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

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

### Publishers

Scribd Selects Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

P. 1

Worked Examples Ec2 Def080723|Views: 40|Likes: 0

Published by fieeeey

See more

See less

https://www.scribd.com/doc/73084803/Worked-Examples-Ec2-Def080723

04/07/2014

text

original

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

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

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

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

.................. 6-21 EXAMPLE 6...................................12 PILE CAP [EC2 CLAUSE 6.......9................................ a<Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6................... 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.......... 7-5 EXAMPLE 7.6] ............................2 – 7......................5] .................... 6-38 EXAMPLE 6...6 VERIFICATION OF LIMIT STATE OF DEFORMATION ......... [EC2 CLAUSE 5..........2] ......15 SLABS............1 – 11......................... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7...2 – 7.....................................................................3 – 7.2 [EC2 CLAUSE 11........................ 3500 KN CONCENTRATED LOAD [EC2 CLAUSE 6.........................2 APPROXIMATED METHOD ... LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES..5]............ 11-3 Table of Content ........................................................ A>Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6........4 – 11..10 – 6..................................................................3.... 7-13 EXAMPLE 7...................3..........................................2 DESIGN OF MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT [EC2 CLAUSE 7........3....................4] .4........................................................................2] ........................... 11-1 EXAMPLE 11............................................ 11-1 EXAMPLE 11.............4] ................5 – 11....3...... SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES ...3.......................6 – 11..........13 VARIABLE HEIGHT BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6................11 GERBER BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6...... 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.............1 – 11................................5 APPLICATION OF THE APPROXIMATED METHOD [EC2 CLAUSE 7...4] ....... 6-24 EXAMPLE 6...................1 – 6................3 EVALUATION OF CRACK AMPLITUDE [EC2 CLAUSE 7...EC2 – worked examples summary EXAMPLE 6....................................................... 7-11 EXAMPLE 7. 7-1 EXAMPLE 7.....2] .............................................1 EVALUATION OF SERVICE STRESSES [EC2 CLAUSE 7..3.........5] ............................................. THICK SHORT CORBEL.....................1 [EC2 CLAUSE 11...................4.............................................................................. DESIGN FORMULAS DERIVATION FOR THE CRACKING LIMIT STATE [EC2 CLAUSE 7................................14....10 THICK CANTILEVER BEAM......................................................................... 7-10 5B7.......... 6-18 EXAMPLE 6....................................... 6-40 SECTION 7......................................... 6-28 EXAMPLE 6.....4] ..5] ......................5] ...5] ........ 7-18 SECTION 11....3........................

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

Load combination for verification of static equilibrium. 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. STR – Verification of resistance of a column(Set B) The partial factor to be taken for permanent loads in the verification of maximum compression stresses and of bending with axial force in the column is the same (γG = 1.2.3. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case. 2.35) for all spans.3. as in Fig. Table of Content . ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2. and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force. Fig.EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.

Load combination for the verification of bending with axial force of the column. 2.4.EC2 – worked examples 2-3 Fig. 2. Table of Content . Fig. Load combination for the compression stresses verification of the column.5.

6.es 0.35·Gk + 1.1.es) = 1.5·Qk. 2.75· Qk.s.w) = 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure .n + 1.5·Qk.75·Qk.6 Fk.35·Gk + 1. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.5·Fk.0·Gk + 1.es + 0.05·Qk.n + 0.w Predominant action: service load (fig.es Predominant action: snow (fig.Variable actions are listed in table 2.1.35·Gk + 1. 2. d) service load predominant. b) Wind predominant.35·Gk + 1. Table of Content .7 Qk.35·Gk + 1.n + 0.5·Qk.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk. unfavourable vertical loads. ULS combination of action .5·Qk. c) Snow load predominant.es + 0.w) = 1.3. c) 1.es + 0.7·Qk.5·( Fk.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2. 2. a) 1.B.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.6.7·Qk. 6.n (for sites under 1000 m a.6·Fk.6. favourable vertical loads.) wind Fk.w + 0.5· Fk.w + 0.6·Fk. d) 1.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig.6. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant.w Fig. Variable actions on a residential concrete building.w unfavourable vertical loads (fig.05·Qk.w 0.n + 0.9·Fk.6.n + 0.n 0.l.5·( Qk.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk.35·Gk + 1.9·Fk. Table 2.STR (Set B) (eq.5 Qk.5·(Qk. b) 1. 2.w N. 2. but they may be defined in the National Annex.n + 1.es + 0.

7·Qk.65·Qk.7·Qk.n + 1.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig.es + 1.0·Gk + 1.n + 0.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq.0·Gk + 1.3·0. 2.3·0.w Predominant action: service load (fig.7. 2.3·0.w + 1.3· Fk.6·Fk. unfavourable vertical loads.15 and 2.n + 0.0·Gk + 1.3· Fk.3·Qk.0·Gk + 1. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig.3·Qk.7.w + 0.6·Fk. 2.91·Qk. Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification). favourable vertical loads.7.es + 0.n + 1. c) 1.7.w = 1. or on the structure.n + 0. d) 1.w Fig.es + 1. a) 1.3·0.78·Fk.3· Fk.3·Qk.78·Fk.es = 1. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2.0·Gk + 1.0·Gk + 1. b) Wind predominant.5·Qk.3·0.65· Qk. 6. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below.es Predominant action: snow (fig.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches.16.n + 1. d) service load predominant. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant.91·Qk. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure.3·0. the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex.es + 0. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation. Table of Content . c) Snow load predominant.7. b) 1.w = 1.3·Qk. are applied in separate calculations.5·Qk. 2. 2.0·Gk + 1.

35·Gk + 1.n + 1.n + 0.e. can be referred to Set B.es 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1.terr) + 1.1·Sk.8.es + 0. EXAMPLE 2. to approach 2. ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2.05·Qk.75·Qk.w + 0. Set B) are used.(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.5·Qk. as geotechnical actions are not present.4] Fig.5·Qk. 2.sovr Fig.9·(Gk. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.05·Qk.4.9. 2.9). This case.e.terr + 0.es + 0.35·Gk + 1.w 1.5· Fk.w 1. 1.5·Sk.5·Qk.75·Qk.n + 1.35·Gk + 1. Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU . 2.9·Fk. Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content . i.9·Fk.wall + Gk.w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i.0·Gk + 1.

0·Gk.10b).35·Gk. Set C 1.sovr + 1.e.sovr 1. 2.0·Sk.0·Gk.sovr + 1.terr + 1. two possibilities must be considered: either that the surcharge concerns only the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing (Fig.5·Qk.3·Sk.terr + 1.0·Gk.5·Sk.terr + 1. Table of Content .sovr 1.10a).5·Sk.terr + 1.35·Gk.35·Sk.35·Sk.0·Gk. i.terr + 1. For brevity. or that it acts on the whole surface of the embankment (Fig. are given below. Fig.sovr + 1.5·Qk.10.35·Sk. with surcharge acting on the whole surface of embankment.terr + 1.5·Sk.wall + 1.terr + 1.wall + 1.35·Sk.35·Gk.EC2 – worked examples 2-7 STR/GEO .sovr 1. 2.5·Sk. Possible load cases of surcharge on the embankment.35·Gk.terr + 1.wall + 1.terr + 1.0·Gk.sovr + 1. only cases in relation with case b). The following figures show loads in relation to the combinations obtained with Set B partial safety factors.wall + 1.sovr Note: For all the above-listed combinations.(ground pressure and verification of resistance of wall and footing) Approach 1 Design values from Set C and from Set B are applied in separate calculations to the geotechnical actions and to all other actions from the structure or on the structure.wall + 1. 2.5·Qk.sovr Set B 1.5·Qk.terr + 1.0·Gk.

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

terr + 1.3·Sk.75 kN/m Pk.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.0·Gk.0·Sk. EXAMPLE 2.3·Qk. Fig.0·Sk.3·Sk.33 δ=0° Pk. 1.wall = 0.wall + 1.0·Gk.sovr + 1.3·Qk.0·Sk.0·Gk. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.0·Sk.9 kN/m Table of Content . active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.75 + 31.terr + 1.50 ⋅ 25 = 31.ground = 18 ⋅ 2.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.wall + 1.50 ⋅ 25 = 18.Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).terr + 1.terr + 1.terr + 1.sovr 1.0·Gk.wall + 1.25 kN/m Gk.12. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.70 = 76.30 ⋅ 2.3·Sk.35·Gk.wall + 1.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.surch = 9. 2.sovr A numeric example is given below.5.sovr 1.sovr + 1.3·Sk.foot = 18. weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz.terr + 1.3·Qk.50 ⋅ 2.35·Gk.3·Qk.35·Gk.EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used.terr + 1.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk.foot = 0.ground = 26.5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.wall = Pk.sovr 1.terr + 1.sovr + 1.wall + Pk.35·Gk.sovr + 1.50 ⋅ 1.

