EXPERT INTERACTIVE D E S I G N OF R / C COLUMNS

UNDER BIAXIAL BENDING

By Russel Sacks 1 and Oral Buyukozturk, 2 M. ASCE

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ABSTRACT: A new computer-based approach to the problem of design of rein-

forced concrete columns that may be subjected to biaxial bending is presented.
Previous approaches to the design of concrete columns (including those with
biaxial bending) using computers have been primarily based on iterative nu-
merical analysis. The EIDOCC (Expert Interactive Design of Concrete Columns)
program described in this paper uses the accumulated experience and knowl-
edge of experts in the field of concrete column design to account for the issues
involved in the design in order to make an optimal design proposal for given
loadings. The approach used in the program is that of an "expert system" and
the program is developed to run on a microcomputer. The developed computer
program is interactive, and it incorporates an accurate analysis routine which
enables the user to analyze both the sections proposed by the design routine
and any other concrete column sections.

INTRODUCTION

The standard approach to reinforced concrete section design using

compatibility a n d equilibrium equations with suitable assumptions is
cumbersome in the case of columns w h e r e the load is applied eccentri-
cally in both principal directions. This is because the problem is nonlin-
ear, and the n u m b e r of u n k n o w n s is large. The problem m a y be ex-
pressed for a n y defined column section as
(P,ex,ey) = /(c,9,e c ) (1)
where / = a nonlinear function of t h e variables, a n d can be derived from
the equilibrium equations and geometry of any given column section
and the stress strain curves of the materials (see Appendix III for n o -
tation). A n u m b e r of approximate m e t h o d s which are based on simpli-
fying assumptions have been developed, e.g., references by Moran (1973),
Meek (1963), and Bresler (1960). Design charts are also available (Weber
1966; Row and Paulay 1973). However, for certain situations, the sim-
plifying assumptions may lead to inaccurate results, a n d the use of pres-
ently available design charts is often limited. Thus, a n e w methodology
for this design problem w o u l d b e useful. The availability of computers
in the design office allows the development of a n e w approach.
The use of computers to solve this problem w i t h improved accuracy
has u p to n o w been based u p o n iterative analysis of trial sections until
a satisfactory result is achieved. As each computation is rather complex,
this approach can be inefficient in its u s e of computer time. Apart from
this consideration, the design process should n o t be limited to a purely
numerical evaluation of t h e loads, stresses, a n d strains involved; basic
]
Engr., Ben-El Struct. Engrs., Jerusalem, Israel.
2
Prof. of Civ. Engrg., Massachusetts Inst, of Tech., Cambridge, MA 02139.
Note.—Discussion open until September 1, 1987. To extend the closing date
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals.
The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication
on April 11, 1986. This paper is part of the Journal of Computing in Civil En-
gineering, Vol. 1, No. 2, April, 1987. ©ASCE, ISSN 0887-3801/87/0002-0069/$01.00.
Paper No. 21420.

69

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 design issues, such as seismic requirements, architectural preferences,
availability of material types and sizes, and constructibility must be taken
into consideration. The necessity to achieve an economically optimum
design further complicates the problem.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

For these reasons, it is appropriate to investigate the application of a

computer "expert system" to reinforced concrete. The program pre-
sented in this paper, EIDOCC (Expert Interactive Design of Concrete
Columns), is a practical application of an expert system to the problem
of design of concrete columns subjected to biaxial bending. Its approach
is fundamentally different from that of previously developed computer
programs in that it attempts to make use of the accumulated knowledge
and experience of expert designers in the design execution and does not
use a brute-force numerical procedure. EIDOCC runs on any.IBM PC or
compatible microcomputer; this is particularly significant for smaller
structural design offices in which mainframe machines are unavailable
and microcomputers are commonplace.

