P R I S M A T I C AND N O N P R I S M A T I C S L E N D E R C O L U M N S

AND B R I D G E P I E R S
By Anibal A. Manzelli, ] and I. E. Harik, 2 Member, ASCE

ABSTRACT: An approximate second-order hand-calculation technique is pre-

sented for the analysis and design of cantilever compression members. Prismatic
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

members with constant or nonconstant reinforcement, and nonprismatic members

can be treated by this method. A linear approximation of the nonlinear moment-
curvature relationship is derived. The approximation accounts for the influence of
the axial load on the stiffness of the column. Analysis and design equations are
generated, and their formulation takes into account the effects of creep, foundation
rotation, and out-of-plumbness. Design tables for different cross-section and ma-
terial properties are presented. Analysis and design examples are presented for
prismatic and nonprismatic columns.

INTRODUCTION

A recent survey about bridges (Poston et al. 1986) revealed increasing

use of slender compression members and occasional use of tapered, flared,
and stepped compression members (Fig. 1). The current A A S H T O speci-
fications (Standard 1989) and A C I Building Code (1989) encourage the use
of second-order analyses or PA analyses for the design of compression
members. These include the effects of sway deflections on the axial load
and moments. In addition, the commentary to the Building Code (1989)
requires a minimum of five additional considerations for an adequate frame
analysis for the design of compression members [section 10.10.1 (ACI:
Building 1989)]. Designs based on the analysis procedure of A C I code
section 10.10.1 require the use of sophisticated computer programs involving
iterative methods (e.g. E1-Metwally and Chen 1989; Huang 1990; Poston
et al. 1985a, b).
For design, the A C I Building Code (1989) provides the approximate
moment-magnifier method and the stability-index procedure for determin-
ing slenderness effects. The disadvantage of these hand-calculation tech-
niques lies in their limitation to prismatic columns with the same reinforce-
ment from end to end. In addition, the stiffness of the columns is independent
of the axial loading level.
This paper presents an approximate second-order method of analysis for
cantilever compression members. The proposed hand-calculation technique
is applicable to prismatic columns with constant or nonconstant reinforce-
ment, stepped, tapered, and flared columns (Fig. 1). In the case of tapered
and flared members, a representation of discrete prismatic segments is em-
ployed [see Fig. 4 in Manzelli and Mafik (1993)]. Unlike the moment-
magnifier method, the column stiffness is dependent on the axial loading
level.
1Asst. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Buenos Aires, Argentina; formerly,
Visiting Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0046,
2Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
Note. Discussion open until September 1, 1993. Separate discussions should be
submitted for the individual papers in this symposium. 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
January 15, 1992. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.
119, No. 4, April, 1993. 9 ISSN 0733-9445/93/0004-1133/$1.00 + $.15 per
page. Paper No. 3261.
1133

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 +, +
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

,///////////?//,
(a) (b)
FIG. 1. Equivalent Piecewise Prismatic Column: (a) Tapered Column; (b) Flared
Column

In the process of generating the design tables, expressions are derived

for the total factored moment Me, which is the sum of the first-order moment
and the second-order moment (or pA). The pA effects are presented in
terms of the second-order curvature and its distribution along the length of
the column. The influence of sustained loads, out-of-plumbness, and foun-
dation rotation are also considered in the formulation of.the analysis and
design equations.

Mc.~ RELATIONSHIP DUE TO APPLIED FACTORED LOADS

As a curvature based design, the analysis in this study employs the classical
elastic theory. In addition, both a parabolic and a uniform distribution of
the curvature along the length of the column will be treated,
The cantilever column in Manzelli and Harik's (1993) Fig. 4 is subjected
to a factored lateral force Hu, bending moment M,, and axial load P~. The
diagrams for the first-order moment M~(x) and curvature ~ ( x ) , resulting
from the action of H , and M,, are presented in Manzelli and Harik's (1993)
Fig. 4. The second-order p-A effects, and the combined effect of allthree
loads for quadratic curvature distribution and in uniform curvature ap-
proximation are also presented in that figure. The total deflection Ac at x
= l, resulting from the combined loading condition, can be determined by
applying the moment-area theorems.
~ 5~jlZ ~ c + -~212
~ - (2q~M, - ~S~o) . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
AC = m(x)cb,(x) dx = 12

in which, for quadratic curvature distribution

1134

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 ~1 = l a n d 6 2 = 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
for uniform curvature distribution
6
~ = ~ and,~z = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)

in which A = second-order relative displacement between the top (x = l)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and the base (x = 0) of the column (Manzeili and Harik's (1993) Fig. 4];
#0~ = total curvature at the column base resulting from the combined loading
case shown in Manzelli and Harik's (1993) Fig. 4 (c and d); ~ o = first-
order curvature at the column base resulting from the lateral factored force
H . and bending moment M.; and dgM. = curvature resulting from the end
moment M. in the same figure; and m(x) = moment resulting from a unit
lateral load at the top of the column.
The total factored moment at the base M~ is the sum of the first-order
and second-order moments
5~lPu12
M~ = M~o + M,% = M~ + qbc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
12
in which
~2PJ z
M,~ = M,% + ~ (2qSM,, - ~ o ) ............................. (5)

where M~o = M, + 14,1 and 341,10 = P,Ac = factored first- and second-
order moments at the base of the column, respectively; and M~ = a factored
moment dependent on quantities derived from the first-order analysis.
Eq. (4) presents a linear relationship between the total factored moment
Mc and the total curvature q~c. The slope of the line is proportional to P,I 2.
These equations clearly show the influence of the P-A effects and the col-
umn's length on the total moment. Relationships similar to the one in (4)
can be derived for other loading and end conditions. A detailed derivation
of (4) and the analysis and design equations to follow is presented elsewhere
(Manzelli and Harik 1993).

