Design of Concrete Structures To Eurocodes - An Australian Perspective PDF

Bo Westerberg
Design of concrete structures

according to Eurocodes
19 July 2010
Concrete Institute of Australia,
Victoria Branch
1
EN 1992 Design of concrete structures
Contents Main contents of EN 1992-1-1, 43
Introduction Taking into account shrinkage and creep, 49
Brief history of the European Union, 3 Partial safety factors for materials, 50
Material properties, concrete, 51
Brief history of the Eurocodes, 5 Material properties, reinforcement, 55
Overview of the Eurocode system, 6 Material properties, reinforcement, 55
”Packages” for the design of concrete structures, 14 Exposure classes, 57
National adjustment of Eurocodes, 15 Structural analysis, 60
The Eurocodes outside Europe, 16 Linear elastic analysis, 60
Linear elastic analysis with redistribution, 61
EN 1990 Basis of design, 18 Plastic analysis, 62
Classification of actions, 19 Non-linear analysis, 65
Second order analysis, 66
Characteristic values of actions, 20
Ultimate limit states, 71
Other representative values of actions, 21 Bending with or without axial force, 71
Verification with the partial factor method, 22 Shear, 73
Torsion, 81
Ultimate limit states, 23
Punching, 82
Serviceability limit states, 25 Strut-and-tie models, 87
EN 1991 Actions on structures Serviceability limit states, 88
Limitation of stresses, 88
EN 1991-1-1. Selfweight, imposed loads in buildings, 27 Crack control, 89
Imposed loads in buildings, 28 Deflections, 92
Modification of partial factors for materials, 96
EN 1991-2 Traffic load on bridges, 32
Expressions for creep and shrinkage, 98
Road bridges, 34 Ductility classes for reinforcement, 100
Railway bridges, 38 Global second order effects in structures, 101
Short presentation of myself, 102
Brief history of the European Union
1945 End of World War II
1951 Treaty of Paris - Coal and Steel Community (Bel, Fra, Ita, Lux, Neth, W-Ger)
1957 Treaty of Rome - European Economic Community (EEC)
1967 ECSC, EEC and Euratom merge into the European Community
1973 Denmark, Ireland and the UK join the European Community
1979 First direct elections to the European Parliament
1981 Accession of Greece
1986 Accession of Portugal and Spain, adoption of flag
1989 Fall of the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe
1990 Unification of Germany
1992 Maastricht Treaty, birth of the European Union
1995 Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden
2002 The euro replaces twelve national currencies
2004 Accession of ten new countries, signing of Constitution
2007 Accession of Bulgaria and Romania
The embryo of the European Union was the Coal and Steel Community bet-ween
Belgium, France, Italy, Luxemburg, Netherlands and West Germany, founded in
1951.
Since then it has evolved into the European Community and finally (?) the European
union, increasing the number of member states from 6 to 27. Ucraine and Turkey
are probable future candidates, perhaps also Iceland and Norway.
Already in 1947, Winston Churchill advocated the United States of Europe, but this
will hardly be realized in the foreseeable future, since most countries in the Union
are reluctant to the idea of federalism.
3
1957 - Belgium, France,
Italy, Luxemburg, Nether-
lands, W Germany
SE FI
1973 + Denmark, Ireland, UK
1981 + Greece EE
LV
1986 + Portugal, Spain
DK LT
IE
1990 + Germany unified
UK NL PL
1995 + Austria, Finland, Sweden BE DE
W-G
LU CZ
SK
2004 + Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, FR AT HU
RO
Lithuania, Malta, Poland, SI
Slovakia, Slovenia IT
BG
2007 + Bulgaria, Romania PT

ES
GR
CY
MT
The figure illustrates the growth from the 1951 European Coal and Steel Community
to today’s European Union.
Note that Iceland, Norway and Switzerland are not (yet?) members.
4
Brief history of the Eurocodes
• 1975 – Work initiated within European Community
• 1984 - First complete version of EC2 (concrete) issued
• 1989 - Work transferred to CEN / TC 250
– Thereby Sweden become involved (not yet member of the EU)
• 1994-1998 - Prestandards (ENV) issued
– Voluntary to use in the member states
– Example of use: Öresund link between Sweden and Denmark
• 1998 – Conversion to definitive standards (EN) started
– All EN parts are now available
– They should replace national codes according to certain
(generous) rules for the transition. For example in Sweden:
• For bridges from July 2009
• For buildings from January 2011 (can be applied from 2009)
Öresund Link 16 km,

inaugurated in 2000
The Eurocode project has been going on for a long time. The blue text below, quoted from
the Foreword of all Eurocodes, describes the history.
”In 1975, the Commission of the European Community decided on an action program-me in
the field of construction, based on article 95 of the Treaty. The objective of the programme
was the elimination of technical obstacles to trade and the harmonisation of technical
specifications. Within this action programme, the Commission took the initiative to establish
a set of harmonised technical rules for the design of construc-tion works which, in a first
stage, would serve as an alternative to the national rules in force in the Member States and,
ultimately, would replace them.
For fifteen years, the Commission, with the help of a Steering Committee with Repre-
sentatives of Member States, conducted the development of the Eurocodes program-me,
which led to the first generation of European codes in the 1980s.
In 1989, the Commission and the Member States of the EU and EFTA decided, on the
basis of an agreement between the Commission and CEN, to transfer the prepa-ration and
the publication of the Eurocodes to CEN through a series of Mandates, in order to provide
them with a future status of European Standard (EN). This links de facto the Eurocodes
with the provisions of all the Council’s Directives and/or Commis-sion’s Decisions dealing
with European standards (e.g. the Council Directive 89/106/EEC on construction products -
CPD - and Council Directives 93/37/EEC, 92/50/EEC and 89/440/EEC on public works and
services and equivalent EFTA Directives initiated in pursuit of setting up the internal
market).”
The transfer of the work to CEN in 1989 meant that many countries outside the Union also
became involved in the development of the Eurocodes, among them Sweden.
5
Overview of the Eurocode system
Eurocode
0. Basis of design
1. Actions on structures
2. Design of concrete structures
3. Design of concrete structures
4. Design of composite steel-concrete structures
5. Design of timber structures
6. Design of masonry structures
7. Geotechnical design
8. Design of structures for earthquake resistance
9. Design of aluminium structures
There are 10 Eurocodes. The reason for the numbering, starting with zero, is that in
the prestandard versions (ENV), Basis of design and Actions on struc-tures were
given in the same standard, Eurocode 1. When they were separa-ted into different
standards, Basis of design was given number 0, in order that the others could keep
their old numbers.
6
EN Name
1990 Basis of design
1991 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures
-1 General actions
-1-1 Densities, self-weight and imposed loads
-1-2 Actions on structures exposed to fire
-1-3 Snow loads
-1-4 Wind actions
-1-5 Thermal actions
-1-6 Actions during execution
-1-7 Accidental actions
-2 Traffic loads on bridges
-3 Actions induced by cranes and machinery
-4 Actions in silos and tanks Σ 11 parts, 780 pp
EN 1990 contains general and basic rules for the design of structures, common to
all the other Eurocodes.
EN 1991 gives concrete data for different types of actions. With its 11 parts (each a
separate standard) and 780 pages it is very comprehensive.
There is no possibility to go into details in this extensive set of standards. We will
just have a short glance at parts 1-1 and 2.
7
EN Name
1992 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures
-1-1 General rules and rules for buildings
-1-2 Structural fire design
-2 Bridges
-3 Liquid retaining and containment structures
Eurocode 2 has only 4 parts, but above all parts 1-1 and 1-2 are very extensive.
Part 1-1 is the basic part, also for other types of structures than buildings. Parts 2
and 3 give supplementary rules and in some cases deviations from part 1-1, but can
not be used independently of part 1-1.
8
EN Name
1993 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures
-1-3 Cold formed thin gauge members and sheeting
-1-4 Structures in stainless steel
-1-5 Strength and stability of planar plated str. without transverse loading
-1-6 Strength and stability of shell structures
-1-7 Design values for plated structures subjected to out of plane loading
-1-8 Design of joints
-1-9 fatigue strength
-1-10 Material toughness and through thickness assessment
-1-11 Design of structures with tension components
-1-12 Supplementary rules for high strength steels
EN 1993 has a very large number of individual parts, of which we can here see
about half.
9
EN Name
1993 Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures
-2 Bridges
-3-1 Towers and masts
-3-2 Chimneys
-4-1 Silos
-4-2 Tanks
-4-3 Pipelines
-5 Piling
-6 Crane supporting structures
Σ 20 parts
EN 1993 is unique with regard to the the large number of parts, 20.
10
EN Name
1994 Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel - concrete str.
-2 Bridges
1995 Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures

-2 Bridges
1996 Eurocode 6: Design of masonry structures

-1-1 General rules for reinforced and unreinf. masonry, incl. lateral loading
-2 Selection and execution of masonry
-3 Simplified calculation methods for masonry structures
EN 1994 gives a complete set of rules for composite steel and concrete structures,
something that has been lacking at least in Sweden.
EN 1995 and 1996 also give much more complete rules for timber and masonry
structures than the corresponding rules in Sweden so far.
11
EN Name
1997 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design
-1-1 General rules
-2 Ground investigation and testing
1998 Eurocode 8: Design of str. for earthquake resistance

-1 General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings
-2 Bridges
-3 Strengthening and repair of buildings
-4 Silos, tanks and pipelines
-5 Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects
-6 Towers, masts and chimneys
EN 1998 may not be of much interest in countries where earthquakes do not have
to be taken into account. Sweden is such a country (except when it comes to
nuclear power plants, which are designed with regard to earthqua-kes), but EN
1998 may in any case come into use for projects abroad.
12
EN Name
1999 Eurocode 9: Design of aluminium structures
-1 General rules
-1-3 Additional rules for structures susceptible to fatigue
-1-4 Supplementary rules for trapezoidal sheeting
-1-5 Supplementary rules for shell structures
Totally 60 individual standards *)
Ca 6000 pages
*) Annex A2 in EN 1990 is a separate standard
The whole Eurocode system comprises 60 individual standards (each ”part” is a

separate standard, and Annex A2 to EN 1990 is also a separate standard).
The total number of pages is a rough guess, based on the fact that some of the
individual standards have more than 200 pages (e.g. Eurocode 2 part 1-1, 230
pages), whereas others have much fewer pages.
13
Package
Eurocode
2/2 Bridges
2/3 Silos etc.
2/1 Buildings
▼
concrete, timber etc.

