Articles
Essam Ayoub*
Charles Malek
Gamal Helmy
Considerations for the design of doubly
unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams
used for box girder construction
Many box girder bridges are constructed with doubly unsym-
metrical precast beam units. The aim of this paper is to present
special considerations for the optimum arrangement of preten-
sioned strands in a simply supported precast pretensioned beam
with a doubly unsymmetrical section. The goal of the optimum
arrangement is to minimize the distortion (lateral sway pheno-
menon) caused by the doubly unsymmetrical characteristic of
the beam section at transfer. The study shows that the distortion
of the unsymmetrical section is minimized when the resultant
stresses at transfer are constant over all of the top flange and
over all of the bottom flange of the precast beam for most of
the sections within the beam length. In this case, the neutral axes
of these sections will be horizontal with respect to the beam sec-
tion. This approach is verified with the help of two different finite
element models. In the first model, the beam is modelled as
one-dimensional space frame elements; in the second model,
the beam is modelled using three-dimensional solid elements.
A practical example of a box girder bridge made from doubly un-
symmetrical precast pretensioned beams in the APM (Automated
People Mover) elevated bridge project in Saudi Arabia is also
presented.
Keywords: bridge, precast beam, unsymmetrical section, prestressing,
distortion, finite element, stress analysis
1 Introduction
Precast prestressed beams have been increasingly used in
recent decades for the construction of single- and multi-
span bridges as well as in buildings such as multi-storey
car parks, factories, etc. The main advantages of precast
beams can be summarized in the considerable savings in
cost, labour and construction time. Moreover, the precast
beam alternative offers a solution in congested areas
where traffic requirements make formwork unacceptable.
However, in the general case, the precast beam bridge so-
lution has the disadvantages of being less aesthetically
pleasing and having a lower torsion stiffness capacity com-
pared with box girder bridge solutions. In this respect, the
optimum solution – combining high aesthetic characteris-
* Corresponding author: Essam.Ayoub@dargroup.com
Submitted for review: 08 August 2011
Revised: 08 March 2012
Accepted for publication: 18 March 2012
© 2012 Ernst & Sohn Verlag für Architektur und technische Wissenschaften GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin · Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3
DOI: 10.1002/suco.201100037
tics and high torsion stiffness capacity – would be to use
precast box girder bridges. Most precast box girders are
very heavy and therefore require special lifting equipment,
shipping and handling, which may not be readily avail-
able. However, splitting the box girder into two or more
precast beams and then using stitching concrete can be
the solution for a simplified box girder construction. The
precast beams required for the box girder construction can
be singly or doubly unsymmetrical sections.
There are many publications in the literature dealing
with precast prestressed beams. In most of them, however,
the precast prestressed beams are symmetrical sections.
Rodriguez et al. [1] presented the design of a precast con-
crete light rail system for JFK international airport using
precast prestressed concrete segments with symmetrical
sections. Yee [2] discussed the structural and economic
benefits of precast/prestressed concrete construction; he
also dealt with precast symmetrical sections. Only a few
research works consider the analysis and design of singly
or doubly unsymmetrical precast prestressed beams. Ma et
al. [3] discuss the behaviour and advantages of unsymmet-
rical precast beams used for box girder construction but
they do not emphasize how the self-weight of the beams
and the arrangement of the pretensioned strands affect
the distortion that may occur at transfer due to the behav-
iour of doubly unsymmetrical sections. Of course, at trans-
fer, any significant distortion of the precast beams will
have a negative effect on the assembly of the box girder
section.
It is therefore the purpose of this paper to present an
optimum arrangement of the pretensioned strands in or-
der to minimize the distortion that may occur at transfer
due to a doubly unsymmetrical precast beam. A detailed
stress and displacement analysis is performed for the un-
symmetrical beam section using two finite element meth-
ods: a one-dimensional frame elements model and a three-
dimensional solid elements model. The SAP2000 program
[4] is used to develop the two models. Further, a simple
formula is derived using the fundamental beam equations
to come up with the necessary transverse eccentricity of
the pretensioned strands in order to minimize the distor-
tion of the unsymmetrical beam. In the service condition,
after connecting the precast beams with stitching con-
crete, the assembled box section will behave as a symmet-
rical section under service loads. A practical example from
the Automated People Mover (APM) elevated bridge pro-
193
E. Ayoub/C. Malek/G. Helmy · Considerations for the design of doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams used for box girder construction

ject at Princess Nora University (PNU) in Saudi Arabia is

presented and discussed.

