Actions Wanted: Dead or Live

Basis of Structural Design - EC0

Actions on structures - EC1

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. Worked Examples

5. Summary

2
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
Linkages between the Eurocodes

EC0

EC1

EC7 EC8

EC2 EC3 EC4

EC5 EC6 EC9

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withdrawn from the Approved Document.

4
 EN 1990: Basis of Structural Design (EC0)

EN 1991: Actions on Structures (EC1)

EN 1991-1 EN 1991-2 EN 1991-3

Traffic loads Actions induced
on bridges 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, Actions on Snow Wind Thermal Actions Accidental actions
self-weight structures loads loads actions during due to impact
& imposed loads exposed to fire execution and explosion

EN 1993: Design of Steel Structures (EC3)

EN 1993-1
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.
EN 1993-1.1 EN 1993-1.2
General rules and rules for Structural
Buildings Fire
Design
etc.

5
 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

6
 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)

Leading vs Accompanying

Live load Imposed loads

7
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) Design for Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

The structure to be designed to satisfy: The structure to be designed to satisfy:

Ed Rd Ed Cd

Actions and Environmental Influences Material and Product Properties

8
 2. EC0
Design working life to EC0

9
2. EC0
LIMIT STATES

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

Ultimate Limit States (ULS) Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

(1) deformation or cracking in

(1) collapse or failure, and generally
govern the strength of the structure or
member;
(2) loss of equilibrium or stability of
the structure as a whole*.
ULS is governed by strength and
stability of structures or members.
structural or non-structural elements;
(2) cause discomfort to the
occupants of buildings;
(3) affect adversely appearance,
durability or water and weather
tightness.
SLS is generally governed by the
stiffness of the structure and detailing
of reinforcement.

10
 2. EC0
DESIGN SITUATIONS

Persistent Situations Transient Situations Accidental Situations Seismic Situations

Conditions of normal Temporary Exceptional Exceptional

use including conditions of the conditions e.g. due conditions applicable
possible extreme structure in terms of to fire, explosion, to the structure
loading conditions its use or its impact or local when subjected to
from wind, snow, exposure, e.g. failure. seismic events.
imposed loads, etc during construction
or repair.

Related to the Much shorter than Refer to relatively

design working life the design working short period.
of the structure. life
.

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

11
 2. EC0

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

EQU STR GEO FAT

Loss of static Internal failure or Failure or excessive Fatigue failure of the

equilibrium of the
excessive deformation deformation of the
structure or any part of it structure or structural
of the structure or ground where the
considered as a rigid
structural members, strength of soil or rock members.
body, where:
(1) minor variations in including columns, are significant in
the value or the spatial footings, piles, providing resistance;
distribution of actions
basement walls, etc.,
from a single source are
where the strength of
significant, and
(2) the strengths of construction materials of
construction materials the structure governs;
or the ground do not
govern.

12
 2. EC0

Ultimate limit states: Three common failure states

13
2. EC0
Classification of Actions

14
 2. EC0
OTHER REPRESENTATIVE VALUES OF VARIABLE ACTIONS:

Combination Value 0Qk Frequent Value 1Qk Quasi-permanent Value 2Qk

For: For: For:

1) ULS and
2) Irreversible SLS
3) Apply to non-leading variable
actions
(consider the reduced probability
of simultaneous occurrences of
two or more independent variable
actions.)
1) ULS involving accidental actions, 1) ULS involving accidental
and actions, and
2) Reversible SLS 2) Reversible SLS
3) Apply to leading variable action 3) Used for calculation of long-
term effects.
(e.g. for buildings, the frequent value
is chosen so that the time it is (e.g. for loads on building floors,
the quasi-permanent value is
exceeded is 0.01 of the reference
chosen so that the proportion of
period of 50 years) the time it is exceeded is 0.50 of
the reference period.)