EN 1990 Basis of design
EN 1991-1-1 Selfweight, imposed .
EN 1991-1-2 Actions during fire
EN 1991-1-3 Snow load
EN 1991-1-4 Wind load

EN 1991-1-5 Thermal actions
Actions
EN 1991-1-6 Actions during exec
design of different types of concrete structures.

EN 1991-1-7 Accidental actions
EN 1991-2 Traffic loads on br.
EN 1991-4 Actions in silos …
EN 1992-1-1 General rules…

EN 1992-1-2 Fire design
EN 1992-2 Concrete bridges

Concr. struct.
EN 1992-3 Silos…
”Packages” for the design of concrete str.
EN 1997-1 Geotechnical design

Similar ”packages” can be identified for structures in steel, composite steel and
Three different ”packages” of Eurocodes can be distinguished as necessary for the
14
National adjustment of Eurocodes
• Nationally Determined Parameters (NDP):
– A recommended value is given, but each country may choose its own value
– Whole methods, tables etc can sometimes also be NDP
– National choice is permitted only where specifically stated
• What type of parameters are NDP?
– All partial safety factors and other parameters directly related to safety
– Parameters depending on regional differences, e.g. with regard to
• climate etc, e.g. snow loads, wind loads, concrete cover, permissible crack widths
• traditions, e.g. certain minimium requirements
– Parameters for which agreement was difficult to reach
• without the possibility to make them NDP, discussions would still go on
• National values of NDP are given in the National Annex, NA

– All countries should try to choose the recommended values
– Deviations should be justified
– The aim is to harmonize the rules within Europe as far as possible
• This will take time, and is not easily achieved !
It has not been possible to reach full harmonization beetwen the member countries.
Some things had to be left open for national choice in the different countries.
One such thing is the level of safety, since the building legislation is not harmo-
nized among the countries. Therefore all safety factors and other parameters
directly related to safety have to be left open for national choice.
Parameters depending on geographic and climatic differences are also left open,
like parameters depending on traditions, quality of work etc.
Finally, it was simply not possible to reach agreement on all parameters bet-ween
countries and individual experts. A smart way to avoid endless discus-sions was
then to make such parameters nationally determined.
15
The Eurocodes outside Europe
Countries that are actively developing National Annexes so
as to implement, at least some, EN Eurocode Parts under
national provisions:
Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam
Countries that are actively working to adopt parts of some

EN Eurocode Parts; the formal arrangements with CEN and
the method of adoption remain to be agreed:
Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Sri Lanka
Countries that are “interested” in the Eurocodes, without at

present having any declared intention of adopting them:
Afghanistan, Albania, China, Ecuador, Hong Kong,
India, Japan, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Russia, Thailand
The Eurocodes may become more than a European set of standards, since many
countries outside the EU have shown interest in adopting (parts of) them as national
standards, or at least in being informed about them.
ISO is currently contemplating whether a similar international set of standards
should be developed, on the basis of Eurocodes. The harmonization of design rules
within Europe was the idea that started the Eurocode project, and from this point of
view the system with Nationally Determined Parameters may be a setback. On the
other hand, this built-in flexibility may be a great advantage if the Eurocodes are
going to be used outside Europe.
The information above about countries is based on ISO/TAG 008 document N390*).
The blue text below is quoted from the same document:
“The structural Eurocodes are a complete set of design standards that cover in a
comprehensive manner all principal construction materials, all major fields of
structural engineering and a wide range of types of structures and products. They
are the most up-to-date codes of practice and are flexible, offering the possibility
for each country to adapt the Eurocodes to their specific conditions regarding **)
climate, seismic risk, traditions, etc. through the Nationally Determined Parameters.”
---
*) In the last line, I have added India, where I participated in a workshop on
Eurocodes in 2003, and in which EN 1990 (general), EN 1991 (actions) and EN
1992 (concrete) were presented.
**) The word ”safety” could be added here, since all partial factors are NDP.
16
EN 1990
Basis of design
17
Contents of EN 1990
1. General (12 pages)
2. Requirements (4)
3. Principles of limit state design (3)
4. Basic variables (4)
5. Structural analysis and design assisted by testing (2)
6. Verification by the partial factor method (9)
Annex A1. Application for buildings (8)
A2. Application for bridges (29) (separate standard)
B. Management of structural reliability… (4)
C. Basis for partial factor design and reliability
analysis (9)
D. Design assisted by testing (15)
18
Classification of actions (4.1.1)
Variation in time: • permanent – self-weight of structures
– fixed equipment and road surfacing
– indirect actions from shrinkage and settlements
– prestress
• variable – imposed loads on building floors

– snow loads
– wind actions
– traffic loads …
• accidental – explosion
– impact from vehicles
Origin of action: • direct

• indirect – imposed deformation
Spacial variation: • fixed

• free
Nature of actions / structural response: • static

• dynamic
The classification of loads is very similar to what has been used in (probably) most
countries for a long time.
Some actions, e.g. sesmic actions and snow loads, can be either accidental load or
variable load, depending on the geographic locatgion.
19
Characteristic values of actions (4.1.2)
Permanent • if variability can be considered as small: Gk = Gm
• self-weight of structure can be based on
nominal dimensions and mean value of mass
• if variability can not be considered

as small, or if structure is sensitive
to small variations: Gk,inf and Gk,sup
• prestress: Pk,inf (t ) , Pm (t ) , Pk,sup (t )
Variable • an upper value with a low probability of being exceeded

(Qk ) • a nominal value where a statistical distribution is not known
Accidental • the design value Ad should be specified for individual projects
Seismic • the design value AEd should be assessed from the

characteristic value AEk or specified for individual projects
For permanent load with insignificant variations the characteristic value is de-fined
as the mean value. If variations can not be considered to be small, or if the structure
is sensitive even to small variations, an upper and a lower cha-racteristic value is
used, defined as the 95 and 5 % percentiles respectively.
Characteristis values of variable loads are given in different parts of EN 1991. For
climatic actions it is the value that is exceeded with a probability of 2 % during one
year, or the value with a return period of 50 years.
Accidental loads do not have a statistical definition, for natural reasons.
For seismic loads reference is made to EN 1998.
20
Other representative values of variable
actions (4.1.3)
Combination value ψ 0Qk used for verifications in
• ultimate limit state (ULS)
• irreversible serviceability limit states (SLS)
Frequent value ψ 1Q k used for verifications in

• ULS with accidental actions
• reversible SLS
Infrequent value ψ 1,infq Qk is defined only for

• traffic load on road bridges
• thermal actions
• wind actions
Quasi-perma- ψ 2Q k used for

nent value • verifications in ULS with accidental actions
• verifications in reversible SLS
• calculation of long-term effects (e.g. creep in concrete
The combination value is used in load combinations in ultimate limit states and in so
called irreversible serviceability limit states.
The frequent value is used in ultimate limit states with accidental load and in so
called reversible serviceability limit states. For buildings it is the value that is
exceeded during 1 % of the reference period. For bridges it is the value with a
return period of one week.
The infrequent value is based on a return period of one year.
The quasi-permanent value is the value that is exceeded during 50% of the
reference period, alternatively the mean value over a chosen period of time. For
wind loads and traffic loads the quasi-permanent value is usually defined as zero.
21
Verification with the partial factor method (6)
Design values of actions (6.3.1)
Fd = γ f ⋅ Frep
where
γf is a partial factor for the action, taking into account the
possibility of unfavourable deviations from the
representative values
Frep is the relevant representative value of the action = ψ Fk
ψ is either 1,0 or ψ0, ψ1 or ψ2
The representative value consists of three parameters: the partial factor γf, the
reduction factor ψ and the characteristic value Fk.
22
Ultimate limit states (6.4)
EQU Loss of static equilibrium of the structure or part of
it considered as a rigid body, where
”Overturning,
”lifting, - minor variations in the value or the spacial distribu-
”sliding” tion of actions from a single source are significant
- strengths of construction materials or ground are
generally not governing
STR Internal failure or excessive deformation of structure
or structural members, where the strengths of
construction materials govern
Failure or excessive deformation of the ground
GEO where the strengths of soil or rock are significant for
the resistance
FAT Fatigue
Ultimate limit state EQU is about ”overturning, lifting, sliding”.

STR is the ultimate limit state for which structures are normally designed.
GEO has to do with the strength of soil and rock.
23
Rekommended values of partial factors for actions
in ULS (table A.1.2 A, B, C)
Combinations of actions, load factors γG and γQ
Permanent, γG Variable, γQ
Type of ULS unfavoura- favoura- leading other
ble, γG,sup ble γG,inf action actions
A. EQU 1,1 0,9 1,5 1,5ψ 0

1,35 1,0 1,5 1,5ψ 0
B. STR/GEO 1,35 1,0 − 1,5ψ 0
1,15 1,0 1,5 1,5ψ 0
C. STR/GEO 1,0 1,3 1,3ψ 0
The table shows the values of load factors that are recommended in EN 1990.
The values shown are γG for permanent load (subdivided into the high value γG,sup
and the low value γG,inf ) and γQ for variable load.
The ψ factors can’t be given values at this stage, since they vary with the type of
load.
In case B you use either (6.10), or the most unfavourable of (6.10a) and (6.10b); a
is governing when permanent actions are dominating, otherwise b. Expression
(6.10) can be said to be a simplified and conservative combination of (6.10a) and
(6.10b).
For exceptional and seismic design situations the recommended value is 1,0 for all
load factors. ψ factors for ”normal” actions in these situations have been shown
before.
24
Serviceability limit states (SLS) (6.5)
Combinations of actions, load factors on characteristic value
Permanent actions Variable actions

Combi-
nation
load prestress leading other
Charac- ψ0
1 1 1
teristic
Frequent 1 1 ψ1 ψ2
Quasi-
permanent
1 1 − ψ2
There are three load combinations för serviceability limit states.

