DESIGN AND PRODUCTION OF

PRESTRESSED L-SHAPED
BLEACHER SEAT UNITS
John 6. Kelly, P.E.
Chief Engineer
Con,lrdion Product, carp.
Lafayem, lndiana
Kenneth J. Pike, P.E

STEEL
BENT

I
S E C T I O N A-A

Fig. 1. Plan

of typical quadrant of amphitheater.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Compressirm: 0.6 (4500) = 2700 psi

Tension (&ring rotation):
7.5~/4500 = 503 psi
Tensim (after rotation):
3$SCl = 301 psi
Comprernion: 0.45 (6000) = 2700 psi
6\/6Ooii= 465 psi
Tension:
In derigrhg the sections for Rexure,
stresses were checked in the inverted
and upright position considering a 25
percent dead load impact factor and

.9-10"

I-----Fig. 3. Typical cross section of bleacher units.

PC1 loumal/Septembe~-October

1973

75

position of the form relative to the

stressing header blocks. Sea Fig. 4 for
the locus of strands A through Y.
4. Calculate the range of prestress
required at the critical points (Points a,
b, and c) for each condition of applied
loads. The sum of prestress and applied
stress should not exceed the allowable
stresses. Fro, Item 3, above, select the
strand combination which will meet all
prestress range requirements.
5. By finding the principle axis, check
the ultimate moment criteria.
The calculations for Steps 1, 2, and
4 above RR summarized in Table 1.
See Table 2 for a summsry of the calculations described in Item 3 above.
It was assumed for purposes of
simplifying the analysis that the bleacher unit is able to freely de&t under
service loads and is only supported at
the bent lines. This should be somewhat conservative sicB in Section A
of Fig. I the unit below the one being
nnalvzod will be somewhat stiffer and
76

should provide some resistance to the

deilectio of the analyzed unit uador
service loads. In Section B of Fig. 1,
when all the its are the same length
it is improbable that all the units will
be srrhjected to maximum loads st thr
same time. Therefore, some resistance
to the free deflection of the unit beins
analyzed will probably he providc<l.
In the Iongel- blencher wits. harlling
points for stripping the products from
the form had to be moved in fro1 the
end of the member to npprorimet+
0.2L to Nmtrol stresses ill all pnsitinns.
Analysis of shear reinforcement was
wmservative in that the worst case was
considered for design of all w~~~lxxs.
A 38 A long Type I it was selected
and loaded with 100 lb per sq ft live
load. The member was desigvd x if
only the vertical leg of the section was
carrying the shear load. As CR he see
in the sanlple problem, only minimom
shear reinforcement was required.
Analysis of torsional reinforcement

DESIGN EXAMPLE

.V, -.I
L!#l,8

= 0.258

(I,;)/,. Tz 10818.775 in.*

([,,)z,I, zz 2189.403 imh

(1)

The stresses are then checked at

Points a, h, and c (see Fig. 4) due to
dead load in the manufactured condition, and dead load plus all live loads
in the final, or erected position. These
stresses are summarized in Table 1.
T h e e f f e c t ~of the prestrcssing strands

78

PC1 journal/September-Odoher 1973

WBS cdculated for cnch of the possihlc

strand locntions (see Table 2). More
discussion of the stress calculations is
given under Design Considerations.
For production convenience, hna
p.ltterns were selected that would he
ruitahle f o r a w i d e r a n g e o f span
lengths. When the span lengths were
.
increa5cd to a point that a new pat.
tern bad to be devised, every effort
mm made to arrive at one that would
match up with an existing pattern,
with the unneeded strands being hlanketed. F o r s p a n s over 3 0 f t , i t w a s
necessary that bond he broken to prevent overstress in the cad regions.
Strength
The ultimate moment capacity was
checked. For this particular example it
wns fotrxid that the section had an ulti-

79

v, = 1.4 (2.75 x loo)+

= 16,198 lb

I.7 (2.75 x loo)?!

