i
Volume-
Editor’s quick points
n  Precast concrete buildings usually perform satisfactorily if PCI
Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete methods
are used to design for volume-change effects, but misconcep-
tions still exist about their performance.
n  This research was funded by PCI and Wiss, Janney, Elstner
Associates Inc. to gain a better understanding of the volume-
change response of actual precast concrete buildings and to
compare measured performance with analytical models—and
provide calibration if needed. The full research report is avail-
able from PCI.
n  Another objective of this research is to recommend revised
design procedures that account for flexible connections.
112 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal
change
response
of precast
concrete
buildings
Gary J. Klein
and Richard E. Lindenberg
Volume-change effects are the combined result of creep,
shrinkage, and temperature strains. In standard load com-
binations, elastic shortening and differential settlement
are included with volume-change effects. Because elastic
shortening occurs before the members are connected, it
does not affect precast concrete structures. Differential
settlement is not addressed in this paper.
Volume-change damage is second only to chloride-
induced deterioration as a leading cause of problems and
failures in parking structures.1 Figures 1 and 2 show
examples of volume-change distress. The expansion joints
used to alleviate volume-change restraint are frequently
the weak point of exposed structures, especially parking
structures. They add significantly to construction costs and
frequently fail, resulting in unintended moisture entry and
related deterioration.
Volume changes are different from other load effects.
Unlike forces from gravity and wind, volume-change
forces are self-straining forces. That is, they are created as
members deform. The fundamental demand resulting from
volume change is a movement, not a force, but substan-
tial forces can develop where volume-change movement
is restrained. The American Concrete Institute’s (ACI’s)
Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI
318-08) and Commentary (ACI 318R-08)2 requires that
volume-change forces be based on “realistic assessment of
such effects occurring in service.” However, ACI 318 does
not otherwise differentiate volume-change-force effects
from gravity loads.
Procedures for determining volume-change movement and
forces in precast concrete buildings have been available in
the PCI Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Con-

Figure 1. Volume-change distress is evident at this rigid spandrel-beam connection.
crete3 for 30 years. When developed by the PCI Committee
on Design Handbook in 1977,4 the methods were believed
to provide realistic estimates of volume-change forces. The
PCI Design Handbook provides a procedure for evaluating
volume-change movements and forces:
1. Determine the maximum seasonal temperature change.
2. Determine the annual average ambient relative humidity.
3. Determine the volume-change strains caused by creep
and shrinkage as influenced by the following:
• concrete type (normalweight or lightweight)
• curing conditions
• age at erection
• volume-to-surface ratio
• relative humidity
• concrete strength and level of prestress
4. Determine the design temperature strain.
i
5. Evaluate the need for and location of expansion joints.
6. Determine the expansion-joint width and movement.
7. Estimate equivalent volume-change strains (reduced
by K factors that account for creep and microcracking
of precast concrete members) for analyzing volume-
change forces.
8. Estimate fixity of column bases.
9. Calculate volume-change-restraint forces based on
frame analysis or approximate methods.
10. Proportion members based on calculated forces.
Also, section 3.4 of the PCI Design Handbook provides
helpful advice regarding connection design for volume-
change effects. “Properly detailed connections can minimize
the effects of volume change strains. Connections should be
detailed so that ductile deformation of one of the elements
such as the connecting plate or connection bolt assembly
can take place. Neglecting the effect of this connection
deformation will produce unrealistically high computed
restraint forces and can actually have a negative effect if
connections are too strong, and inhibit necessary ductility.”
PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 113
i
Figure 2. Spandrel connection distress shown by the arrow is caused by unin-
tended volume-change restraint from a grade-level barrier.
When the PCI Design Handbook methods are used, precast
concrete buildings usually perform satisfactorily. In his
paper summarizing a 1971 symposium on design for ef-
fects of creep, shrinkage, and temperature, Robert Philleo5
supports the notion that “it makes no difference what you
do as long as you do something.” In that sense, the PCI
Design Handbook procedures have been successful.
Nonetheless, questions and concerns regarding volume-
change response of precast concrete buildings remain, as
described in the following paragraphs.
Design for volume-change forces
Treating volume change as an external force can lead to
irrational decisions, as described in the following scenario.
Based on PCI Design Handbook procedures, a designer
calculates the volume-change forces using educated assump-
tions about the material properties, volume-change strain,
force-reduction coefficients, member sizes, and reinforce-
ment ratios. According to the ACI 318 requirements, the
volume-change forces are then factored and combined with
gravity loads to determine the needed reinforcement.
114 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal
If, for example, the bending forces in corner columns due to
volume-change effects are greater than expected, the design-
er then adds longitudinal column reinforcement, or worse,
increases the column size. Performance is not enhanced
by this increase in strength. In fact, volume-change forces
will only increase, escalating the likelihood of wide cracks,
column shear failures, connection failures, and the like.
However, in practice, designers generally do not calculate
volume-change forces, even though they are included in
the basic load combinations of ACI 318 and the Struc-
tural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society
of Civil Engineers (ASCE)’s Minimum Design Loads
for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7-05).6
Rather, designers rely on rules of thumb and successful
past practices. When volume-change forces are calculated,
hand calculations and two-dimensional frame analyses are
generally used.
Accuracy of volume-change strains
and forces
Design for volume-change effects is complicated by the ex-
treme variability of concrete strain and the resulting forces.
Furthermore, there are few actual data on volume-change
effects in precast concrete buildings. Due to the wide scat-
ter in material properties, thermal exposure, and structural
response, it is not possible to predict volume-change forces
with accuracy comparable with the prediction of gravity-
load forces. At the same time, using conservative assump-
tions leading to upper-bound estimates of volume-change
force leads to highly impractical and costly designs.
Iqbal7 measured thermal movements in several precast
concrete parking structures. Figure 3, developed from
this study, is a plot of the ratio of actual to predicted joint
movement. Although actual movements are generally less
than predicted, the data are widely scattered. These data
confirm the unpredictability of volume-change response.
Volume-change response
of precast concrete buildings
Developments in connection details have changed the
volume-change response of precast concrete buildings.
In particular, pretopped double-tees (or wall panels) with
semiflexible flange-to-flange connections respond dif-
ferently from a monolithic structure. Semiflexible flange
connections permit small volume-change movements
that reduce both volume-change forces and movement
at expansion joints. None of the available procedures for
estimating volume-change effects account for the behavior
of precast concrete structures with flexible connections.
This paper summarizes the findings of the authors’ recent
study conducted for PCI on the volume-change response
of precast concrete buildings.8 This research was designed
 i

