## Are you sure?

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

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

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

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

................10 – 6................................... 7-18 SECTION 11...................................................................... 6-28 EXAMPLE 6........................ 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.............2] ............................. [EC2 CLAUSE 5.........3.............................................3 EVALUATION OF CRACK AMPLITUDE [EC2 CLAUSE 7......................1 [EC2 CLAUSE 11..3........2 – 7......................... SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES ...............................1 – 11......... THICK SHORT CORBEL.............3.13 VARIABLE HEIGHT BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6......... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7.2] ........... 6-40 SECTION 7................................... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11................................3... 7-10 5B7...................................EC2 – worked examples summary EXAMPLE 6....4................5] ........12 PILE CAP [EC2 CLAUSE 6............. a<Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES............ 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.5] ................3 – 7......6] ....................................11 GERBER BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6.....................................3.....2] .........5] ...........................5]........................... 7-5 EXAMPLE 7..........................................4] .......................................5] ....4] . A>Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6.........................2 [EC2 CLAUSE 11................... 3500 KN CONCENTRATED LOAD [EC2 CLAUSE 6.................... 7-11 EXAMPLE 7................................5] ..............1 EVALUATION OF SERVICE STRESSES [EC2 CLAUSE 7................. 6-24 EXAMPLE 6..................2 DESIGN OF MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT [EC2 CLAUSE 7............ 7-8 EXAMPLE 7..... 6-38 EXAMPLE 6..............................................................10 THICK CANTILEVER BEAM.................... 11-3 Table of Content .....................................5 APPLICATION OF THE APPROXIMATED METHOD [EC2 CLAUSE 7...........................4] ............................9....................................6 VERIFICATION OF LIMIT STATE OF DEFORMATION ............1 – 11..................4 – 11............ 6-18 EXAMPLE 6...................................3...... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11........................4] ........15 SLABS...14........ DESIGN FORMULAS DERIVATION FOR THE CRACKING LIMIT STATE [EC2 CLAUSE 7...............................3..........1 – 6.........................2 APPROXIMATED METHOD ....................2 – 7.................4....................................................................5 – 11........ 6-21 EXAMPLE 6..6 – 11...................................... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7...

respectively Gk1 and Gk2. ULS combinations of actions for a continuous beam [EC2 – clause 2.1.35 (Fig. 2. Load combination for verification of bending moment in the BC span. as indicated in Fig. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN EXAMPLE 2. Table of Content . 2.1.EC2 – worked examples 2-1 SECTION 2.2.4] A continuous beam on four bearings is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Service imposed load Qk1 Note. 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. the partial safety factor for permanent loads in the verification of bending moment in the middle of the central span.1. 2. Fig. a single characteristic value is taken for self-weight and permanent imposed load. In this example and in the following ones. is the same for all spans: γG = 1. STR – Bending moment verification at mid span (Set B) Unlike in the verification of static equilibrium.2). 2. Fig. because of their small variability. Load combination for verification of holding down devices at the end bearings.

35) for all spans. 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. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case. and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force.3. 2. Table of Content . as in Fig. ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2.EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.4] The canopy is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Snow imposed load Qk1 EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors to be taken for the verification of overturning are those of Set A. Load combination for verification of static equilibrium. Fig. 2.2.3.

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

w unfavourable vertical loads (fig. but they may be defined in the National Annex.05·Qk.9·Fk.s.n + 1.w 0.7 Qk.es + 0.w N. unfavourable vertical loads.n + 0.35·Gk + 1. 2.5· Fk.5 Qk. b) 1.w Fig.3.6.n + 0.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig.35·Gk + 1.es) = 1. Table 2.n (for sites under 1000 m a.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk.6. d) service load predominant.es 0. c) 1.n + 1.75· Qk.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2.) wind Fk. favourable vertical loads. 6. Variable actions on a residential concrete building.n + 0.05·Qk. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure .es + 0.w) = 1.l.w + 0.6. 2. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant.7·Qk. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.5·( Fk. a) 1.75·Qk.35·Gk + 1.w Predominant action: service load (fig.es + 0.es Predominant action: snow (fig.n 0.es + 0.STR (Set B) (eq.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.n + 0.w + 0.6·Fk. 2.B.5·Qk.Variable actions are listed in table 2.0·Gk + 1.5·Qk.1.5·Qk.35·Gk + 1.w) = 1. 2. Table of Content .6.1. b) Wind predominant.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk.5·( Qk.9·Fk.5·Qk.6·Fk.6 Fk.35·Gk + 1.5·(Qk.5·Fk. ULS combination of action .35·Gk + 1. d) 1.6.7·Qk. c) Snow load predominant. 2.

es + 1.78·Fk.w Predominant action: service load (fig.0·Gk + 1.w + 0.n + 1. 2.0·Gk + 1.7. unfavourable vertical loads. b) Wind predominant.0·Gk + 1. d) 1.6·Fk.7·Qk.3· Fk.3·0.es + 0. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2. or on the structure.3·0.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq.0·Gk + 1.3·Qk.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches.es Predominant action: snow (fig. are applied in separate calculations.78·Fk.65· Qk.91·Qk.65·Qk.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig. 2. favourable vertical loads. 6.w = 1.3· Fk. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation.3·0. Table of Content . c) Snow load predominant.3·Qk. 2.3·Qk.n + 1.7.3·0.6·Fk.0·Gk + 1.es + 1.5·Qk.3·Qk.3· Fk.es = 1.7.n + 1.7.7·Qk. 2.15 and 2. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure. d) service load predominant.7.w + 1.16.w Fig.0·Gk + 1. b) 1.3·0. 2. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig.w = 1. Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification). the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex.91·Qk.0·Gk + 1. c) 1.n + 0.n + 0. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant. a) 1.3·0.n + 0.es + 0.5·Qk.

75·Qk.0·Gk + 1.5·Qk.w + 0.(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. 2.sovr Fig.n + 1.5·Qk.n + 1. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.9.05·Qk.9·(Gk.9·Fk.35·Gk + 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1.9).e. 1. 2. as geotechnical actions are not present.35·Gk + 1.w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i. Set B) are used.5·Qk.9·Fk. Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content .terr) + 1.1·Sk.n + 0.terr + 0.5·Sk. i.wall + Gk.w 1.5· Fk. EXAMPLE 2. Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU . This case.e. 2. can be referred to Set B.4] Fig.05·Qk. ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2.8.es 1.es + 0.75·Qk. to approach 2.35·Gk + 1.w 1.4.es + 0.

5·Qk. 2. are given below. Fig.EC2 – worked examples 2-7 STR/GEO .sovr 1.10a). For brevity. The following figures show loads in relation to the combinations obtained with Set B partial safety factors. Table of Content .sovr 1.0·Gk.terr + 1.3·Sk.sovr Note: For all the above-listed combinations.5·Sk.5·Sk. two possibilities must be considered: either that the surcharge concerns only the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing (Fig.sovr + 1.0·Sk.35·Gk. or that it acts on the whole surface of the embankment (Fig.sovr + 1.35·Gk.sovr + 1.35·Sk.sovr 1. 2.terr + 1.5·Qk. with surcharge acting on the whole surface of embankment.35·Gk.0·Gk.wall + 1.wall + 1. 2.wall + 1.0·Gk.terr + 1.terr + 1. i.terr + 1.35·Gk.35·Sk.terr + 1.5·Sk.35·Sk. Possible load cases of surcharge on the embankment.wall + 1.terr + 1.10.0·Gk.sovr + 1.terr + 1.10b).(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.0·Gk.terr + 1.5·Qk.5·Sk.5·Qk.0·Gk.e.wall + 1.terr + 1. Set C 1. only cases in relation with case b).sovr Set B 1.35·Sk.

