIDJ H_DE.lt'.1.CE_A__ PROFILE
Rawl hole
oJ,,,,l.mlto 211 soI 40I soI fill 11
'· • I

Scale (mm)
I I

3 Pins 1:
rr.:::=======t=~===i :::f: 2mm 1:
'l Active 5.6 Ii

. . . .---'I
'l Dummy 5.6
• •
KEY
~ T Crack (Profile)
All materiab Steel except .as shown

f irM
-- Crack {Plan)
CR.;~J< WIQ.ll::L_DEVICL C
~~~MW~
f!:~=--8 i : e I I Active Sfi/side
B
· Steel plate l12 thick}
PLAN
Gon~trudion Matieri.al ,..., Per5pe.x

CRACK WIDTH DEVICE 6_ CALJBBATION DEVICE (steel)

~
CJ'!
FIG. 7.19 DETAILS OF CRACK WIDTH DEVICE
 24 6

FIG. 7.20 CRACK WIDTH DEVICE A ATI'ACHED TO BEAM

CWDs A and B were individually calibrated using the device shown in

Fig . 7 . 19. The CWDs were glued to both sides o f t he devi ce , which was
stretched on the Avery 100 kN Universal Testing Machine Type 7109 DCJ.
At each load level, the strains from the calibrating device and CWDs were
recorded on a Budd P- 350 Strain Indicator. The increase in length between
A and Bon the calibrating device (Fig. 7.19) can be calculated from the
strain readings, and was interpreted as an effective crack width. It was
noted that at low strains an irregular calibration was obtained, due to the
inherent twisting of the machine. However at intermediate strains a
linear reproduceable relationship between CWD reading and effective crack
width was obtained. The calibration for CWD C was based on a theonetical
relationship between effective crack width and CWD reading, calculated from
the CWD geometry.

It was found that of the three CWDs, CWD A (Fig. 7.20) was the most
easy to construct, the most sensitive and appeared to function well during
testing, and is therefore the recommended design.

The location of the CWDs depended upon the crack pattern of interest
for each particular test and will be shown in presentation of relevant test
results. Demountable mechanical strain gauges of 51 mm gauge length were
also used to obtain spot- checks on crack widths for comparison with
values from the CWDs.
 247

7.3 DESCRIPTION OF MODEL TESTS

The sequence of tests shown schematically in Fig. 7.21 was performed

enabling the model beams to be tested in the uncracked and various cracked
states. The kentledge weight distributions corresponding to the load
cases in Fig. 7.21 are shown in Table 7.2. At completion of all testing on
each model beam, the cracks on the surface of the beam were traced, scaled,
and are shown plotted in Figs. 7.22 and 7.23 for Beams Three and Four
respectively. The diagrams follow the cracking over an unfolded view of the
beam surface.

Heat Heat (a) Thermal Load on Uncracked

-A
~ \
~ I ~

r ,. I·
s·
t
d
\ (
-A
Beam.
( Fuli kentledge load )

F F
Heat Heat (b) Thermal Load Plus Force Load
on Beam. Crack initiation
approximately between A and 8.
Repeat tests.
( Full kentledge load)

(c ) Thermal Load on Precracked beam

(Full kentledge load)

(d) Thermal Plus Reduced

Kentledge Load. Crack
initiation near supports.
Repeat tests.

l
Fl

F1 Ir (e) Force Load to Failure

Reduced Kentledge Load.

FIG. 7. 21 TEST SEQUENCE ON BEAMS THREE AND FOUR

7.3.1 Thermal Load on Uncracked Beam (Test Group A)

Before testing a thorough investigation revealed no visible cracks

on the surface of the model beams. Thus the first thermal tests (Fig. 7.2l(a))
were performed to test the beams in the crack free state. During the first
of these tests on Beam Four, cracks A and B (Fig. 7.23) were formed at
about 1600 seconds and were accompanied by a sharp cracking noise and a
 Force Load Line
North flange face WEST ~ SUPPORT I BEAM
~
Under flange

Web I \ I "I 11
fff
IA~
Soffit---4-
Crushing
Zone- -
~- 1· r \ r I I\
\\
I!
l.C:
c
·c;

t
-.

Web
I .I ( ( ) ~\ \
~ ) l \Narrow++~,.) I
Under flange--
South flange face

~BEAM
Force Load Line
EAST~ SUPPORT flang~
i I
North face
Under
I I I I I ,_
flange
(~
\

s
~\ \ " I 0'
I I
I -Web
I f.. \ 6 \
\\ I

!
c
·c:
I
\ - Soffit
~
I

\ Web
\\
~
vl
I /'-. ) f /'-. / (
I
(
I I
/ I
I
I
I
\ Under
~
flange
."""-.
South flange face
The view is of the unfolded surface of the beam excluding deck surface.
1 Metre
- - - -

Scale
N
FIG. 7.22 CRACK DISTRIBUTION IN BEAM THREE
~
North
flang
WEST t SUPPORT t-orce lad Lme BEAM
face I
I
Unde
flang !-
I Wide
cra~ll
I I

I
I I I
I \ I
\l I
/i
Web - I c ) ~
II > )
I 2 3 10 4 5 '
IAO I
Soffi - Crushing Zqi~ 1 ·> II

Web - """' =- I f v-vl I \ '\ \

\
I
I 1
\
I I I \J 'I
Unde I
flan ! -
Sout ~
flang !
face
Force Load Line EAST ~ SUPPORT
BF.AM
I
. ·ace
:orth flange

I
I I
I
Wide
~ck
I- Under
flange
I \ [\ l

,~ 7 8 9 .\ \
11
B D ) I \ , } - Web
I
-/ ~
, I, Crushing Zone -::: Soffit
I 'Ti' ljJ

! /') I I ' ., '\\

h /
I
\
\
, - Web
I I
}
I - Under
I
flange
Vlide
~ck
I
(
The view is of the unfolded surface of the beam ==---ll!~~ ·ta~~h flange
excluding the top deck surface. - .1
t-.J
~ ii::.
~

FINAL . CRACK DISTRIBUTION IN BEAM 4

FIG. 7.23 CRACK DISTRIBUTION IN BEAM FOUR

 250

sudden increase in deflections. No cracks were formed during this

testing on Beam Three.

7.3.2 Thermal Plus Force Lc>ad (Test Group B)

When the synunetrically placed force loads F in Fig. 7.2l(b) were

incrementally applied to the beams, no further cracking was observed. The
magnitudes of F and d in Fig. 7.22(b) are (6.612 kN, 0.5 m) and
(7.124 kN, 0.678 m) for Beams Three and Four respectively, and induce a
moment at the centre of the midspan of almost half the maximum recorded
thermal moment from Test Group A above. The forces were applied
hydraulically with the equipment arranged as described for Beam One (Section
5.5.1). When the heat lamps were switched on, thus applying the thermal
load, continuous adjustments were made to ensure the force load remained
constant as described in Section 5.5.1.

The equivalent prototype load F can be found from

p

F
p
= (F
~
+ F.L.E.)/scale/p.s

where F =·force applied to model hydraulically

m
F.L.E. = weight of force load equipment (from Table 7.2)
ps proportion of prototype section modelled.

Values of F are 133.4 kN for Beam Three and 101.3 kN for Beam
p
Four. Thus Beam Three models slightly larger force loads than the 120 kN
40 40
MWD HN live load, and also models the Mwo uniformly distributed live
load and the spacing between the force loads. However Beam Four has a
slightly lower force load at almost twice the scaled spacing and does
not model the uniformly distributed live load.

(a) Beam Three

The first test in Group B initiated cracks 1-6 (Fig. 7.22). No
associated cracking noises were heard and cracking was first observed at
700 seconds. Subsequent tests.in this series did not initiate additional
cracking, but appeared to propagate the observed cracks about 60 mm.

(b) Beam Four

The first test in Group B initiated cracks 1 -9 (Fig. 7.23), the
first being observed at 1020 seconds with the rest soon following.
Subsequent tests in this series produced cracks 10 and 11 and appeared to
propagate existing cracks about 50 mm.
 251

7.3.3 Thermal Load On Pre-Cracked Beam (Test-Group C)

The force loading of Test Group B was removed and the beam retested
under normal kentledge (Fig. 7.2l(c)). The purpose of this testing was
to study how the thermal response of a pre-cracked beam differed from that
of an uncracked beam, and to study the effectiveness of crack closing on
load removal.

7.3.4 Thermal Plus Reduced Kentledge Load (Test Group D)

Sufficient kentledge load was removed from the beams (Table 7.2 and
Fig. 7.15) so that under thermal loading (Fig. 7.2l(d)) the cracks labelled
1-11 in Figs. 7.22 and 7.23 were likely to remain closed. Measurements
were performed to check this. The beams were thus effectively uncracked
with a prestress overbalance, and thermal loading would be likely to
initiate cracking near the supports as had been found in prototype structures
as discussed in Section 1.2.4. Note that the prestress support moment is
approximately 75% larger than the reduced kentledge dead load support
moment for both beams (Fig. 7.15), thus creating a more severe prestress
overbalance effect than found in normal design.

(a) Beam Three

In the first test in Group D, crack B (Fig. 7.22) was formed at about
1800 seconds and was accompanied by a sharp cracking noise. Shortly
afterwards crack D was initiated. The narrow cracks A and C were located
after test completion.

(b) Beam Four

Cracks D and C (Fig. 7.23) were first observed at about 1600 and 2050
seconds respectively. Test results indicated that the performed cracks A
and B (see Test Group A) opened up at about 800 seconds.

7.3.5 Ultimate Force Load (Test Group E)

The beams were loaded to failure in increments under force load alone
(Fig. 7.2l(e)) to study the redistribution and ultimate moment capacity of
the beams. To avoid the beam ends being lifte4 off the supports, some
kentledge loads removed under Test Group D were stacked on the beam top above
the end supports. The remaining cracks in Figs. 7.22 and 7.23 that have not
already been attributed to thermal loading above, i.e. the unlabelled thin
line cracks, and the crushing zones were formed during this loading.
 252

7.4 EXPERIMENTAL TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS

Measured temperature rises at corresponding ga.uges and times varied

by less than 3°C between tests for each of the two beams. Thus a single
temperature distribution for any time in each beam could be used in
theoretical calculations with little loss of accuracy. Full temperature
recordings were only taken in five tests for Beam Three and four tests for
Beam Four. In other tests only 5-10 top gauga temperatures were recorded
to check that there was no significant recorded temperature differences
between tests.

(a) Beam Three

Typical experimental temperature/time results are shown in Fig. 7.24(a)
and the derived experimental temperature profile at 600 and 1400 seconds in
Fig. 7.24(b). It can be seen that experimental temperatures develop
smoothly with respect to time and show little variation between gauges at
corresponding height at 1400 seconds. Measured temperature profiles in
Test 24 were taken as a standard for the theoretical analysis of all tests
for times not more than 1400 seconds. The derived temperature profile at
2100 seconds from other tests is shown in Fig. 7.24(b).
(b) Beam Four
A standard temperature profile for each 200 second timestep was
calculated numerically as follows:
(1) For each gauge the temperature at each timestep was found by
interpolation.
(2) The results of (1) were averaged over three tests and all
corresponding gauges.
Some of the calculated temperature profiles and typical experimental
temperature/time results are shown in Fig. 7.25.
Note that although both beams develop a similar shaped temperature
40
profile to the MWo recommended loading (Fig. 1.3) the scale is exaggerated.
Th e MWD 40 d .
recommen a maxlll\um .
concrete temperature of 22°C for bridges with
50 mm of blacktop, 32°C for permanently unsurfaced bridges and 27°C for
temporarily unsurfaced bridges. The latter (27°C) is for conditions
corresponding to Load Group D (Section 7.3.4) which lasted for 2100 and
2300 seconds for Beams Three and Four respectively. The 50 mm blacktop
concrete temperature (22°C) is for conditions corresponding to Load Groups B
and C (Section 7.3.2) which lasted for 1400 and 1700 seconds for Beams Three
and Four respectively. For comparative purposes the ratio of the mean
experimental deck surface temperatures to the above MWD temperatures is
shown in Table 7.5.
 253

42
KEY TEST N024
u Haaf

~(~J(
40
'J
A
West
i 1
zl 11 1 11€a'1f
I

I~
"
I
6 7
1i!lLl
l

7
6
'
I- 24
22
. B
7 2

20
;
-
16
' " 2
16

14 - -
6 " 3
12 ., 3
2
10
7
3
8

6
i ... "
7 4 4
4
~
2

0
~ l.. -
- ~ -... !Iii \ I
5

tl
2
0 eoo 800 1000 1200 1400
TIME (SECONDS)

(a) Typical Experimental Temperature Development

TEST NO. 24
VERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROFILES AT 1400 SECONDS
,,.,.,;.,,.. .
SVl'SOL + • • • • • LUC
sY!9:lL C • • • • • LUC
IT...,.
2 Deck Slab Top.

- -- __ ...
~1·•· • L~~ 3

I-
210
200
""F-1 .·:+-;_..,.., 4
j4· 1- ---- -~- - - -- ~ ~
"""' .... -~ -·
......
LL
b
100
Heat

A if 11 ! !I\.
I I
Heo/

_i.-- ...... --- ~

·-- i---- t-- Deck Slab

(f)
160
170
Wczsf
I
East - . __. ~ ~- --Deck
-- Slab-- -- -Y--
Bott,om I
-'l!I
/
-- ,__ -- -- --
w 160
L- ~
6 150
L
,/

-Web
1 I -
~
. .. . ---c.;- ----··-iii;--
220
no .-- -- ...
140
, . ;- -
130
I -
j: 100 . -.. -- -
(!)
......
120
110
·r 160
-
~ 100 140 -
90 120 K£V -
eo I
I 100 1 Tifftt 600 S&eonda
2 Tl4M 1400 •
-
70
I eo 3 TllM 2100 ~ -
60
I 00 -we -
50
I 40 - - -Dede Slab -
'
40 -
20
30
T- -
20 0 10 ~ 30 40 so 61) '10 -
I- J-Soffit Stab T~Clltl.n ~ I-Cl
10
l I I I I I I i l I !
-
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 18 18 20 22 24 28 28 30 32 34 38 39 40 42 44 48 48 50
TEMPERATURES C"C)

(b) Experimental Temperature Rise Profiles at 1400 Seconds

FIG. 7.24 EXPERIMENTAL TEMPERATURE RISES IN

BEAM THREE
 254

TEST N0.60
I I
u
0
40
1 I

(J) 35
w
a:
:)
I- 30
CI
a:
w
0.. Z5
L:
w
I-
20

·15
ssi I I 4 4 4 ~ z z L 5 5~?1" . 6 E6 o -
9 I I 4 2: 2: 5 53 3 6 6 6
6
9 II 44 ,:2:555:3P 56>
_ 2: ~ 5 - 3
4
9 I 4 ,_" 6 6
10

-5'--~~-->.~~~-'-~~~...._~~~,__~~--'-~~~-'-~~~...._~~~'--~~--'~~~-'--~~~_,__~~~

0 400 600 ICXJO IZl'.Xl 1400 1600 1800 2000 2:200 2:400
TIME (SECONDS)

(a) Typical Temperature Development

220
/
/
/
200
/(j)/

/
180 /

160

1LO
E
E KEY
120 1. Time 700 Seconds
~
ll) 2. Time 1500 Seconds
QJ 3. Time 2300 Seconds
> 100
0
-Centre line Spine
~
- - Centre line Flange
:c 80

I
60

LO

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 LO L5

Temperature Rise {'Cl

(b) Temeerature Profiles

FIG. 7.25 EXPERIMENTAL TEMPERATURE RISES IN

BEAM FOUR
 255

4
TABLE 7.5 RATIO OF EXPERIMENTAL AND MWD 0 RECOMMENDED
~RIDGE TE11PE~TQRES

Beam Three. Beam Four

Temperature
1400 $eCQI1dS :noo .$E!GQI1dS 1700 second$ 2300 seconds

22°C 2.05 2.87 1.49 1.82

27°C 1.67 2.34 1.21 1.48
32°C 1.41 1.97 1.02 1.25

7.5 THERMAL RESPONSE OF MODEL BEAMS

The analysis method described in Section 6.2.3(c) was used for

calculating the thermal response of the model beams. This involved
selecting a series of bending moment distributions for the beam that
satisfy statics, until one was found that also satisfied compatibility.
The equation adopted to check compatibility is developed below, and an
iterative technique used in refining the assumed bending moment distributions
described. Two idealisations of the moment/curvature relationship for
prestressed concrete sections to be used in the solution procedure for
total structural response are discussed.

7.5.1 Development of Compatibility Equation for Model Beams

Because of the symmetrical nature of the loading and structure of the

model beams, they can be represented as shown in Fig. 7.26. If under
imposed loading, the support Q sinks by /::,. and the curvature change
at distance x from support P is given by '"'l'x , then from Moment-Area
principles:

a+b a+b
=
J0 I/ix x dx
Ja lfJx(x-a)dx !::,. (7.1)

Simplifying

= (7.2)

For a compatible solution /::,. = O. An iterative solution to

establish this condition is proposed below.
 256

I
I

~
x Beam

a b

-J:p & 4t Structure

Q R

Deflected
Shape

FIG. 7.26 DEFLECTIONS OF MODEL BEAMS UNDER SYMMETRICAL

LOADING

7.5.2 Iterative Refining of Assumed Bending Moment Distribution

If PQ is divided into N elements, QR into M elements, and

if the ith element from P has a length of o.l. , an average curvature
change of 1/J,l. and a mean distance from P of x.l. , then equation 7.2
approximately reduces to:

i=N i=N+M
l: l/J.x.o.
l. l. l.
+ a E 1/J.o.
1 1
= (7.3)
i=l i=N+l

It will be noted that the structure in Fig. 7.26 has only one
redundancy. Thus if an incremental moment due to the additional
applied loading is selected, the bending moment at the centre of element i
due to the additional loading can be calculated from statics. If the
moment-curvature relationship is known at element . i , the curvature change
1/Ji at the centre of the element can be found. When these curvatures are
inserted into equation 7.3, a deflection !::, can be calculated. A moment
MQ corresponding to 6 = 0 can be found from a variety of numerical
interpolation and graphical means including:
(1) Select two realistic trial values of MQ (MQl'MQ ) and calculate
2
corresrxmding values of !::, (t:. ,t:. ) as above.
1 2
(2) Use linear numerical interpolation to select a new trial value
of moment at support Q (MQ }
3
(7.4)
 257

(3) Calculate fi corresponding to MQ as above.

3 3
(4) I f fi3 !::! Q the iteration is finished. Otherwise determine
whether (M6 ,6 ) or (MQ ,fi ) should be discarded. Replace discarded
1 1 2 2
values by (MQ ,6 ) and return to step (2) above.
1 1
(5) Beam deflections at x , fi can be calculated from
x

6 =
a +b Ia +b ( 7. 5)
x J0 '".,.,x x dx - .,.,x x dx
,1i
x

.7.5.3 Idealisation of Prestressed Concrete Moment-curvature (M/l/J) Diagrams

A general theoretical M/l/J relationship of a prestressed concrete

section under thermal loading, such as may have been derived as described
in Section 6.2.1,is presented in Fig. 7.27 (A,B~C,D). The moment rises

"-Preformed crack
solution ·

Curvature
A

FIG. 7.27 GENERAL MOMENT-CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP OF A PRESTRESSED

CONCRETE SECTION UNDER THERMAL LOAD

almost linearly to point B, where after crack initiation it drops sharply

to point C before rising to D. Note that thermal loading significantly
increases the magnitude of the drop in moment from B to C since cracking
is delayed because of soffit primary compressive stresses. However on
repeat loading the M/l/J relationship follows AHD (Fig. 7.27) as no tensile
stress can be generated across the preformed crack face. There appears
to be little experimental evidence of the large theoretical drop in
moments in structures on crack initiation. This can be explained as
follows. Consider a long constant moment zone within a statically
 258

determinate beam, with gradually increasing moment. The first crack will
form at the weakest section, and the curvature at this crack will
immediately develop from B to E (Fig. 7.27) with the curvature well away
from this crack still remaini_ng at B. The average curvature over .the
constant moment zone will not increase significantly. Further slight
increases in moment will cause additional cracks which immediately develop
curvatures at E. Only after all the cracks have formed will .the M/W
behaviour pattern of the whole constant moment zone follow ED •

If the full section M/~ relationship (A,B,C,D) shown in Fig. 7.27

I
was used in conjunction with the analysis procedure presented in Section
7.5.2 problems would arise for moments between Mc and MB (Fig. 7.27)
because for any moment there are three corresponding curvature solutions.
If loading on a statically indeterminate initially uncracked structure,
such as shown in Fig. 7.26, is slowly increased and first cracking occurs
near location R, moments will be redistributed from R to Q. Thus if the
loading has induced a constant moment near R (Fig. 7.26), then inunediately
after cracking the curvatures of sections close to cracks will be somewhere
along the branch CD (Fig. 7.27), probably close to E, and the curvatures
of sections well away from the first cracks will be along the branch AB
(Fig. 7.27), probably close to B.

(a) Technique 1
The M/~ curve A,B,C,D (Fig. 7.27) was idealised into curve A,B,E,D
to enable the curvatures to be uniquely related to the moment, and producing
solutions subsequently referred to as Technique 1. Theoretical thermal
solutions using Technique 1, which will be later discussed in detail in
the relevant theoretical/experimental comparisons, provided a solution
at about point F(Fig. 7.27). The soffit strains at B (Eb) and E (Ee)
were calculated during derivation of the M/W relationship (Section 6.2.1)
and are known. The soffit strain at F (Ef) from which theoretical crack
widths are calculated can be estimated from:

= + (7.6)

(b) Technique 2
The curvature in.Fig. 7.27 can be uniquely related to the moment if
before cracking the section response is defined to lie along AB, and after
cracking the section response defined to lie along CD. This requires
that after first section cracking and before section moment rises above E
 259

(Fig. 7 .27), the zone of cracking be specified. (i.e. the M/ljJ curves
for elements that are assumed cracked specified as being CD, and the
M/ljJ curves for elements that are assumed uncracked specified as AB) .
This approach is referred to as Technique 2, and provided thermal
solutions about point G (Fig. 7.27). (i.e. smaller moment but larger
curvature than Technique 1).

Because the dead load plus force load bending moment was almost
constant between the two force loads Fin Fig. 7.2l(b) only one element
was used to describe this region. This meant that the cracking zone
was assumed to extend over the full element, and as the theoretical moment
did not rise above E (Fig. 7.27) cracking was limited to this single
element for both Techniques 1 and 2. Note that if only one element is used
to describe this zone (AB Fig. 7.2l(b)) the modified Newton-Raphson
technique (Section 6.2.2(b)) will produce identical results to Technique 2
because it will use the same M/ljJ distribution along the structure.

(c) Reloading
During reloading tests no longitudinal tensile stresses can be
generated below the crack root at a prefonned cracked ·s.ection. The moment
drop from B to C (Fig. 7.27) is due to release of concrete tension forces,
and does not occur in repeat tests which follow AHO (Fig. 7.27) and for
which Techniques 1 and 2 become identical. Note that this is the more
realistic design case, although designers should be aware that minimising
the zone of cracking maximises continuity forces. If repeat loading is
identical to the loading that formed the cracks then the final structural
response will be the same, as the final propagated crack heights will be
the same. At intermediate loadings the continuity forces generated on
the pre-cracked structure will be lower because propagated crack heights
(and hence structural softening) will be greater.

7.5.4 Sensitivity of Thermal Response of Model Beams to Crack Heights

A graph showing the variation of section moment-of-inertia and

unrestrained thermal curvature with the height of cracks propagating from
the soffit for the centreline sections of the m:>del beams is shown in
Fig. 7.28 and is based on the theory developed in Section 4.2.2. The
calculations were performed by TSTRESS using a coefficient of thermal
-6
expansion of both steel and concrete of 10.8 x 10 /°C, a concrete elastic
14
modulus of 28.9 GPa, and a scaled version of part of Priestley•s 5th
power.curve.
 ~bO

320

280

_.E
240
.
~
'52
200 •
E 0
! Temperature - Scaled Priestley's 5th po.ver curve
""t
160 ~.s
~

52
Coefficients - L. - L. • 10·8 • 10-Y'c
0
~
.2 10
0
~
:;J
120 I
::E
u
80
5

40

o+-~-T~~-.-~-T~~-.-~-..~~-.-~-.-~~-.-~-, 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Crock Depth (inm l

FIG. 7.28 VARIATION OF MOMENT-OF-INERTIA AND THERMAL CURVATURE

WITH CRACK HEIGHT FOR SECTIONS OF MODEL BEAMS AT
CENTRE SECTION OF MIDDLE :SPAN

T(y) = 30 [z i y J5 oc

where y = distance below soffit

(If y > z T(y) is put = 0.)
z = 1200 * (beam scale)

Cracking through the 30.5 mm thick Beam Three soffit slab affects
both the section moment-of-inertia and thermal curvature significantly.
(Fig. 7.28.) The maximum cracked thermal curvature is 100% larger than
the uncracked thermal curvature, while the moment-of-inertia at a crack
height of 0.6d is only 12% of the uncracked moment-of-inertia where d =
section depth. These large variations from the uncracked state can be
attributed both to the influence of the soffit slab and the low longitudinal
steel percentages. The corresponding ratios for Beam Four (Fig. 7.28) 'are
41% and 24%, while for the reinforced concrete model Beam Two are 15% and
44% (Fig. 5.62 and 5.31). These ratios show that cracking has more
influence on thermal respo·nse of lightly reinforced prestressed concrete
sections than conventionally reinforced concrete sections.
 261

Note that a pre-cracked reinforced concrete section of moment-of-

inertia I has close to a linear moment-curvature (M/\jJ) relationship
c
in the elastic range. Thus if a flexurally fully restrained section
experiences an unrestrained thermal curvature ljJt , then the thermal
However crack growth and the effect
of the prestress force induce a non-linear M/ljJ relationship in
prestressed concrete (Fig. 6.1). Thus if a prestressed concrete section
has a final moment-of-inertia I under additional thermal load, then
p
Mt > Ec I p ljJt •

7.6 CALCULATION OF THEORETICAL CRACK WIDTHS

Three existing equations for calculating crack widths were discussed

in Section 6.1.2 and an equation developed from first principles in Section
6.2.4. Considerations in application of these equations for crack width
predictions in the model beams are discussed below.
100
Th e crack wi'dth equation
· 6 • 1 propose dby Bee b y et a 1 . pre d'ict a
c02 -(4Co/~) 99
crack spaping of (1. 33 C + k
0 1
(j) k 3 e ). However Beeby found

that the maximum crack spacing in unbonded prestressed beams was 1.33~ '·
which is taken as an upper bound for the crack spacing of bonded prestressed
beams. Although both beams were fully grouted, this limit was reached
for both beams for positive moment cracks near the supports, and f0r Beam
Three at locations near midspan. Beeby et al proposed values of
1
k = 0.8
for deformed bars and 1.6 for crimped wire. The former was used for
Beam Four which had twisted strands for prestressing, and the latter for
Beam Three which had 7 mm diameter prestress wire.
102
The crack width equation 6.3 proposed by Bennett and Chandrasehar
6
used a constant k with suggested values of 735 x 10- /MPa for three-wire
4
6
strands (used for Beam Four) and 1160 x l0- /MPa for 7 mm diameter wires
(used for Beam Three) •

The adopted estimate of crack spacing for the two model beams using
the proposed equation 6.17 is described below:

(a) Beam Three

The soffit slab in Beam Three can be considered as a member in direct
108
tension when the beam is subjected to positive flexural moment. Broms
found that when concrete specimens of width D and with one central
 262

reinforcing bar were subjected to direct tension the average crack

spacing = D• Note that the cracks in the prism are restrained at the
central steel and a 45° stress relief pattern is indicated (Fig. 7.29(a)).

Secondary Cracks Primary Cracks Stress relief

steel bar

45° Stress relief pattern

(a) Concrete Prism Tensioned Through Single Reinforcing Bar

Primary Cracks
--1--_..cJ-....-~--,.-+-..---'r--.---.:~,..,._-.-~~r-t-.-~i....a....Webs
Tensioned

LI
45° Stress relief pattern
~
(bl Anticipated Cracking in Beam Three Soff it Slab

FIG. 7.29 PREDICTED CRACK PATTERNS IN BEAM THREE SOFFIT SLAB

Cracks in Beam Three ar·e restrained by the steel in the webs, and are
effectively unrestrained at the centre of the soffit, resulting in a
different stress relief pattern (Fig. 7.29(b)), but effectively the same
theoretical crack spacing. For large soffit widths relative to the depth
of the beam, secondary cracks (Fig. 7.29(b)) may be predicted. However
there was no evid.ence of the secondary cracks at service load during tests
on Beam Three.

Large steel percentages in box-girder beam soffit slabs may transfer

sufficient tension to the concrete by bond to reduce crack spacings.
However there was little steel in the soffit slab in Beam Three, and
calculations showed that it would be unlikely to alter crack spacing.

(b) Beam Four

The predicted crack spacing in Beam Four was based on an observation
99
by Beeby that in unbonded prestressed beams and in slabs well away from
reinforcing bars, crack spacing S equalled 1.33 times the crack height ~.
 263

99
Beeby suggested that proximity of bonded steel would reduce the
'effective' crack height, and hence crack spacing, depending on the amount
of slip. Thus assuming s = l.33s is expected to be conservative.

7.7 THERMAL LOADING ON UNCRACKED MODEL BEAMS

Thermal loading was applied to both model beams in the uncracked

state (Fig. 7.2l(a)) as described in Section 7.3.1. The two theoretical
solution techniques described in Section 7.5.3 provided identical results
for the uncracked beam.

7.7.l Vertical Thermal Deflections

A time history of vertical deflections under the first thermal loading

of the uncracked beams is shown in Figs. 7.30 and 7.3l(a) for Beams Three
and Four respectively. No cracking was noted on Beam Three after these
'hests, and two repeat tests provided thermal deflections within 4% of
those shown in Fig. 7.30 at 1400 seconds. Cracks A and B (Fig. 7.23)
were initiated on Beam Four at about 1600 seconds during the first thermal
loading test and caused a sharp change in measured deflections (Fig. 7.3l(a)).
A repeat test provided similar final deflections (Fig. 7.3l(b)), but
followed a smooth curve directly to the final deflections at intermediate
times.

With experimental data taken from Fig. 7.30 and 7.3l(a), a comparison
of experimental and theoretical deflection profiles is shown in Fig. 7.32.
Agreement is good for Beam Three at 600 and 1000 seconds, (Fig. 7.32(a))
but at 1400 seconds the experimental deflections are skewed, suggesting
that a narrow undetected crack may have formed in the western portion of
the centre span. The experimental deflections for Beam Four are larger
than the theoretical deflections (24% centre span, 10% average end spans
at 1100 seconds) although the shape of the deflection profiles is similar.
The agreement is considered reasonable.

7.7.2 Concrete Midspan Thermal Strain Profile

A grid of 18 (longitudinally) by 9 (vertically) steel buttons were

waxed to the south web face at the centreline of Beam Four (Fig. 7.17).
Concrete strains in two different columns of steel buttons were
continuously read in rotation in three thermal tests using a demountable
mechanical (Demec) gauge over a 102 nun gauge length. Strain time histories
were plotted by computer for each gauge length, a smooth curve drawn
 264

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

TEST N0.24
11 .,.,• -·~

~~:
~ ..... 7
3 a
~ .. ~ 4
..
..
DIA.. G 5·
E JO
a
a
.
.§
--
[
.. •
Hflaf , Heof

i@ .
- 1~ ~kt rt:~
-·. . It
8

,__
Ht : fI I
£o$f

a
a
..-
•
..
•
.. • ... +. +.
a •
.
+
7 Dial Gaug111 Locations

a
a .. •+ +
6 - - + "'
a +
+ .. • .
a
.
.. ....
+
5

~
a
+
T
•
+
4
a
M

+ .. .
a + .. • •
. A

..+ •.. • . . . "'

3
a
a +
2
.. • . .

.
a
...•+
vt.
.
I
a
. +• -0

+ ~·
Cl <lo
L.cJ.&, ...o·+
0
0 200 600 600 JCXlO 1200 1400
TI ME (SECONDS)

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

i DIFI: GRiiE e
TEST NO. 24
)(
1 ""'' 7 n~

•1 DLHL
~:
~
)(
2
DIA.. I
DIAL I ~10
3 D'~ II
E 10
.§ 2
2•
9 ?-

2.
2 l
8
z " 3
)( 3
7 I>
2
• )( 3
fl

.
2 )( 3
.
6 2

•
fl )(

. . 3

. .
2 )( 3

•
2 )(
3
5

-
2
2
• " )( 3
. '" •
4

3
2
2
• )( ..">< 3
l!..
3
.. 3

I
I
I
1 - 1 I

: •• 3 • I
I
2 .., Cl< 3 I
2
" &)(
8)(
3 •
3.
3 •

I
1
. 1

3 • 1

-
3 El<o,
3 ""1
-*· 1
1

,_ z... ~
0
0 200 600 600 1000 1200 1400
TIME CSECONDS)

FIG. 7.30 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING FIRST

THERMAL LOADING OF UNCRACKED BEAM THREE
 265

KEX GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

S'll'i!OL
+
l..OCFITICJ'I
b!Al GAOtE I
TEST NO. 40
.a Dil't- GfLGE z
Dil't- GfLGE 3
10 .
6 nT :d ~trr

DI II. GA.GE
4
5
•
)(
DI
DI
~=
e
7
9

-1'--~~~-'-~~~-'-~~~-'-~~~-'-~~~ ........~~~--'-~~~__.~~~--'~~~--'
0 200 400 eoo 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
TIME CSECONDS)

(a) First Thermal Load Test

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME
S'tTflOL TEST NO. 41
+ DIAL GR.GE I
.
a
..,.
DIAL GR.GE Z
DIAL GR.GE 3
a
........
10 .. nT II ~~

DI IL GR.GE 5
d
+T
•
)(
)( DI II. GR.GE 6 + )( )(
)( DI ll.. GR..GE 7 +v )(
E 9
..§

t tf!H~J
1
f f
z
0
8 - A. A
East + )( "
West +x
1--t
)(
t- 7 ,...-----
u
w
_J
Dial Gavg<Z Locations
6
LL
w
0
5

-1L-~~~~~~~-'-~~~-'-~~~-'-~~~-'-~~~ ........
~~~--'-~~~--'-~~~~

0 zoo 400 eoo 1000 !ZOO 1400 1600 1800

TIME (SECONDS)

(b) Second Thermal Load Test

FIG. 7.31 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING THERMAL
LOADING OF 'UNCRACKED' BEAM FOUR
 266
KEY

,., Eim~cirn~D!QI Dellect;ons

1·0
.'
I
600 Seconds
1000 Seconds
1400 Seconds
0·9
0·8
0·7
- 0·6
E Theoretical Deflections
! O·S
al 600, 1000, 1LOO seconds
5 0·4
t;
~ 0·3
2l 0·2

t o:
0·1
0·2
0·3
0·4
0·5
0·6
0·7
0·8
0·9
1·0

(A) Beam Three

0·9 KEY
ExQerimental Deflections
0·8 l< + 700 seconds
e 1100 seconds
0·7
t 1500 seconds
0·6
E
E
0·5
c
0
...... O·t.
u
Q.I
;;:= 0·3 Theoretical Deflections
Q.I
0 at 700, 1100, 1500 seconds
0·2

0·1
0

t 0·1

0·2

0·3-

O·l.

0·5j
0·6
"
ll
ll

0·7

(B) Beam Four

FIG. 7.32 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL

DEFLECTION PROFILES FOR UNCRACKED BEAMS UNDER
THERMAL LOADING ALONE
 267

through the experimental points, and the strain at 1700 seconds extracted.
The average strain found for each level over the three tests is shown
plotted in Fig. 7.33. It can be seen that experimental strains exceed

-250
E ~ Top surface of deck
E ""'\
I
:t:!
200 I

~ \ ~ Estimated experimental
r" strain profile
VI
OJ
150 ,.
I

e; It
~xperimental strain
-g 100 ·\~Average
........ e\
..c
L...~-'--- Theoretical
0)
·a; 50 strain profile
I

0 50 100 150 200 250

Strain (/Le)

FIG. 7.33 THEORETICAL AND MEASURED CONCRETE THERMAL STRAIN

PROFILES AT 1700 SECONDS AT CENTRE SECTTON OF
MIDDLE SPAN. (UNCRACKED BEAM FOUR)

theoretical strains by about 14%. Both this and results from the last
section suggest that the assumed values of concrete coefficient of thermal
expansion and/or temperatures were slightly too low for Beam Four.

7.7.3 Thermal Reactions

The experimental and theoretical reaction time-histories of Beams

Three and Four are shown in Fig. 7.34(a) and (b) respectively; It can be
seen that there is excellent agreement between predicted and measured
reactions. After 700 seconds the experimental reactions in Beam Three
diverge slightly from the predicted reactions, which may have been due
to undetected cracking as discussed in Section 7.7.l.

7.7.4 Steel Stress-Induced Thermal Strains

Typical examples of steel stress-induced strain time-histories are

shown in Fig. 7.35(a) and (b) for Beam Three and Four respectively, and
have been used to plot the experimental strains in Fig. 7.36. The
theoretical steel stress-induced strain £ (y) at height y was
s
 268

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

KEY
(f)
z TEST N'.l, Z4

~ 6400
-·-~- - -
Haaf -~
~
3
J I
·1 i~ ---

-
w
sf 'i

.-----·
z~
!5600

48(X)
-:sf ·,
-.....- -- -- -
w=
-----
+
(.!) ---
i-- +
ttI :!ZOO
__,,,, ~
~
o\"\
U Z400
c;uQ\' i..--
a
.......
1600
v--
~J,o .....- \
\
b 800 _.,.,-- ITheoretical
Iassuming
Curve .I
eiCl:'. -800
~ Techniaue 1
zero cracking
·1

c r--..___ I

--
-1600
fi>f)fre ......... ~
Su
J
'PPort ~

-- .----... --·
-.........._ J
~

----- ----
0

-!5600
" .
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
TI ME (SECONDS l

(A) Beam Three

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

S!ffiOL L!XHTIOO K.EtOO
(f) + 00 SlJ'PCRT I.EST TEST N'.l. 40
z
0
0
•
C£NTR£ 5LPPCRT
00 SlJ'PCRT
I.EST
£AST Haaf
• ~~ 5LPPCRT
f- 6000
£AST
_d LJ ! ':d 'i ~
zG5
West East
5000
·-~
..__ji ~--
~
~~ ~ique J
4000

([ 3000

0 c;uQ\'
o\"\
~-->-
~
-~~o
2000
z ~
0
....... 1000 ,_____
~
b
([ 0
~
w
Cl:'.
-1000
~
-2000 ,___ Ce~~
'fl fre ... IJ---S.
s ~
-3000 l.JpPort .....--u
-4000
~CJ '
~que 17
.... Cl IT"'[;
-5000
~
-~

-6000
~
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
TIME CSECONDSl

(B) Beam Four

FIG. 7.34 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL

REACTIONS IN UNCRACKED BEAMS UNDER THERMAL
LOADING ALONE
 269

1:
IBD
KF:Y Tio-~T NO. 7.1.

. . -~-A: 1:,1
I
llaot
~ 3
I
'!ii
~.1
(/) 140
"

JJ
z
...... cast 3
120
CI ~

ex
I- 100
3
(/)
0 so
ex
u
Location C
~

c ..... 80
0
·v; L:
~
3
40
"'
i
0
'-'
20
3

3
0

8
t ~
4
-20
4
] z (/)
7 ~ 4 14 4 4 4
-40
...... 2i
CI 7
ex -w
It
I- 7 1
(/)
-so - I
7
-100
7
r
5
7 2
ls
-120
'f
-140
7
7
2

,, .
-ISO
0 200 400 BOO BOO 1000 1200 1400
TIME CSECONDS)

(A) Beam Three

(f)
z
......
CI
ex
200

lSO

100

140
,. . ?gj:fr~···_ KFY

• 6
1 11
1--West
TEST NO. 40
Hczot
I I l \Elasf
:,
I- 120 ? 2
(f) Location A 2 2 2 '
0 100 ,. ? 2 2
ex 2 2 ' "
-
u
...... so
2 '
? 2 2 2
l •
I I I I
2 z I I ~
c
0 L: 00
? z z l I I l
·v; ~
z 2 ' I l I '
Ill z z 1 I
I
"'a. 40
z z. "I
l I
8 ~ 2 l l
20
'-' l I
_ 2 z I

0
I
c
0

-20
!I~~ il .,
.Oi
c (f) ~ ~ ~ ~ l i1.,
,gi
z
......
-40

-00
u 5 s : . ~ : ~ ~33~":1-
CI 5 5 u

5 5 -
6 6 ... 4
4 ~ : 3 3
3'. -so 3 3 3 " .,
I-
(f) -100
~
6
5
"

5 -
- 6 6
6
-
-
4 4 4 4
W' ~ 3 3
3 3 3 3 : 3 3
5 5 u 6 6 fl 4 4
4 4
-120 5 "
5 5 5
6 "
- "' 6
- 4 4 4 •
-140 " - 5 Fi
5
6

c
"
- i 6 6
4

-100 6 "
5 5
6 "
-lSO " - 5
5
-200 c

0 200 400 000 BOO 1000 1200 1400 1000 !BOO

TIME (SECONDS)

(B) Beam Four

FIG. 7.35 TYPICAL MEASURED STEEL STRESS-INDUCED

STRAIN DEVELOPMENT IN UNCRACKED BEAMS
 2'20 270

- E
E 140
.........
±: ID
~ 1'2.0 • Web } Steel
0
(./') ><Soffit Slab 5tram
+ Deck Slab Gauge
<l)
>
100 o Web (Concrete Strain Gauge)
0
...0

- m
..r:.
.~
QJ
:c
..
000

0
250 200 150 100 50 0 SO 100 150 200 250 ~D 350
STEEL STRESS INDUCED STRAIN5.(..a£)
Tension >iii • • Compression

(A) Beam Three (1400 Seconds)

220

200

E 180
.s
-
....0
~
160 KEY
I.fl 11.0 x Experimental Results (Spine )
QI
>
0 120 • Experimental Results (Flange )
.D.
<{ - Theoretical Results ( Spine l
-
.r.
Ol
'iii
100

80
- - Theoretical Results (Flange)
I
60

40

20

- 200 -160 -120 -80 -L.O 0 L.0 80 120 160 200

Steel Stress - Induced Strains !,µ-£)
Tension • o • Compression

(B) Beam Four (1700 Seconds)

FIG. 7.36 COMPARISON OF EXPERiMENTAL AND THEORETICAL

STRESS-INDUCED STEEL STRAINS IN UNCRACKED BEAMS
 271

calculated from

E (y)
s
= (a T(y)
s
+ E(y)) (7.7)

where a = steel coefficient of thermal expansion

s
6
(assumed = 10.8 x l0- /°C)
T(y) = temperature at height y for relevant slice
E(y) =calculated section strain change at height y from
theoretical solution.

Good agreement was obtained between the experimental and theoretical

strains shown in Fig. 7.36. However in Beam Three the experimental strains
near the soffit were slightly less than predicted. Experimental results
for the steel in the top deck slab show small discrepancies with theory
which can be attributed to errors in the temperature compensation of
strain gauges as discussed in Section 5.8.6.

Unfortunately, subsequent to these tests, a voltage overload damaged

all strain gauges in Beam Three, and no strain results are reported for
this beam in further tests.

7.8 THERMAL PLUS FORCE LOADING ON MODEL BEAMS

The moment-curvature (M/~) relationship for the model beams, both

with and without imposed temperature loading, as calculated using the
theory described in Section 6.2.1, are presented in Fig. 7.37. The assumed
concrete stress-strain curve is presented in Appendix G, with other
material properties taken from experimental measurements reported in
Appendix B. It can be seen that the imposed temperature loading delays
cracking, and causes a larger theoretical moment drop just after cracking,
especially for Beam Three due mainly to the influence of the soffit slab
as discussed in Section 7.5.4. Soon after cracking, for the same
moments, larger crack ha::irghts result for loadings with imposed temperatures.

Theoretical analysis on the model beams under thermal and force

loading was carried out by a computer program based on the theory
presented in Section 7.5. The M/~ relationship (Fig. 7.37) was fed
into the program as a series of discrete points, and the initial loading
was taken from the dead load distribution shown in Fig. 7.15. The
division of the beams into elements, as used in the analysis, is shown in
Fig. 7.38 and Table 7.6. M/~ relationships were developed for
 ] m
225
"

,.
FllfX.iro.t Mom•nt----..

· - Cror;k O•Plh
-- --- --- 200

17'
,,
28
m

ITT

- -"'
24 150
:>:: i:>:: z:c "
z
"" - -"" :>::
-20
I-
z
12S ::C
....0.. (A) Beam Three I-
w
z
:>::
20 ITT~
0..
w w 0 w
c
"':>::
0 10 100 c :>::
16 ~

"'u< ~ ""u
~12
:::>
7S 5 :::>
; 12 n
~
u
x
u.
~
u. • ;o
50

I
0
-20 0 20 iLO 60 80 . 100 120
CURVATURE
1'0 160 180
(/Ml •1000·0
200
'
120 2<.0 260

-O~-'-'----'---~-~-~--'--,__
20
" 60 80 100 120
_ _.___
11.0
CURVATURE I/MI• 1000·0
_.___~-~-~--
160 180 m =
- m
™
0

(1400 Second Profile Beam Three)

(1) Without Temperature Loading (2) With Temperature Loading (1700 Second Profile Beam Four)

"' 225
. 225

,, 200
. Croc:k O•pttl -----.... '---------=====------- 200

" 17'
"
175

~ J6 150
:>:: "'z,. 150 -
"'
1-
z JO t25
=
:::c
....
"'
1-
z JO 12S =
:c

....
:::C

~:c C1.
)!:: (8) Beam Four ~ C1.
w
c
" 100
"' ,, 100

~ ""0 ""<u
-'
<
x,.
~
75 5 !5x 18 75
a:
u
u. ~
u.
50 50

25 25

I
O'---"'---'--~-~--'~-,__

-20 0 20 LO &O 80 100

_ _.____
120 140
,__~-~--'--,__-_.__

1SO

CURVATURE I /M l • 1000 · 0
180 200 220 240
_ _.___ _..
200 2&0

- o'----'.1...---'----'--~-~--'~-,__

40 60 (10 100 120

_ _.___ _.___
11.0

CURVATURE (/Ml • 1000 · 0

150
_..__~-~--~-,__~

180 200 220 240 200 200

0

FIG. 7.37 f'.Ol1ENT-CURVAH'RE-CRACK HEIGHT RELATIOIJSHIP FOR MODEL tlEAMS

DOTH \llTH AIJO HITHOUT 11'.POSErl TEf1PERAT!JRE LOAf11NG

~
N
 273

Beam Segment Numbers

t '2 s 4 5 &; 7 & g 10

(A) Beam Three

Beam Segment Numbers

t 4 s\1?~~
1:;&;11 I ts
(8) Beam Four

FIG. 7.38 DIVISION OF MODEL BEAMS INTO ELEMENTS

TABLE 7 • 6 LENGTH OF BEAM ELEMENTS

Beam Three Beam Four

Element Numbers Element Lengths (mm) Element Numbers Element Lengths (mm)

1 901 1 800
2,3,4,5,8,10 500 2,3,4,5,12 500
6,7 147 6,7,8,9,10 100
9 790 11,13 350
11 500 12 465
14 678

elements 3,7,9,11 (Fig. 7.38(a) and 3,8,12,14 (Fig. 7.38(b)). The M/ijJ
relationships of other elements, which remained uncracked, were assumed
to be the same as the nearest element for which the M/1/J relationship had
been determined from the load balance point.

The analysis of the model beams under force plus thermal load
predicted that only element 11 for Beam Three (Fig. 7.38(a)) and element 14
for Beam Four (Fig. 7.38(b)) would crack. Thus other elements follow
close to linear M/1/J curves of approximately the same slope. Note that
the lengt...h of elements 11 and 14 was chosen to predefine the expected zone
of cracking. This length was exactly bounded by the force loads, and,
thus covered an approximately constant moment zone, which suggests that
cracking would exten.d throughout the zone. This was borne out by test
, results, where the following cracking under this load was observed.
 274

(a) Beam Three

Cracks labelled 1 to 6 (Fig. 7.22) were formed. However Crack 1

was very narrow, showed no tendency to grow, and may have been initiated
by testing described in Section 7.7. Cracks 2 to 6 were approximately
boWlded by the force locations as shown in Fig. 7.21 and have an average
spacing of 305 mm which approximately equals the soffit slab clear width
of 294 mm, thus agreeing with theoretical predictions in Section 7.6(a).