15
2. EC0

Instantaneous value of Q

Characteristic value Qk

t 1 t 2 t 3

Combination value 0Qk

Frequent value 1Qk

Quasi-permanent value 2Qk

Time
Figure Representative values of variable actions
16
 2. EC0
Table on combinations of actions for the Serviceability Limit State

Combination Permanent action Gd Variable action Qd

Leading Others
Characteristic Gk,j Qk,1 0,iQk,i
Frequent Gk,j 1,1Qk,1 2,iQk,i
Quasi-permanent Gk,j 2,1Qk,1 2,iQk,i

17
 3. Load combinations
COMBINATION OF ACTIONS FOR DESIGN AT ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES (ULS)

Permanent Variable Action Variable Actions Prestress Accidental

Actions (leading) (accompanying) Actions 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 + P Pk +

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

G,j Gk,j + Q,1 0,1Qk,1 + Q,i 0,i Qk,i + P Pk +

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 + P Pk +

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;
18
(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.
 3. Load combinations

In BS standards, 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 Eurocode, 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 Accidental Situations Seismic Situations

For EQU, STR, GEO: For EQU, STR, GEO:

Equation (6.10) Equation (6.10)
For STR, GEO: For STR, GEO: Equation (6.11b) Equation (6.12b)

Equation (6.10a) & Equation (6.10a) &

Equation (6.10b) Equation (6.10b)

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 BS 5950 EC3
With one variable action
1.4DL + 1.6LL 1.35Gk + 1.5Qk
(Live load)
With one variable action
1.4DL + 1.6W 1.35Gk + 1.5Wk
(Wind load)
With two variable actions 1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 0.75Wk
1.2DL + 1.2LL + 1.2W
(Wind & live loads) Or 1.35 Gk + 1.05 Qk + 1.5Wk

0.7x1.5Qk 0.5x1.5Wk

22
Leading variable action
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) 0.925*1.35Gk + 1.00Gk +1.5Wk +1.5*0.7 Q
For STR, GEO (adverse) (favourable)

24
 4. Worked examples
Example 1. Load combination for a beam with an overhang

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.
P

1 2

25
 4. Worked examples
Example 1. Load combination for a beam with an overhang

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 for both permanent
and variable actions needs to be made.

26
 4. Worked examples
For verifying static
Annex A1. Application for buildings equilibrium for building
structures
NA to BS EN 1990:2002

27
 4. Worked examples
Example 1. Load combination for a beam with an overhang

Equation 6.10 EQU (Set A)

Load case For potential uplift at 1

1.10P
1.1Gk+1.5Qk
0.9Gk

1 2
 4. Worked examples
Example 1. Load combination for a beam with an overhang

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.

29
 4. 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 BUT not to EQU state.

30
Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 1 For max reaction at 2

1.35P
1.35Gk+1.5Qk 1.35Gk+1.5Qk

1 2
Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 2. For max reaction at 1

1.35P
1.35Gk+1.5Qk
1.35Gk

1 2

31
Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 3. For max moment of cantilever

1.35P
1.35Gk+1.5Qk
1.35Gk

1 2
Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)
Load case 4. For max sagging moment at 1-2

1.35Gk+1.5Qk 1.35P
1.35Gk

1 2

32
Equation 6.10 STR (Set B)

Load case 5. For min sagging moment 1-2

1P
1.00Gk +1.5Qk
1.00Gk

33
 4. Worked examples
Example 2. Load combination for frames
(EQU, STR, GEO - Set A, B, C Eq. 6.10)
Identify the critical load combinations for the overall stability (EQU - Set A), ultimate
limit state design (STR - Set B), and structural design involving geotechnical actions
(STR/GEO Set C) of the 3-storey frame shown below. The frame is subject to
permanent loads (characteristic value: Gk kN/m), imposed loads (characteristic
value: Qk kN/m), and wind load (characteristic value: Wk kN).

1 2
34
 Overall stability (EQU - Set A)

Load case 1(a). Treat the wind Load case 1(b). Treat the wind
load as dominant load load as dominant load
(uplift at column 1) (uplift at column 2)

0.9Gk 0.9Gk
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

0.9Gk 0.9Gk
1.5Wk 1.5Wk
1.1Gk+
0.7(1.5Qk)
0.9Gk 0.9Gk 0.9Gk
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1 2 1 2

35
 Overall stability (EQU - Set A)

Load case 2(a). Treat the Load case 2(b). Treat the
imposed load as dominant load imposed load as dominant load
(uplift at column 1) (uplift at column 2)

0.9Gk 0.9Gk
0.5(1.5Wk) 0.5(1.5Wk)

0.9Gk 0.9Gk 0.5(1.5Wk)

0.5(1.5Wk)
1.1Gk+
1.5Qk
0.9Gk 0.9Gk 0.5(1.5Wk)
0.5(1.5Wk)

1 2 1 2

36
 Strength of 2nd floor beam (STR - Set B)

Load case 1(a). Treat the wind Load case 1(b). Treat the wind
load as dominant load load as dominant load

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk) 1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk) 1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk) 1.35Gk+0.7(1.5Qk)
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1 2 1 2

37
 Strength of 2nd floor beam (STR - Set B)

Load case 2(a). Treat the Load case 2(b). Treat the
imposed load as dominant load imposed load as dominant load

1.35Gk+1.5Qk 1.35Gk+1.5Qk
0.5(1.5Wk) 0.5(1.5Wk)

1.35Gk+1.5Qk 1.35Gk+1.5Qk
0.5(1.5Wk) 0.5(1.5Wk)

1.35Gk+1.5Qk 1.35Gk+1.5Qk
0.5(1.5Wk) 0.5(1.5Wk)

1 2 1 2

38
 Strength of ground column (STR - Set B)

Load case 3(a). Treat the wind Load case 3(b). Treat the wind
load as dominant load Column 2 load as dominant load Column 1

1.35Gk 1.35Gk
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1.35Gk 1.35Gk
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1.35Gk 1.35Gk
1.5Wk 1.5Wk

1 2 1 2

39
Strength of ground column and beams (STR - Set B)

Load case 4. Treat the imposed

load as dominant load without wind

1.35Gk+1.5Gk

1.35Gk+1.5Gk

1.35Gk+1.5Gk

1 2

40
Example 2. Load combination for frames (STR/GEO)

When considering strength (STR) involving geotechnical actions

(GEO), UK National Annex to BS EN allows for Approach 1, in which
the sizing of foundations is governed by Table A1.2(C) EC0) whereas
the structural resistance is governed by Table A1.2(B) EC0)

41
 Foundation resistance (STR/GEO - Set C)

Load case 1(a). Treat the wind Load case 1(b). Treat the wind
load as dominant load load as dominant load

Gk+0.7(1.3Qk) Gk+0.7(1.3Qk)
1.3Wk 1.3Wk

Gk+0.7(1.3Qk) Gk+0.7(1.3Qk)
1.3Wk 1.3Wk

Gk+0.7(1.3Qk) Gk+0.7(1.3Qk)
1.3Wk 1.3Wk

1 2 1 2

42
 Foundation resistance (STR/GEO - Set C)

Load case 2(a). Treat the Load case 2(b). Treat the
imposed load as dominant load imposed load as dominant load

Gk+1.3Qk Gk+1.3Qk
0.5(1.3Wk) 0.5(1.3Wk)

Gk+1.3Qk Gk+1.3Qk
0.5(1.3Wk) 0.5(1.3Wk)

Gk+1.3Qk Gk+1.3Qk
0.5(1.3Wk) 0.5(1.3Wk)

1 2 1 2

43
 6. Summary
Either Equation 6.10, OR 6.10(a) and 6.10(b) for STR

Persistent/Transient/Accidental/Seismic design situations

Variable actions: leading and accompanying actions

Failure mode: EQU,STR, GEO and STR/GEO

44
Thank You for your attention!

45