Slenderness of Prestressed

Concrete Columns

Noel D. Nathan
Professor of Civil Engineering
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada

t has been found that the usual

' methods of handling slenderness in
reinforced concrete columns do not
apply directly to prestressed concrete
members because of differences in the
moment-curvature characteristics. The
PCI Committee on Prestressed Con-
crete Columns has been studying the
question for some time, and the present
paper is a review of the slenderness
problem from that viewpoint.
First, the behavior of reinforced and
prestressed concrete columns is re-
viewed, and the application of various
code approaches is discussed. Then,
attempts to develop methods specif-
ically for prestressed concrete columns
are described.
Throughout these discussions, the

NOTE: This report forms part of the work of the

PCI Committee on Prestressed Concrete Col-
umns, of which the author is a member. It has
been reviewed and endorsed by the committee
for publication and discussion.

50
 P

Ai
pi P
P Cl

0
J A2
J B,
X

D22 Ez
PZ

C2

'Le]
MOMENT

Fig. 1. Behavior of slender columns. Material failure and instability failure.

questions of load factors and capacity
reduction factors will be omitted. It will
be assumed throughout that loads and
moments are design values P„ and M,
and it will be taken as understood that
the necessary safety factors would be
applied to loads and capacities.
BEHAVIOR OF
SLENDER COLUMNS
When the end moment of a column,
loaded at equal end eccentricities, fol-
lows Paths 0A1 or 0A2 of Fig. 1, the
mid-height moment follows paths such
as OBC, with the maximum loads P1 and
P2 , corresponding to Points C l or B2,
when the end moments are at Points Dl
and D2 , respectively.
In Case 1, the capacity of the column
is controlled by material failure of the
cross section at the point of maximum
moment: the mid-height moment at
Point C l has reached the load-moment
interaction curve of the cross section. In
Case 2, the capacity of the column is
governed by instability: at Point B 2 the
column bows sharply and the load ca-
pacity is reduced.
If the load were monotonically in-
creasing, the mid-height section would
be rapidly displaced to Point E 2 and
material failure would occur, as a sec-
ondary cause of collapse. If the vertical
displacement were controlled or if
load-shedding were possible, the load
would reduce as the mid-height section
followed Path BQ C2 , with material fail-
ure finally occurring at Point C2.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1983 51

 2400

. e .
2000 `rdo20X20
6% Steel
o^
Material Failure
O
—•—•— Instability within

1600 ----^ ----\90%

\
of
`,0
material
---- Failure
a_ ` — Instability
Y

Q 1200
0
J N FO

Q 800 e0 \ `,9c, \

400

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)

Fig. 2. Load-moment interaction curves for a heavily reinforced concrete column. The.
ACI curves are based on El = E0 1 9 15 + Eel.

DIFFERENCES IN RESPONSE govern only when the slenderness ratio

OF REINFORCED AND
PRESTRESSED MEMBERS
Fig. 2 shows the load-moment inter-
action curves for a reinforced concrete
column with 6 percent longitudinal
steel. The short-column curve is shown,
together with curves for various slen-
derness (Llr) ratios, drawn through
points such as D1 and D2 of Fig. 1.
These points were calculated by means
of a computer program which has been
fully described elsewhere.1.2
Fig. 2 also shows whether the capac-
ity of the long columns is limited by
material failure or instability, and it will
be seen that the latter does, in fact,
approaches 100. Fig. 3 shows similar
results for a column which has only 1.5
percent of longitudinal steel. Instability
governs the behavior of somewhat less
slender columns in this case, particu-
larly at higher axial loads.
Figs. 4 and 5 show the same results
for a prestressed concrete column and a
double-tee wall section, respectively.
The steel ratios for these sections are,
of course, much lower than for rein-
forced concrete members, and in prac-
tice, the prestressed column also tends
to be more slender. Also, load-bearing
wall panels often carry very low axial
loads as compared to columns.
It will be seen in Figs. 4 and 5 that

52
 I60C
. • is

140C
20 5 X20° Column
1.5% Steel
1200 Material Fail,
—• —. Instability
within 90%
(n of material
--- Failure
a 1000 — Insto Dility

0 -----------------1\ N \"6
o 800
J
J
x 600
4 \\
400 -:

200

0
0 100 200 300 400
END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)

Fig. 3. Load-moment interaction curves for a lightly reinforced concrete column. The
ACI curves are based on El = EEl9 /2.5.

these prestressed sections (the wall tion of dead load and often for live
panel in particular) differ from rein- loads as well.
forced concrete columns in that the bal-
anced load is relatively much higher,
and that they are governed by instabil- APPROACHES TO
ity throughout most of the slenderness
range, even at low axial loads. (In com-
THE DESIGN OF
paring the figures, however, note that SLENDER COLUMNS
Figs. 4 and 5 extend to higher values of
This section considers alternative ap-
slenderness.)
proaches to stability analysis.
Finally, one may comment that rein-
forced concrete columns are generally
built into continuous frames, so that the Stability Analysis of Entire Frame
primary moments are affected by the
This is the preferred method; most
loss of stiffness that accompanies ap-
design codes give semi-empirical for-
proaching instability. Precast columns,
mulas for component design, but, when
on the other hand, are generally stat-
the applicable range of parameters is
ically determinate during the applica-
exceeded, require that a rational

