Eurocode 2 - Design of Concrete Structures Concrete Bridges: Design and Detailing Rules

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

Politecnico di Torino
EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 1
Prof. Ing. Giuseppe Mancini - DISTR - Politecnico di Torino
- EN 1992-2 contains principles and
application rules for the design of bridges
in addition to those stated in EN 1992-1-1
- Scope: basis for design of bridges in

plain/reinforced/prestressed concrete
made with normal/light weight aggregates

Section 3 MATERIALS
- Recommended values for Cmin and Cmax
C30/37 C70/85
(Durability) (Ductility)
- cc coefficient for long term effects and unfavourable

effects resulting from the way the load is applied
Recommended value: 0.85 high stress values during construction
- Recommended classes for reinforcement:

B and C
(Ductility reduction with corrosion / Ductility for bending and shear mechanisms)

Section 4 Durability and cover to
reinforcement
- XC3 class recommended for surface protected by

waterproofing
Exposed concrete surfaces within (6 m) of the

carriage way and supports under expansion
joints: directly affected by de-icing salt
- When de-icing
salt is used Recommended classes for surfaces directly
affectd by de-icing salt: XD3 XF2 XF4, with
covers given in tables 4.4N and 4.5N for XD
classes

- Bare concrete decks without waterproofing or
surfacing should be classified as abrasion class XM2
- When concrete surface is subject to abrasion by ice

or solid transportation in running water increase
the cover by 10 mm, min

Section 5 Structural analysis
- Geometrical imperfections
Piers Arches Shape of imperfections based on

l = 0 n the shape of first horizontal and
vertical buckling mode, idealised by
a sinusoidal profile having amplitude
1/200 2 l 1 l
(recom.) a = l
2
(l = half wavelength)

- Linear elastic analysis with limited redistributions
Limitation of due to uncertaintes on size effect

and bending-shear interaction
0.85 (recommended value)

- Plastic analysis
Restrictions due to uncertaintes on size effect and bending-shear

interaction:
0.15 for concrete strength classes C50/60

xu

d 0.10 for concrete strength classes C55/67

- Rotation capacity
Restrictions due to uncertaintes on size effect and bending-shear

interaction:
in plastic
hinges
0.30 for concrete strength classes C50/60
xu

d 0.23 for concrete strength classes C55/67

Numerical rotation capacity

- Nonlinear analysis Safety format
Reinforcing steel Prestressing steel Concrete
Mean values Mean values Sargin modified

mean values
1.1 fyk 1.1 k fyk 1.1 fpk

cf fck
cf = 1.1 s / c

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
0

Verification of one of the following inequalities
qud
( )
Rd E G G + Q Q R
O
qud
( )
E GG + QQ R
.

Rd O
qud
(i.e.) R
O'
qud
( )
Rd Sd E g G + q Q R
O

Rd = 1.06 partial factor for model uncertainties (resistence side)
With Sd = 1.15 partial factor for model uncertainties (actions side)

0 = 1.20 structural safety factor
If Rd = 1.00 then 0 = 1.27 is the structural safety factor

Application for scalar combination of internal actions
Safety format
and underproportional structural behaviour
E,R
R
qud
O E D A

R (qud O )
Rd F G
R (qud O ) F G
Rd Sd
H H C B
( + ) qud qud q
( + ) O

Application for scalar combination of internal actions
Safety format
and overproportional structural behaviour
E,R
R
qud
O E D
R (qud O ) F G
Rd
F G
R (qud O )
Rd Sd
H H C B
( + ) qud q
O
( + )

Application for vectorial combination of internal
Safety format
actions and underproportional structural behaviour
M sd,M rd
IAP
M (q ud )
q
M ud
O A
B
q D
M ud
O C
Rd a
O q N (q ud ) N sd,N rd
N ud
O
Rd q
N ud
O

Application for vectorial combination of internal
Safety format
actions and overproportional structural behaviour
M sd ,M rd
a IAP
M (qud ) A
b
q
M ud
O B
C
D
q
M ud

