Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2010 Bridges EN1992 GMancini EBouchon PDF
2010 Bridges EN1992 GMancini EBouchon PDF
EN 1992-2
EUROCODE 2 Design of concrete structures
Concrete bridges: design and detailing rules
Approved by CEN on 25 April 2005
Published on October 2005
Supersedes ENV 1992-2:1996
Prof. Ing. Giuseppe Mancini
P lit
Politecnico
i di T
Torino
i
Section 3 MATERIALS
- Recommended values for Cmin and Cmax
C30/37
C70/85
(Durability)
(Ductility)
- cc coefficient
ffi i t for
f long
l
term
t
effects
ff t and
d unfavourable
f
bl
effects resulting from the way the load is applied
Recommended value: 0.85 high stress values during construction
Deterioration of concrete
Corrosion of reinforcement by chloride penetration
Design measures
- Sufficient cover thickness
- Sufficiently
y low permeability
p
y of concrete ((in combination with cover
thickness)
- Avoiding harmfull cracks parallel to reinforcing bars
10
11
12
13
Special considerations
In case of stainless steel the minimum cover may be
reduced. The value of the reduction is left to the decision
of the countries (0 if no further specification).
specification)
14
- When de-icing
salt is used
15
0.85
0 85
(recommended value)
16
- Plastic analysis
xu
0 15 ffor concrete
0.15
t strength
t
th classes
l
C50/60
0.10 for concrete strength classes C55/67
17
- Rotation capacity
in plastic
hinges
xu
18
19
Reinforcing steel
Mean values
1 1 fyk
1.1
1 1 k fyk
1.1
Prestressing steel
Mean values
Concrete
Sargin
S
i modified
difi d
mean values
1 1 fpk
1.1
cf fck
cf = 1.1 s / c
20
Design format
Incremental analysis from SLS, so to reach
G Gk + Q Q in the same step
Continuation of incremental procedure up to the
peak strength of the structure, in corrispondance
of ultimate load qud
Evaluation of structural strength by use of a
global safety factor 0
qud
R
21
qud
Rd E G G Q Q R
qud
E GG QQ R
Rd . O
qud
(i.e.) R
O'
qud
Rd Sd E g G q Q R
22
Safety format
23
E,R
R qud E
O
R qud O
R qud O
Rd
Rd Sd
G
G
G
F
F
x
a
m
x
a
m
C
qud
B
qud
24
Safety format
ER
E,R
A
R
qud
R qud O
R qud O
Rd
G
G
F
Rd Sd
x
a
m
qud
qu
x
a
m
H H
25
Safety format
M sd,M
M rd
IAP
M q ud
q
M ud
O
q
M ud
O
A
B
D
C
Rd
a
b
q
N ud
O
N q ud
Rd
q
N ud
O
N sd,N rd
Safety format
M sd
26
IAP
M qud
q
M ud
O
A
b
B
C
D
O
Rd
q
N ud
O
Rd
q
N ud
O
qu
N
q
M ud
O
N sd,N
rd
27
M ED
qud
M Rd
0'
N ED
qudd
N Rd
0'
and
28
29
CRd,c
k
l
fck
bw
d
30
31
32
33
Out of plane shear forces vEdx and vEdy are applied to the inner layer
with lever arm zc, determined with reference to the centroid of the
appropriate layers of reinforcement.
