You are on page 1of 54

1.

A summary of essential
differences between EC2 and
BS8110
Prof Tan Kang Hai
Email: D-PTRC@ntu.edu.sg
Director of Protective Technology Research Centre (PTRC)
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering
All the rights of 11 lecture materials belong to Tan Kang Hai

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
2

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
3

Similarities
of BS8110 and EC2

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state


Permanent actions, imposed loads and wind loads
Plane strain assumption for design of beams,
slabs, columns, and walls
Linear elastic analysis

Linear elastic analysis with limited distribution

Plastic analysis

Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Differences
between BS8110 and EC2

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

EC2 is phenomenon-based code unlike the BS8110


Entire code is based on reliability index
Based on Model Concrete Code 1978 and 1990

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Influence of material behaviour


Basis of design and load combination
Global geometric imperfections
Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis
Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
6

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

EC2 stress-strain relationships of


concrete under compression
max stress level for idealized curve must be below the max stress
of the schematic diagram for the same area under the curve

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

The design value of concrete compressive strength fcd is given by:


f
0.85fck
fcd cc ck
0.567fck
(3.15)
c
1.5

Where the factor


allows for the difference between the
bending strength and the cylinder crushing strength of concrete,
and c 1.5 is the concrete material partial safety factor.
7

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Table 3.1 Strength and deformation


characteristics for concrete

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

Class 1

Class 2

Class 3

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

EC2 stress-strain relationships of


reinforcing steel

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

k=ft/fy indicates ductility; the greater the k value, the longer is the
plateau or the plastic zone uk.

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

The design value of the modulus of elastic Es is 200 GPa. In


the ultimate limit state calculation, by taking a partial safety
factor of s 1.15 , design values of yield strength fyd and
yield strain y of reinforcing steel are respectively computed as:

fyd

fyk
fyk
500 103

0.00217

0.87fyk y
6
s Es 1.15200 10
1.15
9

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Table C.1: Properties of reinforcement


Product form
Class
Characteristic yield
strength fyk or f0.2k (MPa)
Minimum value of
k = (ft/fy)k

Bars and de-coiled


rods
A
B
C

Wire Fabrics
A

400 to 600

Requirement or
quantile value (%)
5.0

1.05

1.08

1.15
<1.35

1.05

1.08

1.15
<1.35

10.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Characteristic strain at
maximum force,
(%)
Bendability
Shear strength
Maximum
deviation
from nominal
mass
(individual
bar of wire)
(%)

Nominal
bar size
(mm)
8
>8

Bend/Rebend test
-

0.3 A fyk (A is area of wire)

6.0
4.5

Minimum

5.0

10

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

The specified values for the tensile properties


are given in Table 4.
Table 4 Characteristic tensile properties

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

BS 4449:2005
+A2:2009

7.2.3 Tensile properties

B500A

Yield strength,
Re
MPa
500

Tensile/yield strength ratio,


Rm/Re

Total elongation at
maximum force, Agt
%

1.05a

2.5b

B500B

500

1.08

5.0

B500C

500

1.15,<1.35

7.5

Rm/Re characteristics is 1.02 for sizes below 8mm.


b A characteristics is 1.0% for sizes below 8mm.
gt
Values of Re specified are characteristic with p = 0.95.
Values of Rm/Re and Agt specified are characteristic with p = 0.90.
Calculate the values of Rm and Re using the nominal cross sectional area.

The absolute maximum permissible value of yield strength is 650 MPa.

11

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

7.2.3 Tensile properties

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

BS 8666:2005 - Scheduling, dimensioning, bending and cutting of steel


reinforcement for concrete Specification has been revised to incorporate:
(i) Shape codes available under BS EN ISO 3766:2003; (ii) Revised
notation in accordance with BS 4449:2005 and BS EN 10080:2005; (iii)
Revisions to BS 4449:2005 (including the omission of grade 250 and grade
460 reinforcement)
.

