## Are you sure?

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

'

GUIDES TO THE

EUROCODES

•

an

ice initiative

R. S. Narayanan & A. Beeby

E

DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992... ... AND EN 1992..1 11 EUROCODE 2: DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES GENERAL RULES AND RULES FOR BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURAL FIRE DESIGN

Designers' Guide to EN 1990. Eurocode: Basis of Structural M. Hollcky. 0 7277 30 I I 8. Published 2002.

H. Gulvanessian,

Calgaro and

Designers' Guide to EN /994-1-1. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures. Part /.1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings. R. P. johnson and D. Anderson. 0 7277 3151 3. Published 2004. Designers' Guide to EN /997-1. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design General Rules. R. Frank, C. Bauduin,

07277 3154 8. Published 2004. R. Driscoll, M. Kavvadas, N. Krebs Ovesen, T. Orr and B. Schuppener.

Designers' Guide to EN /993-/-1. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. General Rules and Rules for Buildings. L. Gardner and D. Nethercot. 0 7277 3! 63 7. Published 2004.

Designers' Guide to EN /998-1 and EN 1998-5. Eurocode 8: Design Structures for Earthquake Resistance. General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings and Foundations. M. Fardis, E. Carvalho, A. Elnashai,

E. Faccioli, P. Pinto and A Plumier. 0727733486. Published 2005.

Designers' Guide to EN 1992-1-/ and EN 1992-1-2. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. General Rules and Rules for Buildings and Structural Fire Design. A. W. Beeby and R. S. Narayanan. 07277 3105 X. Published

2005.

**Designers' Guide to EN 199/-4. Eurocode I: Actions on Structures. Wind Actions. N. Cook. 0 7277 3152 I.
**

Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

**Designers' Guide to EN 1996. Eurocode 6: Part 1./: Design of Masonry Structures.
**

Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

J.

Morton. 0 7277 3155 6.

Designers' Guide to EN 1995-1-1. Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures. Common Rules and Rules for Buildings. C. Mettem. 0 7277 3162 9. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

Designers' Guide to EN 1991-1-2,1992-1-2,1993-/-2 and EN 1994-1-2. Eurocode I: Actions on Structures. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures. Fire Engineering (Actions on Steel and Composite Structures). Y. Wang, C. Bailey, T. lennon and D. Moore. 3157 2. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

a 7277

**Designers' Guide to EN 1992-2. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. Bridges. D. Smith and C. Hendy.
**

0727731599. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

**Designers' Guide to EN /993-2. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Bridges. C. Murphy and C. Hendy.
**

07277 3160 2. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

Designers' Guide to EN 1994-2. Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures. Bridges. R. Johnson and C. Hendy. 0 7277 3161 O. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

Designers' Guide to EN 1991-2,/991-1-1, 1991-f-3 and 199/-/-5 to /-7. Eurocode I: Actions on Structures. Traffic Loads and Other Actions on Bridges. j.-A Calgaro, M. Tschumi, H. Gulvanessian and N. Shetty. 31564. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

o 7277

Designers' Guide to EN 1991-1-1. EN 1991-/-3 ond 199 f -1-5 to /-7. Eurocode I: Actions on Structures. General Rules and Actions on Buildings (not Wind). H. Gulvanessian, J.-A. Calgaro, P. Formichi and G. Harding. 07277 3158 O. Forthcoming: 2005 (provisional).

www.

2 EUR C DE 2: DESIG STRU URES GENERAL RULES EN 1992· I-I C CRETE BUILDINGS A D RULES F R STRU U FIRE DESIGN w.. and Series editor .EE DESIG ERS' GUI E T D EN 1992-1..

London E14 4JD Thomas Telford Publishing. 3-10 Nihonbashi 2-chome. photocopying or otherwise. For comprehensive and useful information on the adoption of the Eurocodes and their implementation process please visit our website or email eurocodesrgtbomasteljord. VA 20191-4400 Japan: Maruzen Co. Ltd. Except as permitted by the Copyright. 648 Whitehorse Road. Bodmin . Designs and Patents Act 1988. Mitcham 3132. Reston. This book is published on the understanding that the authors are solely responsible for the statements made and opinions expressed in it and that its publication does not necessarily imply that such statements and/or opinions are or reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.Published by Thomas Telford Publishing.com Thomas Telford 1 Heron London E14 4JD Distributors for Thomas Telford books are USA: ASCE Press. Thomas Telford Ltd. including translation. To achieve this. the construction industry needs to become acquainted opportunities with the Eurocodes so that the maximum advantage can be taken of these Eurocodes Expert is a new ICE and Thomas Telford initiative set up to assist in creating a greater awareness of the and implementation of the Eurocodes within the UK construction industry Eurocodes provides a range of products and services to aid and support the transition to Enrocodes. no liability or responsibility can be accepted in this respect by the authors or publishers Typeset by Brighton and Rochester Printed and bound in Great Britain by MPG Books. Book Department. Tokyo 103 Australia: DA Books and Journals. While every effort has been made to ensure that the statements made and the opinions expressed in this publication provide a safe and accurate guide. mechanical. reserved. without the prior written permission ofthe Publishing Director. Chuo-ku. Victoria First published 2005 Eurocodes Structural Eurocodes offer the opportunity of harmonized standards for the European construction market and the rest of the world. no part of this publication may be reproduced. 1801 Alexander Bell Drive. 1 Heron Quay. electronic.eem A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 07277 3105 X © The authors and Thomas Telford Limited 2005 All rights. stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means. URL: www.thomastelford.

It is hoped that this guide will facilitate the effective use of Eurocode 2 by designers. etc. tables and expressions of EN 1992-1-1 are in italic type. designers will still need to get used to new terminology. All the practical aspects of application of EN 1992-1-1 and EN 1992-1-2 to prestressed concrete design are included in Chapter 11 of this guide. Some design aids are also provided. R. subclauses. which is also used where text from EN 1992-1-1 has been directly reproduced (conversely. This guide has been written with the aim of providing practising civil engineers with some insight into the background to EN 1992-1-1 and EN 1992-1-2. figures. S. including other Eurocodes. W Beeby . The guide can be used anywhere in Europe. The depth of coverage is limited. e. The guide starts with a brief outline of the Eurocode system and terminology. Expressions repeated from EN 1992-1-1 retain their numbering. other expressions have numbers prefixed by D (for Designers' Guide).Preface Introd uction EN 1992-1-1 (General Rules and Rules for Buildings) and EN 1992-1-2 (General Rules Structural Fire Design) will replace BS 8110 Parts 1 and 2 in the near future. The authors have been involved with the evolution of the codes from their ENV (pre-standard) status.. Layout All cross-references in this guide to sections. discussed in Chapter 12. and cross-references to sections. The code requirements are illustrated by some local examples. The foregoing also applies to cross-references to EN 1992-1-2. quotations from other sources.1) in Chapter 5. of this guide. paragraphs. Narayanan A. Some adjustments may be required in this regard when used outside the UK. While the broad requirements of EN 1992-1-1 and EN 1992-1-2 are not dissimilar to those in BS 8110. equation (D5. but the authors are indebted to Mr Keith Wilson of Faber Maunsell for drafting this chapter. but it should be noted that the UK values for the Nationally Determined Parameters (set by the UK National Annex at the time of going out to print) have been used in the handbook generally.g. set of new documents and the interaction between them. annexes. are in roman type). clauses.

.

5.4.2.2 Example 2. Characteristic values 2. Global analysis 21 21 25 25 25 .2.2.3. Limit states 2. Introduction 3.4. Design values of actions 2.4.2.3.3. Characteristic values of action 2.7. Geometric data 2.3.1. Layout 1. Actions 2.1. Design values 2. Verification 2. Scope 1. Classifications 2. Related documents 1. Material properties 2. Load cases and combination 3.1.5.5.3. Notation 2.1.4 v v v 1 1 1 2 2 5 Chapter 2 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 14 16 16 16 21 Chapter 3 3.Contents Preface Introduction Layout of this guide Chapter 1 Introduction 1.6. Fundamental requirements 2.2.5.3.1.3 Example 2.1.6.6. Simplified load combinations 2. General 2. Imperfections 3. Durability Example 2.9.2.S.5.1 Example 2. Terminology Basis of design 2. General 3.

Reinforcing steel 4. Ductility 4. 3.3. Assumptions relating to the strains at the ultimate limit state 5.1. Doubly reinforced rectangular sections 5.7.5.3. Beams 3.3.3. Creep and shrinkage 4. Strut-and-tie models Design aids and simplifications 3. Non-linear analysis 3.2.1: singly reinforced rectangular section 5. Stress-strain curves 5.1. of prestressed sections 51 51 51 51 51 52 52 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 58 58 59 59 59 63 63 64 66 66 67 67 67 68 78 78 81 83 Chapter 5 viii .1.3. Concrete 4.7.2.1. Flat slabs 3. Other modifying coefficients 4. Basic assumptions 5.1.3.1.1. Design for biaxial bending Example 5.3. Prestressing steel Design of sections for and axial force 5.8.2.8.2. General 4. 3.3: rectangular column section 5.2.8.1.2.4. Lightweight concrete 4. Design of rectangular column sections Example 5.4.2.1. 3.1.4: biaxially bent column section 5.1. Strength (fyk) 4.2.3. Strength 4.2.1. Members transferring forces to elements Second-order effects Time-dependent effects Design by testing Structural analysis 3. Simplifications 26 26 26 27 27 28 28 34 35 36 38 38 38 43 49 49 Chapter 4 Materials and design data 4.5. 3.6.2.2.2. Elastic deformation 4.2.1.8.6.2.8. Elastic analysis with or without redistribution 3. 3.4. Two-way spanning slabs 3.2.7.2.4.8.3. Checking the moment of resistance of more complex section shapes 5. Design of flanged sections (T or L beams) 5.2.3.2.1. General 4.2: rectangular beam with compression reinforcement 5. Limiting compressive strains 5.7.5. Singly reinforced beams and slabs Example 5.2.4.3. Stress-strain relationships 4.7.2.1. Density classes 4. Plastic analysis 3.DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 3.4.4. Design compressive strength 4. of slender elements 3.4.7.5.1. One-way spanning slabs and continuous beams 3.

3. Other factors 7.1.2.2.1. Design shear force 6.3.1: uniaxially bent rectangular column 7. Control of cracking 8.1.3.2.2. Reinforcement for punching shear Example 6. Global second-order effects 7.2.3.3.3.1. Summary 6. Nominal curvature method Example 7. General 6.2. Summary of the provisions in clause 6. Members without shear reinforcement 6. Introduction 6.3.2.1. Shear .3.2.2.4.3.2.2. First-order moments 7.7.1.4.6.3.3.3. Evaluation of torsional moments 6.2.5.5. Punching shear resistance of slabs without shear reinforcement 6.5.1. Shear capacity enhancement near supports 6. General 8. Verification 6. Basic control perimeter 6.4.2.4. of the phenomena 8.1.5. Scope 7. Torsion 6. Background to the code provisions 6. Derivation of crack prediction formulae 8.3. Procedure for stress checks Example 8.5.5.2.2. Strength of sections with shear reinforcement 6.1.2. Assessment of design action effects 8. Background to design of columns for slenderness effects 7.3. Material properties 8. Punching shear 6.2.CONTENTS 6 shear and torsion 6.5. Basic approaches 7. General 8.3. Minimum areas of reinforcement 8. Design for slenderness effects 7.4.general 6.3.8. General 8.3.4.4.1: T section 6. Moment magnifier method 7. Walls 7.4.2 of EN 1992-1-1 Example 6.5.5.1 8.3.1.1. Limitation of stresses under serviceability conditions 8. Maximum shear strength of a section 6.3.3.2: lightly loaded slab-column connection Example 6. Lateral buckling of slender beams Serviceabilitylimit states 8.3.3: heavily loaded slab-column connection requiring shear reinforcement Slender columns and beams 7.5. Checking without direct calculation 85 85 85 85 86 89 90 91 91 93 95 95 95 96 98 98 98 99 102 104 103 105 107 107 Chapter 7 107 112 112 112 115 121 119 123 123 124 127 Chapter 8 127 127 128 129 129 130 135 ·148 148 150 153 155 157 ix .1.

6. Ultimate limit state 11.2. Columns 10. Common mechanisms leading to the deterioration of concrete structures 9. 9.7. Basic anchorage length 10.1.9. Anchorage of links 10.1."" 8.2. Relative importance of deterioration mechanisms for durability 10.1. Prestressing steel 11.4. Shear 11.9.3. General 10. Mandrel diameters for bars 10.1. Nibs 10.2. Reinforcement in flat slabs Chapter 11 Prestressed concrete 11. Anchorage of longitudinal bars 10.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 ~". Cover to bar reinforcement 10.2. Requirements for weld mesh 10. Bundled bars 10.3. Historical perspective 9.3. General 9. Discussion of the general requirements 10.2.8. General 10. Detailing requirements for particular member types 10.4.7.5.2..2.5. Serviceability limit state 11.9.3. Transverse reinforcement 10.3.1.1.6.2.3.4.904.3.2. Spacing of bars 10. '-'"'. Torsion 170 173 173 175 175 175 175 175 175 176 177 181 182 183 184 177 177 185 185 187 187 187 187 190 190 190 192 192 193 192 195 195 197 x .5.3.2.6.5.2. Design of sections for flexure and axial load 11.5.1. Transverse reinforcement at anchorage lOA.9.3.9. Durability 11..4.2.1.1.6.2. 9 . Summary of main clauses 11.6. Additional requirements for large diameter bars 10.9. Laps for bars 10. Beams 10.. Walls 10. Design of sections for shear and torsion 11. Slabs 10.1.4.2 Checking cracking by direct calculation 159 159 161 161 161 162 164 165 169 169 169 170 170 170 170 9.5.1. Design data 11.1.2. General 11.5.1. Concrete 11. Corbels 10. Design anchorage length 10.5.1.2.U"UI-"V 8.6.9.3.. Partial factors 11. Design lap length 10.

S.7.1. Actions 12.1. 7.7.7.6.7.4.3.3.8.2. Design procedure 12.2. Annex E method References Index 213 xi . Tendon profiles 197 197 197 197 197 198 198 199 199 200 201 201 201 201 203 205 20S 205 206 206 206 206 206 207 207 208 208 209 209 211 Chapter 12 Structural fire design 12. Friction in jack and anchorages 11.9.3. Basis for the tabulated data 12. Discussion of some features 12.4. Anchorages and couplers 11. Detailing 11.4.S.1.1. Spacing of tendons and ducts 11.1.3.S.4.1.3. Zone method 12.9.4. Elastic deformation 11.7.5.8. Aims of design 12.1. Actions and partial factors 12.9. General 11. Duct friction 11.CONTENTS 11.2.9.9.3. Time-dependent losses 11. Scope 12. Minimum area of tendons 11. Material factors 12. Post-tensioned members 11. 7.5.4. Pre tensioned members 11. Member analysis using tabular data 12.2.2.8.3. Anchorage draw-in or slip 11. Prestress losses 11. SOO°Cisotherm method 12. Anchorage zones 11. Simple calculation methods 12.2.2.

.

Application Rules are generally accepted methods. Part 1. reinforced and prestressed concrete. Thus. It is permissible to use alternative design rules. Principles are identified by the letter P following the paragraph number. many of the separate parts of the ENV versions of the code covering the above topics have been brought into one document. General Rules . General Rules and Rules for Buildings 1992-1-2. It applies to plain. This matter should be approached with caution. are identified as such. Principles are general statements and definitions for which there are no alternatives. The code has been written in several parts.1 which do not apply to that part and provide other information that will complement Part 1. they also include some requirements and analytical models for which no alternative is allowed unless specifically stated. Scope Eurocode 2. Part 1. This guide is concerned primarily with Part 1. namely: EN EN EN EN 1992-1-1.2 is also provided in Chapter 12. The specific rules.1 has 12 main chapters and 10 annexes. Application Rules are identified by a number in parentheses. A narrow interpretation of this will provide . other parts of Eurocode 2 are allowed to identify those clauses in Part 1. EN 1992-1-1 has been written in such a way that the principles of the code will generally apply to all the parts.1. Part 1-2 has six main chapters and five annexes.1. which only apply to building structures.CHAPTER I Introd uction 1. provided that it can be demonstrated that they comply with the relevant principles and are at least equivalent with regard to structural safety. Some limited information on Part 1.1 covers in situ and precast structures using normal-weight or lightweight concrete. In addition. Compliance with the code will satisfy the requirements of the Construction Products Directive in respect of mechanical resistance.1.Structural Fire Design 1992-2. reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. will apply to the design of building and civil engineering structures in plain. Under the CEN (the European standards body) rules. Design of Concrete Structures. Liquid and Containment Structures. layout The code clauses are set out as Principles and Application Rules. Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Bridges 1992-3. which follow the principles and satisfy their requirements. serviceability and durability to the rules in the code.

has been developed. The code provides recommended values for all NDPs. by and large. as the principles are likely to be similar. Each country is expected to state in their National Annex to the code (which together with the code is likely to form the basis of regulatory control in the country) whether the recommended value is to be changed. Where the UK National Annex alters the recommended value of an ND P. If this is accepted. and safety in a country remains the prerogative of individual nations. It should also be noted that the design cannot be claimed to be wholly in accordance with the Eurocode when an alternative rule is used.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992. While the product standards rely on Eurocode 2 for design matters. there was a desire by all countries to keep the number of NDPs to a minimum. Such a layout is more efficient. serviceability and durability that may be expected from these rules will be sufficient for the purpose. Concrete Specification..and employed will be familiar to most engineers. Building regulations will not be harmonized across Europe. as considerable duplication is avoided. These generally relate to safety factors. likely to be acceptable. Part 1 of this British standard is written to assist anyone wishing to specify concrete to BS EN 206-1. Actions on Structures 206-1. but not on beams. shear. some supplementary design rules have been given in some of them. a number of product standards have been developed for particular products .138. In the a complementary standard. some exceptions exist such as a chapter on detailing particular member types. ribbed elements. buckling. Eurocode 2 refers to a number of CEN standards and codes and some ISO standards where relevant. Provisions of different codes should not be mixed without a thorough appraisal by responsible bodies. Although at the outset of the conversion of ENVs into ENs. However. any alternative approach has to be acceptable to regulatory authorities. H"""""'!'. there are chapters on bending. BS 8500.hollow core units. Performance. Eurocode 2 relies on EN 206-1 for the specification of concrete mixes to ensure durability in various exposure conditions. Part 2 of this complementary standard contains specification for materials and procedures that are outside of European standardization but within national experience. in the Eurocode system. The following are some of the more important: e " e • • EN EN EN EN EN 1990. Production and Conformity 10. In addition to the above. Prestressing Steels. Steel Reinforcement of Concrete 10. Chapters are arranged generally by reference to phenomena rather than to the type of element as in UK codes. deals with workmanship aspects. which are also defined in the same document. procedures in the current national codes are. Clearly. Basis of Structural Design 1991. Therefore. in practice it has proved difficult to achieve this. Equivalence could be defined more broadly as meaning that the safety. some parameters and procedures are left open for national choice. but not exclusively so.-2 no incentive to develop alternative rules. For example. It is due to be converted into an EN. This part supplements the requirements of BS EN 206 -1. These are referred to as Nationally Determined Parameters (NDPs).'. Execution of Concrete Structures. EN 1990 defines a number which are to all 2 . it is identified in this guide. do not differ from the ENV. etc. slabs or columns. etc. ENV 13670. and a number of parameters other than safety factors have also become NDPs. It also promotes a better understanding of structural behaviour.080.