Linear ~M-~P Relationship for Column Cross Section

The criteria proposed in Heft 220 ("Bemessung" 1979) for linear (bM-qb
relationships is adopted in this study. Only grade 60 steel is considered. For
grade 40 steel, a bilinear approximation is required. Grade 40 steel is avail-
able only in sizes 3 through 6. Consequently, they are rarely used as main
reinforcement in columns.
For P, < P,,b, the line is defined by points I and A [Manzelli and Harik's
(1993) Fig. 8(a)]. At I the tension steel yields, while at A the moment
strength is half that at nominal. The line is bounded by points D(0, +M~)
and K'(qb,, +Mn). +Mp is determined from the intersection of the line with
the ordinate axis. The assumed maximum moment point (K') predicts the
reduced nominal moment strength of the actual d?M-cP curve, but at a cur-
vature level that is lower than the actual one.
For P, > Pnb, the line is defined by points A and K' [Manzelli and Harik's
(1993) Fig. 8(b)]. Point A is as previously defined, while K' is the intersection
between a horizontal line drawn from point K and a line extending from
the origin O and intersecting the +M-~ curve at point J. At J, the compres-
sion steel yields. The line is bounded by points D(0, +M~) and K'(q~,,, qbMn).
1135

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 d~ is the nominal curvature at a section. The assumed nominal curvature
is lower than the actual one [Manzelli and Harik's (1993) Fig. 8(b)], while
the nominal moment strengths are the same.
The equation of the linear + M - ~ relationship can be presented in the
following form:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

~M = 4~M~ + ?pM. (~j)/./

- +M~cb = ~5M~ + EI~ ................... (6)

in which E1 = slope of the line or the flexural stiffness of the slender column.
A computer program, developed by the writers, was used to generate the
coordinates of points D(0, ~bM6) and K'(~,,, +M,), and the stiffness E1 in
terms of the cross section dimensions. Elastic-plastic models for concrete
and steel (ManzeUi and Harik 1993) were used to generate the values in
Figs. 2 and 3. Due to space limitations, tables for other concrete strengths
and/or distance between the steel layers ~/h values are not presented here.
In Figs. 2 - 4 , the reinforcement ratio p~ = AJbh, where A~, is the total
steel area, was varied from 0.01 to 0.08 in increments of 0.01. The nominal
axial load +P* = +P,/Ag was varied from 0 in increments of 500 psi (3,450
kPa). For each 6P,* the nominal moment +M* = +M,/Agh is evaluated
and compared with the ~bP*-~bM* diagram. If +M* falls inside the diagram
(i.e. the section is adequate), then the next ~bP* increment is introduced,
otherwise the computation is stopped. The smaller size numbers at the top
of the dashed vertical lines, are the maximum +P,* that the section is capable
of carrying for the prescribed p~. This maximum +P~ is determined following
the requirements of sections 9.3.2.2 and 10.3.5 of the ACI Code ("Be-

05
~ 9 = ~Pn i
+p~ A~ 'ps
"n
oE~ 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000

OM~ 316,07 34728 44300 39915 305.72= ~ 160.28 ~ ~-~1

~n 3.63 4,69 5.29 3.58 2+59 I 181

-- OM~ 11,80 ~9.66 14.331 10097 66.55 I 42+12 o

~M~ 421,67 500.47 59500 523.39 43679 301,42

217 137,24
130
~; 3.96 483 5.33 ~8B 3.89 I ~'= 0.75 ~p
'02 El" 10264 8265 Bt06 10286 12340 11250 i 9005
Cm~ 1499 10097 15847 124.77 79.59 57.64 I 2050

CM~ 62468 65614 ?48.36 65856 56314 437,34 1 285+Z8

03 ~n 4,24 491 545 4.16 3.17 2,57 II 186 n Agh Ag
El+ 14169 11411 106.60 12291 14668 140"41 1 125,87 CM r e
Cm~ 24,44 9555 16717 146,70 98,54 7687 50.80 ~M*= L ~ = , n X ~ , psi
OM~ 816.86 81 ~35 91708 803.22 59548 57~ 28 4268631~o26243
%~ 4.27 5.04 5+55 4+43 3.59 2+82 2.17 t 1.56
Cnh x 1000, inOn
04 El" 187.41 139+35 135.12 143.93 156+68 171.07 16B-46 I
147-67 " El ,psi
CM~ 18.6tt 189+22 167,46 16567 132.3,3 89.35 6164 ! 32.53 IEl =

CM~ 1023.41 969+29 1072+78 942+80 834.7] 705.77 567+71~'~ 408.36

+00 d~ 4.53' 504 5+55 459 3.86 3.07 2.44 { I.87 ~4p-- ~A~g~+pst'
Et" 220+71 1 6 9 . 9 5 ~8358 16640 17507 ~95.05 203.13 { I92+72
r 14+48 115+07 165+54 t77.80 t5863 1053t 71.g8 ~ 47.55

CM~ ~212+63 1132+39 1228+52 109861 967,19 84.3.61 707.91 552,87~1~ 38556
r 4+57 5.15 5.54 471 3+90 3,33 2+69 2,30 I 1.78
.05 E~ 26527 19357 1 9 2 . 1 2 19549 208.~9 315,02 23173 204.01 1 183,51
CMP 000 13~'04 183"51 17825 155'59 12810 8347 83"83 t 5883

~)t~ 140864 129874 138429 124.3.92 1116.99 96&66 84865 697.33 ~.6741['~ ~67.49
.07 ~n 471 5+24 5.54 4,.82 4 16 358 2,92 244 2.08 ] 1,53
El+ 293,~7 2 1 7 , 4 6 22071 21941 325~6 33234 25709 254.99 22284 211.02
r 23,73 1 5 9 , 5 4 ~6144 185.67 180,41 153.93 9749 75.96 74,04 Ii 38.93