2 How to minimize distortion for doubly

unsymmetrical pretensioned beam sections

When subjected to gravity loads such as self-weight, dou-

bly unsymmetrical sections undergo vertical as well as
transverse displacements due to the resulting bending mo-
ment about the section’s horizontal axis. Moreover, verti-
cal and transverse displacements may also occur as a re-
sult of torsion, which can be expected due to the fact that
the centre of gravity of the section does not coincide with
the section’s shear centre. Further, under prestressing
loading, both of the above displacements can be expected
in addition to axial displacements. To minimize distortion
(lateral sway) due to bending, i.e. to allow for vertical cam-
ber and axial displacement only and eliminate lateral dis-
placements, the prestressing strands should be arranged in
such a way that under self-weight and prestressing forces
(load transfer case), the final lateral displacements across
the beam are minimal. This can be achieved if the final
orientation of the neutral axis at transfer is horizontal at
all the critical cross-sections of the beam. In this case, the
normal stresses at these critical sections, are constant over
all of the top flange and over all of the bottom flange.
The fundamental beam equations that need to be
used to minimize the expected distortion of the unsym-
metrical precast beams are presented below. The above
approach is based on the torsion ignorance assumption
(caused by the eccentric location of the section’s shear
centre), which may be acceptable, as mentioned in Esh-
bach et al. [5], for the following reasons:
a) If the section is considered as a thick-wall section;
since unlike a thin-wall section, the flanges – together
with the web – contribute to resisting the vertical shear
force and in this case the shear centre will be close to
the section’s centre of gravity.
b) If the section has a relatively high torsional rigidity, as
for thick-wall sections, since the deformations caused
by the torsion in this case will not be major.
In addition, if counteracting torsion exists when adopting
corbels connected to the unsymmetrical precast beams as
in the case of the example presented here (Fig. 1), the lat-
eral displacement caused by torsion will be minimal. In
Fig. 1, G and V correspond to the self-weight of the main
precast beam and the precast corbels respectively, and T1
and T2 are the torsions caused by the eccentric shear cen-
tre location (Sh.C.) and the corbel eccentricities respec-
tively. However, to confirm the results, the 3D solid ele-
ment model presented in section 4.2 can be a verification
tool since the 3D model considers all straining actions in-
cluding bending moment, shear force, torsion caused by
the eccentric location of the section’s shear centre, etc.
3 Optimum arrangement of strands using fundamental
beam equations for doubly unsymmetrical sections
Fig. 1. Schematic figure showing torsion caused by eccentric shear center
location and counteracting torsion caused by precast corbels
P (Mx Iy − My Ixy ) (Mx Iy − My Ixy )
f= + y+ x (1)
A (Iy Ix − Ixy )
2 (Iy Ix − Ixy2)
where
f normal stress
A cross-sectional area
Ix moment of inertia about horizontal axis x
Iy moment of inertia about vertical axis y
Ixy product of inertia about x and y axes
x vertical distance from centre of gravity to required lo-
cation
y lateral distance from centre of gravity to required loca-
tion
For the unsymmetrical section of a precast pretensioned
beam shown in Fig. 2, the normal stresses at points 1 and
2 can be the same only if the third term of Eq. (1) is equal
to zero. The same condition is valid to ensure the equality
of the normal stresses at points 3 and 4. As a result, the fi-
nal neutral axis due to self-weight and prestressing forces
will be horizontal. If the neutral axes for most of the criti-
cal sections along the beam length are horizontal, the ex-
pected lateral displacement will be minimal over the entire
beam length. For practical reasons, two prestressing ducts
of 50 mm diameter are embedded in the precast beam as
shown in Fig. 2. These ducts will be used in case distortion
needs to be adjusted by external prestressing.
The third term of Eq. (1) (MyIx – MxIxy)/(IxIy – Ixy2)x
can be zero if
My Ix − Mx Ixy = 0 (2)
Under self-weight, (My)sw = 0, whereas under prestressing
loading, (My)pre and (Mx)pre have specific values based on
prestressing force and prestressing location with respect
to the x and y axes. Therefore, in order to satisfy Eq. (2),
the lateral moment due to prestressing should be equal to:

The general normal stress equation for a doubly unsym-

(My)pre =
((M )x sw − (Mx)pre Ixy) (3)
metrical section subjected to biaxial moments Mx and My Ix
and normal force P is:

194 Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3

 E. Ayoub/C. Malek/G. Helmy · Considerations for the design of doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams used for box girder construction

Fig. 3. Concrete dimensions for the 36 m APM bridge in Saudi Arabia (PNU)

4 Illustrative example

The Automated People Mover (APM) elevated bridge in

Fig. 2. Typical doubly unsymmetrical section used for box girder construction Saudi Arabia at Princess Nora University (PNU) is consid-
ered as a practical illustrative example for doubly unsym-
metrical precast pretensioned beams. The bridge consists
(My)pre of a box girder section with multiple simply supported
(ey)pre = (4)
fpre spans of 36 m each. The box girder section is composed of
two unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams with top
where ribs and inclined struts spaced every 2.9 m as shown in
(Mx)sw moment about x axis due to self-weight of precast Fig. 3. The two precast beams are connected together with
beam stitching concrete. The box girder span is 34.8 m. The top
(Mx)pre moment about x axis due to prestressing forces ribs and the inclined struts are used as supports for the 10
(My)pre moment about y axis due to prestressing forces cm top precast slab used as formwork for the cast-in-place
fpre prestressing forces 15 cm topping slab. The concrete grade used is 55 MPa.
(ey)pre lateral eccentricity of prestressing forces Seventy-five strands, five of them located at the top of the
beam, are adopted for each of the two precast unsymmet-
Using Eq. (4), the lateral eccentricity of the prestressing rical pretensioned beams. The pretensioned strands have
strands can be calculated to minimize precast prestressed an ultimate strength of 1770 MPa and an area of 150 mm2.
beam distortion at transfer. Ten strands are debonded for a distance of 8.9 m from the

Fig. 4. Prestressing strand arrangement for the APM bridge in Saudi Arabia (PNU)

Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3 195

E. Ayoub/C. Malek/G. Helmy · Considerations for the design of doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams used for box girder construction
Fig. 5. Section properties of the precast unsymmetrical beam used for the
APM bridge (PNU)
Fig. 6. Properties of section carrying precast and wet concrete top slab
Fig. 7. Properties of section carrying dead loads and imposed loads
196 Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3
Fig. 8. Photo showing 36 m unsymmetrical precast beam after fabrication
Fig. 9 Photo showing the assembly of the two precast unsymmetrical beams
Fig. 10. Photo showing the installation of the precast slabs used as perma-
nent formwork for the cast-in-place top slab
support and 34 strands are debonded for a distance of
3.4  m from the support as shown in Fig. 3. The vertical
and transverse eccentricities of the pretensioned strands
for the above three critical sections are also given in Fig. 4.
Two finite element models were developed for the
analysis of the unsymmetrical precast section at transfer.
The SAP2000 software was used for both models. The first
 E. Ayoub/C. Malek/G. Helmy · Considerations for the design of doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams used for box girder construction

model is based on one-dimensional frame elements,

whereas three-dimensional solid elements are adopted for
the unsymmetrical beam modelling in the second model.
Fig. 5 shows the section properties of the precast unsym-
metrical beam used at transfer. After stitching the two pre-
cast beams, the weight of precast and wet concrete slabs
are carried by the section shown in Fig. 6 (box section ex-
cluding non-prestressed bottom stitching concrete in ten-
sion) and in the service condition, the dead loads (wearing
course, rails, parapets, etc.) and the imposed loads are car-
ried by the section shown in Fig. 7 (whole section, includ-
ing top slab, except non-prestressed bottom stitching con-
crete in tension). In the service condition, the final stress
in the lower flange of the box section due to the funda- Fig. 11.1. Displacement results for the one-dimensional frame element
mental load combination [6] was found to be 0.1  MPa model due to self-weight loading
(compression). This is acceptable according to the ACI re-
port [6], which does not allow tensile stresses for such a
load combination. Fig. 8 shows the 34.8 m span precast
beam used for the APM bridge after prestressing load
transfer. Figs. 9 and 10 show the two precast beams after
stitching and after installing the precast slabs respectively.

