This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

### Publishers

Editors' Picks Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

EUROCODE 2 WORKED EXAMPLES

**Copyright: European Concrete Platform ASBL, May 2008.
**

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the European Concrete Platform ASBL. Published by the European Concrete Platform ASBL Editor: Jean-Pierre Jacobs 8 rue Volta 1050 Brussels, Belgium Layout & Printing by the European Concrete Platform All information in this document is deemed to be accurate by the European Concrete Platform ASBL at the time of going into press. It is given in good faith. Information on European Concrete Platform documents does not create any liability for its Members. While the goal is to keep this information timely and accurate, the European Concrete Platform ASBL cannot guarantee either. If errors are brought to its attention, they will be corrected. The opinions reflected in this document are those of the authors and the European Concrete Platform ASBL cannot be held liable for any view expressed therein. All advice or information from the European Concrete Platform ASBL is intended for those who will evaluate the significance and limitations of its contents and take responsibility for its use and application. No liability (including for negligence) for any loss resulting from such advice or information is accepted. Readers should note that all European Concrete Platform publications are subject to revision from time to time and therefore ensure that they are in possession of the latest version. This publication is based on the publication: "Guida all'uso dell'eurocodice 2" prepared by AICAP; the Italian Association for Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete, on behalf of the the Italian Cement Organziation AITEC, and on background documents prepared by the Eurocode 2 Project Teams Members, during the preparation of the EN version of Eurocode 2 (prof A.W. Beeby, prof H. Corres Peiretti, prof J. Walraven, prof B. Westerberg, prof R.V. Whitman). Authorization has been received or is pending from organisations or individuals for their specific contributions.

Worked examples further illustrate the application of the code and should promote understanding. And yet the presentation and terminology. which offers tools for the design of economic and innovative concrete structures. They are born out of an ambitious programme initiated by the European Union. EFCA and ERMCO this publication should prove immensely valuable to designers in discovering the background to many of the code requirements. With a wealth of code writing experience in Europe. Like many current national codes in Europe. BIBM. might obscure the similarities to many national codes. tends to be general in character and this might present difficulty to some designers at least initially. Comparisons with the ENV stage of EC2 are also provided in a number of cases. The problems of coming to terms with a new set of codes by busy practising engineers cannot be underestimated. Eurocode 2 (EC 2) for concrete structures draws heavily on the CEB Model Code. Commissioned by CEMBUREAU. The commentary will prove an authentic companion to EC 2 and deserves every success. conditioned by the agreed format for Eurocodes. This publication will assist in building confidence in the new code. This is the backdrop to the publication of ‘Commentary and Worked Examples to EC 2’ by Professor Mancini and his colleagues. it was possible to approach the task in a rational and logical manner. Also EC 2 in common with other Eurocodes. They embody the collective experience and knowledge of whole of Europe. The chapter on EN 1990 (Basis of structural design) is an added bonus and will be appreciated by practioners. The publication brings together many of the documents produced by the Project Team during the development of the code. Eurocodes reflect the results of research in material technology and structural behaviour in the last fifty years and they incorporate all modern trends in structural design. Professor R S Narayanan Chairman CEN/TC 250/SC2 (2002 – 2005) . The document is rich in theoretical explanations and draws on much recent research.Attributable Foreword to the Commentary and Worked Examples to EC2 Eurocodes are one of the most advanced suite of structural codes in the world.

Bo Westerberg. International consensus had to be reached. Hugo Corres and Konrad Zilch. but not on the cost of significant concessions with regard to quality. especially Robin Whittle. A code should be open-minded. I would like to thank my colleagues of the Project Team. that the code is not prepared for those who make it. Codes should be based on clear and scientifically well founded theories. As an alternative more detailed design rules may be offered. another important condition applies. serve as an essential and valuable contribution to this implementation. Also my colleague Giuseppe Mancini and his Italian team are gratefully acknowledged for providing a set of very illustrative and practical working examples. BIBM. support and advice to bring out this publication. Joost Walraven Convenor of Project Team for EC2 (1998 -2002) . That means that the writers should be aware. cannot lead to very accurate results. New developments should be recognized as much as possible. 2. EFCA and ERMCO for their initiative. that it should not be considered as finalized if implementation has not been taken care of. A code should be simple enough to be handled by practicing engineers without considerable problems. On the other hand simplicity should not lead to significant lack of accuracy. excluding others. but for those who will use it. consistent and coherent. derived by scientists. but not at the cost of too complex theoretical formulations. Codes should be transparent. like EC-2. or an existing code is updated. It is a rule for every project. but resulting in more accurate and economic results. for helping in getting together all background information. It contains extensive background information on the recommendations and rules found in EC2. as such increasing the transparency. a number of principles should be regarded: 1. practical rules can be given. Models with different degrees of complexity may be offered. A code may have different levels of sophistication. corresponding to a good representation of the structural behaviour and of the material physics. 3. 4. Finally I would like to thank CEMBURAU. Here the word “accuracy” should be well understood. Often socalled “accurate” formulations. which means that it cannot be based on one certain theory. because the input values can not be estimated with accuracy. 6. For writing a Eurocode. A lot of effort was invested to achieve all those goals. further to courses and trainings on a national and international level.Foreword to Commentary to Eurocode 2 and Worked Examples When a new code is made. This book may. It is important that this background information is well documented and practically available. leading to conservative and robust designs. 5. consuming more calculation time. For instance simple.

.... WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN ..................................5]................ CONCRETE RETAINING WALL: GLOBAL STABILITY AND GROUND RESISTANCE VERIFICATIONS [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.....................1....1] .......... WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY .......................... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2......................................................4] . ULS COMBINATION OF ACTION OF A RESIDENTIAL CONCRETE FRAMED BUILDING [EC2 – CLAUSE 2...........................4] .....1 (CONCRETE C30/37) [EC2 CLAUSE 6...................2] ............................................4] .......................................................................... WITH STEEL S500C fyd = 435 MPA.............................C FOR A PRESTRESSED BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6.....2............................................4]. 6-10 EXAMPLE 6................................7 SHEAR – TORSION INTERACTION DIAGRAMS [EC2 CLAUSE 6.......... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2................................................4] .................... 6-12 EXAMPLE 6.2] ............... 6-7 EXAMPLE 6......3 CALCULATION OF VRD........................4] ... WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES ......................................................................... 4-3 EXAMPLE 4................................................4.....................................................................4B – THE SAME ABOVE......... [EC2 CLAUSE 6..........................EC2 – worked examples summary EUROCODE 2 .........2] ..................... WALL BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6..............3 [EC2 CLAUSE 4............6 [EC2 CLAUSE 6...........5........ ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CONTINUOUS BEAM [EC2 – CLAUSE 2....................................................................... 6-5 EXAMPLE 6..................................... 2-6 EXAMPLE 2..........3................... 6-9 EXAMPLE 6........................... 6-3 EXAMPLE 6................................ 6-1 EXAMPLE 6............................................................................................... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS ON A REINFORCED CONCRETE RETAINING WALL [EC2 – CLAUSE 2....................5 [EC2 CLAUSE 6.8..............................................................WORKED EXAMPLES ..........................................................2] ........ 6-1 EXAMPLE 6.................................. 4-4 SECTION 6.................3] .............................. 4-1 EXAMPLE 4..........1 [EC2 CLAUSE 4...... 6-4 EXAMPLE 6..............................4 DETERMINATION OF SHEAR RESISTANCE GIVEN THE SECTION GEOMETRY AND MECHANICS [EC2 CLAUSE 6................4] ......................SUMMARY SECTION 2............................................... 2-9 SECTION 4.................................................................................................................................3]..... 4-1 EXAMPLE 4............................................ 2-2 EXAMPLE 2..............2 [EC2 CLAUSE 4........................................................................................ 2-4 EXAMPLE 2.........................................................................................................4] ............1] ................................................................2 (CONCRETE C90/105) [EC2 CLAUSE 6.. 6-15 Table of Content . ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CANOPY [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.....

............................................2] .......3.......3 – 7........1 – 11............5 – 11..12 PILE CAP [EC2 CLAUSE 6..........6 VERIFICATION OF LIMIT STATE OF DEFORMATION ............... 7-13 EXAMPLE 7...2] ..........3.......... 7-11 EXAMPLE 7..........................2 DESIGN OF MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT [EC2 CLAUSE 7....... 6-28 EXAMPLE 6...........5] ......................................................... [EC2 CLAUSE 5................ 7-1 EXAMPLE 7.............3..................................................................1 – 11.................................. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES ...........15 SLABS...... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7.......2 – 7....................................4..............3 EVALUATION OF CRACK AMPLITUDE [EC2 CLAUSE 7.....10 – 6.......... 6-21 EXAMPLE 6.............6] ..............................................4] ........................ 6-38 EXAMPLE 6.......4] ........2 APPROXIMATED METHOD ..................................... 11-3 Table of Content ............................ 6-32 EXAMPLE 6...................... 6-40 SECTION 7.10 THICK CANTILEVER BEAM.................................... A>Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6.... THICK SHORT CORBEL........................1 – 6...........1 [EC2 CLAUSE 11..11 GERBER BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6...........1 EVALUATION OF SERVICE STRESSES [EC2 CLAUSE 7............... 3500 KN CONCENTRATED LOAD [EC2 CLAUSE 6..............6 – 11......................................... 7-10 5B7..............3............4] ......................................................................................... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11.... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11.......................................................................... LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES........................... DESIGN FORMULAS DERIVATION FOR THE CRACKING LIMIT STATE [EC2 CLAUSE 7................4 – 11..5] .3.......................EC2 – worked examples summary EXAMPLE 6..2 – 7....................................5] ............................9............2 [EC2 CLAUSE 11......................................................................4] ...... a<Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6.........................3..................................... 6-18 EXAMPLE 6......... 7-5 EXAMPLE 7.............14....5 APPLICATION OF THE APPROXIMATED METHOD [EC2 CLAUSE 7....................................................................... 6-24 EXAMPLE 6..4............13 VARIABLE HEIGHT BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6. 7-18 SECTION 11....................5] ............5].......2] . 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.............5] ........................................3............................

EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors of Set A should be used in the verification of holding down devices for the uplift of bearings at end span. Table of Content .4] A continuous beam on four bearings is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Service imposed load Qk1 Note. 2. 2. as indicated in Fig. is the same for all spans: γG = 1. Fig.1. because of their small variability. Load combination for verification of holding down devices at the end bearings. ULS combinations of actions for a continuous beam [EC2 – clause 2. 2. a single characteristic value is taken for self-weight and permanent imposed load.35 (Fig. 2.1. respectively Gk1 and Gk2.2. the partial safety factor for permanent loads in the verification of bending moment in the middle of the central span.EC2 – worked examples 2-1 SECTION 2. In this example and in the following ones.2).1. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN EXAMPLE 2. STR – Bending moment verification at mid span (Set B) Unlike in the verification of static equilibrium. Fig. Load combination for verification of bending moment in the BC span.

and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force. Fig.3. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case.3.35) for all spans. ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2. STR – Verification of resistance of a column(Set B) The partial factor to be taken for permanent loads in the verification of maximum compression stresses and of bending with axial force in the column is the same (γG = 1.2. 2. as in Fig.EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2. Table of Content . 2.4] The canopy is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Snow imposed load Qk1 EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors to be taken for the verification of overturning are those of Set A. Load combination for verification of static equilibrium.

2. Load combination for the compression stresses verification of the column.EC2 – worked examples 2-3 Fig. Table of Content . 2. Load combination for the verification of bending with axial force of the column.5. Fig.4.

b) Wind predominant.5·( Qk.) wind Fk.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.w + 0.s.6.05·Qk.Variable actions are listed in table 2.w Predominant action: service load (fig. Variable actions on a residential concrete building. c) Snow load predominant.05·Qk. c) 1. b) 1.0·Gk + 1.n + 0.l. 6.w + 0.w N.9·Fk. ULS combination of action .B. 2.5·Fk.35·Gk + 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig.es + 0.6·Fk.es + 0.6 Fk.7·Qk.5 Qk.1. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk.n (for sites under 1000 m a.es 0. unfavourable vertical loads.35·Gk + 1.5· Fk. Table of Content .3.w unfavourable vertical loads (fig.6.5·Qk.es + 0.n + 0.w 0.es) = 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2.n + 1. d) service load predominant.5·Qk.es + 0. 2.w Fig.5·( Fk. a) 1. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.7·Qk.1. but they may be defined in the National Annex. Table 2. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure .35·Gk + 1. 2.35·Gk + 1.75· Qk.6.6.n 0.7 Qk.6.35·Gk + 1.5·(Qk.w) = 1.9·Fk.w) = 1.35·Gk + 1.n + 0.STR (Set B) (eq.n + 1.es Predominant action: snow (fig.5·Qk. favourable vertical loads.75·Qk.n + 0.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk.6·Fk.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk. 2. 2. d) 1.5·Qk.