~M,~ 1605.73 1461.07 1540,09 1391 I t 1256.45 112062 981,12 842.20 679.2544~ ~ 513.54
.00 *~ 4.~2 528 554 486 432 z.so 310 2+e7 2.30 I} 1.~
El' 313.05 2 4 6 . 0 8 24932 248.59 24481 270,60 280.39 281,40 2 5 5 . 0 9 246.11
CM~ 66,~6 161+71 1 5 9 . 4 7 182.10 19~]~5 147,41 112.97 90.81 91,54 I 63-37

FIG. 2. Design Load, Moment Strength, Curvature, and Rigidity for Columns with
f+ = 4,000 psi (27,600 kPa), fy = 60,000 psi (414,000 kPa), and -/ = 0.75 (1 in. =
2.54 cm, 1 psi = 6.9 kPa)

1136

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 CPn = A~ ' ps

OM~ 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000

~ n 213.07 360.19 492.21 502.68 ~53.59 351.63 ~ 208,20 h '

El". 65.52 56,87 60,75 80.50 112.73 113.27 81.97 ~c= 5500, psi
~M~ 0.00 107.40 164.57 ~51.94 10h20 74,60 ( 54.60

CM~ 422,42 518,57 649,47 642.20 073.89 478.61 345,54 I ~6.44 fy = 00,000, psi
.02 ~; 3.83 4.65 540 465 3,59 2,83 2,17 [ 1.57
El" 103,56 87.05 87.51 9955 121.94 133.76 126.86 93.73 y=0,75
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

OM~ 25~ 11~.97 ~77.~o ~79.23 136.18 100.29 70.55 1 3 9 . 2 6

OMr; 626,15 676.07 806,73 780.48 702.96 6O4.66 462.15 1339,55

03 r 3,94 4.63 5.42 4.82 3,87 3.Q8 244 I 1.88 * CM CP e
El" 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I .... CM~= A
" ~n "--nn
Ag X ; 'psi
0M~ . 0.94 98.77 179.33 199.55 162,87 116.46 82,~9 160.68 - -

OM~ 829.92 840.18 964.13 936.71 841.03 734.18 617.21 470.74 307.99
.04 ~'~ 4.27 4.63 5.54 4.95 4.~3 3.34 2.68 2.~7 J 1.57 = ~nh x 1000' in0n
E~" 186,32 ~64.03 140.18 147.50 157.99 177.69 194.,r 182,40 [ 171.07
r 33.92 80.72 187.;4 206.89 188,27 140.79 95.72 75.45 I 39.75 El" E l .
Agh2 x 1000 ' psi
r 1021,071002.15 1521,F,01083.02 972.45 869.35 751.96 61189 1452,62
427 4.97 554 5.06 4.18 3,59 2,9~ 2,43 2.05
E~" 23426 176.70 166.7@ 1 7 ~ 2 ~ 1~]6.17 195.85 22O.59 2~5.54 1191.74 r = ~--~" psi
ct*~ 20,85 124.30 18563 215.76 194.~0 1 6 5 4 ~ 110.04 88.02 L 80,41

1225,36 1165,21 1278.90 1231.221123.42 997.02 8774~ 752,95 596.51 431.23

4.52 4.89 5.55 5,09 4,42 3,61 3,09 2.66 2,17 [ 1.81
.06 =~
265.59 214.24 197,29 200,07 205.21 229.98 24247 244.10 238.94 J 199.47
26.03 116,93 184.67 213,74 216,66 167,28 t28.76 102,75 78.27 I 71,00

~Mr~ 1416.33 1330,04 1436.32 1380.851262,591142.09 1016.49 881.93 741,10 576.78 1406.98
Cn 4.61 4.85 5.55 5.11 4.56 3.89 3..33 2.83 2.42 2.07 1,55
El~ ~03.32 251.37 225.61 228.67 226.24 243.23 25660 270.26 267.20 237.29 237.52
SM~ 18.93 111,28 183.72 2~1.56 230.83 197.03 154,92 116.34 93,52 86.39 41.24

r 1619.40 ~496.36 159374 15316214{}4.271276.66 116083 1022.65 975.82 722,65 [ 558,~

Cn 4.6I 5.05 5,55 5.23 4.6Q 4.O7 3.59 3.07 2.61 2,30 I 1.8~
E~" 35f,51 264,29 254.32 250.09 255.01 ~5898 27t40 28702 293,41 26776 1263.70
~Mp D.O0 160.42 1 8 2 8 6 2 2 4 6 1 230.70 221.40 ~ 8 7 4 9 1 4 2 0 9 169.3,8 106.77 J 72..~4

FIG. 3. Design Load, Moment Strength, Curvature, and Rigidity for Columns with
[~' = 5,000 psi (34,500 kPa), f~ = 60,000 psi (414,000 kPa), and ~ = 0.75 (1 in. =
2.54 cm, 1 psi = 6.9 kPa)

OM~ " CP" i

CPn ~ Ag ' ps
Er
OM~ 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3500 35O0 4OO0 4500 5O00 5500 600O

241.88 380,93 482.26 430.49 324.66 171.60 h

~ 3.08 4.26 5.35 3.02 241 ~,58
~01
78.37 66.36 61.02 t17.80 108,7062.41I 84.62 Ic=4000, psi ~ _ ~
~1~ 0.57 98.20 155.94 75.24 I =64O fy = 5O.000, psi
$.~A~ 478.60 568.08 ~71.26 5 8 0 6 0 474.65 331.86 15395
,02 ~t~ 3.33 4,20 5.35 348 2,65143,251.96 ~ 97.90128 ~'= 0.00
El" 143.65 113.44 91.05 135.82 150.~
ot~ o,c~ 91.42 183.90 112.89 74Ol 51.79 128.78

~Mr: 718.92 755.49 86026 761.79 629.61 490.85 1322.46

.03 r 3.68 4,40 5.36 3,75 2.90 2.23 ! 1,66
El" 191.89 148.43 122.40 166.53 184.75 193.66 t 166.05 o ~V~n r e ,