2

It was decided to use deformed wire

fabric foi shear reinforcement. The bars
are spaced on 3-in. centers.
If WC assumed that the vertical leg
oaly takes the shear:

16,198
* = 0.85(5%)(15.45)
=224pd
Using the PCZ Design Handbook,
this end shear is less than 250 psi.
Therefore, only P minimum A,; is rcqoircd for shear reinforcement.
From~pnge 5-51 of the PC1 Dcsipr
Non&ok:

B,,D = 5.5 (15.45)

= 84.98 sq in.
8 (0.153) (270)
-4. fm _80
f
= 5.51
U s e A , = 0 . 0 5 sq i n . e v e r y 3 in,

Use D S/0 deformed wirC fabric 8s

shown in Fig. 7.
Torsion
Torsion was intiestigated for the
longest span (38 ft) used on the project.
The torsion-prodwing
l o a d was applied as shown in Fig. 8. Since the
front edge of the walking surface is
always supported by the adjacent unit,
it was assumed that loads impowl in
this region would be delivcrcd to the
~opporlhg unit nod so would not induce torsion The calcolatioos WC as
follorvs:
Ab =283 (17 - 14.OG)t 10 (5.28-4)
= 844.8in.Jb per It
T,; = 1.7 (G) (844.8)
= 27,288 ivll,
Smmation ul I$

80

IIorizontal leg 4 x 34 = 544 in.:

Vertical leg 5.P X 19.3 = 584 ia
1128 in.
By Sectioo 11-16 of AC1 X8-71:
3(27,288)

1, = 0.85(1128)
= 85~psi

By Section 11.7.1 of AC1 318-71:

1.5-z I16 psi
This stress is greater tbao 85 psi.
Therefore, effects of torsioo may be
neglected.
The above nnalysis was done BSSU,,.
ing t h e sectim WRS oonprestressed.
Thus, the application of prestressing
would make the torsion noalysis evco
Inore coseavatic.

FABRICATION
As was mentioned earlier, the design
bad to account for stresses resultiug
from the maoufacturing techniques that
were devised to provide the &&xl
appearance. As bridge beam and doe:
blc tee producers we were rarely connrned with turning over a orestressed
concrete products tb.lt had to be ro~oofactored npside down, or with locating
lifting devices so ~3 to minimize the
necessity of job site patching.
The first problem, strippiug withoot
using loops or inserts, was solved easily.
A two-pad ~ncoum lifter (see Fig. 9)
removed the products efficiently md

economically.
Next cxme B touglm pmblm, i.e.,
bow to trn precast and prestressed
beams (that vary fro,,, B to 38 ft in
length) through 180 deg md be confident of not damaging~ them. zany
ideas iiwolving vacwm lifters. motors,
helt~, pdky~, sand beds, nod complicnted machines were aaVRnCed, but all
were discarded as being expensive,
slow 1 uncontrollable. The method developed consisted of using two two-part
wheels that are clamped on the prod81

pig. 1.2. nil being lifted with second

Eifter prior to being stored.
82

at what will be the bottom of the

product. Note the header arrangement
for making a skewed end. The lifting
l o o p s were concenled b y a caulked
joint when erected.
Fig. 14 shows the placing operation.
Concrete was delivered by ready-mix
trucks and compacted with internal vibrators. The uniformed snrface was
given a troweled finish and then steam
curing was spplied.
The farm was 220 ft long and pro-

CONCLUSION
At the time of the design of this
project the authors were unaware of
any literature that dealt with the design of L-shaped bleacher units. Also,
they did not have access to a computer but relied on the accuracy of a

desk calculator. Thus, it is possible

that other more sophisticated methods
of analysis might be available today.,
Howevel-, i t s h o u l d h e me,,tioned
that since the amphitheater was constructed, the bleacher units have shown
no cracking or any other distress. Also,
the camber and deflection were as predicted in the calculations.

Discussion of this p&pm is inoited

Plrwsc forward your discuwion~ to PC1 Hcndqunrters
Iny February I, 1974, to permit publication in the
\lorch-.4pril 1374 PGI JOURNAL.

SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION
More complete details of the Numerical Example
are available from PC1 Headquarters at cost of
reproductinu and handling at time OF request.