DESIGN TOOL CONCEPT

An "expert system" is a computer program that captures the knowl-

edge of a human expert or experts and uses it to solve problems. Such
systems for structural engineering applications are currently being re-
searched at a number of institutions. The EIDOCC system presented
here is an attempt to introduce a new concept in reinforced concrete
design. It is essentially an expert system; thus, the expert's (the engi-
neer's) knowledge is exploited by the program in order to allow a lower-
level designer to access and use it without the expert being available
continuously.
The program is accessed on two levels:

1. The engineer has control over the Code of Practice to be used, the
unit system to be used, the material types and properties, company pol-
icy and architectural design constraints, and the rules used by the pro-
gram. The engineer's control is protected by the use of a password which
allows him to access the knowledge base of the program.
2. The designer, who may in practice be a draftsman or a technician,
accesses only the functions that assist him in the design and/or evalu-
ation of a concrete column. He may therefore execute designs that draw
upon the knowledge of his superior, the engineer, and of the experts
who originally participated in the development of the program. He is
guided through the design process by a series of decision trees which
are controlled by an inferencing subroutine.

The program structure is shown in Fig. 1. It is composed of a number

of modules that are called by the interface routines. The entire program
is written in the "C" language, which has a number of significant ad-
vantages over both FORTRAN and BASIC for this application. These
include its use of pointers, data structures, dynamic memory allocation
and definitions, and the function structure of "C" programs (Sacks 1985).
The expert features of the EIDOCC program include decision tree in-
ferencing, symbolic rule processing, and a limited learning ability. The
70

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 USER
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ENGINEER'S ENGINEER'S
INTERFACE INTERFACE

SYMBOLIC RULE
DESIGN
PROCESSING
AMD INFERENCE PROPOSAL - •

KNOWLEDGE
ANALYSIS
BASE

DATA
BASE

FIG. 1.—EIDOCC Concept (Note: Arrows Indicate Flow of Information)

decision trees cover issues such as requirements for seismic design, con-
crete cover to reinforcing, punching shear for columns supporting con-
crete slabs, and others. The rules processed set the spacing limitations
for reinforcement, minima and maxima for reinforcement content, and
constructibility limits on the gross column dimensions. For example, a
rule that limits the minimum spacing of longitudinal reinforcing bars in
a column to allow for adequate concrete placement is expressed as
spacing : 2 : 1.5 : in. : concrete placement
which has the standard form
subject : operator : value : unit : reason
An example of the type of expert "rule of thumb" used in the design
module is provided by the procedure for selection of appropriate bar
sizes for columns. From the experience of designers, it was established
that the size of the main reinforcing bars was proportional to the min-
imum outside dimension of the column section (Fig. 2). As the bar sizes
are discrete, a set of possible sizes is sensible for a given column, The
program also uses accumulated data to aid its selection of b/h ratios for
rectangular columns. Through an option available, each column de-
signed using the system is evaluated by the engineer with respect to the
b/h ratios and the bar sizes. The program will then adjust itself to in-
corporate this evaluation (experience) in proposing future designs.
Neither the decision trees nor the symbolic rules are part of the pro-
gram; they are stored in knowledge base files and are manipulated by
71

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

SMALL COLUMN DIMENSION

(IN.)

FIG. 2.—Main Reinforcing Bar Size versus Minimum Column Dimension

the program. They can therefore be easily updated or changed by the

engineer.

EIDOCC DESIGN CAPABILITIES

EIDOCC can be used to propose an initial design for a concrete col-

umn section and to accurately analyze any defined column section. The
load for design or analysis may be eccentric in one or both principal
directions. The engineer can set the operation program to use either metric
or imperial unit systems and either the ACI 318 (1983) or CP 110 (1972)
design codes.
In design proposal, the user is guided through a series of questions
that require as an answer Yes, No, or numerical responses. For each
question, an option to request an explanation of the question intent is
provided. Inferencing and computation subject to the rules is performed
concurrently with the input of information, so that the result is pre-
sented seconds after the last piece of information is provided by the
user. The design proposal includes many considerations that are not di-
rectly connected with the load carrying capacity of the column, e.g., the
possibility that splicing of the reinforcing bars being necessary at some
point in the height of the column influences the limits of steel content
for design and the pattern of placing of the bars. Similarly, if the same
gross column section is to be maintained through a number of stories
(as is often the case), the steel content for the uppermost story must be
sufficiently small so that the content of the lowest column remains within
the maximum limit. It is the consideration of this type of issue which
sets the EIDOCC design proposal generation module apart from design
programs developed up to now; it uses an "artificially intelligent" ap-

