Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr
Abstract
The Eurocodes as European unified design rules for structures are part of the European Standard Family comprising also product standards,
testing standards, standards for execution, European Technical Approvals and European Technical Approval Guidelines.
A key feature of all these standards is consistency that has been obtained by consistent definitions of material and product properties and by
basing any calculative way of defining structural properties on test evaluations.
As a consequence all rules in Eurocode 3 are justified by test evaluations with a standardised method that introduced full transparency into the
harmonisation works and allowed new innovative design approaches.
Some examples for determining characteristic values of actions and combination factors for actions as well as for determining characteristic
values and design values of resistances, in particular for the rules for choice of material to avoid brittle fracture, the harmonisation of various types
of stability checks and the new interpretation of the plate buckling rules highlight the benefits of the standardised evaluation method.
c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
properties of prefabricated components to be declared for CE 3. Eurocodes have a double role; beside their role as a tool for
marking either by tests or by calculations and that for the determining Rk they shall also be suitable for the design
calculative determination of properties the Eurocodes are the of structures. That design needs design values Rd that
only design codes referred to, see Fig. 5. shall be determined using the declared characteristic values
By this condition a link between experimental results from Rk . Hence the design values Rd needed for the design of
tests with prefabricated components and the design rules in structures shall be
the Eurocodes is established, that is specified by the reliability Rk
requirements in EN 1990 – Eurocode: Basis of Structural Rd =
γM
Design [2] – in the following way:
1. The product property to be declared, that may be determined where γ M is a global factor related to the resistance Rk . It is
directly from testing, shall represent a certain fractile of therefore not possible to use separate partial factors γ Mi to
the statistical distribution of the experimental results. It parameters X i in the formula for R(X i ), e.g. partial factors
is denoted as characteristic value Rk (in general the 5%- for stiffness, slenderness or the strengths of constitutive
fractile) and this value declared with CE marking will be materials.
acknowledged throughout Europe without any impact from 4. The choice of the global partial factors γ M is the respon-
national safety levels. The method to determine Rk from sibility of Member States (Nationally Determined Parame-
tests is therefore a unified European rule in EN 1990 — ters); however the Eurocodes provide recommendations for
Annex D. the numerical values for these NDPs that result from the
2. Eurocodes shall, as an alternative to experimental testing, same test evaluations that are used to verify Rk . If national
provide by their design rules calculation-based methods for choices are different to these recommendations, these differ-
determining numerical values of Rk , that are in competition ences should be justifiable.
with those from direct experimental tests. Therefore the
characteristic values Rk in the Eurocodes must be calibrated The basic reliability targets for design values for ULS
to test results such that the manufacturer prefers them to any recommended in EN 1990 are based on a semi-probabilistic
experimental determination. approach, see Fig. 6, with the reliability index β = 3.80 for a
1050 G. Sedlacek, C. Müller / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 1047–1059
The procedure for determining the load models in the An example for the use of these definitions is the preparation
Eurocodes [3] can be best described with the load model for of the loading specifications for the Allianz–Arena in Munich
traffic loads on road bridges, see Fig. 7. for the football world championship in 2006. Fig. 9 shows
From traffic measurements (axle loads and distances the statistical distribution of the annual extremes of the
between axles) in the Paris–Lyon highway at Auxerre (that have snowloads at the location of the stadium and the subsequent
been agreed to be adopted as representing “European traffic”) characteristic value for snow on the ground defined by a return
traffic effects E(Q) on typical bridges were calculated with period of 50 years or the 0.98-fractile of the annual extreme
dynamic simulation models. value distribution. Fig. 10 illustrates the determination of the
From statistical evaluations, functions of the characteristic characteristic peak velocity pressure according to EN 1991, Part
values E k (Q) were determined that were used to calibrate a 1-4 for wind, and Fig. 11 gives the characteristic values of air
fictitious engineering load model Q k composed of a suitable temperature related to a reference temperature of +10 ◦ C.
loading pattern and the magnitudes of its components. In In Fig. 12 all characteristic values and design values
conclusion action models are all action-effect-oriented. determined from measurements of magnitudes of actions are
For various actions the definitions of characteristic values assembled.
are given in Fig. 8. Fig. 8 also shows the definition of For the determination of a combination factor the
combination factors from characteristic values of combined consideration of single actions is not sufficient. Fig. 13
action effects. shows how the action effects from snow and wind may be
G. Sedlacek, C. Müller / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 1047–1059 1051
Fig. 19. Use of test evaluation method for various regulatory routes.
and the design value Rd , for which the recommended value the transfer of research results to practical applications, see
of the reliability index β = 3.8 and the weighting factor Fig. 19.