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1983

53
 27001

2400

2100 24"X24" C°lumn

""—"'—"—"•"-------`--'\,\ ,^< < 400psi prestress

cn 1800

1500
0
-J
t I
i
x
a 900
^ _ t
`^ f
600

300 -- --- f t Notarial Failure

/ ^^ —. — Instability within
I` / 90%of material Failure
. ._^. i . ----- — Instability
0
0 200 400 600 800
END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)
Fig. 4. Load-moment interaction curves for a prestressed concrete column. The ACI
curves are based on El = E^l9/2.5.

analysis be made, presumably of the 1. Rational Analysis of Individual

entire frame. The difficulty, of course,
is that it requires a number of cycles of
analysis and design to arrive at a satis-
factory solution. MacGregor 3 has sum-
marized some of the aspects and
methods of making such analyses.
Stability of Components
A more practical approach to design
is to estimate the influence of frame ac-
tion and account for it by adopting an
effective length for the column. That is
to say, the range of the points of inflec-
tion is first estimated and then an
equivalent pin-ended column is
extracted for analysis by one of the fol-
lowing procedures:
Elements—It is now possible, by
computer, to make numerical analyses
of particular columns with as much ac-
curacy as may be desired; the limit is
set only by the computational effort that
is expended.
2. The Additional Moment
Method — This method has been
adopted by many European codes, in-
cluding the British CP 110 6 and the
German DIN 1045. Semi-empirical
formulas give the additional moments
over and above the primary moment,
which arise from changes in the geom-
etry. The analysis is generally limited
to failure conditions.
3. The Moment Magnifier Method -
This is the procedure adopted by the

54
 8 DT 12
h ory PCI Design Handbook

a 800
`Ir i0
Y

\i ce 7
/n
a 600
J
\ I /
J \

Q 400
0

I%
,, /
\^p t , Materiol foilu re
i / ..
/ /r —• Instability
200 I / / / within 90°/p
---- S AC /I I / r-- \ , 2 of material
-^^/ I I / failure
Instability

0•
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)

Fig. 5. Load-moment interaction curves for a standard double-tee section. The ACI
curves are based on El = EE19/2.5.

ACI Code; 4 the primary moment is COMMENTS ON THE

magnified to account for the effect of
changes in geometry.
4. The Reduction Factor Method -
In this procedure, which is permitted as
an alternative by the ACI Code, both
the load and the moment are reduced.
In effect, curves such as those of Fig. 2
for slender columns are derived by
contracting the short column curve, re-
ducing it according to an empirical for-
mula depending on the slenderness
ratio.
5. Direct Methods — Application of
direct methods such as energy, or
weighted residual methods to deter-
mine the critical load of columns gov-
erned by instability, are alternatives to
the above methods.
APPLICABILITY OF
METHODS TO
PRESTRESSED
CONCRETE COLUMNS
While a nonlinear stability analysis of
the entire frame may be desirable as
the final step in the design of an im-
portant structure, it does not obviate the
need for an initial design procedure.
Further, as noted above, prestressed
precast concrete columns are often
parts of statically determinate systems
in which the primary moments are not
dependent on stiffness. The need for
such a complex procedure does not
exist in these cases.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1983 55

 I(
N N N N
M ")'
I—
U-
D:
W 0
a
rn
a-
Y a
a_c
-6-
0'-
0 2
4 Mn( KIPS-FT PER FT )
Fig. 6. Curves for a typical hollow-core section such as might be provided by a
manufacturer.
Rational analysis of individual ele-
ments, however, does seem to be a
highly appropriate procedure for the
precast industry, when standardized
elements are under consideration. It
would be relatively simple and ex-
tremely useful for precasters to supply
families of interaction curves, such as
those of Figs. 2 through 5 for. standard
cross sections at different slenderness
ratios, derived by means of computer
programs such as that referred to above.
An example for a typical hollow-core
slab is shown in Fig. 6.
Nevertheless, the need for a simple
design procedure remains. The addi-
tional moment and moment magnifier
methods (which are essentially the
same) both present difficulties when
the capacity is governed by instability,
1.1
Varies
000"
f,' 5KS1 . fp„= 250KS1
Approx. 225psi Prestress
See PCI Design Honbook
2nd Ed.p.2-59
c
ra
3 4 5 6
as it generally is with prestressed col-
umns (Figs. 4 and 5). In the paper
forming the basis of the British design
procedure, Cranston writes: "Whilst
such a method will not deal realistically
with instability and deflection failure, it
should be possible to ensure that the
method is conservative for such cases."
This point will be discussed below.
In view of the complexity of the
problem and the number of relevant pa-
rameters, the reduction factor method
cannot be expected to work well for the
general case. Approximate solutions for
the critical load of nonlinear columns,
on the other hand, does attack the root
of the problem for prestressed columns,
but it may not be possible to reduce
such a solution to a workable design
office procedure.
v
0
C-
0
C
z