72

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 proach rather than a "brute-force" numerical iteration procedure to pro-
duce a design.
EIDOCC accounts for slenderness of columns by using design code
specifications [e.g., ACI 318 (1983) 10.11.4] to limit maximum slender-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ness and an approximate moment magnification method for secondary

bending effects. The approach of the codes at present is to apply mag-
nification factors to the moments independently in each principal direc-
tion in order to account for the secondary bending effect. However, it
is suggested that this is a conceptually incorrect approach in the case of
rectangular reinforced concrete columns subjected to biaxial bending. This
is because the neutral axis is not perpendicular to the load ray (the line
joining the load point to the geometric center of the section), and thus
deflections of the column in each principal direction do not increase in
direct proportion to the magnitudes of the initially applied moments. To
the writers' knowledge no failures have been attributed to lack of con-
sideration of this phenomenon. However, a clearer understanding of this
situation would be valuable in rethinking the approach to design with
biaxial bending for a future edition of the ACI 318 code.

EIDOCC ANALYSIS ROUTINE

The analysis module is based indirectly on the strain compatibility and

equilibrium equations for the column section. The relationship ex-
pressed in Eq. 1 describes the three-dimensional failure surface for a
column section if the concrete strain is taken to be the ultimate concrete
strain (usually 0.003) (Fig. 3). Then, any combination of neutral axis depth
c and inclination 8 will give a unique load triplet of axial load and x and
y eccentricities, {P„; eux; euy\. In order to declare the column section either
adequate or inadequate to resist a given load triplet {P; ex; ev}, only one
point on the failure surface need be computed. Such a point is that which
has ultimate axial load
Pu = P (2)

and tan I^) = tan ('A (3)

Vux/ W

FIG. 3.—Interaction Surface

73

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 This is shown in Fig. 4. Thus a strategy for making this evaluation is
developed:

1. Find the neutral axis inclination such that Eq. 3 is satisfied.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2. Set the neutral axis depth c equal to the neutral axis depth com-
puted from balanced failure condition for the section.
3. Compute the value of Pu and update c using a modified secant nu-
merical method until P„ = P (see Fig. 5 for description).
4. Compute eux and euy and compare with ex and ey to decide whether
the section is adequate or not.

Finding the neutral axis inclination 0 in Step 1 is not straightforward in

the case of a rectangular column under biaxial loading, because the angle
of inclination of the neutral axis to the vertical column axis is not equal
to the inclination of the load ray (the line joining the load point to the
geometric center of the column) to the horizontal column axis (whereas,
this is the case for a circular column). This is shown in Fig. 6. The pro-
gram uses a relationship developed through experiment by Ramamurthy
to find the neutral axis inclination directly and does not use iteration.
The neutral axis depth is initially set to be equal to the balanced neutral

POSSIBLE SENSIBLE
POINTS OF ACTION
OF ULTIMATE LOADING

0 X

FIG. 4.—Given and Ultimate Load Points

P(GIVEN)

NUMBERS INDICATE
COMPUTATION
SEQUENCE

BAL ^1^2

FIG. 5.—Modified Secant Method

74

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 6.—Neutral Axis Inclination 9 for Rectangular and Circular Sections

CP110 ACI 318

STRESS feu STRESS

& = 09<ct

CONCRETE

TU
In

0 , 24xirj4/TaT' 0-0035, 0 E. STRAIN Eu

''"STTT 0.002 0D03

STRESS STRESS f
Y

STEEL
E=0.002 +
2000008,
*m fy
f
y

/,E=29x10*
0 0.002 STRAIN ° STRAIN

FIG. 7.—Stress-Strain Curves Used

axis depth and is then iterated until the vertical load is within 1% of the
given load. (This requires up to four iterations using a modified secant
method, as shown in Fig. 5, for the solution of the nonlinear relationship
between neutral axis depth and vertical load.) The calculations use the
stress-strain diagrams for the materials (Fig. 7) given in the design codes,
and no assumption of an equivalent stress block is required. In addition,
each reinforcing bar is considered individually in its true position.