(b) Beam Four

Cracks labelled 1 - 11 (Fig. 7. 2 3) were formed under this loading
and are approximately bounded by the force locations. The average crack
spacing was 150 mm which is close to the predicted crack height ~
i.e. less than 1. 33 ~ predicted in Section 7. 6 (b) •

7.8.l Vertical Thermal Deflections

A time history of vertical deflections under the first thermal plus

force loading of the model beams is shown in Figs.7.39 and 7.40(a) for
Beams Three and Four respectively. This loading initiated cracking as
described above, and caused a sharp change in the slopes of the deflection/
time results. Repeat tests provided similar final deflections (Fig.
7.40(b) and 7.41) but followed a smooth curve directly to the final
deflections at intermediate times.

With experimental data taken from Figs. 7.39 and 7.40(a), a comparison
of experimental and theoretical deflection profiles is shown in Fig. 7.42.
Agreement is excellent for both beams Wlder force load alone, and good
for the combined loads. The experimental deflections are closest to
the predictions of Technique 1 for Beam Three and are approximately 12%
larger than, but closest to the predictions of Technique 2 for Beam Four.

7.8.2 Concrete Midspan Inter-Crack Strains

An attempt was made to measure the inter-crack concrete tensile

strains that developed during thermal tests on Beam Four, based on strain
readings over a 51 mm gauge length on the grid of steel buttons (Fig. 7.17)
described in Section 7.7.2. There was a wide scatter of experimental
results, especially over the middle and upper portions of the grid, an?
results are only reported for the bottom three rows of the grid. The
experimental inter-crack concrete tensile strains were calculated from:
 .t. I .J

GRAPH .OF DEFLECT!~ VS TIME

TEST NO. 25
.
. -··-c;m
DIAL GfU;E S
5 65 v

x
DIRL 54
1 .

. , r tm1tt ~f .
E I I I
.
BO
J;.
56
© i Hr.tat~ .. FJ !F Heat
1 k@
East

..
Dial Gaufl.a
I
Locations . I>

. . ..
0
0

. .
. . .
0

. . .
0
30 0
0
0
.
. . . .
25 0
~
,.
20
0 0 0
fJ
0

,.
,. . A

,_ 0
0 0
0

. . . . ,.
0
15
-o
I
0
0

.
0 A - 0
u
10
; 0 0

- 0 0
0 0
5 ~

! LI
0
0
120:> 1400
0
Force
~-------<
Loading
l 20:) BOO BOO
TIME CSECONJS)
!COD

GRAPH OF DEFLECT! ON VS TI ME
TEST NO. 25
•
..
)(
DIAL GfU;E
DIAL m.GE
6
7
DIAL GR..G£ 9
65
~
)(
2 -·~
DIAL GIUE I~
E so
.§ • •...
z )(

0
I-<
50

1- )( '
uw "
_J
b
45

•
• )(

. . -

0
40

- • • )( " .
35

• )(
)(
. .
. • •
"
.. •

..
)( I
25
)( I

. .
"><

. . .
"><
-
)(
8 'x
I
l
I
. I I I
2 z 2
15

.
l"
I I I I I I
z 2
2 2 z

ID

5
." I
I I

- 2
2
I
·-
z •z 2 - z

II 2
L

~ 2
0
Z(X) 600 BOO 1000 lzal 1400
1---'F'-"or'-'c"'e_ _-iP
Loading I TIME CSECONDSl

FIG. 7.39 MEASURED.VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING FIRST

THERMAL PLUS FORCE LOADING OF BEAM THREE
 276

KEY GRFPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

srrr- . ~llJla: I TEST NO. 47
D!Fll. GR.a:

I
0 Z

§
x
45
.
6
8
DI
011 t GR.a:
'?'!!-~~
GR.a: 4
5
A
6
6

! 40
v
I
fF 6
6
Haqt F Haaf 6
·.
!A
...
L titll~J
ti A
t 1
·. ·.
6
35 t:asf 6
West
H
A
6

.. ...
.......
I- 30 ~

u Dia) Gaugrz Locations e

w
_J
6

-
• 6
LL ZS
.,.
6
.,. 6
~
2D v
. ,, . . 6 6
6 6 6
6

---
6 6
6 6 <
6 6 6
- _...... -··
6
.......... ,, ,, .._,w.,cb•~ ~)( ~·
><><

.. _......
6 <

-..... ... - llt~~\11 x"

15 6 -~

_,,, £-it-it~~
"',(><~)( ~
1St1t1i5E ~ ~ "J?~~>
0
• ~·d'd'd'd
dli§iSdd ~~+)(~..,
6 .~~"..>
5
II
I!!
f+I ~~~><t
II'
II'
D

5 1000 !ZOO 1400 1600 1800

0 200 600 800
Force
Load in I TI ME (SECONDS l

(a) First Thermal+ Force Load Test

GRRPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

+ D!Fll. GA.a: I
TEST NO. 48
0 D!Fll. GA.a: Z
45

... ~~i GA.a:

6
5 6 6
GA.a: GFU;E6
4
v
l
""'""" .., I I v
6
) 6
i f"'r ' I 1'.L f l \ I le 0
\ I I 6
6 6

. .
, ..
~~ t~~ . .
t
0

. .. . .
.""-
Fast
~ ~. 5 ~
w
Vie sf 6 6 >
<V 0
66 ::>:
I
' . ·. . ":.. w
a:

·. ·. ·.
6..,
Dial Gougrz Lo~afions
e e 0
<>:
e'
. ~
0
__J

·• ·• ·.
e ~ w
6 u
6 e a:
2D
e e ...
... ... .. e e ~~

+ +
0
lJ_

6
e e < e e ............. + t. t. "'Clg
+
+ +. +
,P .a.P ,p.Pc
v )( )(
6 0
w
>
15
A
: 0

-~ -·· p •

ri~tJJ:.
sngb&b/l~
)( )( )(
...... •
)( )( )( )(
x x )( ~
+
)(
::>:
w
a:
_In .n.aePci= all v )(
)( )( 0
10
,poPff f" Ii' )( .. <>:
0
• 11li:P d:J ,p ,p CJ
ii IP CJ ii ,p + + )( )( )(
+ + )( )(
)( )(
)( )( )(

l!i
__J

__J

5
e ... + + ~ xx ~
Iii 111i><><><~ a:

~ ~
0
*
-5
I
I'Loading
Force 2DO 400 600 BOO l CO'.l
TIME (SECONDS)
I ZOO 1400 1600 1800

(b). Second Thermal+ Force Load Test

FIG. 7.40 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING THERMAL

PLUS FORCE LOADING OF BEAM FOUR
 277

~~ ~FLECTION VS TIME
2
a DIFll. GA.GE 2
'6
~
)(
BS
... u•~
DIFll. 6FE
DIFll. GA.GE 3
54
E oo I
..s I I

..
Haaf , Heed

~ '. ~ t '~tt ' t ft'~~j

:
-

k .
•i
W<St YJ,0f I I
East
®
. .
Dial Gaus_a Locations
I

.. . •
.. . • .
A

. - •
.. •
30
- • • .
.. "' ... • • . A

. .
A

25

.. . • • .
20
~
.. • A
. A

a a c
• • a
A
A
a
.. .
A ~
~
15 A
a a
A

a a
ID .• • p A
A

a a ~
~ a
A
a a
- - a a
5 ll u
! a
a tJ
0
Force
~'----I
Loading
J TI ME
900
CSECONDS)
1000 1200 1400

~¥. ~FLECTION VS TIME.

2
~ 65
.•..
x

2
otAI: GflOtE e
DIFll. GR.GE
DIFll. GR.GE 8
U•ML.
DIFll. < m:1g
7

)(

..sE eo
. • •x
'. • )(

- • )(
)(

•x )(

. .x
I )(

•
. . . .. • •x
'
)(
x

.." . . .. •
•x • x
u

30

. \ . . . .. )(

25
• . . . . x x
Gu

I I I

•v . .) I I
• . . I I

.
I

- .
20
x I
I J
I 2 2
- I I I
7 2 2 2

.
15 I 2
If I .2 ~

. I I I I
I
2 2 2 2

.
I - 7 2
10
!! I 2 2 2 2 "
2
5 ..-
I 2
~
"' - - 2 2

2 2
0
Force 0 200 400 eoo eoo 1000 1200 1400
Load mg TIME (SECONDS)

FIG. 7.41 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING THERMAL

PLUS FORCE LOADING OF PRE-CRACKED BEAM THREE
 278
KEY
~perjroental Deflections
• Force Load Alone
Force Load + Thermal Load (1400 Seconds I

Theoretical Deflections
·········Technique 1
- - - Technique 2
- - Uncracked Theory

3
2

,(•
/.
,, ---
-,. -
-~- ... .. ...... :::--... '
-,,--~
j 0
/'

West
'

,,
~~\. I,'~
J ,;' East

2 Theoretical Deflection
\', //
(Force Load I \'\ :'I
3 •, ,',/
4
\ ',
\ \, , .
,''1

s
6
'"\ \
•

\ \: ,,
,' I
,//
"---Jd---Theoretical Deflections
ds )
\ '-, __ : / / (at 1400 Secon
7 \

8
9
'
..... - /
I

(A) Beam Three

KEY
~P.erimental Deflections
3 • Force Load Alone

E Force Load + Thermal (1700 Seconds )

E
2 Theoretical Deflections
c
2u Technique 1
QI
Technique 2
~
0 Uncracked Theory

f 0

\\ ,vJ
East
Theoretical \',
(Force
\\ • • • ,'f1'l
\\ '
• \\
\ ,! /'
2
' ,/ I
\ \, ,....,...____ Theoretical Deflections
3
\ ',,~_,/ I (at 1700 seconds)
\ I
.\
'-....._/
I•

(8) Beam Four

FIG, 7.42 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL

DEFLECTION PROFILES FOR MODEL BEAMS UNDER
FORCE PLUS THERMAL LOADING
 279

= E - E - aT(y) (7.8)
2 p

where E
2
= strain recorded duri.ng thermal tests
E
p
= effective prestress strain (excluding creep) at start of
test, obtained from strain readings taken throughout test
prograrrrne
T(y) =measured temperature at height of. gauge length.

The resulting tensile strains were averaged over the bottom three
levels and plotted against the distance from the middle of the gauge length
to the nearest crack (Fig. 7.43). These averages appear to follow a
smooth curve, and indicate a maximum inter-crack tensile strain less
than llOµE •. This occurs between cracks seven and eight (Fig. 7.22).
This represents a stress of 3.2 MPa which is 75% of the modulus of rupture.
At a distance S/2 from the crack face, where S average crack spacing
of 150 mm, the best-fit curve (Fig. 7.43) shows a strain of 70µE (stress
2.0 MPa).

KEY
• Average measured strain
- - Best fit curve

_..._ -.. - --
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Distance from crack face (mm)

FIG. 7.43 MEASURED INTERCRACK CONCRETE TENSILE STRAINS IN

BEAM FOUR AT 1700 SECONDS UNDER FORCE PLUS THERMAL
LOADING

7.8.3 Thermal Reactions

A comparison of the experimental and theoretical thermal reactions

for the first thermal plus force loading of Beams Three and Four is shown
·in Fig .. 7.44(a) and (b) respectively. Good agreement is obtained during
 280

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LOAD CELLS VS TIME

KEY
EKl
l.£S'1" re.
~
1EST 25
l.£S'1"
ERST
0 Heat F F Heat

1 i if l l ft I
ERST
I- 8800 IA
CJ 8400 ·a-... ~sf F• 6 · 6 /Zl<N Easf
z 8CXXl
J ..........
7800
I .,......_
w 7200
I ~
(9 6800

a:=
a I
I
ti
CE>l)t,.,.€> ~
s . . . . ._ ._____
0 -
-
T<!<:hnique 2 -
I
,...__
-
J
5600
I l.!IJ/Jort A
, -
z
S200
4800
I
.........._
- n
A

0
....... 4400
J
1- 4000
I
u 3800
r Technique 1 _____:.
([ I
w 320'.l
I
a: 2a:xJ
I
Techniaue 1 ~
I
2:400
J __...
2000
1600
12:00
I
p
~
_,...
• + • + .
eoo J o~\ ~.....-
+ '"
I su.'Q'Q .---- ' + Technique 2 ~
400
cc,(\o ........
" .......... ~
.---- . ~

"'""- _,........-
FORCE 0 zoo 400 600 eoo 1000 12:00 1400
LOADING TI ME C SECONDS l

(A) Beam Three

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LORD.CELLS VS TIME

I KEY
S'r'l'1'la.. l.OCRTI~ EN)
+ &PPCRT
EN) i.EST TEST NJ, 47
0 CTNTRE 51.J'PC'f!T \.£'l r
EN:J 5U'PCR r E"A'l r
A CENTI£ 9..PPCRf ffiS r Heat Heat
9
illoo I 1,t!l\:1 fA
B
~Do~ Ji
We.sf F • 7·124 KN Easl

w
(9 7
I -~
CE>l)fre ,~ ~
~ I '~ --.e
--r -
B Sv.'/JfJo,. t
u l
a,_. 5
I ~ 'oo ...
----..r:.::
Technique 2

c'.!Octc ctctMOMc'.l
1-
u 4 I octctct

([

~ I Technique 1 ~
j

;
3

+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+ ...-.+.+.+
i--:-::i++ .+_+.+.+.+t-.+~
2

I ~
~++.
.. .. .e·•·L echnique 2-
I

~-· .-
ot'\
I c;;,(\o su.'Q~~
..
0

-I
~ . ~·
~-·
~-- .
-2
I Loadm
Force
'""'f 2:00 400 • 600 eoo 1000 12:00 1400
·TI ME (SECONDS l
1600 llOJ

(B) Beam Four

FIG. 7.44 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL REACTIONS

OF INITil;\LLY UNCRACKED BEAMS UNDER FIRST THERMAL PLUS
FORCE LOADING
 281

the force loading and during that portion of thermal loading before
cracking occurs. Cracking initiates earlier than predicted by theory,
and during the portion of Fig. 7.44 between experimental cracking and
theoretical prediction of cracking the rate of change of reactions is
less than predicted. In the latter portion of the graphs Techniques 1
and 2 straddle the experimental measurements, the results being closer
to Technique 2 in Beam Three. Repeat tests (Fig. 7.45) provided similar
final reactions, but show an earlier and less pronounced change in gradient
as the preformedcaracks open. Agreement between theory and experiment
is batter than in Fig. 7.44, reflecting the smoothing of the M/~

relationship resulting from zero concrete tensile strength across the

preformed crack.

To provide a comparison of the response of the beams in both the

cracked and uncracked state, it is informative to study the bending moment
at the centre section of the middle span. The theoretical solutions have
been plotted in Fig. 7.46 as the series of discrete points for which a
solution was obtained, linked by dotted lines. The origin for the tests
with thermal load alone was taken as the theoretical moment due to force
load alone to allow comparisons of thermal moments to be made between the
two load cases. A smooth curve was drawn through the experimental points
in Figs. 7.44 and 7.45, which thus allowed an experimental reaction at any
time to be obtained. These were converted to bending moments at the
centre of the middle span from statics and are plotted as lines in Fig.
7.46. It can be seen that beam cracking reduces the experimental moment
change under thermal loading from the theoretical uncracked moments by
46% for Beam Three at 1400 seconds, and 27% for Beam Four at 1700 seconds.
The larger reduction in Beam Three can be attributed to the influence of
the soffit slab as discussed in Section 7.5.4.

7.8.4 Steel Stress-Induced Strains

The development of steel stress -induced strains during thermal

plus force loading for a symmetric half of the gauges at centre section
of the middle span of Beam Four is shown in Fig. 7.47(a). The experimental
strains for the other half is similar as can be seen in the plotted strain
profile at 1700 seconds shown in Fig. 7.47(b). The theoretical strains'
were calculated from equation 7.7 with £(y) provided by Technique 2.
Agreement between predicted and measured strains is good. Note that the
.predicted stress change in the bottom mild steel equals 142 MPa.
 282

a-R'IGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LOFO CELLS VS TIME

KEYEK!
I.GT 1ESI' to. llll
I.GT
ERST
ERST
j I k
I
•n--....
--
. -
-- Wl•f' F•tS·tSliUCN Eoif'

-
:>500
I
w 7200 I D ~

(!) eeoo ,.
o---..
z &WO
I Cel)fte
.! .........,;,,.11112-
u
~ &:al
6600
I
r SupPOtf " .~
. ..
/

..
~

a 5200
4SCXl
....... 4400
I
I
.
D

..
I.
r-
=
4000
r
I
ffi
a 2800
I
I
2400
2000
1600
I
1'
•
. ... •
1200
I
.. +
800
J
I
c;u\)\)or\ ... --- -.;:

Technll'lue 2....:i.

---
400
t,nd ... i.-
0

"'.........,, .
-- -
-400
~
-800
-1200
... -

-1000
-2000
FORCE
'"
0 400. 600 600 lca;l . 1200 1400
LOADING
TIME (SECONDS)

(A) Beam Three .

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

S'l'l'tlOl. LOCATICtl KEJ:'.EKl
+ EKl ~T I.EST TEST r(), 48
0 C£NTllE~T I.EST
• EKl ~T EAST ffgof F F Heal
• C£NTllE ~ EAST 1111111,
9
A A A
z
~
We11I F • 1124 KN £0111
8

w
(!) 7

frI 6
u
z
0
5
.....
r-
u
a:
w
Q'.

I• Loodi
Force
0 zoo 400 600 800 1000 1200 . 1400 1600 lllOO
I TIME tSECONOSl

(8) Beam Four

FIG. 7.45 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL REACTIONS
OF PRE-CRACKED BEAMS UNDER THERMAL PLUS FORCE LOADING
 26 /+
Heat F $F Heat I
/
21. + I l i i! I l /
i
&a ~ ~ ~
/
fr 24
,.. ,..+
22 Heat Ff F Heat
-t:"'
22 Test 40
Test No. I Initial Condition IF i 1 I I·I I l l
20
di! tit I tit &
21. Uncracked I O·O
20
I 2s Uncracked 6·61kN
29 Cracked 6·61kN
18
l 32 Cracked J 0·0 18 Test 1.0
Plotted from origin 0 ...--:-..c:= Test 48
_->e' __ ... .x
16
Test 24 & · 32
16 ...... ~----
J:'lo~ted
from _ori_gin 0
11.
-E
(/'ii'~
14
z 'fest 29 ez
=
~

E
0
"'
CD
12

10
~/
x
-=
~
E
0
12

10
Test No. Initial Condition F
c 15 0-0
40 Uncracked
c 8 47 Uncracked 7·124 kN
"'0E
:i::
10
:i::
8
48 Cracked 7·124 kN

6 6
~
I.
+ Uncracked theory
KEY
• Technique 1 4
X Technique 2 1-----Theoretical Elastic Solution + Uncracked Theory
• Technique 1
2 2 X Technique 2

0 1000 0
0 200 I.QI) 600 800 1200 11.00 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Time (Seconds l 1_ Force loadina 1 _ Time (Seconds) Thermal Loading
,- -r
I Force loa?in~I Thermal loading
--1
N
();)
w

(A) Beam Three FIG. 7 .46 BEAM MOMENT CHANGES AT CENTRE SECTION OF
(B} Beam Four
MIDDLE SPANS (TEST GROUPS A, B AND C)
 284

TEST NO. 53

-~p.. ·JJ
~··Y:Ti·
- /kof F F Htrat
(f)
~ 600 >--west
I
4 1111 k' !A
F • 7-124 KN East
~ 500
.. ® I

tn l
e; 400
b!!£gliQD A

1--t 300
i
a t; I
-
j :
~ 2 2 zz
-- 1<>22222 222222
' I I 1• J
~22222
--,
222222 222222 222222
. I•• 11 I I I I I I•
~
l
iz22222 j I I I I I I 11 I I
ffH~H ~ I I I I I
j 0
~

"11
z
4 444444
-~ ~
3 3 3 3"
33333:

~
0
'iii (f) -100
z
• "' s sis
1444444

5 5 ~ 0"" 6
4 4 ••
6 '666661
333333
.. ~ 4 4 4
3 3 -:a: ... -
444444
~3333

a:a: -200
55555
5 5" c
6565.,. -
15 5 5 1'-" 6 6 6
~ 4,.
"4
333333
3 3 ~ - -
·;.:11333333

tn -300
555 le
~5
6 6 .- -.. 6
44444,
-"4444
1133333

555 6 6,
l>- 6c 14444.._ ...
-400
.. 5 y 6 6 E -a: 4 4 4 4
5 5 !
665_
-500
5 -
-s "6
656
555
Sc 6 6 6
~5
55
b&ss_
-700
ls 5 c "
5
J Force lo 200 600 800 I 000 1200 1400 1600 11ioo
load in TI ME (SECONDS)

(a) Experimental Strain Time-Histories.

220 /

200
180
160
E
E 140

-
......,

l/)
0
120

100 KEY
Q)

0
> 80 x Experimental Results (Spine)
.0
<(
• Experimental Results (Flange)
....., 60 I( "'

..c.
CJ)
Theoretical Curve (Spine)
40
I
Cl>
Theoretical Curve (Flange)
20

-BOO -600 -400 -200 0 200 L.00

Steel Stress - Induced Strains (_,µ,£)
Tension .. • ... Compression

(b) Theoretical and Experimental Strains at 1700 seconds.

FIG. 7.47 STEEL STRESS-INDUCED STRAINS DEVELOPED DURING FORCE

PLUS THERMAL LOADING AT CENTRE SECTION OF BEAM FOUR
MIDDLE SPAN.
 285

This is only slightly lower than the stress range of 145 MPa which was
109
found to be a lower bound for fatigue failure for 5 million cycles of
a range of A.S.T.M •. grade mild steel bars. However as discussed in
40 d .
.
Sections 7. 3. 2 and 7. 4 the loa d ing excee d s MWD esign recommend a t.ions.

7.8.6 Crack Widths

An attempt was made to measure crack widths by two methods:

(1) Waxing steel buttons on a 51 mm ga.uge length across preformed
cracks. During testing strains were read at intervals with a demountable
mechanical (Demec) gauge.
(2) Attaching crack width devices (CWDs) as described in Section
7.2.7(f) across the crack, and recording output from the CWDs during tests
by Datalogger.
The calculated crack widths from (1) and (2) include the length change
between demec studs or CWD attachment points due to decompression strains,
and will thus overestimate crack widths. No corrections were made for
this as the effect is relatively small (less than 0.008 mm) and conservative.

The experimental CWD crack width time-histories are shown in Fig.

7.48 and 7.49 for Beams Three and Four respectively. It can be seen that
the measured crack widths are small under force load alone, but under
thermal load follow a flattened S shaped curve. This curve is
particularly flat for Beam Three. The steepest slope of the S curve
reflects crack extension and the final slope (reflecting no crack extension)
when extrapolated back to time zero is close to the measured crack width
under force loading. The maximum measured crack width in Beam Three was
0.198 mm at crack three (Fig. 7.48(a)) and in Beam Four was 0.083 mm at
crack nine (Fig. 7.49(a)).

The experimental crack widths derived from Figs. 7.48 and 7.49 are
plotted in Figs. 7.50 and 7.51 respectively. Also plotted 1n these graphs
are the results from the strains read with a demountable mechanical (Demec)
gauge. Experimental results from all three CWDs and from the Demec
gauge readings were in apparent agreement, and suggested that the maximum
crack widths occurred at the web/soffit junction. Strains were also read
on steel buttons waxed to the lower web surface between cracks with a
demountable mechanical (Demec) gauge over a 102 mm gauge length (Beam
Three) and 51 mm gauge length (Beam Four) • These failed to reveal any
cracks undetected by a 10 x magnifier.
 286

TEST NO. 28
l.s - -
8
Heaf ~ F H,,-af
7
~
- - l
~ Wesf
I :PUi£1 IA
East
L I6 Devier;/ ....
- F•6·6121<N
r:: > Device A e~,.. ... ii:
5 . ~ Device c bl
s •
0 14 '!'
0 Crock.I Crock< ~
.!!!
• 13 Crack Dt;:vice Locafions
I 12
1-
01 I
...... 5
::r 10
5
"
a .
3
B ...
5
3
7
4 3
B
5 3
A
5
5 3
4 4

3 "
4
-
2 -
s

0
.
Force
II ~
P
"
-
--
200
Crack Opens
..
400
I 2
eoo
2
eoo
2 t
1000
t
1200
~

1400
i--,L...,o""ado,;in-9---"1 TI ME CSECONDS)

(a) Crack 1 & 2

TEST NO. 28
19 ---
1" Heat F F Heat

17
lNviceC .3. l ':1.k1U£1 East
f.A. z
_,.. ~vie~ >E
I I
E 16
West Fs6·6121<N

15 Jl
0 14
'

I
~
1
f .
0 Crack.J Crac/<4 .!a.
• 13 Crack Device Locations
f 3
I 12

b
......
II 2
I
-

::r 10
3
a
2
8
3
7
2
6
' "
5
~ 3
4
~
3
'f
3
2
i Opens
- - - - Crack
0 " '
For"'-=,ce,___ _,0
,__.... 200 400
I

8CXl BOO 1000 1200 1400

Loading 1 TIME CSECONJSl

(b) Crack 3 & 4

FIG. 7.48 MEASURED CRACK WIDTH DEVELOPMENT DURING FORCE

PLUS THERMAL LOADING ON BEAM THREE
 287

TEST NO. 28
19 Tr-- - Heof ~ F Heaf
17
l><zv1ce 8--i
c< ~
4-~
....
1 11aol:1 East
'A
E IS Device
t-Q) •
~I

"''
O'
- ~ We~t F•6·61ill<N
V'),
15
DeVtce A-< ~
0
0
•
14

13
CracX ~
Crack Device Locations
It 4
z
I IZ
I
l- 4 3
o II
1-t
:I 10 I.

9 -
B
7

6 a
"
5
j
4

3 ~

II
-
SI

- - - Crack Opens
.. II 8 I I

--
0
Force
Loadin
I zoo 400 600
TI ME CSECONDS)
800 1000 IZOO 1400

(c) Crack 5

TEST NO. 28
19 I~----
17
1----.i.~--1;;. _ _ _ _ >Heat F
11a011F Heal
1A
All q....
~!,.Dev.«~ 1--<i:J~
fi. A "A~
West F ~ 6 . 6 lil I< N E a s t - - - - - 4 - - - - - - - + - - - - ' - - l
I: IS
I: ... 0
IS
It--© "'
0 14 ~----1-----1------+-----+------+-----~
....
0
13 1 - - - - - - Crack
Crack 6.
Device Locations
n..1-

• 12
I
b
1-t
II'
3 2
:I JO
z
:lo.! 91------+------+-~----+------+-----+-----s------;i-------i
u
~ 91------+------+------+------+-----+------t-----;i-------i
u 71------+-----+-----+------+-----+-~~:-----+----+-----;
f

"
1------+----;/11---1---=-=-=Crack Opens
I I
zoo 400 800 800 1000 IZOO 1400
TIME CSECONJS)

(d) Crack 6
Continued

FIG. 7 .48 MEASURED CRACK WIDTH DEVELOPMENT DURING FORCE

PLUS THERMAL LOADING ON BEAM THREE
 288

TEST NO. 56
Crocl< locofiot Plofti~ Dt1vica Htzof F F Htzaf 7
NO :symbof typa I 1111 ~f I 7: 6
I Soffit d I 8 - A A
8
~
~

2 W11b S 2. A We.sf F. 7'124 KN Eosf 7 6

7
L: 2 Soffif ~ J A 7 6
L: 2 Wah N 4 A
7 6
7 6
7 .______ J [ifoffif tt 5 B
0 8 :Sof'Fit S 6 A 7 7 6 "
7 6
0 ll Soffif t1: 7 c 6
7 6
"' 6
7
7
6
I
5 5
I 7 6
I- 5 5 ' l l
0 7 - 8 5 ' l
...... 5 7 , 6 5 5
"
l
·1
::r 7 6 5 5 l
7 6 5 l l z • 2 z
~ '6 _5 1 ..... 2 4 4
u 4
a:
O:'.
u
3
3 3 3
3 3 3 3
3 ~ 3

z 7

lCXXI l ZOO l 400 180'.l 180'.l 2C\'.X)

Force o zoo 400 80'.l 80'.l
f--Loa"-d;_;_in---"1 TI ME (SECONDS)

(a) Cracks 1,2,3,8&9

TEST NO. 56
Heof Fl F Heat

- I il 11 qs:1 fA
8
8

West F. 7·124 KN East Q

7- 4 :SoffitN 5 C
0 !S . Web N A
0
tS
,__,._5··-~5c;rr;1r-r-·- -c-
7 L~offif If: 8 C
s-
I
l-
o
......
::r
~
u
£5

800 l CXXI l ZOO l 400 180'.l 180'.l 2C\'.X)

TI ME (SECONDS)

(b) Cracks

FIG. 7.49 MEASURED CRACK WIDTH DEVELOPMENT DURING FORCE

PLUS THERMAL LOADING ON BEAM FOUR
 Crack 2 Crack 3 Crack I. Crack 5 Crack 6
CD
LLI
!:
\
:i::I
I-
150
' \
a::
~I 100 "' ' '' ' ' '\
\
\

' ' "' ...... ' ..... \

'\
50-I
' 1a. '\, ' ' .._

"+r
..__
• ..___ ""-
J I
I
---=- f ® --
I
+ 10="
I
I I
I I I
I ~· ~
I I I
I I I

~I
40
I
9
61
I I
I I
I
I
et'
I e
I
I
I
Gl I e

I
,,.. -
I

/.
'-
r ------? ~
.._ \

I / /
5ol 7 /'
/
.r /. ? / •/
. CD•
I 100 /
LLI
/ / /
/
::: /
/
I/
: 150
iE
::>
&l I I I I I I I I I I
0·0 0·1 0·2 O·O 0·1 0·2 (}0 0·1 0·2 O·O 0·1 0·2 O·O 0·1 0·2
KEY

---- Crack Width {mm) + Test 28 { Crack width devices ).

0 Test 29 ( • l.
• Test 30 ( North) & 31 (South) Using Demec Gauges.
' , Estimated experimental crack width profile.

FIG. 7.50 MEASURED CRACK WIDTHS AT 1400 SECONDS IN BEAM

THREE UNDER FORCE PLUS THERMAL LOADING N
Q)
CCI
£~C11. CRACK 1 CRACK 2 CRACK 3 CRACK l. CRACK 5 CRACK 6

5
z
so
I I •-\ ·Q
. ' '
+
'
'l:l
El
~
~
..
-1 I: : 1 r
I

::
I
I
•'
I
I
'
'
'
. I
.. ~.
I

'
'
,--

'
..
~ . ~.
I

t~
I

:::: t + ~
.. E? .
t:' .
<l> G> 'I
'.
0 ''
.
I I It I
ILi) I I I I
' ~. 'I
: ; : l '' I

',_
\ l ', --- '
.
,
'I
../ ,.,,_ ,• ." JIJ,
l q>'
. .. ... p
I I

~
.0 -+,' if. ct' ,.,'! ,fl
so l ,./'"
r/
t i
.'· J6
,,'
,.,.. ,
1'
,.{.
..
,.fl fl
. ,6-. At
I
. " ,/' ,fl
:;
.c. 100 " ,. .,.-. ,." I 1· " fl
I
,;.
I
fl
rl
/.
,.
fl
I ,•
I ,1'
~
150
l
:
,,
.·"'""'
;. J
,
'f ,,
t I' I
I
,,
rl
,
,•'
,,/'

"
.---- --. -.
0 0·05 0·1 0 0·05 0·1 0 0·05 0·1 0 0·05 0·1 0 0·05 0·1 0 0·05 CM
Crack Width (mm)
.a
CRACK 7 CRACK 8 CRACK 9 CRACK 10 CRACK 11
~
£L.
0
50
z KEY

--0 i
I
I
I

$
I
I
I .
t
I

~
.. Crack width devices
Test 56 Time 900 seconds
I
I ' I

t'
I
Vl ' I
'I
\ ',
<i>
•. 0 Crack width devices
' ·..._
,. .... ~ "' r .- Test 56 Time 1700 seconds
. ;../.,,. ,ti
"' 7
.0
50-1 I 9'" 'f
,',,. ,,'•
,. f
,,,

,,....
;I

-,., .., ......

"' ,~·
.
~ ,,
,, ,.•'
'" ... "'"'
...
,, , Demec Gouges
100~ I ,/' .. I- ,6
.
..c.

· ·"!
, ...,,'
... JI
:; A ''"
f ,a Time 900 seconds
1J fl ,/
......
~ 150J,~,,/' .",. ,
,'
'~...
/9 • Demec Gouges
, Time 1700 seconds

FIG. 7.51 MEASURED CRACK WIDTHS AT 1700 SECONDS IN BEAM FOUR ....
ID
UNDER FORCE PLUS THERMAL LOADING Q
 291

It is of interest to note that measured crack widths across the

soffit of Beam Three (Fig. 7.50) are approximately constant. This
suggests that if any undetected secondary cracks had formed on the soffit,
they must have either been very narrow, or else have extended right across
the soffit.

Table 7.7 provides a comparison of average experimental crack widths

and theoretical crack widths calculated from equations presented in
Section 6.1.2 and 6.2.4. It can be seen that. •there is a wide scatter of
theoretical crack width predictions. Because different final section
strain profiles are predicted by Techniques 1 and 2, the strains fed into
the equations and hence calculated crack predictions depend upon the
solution technique used.
102
The equation by Bennett and Chandrasehar significantly overestimated
101
crack widths while the equation by Gergley and Lutz underestimated
crack widths. The equation by Beeby et allOO provided good crack width
predictions for Beam Three, where the cover to the prestress steel was
large, but was unconservative for Beam Four where the cover to the
prestress steel was small. Results from the equation p~oposed in
Section 6.2.4 (equation 6.17) were consistently conservative. However
predictions using soffit strains derived from Technique 1 were only 3%
and 14% conservative for maximum crack widths in Beams Three and Four
respectively, representing good agreement.

The equivalent prototype maximum crack width is 5 * 0.198 = 0.99 mm

for·Beam Three, and 7 * 0.083 = 0.58 mm for Beam Four.
These appear
95
large when compared with the limit of 0.1 mm set by both the CPll0 and
79
CEB-FIP :ecommendations for partially prestressed (Class III) beams in
exposed conditions. However, as discussed in Sections 7.3.2 and 7.4, the
applied loading on the beams is larger than design recommendations,
especially for Beam Three. Further, the beams have low percentages of
unstressed steel.

7.9 THERMAL LOAD ALONE ON PRECRACKED BEAMS

Thermal load was applied to Beam Three after the cracks discussed
in Section 7.8 had been initiated, and the force load removed. The
experimental reactions (Fig. 7.52(a)) are in good agreement with predictions
from Technique 2. Up to 800 seconds the experimental reactions are close
to predictions for an uncracked beam. After this time the rate of reaction
 TABLE 7.7 THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL CRACK WIDTHS

Method Experimental Technique 1 Technique 2

** ·*** wl wl **** w2 w2
a
*
w (mm) w (mm)
m
w (mm)
1
-w w
w (mm)
2 w
-
w
a m a m

Beam Three (1400 seconds)

Proposed 0.143 0.198 0.203 1.42 1.03 0.234 1.64 1.18

100
Beeby et al 0.143 0.198 0.102 0.71 0.52 0.124 0.87 0.63
101
Gergley and Lutz 0.143 0.198 0.088 0.62 0.44 0.107 0.75 0.54
102
Bennett and Chandrasehar 0.143 0.198 0.685 4.79 3.46 0.685 4.79 3.46

Beam Four (1700 seconds)

Proposed 0.072 0.083 0.095 1.32 1.14 0.118 1.64 1.42
100
Beeby et al 0.072 0.083 0.012 0.17 0.14 0.018 0.25 0.22
101
Gergley and Lutz 0.072 0.083 0.044 0.61 0.53 0.060 0.83 0.72
102
Bennett and Chandrasehar 0.072 0.083 0.142 1.97 1.71 0.142 1.97 1. 71

* w = average crack width from Figs. 1~.so and 7.51

a
** w =maximum crack width from Figs. 7.50 and 7.51
m
*** w = predicted crack width using Technique 1
1
**** ..
w? = predicted crack width using Technique 2

l\J
U)
l\J
 293

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

KEY
TEST t'O. 32

-6400'-~~~~-'-~~~~--'-~~~~--'~~~~~..L-~~~~-'-~~~~--'-~~~~--'

0 zoo 400 600 900 1000 1200 1400

TIME CSECONDS)

{a) Reactions

KEY TEST NO. 32

11

L JO,_
L:

8 Crack 5

I
1-- 7
0
,_.
3 6
~
u 21
CI 5
O'. 3
u
4
~
3
3

•
o'---4ll-----...i.c21--~--~a....._~---•--_,____4_____._________......_______._________,
() zoo 400 900 I 000 1200 1400
TI ME CSECONDS)

(b) Crack Widths

FIG. 7.52 THERMAL LOADING ALONE ON PRE-CRACKED BEAM THREE

 294

change diminishes as the preformed cracks open (Fig. 7.52(b)) and reduce
structural stiffness.

A comparison of the midspan moments generated by the uncracked and

precracked beam during thermal testing is included in Fig. 7.46(a). It

can be seen that the structural response of the precracked beam only differs
from that of the uncracked beam after the cracks open, and that from this
time the response only gradually differs as the height to the crack root
grows. At 1400 seconds the thermal moment is 21% less than predictions
for an uncracked beam.

The width of crack 5 (Fig. 7.52(b)) was 0.058 mm at 1400 seconds,

representing an equivalent prototype crack width of 0.29 mm. However the
40
thermal loading at this time was approximately twice the MWD recommended
level as discussed in pection 7.4.

No results are available for corresponding tests on Beam Four due to

malfunction of the paper-tape punch.

7.10 THERMAL LOAD PLUS REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOAD

Engineers have been concerned that if a bridge with a high prestress

dead load overbalance is subjected to a high thermal load, cracks· might
form in the soffit region near the supports. Because the region of
cracking will be small, little thermal load reduction or force load
redistribution would be anticipated. Further, because the prestress
steel is usually located close to the deck near the supports, and because
there is usually little unstressed steel near the soffit, large crack widths
are predicted. The critical thermal loading case may occur soon after
construction when prestress losses are low. Before the blacktop is laid
full dead load is not present and the normal insulating effect of blacktop
will not occur. However the top surface absorptivity will be lower
without the blacktop, thus lowering thermal effects. Reported examples
of structural distress under this loading are discussed in Section l.2.4(a).

To simulate the effect of prestress overbalance, and to ensure that

the midspan cracks initiated during the loading described in Section 7.8
remained closed, some kentledge blocks were removed providing the reduc,ed
dead load bending moment distribution shown in Fig. 7.15. The loading on
40
th e mo d e 1 bearns excee d e d MW D d esign
. recommen d ations
. as d.iscusse d in
.
, Sections 7.3.4 and 7.4.
 295

Crack patterns induced by this loading are discussed in Section 7.3.4,

and beam segmentation used in the analysis shown in Fig. 7.38. This
segmentation influences the calculated zone of cracki.ng and will be
discussed for each beam in turn.

(a) Beam Three

Under thermal loading the positive cracking moment at the support
exceeds the ultimate moment, and the bending moment distribution is peaked.
Thus only one crack is predicted per support, and after cracking a drop
in flexural moment and large curvatures are anticipated. The segmentation
adopted (Fig. 7.38) must reflect the expected zone of influence of a single
crack. The length of this zone was assumed to equal the clear soffit width.
This effectively assumes the 45° stress relief pattern shown in Fig. 7.29.
Thus the length of both elements 6 and 7 (Fig. 7.38) was chosen as half the
clear soffit width.

(b) Beam Four

Beam Four has more unstressed soffit steel than Beam Three, and the
cracking moment under thermal load is less than the ultimate moment. The
analysis (using Techniques land 2) predicted elements 7, 8 and 9 in Fig.
7 .38 to be cracked (i.e. a zone of cracking of 0.3 m). By using finer
segmentation near the support, a stage could be reached where the solution
for Techniques l and 2 were identical. The solution at the outer cracked
elements would be at E (Fig. 7.27) and for inner cracked segments along the
branch ED •

7.10.l Vertical Thermal Deflections

A time history of vertical deflection under the first thermal plus

reduced kentledge loading is shown in Figs. 7.53 and 7.54(a) for Beams Three
and Four respectively. Sharp slope changes can be detected at about 1800
seconds (Beam Three) and 1600 and 2050 seconds (Beam Four) which coincide
with the times cracking was observed. Slope changes are also apparent
at about 800 seconds in Beam Four, probably due to the preformed cracks
A and B opening. Repeat tests (Figs. 7.54(b) and 7.55) provided similar
final deflections for the centre span, but smaller intermediate deflections,
and follow a smoother development curve, although slope changes (due to
cracks opening) are still apparent.

A comparison of experimental and theoretical deflection profiles is

shown in Fig. 7.56 for the indicated times. For comparative purposes
 296

z 4- h@-r--t~-+-----l---+~-1-----1
0 Cost +
1-t
l z>---
t; 0
w . 0

..
_J lD'-- A

+ e
b +
..
e e

... -
0 B u·
+ e e a

..
+ 0 a e
6 v
a e
+A
+
e
0
. A

- c
a .a
)
m- r;t> a
~

..
4
0 A
a a
+ a
z
0
.
+
a
a -
a a

,.. ~e IP
0

-z

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

DIAL GR.GE 6
TEST NO. 35
~x
lB
..."
l
OIALGR.GE

DIAL~
DIAL
=-.;;; A
9
10 I
I

E i6 I
.E l

4
0
z
1-t I l
'·
Iz
I-
u
w . . T

. " "
I
_J ID
I
LL
w
0
l
l
- . .. ~
0

I •
l
,. ....
8

,.. )(
x
)(
)(
.
.
~
6

..
I "IJ x )( 8

. - ...
l "IJ

. • . ..
)(
)(
•
• ...
4
)(
-
"
.
I 'S )(

.x "' x.
I
. • • x
z
-·l
xi .1!<1
~.
.. .
v

. .
x
x
Cl

. x

•
x

FIG. 7.53 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING FIRST THERMAL

PLUS REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING OF BEAM THREE
 297

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

+ DIRL GFU;E I
TEST NO. 60
D DIAL GFU;E Z
19
~)( .
~ rAL GA.a:
i>IRLGFU;E
~!~~
4
5
6 ++
++

gE 1e "
v ? ~

)()( )(
++
*
:t .:'.!
)(
... +"' v )(
z 14 >-- f
Ha at Heat
f + ) )(
0.._,
f-
u
w
IZ ~
A
.//.ZS/
:~": fl'.t!:t~ 11
A
East
...
... +
)(
)(
+

"
"x )(
)( )(

_J Dial Gous_r.z locations ++ )(

... +
b 10
+ )( )(
)( )(
0 +
+ +)( )( )(
8
+ +)( )(
+,.><
it)(
... -
6

• +><
-1<"'
~·<(>-&~
~~"'>"<)~ <>""""~ ~ ~
= cc c
f:>t) ()v~ ~v~;;; ~·~ .
. - ... _
. ,;; ,,·, .........
I $ $ S $1
4
·--1'-tX ~.~""~
Jf,: •
- le "
~
• ,.
.... c
... - -
) ll! ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~
-1<*~ ~ S'·.···
. ..
~-!<~~~. " c
- ................ - - - n hDDDD 0 DD n n h - - - . . .. ~~

..
~
z
**x;.~ b~ E> ti'b" li'o 0 00 ""
.vi 'l!l '-m @!• DD DC
Do
0

-z
0 400 600 80:) 1000 1200 1400 1600 180:) zooo Z400
TI ME (SECONDS l

(a) First Thermal + Reduced Kentledge Loading

~ GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

S"lt'<l<lL ~lW TEST NO. 61
+ OIRL GFU;E I
D DIALGFU;E z
6 18
x
E
.e
~ C!ALGFU;E
ORLGR.GE
o!~~
.s 16
v

-z~~~-'-~~~-L-~~~-'-~~~'--~~--'~~~----'-~~~-'-~~~-'--~~----'~~~----'-~~~~
0 400 600 800 1000 !ZOO 1400 1600 1800 zooo
TI ME (SECONDS l

(b) Second Thermal+ Reduced Kent ledge Loading

FIG. 7.54 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING THERMAL PLUS

REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING OF BEAM FOUR
 298

KEY GTRAPHE OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

~ ~ L2
1 ST NO. 36
C DIAL GfUi£ 3
18 --- ~- 4
~
)(
~
'DIAL~ 5
I I I +
+
+
E 1e - Haaf , Heat

4
·~ -J~ k tf Hitt :>'. f
_g :k@ +
- East
a
14
+
H +
t- 12 - I
+
u Dial Gauqa Loco fions
+
~ ID
t
+

b0 8
+
+
+
. +~ ~ ~ ~

.
IO ~

. . ..
~
~ ~

.. c...
6
+~ ,. . ,. ,.
~ ~

,.
c a [JJ-v Ill'
-
4 .v .
+~

c u
- ] c [ c c c c c

2 .~
+<>
.. c
c

+.,t> p c
~
c
0

-4
0 800 1000 1200 1400 1800 1800 2400
TI ME (SECONDS l

GRAPH OF DEFLECTION VS TIME

• OIAL GfUi£ 6
TEST NO. 36

~
19
.
sv

I
OIAL GfUi£
- ·-·
OIAL~
OIAL .
,......,. ... 7
g
10
8
I
I I

E. 1s
_g I
z 14
I
0
,__, I
t- 12
u I I
w
_J JO
I

b
0 .9
I
I

I .. I
•• •• ... .... . . . ..
6
• •
• " • . .
I u

,1
~ )( )( )( )(
8
. .
.... .
v
)(

. ..
4
'Iii
"Iii' )(
)(
)( • • l
•
. .
)(

2
I "\
ftl
)(
)(I
. . . ". )(
v

)(

. ...
)(
)( )(
~
0

-2

0 200 400 800 800 1000 1200 1400 1800 1800 2000 2400
TI ME (SECONDS l ·

FIG. 7.55 MEASURED VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS DURING THERMAL PLUS

REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING OF PRE-CRACKED BEAM THREE
 rn
-Technlqµe I }
--- Techn~i e2 Theoretical
----- Uncr theory Curves
- - Modified heocy
• ~perimentel results (Test 3!>)

(a) Beam Three (2100 Seconds)

KEY
- - Technique t } .
--- Technique '2. Theorehcal
---- Uncrac'ke.d theory Curves
• -·- Modified theory ( )
• h~rimental results Teet GO
1·5
/~
//
- -,
......

I
t•O I /' .... -, ,, \
• I ' \
I I \\
I / '\
I / \\
o· I '
I/
'\
'\
// \
//I )

West East

0·5

(b) Beam Four {2300 Seconds)

FIG. 7.56 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL

DEFLECTION PROFILES FOR MODEL BEAMS UNDER
THERMAL AND REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING
 300

the theoretical uncracked deflection is also plotted. Agreement is poor

between predicted and measured deflections for the centre span. No cracks
were experimentally observed near the supports in the end span. This was
simulated using Technique 2(and plotted as 'Modified Theory') in Fig. 7.56
by using the extrapolated line AB (Fig. 7.27) as a M/~ curve for the end
span elements. This slightly improved agreement. The following explanation
of the discrepancy between measured and predicted deflections is provided.