The characteristic combination is normally used for so called irreversible servi-
cability limit states, e.g. to avoid cracks or plastic deformations that would remain
after unloading from a high load.
The frequent load combination is normally used used for so called reversible
servicability limit states, e.g. a crack or a deformation that revert to previous values
after unloading from a higher load.
The quasi-permanent load combination represents the mean value of the load over
a period of time, and is normally used for determining long-term effects, e.g. creep
deformations in concrete.
Partial factors for loads are normally 1,0 in serviceability limit states.
25
EN 1991
Actions on structures
11
Partparts, 780actions
1-1: General pages–
PartDensities, self-weight
1-1. Selfweight, and imposed
imposed loads
loads in buildings
26
Main contents of EN 1991-1-1
1. General (4 pages)
2. Classification of actions (1)
3. Design situations (2)
4. Densities of construction and stored materials (1)
5. Self-weight of construction works (2)
6. Imposed loads on buildings (11)
Bilaga A. Tables for nominal density of construction materials,
and nominal density and angles of repose for stored materials
(12)
B. Vehicle barriers and parapets for car parks (1)
Due to the total size of EN 1990 (780 pages) we will only make very short visits in parts
1-1 (self-weight, imposed load in buildings) and 2 (traffic load on bridges). Here is the
main contents of part 1-1.
27
Table 6.2. Imposed loads on floors, balconies and stairs in buildings
Categories qk kN/m2 Qk kN
Floors 1,5 - 2,0 2,0 - 3,0
A. Domestic
and residential Stairs 2,0 - 4,0 2,0 - 4,0
Balconies 2,5 - 4,0 2,0 - 3,0
B. Office areas 2,0 - 3,0 1,5 – 4,5
C1. Schools, restaurants… 2,0 - 3,0 3,0 - 4,0
C. Areas where C2. Theatres, cinemas… 3,0 - 4,0 2,5 – 7,0(4,0)
people may C3. Museums, exhibition rooms… 3,0 - 5,0 4,0 - 7,0
congregate 3,5 - 7,0
C4. Dance halls, gymnastic rooms… 4,5 - 5,0
C5. Concert halls, sports halls… 5,0 – 7,5 3,5 – 4,5
D1. Retail shops 4,0 - 5,0 3,5 – 7,0(4,0)
D. Shopping areas
D2. Department stores 4,0 - 5,0 3,5 - 7,0
Underlined = recommended value
The table gives intervals, where the underlined value is the recommended value. It
is allowable for a country to choose values outside the intervals.
The concentrated load normally has no effect on concrete floors, but it may have on
e.g. wooden floors.
28
Further categories, Table 6.3-6.12
Category Description
E Areas for storage and industrial use
F Areas with traffic, gross vehicle weight ≤ 30kN
G « 30 - 160 kN
Roofs accessible only for normal maintenance
H
and repair
Roofs accessible with occupancy according to
I
categories A-D
Roofs accessible for special services (e.g.
K
helocopter landing)
Further categories E-K are defined and load values are given.
29
6.3.1.2 (10) Reduction of imposed load w.r.t. loaded area
qk according to table for category A-E may be mulitplied by
5 10 m 2
αA = ψ 0 + ≤ 1,0 where A = loaded area. Example
7 A
If ψ0 = 0,7:
0.8
0.6
0,5
0.4
0.2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
1 A 100
EN 1991-1-1 gives a factor for reduction of the imposed load with regard to the
loaded area, taking into account the reduced probability that the whole area has a
high load at the same time. The loaded area can be interpreted as the area within
which loads give a contribution to a certain load effect, e.g. the load on the column
in the figure. Thus it is not the area with which you multiply the distributed load to
get the column reaction.
30
6.3.1.2 (11) Reduction of imposed load w.r.t. number of stories
Total load from n stories in categories A-D may be mulitplied by

2 + (n − 2 ) ⋅ψ 0
αn = where n = number of stories ≥ 2
n
1
0.9
0.8
If ψ0 = 0,7
0.7
0.6
5 10 15 20
1 n 20
EN-1991-1-1 also gives a reduction factor for load that is added through several
storeys, taking into account the reduced probability that all storeys have a high load at
the same time.
31
EN 1991
Actions on structures
Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges
Road bridges
Footways, cycle tracks and footbridges
Railway bridges
32
Main contents of EN 1991-2
1. General (12 pages) 164 pages
90 national choices
2. Classification of actions (3)
3. Design situations (1)
4. Road bridges (28)
5. Footways, cycle tracks and footbridges (7)
6. Railway bridges (57)
Annex A. Models of special vehicles for road bridges
B. Fatigue, road bridges (4) (5)
C. Dynamic factors for trains(2)
D. Fatigue, railway bridges (7)
E. Load model HSLM for railway bridges (9)
F. Criteria for avoiding dynamic analysis (5)
G. Comb. response from structure and track (9)
H. Transient design situations for railway br. (1)
The main contents of EN 1991-2.

In chapter 2 characteristic, frequent and quasi-permanent values for road and cycle
bridges are defined. The characteristic value can be e.g. a value that is exceeded
once in 1000 years, or a value that is exceeded with 5 % probability during a
reference period of 50 years. Of course these definitions are based on extrapolation
of statistical data for much shorter periods.
Chapter 3 is very short and general.
Chapter 4 is extensive and will be looked upon briefly
Chapter 5 will not be commented in detail
Chapter 6 is the most extensive chapter and will be looked upon briefly
Of the annexes, C and D are normative, whereas the others are informative.
33
Chapter 4. Road bridges
4.1 Field of application
Road bridges with loaded lengths ≤ 200 m
Normally foreseeable traffic situations (specific models
may be defined in the NA or for the individual project)
Loads during construction, inspections and test
loadings should be separately specified
4.2 Representation of actions
Models, loading classes, notional lanes
4.3 Vertical loads – characteristic values
4.4 Horizontal forces – characteristic values
4.5 Groups of traffic loads on road bridges
4.6 Fatigue, 4.7 Accidental, 4.8 Pedestrian parapets,
4.9 Abutments and walls
34
QiQik QiQik (per axel)
Load model 1 (4.3.2) qiqik
Tandem Uniformly
system distributed / 0,4
Lane nr
Qik αQi qik αqi
kN kN/m2 0,5 lane nr
1
1 300 0,9 9 0,7
0,5
2 200 0,9 2,5 1,0

2
3 100 0 2,5 1,0

Other 3
lanes 0 2,5 1,0
Remain.
area 0 2,5 1,0
Adjustment factors α, example from Swedish NA
Load model 1 consists of a tandem system and a simultaneously acting uni-formly

distributed load. The tandem system acts only in three lanes and fur-thermore only
one per lane. The distributed load acts in all lanes. The model is used for the
verification of both global and local effects.
The table shows the recommended values for axle load and distributed load in the
respective lane. Lane no 1 is the lane with highest load, no 2 with the second
highest etc. The lanes do not have to be in the order shown in the figure.
The red figures are the so called adjustment factors αQi and αqi. For these oly
general guidelines are given, whereas the exact values are given in the Natio-nal
Annexes. According to the Swedish values shown as an example the tan-dem
system is included only in two lanes.
35
Load model 2 (4.3.3) Kerb
Single axle load:

400 β Q kN
β Q = α Q1 2,0
Longitud.
Brons
längdaxel
direction
Alternative (if more
unfavourable):
Single wheel load
200βQ kN
Load model 2 consists of a single axle load, or (if this is more unfavourable) a single
wheel load with half the value of the axle load.
For the factor βQ the value chosen for αQ1 is recommended, see previous page.
In the standard the contact area is given a different shape than in load model 1, but
it is allowed to choose the same contact area as for load model 1.
36
Load model 3 (4.3.4)
Special vehicles
Taken into account only in special cases
Annex A describes classes of special vehicles with
up to 18 axles à 200 kN, or 15 axles à 240 kN
Load model 4 (4.3.5)

Crowd loading
- 5 kN/m2
Special vehicles are taken into account only in special cases.

Load model 4 refers to ”crowd loading”.
37
Chapter 6. Railway bridges
6.1 Field of application
Appl. to European standard track and wide track
Not applicable to
- narrow-gauge railways
- tramways and other light railways
- preservation railways
- rack and pinion railways
- funicular railways
6.2 Representation of actions
Vertical loads in different load models
Vertical loading for earthworks
Dynamic effects
Centrifugal forces
Nosing force
Traction and breaking forces
Aerodynamic actions from passing trains
Actions from overhead line equipment and other equipm.
Chapter 6 is very extensive, and here only a minor part of it will be addressed.
38
6.3 Vertical loads
Load models:
LM 71 Normal rail traffic on mainline railways

SW/0 Same for continuous bridges
SW/2 Heavy loads
Unloaded train
HSLM Passenger trains > 200 km/h
There are five different load models for vertical loads.
39
Load model LM 71 (6.3.2)
Axle loads and uniformly distributed loads:
No limit No limit
Characteristic values according to figure are multiplied by