CHAPTER I. C25/30 refers to a cylinder strength of 25 Nzmm? and a corresponding cube strength of 30 Nzmm". Design values carry the subscript 'd'. Action effects are the internal forces. and the subscript 'IND' is used to identify this. variable (Q) (live loads or wind loads) and accidental (A). bending moments. shear and deformations caused by actions. etc. The term 'informative' is used only in relation to annexes. In addition. Prestressing (P) is treated as a permanent action in most situations. These are referred to as 'indirect actions'. The term 'normative' is used for the text of the standards that forms the requirements. Characteristic values of any parameter are distinguished by the subscript 'k'. Actions are further subdivided as permanent (G) (dead loads). EN 1992-1-1 also defines particular terms specifically applicable to Eurocode 2 A few commonly occurring features are noted below: Loads are generally referred to as 'actions' to characterize the generalized format of the code. It is not anticipated that the quality control procedures for the production of concrete will switch to cylinder strength where the cube strength is now used (e. The strength class refers to both cylinder and cube strengths.g. stresses. which seek to inform rather than require.g. Actions refer not only to the forces directly applied to the structure but also to imposed deformations. such as temperature effect or settlement. e. INTRODUCTION materials (actions. and take into account partial safety factors. It is denoted by Jek' The relationship between the cylinder and cube strengths is set out within the code. All the formulae and expressions in the code are in terms of the cylinder strength of concrete.). types of analysis. " " 3 . as in the UK).

.

which occur throughout the document. of variable actions to be used in various verifications characteristic value of a material property partial safety factor for the material property.i Ak Pk IG. Al! Eurocodes are drafted using limit state principles. frequent and quasi-permanent values. However. The provisions of that code are applicable to an materials.j IGA. For a fuller treatment of the subject.j Gk. Gk. In the main it provides partial safety factors for actions. General All Eurocodes rely on EN 1990 for the basis of structural design.i Ip 1jJ 0' 1jJ l' 1jJ 2 characteristic value of the permanent actionj lower characteristic value of a permanent action upper characteristic value of a permanent action characteristic value of the variable action i characteristic value of an accidental action characteristic value of prestressing force partial safety factor for permanent actionj for persistent and transient design situations partial safety factor for permanent actionj for accidental design situations partial safety factor for variable action i partial safety factor for prestressing force multipliers for the characteristic values of variable actions to produce combination. including model uncertainty. reference should be made to Designers' Guide to EN 1990 in this series of guides to Eurocodes. and as such only the requirements which are independent of material properties are noted. Notation In this manual symbols have been defined locally where they occur. the following is a list of symbols. The structure should be designed and executed in such a way that it will: . Fundamental requirements Four basic requirements can be summarized. including the values that should be used in a load combination. respectively.CHAPTER 2 Basis of design I.inf Gk.j IQ. A brief resume of the main requirements of EN 1990 as they affect common designs in concrete is noted below.sup Qk.

They include deformation. Classifications An action is a direct force (load) applied to a structure or an imposed deformation.8 stated in the code for a 50 year reference period (see the note to Table B2 of EN 1990). beams becoming catenaries). 6 . They will generally govern the stiffness of the structure and the detailing of reinforcement within it. The latter is referred to as an indirect action. have adequate resistance for the required period of fire exposure (4) not be damaged by accidents (e.g.S. serviceability and durability (3) in the event of fire. as they will necessitate replacement of the structure or element. it will be possible to prescribe a statistically estimated characteristic value. these states are equivalent to collapse.1.g.1 illustrates a typical load-deformation relationship of reinforced-concrete structures and the limit states. and generally govern the strength of the structure or components. is likely to lead to a structure with a reliability index (3 greater than the target value of 3. characteristic values are obtained statistically from existing data. often specified by the are used as characteristic loads. limit states Limit states are defined as states beyond which the structure infringes an agreed performance criterion.1. Two basic groups of limit states to be considered are (1) ultimate limit states and (2) serviceability limit states. Loads vary in time and space. In theory. are compared with the resistance of the structure. explosion. the effects of loads. In practice. Eurocode 2). They also include loss of equilibrium or stability of the structure as a whole. this is very rarely possible. however. In limit state design. According to EN 1990.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 execution and use sustain all actions and influences that are likely to occur remain fit for the intended use (2) have adequate mechanical resistance. cracking and vibration which: (1) damage the structure or non-structural elements (finishes. for simplicity these states are also regarded as ultimate limit states. The main classification of actions for common design is given in Table 2. Accidental actions are caused by unintended events which generally are of short duration and which have a very low probability of occurrence.) or the contents of buildings (such as machinery) (2) cause discomfort to the occupants of buildings (3) affect adversely appearance. partitions. a design using the partial factors given in its AnnexAl (for actions) and those stated in the material design codes (e. durability or water and weather tightness. Actions 2. which is calculated by suitably discounting the material properties. Ultimate limit states are those associated with collapse or failure. Serviceability limit states generally correspond to conditions of the structure in use. 2.5. although this condition is between serviceability and ultimate limit states. Figure 2. such as settlement or temperature effects. impact and consequences of human error) to an extent disproportionate to the original cause. In countries where wind and snow data have been gathered over a period. As the structure will undergo severe deformation prior to reaching collapse conditions (e. particularly for imposed loads whose nominal values. etc.g. which are factored suitably.

1..1. BASISOF DESIGN Ultimate load Phase 3 Inelastic phase Phase 2 Cracked u co o .g. e. variable or accidental.J Cracking load Phase 1 Uncracked Phases 1 and 2: serviceability Phase 3: ultimate limit state limit states Deformation 2. For permanent actions.CHAPTER 2. walls or slabs cast against an earth surface with random variations in thickness. These values will apply during the life of the structure. These include: (1) The nature of the load. settlement of supports Characteristic values for loads are given EN 1991(Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures). e. Whether the action is permanent. Classification of actions Permanent action Variable action (a) Imposed floor loads (b) Snow loads (c) Wind loads (d) Indirect action. in! respectively.g. which vary very little about their mean value (such as weights of materials). upper and lower characteristic values (commonly corresponding to 95tb and 5th percentiles) will need to be assessed. temperature effects Accidental action (a) Explosions (b) Fire (c) Impact from vehicles (a) Self-weight of structures. as the confidence in the description of each will vary.g. fittings and fixed equipment (b) Prestressing force (c) Water and earth loads (d) Indirect action. These are denoted by Ok. 7 . sup and Ok. When the variation is likely to be large. actions values The values of actions to be used in design are governed by a number of factors. e. Typical load relationship of reinforced concrete structures and the limit states Table 2. or loads imposed by soil fill. the characteristic value corresponds to the mean value.

g. If Ql and Q2 are independent. EN 1990 gives three separate sets of load combinations. The above discussion illustrates the thinking behind the method of combining loads for an ultimate limit state check. it is improbable that all loads will act at their full characteristic value at the same time. deflection. EN 1990 provides recommended values. In practice. lQk. loads vary with time. various generalized combinations of loads are expressed symbolically. cracking or settlement). It is best to read it as meaning 'combined with'. For example. the designer will not have sufficient information to vary the 'l/J values in most cases.1 (ro. 2 as the two loads are unlikely to act at their maximum at the same time. It will be more reasonable to consider one load at its maximum in conjunction with a reduced value for the other load. Clearly. the occurrence and magnitude of Q1 does not depend on the occurrence and magnitude of Qz and vice versa. i.3 below. zQk.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 (2) The limit state being considered. 2Qk. It should be noted that the values of 1 and 'l/Jo vary with each load. The 1 factors account for: (1) (2) (3) (4) the possibility of unfavourable deviation of the loads from the characteristic values inaccuracies in the analyses unforeseen redistribution of stress variations in the geometry of the structure and its elements. 1) + 10. z Multiplication by 'l/Jo is said to produce a combination value of the load. below. Statistically. ZQk. 1Qk. 1 + 'l/Jo. Thus. where the 1 factors are the partial safety factors. the value of an action governing design must be higher for the ultimate limit state than for serviceability for persistent and transient design situations. (3) The number of variable loads acting simultaneously. we have two possibilities: 10. Now consider the case of a structure subject to variable actions Ql and Q2 simultaneously. Similar logic is applied to the estimation of loads for the different serviceability checks. Further. and will be a reflection of the variabilities of the two loads being different. In the following paragraphs. Ultimate limit state (1) Persistent and transient situations fundamental combinations. z( 10.e. Consider the case of permanent action (Gk) and one variable action (Qk) only. STR (internal failure of the structure governed by the 8 . then it would be unrealistic to use 10. 1 + IQ. under serviceability conditions. summarizes the 'l/J values recommended by the UK National Annex. and the UK National Annex will stipulate the values to be used in UK. lQk. 2) or '1)0. The values of IG and 10 will be different. as this affects the determination of the action effects. namely EQU (to check against loss of equilibrium). as the directions of loads could be different. For the ultimate limit state the characteristic values should be magnified. and the design load to be considered could vary substantially.4. and the load may be represented as 1GGk + 10Qk. It should be noted that the '+' symbol in the expressions does not have the normal mathematical meaning. See also Table 2. Joint probabilities will need to be considered to ensure that the probability of occurrence of the two loads is the same as that of a single load. The method of deriving 'l/J values is outlined in the addenda to ISO 2394: 1986. Table 2. creep and settlement are functions of permanent loads only. Realistic serviceability loads should be modelled appropriate to the aspect of the behaviour being checked (e. the characteristic values of actions will need modification. To allow for this.

The dominant load is then combined with the combination value of the secondary loads. and the choice of the method is a Nationally Determined Parameter.5 when unfavourable and 0 when favourable. inf = 1. sup = 1.10) IG.9 (IG. (6.15 should be used. partial a reasonable overall safety factor.2 gives the reduction factors for different values of X. sup is used when the permanent loads are unfavourable. When a design does not involve geotechnical actions. In the UK. BASISOF DESIGN strength of the construction materials) and GEO (failure strength of soil provides the significant resistance).1 (IG.j.5 when unfavourable and Owhen favourable (EN 1990.9. UK National Annex).1. sup of the ground. sup being 1.g.0. overturning of retaining walls). The above combinations assume that a number of variable actions are present at the same time.5 when unfavourable and 0 when favourable (EN 1990. sup' it will be noted that the numerical values are different in the verification of equilibrium and that of strength. which + IG. inf = 0.10a) and (6.CHAPTER 2. in! = 1. infOk. IG.j. Strength.10) from EN 1990 or the less favourable of equations (6. it will generally be necessary to carry out two calculations using the load 9 . Numerically.0. Now turning to the factors IG. in an overhanging cantilever beam.Qk. The above format applies to the verification of the structure as a rigid body (e.j. overhanging cantilevers).j. Equilibrium is as follows: supOk.j. IG. In cases where the verification of equilibrium also involves the resistance of the structural member (e. inf + IQ. otherwise each load is in turn treated as a dominant load and the others as secondary.j. The size of the reduction will depend on the ratio X = Ok/(Ok + Qk)' Table 2.10b) will always be less than that from equation (6.j. ~ = 0. SupOk.35.j.10). sup is used when the permanent loads are unfavourable. a number of approaches are given in EN 1990.j.j. Both are multiplied by their respective I values. and IG. . For instance.925.j. inf is used when the permanent actions are favourable.j. Numerically. lQk. SupOk.1/..35.1 and not 1.lOb) Numerically. sup = 1. A separate verification of the limit state of rupture of structural elements should normally be undertaken using the format given below for strength. 1 + IQ. . sup) and that in the anchor span will be 0.10a) and (6. the strength verification given below without the above equilibrium check may be adopted. and IQ 1. Either combination (6.j. infOk. IG.35 has built into it an necessary only for strength checks) the loading in the cantilever will safety factors for which will ensure element is unlikely to be large allowance for structural performance (which is also generally include variable actions. and IQ = 1.lOa) (6. and IQ = 1. and IG. IG. The magnitude of the load resulting from equations (6. infOk. UK National Annex). Qk.0. 1 is the dominant load if it is obvious. IG. cnf)' The possible explanation for I G. the multiplier for self-weight in the cantilever section will be 1. IG. Two options are given.j. IG.35 as in the strength check is that (a) (b) (c) the variability in self-weight of the the factor 1. When a design involves geotechnical action. IG.g. inf and IG. In such verifications.j. Equilibrium. the strength of elements should be verified using load combination Set B.j.j. inf is used when the permanent actions are favourable.10b) maybe used: (6. sup = 1. where the is verified using the load combination Set A in the code.j. in! = 1.

and confirmed in the UK National Annex.70 0.) + . To provide a realistic variable load combining with the accidental load.6 0.i i>l This represents a combination of service loads..99 0. reference should be made to EN 1990 and EN 1997. each variable action present is in turn treated as dominant. The loading model should attempt to describe the magnitude of other variable loads which are likely to occur in conjunction with the accidental load. Also. which can be considered rather infrequent.76 0. 10 .2 0.j(+P)+Qk.7 0. the variable actions are multiplied by different (and generally lower) 1/J factors.3 0. For details.2.90 __ . 1O) 1.97 1.78 0.l is the main variable action accompanying the accidental action and Qk.8 0.j.98 0.Qk. . Accidents generally occur in structures in use. Table 2. Therefore. 10 for accidental situations is unity.93 0..5 0.93 0.l and are given in EN 1990. Serviceability limit state (3) Characteristic combination. Qk. and multiplication by 1/J2 the quasi-permanent value.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 combinations Set C and Set B and the resistances given in EN 1997. and to the others. Multiplier 1/J1 is applied to the dominant action.117 0._ _ _--- Load __from equation .4 0.7 and ~ == 0. Where the dominant action is not obvious.4 below summarizes the values.. (2) The table assumes lG == 1. Numerical values forlj._-------- (6. lOa) .0 Load from equation (6.93 0. which are of short duration and which have a low probability of occurrence.9 1. lGk.81 0. Reduction factors for different values of X -- Load from equation (6. Accidents are unintended events such as explosions. lQ 1. '1/)0 == 0. The load combination recommended is Gk.96 0. Multiplication by 1/Jj is said to produce a frequent value of the load.925.94 0.96 0.99 0.0 0.1 0.Qk. Table 2.i are other variable actions. (2) Accidental design situation.l + l1/JO. the values of variable actions will be less than those used for the fundamental combination of loads in (1) above.84 0.j.87 0.inf+Ad + 1/J).1 Ob) Load from equation (6.10) 0.73 0. where Ad is the design value of accidental action.95 0. fire or vehicular impact.. a degree of damage is generally acceptable in the event of an accident.00 (I) The reduction factors shown in bold should be used.35.00 0.5. It might be appropriate for checking states such as micro cracking or possible local non-catastrophic failure of reinforcement leading to large cracks in sections. X 0.sup+ Gk.iQk.

90 1.7 0.7 0.00 1. 1/) values 'ljJo 'ljJ1 Variable actions Imposed loads Dwellings Offices Shopping and congregation areas Storage Parking Wind loads Snow loads (for altitudes .7 1.:S. {Q = 1./+P) + L7f!2. 1000 m) 'ljJ2 0.00 1.0 For the purposes of Eurocode 2. {Q for unfavourable effects is 1.00 The above apply to persistent and transient design situations. the three categories of variable actions in the table should be treated as separate and independent actions.i i> 1 This will provide an estimate of sustained loads on the structure.3 0.00 1.7 0.4. settlement.iQk.3.iQk. and will be appropriate for the verification of creep. A = 1.g.IQk. For imposed deformation.5 0. when linear methods are used. Partial safety factor for the prestressing force (rp) is generally 1.0 0. BASISOF DESIGN Table 2.9 0. Values of I and 1/) applicable in the UK are given in Tables 2.4.8 0.5 0. II . loading alternate or adjacent spans in continuous beams). (5) Quasi-permanent combination.35 1.5.0. For nonlinear methods.0 0.00 1.5 0.3 and 2. and is used for checking cracking.i i> 1 This represents a combination that is likely to occur relatively frequently in service conditions.1 + L7f!2.0.2.50 1. (4) Frequent combination.6 0.7 0. Partial safety factors for actions in building structures accordance with the UK National Annex) Action Combination Fundamental Permanent actions caused by structural and non-structural components Stability check Unfavourable Favourable Other checks Unfavourable Favourable Variable actions Unfavourable Accidental actions ( I) (2) (3) (4) ultimate limit state (in Accidental 1. Table 2. IPkj+P) + 1/)I.10 0.00 1.7 0.6 0.3 0. H should be realized that the above combinations describe the magnitude of loads which are likely to be present simultaneously.00 1. For accidental design situations {G.7 0. etc. The actual arrangement of loads in position and direction within the structure to create the most critical effect is a matter of structural analysis (e.2 0.CHAPTER 2.2 0. LGk.