4.1 Modelling the unsymmetrical precast pretensioned

beam at transfer using spine frame elements

Spine frame elements were used to model the precast un-

symmetrical pretensioned beam described above. The pre-
cast beam spanning 34.8 m is divided into 32 three-dimen-
sional frame elements. Every joint of the spine frame ele-
ment has six degrees of freedom; these include three Fig. 11.2. Displacement results for the one-dimensional frame element
translations in the longitudinal, transverse and vertical di- model due to prestressing loading
rections and three rotations about those three directions.
As mentioned in section 2, the torsion due to the shear
centre location can be neglected in the spine frame ele-
ment model. The bearing supports are guided in the longi-
tudinal direction at one end only and fixed at the other
end. At transfer, the beam is subjected to its self-weight in
addition to the prestressing strands forces. The transverse
eccentricities, as shown in Fig. 4, at mid-span as well as at
the sections where debonding is applied, are determined
based on Eq. (4). The section properties used for the pre-
cast frame element model are presented in Fig. 5.
From the model output results, the displacements dx,
dy and dz at support, one-quarter, three-quarters and mid-
span due to self-weight, prestressing and the combined
case (load transfer case) are given in Figs. 11.1, 11.2 and Fig. 11.3. Displacement results for the one-dimensional frame element
11.3 respectively. The maximum transverse displacement model due to combined loading (load transfer)
at mid-span, at load transfer, as per Fig. 11.3, is almost neg-
ligible (1.2 mm) and only significant vertical camber and solid element has six quadrilateral faces with a joint lo-
axial displacement are present. This is due to the trans- cated at each of the eight corners. Each node of the solid
verse prestressing eccentricities selected as per Eq. (4). It element has three translational degrees of freedom with
is worth noting that the small transverse displacement ex- no rotational degrees of freedom. The corbels attached to
ists because the transverse eccentricities as per Eq. (4) the unsymmetrical precast beam are modelled as frame el-
only apply at the critical sections and not at all sections ements. Therefore, the solid element model with the cor-
over the length of the beam. bel frame elements give a full representation of the un-
symmetrical precast beam, and all expected straining ac-
4.2 Modelling the unsymmetrical precast pretensioned tions – including bending moment, shear force, axial force,
beam at transfer using three-dimensional solid elements torsion from corbels and torsion due to the eccentric loca-
tion of the shear centre – are considered.
Three-dimensional solid elements were selected to model The cross-section of the precast beam is divided into
the precast unsymmetrical pretensioned beam described a fine mesh of elements as shown in Fig. 12. In the longi-
above. The solid element adopted has eight nodes. Each tudinal direction, these elements – replicated every 25 cm

Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3 197

E. Ayoub/C. Malek/G. Helmy · Considerations for the design of doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams used for box girder construction

Tendon elements
(5 strands top)

8-node solid elements

Tendon elements
(70 strands top)

Fig. 12. Discretization of the precast section for solid element model Fig. 14. Part of the unsymmetrical precast beam in 3D showing the tendon
including precast corbels prestressing elements with respect to the solid elements

3.06 MPa 3.10 MPa

24.47 MPa 24.60 MPa

-54.0 -49.5 -45.0 -40.5 -36.0 -31.5 -27.0 -22.5 -18.0 -13.5 -9.0 -4.0 0.0 4.5

Fig. 13. 3D representation of precast beam using solid element model Fig. 15. Normal stress distribution at mid-span for unsymmetrical precast
beam at transfer using solid element model

– are connected to create the solid elements representing

the precast beam in three dimensions (Fig. 13). The pre-
tensioned strands are modelled as tendon elements (A =
150 mm2). Each tendon produces a set of self-equilibrating
forces and moments [4] that act on the solid element
model structure. Fig. 14 shows the representation of the
prestressed strands (tendons) in the model. The locations
of the tendons are determined to accommodate the exact
location of each tendon in the transverse and vertical di-
rections on the solid element model. At transfer, the beam
is subjected to self-weight in addition to the prestressing
strand forces.
The normal stress results at mid-span are shown in
Fig. 15. It can be seen from Fig. 15 that the normal stresses
in the top fibres range from 3.06 to 3.10 MPa, whereas in
the bottom fibres the stresses range from 24.5 to 24.6 Fig. 16. Maximum displacements at mid-span for unsymmetrical precast
MPa. The minor variations in the normal stresses in the beam at transfer using solid element model
top and bottom flanges are acceptable due to the three-di-
mensional behaviour of the unsymmetrical beam model. 36 mm; the average camber value was about 34 mm. No
The lateral displacement, as given in Fig. 16, is about 1.1 side-sway displacement was observed or recorded on site.
mm which is insignificant considering a 36  m beam The extension of the prestressing strands, stressed from
length. According to the site measurements, the cambers one side only, is about 242 mm. The above 34 mm camber
of the 30 precast beams with a 34.8 m span used in the measured on site can be reasonably compared with the
APM project were monitored just after prestressing load- 42 mm (from solid element analysis) and the 44 mm (from
ing. The minimum camber for all 30 precast pretensioned frame element analysis) obtained from the analytical SAP
beams was found to be 31 mm, whereas the maximum is 2000 models. The 10 mm maximum difference between