APPLICATION EXAMPLE

The EIDOCC system is designed to have expert performance in pro-

posing column section designs; as this is done using rules of thumb and
expert experience, it is possible that its initial proposal of a column sec-
tion will not be the optimum result in every case. The intention is that
the designer should refine the initial design proposal and analyze it to
verify its adequacy.
75

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 A typical example is provided by the design of a column in a parking
garage. The column, which extends over one story only, is an interior
column and is typical of many similar columns on the same level. The
column supports a reinforced concrete beam and slab floor system (beams
in both directions). The clear height of the column is 15 ft, and lateral
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

deflections of the structure are prevented by a concrete elevator core.

The structure is not in a zone of seismic hazard. The materials to be
used are: concrete 4,000 psi (27.6 MPa) at 28 days; and steel 60 ksi (413.7
MPa). The maximum simultaneously occuring loading for the column is
337 kips (1,499 kN) vertically with moments of 908 kip-in. (102.6 kN • m)
and 664 kip-in. (75 kN-m) about the two principal axes [i.e., a load of
337 kips (1,499 kN) acting with ex = 2.0 in. (50.8 mm) and ey = 2.7 in.
(68.6 mm)].
The EIDOCC design process is as shown in Appendix I. (In these
examples, standard sizes and values with U.S. customary units are used.
Please note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 kip = 4.448 kN; 1 psi = 6.895 kPa; and
1 ft-kip = 1.356 kN-m.) As can be seen the result is a 15x15 in. section
with four #11 bars and #3 ties. The analysis shows that this section is
adequate and that a slightly smaller section might be tried. The analysis
sets P = Pu. For this case, safety factors defined as euy/ey and eux/ex are
given in the output for Mx and My respectively. It should be borne in
mind, though, that the column is slender as designed, and this must be
accounted for in the analysis (i.e., magnification factors must be in-
cluded based on stiffnesses of the column and beams framing in at each
end).

PROGRAM RELIABILITY

Testing of the program design module to date has shown that its pro-
posals are either very close to those of human expert designers or more
efficient. Sample results are given in Table 1. The EIDOCC designs are
in some cases more sensible than other designs, e.g., ACI SP-17A gives
a 15x15 in. column with 8 #10 bars and #3 ties for a design problem
where the vertical load is P = 208 kips and the moments are Mx = 2,064
kip-in. and My = 828 kip-in. (no further design information is supplied).
Clearly the column is required to be significantly stronger about the x-
axis than about the y-axis and if no other restrictions (architectural, avail-
ability of forms, constructibility) apply, a rectangular column would be
preferable to a square column. The EIDOCC initial design proposal is
26x12 in. with 12 #8 bars and # 3 ties. Refining and analyzing shows
that a 20x12 in. column with 10 #8 bars and #3 ties is adequate. (This
section has 6% more concrete but 25% less steel than the 15x15 in. sec-
tion.) Other examples are shown in Table 1.
The accuracy of the analysis module was tested by comparison with
experimental results achieved by Bresler (1960) and Ramamurthy, with
analysis results of Bresler (1960) and Salmon and Wang (1973), with de-
sign chart results of ACI SP-17A (1973) and Park and Paulay (1975), and
with program results of Taylor (1985) and Ehsani and Rosenbaum (1985).
The experimental results are actual failure loads and eccentricities for
model columns; EIDOCC analysis of the same column sections gave fail-
ure loads and eccentricities that were on average 2% lower than the ex-
76

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 TABLE • 1.—Typical Designs Produced Using EIDOCC

Design problem EIDOCC design Refined EIDOCC

specifications Original design proposal design
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(a) ACI SP-17A (1973)

P„ = 208 kips 15x15 in. 26X12 in. 20X12 in.
M,„ = 2,064 kip-in. 8 #10 bars 12 #8 bars 10 #8 bars
M„y = 828 kip-in. #3 ties #3 ties #3 ties
f'c = 5 ksi
fy = 60 ksi
Short column
(b) Salmon and Wang (1973)
P„ = 166 kips 18x12 in. 25X12 in. 18X12 in.
Mux = 138 ft-kips 12 #8 bars 10 #8 bars 10 #8 bars
M„y = 55 ft-kips #3 ties #3 ties # 3 ties
f'c = 4 ksi
/y = 60 ksi
(c) Park and Paulay (1975)
P„ = 700 kips 20x20 in. 23x20 in. 23x20 in.
ex = 2.25 in. 4 #14 bars 4 #11 bars 4 #11 bars
ey = 4.33 in. #3 ties #3 ties
f'c = 4 ksi
fy = 60 ksi
(d) Taylor 1985)—1
P„ = 420 kips 28x14 in. 28X16 in.
ex = 4 in. 16 #6 bars 16 #6 bars
ey = 9 in. • # 3 ties
fc = 5 ksi
fy = 80 ksi
(e) Taylor (1985)—2
P„ = 420 kips 30x17 in. 30x17 in. 30x17 in.
ex — 4 in. 16 #4 bars 12 #8 bars 12 #6 bars
ey = 9 in. #3 ties #3 ties
fc = 4 ksi
fy = 60 ksi
Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 kip = 4.448 kN; 1 psi 6.895 kPa; and 1 ft-kip =
1.356 kN-m.