If the moment-curvature relationship is idealised as shown in

Fig. 7.57(a), then after the support moment reaches ~ an effective
constant moment hinge is formed at internal supports. Thus further thermal
loading causes incremental deflections shown in Fig. 7.57(b), or a change
in total deflected shape shown in Fig. 7.57(c). However more than the
single predicted crack per support occurred (Fig. 7.22 and 7.23) and the
predicted zone of influence of cracking was thus underestimated. If the
hinge length at the supports is increased (Fig. 7.57(d)) to include this
effect it can be seen that the theoretical incremental deflections (Fig.
7.57(d)) tend closer to the shape of measured deflections (Fig. 7.56).
Note that at the East internal support in Beam Three only one crack
occurred (Fig. 7.22); thus there is effectively a smaller hinge zone, which
is reflected in the experimental deflection profile (Fig. 7.56(a).). Note
that larger end span deflections than predicted for the uncracked case
were measured, and are predicted by both the 'short' and 'long' hinge
theories.

The predicted beam curvature distributions on the basis of the

'short' and 'long' hinge zone theory discussed above are shown in Fig.
7.57(e). It can be seen that lower curvatures are predicted for the
100
'long ' hinge theory. Beeby et al noted that average curvatures in
cracked regions of prestressed concrete sections with low steel percentages
were significantly less than derived at a crack. Thus crack width
formulae which assume a zone of constant curvature about a crack (Fig.
7.57(f)), and based on the short hinge length theory are expected to be
conservative. Note that predicted thermal reactions will not be sensitive
to the zone of cracking, being influenced by the level of B (Fig. 7.57(a)).

Clearly the understanding of the problem is not complete and more

experimental work is required.
 M ' Short hinge '
c }01

r
B

r~·
m
:iE

l_ p Q R s
A
Mo = MR : MB
lo l Bilinear MI Ci! Curve (bl Incremental Thermal Deflections

Heat Heat

\ \ \ \ After cracking
Before crocking

p Q R s
(cl Chanc;ie in Total Thermal Deflected Shape due to (bl

'Lonc;i hinge'

1\
~<==>~
\~:A
·"t \
P Q R S
(d l Incremental Thermal Deflections ('Lano hinc;ie' theory l

Unrestrained Thermal
Curvatures

Continuity Moment
Induced Curvatures

Curvature before crock initiation. (Point B in (al above )

Increase in uncracked unrestrained thermal curvatures ofter crock initiation

Additional curvatures ofter crock initiation ('Sharl hinge' theory l

Additional curvatures ofter crock initiation ('Long hinc;ie' t.heary

(el Curvature Distribution Along .crocked Structure

Coble
<1> ~Assumed

11 ~Actual
biaxial compression

+ c!ock f Beam Support

(I l Curvatures Near Crack (9) Forces Due ta Coble Reverse Curvature

FIG. 7.57 STUDY OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE ZONE OF CRACKING

NEAR THE SUPPORTS UPON THERMAL DEFLECTED SHAPE
 302

7.10.2 Thermal Reactions

A comparmson of the experimental and theoretical thermal reactions

for the first thermal plus reduced kentledge loading of Beams~'Three and
Four is shown in Fig. 7.58(a) and 7.59(a) respectively. Good agreement
is found between experiment.and theory, with Technique 1 providing the
closest agreement for both beams. Results for repeat tests (Figs. 7.58(b)
and 7.59(b)) do not exhibit the sharp changes in reactions shown at crack
initiation in the earlier tests.

A comparison of midspan bending moments is shown in Fig. 7.60,

and was derived as described in Section 7.8.3. It can be seen that beam
cracking. reduces the experimental moment change under thermal loading from
the theoretical uncracked moments by 33% for Beam Three at 2100 seconds,
and 23% for Beam Four at 2300 seconds. The larger reduction in Beam Three
can be attributed to the influence of the soffit slab.

7.10.3 Crack Widths

Crack width devices (CWDs) were attached to the soffit of Beam Three
and spine (close to the soffit) of Beam Four as discussed in Section 7.2.7(f).

Crack width development was monitored on the preformed cracks (A and

B Fig. 7.23) during the first thermal plus reduced kent1edge load· test on
Beam Four (Fig. 7.6l(a)), and on all cracks initiated near the supports on
Beam Three (Fig. 7.62) and Beam Four (Fig. 7.6l(b)) in the subsequent retest.

The cracks in Beam Three (Fig. 5.62) opened at about 800 seconds,
and then developed at an almost linear rate. Results for gauges (2 and 3)
and (4 and 5) are both similar, suggesting constant crack width across the
soffit. This was approximately verified by a 20 x magnifier. The
average crack widths at 2100 seconds were 0.072, 0.065 and 0.18 mm for
cracks B,C and D respectively. The crack width for A (Fig. 7.22) was not
monitored. However after beam heating examination by a 20 x magnifier
suggested that crack A had remained closed. Thus the sum of the crack
widths near the West support (B and C) were less than measured at the
East support (Crack D) .

Cracks in Beam Four (Fig. 7.61) start opening at about 600 seconds,
and then reach an almost linear development rate at 800 seconds. However
on initiation of other local cracks, a drop in crack width development can
be detected. Thus in Fig. 7.6l(a) the formation of crack D at about 1600
seconds causes a drop in crack width development rate for crack B, and the
 303

CHANGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LOAD CELLS VS TIME

S'tl"flOL LOCAT ICX'I
KEYENJ
+ ENJ Sll'POOT l.£ST Trnl I'(), 35
D .CEHTl<E Sll'POOT l.£ST
-
• ENJ Sll'POOT
----- ·--
EAST
--··
l

J:St IJ . .
Haaf Technique 1,
I
'1 'J, asf
I
I
J ....---1 + + +
+ -1
o~\
.......-V'+ \
2 _::,
s0'Y'Y ....>:;.,,.... Technique

<(,.'00 __,,....,.,t'f

~ -
~
JU~
-
-2000 ,_____ c~L.- -
fll)trfl ~ ~
~ r-...
-XOJ
s<.JP1> n
Technique 27
-4000 Ort a
b~

!"::-
D
f D I
-5000 ......
-sooo "'--I. D
D
. .... .
-7000

-8000
. T!'chnique '
1~
0 eoo eoo 1000 IZOO 1400 1eoo 1eoo 2000 2200 2400
TI ME (SECONDS l

(a) First Thermal Plus Reduced Kentledge Loading

CHRNGE OF REACTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

KEY
(f) TEST NO. 35
z
0
1-
9000 - -·--~~ - 1

J
I
Ha of
:3:
w
z ·~
70CXJ 4 i \
' l iJ;
sf asf
-
w
(.!)
5CXXl
•+
- ... •+ •+ +
1

z
CI 4000
•+ Technique 2 '
i....----'"
6 3(XX)
s0?'V _ / 'i-
o~\ ~

z
0
2000 t - - <(,.'00
>-! ~
I- 1000
u I~
eJO'.'. -1000
~
-2000 c~ n
fl!) ff'@
-3<XXJ s ......
• .............. D

l.Jpl>ort ~ t--..12.. Technique 2-,

-4000
.- LI
D J
.
L
-5CXXl A u b
D
6
A

-7000

-9000
0 20'.) 400 BOO 1000 120'.l 1400 1600 1800 2000 22!XJ 2400
TIME (SECONDS)

(b) Second Thermal Plus Reduced Kentledge Loading

FIG. 7.58 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL

REACTIONS IN BEAM THREE UNDER REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING
 304