953.45 944,41 1049,26 928,52 792.46 652,57 486,13 I 302.15 ~ = ~nh x 1500, iWin
~'<~ 3.89 4.39 5.36 3.77 3.00 2.46 1.95 1.39
04 % 235.16 194,07 154.26 216.44 233,79 237,41 220.32 1192.39 El'= E I ,psi
~ll~p 39,23 89.88 222.11 124,86 91.36 69.06 57.54 f 34.01 , A h2xl000

#M~ 168732 1135.47 123826 109949 963.92 817.98 653.07~ 470.61

.55 Cr~ 3.97 4.34 5.37 3.95 3.~2 2.67 2.19 ~ 1.69 ~= ~ ,~si
E)" 28600 244.66 185.86 238.73 264.45 276,79 267.89 1248.64
bu~ 52.29 72.97 240.76 15539 112.87 78.86 65.96 161.14

~M~ 1433,06 1328.87 1427,26 1292.191126.67 974.18 t~10,69 640.05~ 01447.98

'~r; 3,97 4.33 5,08 4,02 3+42 2,88 2.37 1.94 I 1.54
"06 El" 361.10 291.35 236:36 265.16 268.62 300.10 311.04 297,62 1254.21
~M~ 0,00 66.60 216.11 145.46 140.00 108.78 74.76 62.61 I 56.78

1664,69 1524.19 1616,26 1469,681310,471 lZ~.66 980,65 602.23 620,1141~~420.83

'~'~ 4.15 4.36 5+09 4.18 3.49 2,98 2.61 2.13 1,81 1.32
,07 El" 395,41 33,60 272,89 310.45 337,46 351.96 337,05 341,98 300.36j1298.17
24.60 71.03 2 2 8 3 1 171,03 131.63 100.61 10(]45 70.10 77.38 i 41.63
~o
r 18973~, 1720.45 18~5.L~ 1648.911480,581312,16 1155.18 973.93 79374 1595.80
00 ~ 4.25 4.59 5.09 4.19 3.ss 3.14 z.70 ~.34 1.94 I 1,57
E~ 43914 343.79 307.15 354.25 360,42 376.98 39602 377.50 374,95 J 340,36
OM~ 30.31 ~43.30 24129 163.4-3 161.13 128.36 87.71 88.92 67,43 162,19

FIG. 4. Design Load, Moment Strength, Curvature, and Rigidity for Columns with
f~' = 4,000 psi (27,600 kPa), f'y = 60,000 psi (414,000 kPa), and ~/ = 0.90 (1 in. =
2.54 cm, 1 psi = 6.9 kPa)

1137

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 messung" 1989). The numbers to the right of the dashed vertical lines are
introduced for the iterative process during the analysis and design procedure.
Design values (e.g. Figs. 2-4) for rectangular column cross sections with
steel on all four sides, nonrectangular, hollow, or cellular cross sections,
can be developed in a manner similar to the one outlined in the present
paper.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Stability Criteria Based on Linear qbM-O

The intersection point S' between (4), which resulted from the factored
applied loads, and the approximate linear ~bM-qbrelationship [(6)] represents
the stable equilibrium condition (Manzelli and Harik 1993). Eq. (4) is bounded
by the coordinates of points D and K'. Since the slopes in both equations
are always positive, the ordinate of point S' will always be larger than M~.
In the special case when l = 0, the ordinate of S' is equal M~.
For the special case when the two lines [(4) and (6)] overlap, S' should
be taken as point A where the moment strength is doM,,/2and the curvature
is determined from (8) with the help of Figs. 2-4.
The proposed method is acceptable for design when (4) and (6) intersect
and Ms > (bM~, and when M~ <- qbM~ and the ordinate of the intersection
lies between +Mn/2 and d0M, [i.e. S' between points A and K'. A more
detailed discussion of the stability criteria is presented elsewhere (Manzelli
and Harik 1993)].

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Point S' (Manzelli and Harik 1993), the intersection between the applied
factored load equation (4) and the approximate moment-curvature equation
(6), can now be used to express the slope E1 in (6) in terms of the coordinates
of points s'(q%, Mc) and K'(~,,, +Mn)

~:I = +M,, - Mc . ........................................... (7)

0,, - qSc

from which
qbM. - Mc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
O~ = rbn E1
Upon substitution of (8) into (4), the expression for the total factored
moment Mc becomes
p"12 (
M~o + --~ 2~.~. - ~*~o + 56~*, - 56, +M.'~
El~
M~ = 56~ P,,I 2 ......... (9)
1
12 El"
Curvature Distribution
Eq. (2) for the curvature coefficients 61 and 62 is applicable when the
curvature distribution along the length of the column is quadratic [Manzelli
and Harik's (1993) Fig. 4(c)], while (3) is to be used in the case of uniform
distribution [Manzelli and Harik's (1993) Fig. 4(d)]. In addition to the ap-
plied loads, the curvature profile is also dependent on the variation in the
cross-section dimensions and reinforcement along the length of the column.
1138

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 The parabolic distribution is used mainly for the analysis of a column.
The uniform distribution is employed in the design and initial cross-section
selection.
For columns with constant cross section and reinforcement, a quadratic
curvature distribution would lead to a good approximation of the actual
one.
For columns with constant cross section and varying reinforcement, or
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

columns with varying cross section and reinforcement, a piecewise constant

curvature can be chosen. This approach overestimates the actual curvature,
but it is conservative since it leads to larger deflections and in turn larger
second-order moments. In the case of linear or nonlinear variation in the
cross section along the length of the column, the stepwise curvature would
closely approximate the actual one if the number of pieces or segments is
large enough.

Creep Effects
Creep due to sustained load will increase the second-order deflection of
the column, which in turn reduces the nominal strength of the slender
column. The increase in the deflection due to such effects is taken into
account by decreasing the flexural stiffness EI of the column by the ratio
1/(1 + ~d)- ~d is the creep coefficient defined in section 10.11.5.2 of the
ACI Code ("Bemessung" 1979).

