You are on page 1of 42

Designing concrete bridges to

EN 1992-2
Dr Stephen Salim

Structure of Eurocodes
EN 1990

Structural safety, serviceability


& durability

EN 1991

Actions on structures

EN 1992

EN 1993

EN 1994

EN 1995

EN 1996

EN 1999

EN 1997

EN 1998

Design &
Detailing
Geotechnical &
seismic design

Eurocodes have National Annexes

Gives values/approaches where


National Determination is allowed

Eurocodes required for concrete bridge design


EN 1990

EN 1991

Limit states, combination


and partial factors

Actions, inc. load groups,


application etc.

Design
Analysis and section
design, partial factors

EN 1992

Design approach, partial factors,


foundations, earth pressures etc.

EN 1997

Comparisons with current


practice Concrete design
Uses cylinder strength ( 0.8fcu )
More rooted in plasticity theory
Consistent approach for reinforced concrete and
prestressed concrete
Greater coverage of non-linear analysis and time
dependent effects

What effect will change of code have on


designs?

ULS Flexure

Strain

Stress Blocks
Stress

0,0035 (for fck< 55)

cc * fck / c
0.8

or

cc * fck / c

Design Concrete Strength


cc * fck / c

fcd

Where
cc

0,85

1,5

fck

0,8 * fcu

cc * fck / c

0,453 * fcu Close to BS 5400!

(From UK NA)

(approx)

Reinforcement

1.15 as BS 5400

Stress/strain relationship very similar (actually


closer to 8110).

Overall effect on Flexural design at ULS

Compression steel more advantage than in BS 5400 but


otherwise Very Similar
Some change due to loading (e.g. switching from the old
HB abnormal loads to new loads similar to the loads
already used in BD 86 assessment

ULS Shear

Case 1: No designed links

For RC approach and results fairly similar to BS 5400


except more benefit for compression
For Prestressed approach same as for RC with axial load.
Tends to be more conservative than BS 5400, except for
external prestress.

Case 2: Designed Links

Unlike BS 5400 which uses the addition principle ( V =


Vconcrete + Vlinks)
In EN 1992 - shear is taken by the links once the shear
strength without links are exceeded and the strength is
calculated using the varying angle truss approach

Case 2: Designed Links


Variable Angle Truss Analogy

Concrete Struts

Steel Ties

Strength limited by Links


=

(Asw / s) *z * fywd * cot

Asw / s

Link Area / Spacing

z
fywd

=
=

Lever Arm (normally 0,9d for RC)


Design yield strength of links
(i.e. with factor of 1,15)

Angle of struts (1< cot <2,5)

VRd,S
where

Strength limited by Concrete


VRd,max

cw * b * w * z * 1 * fcd / (cot + tan )

where
cw

Coefficient taking account of


compression stress
(1.0 for R.C. can be up to 1.25)

bw

Web width (after reductions for ducts)

fcd

Design concrete strength


(As in flexure but cc can be 1.0)

Choice of

For minimum links

cot = 2.5

But, for maximum shear

cot = 1.0

(45o truss)

If shear too great for cot of 2.5 but within limit,


optimum is with:
VRd,s = VRd.max
for higher shear, pays to use 80% yield

Link Design Comparison


600

EN 1992

500

Stength(kN)

Shear Strength
of
300 wide 400 deep
RC beam
with
25/30 Concrete
(1% steel)

400

BS 5400

300
200
100
0
0

Links

Link Design Comparison


1200

Stength(kN)

1000

Shear Strength
of
300 wide 400 deep
RC beam
with
50/60 Concrete
(1% steel)

EN 1992

800
600

BS 5400

400
200
0
0

Links

10

10 links = T16-60
A lot but possible!

Varying Angel Truss Analogy


Can give significant link saving
But
Affects curtailment and EN 1992 already tends to be more
conservative for these
Design calculations more complicated (can optimise for
link design with simple excel spreadsheet)

Shear in Prestressed Concrete


Same general approach as RC
But
Strength without links enhanced
VRd,max = cw * b * w * z * 1 * fcd / (cot + tan ) + k1 * cp
Concrete crush strength increased for
( 0 < cp < 0.5fcd )

Effect of Compressive Stress on cw


1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

Stress/fcd

0.8

Link Design Comparison (Prestressed)

Strength (kN)

3000

EN 1992

2500

For

2000

250 x 1100 beam

1500
1000
500

BS 5400

50/60 concrete

(uncracked in flexure)