2.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq.es + 0.3·Qk.7·Qk.0·Gk + 1.6·Fk. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant.65·Qk.w Fig.es Predominant action: snow (fig.3·Qk.n + 1.78·Fk.w = 1.3·0.7. the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex.3· Fk.7·Qk.es + 1.3·Qk.w = 1.w Predominant action: service load (fig.3·0.n + 0. d) service load predominant.n + 0.3· Fk.es + 1. or on the structure.0·Gk + 1.0·Gk + 1. d) 1.w + 0.7. Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification).n + 1.es = 1.7.65· Qk.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig.es + 0.w + 1.91·Qk.3· Fk.n + 1.3·0.3·0. 2.0·Gk + 1. c) Snow load predominant.16.91·Qk. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig. are applied in separate calculations.0·Gk + 1.78·Fk. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below. 6. b) 1. 2.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches. unfavourable vertical loads. a) 1.3·Qk. Table of Content .7. favourable vertical loads. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2.3·0.6·Fk.5·Qk.n + 0.15 and 2.7.0·Gk + 1. 2.3·0. 2. c) 1.5·Qk. b) Wind predominant.0·Gk + 1. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation.

75·Qk.5· Fk.5·Qk.1·Sk. 2.5·Sk. can be referred to Set B. 2.n + 0.5·Qk. 1.n + 1.75·Qk. 2.(static equilibrium of rigid body: verification of global stability to heave and sliding) (Set A) Only that part of the embankment beyond the foundation footing is considered for the verification of global stability to heave and sliding (Fig.e.w + 0. ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2. Set B) are used.9·Fk.es + 0.sovr Fig. as geotechnical actions are not present.0·Gk + 1.35·Gk + 1.w 1. EXAMPLE 2.4.05·Qk. i.wall + Gk.es 1.es + 0.35·Gk + 1.terr + 0.4] Fig.9).9·(Gk.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1.n + 1.9·Fk. to approach 2.9.5·Qk. This case.05·Qk.w 1.e. Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU .w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i. Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content .35·Gk + 1.terr) + 1.8. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.

5·Qk. For brevity.35·Sk. i. 2.terr + 1. are given below. The following figures show loads in relation to the combinations obtained with Set B partial safety factors.wall + 1.5·Sk.sovr 1.wall + 1.terr + 1.sovr 1. Possible load cases of surcharge on the embankment.35·Sk.10.wall + 1.35·Gk.5·Sk.sovr Note: For all the above-listed combinations.35·Gk.wall + 1.35·Gk.0·Gk.sovr + 1.sovr 1.35·Sk.terr + 1. 2.e.terr + 1. two possibilities must be considered: either that the surcharge concerns only the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing (Fig.0·Sk. Fig. only cases in relation with case b).0·Gk.3·Sk.sovr Set B 1. with surcharge acting on the whole surface of embankment.terr + 1.10b).5·Sk. 2.0·Gk.wall + 1.sovr + 1.terr + 1.sovr + 1.terr + 1.10a).0·Gk.terr + 1.5·Qk.EC2 – worked examples 2-7 STR/GEO .terr + 1.5·Sk.5·Qk.sovr + 1.35·Sk.0·Gk.35·Gk. Table of Content .0·Gk. Set C 1.5·Qk. or that it acts on the whole surface of the embankment (Fig.(ground pressure and verification of resistance of wall and footing) Approach 1 Design values from Set C and from Set B are applied in separate calculations to the geotechnical actions and to all other actions from the structure or on the structure.terr + 1.

Actions for GEO/STR ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete.11. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 2-8 Fig. 2.

35·Gk.3·Qk.ground = 26.terr + 1.9 kN/m Table of Content .0·Sk.75 + 31.sovr 1.sovr + 1.35·Gk.3·Sk.terr + 1.30 ⋅ 2.terr + 1.terr + 1. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.50 ⋅ 25 = 31.sovr 1.0·Sk.0·Gk. 2. EXAMPLE 2.terr + 1.25 kN/m Gk.3·Qk.50 ⋅ 25 = 18.wall + 1.0·Gk.EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used.wall + 1.0·Sk.sovr + 1.Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).50 ⋅ 1.0·Gk. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.35·Gk.surch = 9.wall = 0.foot = 0. weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz. 1.wall = Pk.12.3·Sk.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.70 = 76.3·Sk.terr + 1. active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk.wall + Pk.5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.wall + 1.wall + 1.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.5.foot = 18.ground = 18 ⋅ 2.0·Gk.sovr + 1.sovr A numeric example is given below.3·Qk.sovr + 1.3·Qk.0·Sk.terr + 1.50 ⋅ 2.3·Sk. Fig.33 δ=0° Pk.75 kN/m Pk.terr + 1.sovr 1.35·Gk.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.

73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.sovr Table of Content .57⋅18.40 + 22.57⋅31.5 ⋅ 9.sovr + 1.75) = 9. is used.9⋅(0.ground = 0.ground = 0.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.9⋅(18.35·Sk.wall = 0. Set B if partial factors.terr + 1.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.85 = 44.e.5·Sk.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.50) = 22.9⋅(0.1 ⋅ 26.35·Sk.1): MS.foot = 0.sovr + 1.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.5) = 39.9): Fstab.5·Qk.0·Gk.03 kNm/m Fstab.5·Sk.5·Qk.sovr + 1.62 + 16.25) = 35.90 = 14.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.wall = 0.0 and 1.90 ⋅ 1.68 = 3.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.5): Ssur = 1.wall + 1.89 / 44.sovr second combination 1.0·Gk.24 = 64.35·Sk.73/51.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29.97 + 35.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.35·Gk. i.ground = 1.sovr third combination 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.73= 29. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.25⋅1.28 = 51.9⋅(76.65) = 113.16 kNm/m Mstab.65) = 10.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively.03 + 39.terr + 1.35·Gk.57⋅76.1): Sground = 1.35·Gk.terr + 1.0·Gk.wall + 1.terr + 1.surch = 1.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.9): Fstab.wall + 1.5⋅1.60 = 159.16 + 113.00/3) = 29.1⋅(26.9⋅(0.terr + 1.9): Mstab.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0. By taking 1.40 + 14.9⋅(31.5): MS.5·Sk.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.73⋅3.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9.25) = 16.25 = 1.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.75⋅0.foot = 0.5·Qk.5 ⋅ (9.terr + 1.

0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1.terr + 1.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.75) = 18.terr + 1.0 ⋅ (18.75 + 31.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered.35. as follows: moment vs.5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39. 2. (Fig.5 = 126.sovr + 1.0 ⋅ (76.13.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1.5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18.5·Sk.088 MPa The results given at Table 2. the values given at Table 2.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1.0⋅(76. Table of Content .0 ⋅ (31.73⋅3.28 + 11.08 + 22.terr = 1.502 = 88.05 kN/m2 = 0.50) = 22.sovr = 1.1.90⋅1.wall + 1.50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2.25 – 30. i.6 = 39. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.0⋅(18.25) =31.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors.5⋅0.00/3)=36.25 + 76.0): Pwall = 1.5·Qk.25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .50/6 = 41. 2.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1.0): Pground = 1.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2.5 = 0.08 kNm/m MS.35·Sk.5⋅(9. Fig.35⋅(26.75 ⋅ 0.0·Gk.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS. For the verification of the contact pressure. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.35·Gk.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1.e.6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36.0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1.5) = 76. combinations.13). The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1.40) = .60) = 11.01 / 126.30.

ground (kNm/m) MS.75 (γG=1.60 -41.5) (γQ=1.25 (γG=1.75 25.19 (γG=1.0) 31.20 -10.5) (γQ=1.60 -41.2.5) (γQ=1.5) 169.04 25.19 99.35) 76.35) -30.0) (γG=1.89 fourth 36.5) (γQ=1.78 0.0) -30. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.31 (γG=1.20 (γQ=1.35) 25.75 (γG=1.35) 42.0) -41.50 (γQ=1.35) 42. Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.5) 11.19 99.0) 144 0.5) 15.50 (γG=1.10 88.0) 126.35) 39.19 (γG=1.01 18.60 (γG=1.35) (γG=1.19 88.28 22.46 22.35) 28.31 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.18 88.31 (γG=1.08 36.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) Mtot (kNm/m) Pwall (kN/m) Pfoot (kN/m) Pground (kN/m) Ptot (kN/m) eccentricity (m) pressure on ground (kN/m2) (surcharge outside the foundation footing).08 36. The max pressure on ground is achieved once again for the second combination and its value is here higher than the one calculated in the previous scheme.35) 42.28 (γQ=1.35) (γQ=1.0) -10.0) 42.0) 25.48 fourth 36.83 Table 2.08 (γQ=1.25 15.67 18.28 (γG=1.19 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.19 (γG=1.0) 103.25 (γG=1.0 0.20 -10.35) 170.5) 11.3.0) (γG=1.35) 22.18 and here highlighted in bold.25 15.0) (γG=1.35) 103.08 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.50 0.35) (γG=1. first second 36.35) 103.35) 25.28 (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.35) 42.35) 22.25 (γG=1. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.0) 103.08 (γQ=1.0) 76.5) 15.50 0.0) 31.50 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.95 25.75 (γG=1.24 Msurch (kNm/m) Mtot (kNm/m) Pwall (kN/m) Pfoot (kN/m) Pterr (kN/m) Psurch (kN/m) Ptot (kN/m) eccentricity (m) pressure on ground (kN/m2) The two additional lines.5) 196.0) (γG=1.19 11.35) 22.5) 152.11 99. 5) 178.08 36.0) 31.05 32.35) 76.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.78 0.25 (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.30 18.19 (γG=1.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).5) 11.50 (γG=1. 5) (γQ=1.26 third 36.20 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.ground (kNm/m) MS. 5) 28.31 -41.25 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.50 (γQ=1.28 (γG=1.35) -30.60 (γG=1.31 88.10 18.50 (γQ=1.81 18.30 98.0) 31.0) 76.28 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.5) 32.31 (γG=1.35) 153.19 (γG=1.35) -10.35) -30.24 25.28 (γQ=1.0) 25.28 0. not present in Table 1. first second third 36.75 (γG=1.35) 22.28 0. Table of Content .31 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.28 22.35) 22.28 (γQ=1.28 22.

Bottom longitudinal bars are 5 φ 20.Δcdur. First.add.γ .EC2 – worked examples 4-1 SECTION 4. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY EXAMPLE 4.1.EC2: cmin. With: cmin.b. From relation (3. The structural class is S4.1N . Fig.EC2 we see that. cmin. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. 4.Δcdur. the resistance class adopted (C25/30) is suitable as it is higher than the reference strength class.4] Design the concrete cover of a reinforced concrete beam with exposure class XC1.dur + Δcdur.dur = 15 mm Moreover: Δcdur. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. Refer to figure 4.) concrete strength class for exposure class XC1 is C20/25. the concrete cover for the stirrups is calculated.st . in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. Δcdur.1 From table E.2): cmin = max (cmin. 10 mm) = 15 mm Table of Content .st = 0 . The concrete in use has resistance class C25/30.add = 0 . Normal quality control is put in place. The max aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).b = 8 mm We obtain from table 4. 10 mm) = max (8.4N . the reference (min. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm.1 [EC2 clause 4. Δcdur.γ = 0 .

10 mm) = 20 mm .2): c min = max (20. We obtain from table 4.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 15 + 10 = 25 mm . We obtain from relation (3. Moreover: Δc dur.EC2: c min. Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm.4N . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 25 + 8 = 33 mm .dur = 15 mm . γ = 0 . Table of Content . In this case. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”.add = 0 . We obtain from relation (3. From relation (3.b = 20 mm.st = 0 . Δcdur.1): c nom = 20 + 10 = 30 mm . Δcdur. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. If we now calculate now the concrete cover for longitudinal reinforcement bars. we have: c min.EC2 – Worked examples 4-2 Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm.

A normal quality control is put in place. The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20. the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37. for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm .1.4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast.2 [EC2 clause 4. even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm . The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. the reference (min. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm . From table E. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. Table of Content . The exposure class is XS1. Fig. The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min.2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.dur = 35 mm . In this case. 4. we design the minimum concrete cover with reference to both the stirrups and the longitudinal bars.EC2 we find that. We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30. Refer to figure 3.) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37.2. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm .1N .