25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.73⋅3.wall + 1.25⋅1.ground = 0.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29.5 ⋅ (9.terr + 1.97 + 35.ground = 1. Set B if partial factors.65) = 113.73= 29.sovr + 1.0 and 1.1⋅(26.5·Sk.terr + 1.35·Sk. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.50) = 22.9): Mstab.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.9): Fstab.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.1): Sground = 1.foot = 0.terr + 1. By taking 1.9⋅(31.sovr Table of Content .24 = 64.35·Sk.90 = 14.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.28 = 51.0·Gk.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0.1): MS.terr + 1.sovr second combination 1.9⋅(76.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.sovr + 1.25 = 1.75) = 9.0·Gk.89 / 44.5·Sk.terr + 1.wall = 0.wall + 1.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.5) = 39.16 kNm/m Mstab.73/51.surch = 1.25) = 35.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively.16 + 113.03 + 39.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.5·Qk.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.57⋅18.5): Ssur = 1.90 ⋅ 1.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.5): MS.85 = 44.35·Sk.5 ⋅ 9.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.ground = 0.57⋅31.65) = 10.9⋅(18.5·Sk.e.9⋅(0.9⋅(0.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.9⋅(0. i.5⋅1.terr + 1.35·Gk.57⋅76.62 + 16.5·Qk.68 = 3.0·Gk.25) = 16.wall = 0.sovr third combination 1.40 + 14.9): Fstab.foot = 0.03 kNm/m Fstab.73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.00/3) = 29.5·Qk.wall + 1.35·Gk.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9.60 = 159.40 + 22.sovr + 1. is used.1 ⋅ 26.35·Gk.75⋅0.

01 / 126.90⋅1. 2. i.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.0 ⋅ (18.08 + 22.1.6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36.5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39.088 MPa The results given at Table 2.5 = 126.wall + 1.0⋅(18.502 = 88.40) = .35.25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1.0): Pground = 1.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.50) = 22.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2.50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2.terr + 1.sovr = 1.0⋅(76. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.75 + 31.5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18. The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS.08 kNm/m MS.5⋅(9.75 ⋅ 0.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1.5) = 76. For the verification of the contact pressure. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered.6 = 39.35⋅(26.5⋅0.terr + 1.13.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.50/6 = 41.73⋅3.60) = 11.0 ⋅ (76.35·Gk. Table of Content .35·Sk. as follows: moment vs.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1.0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1. (Fig. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1.5·Sk. combinations.0 ⋅ (31.terr = 1.25) =31.sovr + 1. 2.05 kN/m2 = 0.e.5·Qk. Fig.25 – 30.25 + 76.0): Pwall = 1. the values given at Table 2.13).0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors.75) = 18.0·Gk.30.5 = 0.00/3)=36.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1.28 + 11.

08 36.50 (γG=1.11 99.35) 22.08 (γQ=1.48 fourth 36.04 25.19 99.5) 11.28 (γG=1.3.30 98.78 0.0) 31.19 (γG=1.24 25. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.2.67 18. 5) 28.0) -41. first second 36.25 (γG=1. 5) 178.0) 25.35) 42.0) 76.28 (γG=1.0) (γG=1.35) 22.50 0. Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.10 88.28 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.28 (γQ=1.20 (γQ=1.0) (γG=1.75 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.35) 103.20 -10. first second third 36.5) 196.19 (γG=1.5) 169.35) 22.28 (γG=1.0) 76.31 (γG=1.24 Msurch (kNm/m) Mtot (kNm/m) Pwall (kN/m) Pfoot (kN/m) Pterr (kN/m) Psurch (kN/m) Ptot (kN/m) eccentricity (m) pressure on ground (kN/m2) The two additional lines.50 (γQ=1.25 15.35) -30.31 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.35) 25. not present in Table 1.89 fourth 36.19 (γG=1.5) (γQ=1.35) 39.08 36.78 0.31 (γG=1.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) Mtot (kNm/m) Pwall (kN/m) Pfoot (kN/m) Pground (kN/m) Ptot (kN/m) eccentricity (m) pressure on ground (kN/m2) (surcharge outside the foundation footing).0) 103.ground (kNm/m) MS.08 (γQ=1.35) 25.19 (γG=1.28 22. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.19 88.35) (γQ=1.81 18.26 third 36.35) 76.31 (γG=1.ground (kNm/m) MS.5) 15.01 18.30 18. 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.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).0) 103.25 (γG=1.60 -41.50 0.05 32.28 22.5) 11.0) 42.28 0.5) 152.19 (γG=1.28 (γG=1.35) 28.31 -41.08 (γQ=1.25 (γG=1.19 99.19 11.08 (γQ=1.0) 31.50 (γQ=1.35) 42.0) -10.19 (γG=1.35) 103.0) (γG=1.20 -10.75 25.5) (γQ=1.46 22.28 (γQ=1.35) 42.0) 144 0.28 (γQ=1.0) 31.18 and here highlighted in bold.75 (γG=1.83 Table 2.0) 25.35) -30.31 88.35) 76.20 (γQ=1.31 (γG=1. Table of Content .5) 15.28 22.35) 22.35) (γG=1.25 15.50 (γG=1.35) 42.75 (γG=1.0) (γG=1.35) 170.0) 31.5) (γQ=1. 5) (γQ=1.18 88.08 36.0) -30.35) 22.35) (γQ=1.25 (γG=1.35) -10.08 (γQ=1.35) 153.31 (γG=1.5) 11.35) -30.50 (γG=1.35) (γG=1.0 0.10 18.31 (γG=1.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.19 (γG=1.95 25.0) 126.60 (γG=1.60 -41.50 (γG=1.28 0.25 (γG=1.5) 32.75 (γG=1.5) (γQ=1.60 (γG=1.50 (γQ=1.50 (γQ=1.

EC2: cmin. cmin.) concrete strength class for exposure class XC1 is C20/25.1. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm.1N .2): cmin = max (cmin. 10 mm) = 15 mm Table of Content .add = 0 . Δcdur.1 [EC2 clause 4.b.add. Fig. 10 mm) = max (8.EC2 we see that.Δcdur. From relation (3.1 From table E. the concrete cover for the stirrups is calculated. The design working life of the structure is 50 years.4] Design the concrete cover of a reinforced concrete beam with exposure class XC1.4N .EC2 – worked examples 4-1 SECTION 4. The concrete in use has resistance class C25/30. 4.st = 0 .γ . The max aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm). Bottom longitudinal bars are 5 φ 20.γ = 0 .st . Δcdur. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. First.b = 8 mm We obtain from table 4. Normal quality control is put in place. Refer to figure 4. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY EXAMPLE 4. the resistance class adopted (C25/30) is suitable as it is higher than the reference strength class.dur + Δcdur.dur = 15 mm Moreover: Δcdur.Δcdur. With: cmin. the reference (min. The structural class is S4.

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

4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast. Table of Content . Refer to figure 3. for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm . Fig. The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20.EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.2. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”.EC2 we find that. In this case. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm . A normal quality control is put in place. we design the minimum concrete cover with reference to both the stirrups and the longitudinal bars.1. From table E. 4.2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3. We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30.2 [EC2 clause 4. The exposure class is XS1.) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm . The design working life of the structure is 50 years.1N . The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min. the reference (min.dur = 35 mm . the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm . even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).

2): c min = max (c min. Table of Content .EC2 – Worked examples 4-4 EXAMPLE 4. The original structural class is S4.add . c min. The exposure class is XS1.EC2 that for exposure class XS1.4N . 25 + 0 – 0 – 0. The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 16 mm.st = 0 . Calculating first the concrete cover for stirrups. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. − strands φ 0. 10 mm ) = = max (8. At the lower side of the two ribbings of the TT element we have: − longitudinal φ 12 reinforcement bars. Moreover: Δc dur. Δcdur. 10 mm) = 25 mm .dur + Δc dur. − φ 8 stirrups at 100 mm . We use concrete with strength class C45/55.5” . γ − Δc dur. strength class C45/55 is therefore adequate.b = 8 mm . We find out from table E. From relation (3.3. − the structural class is reduced by 1 as special quality control of the concrete production is ensured We then refer to structural class S2. the minimum concrete strength class is C30/37. placed outside an industrial building situated close to the coast. made of prestressed reinforced concrete.3N: − the structural class is reduced by 1 as the concrete used (C45/55) is of strength class higher than C40/50. γ = 0 .4] Calculate the concrete cover of a TT precast element. Δcdur.dur = 25 mm .st − Δc dur. We obtain from table 4.EC2: c min. An accurate quality control of concrete production is put in place.b . Refer to figure 3.add = 0 . We have: c min.3 [EC2 clause 4.1N . In accordance with table 4.

