DESIGN MODEL FOR BOND-LOSS

RESISTANCE OF PRETENSIONED
I-GIRDERS
Behnam Naji, Ph.D. Candidate

Brandon E. Ross, PE, Ph.D.

Amin Khademi, Ph.D.

 Agenda

• Bond-loss failure

• AASHTO LRFD and proposed end-region models

• Clemson University bond-loss failure database

• Refinement and evaluation of proposed model

 Bond-loss failure
Strand slip

(a) (b)

• Bond-loss initiates with the formation of inclined cracks near the girder end (a).

• Cracks interrupt anchorage of the strands, leading to loss of strand-concrete

bond and slipping of the strands relative to the concrete (b).

• Eventually concrete fails in shear, flexural-compression, or combination of both.

 AASHTO end-region model
• The longitudinal reinforcement on the
flexural tension side of the member Point 0
shall satisfy: C

𝑉𝑢 dv
𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 + 𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑠 ≥ − 0.5𝑉𝑠 − 𝑉𝑝 𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃
𝜙𝑣 Va
Vs

T
Vp
Vu
0.5dvcotӨ 0.5dvcotӨ

• “Any lack of full development length should be accounted for when using the
equation”. (LRFD 5.8.3.5)
• Bond-loss failure is implicitly addressed
Proposed end-region capacity model
Ldh
Point 0

β dh
Hh

Vh
d
Vs
Va dh cotѳ
Ldt

T
Ө Xs

VnBV

𝑇 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑉ℎ 𝑑ℎ 𝐻ℎ 𝑑ℎ
𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + +
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑 cot 𝜃 𝑑 𝑑 cot 𝜃
A) Proposed model B) AASHTO LRFD model

Ldh
Point 0 Point
0
C
β dh
Hh

Vh dv
Vs d Va
dh cotѳ Vs
Ldt
T
Vp
T
Ө Xs Vu
0.5dvcotӨ 0.5dvcotӨ

VnB

Key differences: 1)𝑙𝑑ℎ and 𝑙𝑑𝑡 2)𝑉𝑠 and 𝑋𝑠 3)𝐻ℎ and 𝑉ℎ 4)𝑑ℎ 5)𝛽 6)𝑉𝑛𝐵
 Distribution of the database
60 53 60 57
50 50
40 35 40 37

• Bond failure database

30 30 23
20 17 15 20
10 10 3
0 0
0.3-1 1-2 2-2.5 2.5-7 1-2 2-3 3-4 4 - 4.4
Prestress strand area Aps, in.2 Shear span-to-depth ratio a/d
• 22 different test programs
60 47 60
50 50
40 32 32 40 40 36
• Total of 327 specimens 30 30
35
20 20
10 6 10 9
3
0 0

• 120 resulted in some type 0.375 0.50 0.52

Strand diameter, in.
0.56 0.60 5-7 7-9 9-13
Compressive strength f'c , ksi
13-17.5

of bond-loss failure 80 72 60
50
(Naji et al. Submitted 2016) 60
40 41 41
40 27 30
26
17 20
20 12
4 10
0 0
10-15 15-20 20-30 30-40 15-25 25-40 40-55 55-80
Available dev. length Ldt, in. Flexural depth d, in.
Does the proposed model work?
unconservative

unconservative
5 5
4 4
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 1 2 3 4 5
Compressive strength f’c, ksi Shear span-to-depth ratio a/d
5
5
4
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb / Vexp
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
0
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
Available development length Ldt, in.
Flexural depth d, in.

5
5
4
Vnb / Vexp

4
Vnb/ Vexp

3
3
2
2
1
1
0
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10
Strand Diameter Prestress strand area Aps, in2
 Does the proposed model work?

Single regression analysis

Variables P-value Significant trend
a/d 4.39 x 10−25 Yes
𝑓’𝑐 4.31 x 10−9 Yes
𝐿𝑑𝑡 0.193 No
𝐴𝑠𝑝 0.004 No
Flexural depth, d 7.28 x 10−6 Yes
Strand diameter 0.311 No
Why does 𝑓’𝑐 affect bond-loss capacity?
𝑇 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑉ℎ 𝑑ℎ 𝐻ℎ 𝑑ℎ
𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + +
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑 cot 𝜃 𝑑 𝑑 cot 𝜃

Terms associated with harped strands

Transfer length approximately constant for f’c greater than 5ksi (Ramirez et
al. 2016). 𝑇 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 + 𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑒 (𝐿𝑑𝑡ൗ𝐿𝑡)

As 𝑓’𝑐 decreases, failure occurs at lower loads; therefore, shear

reinforcement takes less stress at ultimate load. 𝑓’𝑐 𝑓𝑠
𝑉𝑠 = 𝐴𝑣 𝑓𝑦 (AASHTO assumption)
 Least squared method(𝑓 ′ c)
𝑗 𝑗 2
 Minσ120
𝑗=1 𝑉𝑛𝐵 − 𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝

𝑇𝑗 𝑉𝑠 𝑗 𝑥𝑠 𝑗 α𝑓 ′ 𝑐 𝑗 𝑉ℎ 𝑗 𝑑ℎ 𝑗 𝐻ℎ 𝑗 𝑑ℎ 𝑗
 𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + + 𝑗
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃𝑗 𝑑 𝑗 𝑐𝑜𝑡 𝜃 𝑗 𝑑𝑗 𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑡 𝜃 𝑗