CHANGE OF RERCTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

~
S!!Wl. l.OCR!lct! EN!
+ EN! 5LPPCRT I-EST TEST!'(), 60
D CDfTRE: 5LPPCRT I-EST
• EN! S1..FA'.RT EAST
Ha of

J '-i I 1-J Ii
• CDfTRE: 5LPPCRT EAST
7
z
.L
West East Technique 1
B
++ .. ~

5
... ++ +++t+
t6z -~f""
a:
I
u
4

3 o\\ ~ ~ - Techninue 2

su?'Y ~~·
z 2 ~(\a
0
...... .,,,,;1;4~
1- 1
u ~
t5
a: ~.
1
·~
2-
~

3
Ce0tre
Sv
~~~.

~~
..
-4

5
'PPort ~~-
-......
~lie
- , ___
..............
uooooo
... ~ ...... 6 ...
Technioue 2
.
uou 0'-
:iooooDr :iD/
6 --
Technique 1
/

7
0 200 400 600 1000 1200 1400 1600 1BOO 2000 2200 2400
TI ME (SECONDS)

(a) First Thermal Plus Reduced Kentledge Loading

CHRNGE OF RERCTIONS IN THE LORD CELLS VS TIME

~L.OCITTICJ'<~
+ EN! 5LPPCRT I-EST TEST r<J, Bl
D CD<TRE 9..PPrnT I-EST
• EN! 5LPPCRT EAST Haaf
6 CDfTRE: St..PPrnT rnsT
I I I I I I 11 __ ---~------~-~

~=-~"- fl . .__;+~t •: i'~i \"-·_+;_. ;.h~+ ~-~ :.:. . . i+·t~.=·~=·=~=:~,f·: :~: -~ . .,=t1- -= ~1
z
.L
1
w
(.!)
. . ".'_ • .. ..
g 3 - ryo'\ , _A"".-.-

z 2 ~ - ~(\a su~......... ~
0
......
t-
u
a:
~~
w
a:

. 7 L - - - L - - - J _ __ _J___ _,____ _J _ __ _J___ _J _ __ _J___ _.___ _.___ ____J.___ __J

400 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

0
TIME CSECONOSl

(b) Second Thermal Plus Reduced Kentledge Loading

FIG. 7.59 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL THERMAL

REACTIONS IN BEAM FOUR UNDER REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING
 28

Heat Heat ;t
26
l ! /
/

A. ~ 6i1 14 / 22
/
,+
,,
24 /
Heat t Heat
/ l l I I I + I

22 / +'
20 ii& & i & l2r ,,...
~,

I
Test Na l~al Condition / /

24 Uncracked
/
18 ~
-
/
20 35
- - ,,"'
- .... - -
Unr.racked II'

36 Cracked
-------
/

;t- - r Test 35 :¥ Test 61

-
E
z
18 r
I / ~ '\
'rest 36
16
--·- .........x
=
.... 16
E
14
Test No.
60
Initial Condition
Semi -cracked ..x. . .
.........;;('
:il
- ~- - -- .:>/.
z
E
61 Cracked Test
.......... ~
..........
=
.0

0 14 I 1.0 Uncracked I
~ 12
.
c
E
0
..1(. -
E
0
....
1_, ..... Af:'

~ 12 "'
al
10
0
10 c
"'
E 8 KEY
KEY 0
:::;:
8 + Uncracked theory
+ Uncracked Theory
• Technique 1
6 " Technique 1
x Technique 2
6 X Technique 2

I.
4

2
2

0 Q-1'-~~..,-~~,.....~~r--~"""'T~~...,..~~~~~-i-~~.,.-~~..-~.....,~~ .....~~~
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 ' 1600 1800 2000 2200 0 200 t.00 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400
Time (Seconds l - - - Time (Seconds l -

(A) Beam Three (B) Beam Four- w

0
(.11
FIG. 7 .60 BEAM MOMENT CHANGES AT CENTRE SECTION OF MIDDLE
SPANS (THERMAL PLUS REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING IN
TEST GROUP D)
 306

[(Et 'TEST NO. 60 2

17 Crock locafiCI Ptottinr Davice
?
22221.<'
-
label Symbo fyp<1
,-
16 A W.. bN I A "
~

:L
:L
15
A
8
8
Web S
Web N
w..b s
2
J
4
A
A
A 2
- 2

~
14 ~

'
0 12
13
0 L
...... 2
• 12
2
'
A 4 4 <
444
I 11- Haaf
2

'ii 'i
4
I-
0
H
::r
10

9
-we4t I
A
\ I
East 4 4: 4,44444
4_ 2
2 4444

_,, 333333
3~

4 "2 3: 333333 ~3J--

:..:: ,l4z~3 3
u 9
er 4
42 t33
7 3
Ct'. 7
A

u 43~
4 II

6 i;i-
4: 2 11
43: 1I11 I
I I 11
5 .. ~2
1 I'
''
.~32 1 I
4
I" ' 11 I l
s ? 2 1 l
3
a" 2 11 I '
_a 1
2 l.
ll 2 l
-"a~ "2 I
Crack Opens
I
If - --
t.iiiii!U H~~~~
11

0 --- -~aaliB I I
0 200 400 600 600 ICXXJ 1200 1400 1600 1600 2CXXJ 2200 240'.
TIME (SECONDS)

(a) First Thermal Loading Test

[(Et TEST NO. 61

17 Crack ~oco/ion P/otfir>j hf!vicq
Lab<1/ Symbol fyp12
16 c W<1bS I B
~
A WabN 2 A 5
:L 15
A Wah S J A
:L :
~
8 W"bN 4 A ts
14 /) KVbN 5 B 3
B WebS 6 A 5
0 13
0 /) Wah S 7 8
......
• 12
I
I I I
I
5
5
-- 7
'

I
M1A f fJ"fl
11- HtZof
6
I- 5
0
H ID>-----Wesf East
- ~

6
6
5
::r 9 -
7.,
5 7 4
:..:: 6 ~
u 8 ~

er 5
7
6 4
Ct'. 7
u 5 3
7
0

4 I I
I
e
6 3 4
5 µ
5
5
-
3
4
6 A
I
I
2
,_
7 6 I 2
4 12
4 I
' 7 31 z
7
3
5
-,_

-
7
t' I
?
z
2 j I 2

- r ·-
~ !3 I, 2
I
II 2 - Crack Opens
- - ~ Je 2
0
0 200
.liE;

400 "" 600 600 lCXXJ 1200

TTMF"
1400 1600
(<=:~TnNOS)
1600 2CXXJ 2200
15
240:

(b} Second Thermal Loading Test

FIG. 7.61 MEASURED CRACK WIDTH DEVELOPMENT DURING THERMAL

PLUS REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING ON BEAM FOUR
 307

TEST NO. 36
zz
ZI W. C.~ Jupport
i- &: C.L >upporf 4

.3. ,_ 1
20 11t--© @--c
i~
E 19 .> ! . ::::t: ... s--
I .. ... -· 4

18
I @--,j Jl
...,. ~
i 9---® A
5
0
~
17

16
I
CrockB Cracl<C !L I
Crock.D 5

Crack Devicct Locations (All f{!Pe A)

• 15 ~
4
I 14
f-
0 13 ~

1-i 4
:3: 12

~ 11 Haaf 15
U
([
O:'.
JO

e
J;:St Id I 'l 'J, asf
4

u 5
e
7 .
~ I_
1

"
~
2
6 ~

1_ 2
5
4 I 2
4 - I 12
3
L
z
z
"
-- - Crack Opens-
A
I "'
0
... -Ii I I! J
0 200 400 600 eoo 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200
TIME (SECONDS)

FIG. 7. 62 .MEASURED CRACK WIDTH DEVELOPMENT DURING THERMAL

PLUS REDUCED KENTLEDGE LOADING ON BEAM THREE

formation of crack C at 2050 seconds causes a reduction in crack width A.

No corresponding slope change is evident in a repeat test for Beam Four
(Fig. 7.62(b)), although similar final crack widths were measured. The
maximum measured crack width in Beam Three was 0.215 mm at crack D (Fig.
7.62) and in Beam Four was 0.178 mm at crack A (Fig. 7.6l(a)).

Crack widths were also monitored in both beams for cracks initiated
near the midspan region under thermal plus force loading as discussed in
Section 7.8. Apparent maximum crack widths lay between 0.005 and 0.012 mm,
which is close to the apparent crack width at section decompression.
Thus cracks were assumed to remain closed.

The experimental crack widths in Beam Three at 2100 seconds and

Beam Four at 2300 seconds, as derived from Figs.7.62 and 7.6l(b) respectively,
are compared with predicted crack widths in Table 7.8. Because the
equations obtained from literature have been used to predict crack widths
for section loading and steel configuration considerably different from
 308

the test conditions from which the equations were derived, they are not
expected to provide good results.

From Table 7.8 it can be seen that predicted crack widths exceed
measured crack widths. This is in agreement with the behaviour found
for the deflections as discussed.in Section 7.10.1. Near the supports,
the forces due to the prestress cable reverse curvature and bearing
reactions induce compressive stresses in the longitudinal direction
(Fig. 7.57(g)) which could inhibit crack growth.

Note that no predictions have been shown in Table 7.8 for Beam
Three using Technique 1, because the cracking moment exceeded the ultimate
moment, and thus no solution for crack width is possible. (See Section
7.5.3(a)).

The crack widths predicted in Table 7.8 are far larger than
measured crack widths, thus showing the formulae inadequate for this
problem. Even though the thermal loading case was significantly more
severe than typically encountered in design (as discussed in Section
7.3.4 and 7.4) the prototype maximum crack widths corresponding to model
measured widths,of 0.975 mm (Beam Three) and 1.155 mm (Beam Four) indicate
the severity of the cracking. Thus a typical design would either provide
a large area of mild steel near the midspan soffit region, and/or design
sections as uncracked using minimum concrete tensile strength.

7.11 ULTIMATE LOADING OF MODEL BEAMS

The two model beams were loaded to failure under force load applied
in 2 kN increments, as discussed in Section 7.3.5 (Load Group E). To

avoid the beam lifting off the end supports, concrete blocks were placed
above the supports on the beam top surface as shown in Fig. 7.63(a).
The initial kentledge loading on the beams is shown in Table 7.2.

The theoretical analysis was computed as described in Section 7.5

using the idealised Technique 1 moment/curvature relationship. (i.e. curve
ABED in Fig. 7.27). However for the pre-cracked concrete curve AHCE was
used. Note that under force loading alone branch BC (Fig. 7.27) is small
as can be seen in Fig. 7.37, and for the latter force load increments the
critical sections were on the branch ED on Fig. 7.27. The beam
segmentation used in the analysis is shown in Fig. 7.38, except that
segments 5, 8 and 10 (Beam Three) and 5, 11 and 13 (Beam Four) were
 309

TABLE 7. 8
CRACK WIDTHS UNDER THERMAL PLUS REDUCED
KENTLEDGE LOADING
(a) Measured Crack Widths (nun)

Beam Three (2100 Seconds) Beam Four (2300 Seconds)

Crack North South Crack North South

Label Side Side Label Side Side

B 0.072 c 0.07 -
c 0.069 0.061 A 0.155 0.05
D 0.195 0.165 B 0.092 0.115
D 0.125 0.165

(b) Predicted Crack Widths

Experimental Technique 1 Technique 2

Method wl w2
* ***
w (mm) w**(nun) -w w (nun)
2
-w
m 1 m m

Beam Three
(2100 seconds)
Proposed 0.195 0.88 4.51
100
Beeby et al 0.195 0.70 3.59
Gergley and
LutzlOl 0.195 0.57 2.92
Bennett and
Chandraseharl0 2 0.195 1.84 9.44

Beam Four
(1700 seconds)
Proposed 0.165 0.31 1.88 0.37 2.24
100
Beeby et al 0.165 0.30 1.82 0.36 2.18
Gergley and
LutzlOl 0.165 0.29 1. 76 0.40 2.42
Bennett and
Chandraseharl02 0.165 1.04 6.30 1.04 6.30

* w
m
= maximum crack width from Table 7.8 (a)
** wl = predicted crack width using Technique 1
*** w2 = predicted crack width using Technique 2
 310

(d) TEST RIG

(a) TEST RIG

(e) CRACKING WEST SUPPORT

(b) CRACKING WEST SUPPORT

(f) CRACKING MIDDLE OF CENTRE SPAN

(c) CRACKING EAST SUPPORT

BEAM THREE BEAM FOUR

FIG. 7.63 ULTIMATE LOADING OF MODEL BEAMS

 312

split into two. The theoretical solution terminated when the maximum
section moment was reached at any section. Crushing at the internal
supports at failure was both predicted and noted during testing. No
crushing occurred away from the supports, and no significant load drop
occurred at crushing. Further force load induced deflection caused a
gradual reduction in the applied force, and there was difficulty in
keeping the two applied forces equal.

A comparison of the theoretical and experimental beam deflections

at the centreline of both middle and end spans is shown in Figs.7.64 and
7.65 for Beams Three and Four respectively. The agreement was excellent
for Beam Three, with the experimentally determined ultimate moment of
the beam being 3% greater than theory. The good agreement with a theory
based on the Bernoulli-Navier hypothesis that plane sections remain plane
after bending suggests that distortion and warping of the beam was small.
There was also good agreement for Beam Four (Fig. 7.65). However
although the experimentally determined ultimate moment of the beam was
15% greater than theory, the stiffness was lower for the first half of
the load cycle. This may have been because the outer zone of the wide
flange lagged in following the centre spine strain profiles.

A comparison of theoretical and experimental support and heam

centreline moments is shown in Fig. 7.66. Agreement is excellent in Beam
Three, and for final load redistribution in Beam Four. However at
intermediate loads in Beam Four there is less experimental load
redistribution than predicted by theory. Note that large moment
redistributions from the midspan to support regions occur due to the
large 'hinge' zones of the midspan regions. The ratio of the. theoretical
support moment including the effects of redistribution to the elastic
solution at ultimate load was 1.34 and 1.23 for Beams Three and/Four
respectively. At ultimate load the theoretical midspan moments were
1.63 kNm (or 6%) and 9.71 kNm (or 24%) less than the theoretical ultimate
mGments for Beams Three and Four respectively.
 313

Maximum deflection
before crushing = 140 mm

0-
30

--"
// ---
Experimental Results~ -
,,..,....-· 0
/
/ :/
" /
Theory
/
/
20
/

/,"
I
/ ""'/
z
~ / /
"O
0 / /
.3 /
" /
10
/
I /
/ /
I
/ /
// /
0
// /
0 20 40 60 80 100
Deflection Imm)

(a) Centre Of Centre S~an

___...
0

30
Experimental
!Average of both spans )
.
Results ~

/
....... ---
-
/
/ /
/' / /
0

I"
20
/ /
0

z
E I / /
~

"O
I" /
/
0
0
...J /," /
G G /
..
/, / /
10
I I /
" /
Ii I
/
//
ov 0
•/ I
2
I
I.
Deflection Imm)
I
6
I
8

(b} Centre Of End SQans

FIG. 7.64 COMPARISONS OF MEASURED AND PREDICTED DEFLECTIONS

OF BEAM THREE UNDER FORCE LOADING
 314

60

50 /
,,0
0"
/
Theory 0

/0 ~ Experimental
L.O ,. 1° Results
,,0 /
/ I
0 /
0
/
I /
/
0 I /
"O /
0 30 /
0 I 0
.9 I
0
I
/
0 /
I
0 I /
I /
I
0
0
I 0/
20 I
0 //
I /
0
I
0 I
I

10 I
0
I
0 7
I/
ti
!/
0
0 20 L.O 60
Deflection (mm l
{a) Centre Of Centre Span

50
-0 - _0

~ /0/0/ .

40 Theory
~ / ' "'
0
"' \ _ Experimental
0
,, ,,, / Results
0 /

,,0"' / / / (Average of both spans)

0
0/ {/
z 30 /
..lo: /0 //

"O
/0 I
0 /0 I
.9 I
0
I
20 I
0

0 I
'/

'I
I;
I;
I
;I
0

0 2 L. 6
Deflection ( mm )

{b) Centre Of End Span

FIG. 7.65 COMPARISONS OF MEASURED AND PREDICTED DEFLECTIONS

OF BEAM FOUR UNDER FORCE LOADING
 40
l"'----Elastic Solution 315
/ l Beam Centreline I

30
Theoretical Ultimate Moment
(Beam Centreline)
Theoretical Solution / .,,A-----Elaslic Solution
(Supports I -- ; ~ (Supports)
Eo ®
z
"" " '/
c
QI
E 20 ~-'----Theoretical Solution
0
::E (Beam Centreline I
e
:J
~
u:
Experimental Moments
• Supports ( 1st Loading I
10 <> Beam Centreline ( 1st Loading I
+ Supports ( 2nd Loading )
Gl Beam Centreline ( 2nd Loading I

o-r--~~~~~~....-~~~~~~....-~~~~~~....-~~---

o 10 20 30
Force (kN)

(A) Beam Three

46

LL Elastic Solulion ~ •
( Beam Centreline I /
42
Theoretical Ultimate Moment (Beam C~~~r:_l~~~!J Jf +'
40
Theoretical Solution ,, -'
38 I Supports I /
36 ¥'
34 /'/
EV'
32 0
- E l a s t i c Solution
I Supports l
30

28 Theoretical
Solution
E t Beam Centreline I
z 26
>.:
o/
24
/
c., 22
E
0
::E 20
18
-e
.,
:J
)( 16 KEV
u:: 14 Exwimentot Moments
'2 Supports (1st Loading)
Beam Centreline I 1st Loading )
10
Supports t 2nd Loading )
8
e Beam Centreline I 2nd Loading I
6
4

2 ' 6 e w u u ~ m ~ n u ~ ~ ~ n K ~ ~ wn " q ~ ~ ~ ~ 9
Foo:e I kN l

(Bl Beam Four

FIG. 7.66 COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND PREDICTED MOMENTS
AT BEAM SUPPORTS AND CENTRE OF MIDDLE SPAN
DURING FORCE LOADING
 316

7.12 CONCLUSIONS

The theory developed in Chapters 6 and 7 provided good agreement

with experimental measurements of thermal response for a typical box-
girder and T-section prestressed concrete bridge for:
(1) Uncracked bridge. (Reactions, defl~ctions, strain profile
and stress-induced steel strains).
(2) Bridge with cracking induced thermally near centre of middle
span. (Reactions, deflections and stress-induced steel strains).
(3) Bridge with cracking induced th~rmally near supports.
(Reactions).

The theory d&d not provide good agreement with experimental

deflections or crack widths for (3). This discrepancy was attributed
to the difficulty of predicting the zone of cracking, and the effects
of concrete tension stiffening between cracks, and further work is
required on this problem.

The experimental moment developed during thermal loading was 46%

and 27% less than the theoretical uncracked thermal moment for Beams
Three and Four respectively for load case (2) above, and 33% and 23%
respectively for load case (3) above. The large reduction in Beam
Three was attributed to the large moment-of-inertia drop on cracking
of the soffit slab.

A typical range of crack width formulae predicted a wide scatter

of crack widths. For load case (2) above, an equation by Bennett and
102 100
Chandrasehar was very conservative, while an equation by Beeby et al
101
and Gergley and Lutz was unconservative. A proposed formula provided
conservative but generally the most reliable predictions. For load
case (3) above, all formulae as used were unduly conservative. The
40
loading on the beams significantly exceeded Mwo design service load
recommendations. However the average equivalent prototype maximum
crack widths of 0.99 mm and 0.58 mm for Beams Three and Four respectively
under load case (2) above, and 0.98 mm and 1.16 mm respectively for load
case (3) above were still excessive. Thus if cracking is to be allowed
in design of these types of beams, more soffit unstressed steel must be
used. However under normal design loading there appears to be little
danger of fatigue failure of the mild steel.

The model beams were force loaded to destruction, and good

agreement between experiment and theory was found for both reactions and
deflections.
 317

CHAPTER 8
TRANSVERSE THERMAL RESPONSE OF BRIDGES

SUMMARY

The effect of cracking on the transverse thermal response of a

multiple box-girder bridge and double T-bridge is examined. The
uncracked thermal stresses in the multiple box-girder bridge as
calculated from a full and approximate manual frame analysis are
compared with results from a finite element solution.

8.1 INTRODUCTION

The longitudinal thermal response of bridges when subjected to

vertical temperature gradients has been discussed in previous chapters.
Significant transverse stresses may also be ·induced by restraint of
transverse hogging and axial movement. The solution for the transverse
and longitudinal stresses is a coupled problem, but an approximate
solution for an uncracked structure can be obtained by decoupling the
effects and at a particular point adding times the stresses in the
V
52
perpendicular direction to the decoupled stresses , where V = Poisson's

Ratio. A literature review of the solution techniques for transverse

thermal stresses and reports of damage attributed to this effect are
presented in Section 1.2.4.

Most prestressed bridges are conventionally reinforced laterally,

and will therefore be subject to cracking under normal service load
conditions. Restrained creep and shrinkage stresses (Section 3.7)
frequently induce longitudinal cracks in the deck slabs of box-girder
and T-beam bridges. This chapter discusses the significance of cracking
to transverse response, by investigating the two prestressed concrete
structures that were used as prototypes for the model beams (Chapter 7).

8.2 TRANSVERSE THERMAL RESPONSE OF THE PORIRUA MULTIPLE BOX-GIRDER

BRIDGE

The transverse thermal response of the Porirua bridge (Fig. 7.4)

when loaded with the temperature profile shown in Section E.3, and for
assumed material properties presented in Table E.l, was initially
analysed in the uncracked state using manual frame-analysis and finite
element methods. Results are compared with the theoretical thermal
response of the cracked structure as calculated from a manual frame-
 318

solution. Advantage was taken of symmetry to analyse only half the

bridge width (Fig. 8.la) and the analysis considered only a unit
longitudinal length of bridge.

8.2.l Full Manual Frame-Solution

The assumptions required for the manual frame-solution of transverse

stresses of uncracked bridge sections are listed in Section 2.5. For
cracked bridge sections a further assumption that cracks do not close
under thermal load was adopted. Note that the critical design transverse
thermal load combination includes live-load. Because both live-load and
shrinkage effects tend to increase crack widths this latter assumption is
realistic.

The full manual frame-solution of uncracked sections is developed

below. The solution requires the stiffness and carry-over factors of
members. For non-uniform members these values can be calculated from the
theory in Appendix A. The manual solutions consider the temperature
variation to be linear through the deck slab and ignore other temperature
rises within the bridge. Thus as the specified temperature gradient has
temperatures at top and bottom of the deck slab of 30°C and 15.2°C
respectively, the temperature distribution can be considered as the sum of
15.2 + 30
a uniform temperature rise of
2
= 22.6°C and a hogging inducing
temperature gradient of 30 - 15.2 = 14.8°C. This is the same approach
. tl 38
a d op t e d by Pries ey •

(a) Sway Modes

For each of the two sway modes (Fig. 8.l(b) and (c)) the fixed end
moments for sways of 6 and 6 can be obtained from the theory
1 2
developed in Appendix A. Thus a simple Hardie-Cross Moment distribution
around the section provides a bending moment diagram for each sway mode
as a function of 6 and 6 only.
1 2
(b) Hogging Curvature
The fixed end moments to restrain hogging curvature in the deck
slab = Ec I l/Jt where I = deck slab moment-of-inertia
l/Jt = unrestrained thermal curvature = 14.8ac /t
t deck slab thickness

A simple Hardie~cross Moment distribution around the section provides

the bending moment diagram due to restraint of hogging curvature.
 319
2172
558 178 178 178

F cp E ~
--- -

/ \\J126 I-'---
,
CJ)

I~
(a) The
Structure
\_ ____
I I c
1740 1829

(b) Sway
Mode
<i One
---...;;;;;;---:::::-- -

(c) Sway
Mode
Two

6fAF

it .-------
(d) Flexural
Web
Deflections

(e) Final
BMD (kNm/m)
Plotted on
tension side

FIG.8.1 ANALYSIS OF TRANSVERSE THERMAL STRESSES IN PORIRUA

STATION OVERBRIDGE
 320

(c) Flexural Web Deflections

The fixed end moments due to the flexural web deflections of 6fAF
and 6fBE (Fig. 8.l(d)) can be found from the theory developed in
Appendix A. Thus a simple Hardie-Cross Moment distribution around the
section provides a bending moment diagram as a function of 6fAF and
6 fBE •
(d) Compatibility Equations
An equation can be written for point F (Fig. 8.l(a)) expressing the
compatibility requirement that the unrestrained horizontal movement of
point F due to the uniform temperature rise of the deck slab must equal the
heiril'zontal stress-induced shortening of the deck slab plus·elongation of
the soffit slab plus horizontal movement of point F relative to point A
(Fig. 8.1 (a)).

22 • 6 ac * LDF = 6 aoE + 6 aEF - 6 acB - 6 aBA + 6 fAF + 6 sAF (8.1)

where L., = length between points i and j

1]
aij =
/::,. stress-induced axial shortening between i and j
6f,. = flexural web deflection between i and j
1]
6 = horizontal shear web deflection between i and j
sij

A similar equation can be written for point E (Fig. 8.l(a))

(8. 2)

Standard expressions for 6 .. and 6 .. are

a1J S1J

6 ,, = P .. L .. /(E A .. ) (8. 3)
a1J 1J 1J c 1J

6 .. 1. 5 v1]
.. L 1]
.. I (A .. G )
1) c
(8. 4)
S1J

where P .. axial force be·tween points i and j

1]
v1]
.. = shear force between points i and j
.......
:a
1]
= average cross-section area between i and j
G = concrete shear modulus.
c

From the bending moment diagrams developed in (a), (b) and (c)
above, expresions for P. . and V.. can be obtained from statics as a
1] 1]
linear· function of four variables (61, 62' 6fAF ' 6fBE) . Thus
 321

substitution of equations 8.3 and 8.4 into 8.1 and 8.2 provides two
equations as linear functions of (6 1 , 6 2 , 6fAF' 6fBE).

Two further equations involving only these four variables can be

generated from the bending moment diagrams by noting that the total
vertical force on sections 1 and 2 (Fig. 8.l(a)) must be zero. Thus there
are four variables and four simultaneous equations and a solution can be
obtained (Fig. 8.l(e)). As expected the solution for
was zero. 6
1
Stress distributions at the midspan sections of mexTibers (Fig. 8.2) as
calculated from the bending moments (Fig. 8.l(e)) and axial member loads
are shown in Fig. 8.3. It can be seen that the tensile stresses at the
bottom of the deck slab are additive to traffic load stresses and
significantly increase the tendency for cracking.

-
~
I'

' ~ I- -<ff.
,_ -4f
''
,_ -~
-
Actual-"" '

re ~
I-
'
Structure ''
'' Jo - -~1r
' y~i
I•
T

FIG. 8.2 FINITE ELEMENT MESH OF PORIRUA STATION OVERBRIDGE

8.2.2 Approximate Manual Frame-Solution

The time involved in obtaining a manual solution is greatly

reduced by neglecting the shear displacements in the webs and the axial
load displacement in the flanges. As these displacements are far
smaller than the final flexural web displacements, neglecting them will
usually only slightly increas,e the effective section stiffness, and thus
provide slightly conservative results. This can be seen in Table 8.1
which compares the theoretical stresses from the two manual frame-
solutions at the locations depicted in Fig. 8.l(a).

8.2.3 Finite Element Solution

To verify the accuracy of the full manual solution a finite element

. using
ana 1ysis . Wi'l son ' s 110 CST finite
. . e 1 ement computer program in
. plane

·strain.mode was performed on the mesh shown in Fig. 8.2. Temperatures

 KEY Top Surface J
-FE Finite Element Soln. .&.......FE

~Theory

___,.;:.' , Bottom Surface ,,

1
- 2·0 -1·0 0-0 1-0
I 2·0
I -2·0 -1-0 (}O 1·0 2·0
SECTION A-A Stresses in E>cternal Box Top Flange SECTION B·B Stresses in Internal Box Top Flange

Top Surfac;:l

Units - MPa
Theory Convention Tension -ve

Bottom Surface
--------~--------------~--~----....._______ -----"'----~-----~--------~--.....-----------

- 1-0 (}0 1-0 - 1-0 I0-0 1-0

SECTION C-C Stresses in External Box Bottom Flange SECTION D-D Stresses in Internal Box Bottom Flange
w
l\J
FIG. 8.3 . TRANSVERSE THERMAL STRESSES IN UNCRACK.ED PORIRUA l\J

STATION OVERBRIDGE
 323

TABLE 8.1 THERMAL STRESSES AT MIDSPAN OF MEMaERS (MPa)

Member Location Full Manual Solution Approximate Manual Solution

FE Top 2.049 2.079

FE Bottom -1.983 -2 .010
ED Top 1.967 1.958
ED Bottom -1.903 -1.895
AB Top -0.754 -0. 718
AB Bottom 0.688 0.647
BC Top -0. 711 -0. 716
BC Bottom 0.648 0.654

at all nodal points were specified as calculated from the temperature

distribution reported in Appendix E. Thus the analysis checked the
accuracy of the simplification of temperature distribution described
in Section 8.2.1. Result~ from the finite element analysis are com~ared

with stresses calculated from the full manual-solution in Fig. 8.3.

Agreement is good.

8.2.4 Effect of Cracking on Transverse Thermal Response

It is expected that cracking will reduce the transverse thermal

continuity moments due to the reduction in member stiffnesses. This
situation is difficult to analyse by finite element techniques but a
solution can readily be obtained by manual frame-analysis methods. To
study the effect of cracking on transverse thermal response the deck
slab was assumed to be cracked across its entire width (Fig. 8.4) but

F Cracks

A B

FIG. 8.4 ASSUMED DECK SLAB CRACK DISTRIBUTION IN PORIRUA

STATION OVERBRIDGE
 324

other members were assumed uncracked. Note that as traffic loads may
move across the full lane width the assumed deck slab cracking
distribution is reasonable.

The transverse deck slab mild steel reinforcement in the Porirua

bridge (Fig. 7.5) is approximately equal to 1% of the flange volume, and
is distributed equally in two layers, at each third point of deck
thickness. Based on the material properties reported in Appendix E
and zero concrete tensile strength the calculated transformed cracked
equivalent moment-of-inertia and area were approximately 10% and 25%
respectively of corresponding uncracked section values. These rounded
percentages were used in the analysis.

The thermal bending moment diagram as calculated from a full

manual-solution based on the above crack distribution is presented in
Fig. 8.5. Deck slab bending moments on the cracked structure at

Moments (kNm)
Plotted on
tension side

FIG. 8.5 TRANSVERSE MOMENTS IN CRACKED PORIRUA STATION OVERBRIDGE

sections one and two (Fig. 8.l(a)) are only 10.7% and 10.1% respectively
of the corresponding moments on the uncracked structure. Corresponding
results in the soffit slab are 93.3% and 98.8%. The maximum bending
moment on the cracked structure is at a different location and is only
37% of the maximum bending moment on the uncracked structure. The
following explanation of the cracked structure thermal response is
provided.

Fixed end moments due to restraint of thermal hogging are reduced

to 10% of the uncracked value and the significance of these moments is
drastically reduced. The deck elongation due to uniform temperature
rise, still develops the same fixed-end moments within the webs, as no
 325

web cracking was assumed. However the assumed stiffness reduction of member
FD (Fig. 8.1) allows joints F and E to rotate more freely, and final
'moments due to the uniform temperature rise are small at these joints.
No stiffness reduction due to cracking was assumed for member AC (Fig.
8.1), and there is thus little reduction in moments in this member due to
the uniform deck slab temperature rise.

8.3 TRANSVERSE THERMAL RESPONSE OF NEWTON GULLY NO. 1 DOUBLE

SPINE T-BRIDGE

Equations will be developed to calculate the thermal response of

a double spine T-bridge shown in Fig. 8.6, where the slab is subjected to

p c R
I ,..
I

I
1. b .1. D .1.
Section A-A

FIG. 8.6 GENERAL DOUBLE SPINE T-BRIDGE

thermal curvature and column capping beams or diaphragms effectively

restrain both slab and spine beam from twisting and lateral expansion
at spacing L• Close to this restraint G or H (Fig. 8.6) beneficial
lateral compressive stresses develop across the slab, but these rapidly
dissipate at distances away from the restraint in accordance with a
St. Venant distribution, and can conservatively be ignored.

At distances away from G or H (Fig. 8.6) the thermal rotations of

the deck slab are resisted by torsional restraint of the spihe beams,
inducing flexural thermal moments in the deck slab. Flexural cracking
of the slab or inclined torsional shear cracks within the spine beam
will reduce the moments. However because it is usual to axially
 326

prestress the spine beams, cracking is unlikely and can conservatively

be ignored.

8.3.l Transverse Thermal Analysis of·oouble Spine T~Bridge

If the torsional stiffness of the slab is neglected, the slab can

be considered as a series of beams of unit width. If it is initially
assumed that the slab intersects the spine at the centre of twist, the
following equilibrium equation for a segment of the spine can. be written:

dT
x
M (8. 5)
dx x

where T
x
= torsion in spine beam at x
M ~ transverse moment per unit width of slab.
x
111
However from torsion theory

T K d<f> (8. 6)
x t dx

where Kt = torsional rigidity of spine beam

<I> = angle of twist.

Thus from equations 8.5 and 8.6

M
x
= 0 (8. 7)

From beam theory, and using the nomenclature of Fig. 8.6

M = .... 5 (8t - </>) (8.8)

x pq

S = stiffness of symmetrical slab between P and Q (Fig. 8.6), with

pq
Q restrained against rotation but not against vertical displacement
= 2E I/D
c
for a slab of uniform thickness, and moment-of-inertia
per unit width= I.
et = unrestrained thermal rotation at spine/slab junction.

From equations 8.7 and 8.8

M 0 (8. 9)
x
 327

The general solution of equation 8.9 is

Ae C/,X -ax
M = + Be (8 .10)
x

where

A, B = . constants.

Using the boundary conditions that M = M at x = 0 and x = L

x ·o

(1 - e - aL) (eaL - 1)
A= M . "'L -/"JL B = M
·o I ·o (eaL e -aL)
(e"' - e "' )

Note that M
0
= Ec I 1jJ
t
for a slab of uniform thickness
where unrestrained slab thermal curvature.
The maximum torque Mt in the spine beams occurs at the diaphragms, and
can be found from integrating equation 8.10

1
= - (B - A) (8 .11)
a
If the slab intersects the spine beam above the centre of twist,
the slab reaction increases the effective torsional restraint on the slab.
112 . h th e maximum
. . . th e spine
.
Sa 1 vad ori. provi. d es tab les. f rom wh ic torsion in
beam and minimum slab moment can be found for this situation. For the
Newton Gully No. 1 bridge, using an average slab thickness, Salvadori's
tables show equation 8.11 bo be conservative by 19% and equation 8.10
to be unconservative by 9% at midspan.

8.3.2 Effect of Cracking on Transverse Thermal Response

The Newton Gully Bridge No. 1 deck slab tapers from 305 mm at the
junction of the spine beam to 203 mm at the centre of the slab. The
transverse reinforcing consisted of 16 mm diameter bars at 305 mm centres
at 45 mm from both top and bottom surface of the slab. The distribution
of the slab thermal moment M between G and H (Fig. 8.6) when the slab
x
is subject to the same temperature distribution used in Section 8.2.1
is shown in Fig. 8.7 for the cases of uncracked and cracked slab and
tapered and average uniform thickness, as calculated from equation 8.10.
Note that for the cracked case the slab was assumed cracked across the
entire width, with crack penetration calculated as described in Section
8.2.4. The specified linearised temperature profile (hence unrestrained
thermal curvature) changes with deck slab thickness. Thus values for
 328

lso . Torsional Restraint'i

-z1E 500
f
~ 40
~ L -
.::L.
400 '
-c ·1
-
\
X" ~
c \
0 \

~ 30
' , --. ............ ~ - (/)
L..
\

'\
~ 300
0
~

20 200

10
--~
----- - ------ --- -:-.::::.:.:_:- ~ 100
- - -.- - - - - - - - - - - - -
0 0
0 L/8 L/4 3L/s 0 L/a L/4 3L/a L/i
x ......L/2 x
(a) Deck Slab Thermal Moments (b) SQine Beam Thermal Torsion

KEY
Gurve T1 T2 c T 2/Cracking
1 254 254 0
2 305 203 0
3 254 254 0/2 ----+----~ C/2
4 305 203 0/2
-------0-------
5 254 254 D
6 305 203 D

FIG. 8.7 TRANSVERSE THERMAL MOMENTS IN DECK SLAB BETWEEN

PIER N AND M IN NEWTON GULLY NO. 1 T-BRIDGE

the tapered beam stiffness S and full thermal restraining moments M

w 0
were calculated using Moment-Area principles as described in Section A.3
and equation 4.20 respectively.

From Fig. 8 •. 7 it can be seen that cracking reduces the thermal

restraining moment in the slab by approximately 91% at the ends and 87%
at midspan, and maximum spine beam torsion by approximately 89%. The
ratio of the smallest to the largest restraining moment in a particula~

slab decreases as slab thickness increases. (If the stiffness of the

uncracked deck slab of mean thickness is doubled, the ratio changes from
0.680 to 0.497).
 329

Al though the calculated uncracked restraini.ng slab thermal moments

were 8% larger when the analysis assumed a uniform thickness rather than
tapered slab, the maximum tensile stresses at the cJntre narrow section
of the tapered slab (6.17 MPa) were 44% larger than that calculated in the
slab of uniform thickness, (4.27 MPa). In interpreting these stresses
it should be noted that the assumed linearised temperature distribution
excludes the induced beneficial compressive primary stress at the deck
slab bottom surface, and has a maximum temperature higher than is expected
14
in a deck slab with usual thicknesses of blacktop • The maximum soffit
tensile stress computed for fully flexurally restrained slabs with 50 mm
blacktop under 'worst day' loading in Appendix D was 2.3 MPa, which is
only 54% of the stress derived for a deck slab of uniform thickness above.

To examine the sensitivity of the theoretical moments to the zone

of cracking, an analysis was performed where only the centre half of the
deck slab was assumed cracked (Fig. 8.7). It can be seen that the
maximum slab moments on the partially cracked deck slab are 67% higher
than on the fully cracked deck slab, but only 15% of the moments of the
uncracked deck slabs. Thus the large reduction in thermal moments in
the deck slabs due to cracking are not sensitive to the zone of cracking.

8.3 CONCLUSIONS

Although a finite element analysis with a fine mesh represents

actual structural behaviour (especially joint and shear stiffnesses)
better than a manual-frame solution, the latter is sufficiently accurate
for design purposes. If the shear displacements in the webs, and the
axial load displacements in the flanges are neglected, the manual-frame
solution is greatly simplified, and for the box-girder section analysed
has little effect on calculated thermal stresses. For a section of
thicker webs than the section analysed (Porirua Bridge) this conclusion
may not apply. Note, however, that the side webs of the Porirua Bridge
are relatively thick.

Cracking of the top flange of box-girder bridges has significant

effect in reducing thermal moments, with the greatest reduction being in
or close to the cracked zones. Deck slab cracking reduces the
significance of moments induced by a temperature differential across the
deck slab, but has little effect on total moments in the soffit slab
which are mainly induced by the uniform deck slab temperature increase.
 330

Cracki.ng of the deck slab in doQble-spine T-bridges s.ignificantly

reduces thermal continuity moments. When uncracked, a tapered deck
slab has lower thermal moments but higher thermal stresses than a deck
slab of mean thickness.
 331

CHAPTER 9
SIGNIFICANCE OF THERMAL LOADING AT HIGH FORCE
LOAD LEVELS

SUMMARY

The influence of the force load level upon the theoretical response
of concrete structures to additional thermal load is studied. In
particular, the significance of thermal load on structures already force
loaded close to their ultimate capacity is examined.

9.1 THERMAL RESPONSE OF FULLY FLEXURALLY RESTRAINED SECTIONS

AT DIFFERENT FORCE LOAD LEVELS

Consider a simply supported beam with external moments M applied

e
as shown in Fig. 9.l(a). The ends are subsequently clamped into

(a) Moments Applied

~
(b) Rotation Fixed
J.jMe Me

Heat Heat

~\ ~
\'r-\
Me+ Mt ' ~
Me+Mt
(c) Heat Applied

FIG. 9.1 BEAM SUBJECTED TO FORCE THEN THERMAL LOAD

position, (Fig. 9.l(b)), and the beam is then subjected to thermal load
(Fig. 9.l(c)). It is of interest to study the variation of the thermal
restraining moment Mt (Fig. 9.l(c)) with Me A similar relationsh,ip
approximately occurs ih large uniform force moment zones of thermally
loaded bridges.
 332

Equations were presented in Section 6. 2. l for deri vi.ng relationships

between moment, curvature and crack height f<Dr.concrete sections subjected
to an imposed temperature distribution. The procedure adopted for
determining values of Mt for corresponding values of M was:
e
(l) Select values of final section curvature ~ • For each value
of ~ solve for total section moment with (M ) and without an
0
imposed temperature profile as shown in Section 6.2.l.
(2) Calculate Mt from

M - M
o e

Solutions for Mt were obtained for correspondi.ng positive values

of M at the centre section of the long span of the experimental model
e
beams Two and Four. Note that Beam Two and Four modelled a typical
prototype conventionally reinforced and prestressed concrete bridge
respectively, and details of the beams are presented in Sections 5.2
and 7.2 respectively. The following values were used in the analysis.
Concrete and steel coefficient of thermal expansion were assumed equal to
-5
10 /°C, concrete flexural tensile strength as 4.26 MPa and steel
properties taken from measured values reported in Appendix B. The
temperature profile used is described in Appendix E and the concrete
stress-strain relationship in Appendix G.

A graph showing the relationship between Mt , Mc and crack

penetration ~ for the two beams is presented in Fig. 9.2. From
Fig. 9.2(a) for the reinforced concrete Beam Two, it can be seen that
apart from sharp changes in thermal moment when the section cracks or
the steel yields, the thermal moment alters little. Thus it is
reasonable to use the method of superposition for a cracked section up
to steel yielding. Note that after steel yielding the thermal moment
rapidly dissipates. Because crack penetration is more dependent on load
level in a prestressed concrete section, and the prestress steel stress-
strain properties differ from the mild steel characteristics, variations of
Mt with Me for the prestressed concrete section (Fig. 9.2(b)) are
significantly different from the reinforced concrete section (Fig. 9.2(a)).
After cracking, reduces continuously for all increases in
M , and
e
thus the method of superposition cannot be used if final crack penetration
is not known.

A graph of the variation of crack penetration with M for loading

e
from M with and without flexurally restrained and unrestrained thermal
e
load is shown in Fig. 9.3 for Beam Two. It can be seen that thermal
 333
·6/.
-<. .. :: 10 ' 10 / C
"" , ::
f.,:: 35 · 283 (1000 E - (500 E ) 2 )
f~:: 350 MPa
200
10
9
1st cracking 160 E
8 g
c
7 .Q

-cQJ
E
6
120 0L..
-ClJ
cQ)
0 5 0..
::E
80 ~
0 4 Thermal Moment steel yields c
L..
E <...)

~
3
40
2

External Moment I kNm l

{a) ·Conventionally Reinforced Section {Beam Two)

15
14
.- 200
Crack Penetration~,,,..,,,,-

-
13 ,,,,-

,,,,,.,,.,..- - ---
- - - Thermal Moment ./ 180
12
160
11
E / E
z
~ 10 / 140 .sc
I
....c 9 I 0
a'-
Cli
E
I 120
a;
8 4

~===-u~::~~~~t
0 c
OJ
::L / 0..
7 100
0 I .;,(.
u
E
L..
QJ
6 I Ultimate Section Moment Above 80 uc
.t:.
I- 5 I Balanced Moment = 28 · 5 kNm
I 60
4 I
3 I
40
I
2 I
20
I
oL-.~~~-L-t---~~~--+~~~~~-1-~~~~-4-~__::::::::::==.......1 0
0 s 10 15 20 25
External Moment Above Balanced Moment I kNm l

(b) Prestressed Section (Beam Four)

FIG. 9.2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EXTERNAL MOMENT AND MOMENT

TO FULLY FLEXURALLV RESTRAIN THERMAL CURVATURE
 334

KEY
-6/• 1. External Moment alone. No thermal load.
oe , = <>< s = 10 *
10 / C 2. External Moment + unrestrained thermal load.
f.,: 35·283 (1000E-(500E) 2 ) 3. External Moment + fully restrained thermal load.

~ 200
E
..5
c
0
...... 160

it
a..1120 Tension steel yields at
gj.... a section moment 26·8 kNm .
u
80
3 2
40

0
0 2 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
External Moment ( kNm)

FIG. 9.3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CRACK PENETRATION AND

EXTERNAL MOMENT FOR BEAM '!WO WITH~AND WITHOUT
THERMAL LOAD

loading increases crack penetration. Relative to the section without

thermal loading, unrestrained thermal loading increases the cracking
moment by 44% but full flexural restraint of thermal curvature results
in a decrease to 22% of the cracking moment.

9.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF THERMAL LOADING ON ULTIMATE BEHAVIOUR

9.2.1 Statically Determinate Structures

In Appendix D a study is made of the thermal response of a wide

variety of uncracked sections with 50 mm blacktop under thermal load,
consisting of two days of •worst day' ambient and insolation loading for
New Zealand conditions. It was found that for the sections studied
