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

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.

FOREWARD The introduction of Eurocodes is a challenge and opportunity for the European cement and concrete industry. These design codes, considered to be the most advanced in the world, will lead to a common understanding of the design principles for concrete structures for owners, operators and users, design engineers, contractors and the manufacturers of concrete products. The advantages of unified codes include the preparation of common design aids and software and the establishment of a common understanding of research and development needs in Europe. As with any new design code, it is important to have an understanding of the principles and background, as well as design aids to assist in the design process. The European cement and concrete industry represented by CEMBUREAU, BIBM and ERMCO recognised this need and set up a task group to prepare two documents, Commentary to EN 1992 and Worked Examples to EN 1992. The Commentary to EN 1992 captures te background to the code and Worked Examples to EN 1992 demonstrates the practical application of the code. Both the documents were prepared by a team led by Professor Giuseppe Mancini, Chairman of CEN TC 250/SC2 Concrete Structures, and peer reviewed by three eminent engineers who played a leading role in the development of the concrete Eurocode: Professor Narayanan, Professor Spehl and Professor Walraven. This is an excellent example of pan-European collaboration and BIBM, CEMBUREAU and ERMCO are delighted to make these authoritative documents available to design engineers, software developers and all others with an interest in promoting excellence in concrete design throughout Europe. As chairman of the Task Group, I would like to thank the authors, peer reviewers and members of the joint Task Force for working efficiently and effectively in producing these documents. Dr Pal Chana Chairman, CEMBUREAU/BIBM/ERMCO TF 5.5: Eurocodes

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

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

..........3 CALCULATION OF VRD...........2] ............................1] .............. ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS ON A REINFORCED CONCRETE RETAINING WALL [EC2 – CLAUSE 2..........6 [EC2 CLAUSE 6..................................................................... WITH STEEL S500C fyd = 435 MPA.........................4]..3..........................4] .................... 6-10 EXAMPLE 6......5. 2-6 EXAMPLE 2..................................... 4-1 EXAMPLE 4..................................3].............1 (CONCRETE C30/37) [EC2 CLAUSE 6.....4] ...... [EC2 CLAUSE 6..........................................1] ...............................4] ................................................. 4-3 EXAMPLE 4..4] ........................................................................ 2-2 EXAMPLE 2................ 6-5 EXAMPLE 6................................................................... 6-12 EXAMPLE 6....................1....EC2 – worked examples summary EUROCODE 2 .... 6-4 EXAMPLE 6... 2-4 EXAMPLE 2....4........................... CONCRETE RETAINING WALL: GLOBAL STABILITY AND GROUND RESISTANCE VERIFICATIONS [EC2 – CLAUSE 2...... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CONTINUOUS BEAM [EC2 – CLAUSE 2..........................................................................2 (CONCRETE C90/105) [EC2 CLAUSE 6........... WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES .................................. 6-1 EXAMPLE 6...........................................................7 SHEAR – TORSION INTERACTION DIAGRAMS [EC2 CLAUSE 6............. 6-9 EXAMPLE 6..........4 DETERMINATION OF SHEAR RESISTANCE GIVEN THE SECTION GEOMETRY AND MECHANICS [EC2 CLAUSE 6.................... 6-15 Table of Content ............. ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CANOPY [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.............................................................................................4] ...................................................... 4-1 EXAMPLE 4.2] .....................................................4B – THE SAME ABOVE................................................................................................................... ULS COMBINATION OF ACTION OF A RESIDENTIAL CONCRETE FRAMED BUILDING [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.................................................................................. 2-1 EXAMPLE 2....................2] ...............8.......... WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN .........................................3 [EC2 CLAUSE 4..........................................................2 [EC2 CLAUSE 4........WORKED EXAMPLES ....................................5 [EC2 CLAUSE 6.................. WALL BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY ...................................................................3] ..............................5]............................................................................................................................... 6-1 EXAMPLE 6.............. 6-7 EXAMPLE 6............ 2-9 SECTION 4..2............. 4-4 SECTION 6...................SUMMARY SECTION 2..................C FOR A PRESTRESSED BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6.......................................................................4] .............. 6-3 EXAMPLE 6...........2] .................. 2-1 EXAMPLE 2..4] ...........................................................................1 [EC2 CLAUSE 4..

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

2. Fig. respectively Gk1 and Gk2. In this example and in the following ones. Load combination for verification of bending moment in the BC span.2. is the same for all spans: γG = 1. because of their small variability. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN EXAMPLE 2.EC2 – worked examples 2-1 SECTION 2. STR – Bending moment verification at mid span (Set B) Unlike in the verification of static equilibrium.35 (Fig.1.2). 2. as indicated in Fig. a single characteristic value is taken for self-weight and permanent imposed load. Load combination for verification of holding down devices at the end bearings.1. 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.4] A continuous beam on four bearings is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Service imposed load Qk1 Note. 2. the partial safety factor for permanent loads in the verification of bending moment in the middle of the central span. 2. Table of Content .1. ULS combinations of actions for a continuous beam [EC2 – clause 2.

STR – Verification of resistance of a column(Set B) The partial factor to be taken for permanent loads in the verification of maximum compression stresses and of bending with axial force in the column is the same (γG = 1. 2. as in Fig. ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2. and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force. Load combination for verification of static equilibrium. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case. 2.2.3.35) for all spans.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. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.3. Fig.

2. Table of Content . 2. Fig. Load combination for the compression stresses verification of the column. Load combination for the verification of bending with axial force of the column.5.4.EC2 – worked examples 2-3 Fig.

favourable vertical loads.35·Gk + 1.w Fig.35·Gk + 1.75·Qk. 6.5·Fk.w + 0.7·Qk. ULS combination of action . 2.es + 0.w Predominant action: service load (fig.6 Fk.5·Qk. Table of Content .05·Qk.9·Fk.5· Fk. d) 1.n + 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant.75· Qk. b) Wind predominant.6.n + 0.w) = 1.w unfavourable vertical loads (fig.es + 0.6·Fk.35·Gk + 1. Variable actions on a residential concrete building. 2.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk.6.7 Qk.w 0.es + 0.5·Qk.5·(Qk. b) 1. but they may be defined in the National Annex.n + 0.es 0.6·Fk.6.6.6.7·Qk.l. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk.5·( Qk.9·Fk.n + 0.B.es + 0. 2.35·Gk + 1.35·Gk + 1. c) Snow load predominant. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure .s.0·Gk + 1. a) 1.05·Qk.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk. 2.) wind Fk. 2.3.5·Qk.5·( Fk.es Predominant action: snow (fig.w N.n 0.w + 0.n + 0. unfavourable vertical loads.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.1.STR (Set B) (eq.es) = 1.n (for sites under 1000 m a. d) service load predominant.1. c) 1.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig.n + 1.5·Qk.5 Qk.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.35·Gk + 1.w) = 1.Variable actions are listed in table 2. Table 2.

Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification). 2. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure. unfavourable vertical loads. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant. b) 1.n + 0. are applied in separate calculations. c) 1.n + 1. 6.w = 1.5·Qk.65·Qk.es = 1. b) Wind predominant.6·Fk.78·Fk.7.0·Gk + 1. d) service load predominant.0·Gk + 1.n + 0. 2. d) 1. favourable vertical loads.w + 1. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below.91·Qk.3·0.15 and 2.es Predominant action: snow (fig.3·0.0·Gk + 1.65· Qk.3· Fk.7.3·Qk.es + 1.3·0.7·Qk.3·0.7.0·Gk + 1. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation.n + 0.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq.0·Gk + 1.7. c) Snow load predominant. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig. 2. the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex. 2. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2.78·Fk.16.3· Fk. Table of Content .es + 1. or on the structure.n + 1.es + 0.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches.es + 0.3·Qk.n + 1.3·0.7.w = 1.w Fig.5·Qk.3·Qk.0·Gk + 1.6·Fk.w + 0.7·Qk.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig.91·Qk.3· Fk. 2.3·0. a) 1.w Predominant action: service load (fig.0·Gk + 1.3·Qk.

i.1·Sk.5·Qk. 1.5·Sk. 2.5· Fk.es 1.5·Qk. ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2.terr + 0.es + 0.9.e.n + 1.(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.n + 0.es + 0. EXAMPLE 2.w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1. 2.w + 0.4.w 1. 2.4] Fig.35·Gk + 1.w 1. Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU . Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content .e.terr) + 1.75·Qk.9·Fk.35·Gk + 1.35·Gk + 1.8.75·Qk. can be referred to Set B.wall + Gk. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation. Set B) are used.5·Qk.n + 1.05·Qk.9·(Gk.sovr Fig.9). as geotechnical actions are not present. This case.0·Gk + 1.9·Fk.05·Qk. to approach 2.

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

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

75 + 31.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.33 δ=0° Pk.sovr 1.75 kN/m Pk.9 kN/m Table of Content .0·Sk.terr + 1.sovr + 1.foot = 18.5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.sovr + 1.50 ⋅ 25 = 31.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk.terr + 1. active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.0·Sk.50 ⋅ 25 = 18.wall = Pk.foot = 0.3·Qk.terr + 1.terr + 1.0·Sk.wall + Pk.ground = 26. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used. weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz.70 = 76. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.0·Gk.terr + 1.0·Sk.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.wall + 1. 2.3·Sk.3·Sk.sovr + 1.25 kN/m Gk. Fig.sovr A numeric example is given below.terr + 1.wall + 1.sovr 1.wall + 1.35·Gk.30 ⋅ 2.50 ⋅ 2.35·Gk. EXAMPLE 2.0·Gk.3·Qk.ground = 18 ⋅ 2. 1.sovr + 1.terr + 1.35·Gk.wall = 0.3·Sk.3·Qk.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.5.terr + 1.3·Sk.sovr 1.0·Gk.35·Gk.3·Qk.wall + 1.0·Gk.12.surch = 9.50 ⋅ 1.

sovr + 1.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.35·Gk.0·Gk.sovr + 1.sovr Table of Content .25) = 16.1): MS.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.terr + 1.surch = 1.90 = 14.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29.9⋅(0.35·Gk.terr + 1.50) = 22.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.1): Sground = 1.foot = 0.40 + 14.68 = 3.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.terr + 1.62 + 16.75) = 9.5·Sk.73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.35·Sk.16 + 113.65) = 113.85 = 44.28 = 51.35·Gk.0·Gk.9): Fstab.97 + 35.9⋅(18.wall = 0.5·Sk.9): Fstab. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.1⋅(26.wall + 1.sovr third combination 1.60 = 159. i.9⋅(76.0·Gk.5): MS.9⋅(31.5·Qk.25⋅1.5): Ssur = 1.16 kNm/m Mstab.00/3) = 29.57⋅31.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.5 ⋅ 9.75⋅0.wall + 1.9⋅(0. is used.ground = 1.24 = 64.5·Qk.35·Sk.89 / 44.9⋅(0.ground = 0.03 kNm/m Fstab.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.73/51.25 = 1.57⋅18.5·Sk.5⋅1. Set B if partial factors.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively.35·Sk.wall = 0.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.terr + 1.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.wall + 1.foot = 0.25) = 35.sovr + 1.25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.e.5) = 39.sovr second combination 1.57⋅76.40 + 22.73⋅3.73= 29.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.terr + 1.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.9): Mstab.03 + 39.90 ⋅ 1.65) = 10.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9. By taking 1.1 ⋅ 26.terr + 1.5 ⋅ (9.5·Qk.0 and 1.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.ground = 0.

25 – 30.30. the values given at Table 2.35⋅(26.5·Qk.0·Gk.1.01 / 126.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS.35·Sk. Fig.50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2.5 = 126. 2.13.25 + 76.28 + 11.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.75 + 31.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1.0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36.60) = 11.05 kN/m2 = 0.0 ⋅ (76.5⋅(9.0): Pwall = 1.5·Sk.5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18.5 = 0.40) = .13).50) = 22.0): Pground = 1.90⋅1.0 ⋅ (31.088 MPa The results given at Table 2. 2.75) = 18.50/6 = 41.terr + 1.terr + 1.0 ⋅ (18. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.35·Gk.terr = 1.00/3)=36. (Fig.sovr + 1.502 = 88.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1.73⋅3.5) = 76. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered. The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination.0⋅(76.wall + 1.5⋅0.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1.75 ⋅ 0.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors.0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1.35.5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39.sovr = 1.e.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1.EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1. Table of Content . For the verification of the contact pressure.08 + 22. combinations.0⋅(18.25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .08 kNm/m MS.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1. i.25) =31.6 = 39.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1. as follows: moment vs.

60 (γG=1.5) 15.28 (γQ=1.50 (γG=1.0) 25.75 25. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.81 18.75 (γG=1.28 (γG=1.20 (γQ=1.31 (γG=1.78 0.5) 11.19 99.19 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.35) 103.60 (γG=1.28 22.35) (γQ=1.35) 25.19 (γG=1.28 (γQ=1.26 third 36.28 (γG=1.24 25.83 Table 2.24 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.20 (γQ=1.60 -41.50 0.35) (γQ=1.0) 144 0.08 36.50 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.18 88.48 fourth 36.50 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.0) 31.35) -30.28 (γG=1.25 15.35) 42.19 (γG=1.35) 22.25 (γG=1.5) 15.0) 76.ground (kNm/m) MS.01 18.35) 170.5) (γQ=1.5) (γQ=1.5) 169.75 (γG=1.35) 39.0) 31.35) (γQ=1.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.0) (γG=1.35) 103.5) 11.2.35) 22.35) 42.0) (γG=1.28 (γQ=1.35) 42.04 25. 5) 178.35) 153.31 (γG=1.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).0) 31.28 22.89 fourth 36.25 15.28 22.08 36.20 -10.19 (γG=1.35) -30. Table of Content .50 (γQ=1.35) 76.ground (kNm/m) MS.19 99.19 88.0) (γG=1.35) -10. 5) (γQ=1.75 (γG=1. 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.31 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.11 99.46 22. first second third 36.35) (γG=1.0) -10.0) 42.31 (γG=1.0 0.05 32.08 (γQ=1.60 -41.31 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.0) (γG=1.35) 22.5) (γQ=1.50 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.0) 25.08 (γQ=1.0) 103.31 (γG=1. not present in Table 1.25 (γG=1.3.0) 103.08 36.0) -30.28 (γQ=1.10 18.35) (γG=1.35) 22.67 18.50 (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).25 (γG=1. Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.08 (γQ=1.28 0.95 25.31 88. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.10 88.0) 126.5) (γQ=1.50 (γQ=1.28 0.35) 28.35) 22.19 11.5) 152.30 18.28 (γQ=1. 5) 28.35) 25.28 (γG=1.30 98.50 (γG=1.35) 42.50 0.19 (γG=1.5) 11.20 -10.0) -41.18 and here highlighted in bold.08 (γQ=1.78 0.35) -30.5) 196.0) 31.31 -41.5) 32.75 (γG=1. first second 36.35) 76.0) 76.

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

2): c min = max (20.EC2 – Worked examples 4-2 Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. γ = 0 . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 25 + 8 = 33 mm . From relation (3. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. In this case.add = 0 .1): c nom = 20 + 10 = 30 mm . If we now calculate now the concrete cover for longitudinal reinforcement bars. We obtain from table 4. Moreover: Δc dur. Table of Content . Δcdur.st = 0 . Δcdur.4N . Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. we have: c min. We obtain from relation (3.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 15 + 10 = 25 mm .b = 20 mm.dur = 15 mm .EC2: c min. We obtain from relation (3. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. 10 mm) = 20 mm .

the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37. Refer to figure 3.EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm . even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30.2. 4. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm .2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3. we design the minimum concrete cover with reference to both the stirrups and the longitudinal bars. Table of Content .2 [EC2 clause 4. In this case. The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm . in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability.dur = 35 mm .EC2 we find that.1N . We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30. A normal quality control is put in place.1. The exposure class is XS1. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm .) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37. The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm). Fig.4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast. From table E. the reference (min.

1N . The exposure class is XS1.add .3 [EC2 clause 4.EC2 – Worked examples 4-4 EXAMPLE 4. We have: c min. 25 + 0 – 0 – 0. γ = 0 . − strands φ 0. From relation (3.st = 0 . We find out from table E. γ − Δc dur.5” . The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 16 mm. At the lower side of the two ribbings of the TT element we have: − longitudinal φ 12 reinforcement bars.3. We obtain from table 4.4N . − φ 8 stirrups at 100 mm . made of prestressed reinforced concrete. Δcdur. − the structural class is reduced by 1 as special quality control of the concrete production is ensured We then refer to structural class S2.4] Calculate the concrete cover of a TT precast element. Moreover: Δc dur.b = 8 mm .dur = 25 mm . 10 mm ) = = max (8.dur + Δc dur. Refer to figure 3. We use concrete with strength class C45/55. Table of Content .2): c min = max (c min.add = 0 . Δcdur.st − Δc dur. Calculating first the concrete cover for stirrups.3N: − the structural class is reduced by 1 as the concrete used (C45/55) is of strength class higher than C40/50. The original structural class is S4.EC2 that for exposure class XS1. An accurate quality control of concrete production is put in place. 10 mm) = 25 mm .b .EC2: c min. In accordance with table 4. strength class C45/55 is therefore adequate. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. c min. the minimum concrete strength class is C30/37. placed outside an industrial building situated close to the coast.

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

st = 0 . From relation (3. 10 mm) = 35 mm . Δcdur.5 · 12. We obtain from table 4.b = 1.EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.8.dur = 35 mm . Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm . Δcdur.EC2: c min.2): c min = max (18. Table of Content . From relation (3.5 = 18. Moreover: Δc dur.1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm . The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element.8 mm . The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm. 35 + 0 – 0 – 0.add = 0 .5N . γ = 0 .

80 0.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth. β2 is the “position factor”.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 . 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. NRd1 = 0. β1 and β2 factors and x1. d = 950 mm.1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6.8·500·608. 6. Example 6. Steel and concrete resistance.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 0.0 541.2 kNm goes alongside it.max = 2821. EXAMPLE 6.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas.56 β2 0.0 x2 (mm) 608. d' = 50 mm. The maximum moment resistance MRd.5 203.40 0.1. Some example is developed using S500 too.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6. Fig.1] Geometrical data: b= 500 mm. the ratio between the distance of the resultant of parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc from εc and the deformation εc itself. NRd3 = 0. x2 values are shown in table 6.0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN.1 6. h = 1000 mm.1 Material data. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C. WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES GENERAL NOTE: Eurocode 2 permits to use a various steel yielding grades ranging from 400 MPa to 600 MPa.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated.35 x1 (mm) 113.8·500·113.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0.

Ed Table 6. moment resistance. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0.294 0.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing. and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated.105 0. it results: x2 + 66. 52m 5000 Table of Content .2. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0.26 0. NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0. the neutral axis x.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently. depth of neutral axis.52 0.2.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0. Example 1: values of axial force.38 1.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0. Their values are shown in Table 6.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎝ ⎠ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0. MRd.91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known. eccentricity.

2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6.350 0.3 Table 6. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN. eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0.55 0.max = 6948.1.3 Values of axial load. moment resistance.5 – 0.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x. MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd . MRd.14 Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.50.619) + 3910·(0. depth of neutral axis.80 1. The results are shown in Table 6.08 0.35·0. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0.0.142 0.619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2.1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6.7 kNm is associated to it.

3 Calculation of VRd.66 )2 + 1.626 + 0. No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present.c = (1.5= 1. Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment. d = 175 mm. Average prestressing σcp = 5.15.05/γC = 1· 2. h = 200 mm.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6.0 = 44.626 and k1 = 0. 66 ⋅ 5. Class C40 concrete. It results: VRd.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm.0 MPa. 0.c = (0.15⋅5.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24.5/1.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0. VRd.33 kN Table of Content .66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.

with fck = 60 MPa.512. fcd = 17 MPa . h = 600 mm. fcd = 34 MPa.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.532. fcd = 51 MPa.max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. ν = 0.s = VRd.90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement. a) fck = 30 MPa .512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2. ν = 0. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd. z = 500 mm. with fck = 90 MPa.38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6. with bw = 150 mm.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd. 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2).29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1.4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6.1504 hence cotθ = 2.2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. ν = 0.375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement. fyd = 391 MPa.s = hence cotθ = 1. The example is developed for three classes of concrete. vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1. d = 550 mm. s = 150 mm.616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.

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

0) .5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0.40 ≤ 0.0) ⋅ 0.5 VRd. fck = 30 MPa .s) ΔFtd = 0.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd.707 and. diameter 10 mm.EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.4 kN 150 It results: VRd. Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .0) = 333 kN Table of Content .2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0.616 ⋅ 17 = 2. ν = 0. fyd = 391 MPa.10 + 1.s (cot θ − cot α) = 0. fcd = 17 MPa .5 [EC2 clause 6. replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2. s = 150 mm.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2.616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm.10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0.10 -1.72 < 7.707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0.707 •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 legs (Asw = 157 mm2).4· (2.5·605.

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 =0.2. 6.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1.6 [EC2 clause 6.0 MPa ν = 0.85·(30/1. 6. d = 1450 mm.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig. Fig.5 MPa fyd = 500/1.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10. with depth 1500 mm. width 1000 mm.707⋅0.2 Ring section subjected to torsion and shear The maximum equivalent shear in each of the vertical members is (z refers to the length of the vertical member): V*Ed = VEd / 2 + (TEd · z) / 2·Ak = [1300⋅103/2 + (700⋅106 ⋅1350)/(2⋅1.5⋅0.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6. It results: VRd.3] Ring rectangular section. with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members.7[1-30/250] = 0.5) = 17.616 ν fcd = 10.707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content .

08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2.865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars.348 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 8 mm wide.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section.3(3)-EC2]. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2. pitch 200 mm.5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2.14) = 0. pitch 200 mm.03o 2 νfcd tz 2 10.14) = 0.14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2. with particular attention to the corner bars. Reinforcement of horizontal members.2. subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1. pitch is in accordance with [9.EC2 – worked examples 6-11 Determination of angle θ: * 1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1087000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 25. 2 legs stirrups. Table of Content .

7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0. 6.616 .3] resistant hollow section Fig.max = 2⋅10.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0.0) It results: VRd.5⋅300⋅400/(2+0.5) = 17.5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd.5⋅83636⋅94⋅0.EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6. 6.4471⋅0. z =400 mm (Fig.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content . h = 500 mm. fyd = 391 MPa αcw = 1 Geometric elements A= 150000 mm2 u = 1600 mm t = A/u = 94 mm Ak = (500 – 94) ⋅ (300-94) = 83636 mm2 Assumption: θ = 26.5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .56o (cotθ = 2.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10. ν fcd = 10.85·(30/1.7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm .

6.31)-EC2] In this expression.c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2. ρ = 0. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.5 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig. it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm.0/1. On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines. 6. For instance.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1.c ≤ 1 where TRd.18/1.63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0. The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd. V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig. it results: CRd.4 kNm 1/3 VRd.3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content .c = ⎡CRd. moreover.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1.c + VEd /VRd. It results therefore: TRd.4. if VEd = 350 kN is taken.1-EC2]).4.01.c = 0.5 = 1. Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.

Namely. It results : Asw/s.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.c = 0.08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0. Because of the torsion.75d = 0.5N-EC2].. For instance. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed.5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content . 6. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8.2.e.2. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9.0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd.12⋅1. 200 mm. i.010 with s not larger than 0.08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0.6.5 The section. which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0.0010 Fig.75⋅450 = 337 mm.2 (5)-EC2] and [9.2 (6)-EC2]. the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9.bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram.

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 ⎠ ⎛ 25 ⎞ ⎝ 2 = k3 f cd = 0.88 ⎜ 1⎟ 14.17 = 11.22 N / mm 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

83 N / mm 2 .max Table of Content . 6. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391. 1.85 250 ⎝ ⎠ σ1Rd.15 1.9 Cantilever beam S&T model.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19. 6. 150 x 300 load plate. Thick short corbel. beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig.3 N / mm 2 1. Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.83 = 20.85f ck 0.5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm). Fig.15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.5 1.18 ⎜1⎟ 19.8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam.9.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6.12 N / mm 0.

9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side.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⎟ 19.83 = 15 N / mm 0.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 72 ) Ft 411000 = = 1050 mm 2 we use 8φ14 (As = 1232 mm2) f yd 391. 6. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is evaluated setting the internal drive arm z equal to 0.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig.max = 20.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig.10 in order to make the partition of the diagonal stress F F ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ Fdiag = c = Ed ⎟ between them.8⋅d (z = 0.88 ⎜ 1⎟ 19.8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.85 250 ⎝ ⎠ σ 2Rd.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 = = 7.83 = 17. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content .85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ ⎝ 2 = k3 f cd = 0. 6.2d = 0.max b = 700000 ≅ 87 mm 20.05 N / mm 0. 6.8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0.max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig.

05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 300 45000 Table of Content .56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd. where the main reinforcement is anchored.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag.2.8.2. 6. double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10.max = 17.25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided.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. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig. and they have provided the following expression of stress in the secondary reinforcement (MC90 par. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node. 6.

in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z. 6.12) is indeterminate. then as in the previous example one more boundary condition is needed to evaluate the stresses values in the rods. 6. 6. Table of Content .13.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever. 6. 150 x 220 mm load plate.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm). 6. The stress Fwd in the vertical tension rod is evaluated assuming a linear relation between Fwd and the a value. 400 x 400 mm column Fig. the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig. The model proposed in EC2 (Fig. 6. This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever). ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig. Fig. a) b) Fig.12 Cantilever S&T model. Elementary beams of the S&T model.10 Thick cantilever beam.13b).

the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 .5 1.83 N / mm 2 .05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.85f ck 0. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side. some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd .8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.15 = 450 = 391.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column. 1.8⋅d (z = 0. a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.max = 20.2d = 0.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. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0.3 N / mm 2 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content .5 f yk 1.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.max = 17.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd. 3 in conclusion.

in which the main reinforcement is anchored.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content . the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 500000 = = 15.5 = 639 mm 2 f yd 391.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .3 FEd 500000 = 0.37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.max = 17.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.max = 20. 208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13.3 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 391.3 EC2 suggests a minimum secondary reinforcement of: Aw ≥ k2 we use 3 stirrups φ 12 (As = 678 mm2) node 2 verification.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391. below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node.

6)]. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam. Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses.5 1. eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10.4. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one.15 [(3.EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam.11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam.85f ck 0. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction. 6. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0. we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1.2. 6.3 N / mm 2 1. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa. if only the scheme a) is used.9.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.5 f yk 1.15 = 450 = 391. 1.17 N / mm 2 .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 . (Fig. a) b) Fig. Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement. On the other hand.14).

00173·2513 Table of Content . 6.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig. as stated in the calculation. ' = εs 0.4⋅x ≅ 40 mm from the upper surface) while the top reinforcement stress is: C’ = Es ε’s A’s = 200000·0.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. the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0.0035 ⋅ (x − d ') where d’ = 50 mm is the distance of the upper surface reinforcement x x − 50 A's = f yd A s x 0.15 Truss a.0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0.0035 391.17 (applied at 0.8 b x fcd = 0.8b x f cd + E s 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.00173 ≤ yd = = 0.8·800·99·14.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0.

Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content . 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).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.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 = 38.45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2. then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 . 6.3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391. Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53.3 Fig.

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

max = 11.5 f yd = f yk 1.75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd. 2000 x 700 mm columns.max = 12. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa. 6.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6.3 N / mm 2 1.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6.85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14. diameter 800 mm piles Fig.85f ck 0.15 = 450 = 391.5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm).17 Log plinth on pilings.5 1.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content . steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.17 N / mm 2 .EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6. 1.8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd.

17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0.8 b x fcd = 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.2000/2) = 333 kN A=A’/2 = 1167 kN B=B’/2 = 167 kN for each compressed pile: In the evaluation of stresses on piles. the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig.NSd/2) = (4000/3. 6.8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0. Table of Content .17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3. the plinth own weight is considered negligible.00 .00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.18.00 .3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0. 6. 6.8·700·462·14. then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3.EC2 – worked examples 6-29 Tied reinforcement in the pile: 8 φ 26 (As = 4248 mm2) The compressive stress Fc in the concrete and the steel tension Fs on the pedestal pile are evaluated from the ULS verification for normal stresses of the section itself: Fs = fyd As = 391.17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3. Fig. S&T model in the plane π1. the truss-tie beam in Fig.8·700·x·14.

θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.5° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65.2° 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 .5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.19 Trusses in plan π2 and in plan π3.2° = 154 kN Fig.5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 6.5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56.

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

85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd.EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .16 N / mm 0. 6.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ ⎝ 2 = k3 f cd = 0.21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa. 1.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm.85f ck 0. 6.88 ⎜1⎟ 17 = 13.85 250 ⎝ ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14.13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.5 f yk 1.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig.3 N / mm 2 1.5 1.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.96 N / mm 0.15 = 450 = 391.max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content .max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.65 N / mm 0.

00 = 3600 kNm = 3.8·x·b = 17·0.8·x·b·(d – 0.4 x) = 3.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.22 Identification of B and D regions.8·x·300·(1900 – 0. 6. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions.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).23 Shear and bending moment diagrams. Fig. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .6·109 17·0. 6. The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B.6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0.4 x) = 3. Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3.

6.26. Fig. The strut C2 tilting is 3190 θ = arctg = 46. 6.25 shows the load paths characterized by Schlaich in the strut&tie model identification.24 Reactions and boundary stresses in the region D.26. Strut and tie model.EC2 – worked examples 6-34 Identification of boundary stresses in the region D Fig. 6. shown in Fig.41° .25 Load paths. 6. Fig.76° 3000 while the strut C4 tilting is 1690 θ1 = arctg = 48. 1500 Table of Content . strut&tie model Fig. 6.

) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1. 6. T2 and T3.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.4 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.128·106/391.61)-EC2] σ2Rd. and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1.) T2 = T3.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig.27 Node A.50 m length As = 1.96 N/mm2 Table of Content . and not less than 150 mm2/m.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1. Table 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used. because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil.13·10 /391.) 2130 kN 2130 kN 1647 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1002 kN 1509 kN 1595 kN Steel tension rods design EC2 point 9.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0. Table 6.3 = 5443 mm As = 1. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.10 % of the concrete area.128·106/391.max = 14.

or an increase of the plate length).76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content . a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1.76° + 150 cos 46.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46.2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers.128 ⋅106 = = 7.05 N / mm 2 > 14.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14.76° + 150 cos 46. 6. 6.max = 1.28 Node B.65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14.65 N/mm2 Fig. this last choice is adopted.EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd.96 a 300 x 300 mm plate (A = 90000 mm2) is used the reinforcement for the tension rod T3 is loaded on two layers (Fig.max = 17.

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

85f ck 0.0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0. because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm). just as in this example.15 = 450 = 391.0 f cd A c0 = 3.5 f yk 1.3 N / mm 2 .7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6.14. In this case there is a partial discontinuity. Reinforcement design Point [6.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 . 3500 kN concentrated load [EC2 clause 6.5)EC2] to analyse this topic.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6.5 1.15 loading area Ac0 = 300·250 = 75000 mm2 dimensions of the load distribution area d2 ≤ 3 d1 = 3·300 = 900 mm b2 ≤ 3 b1 = 3·250 = 750 mm maximal load distribution area Ac1 = 900·750 = 675000 mm2 load distribution height h ≥ (b 2 − b1 ) = 750 − 250 = 500 mm h ≥ (d 2 − d 1 ) = 900 − 300 = 600 mm ⇒ h = 600 mm Ultimate compressive stress FRdu = A c0 f cd A c1 / A c0 = 75000 ⋅17 ⋅ 675000 / 75000 = 3825 kN ≤ ≤ 3. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content .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.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. 1. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu . 1.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6.

3 T= the steel area required to carry T is: As ≥ using 10 mm diameter bars. Table of Content . 15 bars are required for a total area of: As = 15 ⋅ 78.EC2 – worked examples 6-39 b = 500 mm F b − a 3500 500 − 250 = = 437.5 = 1178 mm2.5 kN 4 b 4 500 T 437500 = = 1118 mm 2 f yd 391.

The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2.15.50 m for a central zone 7. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13.40 m width. Mancini. 3: Durability .0 m width.Practical aspects” Manual . Design and Performance Vol. two ballast retaining walls and.1 – 6.6 m.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme. Fig.60 m with two side-walks of 1.29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7.Member Design .3 – 7. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour. two track spacing of 5.1 Description of the structure The design example proposed in this section is related to a railway bridge deck made up by a continuous slab on three spans with two orders of prestressing tendons (longitudinal and transverse prestressing).2 “slabs” by prof.textbook (292 pages.4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point. Assessment and Repair .2 [EC2 clause 5.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6. Fig.29 and 6. 2 Table of Content . FIB Bullettin n°3.Maintenance. table 4. bridge design.s 6.2 – 7. 6. whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0.2 – 7.0 m.Design for Fire Resistance . The slab presents a constant thickness of 1.15 Slabs1. in the middle.10 – 6. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2. Part 2. December 1999). ISBN 9782-88394-043-7. 6.118) for fatigue reasons.

1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel.0 MPa.2 fptk = 1800 MPa. fctm = 3. 6.1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195.0 MPa. As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost). Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35. Table of Content . Ec = 29. fp0.23 MPa.4·103 MPa ν = 0. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations.0·103 MPa. Es = 200.0·103 MPa.1 MPa. fyk = 500.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig. fcd = 23. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm. G = 12.30 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.0 MPa. fcd2 = 12.6”): 0.8 MPa. fyd = 434.3 MPa.7·103 MPa. fcd1 = 17. (strands φ 0. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm.

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

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

85 fp 0. For the vertical direction.55 6 Ky.02 11.66 2.02 6 Table 6. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.74 2.tot 10 kN/m 10.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint.tot 10 kN/m 9. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo.6” having an area of 1.1k = 0.tot 10 kN/m 178.80 4.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa. considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.61 11. Table of Content . thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus. 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. 6. Fig. Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx. being symmetrically disposed.6 . The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one.39 cm2. 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).EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top. I the inertia and H the height of the column.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports.78 6 Kz.max = 0.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck.61 10. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed.

Considering prestressing as an external load. should be applied consistently at the nodes of FEM model. Prestressing has to be introduced in the FEM model in order to calculated the hyperstatic actions that arise in the structural scheme. unintentional angular deviation. 6. Table of Content .01 rad/m coefficient of friction between the tendons and their sheathing. 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.max ⋅ e-μ(α + k x) with: μ = 0.35 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. 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-45 Fig.19 k = 0.

It can be notice that the forces at the end of each segment extremity are the same with opposite signs. If beam elements are used. furthermore. only nodal forces can be considered so that it is necessary to place segment extremities within two sequential nodes.37 may be followed. 6. in general. With shell elements. these forces cancel out themselves with the exception at anchorages. the forces at the extremity of the cable plus the equilibrating system for each segment. consequently the segment extremities may be placed indifferently at nodes or at the middle of the element. the indications of Fig.36 represents the forces acting on a segment of concrete due to a curved prestressing tendon. one has to consider the transverse position of the tendon that.i = P2 sin θ2 P1 sin θ1 while the balancing moment turns out: Mi = (P2 cos θ2 e2 P1 cos θ1 e1 ) (P2 sin θ2 P1 sin θ1 ) a/2 The above procedure should be repeated for all the segments. due to the two-dimensional scheme. 6.36 Effect of prestressing on a segment and equivalent loads Fig. for each tendon. As a simple rule. shall be introduced in the FEM model. Fh.EC2 – worked examples 6-46 Fig. the equilibrating vertical and horizontal forces in the i-segment result: Fv.i = P2 cos θ2 P1 cos θ1 Table of Content . 6. . depending on whether the right or the left segment is considered. do not coincide with a nodal alignment. if the inclination of the cable changes from θ1 to θ2 while the prestress force changes from P1 to P2 due to friction. The choice of the position of the elementary segments is relative to the kind of element adopted in the FEM model. it is possible to introduce a point load (or moment) whether along the element body or at nodes. Finally.

t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp.018.55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1.t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere.000395 fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa. βs (t∞ . fcmo = 10 MPa.c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel.t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ . βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements. age of concrete at prestressing time. t∞ = 25550 ds.574 0.: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 f cm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. 6. εcs (t∞.t0) = 0. between time t0 and time t∞. ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1.37 Transverse distribution of prestressing Time-dependent prestressing losses Time-dependent losses of prestress may be evaluated by means of the following equation: Δσ p . t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0.8 φ ( t ∞ .035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content .t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0. t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ . c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ .

488 0. ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig. Ac = 17. fcm fcmo 1 = 0. t0) and for φ(t∞ .5754 If the improved prediction model of chapter 3 is used.19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours. φ (t∞ .t0) = 1.281.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .1 + t 0 0. t0) = 1.62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one.43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam.5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1.3 = 2. 0.598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1.983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 . Δσpr : loss of prestressing due to relaxation of steel calculated for a reduced initial tensile stress of σp = σpgo 0.c+s+r (where σpgo is the effective initial stress in tendons due to dead load and prestressing) and evaluated as percentage by the following formula: ρt = ρ1000h t ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 1000 ⎠ 0 . for t > 50 years ρt. at least for creep value.38. the following values for εcs (t∞ .2 0.t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1. 6.556.t0) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞.1 3 h 5.012 RH) = 0.3 Δσp. t0) = 182. t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ .EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member. u = 28640 mm perimeter of the member in contact with the atmosphere.5 1 + (0. = ρ1000h × 3. φ (t∞.3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ . Table of Content .

1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1. area of prestressing steel at the considered level. 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. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc. 6.1×250×φdin = 319.15. modulus of elasticity ratio.6 kN → qvk. For the LM71. 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. but as actions of opposite sign.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.EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load. the maximum value of prestressing losses. turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan. inertia of concrete gross section.6 = 199.1 = 319. As a reference.6/1. stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing.75 kN/m Table of Content . area of concrete gross section. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. 6. as percentage of initial steel tension.

40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. 6. Fig. while right truck the other one. being the dynamic factor equal to 1.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig.39 Adopted load arrangement for LM71 load model The uniformly distributed load qvk according to Eurocode 1.1 × 133 × φdin = 170. 6.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin .42 shows which elements are involved by spreading effects. 6. 6. 6.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. 6.3 kN/m Fig. In the following as left track is denoted the track which has a positive value for the y co-ordinate.0 kN/m Fig.1 × 150 × φdin = 174. Fig.162. is evaluated below. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig.1 × 80 × φdin → qvk.2 = 102.6. 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.3 kN/m without any limitation in length. therefore subjected to variable load.41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71.3 is: qvk = 1.

should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking.3 17. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of. sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞).162 L φ − 0.42 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 = 2.75 + 17. arising from variable loads. − STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations. derailment.33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1. has been considered.8 kN/m.) but.2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1.3 as: Lφ = 1. Table of Content .16 + 0. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0.3 = 27. 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.8×9.EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion. wind pressure. 6. for the sake of simplicity. centrifugal forces.33 + 27.73 = 1.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3. so that for a width of 9. rails.5 m. transverse gradient for drain water.04 m 3 3 Several other actions.5 = 136. differential temperature variation etc.8×1.8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3). assumed as a load of 1.

ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0. for each.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1. 6.25 = 6.18 m).25 = 6.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0.43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each. Fig.25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content .25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8. − STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each. 6.43 m).25×9.00 kN/m for each.5 = 11.875 kN/m.

6.47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6.305 m).EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6.48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content .46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32.45 SW/0 arrangement for Load Step 6 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6.

EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6. G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1. Table of Content .5 for unfavourable effect and 0. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1.8 for unfavourable effect and 1.2 for unfavourable effect and 0. equal to 1.8.3 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. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0. = partial factor of prestress load equal to 1. ballast excluded. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads.15.0 for favourable effect. equal to 0.4 for unfavourable effect and 1. Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads. ballast excluded.9 for favourable effect.0 for favourable effect.0 for favourable effect. = combination factor of variable loads for quasi-permanent combination at service. Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action.6.

m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y. θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1. 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] 1.8 Table of Content . t = σ 23. − stress limitation at service. From FEM analysis. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ . − crack widths. t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2.4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning. b = σ 22. t = σ x. b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre.15. t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2. b = σ x.963 1. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig.6.32 one obtains: Table 6. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning. . b = σ 33. . n23 . t / b = σ 22.6 × fck = 21 MPa. t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33. m22 . b = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy. t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23. t = σ 22. m33 .7 Elem. t = σ 33. as subjected to the higher stress level. one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii. σ y. t = σ xy. the value of n22 . b = σ 23. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23. t / b = σ 22.EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6. − deformation. For the sake of simplicity.5 0.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6. t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . n33 . 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 0.5 1.

89 -10.29 -1.b [°] θ1.t -0.t -2.59 σ33.48 -18. 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 σ1.97 -11.86 σ23.66 -3.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6.10 1.86 -4.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.963 1.48 95.29 88.00 0.46 -1.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0.t -2.t -1.66 -3.25 0.58 -8.11 -1.97 -12. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig.09 -2.41 -5. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.t -2.EC2 – worked examples σ22.99 0.89 σ1.b -2.10 Elem.00 -0. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations.91 -2.32.963 1.5 0.17 0.b -14.4 × fck = 14.t -1.75 -0.b 0.72 -4.30 -2.59 σ2.05 -2.21 -5.32 σ1.69 σ2.5 0.31 -2.51 -8.24 -2.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.b -14.48 σ23. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.76 -1.57 -7. 6.17 89.65 -2.11 σ33. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.71 -0.b -2.22 -4.58 -5.14 -2. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6.15 -4.58 -1.6 × fck = 21.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.80 -4.46 -1.02 89.00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions. ensuring that.t θ1.23 σ2.00 0.t [°] σ1.99 90. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit.b -10.37 -5.98 -10.46 -12. under service load conditions.02 -1.01 -0.b -8.49 -7.36 σ2.58 -5.22 -4.t [°] θ2.5 1.78 -11.42 σ2.78 -11.00 0.01 89.83 -9.97 -5.5 -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 .t -0.90 -9.b [°] 6-56 θ2.9 Elem.77 which not exceed the limit one.85 108.11 σ2.62 -6.5 1.b -2.48 σ1.27 -2.40 -2.86 -4.77 89.98 0.46 -13.t -5.01 σ22.b -2. 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 σ1.15 0.11 -1.

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

y = 22. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered.5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step.xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd. For the investigated elements.6 cm2/m placed at 0. In fact. one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ).x = As.EC2 – worked examples 6-58 Slab ultimate limit state Verification at ULS has been performed adopting the sandwich model for shell elements.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd.6. If the is not satisfied. and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As.12 Table of Content . According to CEB Bulletin 223. The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig.5 1.49. ξ (100 ρ fck ) 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6.4. specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd.32).y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd. The external actions are derived from FEM model using the load step for trains which leads to the maximum values and combining the results according to the relevant combination formula.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd. turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig. it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 . 6. 6.2.11 Elem.x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd. h [m] n Sd.x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1. Fig.963 1.49): Table 6.5 0.07 m from the external face.y ( m 22 ) -239 499 38 -1950 m Sd. Table 6. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 .3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o .

0 0.6 784.56 14.43 1.43 51.0 0.56 26.e.56 3509 13860 763.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx . In the design Table of Content .0 0. 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.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd . 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.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig. nyc and nxyc ) only for element number 589.893 -30.56 26. 6.77 0.0 0.76 0.43 1.07 = 0.0 n xyc 0. nxc .5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i.0 0.0 n yc 0.00158 1569 26.s = n xy ⎞ z − ys m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .9 805.0 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.0 0.EC2 – worked examples Elem.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.14 m so that. 6. 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. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig.0 0.18 0.00253 174 45. i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.14 0.00158 23.00158 26. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0.

2 0.3 13.5 -122.3 787.140 0.14 Table of Content .680 1. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met. one obtains: Table 6.13 Elem.140 0. in this case the verification is performed along the principal compression direction in the concrete subjected to biaxial compression and the checking equation is: σc t = n Sdx + n Sdy 2 + (n Sdx − n Sdy 4 ) 2 + v2 Sd ≤ f cd1 t For the considered elements.140 1.8 59.360 -713.140 0.8 -2560.220 0. if result satisfied.360 -1093.i -7.683 0.5 1.1 -5344.823 -3479.140 0.6 -1489.6 726. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.7 0.1 -4202. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.s vSd.3 -577.963 0.0 -1065.7 -3120.5 -4893. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement.3 -2266.8 -1037.9 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.680 0.220 0.360 307.7 -6252.680 1.140 1.140 1.412 0.680 1. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.s [kN/m] n Sdx.9 0.680 0.0 32. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative.i vSd.220 0. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.412 0.4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.140 0.s n Sdy.680 0.7 -4. the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .i n Sdx. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value.2 14.5 1.5 0.

5 0.7 0.600 0.5 1.0 0.0 Asy 2 σc -30.8 -5.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.0 0.0 0.51: Table of Content .0 0. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required.0 34.8 -5768.340 0. whereas they are arranged at 0.372 0.220 0.1 -17. so.s [kN/m] n Sdx.5 66.1 -17.4 -45.140 0.680 1.6 -153.553 0.2 -11.1 -17.960 0.8 -129. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig.680 0.1 -1062.8 -16.8 -16.2 0. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.1 -17.0 0. Thus. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.0 25.5 -1465.0 -22.1 -950.1 -17.930 0.7 870.0 0.8 -3144.0 0.0 0.i n Sdx.0 0.0 0.020 0.i vSd. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions. For element 589.0 Of course.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16.758 -3588.4 0.0 0.0 0.260 -1179.5 -7090.9 0.240 0.6 -5040.387 0.8 14.190 0.3 -17.1 -12.15 Elem.1 -17.8 f cd1/2 -17.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.0 -4054.215 708. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer.1 -12.7 -2962.430 0.0 0.0 0.s n Sdy.6 0.0 0.4 -7.3 0.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6.6 f cd1/2 -17.0 18.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer.1 Asy 2 Asx 0. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.1 -17.0 0.630 1.s vSd.0 0.140 1.1 -17.5 -2157.230 -716.0 0.0 -24.3 0.9 -16.0 0.535 1.580 0.16 Top Layer Design Elem.9 -38.8 0.1 -17.0 It can be notice that verification for concrete in compression is not satisfied for any layers except for element 589 top layer and element 320 bottom layer.0 38.6 -6. 6.3 16.963 0.300 0.5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.0 Asy 2 σc -16.1 -17.0 720.5 1.0 -11.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.i -8.0 0.4 794. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6.0 0.

8 -2287.8 -4063.0 38.3 -159.0 34.0 0.i ns For the investigated elements.17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem.2 -956.1 -2242.5 -3522. Table of Content .y [kN/m] n s.5 -1070.0 0.0 0.3 0. 6.6 -3274.x [kN/m] n i. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons. Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used. 648 93 320 589 n s.6 -1399.3 1664.5 -5026.EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too. to summarise the results in a visual map.0 0. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane.0 -1163. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd .0 0.8 1503.0 0. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd. it is useful.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 -5752. For the sake of simplicity.0 0. to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i.0 0.3 -6370. Table 6.s + nSd.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702.0 The previous procedure should be repeated for all the elements of the structural model finding the amount of reinforcement to provide in the slab.0 0.0 0. 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 .

6.52. The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0.43 m. and the most unfavourable situation occurs when a single tendon is tensioned. 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 .300 m distance between the centroid of tendons above section A-A to the centroid of the prism. 6.52 Geometric dimension for bursting calculation Checking situation is represented in Fig. is: lbs = hbs = 1.6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0.2 m and his length. Table of Content . 115 . distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852.2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0. considering the lower level of tendon (first tensioned) the height of the prism results: hbs = 2×0.075 m t2 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig.6 = 1. corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons. for end anchored tendon.

50 0. supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping.82 cm2/m2 .38 MPa F ∓ = = − ⎜ ⎟ ⎬ ⎨ Sd ⎝ 0.43 1 . spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning. Fig. bs 19.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content .1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A. Thus.61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs . 53).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. 20 0 . may be found by the following: A s. 53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy.56 MPa ⎭ The section along which no shear force results. in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60. As for bursting verification.0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0.5 may be assumed. furthermore. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon. is placed at 0.43 × 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 . from 0. As. bs A s.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧ ⎪ ⎪−15. a section with a breadth of 0.43 × 1. lsl = 1.50 m.40 m to 1. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory.43 m and a height of 1.e. for a prestressing force FSd = 4134.bs = Nbs / fyd = 19.0 cm2/m2 2 0 .20 m) from the anchor plate.61 = = = 57. respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0.35 m. Thus the effective area on a meter length. only the longitudinal direction is considered.50 2 ⎠ ⎪ σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ +2. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0.e.(i. n2 γ1 =1. i. is equal to the overall height of the section.

214 2 × 0. 54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0.5× lsl and bsl = 0.61 kNm 3 Fig.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance.43 × 10 3 = 33.43 m. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44.031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

96 ⋅ 106 Table of content . Rectangular section. The second condition in the first exercise. can be written as N( −600) = −0. d’ = 50 mm.EC2 – worked examples 7-1 SECTION 7. calculation of service stresses.2] Evaluate the normal compressive force and of the associated bending moment in the section of Figure 7. that.45. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. or M. 7. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f . fyk = 450 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 6 3 and then e =-120. M0 = 400 kNm. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then. assuming k2 = 0. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2. αe = 15. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0.1.5m. evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN. S* yn = −88. Finally.1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7. 7.1. linearly changing M N. that is yn = h.1.65 mm. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. calculate the couples M. Fig.96 ⋅ 10 mm . f) M = M0 = 400 kNm. Considering Fig. keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load.45 ⋅ 30 −88. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. β = 1 The boundary conditions from the first exercise set the neutral axis on the border of the bottom section. we have d = 550 mm. N.

49 kNm.3) ⋅ 15 = −201.3 16.3) = −16.95 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: 3 3 yn = 272.59) ⋅10-3 = -570.3) ⋅ 15 = 251. N keeping constant the eccentricity.3 mm.16kN.EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.6fck = = = 1.48 kN M = (-0.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.7/3-300)+0. 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 = 235.4 kNm.6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.5 kNm e = .80 kN.801. S* yn = −13263 ⋅ 10 mm and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.18MPa 272.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16.07MPa 272.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.59σs d − yn 550 − 235.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.71mm 0. Table of Content .096 .457.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0. N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete.5·106/570. M = 1.3 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. If we consider to change M.42MPa −13.7/2+0.16⋅(-120. M=N⋅e=-2001.7/2⋅(235.096N0 = -876.7 = σs = −0. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457.65) ⋅10-3 = 241.096 M0 =438.48·103 = . the stress is N= 1.7 N = -0.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.42 ⋅ (550 − 272.

57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.51 ⎛ 262.6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 262.22 ⋅ 106 mm 3 0.22 ⋅ 106 ⋅ y n ⎣ ⎦ 3 + y n = 300 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] − 2 and iteratively solving Table of Content .6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.25 + 30.57MPa 262.51 (550 − 262.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).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 ) = −0.69MPa 262.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442.51 ' σs = 0.51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.252 + 84795 = 262. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.6fck S* yn and I* yn S * yn and then e= M0 M 0 (y n ) = N 0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.6 ⋅ 30 800 ⋅ 103 Solving with respect to yn 2 yn + 60y n − 84795 = 0 y n = −30.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.51mm (50 − 262.51) ⋅ 15 = −218.69 + 218.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −y n = 0.6 ⋅ fck 0.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.51) σs = 0.

34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7.95 + 235.95 + 235.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0.67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105.2. As a remark.82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0. On the other hand.82) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 400. just in the case c) the concrete tension limit state under load is not reached while in the case a)(k1=0. 7. the tension ultimate state under load for tied steel is got just in the case b).95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235. Fig.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations. Results for different limit distributions of stresses. 2B Table of Content .2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses.82)⎥ = −1666.

8/ 200 = 0.eff = 3.1667 − 0.4 ⎢1 − (1 − 0. fct. I = 71.01235 ⋅ 0.82·1010 mm4. k =0.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 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. design of minimum reinforcement.1 3 8 8 α f = 3 0 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 .35·104 mm2 Fig.3. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0.00208 ⎥ 1 − 0.6945 − 2(1 − 0. Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0.1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content . applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment. Box .EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7.6945 0 ρs. Wi = 7. yG =809 mm.3.01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG.1667 − 0.4494 ) = 0. σs = 200 MPa.65 ⋅ 3.2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.section.4494 ) ⎤ ρs.2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7.4494 . r2 = I/A =39.3 with the following geometry: A = 1.925·106 mm2 .min = 0.8 MPa.25·108 mm3. 7.min = 0.

min = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s.4.min = 0. 7.1667 = 0.00943 1 − 0.825 ⋅ 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. Minimum reinforcement. Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0. The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct .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.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1.25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1.4494 A s.25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7. Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2.8 ⎥ 7.825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.812 > ξ and it follows: ρs.min = 0.4 Fig.01235 ⋅ 0. case (a).4494) − 0. 45 2(1 − 0.

Minimum reinforcement.7050) ⎤ ρs.5 Fig.min = 0. ξ = 0.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.01235 ⋅ 0.01235 ⋅ 0. 3B Table of Content .00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2.min = 0.1667 = 0. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7.min = 0. The bars have to be located in the tied part of the web for an extension a = 1800-1269-300 = 231 mm over the bottom slab In the bottom slab we have: 1 − 9 8 αf = 0.1667 − 0.705) − 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.812 > ξ and it results ρs.min = 0.7050 ) = 0. case (b).00797 1 − 0.7050 e 856 Considering the web.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0.7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s.00046 3 ⋅ 1. 45 2(1 − 0.705 A s. with h = 1.6945 − 2(1 − 0.8(1 − 0.5. 7.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2.1667 − 0.

δ’=460/600=0.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.4 ⋅ c + 0. fck=30MPa. fct.3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7.2a) (7. c=40mm. As’=452mm2 (4φ12).3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2. δ=548/600=0.4. Reinforced concrete section.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0. the (7.4) can be immediately used as verification formula.0767.9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ ⎦=0 2 and then Table of Content .cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.6.913. As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7.eff (7. As=2712mm2 (6φ24). d=548mm. d’=46. ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0.8). M=300kNm. 7.0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡ ⎣548 − y n + 0.1) σs.5 (1 − δ ) . k4=0. b=400mm.cr = k t ⋅ fct .17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7. It results then β=452/2712=0. .0mm.167.2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs.6 Fig.EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7. h=600mm.4) The (7.6). cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7.3. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3.eff=fctm=2.

08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 0.96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 237.2012 ⎛ 0.0113 ⎝ 0.4 ⋅ 40 + 0. (1-0.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡ ( 548 − 237.8 ) / 5.2175.7 + 118.0113 ⎦ 4B Table of Content .3963)/3=0.17 5 ⎢ ⎥ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ 0.5. Then λ=0.cr = 0. 0.913)=0.2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57.8mm .EC2 – worked examples 2 yn + 237.8 )2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.2012.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237.6 ⋅ 2.2012 ⎥ = 0.8 )2 + 0.9 0.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.184mm ⋅ ⎢3.2012.3963 h 600 I* yn = 400 = 5. The adopted statements lead to σs.8 = = 0.72 + 113026 = 237.08MPa 0.0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.167 ( 46 − 237.5(1-0.

5) and with its substitution in the (7. after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3. d’.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7. and fixed M.12) Combining (7.4) to use it as a design formula.4 ⋅ c + 0. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7.4] 7. 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 ⎤ + ξ3 ⎤ δ − ξ + β δ − ξ 2 ⎡3n ⋅ρs ⎡ ' ( ) ( ) ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (7.34αe ⋅φ⋅λ ⎡ δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎤ ξ2 ⎣ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ αeν ( δ−ξ) ⎡ ⎤ 3ξ2 2ξ3 ⎢ ⎥ × + 2 2 ⎢⎡ ' 1 δ+βδ − +β ξ ⎡ ⎤ ⎤ ( ) ⎦ ⎣( δ−ξ) +β( δ '−ξ) ⎦ ⎥ ⎣⎣ ⎦ Table of Content . the (7.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (7. In particular.17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7.6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ ⎣ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7.11). b. h.7) Deducing ρs from (7.4). where w = w k .8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7.4.9) (7.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0.4. 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 . d.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7.5) (7. stated b.9) is 2 ⎡ ⎤ 2αe ⋅λ w0 k ⋅ξ ' 1 = + δ+βδ − +β ξ +α ⎡ ⎤ ( ) ⎢ ⎥× e ⎦ 3.8) and (7.

λ = 0. the solution for (7. An alternative procedure.11) (7.5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ. we have σsAs0. Alternatively.2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7. The procedure. ρs from (7.5 practically impossible for bending problems. if we set the value of σs. and together with the (7. In this case. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter.18 1− 1− 0. consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7. easier to be applied.67) is easy to solve.15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3.7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7. numerically solved.11) solved with respect to φ.8). which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7.185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7.16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.9d.13). aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level.13) the (7. for example coincident with the permissible one.15) and (7. the neutral axis is obtained from (7.13).14) 7. leads to the desred values ρs e σs.4u1 ν ν * − 0. the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount. let’s state δ=0. . using the (7.9. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then.18) the (11.88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7.18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content .4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7. If it is not the case. it is necessary to set in the (7.9).17) the (7.4. In this way. .243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1. In this case too. as the parameter p is defined. it is possible to set the tensional level σs.13) λ = 2.11). being the value λ =0.4c + 0.185ν/(pδ) the (7.9d=M and then ρs=0. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ.20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ν⎥ ⎦ (7.

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.19) that defines the maximal bars diameter.15). 6B Table of Content . which.EC2 – worked examples 7-12 φmax ⎡ 17c( νp − α e ν * ) − 5ν * w ok ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = * αe ν ν p − p2 (7..

design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0.3.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235. p(1) = 156.7.01375 . w k = 0.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3.965 + 18400.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7. Then in a general form w 0k = 0.185 ⋅ 7.15=7.30mm. 2/3.(1000.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7. in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1.16 ⋅ ⎢ 3.77 = 0. h=500mm.874 w k = 0.75 ⋅ 0.086.10mm . Fig. Reinforced concrete Section. σs (1) = 0.20mm.1) u1=50/26=1. 1/3.18/7.6 · 3.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0. fck=33MPa. w k = 0.16 max Defined w k = 0.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.874 (see ex.2 mm .086MPa ν=600/77. together with the (7. φ=26mm.4 ⋅ 1.6.77/(1-1.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0.332/3=3.92 M0cr=0. 7.4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7.6 ⋅ 3.10).086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7.15kNm ν*=7.01049 .30mm the maximal amplitude. It results fctm=0.3 mm . p (2/3) = 119.77)=9.086 · 156.10-6=77. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state.01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation.92 ⋅ p − 9.15) and (7.3.3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0. M=600kNm. Assuming b=1000mm.16 7.5002/6).20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9. in the three cases here considered kw = 1.874 Table of Content .77 = 0.75 As (1) = 0. 119.62 As (2/3) = 0. w k = 0.16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1. c=50mm. 156.62 ⋅ 0.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9.77 0. 7.185 ⋅ 7.7.

652 + 69614 = 195. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0. p (1/3) = 75.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 yn + 159. Table of Content .77 = 0.9 mm . and 26 mm diameter bars are used.9 ) = 7.086·119.62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.48 ⋅ 0.874 σs (1/3) = 0. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision. ξ = 0. the metal areas are overestimated.7.3918 I∗ yn = 1000 ⋅ 195.02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0.9 = 304 MPa 7.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig.48 As (1/3) = 0.6 · 3.185 ⋅ 7.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0. w k = 0.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195. 75. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.02179 .65 + 79.8.3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0. Designed sections.1 mm .48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7. 7.93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195.086 · 75.6·3.

1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.cr = 0.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53.4292) / 3 = 0.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103.6 ⋅ 3.4292 I∗ yn = 1000 ⋅ 214.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.494) / 3 = 0.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247. Then σs.01062 ⎝ 0.1) = 1.5 + 103.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.cr = 0.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.3918) / 3 = 0.2027 0.1 = 160 MPa 1.11 MPa 0.41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 yn + 207.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.2 2 + 143704 = 247.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡ ⎣9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ ⎦=0 2 2 yn + 334.1687 Table of Content . ξ = 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ = 0.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.306 mm ⎟ 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 0.31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.6 ) = 8.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⋅ ⎜ 3. ρs = 69.2027 ⎛ 0.2 + 167.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.1903 σs.6 ⋅ 3.03 / (50 · 100) = 0.4 ⋅50 + 0.1 mm . ξ = 0.06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0.0138 ⎝ 0.31 MPa 0.41 ⋅ 109 0.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.6 = 238 MPa 8.11⎞ ⎛ 0.315.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0. ρs = 111.1903 ⎛ 0.494 I∗ yn = 1000 ⋅ 247.01062 ⎟ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 .0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.5 (1 – 0.6 mm .874) = 0.52 + 90498 = 214.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0.

70 – 21. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0.46/3) / 43.85 h0/d = (43.0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41. those values are evaluated using the (7.086 ⋅ wk = 0.1 11151 140 0. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state.2 and they are shown in Figure 7. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification. Table 7.1 and 7.836 0.3 and Figure 7.836 h0/d = [(18·160·18.16) (7. Table of Content .9 0. Approximated method.811 0.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0.71] / 43. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43.59/3) / 43.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.cr = 0.79/18.1687 ⎛ 0.6 ⋅ 3. Table 7.85 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 = 0.9.70 – 19. Table 7.120 0. 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.99 + 3·160·13. 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 0.1. In fact.70 = 0.9.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0.99) + + 2/3·24. wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0. Exact method.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0.14).10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs. The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.2.0223 ⎝ 0.2 6903 221 0.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.9 0.213 0.70 ≅ 0.78 MPa 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.792/18.

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. wk = 0. Approximated method – Determination of maximum diameter.EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs).3.3 mm (C) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 280 30 5430 290 26 5310 309 20 4910 325 16 4672 355 10 4282 Fig.10. 7. Table of Content .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.

13. deformation limit state. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way.6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7.8 From Table [3.9 ⋅ 5.13.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.12 Fig.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) .9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385. l=10m.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5.745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385. Transversal section.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. 7.13.11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7. stating αe = Es/Ec=15. 7. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385. g+q=40kN/m.12.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0.8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35. g=2q.11.8 ) = 18. deflected beam. Fig.6 In the stage II. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig. Referring to the stage I. Table of Content . 7. as reported in Figure 7. fck=30MPa. as indicated in Figure 7. Section at stage I.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166.

Section at stage II.05/10. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7.13=1.14. 7.21) is written as 2 ⎡ 1 M β ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 4 ( ξ2 − ξ3 ) dξ − 2 Ec I I ⎣ ξ1 4λ ⎝2⎠ ∫ 1 2 ξ1 dξ ⎤ ⎥ 1− ξ ⎦ (7.1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 + 189. .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⎠ ⎦ (7.24) Table of Content . Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2.20) 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.92 2 + 123396 = 269mm 269 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2).92 + 94. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7. the equation (7. where the cracked part of the beam start.23) The abscissa ξ1. is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 )= M cr 1 = M max λ (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 ⎥ .21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe.84y n − 123396 = 0 yn 2 y n = −94.01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 I* II = 500 ⋅ 3 2 3 then c=18.

12Ec I ∗ I (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.28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ).λ. 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. considering that v I = The (7. we obtain the curves reported in Figure 7. leads to the following expression for the section displacement 2 ⎛ ⎞ M l v ⎜ ⎟ = max * ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12Ec I I 3β ⎡ ⎡ ⎤⎤ 3 ⎢1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 − 8ξ1 − λ 2 (1 − 2ξ1 ) ⎥ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎦ ⎣ 2 (7. that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments. 7.27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7.15.15. In this way. a concentrated load Q=200kN. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig. In the same way. Diagrams for v/v1 .26) Finally. Furthermore.15. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section.27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞. varying z . ξ1 .51).29) (7.93 and 0. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0. The result.25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7.20) is expressed as 2 ⎡ 48 ⎛ 4 4 3 ⎞ 12 β ⎤⎫ ⎛ ⎞ 5 M max ⎧ − ξ1 ⎟ − v⎜ ⎟ = 1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 + ⎜ ξ1 ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎬ ⎣ ⎦ ∗ ⎨ 2 ⎥ 5 ⎝ 3 ⎠ 5 λ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 Ec I I ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (7. it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. . for the same Mmax.

16.EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3. displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c). 7.64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.65 ⋅ 21.31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.15 and Figure 7.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig. we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21. as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7.71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17.29) and using the results in Figure 11.26) (7.6.56 ⋅ 17. Deformation in the stage I (a).05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.64 = 35. is reported in Figure 7.16. introducing the numerical values in the (7. In particular. where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam.25. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection. is about 4%. Table of Content .31 = 27.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

3.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk.3.12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0. in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0.2 of Eurocode 2. flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ .95 = 1.60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength.1 [EC2 Clause 11. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11. which can be used as an indicative value for design of the deformability of structural members. flcm = value of the average cylindric compressive strength in MPa. The characteristic values of simple tensile strength.3. for two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes.1 – 11. corresponding to fractiles 0.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2. can be taken equal to: .0.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation. can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk.05 e 0. for corresponding density class in kg/m3.3. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3. 2 Table of Content .40+0.The results of calculation of the two above-mentioned mechanical features are shown and compared in the following table. the intersecting compressive elastic module at 28 days.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.for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 . in lack of direct experimentation.0.1 and 11.05 = 0.3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 11.95. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.

2 4.0.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.0.5 4.9 2.7 3.850 -0.9 3.2 1.1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.959 -0.95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .1 5.4 5.05 [MPa] fctk.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.563 -2.4 2.2 3.868 -4.

The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm.3.75‰.5η1 = 2.15 x Es) = 450/(1. In case one chooses. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit.4 – 11.5 – 11.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10. Fig. described in the previous example. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10.2 [EC2 Clause 11.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3.5 kNm. for fyk= 450 MPa.98‰. Table of Content . 11. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN. ρ = 1650 kg/m3).1 Deformation and tension diagram of r. 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 cm. like in the previous example.1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled.365 = 432.3. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete.6 – 11.8 MPa. made of type 1 lightweight concrete.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding.85 flck/γc = 19. to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T.11.96‰. 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. is εyd = fyd /(1.5 cm = 36.c. from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0.15 x 200000) = 1. The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28. h=50cm and d=47cm. The section in question is shown in Fig. 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. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1.5 cm. build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa.3. section.1 – 11.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

- Connection Details
- SHOP DRAWIN-FW-VC-IP-02-001 (1) (1)
- Born of Faith
- Retaining Wall Details
- Eqiuipment
- Beam Deatils
- Guidance Transition Certificate Shs
- Recommendation Form Shs
- bsl_cp3
- Oman Ophiolite Profile
- DN-02_B
- See These Rare Historica...2. Wow
- Metro
- Worked Example 1 - Question
- 142761284311370
- Faith Explorer
- etabsexamplesmanual-140203102504-phpapp01
- 160_Release_notes_enu.pdf
- He Honour Emperor
- Too Generous
- C SAS 2012 Unlocked
- KT2-1 the Cross - Centre of History
- KT7-4 Worshipping in Truth
- Marker Joint Side
- Gal2_16

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulEC

EC

- Design Manual to EC2
- Eurocode2_Commentary2008
- Design Guide EC2(2)
- ARUP Worked Example
- Concrete EC2
- STRUCTURAL SCHEME DESIGN GUIDE BY ARUP
- Worked Examples Ec2 Def080723
- How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2
- Eurocode 7
- DESIGN_OF_STRUCTURAL_CONNECTIONS_TO _EUROCODE_3
- Worked Examples for the Design of Concrete Structures to Eurocode 2
- 2010 Bridges EN1992 GMancini EBouchon
- Concrete
- Economic Concrete Frame Elements to Ec2
- Derivation of Bernoulli Equation
- Grade April 2012
- Lecture-31.pdf
- Www.rilem.net Images Publis 20bbe05bf665760d6f1ff49c0fe77a90
- Chap_06x.pdf
- 18vedic multiplier
- All Multiplication Tricks-best
- 03D Attachment - 7 Civil
- Firefighter's Handbook
- Maharishi School Primary Curriculum Maths - Multiplications Calculations
- Numercal Methods 2013
- Civil Engineering Syllabus Ok
- chapter 3
- f 044033742
- IRJET-Optimal Diagrid Angle of High-Rise Buildings Subjected to Lateral Loads
- benavent-climent2015
- worked_examples_ec2_def080723_149