3
sv
P
a
'O
(2 CONDITIONS AT
FAILURE ASSUMED
OD TO BE HERE:
W TOTAL MOMENT AND
CURYATURE KNOWN F-

(^
7 CP 110 w O5 CAN BE
6 RIMARV MOMENT P-6MOMENT 2 CALCULATED
IS KNOWN I CALCULATE p
0 ^
1 P IS KNOWN

7OACI MAGNIFIED MOMENT

CURVATURE
IS CALCULATED _ O MOMENT-CURVATURE 1^
RELATIONSHIP ® DISTRIBUTION OF
IS ASSUMED CURVATURE ALONG P
B®IS TOTAL MOMENT SAFE
(WITHIN SHORT COLUMN CURVE I? COLUMN FOLLOWS

MOMENT

Fig. 7. Assumptions of additional moment and moment magnifier methods.

v
C,'
w
1

1500
9 9 9
0 o f

^^ o Q
p \\ L Q
U,
°y c ul
1000
P
to O,

0QJ y 9^
Fo

J
a_ ay

xQ
500 ' O1
Gy

oI NiNr

a A4c
u I t^GN
f c^R^F

1011
0 100 200 300 400 0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006
MOMENT (KIPS-FT) CURVATURE
Fig. 8. CP 110 assumptions with regard to curvature at material failure for the column of Fig. 3.
 ADDITIONAL MOMENT
AND MOMENT
MAGNIFIER METHODS
In this section, representative exam-
ples of the two methods generally used
in existing codes of practice will be dis-
cussed in detail.
The basic assumptions of these
methods, illustrated in Fig. 7, are that
the column will deflect laterally, there
will be an additional P-A moment, and
eventually, at the point of maximum
moment, material failure will ensue (as
opposed to instability failure of the en-
tire column). Then, in a pinned-pinned
column, for example, the conditions at
mid-height are known at failure: for the
given load, the moment and curvature
can be deduced from the short column
interaction curve. Making some as-
sumption about the moment curvature
relation, the distribution of curvature
along the column length can be approx-
imated, and the deflection and the P-A
moment can then be computed. The
capacity available for the primary mo-
ment follows.
The British and American applica-
tions of this approach will be used as
representative examples.
The British Method of CP 1106
The curvature at the balanced point
of the short column interaction curve is A = h
calculated as:
e, + €, (1) where K is the optional reduction due
c6" h to the linear decrease in maximum cur-
where
e, = maximum strain of concrete (tak-
en as 0.00375, which includes an
allowance intended for creep)
e^ = yield strain of steel (taken as
0.002)
h = overall depth of section (should
be effective depth)
An additional small term dependent
upon the slenderness ratio, as advo-
PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1983
cated by the Comite Europeen du
Beton, is added to give:
ou = h (0.00575 - 5000h) (2a)
ou = —1 — (1 - 0.0035 (2b)
175h \ /
where L is the effective length
This value of ultimate curvature may
then be assumed throughout the load
range, or a linear decrease to zero may
be introduced from the balanced load to
the maximum pure axial load. Fig. 8
shows that this variation of ultimate
curvature is not unreasonable above the
balanced load.
The moment curvature relationship
as moment is increased at constant load
is then taken to be linear up to the ul-
timate value of Eq. (2) for any axial
load. Fig. 9 shows that this assumption,
too, may be considered acceptable
above the balanced load:
From this it follows that the curvature
distribution along the column is similar
to the moment distribution, and the de-
flection at mid-height should lie be-
tween L2/(84 u ) for uniform distribution
of moment and curvature and L2/(124)
for triangular distribution of moment
and curvature.
Using an average value of L2/(104),
we obtain:
/L2 1 r1 - 0.0035 L2) K (3)
1750 ` h) ( h
vature above the balanced load point:
Po - P (4)
K=
Po -Pb
The section must then be safe with
respect to the short column interaction
curve under the load P and a moment
equal to the primary moment plus P0.
In Figs. 10 through 13, the dashed
line shows the true value of the ulti-
59
 500
aQo
rro'
Qe^03Po
,Qo
0.6P0 0.2Po
400
0 1 ao

0.1 P

F-
U. 0,8Po
300
a_

F-
z O9PO
g 200
0

100

0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006

CURVATURE (INS-')
Fig. 9. Moment-curvature relationships for the column of Fig. 3 as
generated by the computer program.