25 Permanent + wind t 1.5. in design.50 0 0 1.35 wind 1.6. 2.50 1. Characteristic values A material property is represented by a characteristic value Xk.9 1.5 1.0 1. in practice simplified methods given in Section 2.25 e e t t e 1. only one (lower) characteristic value will be of interest.25 Permanent + imposed + 1.35 Permanent + wind 1.5 = 0.5 =0.35 = 1.00 1.1 Oa) Permanent + imposed 1.0 1. (6.9 1.5).0 = 0.75 1.5.00 1.0 1.00 1. in some problems such as cracking in concrete. an upper characteristic value may be required.35 Permanent + imposed + 1. This is achieved by dividing the characteristic values by partial safety factors for materials ('M)' Thus the design value Xd =XkhM" Uncertainties in the resistance models are also Table 2.1-2.0 load combination (6.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 2.9 1.4 below are likely to be all that is needed for the majority of structures. i.10).ultimate Variable load limit state Permanent load Load combination Adverse Beneficial Imposed Adverse Beneficial Wind Prestress Permanent Permanent Permanent wind load combination (6. 12 .0 = 0.S 1.925 1. I.0=0.925 1. Partial safety factors for load combinations in EN 1990 .0 1.5 1. in practical examples the dominant loads are likely to be fairly obvious.2. expressions (6. Generally.6.35 = 1. Simplified load combinations Unlike the ENV version of EN 1992-1-1. 2.925 1. and therefore the designer will generally not be required to go through all the combinations.10b) for the ultimate limit state may also be represented in a tabular form (Table 2.5 1/)0 7/Jo 1.0 1.4.EN 1990 does not have simplified load combinations. 7/J~ will vary with the use of the building. the value of the property (such as the tensile strength of concrete) above which only a chosen percentage to the values are expected to fall. which in general corresponds to a fractile (commonly 5%) in the statistical distribution of the property.e. However. the strength properties will need to be reduced.50 1.5 7/Jo 1.00 load combination (6.0 7/J~ 7/J~ I.e.00 1. Design values In order to account for the differences between the strength of test specimens of the structural materials and their strength in situ. I0) + imposed + wind + imposed + 1.35 1.00 1. For normal building structures.35 1.50 X 0. i.35 1. Material properties 2.35 = 1. Also.4 illustrate the use of the combinations noted above.5 = 0.5. it is the value below which the chosen percentage of all test results are expected to fall.5 = 0. IOb) Permanent + imposed 1.0 wind (I) (2) It is assumed that wind is not the leading action.10a) and (6.0 1.

deflection under quasipermanent loads should be less than span/2S0. and compression stress under a rare combination of loads should not exceed O. For serviceability. IS 1. Different values of "tc may be used if justified by commensurate control procedures. These include: 13 .0 * See also UK National Annexes for EN 1992-1-1 and EN 1992-1-2. 'YM also accounts for local weaknesses and inaccuracies in the assessment of resistance of the section. In special problems such as buckling and global analyses.fire situations 1. it should be verified that the design effects of destabilizing actions are less than the design effects of stabilizing actions.6.0 Combination Fundamental Accidental except fire situations Accidental . The values of partial safety factors for material properties are shown in Table 2. Traditionally.CHAPTER 2. Geometric data The structure is normally described using the nominal values for the geometrical parameters. geometrical imperfections should be taken into account. 2. for example. (4) IS = 1. (3) It should be ensured that the structure is not transformed into a mechanism unless actions exceed their design values. member or connection.6. and the background paper. 1M = I.0 1.2 1.15 1. detailed calculations using various load combinations are unnecessary. (2) When considering rupture or excessive deformation of a section.1. a number of matters will need to be considered early in the design process. Partial Concrete. (I) These factors apply to the ultimate limit state. as the code stipulates simple compliance rules.6fck' (5) In most cases. The code specifies values for these in the relevant sections. BASISOF DESIGN Table 2. geometrical parameters are modified by factors which are additive. Verification Ultimate limit state (1) When considering overall stability. Serviceability limit state (4) It should be verified that the design effects of actions do not exceed a nominal value or a function of certain design properties of materials. covered by 1M' Although not stated in the code. (3) These factors do not apply to fatigue verification.5 IC Reinforcement and prestressing tendons.15 should be applied to the characteristic strength of 500 MPa. Variability of these is generally negligible compared with the variability associated with the values of actions and material properties. Durability As one of the fundamental aims of design is to produce a durable structure. it should be verified that the design value of internal force or moment is less than the design value of resistance. (2) These factors apply if the quality control procedures stipulated in the code are followed. 1.

The environmental conditions should be considered at the design stage to assess their significance in relation to durability and to enable adequate provisions to be made for protection of the materials.. properties and performance of the materials shape of members and the structural detailing quality of workmanship...7 Case I Treat the load as the dominant load on floors as the 14 . overall load combinations for the lOenU[y the various load Assume office use for this of elements could be anlercnt. e e the the the the the the the the use of the structure required performance criteria expected environmental conditions composition. . '-VJUU'UU characteristic dead =0. • . and level of control particular protective measures maintenance during the intended life.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 @ e .

CHAPTER 2. BASISOF DESIGN 15 .

DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 16 .

CHAPTER 2. BASIS OF DESIGN 17 .

12) 2. Continuous beam also maximum column moment oj negative steel over 3.1 I.9. accidental situations. Continuous beam case 3) a!2 Fig.12) 2. 2.. shown in 2. Continuous beam Maximum negative moment at column 2 2.10. Continuous beam case 2) mn moment column 1 and 2.12.2.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 .14 and 2. 2. 18 .ii) 2.8.15.

deformation 19 . BASISOF DESIGN r-t-r- - i ~ 2.13.0pH density water 2.CHAPTER 2. Alternative .14. Pressure p 1.15. Water tank p density of water L2ph 2.

.

the following methods may be used: e • • • elastic analysis elastic analysis with limited redistribution plastic analysis non-linear analysis.r. this will enable the calculation of stresses. strength) design. To carry out the analysis.e. 3.g.e. Examples of this include: anchorage zones members with significant changes in cross-section. strains. The above methods. finite-element analysis) will yield internal stresses and strains and displacements directly. i. both the geometry and the behaviour of the structure will need to be idealized. dead and imposed loads) a number of different arrangements of loads (load cases) throughout the structure (e.g. Plastic methods can be used generally only for ultimate limit state (i. In addition to global analysis.3 nalysis s. alternate spans loaded and adjacent spans loaded) will need consideration to identify an envelope of action effects (e. In terms of the behaviour of the structure. rotation and displacements. are suitable for both serviceability and ultimate limit states. Introduction The purpose of analysis is the verification of overall stability and establishment of action effects. the designer should consider the effects of the realistic combinations of permanent and variable actions. including the vicinity of large holes beam-column junctions locations adjacent to concentrated loads. Within each set of combinations (e. particularly when the assumption of linear strain distribution does not apply.g.g. The first two models are common for slabs and frames. curvature. non-linear analysis is very rarely used in day-to-day design. the distribution of internal forces and moments. Commonly. . and plastic analysis is popular in the design of slabs. with the exception of plastic analysis. bending moment and shear envelopes) to be used in the design of sections. In certain complex structures the type of analysis used (e. the structure is idealized by considering it as made up of elements depicted in Fig. In turn. local analyses may also be necessary.1. Load cases and combination In the analysis of the structure. In these cases strut and tie models (a plastic method) are commonly employed to analyse the structures.

(c) Slab.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 1~------~~----------~~ (b) II SpanI «za Il ~~ ~support I Freeedges (d) (e) 3. e) One- 22 . (b) way spanning slab (subject predominantly to ultimate design load) beam. (a) Beam. (d.1. Definition of structural elements for analysis.

(g) Column. (Contd.) (f) Ribbed and waffle slabs (conditions to be met to allow analysis as solid slabs). ANALYSIS Minimum 8/10. (h) Wall 23 .1. not less than 50 mm (f) Overall depth h A-A (9) ~~--------------------------~ (h) 3.CHAPTER 3.

The arrangements to be considered are: Clause 5. the designer need not actually calculate these additional deformations to carry out this check.35Gk• For slabs only: a single load case of maximum design load on all spans or panels provided the following conditions are met: in a one-way spanning slab the area of each bay exceeds 30 m2 (here a bay means a strip across the full width of a structure bounded on the other two sides by lines of supports) the ratio of the characteristic variable load to the characteristic permanent load does not exceed 1.35Gk + 1.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992. if these are likely to be less than 10%.1(8) of EN 1992-1-1 states that in linear elements and slabs subject predominantly to bending. but the following additional load cases involving the total frame will also need to be considered: (1) all spans loaded with the design permanent loads (1. The EN code for actions (Eurocode 1) specifies the densities of materials (to enable the calculation of permanent actions and surcharges).25 the characteristic variable load does not exceed 5 kN/m2• The resulting support moments (except those at the supports of cantilevers) should be reduced by 20%. In practice.1.1. it may be necessary to consider the effects of wind loading in conjunction with patterned imposed loading through out the frame.3SGk + 1.35Gk).1.1 Clause 5. The definition of the characteristic value will affect the overall reliability.35Gk + 1. to enable fire engineering calculations to be carried out. the above arrangements are intended for braced non-sway structures. They may also be used in the case of sway structures. there is no reason why the Eurocode cannot be used in conjunction with other loading codes.35Gk) and the frame subjected to the design wind load (1. Clause 5.0SWk (3) in sensitive structures (sensitivity to lateral deformation).1. 24 . e e For frames: all spans loaded with the maximum design ultimate load (1.35Gk + l.5Qk)' with an other spans carrying only the design permanent load (1. and the UK National Annex permits the following additional choices. and values are specifed accordingly. EN 1990 provides the magnitude of the design loads to be used when loads are combined. the effects of shear and axial forces on deformation may be neglected.5Qk) and other spans carrying only the design permanent load (1.35Gk) (2) any two adjacent spans carrying the design variable and permanent loads (1.SQk) and the frame subjected to the design wind load of 1.-I AND EN 1992-1-2 As stated in Chapter 2. While the general requirement is that all relevant load cases should be investigated to arrive at the critical conditions for the design of all sections. and the span moments adjusted upwards accordingly.3 of EN 1992-1-1 also allows the National Annexes to specify simplification of load arrangements. when Wk is the characteristic wind load (2) all spans at all floor levels loaded with (1. No further redistribution should be carried out. Clause 5. Although not stated. It also provides information for estimating fire loads in buildings.3 (1) alternate spans loaded with the design variable and permanent loads (1. and values of variable action (such as imposed gravity. It has been assumed in the Eurocode system that the loads specified in Eurocode 1 are characteristic values with only 5% of values likely to fall above them. Although EN 1992-1-1 forms part of a suite of codes including those which specify loads.5Qk) alternate spans loaded with the maximum ultimate load noted above and all other spans loaded with 1. Note that for wind loads it is 2%.SWk). wind and snow loads). Account is taken of the probability of loads acting together. EN 1992-1-1 permits simplified load arrangements for the design of continuous beams and slabs.

1. truss or strut and tie) in which deflections are rarely.3. load-bearing elements may be out of plumb or the dimensional inaccuracies may cause eccentric application of loads. As a result of the inclination. affecting the design of (1) the structure as a whole.g. and am = . EN 1992-1-1 provides alternative design models (e.j[ where l is the total height of the structure in metres (0. This factor recognizes that the degree of imperfection is statistically unlikely to be the same in all the members. The contribution of axial loads to deflections may be neglected if the axial stresses do not exceed 0. a horizontal component of the vertical loads could be thought of at each floor level..2. The design value will be 3. In such members. and ensure that buildings are sufficiently robust to withstand the consequences of such inaccuracies. The exact approach adopted to achieve this differs between codes.3.08fck' Imperfections I. some degree of imperfection is unavoidable. When the spans are short. ANALYSIS Vc1 Vc2 vcn 3.67 :s.5(1 + 11m)] where m is the number of vertically continuous elements in the storeys contributing to the total horizontal force on the floor. an arbitrary inclination of the structure eo = 1/200 is prescribed as a basic value. For example. in practice. an :s. Application of the effective geometrical imperfections: vertically continuous members = 2) braced structure (number of Deflections are generally of concern only in members with reasonably long spans. Global analysis where an = 2/.CHAPTER 3.2. (2) some slender elements and (3) elements which transfer forces to bracing members.0). These horizontal 25 . and designs should recognize this.j[O. EN 1992-1-1 has a number of provisions in this regard. For the analysis of the structure as a whole. a consideration.2 and 3.. This is then modified for height and for the number of members involved. as shown in Figs 3. General Perfection in buildings exists only in theory. the contribution of shear to the deflections is never significant for members with normal (span/depth) ratios. if ever. Most codes allow for these by prescribing a notional check for lateral stability.

~'" In the design of these elements (such as a floor diagram). In the Application Rules. in the design of the columns. Design of slender elements In the design of slender elements. ".. The deflection caused by the horizontal load alone is . a force to account for the possible imperfection should be taken into account in addition to other design actions. 3..4. Second-order effects As structures subject to lateral loads deflect... EN 1992-1-1 requires geometrical imperfection to be added to other eccentricities.11' In this deflected state.Hj as Fig. such as wind. the verticalloadPwill contribute a further bending moment and increase the lateral sway.5.3. 3. second-order effects may be neglected if the bending moments caused by them do not increase the first- Clause 26 .3. Members transferring forces to bracing ""I. which are prone to fail by buckling (e.g.. and the final deflection will be . For example. This force need not be taken into account in the design of the bracing element itself. the code further states that for normal buildings. the vertical loads acting on the structure produce additional forces and moments.. EN 1992-1-1 requires second-order effects to be considered where they may significantly affect the stability of structure as a whole or the attainment of the ultimate limit state at critical sections.3. 3. Minimum tie force for perimeter columns forces should be taken into account in the stability calculation. an eccentricity of 8/0/2 is assumed for geometrical imperfection (where lo is the effective length of the column).4. This additional force is illustrated in Fig.. This is in addition to other design horizontal actions.2 Fig. Application of the effective geometrical imperfections: unbraced structure (number of vertically continuous members = 3) 3.DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 !l. Consider a cantilever column shown in 3. .. 3.3.. These are normally referred to as second-order effects.4. 3. slender columns).12' This phenomenon is also commonly referred to as the 'P L1effect'.

1 Clause 5.2 3. pipes).6. Design entirely based on testing is not common in building structures.8. second-order effects are unlikely to be significant as serviceability criterion to limit the lateral deflections will ensure that structures are not prone to P Ll effects.8.2. Second-order effect order bending moments (i. These tests are summarized in clause 5. Clause 5.S.e. Time-dependent effects The main effects to be considered are creep and shrinkage of concrete and relaxation of prestressing steel. Although this would suggest that the designer would first have to check the second-order bending moment before ignoring it. Clause 7.1 for isolated elements and clause 5. the code provides some simplified criteria. 3.3 3.2. However.2. there is some guidance in EN 1990.3. However.8. In most practical building structures. These checks essentially ensure that adequate stiffness is provided.S. Annex D of EN 1990 provides further information.3.3. Design by testing EN 1992-1-1 itself does not provide any useable guidance on this subject. this is an accepted method in some other fields (e.CHAPTER 3. test programmes should be designed in such a way that an appropriate design strength can be established. EN 1992-1-1 provides information in clause 7. According to EN 1990.8. bending moments calculated ignoring the effects of displacements) by more than 10%. ANALYSIS p p H_ / / / /" ! Fig.g. testing may be carried out in the following circumstances: • • • if adequate calculation models are not available if a large number of similar components are to be produced to confirm by control checks assumptions made in design. which includes proper allowance for the uncertainties covered by partial safety factors in conventional design. It will be necessary to establish the influence of material 27 . particularly regarding the statistics. when such effects need not be considered explicitly.3 for structures.3. In such work. to verify if second-order analysis is required.

9). when computing the effects of deformation. However. the precise nature of the information required from the test together with criteria for judging the test should be specified.3. including: • * • appraisal of an existing structure to establish data for use in design to verify consistency of manufacture or performance of components. j . assuming points of contraflexure at the mid-lengths of beams and columns (Fig. moment distribution and slope deflection). In is the distance between the faces of supports. 3.2.g. However. 3. 3. " . Testing may also be undertaken for other reasons. 28 . size effects should be considered in the interpretation of results (e. Clearly this is more conservative. As a further simplification.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 on behaviour and their variability so that a characteristic hence design) response can be derived.2 where leff is the effective span. it should be remembered that this method will be inaccurate if (1) the feet of the column are not fixed and/or (2) the beams and columns are not of similar stiffnesses. aj is the lesser of half the width of support or half the overall depth of number.g. aj is the lesser of half the width of support or third of the overall depth of member.8). 3.7). Case 3: discontinuous end support 3.4(3) Clause 5. When testing is carried out on elements which are smaller than the prototype. Structural analysis I. which are defined below. The principle is to identify approximately the location of the line of reaction of the support. The subframes may consist of beams at one level with monolithic attachment to the columns.4(2) Clause 5. shear strength). Case 2: monolithic end support (Fig. analysis with or without redlsteibutto! General EN 1992-1-1 provides limited guidance on analysis. it is generally necessary to consider the whole structure. and a and a2 are the distances from the faces of the supports to the line of the effective reaction at the two ends of the member. Case 1: intermediate support over which member is continuous (Fig.6). In unbraced structures. leff = in + a + a2 j CFause 5.10). Elastic analysis remains the most popular method for frame (e. Braced frames may be analysed as a whole frame or may be partitioned into subframes (Fig.. beams alone can be considered to be continuous over supports providing no restraint to rotation. Stiffness parameters In the calculation of the stiffness of members it is normally satisfactory to assume a 'mean' value of the modulus of elasticity for concrete and the moment of inertia based on the uncracked gross cross-section of the member. The remote ends may be assumed to be 'fixed' unless a 'pinned' end is more reasonable in particular cases. Before planning a test. A simplified analysis may be carried out. particularly when lateral loads are involved. Test methods and procedures will obviously be different in each case. Effective spans Calculations are performed using effective spans. Typical conditions are considered below. shrinkage and settlement reduced stiffness corresponding to cracked cross section should be used..