a maximum dimensionless curvature ~td of about 0.00028 could be
expected, and that most section shapes had values of ~td > 0.0002 for
·d < 2 m.
where $t = unrestrained thermal curvature
d = section depth.

In a statically determinate structure thermal loading will not

alter section moments but merely change section curvatures. Typical
113 51
moment-curvature (M/~) relationships presented by Kent and Blakeley
show that even relatively heavily reinforced concrete sections can sustain
dimensionless curvatures of about 0.008 before crushing. Note that this
is over 28 times the maximum thermal curvature predicted in Appendix D
for uncracked sections. In Sectiorn5.9.l and 7.5.3(d) it was shown that
~t was increased due to cracking by a maximum of 15% and 47% for a
typical conventionally reinforced and prestressed T-section respectively.
Thus thermal loading of a statically determinate concrete structure force
loaded close to its ultimate capacity will be unlikely to cause section
crushing curvature to be exceeded. It is expected that crack widths
will not increase under this unrestrained loading for reasons discussed in
Section 4.3.4.

9.2.2 Statically Indeterminate Structures

When a conventionally reinforced or prestressed section is loaded

close to ultimate load, large changes in curvature induce small changes in
section moment. Such behaviour may conveniently be described as a
constant moment hinge. Thermal rotations may accumulate at the hinge,
and may cause the structure to fail at a lower ultimate force load than
would occur without thermal loading, as a result of reduction in
redistribution capacity. This can be illustrated by studying the three-
span reinforced concrete structure shown in Fig. 9.4(b). For simplicity
the structure is assumed to have the same reinforcement at every section,
and thus one M/~
diagram (Fig. 9.4(a)) applies for the entire beam, and
. 113
is based on experimental and theoretical curves presented by Kent and
51
Blakeley for steel percentages of 2.5% (bottom steel) and 3.75% (top
steel). Note that for a particular section, the curvature at crushing
decreases with increasing steel percentage.

The structural bending moment distribution under a symmetrical

force load F (Fig. 9.4(b)) is shown in Fig. 9.4(c). The resulting to~al

bending moments at points A,B and C (Fig. 9.4(b)) are located on the M/~

curve of Fig. 9.4(a). Note that the structure has not reached its
ultimate force load capacity and further small increases in F cause little
 336

Concrete rushes

(A)
IDEALIZED MOMENT
CURVATURE
RELATIONSHIP

-0•012 0-004 0<108 0-012 0-01& 0-02 0-028

Dimensionless Curvature

KEY:
No thermal load
With thermal load

' ' ..... ...

(B)

A I
A STRUCTURE

.,
I

1- a •1 •
2b
•I a
I IC l

~I~ FORCE
BENDING MOMENT

~
DIAGRAM
I I (DI
I CHANGE IN BMD

1...--C I (E)

=-;~I--=
CHANGE IN
DEFLECTED SHAPE

Idealised
( F)
CHANGE IN
CURVATURE: t:. M
Theoretical SMALL POSITIVE

~.___[- - -
___../\ I
/\_ ___ J
(G)
CHANGE IN
CURVATURE:
t:.M NEGATIVE

FIG. 9.4 THERMAL LOADING ON A BRIDGE AT HIGH FORCE LOADS

 337

moment change at A (but large curvature changes) and significant moment

changes at c (but little curvature changes).
Now consider a thermal load to be applied to the structure causing
an unrestrained thermal curvature l/Jt at every section. Although M/l/J
will vary with crack depth, it was shown in Section 5.9.l that this
variation was small, and for the purposes of this argument constant
thermal curvatures can be assumed. The M/l/J relationship of the beam
including effects of thermal load (Fig. 9.4(a)) has exaggerated the
magnitude of the thermal curvature for clarity. The thermal load will
cause a small change in moment on the structure as indicated in Fig. 9.4(d),
which is much smaller than at service loads due to reduced structural
stiffness. Thus points A,B and C move to points A', B' and C'
respectively in Fig. 9.4(a), and the structure will experience changes in
curvature shown in Fig. 9.4(f). These can be approximated by a plastic
hinge of length L over which curvature is constant, with the remainder
p
of the bridge subjected to lesser constant curvature l/Jt as shown.

The change in deflected shape of the structure during thermal

loading is shown in Fig. 9.4 (e). The deflection of points C and D from
the tangent at A must be equal. Thus from Moment-Area principles:

b2
l/Jt 2
L
-12.
L
__£)
l/Jp 2 (b - 4 = l/Jt (r
a+b
2
-12.
- l/JP L2
L
(a + b - -12..)
4

Simplifying = (9 .1)

Note that the effect has been to concentrate the thermal rotation
in the plastic hinge region, magnifying the free thermal curvature by the
ratio (a + 2b)/L • It is instructive to consider a specific example
p
to estimate the magnitudes of l/J , and the Curlettes Road-Rail Overbridge
p
(Fig. 5.3) was selected. The following values were used:

a + 2b = 34d (Fig. 5.3)

= 0.000236 (Section D.5, based on theoretical
'worst day' analysis with 50 mm blacktop)
L
p
= d (Assumed) .

Equation 9.1 thus provides l/J d

p
= 0.008, which is greater than
half the ultimate section curvature based on the crushing strain. This
could conceivably affect the load carrying capacity if reliance is made
on moment redistribution to develop the required strength.
 338

It is interesting to consider the behaviour if the thermal load

is applied when the structure is already on the verge of crushing at
midspan. In this case further curvature will result in a decrease in
positive moment at A, as the section response follows the dashed portion
of the M/~ curve. Thus if the moment at A was initially at point x
(Fig. 9.4(a)), then l!.M is of the opposite sign to the previous case,
and the resulting curvatures under thermal load are shown in Fig. 9.4(g).
The moments at the supports will increase in magnitude, a reduction in
effective plastic.hinge length may be expected, and the computed value
of in equation 9.1 will be greatly increased.

9.3 CONCLUSIONS

The magnitude of the moment Mt to flexurally fully restrain

thermal curvature of a conventionally reinforced concrete section is
approximately constant for a given temperature profile after crack
initiation and up to first steel yield. Thus the method of superposition
may be used in this range. However for a prestressed concrete section
Mt is a function of the level of force load on the section.

At high force loads additional thermal load has little significance

on a statically determinate concrete structure, but the thermal
curvatures may accumulate in short zones in statically indeterminate
structures, causing large rotations and increases in crack width. This
may cause the structure to fail at a lower ultimate force load than would
occur without thermal loading as a result of reduction of redistribution
capacity. This additional thermal loading imposes a ductility rather
than strength demand on the structure.
 339

CHAPTER 10
CONCLUSIONS

10.1 PREDICTION OF TEMPERATURES AND STRESSES .IN UNCRACKEJD SECTIONS

The development of a computer pr.ogram THERMAL for solution of

temperature distributions under one-dimensional heat-flow conditions
(including heat-of-hydration effects) and stresses (including the effects
of creep and shrinkage) in uncracked reinforced sections was described.
The program was verified by comparing predictions using THERMAL with
measured and reported experimental and theoretical results. It was
found that a linear heat-flow model was adequate for temperature
predictions in complex bridge sections under diurnal ambient loading,
and little creep-induced stress relief can be expected. THERMAL success-
fully simulated temperatures in mass-concrete structures due to heat-of-
hydration effects for cases where heat-flow was essentially linear, and
predicted significant creep-induced stress relief.

10.2 INFLUENCE OF CRACKING ON THERMAL RESPONSE OF REINFORCED

CONCRETE BRIDGES

A theory was presented for prediction of thermal response of

cracked reinforced bridges, and computer programs described for solution
of this theory. One continuous and one simply supported reinforced
concrete model beam were subjected to top surface heat~flux from infra-
red lamps, in a variety of cracked states.

Good agreement was found between experimental and theoretical

thermal deflections for the simply supported beam in the uncracked and
negative moment induced cracked states. Experimental thermal deflections
were slightly smaller than predicted by theory for the case of the beam
precracked by positive moments. Calculations indicated that this
resulted from the influence of shrinkage cracks in the deck slab.

Good agreement was found between experimental and theoretical

thermal continuity reactions for the continuous cracked model beam, with
the magnitude of the reactions being approximately 50% of corresponding
theoretical values for the uncracked beam. Experimental and theoretical
thermal stress-induced steel strains were in general not in good
~greement for both model beams. This was attributed to the inter-crack
 340

bond stresses and the problem associated with strain-gauge temperature

compensations.

A theoretical analysis indicated that thermal continuity forces are

senf:!itive to the assumed zone of cracking in reinforced concrete structures,
but (apart from shallow shrinkage cracks) are not sensitive to depth of
crack penetration.

Transverse thermal stresses in a typical multi-box section were

computed using both a frame analysis and finite element solution. Good
agreement was found between the two techniques, and it was shown that for
this particular· section little loss of accuracy occurred in the frame
solution technique if shear and member axial deformations were ignored.
Cracking of the deck slab reduced the maximum transverse section moment by
63%. The deck slab moments were reduced by approximately 89% but the
soffit slab moments were only reduced by approximately 7%,

Predicted transverse thermal stresses in a double-spine uncracked

T-bridge were high. However analysis showed that cracking reduced
thermal moments by approximately 90%.

10.3 INFLUENCE OF CRACKING ON THERMAL RESPONSE OF PARTIALLY

PRESTRESSED BRIDGES

A more complex theory than proposed for reinforced concrete bridges

was presented for longitudinal thermal analysis of partially-prestressed
bridges. Two model prestressed concrete bridges (one T-section and one
box-section) were thermally loaded. Agreement between theory and
experiment was good for:
(1) Uncracked bridge. (Reactions, deflections, surface strain
profile and stress-induced steel strains) .
(2) Bridge with cracking thermally induced near the centre of the
middle span. (Reactions, deflections and stress-induced steel strains).
(3) Bridge with cracking thermally induced near the supports.
(Reactions).

The theory did not provide good agreement with experimental

deflections or crack widths for (3) • This discrepancy was attributed to
the difficulty of predicting the zone of cracking, and the effects of
concrete tension between cracks.
 341

The experimental moment developed during thermal loading was 46%

and 27% less than the theoretical uncracked thermal moment for the box-
girder and T-section respectively for load case (2) above, and 33% and
23% respectively for load case (3) above, The large reduction in the
box-girder was attributed to the large moment-of-inertia drop on cracking
of the soffit-slab.

Established crack width formulae predicted a wide scatter of

predicted crack widths. A proposed formulae, derived from first principles,
gave the best predictions for load case (2) above. All formulae were unduly
conservative for load case (3). Measured crack widths were large and
more unstressed steel in the soffit zone would be required if cracking
under design service loading is allowed.

Good agreement was found between theory and experiment when the two
beams were force loaded to failure.

10.4 INFLUENCE OF THERMAL LOADING ON ULTIMATE CAPACITY

The moment Mt to fully flexurally restrain thermal curvature of a

conventionally reinforced section is approximately constant for a given
temperature profile at load ~evels between that required to initiate
cracking, and that required to first induce steel yield. Thus the method
of superposition may be used in this range with little loss of accuracy.
However for a prestressed concrete section Mt is a function of the level
of force load on the section.

Near ultimate force loading, the effect of additional thermal loading

in a statically determinate conventionally reinforced structure is
insignificant. Thermal curvatures may accumulate in short zones in
statically indeterminate structures, causing large rotations and increases
in crack widths. This may cause the structure to fail at a lower ultimate
force load than would occur without thermal loading as a result of reduction
in redistribution capacity. The additional thermal loading imposes a
ductility rather than strength demand on the structure.

10.5 SUGGESTED FUTURE RESEARCH

From this study it has become clear that there are several important
areas of thermal loading on concrete structures which require further
investigation.
 342

10.5.1 Experimental R~search

(1) A theoretical study has been made of the variation of

unrestrained thermal curvatures of reinforcedconcrete sections with
effective crack strain. This requires experimental verification.
During the same experiments it would be possible to study the variation
of stress-induced strain for the full section depth. Vibrating wire
strain gauges are recommended for this purpose.

(2) During thermal testing of the continuous reinforced concrete

model beam it appeared that relatively wide shrinkage <::racks prevented
the deck cracks from closing under thermal load. Otherwise s.ignificant
increases in thermal continuity forces were predicted. The theory
predicting this increase could be verified by sealing·the beam to prevent
shrinkage.

(3) Theoretical considerations showed that thermal loading was of

significance near ultimate loading of continuous bridges. This theory
requires experimental verification.

10.5.2 Theoretical Research

(1) Because a combination of high live-load and thermal loading

will be rare, and probably occur in dry conditions, it is unlikely that
this load combination would allow sufficient moisture ingress into cracks
during th·e loading to cause serious subsequent corrosion. As long as
steel yielding did not occur during this load combination, the surface
crack widths will not be sufficiently affected by the passing load.
The longitudinal reinforcing steel stress levels due to thermal loading
are not high (typically about 25 MPa for reinforced concrete) and thus
as the total load combination is rare, it is unlikely to contribute
significantly to steel fatigue. These considerations lead to two further
research topics:
(a) The theory presented for reinforced concrete structures in
Chapter 4 could be applied to a selection of bridges to study the
reinforcing steel stress range and concrete crack widths due to thermal
loading. The significance of thermal loading at service loads on these
structures could then be assessed.
(b) The theory presented in Chapter 6 could be applied to a
selection of partially prestressed bridges to study the amount of
unstre.ssed steel required to contain crack widths to an acceptable level
for a design philosophy which allows cracks to open under thermal load.
 343

(2) Development of a computer program to calculate the thermal

response of generalised multispan prestressed concrete bridges. This
would be based on the theory developed in Chapter 6, and would probably
use the Newton-Raphson approach.

(3) Study of loads on falsework due to heat-of-hydration and/or

solar radiation induced temperature profiles and creep and shrinkage
effects in bridge superstructures during construction. Pr.ogram THERMAL
might be adapted to this end. Experimental verification would be
required.

(4) Further theoretical and experimental investigation into thermal

cracking near interior supports of multispan bridges. The study would
concentrate on the prediction of ·Crack widths and the influence of zone
of cracking.
 344

REFERENCES

l. NEVILLE, A.M. Hardened concrete: physical and mechanical aspects.

Iowa, Iowa State University Press, 1971. (A.C.I. Monograph no. 6)
2. NEVILLE, A.M. Properties of concrete. 2d. (Metric) ed. Bath,
Pitman Press, 1973.

3. BALDWIN, R. and NdR'rH, M.A. A stress-strain relationship for

concrete at high temperatures. Magazine of concrete research,
v.25, no.82, March 1970:208-212.

4. DAVIS, H.S, Thermal considerations in the design of concrete

shields. A.S.C.E. Structural Division. Journal, ST-5, Paper
1755, Sept. 1958:1-25.

5. SULLIV·AN, P.J. and MELLOR, P.P. The influence of temperature on

the physical properties of concrete and mortar in the range 20°C
to 4oo<>c. In Symposium on effect of temperature and concrete,
Memphis Ten;:", 1968. Detroit, A.C .I., 1968. p.103-135. (A. C.I.
Special Publication SP-25) .

6. LANIGAN, A.G. The temperature response of concrete box-girder

bridges. Thesis, Ph.:U., University of Auckland, 1973.

7. BER.VJANGgR, c. The modulus of concrete and the coefficient of·

expansion of concrete and reinforced concrete at below normal
temperatures. In Symposium on effect of temperature and concrete,
Memphis Tenn., 1968. Detroit, A.C.I., 1968. p.l'.)l-233. (A.C.I.
Spe~ial Publication SP-?5)

3. MI111 l!HELL, L.J. Thermal expansion tests on e,ggregates, neat

cements c;,nd concretes. American Society for 'resting Materia,ls.
Proceedings, v.53, 1953:963-977.

9. BERwANGI!rn, C. and FARUl.i,UB SARKAR, A. l<.:ffect of temperature and

age on thermal expansion and modulus of elasticity of concrete.
In Symposium on temperature extremes, Ottawa, 1973. Behaviour
of concrete under temperature extremes. Detroit, A.C.I., 1973.
p.1-22. (A.C .I. Special Publica,tion SP-39)

10. Nli:VILLE, A.M. Greep of c0ncrete: plain, reinforced, and pre-

stressed. Amsterdam, North-Holland Pub. Co., 1970.

11. JOHANSEN, R. and BES'r, C.H. Creep of concrete with ::md without
ice in the system. Materiaux et constructions; essais et recherches.
Materials and structures... no. 16, Sept. 1962 :47-57. (1',ormerly
H.I.L.E.M. Bulletin)

12. ARTHANARI, S. and YU, C.W. Creep of concrete under uniaxial and
biaxial stresses at elevated temperatures. Magc.zine of concrete
:pesearch, v.19, no.60, Sept. 1967:149-156.

13. l!.:NGLJIND, G.L. and HOSS, A.D. Reinforced concrete under thermal
gradients. Magazine of concrete research, v.14, no.40, March
1962:5-12.
 345

14. PH.L~s·rLl!:Y, M•. J .N. Linear heat-flow analysis of concrete bridge

decks. Christchurch, University of Canterbury, 1976. 24,Al5p.
(University of Canterbury, Civil ~ngineering Dept., Civil
Engineering report 76-3)

1). BAdUl~rl, h:.:·3. C;:;lculation or maximum pavement te111perature::: J'rom

vieather reports. Highway Hesearch Board, v~asl11ngton. Bulletin
r10.lr):J, 1::))'7:1-?>.

16. :6UK, ,i. IJ.'hermal behav.iour of composite bridges - insulated and

uninsuh:ted. Highway research record, no. 76, 1965 :231-253.

17. KR.IH'l1H, J:i'. Principles of heat transfer •. 2d ed. London,

International 'l'extbook Co, 1968.

13. i1ll\lJ.i;1i::>mr, M.
'Phe calcul!:,;tion of tte distribution of' tempera.ture
in ~ridges. Gt. Britain. rransport and. iioad Research Laboratory,
1

Crowthorne. T.R..R.L. Report LR 561, 1973.

19. HlfN'r, B. and COOlili, 1~, 'i'herrnal c::tlculations for bridge design.
A.S.c.1_:.:., Structural LJivision. ,Journd, no.8'1'-~, Sept. 1)75:1763-
1781.
20. P.n.t.::~)'rLI·iY, I'll •.J. N. Structural 1nodel of a pre stressed C•)1:crete
llo.x:-e;irder bridge, Ph8.se 2: thermal loadini;. In ~J.Z. :11in.istry
of .Jorks. Central Laboratories. Report 440, Oct. 1972, v.l,
1fodel desoriJ.>tion <:nd temperature results, <·.nd v.2, ::~tref'ser:; c::nd
deflections ··- G\Lnpc.rirrnn between theory and expuriment,
21. ltMill3HAI, P. '.1.1hermc:d effects in concrete box-girder bridge~:.
'l1l1esis, l'h.D., Universit;y of i1uekland, 1;;)'{6.

22. !'d.l8S'l'LJ~Y,
t•i.J.N. Wld i1001J, J.ll. Comparisoi'1 bet~wen theor;y cind.
in-situ tests for a complex box-girder bridge. In lLl.L.l!.:.,,,
international symposium on testint.; in-situ of concrete structures.
Budapest, Sept. l977:14CJ-1S3·

23. ,WUD, J .ri. and AJJAMS, ,J ,t{, gro,dients in a cylindrical

'l1 e~npero,ture
concrete reservoir. In Au.strale,sian conference on the mechanics
of structures ccnd materie,lfl, 6th, Univernity of Go,nterbury, 1977.
v .1) pll5-122.

24. L1~UNHAR1Yl', ii'. and Llf'l:'0'11H,

.1. Ler:;:30ns from dar:iuge to prestref:!sed
con9rete bridges. rlreton-und Stahl betonbau, no .10, Oct. 1 1) 7U:
231-244· (11'01gcrunger aus :)chaden an Spannbetonbrucl·rnh.)

2:1. RA.uOLLI, fll, and CHllil!]N, H. 'I'hermal stress analyi:::is o±' concrete
bridge superstructuref>. '1'ransportation ilesearch BoD-ru, 1·l<w11ington.
Paper presented at 54th annual meetinc;, Jan. l'.;17).

26. CAJ'PS, M.. ~.li. 'l1he thurmal behaviour of the Gea.chley Viaduct/
vJye Bridge. Gt. i3ritain. '1'ransport and lioad Research Laboratory,
Crowthorne. 'i1 • .1:t.d.• L. Heport LH 2)4, 196<).

27. JJlCKil'J~)QN,
l!.!.J. 1
l1e111perature conditions in ·bituminous concrete
surfacings at <.t site near t11e lbourne during a period of three
years. irnstr::tliun road research, v.3, no.'.;l, fl'larch 1)0):35-41.
 346

28. DICKINSON, E.J. Temperature conditions in bituminous concrete

surfacings at a site near Sydney during a period of one year.
Australian road research, v.3, no.9, March 1969:42-48.

29 ~ PRH!STLEY, M.J .N. and MILES, J .W. Prototype investigation of a

complex box-girder bridge. Iri Australian Road Research Board.
Conference, 7th, Adelaide, 1974. Proceedings. Paper A 52, p.1-11.
30. WOOD, J.H. Private communication. N.Z., M4W.D. Central
Laboratories, 1978.

31. BLAIKIE, E.L. Partial prestressing. Thesis, M.E., Dept. of

Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, 1972.

32. MA.HER, D.R.H. The effects of differential temperatures on

continuous prestressed bridges. Australia, ~nstitution of
Engineers. Civil engineering transactions, .v.CEI2, no.l, Paper
233, April 1970:29-32.

33. LhlE, D.J. Western Avenue extension - the design of section 5.

The structural engineer, v.48, no.3, March 1970:109-120.

34. BELL S1r. BRIDGE 1rHERMAL MEASUREMENTS. Victoria Country Roads

Board, Australia. Unpublished report, 1972.

35. HEJNIC, J. Effect of temperature changes on prestressed concrete

bridges. In F.I.P. Congress, 7th, New York, 1974•

36. STE:P.HENSON, D.A. Effects of differential temperatures on tall

slender columns. Concrete and construction engineering, May
1961:175-178.
37. N.z. MINISTRY Oli' WORKS. CIVIL t:NGINEERING DIVISION. Bridge design -
temperature gradient. Wellington, M.o.w., March 1970.

38. PRIESTLEY, rti.J .N. Effects of transverse temperature gradients on

bridges. vJellington, M.W.D., l;J?l. (N.Z. M.v~.D. Central
Laboratories. Report no. 394, Sept. 1974)

39. N.z. MINISrrRY OF iWRKS AND DEVELOPMENT. CIVIL DIVISION. DESIGN OFli'ICE.
Highway bridge design brief. Issue B, Nov. 1972.

40.. N.z. WIIiHSTRY Olt, ~WRKS AND DI!:VELOaTENT. CIVIL DIVI::lION DESIGN
Oli,FICE. Highway bridge design brief. Issue c, July. 1973·
--------. Amendment, June 1976.
41. IfoQUILLAN, M:.F. •remperature response of highway bridges; a report
of an investigation. Auckland, University of Auckland, School
of ~ngineering for the National Roads Board (N.Z.), 1976.
(University of Auckland, School of }t~ngineering. Report 126)

42. EMERSON, M. Bridge temperature and movements in the British Isles.

Gt. Britain. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
T.R.R.L. Report LR 228, 1968.

43. BLACK W., MOSS, D.S. and ~!IJERSON, M. Bridge temperatures derived
from measurement of movement. Gt. Britain. Transport and rload
Research Laboratory, Crowthorne. '1'.R.R.L. LR 748.
 347

59. JACQUIN7 P. and ORTH, J.F. Mass concrete practices in France.

In American Concrete Institute. Symposium on mass concrete,
Denver, 1963. Detroit, A.C.I., 1963. p.103-125. (A.C.I.
Special Publication SP-6)

60. WAUGH, W.R. and RHODES, J.A. Control of cracking in concrete

gravity dams. A.S.C.E. Proceedings, v.85, no.P0-5, Oct. 1959:
1-20.

61. HOUGHTON, D.L. Field study of interior temperatures in concrete.

A.S.C.E. Proceedings, v.85, no.P0-5, Oct. 1959:21-43·

62. BEGA, CARTER, HOLLINGS and FERNER. (Consulting engineers and

surveyors) Private communication. Auckland, Vincent St., 1977•

A.C.I. COMMITTEE 207. Effect of restraint, volume change and

reinforcement on cracking of massive concrete. A.C.I. Journal,
July 1973:445-470.
PAULAY, T. The coupling of she~r walls. Thesis, Ph.D., Dept.
of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, 1969.

LYON, E.V. and TYLER, I.L. Bibliography on mass concrete in

dams. In Ameriean Concrete Institute. Symposium on mass concrete,
Denver,"""1963. Detroit, A.C.I., l9b3. (A.C.I. Special Publi-
cation SP-6)

66. BIR'r, J.C. Large concrete pours - a survey of current practice.

London, Construction Industry Research and Information Association,
1974· (c.I.R.I.A. Report 49)

GAYNOR, il'i. The design of prestressed in-situ bridge decks. In

The design of prestressed concrete bridge structures; proceedings
of the one-day meeting held at Church House, tlestminster on Tues.
6th June, 1967. London, Concrete Society, 1968.

68. 13LuirnELL, R. and BA)ilFOH'rH, P. Humber 'rest proves Cemsave heat

effect. New 6ivil engineer, 24th July 1975:24-25.

HUGHES, B.P. Controlling shrinkage and thermal cracking.

Concrete, i11ay 1972: 39-42.

70. HUGlIBS, B.P. .b:arly thermal movement and cracking of concrete.

Concrete, May 1973:43-44•

71. MIHAILOV, M. Temperature regime and fissuration of the concrete

in large darns. International Cammi ttee on large darns. V. 3,
1964. p.423-442.

72. H.OCHA, M. and DA 3ILV1~IRA, A.F. The use of models to determine

temperature stresses in concrete arch dams. Lisbon, Laboratorio
Nacional de Engenharia Civil, 1964. ('rechnical paper no.230)

7 3. ZIE:NKIEIHCZ, 0. C. _and CHEUNG, Y.K. The finite element method in

structural and continuum mechanics. London, 1foGraw-Hill, 1'}67.

74. .3ILLING'.rON, N. S. Thermal properties of buildings. London,

Cleaver Hume Press, 1952. 208p.
 348
44• REYNOLDS, J.C •. and EMANUEL, J.H. Thermal stresses and movements
in bridges. A.S.C.E. Structural Division. Journal, v.100, no.ST-1,
Jan. 1974:63-78.
45. LEONHARDT, Ii'., KOLBE, G. and PETER, J. Temperature differences
endanger prestressed concrete bridges. Breton-und Stahlbetonau,
no. 7, July 1965 :157-163. ( Temperaturunterschiede gefahrden
Spannbetonbrucken)

46. LEONHARDT, :F'. and LIPPOTH, w. Discussion of a paper "Principal

stresses at the intermediate support of prestressed concrete
continuous beams. 11 , by M.A. Sargious. A.C.I. Journal, April,
1971.

47. DE SERIO, J.N. Thermal and shrinkage stresses - they damage

structures. In Designing for effects of creep, shrinkage and
temperature in-concrete structures. Detroit, A.C.I., 1971,
p.43-49. (A.C.I. Special Publication SP-27)

HUIZING, J.B.S., BLAKELEY, R.W.G. and RAMSAY, G. Falsework.

N.Z. ~ngineering, v.32, no.l, 15 Jan. 1977:2-9.

PRIESTLJ!:Y, i'il. J .N. 'rhermal gradients in bridges - some design

considerations. N.Z. Engineering, v.27, no.7, 15 July 1972:
228-233.

50. PRIESTLEY, M.J.N. Model study of a prestressed concrete box-

girder bridge under thermal loading. In International Association
of Bridge and Structural Engineering, 9th Congress, Amsterdam,
1972. p.737-746.
51. BLAKELln, R.. \~. G. Ductility of prestressed concrete frames under
seismic loading. Thesis, Ph.D., "ept. of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, 1971.

52. PB.IESTLJ!;Y, ,,i.J.N. and 'rHURSTON, S.J. Thermal calculations for

bridge design. (Discussion). A.S.C.E. Structural Division.
Journal, v.102, no.ST-6, June 1976:1277-1279·

53. DAVIS, R.~. Historical account of mass concrete. In American

Concrete Institute. Symposium on mass concrete, Denv;r:', 1963.
p.1-35. (11..c.I. Special Publication SP-6)

54. BROWNE, R•.Ll. and BLUNDELL, R. Behaviour and testing of concrete

for large pours. In Conference on large pours for R.¢. structures.
Paper 6, Concrete Society, Bi:c,ningham, 1973. p.42-65.

55. LEA, F .M. rhe chemistry of cement and concrete.

1
3d ed.
Glasgow, 1i..:dward Arnold, 1970.

56. A.C.I. COMMIT'rEE 207. Mass concrete for dams and other massive
structures. A.C.I. Journal, v.67, no.4, April 1970:273-309.

57. .LlUNSTAl'l', l'i. R..H. and 1H'l1CIIBLL, P .B. Hesul ts of a thermocouple

study in mass concrete in the Upper Tamar Dam. Institution of
Civil Engineers, London. Proceedings, v.60, pt.l, Feb. 1976:27-52.

58. MEAD, R.E. •remperature-instrument observations at Pine .B'lat and

lfolsom Dams. In American Concrete Institute. Symposium on mass
concrete, Den~, 1963. Detroit, A.C.r., 1963. p.151-178.
(A.C.I. Special Publication SP-6)
 349

75. SMI'rH, G•.D. Numerical solution of partial differential equations.

New York, Oxford University Press, 1965.

76. A.C.I. COMMITTEE 209, 1970. Predictions of creep, shrinkage and

temperature effects in concrete structures. In .Designing for
effects of creep, shrinkage and temperature in concrete structures.
Detroit, A.c.r., 1971. p.51-93. (A.C.I. Special Publication
SP-27)

77. A.C.I. COMMIT'l1EE 318, 1977• Building code requirements for

reinforced concrete. A.G.I. 318-71. uetroit, A.C.I., 1J77
(1975)
78. FENwICK, a.c. Influence of creep and shrinkage on concrete
bridges; report on research project 4728. Long span theoretical
study. Wellington, 1974• 54P• (N .z. National Roe,ds Board,
Road Research Unit, R.R.U. Bulletin no. 28)
,,
79. GOMI 1l1.li! ll:UROPEAN DU BE'rON. International recommendations for the
design and construction of concrete structures. English ed.
London, Cement and Concrete Association, 1970. "June, l'.r(O,
FIP Sixth Congress Prague.

80. BUCKLE, I.G. Private Communication. University of Auckland,

Civil ~ngineering Dept. March, 1978.

81. LANIGAN, A.G., BUCKLE, I.G. and BRYAN'r, A.H. .Predictions of.
temperatures in box-girder bridges. In Australian Road Research
Board. Conference, 7th, Adelaide, 1974• Proceedings. Paper
All, p.1-12.

82. :a.ass,
A.D., :t:NGLAND, G.L. and SUAN, R.H. Prestressed concrete
beams under a sustained temperature crossfall. Magazine of
concrete research, v.17, no.52, Sept. 1~65:117-126.

N .z. CEMENT HOL.JINGS. Private communication. lSJ75

84. GLELL.AND, J. Private communication. N .z. i"linistry of vlorks

and .uevelopment. Central Laboratories, 1976.

85. SALT, P.E. and WOOD, J.H. Design and construction of a large
prestressed concrete strong floor. Lower Hutt, Structures
Laboratory, Central Laboratories, 1976. 27p. (N .z. Ministry of
.vorks. Central Laboratories. Report no. 5-75/11) ·

86. BOLEY, B.A. and ~fEINErl, J.H. Theory of thermal stresses.

N.Y., Wiley, 1960. j86p.
87. KURENKOV, A.£. Thermal stresses in reinforced concrete shafts.
Department of Scientifiu and Industrial Research. Building Research
Station. Library communication no.994. Sept. 1960. (Translated
from Russian)

88. HANNAH, I.W. Thermal stress in concrete. Nuclear engineering,

lt,eb. 1961 :69-74.

89. HANNART, D.J. and PELL, P.S. ~hermal stresses in reinforced

concrete slabs. Magazine of concrete research, v.14, no.41,
July 1962:91-98.
 350
90. BASE, G.D., READ, J.B., BEEBY, A.W., and TAYLOR, H.P.J. An
investigation of the crack control characteristics of various
types of bar in reinforced concrete beams. C. & C.A. Research
report no. 18, Part 1, 1966.

91. AL.A.MI, Z.Y. and FERGUSON, P.M. Accuracy of models used in

research in reinforced concrete. American Concrete Institute.
Proceedings v.60, no.ll, Nov. 1963:1643-1661~

92. KAA.R, P.H. High strength bars as concrete reinforcement, Part 8,

Similitude in flexural cracking of T-beam flanges. Journal of
Portland Cement Association, Research and Development Laboratories,
v.8, no. 2, May 1966:2-12.

93. SWAMY, R.N. and QURESHI, S.P. Strength, cracking and deformation
similitude in reinforced T-beams under bending and shear.
American Concrete Institute. Proceedings, v.68, no.3, March 1971:
187-195·

94. PHYTHIAN, B.P. Partially prestressed concrete. Thesis, M.E.,

University of Canterbury, 1974• 143p.

95. BHITISH SrANDARD 00DE OF PRACTICE.

1
The structural use of
concrete. CPllO, Part I and II, 1972.

96. PRASADO, A.S., G.ANDOLRA, K. and RAMASWAMY, G.S. Flexural tests

on beams pre stressed ·t;o different degrees of pre stress. Institute
of l!.:ngineers, India, v.56,0l, 6 May, 1976.

97. PRAKASH, D. Cracking of reinforced and prestressed concrete

members - 1. Indis,n concrete journal, v.50, no.5, May 1976:
146-150.

98. PRAKASH, D. Cracking of reinforced and prestressed concrete

members - 2. Indian concrete journal, v.50, no.6, June 1976:
187-191.

99. BEF.BY, A.W. An investigation of cracking in slabs spanning

one way. Cement a:.1d Concrete As?ociation, London. Technical
Report, April 1970, no.42-433.

100. BEEBY, A.W., KEYDER, E., and TAYLOR, H.P.J. Cracking and
deformation of partially prestressed concrete beams. Cement Emd
Concrete As ociation, London. Technical Report, Jan. 1972, no.
42-465.

101. GERGELY, P and LUTZ, L.A. lfaxirnum crack viidths in reinforced

flexural members. Paper no.6. In Causes, mechanism, and control
of cracking in concrete. Detroit, American Concrete Institute,
1968. (A.C.I. Special Publication SP-20).

102. BENNE'PT, E.w. and GHANDRASCHAR, C.S. Calculation of the width

of cracks in class III beams. Institute of Civil Bngineers.
Proceedings, v.49, 1971:333-346. (Discussion v.51, Feb. 1972.)

103. AH1'1LES, P .w. and. Bftu1rn, E. I. Fatigue behaviour of prestressed

concrete bridge members. International Bridge Symposium, 1st,
rroronto. p. 576-599. (A.C .I. Special Publice,tion SP-23)

104. JHAMB, I.C. and 1•1ACG!IBGOR, J .G. Effect of surface characteristics

on fatigue strength of reinforcing steel • .!!!, Fatigue of concrete.
1974. p.139-168. (A.C.I. Special Publication SP-41)
 351

105. PHILLIPS, D.V. and ZIENKIEWICZ, O.C. Finite element non-linear

analysis of concrete structures. Institute of Uivil Engineers.
Proceedings. Part 2. Research and theory, v.61, March 1976:
'.:>9-88 •·

106. GUYON, Y. Prestressed concrete. Contractors Record Ltd, v.2,

1960.

107. PRIESTLEY, M.J.N. Moment redistribution in prestressed concrete

continuous beams. Thesis, Ph.D., University of Canterbury, 1966.

108. BROMS, B.D. Stress distribution in reinforced concrete members

with tension cracks. A.C.I. Proceedings, v.62, no.9, Sept.
1965:1095-1108.

109. HANSON, J.M., SOMES, M.F. and HELAGSON, T. Investigation of

design factors affecting fatigue strength of reinforcing bars -
test program. In Fatigue of concrete, 1974· p.71-106. (A.C.I.
Special Publication SP-41)

110. WILSON, E.L. li'ini te element computer program "Structural analysis

of axisymmetrical solids 11 • AIAA journal, v.3, no.2, Dec. 1965.
Modified by A.J. Carr, University of Canterbury, 1972. (User
manual titled "Finite element analysis of structures".)

111. CRANDALL, S.H. and DAHL, N.C. An introduction to the mechanics

of solids. McGraw-Hill, 1959· 443p.

112. SALVADORI, M.G. Spandrel-slab interaction. A.S.C.E. Structural

vivision. Journal, v.96, no.ST-I, Jan. 1970:89-106.
I
113. KENT, D.C. Inelastic behaviour of reinforced concrete members
with cyclic loading. Thesis, .Ph.D. Uni versi:ty of Ga,nterbury,
1969.

114. NEd ZEALAND STANDARD no.3112, 1974· Method of test for concrete.

115. ASTM D.hlSIGNNrION 078-64. Standard method of test for flexural

strength of concrete. (Using simple beam with third-point loading)

116. URBANEK, ii. and •rYL:l!.iR, R.G. ·rhermal expansion of a selection of

bridge concretes. Gt. Brit. Transport and Road Research
Laboratory, Crowthorne. Bridges Behaviour Div. Unpublished
report. ( 1I1RRL •rechnical note TN719, June, 1972.)

117. KEliT, D.G. and PARK, R. B'lexural members with confined concrete.
A.S.C.E. Structural Div. Proceedings, ST7 1 July, 1971:1969-1990.
 A.l

APPENDIX A
MOMENT - AREA THEORY

A.l INTRODUCTION

Many computer programs have been described in this thesis that use
Moment-Area theory to calculate the structural properties of members with
a non-uniform moment-of-inertia distribution. The solution technique used
by these programs will be briefly described.

A.2 BASIC ITERATION

Consider a member ij with a unit moment applied at end i as shown

in Fig. A.l

Member

f L------ I
Bending Moment Diagram

~-----~
Deflected Shape
(Clockwise Rotations +ve)

FIG. A.l MEMBER ij WITH UNIT END MOMENT

From Moment-Area principles equations A.l and A.2 can be written

e..
].]. I
1 r 0
Mx
E I
x x
(t - x)dx (A. l)

- eJ].
.. =
1 ft EI""'.
Mx
x dx (A. 2)
I 0 x x

where M =
t - x (A.3)
x t
 A.2

where e]1
.. Rotation at j due to a unit moment at i
I = Moment of inertia at x
x
E Elastic modulus at x
x
(Note: E I can be taken as slope of moment-curvature relationship at
xx
point x)•

The computer solution divides the beam up into n segments of length

A for which I and
are assumed constant. E
Thus equations A.l to
KX x x
A.3 reduce to A.4 and A.5 from which a solution can be obtained.
k=n 2
1 (.Q, - x)
el.l.
.. = E
E I • '\x (A. 4)
.Q,2 k=l x x

k=n x (.Q. - x) ' \

e]1
.. = --1 E .
E I
x
(A. 5)
.Q,2 k=l x x

Similarly e]]
.. and e1]
.. can be obtained.

A.3 BEAM STIFFNESS AND CARRY-OVER FACTOR

For a unit rotation at i and a zero rotation at j , two equations

can be written

M.
1
e..
11
+ M.
J
e.1]. = 1 (A.6)

M.
1
e..
]1
+ M.
J ]]
e .. 0 (A. 7)

where M. ,M. are sagging moments at i and j respectively.

1 J
The solution of equations A.6 and A.7 is

e]]..
M. s'1]'
1 e11
.. eJ..J - e1]
.. e]1
..
M.
_]_
-e ]1
..
and
M.
1
e.-:-
JJ
c.'
1]

where S.. is the beam stiffness between i and j

1]

C .. is the carry-over factor between i and j.

1]
 A.3

A.4 END MOMENTS FOR UNIT DISPLACEMENT, NO END ROTATIONS

Consider a member ij shown in Fig. A.2. The end moments have

induced a unit vertical displacement between the ends, with no end
rotations.

~ -=--=-lij~--~j
j ..........
'._,___: -x
Member

Mil_[-----J]}1 Bending Moment Diagram

Deflected Shape
(Upwards Deflections +ve)

FIG. A.2 MEMBER ij WITH UNIT END DEFLECTION, NO END ROTATIONS

From Moment-Area principles equation A.8 can be written

9., Mjx • (9., - x)dx

f 9., M
0
i
(,Q, - x) • (9., - x) d
9., E I
xx
x +
f
0
9., E I
xx
-1 (A. 8)

Substitution of equations A.l to A.3 into A.8 provides

M . .R. 8 .. M . .R. 8.. = -1 (A.9)

l. l.l. J Jl.

Similarly -M . .R. 8 .. + M . .R. 8 .. = 1 (A .10)

J JJ l. l.J

A solution of equations A.9 and A.10 provides

M.
l.
=
-1
.R.
c.JJ +e. Jl.
..
8 .. 8 .. -8 .. 8 ..
11. JJ l.J Jl.
)

M.
J
=
r
1 C..
l.l.
8 .. 8 ..
+ 8..
l.J
-e l.J
.. 8 Jl.
..
J
l.l. JJ
 A.4

A. 5 FIXED END MOMENTS ON BEAM SUBJECTED TO A VERTICAL FORCE

Consider a simply supported member ij subjected to a vertical

force F as shown in Fig. A.3.

r •A}
.
Member

·I
Bending Moment Diagram

~IF 8
~--------~ Def lee ted Shape

FIG. A. 3 SIMPLY SUPPORTED MEMBER ij WITH VERTICAL FORCE

From Moment-Area principles equation A.11 can be written

M
x
(R, - x)dx (A.11)
E I
x x

where M
x
= Fx(R- - y)/R, For 0 ~ x ~ y

Fy(R, - x)/R, For y ~ x ~ R-

8iF = Rotation at i due to force F .

A computer solution to equation A.11 can readily be obtained as

described in Section A.2.
For zero end rotations at i and j , two equations can be written

M.8 ..
l. l. l.
+ M.8 .. 0 (A.12)
J l.J

8J.F + M.8 ..
l.Jl.
+ M.8 ..
JJJ
= 0 (A.13)
 A.5

A solution of equations A.12 and A.13 provides

M.1 = - < e1.Fe JJ

.. - eJ.Fe 1]
. . >; <e11
.. eJJ
. . - e]1
.. e.1].>

MJ. = - < eJ.Fe 11

.. - e1. Fe ]1
.. >; <e11
.. eJJ.. - e]1
.. e1]
. .>

A. 6 FIXED END MOMENTS ON BEAM SUBJECTED TO A MOMENT COUPLE

Consider a member ij with a couple over a length 6 as shown in

Fig. A.4. The beam stiffness over the length 6 is assumed constant
= (EI)
c

Member
2
d

Bending
PLUS
Moment
Diagram

FIG. A.4 MEMBER ij SUBJECTED TO A COUPLE

From Moment-Area principles equation A.14 can be written

(5l (5l - x) (5l - x) (5l Mjx (.Q, - x)dx + M6 (5l - d)

J0 Mi 5l E I
xx
dx + j --r
0
E I
xx
(EI)
c
0 (A .14)

Substitution of equations A.l to A.3 into A.8 provides

M. 5le . . - M,5l e]1

.. + ~(5l - d) 0 (A.15)
1 ·11 1 (EI)
c
 A.6

Similarly -M. t8 .. + M. t8 .. + M.6.d = 0 (A.16)

J JJ 1 1] (EI)
c

A solution of equations A.15 and A.16 provides

-M
Mi = t(EI) c ((t - d)8 .. - 8 .. d)/(8 .. 8 .. - 8 .. 8 .. )
JJ ]1 11 JJ 1] ]1

-M
M. = t(EI) ( (t - d) 8. . - 8 .. d) / (8 .. 8. . - 8 .. 8 .. >
J c 1] 11 11 JJ 1] ]1
 B.l

APPENDIX B
MATERIALS USED IN EXPERIMENTAL BEAMS

B.l CONCRETE

The four experimental beams were constructed and tested in the

Civil Engineering Wing at .the University of Canterbury, using the same
concrete mix. However the theoretical analysis for each beam used the
material properties as experimentally determined from test specimens
from each particular beam. All test cylinders were 203 mm long by 102 mm
diameter, and were stored in the 100 percent humidity room between casting
and testing.

B.1.1 Mix Properties

A scaled graded aggregate with maximum size 5 mm was used in all

the beams. The aggregate was Billings Flat river gravel, which is a
well-rounded grey-wacke stone. Ordinary Portland Cement was used.
A scaled aggregate has a larger surface area to volume ratio than the
prototype aggregate, and thus adsorbs proportionally more water. To help
select a mix of both adequate workability and strength, 8 trial mixes
were tested. In an attempt to provide sufficient workability while still