Foundation Rotation
The effect of foundation rotation is taken into account by increasing the
second-order relative displacement Ac [(1)] by an amount ~rl 2 [see (12) and
(13) in the following section and example 1], where

(I) r -- {xrMc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)

P,I 2
in which qbr = a curvature introduced for convenience; and ar = P,I/IIks
is calculated from the relationships presented in the PCI Design Handbook
(1985); It = moment of inertia of the contact area between the bottom of
the footing and the soil; and ks = subgrade modulus which can be taken
from Fig. 5.
In the case of a column base where the rotation due to bending of the
base plate and elongation of the anchor bolts must be included, the ratio
ar can be modified following the relationships presented in the PCI hand-
book (PCI 1985) (Fig. 5).

Out-of-Plumb Effects
Several methods that account for out-of-plumbness in concrete structures
have been reviewed by McGregor (1979). These methods were mainly con-
cerned with framed concrete structures and did not deal specifically with
single cantilever columns.
For the U = 1.4D + 1.7L load combination, McGregor (1979) recom-
mends the following sway angle for cast-in-place concrete

Aop 0.015 (11)

1 = 0.00015 + ~ ......................................

in which Aop = relative displacement between the top and bottom of the
column due to out-of-plumb effects; l = length of the column; and N =
1139

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 400

O.

d 200 J
/
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

_=
O

.Z

0
0 I0,000 20,000
A Ilowable soil bearing value, psf

FIG. 5. Variation of Subgrade Modulus with Allowable Soil-Bearing Value [after

PCI (1985)] (1 in. = 2.54 cm, 1 psi = 6.9 kPa)

total number of columns. For precast concrete columns, the constant 0.015
should be reduced to 0.010. The design sway angle in (11) includes the effect
of creep. For a single pier bridge, N = 1.
The out-of-plumbness effect can be introduced in this method by increas-
ing the factored applied moment M, [Manzelli and Harik's (1993) Fig. 4(a)]
by the moment P,Aop (refer to example 1).
In case the creep effects are not included in the sway angle that is de-
termined from other methods, the out-of-plumb effects must be increased
by the factor (1 + [~a).

Combined Effects
The consideration of the effects of creep, foundation rotation, and out-
of-plumb are introduced to the analysis and design equations and are pre-
sented in the following section. Equations for the deflection and curvatures
are also presented. The use of the equations will be illustrated in the nu-
merical examples.

EQUATIONS FOR ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Displacement

Ac = fs m(x)OP.(x) dx + dPrl2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12)

Ac 5~112ape + ~212(2qbu. - d~,o) + alpj2 (13)

=l--T -iT .....................
in which, for quadratic curvature distribution
~ = 1; ~ = 1 .......................................... (14)

for uniform curvature distribution

6
~ = ~; ~ = o .......................................... (15)

1140

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 Curvatures
%M~
dp~ = p.l----T ................................................ (16)

gPc = M~ - ~bM~ (1 + 13~) (17)

1 ...................................
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

M . - ~bM~ (1 + 13a) when M . > 4~M~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18a)

rPM" = E1
qbM. = 0 when M . -< ~bM~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18b)

(pz~ = M~o - 0~M~ (1 + [ 3 e ) when Ml.o > d~M~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19a)

EI
CZ.o = 0 when Mluo -< d~M~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19b)

Moments
Mc : M'.o + M."o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20)
MZ.o = M,, + H . l + P.Aop ................................... (21)
M.~ = P.Ac . .............................................. (22)

Moments in Terms of Curvatures

Mc = ................................... (23)
1 -- Or-r

~2P.l 2
M . = MZ.o + - - ~ (2#PM. - q~o) ............................ (24)

Moments in Terms of Moments

( 5~1P,,12~
M~ - \ ~ ] (1 + [3d)dPM~
Mc : . ......................... (25)

1 - ~,, -
(\l-i-~T!
5~,P,,l=~(1 + ~.)
~2Pu 12
M~ = MZ.o + ~ (1 + Ba)M, .............................. (26)

in which, for quadratic curvature distribution

/14, = 2M. - M~o - (bM~ when M . > cbM~ and M~o > ~bM~ .. (27a)
M , = M*~o + ~bM~ when M . -< ~bM~ and MXuo > ~bM~ . . . . . . . . (27b)
34, = 0 when M . -< (bM~ and M~o -< r ................. (27c)
for uniform curvature distribution
1141

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 M, = 0 ................................................... (28)
Note that the out-of-plumbness moment P,,Ao,,, is included in the factored
moment M. (refer to example 1).

NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Due to space limitation, only two examples and three design figures (Figs.
2-4) are presented here. The first example illustrates the design and analysis
procedure for a prismatic column with constant reinforcement. The second
example deals with the analysis of a nonprismatic column.

Example 1: Design
For the column shown in Fig. 6, select a column section size and choose
reinforcement. Given that compressive strength of concrete f~ = 5,000 psi
(34,000 kPa) and yield strength of steel fy = 60,000 psi (414,000 kPa);
estimate creep coefficient ~3~ = 0.2, foundation rotation coefficient % =
0.05, and out-of-plumb displacement at the tip Aop = 2 in. (5.08 cm).