198 Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3

 E. Ayoub/C. Malek/G. Helmy · Considerations for the design of doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams used for box girder construction

the theoretical and the actual camber values can be due to References
several reasons, including the age of the concrete at trans-
fer (creep effect), the sensitivity of the site instruments, the 1. Rodriguez, J. M., Hedayati, M., Taddeo, A., Parks, J. K.: Precast
Concrete Light Rail Systems Provides Mass Transit Solution
elastic modulus used in the analysis according to the ACI
for JFK International Airport. PCI Journal, vol. 49, No. 1,
report [6] (which can be a bit lower than the actual con-
2004.
crete modulus), etc. 2. Yee, A. A.: Structural and Economic Benefits of Precast/
Prestressed Concrete Construction. PCI Journal, vol. 46,
5 Conclusions No. 4, 2001.
3. Ma, Z., Tadros, M. K., Sun, C.: Prestressed Concrete Box Gird-
The doubly unsymmetrical precast pretensioned beams ers Made from Precast Concrete Unsymmetrical Sections.
commonly used for the construction of box girder bridges PCI Journal, vol. 49, No. 1, 2004.
are subjected – in the general case – to distortion (side 4. Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkely, California, USA,
sway) due to dead and prestressing loading. However, SAP2000 Program.
when excluding torsion caused by the eccentric location 5. Eshbach, O. W., Tapley, B. D., Poston, T. R.: Eshbach’s Hand-
book of Engineering Fundamentals. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
of the section’s shear centre, which is acceptable for the
1990.
case of the current practical example (due to thick section
6. ACI 358.1 R-92: Analysis and Design of Reinforced and Pre-
properties and counteracting torsion caused by corbels at- stressed Concrete Guideway Structures, 1992.
tached to the unsymmetrical precast beams), the arrange- 7. Abeles, P. W., Bardhan-Roy, B. K., Turner, F. H.: Prestressed
ment of the prestressing strands can be chosen in such a Concrete Designer’s Handbook, Viewpoint publisher, 1976.
way that the expected distortion at transfer is minimal. Of
course, the number and the vertical eccentricities of the
prestressing strands are dictated by the final design of the
box girder created by the assembly of the unsymmetrical
precast beams; however, the transverse eccentricities of
the prestressing strands play the main role in minimizing
Dr. Essam Ayoub
the distortion (side sway phenomenon) of the unsymmet- Cairo University, Structural Department
rical precast beam at transfer. Giza Giza 11511
A formula is presented for calculating the optimum 34/36 Geziret El-Arab St.
transverse strands eccentricity to ensure the above goal. Mohandessin, Giza 12411
Two finite element models are presented to illustrate the P.O. Box 895 Cairo 11511, Egypt
Essam.Ayoub@dargroup.com
above approach. The first model adopts one-dimensional
frame elements analysis, the second model deals with
three-dimensional solid elements in order to simulate the
unsymmetrical precast beam. The results obtained from M.Sc. Charles Malek
both finite element models are in good agreement with Dar-Al Handasah
each other in terms of both normal stresses and deforma- Bridges
tions. Of course, the frame element analysis gives results 34/36 Geziret El-Arab St.
Mohandessin, Giza 12411
similar to the theoretical ones which are based on the fun- P.O. Box 895 Cairo 11511, Egypt
damental beam equations, whereas the three-dimensional Charles.Malek@dargroup.com
solid element analysis differs slightly from the beam analy-
sis due to the three-dimensional behaviour of the precast
beam.
Further, at transfer, the displacement results ob- Gamal Helmy, Ph.D.
tained from the 1D frame element and the 3D solid ele- Dar-Al Handasah
Bridges
ment models of the unsymmetrical precast pretensioned 34/36 Geziret El-Arab St.
beam used in the APM project in PNU in Saudi Arabia are Mohandessin, Giza 12411
in good reasonably accord with the displacements mea- P.O. Box 895 Cairo 11511, Egypt
sured on site. Gamal.Helmy@dargroup.com

Structural Concrete 13 (2012), No. 3 199