12

Similar to BS specification
Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

BS system:
notation is T

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

13

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
14

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Load combinations
according to EC0
Leading variable action and accompanying variable action:

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

(6.10)

Comparison of partial factors for loading


Design situations
With one variable action
(Live load)
With one variable action
(Wind load)
With two variable
actions
(leading and
accompanying)

BS 8110

EC2

1.4DL + 1.6LL

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.4DL + 1.6W

1.35Gk + 1.5Wk

1.2DL + 1.2LL +
1.2W

1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 0.75Wk


Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk

(Wind & live loads)


0.7x1.5Qk for office or
residential buildings

0.5x1.5Wk
15

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Load combinations
To be applied together
according to EC0

Influence of
material behaviour

(6.10a)

Basis of design
and load
combination

(6.10b)

Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Ultimate states
Eq. (6.10)

Combinations of actions
1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 1.5*0.5Wk

For EQU, STR,


GEO
Eq. (6.10a)

1.35 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Qk

For STR, GEO

1.35 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk

Eq. (6.10b)
For STR, GEO

0.925*1.35Gk + 1.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Qk


Or 0.925*1.35 Gk + 1.5Wk

Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk

For unfavourable
permanent
actions single
source principle
in EC0 - Table
16
A1.2 (B) Set B

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

Load combinations
according to EC0
Instantaneous value of Q
Characteristic value Qk

t 1

t 2

t 3

Combination value 0Qk


Frequent value 1Qk

Quasi-permanent value 2Qk

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Time

Fig. Representative values of variable actions

17

1. BS EN 1990:2002 (EC0)
OTHER REPRESENTATIVE VALUES OF VARIABLE ACTIONS:

Combination Value 0Qk

Frequent Value 1Qk

For:
1) ULS and

Quasi-permanent Value 2Qk

For:

For:

1) ULS involving accidental actions,

1) ULS

and

involving

accidental

actions, and

2) Irreversible SLS

2) Reversible SLS

2) Reversible SLS

3) Apply to non-leading variable

3) Apply to leading variable actions

3) Used for calculation of longterm effects.

actions
(consider the reduced probability

(e.g. for buildings, the frequent value is


of

simultaneous occurrences of two or

chosen so that the time it is exceeded is


0.01 of the reference period of 50
years)

more independent variable actions.)

(e.g. for loads on building floors, the


quasi-permanent value is chosen
so that the proportion of the time it
is exceeded is 0.50 of the reference
period.)

18

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Load combinations
according to EC0

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Combinations of actions for the Serviceability Limit State

Combination

Permanent action
Gd

Variable action Qd
Leading

Others

Characteristic

Gk,j

Qk,1

0,iQk,i

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Frequent

Gk,j

1,1Qk,1

2,iQk,i

Design of columns

Quasipermanent

Gk,j

2,1Qk,1

2,iQk,i

Detailing of
members

19

Load combinations
according to EC0

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Crack width limit

w wmax

UK Annex Table NA.4 Recommended values of wmax (mm)

Basis of design
and load
combination

Exposure

Global geometric
imperfections

Reinforced members and

Prestressed

prestressed members

members with

without bonded tendons

bonded tendons

(quasi-permanent load

(frequent load

combination)

combination)

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

X0, XC1

0.3a

0.2

XC2, XC3, XC4

0.3

0.2b

Design of columns

XD1, XD2, XD3, XS1, XS2,

Detailing of
members

0.2 and decompressionc

XS3
a

For X0, XC1 exposure classes, crack width has no influence on durability and this limit is set to produce

acceptable appearance. In the absence of specific requirements for appearance this limit may be relaxed.
b

For these exposure classes, in addition, decompression should be checked under the quasi-permanent

combination of loads.
c

wmax = 0.2 mm applies to parts of the member that do not have to be checked for decompression.

