P. 1
Worked Examples for Eurocode 2 Final - DeF080723 (SL 16 09 08)

Worked Examples for Eurocode 2 Final - DeF080723 (SL 16 09 08)

|Views: 4|Likes:
Published by Nanescu Liliana

More info:

Published by: Nanescu Liliana on Mar 02, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/02/2013

pdf

text

original

EUROCODE 2 WORKED EXAMPLES

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.

 

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

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

...........................................................................................5]...................... 6-10 EXAMPLE 6.......................4] .................................... 4-1 EXAMPLE 4............ WITH STEEL S500C fyd = 435 MPA................................................4] ....1 [EC2 CLAUSE 4...... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2.......... 6-4 EXAMPLE 6..2 [EC2 CLAUSE 4....................................................................................................................... 6-1 EXAMPLE 6. 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.... WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES .......................................................................... WALL BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6...........................................................1 (CONCRETE C30/37) [EC2 CLAUSE 6.......................................................................4]..............WORKED EXAMPLES .......................................................... ULS COMBINATION OF ACTION OF A RESIDENTIAL CONCRETE FRAMED BUILDING [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.....................................EC2 – worked examples summary EUROCODE 2 .4] ....................... 6-9 EXAMPLE 6....... WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN ........... CONCRETE RETAINING WALL: GLOBAL STABILITY AND GROUND RESISTANCE VERIFICATIONS [EC2 – CLAUSE 2....................................................4] ........................5.............................C FOR A PRESTRESSED BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6................1.......SUMMARY SECTION 2.............1] ..........4] .....2] ............................................2..................................2 (CONCRETE C90/105) [EC2 CLAUSE 6..... 6-15 Table of Content .............6 [EC2 CLAUSE 6........4....................4] .......................................... 2-4 EXAMPLE 2..............................5 [EC2 CLAUSE 6................................................................................................................... [EC2 CLAUSE 6...............2] .....8.... 6-12 EXAMPLE 6........... 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.....3 [EC2 CLAUSE 4........................................ 4-1 EXAMPLE 4. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY ...............................3]..........................................................................4 DETERMINATION OF SHEAR RESISTANCE GIVEN THE SECTION GEOMETRY AND MECHANICS [EC2 CLAUSE 6....................................................................... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2..........................3] ..................4B – THE SAME ABOVE........................................ ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CONTINUOUS BEAM [EC2 – CLAUSE 2....................... 6-5 EXAMPLE 6........2] .................................................2] .......... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CANOPY [EC2 – CLAUSE 2...................................... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS ON A REINFORCED CONCRETE RETAINING WALL [EC2 – CLAUSE 2..................... 2-9 SECTION 4............... 6-7 EXAMPLE 6................... 4-4 SECTION 6............................................... 6-1 EXAMPLE 6.3...... 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.........1] .............................................................................................................3 CALCULATION OF VRD............................7 SHEAR – TORSION INTERACTION DIAGRAMS [EC2 CLAUSE 6................4] ............ 2-6 EXAMPLE 2..............................................

.....5] ......................13 VARIABLE HEIGHT BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6..............................3.......................... 7-10 5B7.........................2 [EC2 CLAUSE 11..................................................................... 6-32 EXAMPLE 6...........2] ..................... THICK SHORT CORBEL...........................................................5 – 11................4............................................4............................................12 PILE CAP [EC2 CLAUSE 6............... 6-38 EXAMPLE 6..........................4] .............2 – 7.................. 3500 KN CONCENTRATED LOAD [EC2 CLAUSE 6.....3...........................1 EVALUATION OF SERVICE STRESSES [EC2 CLAUSE 7....................3 EVALUATION OF CRACK AMPLITUDE [EC2 CLAUSE 7.......2 APPROXIMATED METHOD ........................................5] ............. 6-40 SECTION 7......................................................5 APPLICATION OF THE APPROXIMATED METHOD [EC2 CLAUSE 7...........................3........................3 – 7........................ 7-5 EXAMPLE 7....5] ......................................... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11.........2 – 7.........................4 – 11................ 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.3........... 6-21 EXAMPLE 6..................................1 – 6......................................................... 7-18 SECTION 11.........10 THICK CANTILEVER BEAM.....................10 – 6...............6] ...6 – 11......................................... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11....... A>Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6.....................1 – 11.................. 7-11 EXAMPLE 7....6 VERIFICATION OF LIMIT STATE OF DEFORMATION ....5].............5] .................4] .....................1 – 11..................... 6-24 EXAMPLE 6................ SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES ....2] ..................EC2 – worked examples summary EXAMPLE 6.... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7.2 DESIGN OF MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT [EC2 CLAUSE 7....... 7-8 EXAMPLE 7...... 11-3 Table of Content .......................................... [EC2 CLAUSE 5..............4] ..........14....... a<Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6......... LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES........9.............1 [EC2 CLAUSE 11..................3................. DESIGN FORMULAS DERIVATION FOR THE CRACKING LIMIT STATE [EC2 CLAUSE 7.............................. 6-28 EXAMPLE 6..15 SLABS.................... 6-18 EXAMPLE 6....................... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7..............................4] ..............11 GERBER BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6.........................2] .....5] ...................3..........3................................

1. Load combination for verification of bending moment in the BC span. 2. 2. the partial safety factor for permanent loads in the verification of bending moment in the middle of the central span. 2. Fig. In this example and in the following ones. Fig.35 (Fig. STR – Bending moment verification at mid span (Set B) Unlike in the verification of static equilibrium.2.EC2 – worked examples 2-1 SECTION 2. 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. as indicated in Fig. 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. because of their small variability. respectively Gk1 and Gk2. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN EXAMPLE 2. 2.1. Load combination for verification of holding down devices at the end bearings.1. ULS combinations of actions for a continuous beam [EC2 – clause 2.2). is the same for all spans: γG = 1. a single characteristic value is taken for self-weight and permanent imposed load.

and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force. 2. 2. Fig.35) for all spans. Load combination for verification of static equilibrium. as in Fig. 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. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.2.3.4] 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. ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case.3.

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

Variable actions are listed in table 2. Table of Content .n (for sites under 1000 m a. a) 1.STR (Set B) (eq. 2.6.5·( Fk.05·Qk.n + 0. but they may be defined in the National Annex.es) = 1.es 0.7 Qk.n + 1.l.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk.es + 0. c) Snow load predominant.3.es + 0.es Predominant action: snow (fig. 2. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk. 2.) wind Fk.w + 0.35·Gk + 1.w + 0. favourable vertical loads.5·(Qk. Table 2. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.5· Fk.7·Qk.6. c) 1.6.5·Qk.35·Gk + 1.1.6.6·Fk.B.5·Qk.05·Qk. d) service load predominant.5 Qk.7·Qk.35·Gk + 1.s.0·Gk + 1.6.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2.w Fig. 2.35·Gk + 1.es + 0.5·( Qk. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure . Variable actions on a residential concrete building.6·Fk.35·Gk + 1.n + 0.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.1.75·Qk.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk.w) = 1.w N.5·Qk.n 0. 6.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant.w Predominant action: service load (fig. b) 1. d) 1. unfavourable vertical loads.w) = 1.w 0.9·Fk.9·Fk.es + 0.n + 0. ULS combination of action .5·Qk. 2.35·Gk + 1.n + 0.5·Fk.w unfavourable vertical loads (fig. b) Wind predominant.75· Qk.6 Fk.n + 1.

0·Gk + 1.3·0.es + 1. d) service load predominant. unfavourable vertical loads. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant. a) 1. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below.es + 0. c) Snow load predominant.es = 1.3·0.3· Fk. c) 1. d) 1. or on the structure.w + 1. 2.78·Fk.0·Gk + 1.w = 1.5·Qk.0·Gk + 1.7·Qk.0·Gk + 1. favourable vertical loads.es + 1.es Predominant action: snow (fig.w + 0.0·Gk + 1.7·Qk. are applied in separate calculations.78·Fk. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2.n + 0.65·Qk.w Predominant action: service load (fig.6·Fk. b) 1.3·0. 2.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches.3·0.3·Qk.5·Qk.3·Qk.0·Gk + 1. the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex.91·Qk.n + 1.15 and 2.n + 0.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig.es + 0.91·Qk. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure.65· Qk.n + 1.n + 0. 6. Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification). Table of Content .16.7.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq.w Fig.3·Qk. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig. 2.3· Fk. 2.w = 1. 2.7.3·0.3· Fk.7. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation.n + 1.7.3·Qk. b) Wind predominant.3·0.7.6·Fk.0·Gk + 1.