Case 5: isolated cantilever.e.6. L -----~---- --~--~----~----~-----W h h h\ / Stillness halved Beam only Column only 3. aj is the distance from the face of the to the centre line of the bearing.11). ANALYSIS Fuilirama r ----- ---------------1----. aj = 0. the effective span is the length of the cantilever from the face of the 29 .CHAPTER 3. i. Case 4: discontinuous end support on bearings 3.------.

Total frame t 3. In 1 • ~ '" L 1 • I line Subframe '" L 1 Ell l-- 1_ In Simplified model for the analysis of unbraced structures Centre T"'-~ i i I __ aj = min{O.5h.1...DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 - ~ 4 . l. O.5f) Fig. Intermediate support over which member is continuous L 8j min{O.8.51} fig. 3.10.5h. Discontinuous end support 30 . O.9. Monolithic end support 3.

14. 3.5. This applies only to elastic design: with or without redistribution and not when more rigorous non-linear methods are adopted.67 and 1.CHAPTER 3. Clause 5. Consider a 31 .1 I. 3.3. EN 1992-1-1 permits the use of a constant flange width throughout the span. f Redistribution The moment-curvature at 3. Note that: (1) The length of the cantilever should be less than half the adjacent span. ANALYSIS V//V//1 _J I 3. (b) L beam. Discontinuous end support on bearings .12. The response of a true elasto-plastic material will be typically as shown after Mp is reached a large rotation capacity.12 may be used. Therefore.13 is the distance between points of contraflexure. lo in Fig. l. Effective flange width: (a) T beam.1 ob < b (a) (b) fig. the stress in the parts of a wide flange distant from the web would be much less than that at the flange-web junction. codes of practice allow approximations by which an 'effective' width can calculated.1 J.2. For building structures the effective widths shown in 3. is half the dear spacing between beams fig. In analysis. (2) The ratio of adjacent spans (other than the cantilever) should be between 0. This should take the value applicable to span sections. A uniform distribution of stress is assumed over the effective width. Definition of 10 for the calculation of the effective flange width Effective width of flanges As a result of 'shear lag'. The calculation of the variation is a complex mathematical problem. ! ben = bw + 0. b is the beam spacing and b.

DESIGNERS'GUiDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 continuous beam made of such a material and loaded as shown in Fig. The structure will be able to withstand further increases in loading until sufficient plastic hinges form to turn the structure into a mechanism.14. EN 1992-1-1 allows moment redistribution up to 30% in braced structures. (c) Bending moment of an elasto- beam at failure 32 . Clearly.IS. Had the beam been elastic. the material must possess adequate ductility (rotation capacity). It should also be noted that the span moment has increased by about 7%.15(c). it can be seen that the elastic bending moment at the support has been reduced from (3/16)puL to (l/6)PuL. The process illustrated is plastic analysis. Indirectly. When a bending moment in a critical section (usually at a support) reaches Mp. Moment-curvature: idealization (a) (b) (e) l. (a.15(a).tilYlCf moment of an elastic beam at failure. or redistributed by about 11%. Concrete has only limited capacity in this regard. 3. Comparing these two figures. a plastic is said to be formed. The moment redistribution procedure is an allowance for the plastic behaviour without carrying out plastic hinge analysis. then the bending moment will be as shown in 3. b) K"". No redistribution is permitted in sway frames or in situations where rotation capacity cannot be defined with confidence.15(b). it also ensures that the yield of sections under service loads and large uncontrolled deflections are avoided. 3. The bending moments at 'failure' will be as shown in Fig. vtr 3. to exploit plasticity fully.

2 0. " ..0014/ccu2)]x/d • For iCk > 50 MPa 8.. 5 " ..3 0..55 0.1 gives thex/d values for different values of 8.16.. -.....4 + [0. xld also increases with the steel percentage. "".:.. Redistribution of moment and limiting x/d values When redistribution is carried out. . where support moments are reduced. Higher-strength concrete tends to be and hence the more onerous limits on xld. ~. . FN values of Ccu2 refer to Table 4. '" ' "'. 33 . Limit for class A reinforcement ' ~ . a: 10 <D ------ = 55 MPa 60 MPa = 70 MPa = 80 MPa -'::'. Table 3.. ' ' ° L- ~ ~ _L _L ~ " .25 0... -. it is essential to maintain equilibrium between the applied loads and the resulting distribution of bending moments.----------~~---------------------------..16.6 + (0.. .. and d is the effective depth. It should be noted that the above limitations try to ensure sufficiently ductile behaviour. " § 20 r-------------~~. In the case of continuous beams or slabs...~"'.' ":: .. . 50 MPa: 8. 15 --fek550MPa fok fek fek -fek " .. In EN 1992-1-1 the limit to the amount of redistribution is related to the ductility characteristics of the reinforcement used: • • class B or class C reinforcement . and therefore affects the ductility of the section..'" . Limit for class Band C reinforcement ... Thus.4 where 8 is the ratio of the redistributed moment to the moment before redistribution. ANALYSIS 35 30 r---~~------------T-----------------------------------------...45 0.. subject predominantly to flexure and in which the ratio of the lengths of the adjacent spans lie in the range 0...6 xld 3. :-.-. the code permits redistribution to be carried out without the rotation being explicitly checked provided the following expressions are satisfied (see the UK National Annex).. ~. . :-..z is the depth of the neutral axis at the ultimate limit state after redistribution.' ":: 25 v.5 to 2.'...6 + (0.20%.'. ~.5 0. " "". ~. These are presented graphically in 3. . .'.:::: 0. .35 0. .. the moments in the adjacent spans will need to be increased to maintain equilibrium for that particular arrangement of loads.1 0..1. . ?i '"5 :§ ~ '\.0014/ccu2)]x/d + [0. l_ ~ ~ 0. "...CHAPTER 3. <"" .15 0.:::: 0. ~~~~L_ .0. "'_. For ick :s:.4 0.30% class A reinforcement .

316 d '-- = __ _. == 500 MPa.240 0.2.85 0.15 for concrete 50 strengthj.260 0.410 0.85fek/1.25d: 0.272 0.70 0. Strain and stress conditions in a balanced section 34 .148 0. 90 MPa 0.360 0.r_.7.80 0.295 0.8x(0.99fek1fy Table 3.11. = 80. As Cross-section Strain diagram Internal forces 3. (3) The ratio of the moments over continuous edges to the moments in the span should be between 0. ~ 55 MPa.152 0.0.5 and 2..322 i. The first of the conditions can be expressed as a reinforcement percentage for a balanced section. ==As(0.460 t. = 55 MPa 0.232 0.5)b == Substituting x == 0. Table 3. i.247 0.277 0. = 70 MPa 0. when both concrete and reinforcement have reached their limiting strains (Fig. Limiting neutral axis depths and redistribution of moment xld 5 0. (2) Reinforcing steel should be class B or C.228 0.113bdfek (p/100)bd and equating and we obtain r.1.143 0...140 0.342 fck = 60 MPa 0.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN ! 992-1-2 3.e.17): == 0. Note that for concrete strength higher than 50 MPa. provided certain conditions are satisfied: without (1) The area of reinforcement at any location in any direction should not exceed a value corresponding to xu/d == 0.ld == 0.2 gives the values of the stress block is a function p offck for different combinations offck and j. Clause from moment EN 1992-1-1 allows the use of plastic any direct check on rotation capacity. 3.332 t.90 fck S 50 MPa 0.286 0.25 for concrete strength t: ~ MPa and x.87fy) Substituting As == p == 12.

09 1. Maximum values of p reinforcement with = 500 MPa frk = I OOAJbd P for plastic using t. A hinge is said to have formed when the steel starts to yield.78 0. The procedure to predict the ultimate load capacity may be as follows: (1) Knowing the reinforcement. Band C. 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 60 70 80 90 0. precast frames).52 0. 'failure' is reached (1) where limiting rotation occurs at a plastic hinge or (2) when sufficient hinges form to render the structure into a mechanism.13 1. 31). p. ANALYSIS Table 3. and (c) the strains in steel and concrete at A. Also.00 1.18) of EN 1992-1-1). The method involves plastic hinge analysis (see redistribution of moments. (b) the bending moment at C. whichever occurs first. Note that the rotations are calculated using mean values of mechanical properties whereas the are calculated design i.CHAPTER 3. section properties and concrete grade. At each stage calculate (a) the rotation of the hinges at A and B by integrating the curvatures of the beam between hinges (this will require the beam to be divided into a number of sections. which includes explicit calculation of rotations at hinges. 35 . an appraisal of the behaviour of the structure at serviceability should be undertaken.91 1. Consider an encastre beam. It could be useful in appraising the capacity of existing structures or when a large repetition of a particular structure is considered (e. calculate Myd by applying 1m' (2) Calculate the loading which will produce an elastic bending moment at A and B equal to Myk' (3) Increase the loading in stages. In this method.g.65 0.16 The most common plastic method used in practice is the yield line analysis for slabs. as shown in Fig. Non-linear analysis This takes into account the non-linear deformation properties of reinforced-concrete sections.2. This method is seldom used in practical design as it is complex. (6) Calculate the load corresponding to 'failure' as noted above. requiring a computer and prior knowledge of reinforcement details throughout the structures.17 1. At each section the curvature should be calculated using equation (7.18. 3. calculate the MYk at A and C. standard textbooks should be consulted. Myk is the bending moment which produces a stress iyk in the tension reinforcement. In conjunction with plastic analysis.e. (4) Compare the rotation at A and B with the limiting rotation given in 5.6N in EN 1992-1-1.30 1. 1m is used. For details of the method. (5) Failure is reached when either the limiting rotation is reached at A and B or is reached at C.04 1.

18. the deformation of the struts may be neglected. While there might appear to be infinite freedom to choose the orientation of struts and ties. it will be safe to model the struts and ties in such a way that they closely follow the 'stress paths' indicated by the theory of elasticity. Typical areas of application are noted in Section 3. The angles between the struts and ties should generally be greater than 45° in order to avoid incompatibility problems. In practice. concrete ties may also be considered (e. Generally. It must be clear that the analysis of a continuous beam will be fairly complex even with a computer. Concrete has only a limited plastic deformation capacity. (b) rotation (J of an encastre beam: (a) elastic moments when the first hinge(s) form at at the first when the load is increased 36 . Occasionally. models Strut-and-tie models utilize the lower-bound theorem of plasticity.19. anchorages without transverse reinforcement). and elastic analysis with moment redistribution is preferred. Typical models are shown in Fig. this is not so. this procedure is rarely used. Also. the 'correct' model is the one with the least number of internal members and least deformation. As can be seen. therefore. 3. the structure is thought of as comprising notional concrete struts and reinforcement ties. which can be summarized as follows: for a structure under a given system of external loads. This approach particularly simplifies the analysis of the parts of the structure where linear distribution of strain is not valid. if a stress distribution throughout the structure can be found such that (1) all conditions of equilibrium are satisfied and (2) the yield condition is not violated anywhere. then the structure is safe under the given system of external loads.g. Plastic A and B. the model has to be chosen with care to ensure that the deformation capacity is not exceeded at any point before the assumed state of stress is reached in the structure. slabs without stirrups.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 The above procedure is set out to clarify the steps involved in a relatively simple example. therefore. and the model optimized by minimizing the expression Me: Mp (a) (b) 3. a number of boundary conditions will need to be imposed in the analysis. In this context. Where several models are possible.1 above.

..._.L.._._..) with holes t tt t Members L a End blocks 1 \ .~ I I . I "I i / I I ...J.CHAPTER 3. ~-----\ I I I i I Beam-column junctions Half joints 37 ._..._._.... I I I l-J! .. I . ANALYSIS "-"'-'-'-'r"'-'-'-'r'-" ..~._... !I... \ ._.. ..L. / (& I I . I i I I I I I / / •• )--" II ill tI II I I I + lilt I I I I I 1+ I I I I I )--'f' I ~ II I I L...

where a number of members meet. O"Rd.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 where is the force in tie. O"Rd. l.20 for variable loads are the maximum values obtained by a linear analysis considering the cases of loading alternate and adjacent spans. 0" Rd. Bearing in mind that strut and tie models fall under plastic analysis. if the above limits are observed. However. O"Rd. continuity with external columns has a significant effect on the bending moments at locations 1 and 2.85v'fcct (6) in compression-tension nodes. Limiting stresses are as follows: (1) in ties. Having idealized the structure as struts and ties. 3.OAcOfect. the 'node' regions are unlikely to be critical.2. where ties are anchored in one direction only. Stresses in the struts and ties should be verified including those at nodes. O"Rd. 38 . 3. It should be noted that the values of bending moments in Fig.3 assumes that the ratio of the stiffness of the end columns to that of the slab (or beam) does not exceed LO. li is the of tie and emi is the mean strain in tie i. it is interesting to note that the code does not impose any conditions similar to those noted in Section 3. Such coefficients are provided later in this section.max O. it is then a simple matter to arrive at the forces in them based on equilibrium with external loads.8. I. The following modifications may be made. Schlaich and Schafer! recommend a procedure for checking the node regions.max O. therefore. max = O.4 in struts with no transverse tension.max = l. as the loading case applicable will vary with each span.75v'fcd (7) where a load distributed uniformly over an area AeO is dispersed to a larger area Ac1 (which is concentric to Aco). be possible to redistribute the bending moments. where ties are anchored in more than one direction.3.7. normally the bending moments are obtained tabulated coefficients. =:0 (2) (3) (4) (5) =:0 In general. Table 3.2 Clause 6. and (3) variations in span lengths do not exceed 15% of the longest span. The coefficients for locations 3-6 may be used (without sacrificing too much economy) even when continuity with internal columns is to be taken into account. fyd Clause 6. It will not.20 may be used for three or more equal spans subject to equal uniformly distributed loads. This is an inconsistency. the applied load F Rdu should be limited as F Rdu Acofed(Ae/Aeo)05 but limited to 3. Under these conditions the bending moments and shear forces may be obtained using Table 3.5.Ov'fcd in compression-tension nodes. aids and simplifications spanning slabs and continuous beams The bending moment coefficients shown in Fig. max = fed in struts with transverse tension. It is therefore important to follow the theory of elasticity fairly closely in choosing the model as already discussed above. General For rectangular slabs with standard edge conditions and subject to distributed loads. A further approximation may be made if: (1) the characteristic variable load does not exceed the characteristic permanent load. This assumes supports which do not offer rotational restraint. depending on the ratio of the total column wall stiffness to the slab stiffness.5. (2) loads are predominantly uniformly distributed over three or more spans. No redistribution of moments is permitted to the bending moments obtained using the above table.6v'fed' where i/ = 1 fek/250 in nodes where no ties are anchored.

(b) continuous slabs with continuity at external columns Table 3.g.057GL O.1060L 0.m E '" Permanent action 2.066QL I o iE <.0 Variable action -0.6F Middle of interior spans -O. Bending moment coefficients: (a) continuous slab on point supports.046GL Variable action o 0. see Johansen.0530L I O.079GL 0.044GL 0. Johansen's yield line analysis and the Hillerborg strip method provide powerful methods for strength calculations (e.057QL Kc = stiffness of external wall Kb = stiffness of slab.0 Variable action -O.063FI Interior supports -O.SOF F is the total design ultimate load (1.079QL 0.03QL I 0.116QL (a) 0.50Qk).065QL I 0.040FI O.030GL O." CEB Bulletin 353 and Wood and 39 .086FI Monolithic At outer support -O.:J 0 .072GL -O.063FI 0 O.3.S Variable action -0.06GL 3 -0.099QL -O.46F Near middle of end span O.CHAPTER 3. ANALYSIS Permanent action 0 O.105GL O. spans 1-3 (b) 3.20. Ultimate bending moment and shear forces in one-way spanning slabs (continuous beams and flat slabs) End support and end span Simple At outer support Moment Shear Near middle of end span O.086FI O. I is the effective span.5 co rn Permanent action 1. For slabs with irregular plan shapes and slabs subject to a combination of point loads and distributed loads.075FI At first interior support -O.35Gk + 1.07SQL I I ~ .OSGL -0.054GL -0.40F O.oa6QL Kb Permanent action 1 I 2 I 0.033GL -O.