α = 0,75 - 0,83 - 0,91 - 1,0 - 1,10 - 1,21 - 1,33 - 1,46
for tracks with lighter or heavier traffic than normal
For international lines α ≥ 1,0 is recommended
40
Load model 1 is used for normal rail traffic on mainline railways. It consists of four
axle loads and distributed loads outside the axle loads.
The factor α is used for lines with lighter or heavier traffic than normal. Loads
multiplied with this factor are called ”classified vertical loads”. The same factor is
then used also for a number of other specifically mentioned loads.
40
Load model SW/0 och SW/2 (6.3.3)
Uniformly distributed load:
qvk
a c a
Load model qvk (kN/m) a (m) c (m)
SW/0 133 15 5,3
SW/2 150 25 7,0
Characteristic values mult. by same factor α as for LM 71 41
Like LM 71 model SW/0 is used for normal rail traffic on mainline railways, but
specifically for continuous bridges. SW/2 is used for particularky heavy traffic.
---
Values of ψ-factors for load on railway bridges are given in Annex A2 to EN 1990.
41
EN 1992
Eurocode 2
Design of concrete structures
EN 1992-1-1 General rules and rules for buildings
EN 1992-1-2 Structural fire design
EN 1992-2 Bridges
EN 1992-3 Liquid retaining and containment structures
42
Main contents of EN 1992-1-1 (Eurocode 2 part 1-1)
Chapter Subheadings
1.1 Scope
1.2 Normative references
1 Introduction 1.3 Assumptions
1.4 Distinction between principles and application rules
1.5 Symbols
2.1 Requirements
2.2 Principles of limit state design
2.3 Basic variables
2 Basis of design 2.4 Verification by the partial factor method
2.5 Design assisted by testing
2.6 Supplementary requirements for foundations
2.7 Requirements for fastenings
3.1 Concrete
3.2 Reinforcing steel
3 Materials 3.3 Prestressing steel
3.4 Prestressing devices
4.1 General
Durability and cover 4.2 Environmental conditions
4 4.3 Requirements for durability
to reinforcement
4.4 Methods of verifications
The table (this and following five pages shows the chapters and their main
subheadings in EN 1992-1-1 (Eurocode 2 part 1-1).
The distinction between Principles and Application rules is worth a comment. Under
the subheading there is only a reference to EN 1990, where in chapter 1 the following
description (valid for all Eurocodes) is given:
“Depending on the character of the individual clauses, distinction is made … between
Principles and Application Rules.
The Principles comprise :
– general statements and definitions for which there is no alternative, as well as
– requirements and analytical models for which no alternative is permitted unless
specifically stated.
The Principles are identified by the letter P following the paragraph number.
The Application Rules are generally recognized rules which comply with the Principles
and satisfy their requirements.
It is permissible to use alternative design rules different from the Application Rules…,
provided that it is shown that the alternative rules accord with the relevant Principles
and are at least equivalent with regard to the structural safety, serviceability and
durability which would be expected when using the Eurocodes.”
43
Chapter Subheadings
5.1 General
5.2 Geometric imperfections
5.3 Idealisation of the structure
5.4 Linear elastic analysis
5.5 Linear analysis with limited redistribution
5 Structural analysis 5.6 Plastic analysis
5.7 Non-linear analysis
5.8 Analysis of second order effects with axial load
5.9 Lateral instability of slender beams
5.10 Prestressed members and structures
5.11 Analysis for some particular structural members
6.1 Bending with or without axial force
6.2 Shear
6.3 Torsion
Ultimate limit states 6.4 Punching
6 6.5 Design with strut-and-tie models
(ULS)
6.6 Anchorage and laps
6.7 Partially loaded areas
6.8 Fatigue
44
Chapter Subheadings
7.1 General
Serviceability limit 7.2 Stress limitation
7 7.3 Crack control
states (SLS)
7.4 Deflection control
8.1 General
8.2 Spacing of bars
8.3 Permissible mandrel diameters for bent bars
Detailing of 8.4 Anchorage of longitudinal reinforcement
reinforcement and 8.5 Anchorage of links and shear reinforcement
8 8.6 Anchorage by welded bars
prestressing
8.7 Laps and mechanical couplers
tendons
8.8 Additional rules for large diameter bars
8.9 Bundled bars
8.10 Prestressing tendons
9.1 General
9.2 Beams
9.3 Solid slabs
Detailing of 9.4 Flat slabs
9.5 Columns
9 members and 9.6 Walls
particular rules 9.7 Deep beams
9.8 Foundations
9.9 Regions with disconuity in geometry or action
9.10 Tying systems
45
Chapter Subheadings
Additional rules for 10.1 General
10.2 Basis of design, fundamental requirements
precast concrete
10 10.3 Materials
elements and 10.5 Structural analysis
structures 10.9 Particular rules for design and detailing
11.1 General
11.2 Basis of design
11.3 Materials
11.4 Durability and cover to reinforcement
Lightweight 11.5 Structural analysis
11 aggregate concrete 11.6 Ultimate limit states
structures 11.7 Servicability limit states
11.8 Detailing of reinforcement
11.9 Detailing of members and particular rules
11.10 Additional rules for precast concrete elements and str.
11.12 Plain and lightly reinforced structures
12.1 General
12.2 Basis of design
12.3 Materials
Plain and lightly
12 12.5 Structural analysis
reinforced structures 12.6 Ultimate limit states
12.7 Servicability limit states
12.9 Detailing of members and particular rules
46
Annex Subheadings
A.1 General
Modification of partial A.2 In situ concrete structures; Reductions based on
1. Quality control and reduced tolerances
A factors for materials 2. Using reduced or measured geometrical data in design
(informative) 3. Assessment of concrete strength in finished structure
A.3 Precast products A.4 Precast elements
Creep and shrinkage B.1 Basic equations for determining the creep coefficient
B B.2 Basic equations for determining the drying shrinkage
strains (i)
C.1 General (ductility, fatigue and bond properties)
Reinforcement properties
C C.2 Strength
(normative) C.3 Bendability
D Detailed calculation method for prestressing steel relaxation losses (i)

E Indicated minimum strength classes for durability (i)
F Tension reinforcement expressions for in-plane stress conditions (i)
G.1 Shallow foundations
G Soil-structure interaction (i) G.2 Piled foundations
Global second order H.1 Criteria for neglection second order effects
H H.2 Methods for calculation of global second order effects
effects in structures (i)
Analysis of flat slabs and I.1 Flat slabs
I I.2 Shear walls
shear walls (i)
J.1 Surface reinforcement
Detailing rules for
J J.2 Frame corners
particular situations (i) J.3 Corbels
47
Eurocode 2 part 2 (Bridges) and part 3 (Retaining…) have the
same basic structure as part 1-1. Part 2 has 7 additional
annexes.
Part 2 and part 3 give supplementary rules and in some cases

deviations from part 1-1, but can not be used as independent
documents.
Part 1-1 is the basic document for all types of

concrete structures.
48
2. Basis of design
Additions to EN 1990 and EN 1991 specific for
concrete structures, for example:
Shrinkage and creep need to be taken into account

(1) primarily in SLS
(2) in ULS only if their effects are significant,

e.g. for second order effects.
(3) Creep deformations are calculated for the

quasi-permanent combination of actions.
Chapter 2 in EN 1992-1-1 contains mainly references to EN 1990 and EN 1991,

plus a few additions in matters that are specific to concrete structures.
The time-dependent effects shrinkage and creep need to be taken into ac-count
primarily in serviceability limit states, e.g. in the calculation of crack widths and
deflections. In ultimate limit states they need to be taken into account only in cases
where there effect is significant, like in the analysis of second order effects.
As pointed out earlier, creep deformations are calculated for the quasi-permanent
load combination.
49
Partial safety factors for materials
γS steel
ULS γC
Design situation concrete reinf. prestr.
Persistent & Transient 1,5 1,15 1,15

Accidental 1,2 1,0 1,0
SLS: All material factors = 1,0
50
3. Materials
Upper limit is NDP;
Concrete Sweden chooses C100/115
Strength classes C12/15 - C90/105 (cylinder / cube)
Tensile strength and E-modulus versus compr. strength:
7 45
f ctk,0,95 40
6
35
5
f ctm 30 E cm GPa
4 25
f ctk,0,05
3 20
15
2
10
1
5
f ck f ck
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
The strength class of concrete is defined with two values, cylinder and cube
strength. The idea is that countries should be able to continue with the same test
method as before, be it cylinder or cube test. Cylinder ≈ 0,8 * Cube.
The range of strength classes reaches into the domain of hifgh strength concrete,
but Sweden goes further up and raises the upper limit one step.
Values of different mechanical properties are given for each strength class in a
large table. The table also gives mathematical expressions for the values as a
function of the compressive strength. The expressions for tensile strength and E-
modulus are shown below:
f ctm = 0,30 ⋅ f ck 2 / 3 ≤ C50/60

f ctm = 2,12 ⋅ ln [1 + 0,1 ⋅ ( f ck + 8 )] > C50/60
f ctk,0,05 = 0,7 ⋅ f ctm
f ctk,0,95 = 1,3 ⋅ f ctm
Ecm = 22000 ⋅ [0,1 ⋅ ( f ck + 8)]0,3
51
Design values
f cd = α cc ⋅ f ck γ C = 1,0 ⋅ f ck 1,5 compr. strength
f ctd = α ct ⋅ f ctk γ C = 1,0 ⋅ f ctk 1,5 tensile strength
αcc and αct are NDP with recommended values:

αcc = αct = 1,0 for buildings
αcc = 0,85, αct = 1,0 for bridges
Swedish NA:
αcc = αct = 1,0 for buildings and bridges
The factors αcc and αct are said to take into account ”long term effects and un-
favourable effects due to the way the load is applied”. However, the recom-mended
values are 1,0 for both, except for bridges where 0,85 is the recom-mended value
for αcc.
A comment: Strength reduction due to long-term effects can never occur in a
properly designed structure, since the stress under long-term load can never reach
levels where such a reduction would occur. This is due to the different load factors
that are used, and furthermore the strength increase with time also compensates.
Therefore, the recommended value 1,0 is justified. It is difficult to understand why
there should be a lower value for bridges, therefore Sweden chooses 1,0 even here.
52
40,7 42,2 43,6
1002,70 2,80 2,90
2,84 MPa2,80 2,80
901,55 1,48 1,42
80 0 0 0
17,4 18,1 18,8
7025,6
33,4
26,8
35,2
28,0
36,8 ⇐ Stress-strain diagrams
40,9 43,3 45,4
6047,9 51,0 53,7 for non-linear analysis
54,4 58,2 61,6
5060,4 64,9 69,0
65,6 71,1 76,0
70,1 76,5 82,3
4073,8 81,1 87,8
76,4 84,7 92,4
3077,8 87,1 95,8
77,8 88,0 97,7
77,8 88,0 97,7
2076,1 87,0 97,7
72,4 83,7 95,1
1066,1
61,8
77,3
72,7
88,9
84,0
o
50,5 59,6 69,3 /oo
034,6 39,8 45,1
24,6 26,5 27,5
0 1 2 3 4
Stress-strain diagrams
for cross section design ⇒
The upper left diagram shows general stress-strain curves intended for non-linear
analysis, calculated according to an expression given in clause 3.1.
The lower right diagram shows stress blocks intended for cross section design. The
upper curve is the general stress–strain curve for the concrete’s mean compressive
strength fcm, which is assumed to be 8 MPa above the characte-ristic value fck, in
this case 30 MPa. Thereunder are the three alternative stress blocks for cross
section design based on design value fcd.
53
70
Confined f ck,c
60
concrete
50
40
30
20
10
σ 2 MPa
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Confinement by stirrups:
A simple model for the increase of strength and deformability of concrete in triaxial
compression is given. Confinement can also be caused by the restrain-ing effect of
transverse reinforcement, as illustrated bottom right. The “core” that is affected by
confinement is shown in a darker shade.
54
Reinforcement
Design rules are valid for 400 ≤ f yk ≤ 600 MPa
Stress-strain
ft
curve for design: ft /γ s
f yk
f yd = f yk / γ s
a) Inclined top branch
with strain limit εud
b) Horizontell top branch

without strain limit
f yd / Es ε ud ε uk
EC2 gives two alternative simplified stress-strain diagrams for reinforcement for use
in design.
Alternative b) is the one that is normally used.
Alternative a) gives a possibility to use a little higher stresses, at the price of more
complicated calculations.
The rest of chapter 3 deals with properties of prestressing steel and prestressing
devices.
55
Ductility classes for reinforcement
Reinforcement is classified in three ductility classes, for which the main parameters
are the strength ratio (maximum stress) / (yield stress) and the strain at maximum
stress. The figure illustrates the required minimum values for each class.
56
4. Class Description of the environment
1. No risk of corrosion or attack
Durability X0
Concrete without reinforcement or embedded metal: all exposures
without freeze/thaw, abrasion and chemical attack
and cover Conrete with reinforcement or embedded metal: very dry