75·Qk.5· Fk.w 1.4. i.9·(Gk.es 1.0·Gk + 1.05·Qk.5·Qk. can be referred to Set B. 2.35·Gk + 1.w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i.w + 0.05·Qk.n + 1. Set B) are used.5·Qk.es + 0.9·Fk.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1.9. Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU . to approach 2. 2. 2. Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content .8.35·Gk + 1. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.sovr Fig.n + 0.e. 1. EXAMPLE 2.terr) + 1.35·Gk + 1.w 1.1·Sk.9·Fk. ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2.75·Qk. as geotechnical actions are not present.wall + Gk.e.9). This case.4] Fig.5·Qk.(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.es + 0.n + 1.terr + 0.5·Sk.

Possible load cases of surcharge on the embankment.3·Sk.terr + 1.35·Sk. 2.5·Sk.0·Gk.35·Sk.5·Sk.sovr Note: For all the above-listed combinations. only cases in relation with case b).5·Sk. are given below.sovr 1.wall + 1.sovr + 1.0·Gk.terr + 1.terr + 1.terr + 1.terr + 1.wall + 1. 2.0·Gk. with surcharge acting on the whole surface of embankment.5·Qk.terr + 1. two possibilities must be considered: either that the surcharge concerns only the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing (Fig.10.5·Qk.wall + 1.terr + 1. 2.35·Sk. Table of Content .35·Gk.10a).35·Gk. For brevity.sovr 1.0·Gk. Fig.0·Gk.terr + 1.0·Gk. The following figures show loads in relation to the combinations obtained with Set B partial safety factors. Set C 1.(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.wall + 1.e.sovr + 1. i.35·Gk.terr + 1.35·Sk.wall + 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-7 STR/GEO .5·Qk. or that it acts on the whole surface of the embankment (Fig.5·Qk.sovr Set B 1.5·Sk.terr + 1.sovr 1.sovr + 1.sovr + 1.0·Sk.10b).35·Gk.

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

sovr + 1.wall + 1.terr + 1.12. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.3·Qk.70 = 76.wall = Pk.wall + Pk.50 ⋅ 25 = 18.wall = 0.terr + 1.75 + 31.terr + 1.wall + 1.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.terr + 1. EXAMPLE 2.5.wall + 1.terr + 1.30 ⋅ 2.terr + 1. weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz.3·Sk.0·Gk.50 ⋅ 2.EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk.wall + 1.foot = 18.50 ⋅ 25 = 31.ground = 18 ⋅ 2. Fig.0·Gk.75 kN/m Pk.ground = 26.35·Gk.sovr + 1.sovr A numeric example is given below. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.0·Sk.3·Qk.33 δ=0° Pk.9 kN/m Table of Content .0·Gk.0·Gk.35·Gk.sovr + 1.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.sovr 1.3·Sk.35·Gk.0·Sk. 2.50 ⋅ 1.terr + 1.surch = 9.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.3·Qk.35·Gk.3·Sk. active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.foot = 0.terr + 1.sovr + 1.Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.0·Sk.3·Sk.0·Sk.sovr 1.sovr 1.25 kN/m Gk.3·Qk. 1.

sovr second combination 1.75⋅0.5⋅1.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.28 = 51.sovr third combination 1.foot = 0. i. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.5·Qk.wall + 1.wall + 1.5) = 39.5·Sk.wall + 1.65) = 113.1): Sground = 1.terr + 1. Set B if partial factors.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.terr + 1.1 ⋅ 26.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.terr + 1.85 = 44.ground = 0.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.73= 29.9⋅(76.35·Sk.9⋅(31.25⋅1.00/3) = 29.0·Gk.5 ⋅ 9.e.03 kNm/m Fstab.5 ⋅ (9.1⋅(26.0·Gk.68 = 3.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.50) = 22.35·Gk.57⋅18.90 ⋅ 1.35·Gk.0 and 1.24 = 64.5·Qk.sovr + 1.57⋅76.40 + 22.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.sovr + 1.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0.ground = 1.73/51.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.16 kNm/m Mstab.97 + 35.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.25) = 35.03 + 39.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29. By taking 1.5·Sk.9): Mstab.62 + 16.9⋅(0.73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.16 + 113.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.65) = 10.60 = 159.5): MS.25) = 16.35·Sk.9): Fstab.sovr + 1.ground = 0.terr + 1.0·Gk.57⋅31.9⋅(0.9): Fstab.wall = 0.5·Qk.terr + 1.1): MS.surch = 1.wall = 0.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9.5): Ssur = 1.75) = 9.sovr Table of Content . is used.35·Sk.89 / 44.40 + 14.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively.9⋅(18.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.5·Sk.foot = 0.25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.73⋅3.25 = 1.90 = 14.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.terr + 1.35·Gk.9⋅(0.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.

5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39.25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .502 = 88.13).5 = 0.5·Sk.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1.30.75 + 31.73⋅3. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1.0 ⋅ (18.0·Gk. (Fig.00/3)=36.35⋅(26.5⋅0.90⋅1.1.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2.0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1. Fig.0): Pwall = 1. as follows: moment vs. The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination.0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.35·Gk.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.wall + 1.35·Sk. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.e.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1.25 + 76.0⋅(18.13.40) = .35. For the verification of the contact pressure.5⋅(9.0): Pground = 1. 2. the values given at Table 2.08 kNm/m MS.5) = 76.60) = 11.5·Qk.5 = 126. combinations.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1.0 ⋅ (31.75 ⋅ 0.25) =31.sovr + 1.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1.75) = 18.50) = 22.50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.0 ⋅ (76.terr = 1.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1.50/6 = 41.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1. Table of Content .088 MPa The results given at Table 2.01 / 126.terr + 1.terr + 1.08 + 22.05 kN/m2 = 0.0⋅(76.28 + 11.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS.6 = 39.6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1. i.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18. 2.25 – 30.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated.sovr = 1.

60 -41.ground (kNm/m) MS.35) 39.0) 144 0. 5) (γQ=1.25 (γG=1.18 88.08 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.35) 76.19 (γG=1.5) 11.5) 15.20 -10.ground (kNm/m) MS.19 11.19 (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.26 third 36.31 88.5) (γQ=1.0) (γG=1.05 32.35) 28.10 18.31 (γG=1.08 36.19 (γG=1.50 (γG=1. 5) 178.35) 25.35) 42.67 18.30 18.35) -30.35) 42.50 (γQ=1.08 36. Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.35) 22.48 fourth 36.50 (γQ=1.5) (γQ=1.0) -10.25 15.08 36. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.0) 25.35) 153.11 99.50 (γQ=1.0) 76.31 (γG=1.28 (γQ=1. first second third 36.25 (γG=1.20 (γQ=1.10 88.35) 103.50 0.0) 42.35) 103.5) 15.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.35) -30.0) 31.19 (γG=1.0) -41.35) -30.83 Table 2.0) -30.35) 25.35) 76.5) 11.35) 22.60 -41. not present in Table 1. Table of Content .20 -10.19 99.3.0) 25.28 22.35) (γQ=1.60 (γG=1.50 0.19 (γG=1.30 98.0) (γG=1.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).35) 22. 5) 28.08 (γQ=1.28 22.78 0.01 18.5) 152.35) (γQ=1.31 -41.5) (γQ=1.28 (γG=1.19 (γG=1.28 (γQ=1. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.60 (γG=1.0) 103.31 (γG=1.50 (γG=1. first second 36.5) 11.28 (γQ=1.2.75 (γG=1.19 (γG=1.75 (γG=1.89 fourth 36.50 (γQ=1.95 25.31 (γG=1.20 (γQ=1.31 (γG=1.75 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.04 25.5) 196.28 0.0) 126.28 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.78 0.0) 31.81 18.35) 22.24 25.28 (γG=1.5) (γQ=1.28 (γG=1.25 15.0) 31.35) 22.25 (γG=1.0 0.19 88.18 and here highlighted in bold.28 22.75 25.75 (γG=1.35) (γG=1.19 99.25 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.0) (γG=1.25 (γG=1.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).0) 103.08 (γQ=1.5) 169.35) (γG=1.28 0.35) 42.35) (γQ=1.35) -10.35) 42.08 (γQ=1.0) (γG=1.46 22.28 (γQ=1.0) 31.0) 76.5) 32. 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.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.35) 170.