1.500

1.000
Movement ratio, actual/predicted

0.500

0.000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

-0.500
Government center
Judicial center
Ameritech
-1.000 O’Hare
Riverway l
Sears east

-1.500

Figure 3. This plot of the ratio of actual to predicted joint movements in precast concrete parking structures illustrates the extreme variability of volume-change movement.

to gain a better understanding of volume-change response Field instrumentation program

starting with the observed behavior of actual precast concrete
structures. Accordingly, the objective of this research was
twofold: develop a better understanding of volume-change
movement and forces based on the measured performance
of precast concrete structures and calibration to analytical
18163
0 model, and recommend revised design procedures that reflect
08587 this understanding and account for the influence of flexible
connections. The primary research tasks included field moni-
toring and finite-element analyses of actual structures, as well
as evaluating the predictability of volume-change forces.
Selection and description of buildings
More than any other precast concrete building type, park-
ing structures present the greatest challenge with respect
to volume-change movement and forces. Parking struc-
tures are frequently large in plan and unheated, resulting
in significant thermal movements. Furthermore, parking
structures are an important building type in the precast
concrete industry. For these reasons, the field instrumenta-

Table 1. Instrumented structures

Metropolitan area Double-tee Dimensions, ft Longitudinal Field

Supported levels
(climate) spans Longitudinal Transverse expansion joint topping

Chicago, Ill. (northern) 2 120 364 1 Yes No

Denver, Colo. (desert/

5 293 399 2 Yes No
mountain)

Washington, D.C. (mid-

3 186 384 4 Yes No
Atlantic)

Atlanta, Ga. (southern) 3 183 342 5 No Yes

Note: 1 ft = 0.3048 m.

PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 115

i

Table 2. Support type and connection data

Double-tee connections Beam connections

Structure Support type
Flange-to-flange Flange-to-beam/column Bearing Torsion

Chicago, Ill. 24-in.-square F: JVI Vector connectors F: Bolt in slotted insert F: 1/2 in. ROF pad F: Threaded rod in
columns on open hole
continuous footing

Denver, Colo. 20-in.-square R: Typically, embedded R: Welded angles at columns F: 1/2 in. Masticord R: S teel plate aligned
columns on iso- plates welded to and inverted-tee beams ROF pad parallel to beam
lated footings with reinforcing-bar and line and welded to
central shear wall chord-steel connector embedments
with welded cover
plates at perimeter

Washington, D.C. 12 in. × 128 in. R: JVI Vector connec-
shear walls on tors and chord steel
isolated footings connector with
welded cover plates
at perimeter
R: E mbedment with welded F: 1 in. Masticord F: Inclined plate
cover plate ROF pad welded at opposite
ends

Atlanta, Ga. 28-in.-square F: Hairpin reinforcing- F: Plate welded to reinforc- F: 1/2 in. Masticord F: Threaded rod in
columns on pile bar connector ing-bar hairpin ROF pad open hole
supported
footings

Note: F = flexible connection; R = rigid connection; ROF = random-oriented fiber. 1 in. = 25.4 mm.

tion program focused on parking structures. New parking
structures were selected in order to obtain early-age data
on creep and shrinkage strain.
Four structures were selected in locations representing a
wide range of structural and climatic conditions. Table 1
summarizes basic data on each of the parking structures.
All parking structures employ precast, prestressed concrete
double-tee floor members supported by precast concrete
spandrel beams and columns. The dimensions of the
structures and numbers of supported levels are provided in
Table 1. The longitudinal dimension is parallel to the span
of the double-tee floor members. The transverse dimension
is perpendicular to the floor members. Three of the four
structures include a longitudinal expansion joint.
The Atlanta, Ga., structure is field topped; that is, a cast-
in-place concrete wearing surface is placed in the field on
the double-tees. The other three structures use pretopped
double-tees. The flanges of pretopped double-tees are
thickened to withstand traffic loading without a cast-in-
place concrete topping.
Table 2 summarizes the column and connection data for
the instrumented portions of the structures. The Washing-
ton, D.C., structure employs intermittent shear walls at the
structure perimeter where measurements were made. Else-
where, conventional square columns are used along the
frames that were monitored for volume-change movement.

Monitoring program

Continuous monitoring A battery-powered data-

acquisition system was used to continuously collect hourly
temperature and movement data over a two- to three-year
period. Figure 4 shows a typical continuous monitoring
system. The following measurements were made at the
lowest supported level and at the upper level:

Figure 4. This photograph shows a typical installation of the continuous monitor-

ing system. The red arrow indicates the data-acquisition system, and the blue
arrows indicate potentiometers for monitoring joint movement.