2. Corrosion induced by carbonation
to reinfor- XC1
XC2
Dry or permanently wet
Wet, rarely dry
cement XC3
XC4
Moderate humidity
Cyclic wet and dry
3. Corrosion induced by chlorides (other than from sea water)
Exposure XD1 Moderate humidity
classes XD2 Wet, rarely dry
XD3 Cyclic wet and dry
Determine 4. Corrosion induced by chlorides from sea water
concrete cover XS1 Exposed to airborne salt but not in direct contact with sea water
XS2 Permanently submerged
and permissible XS3 Tidal, splash and spray zones
crack widths 5. Freeze / thaw attack
XF1 Moderate water saturation, without de-icing agent
Also: XF2 Moderate water saturation, with de-icing agent
6. Chemical attack XF3 High water saturation, without de-icing agent
XA1, XA2, XA3
XF4 High water saturation, with de-icing agent or sea water
The table shows the exposure clases, which are used as a basis for require-ments
on concrete composition, cover to reinforcement and permissible crack widths.
The table may be difficult to read here, therefore it is shown in larger scale in the
following two pages.
57
Same table in larger scale:
Class Description of the environment
1. No risk of corrosion or attack
Concrete without reinforcement or embedded metal: all exposures
X0 without freeze/thaw, abrasion and chemical attack
Conrete with reinforcement or embedded metal: very dry
2. Corrosion induced by carbonation
XC1 Dry or permanently wet
XC2 Wet, rarely dry
XC3 Moderate humidity
XC4 Cyclic wet and dry
3. Corrosion induced by chlorides (other than from sea water)
XD1 Moderate humidity
XD2 Wet, rarely dry
XD3 Cyclic wet and dry
58
Same table in larger scale:
Class Description of the environment
4. Corrosion induced by chlorides from sea water
XS1 Exposed to airborne salt but not in direct contact with sea water
XS2 Permanently submerged
XS3 Tidal, splash and spray zones
5. Freeze / thaw attack
XF1 Moderate water saturation, without de-icing agent
XF2 Moderate water saturation, with de-icing agent
XF3 High water saturation, without de-icing agent
XF4 High water saturation, with de-icing agent or sea water
6. Chemical attack
XA1 Slightly aggressive chemical environment (EN 206-1)
XA2 Moderately aggressive chemical environment «
XA3 Highly aggressive chemical environment «
59
5. Structural analysis
Linear elastic analysis
Analysis may be based on

- uncracked concrete
- linear stress-strain relationships
- mean value of E-modulus
For the effect of imposed deformations, creep and cracking

may be taken into account
Linear elastic analysis can always be used, in both ULS and SLS. It can be used for
determining the moment distribution in frames and continuous beams, the stress
distribution in deep beams and diaphragms with plane stress condi-tions and in
many other cases. Forces, moments and stresses can then be calculated on the
basis of uncracked concrete, even if stresses locally exceed the tensile stress. If
reinforcement is designed for an elastic distribution of stresses, forces and/or
moments, the behaviour of the structure will approach the elastic solution when the
concrete cracks.
For the effects of imposed deformations, it can be favourable to take into account
cracking and creep in the analysis, since it gives lower stiffnes and hence lower
forces due to restraint.
60
Linear elastic analysis with limited redistribution
Mel according to
elastic analysis
δ Mel after
∗
redistribution
Check of rotation capacity is not necessary, if

δ ≥ 0,7 or higher value, depending on concrete strength and
type of reinforcement (ductility); also higher for bridges
The idea behind ”linear analysis with limited redistribution” is to start with an elastic
analysis, for which it is easy to find tables, diagrams and computer pro-grams, and
then to do a redistribution within certain limits. It is not forbidden to go beyond these
limits, but then you have to check rotation capacity.
The limit is expressed as the minimum value of the ratio δ between moments after
and before redistribution respectively.
The minimum value of δ depends on various parameters, among others the type of
reinforcement and the relative depth of compression zone. For build-ings the
absolute minimum value is 0,7, for bridges it is 0,85; both values are NDP.
The possibility to redistribute probably has its greatest advantage in the chec-king of
existing structures, where the reinforcement is given. In the design of new
structures it is seldom a disadvantage to use elastic analysis.
61
Plastic analysis
Lower bound (static) method
Ex: strip method for slabs
Upper bound (kinematic) method)

Ex: yield line theory for slabs
Check of rotation capacity not necessary if

⎧0,25 concrete ≤ C50/60 0,15
i) x d ≤ ⎨ for bridges
⎩0,15 concrete > C50/60 0,10
ii) reinforcement class B or C
iii) 0,5 ≤ M support M span ≤ 2
EC2 mentions the two well-known methods for using plastic analysis. The lower
bound (static) method gives results more or less on the safe side, and the upper
bound (kinematic) method gives results on the other side. With sufficiently refined
models the results according to the two methods approach the theoretically correct
result, but from different directions.
62
Plastic analysis
Rotation capacity Bridges
⎧0,45 0,30 ≤ C50/60
x d ≤⎨
⎩0,35 0,23 > C50/60
Multiply θpl,d with slenderness parameter
k λ = λ 3 where
Class C
λ = a d or
λ = M Ed VEdd (simpl.)
Class B
It is easy to determine the rotation capacity with the help of the diagram. Note the
big difference between the two classes of reinforcement (for class A it is not even
possible to evaluate the rotation capacity according to EC2).
The relative depth of compression zone should be below the indicated values, lower
for bridges.
63
Plastic analysis
Analysis with strut-and-tie models
Primarily for analysis in ULS
- continuity regions (B-regions), example:
design of shear reinforcement
- discontinuity regions (D-regions), example:
corbels, frame corners, splitting, con-
centrated loads, deep beams etc
Can also be used in SLS

- if major compression struts are oriented
along compression stress fields
according to linear elastic analysis ⇒ ⇒
Strut-and tie models can be used for many different problems, both in so called
continuity regions and in discontinuity regions.
Strut-and-tie models is an application of plastic theory, and therefore primarily
applicable to ULS, and in the very first paragraph about plastic theory it is sta-ted
that plastic theory shall only be used in ULS. Nevertheless, in the clause dealing
with strut-and tie models it is said that such models can be used also in SLS,
provided the chosen model is reasonably compatible with an elastic solution; an
example is shown in the figure above. The model could then be used for
determination of forces in ties and hence stress in main reinforce-ment, e.g. for
crack control.
64
Non-linear analysis
Can be used in both ULS and SLS
Safety format for ULS based on partial factor method
requires special rules
Part 1-1 gives detailed rules only for second order analysis
Part 2 (bridges) gives detailed rules for other cases
Non-linear analysis means that the constitutive laws of the materials are taken into
account in a realistic way. Among other things, this means that the non-linear
stress-strain curves of concrete and steel and the cracking of concrete are taken
into account. In non-linear FE analysis also the tensile properties of concrete can be
taken into account by means of fracture mechanics.
When using non-linear analysis for finding a design value of the ULS bearing
capacity, the use of the partial factor method is no longer self-evident. EC2 gives a
method for non-linear second order analysis, but for other types of analysis detailed
rules are given only in the bridge part. However, these rules may already be
obsolete, since new methods to evaluate the safety have recently been proposed.
65
Second order analysis
θ EI
Effective length l0 in case of elastic restraint k= ⋅
M l
a) Members in braced frames:
⎛ k1 ⎞ ⎛ k2 ⎞
l0 = 0,5 ⋅ l ⋅ ⎜ 1 + ⎟⎜1+ ⎟
⎝ 0,45 + k1 ⎠ ⎝ 0,45 + k 2 ⎠
b) Members in bracing (unbraced) frames:
⎧ k1 k 2
⎪ 1 + 10 ⋅ k + k
⎪ 1 2
l0 = l ⋅ max ⎨
⎪⎛⎜1 + k1 ⎞⎟ ⎛⎜1 + k 2 ⎟⎞
⎪⎩⎝ 1 + k1 ⎠ ⎝ 1 + k 2 ⎠
A useful parameter in second order analysis is sometimes the effective length (also
called buckling length). It is well-known for some typical cases, like the four Euler
buckling cases.
Expressions are given for the effective length of columns with flexible end restraints.
The expressions are “empirical”, based on accurate elastic analysis.
66
Second order analysis N
M0
General method based on non-linear analysis
ε ⇒1 r ⇒ y ⇒ M = M0 + N ⋅ y
⇓ r
σ ⇒ N och M M and N should be y

