Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
PRESTRESSED L-SHAPED
BLEACHER SEAT UNITS
John B. Kelly, P.E.
Chief Engineer
Construction Products Corp.
Lafayette, Indiana
The purpose of this paper is to discuss Spans ranged from 6 to 38 ft, with
the design, manufacture, shipment, and spans less than 11 ft being precast.
erection of precast and prestressed con- Dead loads varied from 35 to 100 lb
crete L-shaped bleacher units for a per sq ft and included the dead load
college amphitheater. Fig. 1 shGws the of the unit itself and all superimposed
general plan of one quadrant of the dead loads such as seats and hung ceil-
amphitheater and Fig. 2 shows a typi- ings.
cal secticn through several bleacher Before the design of the section was
units. begun much thought was given to the
There were two basic shapes of sec- various possible methods of producing,
tions (see Fig. 3). The physical dimen- handling, and erecting these segments.
sions and service loads were estab- Because all of these bleacher units were
lished by the architect. The service required to have a very smooth and
loads were: consistent walking surface and many
Vertical = 100 lb per sq ft of them would be exposed to view on
Transverse = 10 lb per linear ft the bottom, it was decided to cast these
Longitudinal = 24 lb per linear ft un'ts in the inverted position. The units
74
Fig. 2. Detail showing units bearing on seat angles at steel bents.
initial prestress. Stresses were also dead load in the manufactured and
checked for in-place service loads with erected positions.
effective prestress. Three critical points 2. Compute the bending moments
(Points a, b, and c) were selected for and the resulting stresses at Points a,
the stress analysis (see Fig. 4). b, and c due to live loads (in-service
position).
Design steps 3. Determine the stresses at Points
The detailed analysis was done using a, b, and c due to prestress forces at
the following steps: each of the 25 possible strand locations
1. Calculate the bending moments and designated A through Y. The location
stresses at Points a, h, and c due to of the strand is determined by the
3 3/4"
Fig. 3. Typical cross section of bleacher units.
IT Spa. At 2"
Fig. 4. Cross section of bleacher unit showing strand location and points where
stresses are determined.
position of the form relative to the should provide some resistance to the
stressing header blocks. See Fig. 4 for deflection of the analyzed unit under
the locus of strands A through Y. service loads. In Section B of Fig. 1,
4. Calculate the range of prestress when all the units are the same length
required at the critical points (Points a, it is improbable that all the units will
b, and c) for each condition of applied be subjected to maximum loads at the
loads. The sum of prestress and applied same time. Therefore, some resistance
stress should not exceed the allowable to the free deflection of the unit being
stresses. From Item 3, above, select the analyzed will probably be provided
strand combination which will meet all In the longer bleacher units, handling
prestress range requirements. points for stripping the products from
5. By finding the principle axis, check the form had to be moved in from the
the ultimate moment criteria. end of the member to approximately
The calculations for Steps 1, 2, and 0.2L to control stresses in all positions.
4 above are summarized in Table 1. Analysis of shear reinforcement was
See Table 2 for a summary of the cal- conservative in that the worst case was
culations described in Item 3 above. considered for design of all members.
It was assumed for purposes of A 38 ft long Type I unit was selected
simplifying the analysis that the bleach- and loaded with 100 lb per sq ft live
er unit is able to freely deflect under load. The member was designed as if
service loads and is only supported at only the vertical leg of the section was
the bent lines. This should be some- carrying the shear load. As can be seen
what conservative since in Section A in the sample problem, only minimum
of Fig. 1 the unit below the one being shear reinforcement was required.
analyzed will be somewhat stiffer and Analysis of torsional reinforcement
76
Q
W
ro
^o
Table 1. Summary of stresses (psi) in 25-ft span Type I bleacher unit.
I
0.85 fc' = 5100 p.s.i.
a/2 C
Id
T
STRESS
78
Table 2. Summary of stresses (psi) at Points a, b, and c (see Fig. 4) for various
strand locations (A. through Y) in 25-ft span Type I bleacher unit..
Strand a b c
location tbi Ifni it It f* fEn1 tilt tbt* tfni tf{t
A +158 +142 +126 —302 —272 —242 +717 +645 +574
B +134 +121 +107 —249 —224 —199 +656 +590 +525
C +108 + 97 + 86 —196 —176 —157
D + 84 + 76 + 67 + 5 95 +536 +476
—143 —129 —114 + 534 +481 +427
E + 58 + 52 + 46 — 90 — 81 — 72
F + 34 + 31 + 27 + 47 3 +426 +378
— 38 — 34 — 30 +412 +371 +330
+ 15 + 14 + 12 +351 +316 +281
H — 16 — 14 -F 13 + 68 + 61 + 54 +289 +260 +231
1 — 42 — 38 — 34 +121 +109 + 97 +227 +204 +182
J — 66 — 59 — 53 +174 +157 +139 +166 +149 +133
K — 92 - 83 — 74 +227 +204 +182 +105 + 95 + 84
L —116 —104 — 93 +279 +251 +223 + 44 + 40 + 35
M —142 —128 —114 +332 +299 +266 — 17 — 15 — 14
N —166 —149 —133 +335 +347 +308 — 78 — 70 — 62
O —192 —173 —154 +433 +394 +350 —139 —125 —111
P —216 —194 —173 +491 +442 +393 —200 —180 —160
Q —241 —217 —193 +543 +489 +434 —261 —235 —209
R —266 —239 —213 +596 +536 +477 —322 —290 —258
S —114 —103 — 91 +485 +437 +388 —258 —232 —206
T + 37 + 33 + 30 +373 +336 +298 —194 —175 —155
U +189 +170 +151 +262 +236 +210 —130 —117 —104
V. +341 +307 +273 +149 +134 +119 — 66 — 59 — 53
W +493 +444 +394 + 38 + 34 + 30 —ҟ 1 —ҟ 1 —ҟ 1
X +644 +580 +515 — 74 — 67 — 59 + 62 + 56 + 50
Y {-797 +717 +638 —185 —167 —148 +127 +114 +102
* Stress calculated using Eq. (1) before losses.