1 1. (5) The panel should observe the detailing rules in Chapter 10 of this guide. simply supported on four sides Vlx 1.055 0. Values of O!sx and O!sy are given in Table 3.062 0. Rectangular panels with restrained edges Where corners are (1) prevented from lifting and (2) reinforced to resist torsion. is the shorter span of the panel. In the corner area shown: (1) provide top and bottom reinforcement (2) in each layer provide bars parallel to the slab edges Table 3.104 0. values of f3sx and f3sy are tabulated in Table 3.7.4. 3.75 2.084 0.118 asy 0.2 1.037 0. (3) The span of the adjacent panels in the direction perpendicular to the line of the common support should be approximately the same as the span of the panel being designed. Therefore. l.061 0. plastic analysis).n.0 40 .DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 slabs Where (1) corners of slabs are free to lift and (2) no provision is made to resist forces at the corners.e.3 1. Conditions for the use of the tabular value are: (1) The table is based on the yield line (i. Bending moment coefficients for slabs spanning in two directions at right angles.5 for different edge conditions. is the longer span.5 1. ly is the longer span of the panel and q is the design ultimate load per unit area. where l. (2) The permanent and variable loads in adjacent panels should be approximately the same as on the panel being designed.029 1. (4) Corners at the junction of simply supported edges should be reinforced over the zone shown in Fig. moment in strips with span = bending l.062 0. For different ratios of the longer to shorter spans (l/IJ.2 should be observed.113 0.4 for different ratios of ly and lx.099 0. Msy is the maximum design moment either over supports or at midspan on strips with span fy.074 0.059 0. q is the design ultimate load per unit area. is the shorter span and ly is the longer span. - l2 O!syq x where l.nrU'rf = bending = Msy O!sxql} moment in strips with span l.4 1.093 0.051 0.21.0 asx 0.046 0. conditions (1)-(3) in Section 3. the maximum moments per unit width are given by the following expressions: u. the maximum bending moments per unit width are given by the following expressions: Msx = = f3sAI} f3syqlx2 Msy where Msx is the maximum design moment either over supports or at midspan on strips with span lx.

078 0.048 0.065 0.062 0.065 0.037 0.Q28 0.5 1.063 0.041 .029 0.034 0.092 0.052 0.047 0.031 0.056 0.069 0.048 0.081 0.028 Two adjacent edges discontinuous Negative moment 0.087 0.024 0.036 0.070 0.044 0.047 0.067 0.062 0.062 0.4 1.044 (one short edge centlnucus) 0.042 0.044 at continuous edge Positive moment 0.092 0.Q28 0.053 0.067 0.047 0.078 0.034 (one long edge continuous) 0.051 0.047 0.039 0.071 0.039 at continuous edge Positive moment 0.065 0.055 0.060 0.096 0.040 0.055 0.034 0.050 0.053 0.037 0.045 0.056 41 .042 at mid-span Four disccntmuous Positive moment 0.0.0 Long span coefficients (3.Q35 0.3 1.047 0.046 0.073 0.024 One short edge dlsccntmuous Negative moment 0.087 0. ANALYSIS Table 3.032 0.059 0.065 0.CHAPTER 3.y' for all values of 1.057 at continuous edge Positive moment 0.045 0.093 0.076 0.050 at continuous edge 0.044 0.072 0.045 0.036 0.084 0.033 at mid-span On9 long edge discontinuous Negative moment 0.063 0.043 0.057 0.037 0.5.074 0.030 at mid-span 0.037 0.Q78 0.067 0.054 0.1 1.082 0.050 0.100 0.074 0.043 at mid-span Three edges discontinuous Negative moment at continuous edge Positive moment 0.111 0.042 0.x Type of panel and moments considered Interior panels Negative moment at continuous edge Positive moment at mid-span Vlx: 1.089 0.056 0.048 0.043 0.054 0.049 0.046 at mid-span Three edges discontinuous Negative moment 0.103 0.055 0.040 0.042 at mid-span Two short edges discentinueus Negative moment 0.105 0.059 0.0 Vlx 0.036 0.034 0.2 1.084 0.046 0.032 0.057 0.070 0.034 at mid-span Two long edges discontinuous Negative moment at continuous edge Positive moment 0.053 0. Bending moment coefficients provision for torsion at corners for rectangular panels supported on four sides with Short span coefficients (3.071 0.063 0.069 0.058 0.056 at continuous edge Positive moment 0.75 2.Q38 Positive moment 0.58 0.098 0.081 0.068 0.050 0.051 0.091 0.055 at mid-span 0.060 0.063 0.039 0.074 0.063 0.

the bending moments at a common support. respectively. As the support on grid A for panel 1 is discontinuous and support on grid C for panel 2 is continuous.l.1-------'-1-----I I I I I Panel 2 L-----~J--------_-L~--I------~----------~~---I I 'I II II II II Ix I I II II II II II II II Panel 1 II II II II Ix II A -----~~-------- l. because of the differing edge condition at the far supports or differing span lengths or loading. may differ significantly (say by 10%).22.L II I I I I ! I II _ . respectively. 42 . l. Unequal edge conditions in adjacent panels M_l and M_2 are the support moments for panels 1 and 2. Consider panels 1 and 2 in Fig. In some cases. obtained by considering the two adjacent panels in isolation.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 (3) in each of the four layers the area of reinforcement should be equal to 75% of the reinforcement required for the maximum span moment (4) the area of reinforcement in (3) above may be halved if one edge of the slab in the corner is continuous.21. Corner reinforcement: two-way spanning slabs I cL I I I I I B . the ~ 1)5 'I l Simply supported fig.22. the moments for panels 1 and 2 for the support on grid B could be significantly different. 3. In these circumstances. and M+l and M+2 are the span moments for panels 1 and 2.

flat slabs must be capable of carrying the total load on the panel in each direction.) (3) For curtailment of reinforcement. In such cases. For this reason. 3. andM_2 as fixed end moments.6. These include: (1) the equivalent frame method (2) coefficients (3) yield line analysis (4) analysis. Loads on supporting beams Loads on supporting beams may be obtained using either Fig. Loads on beams supporting two-way spanning slabs slab may be reinforced throughout for the worst case span and support moments. flat slabs can fail by yield lines in either of the two orthogonal directions (Fig. a revised bending moment M~B may be obtained for support over B. the moments may be distributed in proportion to the stiffnesses of span Ix in panels 1 and 2. Thus. Note that: (1) the reactions shown apply when all edges are continuous (or discontinuous) (2) when one edge is discontinuous. Unlike two-way spanning slabs on line supports. 3. this might be uneconomic in some cases. slabs Flat slab structures are defined as slabs (solid or coffered) supported on point supports. Methods of analyses Many recognized methods are available.6. Treating sf. the reactions on all continuous edges should be increased by 10% and the reaction on the discontinuous edge may be reduced by 20% (3) when adjacent edges are discontinuous.M_2 M'+2 = (M_2 + M_2 + M+2) (Note that this assumes that the final moment over C is M_2. the point of contraflexure may be obtained by assuming a parabolic distribution of moments in each panel. (2) The span moments in panels 1 and 2 should be recalculated as follows: M' +1 = (M_l + M+1) - M~B M~B . the following distribution procedure may be used: (1) Obtain the support moments for panels 1 and 2 from Table 3. ANALYSIS Fig.23.24). considering each span separately. 3. the reactions should be adjusted for elastic shear.CHAPTER 3. 43 .23 or Table 3. However.

37 0.47 0.44 0.48 0.40 0.30 Discontinuous edge 0.26 Two short edges discontinuous Continuous edge 0. Equivalent frame method Division into frames The structure may be divided in two orthogonal directions into frames consisting of columns and strips of slabs acting as 'beams'.29 0.52 e.45 1.47 0.60 0.45 0.48 0.75 0.47 1.33 0.33 0.50 0.33 0.6.29 0.47 Two Continuous edge Discontinuous edge edges discontinuous 0.43 0.36 0.24 Continuous edge Discontinuous edge 0.42 1.41 Two long edges discontinuous Continuous edge Discontinuous edge Three edges discontinuous (one long edge continuous) Continuous edge 0.40 0.36 0.26 0.53 Discontinuous edge 0.36 0.33 0.48 0.27 0.41 0.26 0.38 0.40 0.34 0.33 values of 1. CIRIA Report 1105). 3.39 0.34 0. (See Fig.36 edges continuous 0.30 0.39 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.57 0.38 0.40 0.44 Continuous edge Continuous edge Discontinuous edge One short edge discontinuous 0.40 0.33 44 .50 four Discontinuous edge discontinuous 0.45 0.38 0.40 0.26 0.40 0.54 0.40 0.29 0.25.38 0.47 0. When the aspect ratio is less than 2 the width may be taken as the distance between the centre lines of the adjacent panels.) The width of beams for frame analysis is as follows: Table 3.36 0.5 0.42 0.30 0.36 One edge discontinuous 0.59 0.34 0.48 0.g. only the first two of these methods will be considered.45 0.55 0.39 0.3 1. the width may be taken as the distance between the centre lines of the adjacent panels when considering bending in the direction of longer length spans of the panel and twice this value for bending in the perpendicular direction.38 0.29 0.44 0.60 0.36 0.44 0.50 0.45 0.31 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.43 0.32 Three edges discontinuous (one short edge Continuous edge Discontinuous edge 0.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 In this guide. Shear force coefficients for uniformly loaded rectangular panels supported on four sides with provision for torsion at corners Type of panel and location fOLlI'" f3vx for 1.63 0.52 0.45 0.44 0.40 0.41 0.36 0.57 0.31 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.35 0.49 0.36 0. For other approaches specialist literature should be consulted (e. 0.24 0.51 0.0 0.36 0. For aspect ratios greater than 2.1 '/Ix 1.51 0.55 0.50 2. Vertical loading. The width of the slab to be used for assessing the stiffness depends on the aspect ratio of the panels and whether the loading is vertical or horizontal.39 0.

and hence the effective length of columns. codes of practice adopt a cautious For the slab. (lxl + Ix2)/2 (IYI + [y2)/2 (lxl + lx2)/2 ~= t. 45 . Possible failure modes of flat slabs I I I I I I I ------.24.25. In these cases. the question of restraint to the columns. fig.--------. > 21x: = ~=2~ Horizontal loading. Flat slabs: division into frames u. 3.------I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I --------1------I I I 1 When lx < ly < Wx When Wx = 1~-----------~---------~1 · i j L. As the stiffness at slab-column junctions is a grey area. ANALYSIS fig. the effective length of the column will reduce correspondingly. is a matter of judgement. half the stiffness applicable to vertical loading is used.CHAPTER 3. 3. If the stiffness of the slab framing into the column is overestimated. Horizontal loading in the frame will be considered only in unbraced structures.

the strips of the slab on the lines of the columns will be stiffer than those away from the columns. The far ends of the columns are normally taken as fixed unless this assumption is obviously wrong (e.7). the bending moments obtained from the analysis should be distributed taking into account the elastic behaviours of the slab. The load combinations given in Section 3. Thus. 47. 3. the strips closer to the column lines will attract higher bending moments. 47).DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 Stiffness properties are generally based on the gross cross-section (ignoring the reinforcement). The bending moments obtained from the above. Division of panels Flat slab panels should be divided into column and middle strips.g. the bending moments and shear forces may be obtained using the coefficients given in Section 3. As can be imagined. The bending moments obtained from the analysis should be distributed laterally in the 'width' of the slab in accordance with the allocation of moments between strips (see p.3). 3. It should be noted that drops (and solid areas) should only be taken into account when the smaller dimension of the drop (and solid areas) is at least 33% of the smaller dimension of the surrounding panels.26.1).1 (Table 3. Simplified coefficients In braced buildings with at least three approximately equal bays and both slabs subject predominantly to uniformly distributed loads.26. Lateral distribution of moments in the width of the slab In order to control the cracking of the slabs under service conditions.8. as shown in Fig.7.2 may be used. columns with small pad footings not designed to take moments). Braced structures may be partitioned into subframes consisting of the slab at one level continuous with columns above and below. Additional effects of drops or solid concrete around columns in coffered slabs may be included. Table 3. Analysis The equivalent frames may be analysed using any of the standard linear elastic methods such as moment distribution (see Section 3. but this will complicate hand calculations. should be distributed laterally in the 'width' of the slab in accordance with h the allocation of moments between strips (see p. Flat slabs: definition of panels 46 .

the width of the column strip may be taken as the width of the drop. 3. max should not be less than 50% of the design moment obtained from an elastic analysis or 70% of the design moment obtained from grillage or finite element analysis. the middle span of a three-bay structure. As drawn.26 applies to slabs without drops (or solid areas around columns in coffered slabs). Allocation of moments between strips The bending moments obtained from the analysis should be distributed between the column and middle strips in the proportions shown in Table 3. the moment is concentrated more in the middle strip. if the negative moment at midspan is less than 20% of the negative moment at supports. The design moments to be resisted by the column strip may be decreased by an amount such that the total positive and the total negative design moments resisted by the column strip and middle strip together are unchanged.7. this is allowed for in design by limiting the maximum moment the slab (without edge beams) can transfer to the columns: Mtmax = 0.29). If M.g.67Cy• In the latter case. r = Cy' and for thicker slabs. max is less than these limits.CHAPTER 3.17bed2fck where be is the effective width of the strip transferring the moment as defined in Fig. it is essential to provide torsional links along the edge of the slab. Fig. U bars (as distinct from L bars) with longitudinal anchor bars in the top and bottom may be assumed to provide the necessary torsional reinforcement 3. r = 1. Moment transfer at edge columns As a result of flexural and torsional cracking of the edge (and corner) columns.7. 47 . In some instances the analysis may show that hogging moments occur in the centre of a span (e. Empirically. 3. the effective width through which moments can be transferred between the slabs and the columns will be much narrower than in the case for internal columns.28). The width of the middle strip should be adjusted accordingly. The reinforcement required in the slab to transfer the outer support moment to the column should be placed on a width of slab C. When the above condition is not met. The hogging moment may be assumed to be uniformly distributed across the slab. 3. max' and the span moment should be increased accordingly. and d is the effective depth of the slab. max' then the moment at the outer support should be reduced to M. and the middle strip is thereby increased in width. the structure should be redesigned.27. For slabs with a thickness less than 300 mm. M. However. particularly when it is shorter than the adjacent spans). When the bending moment at the outer support obtained from the analysis exceeds M. + 2r (Fig. Distribution of design moments in panels of flat slabs Apportionment as a percentage moment between column and middle strip expressed of the total negative or positive design Column strip (%) Negative Positive Middle strip (%) 60-80 50-70 40-20 50-30 For the case where the width of the column strip is taken as equal to that of the drop. When drops (or solid areas around columns in coffered slabs) of plan dimensions greater than [xl3 are used. the design moments to be resisted by the middle strip should be increased in proportion to its increased width. ANALYSIS Table 3.

..27.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 / be= Gx+ Cy /I / / / 3.% . Effective slab widths for moment transfer k' ~I ~ A!!'. Flat slabs: detailing at slab 48 .29. Flat slabs: detailing at outer supports Bottom bar 3. Reinforcement lor outer support Moment to be transferred to column placed in this strip 3.28.

Simplifications EN 1992-1-1 permits the following simplifications regardless of the method of analysis used: (1) At a support assumed to offer no restraint to rotation (e. 3. This ensures a minimum design value for the support moment. where supp is the design support reaction and t is the breadth of the support. This is reasonable. but the effect of continuity should be considered when designing the support such as columns or walls. ANALYSIS Bending moments in excess of M. This recognizes effect of the width of support and arbitrarily rounds off the peak in the bending moment diagram. This provision is quite reasonable. (3) The design moment at the faces of rigid supports should not be less than 65% of the support moment calculated assuming full fixity at the faces of support. (4) Loads on members supporting one-way-spanning continuous slabs (solid and ribbed) and beams (including T beams) may be assessed on the assumption that supports offer no rotational restraint. the critical moment may be taken as that at the face of the supports (but see also (3) below).1. max may be transferred to the column only if an edge beam (which may be a strip of slab) is suitably designed to resist the tension. noting the conditions to be complied with. The permitted reduction in moment is then FEd. as failure cannot occur within the support. over walls). the bending moment coefficients given in Fig. particularly in the case of wide supports. a beam or a slab which is continuous over it may be designed for a support moment which is less than the moment theoretically calculated on the centre line of the support. (2) Where a beam or a slab is cast monolithically into its supports. which are discussed in Section 3. 49 .g.3 may be used.CHAPTER 3.8. suppt/S. Beams For the design of beams.20 or Table 3.

.