in agreement along
the whole column
N
General method has been used for
M
calibration of simplified methods:
a) Method based on nominal stiffness
b) Method based på nominal curvature
Clause 5.8 describes three methods of second order analysis, one general (based
on non-linear analysis) and two simplified methods.
The general method is based on fulfilling equilibrium and deformation compa-tibility
in a number of section along the member, using realistic stress-strain diagrams för
concrete and steel and taking into account cracking and creep. The method allows
accurate analysis of arbitrary slender compression mem-bers, without the limitations
attached to all simplified methods.
The general method is seldom used for direct practical design, but it has been
extensively used for the calibration of the two simplified methods given in EC2, the
stiffness method and the curvature method.
67
Method based on nominal stiffness
N
Linear second order analysis
M0 = first order moment
M2 = N y = second order moment
*
⎛ M0 l2 M2 l2 ⎞ 1 M
M 2 = N ⋅ ⎜⎜ ⋅ + ⋅ 2 ⎟⎟ =
⎝ EI C 0 EI π ⎠ r EI
⎛ π 2 C0 ⎞
M d = M 0 + M 2 = M 0 ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟
⎝ N B N − 1 ⎠
N
EI = K c Ecd I c + K s Es I s nominal stiffness M0 1st order
moment
2nd order
Kc and Ks have been calibrated against M 2 moment
calculations with general method (NLA)
The figure illustrates first and second order moments in a simple case.
Second order moments are equal to the the axial force times the deflection.
Deflection can always be written as Curvature * Length 2 / Coefficient. The
coefficient depends on the variation of the curvature along the member.
In a linear analysis the curvature can be written as Moment / Stiffness.
The total defection can be divided into two parts, one associated with the first order
moment and the other with the second order moment. The reason to do this is that
the variation of these two moments (and hence the corresponding curvatures) may
differ, which can then be taken into account by using a coef-ficient C0 for the first
order curvature and π2 for the second order curvature (the latter usually varies
approximately according to a sinus half wave).
After solving a first order equation for M2 and expressing the total moment as the
sum of first and second order, and substituting the expression π2EI / l 2 with the
buckling load NB, the design moment can be expressed as the first order moment
times a magnification factor.
---
A comment concerning symbols: subscript 2 is logical for second order effects;
subscript 0 is not so logical but used traditionally for first order effects.
68
Method based on nominal curvature
Total moment:
M Ed = M 0 + M 2
N
Second order moment:
M 2 = N ⋅ e2
r
1 l0 2 l0
e2 = ⋅
r c
N e2
The curvature method is based on a direct estimation of the curvature, inde-pendent

of the moment. This curvature gives a deflection which in turn gives the second
order moment.
The deflection for a given curvature is calculated in the same way as before.
Therefore, the basic difference between the two methods lies in the way to estimate
the curvature:
Moment / Stiffness (stiffness method) or by
Direct estimation, independent of moment (curvature method).
69
Method based on nominal curvature
Basic curvature:
1 2ε yd 2ε yd ε yd
= ≈ =
r0 d′ 0,9d 0,45d
ε yd = f yd Es
Design curvature:
1 1
= K r Kϕ
r r0
Kr and Kϕ have been calibrated against

calculations with general method (NLA)
The basic value of the curvature assumes that the reinforcement is just about to
yield both on the compression side and the tension side. This case is often decisive
for the ultimate load, since the column then loses much of its stiff-ness.
If the axial force is high, however, yielding is not possible on the tension side, which
means that the curvature will be reduced. This is roughly taken into ac-count by the
factor Kr. The effect of creep is taken into account by factor Kϕ.
70
6. Ultimate limit states
Bending with or without axial force
Basic assumptions
- plane sections remain plain
- concrete strain limited to certain values
- strain in bonded reinforcement = strain in surrounding concr.
- concrete tensile strength is neglected
- compressive stresses according to certain models
- reinforcement stresses accordng to stress-strain relationships
- prestrain is taken into account for prestresses reinforcement
- minimum eccentricity of axial force: emin = h/30 ≥ 20 mm
The basic assumptions for ULS analysis of cross sections with moment and axial
force are sipposedly well-known.
It may have to be pointed out, however, that the minimum eccentricty emin is only
intended togive a minimum bending moment for which a cross section should be
designed in cases with ”axial force without bending moment”. Thus, this eccentricity
should never be added to other eccentricities or moments, and should never be
included in a second order analysis.
71
Bending with or without axial force
Alternative stress blocks:
a) b) c)
Pa Tr Re
ra ia ng cta
bo ng
l a- el- le
re re
cta cta
ng ng
le le
⎧η = 1,0
f ck ≤ 50 : ⎨
⎩λ = 0,8
⎧η = 1 − ( f ck − 50 ) 200
f ck > 50 : ⎨
⎩λ = 0,8 − ( f ck − 50 ) 400
For cracked sections all tensile stresses in concrete are neglected. EC2 gives three
alternative stress blocks (not to be confused with the stress-strain curve for non-
linear analysis). Alternative c) is suitable for ”hand” calculations, and is sufficiently
accurate for most practical cases.
72
6.2
Shear
Equilibrium
for part
n in
ne
k
sio ce
ac
zo
n
between
tio
es or
cr
pr f
in
ac
m ar
el
co She
tio
ow
cracks
ic
D
Fr
Force in stirrups
VRd,s
A shear failure in a simply supported beam is illustrated in the figure. The shear
failure which is illustrated is a so called flexural shear failure (shear cracks start as
flexural cracks; this type of failure also has other names in English).
Shear cracks like those shown in the figure may lead to shear failure, but just before
failure the middle part of the beam between the cracks is somehow hanging in the
end parts.
If the beam has no shear reinforcement, three main contributions to the resis-tance
can be distinguished, as shown in the figure. The shear resistance is called VRd,c in
EC2.
If the beam has shear reinforcement the middle part of the beam is simply hanging
in the stirrups that are intersected by the shear cracks. The shear resistance is then
called VRd,s, and no contributíon from the concrete is taken into account in the model
given in EC2.
73
6.2 Shear
6.2.2 Members not requiring shear reinforcement
VRd,c = bw d ⋅ (v + 0,15σ cp ) in areas with flexural cracks
0,18k 3
v= 100 ρ l ⋅ f ck ≥ vmin = 0,035 k 3 f ck
γC k Ac
2,0
ρ l = Asl bw d ≤ 0,02
1,8
k = 1 + 0,2 d ≤ 2,0 1,6

d bw
1,4
σ cp = N Ac ≤ 0,2 f cd Asl
1,2
Asl reinforcement extending ≥ 1,0

(lbd+d) beyond section cons. 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5
d
An empirical expression is given for the shear capacity without stirrups and in areas
with flexural cracks.
The contribution from the longitudinal reinforcement can partly be associated with
the dowel effect, see previours figure. Increased longitudinal reinforce-ment also
leads to increased depth of compression zone, which increases the corresponding
contribution to the resistance, and it also leads to a reduction of crack widths, which
can increase the contribution from friction (aggregate interlock), see previous figure
again.
The size effect (factor k) can be given different physical explanations. One simple
explanation is that the shear cracks will be wider the deeper the beam is, which
reduces the effect of aggregate interlock in the cracks, but in addition there is a
general size effect on the strength of brittle materials.
74
6.2 Shear
6.2.2 Members not requiring shear reinforcement
In areas without flexural cracks A

(based on principal stress):
z
bw I
VRdc = f ctd 2 + σ cp f ctd
S
I = second moment of area

S = first moment of area A ⋅ z
In parts of a beam where there are no flexural cracks in ULS, e.g. in the ends of
simply supported prestressed beams, shear cracks may start in the web due to a
principal stress exceeding the concrete’s tensile strength. The cor-responding
expression for the shear resistance is not empirical, instead it can be derived from
the expression for the principal tensile stress.
75
6.2 Shear
6.2.2 Members requiring shear reinforcement
Shear mechanism for

beam with shear
reinforcement:
Truss model with "Vc " = 0

VRd,s = reinforcement capacity
for 1 ≤ cotθ ≤ 2,5 (3)
When shear cracks open, the stirrups crossing the cracks are elongated, and the
corresponding tensile force in the stirrups give their contribution to the shear
capacity.
In EC2 a truss model is used, without a separate ”concrete contribution”. In an
inclined shear crack, the stirrups have to take the whole shear force. On the other
hand, the angle of inclination can be chosen as low as θ = 22° (cotθ = 2,5), which
means that a large number of stirrups may pass the crack and contribute to the
capacity.
The transverse tensile forces in the stirrups are balanced by inclined com-pression
forces in the concrete and by longitudinal forces in the compression and tensile
chords. The three types of forces form a truss.
76
6.2 Shear
VRd = min {VRd,s ; VRd,max }

Capacity w.r.t. yielding
VRd,s = n ⋅ Fsw ⋅ sin β of shear reinforcement
Fsw = Asw f ywd n = z (cot θ + cot β ) s
z
VRd,s = Asw f ywd (cot θ + cot β ) sinβ
s
z ≈ 0,9d
The shear capacity for a beam with shear reinforcement is the lesser of two values,
one limited by the yielding of stirrups, the other by inclined compres-sion in the web.
The greater the value of cotθ, the greater the contribution of the stirrups. On the
other hand, the upper limit VRd,max with regard to concrete compression (see next
page) is reduced with increased cotθ, which means that it is not always possible to
use cotθ = 2,5.
77
6.2 Shear
VRd = min {VRd,s ; VRd,max }

Capacity w.r.t. strength
VRd,max = Fcw ⋅ sin θ of compression struts
Fcw = bw z (cot θ + cot β )sin θ ⋅ σ c
Limiting concrete stress:
σ c = α cwν1 ⋅ f cd
VRd,max = α cwν 1 f cdbw z (cot θ + cot β ) sin 2 θ
VRd,max is an upper limit of the shear capacity for a given cross section. The failure
due to inclined compression in the concrete can also be referred to as web
crushing.
Failure is assumed to occur when the concrete stress according to the model
reaches a certain value, equal to the compressive strength fcd multiplied by two
factors αcw explained ν1 on the next page. The shear capacity follows from
equilibrium and geometrical and trigonometrical conditions.
78
6.2 Shear
Strength in compression struts: cw
1,25
σ c = α cwν1 ⋅ f cd 1,0
⎧1 + σ / f 0 < σ cp / f cd < 0,25

cp cd
⎪⎪
α cw = ⎨1,25 0,25 ≤ σ cp / f cd ≤ 0,5
⎪
(
⎪⎩2,5 1 − σ cp / f cd ) 0,5 < σ cp / f cd ≤ 1,0 0,25 0,5 1,0 cp/fcd
⎪⎧0,6(1 − f ck 250) om f ywd = f yd