7N/mm2 prestress

0
0

Links

10

Shear in Prestressed Concrete


Can have thinner webs
May require more links
Bigger reduction for plastic ducts

Short Shear Spans

Load multiplied
by
= av/2d
(av 0.5d)

av

Short Shear Span Enhancement


Altering loads is inconvenient and conservative for multiple
loads and impractical for envelope load cases
So
EN 1992-2 NA has changed it back to an enhancement
factor to the resistance

Serviceability Limit state (SLS)

SLS Stress Limits


Steel: 0.80fyk

(0.75fy in BS 5400)

Concrete: 0.6fck for both RC & PSC


(0.50fcu for RC and 0.40fcu for PSC in BS 5400)
but calculated on cracked section

SLS Cracking
BS 5400 Class

EN 1992 Equivalent

Decompression

None

Crack Width Check


(As for RC)

Decompression VS Class 1

Tendons
Cracked

OK to either

OK for decompression,
not class 1

Table 7.101N Recommended values for wmax &


relevant combination rules
Reinforced members and prestressed members
without bonded tendons

Prestressed members with bonded


tendons

Quasi-permanent load combinationc

Frequent load combinationc

X0, XC1

0.3a

0.2

XC2, XC3, XC4

0.3

0.2b

XD1, XD2, XD3 XS1, XS2,


XS3

0.3

0,2d and Decompression

Exposure Class

a For X0, XC1 exposure classes, crack width has no influence on durability and this limit is set to guarantee
acceptable appearance. In the absence of appearance conditions this limit may be relaxed.
b For these exposure classes, in addition, decompression should be checked under the quasi-permanent
combination of loads.
c For the crack width checks under combinations which include temperature distribution, the resulting member
forces should be calculated using gross section concrete properties and self-equilibrating stresses may be
ignored.
d 0.2 applies to the parts of the member that do not have to be checked for decompression

Cracking in RC
Only checked under quasi-permanent
Unlikely to be critical
Result: despite apparently radical treating of RC and
prestressed together, still tends to give:
RC: designed at ULS
Prestressed: designed at SLS

Cracking in PSC
More sensitive to damage from corrosion than normal
reinforcement due to smaller diameter and higher level of
stress under which they normally operate
Therefore more onerous ruler and reflects in stricter crack
control criteria for bonded tendons
Checked under frequent OR quasi-permanent load
combination depending on exposure class

Determination of crack widths


Calculate
or
Comply with max bar spacing
or
Comply with max bar diameter table
Same basic approach used for PSC

Design Examples
1. Concrete composite construction with precast, pretensioned beams and a cast in-situ slab
2. In-situ post-tensioned box girder bridge

Precast Beam & Slab Bridge

Elevation (half in Section)


Section

Precast Beam & Slab Bridge


Comparison of moments - BS 5400 and EN 1992
Design code
& exposure
class
BS 5400
EN 1992
XD exposure
EN 1992
XC exposure

Design moment (kNm) for checking


Compression

Decompression /
Class 1

Cracking /
tensile stress

3000

1160

2900

(LC 1-5)

(LC 1, no LL)

(LC 3)

3090

2460

3090

(Characteristic LC)

(Frequent LC)

(Characteristic LC)

3090

1230

2460

(Characteristic LC)

(Quasi-permanent LC)

(Frequent LC)

In-Situ Post-tensioned Box Girder Bridge

Mid-span section
Support section
Spans 70m - 100m 70m

Post-tensioned Box Girder Bridge


Comparison of moments - BS 5400 and EN 1992
Design code
& exposure
class
BS 5400

EN 1992
XD exposure
EN 1992
XC exposure

Design moment (MNm) for checking


Compression

Decompression /
Class 1

Cracking /
tensile stress

235
-402

109
-224

231
-386

(LC 1-5)

(LC 1, no LL)

(LC 3)

235
-397

199
-346

235
-397

(Characteristic LC)

(Frequent LC)

(Characteristic LC)

235
-397

115
-2.29

199
346

(Characteristic LC)

(Quasi-permanent LC)

(Frequent LC)

First positive value represents the sagging moment at mid-span, second negative is the
hogging moment at the piers

Post-tensioned Box Girder Bridge


Comparison of prestress requirement
Design code
& exposure
class

Mid-span

Pier

Prestressing
force (kN)

Peak
concrete
compressive
stress
(N/mm2)

Prestressing
force (kN)

Peak
concrete
compressive
stress
(N/mm2)

BS 5400

70800

18.5

73000

23.3

EN 1992
XD exposure

66700

18.7

76400

22.7

EN 1992
XC exposure

45000

22.0

50500

26.0

Challenges for UK bridge designers and clients


To be ready for the introduction of the Eurocodes
Minimise increases in design costs due to unfamiliarity of
documents
Manage the risks associated with this magnitude of
change