Step I ~ Trial Column Section

Assume ~bP* = (d?P,~ P" = 1,000 psi (6,900 kPa)

\ Ag / = A-gg ........... (29)

P, 0.3 x 106 300 sq. in. (1,935 cm 2) .............. (30)

Ag = 1 , 0 0 0 - 1,000 =
Try h = 20 in. (50.8 cm); b = 15 in. (38.1 cm) .............. (31)
h -5 20-5
Estimate ~ = h = 20 = 0.75 ........................ (32)

Step 2-- Total Moment Mc for Initial Reinforcement Selection

From Fig. 3 [f'c = 5,000 psi (34,500 kPa), fy = 60,000 psi (414,000 kPa), ~/
= 0.75], and for d~P* = 1,000 psi, the normalized curvature alp* varies
between 5.39 (at pg -- 0.01) and 5.55 (at p~ = 0.08).
P. = 3 o 0 k

LM==2400 k-in + P= /kop

H.:IO k Zt-~

b I A=,

////// / /

(a) (b)
FIG. 6. Column for Example No. 1 (1 kip = 4.45 kN, 1 in. = 2.54 cm)
1142

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 Estimate ~bn* = 5.55(1 + 13d) = 5.55(1 + 0.2) = 6.66 ........... (33)

qb* _ 6.66 = 3.33 x 10 -4 1/in. (1.31 x 10 -4 1/cm)

qb = h x 1,000 20 x 1,000
.......................................................... (34)
Assume uniform curvature distribution [Manzelli and Harik's (1993) Fig.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

4(d)] and set the second-order curvature at the base qb = dpn.

From (15), ~1 = 6/5 and ~2 = 0.0 for uniform curvature.
From (24), with ~2 = 0.0, M~ = Mluo
From (21)
MZ.o = M. + H , l = 2.4 x 106 + 10 x 103 x (12 x 12) + 0.3
• 106 • 2 = 4.44 x 106 lb-in. (502 k N . m ) .................... (35)
From (23)

M,+ -- ~c

Mc = 1 - %

[fl.3 x 1 0 6 x ( 1 0 x 12) 2]
4.44 x 106 + 2 3,33 x 10 .4

1 - 0.5
= 5.76 x 106 lb-in. (651 k N . m ) .............................. (36)

Step 3--Select Reinforcement

Set Mc = dOMn = 5.76 X 106 lb-in. (651 k N . m ) .

d0Mn 5.76 • 106 = 960 psi (6,624 kPa) ............ (37)

~M* - Agh - 20 x 15 x 20
From Fig. 5, with d0P* = 1,000 psi (6,900 kPa), choose Pg = 0.04 with
4~M* = 964.13 psi (6,652.5 kPa). As, = pr4g = 0.04 x 300 = 12 sq in.
(77.4 cm2).

Step 4--Check Adequacy of Column Section

Design Parameters. From Fig. 3 (f'c = 5,000 psi (34,500 kPa), fy =
60,000 psi (414,000 kPa), ~/ = 0.75), with ~bP* = 1,000 psi (6,900 kPa) and
pg = 0.04:

doM, = d~M* x Agh = 964.13 x 300 x 20

= 5.78 X 106 lb-in. (653 k N . m ) .............................. (38)

dg* 5.54 = 2.77 x t0 -4 I/in. (1.09 x 10 -4 1/cm)

qb = h x 1,000 = 20 x 1,000
.......................................................... (39)
EI = EI* x Aghz x 1,000 = 140.18 x 300 x 21Y x 1,000
= 1.68 x 101~ lb-in. 2 (48.8 x 10 TM N - c m 2) ..................... (40)
1143

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 ~bM~ = + M ~ x A~h = 187.14 x 300 • 20
= 1.12 x 106 lb-in. (126.6 k N - m ) ............................ (41)
Cheek If M~, > +M~. Using quadratic curvature distribution, {, = 1.0
and {2 = 1,0 [(14)]. F r o m (27a), with Mu > +M~ and mt, o > dpm~:
M , = 2 x (2.4 x 106 q- 0.3 x 106 X 2) -- 4.44 x 106 -- 1.12 x 106
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

= 0.44 x 106 lb-in. (50 k N . m) ............................... (42)

F r o m (26)
1 x 0.3 x 106 x (12 • 12) 2
M~ = 4.44 x 106 + 12 x 1.68 x 10 l~ (1 + 0.2)(0.44 x 10 6)

= 4.46 x 106 lb-in. (504 k N . m) .............................. (43)

M~ = 4.46 x 106 lb-in. (504 k N . m) > ~bM~
= 1.12 x 106 lb-in. (126.6 k N . m ) ( O . K . ) ....................... (44)
the m e t h o d is applicable.
Total Moment Me. F r o m (25),

4"46• [ 5 x l x O ' 31 x 10 0 6 x (11 22x 1x-q7

2 )l~ ]- . 6 ("1 +f 0 "f 2 x) • 2-1 5l O
M~=
5 x 1 x 0.3 • 106 • (12 • 12)21
a - 0.05 - ~ 7<-~.g~-~ 1 ~ (1 + 0.2)

= 5.56 x 106 lb-in. (628 kN.m) .................................. (45)

Mc = 5.56 • 106 lb-in. < ~bMn = 5.78 • 106 lb-in. (653 k N . m ) ( O . K . )
.......................................................... (46)
The section is a d e q u a t e [h = 20 in. (50.8 cm); b = 15 in. (38.1 cm); As,
= 12 sq in. (77.4 cm2)].
Tip Displacement, Ac. From (16)
etrMc 0.05 x 5.56 x 106
{~D r -- _ _
PuP 0.3 x 106 x (12 • 12) 2
= 0.47 • 10 -4 1/in. (0.19 x 10 -4 1/cm) ....................... (47)
F r o m (17), the total curvature qb at the base of the column becomes
~c Mc - ~M~ (1 + ~a) = 5.56 • 106 - - 1.12 • 106
= E1 1.68 • 101~ (1 + 0.2)

= 3.17 • 10 -4 1/in. (1.25 x 10 -4 1/cm) ....................... (48)

Similarly, with M , > ~bM~, dp~, = 1.34 • 10 -4 1/in. (0.53 x 10 -4 1/cm)
and ~ , o = 2.37 • 10 -4 I/in. (0.93 • 10 -4 1/cm) from (18a) and (19a),
respectively. This leads to the following column tip deflection [(12)]
/~c = 5 x 1 x (12 x 12) 2 x 3.17 x 10 -4 + 1 x (12 x 12) 2
12 12
9(2 x 1.34 - 2.37) x 10 -4 -t- 0.47 x 10 -4 x (12 x 12) 2