ν1 = ⎨
⎪⎩0,6 om f ywd = 0,8 f yk ⇐ with reduced reinfor-
cement stress
The factor αcw takes into account the favourable effect of a longitudinal
compressive force (e.g. from prestress), at least up to a certain limit. Above this limit
the effect of longitudinal compression starts to become negative, but for this to
occur the longitudinal compressive stress has to be very high.
The factor ν1 takes into account the fact that concrete has a limited capacity for
plastic redistribution of stresses, which means that the full compressive stress can
not be utilized over the whole depth. The mean stress used in the model must
therefore be lower than the design value of the compressive strength. The higher
the strength of the concrete, the lower its capacity for plastic redistribution, therefore
ν1 decreases with increasing strength. The factor also takes into account the fact
that the concrete may have cracks in a direction deviationg from that of the
compression struts (the angles of shear cracks change with increasing load).
There is a possibility to utilize a slightly higher compressive stress in the con-crete if
at the same a lower stress is utilized in the shear reinforcement. Thus, by adding a
little more reinforcement, the upper limit of the shear capacity can be raised.
The factors αcw and ν1 are the only elements of the truss model that are purely
empirical, all the rest can be derived from the mechanical model.
79
Effect of
inclined
tension
and / or
compression
chords:
VEd,red = VEd − Vtd − Vccd
Additional
tensile force:
ΔFtd = 0,5VEd (cot θ − cot α )

Alternative:
al = 0,5 z (cot θ − cot α )
al = d without shear reinf.
The figure illustrates two things: the effect of inclined tension and/or com-pression
cords and the increase of the longitudinal tensile force due to shear.
The latter can be obtained either by the so called shift rule, or (for members with
shear reinforcement only) by direct calculation of the increase of the force. This
increase is easy to derive from the truss model.
80
6.3 Torsion
Transverse reinforcement
Torsion gives shear forces in walls (real or nomina wallsl),

which are added to the shear forces from transverse load
Walls are designed for shear according to truss model,
alternatively the whole section is designed for 2(VV + VT)
Transverse torsion reinforcement can be designed by adding the effects of torsion

and transverse shear. In each wall (in a solid section a fictitious thick-ness along
each side) the shear forces are added and then the transverse reinforcement is
determined with the truss model just described.
The longitudinal torsion reinforcement can be determined from the the increa-se of
the longitudinal tensile force as described on the previous page, or by a specific
expression (giving the same end result).
81
6.4
Punching
c
Design
model
2d
Further control
sections may
have to be
considered in
special cases
Design with regard to punching is based on checking a formal shear stress in a

control section placed at a certain distance from the loaded area (or from the
column face in a flat slab). The basic control section is at a distance 2d. In some
cases other control sections may also have to be checked.
82
6.4 Punching
6.4.3 Punching shear stress
VEd
vEd = β
ui d
β eccentricity factor ≥ 1
VEd design value of action effect
ui perimeter of control section considered
d effective depth, mean y and z
Design equations:
vEd ≤ vRd,c (otherwise shear
reinforcement)
vEd ≤ vRd,max
In the calculation of the formal shear stress a possible eccentricity of the load is
taken into account by increasing the stress with an eccentricity factor β, which is
greater than or equal to 1. The stress is compared to a formal shear strength vRd,c. If
this strength is exceeded the capacity can be increased by adding shear
reinforcement.
The shear stress along the innermost control section (= perimeter of loaded area or
column) is also compared to an upper limit vRd,max, and if this limit is exceeded,
more shear reinforcement will not help; only increased slab thickness and/or loaded
area will.
83
6.4 Punching
Eccentricy factor:
M Ed u1
β = 1+ k
VEd W1
MEd moment transferred to column
W1 plastic moment of resistance for basic control section
For arbitrary shape of control section:

ui
Wi = ∫ e dl
0
The eccentricity factor β accounts for the uneven distribution of the shear stress if
the load is eccentric around the center of the control section. The figure shows the
general expression for the eccentricity factor.
84
6.4 Punching
Eccentricy factor:
= 1,4
Simplified rues for
B
flat slabs not
contributing to
stability by frame B edge
action
B
Calculation if β = 1,4
often gives lower
values
Default values of the eccentricity factor can be used, provided the stability of the
structure is not depending on frame action between the slab and the columns (in
other words: stability is provided by other structural components, e.g. shear walls).
It can often be worth while to calculate the factor.
85
6.4 Punching
6.4.4 Reistance without shear reinforcement
vRd,c = CRd,c k (100 ρ l f ck )1 / 3 + k1σ cp ≥ vmin + k1σ cp

where CRd,c = 0,18 γC k1 = 0,10
k = 1 + 200 d ≤ 2,0 σ cp = (σ cy + σ cz ) 2
ρ l = ρ ly ρ lz ≤ 0,02 σ c = N Ed Ac
vmin = 0,035 ⋅ k 3 / 2 f ck
Reinf. within
3d 3d 3d
The expression for the punching shear strength is very similar to that for the
”ordinary” shear strength. The only difference is the coefficient k1 for the effect of
prestress, which is 0,15 for ordinary shear and 0,10 for punching. The effect of
prestress is defined for tendons within the gray areas in the figure.
The reinforcement ratio ρl is determined for the column width plus 3d for edge
columns and column width plus (3+3)d for interior columns.
86
6.5 Design with strut-and-tie models
In continuity regions, design

of shear reinforcement:
In discontinuity regions,
example deep beam:
Rules for concrete
ut
str
strength in struts
n
sio
and nodes
es
pr
m
Co
Calclation of tensile
forces in special cases
(e.g. splitting)
Strut-and-tie models are an application of plastic theory, where equilibrium is

achieved by means of compressive struts in concrete and ties in the form of main
reinforcement.
The truss model for design of shear reinforcement is an example of a strut-and-tie
model used in continuity regions (B-regions, where ordinary beam theory is valid).
Apart from that, strut-and-tie models are mainly used in discontinuity regions, where
beam theory (plane sections etc) is not valid.
The rules for strut-and-tie models primarily deal with the concrete compressive
strength that can be utilized in struts and nodes.
87
7. Serviceability limit states
7.2 Limitation of stresses
Recommended
(2) Concrete, characterstic load: σ c ≤ k1 f ck k1 = 0,6
(3) Concrete, long-term load: σ c ≤ k 2 f ck k 2 = 0,45

(5) Reinforcement, char. load: σ s ≤ k3 f yk k3 = 0,8
Reinforcement, imposed def: σ s ≤ k 4 f yk k 4 = 1,0
Prestressin steel, mean: σ s ≤ k5 f pk k5 = 0,75
Design in serviceability limit states (SLS) according to chapter 7 is about:

- limitation of stresses in concrete and steel (7.2)
- limitation of crack widths (7.3)
- limitation of deflections (7.4).
88
7.3 Crack control
Without direct calculation
Max. bar diameter Max. bar spacing
Crack width wk mm Crack width wk mm
σs 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,4 0,3 0,2
160 40 32 25 300 300 200
200 32 25 16 300 250 150
240 20 16 12 250 200 100
280 16 12 8 200 150 50
320 12 10 6 150 100 -
360 10 8 5 100 50 -
400 8 6 4
450 6 5 -
EC2 gives a possibility to avoid the calculation of crack widths, by limiting either the
bar diameter (beam) or the bar spacing (slab), depending on the allowable crack
width and the reinforcement stress (at least the latter has to calculated). The bar
diameters / bar spacings given by the tables are not binding, and a calculation of
the crack width, although more time consuming, is often worth while, since the
tables are sometimes very conservative.
The tables shown here are not ”the whole truth”; they are valid under certain
conditions and adjustments may have to be done.
89
7.3 Crack control
Calculation of crack width
wk = sr,max (ε sm - ε cm )
⎛ ⎞ σs
ε sm - ε cm = ⎜ σ s − k t
⎜
f ct,eff
ρ p,eff
(1 + α e ρ p,eff )⎟⎟ E1 ≥ 0,6
Es
⎝ ⎠ s
ρ p,eff = As Ac,eff
⎧2,5(h − d )
⎪
hc,ef = min ⎨(h − x ) 3
α e = Es Ecm ⎪h 2
⎩
⎧0,6 for short term loading
kt = ⎨
⎩0,4 long - term loading
The basic principle for calculating crack widths is

crack width = steel strain x crack spacing.
More precisely, the strain to be used is the difference in strain between steel and
concrete; the minus term in the expression represents the possible strain in the
concrete. If the concrete had unlimited strain capacity there would be no cracks.
90
7.3 Crack control
Calculation of crack width, crack spacing
sr,max = k3c + k1k 2 k 4 φ ρ p,eff
⎧0,8 high bond bars
k1 = ⎨
⎩1,6 smooth bars
⎧0,5 pure bending
⎪
k 2 = ⎨1,0 pure tension
⎪(ε + ε ) (2ε ) otherwise
⎩ 1 2 1
k3 = 3,4
k 4 = 0,425
The crack spacing depends on concrete cover, bar diameter and reinforce-ment
ratio within a certain effective concrete area, shown in the previous figure.
The coefficient k3 was much discussed, and many experts claimed that it would
”punish” a large concrete cover in an appropriate way. The parameter was therefore
made nationally determined, and for instance Sweden chose a value which makes
the first term depending on the bar diameter instead of the cover.
91
7.3 Deflections
before installation of
sensitive non-struc-
tural elements
Total deflection y1 < l / 250
(Refer. to
ISO 4356) under quasi-permanent
Additional « y2 < l / 500 load after a long time
Precamber reduces y1, but not y2:
EC2 gives two simple criteria for deflections:

y1: final total deflection under long-term load (quasi-permanent load combination)
y2: deflection that can damage non-structural elements like partitions, glass facades and
so on, i.e. the additional deflection after the installation of these elements; y2 is also
calculated for long-term load.
Precamber can reduce the first deflection, but has no effect on the second one.
The limits given in EC2 are mainly applicable to buildings, and are only meant as
guidance, not as binding requirements. In principle, deflection limits can be set up for
each individual project.
It can also be discussed whether y2 should be calculated for the frequent or even the
characteristic load combination. This depends on what risk for damage the client is
willing to accept, and whether the damage should be seen as an ”irreversible” or a
”reversible” serviceability limit state.
92
7.3 Deflections
Deflection control without calculation of deflections
Max. l / d (C30/37)
Structural system K
ρ = 1,5 % ρ = 0,5 %
Simply supported beam, one- or two-
way spanning simply supported slab
1,0 14 20
End span of continuous beam or one-

way slab, or two-way slab continuous 1,3 18 26
over one long side
Interior span of beam or one-way or
two-way spanning slab
1,5 20 30
Slab supported on columns without