2
𝑇𝑗 𝑉𝑠 𝑗 𝑥𝑠 𝑗 α𝑓′ 𝑐 𝑗 𝑉ℎ 𝑗 𝑑ℎ 𝑗 𝐻ℎ 𝑗 𝑑ℎ 𝑗
 Minσ120
𝑗=1 + + + 𝑗 − 𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝 𝑗
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃𝑗 𝑑 𝑗 𝑐𝑜𝑡 𝜃 𝑗 𝑑𝑗 𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑡 𝜃 𝑗
 𝑉𝑛𝐵 /𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝 (considering 𝑓 ′ c)

unconservative
5.00 5.00

4.00 4.00
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp
3.00 3.00

2.00 2.00

1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 0 1 2 3 4 5
Compressive strength f’c, ksi Shear span-to-depth ratio a/d
5.00 5.00

4.00 4.00
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp
3.00 3.00

2.00 2.00

1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
Available development length Ldt, in. Flexural depth d, in.
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp

3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 2 4 6 8 10
Strand Diameter Prestress strand area Aps, in2
Does the proposed model (considering 𝑓’𝑐)
work?
Single regression analysis
Variables P-value Significant trend
a/d 8.4 x 10−20 Yes
f’c 0.026 No
𝐿𝑑𝑡 0.002 No
𝐴𝑠𝑝 0.221 No
Flexural depth, d 0.0002 No
Strand diameter 0.017 No
Why does 𝑎/𝑑 affect bond-loss capacity?
𝑇 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑉ℎ 𝑑ℎ 𝐻ℎ 𝑑ℎ
𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + +
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑 cot 𝜃 𝑑 𝑑 cot 𝜃

Terms associated with harped strands

𝑇 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦 + 𝐴𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑝𝑒 (𝐿𝑑𝑡ൗ𝐿𝑡)

𝑉𝑠 =𝐴𝑣 𝑓𝑦 (AASHTO assumption) a a/d 𝑓𝑠

Load spreads over a greater reinforcement area, shear reinforcement takes less stress
 𝑓′ c
Least squared method( )
𝑎/𝑑
𝑗 𝑗 2
 Minσ120
𝑗=1 𝑉𝑛𝐵 − 𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝

 𝑎Τ𝑑=𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃

𝑇𝑗 𝑉𝑠 𝑗 𝑥𝑠 𝑗 α𝑓 ′ 𝑐 𝑗 𝑉ℎ 𝑗 𝑑ℎ 𝑗 𝐻ℎ 𝑗 𝑑ℎ 𝑗
 𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + + 𝑗
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑗 𝑑 𝑗 𝑐𝑜𝑡 2 𝜃𝑗 𝑑𝑗 𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑡 𝜃 𝑗

𝑗 𝑗 𝑗 𝑗 𝑗 2
𝑇𝑗 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑗 α𝑓′ 𝑐 𝑗 𝑉ℎ 𝑑ℎ 𝐻ℎ 𝑑ℎ
 Minσ120
𝑗=1 𝑗 + + + − 𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝 𝑗
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑 𝑗 𝑐𝑜𝑡 2 𝜃𝑗 𝑑𝑗 𝑑 𝑗 𝑐𝑜𝑡 𝜃 𝑗
 𝑓′ c
𝑉𝑛𝐵 /𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝 (considering )
5.00 5.00
𝑎/𝑑
4.00 4.00

Vnb/ Vexp
Vnb/ Vexp

3.00 3.00

2.00 2.00

1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 0 1 2 3 4 5
Compressive strength f’c, ksi Shear span-to-depth ratio a/d
5.00
5.00
4.00
4.00

Vnb/ Vexp
Vnb/ Vexp

3.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00
Flexural depth d, in.
Available development length Ldt, in.
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp

3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 2 4 6 8 10
Strand Diameter, in. Prestress strand area Aps, in2
 𝑓′ c
Does the proposed model (considering )
𝑎/𝑑
work?
Single regression analysis
Variables P-value Significant trend
a/d 0.175 No
f’c 0.204 No
𝐿𝑑𝑡 0.284 No
𝐴𝑠𝑝 0.765 No
Flexural depth, d 0.132 No
Strand diameter 0.634 No
• What about shear reinforcement ratio?

4.50
𝐴𝑣
• ρ𝑠𝑣 =
4.00

𝑏𝑤 𝑎 3.50

3.00
Vnb/ Vexp

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
Shear reinforcement ratio, ρsv
 5.00
Summary 5.00

4.00 4.00
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp
3.00 3.00

2.00 2.00

1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00
0 5 10 15 20 0 1 2 3 4 5
Compressive strength f’c, ksi Shear span-to-depth ratio a/d
5.00
5.00
4.00
4.00

Vnb/ Vexp
Vnb/ Vexp

3.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00
Flexural depth d, in.
Available development length Ldt, in.
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
Vnb/ Vexp

Vnb/ Vexp

3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 2 4 6 8 10
Strand Diameter, in. Prestress strand area Aps, in2
 Summary
• Nominal bond-loss capacity

𝑇 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑉ℎ 𝑑ℎ 𝐻ℎ 𝑑ℎ
𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + +
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑 cot 𝜃 𝑑 𝑑 cot 𝜃

• Modified nominal bond-loss capacity

𝑇 0.16 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑓 ′ 𝑐 𝑉ℎ 𝑑ℎ 𝐻ℎ 𝑑ℎ
𝑉𝑛𝐵 = + + +
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑cot 2 𝜃 𝑑 𝑑 cot 𝜃

• In absence of harped strands:

𝑇 0.16 𝑉𝑠 𝑥𝑠 𝑓 ′ 𝑐
𝑉𝑛𝐵 = +
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 𝑑cot 2 𝜃

• Average 𝑉𝑛𝐵 /𝑉𝑒𝑥𝑝 = 0.98 , CoV = 0.2

Questions?