1144

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 = 3.77 in. (9.58 cm) ........................................ (49)

Example 2: Stepped Column

Check the adequacy of the stepped column shown in Fig. 7, The column
dimensions, loading, cross sections, and material properties are also pre-
sented in Fig. 7. Neglect the effects of creep, out-of-plumbness, and foun-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

dation rotation.
For illustrative purposes, a uniform curvature distribution is assumed [Fig.
8(a)]. The solution procedure involves dividing the column into prismatic
segments. For each segment, the design parameters are determined from
the design figures (Figs. 2-4) in a manner similar to that of step 4 in example
1. The lateral displacement Ac at the top of each segment is expressed in
terms of curvatures ~c at the base of the segment, and then in terms of
total factored moments Me. This leads to a system of S equations to S
unknowns; S being the number of prismatic segments, and the unknowns
being the total factored moments Mc at the base of each segment. Upon
solution of the system of equations, the total factored moments are deter-
mined and checked against the nominal moments ~M,.
The superscripts A, B, and C are used to denote quantities relative to
the column sections at points A, B, and C, respectively (Figs. 7 and 8).

PuA = 12 O k L I 6"---"

HuA= 3 v'
MAu= 4 0 0 k-in
I
15"

pue= 3 5 0 " Bending~

3 .::,o" Axis 7
I M:= 12oo"'~ V
I T I
15" zl#8

7//r/l,
i

////// .L z6" -3 I
50" "=3

!
fc = 4 , 0 0 0 psi
fy = 6 0 , 0 0 0 psi
Ast = 12 X 0 . 7 9 = 9 . 4 8 in z
FIG. 7. Stepped-Column Dimensions, Loading, and Material Properties for Ex-
ample No. 2 (1 in. = 2.54 cm, 1 psi = 6.9 kPa, 1 kip = 4.45 kN)

1145

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 ._,: : o,e,
/ '1
A I P
' T
mA '~AB

-1
)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

R.e

C
k _1
-i
C
J
l
eg '~AB § J~SC

(a) (b) (c) (d)

FIG. 8. Stepped Column in Fig. 9: (a) Curvature Distribution; (b) Lateral Displace-
ment; (c) Bending Moment due to Unit Lateral Force Applied at A; (d) Bending
Moment Diagram due to Unit Lateral Force Applied at B

Step 1--Design Parameters

Segment AB. G r o s s a r e a A f t = 16 • 15 = 240 sq in. (1,548 cm 2)

R e i n f o r c e m e n t ratio pff - A
A ~f t _ 9.48
240 = 0.0394 ~ 0.04 " . . . . . . . . . . (50)

12
D i s t a n c e ratio ~/B = _ = 0.75 ............................... (51)
16

set ~bP *,~ = p a _ 120 X 1,000 = 500 psi (3,450 k P a ) ........... (52)
A~ 240
F r o m Fig. 4 [f'c = 4,000 psi (27,600 k P a ) , fy = 60,000 psi (414,000 k P a ) , ~/
= 0.75] with + P * = 500 psi (3,450 k P a ) and pg = 0.04

+M~ = $M*'BABhB = 811.35 • 240 • 16

= 3.12 • 106 lb-in. (353 k N - m ) .............................. (53)

~,.s 5.04
~ = h a • 1,000 = 16 • 1,000
= 3.15 • 10 -4 I/in. (1.24 x 10 -4 1/cm) ....................... (54)

E I B = EI*,SAff(hB) 2 • 1,000 = 139.5 • 240 • (16) z x 1,000

= 0.857 • 101~ lb-in. (24.88 • 101~ N - c m 2) .................... (55)

d:M~ = "e,,,~'~*'~a,'~,,Bt'b= 109.22 X 240 X 16

= 0.42 X 106 lb-in. (47.5 k N . m ) ............................. (56)
Segment B e . G r o s s a r e a A c = 30 x 15 = 450 sq in. (2,903 cm 2)
1146

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 A cc _ 9.48
R e i n f o r c e m e n t ratio pC = A 450 = 0.021 ~ 0.02 . . . . . . . . . . . . (57)

26
Distance ratio ~/c = _ = 0.87 ~ 0.9 .......................... (58)
30
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

set + p , , c = p a + p ~ _ (120 + 3.30) x 1,000 = 1,000 psi (6,900 kPa)

Ac 450
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (59)
F r o m Fig. 6 [f'~ = 4,000 psi (27,600 k P a ) , fr = 60,000 psi (414,000 kPa),
and -/ = 0.90] with S P * = 1,000 a n d 98 = 0.02
+MC= , c A gch c = 671.26 x 450 x 30
+M,,.
= 9.06 x 106 lb-in. (1,024 k N . m ) ............................ (60)

dpc = h c qb*,c = 5.35 = 1.78 • 10 -4 1/in. (0.70 10 -4 1/cm)

x 1,000 30 x 1,000
.......................................................... (61)
E1 c = EI*,CAC(hC) z x 1,000 = 91.05 • 450 • (30) 2 • 1,000
= 3.69 • 10 a~ lb-in, z (107 • 10 N - e r a 2) ....................... (62)
d o M e = doM~'*CAshc c = 183.90 • 450 • 30
= 2.48 x 106 tb-in. (280 k N . m ) .............................. (63)

Step 2 - - C h e c k I f M~ > doM~

F r o m (26) a n d (21) with ~ = 0 for u n i f o r m c u r v a t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n [(14)],
a n d hop = 0
MS, = M~,,g = M A + Ha, lAs = 0.4 x 106 + 3 x 103 x (15 x 12)
= 0.94 x 106 lb-in. (106 k N . m ) .............................. (64)
M c = M~ ,c = ( M ~ + M B) + [Ha,(lAs + lsc) + H~,lBc]
= (0.4 + 1.2) x 10a + [3(15 + 20) + 10 x 20] x 103 x 12
= 5.26 x 106 lb-in. (594 k N - m ) .............................. (65)
M ~ > qbMg a n d M c > qbM~ ................................. (66)
The p r o p o s e d m e t h o d is applicable.