0.9 3. The values given apply to concretes with quartzite aggregates. which relate to the characteristic cylinder strength ICk or the cube strength cube' The characteristic strength is defined as that strength below which not more than 5% of all test results are likely to fall.3 42 2. it provides only indicative information. which should be sufficient for most normal structures. It relies on EN 206-1 for the specification and production of concrete.5 38 3.4 aterials and design data I. Strength fCk.3 1.5 3. 4.2 3. 4.7 4. Table 4.2 34 3.6 1. cube 20 25 30 35 45 43 3.5 40 50 48 3.0 3.1 60 75 68 4. The code provides models for strength development with time.5 2.9 2. General EN 1992-1-1 covers concrete of strength up to 90 MPa in normal-weight concrete and 80 MPa in lightweight concrete.5 4. However.5 45 55 53 3.05 (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) fctk.95 (MPa) Ecm (GPa) Ecu2 (%0) 20 25 30 37 24 28 33 38 1.1.1.6 3.9 2.4 3.1.6 44 2. in structures that are likely to be sensitive to deformation. Elastic deformation EN 1992-1-1recognizes that deformation properties are crucially dependent on the composition of concrete.0 41 2.1 5.5 55 67 63 4.8 2.3 37 3. cy classes and associated properties (MPa) 15 fCk.9 5. Therefore.9 70 85 78 4.5 2.7 80 95 88 4. Strength In EN 1992-1-1 the compressive strength of concrete is denoted by concrete strength classes. t.2 2. Table 4.0.2 6.4 6.9 36 3. Concrete 4.7 39 2.1 reproduces the mean values for the modulus of elasticity given in the code.1.1 also gives the mean tensile strength of concrete. The reduction factors for other Table 4.5 3.5 6.5 .1.3.2.8 29 30 31 33 3.3 3.1 2. The relationship between the cylinder and cube strengths is given in the code.5 1. and these should be used when concrete strength need to be calculated. it is advisable to determine the properties by controlled testing and appropriate specification. and in particular on the aggregates.1. (MPa) {ctm fctk.5 50 60 58 4.8 3.6 35 3.6 t.0 2.0 5. and is reproduced in Table 4.8 2.5 3.2 2.6 90 105 98 5.

the dimensions of the element. see EN 1992-1-1.'" <. 10%. It does not include the volume change due to loss or ingress of substances.0 1.5 give the data for calculating shrinkage at 30.1. basalt aggregates.5.3.5) diagrams.o' Tables 4. including the ambient humidity. The resulting strain in the member will be cp(oo.4) and bi-linear (Fig. coefficientsfor concrete in indoor conditions 52 . = aj!cm(tO) to allow for the non-linearity of creep development. For numerical values. 1\ ~ ~ ~\. 100 and 1000 days. after initial setting. -.3 defines the parameters for the curve used for analysis.1. 20%. Drying shrinkage is the result of expiration of moisture from the concrete to the surrounding air.). The coefficient of linear thermal expansion may be taken as 10 x 1O-6/K. 30%.6.1 and 4. The drying shrinkage strain at age t is f3dit. Stress-strain relationships A distinction should be made between the stress-strain curve used for analysis and that used for the design of cross-sections.0 4. Shrinkage has two components.0 \ I 0 100 300 500 700 I 900 ho (mm) I 1100 1300 1500 <ph to) 4.2 for uncracked concrete. and will be significant for concretes of high strength.0 3.2. temperature variation or the application of external force and restraint'.2 for inside and outside conditions. Autogenous shrinkage strain at age t is given by cea(t) = f3ascca(oo). 4. Poisson's ratio may be taken as 0. 4. Autogenous shrinkage is related inversely to the water/cement ratio. 2 t?--- 3 5 ~"" ~I.45!Ck(tO). 4. namely drying shrinkage (Ecd) and autogenous shrinkage (Ec.0 ~ ~ t:--=:: --:: I r-I-- I C20/25 C25/30 C30/37 C35/45 C40/50 C45155 C50/60 C60/75 C80/95 -- ::---- r-. the creep coefficient should be multiplied by a factor shown in Table 4.100 and 1000 days are given in Table 4.0 5. respectively.I-' C55/67 C70/85 C90/105 6. Values at 30. "'"~ 20 30 50 100 7. the background document to EN 1992-1-1 defines autogenous shrinkage as 'the macroscopic volume reduction of cementitious materials when cement hydrates. These are parabolarectangle (Fig. Creep and shrinkage The creep and shrinkage of concrete depend on a number of factors. and sandstone aggregates.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 aggregates are as follows: limestone aggregates. to) are shown in Figs 4.4 and 4.0 \. 1. 4. Figure 4.4. to)(aJEc)' When the compressive stress at time to exceeds 0. ts)khEcd. depending on the ratio k. respectively. The long-term values of the creep coefficient cp( 00. and 0 for cracked concrete. On the other hand. \ 2. see EN 1992-1-1. EN 1992-1-1 offers two alternatives for the design of cross-sections. the composition of the concrete and the age of concrete at the time of loading. For numerical values of the parameters.

.964 2.6 0.0 \ 0100 300 500 700 9001100 ho (mm) 13001500 4. to) Ill.CHAPTER 4.7 0.20 0. 4.26 Outdoor 0.29 0. This reduced value.15 conditions.6. Values of ccd (%0) for drying shrinkage Relative humidity Indoor conditions.0 for this coefficient.5 0.0 Multiplier 1.252 1.2. but the UK in its National Annex proposes 0.85.0 1.9 1. shown in Fig.25 0. This is . '\ 5. 80% EN 1992-1-1 also permits a rectangular stress block to be used for section design. EN 1992-1-1 recommends a value of 1. 'Z ~ I I I <.0 2.0 i I' 3.690 1. MATERIALS AND DESIGN DATA 2 3 5 0 <. Creep coefficients for concrete in outdoor conditions Table 4. is considered necessary as a calibration factor 53 .55 0. <"'-" I f------ ~ ~ ~ 20 30 50 100 6.31 0.16 0.44 0.0 4. The basic compressive stress is fed = aecfekhe' The coefficient aee is said to take account of long-term effects on the compressive strength and of the unfavourable effects from the way the load is applied.282 Table 4.2.078 1.3.0 cp(=. which was used in the ENV version of EN 1992-1-1.8 0. Multipliers for non-linear creep ka 0.35 0.455 1. 50% 20/25 40/50 60/75 80/95 90/105 0.

054 0.3.828 0.116 90 0.4.043 0.063 0.033 0.126 0.469 0. Table 4.075 0.ts days ho (mm) 100 200 300 ~ 500 t- 30 days 0.129 0.075 0.056 50 0. Stress-strain relation for structural 54 .714 0.209 0.150 0. Autogenous shrinkage coefficients at different ages cca(oo)fJas(t) (%0) fck 20 (MPa) 25 0.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 Table 4.050 45 0.033 35 0.85 0.151 0.125 0.108 0.962 0.100 80 0.175 0. ts) for shrinkage development t .025 0.083 70 0.086 0.172 0. (2) ho = 2 X (area of cross-section)/(perimeter of that part of the cross-section which is exposed to drying).017 cca(oo)fJas (100 days) cca(oo)fJas (30 days) O"c "m 4.691 ts is the age of concrete in days from the end of curing when the shrinkage strain is being calculated.325 0.428 0.063 100 days 0.00 0.898 0.042 40 0.133 cca(=)fJas (1000 days) 0..022 0. Multipliers fJds(t.038 0.065 0.050 0.025 30 0.088 0.6.75 0.200 0.100 0. coefficient ho (mm) 100 200 300 ~ 500 (I) kh to shrinkage for size of members 1.067 60 0.5.183 1000 days 0. Table 4.70 ho is the notional size of the cross-section in miilimetres.

:-------___.. MATERIALS AND DESIGN DATA o 4.. Table 4. for fek:::." The other parameters defining the rectangular stress block are ).6.O. 50 MPa. I o 4. Parabola-rectangle ec2 diagram for concrete under compression fCk tjI I _ I: : fCd -- .4.--- --- _L __--.00. respectively. See the background paper to the UK National Annex.7 lists the values for different concrete grades.OSirc' In the UK National OIet::::: 1.CHAPTER 4. 55 .5. and ry.0. These are functions of concrete strength. but have constant values of 0. Rectangular stress distribution for concrete between the predicted strength and that obtained in experiments. The value of design tensile OIcJctk.8 and 1.. Bi-linear stress-strain relation for concrete 4.

0.0 concrete 1.8 1601-1800 2.57)1 3.57)1 3.tube (MPa) ht frem (MPa) fretm (MPa) fretk.95= feck.85 0.6 1401-1600 1. (MPa) ::.00 0. Slcu2. Many properties of lightweight concrete are related to its density p.700 Table 4.0.05 = fetk.0. of concrete 7) 1.9711 2.57)1 3.8. Elcm.67)1 See the text for the definition of 7)1 and 71E' 56 .4 + 0.2 1001-1200 1.057)1 fretk.95 0.cy(MPa) 16 frek.57)1 3. etc.750 0. The coefficient 'rJj = 0. Density classes for lightweight Density class 1. Values of A and 7) for different strengths In this expression.80 t.9. Density classes Six density classes are defined in EN 206-1.725 0.775 0. refers to upper limit of the density for the relevant density class.) Lightweight concrete is defined as concrete having a closed structure and a density not exceeding 2200 kg/nr'.95 (MPa) E1em(GPa) "!cu2 (%0) 18 22 20 22 28 25 28 33 30 33 38 35 38 43 40 44 48 45 50 53 50 55 58 55 60 63 60 66 68 70 77 78 80 88 88 fretm:= fetm7)1 freck. EN 1992-1-1 deals with additional requirements for lightweight concrete in Chapter 11. 50 60 70 80 90 A 0.0. In each class. The requirements for normal-weight concrete are generally applicable to lightweight concrete unless specifically varied.0 Density range (kg/ml) Nominal design density 801-1000 IBOI-2000 2050 2150 (kg/rrr') Plain concrete Reinforced concrete 1050 1150 1250 1350 1450 1550 1650 1750 1850 1950 Table 4.0.05 (MPa) fretk. Strength classes and associated properties for lightweight concrete frek.7.57)1 3.8 reproduces the relevant data.7711 2.1711 2.57)1 3. a range is given for the density and the nominal density to be used in design calculations.800 0. The code uses the subscript'!' to distinguish lightweight concrete ~ck.6p/2200 is used to modify the relevant property of normal-weight concrete.957)1 E!cm:= Ecm7)E 3.57)1 3. Table 4.90 0. p Table 4.0.4 1201-1400 1.DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 I.

.5 for/rek ::::. (b) Cold-worked steel modifying . the value of the design tensile strength is /retd= alet/retk/rc with alet = 0.85. LC16/20. The range of essential properties is listed in the normative Annex C of the code.fted= alecfrckire C:1I"t·. Table 4.2 for/rek2 LC20/25.i410rn The value of the design compressive strength is The recommended value in the code for alec is 0. in applications where ductility is critical (e.O normal-weight concrete by 'TI3 = 1. ductility is inversely related to yield stress. EN 1992-1-1 is valid for yield stress of reinforcement in the range 400-600 MPa.. to) for normal-weight concrete should also be multiplied by 'TIE to obtain the coefficient for lightweight concrete..2k fYk ------ O'~~f-(a) (b) cuk 4. welded fabrics and lattice girders.CHAPTER 4.85. In general..9 summarizes the properties of lightweight concrete. de-coiled rods. In the UK. I. The creep strains so derived should be further multiplied by 1. it is important to ensure that the actual strength 57 . Annex proposes to Reinforcing steel EN 1992-1-1 rules are valid for ribbed bars. MATERIALS AND DESIGN DATA f. The mean value of the modulus of elasticity is obtained by multiplying the value for normal weight concrete by 'TIE = (p/2200f The creep coefficient !p( 00.. for LC16/20 and 1. The UK National adopt the same value.2kis substituted as the yield stress.=kfo. Strength {fyJ The grade of reinforcement steel denotes the specified characteristic yield stress lfyk)' It is obtained by dividing the characteristic yield load by the nominal cross-section area of the bar. Similarly. Typical and idealized stress-strain diagrams are given in 4. r i""'Mlt-c: "ffi.g. For products without a pronounced yield stress. Therefore. the characteristic strength lfyJ of the commonly used grade of reinforcement is likely to be 500 MPa. it will confine itself to the testing requirements of properties and not define the properties themselves.. Stress-strain diagrams of typical reinforcing steel. the 0... Shrinkage strains for lightweight concrete should be obtained by multiplying the values of ced.3 for /rek::::. (a) Hot-rolled steel.7. Design compressive . Although the reinforcement standard EN 10080 will be published soon.7.2% proof stress!O. seismic design).

e. Stress-strain diagram for typical prestressing steel Table 4.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 4. indicates the length over which yield takes place (i. the length of the plastic zone influences the rotation. the UK National Annex provides some advice on the use of plain bars with fyk = 250 MPa.8. . The greater the ductility. the length of the plastic zone) (Fig. no UK standard gives any guidance. 4.10. provided suitable allowance is made for the behaviour. Ductility classes for bars. The longer this length. The definition of the relevant parameters is shown in 4.8. the greater the elongation in axially loaded members.". clearly the higher the value of cuk the greater the ductility (i.V>UiJ'''''''' 58 . the greater is the rotation. Ductility is defined using the strain at maximum load (Cuk) and the ratio between the maximum and the yield strengths ifJf)k' Ductility is an essential property if advantage is to be taken of the plastic behaviour of structures. the plateau of the stress-strain diagram is long).15 but 2': 7. In members where the ultimate strength is governed by the yielding of reinforcement (shallow members with a low percentage of steel).08 2': 5. and the greater the rotation capacity in members subjected to flexure. For instance.ft/J. Currently.5 class A Ductility 2': 1. Band C ( in terms of Cuk and (ft/fy))' These are shown in Table 4. EN 1992-1-1 states that its requirements will be satisfied if the prestressing steel with EN 10138. There is no technical reason why other types of reinforcement should not be used in conjunction with EN 1992-1-1.e.0 class B Ductility class C < 1.5 does not exceed the specified value by a large margin.8).35 2': 1.05 2': 2.10. When the ultimate strength is controlled by the strain in concrete reaching the limiting value. Limits for the ratio of the actual yield stress to the specified strength are specified for such applications. EN 1992-1-1 defines three ductility classes (A. Relevant authoritative publications should be consulted when other types of reinforcement are used.. decoiled rods and wire fabrics Ductility 2': 1.

5

**esign of sections for bending and axial rce
**

This chapter is concerned with the design for the ultimate limit state of sections subject to pure flexure, such as beams or slabs, sections subject to combined bending and axial load, such as columns, and prestressed sections. The material in this chapter is covered in EN 1992-1-1 in the following clauses: Design stress-strain curves for reinforcement Design stress-strain curve for prestressing steel Design stress-strain curves for concrete Basic assumptions for section design Minimum reinforcement Limitations imposed by redistribution

Clause 3.2.3 Clause 3.3.3 Clause 3.1. 7 Clause 6.1 Clauses 7.3.2 and 9.2.1.1 Clause 5.5

I. Bask assumptions

The basic assumptions about section behaviour are very similar to those adopted by many, if not most, modern codes of practice. The formulation used in EN 1992-1-1 is taken from the CEB Model Code for Concrete Structures.' The assumptions in EN 1992-1-1 differ in detail to those in the UK code, BS 8110 in ways which, as will be seen, make calculations rather more complex in some cases, but the practical outcome is not significantly different. The assumptions define the stress-strain responses to be assumed for steel and concrete, and the assumptions to be made about the strains at the ultimate limit state. It is these assumptions about the strain that define failure. 5.1.1. curves The information required to obtain the design stress-strain curves for concrete, ordinary reinforcement and prestressing steel are to be found in clauses 3.1.7, 3.2.3 and 3.3.3, respectively, of EN 1992-1-1. For reinforcement and prestressing steel the code specifies the use of bi-linear stressstrain curves. These are given in clauses 3.2.3 and 3.3.3 for reinforcing and prestressing steels, respectively. In each case, it is possible to choose between two possible bi-linear diagrams for the design of sections: one with a horizontal top branch and one with an inclined top branch. These curves are shown in Fig. 5.1. Where the horizontal top branch is used, no limit on the tensile strain is imposed; however, the characteristics of the inclined top branch depend on the ductility class of the reinforcement. These are given in Table 3.3 in EN 1992-1-1 for and are repeated in Table 5.1 for convenience.

Clause 3.1.7 Clause 3.2.3 Clause 3.3.3 Clause 3.2.3 Clause 3.3.3

DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992- -I AND EN 1992-1-2

Clause 3.2.3

The ultimate strain in design when the inclined upper branch is used is 0.9cuk. This is assumed to correspond to a maximum stress of (j/f)dykhs. Clearly, use of the curves with inclined top branches will give some economic advantage over the use of the horizontal top branch. Potentially, this advantage could reach an 8% saving in reinforcement, but a saving approaching this value will only rarely be achievable, and will be at the expense of considerably more complex calculations. The fun saving will only be available where it is certain at the design stage that a high-ductility steel will be used and where the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state will be around 0.25. Above this the steel stress will be below ftkhs' while for lower neutral axis depths the effect of limiting the tension strain will lead to a lower average stress in the compression zone, and hence a deeper neutral axis than if the strain was unlimited. In order to keep the design equations and design aids reasonably simple, the horizontal upper branch will be used in the derivation of all equations, charts and tables in this chapter. For concrete, three possibilities are described in clause 3.2.3 of EN 1992-1-1. The preferred idealization is the parabolic-rectangular diagram, but a bi-linear diagram and a rectangular diagram are also permitted. These three diagrams are compared in Fig. 5.2 with the limiting strains tabulated in Table 5.2.

-- -- -- -- --_\ -~-=--~ -__::_

fYk" -------

Characteristic

curve

-:_-:= -_;

i-

r

I

Design curves

e,

(a)

200 kN/mm2

Strain

Characteristic

fpk fpO.1k

"

-------------

-_\-~-=---::.:-- __

curve

Design curves

Ep (value varies)

Strain (b)

5.1. (a) Stress-strain rii",crr,,,m for curves for steel

and characteristic stress-strain

60

CHAPTER 5. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE

**Table 5.1. Parameters defining the ductility classes of reinforcement Ductility class A
**

Ultimate tensile strain,

Euk

B C

0.025 0.050 0.075

1.05 1.08 1.15 ::; (t;lfy)k::;

1.35

Strain

Parabolic-rectangular

Bi-linear

Rectangular

Fig. S.2. Idealized stress-strain distributions

**Table S.2. Parameters defining design stress-strain curves for concrete Grade ::;C50 C55 C60
**

Ecu

Ed

Ed

n

2.0 1.75 1.60 1.45 1.40 1.40

A

0.800 0.788 0.775 0.750 0.725 0.700

7)

GO

ceo

C90

0.0035 0.0031 0.0029 0.0027 0.0026 0.0026

0.0020 0.0022 0.0023 0.0024 0.0025 0.0026

0.00175 0.00180 0.00190 0.00200 0.00220 0.00230

1.000 0.975 0.950 0.900 0.850 0.800

Extension of the code to include concrete grades up to 90 N'mm'' has required modification of the idealized stress-strain curves for concrete strengths greater than 50 Nzmnr', This arises because research has shown that higher concrete strengths exhibit more brittle behaviour. Above a characteristic strength of 50 Nzmm", the parabolic-rectangular diagram is not, in fact, parabolic-rectangular even though the code describes it as such. The formula for the curved part of the response is

O"c= fet[l - (1 - E/Ec2tl

n varies from 2 to 1.4, depending on the concrete strength, and is clearly only a parabola whenn =2. It will be noted that the maximum design stress is given by the characteristic concrete strength multiplied by a coefficient nee and divided by the partial safety factor for the concrete, i.e. fed = ncelc)"!c The coefficient nee is described in clause 3.1.6 in EN 1992-1-1 as 'taking account of long term effects on the compressive strength and of unfavourable effects resulting from the way the load is applied'. A value of 1.0 is suggested, based on the that there should be no long-term effects at ultimate not already included in the data from which the stress-strain curves were derived. It arguable that the reason for the Clause 3.1.6

61

DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2

introduction of this factor is more related to the idealization of the of the stress-strain diagram as used for flexure than to the nature of the loading (i.e. it is needed to allow for the way the load is applied). Figure 5.3 tries to illustrate this. It will be seen for the area under the actual curve and the idealized curve to be the same, the maximum stress level for the idealized curve must be below the maximum stress of the 'true' diagram. Furthermore, study of the data available on the behaviour of compression zones at failure suggests that the use of 1.0 is unconservative. For this reason, the UK National Annex recommends a value for ace of 0.85, as is proposed in the CEB Model Codes. Derivation of stress block parameters Table 5.3 compares the three permitted idealizations in terms of the average stress over a rectangular compression zone and the distance from the compression face of the section to the centre of compression as a fraction of the neutral axis depth (f3). In this table, a has been assumed to be 0.85 and Ie has been taken as 1.5. As well as providing a convenient comparison of the idealizations, Table 5.3 will be found to provide information in a useful form for design calculations.