maintaining a low water content, an admixture (Febmix Admix Masonry Mortar
Agent) was added to the concrete for some mixes in the proportions
recommended by the manufacturers. Table B.l summarizes the trial mixes
used, and Table B.2 the measured material properties. The testing
procedures are described in detail later in this section. On the basis
of results in Table B.2, mix H was selected and used in all four
experimental beams. Two general conclusions were drawn from.these tests.
(a) It was found that the particular admixture that was used
(Febmix Admix Masonry Mortar Agent) had a detrimental effect on the
required properties of the concrete. Although for a given water content
it increased the workability slightly and provided a lower slump with
little segregation, the modulus of elasticity and ultimate strength of
the concrete were reduced. This is best illustrated by comparing the
results of batches E,G,H. It also gave lower tensile strengths, but
the resulting split segments from the test indicated that the internal
trapped air· voids were smaller. The Admix may have performed better with
a mortar rather than a microconcrete gradation.
 B.2

(b) It was found that increasing the proportion of the larger sized
aggregate resulted in equal workability for a lower water. to cement ratio.
(A comparison of. the results of Batches B and C illustrates this.)
However if the smallest fines (those passing O. 3 .:.. O.15 mm sieve size)
were eliminated the pitting became excessive, and the ultimate load was
reduced (Batch ·c).
~be aggregate for Beams One and Two and for the trial test cylinders
was taken from bins of predried, sieved and graded aggregate. However
for.Beams Three and Four, an ungraded load of aggregate was dried and a
sieve grading analysis performed. On the basis of this, some of the coarser
grading was sieved from the raw aggregate, and some fines from the bins
added, to proyide the correct grading of mix H.

TABLE B.l MICROCONCRETE TEST BATCHES

I
Mix Aggregate Percentage Each Grade (mm) W/C A/C Febmix
Batch Ratio Ratio Used ?
Label 4.8-2.4' 2.4-1.2 1.2-0.6 0.6-0.3 0.3-0.15

'
A 36 23 9 6 26 0.5 6 No
B 36 23 9 6 26 0.621 6 No
c 46 30 14 10 - 0.5 6 No
D 46 30 1.4 10 - 0.45 6
I Yes
E 40 ,26 14 10 10 0.55 6 No
F 40 26 14 10 10 0.1 6 Yes
G 35 26 14 10 15 0.55 6 Yes
H 36 23 14 13 14 0.6 6 No
I I
;

Beam concrete specimens were tested at the time of the corresponding

beam tests. Results are shown in Table B.3.

B.1.2 Ultimate Concrete Cylinder strengths

Test cylinders. were capped with plaster at both ends and loaded to
failure on a~ Avery 2500 kN Universal Testing Machine Type 7112 CC3. Some
cylinde~s were loaded in increments to determine the stress-strain
characteristics of the concrete,· and the remainder loaded at 14 MPa per
minute to failure.
 B.3

TABLE. B.2 ·.MICROCONCRETE TEST BATCH MEASUREMENTS

F1ix Tensile Initial Ultimate Comments Time between

Batch Splitting Modulus of Strength Casting and
Label ·strength Elasticity Testing
(MPa) (GPa) (MPa)

A - 31.9
(1)
35. 4
(1)
Workability too
low. Moderate
28 days

pitting.

B 2.91 29.6 29.1 Marginal work- 28 days

(3) (3) (3) ability. Low
pitting

c 2.88 30.4 26.2 Workability just 28 days

(1) (2) (2) O.K. Excessiively
high pitting

D 2.15 23.5 24.9 Workability O.K. 28 days

(3) (3) (3) Low pitting

E 2.54 34.5 22.0 Workability O.K. 14 days

(2) (2) (2) Moderately high
pitting

F 2.73 24.6 27.0 Workability too 14 days

(2) (2) ( 2) low. Pitting
excessive

G 2.34 21.8 20.7 Workability O.K. 14 days

(2) (3) (3) Low pitting

H 3.41 28.9 35.3 Workability and 12 weeks

(1) (4) (4) pitting
satisfactory
I

Note: Number of test specimens shown in brackets.

Results s_how average values.

B.1.3 Concrete Initial Modulus of Elasticity

The .concrete specimens loaded in increments, described in B.1.2,

had steel buttons waxed to the· surface of the cylinders on two opposite
generators (to compensate for any eccentricity of loading) on 102 mm
gauge lengths, at the mid~height of the cylind~rs. Strains were read
with demountable mechanical (Demec) gauges, averaged over the two gauge
lengths, and plotted against concrete stress. An example of these curves
taken from plots for Bealn One concrete is shown in Fig. B .1. An e·stima te
of the concrete's initial Modulus of Elasticity was found by drawing an
average tangent for these curves at zero strain.
 B.4

TABLE B.3 MEASURED CONCRETE PROPERTIES

Cylinder Initial Splitting Modulus Age

Strength Elastic Tensile of
Modulus Strength Rupture
(MPa) (GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (Days)

Beam One Mean 35.1 28.8 3.13 62

(Coe•ff .of
(5.3%) (10.8%)
variation)
Nwnber of
3 3 3
Specimens
Beam Two Mean 35.3 28.9 3.41 86
(Coeff. of
variation)
(8. 3%) -
Number of
4 4 1
Specimens

Beam Three Mean 35.5 29.0 3.14 105-154

(Coe ff. of
(5.5%) (6.9%)
variation)
Number of
16 6 4
Specimens

Beam Four Mean 34.9 3.21 4.46 54

(Coe ff. of
(3.0%) (4. 7%) (8.1%)
variation)
Number of
3 3 9
Specimens

B.1.4 Concrete Tensile Strength

The concrete tensile splitting strength was obtained on the Avery

2500 kN Universal Testing Machine Type 7112 CC3, with the test procedure
complying with NZ 3112/74114 .
The concrete tensile flexural strength was obtained on the Avery
100 kN Universal Testing Machine Type 7104 DCJ, with the test procedure
115
complying with ASTM C78-64 A simple beam (305 mm long x 76 x 76) was
fractured using third-point loading. For beams where only the concrete
tensile splitting strength was obtained from specimens of the same concrete
batch, the flexural strength was assumed to be k higher than the splitting
84
strength The concrete flexural strength is greater t.~an the splitting
strength because failure initiates at the randomly locate.a weakest poi1;1ts.
With a flexural failure, if the effective weakest point is not at the
external tensile face, the stress gradient will allow a larger maximum
stress to occur in the specimen before failure.
 B.5

B.1.5 Concrete Coefficient of Thermal Expansion

The coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete for normal ambient

2
temperature ranges varies from 3.9 x 10- /~C when using Portland Stone
6

6 12
aggregate to 14.4 x l0- /°C for flint-grave1 aggregate. The coefficient
6 6 0 2
for cement paste varies between 11 x l0- /°C to 20 x lo- ; c , increasing
8
with the fineness of the cement , and is normally higher than the
coefficient for aggregate. Below 200°C the coefficient for concrete varies
2 51718
little with temperature ' and is dependent on the relative proportions
8
of aggregate to cement, and the moisture content • Dry and wet specimens
show about the same value, but at intermediate conditions of dryness the
55 55
value is about 20% higher • The coefficient tends to decrease with age
2
and increase with the number of heating cycles If the coefficient is
plotted against temperature, a hysteresis loop is found between heating
. 55
an d coo 1 ing curves •
The expansion and contraction of concrete specimens were measured
between changes from a constant temperature room at 20°C to a thermostatically
controlled oven set to about 80°C. Specimens were allowed a minimum of
24 hours to obtain the uniform temperature of the environment before
readings were taken. Temperatures were measured with thermometers and
strain qhanges between steel demec buttons read with a demountable (Demec)
gauge. Urbanek and Tyler 116 observed that specimens continued expanding
slightly after reaching a constant temperature andisuggested that this
was due to relief of internal stresses between cement matrix and aggregate,
because of the lower coefficient of the aggregate.
A major problem when measuring the coefficient of thermal expansion
of concrete is to avoid the concurrence of both shrinkage and thermal
stress. Three techniques were used to overcome this problem.
(a) Heat sample in water bath. There is a danger with this
technique that the water may serve as a lubricant to expansive creep.
Additional expansion may also be caused by further cement hydration.
After the heating cycle, on removing the specimens from the water bath,
rapid evaporation and cooling takes place, and readings must be taken
quickly.
(b) Fully seal S:pecimens. The specimens were sealed with four
coats of Silastic RTV Silicone Rubber, providing a fairly un~formly thick
coat of 4 mm. Specimens were removed from the 100% humidity room four
hours before sealing. The weight loss of the specimens averaged 0.2%
on the first heating cycle and 0.09% on the second heating cicle. No
 B.6

corrections were made for these weight losses.

(c) Specimens were dried in oven for 14 - 42 days. The desiccated
specimens were maintained sealed in tightly fitting plastic bags, which
were replaced after each set of strain readings. Weight losses, where
measured, averaged 0.02% over the second heating cycle.

Two different shaped test specimens were used. Concrete cylinder

specimens 203 mm long and 102 mm diameter had demec buttons at 102 mm
gauge lengths epoxy-glued onto opposite generators. Rectangular prisms
(305 mm long x 76 x 76) had demec buttons at 203 mm gauge lengths epoxy-
glued onto each longitudinal face. Results were averaged over all gauge
lengths for each specimen and are shown ~n Table B.4.

TABLE B.4 COEFFICIENT OF THERMAL EXPANSION .MEASUREMENT

Beam Number Specimen Measuring Average coefficient of thermal

Number of Shape Technique expansion x 10-6;oc
Specimens and Coefficient of variation (%)
First First 2nd 2nd Value
Heating Cooling Heating Cooling Assumed

One 3 Cylinder c 9.56 9.73 9.65

( 4. 2%) (2.1%)

Two 3 Cylinder c 10.54 10.17 10.18 10.30

(1. 7%) (0.4%) (1.2%)

Three 2 Cylinder c 10.04 10.16 10.15 10.20

(4.5%) (2.0%) (1.8%)
2 Cylinder A 10.11 10.04 10.63 10.50
(2.5%) ( 2. 7%) (0.7%) (4.6%)
3 Prism c 10.23 10.11 10.14
(1. 3%) (2 .0%) (2.1%)
3 Prism A 10.34 10.39 10.01 10.19
(3.6%) (l.0 96) (2.1%) ( 2. 9%)
3 Prism B 9.97 10.39 10.14 10.35
(3.0%) (0 .4%) (2.4%) (1. 3%)

Four 3 Cylinder c 10.19 10.14 10.20

(l.9%) (1.1%)

B.2 GROUT

After completion of stressing of Beams Three and Four, the post-

tensioning cables were grouted. The grout proportions by weight were:
cement: water: Intraplast A Additive = 1.0: 0.38: 0.01 The average
seven-day grout strength of three 102 by 51 mm (diameter) test cylinders
was 14.1 MPa and 15.5 MPa for Beams Three and Four respectively.
 B.7

B.3 STEEL

(a) Mild steel.

Mild steel used in Beams One to Four were tested in tension on an
Avery 100 kN Universal Testi_ng Machine Type 7109 DCJ. Electronic resistance
strain gauges, type Kyowa KFC-5-Cl-ll, were stuck on opposite generators of
the steel, and connected into a full Wheatstone-Bridge circuit.
Strain gauge readings were measured on a Budd P-350 Strain Indicator.
Strains were also recorded on an Instron S.G. Extensometer. Results are
shown in Table B.5.

TABLE B.5 STEEL PROPERTIES

Bar Type Beam Modulus of Yield Ultimate Ultimate

Numbers Elasticity Stress Stress Strain
(GP a) (MP a) (MP a) (Approx.)

10 nun <ti Mild steel 1,2 211 348 474 .158

6 nun <ti II II
1,2,3,4 218 379 518 .145
4.4 nun <ti II II
1,2,4 204 277 358 .129
2.5 nun <ti II II
3,4 213 480 582 .109
7 nun stressed wire 3 1350* 1610 .056
7/5 nun II II
4 1590* 1855 .040

* Values are 0.2% Proof Stress

(b) Prestressed steel.

Samples of the 7 nun diameter stress relieved cold drawn wire used
in Beam Three were tested as described in (a) above. Samples of the
7/5 nun monostrand wire used in Beam Four were tested in tension on an
Avery 1000 kN Universal Testing Machine Type 7104 DCJ. Strains were
measured on an Instron S.G. Extensometer. Test results on both types
of prestressing tendons are shown in Table B.5 and Fig. B.2.
 B.8

40

35

30

25

'N'20
0..
:IE
'-'1s
."'
"
!; 10
(/)

800 1000 1200 1400

Strain ( ;i [ )

FIG. B.1 BEAM ONE MICRO·CONCRETE STRESS-STRAIN CURVE

1900
1800

1700

1600

1500

1400

1300

1200

1100

1000
Curve A 7mm dia. wire

.
0..
900 Curve B 7/5mm strand

:lE 800

.. 700
..,
-
~
(/)
600

500

400

300

200

100

0•01 0•02 O·Ol 0·04 0-05

Strain

FIG. B.2 PRESTRESSING STEEL STRESS·STRAIN CURVES

 C.l

APPENDIX C
MAJOR COMPUTER PROGRAMS

Three major computer programs developed during this research have

been discussed in detail in the text, and a user-guide and listing is
presented in this Appendix. The output from the programs are self-
explanatory. The development and verification of program THERMAL is
described in Chapters Two and Three respectively, and a block diagram
presented in Fig. C.l. The development of program TSTRESS and TREACTION
is described in Chapter Four.

(a) Program THERMAL

Program THERMAL solves for transient temperatures (using linear

heat-flow) and stresses (considering creep and shrinkage) in a composite
uncracked section, using an incremental time-step procedure. Results
are printed at each time step.

(b) Program TSTRESS

A beam may be divided into a number of segments with one crack

height associated with each segment. Program TSTRESS calculates and
prints the thermal stresses and curvatures at each reinforced cracked
section under the user-specified temperature distribution, plus the
beam s±mply supported thermal deflections and fixed end moments.

(c) Program TREACTION

Program TREACTION is a special purpose program for calculating

the thermal continuity reactions and thermal deflections in experimental
model Beam Two.

The computer programs were developed on the University of

Canterbury's Burroughs B6718 computer. The machine has one million
bytes core storage and online (virtual memory) disc storage of over
360 million bytes. The processor included Victor-mode hardware for
efficient arithmetic c9mputation. Automatic plotting was provided on a
CALCOMP 280 mm drum plotter attached to a PDPll computer, which ran
online to the B6718 computer.
 C.2

Block Diagram for I THERMAL I

I
I READ IN USER INPUT DATA I Initial calc s.
+
CALCULATE REFERENCE SECTION PROPERTIES & NODE DEPTHS.
STORE CYCLE START TIMES. CALCULATE & STORE SHRINKAGE.
FIND NODES BELOW STEEL & DISTANCE PROPORTION FACTORS.
I
I IF STRESS = 1 PUT !START = 1 I
I
I IF !START EQ 0 GO TO <D I
Q)... t
PUT TP INTO TOLD. PUT IST ART :: 1 I
t
CALCULATE TEMPERATURES FOR THIS CYCLE. STORE IN TP. I
t
ADD STRESSES IN FSTR 8. DSTEEL TO FIND RESIDUAL I
AXIAL FORCE (DP) & MOMENT (OM l
t
IF EXTENT. GT. 1 ADD FEMFAC * OM TO ALL EXTERNAL MOMENTS I
t
FIND MOMENT & AXIAL FORCE THAT MUST BE ADDED TO SECTION
ADD STRESSES FROM THESE TO FSTR & DSTEEL
ADD FSTR TO TSTRESS & DSTEEL TO TSTEEL
i
WRITE STRESSES & SECTION AXIAL FORCE & MOMENT I
I
GENERATE CREEP STRAINS FROM FSTR
(FACTOR FOR TEMPERATURE IF REQUIRED ) Creep
t
~ STORE STRESS TO REMOVE THERMAL STRAINS FROM
STEEL IN DSTEEL & THERMAL + CREEP +
lncrementa
SHRINKAGE STRAINS IN CONCRETE IN FSTR strains
+
I PLOT I
IF EXTENT. LT. NCYCLE GO TO ' a>
t
I
I PRINT RESTART & OTHER DATA I
I END ' I

Convention
Compressive forces & stresses are +ve.
Sagging moment +ve.

FIG. C.1 BLOCK DIAGRAM FOR PROGRAM THERMAL

 C.3

DATA PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM THERMAL

Cards groups described below that are not specified as necessary,

based on the user-specified control cards, should be ignored. (Do not
use blank cards).

Card 1 (Job Identification)

HEAD (13A6) Up to 78 characters of job identification.

Card 2 (Control card)

TEMP, HOHYD, SHRINK, CREEP, PLOT, STRESS, FEMFAC, DELTA, (6Il0, 2El0.0)
TEMP = 0 If temperature not considered.
= 1 If temperature calculated, but initially assumed = 0.
2 If initial temperatures specified, but not calculated for
subsequent steps.
3 As per 2 but specified power distribution.
= 4 If temperature calculated and initially specified.
(Note: If initial stresses given also, stresses due to initial
temperature not calculated) •
HOHYD = 0 If heat-of-hydration not considered.
= 1 If heat-of-·hydration considered.
SHRINK = 0 If concrete shrinkage not considered.
= 1 If given in form 1 (independent of temperature).
2 If given in form 2 (considers temperature effect).
CREEP = 0 If concrete creep not considered.
1 If given in form 1 (independent of temperature) •
2 If given in form 2 (considers temperature effect) .
PLOT = 0 If no plotting required.
= 1 If plotting but program calculated scales.
= 2 If plotting and user specified scales.
STRESS = 0 If stress analysis not required.
= 1 If initial stresses given.
= 2 If initial stresses not given.
FEMFAC = Fixity factor by which section curvature restrained.
DELTA = Time increment per step +ve.
If negative t.~e time increment of ith step DELTA = -DELTA/
(NCYCLE + 1 - I), i.e. it becomes +ve and the time increment'
increases during the simulation.
(Note: Setting DELTA as negative cannot be used for temperature
simulations and is usually for effect of shrinkage and creep
only.)
 C.4

Card 3 (Control card)

NCYCLE, FORCE, MOMENT, BASER, STEEL, NLINE, ER, BASEF, (6Il0, 2El0.0)
NCYCLE = Number of steps in analysis (Maximum value = 299).
FORCE = 0 I f no external axial force considered.
= 1 I f external axial force (eg. prestress) considered.
MOMENT = 0 If no external moment considered.
= 1 I f external moment (other than due to FEMFAC).
BASER = 0 I f no base restraint (otherwise 1) I f BASER= 1 then
FEMFAC must = 1.0 or 0.0. Refer to BASEF below.
STEEL = 0 If no steel embedded in section (otherwise 1) .
NLINE Number of lines in the analysis (Maximum 5) .
63
ER = Base fixity factor. Often put= 1/(1 + AgEc/AfEf)
where Ag = cross section of stressed concrete, Af = area of
restraining mass. For concrete on rock Af can be assumed =
63
2.5A • BASEF is the proportion of free base strain that is
g
restrained by underlying foundation.
(Note: NCYCLE * (Total number of nodes on section + NLINE). is
currently restricted to 5000. By changing the size of the
dimensioned array NODE this limit can be altered).

Card 4 !f PLOT = 2 (User defined plotting scales)

TEMINC,TEMDIS,TEMLOW,STRINC,STRDIS (5Il0)
TEMINC = Number of temperature units for each 'TEMDIS' mm/4 plot length
(If zero program calculates scale).
TEMDIS = (Number of mm) * 4 between each plotted temperature unit on
plot.) (Note: Plot is 115 mm wide) •
TEMLOW Lowest temperature unit plotted.
STRINC = Number of stress units for each 'STRDIS' mm/4 plot length.
(If zero program calculates scale).
STRDIS = (Number of mm) * 4 between each plotted stress unit on plot).
(Note: Plot is 115 mm either side of origin).

Card 5 If PLOT > 0 (Plot times)

J, (I TIME (L) , L = 1, J) (8110)

J = Number of plots. (Maximum 8)
I TIME (L) = Time cycle number, for which a±;. the start of this cycle the
stresses and temperatures are plotted. Thus to get the initial
values plotted.use 1, and to get the final values plotted use
I NCYCLE+l'.
 c.5

Card 6 If CREEP > O (Creep parameters of concrete)

FI,FA,FB,FC,FD (5El0.0)

Creep at time t = (
FI* tFA * FC * tLAFD) * elastic strain
FB + tFA

Where 'FI' is the ultimate creep factor for concrete loaded at 7 days.
76
The AC! Committee recommends that this is equal to K *K *K *
11 thickness g
Kf*Kair
. where -11
K = 1.25 - 0.0067H, where 'H' is relative humidity for

H > 40%.
K 1.10 -.0.00067 where 'T' is thickness in mm.
thickness
K
s
= 0.82 + 0.00026 where 'S' is slump in mm.

0.88 + 0.0024F where 'F' is percentage of fine aggregate by

weight.
K.
air
= 1.0 for percent air < 6%.
= 0.46 + 0.090A for percent air > 6%.
FC = 1.25 for moist-cured concrete.
= 1.13 for steam-cured concrete.
FD = -0.118 for moist-cured concrete.
-0.095 for steam-cured concrete.
tLA The loading age in days.
FA 0.6
FB 10.0
t Time in days after the application for the load.
(Note: In Card Group 14 for the material specifications of the
individual layers, the initial concrete age plus a factor
to multiply FI for each layer will be specified).

Card 7 I f CREEP 2 (Temperature factor on creep)

FE,FF,FG (3El0.0)
Creep during a time interval = that calculated using Card 6 factored
FG
by (FE + FF*T ) where 'T' is the temperature and 'FE,FF,FG' are factors.
For instance if 'T' is in centigrade, FE= -0.14, FF = 0.057 and FG = 1.0
may be chosen to be used) .
 C.6

Card 8 If SHRINK > O (Shrinkage parameters of concrete)

FH,FJ,FK,CAGE (4El0.0)
tFK
Free shrinkage strain at time 't' is = FH * - - - -
FJ + tFK
where 'FH' is the ultimate shrinkage.
76 FH = (Esh) *h. *h , *h *h *h *h .
The AC! Committee 209 recommends that u -n thick s c f air
where (Esh) = 800 x 10- 6 for concrete moist-cured for 7 days.
u
730 x 10~
6
for concrete steam-cured for 3 days.
= 1.40 - O.OlH for 40% < H < 80%.
= 3 .0 - 0.03H for 80% < H < 100%
H is relative humidity.

hthick = 1.17 - 0.00114 'T' is thickness in mm.

h
s = 0.89 + 0.0016 'S' is slump in mme
h
c = 0.75 + 0.034B where 'B' is number of 94-pound bags per
cubic yard.
= 0.30 + 0.014F for F < 50% (F is percent fines)
= 0.90 + 0.0020F for F > 50%
h = 0.95 + 0.008A where 'A' = % air.
FJ = 35 for moist-cured concrete, and 55 for steam-cured.
FK = 1.0
CAGE = Curing age. Age for concrete from which the shrinkage is
assumed to start.
(Note: The initial age plus an individual factor for FH for each
layer is specified in Card Group 14).

Card 9 If SHRINK = 2 (Temperature factor on shrinkage)

FP,FQ,FR (2El0.0)
Shrinkage during a time interval that is calculated by Card 8 .is factored
by (FP + FQ x ~R) where 'T' is the temperature and 'FP' and 'FQ' user-
specified factors. For instance if 'T' is in centigrade FP = 0.2 and
FQ = 0.042 and FR = 1.0 may be used.

Card Group 10 If STEEL ~ 0 (Section steel reinforcing details)

lO(a) ESTEEL,ALPHAS (2El0.0)
ESTEEL = Youngs Modulus of steel.
ALPHAS Coefficient of thermal expansion of the steel.
 C.7

SETS OF CARDS lO(b) and lO(c) FOR EACH LINE

lO(b) NAREA (IlO)
Number of different depths for the particular line for which steel
area will be specified. (Maximum 5)
lO(c) I f NAREA-(: 0
IPREST,SDEP,SAREA,DSTEEL (Il0,3ElO.O)
!PREST This is a switch to change the prestressing force at a
section, due to changes at other sections. Not
operational yet.
SDEP = Depth of steel from baseline.
SAREA = Area of steel at corresponding depth.
DSTEEL =Initial steel stress.

Card Group 11 If FORCE > 0 (Basic axial force)

This card repeated as many times as user desires.
J,FORCE (IlO,El0.2)
J = Time interval number from 1 to NCYCLE + 1
FORCE = Total section axial force at the beginning of this cycle.
(Note: (a) J must occur in sequence, with at least one
card for J = NCYCLE + 1 occurring. Values for intermediate
times are interpolated.
(b) The above is the basic axial force or the section
during each time interval. (This however may be modified if
!PREST > 0 as per Card Group 10).

Card Group 12 If MOMENT > 0 (Basic section moment)

This may be repeated as many times as the user desires.
J,MOMENT (IlO,El0.2)
J = Time interval number from one to NCYCLE + 1.
MOMENT = Total section moment at the beginning of this cycle.
(Note: (a) J must occur in sequence, with at least one card
for J = 1, and one card for J = NCYCLE + 1 occurring. Values
for intermediate times are interpolated) •
(b) The above is the basic external moment on the section
during each time interval. This however may be modified if .
IPREST > 0 as per Card Group 10 and/or FEMFAC -(: o.
 C.8

Card Group 13 (Thickness and heat-flow parameters for each line)

NLAYER(LINE) (5Il0)
Nwnber 0£ layers in each line.· (Maximum 10). Note that the nwnber of
nodes in each line is currently restricted to 50.

Card 14 XThickness and heat-flow parameters)

ONE GROUP PER LINE. ONE CARD FOR EACH LAYER (STARTING FROM THE TOP OF A LINE).
NUMINC,Y,VOL,FAC,M,AGE,CTHICK,STHICK (Il0,7El0.0)
NUMINC = Nwnber of distance increments in layer.
Y = Length of interval (·Y) in the layer - constant for each
increment in the layer.
VOL = Density of layer.
FAC = Specific heat of layer.
M = Thermal conductivity of layer.
AGE = Initial age of concrete. Note if material is not concrete
put zero. If concrete hydration, stre.ngth change, creep or
shrinkage effects to be considered make it ~ zero. For
concrete placed over a period of time, the user may find it
useful to make some layers age initially -ve. E will be
considered zero until +ve age is reached.
CTHICK = The factor by which FI on Card 6 is factored for concrete in
this layer due to different thickness, slump etc. associated
with this layer.
STHICK = The factor by which FH on Card 8 is factored for concrete in
this layer.
(Note: If the user is assuming the creep and shrinkage properties
of all layers of concrete to be identical, he will probably
put CTHICK and STHICK = 1).

Card Group 15 If STRESS =1 (Initial stresses)

ONE SET FOR EACH LINE
STRESS(L),L = l,N (7El4.6)
Initial stresses at each node point down the line, starting with the top
node at the first layer. Note that if these stresses are solely due to
the specified initial axial load and moment and temperature, the initial'
stresses need not be specified. If initial stresses are specified, it will
be assumed that these include the effects of the initial temperature, i.e.
if STRESS = 2 initial temperature will not be used to generate stresses.
 C.9

Card Group 16 Depth of line.

DEPTH(LINE) (5El0.2)
Heights of top surface of each line above base sequentially along card.

Card Group 17 If STRESS '/ 0 (Strength parameters)

ONE SET OF CARD GROUP 17 FOR EACH LINE.
ONE SET OF CARD GROUP 17 FOR EACH LAYER.
17(a) ISW,E (LINE,LAYER),B(LINE,LAYER),ALPHA(LINE,LAYER) (Il0,3El0.0)
c
ISW = O E parametersconstant.
= 1 E parameters follow on card 17(b).
= -1 E parameters same as last card.
E = Modulus of elasticity of the particular layer.
c
B = Width of layer.
ALPHA Linear coefficient of thermal expansion of layer.
17(b) I f ISW = 1 (Adjustment of concrete strength with time) •
FL,FM,FN (3El0.0)
Elastic Modulus at any time =
For instance if Ec = Ec
28
, then FL = 0.85, FM = 4.0, FN = 0.5
could be used.

Card Group 18 If TEMP = 3. Specified power distribution of temperature.

POWER, TEMPM, ZEROH (3El0. 2)
Specified power distribution is a polynomial of the form

T(y) = TEMPM * (DEP - y -) ** POWER

DEP - ZEROH
Where DEP is the maximum depth of
any line as specified in Card Group
16. 'Y' is depth of relevant point.
POWER = Power of polynomial.
TEMPM Temperature at depth DEP.
ZEROH = Height of zero temperature measured from base. (If measured from
top put in as -ve) •

I
Card Group 19 to 23 If TEMP = 1 OR 4

Card Group 19 (Temperature calculation time cycle parameters)

BOTEMP,ABSORB,Hl,H2 (Il0,3El0.2)
BOTEMP Switch =1 If separate bottom surface ambient air temperaturesat
each time step are to be used. (Otherwise same
temperatures as top surface are used).
 C.10

ABSORB = Top surface absorptivity.

Hl Top surf ace heat transfer coefficient if constant for duration
of analysis. If variable leave blank.
H2 = Bottom surf ace hear transfer coefficient if constant for
duration of analysis. If variable leave blank.
(Note: Hl and H2 must both be variable or both be constant) •
General Note: If Hl and H2 are constant the solution involves the
inversion of a matrix the result of which is used at every time step. If
Hl and H2 are variable this matrix also varies, and the solution of the
simultaneous equations proceeds by a Gaussian Elimination technique.

Card Group 20 If Hl and H2 =0 (Top and bottom surface heat transfer

coefficient)

HA(I) (7El0.2) - Top surface heat transfer coefficient at the end of

each time interval - seven values per card, then -
HB(I) (7El0.2) - Bottom surface heat transfer coefficient at the end of
each time interval - seven values per card.

Card Group 21 (Read ambient air temperatures)

2l(a) TS(I) (7El0.0) Values of air temperature at the end of each
successive time interval, seven values per card.
2l(b) If BOTEMP > 0
TB(I) (7El0.0) Values of air temperature at the end of each
successive time interval for bottom surface.

Card Group 22 If HOHYD > 0 (Heat-of-hydration parameters)

22(a) NHTEMP (!10)
NHTEMP is the m~mber of temperatures for which a heat.-of-·hydration
vs log time curve will subsequently be specified. Maximum 9.

Card Groups 22(b) and 22(c) for each value of NHTEMP

22(b) TT,J (El0.2,IlO)
TT = Temperature of heat-of-hydration curve.
J = Number of straight lines making up curve. Maximum 10.
22 (c) (HYDT(L) ,HYDS(L),L = l,J (8El0.2)
HYDT = Time at start of straight line portion. If -ve this is
assumed = -Heat/unit volume at start of straight line portion.
(First value however must be time) •
HYDS = Slope of this straight line portion. (Heat/unit volume/log (time))
e
 C.11

General Note:
(a) Heat-of-hydration values will only be applied to materials where
the age.of Card Group 14 was +ve.
(b) Cards in Group 22(b) must start with the 10west temperature
successively increasing to the highest temperature.
(c) The program assumes the graph sl0pes are determined from a graph
plotted to the base e. If however it was plotted to the base 10,
use the conversion factor SLOPE(To base e) = SLOPE(To base lO)*log 10.
e

Card Group 2 3 If HOHYD = 2 (Cumulative heat emitted per node)

ONE GROUP PER LINE
HEAT(LINE,I) (7El0.2) Cumulative heat emitted per node. Usually used
when restarting program after adding to structure
analysed, using previous program printout.

Card Group 24 (Radiation normal to top surface)

F(I) (7El0.2) Values of average top surface radiation normal to top .
surface, for time interval I (Seven values per card).

Card Group 25 If TEMP =2 or 4 (Initial temperature)

ONE GROUP PER LINE
TP(LINE,I) (7El0.2)
Initial temperatures at each node down the line, starting
with the top node at the first layer. (Seven values per card)
 c.12

DATA PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM TSTRESS

Card 1 (Control card and job identification)

NBEAM, IP, TITLE (2I5, 11A6)
NBEAM = Number of beams for which computation is required.
IP > O if plotting required.
TITLE Up to 66 characters of job identification.
The rest of the cards will be repeated once per beam.

Card 2 If IP =2 (User defined plotting scales)

ISTR, IHS, IDF, IVD, ITP, ISP (6Il0)
ISTR = Number of stress units for each 'IHS' mm/4.0 plot length
(If zero program calculates scale).
IHS = (Number of mm)* 4 between each plotted stress unit on plot.
IDF = Number of deflection units for each 'IVD' mm/4.0 plot length.
IVD = (Number of mm) *4 between each plotted deflection unit on plot.
ITP > 0 if temperature plotted.
ISP > 0 if section shape plotted.

Card 3 (Beam Identification)

TITLEB (13A6) Up to 78 characters of beam identification.

Card 4 (Curvature restraint factor)

FACTOR (ElO.O) Degree of flexural restraint imposed on beam for
calculating total stresses.

Card 5 (Control card, material properties, support conditions)

NUMSEC, NLINE, TEMPS, TEMPC, ES, EC, Sl, S2, LENGTH
(2I5, 7E 10.4)
NUMSEC Number of sections of the beam for which computation is
required.
NLINE = Number of parallel lines for which temperatures will be
specified and stresses calculated.
TEMPS = Temperature coefficient of expansion of steel.
TEMPC = Temperature coefficient of expansion of concrete.
ES = Young's Modulus of steel.
EC Young's Modulus of concrete.
,Sl Coordinate of first simple support.
S2 = Coordinate of second simple support.
LENGTH = Total length of beam.
 C.13

(Note: the last 3 parameters are only required if deflections are to

be calculated) •

Card Group 6 (Beam shape)

One set of cards 'A' and 'B' for each line.
Cards A
LEVEL (I5) = Number of levels of the beam spec::ified in cards 'B'
f0r the line.
Cards B
One card for each level.
HEIGHT, THICK (2E 10.3)
HEIGHT = Height from soffit for corresponding level.
THICK = Thickness of section for this height.
(Note: (a) For levels between given heights the program linearly
interpolates for the thickness.
(b) Where the section suddenly changes, such as at the junction
of a spine and flange, two cards are required. The first
will specify the level of the junction and the thickness of
the section just below the junction, and the second, the
level of the junction and the thickness of the section just
above the junction.
The rest of the cards will be repeated once per section.

Card Group 7 (Section Details)

XCOORD,CDEPTH,STRAIN,TSTREN,BM,UCMOI,EROT,ISW,IREP (7El0.0, 2I5)
XCOORD = Coordinate of section.
CDEPTH = Crack depth This is fed in as positive if originating from
the soffit, negative if originating from the deck.
STRAIN = Equivalent tensile face crack strain (only required if BM= 0).
TSTREN Concrete flexural tensile capacity at crack tip.
BM Section bending moment. (Positive if sagging moment).
UCMOI = Uncracked section moment of inertia. (Required for calculations
of beam fixed-end moments only if STRAIN -ve.
EROT = Correction for simply supported rotation at S2 (if any) for
calculation of beam fixed-end moments.
ISW = Switch that is less than zero if there is the same steel
configuration as in the previous section.
·IREP = If t O, then this section is assumed to have the same
curvature as the previous section. Program returns to card
group 7.
 C.14

Card Group 8 If ISW > O (Steel Definition)

One set of cards 'C' and 'D' per line.
Cards C
NSTEEL (IS) = Number of depths with corresponding.steel areas for
this line and section. (Maximum= 8).
Cards D
One card for each NSTEEL
DEPTH, STEELA (2E 10.4)
DEPTH = Depth of steel from soffit. (If depth is n.egative, it
is assumed to be measured from the deck).
STEELA = Area of steel at correspondi.ng depth.

Card Group 9 (Temperature Definitions)

One set of cards 'E' (and if POWER is negative 'F') per line.
Card E
POWER,TEMPM, ZEROH
POWER If POWER = o. the same temperature distribution as the previous
section is assumed. If POWER is less than O., then its absolute
value is the number of temperatures to be manually fed in as per
'F' below. If POWER is positive it is assumed to be the power
of a temperature curve, ranging from a value TEMPM at the deck
to zero at a depth ZEROH from the soffit. (If ZEROH is negative
this depth is assumed to be measured from the deck) .
Card F
One card for each converted integer value of IPOWERI.
TDEPTH, TEMP, (2E 10. 4)
TDEPTH = Depth from soffit for which corresponding temperature is
input. (Note again if TDEPTH is negative it is assumed to
be measured from the deck). Temperatures specified starting
from deck and in sequence until soffit.
TEMP Temperature at depth TDEPTH.
 C.15

DATA PREPARATION FOR PROGRAM TREACTION

Card 1 (Control card)

NJOBS,LENGTH,DEFACT,IVHUND,IVINC,ITES,ITIM,IOTHER (BilO)
NJOBS = Number of independent successive jobs.
LENGTH = Length of plot, i.e. plotted beam length (mm * 4).
DE FACT = Factor by which all deflections are multiplied in plot.
IVHUND = (Number of mm) *4.0 between each plotted vertical deflection
unit on plot.
I VI NC = Number of deflection units (after factoring by DEFACT) for
each IVHUND mm/4.0 plot length.
ITES = Test number. This number is plotted out.
ITIM = Time in seconds. This; number is plotted out.
I OTHER The number of points for which the simply supported thermal
deflection will be fed in (See card group 6) •

Card 2 (Control card)

NUME (IlO)

NUME = Number of changes in section stiffness (EI) to be defined

along the beam. (If EI is constant along length put zero).

Card 3 (Beam lengths and section stiffness)

EI, X, Y, H (4Fl0.4)
EI = Basic stiffness EI of beam sections.
x = Length of Span One (See Fig. 5. 2) •
y Length of Span Two.
H = Length of overlap on simply supported end.

Card 4 (Beam identification)

TITLE (13A6) Up to 78 characters of job identification.

Card Group 5 If NUME f 0 (Beam stiffness distribution)

NUME cards
XEI, FEI (2El0.0)
XEI = The distance from the simply supported end for which the
factor is assumed to apply.
FEI The factor applied to the standard EI in Card 3 above.
(Note: the factor is assumed to apply from this point on
the beam until it is next changed) .
 C.16

Card Group 6 (Simply supported thermal deflections)

One card for each deflection fed in.
TCOO, TDEF (2El0.0)
~00 = Coordinate from simply supported end of deflection.
TDEF THERMAL deflection of simply supported beam at coordinate
TCOO. (Found from TSTRESS).

Card Group 7 (Simple supported thermal deflections)

SLOPE, DEFLCT (2El0.0)
SLOPE = End slope of simply supported beam at column end in
radians. (See Fig. 5.2).
DEFLCT = Deflection at centre support location of simply supported
beam.
(Note: both these values come from TSTRESS).
 cmn I HUED ( 1 ) PROGRAM TSTRESS

REAL TYPA(4)/'PLEASE USE 0.3t1M \JET PEN' I

REAL DEFLAB(3)/'DEFLECTION * 100'/ c *** S2 ex COORDINATE OF 2tlD SUPPORT)
REAL BS(2)/ 'DEAtl SHAPE' I C*** TEMPS(COEFFICIENT OF TEHP,EXPt1 STEEL) 0
REAL HS(4)/ 1 HEIGHT ABOVE SOFFIT'/ C*** TEMPC(TEMPERATURE COEFFICIEN OF EXPN,FOR CONCRETE.)
REAL WS(2)/ 1 THICKNESS'/ c
REAL BEAt1(2)/'BEAH t1UMBER'/,XP(41),YP(41) READ ( 5, 1000) llUttSEC, tlL HIE, TEttPS, TErtPC, ES, EC, S 1 , S2 ,LENGTH
REAL ZAP(41),CONT(4~) ERATIO=ES/EC
REAL TLAB(2)/'TEHPERATURES'/ WRITE(6,1004)tlUMSEC,TEHPS,TEr1PC,ES,EC
REAL SLAB(4)/'SPECIFIED TEMPERATURES'/ IF(S1+S2.LE.O.)GO TO 162
REAL LINL(l)/'LINE' \IRITE(6,1018)S1,S2
REAL SECTN(3) I I SECHotl tlUtlBER' I 162 CONTINUE
REAL BEAl1T(3)/'* BEAM TITLE *'I c
REAL JOBT(3)/'* JOB TITLE *'/ C*** READ IN BEAM SHAPE.
REAL CONC(6)/'CONCRETE STRESSES (COMPRESSION +VE)'/ C*** HEIGHT(DISTANCE UP FROM BOTTOM OF SECTION)
DlMENSlotl STEELA(4,8) ,STEELD(4,8) ,HEIGHT(4,20), THICK(4,20) C*** THICK(TOTAL THICKNESS AT THIS HEIGHT)
DIMENSION TDEPTH(4,31),TEHP(4,31) C*** tlLEVEL(tlUMBER OF LEVELS FOR l/HICH THICKtlESS
lllTEGER t1LEVEL(4) ,IHEt1P(4) ,NAREA(4) C*** IS SPECIFIED.)
DlMEtlSlON STORE(4),TlTLE(16),TlTLEH(20) c
REAL LENGTH \IRITE(6, 1030)HUNE
DIMENSION XCORD(52),CURV(52),SLOPE(50),DISP(50) \./RITE(6,1010) LEtlGTH
REAL H01(52) tl=l
READ(5,1006)NBEAH 1 IP,(TITLE(J),J:1,11) 11=0.
lF(IP.LE.O)GO TO £701 SDEPTH=O.
IY:100 DO 8 I=l ,tlLitlE
CALL AWIT(50) DO 1762 K=l ,20
c HEIGHT(! rK>=o.
1762 THICK(I,KJ=O.
C *** PLOT JOB LABEL
c READ(5,1000)NLEVEL(l)
H=NLEVEL(l)
CALL ATYPE(TYPA,24)
CALL ASPEED(4) EF ( t1. GT. ti) N=H
CALL ALAB(30,20,JOBT,13,1,4) DO 8 K=l ,t1
CALL ALAB(30,170,TITLE,66,1,4) READ(5 1 1002)HEIGHT(l,K),THICK(IrK)
READ(5,1032)ISTR,IHS,IDF,1VD,ITP,ISP IF(THl~K(I,K).GT.W) W=THICK(l,KJ
\.IRITE(6,1033)1STR,IHS,IDF,IVD lF(HElGHT(I,K).GT.SDEPTH) SDEPTH=HEIGHT(I,K)
2701 CONTINUE 8 CONTINUE
DO 999 lJ:1,NBEAH DO 902 1=1,tl
~RITE(6,1007)(TITLE(J),J=1,11),IJ 902 WR1TE(6,1011)(HEIGHT(K,I),THICK(K,l),K=1,NL!NE)
READ(5,1028)(TITLEB(J) J:l,13) YSCA=SDEPTH/8.
\IRITE(6, 1026)(TITLED(J~ ,J=l, 13) CALL SCALE(YSCA,INC2,IYilNC,FACTR2)
READ(5,1002)FACTOR tl4=799 I I Ylt1C+2
~RlTE(6,1035)FACTOR IF(IP.LE.O.OR.ISP.LE.O)GO TO 2100
IF(IP.LE.O)GO TO 211 c
~RITE(6, 1001) c ~:~:~:
PLOT SECTJOH SHAPE
GO TO 212 c
211 llRITE(6,1003) CALL AitlIT(800)
212 CCJMTl llUE CALL ASPEE0(5)
c CALL ALAB(30,20,BEAMT,14,1,4)
c<r<:* READ MUMSEC, CtlUMBER OF SECTIOtJS) CALL ALAB(30,180,TITLEB,78,1,4)
C *** ES (MODULUS OF ELASTICITY OF STEEL) . IX = 150
C **<: EC (MODULUS OF E'LASTI CITY OF Cnt!CRETE) CALL AORIG(lX,IY)
C *** Sl (X COORDINATE OF 1ST SUPPORT) CALL ALAB(-70,100,BEAH,11,2,4) r>
....
CALL ASCA(-70,280,10,10,JJ,10,1,2,4) ......
 CONT I tlUED ( 2) PROGRAM TSTRESS

XSCA=l.J/4. 2783 CONTlllUE

IF(IP.LE.O.oR.ISTR.LE.O) GO To 3567
CALL SCALE(XSCA,lNC,lXINC,FACTR) CALL Alt1IT(50)
tl3:399/IXI tlC+2 CALL ALAB(30,100,SECTN,14,2,4)
CALL AORIG(200,IY) CALL ASCA(30,340,10,10,l,10,1,2,4)
DO 2101 M=l,NLINE 3567 CONTI NUF.
lf(H.NE.l)CALL AORlG(85,lY) \.JRITE(6,1015) X,XCOORD,CDEPTH,TSTREN,BM
CALL ALAB(120,850,ss,10,2,2) IF(BM.NE.O.)NLOOP=40
CALL ALAB(-60,400,HS,19,2r4) IF(RH.NE.O.) GO TO 161
CALL ALAB(50,-60,\.JS,9,2,2J WRITE(6, 1017) STRAIN
XP(l)=O. 161 CONTINUE
YP(l):O. c
tll=t!LEVEL(M) C**"' FOR EACH STEEL AREA,REAO Ill ITS AP..EA,AtlD DEPTH
DO 2102 tJ2=1, tll C"'"'"' AGAltl DEPTH IS -VE IF t1EASURED FROM THE TOP
XP(N2+1):THICK(M,N2) c
2102 YP(N2+1)=HEIGHT(M,N2) IF(ISW.LT.O}GO TO 2
Nl =tll +3 DO 903 L=l ,NLlNE
· XP (tll -1 ) :0. READ(5, 1000} lS\J
YP(tll-1)= SDEPTH IF(lSW.LE.O}GO TO 903
XP(tlt )=O. DO 5 K=l,IS\J
YP(tll )=O. READ(5,1002)DEPTH,STEELA(L,K)
CALL ALINE(XP,YP,N1,0.,0.,XSCA,YSCA) lF(DEPTH)6,7,7
CALL ALAB(120,-90,LINL,4,2,2) 6 STEELD(L,K)=SDEPTH+OEPTH
CALL ASCA(160,-90,10,10,H,1,1,2,2) GO TO 5
CALL ASCA(-55,-S,O,IYINC,0,1NC2,N4,1,2) 7 STlELD(L,K)=DEPTH
CALL ASCA(-35,-30,IXINC,O,O,INC,N3,1,2) 5 Cnt!Tl tllJE
CALL AEND 903 tl/\REA(L)=IS\/
iF(M.NE.NLINE) CALL AINIT(685) 2 CONTINUE
2101 CONTINUE tl=O
2100 COtlT I llUE Do 905 L=1 ,lllltlE
c 905 N=N+tlAREA(L)
C*** BEGHINlNG OF BIG LOOP. (OtlCE PER SECTION) IF(N.GT.O)GO TO 171
c WR I TE ( 6 , 10 1 9)
DO 20 l=1,NUt1SEC GO TO 172
c 171 DO 173 L=1,NLlt!E
c-* FOR EACH DISTAtlCE ALONG UEAM,READ CRACK DEPTH, tl=tlAREA ( L)
C*** CRACK STRAltl,AtlD IS\.J lF(N.LE.O)GO To 173
C*** IS\.J=-1 IF THERE IS THE SMIE STEEL HRITE(6,1031)L
C*** COtlFIGURATIOtl AS ltl THE PREVIOUS SECTlotl DO 170 K=1,l'I
C*** CRACK DEPTH IS FEO Itl AS -VE lF ORIGltlAT!tlG FROt1 TOP 170 WRITE(6,1020)STEELD(L,K),STEELA(L,K)
C*** OF SECTIOtl 173 CONTINUE
c 1 72 COtlTl NllE
REA0(5, 1002)XCOORO,CDEPTH,STRA!tl, TSTREtl,Bt1,UCt10l ,ERoT, ISll, lREP c
NLOOP=l C""''"' ·READ Itl TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION.;
POEPTH=CDEPTH C**"' PO\.JER IS POWER THAT TEMPERATURE DI STRIBUTIOll
IF(PDEPTH.LT,O)PDEPTH=SDEPTH•POEPTH C"'"'* CURVE IS TO USE. (=-1 IF ACTUAL TEt1PERATURES ARE
lF(lREP.LE.O) GO TO 2783 C*"'"' TO BE SPEClflEO, WHERE I IS tlUMBER OF TEt1PERATURES
L=l-1 C *"'-'·,-;, IF POWER = O. SAHE TEt1P DIST. AS DEFORE
XCORD(I+l)=XCOORD C*** TEMPM IS MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
CURV (I+ 1) =CllRV (I)· C*** TOP AND HOTTON
\.JRITE(6,1034)1,XCORD(l+l),L n
GO TO 20
c _.
co
 corH I NUED (3) PROGRAM TSTRESS