Step 3 - - S e c o n d - O r d e r Displacement Ac
T h e s e c o n d - o r d e r lateral d i s p l a c e m e n t s AA a n d A~ at points A a n d B,
respectively [Fig. 8(b)] are d e t e r m i n e d from (12), with qb = 0.0

h A = f l mAdp,(X) dx ........................................ (67)

JO

U
A~ = Jo mBeP"(x) dx ........................................ (68)

in which m A a n d m 8 = b e n d i n g m o m e n t s d u e to u n i t lateral loads applied

1147

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 at points A and B, respectively [Fig. 8(c and d)]; and l = IA~ + 18c = total
length of the column.
l~ ~ (15 • 12)z@~ 20 x 12
A~ = --~ ~ + _ _ (2/As + loc)dPc = 2 +

9 (2 • 15 + 20) X 12 X + c = 1.62 • t04~ + 7.2 • llY+ c . . . . . (69)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(20 • 12)2
h~ = T ~b~c"= 2 = 2.88 x 104~ c' ................ (70)

From (17), qb~ takes the following form with [3a = 0.0:
c/,a = Mp - ~bM~ _ Mp - 0.42 x 10 6
E1 ~ - 0.857 x 1 0 1 ~ ....................... (71)
similarly
~ c = M c - ~bMff M c - 2.48 x 10 6
EI c = 3.69 • 1 0 1 ~ ....................... (72)
substituting (71) and (72) into (69) and (70) leads to
AA = 1.89 • 10-6Mp -I- 1.95 X 10-6M c - 5.63 ............... (73)
Ap = 0.78 • 10-6M c - 1.94 ................................ (74)

Step 4 - - T o t a l Factored Moment Mc

From (20) and (22), with 13d = 0, % = 0 and hop = 0
M ~ = M lbB + 9lt/I
. * .H,B
o = M . o1,13 + P ,A, ( h c Z - h~) .................. (75)

M c = M~,oc + lvl
, , , ,,,ti
c = M ~bC + p A. AA + P ,,B hcB ................. (76)
Mt.~ and MZ.,oc were determined in step 2. U p o n substitution of (73) and
(74) into (75) and (76), the following system of equations is derived:

[ 0.77 -0.14] IMp} 0.50 • 106l

-0.23 0.51J { M C j = [3.94 • 106j ..................... (77)

The solution to the system of equations leads to

M~ = 2.24 • 106 lb-in. (253 k N . m < ~bM~
= 3.12 • 106 lb-in. (353 k N . m ) .............................. (78)
M c = 8.73 • 106 lb-in. (986 k N . m ) < ~ M c
= 9,06 • 106 lb-in. (1,024 kN. m) ............................ (79)
The column cross sections are adequate.
The influence of creep, out-of-plumbness, and foundation rotation on the
analysis and design equations can be introduced in a manner similar to that
presented in example 1.
For columns with more than two segments (Fig. 1), the solution procedure
is similar to the one presented in this example. The only difference lies in
the fact that a system of S equations to S unknowns must be solved; S being
the total number of prismatic segments.
For columns with constant gross area throughout their length but varying
1148

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.

 reinforcement layout, the solution process is similar to the one outlined in
this example. The column is divided into segments of constant reinforcement
layout.

SUMMARYAND CONCLUSIONS
A hand-calculation technique is developed and implemented for the anal-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/18/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ysis and design of slender cantilever columns and bridge piers. When com-
pared to existing hand-calculation techniques (moment magnifier method
and stability index procedures), the advantage of the proposed method lies
in its ability to account for the axial load level when determining the column
stiffness El, and its applicability to nonprismatic compression members. The
influence of creep, out-of-plumbness and foundation rotation are considered
in the formulation process.

APPENDIX, REFERENCES
"Bemessung von Beton und Stahlbeton-bauteilen nach DIN-1045." (1979). Heft220.
Schriftenreihe des Deutschen Ausschusses fur Stahlbeton (DAfStb). Wilhelm, Ernst
& Sohn, Berlin, Germany (in German).
Building code requirements for reinforced concrete (A CI 318-89) and commentary
(ACI 318R-89). (1989). American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Mich.
EI-Metwally, S. E., and Chen, W. F. (1989). "Load deformation relations for rein-
forced concrete sections." AC1 Struct. J., 86(2), 163-167.
Huang, C. (1990). "Nonlinear time-dependent finite element analysis of reinforced
concrete space frames containing slender columns and flanged beams," PhD dis-
sertation, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
Manzelli, A. A., and Harik, I. E. (1993). "Approximate moment--curvature re-
lationships for slender columns." J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 119(4), 1114-1132.
McGregor, J. G. (1979). "Out-of-plumb columns in concrete structures." Concrete
Int.: Des. and Constr., 1(6), 26-31.
PCI design handbook: precast and prestressed concrete. (1985). 3rd Ed., Prestressed
Concrete Institute, Chicago, Ill.
Poston, R. W., Breen, J. E., and Roesset, J. M. (1985a). "Analysis of nonprismatic
or hollow slender concrete bridge piers." ACI J., 82(5), 731-739.
Poston, R. W., Gilliam, T. E., Yamamoto, Y., and Breen, J. E. (1985b). "Hollow
concrete bridge piers." ACI J., 82(6), 779-787.
Poston, R. W., Diaz, M., and Breen, J. E. (1986). "Design trends for concrete
bridge piers." ACI J., 83(1), 14-20.
Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. (1989). 14th Ed., American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C.

1149

J. Struct. Eng. 1993.119:1133-1149.