/'

/' /' / /

Idealized curve

'I

'I

I

5.l. Comparison

of true and idealized stress-strain

curves

Table

5.3.

Comparison

of stress block parameters Bi-linear rectangular Average stress (N/mm2) 5.10 6.80 8.50 10.63 12.75 14.88 17.00 19.13 21.24 22.10 22.88 24.55 26.51 28.44 Centroid factor, {3 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.374 0.363 0.349 0.342 0.337 Rectangular Average stress (N/mm2) 5.44 7.25 9.07 11.33 13.60 15.87 18.13 20.40 22.67 23.93 25.03 26.78 27.94 28.56 Centroid factor, {3 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.35

Parabolic-rectangular Average stress Grade 12 16 20 25 30 35 40 Centroid factor, {3 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.416 0.393 0.377 0.360 0.355 0.353

(Nrrnrrr')

5.51 7.34 9.18 11.47 13.76 16.06 18.35 20.64 22.94 23.19 23.58 24.86 27.1 29.75

45

50 55 60 70 80 90

62

and are certainly sufficiently true for practical purposes for the design of normal members. After bonding. and nor are members such as corbels.0035 for flexure and for combined bending and axial load where the neutral axis remains within the section. relating to at the ultimate limit state The basic assumptions here are that plane sections remain plane and that the strain in reinforcement is the same as the strain in the concrete at the same level. on average. and a limit of between 0. with the ultimate strain strength for cases where the neutral axis is within the section. For prestressed sections. These assumptions are universally accepted for the design of members containing bonded ordinary reinforcement.002 for sections loaded so that the whole section is in compression.CHAPTER 5. the Eurocode adopts values taken from the CEB Model Code. The deformations within a section are very and.0035 and 0. 5. These lie outside the scope of EN 1992-1-1. The formulation of the limit varies from code to code. uses a limit of 0. Ultimate strain distributions It will be seen from Table 5.0035. ACI 318. Nor. The assumption is.4. Nevertheless. the assumptions are not strictly true. For this reason. For concrete strengths not exceeding 50 Nzrnm''. allowance has to be made for the strain in the steel prior to it being bonded to the concrete. One area where they are not adequate is in short members. The values for the ultimate compressive strains for situations where the neutral axis lies within the section and for axial compression vary for higherstrength concretes. for example the American Concrete Institute code. These comprise a limit of 0. while the UK code BS 8110 uses 0. the change in strain in the steel is assumed to be the same as the change in strain in the concrete. This is illustrated in Fig. deep beams are not designed using the provisions of this chapter. plane sections do not remain plane. invalid for beams with unbonded tendons. locally.3 that the results obtained from the three idealizations will be so similar as to be indistinguishable for all normal purposes for concrete strengths up to 50 Nzmnr'. of course. due to local bond slip. It is universal to define failure of concrete in compression by means of a limiting compressive strain.003. are the strains in the concrete exactly the same as those in the steel. However. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE o Strain diagram for section with neutral axis within section Compression Strain diagram for section with zero strain at the least compressed face Strain diagram for section fully in compression but with some bending S. the assumptions are correct.4. while the value for axial compression increases with 63 .

it will be seen that the following equations can be derived from consideration of equilibrium of axial forces and moments: xld = pfyd/fav M = favbx(d .(3x) (D5. (D5. In flexure.-V(1/4(32 + Kaj(3) where Kav = Mctfbd2fav or..459fck fyd = fyk/1.5. It may also sometimes be useful to be able to obtain the neutral axis arm. substituting the values for (3 and fay given above.(3x/d)x/d (D5.3) As = fckbd(0.85.46K)/fYk =M/bd2fck.002 for concrete strengths not exceeding 50 Nzmnr'. These are given by and the lever L-- .4 provides this.2) where zl. (3 is the ratio of the distance of the centre of compression from the compression face to the neutral axis depth.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 The logic behind the reduction in the strain limit for axial compression is in axial compression.2) from equation (D5. Conditions in a reinforced section at the ultimate limit state 64 . Substituting for xld in equation (D5.-V(0. reinforced beams and slabs 5.1. and the value of 0.!yd is the design yield strength of the steel. For the parabolic-rectangular stress-strain curve for a concrete strength not greater than 50 Nzmrn" and taking the partial safety for concrete as 1. A means is needed to interpolate between the value of 0. and p is the reinforcement ratio (Ajbd). The conditions in a singly reinforced rectangular section at the ultimate limit state are assumed to be as shown in Fig.3.I) gives pfyd1fav = 1/2(3 .0035 has been obtained empirically.1) = fav(l or M/bd2 . is the area of tension steel'!av is the average stress over the compression zone.0035 for flexure and 0.1.5. as 0.5 (3 = 0.4 -1. and 5.416 Values for higher strength concretes can be obtained from Table 5. failure will occur at the strain to the attainment of the maximum compressive stress. we can write fay = 0. From Fig. 5.5 and 0.002 for axial load. This is 0.5. considerably higher strains can be reached before the maximum capacity of the section is reached.J _ Strains Forces 5.633 in whichK . 5.

8 in equation (D5.35d as appropriate for the particular concrete strength.24 0.6 + 0.2).28 0. Table 3.45d or 0.4) (D5.0014/Eeu) (D5. (8 .3 Limiting values of Md/bd2fcd fig.4)/(0.1 of EN 1992-1-1 for values of the ultimate strain. 5.6.6. 8 ~ 0.75 0. 5.5) Clause 5. This is done in Fig. The expressions for the calculation of the areas of reinforcement can be presented as design charts.7. The limit is repeated here for convenience: xld s. It can easily be shown that there is no need to distinguish between different concrete grades. The scale on the upper edge of Fig.895fy0Afe/Yd) (D5. and not greater then 0.8. Md/bd2fed' This gives the limits shown in 5. This is of use where flanged sections are being considered. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE 1.CHAPTER 5. The neutral axis limits set out above can now be substituted into equation (D5. and it has been assumed that the ultimate strain is Eeul in this table.0. Alyd/bdfed' in terms of the non-dimensional moment parameter.16 0. 8is limited as a function of the type of reinforcement used as follows: for Class B and Class C steel. M/bd2fed' It should be noted that M/bd2fed should not be taken as greater than the limiting value given by 5.x/d should not be greater than 0.6) In applying this formula.Q 0.7 gives values ofx/d at ultimate.5 zld = 1- 0.22 0.1 gives several values.95 ~ VI "'" tl J!! 0 . 8 ~ 0. 5.85 .5 in EN 1992-1-1 gives limits to the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state as a function of the amount of redistribution carried out in the analysis. to give limiting values of the parameterized moment. Clause 5.70 and for Class A steel.90 I I I I I I I c ~ ·c 0.26 0. then a doubly reinforced section will be required.45 for concrete grades C50 or below. Limiting values of Mibd2fcd as a function of the amount of redistribution xld = 1.00 0.18 0.80 1---.------- 0. This chart can now be used for the design of singly reinforced rectangular sections or flanged sections where the neutral axis remains within the The use of the chart is illustrated below by a simple CAi:UH!JH:O 65 .2 0.35 for grades C55 or higher. If a greater moment capacity is required. some degree of interpretation of the code is necessary since the reader is referred to Table 3. which gives the mechanical reinforcement ratio. 1ii '6 cr: <J) 0.6. This is considered below.6) is the ratio of the redistributed moment to the moment before redistribution. The sloping parts of the relationships for a given concrete strength are the parts of the relationship controlled by the equation given above while the vertical parts are governed by the neutral axis limits of 0. as the line for a 90 Nzmm" concrete is indistinguishable from that for a 50 Nzmrrr' concrete.416x/d It is now necessary to consider the limits to the use of singly reinforced sections.

00 /v /' / I »> »: 1 I .00 / 1/ I -: 0.20 0.04 0.. This second assumption is only true if fsd/Es < Ecu(X - d')/x xld 0.32 0..24 0. /' I ! -: 0.8) will achieve this.35 0..30 0.-/ _.28 5.9) 0.6. The equations (D5.25 0.20 0..40 (D5. 5..12 0..7.16 0.7. i I ! 1. As.08 I .20 -c ~o i I I 1 I .12 0.24 0.36 0. 5.0.16 0.04 0.05 0.6. lim 2 (D5. Mlim is the moment corresponding to the limiting value of M/bd fcd obtained from Fig.15 0. It should be noted that the equations derived in this section implicitly assume firstly that the area displaced by the compression reinforcement is ignored and secondly that the compression reinforcement is working at its design yield strength. it is necessary to add compression reinforcement to maintain the neutral axis depth at the limiting value.08 0.10 0. 5. chart for reinforced sections 66 ." "tl 0. lim is the value of As obtained when M = Mlim• This can be obtained from Fig. »> /'I"" :!? .DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 reinforced sections If the design moment is greater than the limiting value obtained from Fig.28 0..7) As + As.

it will only very infrequently be necessary to do other than consider a flanged beam as rectangular.bJlfyd The remaining part of the beam can be considered as a rectangular beam of width b. If the neutral axis does need to be deeper than the flange depth. b.11) = favbrx(d where b is the overall breadth of the section.7. and effective depth d supporting a moment of M . From experience. as illustrated in 5. then it will be sufficiently accurate to assume that the whole of the outstanding parts of the flanges are carrying a concrete stress of fed. that required to resist M .7) and (DS.br) + favb~ . and it is useful to have a more general approach available.2. An alternative way of looking at these equations is to see that the outstanding part of the flanges carry a moment equal to Mnange = fCdhib br)(d . and the equations derived above may be used. This leads to the equilibrium equations given below: AJyd M = fedhf(b .lO) (DS. the section may be treated as a rectangular section. is the breadth of the rib and h.hf/2) (DS. The total area of tension reinforcement is then zl. is the depth of the flange.CHAPTER 5.6 and 5.8) can be used for the design of doubly reinforced sections. The reinforcement required for this may be calculated using 5.hf/2) which requires a reinforcement area of Af = fedhf(b . Design of flanged sections (T 01" l beams) Provided that the neutral axis at the ultimate limit state remains within the flange of a T or L beam.Mflange.f3x) + fedhf (b br)(d .7 in conjunction with equations (DS. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDiNG AND AXIAL FORCE Figure 5.Mnange. A suitable iterative of resistance of any section is as follows: for the calculation of 67 . the moment resistance of more section shapes moment It is not possible to derive equations for all possible situations.

9a-I). the rectangular idealization is much the easiest to apply. Figures 5.8a-l provide a series of parameterized charts for the design of symmetrically reinforced rectangular columns derived using the parabolic-rectangular diagram.S. In carrying out the summation. Three sets of charts are included here.3.5. Rigorously. Interpolation may be used between the charts for 50 and 90 Nzmm" concrete for intermediate strengths. For simple hand calculations. The final set of charts (Figs 5.) (D5. The summation signs indicate a summation over all the levels of reinforcement within the section. (4) Check whether the total compressive force is equal to the total tension force. moments have been taken about the centroid of the concrete section.. and it is not appropriate to present them here. d. then the neutral axis depth is correct. The resulting equations are rigorous for situations where the neutral axis remains within the section.3x) + ~f. adjust the value of the neutral axis depth and repeat the calculation from step (2). is the distance from the compressive face of the section to the ith layer of reinforcement. The use of these charts is illustrated by Example 5.!1s(h/2 In equation (D5. more complex equations are required for cases where the concrete strength exceeds 50 Nzmnr'. The charts are drawn assuming that the section contains six reinforcing bars.8e-h) are for sections where the reinforcement is distributed in the most disadvantageous way along the sides of the section which are perpendicular to the axis of bending. A simpler approach is to use design charts. and the moments of the internal forces may be taken to obtain the moment of resistance. If the tension and compression forces are not equal. respectively. a further complete set of charts is required for each concrete grade above 50 Nzmnr'. It is found that there is no single of the reinforcement relative to the axis of bending which will always give the strength.13). tensile stresses must be taken as negative. The first set (Figs 5. we can substitute 0.13) MRd = favbx(h/2 .12) (D5.d. calculate the strain in each layer of reinforcement and hence the stress and the force in each layer. Where the whole section is in compression.8i-l) are for sections where the reinforcement is distributed evenly around the section perimeter.8a-d) can be used for sections where either the reinforcement is concentrated at the corners. S. (3) From the neutral axis depth and the ultimate strain.85.416 for p. If the parabolic-rectangular diagram is used. 68 . The second set of charts (Figs 5. and a set of parameterized charts are given in Figs 5. which is the minimum that can reasonably be used in a circular section. If this is so.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 (1) Guess a value for x. (2) Calculate the compressive force in the compression zone using any of the allowable idealizations of the compressive stress-strain curve.2. as the parameters defining the concrete stress-strain curve change. a numerical technique may be most convenient. or for sections where the steel is distributed along the sides parallel to the axis of bending. What has been done here is to provide a further complete set of charts for 90 Nzmm? concrete (Figs 5. Charts can also be produced for circular column sections.15 and 1. as shown in the diagrams on the charts. Additionally. and taking ace as 0. Design IOf rectangular column sections The basic equations for equilibrium of a rectangular section subjected to combined bending and axial load are as given below for situations where the neutral axis remains within the section: N Rd = favbx + ~ fsAs .4.459fck forfav and 0.10a-d. more complex expressions are required to deal with (1) the portion of the parabolic curve cut off by the bottom of the section and (2) the reduction in the ultimate strain at the compressive face according to 5. The resulting equations are unwieldy. The charts are therefore drawn to give a lower bound to the interaction for various of the bars. Assuming that the values for the partial safety factors on the steel and concrete are taken as 1.

1 0.1 0.lh=0.25 0..55 0.55 0.2 1.8 1.5 0.25 0.05 0.4 0.4 I «& • _j_ d.2 0.4 d'n1 _j_1_ b~ d.3 M/bh2fcd 0.0 0 0.3 M/bh2fcd 0.8..6 1.45 0.6 5..4 0.2 0.2 0.6 1.0 0 (e) d.2 0.~ 0.35 0.2 .15 0.6 1.4 0.05 0.35 0.10 ~ <::." 0.. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE 2.lh=0.. charts for columns «(ck s 50) 69 .45 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.15 0.8 0.6 2.0 1.0 <::.2 I ee_j_ d.8 0.6 (b) 2.CHAPTER 5.5 0. 4il 13" ::2 1...3 M/bh2fcd 0.0 <::.6 0.5 0.lh 0. 1.05 0.05 0.2 0.4 0.15 0." 0.4 -c .c.0 1.8 1.35 0.8 0.1 0.6 0..4 0. b~ d.25 0.o I _j_ .0 1. 1.55 0. c d'n1 _j_1_ .8 1. ::2 1.45 0.0 0 (a) -c 1.4 -c I d'n1 _j_1_b~ ••• a..15 fck" 50 0.

'"I h --i d.0 0.55 1.6 0.6 Mibh2fcd d_l .45 0. __l h <II '"' 0.6 Mibh2fcd 5.-0 .4 0.4 0.25 0.10 .15 0.l (I) ° 0. .8 1.2 0..55 0.1 0.0 0.4 U ~" .15 0.4 -c 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.8 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.6 1.35 0..45 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.2 1.8 1.3 0.0 :'2 :z:.8 0.6 Mibh2fcd d_l .c: 1.2 0.4 0.05 0. 4-b --i .1 0.2 1.05 0.0 1.U (e) ° 2.5 0.4 0.35 0.2 1.55 0.5 0. 70 . U 1.6 1.0 1.-0 .25 0.45 0...4 0.3 0.2 0.0 :'2 :z:.2 0.1 0.8.6 0. 4-b .05 0.15 0.2.25 0.c: = 0.8 0.U (d) ° 2. .c..0 1.0 :'2 .35 0.

35 0.15 0.45 0. 71 .3 0.45 0.35 0.6 M/bh2fcd 5.4 0.4 0.05 0.55 0.1 0.05 0.8.5 0.5 0.2 0.6 M/bh2fcd o (i) 0.15 0.25 0.4 0.5 0.6 o (h) 0.05 0. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE o (g) 0.CHAPTER 5.1 0.3 0.35 0.25 0.25 0.45 0.55 0.1 0.2 0.3 Mibh2fcd 0.55 0.2 0.15 0.

25 0.45 0.05 0.8 0..8 1.6 1..2 0..6 Mclbh2fcd 2.3 0.6 1.6 0..15 50 I 0.1 • _l_ h :2 1.5 0.55 0.45 0....4 1.0 1.2 0.6 0.35 0.4 1.1 0.8 0.55 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.15 0.2 .:_u .4 0.4 1.8.10 0.0 0 0.c:: 0..-" U d_j_ .3 Mibh2fcd 0.6 1.35 0. 50 0.8 1..05 0. I -j I e• • _l_ h ~ .0 .6 (k) 2. _b~ <Ii 1& .2 .45 0.4 _ .1 0.5 0..:_u _ __1k d/h=0. 72 ..8 0.6 0.0 .DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 2..1 0.55 0.25 0..2 .15 0.4 0.3 Mibh2fcd 0.0 0 (I) 0. c U d'E' _j_~b~ • • o.8 1.0 0 (j) 0.2 0.4 0..2 0.6 5.0 1.05 0. e •• .25 0. o U ~E' _j_1_b~ «I «I d.0 0.2 0.0 1. ~Ck0.35 0.c:: I _l_ h :2 1. d/h=0..15 0.4 0.:_u 1.