Fig.add = 0 .γ = 0 .4] Design the concrete cover of a reinforced concrete beam with exposure class XC1. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. The structural class is S4. cmin.EC2: cmin. From relation (3.add. The max aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).EC2 – worked examples 4-1 SECTION 4.1N .γ . 10 mm) = 15 mm Table of Content .dur + Δcdur.1 From table E. Δcdur.st .b = 8 mm We obtain from table 4. the reference (min. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY EXAMPLE 4. Refer to figure 4. the concrete cover for the stirrups is calculated.2): cmin = max (cmin.st = 0 . Δcdur. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm. Bottom longitudinal bars are 5 φ 20.4N . 10 mm) = max (8.1 [EC2 clause 4.dur = 15 mm Moreover: Δcdur. First.EC2 we see that.Δcdur. 4.b. The concrete in use has resistance class C25/30. Normal quality control is put in place. With: cmin.1.) concrete strength class for exposure class XC1 is C20/25. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0.Δcdur. the resistance class adopted (C25/30) is suitable as it is higher than the reference strength class. The design working life of the structure is 50 years.

We obtain from table 4.EC2 – Worked examples 4-2 Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. 10 mm) = 20 mm .add = 0 . We obtain from relation (3.4N . γ = 0 .b = 20 mm. Δcdur. we have: c min. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 25 + 8 = 33 mm . Moreover: Δc dur.1): c nom = 20 + 10 = 30 mm .dur = 15 mm . Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 15 + 10 = 25 mm . 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. In this case. Δcdur. From relation (3. If we now calculate now the concrete cover for longitudinal reinforcement bars.2): c min = max (20.EC2: c min.st = 0 . We obtain from relation (3. Table of Content .

EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.1. The exposure class is XS1. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37.1N .4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast. Fig. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm . We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30.EC2 we find that. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm .) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37.2. From table E.2 [EC2 clause 4. Refer to figure 3. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm . we design the minimum concrete cover with reference to both the stirrups and the longitudinal bars.dur = 35 mm . The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min. In this case.2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3. the reference (min. for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm . A normal quality control is put in place. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. 4. Table of Content . even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).

dur = 25 mm . 25 + 0 – 0 – 0.dur + Δc dur. − strands φ 0.4N . γ − Δc dur. Δcdur. Δcdur. We use concrete with strength class C45/55.2): c min = max (c min. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 16 mm.st = 0 . c min. Moreover: Δc dur. the minimum concrete strength class is C30/37. The original structural class is S4. In accordance with table 4. γ = 0 . An accurate quality control of concrete production is put in place. We have: c min. − φ 8 stirrups at 100 mm . − the structural class is reduced by 1 as special quality control of the concrete production is ensured We then refer to structural class S2.5” . Calculating first the concrete cover for stirrups. From relation (3.st − Δc dur.b = 8 mm .3N: − the structural class is reduced by 1 as the concrete used (C45/55) is of strength class higher than C40/50.EC2 – Worked examples 4-4 EXAMPLE 4. We find out from table E. Refer to figure 3.b .4] Calculate the concrete cover of a TT precast element.EC2 that for exposure class XS1.EC2: c min. 10 mm) = 25 mm . made of prestressed reinforced concrete. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. strength class C45/55 is therefore adequate.1N .3 [EC2 clause 4.3. We obtain from table 4. At the lower side of the two ribbings of the TT element we have: − longitudinal φ 12 reinforcement bars. 10 mm ) = = max (8.add .add = 0 . Table of Content . The exposure class is XS1. placed outside an industrial building situated close to the coast.

dur + Δc dur.EC2: c min.add . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 30 + 8 = 38 mm . 4. 10 mm ) = = max (12. Fig.add = 0 . γ = 0 .1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm . 25 + 0 – 0 – 0.b . 10 mm) = 25 mm .st = 0 .dur = 25 mm . Table of Content . In this case. We obtain from relation (3.2): c min = max (c min. Δcdur.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm . Calculating now the concrete cover for longitudinal bars.4N . Note that for the ordinary reinforcement bars. γ − Δc dur. the concrete cover for stirrups is “dominant”. Moreover: Δc dur. c min. From relation (3. We obtain from relation (3.b = 12 mm . in which the concrete cover length is also assessed.3 Calculating now the concrete cover for strands.st − Δc dur. We obtain from table 4. the value of Δcdev can be taken as 5 mm. Δcdur.EC2 – worked examples 4-5 Considering that the TT element is cast under procedures subjected to a highly efficient quality control. We have: c min.

8 mm . Moreover: Δc dur. The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm.8. Table of Content .EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.dur = 35 mm . γ = 0 . From relation (3. From relation (3.b = 1.EC2: c min. Δcdur.5N . Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm . 10 mm) = 35 mm .add = 0 .2): c min = max (18. 35 + 0 – 0 – 0. The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element.1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm .5 = 18.st = 0 . Δcdur. We obtain from table 4.5 · 12.

d' = 50 mm.5 203.80 0. h = 1000 mm.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated. β1 and β2 factors and x1.1.8·500·113. NRd1 = 0.40 0. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth. x2 values are shown in table 6.max = 2821. The maximum moment resistance MRd.8·500·608. β2 is the “position factor”.1 Material data.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 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.0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN.1] Geometrical data: b= 500 mm.0 541. Fig.2 kNm goes alongside it. Some example is developed using S500 too. NRd3 = 0. 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.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 . Steel and concrete resistance. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas. Example 6.1 6. the ratio between the distance of the resultant of parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc from εc and the deformation εc itself.0 x2 (mm) 608.56 β2 0.1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0.35 x1 (mm) 113. EXAMPLE 6. d = 950 mm.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0. 6.

Example 1: values of axial force.105 0. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0.52 0.26 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known. 52m 5000 Table of Content .0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0. it results: x2 + 66.2. Ed Table 6.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown. eccentricity. moment resistance. the neutral axis x. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0.38 1.2. Their values are shown in Table 6.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0.294 0.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3. MRd.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing. NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎠ ⎝ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0. depth of neutral axis.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently. and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated.91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0.

0.max = 6948. moment resistance.619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2. MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd .2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6.7 kNm is associated to it.3 Table 6.08 0. eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0.55 0. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN.80 1.350 0.3 Values of axial load.1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6. depth of neutral axis.1.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x.35·0. MRd.14 Table of Content .142 0.5 – 0.619) + 3910·(0.EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6. The results are shown in Table 6. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0.50.

Class C40 concrete.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm.626 + 0.05/γC = 1· 2.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24.15. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.15⋅5.5/1.3 Calculation of VRd. Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk.626 and k1 = 0. h = 200 mm.5= 1. It results: VRd.66 )2 + 1. VRd. 66 ⋅ 5. Average prestressing σcp = 5.0 MPa.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment.0 = 44. d = 175 mm.66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66.c = (1.33 kN Table of Content . No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6. 0.c = (0.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment.

ν = 0.1504 hence cotθ = 2. z = 500 mm.532. ν = 0. with fck = 90 MPa.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd. s = 150 mm. fcd = 51 MPa. ν = 0.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd.512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2.90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement.375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. fyd = 391 MPa.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.512. vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm.2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. with bw = 150 mm. d = 550 mm.616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd.4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6.29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content .s = hence cotθ = 1.29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement. fcd = 34 MPa.EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd. The example is developed for three classes of concrete.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1. h = 600 mm.38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. with fck = 60 MPa. a) fck = 30 MPa .s = VRd. fcd = 17 MPa . 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2).

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

s) ΔFtd = 0.5 [EC2 clause 6.707 •The angle θ of simultaneous concrete – reinforcement steel collapse It results cot θ = bsνfcd −1 A sw f ywd sin α 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0.0) = 333 kN Table of Content .10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0.707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm. diameter 10 mm.4 kN 150 It results: VRd.5·605.0) ⋅ 0.10 + 1.40 ≤ 0. ν = 0. Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .4· (2. fyd = 391 MPa. 2 legs (Asw = 157 mm2).s (cot θ − cot α) = 0.616 ⋅ 17 = 2.5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0.0) .10 -1.616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1.72 < 7. fcd = 17 MPa .EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.5 VRd. fck = 30 MPa .5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0. replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2.707 and. s = 150 mm.

85·(30/1.707⋅0. width 1000 mm. Fig.5 MPa fyd = 500/1. 6. 6. with depth 1500 mm.2.7[1-30/250] = 0.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1. It results: VRd.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig.5) = 17.6 [EC2 clause 6.2 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. d = 1450 mm.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6.616 ν fcd = 10.707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content .3] Ring rectangular section.0 MPa ν = 0.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10. 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. with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members.5⋅0.