α R = 0.8 for the resistance are used. This method has been used to justify the characteristic values
5. From Rk and Rd the γ M -value for the particular problem can of strength and also the numerical values of the partial factors
be obtained, or as suggested in Eurocode 3, a suitable class γ M recommended in Eurocode 3—EN 1993 [4]. Fig. 20 gives a
of γ M is chosen from the following possibilities: survey on the various recommended γ M values associated with
γ M0 = 1.00 where large deflections due to yielding ( f y ) the different ductile failure modes distinguished in Eurocode
define the ULS 3—EN 1993. It also shows that test evaluations were performed
γ M1 = 1.10 where component failure due to instability to determine the design strength functions Rd depending on
occurs (λ) the yield strength f y or the tensile strength f u according to
γ M2 = 1.25 where failure is caused by disintegration of the relevant failure mode in the first instance, whereas the
material ( f u ). characteristic values Rk were obtained from Rd by multiplying
6. The initial characteristic value is then corrected to comply with the recommended γ M -values.
with the partial factor γ Mi chosen as The method has also been used to adjust the toughness oriented
Rk = γ Mi · Rd . safety checks for brittle failure in the low temperature domain
to target reliability in order to prepare the rules for the choice
7. Finally, the statistical parameters obtained from this test
of material to avoid brittle fracture in EN 1993—Part 10. This
evaluation allow the determination of quality requirements
choice is the prerequisite to base the design on ductile failure
for the product standards and execution standards to comply
modes only.
with the γ M values. All test evaluations have demonstrated that the model
With this evaluation method, which is more detailed in EN uncertainty sδ of any engineering model R is the main
1990 and Eurocode 3, a transparent unified European basis for controlling parameter for γ M , so that the format Rd = γRMk
the equal treatment of research results, unique verifications, used in Eurocode 3 is also justified from the statistical point of
technical approvals and design codes is available that facilitates view.
G. Sedlacek, C. Müller / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 1047–1059 1057
Fig. 28. Application of global slenderness concept for a bridge supporting frame.
1058 G. Sedlacek, C. Müller / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 1047–1059
The two methods offered in EN 1993-1-5 Eurocode 3— The Eurocodes are part of the European Standard Family and
Part 1-5 for plate buckling verification, i.e. the method based will be completed by the end of 2005.
The Eurocodes have a double role. On the one hand they Prof. Patrick J. Dowling as former chairman of the
give rules to determine the characteristic values of product subcommittee of CEN/TC 250 for Eurocode 3 played a key rule
properties for CE marking by calculation instead of testing; in introducing this strategy for harmonising technical rules in
on the other hand they are technical reference documents for Europe.
design works in connection with National Annexes.
This double role requires that all design rules are based on References
test evaluations using an appropriate test evaluation method.
Such a test evaluation method initially developed for Eurocode [1] European Commission: Enterprise Directorate-General. Single Market:
3 (former Annex Z of ENV 1993) is now standardised in Regulatory Environment, Standardisation and New Approach. Construc-
tion. ENTR/G5: Guidance paper L (concerning the Construction Products
Annex D of EN 1990 – Eurocode Basis of Structural Design
Directive — 89/106/EEC) Application and use of eurocodes. Brussels. 27
– applicable to all kinds of materials and ways of construction. November 2003.
Various examples are given to show the benefits of the [2] European Committee for Standardization CEN: EN 1990–Eurocode–Basis
evaluation method both for the determination of characteristic of structural design. Brussels.
values of actions and for determining characteristic and design [3] European Committee for Standardization CEN: EN 1991–Actions on
values of resistances. structures. Brussels.
The evaluation method has led to a transparent system that [4] European Committee for Standardization CEN: EN 1993–Eurocode
3–Design of steel structures. Brussels.
enabled us to introduce new innovative approaches for design, [5] Müller C. Zum Nachweis ebener Tragwerke aus Stahl gegen seitliches
e.g. for the choice of material to avoid brittle fracture and Ausweichen, Dissertation. Heft 47, 2003.
harmonised general rules for stability checks including more [6] Sedlacek G, Müller C. Eurocodes et International Advantages des
consistent approaches for plate buckling. Eurocodes, Colloque Européen sur les Eurocodes. Paris 12/2004.