DO 19 L=l ,NLltlE VV=IL

READ(5, 1002)PO\JER, TE.MPM,ZEROH tl6=449/IXINC +1
lF(PO\JER.NE.O.) \./RITE (6, 1031 )L rl3=1J6+1
IF(Po\.IER)l2,19,16 CALL AORIG(lOO,IY)
12 NTEHP(L)=-PO\.IER OD 2206 N=1 NLXrJE
\.IRITE(6! 1012) lF(M.NE.1) lALL AORIG(85,IY)
IJ:tlTEtlP l L) CALL ALAB(-60,l~O,HS 19,2,4)
DO 13 K=1,N CALL ALAB{50,-60,TLAB,12,2,2)
READ(5,1002)TDEPTH(L,K),TEMP(L 0 K) CALL ALAB(0,850,SLAB,22,2,2)
IF(TDEPTH(L,K).LT.O.O) TDEPTH(L,K)=SDEPTH+TDEPTH(L,K) tll=tlTEt1P(t1)
\.IRITE(6, 1013) TnEPTH(L,K), TEttP(L,K) 00 2207 112= I Ill
13 CONTINUE XP(ll2 )=TEt1~(H,N2)
GO TO 19 2207 YP(fl2 )=TOEPTH(t1,N2)
16 CONTI NlJE CALL ALINE(XP,YP,Nl,VV,O.,XSCA,YSCA)
IF(ZEROH)816,B17,817 CALL ALAB(120,-90,LINL,4,2,2)
816 ZEROH=SOEPTH~ZEROH CALL ASCA(160,-90, 10, 10,t1, l, 1,2,2)
817 Al=O. CALL ASCA(-55,-5,0,IYINC,O,INC2,N4,1,2)
.A2:SOEPTH-ZEROH CALL ASCA(-35,-30,IXINC,O,IL,INC,N3,1,2)
\.IRITE(6, 1014)TEt1PM,PO\.IER CALL AGRID(O,O,N6,N5,IXINC,!YINC)
WRITE (6, 1027)A2,A1 CALL AEIJD
DO 17 K=l ,30 lF(t1.NE.tlLitlE) CALL AitlIT(650)
DEPTH=(30.0-K)/29.0 2206 CONTINUE
TOEPTH(L,K)=OEPTH*A2+ZEROH 2201 CONTINUE
TEMP ( L, K) =TEHPH;'( OEPTH"n~PmlER) c
17 CONTINUE C *** LOOP FOR ITERATION OF CRACK HEIGHT
tlTEt1P ( L) =30 c
!F(ZEROH)19,19,14 DO 1126 ILOOP=1,NLOOP
14 MTEt1P ( L) =31 Al=O.
TEHP(L,31)=0. A2=0.
TDEPTH(L,31):0. A3=0.
19 CONTINUE A4=0.
tl5=N4-1 A6:0 0
IF(lP.LE.O.OR.ITP.LE.O)GO To 2201 A?=O.
IF(PO\.IER.EQ.O.) GO TO 2201 A8=0.
c
c c
,.,,.,~,
PLOT TEt1PERATURE PROFILE C*** Al IS AREA ABOVE CRACK+SWl(ERATIO*AS)
c C*** (ERATI0-1 IS USED FOR STEEL AREA ABOVE CRACK)
CALL AitHT(650) c *** EQUATIONS ARE Al*El + A2*E2 +A3=A4
TL=lOOO. c *** ANO .~5;,E 1 + A6,.'E2 +A7=A8
TH:O. c *** A3 IS Cot1PRESSIOtl FORCE ACROSS CRACK
DO 2203 11=1,NLHIE c *** A? IS tlot1EtlT Of A3 ABOUT SOFFIT
tl=llTEHP ( t1) c *** FOR DEFINITIONS OF OTHER PARAMETERS, REFER
DO 2203 Nl =1, ll c *** TO THE THEORY
IF(TEHP(11,tl1 ).LT. TL) TL=TEt1P(t1,tl1) c
2203 lF(TEHP(M,Nl).GT.TH) TH=TEMP(H,NI) DO 907 L=1,NLINE
OIFF=TH-TL rl=NAREA(L)
lF(OIFF.LE.5.0)0lFF=5.0 IF(N.LE.O)GO TO 908
XSCA:[l IFF //1. 5 DO 25 K=1,N
CALL SCAl.E(XSCJ\, ltJC, IXltJC,FACT~) R=ERATIO 0
r L=(TL+ 0. 2 ) ,., FA err. I I I Jr. Y:STEELD(L,K) ~

IL= IL"'' I t/C/F J\CTP.

CALL F ItlOT(TDEPTH. TEt1P. y. T. tJTEt1P ( L). L) CD
 CONTlNUED(I+) PROGRAM TSTRESS

JF(CDEPTH)21,22,2) 112=J
DELTA=DELTA+DEPTH-YT
23 lF(Y.LE.CDEPTH)GO To 26 YT=DEPTH
22 R:R-1.0 !l=J-1
GO To 26 IF(DEPTH.EQ.HEIGHT(L,J-2)) N=J-2
21 YT=SOEPTH-Y+CDEPTH GO To 32
1F(YT)26 26,22 311 t12=J+ 1
26 R:STEELAiL,K)*R lF(HEIGHT(L,J+1).EQ.HElGHT(L,J))N2=N2+1
A1=A1+R tl=J
A2=A2+R*STEELD(L,K) 32 Y:YT-DELTA/2.
A6=A6+R*STEELD(L,K)*STEELD(L,K) B:(THICK(L,N)-THXCK(L,N-1))*(Y-HEIGHT(L,N-1))
R=R"'T"'TEMPS B=THICK(L,N-1)+8/(HEIGHT(L,N)-HEIGHT(L,N-1))
A4:A4+R 36 CONTINUE
A8:A8+R*Y CALL FINDT(TDEPTH,TEHP,Y,T,NTEMP(L),L)
25 CONTINUE R=B"'DEL TA
900 cor~Tl NUE ' A1=A1+R
DY:(SDEPTH·ABS(CDEPTH))/40.0 A4=A4+R"'TEt1Pc·::T
J=2 R=R"'Y
YT:DY A2=A2+R
TOPD=SDEPTH+CDEPTH AB=A8+R'"TEHPC"'T
IF(CDEPTH.LE.O.)GO To 39 R=R"'Y
TOPD=SDEPTH A6=A6+R
YT=CDEPTH+DY
N2=tlLEVEL{L) c N IS LEVEL FOR THIS WIDTH, N2 THE t1EXT HEIGHT ABOVE YT
C*>"r·::
DO 38 J:2 tl2
1F(HElGHT{L,J)-CDEPTH)38,39,39 c
38 CONTINUE 40 YT:YT+DY
39 N2:J 907 CotlTl llUE
DO 40 K=1 , 200 A5=A2
ll=N2 c
DELTA=DY C*** XF BH IS tlE O, EQUIVALENT CRACK STRAIN IS CALCULATED
c C*** 1ST THE tlA IS FOUND = A5/A1
C*** FIND SECTION WIDTH AT DEPTH Y C*** THEN THE H.O.l. = A6-A1*NA*NA FOUND
c C*** STRAlN=H*Y/(E*l). FOR STRAIN ON OUTSIDE EDGE Y:NA
lF(YT.LT.TOPD)GO TO 217 C*** FOR +VE CRACK, = SDEPTH-NA FOR -VE CRACK
K=1000 c
DELTA=DELTA+TOPD-YT X!lA=A5/A1
YT=TOPD Xt1I=A6-A1 "'XllA "'XNA
GO TO 32
IF ( BM) 44 , 1 , 411
217 CONTINUE 4lf STRAI N:BM/ ( EC"'Xt1 I)
11=NLEVEL(L) lF(CDEPTH) 45,46,46
DO 31 J=N ,H 46 STRA I tJ:STRA I ll'''XtlA
DEPTH:HE!GHT(L,J) GO TO 16666
IF(DEPTH-YT)31,34,33 45 STRA I N=-STRA l t!* ( SDEPTH-XtlA)
16666 WRITE(6,1016) COEPTH,STRAIH
31 CONT I NUE 1 CotJT I tlUE
K:1000
A2=A2/SOEPTH n
tl=HLE VE L( L)
DELTA=DELTA+DEPTH-YT A6=A6/SDEPTH i-J
YT=HEIGHT(L,tl) NLOOPS:O 0
GO To 32 . E10=0
33 lF(J.EQ.N)GO TO 32 (20=0
DEPTH:HEIGHT(L,J-1) 50 E1:(A4-A3)*A6-(A8-A7)*A2
 PROGRAM TSTRESS
CONTINUED(5)

E1=E1/{A1*A6-A2*A5) 110 I ( I + 1 ) =Xtll

IF (UCtlO I. GT. O. O.AND. STRAW.LT. o.o) MO I( 1+ 1) =UCMO 1
E2=(A4-A3)*A5-(AB-A7)*A1 E3=E1+E2
E2=E2/(A2*A5-A1*A6) ~RITE(6,1021)I,E3,E1 ,CURV(l+1)
lF(NlOOPS.EQ.O)GO TO 60 ~RITE(6, 1022)
IF(ABS(El).GE.0.000002 )GO To 312 DX=SDEPTH/40
lF(ABS(ElO).LT.0.000004 )GO To 313 DO 909 L=l ,NLltlE
GO TO 60 \./RITE (6, 1031 )L
312 CmJTINUE Do 1880 K=l ,41
R=ABS(1.0-E10/E1) Y=CK-1 >;,ox
1F(R.GT.0.005)GO TO 60 CALL FINDT(TDEPTH,TEMP,Y,T,NTEttP(L),L)
313 CONTINUE R=E 1+E2;:y /SDIEPTH
. 1F(ABS(E2).LE.0.000002) GO TO 60 R=T*TEMPC -R
R=ABS(l.O-E20/E2) R:R;:EC
IF(R.LT.0.005)GO TO 70 ZAP(K):R
60 IF(CDEPTH)61,70,61 CONT(K)=STORC*(Y-XNA)+R
61 IF(NLOOPS.GT.~0) GD TO 70 PPP=COtlT(K)
l!i=O IF(CDEPTH)181,189,189
.IF(ABS(A3 /A4)+ABS(A7 /AB).LE.0.001) IH=l 189 IF(Y.GE.COEPTH)GO TO 180
IF(NLOOPS.EQ.O) GO TO 1849 CS=STRAIN*(CDEPTH-Y)/COEPTH
E1=(2*E1+E1D)/3.0 182 CS:CS'°'EC
E2:(2*E2+E2D)/3.0 IF(CS.GT.O.) GO To 1441
!F(STRAIN.GT.O.O) GO TO 1849 IF(R.GT.O.) GO TO 180
E1=(E1+E10)/2.0 IF(R.GE.CS) GO TO 180
E2=(E2+E2D)/2.0 R:CS
1849 cm1TINUE GO TO 180
CALL CRACKF ( E1, E2, COEPTH, !!LI llE, STRA ltl, HEIGHT, THI CK, 181 CS:STRAIN*(SOEPTH+CDEPTH-Y)/CDEPTH
1 TEMPC,A3,A7,NLEVEL,SDEPTH,TDEPTH,TEMP,NTEMP) GO To 182
IF(IH.LE.O) GD To 47711 1441 R=R-CS
1F(ABS(A3/A4)+ABS(A7/AB).LE.0.001) GD TO .70 lF(R.GE.O.) GD TO 180
47711 ElO=El R=O.
E20=E2 180 \.IRlTE(6,1023)Y,R,PPP
NLOOPS=NLOOPS+l XP(K)=R
Go TO 50 YP(K)=Y
70 CONTINUE 1 880 CONT I tlUE
IF(l~LOOP.EQ.lLOOP)GD TO 1126 IF(IP.LE.O.OR.ISTR.LE.O)GO TO 909
CALL F ItlDT (TDEPTH, Tf.t1P, PDE PT ii, T, tJTIEtlP ( 1) , 1) c
R=E1+E2*PDEPTH/SOEPTH C *** PLOT PRIMARY STRESSES
R= (T*TEMPC-R) ;:EC -BM* ( XtlA-PDEPTH) /XMl c
IF(R+TSTREN.GT.O.) GO TO 1127 t1=299IlHS+1
POEPTH:POEPTH+SDEPTH/40.0 Ml =2'°' I HS"'M+ 180
lF(CDEPTH.LT.O.) POEPTH=PDEPTH-SDEPTH/20.0 CALL AitHT(M1)
IF(CDEPTH.GE.O)COEPTH=PDEPTH CALL AORIG(85,IY)
IF(CDEPTH.LT.O)COEPTH=PDEPTH-SDEPTH CALL ALAB(-63,100,HS,19,2,4)
1126 ccmTI NUE CALL ASCA(-55,-5,0, IYltlC,O, IrlC2,N4, 1,2)
1127 \.IRITE(6,1008)XllA,Xt1l,A1 t11 :2;'M n
c CALL AGRlD(O,O,H1,H5,IHS,IYltlC) N
c;,-;,;, CALCULATE Atrn PRltJT STRESSES, CURVATURES, TOP Arm BOTTOM STRAINS M2=-M'°'lSTR ......
c t11 =111 +1
CURV(I+1)=E2/SDEPTH CALL ASCA(-30,-25,IHS,O,H2,ISTR,H1,1,2)
STORC=EC*CURV(I+l)*FACTOR CALL ALAB(-40,-60,COtlC,35,2,2)
XCORD(l+l)=XCOORO
 CONTI NUEO ( 6) PROGRAM TSTRESS

t11=lHS''t1+85 c
CALL AORIG(M1,IY) DO 71 J=2,L
CALL ALAB(-80,-90,LINL,4,2,2) IF(XCURD(J).GE.Y)GO TO 72
CALL ASCA(-40,-90,10,10,L,1,1,2,2) 71 CONT I tlUE
XSCA=100.*ISTR/IHS R=1.0
CALL ALINE(XP,YP,41,0.,0.,XSCA,YSCA) J=L
CALL ALINED(ZAP,YP,41,0.,0.,XSCA,YSCA,15,15) GO TO 707
c 72 IF(XCORD(J).EQ.XCORD(J-1)) GOTO 707
C 1'r*--:.· MOMENT = E*l*CURV*FACTOR R:(Y-XCORD(J-1))/(XCORD(J)-XCORO(J-1))
c ~"~"' STRESSES = MOMENT*Y/l = E*CURV*Y*FACTOR c
c ''*'' PLOT TOTAL STRESSES IF FACTOR NE O. C *** CALCULATE SLOPE AND DEFLECTION AT EACH POINT
c c
IF(FACTOR.EQ.O.) GO To 81922 CURVll=CURV(J-l)+R*(ClJRV(J)-CURV(J-1))
CALL ALINED(CONT,YP,41,0.,0.,XSCA,YSCA,15,15) 707 SLOPE(K)=SLOPE(K-l)+(CURVN+CURVO)*DX/2.
81922 CmlTINUE OISP(K)=DISP(K-1)+(SLOPE(K-1)+SLOPE(K))*DX/2.
CALL AEND CURVO=CURVN
909 CONTltJUE 706 Y=Y+DX
WRITE(6,1024) c
DO 190 L=1,NL!NE C""'* HOHEVER 0 I SPLACEt1ENT=O. AT SUPPORTS
N=NAREA(L) C*** Y=DISP+A*X+B
WRITE ( 6, 1031) L
IF(N.LE.O)GO TO 190 c
K=S1/DX+1.
DO 192 K=1,tl Y=DISP(K)+(S1-(K-1)*DX)/DX*{D!SP(K+1)-DISP(K))
Y:STEELD ( L K) K=S2/DX+1.
CALL FINDTlTDEPTH,TEMP,Y,T,NTEMP(L),L) IF(K.GT.49) K=49
R=El+E2*Y/SDEPTH Y2=DISP(K)+(S2-(K-1)*DX)/DX*(DISP(K+1)-DISP[K))
R=T,;'TEMPS -R A:(Y-Y2)/CS2-S1}
Rl=R''ES B=-Y-A''Sl
YT=Rl*STEELA(L,K)
PPP:STORC*ES/EC*(Y-XNA)+Rl c
\ffi!TE(6,1025)STEELD(L,K),STEELA(L,K),YT,Rl,R,PPP C'd'"' ADJUST SLOPE At!D DISPLACEHEtlT ARRAYS.
192
190 ccmTINUE c
20 CONTINUE Y=O.
DO 80 K=l,50
XCORD(l)=O. SLOPE(K):SLOPE(K)+A
CURV(l):CURV(2) DISP(K)=DISP(K)•A*Y+B
XCORD(NUMSEC+2)=LENGTH DlSP(K)=-DISP(K)
CURV ( NlJt1SE C+2) :ClJRV ( tJUt1SE C+ 1 ) 80 Y=Y+DX
c c
C'"'''* CALCULATE AND PRINT DEFLECTION,AND END SLOPE C *** PRillT SLOPE AND DEFLECTION
c c
IF ( llUtlSE C. LE. 1) GO TO 999 \/RITE (6, 1005)
!F(S1+S2.LE.O.)GO To 999 J=-6
DX=(LEtlGTH -XCORD( 1 ))/49. Y=XCORD(l)
Y=DX +XCORD(l) DO 370 K=l,7
SLOPE(1)=0. J:J+7
DISP(1)=0. 11=J•6
CURVO:ClJRV(l) Do 371Hl=1,7 n
L=t1Ut1SEC+2 II= ltl+J-1 f..J
DO 706K=2,50 N
CURV (N):Y
f,.,,.,,., FIIJD 1ST XCORD GE Y
371 Y:Y+DX
370 ~RITE(6,1009)(CURV (L),L:J,t1),(SLOPE(L),L=J,H),(D!SP(L),L=J,M)
 cm1TWUED(7) PROGRAM TSTRESS

CURV (SO)=Y IF(IP.LE.O.OR.IDF.LE.O)GO TO 999

\IRITE(6, 1029)CURV (50) ,SLOPE(SO) ,DISP(SO)
c
c C *** PLOT BEAN DEFLECTIONS
c -...... FIND BEAM FIXED END r1m1EtlTS
c
c CALL AitHT(940)
CALL AORIG(85,300)
t10 I ( I ) =t10 I ( 2) CALL ALAB(-60,SO,DEFLAB 0 16,2,4)
t10I (tM1SEC+2)=t10I (NUMSEC+l) XP (I) =O.
ICOUtlT=2 XP(2)=800.
c
c ,..,.,,., YP(1)=1.
FIND BEAM STIFFNESS AHO CARRY OVER FACTORS YP(2)=1.
c CALL ALINE (XP,YP,2,0.,0.,100.,100.)
Z2=XCORD(2) YP( 1):-1.
U=O. YP(2)=-1.
V=O. CALL ALINE (XP,YP,2,0.,0.,100.,100.)
n=O. XSCA=LENGTH/8.
f:=O. YSCA=l.00 *IDF/IVD
EI =t10 I ( I ) t1=-300/IVD
Z6=0. ILO=M*IDF
DO 430 J=l,100 111= 700/IVD-tl +I
IF(Z2.GT.LENGTH)Z2=LENGTH t1=M,.'1VD
Fl =Z6/LEtlGTH CALL ALINE(XCORO,DISP,50,0.,o.,XSCA,YSCA)
F2=Z2/LEtlGTH XP(2):700
D4=Z2-Z6 XP ( 1) =-300
Dl=Z6+D4/2.0 CALL ALIHE(YP,XP,2,0.,0.,100 ,IOO.) 0
D2=Z6+D4*0.66666667 YP(2)=1.
U=U+F 1*04'"'0 I/EI YP(1)=1.
E=E+Fl ·:'D4'"'( LEtlGTH-D 1) /EI CALL ALINE(YP,XP,2,0.,0.,100.,100.)
U=U+ (F2 -F1)*D4/2.0*D2/EI CALL ASCA(-55AH,O,IVDAlLO,IDFft11,1,2)
E=E+(F2-Fl)*D4/2.0*(LENGTH-D2)/EI CALL SCALE(XS~A,INC,lA HC,FAC R)
FA=1.0-F2 tl=799/ I XI NC+2
F2=1.0-Fl L=tJ-1
Fl=FA t11 =t11-1
O=O+F2''D4'''D 1/EI CALL AGRID(O,H,L,Ml,lXINC,lVD)
V=V+F2,.'D4'"'(LEtlGTH-D1 )/El CALL ASCA(-35,-20,lXINC,O,O,INC,N,l,2)
O=O+(Fl-F2)*D4/2.0*D2/EI CALL AEtJO
V:V+ ( F 1-F2) ,.,D4/2. O"' ( LEtlGTH-D2) /El 999 CONTINUE
IF( lCOUtlT .GE.tJUMSEC+2) GO TO 435 RETURN
IF(Z2.GE.LENGTH)GO TO 435 1000 FORt1AT(2IS,7E10.4)
Z6=Z2 1001 FORNAT(TIO,'OATA WILL BE PLOTTED.')
EI=MOI ( lCOUtlT) 1002 FoRt1AT(7E10.2,2ES)
I COUtJT: I COUtlT+ I 1003 FORt1AT(T10, 1 DATA \.JILL NOT BE PLOTTED.')
Z2=XCORD( ICOUtlT) 1004 FO~~T(TlO,'THE NUMBER OF SECTIONS= ',14,/,
430 cm1Tit1uE 1T10, 'THE TEt1PERATURE COEFFICIENT OF EXPAtlSION. OF ',
435 CFl=O/U 2'STEEL = ',El6.8,/,
S1=LEtlGTfPU'''EC/ ( ll*V-O'''E) .3T10,'THE TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT OF EXPANSION OF '
S2=LENGTH*V*EC/(U*V-O*E) 4'CONCRETE = ',E16.8,/,
CF2=E/V ST10, 'THE t10DULUS OF ELASTICITY OF STEEL = ',E16.8,/,
SLOPE(SO)=SLOPE(SO)-EROT (')
A1=-S1*SLOPE(l)-S2*SLOPE(50)*CF2 6T10, 1 THE MODULUS OF ELAST1CITY OF CONCRETE: ',E16.8)
1005 FORMAT(////,T40,'PRINTOUT OF SLOPES AND DISPLACEMENTS' N
A2=S2*SLOPE(50) +Sl*SLOPE(l)*CFl 1/,T40 1 •-.·:-.·:-::*'fr·.::·:t".'c~:-::-:: . .~-.·:-::-.·n·:i:n'n':;·:.;:-.':****":.':******"t:** O) w
WRITE(6,1036)S1,S2,CF1,CF2,Al,A2
COl!TINUED(S)- PROGRAM TSTRESS

1006 FORMAT(215,11A6) 2 T 99,'TOTAL STRESSES',/,

1007 FORtlAT('lJOB TITLE:-' 11A6,/, 1T5, 'DISTAllCE ABOVE SOFFIT', T30, 'AREA', T45, 'FORCE',
1 I <:*''**'""'*''-:.·*I • '. T30. 'BEAM NUMBER' • I 3, /. 2 T60,'STEEL STRESS 1 ,T78,'STEEL STRAlN',TlOO,'STEEL STRESS' /)
2T30,'**************',/) 1025 FORt1AT(T5,E16.8,T22,E16.8,T39,E16.8,T57,E16.8,T75,E16.8,T9G,E16.8)
1008 FoRt1AT(//T10,'THE ti.A. HEIGHT FROM THE SOFFIT =',E16.8,/,
1 T10r'THE M.O.I. ABOUT THE CENTROID =',E16.8,/,
1
, 026, ~~~~nHfr~),~,~~~~~1~, ITLE =- •• 13A6 • '.
1T10, THE TRANSFORMED AREA= 1 ,E16.8) 1027 FORHAT(T10,'D =DEPTH FROM DECK TO ZERO TEMPERATURE =',E14.6,/,
1009 FORMAT( 'OC08RDitlATES' ,T20, 7E14.6,/, 1T10,'(BELOY THIS DEPTH THE TEMPERATURE IS ASSUMED TO BE =',El6.8
1' SLOPES',T2 , 7E14.6 0 1, 2)
2' DISPLACEMENTS',T20 0 7E14.6) 1028 FORt\AT(13A6)
1010 FORttAT('O',T30,'BEAt1 SHAPE (DEPTHS MEASURED FRot1 SOFFIT)', 1029 FORMAT( •ocooROXtlATES'. T20,E14.6,/.
15X 'BEAM LENGTH =',E16.8,/,T30,'**********',/, · 1 ' SLOPES',T20.E14.6,/,
1/,t15,'LINE 1 1 , T46, 1 LINE 2', 2' DISPLACEMEtlTS',T20,E14.6,//)
2 T77,'LINE 3 1 ,TlOB 'LINE 4',/, 1030 FORttAT(T10, 'THE t1Ut\BER OF Lll~ES =', 15)
3 TlO,'LEVEL', T22,ITH1CKNESS', 1031 FORt1AT( 'O''''''·:: lltlE tlUt1BER', 14)
4 T41,'LEVEL', T53, 1 TH1CKNESS', 1032 FORt1AT(8110)
5 T]"2, 1 1.EVEL I . T84, 'THICKNESS'. 1033 FORt1AT(///, 1 0PLOTTltlG SCALE FOR CONCRETE STRESS' ,T50,'LEtlGT~ OF PL
3T103,'LEVEL', T115,'THICKNESS',/) 10T = 6 INCHES',/,
1011 FORMAT(T5,E12.5,T19,E12.5,T36,El2.5,T50,E12.5, 1 ' ,,,,,,-,.;,*·::-::':°:-::':°:':°:-::*-:":*-::*·::*'".'''''*"''''-;,,,-,,,-;,-::':°:' , /I •
1 T67,E12.5,T81,E12.5,T97 0 E12.5 0 T112,E12.5) 2 1 SCALE IS' ,15,' STRESS UtllTS FOR EVERY',15,' HUNDREDTHS OF AN 111
3CH' /// '0P~OTTltlG SCALE FOR BEAM DEFLECTl0t!S 1 ,T50,'HElGHT OF PLOT
10\2 FORt1AT(' TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION (USER SPECIFIED)',/,T2,
1 • -.:·-.'..·-.·: . .'..--.':-.':-.':"'l':-.': ...':'1'::':-.':-.h':·:.--.'..-...'r:.':··::":.'..·-.·: ...':-.': I • I, 1 1
3 = ts ltll.HES , I,
2 T20,'DEPTH (FROM SOFF1T)',T52, 1 TEMPERATURE',/) 4 -::-::*-;,-;:-::-::-::-::**'~*-::-::·::·::-::-::*':°:-::-::*-::*>':-::':°:*''-;'**' /I
5 1 SCALE IS',15, ' *0.01 DEFLECTION UNITS FD~ EGERY',15,' HUNDRED
I

1013 Foru~T(T28,E16.8,T49 E16.8)

10111 FORt1AT( T10, 'A TEt1PERATURE DISTRIBUTION OF T = R'°'CY''''N)/(D"'''N)
1IS ASSUttED',/,T10,'R =TEMPERATURE RAtlGE =',E14.6,/, 10346THS OF All ltJCH') SECTION rm.',14, 1 AT cooROINATE',E12.5,' !S ASSU
FORt1AT(///,'0""''''°' 1
2T10,'N = POYER OF EQUATION =',E14.6) 1ttED TO HAVE THE SAt1E CURVATURE AS SECTION NO. , 14)
1015 FORHAT(////,T30,'SECTION tlUHBER',14 1 / , 1035 FORt1AT( '0''*-:: CONTltJUlTY FACTOR =' ,E16.8,/)
1T30,'******************',/, 1036 FORt\AT( •o-::-::-::* BEAt1 STIFFNESSES,CARRY OVER FACTORS AtlD FIXED EtlD HO
3T2, 1 THE X COORDltlATE OF SECTlOll =',E16.8,/, 1HENTS',/,T10,6E12.6)
3T2,'THE CRACK HEIGHT =',[16.8, /, END
4T2,'THE TENSILE CAPACITY OF CONCRETE AT THE CRACK TIP =',E16.B, /, SUBROUTl tlE F HlDT (TDEPTH, TEMP, Y• T, tlTEttP, L)
5T2, 'THE BENDltlG HOt1EtlT =' ,E16.8) DIMENSlOtl TOEPTH(4,31) • TEMP(4,31)
1016 FORt1AT(T2, 'FOR CRACK HEIGHT' ,E14.6,' THE STRAitl Otl THE TENSION FAC
1E = I ,E14.6)
cc·::-:n': THIS SUBROUTltlE HUNTS THE ToEPTH ARRAY UtlTlL
1017 FORttAT(T2 ,'THE STRAHi Oil THE TEt~Slotl FACE= ',E16.8) C*** IT FIND A DEPTH CORRESPONDING TO Y, AND IT
1018 FORttAT(T10, •xcooRDINATE OF 1ST SUPPORT= ',Elb.8,/, c-:,,,-,-;, RETURNS THE CQRRESPONDHIG TEt\PERATURE ltl T
1T10, 'X COORDINATE OF 2tlD SUPPORT = 1 E16 8) c
1019 FORMAT(' THERE IS NO STEEL AT THE SECfloNt) DO 1 1 =2, tlTEt'IP
1020 FORMAT(' STEEL AREA AT OEPTH',E16;B•' FROM SOFFIT =',E16.8) lF(TDEPTH(L,l).LT.Y) GO TO 2
1021 Foru1AT(//,T30,'RESULTS AT SECTION ,I4,/,T30, CotlTINUE
!'**********************' I l=NTEMP
2 1 0STRAltl AT TOP FACE ••• =·.~16.8,/, 2 R=(Y-TDEPTH(L,1-1))/(TDEPTH(L,~)-TOEPTH(L,l-1))
3' STRAHi AT l:!OTTOlt FACE=' IE 16.8.._/, T=TEHP ( L, 1-1 )+R·:: (TEt1P ( L, l) -TEMP ( L, I-1))
4 ' CURVATURE OF SECTION 1 E16.ts) = RETUR!l
1022 FORMAT(///,T25, 1 CONCRETE STRESSES (COMPRESSION •VE)',/, EtlD
IT10, 'OlSTAllCE ABOVE SOFFIT' ,T40, 'UllRESTR!AtJED STRESSES', · SUBROUTINE CRACKF(E1,E2,COEPTH~NL,STRAIH,HEI~HT,THICK,TEMPC,A3,A7,
2 T69,'TOTAL STRESSES',/) rnLEVE L, SDEPTH, TDEPTH, TEtlP, !lTEHI"')
1023 Foru1AT(T10,E16.8,T39,E16.8,T68,E16.8) Olt1EMS10tl HEIGHTC4 20), TH1CK(4,20) ,TDEPTH(4,31), TEMP(4,31)
1
1024 FORHAT(//,T40,'STEEL STRESSES (C011PRESSlotl +VE)',///, Olt1Et1Slotl NTEMP(4J ,ULEVEL(4)
1 T47, 1 UllRESTRAltlEO STRESSES STRAlllS AtlD FORCES', ll=2 f)
N
~
 CONTI !IUED ( 9)
PROGRAM TSTRESS

A3=0.
A7=0. DO 31 J=N,M
DO 999 L=1,t4L !12=J
DY=SDEPTH/40. OEPTH=HEIGHT(L,J)
Y=DY /2. lF(OEPTH-YT)31,34,33
YT=DY 31 CotlTlNUE
DX=O. J=M
TOP:CDEPTH 33 IF(J.EU.N)GO TO 36
JF(TOP.GE.O)GO To 51 OEPTH=HEIGHT(L,J-1)
TOP=SDEPTH IF(YT-OY-OEPTH.GE.O.)GO TO 36
Y=SDEPTH+CDEPTH+DY/2. N=J
YT=Y+DY /2. OY=DY+OEPTH-YT
!ILEV=tlLEVE LC L) tl2=1l-1
DO 50 11=2, t~LEV YT=OEPTH
1F(HEJGHT(L,N)-YT)50,50,51 Y=YT-OY/2.
50 CONTHIUE l S\J=l
51 CONTI tJUE GO To 2
DU=DY 62 CONTINUE
Db 101=1,200 lF(OEPTH.EQ.HElGHT(L,J-2))N2=J-2
DY=OU GO TO 36
lS\.1:0 311 tl=J+ 1
IF(YT-TOP)2,3r4 N2=J
4 DY=ToP-(YT-DYJ XF (HE IGHT(L,.1+1) .EQ.HElGHT(L,J) )N=N+1
YT=TQP 36 CotJTINUE
Y=YT-OY/2. B:(THICK(L,!12)-THICK(L,!12-l))*(Y-HElGHT(L,112-t))
3 1=1000 B:THI CK( L • fl2·· 1) +Cl/( HE lGHT ( L, ll2) ~HE lGHT( L, U2-1))
2 CALL FlNOT(TDEPTH,TEt1P,Y,T,tlTEt1P(L),L) T =-T;'OY~:B
T=T;'TEt1PC A3=A3+T
E=E 1+E2,,Y /SDEPTH A7=A7+T'"Y
T=T-E 1 COtlTitWE
IF(CDEPTH) 21,20,20 YT=YT+DlJ
20 CS:STRAI!l*(COEPTH-Y)/CDEPTH Y=YT-OU/2.0
GO TO 22 10 CONT ltlUE
21 CS:STRAI!l*(SOEPTH-Y+CDEPTH)/COEPTH 999 CONTINUE
c RETURN
c,.-,-:,;, IF CS +VE, T +VE, COMPRESSIVE STRAIN = T-CS E!ID
c. ::,,., . ., IF CS -VE, T +VE, COMPRESSIVE STRAIN = T SUBROUTINE SCALE(VERT,IV,J,FACTR)
C"'~:;: IF CS -VE, T -VE, ANO T.GE.CS COMPRESSIVE STRAill = T V=lOOOOOO.
c;,*;' IF CS -VE, T -VE, ANO T.LT.CS COMPRESSIVE STRAIN = CS 1602 lF(V.LE.VERT)GO TO 1601
c V:V/10.0
22 IF(CS.GT.O)GO TO 25 GO TO 1602
IF(T.GT.O.)GO TO 5 1601 l=VERT/V
IF(T.GE.CS)GO TO 5 IF( I .EQ.3) 1=2
T:CS IF(I.EQ.6)1=5
GO To 5 lF(l.EQ.7)1=5
25 T=T-CS IFCI.EQ.9) 1=8
IF(T)l,1,5 FACTR=l.O
5 CotJTltJUE IF(V.LT.1.0) FACTR:1.0/V
lF(lS\.l.EQ.1)GO TO 62 IV=V'"FFACTR
c 1=100*1V/VERT/FACTR
c-::-::;: \JORK OUT THICKllESS AT DEPTH YT VERT:lOO.O*lV/(l*FACTR) n
c RETURtl N
t1=t1LEVEL(L) Erm C1I
CONTINUED ( 1 ) PROGRAM TREACTION

c -·--·--·- THEORETICAL REACTIONS PLUS CONTINUITY DEFLECTED SHAPE FROM READ(S,S)XEl(J),FEI(J}

XEI (J):XEI (.1)-H
c END SLOPE PLUS CENTRAL REACTION SUPPLIED BY THERMAL STRESS HRITE(6,409)XEI(J),FEl(J)
c *-::* PROGRAM (NO 1) 409 FORMAT('O**** AT DISTANCE',E16.8,' STANDARD El IS FACTORED BY',
c 1 E16.8)
DIMENSION FEl(SO),XEl(SD) 408 CONT IHUE
INTEGER DEFACT 41 0 CONT I tlUE
REAL TlM(l)/'TIME ='/ \-IRITE(6,207)EI ,H,X, Y
REAL SEC(2)/'(SECONDS)'/ 207 FORMAT('-::·::·:,,-;, EI =',E16.8,/,
REAL TYPA(B )/'FlllAL PLOT FOR THESIS. PLEASE USE .3MM WET PEN'/ 1 I **** z =',E16.B,/,
DIMENSION ODEF(SS),OCOOD(S5),YL(2),XL(2) 1 ' **** X =',E16.8,/,
c 2 I **** y =',E16.8,///)
c -;,,~,~
ODEF AND OCOOD ARE THERMALLY S.S. COORDINATES AND DEFLECTIONS DO 844 J=l,IOTHER
c READ(S,S)OCDOD(J),ODEF(J)
REAL KEY(1)/'KEY 1 /,TOTD(7)/'TOTAL DEFLECTED SHAPE •••••••••••••••• OCOOD(J)=OCOOD(J)-H
1 •.•• I I
WRITE(6,84S)OCOOD(J},ODEF(J)
REAL CONT(7)/'DEFLECTION DUE TO CONTINUITY REACTIONS'/ 845 FORt1AT(' ,·,-;,,·,,·,AT COORDitlATE',E16.8,' GlVEtl THERMAL DEFLECTION=',
REAL TITLE(20) 1 E16.8) .
REAL DEFL(45),XCOOD(45),XM(45)
REAL LEtH3)/' LEtlGTH (11ETRES) I I 844 CONTINUE
REAL DE(3)/'DEFLECTION (MM)'/ READ(S,S)SLOPE,DEFLCT
REAL DFT(4)/'DEFLECTIO~ FACTOR = 'I 5 FORt1AT(10E10.0)
REAL TE(2)/'TEST NO.'/ WRITE(6,209)SLDPE,DEFLCT
READ(S,t)IJOBX 209 FORMAT('O**** THE END SLOPE =',E16~8,/,
DO 9999 LPPO =1,IJOBX 1 ' *-::·::-:: THE CENTRAL DEFLECTIDtl =' ,E16.8)
READ(S,1)NJOBS,LENGTH,DEFACT,IVHUND,IVINC,ITES ,ITIM,lOTHER IF(ITES.LE.O) GD TO 999
FORl1AT(8!10) c
WRITE ( 6. 1 )tjJQBS. LEllGTH. DE FACT. I VHUtlD. Iv me. ITES • IT lt1, I OTHER C *** IF !TES IS -VE, THEN MEASURED REACTIONS ARE ASSUMED.
READ(S,1)NUME,NVALX c
c C *** CALCULATE FORCE AT CEtlTRAL SUPPORT FOR 1 UNIT OF DEFLECTION
c *** ASSUt1ING TWO ENDS ARE s.suPPORTED. ALSO END ROTATION WITH THIS
c --- NUME IS IWMBER OF EI r ACTORS ALONG LEtlGTH
C *** FORCE. REFER P.100 BOOK 1 OF CALCULATIONS.
c *** IF THERE JS ONLY ONE HOWEVER IT IS MORE EFFICIENT TO PUT ZERO
c *** NVALX IS A SWITCH. IF NUME.GT.O AND NJOBS.GT.O THEN:- c
c *** NVALX=D IF ALL JOBS HAVE OWN El DEFINITION. Z=X+Y
c *** NVALX=1 IF ONLY ONE EI DEFINITION FOR ALL JOBS. IF(NUME.GT.O)GO TD 412
c EIC=(X*Y*Y)*(X+Y/3.)/(2.0*Z) + (X*X*Y*X)/(3.0*Z)
EIA=(X*Y*Y*Y)/(6.0*Z)
REAO(S 9 2)EI,X,Y,H
2 FORMATl8F10.4J GO TO 413
DO 9999 1=1,NJOBS 41 2 COtlT I tJUE
REA0(5,3)(TITLE(~),N=1,13)
lSW=D
WRITE(6,4) (TiTLECtl) ,N=l, 13) Z4=Z
3 FORt1AT(13A6) EIC=O.
EIA=O.
4 FDRl1AT('1TITLE:- ',13A6) Z6=0.
lF(tlUME.LE.O) GO TO 410 F=(X"'Y)/Z
IFCI.LE.1) GD TO 550 CALL FltlDEl(Z6,EIF ,Z2,NU!1E,FE1,XEI)
JF(llVALX.GT .O)GO TO 410 DO 414 J=l,100
550 CONTINUE
DD 408·J=l,NUME . n
N
en
 CONTINUE 0 ( 2) PROGRAtt TR EA CTI ON

IF(Z2.GT.Z4) Z2 = Z4 CALL FINDEI(Z6,EIF,Z2,NUME,FEI.XEI)

IF(Z2.LT.X) GO TO 416 DO 514 J=l,100
IF(Z2.GT.Z4) Z2=Z4
IF(ISW.GT.l)GO TO 415 IF(Z2.LT.X)GO TO 515
ISW=2 IF(ISW.GT.l)GO TO 515
Z2=X I S\J:2
416 CONTIIWE Z2=X
F1 =F* (Z6/X) 515 CONTINUE
F2=F'>(Z2/X) F1=Z6/Z
GO TO 418 F2=Z2/Z
415 F1=F*(Z-Z6)/Y D4=Z2-Z6
F2=F~' ( Z-Z2) /Y DI = Z6•D4,·,o.5
418 COIHINUE D2 = Z6+D4*0.66~666666666
D4=Z2-Z6 E!P=EIP+F1*D4*Dl/EIF
D1 = Z6+D4;'0.5 EIP=EIP+(F2-F1)*D4/2.0*D2/EIF
D2 = Z6+D4*0.66666666666 IF(Z2 .LE.X)GO TO 519
EIC=EIC+F1*D4*D1/EIF EIR=EIR+F1*D4*(D1-X)/EIF
EIC=EIC+(F2-F1)*D4/2.0*D2/EIF EIR=EIR+(F2-F1)*D4/2.0*(D2-X)JEIF
IF(Z2. LE.X) GO TO 419 519 CONTINUE
EIA=EIA+F1*D4*(D1-X)/EIF IF(Z2.GE.Z4)GO TO 520
EIA=EIA+(F2-F1)*D4/2.0*(D2-X)/EIF Z6=Z2
419 CONTINUE CALL FINDEI(Z6,EIF,Z2,NUME,FEl,XEI)
IF(Z2.GE.Z4)GO TO 420 511f COIHINUE
Z6=Z2 . 520 CONTIIWE
CALL FINDEI(Z6,EIF.Z2,NUME,FEI,XEI) EIS=EIP,·:y/z
414 COIHINUE 513 CONTINUE
420 COIHlNUE
413 COIHIIWE EIQ=EIS-EIR
EI B=E: I c-:,y /Z F=(El*Z)/EIP
EID=(EIB-EIA) R3= El/EIP
DELTA2=(EIQ*Z)/EIP
R2=E I /EID c
THETA1=EIC/(Z*EID) c *** SOLVE EQUATIONS
R1=R2;,y/z c
cc ;,,;-:, c *** DEFLCT=F1*1.0+F2*DELTA2
NOW TO SAME- S.S. STRUCTURE APPLY MOMENT AT END TO GIVE UNIT ROTATION c *** SLOPE=F2*1.0+F1*THETA1
c -::;,;, CALC CENTRAL DEFLECTION WITH THIS MOMENT. C*- WHERE Fl AND F2 ARE THE FACTORS TO BE APPLIED TO THE UNIT
c C *** DEFLECTION AND UNIT ROTATION FORCE AND MOMENT, SO THAT THE
IF(NUME.GT.O) GO TO 512 c *** TOTAL CENTRAL DEFLECTION AND END ROTATION IS EXACTLY EQUAL
EIP=Z*Z/3. c *** AIW OPPOSITE THE THERMALLY INDUCED CORRESPONDING VALUES.
EIS=Y*Z/3. c
EIR=X*Y*Y/(2.0*Z)+(Y*Y*Y )/(3.0*Z) DENOM=T~ETA1*DELTA2-1.0
GO TO 513 c
512 CONTINUE c --- CHECK ST AB I LI TY
ISW=O c
ZL+=Z WRITE(6,777) DENOM
EIP=O. 777· Foru~T(' CHECK DENOMINATOR IS NOT CLOSE TO ZERO. DENOMINATOR =',El
El R:O. 16.8)
Z6=0.
n
N
"""'
 COllTI NUED (3) PROGRAtl TREACTI or~

F2={THETA 1~'DEFLCT-SLOPE) /DEtWt1 DEFL(J):A1*D1+A2*D2+AA*(DA+DD)+AB*(DB+DD)

Fl={SLOPE*DELTA2-DEFLCT)/DENOM 3 30 CONT ltlUE
RA=F1*R1+F2*R3 . GO TO 614
RB=F1*R2 610 cornmuE
WRITE(6,666)RA,RB Z6=0.
666 FORMAT( 1 0~"~~'* REACTION AT END SUPPORT =' ,E16.8, CALL FINDEI(Z6,EIF,Z2,NUME,FEI,XEI)
1 '****.REACTION AT CENTRAL SUPPORT =',E16.8) EIX=EIF
DO 619 J=l,45
GO TO 300 619 DEFL(J)=O.
999 RA=SLOPE Z3=XI
RB=DEFLCT Z4=Xl
300 CONTINUE IJ=2
c DO 611 J=l,200
C *** CALCULATE DEFLECTION DUE TO CONTitlUITY REACTIONS AND PLOT IF(Z3.LE.Z2) GO TO 612
c Z3=Z2 _ .
Xl'=X/19. CALL FINDEI(Z3,EIX,Z2,NUME,FEI,XEI)
YI=Y/25.
A=O. 612 CONTINUE
DO 301 J=2,20 DIZ=Z3-Z6
A=A+XI IK= IJ-1
XM(J):RA~'A Al=XM(IK)*DIZ/EIF
301 XCOOD(J)=A D1=Z6+DIZ*0.5
DO 302 J:21,45 A2=(XM(IJ)-XH(IK))*DIZ*0.5 /EIF
A=A+YI D2=Z6+DIZ*0.6666666666
XM(J)=RA*A-RB*(A-X) DO 618 L=l,IK
302 XCOOD(J):A 618 DEFL(L)=DEFL(L)+ Al*(D1-XCOOD(L))+ A2*(D2-XCOOD(L))
IF (NUME.GT.O) GO TO 610 IF(Z3.GE.Z-Yl/10.) GO TO 614
EtlDt1=Xl1(45) Z6= Z3
DO 320 J=20,44 IF(Z3.LT.Z4) GO TO 613
Dl=X+Y-XCOOD(J) IF(IJ.LT.20) Z4=Z4+Xl
A1=XM(J)*D1 IF(IJ.GE.20) Z4=Z4+YI
Dl=Dl/2.0 IJ=IJ+l
A2=(ENDM-XM(J))*D1 613 Z3=Z4
D2=D1*1.33333333333 EIF=EIX
611 CONTINUE
DEFL(J)=A1*D1+A2*D2 614 cor~TINUE
320 COIHitlUE ENDM=DEFL(I)
AA=Xt1(20)·:ry DO 340 J=l,45
DA=Y/2.0 R=XCOOD(J)/Z
AB-(EtJDM-Xt1(20) )".''DA R=l .O-R
DB=Y;'o.-6666666666 DEFL(J)=ENDM*R-DEFL(J)
Errnr1-Xr1(20> DEFL(J)=DEFL(J)/EI
DO 330 J=l,19 340 cornlNUE
DD=X-XCOOD(J) WRITE(6 495) (IJIEFL(N) ,N=l ,45)
Al=XMtJ);:oD
Dl=DD/2.0 495 FORMAT( lo;'~'*;' COIH!tlUITY REACTION DEFLECTIONS';/, (7E 16.8))
A2=(EllDt1-Xr1(J) );'DI cc . _·,. ;, ., . NO\./ PLOT
02=01*1.33333333333 c
n
~
co
 PROGRAM TREACTION
CONTINUED(4)

N=LEllGTH''100/8 XA::O.
L=LENGTH*l00+500 DA=O.
CALL AIUIT(L) NA=2
CALL ATYPE(TYPA,46) DO 472 J::2,4L•
CALL AORIG(150,66) DO 473 K=NA,55
CALL ASPEED(5) IF(OCOOD(K).GE.XCOOD(J)) GO TO 475
L=L-300 473 CONTINUE
J::860/IVHUND 475 NA=K .
M=-J'~l VINC *O. 7 F=(XCOOD(J)-OCOOD(K-1))/(0COOD(K)-OCOOD(K-1))
CALL ABOX(-120,-60,1,1,L,1000r5) DEFL(J)=ODEF(K-1)+(0DEF(K)-ODEF(K-1))*F-DEFL(J)
CALL AGRID(20,0,8 ,J,N,IVHUNDJ 472 CONTINUE
CALL AORIG(170 66) WRITE(6 492HDEFL(L),L=1 45)
CALL ASCA(-4o,-25,N,0,0,1,9 ,1,2) 492 FORMAT( ro,, ...,,,,, TOTAL DEFLECTIONS',/, OE16.S))
J::J+1 YSCA=-YSCA
CALL ASCA(-55.-5,0,IVHUND,M,IVINC,J,1,2) CALL ALINED(XCOOD,DEFL,45,0.,0.,XSCA,YSCA,30,10}
CALL ALAB(500,-55,LEN,15,2p2) N=NAB
CALL ALAB(-50,400,DE,15,2,4) CALL ALAS( 800,N,KEY,3,2,2)
CALL ALAB(450,365,DFT,20,2,2) N=N-30
N=-M*IVHUND/IVINC+66 CALL ALAB(550,N,CONT,38,1,2)
CALL ASCA(S00,365,1,1,DEFACT,1,1,2,2) XL(2)=1130
XSCA=S. I LEllGTH XL(1)=940
YSCA=-1.0*IVINC/IVHUND/DEFACT YL(l)=N
CALL ALAB(350,910,TITLE,50,2,2) YL(2) =N
IF(ITES.LE.O) GO TO 71 CALL ALINE(XL,YL,2,0.,0.,100.,100.)
CALL ALAB(0,910,TE,8,2,2) .N=N-20
CALL ASCA(100 1 910,1,1,lTESr1,1,2,2) CALL ALAB(550,N,TOTD,38,1,2)
CALL ALAB(O,ti80,TIM,6,2,2J YL( 1) =N
CALL ASCA(120,880,1,1,ITIM,1,1,2,2) YL(2)::N
CALL ALAB(240,880,SEC,9,2,2) CALL ALINED(XL,YL,2,0.,0.,100.,100.,30,10)
71 CONTINUE CALL AEND
NAB=880+66-N 9999 CONTirlUE
CALL AORIG(170,N) RETURN
CALL ALINE(XCOOD,DEFL,45,0.,D.,XSCA,YSCA) ENO --
c SUBROUTINE FINDEl(X,EI,Y,NUME,F,D)
C *** PLOT BASE LINE DIMENSION F(l),0(1)
c DO 1 1=1 NUME
XL(l)=O. IF(X.LT.6(I))GO TO 2
YL(l)::O. CONTINUE
YL(2)=D. I=NUME
XL(2)::X+Y 2 I=l-1
CALL ALINED(XL,YL,2,0.,0.,XSCA,1.,10,10) IF( I .LE.O) 1=11
c EI =F (I)
C *** PLOT TOTAL DEFLECTION Y=D(l+l)
c RETURtl
. mo
p
N
(0
CONTltWED( 1) PROGRAt1 THERtlAL

c tlUL Tl -LI II[ THER11AL Arm STRESS AllAL YS Is c ,.,,.,,., HOHYD :0 IF HEAT OF HYDRATIOtJ llOT COUSlOERED
c c =1 IF HEAT OF HYORATIOtl CONSIDERED
c c in':.;: =2 IF HEAT OF HYORATIOll 81ITTED To DATE TO BE READ Ill
l'?.EAL Y(5,10),Z(5,10),TS(300),F(300),A(5,50,50) c *":.':;·: {THIS IS USED FOR RESTARTl!JG AFTER STl'?.UCT. HOD. ETC.)
REAL H(5,10) HA(300) HD(300),R(5 50),TP(5,50) c ...·:..;: ...': SHRIUK=O IF COtlCRETE SHRIIJKAGE NOT CONSIDERED
REAL Yll(5,50~,E(5,10~.ALPHA(5,10),TSTRSS(5,50),FSTR(5,50) c =1 IF GlVErl Itl FOR.ti 1 ( IllDEPEllDENT OF TEt1PERATURE)
l'?.EAL YOUllGS(5, 10), Tlt1(300) ,CTIHCK.(5, 10) ,STIHCt~(S, 10) c =2 IF GlVEtl ltl FOFUI 2
REAL TOLC(5,50) c . .: . .·r:·: CREEP :0 Ir CONCRETE CREEP tlOT COUSIDE~ED
REAL CEPTH(5),D(5,10),HEAD(13) c ""'"' =I IF GlVEtl Ill FORt1 1 ( lllDEPEtlDEt!T OF TEMPERATURE)
I!ITEGER EXTrnT. COL. DEGREE (S), ULA YER ( 5), IJUt1 me (s. 10) • DEG. DEGL c :2 Jr GlVErl Ill FOR.ti 2
Dit1EtlSIOtl XPLOT(100) • YPLOT( 100) r TPLOTC5,50) • IFE11(6) c PLOT =O IF rm PLOTTltlG REQUIRED
REAL TEt1PL(3)/'TEt1PEP..ATURES ( J 'I c =1 IF PLOTTl!IG BUT PROGl'?.At1 CALCULATED SCALES
1'?.EAL HEITL(4) /'HEIGliT ADOVE DASE ( ) 'I c =2 IF PLOTTillG AtlD usrn SPECIFIED SCALES
REAL TYPA(4)/'PLEASE USE 0.311t1 \JCT Pm'/ c ...,,·: ...·: ...': STRESS=O Jr STRESS ANALYSIS llOT REQUIRED
REAL FSTOP(1)/'.'/ c =1 IF IrllTIAL STRESSES GIVE!l
1'?.EAL TITLE(2)/'*TITLE*'/ c ...·: ...·:.·: =2 IF IllITIAL STRESSES !JOT GIVE!l
IIHEGER TrnP 1_1iDHYD, SHRlllK, CREEP, PLOT, PLOTI t1, \./ c rrnrAC= rIXITY FACTOI'?. BY WHCH SECTION CURVATURE RESTRAWED.
·xuTEGER STRE~S,STEP,FORCE,DASER,STEEL c *·.::-::-.·:
. .":·.:: DELTA = Tlt1E ltlCREl1Elff PER STEP IF + VE
:tHEGER TEt1It1Cr TEr1DIS1 TEt1LmJ,STRit1CfSTRDIS1DOTEt1P c IF tlEGATIVE me TltlE IllCREMEtH OF ITH STEP
REAL STRESL (5J/'STRE~SES ( ) AT lME = I c -..·:-.::·:: =-DELTA/(llCYCLE+l-1)
l'?.EAL TD(300),HYDT(9,10),HYDS(9,10),VALUE(10) c .,,:.·: ...... tlCYCLE= llUllBER OF STEPS W AllAL YSI S
DitlEtlSIOtl llYDTEt1C9) ,t!PART(9) ,RAt!GE(9,9) c . .·:;'r-.':·:
·~:--.:: ....
FORCE :0 IF 110 EXTERNAL AXIAL FORCE CONSIDERED
REAL tlDOE(5000) c :1 IF EXTERtlAL AXIAL FORCE(EG.PRESTRESS)COllSIDERED •
REAL BH(300),AXIALF(300) c *-.'r;': llOMEtJT:O l F tlO EXTERIJAL MOt1El!T COtJS IDE RED
REAL AGE(5,50),HEAT(5,50) c -tr:n·: =1 IF EXTERNAL t1011Elff (OTHER THAN DUE TO FEMFAC)
lr!TEGER tlAREA(5) ,n1t1EC8) c -:ri:r-.·: DAS ER =O IF rm BASE P.ESTRAIUT (OTHER\JISE 1)
REAL SDEP(5,5),SAREA(5,5) c ..,,·r..,,':"l': STEEL = 0 IF tlO STEEL EFIBEDDED Ill SECT!Otl (OTHERUISE 1)
ltlTEGER TOTtJOO c -::r.-:.·:
*"';': . .': tlUNE = uu11BER OF LlUES IrJ THE ANALYSIS
OIHEtlSIOtl DSTEEL(5,5),TSTEEL(5,5),FACTR(5,5),FFH(5,10),FFL(5,10), c en = REHREtJCE 110DULUS OF ELASTICITY
IFFtlC5, 10) c .;,':.·: ...·: DASEF = DASE FIXITY FACTOR
ltlTEGER 1LOU(5,5), IPREST(5,5) c
c lf{PLOT.LE.O)GO TO 9001
C -tr:: ...·r START IF(PLOT.EQ.1) GO TO 9003
c c
l'?.EAD(5,501) (HEAD(I),1=1,13) c ~'"'"' *** PLOTTltlG ***
URITE(6,502)(HEAD(l),l=l,13) READ USER SPECIFIED SCALES. (ZERO IF PROGRAM DEDUCED)
READ ( 5, 105 )TE11P ,HOllYD, SHRI llK, CREEP, cc *"'"'
1PLOT ,STRESS,FEt1FAC,DELTA l'?.EAD ( 5, 105) TEM ltlC, TEt1D 1 S, TEt1LO\J, STR ltlC, STRD l S, K, F3 • F1
URI TE ( 6, 8001) TEt1P, flOHYD, SHRI llK, CREEP, lF(TEHltlC.EQ.O)GO TO 9002
1 PLOT, STRESS, FEt1FAC, DEL TA \JRITE ( 6, 8003 )TEt1l IJC, TEt1D IS, TEtlLO\./
1'?.EAD ( 5, 105) llCYCLE • FOl'?.CE 110MEIH, BASER, STEEL, llLl llE, ER, DASEF 9002 lf(STRillC.EQ.O)GO TO 9003
\Jl'?.ITE { 6, 8002) llCYCLF.:, FOl'?.CE, 110t1Et!T, DAS ER, STEEL, till llE, ER, BASEf URITE(6,8004)STRIJJC,STRDIS
c 9003 COtJT I tJUE
c *** TEt1P :0 IF TEt1PERATURES !JOT CO!JSIDERED CALL AitllT( 10)
c ***
c ***
=1
:2
IF TEt1PERATURE S CALCULATED !JUT Ill IT !ALLY ASSut1ED
IF ItUTIAl TEt1PERATURES SPECIFIED, OUT
ZERO = CALL ATYPE{TYPA,24)
CALL ASPHD(5)
c *** tlOT CALCULATED FOR SUOSEQUEllT STEPS. CALL ALAD(I0,10,TITLE,7,1,4)
c *** =3 AS PER 2 our SPECIFIED PO\JER OISTRIBUTlOIJ CALL ALAB{l0,90,HEAD,78,1,4)
c *** =4 IF TEt1PERATURES CALCULATED AtlD IlllTIALLY SPECIFIED 1PLOTK=1
c ***
c ***
(llOTE - IF STRESS =1 STRESSES DUE TO IlllTIAL TEMPERATURES
NOT CAL CUI A TED - c
CALL AEtlD r>
w
0
cm!TINUED(2) PROGRAM THERMAL

READ(5, 105) (IJLAYER( I), l=l ,ULlllE)

C ""'"' READ THIES FOR \JH I CH PLOTT WG IS TO OE DOUE IHH=O.
c lffiITE(6,202)[1,ULAYEP.(I),!=1,llLINE)
READ(5,7612)J,(IT1HE(L),L=1,J) TOTtJOD=O
PLOT111:ITittE( 1) \ffilTE(6,206)
\IP..ITE(6,8005)J,(ITHtE(L) ,L=l ,J) DO 33LltlE=1,llLitlE
9001 COtH l llUE DEGREE (LI tlE) =1
IF(CREEP.LT.1) GO TO 1620 UL=tJLAYEP. (LI tJE)
c D031=1,t1L
C -::~,,., READ CREEP PARAt1ETERS. READ(5,102)tlW1ltlC(LltlE,I),Y(LitlE,I),VOL,FAC,M(LltlE,I),AGE(LlNE,I),
c 1 CTH!CK(LIHE,I),STHICK(LIHE l)
P.[A0(5,101)FI,FA,FB,FC,FO llP..ITE (6,207lL.It1E, I ,t1UtlI!ICCLf 11E, I), Y(LINE, 1), VOL,FAC,M(UNE, l),
\IRITE(6,1621)FI,FA,FO,FC,FD 1 AGE(LltlE,I) ,CTHICK(LIUE,I),STHICK(LINE,I)
IF(CREEP.HE.2) GO TO 1620 !F(TEt1P.EQ.O.oR. TEtlP.EQ.2.0R. TEt1P.EQ.3) GO To 3
P.EAD(5,101)FE,FF,FG Z(LIUE!l)=DELTA*M(LltlE,I)/(VOL*FAC*Y(LitlE,I)*Y(LlUE,1))
\IR!TE(6,1622)FE,FF,FG VALUElI)=1.0 /(VOL*FAC)
1620 COtH IllUE 3 DEGREE (LI ti[) =DEGREE ( u 11[) +11ut1rnc (LI NE. I)
c 33 TOTtlOD=TOTtlOD+DEGREE ( LlrlE) + 1
C -:"~-:, READ SHP. ItlKAGE PARAtlETERS lF(STRESS.tlE.1) GO TO 9313
c c
Ir(SHRillK.LE.O) GO TO 1630 C*** P.[AD ltl ltlITIAL STRESSES.
READ(5,101)FH,FJ,FK ,CAGE c
llRITE(6,1623)FH,FJ,FK,CAGE \JRITE(6,9316)
!f(SHRIHK.HE.2) GO To 1630 DO 9314 LltlE=l ,t~UtlE
READ(5,101)FP,FQ,FR tJ=DEGREE CU tlE)+ I
\JfllTE(6,3623)FP,FQ,FR READ(5,IOl)(FSTR(LltlE,L),L=l,tl)
1630 COt!TlNUE 9314 \IP.ITE(6,9315)LltlE, (FSTR(LltlE,L) ,L=l ,tl)
IF(STEEL.EQ,O)GO TO 9615 9313 CONTillUE
c READ(S,101)(DEPTll(Llt1E),Llt1E=l,t1Llt1E)
C *** P.EAD STEEL AREAS & LOCATIONS \IP..ITE(6,212)(LlNE,DEPTH(LINE),LINE=1,t1LltlE)
c IF(STRESS.EQ.O)GO To 500
REA0(5 101)ESTEEL,ALPHAS c
lffiITE Cl, 9616) ES TEEL, ALPHAS C READ STP.EtlGTH CALCULATION PARAt1ETERS
00 9617 1=1,NLIHE c
REA0(5,105)IJ
\..IR ITE ( 6 2 1 313)
rJAP.[A(I)=lJ DO 300 LfHE=1,HLltlE
IF(IJ.LE.O)GO TO 9617 flL=NLAYER (LI tlE)
DO 9618 J:I, IJ DO 300 !=I ,Ill
P.EAD(5,102)IPR[ST(I,J),SDEP(l,J),SAREA(I,J),OSTEEL(l,J) P.EAD(5,102)ISU,E(LltlE,l),B(LlHE,l),ALPHA(LINE,l)
9610 \IRITE(6,9619)I,IPREST(I.J),SDEP(l,J),SAREA(I,J),DSTEEL(l,J) \IRITE (6,213)UtlE, I ,E(LltlE, I) ,B(LltlE, 1) ,ALPHA(Llt!E,I)
9617 COtH I JJUE YOUtlGS(LitlErIJ=E(LltlE,!)
961 !i COtH It/UC: Ir(ISU.EQ.O;Go TO 300
c
C ~"°'~' READ IIJ tlOtlEt!T AtlD AXIAL FORCES. cc ,~,-,,-,
READ Ill E PARM1ETERS
c c Ir IS\/ LT 0 THE PROGP.M1 USES THE SAt1E E PARAt1ETERS AS LAST CAP.O
UCYCX=tJCYCLE+l c
lF(FQRC[.tlE.O)CALL REED(AXIALF,NCYCX ,1) llEEE=I
lr(MOMENT.tlE.O)CALL REED(Bt1,tlCYCX ,2) Ir(ISU.LT.O)GD To 9334
c READ(5,101)FL,FM,Ftl
c READ THICKtlESS ArlD HCAT-FLO\I PARAr1ETERS FOR EACH UrlE AtlD LAYER 9334 \IRITE(6,9335)FL,Ft1,Ftl n
c rn1C LI ti[. I) =Ft·1 w
...a.
emir mum o > PROGRAM THERMAL

FFLCLltlE, !):FL lffiITE(6,215)LlflE,(YH(ll11E,K) ,K:l ,LEG)

FFll(LltlE, I ):Fii 320 IF(TEHP.EQ.O)GO TO 9000
300 COtlTitlUE lr(TE11P .E0.2) GO TO 99001
c lF(TEHP.flE.3)GO TO 9004
c CALCULATE LAYER HEIGHTS AtlD SECTION PROPERTIES cc .._-:--::'!:
c SPECIFIED POWER DISTRIBUTlOtl
500 AREA:O. c
FIRtt:O. READ(S,101)POUER,TEHPM,ZEROH
SECt1=0. If(ZEROll)816,817,817
DO 304 LlflE:l,NLlNE 816 ZEROH=DEP+ZEROH
IF(DEPTH(LINE).GT.DEP) DEP=DEPTH(LINE) 817 REFD:DEP-ZEROH
llL=llLAYER ( L111[) DO 9323 LINE=t,NLlNE
K:O DEG=DEGRE E(LI t!E)
DO 304 1::::1 l~L DO 9322 1=1,0EG
TA=E(LltlE, f )"'B(Llt~E, I )"'Y(LltlE, I )/ER lf(TPLOT(LlflE,l).LT.ZEROH) GO TO 9323
llUtl=IJUt1 I NC ( Ll llE, l ) 9322 TP(LlNE,l)=TEMPM*(((TPLOT(LlNE,I)-ZEROH)/REFD)**POWER)
DO 304 J:l, UUtl 9323 corn wuE
l~=K+l
\/P..ITE (6, 1014)TEt1Pt1, Pm/ER
IF(K.EO.l)GO TO 301 POWER=O.
lF(l.GT.1.AND.J.EQ.1)GO TO 302 \/RITE (6, 1027) REFD, PO\IER
YH(Lltl[,K+I ):YH(llNE,K)-Y(lltlE, l) GO TO 9000 -
TPLOT(LINE,K+l):TPLOT(LltlE,K)-Y(LltlE,1) 9004 corn ltlUE
GO TO 303 c
301 YH(L WE ,2) =DEPTH (UtlE )-Y (LI llE, l) /2 .o C *** READ HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS & ABSORBTIVITY
TPLOT(LltlE,l):DEPTH(LlllE) c
YH(LltJE, 1) =DEPTH(Ut!E) READ(5,102)BOTEMP,ABSORB ,Hl,112
TPLOT(LINE,2):DEPTH(LlNE)-Y(Llt!E,!) UP. I TE ( 6, 7602) BOTEt1P, ABSORB
GO TO 303 IF (HI +H2. UE .0.00 )WP.ITE ( 6,203)H1 , H2
302 YH(LlflE,K+l):YH(LINE,K)-(Y(Ll!IE,l)+Y(LlNE,l-1))/2.0 IF(H1+112.tlE.O.OO)GO TO 2
TPLOTCLlr!E ,K+I ):TPLOT(LlNE,1~)-Y(LWE, l) ll[AD(5,101)(HA(l),1:1,tlCYCLE)
303 IF(STRESS.EQ.O) GO To 304 f'tEAD(S 101)(HB(l) 1:1 UCYCLE)
AREA:AREA+TA llRITEC&,209)(llA(I~.1:f,ucvcLE)
fIRt1:FIRt1+YH(LlNE,K+l )'''TA lffiITE(6,210)(HB(I),1:1,NCYCLE)
SECt1:SECt1+ (YH(LltlE • K+l) "'YH( LI llE, K+1) +Y ( lltlE, I )''Y (lltJE, I) I 12 .O) "'TA lHH:l
304 COtlT ltlUE c
lF(STRESS.EQ.O) GO To 7304 C llEAD AtlBIErlT AIR TEtlPERATURES
IF(STEEL.LE.O)GO TO 633 c
RAT I O:ESTEE L/[f't 2 READ(5,101)(TS(l),I:l,!ICYCLE)
CALL GEotl( FI Rt1 ,AREA, SECtl, SDEP, SARE A, NAREA, NL ItlE, RAT I 0) \ffilTE (6 ,204) (TS( I), 1:1, tlCYCLE )'
633 COtlT I tlUE IF(BOTEMP.LE.O)GO TO 7619
Afl:Fl Rt1/ AREA READ(5,101)(TB(l),I:1,UCYCLE)
AllEP..T=SECt1-AREA''Atl"'Atl
0
URITE(6,7622)(TB(I).,1:1,NCYCLE)
l/R ITE ( 6, 214) AREA, All ,AllEP..T GO TO 7621
7304 DO 320 LlNE=l,tlLlNE 7619 DO 7620 1:1,NCYCLE
IF(TEHP.EQ.O) GO TO 3296 7620 TB (I) =TS (I)
L[G:DEGREE (LI llE) 7621 COtlTltlUE
lffilTE(6,226)LltlE,(TPLOT(LltlE,K),K:1,LEG) IF(HOHYO.LE.O)GO TO 9007
329(. lf(STRESS.EQ.O) GO TO 320 c
LEG=DEGf'tEE(LlNE)+l C *** READ Ill HEAT OF llYDRATIOU PARAtlETERS
C *** THERE ARE UHTEMP SETS OF 11.0.HYDRAT!ON CURVES. n
tlL=tlLAYUt (LI 11[) -
YH (LI ti[, LEG) =YH ( U ti[, LEG-1 }-Y (LI rIE, tll) I 2. c w
N
CotlTI NUED ( 4) PROGRAM THERMAL

READ(5, 105WHTEt1P DO 3548 tl=l,DEG

TE ( 6, 9012) WlTEt1P
\.JR I lF(TPLOT(l,11).LE.VAL)GO TO 3558
DO 9100 I=1,tmTEt1P 3540 couTIUUE
READ(5,9109)TT,J,(HYDT(I,L),HYDS(l,L),L=1,J) 3558 lLO\I( I, J):tJ
\ffilTE(6,9110)TT, (HYDT(l,L),HYDS(I,L),L=1,J) FACTR (I ,J):(.TPLOTCl ,11-1 )-VAL)/(TPLOT( I ,U-1 )-TPLOT(l ,U))
llPART (I) =J 3510 COtlTIUUE
HYDTEt1( I) =TT 3517 CONTI llUE
CALL HRAJJGE ( J, HYDT, l!YDS, RAtlG[, I) 3516 COtHINUE
9100 COtlT I tlUE lF(STRESS.EQ.O) ISTART=l
c cc ;,,.,,., START OF COt1PUTATiotl LOOPlllG
C *!,;: RESTART OF llEAT OF HYDRATION
c c
DO 28 EXTENT=! NCYCX
1F(HOHYD.NE.2)GO TO 9007 IF(ISTART.EQ.O~ GD TO 81488
DO 29617 LillE=l,NLINE 81409 1START=1
DEG=DEGRE E(LI tJE) IF(TEHP.EQ.O) GO TO 66321
READ(5,101)(HtAT(LltlE,I),I:1,DEG) DO 9321 LillE=1,UL11JE
29617 \ffiITE(6,29618)LINE.(llEAT(LINE,I),I=l,DEG) D[G=DEGREE (LI tlE)
9007 c·ouT IIJUE DO 9321 I=l DEG
c 9321 TOLD(LltlE,l~=TP(LltlE,I)
C READ tl0Rt1AL COttPOt!Etff OF ffEAT FLUX OtJ TOP 'SURFACE IFCTEt1P.tlE. 1.AtlD. TEt1P.rH:.4.AtlD.EXTrnT .EQ.1) GO TO 2765
c IF(TEMP.EQ.2.0R .TEt1P.EQ.3) GO TO 66321
READ(5,101)(F(I),I=1,NCYCLE) IF(EXTENT.GT.IJCYCLE) GO TO 2765
\ffi!TE(6,205)(F(!),1:1,NCYCLE) lF(lHH.GT.O)Hl=HA(EXTEtlT)
lf(TEHP.EQ.l)GO TO gooo IF(IHH.GT.O)H2:HD(EXTEtlT)
c DO 27 LillE=1,llLillE
c ;,;:~:
READ INITIAL TEMPERATURES
c c
99001 CONTI !JUE
c TOP RO\./
DO 4 LIIJE=l,NLINE c
P. ( LWE. 1) =2 .oo;t( HI '"TS (EXTErlT) +ADSORD*F (EXTENT) )'~Y (LI tJE. t) /t1CU NE. 1
D[GL=DEGREE(LillE) 1)
4 READ(5,101)(TP(LIIJE,I),1=1,DEGL) c
9000 CONTltWE c t1IODLE RO\IS
cC c
-::-!r·:: STORE TIMES COL=l
c tlL=tlLAYER (LI tllE)
~D[LTA=DELTA
DD 9813 I:l,NCYCLE DO 8 1:1,llL
L=I+1 !!PO ltlT=llUtl ltJC (LI NE, I)
If(XDELTA.LT.D.)DELTA=-XDELTA/(tlCYCX +1-1) DO 6 J:1,tlPOillT
COL=COL+l
9813 TIM(L):Tlt1(l)+DELTA IF(J.EQ.IJPOillT)GO TO 7
c FACTOR:Z(Ll!IE.I)*(TP(LltlE,COL-1)-2.0*TP(LlNE,COL)+TP(LltlE,COL+l))
c ~""~' fl!JD IJOD(S DELDU STEEL & DISTAIJCE PROPQRTIOtl FACTOR lF(HOHYD.LE.O) GO TO 6
c TLOAD=AGE (LI !IE, I)+ (T Ill ( EXTEtlT+1) +TI t1 ( EXTEtlT)) /2. 0
IF(STEEL.LE.O)GO TO 3516 IF(AGE(LINE,l).EQ.o. on. TLOAD.LE.O.) GO TO 6
IF(TEHP.EQ.O) GO TO 3516 CALL HYDATtl(TP(L!llE,CDL),HEAT(LlNE,COL),DELTA,HH,HYDT,
DD 3517 1:1,NLltlE 1HYDS, RAtlG[, HYOTEt1, llPART, IJHTE!1P, TLOAD) .
L=llAREA( I) FACTOR:FACTOR+2 .O"'VALUE ( l )"'HI!
IF(L.EQ.O)GO TO 3517 6 R(LI t!E, COL) =F tlCTOR+2. o-:,Tp (LI !IE, COL)
DD 3518 J=l ,L 7 lF(I.EQ.llL)GO TO 9
VAL=SDEP(I,J) 0
D[G=DEGREE(I) c
c ItlTERF ACE
w
w
 PROGRAM THERMAL
CONTINUED(S)

c c
D R(LlNE,COL)=O.O C lflTERFACE
c c
c DOTTbM ROW A(LINE,COL,COL-2)q1(LIHE,l)*Y(LINE,l+I)
c A(LINE,COL,COL-1)=-4.0*H(LINE,I)*Y(LINE,1+1)
9 DEG=DEGREE(LINE) A(LINE,COL,COL)=3.0'~(t1(LlllE, 1)"'Y(LINE,1+1) )
R(LlNE,DEG)=2.0*H2*TO(EXTENT)*Y(LlHE,HL)/M(LlHE,NL) 13666 If(llUMltlC(LlNE,1+1).LE.1) GO TO 932
c A(U NE, COL, COL) :A( LI tlE, COL, COL) +3 .O*t1( L HIE, l +1 )'~Y (LI tlE, I)
c CALCULATE NEU TEMPERATURES A(LI!lE,COL,COL+1)=-4.0*H(LINE,I+1)*Y(LlNE,l)
c A(LltlE, COL, COL +2) =tl(L IUE, 1+1 )*Y(L l!IE, I)
Ir( lHH.EO.O.AtlD.EXTEtlT .GT .1 )GO TO 25 GO TO 13
c 932 A(LltlE,COL,COL)=A(LltlE,COL,COL)+2.0*(H(LINE,I+1)*Y(LlNE,l))
c SET 11ATRIX TO ZERO A(LltJE,COL,COL+I )=-tl(LltJE, 1+1 )''Y(LINE, l) ''2.0
c 13 corn rnuE
DO 10 1:1,DEG. c
DO 10 J:1,DEG c DOTTDtl ROW
10 A{LINE,l,J):0.00 c
c 14 IF(NUt1ltlC(LltlE,tlL) .tlE.1 )GO To 779
c TOP ROW D:Y (LI tlE, UL)
c U=Y(LltlE,tlL-1)
!F(NUMINC(LINE,1).NE.1)GO To 777 V:O+U
D:Y(LUIE, 1) A(LINE,DEG,DEG)=2.0*(H2*D/N(LlNE,!lL)+(D+V)/V)
U=Y( LI tl[, 2) A(LIHE,DEG,DEG-l)=-2.0*(V/U)
V:D+U A(LIHE,DEG,DEG-2)=2.0*(D*D/(V*U))
A(LlllE, 1, 1):2.0''(H1'"D/tl(LltlE,1 )+(D+V)/V) GO TO 700
A(LlNE,1,2)=-2.0*(V/U) 77') COtlTltlUE
A(LlNE~1 1 3)=2.0*(D*D/(V*U))
A(LINC,OEG,DEG-2):1.00
GO TO 171J A(LIHE,DEG,DEG-1)=-4.00
777 COtff I tmE A(LltlE,DEG,DEG)=3.0+2.0*H2*Y(LltlE,NL)/N(LiHE,NL)
A(Ll!lE, 1, 1):3.00+2.00"'•il"'Y(LltlE,1)/t1CLirlE,1) 700 CDt!TillUE
A(LlllE,1,2)=-4.00 lf(lHH.[Q.O)GO TO 21
A(LIHE,1,3):1.00 c
770 COtlTI tlUE c SOLVE t1ATRIX EQUATION
c c
c t!IDOLE ROUS !l=DEG-1
c DO 18 1:1,tl
COL=1 rn=I+1
DO 13 1=1,t!L 112=At1Itl0 (tll +1 ,DEG)
NPOINT=HUHINC(LINE,I) DO 10 J=tl1 , IJ2
IF(NPOlllT .llE.1 )GO TO 776 FACTOR=A(LillE,J,l)/A(LINE,l,l)
COL=COL+1 IF(FACTOR)16.18,16
A(LllJE,COL,COL-1 ):-t1(Lltl[, l)'''Y(Llfl[, l+l) "'2 16 R(Ll!IE,J):R(LltlE,J)-FACTOR*R(LltlE,I)
A(LI tlE, COL, COL) =ti ( Ll II[, I) ''Y (LI fl[, I+ 1 )":2 DO 17 L=tll , IJ2
GO To 13666 17 A(LINE,J,L)=A(LlllE,J,L)-FACTOR*A(LlNE,l,L)
18 CDtlT I llUE
776 COtlT I flU[ !=DEG
DO 11 J=l,llPOI!lT 19 TP(LINE,l):R(LlHE,1)/A(Llfl[,1,1)
COL=COL+l IF(I.EO.l)GO TO 27
lF(J.EO.llPOltlT)GO TO 12
111 =I
A( LI NE, COL, COL-1) =-Z (LI II[, I)
A ( LHIE, COL, COL) =2. 00+ Z( LIll[, I) "'2.
tl2=At1ltl0(1!1+1,DEG) n
11 A(LlllE,COLiCOL+l)=-Z(LlllE,l) l=l-1 w
.g:i,.
12 lF(l.EQ.llLJGO TO 14
 CONTINUED ( 6) PROGRAM THERMAL

DO 20 J=ll1,N2 K=K+1
20 R(LlNE,l)=R(LlllE,1)-A(LlllE,l,J)*TP(LINE,J) D=FSTR(LltlE,K)
GO TO 19 Pl =D'~TT
c DP=DP+P1
C lllVERT t1ATRIX Dtl=DH+P 1'"( YH( LI HE, K)-All)
c IF(J.EQ.1) GO TO 410
21 DO 24 1=1,DEG DM=DH+(O-FSTR(LIUE,K-l))*TT*TA/12.0
FACTOR=A(LillE,I,l) 410 CO!ITIIWE
A(LINE,I,1)=1.00 A1=(FSTR(LltlE,2)-FSTR(LlNE,1))*Y(LlUE,l)*B[LltlE,1)/4.0
DO 22 L=1,0EG DP=DP-Al
22 A(LlllE,I,L)=A(LlllE,l,L)/FACTOR Dt1=Dt1-A1,.'(YH(LltlE, 1)-All-Y(LlllE,1 )/6.0)
DO 24 J=l DEG Al=(FSTR(Llt1E,K+1)-D)*TT/4.0
lf(I.EQ.J~GO TD 24 DP = DP+Al
FACTOR=A{LlNE,J,l) 6410 Dtl=Drt+A 1''' ( YH (LI llE, K) -TA/3. 0-Al~)
A(LINE,J,l)=0.00 If(ABS(FEHFAC).EQ.O.)GO TO 411
DO 23 L=1,0EG· c
23 A(LlNE,J,L)=A(LitlE,J,L)-FACTOR'"A(LlNE, I ,L) C *'"'" GET HOt1El!T DUE TO llE\I CURVATURE RESTRAltlT
24 COl~TI tlUE c
25 DO 26 J=1,DEG lF(EXTEllT .LE.1.AtlD.STRESS.EQ.1 )GO TO 411
TP(LltlE,J)=0.00 CHAllGtt=Dt1,.'FEtlF AC
DO 26 L=1,DEG If(CHAllGll.EQ.O)GO TO 411
26 TP(LlNE,J)=TP(LlllE,J)+A(LlNE,J,L)*R(LlNE,L) DO 412 J=EXTEUT,NCYCX
27 CONTHlUE 412 Bit ( J) =Btt ( J) ·~CHAtlGM
2765 \IRITE(6,428)\I, TltlE 411 corn11JUE
DO 321 LillE=1,NLINE c
DEG=DEGREE (LI tlE) cC '~'·"~ FlUD FORCE AUD MOMENT TO APPLY TO SECTION TO
321 \IRITE(6,218)LltlE, CTDLD(LltlE,J) ,J:1,DEG) PRODUCE REQUIRED EXTERNAL VALUES ON SECTION.
-::.._':i.'r
66321 lf(STRESS.EQ.O)GO TD 8420 c . ,·:-.::}'( OBTAIN STRESSES FROM THESE FORCES, ADDING
c c *'''~' TO THOSE CAIJSIIJG LAST STRAW IrlCREttEIJTS TO REDUCE TO ZERO.
C *** CALCULATE STRESSES (COMPRESSlOtl +VE) c
c DP=AXIALF(EXTEHT)-DP -DPOLD