20

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Failure conditions under ULS


according to EC0

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

21

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Load combinations
according to EC2 Cl 5.1.3

Influence of
material behaviour

Single source for Gk

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.35Gk

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

1.0Gk

1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
1.35Gk

1.35Gk

1.0Gk

1.4Gk + 1.6Qk

1.0Gk

22

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
23

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

When to consider
geometric imperfections?
In EC2, there is no notional
horizontal load.

Global geometric imperfections due


to out-of-plumbness of vertical
elements must be modelled by
equivalent loads in two design
situations:
Persistent design situations:
Possible extreme loading condition
of wind, imposed loads.
Accidental design situations: fire,
impact.
24

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

When to consider
geometric imperfections?
Imperfection loads are quantified by three considerations:
Global analysis of building structures.
Analysis of isolated vertical members.
Analysis of floor diaphragms as horizontal elements
transferring forces to bracing members.
Only imperfection loads in global analysis are similar to
notional horizontal loads, although they are very different in
the way to be considered.
Imperfections need not be considered for serviceability limit
states.
25

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

How to consider
geometric imperfections?
The structure is assumed with inclination l, given by:
where: 0 is the basic value (0 = 1/200)
h is the reduction factor for height

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

m is the reduction factor for number of members:

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

where m is the number of vertically continuous members


in the storey contributing to total horizontal forces on the
26
floor.

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

How to consider
geometric imperfections?

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

To design for slab


(member transferring
forces to bracing
elements)

The imperfection on each floor may be represented by a


force acting on the floor where Na and Nb are the factored
axial forces above and below the floor considered. (see
27
EC3 Figure 5.3)

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

How to consider
geometric imperfections?
Lateral load case: in BS 8110: Hdesign = Max(HN, 1.2Wk)
However, in EC 2: Hdesign = 1.0 Hi + FWk
where Hi is horizontal loads for geometric imperfection

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

28

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
29

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Different types of analysis


First order elastic analysis: represents conditions at
normal service loads very well (Section 5.4)

Global geometric
imperfections

First order elastic analysis with limited redistribution:


excluded nonlinearity, represents conditions at normal
service loads very well (Section 5.5)

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

First order inelastic analysis: Plastic analysis with no


geometrical nonlinearity (Section 5.6)

Shear design of
beams and slabs

Second order elastic analysis: Effects of finite


deformation considered. Good representation of P- effect
(Section 5.7)

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Second order inelastic analysis: Both geometrical and


material nonlinearities are considered. Model can faithfully
reflect the behavior of structures up to ultimate limit state
30

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Different types of analysis

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Source: Fig. 8.1 of Matrix Structural Analysis, Second Edition, William


McGuire, Richard H. Gallagher and Ronald D. Ziemian, John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
2000, ISBN 0-471-12918-6
31

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Local second order effects


Cl 5.8.7 or Cl 5.8.8
Taken from EC2

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

32

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

Local second order effects


Cl 5.8.7 or Cl 5.8.8
States that if there are additional action effects caused by
structural deformations under the influence of significant axial
load, second order effects should be considered.
Local second order effect
on isolated members (P-)

Global second order effect


on whole structure (P-)

Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

33

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Local second order effects


Cl 5.8.7 or Cl 5.8.8

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs

How to account for second order effects?

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Local second order effects


- Method based on nominal stiffness (EC2 Clause 5.8.7)
- Method based on nominal curvature (EC2 Clause 5.8.8)

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
35

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination

Methodology
EC2 uses The Variable Strut Inclination Method for shear
design.
BS 8110 uses Truss Analogy with truss angle = 450
DC : the concrete acts as the
diagonal struts;

Global geometric
imperfections

VT: the stirrups act as the


vertical ties;

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis

BT: the tension reinforcement


forms the bottom chord;

Shear design of
beams and slabs

TC: the compression


steel/concrete forms the top
chord.