For the design of the inner layer the principal shear vEdo and its
direction o should be evaluated as follows:
34
35
36
37
38
Edy
Edxy
- Membrane elements
Edxy
Edx
Edxy
Edx
Edxy
Edy
cd max 0.85 f cd
1 3,80
39
cd max
s
f cd 0,85
0,85
f yd
cd max f cd 1 0, 032 el
is the angle to the X axis of plastic
compression field at ULS
(principal compressive stress)
el 15 degrees
iis the
h iinclination
li i to the
h X axis
i off
principal compressive stress in
the elastic analysis
40
41
42
Eq. 70
Eq. 72
0.40
Eq. 71
0.35
0.30
Eq. 69
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
Eq. 73
0.05
0.00
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
pl
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
x = 0.16
y = 0.06
nx = ny = -0.17
el = 45
E
Experimental
i
t l versus calculated
l l t d panell strenght
t
ht bby M
Martiti andd K
Kaufmann
f
((a))
and by Carbone, Giordano and Mancini (b)
43
44
Skew reinforcement
yr
xyr
xr
xr
r
X
yr
xyr
Thickness = tr
Plates
conventions
45
br
r sr br
1
r sr ar
ar
xyr sinr
r
xr sinr
yr cosr
xyr cosr
cosr
sinr
Equilibrium of the
section parallel to
the compression
field
46
br
r sr br
cr
ar
xr cosr
cosr
r sr ar
xyr cosr
xyr
y sinr
yyr sinr
sinr
Equilibrium of the
section orthogonal to
the compression
field
47
48
(recommended value)
k1 = 0.66
0 66 in confined concrete (recommemded value)
49
- Crack control
Exposure
Class
X0, XC1
Quasi-permanent load
combination
0,31
0,2
XC2 XC3,
XC2,
XC3 XC4
0,2
0
22
0,3
Decompression
Note 1: 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.
Note 2: For these exposure classes, in addition, decompression should be checked
under the quasi-permanent combination of loads.
50
cos sin
srm,x
rm,y
y
rm x srm
where srm,x and srm,y are the mean spacing between the cracks
in two ideal ties arranged in the x and y directions
directions. The mean
opening of cracks can than evaluated as:
w m srm ( c,
c )
where and c, represent the total mean strain and the mean
concrete strain
strain, evaluated in the direction orthogonal to the crack
51
52
53
54
55
Distiction between
Autogenous shrinkage:
related to process of hydratation
Drying shrinkage:
related to humidity exchanges
56
- Autogenous shrinkage
For t < 28 days fctm(t) / fck is the main variable
f cm t
f ck
f cm t
f ck
0.1
ca t , f ck 0
0.1
01
ca t , f ck f ck 20 2.2
22
f cm (t )
00.2
2 106
f ck
For t 28 days
57
cd (t , ts , f ck , h0 , RH )
with:
K( f ck ) 72 exp((00.046
046 f ck ) 75 RH t ts 106
(t ts ) cd h0 2
K ( f ck ) 18
if fck 55 MPa
K ( f ck ) 30 0.
0.21 f ck
cd
0.007
0.021
58
- Creep
cc t , t0
t0
Ec 28
Basic creep
b t , t0 d t , t0
Drying creep
59
- Basic creep
b t , t0 , f ck , f cm t0 b 0
with:
t t0
t t0 bc
3.6
for silica fume concrete
f t 0,37
b0 cm 0
1.4
for non silica fume concrete
bc
fcm t 0
0.37
exp
2.8
for silica fume concrete
ck
ck
60
- Drying creep
d (t , ts , t0 , f ck , RH , h0 ) d 0 cd (t , ts ) cd (t0 , ts )
with:
d 0
61
At least 6 months
Formulae
Experimental
determination
62
Assumptions
63
64
Type of analysis
65
- General method
1
(t , ti )
c (t )
(t , t0 )
ti cs t , ts
Ec (t0 )
Ec ((28)) i 1 Ec ti Ec ((28))
- Incremental method
At the time t of application of the creep strain cc(t),
the potential creep strain cc(t) and the creep rate are
derived from the whole load history
66
d cc (t ) d (, t )
dt
dt Ec 28
t te
under constant stress from te the same
cc(t) are obtained
cc(t) and
cc t c t , te cc t
Creep rate at time t may be evaluated using the creep
curve for te
c t , te
d cc (t )
cc t
dt
t
67
ccMax (t ) cc (t ) ccMax (t ) cc (t ) c t , te
d ccMax (t ) cc (t )
dt
ccMax (t ) cc (t )
c t , te
t
68
S (t ) Sel t
t
D(t ) EC J t , dDel
0
69
D(t ) Del t
1 t
S (t )
R t , dSel
EC 0
Structure subjected to imposed constant loads whose initial
statical scheme (1) is modified into the final scheme (2) by
i t d ti off additional
dditi
l restraints
t i t att ti
introduction
time t1 t0
S 2 t Sel ,1 t , t0 , t1 Sel ,1
t
t , t0 , t1 R t , dJ , t0
t1
t , t0 , t
R t , t0
1 E t
C
70
- Ageing
A i coefficient
ffi i t method
th d
Integration in a single step and correction by means of
(
Ec (28)
Ec (28)
E ( ) 28 t , d E (t ) t , t0 28 t , t0 t0 t
t0
c
c 0
- Simplified formulae
(, t0 ) (t1 , t0 ) Ec (t1 )
S S0 S1 S0
1 , t1 Ec (t0 )
where:
71
72
73
EUROCODES
Bridges: Background and applications
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010
Contents
Dissemination of information for training Vienna, 4-6 October 2010
Durability
y cover to reinforcement
Verifications of the transverse reinforcement
3.
4.
Punching
Combination of global and local effects in longitudinal direction
cmin,b
i b (bond) is given in table 4.2
Final class :
4.4.1.3 (1)P )
cmin,b
cmin,dur
cdev
Cnom
20
20
10
25
30
10
30
40
Cover (mm)
10
transverse moment
above the main girder vs.
width of the cantilever
Position of UDL
11
Combination of actions
Transverse bending moment
M (kNm/m)
(kN / )
Quasi
permanentt
SLS
F
Frequent
t SLS
Characteristic
SLS
ULS
Section above
the main
girder
-46
46
-156
156
-204
204
-275
275
Section at
mid-span
24
132
184
248
12
13
for s fyd / Es
for s fyd / Es
s = Ess
s = fyd + (k 1) fyd(s fyd / Es)/ (uk fyd / Es)
14
0,8x
where b = 1 m
with
ith d = 0,36
0 36 m and
d As= 18,48
18 48 cm2 (20 every 0
0,17
17 m):
)
x = 0,052 m , s = 20,6 mm/m (< ud) and s = 448 Mpa
Therefore MRd = 0,281
0 281 MN.m
MN m > MEd = 0,275
0 275 MN.m
MN m
Section at mid
mid-span
span between the main steel girder
with d = 0,26 m and As= 28,87 cm2 (25 every 0,17 m):
x = 0,08
, m , s = 7,9
, mm/m (<
( ud) and s = 439 MPa
Therefore MRd = 0,289 MN.m > MEd = 0,248 MN.m
15
16
17
18
19
X0, XC1
0,31
0,2
0,22
0,3
Decompression
Note 1: 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
b relaxed.
be
l
d
Note 2: For these exposure classes, in addition, decompression should be checked under the quasipermanent combination of loads.
20
21
( 7.1)
As,min
s min is the minimum area of reinforcing steel within the tensile zone
Act is the area of concrete within tensile zone...
s is the absolute value of the maximum stress permitted in the reinforcement
22
( 7.1)
23
24
25
26
27
28
VRd,s = (Asw/s).z.fywd.cot
and
VRd,max
Rd max = cw bw z 1 fcd/(cot + tan)
where:
z is the inner lever arm (z = 0,9d may normally be used for members
without axial force)
is the angle of the compression strut with the horizontal
horizontal, must be
chosen such as 1 cot 2,5
Asw is the cross-sectional area of the shear reinforcement
s is the spacing of the stirrups
fywdd is the design yield strength of the shear reinforcement
1 is a strength reduction factor for concrete cracked in shear, the
recommended value of 1 is = 0,6(1-fck/250)
cw is a coefficient taking account of the interaction of the stress in the
compression chord and any applied axial compressive stress; the
recommended value of cw is 1 for non prestressed members.
29
30
31
surface
f
b-b
b b holing
h li twice
t i by
b the
th
lower transverse reinforcement
layers, As = 2.Ainf
32
33
vEd = Fd/(hf x)
where:
hf is the thickness of flange at the junctions
x is the length under consideration, see Figure 6.7
Fd is the change of the normal force in the flange over the length x.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
39 kN.m/m
41
F,fat
iis the
th partial
ti l factor
f t for
f fatigue
f ti
l d (EN1992-1-1,
load
(EN1992 1 1 2
2.4.2.3)
4 2 3) . Th
The
recommended value is 1,0
42
s,equ = s,Ec.s
where
s,Ec = s(1,4.FLM3)
(1 4 FLM3) ((stress
t
range d
due tto 1
1,4
4 times
ti
FLM3
FLM3, iin th
the case
of pure bending, it is equal to 1,4 s(FLM3) . For a verification of fatigue
on intermediate supports of continuous bridges, the axle loads of FLM3
are multiplied by 1
1,75
75
s is the damage coefficient.
s = fat.s,1. s,2. s,3. s,4
where fat is a dynamic magnification factor
s,1 takes account of the type of member and the length of the influence
line or surface
s,2 takes account of the volume of traffic
s,3 takes account of the design working life
s,4 takes account of the number of loaded lanes
43
s,1 is given by figure NN.2, curve 3c) . In the design example, the length
of the influence line is 2,5 m. Therefore s,1 1,1
44
45
46
47
Pier height : 40 m
Pier shaft
external diameter : 4 m
wall thickness : 0,40
longitudinal
g
reinforcement: 1,5%
,
Ac = 4,52 m2
Ic = 7,42 m4
As = 678 cm2
Is = 0,110 m4
Pier head:
volume : 54 m 3
Weight
W i ht : 1,35
1 35 MN
Concrete
C35/45
fck = 35 MPa
Ecm = 34000 MPa
48
Fy (trans.)
Fx (long.)
Mx(trans.)
14 12 MN
14,12
UDL
3,51 MN
8,44 MN.m
TS
1,21 MN
2,42 MN.m
Braking
0,45 MN
0,036 MN
0,11 MN.m
TK
0,06 MN
Comb 1
25,43 MN
0,032 MN
14,76 MN.m
Comb 2
22,18 MN
0,66 MN
7,01 MN.m
l = 0 h
49
ef = 2.(1,12/28,2) = 0,08
50
51
52
53
54
55
Thank y
you for y
your kind attention
56
EUROCODES
Bridges: Background and applications
Dissemination of information for training Brussels, 2-3 April 2009
Span Distribution
&
Basic geometry of cross
section
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
MNm
MN
MN
Mmax
100
Mmin
80
Resistantbendingmoment(Mmax)
N(Mmax)
60
N(M i )
N(Mmin)
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
10
MNm
MN
MN
Mmax
100
Mmin
80
Resistantbendingmoment(Mmax)
N(Mmax)
60
60
N(Mmin)
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
11
120
120
Mmax
100
Mmin
Resistantbendingmoment(Mmax)
80
N(Mmax)
60
60
N(Mmin)
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
12
120
Mmax
100
Mmin
80
Resistantbendingmoment(Mmax)
N(Mmax)
60
60
N(Mmin)
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
13
120
Mmax
100
Mmin
80
Resistantbendingmoment(Mmax)
N(Mmax)
60
N(Mmin)
40
20
0
20
40
60
80
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
14
Conclusions
The following quantities have been obtained
Girdersteel
Prestressingsteel
Slablongitudinalordinary
reinforcement
TopslabinSLSfrequent
combination
Prestressinglayout
2
3
No
prestr.
[kg/m2]
[kg/m2]
256
0
202
16.0
194
11.6
190
16.0
201
11.6
[kg/m2]
51
51
51
13 1
13.1
13 1
13.1
cracked
Compres
sed
Compres
sed
Quantities
15
Conclusions
Steel cross section [m2]: comparison between not
prestressed solution and 4th layout solution
0
10
20
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0 20
0.20
Prestressed4thlayout
notprestressed
0.25
0.30
0.35
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
16