mate curvature of the short column, as
obtained by rational analysis. Assuming
that the deflection is, in fact, equal to
L2/(104 ), the value of the curvature 0u
which would give the correct PA effect
is deduced and plotted on the figures;
that is, if all the assumptions of CP 110
are retained, but the curvatures plotted
as solid lines in Figs. 10 through 13
were used in place of Eq. (2), the cor-
rect Pd moment would be obtained.
Recall the curvature which is used in
CP 110 is the value at the balanced load
point, with the optional reduction
above the balanced load. (This variation
is also shown on each of the figures, as
a dash-dot line.) Thus, the diagrams re-
flect the applicability of the CP 110
procedure: if the solid lines (which
would give the correct result) are
tightly grouped around the dash-dot
line actually used by CP 110, the pro-
cedure will work well; the more widely
spaced the solid lines are, the more er-
ratic the procedure will be.
It will be seen that, judging by these
figures, the accuracy of the method may
be expected to deteriorate as we move
from heavily reinforced concrete sec-
tions to more lightly reinforced sec-
tions, to prestressed columns, and to
the double-tee section. This might have
been expected since, as noted above,
the method is really predicated upon
material failure, and Figs. 2 to 5 have
shown that instability failure becomes
more dominant as we progress through
the same sequence of cross sections.

60
 <'q\ \ __CURVATURE AT ULTIMATE MOMENT
°• MAX. PERMISSIBLE AXIAL LOAD

Gt^ 0
111.1.1 Q^o\ dI REINFORCED
' CONCRETE COLUMN
OF FIG.2
j' WITH 6% STEEL
U, ^ a
` mI
Y 1500
,
^
0
4
0 JI
J THIS VALUE OF CURVATURE
J WOULD GIVE CORRECT RESULT
IF USED IN CP 110 PROCEDURE
1000
X CEB MODIFICATION MOVES
4 CP 110 CURVE L/r = 60
TO HERE FOR{L/r:100 -\
BALANCED LOAD

500

0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005

CURVATURE (INS-')

Fig. 10. The curvature used in the CP 110 procedure compared with the ones back-
figured by CP 110 formula from the correct result, for the column with 6 percent steel.

It may also be noted that, when the
assumed curvature lies to the right of
that which would give the correct re-
sult, the column is being assumed to be
more flexible than it really is; that is,
this will give a conservative estimate of
slenderness effects. It will be seen that
CP 110 is occasionally somewhat un-
conservative but generally satisfactory
above the balanced load. Below the
balanced load it is very unconservative.
The effect of the CEB slenderness
modification (1 – 0.0035 Llr) is shown
on Fig. 10 by small marks on the bal-
anced load ordinate. The variation with
slenderness is reasonable, but by
shifting the assumed curvature to the
left it makes the method still less con-
servative.
In general, the application of CP 110
procedures to prestressed sections is
hampered by the following points!
1. It is more difficult to compute the
curvature at any point on the load-mo-
ment interaction curve, since there is
no defined yield point for the steel, and
since the strains in the steel and con-
crete are not directly compatible.
(However, these difficulties could be
overcome.)
2. The balanced load point is rela-
tively higher, so that the range in which
the CP 110 procedures are unsatisfac-
tory is greatly extended.
3. Many prestressed concrete col-
umns and particularly wall panels carry
light axial loads, and so are well within
the range referred to in Item 2 above.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1983 61

 (___CURVATURE AT ULTIMATE MOMENT

MAX.PERMISSIBLE AXIAL LOAD

1400 z.
1 ° REINFORCED
1 ^I CONCRETE COLUMN
1200 2 i N• OF FIG.3
WITH I^g%STEEL
m N
Q O Q
m•
1000 W O^
\
;
C \

a 800 THIS VALUE OF CURVATURE

0 u \ WOULD GIVE CORRECT RESULT
J IF USED IN CP 110 PROCEDURE
J
BALANCED LOAD
a 600
x
"p

400
N.
o

,yam

0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006

CURVATURE (INS -1)

Fig. 11. The curvature used in the CP 110 procedure compared with
the curvatures back-figured by CP 110 formula from the correct result,
for the column with 1 1/2 percent steel.

4. These members are generally gov- where

erned by instability failure, so that the t10= primary deflection, calculated
basic assumption of the procedure is without regard to the axial load
violated. This is illustrated by the P = axial load
spread in values of curvature 1/o u that Peru = critical value of axial load =
would be required to give the right an- ir2 EI /L2
swer in Figs. 12 and 13.
The maximum moment is then given
by:

The Method of ACI 3184 M=Mo +PO

The deflection of an elastic pin-
ended beam is increased in the pres- 1
ence of an axial load, and it can be M=Mo+Poo
1 – P/Perit
shown that the final deflection is given
to a very close approximation, by: where
M,, = primary moment, and
^o (5) 0, Ao = maximum values of total and
0 = 1 – PlPcrte primary deflection

62
 nq
2500 ^O\ MAX. PERMISSIBLE LOAD

1 y
i
RECTANGULAR
I PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
2000 1G I Q COLUMN OF FIG.4

N
a_
Y 1`i

o 1500
4
0 BALANCED LOAD
J
J
4 THIS VALUE OF CURVATURE
\^ WOULD GIVE THE CORRECT
a 1000 / RESULT IF USED IN
1 \ CP 110 PROCEDURE

500

0
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006
CURVATURE (INS-')

Fig. 12. The curvature used in the CP 110 procedure compared with
the curvatures back-figured by CP 100 formula from the correct result,
for a rectangular prestressed concrete column.