Design of columns

Detailing of
members

(a) Beam and reinforcement


(b) Analogous truss

= 21.80 450 (strut angle)


(EC2 6.2.3(2))
36

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

Comparison of shear design


BS 8110

EC2

1. = 45o

1. = 21.8o 45o

2. BS 8110 compares shear 2.


stresses.
3.
3. The maximum shear
stress is limited to 5
N/mm2 or 0.8fcu,
4.
whichever is the lesser.
4. The design shear force
must be less than the
sum of the shear
resistance of concrete
plus shear links.

EC 2 compares shear forces.


The maximum shear capacity
of concrete VRd,max cannot be
exceeded.
Where the applied shear
exceeds the min shear
resistance of concrete VRd,c,
the shear reinforcement
should be capable of resisting
all the shear forces.

37

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Punching shear design of slabs


Control perimeters
Basic control perimeter u1:

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

38

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Control perimeters

Influence of
material behaviour

For slabs with a rectangular column with a rectangular head


with lH < 2hH, the value rcont may be taken as the lesser of:

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

rcont 2d 0.56 l1l2 and rcont 2d 0.69l1


l1 c1 2lH1; l2 c2 2lH 2 ; l1 l2

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

39

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections

Control perimeters
For slabs with enlarged column heads where lH > 2hH, the
control sections both within the head and in the slab should
be checked. For circular columns:
rcont,ext lH 2d 0.5c
rcont,int 2 d hH 0.5c

Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

40

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2
Influence of
material behaviour

Punching shear stress VEd

(EC2 6.4.3 (3))

How to calculate b?

MEd u1
b 1 k
VEd W1

Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

For rectangular columns:

c12
W1
c1c2 4c2d 16d 2 2 dc1
2
41

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
42

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in symbols

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

43

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in symbols

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

44

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in design

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

45

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Differences in design

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

46

Outline
Similarities and differences of BS8110 and EC2
Influence of material behaviour

Basis of design and load combination


Global geometric imperfections

Nonlinear versus linear elastic analysis


Shear design of beams and slabs
Design of columns
Detailing of members
47

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Minimum cover due to


environmental conditions cmin,dur

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

48

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Minimum cover due to


environmental conditions cmin,dur

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

49

Similarities and
differences of
BS8110 and EC2

Minimum cover due to


environmental conditions cmin,dur

Influence of
material behaviour
Basis of design
and load
combination
Global geometric
imperfections
Nonlinear versus
linear elastic
analysis
Shear design of
beams and slabs
Design of columns

Detailing of
members

50

Detailing of members
DESIGN ANCHORAGE LENGTH

For the effect of the form of the


bars assuming adequate cover
1=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)
For the effect of concrete minimum
cover 2=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)
For the effect of confinement by tied
transverse bars along the design anc.
length 3=0.7~1.0 (in comp. is 1.0)
For the effect of confinement by welded
transverse bars along the design anc. length
4=0.7
For the effect of confinement by transverse
pressure along the design anc. length 5=0.7

Basic anchorage length


Design stress of the bar:
Design ultimate stress:
For the quality of bond condition 1=0.7
(poor) - 1=1.0 (good)

For the bar diameter 2=1.0 for 32mm


2=(132-)/100 for >32mm
The design concrete tensile strength (<C60/75)
fctd=fctk,0.05/c

51

Detailing of members
DESIGN ANCHORAGE LENGTH lbd

52

SUMMARY on Differences between BS and EC


Complex load combinations due to leading and accompanying
variable load cases;
In EC0 - Eq 6.10 compared with Eq 6.10(a) and Eq 6.10(b).
Definition of member types and the choice of suitable elements;
Represent global geometrical imperfection load by horizontal
loads and consider in all ULS;
Need to consider global second order effect unless structure
satisfies Clause 5.8.3.3;
Calculation model should reflect realistic global and local
behaviour of the designed RC structure
High strength concrete is permitted (above 50 MPa till 90 MPa);

53

Thank You!

54