perimental results (i.e., the EIDOCC analysis was 2% conservative), with

a standard deviation of 9%. When compared with other analysis meth-
ods, design charts, and programs, EIDOCC is on average 5% less con-
servative than these methods.

CONCLUSION

The EIDOCC system presented in this paper represents a new ap-

proach, that of the expert system, to the problem of the design of rein-
77

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 forced concrete columns which may be subjected to biaxial bending and
simultaneously applied axial load. Its module for initial design proposal
draws on the knowledge and experience of expert human designers. A
module for accurate analysis of the biaxial bending situation is a com-
puter-based methodology to assess the adequacy of column sections.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

This application, which is selected as an example, shows that the use

of expert system software for computer-aided design can increase the
productivity of the design office by allowing draftsmen or technicians to
perform designs which draw on the knowledge of experts without their
continuous presence. This would result in the increased productivity of
the engineer (a key factor for small design offices). The approach to the
design of reinforced concrete taken in future codes should take into ac-
count the use of such systems.

APPENDIX I.—EXAMPLE OF EIDOCC DESIGN PROPOSAL

Designing Concrete Column.

1) Setting Design Criteria.
Does the column participate in a lateral framework?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> N
Is the column part of an industrial structure (i.e., not commercial)?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» E
For most industrial structure designs the principal criteria are technical
(strength and serviceability) and not architectural.
Is the column part of an industrial structure (i.e., not commercial)?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> N
Is the structure in an area in which seismic effects should be considered?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» N
2) Input of Factored Design Loads.
Input column loads:
Axial Load (kips) = 337
Eccentricity X (inches) = 2 . 0
Eccentricity Y (inches) = 2.7
Column Height (feet) = 15
Is this column typical of a family of columns?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> Y
Are any of the columns of this family corner columns?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» N
Are any of the columns of this family edge columns?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» N
3) Input Required Material Types.
NOTE: Tables of available material property options in the program and
their selection are omitted for brevity. In this example, the fol-
lowing material properties are used:
78

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 Concrete: ec = 0.002; fcu = 4,060 psi; ec„ = 0.003
Steel: fy = 60,000 psi; Es = 29 x 1Q6 psi
Steel Type: 1
Does the architect require a particular shape for this column?
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(Yes/No/Explain) -> Y
Does the architect require a circular shape?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> N
Does the architect have specific dimension limits for this column?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» N
4) Fix Column Area.
In the Y Direction:
Is the column braced against sidesway?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» Y
In the X Direction:
Is the column braced against sidesway?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> Y
Does the column support a concrete slab at any point in its height?
(Yes/No/Explain) - ^ Y
Is the slab supported by beams?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> Y
5) Proportion Steel and Adjust Section.
Is the column to be cast in place?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> Y
Is the concrete to be cast against and permanently exposed to earth?
(Yes/No/Explain) -» N
Is the concrete to be exposed to earth and weather?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> E
This implies exposure to both temperature and moisture changes.
Is the concrete to be exposed to earth and weather?
(Yes/No/Explain) -> Y
6) Choose Bar Placement Pattern.
The following bars are available.
Those preferred are marked by asterisks ' #*/
Bar number 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 14 18
Preference
Bar Diameter 0.38 0.50 0.63 0.75 0.88 1.00 1.13 1.37 1.75 2.26

Select from preferred bars only? (y/n) Y

Current Column proposal data:

Column Label : Example

Rectangular Column , 15.0 by 15.0 inches.
Concrete Type : 2 Height : 15 feet

79

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 Steel Content : 0.0132 Tie diameter : 0.38 inches
Bar Label Diameter Steel Type X y
A 1.41 1 4.44 4.44
B 1.41 1 4.44 -4.44
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

C 1.41 1 -4.44 -4.44

D 1.41 1 -4.44 4.44
NOTES
1) The column is slender.
*** Hit any key to continue ***
Input column loads:
Axial Load (kips) = 337
Eccentricity X (inches) = 2.0
Eccentricity Y (inches) = 2 . 7
Results:
Neutral Axis Inclination = 53 degrees
Balanced Neutral Axis depth = 10.6 inches
Computing Ultimate Load point . . .
Please Wait : -> 4
Ultimate eccentricity X = 2.7 Y = 3.9 inches
THIS COLUMN IS OK.
P Mx My
Safety3 factors for this analysis:
3
1.00 1.44 1.35
***Hit any key to continue***

APPENDIX II.—REFERENCES

1. "Design Handbook in Accordance with Strength Design Method of ACI 318-

71," Vol. 1, ACI Special Publication 17A, ACI Committee 340, American Con-
crete Institute, Detroit, Mich., 1973.
2. "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete," ACI 318-83, ACI
Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Mich., 1983.
3. Bresler, B., "Design Criteria for Reinforced Concrete Sections Under Axial
Load and Biaxial Bending," ACI Journal, Vol. 57, No. 5, Nov., 1960, pp. 481-
490.
4. British Standard Code of Practice for Reinforced Concrete, CP 110-1972, British
Standard Institute, London, England, 1972.
5. Ehsani, M. R., and Rosenbaum, D. B., "Biaxial Bending of Reinforced Con-
crete Columns," Research Report, Department of Civil Engineering and En-
gineering Mechanics, University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz., 1985.
6. Meek, J. L., "Ultimate Strength of Columns with Biaxially Eccentric Loads,"
ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 60, No. 8, Aug., 1963, pp. 1053-1064.
7. Moran, F., "Design of Reinforced Concrete Sections under Normal Loads
and Stresses in the Ultimate Limit State," Bulletin d'Information No. 83, Com-
itte European du Beton, Paris, France, 1972.
8. Park, R., and Paulay, T. E., Reinforced Concrete Structures, Wiley-Interscience,
New York, N.Y., 1975.
9. Ramamurthy, L. N., "Investigation of the Ultimate Strength of Square and
Rectangular Columns Under Biaxially Eccentric Loads," Special Publication No.
13, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Mich., 1966.
10. Row, D. G., and Paulay, T. E., "Biaxial Flexure and Axial Load Interaction
in Short Rectangular Columns," Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earth-

80

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81

 quake Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 3, Sept., 1973, pp. 110-121.
11. Sacks, R., "EIDOCC—Expert Interactive Design of Concrete Columns," the-
sis presented to M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass., in 1985, in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of Master of Science.
12. Salmon, C. G, and Wang, C. K., Reinforced Concrete Design, Intext Educational
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Publishers, New York, N.Y., 1973.

13. Taylor, M. A., "Direct Biaxial Design of Columns," Journal of Structural En-
gineering, ASCE, Vol. I l l , No. 1, Jan., 1985, pp. 158-174.
14. Weber, D. C , "Ultimate Strength Design Charts for Columns with Biaxial
Bending," ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 63, No. 11, Nov., 1966, pp. 1205-
1230.

APPENDIX III.—NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

b = smaller dimension of rectangular column;

c = depth of neutral axis measured from extreme compression fi-
ber;
d = diameter of circular column;
e = eccentricity;
eux = ultimate eccentricity measured parallel to x-axis;
eUy = ultimate eccentricity measured parallel to y-axis;
ex = eccentricity measured parallel to x-axis;
e
y = eccentricity measured parallel to y-axis;
h = larger dimension of rectangular column;
Mx = m o m e n t about the x-axis;
My = moment about the y-axis;
P = vertical column load;
Pu = ultimate vertical column load;
7m = material strength reduction factor;
6c = failure strain of concrete in compression; a n d
0 = inclination of neutral axis to vertical column edge.

81

J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1987, 1(2): 69-81