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

The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element. The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm.b = 1.st = 0 . Δcdur.5N . 10 mm) = 35 mm .EC2: c min. From relation (3. 35 + 0 – 0 – 0. Moreover: Δc dur.5 · 12.add = 0 .dur = 35 mm .8 mm . From relation (3. Δcdur.8.1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm . We obtain from table 4.EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.2): c min = max (18.5 = 18. γ = 0 . Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm . Table of Content .

35 x1 (mm) 113. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth.max = 2821. NRd1 = 0.0 541. h = 1000 mm.1.0 x2 (mm) 608.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6.8·500·113.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0. Some example is developed using S500 too. Example 6.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated.1 Material data. The maximum moment resistance MRd.8·500·608.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 . x2 values are shown in table 6.1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6. Fig. the ratio between the distance of the resultant of parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc from εc and the deformation εc itself.1] Geometrical data: b= 500 mm.2 kNm goes alongside it.56 β2 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. d = 950 mm.80 0.1 6. d' = 50 mm.40 0. Steel and concrete resistance. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas. β2 is the “position factor”.0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN. β1 and β2 factors and x1. 6. EXAMPLE 6.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 0.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0.5 203. NRd3 = 0. Basis: β1 means the ratio between the area of the parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc and the area of rectangle at the same deformation.

80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0.2.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0. depth of neutral axis. moment resistance.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3. eccentricity.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown. NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0.2. Example 1: values of axial force.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0. it results: x2 + 66.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1. MRd. and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated.52 0.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎠ ⎝ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0.26 0. Their values are shown in Table 6.105 0.38 1. Ed Table 6. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0. the neutral axis x.294 0.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing. 52m 5000 Table of Content .91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0.

350 0. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0. MRd.80 1.619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2.EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.50. The results are shown in Table 6.max = 6948.35·0. MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd .1.619) + 3910·(0. depth of neutral axis.3 Values of axial load.55 0.3 Table 6. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN.5 – 0.08 0.14 Table of Content . eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0.142 0.0.7 kNm is associated to it. moment resistance.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x.2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6.1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6.

0.0 = 44. No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present.66 )2 + 1. VRd.15⋅5. h = 200 mm. Class C40 concrete.05/γC = 1· 2.626 + 0.5= 1.5/1.3 Calculation of VRd.c = (1.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24. 66 ⋅ 5.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment.c = (0.626 and k1 = 0. Average prestressing σcp = 5.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment.0 MPa.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd.15. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6. It results: VRd. Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm. d = 175 mm.33 kN Table of Content .

375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. fcd = 51 MPa.38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. ν = 0. The example is developed for three classes of concrete. a) fck = 30 MPa . fyd = 391 MPa. with fck = 60 MPa. d = 550 mm. s = 150 mm. ν = 0.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content . with bw = 150 mm. with fck = 90 MPa.616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd.2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.532.s = VRd. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd. 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2).29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement.max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd. fcd = 34 MPa.512. z = 500 mm. ν = 0. h = 600 mm.29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2. vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam. fcd = 17 MPa .EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6.4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6.1504 hence cotθ = 2.s = hence cotθ = 1.90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1.

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

5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0.4· (2.616 ⋅ 17 = 2.10 -1. s = 150 mm. Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .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 ⋅ 0.10 + 1.5 VRd.EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6. fcd = 17 MPa .0) = 333 kN Table of Content . ν = 0. 2 legs (Asw = 157 mm2).616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1.72 < 7.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam. fyd = 391 MPa.707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605.4 kN 150 It results: VRd.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd.5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0.5·605.0) ⋅ 0.10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0. diameter 10 mm.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2. replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2.707 and.s) ΔFtd = 0.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0. fck = 30 MPa .s (cot θ − cot α) = 0.5 [EC2 clause 6. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm.40 ≤ 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. 6.85·(30/1.707⋅0. with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members. with depth 1500 mm. 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6. width 1000 mm.7[1-30/250] = 0.6 [EC2 clause 6.2. d = 1450 mm.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1.0 MPa ν = 0.5⋅0. Fig. It results: VRd.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10.616 ν fcd = 10.5 MPa fyd = 500/1. 6.3] Ring rectangular section.707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content .5) = 17.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig.

Reinforcement of horizontal members.08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2.865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section.14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2. pitch 200 mm. 2 legs stirrups. subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1.14) = 0. pitch 200 mm.EC2 – worked examples 6-11 Determination of angle θ: * 1 2VEd 1 2 ⋅ 1087000 θ = arcsin = arcsin = 25.348 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 8 mm wide.03o 2 νfcd tz 2 10.3(3)-EC2]. with particular attention to the corner bars.5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2. pitch is in accordance with [9. Table of Content .14) = 0.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end.2. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2.

4471⋅0.0) It results: VRd.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm . fyd = 391 MPa αcw = 1 Geometric elements A= 150000 mm2 u = 1600 mm t = A/u = 94 mm Ak = (500 – 94) ⋅ (300-94) = 83636 mm2 Assumption: θ = 26.max = 2⋅10.5) = 17.616 .EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6. 6.0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0.7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6. z =400 mm (Fig.5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .56o (cotθ = 2.7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0.5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content . 6.5⋅83636⋅94⋅0.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10.85·(30/1.3] resistant hollow section Fig.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.5⋅300⋅400/(2+0. h = 500 mm. ν fcd = 10.

On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines.c + VEd /VRd.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content . it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm. V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig.63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0. 6.4 kNm 1/3 VRd.01. moreover.4.c = ⎡CRd. 6.18/1. It results therefore: TRd. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations.c ≤ 1 where TRd.EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig. if VEd = 350 kN is taken.0/1.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1. ρ = 0. Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1.c = 0.c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2.3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.31)-EC2] In this expression.5 = 0.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3. it results: CRd.5 = 1.1-EC2]).4. For instance. The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd.

which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0.5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content . Namely.EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram. It results : Asw/s. 200 mm.5N-EC2].5 The section.0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig.e.bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.c = 0.75⋅450 = 337 mm. the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9.2 (6)-EC2]. For instance.0010 Fig.08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0.75d = 0.2 (5)-EC2] and [9.08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0.6. i. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed.2.. 6.010 with s not larger than 0.12⋅1. Because of the torsion. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8.2. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9.

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

8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ σ1Rd.85f ck 0.9 Cantilever beam S&T model. beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig.5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391. 1. Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.5 1.max Table of Content .3 N / mm 2 1. Thick short corbel.15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.12 N / mm 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6.18 ⎜1⎟ 19.9. 150 x 300 load plate. 6.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19. Fig. 6.83 = 20.5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm).15 1.83 N / mm 2 . steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.

88 ⎛ 1.83 = 17. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only.max b = 700000 ≅ 87 mm 20.8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ 2Rd.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.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.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig.2d = 0. 6.83 = 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 = = 7.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is evaluated setting the internal drive arm z equal to 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-19 nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in a fixed direction ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 19.05 N / mm 0.8⋅d (z = 0.9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content . 6.max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig.max = 20.35 ⎞ 19. 6.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig.

8. 6. and they have provided the following expression of stress in the secondary reinforcement (MC90 par. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node. 6.25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15. double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification. where the main reinforcement is anchored.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag.2.2.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 300 45000 Table of Content .56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.max = 17.1): 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. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10.

10 Thick cantilever beam. Elementary beams of the S&T model. 400 x 400 mm column Fig.13b). in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z. 6.13. The stress Fwd in the vertical tension rod is evaluated assuming a linear relation between Fwd and the a value. the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig. 6. Table of Content . 6.12 Cantilever S&T model. ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6. 6.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm). Fig.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever.12) is indeterminate.13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig. 6. then as in the previous example one more boundary condition is needed to evaluate the stresses values in the rods. a) b) Fig. This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever). 150 x 220 mm load plate. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6. The model proposed in EC2 (Fig.

max = 17. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed.5 f yk 1. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20.8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0. 3 in conclusion.15 = 450 = 391.83 N / mm 2 .EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content .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. 1. some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd .15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd.8⋅d (z = 0.85f ck 0.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column.3 N / mm 2 1.5 1. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0.2d = 0. a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.max = 20.05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd. the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 .max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.

max = 20.3 FEd 500000 = 0. below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node.37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.5 = 639 mm 2 f yd 391. in which the main reinforcement is anchored.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.3 EC2 suggests a minimum secondary reinforcement of: Aw ≥ k2 we use 3 stirrups φ 12 (As = 678 mm2) node 2 verification. 208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13. 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content .max = 17.

fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.5 f yk 1. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one.3 N / mm 2 1. 1.6)]. a) b) Fig. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1.4.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.85f ck 0. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction.17 N / mm 2 . Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses.14). we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam. (Fig.2. Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement. 6. On the other hand. if only the scheme a) is used.15 = 450 = 391.9.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam. 6.7 (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 .EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6.15 [(3.5 1. eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10.11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6.

the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0.00173 ≤ yd = = 0.8 b x fcd = 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.15 Truss a.8·800·99·14. ' εs = 0.8b x f cd + E s 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig. as stated in the calculation.0035 391. 6.17 (applied at 0.00173·2513 Table of Content .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 0.4⋅x ≅ 40 mm from the upper surface) while the top reinforcement stress is: C’ = Es ε’s A’s = 200000·0.0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0.

then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 .3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391.EC2 – worked examples 6-26 (applied at 50 mm from the upper surface) the compression net force (C + C’) results to be applied at 45 mm from the beam upper surface.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses. 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).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. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content .3 Fig. Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391. 6.45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2.