beams (flat slab) (based on longer 1,2 17 24
span)
Cantilever 0,4 6 8
Like for crack control, EC2 gives a simple alternative to the calculation of
deflections, namely limiting values for the span / depth ratio l/d. As long as the limits
are not exceed, the criteria on the previous page may be considered to be fullfilled
without further verifications.
Like the table for crack widths, this table does not show ”the whole truth”; ad-
justments may be necessary, which makes the whole thing less simple. There are
also expressions for the direct calculation of the limiting span / depth ratio.
Nevertheless, the table, with or without adjustments, may be useful at an early
stage of design, to avoid span / depth ratios that are likely to give deflection
problems.
The limiting values are not binding, and a calculation of the deflection may
sometimes show that a higher span / depth ratio is possible.
93
7.3 Deflections
Calculation of deformations
α = ς ⋅ α II + (1 − ς ) ⋅ α I α is calc. width
E
α = deformation parameter; can be curvature, Ec,eff = cm
1+ ϕ
rotation or deflection
αI is calculated for uncracked, αII fully cracked section
2
⎛σ ⎞
ς = 1 − β ⋅ ⎜⎜ sr ⎟⎟ ( = 0 for uncracked section)
⎝ σs ⎠
⎧1,0 short - term load
β =⎨
⎩0,5 long - term or repeated load both calculated
for fully cracked
σs = steel stress for moment considered section
σsr = steel stress for cracking moment
If the the span / depth criterion is not fullfilled a deflection may have to be
calculated. For this calculation, EC2 gives a simple possibility to take into account
so called tension stiffening.
The deformation parameter α can be a curvature, a rotation or a deflection. The
greatest benefit from tension stiffening is obtained if the curvature is calculated in a
number of cross sections along the member, and the deflection is then calculated
by numerical integration of the curvature.
94
Annex A. Modification of partial factors for materials
With regard to quality control and reduced tolerances
Dim. Tolerance
b\h Cross section dimension Effective depth
≤ 150 5 (10) 5 (10)
400 10 (15) 10 (15)
≥ 2500 30 (30) 20 (20)

(normal tolerance)
γ S,red,1 = 1,1 (1,15)
γ C,red,1 = 1,4 (1,5)
Annex A gives certain possibilities for the reduction of partial factors for material s.
The first criterion is that there is a system for quality control, plus a reduction of the
execution tolerances for cross section dimensions.
95
Using reduced or measured dimensions in design
d d d
h h h
b b b
γ S,red,2 = 1,05 (1,15)
γ C,red,2 = 1,45 (1,5) Can also be used in check cal-
culations of existing structures,
if dimensions are measured
The second criterion for reduction of material factors is that the calculation is made
with reduced cross section dimensions (reduction = tolerance for the dimension in
question).
The same reduction of partial factors applies if dimensions are measured in the
finished structure; this can be useful in check calculations of existing structures.
96
Using concrete strength measured in finished structure
γ C,red,3 = η ⋅ γ C,(red) ≥ γ C,red,4

γ C,(red) can already be reduced according to previous criteria
η = 0,85 conversion factor specimen ⇒ structure
γ C,red,4 = 1,3 absolute minimum value of γC
The third criterion for reduction of material factors is based on using a concrete
strength measured in the finished structure. The partial factor is then reduced with
the conversion factor η, representing the systematic difference between the
strength of test specimens and that of the concrete in the structure.
This reduction may be applied to a factor that is already reduced according to one
or both of the two previous criteria, but then an absolute lower limit of the partial
factor γC has to be observed.
97
Annex B. Creep and shrinkage
Basic expressions for the creep coefficient
3
Examples of ϕ(t,t0) w eek
calculated values t0 =1
2.5
Creep function takes

th
into account: 2 1 mon
- age at loading t0
1.5
- relative humidity
1 year
- concrete strength 1
- type of cement 10 year

0.5
- size of cross section
- temperature log(year)
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Annex B gives expressions for creep and shrinkage, which can be useful when an
accurate analysis is required, including the effect of various parameters and the
development with time. For ”normal” analyses, the simple guidelines in chapter 3
are sufficient.
The figure shows an example of creep curves calculated for loading at diffe-rent
ages of the concrete. Time is hown in logarithmic scale, and thus runs from 1 to100
years.
The diagram illustrates the decisive effect of the concrete age at loading; for loading
after one week the final creep coefficient is ϕ = 3, after one month ϕ = 2 and after
10 years ϕ = 0,75.
98
Annex B. Creep and shrinkage
Basic expressions for drying shrinkage
Examples of .4
calculated values εcd(t)
%
Shrinkage function
.3
RH = 50
takes into account:
- drying 80 %
.2
- relative humidity
- concrete strength
95 %
- cement type .1
- size of cross section

- autogenuous shrinkage
years
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Annex B gives an expression for the final shrinkage as a function of relative

humidity, concrete strength and cement type; for shrinkage the time function and
the effect of other parameters are instead given in chapter 3.
Shrinkage is mainly associated with the drying of concrete, but there is also a so
called autogenous shrinkage, which is not depending on drying but on the chemical
reactions during hardening of the concrete. For concretes of normal strength the
drying shrinkage dominates, but for high strength the autogenous shrinkage may
dominate. EC2 takes into account both types of shrinkage.
The diagram illustrates the decisive influence of the relative humidity for concrete of
normal strength. For a more high strength concrete the effect of humidity is much
less, but on the other hand the effect of autogenous shrinkage then increases. The
total shrinkage decreases with increasing strength, however.
99
Annex C. Ductility classes for reinforcement
Annex C summarizes the basic requirements on reinforcement.

The diagram illustrates the three ductility classes for reinforcement, where the basic
parameters are the ratio between maximum stress and yield stress, and the
elongation at maximum stress.
100
Annex H. Global second order effects in structures
When can they be neglected?
If not, how can they be calculated?
- taking into account (combinations of)
Annex H gives practical guidelines concerning second order effects on a global level
in structures.
Simple criteria are given for the possibility to neglect these effects.
If they can not be neglected they have to be taken into account, and methods for
this are then given.
The figure illustrates different deformation patterns which may have to be taken into
account, and Annex H gives useful information on how o take them into account.
101
Short presentation of myself
Born in July 1942
Graduated from Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm 1967
PhD in 2008 (!)
Periods of full and part time work at KTH 1967-2009
Consulting company J&W (now part of WSP concern) 1974-1988
Precasting company Strängbetong (now part of Consolis concern) 1988-1994
Consulting company Tyréns 1994-2009
Guest Professor at KTH from 2000 to 2009
Worked with research, development, structural design, education (of both

students and experienced engineers), various national and international
committees (CEB, FIP, fib, CEN), code writing (Swedish and European),
writing of various handbooks and design guides (Swedish and Australian(!))
Active in the development of Eurocodes, particularly Eurocode 2, since 1990
Design guide for
STEEL FIBRE REINFORCED SLABS ON FOREWORD

GROUND WITH CONCENTRATED LOADS
This design guide has been prepared by Bo
December 1999 Westerberg, Tyréns Byggkonsult AB,
Stockholm, commissioned by Scancem
Materials (Australia) Pty Ltd.
The guide is mainly based on guidelines and

handbooks published in Sweden 1989 and
1995, which were in turn based on the work
P by Losberg, 1961 (1). Other sources have

also been taken into account, see the
reference list. The essential idea is to utilise
plastic analysis for the slab, as for ordinary
reinforced concrete slabs, in order to benefit
from the increased ductility provided by
steel fibres.
Tyréns Byggkonsult AB
Stockholm, December 1999
Bo Westerberg
This design guide is copyright. Reproduction of the
whole or any part thereof must not be made
without the express permission of Scancem
Materials (Australia) Pty Ltd.
102

Design of Concrete Structures To Eurocodes - An Australian Perspective PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Design of Concrete Structures To Eurocodes - An Australian Perspective PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Bo Westerberg

Design of concrete structures

2007 + Bulgaria, Romania PT

Öresund Link 16 km,

1995 Eurocode 5: Design of timber structures

1996 Eurocode 6: Design of masonry structures

1998 Eurocode 8: Design of str. for earthquake resistance

Totally 60 individual standards *)

*) Annex A2 in EN 1990 is a separate standard

The whole Eurocode system comprises 60 individual standards (each ”part” is a

concrete, timber etc.

EN 1991-1-1 Selfweight, imposed .

EN 1991-1-2 Actions during fire

EN 1991-1-3 Snow load

EN 1991-1-4 Wind load

EN 1991-1-6 Actions during exec

design of different types of concrete structures.

EN 1991-4 Actions in silos …

EN 1992-1-1 General rules…

EN 1992-2 Concrete bridges

EN 1997-1 Geotechnical design

• National values of NDP are given in the National Annex, NA

Countries that are actively working to adopt parts of some

Countries that are “interested” in the Eurocodes, without at

• variable – imposed loads on building floors

Origin of action: • direct

Spacial variation: • fixed

Nature of actions / structural response: • static

• if variability can not be considered

• prestress: Pk,inf (t ) , Pm (t ) , Pk,sup (t )

Variable • an upper value with a low probability of being exceeded

Accidental • the design value Ad should be specified for individual projects

Seismic • the design value AEd should be assessed from the

Frequent value ψ 1Q k used for verifications in

Infrequent value ψ 1,infq Qk is defined only for

Quasi-perma- ψ 2Q k used for

Frep is the relevant representative value of the action = ψ Fk

ψ is either 1,0 or ψ0, ψ1 or ψ2

Ultimate limit state EQU is about ”overturning, lifting, sliding”.

A. EQU 1,1 0,9 1,5 1,5ψ 0

Permanent actions Variable actions

There are three load combinations för serviceability limit states.

B. Vehicle barriers and parapets for car parks (1)

Underlined = recommended value

Total load from n stories in categories A-D may be mulitplied by

The main contents of EN 1991-2.

2 200 0,9 2,5 1,0

3 100 0 2,5 1,0

Load model 1 consists of a tandem system and a simultaneously acting uni-formly

Single axle load:

Load model 4 (4.3.5)

Special vehicles are taken into account only in special cases.

LM 71 Normal rail traffic on mainline railways

There are five different load models for vertical loads.

Characteristic values according to figure are multiplied by

Load model qvk (kN/m) a (m) c (m)

SW/0 133 15 5,3

SW/2 150 25 7,0

Characteristic values mult. by same factor α as for LM 71 41

D Detailed calculation method for prestressing steel relaxation losses (i)

Part 2 and part 3 give supplementary rules and in some cases

Part 1-1 is the basic document for all types of

Shrinkage and creep need to be taken into account