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

12.terr + 1.75 kN/m Pk.3·Qk.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.terr + 1.0·Sk.33 δ=0° Pk.sovr + 1.0·Gk.foot = 0.terr + 1.sovr 1.sovr 1.terr + 1. weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz. Fig.wall + 1. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.0·Gk.sovr A numeric example is given below.30 ⋅ 2.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.50 ⋅ 2.terr + 1.0·Sk.wall + Pk.35·Gk.ground = 26.0·Sk.terr + 1.3·Qk.sovr + 1.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.0·Gk.wall = Pk.5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.0·Sk.3·Qk.3·Sk.wall + 1. EXAMPLE 2.wall + 1.terr + 1.sovr + 1.50 ⋅ 1.terr + 1.3·Sk.25 kN/m Gk.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk.50 ⋅ 25 = 31. 1.Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).sovr 1.3·Sk.EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used. active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.3·Sk.9 kN/m Table of Content .35·Gk.50 ⋅ 25 = 18. 2.5.wall + 1.wall = 0.35·Gk.0·Gk.foot = 18.3·Qk.sovr + 1.75 + 31.70 = 76.surch = 9.35·Gk.ground = 18 ⋅ 2. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.

terr + 1.35·Sk.5·Sk.wall + 1.25 = 1.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.89 / 44.62 + 16.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29.90 ⋅ 1.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.03 + 39. i.5·Sk.35·Sk.00/3) = 29.9): Fstab.97 + 35.5·Qk.ground = 0.surch = 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.85 = 44.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.terr + 1.5·Qk.9⋅(31.9⋅(0.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.73⋅3.90 = 14.40 + 14.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.0·Gk.5 ⋅ (9.sovr second combination 1.terr + 1.68 = 3.9⋅(18.57⋅76.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively.9): Fstab.16 kNm/m Mstab.35·Gk.73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.25⋅1.0 and 1.ground = 1.wall + 1. Set B if partial factors.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.wall = 0.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9.9): Mstab.25) = 16.5) = 39.wall = 0.1⋅(26.foot = 0.5 ⋅ 9.foot = 0.25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.sovr + 1.50) = 22.0·Gk.60 = 159.terr + 1.5): Ssur = 1.sovr + 1. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.24 = 64.sovr third combination 1.28 = 51.5⋅1.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.sovr Table of Content .5·Qk.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.0·Gk.1): MS.75⋅0.e.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.9⋅(76.35·Sk.03 kNm/m Fstab.35·Gk.65) = 10.35·Gk.9⋅(0.1): Sground = 1.65) = 113.terr + 1.5·Sk.73= 29. By taking 1.40 + 22.16 + 113. is used.75) = 9.25) = 35.1 ⋅ 26.57⋅18.57⋅31.5): MS.sovr + 1.ground = 0.73/51.9⋅(0.terr + 1.wall + 1.

2.25 + 76.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2. (Fig.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated.75 ⋅ 0. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1.90⋅1.25 – 30.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.6 = 39.28 + 11.0 ⋅ (31.08 kNm/m MS.0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.5 = 0.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS. For the verification of the contact pressure. i.40) = .50/6 = 41.00/3)=36. the values given at Table 2.terr = 1.01 / 126. Fig. The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1.0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1.50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2.sovr = 1. as follows: moment vs.75 + 31.25) =31. combinations.35·Gk.35⋅(26.35.5⋅(9.50) = 22.EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1.0 ⋅ (76.wall + 1. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.0·Gk.1.13.5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1.08 + 22.0 ⋅ (18.terr + 1.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1. Table of Content .25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .0⋅(18.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1.5) = 76.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1.terr + 1.e. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.0): Pwall = 1.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.088 MPa The results given at Table 2.0): Pground = 1.60) = 11.75) = 18.05 kN/m2 = 0. 2.73⋅3.5⋅0.sovr + 1.502 = 88.6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36.13).5 = 126.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1.30.5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18.0⋅(76.35·Sk.5·Qk.5·Sk.

0) 25.0) -10.2.08 (γQ=1.50 (γQ=1.75 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.28 (γQ=1.28 (γG=1.05 32. 5) (γQ=1.20 -10.30 98.28 22.50 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.25 (γG=1.19 99.0) 103.0) -41.28 22.0) -30.28 (γQ=1.81 18.50 (γQ=1.28 0.0) (γG=1.0 0.35) 76.0) 76.08 36. first second third 36.5) 152.0) (γG=1.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).28 (γG=1.35) 76.75 (γG=1.19 99.35) 22.08 36.0) 76.50 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.5) 169.75 25.89 fourth 36.08 (γQ=1.35) 103.35) -30.50 0.28 22.0) 31.5) 11.19 88.46 22.35) 42.75 (γG=1.20 -10.25 (γG=1.60 (γG=1.35) 28.ground (kNm/m) MS.19 (γG=1.04 25.5) 15.35) 39.31 (γG=1.95 25.28 (γG=1.35) 42. Table of Content .19 (γG=1.20 (γQ=1.10 18.24 25.5) 11.25 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1. Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.26 third 36.25 15.35) 170. 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.5) 196.20 (γQ=1.0) 31.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).31 -41.0) 42.35) -10.11 99.28 0.35) 22.50 0.0) 25.08 (γQ=1.35) 22.35) (γG=1.35) (γG=1.0) 31.24 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.10 88.83 Table 2.25 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.60 -41.08 (γQ=1.35) 22.08 (γQ=1.5) (γQ=1.35) 103.19 (γG=1.19 11.18 88.28 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.35) -30.5) 32. not present in Table 1.31 (γG=1.35) -30.ground (kNm/m) MS.5) (γQ=1.01 18.28 (γQ=1.75 (γG=1.0) 144 0.50 (γQ=1.60 -41.5) (γQ=1.35) 25.25 15.5) 15.67 18.35) 25. 5) 28.50 (γG=1.31 (γG=1.0) 31.31 88.60 (γG=1.08 36.3.5) 11.78 0.25 (γG=1. 5) 178.31 (γG=1.48 fourth 36. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.30 18.31 (γG=1.0) 103. first second 36.35) 153.50 (γQ=1.28 (γG=1.5) (γQ=1. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.35) 22.19 (γG=1.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.19 (γG=1.0) 126.19 (γG=1.35) 42.0) (γG=1.78 0.35) 42.18 and here highlighted in bold.0) (γG=1.28 (γQ=1.

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

We obtain from relation (3.EC2: c min. We obtain from relation (3. From relation (3.b = 20 mm. Table of Content . If we now calculate now the concrete cover for longitudinal reinforcement bars. Δcdur.st = 0 .add = 0 . We obtain from table 4.2): c min = max (20. In this case.dur = 15 mm . Moreover: Δc dur.4N . 15 + 0 – 0 – 0.1): c nom = 20 + 10 = 30 mm . Δcdur. Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 25 + 8 = 33 mm . we have: c min.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 15 + 10 = 25 mm .EC2 – Worked examples 4-2 Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. γ = 0 . 10 mm) = 20 mm . The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”.

we design the minimum concrete cover with reference to both the stirrups and the longitudinal bars.) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. Refer to figure 3.1. From table E.2. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30. Table of Content .1N . for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm . The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20. The exposure class is XS1.EC2 we find that. The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. Fig. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm .dur = 35 mm . In this case. even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30. 4. A normal quality control is put in place. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm .4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast.2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3. the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm). the reference (min.2 [EC2 clause 4.EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.

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

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

dur = 35 mm .2): c min = max (18. 10 mm) = 35 mm . 35 + 0 – 0 – 0.8 mm .EC2: c min.st = 0 . From relation (3. Moreover: Δc dur. Δcdur. Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm . Δcdur. The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element.b = 1.5 = 18.add = 0 .1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm . Table of Content .5N . From relation (3. γ = 0 .5 · 12. The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm. We obtain from table 4.8.EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.

80 0. EXAMPLE 6. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas.8·500·113. 6.1 Material data.1. β2 is the “position factor”. The maximum moment resistance MRd. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 0. β1 and β2 factors and x1.2 kNm goes alongside it.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0. WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES GENERAL NOTE: Eurocode 2 permits to use a various steel yielding grades ranging from 400 MPa to 600 MPa. Example 6. Some example is developed using S500 too. NRd1 = 0.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6. d' = 50 mm.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 .35 x1 (mm) 113.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated.0 541.1] 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.0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN.1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6.8·500·608. Steel and concrete resistance.40 0. Fig.0 x2 (mm) 608.max = 2821. d = 950 mm. 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. NRd3 = 0.5 203.56 β2 0. x2 values are shown in table 6. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0.1 6. h = 1000 mm.

NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1.26 0. moment resistance.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0. the neutral axis x.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown.38 1. it results: x2 + 66. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0. Ed Table 6. Their values are shown in Table 6. MRd.2. eccentricity.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0. and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎠ ⎝ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0.91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently.52 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known.2.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0.105 0. 52m 5000 Table of Content . Example 1: values of axial force. depth of neutral axis.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0.294 0.

1.08 0.142 0.0.350 0.619) + 3910·(0.55 0.1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6. depth of neutral axis.max = 6948.2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6.7 kNm is associated to it. The results are shown in Table 6. moment resistance.5 – 0.619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0.EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.3 Table 6.14 Table of Content . MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd .80 1.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x. eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0.35·0. MRd.50.3 Values of axial load.

Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk. It results: VRd. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.626 and k1 = 0.0 MPa.c = (1.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6. h = 200 mm. Average prestressing σcp = 5.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm. 66 ⋅ 5.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment.5/1.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24.626 + 0.66 )2 + 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.33 kN Table of Content . 0. No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present.c = (0.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd. d = 175 mm.66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment.5= 1. Class C40 concrete.05/γC = 1· 2.15.15⋅5.0 = 44.3 Calculation of VRd. VRd.

2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement. 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2). proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.s = hence cotθ = 1.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd.90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement. fyd = 391 MPa. The example is developed for three classes of concrete. with fck = 90 MPa.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. ν = 0. h = 600 mm. ν = 0. fcd = 51 MPa.512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2. with bw = 150 mm.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. with fck = 60 MPa. vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm.s = VRd.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1.616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd. s = 150 mm. fcd = 34 MPa. fcd = 17 MPa .max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.532.512.1504 hence cotθ = 2.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1. ν = 0.38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content . d = 550 mm. a) fck = 30 MPa .375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. z = 500 mm.

EC2 – worked examples

6-6

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

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

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

**hence cotθ = 1.80 It results:
**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-7

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

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

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

it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd,s =

hence cotθ = 1.18

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

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

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

hence cotθ = 1.77

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

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

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

hence cotθ = 2.23

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

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

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

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

It results:

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

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

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-8

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

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

Then with it results

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Content

fcd = 17 MPa .5·605.10 -1.10 + 1.616 ⋅ 17 = 2.72 < 7. diameter 10 mm.4· (2.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam. Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .s) ΔFtd = 0.5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0.4 kN 150 It results: VRd.0) .616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2.707 and.5 VRd.0) = 333 kN Table of Content . replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2.707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605. fyd = 391 MPa.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.5 [EC2 clause 6. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm. fck = 30 MPa . ν = 0.s (cot θ − cot α) = 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 ⋅ 0.40 ≤ 0.10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0. 2 legs (Asw = 157 mm2).0) ⋅ 0. s = 150 mm.

width 1000 mm. with depth 1500 mm.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6.5) = 17.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig. Fig. with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members. 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 =0.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1. d = 1450 mm.5 MPa fyd = 500/1. 6. It results: VRd.707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content .707⋅0.2.3] Ring rectangular section. 6.5⋅0.7[1-30/250] = 0.616 ν fcd = 10.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10.85·(30/1.0 MPa ν = 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⋅1.6 [EC2 clause 6.

EC2 – worked examples 6-11 Determination of angle θ: * 1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1087000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 25.14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2.08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2. Table of Content .3(3)-EC2]. pitch 200 mm. Reinforcement of horizontal members.03o 2 νfcd tz 2 10.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section.5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2.348 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 8 mm wide.14) = 0. pitch 200 mm. pitch is in accordance with [9. with particular attention to the corner bars.2.14) = 0.865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end. subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1. 2 legs stirrups. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2.

7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm .56o (cotθ = 2.5⋅300⋅400/(2+0. 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. ν fcd = 10.4471⋅0.3] resistant hollow section Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6.5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .85·(30/1.616 .5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd. z =400 mm (Fig. 6.7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6. 6.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0.0) It results: VRd. h = 500 mm.5⋅83636⋅94⋅0.5) = 17.max = 2⋅10.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content .

The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd.c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2.c ≤ 1 where TRd.c = ⎡CRd.63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0. For instance.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content .3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3. it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm. ρ = 0. 6.01.31)-EC2] In this expression. V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig.1-EC2]).c = 0. moreover.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.c + VEd /VRd.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1.18/1. 6.5 = 0.5 = 1. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations. It results therefore: TRd.0/1. Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.4. if VEd = 350 kN is taken.4 kNm 1/3 VRd. it results: CRd. On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines.3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1.4.

EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram.6. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed.75⋅450 = 337 mm. i.08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0.5N-EC2].5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content . the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9.2 (6)-EC2].2.bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0. It results : Asw/s.e. For instance.c = 0.2 (5)-EC2] and [9.75d = 0. 6. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9.010 with s not larger than 0. 200 mm.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0. Namely.0010 Fig.12⋅1. Because of the torsion.. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8. which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0.5 The section.0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig.2.

EC2 – worked examples

6-15

EXAMPLE 6.8. Wall beam [EC2 clause 6.5]

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

Fig. 6.6 5400 x 3000 mm wall beam.

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

f cd =

f yd =

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

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

**nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes
**

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

σ1Rd,max

nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in a fixed direction

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-16

σ 2Rd,max

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

nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions

σ 3Rd,max

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

Columns reaction

**R = (150+150)⋅5.40/2 = 810 kN
**

Evaluation of stresses in lattice bars

Equilibrium node 1 Equilibrium node 3

C1 = C3 =

ql = 405 kN 2 R = 966 kN senα

(where α = arctg

2000 = 56.98° ) 1300

T1 = C 3 cosα = 526 kN

**Equilibrium node 2 Equilibrium node 4
**

Tension rods

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

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

A s1 ≥ 526000 = 1344 mm 2 391.,3

we use 6φ18 = 1524 mm2,

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

A s1 ≥ 405000 = 1035 mm 2 391.3

We use 4φ20 = 1257 mm2

Table of Content

EC2 – worked examples

6-17

Nodes verification

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

Fig. 6.7 Node 3, left support.

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

σ 2Rd,max = 12.75 N / mm 2

σ c1 =

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

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

σ c2 =

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

Table of Content

15 1. 6. 150 x 300 load plate. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6. 6.8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam.9. 1. Fig.5 1. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.83 = 20. Thick short corbel.83 N / mm 2 .3 N / mm 2 1. beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig.9 Cantilever beam S&T model.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ σ1Rd.85f ck 0.12 N / mm 0.18 ⎜1⎟ 19.15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1. Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.max Table of Content .85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm).5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391.

max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 72 ) Ft 411000 = = 1050 mm 2 we use 8φ14 (As = 1232 mm2) f yd 391.10 in order to make the partition of the diagonal stress F F ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ Fdiag = c = Ed ⎟ between them. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate.9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side. 6.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ 2Rd.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content .8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is evaluated setting the internal drive arm z equal to 0.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd. 6.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig.83 = 15 N / mm 2 = k3 ⎜ ⎟ cd 0.2·360 = 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.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⎟ 19.2d = 0.8⋅d (z = 0.35 ⎞ 19.05 N / mm 0.88 ⎛ 1.max b = 700000 ≅ 87 mm 20.83 = 17.max = 20. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig. 6.

max = 17.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 300 45000 Table of Content .25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391.1): 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. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node.2.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag. double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification. where the main reinforcement is anchored. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements.56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd. 6.8. and they have provided the following expression of stress in the secondary reinforcement (MC90 par.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig. 6.2. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10.

150 x 220 mm load plate. in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z. then as in the previous example one more boundary condition is needed to evaluate the stresses values in the rods.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm). The stress Fwd in the vertical tension rod is evaluated assuming a linear relation between Fwd and the a value. Table of Content . 6. Elementary beams of the S&T model. 6. 6.13. Fig. ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6. 6.13b). This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever).12) is indeterminate.12 Cantilever S&T model. The model proposed in EC2 (Fig.10 Thick cantilever beam.13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever. the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig. 6. a) b) Fig. 400 x 400 mm column Fig. 6.

steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.5 1.max = 17.8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content .max = 20.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd.83 N / mm 2 .8⋅d (z = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement.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.2d = 0. the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 . 3 in conclusion.15 = 450 = 391. some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd .max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.5 f yk 1. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20. 1. a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column.3 N / mm 2 1.85f ck 0.

in which the main reinforcement is anchored. below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node. 208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13.3 FEd 500000 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .max = 17.37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content .max = 20.5 = 639 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. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 500000 = = 15.3 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 391.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391.