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

15 = 450 = 391. 6. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa.EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content . diameter 800 mm piles Fig. 2000 x 700 mm columns.3 N / mm 2 1.5 f yd = f yk 1.5 1.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6.85f ck 0.8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd.5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm).17 N / mm 2 .75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd.max = 12.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6. 1.85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14.17 Log plinth on pilings. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.max = 11.

NSd/2) = (4000/3. Table of Content .18.00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3.EC2 – worked examples 6-29 Tied reinforcement in the pile: 8 φ 26 (As = 4248 mm2) The compressive stress Fc in the concrete and the steel tension Fs on the pedestal pile are evaluated from the ULS verification for normal stresses of the section itself: Fs = fyd As = 391. 6.00 . the plinth own weight is considered negligible. Fig.17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3.17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3.3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0.8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0. S&T model in the plane π1.8·700·x·14.17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0. the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig.8·700·462·14.4⋅x ≅ 185 mm from the upper surface) piles stress pile stresses are evaluated considering the column actions transfer in two steps: in the first step. the truss-tie beam in Fig.8 b x fcd = 0.00 . 6. 6. then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles.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.

EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56.19 Trusses in plan π2 and in plan π3.5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 6. θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44.5° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65.2° T10 = Fs = 1662 kN T11 = A’ cot θ11 = 2333 cot 26.2° = 154 kN Fig.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 . 6.

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

steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq. 1.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .15 = 450 = 391.13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig.96 N / mm 0.3 N / mm 2 1.max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content .16 N / mm 2 = k3 cd ⎜ ⎟ 0.5 1. 6.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd. 6.85f ck 0.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.30 ⎞ 17 = 13.21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa.65 N / mm 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.88 ⎛1.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.5 f yk 1.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14.

6.4 x) = 3. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution.8·x·b = 17·0.22 Identification of B and D regions.00 = 3600 kNm = 3. Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.4 x) = 3.8·x·300·(1900 – 0. 6.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).6·109 17·0.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3.23 Shear and bending moment diagrams. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions.6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0.8·x·b·(d – 0. Fig. The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .

41° . strut&tie model Fig. Strut and tie model.25 Load paths. 6. 6. Fig. 6.76° 3000 while the strut C4 tilting is 1690 θ1 = arctg = 48.26. Fig. 1500 Table of Content .26.24 Reactions and boundary stresses in the region D.25 shows the load paths characterized by Schlaich in the strut&tie model identification.EC2 – worked examples 6-34 Identification of boundary stresses in the region D Fig. 6. The strut C2 tilting is 3190 θ = arctg = 46. shown in Fig. 6.

10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used. T2 and T3.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2.10 % of the concrete area.) 2130 kN 2130 kN 1647 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1002 kN 1509 kN 1595 kN Steel tension rods design EC2 point 9.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.13·10 /391. and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions. 6.3 = 5443 mm As = 1. Table 6. Table 6. because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1.27 Node A.max = 14.96 N/mm2 Table of Content .4 C1 T1 C2 T3 T2 C3 Floop C4 C5 See stresses evaluation in the region B T1=C1 C2 = F/sin θ (Node A vertical equilibrium) T3 = C2 cos θ (Node A horizontal equilibrium.61)-EC2] σ2Rd.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.50 m length As = 1.128·106/391. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1.128·106/391.) T2 = T3. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0.) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil. and not less than 150 mm2/m.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil.

6.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers.76° + 150 cos 46.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14.76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1.96 a 300 x 300 mm plate (A = 90000 mm2) is used the reinforcement for the tension rod T3 is loaded on two layers (Fig.2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17.EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd.05 N / mm 2 > 14.max = 1.max = 17.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd.76° + 150 cos 46.128 ⋅106 = = 7. or an increase of the plate length).28 Node B. this last choice is adopted.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13. a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1.65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1. 6.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content .65 N/mm2 Fig.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.

EC2 – worked examples 6-37 The compressive range for each strut (only exception. 391.25·C2 = 0.3 then the minimum reinforcement (1 φ 12 / 20” on both sides and in both directions. and then. for the reinforcement required to carry this stress: As = 412000 = 1053 mm 2 . Table of Content . in this way the maximal stresses are in the nodes. the strut C1. which stress has been verified before in the forces evaluation for the region B) can spread between the two ends. that is as = 1130 mm2/m) is enough to carry the transversal stresses. The transversal stress for the split of the most stressed strut (C2) is: Ts ≤ 0.25 1647 = 412 kN.

5)EC2] to analyse this topic. just as in this example.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content .3 N / mm 2 . 1.14.0 f cd A c0 = 3.825 ⋅106 N It is worth to observe that the FRdu upper limit corresponds to the the maximal value Ac1 = 3 Ac0 for the load distribution area.0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu .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 ≤ ≤ 3.7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6. 1. 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.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .15 = 450 = 391. Reinforcement design Point [6.5 1.85f ck 0. because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm).5 f yk 1. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0. In this case there is a partial discontinuity.

5 kN 4 b 4 500 T 437500 = = 1118 mm 2 f yd 391.3 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-39 b = 500 mm F b − a 3500 500 − 250 = = 437. Table of Content .5 = 1178 mm2.

6. December 1999). 2 Table of Content . two ballast retaining walls and.0 m.2 – 7.15 Slabs1. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13. two track spacing of 5. FIB Bullettin n°3. Part 2. 6.Maintenance.2 – 7. whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0. The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2. Fig.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).Member Design .6 m. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2.10 – 6.40 m width.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6. 3: Durability . bridge design.textbook (292 pages.0 m width.60 m with two side-walks of 1. Design and Performance Vol.2 “slabs” by prof.2 [EC2 clause 5. table 4.118) for fatigue reasons.4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point.s 6.1 – 6.29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7.3 – 7.29 and 6. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour.Design for Fire Resistance . Assessment and Repair .50 m for a central zone 7.Practical aspects” Manual .15.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme. in the middle. Fig. The slab presents a constant thickness of 1. ISBN 9782-88394-043-7. Mancini.

7·103 MPa. (strands φ 0. fyk = 500. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm.3 MPa.1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel.8 MPa. 6.1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195. Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35. G = 12. fcd = 23.4·103 MPa ν = 0. As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost).0·103 MPa. Ec = 29.1 MPa. fyd = 434.0 MPa.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.23 MPa. fctm = 3.0 MPa.6”): 0. Table of Content .0 MPa. Es = 200. fcd1 = 17.0·103 MPa.2 fptk = 1800 MPa. fcd2 = 12.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations. fp0.

33: Table of Content . 6. − local axis 1 is oriented as global axis Z of the deck.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.31 and 6. 6. The thickness of shell elements has been assumed constant for the inner zone of the slab and stepped to fashion the tapered extremity.31 Transverse view of FEM model Fig. Positive forces for FEM program output are reported in Fig.32 the FEM model is sketched and the different thick of the element is reported too. − local axis 3 is oriented in the opposite direction of global axis X of the deck.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.EC2 – worked examples 6-42 6.15. Fig. this kind of element takes account of all the slab and plate components as well as the out-of-plane shear forces. 6. In Fig 6.

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

6 .tot 10 kN/m 9.61 11.02 11. 6.max = 0. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo. For the vertical direction.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck. Prestressing forces Two orders of prestressing tendons are arranged (in longitudinal and transverse directions) in order to avoid any tensile stress in concrete at service (required by railway code).02 6 Table 6.39 cm2.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports.tot 10 kN/m 10. thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa.1k = 0.78 6 Kz.tot 10 kN/m 178.74 2. considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.80 4.55 6 Ky. Table of Content .66 2. being symmetrically disposed. Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx. The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one. 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 6.61 10. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus. Fig. I the inertia and H the height of the column.EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top.85 fp 0.6” having an area of 1.

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.35 Plan and principal section of tendon layout Immediate losses of prestressing due to friction have been evaluated by means of the following expression: σpo (x) = σpo.max ⋅ e-μ(α + k x) with: μ = 0. 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. 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.EC2 – worked examples 6-45 Fig. unintentional angular deviation.19 k = 0. 6. Table of Content . should be applied consistently at the nodes of FEM model.01 rad/m coefficient of friction between the tendons and their sheathing.

