## Are you sure?

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

EUROCODE 2 WORKED EXAMPLES

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

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

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

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

....................... WITH STEEL S500C fyd = 435 MPA........................... WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY ............................................1 [EC2 CLAUSE 4............................................................................................... 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.............................................. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN ...............4...................EC2 – worked examples summary EUROCODE 2 ................2...2] ........................................ 4-1 EXAMPLE 4.....4B – THE SAME ABOVE........................................................................................................................5.3].....................................................................................1 (CONCRETE C30/37) [EC2 CLAUSE 6................... 6-4 EXAMPLE 6..................................................................... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CANOPY [EC2 – CLAUSE 2............SUMMARY SECTION 2................................................................... 6-15 Table of Content .................. 6-3 EXAMPLE 6......................8......................... CONCRETE RETAINING WALL: GLOBAL STABILITY AND GROUND RESISTANCE VERIFICATIONS [EC2 – CLAUSE 2..............................2 [EC2 CLAUSE 4............................................ 2-4 EXAMPLE 2........... 6-12 EXAMPLE 6.................................................................... WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES .........................................................................4] .. 4-4 SECTION 6...........................................................3 [EC2 CLAUSE 4.......................... 4-1 EXAMPLE 4............................ 6-10 EXAMPLE 6............3 CALCULATION OF VRD.........................................6 [EC2 CLAUSE 6......2 (CONCRETE C90/105) [EC2 CLAUSE 6.5]............ 6-1 EXAMPLE 6......4] ..3.......... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2...........4 DETERMINATION OF SHEAR RESISTANCE GIVEN THE SECTION GEOMETRY AND MECHANICS [EC2 CLAUSE 6................................4] . [EC2 CLAUSE 6... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS ON A REINFORCED CONCRETE RETAINING WALL [EC2 – CLAUSE 2......................................................................1............2] .......... 6-5 EXAMPLE 6............2] ...........4] ................ 6-7 EXAMPLE 6................................3] ....................................... 2-1 EXAMPLE 2............................................ 2-9 SECTION 4...... 2-6 EXAMPLE 2............... ULS COMBINATIONS OF ACTIONS FOR A CONTINUOUS BEAM [EC2 – CLAUSE 2.1] ..................................................4]...........................................1] .................. ULS COMBINATION OF ACTION OF A RESIDENTIAL CONCRETE FRAMED BUILDING [EC2 – CLAUSE 2............................... WALL BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6. 4-3 EXAMPLE 4.......... 2-2 EXAMPLE 2...................4] ..............................................................................4] ...........7 SHEAR – TORSION INTERACTION DIAGRAMS [EC2 CLAUSE 6...................................5 [EC2 CLAUSE 6............2] ................C FOR A PRESTRESSED BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6....................................................................................... 6-1 EXAMPLE 6.....4] .........WORKED EXAMPLES ........................................................

.......................2 – 7....................... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7................. 6-40 SECTION 7..........3..5 APPLICATION OF THE APPROXIMATED METHOD [EC2 CLAUSE 7................15 SLABS..................................... 3500 KN CONCENTRATED LOAD [EC2 CLAUSE 6............. a<Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6..................................10 – 6.......................................................2] ....... 6-24 EXAMPLE 6...............10 THICK CANTILEVER BEAM.............. 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.............2] ...... THICK SHORT CORBEL.................. 6-32 EXAMPLE 6........... LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES....................3.........................14.................................1 – 11.............3 – 7............................................ 6-18 EXAMPLE 6...................................... SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES .......6 – 11........12 PILE CAP [EC2 CLAUSE 6.......................................................EC2 – worked examples summary EXAMPLE 6.................5] ..................3...5] .................6 VERIFICATION OF LIMIT STATE OF DEFORMATION ....... 7-8 EXAMPLE 7...... 6-38 EXAMPLE 6.1 – 11.....................2 APPROXIMATED METHOD .........4...............5] .......5] ...... DESIGN FORMULAS DERIVATION FOR THE CRACKING LIMIT STATE [EC2 CLAUSE 7...................................................4] .2 DESIGN OF MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT [EC2 CLAUSE 7. 11-1 EXAMPLE 11....5]........... A>Z/2 [EC2 CLAUSE 6................................................................................2 [EC2 CLAUSE 11....................... 7-1 EXAMPLE 7............................ 6-21 EXAMPLE 6.......9........................................................................................................... 7-11 EXAMPLE 7.........4.......4] ................3....1 EVALUATION OF SERVICE STRESSES [EC2 CLAUSE 7........3........ 11-1 EXAMPLE 11........................1 [EC2 CLAUSE 11....................................4 – 11...2] ...... [EC2 CLAUSE 5..................................13 VARIABLE HEIGHT BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6.. 6-28 EXAMPLE 6............... 11-3 Table of Content ............................4] .................11 GERBER BEAM [EC2 CLAUSE 6........1 – 6..................3......................5 – 11........... 7-5 EXAMPLE 7........2 – 7......................................3.......4] ...............5] ................................. 7-10 5B7...........................................6] ....................3 EVALUATION OF CRACK AMPLITUDE [EC2 CLAUSE 7....................... 7-18 SECTION 11..........................................

Fig. STR – Bending moment verification at mid span (Set B) Unlike in the verification of static equilibrium.2. Table of Content .1. as indicated in Fig. a single characteristic value is taken for self-weight and permanent imposed load.EC2 – worked examples 2-1 SECTION 2.4] A continuous beam on four bearings is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Service imposed load Qk1 Note. EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors of Set A should be used in the verification of holding down devices for the uplift of bearings at end span.35 (Fig. 2. is the same for all spans: γG = 1. Load combination for verification of holding down devices at the end bearings. In this example and in the following ones. 2. because of their small variability.2). 2. 2. WORKED EXAMPLES – BASIS OF DESIGN EXAMPLE 2. Fig. respectively Gk1 and Gk2. ULS combinations of actions for a continuous beam [EC2 – clause 2. Load combination for verification of bending moment in the BC span. the partial safety factor for permanent loads in the verification of bending moment in the middle of the central span.1.1.

as in Fig. and only on half of it for the verification of bending with axial force.EC2 – worked examples 2-2 EXAMPLE 2.2.3. ULS combinations of actions for a canopy [EC2 – clause 2.35) for all spans.3. Load combination for verification of static equilibrium.4] The canopy is subjected to the following loads: Self-weight Gk1 Permanent imposed load Gk2 Snow imposed load Qk1 EQU – Static equilibrium (Set A) Factors to be taken for the verification of overturning are those of Set A. Table of Content . 2. The variable imposed load is distributed over the full length of the canopy in the first case. Fig. 2. STR – Verification of resistance of a column(Set B) The partial factor to be taken for permanent loads in the verification of maximum compression stresses and of bending with axial force in the column is the same (γG = 1.

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

n + 0.35·Gk + 1.6·Fk.7·Qk.1.w) = 1.n + 0.n 0.5 Qk.35·Gk + 1.es + 0.5·Qk.10-EN1990) Predominant action: wind favourable vertical loads (fig.7·Qk. 2.9·Fk.es + 0.6·Fk.w Fig.5·(Qk.9·Fk. ULS combination of action .1.5·Fk.6.6.5·( Qk.35·Gk + 1.35·Gk + 1.n + 0.w + 0. 2. 2.5·( Fk.) wind Fk. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure . Variable actions on a residential concrete building.es) = 1.residential concrete framed building [EC2 – clause 2.6 Fk.05·Qk.EC2 – worked examples 2-4 EXAMPLE 2.l.es Variable actions snow on roofing Qk.3.5·Qk. c) Snow load predominant.n (for sites under 1000 m a. Characteristic value Qk Combination value ψ0 Qk serviceability imposed load Qk.n + 0.es 0.es + 0.n + 1.w) = 1.n + 1.es + 0.w N.75· Qk.7 Qk. favourable vertical loads. but they may be defined in the National Annex. a) 1.B. d) 1. The values of partial factors are those recommended by EN1990.35·Gk + 1.Variable actions are listed in table 2. Table of Content .5·Qk. 2.6.w Predominant action: service load (fig.STR (Set B) (eq.6.w + 0.0·Gk + 1.w 0.5· Fk. 2. c) 1.35·Gk + 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the superstructure (Set B): a) Wind predominant. b) 1.w unfavourable vertical loads (fig.4] The permanent imposed load is indicated as Gk. unfavourable vertical loads.es Predominant action: snow (fig.5·Qk. b) Wind predominant.6.s.05·Qk. 6. Table 2.75·Qk. d) service load predominant.

3·Qk.3· Fk.0·Gk + 1.w Predominant action: service load (fig.3· Fk.91·Qk.5·Qk.n + 1.3·0. Table of Content . b) Wind predominant.es + 0. Heavier values are usually given by Set C for the geotechnical verifications (ground resistance verification). favourable vertical loads. 2.3·0.3·Qk.3·0.0·Gk + 1.n + 1.6·Fk.es + 1.es Predominant action: snow (fig.5·Qk.w = 1.10-EN1990] EN1990 allows for three different approaches. 2.3·Qk. are applied in separate calculations.es = 1.0·Gk + 1. 2. or on the structure. a) 1.0·Gk + 1.7. b) 1.3·0.3·0. c) Snow load predominant.7·Qk.7.7.15 and 2.w Predominant action: wind (unfavourable vertical loads) (fig.65· Qk. 2.0·Gk + 1. 2. the approach to be used is chosen in the National Annex.78·Fk.3·0. 6. unfavourable vertical loads.es + 1. Basic combinations for the verification of the foundations (Set C): a) Wind predominant.6·Fk. d) 1. c) 1.3· Fk.7·Qk.w Fig.0·Gk + 1.n + 0.w = 1.78·Fk.3·Qk. Approach 1 The design values of Set C and Set B of geotechnical actions and of all other actions from the structure. and by Set B for the verification of the concrete structural elements of the foundation. the basic combinations of actions for all the three approaches provided by EN1990 are given below.w + 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-5 Basic combinations for the verification of foundations and ground resistance – STR/GEO [eq. For completeness and in order to clarify what is indicated in Tables 2. Set C (geotechnical verifications) Predominant action: wind (favourable vertical loads) (fig.n + 0.7.es + 0. d) service load predominant.7.w + 0.0·Gk + 1.n + 0.16.65·Qk.n + 1.91·Qk.

2. 2.35·Gk + 1.5·Qk. 2. as geotechnical actions are not present.e.n + 1.75·Qk. Actions for EQU ULS verification of a retaining wall in reinforced concrete Table of Content .terr) + 1. This case.0·Gk + 1.sovr Fig.1·Sk. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.9·Fk.es 1.4] Fig.w + 0. to approach 2.05·Qk.4.5·Qk.9.e.terr + 0.35·Gk + 1.35·Gk + 1.5·Qk.es + 0.5·Sk. can be referred to Set B. Set B) are used.w 1. i. EXAMPLE 2.(static equilibrium of rigid body: verification of global stability to heave and sliding) (Set A) Only that part of the embankment beyond the foundation footing is considered for the verification of global stability to heave and sliding (Fig.n + 0.EC2 – worked examples 2-6 Set B (verification of concrete structural elements of foundations) 1.n + 1.es + 0.9). Actions on a retaining wall in reinforced concrete EQU .wall + Gk.8.9·(Gk.5· Fk.w 1.75·Qk.w Approach 2 The same combinations used for the superstructure (i. ULS combinations of actions on a reinforced concrete retaining wall [EC2 – clause 2.9·Fk. 1.05·Qk.

0·Gk.10b).terr + 1. Table of Content . Set C 1. only cases in relation with case b).wall + 1.terr + 1. or that it acts on the whole surface of the embankment (Fig.terr + 1.wall + 1.sovr 1.35·Gk.0·Gk.35·Sk.sovr + 1.5·Qk.wall + 1.5·Sk.5·Sk. 2.sovr 1.terr + 1. For brevity.sovr Note: For all the above-listed combinations. Possible load cases of surcharge on the embankment.0·Gk.35·Gk. two possibilities must be considered: either that the surcharge concerns only the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing (Fig. with surcharge acting on the whole surface of embankment. are given below.35·Sk.terr + 1.35·Gk.0·Gk.5·Qk.5·Sk.terr + 1.terr + 1. The following figures show loads in relation to the combinations obtained with Set B partial safety factors. Fig.5·Sk. i.wall + 1.10.e.sovr 1. 2.3·Sk.35·Sk.sovr + 1.sovr Set B 1.0·Gk.EC2 – worked examples 2-7 STR/GEO .0·Sk.35·Sk. 2.sovr + 1.sovr + 1.terr + 1.35·Gk.10a).5·Qk.5·Qk.(ground pressure and verification of resistance of wall and footing) Approach 1 Design values from Set C and from Set B are applied in separate calculations to the geotechnical actions and to all other actions from the structure or on the structure.terr + 1.terr + 1.wall + 1.0·Gk.

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

weight density: angle of shearing resistance: factor of horiz.sovr + 1. 2.sovr 1.75 kN/m Pk.3·Qk.5 kN/m surcharge on embankment: Qk.terr + 1.50 ⋅ 25 = 18.surch = 9.50 ⋅ 2.terr + 1.0·Gk. active earth pressure: wall-ground interface friction angle: self-weight of wall: self-weight of footing: γ=18 kN/m3 φ=30° Ka = 0.sovr + 1.wall + 1.ground = 18 ⋅ 2.35·Gk.5.wall + 1.50 ⋅ 25 = 31.sovr 1.3·Qk.33 δ=0° Pk.0·Gk.9 kN/m Table of Content .3·Sk.4] The assumption is initially made that the surcharge acts only on the part of embankment beyond the foundation footing.Wall dimensions and actions on the wall (surcharge outside the foundation footing).0·Sk. Concrete retaining wall: global stability and ground resistance verifications [EC2 – clause 2.ground = 26.sovr 1. Fig.terr + 1.foot = 0.terr + 1. Approach 3 Factors from Set C for geotechnical actions and from Set B for other actions are used in one calculation.sovr + 1.0·Sk. 1.25 = 50 kN/m self weight of ground above footing: Gk. EXAMPLE 2.sovr + 1.3·Sk.wall + Pk.surch =10 kN/m2 ground horizontal force: Sk.50 ⋅ 1.25 kN/m Gk.terr + 1.0·Gk.12.73 kN/m surcharge horizontal force: Sk.30 ⋅ 2.75 + 31.0·Sk.wall + 1.0·Gk.terr + 1.wall = Pk.3·Qk.foot = 18.wall + 1.35·Gk.terr + 1.wall = 0.3·Qk.3·Sk.35·Gk.35·Gk.0·Sk.sovr A numeric example is given below.3·Sk.EC2 – worked examples 2-9 Approach 2 Set B is used.70 = 76.terr + 1.

9): Fstab.16 + 113. is used.ground = 0.sovr + 1.25⋅1. we obtain four different combinations as seen above: first combination 1.73/51.terr + 1.57⋅76.57⋅31.0·Gk.35 as the partial factors for the self-weight of the wall and of the ground above the foundation footing respectively.85 = 44.e.97 kNm/m moment wall self-weight (γG=0.9): resistant force: Fstab = 9.73= 29.terr + 1.40 + 14.89 kN/m The safety factor for sliding is: FS = Fstab / Frib = 64.terr + 1.1): MS.sovr second combination 1.0·Gk.sovr + 1.9⋅(0.5·Sk.5·Qk.35·Sk.5 ⋅ (9.9): stabilizing moment: Mstab = 10.35·Sk.50) = 22.68 = 3.9⋅(31.03 kNm/m Fstab.90 = 14. i.1 ⋅ 26.ground = 1.terr + 1.wall + 1.85 kN/m Sliding force: Fslide = 29.24 kN/m ground self-weight (γG=0.foot = 0.foot = 0.9⋅(0.5·Sk.9): Fstab.25) = 35.35·Sk. By taking 1.wall = 0.1⋅(26.EC2 – worked examples 2-10 Verification to failure by sliding Slide force Ground horizontal force (γG=1.1): Sground = 1.9): moment footing self-weight (γG=0.wall + 1.75) = 9.0·Gk.9⋅(18.40 kNm/m moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.03 + 39.65) = 113.60 kNm/m moment ground self-weight (γG=0.5·Sk.62 + 16.sovr Table of Content .40 + 22.57⋅18.97 + 35.sovr third combination 1.5⋅1.09 Contact pressure on ground Approach 2.28 kNm/m overturning moment: Mrib = 29.9): Mstab.wall + 1.terr + 1.0 and 1.28 = 51.9⋅(76.ground = 0.5·Qk.60 = 159.16 kNm/m Mstab.25) = 16.5·Qk.73 kNm/m safety factor to global stability FS = Mstab/Mrib = 159.35·Gk.5) = 39.466 Verification to Overturning overturning moment moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.25 kN/m Resistant force (in the assumption of ground-flooring friction factor = 0.9⋅(0.surch = 1.40 kN/m Surcharge horizontal (γQ=1.sovr + 1.90 ⋅ 1. Set B if partial factors.57) wall self-weight (γG=0.35·Gk.89 / 44.00/3) = 29.35·Gk.24 = 64.terr + 1.wall = 0.68 kNm/m stabilizing moment Mstab.75⋅0.5 ⋅ 9.62 kN/m footing self-weight (γG=0.5): Ssur = 1.25 = 1.73⋅3.65) = 10.5): MS.

0): moment from footing self-weight (γG=1.75 ⋅ 0.28 kNm/m Mwall = 1.75 + 31.wall + 1.e.3 are obtained by repeating the calculation for this situation.25 – 30.50/6 = 41. 2.5⋅0. centre of mass of the footing moment from ground lateral force (γG=1.0·Gk. for the one in which the wall self-weight and the self-weight of the ground above the footing are both multiplied by 1.0): Ground self-weight (γG=1.05 kN/m2 = 0. the values given at Table 2.sovr + 1.35⋅(26.90⋅1.5): moment from wall self-weight (γG=1. The maximal pressure on ground is achieved with the second combination.0 ⋅ (76.0): Pground = 1.EC2 – worked examples 2-11 fourth combination 1.13.25 kNm/m Mfoot = 0 kNm/m Mground = .terr + 1. Fig.2 are obtained by repeating the calculation for the three remaining combinations of partial factors. as follows: moment vs.terr = 1. (Fig.08 kNm/m MS.35·Sk.5⋅(9.35·Gk.08 + 22.25 + 76.502 = 88.5 kN/m Eccentricity e = Mtot / Ptot = 39.01 / 126.1.5 = 0.0⋅(18.0⋅(76.28 + 11.01 kNm/m Vertical load Wall self-weight (γG=1.35): moment from surcharge lateral force (γQ=1.75 kNm/m Pfoot = 1.5 = 126.75) = 18.25) =31.0): for the first of the fourth above-mentioned MS.25 kNm/m Footing self-weight (γG=1.0): moment from ground self-weight (γG=1.50) = 22.35. Table of Content .6 kNm/m Total moment Mtot = 36. the possibility that the surcharge acts on the whole embankment surface must be also considered.0 ⋅ (31.30.00/3)=36. Dimensions of the retaining wall of the numeric example with surcharge on the whole embankment.5) = 76.40) = .50 + Mtot ⋅ 6 / 2.088 MPa The results given at Table 2.terr + 1.13). 2. combinations.31 m ≤ B/6 = 2.sovr = 1.0 ⋅ (18.5 kNm/m Total load Ptot = 18.5·Sk.0): Pwall = 1.73⋅3.sovr the contact pressure on ground is calculated.60) = 11.6 = 39.67 cm Max pressure on ground σ = Ptot / 2. For the verification of the contact pressure.5·Qk. i.

50 0.60 (γG=1.2.surch (kNm/m) Mwall (kNm/m) Mground (kNm/m) (surcharge on the whole foundation footing).0) 31.25 (γG=1.5) 11.50 (γG=1.50 (γG=1.50 0.0) (γG=1.0) 42.25 15.25 (γG=1.30 18.35) 76.35) 103.28 0.08 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.26 third 36.35) 28.31 (γG=1.28 0.08 36.35) 42.5) (γQ=1.19 99.75 25.25 (γG=1.20 (γQ=1.35) 22. 5) 28.20 -10.19 11. first second 36.31 (γG=1. correspond to the moment and to the vertical load resulting from the surcharge above the footing.04 25.95 25.0) (γG=1.35) 153.50 (γQ=1.31 88.35) -30.35) 76.28 (γG=1.35) (γG=1.5) 11.EC2 – worked examples 2-12 Table 2.18 and here highlighted in bold.31 (γG=1. Max pressure on ground for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.11 99.5) 15.28 (γQ=1.08 (γQ=1.67 18.35) 22.5) (γQ=1.20 -10.28 (γG=1.25 (γG=1.19 (γG=1.19 (γG=1. The max pressure on ground is achieved once again for the second combination and its value is here higher than the one calculated in the previous scheme. Table of Content .5) 15.50 (γG=1.81 18.50 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.75 (γG=1.0) -41.28 (γQ=1.46 22. first second third 36.08 (γQ=1.35) 22.24 25.50 (γQ=1.5) 11.0) -30. 5) (γQ=1.0) (γG=1.0) (γG=1.25 (γG=1.78 0.5) 196.24 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.25 (γG=1.35) 42.28 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.83 Table 2. 5) 178.ground (kNm/m) MS.35) -10.08 36.19 88.75 (γG=1.28 22.0) 31.50 (γG=1.10 88.0) 76.0) 103.0) 144 0.35) 25.35) 103.50 (γQ=1.19 (γG=1.3.5) 152.0) 126.0) 31.31 -41.48 fourth 36.19 99.35) (γQ=1.10 18.31 (γG=1.60 -41.75 (γG=1.28 22.35) -30.5) 169.5) (γQ=1.18 88.05 32.5) (γQ=1.75 (γG=1.78 0.31 (γG=1.0 0.0) 25.20 (γQ=1.35) 39.60 -41.5) 32.0) 25.28 (γQ=1.35) (γQ=1.31 (γG=1.08 (γQ=1.35) 170.31 (γG=1.35) -30.ground (kNm/m) MS.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). Max pressure for four different combinations of partial factors of permanent loads Combination MS.89 fourth 36.28 (γG=1.35) 25.08 (γQ=1.28 22.0) 31.0) 76.30 98.28 (γQ=1.0) -10.01 18.35) 42.0) 103. not present in Table 1.28 (γG=1.35) 22.35) (γG=1.60 (γG=1.19 (γG=1.35) (γQ=1.35) 42.08 36.35) 22.25 15.

Refer to figure 4.add.b.) concrete strength class for exposure class XC1 is C20/25. The max aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).1N . the concrete cover for the stirrups is calculated. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 mm. WORKED EXAMPLES – DURABILITY EXAMPLE 4.Δcdur. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. the resistance class adopted (C25/30) is suitable as it is higher than the reference strength class. The structural class is S4. Δcdur.Δcdur.add = 0 . 15 + 0 – 0 – 0. From relation (3.2): cmin = max (cmin. cmin.dur = 15 mm Moreover: Δcdur.1 [EC2 clause 4.dur + Δcdur.1 From table E. First. Δcdur.γ = 0 .b = 8 mm We obtain from table 4.4N .EC2 – worked examples 4-1 SECTION 4. 10 mm) = 15 mm Table of Content . in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. 10 mm) = max (8. Bottom longitudinal bars are 5 φ 20.st . Normal quality control is put in place.1.st = 0 .γ . 4.EC2: cmin. Fig.4] Design the concrete cover of a reinforced concrete beam with exposure class XC1. The concrete in use has resistance class C25/30. the reference (min. With: cmin.EC2 we see that.

γ = 0 . We obtain from relation (3. From relation (3.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 15 + 10 = 25 mm .add = 0 . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 25 + 8 = 33 mm .dur = 15 mm . Table of Content . In this case.b = 20 mm. 15 + 0 – 0 – 0.1): c nom = 20 + 10 = 30 mm .4N . If we now calculate now the concrete cover for longitudinal reinforcement bars.2): c min = max (20. 10 mm) = 20 mm . Δcdur. Δcdur. We obtain from relation (3.st = 0 . The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. we have: c min. We obtain from table 4. Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm. Moreover: Δc dur.EC2: c min.EC2 – Worked examples 4-2 Moreover: Δcdev = 10 mm.

Table of Content . From table E. the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 45 + 8 = 53 mm .1N .2. The longitudinal reinforcement bars are 5 φ 20.EC2 – worked examples 4-3 EXAMPLE 4. even if the actions on concrete were compatible with strength class C25/30. The concrete cover for the stirrups is “dominant”. In this case.EC2 we find that. the reference (min. the stirrups are φ 8 at 100 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.dur = 35 mm .) concrete strength class for exposure class XS1 is C30/37.4] Design the concrete cover for a reinforced concrete beam placed outside a residential building situated close to the coast. in order to obtain an adequate concrete durability. 4. for the longitudinal bars: c nom = 45 mm .2 In accordance with what has been stated in example 3.2 [EC2 clause 4. The design working life of the structure is 50 years. Fig. Refer to figure 3. the concrete strength class must therefore be increased from the originally assumed C25/30 to C30/37. The exposure class is XS1. We originally assume concrete with strength class C25/30. The structural class is S4 We obtain ( c min.1. Δcdev = 10 mm): for the stirrups: c nom = 45 mm . The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 20 mm (< 32 mm).

γ = 0 . − the structural class is reduced by 1 as special quality control of the concrete production is ensured We then refer to structural class S2. An accurate quality control of concrete production is put in place.dur + Δc dur. We obtain from table 4. We use concrete with strength class C45/55.EC2 – Worked examples 4-4 EXAMPLE 4.3 [EC2 clause 4. 10 mm ) = = max (8. Refer to figure 3.b = 8 mm .3.4N . The maximal aggregate size is: dg = 16 mm. From relation (3. Calculating first the concrete cover for stirrups. strength class C45/55 is therefore adequate. The exposure class is XS1.EC2: c min.add . 10 mm) = 25 mm . At the lower side of the two ribbings of the TT element we have: − longitudinal φ 12 reinforcement bars.st = 0 .EC2 that for exposure class XS1.dur = 25 mm .add = 0 . the minimum concrete strength class is C30/37. Moreover: Δc dur. In accordance with table 4. placed outside an industrial building situated close to the coast.5” .3N: − the structural class is reduced by 1 as the concrete used (C45/55) is of strength class higher than C40/50. We have: c min.b .2): c min = max (c min. c min. made of prestressed reinforced concrete.st − Δc dur.1N . Δcdur. γ − Δc dur. − strands φ 0. Δcdur.4] Calculate the concrete cover of a TT precast element. We find out from table E. Table of Content . The original structural class is S4. − φ 8 stirrups at 100 mm . The design working life of the structure is 50 years. 25 + 0 – 0 – 0.

We obtain from relation (3.EC2: c min. 10 mm ) = = max (12.st = 0 . We have: c min.st − Δc dur. in which the concrete cover length is also assessed. 4.add . Δcdur. Calculating now the concrete cover for longitudinal bars.dur + Δc dur. the value of Δcdev can be taken as 5 mm. the concrete cover for stirrups is “dominant”. 10 mm) = 25 mm . In this case. Moreover: Δc dur. We obtain from relation (3. γ − Δc dur.3 Calculating now the concrete cover for strands. Note that for the ordinary reinforcement bars. Fig. We obtain from table 4.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm .EC2 – worked examples 4-5 Considering that the TT element is cast under procedures subjected to a highly efficient quality control.add = 0 . Δcdur.dur = 25 mm . From relation (3.4N .b . 25 + 0 – 0 – 0. Table of Content . c min. γ = 0 .b = 12 mm . the concrete cover for longitudinal bars is increased to: 30 + 8 = 38 mm .2): c min = max (c min.1): c nom = c min + Δcdev = 25 + 5 = 30 mm .

5 = 18.st = 0 .b = 1.5N . Moreover: Δcdev = 5 mm . Moreover: Δc dur.add = 0 .1): c nom = 35 + 5 = 40 mm .5 · 12. The concrete cover for the lower strands of the TT element (one for each ribbing) is therefore equal to 43mm. Table of Content . We obtain from table 4. Δcdur. From relation (3. 35 + 0 – 0 – 0. The first strand’s axis is placed at 50mm from the lower end of the ribbing of the TT element.8 mm . γ = 0 .8. 10 mm) = 35 mm . From relation (3.dur = 35 mm . Δcdur.EC2 – Worked examples 4-6 We have: c min.2): c min = max (18.EC2: c min.

Example 6. Steel and concrete resistance.max = 2821.8·500·1000·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 8500 + 3910 = 12410 kN 6-1 .1 (Concrete C30/37) [EC2 clause 6.56 β2 0.5 First the NRd values corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section are calculated. Fig. WORKED EXAMPLES – ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES GENERAL NOTE: Eurocode 2 permits to use a various steel yielding grades ranging from 400 MPa to 600 MPa.80 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-1 SECTION 6. EXAMPLE 6.5 203. d' = 50 mm.0 541. In particular the examples are developed using S450 steel with ductility grade C. 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.1 6. the ratio between the distance of the resultant of parabola – rectangle diagram at certain deformation εc from εc and the deformation εc itself.5·17·10-3 = 772 kN NRd2 = 0. 6.0·17·10-3 = 4134 kN.1 Geometrical data and Possible strain distributions at the ultimate limit states Table 6.40 0. β2 is the “position factor”. h = 1000 mm.2 kNm goes alongside it. The maximum moment resistance MRd.8·500·608. which is used in southern Europe and generally in seismic areas.35 x1 (mm) 113. d = 950 mm.1.1 Material data. β1 and β2 factors and neutral axis depth. β1 and β2 factors and x1.8·500·113.1] Geometrical data: b= 500 mm.8·500·950·17·10-3 + 5000·391·10-3 = 6460 + 1955 = 8415 kN NRd4 = 0.2 fyk (MPa) 450 450 fyd (MPa) 391 391 fck (MPa) 30 90 fcd (MPa) 17 51 β1 0. NRd3 = 0.0 x2 (mm) 608. x2 values are shown in table 6. NRd1 = 0. Some example is developed using S500 too.

52m 5000 Table of Content .52 0.40 666) = 2606·106 Nmm = 2606 kNm and the eccentricity e = 2606 = 0. Ed Table 6. the neutral axis x. and the eccentricity M Rd e = N are calculated.666 virtual neutral axis 2031 2524 2606 1000 3.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⎞ ⎛ 0. depth of neutral axis. This results: MRd3 = 6460·(500 – 0. eccentricity. MRd.2. Their values are shown in Table 6.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ Developing.105 0. it results: x2 + 66.38 1.294 0. NEd (kN) X (m) MRd (kNm) e (m) 600 2000 5000 10000 0.10 As an example the calculation related to NEd = 5000 kN is shown.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ ⎜ − 1 ⎟ = 297N / mm 2 666 ⎠ ⎝ The moment resistance is: MRd = 5000·391·(500-50) + 5000·297·(500-50) + 0.2.26 0.0035 ⋅ 200000 ⋅ 5000 ⋅ 950 ⎞ x2 − ⎜ ⎟x −⎜ ⎟=0 0. moment resistance.4·950) ·10-3 = 1655 kNm Subsequently.80 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 17 0. The equation of equilibrium to shifting for determination of x is written: ⎛ 5000000 − 5000 ⋅ 391 − 5000 ⋅ 0.91x – 488970 = 0 which is satisfied for x = 666 mm ⎛ 950 ⎞ The stress in the lower reinforcement is: σs = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-2 MRd3 must also be known.80·666·500·17·(500 – 0. for a chosen value of NEd in each interval between two following values of NRd written above and one smaller than NRd1. Example 1: values of axial force.

5 – 0.142 0.2 (Concrete C90/105) [EC2 clause 6.05) = 4031 kNm Applying the explained procedure x. NRd3 = 13566 + 3910 = 17476 kN NRd4 = 14280 + 7820 = 22100 kN MRd3 = 13566 (0.55 0. eccentricity NEd (kN) 1500 5000 10000 19000 x (m) 0. The results are shown in Table 6.7 kNm is associated to it. Values of NRd corresponding to the 4 configurations of the plane section and of MRd3: NRd1 = 2899 kN NRd2 = 7732 kN. MRd and the eccentricity e were calculated for the chosen values of NEd .EC2 – worked examples 6-3 EXAMPLE 6.1] For geometrical and mechanical data refer to example 6. depth of neutral axis. moment resistance.max = 6948.14 Table of Content .350 0.619 virtual neutral axis MRd (kNm) 4194 5403 5514 2702 e (m) 2.80 1. MRd.619) + 3910·(0.0.50.3 Values of axial load.1.3 Table 6.08 0.35·0.

626 + 0.0)⋅100⋅175 = 24.c for a prestressed beam [EC2 clause 6.3 Calculation of VRd.0 MPa.08 kN Non-cracked sections subjected to bending moment. 66 ⋅ 5.33 kN Table of Content .66 )2 + 1.5= 1.5/1. It results: VRd.05/γC = 1· 2.66 ⋅ 106 mm 4 12 S= 100 ⋅ 100 ⋅ 50 = 500 ⋅ 103 mm 3 100 ⋅ 66.c = (1.2] Rectangular section bw = 100 mm. VRd. Design tensile resistance in accordance with: fctd = αct fctk.c = (νmin + k1 σcp) bwd where νmin = 0.15.EC2 – worked examples 6-4 EXAMPLE 6.c = (0. Average prestressing σcp = 5.626 and k1 = 0.66 MPa Cracked sections subjected to bending moment.0 = 44. With αI = 1 it results 200 3 I = 100 ⋅ = 66.66 ⋅ 106 500 ⋅ 10 3 VRd. No longitudinal or transverse reinforcement bars are present. Class C40 concrete. d = 175 mm. 0. h = 200 mm.15⋅5.

90 ⋅ 10 −3 = 560 kN s 150 c) For the same section and reinforcement. ν = 0.616 A sw f ywd b w sνfcd = sin 2 θ obtained from VRd.s = VRd.EC2 – worked examples 6-5 EXAMPLE 6. with fck = 90 MPa.38 ⋅ 10−3 = 701 kN s 150 Table of Content . s = 150 mm.s = hence cotθ = 1. z = 500 mm.532. a) fck = 30 MPa .38 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. with fck = 60 MPa.2171 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0. fcd = 51 MPa.375 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.90 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.1504 hence cotθ = 2. ν = 0.532 ⋅ 34 hence cotθ = 1.2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam. with bw = 150 mm.max 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.29 ⋅ 10 −3 = 380 kN s 150 b) For the same section and reinforcement.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0. d = 550 mm. fyd = 391 MPa. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.4 Determination of shear resistance given the section geometry and mechanics [EC2 clause 6. h = 600 mm.29 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 1.616 ⋅ 17 it results: sin 2 θ = Then VRd. proceeding as above it results: sin 2 θ = VRd.s = 226 ⋅ 391 = 0.512 ⋅ 51 A sw 226 ⋅ z ⋅ f ywd ⋅ cot θ = ⋅ 500 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 2. 2 legs (Asw = 226 mm2). ν = 0. fcd = 17 MPa . vertical stirrups diameter 12 mm. fcd = 34 MPa.512. The example is developed for three classes of concrete.

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

2] Rectangular or T-shaped beam.707 and. Calculation of shear resistance •Ductility is first verified by And replacing A sw .10 157 ⋅ 391 ⋅ 0. 2 legs (Asw = 157 mm2).s (cot θ − cot α) = 0.0) = 333 kN Table of Content .5 VRd.s) ΔFtd = 0.10 -1. diameter 10 mm. ν = 0.0) ⋅ 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-9 EXAMPLE 6.707 ⋅ 10 −3 = 605. with bw = 150 mm h = 800 mm d = 750 mm z = 675 mm.10 + 1.4· (2.707 •The angle θ of simultaneous concrete – reinforcement steel collapse It results cot θ = bsνfcd −1 A sw f ywd sin α 150 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 0.5 ⋅ 150 ⋅ 150 0.max f ywd bw s ≤ 0.616 ⋅ 17 = 2.0) .5 ⋅ α cw ν1fcd sin α 157 ⋅ 391 1 ⋅ 0. fyd = 391 MPa.s = •Increase of tensile force the longitudinal bar (VEd =VRd. fck = 30 MPa .4 kN 150 It results: VRd.5 [EC2 clause 6.40 ≤ 0.616 ⋅ 17 − 1 = 2.5·605. fcd = 17 MPa .72 < 7. replacing cot θ = c) Calculation of VRd 157 ⋅ 675 ⋅ 391 ⋅ (2.616 Reinforcement: inclined stirrups 45o (cotα = 1. s = 150 mm.

707 = 1417 k N > V*Ed Table of Content . Fig.08⋅106)]⋅10-3 = 1087 kN Verification of compressed concrete with cot θ =1.max = t z ν fcd sinθ cosθ = 200⋅1350⋅10.6 [EC2 clause 6. 6. with 200 mm wide vertical members and 150 mm wide horizontal members.707⋅0.616 ν fcd = 10. width 1000 mm.2. It results: VRd. with depth 1500 mm.5) = 17.85·(30/1.2 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⋅1.3] Ring rectangular section.15 = 435 MPa Geometric elements: uk = 2(1500-150) + 2(1000-200) = 4300 mm Ak = 1350 · 800 = 1080000 mm2 Fig. d = 1450 mm.7[1-30/250] = 0.5⋅0. 6.0 MPa ν = 0.5 MPa fyd = 500/1.EC2 – worked examples 6-10 EXAMPLE 6. 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.

pitch 200 mm. pitch 200 mm.5 ⋅ 200 ⋅ 1350 hence cotθ = 2. 2 legs stirrups.08⋅106 ⋅435⋅2.2.14/(2⋅435) = 3198 mm2 To be placed at the lower end. Reinforcement of horizontal members. subjected to torsion only: (Asw /s) = TEd /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd⋅cot θ) = 700⋅106 /(2⋅1.3(3)-EC2]. with particular attention to the corner bars. Table of Content .14) = 0.14) = 0.14 Reinforcement of vertical members: (Asw /s) = V*Ed /(z fyd cot θ) = (1087⋅103 )/(1350⋅435⋅2.865 mm2 /mm which can be carried out with 2-legs 12 mm bars. Longitudinal reinforcement for shear: Asl = VEd ⋅ cot θ / (2 ⋅ fyd ) = 1300000⋅2.14/(2⋅1080000⋅435) = 6855 mm2 to be distributed on the section.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. Longitudinal reinforcement for torsion: Asl = TEd ⋅ uk ⋅ cotθ /(2⋅Ak⋅fyd) = 700⋅106⋅4300⋅2. pitch is in accordance with [9.

6.max = αcw ⋅ bw⋅z⋅ν⋅fcd/ (cot θ+ tan θ) = 10.7 Shear – Torsion interaction diagrams [EC2 clause 6.5) = 504 kN and for the taken z = 400 mm TRd.4471⋅0. ν fcd = 10. z =400 mm (Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-12 EXAMPLE 6.7 ⋅ ⎜ 1 − ⎟ = 0.0) It results: VRd.max = 2⋅10. 6.0 MPa 30 ⎞ ⎛ ν = 0. h = 500 mm.3] resistant hollow section Fig.56o (cotθ = 2.3) Materials: fck = 30 MPa fcd = 0.616 . 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 = 26.8945 = 66 kNm Table of Content .5⋅300⋅400/(2+0.85·(30/1.5⋅83636⋅94⋅0.3 Rectangular section subjected to shear and torsion Example: full rectangular section b = 300 mm .5 MPa ⎝ 250 ⎠ fyk = 450 MPa .5) = 17.

Second case: light action effects Same section and materials as in the previous case.4. Points below the straight line that connects the resistance values on the two axis represent safety situations. For instance.4.c = fctd⋅ t⋅2Ak = 1. 6. 6.12 k = 1+ 200 = 1.0/1.c = ⎡CRd. moreover. it results that the maximum compatible torsion moment is 20 kNm.c is the value of the torsion cracking moment: τ = fctd = fctk /γc = 2.3 MPa (fctk deducted from Table [3.01 ⋅ 30 ) 1/3 = ( 30 ) 1/3 Table of Content . The safety condition (absence of cracking) is expressed by: TEd /TRd.01. V-T interaction diagram for highly stressed section The diagram is shown in Fig.63 500 1/3 (100ρlfck ) = (100 ⋅ 0.1-EC2]).3⋅94⋅2⋅83636 = 20.18/1.5 = 1.c = 0. ρ = 0. On the figure other diagrams in relation with different θ values are shown as dotted lines. It results therefore: TRd.c ≤ 1 where TRd.5 = 0. if VEd = 350 kN is taken.4 kNm 1/3 VRd.EC2 – worked examples 6-13 Fig. it results: CRd.31)-EC2] In this expression.c ⋅ k ⋅ (100ρl fck ) ⎤ ⋅ b w d ⎣ ⎦ [(6.c + VEd /VRd.

. i. 6.63⋅ (30)1/3 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 450 = 82.e.2 (5)-EC2] and [9.12⋅1.010 with s not larger than 0. It results : Asw/s. stirrups of 6 mm diameter with 180 mm pitch can be placed.2.0010 Fig.bw = 2⋅28/(180⋅300) = 0.5 V-T interaction diagram for lightly stressed section Table of Content . which prescribes for shear: (Asw / s⋅bw) min = (0. stirrups must be closed and their pitch must not be larger than u/8.08 ⋅ √30)/450 = 0.2 (6)-EC2].08 ⋅ √fck)/fyk = (0.75d = 0.6. Because of the torsion. in the range of action effects defined by the interaction diagram.EC2 – worked examples 6-14 Taking d = 450 mm it results: VRd. 200 mm.c = 0.75⋅450 = 337 mm.0 kN The diagram is shown in Fig. Namely. For instance.5 The section. the minimal quantity of stirrups must be in accordance with [9.2. should have a minimal reinforcement in accordance with [9.5N-EC2].

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

5] Geometry: 250 x 400 mm cantilever (width b = 400 mm).5 1.18 ⎜1⎟ 19.9. beam b x h = 400 x 400 mm Fig. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0. ac < hc/2 [EC2 clause 6.85f ck 0.15 1. Thick short corbel.15 f cd = nodes compressive strength: compressed nodes ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 35 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1. 1.5 f 450 f yd = yk = = 391.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19. 6.9 Cantilever beam S&T model. Fig.83 = 20.8 250 x 400 mm thick cantilever beam.3 N / mm 2 1.max Table of Content .83 N / mm 2 . 6. Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa. 150 x 300 load plate.EC2 – worked examples 6-18 EXAMPLE 6.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ σ1Rd.12 N / mm 0.

8⋅360 = 288 mm): y1 = 0.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd.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. 6.2d = 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.max = 20.05 N / mm 0.8⋅d (z = 0.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.83 = 17.88 ⎛ 1.12 ⋅ 400 the node 1 is located x1/2 ≅ 44 mm from the outer column side (Fig.max nodes tensioned – compressed by anchor logs in different directions σ 3Rd.max Actions FEd = 700 kN Load eccentricity with respect to the column side: e = 125 mm (Fig. but we need to know the stiffness of the two elementary beams shown in Fig.max b = 700000 ≅ 87 mm 20.14 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd. cosθ senθ ⎠ ⎝ Table of Content .9) We state that the upper reinforcement is located 40 mm from the upper cantilever side. then it is not possible to evaluate the stresses for each single bar by equilibrium equations only.8) The beam vertical strut width is evaluated by setting the compressive stress equal to σ1Rd. 6.35 ⎞ 19.3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = Secondary upper reinforcement design: The beam proposed in EC2 is indeterminate.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 72 ) Ft 411000 = = 1050 mm 2 we use 8φ14 (As = 1232 mm2) f yd 391.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ 2Rd.83 = 15 N / mm 2 = k3 ⎜ ⎟ cd 0. 6.10 in order to make the partition of the diagonal stress F F ⎞ ⎛ ⎜ Fdiag = c = Ed ⎟ between them. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is evaluated setting the internal drive arm z equal to 0.

6.max = 17. 6. below the load plate: The node 2 is a tied-compressed node.25 ⋅1232 = 308 mm 2 f yd 391. double armed (Asw = 785 mm2) node 2 verification.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 = 0.8.2. some researcher of Stuttgart have determined the two rates in which Fdiag is divided.3 A sw = we use 5 stirrups φ 10. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 700000 = = 15. based on the trend of main compressive stresses resulting from linear elastic analysis at finite elements.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 300 45000 Table of Content . and they have provided the following expression of stress in the secondary reinforcement (MC90 par. where the main reinforcement is anchored.10 S&T model resolution in two elementary beams and partition of the diagonal stress Fdiag.EC2 – worked examples 6-20 Fig.56 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.2.

6. a) b) Fig. Elementary beams of the S&T model.11 325 x 300 mm cantilever.12) is indeterminate.5] Geometry: 325 x 300 mm cantilever beam (width b = 400 mm). 6. 6. 400 x 400 mm column Fig. 6. the resistant beam is the beam 1 only (Fig. ac > hc/2 [EC2 clause 6. This assumption corresponds to the statement that when a ≤ z/2 (a very thick cantilever). The model proposed in EC2 (Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-21 EXAMPLE 6. 6. 150 x 220 mm load plate.10 Thick cantilever beam.12 Cantilever S&T model. in the range Fwd = 0 when a = z/2 and Fwd = FEd when a = 2⋅z. 6. Table of Content .13b).13a) and when a ≥ 2⋅z the beam 2 only (Fig. The stress Fwd in the vertical tension rod is evaluated assuming a linear relation between Fwd and the a value.13. Fig. then as in the previous example one more boundary condition is needed to evaluate the stresses values in the rods.

3 in conclusion.12 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.12 ⋅ 400 node 1 is located x1/2 = 31 mm from the outer side of the column.max: x1 = FEd σ1Rd. the expression for Fwd as a function of a is the following: Fwd = F 2 FEd 2a / z − 1 .8⋅260 = 208 mm): y1 = 0.2d = 0. the expression for Fwd is: Fwd = Fw1 a + Fw2 z when the two conditions Fwd (a = ) = 0 and Fwd (a = 2z) = FEd are imposed. 1.3 N / mm 2 1.05 N / mm 2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.max = 17. the distance y1 of the node 1 from the lower border is calculated setting the internal drive arm z to be 0.8⋅d (z = 0.2·260 = 52 mm Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-22 Assumed this statement.5 1.5 f yk 1.max b = 500000 ≅ 62 mm 20.85 ⋅ 35 = = 19.max = 20.15 = 450 = 391. some trivial 2 algebra leads to: Fw1 = 2 FEd 3 z and Fw2 = − FEd .83 N / mm 2 .15 Nodes compression resistance (same values of the previous example): Compressed nodes σ1Rd. the upper reinforcement is stated to be 40 mm from the cantilever outer side.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. a − Ed = FEd 3 z 3 3 Materials: concrete C35/45 fck = 35 MPa.85f ck 0. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.

3 Main upper reinforcement design: As = we use 8φ16 (As = 1608 mm2) Secondary reinforcement design: (the expression deduced at the beginning of this example is used) a 2 −1 Fw = z FEd ≅ 204 kN 3 Aw = Fw 204000 = = 521 mm 2 f yd 391.15 N / mm 2 ≤ σ 2Rd.max = 17. the compressive stress below the load plate is: σ= FEd 500000 = = 15.5 = 639 mm 2 f yd 391. 208 Fc = Ft = 500000 ⋅ (200 + 31) = 555288 N ≅ 556 kN 208 node 1 verification σ= Fc 556000 = = 13.12 N / mm 2 b ( 2 y1 ) 400 ( 2 ⋅ 52 ) Ft 556000 = = 1421 mm 2 f yd 391.EC2 – worked examples 6-23 rotational equilibrium: x ⎞ ⎛ FEd ⎜ a c + 1 ⎟ = Fc z 2⎠ ⎝ 500000 (200+31) = Fc .3 FEd 500000 = 0. in which the main reinforcement is anchored.3 EC2 suggests a minimum secondary reinforcement of: Aw ≥ k2 we use 3 stirrups φ 12 (As = 678 mm2) node 2 verification. below the load plate: The node 2 is a compressed-stressed node.37 N / mm 2 ≤ σ1Rd.05 N / mm 2 150 ⋅ 220 33000 Table of Content .max = 20.

14).5 1. 6.5] Two different strut-tie trusses can be considered for the design of a Gerber beam.6)]. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa f cd = f yd = 0. Materials: concrete steel C25/30 B450C fck = 25 MPa. if only the scheme a) is used. it is necessary to consider a longitudinal top reinforcement to anchor both the vertical stirrups and the confining reinforcement of the tilted strut C1.3 N / mm 2 1.9. 6. On the other hand. Hereafter we report the partition of the support reaction between the two trusses.85 ⋅ 25 = = 14.4.EC2 – worked examples 6-24 EXAMPLE 6. Even if the EC2 allows the possibility to use only one strut and then only one reinforcement arrangement.2. 1.11 Gerber beam [EC2 clause 6. eventually in a combined configuration [EC2 (10.15 [(3.7 (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 . we remark as the scheme b) results to be poor under load.14 Possible strut and tie models for a Gerber beam. a) b) Fig.85f ck 0. It seems to be opportune to combine the type b) reinforcement with the type a) one.5 f yk 1. because of the complete lack of reinforcement for the bottom border of the beam. (Fig.17 N / mm 2 .15 = 450 = 391. and the latter will carry at least half of the beam reaction.

8b x f cd + E s 0.17 (applied at 0.0035 391.0035 and then: x = 99 mm ' εs = f 0.3 ⋅ ( 99 − 50 ) = 0. the depth of the neutral axis is evaluated from the section translation equilibrium: 0.4⋅x ≅ 40 mm from the upper surface) while the top reinforcement stress is: C’ = Es ε’s A’s = 200000·0.15 Truss a.8 b x fcd = 0. 6.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.00173·2513 Table of Content .8·800·99·14. as stated in the calculation.0035 ⋅ (x − d ') where d’ = 50 mm is the distance of the upper surface reinforcement x x − 50 A's = f yd A s x 0. the compressive stress in the concrete is C = 0.8 b x fcd + Es ε’s A’s = fyd As Fig. ' εs = 0.00173 ≤ yd = = 0.00196 99 E s 200000 then the compressed steel strain results lower than the strain in the elastic limit.

then the horizontal strut has the axis at 675 – 50 .77° 425 C1 = R = 620 kN sinα T2 = C1 ⋅ cosα = 366 kN Node 2 equilibrium: β = arctg C 2 cosβ + C 3 cos45° = T2 C 2sinβ = C3sin45° 580 = 38. 6. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Node 1 equilibrium: α = arctg 580 = 53.16 Calculation scheme for the truss b bars stresses.EC2 – worked examples 6-26 (applied at 50 mm from the upper surface) the compression net force (C + C’) results to be applied at 45 mm from the beam upper surface. Calculation of the truss rods stresses Table of Content . 66° 725 T2 = 260 kN sinβ + cosβ sinβ C3 = ⋅ C 2 = 230 kN sin45° C2 = ⇒ Node 3 equilibrium: T1 = C1 sin α + C2 sin β = 663 kN Tension rods design the tension rod T1 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 stirrups φ 16 double arm (Asl = 2000 mm2) the tension rod T2 needs a steel area not lower than: A s1 ≥ we use 5 φ 16 (Asl = 1000 mm2).3 Fig. Truss b) R = RSdu /2 = 500 kN 663000 = 1694 mm 2 391.45 = 580 mm from the tension rod T2.3 366000 = 935 mm 2 391.

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

85f ck 0.3 N / mm 2 1.max = 15 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ2Rd.22 N/mm2 Pedestal pile NSd = 2000 kN MSd = 4000 kNm Table of Content .EC2 – worked examples 6-28 EXAMPLE 6.5] Geometry: 4500 x 4500 mm plinth (thickness b=1500 mm).5 1.8) Compressed nodes σ1Rd.5 f yd = f yk 1. 6.17 N / mm 2 .max = 12. 2000 x 700 mm columns.12 Pile cap [EC2 clause 6. steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa 0.15 = 450 = 391.max = 11. 1.85 ⋅ 25 f cd = = = 14.17 Log plinth on pilings. Materials: concrete C25/30 fck = 25 MPa.75 N/mm2 tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ3Rd. diameter 800 mm piles Fig.15 Nodes compression resistance (same values as in the example 6.

the transfer of the forces Fc e Fs happens in the plane π1 (Fig.00 . 6. Fig. then in the second step the transfer is inside the planes π2 and π3 till to the piles.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 = 391.00 + 2000/2) = 2333 kN B’ = (MSd/3.18. the plinth own weight is considered negligible.2000/2) = 333 kN A=A’/2 = 1167 kN B=B’/2 = 167 kN for each compressed pile: In the evaluation of stresses on piles.17 − 1662242 ⇒ x = 462 mm The compressive stress in the concrete is: C = 0. Table of Content .4⋅x ≅ 185 mm from the upper surface) piles stress pile stresses are evaluated considering the column actions transfer in two steps: in the first step.00 + NSd/2) = (4000/3.3·4248 = 1662242 N = 1662 kN NSd = 0. 6.8·700·462·14. 6.8 b x fcd = 0.8·700·x·14.NSd/2) = (4000/3.17 = 3666062 N = 3666 kN (applied at 0.18 is relative to the transfer in the plane π1: compression: tension: for each tied pile: A’ = (MSd/3.00 .8 b x fcd – Fs ⇒ 2000000 = 0. S&T model in the plane π1. the truss-tie beam in Fig.17) till to the orthogonal planes π2 and π3.

5° θ12 = arctg (1300 / 600) = 65. θ13 = arctg (1300 / 1325) = 44.3 Tension rod 10 (plinth tied reinforcement) 11 12 13 14 15 16 Force (kN) 1662 1544 154 1167 1188 170 167 Required reinforcement (mm2) 4248 3946 394 2982 3036 434 427 Bars 8φ26 9φ24 1φ12/20 (6φ12) stirrups 10φ20 7φ24 1φ12/20 (5φ12) Pile reinforcement Table of Content .5° T13 = A = 1167 kN T14 = A cot θ13 = 1167 cot 44.EC2 – worked examples 6-30 θ11 = arctg (1300 / 860) = 56. 6.5° = 1188 kN T15 = B cot θ13 = 167 cot 44.19 Trusses in plan π2 and in plan π3.5° = 170 kN T16 = B = 167 kN design of tension rods Table 6.2° T10 = Fs = 1662 kN T11 = A’ cot θ11 = 2333 cot 26.2° = 154 kN Fig.5° = 1544 kN T12 = B’ cot θ12 = 333 cot 65.

the compressive stresses are very small as a consequence of the piles section large area. In these latter. 6.64 N mm 2 2 2 π⋅r π ⋅ 400 Table of Content . Nodes verification Concentrated nodes are only present at the pedestal pile and on the piles top.: σc = A 2333000 = = 4. Schematic placement of reinforcements.EC2 – worked examples 6-31 Fig.20.

steel B450C fyk = 450 MPa f cd = f yd = 0.85f ck 0.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction σ 2Rd.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ σ1Rd.15 = 450 = 391.85 250 ⎠ ⎝ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k2 ⎝ f cd = ⎜1⎟ 17 = 14.21 Variable height beam Materials: concrete C30/37 fck = 30 MPa. 6.96 N / mm 0. 6.5 1.13 Variable height beam [EC2 clause 6.16 N / mm 2 = k3 cd ⎜ ⎟ 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-32 EXAMPLE 6.30 ⎞ 17 = 13.60) ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜1⎟ 250 ⎠ ⎛ 30 ⎞ 2 = k1 ⎝ f cd = 1.15 Nodes compressive resistance: compressed nodes (EC2 eq. rectangular section 300 x 3500 mm and 300 x 2000 mm Fig.88 ⎛1. 1.5] Geometry: length 22500 mm.max tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in different directions σ 3Rd.65 N / mm 0.3 N / mm 2 1.18 ⎜ 1⎟ 17 = 17.5 f yk 1.85 ⎝ 250 ⎠ ⎛ f ck ⎞ ⎜ 1⎟ ⎝ 250 ⎠ f = 0.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .max loads F = 1200 kN (the own weight of the beam is negligible) Table of Content .

6 109 ⇒ x = 522 mm C = fcd 0. The boundary conditions for the stress in the region B. Calculation of stresses in the region B The stress-block diagram is used for the concrete compressive stresses distribution.4 x) = 3.8·x·b·(d – 0.00 = 3600 kNm = 3.6·109 7752000·x – 1632·x2 = 3. Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-33 strut&tie model identification Beam partitioning in two regions B and D The region standing on the middle section is a continuity region (B).8·x·b = 17·0.8·x·300·(1900 – 0. 6. rotational equilibrium: fcd 0.8·522·300 = 2129760 N = 2130 kN Table of Content .6·109 17·0. while the remaining part of the beam is composed of D type regions.22 Identification of B and D regions.23 Shear and bending moment diagrams. Stresses evaluation for the bars of the S&T model Tmax = 1200 kN Mmax = 1200 ⋅ 3.4 x) = 3. 6.6⋅109 Nmm Fig.

25 Load paths. strut&tie model Fig.26. Fig.24 Reactions and boundary stresses in the region D. The strut C2 tilting is 3190 θ = arctg = 46. 6. 6. 6.26.25 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.76° 3000 while the strut C4 tilting is 1690 θ1 = arctg = 48.41° . Strut and tie model. 6. 6. Fig. 1500 Table of Content . shown in Fig.

because C5 is 45° tilted (node C equil. tied-compressed nodes with tension rods in one direction [(6.3 = 5443 mm As = 1.13·10 /391. and it has to be disposed on both sides of the structural member and in both directions.50 = 3390 mm2) 10 φ 20 = 3142 mm2 Verification of nodes Node A (left support) Fig.61)-EC2] σ2Rd.3 = 2883 mm2 on two layers 6 2 18 φ 20 = 5655 mm2 stirrups φ 12 / 10” 2 legs = 2260 mm2/m (2260 ⋅ 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-35 The following table reports the value for the stresses in the different beam elements.) Floop = C1 – C3 C4 = Floop/cos θ C 5 = T2 ⋅ 2 ( Node C vertical equil. Table 6.96 N/mm2 Table of Content . T2 and T3.max = 14. Table 6.) 2130 kN 2130 kN 1647 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1128 kN 1002 kN 1509 kN 1595 kN Steel tension rods design EC2 point 9.50 m length As = 1.10 % ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1000 = 300 mm2/m e di 150 mm2/m) are used.128·106/391.3 = 2883 mm2 on 1.) C3 = C2 cos θ = T3 (Node B horizontal equil.5 T1 T2 T3 As = 2. and not less than 150 mm2/m. 6. The following table reports the evaluation for the reinforcement area required for the three tension bars T1.27 Node A.128·106/391.10 % of the concrete area.7 suggests that the minimum reinforcement for the wall beams is the 0.4 C1 T1 C2 T3 T2 C3 Floop C4 C5 See stresses evaluation in the region B T1=C1 C2 = F/sin θ (Node A vertical equilibrium) T3 = C2 cos θ (Node A horizontal equilibrium. Bars φ 12 / 20” (=565 mm2/m > 0.) T2 = T3.

28 Node B.128 ⋅106 = = 7.max = 1.27): u = 150 mm a1 = 300 mm a2 = 300 sin 46. this last choice is adopted.2 ⋅106 = 80214 mm 2 14.2 N / mm 2 ≤ 17.93 N / mm 2 ≤ 14.76° = 291 + 103 = 394 mm 1.65 N/mm2 Fig.76° + 150 cos 46.max = 17.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 394 Node B Compressed nodes σ1Rd.76° = 219 + 103 = 322 mm 1.65 a 300 x 300 mm plate is used Strut verification Table of Content .76° + 150 cos 46. and the length is increased from 300 to 400 mm: a2 = 400 sin 46.EC2 – worked examples 6-36 Loading plate area: A≥ Fc1 σ 2Rd.96 a 300 x 300 mm plate (A = 90000 mm2) is used the reinforcement for the tension rod T3 is loaded on two layers (Fig.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 17.647 ⋅106 σ c2 = = 13.05 N / mm 2 > 14. 6.96 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 322 u has to be higher (it is mandatory a reinforcement on more than two layers.65 N / mm 2 300 ⋅ 522 300 ⋅ 522 load plate dimensions: 1. a3 = 522 mm (coincident with the depth of the neutral axis in the region B) σ c3 = C3 1. 6.2 ⋅106 a* ≥ = 227 mm 300 ⋅17. or an increase of the plate length).

that is as = 1130 mm2/m) is enough to carry the transversal stresses.25·C2 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-37 The compressive range for each strut (only exception. Table of Content . and then. 391. the strut C1. which stress has been verified before in the forces evaluation for the region B) can spread between the two ends. The transversal stress for the split of the most stressed strut (C2) is: Ts ≤ 0.3 then the minimum reinforcement (1 φ 12 / 20” on both sides and in both directions. in this way the maximal stresses are in the nodes. for the reinforcement required to carry this stress: As = 412000 = 1053 mm 2 .25 1647 = 412 kN.

5 1.5] 3500 kN load on a 800x500 rectangular column by a 300x250 mm cushion Materials: concrete steel f cd = f yd = C30/37 B450C fck = 30 MPa. 1. because the strut width (500 mm) is lower than the distribution height (600 mm).0 f cd A c0 = 3. In this case there is a partial discontinuity.7(1)P-EC2] sends the reader to paragraph [(6.5)EC2] to analyse this topic.85f ck 0. 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-38 EXAMPLE 6. 3500 kN concentrated load [EC2 clause 6. fyk = 450 MPa Es = 200000 MPa 0.85 ⋅ 30 = = 17 N / mm 2 .15 = 450 = 391.7(4)-EC2] recommends the use of a suitable reinforcement capable to sustain the transversal shrinkage stresses and point [6.825 ⋅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.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. Reinforcement design Point [6.3 N / mm 2 .14.5 f yk 1. the 3500kN load results to be lower than FRdu .0 ⋅17 ⋅ 75000 = 3. just as in this example. then: a = 250 mm Table of Content .

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

4] As two dimensional member a prestressed concrete slab is analysed: the actual structure is described in the following point.s 6. 6.40 m width. 2 Table of Content .29 and 6.0 m. “Structural Concrete Textbook on Behaviour.3 – 7.2 [EC2 clause 5. table 4. Assessment and Repair .15. Mancini. The slab presents a constant thickness of 1.Maintenance.Design for Fire Resistance . two track spacing of 5. See too EN 1992-2 Eurocode 2. The deck rests on abutments and circular piers and has a overall breadth of 13. Part 2. two ballast retaining walls and.1 Description of the structure The design example proposed in this section is related to a railway bridge deck made up by a continuous slab on three spans with two orders of prestressing tendons (longitudinal and transverse prestressing).2 – 7. Fig. December 1999).50 m for a central zone 7.6 m.29 Plan view of the structure and supports’ scheme 1 Example taken from example 7.Member Design .15 Slabs1.EC2 – worked examples 6-40 EXAMPLE 6. in the middle. ISBN 9782-88394-043-7.118) for fatigue reasons.0 m width.30 represent the principal geometric dimension of the slab bridge and supports’ scheme.textbook (292 pages. 3: Durability . bridge design. whilst is tapered towards the extremity with a final height of 0.60 m with two side-walks of 1. The slab is designed in category A (see Eurocode 2.10 – 6.Practical aspects” Manual . Fig. Design and Performance Vol.2 – 7.1 – 6. 6. FIB Bullettin n°3.2 “slabs” by prof.

1k = 1600 MPa εpu > 35‰ Ep = 195. (strands φ 0.4·103 MPa ν = 0. Table of Content . fcd1 = 17. fctm = 3.7·103 MPa.23 MPa. which should be added to the tolerance value of 10mm.0 MPa.0 MPa.6”): 0. fyd = 434.2 fptk = 1800 MPa. Ec = 29. fcd2 = 12. As environmental condition an Exposure Class 2 may be considered (Humid environment with frost: exterior components exposed to frost).1% proofstress total elongation at maximum load: modulus of elasticity: − Reinforcing steel.0 MPa.3 MPa. as a consequence the nominal value for concrete cover results: cnom = cmin + 10 = 25 + 10 = 35 mm adopted in the calculations. Es = 200. Grade 500: design strength: modulus of elasticity: Concrete cover fck = 35.30 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. fcd = 23.0·103 MPa. 6. fyk = 500.8 MPa. The minimum concrete cover for Class 2 is equal to 25 mm. G = 12.0·103 MPa.EC2 – worked examples 6-41 Fig.1 MPa. fp0.

6. 6. − local axis 1 is oriented as global axis Z of the deck. 6. Fig.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.15. In Fig 6.32 the FEM model is sketched and the different thick of the element is reported too. this kind of element takes account of all the slab and plate components as well as the out-of-plane shear forces. Positive forces for FEM program output are reported in Fig.31 and 6.33: Table of Content .2 Structural model To evaluate the internal actions on the structure a linear FEM analysis has been performed adopting shell elements to represent the reinforced slab. The thickness of shell elements has been assumed constant for the inner zone of the slab and stepped to fashion the tapered extremity.31 Transverse view of FEM model Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-42 6. − local axis 3 is oriented in the opposite direction of global axis X of the deck.

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

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. Location Abutment A Pier P1 Pier P2 Abutment B Kx. being symmetrically disposed.max = 0. The number of tendons is 39 for the longitudinal direction and 64 for the transverse one. I the inertia and H the height of the column. Fig.6 Stiffness for restraining elements It can be noticed that the previous values are referred to the overall stiffness of the restraint.39 cm2.02 6 Table 6.85 fp 0.55 6 Ky. Prestressing forces Two orders of prestressing tendons are arranged (in longitudinal and transverse directions) in order to avoid any tensile stress in concrete at service (required by railway code).tot 10 kN/m 10.6” having an area of 1. The initial tensile stress of tendon is: σpo.35 reports tendon’s layout for half deck. Table of Content . considering the substructure vertical behaviour as rigid.61 10.1k = 0. the intrinsic stiffness of pot-bearing is assumed.74 2.EC2 – worked examples 6-44 single column fixed at the base and free at his top. so that the relevant Kx/y stiffness is valuable as: Kx / y = 3E I H3 where E is the Young modulus. thus the elastic constant of any individual spring element may be obtained dividing the K values of table 6.85 × 1600 = 1360 MPa.78 6 Kz.66 2.6 by the number of element representing the restraint or the supports. 6.61 11.80 4.02 11. For the vertical direction.6 .tot 10 kN/m 9.tot 10 kN/m 178. Each tendon is built up with 19 strands φ 0.

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

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

t∞ = 25550 ds. between time t0 and time t∞. βsc = 5 for rapid hardening cements. ⎡ ⎛ RH ⎞ 3 ⎤ βRH = −1. fcmo = 10 MPa. εcs (t∞.c+s+r : t0 = 28 days: loss of initial tendon stress due to creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of steel. t 0 ) Es + Δσ pr + α φ ( t ∞ .t0) = 0. c + s + r = ε cs ( t ∞ .018. t 0 ))⎥ ⎢⎜1 + A c ⎣⎝ Ic ⎠ ⎦ where: Δσp.574 0.t0) = εcs0 × βs (t∞ . ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎝ 100 ⎠ ⎦ RH = 70 % relative humidity of the ambient atmosphere.37 Transverse distribution of prestressing Time-dependent prestressing losses Time-dependent losses of prestress may be evaluated by means of the following equation: Δσ p .: corresponding to a life-time of 70 years. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-47 Fig. age of concrete at prestressing time. t 0 ) ( σ cg + σ cp 0 ) 1+ α ⎤ A p ⎡⎛ Ac 2 ⎞ zcp ⎟ (1 + 0.8 φ ( t ∞ .035 ⋅ h 2 + t ∞ − t 0 Table of Content .55 ⎢1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 1.127 × 10-3 where: εcso = εs ( fcm) × βRH with: εs ( fcm) = [160 + 10 βsc (9 fcm /fcmo)] × 10-6 = 0.t0) : shrinkage strain at time t∞ calculated from: εcs (t∞ .t0) = t∞ − t0 = 0. βs (t∞ .000395 fcm = mean compressive strenght of concrete at 28 days = fck + 8 MPa.

1 + t 0 0. 6. t0) = 1.2 0.5 1 + (0. = ρ1000h × 3.3 Δσp.556. fcm fcmo 1 = 0. t0) = 182. at least for creep value.38. 0.3 = 2.43×106 mm2 gross section of the beam. φ (t∞.012 RH) = 0.5708 where: φo = φRH × β( fcm) × β(t0) = 1.EC2 – worked examples 6-48 h = (2Ac / u) = 1217 mm notional size of member.t0) : creep coefficient at time t∞ calculated from: φ (t∞.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.1 3 h 5.598 with φRH = 1 + β( fcm) = β(t0) = 1 − RH 100 = 1.t0) = φ0 ×βc (t∞ .62 × 10-6 in good aggrement with the previous one.19 = ρ1000h × 3 where ρt = is the relaxation after t hours.488 0. Ac = 17. ρ1000h = is the relaxation after 1000 hours evaluated from Fig. for t > 50 years ρt. t0) and for φ(t∞ . Table of Content .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 . φ (t∞ .3 ⎛ t∞ − t0 ⎞ βc (t∞ .281.t0) = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ βH + t ∞ − t 0 ⎠ βH = 1.983 18 with [ ] h + 250 = 2155 > 1500 → 1500 . t0) may be evaluated: ε cs (t∞ . the following values for εcs (t∞ . Δσpr : loss of prestressing due to relaxation of steel calculated for a reduced initial tensile stress of σp = σpgo 0.

turn out: longitudinal tendon: transverse tendon: 19% at anchorage and 14% at pier axis.75 kN/m Table of Content . 6.1 = 319.15. stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to prestressing.1×250×φdin = 319. As a reference. inertia 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. 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. modulus of elasticity ratio.6 = 199. lever arm between centroid of concrete gross section and prestressing steel.1.6 kN → qvk. area of prestressing steel at the considered level. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-49 Fig. as percentage of initial steel tension.1 may be obtained: Qvk = 1. The effects of losses are taken into account with the same procedure used for the prestressing. 18% at anchorage and 12% at midspan. but as actions of opposite sign. area of concrete gross section.6/1.2 Actions The external loads applied on the structure should be evaluated according to the provisions of Eurocode 1. the maximum value of prestressing losses.38 Relaxation losses in % at 1000 hours for Class 2 σc.3 Traffic Load on Bridges. : σcpo : α = Es/Ec: Ap : Ac : Ic : zcp : stress on concrete at level of pretensioned steel due to self weight and permanent load. 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. For the LM71.

0 kN/m Fig. SW/0 and SW/2 have been introduced in the FEM analysis considering a spreading ratio of 4:1 in the ballast and of 1:1 in the concrete up to the middle plane of the slab.40 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1. 6. Fig.2 = 102.3 kN/m Fig.39 shows the LM71 arrangement adopted in the calculations. The load model SW/0 is represented in Fig.1 × 133 × φdin = 170. being the dynamic factor equal to 1. Fig. Table of Content . Fig.41 Load model SW/2 The previous load model LM71. is evaluated below.41 and its characteristic value results: qvk = 1.40 Load model SW/0 The load model SW/2 is represented in Fig. therefore subjected to variable load. 6.42 shows which elements are involved by spreading effects.3 is: qvk = 1.3 kN/m without any limitation in length.6.1 × 150 × φdin = 174. 6.1 × 80 × φdin → qvk. 6.39 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. 6.EC2 – worked examples 6-50 where φdin . while right truck the other one.162.

5 m.8 kN/m. rails.8×9. centrifugal forces. arising from variable loads.2 where Lφ is the determinant length defined in the Eurocode 1.16 + 0. − STEP 3: Prestressing forces after time-dependent losses: in the calculations. differential temperature variation etc.75 + 17. a limit value of tensile stress in tendon equal to 0. has been considered.8 m and a unit weight of γ = 18 kN/m3). 6.25 kN/m2 it turns out: = 25 kN/m3.33 + 27. assumed as a load of 1.) but. an uniformly distributed load results: gballast = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-51 Fig. − STEP 4: Track load comprehensive of. transverse gradient for drain water. should be considered in the analysis (as traction and braking.04 m 3 3 Several other actions. − STEP 5: Others permanent loads composed by. so that for a width of 9.6×fptk after allowance for losses (t∞).5 = 136.33 L1 + L2 + L3 = 1.73 = 1.3 17.162 L φ − 0.8×1. sleepers and ballast (waterproofing included) evaluated as a cover with a nominal height of 0. wind pressure.3 as: Lφ = 1. for the sake of simplicity. according to the provisions of the applied Railway Code to avoid the risk of brittle failure due to stress corrosion.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. Table of Content . 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. derailment.3 = 27.

25 kN/m noise barriers: gbarriers = 8. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: for each.5 = 11. 6.25 = 6. 6. border curbs (with a cross section area of 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-52 gdrain = 1. − STEP 6: Variable loads for maximum bending moment on first span (x = 6.25×9.1 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3): greinf beam = 25×0. Fig.44 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 5 − STEP 7: Variable loads for minimum bending moment at pier P1 (x = 18.00 kN/m for each.18 m). for each. the applied load is a SW/0 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Table of Content .25 m2 and unit weight of 25 kN/m3) gwalls = 25×0.43 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 5 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. ballast retaining walls (with a cross section area of 0.25 = 6.25 kN/m ducts: gducts = 3 kN/m for each.875 kN/m.43 m).

6. 6.305 m). 6.45 SW/0 arrangement for Load Step 6 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig. the applied load is a LM71 model on the left track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-53 Fig. 6.48 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 7 Table of Content .47 LM71 arrangement for Load Step 7 plus a SW/2 train on the right track with the following longitudinal arrangement: Fig.46 SW/2 arrangement for Load Step 6 − STEP 8: Variable loads for max bending moment on second span (x = 32.

EC2 – worked examples 6-54 6.0 for favourable effect. Pk = characteristic value of action due to prestress. Qik γ1 γ2 γP γQ Ψ0i Ψ2i = characteristic value action due to of the other independent variable loads. G2k = characteristic value of action due to ballast self-weight. Table of Content . = combination factor of variable loads for quasi-permanent combination at service. = combination factor of variable loads equal to 0.4 for unfavourable effect and 1.2 for unfavourable effect and 0.15.0 for favourable effect.0 for favourable effect.9 for favourable effect. = partial factor of ballast load equal to 1. = partial factor of self-weight and permanent loads. ballast excluded.8 for unfavourable effect and 1. ballast excluded. equal to 0.3 Combinations of Actions The design values for the external actions have been calculated adopting the combinations of loads specified in the applied Code as follow indicated in the symbolic presentation: − Ultimate Limit State ⎧ ⎛ ⎞⎫ Sd = S ⎨γ G1 G1k + γ G 2 G 2 k + γ p Pk + γ Q ⎜ Q1k + ∑ Ψoi Q ik ⎟ ⎬ ⎝ ⎠⎭ i >1 ⎩ − Serviceability Limit State: rare combination ⎧ ⎫ Sd = S ⎨G1k + G 2 k + Pk + Q1k + ∑ Ψoi Q ik ⎬ i >1 ⎩ ⎭ − Serviceability Limit State: quasi-permanent combination ⎧ ⎫ Sd = S ⎨G1k + G 2 k + Pk + ∑ Ψ2 i Q ik ⎬ i >1 ⎩ ⎭ where: G1k = characteristic value of the action due to self-weight and permanent loads.5 for unfavourable effect and 0.6. = partial factor of prestress load equal to 1. equal to 1. = partial factor of variable loads equal to 1.8. Q1k = characteristic value of action due to the base variable action.

t / b = σ 22. m23 are evaluated so that it results: σ y.5 -3091 -7806 -3516 -4280 -13159 -8526 -10418 -10007 Table 6.8 Table of Content . n33 . − stress limitation at service. . From FEM analysis. t / b cos 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 33. b = σ 22.7 Elem. t / b cos 2 (θ1 ) + σ 33. one reports the verification related to the four elements showed in fig ii. t / b sin 2 (θ 2 ) + σ 23. t / b = σ 22. − deformation. b = σ 33. t = σ x.5 0. m22 . 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 = n22 6 m22 + 2 h h n33 6 m33 + 2 h h n23 6 m23 + 2 h h σ xy. The external actions are calculated adopting the rare combination with only the load steps 1 and 2.963 1. t / b sin ( 2 θ1 ) σ 2. θ2 = θ1 + 90° and the principal stresses result: σ1. b = σ x. t / b sin ( 2 θ 2 ) Referring to the elements marked in Fig. t / b sin 2 ( θ1 ) + σ 23.32 one obtains: Table 6. . b = σ 23. 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. The angles of principal directions (for which is σxy = 0) are: θ1 = ⎛ 2 σ 23 ⎞ 1 a tan ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ σ 22 − σ 33 ⎠ . t = σ 22. b = where the subscripts t and b indicate respectively top and bottom fibre.5 1. t = n22 6 m22 − 2 h h n33 6 m33 − 2 h h n23 6 m23 − 2 h h . σ y. t = σ 23. m33 . n23 .6. t = σ xy. For the sake of simplicity. − crack widths. as subjected to the higher stress level.EC2 – worked examples 6-55 6. the value of n22 . t = σ 33.6 × fck = 21 MPa.15.4 Verification at Serviceability Limit State The verification at serviceability limit state is relative to the following conditions: − stress limitation at tensioning. Verification at tensioning At time of tensioning.

71 -0.b -2.59 σ33.40 -2.48 -18. under service load conditions.21 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.00 0. ensuring that. One reports the results relative to the four elements indicated in Fig.49 -7.78 -11.24 -2.46 -13.6 × fck = 21.02 89.99 90.29 88.46 -12.5 1.t -2.86 σ23.10 1.b -2.36 σ2.963 1.31 -2.5 0.14 -2. Quasi-Permanent Combination Table 6.11 σ2.t -2.21 -5.85 108.85 [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 0.89 σ1.58 -5.48 σ1.b 0.51 -8.b [°] 6-56 θ2. for the quasi-permanent and the rare combinations.5 1.66 -3.11 -1.b -2.00 MPa Applying to the structural FEM model the variable loads and combining them according to the railway code provisions.01 -0.25 0.11 σ33.75 -0. Verification of limit state of stress limitation in concrete The serviceability limit states checked in this section are relative only to stress limitation.41 -5.97 -12.42 σ2.t -1.22 -4. concrete extreme stresses do not exceed the corresponding limit.t -0.62 -6.58 -8.65 -2.b -14.17 0.86 -4. 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 σ1.17 89.15 0.05 -2.80 -4.59 σ2.01 σ22.00 -0.t -5.76 -1.57 -7.t -2.10 Elem.86 -4.15 -4.97 -5.37 -5.78 -11.963 1.98 -10. 6.48 95.58 -1.09 [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] [Mpa] 1.5 -2420 -6233 -3539 -2736 -10152 -6347 -7855 -7900 Rare Combination Table 6.91 -2.b -14. The limit stresses for concrete are: Quasi-permanent combination: Rare combination: Compressive stress = 0.58 -5.77 89.32.77 which not exceed the limit one.11 -1.30 -2.32 σ1.t [°] σ1.89 -10.97 -11.23 σ2.EC2 – worked examples σ22.t -0.b -8. one obtain the maxima stress values at top and bottom fibres that have to be lower than the corresponding limit.90 -9.27 -2.00 0.46 -1.t -1.9 Elem.09 -2.00 MPa Compressive stress = 0.98 0.22 -4.99 0. 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.t θ1.01 89.69 σ2.72 -4.00 0.46 -1.b -10.4 × fck = 14.48 σ23.66 -3.t [°] θ2.29 -1.b -2.02 -1.83 -9.5 0.b [°] θ1.5 -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 .

placed in the middle of the of the central span. has to be considered. i. Therefore.75 5045 and it results lower than the corresponding limit. the elastic deflection. Having loaded the right track with a LM71 load model plus dynamic allowance. according to the provisions of the Code.5 Verification of Ultimate Limit State Verification at ULS should regard the structure as a whole and its component parts. it results: δ 1 = L 1600 that should be multiplied by a factor 1.e. reading the maximum deflection in correspondence of the track axis. calculated by the FEM analysis. The limit value for maximum vertical deflection is calculated considering a span length of 27.75 m (central span) and a train speed over 280 km/h. In addition to the analysis of ULS of several shell element under the relevant combination of internal actions. − punching under support plate. is relative to the only live load. able to ensure a ductile behaviour in case of corrosion of prestressing steel. due to prestressing effect. − spalling force at anchorage of prestressing tendon.3 as a function of the span length and the train speed. however. finally.: − bursting force at anchorage of prestressing tendon.15. Table of Content . in this example some case of detailing are investigated. The limit values δ/L (deflection/span Length) are given by the Eurocode 1. the maximum stress results tensile. the check shall be performed loading only one track. the structure remains entirely compressed. Deformation Deformation limitation is carried out to control the maximum vertical deflection for passengers comfort. It can be notice that no further calculation is requested because. that from stress calculation neither for the quasipermanent combination nor in the rare one. It has be notice. no specific reinforcement is required and it is sufficient to arrange the minimum amount of reinforcing steel. the following limit may be achieved: δ lim 11 .1 for continuous structures. the obtained δ/L value is: δ effective 0. 6.0055 1 = = L 27.EC2 – worked examples 6-57 Code 90. 1 = = L 1600 1455 As a consequence of the transient nature of this event. analysing the resistance of the critical regions. calculated by the FEM model. so that the elastic value.

5 0. specific shear reinforcement shall be arranged (vertical stirrups) and diagonal compressive forces in concrete shall be checked.6.y = 22.x ( n 33 ) [kN/m] n Sd.5 -1779 -5746 -2130 -3865 -9096 -4610 -5922 -7748 5 -63 10 -54 -6 89 20 -1124 -5 -150 47 -1095 As first step. 6. If the is not satisfied. 649 Internal actions at ULS in a shell elements Let us consider in this section only four elements on the whole (see Fig. it is possible to calculate the principal shear vo2 = vx2 + vy2 . Fig. According to CEB Bulletin 223.12 Table of Content . In fact. 6. and to check that it turn out: v0 < vRd1 = 012 ξ (100 ρ fck ) .xy ( n 23 ) [kN/m] m Sd.49): Table 6.32).2. The internal actions in a shell element at ULS are sketched in Fig.07 m from the external face. The external actions are derived from FEM model using the load step for trains which leads to the maximum values and combining the results according to the relevant combination formula.y ( 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.xy ( m 23 ) -14 -75 -13 -41 v Sd.5 1.963 1. the following table may be calculated for the elements considered. Table 6.x ( m 33 ) 470 -671 3241 -4274 m Sd.x ( v 12 ) [kN/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] [kNm/m] 648 93 320 589 1. and having set a minimum amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in the bottom and top layer of As.6 cm2/m placed at 0. on the principal shear direction ϕo (such that tan ϕ 0 = v y v x ).3 of MC 90 and ρ = ρx cos2ϕ o + ρ y sin 2ϕ o . h [m] n Sd.y ( v 13 ) [kN/m] v Sd.y ( n 22 ) [kN/m] n Sd.11 Elem. turns out (on brackets the notation of Fig.4. 13 d where vRd1 is specified in chapter 6.x = As. For the investigated elements. one may design the inner layer checking if specific shear reinforcement is required or not.49.

i = n x ⎞ z − yi m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.56 3509 13860 763. One assumes: ts = ti = 2×0. 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.e. 6.77 0.s = n xy ⎞ z − ys m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .56 14.00253 174 45.43 1. i = n xy ⎞ z − yi m xy ⎛ 1 v x v y + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ where terms on brackets have be summed if shear reinforcement is required.0 0.18 0.0 n xyc 0.14 m so that.00158 26.43 51.s = n x ⎞ z − ys m x ⎛ 1 v 2 x + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdx . 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.50 Internal forces in the different layers n Sdx .00158 1569 26. internal lever arm z and in plane actions may be evaluated for the outer layers of each element referring to Fig.9 805.s 2 ⎞ z − ys m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny + +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ n Sdy.76 0.50 and by means of the following equations: Fig.0 0.56 26.i 2 ⎞ z − yi m y ⎛ 1 v y = ny − +⎜ cot θ⎟ z z ⎝ 2 v0 ⎠ vSd .00158 23.0 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [cm /m ] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.893 -30.07 = 0.14 0.6 784. nyc and nxyc ) only for element number 589.5 with variation of slab components due to vx and vy (i. nxc .EC2 – worked examples Elem.0 0.0 n yc 0. 6.0 0.0 0.0 0. In the design Table of Content .0 0.43 1.56 26.

140 0. It can be notice that if nRdx or nRdy value are negative.1 -4202.2 0.823 -3479.412 0.220 0.i -7.680 1.4 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.8 -1037. a compression force is present along that direction and no reinforcement is required.7 -3120.140 0.7 0.140 1.i vSd.i n Sdx. For the chosen elements it turns out: Table 6. an increase layer thickness shall be provided until verification is met.5 1.5 -4893.140 1.7 -4.s [kN/m] n Sdx.7 -6252.0 32.6 -1489.140 0.360 -1093.s vSd.412 0.9 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.360 -713. the reinforcement areas may be calculated as: A sx = nRdx f yd .680 0. if both the nRdx and nRdy are negative it is possible to omit the reinforcement in both the directions but.140 0. so that a value of 45° for θ angle may be adopted.14 Table of Content .680 1.13 Elem.220 0.9 0.s n Sdy. one obtains: Table 6.0 -1065.3 -577.1 -5344.220 0. in this case new values for the layer action having changed z value.360 307.5 -122.140 1.680 1.683 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. A sy = nRdy f yd If concrete strength requirement is not satisfied.680 0.680 0.5 1.6 726. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.140 0.963 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-60 procedure is convenient to reach the minimum amount of reinforcement.8 -2560.3 -2266.5 0. if result satisfied.2 14.3 787.8 59.3 13.

260 -1179.2 0.1 -12. an increasing of layer thickness is required and new values of plate actions are obtained: Table 6.0 -11.8 f cd1/2 -17.6 -153.430 0.372 0.340 0.4 794.3 -17.0 0.0 0.1 -17.0 34.680 1.190 0.1 -17.8 -129.1 -17.0 25.0 0.220 0.0 18.0 Of course.553 0.1 -17.0 0.8 14. Thus.2 -11. whereas they are arranged at 0.020 0.s n Sdy.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.5 1.0 720.230 -716.1 Asy 2 Asx 0.600 0.0 0.0 0.6 f cd1/2 -17.0 Asy 2 σc -16.9 0.535 1.930 0.3 0.i -8.140 1.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -35.960 0.0 0.5 66.8 -16.1 -12.0 0. so. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] 6-61 Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.0 0.0 0.5 -1465.6 -5040.EC2 – worked examples Top Layer Design Elem.3 16.630 1.0 -24.1 -950.0 0.0 0.0 0.300 0. This variation may be assessed with the aid of the mechanism pictured in Fig. the amount of reinforcement provided has to be changed to restore equilibrium conditions.0 0.0 Asy 2 σc -30.1 -17.0 -4054.07 m from the external surface of the slab in an eccentric position with respect to middle plane of the layer.1 -17.758 -3588.4 -45.0 0. minima values should be adopted for Asx and Asy if no reinforcement areas are required.5 -7090. 648 93 320 589 σc [MPa] Bottom Layer Design Asx 2 f cd1/2 -17.5 1.0 38.0 -22.0 0.0 It can be notice that verification for concrete in compression is not satisfied for any layers except for element 589 top layer and element 320 bottom layer.0 0.0 0.8 -3144.8 0.8 -5768.3 0. the Asx and Asy value are required at the centroid of the layer. 6.i vSd.9 -16.16 Top Layer Design Elem.6 -6.4 -7.6 0.i n Sdx.1 -1062.1 -17.5 0.240 0.0 0.s vSd.0 0. 648 93 320 589 h [m] ts [m] ti [m] tc [m] ys [m] yi [m] z [m] n Sdy.s [kN/m] n Sdx.0 [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm /m] [MPa] [kN/m] [cm /m] [cm2/m] -16.7 870.8 -5. For element 589.140 0.1 -17.0 0.51: Table of Content .5 [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] [kN/m] 1.580 0.387 0.5 -2157.215 708.7 -2962.0 which lead to the following values: Table 6.1 -17.15 Elem.9 -38.8 -16.7 0.1 -17.680 0.4 0.963 0.

Verification to Bursting Force For the calculation of the bursting force the symmetric prism analogy is used.3 1664. only the longitudinal direction of prestressing tendon is considered with respect to the vertical plane. 648 93 320 589 n s.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. For the sake of simplicity.6 -1399.y [kN/m] n s. s ⎜ h − s − bi′⎟ + nSd .0 0.0 0.0 38.6 -3274. Table 6.5 -5026.0 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-62 Fig. Table of Content . to control the structural behaviour and for a best fitted reinforcement layout.17 Forces referred to tension steel level Elem.0 0.0 0.0 -5752. i ⎜ i − bi′⎟ ⎠ ⎠ ⎝2 ⎝ 2 ns = z ni = nSd.0 34.6 0.0 0.0 0. evaluating the height of the prism so that his centroid results coincident with the centroid of prestressing tendons. but transverse force due to bursting effect should be also calculated in the horizontal plane and for transverse prestressing too. to summarise the results in a visual map. 6.x [kN/m] n i.8 1503.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 -2287.i ns For the investigated elements.0 0.1 -2242.y [kN/m] Top layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 Bottom layer reinf Asy [cm /m] 2 n i.2 -956.s + nSd. the following areas have been detected.3 0.5 -1070.51 Shell element equilibrium in one direction with two reinforcement layers only The new forces acting on the reinforcements become: t ⎞ ⎞ ⎛t ⎛ nSd .8 -4063.3 -6370.0 0.x [kN/m] Asx [cm /m] 2 Asx [cm2/m] -702. it is useful.3 -159.5 -3522.

is: lbs = hbs = 1. The bursting force follows from the moment equilibrium along section A-A: Nbs = 0.6 kN zbs where: t1 = 0.075 m t2 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 6-63 Fig. Table of Content . corresponding to the transverse spacing of longitudinal lower tendons.2 m and his length. for end anchored tendon.52.6 = 1. considering the lower level of tendon (first tensioned) the height of the prism results: hbs = 2×0.43 m.2 m while the width follows from the possible enlargement of the anchor plate that may be assumed equal to 0. 6. 6.300 m distance between the centroid of tendons above section A-A to the centroid of the prism.52 Geometric dimension for bursting calculation Checking situation is represented in Fig. distance between the centroid of concrete stress block above section A-A to the centroid of the prism. and the most unfavourable situation occurs when a single tendon is tensioned.5 ( n1 + n 2 ) t 2 − n1 t1 γ 1 FSd = 852. 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 .

61 cm2 Bursting force shall be resisted by an area of reinforcement steel of: distributed within lbs/3 to lbs . only the longitudinal direction is considered.40 m to 1.e.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.61 = = = 57.20 m) from the anchor plate.5 may be assumed. i.20 − 0.(i.bs = Nbs / fyd = 19.43 (1. furthermore. Thus the effective area on a meter length. the extreme stresses at the end of prism length are calculated by means of the beam theory. a section with a breadth of 0. supplementary partial safety factor against overstressing by overpumping. 53 Bursting reinforcement arrangement Verification to spalling force The spalling force may be calculated with the equivalent prism analogy.43 × 1.50 m. in fact φ22/25×25 corresponds to 60. As for bursting verification.82 cm2/m2 .43 m and a height of 1. spalling effects arise if upper tendon are tensioned firstly (the eccentricity leads to tension stresses).50 ⎠ ⎪ +2.50 0.0 cm2/m2 2 0.38 MPa ⎪ ⎪ ∓ =⎨ = FSd ⎜ − ⎬ 2 ⎟ ⎝ 0.35 × 6 ⎞ ⎧−15.43 × 1.56 MPa σ bott om ⎪ ⎩ ⎭ The section along which no shear force results.35 m. respectively: considering the anchor plate as rigid a value of 0.0 kN they result (negative if compressive): σ top ⎫ ⎛ 1 0. may be found by the following: A s. Thus. is equal to the overall height of the section. 53).e.50 m has to be verified for one tendon tensioning. n2 γ1 =1. bs 19. As. The length of the prism for end anchored tendon.1 numbers of tendons above and below section A-A.428 m from slab bottom fibre (see Fig 54) and the moment for equilibrium turns out: Table of Content . is placed at 0. Considering an eccentricity for upper prestressing tendon of 0. lsl = 1. Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-64 n1 . for a prestressing force FSd = 4134. bs A s. from 0.

5× lsl and bsl = 0.031 cm2 placed parallel to the end face in its close vicinity.61 kNm 3 Fig.EC2 – worked examples 6-65 M sl = 2 σ bott om × 0. 54 Calculation scheme for spalling Assuming zsl = 0. the maximum spalling force turns out: Nsl = Msl / zsl = 44. the amount of reinforcement is: As = Nsl / fyd = 1. Table of Content .214 2 × 0.43 m.81 kN Disregarding any concrete tensile resistance.43 × 10 3 = 33.

EC2 – worked examples 6-66 Table of Content .

fyk = 450 MPa. N. Fig. αe = 15. we have d = 550 mm. S* = −88.65 mm.1.1 Evaluation of service stresses [EC2 clause 7. can be written as N( −600) = −0. e) N = N0 = -800 kN. with the boundary conditions σc ( y = h) = 0. f) M = M0 = 400 kNm. calculation of service stresses.45.1.5m.1.2] Evaluate the normal compressive force and of the associated bending moment in the section of Figure 7. N associated to the three paths d) M/N = -0.96 ⋅ 106 mm 3 .EC2 – worked examples 7-1 SECTION 7. M0 = 400 kNm. evaluate the materials strains from the stresses c) N0 = -800 kN. The following data are given: fck =30 MPa. assuming k2 = 0. respectively with constant normal force or constant bending. SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 7. or M.96 ⋅ 106 Table of content . Finally. that is yn = h. keep the section to the ultimate tension state under load. calculate the couples M. d’ = 50 mm. linearly changing M N. yn The second condition in the first exercise. 7. h = 600 mm As = 6 ⋅ 314= 1884 mm2. 7. Rectangular section. c 2 ck σ c ( y = 0) = k 1fck b) σ ( y = d) = k f s 3 sk Then.45 ⋅ 30 −88. 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. a) σ ( y = 0) = k f . Considering Fig. β = 1 The boundary conditions from the first exercise set the neutral axis on the border of the bottom section. that.

42 ⋅ (550 − 272.59) ⋅250) ⋅10-6 = 457. N0 M 0 σc Once the concrete ultimate compressive limit state is reached. the ultimate tension state corresponds to the maximal tension admitted for concrete.3 mm.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.801.18MPa 272. N keeping constant the eccentricity.3 16. the tensional state change proportionally and we can state N M 0.07MPa 272.263 ⋅ 106 σs = ' σs = 16. M=N⋅e=-2001.3) ⋅ 15 = 251. M = 1.6 ⋅ 30 and the compressed steel tension and the stress components are ' σs = σs d '− y n 50 − 235.096 M0 =438.65) ⋅10-3 = 241.6fck = = = 1.48 kN M = (-0. If we consider to change M.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.7 N = -0.5·106/570.16kN. Table of Content .8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.16⋅(-120.48·103 = .59σs d − yn 550 − 235. 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 = 235.7/2+0.3) ⋅ 15 = −201.4 kNm.80 kN.096N0 = -876.EC2 – worked examples 7-2 and then N=-2001.5 kNm e = .59) ⋅10-3 = -570. S* = −13263 ⋅ 10 3 mm 3 yn and then the tensional state is σc = − 800 ⋅ 103 ( −272.8 ⋅ 450 1+ 15 ⋅ 0.7/2⋅(235.7/3-300)+0.95 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 = 272.457.8⋅450⋅1884⋅(1-0.49 kNm.42 ⋅ (50 − 272.6⋅30⋅400⋅235.42MPa −13. the stress is N= 1.3) = −16.71mm 0.7 = σs = −0.096 .

51mm (50 − 262.51) ⋅ 15 = −218.6fck ⋅ S* yn − M0( yn ) h + yn = * 0.56 ⋅ 10 e== −553.6 ⋅ 30 the previous numeric form becomes 400 3 2 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 ⎡( 550 − y n ) + ( 50 − y n ) ⎤ − 22.51 (550 − 262.51 ⎛ 262.6fck S* yn and I* yn S * yn and then e= M0 M 0 (y n ) = N 0.51 ' σs = 0.252 + 84795 = 262.56kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 6 442.6fck S* yn and then − 400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 1884 [600 − 2 ⋅ y n ] 2 −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 .51) σs = 0. the limit state condition for the concrete stress is N( − y n ) = −0.2mm 800 ⋅ 103 Keeping constant the bending moment (M = M0).57) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 442.6 ⋅ fck ⋅ S yn 2 As M0 400 ⋅ 106 = = 22.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ and then 400 ⋅ 262.69 + 218.22 ⋅ 106 mm 3 0.69MPa 262.51 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.6 ⋅ fck 0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (295.6 ⋅ 30 800 ⋅ 103 Solving with respect to yn 2 y n + 60y n − 84795 = 0 y n = −30.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 295.25 + 30.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 ) = −0.57MPa 262.

82 MPa 395 (550 − 395) σs = 0.45) and the other cases b) d) e) f) (k1=0. just in the case c) the concrete tension limit state under load is not reached while in the case a)(k1=0.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎡ ⎤ N = ⎢ −0.2.82)⎥ = −1666. On the other hand.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅⎜ − 300 ⎟ + 1884 ⋅ (105.2 reports the results obtained in the evaluation in terms of forces and stresses. 2B Table of Content .95 MPa 395 ' σs = 0.34 kNm 2 ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ e=-240 mm Figure 7. Results for different limit distributions of stresses.82) ⋅ 250 ⎥ ⋅ 10 −6 = 400.95 + 235. 7.95 + 235. As a remark. the tension ultimate state under load for tied steel is got just in the case b).EC2 – worked examples 7-4 y n = 395 mm (50 − 395) ⋅ 15 = −235.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ ⋅ 15 = 105.6 ⋅ 30 ⋅ + 1884 ⋅ (105.67 kN 2 ⎣ ⎦ 400 ⋅ 395 ⎛ 395 ⎡ ⎤ ⎞ M = ⎢ −0.65) respectively reach the tension ultimate states under load associated to non linear viscosity phenomena and minimal tension in the presence of particular combinations. Fig.

4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.65 (hw > 1m) The given statements imply: α s = 2 5 0 / 1 8 0 0 = 0 .3.4494 ) ⎤ ρs.min = 0. σs = 200 MPa.4860 > ξ 2 and for the web ⎡ 3 0. Box .8/ 200 = 0.6945 0 ρs.8 MPa.EC2 – worked examples 7-5 EXAMPLE 7.01235 ⋅ 0.82·1010 mm4. and then ξ = 809/1800 = 0.25·108 mm3.4494 ) = 0.925·106 mm2 .01235 Case a) The application of cracking moment is associated to the neutral axis position yn = yG. fct.1 6 6 7 β = 1 − αs − αf = 0.1 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. design of minimum reinforcement.1667 − 0.min = 0. 7.3.65 ⋅ 3. It results also 1 − αs − αf = 0.35·104 mm2 Fig. yG =809 mm. k =0. Consider the following data: fck = 45 MPa.1667 − 0.4494 ⎣ 4 ⎦ Table of Content .6945 − 2(1 − 0.2] Let’s consider the section in Figure 7. Wi = 7.4494 .2 Design of minimum reinforcement [EC2 clause 7.eff = 3.section.00208 1 − 0. I = 71. r2 = I/A =39. applied in the point P at 250 mm from the bottom border of the corresponding cracking moment.3 with the following geometry: A = 1.

The reinforcement scheme is report in Figure 7.1667 = 0.812 > ξ and it follows: ρs.8 ⎥ 7.25 ⋅ 10 ⎠ ⎣ 1.825 ⋅ 10 ⎝ ⎦ the eccentricity of the normal force in the presence of Mcr is then: e = −9585 ⋅ 10 3 6000 + 741 = −856 mm and the neutral axis position results from the relation Table of Content .4 Fig. Referring to the bottom slab we get 1 − 9 8 αf = 0.00943 1 − 0.01235 ⋅ 0.eff ⎥ Wi Wi ⎠ ⎣ A⎝ ⎦ and then: ⎡ 6000 ⋅ 103 ⎛ 741 ⋅ 1. We use (5+5)φ12 mm equivalent to 1130 mm2.min = 0. Minimum reinforcement. 7.4.4494) − 0. case (a). 45 2(1 − 0. with eccentricity eN=1800809-250 = 741 mm derives from the relation ⎡ N⎛ ⎤ A ⎞ M cr = ⎢ − ⎜ 1 + e N ⎟ + fct .min = 0. Case b) The cracking moment associated to the axial force N = -6000 kN.4494 A s.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.25 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 = 9585 kNm 6 ⎜ 8 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-6 A s.825 ⋅ 106 ⎞ ⎤ −6 8 M cr = ⎢ 1+ ⎟ + 3.min = 0.00943 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 4243mm 2 We use (14+14)φ14 mm equivalent to 4312 mm2.

705 A s. with h = 1.7050) ⎣ ⎦ A s.35 ⋅ 104 = 809 + = 1269 mm .00046 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1800 = 248 mm 2 We use 4 φ10 equivalent to 314 mm2.5 Fig.min = 0.6945 − 2(1 − 0.min = 0.8 we deduce: h* ⎡ 0.7050 ) = 0. The reinforcement scheme is reported in Figure 7. 3B Table of Content . Minimum reinforcement.8(1 − 0.1667 = 0. 45 2(1 − 0.min = 0.705) − 0.5.1667 − 0.00046 3 ⋅ 1.min = 0.1667 − 0.7050 e 856 Considering the web.00797 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 1500 = 3586 mm 2 We use (12+12)φ14 mm equivalent to 3692 mm2.812 > ξ and it results ρs. 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. 7. ξ = 0.00797 1 − 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-7 yn = yG − r2 39.01235 ⋅ 0.4 ⎢1 − ⎥ (1 − 0.7050) ⎤ ρs. case (b).01235 ⋅ 0.

δ’=460/600=0.167.eff (7.4) can be immediately used as verification formula.3.0113 s And the equation for the neutral axis yn is −400 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡548 − y n + 0.3 Evaluation of crack amplitude [EC2 clause 7.9MPa Referring to a short time action (kt=0.4 ⋅ c + 0. d’=46. .cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢k 3 ⋅ c + k 1k 2 k 4 λ ⎥ Es ⎣ σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎦ ρs ⎞ λ⎛ ⎜ 1 + αe ⎟ ρs ⎝ λ⎠ (7. the (7. Reinforced concrete section.167 ( 46 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 and then Table of Content .0767.6 Fig. d=548mm.5) with improved bound reinforcement (k1=0.17 σs ⎦ ⎣ ρs ⎣ ⎤ λ⎥ ⎦ (7. M=300kNm.6). cracks amplitude evaluation assuming αe =15.2a) (7.425 and considering the bending case (k2=0.5 (1 − δ ) .4) The (7.cr = k t ⋅ fct . k4=0. b=400mm.8).6.EC2 – worked examples 7-8 EXAMPLE 7.4.cr ⎤ ⎡ φ ⎢1 − ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3. δ=548/600=0.0mm. fct.1) σs. As’=452mm2 (4φ12). 7. As an example let’s consider the section in Figure 7.eff=fctm=2.3) 1− ξ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ = min ⎢ 2. As=2712mm2 (6φ24). ρ =2712/(400 ⋅ 600)=0. 3 2⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Assuming the prescribed values k3=3.4] The crack width can be written as: wk = with σs ⎡ σs. c=40mm.913.2) we get wk = σs Es ⎡ σs. h=600mm. fck=30MPa. It results then β=452/2712=0.

3963 h 600 I*n = y 400 2 2 237.96 ⋅ 109 mm 4 ⎣ ⎦ 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 300 ⋅ 106 ⋅ ( 548 − 237.cr = 0.4y n − 113026 = 0 7-9 y n = −118.83 + 15 ⋅ 2712 ⎡( 548 − 237. Then λ=0.9 0.6 ⋅ 2.184mm 2 ⋅ 10 ⎣ 234 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4B Table of Content . The adopted statements lead to σs.5(1-0.2012 ⎛ 0.17 0.2012.5.8 = = 0.167 ( 46 − 237.8 ) ⎤ = 5.08MPa 0.2012 ⎠ 234 ⎡ 57.0113 ⎞ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⎟ = 57.8 ) + 0.913)=0. The second order moment results ξ= y n 237.2175.96 ⋅ 109 = 234MPa and we deduce the λ value to be adopted is the lowest between 2.8 ) / 5.4 ⋅ 40 + 0.0113 0.7 + 118.72 + 113026 = 237.3963)/3=0.8mm . 0.EC2 – worked examples 2 y n + 237.2012 ⎥ = 0.2012. (1-0.0113 ⎝ 0.08 ⎤ ⎡ 24 ⎤ wk = 1− 5 ⎢ ⎥ ⋅ ⎢3.

4) to use it as a design formula. h. where w = w k .5) (7. d’.EC2 – worked examples 7-10 EXAMPLE 7.4).4.10) with p=σs/(ktfctm) λ +n ρs From (7.11).6) we get ρs = ξ2 2α e ⎡ − (1 + β ) ξ + δ + βδ ' ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = 3ξ2 p δ + βδ '− (1 + β ) ξ (7. In particular.9) (7.7) Deducing ρs from (7. after some calculations we deduce p= w0 k 3. the (7. The adimensional calculus leads to 1 − ξ2 − α e ⋅ρs (1 + β ) ξ + α e ⋅ρs ( δ + β ⋅ δ ' ) = 0 2 σs = α e ν ( δ − ξ ) fctm k t 2 2 2 ⎡3n ⋅ρs ⎡( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) ⎤ + ξ3 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (7. and fixed M.4 ⋅ c ⋅ξ2 + 0.12) Combining (7.17 φ⋅λ ρs + (7. b.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 .9) is ⎡ ⎤ 2α ⋅λ w0 ⋅ξ2 k =⎢ + e2 ⎣δ+βδ '− (1 +β) ξ⎦ +αe ⎥ × ⎡ ⎤ ξ ⎡( δ−ξ)2 +β( δ '−ξ)2 ⎤ ⎢ 3.8) and (7. d.11) Es w k setting w 0k = k f t ctm (7.4] 7.4 ⋅ c + 0.4.6) setting ν= M = M0 cr M b ⋅ h2 k t fctm 6 (7. Design formulas derivation for the cracking limit state [EC2 clause 7.1 Exact method 8B It is interesting to develop the (7.8) 2 2 ( δ − ξ ) + β ( δ '− ξ ) α e ν ( δ − ξ ) − 2ξ 3 p (7.5) and with its substitution in the (7. 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 . stated b.

it is possible to set the tensional level σs. if we set the value of σs. .185ν ν u1 = c φ u2 = w 0k φ (7.5(1-δ) and then re-evaluating ξ.2 Approximated method The application of the procedure discussed above is quite laborious as it requires to iteratively solve the (7. consist in the statement that the lever arm h0 is constant and independent from ξ and equivalent to 0. which assumes the form: φmax = 5B ρs λ ⎡ 5. The procedure.EC2 – worked examples 7-11 (7.4) written for w = w k immediately gives (7. the solution for (7. If it is not the case. In this case.4u1 ν ν * − 0. aimed to the determination of the reinforcement amount and its tension corresponding to fixed crack amplitude values and stress level.9. An alternative procedure.67) is easy to solve. Alternatively. as the parameter p is defined.185ν/(pδ) the (7.8). easier to be applied. In this case too.9).15) and (7.88ρs w ok ⎤ − 2c ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ (p − α e )ρs − λ ⎦ (7. and to evaluate the corresponding reinforcement amount ρs and the maximal bars diameter.4.15) wk = σs Es ⎡ λ ⎛ α e ⋅ρs ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ φ⋅λ ⎞ ⎟ ⎜1+ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ 3. In this way.9d=M and then ρs=0. it is necessary to set in the (7. let’s state δ=0.13).4c + 0.243 and assuming by definition ν* = ν ν = δ⋅λ 1.5 practically impossible for bending problems. allows the determination of the neutral axis position and then.13). ρs from (7. being the value λ =0.13) the (7.16) aiming to a further simplification of the problem.17 ⎢1 − λ ⎠⎦ ⎝ ρs ⎠ ⎣ ρs ⋅ p ⎝ (7.9d.11) (7. numerically solved.20 ⎢ ⎣ αe ⎤ ν ⎥ p − ν * [17α e ⋅ u1 + 5u 2 ] = 0 ⎦ (7. we have σsAs0.13) λ = 2. and together with the (7.7) and the maximal diameter derives from (7. using the (7.18 1− 1− 0. the neutral axis is obtained from (7.18) the (11.16) after some algebra has the form p2 + 5 ⋅ ν * ⎡3. requires to set before the value of the bars diameter φ.11).14) 7.17) the (7. .11) solved with respect to φ.18) with respect to φ leads to the relation Table of Content . the evaluation of the reinforcement tension and its amount. leads to the desred values ρs e σs. λ = 0. for example coincident with the permissible one.

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. associated to the reinforcement amount given by the (7.15). 6B Table of Content . which.

01049 .4] Let’s use the described procedure to the section in Figure 7. reinforcement design for the cracking ultimate state.62 As (2/3) = 0. in the three cases here considered kw = 1. h=500mm.6 · 3. Assuming b=1000mm. 7.965 + 18400.30mm.77)=9.75 ⋅ 0.93 p − 4485 − 57067 k w = 0 and then p ( k w ) = −117.01375 .874 w k = 0.77 δ=(500-63)/500=0.20mm.74 + 57067 k w Using the previous relation.92 M0cr=0. 1/3. together with the (7.7. design the section to have a crack amplitude w k = 0.7.75 = 290 MPa kw = 2/3.62 ⋅ 0.16 ⋅ ⎢ 3.5002/6).10-6=77. 7.15) and (7.16 7.10mm . σs (1) = 0.5 Application of the approximated method [EC2 clause 7. 2/3. fck=33MPa. Fig.3.185 ⋅ 7.6 ⋅ 3.EC2 – worked examples 7-13 EXAMPLE 7.77/(1-1.77 = 0.6. w k = 0.086 · 156.086.10).92 ⋅ p − 9.16 max Defined w k = 0.4 ⋅ 1.1) u1=50/26=1.874 (see ex. 156.01049·500·1000=5245 mm2 ρs (1) = 0. p (2/3) = 119.15kNm ν*=7.3 ⋅ 2 ⋅ 105 ⋅ k w = 32404 ⋅ k w 0. φ=26mm.15=7.18/7.77 0. c=50mm.30mm the maximal amplitude. Then in a general form w 0k = 0.3 mm .75 As (1) = 0.(1000. It results fctm=0.086MPa ν=600/77.874 Table of Content . 119. w k = 0.185 ⋅ 7. Reinforced concrete Section.3.2 mm . M=600kNm.20 ⋅ 15 ⎤ ⎡ − p 2 + 5 ⋅ 9. in the three cases under examination we can max set w k = w k ⋅ k w where kw = 1. w k = 0.77 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ and then p 2 + 235.086 u2 = 32404 ⋅ k w = 1246 ⋅ k w 26 7. p(1) = 156.77 = 0.16 ⋅ [17 ⋅ 15 ⋅ 1.92 + 5 ⋅ 1246 ⋅ k w ] = 0 9.01375·500·1000=6875 mm2 ρs ( 2 3) = 0.332/3=3.

48 ⋅ 0. 75. 7. The following results are obtained: kw = 1.02179 .48 ≅ 140 MPa The three sections are reported in Figure 7.48 As (1/3) = 0. Table of Content .6·3.3 mm σs= 290 MPa kw = 2/3 w k = 0.93 2 + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − 195.EC2 – worked examples 7-14 σs (2/3) = 0. Designed sections.01062 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 5310 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 159.2 mm σs= 221 MPa kw = 1/3 w k = 0.13 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 195.1 mm σs = 140 MPa Fig.6 · 3.9 = 304 MPa 7. and 26 mm diameter bars are used.1 mm .02179·500·1000=10895 mm2 ρs (1 3) = 0.7. Let’s verify the adopted design method in order to evaluated its precision. w k = 0.874 σs (1/3) = 0.652 + 69614 = 195. ξ = 0. ρs = 5310/(500·1000) = 0. the metal areas are overestimated.3918 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 195.77 = 0.9 ) = 7.3y n − 69614 = 0 y n = −79. p (1/3) = 75.65 + 79.8.13 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 kw = 1 w k = 0.9 mm .086 · 75.086·119.62=221 Mpa kw = 1/3.185 ⋅ 7.

0138 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 53.06 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 437 − 247.1687 Table of Content .01062 ⎝ 0.874) = 0.4292) / 3 = 0. ρs = 69.6 ) = 8.13 2 2 + 15 ⋅ 9558 ⋅ ( 437 − 247.0138 ⎠ ⎝ kw = 1/3.cr = 0.2 2 + 143704 = 247.1903 ⎠ λ = (1 – 0.1 mm .63 2 + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − 214.03 / (50 · 100) = 0.1 = 160 MPa 1.6 mm .1903 ⎞ ⎛ 53.494 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 247.2 + 167.cr = 0.06 ⋅ 109 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 λ = (1 – 0.4292 I ∗n = y 1000 ⋅ 214. ξ = 0.6 = 238 MPa 8.4 ⋅50 + 0.41 ⋅ 109 0.11 MPa 0.41 ⋅ 109 mm 4 3 σs = 15 ⋅ 600 ⋅ 106 437 − 214.1) + 15 ⋅ 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − 247.0138 ⎝ 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-15 The lowest value for λ has to be chosen between λ = 2.1903 σs.01062 ⎟ = 0.315.01062 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 63.51 / (50 · 100) = 0.5 (1 – 0.31 MPa 0.2027 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.5 + 103.2027 ⎠ 304 ⎛ 63.52 + 90498 = 214.0138 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ 6903 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) = 0 2 2 y n + 207.1903 ⎛ 0. Then σs.0223 − 1000 2 y n + 15 ⋅ ⎡9558 ⋅ ( 437 − y n ) + 1593 ⋅ ( 385 − y n ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 y n + 334.1) = 1.11⎞ ⎛ 0.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.6 ⋅ 3.306 mm 5 ⎜ 304 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⋅10 ⎝ ⎠ kw = 2/3 .3918) / 3 = 0.2027 ⎛ 0.1 y n − 90498 = 0 y n = −103.086 ⋅ wk = λ = (1 – 0.31 ⎞ ⎛ ⋅⎜1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.5 y n − 143704 = 0 y n = −167.494) / 3 = 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ 0.2027 0.086 ⋅ wk = 238 2 ⋅ 105 0.6 ⋅ 3.213 mm 238 ⎠ ⎝ 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0. ξ = 0. ρs = 111.

836 h0/d = [(18·160·18.70 – 21.1687 ⎛ 0.4 ⋅ 50 + 0.3 5310 190 2 h0/d 0.78 ⎞ ⎛ 0. Stating a suitable precision for the approximated method.85 h0/d = (43.9 0.78 MPa 0. Approximated method.1. Table of Content .10 report numerical values and graphs for the maximal diameter and the required reinforcement expressed as a function of fixed values for σs.086 ⋅ wk = 0. Table 7.306 σs (MPa) 160 238 304 h0/d 0.79/18.1687 ⎞ ⋅ 1− ⎟ ⋅ ⎜ 3.0223 ⎝ 0.1 11151 140 0.17 ⋅ 26 ⋅ ⎟ = 0.71] / 43.6 ⋅ 3.8 Let’s remark that the presence of a compressed reinforcement is highly recommended to make ductile the section in the ultimate limit state. in the three case we have kw = 1 kw = 2/3 kw = 1/3 h0/d = (43.2 6903 221 0. Table 7. being h0/d the adimensional lever arm in units of effective height d.1 and 7.70 = 0.59/3) / 43.99) + + 2/3·24.2.0223 ⎞ ⋅ ⎜ 1 + 15 ⋅ ⎟ = 41.70 – 19.3 and Figure 7.9. wk (mm) As (mm ) σs (MPa) 0.0223 ⎠ The obtained values are in good agreement with those evaluated within the design. In fact. those values are evaluated using the (7.14).16) (7.70 ≅ 0.EC2 – worked examples 7-16 σs.9 As (mm ) 11151 6903 5310 2 wk (mm) 0.46/3) / 43. 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. 7.836 0.2 and they are shown in Figure 7. The approximated method previously discussed can be successfully applied in the design of the ultimate crack state.9.213 0.cr = 0.9 0.9d assumed in the approximated design procedure. Exact method. Comparison between the exact and approximated methods.12 mm 5 ⎜ 2 ⋅ 10 ⎝ 160 ⎠ ⎝ 0.85 Fig.811 0. The obtained results are reported in the Tables 7.70 = 0. Table 7.1687 ⎠ 160 ⎛ 41. The reinforcement increase the lever arm of the section reducing the difference between the approximated values and those coming from the verification.120 0.99 + 3·160·13.792/18.99) / (18·160 + 3·160·13.

EC2 – worked examples 7-17 Table 7. Diagrams for Maximal diameter (φmax) – Metal area (As ) – Steel tension (σs).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 = 0.3 mm (C) σs φmax As (mm2) (MPa) (mm) 280 30 5430 290 26 5310 309 20 4910 325 16 4672 355 10 4282 Fig. 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. wk = 0. 7. Table of Content .3.

Transversal section.8 From Table [3.05 ⋅ 109 Wi* = = 5. g+q=40kN/m.13. g=2q. Assume the following values for the main parameters Fig. 7. and solve the problem firstly in a cumulative way.9MPa M cr = fctm Wi* = 2. fck=30MPa.11 with constant transversal section represented in Figure 7. as reported in Figure 7.13. Fig.9 ⋅ 5.13.05 ⋅ 109 mm 4 12 18.6 In the stage II. 7.EC2 – worked examples 7-18 EXAMPLE 7. A * = 700 ⋅ 500 + 15 ⋅ 3164 = 397460mm 2 * yG = * I ( 700 ⋅ 500 ⋅ 350 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ 650 ) 397460 = 385.745 ⋅ 107 ⋅ 10 −6 = 166. As=3164mm2 (7φ24) . Table of Content .12.6 Verification of limit state of deformation Evaluate the vertical displacement in the mid-spam of the beam in Figure 7.8 ) = 18.8mm 500 ⋅ 7003 2 I = + 500 ⋅ 700 ⋅ 35.12 Fig. l=10m. 7.30 ⋅ 30 and then the cracking moment results 2 3 = 2.6kNm Considering the whole applied load then M max = 40 ⋅ 10 8 = 500kNm 2 λ= M max 500 = =3 M cr 166.11. stating αe = Es/Ec=15. Referring to the stage I.2-EC2] we get fctm = 0. Section at stage I. as indicated in Figure 7. deformation limit state.8 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 385. deflected beam.745 ⋅ 107 mm 3 700 − 385.

13=1. 7. where the cracked part of the beam start. 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 ⎥ .01 ⋅ 1010 mm 4 II 2 3 then c=18.21) is written as 2 ⎡ 1 M β ⎛ ⎞ Δv ⎜ ⎟ = ( c − 1) max ∗ ⎢ ∫ 2 4 ( ξ2 − ξ3 ) dξ − 2 Ec I I ⎣ ξ1 4λ ⎝2⎠ ∫ 1 2 ξ1 dξ ⎤ ⎥ 1− ξ ⎦ (7. ξ1 E c I I ⎣ ξ1 M max g ( ξ ) ⎦ ⎝2⎠ ξ= z l (7.05/10.92 + 94.20) where vI is the displacement calculated in the first step and Δv(l/2) the increase of the displacement itself caused from the cracking. g(ξ) = 4(ξ–ξ2). .78 Fig. is given solving the equation 2 4 ( ξ1 − ξ1 ) = M cr 1 = M max λ (7.21) where Ec is assumed to be Ec =Es/15 in agreement with the introduced statement for the parameter αe.84y n − 123396 = 0 2 y n = −94.24) Table of Content .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⎠ ⎦ (7.92 2 + 123396 = 269mm I * = 500 ⋅ 269 3 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − 269 ) = 1.EC2 – worked examples 7-19 −500 ⋅ y n 2 + 15 ⋅ 3164 ⋅ ( 650 − y n ) = 0 2 y n + 189.23) The abscissa ξ1. Defining the parameter λ=Mmax/Mcr and considering that fM(ξ) = ξ/2.1) here expressed as ⎛ Δv ( l 2 ) ⎞ v ( l 2) = vI ( l 2) ⋅ ⎜1 + vI ( l 2) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7. The evaluation of the middle-spam displacement can be easily obtained using the relation (7. the equation (7. Section at stage II.14.

varying z .λ.27) stating β=1 and letting λ changing in the range 1≤λ≤∞.29) (7.25) λ ⎦ 2⎣ 5 M max 2 48 Ec I ∗ I (7. The result. a concentrated load Q=200kN.88 of the displacement calculated in the stage II. ξ1 . . we obtain the curves reported in Figure 7. that show as the increase of the ratio λ means a decrease for ξ1 and the increase of v(l/2) as a consequence of a larger cracked part of the beam. the displacement in case of concentrated load results to be lower because the linear trend of the relative bending moment is associated to a smaller region of the cracking beam with respect to the case of distributed load. considering that v I = The (7.27) If the value of c previously calculated is inserted in the (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. producing the same maximal moment in the mid-spam section.26) Finally.30) The corresponding curves are reported in Figure 7. The same problems can be solved in a generalized form evaluating numerically the displacement following the procedure expressed in (11. We observe as the displacements in the two cases of distributed and concentrated load are respectively 0.15.28) in this case v 1 = M max ξ1=1/(2λ). that is characterized by a parabolic diagram of the bending moments. 7. for the same Mmax. In the same way. 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. Diagrams for v/v1 . In this way. for a distributed load Table of Content Fig.93 and 0. 12Ec I ∗ I (7.15.51).EC2 – worked examples 7-20 and then ξ1 = 1⎡ λ −1⎤ ⎢1 − ⎥ (7.15. it is possible the evaluation the deformation of the whole beam. Furthermore.

displacement increase caused by the cracking (b) And total deformation (c). In particular.16.64 = 35.64mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 48 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.31mm v1 ⎜ ⎟ = ⋅ 5 9 ⎝ 2 ⎠ 12 2 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 18.31 = 27. as obtained comparing the values in Figure 7. we have for the mid-spam displacement: •Distributed load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 5 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 21. Deformation in the stage I (a).05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1. 7. where graphs refer to a 20 folders division for the cracking part of the beam. Table of Content . is about 4%.56 ⋅ 17.71mm ⎝2⎠ a) Concentrated load 6 8 ⎛ ⎞ 1 500 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ 15 = 17.29) and using the results in Figure 11. introducing the numerical values in the (7.16.EC2 – worked examples 7-21 and for λ=3.25. is reported in Figure 7.00mm ⎝2⎠ Fig. Remark as the committed error in the evaluation of the mid-spam deflection.65 ⋅ 21.15 and Figure 7.26) (7.6.05 ⋅ 10 ⎛ ⎞ v ⎜ ⎟ = 1.

EC2 – worked examples 7-22 Table of Content .

3. can be taken equal to: .95 = 1.3. LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE – WORKED EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 11.05 e 0. ⎝ 2200 ⎠ ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density. can be taken equal to: fractile 5% : flctk. flck = value of the characteristic cylindric compressive strength in MPa.3.for concrete of class ≤ LC 50/55 .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.0.1 [EC2 Clause 11.for concrete of class > LC 50/55 Where: flctm = 0.7 flctm fractile 95% : flctk.2 of Eurocode 2. 2 Table of Content . in accordance with the instructions of paragraphs 11. The characteristic values of simple tensile strength.30 flck2/3 η1 flctm = 2. ⎛ ρ ⎞ • ηE = ⎜ ⎟ . flcm = value of the average cylindric compressive strength in MPa. can be estimated by the expression: ⎡f ⎤ E lcm = 22000 ⎢ lcm ⎥ ηE ⎣ 10 ⎦ where: 0. the intersecting compressive elastic module at 28 days. in lack of direct experimentation. for two different types of light concretes and for the corresponding ordinary concretes belonging to the same strength classes.0.3 [MPa] •flcm = value of the cylindric average compressive strength in MPa.1 – 11.The results of calculation of the two above-mentioned mechanical features are shown and compared in the following table.40+0.3 flctm Intersecting compressive elastic module In lack of direct experimentation.1 and 11.05 = 0.EC2 – worked examples 11-1 SECTION 11. for the corresponding density class expressed in kg/m3. for corresponding density class in kg/m3. Tensile strength The average value of simple (axial) tensile strength. which can be used as an indicative value for design of the deformability of structural members.12 ln[1+(flcm/10)] η1 η1 = 0.60 ρ/2200 ρ = upper limit value of the concrete density.3.95. corresponding to fractiles 0.

9 3.959 -0.7 33950 39100 11-2 flck [MPa] ρ [kg/m3] flcm [MPa] η1 ηE fctm [MPa] fctk.95 [MPa] Elcm [MPa] Table of Content .7 3.5 4.EC2 – worked examples Table 11.2 19168 34077 Concrete type 2 Light Ordinary 60 2050 2400 68 0.850 -0.9 2.563 -2.868 -4.05 [MPa] fctk.1 Concrete type 1 Light Ordinary 35 1650 2400 43 0.4 2.1 5.2 1.2 4.4 5.2 3.0.0.

build up with lightweight concrete (flck = 35 MPa.75‰. The arm of internal forces is h’ = d – 10. the limits of strain by compression have values εlc3 = 1.15 x 200000) = 1.5 – 11. is able to withstand when the reinforcement steel achieves the design elastic limit.75‰ and εlcu3 = 3. Two areas can be distinguished in the compressed zone: the first one is comprised between the upper edge and the chord placed at the level where the contraction is εlc3 = 1. The dimensions of the section are: b=30 cm.c.5η1 = 2.98‰. for collapse condition in which maximum resisting bending moment is reached with reinforcement at elastic design limit. to use the bilinear diagram to calculate the compressive strength on concrete. made of type 1 lightweight concrete.85 flck/γc = 19.1 together with the strain diagram related to the failure mode recalled. h=50cm and d=47cm.6] The maximum moment that the reinforced concrete section of given dimensions.365 = 432. The resultant of compression forces is placed at a distance of around 10. 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.5 kNm.6 – 11.5 cm. is εyd = fyd /(1.11.5 cm = 36. to which corresponds a steel section As equal to As = T/fyd = 3030 mm2.3. For the condition of equilibrium the resultant of compressions C is equal to the resultant of tractions T.1 Deformation and tension diagram of r. described in the previous example. The distance of the neutral axis from the compressed upper edge is therefore x = 28. ρ = 1650 kg/m3). The compressive stress in it is constant and it is equal to flcd = 0.3. 11. for fyk= 450 MPa.8 MPa.3 cm.3.1 – 11.2 [EC2 Clause 11. like in the previous example.96‰. In case one chooses.15 x Es) = 450/(1. The section in question is shown in Fig.5 cm from the compressed end of the section and is equal to C = 1185 kN. Fig.EC2 – worked examples 11-3 EXAMPLE 11. 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. section. from which the value of the moment resistance of the section can eventually be calculated as MRd = 1185 x 0. The design strain corresponding to steel yielding. Table of Content .4 – 11.

EC2 – worked examples 11-4 Table of Content .

- BCA - Worked Examples Design of Concrete Building
- Concise Eurocode 2
- Design Aids EuroCode
- Eurocode 2 Reinforced Concrete Design to Eurocode 2 2007
- EuroCode_4
- Ccip Worked Examples Ec2
- Ccip Concise Ec2
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- CCIP_Properties_of_Concrete
- Worked Example to Eurocode 2 Vol. 1
- How to Design Foundations
- How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2
- Bridge Design Eurocodes Worked Examples
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- DesignersHandbookToEurocode2_Pages1_113
- Eurocode2_Commentary2008
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- Eurocode 3 Actions
- Structural Timber Design To Eurocode 5, 1405146389
- Retaining Wall Design Example
- Example Composite Floor Slab
- Eurocode 2 Worked examples
- 45640339 How2 FlatSlabs FNL
- Concise Eurocode 2
- L4-Beams
- Eurocode Guide - Online
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- Composite beam design to Eurocode 4 Hüseyin Gören
- DESIGN_OF_STRUCTURAL_CONNECTIONS_TO _EUROCODE_3
- steel_design

- Steel Beam Balcony Thermalbreak
- Rebound Hammer
- Wind Load Example 1
- Timber Beam Reinforced With Steel Plate
- Curved Steel Beam Adn HSFG Bolts
- BASE Plate 1
- Several Steel Joints
- Steel-structure+Foundation
- Old School Connection Details
- Bamboo Node Connection
- Bolted Cross Section Examples
- Bamboo Node Connection
- Competencies Proficiency Scale Example
- 3D View of Steel Node in Tekla
- Steel Beam Supporting Timber Floor
- Base Plate Dim Image
- Wind Loads UK Portal Frame WE
- Bolted Joints-examples
- Brick to Steel Connection
- Base Plate Stress Image
- Steel Sections 2008
- Complex Steel Node Joint
- Brick to Steel Connection
- FIE2013 Bahk Et Al
- Painéis fotovoltaicos
- Topic -Connections -Typical Joints for Steel Structures (From Web)
- Steel bridge welds
- Example-NHBC Standards 2011
- bse-re-003_1996_75_a_035_d
- Base Plate Contact Image

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

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

Loading