0 -~--~--~~~~~~~~--£+--~~~~--~---+---~---I o 0.55 0.. '''...55 0.2 0.4 0.05 0.6 5.:-·''::''''''+--+---r-='--r---I <:_u 0.__ f.~~--"''''*----=+-~~-+-.05 0.1 0..c----r--.".8 *-~--.""_"'"k-~--'1'~~t-="-' <:_u __'''''''_''::-'''-d-~.--. 1..0 *_'..6~~~~~~--t---+--r-~---t---t 1..3 0.9.""+---+----I----I .ek..15 fck::::: 90 --+--._"8 <:_u n • II» Ih e d.-:>>.-''"t--=-_+-_+.10 _1_1_b~ U 1.15 0. 1.2 *-""'.1 0.-:s.25 0..45 0.15 0. .15 0. "-+--·-+---+------j~f-----I d..-+--+.-~---''''d--'''-..35 0.2 0..3 MJbh2fed 0...1 0.~-+·~~~~~--+--·t-----+---I o (a) 0.....25 0.0 -k-'".6 2.: ~.35 (b) MJbh2fed 0..05 ::::" fek 90 = :!2 1.ct~--..---. columns (fck = 73 .5 0.----1 o (e) 0.Jn =0.---r--.CHAPTER 5...:.--~~~-"'-.. I _l . c-' d/h=0.-.45 0...~--_1_-~-b-~----.4 -k-""--~-"'rl' .''''l-"".8 +---'~~~ 0.-----"""._. -k-''''--'"'k__''''_~'''''' 2 .0~---r--'----r--'----r---'---r---'------r-------r--.--+_--+----__+--t__·----1 1.05 0.:-''1'~~~"""'''''~""".. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE U 1.55 0.-----.5 0. e (9 ~ 1.. _.6 2.84-~~~~~~~.0 -.2 -k-'''''''''k-"""".4 0.35 0.=_9_0_'--_-I 0.45 0.5 0. d'~1 d.3 Mo/bh2fed 0.~_l I d/ h =0... ~I"""""'.0 -k-'''''-''k:--''''_"F''''''__''''_k-~+'''---''l''--=-~..2 0.25 0. -.4 0.---t---t d.---r--..t--'~+~''""'l----+---+------I ' ~" 1.<j-".

6 0.6 Mibh2fcd 5. 74 .150.6 o (e) 0.1 0.10.5 0.25 0.4 0.4 0.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 o (d) 0.55 0.55 0.50.2 0.35 0.15 0.9.05 0.15 0.1 0.350.050.20.05 0.3 MJbh2fcd 0.35 0.5 0.45 0.30.0~~-F~~~~~~~L-~~-4~L-~--4----+--~----+---~ o (f) 0.25 0.2 0.40.45 0.550.3 Mibh2fcd 0.250.450.

4 0.:" <:_u U ='2 1..2 I ~ ~~ ~ol ~ ~ ~ I f-4Jyibhfed I r-.0 .4 1.t:: ='2 1.55 0.2 \ \ \ 1\\ \\ l\\ I I I I 0. 75 .6 1.6 (g) Mibh2fed 2.0 0 (i) 0...4 1.6 0. ~ I I ~~~}:: ~ ~ d'101 _L _i_J-b~ OIl • h d.8 1.1 0.6 0.1 0.35 0.25 0.0 0 0.8 1.4 1.2 .15 0.2 0.15 0.45 0.45 0.05 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.25 0.0 '\~ ~r\\ ~"\~\\ ~\\l\\\\ l\ VI I i I I • 011 d.6 0.lh=0. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE 2.2 ~" .15 0.1 0.8 1.0 1.55 0.8 0.3 0.6 2.35 Mibh2fed 0.t:: U ='2 1.20 fek = 90 I I I / ~ o 0.6 Mibh2fed 5.5 0.05 0.CHAPTER 5.t 0.0 1.4 0.45 0.2 0.05 \\\ i\\ \ ~~/)/ )) 0.4 0.2 0.4 0..4 0..9.2 0..55 0.0 1.6 1.5 0.35 0.3 0.25 (h) 0. o U .3 0.0 <:_u 0.8 0.0 0.8 0. :.6 1..

6 1.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 2.) \ \\ \ \ \ '. T-.5 0.55 0.0 0 (j) 0.45 0.c: .15 0.35 0.6 .05 V/ // V/ '// ') 0.3 MJbh2fcd 0.1 0.8 0.45 0.2 0.4 0.\ \ \\\ ~\ .::'3 1.5.8 1.t_b--! ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ d.6 (k) 2.4 0.15 0.25 0.6 1.45 0.::'3 1.05 0.4 0.1 0. (Contd) 76 .6 0.35 0.2 . It -.4 -c ~u 1.8 1.5 0.25 0.2 0.0 ..4 ~ 1. r GIl.1 0.55 0.0 1::" ~} ~ <~ 0.::'3 1.2 ~" .4 -c ~AJyJb~fcd __.\\l\ 0.6 0.2 0.55 0.6 1.05 0.2 0.8 0.c.3 MJbh2fcd ))." _L h 0.35 0.0 <~ 0.\\1 .2 0. • d1 _L 1. e 0.\ \\\ ~'\ 1/ ~ o 0.3 MJbh2fcd 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.15 fc/{ = 90 0.0 '\ .8 1.0 0 (I) 0.9.2 0.15 0.4 0.0 1.2 .6 2.8 ~~~) -.4 0.0 1..25 0.0 1.

25 d/h= 0.10.2 ~1l 1..6 1.8 0.2 0....2 0. d ~ ..6 1.9 0. / 0.0 0 0.4 0.CHAPTER 5.0 <?_u h ~ ~ .35 (b) 1.15 Mjbh3fed 0.05 0. D d ~ .8 1.3 0..05 0. 50 0.1 0. 50 0.2 0.4 1.05 0..35 1.2 0.0 0 0.35 (c) 05.2 ~"8 1. .0 ::<:: <?_u h ~ D d " .6 1.6 0.7 fek.15 Mjbh3fed 0.2 0..1 0.15 Mjbh3fed 0.. ..3 0...8 0.. charts for circular columns 77 . ___ / d/h = 0.4 1. . / 0.25 d/h= 0..1 0..3 0..0 0 0.8 fek. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE 1.2 ~-g h ~ 1) .6 0..8 1.6 0..0 0. ..8 1..4 1.4 0.8 0.25 ::<:: <?_u (a) 1.4 0.2 0. ..

10. the development of a suitable computer program is relatively simple.11. ~~ ~~ __~~ __ ~~__ ~~ 0.-.. This is not easy to do without design charts or a suitable computer program.-15 1..25 0. In principle.15 0. ~~ ____ .8~_~~~ o~~~~...~ dlh = 0. In this a number of simplified methods will be considered which will allow the design of rectangular sections to be carried out relatively Three methods of dealing with bent here. and the necessary assumptions are illustrated in Fig.3 0.. 5. The force and the moment about the x and y axes of each at the ultimate limit state can then be calculated and summed to find the moment and axial force developed at the ultimate limit state by the concrete in compression.05 0.35 5. if desired. To develop the most rigorous program.6 fek.DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 1:: . The methods are in order of 78 .. 50 __ 0. (Contd) Design for biaxial EN 1992-1-1 does not directly give a method for designing biaxially bent columns other than working from first principles.2 0. it is convenient to divide the compression zone into strips parallel with the neutral axis and then calculate the stress in each strip using the parabolic-rectangular diagram. __ ~ ..0 t-~_.2 o (d) 0._~-""i~ .1 0.4 0. Such a program can be used to generate design charts for biaxial bending.

4.00 1.8. At loads approaching the squash load.0 0.' / / Stress 5.CHAPTER 5. Values of the exponent a in equation (05.B.1 l . -My interaction diagram can conveniently be represented by a super-ellipse. NRd is the squash load of the column. while in the region of the balance point it is close to a straight line.lS) A convenient parameter for defining the proximity to the squash load is the ratio N/Nuz' and EN 1992-1-1 assumes the relationship between this parameter and the exponent a given in Table 5. Biaxial bending of a rectangular section Table 5.5 2. and is believed to have been first developed by Bresler. 9(4) The the approach from the of view is that it cannot be used as a direct design method since NRd can only be established once the reinforcement area has been found. Clause 5. This is based on the observation that the form of the M.9(4) (DS.4.7 1.9(4) of EN 1992-1-1 for the design of biaxially bent sections in slender columns.4. while if a Clause 5. the Mx-My interaction diagram approaches a circle. and may be calculated from NRd Clause 5.15) NdNRd S.8.1 0.0 The first is an approach given in clause 5. this equation becomes a circle. A super-ellipse has an equation of the form Jt1+ya=k If a = 2. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE / / / . It therefore has to be used An initial estimate is made of N/N uz> the 79 .B. Intermediate values may be interpolated.14) 1 it describes a straight line.9(4) adopts the equation below as a means of describing the complete interaction surface: (DS. a 1. In Table 5.

and My are the design moments about the x and y axes.I8) This approach has the great advantage of being very simple.8 Design is carried out for an increased uniaxial moment. as it was originally devised for general use. if M)h' < M/b' then M.I6) (D5. A possible way to use this simplified method is to use it to obtain a first approximation to the required area of reinforcement and then check the result using equation (D5. a corrected value of N/N uz can then be estimated. X· . and the process repeated until a correct solution is obtained.+ . 5. It is. The factor f3 is defined in BS 8110 as a function of N/bhfcu.12. This is a slightly modified version of a method given in eEB Bulletin d'Information 141. method has been adopted in BS 8110. A much simpler. If the reinforcement is more uniformly distributed around the perimeter of the section. y L. y S. but considerably more approximate.+. It is not clear why the method described above is included only in the code for the design of slender columns.3 < f3 < 1. Notation used in biaxial column design method 80 .12.I7) In the above relationships. 5.I5). while M.. an approximate approach. and is considered to be adequately accurate for column sections where the reinforcement is concentrated near the corners.<::: :l::: I "'f b' "I.0) (D5.13. then the method is conservative.I . and it effectively defines the interaction diagram illustrated in Fig. b' and h' are effective depths as indicated in Fig. which takes account of the biaxial effects.N/bhfck (0. however. b ~ .DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 section is designed. and are the effective uniaxial moments for which the section is actually designed. respectively. The required uniaxial moment is obtained from whichever is appropriate of the two relationships set out below: if M)h' > M/b' then M. In terms offck' it can be obtained from the relationship f3 = 1.. = My + f3b'Mx/h' (D5.

5. Comparison of simplified and rigorous biaxial methods 81 . DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE fig.13.CHAPTER 5.

resistance This for uniaxial For moment of v"a~'''~".14.XUna1:ceinforcement r may area it cou Id in EN 1992-1.DESIGNERS' GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 method su~. Effective steel stress-strain curve for sections 82 .gested earlier aplprC. 4794 kN IJUHn'VlI of the tahle in 1-1 to the results reinforcement Prestrain 1 o l £ 5.L This will now be done. to use the chart for The factor a must now he found.

_ 83 .~<..14.CHAPTER 5.ri S~~c:tlorIS The design of prestressed sections introduces no new problems except that allowance must be made for the in the prestressing steel. DESIGN OF SECTIONS FOR BENDING AND AXIAL FORCE of nr. 5.:"". 1nO__ '_.:1I"'r""'~<. This is effectively done by fixing a false origin for the stress-strain curve for the prestressing steel at a point corresponding to zero stress and a strain equal to the prestrain. This is illustrated in Fig.

.

Despite this.5).6 Shear.3 Clause 6.1. there remain considerable areas of uncertainty and disagreement. Probably more research has been carried out into shear behaviour than into any other mode of failure of reinforced or prestressed concrete. Clause 6. punching shear and torsion I. Despite these uncertainties. there is no generally accepted overall model describing shear behaviour.2 of EN 1992-1-1.general Shear is dealt with in clause 6. and being adjusted to fit. Furthermore. This has been the most researched area of shear performance. Each of these will be considered in turn.4. It is of particular importance for design for punching (see Section 6.2 Clause 6. and the resulting formulae can be considered as reliable for normal types of element. Because of the amount of testing that has been carried the effect of the major variables can be clearly established. . design for shear can be carried out with confidence for an normal members because the design methods given in codes have had the advantage of being tested against.4 Background to the code provisions Four aspects of the strength of sections subjected These are: to shear loading will be considered here.3 and punching shear in clause 6. The first part of this chapter will give an outline of shear behaviour as it is currently understood with an indication of how the provisions in the code reflect this. The formulae given in codes should therefore be considered to be basically empirical. as yet. unlike flexural behaviour. no generally accepted theory describing the ultimate behaviour of a member without shear reinforcement has been developed. 6. a very large body of experimental data. Shear . Members without reinforcement This area is probably of limited importance for beams where some shear reinforcement will always be provided but is of major importance for slabs where it is often very inconvenient to provide shear reinforcement.2. strength of members without shear reinforcement strength of members with shear reinforcement maximum shear that can be carried by a member behaviour close to supports. but. torsion in clause 6.

3) (D6.150"cp] (D6. The tensile axial is force is simply taken into account by the introduction of a negative value for O"cp' In equation (D6. however. Strength of sections with shear reinforcement There is a generally accepted model for the prediction of the effects of shear reinforcement. In this model. This effect is sufficiently large that it is worth taking into account in the design of shallow members such as slabs.viz . and these are as given above.6) F2 = V/sin e v 86 .035k3/2fckl/2 where k = + 0. experimental evidence suggests that the influence of concrete strength is rather less than proportional to the tensile strength.5 cot e) (D6.5 cot e) . the concrete in the compression zone and the tension steel. the top and bottom compression and tension members are. Shear strength increases with increasing reinforcement ratio. The minimum requirement for VRd. The members connecting the top and bottom members are represented by steel tension members and virtual concrete 'struts'. they have been included explicitly in the equation.1 can be analysed to give the forces in the various members as indicated below: Fl = N/2 = N/2 + V(a . In this it agrees with UK practice as incorporated in BS 8110. Most recent codes of practice therefore have a term in their equations to allow for this and which gives a higher shear strength for shallow members. In fact.15 are nationally determined parameters.viz + 0. EN 1992-1-1 gives the tensile strength as varying in proportion to the compressive strength to the power of 2/3. 6.e. It is fairly self-evident that concrete strength will have an influence on shear strength.150"cp) 1 + -Y(200/d)::.18hc)k(100pJck)1/3 b~(0.0.c takes account of the fact that a member without any reinforcement still has some shear strength. though the nature of the failure suggests that it is likely to be the tensile strength rather than the compressive strength which is important. EN 1992-1-1. employs a cube root relationship between shear strength and steel percentage up to a maximum value of p of 0. The absolute section depth is found to have a significant influence on shear strength over and above that expected from normal geometrical scaling (i. The code indicates the shear strength of sections unreinforced in shear to vary in proportion to the compressive strength to the power of 1/3. the term 0.02 and O"cp the average longitudinal stress (note compression is positive). accepted the recommended values. like BS 8110. illustrated in Fig.2.1). c should not be taken as less than + 0.1 for the commonest case where vertical links are used. 6. Taking these various factors into account.c = b~[(0. 0. EN 1992-1-1 gives the following equation for the strength of sections without shear reinforcement: VRd. but the rate of increase reduces as reinforcement ratio increases. the reinforcement ratio and the depth of the member.02.2. The UK has.18hc and the constant 0. 6. This behaviour may be modelled in various ways. Pl =Ajbwd ::.2.V(a . there is a size effect). This is the 'truss model'. For convenience. The truss in Fig.1) (D6.4) (D6.0 d is in millimetres.5) (D6. respectively.2) VRd.DESIGNERS'GUIDE TO EN 1992-1-1 AND EN 1992-1-2 The principal variables governing the shear strength of members without shear reinforcement are the concrete strength.

- Designers Guide to EN1992-2 Eurocode 2
- Designers’ guide to EN 1994-1-1 Composite Steel and Concrete
- reinforced concrete design to eurocodes design theory
- Designers' Guide to Eurocode
- Designers' Guide to en 1994-2 Eurocode 4 - Bridges
- Structural Elements Design Manual-Working With Eurocodes 2009
- Ccip Worked Examples Ec2
- Designers' Guide to en 1994-2_Eurocode 4_Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures
- Design Aids EuroCode
- Designers' Guide to en 1998
- Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design-General Rules-Guide to en 1997-1
- Designers’ guide to EN 1992-2 Concrete Bridges (2007)
- Designers’ Guide to Eurocode 1 - Actions on Bridges
- Designs Guide to en 1994-2, Eurocode 4
- steel_design
- Designers Guide to EN1994-2 Eurocode 4
- Concrete Design using eurocode 2
- Designers' Guide to en 1993-1-1 Eurocode 3 - Design of Steel Structures
- Reinforced Concrete Design to Eurocode 2
- Eurocode 7
- Worked Example to Eurocode 2 Vol. 1
- Worked Examples for the Design of Concrete Structures to Eurocode 2
- Eurocode Load Combinations for Steel Structures 2010
- Designers' Guide to Eurocode 8 Design of Bridges for Earthquake Resistance (Designers' Guides to the Eurocodes)
- Ccip Concise Ec2
- Worked Examples to Eurocode 2
- Eurocode Design Example Book
- Eurocode 4 Design Composite Steel Concrete Structures
- Designers guide to EC3
- How to Design Concrete Structures Using Eurocode 2

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?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading