Actions Wanted: Dead or Live

Basis of Structural Design to EC0

Prof Tan Kang Hai (PhD, PEng)

Email: D-PTRC@ntu.edu.sg
Director of Protective Technology Research Centre (PTRC)
Division of Structures & Mechanics
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering
1

Content
1. National Implementation and Annex
2. EC0
3. Load combinations

4. Global imperfections
5. Worked Examples

6. Summary

1.

National Implementation and Annex

EN 1990 Eurocode

: Basis of Structural Design

EC0

EN 1991 Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures

EC1

EN 1992 Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures

EC2

EN 1993 Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures

EC3

EN 1994 Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures

EC4

EN 1995 Eurocode 5: Design of Timber Structures

EC5

EN 1996 Eurocode 6: Design of Masonry Structures

EC6

EN 1997 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design

EC7

EN 1998 Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance

EC8

EN 1999 Eurocode 9: Design of Aluminum Structures

EC9
3

1.

National Implementation and Annex

Linkage between the Eurocodes

EC0

EC1

EC7

EC8

EC2

EC3

EC4

EC5

EC6

EC9

EN 1990: Basis of Structural Design (EC0)

EN 1991: Actions on Structures (EC1)

EN 1991-1

EN 1991-2

EN 1991-3

Traffic loads
on bridges

Actions induced
by cranes & machinery

EN 1991-1.1

EN 1991-1.2

EN 1991-1.3

EN 1991-1.4

EN 1991-1.5

EN 1991-1.6

EN 1991-1.7

Density,
self-weight
& imposed loads

Actions on
structures
exposed to fire

Snow
loads

Wind
loads

Thermal
actions

Actions
during
execution

Accidental actions
due to impact
and explosion

EN 1993: Design of Steel Structures (EC3)

EN 1993-1

EN 1993-1.1

EN 1993-1.2

General rules and rules for

Buildings

Structural
Fire
Design

EN 1993-1.3, EN 1993-1.4, EN 1993-1.5,

EN 1993-1.6, EN 1993-1.7, EN 1993-1.8,
EN 1993-1.9, EN 1993-1.10, etc.

etc.

1.

National Implementation and Annex

Codes that relate to actions

EN 1991 part

Published

EN 1991-1-1

Densities, self weight, imposed loads for buildings

2002

EN 1991-1-2

Actions on structures exposed to fire

2002

EN 1991-1-3

Snow loads

2003

EN 1991-1-4

Wind actions

2005

EN 1991-1-5

Thermal actions

2003

EN 1991-1-6

Actions during execution

2005

EN 1991-1-7

Accidental actions

2006

EN 1991-2

Traffic loads on bridges

2003

EN 1991-3

Actions induced by cranes and machinery

2006

EN 1991-4

Silos and tanks

2006

1.

National Implementation and Annex

EN 1990:2002

BS EN 1990:2002

NA to BS EN 1990:2002

Basis of
Structural Design

Eurocode - Basis of
Structural Design

UK National Annex for EC0

NA to SS EN 1990:2008
Singapore National Annex for EC0

EN 1991-1.1:2002

BS EN 1991-1.1:2002

NA to BS EN 1991-1.1:2002

Density,
Self-weight
& imposed loads

Eurocode1: Part 1-1: General Actions

Densities, self-weight
& imposed loads for buildings

UK National Annex for EC1

NA to SS EN 1991-1.1:2008
Singapore National Annex for EC1

EN 1993-1.1:2004

BS EN 1993-1.1:2005

NA to BS EN 1993-1.1:2005

Common rules for

Buildings and civil
Engineering structures

Eurocode 3: Design of steel

structures Part 1-1: General rules
and rules for buildings

UK National Annex for EC2

NA to SS EN 1993-1.1:2008
Singapore National Annex for EC3

Structural Eurocodes are accepted from 1 Apr 2013, and co-exist for two years with the current
Singapore/British Standards. Structural Eurocodes will be the only prescribed structural design standards
from 1 Apr 2015. At the end of the two-year co-existence period on 1 Apr 2015, the SS/BS will be
withdrawn from the Approved Document.
7

1.

National Implementation and Annex

Nationally Determined Parameters (NDPs)
1500 NDPs in the Eurocode suite
355 NDPs in EN 1991

2.

EC0

New definitions:
Clause

Traditional definitions

New definitions

1.5.3.1

Forces (load)/ imposed deformations

Actions

1.5.3.2

Shear force, moment, stress, strain

Action effects

1.5.3.3

Dead load (DL)

Permanent actions (Gk)

1.5.3.4

Live load (LL), wind load

Variable actions (Qk)

Live load

Imposed loads

2.

EC0

A structure shall be designed to have adequate:

-

Structural resistance (ultimate limit state)

Serviceability (serviceability limit state)
Durability (serviceability limit state)
Fire resistance (fire limit state)
Robustness (accidental limit state)
Design for Ultimate Limit States (ULS)

The structure to be designed to satisfy:

Design for Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

The structure to be designed to satisfy:

Ed Rd

Ed Cd

Actions and Environmental Influences

Material and Product Properties

10

2.

EC0

Design working life

11

2.

EC0
LIMIT STATES
These refer to states beyond which the structure infringes an agreed performance criterion

Ultimate Limit States (ULS)

These refer to those associated with:
(1) collapse or failure, and generally govern the
strength of the structure or component;

(2) loss of equilibrium or stability of the structure

as a whole*.

Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

These refer to conditions of the structure in use,
including deformation, cracking and vibration
which:
(1) damage the structural or non-structural
elements (finishes, partitions, etc.) or the contents
of buildings (such as machinery);

(*): As the structure will undergo severe

deformation prior to reaching collapse conditions,
these states are regarded as ultimate limit states.
They will necessitate replacement of the structure

(2) cause discomfort to the occupants of

buildings;

or element.

water and weather tightness.

ULS is governed by strength and stability of

structures or members.

SLS is generally governed by he stiffness of the

structure and the detailing of reinforcement.

(3) affect adversely appearance, durability or

12

2.

EC0
DESIGN SITUATIONS

Persistent Situations
These refer to
conditions of normal
use.
Normal use includes
possible extreme
loading conditions from
wind, snow, imposed
loads, etc
Related to the design
working life of the
structure.

Transient Situations

Accidental Situations

Seismic Situations

These refer to

These refer to

Refer to exceptional

temporary conditions of

exceptional conditions

conditions applicable to

e.g. due to fire,

the structure when

explosion, impact or

subjected to seismic

local failure.

events.

the structure, in terms of

its use or its exposure,
e.g. during construction
or repair.
Much shorter than the

Refer to relatively short

period.

design working life

FUNDAMENTAL COMBINATIONS

FAILURE MODES AT ULS: EQU, STR, GEO, FAT

13

2.

EC0

MAJOR FAILURE MODES at ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES TO BE CONSIDERED FOR A DESIGN SITUATION:

EQU

STR

GEO

Loss of static
equilibrium of the
structure or any part of it
considered as a rigid

Internal failure or

Failure or excessive

excessive deformation

deformation of the

of the structure or

ground where the

body, where:
(1) minor variations in
the value or the spatial
distribution of actions
from a single source are
significant, and

structural members,

strength of soil or rock

including columns,

are significant in

footings, piles,

providing resistance;

(2) the strengths of

construction materials
or the ground do not
govern.

construction materials of

FAT
Fatigue failure of the
structure or structural

members.

basement walls, etc.,

where the strength of
the structure governs;

14

2.

EC0

Ultimate limit states: Three common failure states

15

2.

EC0
Classification of Actions

16

2.

EC0
OTHER REPRESENTATIVE VALUES OF VARIABLE ACTIONS:

Combination Value 0Qk

Frequent Value 1Qk

Quasi-permanent Value 2Qk

For:

For:

For:

1) ULS and

1) ULS involving accidental actions,

1) ULS

2) Irreversible SLS
3) Apply to non-leading variable
actions

and

involving

accidental

actions, and

2) Reversible SLS

2) Reversible SLS

3) Apply to leading variable action

3) Used for calculation of long-

(consider the reduced probability

term effects.

of simultaneous occurrences of

(e.g. for buildings, the frequent value

two or more independent variable

is chosen so that the time it is

actions.)

exceeded is 0.01 of the reference

period of 50 years)

(e.g. for loads on building floors,

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

17

3.

Load combinations
COMBINATION OF ACTIONS FOR DESIGN AT ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES (ULS)

Permanent
Actions

Variable Action
(leading)

Variable Actions
(accompanying)

Prestress
Actions

Accidental
Actions

Eq. (6.10) (for EQU, STR, GEO of persistent and transient design situations)

G,j Gk,j

Q,1 Qk,1

+ Q,i 0,i Qk,i +

Eq. (6.10a) (for STR, GEO of persistent and transient design situations)

G,j Gk,j

Q,1 0,1Qk,1

P Pk

P Pk

P Pk

AND

+ Q,i 0,i Qk,i +

Eq. (6.10b) (for STR, GEO of persistent and transient design situations)

j G,j Gk,j

Q,1 Qk,1

+ Q,i 0,i Qk,i +

Notes: (1) j is sub-index for permanent action, j1; i is sub-index for accompanying variable actions, i>1;

(2) The symbol + implies to be combined with;

(3) The symbol implies the combined effect of;
(4) The symbol is a reduction factor for unfavourable permanent action G, in the range of 0.8 to 1.0;
(5) The less favourable of Eq.(6.10a) and Eq.(6.10b) is used for STR and GEO design situations.

18

3.

Load combinations

In BS 5950, a structure is first designed for the

fundamental load combination (DL + LL) and is then
checked for other load combinations (DL + LL + W)
with reduction load factors

In EC3, all combinations of actions (or load cases) are

equally important.

19

3.

Load combinations
COMBINATION OF ACTIONS FOR DESIGN AT ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES (ULS)

FUNDAMENTAL COMBINATIONS

Persistent Situations

Transient Situations

For EQU, STR, GEO:

For EQU, STR, GEO:

Equation (6.10)

Equation (6.10)

For STR, GEO:

Accidental Situations

Equation (6.12b)

Equation (6.11b)

For STR, GEO:

Equation (6.10a) &

Equation (6.10a) &

Equation (6.10b)

Equation (6.10b)

Seismic Situations

COMBINATION OF ACTIONS FOR DESIGN AT SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES (SLS)

Characteristic Combination

Frequent Combination

Quasi-permanent Combination

Equation (6.14b)

Equation (6.15b)

Equation (6.16b)

Note: Fatigue verification (FAT) is not included in EC0 Clause 6.4

20

3.

Load combinations
DISTINCTION BETWEEN Eqs. (6.10), (6.10a) and (6.10b)

1. In Eq.(6.10a), all other variable actions Qi are taken into account with their combination value (0,iQk,i);
2. In Eq.(6.10b), Q1 is identified as a leading action (Qi are taken into account as accompanying actions), but a
reduction factor j is applied to the unfavourable permanent actions Gj;
3. Eqs. (6.10a) and (6.10b) will always give a lower design value for load effect than the use of (Eq.6.10);
4. These can be referred to Reliability Methods

21

3.

Load combinations

Equation 6.10:

Comparison of partial factors

Design situations
With one variable action
(Live load)
With one variable action
(Wind load)
With two variable actions
(Wind & live loads)

BS 5950

EC3

1.4DL + 1.6LL

1.35Gk + 1.5Qk

1.4DL + 1.6W

1.35Gk + 1.5Wk

1.2DL + 1.2LL + 1.2W

1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 0.75Wk

Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk
0.7x1.5Qk

Leading variable action

0.5x1.5Wk

22

3.

Load combinations

23

3.

Load combinations

Equation 6.10a,b

Ultimate states

Combinations of actions

Eq. (6.10)

1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 1.5*0.5Wk

For EQU, STR, GEO

Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk

Eq. (6.10a)

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

For STR, GEO

1.0 Gk + 1.5*0.5Wk

Eq. (6.10b)
For STR, GEO

0.925*1.35Gk + 1.00Gk +1.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Q

(adverse) (favourable)
24

4.

Global imperfections
Global and local imperfections
Variance of dimensions of a structure or a
b
member

Lack of verticality of a structure and straightness

or flatness of a member
h

e0

25

4.

Global imperfections
Global and local imperfections
Global imperfections
of frames or bracing systems
Cover lack of verticality for frames or straightness of
structure restrained by bracings

Local (member) imperfections

of individual members
Cover lack of straightness or flatness of a member
and residual stresses of the member

26

4.

Global imperfections
Global imperfections
V1

V1

V2

V2

V1
V2

In general, the sway imperfections are introduced into

analysis as corresponding horizontal loadings Hi = Vi
For frames, sway imperfections may be disregarded

HEd 0.15VEd
so that their contribution to internal forces is negligible
27

4.

Global imperfections

The structure is assumed with inclination l, given by:

where: 0 is the basic value (0 = 1/200)

h is the reduction factor for height

where l is the total height of the structure in m and

m is the reduction factor for number of members:

where m is the number of vertically continuous members in the

storey contributing to the total horizontal forces on the floor.

4.

Global imperfections
Local imperfections by and LT
Usually local imperfections are covered in global
analysis through reduction factors and LT
in member checks;
Unless the frame is sensitive to 2nd order effects
a member has at least
one moment resistant end joint
and has simultaneously high slenderness
given in Eurocode 3, eq. 5.8.

29

5.

Worked examples

Example 1. Load combination for cantilever beams

Identify the critical load combinations for the ultimate limit state design of the beam
below using fundamental combinations given in Table A1.2(A) (Set A) and Table

A1.2(B) (Set B) of EN 1990. Assume that the beam is subject to permanent loads
(characteristic value: Gk kN/m), imposed loads (characteristic value: Qk kN/m) and a
permanent point load P kN at the end of the cantilever arising from dead loads of the
external wall.

30

5.

Worked examples

Static equilibrium (EQU) for building structures should be

verified using the design values of actions in Table
A1.2(A) EC0 (Set A).

The fundamental load combination to be used is:

G, j

Gk , j Q,1Qk ,1 Q,i 0,i Qk ,i

i 1

When considering stability (EQU), a distinction between

the favorable and unfavorable effects needs to be made.

31

5.

Worked examples

Annex A1. Application for buildings

NA to BS EN 1990:2002

For verifying static

equilibrium for building
structures

32

Equation 6.10 EQU (Set A)

Load case For potential uplift at 1
0.9Gk

1.10P
1.1Gk+1.5Qk

33

5.

Worked examples

When considering strength (STR) which does not involve geotechnical

actions, the strength of elements should be verified using load
combination Set B (Table A1.2(B) EC0).
Two options are given. Either combination (6.10) from EN 1990 or the
less favourable of equations (6.10a) and (6.10b) may be used.

34

5.

Worked examples

In the single source principle for permanent actions in EC0, all

permanent actions from one source are assigned the same value of
partial factor in any one load combination. This principle is applied only
to STR and GEO and not to EQU state.

35

Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 1 For max reaction at 2
1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1.35P
1.35Gk+1.5Qk

Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 2. For max reaction at 1
1.35P

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1.35Gk

36

Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 3. For max moment of cantilever
1.35Gk

1.35P
1.35Gk+1.5Qk

Load case 4. For max moment at 1-2

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1.35Gk

1.35P

37

Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 5. For min positive moment 1-2
1P
1.00Gk

1.00Gk +1.5Qk

38

5.

Worked examples

Example 2. Leading and accompanying Variable Actions

Identify the critical load combinations for the ultimate limit state design (STR - Set B)
of the 3-storey frame shown below. Assume that the frame is subjected to
permanent loads (characteristic value: Gk kN/m), imposed loads (characteristic
value: Qk kN/m), and wind load (characteristic value: Wk kN).

39

5.

Worked examples

Design for columns (STR - Set B)

Load case 1(a). Treat the wind
load as leading VAR action
1.5Wk

1.5Wk

1.5Wk

imposed load as leading VAR action

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)

1.35Gk+ 1.5Qk

0.75Wk

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

0.75Wk

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)

Load case 1(b). Treat the

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

0.75Wk

40

5.

Worked examples

Design for columns (STR - Set B)

Load case 2(a). Treat the wind

Load case 2(b). Treat the

load as leading VAR action

imposed load as leading VAR action

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)

0.5(1.5Wk)

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1.5Wk

0.5(1.5Wk)

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1.5Wk

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)

1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1.5Wk

0.5(1.5Wk)

41

5.

Worked examples
Design for beams (STR - Set B)
Load case 3. Treat the imposed
load as dominant load without wind
1.35Gk+1.5Gk

1.35Gk+1.5Gk

1.35Gk+1.5Gk

42

5.

Worked examples

Example 3. Horizontal action simulating global imperfections

Imperfections for global linear analysis

12 kN/m'
IPE 550
HE 340 B

40 kN

40 kN

imp 1
10000

HEd,1

HEd,2

24000

VEd,2

VEd,1

geometry
and
cross sections

loading
and
reactions
43

5.

Worked examples

HEd = 0 i.e. < 0.15 VEd (consider )

Sway imperfection for global analysis (imp 1):
2
2
h

h
10

m 0.5 1

h ,min

2
3

1
1

0.51 0.87
m
2

1 2
0 h m
0.87 0.0029
200 3
imp 1 V 0.0029 12 24 80 1.07 kN
44

5.

Worked examples

Internal forces (loading + imperfections):

-374,6

387,1

144,5

-38,7

-483,2

143,5
-183,5

-184,5

MEd [kNm]

NEd [kN]

MEd [kNm]

NEd [kN]

-37,5

38,7
VEd [kN]

VEd [kN]

45

5.

Worked examples

Local imperfections for global analysis only if simultaneously

(column concerned):
- exists moment resistant end joint: OK
- slenderness

0,5

In this case,

A fy
NEd

0,5

17090 235
2,33
3
184.5 10

y 10000 / 146.5

0.73
1
93.9

Thus, local imperfections can be ignored in global analysis

and to be considered by factors and LT .
46

6.

Summary

Variable actions: leading and accompanying actions

Failure mode: EQU,STR, GEO and STR/GEO
Either Equation 6.10, OR 6.10(a) and 6.10(b) for STR
Persistent/Transient/Accidental/Seismic design situations

Imperfections significantly influence strength of structures

In general, need to introduce horizontal actions to simulate
equivalent geometrical imperfections in frames
Global and local imperfections should be considered
47

Thank You for your attention!

48