5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2.865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars.EC2 – worked examples 6-11 Determination of angle θ: * 1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1087000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 25.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section. 2 legs stirrups.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end.3(3)-EC2].14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2.14) = 0.14) = 0.03o 2 νfcd tz 2 10.08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2. pitch is in accordance with [9. with particular attention to the corner bars. Reinforcement of horizontal members.348 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 8 mm wide. pitch 200 mm. pitch 200 mm.2. Table of Content . subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2.

5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .3] resistant hollow section Fig.56o (cotθ = 2. h = 500 mm.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10. 6.85·(30/1.EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6. 6.5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd.616 .max = 2⋅10. 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 = 26.0) It results: VRd. ν fcd = 10.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm .0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0.5⋅300⋅400/(2+0.7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content .5⋅83636⋅94⋅0.4471⋅0.7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6. z =400 mm (Fig.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.5) = 17.

It results therefore: TRd. it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm.31)-EC2] In this expression. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations.EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig. 6.3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1.4 kNm 1/3 VRd.1-EC2]).5 = 1. On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1.18/1.4.63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0. For instance.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content .c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2.c ≤ 1 where TRd.01. moreover.0/1.5 = 0. if VEd = 350 kN is taken. The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd. Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.c + VEd /VRd. it results: CRd.c = 0.4. 6.3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3.c = ⎡CRd. ρ = 0. V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig.

bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram.010 with s not larger than 0.75⋅450 = 337 mm.6.12⋅1.e. For instance. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9. the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9. Namely.0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig.2 (6)-EC2]. It results : Asw/s.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.c = 0. 200 mm.2 (5)-EC2] and [9.5 The section.2. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed.2. 6.75d = 0. i. Because of the torsion.0010 Fig.08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0. which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0..EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd.5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content .5N-EC2]. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8.08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0.

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

beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig.15 1. 6. 150 x 300 load plate.85f ck 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6.5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm).8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam.9 Cantilever beam S&T model. Fig. Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa. 6.9.max Table of Content .18 ⎜1⎟ 19.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ σ1Rd.3 N / mm 2 1. 1. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.12 N / mm 0.5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391. Thick short corbel.5 1.15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.83 N / mm 2 . steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.83 = 20.

88 ⎛ 1.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 72 ) Ft 411000 = = 1050 mm 2 we use 8φ14 (As = 1232 mm2) f yd 391.2d = 0.9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side.10 in order to make the partition of the diagonal stress F F ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ Fdiag = c = Ed ⎟ between them.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ 2Rd.35 ⎞ 19.2·360 = 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. 6.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.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig.8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content .3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate.max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd.05 N / mm 0.83 = 15 N / mm 2 = k3 ⎜ ⎟ cd 0. 6. 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 20.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig.max = 20.8⋅d (z = 0.83 = 17. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig. 6.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.

double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification.2. where the main reinforcement is anchored.56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd. 6. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig.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.8. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements.max = 17.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag.2.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10.1): 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 = 0.25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided.

Fig. 6. ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.12 Cantilever S&T model. 6.12) is indeterminate. This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever). 6.13b). a) b) Fig.10 Thick cantilever beam.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6. 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.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever. The model proposed in EC2 (Fig. 400 x 400 mm column Fig. 150 x 220 mm load plate. 6. 6.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm).13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig. the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig. Elementary beams of the S&T model. in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z.13. Table of Content . 6.

some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd .85f ck 0.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side. 1.5 f yk 1.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd. 3 in conclusion.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content . the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 .max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed.83 N / mm 2 . steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.15 = 450 = 391.2d = 0. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19. a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column.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.3 N / mm 2 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement.8⋅d (z = 0.5 1.05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.max = 20.max = 17.

below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node.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 391.5 = 639 mm 2 f yd 391.37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 500000 = = 15. 208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13. in which the main reinforcement is anchored.max = 20.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .3 FEd 500000 = 0.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391.3 EC2 suggests a minimum secondary reinforcement of: Aw ≥ k2 we use 3 stirrups φ 12 (As = 678 mm2) node 2 verification.max = 17.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content .

6. (Fig.2. we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load.85f ck 0.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam.6)]. if only the scheme a) is used. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1.11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6.5 f yk 1. 6. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa.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 .4.3 N / mm 2 1.15 = 450 = 391. 1. Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses. a) b) Fig.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.17 N / mm 2 . Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement.5 1. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam.EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction. On the other hand.14). eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10.15 [(3.9.

4⋅x ≅ 40 mm from the upper surface) while the top reinforcement stress is: C’ = Es ε’s A’s = 200000·0. the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0.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.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. 6.0035 391. ' εs = 0.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0.00173·2513 Table of Content .8·800·99·14.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig.17 (applied at 0. as stated in the calculation.00173 ≤ yd = = 0.0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.8b x f cd + E s 0.15 Truss a.8 b x fcd = 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit.

3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391. then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 .45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content . Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391.3 Fig.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.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses.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. 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).

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. Table of Content .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.

15 = 450 = 391.17 Log plinth on pilings. 6.5 1.max = 11. diameter 800 mm piles Fig.17 N / mm 2 . 2000 x 700 mm columns.3 N / mm 2 1. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content .8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd.max = 12.85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14.5 f yd = f yk 1.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd.EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6. 1.75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd.5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm). steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6.85f ck 0.

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. the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig.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 = 391.3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0.18.17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0. the plinth own weight is considered negligible.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. then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles.00 .00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.8·700·462·14. 6. Fig.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3. 6. 6.00 .8·700·x·14.8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0.17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3. S&T model in the plane π1.NSd/2) = (4000/3.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3.8 b x fcd = 0. the truss-tie beam in Fig. Table of Content .17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0.

5° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.2° = 154 kN Fig.2° T10 = Fs = 1662 kN T11 = A’ cot θ11 = 2333 cot 26. 6.3 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 π3.5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56.5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65.5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 6. θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.

: σc = A 2333000 = = 4. 6. Nodes verification Concentrated nodes are only present at the pedestal pile and on the piles top.20.64 N mm 2 2 2 π⋅r π ⋅ 400 Table of Content . In these latter. Schematic placement of reinforcements. the compressive stresses are very small as a consequence of the piles section large area.EC2 – worked examples 6-31 Fig.

max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.96 N / mm 0.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig. 6.15 = 450 = 391. 1.30 ⎞ 17 = 13.5 1.16 N / mm 2 = k3 cd ⎜ ⎟ 0.max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content .21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa.88 ⎛1.5 f yk 1.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq. 6.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.65 N / mm 0.3 N / mm 2 1.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm.85f ck 0.13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.

22 Identification of B and D regions.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .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). Fig.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.4 x) = 3. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions.6·109 17·0. 6. 6.8·x·b·(d – 0.8·x·300·(1900 – 0.8·x·b = 17·0. The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B.6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0. Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution.23 Shear and bending moment diagrams.4 x) = 3.00 = 3600 kNm = 3.

6. 6.25 Load paths. Fig. Strut and tie model. strut&tie model Fig. 6.25 shows the load paths characterized by Schlaich in the strut&tie model identification.26. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-34 Identification of boundary stresses in the region D Fig.24 Reactions and boundary stresses in the region D.76° 3000 while the strut C4 tilting is 1690 θ1 = arctg = 48.26. The strut C2 tilting is 3190 θ = arctg = 46.41° . shown in Fig. Fig. 6. 1500 Table of Content .

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. Table 6.128·106/391. because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1. and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil. T2 and T3. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2.max = 14.96 N/mm2 Table of Content .61)-EC2] σ2Rd.3 = 5443 mm As = 1.10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1.) T2 = T3.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1.50 m length As = 1.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.128·106/391. Table 6.) 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. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0.13·10 /391.) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil. and not less than 150 mm2/m.10 % of the concrete area.

28 Node B.2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content .647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13. 6.max = 1.76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1.96 a 300 x 300 mm plate (A = 90000 mm2) is used the reinforcement for the tension rod T3 is loaded on two layers (Fig. or an increase of the plate length).65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.05 N / mm 2 > 14. this last choice is adopted.EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1.76° + 150 cos 46.128 ⋅106 = = 7.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17.76° + 150 cos 46.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd. a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers.max = 17.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14. 6.65 N/mm2 Fig.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.