116 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal


• Expansion-joint/structure movement. Typically, a
potentiometer was used to measure expansion-joint
movements. Because the Atlanta structure did not have
an expansion joint, a laser measurement system was
employed to measure changes in out-to-out width.
• Air temperature at structure. Thermocouples were
typically located below the deck at the lowest sup-
ported level and upper level.
• Temperature of structural elements. Thermocouples
were inserted into drilled holes (drilled to half the
member depth) in the spandrel beams and double-tee
flanges at the lowest supported level and upper level.
• Local weather data. Local weather data were down-
loaded from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration in electronic form and were integrated
with continuous monitoring data.
Measurements were generally successful, though there
were several gaps in the data due to power outages and
vandalism.
Periodic monitoring At about six-month intervals
(summer and winter), volume-change data were collected
in study areas at the top and first supported levels. Figure
Legend
Periodic monitoring
Figure 5. Typical periodic measurement locations are illustrated in this plot.
i
5 illustrates typical measurement locations. Periodic mea-
surements included the following:
• Movement at spandrel-beam joints and double-tee
joints. Movement data were collected using a digital
caliper that measured the distance between machined
measurement points affixed to the structure (see Fig. 6).
• Column-tilt measurements. A uniaxial tiltmeter
mounted on a custom-designed bracket was used for
column-tilt measurements.
• Strain measurements of spandrel beams and
double-tees. Strain measurements were made using a
10 in. (250 mm) Whittemore strain gauge.
The measurements of movement at spandrel-beam and
double-tee joints were especially useful. However, the re-
peatability of tiltmeter measurements was suspect, so those
results were less useful.
Field instrumentation findings
Temperature range Thermal-contraction strains dur-
ing cold weather are of primary interest because they add
to creep and shrinkage strain. Winter temperature measure-
ments indicated significant differences between the struc-
Expansion joint
Continuous
Joint gap
Column tilt
Data acquisition computer
Temperature
Joint movement potentiometer
PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 117
i
Figure 6. Movements at flange joints were determined by periodic measurements
using a digital caliper.
ture temperature, ambient parking-structure temperature,
and local weather-station temperature. Figure 7 is a plot
of January 2004 temperatures at the Chicago, Ill., parking
structure, which is typical of cold-weather temperatures in
the instrumented parking structures.
As can be seen, the ambient temperature in the one-level
structure lags the extreme cold temperatures measured by
the National Weather Service near the site. This difference
was observed in the lower level of all structures. Appar-
ently the structure warms the air, probably because of heat
from the ground. There is not much difference between the
temperature of the concrete deck and the ambient parking
structure temperature, indicating that the relatively thin ele-
ments have little thermal inertia.
In U.S. practice, thermal-contraction strains are calculated
based on the difference between the mean temperature
during the construction season and the temperature that is
exceeded 99% of the time during winter months, as shown
in PCI Design Handbook Figure 3.10.11. For unheated
structures, the PCI Design Handbook recommends a 25%
reduction in thermal strains computed on this basis. The
recommended reduction for heated structures is 50%.
118 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal
These reductions are incorporated into the design temper-
ature-strain values given in PCI Design Handbook Figures
3.10.17, 3.10.18, and 3.10.19. As previously described, the
temperature difference is primarily due to the less extreme
microclimate inside the structure.
To evaluate the apparent temperature lag, low-temperature
events at each structure were analyzed for the differ-
ence between deck temperature and local weather-station
temperature, both relative to the mean temperature during
the construction season. Specifically, the coefficient to ac-
count for the lag between weather-station temperature and
structure temperature Ks is given by
Ts − Tm
Ks =
Tws − Tm
where
Ts = structure temperature
Tws = weather-station temperature
Tm = mean temperature during the construction season
The 25% reduction in design temperature strains incorpo-
rated into the PCI Design Handbook corresponds to a Ks of
0.75. Likewise, the 50% reduction in design temperature
strains for heated structures corresponds to a Ks of 0.50.
The 10 coldest events in the winter season were evaluated.
Table 3 shows the summarized results.
These results indicate that PCI Design Handbook recom-
mendations reasonably approximate the thermal-lag effect
at the lower level but overestimate the lag at the upper
level. However, as noted, the design low temperature is
the temperature exceeded 99% of the time during winter
months. As such, the design low temperature is warmer
than the expected low temperature in any given year, and
much warmer than the expected 50-year low. For example,
the 50-year low temperature for Chicago is -27 °F (-32.8
°C), 24 °F (13.3 °C) colder than the design temperature of
-3 °F (-19.4 °C), which is the temperature exceeded 99%
of the time during winter months and the basis of U.S. de-
sign practice. To be consistent with other load effects, the
design low temperature should be the 50-year low.
In developing design recommendations for thermal-bridge
movements, Roeder9 studied weather data in several U.S.
cities over a 60- to 70-year period. Roeder recommends
design for a temperature fall taken as the difference be-
tween the probable low temperature of the structure and
the installation temperature. The low structure temperature
depends on the structure type but correlates with average
of the low temperatures over four consecutive days. The
installation temperature is assumed to be 20 °F (11.1 °C)
 i

70
Garage air
National Weather Service
Deck
50
Temperature, °F

30

10

-10
January 1, 2004 January 11, 2004 January 21, 2004 January 31, 2004
Time

Figure 7. Air and deck temperatures in parking structures lag National Weather Service temperatures during cold weather, as can be seen in this plot of January 2004
temperature data from a Chicago, Ill., parking structure. Note: °C = (°F - 32)0.56.

warmer than the average of the probable high and low
temperatures.
Table 4 summarizes the temperature statistics for the study
locations. The temperature fall for the design of bridge
bearings and expansion joints as recommended by Roeder
is provided for comparison.
Review of Table 4 indicates that the seasonal temperature
fall is comparable with the adjusted 50-year temperature
fall. The difference is only a few degrees Fahrenheit,
except in Atlanta, where the adjusted 50-year temperature
fall is 9 °F (5 °C) lower than the seasonal temperature
fall. Apparently, the temperature-lag effect makes up
for the difference between the 50-year low and seasonal
low, assuming a temperature-lag coefficient Ks of 0.75, as
observed at the lower level of the monitored structures.
Accordingly, it is reasonable to design both the structural
frame and expansion joints for the same temperature fall in
any given climate. The lower level of the structural frame

Table 3. Temperature coefficients

Structure temperature coefficient Ks

Structure Lower level Upper level

Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation

Chicago, Ill. 0.78 0.10 n.a. n.a.

Washington, D.C. 0.73 0.07 0.88 0.07

Denver, Colo. 0.71 0.08 0.87 0.10

Average 0.74 0.08 0.87 0.09

Note: n.a. = not applicable.

PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 119

i

Table 4. Summary of temperature statistics for study locations, °F

A B C D E F G H

Adjusted Adjusted
Mean Concrete
Seasonal seasonal 50-year 50-year
construc- Annual low 50-year low bridge design
Structure temperature temperature temperature temperature
tion season temperature* temperature** temperature
fall, A - B† fall 0.75,* fall, A - E fall,†† 0.75 ×
temperature fall
A - B‡ (A - E)

Chicago, Ill. 60 -3 63 47 -27 87 65 77

Denver, Colo. 62 -2 64 48 -25 87 65 77

Washington,
63 16 47 35 -5 8 51 66
D.C.

Atlanta, Ga. 62 18 44 33 -8 70 53 64

Sources: Data in column A from Standing Committee on Structural Engineering of the Federal Construction Council, Building Research Advisory Board,
Division of Engineering, and National Research Council, Expansion Joints in Buildings: Technical Report No. 65 (1974). Data in column H from Roeder 2003.
*
The temperature was exceeded 99% of the time during winter months.
†
Basis for PCI Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete Figure 3.10.11.
‡
Basis of temperature strain indicated in PCI Design Handbook Figure 3.10.17.
**
Based on annual low temperatures according to National Weather Service data.
††
Adjusted for temperature-lag effect (Ks = 0.75).
Note: Ks = coefficient that accounts for the lag between weather-station temperature and structure temperature. °C = (°F - 32)0.56.