j- Stress after initial losses (about 10 percent).
t Stress after final losses (about 21 percent).
nominal
■-- 5 1/2 in
CG
5.28 In
4in r
80
2
Vu = 1.4 (2.75 x 100) + Horizontal leg 42 X 34 = 544 in.3
1.7 (2.75 x 100) Vertical leg 5.52 X 19.3 = 584 in.3
= 16,198 lb 1128 in ,3
By Section 11 -16 of ACI 318-71:
It was decided . to use deformed wire _ 3(27,288)
fabric for shear reinforcement. The bars V t" 0.85(1128)
are spaced on 3-in. centers. = 85 psi
If we assumed that the vertical leg By Section 11.7.1 of ACI 318-71:
only takes the shear:
1.5/6000 = 116 psi
_ 16,198 This stress is greater than 85 psi,
Vu — 0.85 (5%) (15.45) Therefore, effects of torsion may be
= 224 psi neglected.
Using the PCI Design Handbook, The above analysis was done assum-
this 'end shear is less than 250 psi. ing the section was nonprestressed.
Therefore; only a minimum A„ is re- Thus, the application of prestressing
quired for shear reinforcement. would make . the torsion analysis even
From page 5-51 of the PCI Design more conservative.
Handbook:
BD = 5.5 (15.45)
FABRICATION
= 84.98 sq in.
Ap , f3,,, — 8 (0.153) (270) As was mentioned earlier, the design
f^ҟ60 had to account for stresses resulting
= 5.51 from the manufacturing techniques that
Use A„ = 0.05 sq in. every 3 in: were devised to provide the specified
Use D 5/6 deformed wire fabric as appearance. As bridge beam and dou=
ble tee producers we were rarely con-
shown in Fig. 7.
cerned with turning over a prestressed
concrete product that had to be manu-
Torsion factured upside down, or with locating
Torsion was investigated for the lifting devices so as to minimize the
longest span (38 ft) used on the project. necessity of job site patching.
The torsion-producing load was ap- The first problem, stripping without
plied as shown in. Fig. 8. Since the using loops or inserts, was solved easily.
front edge of the walking surface is A two-pad vacuum lifter (see Fig. 9)
always supported by the adjacent unit, removed the products efficiently and
it was assumed that loads imposed in economically.
this region would be delivered to the Next came a tougher problem, i.e.,
supporting unit and so would not in- how to turn precast and prestressed
duce torsion. The calculations are as beams (that vary from 6 to 38 ft in
follows: length) through 180 deg 'and be con-
.fident of not damaging them. Many
M = 283 (17 — 14.06) + 10 (5.28-4)
ideas involving vacuum lifters, motors,
= 844.8 in.-lb per ft belts, pulleys, sand beds, and compli-
M
cated machines were advanced, but all
T,, = 1.7 (844.8) were discarded as being expensive,
= 27,288 in.-lb slow or uncontrollable. The method de-
veloped consisted of using two two-part
Summation of x2y: wheels that are clamped on the prod-
82
duced am average of nine pieces per
day. The stripping operation took 11/a
hours and the entire daily process took
from 8 to 10 hours. The project had a
total of 17,200 lineal ft of product
(740 pieces) and was completed in 80
production days. There were over 250
different mark numbers required for the
job, so repetition was not common.
Careful attention to dimensional and
tolerance requirements resulted in a
nearly flawless job. Only two pieces Fig. 13. Reinforcement details prior to
had to be remade and both resulted, concreting.
from shipping or handling damage. A
few inserts had to be corrected in the
field, but this only took one man-day
for the whole job. Credit for this per-
formance belongs to the detailers, the
bed leadman, and the quality control
technicians.
SHIPPING
Fig. 15 shows products being loaded Fig. 14. Concreting operation.
for truck delivery. Timber bearings
were made to allow the products to
nest together without touching. In Fig.
16 we see a complete load tied down
and ready for shipment. Note the lift-
ing loops in the ends of the products.
Delivery was made at a rate of four
truck loads per day carrying a maxi-
mum weight of 42,000 lb of product.
Loading time was 30 to 45 minutes
per load. Drivers commented that the
method of stacking made a very stable Fig. 15. Units being loaded for truck
load. delivery.
ERECTION
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
More complete details of the Numerical Example
are available from PCI Headquarters at cost of
reproduction and handling at time of request.
84