C *** (A) SUH EXISTING STRESSES Otl SECTION TO DEDUCE DP & DH Dt1=Bt1 ( EXTEllT)-DH -Dt10LD
c DP=DP/AREA
If(EXTEtlT .GT .1 )Dt10LD=Btt(\J) Dtt=Dtt/ Afl ER T
IF(EXTEtJT.GT.l)DPOLD=AXlALF(U} IF(DASER.LE.O) GO To 22914
Dll=O. TT=-( DP-DW'AtlFBASEF
DP=O. TA=l.O/AREA
D06410 LlNE=1,llLINE IF ( FEttFAC. EQ. O.) TA=TA+Afl>"'All/ AllERT
llL=ULAYER (LI tlE) TT=TT /TA
K::1 TA=O.
L=t!AREA(LillE) 1F(FE11FAC.E<l.O.) TA=-TT>"'All
IF(L.EO.O)GO TO 6517 If( FE11F AC. llE. O. 0) ZPX=ZPX-TT,.'All
DO 6518 J=1,L DO 24412 J=EXTEllT,llCYCX
Pl=DSTEEL(LINE,J)*SAREA(LINE,J) Btt(J)=Dl1(J)·~TA
DP=Pl+DP 24412 AXIALF(J)=AXIALF(J)+TT
6510 Dtl=Dtt+Pl >"'( SDEP (LI tlE • J )-Ari) DP=DP+TT/AREA
6517 COtlT ltlUE Dll=Dtt+TA/ AllERT
DO 410 !=1 NL 2291"4 COl!TI llUE
TA=Y(LltlE, f) DSTRll=DSTRll- ( DP-Dt1"'All) /ER
TT=B(LlflE, I ,,.,TA CURVAT=CURVAT+DM/ER 0
tlU11=UUH I !IC (LI tlE, I)
DO 410 J=l ,tlUtl
DO 420 LlllE=l ,IJLirlE w
CJ1
 CONTI IWE D( 7)
PRQGRAt1 THERMAL

l=NAREA(lltlE) 1633 Atl=F IRt1/ AREA

lf(L.EQ.O)GO TO 7517 0

AtlERT=SE cr1-AREA' 'AIJ'°' All

DO 7518 J=l,L 9574 lF(lSTART.EQ.O)GO TO 68420
TT=DSTEEL (LI llE, J) +(DP+Dr1'°' ( SD[P (LI IJE. J )-Arn)".': RATIO c
DSTEEL(LltlE,J)=D. C -::-::-:: ADJUST PRESTRESSillG FORCE AllD t10HWT
7510 TSTEEL(LINE,J):TST[EL(LltlE,J)+TT
7517 COtlTitmE
c
lF(EXTE!lT.EQ.l.OR.EXTEllT.GT.llCYCLE) GO TO 9516
tll=llLAYER (LI llE)
IF(STEEL.LE.O)GO TO 9516
1.~=0
DP=O.
DO 420 I=l ,tll Dt1=0.
11Ut1:11Ut1l tlC ( l I tJE, I) DO 9517 1=1,tllltlE
IF( I .EQ.1 )t1ur1=t1Ut1+1 l=llAREA(I)
If ( I • E Q. Ill) tlUt1=11Ut1+ 1 IF(l.EQ.O)GO TO 9517
DO 420 J=1,NUtl DO 9518 J:l ,L
K=K+1 IF(IPREST(l,J).LE.O)GO TO 9518
FSTR (LI llE, K) =f'STR (LI llE, K) + (DP+Drl''( YH (L ltlE, K)-Atl)) ''YOUtJGS (LI tJE, I) /E Pl=DSTEEL(l,J)*SAREA(I,J)
1R DP:Pl+DP
T~TRSS(LltlE,K):TSTRSS(LltlE,K)+fSTR(LltlE,K) Dtl=Dtl+P 1 '' ( SDEP (LI tJE, J) -AtJ)
420 COtlTltlUE
81488 9510 COtlTltJUE
lf(EXTEllT.GT.tlCYCLE) GO TO 9574
9517 CotJTltlUE
IF(t1EEE.t1E.1)GO TO 9574 l=EXTEtlT+ I
cc ,,,.,,., DO 9412 J=L 0 t1CYCX
c ,,,,,., RECALCULATE SECTION PROPERTICS
STORE tlEU YOUNGS MODULUS Itl ARRAY YOUllGS ( , )
Btl(J) =Bt1(J)-Dt1
c 9412 AXIALF(J):AXlALF(J)-DP
AREA=O. 9516 CotlTitlUE
f Ir..tl=O. cc ,.,,.,,., PRirlT STRESSES.
SECt1=0.
DO 1304 Llt1E=1rt1LINE
c
lll=llLAYEn ( l I llE J UR I TE ( 6 • 219) \.I, TI t1E
K:O TA=ZPX+Btl(E:nrnn
DO 1304 1:1,lll URITE(6,220) AXIALF(EXTE!JT), TA,CURVAT ,BSTRN
!1Utl=t1Ut1 l tlC ( l l !lE, I) DO 425 llNE=1,llLlllE
LEG=DEGREE ( ll !IE)+ 1
lF(AGE(LltlE,l).EQ.O.)GO TO 1903
425 URITE (6,221 )LltlE, (TSTRSS(LltJE, l), 1:1,LEG)
TLOAD=AGE (LI IJE 1 I)+ ( Tlt1 ( EXTEtlT+ 1 ) +TX M( EXTEtlT)) /2 .O IF( STEEL.l[.O)GO TO 9717
IF(ISTART.EQ.OJ TLOAD=AGE(LillE,I)
\/RITE ( 6, 9720)
FXll=FFIHLltJE, l) DO 9710 I=l,tJLlllE
IF(FXll.LE.O)GO TO 1903
l=IJAREA( I)
YOUtlGS(LlllE,I)=O. IF(l.EQ.O)GO TO 9718
IF(TLOAD.LE.O.) GO To 1903
URITE(6,9719)l 0 (TSTEEL(l,J),J=1,L)
YOUtlGS(LINE, l)=E(lIIJE, I)-::( (TLOAD/(FFM(LltlE, l )+FFL(lltJE, l )'°'TLOAD) )'°'
0
9718 COtlT l llUE
1''FXtl)
9717 COtlTltlUE
1903 TT=Y(LltlE,I)*B(LltlE,I)*YOUllGS(LI!lE,I)/tR c
DO 1304 J:1,llUt1
C *** OOTAlll STRAltlS DUE TO FSTR FOR All FUTURE Tlt1E STEPS.
l~=K+l
AREA:AREA+TT
c
lF(EXTEllT.GT.tJCYCLE)GO TO 8420
F IRt1=F IRtt+TT'°'YH (LI tJE, K+ 1) lf(CREEP.LE.O)GO To 68420
S[Ct1:S[Ct1+TT'°'YH ( ll tJE, K+ 1) '°' 1'2. O+TT'°'Y (LI IJE, I )'°''°'2.0/12. 0 VAL=O.
1304 COtlT l llUE .
lf(STEEL.LE.O)GO TO 1633 K1 :\l''TOTtlOD
CALL GEOr1 (FI Rtl, AREA, SE Ctl, SOE P, SARE A, tJAREA, fill !JE, RATIO)
DO 1725J=EXTE!IT, !!CYCLE fl
Til12=Tln(J+1) -Titl[ w
0)
 CotlTINUED ( 8)
PROGRAt1 THERMAL
TI t\2 =TI t12 ""''FA llL=NLAYER(LINE)
Tit12=Tlt12/ (FB+Tlt\2) TA=TP(LlNE,1)-TOLD(LltlE,1)
VAL=Tlt\2-VAL TX=TP (LI NE, 1 )
DO 1724 LIUE=l,NLIHE DO 1824 1=1,NL
K=O UUtt=NUtlIIJC ( LWE, I)
llL=tlLAYER (LI NE) Ir Cl. EQ. 1 )tlUltt=NUtl+ 1
DO 1724 1=1,NL tr (I. EQ. tlL) t.JUt\:tlUH+ 1
tlUtt=tlUt1I tlC CLI tJE, I) DO 182!1 ti= 1 , tlUtl
Ir ( 1. EQ. 1) tlUt\=tlUrt+ 1 r.:K+1
IF (I. EO. UL) tlUM=UUt\+1 K1=K1+1
IF(YOUUGS(LlUE,I).LE.O) GO To 1716 Ir(I.EQ.llL.AtlD.N.EQ.UUtt)GO TO 2614
lf(AGE(LlUE,1))1717,1716,1717 TT=TP(LlNE,K)-TOLD(LlUE,K)
1716 K 1 =K 1 +t!Ut\
K=K+NUt\ TA:(TT+TA)/2.0
GO TO 1724 261!1 STRAlN=ALPHA(LltlE,l)*TA
1717 COtff 1 tlUE TA=TT
TLOAD=AGE (LI llE t I) +Tit\ ( EXTE tlT)
c
lf(TLOAD.LE.O.J GO TO 1716 cc *"'"' fACTOR roR CREEP THAT IS ALSO A FUUCTIOll TEMPERATURE
STRAIN:FI*VAL*FC*(TLOAD**FO) IF(ISTART.EQ.O) GO TO 1024
STRAIU=STRAltl/YOUNGS(LlUE,I) *CTHlCK(LlNE,I) lf(CREEP.NE.2)GO TO 2719
DO 1726tU=l ,tlUH lF{l.EQ.NL.AtlD.tl.EQ.tlUt\) GO TO 22614
t~=K+ I
TY:TP (LI tlE, K)
K1=K1+1 T~=(TY+TX)/2.0
llOOE(Kl )=tlODE(K1 )-STRAltl"'FSTR(LINE,K) ~2614 UODE(K1)=NODE(K1)*(FE+Ff*TX**fG)
1726 CONTI tlUE V2=TX
1724 COtlTitlUE T:::TY
1725 VAL=Tlt\2 2719 IF(SHRltlK.EQ.O) GO TO 1824
68420 CatlTI tlUE IF(AGE(LINE,l).EQ.O.) GO TO 1824
lf(EXTENT.EQ.1.AUD.ISTART.EO.D.AND.STRESS.EQ.1) GO TO 81489 c
c c "d'"' ADD SHRINKAGE. FACTOR IF NECESSARY FOR TEMPERATURE.
cc *'"'" REMOVE THERt\AL STRAirlS FROt\ STEEL c
TT=(AGE(LINE,l)-CAGE +Tlt1E)
lf(TE11P.EQ.D) GO To 2516 TY=AGE(LlNE,l)-CAGE+TIM(EXTENT•l)
IF(STEEL.LE.O)GO TO 2516 TT:TT"""FK
DO 2517 1:1,NLlllE TY:TY"'""FK
K=tlAREA( I) TT=FH*TT/(FJ+TT)
IF(K.EQ.O)GO TO 2517 TY:FH*TY/(FJ+TY)
DO 2518 J=l ,K TT:(TY-TT)*STHICK(LltJE,l)
L=ILml( l ,J) lF(SHRltlK.ECl.1) GO TO 27199
tl=L-1 TT=TT*(f P+FQ*V2**FR)
TT=FACTR(I,J)*(TP(!,L)-TOLD(I,L))+(TP(I,tl)-TOLD(l,U))*(l.-FACTR( 27199 tlODE(K1)=HODE(K1)-TT
1 I,J)) . 1824 FSTR(LlNE,K)=(llOOE(Kl)+STRAlN)*YOUUGS(LlUE,I)
2510 DSTEE L( l, J) =TT"'ALPHAS"'E STEEL lF(lSTART.EQ.O) GO TO 01489
2 51 7 corn 111uE
8420 lf(PLOT.EQ.O) GO TO 2810
251G corlTWuE IF(PLOTIM.UE.EXTEUT ) GO TO 2818
c lPLOTK=lPLOTK+1
c ·;,,.,,., ADD ItKREtlErlTAL TEt\PERATURES To STRAir!S f'LOTlt1=ITit1ECIPLOTK).
C M:": G[fl[RATE STRESSES TO REt\OVE STRAWS FOR THIS It1Cll.Et1ENT c
c START PLQTTJ:HG 0
K 1:\./':'TOT!lQD cc """"'
LlO 1824 LI HE= l , NU riE w
'-J
K=O
CONTINUED ( 9) PROGRAt1 THERMAL

VERT=DEP/9.0 11=450/K+2
CALL SCALE(VERT,IV,l,F2) CALL ASCA(-35,-30,K,O,L,IKV,N,1,2)
llQ=900/I+1 CALL ALAD( 100,-60, TEllPL, 17,2,2)
V2=1v·,.,100 • O/F2/l c
IF(TEHP .EQ.O) GO TO 97314 c ...... PLOT TEt1PERATURES
IF(IPLOTK.GT.2.AtJD.TEtlP.EQ.2) GO TO 97314 c
IF(IPLOTK.GT.2.AllD.TEHP.EQ.3) GO TO 97314 V=L
c V1:KV*100.0/F3/K
C *** PLOT VERTICAL SCALE AllD LABEL DO 1800 111=1.NLINE
c DEG=DEGREE (Ill)
CALL AINIT(600) DO 1793 N2=1.DEG
CALL AORIG(0,100) XPLOT(ll2)=TOLD(N1,112)
CALL ALAB(20,300,HEITL,22,2,4) YPLOT(U2):TPLOT(tll ll2)
CALL ASCA(14,-5,0,I,O,IV,NQ,1,2) IF ( YPLOTC N2) .. LE .oJ YPLOT( 112) =O.
CALL AORIG(65,JOO) 1793 Cotlll NUE
lF(TENlHC.GT.O)GO TO 3496 113=5,.'IJl
c lF(Nl.NE.1) GO TO 1801
C ,.,,.,,., FillD t1AXlt1Ut1 TEt1PEFl.ATURE DIFFEREtlCE CALL ALlllE(XPLOT,YPLOT,DEG,V,O.,V1,V2)
c GO TO 1800
Ttll 11=1000. 1801 CALL ALINED(XPLOT,YPLOT,DEG,V,O.,V1,V2,113,10)
TtlAX=-1000 0 1800 CONTINUE
DO 1701 L=l,NLlllE cc ,.,,.,,.,
DEG=DEGREE(L) GRID TEttPERATURE PLOT
DO 1701 K=l,DEG c
IF (TOLD ( L, K). GT. TtlAX)TttAX=TOLD ( L, K) 111 = tl-1
IF(TOLD(L,K) .LT. TtUN)Ttlltl=TOLD(L,K) 112 = 920/l
1701 cor1Tir1uc CALL AGRID(O,O,N1,N2,K,I)
DIFF = Tt1AX-Ttlltl ITT=940
IF(DIFF.LE.5.0)DIFF=5.0 GO TO 2713
Y.PLOT(l)=O. 2711f CALL AEllD
YPLOT(l)=O. 97314 lF(STRESS.LE.O)GO TO 2818
XPLOT(2)=5. CALL AlllIT(1050)
YPLOTC2)=0. CALL AORIG(0,100)
CALL ALINE(XPLOT,YPLOT,2,0.,0.,1.,1. CALL ALAD(20,300,HEITL,22,2,4)
V=DIFF/4.5 CALL ASCA(14,-5,o,1,o,1v,11Q,1,2)
CALL SCALE(V,KV,K,F3) CALL AORIG(65,100J
L= ( Ttll N+O. 2) ,.,F3/KV Ir( STRillC.EQ.O)GO To 34926
L=L·::Kv IH=STRltlC
c J=STROIS
C ****IF SCALE IS PRESET, ALTER PARAMETERS. lF(Fl.EQ.O.) F1=1.0
c GO TO 3492
GO TO 7601 34926 HORIZ=O.
3496 L=TEt1LO\.I DO 3493 L=l,NLillE
KV=TEt1lt!C DEG=DEGREE(L)
1F(F3.EQ.O.) F3=1.0 DO 3493 K=l DEG
K=TEt1D IS lF(ABS(TSTR!scL,K)).GT.HORlZ)HORIZ=ABS(TSTRSS(L,K))
7601 \IRITE(6,7600)KV,K,L 3493. cornitwE
c HOR I Z=HOR I Zf J'+. 5
C *** PLOT TENPERATUR& SCALE AllD LABEL IF(HORIZ.LT.0.1) HORIZ:0.1
c CALL SCALE(HORIZ,IH,J,Fl)
n
3492 CotHirlUE
\/RITE(6, 77600) IH,J w
co
CONTINUED( 10) IPROGRAN THERMAL

c 2713 tll=TittE
C ,·,,·:-:: ORA\/ A 9 I llCH LI tlE O=TitlE
c XA=15
CALL ASCA(IA,ITT,30,30,Hl,0,1,2,2)
XPLOT(l}:O.
XPLOTC2)=9.0 IA=IA+32
YPLOT(1)=0. CALL ALAD(llO,lTT,FStoP,1,2,2)
YPLOT(2):0. DO 1986 tl2=1,4
CALL ALIHE(XPLOT,YPLOT,2,0.,0.,1.,1.) 111=I11-::10
c O:o-:q 0
C *** PLOT TOTAL STRESSES fl3=0-N1
c 1!1=0
CALL ASCA(IA,ITT,30,30,H3,0,1,2,2)
CALL AORIG(515,100)
V1=IH*100~0/F1/J 1906 IA=IA+20
DO 1900 H1=1,HLillE IrCITT.EQ.940) GO To 2714
LEG=DEGREE (Ill) +1 CALL AEIJD
DO 1995 112=1,LEG 281!J CotlTIIJUE
XPLOT(H2): TSTRSS(Nl,112) Tit1E=Tif1(EXTEflT+1)
YPLOT(H2):YH(H1,!12) U:\/+l
IF ( YPLOTCN2) 'LT .o.) XPLOT ( 112) =XPLOT ( 112 )+YPLOTC tl2) I ( YH( rn. N2-1) - 28 \IRITE(6,222)
I YPLOT(tl2) )''lXPLQT(ll2)-TSTRSS(tl1,1!2-1))
0
c
Ir(YPLOT(U2).LE.O.) YPLOT(N2)=0. C *-::o·: \/RITE OUT TOT.AL HEAT OF HYORATIOll ENISSIOtl
1995 CONTINUE c
IF(N1.NE.1) GO TO 1901 . Ir(HOHYD.LE.O) GO To 29627
CALL ALlllE(XPLOT,YPLOT,LEG,O.,O.,Vl,V2) DO 29628 Ll11E=1,HLillE
GO TD 1900 DEG=DEGREE (LINE)
1901 tl3 = 5'':1H 29628 \IP.ITE(6,29629)LUJE, (l!EAT(LillE, I), I=l ,OEG)
CALL ALillED(XPLOT,YPLOT,LEG,O.,O.,Vl,V2,N3,10) 2 9627 CONTINUE
1900 cmn1tlUE RETURtl
c 105 roRHAT(6It0,2E10.2)
C 1,,·,,·, LABEL AIJD PUT SCALE Oil TOTAL STRESS PLOT 7612 FORtlAT(8110J
c 501 FORtlAT(13A6)
502 fQRttAT(lX,13A6)
11=450/J+l
CALL ASCA(-35,-30,J,O,O, IH,N, I ,2) 100 FORtlA T ( 2 I 10,4E 10.3)
ll=fl-1 101 FORtlAT(7E10.2)
t11 = -ti -:: J 102 roRt1AT(l10,7E10.3)
202 FORtlAT(/ ,(' ,.,,.,-;,,., LUIE',I2,2X,'NUllBER Of LAYERS =',12))
112=-IJ'°' l H
114=111-35 203 FORMAT(T7,'UPPER SURFACE HEAT TRAllSFER COEFFICIENT =',El2.6,/,
CALL ASCACrl4,-30,J,O,tJ2,lH,tl, 1,2) 1T7, 'LO\JEP.. SURFACE HEAT TRAllSFER COEFFICIENT =' ,E12.6)
11=11'°'2 2011 FORt1AT( 1 0'°''°''°'* M1DIEtff AIR TEt1PERATURES AT EACli TltlE STEP',/,
112=920/I 1 (2X,7F15.2))
XT=t12-:: I I 100. 0 205 fORt1AT('0''''°"':·:: UPPER SURFACE tiEAT FLUX AT EACH Tlt1E STEP',/,(2X,7Fl
XPLOT(1)=0.01 1 5.2))
XPLOT(2)=XPLOT(1) 206 FORt1AT( •o,·,-;,,·,,·: LltlE SUBDIVISIOtl AtJD LAYER THERt1AL PROPERTIES >':*""'',
YPLOT( 1) =O. • I •• LltlE' ,3X, 'LAYER' ,3X, •rm. lt~CREt1EtlTS'.
YPLOT(2)=XT 1 6X,'TH!CKllESS',6X,'OEllSITY',6X,~SPEC. HEAT',3X,'COND
CALL ALlllE(XPLOT,YPLOT,2,0.,0.,1.,1.) 2UCTIVITY',7X,'AGE',TI05,'CREEP FACTOR',Tl19,'SHRNK FACTOR')
XPLOT(l):-XPLOT(l) 207. FORt1AT(1X,I3,2X,I6,6X, 16, 8X,7E14.6)
Y.PLOT(2):XPLOT(l) 209 FORtlAT('OTOP SURFACE H.T.COEFF.AT TlrlE WTERVALS'/(2X,5E15.7))
CALL ALil!E(XPLOT~YPLOT,2,0.,0.,1.,1.) 210 FORt1AT( 'OOOTTOt1 SURFACE H. T .CDffF 0 AT Tlt1E I!JTEfWALS' /(2X,5E15.7))
CALL ALA0(-400,-60,STRESL,25,2,2) 212 FORtlAT('OLltlE',5X,'Ll11E HEIGHT' /(1X,I3,2X,E10.4)) 0
CALL AGnIO(ll1,0,ll,1!2,J,I) 2111 FORttAT('O'':-:::::·:: SECTIOll PROPERTIES',/,' AREA=', (..)
lTT=-60 CD
 PROGRAM THERMAL
COIH I NUE 0 ( 11 )

9109 FORtlAT(EI0.2~110,/, (8EI0.2))

1 E14.7,' ti.A. HEIGHT =',E14.7,' fl.D.l. =',El4.7) 9110 FORttAT(F12.3,(T13,4(4X,E12.6,2X,El2.6)) )
21!i FORt1AT('0'"'"'"'" HEIGHTS FOR \../HICH CORRESPOtlDlflG STRESSES \/ILL LATER 219 roRtlAT('O""""'"' STRESSES AT THE mo Of Tlt1E ltlTERVAL',14,
lBE PRlllTLD FOR LirlE llUtlDER',13, /,(3X,OE14.6)) 1I TI t1E = ( I • E 10. 4 •• ) I )
428 FORtlAT( 'o·::·::·::;: TEt1PERATURES AT THE END OF TIME IllTERVAL', 14,
0 0 0

217 FORMAT( '0' '""''Tit1E=' ,Fl0.2/'0TEt1PERATURES')

" "

210 roRr1AT( 'OLltlE fl0. 1 • I4/(2X,OF10.2)) 1' TltlE = (',El0.4, 1 ) 1 )

222 FORttAT('O') 221 FORtlATC'OLltlE rm.',I4,/,(8E14.6))
223 FORflAT( 1 1 ') 1014 FORtlATC '0"""'"''' A TEt1PERATURE DISTRIBUTIOll OF T = R":(Y'""'tJ)/(D"'"'tJ)
22G FORt1AT('0''"'""'" HEIGHTS FOR \../HlCH CORRESPOIJDiflG TEnPERATURES WILL LA 115 ASSut1ED',/,T7 ,'R = TEt1PERATURE RAtlGE =',E14.6,/,
1TER BE PRillTED FOR LltJE fJUflBCR', 13,/, C3X,8E14.6)) 2T7 , 'tJ = POWER OF EQUATIOIJ =' ,El4.6)
7616 FORMAT(' IrJTERVAL' IS,7E16.0) 1027 FORMATCT7 , 'D = DEPTH FROtl DECK TO ZERO TEt1PERATURE =' ,El4.6,/,
7622 FORt1AT( 'OLO\../ER SURFACE AIR TEt!PERATURE AT EACH TIME STEP',// 1T7 •• (BELO\J nus DEPTH THE TEt1PERATURE IS ASSUtlED TO llE =' ,El6.8 )
1,(2X,7F15.2)) 220 FORt1AT(T7,'AXIAL FORCE =',E14.6,' B.t1. =',E14.6,' CURVATURE
8001 FORt1AT( 1 0',T10,'TEt1PERATURE S\JITCH ••••• ',T37,'=',12,/, 1=',El4.6,' DASE STRAltl =',E14.6)
1T10,'HEAT OF HYDRATIOll S\../lTCH',T37,'=',I2,/, 961G FORt1AT( 1 0''""'"''' YOUtlGS llODULUS OF STEEL=' ,El4.6,/,
2T10,'SHRINKAGE S\../ITCH ••••••• ',T37,'=',I2,/, 1T7 'COEFFIC1EllT OF THERtlAL EXPAtlSlOll OF STEEL =',El4.6)
1
3TIO,'Cor1CRETE CREEP SI/ITCH •• ',T37,'=',I2,/, 9619 FOKt1AT(T7,'Llt!E',I2,' PRESTRESS!rlG S\../ITCH =',12,
4T10,'PLOT S\../ITCH ••••••••••••',T37,'=',I2,/, 11 AT DEPTH' ,E14.6,' STEEL AREA =' ,E14.6,' ltHTIAL STRESS =',
STIO,'STfl.ESS SUITCH ••••••••••',T37,'=',I2,/, 1 E14.6)
6TIO,'CURVATURE FIXITY FACTOR',T37,'=',F7.4,/, 1621 FORt~T('O**** CREEP PARAtlEHTERS - (Fl,FA 1 FD,FC 1 FD)',/,·(3X,5El6.S))
7T10, 'Tlt1E ItJCREMEtH •••••••••', T37, '=',El 1.5) 1622 r0Rt1AT( 'O'""""'" CREEP-TEt1PERATURE PARAt1ETEKS - CtE,FF ,FG) •,I.
8002 FORttAT(TIO,'tlUttBER OF CYCLES •••••••',T37,'=',I3,/, I 3X,3E16.8)
1623 FORtlAT( 1 0"'~,,.,.;, SHRWKAGE PARAt1ETERS - (FH,FJ,FK,CAGE) , / ,3X,4El6.8)
1
1T10,'AXIAL FORCE SUITCH ••••• ',T37,'=',12,/,
2TIQ,'APPLIED MOMEtJT S\llTCH •• ',T37, 1 =',I2,/, 931G FORMAT( 1 0'""'"'"' INITIAL STRESSES')
3TIO,'BASE RESTRAitJT SI/ITCH •• ',T37,'=',I2,/, 9315 FORtlAT(' LltJE',I2,(T9,'STRESSES',7E14.6))
L~T10, 1 Et1BEDDED STEEL S\/ITCH •• ',T37,'=',!2,/, 9720 FORMAT( 1 0"""-:"" STEEL STRESSES')
!iTlO, I llUtlllER OF LltlES •••••••• ' . T37. I='. !2,/. 9719 f"ORtlAT( 1 0LWE rm.'. I4,/. (8E14.6))
6T10,'REFEREtlCE MOD. OF ELAST.',T37,'=',E12.6, 21313 FORMAT( 1 0**** t~TERIAL PROPERTIES FOR STRESS AtJALYSIS ****', /,
1
7 /,TI0, 1 13ASE RESTRAINT FACTOR •• 1 ,T37,'=',E12.6,//) 1'0Llt1E',T9, 'LAYER 1 ,T18, 1 tlOD. OF ELAST, , T37,'UIDTH',
1
0003 fORtlAT( 1 0'"''""'" USER SPECIFIED TEt1PERATURE PLOTTltJG' • 1
2 TSI, 'ALPHA', T66, 'FL', T80, 1Ft1 , T94, Frl')
1' SCALES',/ T7 ,'THERE \/ILL BE',14 213 FORt1AT (Iii, 2X, I 6, Tl 6, E 14. 6, T32, E 14. 6, T46, E 12. 4)
2' TEMPERATURE UtllTS EVERY',14,' UHirS OF Atl ItlCH', 933!j FORMAT('+' ,T60,El2.4,T74,E12.4,T88,El2.4)
J' (LO\/ TEMPERATURE =',13,' url!TS)') 29610 FORt1AT( 1 0'°'""""' ItUTlAL HEAT OF HYORATIOll Et1ISSIOtl AT tlODES FOR LINE
8004 FORt1AT( '0"""""" USER SPECIFIED STRESS PLOTT!tlG SCALES', 1',I3,/,(T6,7E12.6)) .
1/,T7 ,'THERE \/ILL BE',14,' STRESS UNITS EVERY',14, 29629 FORt1AT( '0°'""""" FltlAL HEAT OF HYORATIOll Et11ss1or1 AT !!ODES FOR LltJE
2' UtllTS OF AH ltlCH 1 ) 1',I3,/,(T6,7E12.6))
aoos FORtlAT(' "'"'""" tlUtlBER OF PLOTS =',13,/ 3623 FORtlAT('O''""'""' SHRillKAGE T(tlPERATURE PARAt1ETERS - (FP,FQ,FR)',/,
1T7 ,'THESE PLOTS To DE AT THE START oF TittE rncRcr1Er1TS', COl4)) 1 (3X,3E16.8))
77600 r0Rr1ATC 'O'"""""' PLOT SCAL~ 1 I EtlD
3T7 ,'STRESS •••• :- 1 ,14, §TAESS UNITS EVERY', SUllROUTltJE SCALE(VERT,IV,I,FACTR)
414, I HUtlDREDTHS OF AtJ WCH') V=JOOOOOO.
7600 roRt1AT('0""'"'"" PLOT SCALE ·.;. 1602 lf"(V.LE.VERT) GO TO 1601
1T7 'TEt1PERATURE:-',I3,' DEGREES FOR EVERY', V=V/10.0
213,I HUtlDREDTHS OF Atl ItlCH (LmJ=',13,')') GO TO 1602
7602 FORt1AT( 1 0"""""" TEt!PERATURE PARAt!ETEP.S' ,/, 1601 I=VEP.T/V
1T7 , 'BOTTOtl TEt1PERATURE SI/ITCH', T37, '=', 12,/, IF(l,EQ.3)1=2
2T7 ,'TOP SURFACE Al3SOR13TIVITY',T37,'= 1 ,F7.4)
0 0 0
IF( I .E0.6) I=S
9012 FORt1AT('0''" HEAT OF HYDRATIOtJ PARAt1ETERS', /,
" " '
"Ir(l.EQ.7)1=5
JT7 ,'NUtlllER Of SETS or HEAT OF HYDRATIOIJ CURVES =',IS,/, IF(I.EQ.9)1:8 (")
1 T2,'TEt1PERATURE 1 1 T20,'Tlt1E',T34,'SLOPE',TSQ,'Tlr1E 1 , FACTR=l.O ~
1 T64. 'SLOPE', TDD, 1 TlnE', T94, 'SLOPE', Tl 10, 'Tlt1E', Tl24, 'SLOPE') IF(V.LT.1.0) FACTR=t.O/V Cl
IV=V*l*FACTR +0.00001
 PROGRAt1 THERMAL
CONTI !JUE ll ( 12)

l:100*IV/VERT/FACTP.. IF(J.LE.1)GO TO 20
VERT=IOO.O*IV/(l*FACTR) L=J-1
RE TUR fl DO 11 1=1,L
mo Hl=HYOT(K,I)
SUBROUTI IJE GE011( F Intl, AREA, SECt1, SOEP, SARE A, llAREA, tlL I !IE, RA Tl 0) H2=HYOS(K,l)
lllTEGER UAREA(5) H3=HYOT(I~, I+l)
REAL SDEP(5,5),SAREA(5,5) 1F(I.GT.1)GO TO 2
DO 1 1:1,tJUtlE IF(H3.GT.O.)GO TO 6
J=NAREA( I) H=-H3
lF(J.LE.O)GO To 1 HYDT(K,2)=H1*EXP(H/H2)
DO 2 K=l,J GO TO 1
A=SAREA(I,K)*RATIO 6 COt!T I tlUE
AREA=AREA+A H1=H3/H1
flRt1=F IRtl+A'"'SDEP (1, K) H4=ALOG(H1)
SE Ct1=SE Ct1+A''SD[P (I • K) ,·,so[P ( I. K) lt=H2''H4
2 corn xNuE H4=ALOG(H3)
1 COJJTl IJUE GO TO 1
RETURIJ 2 COt!TltlUE
Et ID 1F(H3.GT.O.)GO TO 22
SU8ROUTI llE REED (VAL, IICY CLE, K) HYDT(K,1+1)=H1*EXP((-H-H3)/H2)
REAL VAL(300) H=-H3
IF(K.EU.1)~RITE(6,7) GO TO 1
Ir(K.EQ.2)~RITE(6,0) 22 H=H-H2''H4
DO 4 1'=1 NCYCLE H4=ALOG (H3)
READ(5,2~J,FORCE H:H+H4
VAL(J):FQRCE RAIJGE(K, l)=H
URITE(6,6)J,FQRCE 11 COt!T I tlUE
1F(I.EQ.1)GO To 1 20 flETURtl
Ir(J.EQ.L)GO To 1 EIJD
ll=J-1 SUBROUTIUE HYDATtl(T ,H, DEL TA,DEL TAH, HYDT ,HYOS,
DELTA=(FORCE-VAL(L-1))/(J-L+l) 1RAllGE,HYOTEt1 IJPART WiTEt1P Tlt!E)
DO 3 t1:L,N REAL HYDT(9,{o),HY6sc9,10S,RANGE(9,9),HYDTEM(9)
3 VAL(t1):VAL(t1-I )+DEL TA llJTEGER IJPART(9)
1 L=J+l c
Ir(J.EQ.NCYCLE)GO To 5 C *** FIND CURVES THAT THIS TEMPERATURE LIES DETWEEN.
If corn I !JUE . c
5 RETURfl IF(WiTEttP.LE.1)GO TO 10
2 roRt!AT(IIO,El0.2) DO 1 1=1,NHTEt1P
6 FORMAT(l10,E16.6) Ir(T.LE.HYDTEM(l))GO To 2.
7 FORr1AT( •o-::;:;:·:: SPECIFIED SECTION AXIAL FORCES ,,,.,,,,,. · ' . 1 CatHitlUE
1T7. 'TI11E I . T19, 'FORCE') . 10 l=NHTEttP
8 FORt1AT( •o;,,·,,,,., SPECIFIED SECTIOtJ EXTERtJAL t10t1EtlT .;,,·,,;-::• ,/, c
1T7, 'Tlt1E', T19, 't1DMEt!T') c -::;:-:: COMPUTE HEAT OF HYORATIOIJ RATE
[llD c .·..·..·. HYDRATIOIJ CURVES MUST DE FED ltl UITH THE LOWEST TEMP. FIRST
SUBROUTitlE HRAtlGE(J,HYDT ,HYOS,RAllGE,K) c
P..EAL HYDT(9, 10) ,HYOS(9, 10) ,RAIJGE(9,9) 2 IS~=O
c IF( I.GT .1) I=I-1
c ·::-::-:: THIS SUDROUTIUE STORES THE TOTAL HEAT AT THE END OF Ir(TlttE.LT.HYOT(I,1))GO TO 91
n
c EACH HEAT!UG RANGE. H=SLOPE*LOG(T)+C 19 J=tJPART(I) -1
c -::-:.·:-:.":
c
IST CYCLE H=11LOG(T /TO)
OTHERS H=r1LOG (T) +HO-SLOPE;'LOG (TO)
IF(J.GT.O)GO TO 20
17 t:=1
....~
c IF TltlE IS tlEGATIVE ITS ASSUr1ED TO 8E -HEAT
c
CONTINUED { 13) PROGRAM THERMAL

H2:H
10 Tl =HYDT( I, K)
Hl:HYDS(I,K)
T2=T1"'EXP(H2/Hl)
DELTAH=H1*(ALOG((T2+DELTA)/T2))
IF(ISU.EQ.l)GO TO 35
IF ( tlHTEtlP. EQ. l ) GO TO 90
I S>l=1
HG=DELTAH
1=1+1
GO To 19
3s corn 1r1uE
H7=DELTAH
H8:H
DELTAH=HG+(DELTAH-H6)*(T-HYDTEM(l-1))
1 / (HYDTEll( I )-HYoTEt1( I-1))
90 ~=H+DELTAH
91 fl.ETURtl
20 DO 12 K=l,J
IF(H.LT.RANGE(I,K))GO TO 15
12 corn I rwE
K:J+l
15 corn I riuE
IF(K.EQ.l)GO TO 17
H2=H-RAtlGE(l,K-1)
GO To 113
Et ID

n
:i::i.
N
 D.l

APPENDIX D
RESPONSE OF UNCRACKED BRIDGE SECTIONS TO DESIGN
AND CALCULATED TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS

D.l INTRODUCTION

various design temperature gradients for bri.dge superstructures have

25
been proposed as discussed in Section 1.2.3. Radolli and Green compare
the response of an unsurfaced slab to some of these gradients with the
theoretical response using a linear heat flow analysis using a 'worst'
day for Toronto, Canada. However their assumed temperature distribution
'
f or b oth Priest 1 ey I s 6 t h power curve 38 an d Maher I s d'istri'bu t'ion 32 was
14
incorrect, and their report was published before Priestley proposed the
current 5th power curve. This appendix compares the structural response
of uncracked bridge sections when loaded with the design temperature
profiles and temperature distributions computed using a linear heat-flow
analysis with 'worst' day loading applicable to New Zealand conditions.
A 50 nun blacktop thickness was used on the bridge sections, and the
assumed 'worst day' loading and material properties are presented in
Appendix E.
19
Analysis for winter conditions was also performed. Hunt and Cooke
developed equations which provided heat losses on a cold clear night of
2 17
14 7 j/m / s, based on an effective sky temperature of 228 °K •
18 2 25 2
Emerson used a value of 110 j/m /s and Radolli and Green used 126 j/m /s.
The latter value was used in these analyses for a period of 14 hours. A
constant air temperature of 0°C was used, and two different initial
uniform bridge temperatures of 0°C and 10°C assumed. When bridge
surface temperatures fall below the air temperature, the surfaces
experience heat gain from the surrounding air. For this reason the low
values of surface heat transfer assumed for the summer analysis were
used.

D.2 MAJOR BRIDGE THERMAL LOADING CONDITIONS

Four major design thermal loading cases occur in continuous prestressed

concrete bridges, and are shown in Table D.l. The heat transfer
mechanisms for these loadings are either heating from solar radiation
and ambient effects during warm summer days, or radiation heat loss to the
 D.2

sky on cold clear nights. The critical loadi.ng conditions are either
soon after construction, when minimal prestress losses will have occurred
and when the bridge will have .no insulati.ng blacktop and a light grey
colouring, or after the blacktop is laid when the critical design case
includes live-load. The critical r.egions will either be near the
supports (when conditions will be worst on a 2-span bridge) or near the
centre of interior spans of continuous bri.dges.

TABLE D.l MAJOR THERMAL LOADING CASES IN CONTINUOUS

PRESTRESSED.CONCRE'l;'E .~~~PG~S

Loading Heating Live Blacktop Critical No. of Location of

Case Mechanism Load? Region Spans Critical Stresses

A Insolation etc Yes Yes Midspan ,,...._ ....

L. Soffit
B II II
No No Supports 2 Lower Web
c Radiation to Yes Yes Supports 2 Deck top
Sky
D Radiation tp No No Midspan > 2 Deck top
Sky

In combination with design live-load as shown in Table D.l, the

maximum tensiile stresses for load case A occurs at the soffit, whi·le for
load cases C and D it occurs at the decktop. Thus for comparative
purposes in this appendix the maximum thermal tensile stresses have been
taken at these tensile faces. However higher tensile stresses may occur
in the web than in the soffit for load case B. The thermal stresses in
this appendix were calculated assuming full flexural restraint, which
approximates load cases A and D. However larger tensile stresses occur
in load cases B and C, where approximately 1.5 times full flexural
restraint occurs.

For load cases A and B the primary stresses are of the opposite
sign, and significantly smaller than the continuity stresses on the tensile
face. The reverse is true for load cases C and D. Note that continuity
thermal stresses in geometrically similar sections experiencing the same
flexural restraint are proportional to both the unrestrained thermal
curvature (~t) and section depth (d) • Thus ~td provides a suitable,
parameter for comparing thermal responses of geometrically similar
sections..
 D.3

Manual thermal analysis of bridges under a design temperature

profile tend to be tedious. An alternative is to use curves to obtain
the unrestrained thermal curvature at any section, and the primary
stresses at the tensile face. The calculation of tensile stresses at
the tensile face at any section is then a simple matter. The problem in
producing the design curves is to incorporate the effect of blacktop
thickness and section shape. However this approach is difficult to
extend to cracked bridges.

D.3 RESPONSE OF SECTIONS TO DESIGN AND CALCULATED TEMPERATURES

The variation of thermal response of slabs with 50 mm blacktop with

structural depth when subjected to design temperature profiles and
temperature distributions from a 'worst' day analysis is shown in Fig. D.l.
The former were computed with TSTRESS and the latter with THERMAL.
Details of the design temperature profiles are provided in Section 1.2.3
and Figs. 1. 2 and 1. 3, and a description of the 'worst' day loading in
Section D.l. Curve 2A (Fig. D.l) is provided to show the effect of
ignoring the temperature rise in the soffit zone for the temperature
49
distribution proposed by Priestley , and curve 8 is an expression proposed
25
by Radolli and Green for maximum thermal curvature of unsurfaced slabs.
Note that although unsurfaced slabs may have a lower top surface
absorptivity they lack the insulating effect of blacktop, and Curve 8
(Fig. D.l) appears unconservative.

The thermal response of geometrically similar box-girder bridges

(Fig. D.2) under the same loading described for the slab above, is
shown in Fig. D.2. The lateral thickness ratios are realistic, but the
deck slab thickness becomes non-typical for section depths at either end
of the range analysed (i.e. deck slab thickness = 0.45 m for a 3 m deep
section). However the shape was considered adequate for the purpose of
25
comparing predictions from proposed design profiles. Radolli and Green
found that the ratio of web thickness to flange width had little effect
on thermal curvatures and maximum thermal stresses in I sections.

For both the slab and box-girder section (based on Priestley 1 s 49

5th power temperature distribution) Curve 2 provides the best agreement'
with the results from the 'worst' day summer analysis. (Curve 1.)
38
Curve 3 (based on Priestley•s 6th power temperature distribution)
 l4

32 ---------------------@
30
······························ ....
211
..·· .. · ········
26
............ "···········Ql
~ 22 ......./
{20
ti
0
(j)--f..
18
.a .i'
~ 1& :r-c /
.
t 1'
L..
z12
/I/'
"~to
(.)
I
/ 1' I
1. 'Worst' Doy ~urt'V'Mr An.aly,i§
2. Pr,tuky S~wer Curve
3· Prautlllly &·~ow.r Curve
QI
c:
·~ 6
8
// 4. Maher Curve t Maximum 30C'C l
5. 'Wont' D.ay Wint&r AMlysis !Initial T111mp.t. 10° C )
Ii. 'Won~ 0.y Win=' AMlysis ( !n.1i&l Tcmp.s 00 C )
:f
4 .1·
f,
7, Leonhardt Curve <Maximum 17•S°Cl
a. Radolli and Grun Distribution
2
o.,...~ .......
~~....-~--,...-~-.-~~,-~ ........ ~~-.-~~..-~-.-~~~

' - 100 200 400 600 800 10 0

-2 "'-·.:..:..·.::..:.:···-·-· Slab Depth - mm ________ .............. :::@
- - .:.:.--..::.-.:.:."..::..:.."..:.:·=@:.:.:·.:.::-..:..: - - - - -
-4

(al Curvature on Unre!:.trained Section

----------------------©
5
Cl
0..
l:
I

......." 4

c __ .......................... .
.R
"' ---,,.::___ _ _ _··~-----· <:[)
.'
----·-
c
~
3
, \.,JJ• ...
..... .......
c
0
''
. . .............
.. ..... ....
... ,''
,' ... ............... . ... ............ .

...
el
,' - ~- - - - I")\ ................ -------
2 ' /"7 / ""' .............. --·· -~:-
l::
UI

.-!.
/~~y·
I fl:\ ••
.-- ...--·-~--.-....__~·--@ --
c ..-'\.::!) ........
t!!.
!/ I

--- ---
,,••"" - - - -@

0 ~----.-----..----..------.-----..----...----..----..------.-~--.-
0 100 200 400 Ii()() 800 1000
· Slab Dapth - mm

( b) Stresses on Flexurally Restrained Section

FIG. D.1 RESPONSE OF SLABS TO DESIGN AND CALCULATED

TEMPERATURE PROFILES
 PS
32
30

211
.... al

-
'f'o

&.

..
0.20
0

..
... 18
~ 16
'lb

...., 1214
b
:I
.M1..
.~
>
aa
10
1. 'Worst' Day tl\Summer Analysis
2. Pr,1uttey S~wer
3. Pnuttey &·l"ower Curve
Curv111
4. Moher Curva (Maximum JOOC )
m 6
.~ S. 'Wont' Day Winter Analysis <Initial Temp.$ 100 C)
DI &. 'Worst' Day Win..- Analysis <Initial Tamp.s 00 C)
g' 4 7. Leonhardt Curve <Maximum 17•S°C>
:x:
2
0 i--~~~....-~~~...-~~~-.-~~~ ........~~~---.-~~~--,
soo 1000 1500 2000 2SOO 3000
-2 Girder Depth - mm
------- --- - --------
--........................................... .
-4
@ ..,,,,.,,,..-- -- _... ........... ........
.... ., ... .,.

-6 CS)- --- ----- ---- • -..•

(al Curvature on Unrestrained Section

& w

®-- .. ... .Q.

.. ,,~ s = 0·10
~ .'.
'• w :::; 1 ·8
s
::a:
·..
.
14
u
--~---
...... .. . .. -- ---- --~ =- ---

:. ......
c .....
·~c 3
"~---------··......
······ .. :-:---- --
~
-~ ....... .
c ..........-. ~ ...............................·. ·.-.:... ~ ,.:;

--·--- ·--·--
0 ..... .......

IC\ ••
...... ...... ........
\,JI-·

~--------------------~-------

500 1000 HiOO 2000 2SOO

Girdar Depth - mm

I b) Stresses on Flexurally Restrained Section

FIG. D.2 RESPONSE OF GEOMETRICALLY SIMILAR SHAPED

BOX-GIRDER SECTIONS TO DESIGN AND CALCULATED
TEMPERATURE PROFILES
 D.6

follows the.same trends as Curve 1, but requires adjustment to the vertical

32 24
scale. Predictions based on the Maher and Leonhardt temperature
distributions (Curves 4 and 7) are not realistic as they provide no
variation in either dimensionless curvature l/J d or tensile surface
t
stresses ft with section depth d • Note that although values of l/Jtd
for Curve 4 are larger than for Curve 7 for the box-girder bridge
(Fig. D.2(a)), the total soffit stresses for the flexurally restrained
section are lower (Fig. D.2(b)). This is because Curve 7 has zero
primary stresses. A comparison of Curves 2 and 2A (Fig. D.l) shows that
49
the design small temperature rise in the soffit zone causes a
significant reduction in tensile surface stresses ft but a smaller
reduction in dimensionless curvature l/Jtd • The soffit temperature rise
noted in the 'worst' day summer analysis at the time of critical stresses
49
was generally more than twice the l.5°C predicted by Priestley •

Results from two 'worst' day winter night analyses for initial
temperature 10°C (Curve 5) and 0°C (Curve 6) are also shown in Figs. D.l
and D.2. Curve 5 consistently predicts a more critical response than
Curve 6. Thus it can be expected that the conditions which cause the
most critical reverse gradient conditions are a warm cloudy day followed
by a clear cold night. Although the predicted reverse curvatures are
low, the total stresses are relatively high for deep sections. This is
because primary thermal stresses are large and of the same sign as
continuity thermal stresses on the tension face. The analysed curvatures
25
did not confirm the findings of Radolli and Green that maximum reverse
curvatures for winter conditions are approximately 60% (but of the
opposite sign) of curvatures for summer conditions.

D.4 THERMAL RESPONSE OF SELECTED SECTIONS TO 'WORST' DAY SUMMER

LOADING

A variety of section shapes (Fig. D.3) was analysed by program

THERMAL under the 'worst' day summer loading. Curves that have not been
labelled with an asterisk have been plotted for sections with a ratio of
slab thickness to section depth = 0.15. A comparisoµ of Curves 4 and 5
and Curves 2 and 3 shows that section response increases with top
flange width, with the exception being that Curve 2 has greater curvatures
than Curve 3 for shallow sections. This is because the average temperature
rise of the slab above the air cells in shallow sections exceeds the
 P7

30

\, ...... .
28
....~
' .. -......··--.............
. . ~"'-..
...
in
26
*®-···· .. ·,-......
... ._... ' ···~·-.......::................... _
111 ll'i\ • ..... .... ••••• •••••••
·~ 24 "'21'" ••• .... _ ' "' ' ' , •••••• .... ..........•••••••• ....... . .........
.....

---~ -.
Ill
... 22 ............ ...
.........
~ .,....--...... ............ ' '
·· ..... . ......
.........
~·.. ·- ••• •'::1-i. ••• •• 11!\
.. ........
"....... ~~------ ..........':::JJ
'
'--
'
.... .... ---.....
....-"!;>
.. '-- ..... .. .... __
................... \!:!,)

14
......... . ..... ....... ~

.
.......... •• \,J)
.......__~
~ 12 Curve
~ 10 CD
...::>
u 8 10 1·0 D t"' 0.15 except tor c.urvu
OI
.5 6 101·au 11\UUd II Wh@n t e2!){)
tn
tn
~ 4
© 2 5·o T Note: Spine Thickness for
2 9·0-,-- Sections <D .© ,@
'l = 2b
2000 ------~~-----
o......------.......
500
--------------------................
1000 2500 3000
Girder Depth - mm

10) Curvature on Unrestrained Section

w
~ = 0· 15
4 -sb =0·10
w::; 1 ·8
s

c
0
.ii\
c
.!!
c2
0

.~ 1
c
..
~

01------....-.----------------.......
500 1000 1500 ----.......
2000 ------------------
3000 2~00
Girdtr Depth - mm

I b) Stres.ses on Flexurally Restrained Section

FIG. D.3 RESPONSE OF BRIDGE SECTIONS TO CALCULATED

TEMPERATURE PROFILES
 D.8

average temperature rise of the cantilever slab by a sufficient amount

to cause the phenomena.

Slab depths tend to increase little with section depth in practice.

To study the implications of this Curves 3 and 5 have been replotted
and labelled with an asterisk for sections with constant slab depths of
200 mm. Correspondi_ng curves will intersect at a depth of 200/0 .15 =
1333 mm. It can be seen in Fig. D.4 that a constant slab depth produces
a flatter curve (i.e. 1/Jtd and ft are less sensitive to changes in d ) •
A comparison of Curves 3 and 3*, shows that a larger thermal response
will be obtained with a shallower slab depth. This is partially due to
a reduction in the restraining effect of the bottom slab, and thus the
trend is not so pronounced in a comparison of Curves 5 and 5* (plotted
for a T section) • In fact for deep sections larger soffit tensile
stresses are induced on a section with a thicker slab.
 E.l

APPENDIX E
ASSUMPTIONS FOR THERMAL SIMULATIONS

To avoid repetition, this appendix summarizes the assumptions

used in the various thermal simulations within the thesis. Further and/
or different assumptions used in the simulations have been explicitly
stated in the text.

E.l AMBIENT DATA FOR 'WORST DAY' SUMMER ANALYSIS

The analysis used solar radiation and temperatures recorded at

14
Christchurch Airport on 18/12/74 (Fig. E.l). (Priestley also used
this data and showed that it would produce near maximum critical
conditions for New Zealand bridges). A uniform low wind speed of 1.8 m/sec,
corresponding to that expected at a sheltered site, was assumed. This
/2 ')
provided a top surface heat transfer coefficient h of (20~1ll/9
from
74
Fig. E.2 taken from Billington for concrete. Equation-E.l was derived
from Fig. E.2.

2
h = 11~4 + 4.66 w j/m /s (E .1)

where w =wind speed (m/s).

A bottom surface heat transfer coefficient equal to half the top surface
18
heat transfer coefficient, as proposed by Emerson was assumed. Initial
temperatures were assumed uniform at 15°C throughout the section.
Since this is not a very realistic condition, a 48 hour analysis was
adopted, with the ambient data for 18/12/74 duplicated for the two days.
Night time conditions were assumed cloudy with no radiation heat losses.

E. 2 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

The material properties used in the analysis are shown in Table E.l.

TABLE E.l MATERIAL PROPERTIES ASSUMED

MATERIAL

Concrete Bitumen Air Steel Sand

-1 -1 ' 0.0225
Conductivity J.m s /°C 1.384 0.744 1.384
Specific Heat J.kg-1/oc 922 838 922 922
-3 2240
Density kg.m 2480. 1.3 1820
Surface Absorptivity 0.8 0.9 - -
Modulus of Elasticity GP a 35 0.0 - 200 -
-6 -6 -6
Coef. of Ther. Exp. m/m/°C 10.8x10 20.0x10 - 10.8x10 -
 E.2

The typical values of conductivity and specific heat in Table E.l

74 6
were taken from mean va 1 ues f rem Bi·11·ington • ·
Lan_igan provi'd e d a
literature review of values reported for concrete, and found a ra_nge of
conductivity from 1.04 to 5.19 j/m/s/°C. He concluded that conductivity
'
is particularly sensitive to the minerological character of the aggregate.
The reported values of specific heat varied from 502 to 1172 j/kg/°C at
20°c, and over the range 10°C to 65°C the specific heat increased linearly
by 20%.
74
Bi· 11 i_ngton
· repor t e d th a t va 1ues o f sur f ace a b sorpt.ivi. t y f or so 1 ar
radiation for black, non-metallic surfaces (such as black top) can range
. 6 1 ey14 b o th use d va 1 ues o f 0 . 9 .
between 0. 85 and 0. 98. Lanigan an d Priest
.
A range for concrete of 0.65 - o-.8 (depending on surface colour) was
74
reporte d b y Bi·11·ing t on •
2
Neville reported a range of normal design secant concrete modulus
of elasticity from 21 to 45 GPa. The value of 35 GPa in Table E.l
represents typical measured prototype values for prestressed concret~

bridges.

The reported range of concrete coefficient of thermal expansion was

discussed in Appendix C. Values of density in Table E.2 were taken from
74
average values reported by Billington

E.3 ASSUMED TEMPERATURE PROFILE

The thermal response of sections, as affected by various parameters,.

has been studied in this thesis by imposing the temperature profile shown
in Fig. E.3 onto the section. The temperature increases from zero at the
soffit to a maximum of 30°C at the concrete deck, with the temperature at
height y above the soffit T(y) given by equation E.2

5 5 oc
T(y) 30 x y I d (E. 2)

Note that this temperature profile will automatically be generated

by TSTRESS if user-requested. Although this profile is unrealistic for
deep or shallow sections, it has been applied only to sections of equivalent
prototype depth of approximately 1200 mm, and thus is similar to
49
Priestley 1 s proposed web profile shown in Fig. 1.3.
 E.3

1000 30 8

\ Radiation

.
-.. \•
..
r:r~lr,
N
Cl) 750 -.. 25 6 ......
I (..) I
~-
(/')

.._ ~ • E
Q.I .._
c:
......._
0

500
(..

.....::i
~20
\ I
I
I • 'tl
Cl.I
OJ

·- CJ

....... '
4 Q.
V)

I
Q.I
"'CJ Q. I
CJ I "O
Q;;: E I .s
-
V)
(..
CJ
0
250
~

15 I
I
I
I •
/_;-Wind \ 2
~

•
" I e

•
\
0 10 .I Mid day •
0
0 4 8 12 16 24
Time (hrs)

FIG. E.l METEOROLOGICAL DATA RECORDED AT CHRISTCHURCH AIRPORT ON

18/12/74

'- "(3
Cl.I c
Vi~
§~
'- E
I-~
...... ~

0
Cl.I .....
I C
Cl.I
Cl.Iu
u ·-
.E'- ::::Cl.I
:::J 0
VJ 0

4 8 12 16
Wind Speed (m/s)

FIG. E.2 INFLUENCE OF WIND ON CONCRETE TOP SURFACE HEAT

TRANSFER COEFFICIENT (AFTER BILLINGTON74)

1 r _ _ J___ _ Ty = 30 x( y/d)5 °C
d y

"--L..c;;_-X~__._J~j- ~300C
(a) General Section (b) Temperature Profile

FIG. E.3 ASSUMED 5TH POWER TEMPERATURE PROFILE

 F.l

APPENDIX F
EFFECTIVE CRACK STRAIN AT DECK OF BEAM TWO
DUE TO SHRINKAGE

When examining whether cracks in the deck of Beam Two were likely
to close under thermal loading in Section 5.8.4(<!:), it was necessary to
estimate the effective crack strain at the deck, £er , (as defined by
equation 4.1), due to shrinkage.
76
The AC! Committee 209 provide a formula to estimate the free
shrinkage strain Esh(t) at time t days after curing for moist cured
concrete.

t
Es h(t) = 35 + t -11 • ht • hs • he • hf • hai'r" 800 µe
h (F .1)

The parameters in this equation are defined in Appendix c. For

the spine of Beam Two at t = 101 days and for a measured humidity of ~4%,

Esh (101) = 507µ£ • The crack height of the fully-cracked beam .; was
calculated as 120 mm (Section 5.6.1). The section dimensions at the
centre support (taken from Fig. 5.2) are shown in Fig. F.l(a).

The fina.l sec.tion strain profile (Fig. F .1 (b)) due to shrinkage

effects can be found from a force and moment balance, as shrinkage effects
clearly will not induce an axial load, and are assumed not to affect the
moment balance for the fully cracked beam.

Force Balance

(F. 2)

Moment Balance

The solution of equations F.l and F.2 for ~ and e is shown

1
in Fig. F.l(c). The effective crack strain £ is the difference between
er
the free shrinkage strain Esh(lOl) for the deck top and final section·
strain= 503µ£ (Fig. F.l).
 F • .2

As1

(a) Section (b) General Strain (c) Calculated Strain

Prof He Profile
KEY
A5 1 Steel Area 712 mm2
As2 " " 285 ''
!. Crack Height 120 mm
h 114 mm
w 102 mm
d2 19 mm
d1 215mm
d 234 mm
Final Soffit Strain 506 /l£
Final Deck Strain 40 ,,
Unrestrained Flange Shrinkage 543
" Spine 507
Effective Crack Strain ..... 503 q

FIG. F.l SHRINKAGE STRAINS IN FULLY CRACKED BEAM TWO

 G.l

APPENDIX G
CONCRETE STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIP ADOPTED

To avoid repetition, this appendix has summarized the concrete

stress-strain relationship adopted in the various theoretical predictions
within the thesis. Numerous investigators have proposed stress-strain
113
relationships for concrete and these have been reviewed by Kent and
51
Blakeley . The monotonic stress-strain relationship chosen for this
study is presented in Fig. G.l and is based on the relationship proposed
117
by Kent and Park for unconfined concrete with a concrete strain at
maximum stress = 0.002. The concrete cylinder strength f' was taken
c
from the appropriate experimental test measurements reported in
Appendix B.

-f f~
..!:!
(/)
(/)
Initial Tangent
Q) Modulus=
.....
L..

(f) 1000 f~ f =f~ (1·8 -400£c)

.....
Q)

Q)
L..
0
c
0
(.)

Secant Modulus
0·2f~
= 1000 f~ (1-250£c)

0·002 0004
Concrete Strains (£c)

FIG. G.l ADOPTED CONCRETE STRESS - STRAIN CURVE

 ERRATA SHEET

Page xii line 7 replace e: £

au av

" II
line 9 after Poisson's ratio add . ., or thermal diffusivity

Page 39 Two lines below eqn. (2.40), should read ' wind speed is
assumed'

Page 68 Second line, last word should be 'pours'

-F
er
Page 99 eqn. (4.9) : -F should be
er E
c
-M
er
Page 99 eqn. (4 .10) -M should be
er E
c
Page 99 eqn. (4.8) , third line should read

N N 2
L: y .A. + E ijJt l: y, A. 0 •. • • (4. 8)
i=l l l s i=l l l

PagP 100 Two lines above eqn. (4.14) : replace smaller by larger.
3ijJtEI
l'i::t'JL .102 Fig. 4.2d. Di vi de reactions by span length 1 , i.e. :
1
l'aqc· ] 26 Last line h should read h
P m
Pa(:Je 160 Section 5.7.3 line 2: Fig. 5.2B should read: Fig. 5.24

J'dtjF ;> () l Line 5 replace aided by adrl1•d

l'aqc· ;~bO Line 2 (below Fig. 7.28) replace soffit by deck

P1:q ci ~)o Eqn. (8.4) constant should bP 1.2 not 1.5

l'CJ1_1e 332 Paragraph 3, first line M should be M

c e
PaqE-> C4 Card 5 format statement should be (8110)

h'lge cs Definition of
Kthickness
shouJd read:

K = 1 .10 - 0. 0006 7'1' where T is thickness in mm

thickness
Definition of K should readi
s
K
s
= 0.82 + 0.00026S where S is slump in mm

Page C6 Definition of h should read:

thick

hthick = 1.17 - 0. 00114T where T is thickness in mm

Paqe C6 Definition of h should read:

s
h = 0.89 + 0 . 0016S where S jr; slump in mm
s
 2.

Page C6 Card 9 format statement should be (3El0.0)

Page Cl4 Card E format statement should be (3El0.4)

Sign Convention Page 98 and subsequent:

Strains are compression positive, but temperature increases

are positive. Hence, for example, in eqn. (4.3),

I

a T is a positive quantity while E + ~t.y will be

c (x,y) 1
negative strains on solution of the equations.