Temperature strain As described previously, strain

Table 5. Observed coefficient of thermal expansion
measurements at double-tees and spandrel beams were
Thermal expansion coefficient, taken at two structures during each periodic visit. The mea-
microstrain/ºF sured strains were adjusted for expected creep and shrink-
Structure age strain between monitoring periods. Using the adjusted
Standard strain and values and the measured deck and spandrel-beam
Average
deviation temperatures, the coefficient of thermal expansion was cal-
Chicago, Ill., culated. Table 5 summarizes the results.
4.4 0.72
double-tees
The thermal expansion coefficient varies significantly
Chicago, Ill., with aggregate type,10,11 and there is a wide range of values
3.2 0.95
spandrel beams for most aggregate types. The Chicago values are typical
of precast concrete with limestone aggregate (which was
Washington, D.C.,
3.8 1.40 used) but lower than the thermal expansion coefficient of
double-tees
6 microstrains/°F (10.8 microstrains/°C) recommended
Note: 1 microstrain/°F = 1.8 microstrains/°C. by the PCI Design Handbook for precast concrete. The
precast concrete in the Washington parking structure
used granite aggregate, so the observed values are lower
does not experience the 50-year low temperature due to than the published ACI 209 values of 4.5 microstrains/
the temperature-lag effect, and expansion joints can be ºF to 5.7 microstrains/ºF (8.1 microstrains/°C to 10.3
designed based on seasonal temperature range. microstrains/°C).

The seasonal temperature range values given in PCI
Design Handbook Figure 3.10.11 are reasonable for these
purposes, though they may be somewhat unconservative
in Southern states. Furthermore, as can be seen by com-
paring columns C and H of Table 4, the proposed design
temperature range for exposed precast concrete buildings is
somewhat lower than the range recommended for design of
concrete bridges.
Creep and shrinkage strain Measurement of creep
and shrinkage strain in an exposed structure is especially
difficult. Strain due to temperature changes obscures the
more subtle changes in strain due to creep and shrinkage.
To partially overcome this problem, the structure move-
ment data were analyzed within narrow temperature bands.
An example of this analysis can be seen in Fig. 8, which is
a plot of expansion-joint movement at the upper level of the

120 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal

 i

1
Total movement
0.8 Movement from 50 ºF to 54 ºF
Curve fit
0.6
0.4
Movement, in.

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
June 2004 January 2005 January 2006 January 2007 July 2007

Figure 8. This plot of upper-level expansion-joint movement versus time at the Washington, D.C., structure illustrates the long-term opening of the joint due to creep and
shrinkage. Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm

Washington structure over the two-year monitoring period.
Data taken when the temperature was between 50 °F and 54
°F (10 °C and 12 °C) are highlighted. The resulting upward
slope of the movement-versus-time plot is consistent with
creep and shrinkage.
The PCI Design Handbook provides procedures for deter-
mining creep and shrinkage strain as a function of age at
erection, relative humidity, concrete strength, volume-to-
surface ratio, and level of prestress. Table 6 compares the
observed creep and shrinkage strain with those determined
using PCI procedures.
As can be seen in Table 6, the strains predicted using PCI
Design Handbook procedures are both significantly greater
and smaller compared with those observed. The differ-
ences are partly attributable to movement at intermediate
joints. As explained in the following section, movement at
intermediate joints reduces movement at expansion joints,
which reduces the apparent creep and shrinkage strain.
Furthermore, field measurement of creep and shrinkage
strain of an exposed structure is inherently inaccurate.
Nonetheless, these observations indicate that the creep- and
shrinkage-strain values in the PCI Design Handbook are
reasonable.
Joint movements It is useful to compare the observed
movements at double-tee joints and the expansion joint.
Figure 9 plots the movement at the double-tee joints and
the expansion joint in the lower level of the Washington
structure during a cooling cycle. As can be seen, the expan-
sion joint moves much more than any individual double-tee
joint. However, the total of the individual movements at
the double-tee joints is nearly the same as was observed at
the expansion joint. This movement pattern was observed
at the lower levels of both of the Washington and Chicago
structures, where flexible beam connections were used.
Little movement at intermediate joints was observed at the
upper levels, apparently due to the relative flexibility of the
columns.
Refer to the idealized one-story structure shown in Fig. 10.
If the expansion joint shown is at the middle of a sym-
metrical structure and each half is also symmetrical, the
movement at the end of the structure will equal one half
of the movement at the expansion joint ∆EJ. Note that ∆EJ
is also equal to the total shortening of each half of the
structure ∆TS. In this idealized structure, movement at each
intermediate joint ∆IJ reduces the demand for movement at
expansion joints and forces in the structure due to volume-
change shortening. The joint flexibility factor KJ is an

PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 121

i

Table 6. Creep and shrinkage strain

Creep and shrinkage strain, microstrain

Structure upper level PCI/observed
PCI procedure Observed

Chicago, Ill. 132 83 1.59

Washington, D.C. 182 120 1.52

Denver, Colo. 239 223 1.07

Atlanta, Ga. 50 78 0.64

indicator of the relative flexibility of the intermediate joints
and is given by the following expression:
∑ Δ IJ ∑ Δ IJ
KJ = =
Δ EJ
where
Σ∆IJ = the sum of the movements at the intermediate joints
Thus, KJ is an indicator of the relative flexibility of inter-
mediate joints. Current PCI Design Handbook procedures
treat precast concrete structures as monolithic in that
intermediate joint movement is not considered, which is
equivalent to assuming a KJ of zero. Relative to a struc-
ture with rigid joints, the expected global volume-change
movement of a symmetrical structure with flexible joints is
reduced by a factor of (KJ + 1).
ΔTS Table 7 summarizes the joint flexibility factor KJ based on
measurements at the double-tee deck joints and spandrel-
beam joints. KJ predicted by finite-element models of the
instrumented frames is provided for comparison purposes.
Finite-element-model analysis
Description of models
Two-dimensional models of the instrumented frames
were developed and analyzed using SAP2000. Volume

0.5

0.4
Total movement, in.

0.3

Expansion joint
0.2

0.1

0
2 2.3 2.6 3 3.3 3.6 4 4.3 4.6 5 5.3 5.6 6 6.3 6.6 7 7.3 7.6 8 8.3 8.6 9

Figure 9. This plot illustrates the relative magnitude of movement at intermediate and expansion joints. The data are from the lower level of Washington, D.C., structure
after a cooling cycle. Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm

122 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal

 i

∆EJ ∆EJ
∆IJ /2

Figure 10. This graphic of a symmetrical one-story structure illustrates idealized volume-change response, including movement at the intermediate and expansion joints.
Note: ∆EJ = expansion-joint movement; ∆IJ = movement at each intermediate joint.

change due to creep, shrinkage, and temperature change
was simulated as an equivalent-strain load on the beams.
These models were analyzed two ways: assuming that all
intermediate mechanical connections (not including expan-
sion joints) were rigid and assuming flexible connections.
For the latter case, nonlinear link elements were required
because the resistance of deck joints to closing is much
greater than the resistance to opening.
Member stiffness
The PCI Design Handbook recommends calculating
equivalent volume-change strains that are reduced to
account for creep and microcracking of precast concrete
members. Section 3.4.3.1 of the PCI Design Handbook
gives the rationale for this reduction: “Since the shorten-
ing takes place gradually over a period of time, the effect
of the shortening on the shears and moment of the sup-
port is lessened because of creep and microcracking of
the member and its support.” Specifically, the PCI Design
Handbook recommends dividing the calculated strains due
to creep and shrinkage by the coefficient Kl when calcu-
lating volume-change forces, where Kl is the softening
factor for creep and shrinkage effects. (Kl is not to be used
when calculating a volume-change movement.) For design
purposes, the recommended range of Kl is 4 to 6. Likewise,
the PCI Design Handbook recommends that the design
temperature strain be divided by a Kt value of 1.5, where
Kt is the softening factor for temperature effects.
The selection of the Kl values is explained in a 1977 paper4
by the PCI Committee on Design Handbook. Creep studies
by Mattock12 indicated that the effect of creep reduces the
volume-change force by a factor of 2 to 3 relative to the
force computed using gross member stiffness. The PCI
Committee on Design Handbook reasoned that, because
this force reduction applies to both axial and rotational
restraint, it would apply to both the beam and the column,
and the total reduction would be equal to the square of the
reductions in the beam and column; that is, the correspond-
ing Kl value ranges from 4 to 9. As noted previously, the
sixth edition of the PCI Design Handbook recommends a Kl
of 4 to 6. The basis for selecting a value of 1.5 Kt is not dis-
cussed; however, the smaller value of 1.5 is consistent with
the shorter time frame for changes in temperature strain.
The previous development of Kl was reevaluated as part of
the PCI research project. The authors concluded that the

Table 7. Reduction coefficient for movement at deck and spandrel joints

Average flexibility factor KJ*

Structure Lower level Upper level

Deck joints Spandrel joints Model† Deck joints Spandrel joints Model†

Chicago, Ill. 2.19 1.57 2.06 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Washington, D.C. 1.13 2.78 2.22 -0.10 0.09 0.0

Denver, Colo. 0.22 n.a. 0.25 0.32 n.a. 0.0

Atlanta, Ga. 1.65 0.62 0.48 0.51 -0.08 -0.042

*
A negative number indicates that the intermediate joints were closing during cooling cycles.
†
See “Finite-Element-Model Analysis.”

Note: n.a. = not applicable.

PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 123

i

Table 8. Tensile capacity and stiffness of diaphragm connections

Yield, ~75% of ultimate Ultimate Stiffness, kip/in.

Connection type Topped Secant stiff-

Capacity, kip ∆, in. Capacity, kip ∆, in. Initial ness at 0.1
in. ∆*

A: JVI Vector connector No 5.7 0.065 9.7 1.26 88 58

B: Chord connector No 28.0 0.042 36.4 0.32 667 297

C: Hairpin connector No 2.6 0.092 3.8 0.26 245 27

D: Hairpin connector Yes 15.8 0.014 25.0 0.05 1129 †

E: Cover-plate connector Yes 36.6 0.020 43.4 0.15 1828 408

F: Pour-strip connector Yes 46.7 0.031 62.3 0.14 1507 569

G: WWR topping Yes 19.4 0.035 24.86 0.08 555 †

Source: Data from Naito, Peter, and Cao 2006.

*
 onnections with a secant stiffness of less than 150 kip/in. are classified as flexible; rigid connections are those with a secant stiffness exceeding
C
150 kip/in.
†
Peak load reached before 0.1 in. displacement.

Note: WWR = welded-wire reinforcement; ∆ = displacement. 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 kip = 4.448 kN; 1 kip/in. = 0.175 kN/mm.

softening in both the beam and column are not synergistic;
that is, the total reduction is not proportional to the square
of the fundamental reduction due to creep-related soften-
ing. On the contrary, the beam and column behave like
springs in a series. If the effective stiffness of both beams
and columns is reduced by a factor of 3, the resulting force
is reduced by exactly a factor of 3. Accordingly, based on
the creep studies by Mattock, Kl should vary between 2 and
3, not 4 and 6 as currently recommended. A Kl value of 2.5
is recommended by the authors and was used for the finite-
element models.
For temperature strain, it may be assumed that roughly one-
half of the temperature difference used to calculate tem-
perature strain occurs seasonally, over a period of approxi-
mately three months, while the other half can occur in less
than a day. The ACI 318 provides guidelines for estimating
long-term creep behavior. Section 9.5.2.5 gives an equation
for estimating the additional long-term deflection result-
ing from creep and shrinkage of flexural members, which
depends on the duration of load and compression reinforce-
ment ratio. Using the ACI 318 equation, the corresponding
Kt is about 1.5, as currently recommended by PCI.
Connection stiffness
Deck connections Estimates of deck-connection
stiffness were taken from research conducted at Lehigh
University on development of a seismic design methodol-
ogy for precast concrete diaphragms.13 Table 8 shows a
summary of capacity and stiffness properties. As shown in
this table, most connection types exhibited ductile behav-
ior. The displacement at ultimate load generally exceeded
0.1 in. (2.5 mm). Displacements greater than this amount
were usually associated with the onset of cracking in the
connection region.
For the models, the opening stiffness of the deck connec-
tions was taken as the secant stiffness at 0.1 in. (2.5 mm)
deformation; that is, the tensile force at an opening of 0.1
in. divided by 0.1 in.. Although the closing stiffness of the
deck connections was not tested, it is obvious that these
would behave much more rigidly in compression. Ac-
cordingly, the closing stiffness was taken as 100 times the
opening stiffness.
In a Winter 2009 PCI Journal paper, Naito et al.14 recom-
mend a more complex nonlinear stiffness response for
seismic analyses—a response model that captures the high
initial stiffness and the decline in stiffness after peak load-
ing. The bilinear stiffness response described previously
was chosen for volume-change analyses because it simpli-
fies combining the deck-joint stiffness with the stiffness
of the bearings in the simplified two-dimensional models.
Of course, the more complex response models can be used
for more accurate results, but the response beyond 0.1 in.
(2.5 mm) at deck joints is irrelevant for volume-change
analyses.
Bearing pads The stiffness of the elastomeric bearings
was estimated based on the pad size, thickness, and type.
PCI Design Handbook Figure 6.11.1.2 plots resistance to

124 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal

 i

horizontal movement versus compressive stress for vari-
ous pad materials (on concrete or steel bearing surfaces),
assuming 70% shear and slippage strain. For example, the
PCI figure indicates a shear resistance of about 220 psi
(1500 kPa) of contact surface for a cotton duck pad bear-
ing on concrete under a dead-load stress of 1000 psi (7000
kPa). The pad stiffness (pounds per inch of lateral move-
ment) was calculated as the shear resistance (according to
PCI Design Handbook Figure 6.11.1.2) times the pad area
divided by 70% of the pad thickness.
Combined stiffness of the deck connectors
and bearing pads As noted previously, a single non-
linear link element was employed at each spandrel-beam-
to-column connection to simulate the performance of
double-tee and spandrel-beam connections. To do so, the
opening stiffnesses of individual connections were com-
bined according to the behavior of springs in parallel and
in series. That is, the stiffness of the combined spring was
taken as the stiffness of individual springs multiplied by the
number of springs in parallel and divided by the number of
springs in a series.
Flexural stiffness at column base The current
PCI Design Handbook procedures for estimating the stiff-
ness of column baseplate connections is based on work by
LaFraugh and Magura.15 LaFraugh and Magura found that
the initial stiffness of the baseplate connection depends on
the stiffness of the anchor bolts and the baseplate itself.
They tested a variety of column base details under increas-
ing load at constant eccentricity. The current PCI Design
Handbook procedure is based on LaFraugh and Magura’s
test results and recommendations.
The flexural stiffness of the column baseplate connections
was calculated as the secant stiffness after flexural yield-
ing of the baseplate. Similar to the deck connections, a
deformation (liftoff of the baseplate) of 0.1 in. (2.5 mm)
was assumed in calculating the secant stiffness. According
to LaFraugh during a conversation in October 2008, there
was no unusual distress at rotations of this magnitude.
Note that this procedure gives a lower stiffness than the
initial stiffness predicted by the PCI Design Handbook
method, but the lower stiffness is appropriate for calculat-
ing the volume-change forces.
The procedure explained in PCI Design Handbook section
3.6.1 was used to estimate the stiffness of the footing on
the soil. This combined flexural stiffness of the base-plate
connection and footing/soil interface was calculated as the
inverse of the combined flexibility of each element.
Analysis results
Table 9 compares the results of the rigid models with those
employing flexible connections. Note that small move-
ments at flexible connections substantially reduce volume-
change forces. For the models with flexible connections,
the shear force at the exterior columns is reduced 74% to
99% compared with the models with rigid connections.
Figure 11 compares the deformation of the Washington
structure with completely rigid (top model) and flexible
connections (lower model). Even though some of the con-
nections in the Washington structure are relatively stiff,
movement at intermediate joints drastically changes the
deformation pattern, as well as the volume-change forces.
The rigid joints in the top model impose equal overall
shortening of both levels and relatively sharp column
curvature. In the lower model, the column is more gently
curved because the overall shortening in the lower level is
less than that at the upper level.

Table 9. Volume-change-analysis summary

Movement at exterior Average movement at Forces in exterior

column, in. spandrel joints, in. Maximum column
Stiffness of spandrel/
Structure column base
column connection Upper Bending,
Lower level Upper level Lower level rotation, % Shear, kip
level ft-kip

Case 1: rigid 0.55 n.a. 0 n.a. 0.0 577 1612

Chicago, Ill.
Case 2: 133 kip/in. 0.16 n.a. 0.06 n.a. 0.06 6 17

Washington, Case 1: rigid 0.34 0.53 0 n.a. 0.16 505 2949

D.C. Case 2: 830 kip/in. 0.15 0.51 0.10 -0.0003 0.09 52 517

Case 1: rigid 0.64 0.67 0 0 0.0 60 391

Denver, Colo.
Case 2: 1520 kip/in. 0.50 0.64 0.02 -0.0001 0.36 16 92

Case 1: rigid 0.62 0.72 0 0 0.13 105 766

Atlanta, Ga.
Case 2: 3070 kip/in. 0.53 0.74 0.04 -0.0036 0.36 27 212

Note: n.a. = not applicable. 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 kip = 4.448 kN; 1 ft-kip = 1.356 kN-m.

PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 125

i
Figure 11. These two-dimensional models of the Washington, D.C., structure illustrate the influence on flexible connections on the deformation pattern. The intermediate
joints in the top model have no flexibility, whereas the bottom model has flexible intermediate joints, which dramatically reduce curvature of the exterior columns.
The flexible-connection model indicates that the intermedi-
ate joints at the upper level actually close slightly during
cooling cycles. The difference in column shear and bend-
ing forces is dramatic. In Table 9, note the substantial de-
crease in volume-change forces due to small movements at
intermediate joints. Rotations at column base connections
also help to reduce forces in the flexible models, especially
for the one-story Chicago structure.
As can be seen in Fig. 11, small movements at intermediate
connections allow for a gentle transition of volume-change
response from the ground to the upper level, whereas rigid
connections impose equal shortening at all levels.
Predictability of
volume-change forces
Consider the simple structure shown in Fig. 12. Creep,
shrinkage, and thermal shortening induce footing rotation,
shear, and bending forces in the supporting columns as
well as a horizontal force at the column-to-beam connec-
tion.
In U.S. practice, the volume-change and gravity-load
effects are added together as forces in a factored load
combination. According to ASCE/SEI 7, the load fac-
tor on volume-change effects is 1.2. However, even for
the simplest structures, such as the frame shown in Fig.
12, the magnitude of the volume-change forces depends
on numerous factors. All of these factors can vary, some
significantly.
Table 10 lists the primary factors influencing volume-
change forces and provides an estimate of their bias (the
specified mean divided by the true mean) and coefficient
of variation (COV). Where COV data were not available,
126 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal
the authors estimated the COV based on engineering ex-
perience. As recommended in the following example, the
specified mean and the values in the PCI Design Hand-
book should be adjusted for these factors. The flexibility
factor KJ is not considered in this example.
The bias and variation of the volume-change force were
calculated using Monte Carlo simulations and using the
statistical parameters shown in Table 10. The resulting
bias and COV are also shown in the table. The bias of 0.68
indicates that PCI Design Handbook procedures underes-
timate the potential volume-change force by 32% without
considering flexible connections.
This difference is primarily attributable to the bias in two
variables: the softening factor for creep loading Kl and a
temperature change that is less than would be expected for
the life of the structure. The overall bias would be even
worse except that the assumed coefficient of thermal ex-
pansion was chosen closer to an average value rather than
the PCI Design Handbook’s recommended value. Figure
13 shows the probability distribution of the calculated
force due to volume change using PCI Design Handbook
procedures for this example.
For this example, if rigid connections were employed and
current practices were followed (including a load factor
of 1.2 on volume-change effects), the probability that the
volume-change force will exceed the factored design load
is roughly 50%. In well-designed precast concrete build-
ings, the connections between precast concrete elements
yield before the volume-change movement can cause seri-
ous damage. Even where rigid connections are used, past
experience indicates that cracking generally alleviates the
volume-change force before global safety of the structure
is threatened.
 i

Figure 12. This figure illustrates the response of a simple single-span structure to volume-change shortening.

In U.S. practice, the load factors for dead, live, and wind Summary of findings
loads are based on the bias and COV. Assuming that the and recommendations
variability from this single example is typical, a much
higher load factor on volume-change forces is warranted. The following findings and recommendations are based on
Considering the bias in current PCI Design Handbook the research work described in this paper.
procedures, a load factor of 2.0 on volume-change effects
would result in a probability of exceeding the factored load Findings
comparable with that for other loads. If the current proce-
dures are adjusted to remove the bias, the comparable load • Thermal expansion coefficient. The coefficient of
factor could be reduced to 1.6. thermal expansion varies significantly with aggregate
type. For some concrete, especially that produced with
In the ASCE/SEI 7 load combinations, volume-change limestone aggregate, a thermal expansion coefficient
effects are included with dead load as part of the basic significantly less than the commonly accepted value
dead-plus-live-load combination. The inclusion of volume- of 6 microstrains/°F (10.8 microstrains/°C) can be re-
change effects in this basic load combination technically liably used, provided that the coefficient is determined
requires that temperature- and shrinkage-induced forces be
included for the design of every concrete building frame.
However, like wind load, maximum volume-change effects Table 10. Key variables influencing volume-change force
occur during an extreme weather event.
Variables Bias COV
In ASCE/SEI 7, extreme wind load is considered in com- Dimensions 1.00 0.07
bination with a point-in-time live load. A similar approach
for volume-change effects would be appropriate. At the Temperature difference* 0.72 0.15
time of writing, the ASCE/SEI committee on design loads
Ks 0.99 0.11
is reconsidering load combinations that include volume-
change effects. Coefficient of thermal expansion* 1.22 0.27

It should be reemphasized that the limited study described Creep and shrinkage strains/age at erection 1.00 0.25
previously was undertaken to get a general sense of the Column fixity 1.00 0.13
inherent variability of volume-change force. It was not
the purpose of this study to make broad recommendations Concrete MOE 1.10 0.14
on volume-change load factors. In any case, the factored Kl* 1.92 0.20
volume-change force should only be used for determining
the required strength of nonductile elements in the volume- Kt 1.00 0.20
change load path—strengthening ductile elements for
Volume-change force from Monte Carlo simulation 0.68 0.31
volume-change movement is unnecessary and counterpro-
ductive, though serviceability should be evaluated. *
A substantial difference exists between the specified mean according
to the current PCI Design Handbook and the true mean.

Note: COV = coefficient of variation; Kl = softening factor for creep and

shrinkage effects; Ks = coefficient that accounts for the lag between
weather-station temperature and structure temperature; Kt = softening
factor for temperature effects; MOE = modulus of elasticity.

PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 127

i
12,000
9000
6000
3000
0
0 10
Figure 13. This figure illustrates the wide probability distribution of volume-change force based on the Monte Carlo simulation of the controlling parameters. The mean
force value is 13.4 kip. Note: 1 kip = 4.448 kN.
by laboratory testing of specimens produced using the
project mixture proportions.
• Design temperature range. The temperature-range
values provided in the PCI Design Handbook are
based on outdoor temperatures that are much warmer
than the expected 50-year low. However, the ambient
temperatures in the lower levels of parking structures
lag the extreme cold temperatures measured by the
National Weather Service. Design temperature ranges
that account for these offsetting effects are recom-
mended.
• Creep and shrinkage effects. Measurable creep and
shrinkage strains were observed during the course of
the two- to three-year monitoring period. Although
the variability of the limited measurements precludes
quantitative evaluation, the observed long-term move-
ments were reasonably consistent with creep and
shrinkage predictions of the PCI Design Handbook.
Regardless, temperature change dominates volume-
change behavior of exposed precast concrete build-
ings. By comparison, creep and shrinkage effects are
much less significant.
• Member softening due to creep and microcracking.
The PCI Design Handbook recommends dividing the
calculated strains due to creep and shrinkage by a Kl
value from 4 to 6. A more realistic value for Kl is 2.5.
• Flexible connections. Deformations of flexible
double-tee and spandrel connections substantially
change the deformation pattern and thereby reduce
128 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal
20 30 40 50
Force, kip
volume-change movement and force at the lowest
supported level, where volume-change forces are most
significant. Rotation at flexible column-base con-
nections also helps reduce volume-change force. For
the structures analyzed in this study, the reduction in
shear force at exterior columns due to movement at
flexible connections ranged from 74% to 99%.
• Load factor for volume-change effects. Prediction
of volume-change force is inherently inaccurate due
to the underlying variability in volume-change strain
and structure response. Monte Carlo simulation of
the possible range of the volume-change force in a
sample structure suggests that the current ASCE/SEI
7 load factor of 1.2 is much too low to account for this
inherent variability. However, the factored load should
only be used for determining the required strength of
nonductile elements in the volume-change load path.
Strengthening ductile elements for volume-change
movement is unnecessary and counterproductive,
though serviceability should be evaluated. Furthermore,
building codes should evaluate inclusion of volume-
change effects in the dead-plus-live-load combination.
Design recommendations
• For typical structures, a qualitative approach to vol-
ume-change design is recommended in lieu of explicit
calculation of volume-change forces. Designers may
rely on successful past practices, employing compliant
members and flexible connections that accommodate
volume-change movement while providing the needed
resistance to gravity and lateral loads.