so that
M = M° ^1 +-:-
PA1
1 – P/P",.,1)
–0.234<I– P`MA° <+ 0.178
ci.u+PoIMo)
(1_P/P
M=M1–PIPGrit Noting that, for practical columns, P1
Pcra will also be small, we can ignore
1– P /Pcru (1 – Pcrtt 0°/M°) (6) the term:
M=M°
1 — PlPcrtt Peru D°
P/Pcrtt (1 – M

Assuming, as in the case of CP 110, °

that the distribution of primary moment in comparison with unity. Thus, it is ar-
lies between a uniform and a triangular gued that, for the elastic case, the mag-
distribution, and again confining our- nified moment is given with sufficient
selves to the elastic case, we have. accuracy by:

M° L2 < D < M° L2 M = M° 1 (7)

12E1 8E1 1–P/Pcrtt

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1983 63

 1200 CURVATURE AT ULTIMATE MOMENT

BASIC ASSUMTION OF CP 110

MAX. PERMISSIBLE LOAD

1000 'II 8 DT 12
OF FIG.5

T BALANCED
800
a_

a
0 600
J THIS VALUE OF CURVATURE
J WOULD GIVE CORRECT RESULT
/ IF USED IN CP 110 PROCEDURE
X
a 400

^2s

200

0•
0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003

CURVATURE (INS-')

Fig. 13. The curvature used in the CP 110 procedure compared

with the curvatures back-figured by CP 110 formula from the
correct result, for a double-tee section.

We note, once again, that this expres-
sion is applied to the elastic case, with:
AEI
PcTu = L2 (8)
The term EI, of course, is the curva-
ture constant; for the elastic case, cur-
vature 0 = MIEI. The ACI procedure
adapts this expression for the inelastic
case of reinforced concrete columns by
including an empirical expression for
the rigidity EI. Once again, the column
must be safe with respect to the short
column interaction curve under the
load P and the magnified moment M.
Fig. 14 shows the load path OA at the
end of a pinned column loaded under
equal end eccentricities. OBC is the
load path followed by the mid-height
section of the column. As the load in-
creases, the magnification increases as
suggested by the formula developed
above; but the moment-curvature rela-
tion eventually becomes nonlinear, and
this leads to a slightly more rapid in-
crease in the moment magnification.
The ACI formula, however, assumes
a linear relationship between moment
and curvature; it is desirable that the
predicted load should end at the correct
point C, so the empirical value of EI is
presumably chosen so as to exaggerate
the moment magnification slightly at

64

0
J
A.
4?
ro ^^
s
4+0 ^^ \OHS\GHQ pC \\
4.04()
P M
o paeoO^ ^o
A
Fig. 14. Actual and fictitious load-paths for columns subject to
material failure or instability.
lower loads, to follow a path such as
ODC. The British procedure, of course,
does not attempt to predict the load
path, but merely to calculate additional
moment AC when failure occurs.
In the case of a column which fails in
the instability mode, the end follows a
load path such as OE, while the mid-
height section follows the path OFG. If
the two methods really worked exactly,
the additional moment of CP 110 or the
magnification factor of ACI 318 would
both increase without bound quite sud-
denly when the load corresponding to
PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1983
A C (MATERIAL FAILURE)
`p INSTABILITY
1 q FAILURE
0
E F J
6
MOMENT
Point F was reached. However, CP 110
is predicated upon material failure, and
ACI 318 upon linear moment-curvature
relationships, so they must be adjusted
in some empirical manner to account
for instability failure. In the ACI proce-
dure, the value of El must be adjusted
to predict a load path such as OHJ, so
that it appears that material failure oc-
curs at the load corresponding to Points
F and J.
As pointed out above, this is a much
more serious problem for prestressed
columns than it is for reinforced con-
65
crete members. In the British proce-
dure, the deflection when the mid-
height section is really at Point F must
be exaggerated to give aP-0 moment of
EJ instead of EF. This happens auto-
matically, to some degree, since the
curvature is assumed to be the ultimate
value, corresponding to Point J, instead
of that corresponding to Point F; but
Figs. 12 and 13 show that the self-cor-
rection of the method is far from per-
fect.
It is seen, then, that if these methods
are to be used when failure is generally
governed by instability rather than by
material failure, the rigidity (EI in the
ACI procedure; curvature at ultimate
moment, 4, in the British procedure)
must be artificially modified to give the
appearance of material failure when in-
stability actually occurs. It was decided
to attempt a modification of the ACI
procedure, as detailed in the next sec-
tion.
MODIFICATION OF THE
ACI MOMENT-MAGNIFIER
PROCEDURE FOR
PRESTRESSED COLUMNS
In this section, current efforts at em-
pirical modification of code procedures,
to fit them to prestressed concrete col-
umns, are described. The ACI method
was selected for attention. In order to
develop a data base for comparisons,
the previously mentioned computer
program was used. (Note that the ex-
perimental verification of the program
has been discussed by Alcock. 2 ) Forty-
eight sections as shown in Fig. 15 were
analyzed, each at ten load levels and six
effective lengths, that is the equivalent
of 2880 laboratory experiments.
It was desired to modify the rigidity
(and hence the curvature) of the sec-
tion, as discussed previously, to achieve
the fictitious load path OJ of Fig. 14. In
the ACI Code for reinforced concrete
66
columns at low levels of reinforce-
ment ratio, the rigidity is set equal to:
E,1, /2.5 (9)
where E, I, = EI for the gross concrete
section.
Since the steel ratio is generally very
low for prestressed concrete columns, it
was hoped that the rigidity could be set
equal to:
E,I,/x (10)
where A would be a scalar function of a
limited number of parameters.
The affect on A of the following fac-
tors was investigated:
(a) Amount, distribution, and level of
prestress.
(b) Shape of cross section.
(c) Load level P/P0 , where P,, is the
pure axial load capacity.
(d) Slenderness ratio L/r.
Effect of Prestress
Within a practical range of prestress,
up to about 600 psi (4.14 MPa), in-
creasing the amount of prestressing or
distributing it more widely across the
section appears to increase the short
column bending capacity more than it
increases the moment at instability.
This makes the proposed procedure
somewhat less conservative, but within
the stated range of stress the variation is
not large.
The variation is greater at low axial
loads, since the prestress, and particu-
larly its distribution about the centroid,
affects bending capacity more than axial
load. However, higher levels of pre-
stress have the effect of reducing the
balanced load, and finally of eliminat-
ing the tension failure region of the
column interaction curve, drastically
changing the behavior of the cross sec-
tion.
The same effect is brought about if
excess high strength prestressing steel
is used at a low level of stress in the
 SQUARE SECTIONS
12'x 12' OR 24'x24'
PRESTRESSED TO 200 PSI 400 PSI OR 600 PSI
PRESTRESS CONCENTRATED AT CENTROID
OR DISPERSED VERTICALLY
(12 SECTIONS)

