©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion - clause 6.3

©2006 Atkins plc

Outline of talk

 Types of torsion
 Resistance to torsion in EN 1992
 Resistance to torsion in open sections
 Torsion in slabs
 Examples
©2006 Atkins plc

Types of torsion
©2006 Atkins plc

Types of torsion

 Torsion does not usually determine the size of members

 Usually therefore checked after the flexural design has been
completed
 (Usually maximum torsional design moment will not coexist with
the maximum flexural moment and shear force)
Two types of torsion:
- Equilibrium
- Compatibility
 This distinction between compatibility torsion and equilibrium
torsion is the subject of 2-1-1/6.3.1(1) and 2-1-1/6.3.1(2).
©2006 Atkins plc

Types of torsion

Equilibrium torsion
• Essential for stability of system e.g.
- Curved beams
- Eccentric loads
©2006 Atkins plc

Types of torsion

Compatibility torsion
 Arises because of compatibility of rotations in structural system
 Equilibrium can still be found if torsion is released e.g.
- Beam grids
- Deck slabs
 Torsional stiffness should be evaluated realistically e.g. cracked
stiffness in torsion is typically only about a quarter of the
uncracked value and this would significantly reduce any torque
attracted to the beams once they had cracked.
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistances to torsion
 Further distinction needs to be made between St. Venant
torsion, circulatory torsion and warping torsion
1. St. Venant torsion arises due to the closed flow of shear
stresses around the perimeter of a cross section e.g.
- closed flow of shear around a closed hollow section such as a
box girder (circulatory torsion in EN 1992)
- similar flow around the perimeter of an open section (St. Venant
torsion in EN 1992)

St Venant torsion Circulatory torsion

©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistances to torsion
2. Warping torsion arises from in plane bending of individual
walls when there is restraint to longitudinal deformations, such
as might occur in an “I” beam

h TEd/h

TEd
Bi-moment

TEd/h

 Total applied torque has to be carried by either or a

combination of these two mechanisms
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistances to torsion
 For open sections, warping can be an efficient method of
carrying torsion (where the span for transverse bending of
individual walls is short)
 2-1-1/6.3.3(2) permits a spaceframe analysis to be carried out
to determine the distribution of torsion between warping and St
Venant mechanisms.
 The design of individual walls would then be carried out for the
bending, shear, torsion and axial forces determined therein.
Transverse bending
inertia of web and
Transverse
vertical area of web
bending inertia
only
of flange and St
Venant torsional
inertia of flange Longitudinal area and inertia
only of entire main beam. St
Venant torsional inertia of
web and. transverse bending
inertia of web.
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistance to torsion in EN 1992

 Resistance in EN 1992 is based on circulatory torsion
even in open and solid sections
Ak is the area enclosed by the centre-line;
 t ,i is the shear stress in wall i;
t ef ,i is the effective thickness of wall i (defined by designer);
A is the area within the outer surface;
u is the outer circumference of the cross-section;
zi is the side length of wall i defined by the distance between the intersection
points with the adjacent walls
Centre-line
defining Ak zi

Cover Surface defining

perimeter, u, and
TEd area, A
tef /2

tef
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistance to torsion in EN 1992

• Effective thickness, tef,i, may be varied to optimise the torsional
resistance
• It can be made equal to A/u, but not less than twice the distance
from edge of section to centre of longitudinal reinforcement
• Latter ensures that the centreline of the wall and hence shear
force does not lie outside the longitudinal reinforcement (but
leads to conflict in thin sections where this exceeds the physical
half-thickness)
Centre-line
defining Ak zi

Cover Surface defining

perimeter, u, and
TEd area, A
tef /2

tef
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

 Open sections are divided into several rectangles and each idealised
as thin-walled closed sections – similar to current UK practice
 Design for torsion based on calculation of elastic shear stress in a
wall:
TEd  2 Ak ( t ,i t ef ,i )

 The shear in each wall is:

VEd ,i   t ,i t ef ,i z i

 And hence from the above equations, each wall must be designed for
Centre-line
a shear of: defining Ak zi
TEd
VEd ,i  zi
2 Ak
Cover
 Equating to shear resistance of links gives:
TEd
TEd A tef /2
VEd ,i  z i  st z i f yd cot 
2 Ak st
tef
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

 Each wall designed like a web in shear

Resistance based
on links:
Asw
zf ywd cot  cot sin 
compression chord (concrete in
compression zone)
stirrups VRd ,s 
s

s z
Resistance based
α θ on concrete
tension chord (tensile typical web
crushing:
reinforcement) compression strut
  b z f
cot   cot  
VRd , max cw w 1 cd
1  cot  
2

 1    0.6  1  f ck 250 - Efficiency factor - can be varied in the National Annex

αcw – factor to allow for effects of compression; equals 1.0 for no applied axial force
and increases to a maximum of 1.25 for prestress between 0.25 fcd and 0.5 fcd
before reducing again to 0 for an axial stress of fcd
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion
 This (and similar analyses for longitudinal steel and concrete
crushing) leads to the following results
 Variable angle truss model again applies with same
implications of shallow or steep truss angles as in shear design

Transverse
reinforcement: Centre-line Reinforcement
defining Ak zi
Ast TEd area, Ast at st
 centres
st 2 Ak f yd cot 
Cover Surface defining
Longitudinal perimeter, u, and
TEd area, A
reinforcement: tef /2
Asl TEd
 cot 
sl 2 Ak f yd
tef
Concrete crushing:
TRd ,max  2 cw f cd Ak t ef ,i sin cos
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistance to torsion Half width

Problems defining effective thickness, tef,I

 Requirements for tef,I can lead to

difficulties of interpretation with thin solid
sections where the minimum permissible
effective thickness (twice the distance
from edge of section to centre of
longitudinal reinforcement) may exceed
both A/u and the physical half-thickness
 Solution is to use tef,I as follows:
- Reinforcement design – 2 x cover to
longitudinal bar centres, even if more than
half width
- Concrete crushing – not greater than half
width Min tef,i / 2 ?
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion

Resistance to torsion
Problems defining effective thickness, tef,I

 Thin walled analogy by definition is not valid for thick walls, so

breaks down for crushing check in thin sections
 Alternative where exceeds the available half width is to use plastic
torque TRd,max   cw f cd sin  cos  b d  b / 3
2

2
dh
TRd,max
h
d

d/3 d tef,i
d
d/2 (physical Plastic torque
limit)
b 2 d  b / 3
A/u = d/4 TRd,max   cw f cd sin  cos 
Anomalous result with TRd ,max  2 cw f cd Ak t ef ,i sin cos 2
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion
Shear and torsion
 For box girders, can also design each wall individually for
TEd
shear from shear and torsion i.e. Ed ,i
V  zi
2 Ak
 For other beams, add steel requirements for shear and
torsion and check crushing against:
TEd VEd
  1.0
TRd ,max VRd ,max
 Must use same truss angle for shear and torsion design

+ =

Torsion Shear Total

©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion
Open sections
 2-1-1/6.3.1(3) allows open flanged sections, such as T-sections, to be
divided into a series of component rectangles
 Each is modelled as an equivalent thin-walled section
 The total torsional resistance is taken as the sum of the resistances of
the individual elements
 Sub-division should be done so as to maximise the total torsional
stiffness derived for the overall section
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion
Open sections
 The un-cracked torsional stiffness, Ixx, of a component rectangle may
be determined from:
I xx  k  bmax bmin
3

with:
1  
4
b bmin
k  1  0.63 min 1  
3   12  b 4 
max 
bmax  

bmax /bmin k bmax /bmin k bmax /bmin k

1.0 0.141 1.5 0.196 4.0 0.281

1.1 0.153 1.8 0.218 5.0 0.291
1.2 0.165 2.0 0.229 7.5 0.305
1.3 0.177 2.5 0.250 10.0 0.312
bmin
1.4 0.187 3.0 0.263  0.333
bmax
©2006 Atkins plc

Resistance to torsion
Open sections
 2-1-1/6.3.1(4) requires the share of the total design torsional moment
acting on each component rectangle to be based pro-rata to the total
uncracked torsional stiffness
 Each sub-section may then be designed separately in accordance
with 2-1-1/6.3.1(5) – as above
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion in slabs
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion in slabs
Torsion in slabs
 The rules on torsion in 2-1-1/6.3
do not apply to slabs
 Torsion in slabs is carried by a
modification to the moment field
caused by the presence of the 1
h
1

twisting moments in addition to

the bending moments in two
orthogonal directions y vEdx vEdy
x
z
 In the UK, this has been nEdx
nEdyx nEdxy
nEdy
mEdx
traditionally achieved in design mEdx
mEdxy mEdxy
by using the Wood-Armer eqns
 In EN 1992-2, an alternative
sandwich model is employed (2-
2/Annex LL) to convert moments
to reinforcement forces
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion in slabs
Torsion in slabs
Edy h
1 1
τEdxy
τEdxy
yyxs yxys
zyx z
yyxi yxyi xy
z
Edx Edx nEdyxs nEdxys

τEdxy nEdyx nEdyxi nEdxyi nEdxy

mEdyx y x mEdxy
τEdxy
Edy

 x sx   Edxy cot    Edx   x f yd , x

h  y sy   Edxy tan    Edy   y f yd , y
1 1
 cd    Edxy (tan   cot  )   cd ,max

yxs yys  is the reinforcement ratio

zx zy
yxi yyi
z
nEdxs nEdys
mEdx mEdy
nEdx y
nEdxi x nEdyi nEdy
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion in slabs

More general case with skew reinforcement

 Edx sin  cos    Edy cos  sin    Edxy cos(   )

  s 
Edy sin(    ) cos(   )
τEdxy
 Edx sin  sin    Edy cos  cos    Edxy sin(    )
τEdxy    s 
cos(   ) cos(   )
β

α
Edx θ Edx

τEdxy
Y

τEdxy
X
Edy

cos  sin 
 cd   Edx   Edxy tan     s cos(   )     s sin(    )
cos  cos 
©2006 Atkins plc

Examples
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion
Box girder example
10000
350

3500

500

500 500

6000

Centre-line
defining Ak zi

Cover Surface defining

perimeter, u, and
TEd area, A
tef /2

tef
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion
M-beam example

160 1000
thk

250 400 Deck slab

thk
Top flange

335 160
Web
thk
Bottom flange

185 950
thk

I xx  k  bmax bmin
3
©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion
M-beam example

45 30

400
160

Deck slab
250
Top flange

335 160 thk

Web

Bottom flange

185 950 thk

©2006 Atkins plc

Torsion
80
M-beam example

tef,i / 2 = 45
160

160

250 400 thk Deck slab

Top flange

335 Web

Bottom flange

185 950 thk

©2006 Atkins plc

The above is based on:

“Designers’ Guide to EN 1992-2 : Concrete Bridges” –
by C R Hendy and D A Smith

where more information can be found.