6.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one.5 1. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction.15 = 450 = 391.9. On the other hand. we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load.11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6. if only the scheme a) is used. Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1. 6.14).85f ck 0. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam.EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6. (Fig. a) b) Fig.4. Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement. eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10.6)].5 f yk 1. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa.7 (4)-EC2] Actions: Distributed load: 250 kN/m Beam spam: 8000 mm RSdu = 1000 kN Bending moment in the beam mid-spam: MSdu = 2000 kNm Beam section: b x h = 800 x 1400 mm Bottom longitudinal reinforcement (As): 10φ24 = 4524 mm2 Table of Content .2.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14. 1.17 N / mm 2 .15 [(3.3 N / mm 2 1.

8 b x fcd = 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. ' εs = 0.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig. the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0. 6. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.0035 391.8·800·99·14.8b x f cd + E s 0.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0. as stated in the calculation.17 (applied at 0.00173·2513 Table of Content .0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0.15 Truss a.00173 ≤ yd = = 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit.0035 ⋅ (x − d ') where d’ = 50 mm is the distance of the upper surface reinforcement x x − 50 A's = f yd A s x 0.

6.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses.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.3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391. 66° 725 T2 = 260 kN sinβ + cosβ sinβ C3 = ⋅ C 2 = 230 kN sin45° C2 = ⇒ Node 3 equilibrium: T1 = C1 sin α + C2 sin β = 663 kN Tension rods design the tension rod T1 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 stirrups φ 16 double arm (Asl = 2000 mm2) the tension rod T2 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 φ 16 (Asl = 1000 mm2). then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 . Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53. Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391.3 Fig.45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content .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.

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

6. diameter 800 mm piles Fig.max = 12. 1.3 N / mm 2 1.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content .17 N / mm 2 .max = 11.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd. 2000 x 700 mm columns.5 1.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6.8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.85f ck 0.5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm).17 Log plinth on pilings.EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6.85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14.5 f yd = f yk 1.75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd.15 = 450 = 391. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa.

3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0.8·700·462·14. Table of Content . Fig. 6. 6. S&T model in the plane π1.17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3.00 .17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0. then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles.8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0.2000/2) = 333 kN A=A’/2 = 1167 kN B=B’/2 = 167 kN for each compressed pile: In the evaluation of stresses on piles. the plinth own weight is considered negligible.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3.00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.18.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. the truss-tie beam in Fig.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.8·700·x·14. 6. the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig.17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0.8 b x fcd = 0.NSd/2) = (4000/3.00 .

5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 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° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65.2° = 154 kN Fig. 6. θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44.2° T10 = Fs = 1662 kN T11 = A’ cot θ11 = 2333 cot 26.EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56.5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65.19 Trusses in plan π2 and in plan π3.

the compressive stresses are very small as a consequence of the piles section large area. Schematic placement of reinforcements. Nodes verification Concentrated nodes are only present at the pedestal pile and on the piles top.: σc = A 2333000 = = 4.20. 6.64 N mm 2 2 2 π⋅r π ⋅ 400 Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-31 Fig. In these latter.

max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.65 N / mm 0.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig.30 ⎞ 17 = 13.13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6.max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content .5 1.16 N / mm 2 = k3 cd ⎜ ⎟ 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd.3 N / mm 2 1. 1. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17. 6.85f ck 0.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.5 f yk 1.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .88 ⎛1.15 = 450 = 391.96 N / mm 0.21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.

Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-33 strut&tie model identification Beam partitioning in two regions B and D The region standing on the middle section is a continuity region (B).4 x) = 3. 6.00 = 3600 kNm = 3. Fig.8·x·b = 17·0.6·109 17·0.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.8·x·b·(d – 0. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution.8·x·300·(1900 – 0.4 x) = 3. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0.6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0. The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B. 6.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions.22 Identification of B and D regions.23 Shear and bending moment diagrams.

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

T2 and T3.128·106/391.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.50 m length As = 1.96 N/mm2 Table of Content . and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2.max = 14. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1. Table 6.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1.27 Node A.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil.128·106/391. because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil.10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used.) T2 = T3.10 % of the concrete area.) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil. and not less than 150 mm2/m. Table 6. 6.3 = 5443 mm As = 1.) 2130 kN 2130 kN 1647 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1002 kN 1509 kN 1595 kN Steel tension rods design EC2 point 9.61)-EC2] σ2Rd. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1.13·10 /391.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig.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. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.

647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13.96 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 = 17.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.65 N/mm2 Fig.76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1. this last choice is adopted.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.max = 1.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers. 6.128 ⋅106 = = 7. 6.05 N / mm 2 > 14.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd. a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1.76° + 150 cos 46.65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1.2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46. or an increase of the plate length).28 Node B.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17.76° + 150 cos 46.

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

14. 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0. 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 ≤ ≤ 3.5)EC2] to analyse this topic.5 f yk 1. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content .0 f cd A c0 = 3. 3500 kN concentrated load [EC2 clause 6.5] 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. Reinforcement design Point [6.7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6. In this case there is a partial discontinuity.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.5 1.85f ck 0.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu . because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm).0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3. just as in this example.15 = 450 = 391.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .3 N / mm 2 .

EC2 – worked examples 6-39 b = 500 mm F b − a 3500 500 − 250 = = 437.3 T= the steel area required to carry T is: As ≥ using 10 mm diameter bars. 15 bars are required for a total area of: As = 15 ⋅ 78.5 kN 4 b 4 500 T 437500 = = 1118 mm 2 f yd 391.5 = 1178 mm2. Table of Content .

2 – 7.40 m width.50 m for a central zone 7. 3: Durability .4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point.2 “slabs” by prof.29 and 6. December 1999).1 – 6.s 6. 2 Table of Content .15. The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2. Design and Performance Vol.60 m with two side-walks of 1.3 – 7. Mancini.29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7. 6.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme.2 [EC2 clause 5. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2.1 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). ISBN 9782-88394-043-7. in the middle. FIB Bullettin n°3. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6. 6. two track spacing of 5.Member Design . bridge design. two ballast retaining walls and.118) for fatigue reasons. Fig.10 – 6.textbook (292 pages. Fig. The slab presents a constant thickness of 1.2 – 7.Practical aspects” Manual . whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0.Design for Fire Resistance . Part 2. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13.15 Slabs1.0 m. Assessment and Repair .6 m.Maintenance. table 4.0 m width.

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. Ec = 29. Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35. fyk = 500. fp0. G = 12. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations.0·103 MPa. fyd = 434.7·103 MPa.1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel. fcd2 = 12. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm.8 MPa.0 MPa.23 MPa.0 MPa. fctm = 3.1 MPa.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig. fcd1 = 17.1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195. fcd = 23. (strands φ 0.3 MPa.0 MPa. As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost).6”): 0.2 fptk = 1800 MPa. 6.4·103 MPa ν = 0. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm. Es = 200.0·103 MPa. Table of Content .

6. − local axis 3 is oriented in the opposite direction of global axis X of the deck.31 and 6.33: Table of Content .15.31 Transverse view of FEM model Fig.32 the FEM model is sketched and the different thick of the element is reported too.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. 6. 6. this kind of element takes account of all the slab and plate components as well as the out-of-plane shear forces. The thickness of shell elements has been assumed constant for the inner zone of the slab and stepped to fashion the tapered extremity.EC2 – worked examples 6-42 6. In Fig 6.32 Plan of FEM model and considered elements The adopted shell elements are oriented with the following guidelines: − local axis 2 is oriented as global axis Y of the deck. Positive forces for FEM program output are reported in Fig. Fig. − local axis 1 is oriented as global axis Z of the deck.

For the x and y directions. thus.34 External restraints on the FEM model The elastic constant of the spring restraining elements is calculated to have the same stiffness of the substructure (abutments or piers) on which the slab is rested. Fig. or the abutment front wall.EC2 – worked examples 6-43 Fig. 6.34 shows a symbolic notation for the external restraints with the nodes involved. it may be assumed that the pier. Fig. behaves like a Table of Content . few nodes have been restrained by means of spring elements in order to represent only an individual restraint or support. 6. 6.33 Positive actions for FEM elements Restraints The external restraints have been introduced in the FEM model considering their real geometric dimensions.

The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck. considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.61 11.02 6 Table 6.6” having an area of 1. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed.61 10. 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. 6.80 4.74 2.55 6 Ky.39 cm2. Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx.78 6 Kz.tot 10 kN/m 10. I the inertia and H the height of the column. 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).tot 10 kN/m 9.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus.1k = 0. For the vertical direction.6 .02 11. Fig.max = 0. Table of Content . thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6.85 fp 0.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa.tot 10 kN/m 178.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint. being symmetrically disposed.66 2.

unintentional angular deviation. 6. 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. Prestressing has to be introduced in the FEM model in order to calculated the hyperstatic actions that arise in the structural scheme. Considering prestressing as an external load. should be applied consistently at the nodes of FEM model.19 k = 0. it is possible to introduce it by means of two inclined forces at anchorages (representing actions at the extremity) and of a system of equivalent loads along tendon’s profile (representing tendon curvature and losses due to friction): these actions per tendon.01 rad/m coefficient of friction between the tendons and their sheathing. Table of Content .max ⋅ e-μ(α + k x) with: μ = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-45 Fig.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.

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

between time t0 and time t∞. εcs (t∞.574 0.t0) = 0.035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content . βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements.55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1.t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0. ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere. c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ .000395 fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa. t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp.c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel. t∞ = 25550 ds. fcmo = 10 MPa.t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ . βs (t∞ .t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . 6.37 Transverse distribution of prestressing Time-dependent prestressing losses Time-dependent losses of prestress may be evaluated by means of the following equation: Δσ p .: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 fcm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0. t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0.018. ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. age of concrete at prestressing time.8 φ ( t ∞ . t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ .

for t > 50 years ρt. Ac = 17. t0) = 182.3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ . Table of Content .1 + t 0 0. ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig. t0) = 1.598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1.3 Δσp.1 3 h 5.19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1. 0. fcm fcmo 1 = 0.281. 6.2 0.t0) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞. the following values for εcs (t∞ .488 0. t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ . t0) and for φ(t∞ .EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member. = ρ1000h × 3.556.5754 If the improved prediction model of chapter 3 is used. φ (t∞ .5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1. φ (t∞. Δσpr : loss of prestressing due to relaxation of steel calculated for a reduced initial tensile stress of σp = σpgo 0. at least for creep value.3 = 2.62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one.38.5 1 + (0.t0) = 1.43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam.012 RH) = 0. u = 28640 mm perimeter of the member in contact with the atmosphere.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 .983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 .

6 = 199. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel.15. For the LM71. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan. 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.6/1.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. but as actions of opposite sign. turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1. the 4 point loads have been reduced in an equivalent uniform load by smearing their characteristic value Qvk along the influence length so that a qvk.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc.75 kN/m Table of Content .1×250×φdin = 319. area of concrete gross section. 6. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing.EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig.1.6 kN → qvk. 6. 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. as percentage of initial steel tension.1 = 319. area of prestressing steel at the considered level. stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing. As a reference. the maximum value of prestressing losses. modulus of elasticity ratio. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load. inertia of concrete gross section.1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1.

41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin .1 × 80 × φdin → qvk. therefore subjected to variable load.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig. Fig.42 shows which elements are involved by spreading effects.39 Adopted load arrangement for LM71 load model The uniformly distributed load qvk according to Eurocode 1. 6. 6.0 kN/m Fig.2 = 102. being the dynamic factor equal to 1. 6.3 is: qvk = 1.1 × 133 × φdin = 170. is evaluated below. Fig.6.3 kN/m Fig. Table of Content .3 kN/m without any limitation in length. 6. Fig.1 × 150 × φdin = 174.162.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig. while right truck the other one. In the following as left track is denoted the track which has a positive value for the y co-ordinate. 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.40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. 6.

sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0. 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. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0.3 as: Lφ = 1.75 + 17. for the sake of simplicity. has been considered. arising from variable loads.3 = 27.33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1.16 + 0.5 = 136. transverse gradient for drain water.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞). wind pressure.5 m. differential temperature variation etc.04 m 3 3 Several other actions.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. derailment. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of. − STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations.2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1.33 + 27. rails. so that for a width of 9.) but.73 = 1. 6. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion. Table of Content .8×1.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3.8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3).8 kN/m. should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking.162 L φ − 0. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0.8×9.EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig. assumed as a load of 1.3 17. centrifugal forces.

5 = 11.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0. 6.25 = 6.25 = 6. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content . the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each. for each. Fig.00 kN/m for each.25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8.875 kN/m.43 m). − STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1. 6.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18. ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each.25×9.18 m).25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0.43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.

47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32. 6. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.45 SW/0 arrangement for Load Step 6 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6.305 m). 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig.48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content . 6.

9 for favourable effect.8. equal to 0. Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress.8 for unfavourable effect and 1.3 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 for quasi-permanent combination at service. G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6.0 for favourable effect. equal to 1. ballast excluded.5 for unfavourable effect and 0.4 for unfavourable effect and 1. ballast excluded. Table of Content . = partial factor of prestress load equal to 1.2 for unfavourable effect and 0. Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1.0 for favourable effect. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads.6.15.0 for favourable effect.

5 0. − deformation. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6.32 one obtains: Table 6. m33 . b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre. t / b = σ 22. m22 . t / b = σ 22.963 1. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23. one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii. t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . n23 . t = σ xy. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig. b = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy. From FEM analysis. t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23. − crack widths.15. m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y. b = σ 23. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ . θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1.5 1. t = σ 22. b = σ 33. t = σ 23. b = σ 22. 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. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning. 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. n33 . t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33.7 Elem. For the sake of simplicity. . t = σ x.4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning. t = σ 33. − stress limitation at service.8 Table of Content . t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2. .EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6.6. b = σ x. σ y. t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. the value of n22 . as subjected to the higher stress level.6 × fck = 21 MPa.

05 -2.97 -12.10 1.963 1.42 σ2.76 -1.75 -0.58 -1.27 -2.963 1.89 -10.9 Elem.41 -5.11 σ33.37 -5.91 -2.23 σ2.29 88.65 -2.78 -11.11 -1.00 0. 6. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit.21 -5.02 89.b -2.t θ1.46 -13.89 σ1.97 -5.46 -12.00 0.22 -4.5 1.t -2.b -14.69 σ2.10 Elem.00 0.86 -4.58 -5.99 90.24 -2.83 -9.17 0.02 -1.58 -5.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0.t -0.85 108.78 -11.t -2.01 -0.11 -1.77 which not exceed the limit one.5 0.40 -2.01 σ22.99 0.80 -4.t -1.66 -3.32 σ1.b -2.30 -2.77 89.66 -3.36 σ2.00 -0. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.5 0.98 -10.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.48 95.6 × fck = 21.b -2.86 σ23.46 -1.01 89.49 -7.22 -4. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6. 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 σ1.72 -4.b -10. ensuring that.b -2.11 σ2. 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 σ1.98 0.5 1.97 -11.09 -2.t -0. under service load conditions.17 89.90 -9.86 -4.31 -2.32.57 -7.46 -1. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.59 σ33.t -2.15 -4.15 0.t -5.29 -1.t -1.b [°] 6-56 θ2.b [°] θ1.25 0. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.58 -8.48 σ23.59 σ2.b 0.t [°] θ2.t [°] σ1.4 × fck = 14. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig.EC2 – worked examples σ22.51 -8.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.48 σ1.b -8.48 -18.00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions.62 -6.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.5 -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 .14 -2.71 -0.b -14.

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

EC2 – worked examples 6-58 Slab ultimate limit state Verification at ULS has been performed adopting the sandwich model for shell elements. one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not. Table 6.5 0.07 m from the external face.x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1.5 1. 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. h [m] n Sd.12 Table of Content .4.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ).2. The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig.11 Elem.5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step.963 1. 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6.y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd. For the investigated elements. In fact. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 ξ (100 ρ fck ) .32). turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig.3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o .y ( m 22 ) -239 499 38 -1950 m Sd. According to CEB Bulletin 223.49. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig.6 cm2/m placed at 0.xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd. If the is not satisfied. and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As. Fig. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered.49): Table 6.x = As.6.x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd. specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked. 6.y = 22.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd. it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 . 6.

0 0.00158 23.43 51.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx .00253 174 45.893 -30.0 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .9 805. 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 0.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig.56 3509 13860 763.14 0.e.EC2 – worked examples Elem. 6.76 0. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0.56 26.00158 26.00158 1569 26.56 14.0 n yc 0.s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.0 0.0 0.18 0.6 784.43 1. 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.43 1. nxc .0 0.14 m so that.0 0.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .0 n xyc 0. 6.s = n xy ⎞ z − ys m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd . nyc and nxyc ) only for element number 589. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig. i = n xy ⎞ z − yi m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ where terms on brackets have be summed if shear reinforcement is required.0 0. In the design Table of Content .07 = 0.56 26.5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i.0 0.77 0. i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.

2 14.680 1.3 13.0 32. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.6 -1489.5 1.220 0. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value.i vSd.360 -713.i n Sdx.i -7. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.140 1.8 -2560. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met.360 307.140 0.8 -1037.8 59.s vSd. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6.5 1. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative.140 1.963 0. the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .2 0.s [kN/m] n Sdx.5 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement.1 -5344.1 -4202.9 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.5 -122. in this case the verification is performed along the principal compression direction in the concrete subjected to biaxial compression and the checking equation is: σc t = n Sdx + n Sdy 2 + (n Sdx − n Sdy 4 ) 2 + v 2 ≤ f cd1 t Sd For the considered elements. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.140 0.412 0.3 -577.7 -6252.7 -4.680 0.680 1.7 -3120. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.14 Table of Content . if result satisfied.412 0.220 0.0 -1065.140 0.7 0.140 0.683 0.3 787.13 Elem.680 1. one obtains: Table 6.823 -3479.140 1.s n Sdy.680 0.360 -1093.4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.680 0. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required.3 -2266.140 0.5 -4893.9 0.220 0.6 726.

1 -12.7 0.0 25.5 -1465.0 Asy 2 σc -30.4 -7.7 -2962.580 0.5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.6 -6.5 -2157.220 0.1 -17.140 0.1 -17. For element 589.0 34.260 -1179.8 14.680 0.0 -24.0 0.140 1.5 66.963 0.1 -17.8 -3144.3 -17.6 -153.0 0.8 -16.1 -950.190 0.15 Elem.8 -16.0 0. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.6 0.1 Asy 2 Asx 0. so.0 0.0 -4054. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig.9 -16.0 0.535 1.630 1.1 -17.0 720. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.0 0.0 0.758 -3588.4 0.240 0.4 -45.5 -7090.1 -17.020 0.0 0.430 0.16 Top Layer Design Elem.51: Table of Content .1 -17.2 0.0 0.215 708.5 0.8 -129.0 -11.s vSd.0 0.0 0.553 0.9 0.680 1.0 0.4 794.i n Sdx.8 f cd1/2 -17.0 0.300 0. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.930 0.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.0 38.5 1.8 0.372 0.960 0.230 -716. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions.8 -5768.1 -1062.0 0.1 -17.0 0.0 0.2 -11. whereas they are arranged at 0.1 -17.3 16. Thus. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6.1 -17.8 -5.1 -12.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.7 870. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.s n Sdy.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer.6 -5040.3 0.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16.6 f cd1/2 -17. 6.0 -22.0 0. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required.0 0.9 -38.0 0.0 18.1 -17.3 0.i vSd.i -8.0 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.600 0.s [kN/m] n Sdx.5 1.387 0.0 Of course.0 0.0 Asy 2 σc -16.340 0.0 0.

0 0.0 0.3 1664.0 0.51 Shell element equilibrium in one direction with two reinforcement layers only The new forces acting on the reinforcements become: t ⎞ ⎞ ⎛t ⎛ nSd .6 -1399.0 0. 6. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i.0 -5752. the following areas have been detected.6 0. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane. 648 93 320 589 n s.0 34.y [kN/m] n s.0 0. Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used.EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig.3 -6370.6 -3274.1 -2242.0 0.0 0. it is useful.s + nSd.5 -5026.5 -1070.x [kN/m] n i.8 -4063.0 -1163.2 -956.3 0. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd.0 0. to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.8 1503.0 0.17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem.3 -159.0 0.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702. to summarise the results in a visual map.0 38. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons. For the sake of simplicity. Table of Content .0 0. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd .5 -3522.8 -2287.0 0. Table 6.i ns For the investigated elements.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.

2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0. 115 . is: lbs = hbs = 1.52 Geometric dimension for bursting calculation Checking situation is represented in Fig.43 m. distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism. Table of Content . 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.075 m t2 = 0. for end anchored tendon. corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons.2 m and his length. 6. 6.5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852. The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig.52. considering the lower level of tendon (first tensioned) the height of the prism results: hbs = 2×0.6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0.6 = 1.

50 ⎠ ⎪ +2. may be found by the following: A s.43 (1. bs 19. furthermore. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0.1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A. As.61 = = = 57. As for bursting verification.0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory. Thus.35 m.43 × 1. spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).e.5 may be assumed. for a prestressing force FSd = 4134.56 MPa σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ The section along which no shear force results. i. bs A s.e.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧−15. Fig.82 cm2/m2 .bs = Nbs / fyd = 19.(i.50 m. is placed at 0.4) 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. only the longitudinal direction is considered. a section with a breadth of 0. is equal to the overall height of the section.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content . n2 γ1 =1.50 0.20 − 0. 53). from 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 . respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0.43 × 1. in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60. supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping.50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning.43 m and a height of 1.40 m to 1. Thus the effective area on a meter length.61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs . lsl = 1.0 cm2/m2 2 0. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon. 53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy.38 MPa ⎪ ⎪ ∓ =⎨ = FSd ⎜ − ⎬ 2 ⎟ ⎝ 0.20 m) from the anchor plate.

54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0.43 × 10 3 = 33. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance.43 m.5× lsl and bsl = 0.031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1.214 2 × 0.61 kNm 3 Fig. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

can be written as N( −600) = −0. calculate the couples M. yn The second condition in the first exercise. αe = 15. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2. N. fyk = 450 MPa. that is yn = h. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0. Rectangular section. M0 = 400 kNm. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. calculation of service stresses. or M.45 ⋅ 30 −88. 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. For this value it results 400 ⋅ 600 12 + 400 ⋅ 600 ⋅ ( 300 ) + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡50 2 + 550 2 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ + 300 e= 2 −400 ⋅ 600 2 + 15 ⋅ 1884( −600) 2 3 and then e =-120.EC2 – worked examples 7-1 SECTION 7. linearly changing M N.1.1. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. Fig. Considering Fig. 7. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. S* = −88.5m. keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load.96 ⋅ 106 mm 3 . f) M = M0 = 400 kNm.2] Evaluate the normal compressive force and of the associated bending moment in the section of Figure 7.65 mm. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7.45. Finally. 7. that. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending. d’ = 50 mm. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f . evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN.1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7.96 ⋅ 106 Table of content .1. assuming k2 = 0.

59) ⋅10-3 = -570. N keeping constant the eccentricity.5·106/570.3 Because the condition e = -500 mm implies that the neutral axis position is lower than the one previously evaluated assuming the maximal stresses for both materials.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16.3 mm.16⋅(-120. If we consider to change M. Table of Content .3) = −16.6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.096 .5 kNm e = .7/3-300)+0.096 M0 =438. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001.7/2+0.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0.48 kN M = (-0.3) ⋅ 15 = 251.95 mm Considering the third exercise 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 400 −3 3 + y n = −200 e=− ⋅ 10 = −500 mm and 400 2 800 − y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 this equation is iteratively solved: yn = 272. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete.42MPa −13.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457.71mm 0.48·103 = .16kN.07MPa 272.801. the stress is N= 1.42 ⋅ (550 − 272.3 16.4 kNm.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.49 kNm. M=N⋅e=-2001.18MPa 272.7 = σs = −0.7 N = -0.457. N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached.096N0 = -876. S* = −13263 ⋅ 10 3 mm 3 yn and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.80 kN.65) ⋅10-3 = 241.59σs d − yn 550 − 235.6fck = = = 1.7/2⋅(235.3) ⋅ 15 = −201. 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. M = 1.

6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.51) ⋅ 15 = −218.51mm (50 − 262.51) σs = 0.51 (550 − 262.6 ⋅ fck 0.6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.51 ⎛ 262.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −y n = 0.51 ' σs = 0.57MPa 262.25 + 30.57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.252 + 84795 = 262.6fck S* yn and I* yn S * yn and then e= M0 M 0 (y n ) = N 0.6 ⋅ 30 800 ⋅ 103 Solving with respect to yn 2 y n + 60y n − 84795 = 0 y n = −30.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 262.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.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 ) = −0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.69 + 218.69MPa 262.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.22 ⋅ 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 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.

95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0.34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7.2.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations.95 + 235.95 + 235. Fig.82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0.67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses. As a remark.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105.EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235. 2B Table of Content .6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105.82)⎥ = −1666. 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).6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105. Results for different limit distributions of stresses.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0.

4494 ) ⎤ ρs. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0. yG =809 mm.8 MPa. I = 71. σs = 200 MPa.1667 − 0. Evaluate the minimum reinforcement into the bottom slab in the following cases: •Application of the first cracking moment Mcr •Application of an axial compressive force N = -6000 kN.EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7. design of minimum reinforcement.min = 0. r2 = I/A =39. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.6945 − 2(1 − 0.section.3 with the following geometry: A = 1.1 3 8 8 α f = 3 0 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 .4494 .1667 − 0.3.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 . Wi = 7.4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content .01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG. Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.3.25·108 mm3.min = 0.2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7. k =0.1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.35·104 mm2 Fig.4494 ) = 0.65 ⋅ 3.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0. 7. applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment.2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7.925·106 mm2 .00208 1 − 0.8/ 200 = 0.6945 0 ρs.82·1010 mm4.eff = 3. Box . fct.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0.

min = 0.825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.812 > ξ and it follows: ρs. 7.4494 A s.EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s. 45 2(1 − 0.min = 0. Minimum reinforcement.1667 = 0.8 ⎥ 7. The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7.00208 ⋅ 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. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2. Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.4 Fig.min = 0. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct .25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1.825 ⋅ 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 .25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7. Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN. case (a).4.00943 1 − 0.4494) − 0.00943 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 4243mm 2 We use (14+14)φ14 mm equivalent to 4312 mm2.

00797 1 − 0.min = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.7050) ⎤ ρs. 7. 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 = 0.5 Fig.1667 − 0. Minimum reinforcement.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0.1667 = 0.705 A s. 45 2(1 − 0. case (b).01235 ⋅ 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.00046 3 ⋅ 1.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s.812 > ξ and it results ρs.1667 − 0.00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2.705) − 0. ξ = 0.7050 ) = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.min = 0.7050 e 856 Considering the web.6945 − 2(1 − 0.8(1 − 0.min = 0. 3B Table of Content .5.min = 0.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2. with h = 1. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7.

3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7.eff=fctm=2. δ=548/600=0.4) can be immediately used as verification formula.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs. k4=0.913.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡548 − y n + 0.167.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 and then Table of Content .6.2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs. .cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7. c=40mm.EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.4. 7. fct.17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7.6).eff (7.8). d’=46. M=300kNm.2a) (7.0mm. fck=30MPa. As=2712mm2 (6φ24).3.1) σs.cr = k t ⋅ fct .0767.4) The (7.3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2. ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0. h=600mm. It results then β=452/2712=0. Reinforced concrete section.6 Fig. As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7. d=548mm. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3.5 (1 − δ ) .9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0. b=400mm. As’=452mm2 (4φ12).4 ⋅ c + 0. the (7. δ’=460/600=0. cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15.

913)=0.184mm 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4B Table of Content .2012.0113 ⎝ 0.5(1-0.167 ( 46 − 237.0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.3963 h 600 I*n = y 400 2 2 237.7 + 118.08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 5 ⎢ ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.2012.6 ⋅ 2.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡( 548 − 237.cr = 0. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237. (1-0. 0.8mm .8 ) ⎤ = 5.08MPa 0.2012 ⎥ = 0.8 ) / 5.72 + 113026 = 237.8 = = 0.EC2 – worked examples 2 y n + 237.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.2012 ⎛ 0. The adopted statements lead to σs.8 ) + 0.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2.17 0.2175.5.9 0.4 ⋅ 40 + 0.0113 0.3963)/3=0.2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57. Then λ=0.96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.

4. after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3. h.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 2 ⎡3n ⋅ρs ⎡( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) ⎤ + ξ3 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (7. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7. we want to deduce the metal reinforcement amount As and its design tension σs in order to have a crack amplitude wk lower than the fixed value w k .12) Combining (7.6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7.4).11). d.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7.9) is ⎡ ⎤ 2α ⋅λ w0 ⋅ξ2 k =⎢ + e2 ⎣δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎦ +αe ⎥ × ⎡ ⎤ ξ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎢ 3. d’.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (7.8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7.9) (7.4) to use it as a design formula.17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7.4. In particular.5) and with its substitution in the (7. and fixed M.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7.7) Deducing ρs from (7.34αe ⋅φ⋅λ ⎡δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎤ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎡ ⎤ 3ξ2 2ξ3 ⎢ ⎥ × + ⎢ ⎡δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎤ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦⎦ ⎣⎣ αeν ( δ−ξ) Table of Content . b.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0.8) and (7.4 ⋅ c + 0.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7. where w = w k . stated b.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7. the (7.5) (7.

5 practically impossible for bending problems.4. we have σsAs0.4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7. In this case too.8).5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ. easier to be applied.9. In this case.2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7. which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5.185ν/(pδ) the (7.88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7. it is possible to set the tensional level σs. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then.18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content . the neutral axis is obtained from (7.9). being the value λ =0. Alternatively.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7. the solution for (7. it is necessary to set in the (7.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3.13).18) the (11. aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level.9d=M and then ρs=0.243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1. An alternative procedure.11).185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7.9d. ρs from (7. consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0.18 1− 1− 0. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter.11) solved with respect to φ.14) 7.15) and (7. In this way.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7. if we set the value of σs. let’s state δ=0. leads to the desred values ρs e σs.16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.4u1 ν ν * − 0. λ = 0. The procedure.15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3. using the (7. numerically solved. . and together with the (7.13) the (7.4c + 0.17) the (7. If it is not the case.13) λ = 2.13).11) (7. . for example coincident with the permissible one.20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ ν ⎥ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ⎦ (7. the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount.7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7. as the parameter p is defined.67) is easy to solve.

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

16 ⋅ ⎢ 3.086 · 156.62 ⋅ 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7. c=50mm.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation.4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7. 7.62 As (2/3) = 0.086MPa ν=600/77.16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1.30mm.2 mm .01049 .874 Table of Content .10mm .(1000.01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0.5002/6).16 max Defined w k = 0.75 ⋅ 0. w k = 0. 7. fck=33MPa. design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0.086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7. 156. σs (1) = 0.6 ⋅ 3. Reinforced concrete Section.77 = 0.874 w k = 0. 2/3.10-6=77. w k = 0. Fig.6. Assuming b=1000mm.92 M0cr=0.4 ⋅ 1. h=500mm. M=600kNm.3 mm .185 ⋅ 7. φ=26mm.086.77/(1-1.3.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235.10).20mm.15=7.15) and (7. 119. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state.16 7.3.15kNm ν*=7. Then in a general form w 0k = 0.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7.7. p (2/3) = 119.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3.7.18/7.92 ⋅ p − 9.3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0. in the three cases here considered kw = 1.185 ⋅ 7. It results fctm=0. in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0.1) u1=50/26=1. w k = 0.874 (see ex.77 0.77 = 0.75 As (1) = 0.77)=9. 1/3.30mm the maximal amplitude.20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0.965 + 18400.6 · 3. p(1) = 156.332/3=3.01375 . together with the (7.

02179 .1 mm .185 ⋅ 7.48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7.652 + 69614 = 195.3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision. ξ = 0. the metal areas are overestimated.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 159.9 mm .874 σs (1/3) = 0.65 + 79. and 26 mm diameter bars are used. Table of Content .48 As (1/3) = 0.02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0.77 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0.9 ) = 7. p (1/3) = 75.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig.086 · 75.7. 75. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0.62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.48 ⋅ 0.8.9 = 304 MPa 7. 7. w k = 0.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0.6 · 3.93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195.086·119.3918 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 195. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0.6·3. Designed sections.

4292) / 3 = 0.1903 ⎛ 0.4292 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 214.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103.63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.01062 ⎝ 0.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.2027 0.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0. ρs = 69.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.874) = 0. ρs = 111.6 mm .52 + 90498 = 214.cr = 0.1) = 1.6 ⋅ 3.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.2 2 + 143704 = 247.315.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247.306 mm 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 .31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0.41 ⋅ 109 0.11 MPa 0.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 207.41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.494 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 247.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 y n + 334.1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.cr = 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ 0.494) / 3 = 0.0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.1 = 160 MPa 1.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.5 + 103.2027 ⎛ 0. ξ = 0.01062 ⎟ = 0.6 ) = 8. Then σs.6 ⋅ 3.31 MPa 0.03 / (50 · 100) = 0.5 (1 – 0.2 + 167.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.6 = 238 MPa 8.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53. ξ = 0.1903 σs.4 ⋅50 + 0.1687 Table of Content .11⎞ ⎛ 0.0138 ⎝ 0.1 mm .3918) / 3 = 0.

59/3) / 43.3 and Figure 7.9 0.99 + 3·160·13.2 6903 221 0. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.1687 ⎛ 0.792/18.46/3) / 43.70 = 0.71] / 43.16) (7. Table 7. 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 0.811 0.6 ⋅ 3.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0. Exact method. Table 7.1 11151 140 0.cr = 0.70 = 0. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification.85 Fig.14). wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0.2 and they are shown in Figure 7.79/18.78 MPa 0.836 0.1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41.99) + + 2/3·24. 7.1.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.1 and 7. Table 7. In fact.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0.85 h0/d = (43.9 0.0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.70 ≅ 0.213 0. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state.086 ⋅ wk = 0.9.2.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.0223 ⎝ 0.120 0. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43.70 – 19.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0. The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure.70 – 21.836 h0/d = [(18·160·18. those values are evaluated using the (7.10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs.4 ⋅ 50 + 0. Table of Content .9.8 Let’s remark that the presence of a compressed reinforcement is highly recommended to make ductile the section in the ultimate limit state. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method. Approximated method.

7. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs). 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. wk = 0.3.EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7. Approximated method – Determination of maximum diameter.10.3 mm (C) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 280 30 5430 290 26 5310 309 20 4910 325 16 4672 355 10 4282 Fig.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.

7. stating αe = Es/Ec=15. Table of Content .13. fck=30MPa.8 ) = 18. deflected beam.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385.6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7. 7. as reported in Figure 7.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35. g=2q. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385.11.13.9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig.12 Fig.12.9 ⋅ 5. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) .6 In the stage II.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0. Referring to the stage I. as indicated in Figure 7. Transversal section.11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. g+q=40kN/m. 7.745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166.13.8 From Table [3. Section at stage I. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way. deformation limit state. l=10m. Fig.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166.

1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.92 + 94. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2). Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2. where the cracked part of the beam start.92 2 + 123396 = 269mm I * = 500 ⋅ 269 3 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1.23) The abscissa ξ1. the equation (7. 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 y n + 189.21) 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. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7.14.20) where vI is the displacement calculated in the first step and Δv(l/2) the increase of the displacement itself caused from the cracking.05/10.13=1. . 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 ⎥ . Section at stage II.24) Table of Content . is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 ) = M cr 1 = M max λ (7.22) Calculating the integrals on the right side of the equation we finally obtain 2 M 4 3 β ⎛ ⎞ ⎡5 ⎤ 4 Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ + ξ1 − ξ1 − 2 ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Ec I I ⎣ 48 3 4λ ⎝2⎠ ⎦ (7.21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7.01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 II 2 3 then c=18.78 Fig.84y n − 123396 = 0 2 y n = −94.

93 and 0. .27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞.26) Finally. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig. 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.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7. In the same way.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. 7.20) is expressed as 2 ⎡ 48 ⎛ 4 4 3 ⎞ 12 β ⎤⎫ ⎛ ⎞ 5 M max ⎧ v⎜ ⎟ = 1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 + ⎜ ξ1 − ξ1 ⎟ − ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎥ ⎬ ⎣ ⎦ ∗ ⎨ 2 5 ⎝ 3 ⎠ 5 λ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 Ec I I ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (7. a concentrated load Q=200kN. 12Ec I ∗ I (7. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section. 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. varying z .λ. In this way. 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 (7.15. The result. ξ1 . for the same Mmax. Diagrams for v/v1 .27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (7.28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ).15. it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam.EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11.25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7.29) (7. considering that v I = The (7. that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments. Furthermore. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0.51).15.

Table of Content .25.16.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.64 = 35.31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18. displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c).EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3.71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.16. Deformation in the stage I (a). as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7. where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam.26) (7.56 ⋅ 17.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig.6. In particular. introducing the numerical values in the (7.15 and Figure 7. we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21. is about 4%.29) and using the results in Figure 11. is reported in Figure 7.31 = 27. 7.65 ⋅ 21. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

05 = 0. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0.40+0.05 e 0.12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0. 2 Table of Content . corresponding to fractiles 0.60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa. for corresponding density class in kg/m3.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0. in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11.2 of Eurocode 2.1 and 11.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk.3. flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa.3.3. the intersecting compressive elastic module at 28 days.The results of calculation of the two above-mentioned mechanical features are shown and compared in the following table. in lack of direct experimentation. The characteristic values of simple tensile strength.1 [EC2 Clause 11.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 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.3.0.95.2] 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 two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes.0.1 – 11.95 = 1. can be taken equal to: . can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ .for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 .

95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .2 4.9 3.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.9 2.0.4 2.2 1.868 -4.1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.4 5.850 -0.7 3.2 3.05 [MPa] fctk.1 5.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.0.563 -2.5 4.959 -0.

section. The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm. 11. for fyk= 450 MPa.6 – 11.3.1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled.2 [EC2 Clause 11. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28.3 cm.3. h=50cm and d=47cm.98‰. to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding. In case one chooses. from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0. made of type 1 lightweight concrete.8 MPa.c.85 flck/γc = 19. like in the previous example. build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete. described in the previous example.5 – 11. Fig.3. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T. The section in question is shown in Fig.5η1 = 2.75‰.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10.5 cm.5 kNm.5 cm = 36.96‰. is εyd = fyd /(1. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit.11. The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0. 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. 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.1 – 11.365 = 432.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN. Table of Content .4 – 11.15 x Es) = 450/(1.15 x 200000) = 1.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11.1 Deformation and tension diagram of r. ρ = 1650 kg/m3). the second remaining area is the one where compression on concrete linearly decreases from the value flcd to zero in correspondence of the neutral axis.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

- Guide Ec2 En
- Concise Eurocode 2
- Structural Elements Design Manual-Working With Eurocodes 2009
- Eurocode2_Commentary2008
- eurocode_7_geotechnical_limit_analysis
- Ccip Worked Examples Ec2
- Design Aids EuroCode
- EuroCode_4
- ECCS Examples to Eurocode 3
- Worked Example to Eurocode 2 Vol. 1
- Ccip Concise Ec2
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2
- Designers-Guide-to-EN1992-1-1-and-EN1992-1-2
- Eurocode 3 Actions
- Wall Calculation Example EC2
- BCA - Worked Examples Design of Concrete Building
- Design Examples for the Eurocode 7
- Bridge design
- EC3 & EC4 Worked Examples
- Eurocode 7
- Steel Design To Eurocode 3 - University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- Composite beam design to Eurocode 4 Hüseyin Gören
- Structrual Concrete Design to Eurocode 2 University Of Sheffield Structural Engineering Masters
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Examples Eurocode2
- Bridge Design Eurocodes Worked Examples

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Loading