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

βs (t∞ .8 φ ( t ∞ .t0) = 0. 6.000395 fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa. t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ . t∞ = 25550 ds.035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content .t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0. ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1. ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere. age of concrete at prestressing time. εcs (t∞.: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years.t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements.37 Transverse distribution of prestressing Time-dependent prestressing losses Time-dependent losses of prestress may be evaluated by means of the following equation: Δσ p .c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel.55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1.t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ . t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0.018.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. fcmo = 10 MPa. between time t0 and time t∞.574 0.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 fcm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0. c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ . t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp.

φ (t∞ . t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ . t0) = 182.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .556. ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig. the following values for εcs (t∞ .598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1.t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1.t0) = 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member. Table of Content .2 0.488 0.c+s+r (where σpgo is the effective initial stress in tendons due to dead load and prestressing) and evaluated as percentage by the following formula: ρt = ρ1000h ⎛ t ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 1000 ⎠ 0 .5 1 + (0.19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours.1 3 h 5.3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ . 0.43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam.281.62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one. φ (t∞.5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1.5754 If the improved prediction model of chapter 3 is used. u = 28640 mm perimeter of the member in contact with the atmosphere.38.3 = 2. t0) and for 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. t0) = 1. = ρ1000h × 3. 6. Ac = 17.1 + t 0 0.012 RH) = 0.3 Δσp.t0) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞.983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 . fcm fcmo 1 = 0. for t > 50 years ρt.

75 kN/m Table of Content . area of prestressing steel at the considered level.1×250×φdin = 319.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1.6 = 199.EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig.6 kN → qvk. stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load. 6. as percentage of initial steel tension.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc. 6. the maximum value of prestressing losses. 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.1. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan. turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis. For the LM71. 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. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing.1 = 319.1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. As a reference. modulus of elasticity ratio.15. area of concrete gross section. As vertical train load the load model LM71 plus the load models SW (SW/0 and SW/2 respectively) have been adopted with an α coefficient of 1. inertia of concrete gross section. but as actions of opposite sign.6/1.

6.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1.0 kN/m Fig. 6. Fig.3 kN/m Fig. is evaluated below. Fig. therefore subjected to variable load. Table of Content .2 = 102. being the dynamic factor equal to 1.40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. Fig.41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71.3 is: qvk = 1. 6.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations. 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.1 × 150 × φdin = 174. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin . 6.6. while right truck the other one.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig.1 × 133 × φdin = 170. 6.1 × 80 × φdin → qvk.3 kN/m without any limitation in length.162.42 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. In the following as left track is denoted the track which has a positive value for the y co-ordinate.

Table of Content .75 + 17. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0. has been considered. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion. should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking.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. transverse gradient for drain water.3 as: Lφ = 1.8 kN/m. in these calculations only the following actions have been considered (introduced in the mathematical model in different steps): − STEP 1: Self-weight of the structure: adopting a unit weight value of − STEP 2: Prestressing forces at time of tensioning.8×1.5 m.8×9. − STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations. 6.5 = 136.73 = 1. arising from variable loads.3 = 27.) but.2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of. differential temperature variation etc. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by. wind pressure. sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0. rails.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞). assumed as a load of 1.16 + 0. centrifugal forces.8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3).EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig.04 m 3 3 Several other actions. derailment.33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1.33 + 27.3 17. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0. for the sake of simplicity.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3. so that for a width of 9.162 L φ − 0.

43 m). 6.25 = 6.00 kN/m for each. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content . Fig.18 m).25×9. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0.25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1. 6. ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0. for each.25 = 6.875 kN/m.5 = 11.25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0. − STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6.43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each.

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.EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig. 6.305 m).48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content . 6.46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32. 6.47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. 6.

0 for favourable effect.EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6. Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1. equal to 1. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads.5 for unfavourable effect and 0.9 for favourable effect. = combination factor of variable loads for quasi-permanent combination at service. = partial factor of prestress load equal to 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. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1. equal to 0.6.8.2 for unfavourable effect and 0.8 for unfavourable effect and 1. ballast excluded.15.0 for favourable effect.0 for favourable effect.4 for unfavourable effect and 1. Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress. Table of Content . G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight. ballast excluded.

From FEM analysis.5 0. − deformation. t = σ 33. σ y. the value of n22 . t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33. θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1.EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6. t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2. n23 . t / b = σ 22. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23. one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii. m22 .8 Table of Content . b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre. n33 . t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. as subjected to the higher stress level. b = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy. − crack widths. For the sake of simplicity.6 × fck = 21 MPa. b = σ 33. 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] 1.7 Elem. t = σ x. b = σ 22.15. − stress limitation at service. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ .4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning. 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. . b = σ 23. t / b = σ 22.6. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig. b = σ x.963 1.32 one obtains: Table 6. t = σ 22.5 1. t = σ 23.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6. t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23. m33 . t = σ xy. m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y. .

6.83 -9.b -2.89 -10.b [°] θ1.86 σ23.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0.09 -2.b [°] 6-56 θ2.46 -12.75 -0.17 89. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig.10 1.78 -11.57 -7.78 -11.71 -0.46 -1.59 σ33. ensuring that.5 1.48 95.21 -5.29 88.66 -3.t -2.59 σ2.46 -13.36 σ2.t θ1.31 -2.99 0.25 0.963 1.58 -8.11 σ33.27 -2.32.00 -0.86 -4.80 -4. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit.86 -4.58 -5.98 -10.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6.02 89.00 0.14 -2. 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 σ1.89 σ1.40 -2.22 -4.48 σ1.05 -2.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.11 σ2. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.b -14.42 σ2.97 -12. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6.b -8.90 -9.99 90.62 -6.02 -1.98 0. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations.32 σ1.58 -5.01 89.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.72 -4.00 0. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.58 -1.97 -11. under service load conditions.00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions.77 89.51 -8.48 σ23.17 0.24 -2.77 which not exceed the limit one.37 -5. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.963 1.t [°] σ1.t -5.10 Elem.t -2.EC2 – worked examples σ22.49 -7.15 -4.01 σ22.b -2.t -1.4 × fck = 14.22 -4.t -1.29 -1.5 0.t [°] θ2. 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.b 0.11 -1.41 -5.5 0.76 -1.46 -1.01 -0.t -0.30 -2.65 -2.5 1.23 σ2.48 -18.15 0.00 0.t -0.9 Elem.b -2.b -2.5 -2238 -6284 -2604 -3791 -10270 -6033 -7479 -8243 Verification of Serviceability Limit State of Cracking The characteristic crack width should be calculated according to the provisions of Model Table of Content .t -2.b -10.11 -1.69 σ2.91 -2.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.b -14.66 -3.6 × fck = 21.85 108.97 -5.

the structure remains entirely compressed. the check shall be performed loading only one track. In addition to the analysis of ULS of several shell element under the relevant combination of internal actions. reading the maximum deflection in correspondence of the track axis. however.5 Verification of Ultimate Limit State Verification at ULS should regard the structure as a whole and its component parts.3 as a function of the span length and the train speed. has to be considered. that from stress calculation neither for the quasipermanent combination nor in the rare one.e. 6. Deformation Deformation limitation is carried out to control the maximum vertical deflection for passengers comfort. is relative to the only live load. analysing the resistance of the critical regions. the obtained δ/L value is: δ effective 0. The limit value for maximum vertical deflection is calculated considering a span length of 27. according to the provisions of the Code. Therefore. calculated by the FEM model. − spalling force at anchorage of prestressing tendon. in this example some case of detailing are investigated. Table of Content . − punching under support plate. so that the elastic value. calculated by the FEM analysis. i.75 5045 and it results lower than the corresponding limit. 1 = = L 1600 1455 As a consequence of the transient nature of this event. able to ensure a ductile behaviour in case of corrosion of prestressing steel. the maximum stress results tensile. The limit values δ/L (deflection/span Length) are given by the Eurocode 1. the elastic deflection. no specific reinforcement is required and it is sufficient to arrange the minimum amount of reinforcing steel.EC2 – worked examples 6-57 Code 90. finally. Having loaded the right track with a LM71 load model plus dynamic allowance. It can be notice that no further calculation is requested because. due to prestressing effect. It has be notice. the following limit may be achieved: δ lim 11 . placed in the middle of the of the central span.15. it results: δ 1 = L 1600 that should be multiplied by a factor 1.75 m (central span) and a train speed over 280 km/h.0055 1 = = L 27.1 for continuous structures.: − bursting force at anchorage of prestressing tendon.