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

5 f yk 1.0 f cd A c0 = 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.85f ck 0.5] 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. 3500 kN concentrated load [EC2 clause 6.14. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content .5 1.0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0.3 N / mm 2 . Reinforcement design Point [6.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6.15 = 450 = 391. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu .5)EC2] to analyse this topic.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6. 1. 1. In this case there is a partial discontinuity. just as in this example.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. because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm).

3 T= the steel area required to carry T is: As ≥ using 10 mm diameter bars.5 = 1178 mm2. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-39 b = 500 mm F b − a 3500 500 − 250 = = 437. 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.

textbook (292 pages. bridge design. The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2. Mancini.15. Assessment and Repair .0 m width. 6.s 6.2 – 7.2 “slabs” by prof.118) for fatigue reasons.10 – 6. Design and Performance Vol. Fig. Part 2. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2. whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0.0 m.29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7.15 Slabs1.Maintenance.1 – 6.Practical aspects” Manual . 6. two ballast retaining walls and. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour.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).29 and 6. December 1999). in the middle.4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point.2 [EC2 clause 5. FIB Bullettin n°3.50 m for a central zone 7. Fig. ISBN 9782-88394-043-7.3 – 7. 2 Table of Content .60 m with two side-walks of 1.6 m. The slab presents a constant thickness of 1.Member Design .40 m width. 3: Durability . table 4.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme.Design for Fire Resistance . two track spacing of 5.2 – 7.

fctm = 3.7·103 MPa.0 MPa. Ec = 29. Es = 200. As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost). (strands φ 0.0 MPa. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm. fyd = 434.23 MPa. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm. Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35.8 MPa. fp0. 6. fcd = 23. Table of Content .0 MPa. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations. fcd1 = 17.6”): 0. G = 12. fyk = 500.0·103 MPa.1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel.1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195.30 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. fcd2 = 12.1 MPa.3 MPa.0·103 MPa.2 fptk = 1800 MPa.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig.4·103 MPa ν = 0.

32 the FEM model is sketched and the different thick of the element is reported too. 6. 6. Positive forces for FEM program output are reported in Fig. − local axis 1 is oriented as global axis Z of the deck.33: Table of Content .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.EC2 – worked examples 6-42 6. In Fig 6. − local axis 3 is oriented in the opposite direction of global axis X of the deck.31 and 6. 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.31 Transverse view of FEM model Fig.15. 6. The thickness of shell elements has been assumed constant for the inner zone of the slab and stepped to fashion the tapered extremity. Fig.

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

Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx. Fig.66 2.85 fp 0.02 6 Table 6. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa.55    6 Ky. 6.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck.39 cm2. thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6. I the inertia and H the height of the column.1k = 0.61 10.EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus.02 11.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint. 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). being symmetrically disposed.61 11.74 2.max = 0. Table of Content .6 .78 6 Kz. 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 6.80 4. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo.tot 10 kN/m 10. For the vertical direction. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.tot 10 kN/m 178.6” having an area of 1. The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one. considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.tot 10 kN/m 9.

should be applied consistently at the nodes of FEM model.19 k = 0. 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.01 rad/m coefficient of friction between the tendons and their sheathing.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. 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-45 Fig.max ⋅ e-μ(α + k x) with: μ = 0. 6. Prestressing has to be introduced in the FEM model in order to calculated the hyperstatic actions that arise in the structural scheme. Considering prestressing as an external load. Table of Content . unintentional angular deviation.

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

t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ .t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0.55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1.c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel.000395  fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa. εcs (t∞. ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1.: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years.035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content . t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp.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 . fcmo = 10 MPa. t∞ = 25550 ds. c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ . age of concrete at prestressing time.018.t0) =  0. t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0. βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements.t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ .574 0.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 fcm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0. between time t0 and time t∞. βs (t∞ . ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere.8 φ ( t ∞ .

598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1. = ρ1000h × 3. t0) = 182. φ (t∞.62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one.1 + t 0 0. Δσpr : loss of prestressing due to relaxation of steel calculated for a reduced initial tensile stress of σp = σpgo  0.3 = 2.1 3 h 5.43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam.5754 If the improved prediction model of chapter 3 is used. φ (t∞ .19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours. t0) = 1. 6. Table of Content .556. Ac = 17.2 0.281.5 1 + (0. u = 28640 mm perimeter of the member in contact with the atmosphere.EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1.t0) = 1. at least for creep value. t0) and for φ(t∞ .3 Δσp. fcm fcmo 1 = 0.983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 . for t > 50 years ρt.488 0. t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ . ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig. the following values for εcs (t∞ . 0.38.3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ .012 RH) = 0.5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1.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) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞.

EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig.6/1. 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.75 kN/m Table of Content . As a reference. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load.15.6 = 199. inertia of concrete gross section. 6. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel. the maximum value of prestressing losses.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. area of prestressing steel at the considered level. 6. modulus of elasticity ratio. area of concrete gross section. 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 1.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc.6 kN → qvk. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing. For the LM71. turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis.1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1.1. as percentage of initial steel tension. 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. stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing. but as actions of opposite sign.1 = 319.1×250×φdin = 319.

3 is: qvk = 1. 6.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig.41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71.0 kN/m Fig. 6.2 = 102. while right truck the other one.3 kN/m without any limitation in length.39 Adopted load arrangement for LM71 load model The uniformly distributed load qvk according to Eurocode 1.1 × 133 × φdin = 170.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations. is evaluated below. Fig.1 × 80 × φdin → qvk.1 × 150 × φdin = 174.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. In the following as left track is denoted the track which has a positive value for the y co-ordinate.42 shows which elements are involved by spreading effects. therefore subjected to variable load.40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1.3 kN/m Fig. 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. 6. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig.162.EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin .6. being the dynamic factor equal to 1. 6. Fig. 6. Fig. Table of Content . 6.

− STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations. differential temperature variation etc.75 + 17.3 as: Lφ = 1. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by.16 + 0.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞).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. rails. Table of Content .33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1.8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3). should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking. has been considered. 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. sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0.8×9.5 m.04 m 3 3 Several other actions. wind pressure.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0.3 17.33 + 27. arising from variable loads.EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig. transverse gradient for drain water.2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1. for the sake of simplicity.8 kN/m. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of.) but. 6.73 = 1.162 L φ − 0. so that for a width of 9.5 = 136. derailment. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0. centrifugal forces. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion.8×1.3 = 27. assumed as a load of 1.

− STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6.25 = 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each.43 m). for each. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0. Fig. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content .25 = 6.43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.5 = 11.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each.25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0. 6.25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8.18 m).875 kN/m.25×9.00 kN/m for each. 6.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0. ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0.

6.45 SW/0 arrangement for Load Step 6 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig.305 m).46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32.47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6. 6.48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content .

Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action.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. G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight.8 for unfavourable effect and 1. Table of Content . = partial factor of prestress load equal to 1. = combination factor of variable loads for quasi-permanent combination at service. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0.5 for unfavourable effect and 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6. Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress. ballast excluded.6. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1.4 for unfavourable effect and 1.0 for favourable effect.9 for favourable effect.2 for unfavourable effect and 0. equal to 1.0 for favourable effect. equal to 0. ballast excluded. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1.15.8. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads.0 for favourable effect. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads.

b = σ 23.5 0. 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6. t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33. m33 . .8 Table of Content .7 Elem. b = σ 22. − deformation. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ . one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii.5 1. t = σ 33. t = σ 22. b = σ x. t / b = σ 22. t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. b = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6. − crack widths.6. n33 . t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23. m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y.4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning. m22 . b = σ 33. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig.963 1. b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre. n23 .15. σ y. the value of n22 . t = σ x. t = σ xy. t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23. θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2. 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. t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . t / b = σ 22. as subjected to the higher stress level. For the sake of simplicity. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning.6 × fck = 21 MPa. . − stress limitation at service. From FEM analysis.32 one obtains: Table 6. t = σ 23.

963 1.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.27 -2.89 -10.59 σ33.77 89.b -8.t -2.t [°] θ2.98 -10.89 σ1.00 0.46 -1.01 -0.69 σ2.78 -11.963 1.31 -2.71 -0.t -2.17 0. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6.22 -4.46 -12.86 -4. 6.9 Elem.36 σ2.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0. ensuring that.66 -3.b -2.42 σ2.b -14.90 -9.t [°] σ1.80 -4.t -0.25 0.65 -2.05 -2.85 108.29 88.5 0.b -2.41 -5.75 -0.72 -4.46 -13.57 -7.99 90.5 -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 .b 0.6 × fck = 21. 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 σ1.5 1.97 -12.11 -1.14 -2.b -14.5 0.15 -4.48 σ1.b [°] θ1.62 -6.32.76 -1.02 -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 σ1.23 σ2.46 -1.97 -5.t -2.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6.4 × fck = 14.77 which not exceed the limit one.01 σ22.00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions.51 -8.b -2.09 -2.00 0.b [°] 6-56 θ2.22 -4.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.t θ1.02 89.10 Elem.b -2.b -10.11 -1.00 0.17 89.32 σ1.EC2 – worked examples σ22. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.5 1. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.86 -4.58 -5.10 1.98 0.t -0.48 -18.58 -5.40 -2.11 σ2.48 σ23. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig.21 -5.99 0.15 0.t -1.66 -3.83 -9.00 -0.24 -2.91 -2.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.11 σ33.t -1. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.58 -1.37 -5. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations.78 -11.29 -1.97 -11.30 -2.49 -7. under service load conditions.01 89.59 σ2.t -5.48 95.58 -8.86 σ23.

however. It can be notice that no further calculation is requested because. so that the elastic value. the following limit may be achieved: δ lim 11 .EC2 – worked examples 6-57 Code 90. Deformation Deformation limitation is carried out to control the maximum vertical deflection for passengers comfort. − spalling force at anchorage of prestressing tendon. able to ensure a ductile behaviour in case of corrosion of prestressing steel. calculated by the FEM model. in this example some case of detailing are investigated. according to the provisions of the Code. reading the maximum deflection in correspondence of the track axis. the maximum stress results tensile. placed in the middle of the of the central span. Therefore.15.: − bursting force at anchorage of prestressing tendon. analysing the resistance of the critical regions. the check shall be performed loading only one track. Table of Content . − punching under support plate. the structure remains entirely compressed. 6. Having loaded the right track with a LM71 load model plus dynamic allowance. i. 1 = = L 1600 1455 As a consequence of the transient nature of this event. no specific reinforcement is required and it is sufficient to arrange the minimum amount of reinforcing steel. that from stress calculation neither for the quasipermanent combination nor in the rare one. It has be notice.0055 1 = = L 27.3 as a function of the span length and the train speed. calculated by the FEM analysis. The limit values δ/L (deflection/span Length) are given by the Eurocode 1. the obtained δ/L value is: δ effective 0.75 m (central span) and a train speed over 280 km/h. is relative to the only live load. it results: δ 1 = L 1600 that should be multiplied by a factor 1.75 5045 and it results lower than the corresponding limit.1 for continuous structures. due to prestressing effect. In addition to the analysis of ULS of several shell element under the relevant combination of internal actions. the elastic deflection. has to be considered.e. finally.5 Verification of Ultimate Limit State Verification at ULS should regard the structure as a whole and its component parts. The limit value for maximum vertical deflection is calculated considering a span length of 27.

963 1. For the investigated elements. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 ξ (100 ρ fck ) .5 1. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered. it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 . 6.6 cm2/m placed at 0. turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig. Fig. Table 6. In fact.5 0.x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd.49): Table 6. The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig.11 Elem. 6.y ( m 22 ) -239 499 38 -1950 m Sd. h [m] n Sd. If the is not satisfied.y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd. and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As.32). one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not.5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step.4. 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 = 22.3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o .x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1.49.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd. 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6.2. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd.x = As. According to CEB Bulletin 223.EC2 – worked examples 6-58 Slab ultimate limit state Verification at ULS has been performed adopting the sandwich model for shell elements. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ). specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd.12 Table of Content .xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd.6.07 m from the external face.

0 0.77 0.6 784.14 0. In the design Table of Content . 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.e.07 = 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0.00158 1569 26.14 m so that.43 51.5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i.56 26. 6.9 805. 6. i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.0 0.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .00158 23.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .43 1.00253 174 45.18 0.43 1.56 26.EC2 – worked examples Elem. 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 n yc 0.893 -30.00158 26.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx . nyc and nxyc ) only for element number 589. nxc .0 n xyc 0.76 0.0 0.s = n xy ⎞ z − ys m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd . 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 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig.56 3509 13860 763.56 14. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig.s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.0 0.

140 0. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met.680 0.5 -4893.6 726.14 Table of Content .140 0. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required.680 1.412 0.8 59.6 -1489.360 -713.220 0.140 0.680 1.5 1.220 0.s n Sdy. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative. 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.412 0.0 -1065.7 -4.963 0.0 32.3 -2266.683 0. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.680 1.13 Elem. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.9 0.s [kN/m] n Sdx.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.i -7. the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.140 0.5 0.680 0. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6.140 1.3 13. if result satisfied.140 1.220 0.140 1.3 -577.3 787.140 0.5 1.s vSd.680 0.8 -2560.7 -3120.1 -4202. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value.2 0.7 -6252.2 14.9 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 -3479.360 -1093. one obtains: Table 6.1 -5344.i n Sdx.8 -1037. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.5 -122.360 307.7 0.i vSd.

240 0.1 -950.0 Asy 2 σc -16.5 -1465.4 -45.960 0.s vSd.680 1. 6.0 0. whereas they are arranged at 0.300 0. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.15 Elem.260 -1179.3 0.190 0.020 0.6 0.0 0.0 25.220 0.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16.0 0.i -8. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions.0 0.0 0.5 1.758 -3588.8 -16.i vSd.0 0.0 18.0 0. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.0 0.1 -17.s n Sdy. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.i n Sdx.1 -17.5 0.9 0.5 -7090.1 -17.1 -12.5 66.5 1.8 -3144.6 -6.0 0.8 14.3 16.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.630 1.0 -11.9 -38.6 f cd1/2 -17.8 -5768.7 0.387 0. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required.8 f cd1/2 -17.0 0.930 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.16 Top Layer Design Elem.8 -129.0 38.1 -17.340 0. Thus.1 -17.2 -11.0 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.680 0.3 -17.0 0.215 708.0 34.s [kN/m] n Sdx.5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6.7 -2962. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig.0 0.4 794.1 -1062.6 -153.580 0.1 -17.553 0.0 0.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.535 1.1 -17.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.9 -16.6 -5040.0 0.963 0.0 -24. so.1 -17.8 -5.1 -17.600 0.0 0.7 870.0 -22.8 0.0 0.372 0. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6.0 0.51: Table of Content .0 Of course.8 -16.430 0.140 0.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.0 Asy 2 σc -30.0 0.4 -7.0 720.0 0.5 -2157.1 -17.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer.0 -4054. For element 589. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer.1 -12.3 0.0 0.140 1.230 -716.

5 -1070.0 0.0 0. Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used.2 -956.0 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig.0 0.0 0.y [kN/m] n s. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd . it is useful.x [kN/m] n i.1 -2242.0 0.s + nSd.0 0. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too.i  ns For the investigated elements. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702.0 34. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons. the following areas have been detected.51 Shell element equilibrium in one direction with two reinforcement layers only The new forces acting on the reinforcements become: t ⎞ ⎞ ⎛t ⎛ nSd .17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem. 6.6 -3274.3 -6370. 648 93 320 589 n s. Table 6. to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.8 1503.0 -5752.0 0.0 0.5 -5026. to summarise the results in a visual map.0 -1163.0 0. Table of Content .3 1664.6 0.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i.3 0.0 38. For the sake of simplicity.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 -4063.0 0.0 0.8 -2287.5 -3522.3 -159. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd.6 -1399.

2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0.6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0. 6. for end anchored tendon.075 m t2 = 0.300 m distance between the centroid of tendons above section A-A to the centroid of the prism. is: lbs = hbs = 1. corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons. Table of Content .2 m and his length.52.43 m. distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism. 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. 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 .5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852. and the most unfavourable situation occurs when a single tendon is tensioned. 115 . The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0.6 = 1. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig.

bs = Nbs / fyd = 19. a section with a breadth of 0. Thus. As for bursting verification. furthermore.35 m.1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A.82 cm2/m2 .0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0. i.61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs . supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping. 53).5 may be assumed. respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0. lsl = 1.20 m) from the anchor plate. bs 19.50 m.43 m and a height of 1.50 ⎠ ⎪ +2.20 − 0.0 cm2/m2 2 0.61 = = = 57.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 . spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).50 0. only the longitudinal direction is considered.38 MPa ⎪ ⎪ ∓ =⎨ = FSd ⎜ − ⎬ 2 ⎟ ⎝ 0. in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60. is equal to the overall height of the section. bs A s. from 0. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory. is placed at 0. Fig.40 m to 1.50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning.43 (1. Thus the effective area on a meter length.e. n2 γ1 =1. As.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content .e. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧−15. for a prestressing force FSd = 4134.4) 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.43 × 1. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0.56 MPa σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ The section along which no shear force results.(i. 53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy.43 × 1. may be found by the following: A s.

214 2 × 0.43 m.5× lsl and bsl = 0.031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1.61 kNm 3 Fig.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0. 54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0. Table of Content .43 × 10 3 = 33.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

β = 1 The boundary conditions from the first exercise set the neutral axis on the border of the bottom section. αe = 15. that is yn = h. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. 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. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f . or M. 7. calculation of service stresses. Finally.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. 7. calculate the couples M. N. Considering Fig. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then. we have d = 550 mm. that. Rectangular section. fyk = 450 MPa. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2.1. assuming k2 = 0.45 ⋅ 30 −88.1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7. M0 = 400 kNm. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending.65 mm. can be written as N( −600) = −0. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load.96 ⋅ 106 Table of content . yn The second condition in the first exercise.96 ⋅ 106 mm 3 . evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN. f) M = M0 = 400 kNm.5m.45. d’ = 50 mm. linearly changing M N.1. S* = −88.1. Fig.

7/2+0.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0. M = 1.71mm 0.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.3) ⋅ 15 = 251.95 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.07MPa 272.3 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.16⋅(-120.49 kNm.3) = −16. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete. If we consider to change M.59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457.16kN.6fck = = = 1.59σs d − yn 550 − 235.096 .48 kN M = (-0.5 kNm e = .42 ⋅ (550 − 272.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16.6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.59) ⋅10-3 = -570.7/3-300)+0. Table of Content .096N0 = -876.7/2⋅(235. the stress is N= 1.42MPa −13.3) ⋅ 15 = −201.18MPa 272.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.7 N = -0.3 16. N keeping constant the eccentricity. S* = −13263 ⋅ 10 3 mm 3 yn and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.5·106/570.65) ⋅10-3 = 241.3 mm.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.457.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.096 M0 =438. M=N⋅e=-2001.80 kN. 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 = 235.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.7 = σs = −0.801.48·103 = . N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached.EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001.

69 + 218.6fck S* yn and I* yn S * yn and then e= M0 M 0 (y n ) = N 0.51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.6 ⋅ fck 0.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.6 ⋅ 30 800 ⋅ 103 Solving with respect to yn 2 y n + 60y n − 84795 = 0 y n = −30.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.69MPa 262.51) σs = 0.6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).51) ⋅ 15 = −218.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 262.57MPa 262.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.51 (550 − 262.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 ) = −0.22 ⋅ 106 mm 3 0.51 ⎛ 262.252 + 84795 = 262. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −y n = 0.51 ' σs = 0.51mm (50 − 262.22 ⋅ 106 ⋅ y n ⎣ ⎦ 3 + y n = 300 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] − 2 and iteratively solving Table of Content .25 + 30.

95 + 235. On the other hand.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations.82) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 400.EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235.82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0.82)⎥ = −1666. 7. the tension ultimate state under load for tied steel is got just in the case b).95 + 235.2. Results for different limit distributions of stresses.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105.34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0. 2B Table of Content .6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105.67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0. just in the case c) the concrete tension limit state under load is not reached while in the case a)(k1=0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0. Fig.95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0.2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses. As a remark.

design of minimum reinforcement.2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7.8/ 200 = 0.4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content .min = 0.4494 .3 with the following geometry: A = 1.3.1667 − 0.25·108 mm3.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 . Box .EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7. I = 71.min = 0.8 MPa.1 3 8 8 α f = 3 0 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 . k =0.82·1010 mm4.1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.1667 − 0. 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.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0. Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.925·106 mm2 .01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0.4494 ) = 0. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.01235 ⋅ 0.6945 0 ρs.6945 − 2(1 − 0.2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7. r2 = I/A =39. yG =809 mm.4494 ) ⎤ ρs.section. fct. σs = 200 MPa.65 ⋅ 3.00208 1 − 0.eff = 3. Wi = 7. 7. applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment.35·104 mm2 Fig.3.

25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7.4494) − 0. Minimum reinforcement. The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7.4. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2. case (a).01235 ⋅ 0.min = 0.8 ⎥ 7.4 Fig.00943 1 − 0.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1.min = 0. 7.25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1. Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0.812 > ξ and it follows: ρs.1667 = 0. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct .min = 0.825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.825 ⋅ 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 .00943 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 4243mm 2 We use (14+14)φ14 mm equivalent to 4312 mm2.00208 ⋅ 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. 45 2(1 − 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s. Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN.4494 A s.

min = 0.5 Fig. Minimum reinforcement.7050) ⎤ ρs.01235 ⋅ 0.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0. 7.705) − 0.7050 e 856 Considering the web.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2.1667 = 0. 45 2(1 − 0.1667 − 0. ξ = 0.00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2. with h = 1.6945 − 2(1 − 0. case (b).7050 ) = 0.5.00797 1 − 0. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.min = 0. 3B Table of Content .1667 − 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.8(1 − 0.705 A s. 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.min = 0.min = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s.812 > ξ and it results ρs.00046 3 ⋅ 1.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .

4) can be immediately used as verification formula. M=300kNm.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3. the (7.0mm.913.3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2. It results then β=452/2712=0.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0. As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7.6 Fig.6. As’=452mm2 (4φ12). ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0.eff (7.0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡548 − y n + 0. δ=548/600=0.167. d’=46.0767.1) σs.EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.4. δ’=460/600=0. As=2712mm2 (6φ24).4 ⋅ c + 0. d=548mm. b=400mm. fct.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 and then Table of Content . 7.17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7.8).3.3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7.9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0.6). fck=30MPa. c=40mm.5 (1 − δ ) . k4=0.2a) (7. Reinforced concrete section. cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15. h=600mm.eff=fctm=2.cr = k t ⋅ fct .2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7.4) The (7. .

9 0. The adopted statements lead to σs.72 + 113026 = 237.8mm .96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.7 + 118.913)=0. 0.8 = = 0.08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 5 ⎢ ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.8 ) + 0.6 ⋅ 2. (1-0.08MPa 0.4 ⋅ 40 + 0.cr = 0.0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.8 ) / 5.3963 h 600 I*n = y 400 2 2 237. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237.2012.17 0.5.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2.2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57.167 ( 46 − 237.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡( 548 − 237.184mm 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4B Table of Content .2012.8 ) ⎤ = 5.0113 ⎝ 0.2012 ⎥ = 0. Then λ=0.5(1-0.3963)/3=0.2012 ⎛ 0.2175.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.EC2 – worked examples 2 y n + 237.0113 0.

4).4] 7.7) Deducing ρs from (7. where w = w k .11).9) is ⎡ ⎤ 2α ⋅λ w0 ⋅ξ2 k =⎢ + e2 ⎣δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎦ +αe ⎥ × ⎡ ⎤ ξ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎢ 3.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7. d. d’. the (7.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7.8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7.5) and with its substitution in the (7.5) (7. b. after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3. and fixed M. 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. 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 .4 ⋅ c + 0.4. h.4) to use it as a design formula.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 .4.8) and (7.9) (7.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0. In particular.17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7.12) Combining (7.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (7.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7. stated b.6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7.