We obtain from table 4. 10 mm) = 25 mm .add = 0 .1N .3N: − the structural class is reduced by 1 as the concrete used (C45/55) is of strength class higher than C40/50. γ = 0 .st = 0 . c min. 10 mm ) = = max (8.add . The original structural class is S4. An accurate quality control of concrete production is put in place. − the structural class is reduced by 1 as special quality control of the concrete production is ensured We then refer to structural class S2.b = 8 mm . 25 + 0 – 0 – 0. At the lower side of the two ribbings of the TT element we have: − longitudinal φ 12 reinforcement bars. The design working life of the structure is 50 years.st − Δc dur. From relation (3.4] Calculate the concrete cover of a TT precast element. We find out from table E.3. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 16 mm. strength class C45/55 is therefore adequate.3 [EC2 clause 4. − φ 8 stirrups at 100 mm . Table of Content . placed outside an industrial building situated close to the coast. We have: c min. γ − Δc dur. the minimum concrete strength class is C30/37.EC2: c min. We use concrete with strength class C45/55.EC2 that for exposure class XS1. Δcdur. Calculating first the concrete cover for stirrups.dur = 25 mm . Refer to figure 3. In accordance with table 4. made of prestressed reinforced concrete.2): c min = max (c min.4N .dur + Δc dur. Δcdur. − strands φ 0.5” . The exposure class is XS1.EC2 – Worked examples 4-4 EXAMPLE 4. Moreover: Δc dur.b .

10 mm) = 25 mm . From relation (3. Note that for the ordinary reinforcement bars.2): c min = max (c min. c min. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 30 + 8 = 38 mm .add .b . γ = 0 . We obtain from relation (3.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm . Calculating now the concrete cover for longitudinal bars. We have: c min.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm .b = 12 mm . 4. Table of Content .add = 0 . Fig.EC2: c min.st − Δc dur. 25 + 0 – 0 – 0. γ − Δc dur. in which the concrete cover length is also assessed.3 Calculating now the concrete cover for strands. We obtain from table 4.st = 0 . Δcdur. the value of Δcdev can be taken as 5 mm.EC2 – worked examples 4-5 Considering that the TT element is cast under procedures subjected to a highly efficient quality control.dur = 25 mm . Δcdur. the concrete cover for stirrups is “dominant”. In this case. We obtain from relation (3.dur + Δc dur. 10 mm ) = = max (12.4N . Moreover: Δc dur.

Δcdur.dur = 35 mm . Δcdur.EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.8 mm . We obtain from table 4.5 · 12.5 = 18.st = 0 .add = 0 .5N . The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element.b = 1. The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm.2): c min = max (18.EC2: c min.1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm . γ = 0 . Table of Content . Moreover: Δc dur. 35 + 0 – 0 – 0. From relation (3. From relation (3. 10 mm) = 35 mm .8. Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm .

0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN. h = 1000 mm. The maximum moment resistance MRd. β2 is the “position factor”. d = 950 mm.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0.max = 2821.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6.1 6. 6.5 203.35 x1 (mm) 113.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0.40 0. WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES GENERAL NOTE: Eurocode 2 permits to use a various steel yielding grades ranging from 400 MPa to 600 MPa. the ratio between the distance of the resultant of parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc from εc and the deformation εc itself. Fig.8·500·608. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas. Some example is developed using S500 too.56 β2 0.2 kNm goes alongside it. β1 and β2 factors and x1. Basis: β1 means the ratio between the area of the parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc and the area of rectangle at the same deformation. x2 values are shown in table 6.1] Geometrical data: b= 500 mm.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 .8·500·113.1 Material data. EXAMPLE 6. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth. NRd3 = 0.1. Example 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6. NRd1 = 0.0 x2 (mm) 608.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 0.0 541.1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6. Steel and concrete resistance. d' = 50 mm.80 0.

and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated. 52m 5000 Table of Content .294 0. NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0.26 0.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0. depth of neutral axis. Example 1: values of axial force.2.38 1.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0.52 0.2.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0. it results: x2 + 66.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown.91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0. MRd.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0. Their values are shown in Table 6. moment resistance. eccentricity. Ed Table 6.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎠ ⎝ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0.105 0. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1. the neutral axis x.

619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2.619) + 3910·(0. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN.08 0.7 kNm is associated to it.55 0.80 1. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0.50.350 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.14 Table of Content .5 – 0. MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd .1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6.35·0.0. depth of neutral axis. moment resistance. MRd.3 Values of axial load.1. eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0.3 Table 6.max = 6948.142 0. The results are shown in Table 6.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x.2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6.

0 = 44.5= 1.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24. h = 200 mm. Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk. Class C40 concrete.3 Calculation of VRd. No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present. Average prestressing σcp = 5.c = (1.33 kN Table of Content . It results: VRd.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment. 0. d = 175 mm.66 )2 + 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66.626 + 0.5/1. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6.626 and k1 = 0.05/γC = 1· 2.0 MPa.15⋅5.15.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm. 66 ⋅ 5.c = (0. VRd.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0.

proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement. fcd = 51 MPa. fyd = 391 MPa. s = 150 mm. fcd = 17 MPa .38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content .2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. with bw = 150 mm.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1.1504 hence cotθ = 2.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. The example is developed for three classes of concrete. z = 500 mm.532. with fck = 60 MPa.4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6.90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement. ν = 0.s = hence cotθ = 1.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam. with fck = 90 MPa. a) fck = 30 MPa .max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.s = VRd. 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2).616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2.512. fcd = 34 MPa. ν = 0. h = 600 mm.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. ν = 0.38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm.EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6. d = 550 mm.

EC2 – worked examples

6-6

Determination of reinforcement (vertical stirrups) given the beam and shear action VEd

Rectangular beam bw = 200 mm, h = 800 mm, d = 750 mm, z = 675 mm; vertical stirrups fywd = 391 MPa. Three cases are shown, with varying values of VEd and of fck. •VEd = 600 kN; fck = 30 MPa ; fcd = 17 MPa ; ν = 0.616

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 600000 Then θ = arcsin = arcsin = 29.0 o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**hence cotθ = 1.80 It results:
**

A sw VEd 600000 = = = 1.263 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.80

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/170 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·600000·1.80 = 540 kN •VEd = 900 kN; fck = 60 MPa ; fcd = 34 MPa ; ν = 0.532

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 900000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 23.74 o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.532 ⋅ 34) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**hence cotθ = 2.27 Then with it results
**

A sw VEd 900000 = = = 1.50 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2.27

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/150 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·900000·2.27= 1021 kN • VEd = 1200 kN; fck = 90 MPa ; fcd = 51 MPa ; ν = 0.512

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1200000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 21.45o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 0.512 ⋅ 51 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**As θ is smaller than 21.8o , cotθ = 2.50 Hence
**

A sw VEd 1200000 = = = 1.82 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2.50

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/120 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·1200000·2.50 = 1500 kN

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-7

EXAMPLE 6.4b – the same above, with steel S500C fyd = 435 MPa. [EC2 clause 6.2]

The example is developed for three classes of concrete. a) fck = 30 MPa ; fcd = 17 MPa ; ν = 0.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained for VRd,s = VRd,max

226 ⋅ 435 = 0.417 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17

it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd,s =

hence cotθ = 1.18

A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 1.18 ⋅ 10 −3 = 387 kN s 150

b) For the same section and reinforcement, with fck = 60 MPa , fcd = 34 MPa; ν = 0.532, proceeding as above it results:

sin 2 θ = VRd,s = 226 ⋅ 435 = 0.242 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.532 ⋅ 34

hence cotθ = 1.77

A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 1.77 ⋅ 10 −3 = 580 kN s 150

c) For the same section and reinforcement, with fck = 90 MPa, fcd = 51 MPa; ν = 0.512, proceeding as above it results:

sin 2 θ = VRd,s = 226 ⋅ 435 = 0.167 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.512 ⋅ 51

hence cotθ = 2.23

A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 2.23 ⋅ 10 −3 = 731 kN s 150

Determination of reinforcement (vertical stirrups) given the beam and shear action VEd

Rectangular beam bw = 200 mm, h = 800 mm, d = 750 mm, z = 675 mm; vertical stirrups fywd = 391 MPa. Three cases are shown, with varying values of VEd and of fck. •VEd = 600 kN; fck = 30 MPa ; fcd = 17 MPa ; ν = 0.616 then

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 600000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 29.0 o hence cotθ = 1.80 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

It results:

A sw VEd 600000 = = = 1.135 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 1.80

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/190 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·600000·1.80 = 540 kN

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-8

**• VEd = 900 kN; fck = 60 MPa ; fcd = 34 MPa ; ν = 0.532
**

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 900000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 23.74 o hence cotθ = 2.27 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 (1 ⋅ 0.532 ⋅ 34) ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

Then with it results

A sw VEd 900000 = = = 1.35 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 2.27

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/160 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·900000·2.27 = 1021 kN • VEd = 1200 kN; fck = 90 MPa ; fcd = 51 MPa ; ν = 0.512

1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1200000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 21.45o 2 ( α cw νfcd )b w z 2 0.512 ⋅ 51 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 675

**As θ is smaller than 21.8o , cotθ = 2.50 Hence
**

A sw VEd 1200000 = = = 1.63 mm 2 / mm s z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ 675 ⋅ 435 ⋅ 2.50

which is satisfied with 2-leg stirrups φ12/130 mm. The tensile force in the tensioned longitudinal reinforcement necessary for bending must be increased by ΔFtd = 0.5 VEd cot θ = 0.5·1200000·2.50 = 1500 kN

Table of Content

fck = 30 MPa .72 < 7. fcd = 17 MPa .0) = 333 kN Table of Content . s = 150 mm. 2 legs (Asw = 157 mm2).s) ΔFtd = 0.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0.5 VRd. ν = 0.0) ⋅ 0.0) .616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1.5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0.10 -1.707 •The angle θ of simultaneous concrete – reinforcement steel collapse It results cot θ = bsνfcd −1 A sw f ywd sin α 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. diameter 10 mm. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm.707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605.5·605.707 and.616 ⋅ 17 = 2.10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2.s (cot θ − cot α) = 0.5 [EC2 clause 6.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam. fyd = 391 MPa.4 kN 150 It results: VRd. replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2.EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd.10 + 1.40 ≤ 0.5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0.4· (2. Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .

It results: VRd. Fig. with depth 1500 mm. d = 1450 mm.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10.616 ν fcd = 10.6 [EC2 clause 6.5⋅0.0 MPa ν = 0.707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content . with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1. 6.5) = 17.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6. 6.2.85·(30/1. width 1000 mm.2 Ring section subjected to torsion and shear The maximum equivalent shear in each of the vertical members is (z refers to the length of the vertical member): V*Ed = VEd / 2 + (TEd · z) / 2·Ak = [1300⋅103/2 + (700⋅106 ⋅1350)/(2⋅1.5 MPa fyd = 500/1. Materials: fck = 30 MPa fyk = 500 MPa Results of actions: VEd = 1300 kN (force parallel to the larger side) TEd = 700 kNm Design resistances: fcd =0.7[1-30/250] = 0.707⋅0.3] Ring rectangular section.

with particular attention to the corner bars.08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2.348 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 8 mm wide. Reinforcement of horizontal members. pitch 200 mm.14) = 0.3(3)-EC2]. subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1.03o 2 νfcd tz 2 10. 2 legs stirrups.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section. pitch is in accordance with [9.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end.14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2.EC2 – worked examples 6-11 Determination of angle θ: * 1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1087000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 25. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2.2. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2.5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2.14) = 0. Table of Content .865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars. pitch 200 mm.

max = 2⋅10.7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm . z =400 mm (Fig.5⋅83636⋅94⋅0.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content .3] resistant hollow section Fig.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.4471⋅0.5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6. ν fcd = 10. h = 500 mm.56o (cotθ = 2. 6.85·(30/1. fyd = 391 MPa αcw = 1 Geometric elements A= 150000 mm2 u = 1600 mm t = A/u = 94 mm Ak = (500 – 94) ⋅ (300-94) = 83636 mm2 Assumption: θ = 26.5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd.0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6.616 . 6.5⋅300⋅400/(2+0.5) = 17.0) It results: VRd.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10.

63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0.1-EC2]). V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations.c ≤ 1 where TRd. 6.4. The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd.01.4 kNm 1/3 VRd.c = ⎡CRd.EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig.c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2. if VEd = 350 kN is taken.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content . 6.0/1.5 = 0. It results therefore: TRd.5 = 1. On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines. Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1.3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.18/1. it results: CRd.c = 0.3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3. moreover. ρ = 0.31)-EC2] In this expression.4.c + VEd /VRd. For instance.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1. it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm.

12⋅1.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.010 with s not larger than 0. 6.bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0..0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig.2.2 (5)-EC2] and [9.6. which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0.75⋅450 = 337 mm.08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0. Namely. 200 mm. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9.5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content . It results : Asw/s. For instance.75d = 0. the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8.08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0.c = 0.0010 Fig.2.5N-EC2]. i. Because of the torsion. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram.e.5 The section.2 (6)-EC2].EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed.

EC2 – worked examples

6-15

EXAMPLE 6.8. Wall beam [EC2 clause 6.5]

Geometry: 5400 x 3000 mm beam (depth b = 250 mm), 400 x 250 mm columns, columns reinforcement 6φ20 We state that the strut location C2 is 200 cm from the bottom reinforcement, so that the inner drive arm is equal to the elastic solution in the case of a wall beam with ratio 1/h=2, that is 0.67 h; it suggests to use the range (0.6 ÷ 0.7)·l as values for the lever arm, lower than the case of a slender beam with the same span.

Fig. 6.6 5400 x 3000 mm wall beam.

**Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa, steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa
**

f cd =

f yd =

0.85f ck 0.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.17 N / mm 2 , 1.5 1.5

f yk 1.15 = 450 = 391.3 N / mm 2 1.15

**nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes
**

⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 25 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.18 ⎜1⎟ 14.17 = 15 N / mm 0.85 250 ⎠ ⎝

σ1Rd,max

nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in a fixed direction

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-16

σ 2Rd,max

⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 25 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 14.17 = 12.75 N / mm 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.88 ⎛ 1- 25 ⎞ 14.17 = 11.22 N / mm 2 = k3 cd ⎜ ⎟ 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠

nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions

σ 3Rd,max

**Actions Distributed load: 150 kN/m upper surface and 150 kN/m lower surface
**

Columns reaction

**R = (150+150)⋅5.40/2 = 810 kN
**

Evaluation of stresses in lattice bars

Equilibrium node 1 Equilibrium node 3

C1 = C3 =

ql = 405 kN 2 R = 966 kN senα

(where α = arctg

2000 = 56.98° ) 1300

T1 = C 3 cosα = 526 kN

**Equilibrium node 2 Equilibrium node 4
**

Tension rods

C2 = C3cosα = T1 = 526 kN T2 = ql = 405 kN 2

**The tension rod T1 requires a steel area not lower than:
**

A s1 ≥ 526000 = 1344 mm 2 391.,3

we use 6φ18 = 1524 mm2,

the reinforcement of the lower tension rod are located at the height of 0,12 h = 360 mm The tension rod T2 requires a steel area not lower than:

A s1 ≥ 405000 = 1035 mm 2 391.3

We use 4φ20 = 1257 mm2

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-17

Nodes verification

Node 3 The node geometry is unambiguously defined by the column width, the wall depth (250 mm), the height of the side on which the lower bars are distributed and by the strut C3 fall (Fig. 6.7)

Fig. 6.7 Node 3, left support.

The node 3 is a compressed-stressed node by a single direction reinforcement anchor, then it is mandatory to verify that the maximal concrete compression is not higher than the value:

σ 2Rd,max = 12.75 N / mm 2

σ c1 =

810000 = 8.1 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd,max 400 ⋅ 250

Remark as the verification of the column contact pressure is satisfied even without taking into account the longitudinal reinforcement (6φ20) present in the column.

σ c2 =

966000 = 7.27 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd,max 531.6 ⋅ 250

Table of Content

18 ⎜1⎟ 19. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0. 1.9 Cantilever beam S&T model. 150 x 300 load plate. Thick short corbel. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6.12 N / mm 0.8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam.max Table of Content .15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391. 6.83 N / mm 2 .5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm). Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.85f ck 0. Fig.5 1.83 = 20. 6.3 N / mm 2 1.15 1.9. beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ σ1Rd.

35 ⎞ 19. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content .83 = 17. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ 2Rd.2d = 0.8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.2·360 = 72 mm rotational equilibrium: FEd a = Fc z Fc = Ft = 700000 ⋅ (125 + 44) = Fc ⋅ 288 700000 ⋅ (125 + 44) = 410763 N ≅ 411 kN 288 node 1verification: σ= Fc 411000 = = 7.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd.10 in order to make the partition of the diagonal stress F F ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ Fdiag = c = Ed ⎟ between them. 6.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig.9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side.05 N / mm 0.8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.8⋅d (z = 0.max = 20. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is evaluated setting the internal drive arm z equal to 0.max b = 700000 ≅ 87 mm 20.83 = 15 N / mm 2 = k3 ⎜ ⎟ cd 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-19 nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in a fixed direction ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 19.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0. 6. 6.88 ⎛ 1.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 72 ) Ft 411000 = = 1050 mm 2 we use 8φ14 (As = 1232 mm2) f yd 391.

6. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15.2.8.25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 300 45000 Table of Content . and they have provided the following expression of stress in the secondary reinforcement (MC90 par.max = 17.2.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag. where the main reinforcement is anchored.1): Fwd z 288 2 −1 2⋅ −1 a 125 + 44 = Fc = 411 ≅ 211 kN 3 + FEd / Fc 3 + 700 / 411 Fwd 211000 = ≅ 539 mm 2 ≥ k1 ⋅ A s = 0. 6.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10. double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig.56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.

Fig. in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever.13b). the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6.13. 6. Elementary beams of the S&T model. 6.12 Cantilever S&T model. 6. 6. 400 x 400 mm column Fig.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm). The model proposed in EC2 (Fig. a) b) Fig. 6. ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6. This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever). 6.10 Thick cantilever beam. Table of Content .13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig. then as in the previous example one more boundary condition is needed to evaluate the stresses values in the rods. The stress Fwd in the vertical tension rod is evaluated assuming a linear relation between Fwd and the a value. 150 x 220 mm load plate.12) is indeterminate.

1. some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd . a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.max = 15 N/mm 2 Actions: FEd = 500 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column outer side: e = 200 mm The column vertical strut width is evaluated setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content . the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 .3 N / mm 2 1.2d = 0.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd.83 N / mm 2 .8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0.15 = 450 = 391.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed.5 1.85f ck 0. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0. 3 in conclusion.EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0.max = 17.max = 20. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.8⋅d (z = 0.05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.5 f yk 1.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.

37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd. 208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13.3 EC2 suggests a minimum secondary reinforcement of: Aw ≥ k2 we use 3 stirrups φ 12 (As = 678 mm2) node 2 verification.5 = 639 mm 2 f yd 391.3 FEd 500000 = 0.max = 17. in which the main reinforcement is anchored. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 500000 = = 15.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content .12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = we use 8φ16 (As = 1608 mm2) Secondary reinforcement design: (the expression deduced at the beginning of this example is used) a 2 −1 Fw = z FEd ≅ 204 kN 3 Aw = Fw 204000 = = 521 mm 2 f yd 391. below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .max = 20.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.

11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6.15 [(3. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0. (Fig. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one. Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement.14).5 1.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction.85f ck 0.2. 1.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam.3 N / mm 2 1. On the other hand. if only the scheme a) is used.7 (4)-EC2] Actions: Distributed load: 250 kN/m Beam spam: 8000 mm RSdu = 1000 kN Bending moment in the beam mid-spam: MSdu = 2000 kNm Beam section: b x h = 800 x 1400 mm Bottom longitudinal reinforcement (As): 10φ24 = 4524 mm2 Table of Content .15 = 450 = 391.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1. Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa. 6. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam. we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load. a) b) Fig.5 f yk 1.4.17 N / mm 2 . 6.9. eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10.6)].EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6.

8b x f cd + E s 0. the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig.8 b x fcd = 0.00173 ≤ yd = = 0. ' εs = 0.15 Truss a.4⋅x ≅ 40 mm from the upper surface) while the top reinforcement stress is: C’ = Es ε’s A’s = 200000·0.8·800·99·14.EC2 – worked examples 6-25 Top longitudinal reinforcement (As’): 8φ20 = 2513 mm2 Truss a) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN Definition of the truss rods position The compressed longitudinal bar has a width equal to the depth x of the section neutral axis and then it is x/2 from the top border. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.17 (applied at 0. 6.0035 391.0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0.00173·2513 Table of Content . as stated in the calculation.0035 ⋅ (x − d ') where d’ = 50 mm is the distance of the upper surface reinforcement x x − 50 A's = f yd A s x 0.

EC2 – worked examples 6-26 (applied at 50 mm from the upper surface) the compression net force (C + C’) results to be applied at 45 mm from the beam upper surface. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content . 6. 66° 725 T2 = 260 kN sinβ + cosβ sinβ C3 = ⋅ C 2 = 230 kN sin45° C2 = ⇒ Node 3 equilibrium: T1 = C1 sin α + C2 sin β = 663 kN Tension rods design the tension rod T1 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 stirrups φ 16 double arm (Asl = 2000 mm2) the tension rod T2 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 φ 16 (Asl = 1000 mm2). then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 .77° 425 C1 = R = 620 kN sinα T2 = C1 ⋅ cosα = 366 kN Node 2 equilibrium: β = arctg C 2 cosβ + C 3 cos45° = T2 C 2sinβ = C3sin45° 580 = 38.3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53. Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391.45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2.3 Fig.

3 6φ24 = 2712 mm2 are adopted. a lower reinforcement area would be sufficient for tension rod T’1 but for question of bar anchoring the same reinforcement as in T’2 is adopted.EC2 – worked examples 6-27 node 1 equilibrium C’1 = 500 kN node 2 equilibrium C’2 = C’1 = 500 kN T'1 = 2 ⋅ C'1 = 707 kN node 3 equilibrium C’3 = T’1 = 707 kN T’2 = (T’1 + C’3)·cos 45° = 1000 kN Tension rods for tension rod T’2 it is necessary to adopt a steel area not lower than: 1000000 A s1 ≥ = 2556 mm 2 391. Table of Content .

17 Log plinth on pilings.max = 12.17 N / mm 2 .5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm).75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd.max = 11. 1.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6.85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content . 6. diameter 800 mm piles Fig. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6. 2000 x 700 mm columns. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa.85f ck 0.5 f yd = f yk 1.3 N / mm 2 1.15 = 450 = 391.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6.5 1.8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd.

then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles. 6.3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0.NSd/2) = (4000/3.EC2 – worked examples 6-29 Tied reinforcement in the pile: 8 φ 26 (As = 4248 mm2) The compressive stress Fc in the concrete and the steel tension Fs on the pedestal pile are evaluated from the ULS verification for normal stresses of the section itself: Fs = fyd As = 391.2000/2) = 333 kN A=A’/2 = 1167 kN B=B’/2 = 167 kN for each compressed pile: In the evaluation of stresses on piles. the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3. the plinth own weight is considered negligible. S&T model in the plane π1.4⋅x ≅ 185 mm from the upper surface) piles stress pile stresses are evaluated considering the column actions transfer in two steps: in the first step.00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3.00 .17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0.18. Table of Content .17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0.8 b x fcd = 0. Fig. 6.8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0.00 .8·700·x·14. 6.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3.8·700·462·14. the truss-tie beam in Fig.

5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65.3 Tension rod 10 (plinth tied reinforcement) 11 12 13 14 15 16 Force (kN) 1662 1544 154 1167 1188 170 167 Required reinforcement (mm2) 4248 3946 394 2982 3036 434 427 Bars 8φ26 9φ24 1φ12/20 (6φ12) stirrups 10φ20 7φ24 1φ12/20 (5φ12) Pile reinforcement Table of Content .19 Trusses in plan π2 and in plan π3. θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56.5° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65.2° = 154 kN Fig.5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 6.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.2° T10 = Fs = 1662 kN T11 = A’ cot θ11 = 2333 cot 26. 6.5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44.

the compressive stresses are very small as a consequence of the piles section large area. Schematic placement of reinforcements. 6.20. Nodes verification Concentrated nodes are only present at the pedestal pile and on the piles top. In these latter.EC2 – worked examples 6-31 Fig.64 N mm 2 2 2 π⋅r π ⋅ 400 Table of Content .: σc = A 2333000 = = 4.

16 N / mm 2 = k3 cd ⎜ ⎟ 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17.5 1.65 N / mm 0.15 = 450 = 391.88 ⎛1. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig.5 f yk 1.21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm.max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content . 1.85f ck 0. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.30 ⎞ 17 = 13.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1. 6. 6.3 N / mm 2 1.96 N / mm 0.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.

Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3. Fig.4 x) = 3.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3.6·109 17·0.00 = 3600 kNm = 3.8·x·300·(1900 – 0.8·x·b = 17·0.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-33 strut&tie model identification Beam partitioning in two regions B and D The region standing on the middle section is a continuity region (B). The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B.8·x·b·(d – 0. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0.4 x) = 3. 6.6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0.22 Identification of B and D regions.23 Shear and bending moment diagrams. 6.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .

strut&tie model Fig.26.25 Load paths. 1500 Table of Content . 6. The strut C2 tilting is 3190 θ = arctg = 46. 6. Fig. shown in Fig.25 shows the load paths characterized by Schlaich in the strut&tie model identification.EC2 – worked examples 6-34 Identification of boundary stresses in the region D Fig.26.76° 3000 while the strut C4 tilting is 1690 θ1 = arctg = 48. 6. Fig. 6.41° . Strut and tie model.24 Reactions and boundary stresses in the region D. 6.

3 = 5443 mm As = 1.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1. Table 6.50 m length As = 1. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2. T2 and T3.10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used. and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil.) T2 = T3.10 % of the concrete area. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0. Table 6. and not less than 150 mm2/m. because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig.13·10 /391.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil.max = 14.128·106/391.) 2130 kN 2130 kN 1647 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1002 kN 1509 kN 1595 kN Steel tension rods design EC2 point 9.27 Node A. 6.4 C1 T1 C2 T3 T2 C3 Floop C4 C5 See stresses evaluation in the region B T1=C1 C2 = F/sin θ (Node A vertical equilibrium) T3 = C2 cos θ (Node A horizontal equilibrium.96 N/mm2 Table of Content .128·106/391.61)-EC2] σ2Rd.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1.

max = 17.65 N/mm2 Fig.max = 1.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content .96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers.05 N / mm 2 > 14.65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17. a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1. 6.28 Node B.EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd.96 a 300 x 300 mm plate (A = 90000 mm2) is used the reinforcement for the tension rod T3 is loaded on two layers (Fig.76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1. or an increase of the plate length).2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46.76° + 150 cos 46. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14. 6.76° + 150 cos 46. this last choice is adopted.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd.128 ⋅106 = = 7.

The transversal stress for the split of the most stressed strut (C2) is: Ts ≤ 0.25 1647 = 412 kN. for the reinforcement required to carry this stress: As = 412000 = 1053 mm 2 .3 then the minimum reinforcement (1 φ 12 / 20” on both sides and in both directions. that is as = 1130 mm2/m) is enough to carry the transversal stresses. in this way the maximal stresses are in the nodes. which stress has been verified before in the forces evaluation for the region B) can spread between the two ends. the strut C1. Table of Content . 391. and then.EC2 – worked examples 6-37 The compressive range for each strut (only exception.25·C2 = 0.

0 f cd A c0 = 3.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6. 1. 3500 kN concentrated load [EC2 clause 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6. because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm).85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .5 1. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu .14.5 f yk 1.7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6.85f ck 0. just as in this example.5] 3500 kN load on a 800x500 rectangular column by a 300x250 mm cushion Materials: concrete steel f cd = f yd = C30/37 B450C fck = 30 MPa. 1.15 loading area Ac0 = 300·250 = 75000 mm2 dimensions of the load distribution area d2 ≤ 3 d1 = 3·300 = 900 mm b2 ≤ 3 b1 = 3·250 = 750 mm maximal load distribution area Ac1 = 900·750 = 675000 mm2 load distribution height h ≥ (b 2 − b1 ) = 750 − 250 = 500 mm h ≥ (d 2 − d 1 ) = 900 − 300 = 600 mm ⇒ h = 600 mm Ultimate compressive stress FRdu = A c0 f cd A c1 / A c0 = 75000 ⋅17 ⋅ 675000 / 75000 = 3825 kN ≤ ≤ 3.3 N / mm 2 .0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3.825 ⋅106 N It is worth to observe that the FRdu upper limit corresponds to the the maximal value Ac1 = 3 Ac0 for the load distribution area. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content .15 = 450 = 391.5)EC2] to analyse this topic. Reinforcement design Point [6. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0. In this case there is a partial discontinuity.

3 T= the steel area required to carry T is: As ≥ using 10 mm diameter bars.5 = 1178 mm2. Table of Content . 15 bars are required for a total area of: As = 15 ⋅ 78.5 kN 4 b 4 500 T 437500 = = 1118 mm 2 f yd 391.EC2 – worked examples 6-39 b = 500 mm F b − a 3500 500 − 250 = = 437.

40 m width.textbook (292 pages.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6.15 Slabs1.Maintenance.Member Design . 6. in the middle. Fig. 2 Table of Content . table 4.118) for fatigue reasons.4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point. Mancini. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2.s 6.15. The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2. ISBN 9782-88394-043-7.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme.Practical aspects” Manual .29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7. whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0. two ballast retaining walls and.3 – 7.10 – 6.29 and 6. Fig. Part 2.50 m for a central zone 7. The slab presents a constant thickness of 1. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour.2 – 7.0 m width. FIB Bullettin n°3.0 m. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13. 3: Durability .2 – 7.2 “slabs” by prof. bridge design.6 m. two track spacing of 5.1 Description of the structure The design example proposed in this section is related to a railway bridge deck made up by a continuous slab on three spans with two orders of prestressing tendons (longitudinal and transverse prestressing).2 [EC2 clause 5. 6. Design and Performance Vol.Design for Fire Resistance . December 1999).60 m with two side-walks of 1. Assessment and Repair .1 – 6.

1 MPa.0 MPa. fctm = 3.30 Geometric dimensions of bridge cross section Material properties The following materials properties have been considered: − Concrete Grade 35: compressive design strength: compressive resistance for uncracked zones: compressive resistance for cracked zones: mean value of tensile strength: modulus of elasticity: shear modulus: Poisson ratio: − Prestressing steel. fcd1 = 17.7·103 MPa. fyd = 434. fp0. Table of Content . As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost).2 fptk = 1800 MPa.8 MPa.4·103 MPa ν = 0.6”): 0. 6. Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35.1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations. (strands φ 0.3 MPa.0 MPa.0·103 MPa. fyk = 500.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig.23 MPa.1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel. Ec = 29.0·103 MPa. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm. fcd2 = 12. G = 12.0 MPa. fcd = 23. Es = 200.

Fig. 6.31 and 6. The thickness of shell elements has been assumed constant for the inner zone of the slab and stepped to fashion the tapered extremity. this kind of element takes account of all the slab and plate components as well as the out-of-plane shear forces.2 Structural model To evaluate the internal actions on the structure a linear FEM analysis has been performed adopting shell elements to represent the reinforced slab. Positive forces for FEM program output are reported in Fig. − local axis 1 is oriented as global axis Z of the deck. In Fig 6. 6.32 the FEM model is sketched and the different thick of the element is reported too.33: Table of Content .15.EC2 – worked examples 6-42 6. − local axis 3 is oriented in the opposite direction of global axis X of the deck.31 Transverse view of FEM model Fig. 6.32 Plan of FEM model and considered elements The adopted shell elements are oriented with the following guidelines: − local axis 2 is oriented as global axis Y of the deck.

6. behaves like a Table of Content . Fig. 6. thus. For the x and y directions.34 shows a symbolic notation for the external restraints with the nodes involved. few nodes have been restrained by means of spring elements in order to represent only an individual restraint or support.33 Positive actions for FEM elements Restraints The external restraints have been introduced in the FEM model considering their real geometric dimensions. or the abutment front wall.EC2 – worked examples 6-43 Fig.34 External restraints on the FEM model The elastic constant of the spring restraining elements is calculated to have the same stiffness of the substructure (abutments or piers) on which the slab is rested. Fig. it may be assumed that the pier. 6.

EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top. I the inertia and H the height of the column. Table of Content . being symmetrically disposed.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.74 2. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed. The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one. Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx.tot 10 kN/m 10.tot 10 kN/m 9. For the sake of simplicity the calculus of the relevant stiffness is omitted and the final values of the spring constants are reported in table 6.max = 0.61 10.39 cm2.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports. Fig. For the vertical direction.78 6 Kz.85 fp 0. Prestressing forces Two orders of prestressing tendons are arranged (in longitudinal and transverse directions) in order to avoid any tensile stress in concrete at service (required by railway code).02 11.tot 10 kN/m 178.1k = 0.55 6 Ky.66 2.02 6 Table 6.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck.80 4. considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.6” having an area of 1. thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint. 6. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus.61 11.6 .

it is possible to introduce it by means of two inclined forces at anchorages (representing actions at the extremity) and of a system of equivalent loads along tendon’s profile (representing tendon curvature and losses due to friction): these actions per tendon. The equivalent loads may be calculated subdividing the tendon profile into elementary segments and evaluating the internal action able to equilibrate the external one due to end actions deriving by the prestressing. Considering prestressing as an external load.01 rad/m coefficient of friction between the tendons and their sheathing.EC2 – worked examples 6-45 Fig.19 k = 0. Table of Content . should be applied consistently at the nodes of FEM model.35 Plan and principal section of tendon layout Immediate losses of prestressing due to friction have been evaluated by means of the following expression: σpo (x) = σpo.max ⋅ e-μ(α + k x) with: μ = 0. Prestressing has to be introduced in the FEM model in order to calculated the hyperstatic actions that arise in the structural scheme. 6. unintentional angular deviation.

the equilibrating vertical and horizontal forces in the i-segment result: Fv. 6. furthermore. the forces at the extremity of the cable plus the equilibrating system for each segment.36 represents the forces acting on a segment of concrete due to a curved prestressing tendon. If beam elements are used.i = P2 cos θ2 P1 cos θ1 Table of Content .i = P2 sin θ2 P1 sin θ1 while the balancing moment turns out: Mi = (P2 cos θ2 e2 P1 cos θ1 e1 ) (P2 sin θ2 P1 sin θ1 ) a/2 The above procedure should be repeated for all the segments. due to the two-dimensional scheme. . As a simple rule.EC2 – worked examples 6-46 Fig. consequently the segment extremities may be placed indifferently at nodes or at the middle of the element. these forces cancel out themselves with the exception at anchorages. With shell elements. The choice of the position of the elementary segments is relative to the kind of element adopted in the FEM model. shall be introduced in the FEM model. do not coincide with a nodal alignment. if the inclination of the cable changes from θ1 to θ2 while the prestress force changes from P1 to P2 due to friction. the indications of Fig.36 Effect of prestressing on a segment and equivalent loads Fig. 6. one has to consider the transverse position of the tendon that. for each tendon.37 may be followed. depending on whether the right or the left segment is considered. in general. 6. Finally. it is possible to introduce a point load (or moment) whether along the element body or at nodes. only nodal forces can be considered so that it is necessary to place segment extremities within two sequential nodes. It can be notice that the forces at the end of each segment extremity are the same with opposite signs. Fh.

t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0.c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel.8 φ ( t ∞ . εcs (t∞.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere. t∞ = 25550 ds.t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ . ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1. βs (t∞ .035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content .t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 fcm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0.t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . between time t0 and time t∞. 6. t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp. βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements.37 Transverse distribution of prestressing Time-dependent prestressing losses Time-dependent losses of prestress may be evaluated by means of the following equation: Δσ p .000395 fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa.55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1. c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ .: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years. fcmo = 10 MPa.018.574 0.t0) = 0. age of concrete at prestressing time. t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ .

281. Δσpr : loss of prestressing due to relaxation of steel calculated for a reduced initial tensile stress of σp = σpgo 0. 6.5 1 + (0.1 3 h 5. at least for creep value.488 0. φ (t∞ .983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 .5754 If the improved prediction model of chapter 3 is used.3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ .43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam.62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one. t0) = 1. the following values for εcs (t∞ .19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours.1 + t 0 0.c+s+r (where σpgo is the effective initial stress in tendons due to dead load and prestressing) and evaluated as percentage by the following formula: ρt = ρ1000h ⎛ t ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 1000 ⎠ 0 .t0) = 1. Table of Content .598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1. ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig.t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1. t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ . 0.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .2 0. t0) = 182. Ac = 17.012 RH) = 0. t0) and for φ(t∞ . u = 28640 mm perimeter of the member in contact with the atmosphere.t0) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞.556. φ (t∞. fcm fcmo 1 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member.3 Δσp.5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1. for t > 50 years ρt.3 = 2. = ρ1000h × 3.38.

6 = 199. area of concrete gross section. 6.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. modulus of elasticity ratio.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc. turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis.1×250×φdin = 319.1 = 319. as percentage of initial steel tension.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1. the 4 point loads have been reduced in an equivalent uniform load by smearing their characteristic value Qvk along the influence length so that a qvk. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan. As vertical train load the load model LM71 plus the load models SW (SW/0 and SW/2 respectively) have been adopted with an α coefficient of 1. area of prestressing steel at the considered level. but as actions of opposite sign. For the LM71.EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig.6/1. the maximum value of prestressing losses.75 kN/m Table of Content . stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing. Time-dependent losses of prestressing should be calculated for each tendon along his profile so that a correct value may be used for each element.15.1. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing. 6.6 kN → qvk. As a reference.1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel. inertia of concrete gross section.

6.3 kN/m without any limitation in length. Fig.40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. being the dynamic factor equal to 1.3 is: qvk = 1. Fig.1 × 133 × φdin = 170.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1.41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71.2 = 102. In the following as left track is denoted the track which has a positive value for the y co-ordinate. 6.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig. Fig. 6.1 × 150 × φdin = 174. SW/0 and SW/2 have been introduced in the FEM analysis considering a spreading ratio of 4:1 in the ballast and of 1:1 in the concrete up to the middle plane of the slab.3 kN/m Fig.6. 6.39 Adopted load arrangement for LM71 load model The uniformly distributed load qvk according to Eurocode 1.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations.1 × 80 × φdin → qvk.0 kN/m Fig. 6.42 shows which elements are involved by spreading effects.162.EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin . is evaluated below. Table of Content . while right truck the other one. 6. therefore subjected to variable load.

derailment.8 kN/m.) but.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞).2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1.42 Spreading effects on FEM model and loaded elements The dynamic factor φ is calculated by means of the following expression (track with standard maintenance): φ3 = 2.3 17. arising from variable loads. centrifugal forces.8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3).33 + 27.3 = 27.33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1. for the sake of simplicity. in these calculations only the following actions have been considered (introduced in the mathematical model in different steps): − STEP 1: Self-weight of the structure: adopting a unit weight value of − STEP 2: Prestressing forces at time of tensioning. − STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations.75 + 17.EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig. rails.5 m. transverse gradient for drain water.8×1.16 + 0.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3. sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion. so that for a width of 9.5 = 136. Table of Content .73 = 1. has been considered.3 as: Lφ = 1. should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0. wind pressure. 6. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of.04 m 3 3 Several other actions. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0.8×9. assumed as a load of 1. differential temperature variation etc.162 L φ − 0. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by.

875 kN/m. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content . ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0.25×9.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1.25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0. Fig. 6.5 = 11.43 m).18 m).00 kN/m for each.25 = 6. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0. − STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6.25 = 6.43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each. for each. 6.25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18.

EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig. 6.305 m).47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content .46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6.45 SW/0 arrangement for Load Step 6 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6. 6.

ballast excluded.EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6.8 for unfavourable effect and 1. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads.9 for favourable effect. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0. = partial factor of prestress load equal to 1. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1.5 for unfavourable effect and 0. ballast excluded.2 for unfavourable effect and 0.0 for favourable effect. Table of Content . Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress.15. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1. equal to 1.4 for unfavourable effect and 1.0 for favourable effect. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads.8. G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight. Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action.6. equal to 0.3 Combinations of Actions The design values for the external actions have been calculated adopting the combinations of loads specified in the applied Code as follow indicated in the symbolic presentation: − Ultimate Limit State ⎧ ⎛ ⎞⎫ Sd = S ⎨γ G1 G1k + γ G 2 G 2 k + γ p Pk + γ Q ⎜ Q1k + ∑ Ψoi Q ik ⎟ ⎬ ⎝ ⎠⎭ i >1 ⎩ − Serviceability Limit State: rare combination ⎧ ⎫ Sd = S ⎨G1k + G 2 k + Pk + Q1k + ∑ Ψoi Q ik ⎬ i >1 ⎩ ⎭ − Serviceability Limit State: quasi-permanent combination ⎧ ⎫ Sd = S ⎨G1k + G 2 k + Pk + ∑ Ψ2 i Q ik ⎬ i >1 ⎩ ⎭ where: G1k = characteristic value of the action due to self-weight and permanent loads.0 for favourable effect. = combination factor of variable loads for quasi-permanent combination at service.

as subjected to the higher stress level.15. . From FEM analysis.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6. t / b = σ 22. t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig. t = σ 23.963 1. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2. t / b = σ 22. b = σ 23. θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1. t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23. t = σ xy. b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre. t = σ 33. t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2.5 1. one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23. t = σ 22. the value of n22 . b = σ 33.8 Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6. σ y.5 0. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning. m33 . − deformation. − crack widths. b = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy. n23 . n33 . m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y. − stress limitation at service.6 × fck = 21 MPa.6. t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33. t = σ x. . m22 . t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . b = σ x. no tensile stress should be present in the extreme fibres of the slab and the maximum compressive stress should not exceed the limit value of 0. 648 93 320 589 h [m] n 22 [kN/m] n 33 [kN/m] n 23 6 75 1 -67 m 22 -225 743 -45 653 m 33 -2176 456 -812 1945 m 23 0 -51 0 20 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 1. b = σ 22.32 one obtains: Table 6.4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning. For the sake of simplicity.7 Elem. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ .

00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions.42 σ2.6 × fck = 21.48 -18.86 σ23.00 0.5 1.57 -7.77 which not exceed the limit one.97 -12.t [°] σ1.5 0.t -1.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.97 -5.46 -1. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6.41 -5.99 90.01 89.9 Elem. 6.t -2.37 -5.t -0.b -2.25 0.10 1. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations.29 88.69 σ2.48 95.b 0.58 -5.66 -3.22 -4.29 -1.09 -2.963 1.98 -10.00 0.5 0.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0.b [°] 6-56 θ2.21 -5.66 -3.58 -5.58 -1.86 -4.40 -2.00 -0.58 -8.59 σ33.49 -7.t -0.02 89.27 -2.51 -8.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.78 -11.5 1.t θ1.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.24 -2.76 -1.46 -13. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.46 -12.963 1.t [°] θ2.23 σ2.01 σ22.97 -11.91 -2.11 σ2.b -2.86 -4.t -2.4 × fck = 14.83 -9.17 0.15 0.65 -2.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6.14 -2.t -1.15 -4.5 -2238 -6284 -2604 -3791 -10270 -6033 -7479 -8243 Verification of Serviceability Limit State of Cracking The characteristic crack width should be calculated according to the provisions of Model Table of Content .17 89.b -14.10 Elem.46 -1.71 -0.b [°] θ1.EC2 – worked examples σ22.01 -0.98 0.78 -11. under service load conditions.48 σ1.90 -9.11 -1.b -14.36 σ2.02 -1.05 -2.b -2.22 -4.t -2.80 -4.62 -6.32. ensuring that.31 -2.77 89.85 108.89 σ1.75 -0.59 σ2.72 -4.11 -1. 648 93 320 589 h [m] n 22 [kN/m] n 33 [kN/m] n 23 4 50 2 -3 m 22 -236 589 81 -151 m 33 -1576 108 233 -396 m 23 4 -37 4 0 σ1.89 -10.00 0.t -5. 648 93 320 589 h [m] n 22 [kN/m] n 33 [kN/m] n 23 3 4 7 -55 m 22 -226 577 7 -689 m 33 -615 -133 1279 -1275 m 23 4 -62 -9 -26 σ1.b -8.11 σ33.30 -2. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.99 0.b -2. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig.b -10.48 σ23. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.32 σ1.

75 m (central span) and a train speed over 280 km/h. The limit values δ/L (deflection/span Length) are given by the Eurocode 1. finally. − punching under support plate. In addition to the analysis of ULS of several shell element under the relevant combination of internal actions. so that the elastic value. The limit value for maximum vertical deflection is calculated considering a span length of 27. in this example some case of detailing are investigated. according to the provisions of the Code. it results: δ 1 = L 1600 that should be multiplied by a factor 1. Therefore. analysing the resistance of the critical regions. 1 = = L 1600 1455 As a consequence of the transient nature of this event. Deformation Deformation limitation is carried out to control the maximum vertical deflection for passengers comfort. placed in the middle of the of the central span. that from stress calculation neither for the quasipermanent combination nor in the rare one. the elastic deflection.5 Verification of Ultimate Limit State Verification at ULS should regard the structure as a whole and its component parts. due to prestressing effect. able to ensure a ductile behaviour in case of corrosion of prestressing steel. the following limit may be achieved: δ lim 11 . reading the maximum deflection in correspondence of the track axis.0055 1 = = L 27.1 for continuous structures. It can be notice that no further calculation is requested because. Table of Content . i. no specific reinforcement is required and it is sufficient to arrange the minimum amount of reinforcing steel.15. the structure remains entirely compressed. the maximum stress results tensile. however. 6. calculated by the FEM model.3 as a function of the span length and the train speed. calculated by the FEM analysis. is relative to the only live load. has to be considered. − spalling force at anchorage of prestressing tendon. Having loaded the right track with a LM71 load model plus dynamic allowance. the obtained δ/L value is: δ effective 0. It has be notice.75 5045 and it results lower than the corresponding limit.e.EC2 – worked examples 6-57 Code 90.: − bursting force at anchorage of prestressing tendon. the check shall be performed loading only one track.

x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd.07 m from the external face.5 0.xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ). one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not.y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd.6 cm2/m placed at 0.y ( m 22 ) -239 499 38 -1950 m Sd. The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig.49): Table 6.4. turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig.x = As. Table 6.963 1.3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o .5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd. In fact. 6. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig. specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 ξ (100 ρ fck ) .EC2 – worked examples 6-58 Slab ultimate limit state Verification at ULS has been performed adopting the sandwich model for shell elements. h [m] n Sd.49. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd.6.2. and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd. The external actions are derived from FEM model using the load step for trains which leads to the maximum values and combining the results according to the relevant combination formula.y = 22. According to CEB Bulletin 223. If the is not satisfied.11 Elem. 6. Fig.32).12 Table of Content . it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 .5 1.x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1. 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6. For the investigated elements.

43 51.43 1.76 0.56 26.07 = 0.14 0.893 -30.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx . 6. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0.0 n yc 0.6 784.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .0 0. nxc .0 0.0 0. i = n xy ⎞ z − yi m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ where terms on brackets have be summed if shear reinforcement is required.0 0.56 14. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig.56 3509 13860 763.9 805. nyc and nxyc ) only for element number 589. The outer layers should be designed supposing an initial thickness for both layers not lesser than twice the concrete cover evaluated at the centroid of reinforcement.0 0.00158 23. 648 93 320 589 d [m] 6-59 ρo [-] ϕo [°] vo 7 51 v Rd1 417 327 417 417 θ [°] F Scw - F Rcw - As/s2 2 2 n xc 0.0 0.e.00253 174 45.43 1. In the design Table of Content .0 0.00158 1569 26. i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.77 0.00158 26.5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i.56 26.0 n xyc 0.14 m so that.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig. 6.EC2 – worked examples Elem.18 0.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .s = n xy ⎞ z − ys m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .0 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.

the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .140 1.680 1.s [kN/m] n Sdx.3 -577.6 726.360 307. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.360 -713.13 Elem.5 1.220 0.14 Table of Content .8 -2560.5 -4893.9 0.7 0.7 -4.412 0.412 0.683 0.680 1.0 -1065.1 -5344. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value.7 -3120.963 0.i n Sdx.5 0.5 -122.140 0. if result satisfied.3 13.2 14.140 1.140 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement.s n Sdy.i vSd.220 0. in this case the verification is performed along the principal compression direction in the concrete subjected to biaxial compression and the checking equation is: σc t = n Sdx + n Sdy 2 + (n Sdx − n Sdy 4 ) 2 + v 2 ≤ f cd1 t Sd For the considered elements.3 -2266.680 1.140 0. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative.8 -1037.3 787.9 At this stage each layer may be designed by applying the following equations (θ = 45°): σc t = v Sd ≤ fcd 2 t sin θ cos θ safety verification on concrete side required resistance along x direction required resistance along y direction nRdx = nSdx + vSd cot θ nRdy = nSdy + v Sd cot θ from which.823 -3479. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1. one obtains: Table 6.8 59. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required.680 0.1 -4202. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.140 1.140 0. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6.140 0.220 0. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met.680 0. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.5 1.360 -1093.i -7.7 -6252.6 -1489.0 32.s vSd.2 0.680 0.

3 -17.758 -3588.0 0.0 Asy 2 σc -30.1 -950.0 -24.8 -3144.s vSd.6 -5040.5 66.0 0. 6. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig.0 0.6 -153.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.430 0.6 0.0 0.8 -5768.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer.3 0.9 -16.4 -7.6 f cd1/2 -17.1 -17.1 -17.140 1. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer.0 It can be notice that verification for concrete in compression is not satisfied for any layers except for element 589 top layer and element 320 bottom layer.0 25.680 1.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.553 0.5 -7090.0 720.5 0.5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.i n Sdx.2 0. so.600 0.300 0.0 0.9 0.0 Of course.15 Elem.140 0.0 -11.0 0.930 0.0 0.0 Asy 2 σc -16. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.5 -1465.1 -17. Thus.i -8.16 Top Layer Design Elem.8 -16. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.0 0.0 34.1 Asy 2 Asx 0. whereas they are arranged at 0.1 -1062.3 16.0 0.2 -11.372 0.6 -6.4 -45.9 -38.1 -17.s [kN/m] n Sdx.0 0.220 0.0 0.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6.7 870.020 0.5 -2157.0 0.0 0. For element 589.0 0.230 -716.215 708.8 14.4 794.s n Sdy.340 0.960 0.240 0.0 0.8 -129.0 0. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.535 1.1 -17.580 0.1 -17.1 -17.8 f cd1/2 -17.1 -12.1 -17.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16.0 0.i vSd.8 0.1 -12.963 0.0 0.1 -17.3 0.8 -5.0 -4054.0 0.0 18.5 1.7 0.260 -1179.0 0. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions.630 1.4 0.7 -2962.680 0.0 -22.0 38.0 0.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.8 -16.1 -17.51: Table of Content .387 0.190 0.5 1.

5 -1070.0 0.17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons.2 -956.1 -2242.8 -2287.0 0.3 1664.0 0.3 0. 648 93 320 589 n s.y [kN/m] n s.0 38.3 -6370. Table 6.6 -1399.0 -5752. Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used.8 -4063.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702.5 -5026.x [kN/m] n i. the following areas have been detected.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i. it is useful.6 -3274.EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig.3 -159.0 The previous procedure should be repeated for all the elements of the structural model finding the amount of reinforcement to provide in the slab.8 1503. For the sake of simplicity.0 0.51 Shell element equilibrium in one direction with two reinforcement layers only The new forces acting on the reinforcements become: t ⎞ ⎞ ⎛t ⎛ nSd . 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.i ns For the investigated elements. to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.s + nSd. to summarise the results in a visual map.0 -1163.0 0.0 0. Table of Content .5 -3522. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd .0 0.6 0. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd.0 34.0 0. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too.0 0.

and the most unfavourable situation occurs when a single tendon is tensioned. 6. The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0. Table of Content . distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.43 m.EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig.2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0.2 m and his length.6 = 1. for end anchored tendon.52. 6. 115 . The design force per tendon has been evaluated by means of the following expression: FSd = f ptk 1800 Asp = (139 × 19) × 10 −3 = 4134 kN 115 .6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0.075 m t2 = 0. corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons.300 m distance between the centroid of tendons above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852. considering the lower level of tendon (first tensioned) the height of the prism results: hbs = 2×0.52 Geometric dimension for bursting calculation Checking situation is represented in Fig. is: lbs = hbs = 1.

53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0. a section with a breadth of 0.43 (1.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 .50 m. Fig. lsl = 1. furthermore.43 m and a height of 1.(i. for a prestressing force FSd = 4134. in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60.1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A. is equal to the overall height of the section.0 cm2/m2 2 0.50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning. from 0.61 = = = 57. bs A s. Thus.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content . i. As.5 may be assumed. supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping.43 × 1. spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).e.50 0.50 ⎠ ⎪ +2. bs 19. As for bursting verification.20 m) from the anchor plate. only the longitudinal direction is considered.4) s×s b × lbs 3 that may be provided with ties having diameter of 22 mm and spacing both transversally and longitudinally of 250 mm (see Fig. is placed at 0.38 MPa ⎪ ⎪ ∓ =⎨ = FSd ⎜ − ⎬ 2 ⎟ ⎝ 0.35 m. 53).20 − 0.82 cm2/m2 .43 × 1. may be found by the following: A s.e.61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs . n2 γ1 =1.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧−15.40 m to 1. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory. Thus the effective area on a meter length.0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0.56 MPa σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ The section along which no shear force results.bs = Nbs / fyd = 19. respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0.

61 kNm 3 Fig. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1.43 m.5× lsl and bsl = 0.214 2 × 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0. 54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0. Table of Content .031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance.43 × 10 3 = 33.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

αe = 15.EC2 – worked examples 7-1 SECTION 7.2] Evaluate the normal compressive force and of the associated bending moment in the section of Figure 7. linearly changing M N. 7. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then. 7. assuming k2 = 0. Finally. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7.5m. Considering Fig. β = 1 The boundary conditions from the first exercise set the neutral axis on the border of the bottom section. N. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2. Fig. For this value it results 400 ⋅ 600 12 + 400 ⋅ 600 ⋅ ( 300 ) + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡50 2 + 550 2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ + 300 e= 2 −400 ⋅ 600 2 + 15 ⋅ 1884( −600) 2 3 and then e =-120. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load. d’ = 50 mm. can be written as N( −600) = −0.45. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending.65 mm. or M. S* = −88. we have d = 550 mm.45 ⋅ 30 −88. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. calculate the couples M. Rectangular section.1. yn The second condition in the first exercise. M0 = 400 kNm. that. fyk = 450 MPa. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f . f) M = M0 = 400 kNm.96 ⋅ 106 mm 3 . calculation of service stresses.1.96 ⋅ 106 Table of content .1. evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN.1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7. that is yn = h.

096 .6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.3 Because the condition e = -500 mm implies that the neutral axis position is lower than the one previously evaluated assuming the maximal stresses for both materials.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.71mm 0.7 = σs = −0. M = 1. N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached.42 ⋅ (550 − 272.59σs d − yn 550 − 235.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.801.096N0 = -876.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16. M=N⋅e=-2001.07MPa 272.3) = −16. Table of Content .7/2+0. If we consider to change M.EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001. The tension stress postulated by the second exercise gives the following expression for the neutral axis yn = 1+ d k 3f yk α e k 2fck = 550 = 235. S* = −13263 ⋅ 10 3 mm 3 yn and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.80 kN.59) ⋅10-3 = -570.48 kN M = (-0.6fck = = = 1.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.5·106/570.7/3-300)+0.65) ⋅10-3 = 241.7/2⋅(235.096 M0 =438.42MPa −13.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.16⋅(-120.3) ⋅ 15 = −201. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete.59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457.16kN.95 mm Considering the third exercise 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 400 −3 3 + y n = −200 e=− ⋅ 10 = −500 mm and 400 2 800 − y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 this equation is iteratively solved: yn = 272.4 kNm. N keeping constant the eccentricity.3 mm. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.7 N = -0.3 16. the stress is N= 1.5 kNm e = .18MPa 272.457.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0.49 kNm.48·103 = .3) ⋅ 15 = 251.

51 ⎛ 262.6fck S* yn and I* yn S * yn and then e= M0 M 0 (y n ) = N 0.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.6 ⋅ 30 800 ⋅ 103 Solving with respect to yn 2 y n + 60y n − 84795 = 0 y n = −30.69MPa 262.6 ⋅ fck 0.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.51mm (50 − 262.51) σs = 0.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −y n = 0.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.25 + 30.22 ⋅ 106 mm 3 0.57MPa 262.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 262.51 ' σs = 0.51) ⋅ 15 = −218.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.69 + 218.EC2 – worked examples 7-3 Working with constant normal force (N = N0) the ultimate limit state for the concrete tension leads to N0 ( − y n ) = −0.252 + 84795 = 262.57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.51 (550 − 262. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.22 ⋅ 106 ⋅ y n ⎣ ⎦ 3 + y n = 300 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] − 2 and iteratively solving Table of Content .

2.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations.34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7.82)⎥ = −1666.67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0. the tension ultimate state under load for tied steel is got just in the case b). Fig. Results for different limit distributions of stresses.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105. 7.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105. On the other hand. 2B Table of Content . just in the case c) the concrete tension limit state under load is not reached while in the case a)(k1=0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105.82) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 400.95 + 235.EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235.82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0.95 + 235.95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0. As a remark.

01235 ⋅ 0. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7.min = 0. fct.section. Wi = 7.1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.6945 − 2(1 − 0.4494 ) ⎤ ρs.00208 1 − 0.65 ⋅ 3. k =0. 7.min = 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.82·1010 mm4. Evaluate the minimum reinforcement into the bottom slab in the following cases: •Application of the first cracking moment Mcr •Application of an axial compressive force N = -6000 kN.2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7.8/ 200 = 0.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0.6945 0 ρs.4494 ) = 0.1667 − 0. Box .925·106 mm2 . r2 = I/A =39.2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7.8 MPa. design of minimum reinforcement.1 3 8 8 α f = 3 0 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 . Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.3. applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment.1667 − 0. σs = 200 MPa.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 .3.3 with the following geometry: A = 1. yG =809 mm.4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content . I = 71.01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG.25·108 mm3. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.35·104 mm2 Fig.eff = 3.4494 .

EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s.1667 = 0.00208 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 1123 mm 2 this reinforcement has to be put in the web tied area with height over the bottom slab a = 1800 – 809 – 300 = 691 mm.00943 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 4243mm 2 We use (14+14)φ14 mm equivalent to 4312 mm2.00943 1 − 0.4494 A s.825 ⋅ 10 ⎝ ⎦ the eccentricity of the normal force in the presence of Mcr is then: e = −9585 ⋅ 10 3 6000 + 741 = −856 mm and the neutral axis position results from the relation Table of Content .812 > ξ and it follows: ρs. 45 2(1 − 0.25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1.4494) − 0. The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7. 7. Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2.01235 ⋅ 0.min = 0.825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1.min = 0.4 Fig. Minimum reinforcement. Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct .min = 0. case (a).25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7.8 ⎥ 7.4.

705) − 0.7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s.00797 1 − 0. 7.00046 3 ⋅ 1.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2.7050) ⎤ ρs.min = 0. case (b).5 Fig.min = 0.1667 = 0.min = 0.7050 ) = 0.6945 − 2(1 − 0.8(1 − 0. with h = 1.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.1667 − 0.1667 − 0.812 > ξ and it results ρs.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0.00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2.01235 ⋅ 0.7050 e 856 Considering the web.705 A s. Minimum reinforcement. ξ = 0.5. 3B Table of Content .4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.01235 ⋅ 0. The bars have to be located in the tied part of the web for an extension a = 1800-1269-300 = 231 mm over the bottom slab In the bottom slab we have: 1 − 9 8 αf = 0. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7.min = 0. 45 2(1 − 0.

6 Fig.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 and then Table of Content .4. d=548mm.2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs. 7. Reinforced concrete section. cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15.cr = k t ⋅ fct .6.6).8).3. M=300kNm.2a) (7.0767. As=2712mm2 (6φ24). δ=548/600=0.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs.167. It results then β=452/2712=0. h=600mm.0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡548 − y n + 0.4) can be immediately used as verification formula.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7.3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2.17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3. ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0.3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7.4) The (7.913. fck=30MPa.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3. the (7. c=40mm.eff (7. δ’=460/600=0. fct.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.0mm.1) σs.4 ⋅ c + 0. As’=452mm2 (4φ12).eff=fctm=2.9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0. k4=0. d’=46. b=400mm. . As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0.5 (1 − δ ) .EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.

08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 5 ⎢ ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.2012 ⎛ 0.08MPa 0. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237.17 0. 0.8 = = 0.2175.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2.3963 h 600 I*n = y 400 2 2 237. Then λ=0.cr = 0. (1-0.9 0.5.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡( 548 − 237.96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.167 ( 46 − 237.6 ⋅ 2.2012.2012 ⎥ = 0.72 + 113026 = 237.7 + 118.8 ) ⎤ = 5.EC2 – worked examples 2 y n + 237.0113 0.8 ) / 5.0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.184mm 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4B Table of Content .4 ⋅ 40 + 0.2012.8 ) + 0.8mm .0113 ⎝ 0. The adopted statements lead to σs.5(1-0.2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57.913)=0.3963)/3=0.

stated b. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7. d. and fixed M.4.8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7. h.12) Combining (7.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7.7) Deducing ρs from (7. d’.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0.5) and with its substitution in the (7. the (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7.4] 7.11).34αe ⋅φ⋅λ ⎡δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎤ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎡ ⎤ 3ξ2 2ξ3 ⎢ ⎥ × + ⎢ ⎡δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎤ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦⎦ ⎣⎣ αeν ( δ−ξ) Table of Content . The adimensional calculus leads to 1 − ξ2 − α e ⋅ρs (1 + β ) ξ + α e ⋅ρs ( δ + β ⋅ δ ' ) = 0 2 σs = α e ν ( δ − ξ ) fctm k t 2 2 2 ⎡3n ⋅ρs ⎡( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) ⎤ + ξ3 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (7.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7.5) (7. b.8) and (7.4) to use it as a design formula.4).4.9) (7.4 ⋅ c + 0. In particular.6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7. we want to deduce the metal reinforcement amount As and its design tension σs in order to have a crack amplitude wk lower than the fixed value w k . after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3.9) is ⎡ ⎤ 2α ⋅λ w0 ⋅ξ2 k =⎢ + e2 ⎣δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎦ +αe ⎥ × ⎡ ⎤ ξ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎢ 3.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (7. where w = w k .17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7.

18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content .9d=M and then ρs=0. In this case.13) the (7.15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3. being the value λ =0. .9.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter.88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then. ρs from (7.17) the (7.18) the (11. easier to be applied. leads to the desred values ρs e σs. If it is not the case. we have σsAs0.9d. if we set the value of σs. the solution for (7. An alternative procedure. the neutral axis is obtained from (7.243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1. it is necessary to set in the (7. The procedure. aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level.18 1− 1− 0. let’s state δ=0.185ν/(pδ) the (7.14) 7.8). consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0.11).11) (7. and together with the (7.13).20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ ν ⎥ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ⎦ (7.5 practically impossible for bending problems. numerically solved.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3.67) is easy to solve. In this case too. which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5.4u1 ν ν * − 0.5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ. as the parameter p is defined.4.13). Alternatively. using the (7.4c + 0.11) solved with respect to φ.9).2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7.16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7. . In this way. it is possible to set the tensional level σs. the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount.7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ.185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7.15) and (7. for example coincident with the permissible one.4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7.13) λ = 2. λ = 0.

allows to satisfy the cracking ultimate state corresponding to a fixed value of the steel tension.19) that defines the maximal bars diameter. 6B Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 7-12 φmax ⎡17c( νp − α e ν * ) − 5ν * w ok ⎤ ⎦ =⎣ * αe ν ν p − p2 (7. associated to the reinforcement amount given by the (7. which.15)..

75 ⋅ 0.62 ⋅ 0. p(1) = 156. Reinforced concrete Section.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.7.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3.086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7.62 As (2/3) = 0. 156.2 mm .6 ⋅ 3.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9. w k = 0.20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9. Then in a general form w 0k = 0. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state. 7.965 + 18400.4 ⋅ 1.30mm the maximal amplitude.01375 .4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7.18/7. M=600kNm.874 w k = 0.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235.77 = 0.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0.15kNm ν*=7.874 (see ex. Fig. design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0.15) and (7. It results fctm=0. c=50mm.332/3=3.01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0.16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1. w k = 0.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.3 mm .92 ⋅ p − 9. σs (1) = 0.77 = 0. 119. 2/3. 7.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7. φ=26mm. in the three cases here considered kw = 1. 1/3.77 0.15=7.185 ⋅ 7.6 · 3.086 · 156.5002/6). in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1.(1000.1) u1=50/26=1.185 ⋅ 7.30mm. h=500mm.16 7.3.086MPa ν=600/77.77/(1-1.92 M0cr=0.7. fck=33MPa.75 As (1) = 0.6. w k = 0.20mm.16 ⋅ ⎢ 3. together with the (7.77)=9.10).086.10mm .01049 . Assuming b=1000mm. p (2/3) = 119.3.874 Table of Content .3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0.10-6=77.16 max Defined w k = 0.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation.

874 σs (1/3) = 0. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0.6·3.652 + 69614 = 195.48 As (1/3) = 0. Designed sections. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.086·119.185 ⋅ 7.1 mm .3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79. 7.62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.9 mm .9 = 304 MPa 7.65 + 79. the metal areas are overestimated. p (1/3) = 75.02179 . w k = 0. and 26 mm diameter bars are used.48 ⋅ 0.93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195. ξ = 0.086 · 75.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0.8.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 159. Table of Content .77 = 0.3918 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 195.9 ) = 7.48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7.02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0.7. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision.6 · 3.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig. 75.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0.

41 ⋅ 109 0.6 ⋅ 3.2 2 + 143704 = 247.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.874) = 0.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.1 mm .0138 ⎝ 0.1) = 1.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.6 ) = 8.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.2 + 167.31 MPa 0.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 207.4 ⋅50 + 0. Then σs.31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.01062 ⎝ 0. ρs = 69.5 + 103.1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.52 + 90498 = 214.cr = 0. ξ = 0.6 ⋅ 3.3918) / 3 = 0.315.0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53.13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.1687 Table of Content .2027 0.306 mm 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 .06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0.11 MPa 0.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0.1 = 160 MPa 1. ξ = 0.41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.494 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 247.6 mm .4292 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 214.4292) / 3 = 0.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247.6 = 238 MPa 8.03 / (50 · 100) = 0.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 y n + 334. ρs = 111.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.1903 σs.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.11⎞ ⎛ 0.cr = 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ 0.2027 ⎛ 0.01062 ⎟ = 0.1903 ⎛ 0.5 (1 – 0.494) / 3 = 0.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.

811 0.213 0. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification.2.99 + 3·160·13.85 h0/d = (43.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.0223 ⎝ 0. Table 7.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.8 Let’s remark that the presence of a compressed reinforcement is highly recommended to make ductile the section in the ultimate limit state.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.78 MPa 0.1 and 7.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0.79/18. The values from the verification are slightly larger because of the fact that in the considered section the internal drive lever arm is lower than the approximated value 0. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state.9 0. In fact.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13.836 0.cr = 0.70 = 0. Exact method.70 ≅ 0.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure.9 0.2 6903 221 0.1 11151 140 0.46/3) / 43. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43.2 and they are shown in Figure 7.70 = 0.59/3) / 43. Table 7.1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0.99) + + 2/3·24.14).16) (7.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design.70 – 21. Table of Content .0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41.120 0. Approximated method.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.70 – 19.9.85 Fig.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0.3 and Figure 7.6 ⋅ 3. those values are evaluated using the (7. Table 7. wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0. The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.086 ⋅ wk = 0. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.9.792/18.10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs.836 h0/d = [(18·160·18.1687 ⎛ 0.1.71] / 43. 7.

Approximated method – Determination of maximum diameter. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs). wk = 0. Table of Content .3.1 mm (A) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 137 30 11111 140 26 11151 145 20 10486 149 16 10205 156 10 9750 wk = 0.10.3 mm (C) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 280 30 5430 290 26 5310 309 20 4910 325 16 4672 355 10 4282 Fig.2 mm (B) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 214 30 7001 221 26 6903 233 20 6508 243 16 6245 261 10 5816 wk = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7. 7.

12.6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7. deformation limit state.8 ) = 18. 7.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385.9 ⋅ 5. g=2q. 7. l=10m.8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166.11. Table of Content .745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385.12 Fig. as indicated in Figure 7.13. fck=30MPa.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385. g+q=40kN/m. Fig. Section at stage I.9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2. as reported in Figure 7. deflected beam. Transversal section.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0.11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7.13. stating αe = Es/Ec=15.6 In the stage II.8 From Table [3.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2. Referring to the stage I.13. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) . 7.

1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.21) is written as 2 ⎡ 1 M β ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 4 ( ξ2 − ξ3 ) dξ − 2 Ec I I ⎣ ξ1 4λ ⎝2⎠ ∫ 1 2 ξ1 dξ ⎤ ⎥ 1− ξ ⎦ (7.21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe.20) where vI is the displacement calculated in the first step and Δv(l/2) the increase of the displacement itself caused from the cracking. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7. is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 ) = M cr 1 = M max λ (7.23) The abscissa ξ1.92 + 94. Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2). .14. that can be expressed for symmetry reason 1 2 ⎡ 1 M M2 f (ξ) ⎤ ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = 2 ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 f M ( ξ ) g ( ξ ) dξ − ∫ 2 β 2cr M dξ ⎥ .EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 y n + 189.05/10. the equation (7.22) Calculating the integrals on the right side of the equation we finally obtain 2 M 4 3 β ⎛ ⎞ ⎡5 ⎤ 4 Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ + ξ1 − ξ1 − 2 ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Ec I I ⎣ 48 3 4λ ⎝2⎠ ⎦ (7. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7.01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 II 2 3 then c=18.13=1.24) Table of Content . where the cracked part of the beam start.78 Fig.84y n − 123396 = 0 2 y n = −94. Section at stage II.92 2 + 123396 = 269mm I * = 500 ⋅ 269 3 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1. 7.

15. considering that v I = The (7.26) Finally.29) (7. 7. that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0.15.27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (7.λ.EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7. for the same Mmax. the displacement in case of concentrated load results to be lower because the linear trend of the relative bending moment is associated to a smaller region of the cracking beam with respect to the case of distributed load.27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section.28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ).20) is expressed as 2 ⎡ 48 ⎛ 4 4 3 ⎞ 12 β ⎤⎫ ⎛ ⎞ 5 M max ⎧ v⎜ ⎟ = 1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 + ⎜ ξ1 − ξ1 ⎟ − ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎥ ⎬ ⎣ ⎦ ∗ ⎨ 2 5 ⎝ 3 ⎠ 5 λ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 Ec I I ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (7.51).15. .25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7. leads to the following expression for the section displacement 2 ⎛ ⎞ M l v ⎜ ⎟ = max * ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12Ec I I 3β ⎡ ⎡ ⎤⎤ 3 ⎢1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 − 8ξ1 − λ 2 (1 − 2ξ1 ) ⎥ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎦ ⎣ 2 (7. In the same way.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11. Diagrams for v/v1 . 12Ec I ∗ I (7. it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam.93 and 0. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig. In this way. varying z . The result. Furthermore. that show as the increase of the ratio λ means a decrease for ξ1 and the increase of v(l/2) as a consequence of a larger cracked part of the beam. a concentrated load Q=200kN. ξ1 . we obtain the curves reported in Figure 7.

05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1. as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7. where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam.16. Table of Content .05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig.15 and Figure 7. displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c). introducing the numerical values in the (7. is about 4%.64 = 35.56 ⋅ 17.26) (7. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection.29) and using the results in Figure 11.16. we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21.64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18. Deformation in the stage I (a). 7.65 ⋅ 21.EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3. In particular.31 = 27.25.6. is reported in Figure 7.71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

0. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength.1 – 11. 2 Table of Content .0. for corresponding density class in kg/m3.3. flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa.95 = 1. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11.12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0.for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 . flcm = value of the average cylindric compressive strength in MPa. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3.1 and 11. corresponding to fractiles 0.3.3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.2] The criteria for design of the characteristic tensile strength (fractile 5% and 95%) and of the intersecting compressive elastic module for light concrete are shown below.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 11.60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.40+0. for two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation. the intersecting compressive elastic module at 28 days.3.05 = 0.05 e 0. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0. in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11. The characteristic values of simple tensile strength. can be taken equal to: . can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk.2 of Eurocode 2.1 [EC2 Clause 11. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ .The results of calculation of the two above-mentioned mechanical features are shown and compared in the following table. which can be used as an indicative value for design of the deformability of structural members. in lack of direct experimentation.95.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2.3.

0.1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.2 1.9 2.5 4.05 [MPa] fctk.2 3.0.563 -2.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.1 5.4 5.868 -4.959 -0.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.9 3.2 4.4 2.7 3.95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .850 -0.

3.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN. In case one chooses. The section in question is shown in Fig. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T.5 cm = 36.96‰. for fyk= 450 MPa.5 cm. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28.5 – 11.1 Deformation and tension diagram of r.1 – 11. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding.11.3. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10.c.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3.4 – 11. section.98‰.5η1 = 2. 11. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit. to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2. which implies the simultaneous achievement of maximum contraction side concrete and of the strain corresponding to the design yield stress of the tensioned reinforcement steel. build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1. like in the previous example.365 = 432. ρ = 1650 kg/m3). from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0.3 cm. The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10. The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0.6 – 11. made of type 1 lightweight concrete.3. described in the previous example.75‰.2 [EC2 Clause 11.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions.5 kNm. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit.15 x 200000) = 1. Table of Content .1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled.15 x Es) = 450/(1. is εyd = fyd /(1. Fig. Two areas can be distinguished in the compressed zone: the first one is comprised between the upper edge and the chord placed at the level where the contraction is εlc3 = 1.85 flck/γc = 19.8 MPa. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11. h=50cm and d=47cm. the second remaining area is the one where compression on concrete linearly decreases from the value flcd to zero in correspondence of the neutral axis.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

Carte Fundatii Ec2

incarcari.xlsx

Platon - Opere Complete (Vol. 1)

Armare Radier Cu Otel BST500 S

21 Standard Tunel CF Linie Dubla

Colossus of Rhodes

Big r Bridge Interlocking Steel Sheet Piling

Adancime de Pozare Tuburi

View

profu17

Catalog Spectrum 2012

Extras Mic

Gard de Lemn-Layout1

Caracteristicile Terenului Folosit Pentru Umpluturi

Calculul Timpanului La Podetele

2 Infrastructura Cailor de Comunicatie Terestre

1.6..Fise Tehnice - Rezervor 5mc

Wood Fence Detail

Troliu Rugged Ridge Heavy Duty 8500 LBS 12V 3856 KG Cu Cablu Sintetic SK 75 Si Set de Accesorii Fisa Tehnica

ORDIN-albiiminore

Note de Calcul Container

Gard de Lemn-Layout1

Caracteristicile Terenului Folosit Pentru Umpluturi

Bonjour

A n t e m a s u r a t o a r e

Download

by Anthony Doerr

by Graeme Simsion

by Lindsay Harrison

by Brad Kessler

by David McCullough

by Jaron Lanier

by Miriam Toews

by Meg Wolitzer

by Alexandra Horowitz

by Ernest Hemingway

by Lewis MacAdams

by Katie Ward

by Nic Pizzolatto

by Rachel Kushner

by Aravind Adiga

by David Gordon

by Maxim Biller

by Åke Edwardson

On Writing

The Shell Collector

I Am Having So Much Fun Here Without You

The Rosie Project

The Blazing World

Quiet Dell

After Visiting Friends

Missing

Birds in Fall

Who Owns the Future?

All My Puny Sorrows

The Wife

A Farewell to Arms

Birth of the Cool

Girl Reading

Galveston

Telex from Cuba

Rin Tin Tin

The White Tiger

The Serialist

No One Belongs Here More Than You

Love Today

Sail of Stone

Fourth of July Creek

The Walls Around Us

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CANCEL

OK

scribd