8`—

TEE SECTIONS
FLANGE 40'x4' OR 80'x2' o/A DEPTH 12' OR 24'
PRESTRESSED TO 200 PSI 400 PSI OR 600 PSI
PRESTRESS CONCENTRATED AT CENTROID
OR DISPERSED VERTICALLY

(24 SECTIONS)

INVERTED TEE SECTIONS

FLANGE 40'x4' OR 80'x2' o/A DEPTH 12' OR 24'
PRESTRESSED TO- 200 PSI 400 PSI OR 600 PSI
PRESTRESS CONCENTRATED AT CENTROID
(12 SECTIONS)

Fig. 15. Sections used for developing computed data.

steel, to induce low initial prestress in Effect of Cross Section

the concrete. These phenomena can be
observed in analyzing some of the tests
done by Aroni. 8 Nevertheless, it was
felt that a value of X which applied only
to columns with initial prestress up to
600 psi (4.14 MPa), achieved by use of
prestressing steel utilized at high stress,
would be of practical value.
The shape of the cross section has a
marked effect on column behavior. A
wide compression flange again in-
creases the bending capacity more than
it affects the initial curvature, or the in-
stability moment. Thus again, the ap-
parent magnification factor should be
larger.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1983 67

Effect of Load Ratio and
Slenderness
The principal variables affecting the
required values of A are, however, the
load ratio P/P0 and the slenderness ratio
L/r. In the interests of developing a
practical procedure, therefore, it was
decided to base A upon P/P0 , Llr, and on
the presence or absence of a compres-
sion flange, and to account for other in-
fluences by adopting a sufficiently con-
servative form for X.
The value of A to give the "correct"
computed long column moment was
deduced for each of the 2880 cases
mentioned above, and tabulated against
the ratios P/P. and L/r. A trial function
for A was then adopted; the difference
between the moment capacity obtained
from the computer program and the
value based on the trial A was deter-
mined and expressed as a ratio of the
computer value.
The trial function was varied in an
endeavor to get small differences on the
conservative side. This was done for
sections with and without a compres-
sion flange; no precise definition of a
compression flange could be arrived at,
but essentially the question seems to be
whether or not the compression stress
block will be rectangular at lower loads.
The expressions finally arrived at
were as follows:
X=778-1.5 (11)
where
1100 forP/PO.02 _- 0.02
P3 ^ p 2 for0.02<P/P0<0.42
7forP/P0%0.42
o for sections with no compres-
= L7 sion flange
B = 31 – 0.09 for sections with a com-
Llr pression flange
68
The magnification factor is then
given by the familiar ACI formula:
8 = Cm (12)
1 – P/Peru
where
7r2[EI/(1 + Pd)]
Peru = L2
and
El = ECI0/A
In Figs. 16 to 18 the curves represent
long column capacities in a diagram-
matic sense. (The curves for real col-
umns do terminate, for example, at the
appropriate P/P,, ratios shown.) Using
these curves as a base line, the dis-
tributions of errors, arising from use of
Eqs. (11) and (12), are plotted for the 48
columns of Fig. 15 for each load and
slenderness ratio, i.e., the distribution
of errors is shown relative to the long
column moment in each case, but, to
put the situation in perspective, the
long column moments are shown in a
schematic relationship to each other. It
will be noted that:
1. There is considerable scatter, ex-
tending to the unconservative side, at
very low loads (P/P, = 0.02). This ap-
parently reflects the influence of sec-
tion shape, amount, and distribution of
prestressing steel when the load is al-
most pure bending. The easiest way to
avoid this problem would be to base
design on a minimum axial load, in ad-
dition to prestress, of 0.05 P0.
2. At an Llr ratio of 150, the results
have become erratic.
3. At high axial loads, the results tend
to separate into two groups, which are
found to represent the flanged and
non-flanged sections. This is not signif-
icant, as the minimum eccentricity re-
quired by codes precludes design in
this region.
4. Between these regions the distri-
bution of errors is about as good as can
 0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
Qo
a

0.3

0.2

0,1

Fig. 16. Schematic representation of load-moment curves showing distribution of

,results obtained by proposed modification to ACI formula. Slenderness ratios of
25 and 100.

be hoped for from an empirical proce- double-tee of Fig. 5 and to a rectangular

dure which does not account in detail
for all the parameters.
Figs. 19 and 20 show possible design
aids giving the value of X in Eqs. (11)
and (12). Figs. 21-24 show the results of
applying Eqs. (11) and (12) to the
load-bearing wall section.
It will be noted that A as given by Eq.
(11) decreases as P/Pa increases and also
L/r increases. This implies that the ef-
fective rigidity El of a column cross
section increases as P/P0 increases or as

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1983 69

 0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
a0
a

0.3

0.2

0.l

Fig. 17. Schematic representation of load-moment curves showing distribution of

results obtained by proposed modification to ACI formula. Slenderness ratios of
50 and 125.

L/r increases, and these trends may de-
serve comment.
The above can be explained by refer-
ence to Fig. 25, which shows the mo-
ment-curvature relationships at two
different loads for the square pre-
stressed concrete column of Fig. 2. The
curve for the 500-kip load is higher and
steeper than that for the 100-kip load.
(Note: 1 kip = 4.448 kN.) This kind of
relationship has already been shown in
Fig. 9. But Fig. 25 also shows the range

70
 0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

a
0.3

0.2

0.1

Fig. 18. Schematic representation of load-moment curves showing distribution of

results obtained by proposed modification to ACI formula. Slenderness ratios of
75 and 150.

of curvature that was actually exhibited
by the two columns, with Llr equal to
75 and 150, respectively, at the moment
of instability, according to a rational
analysis.
The shorter column naturally reached
higher bending moments, and therefore
moved further out along the moment-
curvature relationship. The slopes of
these curves are the effective rigidities
El. Following the work of Shanley, 9 the
stability of the columns can be ex-

PCI JOURNAL/March -April 1983 71

I■
■■
■I
 8DT12
Sh ory Cod PCI DESIGN HDBK
p.2-6
1000

800
a_

0
0
1
600 /S./
J
J 1 ^ /
Q
/

_,//J
a 400 /

200
COMPUTER SOLUTION

\ ---- - PROPOSED MODIFIED ACI

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)

Fig. 21. Solution obtained by proposed modification to ACI formula compared with
computer solution for a double-tee section. Slenderness ratios of 25, 75, and 125.

pected to be related to the tangent
modulus. Although they cannot be de-
termined with great accuracy, values of
the tangent modulus at the centerline
or mid-height of the column at the mo-
ment of instability are given in Table 1.
The secant values of rigidity would
clearly follow the same pattern as those
in Table 1, and they are seen to exhibit
the trends reflected in Eq. (11), in-
creasing both with load and with slen-
derness. However, it must be recalled
that Eq. (11) is not intended to give the
actual values of rigidity, but rather to
give artificial values leading to the fic-
titious load path OJ of Fig. 14.
It is interesting to note the values
given for the critical loads when the
tangent rigidities of Table 1 are used
with the Euler formula. For the column
with Llr = 75 they give 97.5 and 360
kips (instead of 100 and 500 kips) and
for the column with Llr = 150, they
give 90.5 and 463 kips. (Note: 1 kip =
4.448 kN.)
Again, following Shanley, one might
expect them to give slightly low esti-
Table 1. Computer values of slope of
M/¢ curve at point reached at column
mid-height at time of instability (kip-in.).
Load L/r = 75 Llr = 150
100 kips 2.67 x 101 9.9 x 106
500 kips 9.85 x 106 50.74 x 106
Note: 1 kip-in. = 0.113 kN-m.

PCI JOURNAL/March-April 1983 73

 8 DT 12
Sh Orf C0^Umn PCI DEDSIGNSHDBK
1000

800
a_
U) --------------^

0
J
600 No

J
/ J
Q 400 2 /

200
f J COMPUTER SOLUTION
/ --- - PROPOSED
_\` ' MODIFIED ACI

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)
Fig. 22. Solution obtained by proposed modification to ACI formula compared with
computer solution for a double-tee. section. Slenderness ratios of 50, 100, and 150.

mates of the actual loads at instability.
The average tangent rigidity in the col-
umn is somewhat higher than the value
reached at midheight.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the design of
prestressed concrete columns by means
of Eqs. (11) and (12) be permitted,
subject to the limitations listed below.
When these limitations cannot be met,
some rational procedure must be sub-
stituted, and use of a computer program
such as that referred to above would be
considered acceptable.
Limitations:
1. The intial prestress in the concrete
should not exceed 600 psi (4.14 MPa).
2. The prestressing steel should be
initially stressed to at least 50 percent
of its ultimate strength.
3. The slenderness ratio Llr should
not exceed 150.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The research reported herein was
funded by the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of
Canada. Some work was done under a
PCI Fellowship, and computing facili-
ties were made available, during the
author's sabbatical, by the University of
the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg,
South Africa.

74
 48"
• . 4'
700 3— 2~4> STRANDS
f,= 5KSI f•„= 270KS1
---------------`^^ Initial Prestress = 368psi
600
^ S

a_ 500
Y

a 400
0
J
J \ I
Q 300 L/r = 125 1
x
4

••
/ ,^ / COMPUTER SOLUTION
j .—.—PROPOSED MODIFIED ACI

n
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
END MOMENT(KIPS-FT)

Fig. 23. Solution obtained by proposed modification of ACI formula compared with
computer solution for a rectangular wall section. Slenderness ratios of 25, 75, and 125.

REFERENCES Detroit, Michigan, 1977.

1. Nathan, N.D., "Slenderness of Pre-
stressed Concrete Beam-Columns," PCI
JOURNAL, V. 17, No. 6, November-
December 1972, pp. 45-57.
2. Alcock, W. J., and Nathan, N. D., "Mo-
ment Magnification Tests of Prestressed
Concrete Columns," PCI JOURNAL, V.
22, No. 4, July-August 1977, pp. 50-61.
3. MacGregor, J. G., "Stability of Multi-story
Concrete Buildings," ASCE-IABSE
Conference on Tall Buildings,
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, SoA — Rep
23-3, Planning and Design of Tall Build-
ings, Vol. III, 1972, pp. 517-536.
4. ACI Committee 318, `Building Code Re-
quirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI
318-77)," American Concrete Institute,
5. Cranston, W. B., "Analysis and Design of
Reinforced Concrete Columns," Report
No. 20, Cement and Concrete Associa-
tion, London, 1972, 54 pp.
6. British Standards Institution, "Code of
Practice for the Structural Use of Con-
crete (CP110)," Part 1, 1972.
7. Timoshenko, S. P., and Gere, J. M.,
Theory of Elastic Stability, McGraw-Hill,
New York, N.Y., 1961.
8. Aroni, S., "Slender Prestressed Concrete
Columns," Report No. 67-10, Structures
and Material Research, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley, May 1967, pp. 231.
9. Shanley, F. R., "Inelastic Column
Theory," Journal of Aeronautical Sci-
ences, V. 4, No. 5, May 1947.

PCI JOURNAUMarch-April 1983 75

 48

• 4

700 3-,STRANDS
f^= 5KSI. , fs ^' 27OKSI
Initial Prestress=368 psi

600 Sti

U)
500
Y

0 400
J
J
Q
X 300
Q
1

I••

! O

I
! COMPUTER SOLUTION
/ ---- - PROPOSED
MOOIFIE ACI
'^
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

END MOMENT (KIPS-FT)

Fig. 24. Solution obtained by proposed modification to ACI formula compared with
a
computer solution for rectangular wall section. Slenderness ratios of 50, 100 and 150.

APPENDIX - NOTATION
E = modulus of elasticity Pb = balanced load
E, = modulus of elasticity of concrete PC,.;, = critical load
El = flexural rigidity Pn = design load
P° = pure axial load capacity
h = overall depth of section
r = radius of gyration of cross section
I = moment of inertia of cross section
A = maximum deflection
I, = moment of inertia of concrete = primary deflection
cross section E, = strain in concrete at crushing
Ia = moment of inertia of gross cross
Ev = yield strain in steel
section = function ofP/P° defined in Eq. (11)
K = quantity defined in Eq. (4); used 0 = function ofLlr defined in Eq. (11)
in CP 110 A = function of 0 and q, defined in
L = effective length Eq. (11), bywhichE^Ia is divided
M„ = design moment to get effective rigidity
M° = primary moment ¢ = curvature
P = load Oti = ultimate curvature

76
 800
g00 KIPS

700 16v

600 ^^ P - 100KIPS

.1^
o ^l^
LL 500

a_
U)

h0
400 h v^^
z
w
2
0
2 300

200

O
0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006
CURVATURE (INS-')

Fig. 25. Curvatures at instability in the square prestressed concrete column of Fig. 4.

NOTE: Discussion of this paper is invited. Please submit

your discussion to PCI Headquarters by Nov. 1, 1983.
PCI JOURNALJMarch-April 1983 77