Tailor Made Concrete Structures – Walraven & Stoelhorst (eds)

© 2008 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-47535-8

Research on volume change movement and forces in precast concrete

buildings

G. Klein & R. Lindenberg

Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, USA

ABSTRACT: Volume change effects are the combined result of creep, shrinkage and temperature strains.
Although a frequent cause of distress, volume change is often ignored in the design of precast concrete build-
ings. Design for volume change effects is complicated by the unknown influence of flexible connections and the
extreme variability of concrete strain and the resulting forces. The objectives of this research are to 1) develop
a better understanding of volume change effects based on measured performance of precast structures, and
2) recommend revised design procedures that reflect this understanding and account for the influence of flexible
connections. The research program includes field monitoring of movements and strains of four newly con-
structed parking structures, development of computer models that accurately predict volume change behavior,
and reevaluation of design procedures.

1 INTRODUCTION volume change forces in basic load combinations, vol-

ume change forces are rarely calculated. When they
1.1 Background are, hand calculations and two dimensional frame anal-
yses are used. More sophisticated methods, such as
Volume change effects are the combined result of
three dimensional finite element models, are used only
creep, shrinkage and temperature strains. Volume
in exceptional circumstances – for example, to analyze
change is a leading cause of distress in precast concrete
a volume change failure.
buildings, especially exposed structures. Experience
However, new developments in precast connection
with exposed structures indicates that damage from
details have changed the volume change response of
volume change effects is second only to chloride-
precast buildings. In particular, pre-topped double tees
induced deterioration, as a major cause of problems
(or wall panels) with semi-flexible flange-to-flange
and failures. Generally, these failures occur because
connections respond differently than a monolithic
volume change effects are ignored or misunderstood.
structure, which is assumed by the current procedures.
Expansion joints are provided in precast buildings
None of the available procedures for estimating vol-
to limit volume change effects. However, expansion
ume change effects account for the behavior of precast
joints are the “Achilles’ heal,” of precast structures.
structures with flexible connections.
They add significantly to the construction costs and
frequently fail, resulting in unintended moisture entry
1.2 Research objective
and related deterioration.
Design for volume change effects is complicated by The objective of this research is twofold: 1) develop
the extreme variability of concrete strain and the result- a better understanding of volume change movement
ing forces. Furthermore, there is very little actual data and forces based on measured performance of precast
on volume change effects in precast buildings.A recent structures and calibration to analytical models, and
study (Iqbal, 2007) found extreme scatter of observed 2) recommend revised design procedures that reflect
thermal movements in precast parking structures. this understanding and account for the influence of
Procedures for determining volume change move- flexible connections.
ment and forces in precast buildings have been avail-
able in the PCI Design Handbook (Precast/Prestressed
2 FIELD INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAM
Concrete Institute, 2004) for over 25 years. How-
ever, in practice, designers rely on rules of thumb
2.1 Selection and description of structures
and successful past practices. Although the standard
load combinations in ASCE 7 (American Society More than any other precast structure, parking struc-
of Civil Engineers, 2006) require consideration of tures present the greatest challenge with respect to