O
q ( ) N sd,N rd
N ud Rd
O
Rd
O
q
N ud
O

For vectorial combination and Rd = Sd = 1.00 the safety
check is satisfied if:
qud
M ED M Rd
0'
and
qud
N ED N Rd
0'

Example 1:
Two spans R. C. bridge (l = 20 + 20 m)
Advance shoring (20+5 m / 15 m)
Dead load at t0 = 28 days and t1 = 90 days
(28, 90, ) = 0.51
t1 (no redistribution due to creep)

N. L. analyses at
t (full redistribution due to creep)

650
60 115 300 115 60

30
140
110
125 50 300 50 125

300 kN 300kN
q = 32.75 kN/m
g = 101.4 kN/m
8 9 10 11 20 21 22 23 24 30 31
10,80
Load distribution for the design of the region close to the central support 12,00
300 kN 300kN
q = 32.75 kN/m
g = 101.4 kN/m
8 9 10 11 20 21 22 23 24 30 31
8,00
Load distribution for the design of the midspan
9,20

Incremental loading process
Application of self weight in different statical schemes with G = 1
Modification of internal actions by creep by means of function

(G = 1) only for t = t
Application of other permanent actions (G = 1) on the final statical

scheme
Application of live loads with G = 1
Starting of incremental process so that G = 1.4 and Q = 1.5

is reached in the same step
Continuation of incremental process up to attainment of peak load

(Critical region: central support section)

Safety format : Gl

Safety format : gl

Gu 1.4 Qu 1.5
Gain = =
1.4 1.5
Critical section : number 22
Reduction of gain by application of model uncertaintes only in

case Y due to the increase of negative bending moment by
creep and consequent translation of N.L. behaviour

1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 G
1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 G
14000 14000
12000 12000
10000 10000
8000 8000
6000 6000
4000 4000
Sectio n 30
Sectio n 8
2000 Sectio n 31
2000 Sectio n 9
Sectio n 10
Sectio n 10
Sectio n 11
Sectio n 11
Sectio n 20
0 0 Sectio n 20
Sectio n 21
Sectio n 21
Sectio n 22
Sectio n 22
Sectio n 23
-2000 -2000 Sectio n 23
Sectio n 24
Sectio n 24
-4000 -4000
-6000 -6000
-8000 -8000
-10000
-10000
-12000 -12000
-14000
-14000
1.00 1.28 1.50 1.71 1.93 2.14 Q 1.00 1.28 1.50 1.71 1.93 2.14 Q
Bending moment for load case X (max. negative t = t 1) Bending moment for load case W (max. positive t = t 1)

1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 G 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 G
14000 14000
12000 12000
10000 10000
8000 8000
6000 6000
4000 4000
Sectio n 8
2000 Sectio n 30 2000 Sectio n 9
Sectio n 31 Sectio n 10
0 Sectio n 11 0 Sectio n 20
-2000 Sectio n 22 -2000 Sectio n 23
Sectio n 24
-4000 -4000
-6000 -6000
-8000 -8000
-10000 -10000
-12000 -12000
-14000 -14000
1.00 1.28 1.50 1.71 1.93 2.14 Q 1.00 1.28 1.50 1.71 1.93 2.14 Q
Bending moment for load case Y (max. negative t = ) Bending moment for load case Z (max. positive t = )
Example 2: Set of slender piers with variable section
Depth: 82 / 87 / 92 / 97 m
Unforeseen eccentricity: 5/1000 x depth
G = Q = 1.5 (for semplification)
Critical section at 53.30 m from plinth in

which both thickness and reinforcement
undergo a change
Safety format applied to

that section

Section A-A
Pier geometry and

Section B-B reinforcement arrangement

Safety format : Gl

Safety format : gl

Safety format : gl
4.0E+05
Collapse surface
for section11
3.5E+05 82 m Pier
87 m Pier
Bending moment [kNm]
3.0E+05
92 m Pier
97 m Pier
2.5E+05
2.0E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+05
5.0E+04
0.0E+00
0.0E+00 -5.0E+04 -1.0E+05 -1.5E+05 -2.0E+05 -2.5E+05 -3.0E+05 -3.5E+05 -4.0E+05
Axial force N [kN]

Safety format : gl - enlargement of the most interesting
region of the omothetic curves
4.0E+05
3.5E+05
Bending moment [kNm]
3.0E+05
Collapse surface
for section11
82 m Pier
2.5E+05 87 m Pier
92 m Pier
97 m Pier
2.0E+05
1.5E+05
-9.0E+04 -1.1E+05 -1.3E+05 -1.5E+05 -1.7E+05 -1.9E+05 -2.1E+05 -2.3E+05
Axial force N [kN]

Example 3: Continous deep beam experimentally tested
(Rogowsky, Mac Gregor, Ong)
Adina N.L. code
Concrete strength criterion by

Carbone, Giordano, Mancini
Peak load reached at the crushing of second

element (model unable to reach the equilibrium
for further load increments)

R/C deep beam: FE half mesh (right) load-displacement curve of point A (left)

Application of safety format in the
vectorial space of internal actions
Resisting interaction surface

x, y, xy

Set of external and internal actions
Behaviour with limited non linearity
Very limited effect of

model uncertaintes

Section 6 Ultimate limit state (ULS)
- Robustness criteria for prestressed structures
3 different approaches

a) Verification of load capacity with a reduced area of
prestressing
Evaluation of bending moment in frequent combination of

actions: Mfreq
Reduction of prestressing up the reaching of fctm at the extreme

tensed fibre, in presence of Mfreq
Evaluation of resisting bending moment MRd with reduced

prestressing and check that:
MRd > Mfreq
Redistributions can Material partial safety

be applied factors as for accidental
combinations

b) Verification with nil residual prestressing
Provide a minimum reinforcement so that
M rep Ap p
As ,min =
zs f yk f yk
p < 0.4 fptk and 500 MPa
where Mrep is the cracking bending moment evaluated with fctx

(fctm recommended)
c) Estabilish an appropriate inspection regime

(External tendons!)

Tendon layout

Brittle failure
1. Reduction of prestressing up to reaching of fctm at the

extreme tensed fibre in presence of Mfreq
In such condition add ordinary reinforcement so that

MRd Mfreq, with C = 1.3 and S = 1.0

Take care of preelongation for the contribution of tendons to
the evaluation of MRd
Such condition is reached for an addition of 114 / 150 mm in the

bottom slab and 112 / 150 mm in the webs and top slab

2. Provide a minimum reinforcement evaluated as
M rep
As ,min =
zs f yk
Mrep = cracking moment evaluated with fctm and nil prestressing

zs = lever arm at USL = 1.62 m
The required ordinary reinforcement results

112 / 150 mm in the bottom slab

- Shear design of precast prestressed beams
High level of prestress cp/ fcd > 0.5

Thin webs
End blocks
Redundancy in compressed and tensed chords
Web verification only for compression field due to shear (cw = 1)

Pd,c
Pd Pd = Pd,c + Pd,t
Pd,t

- Superimposition of different truss models
2
1

- Bendingshear behaviour of segmental precast
bridges with external prestressing (only)
Tension chord of truss
(external tendon)
Axes of theoretical
tension tie Axes of theoretical
compression struts
VEd
hred = ( cot + tan )
bw f cd
hred Asw VEd

=
s hred f ywd cot
min max
Field A hred,min = 0.5 h

Field B (recommended value)
Field A : arrangement of stirrups with max (cot = 1.0)

Field B : arrangement of stirrups with min (cot = 2.5)

- Shear and transverse bending interaction
Web of box girder
Semplified procedure
VEd
< 0.20
VRd ,max
The interaction can
When or be disregarded
M Ed
< 0.10
M Rd ,max

- Combination of shear and torsion for box sections
Torsion Shear Combination
Each wall should be designed separately

- Bendingshear-torsion behaviour of segmental
precast bridges with external prestressing (only)
Bredt Self- balanced

Qb0 Qb 0
2h0 2h0
Q Qb0 Q Q Qb 0 Q
2 2h0 2 2 2h0 2
b0
Q Q D=
Q
2
2
Qb0 2
2h0 D
D
h0
De Saint Venant Warping

Qb 0 (1-)Qb 0
(1-) Qb0 (1-)Qb0
b0 b0

Q Q
0
Design the shear keys so that circulatory torsion can be maintained !

- Fatigue
Verification of concrete under compression or shear
Traffic data S-N curves Load models
National authorities
values semplified approach (Annex NN, from ENV 1992-2)

Application of Miner rule
m ni
1
i =1 N i
Given by national authorities (S-N curves)

Ni 1 Ecd ,max,i
N i = 10 exp 14
1 Ri

Ecd ,min,i cd ,min,i cd ,max,i

where: Ri = ; Ecd ,min,i = ; Ecd ,max,i =
Ecd ,max,i f cd , fat f cd , fat
f
fcd,fat = k1cc ( t0 ) fcd 1 ck
250
K1 =0.85 (Recommended value)

Edy
Edxy
Edxy
Edx
- Membrane elements Edx

Edxy
Edxy
Edy
Compressive stress field strength defined as a function

of principal stresses
If both principal stresses are comprensive

1 + 3,80
cd max = 0.85 f cd
(1 + )
2
is the ratio between the two

principal stresses ( 1)

Where a plastic analysis has been carried out with = el
and at least one principal stress is in tension and no
reinforcement yields
s
cd max = f cd 0,85 ( 0,85 )
f yd
is the maximum tensile stress
value in the reinforcement
Where a plastic analysis is carried out with yielding of any

reinforcement
cd max = f cd (1 0, 032 el )
is the angle to the X axis of plastic
compression field at ULS is the inclination to the X axis of
(principal compressive stress) principal compressive stress in
el 15 degrees the elastic analysis

Model by Carbone, Giordano, Mancini
Assumption: strength of concrete subjected to biaxial

stresses is correlated to the angular deviation
between angle el which identifies the
principal compressive stresses in incipient
cracking and angle u which identifies the
inclination of compression stress field in
concrete at ULS
With increasing concrete damage increases

progressively and strength is reduced accordingly

Plastic equilibrium condition

Graphical solution of inequalities system
0.50
0.45 Eq. 70
0.40 Eq. 72
Eq. 71
0.35
0.30 Eq. 69 x = 0.16
v 0.25 y = 0.06
0.20 nx = ny = -0.17
0.15 el = 45
0.10 Eq. 73
0.05
0.00
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0
pl

Resisting domain for vmax (a) and vmin (b)
with el=45, x=y=0.3

Experimental versus calculated panel strenght by Marti and Kaufmann (a)
and by Carbone, Giordano and Mancini (b)

Skew reinforcement
yr
xyr

Plates
xr xr conventions
Y
r
xyr
yr
X
Thickness = tr

br
r sr br
1
Equilibrium of the
xr sinr
r sr ar
sinr section parallel to
the compression
ar xyr sinr field
r
xyr cosr
yr cosr
cosr

br
r sr br
cr

r ar Equilibrium of the
xr cosr section orthogonal to
r sr ar

cosr the compression

xyr cosr 1 field
xyr sinr yr sinr
sinr

Use of genetic algorithms (Genecop III) for the optimization of
reinforcement and concrete verification
Objective: minimization of global reinforcement
Stability: find correct results also if the starting point is very

far from the actual solution

Section 7 Serviceability limit state (SLS)
- Compressive stresses limited to k1fck with exposure

classes XD, XF, XS (Microcracking)
k1 = 0.6 (recommended value)

k1 = 0.66 in confined concrete (recommemded value)

- Crack control
Reinforced members and Prestressed members with
Exposure
prestressed members with bonded tendons
Class
unbonded tendons
Quasi-permanent load
Frequent load combination
combination
X0, XC1 0,31 0,2
XC2, XC3, XC4 0,22
0,3
XD1, XD2, XD3
Decompression
XS1, XS2, XS3
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.
Decompression requires that concrete is in compression within a distance

of 100 mm (recommended value) from bondend tendons

- Minimum reinforcement areas
Clarification about T and Box beams
Component section Component section WebFlange

flange flange fct,eff fct,eff
+ +
c,flange
Sflange Sflange Sflange
Sm
Sm
c,web
Component Sweb
section Sweb
web Component
section
web

- Control of shear cracks within the webs
Concrete tensile strength fctb is:
3
f ctb = 1 0,8 f ctk ,0.05
f ck
3 is the larger compressive principal stress
(3 > 0 and 3 < 0.6 fck)
- The larger tensile principal stress 1 is compared

with fctb
< 1 minimum longitudinal reinforcement
1
1 crack width controlled or calculated
f ctb
considering the skewness of
reinforcement

Section 8 Detailing of reinforcement
and prestressing tendons
- Couplers for prestressing tendons

- In the same section maximum 67% of coupled tendons
- For more than 50% of coupled tendons:
Continous minimum reinforcement

or
Residual stress > 3 MPa in characteristic
combination

- Minimum distance of sections in which couplers
are used
Construction depth h Distance a
1,5 m 1,5 m
1,5 m < h < 3,0 m a=h
3,0 m 3,0 m
- For tendons anchored at a construction joint a

minimum residual compressive stress of 3 MPa is
required under the frequent combination of actions,
otherwise reinforcement should be provided to
carter for the local tension behind the anchor

Baricentric prestressing, two coupled tendons over two
t = 14 gg
deformation x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 41 gg
two coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 42 gg
two coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 70 gg
two coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t=
two coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric prestressing, one coupled tendon over two
t = 14 gg
deformation x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 41 gg
one coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 42 gg
one coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 70 gg
one coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t=
one coupled tendons
over two
x y

Baricentric prestressing, two anchored tendons over two
t = 14 gg
deformation x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 41 gg
two anchored
tendons over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t = 70 gg
two anchored
tendons over two
x y

Baricentric
deformation
prestressing
t=
two anchored
tendons over two
x y

Baricentric
prestressing Zoomed areas
t=
two anchored near anchorages
tendons over two
x y

Section 113 Design for the execution stages
Construction stages
Take account of Redistribution by creep in the section

construction
procedure Redistribution by creep for variation of
statical scheme

Cross reference to
- Actions during execution EN1991-1-6
Statical equilibrium of cantilever bridge unbalanced

wind pressure of 200 N/m2 (recommended value)
Fall of formwork
For cantilever construction
Fall of one segment
For incremental launching Imposed deformations!

In case in SLS decompression is required, tensile stresses
less then fctm (recommended value) are permitted during the
construction in quasi-permanent combination of actions

Annex B Creep and shrinkage strain
HPC, class R cement, strength 50/60 MPa with or

without silica fume
Thick members kinetic of basic creep and drying

creep is different
Autogenous shrinkage:
related to process of hydratation
Distiction between
Drying shrinkage:
related to humidity exchanges
Specific formulae for SFC (content > 5% of cement by

weight)

- Autogenous shrinkage
For t < 28 days fctm(t) / fck is the main variable
f cm ( t ) ca ( t , f ck ) = 0
< 0.1
f ck
f cm ( t ) f cm (t )
0.1 ca ( t , f ck ) = ( f ck 20 ) 2.2 0.2 106
f ck f ck
For t 28 days
ca (t ,f ck ) = ( f ck 20) [ 2.8 1.1exp(t / 96) ] 106
97% of total autogenous shrinkage occurs

within 3 mounths

- Drying shrinkage (RH 80%)
K( f ck ) 72 exp(0.046 f ck ) + 75 RH ( t ts )106
cd (t , ts , f ck , h0 , RH ) =
(t ts ) + cd h0 2
with: K ( f ck ) = 18 if fck 55 MPa

K ( f ck ) = 30 0.21 f ck if fck > 55 MPa
0.007 for silica fume concrete

cd =
0.021 for non silica fume concrete

- Creep
( t0 )
cc ( t , t0 ) = b ( t , t0 ) + d ( t , t0 )
Ec 28
Basic creep Drying creep

- Basic creep
t t0
b ( t , t0 , f ck , f cm ( t0 ) ) = b 0
t t0 + bc

3.6
f ( t )0,37 for silica fume concrete
with: b0 = cm 0

1.4 for non silica fume concrete

fcm ( t 0 )
0.37 exp 2.8 for silica fume concrete
fck
bc =

0.4 exp 3.1 fcm ( t 0 ) for non silica fume concrete
f
ck

- Drying creep
d (t , ts , t0 , f ck , RH , h0 ) = d 0 cd (t , ts ) cd (t0 , ts )
1000 for silica - fume concrete

with: d 0 =
3200 for non silica - fume concrete


- Experimental identification procedure
At least 6 months
- Long term delayed strain estimation
Experimental
Formulae
determination

- Safety factor for long term extrapolation lt

Annex J Detailing rules for particular
situations
Bearing zones of bridges
Consideration of brittleness of HSC with a factor to be

applied to fcd
0, 46. f ck2 / 3
. f cd ( 1)
1 + 0,1. f ck
Edge sliding
AS . fyd FRdu / 2 = 30

- Anchorage zones of postensioned members
Bursting and spalling in anchorage zones controlled by
reinforcement evaluated in relation to the primary
regularisation prism
Pmax
0,6 f ck (t )
c c'
where c,c are the dimensions of the associate rectangle
similar to anchorage plate
c/a cc'
1, 25
c/a aa'
being a,a the dimensions of smallest rectangle including

anchorage plate

Primary regularisation prism represents the volume in which
the stresses reduce from very high values to acceptable
values under uniaxial compression
The depth of the prism is 1.2 max(c,c)
Reinforcement for bursting and spalling

(distributed in each direction within the prism)
Pmax
AS = 0,15 P ,unf (with P,unf = 1.20)
f yd
Surface reinforcement at the loaded face
Pmax
Asurf 0, 03 P ,unf (in each direction)
f yd

Annex KK Structural effects of time
dependent behaviour of
concrete
Creep and shrinkage indipendent of each other
Assumptions Average values for creep and shrinkage within

the section
Validity of principle of superposition (Mc-Henry)

Type of analysis Comment and typical
application
General and incremental step-by-step These are general methods and are
method applicable to all structures. Particularly
useful for verification at intermediate
stages of construction in structures in
which properties vary along the length
(e.g.) cantilever construction.
Methods based on the theorems of linear Applicable to homogeneous structures with
viscoelasticity rigid restraints.
The ageing coefficient method This mehod will be useful when only the
long -term distribution of forces and
stresses are required. Applicable to
bridges with composite sections (precast
beams and in-situ concrete slabs).
Simplified ageing coefficient method Applicable to structures that undergo

changes in support conditions (e.g.) span-
to- span or free cantilever construction.

- General method
0 0 1
n (t , ti )
c (t ) = + (t , t0 ) + + ( ti ) + cs ( t , ts )
Ec (t0 ) Ec (28) i =1 Ec ( ti ) Ec (28)

A step by step analysis is required
- 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

The potential creep strain at time t is:
d cc (t ) d (, t )
=
dt dt Ec 28
t te
under constant stress from te the same cc(t) and

cc(t) are obtained
cc ( t ) c ( t , te ) = cc ( t )
Creep rate at time t may be evaluated using the creep

curve for te
d cc (t ) c ( t , te )
= cc ( t )
dt t

For unloading procedures
|cc(t)| > |cc(t)|
and te accounts for the sign change
ccMax (t ) cc (t ) = ( ccMax (t ) cc (t ) ) c ( t , te )
d ( ccMax (t ) cc (t ) ) c ( t , te )
= ( ccMax (t ) cc (t ) )
dt t
where ccMax(t) is the last extreme creep strain reached before t

- Application of theorems of linear viscoelasticity
J(t,t0) an R(t,t0) fully characterize the dependent properties

of concrete
Structures homogeneous, elastic, with rigid restraints
Direct actions effect
S (t ) = Sel ( t )
t
D(t ) = EC J ( t , ) dDel ( )
0

Indirect action effect
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
introduction of additional restraints at time t1 t0
S 2 ( t ) = Sel ,1 + ( t , t0 , t1 ) Sel ,1
t
( t , t0 , t1 ) = R ( t , ) dJ ( , t0 )
t1
R ( t , t0 )
( t , t0 , t +
0 ) = 1 E (t )
C 0

When additional restraints are introduced at different times
ti t0, the stress variation by effect of restrain j introduced at
tj is indipendent of the history of restraints added at ti < tj
j
S j +1 = Sel ,1 + ( t , t0 , ti ) Sel ,i
i =1
- Ageing coefficient method

Integration in a single step and correction by means of
(0.8)
t 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: S0 and S1 refer respectively to construction and

final statical scheme
t1 is the age at the restraints variation

Annex LL Concrete shell elements
A powerfull tool to design 2D elements

Axial actions and bending
moments in the outer layer
Membrane shear actions and

twisting moments in the outer layer

RANTIVA BRIDGE
Sandwich model:
Numerical example

Mesh
2215 shell elements

2285 nodes
6 D.o.F. per node
13710 D.o.F. in total

Element chosen: n682
Y = 33
X = 22

Symbols, conventions
and general data
= 0 transverse reinforcement, Asx, direction 22

= 0 longitudinal reinforcement, Asy, direction 33
Concrete properties fcd = 20.75 MPa

fctm = 3.16 MPa
fctd = 1.38 MPa
Steel properties fyd = 373.9 MPa

Dimensioning of
reinforcement (transverse)
in the inferior layer
Distance of reinforcement from the outer surface = 6 cm
Combination Nsd22 Nsd33 Nsd23 Msd22 Msd33 Msd23 Vsd12 Vsd13

type (KN/m) (KN/m) (KN/m) (KNm/m) (KNm/m) (KNm/m) (KN/m) (KN/m)
Max M33 277 -5134 -230 616 1121 -476 95 -212
Load combination that maximizes this reinforcement

Layers
thicknesses
H sez. tsup tinf
(m) (m) (m)
1.0000 0.23 0.18
Increment of internal actions

due to shear
(for the single layer)
nsd22 nsd33 nsd23
(KN/m) (KN/m) (KN/m)
0 0 0

Upper layer verification
Actions in Reinforcement
Internal actions on the Cracked Concrete
?
reinforcement calculated at
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
nsd22 nsd33 nsd23 case fcd c(f) nR1(x) nR2(y) As(x)nec As(y)nec
(KN/m) (KN/m) (KN/m) (-) () (N/mm) (kN/m) (kN/m) (cm2/m) (cm2/m)
-633 -4070 481 no. 65.0 17.6 17.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 15.7
Minimum reinforcement 20/20 = 15.7 cm2/m
Lower layer verification
?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
909 -1064 -711 yes 23.1 11.1 11.1 1212.0 607.2 31.3 15.7

Dimensioning of
reinforcement (longitudinal)
in the inferior layer

Max M22 261 -5134 -219 657 1014 -464 79 -197

Layers
thicknesses
H sez. tsup tinf
(m) (m) (m)
1.0000 0.23 0.19

due to shear
nsd22 nsd33 nsd23
0 0 0

?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
-695 -3904 474 no 45.0 17.6 17.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 15.7
?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
956 -1229 -693 yes 20.6 11.1 11.1 1216.7 611.5 31.3 15.7
Dimensioning of
reinforcement (transverse)
in the superior layer

Max M22 261 -5134 -219 657 1014 -464 79 -197

Layers
thicknesses
H sez. tsup tinf
(m) (m) (m)
1.0000 0.23 0.19

due to shear
nsd22 nsd33 nsd23
0 0 0

?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
-695 -3904 474 no 45.0 17.6 17.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 15.7
?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
956 -1229 -693 yes 20.6 11.1 11.1 1216.7 611.5 31.3 15.7

Dimensioning of
reinforcement (longitudinal)
in the superior layer

Max M22 261 -5134 -219 657 1014 -464 79 -197

Layers
thicknesses
H sez. tsup tinf
(m) (m) (m)
1.0000 0.23 0.19

due to shear
nsd22 nsd33 nsd23
0 0 0

?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
-695 -3904 474 no 45.0 17.6 17.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 15.7
?
layer parameters
at tsup/2 c+/2
956 -1229 -693 yes 20.6 11.1 11.1 1216.7 611.5 31.3 15.7

Annex MM Shear and transverse bending
Webs of box girder bridges

Modified sandwich model

Annex NN Damage equivalent stresses
for fatigue verification
Unchanged with respect to ENV 1992-2
To be used only for simple cases

Annex OO Typical bridge discontinuity
regions
Strut and tie model for a solid

type diaphragm without manhole

Strut and tie model for a solid
type diaphragm with manhole

Diaphragms with indirect
support. Strut and tie model
reinforcement

support. Anchorage of the
suspension reinforcement

support. Links as
suspension reinforcement
Diaphragm in monolithic diaphragm

joint with double diaphragm:
Equivalent system of struts
and ties.
pier
longitudinal section

Torsion in the deck slab and
reactions in the supports
Model of struts and ties for a

typical diaphragm of a slab

EN 1992-2 A new design code to help in
conceiving more and more
enhanced concrete bridges

Thank you for the
kind attention


Eurocode 2 - Design of Concrete Structures Concrete Bridges: Design and Detailing Rules

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eurocode 2 - Design of Concrete Structures Concrete Bridges: Design and Detailing Rules

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN 1992-2

EUROCODE 2 Design of concrete structures

Approved by CEN on 25 April 2005

Prof. Ing. Giuseppe Mancini

- Scope: basis for design of bridges in

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 2

- Recommended values for Cmin and Cmax

- cc coefficient for long term effects and unfavourable

Recommended value: 0.85 high stress values during construction

- Recommended classes for reinforcement:

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 3

- XC3 class recommended for surface protected by

Exposed concrete surfaces within (6 m) of the

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 4

- When concrete surface is subject to abrasion by ice

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 5

Piers Arches Shape of imperfections based on

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 6

Limitation of due to uncertaintes on size effect

0.85 (recommended value)

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 7

Restrictions due to uncertaintes on size effect and bending-shear

0.15 for concrete strength classes C50/60

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 8

Restrictions due to uncertaintes on size effect and bending-shear

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 9

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 10

Reinforcing steel Prestressing steel Concrete

Mean values Mean values Sargin modified

1.1 fyk 1.1 k fyk 1.1 fpk

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 11

Incremental analysis from SLS, so to reach

Continuation of incremental procedure up to the

Evaluation of structural strength by use of a

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 12

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 13

With Sd = 1.15 partial factor for model uncertainties (actions side)

If Rd = 1.00 then 0 = 1.27 is the structural safety factor

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 14

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 15

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 16

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 17

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 18

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 19

Two spans R. C. bridge (l = 20 + 20 m)

Advance shoring (20+5 m / 15 m)

Dead load at t0 = 28 days and t1 = 90 days

(28, 90, ) = 0.51

t1 (no redistribution due to creep)

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 20

60 115 300 115 60

125 50 300 50 125

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 21

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 22

Application of self weight in different statical schemes with G = 1

Modification of internal actions by creep by means of function

Application of other permanent actions (G = 1) on the final statical

Application of live loads with G = 1

Starting of incremental process so that G = 1.4 and Q = 1.5

Continuation of incremental process up to attainment of peak load

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 23

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 24

EUROCODES - Background and Applications - Brussels 18-20 February 2008 25