• Quantitative assessment of the volume-change force
is appropriate only in special cases, such as structures
that have dimensions or details beyond the limits of
successful past practices. PCI Design Handbook pro-
cedures may be used to estimate volume-change forces
with modifications to account for the findings as
described previously. However, the quantitative results
should be viewed with a high degree of circumspec-
tion, given the uncertainty and variability inherent in
prediction of a volume-change response.
• PCI Design Handbook procedures may also be used
to estimate volume-change movement for expansion-
joint design, with applicable modifications to account
for the listed findings. The expected movement at
intermediate joints should also be considered in their
design.
Acknowledgments
Funding for the research project was provided by the PCI
Research and Development Committee, with additional
contribution by Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates Inc. The
research effort was guided by an advisory committee com-
prising precast concrete experts Helm Wilden of Wilden
Enterprises Inc., Tom D’Arcy of The Consulting Engineers
Group; Anant Dabholkar of Neilsoft Inc., Harry Gleich
of Metromont Corp., Jim Sirko of Sirko Associates Inc.,
Doug Sutton of Purdue University, and A. Fattah Shaikh
of the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. The support of
PCI and Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates Inc. is gratefully
acknowledged. Likewise, the guidance provided by the
advisory committee was instrumental to the success and
relevance of this research.
Access to the structures was arranged through the follow-
ing contractors and precast concrete producers, respec-
tively:
• Chicago: Castle Construction Corp. and Dukane
Precast
• Denver: Saunders Construction Inc. and Stresscon
Corp.
• Washington: Donley’s Inc. and Tindall Corp.
• Atlanta: Holden Construction Co. and Metromont
Corp.
This research would not have been possible without their
cooperation.
i
References
1. American Concrete Institute (ACI) Committee 362.
2002. Guide for the Design of Durable Parking Struc-
tures (ACI 362-97). Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
2. ACI Committee 318. 2008. Building Code Require-
ments for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-08) and
Commentary (ACI 318R-08). Farmington Hills, MI:
ACI.
3. PCI Industry Handbook Committee. 2004. PCI Design
Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete. MNL-
120. 6th ed. Chicago, IL: PCI.
4. PCI Committee on Design Handbook. 1977. Volume
Changes in Precast Prestressed Concrete Structures.
PCI Journal, V. 22, No. 5 (September–October): pp.
38–53.
5. Philleo, R. E. 1971. Designing for Effects of Creep
and Shrinkage Temperature in Concrete Structures. In
Summary of Symposium on Designing for Effects of
Creep, Shrinkage, and Temperature. SP-27, V. 27, pp.
247–256. Detroit, MI: ACI
6. Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 2006. Minimum
Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures.
ASCE/SEI 7-05. Reston, VA: ASCE.
7. Iqbal, M. 2007. Thermal Movements in Parking Struc-
tures. ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 5 (Septem-
ber): pp. 542–548.
8. Klein, G. J., and R. E. Lindenberg. 2009. Volume
Change Movement and Forces in Precast Concrete
Buildings. Research report, PCI, Chicago, IL.
9. Roeder, Charles W. 2003. Proposed Design Method
for Thermal Bridge Movements. Journal of Bridge
Engineering, V. 8, No. 1 (January–February): pp.
12–19.
10. Brown, R. D. 1972. Thermal Movement of Concrete.
Journal of the Concrete Society, V. 6, No. 11
(November): pp. 51–53.
11. ACI Committee 209. 2008. Prediction of Creep,
Shrinkage, and Temperature Effects in Concrete
Structures. ACI 209R-92. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
12. Mattock, A. H. 1961. Precast-Prestressed Concrete
Bridges 5. Creep and Shrinkage Studies. Journal of
the PCA Research and Development Laboratories, V.
3, No. 2 (May): pp. 32–66.
PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 129
i

13. Naito, Clay, Wesley Peter, and Liling Cao. 2006. De-
velopment of a Seismic Design Methodology for Pre-
cast Diaphragms–Phase 1 Summary Report. Research
report, PCI and National Science Foundation.

14. Naito, C., L. Cao, and W. Peter. 2009. Precast Con-

crete Double-Tee Connections, Part 1: Tension Behav-
ior. PCI Journal, V. 54, No. 1 (January–February): pp.
49–66.

15. LaFraugh, R. W., and D. D. Magura. 1966. Connec-

tions in Pre-Cast Concrete Structures ‑ Column Base
Plates. PCI Journal, V. 11, No. 6 (November–Decem-
ber): pp. 18–39.

Notation

COV = coefficient of variation

K = factors that account for creep and microcracking of

precast concrete members when estimating equiva-
lent volume-change strains

KJ = joint flexibility factor, which indicates the relative

flexibility of the intermediate joints

Kl = softening factor for creep and shrinkage effects

Ks = coefficient that accounts for the lag between

weather-station temperature and structure tempera-
ture

Kt = softening factor for temperature effects

Tm = mean temperature during construction season

Ts = structure temperature

Tws = weather-station temperature

∆ = displacement

∆EJ = expansion-joint movement

∆IJ = movement at each intermediate joint

∆TS = total shortening of the structure

130 Fall 2 0 0 9 | PCI Journal


About the authors
Gary Klein, S.E., is a senior
principal with Wiss, Janney,
Elstner Associates Inc. in
Northbrook, Ill. He is a member
of American Concrete Institute
building code committee (ACI
318) and specializes in structural
investigations and research.
Richard Lindenberg, S.E., is a
senior associate with Wiss,
Janney, Elstner Associates Inc.
He specializes in structural
monitoring and the correlation to
analytical models.
Synopsis
This paper summarizes the findings of the authors’
recent study on the volume-change response of precast
concrete buildings. The objective of this research was
twofold: to develop a better understanding of volume-
change movement and forces based on measured
performance of precast concrete parking structures and
calibration to analytical models and to recommend re-
vised design procedures that reflect this understanding
and account for the influence of flexible connections.
The primary research tasks included field monitoring
and finite-element analyses of actual structures as well
as evaluation of the predictability of volume-change
forces.
The research revealed that deformations of flexible
deck and spandrel connections change the deforma-
tion pattern and thereby substantially reduce volume-
change movement and force at the lowest supported
i
level, where volume-change forces are most signifi-
cant. The study also developed new findings with
respect to other volume-change parameters, including
the thermal-expansion coefficient, the design tem-
perature range, the degree of member softening due
to creep and microcracking, and the load factor for
volume-change effects.
Design recommendations are provided for qualita-
tive consideration of volume-change effects as well
as quantitative analysis. Although the new research
indicates that the procedures recommended in the PCI
Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete
result in a conservative estimate of volume-change
force, certain aspects of the PCI Design Handbook
procedures were found to be unconservative. There-
fore, the research findings should be considered in
their entirety. The full research report is available
from PCI.
Keywords
Coefficient of thermal expansion, connector, creep,
double-tee, field testing, flange connector, load fac-
tor, parking structure, shrinkage-flexible connection,
temperature, volume change.
Review policy
This paper was reviewed in accordance with the
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute’s peer-review
process.
Reader comments
Please address any reader comments to PCI Journal
editor-in-chief Emily Lorenz at elorenz@pci.org or
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, c/o PCI Journal,
209 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 500, Chicago, IL 60606. J
PCI Journal | Fa l l 2009 131