121
Table 1. Instrumented structures.
Metropolitan area Dimensions Exp. Field
(Climate) (Meters) Levels joints overlay
Chicago 108 × 37 1 Yes No
(Northern)
Denver 103 × 72 2 Yes No
(Desert/Mountain)
Washington, DC 116 × 57 4 Yes No
(Mid Atlantic)
Atlanta 104 × 56 5 No Yes
(Southern)
volume change movement and forces. Parking struc-
tures are frequently very large in plan and unheated,
resulting in significant thermal movements. Further-
more, parking structures are the single most important
building type in the precast concrete industry. For these
reasons, the field instrumentation 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 rep-
resenting a wide range of structural and climactic
conditions. Basic data on each of the structures are
summarized in Table 1. All structures employ pre-
cast/prestressed double tee floor members supported
by precast spandrel beams and columns. The Denver
and Washington structures employ intermittent shear
walls at the structure perimeter where measurements
were made; elsewhere, conventional columns (roughly
0.7 m square) are used. The dimensions of the struc-
tures and number of supported levels are provided in
Table 1. (The longitudinal dimension is parallel to
the double tee floor members; the transverse dimen-
sion is perpendicular to the floor members.) Three of
the four structures include a longitudinal expansion
joint.
The Atlanta structure is field-topped; that is, a cast-
in-place wearing surface is placed in the field on the
double tees. The other three structures use pre-topped
double tees. The flanges of pre-topped double tees
are thickened to withstand traffic without a cast-in-
placed topping. The flanges are connected in both
systems, but the joints in the pre-topped system allow
significantly more volume change movement.
2.2 Continuous monitoring
A battery-powered data acquisition system was used
to continuously collect the following temperature and
movement data over a two- or three-year period:
– Expansion joint/structure movement
– Air temperature at structure
– Temperature of structural elements
– Local weather data
122
Data were generally collected at the expansion joint
at the lowest supported level and top level (except
Atlanta). Because the Atlanta structure did not include
an expansion joint, a laser measurement system was
employed to measure changes in out-to-out width.
Measurements were generally successful, although
there are several gaps in the data due to power outages
and vandalism. Local weather data were downloaded
from the Internet in electronic form and integrated with
continuous monitoring data.
2.3 Periodic monitoring
At approximately six-month intervals (summer and
winter) volume change data were collected in study
areas at the top and first supported levels, as follows:
– Movement at spandrel beam joints
– Movement at double tee joints
– Column tilt measurements
– Strain measurements of spandrel beams and double
tees
Movement data were collected using a digital
caliper that measured the distance between machined
measurement points affixed to the structure. Measure-
ment repeatability using this system is ±0.05 mm.
A Tuftilt Model 801 uniaxial tiltmeter mounted on
a custom-design bracket was used for column tilt
measurements. The tiltmeter has a repeatability of
0.001◦ (0.017% slope) over a range of ±3◦ ; how-
ever, under field conditions, the actual repeatability
was approximately 0.005◦ .
Strain measurements were made using a 250 mm
Whittemore strain gauge, which has a repeatability
of 0.002 present strain. An invar bar was used to
“zero” the instrument at field temperatures such that
strains due to temperature change (as well as creep and
shrinkage) were recorded.
2.4 Temperature measurements
Thermal contraction strains during cold weather are
of primary interest because they add to creep and
shrinkage strain. Winter temperature measurements
indicated significant differences between the struc-
ture temperature, ambient garage temperature, and
local weather station temperature. Figure 1 is a plot
of January 2004 temperatures at the Chicago parking
structure, which is typical of cold-whether tempera-
tures 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 (NWS Temp) near
the site. This difference was observed in the lower
level of all structures. Apparently, the structure warms
the air – probably due to heat from the ground. On the
other hand, there is not much difference between the
 Table 2. Temperature ratios.

Structure temperature coefficient, K s

Lower level Upper level

Structure Mean σ∗ Mean σ∗

Chicago 0.78 0.10 NA NA

Washington 0.73 0.07 0.88 0.07
Denver 0.71 0.08 0.87 0.10
Average 0.74 0.08 0.87 0.09
∗
σ = standard deviation.

Table 3. Observed coefficient of thermal expansion.

Figure 1. January 2004 temperatures at the Chicago
structure.
temperature of the concrete deck and the ambient
garage temperature, indicating that the relatively thin
elements have little thermal inertia.
In US practice, thermal contraction strains are cal-
culated based on the difference between the mean
temperature during the construction season and the
temperature exceeded 99% of the time during win-
ter months. 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%. As described
above, the temperature difference is primarily due
to the less extreme microclimate inside the struc-
ture. To evaluate the apparent temperature lag, low-
temperature events at each structure were analyzed
for the difference between deck temperature and
local weather station temperature, both relative to
the mean temperature during the construction season.
Specifically the coefficient to account for structure
temperature, K s , is given by:
where T s = structure temperature, T ws = weather sta-
tion temperature, and T m = the mean temperature
during the construction season. The 10 coldest events
in the winter season were evaluated. The results are
summarized in Table 2.
These results indicate that PCI Design Handbook
recommendations reasonably approximate the thermal
lag effect at the lower level, but overestimate the lag at
the upper level. However, 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 −32◦ C, 13◦ C colder than the design temperature of
−19◦ C, which is the temperature exceeded 99% of the
time during winter months and the basis of US design
practice.
Thermal exp. coefficient
(microstrain/◦ C)
Standard
Structure Average deviation
Chicago (Double Tees) 7.8 0.27
Chicago (Spandrel Beams) 6.0 0.35
Washington (Double Tees) 6.5 0.34
Average 6.8 0.32
2.5 Temperature strain
As described above, strain measurements at double
tees and spandrel beams were taken during each peri-
odic visit. The measured strains were adjusted for
expected creep and shrinkage strain between monitor-
ing periods. Using the adjusted strain and values and
the measured deck and spandrel beam temperatures,
the coefficient of thermal expansion was calculated.
Table 3 summarizes the results.
The values are typical of precast concrete with
limestone aggregate, but lower than the thermal expan-
sion coefficient of 10.8 microstrain/◦ C recommended
by the PCI Design Handbook for precast concrete.
The thermal expansion coefficient varies significantly
with aggregate type. Predictability of volume change
movements and forces is discussed in 3.3.
2.6 Creep and shrinkage strain
Measurement of creep and shrinkage strain in an
exposed structure is especially difficult; strain due
to temperature changes dominates the more subtle
changes in strain due to creep and shrinkage. To par-
tially overcome this problem, the structure movement
data were analyzed within narrow temperature bands.
An example of this analysis can be seen in Figure 2,
which is a plot of expansion joint movement at upper
level of the Washington structure over the two-year
monitoring period. Data taken when the temperature
was between 10 and 13◦ C is highlighted. The resulting

123
Figure 2. Upper level expansion joint movement at the Figure 3. Joint movement at the Washington, DC structure.
Washington, DC structure vs. time.
Table 5A. Reduction coefficient for movement at deck
Table 4. Creep and shrinkage strain: PCI vs. Observed. joints.

Creep and shrinkage Reduction coefficient, K J

strain (microstrain)
PCI Structure Lower level Upper level
Structure PCI procedure Observed observed
Chicago 0.34 NA
Chicago 132 69 1.91 Washington 0.52 1.00
Washington 161 90 1.79 Denver 0.88 0.87
Denver 284 152 1.86 Atlanta NA 0.92
Atlanta 205 163 1.26

upward slope of the movement-versus-time plot is due Table 5B. Reduction coefficient for movement at spandrel
to creep and shrinkage. beam joints.
The PCI Design Handbook provides procedures for
determining creep and shrinkage strain as a function Reduction coefficient, K J
of age at erection, relative humidity, concrete strength,
volume-to-surface ratio, and level of prestress. Table 4 Structure Lower level Upper level
compares the observed creep and shrinkage strain to
Chicago 0.36 NA
that determined using PCI procedures.
Washington 0.28 0.91
As can be seen in Table 4, the strains predicted Denver 0.37 0.90
using PCI procedures are almost twice those observed. Atlanta NA 0.86
The difference is partly attributable to movement at
intermediate joints (as discussed in 2.7) and the inher-
ent inaccuracies of field measurement of creep and
shrinkage of an exposed structure. On the other hand, very little movement at interme-
diate joints was observed at the upper levels, appar-
2.7 Joint movements ently due to the relative flexibility of the columns.
Movement at individual double tee joints reduces
It is useful to compare the observed movements at dou- the demand for movement at expansion joints as well as
ble tee joints and the expansion joint. Figure 3 plots the forces in the structure due to volume change shorten-
movement at the double tee joints and the expansion ing. This reduction in demand can be calculated using
joint in the lower level of the Washington, DC struc- the following expression:
ture. As can be seen, the expansion joint moves much
more than any individual double tee joint; however,
the total of the individual movements at the double
tee joints are nearly the same as that observed at the
expansion joint. This movement pattern was typical at where K J = reduction coefficient for movement at
the lower level of the structures with pre-topped double intermediate joints, EJ = the expansion joint move-
tees. ment, and 
J = the sum of the movements at the

124
intermediate joints. Table 5A summarizes the reduc-
tion coefficient K J for the double tee deck joints.
A similar reduction coefficient can be calculated
based on observed movements and the spandrel beam
joints. Table 5B summarizes the reduction coefficient
K J for the spandrel joints.
Figure 4. Structure response to volume change shortening.

3 ANALYSIS OF VOLUME CHANGE FORCES Table 6. Key variables influencing volume change force.

3.1 Finite element models Variable Bias COV

A finite element model (FEM) of the structure was
Dimensions 1.00 0.07
assembled and analyzed using SAP2000, a proprietary
Temperature difference 1.39 0.15
software program for general analysis of structures. Temperature lag, K s 0.99 0.08
Deck and spandrel beam members were assembled Coefficient of thermal expansion 0.82 0.27
from individual plate elements. Columns were mod- Creep and shrinkage strains/age 1.00 0.25
eled using beam elements. Connections were modeled at erection
with link elements. Column fixity 1.00 0.13
To account for creep and microcracking for the Concrete MOE 1.10 0.14
gradually applied volume change strains, the PCI PCI reduction factors for creep 1.00 0.20
Design Handbook recommends equivalent volume and cracking of supporting
members
change strains for purposes of calculating volume
change forces. Specifically, PCI recommends reduc-
ing temperature strains by a factor of 1.5, and strains
due to creep and shrinkage by a factor of about 5.
Rather than reducing strain, the stiffness of column
elements was reduced to account for the softening
effect of the gradually applied loads. In this way, both
the resulting movements and forces are consistent with
PCI Design Handbook recommendations.

3.2 Influence of flexible connections

In the initial analysis, the connections were mod-
eled using rigid elements. Later, the stiffnesses of
the connection elements were adjusted to match the
observed movements at expansion joints and interme-
diate joints between double tees and spandrel beams. In
this way, the influence of flexible connections on vol-
ume change forces could be evaluated. This approach
led to a reduction in both column shear forces and
in-plane tension forces of similar magnitude. For the
Chicago structure, the total movement at intermediate
joints was 2.5 times the movement at the expansion
joint; thus, the calculated K J is 0.40. This reduction
coefficient is comparable to the reduction coefficients
determined based on the observed movements at inter-
mediate double tee and spandrel joints at the Chicago
structure (see Table 5A and 5B).
3.3 Predictability of volume change forces
Consider the simple structure shown in Figure 4.
Creep, shrinkage and thermal shortening induce foot-
ing rotation, shear and bending forces in the sup-
porting columns, as well as a horizontal force at the
column-to-beam connection.
Figure 5. Probability distribution of volume change force.
In US practice, the volume change and gravity load
effects are added together as forces in a factored load
combination. According to ASCE 7, the load factor
on volume change effects is 1.2. However, even for
the simplest structures, such as the frame shown in
Figure 4, the magnitude of the volume change forces
depends on numerous factors. All of these factors can
very, some very significantly. Table 6 lists the primary
factors influencing volume change force and provides
an estimate of their bias (the specified mean divided
by the true mean) and coefficient of variation (COV).
The bias and variation of the volume change force
were calculated by Monte Carlo simulations, using the
statistical parameters shown in Table 6. Figure 5 shows
of the probability distribution of the calculated force
due to volume change. The resulting bias and COV are
1.06 and 0.35, respectively.
In US practice, the load factors for dead, live and
wind loads are equal to the bias plus at least twice
the COV. Applying this approach to volume change

125
forces would require a load factor of 1.8; however, the
specified load factor in ASCE 7 is only 1.2.
Thus, there is an unusually high probability that
the volume change force will exceed the factored
design load and even the member resistance. Nonethe-
less, volume change forces are generally ignored in
design of precast buildings. When they are consid-
ered, lower-bound estimates of load are generally used.
Most designers of precast buildings take a more quali-
tative approach. They rely on successful past practices,
employing details that accommodate volume change
movement while providing the needed restraint.
Failures occur when non-ductile elements are used
in the volume change load path, and forces are not
limited by the yielding of ductile elements. However,
catastrophic failures due to volume change are not
likely because volume change is fundamentally differ-
ent than other loads. Volume change is a self-straining
force, not a following load; the force is relieved when
the member yields or fails. To the authors’ knowledge,
volume change has not been the primary cause of any
major building failures in the US.
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Conclusions
– PCI Design Handbook recommendations reason-
ably approximate the thermal lag effect at the lower
level, but overestimate the lag at the upper level.
– Observed creep and shrinkage strains are con-
sistent with PCI Design Handbook procedures.
However, temperature change dominates volume
change behavior of exposed precast buildings; by
comparison, creep and shrinkage effects are much
less significant.
– Deformations of flexible double tee and spandrel
connections substantially reduce volume change
movement and force at the lowest supported level.
The effect of flexible connections is much less sig-
nificant at the upper levels of multilevel structures.
– Prediction of volume change force is inherently
inaccurate due to the underlying variability in
volume change strain and structure response. Suc-
cessful designs for volume change effects therefore
rely on a sound qualitative approach, where compli-
ant structural members and ductile connections are
used to accommodate volume change movement
while providing the needed resistance to gravity and
lateral loads.
4.2 Design recommendations
– PCI Design Handbook procedures can be used to
estimate movement at expansion joints, except that
126
the thermal lag effect embedded in the suggested
temperature strain values should be neglected.
Actual movements may be significantly lower at the
lowest supported level of structures with pre-topped
double tees.
– For typical structures, a qualitative approach to
volume change design is recommended in lieu
of explicit calculation of volume change forces.
Designers may rely on successful past prac-
tices, employing details that accommodate volume
change movement. When volume change forces are
calculated, a reduction coefficient to account for the
influence of flexible connections may be used.
– Volume change forces should be calculated when
non-ductile elements are used in the volume change
load path. A volume change load factor of at least
1.8 should be used for design of non-ductile ele-
ments unless volume change forces are limited by
the yield strength of ductile elements in the load
path. In such cases, designs should be based on
upper bound estimates of the yield strength of these
ductile elements.
– Volume change forces in ductile elements are lim-
ited by their yield strength; serviceability should be
evaluated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding for the research project was provided by
the PCI Research and Development Committee. The
research effort was guided by a steering committee
comprised of precast producers and designers. The
support of PCI and the volunteer steering committee
is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute Committee 318, 2004. Building
Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI318-
05) and Commentary (ACI318R-05). Farmington Hills:
American Concrete Institute.
American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006. Minimum
Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston:
American Society of Civil Engineers.
Iqbal, M., 2007. Thermal Movements in Parking Structures.
ACI Structural Journal Vol. 104, No. 5: 542–548.
Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, 2004. PCI Design
Handbook, Sixth Edition. Chicago: Precast/Prestressed
Concrete Institute.