6 cm2/m placed at 0.32).x = As. According to CEB Bulletin 223. 6.2. If the is not satisfied.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd.07 m from the external face. In fact. and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As. 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. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ).y ( m 22 ) -239 499 38 -1950 m Sd.EC2 – worked examples 6-58 Slab ultimate limit state Verification at ULS has been performed adopting the sandwich model for shell elements. h [m] n Sd.4.5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step. Fig. For the investigated elements.3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o .963 1. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 ξ (100 ρ fck ) .xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd.49): Table 6.x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered.x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd. it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 . The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig.12 Table of Content .y = 22. one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not.5 0. 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6.49. Table 6. specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked. turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig.6.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd. 6.11 Elem.5 1.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd.y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd.

00253 174 45. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig.0 0.0 0.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .e.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.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .893 -30.0 0.14 m so that. In the design Table of Content .14 0.0 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1. nxc .56 3509 13860 763.5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i.56 14.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig.0 n xyc 0.9 805.43 1.0 0.43 51. 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. 6. 648 93 320 589 d [m] 6-59 ρo [-] ϕo [°] vo 7 51 v Rd1 417 327 417 417 θ [°] F Scw - F Rcw - As/s2 2 2 n xc 0.6 784. i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.00158 26.EC2 – worked examples Elem.18 0.77 0.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx .43 1.56 26.0 n yc 0. The outer layers should be designed supposing an initial thickness for both layers not lesser than twice the concrete cover evaluated at the centroid of reinforcement.07 = 0.0 0.0 0. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0.s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.76 0. 6.56 26.0 0.00158 1569 26.00158 23.

680 0.5 1.i vSd.140 0. in this case the verification is performed along the principal compression direction in the concrete subjected to biaxial compression and the checking equation is: σc t = n Sdx + n Sdy 2 + (n Sdx − n Sdy 4 ) 2 + v 2 ≤ f cd1 t Sd For the considered elements.3 -2266.5 -122. the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .13 Elem.6 -1489.2 0.220 0.140 1. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.9 0.680 1.140 1.140 0. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value.1 -5344.140 0.8 -2560.1 -4202.412 0.680 0. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met.3 13.220 0. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.0 -1065.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement.7 -6252.6 726.823 -3479.2 14.412 0. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6.14 Table of Content .963 0.360 -713.s vSd.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.0 32.7 -3120.3 787.360 -1093.3 -577.5 -4893. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy. one obtains: Table 6.i n Sdx.4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.i -7.5 1.s n Sdy. if result satisfied.7 0.140 1.s [kN/m] n Sdx.220 0.680 1.680 0. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.360 307.5 0.683 0.8 -1037.8 59.7 -4.140 0.680 1.140 0.

5 -1465.0 0.5 -7090.7 870.0 -22.0 Asy 2 σc -30.930 0.1 -17.i -8.7 -2962.0 0.8 -16. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer.1 Asy 2 Asx 0. whereas they are arranged at 0.6 -6.372 0.1 -17.553 0.600 0. Thus.960 0.1 -17.5 1.5 0.1 -950.0 18.0 0.0 0. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.0 0.8 -16.300 0.0 0.8 -5768.0 0.1 -17.i n Sdx.0 38.s n Sdy.9 0.5 1.6 -5040.16 Top Layer Design Elem.9 -38.0 0.2 -11.0 25.0 0.8 -3144.7 0.580 0.230 -716.1 -17.0 0.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16.0 0.1 Asy 2 Asx 0. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6.0 0.758 -3588. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig.5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.1 -1062.963 0.5 66.6 -153. 6.s [kN/m] n Sdx.0 Of course.8 f cd1/2 -17. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.3 -17.8 -129.190 0.430 0.9 -16.4 -45.1 -17.4 -7.630 1.140 1.3 0.8 14.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6. so.0 0.1 -17. For element 589.340 0.020 0.0 -24.3 16.0 0.0 0.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer.0 It can be notice that verification for concrete in compression is not satisfied for any layers except for element 589 top layer and element 320 bottom layer.8 0.240 0.0 0.i vSd.1 -17.0 0.3 0. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required.140 0.0 0.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.0 0.0 34.0 0.0 720.15 Elem.680 0.6 f cd1/2 -17.s vSd. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.0 -11.1 -17.1 -12.387 0. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions.535 1.215 708.220 0.5 -2157.51: Table of Content .680 1.4 794.1 -12.1 -17.0 Asy 2 σc -16.260 -1179.2 0.0 -4054.0 0.6 0.8 -5.4 0.

y [kN/m] n s.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i.0 0.0 0.8 -2287.8 -4063.EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig.5 -3522. Table of Content .17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem. Table 6.6 0.0 38.3 -159.0 0. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd .0 The previous procedure should be repeated for all the elements of the structural model finding the amount of reinforcement to provide in the slab.0 -1163.3 0.0 34. it is useful.3 1664.0 -5752.0 0. 648 93 320 589 n s.s + nSd. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd.8 1503.3 -6370.i ns For the investigated elements.1 -2242.x [kN/m] n i.0 0. to summarise the results in a visual map. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702.0 0. the following areas have been detected. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons.2 -956. 6. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane. For the sake of simplicity. to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.0 0.0 0. Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used.5 -1070.0 0.0 0.51 Shell element equilibrium in one direction with two reinforcement layers only The new forces acting on the reinforcements become: t ⎞ ⎞ ⎛t ⎛ nSd .0 0.6 -1399.0 0.5 -5026.6 -3274.

300 m distance between the centroid of tendons above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852.2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0.6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0.52 Geometric dimension for bursting calculation Checking situation is represented in Fig. The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0.2 m and his length. 6.52.43 m. is: lbs = hbs = 1. considering the lower level of tendon (first tensioned) the height of the prism results: hbs = 2×0.075 m t2 = 0. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig.6 = 1. distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism. for end anchored tendon. and the most unfavourable situation occurs when a single tendon is tensioned. 6. 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 . 115 . corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons.

82 cm2/m2 . spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).43 m and a height of 1. n2 γ1 =1.20 m) from the anchor plate. for a prestressing force FSd = 4134. As. respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0. in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60. As for bursting verification. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory. is placed at 0. Fig.0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0.e.20 − 0. supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping.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. Thus. only the longitudinal direction is considered.50 m.0 cm2/m2 2 0.50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning.43 (1. lsl = 1.1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A.(i.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧−15.50 ⎠ ⎪ +2.38 MPa ⎪ ⎪ ∓ =⎨ = FSd ⎜ − ⎬ 2 ⎟ ⎝ 0.e. i.56 MPa σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ The section along which no shear force results. is equal to the overall height of the section. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon. a section with a breadth of 0.bs = Nbs / fyd = 19.43 × 1.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content . may be found by the following: A s.61 = = = 57.35 m. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0.43 × 1. from 0.40 m to 1. furthermore.50 0. 53).5 may be assumed. Thus the effective area on a meter length. 53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy. bs 19.61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs . bs A s.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 .

43 × 10 3 = 33.5× lsl and bsl = 0. 54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance.61 kNm 3 Fig. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44.031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity.43 m. Table of Content .214 2 × 0.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

can be written as N( −600) = −0. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2. evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN. or M. N. calculate the couples M. assuming k2 = 0.5m. Finally. keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load.1.EC2 – worked examples 7-1 SECTION 7. M0 = 400 kNm. S* = −88. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f .1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7. β = 1 The boundary conditions from the first exercise set the neutral axis on the border of the bottom section. f) M = M0 = 400 kNm.45 ⋅ 30 −88. that is yn = h. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending. that.2] Evaluate the normal compressive force and of the associated bending moment in the section of Figure 7. we have d = 550 mm. d’ = 50 mm.96 ⋅ 106 Table of content . linearly changing M N.45. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then. 7. calculation of service stresses. Rectangular section.1. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0. 7.65 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. αe = 15. Considering Fig. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. fyk = 450 MPa. Fig. yn The second condition in the first exercise.1.96 ⋅ 106 mm 3 .

80 kN.59) ⋅10-3 = -570.16kN.49 kNm.3 16. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete.7/2⋅(235.07MPa 272.6⋅30⋅400⋅235. M = 1.59σs d − yn 550 − 235. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.7 = σs = −0.59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457.42MPa −13.7/2+0. If we consider to change M.48·103 = .801.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.5·106/570.457. Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001.18MPa 272.5 kNm e = . 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 = 235.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16.7 N = -0.65) ⋅10-3 = 241.096 . N keeping constant the eccentricity.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.096 M0 =438.3) ⋅ 15 = 251.95 mm Considering the third exercise 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 400 −3 3 + y n = −200 e=− ⋅ 10 = −500 mm and 400 2 800 − y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 this equation is iteratively solved: yn = 272.4 kNm.16⋅(-120. N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached.3 mm.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.3 Because the condition e = -500 mm implies that the neutral axis position is lower than the one previously evaluated assuming the maximal stresses for both materials.6fck = = = 1.7/3-300)+0.3) ⋅ 15 = −201.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0. the stress is N= 1.096N0 = -876.3) = −16.42 ⋅ (550 − 272. S* = −13263 ⋅ 10 3 mm 3 yn and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.48 kN M = (-0.6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.71mm 0. M=N⋅e=-2001.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0.

51mm (50 − 262.EC2 – worked examples 7-3 Working with constant normal force (N = N0) the ultimate limit state for the concrete tension leads to N0 ( − y n ) = −0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 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 = −30.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.25 + 30.57MPa 262.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.51 ⎛ 262.252 + 84795 = 262.6 ⋅ fck 0. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.22 ⋅ 106 ⋅ y n ⎣ ⎦ 3 + y n = 300 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] − 2 and iteratively solving Table of Content .57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.69MPa 262.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.51 ' σs = 0.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −y n = 0.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442.69 + 218.51) ⋅ 15 = −218.51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.51 (550 − 262.6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.51) σs = 0.22 ⋅ 106 mm 3 0.

67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0. Fig. just in the case c) the concrete tension limit state under load is not reached while in the case a)(k1=0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105.2.82)⎥ = −1666. 7.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105. 2B Table of Content .82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105. the tension ultimate state under load for tied steel is got just in the case b). Results for different limit distributions of stresses.95 + 235.34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7.95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0. As a remark. On the other hand.95 + 235.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0.EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235.82) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 400.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations.2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses.

01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG.section.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7. I = 71. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.eff = 3.4494 .65 ⋅ 3.8/ 200 = 0.4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content .35·104 mm2 Fig.8 MPa. Box .2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7. 7. yG =809 mm.6945 − 2(1 − 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.3 with the following geometry: A = 1.1 3 8 8 α f = 3 0 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 . Evaluate the minimum reinforcement into the bottom slab in the following cases: •Application of the first cracking moment Mcr •Application of an axial compressive force N = -6000 kN.min = 0. design of minimum reinforcement. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0.6945 0 ρs.00208 1 − 0. σs = 200 MPa. r2 = I/A =39. k =0.925·106 mm2 .2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7. fct.01235 ⋅ 0. applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment. Wi = 7.1667 − 0.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 .1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.82·1010 mm4.4494 ) = 0. Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.min = 0.1667 − 0.25·108 mm3.4494 ) ⎤ ρs.3.3.

825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.00943 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 4243mm 2 We use (14+14)φ14 mm equivalent to 4312 mm2. Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0.01235 ⋅ 0. 7.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1.25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7. Minimum reinforcement.min = 0. Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN.min = 0.8 ⎥ 7.25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1.4 Fig.4. 45 2(1 − 0.min = 0. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct .4494) − 0. case (a).EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2.00208 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 1123 mm 2 this reinforcement has to be put in the web tied area with height over the bottom slab a = 1800 – 809 – 300 = 691 mm.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 .4494 A s.812 > ξ and it follows: ρs. The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7.00943 1 − 0.1667 = 0.

7050) ⎤ ρs.705 A s. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7.min = 0.min = 0. 45 2(1 − 0.00797 1 − 0. with h = 1.7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0. Minimum reinforcement.812 > ξ and it results ρs.5 Fig.705) − 0.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2. ξ = 0.7050 e 856 Considering the web.min = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.8(1 − 0.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0.1667 − 0.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .1667 = 0.1667 − 0.5.7050 ) = 0. The bars have to be located in the tied part of the web for an extension a = 1800-1269-300 = 231 mm over the bottom slab In the bottom slab we have: 1 − 9 8 αf = 0. case (b).6945 − 2(1 − 0. 3B Table of Content .min = 0.01235 ⋅ 0.01235 ⋅ 0.00046 3 ⋅ 1. 7.00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2.

0767.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 and then Table of Content .4.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3. .8).6).eff=fctm=2.6 Fig.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0.4) The (7. cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15. 7. δ’=460/600=0. h=600mm.eff (7. the (7. It results then β=452/2712=0.0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡548 − y n + 0.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3. ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0. M=300kNm. d’=46. fct.2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs. c=40mm. As’=452mm2 (4φ12).4 ⋅ c + 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.4) can be immediately used as verification formula. b=400mm. δ=548/600=0.2a) (7.6.1) σs.3. d=548mm.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7.3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7. fck=30MPa. As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7.913. Reinforced concrete section. As=2712mm2 (6φ24). k4=0.167.9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0.5 (1 − δ ) .cr = k t ⋅ fct .3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2.0mm.

8mm .4 ⋅ 40 + 0.8 ) ⎤ = 5.2012 ⎛ 0.5(1-0.72 + 113026 = 237.17 0.2012.6 ⋅ 2.96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.2012 ⎥ = 0. Then λ=0.0113 ⎝ 0.3963)/3=0. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237.2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡( 548 − 237.08MPa 0. (1-0.913)=0.cr = 0.9 0.08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 5 ⎢ ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.8 ) + 0.3963 h 600 I*n = y 400 2 2 237.8 ) / 5.5.2175. The adopted statements lead to σs.8 = = 0. 0.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2.2012.EC2 – worked examples 2 y n + 237.184mm 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4B Table of Content .0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.0113 0.167 ( 46 − 237.7 + 118.

the (7.4).5) and with its substitution in the (7. d’.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0. h.11). and fixed M. after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3.17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7.12) Combining (7.8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7.6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7. where w = w k .4] 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7.4. stated b.4.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7.7) Deducing ρs from (7.4) to use it as a design formula. 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 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (7.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7. b.9) (7. d.9) is ⎡ ⎤ 2α ⋅λ w0 ⋅ξ2 k =⎢ + e2 ⎣δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎦ +αe ⎥ × ⎡ ⎤ ξ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎢ 3. we want to deduce the metal reinforcement amount As and its design tension σs in order to have a crack amplitude wk lower than the fixed value w k .4 ⋅ c + 0.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (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 .8) and (7. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7. In particular.5) (7.

9).18) the (11.9.8).9d=M and then ρs=0. In this case too.5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ. λ = 0. An alternative procedure.20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ ν ⎥ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ⎦ (7. numerically solved.14) 7.185ν/(pδ) the (7. the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount.13).11) (7.4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7. and together with the (7.243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1.2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7. In this case. for example coincident with the permissible one.18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content .13) the (7. as the parameter p is defined. In this way.7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then. using the (7. if we set the value of σs. .11). the neutral axis is obtained from (7.11) solved with respect to φ. The procedure. .5 practically impossible for bending problems.88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7.9d. being the value λ =0. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ.67) is easy to solve. it is possible to set the tensional level σs. it is necessary to set in the (7. If it is not the case. the solution for (7. Alternatively.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7.17) the (7. we have σsAs0.13) λ = 2.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3. leads to the desred values ρs e σs. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter. aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level.13).16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3. ρs from (7.4c + 0.4u1 ν ν * − 0.4. let’s state δ=0.185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7. consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0. easier to be applied.15) and (7.18 1− 1− 0. which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5.

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

30mm. p (2/3) = 119.77 = 0.77)=9. 156. together with the (7.874 (see ex.086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7. in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1.965 + 18400.75 As (1) = 0. c=50mm. h=500mm.15=7.5002/6).6 ⋅ 3.10).01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0. 1/3.15kNm ν*=7.185 ⋅ 7.(1000.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7.01375 .6 · 3. Fig.3.16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1.3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0.185 ⋅ 7. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state.10-6=77.77 0. Assuming b=1000mm.62 As (2/3) = 0. fck=33MPa.20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation. 7. M=600kNm.4 ⋅ 1.10mm .18/7.75 ⋅ 0.77 = 0.874 w k = 0.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0. w k = 0.16 7.92 M0cr=0.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.3.086 · 156.92 ⋅ p − 9.086.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3.01049 . σs (1) = 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.62 ⋅ 0. Reinforced concrete Section.77/(1-1.332/3=3. w k = 0.6.7. w k = 0.874 Table of Content .16 ⋅ ⎢ 3.2 mm .7. φ=26mm. design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0. 119.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9. 7.15) and (7.4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235.20mm.1) u1=50/26=1.16 max Defined w k = 0.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0.30mm the maximal amplitude. in the three cases here considered kw = 1. It results fctm=0. p(1) = 156.086MPa ν=600/77. 2/3. Then in a general form w 0k = 0.3 mm .

77 = 0. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0.874 σs (1/3) = 0.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 159.9 = 304 MPa 7.48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7.086 · 75.3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79.8. p (1/3) = 75.93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195. Designed sections.65 + 79. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig. the metal areas are overestimated.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0.6 · 3.48 ⋅ 0. 7.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0.185 ⋅ 7. and 26 mm diameter bars are used.48 As (1/3) = 0. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision. ξ = 0. Table of Content .6·3.9 mm .1 mm .02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0. w k = 0.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0.7. 75.652 + 69614 = 195.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195.3918 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 195.086·119.02179 .62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0.9 ) = 7.

6 ⋅ 3.52 + 90498 = 214.1 mm .2 2 + 143704 = 247.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103. Then σs.06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0. ρs = 111.01062 ⎟ = 0.4292) / 3 = 0.41 ⋅ 109 0.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247.1903 ⎛ 0.2 + 167.1) = 1.cr = 0.5 + 103.2027 ⎛ 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ 0.0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53.3918) / 3 = 0.315.874) = 0. ξ = 0.0138 ⎝ 0.0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.6 ⋅ 3.6 ) = 8.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.01062 ⎝ 0.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.494) / 3 = 0.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.6 mm .13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.1 = 160 MPa 1.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.5 (1 – 0.494 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 247. ξ = 0.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.11⎞ ⎛ 0.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 y n + 334.1687 Table of Content .11 MPa 0.31 MPa 0.4292 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 214.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 207.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.cr = 0.306 mm 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 .41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.2027 0. ρs = 69.4 ⋅50 + 0.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0.03 / (50 · 100) = 0.6 = 238 MPa 8.1903 σs.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.

2.1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41.1.70 – 21.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure. The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design.9.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0.120 0.3 and Figure 7.1 and 7. Table of Content .836 0.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0.71] / 43.8 Let’s remark that the presence of a compressed reinforcement is highly recommended to make ductile the section in the ultimate limit state.9 0.10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs.99) + + 2/3·24. In fact. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state.2 and they are shown in Figure 7. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.0223 ⎝ 0.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0.9. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method. Approximated method. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43.70 ≅ 0.1 11151 140 0.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13.59/3) / 43.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.70 – 19. wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0.85 Fig.16) (7. those values are evaluated using the (7. Table 7.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0.086 ⋅ wk = 0. Table 7.85 h0/d = (43.79/18.99 + 3·160·13. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.46/3) / 43.6 ⋅ 3.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.213 0. 7.2 6903 221 0.14). Table 7.cr = 0.0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41.70 = 0.1687 ⎛ 0. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.9 0. Exact method.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.836 h0/d = [(18·160·18.792/18.70 = 0.811 0.4 ⋅ 50 + 0. The values from the verification are slightly larger because of the fact that in the considered section the internal drive lever arm is lower than the approximated value 0.78 MPa 0.

1 mm (A) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 137 30 11111 140 26 11151 145 20 10486 149 16 10205 156 10 9750 wk = 0. Table of Content .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. wk = 0.3. 7. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs). Approximated method – Determination of maximum diameter.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 = 0.10.EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7.

g+q=40kN/m.6 In the stage II.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. as reported in Figure 7. deformation limit state. Transversal section.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166. stating αe = Es/Ec=15.13.12 Fig.8 ) = 18. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385. 7. Section at stage I. as indicated in Figure 7. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig.9 ⋅ 5.11.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5.9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way. l=10m.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0. deflected beam.12. Referring to the stage I. 7.8 From Table [3. fck=30MPa.6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2.13. 7. Table of Content .8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35.745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385.13. g=2q. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) .11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7. Fig.

the equation (7.EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 y n + 189. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7.13=1. 7.92 + 94. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2).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. 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 ⎥ .24) Table of Content .92 2 + 123396 = 269mm I * = 500 ⋅ 269 3 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1. Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2.01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 II 2 3 then c=18.1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.84y n − 123396 = 0 2 y n = −94.23) The abscissa ξ1.78 Fig.14. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7. . Section at stage II.21) is written as 2 ⎡ 1 M β ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 4 ( ξ2 − ξ3 ) dξ − 2 Ec I I ⎣ ξ1 4λ ⎝2⎠ ∫ 1 2 ξ1 dξ ⎤ ⎥ 1− ξ ⎦ (7.21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe.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. where the cracked part of the beam start.05/10. is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 ) = M cr 1 = M max λ (7.

varying z . we obtain the curves reported in Figure 7. .28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ).29) (7.15. considering that v I = The (7.51). it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam.λ. Diagrams for v/v1 . 12Ec I ∗ I (7. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0. the displacement in case of concentrated load results to be lower because the linear trend of the relative bending moment is associated to a smaller region of the cracking beam with respect to the case of distributed load.15. In the same way. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section.15.27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (7. Furthermore.93 and 0.25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7.20) is expressed as 2 ⎡ 48 ⎛ 4 4 3 ⎞ 12 β ⎤⎫ ⎛ ⎞ 5 M max ⎧ v⎜ ⎟ = 1 + ( c − 1) ⎢1 + ⎜ ξ1 − ξ1 ⎟ − ln ⎡ 2 (1 − ξ1 ) ⎤ ⎥ ⎬ ⎣ ⎦ ∗ ⎨ 2 5 ⎝ 3 ⎠ 5 λ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 Ec I I ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (7. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig. 7. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11. 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.EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. ξ1 . The result. that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments.26) Finally. a concentrated load Q=200kN. 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.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7.27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞. for the same Mmax. In this way.

where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.56 ⋅ 17. 7.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1. displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c).6.29) and using the results in Figure 11.26) (7. Deformation in the stage I (a). we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21.16.71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17. In particular. as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7.16.25.31 = 27. introducing the numerical values in the (7. Table of Content .31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.15 and Figure 7.64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3. is reported in Figure 7. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig. is about 4%.64 = 35.65 ⋅ 21.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

3.1 [EC2 Clause 11.95 = 1.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk. which can be used as an indicative value for design of the deformability of structural members.2 of Eurocode 2. flcm = value of the average cylindric compressive strength in MPa.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ .0.05 e 0.0.1 and 11.2] 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. corresponding to fractiles 0. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2. for corresponding density class in kg/m3. can be taken equal to: . can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk.40+0.3.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 11.1 – 11. in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11. in lack of direct experimentation. 2 Table of Content .95.3. for two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. 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. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength.3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa.3. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3. flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa.for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 .12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0. The characteristic values of simple tensile strength.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation.05 = 0.

9 3.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.563 -2.05 [MPa] fctk.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.2 3.850 -0.2 4.7 3.9 2.95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .868 -4.1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.1 5.959 -0.2 1.0.4 5.0.4 2.5 4.

75‰. The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm.1 Deformation and tension diagram of r.3. section. build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa.8 MPa.3. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3.4 – 11.98‰. In case one chooses. 11. for fyk= 450 MPa. 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.5 cm = 36.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions.1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled.2 [EC2 Clause 11. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T.c. ρ = 1650 kg/m3). h=50cm and d=47cm. described in the previous example. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28.85 flck/γc = 19.5η1 = 2.3 cm.5 kNm. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10.6 – 11. like in the previous example. Table of Content .365 = 432. made of type 1 lightweight concrete.1 – 11.96‰.5 cm. to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2. Fig. from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0. The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0.5 – 11.3.15 x Es) = 450/(1. 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.15 x 200000) = 1.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10. The section in question is shown in Fig. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete.11. is εyd = fyd /(1.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

Point Load Table

Birthday Card

Birthday Card

1. Cover

guidance

Spec Section 6

Example Individual Objectives

Design Examples

FDHguide

FC ICE Approved Training Scheme 2010

- Read and print without ads
- Download to keep your version
- Edit, email or read offline

ARAHAN TEKNIK (JALAN) 12/87

Guide at-Grade Intersections(1)

REAM Guidelines for Road Drainage Design - Volume 2

REAM Guidelines for Road Drainage Design - Volume 1

JKR-Arahan Teknik Road Design

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 4-85 (Pind. 1997) - Application for the Installation of Public Utilitiy Services Within Road Reserve

REAM Guidelines for Road Drainage Design - Volume 4

REAM Guidelines On Geometric Design of Roads

JKR Arahan Teknik Jalan 8-86 Geometric Design

Arahan Teknik Jalan 2D-85-RoadMarkingDileanation

Guidelines for the Environmental Impact Assessment of Highway or Road Projects

Arahan Teknik Jalan 2B 85 Traffic Signs Application

How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2

Guide a Grade Intersections

2D-85-RoadMarkingDileanation

JKR Road Marking & Delineation

Standard Specification JKR Road

JKR Manual on Pavement Design

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 14-87 - Model Terms of Reference for Detailed Ground Survey and Engineering Design Road

Jkr Standard Road Work

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 5-85 - Manual on Pavement Design

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 8-86 - A Guide on Geometric Design of Roads

Environmental Impact Assessment for Highway Projects

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 11-87 - A Guide to the Design of at Grade Intersections

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 12-87 - A Guide to the Design of Interchanges

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 2E-87 - Guide Signs Design and Application

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 2C-85 - Temporary Signs and Zones Control

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 2B-85 - Traffic Signs Application

REAM Guidelines for Road Drainage Design - Volume 3

Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 13-87 - A Guide to the Design of Traffic Signal

Are you sure?

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

CANCEL

OK

You've been reading!

NO, THANKS

OK

scribd

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