15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ.9d=M and then ρs=0.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3.18) the (11. Alternatively.243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1.11) solved with respect to φ. using the (7.18 1− 1− 0. for example coincident with the permissible one.185ν/(pδ) the (7.5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ. numerically solved.88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7. .2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7.4.4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7.5 practically impossible for bending problems. In this case. In this way.18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content . which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5.67) is easy to solve. ρs from (7. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter. the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount. If it is not the case.16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7.11) (7.8).4c + 0. An alternative procedure. being the value λ =0.13).13) λ = 2.9d.11).9.185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7. aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level.14) 7. easier to be applied. The procedure. as the parameter p is defined. leads to the desred values ρs e σs. it is possible to set the tensional level σs. consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0. the solution for (7. we have σsAs0. λ = 0.17) the (7.4u1 ν ν * − 0.9). if we set the value of σs.15) and (7. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then. it is necessary to set in the (7. let’s state δ=0. the neutral axis is obtained from (7. and together with the (7.13) the (7.13).7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7.20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ ν ⎥ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ⎦ (7. . In this case too.

which.EC2 – worked examples 7-12 φmax ⎡17c( νp − α e ν * ) − 5ν * w ok ⎤ ⎦ =⎣ * αe ν ν p − p2 (7.15).19) that defines the maximal bars diameter.. associated to the reinforcement amount given by the (7. allows to satisfy the cracking ultimate state corresponding to a fixed value of the steel tension. 6B Table of Content .

fck=33MPa.3. 1/3.6 · 3. Then in a general form w 0k = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0. Reinforced concrete Section.77/(1-1.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3.30mm the maximal amplitude.4 ⋅ 1.10-6=77.16 max Defined w k = 0. in the three cases here considered kw = 1.3. p (2/3) = 119. M=600kNm. 7. w k = 0. It results fctm=0.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9.15kNm ν*=7.6 ⋅ 3.965 + 18400.3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0.332/3=3. p(1) = 156.3 mm .7.(1000.62 As (2/3) = 0. w k = 0.16 7. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state. 2/3.5002/6).185 ⋅ 7.10).01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0.75 As (1) = 0. together with the (7.15=7. 119.185 ⋅ 7.01049 . φ=26mm.874 Table of Content .10mm .20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9.086.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7. c=50mm.77)=9.92 M0cr=0. w k = 0.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235.16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1. in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1.6.92 ⋅ p − 9.77 = 0.30mm. Fig.874 w k = 0.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation. σs (1) = 0.75 ⋅ 0. h=500mm. design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0.77 = 0.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7.874 (see ex.62 ⋅ 0.086MPa ν=600/77.77 0.7.01375 . Assuming b=1000mm.2 mm .1) u1=50/26=1.16 ⋅ ⎢ 3.20mm.086 · 156.4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7.18/7. 7.15) and (7. 156.

65 + 79. Designed sections.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0.9 = 304 MPa 7.02179 . ξ = 0.652 + 69614 = 195.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195.62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.7.6 · 3. the metal areas are overestimated.3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79.77 = 0.3918 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 195.874 σs (1/3) = 0. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.48 As (1/3) = 0. Table of Content . w k = 0.93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195.185 ⋅ 7.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0.9 ) = 7.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0. p (1/3) = 75.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0.48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7.9 mm .6·3.086·119. and 26 mm diameter bars are used. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0.8. 75.086 · 75.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 159. 7.48 ⋅ 0.02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0.1 mm .

874) = 0.6 ⋅ 3.01062 ⎝ 0.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.2027 ⎛ 0.4292) / 3 = 0.11 MPa 0.494) / 3 = 0.11⎞ ⎛ 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.cr = 0.1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.2 2 + 143704 = 247.1) = 1.5 (1 – 0.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.cr = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 207. ξ = 0.31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.1 mm .0138 ⎝ 0.3918) / 3 = 0.06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0.31 MPa 0.1687 Table of Content .1 = 160 MPa 1.494 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 247.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ 0. ρs = 69.1903 ⎛ 0.315.2 + 167.2027 0.4292 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 214. Then σs.52 + 90498 = 214.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.306 mm 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 .41 ⋅ 109 0.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0.1903 σs.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.6 mm .6 ⋅ 3.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247.4 ⋅50 + 0.0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53.6 = 238 MPa 8.13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 y n + 334. ξ = 0. ρs = 111.63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.5 + 103.01062 ⎟ = 0.6 ) = 8.03 / (50 · 100) = 0.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.

213 0.2 and they are shown in Figure 7. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.71] / 43.0223 ⎝ 0.6 ⋅ 3. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state. Table 7.99) + + 2/3·24. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43. Exact method.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.85 Fig.8 Let’s remark that the presence of a compressed reinforcement is highly recommended to make ductile the section in the ultimate limit state.70 ≅ 0. Table 7.2 6903 221 0.0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.811 0.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0. those values are evaluated using the (7.9 0.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0.85 h0/d = (43.1 11151 140 0.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure.59/3) / 43.70 = 0.16) (7.10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs.2.792/18.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.70 – 19. Approximated method.cr = 0.46/3) / 43.1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41.70 – 21.1 and 7.99 + 3·160·13.9 0.3 and Figure 7.9.9.836 0.79/18.836 h0/d = [(18·160·18. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification. 7.70 = 0.1.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.14). The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.78 MPa 0.086 ⋅ wk = 0. 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. Table of Content .120 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.1687 ⎛ 0. wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0. In fact. Table 7.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0.

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. Table of Content .10.3. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs). wk = 0.1 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.EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7.2 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. 7. Approximated method – Determination of maximum diameter.

6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7. as indicated in Figure 7. Referring to the stage I. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig. deformation limit state. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) .13. 7.9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2. Section at stage I. stating αe = Es/Ec=15. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way.12.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166.8 ) = 18. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2. fck=30MPa. Table of Content .6 In the stage II.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. as reported in Figure 7.13.745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5.11.11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7. Transversal section. 7. deflected beam.9 ⋅ 5.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.13. l=10m.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166. Fig. g+q=40kN/m.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385.8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35. g=2q.8 From Table [3. 7.12 Fig.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0.

.EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 y n + 189.21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe. is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 ) = M cr 1 = M max λ (7.92 + 94.21) 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. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7.23) The abscissa ξ1.24) Table of Content . Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2.92 2 + 123396 = 269mm I * = 500 ⋅ 269 3 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7.1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.14.01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 II 2 3 then c=18. where the cracked part of the beam start.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.78 Fig.05/10. Section at stage II.84y n − 123396 = 0 2 y n = −94. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2).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 equation (7. 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 ⎥ . 7.13=1.

. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11. varying z .λ.29) (7. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section.15. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig. 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. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0. The result.15. ξ1 .25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7. for the same Mmax.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. a concentrated load Q=200kN.26) Finally. we obtain the curves reported in Figure 7. In the same way.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7. Furthermore.27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞. 7. Diagrams for v/v1 . 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.15. considering that v I = The (7. 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.27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (7. that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments. 12Ec I ∗ I (7.20) 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. In this way.EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7.28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ). it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam.51).93 and 0.

64 = 35.71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.26) (7.65 ⋅ 21.6.16.EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3.15 and Figure 7. introducing the numerical values in the (7. is about 4%.31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.25. as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7.31 = 27.16.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig. is reported in Figure 7. we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21.56 ⋅ 17. where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1. Table of Content . displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c). 7. Deformation in the stage I (a).64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18. In particular.29) and using the results in Figure 11. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

The characteristic values of simple tensile strength.12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0. in lack of direct experimentation. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.0.1 and 11. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11.3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk.40+0. for corresponding density class in kg/m3.for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 .60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0.The results of calculation of the two above-mentioned mechanical features are shown and compared in the following table.0.3. can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ .3. 2 Table of Content .1 – 11. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3. can be taken equal to: . in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 11.3.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0.2 of Eurocode 2.05 e 0.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation.3. the intersecting compressive elastic module at 28 days.95 = 1. for two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes.95. flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa. corresponding to fractiles 0. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength. which can be used as an indicative value for design of the deformability of structural members.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.1 [EC2 Clause 11.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2. flcm = value of the average cylindric compressive strength in MPa.05 = 0.

0.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.563 -2.2 1.5 4.2 3.2 4.850 -0.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.7 3.4 5.0.05 [MPa] fctk.1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.9 3.1 5.868 -4.4 2.9 2.95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .959 -0.

Fig.6 – 11.11.96‰.3.3 cm. 11.c.85 flck/γc = 19.2 [EC2 Clause 11. build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa. made of type 1 lightweight concrete. like in the previous example.75‰. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1. from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0.5 cm. 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. The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0.8 MPa. In case one chooses. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10. to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete. 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.3. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28. 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.15 x 200000) = 1.5 – 11. The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm.5 kNm.1 – 11.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit.15 x Es) = 450/(1. ρ = 1650 kg/m3).1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled. for fyk= 450 MPa.3. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding.1 Deformation and tension diagram of r. h=50cm and d=47cm. section. described in the previous example.5η1 = 2.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN.98‰.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3.5 cm = 36. Table of Content . is εyd = fyd /(1.4 – 11. The section in question is shown in Fig.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11.365 = 432.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->